Confirmation in the Cognitive Sciences: The Problematic Case of Bayesian Models [Book Review]

Minds and Machines 21 (3):389-410 (2011)
Bayesian models of human learning are becoming increasingly popular in cognitive science. We argue that their purported confirmation largely relies on a methodology that depends on premises that are inconsistent with the claim that people are Bayesian about learning and inference. Bayesian models in cognitive science derive their appeal from their normative claim that the modeled inference is in some sense rational. Standard accounts of the rationality of Bayesian inference imply predictions that an agent selects the option that maximizes the posterior expected utility. Experimental confirmation of the models, however, has been claimed because of groups of agents that probability match the posterior. Probability matching only constitutes support for the Bayesian claim if additional unobvious and untested (but testable) assumptions are invoked. The alternative strategy of weakening the underlying notion of rationality no longer distinguishes the Bayesian model uniquely. A new account of rationality—either for inference or for decision-making—is required to successfully confirm Bayesian models in cognitive science.
Keywords Bayesian modeling  Rationality  Levels of explanation  Methodology in cognitive science
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1007/s11023-011-9241-3
 Save to my reading list
Follow the author(s)
My bibliography
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Revision history Request removal from index
Download options
PhilPapers Archive

Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy on self-archival     Papers currently archived: 15,831
External links
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
Through your library
References found in this work BETA

View all 34 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA
Clark Glymour (2011). Osiander's psychology. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 34 (4):199-200.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles
M. Colombo & P. Series (2012). Bayes in the Brain--On Bayesian Modelling in Neuroscience. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 63 (3):697-723.
Miklós Rédei (1992). When Can Non-Commutative Statistical Inference Be Bayesian? International Studies in the Philosophy of Science 6 (2):129 – 132.
Miklós Rédei (1992). When Can Non‐Commutative Statistical Inference Be Bayesian? International Studies in the Philosophy of Science 6 (2):129-132.

Monthly downloads

Added to index


Total downloads

39 ( #84,059 of 1,724,771 )

Recent downloads (6 months)

6 ( #110,389 of 1,724,771 )

How can I increase my downloads?

My notes
Sign in to use this feature

Start a new thread
There  are no threads in this forum
Nothing in this forum yet.