Abstract:Numerous studies have found that the Bayesian framework, which formulates the optimal integration of the knowledge of the world (i.e. prior) and current sensory evidence (i.e. likelihood), captures human behaviours sufficiently well. However, there are debates regarding whether humans use precise but cognitively demanding Bayesian computations for behaviours. Across two studies, we trained participants to estimate hidden locations of a target drawn from priors with different levels of uncertainty. In each trial, scattered dots provided noisy likelihood information about the target location. Participants showed that they learned the priors and combined prior and likelihood information to infer target locations in a Bayes fashion. We then introduced a transfer condition presenting a trained prior and a likelihood that has never been put together during training. How well participants integrate this novel likelihood with their learned prior is an indicator of whether participants perform Bayesian computations. In one study, participants experienced the newly introduced likelihood, which was paired with a different prior, during training. Participants changed likelihood weighting following expected directions although the degrees of change were significantly lower than Bayes-optimal predictions. In another group, the novel likelihoods were never used during training. We found people integrated a new likelihood within (interpolation) better than the one outside (extrapolation) the range of their previous learning experience and they were quantitatively Bayes-suboptimal in both. We replicated the findings of both studies in a validation dataset. Our results showed that Bayesian behaviours may not always be achieved by a full Bayesian computation. Future studies can apply our approach to different tasks to enhance the understanding of decision-making mechanisms. Bayesian decision theory has emerged as a unified approach for capturing a wide range of behaviours under uncertainty. However, behavioural evidence supporting that humans use explicit Bayesian computation is scarce. While it has been argued that knowledge generalization should be treated as hard evidence of the use of Bayesian strategies, results from previous work were inconclusive. Here, we develop a marker that effectively quantifies how well humans transfer learned priors to a new scenario. Our marker can be applied to various tasks and thus can provide a path forwarding the understanding of psychological and biological underpinnings of inferential behaviours.

Bayesian inference in the framework of uncertainty theory

Uncertainty-Aware Bayes' Rule and Its Applications

Statistical Cognition Theory and Its Applications:An Overview

Mathematical theory of Bayesian statistics for unknown information source

Inferential Moments of Uncertain Multivariable Systems

Are we really Bayesian? Probabilistic inference shows sub-optimal knowledge transfer

A Nonparametric Bayesian Framework for Uncertainty Quantification in Stochastic Simulation

Bayesian inference: More than Bayes's theorem

Uncertainty theory and its axiomatic foundations

Bayesian questions with frequentist answers

A Theory of Statistical Inference for Ensuring the Robustness of Scientific Results

Bayesian inference for psychology. Part I: Theoretical advantages and practical ramifications

A Unified Framework For Performance Analysis Of Bayesian Inference

Bayesian Updating Method Under Random and Interval Hybrid Uncertainties

Bayesian meta learning for trustworthy uncertainty quantification

Bayesian forecasting with information theory

Valid and efficient imprecise-probabilistic inference with partial priors, II. General framework

Understanding Approximation for Bayesian Inference in Neural Networks

Bayesian Bandit Algorithms with Approximate Inference in Stochastic Linear Bandits

Be Bayesian by Attachments to Catch More Uncertainty

Theoretical characterization of uncertainty in high-dimensional linear classification