Literature DB >> 22033949

Observers can voluntarily shift their psychometric functions without losing sensitivity.

Michael Morgan1, Barbara Dillenburger, Sabine Raphael, Joshua A Solomon.   

Abstract

Psychometric sensory discrimination functions are usually modeled by cumulative Gaussian functions with just two parameters, their central tendency (μ) and their slope (1/σ). These correspond to Fechner's "constant" and "variable" errors, respectively. Fechner pointed out that even the constant error could vary over space and time and could masquerade as variable error. We wondered whether observers could deliberately introduce a constant error into their performance without loss of precision. In three-dot vernier and bisection tasks with the method of single stimuli, observers were instructed to favour one of the two responses when unsure of their answer. The slope of the resulting psychometric function was not significantly changed, despite a significant change in central tendency. Similar results were obtained when altered feedback was used to induce bias. We inferred that observers can adopt artificial response criteria without any significant increase in criterion fluctuation. These findings have implications for some studies that have measured perceptual "illusions" by shifts in the psychometric functions of sophisticated observers.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22033949      PMCID: PMC3264850          DOI: 10.3758/s13414-011-0222-7

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Atten Percept Psychophys        ISSN: 1943-3921            Impact factor:   2.199


  22 in total

1.  Prototype-referenced shape encoding revealed by high-level aftereffects.

Authors:  D A Leopold; A J O'Toole; T Vetter; V Blanz
Journal:  Nat Neurosci       Date:  2001-01       Impact factor: 24.884

2.  Effects of biased feedback on learning and deciding in a vernier discrimination task.

Authors:  M H Herzog; M Fahle
Journal:  Vision Res       Date:  1999       Impact factor: 1.886

3.  Processing of irrelevant visual motion during performance of an auditory attention task.

Authors:  G Rees; C Frith; N Lavie
Journal:  Neuropsychologia       Date:  2001       Impact factor: 3.139

4.  The fate of task-irrelevant visual motion: perceptual load versus feature-based attention.

Authors:  Shuichiro Taya; Wendy J Adams; Erich W Graf; Nilli Lavie
Journal:  J Vis       Date:  2009-11-18       Impact factor: 2.240

5.  Spatiotopic selectivity of adaptation-based compression of event duration.

Authors:  David C Burr; G Marco Cicchini; Roberto Arrighi; M Concetta Morrone
Journal:  J Vis       Date:  2011-02-25       Impact factor: 2.240

6.  Effect of the luminance signal on adaptation-based time compression.

Authors:  Inci Ayhan; Aurelio Bruno; Shin'ya Nishida; Alan Johnston
Journal:  J Vis       Date:  2011-06-29       Impact factor: 2.240

7.  Spatial frequency discrimination: visual long-term memory or criterion setting?

Authors:  M Lages; M Treisman
Journal:  Vision Res       Date:  1998-02       Impact factor: 1.886

8.  Categorizing externally distributed stimulus samples for unequal molar probabilities.

Authors:  W Lee; M Janke
Journal:  Psychol Rep       Date:  1965-08

9.  Storage of spatially specific threshold elevation.

Authors:  P G Thompson; J A Movshon
Journal:  Perception       Date:  1978       Impact factor: 1.490

10.  The aperture problem in contoured stimuli.

Authors:  David Kane; Peter J Bex; Steven C Dakin
Journal:  J Vis       Date:  2009-09-16       Impact factor: 2.240

View more
  39 in total

1.  Whole body motion-detection tasks can yield much lower thresholds than direction-recognition tasks: implications for the role of vibration.

Authors:  Shomesh E Chaudhuri; Faisal Karmali; Daniel M Merfeld
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2013-09-25       Impact factor: 2.714

2.  A bias-free measure of retinotopic tilt adaptation.

Authors:  M J Morgan
Journal:  J Vis       Date:  2014-01-08       Impact factor: 2.240

3.  Motion adaptation does not depend on attention to the adaptor.

Authors:  Michael J Morgan
Journal:  Vision Res       Date:  2012-01-05       Impact factor: 1.886

4.  Vestibular cognition: the effect of prior belief on vestibular perceptual decision making.

Authors:  Andrew W Ellis; Manuel P Klaus; Fred W Mast
Journal:  J Neurol       Date:  2017-03-30       Impact factor: 4.849

5.  Sustained attention is not necessary for velocity adaptation.

Authors:  Michael Morgan
Journal:  J Vis       Date:  2013-07-31       Impact factor: 2.240

6.  When uncertain, does human self-motion decision-making fully utilize complete information?

Authors:  Torin K Clark; Yongwoo Yi; Raquel C Galvan-Garza; María Carolina Bermúdez Rey; Daniel M Merfeld
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2017-12-20       Impact factor: 2.714

7.  Larger extrastriate population receptive fields in autism spectrum disorders.

Authors:  D Samuel Schwarzkopf; Elaine J Anderson; Benjamin de Haas; Sarah J White; Geraint Rees
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2014-02-12       Impact factor: 6.167

8.  The bisection point across variants of the task.

Authors:  Miguel A García-Pérez; Eli Peli
Journal:  Atten Percept Psychophys       Date:  2014-08       Impact factor: 2.199

9.  Sensory and decision-making processes underlying perceptual adaptation.

Authors:  Nathan Witthoft; Long Sha; Jonathan Winawer; Roozbeh Kiani
Journal:  J Vis       Date:  2018-08-01       Impact factor: 2.240

10.  The influence of head and body tilt on human fore-aft translation perception.

Authors:  Benjamin T Crane
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2014-08-27       Impact factor: 1.972

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.