↓ Skip to main content

Assessing cognitive processes with diffusion model analyses: a tutorial based on fast-dm-30

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, March 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (52nd percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
6 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
179 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
207 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Assessing cognitive processes with diffusion model analyses: a tutorial based on fast-dm-30
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, March 2015
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00336
Pubmed ID
Authors

Andreas Voss, Jochen Voss, Veronika Lerche

Abstract

Diffusion models can be used to infer cognitive processes involved in fast binary decision tasks. The model assumes that information is accumulated continuously until one of two thresholds is hit. In the analysis, response time distributions from numerous trials of the decision task are used to estimate a set of parameters mapping distinct cognitive processes. In recent years, diffusion model analyses have become more and more popular in different fields of psychology. This increased popularity is based on the recent development of several software solutions for the parameter estimation. Although these programs make the application of the model relatively easy, there is a shortage of knowledge about different steps of a state-of-the-art diffusion model study. In this paper, we give a concise tutorial on diffusion modeling, and we present fast-dm-30, a thoroughly revised and extended version of the fast-dm software (Voss and Voss, 2007) for diffusion model data analysis. The most important improvement of the fast-dm version is the possibility to choose between different optimization criteria (i.e., Maximum Likelihood, Chi-Square, and Kolmogorov-Smirnov), which differ in applicability for different data sets.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 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 207 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Germany 3 1%
Netherlands 2 <1%
United States 2 <1%
Spain 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Unknown 198 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 49 24%
Researcher 29 14%
Student > Master 29 14%
Student > Doctoral Student 17 8%
Student > Bachelor 17 8%
Other 28 14%
Unknown 38 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 104 50%
Neuroscience 25 12%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 7 3%
Engineering 5 2%
Linguistics 4 2%
Other 13 6%
Unknown 49 24%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 05 November 2019.
All research outputs
#14,663,361
of 25,805,386 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#13,153
of 34,800 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#130,363
of 278,909 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#252
of 476 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,805,386 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 34,800 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 61% 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 278,909 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 52% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 476 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.