ArticlePsychonomic bulletin & review2026
The diffusion model's drift rate parameter primarily reflects efficiency, rather than speed, of evidence accumulation.
Article in Psychonomic bulletin & review, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Less systematic decision-making during delay discounting, but not discounting rate, is robustly linked to psychopathology.Journal of psychopathology and clinical science · 2026Article
- Article
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
Abstract
Applications of the diffusion decision model (DDM) to the study of cognitive individual differences consistently find that the model's drift rate (v) parameter forms a cohesive factor across many tasks and relates to measures of higher-order cognitive functioning, including general cognitive ability and working memory. This parameter is often interpreted as a measure of "processing speed," a traditional psychometric construct thought to reflect an individual's basic speed of information processing across tasks. However, conceptual differences between v and traditional notions of processing speed make this mapping far from straightforward. Racing accumulator models, which provide a more flexible and comprehensive account of behavioral data than the DDM, allow for the speed with which individuals accumulate evidence to be dissociated from the efficiency with which they accumulate task-relevant evidence (versus task-irrelevant evidence). We applied the DDM and a racing accumulator model to three tasks across three independent datasets to gauge the extent to which v parameter findings from the cognitive individual differences literature reflect speed of evidence accumulation (SEA) versus efficiency of evidence accumulation (EEA). Across all tasks, v was more strongly related to EEA than SEA. EEA was consistently related to measures of general cognitive ability, working memory, and executive function whereas SEA explained <1% of the variance in each. These findings suggest individual differences in the DDM's v parameter, and its relations with higher-order cognitive abilities, primarily reflect EEA rather than SEA and challenge the widespread practice of equating v with the traditional "processing speed" construct.
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.