Sensory decision theory methods in pain research: A reply to Rollman

TLDR

Sensory Decision Theory has received positive reviews, yet Rollman has criticized its use in pain research, claiming SDT parameters cannot conclusively reveal pain‑modulation mechanisms. This paper responds to Rollman from the perspective of a single SDT pain research group. The authors refute recurrent, unfounded assertions, address specific methodological concerns, and describe the pain model underlying their laboratory work.

Abstract

Positive reviews of the developing literature on Sensory Decision Theory (SDT) pain research have been provided by Lloyd and Appel [21] and Hall [17]. In contrast, Rollman [24] has criticized the application of SDT methodology to the study of pain, arguing that it is "an error in logic to utilize SDT parameters to reach definitive conclusions about mechanisms altered during pain modulation", and he has attacked the procedures employed by decision theory researchers in data collection and analysis. This paper is a response to Rollman written from the perspective of a single group of SDT pain researchers. I will first bring to issue certain fundamental statements that appear recurrently throughout Rollman's paper, and I will argue that many of his criticisms lack substance because these assertions are inappropriate. In addition, I will deal briefly with some of Rollman's specific methodologic criticisms, limiting my comments to those points that are salient to the multidisciplinary audience of this journal, and I will briefly describe the pain model that has been implicit in the work of our laboratory group.