Cognitive Engineering

In this episode of the Cognitive Engineering Podcast, the team responds to a listener’s question about how to buy a car, using it as a springboard into wider ideas about decision-making. They explore the tension between analytical approaches—spreadsheets, cost breakdowns and rational comparisons—and more instinctive, emotionally driven choices. Drawing on their own contrasting experiences, from careful, criteria-based selection to impulsive, passion-led purchases, they highlight how factors like price, depreciation, usage and even the buying experience itself can influence both decisions and long-term satisfaction. The discussion also touches on how identity, politics and personal values can shape preferences, as well as the role of emotional responses in supposedly rational decisions.Broadening out beyond cars, the conversation examines how people make big, infrequent decisions more generally, from buying houses to choosing careers. The hosts discuss psychological concepts such as “maximisers” versus “satisfiers”, the role of subconscious decision-making and the tendency to rationalise choices after the fact. They note that more analysis doesn’t necessarily lead to greater satisfaction, and may even increase regret. Practical takeaways include reframing big purchases as ongoing costs versus ongoing value, being honest about what you actually care about and recognising that people quickly adapt to new possessions. Ultimately, they suggest that while structured thinking can help, overthinking can be counterproductive—and sometimes the better question isn’t which option to choose, but whether you’re asking the right question in the first place.

In this episode, we explore why some older media remain surprisingly accessible while other, much newer works become almost impossible to experience. We compare a 300-year-old piece of music that can still be played from notation with old computer games that no longer run because of lost code, outdated hardware, vanished servers or obsolete software. We discuss how digital media can be fragile precisely because it depends on layers of technology, compression and decoding, whereas older forms like printed music, books or physical records can sometimes survive in more direct and recoverable ways.We then turn to a different kind of accessibility: whether we can still appreciate older works as their original audiences did. From silent films and early recordings to Trainspotting, Star Wars, strange 1970s cinema and old sci-fi television, we ask how much cultural context, nostalgia and changing technology shape our experience. We consider whether some art forms stop evolving or whether each generation simply mistakes its own moment for the endpoint. Finally, we share examples of older media we still enjoy, from Charlie Chaplin and Laurel and Hardy to cult sci-fi and ancient decorated stone spheres.P.T.: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/P.T._(video_game)Difficulty of playing Black and White on the PC: https://www.reddit.com/r/gamesupport/comments/3glp00/black_white_the_first_game_on_windows_10/Video game preservation efforts https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Video_game_preservationAppreciation or Nostalgia? https://from.ncl.ac.uk/nostalgia-in-retro-gamingBronze Age stone balls https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carved_stone_balls

In this episode, we discuss a forthcoming board game about the Troubles in Northern Ireland and ask why some subjects feel uncomfortable when turned into games. We explore whether the controversy comes from the topic itself, the tone, the medium, the time elapsed since the events or the cultural distance from them. We compare this with other difficult subjects represented in films, books, video games and board games, from the Second World War and the war on terror to natural disasters and pandemics.We then look more closely at what games actually do, especially the idea of adopting temporary agency: playing a role without morally endorsing it. We ask whether participatory media are judged differently because players actively make choices, rather than simply watching or reading. Finally, we broaden the discussion into what makes board games compelling at all, comparing them with sport, horror films and other forms of imaginative suspension, before ending with a few reflections on why board games can be both intellectually rich and emotionally difficult to explain to non-gamers.The Troubles boardgame: https://www.compassgames.com/product/the-troubles-shadow-war-in-northern-ireland-pay-later/Guardian article about the controversy: https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2026/jan/23/target-mainland-planned-troubles-board-game-condemned-in-northern-irelandLa Famiglia: The Great Mafia War: https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/367517/la-famiglia-the-great-mafia-warLabyrinth: The War on Terror: https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/62227/labyrinth-the-war-on-terror-2001Agency as Art by C. Thi Nguyen: https://academic.oup.com/book/32137

In this episode we discuss training: what it can realistically achieve, why it often fails and how people actually become good at things.The conversation begins with Aleph’s past experience delivering analytical training, and Nick’s frustration that training often strips away the excitement of discovery. The group explores whether people really learn best through formal instruction, or whether genuine understanding comes from practice, mistakes, motivation and real-world need.Links:Michael Polanyi's 'Tacit knowledge' - We know more than we can tell. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tacit_knowledge

Episode summaryIn this episode, the team explores what prizes are actually for. Starting with a discussion of FIFA’s much-mocked “Peace Prize” and the longer pedigree of the Nobel Peace Prize, they examine how prizes gain prestige, whether they genuinely incentivise good behaviour and how they can shape status, motivation and public recognition.The conversation moves from global peace prizes to personal experiences of winning school and university awards, before turning to the deeper question: what makes a prize valuable? Is it age, scarcity, continuity, the calibre of previous winners or the significance of what it rewards?The episode ends with the proposal of a new award: the Aleph Peace Prize, aimed not at symbolic virtue but at people or institutions that have plausibly reduced the risk of actual conflict.In this episodeWhy FIFA’s “Peace Prize” is seen as absurd and performativeWhat the Nobel Peace Prize was originally meant to rewardControversial Nobel winners, including Henry Kissinger and Barack ObamaHow Nobel Peace Prize winners tend to fall into categories such as:peace process participantshuman rights advocatesinstitution buildershumanitarian organisationsWhether prizes are mainly about:incentivesrecognitioncredentialisationrewardWhy prestige depends on factors like age, continuity, scarcity and past winnersThe idea that too many prizes can dilute the value of all prizesPersonal reflections on school and university prizes, and how recognition can affect confidence and effortA proposed alternative peace prize focused on real-world conflict reduction