The concept of adaptation‐level in psychological research

Abstract

Vuorinen, R. The concept of adaptation‐level in psychological research. Scand. J. Psychol., 1973, 14, 228–240.‐ Helson's adaptation‐level theory (ALT) is appraised as a general theory of psychology. The reformulated Fechner law underlying ALT is shown to be untenable and the conceptual status of AL is shown to be self‐contradictory. The ambiguous measures and the inconsistent theoretical definitions proposed for AL are found to limit the scope of ALT. Reasons for its flexibility and claimed heuristic value are analyzed and potential sources of confusion are suggested. Some defects of ALT are likely to be shared by other behaviouristic theories since they follow from a commitment to the strict S‐R model.

Anchor effects in category judgment of weight

“…Two important factors support this tentative hypothesis. Firstly, the proposed link between response bias and stimulus uncertainty coincides with the critique which Stevens (1958) has presented against the view of category scales adopted in the ALtheory (see Vuorinen, 1973). Secondly, the tendency to distribute one's responses asymmetrically over the scale appears to be a common phenomenon not confined to category judgment (see Gamer, 1953).…”

“…(2) The many defects of the AL-model in psychophysics restrict seriously its validity as a general theory of psychology (see Vuorinen, b, 1972Vuorinen, , 1973. Firstly, the assumed universality of contrast in judgment is definitely wrong (Experiments 1 and 2; for many instances of assimilation see Garner (1953) on loudness judgment, Anderson (1971) on weight judgment and Howard (1971) on judgment of visual size).…”

“…For example, the locus of AL below the midpoint of the series stimuli is sometimes used as an explanation for the response tendencies which are responsible for this locus. To avoid such circularity it should be required (and this is a minimum requirement only) that the procedures of category judgment are provided with justification from independent procedures of psychophysics (see Vuorinen (1973) for further reasons for this conclusion). Fifthly, the large interindividual variation displayed in the obtained ALs may, in the long run, prove to be an ultimate impediment for formulating a universally valid model of judgment at this level of discourse.…”