Context effects are phenomena of multiattribute, multialternative decision-making that contradict normative models of preference. Numerous computational models have been created to explain these effects, communicated through the estimation of model parameters. Historically, parameters have been estimated by fitting these models to choice response data alone. In other contexts, such as those conventionally studied in perceptual decision-making, the times associated with choice responses have proven effective in improving understanding and testing competing theoretical accounts of various experimental manipulations. Here, we explore the advantages of incorporating response time distributions into the inference procedure, using the most recent model of context effects-the multiattribute linear ballistic accumulator (MLBA) model-as a case study. First, we establish in a simulation study that incorporating response time data in the inference procedure does indeed produce more constrained estimates of the model parameters, and the extent of this constraint is modulated by the number of observations within the data. Second, we generalize our results beyond the MLBA model by using likelihood-free techniques to estimate model parameters. Finally, we investigate parameter differences when choice or choice response time data are used to fit the MLBA model by fitting different model variants to real data from a perceptual decision-making experiment with context effects. Based on likelihood-free and likelihood-based estimations of both simulated and real data, we conclude that response time measures offer an important source of constraint for models of context effects.
Response inhibition is a widely studied aspect of cognitive control that is particularly interesting because of its applications to clinical populations. Although individual differences are integral to cognitive control, so too is our ability to aggregate information across a group of individuals, so that we can powerfully generalize and characterize the group's behavior. Hence, an examination of response inhibition would ideally involve an accurate estimation of both group- and individual-level effects. Hierarchical Bayesian analyses account for individual differences by simultaneously estimating group and individual factors and compensate for sparse data by pooling information across participants. Hierarchical Bayesian models are thus an ideal tool for studying response inhibition, especially when analyzing neural data. We construct hierarchical Bayesian models of the fMRI neural time series, models assuming hierarchies across conditions, participants, and ROIs. Here, we demonstrate the advantages of our models over a conventional generalized linear model in accurately separating signal from noise. We then apply our models to go/no-go and stop signal data from 11 participants. We find strong evidence for individual differences in neural responses to going, not going, and stopping and in functional connectivity across the two tasks and demonstrate how hierarchical Bayesian models can effectively compensate for these individual differences while providing group-level summarizations. Finally, we validated the reliability of our findings using a larger go/no-go data set consisting of 179 participants. In conclusion, hierarchical Bayesian models not only account for individual differences but allow us to better understand the cognitive dynamics of response inhibition.
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.