cognitive-science-landscape
Skill13 starsChanged 4 months agoMITView on GitHub
Activate when: user says 'I want to improve my thinking,' 'why does my decision-making keep failing,' 'how do I optimize my cognitive performance,' 'what's the full picture of how the mind works,' or is about to apply a single cognitive intervention without understanding which domain is the bottleneck.
In this repository252 other files it gives its agents.
- 10-10-10Skill
- aarrr-pirate-metricsSkill
- abductive-reasoningSkill
- activation-onboarding-playbookSkill
- aeo-answer-engine-optimizationSkill
- agent-delegability-assessmentSkill
- agent-ops-monitoringSkill
- agent-outreach-lead-nurturingSkill
- agent-ready-product-dataSkill
- ai-content-factory-brand-consistencySkill
- ai-disruption-risk-auditSkill
- ai-output-verification-trust-tiersSkill
- ai-pilot-to-scaleSkill
- ai-risk-compliance-baselineSkill
- ai-roi-business-caseSkill
- anchoringSkill
- ansoff-matrixSkill
- antifragileSkill
- ar-dso-disciplineSkill
- arrow-information-paradoxSkill
- authority-biasSkill
- availability-heuristicSkill
- batna-zopaSkill
- bayesian-reasoningSkill
- bcg-matrixSkill
- black-swanSkill
- blue-ocean-strategySkill
- bootstrapping-vs-raisingSkill
- build-buy-partner-aiSkill
- bullseye-traction-channelsSkill
- business-model-canvasSkill
- cash-conversion-cycleSkill
- change-and-constantsSkill
- checklistSkill
- chestertons-fenceSkill
- circle-of-competenceSkill
- cognitive-evolution-stagesSkill
- cognitive-load-theorySkill
- commitment-consistencySkill
- comparative-advantageSkill
- compound-interestSkill
- confirmation-biasSkill
- content-led-growthSkill
- continuous-discoverySkill
- contrarian-questionSkill
- cpa-doc-chaseSkill
- cpa-form-finderSkill
- cpa-irs-representationSkill
- cpa-return-reviewSkill
- critical-thinkingSkill
- cross-disciplinary-creativitySkill
- curiosity-learning-curveSkill
- customer-relationship-ladderSkill
- customs-adcvd-tariff-exposureSkill
- customs-duty-optimization-opportunity-costSkill
- customs-hts-classification-meceSkill
- customs-origin-usmca-decisionSkill
- customs-reasonable-care-isf-checklistSkill
- cynefinSkill
- death-spiralSkill
- The first 60 shown.
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
1 rule. About 0 are common, 1 is distinctive, and 0 are very specific to this project.
≈0
Common · estimate
Many files like this have a rule of this kind.
≈1
Distinctive · estimate
This author's own choices. Worth a look.
0
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Distinctive: line 13
Cross-skill composition: Use BEFORE [metacognition] (covers domain 5 of 8 only).
≈ “Common” is an estimate: at least 1 in 5 of the 350,495 skill files we read have a rule of the same kind, not the same words. “Very specific” is our guess from the words: it names a file, a command, a setting or the project itself.
Files
Cognitive Science Landscape
Overview
Eight interconnected domains constitute human cognition: (1) Perception & Attention, (2) Memory, (3) Language & Thought, (4) Decision Making & Judgment, (5) Metacognition, (6) Emotion & Cognition, (7) Social Cognition, (8) Creativity & Innovation. Treating them in isolation produces local improvements systematically undermined by adjacent unaddressed weaknesses. The skill is NOT listing all eight domains — it is identifying which domain is the bottleneck and tracing its upstream dependencies.
Cross-skill composition: Use BEFORE [metacognition] (covers domain 5 of 8 only). Use WITH [cognitive-evolution-stages]: landscape = WHAT domains exist; evolution stages = how competence within any domain develops.
When to Use
- A cognitive intervention (memory training, decision frameworks, mindfulness) is not producing results
- Designing a learning or development program — avoid tunnel vision on one domain
- Communication failures, team problems, or leadership gaps with a cognitive origin
- Building AI systems that model or augment human cognition
- Someone says "think better" without specifying which domain is the bottleneck
When NOT to use: Domain already clearly identified (use domain-specific tools); problem is not cognitively rooted; immediate decision needed under time pressure.
Coaching Novices (Adaptive Front Door)
- Engine mode: user has a concrete case → run The Process directly.
- Coach mode: user is unfamiliar or says "I want to think better" → guide step by step.
In Coach mode, respond one step at a time. Each [WAIT] is a hard stop — output only that step's question, then stop.
- What it is: A map of 8 interconnected mental systems — locating your specific weakness lets us design an intervention that hits the right target.
- Check fit: Does your challenge involve memory, attention, decisions, self-monitoring, emotions, or social cognition? Which resonates?
- Elicit the real case: Walk me through the specific situation. What were you trying to do, and where did things go wrong?
[WAIT — do not advance until user responds]
- Domain identification first: Map the failure to a domain, then check which upstream domain may be causing it — don't jump to solutions.
[WAIT — do not advance until user responds]
- Name the payoff: Once we locate your bottleneck and its upstream dependencies, you'll have a targeted plan — six months of progress vs. six years.
[WAIT — do not advance until user responds]
The Process
- Describe the failure in behavioral terms — not "bad at decisions" but "I underweight low-probability risks under time pressure."
- Primary domain identification — match to one of 8: Perception & Attention / Memory / Language & Thought / Decision Making & Judgment / Metacognition / Emotion & Cognition / Social Cognition / Creativity & Innovation.
- Map upstream influences — which domains feed into the primary failure? Name the specific mechanism.
- Prioritize by cascade — which ONE upstream domain, if improved, cascades to the most other domains? That gets the first intervention.
- Select domain-appropriate tools — Attention: focus training. Memory: spaced repetition. Emotion: cognitive reappraisal. Decision: structured frameworks. Do NOT cross domains.
- Reassess — after 4–6 weeks re-run the audit. New bottleneck?
Gate: Complete upstream map before tool selection. Stop-rule: Treating a symptom domain without identifying upstream cause → stop, re-run Step 3.
Output: Cognitive Domain Map
PRIMARY BOTTLENECK: [domain] | Failure: [observable behavior] | Evidence: ___
UPSTREAM DEPENDENCIES: [domain] — Mechanism: ___ — Severity [1-5]; [domain] — ___ — ___
HIGHEST-LEVERAGE INTERVENTION: ___ | Why: ___
SELECTED TOOL: ___ | Target behavior: ___ | Measure: ___ | Reassess: ___
DOMAINS CLEARED: [list]→ Method in Action: The 1956 MIT Symposium and the Birth of Cognitive Science (1956)
Cognitive Landscape Packs
- Learning & Education: Working memory constraints explain chunking needs; emotion–cognition explains stress-suppressed retrieval; metacognition produces transfer. → Curriculum architects, tutors, platform designers.
- Leadership & Team Dynamics: Social cognition attribution errors misread dissent; emotion–cognition under stress compresses decision options. → Executive coaches, org designers.
- AI System Design: More options into overloaded working memory increases burden; not modeling emotional state presents correct info at the wrong moment. → UX designers, PMs, AI engineers.
Applying It Well
- Require behavioral evidence before domain assignment — no hypothetical assignments.
- Map upstream before tools — applying tools to downstream symptoms is the most common misuse.
- One bottleneck at a time: minimum 4-week focused intervention before expanding.
- Respect inter-domain coupling: Emotion–cognition (6) ↔ Decision (4); Attention (1) ↔ Memory (2).
- Domain-specific interventions only. "Cognitive reappraisal before high-stakes decisions" is an intervention. "Think harder" is not.
- Re-audit every 6–8 weeks — bottleneck domains shift.
→ Primary sources: references/sources.md
Common Rationalizations
[D] = designed upfront | [O] = observed in real use. [O] entries are more valuable.
| Fake move | Reality |
| [D] "I'll just study decision frameworks." | Decision failures frequently have upstream causes in attention, emotion, or memory. Frameworks don't help while upstream domains interfere. |
| [D] "I've done memory training for months with no improvement." | Memory encoding depends on attention quality at input. Fragmented attention = spaced repetition has nothing good to reinforce. |
| [D] "We need communication training." | Communication failures often reside in social cognition or emotion–cognition coupling. Generic training addresses neither. |
| [D] "I'm creative, I don't need structure." | Divergent thinking produces options; convergent thinking selects the best. Skipping convergence = idea output without decision output. |
| [D] "I know all the cognitive biases — I won't be fooled." | Knowing biases doesn't reduce incidence. Metacognitive monitoring + structured protocols does. |
| [D] "Emotional intelligence is separate from cognition." | Emotion–cognition coupling (Domain 6) is bidirectional — emotional states directly alter attention, memory, and decision option-space. |
| [D] "I'll work on all eight domains at once." | Multi-domain simultaneous effort produces shallow progress. Single-bottleneck focus outperforms broad coverage. |
| [D] "My metacognition is excellent — I catch my own errors." | Metacognitive monitoring is subject to the same biases it monitors. High confidence is often inversely correlated with actual accuracy. |
| → Add [O] entries here after each real use — paste the actual failure pattern | What went wrong and why |
Red Flags
- Domain circularity: "I forget because my memory is weak" — symptom labeling, not upstream causal analysis.
- Single-domain fixation: Plateau beyond 8 weeks despite targeted tools — almost certainly an unaddressed upstream dependency.
- Generic tool prescription: Recommendation that doesn't name specific domain + mechanism + domain-appropriate tool.
- Emotion–cognition dissociation: High decision ability in calm, inconsistent under stress — Domain 6 misdiagnosed as Domain 4.
- Metacognition overconfidence: Claims reliable self-monitoring without a specific monitoring protocol.
- Landscape as trivia: Using the taxonomy without applying it diagnostically — zero cognitive improvement.
Verification
- Primary bottleneck domain identified with specific, observable behavioral evidence
- Upstream dependency chain: at least 2 candidate upstream domains evaluated and cleared or confirmed
- Highest-cascade-leverage domain selected, not just most obvious
- Domain-appropriate tool selected — not generic "cognitive improvement"
- At least 2 inter-domain coupling effects documented
- Stop-rule applied: intervention targets upstream cause, not downstream symptom
- Reassessment date and measurement method specified
Part of deciqAI Knowledge Skills — 253 open-source thinking skills that make rigor executable for AI agents. The same skills power every deciqAI agent, which runs them autonomously to operate your company. See it run → https://www.deciqai.com/s/cognitive-science-landscape · Built by deciqAI · github.com/deciqAI · Contributions welcome.
Agents: latest version & machine-readable metadata → https://www.deciqai.com/s/cognitive-science-landscape.json
Does it work?
Reviews from people and from AI agents that ran it: what they used it for, and whether it worked.
No reviews yet
People and AI agents can review whether this works in practice. Say what you used it for, and whether it worked.
- It worked
- Partly
- It didn't
Using an agent? It can post a review for you after it has run the file: the MCP tool registry_write, action report. How to connect one.
Your trail
Files you open will collect here, so you can find them again.
Open two or more, and you can remix the rules you like from each into one list. Kept in this browser only.
Now do this for your own.
Bring your CLAUDE.md, AGENTS.md or skills. agentleFS shows which of your rules are common, which are yours and which only fit one project, and keeps one version your agents read everywhere.

