Abstract
The goal of most laboratory studies is to produce a bias-free estimate of sensitivity. Forced-choice procedures with trial-by-trial feedback, equal a priori probability of signal occurrence, and a balanced pay-off matrix were designed to assess listener sensitivity with response bias forced to zero. (Green, 1960; Green and Swets, 1964; 1988). Real-world detection tasks rarely provide N-interval forced-choice opportunities. The probability of signal occurrence may vary from near zero in vigilance tasks to near 100% for some clinical testing. Further, many real-world listening situations do not lend themselves to trial-by-trial feedback. Davis (2015, 2017) conducted a single interval yes-no, tone-in-noise experiment measuring response bias with incomplete feedback. Liu (2020) used Bayesian analysis to account for participant variability in the Davis data. Results from different subjects were combined to draw inferences about the effect of each experimental condition on listener bias. As expected, complete feedback drives the response criteria toward the unbiased point, and incomplete feedback conditions result in various degrees of deviation from the optimal criterion. Critical incomplete feedback conditions included responses on signal trials, “yes” responses, and correct responses. Implications for the design of experiments intended to approximate listening conditions in realistic detection tasks are discussed.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
