CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 2,673

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Calculation of signal detection theory measures

Stanislaw, Harold, Todorov, Natasha·1999·Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers
DOI 10.3758/bf03207704
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3758/bf03207704

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • Response biases can be captured by recoding accuracy into hits and false positives and converting to d' and criterion.

    “These biases can be captured by recoding the accuracy of face-matching tasks into hits (correct responses on match trials) and false positives (incorrect responses on mismatch trials) and by converting these variables into the signal detection measures of d' (sensitivity) and criterion (see Stanislaw & Todorov, 1999).”

    From A criterion-placement theory of face matching (2026) · cites this paper as Stanislaw & Todorov, 1999

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

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 62

  1. Achenbach, T. M., &Edelbrock, C. S. (1983).Manual for the child behavior checklist and revised child behavior profile. Burlington: University of Vermont, Department of Psychiatry.
  2. Ahroon, W. A., Jr., &Pastore, R. E. (1977). Procedures for computingd′ andβ.Behavior Research Methods & Instrumentation,9, 533–537. · DOI
  3. Alf, E. F., &Grossberg, J.M. (1987). DORF2R. BAS: Analyzing signaldetection theory rating data in the BASIC programming language.Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers,19, 475–482. · DOI
  4. Banks, W. P. (1970). Signal detection theory and human memory.Psychological Bulletin,74, 81–99. · DOI
  5. Brophy, A. L. (1985). Approximation of the inverse normal distribution function.Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers,17, 415–417. · DOI
  6. Brophy, A. L. (1986). Alternatives to a table of criterion values in signal detection theory.Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers,18, 285–286. · DOI
  7. Centor, R. M. (1985). A Visicalc program for estimating the area under a receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve.Medical Decision Making,5, 139–148. · DOI
  8. Centor, R. M., &Schwartz, J. S. (1985). An evaluation of methods for estimating the area under a receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve.Medical Decision Making,5, 149–156. · DOI
  9. Cradit, J. D., Tashchian, A., &Hofacker, C. F. (1994). Signal detection theory and single observation designs: Methods and indices for advertising recognition testing.Journal of Marketing Research,31, 117–127. · DOI
  10. Craig, A. (1979). Nonparametric measures of sensory efficiency for sustained monitoring tasks.Human Factors,21, 69–78. · DOI
  11. Craig, A. (1985). Field studies of human inspection: The application of vigilance research. In S. Folkard & T. H. Monk (Eds.),Hours of work (pp. 133–145). Chichester, U.K.: Wiley.
  12. Craven, B. J. (1992). A table ofd′ forM-alternative odd-man-out forced-choice procedures.Perception & Psychophysics,51, 379–385. · DOI
  13. Davies, D. R., &Parasuraman, R. (1982).The psychology of vigilance. London: Academic Press.
  14. Donaldson, W. (1993). Accuracy ofd′ andA′ as estimates of sensitivity.Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society,31, 271–274. · DOI
  15. Dorfman, D. D. (1982). RSCORE II. In J. A. Swets & R. M. Pickett,Evaluation of diagnostic systems: Methods from signal detection theory (pp. 212–232). New York: Academic Press.
  16. Dorfman, D. D., &Berbaum, K. S. (1995). Degeneracy and discrete receiver operating characteristic rating data.Academic Radiology,2, 907–915. · DOI
  17. Elliott, P. B. (1964). Tables ofd′. In J. A. Swets (Ed.),Signal detection and recognition by human observers (pp. 651–684). New York: Wiley.
  18. Erdelyi, M. H. (1974). A new look at the New Look: Perceptual defense and vigilance.Psychological Review,81, 1–25. · DOI
  19. Freeman, P. R. (1973).Tables of d′ and β. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  20. Gardner, R. M., &Boice, R. (1986). A computer program to generate signal-detection theory values for sensitivity and response bias.Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers,18, 54–56. · DOI
  21. Gardner, R. M., Dalsing, S., Reyes, B., &Brake, S. (1984). Table of criterion values (β) used in signal detection theory.Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers,16, 425–436. · DOI
  22. Garland, H. L. (1949). On the scientific evaluation of diagnostic procedures.Radiology,52, 309–328. · DOI
  23. Goldstein, E. B. (1996).Sensation and perception (4th ed.). New York: Brooks Cole.
  24. Green, D. M., &Moses, F. L. (1966). On the equivalence of two recognition measures of short-term memory.Psychological Bulletin,66, 228–234. · DOI
  25. Green, D. M., &Swets, J. A. (1966).Signal detection theory and psychophysics. New York: Wiley.
  26. Grier, J. B. (1971). Nonparametric indexes for sensitivity and bias: Computing formulas.Psychological Bulletin,75, 424–429. · DOI
  27. Hacker, M. J., &Ratcliff, R. (1979). A revised table ofd′ form-alternative forced choice.Perception & Psychophysics,26, 168–170. · DOI
  28. Hautus, M. (1995). Corrections for extreme proportions and their biasing effects on estimated values ofd′.Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers,27, 46–51. · DOI
  29. Hershman, R. L., &Small, D. (1968). Tables ofd′ for detection and localization.Perception & Psychophysics,3, 321–323. · DOI
  30. Hodos, W. (1970). Nonparametric index of response bias for use in de tection and recognition experiments.Psychological Bulletin,74, 351–354. · DOI
  31. Hutchinson, T. P. (1981). A review of some unusual applications of signal detection theory.Quality & Quantity,15, 71–98. · DOI
  32. Ingham, J. G. (1970). Individual differences in signal detection.Acta Psychologica,34, 39–50. · DOI
  33. Kaplan, H. L., Macmillan, N. A., &Creelman, C. D. (1978). Tables ofd′ for variable-standard discrimination paradigms.Behavior Research Methods & Instrumentation,10, 796–813. · DOI
  34. Klatzky, R. L., &Erdelyi, M. H. (1985). The response criterion problem in tests of hypnosis and memory.International Journal of Clinical & Experimental Hypnosis,33, 246–257. · DOI
  35. Macmillan, N. A. (1993). Signal detection theory as data analysis method and psychological decision model. In G. Keren & C. Lewis (Eds.),A handbook for data analysis in the behavioral sciences: Methodological issues (pp. 21–57). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
  36. Macmillan, N. A., &Creelman, C. D. (1990). Response bias: Characteristics of detection theory, threshold theory, and “nonparametric” indexes.Psychological Bulletin,107, 401–413. · DOI
  37. Macmillan, N. A., &Creelman, C. D. (1991).Detection theory: A user’s guide. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  38. Macmillan, N. A., &Creelman, C. D. (1996). Triangles in ROC space: History and theory of “nonparametric” measures of sensitivity and bias.Psychonomic Bulletin & Review,3, 164–170. · DOI
  39. Macmillan, N. A., &Kaplan, H. L. (1985). Detection theory analysis of group data: Estimating sensitivity from average hit and false-alarm rates.Psychological Bulletin,98, 185–199. · DOI
  40. McGowan, W. T., III, &Appel, J. B. (1977). An APL program for calculating signal detection indices.Behavior Research Methods & Instrumentation,9, 517–521. · DOI
  41. McNicol, D. (1972).A primer of signal detection theory. London: Allen & Unwin.
  42. Miller, J. (1996). The sampling distribution ofd′.Perception & Psychophysics,58, 65–72. · DOI
  43. Naylor, J. C., &Lawshe, C. H. (1958). An analytical review of the experimental basis of subception.Journal of Psychology,46, 75–96. · DOI
  44. Nelson, T. O. (1986). ROC curves and measures of discrimination accuracy: A reply to Swets.Psychological Bulletin,100, 128–132. · DOI
  45. Pollack, I., &Norman, D. A. (1964). A nonparametric analysis of recognition experiments.Psychonomic Science,1, 125–126. · DOI
  46. Rey, J. M., Morris-Yates, A., &Stanislaw, H. (1992). Measuring the accuracy of diagnostic tests using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis.International Journal of Methods in Psychiatric Research,2, 39–50.
  47. Richards, B. L., &Thornton, C. L. (1970). Quantitative methods of calculating thed′ of signal detection theory.Educational & Psychological Measurement,30, 855–859. · DOI
  48. Richardson, J. T. E. (1994). Continuous recognition memory tests: Are the assumptions of the theory of signal detection really met?Journal of Clinical & Experimental Neuropsychology,16, 482–486. · DOI
  49. Smith, J. E. K. (1982). Simple algorithms for M-alternative forcedchoice calculations.Perception & Psychophysics,31, 95–96. · DOI
  50. Smith, W. D. (1995). Clarification of sensitivity measureA′.Journal of Mathematical Psychology,39, 82–89. · DOI
  51. Snodgrass, J. G., &Corwin, J. (1988). Pragmatics of measuring recognition memory: Applications to dementia and amnesia.Journal of Experimental Psychology: General,117, 34–50. · DOI
  52. Snodgrass, J. G., Levy-Berger, G., &Haydon, M. (1985).Human experimental psychology. New York: Oxford University Press.
  53. Stanislaw, H. (1995). Effect of type of task and number of inspectors on performance of an industrial inspection-type task.Human Factors,37, 182–192. · DOI
  54. Stanislaw, H. (1996). Relative versus absolute judgments, and the effect of batch composition on simulated industrial inspection. In R. J. Koubek & W. Karwowski (Eds.),Manufacturing agility and hybrid automation: I (pp. 105–108). Louisville, KY: IEA Press.
  55. Stanislaw, H., &Todorov, N. (1992). Documenting the rise and fall of a psychological theory: Whatever happened to signal detection theory? (Abstract).Australian Journal of Psychology,44, 128.
  56. Swets, J. A. (1973). The relative operating characteristic in psychology.Science,182, 990–1000. · DOI
  57. Swets, J. A. (1986). Form of empirical ROCs in discrimination and diagnostic tasks: Implications for theory and measurement of performance.Psychological Bulletin,99, 181–198. · DOI
  58. Swets, J. A. (1988a). Measuring the accuracy of diagnostic systems.Science,240, 1285–1293. · DOI · Paper page
  59. Swets, J. A. (Ed.) (1988b).Signal detection and recognition by human observers. New York: Wiley.
  60. Swets, J. A., &Pickett, R. M. (1982).Evaluation of diagnostic systems: Methods from signal detection theory. New York: Academic Press.
  61. Thomas, E. A. C., &Hogue, A. (1976). Apparent weight of evidence, decision criteria, and confidence ratings in juror decision making.Psychological Review,83, 442–465. · DOI
  62. Zelen, M., &Severo, N. C. (1972). Probability functions. In M. Abramowitz & I. A. Stegun (Eds.),Handbook of mathematical functions with formulas, graphs, and mathematical tables (pp. 925–973). Washington, DC: National Bureau of Standards.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Stanislaw, H., & Todorov, N.
Venue
Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Published
1999-03
Volume
31
Issue
1
Pages
137-149
ISSN
  • 0743-3808
  • 1532-5970
DOI
10.3758/bf03207704
Cited by
2,673
References
1
Language
en
Licence
www.springer.com/tdm (tdm)

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