Median-of-reversal-point threshold estimates are more robust to unreliable runs
Evidence
The final MAA threshold estimate was calculated based on the median of the last three lower reversal points during a run. On average, this method provides a threshold value, which is lower than that produced by e.g. Levitt ( 1971 ) or Neher et al. ( 2011 ). However, data inspection indicated that both of these alternate methods could lead to misleading results if a test subject had been performing unreliably during parts of the run. Further, since this study investigates differences between conditions (cues) rather than the absolute MAA values, the consequently lower MAA was accepted. — Dijk, Pim van, Physiology, Psychoacoustics and…, 3052
Categorization
Category: Craft and Method
Related
- Median-of-reversals MAA estimation is more robust than Levitt when subjects perform unreliably (similarity 0.95)
- Median-based MAA thresholds differ from Levitt-style staircase estimates (similarity 0.90)
- Different adaptive-threshold algorithms yield different threshold estimates (similarity 0.88)
- Median-based MAA estimation yields lower thresholds but proves more robust to unreliable runs (similarity 0.83)
- Adaptive staircase averaging of lower reversal points yields lower MAA thresholds than Levitt’s method. (similarity 0.79)
Broader Connections
- Median-based MAA estimation yields lower thresholds but proves more robust to unreliable runs
#corroborates(0.95) — Dijk, Pim van, Physiology, Psychoacoustics and…, 3061 - Median is less sensitive to outliers than mean
#expands(0.80) — Diego Gambetta, The Sicilian Mafia The Business of…, 880