The psychometric function: I. Fitting, sampling, and goodness of fit.

The psychometric function relates an observer's performance to an independent variable, usually some physical quantity of a stimulus in a psychophysical task. This paper, together with its companion paper (Wichmann & Hill, 2001), describes an integrated approach to (1) fitting psychometric functions, (2) assessing the goodness of fit, and (3) providing confidence intervals for the function's parameters and other estimates derived from them, for the purposes of hypothesis testing. The present paper deals with the first two topics, describing a constrained maximum-likelihood method of parameter estimation and developing several goodness-of-fit tests. Using Monte Carlo simulations, we deal with two specific difficulties that arise when fitting functions to psychophysical data. First, we note that human observers are prone to stimulus-independent errors (or lapses). We show that failure to account for this can lead to serious biases in estimates of the psychometric function's parameters and illustrate how the problem may be overcome. Second, we note that psychophysical data sets are usually rather small by the standards required by most of the commonly applied statistical tests. We demonstrate the potential errors of applying traditional chi2 methods to psychophysical data and advocate use of Monte Carlo resampling techniques that do not rely on asymptotic theory. We have made available the software to implement our methods.     

The psychometric function: I. Fitting, sampling, and goodness of fit

The psychometric function relates an observer’s performance to an independent variable, usually some physical quantity of a stimulus in a psychophysical task. This paper, together with its companion paper (Wichmann & Hill, 2001), describes an integrated approach to (1) fitting psychometric functions, (2) assessing the goodness of fit, and (3) providing confidence intervals for the function’s parameters and other estimates derived from them, for the purposes of hypothesis testing. The present paper deals with the first two topics, describing a constrained maximum-likelihood method of parameter estimation and developing several goodness-of-fit tests. Using Monte Carlo simulations, we deal with two specific difficulties that arise when fitting functions to psychophysical data. First, we note that human observers are prone to stimulus-independent errors (orlapses). We show that failure to account for this can lead to serious biases in estimates of the psychometric function’s parameters and illustrate how the problem may be overcome. Second, we note that psychophysical data sets are usually rather small by the standards required by most of the commonly applied statistical tests. We demonstrate the potential errors of applying traditionalX ² methods to psychophysical data and advocate use of Monte Carlo resampling techniques that do not rely on asymptotic theory. We have made available the software to implement our methods.     

The psychometric function: II. Bootstrap-based confidence intervals and sampling

The psychometric function relates an observer’s performance to an independent variable, usually a physical quantity of an experimental stimulus. Even if a model is successfully fit to the data and its goodness of fit is acceptable, experimenters require an estimate of the variability of the parameters to assess whether differences across conditions are significant. Accurate estimates of variability are difficult to obtain, however, given the typically small size of psychophysical data sets: Traditional statistical techniques are only asymptotically correct and can be shown to be unreliable in some common situations. Here and in our companion paper (Wichmann & Hill, 2001), we suggest alternative statistical techniques based on Monte Carlo resampling methods. The present paper’s principal topic is the estimation of the variability of fitted parameters and derived quantities, such as thresholds and slopes. First, we outline the basic bootstrap procedure and argue in favor of the parametric, as opposed to the nonparametric, bootstrap. Second, we describe how the bootstrap bridging assumption, on which the validity of the procedure depends, can be tested. Third, we show how one’s choice of sampling scheme (the placement of sample points on the stimulus axis) strongly affects the reliability of bootstrap confidence intervals, and we make recommendations on how to sample the psychometric function efficiently. Fourth, we show that, under certain circumstances, the (arbitrary) choice of the distribution function can exert an unwanted influence on the size of the bootstrap confidence intervals obtained, and we make recommendations on how to avoid this influence. Finally, we introduce improved confidence intervals (bias corrected and accelerated) that improve on the parametric and percentile-based bootstrap confidence intervals previously used. Software implementing our methods is available.     

The psychometric function: II. Bootstrap-based confidence intervals and sampling.

The psychometric function relates an observer's performance to an independent variable, usually a physical quantity of an experimental stimulus. Even if a model is successfully fit to the data and its goodness of fit is acceptable, experimenters require an estimate of the variability of the parameters to assess whether differences across conditions are significant. Accurate estimates of variability are difficult to obtain, however, given the typically small size of psychophysical data sets: Traditional statistical techniques are only asymptotically correct and can be shown to be unreliable in some common situations. Here and in our companion paper (Wichmann & Hill, 2001), we suggest alternative statistical techniques based on Monte Carlo resampling methods. The present paper's principal topic is the estimation of the variability of fitted parameters and derived quantities, such as thresholds and slopes. First, we outline the basic bootstrap procedure and argue in favor of the parametric, as opposed to the nonparametric, bootstrap. Second, we describe how the bootstrap bridging assumption, on which the validity of the procedure depends, can be tested. Third, we show how one's choice of sampling scheme (the placement of sample points on the stimulus axis) strongly affects the reliability of bootstrap confidence intervals, and we make recommendations on how to sample the psychometric function efficiently. Fourth, we show that, under certain circumstances, the (arbitrary) choice of the distribution function can exert an unwanted influence on the size of the bootstrap confidence intervals obtained, and we make recommendations on how to avoid this influence. Finally, we introduce improved confidence intervals (bias corrected and accelerated) that improve on the parametric and percentile-based bootstrap confidence intervals previously used. Software implementing our methods is available.     

基于概化理论的方差分量变异量估计

概化理论广泛应用于心理与教育测量实践中, 方差分量估计是进行概化理论分析的关键。方差分量估计受限于抽样, 需要对其变异量进行探讨。采用蒙特卡洛(Monte Carlo)数据模拟技术, 在正态分布下讨论不同方法对基于概化理论的方差分量变异量估计的影响。结果表明: Jackknife方法在方差分量变异量估计上不足取; 不采取Bootstrap方法的“分而治之”策略, 从总体上看, Traditional方法和有先验信息的MCMC方法在标准误及置信区间这两个变异量估计上优势明显。     

Bootstrap standard error and confidence intervals for the correlations corrected for indirect range restriction

The standard Pearson correlation coefficient, r, is a biased estimator of the population correlation coefficient, ρ(XY) , when predictor X and criterion Y are indirectly range-restricted by a third variable Z (or S). Two correction algorithms, Thorndike's (1949) Case III, and Schmidt, Oh, and Le's (2006) Case IV, have been proposed to correct for the bias. However, to our knowledge, the two algorithms did not provide a procedure to estimate the associated standard error and confidence intervals. This paper suggests using the bootstrap procedure as an alternative. Two Monte Carlo simulations were conducted to systematically evaluate the empirical performance of the proposed bootstrap procedure. The results indicated that the bootstrap standard error and confidence intervals were generally accurate across simulation conditions (e.g., selection ratio, sample size). The proposed bootstrap procedure can provide a useful alternative for the estimation of the standard error and confidence intervals for the correlation corrected for indirect range restriction.     

Fitting the psychometric function

A constrained generalized maximum likelihood routine for fitting psychometric functions is proposed, which determines optimum values for the complete parameter set--that is, threshold and slope--as well as for guessing and lapsing probability. The constraints are realized by Bayesian prior distributions for each of these parameters. The fit itself results from maximizing the posterior distribution of the parameter values by a multidimensional simplex method. We present results from extensive Monte Carlo simulations by which we can approximate bias and variability of the estimated parameters of simulated psychometric functions. Furthermore, we have tested the routine with data gathered in real sessions of psychophysical experimenting.     

Reconsidering the use of the general linear model with single-case data

Using a low point estimate of autocorrelation to justify analyzing single-case data with the general linear model (GLM) is questioned. Monte Carlo methods are used to examine the degree to which bias in the estimate of autocorrelation depends on the complexity of the linear model used to describe the data. A method is then illustrated for determining the range of autocorrelation parameters that could reasonably have led to the observed autocorrelation. The argument for using a GLM analysis can be strengthened when the GLM analysis functions appropriately across the range of plausible autocorrelations. For situations in which the GLM analysis does not function appropriately across this range, a method is provided for adjusting the confidence intervals to ensure adequate coverage probabilities for specified levels of autocorrelation.     

Ordinary Least Squares Estimation of Parameters in Exploratory Factor Analysis With Ordinal Data

Exploratory factor analysis (EFA) is often conducted with ordinal data (e.g., items with 5-point responses) in the social and behavioral sciences. These ordinal variables are often treated as if they were continuous in practice. An alternative strategy is to assume that a normally distributed continuous variable underlies each ordinal variable. The EFA model is specified for these underlying continuous variables rather than the observed ordinal variables. Although these underlying continuous variables are not observed directly, their correlations can be estimated from the ordinal variables. These correlations are referred to as polychoric correlations. This article is concerned with ordinary least squares (OLS) estimation of parameters in EFA with polychoric correlations. Standard errors and confidence intervals for rotated factor loadings and factor correlations are presented. OLS estimates and the associated standard error estimates and confidence intervals are illustrated using personality trait ratings from 228 college students. Statistical properties of the proposed procedure are explored using a Monte Carlo study. The empirical illustration and the Monte Carlo study showed that (a) OLS estimation of EFA is feasible with large models, (b) point estimates of rotated factor loadings are unbiased, (c) point estimates of factor correlations are slightly negatively biased with small samples, and (d) standard error estimates and confidence intervals perform satisfactorily at moderately large samples.     

Constructing second‐order accurate confidence intervals for communalities in factor analysis

In an effort to find accurate alternatives to the usual confidence intervals based on normal approximations, this paper compares four methods of generating second‐order accurate confidence intervals for non‐standardized and standardized communalities in exploratory factor analysis under the normality assumption. The methods to generate the intervals employ, respectively, the Cornish–Fisher expansion and the approximate bootstrap confidence (ABC), and the bootstrap‐t and the bias‐corrected and accelerated bootstrap (BC_a). The former two are analytical and the latter two are numerical. Explicit expressions of the asymptotic bias and skewness of the communality estimators, used in the analytical methods, are derived. A Monte Carlo experiment reveals that the performance of central intervals based on normal approximations is a consequence of imbalance of miscoverage on the left‐ and right‐hand sides. The second‐order accurate intervals do not require symmetry around the point estimates of the usual intervals and achieve better balance, even when the sample size is not large. The behaviours of the second‐order accurate intervals were similar to each other, particularly for large sample sizes, and no method performed consistently better than the others.     

Accuracy in parameter estimation for targeted effects in structural equation modeling: sample size planning for narrow confidence intervals

In addition to evaluating a structural equation model (SEM) as a whole, often the model parameters are of interest and confidence intervals for those parameters are formed. Given a model with a good overall fit, it is entirely possible for the targeted effects of interest to have very wide confidence intervals, thus giving little information about the magnitude of the population targeted effects. With the goal of obtaining sufficiently narrow confidence intervals for the model parameters of interest, sample size planning methods for SEM are developed from the accuracy in parameter estimation approach. One method plans for the sample size so that the expected confidence interval width is sufficiently narrow. An extended procedure ensures that the obtained confidence interval will be no wider than desired, with some specified degree of assurance. A Monte Carlo simulation study was conducted that verified the effectiveness of the procedures in realistic situations. The methods developed have been implemented in the MBESS package in R so that they can be easily applied by researchers.     

Constructing Confidence Intervals for Effect Size Measures of an Indirect Effect

Confidence intervals for an effect size can provide the information about the magnitude of an effect and its precision as well as the binary decision about the existence of an effect. In this study, the performances of five different methods for constructing confidence intervals for ratio effect size measures of an indirect effect were compared in terms of power, coverage rates, Type I error rates, and widths of confidence intervals. The five methods include the percentile bootstrap method, the bias-corrected and accelerated (BCa) bootstrap method, the delta method, the Fieller method, and the Monte Carlo method. The results were discussed with respect to the adequacy of the distributional assumptions and the nature of ratio quantity. The confidence intervals from the five methods showed similar results for samples of more than 500, whereas, for samples of less than 500, the confidence intervals were sufficiently narrow to convey the information about the population effect sizes only when the effect sizes of regression coefficients defining the indirect effect are large.     

Alpha's standard error (ASE): an accurate and precise confidence interval estimate

This research presents the inferential statistics for Cronbach's coefficient alpha on the basis of the standard statistical assumption of multivariate normality. The estimation of alpha's standard error (ASE) and confidence intervals are described, and the authors analytically and empirically investigate the effects of the components of these equations. The authors then demonstrate the superiority of this estimate compared with previous derivations of ASE in a separate Monte Carlo simulation. The authors also present a sampling error and test statistic for a test of independent sample alphas. They conclude with a recommendation that all alpha coefficients be reported in conjunction with standard error or confidence interval estimates and offer SAS and SPSS programming codes for easy implementation.     

Profile-likelihood Confidence Intervals in Item Response Theory Models

Confidence intervals (CIs) are fundamental inferential devices which quantify the sampling variability of parameter estimates. In item response theory, CIs have been primarily obtained from large-sample Wald-type approaches based on standard error estimates, derived from the observed or expected information matrix, after parameters have been estimated via maximum likelihood. An alternative approach to constructing CIs is to quantify sampling variability directly from the likelihood function with a technique known as profile-likelihood confidence intervals (PL CIs). In this article, we introduce PL CIs for item response theory models, compare PL CIs to classical large-sample Wald-type CIs, and demonstrate important distinctions among these CIs. CIs are then constructed for parameters directly estimated in the specified model and for transformed parameters which are often obtained post-estimation. Monte Carlo simulation results suggest that PL CIs perform consistently better than Wald-type CIs for both non-transformed and transformed parameters.     

校正的Bootstrap方法对概化理论方差分量及其变异量估计的改善

Bootstrap方法是一种有放回的再抽样方法, 可用于概化理论的方差分量及其变异量估计。用Monte Carlo技术模拟四种分布数据, 分别是正态分布、二项分布、多项分布和偏态分布数据。基于p×i设计, 探讨校正的Bootstrap方法相对于未校正的Bootstrap方法, 是否改善了概化理论估计四种模拟分布数据的方差分量及其变异量。结果表明：跨越四种分布数据, 从整体到局部, 不论是“点估计”还是“变异量”估计, 校正的Bootstrap方法都要优于未校正的Bootstrap方法, 校正的Bootstrap方法改善了概化理论方差分量及其变异量估计。     

Fast and accurate measurement of taste and smell thresholds using a maximum-likelihood adaptive staircase procedure.

This paper evaluates the use of a maximum-likelihood adaptive staircase psychophysical procedure (ML-PEST), originally developed in vision and audition, for measuring detection thresholds in gustation and olfaction. The basis for the psychophysical measurement of thresholds with the ML-PEST procedure is developed. Then, two experiments and four simulations are reported. In the first experiment, ML-PEST was compared with the Wetherill and Levitt up-down staircase method and with the Cain ascending method of limits in the measurement of butyl alcohol thresholds. The four Monte Carlo simulations compared the three psychophysical procedures. In the second experiment, the test-retest reliability of MLPEST for measuring NaCl and butyl alcohol thresholds was assessed. The results indicate that the ML-PEST method gives reliable and precise threshold measurements. Its ability to detect malingerers shows considerable promise. It is recommended for use in clinical testing.     

Fast and accurate measurement of taste and smell thresholds using a maximum-likelihood adaptive staircase procedure

This paper evaluates the use of a maximum-likelihood adaptive staircase psychophysical procedure (ML-PEST), originally developed in vision and audition, for measuring detection thresholds in gustation and olfaction. The basis for the psychophysical measurement of thresholds with the ML-PEST procedure is developed. Then, two experiments and four simulations are reported. In the first experiment, ML-PEST was compared with the Wetherill and Levitt up-down staircase method and with the Cain ascending method of limits in the measurement of butyl alcohol thresholds. The four Monte Carlo simulations compared the three psychophysical procedures. In the second experiment, the test-retest reliability of ML-PEST for measuring NaCl and butyl alcohol thresholds was assessed. The results indicate that the ML-PEST method gives reliable and precise threshold measurements. Its ability to detect malingerers shows considerable promise. It is recommended for use in clinical testing.     

非正态分布下概化理论方差分量变异量估计

方差分量估计是概化理论的必用技术,但受限于抽样,需要对其变异量进行探讨。采用Monte Carlo数据模拟技术,探讨非正态数据分布对四种方法估计概化理论方差分量变异量的影响。结果表明：（1）不同非正态数据分布下,各种估计方法的“性能”表现出差异性;（2）数据分布对方差分量变异量估计有影响,适合于非正态分布数据的方差分量变异量估计方法不一定适合于正态分布数据。     

抑郁在青少年核心自我评价与自杀意念间的中介作用:基于Bootstrap法和MCMC法的实证研究

考察抑郁在青少年核心自我评价与自杀意念间的中介作用。对502名高中生进行量表测评。通过偏差校正的Bootstrap法和有先验信息的MCMC法求出中介效应值的95%置信区间分别为[-.030,-.011]和[-.024,-.014],提示抑郁的中介效应显著。效应量k2、R2med分别为.124、.104,偏差校正的Bootstrap法抽样5000次后,构建的效应量的95%置信区间分别为[.070,.178]、[.063,.156],两种指标共同验证效应量为中等。研究结果说明抑郁在核心自我评价与自杀意念间起部分中介作用,效应量中等。