[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: AUDITORY Digest - 11 Aug 2011 to 12 Aug 2011 (#2011-183)
Dear Imran Dhamani,
The problem of detecting signals without defined observation intervals has always been difficult. Both reduced sensitivity and variation in bias might be involved. If I understand what you are doing, your hit rates are estimated from the responses to signals that occur at specific times, for multiple possible times of occurance. But the false alarm rate is estimated from the overall rate of responding when no signal is presented. From your discussion it appears you have thought of the possibility of shifts in either sensitivity or bias over time, therefore you need to be collecting some index of bias that can vary over time as well. Tom Nichols and I showed one way to do this, way back in 1976 (JASA, Vol. 59, 655-668). but we dealt with the case of signals that could occur at any point in time. Hope that might be of some help,
Best regards,
Chuck Watson
Professor Emeritus
Indiana University
________________________________________
From: AUDITORY - Research in Auditory Perception [AUDITORY@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] on behalf of AUDITORY automatic digest system [LISTSERV@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Saturday, August 13, 2011 12:04 AM
To: AUDITORY@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: AUDITORY Digest - 11 Aug 2011 to 12 Aug 2011 (#2011-183)
There are 9 messages totalling 508 lines in this issue.
Topics of the day:
1. Dirk Jan Povel (4)
2. Interpreting Negative d prime values in simple Yes/No detection task (3)
3. [MUSIC-IR] musical complexity
4. musical complexity
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Fri, 12 Aug 2011 10:23:24 +0200
From: Leon van Noorden <leonvannoorden@xxxxxxx>
Subject: Dirk Jan Povel
Dear list,
yesterday we commemorated the passing away of Dirk Jan Povel after an incurable illness.
He underwent this predictable end of his live in a philosophical way. He stayed the same cheerful person till the end.
He made a invaluable contribution to our understanding of the perception of rhythmic patterns.
Leon van Noorden
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 12 Aug 2011 14:39:36 +0530
From: Imran Dhamani <imrandhamani@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Interpreting Negative d prime values in simple Yes/No detection task
Dear List,=0A=0A=0AIn one of the experiments that I performed using the yes=
/no detection task (button press), I have got some negative d prime values =
which I am=A0 not sure how to interpret.The experiment is actually created =
in such a way that most of the targets occur at one time interval (expected=
=3D 60%) and at other time intervals (unexpected=3D20%) for other trials, =
the rest 20% are the catch trials in which the target does not appear in an=
y of the time intervals. Since the frequent presentations of the targets in=
the expected time intervals may create an internal systematic bias for the=
observer the d prime are expected to be high at those target intervals and=
lower in the other intervals (may be due to tuning attention band to the f=
requently occurring or expected trials, attentional blink, attentional laps=
es or purposefully not heeding to the targets at the unexpected time interv=
als due to the lower frequency of their occurrence).The last possibility of=
lower d primes
due to not heeding seems to be very low in this experiment since the parti=
cipants understood the task well and the instructions given to them were ne=
utral (i.e. press the button as soon as the target is heard and not to pres=
s the button on catch trials) and they were aware that the target can occur=
at =0Aany time interval. At some of the unexpected trials instead of lower=
d primes, I am getting negative d prime values.The most common explanation=
for negative d primes that I could trace in literature was due to sampling=
error, response confusion or malingering. In this experiment I do not susp=
ect a =0Aresponse confusion or malingering. In terms of sampling error, I h=
ave read some literature in terms of assuming the confidence interval for d=
prime to be plus or minus twice the standard error and then if the SE erro=
r includes values equal to or close to zero then the negative d prime is ac=
tually zero or close to zero.But I am not sure how this calculation exactly=
works and what is this sampling error that we are calculating in the conte=
xt of signal detection theory. =0ACan someone please throw some light on wh=
at sampling error means in the context of a signal detection theory and als=
o a simple way to calculate this ? Do negative prime values have no signifi=
cance in terms of their sign and thus if the negative d prime values are no=
t too large they can be simply flipped to indicate the discriminability ? C=
an these negative d primes (pertaining to the current experiment) be interp=
reted in some logical way (eg: Inattention to unexpected trials) ?=A0 =0A=
=0ARegards,=0AImran Dhamani
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 12 Aug 2011 10:51:01 +0100
From: Dan Stowell <dan.stowell@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [MUSIC-IR] musical complexity
Hi Tom -
On the information-theoretic side of your question, the following paper
is apt:
Information dynamics: patterns of expectation and surprise in the
perception of music
Abdallah, S. and Plumbley, M.
2009
Connection Science
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09540090902733756
Best
Dan
On 11/08/2011 15:29, Tom Cochrane wrote:
> (apologies for cross postings)
>
> Dear listmembers
>
> Does anyone know of any important articles or books which discuss the
> issue of musical complexity? I am particularly interested to find papers
> that debate how musical complexity should be understood at a high
> theoretical level. For instance, should musical complexity be understood
> in purely information theoretic terms or in terms of our psychological
> capacity to predict and remember (e.g. analogous to the way that
> amplitude differs from perceived loudness)?
>
> cheers
>
> Tom
>
--
Dan Stowell
Postdoctoral Research Assistant
Centre for Digital Music
Queen Mary, University of London
Mile End Road, London E1 4NS
http://www.elec.qmul.ac.uk/digitalmusic/people/dans.htm
http://www.mcld.co.uk/
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 12 Aug 2011 09:05:15 -0400
From: Bob Masta <audio@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: musical complexity
Judging from the the title, the reference that Dan provided
(about complexity and surprise) sounds germane. (I don't
have access to the download.)
IMHO, music is all about the "frontier" that is the
borderland between order and chaos. We are bored by too
much order, and repulsed by too much chaos. But the "too
much" thresholds differ across individuals, and differ over
time within any given individual. (See
<http://www.daqarta.com/dw_qqee.htm> for more details,
though may be too elementary for this group.)
So the psychological capacity to remember and predict is
important, since that is the essence of pattern
recognition, which is the heart of music. Pure information
theory would seem to be equivalent only if all listerners
were equal (had the same pattern recognition
sophistication, etc). With musical training, listeners are
better able to discern high-order patterns, and appreciate
the deviations from them that add interest to the music.
Just my 2 cent's worth....
Bob Masta
======================
On 11 Aug 2011 at 15:29, Tom Cochrane wrote:
> (apologies for cross postings)
>
> Dear listmembers
>
> Does anyone know of any important articles or books which discuss the
> issue of musical complexity? I am particularly interested to find papers
> that debate how musical complexity should be understood at a high
> theoretical level. For instance, should musical complexity be understood
> in purely information theoretic terms or in terms of our psychological
> capacity to predict and remember (e.g. analogous to the way that
> amplitude differs from perceived loudness)?
>
> cheers
>
> Tom
==============
Bob Masta
D A Q A R T A
Data AcQuisition And Real-Time Analysis
www.daqarta.com
Scope, Spectrum, Spectrogram, Signal Generator
Science with your sound card!
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 12 Aug 2011 18:21:58 +0000
From: Brian Gygi <bgygi@xxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: Interpreting Negative d prime values in simple Yes/No detection task
----=_vm_0011_W7319225495_24954_1313173318
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Dear Imran,
In my experience a negative d' usually means the subjects are not underst=
anding the task properly. This means the stimuli are discriminable, but s=
ubjects responding to the wrong thing. Looking through your procedures, I=
can't say for sure if that is what happening, but you might consider it.=
Brian Gygi, Ph.D.
Speech and Hearing Research
Veterans Affairs Northern California Health Care System
150 Muir Road
Martinez, CA 94553
(925) 372-2000 x5653
-----Original Message-----
From: Imran Dhamani [mailto:imrandhamani@xxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Friday, August 12, 2011 02:09 AM
To: AUDITORY@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Interpreting Negative d prime values in simple Yes/No detection =
task
Dear List,In one of the experiments that I performed using the yes/no det=
ection task (button press), I have got some negative d prime values which=
I am not sure how to interpret.The experiment is actually created in suc=
h a way that most of the targets occur at one time interval (expected =3D=
60%) and at other time intervals (unexpected=3D20%) for other trials, th=
e rest 20% are the catch trials in which the target does not appear in an=
y of the time intervals. Since the frequent presentations of the targets =
in the expected time intervals may create an internal systematic bias for=
the observer the d prime are expected to be high at those target interva=
ls and lower in the other intervals (may be due to tuning attention band =
to the frequently occurring or expected trials, attentional blink, attent=
ional lapses or purposefully not heeding to the targets at the unexpected=
time intervals due to the lower frequency of their occurrence).The last =
possibility of lower d primes due to not heeding seems to be very low in =
this experiment since the participants understood the task well and the i=
nstructions given to them were neutral (i.e. press the button as soon as =
the target is heard and not to press the button on catch trials) and they=
were aware that the target can occur at any time interval. At some of th=
e unexpected trials instead of lower d primes, I am getting negative d pr=
ime values.The most common explanation for negative d primes that I could=
trace in literature was due to sampling error, response confusion or mal=
ingering. In this experiment I do not suspect a response confusion or mal=
ingering. In terms of sampling error, I have read some literature in term=
s of assuming the confidence interval for d prime to be plus or minus twi=
ce the standard error and then if the SE error includes values equal to o=
r close to zero then the negative d prime is actually zero or close to ze=
ro.But I am not sure how this calculation exactly works and what is this =
sampling error that we are calculating in the context of signal detection=
theory. Can someone please throw some light on what sampling error means=
in the context of a signal detection theory and also a simple way to cal=
culate this ? Do negative prime values have no significance in terms of t=
heir sign and thus if the negative d prime values are not too large they =
can be simply flipped to indicate the discriminability ? Can these negati=
ve d primes (pertaining to the current experiment) be interpreted in some=
logical way (eg: Inattention to unexpected trials) ? Regards,Imran Dhama=
ni
----=_vm_0011_W7319225495_24954_1313173318
Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<html><br>Dear Imran,<br><br>In my experience a negative d' usually means=
the subjects are not understanding the task properly. This means t=
he stimuli are discriminable, but subjects responding to the wrong thing.=
Looking through your procedures, I can't say for sure if that is w=
hat happening, but you might consider it.<br><div><font face=3D"Verdana" =
size=3D"2"> </font></div>
Brian Gygi, Ph.D.
<br>
Speech and Hearing Research
<br>
Veterans Affairs Northern California Health Care System
<br>
150 Muir Road
<br>
Martinez, CA 94553
<br>
(925) 372-2000 x5653<div><font color=3D"#0000ff" face=3D"Verdana" size=3D=
"2"></font> </div>
<blockquote style=3D"border-left: 2px solid rgb(0, 0, 255); padding-left:=
5px; margin-left: 5px; margin-right: 0px;"><font face=3D"Tahoma" size=3D=
"2">-----Original Message-----<br><b>From:</b> Imran Dhamani [mailto:imra=
ndhamani@xxxxxxxxxxx]<br><b>Sent:</b> Friday, August 12, 2011 02:09 AM<br=
><b>To:</b> AUDITORY@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx<br><b>Subject:</b> Interpreting Nega=
tive d prime values in simple Yes/No detection task<br><br></font>Dear Li=
st,
In one of the experiments that I performed using the yes/no detection tas=
k (button press), I have got some negative d prime values which I am =
; not sure how to interpret.The experiment is actually created in such a =
way that most of the targets occur at one time interval (expected =3D 60%=
) and at other time intervals (unexpected=3D20%) for other trials, the re=
st 20% are the catch trials in which the target does not appear in any of=
the time intervals. Since the frequent presentations of the targets in t=
he expected time intervals may create an internal systematic bias for the=
observer the d prime are expected to be high at those target intervals a=
nd lower in the other intervals (may be due to tuning attention band to t=
he frequently occurring or expected trials, attentional blink, attentiona=
l lapses or purposefully not heeding to the targets at the unexpected tim=
e intervals due to the lower frequency of their occurrence).The last poss=
ibility of lower d primes
due to not heeding seems to be very low in this experiment since the par=
ticipants understood the task well and the instructions given to them wer=
e neutral (i.e. press the button as soon as the target is heard and not t=
o press the button on catch trials) and they were aware that the target c=
an occur at
any time interval. At some of the unexpected trials instead of lower d pr=
imes, I am getting negative d prime values.The most common explanation fo=
r negative d primes that I could trace in literature was due to sampling =
error, response confusion or malingering. In this experiment I do not sus=
pect a
response confusion or malingering. In terms of sampling error, I have rea=
d some literature in terms of assuming the confidence interval for d prim=
e to be plus or minus twice the standard error and then if the SE error i=
ncludes values equal to or close to zero then the negative d prime is act=
ually zero or close to zero.But I am not sure how this calculation exactl=
y works and what is this sampling error that we are calculating in the co=
ntext of signal detection theory.
Can someone please throw some light on what sampling error means in the c=
ontext of a signal detection theory and also a simple way to calculate th=
is ? Do negative prime values have no significance in terms of their sign=
and thus if the negative d prime values are not too large they can be si=
mply flipped to indicate the discriminability ? Can these negative d prim=
es (pertaining to the current experiment) be interpreted in some logical =
way (eg: Inattention to unexpected trials) ?
Regards,
Imran Dhamani
</blockquote></html>
----=_vm_0011_W7319225495_24954_1313173318--
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 12 Aug 2011 14:37:12 -0700
From: Diana Deutsch <ddeutsch@xxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: Dirk Jan Povel
This is sad news indeed. Dirk was a wonderful person and a terrific =
scientist - he will be sorely missed.
Diana Deutsch
On Aug 12, 2011, at 1:23 AM, Leon van Noorden wrote:
> Dear list,
> yesterday we commemorated the passing away of Dirk Jan Povel after an =
incurable illness.
> He underwent this predictable end of his live in a philosophical way. =
He stayed the same cheerful person till the end.
> He made a invaluable contribution to our understanding of the =
perception of rhythmic patterns.
> Leon van Noorden
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 12 Aug 2011 18:39:11 -0700
From: yund <yund@xxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: Interpreting Negative d prime values in simple Yes/No detection task
A negative d prime means that the false-alarm rate is greater than the hit rate. It sounds to me that
the experimental design does not let you discriminate between "expected-interval" false alarms (FAs) and
"unexpected-interval" FAs. If, on the catch trials, the participant generates more FAs based on the
noise-alone stimulus in the expected interval than in the unexpected interval, then the expected-interval
FA rate is higher than the unexpected-interval FA rate. If you use the FA rate on catch trials as the
FA rate to compute the d prime for both expected and unexpected intervals, without differentiating
between expected- and unexpected-interval FAs (and it may not be possible to differentiate them in the
data), then negative d primes could be found for the unexpected intervals, whenever the combined FA rate
was greater than the unexpected-interval hit rate. Similarly, the d primes for the expected intervals
may be lower than they should be because the overall FA rate for the catch trials would count both
expected- and unexpected-interval FAs.
One more minor point. If the participant responded only on the basis of the expected time interval,
that would yield valid expected-interval d primes and chance unexpected-interval d primes. If the
participant is responding on the basis of the full interval and shifting the response criterion
consistent with target expectation, then the above-chance unexpected-interval negative d prime
becomes possible.
------------------------------------------
E. William Yund, Ph.D.
Hearing Loss Research Laboratory (151/MTZ)
VA Northern California Health Care System
150 Muir Road
Martinez, CA 94553
yund@xxxxxxxxx
(925)372-2296
FAX (925)228-5738
------------------------------------------
On 8/12/2011 2:09 AM, Imran Dhamani wrote:
> Dear List,
>
>
> In one of the experiments that I performed using the yes/no detection task (button press), I have got some negative d prime values which I am not sure how to interpret.The experiment is actually created in such a way that most of the targets occur at one time interval (expected = 60%) and at other time intervals (unexpected=20%) for other trials, the rest 20% are the catch trials in which the target does not appear in any of the time intervals. Since the frequent presentations of the targets in the expected time intervals may create an internal systematic bias for the observer the d prime are expected to be high at those target intervals and lower in the other intervals (may be due to tuning attention band to the frequently occurring or expected trials, attentional blink, attentional lapses or purposefully not heeding to the targets at the unexpected time intervals due to the lower frequency of their occurrence).The last possibility of lower d primes
> due to not heeding seems to be very low in this experiment since the participants understood the task well and the instructions given to them were neutral (i.e. press the button as soon as the target is heard and not to press the button on catch trials) and they were aware that the target can occur at
> any time interval. At some of the unexpected trials instead of lower d primes, I am getting negative d prime values.The most common explanation for negative d primes that I could trace in literature was due to sampling error, response confusion or malingering. In this experiment I do not suspect a
> response confusion or malingering. In terms of sampling error, I have read some literature in terms of assuming the confidence interval for d prime to be plus or minus twice the standard error and then if the SE error includes values equal to or close to zero then the negative d prime is actually zero or close to zero.But I am not sure how this calculation exactly works and what is this sampling error that we are calculating in the context of signal detection theory.
> Can someone please throw some light on what sampling error means in the context of a signal detection theory and also a simple way to calculate this ? Do negative prime values have no significance in terms of their sign and thus if the negative d prime values are not too large they can be simply flipped to indicate the discriminability ? Can these negative d primes (pertaining to the current experiment) be interpreted in some logical way (eg: Inattention to unexpected trials) ?
>
> Regards,
> Imran Dhamani
>
>
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 13 Aug 2011 10:32:16 +0900
From: Nakajima <nakajima@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: Dirk Jan Povel
Please allow me to mention something personal. I visited Dirk-Jan in 1987,
and he gave me an opportunity to give a talk. I was just at the beginning
of my career, and I was very glad that I could discuss some issues with a
researcher I knew very well in the literature. After going back to Leiden,
which was my home base at that time, he wrote me a long letter to encourage
me to continue my research in the field of time perception. Dirk-Jan was a
very kind man and an excellent teacher.
Yoshitaka Nakajima
----- Original Message -----
From: "Diana Deutsch" <ddeutsch@xxxxxxxx>
To: <AUDITORY@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Saturday, August 13, 2011 6:37 AM
Subject: Re: Dirk Jan Povel
This is sad news indeed. Dirk was a wonderful person and a terrific
scientist - he will be sorely missed.
Diana Deutsch
On Aug 12, 2011, at 1:23 AM, Leon van Noorden wrote:
> Dear list,
> yesterday we commemorated the passing away of Dirk Jan Povel after an
> incurable illness.
> He underwent this predictable end of his live in a philosophical way. He
> stayed the same cheerful person till the end.
> He made a invaluable contribution to our understanding of the perception
> of rhythmic patterns.
> Leon van Noorden
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 12 Aug 2011 20:28:16 -0700
From: Aniruddh Patel <apatel@xxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: Dirk Jan Povel
Dirk will be remembered tomorrow at the Society for Music Perception &
Cognition meeting (currently underway in Rochester, NY). A friend and
colleague of his, Dr. Richard Ashley, will speak about Dirk at our society
business meeting, where many researchers and students will be present.
He will be missed by many in our field, both for his good-natured
personality and his excellent scientific work. For those of you who might
not know his work, his 1985 paper with Peter Essens in Music Perception,
"The perception of temporal patterns," is a classic, and influenced many
subsequent studies of rhythm perception.
Ani Patel
> Please allow me to mention something personal. I visited Dirk-Jan in
> 1987,
> and he gave me an opportunity to give a talk. I was just at the beginning
> of my career, and I was very glad that I could discuss some issues with a
> researcher I knew very well in the literature. After going back to
> Leiden,
> which was my home base at that time, he wrote me a long letter to
> encourage
> me to continue my research in the field of time perception. Dirk-Jan was
> a
> very kind man and an excellent teacher.
>
> Yoshitaka Nakajima
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Diana Deutsch" <ddeutsch@xxxxxxxx>
> To: <AUDITORY@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Sent: Saturday, August 13, 2011 6:37 AM
> Subject: Re: Dirk Jan Povel
>
>
> This is sad news indeed. Dirk was a wonderful person and a terrific
> scientist - he will be sorely missed.
>
> Diana Deutsch
>
>
>
> On Aug 12, 2011, at 1:23 AM, Leon van Noorden wrote:
>
>> Dear list,
>> yesterday we commemorated the passing away of Dirk Jan Povel after an
>> incurable illness.
>> He underwent this predictable end of his live in a philosophical way. He
>> stayed the same cheerful person till the end.
>> He made a invaluable contribution to our understanding of the perception
>> of rhythmic patterns.
>> Leon van Noorden
>
------------------------------
End of AUDITORY Digest - 11 Aug 2011 to 12 Aug 2011 (#2011-183)
***************************************************************