Modeling evidence accumulation decision processes using integral equations: Urgency-gating and collapsing boundaries.

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Philip L. Smith ◽  
Roger Ratcliff
2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Peter D. Kvam

Despite the prevalence of real-world and laboratory tasks where people select among many options, cognitive models have traditionally focused on choices among small sets of alternatives. This has resulted in theoretical and empirical gaps in understanding the decision processes that go into selections among many alternatives or responses that fall along a continuum. This paper addresses these issues by modeling decisions in a perceptual study where participants produce continuous orientation judgments. The experiments showed that manipulations of stimulus difficulty and time pressure have parallel effects to binary choice, with greater stimulus difficulty yielding slower and less accurate responses and time pressure resulting in faster responses at the expense of accuracy. These effects were well accounted for by the circular diffusion model developed by Smith (2016), with drift magnitude parameters shifting with difficulty and threshold parameters shifting with time pressure. However, a manipulation of bias using a predecision cue resulted in bimodal distributions of responses that cannot be explained by the model in its original formulation. To account for this result, I developed a theory of bias based on split attention and racing 2D diffusion processes. This model suggests that responses are determined by both cue-driven and stimulus-driven evidence accumulation processes, such that the winning process determines responses and response times (RTs). As a result, it predicts critical features of responses and response times in the conditions with predecision cues, including bimodal distributions of responses and the longer RTs observed when there was a discrepancy between cue and stimulus orientations.


Author(s):  
Jason Samaha ◽  
Rachel Denison

AbstractConfidence in a perceptual decision is a subjective estimate of the accuracy of one’s choice. As such, confidence is thought to be an important computation for a variety of cognitive and perceptual processes, and it features heavily in theorizing about conscious access to perceptual states. Recent experiments have revealed a “positive evidence bias” (PEB) in the computations underlying confidence reports. A PEB occurs when confidence, unlike objective choice, over-weights the evidence for the chosen option, relative to evidence against the chosen option. Accordingly, in a perceptual task, appropriate stimulus conditions can be arranged that produce selective changes in confidence reports but no changes in accuracy. Although the PEB is generally assumed to reflect the observer’s perceptual and/or decision processes, post-decisional accounts have not been ruled out. We therefore asked whether the PEB persisted under novel conditions that eliminated two possible post-decisional accounts: 1) post-decision evidence accumulation that contributes to a confidence report solicited after the perceptual choice, and 2) a memory bias that emerges in the delay between the stimulus offset and the confidence report. We found that even when the stimulus remained on the screen until observers responded, and when observers reported their choice and confidence simultaneously, the PEB still emerged. Signal detection-based modeling also showed that the PEB was not associated with changes to metacognitive efficiency, but rather to confidence criteria. We conclude that once-plausible post-decisional accounts of the PEB do not explain the bias, bolstering the idea that it is perceptual or decisional in nature.


Author(s):  
Barbara Fasolo ◽  
Gary H. McClelland
Keyword(s):  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document