Parameter estimation in evidence-accumulation models of choice response times is demanding of both the data and the user. We outline how to fit evidence-accumulation models using the flexible, open-source, R-based Dynamic Models of Choice (DMC) software. DMC provides a hands-on introduction to the Bayesian implementation of two popular evidence-accumulation models: the diffusion decision model (DDM) and the linear ballistic accumulator (LBA). It enables individual and hierarchical estimation, as well as assessment of the quality of a model's parameter estimates and descriptive accuracy. First, we introduce the basic concepts of Bayesian parameter estimation, guiding the reader through a simple DDM analysis. We then illustrate the challenges of fitting evidence-accumulation models using a set of LBA analyses. We emphasize best practices in modeling and discuss the importance of parameter- and model-recovery simulations, exploring the strengths and weaknesses of models in different experimental designs and parameter regions. We also demonstrate how DMC can be used to model complex cognitive processes, using as an example a race model of the stop-signal paradigm, which is used to measure inhibitory ability. We illustrate the flexibility of DMC by extending this model to account for mixtures of cognitive processes resulting from attention failures. We then guide the reader through the practical details of a Bayesian hierarchical analysis, from specifying priors to obtaining posterior distributions that encapsulate what has been learned from the data. Finally, we illustrate how the Bayesian approach leads to a quantitatively cumulative science, showing how to use posterior distributions to specify priors that can be used to inform the analysis of future experiments.
Critical evaluation of current data analysis strategies for psychophysiological measures of fear conditioning and extinction in humans.
Scientific advances across a range of disciplines hinge on the ability to make inferences about unobservable theoretical entities on the basis of empirical data patterns. Accurate inferences rely on both discovering valid, replicable data patterns and accurately interpreting those patterns in terms of their implications for theoretical constructs. The replication crisis in science has led to widespread efforts to improve the reliability of research findings, but comparatively little attention has been devoted to the validity of inferences based on those findings. Using an example from cognitive psychology, we demonstrate a blinded-inference paradigm for assessing the quality of theoretical inferences from data. Our results reveal substantial variability in experts’ judgments on the very same data, hinting at a possible inference crisis.
Many models of response time that base choices on the first evidence accumulator to win a race to threshold rely on statistical independence between accumulators to achieve mathematical tractability (e.g.,
Base-rate neglect is a failure to sufficiently bias decisions toward a priori more likely options. Given cognitive and neurocognitive model-based evidence indicating that, in speeded choice tasks, (1) age-related slowing is associated with higher and less flexible overall evidence thresholds (response caution) and (2) gains in speed and accuracy in relation to base-rate bias require flexible control of choice-specific evidence thresholds (response bias), it was hypothesised that base-rate neglect might increase with age due to compromised flexibility of response bias. We administered a computer-based perceptual discrimination task to 20 healthy older (63-78 years) and 20 younger (18-28 years) adults where base-rate direction was either variable or constant over trials and so required more or less flexible bias control. Using an evidence accumulation model of response times and accuracy (specifically, the Linear Ballistic Accumulator model; Brown & Heathcote, 2008), age-related slowing was attributable to higher response caution, and gains in speed and accuracy per base-rate bias were attributable to response bias. Both age groups were less biased than required to achieve optimal accuracy, and more so when base-rate direction changed frequently. However, bias was closer to optimal among older than younger participants, especially when base-rate direction was constant. We conclude that older participants performed better than younger participants because of their greater emphasis on accuracy, and that, by making greater absolute and equivalent relative adjustments of evidence thresholds in relation to base-rate bias, flexibility of bias control is at most only slightly compromised with age.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.