No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
Bayesian statistics to test Bayes optimality
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 10 January 2019
Abstract
We agree with the authors that putting forward specific models and examining their agreement with experimental data are the best approach for understanding the nature of decision making. Although the authors only consider the likelihood function, prior, cost function, and decision rule (LPCD) framework, other choices are available. Bayesian statistics can be used to estimate essential parameters and assess the degree of optimality.
- Type
- Open Peer Commentary
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2018
References
Anderson, J. R. (1991) The adaptive nature of human categorization. Psychological Review 98:409–29.Google Scholar
Hotaling, J. M., Cohen, A. L., Shiffrin, R. M. & Busemeyer, J. R. (2015) The dilution effect and information integration in perceptual decision making. PLoS ONE 10(9):e0138481. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0138481.Google Scholar
McClelland, J. L. (2013) Integrating probabilistic models of perception and interactive neural networks: A historical and tutorial review. Frontiers in Psychology 4:503.Google Scholar
Sanborn, A. N., Griffiths, T. L. & Navarro, D. J. (2010) Rational approximations to rational models: Alternative algorithms for category learning. Psychological Review 4:1144–67.Google Scholar
Shi, L., Griffiths, T. L., Feldman, N. H. & Sanborn, A. N. (2010) Exemplar models as a mechanism for performing Bayesian inference. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review 17:443–64.Google Scholar
Turner, B. M. (under review) Toward a common representational framework for adaptation.Google Scholar
Turner, B. M., Gao, J., Koenig, S., Palfy, D. & McClelland, J. L. (2017) The dynamics of multimodal integration: The averaging diffusion model. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review 24:1819–43.Google Scholar
Turner, B. M. & Van Zandt, T. (2014) Hierarchical approximate Bayesian computation. Psychometrika 79:185–209.Google Scholar
Turner, B. M., Van Zandt, T. & Brown, S. (2011) A dynamic, stimulus-driven model of signal detection. Psychological Review 118:583–613.Google Scholar
Target article
Suboptimality in perceptual decision making
Related commentaries (27)
Although optimal models are useful, optimality claims are not that common
Bayesian statistics to test Bayes optimality
Characterising variations in perceptual decision making
Credo for optimality
Descending Marr's levels: Standard observers are no panacea
Discarding optimality: Throwing out the baby with the bathwater?
Excess of individual variability of priors prevents successful development of general models
How did that individual make that perceptual decision?
Identifying suboptimalities with factorial model comparison
Inclusion of neural effort in cost function can explain perceptual decision suboptimality
Leveraging decision consistency to decompose suboptimality in terms of its ultimate predictability
LPCD framework: Analytical tool or psychological model?
Model comparison, not model falsification
Non-optimal perceptual decision in human navigation
Observer models of perceptual development
Optimality is both elusive and necessary
Optimality is critical when it comes to testing computation-level hypotheses
Perceptual suboptimality: Bug or feature?
Satisficing as an alternative to optimality and suboptimality in perceptual decision making
Serial effects are optimal
Suboptimalities for sure: Arguments from evolutionary theory
Suboptimality in perceptual decision making and beyond
Supra-optimality may emanate from suboptimality, and hence optimality is no benchmark in multisensory integration
The role of (bounded) optimization in theory testing and prediction
The standard Bayesian model is normatively invalid for biological brains
The world is complex, not just noisy
When the simplest voluntary decisions appear patently suboptimal
Author response
Behavior is sensible but not globally optimal: Seeking common ground in the optimality debate