CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 139Visual perception and processing mechanismsDecision-Making and Behavioral EconomicsNeural and Behavioral Psychology Studies

Effects of alternating set for speed or accuracy on response time, accuracy and confidence in a unidimensional discrimination task

Vickers, Douglas, Packer, Jeanette·1982·Acta Psychologica
DOI 10.1016/0001-6918(82)90006-3
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/0001-6918(82)90006-3

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The model explains both the diminishing returns associated with prolonged viewing and the tradeoff between speed and accuracy in reaction time experiments.

    “It explains both the diminishing returns associated with prolonged viewing in our experiment (Fig. S3) (20) and the tradeoff between speed and accuracy in reaction time experiments (13, 39, 40).”

    From Representation of Confidence Associated with a Decision by Neurons in the Parietal Cortex (2009) · cites this paper as [40]

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 26 · Cited by 139

Authors
Vickers, D., & Packer, J.
Affiliations
The University of Adelaide (AU)
Venue
Acta Psychologica
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
1982-03
Volume
50
Issue
2
Pages
179-197
ISSN
0001-6918 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/0001-6918(82)90006-3
OpenAlex
W1970951996
Cited by
139
References
26
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 9 · 2020: 10 · 2019: 10 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 11 · 2016: 7 · 2015: 8 · 2014: 8 · 2013: 4 · 2012: 3
FWCI
1.34
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
www.elsevier.com/tdm/userlicense/1.0/ (tdm)
Locations
  • Acta Psychologica (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Visual perception and processing mechanisms
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › General Decision Sciences › Decision-Making and Behavioral Economics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
Keywords
confidence judgments, metacognition, speed-accuracy trade-off, reaction time (psychology), response accuracy, set size, accumulator model, parallel lines
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Discrimination Learning, Humans, Orientation, Reaction Time, Set, Psychology, Size Perception

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review