Conflict tasks and the diffusion framework: Insight in model constraints based on psychological laws

Cognitive Psychology

Volumn 72, Issue , 2014, Pages 162-195

  Servant, Mathieu ^a,b   Montagnini, Anna ^b   Burle, Borís ^a  

^a CNRS   (France)

^b AIX MARSEILLE UNIVERSITY   (France)

Author keywords

Cognitive control; Conflict tasks; Decision making; Diffusion model; Pi ron's law; Wagenmakers Brown's law

Indexed keywords

ATTENTION; DECISION MAKING; FEMALE; HUMAN; MALE; PATTERN RECOGNITION; PSYCHOLOGICAL MODEL; PSYCHOMOTOR PERFORMANCE; REACTION TIME; YOUNG ADULT;

ATTENTION; CHOICE BEHAVIOR; DECISION MAKING; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; MODELS, PSYCHOLOGICAL; PATTERN RECOGNITION, VISUAL; PSYCHOMOTOR PERFORMANCE; REACTION TIME; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 84899146009     PISSN: 00100285     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.cogpsych.2014.03.002     Document Type: Article

References (80)

1. Acosta E., Simon J.R. The effect of irrelevant Information on the stages of processing. Journal of Motor Behavior 1976, 8:181-187. 10.1080/00222895.1976.10735070.
2. Baayen R.H., Davidson D.J., Bates D.M. Mixed-effects modeling with crossed random effects for subjects and items. Journal of Memory and Language 2008, 59:390-412. 10.1016/j.jml.2007.12.005.
3. Barr D.J., Levy R., Scheepers C., Tily H.J. Random effects structure for confirmatory hypothesis testing: Keep it maximal. Journal of Memory and Language 2013, 68(3):255-278. 10.1016/j.jml.2012.11.001.
4. Bates, D. M., Maechler, M., & Bolker, B. (2012). lmer4: Linear mixed-effects models using S4 classes. R package (version 0.999999-0).
5. Bogacz R., Brown E., Moehlis J., Holmes P., Cohen J.D. The physics of optimal decision making: A formal analysis of models of performance in two-alternative forced-choice tasks. Psychological Review 2006, 113:700-765.
6. Bonnet C. Psychophysical scaling within an information processing approach?. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 1992, 15:560-561.
7. Burle B., Spieser L., Servant M., Hasbroucq T. Distributional reaction time properties in the Eriksen task: Marked differences or hidden similarities with the Simon task?. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review 2014, 10.3758/s13423-013-0561-6.
8. Burle B., Possamai C.A., Vidal F., Bonnet M., Hasbroucq T. Executive control in the Simon effect: An electromyographic and distributional analysis. Psychological Research Psychologische Forschung 2002, 66:324-336. 10.1007/s00426-002-0105-6.
9. Chocholle R. Variation des temps de réaction auditifs en fonction de l'intensitéà diverses fréquences. Année Psychologique 1940, 41:65-124. 10.3406/psy.1940.5877.
10. Churchland A.K., Kiani R., Shadlen M.N. Decision-making with multiple alternatives. Nature Neuroscience 2008, 11:693-702.
11. Commission Internationale de l'Eclairage (1976). ISO 11664-4:2008(E)/CIE S 014-4/E:2007: Joint ISO/CIE Standard: Colorimetry-Part 4: CIE 1976 L*a*b* Colour Space.
12. Davranche K., Hall B., McMorris T. Effect of acute exercise on cognitive control required during an Eriksen flanker task. Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology 2009, 31:628-639.
13. Diederich A., Busemeyer J.R. Simple matrix methods for analyzing diffusion models of choice probability, choice response time, and simple response time. Journal of Mathematical Psychology 2003, 47:304-322. 10.1016/S0022-2496(03)00003-8.
14. Eriksen B.A., Eriksen C.W. Effects of noise letters upon the identification of a target letter in a nonsearch task. Perception & Psychophysics 1974, 16:143-149. 10.3758/BF03203267.
15. Eriksen C.W., St James J.D. Visual attention within and around the field of focal attention: A zoom lens model. Perception & Psychophysics 1986, 40:225-240.
16. Everett B.L., Hochhaus L., Brown J.R. Letter-naming as a function of intensity, degradation, S-R compatibility, and practice. Perception & Psychophysics 1985, 37:467-470.
17. Frowein H.W., Sanders A.F. Effects of visual stimulus degradation, S-R compatibility, and foreperiod duration on choice reaction time and movement time. Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society 1978, 12(2):106-108. 10.3758/BF03329641.
18. Gratton G., Coles M.G., Sirevaag E.J., Eriksen C.W., Donchin E. Pre- and poststimulus activation of response channels: A psychophysiological analysis. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 1988, 14:331-344.
19. Greenhouse S., Geisser S. On methods in the analysis of profile data. Psychometrika 1959, 24:95-112.
20. Hasbroucq T., Possamai C.A., Bonnet M., Vidal F. Effect of the irrelevant location of the response signal on choice reaction time: An electromyographic study in humans. Psychophysiology 1999, 36:522-526.
21. Hommel B. The relationship between stimulus processing and response selection in the Simon task: Evidence for a temporal overlap. Psychological Research Psychologische Forschung 1993, 55:280-290. 10.1007/BF00419688.
22. Hommel B. The Simon effect as tool and heuristic. Acta Psychologica 2011, 136:189-202.
23. Hübner R., Steinhauser M., Lehle C. A dual-stage two-phase model of selective attention. Psychological Review 2010, 117:759-784.
24. Hübner R., Töbel L. Does attentional selectivity in the flanker task improve discretely or gradually?. Frontiers in Psychology 2012, 3:1-11. 10.3389/fpsyg.2012.00434.
25. Jeffreys H. Theory of probability 1961, Oxford University Press, Oxford, England.
26. Kornblum S., Hasbroucq T., Osman A. Dimensional overlap: Cognitive basis for stimulus-response compatibility - A model and taxonomy. Psychological Review 1990, 97:253-270.
27. Laming D.R.J. Information theory of choice reaction time 1968, Wiley, New York.
28. Leite F.P., Ratcliff R. Modeling reaction time and accuracy of multiple-alternative decisions. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics 2010, 72:246-273.
29. Luce R.D. Response times 1986, Oxford University Press, New York.
30. Morey, R. D., & Rouder, J. N. (2012). BayesFactor. R package (version 0.9.5).
31. Nelder J.A., Mead R. A Simplex method for function minimization. The Computer Journal 1965, 7:308-313. 10.1093/comjnl/7.4.308.
32. Palmer J., Huk A.C., Shadlen M.N. The effect of stimulus strength on the speed and accuracy of a perceptual decision. Journal of Vision 2005, 5:376-404.
33. Peirce J.W. PsychoPy-Psychophysics software in Python. Journal of Neuroscience Methods 2007, 162:8-13. 10.1016/j.jneumeth.2006.11.017.
34. Piéron H. Recherches sur les lois de variation des temps de latence sensorielle en fonction des intensités excitatrices. Année Psychologique 1913, 22:17-96. 10.3406/psy.1913.4294.
35. Pinheiro J.C., Bates D.M. Mixed-effects models in S and S-PLUS 2000, Springer, New York.
36. Pins D., Bonnet C. On the relation between stimulus intensity and processing time: Pieron's law and choice reaction time. Perception & Psychophysics 1996, 58:390-400.
37. Pratte M.S., Rouder J.N., Morey R.D., Feng C. Exploring the differences in distributional properties between Stroop and Simon effects using delta plots. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics 2010, 72:2013-2025.
38. Ratcliff R. A theory of memory retrieval. Psychological Review 1978, 85:59-108.
39. Ratcliff R. A note on modeling accumulation of information when the rate of accumulation changes over time. Journal of Mathematical Psychology 1980, 21:178-184.
40. Ratcliff R. Diffusion and random walks models. International encyclopedia of the social and behavioral sciences 2001, Vol. 6:3668-3673. Elsevier, Oxford, England.
41. Ratcliff R., McKoon G. The diffusion decision model: Theory and data for two-choice decision tasks. Neural Computation 2008, 20:873-922. 10.1162/neco.2008.12-06-420.
42. Ratcliff R., Rouder J.N. Modeling response times for two-choice decisions. Psychological Science 1998, 9:347-356. 10.1111/1467-9280.00067.
43. Ratcliff R., Smith P.L. A comparison of sequential sampling models for two-choice reaction time. Psychological Review 2004, 111:333-367.
44. Ratcliff R., Tuerlinckx F. Estimating parameters of the diffusion model: Approaches to dealing with contaminant reaction times and parameter variability. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review 2002, 9:438-481.
45. Resulaj A., Kiani R., Wolpert D.M., Shadlen M.N. Changes of mind in decision-making. Nature 2009, 461:263-266.
46. Ridderinkhof K.R. Activation and suppression in conflict tasks: Empirical clarification through distributional analyses. Common mechanisms in perception and action. Attention and performance 2002, 494-519. Oxford University Press, Oxford. W. Prinz, B. Hommel (Eds.).
47. Ridderinkhof K.R., Scheres A., Oosterlaan J., Sergeant J.A. Delta plots in the study of individual differences: New tools reveal response inhibition deficits in AD/Hd that are eliminated by methylphenidate treatment. Journal of Abnormal Psychology 2005, 114:197-215.
48. Rösler F., Finger T. A psychophysiological analysis of response-channel activation and outcome states in Eriksen's noise-compatibility task. Psychological Research Psychologische Forschung 1993, 55:20-28.
49. Rouder J.N., Morey R.D., Speckman P.L., Province J.M. Default Bayes factors for ANOVA designs. Journal of Mathematical Psychology 2012, 56:356-374. 10.1016/j.jmp.2012.08.001.
50. Sanders A.F. Some issues and trends in the debate on discrete vs. continuous processing of information. Acta Psychologica 1990, 74:123-167.
51. Sanders A.F. Structural and functional aspects of the reaction process. Attention and performance 6 1977, 3-25. Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ. S. Dornic (Ed.).
52. Sanders A.F. Stage analysis of reaction processes. Tutorials in motor behavior 1980, 331-354. North-Holland, Amsterdam. G.E. Stelmach, J.Q. Requin (Eds.).
53. Schielzeth H., Forstmeier W. Conclusions beyond support: Overconfident estimates in mixed models. Behavioral Ecology 2009, 20:416-420. 10.1093/beheco/arn145.
54. Schwarz G. Estimating the dimension of a model. The Annals of Statistics 1978, 6:461-464.
55. Schwarz W., Miller J. Response time models of delta plots with negative-going slopes. Psychonomic Bulletin &Review 2012, 19:555-574. 10.3758/s13423-012-0254-6.
56. Shwartz S.P., Pomerantz J.R., Egeth H.E. State and process limitations in information processing: An additive factors analysis. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 1977, 3:402-410.
57. Simon J.R. Effect of an auditory stimulus on the processing of a visual stimulus under single- and dual-tasks conditions. Acta Psychologica 1982, 51:61-73. 10.1016/0001-6918(82)90019-1.
58. Simon J.R., Berbaum K. Effect of conflicting cues on information processing: The 'Stroop effect' vs. the 'Simon effect'. Acta Psychologica 1990, 73:159-170.
59. Simon J.R., Pouraghabagher A.R. The effect of aging on the stages of processing in a choice reaction time task. Journal of Gerontology 1978, 33:553-561.
60. Simon J.R., Small A.M. Processing auditory information: Interference from an irrelevant cue. Journal of Applied Psychology 1969, 53:433-435.
61. Smith P.L., Ratcliff R. An integrated theory of attention and decision making in visual signal detection. Psychological Review 2009, 116:283-317.
62. Speckman P.L., Rouder J.N., Morey R.D., Pratte M.S. Delta plots and coherent distribution ordering. American Statistician 2008, 62:262-266.
63. Stafford T., Ingram L., Gurney K.N. Pieron's Law holds during Stroop conflict: Insights into the architecture of decision making. Cognitive Science 2011, 35:1553-1566. 10.1111/j.1551-6709.2011.01195.x.
64. Stanovich K.E., Pachella R.G. Encoding, stimulus-response compatibility, and stages of processing. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 1977, 3:411-421.
65. Sternberg S. The discovery of processing stages: Extensions of Donders' method. Acta Psychologica 1969, 30:276-315. 10.1016/0001-6918(69)90055-9.
66. Sternberg S. The meaning of additive reaction-time effects: Some misconceptions. Frontiers in Psychology 2013, 4. 10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00744.
67. Stoffels E.J., Van der Molen M.W., Keuss P.J. Intersensory facilitation and inhibition: Immediate arousal and location effects of auditory noise on visual choice reaction time. Acta Psychologica 1985, 58:45-62.
68. Stroop J.R. Studies of interference in serial verbal reactions. Journal of Experimental Psychology 1935, 18:643-662. 10.1037/h0054651.
69. Townsend J.T., Ashby F.G. Stochastic modeling of elementary psychological processes 1983, Cambridge University Press, London.
70. van Casteren M., Davis M.H. Mix, a program for pseudorandomization. Behavioral Research Methods 2006, 38:584-589.
71. van Duren L.L., Sanders A.F. On the robustness of the additive factors stage structure in blocked and mixed choice reaction designs. Acta Psychologica 1988, 69:83-94. doi:0001-6918.
72. van Maanen L., Grasman R.P., Forstmann B.U., Wagenmakers E.J. Pieron's law and optimal behavior in perceptual decision-making. Frontiers in Neuroscience 2012, 5:143. 10.3389/fnins.2011.00143.
73. Wagenmakers E.-J., Brown S. On the linear relation between the mean and the standard deviation of a response time distribution. Psychological Review 2007, 114:830-841. 10.1037/0033-295X.114.3.830.
74. Wald A. Sequential analysis 1947, Wiley, New York.
75. Wald A., Wolfowitz J. Optimum character of the sequential probability ratio test. Annals of Mathematical Statistics 1948, 19:326-339.
76. White C.N., Brown S., Ratcliff R. A test of Bayesian observer models of processing in the Eriksen flanker task. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 2011, 38:489-497. 10.1037/a0026065.
77. White C.N., Ratcliff R., Starns J.J. Diffusion models of the flanker task: Discrete versus gradual attentional selection. Cognitive Psychology 2011, 63:210-238.
78. Winer B.J. Statistical principles in experimental design: Design and analysis of factorial experiments 1971, McGraw-Hill, New York.
79. Wylie S.A., Claassen D.O., Huizenga H.M., Schewel K.D., Ridderinkhof K.R., Bashore T.R., et al. Dopamine agonists and the suppression of impulsive motor actions in Parkinson disease. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 2012, 24:1709-1724. 10.1162/jocn_a_00241.
80. Wylie S.A., Ridderinkhof K.R., Bashore T.R., van den Wildenberg W.P. The effect of Parkinson's disease on the dynamics of on-line and proactive cognitive control during action selection. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 2010, 22:2058-2073. 10.1162/jocn.2009.21326.