Decision strategies determined from the shape of the same-different roc curve: What are the effects of incorrect assumptions?

Journal of Sensory Studies

Volumn 23, Issue 6, 2008, Pages 743-764

  Hautus, Michael J ^a   O'Mahony, Michael ^b   Lee, Hye Seong ^c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF AUCKLAND   (New Zealand)

^b UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^c Ewha Womans University   (South Korea)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 65249114739     PISSN: 08878250     EISSN: 1745459X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1745-459X.2008.00185.x     Document Type: Article

References (49)

1. AVANCINI DE ALMEIDA, T.C., CUBERO, E. and O'MAHONY, M. 1999. Same-different discrimination tests with interstimulus delays up to one day. J. Sensory Studies 14, 1-18.
2. CUBERO, E., AVANCINI DE ALMEIDA, T. and O'MAHONY, M. 1995. Cognitive aspects of difference testing: Memory and interstimulus delay. J. Sensory Studies 10, 307-324.
3. DELWICHE, J. and O'MAHONY, M. 1996a. Flavour discrimination - an extension of Thurstonian paradoxes to the tetrad method. Food Qual. Pref. 7, 1-5.
4. DELWICHE, J. and O'MAHONY, M. 1996b. Changes in secreted salivary sodium are sufficient to alter taste sensitivity: Use of signal detection measures with continuous monitoring of the oral environment. Physiol. Behav. 59, 605-611.
5. DESSIRIER, J.M., SIFFERMANN, J.M. and O'MAHONY, M. 1999. Taste discrimination by the 3-AFC method: Testing sensitivity predictions regarding particular tasting sequences based on the sequential sensitivity analysis model. J. Sensory Studies 14, 271-287.
6. ENNIS, D.M. 1990. Relative power of difference testing methods in sensory evaluation. Food Technol. 44, 114-118.
7. ENNIS, D.M. 1993. The power of sensory discrimination methods. J. Sensory Studies 8, 353-370.
8. ENNIS, D.M. Personal communication, 2004.
9. ENNIS, D.M. and JOHNSON, N.L. 1993. Thurstone-Shepard similarity models as special cases of moment generating functions. J. Math. Psychol. 37, 104-110.
10. ENNIS, D.M. and O'MAHONY, M. 1995. Probabilistic models for sequential taste effects in triadic choice. J. Exp. Psychol.: Hum. Percept. Perform. 5, 1088-1097.
11. ENNIS, D.M., PALEN, J. and MULLEN, K. 1988. A multidimensional stochastic theory of similarity. J. Math. Psychol. 32, 449-465.
12. FRANCIS, M.A. and IRWIN, R.J. 1995. Decision strategies and visual-field symmetries in same-different judgements of word meaning. Mem. Cognit. 23, 301-312.
13. FRANDSEN, L.W., DIJKSTERHUIS, G.B., BROCKHOFF, P.B., NIELSEN, J.H. and MARTENS, M. 2007. Feelings as a basis for discrimination: Comparison of a modified authenticity test with the same-different test for slightly different types of milk. Food Qual. Pref. 18, 97-105.
14. GREEN, D.M. and SWETS, J.A. 1966. Signal Detecting Theory and Psycho-physics. John Wiley and Sons, NY.
15. HAUTUS, M.J. and IRWIN, R.J. 1995. Two models for estimating the dis-criminability of foods and beverages. J. Sensory Studies 10, 203-215.
16. HAUTUS, M.J., IRWIN, R.J. and SUTHERLAND, S. 1994. Relativity of judgements about sound amplitude and the asymmetry of the Same-Different ROC. Q. J. Exp. Psychol. 47A, 1035-1045.
17. IRWIN, R.J. and FRANCIS, M.A. 1995. Perception of simple and complex visual stimuli: Decision strategies and hemispheric differences in same-different judgments. Perception 24, 787-809.
18. IRWIN, R.J. and HAUTUS, M.J. 1997. Likelihood-ratio decision strategy for independent observations in the same-different task: An approximation to the detection-theoretic model. Percept. Psychophys. 59, 313-316.
19. IRWIN, R.J., HAUTUS, M.J. and STILLMAN, J.A. 1992. Use of the receiver operating characteristic in the study of taste perception. J. Sensory Studies 7, 291-314.
20. IRWIN, R.J., STILLMAN, J.A., HAUTUS, M.J. and HUDDLESTON, L.M. 1993. The measurement of taste discrimination with the same-different task. J. Sensory Studies 8, 229-239.
21. ISHII, R., KAWAGUCHI, H., O'MAHONY, M. and ROUSSEAU, B. 2007. Relating consumer and trained panels' discriminative sensitivities using vanilla flavoured ice cream as a medium. Food Qual. Pref. 18, 89-96.
22. KIM, H-J., JEON, S.Y., KIM, K-O. and O'MAHONY, M. 2006. Thurstonian models and variance I: Experimental confirmation of cognitive strategies for difference tests and effects of perceptual variance. J. Sensory Studies 21, 465-484.
23. LAU, S., O'MAHONY, M. and ROUSSEAU, B. 2004. Are three-sample tasks less sensitive than two-sample tasks? Memory effects in the testing of taste discrimination. Percept. Psychophys. 66, 464-474.
24. LEE, H-S. and O'MAHONY, M. 2007. Difference test sensitivity: Cognitive contrast effects. J. Sensory Studies 22, 17-33.
25. LEE, H-S., VAN HOUT, D. and HAUTUS, M.J. 2007a. Comparison of performance in the A-Not A, 2-AFC, and same-different tests for the flavor discrimination of margarines: The effect of cognitive decision strategies. Food Qual. Pref. 18, 920-928.
26. LEE, H.-S., VAN HOUT, D., HAUTUS, M. and O'MAHONY, M. 2007b. Can the same-different test use a beta criterion as well as a tau criterion? Food Qual. Pref 18, 605-613.
27. MACMILLAN, N.A. and CREELMAN, C.D. 2005. Detection Theory: A User's Guide, 2nd Ed., Cambridge University Press, NY.
28. MASUOKA, S., HATJOPOULOS, D. and O'MAHONY, M. 1995. Beer bitterness detection: Testing Thurstonian and Sequential Sensitivity Analysis models for triad and tetrad methods. J. Sensory Studies 10, 295-306.
29. NOREEN, D.L. 1981. Optimal decision rules for some common psychophy-sical paradigms. In Mathematical Psychology and Psychophysiology, Vol 13. Proceedings of the Symposium in Applied Mathematics of the American Mathematical Society and the Society for Industrial Applied Mathematics (S. Grossberg, ed.) pp. 237-279, American Mathematical Society, Providence, RI.
30. O'MAHONY, M. 1972. Salt taste sensitivity: A signal detection approach. Perception 1, 439-464.
31. O'MAHONY, M. 1992. Understanding discrimination tests: A user-friendly treatment of response bias, rating and ranking R-index tests and their relationship to signal detection. J. Sensory Studies 7, 1-47.
32. O'MAHONY, M. 1995a. Sensory measurement in food science: Fitting methods to goals. Food Technol. 29, 72-82.
33. O'MAHONY, M. 1995b. Who told you the triangle test was simple? Food Qual. Pref. 6, 227-238.
34. O'MAHONY, M. and GOLDSTEIN, L.R. 1986. Effectiveness of sensory difference tests sequential sensitivity analysis for liquid food stimuli. J. Food Sci. 51, 1550-1553.
35. O'MAHONY, M. and GOLDSTEIN, L.R. 1987. Tasting successive salt and water stimuli: The roles of adaptation, variability in physical signal strength, learning, supra- and subadapting signal detectability. Chem. Senses 12, 425-436.
36. O'MAHONY, M. and HAUTUS, M.J. 2008. The signal detection theory roc curve: Some applications in food science. J. Sensory Studies. 23, 186-204.
37. O'MAHONY, M. and ODBERT, N. 1985. A comparison of sensory difference testing procedures sequential sensitivity analysis and aspects of taste adaptation. J. Food Sci. 50, 1055-1058.
38. O'MAHONY, M. and ROUSSEAU, B. 2002. Discrimination testing: A few ideas, old and new. Food Qual. Pref. 14, 157-164.
39. ROUSSEAU, B. 2001. The β-strategy: An alternative and powerful cognitive strategy when performing sensory discrimination tests. J. Sensory Studies 16, 301-318.
40. ROUSSEAU, B. and O'MAHONY, M. 1997. Sensory difference tests: Thur-stonian and SSA predictions for vanilla flavored yogurts. J. Sensory Studies 12, 127-146.
41. ROUSSEAU, B. and O'MAHONY, M. 2000. Investigation of a dual-pair method as a possible alternative to the triangle and same-different tests. J. Sensory Studies 16, 161-178.
42. ROUSSEAU, B., MEYER, A. and O'MAHONY, M. 1998. Power and sensitivity of the same-different test: Comparison with triangle and duo-trio methods. J. Sensory Studies 13, 149-173.
43. ROUSSEAU, B., ROGEAUX, M. and O'MAHONY, M. 1999. Mustard discrimination by same-different and triangle tests: Aspects of irritation, memory and τ criteria. Food Qual. Pref. 10, 173-184.
44. ROUSSEAU, B., STROH, S. and O'MAHONY, M. 2002. Investigating more powerful discrimination tests with consumers: Effects of memory and response bias. Food Qual. Pref. 13, 39-45.
45. STILLMAN, J.A. 1993. Response selection, sensitivity, and taste-test performance. Percept. Psychophys. 54, 190-194.
46. STILLMAN, J.A. and IRWIN, R.J. 1995. Advantages of the same-different method over the triangular method for the measurement of taste discrimination. J. Sensory Studies 10, 261-272.
47. TEDJA, S., NONAKA, R., ENNIS, D.M. and O'MAHONY, M. 1994. Triadic discrimination testing-refinement of Thurstonian and Sequential Sensitivity Analysis approaches. Chem. Senses 19, 279-301.
48. VIÉ, A. and O'MAHONY, M. 1989. Triangular difference testing: Refinements of sequential sensitivity analysis for predictions for individual triads. J. Sensory Studies 4, 87-103.
49. WONG, D.A. 1997. Cognitive strategies of the triangle difference test. MS Thesis, pp. 1-118, University of California, Davis.