The dimensionality of magnitude estimates

Hosman, Jan

doi:10.1037/e574722009-001

Cited by 2 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…It is important to note that these judgmental scales supposedly possess the characteristics of ratio scales. It is intriguing to discover that these three scales possess an observed factor structure (Stone, 19683) similar to that seen in recent factor analyses of unidimensional psychophysical scales based on magnitude estimations and on cross-model equal ratio settings (Hosman, 1967(Hosman, , 1968.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 52%

Judged Constitutionality of Functional Psychosis Disorder Classifications

Stone

1968

Scandinavian J Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Stone, L. A. Judged constitutionality of functional psychosis disorder classifications. Scand. J. Psychol., 1968, 9, 252–256.—Psychiatrists (N = 37) made magnitude estimations and category scale evaluations of 15 psychiatric classification stimuli with respect to their own opinions regarding biogenic predisposition associated with the stimuli. The scale from category judgments was a logarithmic transformation of the magnitude estimation scale. Judgmental variability, in subjective unit measurement, was linearly and positively related to subjective magnitude. The underlying judgmental continuum was tentatively Classified as prothetic. The results were in line with those obtained in several previous studies.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 52%

Judged Constitutionality of Functional Psychosis Disorder Classifications

Stone

1968

Scandinavian J Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Inconsistencies have been frequently observed and have been studied particularly for rhe method of complete ratio estimation which provides, without special arrangements, data well suited for internal consistency tests (Eisler, 1960;Sjoeberg, 1965;Svenson & Akesson, 1966a, 1966bEkman, Gustafsson, & Hosman, 1968;Hosman, 1967). One possible, important source of such bias may be S's interpretation and handling of the numbers used in scaling experiments.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Interindividual Differences in Scaling Performance

et al. 1968

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

21 Ss performed complete ratio estimation of 7 stimuli in each of 6 continua. Individual scales were constructed and condensed into a measure of scale range. The coefficients of correlation between continua were positive and mostly statistically significant but much lower than the coefficients of reliability. The results support a two-factor hypothesis, according to which individual differences in scaling behavior reflect both a genuine perceptual variability and differences in response bias.

show abstract

The dimensionality of magnitude estimates

Cited by 2 publications

References 0 publications

Judged Constitutionality of Functional Psychosis Disorder Classifications

Judged Constitutionality of Functional Psychosis Disorder Classifications

Interindividual Differences in Scaling Performance

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About