The Active Bayesian Brain and the Rorschach Task

Q3 Psychology
G. Meyer, K. Friston
{"title":"The Active Bayesian Brain and the Rorschach Task","authors":"G. Meyer, K. Friston","doi":"10.1027/1192-5604/a000158","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract. The Rorschach offers a unique and interesting paradigm from the perspective of the (Bayesian) brain. This contribution to the cross-disciplinary special issue considers the Rorschach from the perspective of perceptual inference in the brain and how it might inform subject-specific differences in perceptual synthesis. Before doing so, we provide a broad overview of active inference in its various manifestations. In brief, active inference supposes that our perceptions are the best hypothesis to explain sensory impressions. On a Bayesian account, the requisite belief updating rests sensitively upon the precision or confidence ascribed to sensory input, relative to prior beliefs about the causes of sensations. This focus – on the balance between sensory and prior precision – has been a useful construct in both cognitive science (e.g., as a formal explanation for attention) and neuropsychology (e.g., as a formal explanation for aberrant or false inference in hallucinations). In this setting, false inference is generally understood as abnormally high precision afforded to high-level hypotheses or explanations for visual input, which may compensate for a failure to attenuate sensory precision. On this view, the Rorschach offers an interesting paradigm because the amount of precise information about the causes of visual input is deliberately minimized – and rendered ambiguous – thereby placing greater emphasis on prior beliefs entertained by the respondent. We close by exploring this issue and several other areas of intersection between Rorschach responding and active inference.","PeriodicalId":39365,"journal":{"name":"Rorschachiana","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-09-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"5","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Rorschachiana","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1027/1192-5604/a000158","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Psychology","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 5

Abstract

Abstract. The Rorschach offers a unique and interesting paradigm from the perspective of the (Bayesian) brain. This contribution to the cross-disciplinary special issue considers the Rorschach from the perspective of perceptual inference in the brain and how it might inform subject-specific differences in perceptual synthesis. Before doing so, we provide a broad overview of active inference in its various manifestations. In brief, active inference supposes that our perceptions are the best hypothesis to explain sensory impressions. On a Bayesian account, the requisite belief updating rests sensitively upon the precision or confidence ascribed to sensory input, relative to prior beliefs about the causes of sensations. This focus – on the balance between sensory and prior precision – has been a useful construct in both cognitive science (e.g., as a formal explanation for attention) and neuropsychology (e.g., as a formal explanation for aberrant or false inference in hallucinations). In this setting, false inference is generally understood as abnormally high precision afforded to high-level hypotheses or explanations for visual input, which may compensate for a failure to attenuate sensory precision. On this view, the Rorschach offers an interesting paradigm because the amount of precise information about the causes of visual input is deliberately minimized – and rendered ambiguous – thereby placing greater emphasis on prior beliefs entertained by the respondent. We close by exploring this issue and several other areas of intersection between Rorschach responding and active inference.
活跃贝叶斯脑与罗夏测验
摘要罗夏墨迹测验从(贝叶斯)大脑的角度提供了一个独特而有趣的范式。这篇跨学科特刊的贡献从大脑的感知推理的角度考虑了罗夏墨迹测验,以及它如何在感知合成中告知受试者特定的差异。在此之前,我们提供了主动推理的各种表现形式的广泛概述。简而言之,主动推理假设我们的感知是解释感官印象的最佳假设。根据贝叶斯理论,必要的信念更新敏感地依赖于感官输入的精确度或信心,而不是先前关于感觉原因的信念。这种对感觉和先验精度之间平衡的关注,在认知科学(例如,作为对注意力的正式解释)和神经心理学(例如,作为对幻觉中异常或错误推理的正式解释)中都是一个有用的结构。在这种情况下,错误推理通常被理解为对视觉输入的高级假设或解释提供异常高的精度,这可能弥补了感官精度衰减的失败。根据这种观点,罗夏墨迹测验提供了一个有趣的范例,因为关于视觉输入原因的精确信息的数量被故意地最小化了——并且变得模棱两可——从而更加强调被调查者的先验信念。最后,我们将探讨这个问题以及罗夏反应和主动推理之间的其他几个交叉领域。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Rorschachiana
Rorschachiana Psychology-Clinical Psychology
CiteScore
2.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
10
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信