An integrated theory of deciding and acting.

Servant, Mathieu; Logan, Gordon D.; Gajdos, Thibault; Evans, Nathan J.

doi:10.1037/xge0001063

Cited by 30 publications

(79 citation statements)

References 81 publications

(150 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…These results complement existing findings for constant FP and indicate a degree of independence between the processes of response preparation and execution [2,34,35]. Similar results were reported in the study by Servant et al [24]. Using a random dot motion task, the study found strong positive between-participant correlations (r>0.95) between the duration of the premotor period and the duration of the motor period as well as low values of the within-subject correlations (r<0.13) at different levels of complexity of the perceptual task.…”

Section: Plos Onesupporting

confidence: 91%

“…Finally, research by Servant et al [24] proposed a Dual-Threshold Diffusion Model, according to which the reaction time period is divided into premotor and motor periods based on the EMG latency. The results showed that decision making in the situation of increasing uncertainty using a random dot motion task causes an increase in the duration of both periods.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

An adaptive paradigm for detecting the individual duration of the preparatory period in the choice reaction time task

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

According to the sequential stage model, the selection and the execution of a motor response are two distinct independent processes. Here, we propose a new adaptive paradigm for identifying the individual duration of the response preparatory period based on the motor reaction time (RT) data. The results are compared using the paradigm with constant values of the preparatory period. Two groups of participants performed on either an easy (Group 1) or a hard (Group 2) response selection task with two types of stimuli based on the preparatory period parameters: (1) stimuli with a constant preparatory period duration of 0 or 1200 ms and (2) stimuli with adaptive preparatory period durations. Our analysis showed an increase in the duration of the response selection process as a function of increasing task complexity when using both paradigms with constant and adaptive values of the preparatory period duration. We conclude that the adaptive paradigm proposed in the current paper has several important advantages over the constant paradigm in terms of measuring the response accuracy while being equally efficiently in capturing other critical response parameters.

show abstract

Section: Plos Onesupporting

confidence: 91%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

An adaptive paradigm for detecting the individual duration of the preparatory period in the choice reaction time task

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…For example, a cognitive premotor planning/initiation component along with physical motor speed. That is, fractionating non-decision time, and specifically Tr , into premotor planning + motor time (Servant et al, 2021 ). We focus our manipulations and questions specifically on whether physical motor slowing is or is not captured by the drift rate ( v ) parameter.…”

Section: Present Experimentsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Motor speed does not impact the drift rate: a computational HDDM approach to differentiate cognitive and motor speed

Sandry

Ricker

2022

Cogn. Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The drift diffusion model (DDM) is a widely applied computational model of decision making that allows differentiation between latent cognitive and residual processes. One main assumption of the DDM that has undergone little empirical testing is the level of independence between cognitive and motor responses. If true, widespread incorporation of DDM estimation into applied and clinical settings could ease assessment of whether response disruption occurs due to cognitive or motor slowing. Across two experiments, we manipulated response force (motor speed) and set size to evaluate whether drift rates are independent of motor slowing or if motor slowing impacts the drift rate parameter. The hierarchical Bayesian drift diffusion model was used to quantify parameter estimates of drift rate, boundary separation, and non-decision time. Model comparison revealed changes in set size impacted the drift rate while changes in response force did not impact the drift rate, validating independence between drift rates and motor speed. Convergent validity between parameter estimates and traditional assessments of processing speed and motor function were weak or absent. Widespread application, including neurocognitive assessment where confounded changes in cognitive and motor slowing are pervasive, may provide a more process-pure measurement of information processing speed, leading to advanced disease-symptom management.

show abstract

“…One potential method for limiting model mimicry is through constraining the models to account for additional types of data, making it increasingly difficult to successfully account for all trends in the empirical data (Servant, White, Montagnini, & Burle, 2015;Servant, Logan, Gajdos, & Evans, 2021;Evans, Dutilh, et al, 2020). Specifically, while EAMs are typically only required to account for the trends in the choice response time distributions, they can be extended to also account for other types of data (e.g., muscle movements), which may result in different underlying architectures making distinguishable joint predictions across all types of data.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Does allowing for changes of mind influence initial responses?

Taylor¹,

Nguyen²,

Evans³

2022

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Evidence accumulation models (EAMs) have become the dominant theoretical framework for rapid decision-making, and while many theoretically distinct variants exist, comparisons have proved challenging due to strong mimicry in their predictions about choice response time data. One solution to reduce mimicry is constraining these models with double responses, which are a second response that is made after the initial response. However, instructing participants that they are allowed to change their mind could influence their strategy for initial responding, meaning that explicit double responding paradigms may not generalise to standard paradigms. Here, we provide a validation of explicit double responding paradigms, by assessing whether participants’ initial decisions – as measured by diffusion model parameters – differ based on whether or not they were instructed that they could change their response after their initial response. Across two experiments, our results consistently indicate that allowing for changes of mind does not influence initial responses, with Bayesian analyses providing at least moderate evidence in favour of the null in all cases. Our findings suggest that explicit double responding paradigms should generalise to standard paradigms, validating the use of explicit double responding in future rapid decision-making studies.

show abstract

An integrated theory of deciding and acting.

Cited by 30 publications

References 81 publications

An adaptive paradigm for detecting the individual duration of the preparatory period in the choice reaction time task

An adaptive paradigm for detecting the individual duration of the preparatory period in the choice reaction time task

Motor speed does not impact the drift rate: a computational HDDM approach to differentiate cognitive and motor speed

Does allowing for changes of mind influence initial responses?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About