English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Fifty years after the advent of signal-detection theory, some visual scientists still adhere to the notion of a high, fixed threshold. Indeed, experienced observers are able to deliver consistent settings of thresholds using the method of adjustment, but those settings are different from the thresholds obtained with two-alternative forced choice (2AFC) procedures. This article illustrates the difference by reference to four existing studies of contrast discrimination. All four sets of data show clear subthreshold facilitation, but the method of adjustment produces a rectilinear characteristic that corresponds to the use of different criteria over different ranges of contrast, whereas 2AFC procedures produce a curvilinear characteristic with generally lower thresholds. This article proposes a theoretical explanation for the difference.

Contrast discrimination by the methods of adjustment and two-alternative forced choice