Psychological Research

, Volume 38, Issue 2, pp 189–207 | Cite as

Psychophysical study of Numbers

V. Preferred state theory of matching functions
  • John C. Baird
Article

Summary

This paper describes an extension of Preferred State Theory (Baird, 1975) to deal with matching functions produced by such techniques as magnitude and category estimation. It is assumed by this theory that all stimulus attributes are transformed into perceptual states according to the operation of mathematical base systems. Intensities are matched across attributes in terms of the number of preferred states generated by each. The theory provides quantitative explanations for a variety of psychophysical effects, including the prothetic-metathetic distinction, the selective applicability of Fechner's and Stevens' laws, and the success of transitivity tests among exponents.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Attneave, F.: Perception and related areas. In: Psychology: A study of a science, Vol. 4 (Koch, S., Ed.). New York: McGraw Hill 1962Google Scholar
  2. Baird, J. C.: A cognitive theory of psychophysics. I. Information transmission, partitioning, and Weber's law. Scand. J. Psychol. 11, 35–46 (1970a)Google Scholar
  3. Baird, J. C.: A cognitive theory of psychophysics. II. Fechner's law and Stevens' law. Scand. J. Psychol. 11, 89–102 (1970b)Google Scholar
  4. Baird, J. C.: Psychophysical analysis of visual space. London: Pergamon 1970cGoogle Scholar
  5. Baird, J. C.: Psychophysical study of numbers: IV. Generalized preferred state theory. Psychol. Res. (1975)Google Scholar
  6. Baird, J. C., Lewis, C., Romer, D.: Relative frequencies of numerical responses in ratio estimation. Perception and Psychophysics 8, 358–362 (1970)Google Scholar
  7. Baird, J. C., Noma E.: Psychophysical study of numbers: I. Generation of numerical responses. Psychol. Res. 37, 281–287 (1975)Google Scholar
  8. Baird, J. C., Stein, T.: When power functions fail: A theoretical explanation. Perceptual and Motor Skills 30, 415–425 (1970)Google Scholar
  9. Banks, W. P.: A new psychophysical ratio scaling technique: Random Production. Bull. Psychonomic Soc. 1, 273–275 (1973)Google Scholar
  10. Eisler, H.: A general differential equation in psychophysics. Scand. J. Psychol. 4, 265–272 (1963)Google Scholar
  11. Eisler, H., Montgomery, H.: On theoretical and realizable ideal conditions in psychophysics: Magnitude and category scales and their relation. Göteborg Pschological Reports. The University of Göteborg 2, No. 16 (1972)Google Scholar
  12. Ekman, G.: Subjective power functions and the method of fractionation. Reports from the Psychological Laboratories. The University of Stockholm, No. 34 (1956)Google Scholar
  13. Ekman, G.: Weber's law and related functions. J. Psychol. 47, 343–352 (1959)Google Scholar
  14. Ekman, G.: Is the power law a special case of Fechner's law? Perceptual and Motor Skills 19, 73 (1974)Google Scholar
  15. Ekman, G., Sjöberg, L.: Scaling. Annual Review of Psychology 16, 451–474 (1965)Google Scholar
  16. Engen, T., Levy, N.: The influence of standards on psychophysical judgments. Perceptual and Motor Skills 5, 193–197 (1955)Google Scholar
  17. Engen, T., Ross, B. M.: Effect of reference number of magnitude estimation. Perception and Psychophysics 1, 74–76 (1966)Google Scholar
  18. Fechner, G.: Elemente der Psychophysik, Vol. II. Leipzig: Breitkopf and Bartel 1907Google Scholar
  19. Freides, D., Phillips, P.: Power law fits to magnitude estimates of groups and individuals. Psychonomic Sci. 5, 367–368 (1966)Google Scholar
  20. Gibson, R.H., Tomko, D. L.: The relation between category and magnitude estimates of tactile intensity. Perception and Psychophysics. 12, 135–138 (1972)Google Scholar
  21. Graf, V., Baird, J. C., Glesman, G.: An empirical test of two psychophysical models. Acta psychol. 38, 59–72 (1974)Google Scholar
  22. Helm, C. E., Messick, S., Tucker, L. R.: Psychological models for relating discrimination and magnitude estimation scales. Psychol. Rev. 68, 167–177 (1961)Google Scholar
  23. Helson, H.: Adaptation-level theory. New York: Harper and Row 1964Google Scholar
  24. Künnapas, T.: Scales for subjective distance. Scand. J. Psychol. 1, 187–192 (1960)Google Scholar
  25. Luce, R. D., Mo, S. S.: Magnitude estimation of heaviness and loudness by individual subjects: A test of a probabilistic response theory. British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology 18, 159–174 (1965)Google Scholar
  26. Marks, L. E.: Stimulus range, number of categories, and form of the category scale. Amer, J. Psychol. 81, 467–479 (1968)Google Scholar
  27. Marks, L. E., Stevens, J. C.: The form of the psychophysical function near threshold. Perception and Psychophysics 4, 315–318 (1968)Google Scholar
  28. Mashhour, M., Hosman, J.: On the new psychophysical law. A validation study. Perception and Psychophysics 3, 367–375 (1968)Google Scholar
  29. McGill, W.: The slope of the loudness function. A puzzle, p. 67–81. In: Psychological scaling: Theory and applications (Gulliksen, H., Messick, S., Eds.) New York: Wiley 1960Google Scholar
  30. McKay, D. M.: Psychophysics of perceived intensity: A theoretical basis for Fechner's and Stevens' laws. Science 139, 1212–1216 (1963)Google Scholar
  31. Noma, E., Baird, J. C.: Psychophysical study of numbers. II. Theoretical models of number generation. Psychol. Res. 38, 81–96 (1975)Google Scholar
  32. Poulton, E. C.: The new psychophysics: Six models for magnitude estimation. Psychol. Bull. 69, 1–19 (1968)Google Scholar
  33. Poulton, E. C.: Choice of first variables for single and repeated multiple estimates of loudness. J. exp. Psychol. 80, 249–253 (1969)Google Scholar
  34. Pradhan, P. L., Hoffman, P. J.: Effect of spacing and range of stimuli on magnitude estimation judgments. J. exp. Psychol. 66, 533–541 (1963)Google Scholar
  35. Stevens, S. S.: On the brightness of lights and the loudness of sounds. Science 118, 576 (1953) (Abstract)Google Scholar
  36. Stevens, S. S.: To honor Fechner and repeal his law. Science 133, 80–86 (1961)Google Scholar
  37. Stevens, S. S.: On the operation known as judgment. American Scientist 54, 385–401 (1966a)Google Scholar
  38. Stevens, S. S.: A metric for the social consensus. Science 151, 530–541 (1966b)Google Scholar
  39. Stevens, S. S.: Neural events and the psychophysical law. Science 170, 1043–1050 (1970)Google Scholar
  40. Stevens, S. S.: Issues in Psychophysical measurement. Psychol. Rev. 78, 426–450 (1971)Google Scholar
  41. Stevens, S. S., Galanter, E. H.: Ratio scales and category scales for a dozen perceptual continua. J. exp. Psychol. 54, 377–411 (1957)Google Scholar
  42. Teghtsoonian, R.: On the exponents in Stevens' law and the constant in Ekman's law. Psychol. Rev. 8, 71–80 (1971)Google Scholar
  43. Treisman, M.: Sensory scaling and the psychphysical law. Quart. J. exp. Psychol. 16, 11–22 (1964)Google Scholar
  44. Wandmacher, J.: Die Trennung von sensorischen und Urteilsprozessen bei der Größen- und Verhältnisschätzung. Doctoral dissertation, University of Hamburg (1970)Google Scholar
  45. Ward, L. M.: Category judgments of loudnesses in the absence of an experimenter-induced identification function: Sequential effects and power function fit. J. exp. Psychol. 94, 179–184 (1972)Google Scholar
  46. Ward, L. M.: Repeated magnitude estimations with a variable standard: Sequential effects and other properties. Perception and Psychophysics 13, 193–200 (1973)Google Scholar
  47. Ward, L. M., Lockhead, G. R.: Response system processes in absolute judgment. Perception and Psychophysics 9, 73–78 (1971)Google Scholar
  48. Weissmann, W. M., Holligsworth, S. R., Baird, J. C.: Psychophysical study of numbers. III. Methodological applications. Psychol. Res. 38, 97–115 (1975)Google Scholar
  49. Wong, R.: Effect of the modulus on estimates of magnitude of linear extent. Amer. J. Psychol. 76, 511–521 (1963)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 1975

Authors and Affiliations

  • John C. Baird
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of PsychologyDartmouth CollegeHanoverUSA

Personalised recommendations