Comparisons of Two Variants of the Method of Constant Stimuli for Estimating Difference Thresholds
Abstract
The two-alternative forced-choice (2AFC) and the reminder tasks are variants of the method of constant stimuli. One or the other task is usually employed for estimating the difference limen (DL) in psychophysical research. Lapid, Ulrich, and Rammsayer (2008) found that the 2AFC task yields larger DLs than the reminder task for duration discrimination judgments. The results of the present paper confirm that this discrepancy also generalizes to discrimination judgments about nontemporal, visual information (Experiment 1: Random dot pattern discrimination; Experiment 2: Line-length discrimination). It is argued that this discrepancy is related to the presentation order of the standard and the comparison stimulus.
References
(1991). Size invariance in visual number discrimination. Psychological Records, 53, 290–295.
(2005). What makes us tick? Functional and neural mechanisms of interval timing. Nature Neuroscience, 6, 755–764.
(1983). The precision of numerosity discrimination in array of random dots. Vision Research, 23, 811–820.
(1963). Estimation and evaluation. In , Handbook of mathematical psychology (Vol. 1, pp. 429–469). New York: Wiley.
(1997). Psychophysics: The fundamentals (3rd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
(2001). From physical time to the first and second moments of psychological time. Psychological Bulletin, 127, 22–44.
(2008). On estimating the difference limen in duration discrimination tasks: A comparison of the 2AFC and the reminder task. Perception and Psychophysics, 70, 291–305.
(2005). Detection theory: A user’s guide (2nd ed.). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
(2000). The use of an implicit standard for measuring discrimination thresholds. Vision Research, 40, 2341–2349.
(2006). The role of virtual standards in visual discrimination. Vision Research, 46, 2456–2464.
(2003). Visual discrimination of number without counting. Perception, 32, 867–870.
(1971). On the exponents in Stevens’ Law and the constant in Ekman’s Law. Psychological Review, 78, 71–81.
(1976). The discrimination of brief intervals. Acta Psychologica, 40, 489–493.
(1997). Learning and generalization of auditory temporal-interval discrimination in humans. Journal of Neuroscience, 17, 3956–3963.
(1997). Temporal cognition. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 6, 12–16.
