Widening Access to Bayesian Problem Solving.

Bayesian networks assistive software technology decision making probabilistic reasoning

Journal

Frontiers in psychology
ISSN: 1664-1078
Titre abrégé: Front Psychol
Pays: Switzerland
ID NLM: 101550902

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
2020
Historique:
received: 20 12 2019
accepted: 19 03 2020
entrez: 25 4 2020
pubmed: 25 4 2020
medline: 25 4 2020
Statut: epublish

Résumé

Bayesian reasoning and decision making is widely considered normative because it minimizes prediction error in a coherent way. However, it is often difficult to apply Bayesian principles to complex real world problems, which typically have many unknowns and interconnected variables. Bayesian network modeling techniques make it possible to model such problems and obtain precise predictions about the causal impact that changing the value of one variable may have on the values of other variables connected to it. But Bayesian modeling is itself complex, and has until now remained largely inaccessible to lay people. In a large scale lab experiment, we provide proof of principle that a Bayesian network modeling tool, adapted to provide basic training and guidance on the modeling process to beginners without requiring knowledge of the mathematical machinery working behind the scenes, significantly helps lay people find normative Bayesian solutions to complex problems, compared to generic training on probabilistic reasoning. We discuss the implications of this finding for the use of Bayesian network software tools in applied contexts such as security, medical, forensic, economic or environmental decision making.

Identifiants

pubmed: 32328015
doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2020.00660
pmc: PMC7160335
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Pagination

660

Informations de copyright

Copyright © 2020 Cruz, Desai, Dewitt, Hahn, Lagnado, Liefgreen, Phillips, Pilditch and Tešić.

Références

Mem Cognit. 2017 Feb;45(2):245-260
pubmed: 27826953
Crime Sci. 2016 May 25;5:9
pubmed: 27376015
Annu Rev Psychol. 2020 Jan 4;71:305-330
pubmed: 31514580
Psychol Sci. 2019 Feb;30(2):250-260
pubmed: 30597122
Top Cogn Sci. 2019 Jan;11(1):194-206
pubmed: 30585433
Psychol Sci. 2010 Mar;21(3):329-36
pubmed: 20424064
Psychol Rev. 2009 Oct;116(4):856-74
pubmed: 19839686
Psychol Rev. 2017 Apr;124(3):301-338
pubmed: 28240922
Annu Rev Psychol. 2015 Jan 3;66:223-47
pubmed: 25061673
J Biomed Inform. 2010 Aug;43(4):485-95
pubmed: 20152931
Artif Intell Med. 2016 Feb;67:75-93
pubmed: 26830286
Cogn Psychol. 2016 Jun;87:88-134
pubmed: 27261539

Auteurs

Nicole Cruz (N)

Department of Psychological Sciences, Birkbeck, University of London, London, United Kingdom.

Saoirse Connor Desai (SC)

Department of Psychology, City, University of London, London, United Kingdom.

Stephen Dewitt (S)

Department of Experimental Psychology, University College London, London, United Kingdom.

Ulrike Hahn (U)

Department of Psychological Sciences, Birkbeck, University of London, London, United Kingdom.

David Lagnado (D)

Department of Experimental Psychology, University College London, London, United Kingdom.

Alice Liefgreen (A)

Department of Experimental Psychology, University College London, London, United Kingdom.

Kirsty Phillips (K)

Department of Psychological Sciences, Birkbeck, University of London, London, United Kingdom.

Toby Pilditch (T)

Department of Experimental Psychology, University College London, London, United Kingdom.

Marko Tešić (M)

Department of Psychological Sciences, Birkbeck, University of London, London, United Kingdom.

Classifications MeSH