The effects of the base referent or standard stimulus on the scale values obtained in the magnitude estimation scaling of 34 frequency expressions was investigated using 208 subjects and two different referents ("sometimes" and "fairly many times"). MANOVA and ANOVA findings indicated that the two referents yielded statistically significant differences in scale values, and t tests of differences between the current and previously obtained scale values supported this conclusion. Finally, the scale values produced by the two referents led to the selection of different sets of 5-point response anchors, suggesting that the divergence in results was also of practical importance. Implications and future directions for research are discussed.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Bass, B. M. , Cascio, W. J., & O'Connor, E. J. (1974). Magnitude estimation of expressions of frequency and amount. Journal of Applied Psychology, 59, 313-320.
2.
Bolanowski, S. J. , & Gescheider, G. A. (1991). Ratio scaling of psychological magnitude. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
3.
Duncan, O. D. (1984). Notes on social measurement: Historical and critical. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
4.
Foley, H. J. , Cross, D. V., & O'Reilly, J. A. (1990). Pervasiveness and magnitude of context effects: Evidence for the relativity of absolute magnitude estimation. Perception and Psychophysics, 48, 551-558.
5.
Galanter, E. , & Wiegand, T. E. (1991). Multiple moduli and payoff functions in psychophysical scaling. In S. J. Bolanowski & G. A. Gescheider (Eds.), Ratio scaling of psychological magnitude (pp. 129-139). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
6.
Gescheider, G. A. , & Bolanowski, S. J. (1991). Final comments on ratio scaling of psychological magnitudes. In S. J. Bolanowski & G. A. Gescheider (Eds.), Ratio scaling of psychological magnitude (pp. 295-311). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
7.
Guilford, J. P. (1954). Psychometric methods (2nd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.
8.
Hakel, M. D. (1968). How often is often? American Psychologist, 23, 533-534.
9.
Hellmann, R. P. , & Zwislocki, J. (1961). Some factors affecting the estimation of loudness. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 33, 687-694.
10.
Hellmann, R. P. , & Zwislocki, J. (1963). Monaural loudness functions at 1000 cps and interaural summation. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 35, 856-865.
11.
Lodge, M. (1981). Magnitude scaling: Quantitative measurement of opinions. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
12.
Mellers, B. A. (1983a). Evidence against "absolute" scaling. Perception and Psychophysics, 33, 523-526.
13.
Mellers, B. A. (1983b). Reply to Zwislocki's views on "absolute" scaling. Perception and Psychophysics, 34, 405-408.
14.
Nunnally, J. C. (1978). Psychometric theory (2nd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.
15.
Olson, C. L. (1976). On choosing a test statistic in multivariate analysis of variance. Psychological Bulletin, 83, 579-586.
16.
Olson, C. L. (1979). Practical considerations in choosing a MANOVA test statistic: A rejoinder to Stevens. Psychological Bulletin, 86, 1350-1352.
17.
Pohl, N. F. (1981). Scale considerations in using vague quantifiers. Journal of Experimental Education, 49, 235-240.
18.
Rosenthal, R. , & Rosnow, R. L. (1991). Essentials of behavioral research: Methods and data analysis (2nd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.
19.
Schriesheim, C. A. , & Gardiner, C. C. (1992). A comparative test of magnitude estimation and pair-comparison treatment of complete ranks for scaling a small number of equal-interval frequency response anchors. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 52, 867-877.
20.
Schriesheim, C. A. , & Novelli, L. (1989). A comparative test of the interval-scale properties of magnitude estimation and case III scaling and recommendations for equal-interval frequency response anchors. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 49, 59-74.
21.
Schriesheim, C. A. , & Schriesheim, J. F. (1974). Development and empirical verification of new response categories to increase the validity of multiple response alternative questionnaires. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 34, 877-884.
22.
Schriesheim, C. A. , & Schriesheim, J. F. (1978). The invariance of anchor points obtained by magnitude estimation and pair-comparison treatment of complete ranks scaling procedures: An empirical comparison and implications for validity of measurement. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 38, 977-983.
23.
Simpson, R. H. (1944). The specific meanings of certain terms indicating different degrees of frequency. Quarterly Journal of Speech, 30, 328-330.
24.
Stevens, S. S. (1956). The directestimation of sensory magnitudes-loudness. American Journal of Psychology, 69, 1-25.
25.
Stevens, S. S. (1957). On the psychophysical law. Psychological Review, 64, 153-181.
26.
Stevens, S. S. (1975). Psychophysics. New York: John Wiley.
27.
Thurstone, L. L. (1931). The measurement of social attitudes. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 26, 249-269.
28.
Ward, L. M. (1987). Remembrance of sounds past: Memory and psychophysical scaling. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 13, 216-227.
29.
Ward, L. M. (1990). Mixed-method mixed-modality psychophysical scaling. Perception and Psychophysics, 48, 571-582.
30.
Wegener, B. (1982). Fitting category to magnitude scales for a dozen survey-assessed attitudes. In B. Wegener (Ed.), Social attitudes and psychophysical measurement. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
31.
Zwislocki, J. (1983a). Absolute and other scales: Question of validity. Perception and Psychophysics, 33, 593-594.
32.
Zwislocki, J. (1983b). Group and individual relations between sensation magnitudes and their numerical estimates. Perception and Psychophysics, 33, 460-468.
33.
Zwislocki, J. , & Goodman, D. A. (1980). Absolute scaling of sensory magnitudes: A validation. Perception and Psychophysics, 28, 28-38.
