The functional measurement criterion for choosing a response scale involves joint validation of a judgmental model and a scale. This criterion was applied by Weiss (1972), whose grayness averaging data led him to accept graphic ratings and reject magnitude estimation. These same data were reanalyzed in light of a different criterion, that of scale sensitivity, using a statistical test developed by Schumann and Bradley (1959). Graphic ratings were significantly more sensitive.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AndersonN. H.Functional measurement and psychophysical judgment.Psychological Review, 1970, 77, 153–170
2.
AndersonN. H.Cross-task validation of functional measurement using judgments of total magnitude.Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1974, 102, 226–233
3.
EislerH., and MontgomeryH.On theoretical and realizable ideal conditions in psychophysics: magnitude and category scales and their relation.Perception & Psychophysics, 1974, 16, 157–168
4.
GarnerW. R.Rating scales, discriminability, and information transmission.Psychological Review, 1960, 67, 343–352
5.
GarnerW. R.Uncertainty and structure as psychological concepts.New York: Wiley, 1962
MacRaeA. W.Channel capacity in absolute judgment tasks: an artifact of information bias?Psychological Bulletin, 1970, 73, 112–121
8.
RamsayJ. O.The effect of number of categories in rating scales on precision of estimation of scale values.Psychometrika, 1973, 38, 513–532
9.
SchumannD. E. W., and BradleyR. A.The comparison of the sensitivities of similar experiments: model II of the analysis of variance.Biometrics, 1959, 15, 405–416
10.
StevensS. S.Issues in psychophysical measurement.Psychological Review, 1971, 78, 426–450
11.
WeissD. J.Averaging: an empirical validity criterion for magnitude estimation.Perception & Psychophysics, 1972, 12, 385–388
