Calculation of signal detection theory measures

Signal detection theory (SDT) may be applied to any area of psychology in which two different types of stimuli must be discriminated. We describe several of these areas and the advantages that can be realized through the application of SDT. Three of the most popular tasks used to study discriminability are then discussed, together with the measures that SDT prescribes for quantifying performance in these tasks. Mathematical formulae for the measures are presented, as are methods for calculating the measures with lookup tables, computer software specifically developed for SDT applications, and general purpose computer software (including spreadsheets and statistical analysis software).     

Visual selection mediated by location: Feature-based selection of noncontiguous locations

Experiments using two different methods and three types of stimuli tested whether stimuli at nonadjacent locations could be selected simultaneously. In one set of experiments, subjects attended to red digits presented in multiple frames with green digits. Accuracy was no better when red digits appeared successively than when pairs of red digits occurred simultaneously, implying allocation of attention to the two locations simultaneously. Different tasks involving oriented grating stimuli produced the same result. The final experiment demonstrated split attention with an array of spatial probes. When the probe at one of two target locations was correctly reported, the probe at the other target location was more often reported correctly than were any of the probes at distractor locations, including those between the targets. Together, these experiments provide strong converging evidence that when two targets are easily discriminated from distractors by a basic property, spatial attention can be split across both locations.     

Learning Painting Styles: Spacing is Advantageous when it Promotes Discriminative Contrast

Repetitions that are distributed over time benefit long‐term retention more than when massed. Recent research has suggested that the advantage of spacing may extend to induction learning‐‐learners were better able to identify the artists of previously unseen paintings when, during training, artists' paintings were spaced (paintings by different artists were interleaved) rather than massed (a given artist's paintings were blocked and presented consecutively). Increasing temporal spacing between paintings while maintaining a presentation sequence that was blocked by artist produced test performance no better than massed presentation (both worse than interleaved presentation) (Experiment 1). Displaying paintings by different artists simultaneously produced test performance as good as interleaved presentation and better than massed presentation (Experiment 2). Our findings argue that spacing benefits perceptual induction learning not because of increased temporal spacing per se but rather because interleaving paintings by different artists enhances discriminative contrast between the artists' styles. Copyright © 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Distinguishing different strategies of across-dimension attentional selection

Selective attention in multidimensional displays has usually been examined using search tasks requiring the detection of a single target. We examined the ability to perceive a spatial structure in multi-item subsets of a display that were defined either conjunctively or disjunctively. Observers saw two adjacent displays and indicated whether the to-be-selected items within the two displays matched in terms of their spatial structure (the identity of the corresponding items within these subsets was not relevant to the task). The observers in our study could readily perceive conjunctively defined subsets, but had great difficulty with disjunctively defined subsets. The results pose a challenge to the popular idea that attention is guided by a "priority map" that sums bottom-up and top-down factors, whereas they are directly predicted by Boolean map theory of visual attention.     

The perceptual span during foveally-demanding visual target localization

Foveally-induced processing load deteriorates target localization performance in vision-guided tasks. Here, participants searched for a target embedded among coded distractors. High processing load was effected by instructing some participants to use the coded distractors to guide their search for the target. Other participants (in the low processing load condition) were not apprised of the code. The experiment examined whether increased processing load alters the span of effective processing (i.e. perceptual span) by (a) reducing its size, (b) altering its shape, or (c) reducing its size and altering its shape. The results demonstrated a reduction in the size of the perceptual span, with no significant change to its shape. It is argued that when distractors are processed beyond simply rejecting them as non targets, the perceptual span shrinks with increasing processing load. The findings are discussed in contrast to a general interference theory that predicts a change in vision-guided performance without a shrinking of the perceptual span.     

Self-efficacy and academic success among diverse first-generation college students: The mediating role of self-regulation

Social Psychology of Education - This study examines whether self-efficacy predicted academic success (via self-regulation) for first-generation and continuing-generation college students (Model 1)...     

The specificity of learned parallelism in dual-memory retrieval

Retrieval of two responses from one visually presented cue occurs sequentially at the outset of dual-retrieval practice. Exclusively for subjects who adopt a mode of grouping (i.e., synchronizing) their response execution, however, reaction times after dual-retrieval practice indicate a shift to learned retrieval parallelism (e.g., Nino & Rickard, in Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 29, 373–388, 2003). In the present study, we investigated how this learned parallelism is achieved and why it appears to occur only for subjects who group their responses. Two main accounts were considered: a task-level versus a cue-level account. The task-level account assumes that learned retrieval parallelism occurs at the level of the task as a whole and is not limited to practiced cues. Grouping response execution may thus promote a general shift to parallel retrieval following practice. The cue-level account states that learned retrieval parallelism is specific to practiced cues. This type of parallelism may result from cue-specific response chunking that occurs uniquely as a consequence of grouped response execution. The results of two experiments favored the second account and were best interpreted in terms of a structural bottleneck model.