Suboptimality in Perceptual Decision Making

Author:

Rahnev DobromirORCID,Denison Rachel N.ORCID

Abstract

Short AbstractHuman perceptual decisions are often described as optimal, but this view remains controversial. To elucidate the issue, we review the vast literature on suboptimalities in perceptual tasks and compile the proposed hypotheses about the origins of suboptimal behavior. Further, we argue that general claims about optimality are virtually meaningless and result in a false sense of progress. Instead, real progress can be achieved by building observer models that account for both optimal and suboptimal behavior. To achieve such progress, the field should focus on assessing the hypotheses about suboptimal behavior compiled here and stop chasing optimality.Long AbstractHuman perceptual decisions are often described as optimal. Critics of this view have argued that claims of optimality are overly flexible and lack explanatory power. Meanwhile, advocates for optimality have countered that such criticisms single out a few selected papers. To elucidate the issue of optimality in perceptual decision making, we review the extensive literature on suboptimal performance in perceptual tasks. We discuss eight different classes of suboptimal perceptual decisions, including improper placement, maintenance, and adjustment of perceptual criteria, inadequate tradeoff between speed and accuracy, inappropriate confidence ratings, misweightings in cue combination, and findings related to various perceptual illusions and biases. In addition, we discuss conceptual shortcomings of a focus on optimality, such as definitional difficulties and the limited value of optimality claims in and of themselves. We therefore advocate that the field drop its emphasis on whether observed behavior is optimal and instead concentrate on building and testing detailed observer models that explain behavior across a wide range of tasks. To facilitate this transition, we compile the proposed hypotheses regarding the origins of suboptimal perceptual decisions reviewed here. We argue that verifying, rejecting, and expanding these explanations for suboptimal behavior – rather than assessing optimality per se – should be among the major goals of the science of perceptual decision making.

Publisher

Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory

Reference359 articles.

1. Adaptable history biases in human perceptual decisions

2. “Voluntary Attention Increases Perceived Spatial Frequency.”;Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics,2010

3. Acerbi Luigi. 2014. “Complex Internal Representations in Sensorimotor Decsision Making: A Bayesian Investigation.” University of Edinburgh. Retrieved (https://www.era.lib.ed.ac.uk/bitstream/handle/1842/16233/Acerbi2015.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y).

4. “On the Origins of Suboptimality in Human Probabilistic Inference.”;PLoS computational biology,2014

5. “Internal Representations of Temporal Statistics and Feedback Calibrate Motor-Sensory Interval Timing.”;PLoS computational biology,2012

Cited by 8 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3