IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pcbi00/1007043.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Hierarchical Bayesian inference for concurrent model fitting and comparison for group studies

Author

Listed:
  • Payam Piray
  • Amir Dezfouli
  • Tom Heskes
  • Michael J Frank
  • Nathaniel D Daw

Abstract

Computational modeling plays an important role in modern neuroscience research. Much previous research has relied on statistical methods, separately, to address two problems that are actually interdependent. First, given a particular computational model, Bayesian hierarchical techniques have been used to estimate individual variation in parameters over a population of subjects, leveraging their population-level distributions. Second, candidate models are themselves compared, and individual variation in the expressed model estimated, according to the fits of the models to each subject. The interdependence between these two problems arises because the relevant population for estimating parameters of a model depends on which other subjects express the model. Here, we propose a hierarchical Bayesian inference (HBI) framework for concurrent model comparison, parameter estimation and inference at the population level, combining previous approaches. We show that this framework has important advantages for both parameter estimation and model comparison theoretically and experimentally. The parameters estimated by the HBI show smaller errors compared to other methods. Model comparison by HBI is robust against outliers and is not biased towards overly simplistic models. Furthermore, the fully Bayesian approach of our theory enables researchers to make inference on group-level parameters by performing HBI t-test.Author summary: Computational modeling of brain and behavior plays an important role in modern neuroscience research. By deconstructing mechanisms of behavior and quantifying parameters of interest, computational modeling helps researchers to study brain-behavior mechanisms. In neuroscience studies, a dataset includes a number of samples, and often the question of interest is to characterize parameters of interest in a population: Do patients with attention-deficit hyperactive disorders exhibit lower learning rate than the general population? Do cognitive enhancers, such as Ritalin, enhance parameters influencing decision making? The success of these efforts heavily depends on statistical methods making inference about validity and robustness of estimated parameters, as well as generalizability of computational models. In this work, we present a novel method, hierarchical Bayesian inference, for concurrent model comparison, parameter estimation and inference at the population level. We show, both theoretically and experimentally, that our approach has important advantages over previous methods. The proposed method has implications for computational modeling research in group studies across many areas of psychology, neuroscience, and psychiatry.

Suggested Citation

  • Payam Piray & Amir Dezfouli & Tom Heskes & Michael J Frank & Nathaniel D Daw, 2019. "Hierarchical Bayesian inference for concurrent model fitting and comparison for group studies," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(6), pages 1-34, June.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pcbi00:1007043
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1007043
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/ploscompbiol/article?id=10.1371/journal.pcbi.1007043
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/ploscompbiol/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pcbi.1007043&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pcbi.1007043?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Li, Jing Jing & Shi, Chengchun & Li, Lexin & Collins, Anne G.E., 2024. "Dynamic noise estimation: a generalized method for modeling noise fluctuations in decision-making," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 122383, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    2. Caroline J. Charpentier & Qianying Wu & Seokyoung Min & Weilun Ding & Jeffrey Cockburn & John P. O’Doherty, 2024. "Heterogeneity in strategy use during arbitration between experiential and observational learning," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 15(1), pages 1-20, December.
    3. repec:cup:judgdm:v:16:y:2021:i:6:p:1413-1438 is not listed on IDEAS
    4. Jacqueline N. Zadelaar & Joost A. Agelink van Rentergem & Jessica V. Schaaf & Tycho J. Dekkers & Nathalie de Vent & Laura M. S. Dekkers & Maria C. Olthof & Brenda R. J. Jansen & Hilde M. Huizenga, 2021. "Development of decision making based on internal and external information: A hierarchical Bayesian approach," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 16(6), pages 1413-1438, November.
    5. Payam Piray & Nathaniel D Daw, 2020. "A simple model for learning in volatile environments," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 16(7), pages 1-26, July.
    6. Johannes Algermissen & Jennifer C. Swart & René Scheeringa & Roshan Cools & Hanneke E. M. den Ouden, 2024. "Prefrontal signals precede striatal signals for biased credit assignment in motivational learning biases," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 15(1), pages 1-19, December.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pcbi00:1007043. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: ploscompbiol (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/ploscompbiol/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.