Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-5r2nc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-08T12:04:18.716Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A Model for Detection and Recognition with Signal Uncertainty

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2025

Elizabeth F. Shipley
Elizabeth F. Shipley*
Affiliation:
Harvard University
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

A model for signal detectability suggested by Luce is extended to situations in which the observer is uncertain of some important characteristic of the signal, such as frequency. By making a single assumption concerning the observer's covert response behavior, two solutions are obtained corresponding to qualitatively different behavior. Decrements in detectability and in recognition with uncertainty are shown to be particular functions of discriminability and detectability of the stimuli in other situations. Relevant experimental data are considered.

Type
Original Paper
Information
Psychometrika , Volume 25 , Issue 3 , September 1960 , pp. 273 - 289
Copyright
Copyright © 1960 The Psychometric Society

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

*

This work was supported by grant NSF-G5544 from the National Science Foundation. The author is indebted to R. Duncan Luce for critical discussion of the content and helpful suggestions concerning the form of this paper. Useful comments have been made by David M. Green, Francis W. Irwin, Roger M. Shepard, and W. P. Tanner, Jr.

†

Now at University of Pennsylvania

References

Green, D. M. Detection of multiple component signals in noise. J. acoust. Soc. Amer., 1958, 30, 904–911.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lawrence, D. H. and Coles, G. R.. Accuracy of recognition with alternatives before and after the stimulus. J. exp. Psychol., 1954, 47, 208–214.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Luce, R. D. Individual choice behavior: a theoretical analysis, New York: Wiley, 1959.Google Scholar
Plotkin, L. Stimulus generalization in Morse code learning. Arch. Psychol., 1943, 287, 5–39.Google Scholar
Pollack, I. Message-uncertainty and message-reception. J. acoust. Soc. Amer., 1959, 31, 1500–1508.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Swets, J. A. and Birdsall, T. G. The human use of information, III. Decision-making in signal detection and recognition situations involving multiple alternatives. Trans. I. R. E. Professional Group on Information Theory, 1956, 138–165.Google Scholar
Swets, J. A., Shipley, E. F., McKey, M. J., and Green, D. M.. Multiple observations of signals in noise. J. acoust. Soc. Amer., 1959, 31, 514–521.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tanner, W. P. Jr. Theory of recognition. J. acoust. Soc. Amer., 1956, 28, 882–888.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tanner, W. P. Jr. and Norman, R. Z. The human use of information, II. Signal detection for the case of an unknown signal parameter. Trans. I. R. E. Professional Group on Information Theory, 1954, 222–226.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tanner, W. P. Jr., Swets, J. A., and Green, D. M. Some general properties of the hearing mechanism. Tech. Rep. No. 30, Electronic Defense Group, Univ. Michigan, 1956.Google Scholar
Veniar, F. A. Signal detection as a function of frequency ensemble, I. J. acoust. Soc. Amer., 1958, 30, 1020–1024.CrossRefGoogle Scholar