Model Complexity in Diffusion Modeling: Benefits of Making the Model More Parsimonious.
The diffusion model (Ratcliff, 1978) takes into account the reaction time distributions of both correct and erroneous responses from binary decision tasks. This high degree of information usage allows the estimation of different parameters mapping cognitive components such as speed of information accumulation or decision bias. For three of the four main parameters (drift rate, starting point, and non-decision time) trial-to-trial variability is allowed. We investigated the influence of these variability parameters both drawing on simulation studies and on data from an empirical test-retest study using different optimization criteria and different trial numbers. Our results suggest that less complex models (fixing intertrial variabilities of the drift rate and the starting point at zero) can improve the estimation of the psychologically most interesting parameters (drift rate, threshold separation, starting point, and non-decision time).
Quantitative Research Methods, Institute of Psychology, Ruprecht-Karls-Universität Heidelberg Heidelberg, Germany.
Veronika
V
Lerche
Quantitative Research Methods, Institute of Psychology, Ruprecht-Karls-Universität Heidelberg Heidelberg, Germany.
Andreas
A
Voss
diffusion model; fast-dm; mathematical models; parameter estimation; reaction time methods
Exp Psychol. 2013;60(6):385-402
23895923
Psychol Res. 2016 Apr 23;:null
27107855
J Abnorm Child Psychol. 2013 Jul;41(5):837-50
23334775
J Exp Psychol Gen. 2007 Aug;136(3):414-29
17696691
Psychol Aging. 2004 Jun;19(2):278-89
15222821
Behav Res Methods. 2007 Nov;39(4):767-75
18183889
Psychol Aging. 2008 Dec;23(4):859-72
19140656
Psychon Bull Rev. 2008 Dec;15(6):1229-35
19001594
Psychon Bull Rev. 2002 Sep;9(3):438-81
12412886
Neuropsychology. 2012 Nov;26(6):684-94
23106115
Front Psychol. 2015 Mar 27;6:336
25870575
Psychol Res. 2015 Sep;79(5):882-98
25281426
Behav Res Methods. 2008 Feb;40(1):61-72
18411528
Psychopharmacology (Berl). 2012 Feb;219(4):1017-25
21842158
Cogn Psychol. 2008 Nov;57(3):153-78
18243170
J Pers Soc Psychol. 2007 Sep;93(3):353-68
17723053
Decision (Wash D C ). 2015;2015:null
26236754
Psychol Aging. 2008 Dec;23(4):900-16
19140659
Psychon Bull Rev. 2016 Jun 28;:null
27352898
Emotion. 2013 Aug;13(4):739-47
23527499
Psychon Bull Rev. 2012 Feb;19(1):139-45
22144142
Mem Cognit. 2012 Jan;40(1):70-82
21755410
Front Neuroinform. 2013 Aug 02;7:14
23935581
Psychon Bull Rev. 2002 Jun;9(2):394-401
12120806
Pers Soc Psychol Bull. 2014 Feb;40(2):217-31
24154917
Psychol Aging. 2013 Mar;28(1):64-76
22946524
Br J Math Stat Psychol. 2010 Nov;63(Pt 3):539-55
20030967
Behav Res Methods. 2016 Jun 10;:null
27287445
J Exp Psychol Gen. 2014 Oct;143(5):1794-805
24933517
J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform. 2012 Feb;38(1):53-79
21728459
Exp Aging Res. 2014;40(3):280-307
24785592
Psychon Bull Rev. 2007 Feb;14(1):3-22
17546727
J Mem Lang. 2008 Jan;58(1):140-159
19122740
Mem Cognit. 2004 Oct;32(7):1206-20
15813501
Neuropsychology. 2013 Mar;27(2):193-200
23527647
Psychon Bull Rev. 2007 Dec;14(6):1011-26
18229471