From: Distinguishing bias from sensitivity effects in multialternative detection tasks
Journal of Vision. 2014;14(9):16. doi:10.1167/14.9.16
Figure Legend:
Model identifiability and optimality. (A–C): Identifiability of the 2-ADC model. (A) Two-dimensional decision space for the
2-ADC model during catch trials, partitioned into three decision regions—NoGo response (gray) or Go response to
location 1 (red) or location 2 (blue)—by one set of criteria (c1, c2). Dashed circle: Contour of the noise distribution. Thick
solid lines: Decision boundaries. Other conventions are as in Figure 2C. (B) 2-ADC decision space during catch trials
partitioned with an alternate set of criteria ( , ). These criterion values were chosen to keep the NoGo response
probability the same as in (A). Thick, dashed lines: The decision boundaries associated with criteria (c 1, c2) in (A). Other
conventions
are7/12/2017
as in (A). (C) 2-ADCThe
decision
spaceforwith
increasing
perceptual
sensitivity toCopyright
a stimulus
at location
1 reserved.
Date
of download:
Association
Research
in Vision
and Ophthalmology
© 2017.
All rights
(increasing d ). Red circles: Contours of the signal distribution. Gray circle: Contour of the noise distribution. Response