bioRxiv ScienceSearch

bioRxiv · 10.1101/060194

Suboptimality in perception

Abstract

LONG ABSTRACTHuman perceptual decisions are often described as optimal. This view reflects recent successes of Bayesian approaches to both cognition and perception. However, claims regarding optimality have been strongly criticized for their excessive flexibility and lack of explanatory power. Rebuttals from Bayesian theorists in turn claim that critics unfairly pick on select few papers. To resolve the issue regarding the role of optimality in perceptual decision making, we review the vast literature on suboptimal performance in perceptual tasks. Specifically, 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. We then extract the proposed explanations for the suboptimal behavior seen in each type of task. Critically, we show that these explanations naturally fit within an overarching Bayesian framework. Specifically, each suboptimality can be explained by alternative likelihood functions, priors, cost functions, or decision rules (LPCDs). We argue that unless the observers likelihood functions, priors, and cost functions are known, statements about the optimality or suboptimality of decision rules are meaningless. Further, the very definition of optimal behavior is debatable and may ultimately require appeals to evolutionary history beyond the current scope of perceptual science. The field should therefore shift its focus away from optimality. We propose a \"LPCD approach\" to perceptual decision making that focuses exclusively on uncovering the LPCD components, without debating whether the uncovered LPCDs are \"optimal\" or not.\n\nSHORT ABSTRACTHuman perceptual decisions are often described as optimal, but this view remains controversial. To resolve the issue, we review the vast literature on suboptimalities in perceptual tasks. We then extract the proposed explanations for the suboptimal behavior seen in each type of task and show that each suboptimality can be explained by alternative likelihood functions, priors, cost functions, or decision rules (LPCDs). We argue that general statements about the optimality or suboptimality of perceptual decisions are meaningless and propose a \"LPCD approach\" to perceptual decision making that focuses on the LPCD components rather than optimality.

Source connections

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

BibTeXRIS

Dobromir Rahnev, Rachel Denison. 2016-06-22. Suboptimality in perception. https://doi.org/10.1101/060194

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related preprints

Temporal and spatial localization of prediction-error signals in the visual brain

It has been suggested that the brain pre-empts changes in the visual environment through generating predictions, although real-time eletrophysiological evidence of prediction violations remains elusive. In a series of experiments we showed participants sequences of images that followed a predictable implied sequence or whose final image violated the implied sequence. Through careful design we were able to use the same final image transitions across predictable and unpredictable conditions, ensuring that any differences in neural responses were due only to preceding context and not to the images themselves. EEG and MEG recordings showed that early/mid-latency visual evoked potentials were robustly modulated by images that violated the implied sequence across a range of types of image change (expression deformations, rigid-rotations and visual field location). This modulation occurred irrespective of stimulus object category. Although the stimuli were static images, MEG source reconstruction of the early latency signal (N/M170) localised expectancy violation signals to brain areas associated with motion perception. Our findings suggest that the N/M170 can index mismatches between predicted and actual visual inputs in a system that predicts trajectories based on ongoing context. This has important implications for understanding the N/M170 and investigating how the brain represents context to generate perceptual predictions.

Neuroscience

AN OSCILLATORY NETWORK MODEL OF HEAD DIRECTION, SPATIALLY PERIODIC CELLS AND PLACE CELLS USING LOCOMOTOR INPUTS

We propose a computational modeling approach that explains the formation of a range of spatial cells like head direction cells, grid cells, border cells and place cells which are believed to play a pivotal role in the spatial navigation of an animal. Most existing models insert special symmetry conditions in the models in order to obtain such symmetries in the outcome; our models do not require such symmetry assumptions. Our modeling approach is embodied in two models: a simple one (Model #1) and a more detailed version (Model #2). In Model #1, velocity input is presented to a layer of Head Direction cells, with no special topology requirements, the outputs of which are presented to a layer of Path Integration neurons. A variety of spatially periodic responses resembling grid cells, are obtained using the Principal Components of Path Integration layer. In Model #2, the input consists of the locomotor rhythms from the four legs of a virtual animal. These rhythms are integrated into the phases of a layer of oscillatory neurons, whose outputs drive a layer of Head Direction cells. The Head Direction cells in turn drive a layer of Path Integration neurons, which in turn project to two successive layers of Lateral Anti Hebbian Networks (LAHN). Cells in the first LAHN resemble grid cells (with both hexagonal and square gridness), and border cells. Cells in the second LAHN exhibit place cell behaviour and a new cell type known as corner cell. Both grid cells and place cells exhibit phase precession in 1D and 2D spaces. The models outline the neural hierarchy necessary to obtain the complete range of spatial cell responses found in the hippocampal system.

Neuroscience

Association of polygenic risk for major psychiatric illness with subcortical volumes and white matter integrity in UK Biobank

Major depressive disorder (MDD), schizophrenia (SCZ) and bipolar disorder (BP) are common, disabling and heritable psychiatric diseases with a complex overlapping polygenic architecture. Individuals with these disorders, as well as their unaffected relatives, show widespread structural differences in corticostriatal and limbic networks. Structural variation in many of these brain regions is also heritable and polygenic but whether their genetic architecture overlaps with major psychiatric disorders is unknown. We sought to address this issue by examining the impact of polygenic risk of MDD, SCZ, and BP on subcortical brain volumes and white matter (WM) microstructure in a large single sample of neuroimaging data; the UK Biobank Imaging study. The first release of UK Biobank imaging data compromised participants with overlapping genetic data and subcortical volumes (N = 978) and WM measures (N = 816). Our, findings however, indicated no statistically significant associations between either subcortical volumes or WM microstructure, and polygenic risk for MDD, SCZ or BP. In the current study, we found little or no evidence for genetic overlap between major psychiatric disorders and structural brain measures. These findings suggest that subcortical brain volumes and WM microstructure may not be closely linked to the genetic mechanisms of major psychiatric disorders.

Neuroscience