PubMed Health⌕ Search

PubMed · 10830389

Experience with a yes-no single-interval maximum-likelihood procedure.

Abstract

The report in 1993 by Green [J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 93, 2096-2105 (1993)] describing the application of a new psychophysical method requiring few trials and little time to measure auditory thresholds has generated considerable interest among experimentalists. The procedure uses a single-interval stimulus presentation, requests a yes-no decision by subjects, and implements a maximum-likelihood calculation to determine the next trial stimulus level within an adaptive track, as well as the final threshold estimate. Data are presented here describing separate experiences with this procedure in two laboratories in both detection and discrimination tasks. Issues addressed include comparisons with more traditional psychophysical methods, variability in threshold estimates, experimental time required, and possible minor modifications to improve the basic procedure. Results using this procedure are comparable in terms of variability of estimates to those emerging from more lengthy procedures. However, because it may be difficult for some listeners to maintain a consistent criterion and because attentional lapses may be costly, experimenters must be willing to monitor performance closely and repeat some tracks in cases where excessively high variability is noted. Further, this procedure may not be suitable for tasks for which the form of the psychometric function is not well-established. Modifications allowing a variable slope parameter in the maximum-likelihood evaluations of psychometric functions may be of benefit.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

M R Leek, J R Dubno, N He, J B Ahlstrom. 2000. Experience with a yes-no single-interval maximum-likelihood procedure.. https://doi.org/10.1121/1.428653

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

A low glycaemic index breakfast cereal preferentially prevents children's cognitive performance from declining throughout the morning.

This study investigated whether the glycaemic index (GI) of breakfast cereal differentially affects children's attention and memory. Using a balanced cross-over design, on two consecutive mornings 64 children aged 6-11 years were given a high GI cereal and a low GI cereal in a counterbalanced order. They performed a series of computerised tests of attention and memory, once prior to breakfast and three times following breakfast at hourly intervals. The results indicate that children's performance declines throughout the morning and that this decline can be significantly reduced following the intake of a low GI cereal as compared with a high GI cereal on measures of accuracy of attention (M=-6.742 and -13.510, respectively, p<0.05) and secondary memory (M=-30.675 and -47.183, respectively, p<0.05).

Attention↗

Inhibitory control test is a simple method to diagnose minimal hepatic encephalopathy and predict development of overt hepatic encephalopathy.

OBJECTIVES: To compare inhibitory control test (ICT), a simple/rapid test of attention, to a standard psychometric battery (SPT) to diagnose minimal hepatic encephalopathy (MHE) and predict development of overt hepatic encephalopathy (OHE) in cirrhotic patients. METHODS: Fifty nonalcoholic cirrhotics and 50 age/educational-status-matched controls were given ICT and SPT in the same sitting. Performance impaired beyond two standard deviations of controls was considered MHE in cirrhotics. ICT results (lure/target response and lures/person) were compared between controls and cirrhotics and within cirrhotics with/without MHE. Receiver-operating characteristic analysis was used to study ICT for MHE diagnosis. Twenty subjects were administered SPT and ICT twice to assess test-retest reliability. All cirrhotics were followed routinely for the development of OHE. RESULTS: Cirrhotics performed worse than controls on SPT and ICT. Using SPT, 39 cirrhotics had MHE. ICT was administered faster than SPT (15 vs 37 min). Cirrhotics with MHE had significantly higher lure (28%vs 3%) and lower target response (91%vs 96%) compared with those without MHE. Lure/person >5 had 90% sensitivity/specificity for MHE diagnosis. AUC for receiver-operating characteristic for lures alone was 95.8%. Lure and target responses were highly correlated (r= 0.9) between sessions showing high test-retest reliability. Five (10%) patients developed OHE on f/u of 26 +/- 10 months; all five had been diagnosed with MHE using ICT and SPT. None of the five patients with discordant results on SPT and ICT developed OHE. CONCLUSIONS: ICT has good sensitivity/specificity for MHE diagnosis, is reliable and is equivalent to SPT for predicting OHE development.

Attention↗