An Expert Guide to Planning Experimental Tasks For Evidence-Accumulation Modeling

Abstract

Evidence-accumulation models (EAMs) are powerful tools for making sense of human and animal decision-making behavior. EAMs have generated significant theoretical advances in psychology, behavioral economics, and cognitive neuroscience and are increasingly used as a measurement tool in clinical research and other applied settings. Obtaining valid and reliable inferences from EAMs depends on knowing how to establish a close match between model assumptions and features of the task/data to which the model is applied. However, this knowledge is rarely articulated in the EAM literature, leaving beginners to rely on the private advice of mentors and colleagues and inefficient trial-and-error learning. In this article, we provide practical guidance for designing tasks appropriate for EAMs, relating experimental manipulations to EAM parameters, planning appropriate sample sizes, and preparing data and conducting an EAM analysis. Our advice is based on prior methodological studies and the our substantial collective experience with EAMs. By encouraging good task-design practices and warning of potential pitfalls, we hope to improve the quality and trustworthiness of future EAM research and applications.

Publication DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/25152459251336127
Divisions: College of Health & Life Sciences > School of Psychology
College of Health & Life Sciences
College of Health & Life Sciences > Aston Institute of Health & Neurodevelopment (AIHN)
Funding Information: R. J. Boag, R. J. Innes, N. Stevenson, and B. U. Forstmann were supported by a European Research Council Consolidator Grant (864750) and NWO Vici (016.Vici.185.052) awarded to B. U. Forstmann. N. J. Evans was supported by an Australian Research Council Di
Additional Information: Copyright © The Author(s) 2025. This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) which permits any use, reproduction and distribution of the work without further permission provided the original work is attributed as specified on the SAGE and Open Access pages (https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/open-access-at-sage).
Uncontrolled Keywords: evidence-accumulation models,experimental design,decision-making,response time,model-based cognitive neuroscience
Publication ISSN: 2515-2467
Last Modified: 29 May 2025 07:12
Date Deposited: 28 May 2025 11:57
Full Text Link:
Related URLs: https://journal ... 152459251336127 (Publisher URL)
PURE Output Type: Article
Published Date: 2025-05-27
Published Online Date: 2025-05-27
Accepted Date: 2025-04-03
Authors: Boag, Russell J.
Innes, Reilly J.
Stevenson, Niek
Bahg, Giwon
Busemeyer, Jerome R.
Cox, Gregory E.
Donkin, Chris
Frank, Michael J.
Hawkins, Guy E.
Heathcote, Andrew
Hedge, Craig (ORCID Profile 0000-0001-6145-3319)
Lerche, Veronika
Lilburn, Simon D.
Logan, Gordon D.
Matzke, Dora
Miletić, Steven
Osth, Adam F.
Palmeri, Thomas J.
Sederberg, Per B.
Singmann, Henrik
Smith, Philip L.
Stafford, Tom
Steyvers, Mark
Strickland, Luke
Trueblood, Jennifer S.
Tsetsos, Konstantinos
Turner, Brandon M.
Usher, Marius
van Maanen, Leendert
van Ravenzwaaij, Don
Vandekerckhove, Joachim
Voss, Andreas
Weichart, Emily R.
Weindel, Gabriel
White, Corey N.
Evans, Nathan J.
Brown, Scott D.
Forstmann, Birte U.

Download

[img]

Version: Published Version

License: Creative Commons Attribution


Export / Share Citation


Statistics

Additional statistics for this record