Bias and sensitivity in two-interval forced choice procedures: Tests of the difference model

Yaffa Yeshurun, Marisa Carrasco, Laurence T. Maloney

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

We assess four common claims concerning the two-interval forced choice (2-IFC) procedure and the standard Difference Model of 2-IFC performance. The first two are (1) that it is unbiased and (2) that the structure of the 2-IFC task does not in itself alter sensitivity. The remaining two concern a claimed sqrt(2) enhancement in sensitivity in 2-IFC relative to that measured in a Yes-No task. We review relevant past research and re-analyze seventeen experiments from previous studies across three laboratories. We then report an experiment comparing 2-IFC performance with performance in a second task designed to elucidate observers' decision processes. This second task is simply two successive Yes-No signal detection tasks with the same timing as in the 2-IFC experiment. We find little evidence supporting the claims that 2-IFC is unbiased and that it does not alter sensitivity and we also reject the two claims associated with the Difference Model as a model of performance in our own experiment.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)1837-1851
Number of pages15
JournalVision Research
Volume48
Issue number17
DOIs
StatePublished - Aug 2008

Fingerprint

Research

Keywords

  • Bias
  • Psychophysics
  • Threshold estimation 2-IFC

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Ophthalmology
  • Sensory Systems

Cite this

Bias and sensitivity in two-interval forced choice procedures : Tests of the difference model. / Yeshurun, Yaffa; Carrasco, Marisa; Maloney, Laurence T.

In: Vision Research, Vol. 48, No. 17, 08.2008, p. 1837-1851.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{b3349c0c11f1497dab103f17f7d08aaf,
title = "Bias and sensitivity in two-interval forced choice procedures: Tests of the difference model",
abstract = "We assess four common claims concerning the two-interval forced choice (2-IFC) procedure and the standard Difference Model of 2-IFC performance. The first two are (1) that it is unbiased and (2) that the structure of the 2-IFC task does not in itself alter sensitivity. The remaining two concern a claimed sqrt(2) enhancement in sensitivity in 2-IFC relative to that measured in a Yes-No task. We review relevant past research and re-analyze seventeen experiments from previous studies across three laboratories. We then report an experiment comparing 2-IFC performance with performance in a second task designed to elucidate observers' decision processes. This second task is simply two successive Yes-No signal detection tasks with the same timing as in the 2-IFC experiment. We find little evidence supporting the claims that 2-IFC is unbiased and that it does not alter sensitivity and we also reject the two claims associated with the Difference Model as a model of performance in our own experiment.",
keywords = "Bias, Psychophysics, Threshold estimation 2-IFC",
author = "Yaffa Yeshurun and Marisa Carrasco and Maloney, {Laurence T.}",
year = "2008",
month = "8",
doi = "10.1016/j.visres.2008.05.008",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "48",
pages = "1837--1851",
journal = "Vision Research",
issn = "0042-6989",
publisher = "Elsevier Limited",
number = "17",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Bias and sensitivity in two-interval forced choice procedures

T2 - Tests of the difference model

AU - Yeshurun, Yaffa

AU - Carrasco, Marisa

AU - Maloney, Laurence T.

PY - 2008/8

Y1 - 2008/8

N2 - We assess four common claims concerning the two-interval forced choice (2-IFC) procedure and the standard Difference Model of 2-IFC performance. The first two are (1) that it is unbiased and (2) that the structure of the 2-IFC task does not in itself alter sensitivity. The remaining two concern a claimed sqrt(2) enhancement in sensitivity in 2-IFC relative to that measured in a Yes-No task. We review relevant past research and re-analyze seventeen experiments from previous studies across three laboratories. We then report an experiment comparing 2-IFC performance with performance in a second task designed to elucidate observers' decision processes. This second task is simply two successive Yes-No signal detection tasks with the same timing as in the 2-IFC experiment. We find little evidence supporting the claims that 2-IFC is unbiased and that it does not alter sensitivity and we also reject the two claims associated with the Difference Model as a model of performance in our own experiment.

AB - We assess four common claims concerning the two-interval forced choice (2-IFC) procedure and the standard Difference Model of 2-IFC performance. The first two are (1) that it is unbiased and (2) that the structure of the 2-IFC task does not in itself alter sensitivity. The remaining two concern a claimed sqrt(2) enhancement in sensitivity in 2-IFC relative to that measured in a Yes-No task. We review relevant past research and re-analyze seventeen experiments from previous studies across three laboratories. We then report an experiment comparing 2-IFC performance with performance in a second task designed to elucidate observers' decision processes. This second task is simply two successive Yes-No signal detection tasks with the same timing as in the 2-IFC experiment. We find little evidence supporting the claims that 2-IFC is unbiased and that it does not alter sensitivity and we also reject the two claims associated with the Difference Model as a model of performance in our own experiment.

KW - Bias

KW - Psychophysics

KW - Threshold estimation 2-IFC

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=47249102889&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=47249102889&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.visres.2008.05.008

DO - 10.1016/j.visres.2008.05.008

M3 - Article

C2 - 18585750

AN - SCOPUS:47249102889

VL - 48

SP - 1837

EP - 1851

JO - Vision Research

JF - Vision Research

SN - 0042-6989

IS - 17

ER -