Evidence accumulation models have been one of the most dominant modeling frameworks used to study rapid decision-making over the past several decades. These models propose that evidence accumulates from the environment until the evidence for one alternative reaches some threshold, typically associated with caution, triggering a response. However, researchers have recently begun to reconsider the fundamental assumptions of how caution varies with time. In the past, it was typically assumed that levels of caution are independent of time. Recent investigations have however suggested the possibility that levels of caution decrease over time and that this strategy provides more efficient performance under certain conditions. Our study provides the first comprehensive assessment of this newer class of models accounting for time-varying caution to determine how robustly their parameters can be estimated. We assess five overall variants of collapsing threshold/urgency signal models based on the diffusion decision model, linear ballistic accumulator model, and urgency gating model frameworks. We find that estimation of parameters, particularly those associated with caution/urgency modulation are most robust for the linearly collapsing threshold diffusion model followed by an urgency-gating model with a leakage process. All other models considered, particularly those with ballistic accumulation or nonlinear thresholds, are unable to recover their own parameters adequately, making their usage in parameter estimation contexts questionable.
Keywords: Bayesian parameter estimation; Collapsing thresholds; Decision-making; Parameter recovery; Probability density approximation; Urgency gating.