Abstract
Theoretical models for choice reaction time and discrimination under time pressure must account for Ss’ ability to trade accuracy for increased speed. The fast guess model views these tradeoffs as different mixtures of “all-or-none” strategies, while incremental models assume they reflect different degrees of thoroughness in processing the stimulus. Three experiments sought tradeoffs for difficult visual discriminations, using explicit payoffs to control and manipulate pressures for speed and accuracy. Although guessing was pervasive, the simple fast guess model could be rejected; Experiments II and III obtained tradeoffs even when fast guesses were purged from Ss’ data. Tradeoff functions fit by several formulations revealed: (1) slower rates of increase in accuracy for more similar stimuli, and (2) substantial “dead times” (80–100 msec slower than detection times) before discrimination responses could exceed chance accuracy. Errors were sometimes faster and sometimes slower than correct responses (depending on S’s speed-accuracy trade); the latter effect may reflect a ceiling on S’s achievable accuracy. A final discussion examines implications of the results for models of discrimination under time pressure; it suggests modifications in present models, focusing on the random walk model, and describes an alternative “deadline” model.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
References
AUDLEY, R. J., & MERCER, A. The relation between decision time and relative response frequency in a blue-green discrimination. British Journal of Mathematical & Statistical Psychology, 1968, 21, 183–192.
AUDLEY, R. J., & PIKE, A. R. Some alternative stochastic models of choice. British Journal of Mathematical & Statistical Psychology, 1965, 18, 207–225.
BIRDSALL, T. G., & ROBERTS, R. A. Theory of signal detectability: Deferred decision theory. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 1965, 37, 1064–1074.
BIRREN, J. E., & BOTWINICK, J. Speed of response as a function of perceptual difficulty and age. Journal of Gerontology, 1955, 10, 433–436.
BOTWINICK, J., BRINLEY, J. F., & ROBBIN, J. S. The interaction effects of perceptual difficulty and stimulus exposure time on age differences in speed and accuracy of response. Gerontologia, 1958, 2, 1–10.
EDWARDS, W. Costs and payoffs are instructions. Psychological Review, 1961, 68, 275–284.
EDWARDS, W. Optimal strategies for seeking information: Models for statistics, choice reaction times, and human information processing. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 1965, 2, 312–329.
EGETH, H., & SMITH, E. E. On the nature of errors in a choice reaction task. Psychonomic Science, 1967, 8, 345–346.
FESTINGER, L. Studies in decision: I. Decision time, relative frequency of judgment and subjective confidence as related to physical stimulus difference. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1943a, 32, 291–306.
FESTINGER, L. Studies in decision: II. An empirical test of a quantitative theory of decision. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1943b, 32, 411–423.
FITTS, P. M. Cognitive aspects of information processing: III. Set for speed versus accuracy. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1966, 77, 849–857.
GREEN, D. M., & SWETS, J. A.Signal detection theory and psychophysics. New York: Wiley, 1966.
HALE, D. J. Speed-error tradeoff in a three-choice serial reaction task. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1969, 81, 428–435.
HECKER, M. H., STEVENS, K. N., & WILLIAMS, C. E. Measurements of reaction time in intelligibility tests. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 1966, 39, 1188–1189.
HENMON, V. A. C. The time of perception as a measure of differences in sensation. Archives of Philosophical Psychology & Scientific Method, 1906, No.8.
HENMON, V. A. C. The relation of time of a judgement to its accuracy. Psychological Review, 1911, 18, 186–201.
HICK, W. E. On the rate of gain of information. Quarterly Journal of Experimental psychology, 1952, 4, 11–26.
JOHNSON, D. M. Confidence and speed in the two category judgment. Archives of psychology, 1939, No. 241.
KAHNEMAN, D., & NORMAN, J. The time-intensity relation in visual perception as a function of the observer’s task. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1964, 68, 215–220.
KAHNEMAN, D., NORMAN, J., & KUBOVY, M. Critical duration for the resolution of form: Centrally or peripherally determined? Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1967, 73, 323–327.
KELLOGG, W. N. The time of judgement in psy chometric me asures. American Journal of Psychology, 1931, 43, 65–86.
LaBERGE, D. A recruitment theory of simple behavior. Psychometrika, 1962, 27, 375–396.
LAMING, D. R. J.Information theory of choice-reaction times. New York: Academic Press. 1968.
LEMMON, V. W. The relation of reaction time to measures of intelligence, memory, and learning. Archives of Psychology, 1927, No. 94.
MORGAN, B. B., JR., & ALLUISI, E. A. Effects of discriminability and irrelevant information on absolute judgments. Perception & Psychophysics, 1967, 2, 54–58.
NICKERSON, R. S. ‘Same’-“different’ response times: A model and a preliminary test. In W. G. Koster (Ed.),Attention and performance II: Acta Psvchologica, 1969, 30, 257–275.
OLLMAN, R. T. Fast guesses in choice reaction time. Psychonomic Science, 1966, 6, 155–156.
OLLMAN, R. T., & BILLINGTON, M. J. The deadline model for simple reaction times. Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 1972. in press.
PACHELLA, R. C., & FISHER, D. F. Effect of stimulus degradation and similarity on the trade-off between speed and accuracy in absolute judgements. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1969, 81, 7–9.
PEW, R. W. The speed-accuracy operating characteristic. In W. G. Koster (Ed.),Attention and performance II. Acta Psvcholoatca, 1969, 30, 16–26.
PICKETT, R. M. The perception of a visual texture. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1964, 68, 13–20.
PICKETT, R. M. Response latency in a pattern perception situation. In A. F. Sanders (Ed.),Attention and performance. Acta Psvehotogica, 1967, 27, 160–169.
PIKE, A. R. Latency and relative frequency of response in psychophysical discriminations. British Journal of Mathematical & Statistical Psychology, 1968, 21, 161–182.
RABBITT, P. M. A. Errors and error correction in choice-response tasks. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1966, 71, 264–272.
RAPOPORT, A., & BURKHEIMER, G. J. Models for deferred decision making. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 1971, 8, 508–538,
SCHOUTEN, J. F., & BEKKER, J. A. M. Reaction time and accuracy. In A. F. Sanders (Ed.), Attention and performance. Acta Psvchologtca, 1967, 27, 143–153.
SMITH, E. E. Choice reaction time: An analysis of the major theoretical positions. Psychological Bulletin, 1968, 69, 77–110.
STONE, M. Models for choice-reaction times. Psychometrika, 1960, 25, 251–260.
SWANSON, J. M., & BRIGGS, G. E. Information processing as a function of speed versus accuracy. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1969, 81, 223–229.
SWENSSON, R. G., & EDWARDS, W. Response strategies in a two-choice reaction task with a continuous cost for time. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1971, 88, 67–81.
SWETS, J. A., & BIRDSALL, T. G. Deferred decision in human signal detection: A preliminary experiment. Perception & Psychophysics, 1967, 2, 15–28.
TAYLOR, M. M., LINDSAY. P. H., & FORBES, S. M. Quantification of shared capacity processing in auditory and visual discrimination. In A. F. Sanders (Ed.),Attention and performance. Acta Psvchotoatca, 1967, 27, 223–229.
THURMOND, J. B., & ALLUISI, E. A. Choice time as a function of stimulus dissimilarity and discriminability. Canadian Journal of Psychology, 1963, 17, 326–337.
VICKERS, D. Evidence for an accumulator model of psychophysical discrimination. Ergonomics, 1970, 13, 37–58.
WEAVER, H. R. A studY of discriminative serial action: Manual response to color. Journal of Experimental Psychology. 1942, 31, 177–201.
WELFORD, A. T. Fundamentals of skill. London: Methuen, 1968.
YELLOTT, J. I., JR. Correction for guessing in choice reaction time. Psychonomic Science, 1967, 8, 321–322.
YELLOTT, J. I., JR. Correction for guessing and the speed-accuracy tradeoff in choice reaction time. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 1971, 8, 159–199.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Additional information
This research was supported in part by the Advanced Research Projects Agency, Department of Defense, monitored by the Air Force Office of Scientific Research, under Contract No. AF(638)-1235 with the Human Performance Center. Department of Psychology, University of Michigan, and in part by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration under Grant NGR 23-005-171 to the Engineering Psychology Laboratory, University of Michigan, monitored by the Ames Research Center, NASA. It also formed part of a dissertation submitted by the author in partial fulfillment of the PhD degree (psychology) in the University of Michigan, 1969.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Swensson, R.G. The elusive tradeoff: Speed vs accuracy in visual discrimination tasks. Perception & Psychophysics 12, 16–32 (1972). https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03212837
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03212837