Short AbstractHuman perceptual decisions are often described as optimal, but this view remains controversial. To elucidate the issue, we review the vast literature on suboptimalities in perceptual tasks and compile the proposed hypotheses about the origins of suboptimal behavior. Further, we argue that general claims about optimality are virtually meaningless and result in a false sense of progress. Instead, real progress can be achieved by building observer models that account for both optimal and suboptimal behavior. To achieve such progress, the field should focus on assessing the hypotheses about suboptimal behavior compiled here and stop chasing optimality.Long AbstractHuman perceptual decisions are often described as optimal. Critics of this view have argued that claims of optimality are overly flexible and lack explanatory power. Meanwhile, advocates for optimality have countered that such criticisms single out a few selected papers. To elucidate the issue of optimality in perceptual decision making, we review the extensive literature on suboptimal performance in perceptual tasks. We discuss eight different classes of suboptimal perceptual decisions, including improper placement, maintenance, and adjustment of perceptual criteria, inadequate tradeoff between speed and accuracy, inappropriate confidence ratings, misweightings in cue combination, and findings related to various perceptual illusions and biases. In addition, we discuss conceptual shortcomings of a focus on optimality, such as definitional difficulties and the limited value of optimality claims in and of themselves. We therefore advocate that the field drop its emphasis on whether observed behavior is optimal and instead concentrate on building and testing detailed observer models that explain behavior across a wide range of tasks. To facilitate this transition, we compile the proposed hypotheses regarding the origins of suboptimal perceptual decisions reviewed here. We argue that verifying, rejecting, and expanding these explanations for suboptimal behavior – rather than assessing optimality per se – should be among the major goals of the science of perceptual decision making.
FoxP influences the speed and accuracy of a perceptual decision in Drosophila
