Abstract
Self-estimates obtained by the rating method or by the magnitude-estimation method are used unprocessed as scores to test statistical hypotheses in factorial designs. Properly, ANOVAs are based on the assumption that the distribution of scores is normal. In Experiments 1 and 2, observers were asked, after they had produced a given numerical-rating response, n, to evaluate the subjective probability or degree of certainty that other numbers within the scale might be chosen as a rating. It was found that the degree of certainty was asymmetrical with respect to an n, when n was near the end values of the scale. In Experiment 3, a similar result was found for the magnitude-estimation method. The asymmetry indicates that the population density function of the distribution of numerical responses is skewed. It is concluded that the results of ANOVAs should be interpreted with caution.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
References
Baird, J. C., & Noma, E. (1978). Fundamentals of scaling and psychophysics.New York: Wiley.
John, I. D. (1969). Stimulus discriminability in the magnitude estimation and category rating of loudness. Perception & Psychophysics, 6, 78–80.
Johnson, N. L., & Kotz, S. (1970). Distributions in statistics: Continuous univariate distributions (Vol. 2). New York: Wiley.
Montgomery, H. (1975). Direct estimation: Effect of methodological factors on scale type. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 16, 19–25.
Montgomery, H. (1977). Magnitude scales, category scales, and the general psychophysical differential equation. Perception & Psychophysics, 21, 217–226.
Scheffé, H. (1959). The analysis of variance.New York: Wiley.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Additional information
I wish to thank L. Burigana and G. Vicario for discussion of this paper.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Masin, S.C. The subjective uncertainty of self-estimates. Bull. Psychon. Soc. 24, 99–102 (1986). https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03330515
Received:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03330515