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...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Psychonomic bulletin & review 2018-08, Vol.25 (4), p.1225-1248
Hauptverfasser: Palestro, James J., Weichart, Emily, Sederberg, Per B., Turner, Brandon M.
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 &amp; 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 &amp; 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 &amp; 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 &amp; Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Health &amp; 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 &amp; 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 &amp; 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