scholarly journals The variance of d′ estimates obtained in yes—no and two-interval forced choice procedures

2005 ◽  
Vol 67 (1) ◽  
pp. 72-80 ◽  
Author(s):  
Walt Jesteadt
Keyword(s):  
Forced Choice ◽  
Choice Procedures

Observed variability in d′ for yes‐no and two‐interval forced choice procedures

2006 ◽  
Vol 120 (5) ◽  
pp. 3124-3124
Author(s):  
Walt Jesteadt ◽  
Lori Leibold ◽  
Samar Khaddam ◽  
Jessica Messersmith ◽  
Melissa Krivohlavek
Keyword(s):  
Forced Choice ◽  
Choice Procedures

Comparison of Pure-Tone Audibility Thresholds Obtained with Audiological and Two-Interval Forced-Choice Procedures

1986 ◽  
Vol 29 (1) ◽  
pp. 82-91 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lynne Marshall ◽  
Walt Jesteadt
Keyword(s):  
Response Bias ◽  
Pure Tone ◽  
Sound Pressure ◽  
Forced Choice ◽  
Adaptive Procedure ◽  
Clinical Procedure ◽  
Clinical Procedures ◽  
Choice Procedures ◽  
Adaptive Thresholds ◽  
The Difference

Audibility thresholds were measured at 500 and 4000 Hz with a standard clinical procedure and a two-interval, forced-choice (2IFC) adaptive procedure for 72 normal-hearing and hearing-impaired listeners, age 17 to 83. Psychometric functions were obtained for clinical, 2IFC, and Yes-No procedures. A measure of response bias was obtained from the Yes-No procedure. The 2IFC adaptive thresholds were 6.5 dB lower than audiological thresholds. The psychometric functions for the forced?choice procedures were generally shallower than those for the clinical procedure and were shifted to lower sound pressure levels. Response bias played a small role at best in accounting for the magnitude of the difference in threshold estimated by the adaptive and clinical procedures or for the differences among the psychometric functions.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document