Isobias and alloiobias functions in animal psycophysics.
Isobias and alloiobias functions in animal psycophysics.
复制标题
Isobias 和 alloiobias 在动物心理物理学中发挥作用。
DOI：
10.1037//0097-7403.10.3.390
复制
发表时间：
1984
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
M. Davison
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
D. Mccarthy;M. Davison
使用人类是/否检测任务的类似物来训练六只鸽子在两种不同的强化物调度程序下区分亮度差异。当使用受控强化比率程序时，相对刺激频率恒定为 0.5，并且对于五个亮度差异中的每一个，正确检测的相对强化频率保持恒定在三个不同值。当使用不受控制的强化比率程序（典型的检测范例）时，允许正确检测的相对强化频率随着五个亮度差异中每一个的相对刺激频率的变化而变化。比较了两种偏差测量，即响应偏差（Davison & Tustin，1978）和检测理论似然比测量（beta obt）。受控强化物比率程序产生相等或等反应偏差函数，而不受控制的强化物比率程序产生变化或同种反应偏差函数。 Davison-Tustin 模型分别解释了受控和非受控强化比率程序中数据方差的 88% 和 93%。在这两个过程中，最佳拟合的等贝塔函数平均分别占 53% 和 69%。此外，这两种程序都没有给出恒定的 beta obt 测量值，以便在不同的可区分性测量中进行恒定的偏差操作。
An analogue of the human yes-no detection task was used to train six pigeons to discriminate luminance differences under two different reinforcer-scheduling procedures. When a controlled reinforce-ratio procedure was used, relative stimulus frequency was constant at .5, and relative reinforcer frequency for correct detections was held constant at three different values for each of five luminance differences. When an uncontrolled reinforcer-ratio procedure (the typical detection paradigm) was used, relative reinforcer frequency for correct detections was allowed to covary with changes in relative stimulus frequency for each of five luminance differences. Two measures of bias, response bias (Davison & Tustin, 1978) and the detection-theory likelihood-ratio measure (beta obt), were compared. The controlled reinforcer-ratio procedure generated equal- or iso-response-bias functions, and the uncontrolled reinforcer-ratio procedure gave changing or alloio-response-bias functions. The Davison-Tustin model accounted for 88% and 93% of the data variance in the controlled and uncontrolled reinforcer-ratio procedures, respectively. The best-fitting equal-beta functions accounted for an average of 53% and 69%, respectively, in the two procedures. In addition, neither procedure gave constant measures of beta obt for constant bias manipulations across different discriminability measures.