Seminars

The ‘quantification’ of perception is arguably both one of the most important and most difficult aspects of perception study. This is particularly true in visual perception, in which the evaluation of the perceptual threshold is a pillar of the experimental process. The choice of the correct adaptive psychometric procedure, as well as the selection of the proper parameters, is a difficult but key aspect of the experimental protocol. For instance, Bayesian methods such as QUEST, require the a priori choice of a family of functions (e.g. Gaussian), which is rarely known before the experiment, as well as the specification of multiple parameters. Importantly, the choice of an ill-fitted function or parameters will induce costly mistakes and errors in the experimental process. In this talk we discuss the existing methods and introduce a new adaptive procedure to solve this problem, named, ZOOM (Zooming Optimistic Optimization of Models), based on recent advances in optimization and statistical learning. Compared to existing approaches, ZOOM is completely parameter free and model-free, i.e. can be applied on any arbitrary psychometric problem. Moreover, ZOOM parameters are self-tuned, thus do not need to be manually chosen using heuristics (eg. step size in the Staircase method), preventing further errors. Finally, ZOOM is based on state-of-the-art optimization theory, providing strong mathematical guarantees that are missing from many of its alternatives, while being the most accurate and robust in real life conditions. In our experiments and simulations, ZOOM was found to be significantly better than its alternative, in particular for difficult psychometric functions or when the parameters when not properly chosen. ZOOM is open source, and its implementation is freely available on the web. Given these advantages and its ease of use, we argue that ZOOM can improve the process of many psychophysics experiments.

To efficiently process sensory information, the brain relies on statistical regularities in the input. While generally improving the reliability of sensory estimates, this strategy also induces perceptual illusions that help reveal the underlying computational principles. Focusing on auditory and visual perception, in my talk I will describe how the brain exploits statistical regularities within and across the senses for the perception space, time and multisensory integration. In particular, I will show how results from a series of psychophysical experiments can be interpreted in the light of Bayesian Decision Theory, and I will demonstrate how such canonical computations can be implemented into simple and biologically plausible neural circuits. Finally, I will show how such principles of sensory information processing can be leveraged in virtual and augmented reality to overcome display limitations and expand human perception.

Common factors are omnipresent in everyday life, e.g., it is widely held that there is a common factor g for intelligence. In vision, however, there seems to be a multitude of specific factors rather than a strong and unique common factor. In my thesis, I first examined the multidimensionality of the structure underlying visual illusions. To this aim, the susceptibility to various visual illusions was measured. In addition, subjects were tested with variants of the same illusion, which differed in spatial features, luminance, orientation, or contextual conditions. Only weak correlations were observed between the susceptibility to different visual illusions. An individual showing a strong susceptibility to one visual illusion does not necessarily show a strong susceptibility to other visual illusions, suggesting that the structure underlying visual illusions is multifactorial. In contrast, there were strong correlations between the susceptibility to variants of the same illusion. Hence, factors seem to be illusion-specific but not feature-specific. Second, I investigated whether a strong visual factor emerges in healthy elderly and patients with schizophrenia, which may be expected from the general decline in perceptual abilities usually reported in these two populations compared to healthy young adults. Similarly, a strong visual factor may emerge in action video gamers, who often show enhanced perceptual performance compared to non-video gamers. Hence, healthy elderly, patients with schizophrenia, and action video gamers were tested with a battery of visual tasks, such as a contrast detection and orientation discrimination task. As in control groups, between-task correlations were weak in general, which argues against the emergence of a strong common factor for vision in these populations. While similar tasks are usually assumed to rely on similar neural mechanisms, the performances in different visual tasks were only weakly related to each other, i.e., performance does not generalize across visual tasks. These results highlight the relevance of an individual differences approach to unravel the multidimensionality of the visual structure.

Motor learning is typically assessed in the lab, affording a high degree of control over the task environment. However, this level of control often comes at the cost of smaller sample sizes and a homogenous pool of participants (e.g. college students). To address this, we have designed a web-based motor learning experiment, making it possible to reach a larger, more diverse set of participants. As a proof-of-concept, we collected 1,581 participants completing a visuomotor rotation task, where participants controlled a visual cursor on the screen with their mouse and trackpad. Motor learning was indexed by how fast participants were able to compensate for a 45° rotation imposed between the cursor and their actual movement. Using a cross-validated LASSO regression, we found that motor learning varied significantly with the participant’s age and sex, and also strongly correlated with the location of the target, visual acuity, and satisfaction with the experiment. In contrast, participants' mouse and browser type were features eliminated by the model, indicating that motor performance was not influenced by variations in computer hardware and software. Together, this proof-of-concept study demonstrates how large datasets can generate important insights into the factors underlying motor learning.

The goal of this talk is to first provide a realization of why the replication crisis is omnipresent and then point to several tools via which the listener can improve their own work. To do so, I will go through our own work on social thermoregulation, point out why I thought changes were necessary, discuss which shortcomings we have in our own work, which measures we have taken to reduce those shortcomings, which tools we have relied on to do so, and which steps I believe we still need to make. Specifically, I will go through the following points: Major replication failures and data fabrication in the field of psychology; Replication failures of social thermoregulation studies; Realization that many of our studies were underpowered; Realization that many of our studies were very narrow in scope (i.e., in undergraduate students and mostly in EU/US); Realization that a lot of our measures were not independently validated. I will show these for our own work (but will also show why, via a meta-analysis, we have enough confidence to proceed with social thermoregulation research). Throughout the talk I will point you to the following tools that facilitate our work: Templates for exploratory and confirmatory research and for meta-analyses (developed for our work, but easily adaptable for other programs). I will also show you how to fork our templates; A lab philosophy; A research milestones sheet for collaborations and overviews; Excel sheet for contributorship; A tutorial for exploratory research; I would recommend listeners to read through this chapter before the talk (I will repeat a lot of that work, but I will go into greater depth). own work. To do so, I will go through our own work on social thermoregulation, point out why I thought changes were necessary, discuss which shortcomings we have in our own work, which measures we have taken to reduce those shortcomings, which tools we have relied on to do so, and which steps I believe we still need to make.

In recent years, more and more evidence has accumulated showing that many studies in psychological research cannot be replicated, effects are often overestimated, and little is publicly known about unsuccessful studies. What are the mechanisms behind this crisis? In this talk, I will explain how we got there and why it is still difficult to break free from the current system. I will further explain which role Open Science plays within the replication crisis and how it can help to improve science. This might sound like a pessimistic, negative talk, but I will end it on a positive note, I promise!

Case-control comparisons are a gold standard method for diagnosing and researching neuropsychological deficits and dissociations at the single-case level. These statistical tests, developed by John Crawford and collaborators, provide quantitative criteria for the classical concepts of deficit, dissociation and double-dissociation. Much attention has been given to the control of Type I (false positive) errors for these tests, but far less to the avoidance of Type II (false negative) errors; that is, to statistical power. I will describe the origins and limits of statistical power for case-control comparisons, showing that there are hard upper limits on power, which have important implications for the design and interpretation of single-case studies. My aim is to stimulate discussion of the inferential status of single-case neuropsychological evidence, particularly with respect to contemporary ideals of open science and study preregistration.

Many psychological theories assume that qualitatively different cognitive processes can result in identical responses. Multinomial processing tree (MPT) models allow researchers to disentangle latent cognitive processes based on observed response frequencies. Recently, MPT models have been extended to explicitly account for participant and item heterogeneity. These hierarchical Bayesian MPT models provide the opportunity to connect two traditionally isolated disciplines. Whereas cognitive psychology has often focused on the experimental validation of MPT model parameters on the group level, psychometrics provides the necessary concepts and tools for measuring differences in MPT parameters on the item or person level. Moreover, MPT parameters can be regressed on covariates to model latent processes as a function of personality traits or other person characteristics.

Reliable and validated measures of emotion in animals are of great import; they are crucial to better understanding and developing treatments for human mood disorders, and they are necessary for ensuring good animal welfare. We have developed a novel measure of emotion in animals that is grounded in theory and psychological research – decision-making under ambiguity. Specifically, we consider that more ‘optimistic’ decisions about ambiguous stimuli reflect more positive emotional states, while the opposite is true for more ‘pessimistic’ decisions. In this talk, we will outline the background behind and implementation of this measure, meta-analyses that have been conducted to validate the measure, and discuss how computational modelling has been used to further understand the cognitive processes underlying ‘optimistic’ and ‘pessimistic’ decision-making as an indicator of animal emotion and welfare.