Category ratio scale as an alternative to magnitude matching for age-related taste and odour perception

On perceived exertion and its measurement

“…Primarily, however, it has been used in clinical diagnosis of aches and pain, in ergonomy, in determining perceived exertion including "breathlessness", "difficulties breathing", and fatigue, especially in connection with work tests, training, and rehabilitation (see, e.g., G. Borg, 1998;Dedering, Németh, and Harms-Ringdahl, 1999;Geddes, Reid, Crowe, O'Brien and Brooks, 2005;Harms-Ringdahl, 1986;Harms-Ringdahl, Brodin, Eklund, and G. Borg, 1983;Hummel, Läubli, Pozzo, Schenk, Spillmann, and Klipstein, 2005;Mahler and Horowitz, 1994;Mahler, Mejia-Alfaro, Ward and Baird, 2001;Myers, 1994;Ries, 2005;Sjögren, Nissinen, Järvenpää, Ojanen, Vanharanta, and Mälkiä, 2005;Stendardi, Grazzini, Gigliotti, Lotti, and Scano, 2005;Vieira, Kumar, Coury, and Narayan, 2005). But also for taste and odor in elderly, for wine tasting and in treatmens of patients with anorexia nervosa (Bergh, Brodin, Lindberg, and Södersten, 2002;Garriga-Trillo, Muro, and Merino, 2002;Griep, E. Borg, Collys, and Massart, 1998).…”

“…Previous versions of the scale have also been tested on, for example, pain, loudness, taste, odor, and color perception. With promising outcomes, comparisons have been made with results from other types of scales, for example, magnitude estimation, magnitude matching, line production, VAS, and common category scales (e.g., G. Borg and E. Borg, 2001;Griep, E. Borg, Collys, and Massart, 1998;Marks, G. Borg, and Ljunggren, 1983;Marks, G. Borg, and Westerlund, 1992;Neely, 1995). In analogy, it can also be assumed that the Borg CR100 (centiMax) scale will work well for any continuum where the Borg CR10 scale is now used, that is, in clinical diagnostics for perceived exertion, symptom evaluation, pain, "difficulties breathing"; in eating disorders; in rehabilitation of patients with cardiac or musculo-skeletal disorders; in ergonomics and human factors; in sports; in food quality, etc.…”

Measuring consumer response to complex perception: Scaling vs. categorization task

“…Plotting of CT score average (x axis) vs. scaling score average (y axis). The 8 pictures are numbered from 100 to 800. tive and psychological abilities (Barylko-Pikielna et al, 2004) and this may impact the comprehension of the task as well as their ability to report their subjective experience on the line scale (Griep, Borg, Collys, & Massart, 2001). In this context, further research is required to determine whether the simplicity of CT may lead to more discrimination compared to scaling for this population.…”

Labeled Magnitude Scales: A critical review

“…In the original version of the CR scale the descriptors were depicted together with a set of evenly spaced numbers (Griep et al, 1998;Marks et al, 1992), although the graphical spacing did not concur with the natural spacing between the numerical values (e.g., the graphical distance between 0 and 1 was larger than the graphical distance between 3 and 4; see Fig. 1).…”

“…Nonetheless, several investigators have suggested that a Category Ratio (CR; see Fig. 1) Scale (e.g., Borg, 1982;Griep, Borg, Collys, & Massart, 1998;Marks, Borg, & Westerlund, 1992) or a Labeled Magnitude Scale (LMS; see Fig. 2) (e.g., Bartoshuk et al, 2002;Green, Shaffer, & Gilmore, 1993;Green et al, 1996) may have properties that approach a perfect ratio scale, and would make it possible to compare intensity ratings over different individuals, different senses, and different contexts.…”