Bayesian decision theory as a model of human visual perception: Testing Bayesian transfer
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
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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].”
From Comparing Bayesian and non-Bayesian accounts of human confidence reports (2018) · cites this paper as [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].”
From Comparing Bayesian and non-Bayesian accounts of human confidence reports (2018) · cites this paper as [32]
Cites
Experience can change the 'light-from-above' prior
Adams, W. J., Graf, E. W., & Ernst, M. O. (2004) · Nature Neuroscience · doi:10.1038/nn1312 · Cited by 377 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Whatever next? Predictive brains, situated agents, and the future of cognitive science
Clark, A. (2013) · Behavioral and Brain Sciences · doi:10.1017/s0140525x12000477 · Cited by 5,924 · see citing works
Cardinal rules: visual orientation perception reflects knowledge of environmental statistics
Girshick, A. R., Landy, M. S., & Simoncelli, E. P. (2011) · Nature Neuroscience · doi:10.1038/nn.2831 · Cited by 613 · see citing works
Jones, M., & Love, B. C. (2011) · Behavioral and Brain Sciences · doi:10.1017/s0140525x10003134 · Cited by 533 · see citing works
Bayesian just-so stories in psychology and neuroscience.
Bowers, J. S., & Davis, C. J. (2012) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/a0026450 · Cited by 436 · see citing works
Causal inference in perception
Shams, L., & Beierholm, U. R. (2010) · Trends in Cognitive Sciences · doi:10.1016/j.tics.2010.07.001 · Cited by 403 · see citing works
Suboptimality in perceptual decision making
Rahnev, D., & Denison, R. N. (2018) · Behavioral and Brain Sciences · doi:10.1017/s0140525x18000936 · Cited by 342 · see citing works
The Border Between Seeing and Thinking
Block, N. (2023) · doi:10.1093/oso/9780197622223.001.0001 · Cited by 367 · see citing works
Neural Coding of Uncertainty and Probability
Ma, W. J., & Jazayeri, M. (2014) · Annual Review of Neuroscience · doi:10.1146/annurev-neuro-071013-014017 · Cited by 290 · see citing works
Learning what to expect (in visual perception)
Seriès, P., & Seitz, A. R. (2013) · Frontiers in Human Neuroscience · doi:10.3389/fnhum.2013.00668 · Cited by 194 · see citing works
Bayes in the Brain—On Bayesian Modelling in Neuroscience
Colombo, M., & Seriès, P. (2012) · The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science · doi:10.1093/bjps/axr043 · Cited by 164 · see citing works
Comparing Bayesian and non-Bayesian accounts of human confidence reports
Adler, W. T., & Ma, W. J. (2018) · PLoS Computational Biology · doi:10.1371/journal.pcbi.1006572 · Cited by 118 · see citing works
If perception is probabilistic, why does it not seem probabilistic?
Block, N. (2018) · Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences · doi:10.1098/rstb.2017.0341 · Cited by 91 · see citing works
Efficient probabilistic inference in generic neural networks trained with non-probabilistic feedback
Orhan, A. E., & Ma, W. J. (2017) · Nature Communications · doi:10.1038/s41467-017-00181-8 · Cited by 77 · see citing works
The promises and pitfalls of applying computational models to neurological and psychiatric disorders
Teufel, C., & Fletcher, P. C. (2016) · Brain · doi:10.1093/brain/aww209 · Cited by 64 · see citing works
Alterations of agency in hypnosis: A new predictive coding model.
Martin, J.-R., & Pacherie, E. (2019) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/rev0000134 · Cited by 57 · see citing works
- 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
- Publisher
- Maximum Academic Press
- 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