Biases and Variability from Costly Bayesian Inference

Resource-rational account of sequential effects in human prediction

An abundant literature reports on 'sequential effects' observed when humans make predictions on the basis of stochastic sequences of stimuli. Such sequential effects represent departures from an optimal, Bayesian process. A prominent explanation posits that humans are adapted to changing environments, and erroneously assume non-stationarity of the environment, even if the latter is static. As a result, their predictions fluctuate over time. We propose a different explanation in which sub-optimal and fluctuating predictions result from cognitive constraints (or costs), under which humans however behave rationally. We devise a framework of costly inference, in which we develop two classes of models that differ by the nature of the constraints at play: in one case the precision of beliefs comes at a cost, resulting in an exponential forgetting of past observations, while in the other beliefs with high predictive power are favored. To compare model predictions to human behavior, we carry out a prediction task that uses binary random stimuli, with probabilities ranging from 0.05 to 0.95. Although in this task the environment is static and the Bayesian belief converges, subjects' predictions fluctuate and are biased toward the recent stimulus history. Both classes of models capture this 'attractive effect', but they depart in their characterization of higher-order effects. Only the precision-cost model reproduces a 'repulsive effect', observed in the data, in which predictions are biased away from stimuli presented in more distant trials. Our experimental results reveal systematic modulations in sequential effects, which our theoretical approach accounts for in terms of rationality under cognitive constraints.

The effects of base rate neglect on sequential belief updating and real-world beliefs

Base-rate neglect is a pervasive bias in judgment that is conceptualized as underweighting of prior information and can have serious consequences in real-world scenarios. This bias is thought to reflect variability in inferential processes but empirical support for a cohesive theory of base-rate neglect with sufficient explanatory power to account for longer-term and real-world beliefs is lacking. A Bayesian formalization of base-rate neglect in the context of sequential belief updating predicts that belief trajectories should exhibit dynamic patterns of dependence on the order in which evidence is presented and its consistency with prior beliefs. To test this, we developed a novel 'urn-and-beads' task that systematically manipulated the order of colored bead sequences and elicited beliefs via an incentive-compatible procedure. Our results in two independent online studies confirmed the predictions of the sequential base-rate neglect model: people exhibited beliefs that are more influenced by recent evidence and by evidence inconsistent with prior beliefs. We further found support for a noisy-sampling inference model whereby base-rate neglect results from rational discounting of noisy internal representations of prior beliefs. Finally, we found that model-derived indices of base-rate neglect-including noisier prior representation-correlated with propensity for unusual beliefs outside the laboratory. Our work supports the relevance of Bayesian accounts of sequential base-rate neglect to real-world beliefs and hints at strategies to minimize deleterious consequences of this pervasive bias.