The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Nonparametric indexes for sensitivity and bias: Computing formulas.
Abstract
Computing formulas are derived for two nonparametric indexes of sensitivity and bias that have been suggested for signal detectability studies. A relationship is shown between the sensitivity index and P(I), a statistic whose sampling variability is known. An additional index of bias is proposed, which is free of certain inconveniences, yet yields identical isobias contours. Use of the new indexes is illustrated with several sets of data. Development of the theory of signal detectability has lead to a renewed interest in the possible processes involved in perception, psychophysics, and recognition memory. To a considerable extent both theory and research in these areas have rested on specific assumptions about the underlying distributions (as in the various threshold theories versus normality). But even without explicit assumption about the distributions, data are often judged by how close they lie to operating characteristic curves derived from normal distributions, and different experimental conditions are characterized by their value of d'. Recently there has been a growing interest in various "nonparametric " analyses of detection/ recognition experiments, where specific underlying distributions are not assumed. Following one line of development, Green (1964) has shown that for experiments using the yes-no procedure, the area under the (theoretical) operating characteristic curve can be interpreted as the percentage correct on an equivalent unbiased forced-choice test, and that this is true for any continuous underlying distributions. The sampling variability of this area measure has been determined by Pollack and Hsieh (1969). A similar proof for ratingscale experiments is due to Green and Moses (1966). However, using data to estimate the area under a curve of unknown theoretical shape presents difficulties. One expedient has been to connect the points and use the trapezoidal rule (Green & Moses, 1966; Pollack, Norman, & Galanter, 1964). If the true func-
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.
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
Cited by
Calculation of signal detection theory measures
Stanislaw, H., & Todorov, N. (1999) · Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers · doi:10.3758/bf03207704 · Cited by 2,673
A comparison of current measures of the accuracy of feeling-of-knowing predictions
Nelson, T. O. (1984) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/0033-2909.95.1.109 · Cited by 976
Exploring differences in males’ and females’ processing strategies
Meyers-Levy, J., & Maheswaran, D. (1991) · Journal of Consumer Research · doi:10.1086/209241 · Cited by 779
Developmental changes in perception of nonnative vowel contrasts.
Polka, L., & Werker, J. F. (1994) · Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance · doi:10.1037/0096-1523.20.2.421 · Cited by 721
Happé, F., Booth, R., Charlton, R., & Hughes, C. (2006) · Brain and Cognition · doi:10.1016/j.bandc.2006.03.004 · Cited by 638
Metadata
- Authors
- Grier, J. B.
- Venue
- Psychological Bulletin
- Published
- 1971
- Volume
- 75
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 424-429
- ISSN
- 0033-2909 (ISSN-L)
- 1939-1455
- OpenAlex
- W2031050189
- Cited by
- 1,039
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 5.02
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Nonparametric indexes for sensitivity and bias: Computing formulas. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1037/h0031246
- The paper
- Grier, J. B. (1971). Nonparametric indexes for sensitivity and bias: Computing formulas. Psychological Bulletin. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0031246
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.