One Standard for All: Uniform Scale for Comparing Individuals and Groups in Hierarchical Bayesian Evidence Accumulation Modeling

In recent years, a growing body of research uses Evidence Accumulation Models (EAMs) to study individual differences and group effects. This endeavor is challenging because fitting EAMs requires constraining one of the EAM parameters to be equal for all participants, which makes a strong and possibly unlikely assumption. Moreover, if this assumption is violated, differences or lack thereof may be wrongly found. To overcome this limitation, in this study, we introduce a new method that was originally suggested by van Maanen & Miletić (2021), which employs Bayesian hierarchical estimation. In this new method, we set the scale at the population level, thereby allowing for individual and group differences, which is realized by <i>de facto</i> fixing a population-level hyper-parameter through its priors. As proof of concept, we ran two successful parameter recovery studies using the Linear Ballistic Accumulation model. The results suggest that the new method can be reliably used to study individual and group differences using EAMs. We further show a case in which the new method reveals the true group differences whereas the classic method wrongly detects differences that are truly absent.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Cognition
Published
2024-08-16
DOI
https://doi.org/10.5334/joc.394
Citations
1
Primary Topic
Mental Health Research Topics
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.51
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

One Standard for All: Uniform Scale for Comparing Individuals and Groups in Hierarchical Bayesian Evidence Accumulation Modeling

Nachshon Meiran, Rotem Berkovich
1 citations
Journal of Cognition
Mental Health Research Topics
0.51
article

One Standard for All: Uniform Scale for Comparing Individuals and Groups in Hierarchical Bayesian Evidence Accumulation Modeling

Nachshon Meiran, Rotem Berkovich
article en
1 citations

Abstract

In recent years, a growing body of research uses Evidence Accumulation Models (EAMs) to study individual differences and group effects. This endeavor is challenging because fitting EAMs requires constraining one of the EAM parameters to be equal for all participants, which makes a strong and possibly unlikely assumption. Moreover, if this assumption is violated, differences or lack thereof may be wrongly found. To overcome this limitation, in this study, we introduce a new method that was originally suggested by van Maanen & Miletić (2021), which employs Bayesian hierarchical estimation. In this new method, we set the scale at the population level, thereby allowing for individual and group differences, which is realized by <i>de facto</i> fixing a population-level hyper-parameter through its priors. As proof of concept, we ran two successful parameter recovery studies using the Linear Ballistic Accumulation model. The results suggest that the new method can be reliably used to study individual and group differences using EAMs. We further show a case in which the new method reveals the true group differences whereas the classic method wrongly detects differences that are truly absent.

Journal of CognitionVol. 7(1)
Ben-Gurion University of the Negev (IL)
Openalex Percentile: Top 31%
Mental Health Research Topics
0.51
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

One Standard for All: Uniform Scale for Comparing Individuals and Groups in Hierarchical Bayesian Evidence Accumulation Modeling — Nachshon Meiran, Rotem Berkovich · Journal of Cognition (2024) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS