I’m sure motivation improves performance, but I don’t think that is the only thing going on here.
I’m sure that our evolved psychology does make some problems harder/easier than others, despite having identical math behind them. But I’m also sure that our previous experience with problems matters. In your description, C&T don’t distinguish between problems we’ve evolved to think about, and problems that we think about a lot for cultural or idiosyncratic reasons.
If I understand your last sentence correctly, that was my other main problem with their argument for evolved social contract algorithms or whatever: I didn’t see sufficient evidence that the “cheating” stuff was part of our “native” architecture rather than a learned behavior. Hence the suggestion to create tests that vary on things we know to culturally vary.
I’m sure motivation improves performance, but I don’t think that is the only thing going on here.
I’m sure that our evolved psychology does make some problems harder/easier than others, despite having identical math behind them. But I’m also sure that our previous experience with problems matters. In your description, C&T don’t distinguish between problems we’ve evolved to think about, and problems that we think about a lot for cultural or idiosyncratic reasons.
If I understand your last sentence correctly, that was my other main problem with their argument for evolved social contract algorithms or whatever: I didn’t see sufficient evidence that the “cheating” stuff was part of our “native” architecture rather than a learned behavior. Hence the suggestion to create tests that vary on things we know to culturally vary.