ArticleBehavior research methods2026
An illustrative guide to expressing cognitive theories using evidence accumulation modelling.
Article in Behavior research methods, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
Evidence accumulation models (EAMs) explain and predict human choices and response times in a way that maps more directly to cognitive processes than traditional analyses. For example, EAMs can separate the speed-accuracy trade-off from processing capacity. However, little guidance is available regarding how to use EAMs to instantiate cognitive process theories, which often involve complex mappings of parameters to experimental designs. This tutorial illustrates how to embed such theories using the R package EMC2. We show how the effects of cognitive processes can be estimated by mapping EAM parameters to experimental designs using an augmented linear model language. We demonstrate with two examples. The first instantiates a theory of prospective memory. The second instantiates a theory of how humans integrate advice from automated decision aids into their choices. We then show how to combine these two different theories in a unified framework. We conclude by discussing further directions for theory embedding, including non-linear mappings from stimulus values to EAM parameters and the incorporation of trial-by-trial dynamics.
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.