Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-v2bm5 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-07T19:30:14.391Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Hierarchical Bayes Models for Response Time Data

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2025

Peter F. Craigmile ,
Mario Peruggia  and
Trisha Van Zandt
Peter F. Craigmile*
Affiliation:
Department of Statistics, The Ohio State University
Mario Peruggia
Affiliation:
Department of Statistics, The Ohio State University
Trisha Van Zandt
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology, The Ohio State University
*
Requests for reprints should be sent to Peter F. Craigmile, Department of Statistics, The Ohio State University, 404 Cockins Hall, 1958 Neil Avenue, Columbus, OH 43210, USA. E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Human response time (RT) data are widely used in experimental psychology to evaluate theories of mental processing. Typically, the data constitute the times taken by a subject to react to a succession of stimuli under varying experimental conditions. Because of the sequential nature of the experiments there are trends (due to learning, fatigue, fluctuations in attentional state, etc.) and serial dependencies in the data. The data also exhibit extreme observations that can be attributed to lapses, intrusions from outside the experiment, and errors occurring during the experiment. Any adequate analysis should account for these features and quantify them accurately. Recognizing that Bayesian hierarchical models are an excellent modeling tool, we focus on the elaboration of a realistic likelihood for the data and on a careful assessment of the quality of fit that it provides. We judge quality of fit in terms of the predictive performance of the model. We demonstrate how simple Bayesian hierarchical models can be built for several RT sequences, differentiating between subject-specific and condition-specific effects.

Keywords

extreme observationslong tailsmixture modelsreaction timessequential dependenciestime series modelingwavelet-based trend
Type
Original Paper
Information
Psychometrika , Volume 75 , Issue 4 , December 2010 , pp. 613 - 632
Copyright
Copyright © 2010 The Psychometric Society

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

This work is supported by the National Science Foundation under award numbers BCS-0738059, DMS-0604963, DMS-0605052, SES-0214574 and SES-0437251.

The authors would like to thank and acknowledge assistance in the early stages of this project from Emily Johnson, Dartmouth College (REU student sponsored by the National Science Foundation under award No. DMS-9988006) and Maria Salotti, University of Wisconsin at Stevens Point (REU student sponsored by the Department of Statistics and the College of Mathematical and Physical Sciences of The Ohio State University).

References

Andrews, S., Heathcote, A. (2001). Distinguishing common and task-specific processes in word identification: a matter of some moment?. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 27, 514–544.Google ScholarPubMed
Barnett, V., Lewis, T. (1994). Outliers in statistical data, (3rd ed.). New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
Belin, T.R., Rubin, D.B. (1995). The analysis of repeated-measures data on schizophrenic reaction times using mixture models. Statistics in Medicine, 14, 747–768.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Borowsky, A., Oron-Gilad, T., Parmet, Y. (2009). Age and skill differences in classifying hazardous traffic scenes. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, 12, 277–287.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brillinger, D. (1994). Some river wavelets. Environmetrics, 5, 211–220.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brown, S.D., Marley, A.A.J., Donkin, C., Heathcote, A. (2008). An integrated model of choices and response times in absolute identification. Psychological Review, 115, 396–425.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Craigmile, P.F., Guttorp, P., Percival, D.B. (2004). Trend assessment in a long memory dependence model using the discrete wavelet transform. Environmetrics, 15, 313–335.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dawid, A. (1984). Present position and potential developments: some personal views: statistical theory: the prequential approach. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society. Series A, 147, 278–292.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Farrell, S., Wagenmakers, E.-J., Ratcliff, R. (2006). 1/f noise in human cognition: is it ubiquitous, and what does it mean?. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 13, 737–741.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Geisser, S., Eddy, W.F. (1979). A predictive approach to model selection (Corr: V75 p. 765). Journal of the American Statistical Association, 74, 153–160.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gelfand, A. (1996). Model determination using sampling-based methods. In Gilks, W., Richardson, S., Spiegelhalter, J. (Eds.), Monte Carlo in practice (pp. 145–162). Boca Raton: Chapman and Hall.Google Scholar
Gilden, D.L. (1997). Fluctuations in the time required for elementary decisions. Psychological Science, 8, 296–301.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gilden, D.L. (2001). Cognitive emissions of 1/f noise. Psychological Review, 108, 33–56.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gottlob, L.R. (2004). Location cuing and response time distributions in visual attention. Perception and Psychophysics, 66, 1293–1302.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Heathcote, A., Brown, S., Mewhort, D.J.K. (2000). The power law repealed: the case for an exponential law of practice. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 7, 185–207.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Heathcote, A., Popiel, S.J., Mewhort, D.J. (1991). Analysis of response time distributions: an example using the stroop task. Psychological Bulletin, 109, 340–347.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Heiervang, E., Hugdahl, K. (2003). Impaired visual attention in children with dyslexia. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 36, 68–73.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hohle, R.H. (1965). Inferred components of reaction time as a function of foreperiod duration. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 69, 382–386.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Holden, J.G., Van Orden, G.C., Turvey, M.T. (2009). Dispersion of response times reveals cognitive dynamics. Psychological Review, 116, 318–342.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Jones, M., Love, B.C., Maddox, W.T. (2006). Recency effects as a window to generalization: separating decisional and perceptual sequential effects in category learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 32, 316–332.Google ScholarPubMed
Kello, C.T., Anderson, G.G., Holden, J.G., Van Orden, G.C. (2008). The pervasiveness of 1/f scaling in speech reflects the metastable basis of cognition. Cognitive Science: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 32, 1217–1231.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kiefer, A.W., Riley, M.A., Shockley, K., Villard, S., Van Orden, G.C. (2009). Walking changes the dynamics of cognitive estimates of time intervals. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 35, 1532–1541.Google ScholarPubMed
Laming, D. (1968). Information theory of choice-response times, London: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Luce, R.D. (1986). Response times: their role in inferring elementary mental organization, New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Meeter, M., Olivers, C.N.L. (2006). Intertrial priming stemming from ambiguity: a new account of priming in visual search. Visual Cognition, 13, 202–222.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Müller, P., Vidakovic, B. (1999). Bayesian inference in wavelet-based models, New York: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Müller, P., Vidakovic, B. (1999). MCMC methods in wavelet shrinkage. In Müller, P., Vidakovic, B. (Eds.), Bayesian inference in wavelet-based models (pp. 187–202). New York: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Myung, I.J., Kim, C., Pitt, M.A. (2000). Toward an explanation of the power law artifact: insights from response surface analysis. Memory and Cognition, 28, 832–840.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Newell, A., Rosenblum, P. (1981). Mechanisms of skill acquisition and the law of practice. In Anderson, J.R. (Eds.), Cognitive skills and their acquisition (pp. 1–55). Hillsdale: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Niemi, P., Näätänen, R. (1981). Foreperiod and simple reaction-time. Psychological Bulletin, 89, 133–162.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Peña, D., Tiao, G.C., Tsay, R.S. (2001). A course in time series analysis, New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
Penner-Wilger, M., Leth-Steensen, C., LeFevre, J.-A. (2002). Decomposing the problem-size effect: a comparison of response time distributions across cultures. Memory and Cognition, 30, 1160–1167.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Percival, D., Walden, A. (2000). Wavelet methods for time series analysis, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Peruggia, M. (2008). Bayesian model diagnostics based on artificial autoregressive errors. Bayesian Analysis, 2, 817–842.Google Scholar
Peruggia, P., Van Zandt, T., Chen, M. (2002). Was it a car or a cat I saw? An analysis of response times for word recognition. Case studies in Bayesian statistics (pp. 319–334). New York: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Plummer, M. (2009). JAGS Version 1.0.3 manual. http://www-ice.iarc.fr/~martyn/software/jags/jags_user_manual.pdf.Google Scholar
Pressing, J., Jolley-Rogers, G. (1997). Spectral properties of human cognition and skill. Biological Cybernetics, 76, 339–347.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Querne, L., Berquin, P. (2009). Distinct response time distributions in attention deficit hyperactivity disorder subtypes. Journal of Attention Disorders, 13, 66–77.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rabbitt, P.M.A. (1966). Errors and error-correction in choice-response tasks. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 71, 264–272.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ratcliff, R. (1978). A theory of memory retrieval. Psychological Review, 85, 59–108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ratcliff, R. (1993). Methods for dealing with reaction time outliers. Psychological Bulletin, 114, 510–532.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ratcliff, R., Smith, P.L. (2004). A comparison of sequential sampling models for two-choice reaction time. Psychological Review, 111, 333–367.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rosenblatt, M. (1952). Remarks on a multivariate transformation. Annals of Mathematical Statistics, 23, 470–472.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rotello, C.M., Zeng, M. (2008). Analysis of RT distributions in the remember-know paradigm. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 15, 825–832.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rouder, J., Sun, D., Speckman, P., Lu, J., Zhou, D. (2003). A hierarchical Bayesian statistical framework for response time distributions. Psychometrika, 68, 589–606.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rouder, J.N., Lu, J., Speckman, P., Sun, D., Jiang, Y. (2005). A hierarchical model for estimating response time distributions. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 12, 195–223.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Shakow, D. (1977). Segmental set: the adaptive process in schizophrenia. American Psychologist, 32, 129–139.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Steinhauser, M., Hübner, R. (2009). Distinguishing response conflict and task conflict in the stroop task: evidence from ex-Gaussian distribution analysis. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 35, 1398–1412.Google ScholarPubMed
Stevens, C.J., Brennan, D., Petocz, A., Howell, C. (2009). Designing informative warning signals: effects of indicator type, modality, and task demand on recognition speed and accuracy. Advances in Cognitive Psychology, 5, 42–48.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Stewart, N., Brown, G.D.A., Chater, N. (2005). Absolute identification by relative judgment. Psychological Review, 112, 881–911.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sullivan, J.M., Tsimhoni, O., Bogard, S. (2008). Warning reliability and driver performance in naturalistic driving. Human Factors, 50, 845–852.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Thornton, T.L., Gilden, D.L. (2005). Provenance of correlations in psychological data. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 12, 409–441.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Treisman, M., Williams, T.C. (1984). A theory of criterion setting with an application to sequential dependencies. Psychological Review, 91, 68–111.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ulrich, R., Miller, J. (1994). Effects of truncation on reaction time analysis. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 123, 34–80.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
van der Linden, W.J. (2007). A hierarchical framework for modeling speed and accuracy on test items. Psychometrika, 72, 287–308.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Van Orden, G.C., Holden, J.G., Turvey, M.T. (2003). Self-organization of cognitive performance. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 132, 331–350.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Van Selst, M., Jolicoeur, P. (1994). A solution to the effect of sample size on outlier elimination. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 47, 631–650.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vandekerckhove, J., Tuerlinckx, F. (2007). Fitting the Ratcliff diffusion model to experimental data. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 14, 1011–1026.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Vidakovic, B. (1998). Statistical modeling by wavelets, New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
Wagenmakers, E.-J., Farrell, S., Ratcliff, R. (2004). Estimation and interpretation of 1/f noise in human cognition. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 11, 579–615.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed