Department of Psychology, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN, 37235, USA.
Department of Psychology, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Psychon Bull Rev. 2019 Jun;26(3):901-933. doi: 10.3758/s13423-018-1557-z.
Understanding the cognitive processes involved in multi-alternative, multi-attribute choice is of interest to a wide range of fields including psychology, neuroscience, and economics. Prior investigations in this domain have relied primarily on choice data to compare different theories. Despite numerous such studies, results have largely been inconclusive. Our study uses state-of-the-art response-time modeling and data from 12 different experiments appearing in six different published studies to compare four previously proposed theories/models of these effects: multi-alternative decision field theory (MDFT), the leaky-competing accumulator (LCA), the multi-attribute linear ballistic accumulator (MLBA), and the associative accumulation model (AAM). All four models are, by design, dynamic process models and thus a comprehensive evaluation of their theoretical properties requires quantitative evaluation with both choice and response-time data. Our results show that response-time data is critical at distinguishing among these models and that using choice data alone can lead to inconclusive results for some datasets. In conclusion, we encourage future research to include response-time data in the evaluation of these models.
理解多选项、多属性选择所涉及的认知过程是心理学、神经科学和经济学等多个领域都感兴趣的问题。该领域的先前研究主要依赖于选择数据来比较不同的理论。尽管有许多这样的研究,但结果在很大程度上没有定论。我们的研究使用最先进的反应时建模和来自六个已发表研究中的 12 个不同实验的数据,比较了四种先前提出的此类效应理论/模型:多选项决策场理论(MDFT)、漏竞争累加器(LCA)、多属性线性弹道累加器(MLBA)和联想积累模型(AAM)。所有四个模型都是设计为动态过程模型,因此,对其理论性质的全面评估需要使用选择和反应时数据进行定量评估。我们的研究结果表明,反应时数据对于区分这些模型至关重要,仅使用选择数据可能会导致某些数据集的结果不确定。总之,我们鼓励未来的研究在这些模型的评估中包含反应时数据。