Modeling individual differences in response time and accuracy in numeracy

Cognition

Volumn 137, Issue , 2015, Pages 115-136

  Ratcliff, Roger ^a   Thompson, Clarissa A ^b   McKoon, Gail ^a  

^a OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b KENT STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Diffusion model; Individual differences; Number ability; Numeracy; Response time and accuracy

Indexed keywords

ACCURACY; ADULT; ARTICLE; BOOTSTRAPPING; DECISION MAKING; DIFFUSION; HUMAN; HUMAN EXPERIMENT; INTELLIGENCE QUOTIENT; MEMORY; MONTE CARLO METHOD; PERCEPTION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RESPONSE TIME; TIME; VELOCITY; YOUNG ADULT; FEMALE; INDIVIDUALITY; MALE; MATHEMATICS; PHYSIOLOGY; PSYCHOLOGICAL THEORY; REACTION TIME;

DECISION MAKING; FEMALE; HUMANS; INDIVIDUALITY; MALE; MATHEMATICS; MEMORY; PSYCHOLOGICAL THEORY; REACTION TIME; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 84921949521     PISSN: 00100277     EISSN: 18737838     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.cognition.2014.12.004     Document Type: Article

References (57)

1. 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.
2. Brainerd C.J., Gordon L.L. Development of verbatim and gist memory for numbers. Developmental Psychology 1994, 30:163-177.
3. Brown S.D., Heathcote A.J. The simplest complete model of choice response time: Linear ballistic accumulation. Cognitive Psychology 2008, 57:153-178.
4. Chen Q., Li J. Association between individual differences in non-symbolic number acuity and math performance: A meta-analysis. Acta Psychologica 2014, 148:163-172.
5. Cohen J. A power primer. Psychological Bulletin 1992, 112:155-159.
6. De Smedt B., Verschaffel L., Ghesquiere P. The predictive value of numerical magnitude comparison for individual differences in mathematics achievement. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology 2009, 103:469-479.
7. Dehaene S. The number sense: How the mind creates mathematics 1997, Oxford University Press, New York.
8. Dehaene S., Dehaene-Lambertz G., Cohen L. Abstract representations of numbers in the animal and human brain. Trends in Neuroscience 1998, 21:355-361.
9. Dehaene S., Dupoux E., Mehler J. Is numerical comparison digital? Analogical and symbolic effects in two-digit number comparison. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 1990, 16:626-641.
10. Durand M., Hulme C., Larkin R., Snowling M. The cognitive foundations of reading and arithmetic skills in 7- to 10-year old children. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology 2005, 91:113-136.
11. Geddes J., Ratcliff R., Allerhand M., Childers R., Wright R.J., Frier B.M., Deary I.J. Modeling the effects of hypoglycemia on a two-choice task in adult humans. Neuropsychology 2010, 24:652-660.
12. Gilmore C., Attridge N., Inglis M. Measuring the approximate number system. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology 2011, 64:2099-2109.
13. Gilmore C.K., McCarthy S.W., Spelke E.S. Non-symbolic arithmetic abilities and mathematics achievement in the first year of formal schooling. Cognition 2010, 115:394-406.
14. Halberda J., Mazzocco M.M.M., Feigenson L. Individual differences in nonverbal number acuity predict maths achievement. Nature 2008, 455:665-668.
15. Halberda J., Ly R., Wilmer J.B., Naiman D.Q., Germine L. Number sense across lifespan as revealed by a massive Internet-based sample. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 2012, 109:11116-11120.
16. Holloway I.D., Ansari D. Mapping numerical magnitudes onto symbols: The numerical distance effect and individual differences in children's math achievement. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology 2009, 103:17-29.
17. Inglis M., Attridge N., Batchelor S., Gilmore C.K. Non-verbal number acuity correlates with symbolic mathematics achievement: But only in children. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review 2011, 18:1222-1229.
18. Laming D.R.J. Information theory of choice reaction time 1968, Wiley, New York.
19. Libertus M.E., Feigenson L., Halberda J. Preschool acuity of the approximate number system correlates with school math ability. Developmental Science 2011, 14:1292-1300.
20. Lyons I.M., Beilock S.L. Mathematics anxiety: Separating the math from the anxiety. Cerebral Cortex 2011, (first published online October 20, 2011). 10.1093/cercor/bhr289.
21. Maloney E., Risko E., Preston F., Ansari D., Fugelsang J. Challenging the reliability and validity of cognitive measures: The case of the numerical distance effect. Acta Psychologica 2010, 134:154-161.
22. Mazzocco M.M.M., Feigenson L., Halberda J. Impaired acuity of the approximate number system underlies mathematical learning disability (dyscalcula). Child Development 2011, 82:1224-1237.
23. Mundy E., Gilmore C. Children's mapping between symbolic and nonsymbolic representation of number. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology 2009, 103:490-502.
24. Petrov A.A., Van Horn N.M., Ratcliff R. Dissociable perceptual learning mechanisms revealed by diffusion-model analysis. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review 2011, 18:490-497.
25. Price G.R., Palmer D., Battista C., Ansari D. Nonsymbolic numerical magnitude comparison: Reliability and validity of different task variants and outcome measures, and their relationship to arithmetic achievement in adults. Acta Psychologica 2012, 140:50-57.
26. Ratcliff R. A theory of memory retrieval. Psychological Review 1978, 85:59-108.
27. Ratcliff R. A diffusion model account of reaction time and accuracy in a two choice brightness discrimination task: Fitting real data and failing to fit fake but plausible data. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review 2002, 9:278-291.
28. Ratcliff R. Parameter variability and distributional assumptions in the diffusion model. Psychological Review 2013, 120:281-292.
29. Ratcliff R. Measuring psychometric functions with the diffusion model. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 2014, 40:870-888.
30. Ratcliff, R., & Childers, R. (in press). Individual differences and fitting methods for the two-choice diffusion. Decision.
31. Ratcliff R., Love J., Thompson C.A., Opfer J. Children are not like older adults: A diffusion model analysis of developmental changes in speeded responses. Child Development 2012, 83:367-381.
32. Ratcliff R., McKoon G. The diffusion decision model: Theory and data for two-choice decision tasks. Neural Computation 2008, 20:873-922.
33. Ratcliff R., Rouder J.N. Modeling response times for two-choice decisions. Psychological Science 1998, 9:347-356.
34. Ratcliff R., Thapar A., McKoon G. The effects of aging on reaction time in a signal detection task. Psychology and Aging 2001, 16:323-341.
35. Ratcliff R., Thapar A., McKoon G. A diffusion model analysis of the effects of aging on brightness discrimination. Perception and Psychophysics 2003, 65:523-535.
36. Ratcliff R., Thapar A., McKoon G. A diffusion model analysis of the effects of aging on recognition memory. Journal of Memory and Language 2004, 50:408-424.
37. Ratcliff R., Thapar A., McKoon G. Aging and individual differences in rapid two-choice decisions. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review 2006, 13:626-635.
38. Ratcliff R., Thapar A., McKoon G. Aging, practice, and perceptual tasks: A diffusion model analysis. Psychology and Aging 2006, 21:353-371.
39. Ratcliff R., Thapar A., McKoon G. Individual differences, aging, and IQ in two-choice tasks. Cognitive Psychology 2010, 60:127-157.
40. Ratcliff R., Thapar A., McKoon G. Effects of aging and IQ on item and associative memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 2011, 140:46-487.
41. Ratcliff R., Tuerlinckx F. Estimating the parameters of the diffusion model: Approaches to dealing with contaminant reaction times and parameter variability. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review 2002, 9:438-481.
42. Ratcliff R., Van Dongen H.P.A. Sleep deprivation affects multiple distinct cognitive processes. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review 2009, 16:742-751.
43. Ratcliff R., Van Zandt T., McKoon G. Connectionist and diffusion models of reaction time. Psychological Review 1999, 106:261-300.
44. Rinkenauer G., Osman A., Ulrich R., Muller-Gethmann H., Mattes S. On the locus of speed-accuracy tradeoff in reaction time: Inferences from the lateralized readiness potential. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 2004, 133:261-282.
45. Sasanguie D., Defever E., Van den Bussche E., Reynvoet B. The reliability of and the relation between non-symbolic numerical distance effects in comparison, same-different judgments and priming. Acta Psychologica 2011, 136:73-80.
46. Starns J.J., Ratcliff R. The effects of aging on the speed-accuracy compromise: Boundary optimality in the diffusion model. Psychology and Aging 2010, 5:377-390.
47. Starns J.J., Ratcliff R. Age-related differences in diffusion model boundary optimality with both trial-limited and time-limited tasks. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review 2012, 19:139-145.
48. Starns J.J., Ratcliff R., McKoon G. Evaluating the unequal-variability and dual-process explanations of zROC slopes with response time data and the diffusion model. Cognitive Psychology 2012, 64:1-34.
49. Thapar A., Ratcliff R., McKoon G. A diffusion model analysis of the effects of aging on letter discrimination. Psychology and Aging 2003, 18:415-429.
50. Thompson C.A., Siegler R.S. Linear numerical magnitude representations aid children's memory for numbers. Psychological Science 2010, 21:1274-1281.
51. Usher M., McClelland J.L. The time course of perceptual choice: The leaky, competing accumulator model. Psychological Review 2001, 108:550-592.
52. Vandekerckhove J., Tuerlinckx F. Fitting the Ratcliff diffusion model to experimental data. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review 2007, 14:1011-1026.
53. Voss A., Nagler M., Lerche V. Diffusion models in experimental psychology: A practical introduction. Experimental Psychology 2013, 60:385-402.
54. Voss A., Voss J. Fast-dm: A free program for efficient diffusion model analysis. Behavior Research Methods 2007, 39:767-775.
55. White C.N., Ratcliff R., Vasey M.W., McKoon G. Using diffusion models to understand clinical disorders. Journal of Mathematical Psychology 2010, 54:39-52.
56. Wiecki T.V., Sofer I., Frank M.J. HDDM: Hierarchical Bayesian estimation of the drift-diffusion model in python. Frontiers in Neuroinformatics 2013, 7:1-10.
57. Zebain S., Ansari D. Differences between literates and illiterates on symbolic but not nonsymbolic numerical magnitude processing. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review 2012, 19:93-100.