The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Visual signal detection IV Observer inconsistency
Abstract
Historically, human signal-detection responses have been assumed to be governed by external determinants (nature of the signal, the noise, and the task) and internal determinants. Variability in the internal determinants is commonly attributed to internal noise (often vaguely defined). We present a variety of experimental results that demonstrate observer inconsistency in performing noise-limited visual detection and discrimination tasks with repeated presentation of images. Our results can be interpreted by using a model that includes an internal-noise component that is directly proportional to image noise. This so-called induced internal-noise component dominates when external noise is easily visible. We demonstrate that decision-variable fluctuations lead to this type of internal noise. Given this induced internal-noise proportionality (sigma i/sigma 0 = 0.75 +/- 0.1), the upper limit to human visual signal-detection efficiency is 64% +/- 6%. This limit is consistent with a variety of results presented in earlier papers in this series.
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
Mechanisms of perceptual learning
Dosher, B. A., & Lu, Z.-L. (1999) · Vision Research · doi:10.1016/s0042-6989(99)00059-0 · Cited by 394
Abbey, C. K., & Barrett, H. H. (2001) · Journal of the Optical Society of America A · doi:10.1364/josaa.18.000473 · Cited by 324
Metadata
- Authors
- Burgess, A. E., & Colborne, B.
- Venue
- Journal of the Optical Society of America A
- Publisher
- Optica Publishing Group
- Published
- 1988-04-01
- Volume
- 5
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 617
- ISSN
- 1084-7529 (ISSN-L)
- 1520-8532
- OpenAlex
- W2074914673
- Cited by
- 282
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 1.40
- 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: Visual signal detection IV Observer inconsistency. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1364/josaa.5.000617
- The paper
- Burgess, A. E., & Colborne, B. (1988). Visual signal detection IV Observer inconsistency. Journal of the Optical Society of America A. https://doi.org/10.1364/josaa.5.000617
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.
