Advertisement

Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society

, Volume 26, Issue 6, pp 544–547 | Cite as

Magnitude estimation of the utility of nonmonetary items

  • Simon Kemp
Article

Abstract

Magnitude estimation of the utility of personally and nationally consumed goods and services was undertaken by student and general public samples. For the personally consumed items, a power function with an exponent around 0.4 provided a good description of the relation between the utility of the items and their cost. Moreover, equivalent costs for uncosted personal items, such as fine weather on the following weekend, could be reliably obtained from the function. The utility of the national items, however, was virtually independent of cost.

Keywords

Power Function Magnitude Estimation Preschool Education Item Median Personal Item 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. Galanter, E. (1962). The direct measurement of utility and subjective probability. American Journal of Psychology, 75, 208–220.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Galanter, E. (1974). Psychological decision mechanisms and perception. InE. C. Carterette & M. P. Friedman (Eds.), Handbook of perception: Vol. 2. Psychophysical judgment and measurement (pp. 85–125). New York: Academic Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Hamblin, R. L. (1974). Social attitudes: Magnitude measurement and theory. In H. M. Blalock (Ed.), Measurement in the social sciences: Theories and strategies (pp. 61–120). London: Macmillan.Google Scholar
  4. Mosteller, F., & Nogee, P. (1951). An experimental measurement of utility. Journal of Political Economy, 59, 371–404.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Sellin, J. T., & Wolfgang, M. E. (1964). The measurement of delinquency. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  6. Stevens, S. S. (1957). On the psychophysical law. Psychological Review, 64, 153–181.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Stevens, S. S. (1975). Psychophysics: Introduction to its perceptual, neural, and social prospects. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  8. Wendt, D. (1982). On S. S. Stevens: Psychophysics and the measurement of subjective probability and utility. In B. Wegener (Ed.), Social attitudes and psychophysical measurement (pp. 303–314). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Psychonomic Society, Inc. 1988

Authors and Affiliations

  • Simon Kemp
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of PsychologyUniversity of CanterburyChristchurchNew Zealand

Personalised recommendations