» Articles » PMID: 24487728

Time Pressure Affects the Efficiency of Perceptual Processing in Decisions Under Conflict

Overview
Journal Psychol Res
Specialty Psychology
Date 2014 Feb 4
PMID 24487728
Citations 26
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

The negative correlation between speed and accuracy in perceptual decision making is often explained as a tradeoff, where lowered decision boundaries under time pressure result in faster but more error-prone responses. Corresponding implementations in sequential sampling models confirmed the success of this account, which has led to the prevalent assumption that a second component of decision making, the efficiency of perceptual processing, is largely independent from temporal demands. To test the generality of this claim, we examined time pressure effects on decisions under conflict. Data from a flanker task were fit with a sequential sampling model that incorporates two successive phases of response selection, driven by the output of an early and late stage of stimulus selection, respectively. The fits revealed the canonical decrease of response boundaries with increasing time pressure. In addition, time pressure reduced the duration of non-decisional processes and impaired the early stage of stimulus selection, together with the subsequent first phase of response selection. The results show that the relation between speed and accuracy not only relies on the strategic adjustment of response boundaries but involves variations of processing efficiency. The findings support recent evidence of drift rate modulations in response to time pressure in simple perceptual decisions and confirm their validity in the context of more complex tasks.

Citing Articles

Prediction of Attention Groups and Big Five Personality Traits from Gaze Features Collected from an Outlier Search Game.

Saboundji R, Farago K, Firyaridi V J Imaging. 2024; 10(10).

PMID: 39452418 PMC: 11508584. DOI: 10.3390/jimaging10100255.


Effects of acute stress on biological motion perception.

Wang J, Shi F, Yu L PLoS One. 2024; 19(9):e0310502.

PMID: 39292714 PMC: 11410201. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0310502.


Support for the Time-Varying Drift Rate Model of Perceptual Discrimination in Dynamic and Static Noise Using Bayesian Model-Fitting Methodology.

Deakin J, Schofield A, Heinke D Entropy (Basel). 2024; 26(8).

PMID: 39202112 PMC: 11354202. DOI: 10.3390/e26080642.


The dynamics of competition and decision-making.

Morgan A, Neal A, Ballard T Psychon Bull Rev. 2024; 31(6):2811-2822.

PMID: 38858324 PMC: 11680669. DOI: 10.3758/s13423-024-02523-2.


What mechanisms mediate prior probability effects on rapid-choice decision-making?.

Puri R, Hinder M, Heathcote A PLoS One. 2023; 18(7):e0288085.

PMID: 37418378 PMC: 10328325. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0288085.


References
1.
Forstmann B, Anwander A, Schafer A, Neumann J, Brown S, Wagenmakers E . Cortico-striatal connections predict control over speed and accuracy in perceptual decision making. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2010; 107(36):15916-20. PMC: 2936628. DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1004932107. View

2.
Diederich A, Busemeyer J . Modeling the effects of payoff on response bias in a perceptual discrimination task: bound-change, drift-rate-change, or two-stage-processing hypothesis. Percept Psychophys. 2006; 68(2):194-207. DOI: 10.3758/bf03193669. View

3.
Miller J, Patterson T, Ulrich R . Jackknife-based method for measuring LRP onset latency differences. Psychophysiology. 1998; 35(1):99-115. View

4.
Bausenhart K, Rolke B, Seibold V, Ulrich R . Temporal preparation influences the dynamics of information processing: evidence for early onset of information accumulation. Vision Res. 2010; 50(11):1025-34. DOI: 10.1016/j.visres.2010.03.011. View

5.
Logan G, Gordon R . Executive control of visual attention in dual-task situations. Psychol Rev. 2001; 108(2):393-434. DOI: 10.1037/0033-295x.108.2.393. View