Abstract
Marks (1988) reported that when equal-loudness matches were inferred from magnitude estimates of loudness for tones of two different frequencies, the matches were affected by changes in the stimulus intensity range at both frequencies. Marks interpreted these results as reflecting the operation of response biases in the subjects’ estimates; that is, the effect of range was to alter subjects’ judgments but not necessarily the perception of loudness itself. We investigated this effect by having subjects choose which of two tone pairs defined the larger loudness interval. By using tones of two frequencies, and varying their respective intensity ranges, we reproduced Marks’ result in a procedure devoid of numerical responses. When the tones at one frequency are all soft, but the tones at the other frequency are not all soft, cross-frequency loudness matches are different from those obtained with other intensity range combinations. This suggests that stimulus range affects the perception of loudness in addition to whatever effects it may have on numerical judgments of loudness.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
References
Baird, J. C., &Noma, E. (1978)Fundamentals of scaling and psychophysics. New York: Wiley.
Bissett, R. J., & Schneider, B. (1990).Spatial and conjoint models based on pairwise comparisons of dissimilarities and conjoint effects. Complete and incomplete designs. Unpublished manuscript.
Churcher, B. G., &King, A J. (1937). The performance of noise meters in terms of the primary standard.Journal of the Institute of Electrical Engineering,81. 57–90.
Durlach, N. I. (1972). Binaural signal detection: Equalization and cancellation theory. In J. V. Tobias (Ed.),Foundations of modern auditory theory: Vol. II (pp 369–462). New York: Academic Press.
Engen, T., &Levy, N. (1955). The influence of standards on psychophysical judgmentsPerceptual & Motor Skills,5, 193–197
Krueger, L. E. (1989) Reconciling Fechner and Stevens: Towards a unified psychophysical law.Behavioral & Brain Sciences,12. 251–267.
Krantz, D. H., Luce, R. D., Supves, P., Atversky, A. (1971).Foundations of measurement: Vol. I. Additive and polynomial representations. New York. Academic Press.
Luce, R. D. (1959)Individual choice behavior New York: Wiley.
Marks, L. E. (1974). On scales of sensation: Prolegomena to any future psychophysics that will be able to come forth as science.Perception & Psychophysics,16, 358–376.
Marks, L. E. (1979). A theory of loudness and loudness judgments.Psychological Review,86, 256–285.
Marks, L. E. (1988). Magnitude estimation and sensory matchingPerception & Psychophysics,43, 511–525.
Marks, L. E. (in press). The dynamics of ratio scaling. In G. A Gescheider & S. J. Bolanowski (Eds.),Ratio scaling of psychological magnitudes. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum
Marks, L. E., Szczesiul, R., &Ohlott, P. (1986). On the cross modal perception of intensity.Journal of Experimental Psychology-Human Perception & Performance,12, 517–534.
Molino, J. A. (1973). Pure-tone equal-loudness contours for standard tones of different frequencies.Perception & Psychophysics,14, 1–4
Robinson, D W., &Dadson, R. S. (1956). A redetermination of the equal-loudness relations for pure tones.British Journal of Applied Physics,7, 166–181.
Robinson, G. H. (1976) Biasing power law exponents by magnitude estimation instructions.Perception & Psychophysics,19, 80–84.
Ross, S. (1967). Matching functions and equal-sensation contours for loudness.Journal of the Acoustical Society of America,42, 778–793.
Rule, S. J., &Curtis, D. W. (1982). Levels of sensory and judgmental processing: Strategies for evaluation of a model. In B. Wegener (Ed.),Social attitudes and psychophysical measurement (pp. 107–122). Hillsdale. NJ. Erlbaum.
Scharf, B., &Stevens, J. C. (1961). The form of the loudness function near threshold. InProceedings of the Third International Congress of Acoustics (pp. 80–82). Amsterdam: Elsevier.
Schneider, B. (1980). Individual loudness functions determined from direct comparisons of loudness intervals.Perception & Psychophysics,28, 493–503.
Schneider, B. A., &Bissett, R. J. (1987). Equal loudness contours derived from comparisons of sensory differences.Canadian Journal of Psychology,41, 429–441.
Schneider, B. A., Parker, S., &Stein, D. (1974). Measurement of loudness using direct comparisons of sensory intervals.Journal of Mathematical Psychology,11, 259–273.
Schneider, B., Parker, S., Valenti, M., Farrell, G., &Kanow, G. (1978). Response bias in category and magnitude estimation of difference and similarity for loudness and pitch.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,4, 483–496.
Schneider, B., Wright, A. A., Edelheit, W., Hock, P., &Humphrey, C. (1972). Equal loudness contours derived from sensory magnitude judgments.Journal of the Acoustical Society of America,51, 1951–1959.
Stevens, S. S. (1957). On the psychophysical law.Psychological Review,64, 153–181.
Stevens, S. S. (1971) Issues in psychophysical measurement.Psychological Review,78, 426–450.
Stevens, S. S., &Galanter, E. (1957) Ratio scales and category scales for a dozen perceptual continua.Journal of Experimental Psychology,54, 377–411
Teghtsoonian, R. (1973). Range effects in psychophysical scaling and a revision of Stevens’ law.American Journal of Psychology,86, 3–27.
Zwislocki, J. J., &Goodman, D. A. (1980). Absolute scaling of sensory magnitudes- A validation.Perception & Psychophysics,28, 28–38.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Additional information
This research was supported by a grant from the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Calada.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Schneider, B., Parker, S. Does stimulus context affect loudness or only loudness judgments?. Perception & Psychophysics 48, 409–418 (1990). https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03211584
Received:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03211584