The difference model with guessing explains interval bias in two-alternative forced-choice detection procedures

Journal of Sensory Studies

Volumn 25, Issue 6, 2010, Pages 876-898

  García Pérez, Miguel A ^a   Alcalá Quintana, Rocío ^a  

^a UNIVERSIDAD COMPLUTENSE DE MADRID   (Spain)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ANALYTICAL PREDICTIONS; DECISION VARIABLES; DIFFERENCE MODELS; EMPIRICAL DATA; GOODNESS-OF-FIT TESTING; INDIFFERENCE ZONE; NULL VALUE; PARAMETER ESTIMATION METHOD; SIMULATION STUDIES;

PARAMETER ESTIMATION; STANDARDS;

COMPUTER SIMULATION;

EID: 78650056784     PISSN: 08878250     EISSN: 1745459X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1745-459X.2010.00310.x     Document Type: Article

References (56)

1. Adhikari, K., Hein, K.A., Elmore, J.R., Heymann, H. and Willott, A.M. 2006. Flavor threshold as affected by interaction among three dairy-related flavor compounds. J. Sensory Studies 21, 626-643.
2. Alcalá-Quintana, R. and García-Pérez, M.A. 2005. Interval bias in discrimination tasks. Perception 34(Suppl.), 237-238.
3. Alcalá-Quintana, R. and García-Pérez, M.A. 2007. A comparison of fixed-step-size and Bayesian staircases for sensory threshold estimation. Spat. Vis. 20, 197-218.
4. Alcalá-Quintana, R. and García-Pérez, M.A. 2010. A model for the time-order error in contrast discrimination (submitted).
5. Alfaro-Rodriguez, H., O'mahony, M. and Angulo, O. 2005. Paired preference tests: d' values from Mexican consumers with various response options. J. Sensory Studies 20, 275-281.
6. Alfaro-Rodriguez, H., Angulo, O. and O'mahony, M. 2007. Be your own placebo: A double paired preference test approach for establishing expected frequencies. Food Qual. Prefer. 18, 353-361.
7. Alfaro-Rodriguez, H., Angulo, O. and O'mahony, M. 2008. Paired preference tests: "50:50" and "alternating" no preferences. J. Sensory Studies 23, 765-779.
8. Alvarez-Coureaux, Y., Aguilar, P., O'mahony, M. and Angulo, O. 2010. Assessment of preference with controls for response bias operating in the test situation: A practical example using omega-3 enriched wholegrain breads with Ecuadorian consumers. J. Sensory Studies doi: 10.1111/j.1745-459X.2010.00295.x.
9. Angulo, O. and O'mahony, M. 2005. The paired preference test and the "No Preference" option: Was Odesky correct? Food Qual. Prefer. 16, 425-434.
10. Angulo, O., Okayama, K., Nakamura, T., Yuen, R. and O'mahony, M. 2009. Use of purchase preference options to increase "no preference" frequencies in placebo preference tests. J. Sensory Studies 24, 258-268.
11. 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.
12. Bi, J. and Ennis, D.M. 1998. A Thurstonian variant of the beta-binomial model for replicated difference tests. J. Sensory Studies 13, 461-466.
13. Bi, J. and Ennis, D.M. 2001. Statistical models for the A-not A method. J. Sensory Studies 16, 215-237.
14. Chapman, K.W. and Lawless, H.T. 2005. Sources of error and the no-preference option in dairy product testing. J. Sensory Studies 20, 454-468.
15. Chapman, K.W., Grace-Martin, K. and Lawless, H.T. 2006. Expectations and stability of preference choice. J. Sensory Studies 21, 441-455.
16. Cubero, E., Avancini De Almeida, T.C. and O'mahony, M. 1995. Cognitive aspects of difference testing: Memory and interstimulus delay. J. Sensory Studies 10, 307-324.
17. Dessirier, J.-M., Sieffermann, 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.
18. Fechner, G.T. 1860/1966.Elements of Psychophysics, Holt, New York, NY.
19. Fleet, C.F. and Siebert, K.J. 2005. Effect of illumination intensity on visual perception of turbidity. Food Qual. Prefer. 16, 536-544.
20. Fleet, C.F. and Siebert, K.J. 2006. Effect of viewing background on turbidity perception thresholds. J. Sensory Studies 21, 34-53.
21. García-Pérez, M.A. 2002. Properties of some variants of adaptive staircases with fixed step sizes. Spat. Vis. 15, 303-321.
22. García-Pérez, M.A. 2010. Denoising forced-choice detection data. Br. J. Math. Stat. Psychol. 63, 75-100.
23. García-Pérez, M.A. and Alcalá-Quintana, R. 2007. The transducer model for contrast detection and discrimination: Formal relations, implications, and an empirical test. Spat. Vis. 20, 5-43.
24. García-Pérez, M.A. and Alcalá-Quintana, R. 2009. Fixed vs. variable noise in 2AFC contrast discrimination: Lessons from psychometric functions. Spat. Vis. 22, 273-300.
25. García-Pérez, M.A. and Alcalá-Quintana, R. 2010. Reminder and 2AFC tasks provide similar estimates of the difference limen: A reanalysis of data from Lapid, Ulrich, and Rammsayer (2008) and a discussion of Ulrich and Vorberg (2009). Atten. Percept. Psychophys. 72, 1155-1178.
26. García-Pérez, M.A. and Núñez-Antón, V. 2009. Accuracy of power-divergence statistics for testing independence and homogeneity in two-way contingency tables. Commun. Stat. Simul. Comput. 38, 503-512.
27. García-Pérez, M.A. and Peli, E. 2001. Luminance artifacts of cathode-ray tube displays for vision research. Spat. Vis. 14, 201-215.
28. González Viñas, M.A., Salvador, M.D. and Martin-Alvarez, P.J. 1998. Comparison of two simple methods for the measurement of detection thresholds for basic, umami and metallic tastes. J. Sensory Studies 13, 299-314.
29. Hautus, H.J., O'mahony, M. and Lee, H.-S. 2008. Decision strategies determined from the shape of the same-different ROC curve: What are the effects of incorrect assumptions? J. Sensory Studies 23, 743-764.
30. Hellström, Å. 2003. Comparison is not just subtraction: Effects of time- and space-order on subjective stimulus difference. Percept. Psychophys. 65, 1161-1177.
31. Jäkel, F. and Wichmann, F.A. 2006. Spatial four-alternative forced-choice method is the preferred psychophysical method for naïve observers. J. Vis. 6, 1307-1322. (accessed July 26, 2010) doi:10.1167/6.11.13.
32. Kaernbach, C. 2001. Adaptive threshold estimation with unforced-choice tasks. Percept. Psychophys. 63, 1377-1388.
33. Kim, H.-J., Jeon, S.Y., Kim, K.-O. and O'mahony, M. 2006a. Thurstonian models and variance I: Experimental confirmation of cognitive strategies for difference tests and effects of perceptual variance. J. Sensory Studies 21, 465-484.
34. Kim, H.-J., Kim, K.-O., Jeon, S.Y., Kim, J.-M. and O'mahony, M. 2006b. Thurstonian models and variance I: Experimental confirmation of the effects of variance on Thurstonian models of scaling. J. Sensory Studies 21, 485-504.
35. Kim, H.S., Lee, H.S., O'mahony, M. and Kim, K.O. 2008. Paired preference tests using placebo pairs and different response options for chips, orange juices and cookies. J. Sensory Studies 23, 417-438.
36. Kim, M.-A., Lee, Y.-M. and Kim, H.-S. 2010. Comparison of d' estimates produced by three versions of a duo-trio test for discriminating tomato juices with varying salt concentrations: The effects of the number and position of the reference stimulus. Food Qual. Prefer. 21, 504-511.
37. Lawless, H.T. 2010. A simple alternative analysis for threshold data determined by ascending forced-choice methods of limits. J. Sensory Studies 25, 332-346.
38. Lee, H.-S. and Kim, K.-O. 2008. Difference test sensitivity: Comparison of three versions of the duo-trio method requiring different memory schemes and taste sequences. Food Qual. Prefer., 19, 97-102.
39. Lee, H.-S. and O'mahony, M. 2007. Difference test sensitivity: Cognitive contrast effects. J. Sensory Studies 22, 17-33.
40. Lee, Y.-M., Chae, J.-E. and Lee, H.-S. 2009. Effects of order of tasting in sensory difference tests using apple juice stimuli: Development of a new model. J. Food Sci. 74, 268-275.
41. Macmillan, N.A. and Creelman, C.D. 2005. Detection Theory: A User's Guide, Lawrence Erlbaum, Mahwah, NJ.
42. Marchisano, C., Lim, J., Cho, H.S., Suh, D.S., Jeon, S.Y., Kim, K.O. and O'mahony, M. 2003. Consumers report preferences when they should not: A cross-cultural study. J. Sensory Studies 18, 487-516.
43. 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.
44. O'mahony, M. and Hautus, M.J. 2008. The signal detection theory ROC curve: Some applications in food sensory science. J. Sensory Studies 23, 186-204.
45. Poggel, D.A., Strasburger, H. and Mackeben, M. 2007. Cueing attention by relative motion in the periphery of the visual field. Perception 36, 955-970.
46. Rousseau, B. 2001. The β-strategy: An alternative and powerful cognitive strategy when performing sensory discrimination tests. J. Sensory Studies 16, 301-318.
47. Santosa, M. and O'mahony, M. 2008. Sequential sensitivity analysis for same-different tests: Some further insights. J. Sensory Studies 23, 267-283.
48. Shepherd, D., Quek, S.W. and Pathirana, S. 2008. Sucrose detection and the stability of the 2-AFC procedure in the presence of a confounding variable. J. Sensory Studies 23, 600-613.
49. Suwonsichon, S., Chambers Iv, E., Chambers, D.H. and Milliken, G.A. 2009. Effects of oral rinsing on the perception of residual cooling and burn in highly mentholated toothpaste. J. Sensory Studies 24, 290-300.
50. Swift, D., Panish, S. and Hippensteel, B. 1997. The use of VisionWorks™ in visual psychophysics research. Spat. Vis. 10, 471-477.
51. Van Vleet, T.M. and Robertson, L.C. 2006. Cross-modal interactions in time and space: Auditory influence on visual attention in hemispatial neglect. J. Cogn. Neurosci. 18, 1368-1379.
52. Villegas-Ruiz, X., Angulo, O. and O'mahony, M. 2008. Paired preference "placebo" tests with "identical" stimuli: Does introducing graded preference responses affect the frequency of "no preference" responses? J. Sensory Studies 23, 439-449.
53. Von Waldkirch, M., Lukowicz, P. and Tröster, G. 2004. Multiple imaging technique for extending depth of focus in retinal displays. Opt. Express 12, 6350-6355.
54. Von Waldkirch, M., Lukowicz, P. and Tröster, G. 2005. Oscillating fluid lens in coherent retinal projection displays for extending depth of focus. Opt. Commun. 253, 407-418.
55. Watson, C.S., Kellogg, S.C., Kawanishi, D.T. and Lucas, P.A. 1973. The uncertain response in detection-oriented psychophysics. J. Exp. Psychol. 99, 180-185.
56. Yeshurun, Y., Carrasco, M. and Maloney, L.T. 2008. Bias and sensitivity in two-interval forced choice procedures: Tests of the difference model. Vision Res. 48, 1837-1851.