Abstract
Zwislocki and Goodman (1980) argue that there exists an “absolute coupling” of numbers to sensation magnitudes and conclude that, when subjects are left unconstrained by a designated stimulus-number pair, they may use this “absolute” scale. The purpose of the studies reported here was to test whether Zwislocki and Goodman’s (1980) absolute scaling procedure reduces contextual effects due to variations in the stimulus spacing. It was found that magnitude estimations vary as a function of the stimulus spacing, regardless of whether subjects are instructed to use a standard and modulus, and, furthermore, that category ratings yield effects of the stimulus spacing comparable to those obtained with magnitude estimations. It is argued that removing the so-called constraints of a standard and modulus does not yield an “absolute” scale of sensation. The absolute scaling procedure increases response variability and thereby lowers the power of a test for contextual effects.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Birnbaum, M. H. Using contextual effects to derive psychophysical scales.Perception & Psychophysics, 1974,15, 89–96.
Birnbaum, M. H. Expectancy and judgment. In F. Restle, R. M. Shiffrin, N. J. Castellan, H. R. Lindman, & D. B. Pisoni (Eds.),Cognitive theory (Vol. 1). Hillsdale, N.J: Erlbaum, 1975.
Birnbaum, M. H. Controversies in psychological measurement. In B. Wegner (Ed.),Social attitudes and psychophysical measurement. Hillsdale, N.J: Erlbaum, 1982. (a)
Birnbaum, N. H. Problems with so-called “direct” scaling. In J. T. Kuznicki, R. A. Johnson, & A. F. Rutkiewic (Eds.),Selected sensory methods: Problems and approaches to hedonics (ASTM STP773). Philadelphia: American Society for Testing and Materials, 1982. (b)
Mellers, B. A. Equity judgment: A revision of Aristotelian views.Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 1982,111, 242–270.
Mellers, B. A., &Birnbaum, M. H. Loci of contextual effects in judgment.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 1982,8, 582–601.
Mellers, B. A., &Birnbaum, M. H. Contextual effects in social judgment.Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 1983, 1983,19, 157–171.
Montgomery, H. Direct estimation: Effect of methodological factors on scale type.Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 1975,16, 19–29.
Moskowitz, H. R. Utilitarian benefits of magnitude estimation scaling for testing product acceptability. In J. T. Kuznicki, R. A. Johnson, & A. F. Rutkiewic (Eds.),Selected sensory methods: Problems and approaches to hedonics (ASTM STP773). Philadelphia: American Society for Testing and Materials, 1982.
Parduccl A. The relativity of absolute judgment.Scientific American, 1968,219, 84–90.
Parducci, A. Contextual effects: A range-frequency analysis. In E. C. Carterette & M. P. Friedman (Eds.),Handbook of perception (Vol. 2). New York: Academic Press, 1974.
Parducci, A. Category ratings: Still more contextual effects! In B. Wegner (Ed.),Social attitudes and psychophysical measurement. Hillsdale, N.J: Erlbaum, 1982.
Poulton, E. C. The new psychophysics: Six models for magnitude estimation.Psychological Bulletin, 1968,69, 1–19.
Poulton, E. C. Models for biases in judging sensory magnitude.Psychological Bulletin, 1979,86, 777–803.
Romssos, G. H. Biasing power law exponents by magnitude estimation instructions.Perception & Psychophysics, 1976,19, 80–84.
Stevens, S. S., &Galanter, E. H. Ratio scales and category scales for a dozen perceptual continua.Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1957,54, 377–411.
Zwislocki, J. J., &Galanter, D. A. Absolute scaling of sensory magnitudes: A validation.Perception & Psychophysics, 1980,211, 28–38.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Mellers, B.A. Evidence against “absolute” scaling. Perception & Psychophysics 33, 523–526 (1983). https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03202933
Received:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03202933