When I present two signals in paired comparison and ask the respondent to select the stronger signal in the pair, I find that it is the signal strength of the second signal that more so determines correct detection (0,1) yet the correlation between probability of correct detection (p) and both signals is significant and negative. Yes, the contrast contributes to the prediction of (p) but I cant figure out why my correlations are negative. It is as if the respondent is anchoring on the first signal and the "smallness" of the second signal determines (p). Does anyone have an explanation for this?
- The stimulus is paired comparison words with each having a different factor loading based on it's measurement of agreeableness. So each word taps the construct more or less deeply than the other;
- The contrast between the words in terms of their factor loading is the signal;
- A set of 122 such paired comparison tasks was developed and the task before the respondent is to select the more agreeable word.
- The stronger loading was alternated between being on the first and second word. I did find that the contrast predicted probability of correct detection (r = .20*). I know this is an unusual application of signal detection theory and you might not has seen this before.