↓ Skip to main content

Fast and slow errors: Logistic regression to identify patterns in accuracy–response time relationships

Overview of attention for article published in Behavior Research Methods, September 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (72nd percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
12 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
10 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
43 Mendeley
Title
Fast and slow errors: Logistic regression to identify patterns in accuracy–response time relationships
Published in
Behavior Research Methods, September 2018
DOI 10.3758/s13428-018-1110-z
Pubmed ID
Authors

Leendert van Maanen, Dimitris Katsimpokis, A. Dilene van Campen

Abstract

Understanding error and response time patterns is essential for making inferences in several domains of cognitive psychology. Crucial insights on cognitive performance and typical behavioral patterns are disclosed by using distributional analyses such as conditional accuracy functions (CAFs) instead of mean statistics. Several common behavioral error patterns revealed by CAFs are frequently described in the literature: response capture (associated with relatively fast errors), time pressure or urgency paradigms (slow errors), or cue-induced speed-accuracy trade-off (evenly distributed errors). Unfortunately, the standard way of computing CAFs is problematic, because accuracy is averaged in RT bins. Here we present a novel way of analyzing accuracy-RT relationships on the basis of nonlinear logistic regression, to handle these problematic aspects of RT binning. First we evaluate the parametric robustness of the logistic regression CAF through parameter recovery. Second, we apply the function to three existing data sets showing that specific parametric changes in the logistic regression CAF can consistently describe common behavioral patterns (such as response capture, time pressure, and speed-accuracy trade-off). Finally, we discuss potential modifications for future research.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 12 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 43 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 43 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 16 37%
Researcher 8 19%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 14%
Student > Bachelor 2 5%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 5%
Other 4 9%
Unknown 5 12%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 19 44%
Neuroscience 7 16%
Mathematics 2 5%
Engineering 2 5%
Linguistics 1 2%
Other 4 9%
Unknown 8 19%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 28 January 2020.
All research outputs
#5,341,501
of 25,385,509 outputs
Outputs from Behavior Research Methods
#727
of 2,526 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#96,070
of 345,354 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Behavior Research Methods
#33
of 53 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,385,509 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 78th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,526 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.2. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 71% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 345,354 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 53 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.