ArticlePsychological review2022
Modeling evidence accumulation decision processes using integral equations: Urgency-gating and collapsing boundaries.
Article in Psychological review, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 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
16 citing papers in PubMed.
- Can Systematic Drift Rate Variability Replace Random Variability in the Diffusion Decision Model?Computational brain & behavior · 2026Article
- Efficient Inference in First Passage Time Models.Statistics and computing · 2026Article
- A brain-wide, trial- and time-dependent deterministic drive synergizes with within-trial noise to time self-initiated actions.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026Article
- Proximal procrastination of saccades: "paradoxical" delays to larger objects explained by a simple payoff-time heuristic.iScience · 2026Article
- 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
- The neural implausibility of the diffusion decision model doesn't matter for cognitive psychometrics, but the Ornstein-Uhlenbeck model is better.Psychonomic bulletin & review · 2024Article
- Bayesian confidence in optimal decisions.Psychological review · 2024Article
- Graded decisions in the human brain.Nature communications · 2024Article
- Attribute latencies causally shape intertemporal decisions.Nature communications · 2024Article
- Of Rodents and Primates: Time-Variant Gain in Drift-Diffusion Decision Models.Computational brain & behavior · 2024Article
- Expressions for Bayesian confidence of drift diffusion observers in fluctuating stimuli tasks.Journal of mathematical psychology · 2023Article
- "Reliable organisms from unreliable components" revisited: the linear drift, linear infinitesimal variance model of decision making.Psychonomic bulletin & review · 2023Review
- Article
- Humans utilize sensory evidence of others' intended action to make online decisions.Scientific reports · 2022Article
- Qualitative speed-accuracy tradeoff effects can be explained by a diffusion/fast-guess mixture model.Scientific reports · 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
Diffusion models of evidence accumulation have successfully accounted for the distributions of response times and choice probabilities from many experimental tasks, but recently their assumption that evidence is accumulated at a constant rate to constant decision boundaries has been challenged. One model assumes that decision-makers seek to optimize their performance by using decision boundaries that collapse over time. Another model assumes that evidence does not accumulate and is represented by a stationary distribution that is gated by an urgency signal to make a response. We present explicit, integral-equation expressions for the first-passage time distributions of the urgency-gating and collapsing-bounds models and use them to identify conditions under which the models are equivalent. We combine these expressions with a dynamic model of stimulus encoding that allows the effects of perceptual and decisional integration to be distinguished. We compare the resulting models to the standard diffusion model with variability in drift rates on data from three experimental paradigms in which stimulus information was either constant or changed over time. The standard diffusion model was the best model for tasks with constant stimulus information; the models with time-varying urgency or decision bounds performed similarly to the standard diffusion model on tasks with changing stimulus information. We found little support for the claim that evidence does not accumulate and attribute the good performance of the time-varying models on changing-stimulus tasks to their increased flexibility and not to their ability to account for systematic experimental effects. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).
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.