Advertisement

An Introduction to the Diffusion Model of Decision Making

  • Philip L. Smith
  • Roger Ratcliff
Chapter

Abstract

The diffusion model assumes that two-choice decisions are made by accumulating successive samples of noisy evidence to a response criterion. The model has a pair of criteria that represent the amounts of evidence needed to make each response. The time taken to reach criterion determines the decision time and the criterion that is reached first determines the response. The model predicts choice probabilities and the distributions of response times for correct responses and errors as a function of experimental conditions such as stimulus discriminability, speed-accuracy instructions, and manipulations of relative stimulus frequency, which affect response bias. This chapter describes the main features of the model, including mathematical methods for obtaining response time predictions, methods for fitting it to experimental data, including alternative fitting criteria, and ways to represent the fit to multiple experimental conditions graphically in a compact way. The chapter concludes with a discussion of recent work in psychology that links evidence accumulation to processes of perception, attention, and memory, and in neuroscience, to neural firing rates in the oculomotor control system in monkeys performing saccade-to-target decision tasks.

Keywords

Diffusion process Random walk Decision-making Response time Choice probability 

References

  1. 1.
    Link, SW (1992) The wave theory of difference and similarity. Erlbaum, Englewood CliffsGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Luce RD (1986) Response times. Oxford University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Townsend JT, Ashby FG (1983) Stochastic modeling of elementary psychological processes. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Vickers D (1979) Decision processes in visual perception. Academic, LondonGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Ratcliff R (1978) A theory of memory retrieval. Psychol Rev 85:59–108CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Ratcliff R, Smith PL (2004) A comparison of sequential-sampling models for two choice reaction time. Psychol Rev 111:333–367CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Cox DR, Miller HD (1965) The theory of stochastic processes. Chapman & Hall, London.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Wald A (1947) Sequential analysis. Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Laming DRJ (1968) Information theory of choice reaction time. Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Link SW, Heath RA (1975) A sequential theory of psychological discrimination. Psychometrika 40:77–105CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Gardiner CW (2004) Handbook of stochastic methods, 3rd edn. Springer, BerlinGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Wiener N (1923) Differential space. J Math Phys 2:131–174Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Feller W (1967) An introduction to probability theory and its applications, 3rd edn. Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Busemeyer J, Townsend JT (1992) Fundamental derivations from decision field theory. Math Soc Sci 23:255–282CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Busemeyer J, Townsend JT (1993) Decision field theory: a dynamic-cognitive approach to decision making in an uncertain environment. Psychol Rev 100:432–459CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Smith PL (2000) Stochastic dynamic models of response time and accuracy: a foundational primer. J Math Psychol 44:408–463CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Wagenmakers E-J, Brown S (2007) On the linear relationship between the mean and standard deviation of a response time distribution. Psychol Rev 114:830–841CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Ashby FG (1983) A biased random walk model for two choice reaction time. J Math Psychol 27:277–297CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Ratcliff R, Van Zandt T, McKoon G (1999) Connectionist and diffusion models of reaction time. Psychol Rev 106:261–300CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Leite FP, Ratcliff R (2011) What cognitive processes drive response biases? A diffusion model analysis. Judgm Decis Mak 6:651–687Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Buonocore A, Giorno V, Nobile AG, Ricciardi L (1990) On the two-boundary first-crossing-time problem for diffusion processes. J Appl Probab 27:102–114CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Tuerlinckx F, Maris E, Ratcliff R, De Boeck P (2001) A comparison of four methods for simulating the diffusion process. Behav Res Methods Instrum Comput 33:443–456CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Diederich A, Busemeyer JR (2003) Simple matrix methods for analyzing diffusion models of choice probability, choice response time, and simple response time. J Math Psychol 47:304–322CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Bhattacharya RB, Waymire EC (1990) Stochastic processes with applications. Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Vandekerckhove J, Tuerlinckx F (2008) Diffusion model analysis with MATLAB: a DMAT primer. Behav Res Methods 40:61–72CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Wiecki TV, Sofer I, Frank MJ (2013) HDDM: Hierarchical Bayesian estimation of the drift-diffusion model in Python. Front Neuroinformatics 7:1–10Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Voss A, Voss J (2008) A fast numerical algorithm for the estimation of diffusion model parameters. J Math Psychol 52:1–9CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Ratcliff R, Smith PL (2010) Perceptual discrimination in static and dynamic noise: the temporal relationship between perceptual encoding and decision making. J Exp Psychol Gen 139:70–94CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Ratcliff R (2002) 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. Psychon Bull Rev 9:278–291CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Nelder JA, Mead R (1965) A simplex method for function minimization. Comput J 7:308–313CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Ratcliff R, Tuerlinckx F (2002) Estimating parameters of the diffusion model: approaches to dealing with contaminant reaction times and parameter variability. Psychon Bull Rev 9:438–481CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Ratcliff R, Thapar A, McKoon G (2003) A diffusion model analysis of the effects of aging on brightness discrimination. Percept Psychophys 65:523–535CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Ratcliff R, Thapar A, McKoon G (2004) A diffusion model analysis of the effects of aging on recognition memory. J Mem Lang 50:408–424CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Smith PL, Ratcliff R (2009) An integrated theory of attention and decision making in visual signal detection. Psychol Rev 116:283–317CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Ratcliff R, Rouder J (2000) A diffusion model account of masking in two-choice letter identification. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 26:127–140CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Smith PL, Ratcliff R, Wolfgang BJ (2004) Attention orienting and the time course of perceptual decisions: response time distributions with masked and unmasked displays. Vis Res 44:1297–1320CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Smith PL, Ratcliff R, Sewell DK (2014) Modeling perceptual discrimination in dynamic noise: time-changed diffusion and release from inhibition. J Math Psychol 59:95–113Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Smith PL, Ratcliff R (2004) Psychology and neurobiology of simple decisions. Trends Neurosci 27:161–168CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Ratcliff R, Cherian A, Segraves M (2003) A comparison of macaque behavior and superior colliculus neuronal activity to predictions from models of simple two-choice decisions. J Neurophysiol 90:1392–1407CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Ratcliff R, Hasegawa Y, Hasegawa R, Smith PL, Segraves M (2007) A dual diffusion model for single cell recording data from the superior colliculus in a brightness discrimination task. J Neurophysiol 97:1756–1797CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Smith PL (2010) From Poisson shot noise to the integrated Ornstein-Uhlenbeck process: Neurally-principled models of diffusive evidence accumulation in decision-making and response time. J Math Psychol 54:266–283CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Smith PL, McKenzie CRL (2011) Diffusive information accumulation by minimal recurrent neural models of decision-making. Neural Comput 23:2000–2031CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Usher M, McClelland JL (2001) The time course of perceptual choice: the leaky, competing accumulator model. Psychol Rev 108:550–592CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Philip L. Smith
    • 1
  • Roger Ratcliff
    • 2
  1. 1.Melbourne School of Psychological SciencesThe University of MelbourneMelbourneAustralia
  2. 2.Department of PsychologyThe Ohio State UniversityColumbusUSA

Personalised recommendations