Scale convergence as a criterion for rescaling: Information integration with difference, ratio, and averaging tasks

Ss lifted pairs of weights simultaneously, one in each hand, and judged either the difference, ratio, or average heaviness of the two weights. Data for the difference and ratio tasks were in general agreement with subtractive and ratio models, but the averaging data showed discrepancies from the constant-weight averaging model similar to those reported in previous psychophysical research. Rescaling was ruled out for the averaging data, because responses to pairs of equal weight were a linear function of subtractive model scale values derived from the difference task data. Scale values for the ratio and difference task data were related exponentially, as were the responses to the pairs, consistent with Torgerson’s conjecture that Ss do not distinguish “differences” from “ratios.” They appear to use the same composition rule but different output functions, depending on the procedures for responding. The scale convergence criterion can thus prevent inappropriate rescaling when a model fails and can dictate rescaling even when a model fits.

[1]  D. Krantz A theory of magnitude estimation and cross-modality matching☆ , 1972 .

[2]  W. R. Garner,et al.  Operationism and the concept of perception. , 1956, Psychological review.

[3]  A. Tversky,et al.  Conjoint-measurement analysis of composition rules in psychology. , 1971 .

[4]  Norman H. Anderson,et al.  Cross-task validation of functional measurement , 1972 .

[5]  I. Levin,et al.  Averaging of motor movements: test of an additive model. , 1971, Journal of experimental psychology.

[6]  S. S. Stevens On the psychophysical law. , 1957, Psychological review.

[7]  J. Kruskal Analysis of Factorial Experiments by Estimating Monotone Transformations of the Data , 1965 .

[8]  N. Anderson Integration theory and attitude change. , 1971 .

[9]  N. Anderson Functional measurement and psychophysical judgment. , 1970, Psychological review.

[10]  E. Poulton The new psychophysics: Six models for magnitude estimation. , 1968 .

[11]  S. S. Stevens Issues in psychophysical measurement. , 1971 .

[12]  Thomas L. Harrington,et al.  A test of a two-stage model of magnitude judgment , 1968 .

[13]  N. Anderson On the quantification of Miller's conflict theory. , 1962, Psychological review.

[14]  S. S. Stevens,et al.  Ratio scales and category scales for a dozen perceptual continua. , 1957, Journal of experimental psychology.

[15]  J. P. Seward The constancy of the I-V: a critique of intervening variables. , 1955, Psychological review.

[16]  M. Birnbaum,et al.  Contextual effects in information integration. , 1971, Journal of experimental psychology.

[17]  D. W. Curtis,et al.  Direct quantitative judgments of sums and a two-stage model for psychophysical judgments , 1969 .

[18]  T. L. Harrington,et al.  Erratum to: A test of a two-stage model of magnitude judgment , 1968 .

[19]  W. Brogden Annual Review of Psychology , 1957 .

[20]  D. Weiss Averaging: An empirical validity criterion for magnitude estimation , 1972 .

[21]  D. W. Curtis,et al.  Input and output transformations from magnitude estimation. , 1970, Journal of experimental psychology.

[22]  Michel Treisman,et al.  Sensory Scaling and the Psychophysical Law , 1964 .

[23]  R. Bogartz,et al.  Polynomial response scaling and functional measurement , 1971 .

[24]  Norman H. Anderson,et al.  Stimulus averaging and the context for judgment , 1968 .

[25]  S. Tipper,et al.  Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology , 1948, Nature.

[26]  D. W. Curtis Magnitude estimations and category judgments of brightness and brightness intervals: a two-stage interpretation. , 1970, Journal of Experimental Psychology.

[27]  Warren S. Torgerson,et al.  Distances and ratios in psychophysical scaling , 1961 .

[28]  Savage Cw,et al.  Introspectionist and behaviorist interpretations of ratio scales of perceptual magnitudes. , 1966 .