PubMed Health⌕ Search
Home/Archive/PubMed

PubMed · 8533322

Combining speed information across space.

P Verghese·L S Stone
View original source ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

We used speed discrimination tasks to measure the ability of observers to combine speed information from multiple stimuli distributed across space. We compared speed discrimination thresholds in a classical discrimination paradigm to those in an uncertainty/search paradigm. Thresholds were measured using a temporal two-interval forced-choice design. In the discrimination paradigm, the n gratings in each interval all moved at the same speed and observers were asked to choose the interval with the faster gratings. Discrimination thresholds for this paradigm decreased as the number of gratings increased. This decrease was not due to increasing the effective stimulus area as a control experiment that increased the area of a single grating did not show a similar improvement in thresholds. Adding independent speed noise to each of the n gratings caused thresholds to decrease at a rate similar to the original no-noise case, consistent with observers combining an independent sample of speed from each grating in both the added- and no-noise cases. In the search paradigm, observers were asked to choose the interval in which one of the n gratings moved faster. Thresholds in this case increased with the number of gratings, behavior traditionally attributed to an input bottleneck. However, results from the discrimination paradigm showed that the increase was not due to observers' inability to process these gratings. We have also shown that the opposite trends of the data in the two paradigms can be predicted by a decision theory model that combines independent samples of speed information across space. This demonstrates that models typically used in classical detection and discrimination paradigms are also applicable to search paradigms. As our model does not distinguish between samples in space and time, it predicts that discrimination performance should be the same regardless of whether the gratings are presented in two spatial intervals or two temporal intervals. Our last experiment largely confirmed this prediction.

Explore related subjects

Decision TheoryDifferential ThresholdHumansMaleModels, BiologicalMotion PerceptionPattern Recognition, VisualPsychophysicsTime FactorsNASA Center ARCNASA Discipline NeuroscienceJournal ArticleResearch Support, Non-U.S. Gov'tResearch Support, U.S. Gov't, Non-P.H.S.

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

P Verghese, L S Stone. 1995. Combining speed information across space.. https://doi.org/10.1016/0042-6989(95)00038-2

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

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

PubMed2006

What does the precautionary principle mean for evidence-based dentistry?

The precautionary principle calls for preventive actions in the face of uncertain information about risks. It serves as a compass to better guide more health-protective decisions in the face of complex risks. Applying precaution requires thinking more broadly about risks, taking an interdisciplinary approach to science and policy, and considering a wide range of alternatives to potentially harmful activities. While often criticized as antiscientific, the precautionary principle represents a challenge to scientists and public health professionals to develop newer and more effective tools for characterizing and preventing complex risks, in addition to being more explicit about uncertainties. This article examines the role and application of precaution in the context of dental practice, where activities that may convey risks also have public health benefits, and risk trade offs are a possibility. We conclude that the precautionary principle is not at odds with, but rather complements evidence-based practice in situations of scientific uncertainty and complex risks.

Decision Theory↗
PubMed2006

Science-policy in environmental and health risk assessment: if we cannot do without, can we do better?

How can empirical evidence of adverse effects from exposure to noxious agents, which is often incomplete and uncertain, be used most appropriately to protect human health? We examine several important questions on the best uses of empirical evidence in regulatory risk management decision-making raised by the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)'s science-policy concerning uncertainty and variability in human health risk assessment. In our view, the US EPA (and other agencies that have adopted similar views of risk management) can often improve decision-making by decreasing reliance on default values and assumptions, particularly when causation is uncertain. This can be achieved by more fully exploiting decision-theoretic methods and criteria that explicitly account for uncertain, possibly conflicting scientific beliefs and that can be fully studied by advocates and adversaries of a policy choice, in administrative decision-making involving risk assessment. The substitution of decision-theoretic frameworks for default assumption-driven policies also allows stakeholder attitudes toward risk to be incorporated into policy debates, so that the public and risk managers can more explicitly identify the roles of risk-aversion or other attitudes toward risk and uncertainty in policy recommendations. Decision theory provides a sound scientific way explicitly to account for new knowledge and its effects on eventual policy choices. Although these improvements can complicate regulatory analyses, simplifying default assumptions can create substantial costs to society and can prematurely cut off consideration of new scientific insights (e.g., possible beneficial health effects from exposure to sufficiently low 'hormetic' doses of some agents). In many cases, the administrative burden of applying decision-analytic methods is likely to be more than offset by improved effectiveness of regulations in achieving desired goals. Because many foreign jurisdictions adopt US EPA reasoning and methods of risk analysis, it may be especially valuable to incorporate decision-theoretic principles that transcend local differences among jurisdictions.

Decision Theory↗