Variants of A Not-A and 2AFC tests: Signal Detection Theory models

Hautus, Michael J.; Hout, Danielle van; Lee, H.-S.

doi:10.1016/j.foodqual.2008.10.002

Cited by 52 publications

(79 citation statements)

References 34 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…It may also provide the observer with a comparison for the test stimulus, which may or may not be used in the decision process. It has been argued that familiarity with the stimuli becomes less important to the task when a reminder is available (Hautus, van Hout, & Lee, 2009). The observer could simply be asked, "Were the reminder and test stimuli the same or different?"…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The theoretical relationship for the 2AFC procedure is d' = [z(H) -z(F)]/ √2, irrespective of whether the difference or likelihood ratio strategy is assumed (Green & Swets, 1966). More recently, SDT models for the 2AFCR procedure have been developed (Hautus et al, 2009). These models show that the same relationship holds for the difference and likelihood ratio strategies in the 2AFCR procedure as in the 2AFC procedure; that is, in both cases, for the 2AFCR procedure,…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Also, there is no clear way to illustrate biased responding, because these depictions do not represent the decision criterion, an integral component of any model based on SDT. Hautus et al (2009) presented the 2AFCR model in a two-dimensional representation of the decision space that explicitly included the decision criterion. They represented the difference between the first test stimulus and the reminder (A -R) on one dimension, and the difference between the second test stimulus and the reminder (B -R) on a second dimension.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Figure 2 illustrates the resulting decision space and includes the criterial boundaries for the comparison-of-distances strategy for the case of unbiased performance (see Fig. 7 of Hautus et al, 2009, for examples of the decision space for biased observers).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…While two of the strategies lead to the same level of performance (likelihood ratio and difference; but see Hautus et al, 2009, for reasons why performance under the difference strategy might still prove inferior), the use of the comparison-of-distances strategy yields much poorer performance. This can be seen from the horizontal line in Fig.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Decision strategies for the two-alternative forced choice reminder paradigm

Hautus

Shepherd

Peng

2010

Atten Percept Psychophys

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The decision strategy adopted by an observer in a psychophysical procedure may be established by comparing estimates of sensitivity obtained by using detection-theoretic models based on each of the available decision strategies. Estimates of sensitivity obtained from 10 observers on auditory-level discrimination tasks using the yes/no, two-alternative forced choice (2AFC), and 2AFC with reminder (2AFCR; sometimes called duo-trio) procedures were compared in order to determine the decision strategy used by the judges in the 2AFCR procedure. 2AFCR permits at least three decision strategies: differencing, likelihood ratio, and comparison of distances. The latter strategy has frequently been assumed in the analysis of duo-trio data in the sensory evaluation literature. The present study demonstrates that the comparison-of-distances strategy was not used by 9 of the 10 observers in this auditory experiment. The nature of the instructions given to the observers had no measurable impact on the decision strategy that they adopted.Keywords Reminder paradigm . Decision strategy . duo-trio . 2AFCR . SDT While it is widely known that signal detection theory (SDT) provides a mechanism to minimize the effect of response bias on estimates of discriminative ability, it has another benefit that is less well known. SDT can accommodate the decision strategy used in the process of judgment, which in itself can have a major impact on performance as measured by other indices such as proportion correct. A decision strategy is the rule applied by an observer to the sensory evidence that stems from the stimuli presented in a trial, to make a decision. There are two major decision strategies commonly reported in the literature: the likelihood ratio decision strategy and the difference decision strategy. For the likelihood ratio strategy, the observer sets a criterion at some level of likelihood ratio (of one type of event over another; e.g., same vs. different) and makes a decision based on where the likelihood of the evidence available from the stimuli presented on a trial falls about this criterion. For the difference strategy, the observer sets a criterion difference that is compared to the difference in sensory evidence that arises from two or more stimuli presented on a trial. The likelihood ratio strategy can-most easily in its simplest form, where the likelihood ratio is 1-be considered an "independent" or "absolute" approach to decision making, as the evidence from each stimulus, or stimulus sequence, is compared independently to a specific criterion. In contrast, the difference strategy can be considered a "relative" or "dependent" approach to decision making because the decision is based on the relation between the evidence arising from two or more stimuli

show abstract

mentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations