From Indices to Mappings: The Representational Approach to Measurement

  • David H. Krantz
Part of the Recent Research in Psychology book series (PSYCHOLOGY)

Abstract

I am pleased to be able to offer this essay on measurement in honor of Clyde Coombs. It was Coombs, more than anyone else, who saw the relevance of qualitative measurement structures to behavioral science theory and data, and who inspired his students to test axioms by carefully designed experiments. Though I was not his student, my work benefitted for many years from his encouragement, and from his intense joy in the struggle to understand.

Keywords

Prefix Undercut 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Bock, R. D. & Jones, L. V. (1968). The measurement and prediction of judgment and choice. San Francisco: Holden-Day.Google Scholar
  2. Briggs, L. K & Krantz, D. H. (1990). Judging the strength of designated evidence. Unpublished manuscript.Google Scholar
  3. Cicerone, C. M., Krantz, D. H. & Larimer, J. (1975). Opponent process additivity—III: Effect of moderate chromatic adaptation. Vision Research, 15, 1125–1135.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Coombs, C. H. (1950). Psychological scaling without a unit of measurement. Psychological Review, 57, 145–158.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Debreu, G. (1960). Topological methods in cardinal utility theory. In K J. Arrow, S. Karlin & P. Suppes (Eds.), Mathematical methods in the social sciences, 1959. Stanford: Stanford Univ. Press. Pp. 16–26.Google Scholar
  6. Dempster, A. (1967). Upper and lower probabilities induced by a multivalued mapping. Annals of Mathematical Statistics, 38, 325–339.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Donnell, M. L. (1977). Individual red/green and yellow/blue opponent-isocancellation functions: Their measurement and prediction. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Michigan. Ann Arbor: University Microfilms.Google Scholar
  8. Ejimo, Y. & Takahashi, S. (1984). Bezold-Bruecke hue shift and nonlinearity in opponent-color process. Vision Research, 24, 1897–1904.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Hering, E. (1878). Zur Lehre vom Lichtsinne. Vienna: C. Gerold’s Sohn.Google Scholar
  10. Hering, E. (1920). Grundzuege der Lehre vom Lichtsinn. Berlin: Springer. English translation by L. M. Hurvich & D. Jameson (1964), Outlines of a Theory of the Light Sense, Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard Univ. Press.Google Scholar
  11. Hicks, J. (1939). Value and capital. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
  12. Hurvich, L. M. & Jameson, D. (1951a). The binocular fusion of yellow in relation to color theories. Science, 114, 199–202.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Hurvich, L. M. & Jameson, D. (1951b). A psychophysical study of white. I. Neutral adaptation. Journal of the Optical Society of America, 41, 521–527.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Hurvich, L. M. & Jameson, D. (1955). Some quantitative aspects of an opponent-colors theory. II. Brightness, saturation, and hue in normal and dichromatic vision. Journal of the Optical Society of America, 45, 602–616.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Hurvich, L. M. & Jameson, D. (1957). An opponent-process theory of color vision. Psychological Review, 64, 384–404.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Jameson, D. & Hurvich, L. M. (1955). Some quantitative aspects of an opponent-colors theory. I. Chromatic responses and spectral saturation. Journal of the Optical Society of America, 45, 546–552.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Jameson, D. & Hurvich, L. M. (1961). Opponent chromatic induction: Experimental evaluation and theoretical account. Journal of the Optical Society of America, 51, 46–53.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Judd, D. B. (1951). Basic correlates of the visual stimulus. In S. S. Stevens (Ed.), Handbook of Experimental Psychology, New York: Wiley. Pp. 811–867.Google Scholar
  19. Kahneman, D. & Tversky, A. (1972). Subjective probability: A judgment of representativeness. Cognitive Psychology, 3, 430–454.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Krantz, D. H. (1968). A theory of context effects based on cross-context matching. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 5, 1–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Krantz, D. H. (1975a). Color measurement and color theory: I. Representation theorem for Grassmann structures. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 12, 283–303.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Krantz, D. H. (1975b). Color measurement and color theory: II. Opponent-colors theory. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 12, 304–327.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Krantz, D. H. & Briggs, L. K. (1990). Judgments of frequency and evidence strength. Unpublished manuscript.Google Scholar
  24. Krantz, D. H., Luce, R. D., Suppes P. & Tversky, A. (1971). Foundations of measurement. Vol. 1. Additive and polynomial representations. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  25. Krantz, D. H. & Miller, G. F. (1990). Judging the strength of likelihood evidence. Unpublished manuscript.Google Scholar
  26. Krantz, D. H. & Miyamoto, J. (1990). Foundations of the theory of evidence: Separable support structures. Unpublished manuscript.Google Scholar
  27. Krantz, D. H., Ray, B. & Briggs, L. K (1990). Foundations of the theory of evidence: The role of schemata. Unpublished manuscript.Google Scholar
  28. Krantz, D. H. & Tversky, A. (1971). Conjoint-measurement analysis of composition rules in psychology. Psychological Review, 78, 151–169.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Larimer, J., Krantz, D. H. & Cicerone, C. M. (1974). Opponent process additivity—I: Red/green equilibria. Vision Research, 14 1127–1140.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Larimer, J., Krantz, D. H. & Cicerone, C. M. (1975). Opponent-process additivity—II: Yellow/blue equilibria and nonlinear models. Vision Research, 15, 723–731.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Luce, R. D. & Cohen, M. (1983). Factorizable automorphisms in solvable conjoint structures. Journal of Pure and Applied Algebra, 27, 225–261.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Luce, R. D., Krantz, D. H., Suppes, P. & Tversky, A. (1990). Foundations of measurement. Vol. III. Representation, axiomatization, and invariance. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  33. Luce, R. D. & Tukey, J. W. (1964). Simultaneous conjoint measurement: A new form of fundamental measurement. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 1, 1–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Moeller, J. R. (1976). Measuring the red/green quality of lights: A study relating the Jameson and Hurvich red/green cancellation valence to direct magnitude estimation of greenness. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Michigan. Ann Arbor: University Microfilms.Google Scholar
  35. Narens, L. & Luce, R. D. (1976). The algebra of measurement. Journal of Pure and Applied Algebra, 8, 197–233.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Purdy, D. M. (1931). Spectral hue as a function of intensity. American Journal of Psychology, 43, 541–559.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Ray, B. & Krantz, D. H. (1990). Foundations of the theory of evidence: Resolving conflicts among schemata. Unpublished manuscript.Google Scholar
  38. Romeskie, M. & Yager, D. (1978). Psychophysical measure and theoretical analysis of dichromatic opponent-response functions. Modern Problems of Ophthalmology, 19, 212–217.Google Scholar
  39. Savage, L. J. (1954). The foundations of statistics. New York: WileyGoogle Scholar
  40. Scott, D. & Suppes, P. (1958). Foundational aspects of theories of measurement. Journal of Symbolic Logic, 23, 113–128.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Shafer, G. (1976). A mathematical theory of evidence. Princeton: Princeton Univ. Press.Google Scholar
  42. Shafer, G. (1981). Two theories of probability. In P. D. Asquith & I. Hacking (Eds.), PSA, 1978, vol. 2. East Lansing, MI: Philosophy of Science Association.Google Scholar
  43. Shafer, G. (1982). Constructive decision theory. Unpublished manuscript.Google Scholar
  44. Shevell, S. K. (1978). The dual role of chromatic backgrounds in color perception. Vision Research, 18, 1649–1661.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Slovic, P. & Lichtenstein, S. (1968). The relative importance of probabilities and payoffs in risk-taking. Journal of Experimental Psychology Monograph Supplement, 78 (3), part 2 (b).Google Scholar
  46. Slovic, P. & Lichtenstein, S. (1983). Preference reversals: A broader perspective. American Economic Review, 73, 596–605.Google Scholar
  47. Stevens, S. S. (1946). On the theory of scales of measurement. Science, 103, 677–680.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Stevens, S. S. (1966). A metric for the social consensus. Science, 151, 530–541.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Suppes, P., Krantz, D. H., Luce, R. D. & Tversky, A. (1989). Foundations of measurement. Vol. II. Geometrical, threshold and probabilistic representations. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  50. Thornton, J. E. & Pugh, E. N., Jr. (1983). Relationship of opponent-colours cancellation measures to cone-antagonistic signals deduced from increment threshold data. In J. D. Mollon & L. T. Sharpe (Eds.), Colour vision: Physiology and psychophysics. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  51. Thurstone, L. L. (1959). The measurement of values. Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  52. Tversky, A. (1969). Intransitivity of preferences. Psychological Review, 76, 31–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Tversky, A. & Kahneman, D. (1986). Rational choice and the framing of decisions. The Journal of Business, 59 (4), part 2, 251–278.Google Scholar
  54. Tversky, A., Slovic, D. & Kahneman, D. (1990). The causes of preference reversal. American Economic Review, 80, 204–217.Google Scholar
  55. von Neumann, J. & Morgenstern, O. (1947). Theory of games and economic behavior. (2nd Ed.) Princeton: Princeton Univ. Press.Google Scholar
  56. Werner, J. S. & Wooten, B. R. (1979). Opponent chromatic mechanisms: Relation to photopigments and hue naming. Journal of the Optical Society of America, 69, 422–434.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Yager, D. & Taylor, E. (1970). Experimental measures and theoretical account of hue scaling as a function of luminance. Perception & Psychophysics, 7, 360–364.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag New York Inc. 1991

Authors and Affiliations

  • David H. Krantz

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations