ReviewPsychonomic bulletin & review2014
A generalized, likelihood-free method for posterior estimation.
Review in Psychonomic bulletin & review, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 35 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
35 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Response-time data provide critical constraints on dynamic models of multi-alternative, multi-attribute choice.Psychonomic bulletin & review · 2019Pooled it
- A two-phase diffusion process account of cross-location conflict processing during mental imagery.iScience · 2026Article
- HSSM: A Widely Applicable Toolbox for Hierarchical Bayesian Neurocognitive Modeling.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026Article
- Ten years Diffusion Model for Conflict (DMC) tasks: Theoretical foundations, applications, practical recommendations, and open challenges.Psychonomic bulletin & review · 2026Review
- Second-order facial features are processed analytically in composite faces.Attention, perception & psychophysics · 2025Article
- Parameter estimation of hyper-spherical diffusion models with a time-dependent threshold: An integral equation method.Behavior research methods · 2025Article
- The Tweedledum and Tweedledee of dynamic decisions: Discriminating between diffusion decision and accumulator models.Psychonomic bulletin & review · 2025Review
- Probing the origins of subjective confidence in source memory decisions in young and older adults: A sequential sampling account.Journal of experimental psychology. General · 2025Article
- Models of Variability in Probabilistic Causal Judgments.Computational brain & behavior · 2025Article
- Support for the Time-Varying Drift Rate Model of Perceptual Discrimination in Dynamic and Static Noise Using Bayesian Model-Fitting Methodology.Entropy (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Artificial neural networks for model identification and parameter estimation in computational cognitive models.PLoS computational biology · 2024Article
- Artificial neural networks for model identification and parameter estimation in computational cognitive models.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2024Article
- PyBEAM: A Bayesian approach to parameter inference for a wide class of binary evidence accumulation models.Behavior research methods · 2024Article
- Article
- A Modeling Framework to Examine Psychological Processes Underlying Ordinal Responses and Response Times of Psychometric Data.Psychometrika · 2023Article
- An adaptive rejection sampler for sampling from the Wiener diffusion model.Behavior research methods · 2023Article
- Calibration methods to fit parameters within complex biological models.Frontiers in applied mathematics and statistics · 2023Article
- The Bayesian Mutation Sampler Explains Distributions of Causal Judgments.Open mind : discoveries in cognitive science · 2023Article
- Modified leaky competing accumulator model of decision making with multiple alternatives: the Lie-algebraic approach.Scientific reports · 2021Article
- Likelihood approximation networks (LANs) for fast inference of simulation models in cognitive neuroscience.eLife · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Recent advancements in Bayesian modeling have allowed for likelihood-free posterior estimation. Such estimation techniques are crucial to the understanding of simulation-based models, whose likelihood functions may be difficult or even impossible to derive. However, current approaches are limited by their dependence on sufficient statistics and/or tolerance thresholds. In this article, we provide a new approach that requires no summary statistics, error terms, or thresholds and is generalizable to all models in psychology that can be simulated. We use our algorithm to fit a variety of cognitive models with known likelihood functions to ensure the accuracy of our approach. We then apply our method to two real-world examples to illustrate the types of complex problems our method solves. In the first example, we fit an error-correcting criterion model of signal detection, whose criterion dynamically adjusts after every trial. We then fit two models of choice response time to experimental data: the linear ballistic accumulator model, which has a known likelihood, and the leaky competing accumulator model, whose likelihood is intractable. The estimated posterior distributions of the two models allow for direct parameter interpretation and model comparison by means of conventional Bayesian statistics-a feat that was not previously possible.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.