Comparing Bayesian and non-Bayesian accounts of human confidence reports

Citations Over TimeTop 10% of 2018 papers

Abstract

Humans can meaningfully report their confidence in a perceptual or cognitive decision. It is widely believed that these reports reflect the Bayesian probability that the decision is correct, but this hypothesis has not been rigorously tested against non-Bayesian alternatives. We use two perceptual categorization tasks in which Bayesian confidence reporting requires subjects to take sensory uncertainty into account in a specific way. We find that subjects do take sensory uncertainty into account when reporting confidence, suggesting that brain areas involved in reporting confidence can access low-level representations of sensory uncertainty, a prerequisite of Bayesian inference. However, behavior is not fully consistent with the Bayesian hypothesis and is better described by simple heuristic models that use uncertainty in a non-Bayesian way. Both conclusions are robust to changes in the uncertainty manipulation, task, response modality, model comparison metric, and additional flexibility in the Bayesian model. Our results suggest that adhering to a rational account of confidence behavior may require incorporating implementational constraints.

Related Papers

• → Bayesian statistical analysis applied to solar radiation modelling(2012)44 cited
• → BAYESIAN APPROACH TO SENSORY PREFERENCE, DIFFERENCE AND EQUIVALENCE TESTS(2011)10 cited
• → What is the Probability you are a Bayesian?(2014)5 cited
• → Turning the Bayesian Crank(2011)3 cited
• → Predictive Performance of Bayesian Stacking in Multilevel Education Data(2023)1 cited