Psychonomic Bulletin & Review

, Volume 9, Issue 2, pp 278–291 | Cite as

A diffusion model account of response time and accuracy in a brightness discrimination task: Fitting real data and failing to fit fake but plausible data

Brief Reports


A brightness discrimination experiment was performed to examine how subjects decide whether a patch of pixels is “bright” or “dark,” and stimulus duration, brightness, and speed versus accuracy instructions were manipulated. The diffusion model (Ratcliff, 1978) was fit to the data, and it accounted for all the dependent variables: mean correct and error response times, the shapes of response time distributions for correct and error responses, and accuracy values. Speed-accuracy manipulations affected only boundary separation (response criteria settings) in the model. Drift rate (the rate of accumulation of evidence) in the diffusion model, which represents stimulus quality, increased as a function of stimulus duration and stimulus brightness but asymptoted as stimulus duration increased from 100 to 150 msec. To address the argument that the diffusion model can fit any pattern of data, simulated patterns of plausible data are presented that the model cannot fit.


  1. Bloch, A. M. (1885). Expériences sur la vision.Comptes Rendus de la Societé de Biologie,37, 493–495.Google Scholar
  2. Busey, T. A., &Loftus, G. R. (1994). Sensory and cognitive components of visual information acquisition.Psychological Review,101, 446–469.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Carterette, E. C., Friedman, M. P., &Cosmides, R. (1965). Reactiontime distributions in the detection of weak signals in noise.Journal of the Acoustical Society of America,38, 531–542.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Espinoza-Varas, B., &Watson, C. S. (1994). Effects of decision criterion on response latencies of binary decisions.Perception & Psychophysics,55, 190–203.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Hacker, M. J. (1980). Speed and accuracy of recency judgments for events in short-term memory.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,6, 651–675.Google Scholar
  6. Kellogg, W. N. (1931). The time of judgement in psychometric measures.American Journal of Psychology,43, 65–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. LaBerge, D. A. (1962). A recruitment theory of simple behavior.Psychometrika,27, 375–396.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Laming, D. R. J. (1968).Information theory of choice reaction time. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  9. Link, S. W. (1992).The wave theory of difference and similarity. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  10. Luce, R. D. (1986).Response times. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  11. Muter, P. A. (1979). Response latencies in discriminations of recency.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,5, 160–169.Google Scholar
  12. Nelder, J. A., &Mead, R. (1965). A simplex method for function minimization.Computer Journal,7, 308–313.Google Scholar
  13. Ratcliff, R. (1978). A theory of memory retrieval.Psychological Review,85, 59–108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Ratcliff, R. (1979). Group reaction time distributions and an analysis of distribution statistics.Psychological Bulletin,86, 446–461.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Ratcliff, R. (1981). A theory of order relations in perceptual matching.Psychological Review,88, 552–572.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Ratcliff, R. (1985). Theoretical interpretations of speed and accuracy of positive and negative responses.Psychological Review,92, 212–225.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Ratcliff, R. (1988). Continuous versus discrete information processing: Modeling the accumulation of partial information.Psychological Review,95, 238–255.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Ratcliff, R., Gomez, P., & McKoon, G. (2002).Diffusion model account of lexical decision. Manuscript submitted for publication.Google Scholar
  19. Ratcliff, R., &Rouder, J. N. (1998). Modeling response times for two-choice decisions.Psychological Science,9, 347–356.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Ratcliff, R., &Rouder, J. N. (2000). A diffusion model account of masking in letter identification.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,26, 127–140.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Ratcliff, R., Thapar, A., &McKoon, G. (2001). The effects of aging on reaction time in a signal detection task.Psychology & Aging,16, 323–341.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Ratcliff, R., & Tuerlinckx, F. (in press). Estimating parameters of the diffusion model: Approaches to dealing with contaminant reaction times and parameter.Psychonomic Bulletin & Review.Google Scholar
  23. Ratcliff, R., Van Zandt, T., &McKoon, G. (1999). Connectionist and diffusion models of reaction time variability.Psychological Review,106, 261–300.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Rayner, K., Inhoff, A. W., Morrison, R. E., Slowiaczek, M. L., &Bertera, J. H. (1981). Masking of foveal and parafoveal vision dur ing eye fixations in reading.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,7, 167–179.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Roberts, S., &Pashler, H. (2000). How persuasive is a good fit? A comment on theory testing.Psychological Review,107, 358–367.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Sekuler, R. W. (1965). Signal detection, choice response times, and visual backward masking.Canadian Journal of Psychology,19, 118–132.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Slamecka, N. J. (1991). The analysis of recognition. In W. E. Hockley & S. Lewandowsky (Eds.),Relating theory and data: Essays on human memory in honor of Bennet B. Murdock (pp. 297–306). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  28. Smith, P. L. (1995). Psychophysically principled models of visual simple reaction time.Psychological Review,102, 567–591.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Smith, P. L. (1998). Bloch’s law predictions from diffusion process models of detection.Australian Journal of Psychology,50, 139–147.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Smith, P. L., &Vickers, D. (1988). The accumulator model of two-choice discrimination.Journal of Mathematical Psychology,32, 135–168.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Stone, M. (1960). Models for choice reaction time.Psychometrika,25, 251–260.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Swensson, R. G. (1972). The elusive tradeoff: Speed vs. accuracy in visual discrimination tasks.Perception & Psychophysics,12, 16–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Watson, A. B. (1986). Temporal sensitivity. In K. R. Boff, L. Kaufman, & J. P. Thomas (Eds.),Handbook of perception and human performance (pp. 6-1 to 6-43. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Psychonomic Society, Inc. 2002

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of PsychologyNorthwestern UniversityEvanston

Personalised recommendations