A Duet for one

This paper considers communication in terms of inference about the behaviour of others (and our own behaviour). It is based on the premise that our sensations are largely generated by other agents like ourselves. This means, we are trying to infer how our sensations are caused by others, while they are trying to infer our behaviour: for example, in the dialogue between two speakers. We suggest that the infinite regress induced by modelling another agent – who is modelling you – can be finessed if you both possess the same model. In other words, the sensations caused by others and oneself are generated by the same process. This leads to a view of communication based upon a narrative that is shared by agents who are exchanging sensory signals. Crucially, this narrative transcends agency – and simply involves intermittently attending to and attenuating sensory input. Attending to sensations enables the shared narrative to predict the sensations generated by another (i.e. to listen), while attenuating sensory input enables one to articulate the narrative (i.e. to speak). This produces a reciprocal exchange of sensory signals that, formally, induces a generalised synchrony between internal (neuronal) brain states generating predictions in both agents. We develop the arguments behind this perspective, using an active (Bayesian) inference framework and offer some simulations (of birdsong) as proof of principle.     

Team adaptation to an unforeseen system failure: Limits of the potential aids of shared knowledge and standardized communication

The present study investigates the potential benefits of a team’s shared knowledge and standardized communication in adapting to an unforeseen change by combining literature on adaptation and team performance. Each of 20 teams performed a dynamic team task and was suddenly confronted with a simulated partial system breakdown. Results show that a methodological framework designed to describe performance adaptation to an unforeseen change in individuals can also be used to model performance adaptation in teams. The system failure was followed by a performance drop and a subsequent period of gradual performance recovery. Accuracy of teams’ shared knowledge correlated positively with performance before and after the change, confirming and extending the literature on shared mental models. However, the amount of knowledge similarity did not aid teams in adapting to the unforeseen system breakdown. In addition, improving teams’ standardized communication had no damping effect on the sudden performance drop and neither helped them during the subsequent recovery period. These results show that even though shared knowledge and efficient communication are of high value to team performance and success, these characteristics are limited in aiding adaptive team performance after unforeseen unique changes that force team members to update their strategies.     

Identifying expectations about the strength of causal relationships

When we try to identify causal relationships, how strong do we expect that relationship to be? Bayesian models of causal induction rely on assumptions regarding people’s a priori beliefs about causal systems, with recent research focusing on people’s expectations about the strength of causes. These expectations are expressed in terms of prior probability distributions. While proposals about the form of such prior distributions have been made previously, many different distributions are possible, making it difficult to test such proposals exhaustively. In Experiment 1 we used iterated learning—a method in which participants make inferences about data generated based on their own responses in previous trials—to estimate participants’ prior beliefs about the strengths of causes. This method produced estimated prior distributions that were quite different from those previously proposed in the literature. Experiment 2 collected a large set of human judgments on the strength of causal relationships to be used as a benchmark for evaluating different models, using stimuli that cover a wider and more systematic set of contingencies than previous research. Using these judgments, we evaluated the predictions of various Bayesian models. The Bayesian model with priors estimated via iterated learning compared favorably against the others. Experiment 3 estimated participants’ prior beliefs concerning different causal systems, revealing key similarities in their expectations across diverse scenarios.     

Polytomous multilevel testlet models for testlet‐based assessments with complex sampling designs

A pplications of standard item response theory models assume local independence of items and persons. This paper presents polytomous multilevel testlet models for dual dependence due to item and person clustering in testlet‐based assessments with clustered samples. Simulation and survey data were analysed with a multilevel partial credit testlet model. This model was compared with three alternative models – a testlet partial credit model (PCM), multilevel PCM, and PCM – in terms of model parameter estimation. The results indicated that the deviance information criterion was the fit index that always correctly identified the true multilevel testlet model based on the quantified evidence in model selection, while the Akaike and Bayesian information criteria could not identify the true model. In general, the estimation model and the magnitude of item and person clustering impacted the estimation accuracy of ability parameters, while only the estimation model and the magnitude of item clustering affected the item parameter estimation accuracy. Furthermore, ignoring item clustering effects produced higher total errors in item parameter estimates but did not have much impact on the accuracy of ability parameter estimates, while ignoring person clustering effects yielded higher total errors in ability parameter estimates but did not have much effect on the accuracy of item parameter estimates. When both clustering effects were ignored in the PCM, item and ability parameter estimation accuracy was reduced.     

Estimation and visualization of confusability matrices from adaptive measurement data

We present a simple but effective method based on Luce’s choice axiom [Luce, R.D. (1959). Individual choice behavior: A theoretical analysis. New York: John Wiley & Sons] for consistent estimation of the pairwise confusabilities of items in a multiple-choice recognition task with arbitrarily chosen choice-sets. The method combines the exact (non-asymptotic) Bayesian way of assessing uncertainty with the unbiasedness emphasized in the classical frequentist approach.We apply the method to data collected using an adaptive computer game designed for prevention of reading disability. A player’s estimated confusability of phonemes (or more accurately, phoneme-grapheme connections) and larger units of language is visualized in an easily understood way with color cues and explicit indication of the accuracy of the estimates. Visualization of learning-related changes in the player’s performance is considered.The empirical validity of the choice axiom is evaluated using the game data itself. The axiom appears to hold reasonably well although a small systematic violation is observable for the smallest choice-set sizes.     

Bayesian parameter estimation in the Expectancy Valence model of the Iowa gambling task

The purpose of the popular Iowa gambling task is to study decision making deficits in clinical populations by mimicking real-life decision making in an experimental context. Busemeyer and Stout [Busemeyer, J. R., & Stout, J. C. (2002). A contribution of cognitive decision models to clinical assessment: Decomposing performance on the Bechara gambling task. Psychological Assessment, 14, 253-262] proposed an “Expectancy Valence” reinforcement learning model that estimates three latent components which are assumed to jointly determine choice behavior in the Iowa gambling task: weighing of wins versus losses, memory for past payoffs, and response consistency. In this article we explore the statistical properties of the Expectancy Valence model. We first demonstrate the difficulty of applying the model on the level of a single participant, we then propose and implement a Bayesian hierarchical estimation procedure to coherently combine information from different participants, and we finally apply the Bayesian estimation procedure to data from an experiment designed to provide a test of specific influence.     

Distribution-free tests of stochastic dominance for small samples

One variable is said to “stochastically dominate” another if the probability of observations smaller than x is greater for one variable than the other, for all x. Inferring stochastic dominance from data samples is important for many applications of econometrics and experimental psychology, but little is known about the performance of existing inferential methods. Through simulation, we show that three of the most widely used inferential methods are inadequate for use in small samples of the size commonly encountered in many applications (up to 400 observations from each distribution). We develop two new inferential methods that perform very well in a limited, but practically important, case where the two variables are guaranteed not to be equal in distribution. We also show that extensions of these new methods, and an improved version of an existing method, perform quite well in the original, unlimited case.     

Beta-MPT: Multinomial processing tree models for addressing individual differences

Traditionally, multinomial processing tree (MPT) models are applied to groups of homogeneous participants, where all participants within a group are assumed to have identical MPT model parameter values. This assumption is unreasonable when MPT models are used for clinical assessment, and it often may be suspect for applications to ordinary psychological experiments. One method for dealing with parameter variability is to incorporate random effects assumptions into a model. This is achieved by assuming that participants’ parameters are drawn independently from some specified multivariate hyperdistribution. In this paper we explore the assumption that the hyperdistribution consists of independent beta distributions, one for each MPT model parameter. These beta-MPT models are ‘hierarchical models’, and their statistical inference is different from the usual approaches based on data aggregated over participants. The paper provides both classical (frequentist) and hierarchical Bayesian approaches to statistical inference for beta-MPT models. In simple cases the likelihood function can be obtained analytically; however, for more complex cases, Markov Chain Monte Carlo algorithms are constructed to assist both approaches to inference. Examples based on clinical assessment studies are provided to demonstrate the advantages of hierarchical MPT models over aggregate analysis in the presence of individual differences.