Literature DB >> 23356779

Disentangling decision models: from independence to competition.

Andrei R Teodorescu1, Marius Usher.   

Abstract

A multitude of models have been proposed to account for the neural mechanism of value integration and decision making in speeded decision tasks. While most of these models account for existing data, they largely disagree on a fundamental characteristic of the choice mechanism: independent versus different types of competitive processing. Five models, an independent race model, 2 types of input competition models (normalized race and feed-forward inhibition [FFI]) and 2 types of response competition models (max-minus-next [MMN] diffusion and leaky competing accumulators [LCA]) were compared in 3 combined computational and experimental studies. In each study, difficulty was manipulated in a way that produced qualitatively distinct predictions from the different classes of models. When parameters were constrained by the experimental conditions to avoid mimicking, simulations demonstrated that independent models predict speedups in response time with increased difficulty, while response competition models predict the opposite. Predictions of input-competition models vary between specific models and experimental conditions. Taken together, the combined computational and empirical findings provide support for the notion that decisional processes are intrinsically competitive and that this competition is likely to kick in at a late (response), rather than early (input), processing stage.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23356779     DOI: 10.1037/a0030776

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


  40 in total

1.  Evidence integration in model-based tree search.

Authors:  Alec Solway; Matthew M Botvinick
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2015-08-31       Impact factor: 11.205

2.  How to discriminate conclusively among different models of decision making?

Authors:  David Thura
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2015-11-04       Impact factor: 2.714

3.  Does response modality influence conflict? Modelling vocal and manual response Stroop interference.

Authors:  Alex Fennell; Roger Ratcliff
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn       Date:  2019-02-25       Impact factor: 3.051

Review 4.  Using experiential optimization to build lexical representations.

Authors:  Brendan T Johns; Michael N Jones; D J K Mewhort
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2019-02

5.  Modeling numerosity representation with an integrated diffusion model.

Authors:  Roger Ratcliff; Gail McKoon
Journal:  Psychol Rev       Date:  2017-11-16       Impact factor: 8.934

6.  Examining aging and numerosity using an integrated diffusion model.

Authors:  Roger Ratcliff; Gail McKoon
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn       Date:  2020-07-30       Impact factor: 3.051

Review 7.  Sequential Sampling Models in Cognitive Neuroscience: Advantages, Applications, and Extensions.

Authors:  B U Forstmann; R Ratcliff; E-J Wagenmakers
Journal:  Annu Rev Psychol       Date:  2015-09-17       Impact factor: 24.137

8.  Continuous track paths reveal additive evidence integration in multistep decision making.

Authors:  Cristian Buc Calderon; Myrtille Dewulf; Wim Gevers; Tom Verguts
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2017-09-18       Impact factor: 11.205

9.  Approaches to Analysis in Model-based Cognitive Neuroscience.

Authors:  Brandon M Turner; Birte U Forstmann; Bradley C Love; Thomas J Palmeri; Leendert Van Maanen
Journal:  J Math Psychol       Date:  2016-02-17       Impact factor: 2.223

10.  Evidence accumulation during a sensorimotor decision task revealed by whole-brain imaging.

Authors:  Elena I Dragomir; Vilim Štih; Ruben Portugues
Journal:  Nat Neurosci       Date:  2019-12-02       Impact factor: 24.884

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.