Journal of Experimental Psychology

1961

DOI: 10.1037/h0041065

|View full text |Cite

|

Sign up to set email alerts

|

Subjective similarity in two perceptual continua.

Gösta Ekman¹,

Gunnar Goude²,

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...

Discussion5

Citation Types

Supporting

1

Mentioning

22

Contrasting

0

Year Published

1964

1964

1981

1981

Publication Types

Select...

Article5

Book1

Relationship

Self Cite0

Independent6

Authors

Journals

Cited by 42 publications

(23 citation statements)

References 8 publications

Supporting

1

Mentioning

22

Contrasting

0

Order By: Relevance

“…C2 was also satisfied for unidimensional similarity estimates of pitch (Eisler & Ekman, 1959), visual area (Ekman, Goude, & Waern, 1961), and heaviness (Eisler, 1960). However, C2 was rejected for ratio estimation judgments of angles (Goude, 1962), brightness (Fagot, Stewart, & Kleinknecht, 1975), heaviness (Eisler, 1960), and darkness (Ekman, Goude, & Waern, 1961). C2 was also rejected for unidimensional similarity estimates of darkness (Ekman, Goude, & Waern, 1961).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 97%

“…C2 was satisfied for ratio estimation judgments of size of BIDIRECTIONAL JUDGMENTS 191 circular surfaces (Ekman, 1958), velocity (Mashhour,. Note 3), weight (Goude, 1962), area (Ekman, Goude, & Waern, 1961), and odor intensity (Engen & Lindstrom, 1963). C2 was also satisfied for unidimensional similarity estimates of pitch (Eisler & Ekman, 1959), visual area (Ekman, Goude, & Waern, 1961), and heaviness (Eisler, 1960).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Note 3), weight (Goude, 1962), area (Ekman, Goude, & Waern, 1961), and odor intensity (Engen & Lindstrom, 1963). C2 was also satisfied for unidimensional similarity estimates of pitch (Eisler & Ekman, 1959), visual area (Ekman, Goude, & Waern, 1961), and heaviness (Eisler, 1960). However, C2 was rejected for ratio estimation judgments of angles (Goude, 1962), brightness (Fagot, Stewart, & Kleinknecht, 1975), heaviness (Eisler, 1960), and darkness (Ekman, Goude, & Waern, 1961).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This view is clearly inconsistent with these data for ratio estimation of weight and brightness, and for part-sum estimation of weight, as demonstrated by the rejection of Cl and the C model form of the reciprocal rule. Fagot's (1978) analysis led to the rejection of the C model for unidirectional (high standard) judgments of each of the following attributes: angles and weight (Goude, 1962); brightness (Fagot, Stewart, & Kleinknecht, 1975); velocity (Mashhour,Note 3); heaviness (Eisler, 1960); and darkness and area (Ekman, Goude, & Waern, 1961). However, Cl was not rejected for size of circular surfaces (Ekman, 1958)and odor intensity (Engen & Lindstrom, 1963), although for the latter the ICC was only .691.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, Cl was not rejected for size of circular surfaces (Ekman, 1958)and odor intensity (Engen & Lindstrom, 1963), although for the latter the ICC was only .691. Fagot's (1979) study led to the rejection of Cl for unidimensional similarity judgments of pitch (Eisler & Ekman, 1959), darkness and visual area (Ekman, Goude, & Waern, 1961), and heaviness (Eisler, 1960).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

A theory of bidirectional judgments

¹

1981

Perception & Psychophysics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper is concerned with a scaling theory for "bidirectional" judgments, for which the order of judgment is reversible, as in fractional and multiple ratio estimation judgments. With the assumption that judgments are mediated by perceived relations of pairs of stimuli, the theory is developed for judgments of comparison stimuli in relation to standards, taking explicit account of the location of the comparison stimulus relative to the standard. The theory of bidirectional judgments, based on a theory of relative judgment by Fagot (1978Fagot ( ,1979,entails a partial nesting of models characterized by a progressive weakening of the constraints placed on the structure of the data. The weakest model, the relative bias/directional standard (RBDS) model, allows each standard to have two biasing effects, depending on the location of the standard above or below the comparison stimulus. Tests of the theory were carried out on the ratio estimation of brightness and weight data of Engen and Levy (l955),and the part-sum estimation data of Goude (1962). Only the RBDS model was found acceptable for all three data sets. THEORY

“…C2 was also satisfied for unidimensional similarity estimates of pitch (Eisler & Ekman, 1959), visual area (Ekman, Goude, & Waern, 1961), and heaviness (Eisler, 1960). However, C2 was rejected for ratio estimation judgments of angles (Goude, 1962), brightness (Fagot, Stewart, & Kleinknecht, 1975), heaviness (Eisler, 1960), and darkness (Ekman, Goude, & Waern, 1961). C2 was also rejected for unidimensional similarity estimates of darkness (Ekman, Goude, & Waern, 1961).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 97%

“…C2 was satisfied for ratio estimation judgments of size of BIDIRECTIONAL JUDGMENTS 191 circular surfaces (Ekman, 1958), velocity (Mashhour,. Note 3), weight (Goude, 1962), area (Ekman, Goude, & Waern, 1961), and odor intensity (Engen & Lindstrom, 1963). C2 was also satisfied for unidimensional similarity estimates of pitch (Eisler & Ekman, 1959), visual area (Ekman, Goude, & Waern, 1961), and heaviness (Eisler, 1960).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Note 3), weight (Goude, 1962), area (Ekman, Goude, & Waern, 1961), and odor intensity (Engen & Lindstrom, 1963). C2 was also satisfied for unidimensional similarity estimates of pitch (Eisler & Ekman, 1959), visual area (Ekman, Goude, & Waern, 1961), and heaviness (Eisler, 1960). However, C2 was rejected for ratio estimation judgments of angles (Goude, 1962), brightness (Fagot, Stewart, & Kleinknecht, 1975), heaviness (Eisler, 1960), and darkness (Ekman, Goude, & Waern, 1961).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This view is clearly inconsistent with these data for ratio estimation of weight and brightness, and for part-sum estimation of weight, as demonstrated by the rejection of Cl and the C model form of the reciprocal rule. Fagot's (1978) analysis led to the rejection of the C model for unidirectional (high standard) judgments of each of the following attributes: angles and weight (Goude, 1962); brightness (Fagot, Stewart, & Kleinknecht, 1975); velocity (Mashhour,Note 3); heaviness (Eisler, 1960); and darkness and area (Ekman, Goude, & Waern, 1961). However, Cl was not rejected for size of circular surfaces (Ekman, 1958)and odor intensity (Engen & Lindstrom, 1963), although for the latter the ICC was only .691.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, Cl was not rejected for size of circular surfaces (Ekman, 1958)and odor intensity (Engen & Lindstrom, 1963), although for the latter the ICC was only .691. Fagot's (1979) study led to the rejection of Cl for unidimensional similarity judgments of pitch (Eisler & Ekman, 1959), darkness and visual area (Ekman, Goude, & Waern, 1961), and heaviness (Eisler, 1960).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

A theory of bidirectional judgments

¹

1981

Perception & Psychophysics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper is concerned with a scaling theory for "bidirectional" judgments, for which the order of judgment is reversible, as in fractional and multiple ratio estimation judgments. With the assumption that judgments are mediated by perceived relations of pairs of stimuli, the theory is developed for judgments of comparison stimuli in relation to standards, taking explicit account of the location of the comparison stimulus relative to the standard. The theory of bidirectional judgments, based on a theory of relative judgment by Fagot (1978Fagot ( ,1979,entails a partial nesting of models characterized by a progressive weakening of the constraints placed on the structure of the data. The weakest model, the relative bias/directional standard (RBDS) model, allows each standard to have two biasing effects, depending on the location of the standard above or below the comparison stimulus. Tests of the theory were carried out on the ratio estimation of brightness and weight data of Engen and Levy (l955),and the part-sum estimation data of Goude (1962). Only the RBDS model was found acceptable for all three data sets. THEORY

A law of clinical judgment: A psychological mechanism based on the logic of psychophysics

¹

1970

J. Clin. Psychol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

No abstract

Relations Between Scales

1974

Measurement in the Social Sciences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

No abstract

scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.

Contact Info

customersupport@researchsolutions.com

10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614

Henderson, NV 89052, USA

Product

Browser Extension Assistant by scite Citation Statement Search Reference Check Visualizations Dashboards Explore Journals Explore Organizations Explore Funders Embedding Badge Embedding Citation Search Pricing

Resources

Blog Help & FAQ Accessibility Statement API Terms For Universities & Governments For Researchers For Publishers For Corporate, Pharma & Enterprise Author Marketing Become an Affiliate Get an organization trial or quote scite Data & Services

About

News & Press Careers Read our Paper Coverage

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

Blog Terms and Conditions API Terms Privacy Policy Contact Cookie Preferences Do Not Sell or Share My Personal Information

Copyright © 2025 scite LLC. All rights reserved.

Made with 💙 for researchers

Part of the Research Solutions Family.