Literature DB >> 17685787

Visual estimation under risk.

Michael S Landy1, Ross Goutcher, Julia Trommershäuser, Pascal Mamassian.   

Abstract

We investigate whether observers take into account their visual uncertainty in an optimal manner in a perceptual estimation task with explicit rewards and penalties for performance. Observers judged the mean orientation of a briefly presented texture consisting of a collection of line segments. The mean and, in some experiments, the variance of the distribution of line orientations changed from trial to trial. Subjects tried to maximize the number of points won in a "bet" on the mean texture orientation. They placed their bet by rotating a visual display that indicated two ranges of orientations: a reward region and a neighboring penalty region. Subjects won 100 points if the mean texture orientation fell within the reward region, and subjects lost points (0, 100, or 500, in separate blocks) if the mean orientation fell in the penalty region. We compared each subject's performance to a decision strategy that maximizes expected gain (MEG). For the nonzero-penalty conditions, this ideal strategy predicts subjects will adjust the payoff display to shift the center of the reward region away from the perceived mean texture orientation, putting the perceived mean orientation on the opposite side of the reward region from the penalty region. This shift is predicted to be larger for (1) larger penalties, (2) penalty regions located closer to the payoff region, and (3) larger stimulus variability. While some subjects' performance was nearly optimal, other subjects displayed a variety of suboptimal strategies when stimulus variability was high and changed unpredictably from trial to trial.

Mesh:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17685787      PMCID: PMC2638507          DOI: 10.1167/7.6.4

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Vis        ISSN: 1534-7362            Impact factor:   2.240


  13 in total

1.  Information limit on the spatial integration of local orientation signals.

Authors:  S C Dakin
Journal:  J Opt Soc Am A Opt Image Sci Vis       Date:  2001-05       Impact factor: 2.129

Review 2.  Object perception as Bayesian inference.

Authors:  Daniel Kersten; Pascal Mamassian; Alan Yuille
Journal:  Annu Rev Psychol       Date:  2004       Impact factor: 24.137

3.  Statistical decision theory and trade-offs in the control of motor response.

Authors:  Julia Trommershäuser; Laurence T Maloney; Michael S Landy
Journal:  Spat Vis       Date:  2003

4.  Statistical decision theory and the selection of rapid, goal-directed movements.

Authors:  Julia Trommershäuser; Laurence T Maloney; Michael S Landy
Journal:  J Opt Soc Am A Opt Image Sci Vis       Date:  2003-07       Impact factor: 2.129

5.  Decisions from experience and the effect of rare events in risky choice.

Authors:  Ralph Hertwig; Greg Barron; Elke U Weber; Ido Erev
Journal:  Psychol Sci       Date:  2004-08

6.  Humans rapidly estimate expected gain in movement planning.

Authors:  Julia Trommershäuser; Michael S Landy; Laurence T Maloney
Journal:  Psychol Sci       Date:  2006-11

7.  The computation of orientation statistics from visual texture.

Authors:  S C Dakin; R J Watt
Journal:  Vision Res       Date:  1997-11       Impact factor: 1.886

8.  Examining edge- and region-based texture analysis mechanisms.

Authors:  S S Wolfson; M S Landy
Journal:  Vision Res       Date:  1998-02       Impact factor: 1.886

9.  The VideoToolbox software for visual psychophysics: transforming numbers into movies.

Authors:  D G Pelli
Journal:  Spat Vis       Date:  1997

10.  Predicting risk sensitivity in humans and lower animals: risk as variance or coefficient of variation.

Authors:  Elke U Weber; Sharoni Shafir; Ann-Renee Blais
Journal:  Psychol Rev       Date:  2004-04       Impact factor: 8.934

View more
  17 in total

1.  Dynamic estimation of task-relevant variance in movement under risk.

Authors:  Michael S Landy; Julia Trommershäuser; Nathaniel D Daw
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2012-09-12       Impact factor: 6.167

2.  A detailed comparison of optimality and simplicity in perceptual decision making.

Authors:  Shan Shen; Wei Ji Ma
Journal:  Psychol Rev       Date:  2016-05-12       Impact factor: 8.934

3.  Effects of category-specific costs on neural systems for perceptual decision-making.

Authors:  Stephen M Fleming; Louise Whiteley; Oliver J Hulme; Maneesh Sahani; Raymond J Dolan
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2010-03-31       Impact factor: 2.714

4.  Probability matching as a computational strategy used in perception.

Authors:  David R Wozny; Ulrik R Beierholm; Ladan Shams
Journal:  PLoS Comput Biol       Date:  2010-08-05       Impact factor: 4.475

Review 5.  Probabilistic vs. non-probabilistic approaches to the neurobiology of perceptual decision-making.

Authors:  Jan Drugowitsch; Alexandre Pouget
Journal:  Curr Opin Neurobiol       Date:  2012-08-09       Impact factor: 6.627

6.  Implicit knowledge of visual uncertainty guides decisions with asymmetric outcomes.

Authors:  Louise Whiteley; Maneesh Sahani
Journal:  J Vis       Date:  2008-03-06       Impact factor: 2.240

7.  Suboptimality in Perceptual Decision Making.

Authors:  Dobromir Rahnev; Rachel N Denison
Journal:  Behav Brain Sci       Date:  2018-02-27       Impact factor: 12.579

8.  Sensory uncertainty impacts avoidance during spatial decisions.

Authors:  Kevin Jarbo; Rory Flemming; Timothy D Verstynen
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2017-12-14       Impact factor: 1.972

9.  Variance misperception under skewed empirical noise statistics explains overconfidence in the visual periphery.

Authors:  Charles J Winter; Megan A K Peters
Journal:  Atten Percept Psychophys       Date:  2021-08-23       Impact factor: 2.199

Review 10.  The neural basis of metacognitive ability.

Authors:  Stephen M Fleming; Raymond J Dolan
Journal:  Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci       Date:  2012-05-19       Impact factor: 6.237

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.