Cognitive Science 35 (2):211-250 (2011)
AbstractMost models of response time (RT) in elementary cognitive tasks implicitly assume that the speed-accuracy trade-off is continuous: When payoffs or instructions gradually increase the level of speed stress, people are assumed to gradually sacrifice response accuracy in exchange for gradual increases in response speed. This trade-off presumably operates over the entire range from accurate but slow responding to fast but chance-level responding (i.e., guessing). In this article, we challenge the assumption of continuity and propose a phase transition model for RTs and accuracy. Analogous to the fast guess model (Ollman, 1966), our model postulates two modes of processing: a guess mode and a stimulus-controlled mode. From catastrophe theory, we derive two important predictions that allow us to test our model against the fast guess model and against the popular class of sequential sampling models. The first prediction—hysteresis in the transitions between guessing and stimulus-controlled behavior—was confirmed in an experiment that gradually changed the reward for speed versus accuracy. The second prediction—bimodal RT distributions—was confirmed in an experiment that required participants to respond in a way that is intermediate between guessing and accurate responding
Similar books and articles
Effects of Model-Based and Memory-Based Processing on Speed and Accuracy of Grammar String Generation.Robert C. Mathews & Ron Sun - unknown
Context Effects in Multi-Alternative Decision Making: Empirical Data and a Bayesian Model.Guy Hawkins, Scott D. Brown, Mark Steyvers & Eric-Jan Wagenmakers - 2012 - Cognitive Science 36 (3):498-516.
Confidence and accuracy of near-threshold discrimination responses.Craig Kunimoto, Jeff Miller & Harold Pashler - 2001 - Consciousness and Cognition 10 (3):294-340.
Where in the world is the speed/accuracy trade-off?P. A. Hancock & Willem B. Verwey - 1997 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 20 (2):310-311.
Movement dynamics in speed/accuracy trade-off.P. Morasso & V. Sanguineti - 1997 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 20 (2):319-319.
Speed/accuracy trade-offs in rapid simultaneous and sequential actions: Evidence for carryover effects.David E. Sherwood - 1997 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 20 (2):320-320.
Do we need an encompassing speed/accuracy trade-off theory?Arnold J. W. M. Thomassen & Ruud G. J. Meulenbroek - 1997 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 20 (2):322-323.
Are speed/accuracy trade-offs caused by neuromotor noise, or not?Willem P. De Jong & Gerard P. Van Galen - 1997 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 20 (2):306-307.
Dynamics of trajectory formation and speed/accuracy trade-offs.Reinoud J. Bootsma & Denis Mottet - 1997 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 20 (2):303-304.
Speed/accuracy trade-offs in target-directed movements.Réjean Plamondon & Adel M. Alimi - 1997 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 20 (2):279-303.
What's different in speed/accuracy trade-offs in young and elderly subjects.George E. Stelmach & Jerry R. Thomas - 1997 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 20 (2):321-321.
The delta-lambda model: “Yes” for simple movement trajectories; “no” for speed/accuracy tradeoffs.Charles E. Wright & David E. Meyer - 1997 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 20 (2):324-324.
Added to PP
Historical graph of downloads
Citations of this work
Learning From the Body About the Mind.Michael A. Riley, Kevin Shockley & Guy Van Orden - 2012 - Topics in Cognitive Science 4 (1):21-34.
Is There Evidence for a Mixture of Processes in Speed‐Accuracy Trade‐Off Behavior?Leendert Maanen - 2016 - Topics in Cognitive Science 8 (1):279-290.
Abstract Concepts Require Concrete Models: Why Cognitive Scientists Have Not Yet Embraced Nonlinearly Coupled, Dynamical, Self-Organized Critical, Synergistic, Scale-Free, Exquisitely Context-Sensitive, Interaction-Dominant, Multifractal, Interdependent Brain-Body-Niche Systems.Eric-Jan Wagenmakers, Han L. J. van der Maas & Simon Farrell - 2012 - Topics in Cognitive Science 4 (1):87-93.
Strategic attention and decision control support prospective memory in a complex dual-task environment.Russell J. Boag, Luke Strickland, Shayne Loft & Andrew Heathcote - 2019 - Cognition 191:103974.
Understanding Test Takers' Choices in a Self-Adapted Test: A Hidden Markov Modeling of Process Data.Meirav Arieli-Attali, Lu Ou & Vanessa R. Simmering - 2019 - Frontiers in Psychology 10.
References found in this work
Conflict monitoring and cognitive control.Matthew M. Botvinick, Todd S. Braver, Deanna M. Barch, Cameron S. Carter & Jonathan D. Cohen - 2001 - Psychological Review 108 (3):624-652.
The time course of perceptual choice: The leaky, competing accumulator model.Marius Usher & James L. McClelland - 2001 - Psychological Review 108 (3):550-592.
Multialternative decision field theory: A dynamic connectionst model of decision making.Robert M. Roe, Jermone R. Busemeyer & James T. Townsend - 2001 - Psychological Review 108 (2):370-392.
Stagewise cognitive development: An application of catastrophe theory.Han L. Van der Maas & Peter C. Molenaar - 1992 - Psychological Review 99 (3):395-417.