Literature DB >> 29589289

The relative merit of empirical priors in non-identifiable and sloppy models: Applications to models of learning and decision-making : Empirical priors.

Mikhail S Spektor1,2, David Kellen3.   

Abstract

Formal modeling approaches to cognition provide a principled characterization of observed responses in terms of a set of postulated processes, specifically in terms of parameters that modulate the latter. These model-based characterizations are useful to the extent that there is a clear, one-to-one mapping between parameters and model expectations (identifiability) and that parameters can be recovered from reasonably sized data using a typical experimental design (recoverability). These properties are sometimes not met for certain combinations of model classes and data. One suggestion to improve parameter identifiability and recoverability involves the use of "empirical priors", which constrain parameters according to a previously observed distribution of values. We assessed the efficacy of this proposal using a combination of real and artificial data. Our results showed that a point-estimate variant of the empirical-prior method could not improve parameter recovery systematically. We identified the source of poor parameter recovery in the low information content of the data. As a follow-up step, we developed a fully Bayesian variant of the empirical-prior method and assessed its performance. We find that even such a method that takes the covariance structure of the parameter distributions into account cannot reliably improve parameter recovery. We conclude that researchers should invest additional efforts in improving the informativeness of their experimental designs, as many of the problems associated to impoverished designs cannot be alleviated by modern statistical methods alone.

Keywords:  Empirical priors; Identifiability; Prospect theory; Reinforcement learning

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 29589289     DOI: 10.3758/s13423-018-1446-5

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev        ISSN: 1069-9384


  37 in total

1.  Modeling individual differences in cognition.

Authors:  Michael D Lee; Michael R Webb
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2005-08

2.  Determining informative priors for cognitive models.

Authors:  Michael D Lee; Wolf Vanpaemel
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2018-02

Review 3.  Using Bayesian hierarchical parameter estimation to assess the generalizability of cognitive models of choice.

Authors:  Benjamin Scheibehenne; Thorsten Pachur
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2015-04

Review 4.  A multinomial processing tree model for degradation and redintegration in immediate recall.

Authors:  R Schweickert
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  1993-03

Review 5.  Reward, motivation, and reinforcement learning.

Authors:  Peter Dayan; Bernard W Balleine
Journal:  Neuron       Date:  2002-10-10       Impact factor: 17.173

6.  Dynamic Interaction between Reinforcement Learning and Attention in Multidimensional Environments.

Authors:  Yuan Chang Leong; Angela Radulescu; Reka Daniel; Vivian DeWoskin; Yael Niv
Journal:  Neuron       Date:  2017-01-18       Impact factor: 17.173

7.  A Model-Based fMRI Analysis with Hierarchical Bayesian Parameter Estimation.

Authors:  Woo-Young Ahn; Adam Krawitz; Woojae Kim; Jerome R Busmeyer; Joshua W Brown
Journal:  J Neurosci Psychol Econ       Date:  2011-05

8.  Of matchers and maximizers: How competition shapes choice under risk and uncertainty.

Authors:  Christin Schulze; Don van Ravenzwaaij; Ben R Newell
Journal:  Cogn Psychol       Date:  2015-04-08       Impact factor: 3.468

9.  Word frequency of irrelevant speech distractors affects serial recall.

Authors:  Axel Buchner; Edgar Erdfelder
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2005-01

10.  Decomposing the roles of perseveration and expected value representation in models of the Iowa gambling task.

Authors:  Darrell A Worthy; Bo Pang; Kaileigh A Byrne
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2013-09-30
View more
  8 in total

1.  Improving the Reliability of Computational Analyses: Model-Based Planning and Its Relationship With Compulsivity.

Authors:  Vanessa M Brown; Jiazhou Chen; Claire M Gillan; Rebecca B Price
Journal:  Biol Psychiatry Cogn Neurosci Neuroimaging       Date:  2020-01-13

2.  Joint modeling of reaction times and choice improves parameter identifiability in reinforcement learning models.

Authors:  Ian C Ballard; Samuel M McClure
Journal:  J Neurosci Methods       Date:  2019-01-18       Impact factor: 2.390

3.  A new model of decision processing in instrumental learning tasks.

Authors:  Steven Miletić; Russell J Boag; Anne C Trutti; Niek Stevenson; Birte U Forstmann; Andrew Heathcote
Journal:  Elife       Date:  2021-01-27       Impact factor: 8.140

4.  Empirical underidentification in estimating random utility models: The role of choice sets and standardizations.

Authors:  Sebastian Olschewski; Pavel Sirotkin; Jörg Rieskamp
Journal:  Br J Math Stat Psychol       Date:  2021-11-08       Impact factor: 2.410

5.  A reinforcement learning diffusion decision model for value-based decisions.

Authors:  Laura Fontanesi; Sebastian Gluth; Mikhail S Spektor; Jörg Rieskamp
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2019-08

Review 6.  Models of Dynamic Belief Updating in Psychosis-A Review Across Different Computational Approaches.

Authors:  Teresa Katthagen; Sophie Fromm; Lara Wieland; Florian Schlagenhauf
Journal:  Front Psychiatry       Date:  2022-04-12       Impact factor: 5.435

7.  Context-dependent sensitivity to losses: Range and skew manipulations.

Authors:  Lukasz Walasek; Neil Stewart
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn       Date:  2018-10-25       Impact factor: 3.051

8.  Response time models separate single- and dual-process accounts of memory-based decisions.

Authors:  Peter M Kraemer; Laura Fontanesi; Mikhail S Spektor; Sebastian Gluth
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2021-02
  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.