Abstract
Measures of interletter similarity are often required in perception experiments. The most reliable and valid of the available measures appears to be Townsend’s (1971) set of similarity parameters based on the Luce choice model. A simple mechanical measure offered a fairly strong prediction of the Luce choice-model similarity measure, as did a subjective rating measure based on the 10-point visual similarity ratings of eight subjects. By comparison, Gibson et al.’s (1963) matching-confusion matrix faired poorly, as did Gibson’s (1969) distinctive feature analysis based on a letter pair’s number of shared features. Distinctive feature analysis was significantly improved by substituting the feature set proposed by Geyer and DeWald (1973) or by weighting the features optimally via regression analysis. Such analyses suggested that figural curvature may be a particularly important perceptual feature, but in no case did these feature-analytic models predict the Luce measure as well as the mechanical or subjective rating measures.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Reference Notes
Gibson, E. J., Osser, H., Schiff, W., & Smith, J. An analysis of critical features of letters, tested by a confusion matrix. In: A basic research program on reading. Cooperative Research Project No. 639. U.S. Office of Education, 1963.
Miller, L. K. Visual and auditory similarity ratings for capital letters. Unpublished manuscript. University of Illinois, no date.
References
Dunn-Rankin, P., Leton, D. A., &Shelton, V. F. Congruences factors related to visual confusion of English letters.Perceptual and Motor Skills, 1968,26, 659–666.
Geyer, L. H.,&Dewald, C. G. Feature lists and contusion matrices.Perception & Psychophysics, 1973,14, 471–482.
Gibson, E. J.Principles of perceptual learning and development. New York: Meredith. 1969.
Holbrook, M. B. Note on validity of a mechanical measure of interletter similarity.Perceptual and Motor Skills, 1973,36. 298.
Holbrook. M. B. A study of communication in advertising. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. Columbia University, 1975.
Kuennapas, T. Visual perception of capital letters ScandinavianJournal of Psychology, 1966,7, 189–196.
Kuennapas, T. Visual memory of capital letters: Multidimensional ratio scaling and multidimensional similarity.Perceptual and Motor Skills, 1967,25, 345–350.
Kuennapas, T., &Janson, A.-J. Multidimensional similarity of letters.Perceptual and Motor Skills, 1969,28, 3–12
Miller, L. K. Letter recognition: Effects of interitem similarity and report requirements.Perception & Psychophysics, 1972,11, 252–256.
Townsend, J. T. Theoretical analysis of an alphabetic confusion matrix.Perception & Psychophysics, 1971,9, 40–50. (a)
Townsend, J. T. Alphabetic confusion: A test of models for individuals.Perception & Psychophysics, 1971,9, 449–454 (b)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Holbrook, M.B. A comparison of methods for measuring the interletter similarity between capital letters. Perception & Psychophysics 17, 532–536 (1975). https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03203964
Received:
Revised:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03203964