Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
A cognitive model of response omissions in distraction paradigms.
Damaso, Karlye A M; Castro, Spencer C; Todd, Juanita; Strayer, David L; Provost, Alexander; Matzke, Dora; Heathcote, Andrew.
Afiliación
  • Damaso KAM; School of Psychology, University of Newcastle, University Drive, Callaghan, Newcastle, NSW, 2308, Australia.
  • Castro SC; Department of Psychology, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT, USA.
  • Todd J; School of Psychology, University of Newcastle, University Drive, Callaghan, Newcastle, NSW, 2308, Australia.
  • Strayer DL; Department of Psychology, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT, USA.
  • Provost A; School of Psychology, University of Newcastle, University Drive, Callaghan, Newcastle, NSW, 2308, Australia.
  • Matzke D; Department of Psychology, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands.
  • Heathcote A; School of Psychology, University of Newcastle, University Drive, Callaghan, Newcastle, NSW, 2308, Australia. andrew.heathcote@newcastle.edu.au.
Mem Cognit ; 50(5): 962-978, 2022 07.
Article en En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34950999
The effects of distraction on responses manifest in three ways: prolonged reaction times, and increased error and response omission rates. However, the latter effect is often ignored or assumed to be due to a separate cognitive process. We investigated omissions occurring in two paradigms that manipulated distraction. One required simple stimulus detection of younger participants, the second required choice responses and was completed by both younger and older participants. We fit data from these paradigms with a model that identifies three causes of omissions: two are related to the process of accumulating the evidence on which a response is based: intrinsic omissions (due to between-trial variation in accumulation rates making it impossible to ever reach the evidence threshold) and design omissions (due to response windows that cause slow responses not to be recorded; a third, contaminant omissions, allows for a cause unrelated to the response process. In both data sets systematic differences in omission rates across conditions were accounted for by task-related omissions. Intrinsic omissions played a lesser role than design omissions, even though the presence of design omissions was not evident in descriptive analyses of the data. The model provided an accurate account of all aspects of the detection data and the choice-response data, but slightly underestimated overall omissions in the choice paradigm, particularly in older participants, suggesting that further investigation of contaminant omission effects is needed.
Asunto(s)
Palabras clave
Texto completo
Añadir a Mi BVS
Imprimir
XML
PubMed Links
Buscar en Google

Texto completo: 1 Colección: 01-internacional Base de datos: MEDLINE Asunto principal: Cognición Límite: Aged / Humans Idioma: En Revista: Mem Cognit Año: 2022 Tipo del documento: Article País de afiliación: Australia Pais de publicación: Estados Unidos
Texto completo
Añadir a Mi BVS
Imprimir
XML
PubMed Links
Buscar en Google

Texto completo: 1 Colección: 01-internacional Base de datos: MEDLINE Asunto principal: Cognición Límite: Aged / Humans Idioma: En Revista: Mem Cognit Año: 2022 Tipo del documento: Article País de afiliación: Australia Pais de publicación: Estados Unidos