The overconstraint of response time models: Rethinking the scaling problem

Psychonomic Bulletin and Review

Volumn 16, Issue 6, 2009, Pages 1129-1135

  Donkin, Chris ^a   Brown, Scott D ^a   Heathcote, Andrew ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF NEWCASTLE   (Australia)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

DECISION MAKING; HUMAN; LEARNING; NOTE; PSYCHOLOGICAL MODEL; PSYCHOPHYSICS; REACTION TIME; SEMANTICS; STATISTICAL MODEL;

CHOICE BEHAVIOR; DECISION MAKING; HUMANS; MODELS, PSYCHOLOGICAL; MODELS, STATISTICAL; PSYCHOPHYSICS; REACTION TIME; SEMANTICS; VERBAL LEARNING;

EID: 74849128692     PISSN: 10699384     EISSN: 15315320     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3758/PBR.16.6.1129     Document Type: Note

References (34)

1. Brown, S. & Heathcote, A. (2005). A ballistic model of choice response time. Psychological Review, 112, 117-128.
2. Brown, S. D., & Heathcote, A. J. (2008). The simplest complete model of choice reaction time: Linear ballistic accumulation. Cognitive Psychology, 57, 153-178.
3. Busemeyer, J. R., & Townsend, J. T. (1993). Decision field theory: A dynamic-cognitive approach to decision making in an uncertain environment. Psychological Review, 100, 432-459.
4. Donkin, C., Averell, L., Brown, S., & Heathcote, A. (2009). Getting more from accuracy and response time data: Methods for fitting the linear ballistic accumulator. Behavior Research Methods, 41, 1095-1110.
5. Forstmann, B. U., Dutilh, G., Brown, S. D., Neumann, J., von Cramon, D. Y., Ridderinkhof, K. R., & Wagenmakers, E.-J. (2008). Striatum and pre-SMA facilitate decision-making under time pressure. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 105, 17538-17542.
6. Gould, I. C., Wolfgang, B. J., & Smith, P. L. (2007). Spatial uncertainty explains exogenous and endogenous attentional cuing effects in visual signal detection. Journal of Vision, 7(13, Art. 4), 1-17.
7. Heathcote, A., & Brown, S. D. (2004). Reply to Speckman and Rouder: A theoretical basis for QML. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 11, 577-578.
8. Ho, T. C., Brown, S. D., & Serences, J. T. (2009). Domain general mechanisms of perceptual decision making in human cortex. Journal of Neuroscience, 29, 8675-8687.
9. Luce, R. D. (1986). Response times. New York: Oxford University Press.
10. Pike, A. R., & Dalgleish, L. (1982). Latency-probability curves for sequential decision models: A comment on Weatherburn. Psychological Bulletin, 91, 384-388.
11. Raftery, A. (1995). Bayesian model selection in social research. Sociological Methodology, 25, 111-163.
12. Ratcliff, R. (1978). A theory of memory retrieval. Psychological Review, 85, 59-108.
13. Ratcliff, R., Cherian, A., & Segraves, M. (2003). A comparison of macaque behavior and superior colliculus neuronal activity to predictions from models of two choice decisions. Journal of Neurophysiology, 90, 1392-1407.
14. Ratcliff, R., Gomez, P., & McKoon, P. (2004). A diffusion model account of the lexical decision task. Psychological Review, 111, 159-182.
15. Ratcliff, R., & Rouder, J. N. (1998). Modeling response times for two-choice decisions. Psychological Science, 9, 347-356.
16. Ratcliff, R., & Smith, P. L. (2004). A comparison of sequential sampling models for two-choice reaction time. Psychological Review, 111, 333-367.
17. Ratcliff, R., & Tuerlinckx, F. (2002). Estimating the parameters of the diffusion model: Approaches to dealing with contaminant reaction times and parameter variability. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 9, 438-481.
18. Schmiedek, F., Oberauer, K., Wilhelm, O., Süß, H. M., & Wittmann, W. W. (2007). Individual differences in components of reaction time distributions and their relations to working memory and intelligence. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 136, 414-429.
19. Smith, P. L. (1995). Psychophysically principled models of visual simple reaction time. Psychological Review, 102, 567-591.
20. Smith, P. L., & Ratcliff, R. (2004). Psychology and neurobiology of simple decisions. Trends in Neurosciences, 27, 161-168.
21. Smith, P. L., & Van Zandt, T. (2000). Time-dependent Poisson counter models of response latency in simple judgment. British Journal of Mathematical & Statistical Psychology, 53, 293-315.
22. Smith, P. L., & Vickers, D. (1988). The accumulator model of two-choice discrimination. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 32, 135-168.
23. Stone, M. (1960). Models for choice-reaction time. Psychometrika, 25, 251-260.
24. Townsend, J. T., & Ashby, F. G. (1983). Stochastic modeling of elementary psychological processes. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
25. Usher, M., & McClelland, J. L. (2001). On the time course of perceptual choice: The leaky competing accumulator model. Psychological Review, 108, 550-592.
26. Vandekerckhove, J., Tuerlinckx, F., &Lee, M. D. (2009). Hierarchical diffusion models for two-choice response times. Manuscript submitted for publication.
27. Van Zandt, T., Colonius, H., & Proctor, R. W. (2000). A comparison of two response time models applied to perceptual matching. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 7, 208-256.
28. Vickers, D. (1970). Evidence for an accumulator model of psychophysical discrimination. Ergonomics, 13, 37-58.
29. Voss, A., Rothermund, K., & Voss, J. (2004). Interpreting the parameters of the diffusion model: An empirical validation. Memory & Cognition, 32, 1206-1220.
30. Voss, A., & Voss, J. (2007). Fast-dm: A free program for efficient diffusion model analysis. Behavior Research Methods, 39, 767-775.
31. Wagenmakers, E.-J., & Farrell, S. (2004). AIC model selection using Akaike weights. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 11, 192-196.
32. Wagenmakers, E.-J., van der Maas, H. L. J., & Grasman, R. P. P. P. (2007). An EZ-diffusion model for response time and accuracy. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 14, 3-22.
33. Weatherburn, D. (1978). Latency-probability functions as bases for evaluating competing accounts of the sensory decision process. Psychological Bulletin, 85, 1344-1347.
34. Weatherburn, D., & Grayson, D. (1982). Latency-probability functions: A reply to Pike and Dalgleish. Psychological Bulletin, 91, 389-392.