Search

Though the scientific study of surprise dates back to Darwin (), there was an upsurge in interest beginning in the 1960s and 70s, and this has continued to the present. Recent developments have shed much light on the cognitive mechanisms and consequences of surprise, but research has often been siloed within sub-areas of Cognitive Science. A central challenge for research on surprise is, therefore, to connect various research programs around their overlapping foci. This issue has its roots in a symposium on surprise, entitled "Triangulating Surprise: Expectations, Uncertainty, and Making Sense," at the 36th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society (Quebec City, July 2014). Building on the interdisciplinary conversations that started at the symposium, this issue aims to draw attention to some promising empirical and modeling results and their theoretical implications. The present paper sets the stage for the issue by presenting a historical summary, discussing contrasting definitions of surprise, and then by tracing major threads that run through both this issue and the larger literature on surprise. Our aim is to develop broader, shared understandings of the main insights, theories, and findings regarding surprise, with a view to supporting future integration and progress., (© 2018 Cognitive Science Society, Inc.)

Surprise has been explored as a cognitive-emotional phenomenon that impacts many aspects of mental life from creativity to learning to decision-making. In this paper, we specifically address the role of surprise in learning and memory. Although surprise has been cast as a basic emotion since Darwin's () The Expression of the Emotions in Man and Animals, recently more emphasis has been placed on its cognitive aspects. One such view casts surprise as a process of "sense making" or "explanation finding": metacognitive explanation-based theory proposes that people's perception of surprise is a metacognitive assessment of the cognitive work done to explain a surprising outcome. Or, to put it more simply, surprise increases with the explanatory work required to resolve it. This theory predicts that some surprises should be more surprising than others because they are harder to explain. In the current paper, this theory is extended to consider the role of surprise in learning as evidenced by memorability. This theory is tested to determine how scenarios with differentially surprising outcomes impact the memorability of those outcomes. The results show that surprising outcomes (less-known outcomes) that are more difficult to explain are recalled more accurately than less-surprising outcomes that require little (known outcomes) or no explanation (normal)., (© 2018 Cognitive Science Society, Inc.)