DISENTANGLING MODELS OF EVIDENCE INTEGRATION

Decision making has been studied using a variety of experimental paradigms. Here, we focus on dynamically changing noisy perceptual stimuli that require the accumulation of evidence over time. Such decisions have often and successfully been accounted for by models implementing a psychophysically inspired sequential sampling framework. This framework represents a mechanistic approach to Signal Detection Theory where observers accumulate multiple samples of perceptual evidence to a predefined decision criterion. However, a multitude of such models exist which, despite their profound structural differences, all fit existing empirical data well. We propose an approach for comparing models which is based on isolating a specific model attribute to produce qualitative, rather than quantitative, predictions via computational simulations. Simulations demonstrate that, some models (mainly but not exclusively independent ones) speed up (due to statistical facilitation) while others slow down. Our results provide strong support for the presence of high level competition and against independent models of decision making.

[1]  Scott D. Brown,et al.  The simplest complete model of choice response time: Linear ballistic accumulation , 2008, Cognitive Psychology.

[2]  Philip L. Smith,et al.  The accumulator model of two-choice discrimination , 1988 .

[3]  M. Shadlen,et al.  A role for neural integrators in perceptual decision making. , 2003, Cerebral cortex.

[4]  Jonathan D. Cohen,et al.  The physics of optimal decision making: a formal analysis of models of performance in two-alternative forced-choice tasks. , 2006, Psychological review.

[5]  Casimir J. H. Ludwig,et al.  The Temporal Impulse Response Underlying Saccadic Decisions , 2005, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[6]  P. Holmes,et al.  The dynamics of choice among multiple alternatives , 2006 .

[7]  R. Ratcliff,et al.  Multialternative decision field theory: a dynamic connectionist model of decision making. , 2001, Psychological review.

[8]  R. Duncan Luce,et al.  Response Times: Their Role in Inferring Elementary Mental Organization , 1986 .

[9]  Jochen Ditterich,et al.  Perceptual Decisions between Multiple Directions of Visual Motion , 2008, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[10]  Jeffrey N. Rouder,et al.  Modeling Response Times for Two-Choice Decisions , 1998 .

[11]  D. Raab Statistical facilitation of simple reaction times. , 1962, Transactions of the New York Academy of Sciences.

[12]  J. Townsend,et al.  Spatio-temporal properties of elementary perception: an investigation of parallel, serial, and coactive theories , 1995 .

[13]  D. Vickers,et al.  Evidence for an accumulator model of psychophysical discrimination. , 1970, Ergonomics.

[14]  James L. McClelland,et al.  The time course of perceptual choice: the leaky, competing accumulator model. , 2001, Psychological review.

[15]  D. Raab DIVISION OF PSYCHOLOGY: STATISTICAL FACILITATION OF SIMPLE REACTION TIMES* , 1962 .

[16]  Roger Ratcliff,et al.  A Theory of Memory Retrieval. , 1978 .

[17]  S. Link,et al.  A sequential theory of psychological discrimination , 1975 .