Abstract
Scaling methods based on direct estimation of sensory ratios and intervals give discrepant results (the partition paradox). Stevens’s explanation of this discrepancy was tested here. Given a psychological magnitude, ψ, observers were required to select a magnitude 2ψ, and subsequently to bisect the interval between ψ and 2ψ. Stevens’s hypothesis predicts that the bisected psychological magnitude falls between 1.41ψ and 1.50ψ. The hypothesis is not substantiated, since a bisected magnitude of 1.55ψ was obtained. Furthermore, observers had to bisect the interval between ψ and an imagined magnitude of 2ψ. The results show that observers are able to producereliably both a visual and a representational double.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Reference Notes
1. Kanizsa, G., & Minguzzi, G. F.Contrasto e assimilazione di chiarezza (Report from the Institute of Psychology). Trieste: University of Trieste, 1980.
References
Anderson, N. H. Functional measurement and psychological judgment.Psychological Review, 1970,77, 153–170.
Fagot, R. F., &Stewart, M. R. Test of a response bias model of bisection.Perception & Psychophysics, 1970,7, 257–262.
Garner, W. R. A technique and a scale for loudness measurement.Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 1954,48, 218–224.
Stevens, S. S. The measurement of loudness.Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 1955,27, 815–829.
Stevens, S. S. Issues in psychophysical measurement.Psychological Review, 1971,78, 426–450.
Stevens, S. S.Psychophysics. New York: Wiley, 1975.
Stevens, S. S., &Davis, H.Hearing: Its psychology and physiology. New York: Wiley, 1938.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Masin, S.C. An experimental check on Stevens’s explanation of the partition paradox by successive doubling and bisecting. Perception & Psychophysics 34, 294–296 (1983). https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03202959
Received:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03202959