Jones Bill
Department of Psychology, Carleton University, Ottawa, Ont. Canada.
Pain. 1979 Dec;7(3):305-312. doi: 10.1016/0304-3959(79)90086-1.
Rollman [13,14] has clearly raised important questions about the application of signal detection (TSD) procedures to the study of the perceived painfulness of stimuli. Researchers have often failed to realize that the discriminability of two usually painful stimuli need not be related to their reported painfulness. Thus indices of discrimination accuracy derived form TSD are logically (though not necessarily empirically) independent of the analgesic properties of any treatment. However, Rollman misleadingly gives the impression that he is questioning the general validity of the application of TSD to answering questions in pain research. This is not the case. Procedures derived from TSD may play an important part in answering questions of interest to pain researchers especially as Rollman has exaggerated the practical difficulties associated with TSD experiments. It must be emphasized that there is no one TSD model as Rollman often seems to imply but a variety of models [5,9]. The usefulness of any model in any situation is a matter for experiment. Rollman has certainly criticized effectively one dubious analogy to TSD procedures which pain researchers have used. That is not the same as questioning the general usefulness of TSD models.
罗尔曼[13,14]明确提出了关于信号检测（TSD）程序在研究刺激的感知疼痛程度方面应用的重要问题。研究人员常常没有意识到，两种通常具有疼痛性的刺激之间的可辨别性不一定与它们所报告的疼痛程度相关。因此，从TSD得出的辨别准确性指标在逻辑上（尽管不一定在经验上）独立于任何治疗的镇痛特性。然而，罗尔曼误导性地给人一种印象，即他在质疑TSD在回答疼痛研究问题方面应用的普遍有效性。事实并非如此。源自TSD的程序可能在回答疼痛研究人员感兴趣的问题中发挥重要作用，尤其是因为罗尔曼夸大了与TSD实验相关的实际困难。必须强调的是，并不像罗尔曼经常似乎暗示的那样只有一种TSD模型，而是有多种模型[5,9]。任何模型在任何情况下的有用性都有待实验验证。罗尔曼确实有效地批评了疼痛研究人员使用的一种与TSD程序有关的可疑类比。但这与质疑TSD模型的普遍有用性并不相同。
