Literature DB >> 10909132

A comparison of two response time models applied to perceptual matching.

T Van Zandt1, H Colonius, R W Proctor.   

Abstract

Two models, a Poisson race model and a diffusion model, are fit to data from a perceptual matching task. In each model, information about the similarity or the difference between two stimuli accumulates toward thresholds for either response. Stimulus variables are assumed to influence the rate at which information accumulates, and response variables are assumed to influence the level of the response thresholds. Three experiments were conducted to assess the performance of each model. In Experiment 1, observers performed under different response deadlines; in Experiment 2, response bias was manipulated by changing the relative frequency of same and different stimuli. In Experiment 3, stimulus pairs were presented at three eccentricities: foveal, parafoveal, and peripheral. We examined whether the race and diffusion models could fit the response time and accuracy data through changes only in response parameters (for Experiments 1 and 2) or stimulus parameters (for Experiment 3). Comparisons between the two models suggest that the race model, which has not been studied extensively, can account for perceptual matching data at least as well as the diffusion model. Furthermore, without the constraints on the parameters provided by the experimental conditions, the diffusion and the race models are indistinguishable. This finding emphasizes the importance of fitting models across several conditions and imposing logical psychological constraints on the parameters of models.

Mesh:

Year:  2000        PMID: 10909132     DOI: 10.3758/bf03212980

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev        ISSN: 1069-9384


  23 in total

Review 1.  How to fit a response time distribution.

Authors:  T Van Zandt
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2000-09

2.  Shapes of reaction-time distributions and shapes of learning curves: a test of the instance theory of automaticity.

Authors:  G D Logan
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn       Date:  1992-09       Impact factor: 3.051

3.  Stimulus information as a determinant of reaction time.

Authors:  R HYMAN
Journal:  J Exp Psychol       Date:  1953-03

4.  An interactive race model of divided attention.

Authors:  J T Mordkoff; S Yantis
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform       Date:  1991-05       Impact factor: 3.332

5.  Conjunctive search for one and two identical targets.

Authors:  R Ward; J L McClelland
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform       Date:  1989-11       Impact factor: 3.332

6.  Response latency models for signal detection.

Authors:  R Pike
Journal:  Psychol Rev       Date:  1973-01       Impact factor: 8.934

7.  Evidence that the same-different disparity in letter matching is not attributable to response bias.

Authors:  R W Proctor; K V Rao
Journal:  Percept Psychophys       Date:  1983-07

8.  Theoretical interpretations of the speed and accuracy of positive and negative responses.

Authors:  R Ratcliff
Journal:  Psychol Rev       Date:  1985-04       Impact factor: 8.934

9.  Effect of intermixed foveal and parafoveal presentation on same-different judgments: evidence for a criterion-inertia model.

Authors:  L E Krueger
Journal:  Percept Psychophys       Date:  1985-03

10.  A theory of perceptual matching.

Authors:  L E Krueger
Journal:  Psychol Rev       Date:  1978-07       Impact factor: 8.934

View more
  29 in total

Review 1.  How to fit a response time distribution.

Authors:  T Van Zandt
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2000-09

2.  Quantile maximum likelihood estimation of response time distributions.

Authors:  Andrew Heathcote; Scott Brown; D J K Mewhort
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2002-06

3.  A comparison of sequential sampling models for two-choice reaction time.

Authors:  Roger Ratcliff; Philip L Smith
Journal:  Psychol Rev       Date:  2004-04       Impact factor: 8.934

4.  Analysis of group differences in processing speed: where are the models of processing?

Authors:  Roger Ratcliff; Daniel Spieler; Gail McKoon
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2004-08

5.  Estimation and interpretation of 1/falpha noise in human cognition.

Authors:  Eric-Jan Wagenmakers; Simon Farrell; Roger Ratcliff
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2004-08

6.  Merging race models and adaptive networks: a parallel race network.

Authors:  Denis Cousineau
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2004-10

7.  A hierarchical model for estimating response time distributions.

Authors:  Jeffrey N Rouder; Jun Lu; Paul Speckman; Dongchu Sun; Yi Jiang
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2005-04

8.  Is the psychological refractory period effect for ideomotor compatible tasks eliminated by speed-stress instructions?

Authors:  Yun Kyoung Shin; Yang Seok Cho; Mei-Ching Lien; Robert W Proctor
Journal:  Psychol Res       Date:  2006-05-23

9.  An EZ-diffusion model for response time and accuracy.

Authors:  Eric-Jan Wagenmakers; Han L J van der Maas; Raoul P P P Grasman
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2007-02

10.  The overconstraint of response time models: rethinking the scaling problem.

Authors:  Chris Donkin; Scott D Brown; Andrew Heathcote
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2009-12
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.