Cited by 180Visual perception and processing mechanismsMotor Control and AdaptationBayesian Modeling and Causal Inference

Bayesian decision theory as a model of human visual perception: Testing Bayesian transfer

MALONEY, LAURENCE T., MAMASSIAN, PASCAL·2009·Visual Neuroscience

Abstract

Bayesian decision theory (BDT) is a mathematical framework that allows the experimenter to model ideal performance in a wide variety of visuomotor tasks. The experimenter can use BDT to compute benchmarks for ideal performance in such tasks and compare human performance to ideal. Recently, researchers have asked whether BDT can also be treated as a process model of visuomotor processing. It is unclear what sorts of experiments are appropriate to testing such claims and whether such claims are even meaningful. Any such claim presupposes that observers' performance is close to ideal, and typical experimental tests involve comparison of human performance to ideal. We argue that this experimental criterion, while necessary, is weak. We illustrate how to achieve near-optimal performance in combining perceptual cues with a process model bearing little resemblance to BDT. We then propose experimental criteria termed transfer criteria that constitute more powerful tests of BDT as a model of perception and action. We describe how recent work in motor control can be viewed as tests of transfer properties of BDT. The transfer properties discussed here comprise the beginning of an operationalization (Bridgman, 1927) of what it means to claim that perception is or is not Bayesian inference (Knill & Richards, 1996). They are particularly relevant to research concerning natural scenes since they assess the ability of the organism to rapidly adapt to novel tasks in familiar environments or c…

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1017/s0952523808080905

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The study used overlapping categories, withholding feedback on testing trials, and varying task, stimulus type, and stimulus reliability as a strong test of human confidence reports.

    “We carried out a strong test of human confidence reports, using overlapping categories [52], withholding feedback on testing trials, and varying experimental components such as task, stimulus type, and stimulus reliability [32].”
  • Correctness feedback was withheld during testing to avoid the possibility that confidence simply reflects a learned mapping between stimulus orientation and reliability and the probability of being correct.

    “During testing, correctness feedback was withheld to avoid the possibility that confidence simply reflects a learned mapping between stimulus orientation and reliability and the probability of being correct [30–33].”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
MALONEY, L. T., & MAMASSIAN, P.
Affiliations
  • New York University (US)
  • Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (FR)
Corresponding author
MALONEY, LAURENCE T.
Venue
Visual Neuroscience
Published
2009-01
Volume
26
Issue
1
Pages
147-155
ISSN
  • 0952-5238 (ISSN-L)
  • 1469-8714
OpenAlex
W2050878336
Cited by
180
References
1
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 29 · 2022: 11 · 2021: 12 · 2020: 12 · 2019: 16 · 2018: 14 · 2017: 6 · 2016: 13 · 2015: 10 · 2014: 8 · 2013: 6 · 2012: 7
FWCI
3.87
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Visual Neuroscience (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health (2r01ey002866-10a1)
  • National Eye Institute (EY 02866)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Visual perception and processing mechanisms
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Motor Control and Adaptation
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Bayesian Modeling and Causal Inference
Keywords
Bayesian decision theory, Bayesian inference, visual perception, visuomotor task, transfer criteria, motor control, natural images, perceptual adaptation
MeSH terms
Adaptation, Psychological, Bayes Theorem, Cues, Decision Theory, Humans, Learning, Models, Biological, Movement, Psychomotor Performance, Risk-Taking, Visual Perception, Models, Statistical

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review