Bayesian statistical approaches to evaluating cognitive models

被引:12
作者
Annis, Jeffrey [1 ]
Palmeri, Thomas J. [1 ]
机构
[1] Vanderbilt Univ, Dept Psychol, Nashville, TN 37240 USA
关键词
MARGINAL LIKELIHOOD; INDIVIDUAL-DIFFERENCES; HIERARCHICAL-MODELS; RECOGNITION MEMORY; PRIOR SENSITIVITY; TUTORIAL; DISTRIBUTIONS; CHOICE; COMPUTATION; ATTENTION;
D O I
10.1002/wcs.1458
中图分类号
B84 [心理学];
学科分类号
04 ; 0402 ;
摘要
Cognitive models aim to explain complex human behavior in terms of hypothesized mechanisms of the mind. These mechanisms can be formalized in terms of mathematical structures containing parameters that are theoretically meaningful. For example, in the case of perceptual decision making, model parameters might correspond to theoretical constructs like response bias, evidence quality, response caution, and the like. Formal cognitive models go beyond verbal models in that cognitive mechanisms are instantiated in terms of mathematics and they go beyond statistical models in that cognitive model parameters are psychologically interpretable. We explore three key elements used to formally evaluate cognitive models: parameter estimation, model prediction, and model selection. We compare and contrast traditional approaches with Bayesian statistical approaches to performing each of these three elements. Traditional approaches rely on an array of seemingly ad hoc techniques, whereas Bayesian statistical approaches rely on a single, principled, internally consistent system. We illustrate the Bayesian statistical approach to evaluating cognitive models using a running example of the Linear Ballistic Accumulator model of decision making (Brown SD, Heathcote A. The simplest complete model of choice response time: linear ballistic accumulation. Cogn Psychol 2008, 57:153-178). WIREs Cogn Sci 2018, 9:e1458. doi: 10.1002/wcs.1458
引用
收藏
页数:19
相关论文
共 132 条
[51]   Pinning down the theoretical commitments of Bayesian cognitive models [J].
Jones, Matt ;
Love, Bradley C. .
BEHAVIORAL AND BRAIN SCIENCES, 2011, 34 (04) :215-+
[52]   The selection of prior distributions by formal rules [J].
Kass, RE ;
Wasserman, L .
JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN STATISTICAL ASSOCIATION, 1996, 91 (435) :1343-1370
[53]   BAYES FACTORS [J].
KASS, RE ;
RAFTERY, AE .
JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN STATISTICAL ASSOCIATION, 1995, 90 (430) :773-795
[54]   How hierarchical models improve point estimates of model parameters at the individual level [J].
Katahira, Kentaro .
JOURNAL OF MATHEMATICAL PSYCHOLOGY, 2016, 73 :37-58
[55]  
Kruschke J., 2014, JAGS STAN
[56]   Posterior predictive checks can and should be Bayesian: Comment on Gelman and Shalizi, Philosophy and the practice of Bayesian statistics' [J].
Kruschke, John K. .
BRITISH JOURNAL OF MATHEMATICAL & STATISTICAL PSYCHOLOGY, 2013, 66 (01) :45-56
[57]   Bayesian Assessment of Null Values Via Parameter Estimation and Model Comparison [J].
Kruschke, John K. .
PERSPECTIVES ON PSYCHOLOGICAL SCIENCE, 2011, 6 (03) :299-312
[58]   Bayesian data analysis [J].
Kruschke, John K. .
WILEY INTERDISCIPLINARY REVIEWS-COGNITIVE SCIENCE, 2010, 1 (05) :658-676
[59]   Computing Bayes factors using thermodynamic integration [J].
Lartillot, N ;
Philippe, H .
SYSTEMATIC BIOLOGY, 2006, 55 (02) :195-207
[60]   Modeling individual differences in cognition [J].
Lee, MD ;
Webb, MR .
PSYCHONOMIC BULLETIN & REVIEW, 2005, 12 (04) :605-621