Multidimensional studies of Munsell color solid.

Abstract

This article reports descriptions of the logic of constructing the Munsell color solid as a coherent psychological system, the history of its improvement by a committee of the Optical Society of America, and findings obtained by the method of multidimensional scaling (MDS) in a series of studies. When multiattribute color differences that subjects can naturally perceive are matched with lightness differences between two grays, Munsell colors can be embedded in a three-dimensional Euclidean space with the following reproducibility. Interpoint distances of the constructed configuration are proportional to scaled color differences, and the root mean squares of discrepancies between these were of the order of .23 in the Munsell V unit, (i.e., only about three times of just-noticeable difference of lightness). Three major deviations of the result from the Munsell notation, embedding colors in some non-Euclidean spaces, and psychological implications of spatial representation of color are discussed.

Selective attention and the formation of linear decision boundaries: Reply to Maddox and Ashby (1998).

“…According to the AIC-fit criterion, the extra free parameters accorded the quadratic model were wasted in the orthogonal conditions. 4At least in cases in which Munsell hue is held constant (as in McKinley and Nosofsky's 1996 study), a variety of alternative psychological scaling techniques yield configurations that well approximate the Munsell scalings of brightness and saturation--for some examples, see Indow (1988, Figure 1), Nosofsky (1987, Figure 4), and Shepard (1958, Figure 3). Although in much of my previous work I have used MDS techniques to derive more exact psychological representations for the particular subset of MunseU colors in use (e.g., Nosofsky, 1987Nosofsky, , 1988cNosofsky & Palmed, 1996), in the McKinley and article, I viewed the Munsell configuration as a neutral scaling solution that, a priori, would not differentially favor predictions emerging from the GCM versus decision-bound theory.…”

Examination of three systems of surface color by scaled color differences

“…The observer can assign any positive value r i.jk that is felt appropriate to represent δ ij /δ ik . The assessment is consistent in the sense that r i.. (12)(13) . The second method makes the use of the fact that Munsell Value Scale varying from the ideal black V=0 to the ideal white V=10 with perceptually equal steps.…”

“…Since the axis representing the V-axis turned out orthogonal to the plane representing H and C, all points are vertically projected on the H-C plane at an arbitrary level of V 0 . If a positive value of K is taken, equi-chroma circles of {P j } with this K are slightly more equally separated from C to C+2 (13) . However, the difference between {P j } with K > 0 and {P j } in E 3 is small, and hence the discussion will be limited to the latter only.…”

“…The experimental studies started from 1960 (see Table 1 (13) ). In the beginning, the number of colors, N, was limited because of the capacity of computer, and {P j } was constructed in Euclidean space E only.…”

Perceptual color spacing derived from maximum likelihood multidimensional scaling

“…Often the goal was to examine the adequacy of putatively uniform color specifying systems, most notably the Munsell system (e.g. [1]; reviewed in [2]), but also the OSA-UCS [3]. The Method of Triads plays a prominent role in this tradition [4,5], eliciting purely ordinal judgments without requiring observers to convert their perceptions of dissimilarity into numerical form.…”