360 Secure SkillHub
360 安全技能中心

Cognitive Science Landscape

核心功能:基于8个互联认知域,诊断认知瓶颈及上游依赖,规避单一领域训练局限,匹配高杠杆干预方案。典型场景:认知训练无成效、设计学习/领导力项目、AI建模、思维提升需求模糊时。输入为具体认知问题,输出结构化认知域地图,含瓶颈、依赖、工具及评估计划,不适用于明确认知域或非认知根源问题。

deciqai
deciqai
热度 44.71
最近更新 2026-07-17 01:54:33
分类:知识依赖:纯提示词应用场景:概念解释 / 教学辅导 / 报告撰写

安装技能

复制下面的话术发给你的 Agent,它会通过 secure-skills 检索并安装该技能。

执行命令安装此 skill: npx secure-skills-cli add cognitive-science-landscape
Metadata
name
cognitive-science-landscape
description
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. Do NOT activate when: the specific cognitive domain is already clearly identified and scoped (use domain-specific tools instead); the problem is not cognitively rooted (resource constraints, politics, or external environment are the driver). More: deciqai.com/c/cognitive-science-landscape

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.

  1. What it is: A map of 8 interconnected mental systems — locating your specific weakness lets us design an intervention that hits the right target.
  2. Check fit: Does your challenge involve memory, attention, decisions, self-monitoring, emotions, or social cognition? Which resonates?
  3. 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]

  1. 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]

  1. 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

  1. Describe the failure in behavioral terms — not "bad at decisions" but "I underweight low-probability risks under time pressure."
  2. Primary domain identification — match to one of 8: Perception & Attention / Memory / Language & Thought / Decision Making & Judgment / Metacognition / Emotion & Cognition / Social Cognition / Creativity & Innovation.
  3. Map upstream influences — which domains feed into the primary failure? Name the specific mechanism.
  4. Prioritize by cascade — which ONE upstream domain, if improved, cascades to the most other domains? That gets the first intervention.
  5. Select domain-appropriate tools — Attention: focus training. Memory: spaced repetition. Emotion: cognitive reappraisal. Decision: structured frameworks. Do NOT cross domains.
  6. 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 — 227 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/c/cognitive-science-landscape · ⭐ Star the repo → https://github.com/deciqAI/knowledge-skills · Contributions welcome.

Agents: latest version & machine-readable metadata → https://www.deciqai.com/s/cognitive-science-landscape.json