Hostname: page-component-89b8bd64d-ksp62 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-05-08T08:51:05.523Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Although optimal models are useful, optimality claims are not that common

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 January 2019

Claire Chambers
Affiliation:
Department of Bioengineering and Department of Neuroscience, University of Pennsylvania, PA 19104. clairenc@seas.upenn.edukording@seas.upenn.eduhttp://kordinglab.com/
Konrad Paul Kording
Affiliation:
Department of Bioengineering and Department of Neuroscience, University of Pennsylvania, PA 19104. clairenc@seas.upenn.edukording@seas.upenn.eduhttp://kordinglab.com/

Abstract

Rahnev & Denison (R&D) argue that human behavior is often described as “optimal,” despite many previous findings of suboptimality. We address how the literature handles these concepts and discuss our own findings on suboptimality. Although we agree that the field should embrace the “systematic weirdness of human behavior” (sect. 6, para. 1), this does not detract from the value of the Bayesian approach.

Information

Type
Open Peer Commentary
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2018 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable