Abstract
The review considers various proposals about the form of isobias curves and about the relation between bias and bias conditions (payoff, presentation probability, and instructions). Though the proposals differ sharply, none of them proves to be adequately supported by existing evidence. There has been a curious tendency to appeal to a priori arguments, to consider only a very restricted set of alternatives from among the published proposals, to contrast proposals at levels of performance where their predictions are minimally different, and to ignore existing evidence. The review tries to provide a solid basis for more adequate experimental work in the future.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Altham, P. M. E. A nonparametric measure of signal discriminability,British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, 1973,26, 1–12.
Atkinson, R. C., Bower, G. H., &Crothers, E. J.An introduction to mathematical learning theory New York: Wiley, 1965.
Atkinson, R. C., &Kinchla, R. A. A learning model for forced-choice detection experiments,British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, 1965,18, 183–206.
Broadbent, D. E. A reformulation of the Yerkes-Dodson law,British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, 1965,18, 145–157.
Broadbent, D. E.Decision and stress. London: Academic-Press. 1971.
Broadbent, D. E., &Gregory, M. Vigilance considered as a statistical decision,British Journal of Psychology, 1963,54, 309–323.
Bush, R. R. Estimation and evaluation. In R. D. Luce, R. R., Bush, und E. Galanter (Eds.),Handbook of mathematical psychology (Vol. 1). New York: Wiley, 1963.
Bush, R. R., Luce, R. D., &Rose, R. M. Learning models for psychophysics. In R. C. Atkinson (Ed.),Studies in mathematical psychology. Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1964.
Clarke, F. R. Confidence ratings, second-choice responses, and confusion matrices in intelligibility tests,Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 1960,32, 35–46.
Creelman, C. D., &Donaldson, W. ROC curves for discrimination ot linear extent,Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1968,77, 514–516.
Davis, R., Sutherland, N. S., &Judd, B. R. Information content in recognition and recall,Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1961,61, 422–429.
Decker, L., &Pollack, I. Confidence ratings and message reception tor filtered speech,Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 1959,30, 432–434.
Egan, J. P., Schulman, A. I., &Greenberg, G. Z. Operating characteristics determined by binary decisions and by ratings,Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 1959,31, 768–773.
Galanter, E., &Holman, G. L. Some invariances of the isosensitivity function and their implications for the utility function of money,Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1967,73, 333–339.
Green, D. M. Psychoacoustics and detection theory,Journal ol the Acoustical Society of America, 1960,32, 1189–1203.
Green, D. M., &Swets, J. A.Signal detection theory and psychophysics. New York: Wiley, 1966.
Hardy, G. R., &Legge, D. Cross-modal induction of changes in sensorv thresholds,Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1968,20, 20–29.
Healy, A. F., &Jones, C. Criterion shifts in recall,Psychological Bulletin, 1973,79, 335–340.
Hodos, W. Nonparametric index of response bias for use in detection and recognition experiments,Psychological Bulletin, 1970,74, 351–354.
Howarth, C. I. &Treisman, M. The effect of warning interval on the electric phosphene and auditory thresholds,Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1958,10, 130–141.
Ingham, J. B. Individual differences in signal detection,Acta Psychologica, 1970,34, 39–50.
Ingleby, J. D. Decision making processes in human perception and memory PhD thesis. University of Cambridge, 1969.
Luce, R. D. Detection and recognition. In R. D. Luce, R. R. Bush, and E. Galanter (Eds.),Handbook of mathematical psychology (Vol. 1). New York: Wiley, 1963.
Markowiiz, J., &Swets, J. A. Factors affecting the slope of empirical ROC curves: Comparison of binary and rating responses,Perception & Psychophysics, 1967,2, 91–100.
Moray, N.Attention Selective processes in vision and hearing London Hutchinson, 1969.
Moray, N., &O’brien, T. Signal detection theory applied to selective listening,Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 1967,42, 765–772.
Newman, J., &Pearson, E. S. On the problem of the most efficient lests ot statistical hypothesesPhilosophical Transactions of the Royal Society [London], 1933,A231, 289–337.
Norman, D. A. A comparison of data obtained with different lalse-alarm rates,Psychological Review, 1964,71, 243–246.
Norman, M F. Statistical inference with dependent observations: Lxlensions of classical procedures,Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 1971,8, 444–451.
Parks, T. E. Signal detectability theory of recognition memory performance,Psychological Review, 1960,73, 44–58.
Peterson, W. W., Birdsall, T. G., &Fox, W. C. The theory of signal detectability,IRE Transactions. Professional Group on Information I henry, 1954,4, 171–212.
Pollack, I., &Decker, L. Confidence ratings, message reception, and the receiver operating characteristic,Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 1958,30, 286–292.
Smith, P. T. Cost disermanability, and response bias,British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, 1968,21, 35–60
Smith, P. I. The non-monototeny of the psychometric function in recognition memoryPerception & Psychophysics, 1964,5, 329–337
Smith, P T. Decision piocesses in long term memory,Acta Psvchologica, 1970,33, 315–325.
Strong, E. K. I lie clicet ot length of series upon recognition memory,Psychological Review, 1912,19, 447–462.
Swets, J. A. Indices of signal detectability obtained with various psychophysical procedures,Journal of the Acoustical Society of Amenai, 1959,31, 511–513.
Swets, J. A., Tanner, W. P., &Birdsall, T. G. Decision processes in perception,Psychological Review, 1961,68, 301–340.
Tanner, T. A., Jr.,Haller, R. W., &Atkinson, R. C. Signal recognition as influenced by presentation schedules.Perception & Psychophysics, 1967,2, 349–358.
Tanner, T. A., Jr.,Rauk, J. A., &Atkinson, R. C. Signal recognition as influenced by information feedback,Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 1970,7, 259–274.
Thomas, E. A. C., &Legge, D. Probability matching as a basis for detection and recognition decisions,Psychological Review, 1970,77, 65–72.
Thomas, E. A. C., &Myers, J. L. Implications of latency data for threshold and non-threshold models ot signal detection,Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 1972,9, 253–285.
Treisman, A. M., &Geffen, G. Selective attention: Perception or response,Quarterly Journal of’ Experimental Psychology 1967,19, 1–17
Treisman, M. The effect of one stimulus on the threshold tor another: An application of signal detectability theory,British Journal of Statistical Psychology, 1964,17, 15–35.
Treisman, M., &Howarth, C. I. Changes in threshold level produced by a signal preceding or following the threshold stimulus,Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1959,11, 129–142.
Wickelgren, W. A. Unidimensional strength theory and component analysis of noise in absolute and comparative judgements,Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 1968,5, 102–122.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Dusoir, A.E. Treatments of bias in detection and recognition models: A review. Perception & Psychophysics 17, 167–178 (1975). https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03203882
Received:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03203882