Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38690062›Full record

Articlei-Perception

Continuous psychophysics for two-variable experiments; A new "Bayesian participant" approach.

Michael Falconbridge, Robert L Stamps, Mark Edwards, David R Badcock

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in i-Perception. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. 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.

Michael FalconbridgeSchool of Psychology, University of Western Australia, Crawley, WA, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9552-2597
Robert L StampsUniversity of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Canada.
Mark EdwardsResearch School of Psychology, Australian National University, Canberra, ACT, Australia.
David R BadcockSchool of Psychology, University of Western Australia, Crawley, WA, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4517-435X

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Interest in continuous psychophysical approaches as a means of collecting data quickly under natural conditions is growing. Such approaches require stimuli to be changed randomly on a continuous basis so that participants can not guess future stimulus states. Participants are generally tasked with responding continuously using a continuum of response options. These features introduce variability in the data that is not present in traditional trial-based experiments. Given the unique weaknesses and strengths of continuous psychophysical approaches, we propose that they are well suited to quickly mapping out relationships between above-threshold stimulus variables such as the perceived direction of a moving target as a function of the direction of the background against which the target is moving. We show that modelling the participant in such a two-variable experiment using a novel "Bayesian Participant" model facilitates the conversion of the noisy continuous data into a less-noisy form that resembles data from an equivalent trial-based experiment. We also show that adaptation can result from longer-than-usual stimulus exposure times during continuous experiments, even to features that the participant is not aware of. Methods for mitigating the effects of adaptation are discussed.

Indexed as

adaptationBayesian inferencecontinuous psychophysicsdata analysisinduced motion

Identifiers

PMID38690062
PMCPMC11058635

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.