Xiuli Chen
Sandra Dorothee Starke
Andrew Howes
ABSTRACT
In this paper we report a cognitive model of how people make decisions through interaction. The model is based on the assumption that interaction for decision making is an example of a Partially Observable Markov Decision Process (POMDP) in which observations are made by limited perceptual systems that model human foveated vision and decisions are made by strategies that are adapted to the task. We illustrate the model by applying it to the task of determining whether to block a credit card given a number of variables including the location of a transaction, its amount, and the customer history. Each of these variables have a different validity and users may weight them accordingly. The model solves the POMDP by learning patterns of eye movements (strategies) adapted to different presentations of the data. We compare the model behavior to human performance on the credit card transaction task.
- Chris Baber, Simon Attfield, Gareth Conway, Chris Rooney, and Neesha Kodagoda. 2016. Collaborative sense-making during simulated Intelligence Analysis exercises. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies 86 (2016), 94--108. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Robert W Baloh, Andrew W Sills, Warren E Kumley, and Vicente Honrubia. 1975. Quantitative measurement of saccade amplitude, duration, and velocity. Neurology 25, 11 (1975), 1065.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Arndt Bröder and Wolfgang Gaissmaier. 2011. Heuristics: The foundations of adaptive behavior. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
- Arndt Bröder and Stefanie Schiffer. 2006. Adaptive fiexibility and maladaptive routines in selecting fast and frugal decision strategies. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 32, 4 (2006), 904.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Jerome R Busemeyer and James T Townsend. 1993. Decision field theory: a dynamic-cognitive approach to decision making in an uncertain environment. Psychological review 100, 3 (1993), 432.Google Scholar
- Nicholas J. Butko and Javier R. Movellan. 2008. I-POMDP: An infomax model of eye movement. In 2008 IEEE 7th International Conference on Development and Learning, ICDL. 139--144.Google Scholar
- Xiuli Chen, Gilles Bailly, Duncan P. Brumby, Antti Oulasvirta, and Andrew Howes. 2015. The Emergence of Interactive Behavior: A Model of Rational Menu Search. Proceedings of the ACM CHI'15 Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems 1 (2015), 4217--4226.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Andrea Dal Pozzolo, Olivier Caelen, Yann-Aël Le Borgne, Serge Waterschoot, and Gianluca Bontempi. 2014. Learned lessons in credit card fraud detection from a practitioner perspective. Expert systems with applications 41, 10 (2014), 4915--4928. Google ScholarCross Ref
- Thomas H. Davenport. 2013. How P&G Presents Data to Decision-Makers. Harvard Business Review (2013).Google Scholar
- Fermin del Prado Martin. 2008. A theory of reaction time distributions. (dec 2008).Google Scholar
- Paul Dourish. 2006. Implications for design. SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI'06) (2006), 541--550. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/1124772.1124855 Google ScholarDigital Library
- John M. Findlay. 1982. Global visual processing for saccadic eye movements. Vision Research 22, 8 (1982), 1033--1045. Google ScholarCross Ref
- Wilson S Geisler. 2011. Contributions of ideal observer theory to vision research. Vision research 51, 7 (2011), 771--781. Google ScholarCross Ref
- Gerd Gigerenzer and Wolfgang Gaissmaier. 2011. Heuristic decision making. Annual review of psychology 62 (2011), 451--482. Google Scholar
- Gerd Gigerenzer and Daniel G Goldstein. 1996. Reasoning the fast and frugal way: models of bounded rationality. Psychological review 103, 4 (1996), 650.Google Scholar
- Gerd Gigerenzer and Peter M Todd. 1999. Fast and frugal heuristics: The adaptive toolbox. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
- Wayne D Gray, Chris R Sims, Wai-Tat W-T Fu, and Michael J Schoelles. 2006. The soft constraints hypothesis: a rational analysis approach to resource allocation for interactive behavior. Psych Review 113, 3 (2006), 461.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Mary Hayhoe and Dana Ballard. 2014. Modeling Task Control of Eye Movements. Current Biology 24, 13 (2014), R622--R628. Google ScholarCross Ref
- Andrew Howes, Geoffrey B Duggan, Kiran Kalidindi, Yuan-Chi Tseng, and Richard L Lewis. 2015. Predicting Short-Term Remembering as Boundedly Optimal Strategy Choice. Cognitive Science 40, 5 (2015), 1192--1223. Google ScholarCross Ref
- Andrew Howes, Richard L. Lewis, and Alonso Vera. 2009. Rational adaptation under task and processing constraints: implications for testing theories of cognition and action. Psychological review 116, 4 (2009), 717--751. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0017187 Google ScholarCross Ref
- Sanjeev Jha and J Christopher Westland. 2013. A Descriptive Study of Credit Card Fraud Pattern. Global Business Review 14, 3 (2013), 373--384. Google ScholarCross Ref
- L Kaelbling, Michael L. Littman, and Ar Cassandra. 1998. Planning and Acting in Partially Observable Stochastic Domains. Artificial Intelligence 101, 1--2 (1998), 99--134.Google ScholarCross Ref
- David E. Kieras and Anthony J. Hornof. 2014. Towards accurate and practical predictive models of active-vision-based visual search. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. ACM, 3875--3884. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Michael D Lee and S A Zhang. 2012. Evaluating the coherence of Take-the-best in structured environments. Judgment and Decision Making 7, 4 (2012).Google Scholar
- Richard L. Lewis, Andrew Howes, and Satinder Singh. 2014. Computational rationality: linking mechanism and behavior through bounded utility maximization. Topics in Cognitive Science 6, 2 (2014), 279--311. Google ScholarCross Ref
- Volodymyr Mnih, Koray Kavukcuoglu, David Silver, Alex Graves, Ioannis Antonoglou, Daan Wierstra, and Martin Riedmiller. 2013. Playing atari with deep reinforcement learning. arXiv preprint arXiv:1312.5602 (2013).Google Scholar
- Ben R Newell and David R Shanks. 2003. Take the best or look at the rest? Factors influencing" one-reason" decision making. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 29, 1 (2003), 53.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Ben R Newell, Nicola J Weston, and David R Shanks. 2003. Empirical tests of a fast-and-frugal heuristic: Not everyone "takes-the-best". Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 91, 1 (2003), 82--96.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Jose Nunez-Varela and Jeremy L. Wyatt. 2013. Models of gaze control for manipulation tasks. ACM Transactions on Applied Perception (TAP) 10, 4 (2013), 20.Google Scholar
- Manoj Pandey. 2010. Operational risk forum: A model for managing online fraud risk using transaction validation. Journal of Operational Risk 1 (2010), 49. Google ScholarCross Ref
- Stephen J. Payne and Andrew Howes. 2013. Adaptive interaction: A utility maximization approach to understanding human interaction with technology. Synthesis Lectures on Human-Centered Informatics 6, 1 (2013), 1--111. Google ScholarCross Ref
- Rajesh P N Rao. 2010. Decision making under uncertainty: a neural model based on partially observable markov decision processes. Frontiers in computational neuroscience 4, November (2010), 146.Google Scholar
- Roger Ratcliff. 2002. A diffusion model account of response time and accuracy in a brightness discrimination task: fitting real data and failing to fit fake but plausible data. Psychonomic bulletin {&} review 9, 2 (jun 2002), 278--291.Google Scholar
- Roger Ratcliff and Philip L Smith. 2010. Perceptual discrimination in static and dynamic noise: the temporal relation between perceptual encoding and decision making. Journal of experimental psychology. General 139, 1 (feb 2010), 70--94. Google ScholarCross Ref
- Jörg Rieskamp and Ulrich Hoffrage. 2008. Inferences under time pressure: How opportunity costs affect strategy selection. Acta psychologica 127, 2 (2008), 258--276. Google ScholarCross Ref
- Jörg Rieskamp and Philipp E Otto. 2006. SSL: a theory of how people learn to select strategies. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 135, 2 (2006), 207.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Daniel M Russell, Mark J Stefik, Peter Pirolli, and Stuart K Card. 1993. The cost structure of sensemaking. In Proceedings of the INTERACT'93 and CHI'93 conference on Human factors in computing systems. ACM, 269--276.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Daniel Sánchez, M A Vila, L Cerda, and José-Maria Serrano. 2009. Association rules applied to credit card fraud detection. Expert Systems with Applications 36, 2 (2009), 3630--3640.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Guy Shani, Joelle Pineau, and Robert Kaplow. 2013. A survey of point-based POMDP solvers. Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems 27, 1 (2013), 1--51. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Nathan Sprague, Dana Ballard, and Al Robinson. 2007. Modeling embodied visual behaviors. ACM Transactions on Applied Perception (TAP) 4, 2 (2007), 11.Google ScholarDigital Library
- R.S. Sutton and A.G. Barto. 1998. Reinforcement Learning: An Introduction. IEEE Transactions on Neural Networks 9, 5 (1998), 1054--1054. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Julia Trommershäuser, Paul W Glimcher, and Karl R Gegenfurtner. 2009. Visual processing, learning and feedback in the primate eye movement system. Trends in Neurosciences 32, 11 (2009), 583--590. Google ScholarCross Ref
- Yuan-Chi Tseng and Andrew Howes. 2015. The adaptation of visual search to utility, ecology and design. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies 80 (2015), 45--55. Google ScholarDigital Library
- S Van der Stigchel and T C Nijboer. 2011. The global effect: what determines where the eyes land? Journal of Eye Movement Research 4, 2 (2011), 1--13.Google Scholar
- Dustin Venini, Roger W. Remington, Gernot Horstmann, and Stefanie I. Becker. 2014. Centre-of-gravity fixations in visual search: When looking at nothing helps to find something. Journal of Ophthalmology 2014, June (2014). Google ScholarCross Ref
- Françoise Vitu. 2008. About the global effect and the critical role of retinal eccentricity: Implications for eye movements in reading. Journal of Eye Movement Research 2, 3 (2008), 1--18.Google ScholarCross Ref
- C Watkins and Peter Dayan. 1992. Q-Learning. Machine Learning 8 (1992), 279--292.Google ScholarDigital Library
Index Terms
- A Cognitive Model of How People Make Decisions Through Interaction with Visual Displays
Recommendations
An integrated model of eye movements and visual encoding
Recent computational models of cognition have made good progress in accounting for the visual processes needed to encode external stimuli. However, these models typically incorporate simplified models of visual processing that assume a constant encoding ...
Object displays for identifying multidimensional outliers within a crowded visual periphery
This article discusses the human ability to detect, locate, or identify objects and their features using peripheral vision. The potential of peripheral vision is underused with user interfaces probably due to the limits of visual acuity. Peripheral ...
Cognitive strategies and eye movements for searching hierarchical computer displays
CHI '03: Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing SystemsThis research investigates the cognitive strategies and eye movements that people use to search for a known item in a hierarchical computer display. Computational cognitive models were built to simulate the visual-perceptual and oculomotor processing ...
Comments