Leave-One-Trial-Out (LOTO): A general approach to link single-trial parameters of cognitive models to neural data

Gluth, Sebastian; Meiran, Nachshon

doi:10.1101/403766

Cited by 5 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 42 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…To test more broadly whether spontaneous pre‐stimulus activity affects audiovisual temporal sensitivity, we asked participants to make temporal‐order judgements (TOJs) on supra‐threshold audiovisual stimuli. We employed a ‘jackknife’ procedure adapted for linking psychophysical data to single‐trial EEG parameters (Benwell et al, 2018; Gluth & Meiran, 2019; Richter et al, 2015). This leave‐one‐out procedure allowed us to examine cross‐trial co‐variation of pre‐stimulus oscillatory parameters in EEG with temporal discrimination sensitivity estimates obtained from psychometric curves.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

EEG alpha power predicts the temporal sensitivity of multisensory perception

London

Benwell

Cecere

et al. 2022

Eur J of Neuroscience

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Pre-stimulus electroencephalogram (EEG) oscillations, especially in the alpha range (8-13 Hz), can affect the sensitivity to temporal lags between modalities in multisensory perception. The effects of alpha power are often explained in terms of alpha's inhibitory functions, whereas effects of alpha frequency have bolstered theories of discrete perceptual cycles, where the length of a cycle, or window of integration, is determined by alpha frequency. Such studies typically employ visual detection paradigms with near-threshold or even illusory stimuli. It is unclear whether such results generalize to above-threshold stimuli. Here, we recorded EEG, while measuring temporal discrimination sensi-

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

EEG alpha power predicts the temporal sensitivity of multisensory perception

London

Benwell

Cecere

et al. 2022

Eur J of Neuroscience

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The consideration of RTs has a rich tradition in psychological research, since they contain information about the underlying cognitive processes (Luce, 1986). Additionally, RTs can aid model selection (Ballard & McClure, 2019;Gluth & Meiran, 2019;Wilson & Collins, 2019). Critically, we will show that although the singleand dual-process accounts can make similar predictions on choice behavior, they differ with respect to RTs.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 75%

Response time models separate single- and dual-process accounts of memory-based decisions

et al. 2020

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Human decisions often deviate from economic rationality and are influenced by cognitive biases. One such bias is the memory bias according to which people prefer choice options they have a better memory of—even when the options’ utilities are comparatively low. Although this phenomenon is well supported empirically, its cognitive foundation remains elusive. Here we test two conceivable computational accounts of the memory bias against each other. On the one hand, a single-process account explains the memory bias by assuming a single biased evidence-accumulation process in favor of remembered options. On the contrary, a dual-process account posits that some decisions are driven by a purely memory-driven process and others by a utility-maximizing one. We show that both accounts are indistinguishable based on choices alone as they make similar predictions with respect to the memory bias. However, they make qualitatively different predictions about response times. We tested the qualitative and quantitative predictions of both accounts on behavioral data from a memory-based decision-making task. Our results show that a single-process account provides a better account of the data, both qualitatively and quantitatively. In addition to deepening our understanding of memory-based decision-making, our study provides an example of how to rigorously compare single- versus dual-process models using empirical data and hierarchical Bayesian parameter estimation methods.

show abstract

“…While MPT models provide several advantages, however, one limitation remains: other than the methodology of univalent response mappings, they do not allow for separating task-selection and task-execution failures on the level of single trials (for a possible solution to this issue, see Gluth & Meiran, 2019).…”

Section: Methodology Ii: Capitalizing On Stimulus Congruencymentioning

confidence: 99%

Disentangling task-selection failures from task-execution failures in task switching: an assessment of different paradigms

Moretti

Koch

Steinhauser

et al. 2022

Psychological Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Differentiating errors on the basis of the distinct cognitive mechanisms that may have generated them has provided neuropsychologists with useful diagnostic tools. For example, perseverative errors arising from the inability of the patient to set a new criterion for responding are considered one of the hallmarks of cognitive inflexibility. Similarly, in the task-switching paradigm it is possible to distinguish between task-confusion errors, produced by a failure in task selection, and response-confusion errors, arising when the correct task is selected, but the wrong response is given. Nonetheless, only a few studies so far have exploited the existence of different kinds of errors in multitasking situations to inform theories of cognitive flexibility. In the present study, we set out to use a variety of methodologies employed so far in the literature for disentangling errors due to task-selection failure from errors due to task-execution failure. In three experiments, we assessed the capacity of each method to produce error categories that can be mapped as clearly as possible to the cognitive mechanism(s) underlying them using multinomial processing tree modelling. Subsequently, the distinction between task- and response-confusion errors was used to test their differential impact on inhibitory mechanisms in task switching as measured by N-2 repetition costs. Our results are encouraging regarding the possibility of correctly detecting response- and task-selection failures, thus allowing us to assess their differential impact on N-2 repetition costs.

show abstract

Leave-One-Trial-Out (LOTO): A general approach to link single-trial parameters of cognitive models to neural data

Cited by 5 publications

References 42 publications

EEG alpha power predicts the temporal sensitivity of multisensory perception

EEG alpha power predicts the temporal sensitivity of multisensory perception

Response time models separate single- and dual-process accounts of memory-based decisions

Disentangling task-selection failures from task-execution failures in task switching: an assessment of different paradigms

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About