Hostname: page-component-77f85d65b8-t6st2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-03-28T21:48:46.718Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The role of (bounded) optimization in theory testing and prediction

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 January 2019

Andrew Howes  and
Richard L. Lewis
Andrew Howes
Affiliation:
School of Computer Science, University of Birmingham, Edgbaston, Birmingham B15 3TT, United Kingdom. HowesA@bham.ac.ukhttps://www.cs.bham.ac.uk/~howesa/
Richard L. Lewis
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI 48109. rickl@umich.eduhttp://www-personal.umich.edu/~rickl/
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

We argue that a radically increased emphasis on (bounded) optimality can contribute to cognitive science by supporting prediction. Bounded optimality (computational rationality), an idea that borrowed from artificial intelligence, supports a priori behavioral prediction from constrained generative models of cognition. Bounded optimality thereby addresses serious failings with the logic and testing of descriptive models of perception and action.

Information

Type
Open Peer Commentary
Information
Behavioral and Brain Sciences , Volume 41 , 2018 , e232
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

References

Bowers, J. S. & Davis, C. J. (2012a) Bayesian just-so stories in psychology and neuroscience. Psychological Bulletin 138(3):389–414.Available at: http://eutils.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/eutils/elink.fcgi?dbfrom=pubmed&id=22545686&retmode=ref&cmd=prlinks.Google Scholar
Howes, A., Lewis, R. L. & Vera, A. (2009) Rational adaptation under task and processing constraints: implications for testing theories of cognition and action. Psychological Review 116(4):717–51.Google Scholar
Howes, A., Warren, P., Farmer, G., El-Deredy, W. & Lewis, R. L. (2016) Why contextual preference reversals maximize expected value. Psychological Review 123(4):368–91.Google Scholar
Lewis, R. L., Howes, A. & Singh, S. (2014) Computational rationality: Linking mechanism and behavior through bounded utility maximization. Topics in Cognitive Science 6(2):279–311.Google Scholar
Meyer, D. E. & Kieras, D. E. (1997) A computational theory of executive cognitive processes and multiple-task performance: Part 1. Basic mechanisms. Psychological Review 104(1):3–65.Google Scholar
Myers, C. W., Lewis, R. L. & Howes, A. (2013) Bounded optimal state estimation and control in visual search: Explaining distractor ratio effects. Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society 35:1049–54.Google Scholar
Russell, S. J. & Subramanian, D. (1995) Provably bounded-optimal agents. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 2:575–609.Google Scholar