Abstract
Ratcliff (1985) performed fits of his diffusion model to the results of multiletter-matching experiments conducted by Ratcliff and Hacker (1981) and Proctor, Rao, and Hurst (1984), in which bias to respond “same” or “different” was manipulated by instructions and probabilities, respectively. The fits showed that both bias manipulations affected settings of a goodness-of-match criterion, whereas instructions also affected sensitivity. Evaluations of the experimental procedures and of Ratcliff’s model-fitting procedures were performed in the present study. Three experiments showed that instructions and probabilities had similar effects, regardless of whether the different pairs were blocked or randomized according to the number of mismatching positions. The most salient feature of the results—that \ldsame\rd reaction times were traded off more than were \lddifferent\rd reaction times, with no corresponding asymmetry in the error rates—was evident in all situations. The evaluation of Ratcliff’s model-fitting procedures indicated that the apparent influence of instructions on sensitivity likely is an artifact of unequal variance for the sets of same and different pairs. Moreover, the effects of bias can be explained in terms of settings of response criteria, rather than of the goodness-of-match criterion, as in Ratcliff’s fits.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
References
Ashby, F. G. (1983). A biased random walk model for two choice reaction times.Journal of Mathematical Psychology,27, 277–297.
Baird, J. C., &Noma, E. (1978).Fundamentals of scaling and psychophysics. New York: Wiley.
Bamber, D. (1969). Reaction times and error rates for “same-different” judgments of multidimensional stimuli.Perception & Psychophysics,6, 169–174.
Coltheart, M., &Curthoys, I. (1968). Short-term recognition memory for pitch: Effect of a priori probability on response times and error rates.Perception & Psychophysics,4, 85–89.
Downing, B. D. (1971). Response probabilities and “same”-“different” reaction times.Perception & Psychophysics,9, 213–215.
Eriksen, C. W., O’Hara, W. P., &Eriksen, B. A. (1982). Response competition effects in same-different judgments.Perception & Psychophysics,32, 261–270.
Eriksen, C. W., &Schultz, D. W. (1979). Information processing in visual search: A continuous flow conception and experimental results.Perception & Psychophysics,25, 249–263.
Gescheider, G. A. (1985).Psychophysics: Method, theory, and application (2nd ed). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Green, D. M., &Swets, J. A. (1966).Signal detection theory and psychophysics. New York: Wiley.
Hyman, R. (1953). Stimulus information as a determinant of reaction time.Journal of Fxperimental Psychology,45, 188–196.
Krueger, L. E. (1978). A theory of perceptual matching.Psychological Review,85, 278–304.
Krueger, L. E. (1979). A model of unidimensional perceptual matching.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,5, 277–288.
Krueger, L. E. (1986). Positive effect of heterogeneity of difference on thesame-different disparity in letter matching.Perception & Psychophysics,39, 117–122.
Krueger, L. E., &Shapiro, R. G. (1981). Intertrial effects ofsame-different judgments.Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology,33A, 241–265.
Laming, D. R. J. (1968).Information theory of choice-reaction times. New York: Academic Press.
Link, S. W. (1975). The relative judgment theory of two choice response time.Journal of Mathematical Psychology,12, 114–135.
McNicol, D. (1972).A primer of signal detection theory. London: Allen & Unwin.
Proctor, R. W. (1986). Response bias, criteria settings, and the fast-same phenomenon: A reply to Ratcliff.Psychological Review,93, 473–477.
Proctor, R. W., &Healy, A. F. (1987). Task-specific serial position effects in multiletter matching.Perception & Psychophysics,42, 180–194.
Proctor, R. W., &Rao, K. V. (1982). On the “misguided” use of reaction-time differences: A discussion of Ratctiff and Hacker (1981).Perception & Psychophysics,31, 601–602.
Proctor, R. W., &Rao, K. V. (1983). Evidence that thesame-different disparity in letter matching is not attributable to response bias.Perception & Psychophysics,34, 72–76.
Proctor, R. W., Rao, K. V., &Hurst, P. W. (1984). An examination of response bias in multiletter matching.Perception & Psychophysics,35, 464–476.
Ratcliff, R. (1978). A theory of memory retrieval.Psychological Review,85, 59–108.
Ratcliff, R. (1981). A theory of order relations in perceptual matching.Psychological Review,88, 552–572.
Ratcliff, R. (1985). Theoretical interpretations of speed and accuracy of positive and negative responses.Psychological Review,92, 212–225
Ratcliff, R. (1987). More on the speed and accuracy of positive and negative responses.Psychological Review,94, 277–280.
Ratcliff, R., &Hacker, M. J. (1981). Speed and accuracy of same and different responses in perceptual matching.Perception & Psychophysics,30, 303–307.
Snodgrass, J. G., Luce, R. D., &Galanter, E. (1967). Some experiments on simple and choice reaction time.Journal of Experimental Psychology,75, 1–17.
Stone, M. (1960). Models for choice-reaction time.Psychometrika,25, 251–260.
Swets, J. A. (1964).Signal detection and recognition by human observers. New York: Wiley.
Taylor, D. A. (1976). Effect of identity in the multiletter matching task.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,2, 417–428.
Townsend, J. T., &Ashby, F. G. (1983).Stochastic modeling of elementary psychological processes. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Additional information
This research was supported in part by Grant AFOSR-88-0002 from the Air Force Office of Scientific Research.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Proctor, R.W., Weeks, D.J. Instructional and probability manipulations of bias in multiletter matching. Perception & Psychophysics 45, 55–65 (1989). https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03208033
Received:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03208033