Abstract
The cognitive processes underlying the ability of human performers to trade speed for accuracy is often conceptualized within evidence accumulation models, but it is not yet clear whether and how these models can account for decision-making in the presence of various sources of conflicting information. In the present study, we provide evidence that speed-accuracy tradeoffs (SATs) can have opposing effects on performance across two different conflict tasks. Specifically, in a single preregistered experiment, the mean reaction time (RT) congruency effect in the Simon task increased, whereas the mean RT congruency effect in the Eriksen task decreased, when the focus was put on response speed versus accuracy. Critically, distributional RT analyses revealed distinct delta plot patterns across tasks, thus indicating that the unfolding of distractor-based response activation in time is sufficient to explain the opposing pattern of congruency effects. In addition, a recent evidence accumulation model with the notion of time-varying conflicting information was successfully fitted to the experimental data. These fits revealed task-specific time-courses of distractor-based activation and suggested that time pressure substantially decreases decision boundaries in addition to reducing the duration of non-decision processes and the rate of evidence accumulation. Overall, the present results suggest that time pressure can have multiple effects in decision-making under conflict, but that strategic adjustments of decision boundaries in conjunction with different time-courses of distractor-based activation can produce counteracting effects on task performance with different types of distracting sources of information.
Highlights
One of the most basic characteristics of the human cognitive system is the ability to trade off speed for accuracy in decision-making (e.g., Bogacz et al, 2006; Heitz, 2014; Luce, 1986; Pachella, 1974)
The present study demonstrates that time pressure can have counteracting effects on task performance in decision-making under conflict
Using a Simon-Eriksen-speed-accuracy tradeoffs (SATs) paradigm, we showed that the mean congruency effect on reaction time (RT) increased in the Simon task but decreased in the Eriksen task when the focus was on response speed versus response accuracy
Summary
One of the most basic characteristics of the human cognitive system is the ability to trade off speed for accuracy in decision-making (e.g., Bogacz et al, 2006; Heitz, 2014; Luce, 1986; Pachella, 1974). As soon as a criterion amount of evidence needed to select a response is reached (i.e., one of two decision boundaries), a response is executed (for recent reviews, see, e.g., Evans & Wagenmakers, 2020; Ratcliff et al, 2016) These models can account for SATs in a straightforward and intuitive way by assuming changes in the height of decision boundaries: Higher decision boundaries lead to slower but more accurate decisions, whereas lower decision boundaries lead to faster but less accurate decisions (e.g., Bogacz et al, 2006; Lerche & Voss, 2018; Ratcliff & McKoon, 2008). Processes attributed to the non-decision time might be sensitive to temporal demands – that is, processes after the start of motor activation of the selected response (e.g., Lerche & Voss, 2018; Osman et al, 2000; Rinkenauer et al, 2004; Spieser et al, 2017)
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary 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 callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
