The DOI matches its Crossref record.
A Note on ROC Analysis and Non-Parametric Estimate of Sensitivity
Abstract
In the signal detection paradigm, the non-parametric index of sensitivity A′, as first introduced by Pollack and Norman (1964), is a popular alternative to the more traditional d′ measure of sensitivity. Smith (1995) clarified a confusion about the interpretation of A′ in relation to the area beneath proper receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves, and provided a formula (which he called A′′) for this commonly held interpretation. However, he made an error in his calculations. Here, we rectify this error by providing the correct formula (which we call A) and compare the discrepancy that would have resulted. The corresponding measure for bias b is also provided. Since all such calculations apply to “proper” ROC curves with non-decreasing slopes, we also prove, as a separate result, the slope-monotonicity of ROC curves generated by likelihood-ratio criterion.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Due to these departures from normality, a nonparametric measure of sensitivity (A) and bias (b) was used.
“Due to these departures from normality, we used a nonparametric measure of sensitivity (A) and bias (b; Zhang & Mueller, 2005).”
From Enhanced Matching of Children’s Faces in “Super-Recognisers” But Not High-Contact Controls (2020) · cites this paper as Zhang & Mueller, 2005
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
No references could be resolved yet.
Research works printed but not linked: 14
- 10.1037/h0026862 · DOI
- 10.1006/jmps.1995.1007 · DOI
- 10.1006/jmps.1997.1168 · DOI
- 10.1037/1082-989X.3.1.68 · DOI
- 10.3758/BF03212415 · DOI
- 10.3758/BF03342823 · DOI
- Balakrishnan, 1999, Decision processes in discrimination: fundamental misrepresentations of signal detection theory, Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 25, 1189
- 10.1037/h0058700 · DOI
- 10.3758/BF03200547 · DOI
- 10.1037/h0040547 · DOI
- 10.1037/0033-295X.93.2.154 · DOI
- Green, 1964, Signal Detection Theory and Psychophysics
- 10.1109/TIT.1954.1057460 · DOI
- Newsome, 1989, Proceedings of the Retina Research Foundation Symposia, Vol. 2, Neural Mechanisms of Visual Perception, 171
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Performance-dependent inhibition of pain by an executive working memory task
Buhle, J., & Wager, T. D. (2010) · Pain · doi:10.1016/j.pain.2009.10.027 · Cited by 249
Cognitive fatigue weakens the effects of distraction on pain
Vogel, T. A., Desjardins, S., Chabot, B., Otto, A. R., Falk, C. F., & Roy, M. (2023) · Pain · doi:10.1097/j.pain.0000000000002985 · Cited by 15
Enhanced Matching of Children’s Faces in “Super-Recognisers” But Not High-Contact Controls
Bate, S., Bennetts, R., Murray, E., & Portch, E. (2020) · i-Perception · doi:10.1177/2041669520944420 · Cited by 12
Metadata
- Authors
- Zhang, J., & Mueller, S. T.
- Venue
- Psychometrika
- Publisher
- Cambridge University Press (CUP)
- Published
- 2005-03
- Volume
- 70
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 203-212
- ISSN
- 0033-3123
- 1860-0980
- Cited by
- 196
- References
- 0
- Language
- en
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
