Some task demands induce collapsing bounds: Evidence from a behavioral analysis
Traditional models of choice-response time assume that sensory evidence accumulates for choice alternatives until a threshold amount of evidence has been obtained. Although some researchers have characterized the threshold as varying randomly from trial to trial, these investigations have all assume...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Psychonomic bulletin & review 2018-08, Vol.25 (4), p.1225-1248 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 1248 |
---|---|
container_issue | 4 |
container_start_page | 1225 |
container_title | Psychonomic bulletin & review |
container_volume | 25 |
creator | Palestro, James J. Weichart, Emily Sederberg, Per B. Turner, Brandon M. |
description | Traditional models of choice-response time assume that sensory evidence accumulates for choice alternatives until a threshold amount of evidence has been obtained. Although some researchers have characterized the threshold as varying randomly from trial to trial, these investigations have all assumed that the threshold remains fixed across time within a trial. Despite decades of successful applications of these models to a variety of experimental manipulations, the time-invariance assumption has recently been called into question, and a time-variant alternative implementing collapsing decision thresholds has been proposed instead. Here, we investigated the fidelity of the collapsing threshold assumption by assessing relative model fit to data from a highly constrained experimental design that coupled a within-subject mixture of two classic response time paradigms—interrogation and free response—within a random dot motion (RDM) task. Overall, we identified strong evidence in favor of collapsing decision thresholds, suggesting that subjects may adopt a dynamic decision policy due to task characteristics, specifically to account for the mixture of response time paradigms and motion strengths across trials in the mixed response signal task. We conclude that time-variant mechanisms may serve as a viable explanation for the strategy used by human subjects in our task. |
doi_str_mv | 10.3758/s13423-018-1479-9 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2047287304</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2047287304</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c415t-4ce2b65742572d6a65af6f12c14c3686ab7f553282e869a0f294a4d089cef6553</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp1kEtLAzEUhYMoVqs_wI0E3LgZzXsSd1LqAwpdqOuQyWTq1JlJTTqF_ntTpioIrnLJ-e659x4ALjC6oTmXtxFTRmiGsMwwy1WmDsAJ5hRnnBJ0mGok0ieVbAROY1wihLhQ4hiMiJKMM0pPwPzFtw6uTfyApWtNV0ZYd2VvHbS-acwq1t0CFr5Pwh2cburSdUmrgm-hgYV7N5vaB9NA05lmG-t4Bo4q00R3vn_H4O1h-jp5ymbzx-fJ_SyzDPN1xqwjheA5IzwnpTCCm0pUmFjMLBVSmCKveLpCEieFMqgiihlWIqmsq0RSxuB68F0F_9m7uNZtHa1LK3fO91ETxHIic4pYQq_-oEvfh7RvorDCFCuW7wzxQNngYwyu0qtQtyZsNUZ6l7Ye0tYpbb1LW6vUc7l37ovWlT8d3_EmgAxATFK3cOF39P-uX4cYiOk</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2191319475</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Some task demands induce collapsing bounds: Evidence from a behavioral analysis</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>SpringerNature Journals</source><source>EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals</source><creator>Palestro, James J. ; Weichart, Emily ; Sederberg, Per B. ; Turner, Brandon M.</creator><creatorcontrib>Palestro, James J. ; Weichart, Emily ; Sederberg, Per B. ; Turner, Brandon M.</creatorcontrib><description>Traditional models of choice-response time assume that sensory evidence accumulates for choice alternatives until a threshold amount of evidence has been obtained. Although some researchers have characterized the threshold as varying randomly from trial to trial, these investigations have all assumed that the threshold remains fixed across time within a trial. Despite decades of successful applications of these models to a variety of experimental manipulations, the time-invariance assumption has recently been called into question, and a time-variant alternative implementing collapsing decision thresholds has been proposed instead. Here, we investigated the fidelity of the collapsing threshold assumption by assessing relative model fit to data from a highly constrained experimental design that coupled a within-subject mixture of two classic response time paradigms—interrogation and free response—within a random dot motion (RDM) task. Overall, we identified strong evidence in favor of collapsing decision thresholds, suggesting that subjects may adopt a dynamic decision policy due to task characteristics, specifically to account for the mixture of response time paradigms and motion strengths across trials in the mixed response signal task. We conclude that time-variant mechanisms may serve as a viable explanation for the strategy used by human subjects in our task.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1069-9384</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1531-5320</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.3758/s13423-018-1479-9</identifier><identifier>PMID: 29845433</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>New York: Springer US</publisher><subject>Adult ; Behavior ; Behavioral Science and Psychology ; Cognitive Psychology ; Decision making ; Humans ; Models, Theoretical ; Motion Perception - physiology ; Neurophysiology ; Neurosciences ; Parameter estimation ; Pattern Recognition, Visual - physiology ; Psychology ; Psychomotor Performance - physiology ; Quantitative psychology ; Questioning ; Reaction Time - physiology ; Research methodology ; Response time ; Theoretical Review ; Theory ; Young Adult</subject><ispartof>Psychonomic bulletin & review, 2018-08, Vol.25 (4), p.1225-1248</ispartof><rights>Psychonomic Society, Inc. 2018</rights><rights>Copyright Springer Nature B.V. Aug 2018</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c415t-4ce2b65742572d6a65af6f12c14c3686ab7f553282e869a0f294a4d089cef6553</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c415t-4ce2b65742572d6a65af6f12c14c3686ab7f553282e869a0f294a4d089cef6553</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.3758/s13423-018-1479-9$$EPDF$$P50$$Gspringer$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/10.3758/s13423-018-1479-9$$EHTML$$P50$$Gspringer$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27924,27925,41488,42557,51319</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29845433$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Palestro, James J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Weichart, Emily</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sederberg, Per B.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Turner, Brandon M.</creatorcontrib><title>Some task demands induce collapsing bounds: Evidence from a behavioral analysis</title><title>Psychonomic bulletin & review</title><addtitle>Psychon Bull Rev</addtitle><addtitle>Psychon Bull Rev</addtitle><description>Traditional models of choice-response time assume that sensory evidence accumulates for choice alternatives until a threshold amount of evidence has been obtained. Although some researchers have characterized the threshold as varying randomly from trial to trial, these investigations have all assumed that the threshold remains fixed across time within a trial. Despite decades of successful applications of these models to a variety of experimental manipulations, the time-invariance assumption has recently been called into question, and a time-variant alternative implementing collapsing decision thresholds has been proposed instead. Here, we investigated the fidelity of the collapsing threshold assumption by assessing relative model fit to data from a highly constrained experimental design that coupled a within-subject mixture of two classic response time paradigms—interrogation and free response—within a random dot motion (RDM) task. Overall, we identified strong evidence in favor of collapsing decision thresholds, suggesting that subjects may adopt a dynamic decision policy due to task characteristics, specifically to account for the mixture of response time paradigms and motion strengths across trials in the mixed response signal task. We conclude that time-variant mechanisms may serve as a viable explanation for the strategy used by human subjects in our task.</description><subject>Adult</subject><subject>Behavior</subject><subject>Behavioral Science and Psychology</subject><subject>Cognitive Psychology</subject><subject>Decision making</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Models, Theoretical</subject><subject>Motion Perception - physiology</subject><subject>Neurophysiology</subject><subject>Neurosciences</subject><subject>Parameter estimation</subject><subject>Pattern Recognition, Visual - physiology</subject><subject>Psychology</subject><subject>Psychomotor Performance - physiology</subject><subject>Quantitative psychology</subject><subject>Questioning</subject><subject>Reaction Time - physiology</subject><subject>Research methodology</subject><subject>Response time</subject><subject>Theoretical Review</subject><subject>Theory</subject><subject>Young Adult</subject><issn>1069-9384</issn><issn>1531-5320</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2018</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><sourceid>8G5</sourceid><sourceid>ABUWG</sourceid><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>AZQEC</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><sourceid>DWQXO</sourceid><sourceid>GNUQQ</sourceid><sourceid>GUQSH</sourceid><sourceid>M2O</sourceid><recordid>eNp1kEtLAzEUhYMoVqs_wI0E3LgZzXsSd1LqAwpdqOuQyWTq1JlJTTqF_ntTpioIrnLJ-e659x4ALjC6oTmXtxFTRmiGsMwwy1WmDsAJ5hRnnBJ0mGok0ieVbAROY1wihLhQ4hiMiJKMM0pPwPzFtw6uTfyApWtNV0ZYd2VvHbS-acwq1t0CFr5Pwh2cburSdUmrgm-hgYV7N5vaB9NA05lmG-t4Bo4q00R3vn_H4O1h-jp5ymbzx-fJ_SyzDPN1xqwjheA5IzwnpTCCm0pUmFjMLBVSmCKveLpCEieFMqgiihlWIqmsq0RSxuB68F0F_9m7uNZtHa1LK3fO91ETxHIic4pYQq_-oEvfh7RvorDCFCuW7wzxQNngYwyu0qtQtyZsNUZ6l7Ye0tYpbb1LW6vUc7l37ovWlT8d3_EmgAxATFK3cOF39P-uX4cYiOk</recordid><startdate>20180801</startdate><enddate>20180801</enddate><creator>Palestro, James J.</creator><creator>Weichart, Emily</creator><creator>Sederberg, Per B.</creator><creator>Turner, Brandon M.</creator><general>Springer US</general><general>Springer Nature B.V</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>4T-</scope><scope>4U-</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88E</scope><scope>88G</scope><scope>8AO</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>8G5</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>GUQSH</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M1P</scope><scope>M2M</scope><scope>M2O</scope><scope>MBDVC</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>PSYQQ</scope><scope>Q9U</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20180801</creationdate><title>Some task demands induce collapsing bounds: Evidence from a behavioral analysis</title><author>Palestro, James J. ; Weichart, Emily ; Sederberg, Per B. ; Turner, Brandon M.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c415t-4ce2b65742572d6a65af6f12c14c3686ab7f553282e869a0f294a4d089cef6553</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2018</creationdate><topic>Adult</topic><topic>Behavior</topic><topic>Behavioral Science and Psychology</topic><topic>Cognitive Psychology</topic><topic>Decision making</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Models, Theoretical</topic><topic>Motion Perception - physiology</topic><topic>Neurophysiology</topic><topic>Neurosciences</topic><topic>Parameter estimation</topic><topic>Pattern Recognition, Visual - physiology</topic><topic>Psychology</topic><topic>Psychomotor Performance - physiology</topic><topic>Quantitative psychology</topic><topic>Questioning</topic><topic>Reaction Time - physiology</topic><topic>Research methodology</topic><topic>Response time</topic><topic>Theoretical Review</topic><topic>Theory</topic><topic>Young Adult</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Palestro, James J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Weichart, Emily</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sederberg, Per B.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Turner, Brandon M.</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Docstoc</collection><collection>University Readers</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Medical Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Psychology Database (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Pharma Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Research Library (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>Research Library Prep</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Medical Database</collection><collection>Psychology Database</collection><collection>Research Library</collection><collection>Research Library (Corporate)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>ProQuest One Psychology</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Psychonomic bulletin & review</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Palestro, James J.</au><au>Weichart, Emily</au><au>Sederberg, Per B.</au><au>Turner, Brandon M.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Some task demands induce collapsing bounds: Evidence from a behavioral analysis</atitle><jtitle>Psychonomic bulletin & review</jtitle><stitle>Psychon Bull Rev</stitle><addtitle>Psychon Bull Rev</addtitle><date>2018-08-01</date><risdate>2018</risdate><volume>25</volume><issue>4</issue><spage>1225</spage><epage>1248</epage><pages>1225-1248</pages><issn>1069-9384</issn><eissn>1531-5320</eissn><abstract>Traditional models of choice-response time assume that sensory evidence accumulates for choice alternatives until a threshold amount of evidence has been obtained. Although some researchers have characterized the threshold as varying randomly from trial to trial, these investigations have all assumed that the threshold remains fixed across time within a trial. Despite decades of successful applications of these models to a variety of experimental manipulations, the time-invariance assumption has recently been called into question, and a time-variant alternative implementing collapsing decision thresholds has been proposed instead. Here, we investigated the fidelity of the collapsing threshold assumption by assessing relative model fit to data from a highly constrained experimental design that coupled a within-subject mixture of two classic response time paradigms—interrogation and free response—within a random dot motion (RDM) task. Overall, we identified strong evidence in favor of collapsing decision thresholds, suggesting that subjects may adopt a dynamic decision policy due to task characteristics, specifically to account for the mixture of response time paradigms and motion strengths across trials in the mixed response signal task. We conclude that time-variant mechanisms may serve as a viable explanation for the strategy used by human subjects in our task.</abstract><cop>New York</cop><pub>Springer US</pub><pmid>29845433</pmid><doi>10.3758/s13423-018-1479-9</doi><tpages>24</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 1069-9384 |
ispartof | Psychonomic bulletin & review, 2018-08, Vol.25 (4), p.1225-1248 |
issn | 1069-9384 1531-5320 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2047287304 |
source | MEDLINE; SpringerNature Journals; EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals |
subjects | Adult Behavior Behavioral Science and Psychology Cognitive Psychology Decision making Humans Models, Theoretical Motion Perception - physiology Neurophysiology Neurosciences Parameter estimation Pattern Recognition, Visual - physiology Psychology Psychomotor Performance - physiology Quantitative psychology Questioning Reaction Time - physiology Research methodology Response time Theoretical Review Theory Young Adult |
title | Some task demands induce collapsing bounds: Evidence from a behavioral analysis |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-02T03%3A56%3A41IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Some%20task%20demands%20induce%20collapsing%20bounds:%20Evidence%20from%20a%20behavioral%20analysis&rft.jtitle=Psychonomic%20bulletin%20&%20review&rft.au=Palestro,%20James%20J.&rft.date=2018-08-01&rft.volume=25&rft.issue=4&rft.spage=1225&rft.epage=1248&rft.pages=1225-1248&rft.issn=1069-9384&rft.eissn=1531-5320&rft_id=info:doi/10.3758/s13423-018-1479-9&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2047287304%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2191319475&rft_id=info:pmid/29845433&rfr_iscdi=true |