A systematic investigation into the reliability of inter-temporal choice model parameters

Decades of work have been dedicated to developing and testing models that characterize how people make inter-temporal choices. Although parameter estimates from these models are often interpreted as indices of latent components of the choice process, little work has been done to examine their reliability. This is problematic because estimation error can bias conclusions that are drawn from these parameter estimates. We examine the reliability of parameter estimates from 11 prominent models of inter-temporal choice by (a) fitting each model to data from three previous experiments with designs representative of those typically used to study inter-temporal choice, (b) examining the consistency of parameters estimated for the same person based on different choice sets, and (c) conducting a parameter recovery analysis. We find generally low correlations between parameters estimated for the same person from the different choice sets. Moreover, parameter recovery varies considerably between models and the experimental designs upon which parameter estimates are based. We conclude that many parameter estimates reported in previous research are likely unreliable and provide recommendations on how to enhance the reliability of inter-temporal choice models for measurement purposes.

A cognitive process modeling framework for the ABCD study stop-signal task

The Adolescent Brain Cognitive Development (ABCD) Study is a longitudinal neuroimaging study of unprecedented scale that is in the process of following over 11,000 youth from middle childhood though age 20. However, a design feature of the study's stop-signal task violates "context independence", an assumption critical to current non-parametric methods for estimating stop-signal reaction time (SSRT), a key measure of inhibitory ability in the study. This has led some experts to call for the task to be changed and for previously collected data to be used with caution. We present a cognitive process modeling framework, the RDEX-ABCD model, that provides a parsimonious explanation for the impact of this design feature on "go" stimulus processing and successfully accounts for key behavioral trends in the ABCD data. Simulation studies using this model suggest that failing to account for the context independence violations in the ABCD design can lead to erroneous inferences in several realistic scenarios. However, we demonstrate that RDEX-ABCD effectively addresses these violations and can be used to accurately measure SSRT along with an array of additional mechanistic parameters of interest (e.g., attention to the stop signal, cognitive efficiency), advancing investigators' ability to draw valid and nuanced inferences from ABCD data. AVAILABILITY OF DATA AND MATERIALS: Data from the ABCD Study are available through the NIH Data Archive (NDA): nda.nih.gov/abcd. Code for all analyses featured in this study is openly available on the Open Science Framework (OSF): osf.io/2h8a7/.

Improving parameter recovery for conflict drift-diffusion models

Several drift-diffusion models have been developed to account for the performance in conflict tasks. Although a common characteristic of these models is that the drift rate changes within a trial, their architecture is rather different. Comparative studies usually examine which model fits the data best. However, a good fit does not guarantee good parameter recovery, which is a necessary condition for a valid interpretation of any fit. A recent simulation study revealed that recovery performance varies largely between models and individual parameters. Moreover, recovery was generally not very impressive. Therefore, the aim of the present study was to introduce and test an improved fit procedure. It is based on a grid search for determining the initial parameter values and on a specific criterion for assessing the goodness of fit. Simulations show that not only the fit performance but also parameter recovery improved substantially by applying this procedure, compared to the standard one. The improvement was largest for the most complex model.

A parameter recovery assessment of time-variant models of decision-making

Evidence accumulation models have been one of the most dominant modeling frameworks used to study rapid decision-making over the past several decades. These models propose that evidence accumulates from the environment until the evidence for one alternative reaches some threshold, typically associated with caution, triggering a response. However, researchers have recently begun to reconsider the fundamental assumptions of how caution varies with time. In the past, it was typically assumed that levels of caution are independent of time. Recent investigations have however suggested the possibility that levels of caution decrease over time and that this strategy provides more efficient performance under certain conditions. Our study provides the first comprehensive assessment of this newer class of models accounting for time-varying caution to determine how robustly their parameters can be estimated. We assess five overall variants of collapsing threshold/urgency signal models based on the diffusion decision model, linear ballistic accumulator model, and urgency gating model frameworks. We find that estimation of parameters, particularly those associated with caution/urgency modulation are most robust for the linearly collapsing threshold diffusion model followed by an urgency-gating model with a leakage process. All other models considered, particularly those with ballistic accumulation or nonlinear thresholds, are unable to recover their own parameters adequately, making their usage in parameter estimation contexts questionable.

Improved information pooling for hierarchical cognitive models through multiple and covaried regression

Cognitive process models are fit to observed data to infer how experimental manipulations modify the assumed underlying cognitive process. They are alternatives to descriptive models, which only capture differences on the observed data level, and do not make assumptions about the underlying cognitive process. Process models may require more observations than descriptive models however, and as a consequence, usually fewer conditions can be simultaneously modeled with them. Unfortunately, it is known that the predictive validity of a model may be compromised when fewer experimental conditions are jointly accounted for (e.g., overestimation of predictor effects, or their incorrect assignment). We develop a hierarchical and covaried multiple regression approach to address this problem. Specifically, we show how to map the recurrences of all conditions, participants, items, and/or traits across experimental design cells to the process model parameters. This systematic pooling of information can facilitate parameter estimation. The proposed approach is particularly relevant for multi-factor experimental designs, and for mixture models that parameterize per cell to assess predictor effects. This hierarchical framework provides the capacity to model more conditions jointly to improve parameter recovery at low observation numbers (e.g., using only 1/6 of trials, recovering as well as standard hierarchical Bayesian methods), and to directly model predictor and covariate effects on the process parameters, without the need for post hoc analyses (e.g., ANOVA). An example application to real data is also provided.