Search

Independent racing evidence-accumulator models have proven fruitful in advancing understanding of rapid decisions, mainly in the case of binary choice, where they can be relatively easily estimated and are known to account for a range of benchmark phenomena. Typically, such models assume a one-to-one mapping between accumulators and responses. We explore an alternative independent-race framework where more than one accumulator can be associated with each response, and where a response is triggered when a sufficient number of accumulators associated with that response reach their thresholds. Each accumulator is primarily driven by the difference in evidence supporting one versus another response (i.e., that response's "advantage"), with secondary inputs corresponding to the total evidence for both responses and a constant term. We use Brown and Heathcote's (2008) linear ballistic accumulator (LBA) to instantiate the framework in a mathematically tractable measurement model (i.e., a model whose parameters can be successfully recovered from data). We show this "advantage LBA" model provides a detailed quantitative account of a variety of benchmark binary and multiple choice phenomena that traditional independent accumulator models struggle with; in binary choice the effects of additive versus multiplicative changes to input values, and in multiple choice the effects of manipulations of the strength of lure (i.e., nontarget) stimuli and Hick's law. We conclude that the advantage LBA provides a tractable new avenue for understanding the dynamics of decisions among multiple choices. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2020 APA, all rights reserved).

Objectives: To explore in a sample of medical oncology outpatients and their nominated support persons (SPs): (1) the relative influence of pain, consciousness and life extension on end-of-life choices using a discrete choice experiment (DCE); (2) the extent to which SPs can predict the choices of index patients and (3) whether having a previous end-of-life discussion was associated with dyad agreement., Methods: Adult medical oncology patients and their SPs were approached for consent to complete a survey containing a DCE. Participants chose between three unlabelled care scenarios characterised by three attributes: pain (mild, moderate or severe), consciousness (some, half or most of time) and extension of life (1, 2 or 3 weeks). Respondents selected (1) most-preferred and (2) least-preferred scenarios within each question. SPs answered the same questions but from patient's perspective., Results: A total of 110 patients and 64 SPs responded overall (42 matched patient-SP dyads). For patients, pain was the most influential predictor of most- and least-preferred scenarios (z = 12.5 and z = 12.9). For SPs, pain was the only significant predictor of most and least-preferred scenarios (z = 9.7 and z = 11.5). Dyad agreement was greater for choices about least- (69%) compared to most-preferred scenarios (55%). Agreement was slightly higher for dyads reporting a previous EOL discussion (68 versus 48%; p = 0.065)., Conclusion: Patients and SPs place significant value on avoiding severe pain when making end-of-life choices, over and above level of consciousness or life extension. People's views about end-of-life scenarios they most as well as least prefer should be sought.

Organisms making repeated simple decisions are faced with a tradeoff between urgent and cautious strategies. While animals can adopt a statistically optimal policy for this tradeoff, findings about human decision-makers have been mixed. Some studies have shown that people can optimize this "speed-accuracy tradeoff", while others have identified a systematic bias towards excessive caution. These issues have driven theoretical development and spurred debate about the nature of human decision-making. We investigated a potential resolution to the debate, based on two factors that routinely differ between human and animal studies of decision-making: the effects of practice, and of longer-term feedback. Our study replicated the finding that most people, by default, are overly cautious. When given both practice and detailed feedback, people moved rapidly towards the optimal policy, with many participants reaching optimality with less than 1 h of practice. Our findings have theoretical implications for cognitive and neural models of simple decision-making, as well as methodological implications.

Trueblood, Brown, and Heathcote (2014) developed a new model, called the multiattribute linear ballistic accumulator (MLBA), to explain contextual preference reversals in multialternative choice. MLBA was shown to provide good accounts of human behavior through both qualitative analyses and quantitative fitting of choice data. Tsetsos, Chater, and Usher (2015) investigated the ability of MLBA to simultaneously capture 3 prominent context effects (attraction, compromise, and similarity). They concluded that MLBA must set a "fine balance" of competing forces to account for all 3 effects simultaneously and that its predictions are sensitive to the position of the stimuli in the attribute space. Through a new experiment, we show that the 3 effects are very fragile and that only a small subset of people shows all 3 simultaneously. Thus, the predictions that Tsetsos et al. generated from the MLBA model turn out to match closely real data in a new experiment. Support for these predictions provides strong evidence for the MLBA. A corollary is that a model that can "robustly" capture all 3 effects simultaneously is not necessarily a good model. Rather, a good model captures patterns found in human data, but cannot accommodate patterns that are not found., ((c) 2015 APA, all rights reserved).)

Discrete choice experiments--selecting the best and/or worst from a set of options--are increasingly used to provide more efficient and valid measurement of attitudes or preferences than conventional methods such as Likert scales. Discrete choice data have traditionally been analyzed with random utility models that have good measurement properties but provide limited insight into cognitive processes. We extend a well-established cognitive model, which has successfully explained both choices and response times for simple decision tasks, to complex, multi-attribute discrete choice data. The fits, and parameters, of the extended model for two sets of choice data (involving patient preferences for dermatology appointments, and consumer attitudes toward mobile phones) agree with those of standard choice models. The extended model also accounts for choice and response time data in a perceptual judgment task designed in a manner analogous to best-worst discrete choice experiments. We conclude that several research fields might benefit from discrete choice experiments, and that the particular accumulator-based models of decision making used in response time research can also provide process-level instantiations for random utility models., (© 2013 Cognitive Science Society, Inc.)

Context effects occur when a choice between 2 options is altered by adding a 3rd alternative. Three major context effects--similarity, compromise, and attraction--have wide-ranging implications across applied and theoretical domains, and have driven the development of new dynamic models of multiattribute and multialternative choice. We propose the multiattribute linear ballistic accumulator (MLBA), a new dynamic model that provides a quantitative account of all 3 context effects. Our account applies not only to traditional paradigms involving choices among hedonic stimuli, but also to recent demonstrations of context effects with nonhedonic stimuli. Because of its computational tractability, the MLBA model is more easily applied than previous dynamic models. We show that the model also accounts for a range of other phenomena in multiattribute, multialternative choice, including time pressure effects, and that it makes a new prediction about the relationship between deliberation time and the magnitude of the similarity effect, which we confirm experimentally.

The cognitive concept of response inhibition can be measured with the stop-signal paradigm. In this paradigm, participants perform a 2-choice response time (RT) task where, on some of the trials, the primary task is interrupted by a stop signal that prompts participants to withhold their response. The dependent variable of interest is the latency of the unobservable stop response (stop-signal reaction time, or SSRT). Based on the horse race model (Logan & Cowan, 1984), several methods have been developed to estimate SSRTs. None of these approaches allow for the accurate estimation of the entire distribution of SSRTs. Here we introduce a Bayesian parametric approach that addresses this limitation. Our method is based on the assumptions of the horse race model and rests on the concept of censored distributions. We treat response inhibition as a censoring mechanism, where the distribution of RTs on the primary task (go RTs) is censored by the distribution of SSRTs. The method assumes that go RTs and SSRTs are ex-Gaussian distributed and uses Markov chain Monte Carlo sampling to obtain posterior distributions for the model parameters. The method can be applied to individual as well as hierarchical data structures. We present the results of a number of parameter recovery and robustness studies and apply our approach to published data from a stop-signal experiment., (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2013 APA, all rights reserved.)

The context in which a decision occurs can influence the decision-making process in many ways. In the laboratory, this is often evident in the effects of recent decisions. For instance, many experiments combine easy and difficult decisions, such as when word frequency is manipulated in lexical decision. The "blocking effect" describes how such decisions differ depending on whether the conditions are presented in pure blocks (comprised purely of easy or hard stimuli) or mixed blocks (also known as a "mixing cost"). We present a novel extension to these context effects, demonstrating in two experiments that they can be induced using conditions with identical difficulty, but different timing properties. This suggests that explanations of context effects based on task difficulty or error monitoring alone might be insufficient, and suggest a role for decision time. In prior work, we suggested such a hypothesis under the assumption that observers minimize their decision time, subject to an accuracy constraint. Consistent with this explanation, we find that decisions in slower conditions were based on less evidence when they were experienced in mixed compared to pure blocks.

Theories of choice response time (RT) provide insight into the psychological underpinnings of simple decisions. Evidence accumulation (or sequential sampling) models are the most successful theories of choice RT. These models all have the same "scaling" property--that a subset of their parameters can be multiplied by the same amount without changing their predictions. This property means that a single parameter must be fixed to allow the estimation of the remaining parameters. In the present article, we show that the traditional solution to this problem has overconstrained these models, unnecessarily restricting their ability to account for data and making implicit--and therefore unexamined--psychological assumptions. We show that versions of these models that address the scaling problem in a minimal way can provide a better description of data than can their overconstrained counterparts, even when increased model complexity is taken into account.

We propose a linear ballistic accumulator (LBA) model of decision making and reaction time. The LBA is simpler than other models of choice response time, with independent accumulators that race towards a common response threshold. Activity in the accumulators increases in a linear and deterministic manner. The simplicity of the model allows complete analytic solutions for choices between any number of alternatives. These solutions (and freely-available computer code) make the model easy to apply to both binary and multiple choice situations. Using data from five previously published experiments, we demonstrate that the LBA model successfully accommodates empirical phenomena from binary and multiple choice tasks that have proven difficult for other theoretical accounts. Our results are encouraging in a field beset by the tradeoff between complexity and completeness.

Recent theoretical developments in the field of absolute identification have stressed differences between relative and absolute processes, that is, whether stimulus magnitudes are judged relative to a shorter term context provided by recently presented stimuli or a longer term context provided by the entire set of stimuli. The authors developed a model (SAMBA: selective attention, mapping, and ballistic accumulation) that integrates shorter and longer term memory processes and accounts for both the choices made and the associated response time distributions, including sequential effects in each. The model's predictions arise as a consequence of its architecture and require estimation of only a few parameters with values that are consistent across numerous data sets. The authors show that SAMBA provides a quantitative account of benchmark choice phenomena in classical absolute identification experiments and in contemporary data involving both choice and response time.