The Thought Mobility Model: Exploratory Collapse and Preserved-Capacity Collapse
Description
This study proposes the Thought Mobility Model (TMM), a theoretical framework that reconceptualizes cognitive collapse as a breakdown of exploratory structure rather than a global loss of cognitive capacity. TMM describes cognitive dynamics through the interaction of three variables: Unfixed-State Maintenance Cost (USMC), Fixation Pressure (F), and Thought Mobility (M). Within this framework, Exploratory Collapse (EC) is defined as a state in which Thought Mobility falls below a critical threshold and the exploratory structure of cognition can no longer be maintained.
In addition, this study introduces Preserved-Capacity Collapse (PCC), a condition in which exploratory capacity has collapsed while local processing functions remain relatively preserved.
In PCC, individuals retain comprehension, reasoning, and explanatory abilities, yet cannot move towardnew cognitive alternatives.
What appears as paralysis or inability is therefore interpreted not as a failure of understanding, but as a collapse of the structure that enables exploration.
To examine the implications of the model, a minimal simulation was conducted based on the formal relationship among USMC, F, and M. The simulation reproduced reductions in Thought Mobility as Unfixed-State Maintenance Cost and Fixation Pressure increased, generating both EC and PCC states.
The model further predicts a dissociation in which exploratory indicators decline while localprocessing functions remain relatively preserved.
This prediction distinguishes TMM from conventional cognitive load and cognitive control frameworks.
TMM reconceptualizes cognitive collapse not as a global deficit but as a breakdown of exploratorystructure. By distinguishing exploratory mobility from local processing capacity, the model provides a theoretical account of states in which understanding remains intact while exploration becomes impossible.
The framework generates experimentally testable predictions and offers a foundation for future research on recovery dynamics, hysteresis, and intervention strategies aimed at restoringexploratory capacity.
This version includes revisions, clarifications, and expanded theoretical discussions relative to the initial preprint.
Files
Tanaka_TMM_2026_v2.pdf
Files
(4.8 MB)
| Name | Size | Download all |
|---|---|---|
|
md5:941d87ae093197ee1ae5598589a45310
|
4.8 MB | Preview Download |
Additional details
References
- Kahneman, D. (1973). Attention and Effort. Prentice-Hall.
- Sweller, J. (1988). Cognitive load during problem solving: Effects on learning. Cognitive Science, 12(2), 257–285.
- Friston, K. (2010). The free-energy principle: A unified brain theory? Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 11(2), 127–138.
- Clark, A. (2013). Whatever next? Predictive brains, situated agents, and the future of cognitive science. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 36(3), 181–204.
- Kelso, J. A. S. (1995). Dynamic Patterns: The Self-Organization of Brain and Behavior. MIT Press.
- Tognoli, E., & Kelso, J. A. S. (2014). The metastable brain. Neuron, 81(1), 35–48.