Literature DB >> 21875247

Predicting the future as Bayesian inference: people combine prior knowledge with observations when estimating duration and extent.

Thomas L Griffiths1, Joshua B Tenenbaum.   

Abstract

Predicting the future is a basic problem that people have to solve every day and a component of planning, decision making, memory, and causal reasoning. In this article, we present 5 experiments testing a Bayesian model of predicting the duration or extent of phenomena from their current state. This Bayesian model indicates how people should combine prior knowledge with observed data. Comparing this model with human judgments provides constraints on possible algorithms that people might use to predict the future. In the experiments, we examine the effects of multiple observations, the effects of prior knowledge, and the difference between independent and dependent observations, using both descriptions and direct experience of prediction problems. The results indicate that people integrate prior knowledge and observed data in a way that is consistent with our Bayesian model, ruling out some simple heuristics for predicting the future. We suggest some mechanisms that might lead to more complete algorithmic-level accounts.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21875247     DOI: 10.1037/a0024899

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Exp Psychol Gen        ISSN: 0022-1015


  14 in total

1.  Exploring the knowledge behind predictions in everyday cognition: an iterated learning study.

Authors:  Rachel G Stephens; John C Dunn; Li-Lin Rao; Shu Li
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2015-10

2.  Decision makers calibrate behavioral persistence on the basis of time-interval experience.

Authors:  Joseph T McGuire; Joseph W Kable
Journal:  Cognition       Date:  2012-04-23

3.  Decision from Models: Generalizing Probability Information to Novel Tasks.

Authors:  Hang Zhang; Jacienta T Paily; Laurence T Maloney
Journal:  Decision (Wash D C )       Date:  2015-01

Review 4.  The anchoring bias reflects rational use of cognitive resources.

Authors:  Falk Lieder; Thomas L Griffiths; Quentin J M Huys; Noah D Goodman
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2018-02

5.  Mice infer probabilistic models for timing.

Authors:  Yi Li; Joshua Tate Dudman
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2013-09-30       Impact factor: 11.205

6.  The neural basis of belief updating and rational decision making.

Authors:  Anja Achtziger; Carlos Alós-Ferrer; Sabine Hügelschäfer; Marco Steinhauser
Journal:  Soc Cogn Affect Neurosci       Date:  2012-09-05       Impact factor: 3.436

Review 7.  Resolving uncertainty in a social world.

Authors:  Oriel FeldmanHall; Amitai Shenhav
Journal:  Nat Hum Behav       Date:  2019-04-22

8.  Model-based hierarchical reinforcement learning and human action control.

Authors:  Matthew Botvinick; Ari Weinstein
Journal:  Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci       Date:  2014-11-05       Impact factor: 6.237

9.  Rational temporal predictions can underlie apparent failures to delay gratification.

Authors:  Joseph T McGuire; Joseph W Kable
Journal:  Psychol Rev       Date:  2013-03-04       Impact factor: 8.247

10.  Are all data created equal?--Exploring some boundary conditions for a lazy intuitive statistician.

Authors:  Marcus Lindskog; Anders Winman
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2014-05-16       Impact factor: 3.240

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.