Signal detection theory cannot distinguish
Transcription
Signal detection theory cannot distinguish
Signal detection theory cannot distinguish perceptual and response-based biases: Evidence from the Muller-Lyer illusion and application for action-specific effects 2, John Wixted3 Jessica K. Witt12, J. Eric T Taylor y 2, Mila Sugovic g 1Colorado State University, 2Purdue University, 3UC-San Diego Action-Specific Perception SDT & Muller-Lyer Illusion Alternative Techniques Witt & Sugovic (in preparation) Performance influences p perceptual p jjudgments: g Athletes who perform better than others report that the target looks bigger, closer, or slower. Sample S l display di l off the th experiment. i t The Th top t left l ft line li was the th standard t d d line and was the same length on each trial. The bottom right line was the comparison line. On each trial, this line was set to 1 of 6 possible lengths and had the tails oriented out (as depicted here) or the tails oriented in. Ps indicated which line was longer. 1) Fish moves across screen @ 1-6 speeds 2) Press trigger to release net – attempt to intersect fish 3) Speed bisection task: Judge whether fish moved more like the slow speed or more like the fast speed Witt et al.(2011) Witt et al.(2008) Witt & Sugovic (2010) Witt & Proffitt (2005) Judgment-Based Measure Direction of the effect is specific to the task: Parkour experts judge walls (aka obstacles) to be lower. Taylor et al.(2011) Heavy objects seem lighter when anticipating help from another person Canal-Bruland & van den Kamp (2009) Action-Based Measure Proportion of trials on which participants responded that the comparison line was longer as a function of actual line length and tail orientation. The gray dashed arrows indicate the PSE for each tail orientation i t ti condition. diti Table 1. Means (and Standard Deviations) from SDT analyses with the Muller‐Lyer illusion. Targets within reach as a result of using a tool look closer to actors and to observers Witt & Dorsch (2009) Bloesch et al. (2012) Davoli et al., (2012) Linkenauger et al. (submitted) Witt et al.(2005) Doerrfeld et al. al (2011) Question: Does Perception Change? Classifications: Hits = correctly classifying long lines as long False Alarms = incorrectly classifying short lines as long • 3 Sources of Support: • Prior demonstrations: Mack et al., 2011; Wixted & Stretch, 2000 • Empirical: Muller-Lyer illusion influences c, not d’ • Theoretical: Bias in perception and bias in decision both create effects in c, not d’ References 2.73 (0.82) 1.50 (.62) Tails-Out 2.50 (1.06) -1.41 (.71) ns n.s. *** Eq ations Used Equations Used: d' = [ z(H) – z(FA) ] / √2 (1) c = -0.5 * [ z(H) + z(FA) ] (2) d’ Judgment-Based Measure Changes that Influence d’ b c Means are changed Baseline • Both of the changes (depicted in a and c) would result in changes in d’ • Neither change is predicted to occur for the Muller-Lyer illusion (or for actionspecific effects) • So no predicted effect in d’ d for either. either Spread is changed Balcetis, E. & Dunning, D. (2010). Wishful seeing: Desirable objects are seen as closer. Psychological Science, 21, 147-152. Bloesch,E.K., Davoli,C.C., Roth,N., Brockmole,J.R., & Abrams,R.A. (2012). Psychonomic Bulletin & Review. Changes that Influence c Cañal-Bruland, R. & van der Kamp, J. (2009). Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 16, 1100-1105. Davoli, C. C., Brockmole, J. R., & Witt, J. K. (2012). Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 38. Doerrfeld, A., Sebanz, N.,& Shiffrar, M. (2011). Expecting to Lift a box together makes the load look lighter. Psychological Research. Lessard, D.A., Linkenauger, S.A., & Proffitt, D.R. (2009). Look before you leap: Jumping ability influences distance perception. Perception d Linkenauger, S.A., Bulthoff, H.H., & Mohler, B.M. (submitted). Go-go-gadget arms! The influence of virtual arm reach on perceived… No perceptual bias Response bias for “Long” Li k Linkenauger, S S.A., A Witt Witt, JJ.K., K &P Proffitt, ffitt D.R. D R (2011). (2011) Journal J l off Experimental E i t l Psychology: P h l Human H Perception P ti and dP Performance, f 37 37. Mack,M.L., Richler,J.J., Gauthier,I., & Palmeri,T.J. (2011). Indecision on decisional separability. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 18. Taylor, J.E.T., Witt, J.K., & Sugovic, M. (2011). When walls are no longer barriers: Perception of wall height in parkour. Perception,40. e Baseline Stefanucci, J. K., & Proffitt, D. R. (2009). Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 35, 424-438. • Anticipated results based on a responsebased bias (a) and a perceptual bias (c) • Both types of biases result in the same relative distributions of hits and false alarms, so no change to d’ • Both types of biases lead to an increase in hits and false alarms, leading to effects in c Witt, J. K., & Dorsch, T. (2009). Perception, 38, 1328-1340. Witt, J. K., Linkenauger, S. A., Bakdash, J. Z., & Proffitt, D. R. (2008). Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 15, 581-585. Witt, J. K., & Proffitt, D.R. (2005). Psychological Science, 16, 937-938. Witt, J. K., Schuck, D. M., & Taylor, J. E. T. (2011). Action-specific effects underwater. Perception, 40, 530-537. Witt, J. K., & Sugovic, M. (2010). Performance and ease influence perceived speed. Perception, 39, 1341-1353 Wixted,J.T., & Stretch,V. (2000). The case against a criterion-shift account of false memory. Psychological Review, 107, 368-376. f F(2, 36.05) = 5.01, p < .05, ηp2 = .22 Action-Based Measure Experiment 2: Judge speed of fish on a scale of 1-7: Note. n.s. = not significant. *** = p < .001. • Hypothetical distributions of perception of short lines (blue curves) and long lines (pink curves) • Black line represents the decision criterion location for classifying a line as “long” rather than “short” • Hits: Correctly classifying long lines as long • False Alarms: Misclassifying short lines as long • Area under pink curve to right of black line • Area under blue curve to right of black line a F(2, 36) = 16.73, p < .001, ηp2= .48 c Overview of SDT Measures • What is being affected: Perception or Responses? • Can we use Signal Detection Theory (SDT) to separate out processes related to perception and processes related to the response? • Seems like SDT is designed to do just that • Answer: NO • SDT cannot separate perceptual biases from response biases Tail Orientation Tails-In Perceptual bias to see as longer No response bias Thus, c cannot be used to discriminate between decision-based and perceptual biases F(2, 20) = 7.64, p < .01, ηp2 = .43 F(2, 22.03) = 5.10, p < .05, ηp2 = .32 Discussion • Signal Detection Theory cannot be used to differentiate between perceptual biases and response-based biases • Such as the Muller-Lyer illusion and action-specific effects • A technique that is valid must be able to prove that the Muller-Lyer illusion is perceptual (or researcher must claim the illusion is not perceptual) SDT researchers must rely on other techniques to evaluate • Without SDT, whether action-specific effects are perceptual • Action-based measures (see also Balcetis & Dunning, 2010; Witt et al. 2010) • Indirect measures (see Stefanucci & Proffitt, 2009; Witt, 2011) • Functional Specificity (Lessard et al., 2009; Linkenauger et al., 2011; Witt et al., 2004) • Rule out methodological artifacts/demands (Witt & Sugovic, in press, submitted) Perceive environment in terms of ability y to act on it For More Information Contact Jessi Witt (jkwitt@purdue.edu), Purdue University Starting at Colorado State University in Fall 2012 Web: www.psych.purdue.edu/~jkwitt