Literature DB >> 16478305

The race model inequality: interpreting a geometric measure of the amount of violation.

Hans Colonius1, Adele Diederich.   

Abstract

An inequality by J. O. Miller (1982) has become the standard tool to test the race model for redundant signals reaction times (RTs), as an alternative to a neural summation mechanism. It stipulates that the RT distribution function to redundant stimuli is never larger than the sum of the distribution functions for 2 single stimuli. When many different experimental conditions are to be compared, a numerical index of violation is very desirable. Widespread practice is to take a certain area with contours defined by the distribution functions for single and redundant stimuli. Here this area is shown to equal the difference between 2 mean RT values. This result provides an intuitive interpretation of the index and makes it amenable to simple statistical testing. An extension of this approach to 3 redundant signals is presented.

Mesh:

Year:  2006        PMID: 16478305     DOI: 10.1037/0033-295X.113.1.148

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Psychol Rev        ISSN: 0033-295X            Impact factor:   8.934


  40 in total

1.  Why two "Distractors" are better than one: modeling the effect of non-target auditory and tactile stimuli on visual saccadic reaction time.

Authors:  Adele Diederich; Hans Colonius
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2007-01-10       Impact factor: 1.972

2.  Consequences of Base Time for Redundant Signals Experiments.

Authors:  James T Townsend; Christopher Honey
Journal:  J Math Psychol       Date:  2007-08       Impact factor: 2.223

3.  Computing an optimal time window of audiovisual integration in focused attention tasks: illustrated by studies on effect of age and prior knowledge.

Authors:  Hans Colonius; Adele Diederich
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2011-05-31       Impact factor: 1.972

4.  Acoustic noise and vision differentially warp the auditory categorization of speech.

Authors:  Gavin M Bidelman; Lauren Sigley; Gwyneth A Lewis
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2019-07       Impact factor: 1.840

5.  Visuotactile interaction even in far sagittal space in older adults with decreased gait and balance functions.

Authors:  Wataru Teramoto; Keito Honda; Kento Furuta; Kaoru Sekiyama
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2017-05-10       Impact factor: 1.972

6.  Multisensory integration is independent of perceived simultaneity.

Authors:  Vanessa Harrar; Laurence R Harris; Charles Spence
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2016-11-21       Impact factor: 1.972

7.  Semantic incongruity influences response caution in audio-visual integration.

Authors:  Benjamin Steinweg; Fred W Mast
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2016-10-12       Impact factor: 1.972

8.  Multisensory Integration Predicts Balance and Falls in Older Adults.

Authors:  Jeannette R Mahoney; Kelly Cotton; Joe Verghese
Journal:  J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci       Date:  2019-08-16       Impact factor: 6.053

9.  Interactions between the spatial and temporal stimulus factors that influence multisensory integration in human performance.

Authors:  Ryan A Stevenson; Juliane Krueger Fister; Zachary P Barnett; Aaron R Nidiffer; Mark T Wallace
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2012-03-24       Impact factor: 1.972

10.  Multisensory integration of redundant trisensory stimulation.

Authors:  Carl Erick Hagmann; Natalie Russo
Journal:  Atten Percept Psychophys       Date:  2016-11       Impact factor: 2.199

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.