Cargando…

The validity and consistency of continuous joystick response in perceptual decision-making

A computer joystick is an efficient and cost-effective response device for recording continuous movements in psychological experiments. Movement trajectories and other measures from continuous responses have expanded the insights gained from discrete responses (e.g., button presses) by providing uni...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Szul, Maciej J., Bompas, Aline, Sumner, Petroc, Zhang, Jiaxiang
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer US 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7148284/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31270793
http://dx.doi.org/10.3758/s13428-019-01269-3
_version_ 1783520561416110080
author Szul, Maciej J.
Bompas, Aline
Sumner, Petroc
Zhang, Jiaxiang
author_facet Szul, Maciej J.
Bompas, Aline
Sumner, Petroc
Zhang, Jiaxiang
author_sort Szul, Maciej J.
collection PubMed
description A computer joystick is an efficient and cost-effective response device for recording continuous movements in psychological experiments. Movement trajectories and other measures from continuous responses have expanded the insights gained from discrete responses (e.g., button presses) by providing unique information about how cognitive processes unfold over time. However, few studies have evaluated the validity of joystick responses with reference to conventional key presses, and how response modality can affect cognitive processes. Here we systematically compared human participants’ behavioral performance of perceptual decision-making when they responded with either joystick movements or key presses in a four-alternative motion discrimination task. We found evidence that the response modality did not affect raw behavioral measures, including decision accuracy and mean response time, at the group level. Furthermore, to compare the underlying decision processes between the two response modalities, we fitted a drift-diffusion model of decision-making to individual participants’ behavioral data. Bayesian analyses of the model parameters showed no evidence that switching from key presses to continuous joystick movements modulated the decision-making process. These results supported continuous joystick actions as a valid apparatus for continuous movements, although we highlight the need for caution when conducting experiments with continuous movement responses. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.3758/s13428-019-01269-3) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7148284
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher Springer US
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-71482842020-04-16 The validity and consistency of continuous joystick response in perceptual decision-making Szul, Maciej J. Bompas, Aline Sumner, Petroc Zhang, Jiaxiang Behav Res Methods Article A computer joystick is an efficient and cost-effective response device for recording continuous movements in psychological experiments. Movement trajectories and other measures from continuous responses have expanded the insights gained from discrete responses (e.g., button presses) by providing unique information about how cognitive processes unfold over time. However, few studies have evaluated the validity of joystick responses with reference to conventional key presses, and how response modality can affect cognitive processes. Here we systematically compared human participants’ behavioral performance of perceptual decision-making when they responded with either joystick movements or key presses in a four-alternative motion discrimination task. We found evidence that the response modality did not affect raw behavioral measures, including decision accuracy and mean response time, at the group level. Furthermore, to compare the underlying decision processes between the two response modalities, we fitted a drift-diffusion model of decision-making to individual participants’ behavioral data. Bayesian analyses of the model parameters showed no evidence that switching from key presses to continuous joystick movements modulated the decision-making process. These results supported continuous joystick actions as a valid apparatus for continuous movements, although we highlight the need for caution when conducting experiments with continuous movement responses. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.3758/s13428-019-01269-3) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. Springer US 2019-07-03 2020 /pmc/articles/PMC7148284/ /pubmed/31270793 http://dx.doi.org/10.3758/s13428-019-01269-3 Text en © The Author(s) 2019 Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.
spellingShingle Article
Szul, Maciej J.
Bompas, Aline
Sumner, Petroc
Zhang, Jiaxiang
The validity and consistency of continuous joystick response in perceptual decision-making
title The validity and consistency of continuous joystick response in perceptual decision-making
title_full The validity and consistency of continuous joystick response in perceptual decision-making
title_fullStr The validity and consistency of continuous joystick response in perceptual decision-making
title_full_unstemmed The validity and consistency of continuous joystick response in perceptual decision-making
title_short The validity and consistency of continuous joystick response in perceptual decision-making
title_sort validity and consistency of continuous joystick response in perceptual decision-making
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7148284/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31270793
http://dx.doi.org/10.3758/s13428-019-01269-3
work_keys_str_mv AT szulmaciejj thevalidityandconsistencyofcontinuousjoystickresponseinperceptualdecisionmaking
AT bompasaline thevalidityandconsistencyofcontinuousjoystickresponseinperceptualdecisionmaking
AT sumnerpetroc thevalidityandconsistencyofcontinuousjoystickresponseinperceptualdecisionmaking
AT zhangjiaxiang thevalidityandconsistencyofcontinuousjoystickresponseinperceptualdecisionmaking
AT szulmaciejj validityandconsistencyofcontinuousjoystickresponseinperceptualdecisionmaking
AT bompasaline validityandconsistencyofcontinuousjoystickresponseinperceptualdecisionmaking
AT sumnerpetroc validityandconsistencyofcontinuousjoystickresponseinperceptualdecisionmaking
AT zhangjiaxiang validityandconsistencyofcontinuousjoystickresponseinperceptualdecisionmaking