Satisficing as an alternative to optimality and suboptimality in perceptual decision making

Area of Science:

• Cognitive Science
• Neuroscience
• Decision Theory

Background:

• The critique of optimality in perceptual decision-making presents a dilemma: retain optimality or abandon normativity.
• Existing frameworks struggle to reconcile normative benchmarks with observed perceptual behavior.

Purpose of the Study:

• To propose "bounded rationality" and the "satisficing" criterion as an alternative to optimality in perceptual decision-making.
• To demonstrate how satisficing can salvage normativity while dispensing with strict optimality.
• To establish satisficing as a parsimonious and robust explanatory framework for perceptual behavior.

Main Methods:

• Conceptual analysis of existing decision-making models.
• Theoretical integration of bounded rationality and satisficing principles.
• Application of satisficing to explain empirical observations in perceptual tasks.

Main Results:

• Bounded rationality, specifically satisficing, offers a viable alternative to optimality.
• Satisficing provides a normative yet flexible framework for decision-making.
• This approach simplifies explanations of perceptual behavior.

Conclusions:

• Satisficing presents a more realistic and parsimonious approach to understanding perceptual decision-making.
• Adopting satisficing allows for the retention of normativity without demanding strict optimality.
• This framework offers robust explanatory power for diverse perceptual phenomena.