Although the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) method is the acknowledged gold-standard for imaging system assessment, it ignores localisation information and differentiation between multiple abnormalities per case. As the free-response ROC (FROC) method uses localisation information and more closely resembles the clinical reporting process, it is being increasingly used. A number of methods have been proposed to analyse the data that result from an FROC study: jackknife alternative FROC (JAFROC) and a variant termed JAFROC1, initial detection and candidate analysis (IDCA) and ROC analysis via the reduction of the multiple ratings on a case to a single rating. The focus of this paper was to compare JAFROC1, IDCA and the ROC analysis methods using a clinical FROC human data set. All methods agreed on the ordering of the modalities and all yielded statistically significant differences of the figures-of-merit, i.e. p < 0.05. Both IDCA and JAFROC1 yielded much smaller p-values than ROC. The results are consistent with a recent simulation-based validation study comparing these and other methods. In conclusion, IDCA or JAFROC1 analysis of FROC human data may be superior at detecting modality differences than ROC analysis.