ArticlePsychonomic bulletin & review2012
An optimal adjustment procedure to minimize experiment time in decisions with multiple alternatives.
Article in Psychonomic bulletin & review, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
14 citing papers in PubMed.
- People are at least as good at optimizing reward rate under equivalent fixed-trial compared to fixed-time conditions.Psychonomic bulletin & review · 2025Article
- Individual differences in working memory impact the trajectory of non-native speech category learning.PloS one · 2024Article
- Information-Theoretic Quantification of Dedifferentiation in the Aging of Motor and Executive Functions.Frontiers in aging neuroscience · 2021Article
- Sequential sampling models without random between-trial variability: the racing diffusion model of speeded decision making.Psychonomic bulletin & review · 2020Review
- Article
- Some task demands induce collapsing bounds: Evidence from a behavioral analysis.Psychonomic bulletin & review · 2018Article
- Time-varying decision boundaries: insights from optimality analysis.Psychonomic bulletin & review · 2018Review
- The BCD of response time analysis in experimental economics.Experimental economics · 2018Article
- Overcoming indecision by changing the decision boundary.Journal of experimental psychology. General · 2017Article
- Using parameter space partitioning to evaluate a model's qualitative fit.Psychonomic bulletin & review · 2017Article
- People adopt optimal policies in simple decision-making, after practice and guidance.Psychonomic bulletin & review · 2017Article
- Of monkeys and men: Impatience in perceptual decision-making.Psychonomic bulletin & review · 2016Review
- Diffusion Decision Model: Current Issues and History.Trends in cognitive sciences · 2016Review
- Predicting individual differences in decision-making process from signature movement styles: an illustrative study of leaders.Frontiers in psychology · 2013Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Decisions between multiple alternatives typically conform to Hick's Law: Mean response time increases log-linearly with the number of choice alternatives. We recently demonstrated context effects in Hick's Law, showing that patterns of response latency and choice accuracy were different for easy versus difficult blocks. The context effect explained previously observed discrepancies in error rate data and provided a new challenge for theoretical accounts of multialternative choice. In the present article, we propose a novel approach to modeling context effects that can be applied to any account that models the speed-accuracy trade-off. The core element of the approach is "optimality" in the way an experimental participant might define it: minimizing the total time spent in the experiment, without making too many errors. We show how this approach can be included in an existing Bayesian model of choice and highlight its ability to fit previous data as well as to predict novel empirical context effects. The model is shown to provide better quantitative fits than a more flexible heuristic account.
Indexed as
Identifiers
22302644What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.