Literature DB >> 34950999

A cognitive model of response omissions in distraction paradigms.

Karlye A M Damaso1, Spencer C Castro2, Juanita Todd1, David L Strayer2, Alexander Provost1, Dora Matzke3, Andrew Heathcote4.   

Abstract

The effects of distraction on responses manifest in three ways: prolonged reaction times, and increased error and response omission rates. However, the latter effect is often ignored or assumed to be due to a separate cognitive process. We investigated omissions occurring in two paradigms that manipulated distraction. One required simple stimulus detection of younger participants, the second required choice responses and was completed by both younger and older participants. We fit data from these paradigms with a model that identifies three causes of omissions: two are related to the process of accumulating the evidence on which a response is based: intrinsic omissions (due to between-trial variation in accumulation rates making it impossible to ever reach the evidence threshold) and design omissions (due to response windows that cause slow responses not to be recorded; a third, contaminant omissions, allows for a cause unrelated to the response process. In both data sets systematic differences in omission rates across conditions were accounted for by task-related omissions. Intrinsic omissions played a lesser role than design omissions, even though the presence of design omissions was not evident in descriptive analyses of the data. The model provided an accurate account of all aspects of the detection data and the choice-response data, but slightly underestimated overall omissions in the choice paradigm, particularly in older participants, suggesting that further investigation of contaminant omission effects is needed.
© 2021. The Psychonomic Society, Inc.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Distraction; Evidence accumulation model; Omission rates

Mesh:

Year:  2021        PMID: 34950999     DOI: 10.3758/s13421-021-01265-z

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Mem Cognit        ISSN: 0090-502X


  26 in total

1.  Assessing attention: comparison of response-inhibition and traditional continuous performance tests.

Authors:  J C Ballard
Journal:  J Clin Exp Neuropsychol       Date:  2001-06       Impact factor: 2.475

2.  The effect of age on involuntary capture of attention by irrelevant sounds: a test of the frontal hypothesis of aging.

Authors:  Pilar Andrés; Fabrice B R Parmentier; Carles Escera
Journal:  Neuropsychologia       Date:  2006-06-22       Impact factor: 3.139

3.  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

4.  Emotional context enhances auditory novelty processing in superior temporal gyrus.

Authors:  Judith Domínguez-Borràs; Sina-Alexa Trautmann; Peter Erhard; Thorsten Fehr; Manfred Herrmann; Carles Escera
Journal:  Cereb Cortex       Date:  2008-11-07       Impact factor: 5.357

5.  Dynamic models of choice.

Authors:  Andrew Heathcote; Yi-Shin Lin; Angus Reynolds; Luke Strickland; Matthew Gretton; Dora Matzke
Journal:  Behav Res Methods       Date:  2019-04

6.  Reduced novelty-P3 associated with increased behavioral distractibility in schizophrenia.

Authors:  Miriam Cortiñas; María-José Corral; Gemma Garrido; Maite Garolera; Marta Pajares; Carles Escera
Journal:  Biol Psychol       Date:  2008-03-26       Impact factor: 3.251

7.  Cognitive workload measurement and modeling under divided attention.

Authors:  Spencer C Castro; David L Strayer; Dora Matzke; Andrew Heathcote
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform       Date:  2019-04-18       Impact factor: 3.332

8.  Performance of disabled and normal readers on the Continuous Performance Test.

Authors:  I L Beale; P J Matthew; S Oliver; M C Corballis
Journal:  J Abnorm Child Psychol       Date:  1987-06

9.  Double responding: A new constraint for models of speeded decision making.

Authors:  Nathan J Evans; Gilles Dutilh; Eric-Jan Wagenmakers; Han L J van der Maas
Journal:  Cogn Psychol       Date:  2020-03-24       Impact factor: 3.468

10.  An electrophysiological and behavioral investigation of involuntary attention towards auditory frequency, duration and intensity changes.

Authors:  Carles Escera; Maria Jose Corral; Elena Yago
Journal:  Brain Res Cogn Brain Res       Date:  2002-11
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.