Sequential sampling models without random between-trial variability: the racing diffusion model of speeded decision making

Most current sequential sampling models have random between-trial variability in their parameters. These sources of variability make the models more complex in order to fit response time data, do not provide any further explanation to how the data were generated, and have recently been criticised for allowing infinite flexibility in the models. To explore and test the need of between-trial variability parameters we develop a simple sequential sampling model of N-choice speeded decision making: the racing diffusion model. The model makes speeded decisions from a race of evidence accumulators that integrate information in a noisy fashion within a trial. The racing diffusion does not assume that any evidence accumulation process varies between trial, and so, the model provides alternative explanations of key response time phenomena, such as fast and slow error response times relative to correct response times. Overall, our paper gives good reason to rethink including between-trial variability parameters in sequential sampling models

[1]  G. Logan Toward an instance theory of automatization. , 1988 .

[2]  G. Woodman,et al.  The Effect of Visual Search Efficiency on Response Preparation , 2008, Psychological science.

[3]  F. Tuerlinckx,et al.  Factoring out nondecision time in choice reaction time data: Theory and implications. , 2016, Psychological review.

[4]  Roger Ratcliff,et al.  Modeling one-choice and two-choice driving tasks , 2015, Attention, perception & psychophysics.

[5]  R. Anders,et al.  The shifted Wald distribution for response time data analysis. , 2016, Psychological methods.

[6]  Brandon M. Turner,et al.  Toward a common representational framework for adaptation. , 2019, Psychological review.

[7]  Braden A. Purcell,et al.  From Salience to Saccades: Multiple-Alternative Gated Stochastic Accumulator Model of Visual Search , 2012, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[8]  J. Ditterich Evidence for time‐variant decision making , 2006, The European journal of neuroscience.

[9]  J. Vandekerckhove,et al.  The EZ diffusion model provides a powerful test of simple empirical effects , 2016, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[10]  Andrew Heathcote,et al.  Non-Decision Time Effects in the Lexical Decision Task , 2009 .

[11]  Andrew Heathcote,et al.  Likelihood ratio sequential sampling models of recognition memory , 2017, Cognitive Psychology.

[12]  Mark Steyvers,et al.  An optimal adjustment procedure to minimize experiment time in decisions with multiple alternatives , 2012, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[13]  G. Schwarz Estimating the Dimension of a Model , 1978 .

[14]  James P. Egan,et al.  Recognition memory and the operating characteristic. , 1958 .

[15]  Donald Laming,et al.  Information theory of choice-reaction times , 1968 .

[16]  Francis Tuerlinckx,et al.  Factoring out non-decision time in choice RT data : Theory and implications , 2016 .

[17]  Jeffrey N. Rouder,et al.  A diffusion model account of masking in two-choice letter identification. , 2000, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[18]  W. E. Hick Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology , 1948, Nature.

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

[20]  Eric-Jan Wagenmakers,et al.  A diffusion model decomposition of the effects of alcohol on perceptual decision making , 2011, Psychopharmacology.

[21]  G. Logan,et al.  On the ability to inhibit thought and action: general and special theories of an act of control. , 2014, Psychological review.

[22]  Thomas V. Wiecki,et al.  Estimating across-trial variability parameters of the Diffusion Decision Model: Expert advice and recommendations , 2018, Journal of Mathematical Psychology.

[23]  R. Ratcliff,et al.  Estimating parameters of the diffusion model: Approaches to dealing with contaminant reaction times and parameter variability , 2002, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[24]  Jillian H. Fecteau,et al.  Exploring the consequences of the previous trial , 2003, Nature Reviews Neuroscience.

[25]  J. Starns Using response time modeling to distinguish memory and decision processes in recognition and source tasks , 2014, Memory & Cognition.

[26]  E. Wagenmakers,et al.  Diffusion versus linear ballistic accumulation: different models but the same conclusions about psychological processes? , 2010, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[27]  R. Ratcliff A diffusion model account of response time and accuracy in a brightness discrimination task: Fitting real data and failing to fit fake but plausible data , 2002, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[28]  Matthew H. Wilder,et al.  Sequential effects in response time reveal learning mechanisms and event representations. , 2013, Psychological review.

[29]  Roger Ratcliff,et al.  Validating the unequal-variance assumption in recognition memory using response time distributions instead of ROC functions: A diffusion model analysis. , 2014, Journal of memory and language.

[30]  R. Hyman Stimulus information as a determinant of reaction time. , 1953, Journal of experimental psychology.

[31]  R. Ratcliff,et al.  Diffusion model for one-choice reaction-time tasks and the cognitive effects of sleep deprivation , 2011, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[32]  J. Andel Sequential Analysis , 2022, The SAGE Encyclopedia of Research Design.

[33]  Roger Ratcliff,et al.  Internal and External Sources of Variability in Perceptual Decision-Making , 2017, Psychological review.

[34]  R. Ratcliff,et al.  Modeling reaction time and accuracy of multiple-alternative decisions , 2010, Attention, perception & psychophysics.

[35]  R. Ratcliff,et al.  Modeling confidence and response time in recognition memory. , 2009, Psychological review.

[36]  Marius Usher,et al.  Disentangling decision models: from independence to competition. , 2013, Psychological review.

[37]  H. Akaike A new look at the statistical model identification , 1974 .

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

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

[40]  Philip L. Smith,et al.  A comparison of sequential sampling models for two-choice reaction time. , 2004, Psychological review.

[41]  D. Strayer,et al.  Modeling cognitive load effects of conversation between a passenger and driver , 2017, Attention, perception & psychophysics.

[42]  Adam F. Osth,et al.  Using response time distributions and race models to characterize primacy and recency effects in free recall initiation. , 2019, Psychology Review.

[43]  James T. Townsend,et al.  The Stochastic Modeling of Elementary Psychological Processes , 1983 .

[44]  Y. Ejima,et al.  Estimation of the Timing of Human Visual Perception from Magnetoencephalography , 2006, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[45]  W. Schwarz The ex-Wald distribution as a descriptive model of response times , 2001, Behavior research methods, instruments, & computers : a journal of the Psychonomic Society, Inc.

[46]  Scott D. Brown,et al.  Similarity and number of alternatives in the random-dot motion paradigm , 2012, Attention, perception & psychophysics.

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

[48]  R. Ratcliff,et al.  Connectionist and diffusion models of reaction time. , 1999, Psychological review.

[49]  Paul Sajda,et al.  Quality of evidence for perceptual decision making is indexed by trial-to-trial variability of the EEG , 2009, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[50]  A. Bompas,et al.  Saccadic Inhibition Reveals the Timing of Automatic and Voluntary Signals in the Human Brain , 2011, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[51]  E. Wagenmakers,et al.  Systematic and random sources of variability in perceptual decision-making: Comment on Ratcliff, Voskuilen, and McKoon (2018). , 2020, Psychological review.

[52]  James L. McClelland,et al.  Hick's law in a stochastic race model with speed-accuracy tradeoffs , 2002 .

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

[54]  Philip L. Smith Psychophysically principled models of visual simple reaction time. , 1995 .

[55]  Franck Vidal,et al.  An ERP study of cognitive architecture and the insertion of mental processes: Donders revisited. , 2011, Psychophysiology.

[56]  Roger Ratcliff,et al.  Parameter variability and distributional assumptions in the diffusion model. , 2013, Psychological review.

[57]  Andrew Heathcote,et al.  The falsifiability of actual decision-making models. , 2014, Psychological review.

[58]  Brandon M. Turner,et al.  A method for efficiently sampling from distributions with correlated dimensions. , 2013, Psychological methods.

[59]  Roger Ratcliff,et al.  A diffusion model account of the lexical decision task. , 2004, Psychological review.

[60]  Sumio Watanabe,et al.  Asymptotic Equivalence of Bayes Cross Validation and Widely Applicable Information Criterion in Singular Learning Theory , 2010, J. Mach. Learn. Res..

[61]  S. Geisser,et al.  A Predictive Approach to Model Selection , 1979 .

[62]  Roger Ratcliff,et al.  Pointing, looking at, and pressing keys: A diffusion model account of response modality. , 2015, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[63]  John H. R. Maunsell,et al.  Dynamics of neuronal responses in macaque MT and VIP during motion detection , 2002, Nature Neuroscience.

[64]  A. Heathcote,et al.  Is the Linear Ballistic Accumulator Model Really the Simplest Model of Choice Response Times: A Bayesian Model Complexity Analysis , 2009 .

[65]  J. Schall,et al.  Neural Control of Voluntary Movement Initiation , 1996, Science.

[66]  Andrew Heathcote,et al.  Fitting Wald and ex-Wald distributions to response time data: An example using functions for the S-PLUS package , 2004, Behavior research methods, instruments, & computers : a journal of the Psychonomic Society, Inc.

[67]  D. Rubin,et al.  Inference from Iterative Simulation Using Multiple Sequences , 1992 .

[68]  Scott D. Brown,et al.  The hare and the tortoise: emphasizing speed can change the evidence used to make decisions. , 2014, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[69]  Richard P. Heitz,et al.  Neurally constrained modeling of perceptual decision making. , 2010, Psychological review.

[70]  Andrew Heathcote,et al.  An integrated model of choices and response times in absolute identification. , 2008, Psychological review.

[71]  Andrew Heathcote,et al.  Diffusion versus linear ballistic accumulation: different models for response time with different conclusions about psychological mechanisms? , 2012, Canadian journal of experimental psychology = Revue canadienne de psychologie experimentale.

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

[73]  Adam F. Osth,et al.  A diffusion decision model analysis of evidence variability in the lexical decision task , 2017, Psychonomic Bulletin & Review.

[74]  Jeffrey N. Rouder,et al.  Assessing the roles of change discrimination and luminance integration: evidence for a hybrid race model of perceptual decision making in luminance discrimination. , 2000, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[75]  E. Wagenmakers,et al.  Psychological interpretation of the ex-Gaussian and shifted Wald parameters: A diffusion model analysis , 2009, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[76]  Per B. Sederberg,et al.  A single trial analysis of EEG in recognition memory: Tracking the neural correlates of memory strength , 2016, Neuropsychologia.

[77]  Brandon M. Turner,et al.  The dynamics of multimodal integration: The averaging diffusion model , 2017, Psychonomic Bulletin & Review.

[78]  Cajo J. F. ter Braak,et al.  A Markov Chain Monte Carlo version of the genetic algorithm Differential Evolution: easy Bayesian computing for real parameter spaces , 2006, Stat. Comput..

[79]  D. Teller Linking propositions , 1984, Vision Research.

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

[81]  Scott D. Brown,et al.  Response Times and Decision‐Making , 2018 .

[82]  Jochen Ditterich,et al.  Stochastic models of decisions about motion direction: Behavior and physiology , 2006, Neural Networks.

[83]  Andrew Heathcote,et al.  A ballistic model of choice response time. , 2005, Psychological review.

[84]  David S. Brée,et al.  Linking Propositions , 1986, COLING.

[85]  Roger Ratcliff,et al.  Modeling confidence judgments, response times, and multiple choices in decision making: recognition memory and motion discrimination. , 2013, Psychological review.

[86]  A. Voss,et al.  Model Complexity in Diffusion Modeling: Benefits of Making the Model More Parsimonious , 2016, Front. Psychol..

[87]  Roger Ratcliff,et al.  The diffusion model is not a deterministic growth model: comment on Jones and Dzhafarov (2014). , 2014, Psychological review.

[88]  Ehtibar N Dzhafarov,et al.  Unfalsifiability and mutual translatability of major modeling schemes for choice reaction time. , 2014, Psychological review.

[89]  R. Ratcliff,et al.  Modeling simple driving tasks with a one-boundary diffusion model , 2013, Psychonomic Bulletin & Review.

[90]  Brandon M. Turner,et al.  Informing cognitive abstractions through neuroimaging: the neural drift diffusion model. , 2015, Psychological review.

[91]  T. Hasbroucq,et al.  Spatial enhancement of EEG traces by surface Laplacian estimation: comparison between local and global methods , 2005, Clinical Neurophysiology.