Literature DB >> 25347314

The diffusion model is not a deterministic growth model: comment on Jones and Dzhafarov (2014).

Philip L Smith1, Roger Ratcliff2, Gail McKoon2.   

Abstract

Jones and Dzhafarov (2014) claim that several current models of speeded decision making in cognitive tasks, including the diffusion model, can be viewed as special cases of other general models or model classes. The general models can be made to match any set of response time (RT) distribution and accuracy data exactly by a suitable choice of parameters and so are unfalsifiable. The implication of their claim is that models like the diffusion model are empirically testable only by artificially restricting them to exclude unfalsifiable instances of the general model. We show that Jones and Dzhafarov's argument depends on enlarging the class of "diffusion" models to include models in which there is little or no diffusion. The unfalsifiable models are deterministic or near-deterministic growth models, from which the effects of within-trial variability have been removed or in which they are constrained to be negligible. These models attribute most or all of the variability in RT and accuracy to across-trial variability in the rate of evidence growth, which is permitted to be distributed arbitrarily and to vary freely across experimental conditions. In contrast, in the standard diffusion model, within-trial variability in evidence is the primary determinant of variability in RT. Across-trial variability, which determines the relative speed of correct responses and errors, is theoretically and empirically constrained. Jones and Dzhafarov's attempt to include the diffusion model in a class of models that also includes deterministic growth models misrepresents and trivializes it and conveys a misleading picture of cognitive decision-making research. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2014 APA, all rights reserved).

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 25347314      PMCID: PMC4429756          DOI: 10.1037/a0037667

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


  16 in total

1.  The time course of perceptual choice: the leaky, competing accumulator model.

Authors:  M Usher; J L McClelland
Journal:  Psychol Rev       Date:  2001-07       Impact factor: 8.934

2.  Evaluating the unequal-variance and dual-process explanations of zROC slopes with response time data and the diffusion model.

Authors:  Jeffrey J Starns; Roger Ratcliff; Gail McKoon
Journal:  Cogn Psychol       Date:  2011-11-11       Impact factor: 3.468

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

Review 4.  The diffusion decision model: theory and data for two-choice decision tasks.

Authors:  Roger Ratcliff; Gail McKoon
Journal:  Neural Comput       Date:  2008-04       Impact factor: 2.026

5.  The simplest complete model of choice response time: linear ballistic accumulation.

Authors:  Scott D Brown; Andrew Heathcote
Journal:  Cogn Psychol       Date:  2008-02-20       Impact factor: 3.468

Review 6.  An integrated theory of attention and decision making in visual signal detection.

Authors:  Philip L Smith; Roger Ratcliff
Journal:  Psychol Rev       Date:  2009-04       Impact factor: 8.934

7.  Unfalsifiability and mutual translatability of major modeling schemes for choice reaction time.

Authors:  Matt Jones; Ehtibar N Dzhafarov
Journal:  Psychol Rev       Date:  2013-09-30       Impact factor: 8.934

Review 8.  Stimulus intensity and response evocation.

Authors:  G R Grice
Journal:  Psychol Rev       Date:  1968-09       Impact factor: 8.934

9.  Evidence for an accumulator model of psychophysical discrimination.

Authors:  D Vickers
Journal:  Ergonomics       Date:  1970-01       Impact factor: 2.778

10.  Parameter variability and distributional assumptions in the diffusion model.

Authors:  Roger Ratcliff
Journal:  Psychol Rev       Date:  2012-11-12       Impact factor: 8.934

View more
  9 in total

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

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

2.  Modelling individual difference in visual categorization.

Authors:  Jianhong Shen; Thomas J Palmeri
Journal:  Vis cogn       Date:  2016-11-10

3.  Determining informative priors for cognitive models.

Authors:  Michael D Lee; Wolf Vanpaemel
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2018-02

4.  Modeling Regularities in Response Time and Accuracy Data with the Diffusion Model.

Authors:  Roger Ratcliff; Philip L Smith; Gail McKoon
Journal:  Curr Dir Psychol Sci       Date:  2015-12

5.  A single trial analysis of EEG in recognition memory: Tracking the neural correlates of memory strength.

Authors:  Roger Ratcliff; Per B Sederberg; Troy A Smith; Russ Childers
Journal:  Neuropsychologia       Date:  2016-09-29       Impact factor: 3.139

Review 6.  Diffusion Decision Model: Current Issues and History.

Authors:  Roger Ratcliff; Philip L Smith; Scott D Brown; Gail McKoon
Journal:  Trends Cogn Sci       Date:  2016-03-05       Impact factor: 20.229

7.  Individual Differences and Fitting Methods for the Two-Choice Diffusion Model of Decision Making.

Authors:  Roger Ratcliff; Russ Childers
Journal:  Decision (Wash D C )       Date:  2015

8.  Adults with poor reading skills: How lexical knowledge interacts with scores on standardized reading comprehension tests.

Authors:  Gail McKoon; Roger Ratcliff
Journal:  Cognition       Date:  2015-11-09

9.  A Common Mechanism Underlying Food Choice and Social Decisions.

Authors:  Ian Krajbich; Todd Hare; Björn Bartling; Yosuke Morishima; Ernst Fehr
Journal:  PLoS Comput Biol       Date:  2015-10-13       Impact factor: 4.475

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.