García Pérez, Miguel A.Alcalá Quintana, Rocío2023-06-202023-06-202012Allan, L. G. (1975). The relationship between judgments of successiveness and judgments of order. Percept. Psychophys. 18, 29–36. CrossRef Full Text. Collett, D. (2003). Modelling Binary Data, 2nd Edn. Boca Raton: CRC Press. Colonius, H., and Diederich, A. (2011). Computing an optimal time window of audiovisual integration in focused attention tasks: illustrated by studies on effect of age and prior knowledge. Exp. Brain Res. 212, 327–337. Pubmed Abstract | Pubmed Full Text | CrossRef Full Text Diederich, A., and Colonius, H. (2011). “Modeling multisensory processes in saccadic responses: time-window-of-integration model,” in The Neural Bases of Multisensory Processes, eds M. M. Murray and M. T. Wallace (Boca Raton: CRC Press), 253–276. Estes, W. K. (1956). The problem of inference from curves based on group data. Psychol. Bull. 53, 134–140. Pubmed Abstract | Pubmed Full Text | CrossRef Full Text Estes, W. K., and Maddox, W. T. (2005). Risks of drawing inferences about cognitive processes from model fits to individual versus average performance. Psychon. Bull. Rev. 12, 403–408. Pubmed Abstract | Pubmed Full Text | CrossRef Full Text Fujisaki, W., and Nishida, S. (2009). Audio–tactile superiority over visuo–tactile and audio–visual combinations in the temporal resolution of synchrony perception. Exp. Brain Res. 198, 245–259. Pubmed Abstract | Pubmed Full Text | CrossRef Full Text García-Pérez, M. A. (1994). Parameter estimation and goodness-of-fit testing in multinomial models. Br. J. Math. Stat. Psychol. 47, 247–282. CrossRef Full Text García-Pérez, M. A., and Alcalá-Quintana, R. (2005). Sampling plans for fitting the psychometric function. Span. J. Psychol. 8, 256–289. Pubmed Abstract | Pubmed Full Text García-Pérez, M. A., and Alcalá-Quintana, R. (2010a). The difference model with guessing explains interval bias in two-alternative forced-choice detection procedures. J. Sens. Stud. 25, 876–898. CrossRef Full Text García-Pérez, M. A., and Alcalá-Quintana, R. (2010b). Reminder and 2AFC tasks provide similar estimates of the difference limen: a reanalysis of data from Lapid, Ulrich, and Rammsayer (2008) and a discussion of Ulrich and Vorberg (2009). Atten. Percept. Psychophys. 72, 1155–1178. [A correction has been published: Atten. Percept. Psychophys. 2012, 74, 489–492.] CrossRef Full Text García-Pérez, M. A., and Alcalá-Quintana, R. (2011). Interval bias in 2AFC detection tasks: sorting out the artifacts. Atten. Percept. Psychophys. 73, 2332–2352. Pubmed Abstract | Pubmed Full Text | CrossRef Full Text García-Pérez, M. A., and Núñez-Antón, V. (2001). Small-sample comparisons for power-divergence goodness-of-fit statistics for symmetric and skewed simple null hypotheses. J. Appl. Stat. 28, 855–874. CrossRef Full Text García-Pérez, M. A., and Núñez-Antón, V. (2004). Small-sample comparisons for goodness-of-fit statistics in one-way multinomials with composite hypotheses. J. Appl. Stat. 31, 161–181. CrossRef Full Text Harrar, V., and Harris, L. R. (2008). The effect of exposure to asynchronous audio, visual, and tactile stimulus combinations on the perception of simultaneity. Exp. Brain Res. 186, 517–524. Pubmed Abstract | Pubmed Full Text | CrossRef Full Text Heath, R. A. (1984). Response time and temporal order judgement in vision. Aust. J. Psychol. 36, 21–34. CrossRef Full Text Jaskowski, P. (1991). Two-stage model for order discrimination. Percept. Psychophys. 50, 76–82. Pubmed Abstract | Pubmed Full Text | CrossRef Full Text Jaskowski, P. (1993). Selective attention and temporal-order judgment. Perception 22, 681–689. Pubmed Abstract | Pubmed Full Text | CrossRef Full Text Kingdom, F. A. A., and Prins, N. (2010). Psychophysics: A Practical Introduction. London: Academic Press. Kristofferson, A. B., and Allan, L. G. (1973). “Successiveness and duration discrimination,” in Attention and Performance IV, ed. S. Kornblum (New York: Academic Press), 737–749. Lawrence, M. A. (2010). Estimating the probability and fidelity of memory. Behav. Res. Methods 42, 957–968. Pubmed Abstract | Pubmed Full Text | CrossRef Full Text Lin, L. I.-K. (1989). A concordance correlation coefficient to evaluate reproducibility. Biometrics 45, 255–268. Pubmed Abstract | Pubmed Full Text | CrossRef Full Text Nicholls, M. E. R., Lew, M., Loetscher, T., and Yates, M. J. (2011). The importance of response type to the relationship between temporal order and numerical magnitude. Atten. Percept. Psychophys. 73, 1604–1613. Pubmed Abstract | Pubmed Full Text | CrossRef Full Text Numerical Algorithms Group. (1999). NAG Fortran Library Manual, Mark 19. Oxford: Numerical Algorithms Group. Occelli, V., Spence, C., and Zampini, M. (2011). Audiotactile interactions in temporal perception. Psychon. Bull. Rev. 18, 429–454. Pubmed Abstract | Pubmed Full Text | CrossRef Full Text Schneider, K. A., and Bavelier, D. (2003). Components of visual prior entry. Cogn. Psychol. 47, 333–366. Pubmed Abstract | Pubmed Full Text | CrossRef Full Text Shore, D. I., Spry, E., and Spence, C. (2002). Confusing the mind by crossing the hands. Cogn. Brain Res. 14, 153–163. CrossRef Full Text Spence, C., Baddeley, R., Zampini, M., James, R., and Shore, D. I. (2003). Multisensory temporal order judgments: when two locations are better than one. Percept. Psychophys. 65, 318–328. Pubmed Abstract | Pubmed Full Text | CrossRef Full Text Spence, C., and Parise, C. (2010). Prior-entry: a review. Conscious. Cogn. 19, 364–379. Pubmed Abstract | Pubmed Full Text | CrossRef Full Text Sternberg, S., and Knoll, R. L. (1973). “The perception of temporal order: fundamental issues and a general model,” in Attention and Performance IV, ed. S. Kornblum (New York: Academic Press), 629–685. Stetson, C., Cui, X., Montague, P. R., and Eagleman, D. M. (2006). Motor-sensory recalibration leads to an illusory reversal of action and sensation. Neuron 51, 651–659. Pubmed Abstract | Pubmed Full Text | CrossRef Full Text Stone, J. V., Hunkin, N. M., Porrill, J., Wood, R., Keeler, V., Beanland, M., Port, M., and Porter, N. R. (2001). When is now? Perception of simultaneity. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B Biol. Sci. 268, 31–38. CrossRef Full Text Swanson, W. H., and Birch, E. E. (1992). Extracting thresholds from noisy psychophysical data. Percept. Psychophys. 51, 409–422. Pubmed Abstract | Pubmed Full Text | CrossRef Full Text Ulrich, R. (1987). Threshold models of temporal-order judgments evaluated by a ternary response task. Percept. Psychophys. 42, 224–239. Pubmed Abstract | Pubmed Full Text | CrossRef Full Text van Eijk, R. L. J., Kohlrausch, A., Juola, J. F., and van de Par, S. (2008). Audiovisual synchrony and temporal order judgments: effects of experimental method and stimulus type. Percept. Psychophys. 70, 955–968. Pubmed Abstract | Pubmed Full Text | CrossRef Full Text van Eijk, R. L. J., Kohlrausch, A., Juola, J. F., and van de Par, S. (2010). Temporal order judgment criteria are affected by synchrony judgment sensitivity. Atten. Percept. Psychophys. 72, 2227–2235. Pubmed Abstract | Pubmed Full Text | CrossRef Full Text Vatakis, A., Navarra, J., Soto-Faraco, S., and Spence, C. (2008). Audiovisual temporal adaptation of speech: temporal order versus simultaneity judgments. Exp. Brain Res. 185, 521–529. Pubmed Abstract | Pubmed Full Text | CrossRef Full Text Vroomen, J., and Keetels, M. (2010). Perception of intersensory synchrony: a tutorial review. Atten. Percept. Psychophys. 72, 871–874. Pubmed Abstract | Pubmed Full Text | CrossRef Full Text Wichmann, F. A., and Hill, N. J. (2001). The psychometric function: I. Fitting, sampling, and goodness of fit. Percept. Psychophys. 63, 1293–1313. Pubmed Abstract | Pubmed Full Text | CrossRef Full Text Yates, M. J., and Nicholls, M. E. R. (2009). Somatosensory prior entry. Atten. Percept. Psychophys. 71, 847–859. Pubmed Abstract | Pubmed Full Text | CrossRef Full Text Yates, M. J., and Nicholls, M. E. R. (2011). Somatosensory prior entry assessed with temporal order judgments and simultaneity judgments. Atten. Percept. Psychophys. 73, 1586–1603.1664-107810.3389/fpsyg.2012.00094https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14352/44901Independent-channels models of perception of temporal order (also referred to as threshold models or perceptual latency models) have been ruled out because two formal properties of these models (monotonicity and parallelism) are not borne out by data from ternary tasks in which observers must judge whether stimulus A was presented before, after, or simultaneously with stimulus B. These models generally assume that observed responses are authentic indicators of unobservable judgments, but blinks, lapses of attention, or errors in pressing the response keys (maybe, but not only, motivated by time pressure when reaction times are being recorded) may make observers misreport their judgments or simply guess a response. We present an extension of independent-channels models that considers response errors and we show that the model produces psychometric functions that do not satisfy monotonicity and parallelism. The model is illustrated by fitting it to data from a published study in which the ternary task was used. The fitted functions describe very accurately the absence of monotonicity and parallelism shown by the data. These characteristics of empirical data are thus consistent with independent-channels models when response errors are taken into consideration. The implications of these results for the analysis and interpretation of temporal order judgment data are discussed.engAtribución 3.0 Españajournal articlehttp://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2012.00094http://journal.frontiersin.org/journal/psychologyopen access159.9.07Temporal order judgmentSimultaneity judgmentResponse ErrorsAudiovisual eventsExperimental methodsModel identifiabilityPsicología experimental6106 Psicología Experimental