Abstract
Each S indicated whether two successively presented rows of letters were “same” or “different.” Reaction times of the “different” response seemed to indicate that S examined the stimulus letters in a serial, self-terminating manner. However, the reaction times of the “same” response were not consistent with this model. Consequently, it was proposed that S employs simultaneously two distinct processes for comparing stimuli. One process would generate the “different” responses; the other process would generate the “same” responses. Most false “same” responses occurred when the two rows of letters differed minimally. Thus, the false “same” responses appear to result from a failure to detect the difference between the two stimuli. However, when S made a false “same” response, he was aware that he had done so. Therefore, it was suggested that only one of the two comparison processes failed to detect the stimulus difference.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
References
AVERBACH, E., & CORIELL, A. S. Short-term memory in vision. Bell System Technical Journal, 1961, 40, 309–328.
BAMBER, D. “Same”-“different” judgments of multidimensional stimuli: Reaction times and error rates. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Stanford University, 1969. Bindra, D., Ponderi, D. C., & Nishisato, S. Decision latencies of “same” and “different” judgments. Perception & Psychophysics, 1968, 3, 121-130.
BINDRA, D., WILLIAMS, J. A., & WISE, J. S. Judgments of sameness and difference: Experiments on decision time. Science, 1965, 150, 1625–1627.
EGETH, H. E. Parallel versus serial processes in multidimensional stimulus discrimination. Perception & Psychophysics, 1966, 1, 245–252.
NICKERSON, R. S. Response times for “same”-“different” judgments. Perceptual & Motor Skills, 1965, 20, 15–18.
NICKERSON, R. S. “Same”-“different” response times with multiattribute stimulus differences. Perceptual & Motor Skills, 1967, 24, 543–554.
POSNER, M. I., & MITCHELL, R. F. Chronometric analysis of classification. Psychological Review, 1967, 74, 392–409.
SEKULER, R. W., & ABRAMS, M. Visual sameness: A choice time analysis of pattern recognition processes. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1968, 77, 232–238.
SPERLING, G. The information available in brief visual presentations. Psychological Monographs, 1960, 74 (11, Whole No. 498).
STERNBERG, S. Scanning a persisting visual image versus a memorized list. Paper presented at the meeting of the Eastern Psychological Association, Boston, April 1967.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Additional information
This paper is based upon a dissertation submitted to Stanford University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the PhD degree. The author wishes to thank Richard C. Atkinson, Leon Festinger, William K. Estes, and Herman Buschke for their guidance.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Bamber, D. Reaction times and error rates for “same”-“different” judgments of multidimensional stimull. Perception & Psychophysics 6, 169–174 (1969). https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03210087
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03210087