Literature DB >> 26461957

Scale (in)variance in a unified diffusion model of decision making and timing.

Patrick Simen1, Ksenia Vlasov2, Samantha Papadakis1.   

Abstract

Weber's law is the canonical scale-invariance law in psychology: when the intensities of 2 stimuli are scaled by any value k, the just-noticeable-difference between them also scales by k. A diffusion model that approximates a spike-counting process accounts for Weber's law (Link, 1992), but there exist surprising corollaries of this account that have not yet been described or tested. We show that (a) this spike-counting diffusion model predicts time-scale invariant decision time distributions in perceptual decision making, and time-scale invariant response time (RT) distributions in interval timing; (b) for 2-choice perceptual decisions, the model predicts equal accuracy but faster responding for stimulus pairs with equally scaled-up intensities; (c) the coefficient of variation (CV) of decision times should remain constant across average intensity scales, but should otherwise decrease as a specific function of stimulus discriminability and speed-accuracy trade-off; and (d) for timing tasks, RT CVs should be constant for all durations, and RT skewness should always equal 3 times the CV. We tested these predictions using visual, auditory and vibrotactile decision tasks and visual interval timing tasks in humans. The data conformed closely to the predictions in all modalities. These results support a unified theory of decision making and timing in terms of a common, underlying spike-counting process, compactly represented as a diffusion process. (c) 2016 APA, all rights reserved).

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 26461957     DOI: 10.1037/rev0000014

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


  13 in total

1.  Modeling 2-alternative forced-choice tasks: Accounting for both magnitude and difference effects.

Authors:  Roger Ratcliff; Chelsea Voskuilen; Andrei Teodorescu
Journal:  Cogn Psychol       Date:  2018-03-23       Impact factor: 3.468

2.  Exploring spatiotemporal interactions: On the superiority of time over space.

Authors:  Kévin Vidaud-Laperrière; Lionel Brunel; Arielle Syssau-Vaccarella; Pom Charras
Journal:  Atten Percept Psychophys       Date:  2022-10-13       Impact factor: 2.157

3.  Inactivation of the Medial Entorhinal Cortex Selectively Disrupts Learning of Interval Timing.

Authors:  James G Heys; Zihan Wu; Anna Letizia Allegra Mascaro; Daniel A Dombeck
Journal:  Cell Rep       Date:  2020-09-22       Impact factor: 9.423

4.  A cognitive model of response omissions in distraction paradigms.

Authors:  Karlye A M Damaso; Spencer C Castro; Juanita Todd; David L Strayer; Alexander Provost; Dora Matzke; Andrew Heathcote
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2021-12-23

5.  Perceived Duration Increases with Contrast, but Only a Little.

Authors:  Christopher P Benton; Annabelle S Redfern
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2016-12-15

6.  A neuromechanistic model for rhythmic beat generation.

Authors:  Amitabha Bose; Áine Byrne; John Rinzel
Journal:  PLoS Comput Biol       Date:  2019-05-09       Impact factor: 4.475

7.  Core body temperature speeds up temporal processing and choice behavior under deadlines.

Authors:  Leendert van Maanen; Robbert van der Mijn; Maurice H P H van Beurden; Linsey M M Roijendijk; Boris R M Kingma; Steven Miletić; Hedderik van Rijn
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2019-07-11       Impact factor: 4.379

8.  Sources of noise during accumulation of evidence in unrestrained and voluntarily head-restrained rats.

Authors:  Benjamin B Scott; Christine M Constantinople; Jeffrey C Erlich; David W Tank; Carlos D Brody
Journal:  Elife       Date:  2015-12-17       Impact factor: 8.140

9.  Activation of serotonin neurons promotes active persistence in a probabilistic foraging task.

Authors:  Eran Lottem; Dhruba Banerjee; Pietro Vertechi; Dario Sarra; Matthijs Oude Lohuis; Zachary F Mainen
Journal:  Nat Commun       Date:  2018-03-08       Impact factor: 14.919

10.  Recalibrating timing behavior via expected covariance between temporal cues.

Authors:  Benjamin J De Corte; Rebecca R Della Valle; Matthew S Matell
Journal:  Elife       Date:  2018-11-02       Impact factor: 8.140

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.