Statistical measures for workload capacity analysis

Journal of Mathematical Psychology

Volumn 56, Issue 5, 2012, Pages 341-355

  Houpt, Joseph W ^a   Townsend, James T ^a  

^a INDIANA UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Capacity coefficient; Human information processing; Mental architecture; Nonparametric; Race model

Indexed keywords

EID: 84866876251     PISSN: 00222496     EISSN: 10960880     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.jmp.2012.05.004     Document Type: Article

References (37)

1. Aalen, Andersen, et al. History of applications of martingales in survival analysis. Electronic Journal for History of Probability and Statistics 2009, 5(1).
2. Aalen O.O., Borgan Ø., Gjessing H.K. Survival and event history analysis: a process point of view 2008, Springer, New York.
3. Andersen P.K., Borgan Ø., Keiding N. Statistical models based on counting processes 1993, Springer, New York.
4. Billingsley P. Probability and measure 1995, Wiley, New York. 3rd ed.
5. Blaha, L. M. (2010). A dynamic Hebbian-style model of configural learning. Ph.D. Thesis. Indiana University, Bloomington, Indiana.
6. Brown S.D., Heathcote A. The simplest complete model of choice response time: linear ballistic accumulation. Cognitive Psychology 2008, 57:153-178.
7. Chechile R.A. Mathematical tools for hazard function analysis. Journal of Mathematical Psychology 2003, 47:478-494.
8. Chechile R.A. Properties of reverse hazard functions. Journal of Mathematical Psychology 2011, 55:203-222.
9. Eidels A., Donkin C., Brown S., Heathcote A. Converging measures of workload capacity. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review 2010, 17:763-771.
10. Eidels A., Townsend J.T., Algom D. Comparing perception of stroop stimuli in focused versus divided attention paradigms: evidence for dramatic processing differences. Cognition 2010, 114:129-150.
11. Eidels, A., Townsend, J. T., Hughes, H. C., & Perry, L. A. (2011). Complementary relationship between response times, response accuracy, and task requirements in a parallel processing system. Manuscript (submitted for publication).
12. Fiedler A., Schröter H., Ulrich R. Coactive processing of dimensionally redundant targets within the auditory modality?. Journal of Experimental Psychology 2011, 58:50-54.
13. Gondan M., Riehl V., Blurton S.P. Showing that the race model inequality is not violated. Behavior Research Methods 2012, 44:248-255.
14. Harrington D.P., Fleming T.R. A class of rank test procedures for censored survival data. Biometrika 1982, 69:133-143.
15. Hess, K., & Gentleman, R. (2010). Muhaz: hazard function estimation in survival analysis. S Original by Kenneth Hess and R Port by R. Gentleman.
16. Houpt J.W., Townsend J.T. The statistical properties of the survivor interaction contrast. Journal of Mathematical Psychology 2010, 54:446-453.
17. Hugenschmidt C.E., Hayasaka S., Peiffer A.M., Laurienti P.J. Applying capacity analyses to psychophysical evaluation of multisensory interactions. Information Fusion 2010, 11:12-20.
18. Krummenacher J., Grubert A., Müller H.J. Inter-trial and redundant-signals effects in visual search and discrimination tasks: separable pre-attentive and post-selective effects. Vision Research 2010, 50:1382-1395.
19. Kruschke J.K. What to believe: Bayesian methods for data analysis. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 2010, 14:293-300.
20. Loynes R.M. The central limit theorem for backwards martingales. Probability Theory and Related Fields 1969, 13:1-8.
21. Mantel N. Evaluation of survival data and two new rank order statistics arising in its consideration. Cancer Chemotherapy Reports 1966, 50:163-170.
22. Maris G., Maris E. Testing the race model inequality: a nonparametric approach. Journal of Mathematical Psychology 2003, 47:507-514.
23. Miller J. Divided attention: evidence for coactivation with redundant signals. Cognitive Psychology 1982, 14:247-279.
24. R Development Core Team (2011). R: a language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing. Vienna, Austria. ISBN: 3-900051-07-0.
25. Rach S., Diederich A., Colonius H. On quantifying multisensory interaction effects in reaction time and detection rate. Psychological Research 2011, 75:77-94.
26. Richards H.J., Hadwin J.A., Benson V., Wenger M.J., Donnelly N. The influence of anxiety on processing capacity for threat detection. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review 2011, 18:883-889.
27. Rickard T.C., Bajic D. Memory retrieval given two independent cues: cue selection or parallel access?. Cognitive Psychology 2004, 48:243-294.
28. Scharf A., Palmer J., Moore C.M. Evidence of fixed capacity in visual object categorization. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review 2011, 18:713-721.
29. Townsend J.T., Ashby F.G. The stochastic modeling of elementary psychological processes 1983, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
30. Townsend J.T., Eidels A. Workload capacity spaces: a unified methodology for response time measures of efficiency as workload is varied. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review 2011, 18:659-681.
31. Townsend J.T., Honey C.J. Consequences of base time for redundant signals experiments. Journal of Mathematical Psychology 2007, 51:242-265.
32. Townsend J.T., Nozawa G. Spatio-temporal properties of elementary perception: an investigation of parallel, serial and coactive theories. Journal of Mathematical Psychology 1995, 39:321-360.
33. Townsend J.T., Wenger M.J. A theory of interactive parallel processing: new capacity measures and predictions for a response time inequality series. Psychological Review 2004, 111:1003-1035.
34. Ulrich R., Miller J., Schröter H. Testing the race model inequality: an algorithm and computer programs. Behavior Research Methods 2007, 39:291-302.
35. Van Zandt T. Analysis of response time distributions. Stevens' handbook of experimental psychology 2002, Vol. 4:461-516. Wiley Press, New York. 3rd ed.
36. Veldhuizen M.G., Shepard T.G., Wang M.-F., Marks L.E. Coactivation of gustatory and olfactory signals in flavor perception. Chemical Senses 2010, 35:121-133.
37. Weidner R., Muller H.J. Dimensional weighting of primary and secondary target-defining dimensions in visual search for singleton conjunction targets. Psychological Research 2010, 73:198-211.