The DOI matches its Crossref record; 6 of the 6 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
The Attentional Drift-Diffusion Model Extends to Simple Purchasing Decisions
Open accessAbstract
How do we make simple purchasing decisions (e.g., whether or not to buy a product at a given price)? Previous work has shown that the attentional drift-diffusion model (aDDM) can provide accurate quantitative descriptions of the psychometric data for binary and trinary value-based choices, and of how the choice process is guided by visual attention. Here we extend the aDDM to the case of purchasing decisions, and test it using an eye-tracking experiment. We find that the model also provides a reasonably accurate quantitative description of the relationship between choice, reaction time, and visual fixations using parameters that are very similar to those that best fit the previous data. The only critical difference is that the choice biases induced by the fixations are about half as big in purchasing decisions as in binary choices. This suggests that a similar computational process is used to make binary choices, trinary choices, and simple purchasing decisions.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Working memory: Looking back and looking forward
Baddeley, A. (2003) · Nature Reviews Neuroscience · doi:10.1038/nrn1201 · Cited by 5,200
The Neural Basis of Decision Making
Gold, J. I., & Shadlen, M. N. (2007) · Annual Review of Neuroscience · doi:10.1146/annurev.neuro.29.051605.113038 · Cited by 3,764
The Diffusion Decision Model: Theory and Data for Two-Choice Decision Tasks
Ratcliff, R., & McKoon, G. (2008) · Neural Computation · doi:10.1162/neco.2008.12-06-420 · Cited by 3,059
A framework for studying the neurobiology of value-based decision making
Rangel, A., Camerer, C., & Montague, P. R. (2008) · Nature Reviews Neuroscience · doi:10.1038/nrn2357 · Cited by 2,184
Self-citationVisual fixations and the computation and comparison of value in simple choice
Krajbich, I., Armel, C., & Rangel, A. (2010) · Nature Neuroscience · doi:10.1038/nn.2635 · Cited by 1,408
Self-citationGaze bias both reflects and influences preference
Shimojo, S., Simion, C., Shimojo, E., & Scheier, C. (2003) · Nature Neuroscience · doi:10.1038/nn1150 · Cited by 924
Cited by
Diffusion decision model: Current issues and history
Ratcliff, R., Smith, P. L., Brown, S. D., & McKoon, G. (2016) · Trends in Cognitive Sciences · doi:10.1016/j.tics.2016.01.007 · Cited by 1,630
“This and other diffusion models have been used to account for, among other things, value-based decision, social choice, and purchasing decisions [150,152,153,157,207–210].”
MethodAttention and choice: A review on eye movements in decision making
Orquin, J. L., & Mueller Loose, S. (2013) · Acta Psychologica · doi:10.1016/j.actpsy.2013.06.003 · Cited by 940
The speed-accuracy tradeoff: history, physiology, methodology, and behavior
Heitz, R. P. (2014) · Frontiers in Neuroscience · doi:10.3389/fnins.2014.00150 · Cited by 938
Decision Making as a Window on Cognition
Shadlen, M. N., & Kiani, R. (2013) · Neuron · doi:10.1016/j.neuron.2013.10.047 · Cited by 658
Towards a neuroscience of active sampling and curiosity
Gottlieb, J., & Oudeyer, P.-Y. (2018) · Nature Reviews Neuroscience · doi:10.1038/s41583-018-0078-0 · Cited by 494
Metadata
- Authors
- Krajbich, I., Lu, D., Camerer, C., & Rangel, A.
- Venue
- Frontiers in Psychology
- Publisher
- Frontiers Media SA
- Published
- 2012
- Volume
- 3
- Pages
- 193-193
- ISSN
- 1664-1078 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2022557219
- Cited by
- 359
- References
- 6
- FWCI
- 11.09
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: The Attentional Drift-Diffusion Model Extends to Simple Purchasing Decisions. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.3389/fpsyg.2012.00193
- The paper
- Krajbich, I., Lu, D., Camerer, C., & Rangel, A. (2012). The Attentional Drift-Diffusion Model Extends to Simple Purchasing Decisions. Frontiers in Psychology. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2012.00193
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
