Abstract

Response time and accuracy are fundamental measures of behavioral science, but discerning participants’ underlying abilities can be masked by speed–accuracy trade-offs (SATOs). SATOs are often inadequately addressed in experiment analyses which focus on a single variable or which involve a suboptimal analytic correction. Models of decision-making, such as the drift diffusion model (DDM), provide a principled account of the decision-making process, allowing the recovery of SATO-unconfounded decision parameters from observed behavioral variables. For plausible parameters of a typical between-groups experiment, we simulate experimental data, for both real and null group differences in participants’ ability to discriminate stimuli (represented by differences in the drift rate parameter of the DDM used to generate the simulated data), for both systematic and null SATOs. We then use the DDM to fit the generated data. This allows the direct comparison of the specificity and sensitivity for testing of group differences of different measures (accuracy, reaction time, and the drift rate from the model fitting). Our purpose here is not to make a theoretical innovation in decision modeling, but to use established decision models to demonstrate and quantify the benefits of decision modeling for experimentalists. We show, in terms of reduction of required sample size, how decision modeling can allow dramatically more efficient data collection for set statistical power; we confirm and depict the non-linear speed–accuracy relation; and we show how accuracy can be a more sensitive measure than response time given decision parameters which reasonably reflect a typical experiment.

Highlights

  • Speed–accuracy trade-offsSpeed and accuracy of responding are fundamental measures of performance, collected by behavioral scientists across diverse domains in an attempt to track participants’Sheffield, UK underlying capacities

  • The results shown here support our central claim that decision modeling can have substantial benefits

  • The results will be depressingly familiar to any experimentalist who has taken power analysis seriously—a sample size far larger than that conventionally recruited is required to reach adequate power levels for small/medium group differences

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Speed–accuracy trade-offsSpeed and accuracy of responding are fundamental measures of performance, collected by behavioral scientists across diverse domains in an attempt to track participants’Sheffield, UK underlying capacities. Speed and accuracy of responding are fundamental measures of performance, collected by behavioral scientists across diverse domains in an attempt to track participants’. As well as being affected by the capacity of participants to respond quickly and accurately, the two measures are related by participants’ strategic choices of a speed–accuracy trade-off (SATO; for reviews see Heitz, 2014; Wickelgren, 1977). Because the SATO is unavoidable, it is necessary that all decision-making processes are positioned with respect to the trade-off. This does not need to be done deliberately or explicitly, but any decision process can be characterized as adopting some trade-off between speed and accuracy. For the tasks studied by psychologists, it is important to recognize that there will be individual differences, as well as task

Objectives
Methods
Results
Discussion
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call