Slow and steady? Strategic adjustments in response caution are moderately reliable and correlate across tasks

• Published in: Consciousness and cognition Vol. 75; p. 102797
• Main Authors: Hedge, Craig, Vivian-Griffiths, Solveiga, Powell, Georgina, Bompas, Aline, Sumner, Petroc
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: United States Elsevier Inc 01-10-2019; Elsevier BV
• Subjects: Accuracy; Adult; Attention - physiology; Decision Making - physiology; Diffusion model for conflict tasks; Drift-diffusion model; Executive Function - physiology; Female; Humans; Impulsive behavior; Impulsive Behavior - physiology; Impulsivity; Individual differences; Individuality; Inhibition; Male; Psychomotor Performance - physiology; Reaction Time - physiology; Reliability; Reproducibility of Results; Response caution; Response control; Speed-accuracy trade-off; Stroop Test; Young Adult; Speed-accuracy trade-off; Impulsivity; Drift-diffusion model; Individual differences; Response control; Inhibition; Reliability; Diffusion model for conflict tasks; Response caution
• ISSN: 1053-8100; 1090-2376; 1090-2376
• DOI: 10.1016/j.concog.2019.102797

•Strategic adjustments in response caution underlie the speed-accuracy trade-off.•Individual differences have been linked to personality and brain structure.•Strategic adjustments in response caution have moderate test-retest reliability.•Strategic adjustments in response caution correlate across behavioural tasks.•We find no consistent evidence for a link to impulsivity.
Speed-accuracy trade-offs are often considered a confound in speeded choice tasks, but individual differences in strategy have been linked to personality and brain structure. We ask whether strategic adjustments in response caution are reliable, and whether they correlate across tasks and with impulsivity traits. In Study 1, participants performed Eriksen flanker and Stroop tasks in two sessions four weeks apart. We manipulated response caution by emphasising speed or accuracy. We fit the diffusion model for conflict tasks and correlated the change in boundary (accuracy – speed) across session and task. We observed moderate test-retest reliability, and medium to large correlations across tasks. We replicated this between-task correlation in Study 2 using flanker and perceptual decision tasks. We found no consistent correlations with impulsivity. Though moderate reliability poses a challenge for researchers interested in stable traits, consistent correlation between tasks indicates there are meaningful individual differences in the speed-accuracy trade-off.