Dear Seb - there is a large literature on psychophysical methods (involving
monte carlo simulations and the like), though most of it is on staircases
and maximum liklihood methods rather than MCS because the main aim has been
to figure out what the most efficient way of measuring a psychometric
function is. There are a couple of papers that I know of that have looked
at MCS; they are:
Watt and Andrews (1981) Current Psychological Reviews, 1, 205-214; (This is
a kind of adaptive version of MCS)
and
Watson and Fitzhugh (1990) Perception and Psychophysics, 47, 87-91; (This
is a rebuttal of Simpson (1988) who claimed that MCS was efficient).
If you are interested I can send you a copy of one of my own papers that
shows, contrary to widespread belief at the time, that a standard staircase
can be nearly as effecient as more sophisticated methods. The paper is for
a 'one-up one-down' stairacse suitable for measuring a PSE, though further
unpublished simulations found similar results for staircase configurations
suitable for measuring detection thresholds. The paper does not address MCS.
best wishes
Tim Meese
-------------------------------------------------
Dr Tim Meese
Neurosciences Research Institute
Vision Sciences
Aston University
Aston Triangle
Birmingham
B4 7ET UK
Voice: +44 (0)121 359 3611 X5421
Fax: +44 (0)121 333 4220
e-mail: t.s.meese@aston.ac.uk
http://www.vs.aston.ac.uk/Staff/TMeese.html
http://www.vs.aston.ac.uk/Research/research.html
--------------------------------------------------
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Dec 19 2000 - 10:24:53 PST