Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36083217›Full record

ArticleJournal of vision2022

Maximum likelihood estimation of difference scaling functions for suprathreshold judgments.

Emily S Teti, Terece L Turton, Jonah M Miller, Roxana Bujack

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of vision, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Emily S TetiComputer, Computational, and Statistical Sciences Division, Los Alamos National Laboratory, Los Alamos, NM, USA.
Terece L TurtonComputer, Computational, and Statistical Sciences Division, Los Alamos National Laboratory, Los Alamos, NM, USA.
Jonah M MillerComputer, Computational, and Statistical Sciences Division, Los Alamos National Laboratory, Los Alamos, NM, USA.
Roxana BujackComputer, Computational, and Statistical Sciences Division, Los Alamos National Laboratory, Los Alamos, NM, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Maximum likelihood estimation (MLE) has been used to produce perceptual scales from binary judgments of triads and quadruples. This method relies on Thurstone's theory of a stochastic perceptual process where the perceived difference of two stimuli is the difference in their perceived strengths. It is possible that the perception of a suprathreshold difference is overestimated when adding smaller differences, a phenomenon referred to as diminishing returns. The current approach to construct a perceptual scale using MLE does not account for this phenomenon. We present a way to model the perception of differences using MLE and Thurstone's theory, adapted to allow the possibility of diminishing returns. This method is validated using Monte Carlo simulated responses to experimental triads and can correctly model diminishing returns, the absence of diminishing returns, and the opposite of diminishing returns both in the cases when a perceptual scale is known and when the true perceived strengths of the stimuli are unknown. Additionally, this method was applied to empirical data sets to determine its feasibility in investigations of perception. Ultimately, it was found that this analysis allows for more accurate modeling of suprathreshold difference judgments, a more complete understanding of the perceptual processes underlying comparisons, and the evaluation of Thurstone's theory of difference judgments.

Indexed as

JudgmentHumansLikelihood FunctionsMonte Carlo MethodStochastic Processes

Identifiers

PMID36083217
PMCPMC9469040

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.