A comparison of adaptive procedures for rapid and reliable threshold assessment and training in naive listeners

In psychoacoustic studies there is often a need to assess performance indices quickly and reliably. The aim of this study was to establish a quick and reliable procedure for evaluating thresholds in backward masking and frequency discrimination tasks. Based on simulations, four procedures likely to produce the best results were selected, and data collected from 20 naive adult listeners on each. Each procedure used one of two adaptive methods (staircase or maximum-likelihood estimation, each targeting the 79% correct point on the psychometric function) and two response paradigms (3-interval, 2-alternative forced-choice AXB or 3-interval; 3-alternative forced-choice oddball). All procedures yielded statistically equivalent threshold estimates in both backward masking and frequency discrimination, with a trend to lower thresholds for oddball procedures in frequency discrimination. Oddball procedures were both more efficient and more reliable (test-retest) in backward masking, but all four procedures were equally efficient and reliable in frequency discrimination. Fitted psychometric functions yielded similar thresholds to averaging over reversals in staircase procedures. Learning was observed across threshold-assessment blocks and experimental sessions. In four additional groups, each of ten listeners, trained on the different procedures, no differences in performance improvement or rate of learning were observed, suggesting that learning is independent of procedure. (c) 2006 Acoustical Society of America.