{"title":"练习对反应时间隐藏信息测试的分类准确性没有影响。","authors":"Gáspár Lukács PhD, Izumi Matsuda PhD","doi":"10.1111/1556-4029.15656","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>The Response Time Concealed Information Test can reveal that a person recognizes a relevant item (<i>probe</i>, e.g., a murder weapon) among other, irrelevant items (<i>controls</i>), based on slower responses to the probe compared to the controls. A previous study (Lukács, 2022, JARMAC) analyzed the data of 14 experiments and demonstrated that classification accuracy is increased by increased test length (i.e., increased number of trials included in the analysis). However, that study left the important question open whether prior practice (whose trials are not included in the analysis) influences the classification accuracy of subsequent testing (i.e., subsequent trials included in the analysis). Reanalyzing the same data from the 14 experiments (comprising 2223 individual tests), we show that different sections of the test (each with the same number of trials), such as the first and second half of each examined test, do not differ substantially in their classification accuracy. The main implications for real-life application are that, at least up to about 600 trials, prior practice does not affect subsequent tests' results, and the number of examined relevant items or their order of presentation may be freely chosen without compromising the method's validity.</p>","PeriodicalId":15743,"journal":{"name":"Journal of forensic sciences","volume":"70 1","pages":"215-221"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"No practice effect on the classification accuracy of the response time concealed information test\",\"authors\":\"Gáspár Lukács PhD, Izumi Matsuda PhD\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/1556-4029.15656\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>The Response Time Concealed Information Test can reveal that a person recognizes a relevant item (<i>probe</i>, e.g., a murder weapon) among other, irrelevant items (<i>controls</i>), based on slower responses to the probe compared to the controls. A previous study (Lukács, 2022, JARMAC) analyzed the data of 14 experiments and demonstrated that classification accuracy is increased by increased test length (i.e., increased number of trials included in the analysis). However, that study left the important question open whether prior practice (whose trials are not included in the analysis) influences the classification accuracy of subsequent testing (i.e., subsequent trials included in the analysis). Reanalyzing the same data from the 14 experiments (comprising 2223 individual tests), we show that different sections of the test (each with the same number of trials), such as the first and second half of each examined test, do not differ substantially in their classification accuracy. The main implications for real-life application are that, at least up to about 600 trials, prior practice does not affect subsequent tests' results, and the number of examined relevant items or their order of presentation may be freely chosen without compromising the method's validity.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":15743,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of forensic sciences\",\"volume\":\"70 1\",\"pages\":\"215-221\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-08\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of forensic sciences\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1556-4029.15656\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"MEDICINE, LEGAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of forensic sciences","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1556-4029.15656","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MEDICINE, LEGAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
No practice effect on the classification accuracy of the response time concealed information test
The Response Time Concealed Information Test can reveal that a person recognizes a relevant item (probe, e.g., a murder weapon) among other, irrelevant items (controls), based on slower responses to the probe compared to the controls. A previous study (Lukács, 2022, JARMAC) analyzed the data of 14 experiments and demonstrated that classification accuracy is increased by increased test length (i.e., increased number of trials included in the analysis). However, that study left the important question open whether prior practice (whose trials are not included in the analysis) influences the classification accuracy of subsequent testing (i.e., subsequent trials included in the analysis). Reanalyzing the same data from the 14 experiments (comprising 2223 individual tests), we show that different sections of the test (each with the same number of trials), such as the first and second half of each examined test, do not differ substantially in their classification accuracy. The main implications for real-life application are that, at least up to about 600 trials, prior practice does not affect subsequent tests' results, and the number of examined relevant items or their order of presentation may be freely chosen without compromising the method's validity.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Forensic Sciences (JFS) is the official publication of the American Academy of Forensic Sciences (AAFS). It is devoted to the publication of original investigations, observations, scholarly inquiries and reviews in various branches of the forensic sciences. These include anthropology, criminalistics, digital and multimedia sciences, engineering and applied sciences, pathology/biology, psychiatry and behavioral science, jurisprudence, odontology, questioned documents, and toxicology. Similar submissions dealing with forensic aspects of other sciences and the social sciences are also accepted, as are submissions dealing with scientifically sound emerging science disciplines. The content and/or views expressed in the JFS are not necessarily those of the AAFS, the JFS Editorial Board, the organizations with which authors are affiliated, or the publisher of JFS. All manuscript submissions are double-blind peer-reviewed.