These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

152 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 11800463)

  • 1. Adaptive threshold estimation with unforced-choice tasks.
    Kaernbach C
    Percept Psychophys; 2001 Nov; 63(8):1377-88. PubMed ID: 11800463
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Measuring, estimating, and understanding the psychometric function: a commentary.
    Klein SA
    Percept Psychophys; 2001 Nov; 63(8):1421-55. PubMed ID: 11800466
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Slope bias of psychometric functions derived from adaptive data.
    Kaernbach C
    Percept Psychophys; 2001 Nov; 63(8):1389-98. PubMed ID: 11800464
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Fast and accurate measurement of taste and smell thresholds using a maximum-likelihood adaptive staircase procedure.
    Linschoten MR; Harvey LO; Eller PM; Jafek BW
    Percept Psychophys; 2001 Nov; 63(8):1330-47. PubMed ID: 11800460
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Determining thresholds using adaptive procedures and psychometric fits: evaluating efficiency using theory, simulations, and human experiments.
    Karmali F; Chaudhuri SE; Yi Y; Merfeld DM
    Exp Brain Res; 2016 Mar; 234(3):773-89. PubMed ID: 26645306
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. The single interval adjustment matrix (SIAM) yes-no task: an empirical assessment using auditory and gustatory stimuli.
    Shepherd D; Hautus MJ; Stocks MA; Quek SY
    Atten Percept Psychophys; 2011 Aug; 73(6):1934-47. PubMed ID: 21533962
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Tracking of nociceptive thresholds using adaptive psychophysical methods.
    Doll RJ; Buitenweg JR; Meijer HG; Veltink PH
    Behav Res Methods; 2014 Mar; 46(1):55-66. PubMed ID: 23835651
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. A comparison of adaptive procedures for rapid and reliable threshold assessment and training in naive listeners.
    Amitay S; Irwin A; Hawkey DJ; Cowan JA; Moore DR
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2006 Mar; 119(3):1616-25. PubMed ID: 16583906
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. A comparison of psychophysical procedures for level-discrimination thresholds.
    Marvit P; Florentine M; Buus S
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2003 Jun; 113(6):3348-61. PubMed ID: 12822806
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. A single-interval adjustment-matrix (SIAM) procedure for unbiased adaptive testing.
    Kaernbach C
    J Acoust Soc Am; 1990 Dec; 88(6):2645-55. PubMed ID: 2283438
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Relation between confidence in yes-no and forced-choice tasks.
    McKenzie CR; Wixted JT; Noelle DC; Gyurjyan G
    J Exp Psychol Gen; 2001 Mar; 130(1):140-55. PubMed ID: 11293457
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Empirical performance of optimal Bayesian adaptive estimation.
    García-Pérez MA; Alcalá-Quintana R
    Span J Psychol; 2009 May; 12(1):3-11. PubMed ID: 19476214
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Spatial four-alternative forced-choice method is the preferred psychophysical method for naïve observers.
    Jäkel F; Wichmann FA
    J Vis; 2006 Nov; 6(11):1307-22. PubMed ID: 17209737
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Estimating discrimination performance in two-alternative forced choice tasks: routines for MATLAB and R.
    Bausenhart KM; Dyjas O; Vorberg D; Ulrich R
    Behav Res Methods; 2012 Dec; 44(4):1157-74. PubMed ID: 22773433
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Order effects in two-alternative forced-choice tasks invalidate adaptive threshold estimates.
    García-Pérez MA; Alcalá-Quintana R
    Behav Res Methods; 2020 Oct; 52(5):2168-2187. PubMed ID: 32232736
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. On the limitations of fixed-step-size adaptive methods with response confidence.
    Hsu YF; Chin CL
    Br J Math Stat Psychol; 2014 May; 67(2):266-83. PubMed ID: 23808913
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. A computer program for Spearman-Kärber and probit analysis of psychometric function data.
    Miller J; Ulrich R
    Behav Res Methods Instrum Comput; 2004 Feb; 36(1):11-6. PubMed ID: 15190695
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Efficient and unbiased modifications of the QUEST threshold method: theory, simulations, experimental evaluation and practical implementation.
    King-Smith PE; Grigsby SS; Vingrys AJ; Benes SC; Supowit A
    Vision Res; 1994 Apr; 34(7):885-912. PubMed ID: 8160402
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Using the standard staircase to measure the point of subjective equality: a guide based on computer simulations.
    Meese TS
    Percept Psychophys; 1995 Apr; 57(3):267-81. PubMed ID: 7770319
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Empirical validation of QUEST+ in PSE and JND estimations in visual discrimination tasks.
    Paire A; Hillairet de Boisferon A; Paeye C
    Behav Res Methods; 2023 Dec; 55(8):3984-4001. PubMed ID: 36538168
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 8.