Generalizing parametric models by introducing trial-by-trial parameter variability: The case of TVA

Journal of Mathematical Psychology

Volumn 55, Issue 6, 2011, Pages 416-429

  Dyrholm, Mads ^a   Kyllingsbæk, Søren ^a   Espeseth, Thomas ^b   Bundesen, Claus ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF COPENHAGEN   (Denmark)

^b UNIVERSITY OF OSLO   (Norway)

Author keywords

Model selection; Trial by trial variability; TVA; Visual attention; VSTM capacity

Indexed keywords

EID: 82755197723     PISSN: 00222496     EISSN: 10960880     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.jmp.2011.08.005     Document Type: Article

References (56)

1. Bishop C.M. Neural networks for pattern recognition 1996, Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK.
2. Bublak P., Finke K., Krummenacher J., Preger R., Kyllingsbæk S., Müller H.J., et al. Usability of a theory of visual attention (TVA) for parameter-based measurement of attention II: evidence from two patients with frontal or parietal damage. Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society 2005, 11:843-854.
3. Bublak P., Redel P., Finke K. Spatial and non-spatial attention deficits in neurodegenerative diseases: assessment based on Bundesen's theory of visual attention (TVA). Restorative Neurology and Neuroscience 2006, 24:287-301.
4. Bublak P., Redel P., Sorg C., Kurz A., Förstl H., Müller H.J., et al. Staged decline of visual processing capacity in mild cognitive impairment and Alzheimer's disease. Neurobiology of Aging 2009.
5. Bundesen C. A theory of visual attention. Psychological Review 1990, 97(4):523-547.
6. Bundesen C., Habekost T. Principles of visual attention 2008, Oxford University Press, New York.
7. Bundesen C., Habekost T., Kyllingsbæk S. A neural theory of visual attention: bridging cognition and neurophysiology. Psychological Review 2005, 112(2):291-328.
8. Cattell J.M. Über die Zeit der Erkennung und Benennung Schriftzeichen, Bildern und Farben. Philosophische Studien 1885, 2:635-650.
9. Cowan N. The magical number 4 in short-term memory: a reconsideration of mental storage capacity. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 2001, 24(1):87-114. discussion 114-185.
10. Duncan J., Bundesen C., Olson A., Humphreys G., Chavda S., Shibuya H. Systematic analysis of deficits in visual attention. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 1999, 128:450-478.
11. Duncan J., Bundesen C., Olson A., Humphreys G., Ward R., Kyllingsbæk S., et al. Dorsal and ventral simultanagnosia. Cognitive Neuropsychology 2003, 20:675-701.
12. Finke K., Bublak P., Dose M., Müller H.J., Schneider W.X. Parameter-based assessment of spatial and non-spatial attentional deficits in Huntington's disease. Brain 2006, 129:1137-1151.
13. Finke K., Bublak P., Krummenacher J., Kyllingsbæk S., Müller H.J., Schneider W.X. Usability of a theory of visual attention (TVA) for parameter-based measurement of attention I: evidence from normal subjects. Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society 2005, 11:832-842.
14. Finke K., Dodds C.M., Bublak P., Regenthal R., Baumann F., Manly T., et al. Effects of modafinil and methylphenidate on visual attention capacity: a TVA-based study. Psychopharmacology 2010, 210:317-329.
15. Finke K., Schneider W.X., Redel P., Dose M., Kerkhoff G., Müller H.J., et al. The capacity of attention and simultaneous perception of objects: a group study of Huntington's disease patients. Neuropsychologia 2007, 45:3272-3284.
16. Geman S., Bienenstock E., Doursat R. Neural networks and the bias/variance dilemma. Neural Computation 1992, 4:1-58.
17. Gerlach C., Marstrand L., Habekost T., Gade A. A case of impaired shape integration: implications for models of visual object processing. Visual Cognition 2005, 12:1409-1443.
18. Habekost T., Bundesen C. Patient assessment based on a theory of visual attention (TVA): subtle deficits after a right frontal-subcortical lesion. Neuropsychologia 2003, 41:1171-1188.
19. Habekost T., Rostrup E. Persisting asymmetries of vision after right side lesions. Neuropsychologia 2006, 44:876-895.
20. Habekost T., Rostrup E. Visual attention capacity after right hemisphere lesions. Neuropsychologia 2007, 45:1474-1488.
21. Habekost T., Starrfelt R. Alexia and quadrant-amblyopia: reading disability after a minor visual field deficit. Neuropsychologia 2006, 44:2465-2476.
22. Habekost T., Starrfelt R. Visual attention capacity: a review of TVA-based patient studies. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology 2009, 50:23-32.
23. Hastings W.K. Monte Carlo sampling methods using Markov chains and their applications. Biometrika 1970, 57(1):97-109.
24. Hebb D.O. Organization of behavior 1949, Wiley, New York.
25. Jaynes E.T. Information theory and statistical mechanics. The Physical Review 1957, 106(4):620-630.
26. Kass R.E., Raftery A.E. Bayes factors. Journal of the American Statistical Association 1995, 90(430):773-795.
27. Kyllingsbæk S. Modeling visual attention. Behavior Research Methods 2006, 38:123-133.
28. Kyllingsbæk, S., & Habekost, T. (2001). Item based fitting of whole report data. Technical report. University of Copenhagen.
29. Kyllingsbæk, S., Markussen, B., & Bundesen, C. (2011). Testing a Poisson counter model for visual identification of briefly presented, mutually confusable single stimuli in pure accuracy tasks. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, in press (). doi:10.1037/a0024751.
30. Lee M.D. How cognitive modeling can benefit from hierarchical Bayesian models. Journal of Mathematical Psychology 2011, 55:1-7.
31. Luce R.D. Response times: their role in inferring elementary mental organization 1986, Oxford University Press, New York.
32. Luck S.J., Vogel E.K. The capacity of visual working memory for features and conjunctions. Nature 1997, 390(6657):279-281.
33. McCulloch C.E., Searle S.R. Generalized, linear, and mixed models 2001, Wiley.
34. Metropolis N., Rosenbluth A.W., Rosenbluth M.N., Teller A.H., Teller E. Equation of state calculations by fast computing machines. The Journal of Chemical Physics 1953, 21:1087-1092.
35. Morey R.D. A Bayesian hierarchical model for the measurement of working memory capacity. Journal of Mathematical Psychology 2011, 55:8-24.
36. Nielsen, H. B. (2006). IMMOPTIBOX-a Matlab toolbox for optimization and datafitting. Available from http://www.imm.dtu.dk/hbn/immoptibox/.
37. Pashler H. Familiarity and visual change detection. Perception & Psychophysics 1988, 44:369-378.
38. Peers P.V., Ludwig C.J., Rorden C., Cusack R., Bonfiglioli C., Bundesen C., et al. Attentional functions of parietal and frontal cortex. Cerebral Cortex 2005, 15:1469-1484.
39. Raftery A.E. Approximate Bayes factors and accounting for model uncertainty in generalized linear models. Biometrika 1996, 83:251-266.
40. Redel P., Bublak P., Sorg C., Kurz A., Förstl H., Müller H.J., et al. Deficits of spatial and task-related attentional selection in mild cognitive impairment and Alzheimer's disease. Neurobiology of Aging 2010, Epub ahead of print.
41. Rouder J.N., Morey R.D., Cowan N., Zwilling C.E., Morey C.C., Pratte M.S. An assessment of fixed-capacity models of visual working memory. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 2008, 105(16):5975-5979.
42. Rouder J.N., Morey R.D., Morey C.C., Cowan N. How to measure working memory capacity in the change detection paradigm. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review 2011.
43. Ruanaidh J., Fitzgerald W. Numerical Bayesian methods applied to signal processing 1996, Springer, New York.
44. Schwarz G. Estimating the dimension of a model. The Annals of Statistics 1978, 6(2):461-464.
45. Shibuya H., Bundesen C. Visual selection from multielement displays: measuring and modeling effects of exposure duration. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 1988, 14(4):591-600.
46. Sivia D.S. Data analysis: a Bayesian tutorial 1996, Oxford University Press, New York.
47. Sperling G. The information available in brief visual presentations. Psychological Monographs 1960, 74(11).
48. Sperling G. A model for visual memory tasks. Human Factors 1963, 5:19-31.
49. Sperling G. Successive approximations to a model for short term memory. Acta Psychologica 1967, 27:285-292.
50. Starrfelt R., Habekost T., Gerlach C. Visual processing in pure alexia: a case study. Cortex 2010, 46:242-255.
51. Starrfelt R., Habekost T., Leff A.P. Too little, too late: reduced visual span and speed characterize pure alexia. Cerebral Cortex 2009, 19:2880-2890.
52. Usher M., Cohen J.D. Short term memory and selection processes in a frontal-lobe mode. Connectionist models in cognitive neuroscience 1999, 78-91. Springer-Verlag. D. Heinke, G.W. Humphreys (Eds.).
53. Vangkilde, S., Bundesen, C., & Coull, J. (2009). Differential effects of nicotine on discrete components of visual attention. In Proceedings of the international neuropsychological society mid-year meeting (p. 53).
54. Vangkilde, S., Bundesen, C., & Coull, J. T. (2011). Prompt but inefficient: nicotine differentially modulates discrete components of attention. Psychopharmacology, in press (). doi:10.1007/s00213-011-2361-x.
55. Van Zandt T., Ratcliff R. Statistical mimicking of reaction time data: single process models, parameter variability and mixtures. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review 1995, 2(1):20-54.
56. Wechsler D. Abbreviated scale of intelligence 1999, The Psychological Corporation, San Antonio, TX.