title: No troubles with bubbles: a reply to Murray and Gold.
abstract: Murray and Gold discuss two "shortcomings" of the Bubbles method [Vision Research 41 (2001) 2261]. The first one is theoretical: Bubbles would not fully characterize the LAM (Linear Amplifier Model) observer, whereas reverse correlation would. The second "shortcoming" is practical: the apertures that partly reveal information in a typical Bubbles experiment would induce atypical strategies in human observers, whereas the additive Gaussian white noise used by Murray and Gold (and others) in conjunction with reverse correlation would not. Here, we show that these claims are unfounded.
authors.affiliation: Département de Psychologie, Université de Montréal, C.P. 6128, Succursale Centre-ville, Qué., Montréal, Canada H3C 3J7. frederic.gosselin@umontreal.ca
authors.forename: Frédéric
authors.initials: F
authors.lastname: Gosselin
authors.forename: Philippe G
authors.initials: PG
authors.lastname: Schyns
mesh_terms: D006801:Humans; D008960:Models, Psychological; D010775:Photic Stimulation; D011601:Psychophysics; D014796:Visual Perception / Q000502:physiology*