| Abstract: | In a recent assessment of models of psychophysical discrimination, Heath criticises the accumulator model for its reliance on computer simulation and qualitative evidence, and contrasts it unfavourably with a modified random-walk model, which yields exact predictions, is susceptible to critical test, and is provided with simple parameter-estimation techniques. A counter-evaluation is presented, in which the approximations employed in the modified random-walk analysis are demonstrated to be seriously inaccurate, the resulting parameter estimates to be artefactually determined, and the proposed test not critical. It is pointed out that Heath's specific application of the model is not legitimate, his data treatment inappropriate, and his hypothesis concerning confidence inconsistent with experimental results. Evidence from adaptive performance changes is presented which shows that the necessary assumptions for quantitative analysis in terms of the modified random-walk model are not satisfied, and that the model can be reconciled with data at the qualitative level only by making it virtually indistinguishable from an accumulator process. A procedure for deriving exact predictions for an accumulator process is outlined. |
