Modeling individual differences in perceptual decision making / / topic editors, Joseph W. Houpt, Wright State University, USA, Cheng-Ta Yang, National Cheng Kung University, Taiwan, James T. Townsend, Indiana University, Bloomington, USA.

To deal with the abundant amount of information in the environment in order to achieve our goals, human beings adopt a strategy to accumulate some information and filter out other information to ultimately make decisions. Since the development of cognitive science in the 1960s, researchers have been...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Superior document:Frontiers Research Topics
TeilnehmendeR:
Year of Publication:2017
Language:English
Series:Frontiers Research Topics
Physical Description:1 electronic resource (140 p.)
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
id 993546757204498
ctrlnum (CKB)3800000000216208
(oapen)https://directory.doabooks.org/handle/20.500.12854/53694
(EXLCZ)993800000000216208
collection bib_alma
record_format marc
spelling Modeling individual differences in perceptual decision making / topic editors, Joseph W. Houpt, Wright State University, USA, Cheng-Ta Yang, National Cheng Kung University, Taiwan, James T. Townsend, Indiana University, Bloomington, USA.
Frontiers Media SA 2017
1 electronic resource (140 p.)
text txt rdacontent
computer c rdamedia
online resource cr rdacarrier
Frontiers Research Topics
To deal with the abundant amount of information in the environment in order to achieve our goals, human beings adopt a strategy to accumulate some information and filter out other information to ultimately make decisions. Since the development of cognitive science in the 1960s, researchers have been interested in understanding how human beings process and accumulate information for decision-making. Researchers have conducted extensive behavioral studies and applied a wide range of modeling tools to study human behavior in simple-detection tasks and two-choice decision tasks (e.g., discrimination, classification). In general, researchers often assume that the manner in which information is processed for decision-making is invariant across individuals given a particular experimental context. Independent variables, including speed-accuracy instructions, stimulus properties (i.e., intensity), and characteristics of the participants (i.e., aging, cognitive ability) are assumed to affect the parameters in a model (i.e., speed of information accumulation, response bias) but not the way that participants process information (e.g., the order of information processing). Given these assumptions, much modeling has been accomplished based on the grouped data, rather than the individual data. However, a growing number of studies have demonstrated that there were individual differences in the perceptual decision process. In the same task context, different groups of the participants may process information in different manners. The capacity and architecture of the decision mechanism were found to vary across individuals, implying that humans’ decision strategies can vary depending on the context to maximize their performance. In this special issue, we focused on a particular subset of cognitive models, particularly accumulator models, multinomial processing trees and systems factorial technology (SFT) as applied to perceptual decision making. The motivation for the focus on perceptual decision-making is threefold. Empirical studies of perception have grown out of a history of making a large number of observations for each individual so as to achieve precise estimates of each individual’s performance. This type of data, rather than a small number of observations per individual, is most amenable to achieving precision in individual-level and group-level cognitive modeling. Second, the interaction between the acquisition of perceptual information and the decisions based on that information (to the extent that those processes are distinguishable) offers rich data for scientific exploration. Finally, there is an increasing interest in the practical application of individual variation in perceptual ability, whether to inform perceptual training and expertise, or to guide personnel decisions. Although these practical applications are beyond the scope of this issue, we hope that the research presented herein may serve as the foundation for future endeavors in that domain. To deal with the abundant amount of information in the environment in order to achieve our goals, human beings adopt a strategy to accumulate some information and filter out other information to ultimately make decisions. Since the development of cognitive science in the 1960s, researchers have been interested in understanding how human beings process and accumulate information for decision-making. Researchers have conducted extensive behavioral studies and applied a wide range of modeling tools to study human behavior in simple-detection tasks and two-choice decision tasks (e.g., discrimination, classification). In general, researchers often assume that the manner in which information is processed for decision-making is invariant across individuals given a particular experimental context. Independent variables, including speed-accuracy instructions, stimulus properties (i.e., intensity), and characteristics of the participants (i.e., aging, cognitive ability) are assumed to affect the parameters in a model (i.e., speed of information accumulation, response bias) but not the way that participants process information (e.g., the order of information processing). Given these assumptions, much modeling has been accomplished based on the grouped data, rather than the individual data. However, a growing number of studies have demonstrated that there were individual differences in the perceptual decision process. In the same task context, different groups of the participants may process information in different manners. The capacity and architecture of the decision mechanism were found to vary across individuals, implying that humans’ decision strategies can vary depending on the context to maximize their performance. In this special issue, we focused on a particular subset of cognitive models, particularly accumulator models, multinomial processing trees and systems factorial technology (SFT) as applied to perceptual decision making. The motivation for the focus on perceptual decision-making is threefold. Empirical studies of perception have grown out of a history of making a large number of observations for each individual so as to achieve precise estimates of each individual’s performance. This type of data, rather than a small number of observations per individual, is most amenable to achieving precision in individual-level and group-level cognitive modeling. Second, the interaction between the acquisition of perceptual information and the decisions based on that information (to the extent that those processes are distinguishable) offers rich data for scientific exploration. Finally, there is an increasing interest in the practical application of individual variation in perceptual ability, whether to inform perceptual training and expertise, or to guide personnel decisions. Although these practical applications are beyond the scope of this issue, we hope that the research presented herein may serve as the foundation for future endeavors in that domain.
English
Creative Commons NonCommercial-NoDerivs CC by-nc-nd https://creativecommons.org/licenses/http://journal.frontiersin.org/researchtopic/1847/modeling-individual-differences-in-perceptual-decision-making
Description based on online resource; title from PDF title page (viewed on 09/02/2020)
Unrestricted online access star
perceptual decision making
processing capacity
Response Time
Cognitive Modeling
individual differences
Decision making.
Cognitive psychology Methodology.
2-88945-056-2
Houpt, Joseph W., editor.
Townsend, James T., editor.
Yang, Cheng-Ta, editor.
language English
format eBook
author2 Houpt, Joseph W.,
Townsend, James T.,
Yang, Cheng-Ta,
author_facet Houpt, Joseph W.,
Townsend, James T.,
Yang, Cheng-Ta,
author2_variant j w h jw jwh
j t t jt jtt
c t y cty
author2_role TeilnehmendeR
TeilnehmendeR
TeilnehmendeR
title Modeling individual differences in perceptual decision making /
spellingShingle Modeling individual differences in perceptual decision making /
Frontiers Research Topics
title_full Modeling individual differences in perceptual decision making / topic editors, Joseph W. Houpt, Wright State University, USA, Cheng-Ta Yang, National Cheng Kung University, Taiwan, James T. Townsend, Indiana University, Bloomington, USA.
title_fullStr Modeling individual differences in perceptual decision making / topic editors, Joseph W. Houpt, Wright State University, USA, Cheng-Ta Yang, National Cheng Kung University, Taiwan, James T. Townsend, Indiana University, Bloomington, USA.
title_full_unstemmed Modeling individual differences in perceptual decision making / topic editors, Joseph W. Houpt, Wright State University, USA, Cheng-Ta Yang, National Cheng Kung University, Taiwan, James T. Townsend, Indiana University, Bloomington, USA.
title_auth Modeling individual differences in perceptual decision making /
title_new Modeling individual differences in perceptual decision making /
title_sort modeling individual differences in perceptual decision making /
series Frontiers Research Topics
series2 Frontiers Research Topics
publisher Frontiers Media SA
publishDate 2017
physical 1 electronic resource (140 p.)
isbn 2-88945-056-2
callnumber-first B - Philosophy, Psychology, Religion
callnumber-subject BF - Psychology
callnumber-label BF448
callnumber-sort BF 3448
illustrated Not Illustrated
dewey-hundreds 100 - Philosophy & psychology
dewey-tens 150 - Psychology
dewey-ones 153 - Mental processes & intelligence
dewey-full 153.8/3
dewey-sort 3153.8 13
dewey-raw 153.8/3
dewey-search 153.8/3
work_keys_str_mv AT houptjosephw modelingindividualdifferencesinperceptualdecisionmaking
AT townsendjamest modelingindividualdifferencesinperceptualdecisionmaking
AT yangchengta modelingindividualdifferencesinperceptualdecisionmaking
status_str n
ids_txt_mv (CKB)3800000000216208
(oapen)https://directory.doabooks.org/handle/20.500.12854/53694
(EXLCZ)993800000000216208
carrierType_str_mv cr
hierarchy_parent_title Frontiers Research Topics
is_hierarchy_title Modeling individual differences in perceptual decision making /
container_title Frontiers Research Topics
author2_original_writing_str_mv noLinkedField
noLinkedField
noLinkedField
_version_ 1797653504951582721
fullrecord <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>07788nam-a2200433z--4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">993546757204498</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20240424230443.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="006">m o d </controlfield><controlfield tag="007">cr|mn|---annan</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">202102s2017 xx |||||o ||| 0|eng d</controlfield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(CKB)3800000000216208</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(oapen)https://directory.doabooks.org/handle/20.500.12854/53694</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(EXLCZ)993800000000216208</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="050" ind1="0" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">BF448</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="082" ind1="0" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">153.8/3</subfield><subfield code="2">23</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="0" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Modeling individual differences in perceptual decision making /</subfield><subfield code="c">topic editors, Joseph W. Houpt, Wright State University, USA, Cheng-Ta Yang, National Cheng Kung University, Taiwan, James T. Townsend, Indiana University, Bloomington, USA.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="260" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="b">Frontiers Media SA</subfield><subfield code="c">2017</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="300" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">1 electronic resource (140 p.)</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">text</subfield><subfield code="b">txt</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">computer</subfield><subfield code="b">c</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">online resource</subfield><subfield code="b">cr</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="490" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Frontiers Research Topics</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">To deal with the abundant amount of information in the environment in order to achieve our goals, human beings adopt a strategy to accumulate some information and filter out other information to ultimately make decisions. Since the development of cognitive science in the 1960s, researchers have been interested in understanding how human beings process and accumulate information for decision-making. Researchers have conducted extensive behavioral studies and applied a wide range of modeling tools to study human behavior in simple-detection tasks and two-choice decision tasks (e.g., discrimination, classification). In general, researchers often assume that the manner in which information is processed for decision-making is invariant across individuals given a particular experimental context. Independent variables, including speed-accuracy instructions, stimulus properties (i.e., intensity), and characteristics of the participants (i.e., aging, cognitive ability) are assumed to affect the parameters in a model (i.e., speed of information accumulation, response bias) but not the way that participants process information (e.g., the order of information processing). Given these assumptions, much modeling has been accomplished based on the grouped data, rather than the individual data. However, a growing number of studies have demonstrated that there were individual differences in the perceptual decision process. In the same task context, different groups of the participants may process information in different manners. The capacity and architecture of the decision mechanism were found to vary across individuals, implying that humans’ decision strategies can vary depending on the context to maximize their performance. In this special issue, we focused on a particular subset of cognitive models, particularly accumulator models, multinomial processing trees and systems factorial technology (SFT) as applied to perceptual decision making. The motivation for the focus on perceptual decision-making is threefold. Empirical studies of perception have grown out of a history of making a large number of observations for each individual so as to achieve precise estimates of each individual’s performance. This type of data, rather than a small number of observations per individual, is most amenable to achieving precision in individual-level and group-level cognitive modeling. Second, the interaction between the acquisition of perceptual information and the decisions based on that information (to the extent that those processes are distinguishable) offers rich data for scientific exploration. Finally, there is an increasing interest in the practical application of individual variation in perceptual ability, whether to inform perceptual training and expertise, or to guide personnel decisions. Although these practical applications are beyond the scope of this issue, we hope that the research presented herein may serve as the foundation for future endeavors in that domain. To deal with the abundant amount of information in the environment in order to achieve our goals, human beings adopt a strategy to accumulate some information and filter out other information to ultimately make decisions. Since the development of cognitive science in the 1960s, researchers have been interested in understanding how human beings process and accumulate information for decision-making. Researchers have conducted extensive behavioral studies and applied a wide range of modeling tools to study human behavior in simple-detection tasks and two-choice decision tasks (e.g., discrimination, classification). In general, researchers often assume that the manner in which information is processed for decision-making is invariant across individuals given a particular experimental context. Independent variables, including speed-accuracy instructions, stimulus properties (i.e., intensity), and characteristics of the participants (i.e., aging, cognitive ability) are assumed to affect the parameters in a model (i.e., speed of information accumulation, response bias) but not the way that participants process information (e.g., the order of information processing). Given these assumptions, much modeling has been accomplished based on the grouped data, rather than the individual data. However, a growing number of studies have demonstrated that there were individual differences in the perceptual decision process. In the same task context, different groups of the participants may process information in different manners. The capacity and architecture of the decision mechanism were found to vary across individuals, implying that humans’ decision strategies can vary depending on the context to maximize their performance. In this special issue, we focused on a particular subset of cognitive models, particularly accumulator models, multinomial processing trees and systems factorial technology (SFT) as applied to perceptual decision making. The motivation for the focus on perceptual decision-making is threefold. Empirical studies of perception have grown out of a history of making a large number of observations for each individual so as to achieve precise estimates of each individual’s performance. This type of data, rather than a small number of observations per individual, is most amenable to achieving precision in individual-level and group-level cognitive modeling. Second, the interaction between the acquisition of perceptual information and the decisions based on that information (to the extent that those processes are distinguishable) offers rich data for scientific exploration. Finally, there is an increasing interest in the practical application of individual variation in perceptual ability, whether to inform perceptual training and expertise, or to guide personnel decisions. Although these practical applications are beyond the scope of this issue, we hope that the research presented herein may serve as the foundation for future endeavors in that domain.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="546" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">English</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="540" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Creative Commons NonCommercial-NoDerivs</subfield><subfield code="f">CC by-nc-nd</subfield><subfield code="u">https://creativecommons.org/licenses/http://journal.frontiersin.org/researchtopic/1847/modeling-individual-differences-in-perceptual-decision-making</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="588" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Description based on online resource; title from PDF title page (viewed on 09/02/2020)</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="506" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="f">Unrestricted online access</subfield><subfield code="2">star</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="653" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">perceptual decision making</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="653" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">processing capacity</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="653" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Response Time</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="653" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Cognitive Modeling</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="653" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">individual differences</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Decision making.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Cognitive psychology</subfield><subfield code="x">Methodology.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="776" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="z">2-88945-056-2</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Houpt, Joseph W.,</subfield><subfield code="e">editor.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Townsend, James T.,</subfield><subfield code="e">editor.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Yang, Cheng-Ta,</subfield><subfield code="e">editor.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="906" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">BOOK</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="ADM" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="b">2024-04-26 03:13:25 Europe/Vienna</subfield><subfield code="f">system</subfield><subfield code="c">marc21</subfield><subfield code="a">2017-09-30 19:47:25 Europe/Vienna</subfield><subfield code="g">false</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="AVE" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="i">DOAB Directory of Open Access Books</subfield><subfield code="P">DOAB Directory of Open Access Books</subfield><subfield code="x">https://eu02.alma.exlibrisgroup.com/view/uresolver/43ACC_OEAW/openurl?u.ignore_date_coverage=true&amp;portfolio_pid=5338339680004498&amp;Force_direct=true</subfield><subfield code="Z">5338339680004498</subfield><subfield code="b">Available</subfield><subfield code="8">5338339680004498</subfield></datafield></record></collection>