From the Pigeon Lab to the Courtroom

Pub Date : 2016-01-01 DOI:10.3819/CCBR.2016.110001
J. Wixted
{"title":"From the Pigeon Lab to the Courtroom","authors":"J. Wixted","doi":"10.3819/CCBR.2016.110001","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The task of detecting the presence or absence of a stimulus based on a diagnostic evidence variable is a pervasive one. It arises in basic experimental circumstances, such as a pigeon making a decision about whether or not a stimulus was presented 10 seconds ago, as well as in applied circumstances, such as a witness making a decision about whether or not a suspect is the guilty perpetrator. Understanding how to properly conceptualize and analyze performance on a signal-detection task like that is nontrivial, and advances in this area have come mainly from experimental psychologists studying performance on basic memory and perception tasks. One illustrative example from the pigeon memory literature is considered here in some detail. Unfortunately, lessons learned by basic experimental psychologists (e.g., the value of using signal-detection theory to guide thinking, appreciating the distinction between discriminability and response bias, understanding the utility of receiver operating characteristic analysis, etc.), while having a major impact on applied fields such as diagnostic medicine, have not always been fully appreciated by applied psychologists working on issues pertaining to eyewitness misidentification. In this regard, signal-detection-based analyses can greatly enhance our understanding of important applied issues such as (a) the diagnostic accuracy of different police lineup procedures and (b) the relationship between eyewitness confidence and accuracy. The application of signal-detection theory to issues like these can reverse what many believe to be true about eyewitness identifications made from police lineups.","PeriodicalId":0,"journal":{"name":"","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2016-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3819/CCBR.2016.110001","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

The task of detecting the presence or absence of a stimulus based on a diagnostic evidence variable is a pervasive one. It arises in basic experimental circumstances, such as a pigeon making a decision about whether or not a stimulus was presented 10 seconds ago, as well as in applied circumstances, such as a witness making a decision about whether or not a suspect is the guilty perpetrator. Understanding how to properly conceptualize and analyze performance on a signal-detection task like that is nontrivial, and advances in this area have come mainly from experimental psychologists studying performance on basic memory and perception tasks. One illustrative example from the pigeon memory literature is considered here in some detail. Unfortunately, lessons learned by basic experimental psychologists (e.g., the value of using signal-detection theory to guide thinking, appreciating the distinction between discriminability and response bias, understanding the utility of receiver operating characteristic analysis, etc.), while having a major impact on applied fields such as diagnostic medicine, have not always been fully appreciated by applied psychologists working on issues pertaining to eyewitness misidentification. In this regard, signal-detection-based analyses can greatly enhance our understanding of important applied issues such as (a) the diagnostic accuracy of different police lineup procedures and (b) the relationship between eyewitness confidence and accuracy. The application of signal-detection theory to issues like these can reverse what many believe to be true about eyewitness identifications made from police lineups.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
从鸽子实验室到法庭
基于诊断证据变量检测刺激存在与否的任务是普遍存在的。它出现在基本的实验环境中,比如一只鸽子决定是否在10秒前出现了一个刺激,也出现在应用环境中,比如一个证人决定嫌疑人是否是有罪的犯罪者。理解如何正确地概念化和分析这样的信号检测任务的表现是非常重要的,这一领域的进展主要来自于研究基本记忆和感知任务表现的实验心理学家。这里将详细讨论鸽子记忆文献中的一个说明性例子。不幸的是,基础实验心理学家所吸取的经验教训(例如,使用信号检测理论指导思维的价值,理解区别性和反应偏差之间的区别,理解接受者操作特征分析的效用等)虽然对诊断医学等应用领域产生了重大影响,但在与目击者错误识别有关的问题上工作的应用心理学家并不总是充分理解。在这方面,基于信号检测的分析可以极大地增强我们对重要应用问题的理解,例如(a)不同警察列队程序的诊断准确性和(b)目击证人信心与准确性之间的关系。将信号探测理论应用到这类问题上,可以扭转许多人对目击者指认警察的看法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1