1983
DOI: 10.3758/bf03202957
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Individual differences in perceived exertion assessed by two new methods

Abstract: Each of 30 male subjects judged, in a single session, the loudness of a 1000-Hz tone and the exertion perceived while pedaling a bicycle. Two psychophysical methods were used-one employing a combined category-ratio scale whose upper limit was defined as "maximum sensation" and the other a freer magnitude-estimation scale having no verbal labels. Both methods yielded data consistent with power functions, although the combined category-ratio scale gave slightly smaller exponents. The category-ratio estimates pro… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1

Citation Types

2
30
0
2

Year Published

1986
1986
2013
2013

Publication Types

Select...
3
3
3

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 125 publications
(34 citation statements)
references
References 13 publications
2
30
0
2
Order By: Relevance
“…Participants serve as their own controls reducing variability in slope, position, and shape of the psychophysical functions. Under the assumption that the psychophysical function of one of the modalities is the same in all individuals, it is possible to assess individual differences in the target modality (J. C. Stevens and Marks, 1980;Marks, G. Borg and Ljunggren, 1983;Marks, 1988). This method has, e.g., been used by Bartoshuk to study sensory differences in taste perception between non-tasters, tasters and super-tasters (see, e.g., Bartoshuk, 2000).…”
Section: Joint Scalingmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Participants serve as their own controls reducing variability in slope, position, and shape of the psychophysical functions. Under the assumption that the psychophysical function of one of the modalities is the same in all individuals, it is possible to assess individual differences in the target modality (J. C. Stevens and Marks, 1980;Marks, G. Borg and Ljunggren, 1983;Marks, 1988). This method has, e.g., been used by Bartoshuk to study sensory differences in taste perception between non-tasters, tasters and super-tasters (see, e.g., Bartoshuk, 2000).…”
Section: Joint Scalingmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The scale ranged from 'nothing at all' to 'maximal'. Other labels were spaced nearly linearly, whereas the scale from 0.1 to 10 was logarithmic (26). At each test subjects were shown a new scale for each of the studied variables and were asked to select the appropriate magnitude of the sensation.…”
Section: Measurementsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…It is easier to test whether maximum subjective range is constant over perceptual continua (since these comparisons are made within a single central nervous system) than to test whether maximum subjective range is constant over individuals (Borg, 1962), since there is no single response system that can be known to be constant for different observers. It is possible that newer psychophysical methods, such as category-ratio judgments and magnitude matching (Marks, Borg, & Ljunggren, 1983), may help to clarify these matters.…”
Section: The Relationship Between Physical Range and Exponentmentioning
confidence: 99%