Literature DB >> 8473622

A maximum-likelihood method for estimating thresholds in a yes-no task.

D M Green1.   

Abstract

A maximum-likelihood procedure for estimating threshold values in a yes-no task is presented. In computer simulations of this procedure, it is demonstrated that the variability of the threshold estimates is little affected by the density of the hypotheses tested for a fixed range, or by serious misestimates of the slope of the psychometric functions. The threshold value is also largely independent of the starting value of the signal. The standard deviation of the threshold estimates appears to decrease with the square root of the number of trials, with a 2- to 3-dB standard deviation possible if only 12 trials are used in the threshold estimates. Data are presented using human listeners tested on 5 days. Two threshold estimates, based on 12 trials, were made at each of the six audiometric frequencies on each day. The mean data appear sensible, and the standard deviation of the measured thresholds is about 3 dB. Using this procedure, it takes less than 3 min to measure the audiogram for a single ear.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1993        PMID: 8473622     DOI: 10.1121/1.406696

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am        ISSN: 0001-4966            Impact factor:   1.840


  46 in total

1.  Movement-related modulation of vibrotactile detection thresholds in the human orofacial system.

Authors:  Richard D Andreatta; Steven M Barlow
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2002-12-19       Impact factor: 1.972

2.  Use of stimulus-frequency otoacoustic emissions to investigate efferent and cochlear contributions to temporal overshoot.

Authors:  Douglas H Keefe; Kim S Schairer; John C Ellison; Denis F Fitzpatrick; Walt Jesteadt
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2009-03       Impact factor: 1.840

3.  A maximum-likelihood procedure for estimating psychometric functions: thresholds, slopes, and lapses of attention.

Authors:  Yi Shen; Virginia M Richards
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2012-08       Impact factor: 1.840

4.  Factors affecting the benefits of high-frequency amplification.

Authors:  Amy R Horwitz; Jayne B Ahlstrom; Judy R Dubno
Journal:  J Speech Lang Hear Res       Date:  2008-06       Impact factor: 2.297

5.  Suboptimal use of neural information in a mammalian auditory system.

Authors:  Laurel H Carney; Muhammad S A Zilany; Nicholas J Huang; Kristina S Abrams; Fabio Idrobo
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2014-01-22       Impact factor: 6.167

6.  Spatial separation benefit for unaided and aided listening.

Authors:  Jayne B Ahlstrom; Amy R Horwitz; Judy R Dubno
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2014 Jan-Feb       Impact factor: 3.570

7.  Detecting high-frequency hearing loss with click-evoked otoacoustic emissions.

Authors:  Douglas H Keefe; Shawn S Goodman; John C Ellison; Denis F Fitzpatrick; Michael P Gorga
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2011-01       Impact factor: 1.840

8.  Additional rules for the transformed up-down method in psychophysics.

Authors:  L G Brown
Journal:  Percept Psychophys       Date:  1996-08

9.  Development of a multi-category psychometric function to model categorical loudness measurements.

Authors:  Andrea C Trevino; Walt Jesteadt; Stephen T Neely
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2016-10       Impact factor: 1.840

10.  Wideband acoustic-reflex test in a test battery to predict middle-ear dysfunction.

Authors:  Douglas H Keefe; Denis Fitzpatrick; Yi-Wen Liu; Chris A Sanford; Michael P Gorga
Journal:  Hear Res       Date:  2009-09-20       Impact factor: 3.208

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.