For many years the Diffusion Decision Model (DDM) has successfully accounted for behavioral data from a wide range of domains. Important contributors to the DDM's success are the across-trial variability parameters, which allow the model to account for the various shapes of response time distributions encountered in practice. However, several researchers have pointed out that estimating the variability parameters can be a challenging task. Moreover, the numerous fitting methods for the DDM each come with their own associated problems and solutions. This often leaves users in a difficult position. In this collaborative project we invited researchers from the DDM community to apply their various fitting methods to simulated data and provide advice and expert guidance on estimating the DDM's across-trial variability parameters using these methods. Our study establishes a comprehensive reference resource and describes methods that can help to overcome the challenges associated with estimating the DDM's across-trial variability parameters. keywords: Diffusion Decision Model, across-trial variability parameters, parameter estimation ESTIMATING ACROSS-TRIAL PARAMETERS 4 Estimating Across-Trial Variability Parameters of the Diffusion Decision Model: Expert Advice and Recommendations

No abstract

No abstract

One of the more principled methods of performing model selection is via Bayes factors. However, calculating Bayes factors requires marginal likelihoods, which are integrals over the entire parameter space, making estimation of Bayes factors for models with more than a few parameters a significant computational challenge. Here, we review two Monte Carlo techniques rarely used in psychology that efficiently and accurately compute marginal likelihoods: thermodynamic integration (Friel & Pettitt, 2008; Lartillot & Philippe, 2006) and steppingstone sampling (Xie, Lewis, Fan, Kuo, & Chen, 2011). The methods are general and can be easily implemented in existing MCMC code; we provide both the details for implementation and associated R code for the interested reader. While Bayesian toolkits implementing standard statistical analyses (e.g., JASP Team, 2017; Morey & Rouder, 2015) often compute Bayes factors for the researcher, those using Bayesian approaches to evaluate cognitive models are usually left to compute Bayes factors for themselves. Here, we provide examples of the methods by computing marginal likelihoods for a moderately complex model of choice response time, the Linear Ballistic Accumulator model (Brown & Heathcote, 2008), and compare them to findings of Evans and Brown (2017), who used a brute force technique. We then present a derivation of TI and SS within a hierarchical framework, provide results of a model recovery case study using hierarchical models, and show an application to empirical data. A companion R package is available at the Open Science Framework: https://osf.io/jpnb4.

A typical goal in cognitive psychology is to select the model that provides the best explanation of the observed behavioral data. The Bayes factor provides a principled approach for making these selections, though the integral required to calculate the marginal likelihood for each model is intractable for most cognitive models. In these cases, Monte Carlo techniques must be used to approximate the marginal likelihood, such as thermodynamic integration (TI; Friel & Pettitt, 2008; Lartillot & Philippe, 2006), which relies on sampling from the posterior at different powers (called power posteriors). TI can become computationally expensive when using population Markov chain Monte Carlo (MCMC) approaches such as differential evolution MCMC (DE-MCMC; Turner, Sederberg, Brown, & Steyvers, 2013) that require several interacting chains per power posterior. Here, we propose a method called thermodynamic integration via differential evolution (TIDE), which aims to reduce the computational burden associated with TI by using a single chain per power posterior. We show that when applied to non-hierarchical models, TIDE produces an approximation of the marginal likelihood that closely matches TI. When extended to hierarchical models, we find that certain assumptions about the dependence between the individual and group level parameters samples (i.e., dependent/independent) have sizable effects on the TI approximated marginal likelihood. We propose two possible extensions of TIDE to hierarchical models, which closely match the marginal likelihoods obtained through TI with dependent/independent sampling in many, but not all, situations. Based on these findings, we believe that TIDE provides a promising method for estimating marginal likelihoods, though future research should focus on a detailed comparison between the methods of approximating marginal likelihoods for cognitive models.