Subject: From: Pierre Divenyi <marva4!pdivenyi(at)UCDAVIS.EDU> Date: Wed, 27 Oct 1993 12:32:46 PDT
ucdavis!auditory(at)vm1.mcgill.ca Re: Steve McAdams's comments on P. Divenyi's comments on B. Repp's expt. The difference between a "classical" discrimination experiment (pitch, intensity, or shoe size) and the Shepard tone discrimination experiment is that one has absolutely no way of determining what made the subject respond the way he/she did. I am not here to defend Dave Green, Ed Burns, or Neil Viemesiter (they can do it better themselves), but would like to warn against making far-reaching inferences from essentially uninterpretable data. I am not even saying that the results are wrong: all I would like to (equally) respectfully propose is to go after the presumed effect with some other method, too. For a discussion of criterion, I recommend the interested readers to browse through the recent book by Macmillan and Creelman, or Egan's (posthumus?) book. However, the good-old text by Green and Swets is also an excellent starting point. And, please, do not consider this as an exercise in didactism -- I like to have people talk the same language when they discuss any issue. --Pierre Divenyi PS: Steve (McAdams): Beef in the U.S. is no longer politically correct.