On the discrimination of minimal differences in weight: IV. Kinesthetic adaptation for exposure-intensity as variant.

Holway, Alfred H.; Golding, Laura; Zigler, Michael J.

doi:10.1037/h0060288

Cited by 11 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 15 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Discrimination also deteriorates when the arm weight is unchanged but the range of weights is changed. For example, prior lifting of heavy weights temporarily raises the threshold for discrimination between lighter weights (Holway, Goldring, & Zigler, 1938), and a varying standard yields a higher threshold than a constant standard (Woodrow, 1933). Ross and Gregory (1970) found a similar result for purely cognitive factors: the size-weight illusion raised the threshold slightly above optimum for objects that were apparently too heavy or too light for their size.…”

Section: Methodssupporting

confidence: 56%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Mass estimation and discrimination during brief periods of zero gravity

Ross

Reschke

1982

Perception & Psychophysics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Methodssupporting

confidence: 56%

“…The reported changes in threshold due to maladaptation are usually not greater than a factor of 2. Holway et al (1938) reported changes up to a factor of 6, but they used an adjustment method that yielded thresholds about 10 times higher than those normally found by the usual methods, so their results should be treated with caution.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Mass estimation and discrimination during brief periods of zero gravity

Ross

Reschke

1982

Perception & Psychophysics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…For example, adaptation to heavier weights causes a deterioration in weight discrimination (Gregory and Ross, 1967;Holway et al, 1938), and the DL for lighter weights may rise by a factor of 2-6 (Ross, 1981). A varying standard causes poorer discrimination than a steady standard (e.g., Hellström, 2000;Woodrow, 1933), because it prevents appropriate adaptation: the weight DL may rise by a factor of about 1.3.…”

Section: Modern Workmentioning

confidence: 96%

Fechner's Elusive Parallel Law

Ross

Wade

2010

Seeing and Perceiving

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Weber's Law states that the differential threshold or just-noticeable-difference (jnd) is proportional to the physical intensity of the stimulus. Fechner built up his logarithmic law of sensation intensity from Weber's Law and the assumption that all jnds are subjectively equal. He thought it important that the Parallel Law should also hold. The Parallel Law states that, when perceived stimulus intensity is changed by something other than physical intensity (such as adaptation), Weber's Law continues to hold: discrimination should be unchanged provided the perceived values of the two stimuli change in the same ratio. Fechner claimed that weight discrimination was unaffected by weight adaptation; he was unsure about light adaptation; and he claimed that tactile length discrimination was unaffected by perceived changes caused by the bodily location of the stimulus. Modern research on adaptation for weights and other sensory stimuli shows that changes occur both in perceived intensity and in discrimination. Discrimination between stimuli is usually finest when the adaptation level is appropriate to the test level. There is insufficient evidence concerning the discrimination of tactile length and visual length when perceived length is changed. However, the Parallel Law may be untestable because of the difficulty of obtaining measures in the same experiment both for changes in discrimination and for the ratios of the perceived changes of the stimuli.

show abstract

“…Discrimination is finest when the subject is adapted to the intensity at which he is to be tested, and it deteriorates if he is adapted to a higher or lower level (Keidel et al 1961). In the case of weight discrimination, the adaptation level can be altered in various ways: by varying the physical intensity of the' adapting' weights (Woodrow 1933, Holway et al 1938; by varying the expected intensity of the weights through changes in size or Downloaded by [University of Cincinnati Libraries] at 18:20 04 January 2015 material (Ross and Gregory 1970); or by varying the weight of the arm, through the addition or removal of a weighted cuff (Gregory and Ross 1967), or through the immersion of the arm in water (Ross and Rejman 1973). It is the last case that is of special relevance here.…”

Section: Level Ofadaptationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Water temperature and weight discrimination

Synodinos

Ross

1979

Ergonomics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Previous experiments have shown that, in warm water, subjects adapt to the reduction of weight in water:after 10min immersiontheirweight discrimination improves.and on leaving the water they suffer an after-effect when discrimination is impaired in air. The present experiment investigated changes in discrimination when immersing the arm in warm (27 DC) or cold (11°C) water. Twenty-four subjects were tested at each temperature. All subjects showed a deterioration of similar magnitude between air and the first water test. The cold group showed a further deterioration between the first and second water test, in contrast to the slight improvement of the warm group. They also show a deterioration between the first and second air tests. while the warm group showed none. It is argued that the relative deterioration of the cold group was probably due to numbing of the tactile senses, or perhaps to the distracting effects of cold pain. IntroductionThis paper is concerned with the ability to discriminate between the weights of objects, when the objects are immersed in cold or warm water. It is not easy to predict the level of discrimination from comparable studies in air, because at least three factors are involved: the effect of cold on manual and cognitive skills; the effect of water on the weight of objects and on human skills; and the level of adaptation of the subject to the effects of water. These three factors will beconsidered separately, before predicting their combined effect on weight discrimination.

show abstract

On the discrimination of minimal differences in weight: IV. Kinesthetic adaptation for exposure-intensity as variant.

Cited by 11 publications

References 15 publications

Mass estimation and discrimination during brief periods of zero gravity

Mass estimation and discrimination during brief periods of zero gravity

Fechner's Elusive Parallel Law

Water temperature and weight discrimination

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About