Another look at the ‘new psychophysics’

McKenna, Frank

doi:10.1111/j.2044-8295.1985.tb01934.x

Cited by 90 publications

(16 citation statements)

References 31 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…It would be very useful, for example, to know how loudness increases as a function of increasing auditory intensity. In the case of loudness, as with other modalities, however, there is no agreement yet on the true psychophysical function (Gescheider 1988;Marks 1974a;1974b;McKenna 1985; S. S. Stevens 1975).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Reconciling Fechner and Stevens: Toward a unified psychophysical law

1989

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

How does subjective magnitude, S. increase as physical magnitude or intensity, I, increases? Direct ratings (magnitude scales; partition or category scales) can be fitted by the power function, S = aIb, in which S equals I raised to a power or exponent, b, and multiplied by a measure constant, a. The exponent is typically about twice as large for the magnitude scale (Stevens) as for the corresponding partition or category scale, but the higher exponent may be explained by the overly expansive way people use numbers in making magnitude estimations. The partition or category scale and the adjusted (for the use of number) magnitude scale for a given modality or condition generally agree with the neurelectric scale and the summated just noticeable difference (jnd) scale. A unified psychophysical law is proposed in which each jnd has the same subjective magnitude for a given modality or condition, subjective magnitude increases as approximately a power function of physical magnitude with the exponent ranging from near 0 to 1 (compressive function), and subjective magnitude depends primarily on peripheral sensory processes, that is, no nonlinear central transformations occur. An undue reliance on Weber's law blinded Fechner to the fact that the true psychophysical scale is approximately a power function. Rejecting Weber's law, which is not valid, means that we no longer have to choose between letting the summated jnd scale be a logarithmic function (Fechner's law) and introducing a nonlinear central transformation to make it into a power function (Brentano–Ekman-Teghtsoonian's law). Fechner and Stevens erred equally about the true psychophysical power function, whose exponent lies halfway between that of Fechner (an exponent approaching zero) and that of Stevens. To be reconciled, Fechnerians must give up the assumptions that Webers law is valid and that the jnd has the same subjective magnitude across modalities and conditions; Stevensians must give up the assumption that the unadjusted (for the use of number) magnitude scale is a direct measure of subjective magnitude.

show abstract

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Reconciling Fechner and Stevens: Toward a unified psychophysical law

1989

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…According to Stevens (eg, 1975), the numerical response obtained using magnitude estimation instructions is a direct and unbiased estimate of the perceived intensity of the stimulus. This view represents a behaviouristic stimulus -response (S-R) conception of psychophysics (Shepard 1981;McKenna 1985). In contrast, in the stimulus -output -response (S -O -R) paradigm of psychophysical judgement a psychophysical stage relating stimulus to sensation (psychophysical input function), and a judgemental stage relating sensation to overt response (judgemental output function) are distinguished (Torgerson 1961;Attneave 1962;Treisman 1964).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Equiratio Taste Mixture Model Successfully Predicts the Sensory Response to the Sweetness Intensity of Complex Mixtures of Sugars and Sugar Alcohols

Frijters

Graaf

1987

Perception

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The equiratio taste mixture model was originally developed for the prediction of psychophysical power functions of equiratio mixtures of substances that have a similar taste and that also exhibit mutual cross adaptation. Earlier studies have shown that the model is valid for mixtures of sugars and/or sugar alcohols. Two experiments are reported in which it is questioned whether the psychophysical functions of mixtures of higher physical complexity can be predicted by the model. In the first experiment the psychophysical power functions of binary and quaternary equiratio mixture types were determined experimentally and compared to those predicted by the generalized model. In the second, similar, experiment quaternary and eight-component mixture types were examined. The method of magnitude estimation, in combination with the sip and spit procedure, was used. The functions predicted by the model were almost identical to the functions established on the basis of the experimental data. These results reconfirm that the gustatory modality operates like an 'averaging' system when processing this kind of mixture. It is argued that for other kind of mixtures the model will predict incorrectly. The status of the equiratio mixture model is discussed.

show abstract

“…(Shepard, 1978, p. 453). For this reason, different researchers (e.g., Graham, 1958;Anderson, 1970Anderson, , 1976Shepard, 1981;McKenna, 1985) have questioned Stevens' direct scaling methods.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 98%