Group analyses can hide heterogeneity effects when searching for a general model: evidence based on a conflict monitoring task

Abstract

In experimental psychology, a unique model of general processing is often sought to represent the behaviors of all individuals. We address the question of whether seeking this objective - a unique model - is the most fruitful scientific strategy by studying a specific case example. In order to approach an answer to such a question, we compared the conventional approach in experimental psychology with analyses at the individual level by applying a specific mathematical modeling approach. A sample of 1159 individuals completed an experimental task based on managing conflict (a type of Simon task). Key findings revealed that at least four models are required to properly account for individuals' performance. Interestingly, four out of ten participants failed to show stimulus-response congruency effects in the experimental task, whereas the remaining 60% followed distinguishable theoretical models (consistent with conflict-monitoring theory and/or priming and episodic memory effects). The reported findings suggest that individuals' psychological characteristics might help to explain some of the reproducibility issues that are currently of great concern in psychology. These findings, along with further recent research, support the view that general and differential psychological approaches work better together for addressing relevant theoretical issues in psychological research.