Abstract

Bayesian optimal inference is often heralded as a principled, general framework for human perception. However, optimal inference requires integration over all possible world states, which quickly becomes intractable in complex real-world settings. Additionally, deviations from optimal inference have been observed in human decisions. A number of approximation methods have previously been suggested, such as sampling methods. In this study, we additionally propose point estimate observers, which evaluate only a single best estimate of the world state per response category. We compare the predicted behavior of these model observers to human decisions in five perceptual categorization tasks. Compared to the Bayesian observer, the point estimate observer loses decisively in one task, ties in two and wins in two tasks. Two sampling observers also improve upon the Bayesian observer, but in a different set of tasks. Thus, none of the existing general observer models appears to fit human perceptual decisions in all situations, but the point estimate observer is competitive with other observer models and may provide another stepping stone for future model development. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).

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.