Abstract

While previous studies have shown that human behavior adjusts in response to uncertainty, it is still not well understood how uncertainty is estimated and represented. As probability distributions are high dimensional objects, only constrained families of distributions with a low number of parameters can be specified from finite data. However, it is unknown what the structural assumptions are that the brain uses to estimate them. We introduce a novel paradigm that requires human participants of either sex to explicitly estimate the dispersion of a distribution over future observations. Judgments are based on a very small sample from a centered, normally distributed random variable that was suggested by the framing of the task. This probability density estimation task could optimally be solved by inferring the dispersion parameter of a normal distribution. We find that although behavior closely tracks uncertainty on a trial-by-trial basis and resists an explanation with simple heuristics, it is hardly consistent with parametric inference of a normal distribution. Despite the transparency of the simple generating process, participants estimate a distribution biased towards the observed instances while still strongly generalizing beyond the sample. The inferred internal distributions can be well approximated by a nonparametric mixture of spatially extended basis distributions. Thus, our results suggest that fluctuations have an excessive effect on human uncertainty judgments because of representations that can adapt overly flexibly to the sample. This might be of greater utility in more general conditions in structurally uncertain environments.

Highlights

  • Determining from limited data when observations reflect a consistently appearing pattern or when they are merely the result of randomness is important to faithfully represent the environment (e.g. [1])

  • Are three heavy tropical storms this year compelling evidence for climate change? A suspicious clustering of events may reflect a real change of the environment or might be due to random fluctuations because our world is uncertain

  • We should build a probability distribution over our observations defined in terms of latent causes

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Determining from limited data when observations reflect a consistently appearing pattern or when they are merely the result of randomness is important to faithfully represent the environment (e.g. [1]). Suppose you want to assess the skill of a dart player in throwing darts at the bullseye (center) of the board. For a single bad throw, it is hard to discern whether it was due to bad luck or to the general inability of the player. The dispersion of the darts around the center should more closely reflect the skill of the player. To represent uncertainty of our knowledge in this and more general situations, normative considerations suggest that an agent should explicitly represent knowledge as probability distributions instead of point estimates [2,3]. Several studies have shown that under certain conditions humans behave as if the uncertainty about a task-relevant variable was available to them as a distribution over its possible values [4,5]

Objectives
Methods
Results
Discussion
Conclusion
Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.