Hostname: page-component-669899f699-tzmfd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-04-28T16:34:36.182Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Comparative Scaling of Unidimensional Discrimination and Similarity Data

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2025

Gordon G. Bechtel
Gordon G. Bechtel*
Affiliation:
Oregon Research Institute Eugene, Oregon
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Scales constructed from paired-comparison designs under Thurstone's Case V model are discussed in relation to those derived from similarity data by means of the Unilateral Law of Comparative Judgment [3]. Factors inherent in the triadic similarity task are then considered with respect to scale invariance across experimental designs. Illustrative data, although revealing the influence of these factors upon similarity response consistency, indicate the similarity scale to be somewhat robust to their biasing effects.

Type
Original Paper
Information
Psychometrika , Volume 31 , Issue 1 , March 1966 , pp. 75 - 84
Copyright
Copyright © 1966 Psychometric Society

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

Footnotes

*

This research was supported in part by National Institute of Mental Health Grant MH-04439-05.

References

Campbell, D. T. and Fiske, D. W. Convergent and discriminant validation by the multitrait-multimethod matrix. Psychological Bulletin, 1959, 56, 81–105.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Coombs, C. H. A theory of data, New York: Wiley, 1964.Google Scholar
Coombs, C. H., Greenberg, M., and Zinnes, J. L. A double law of comparative judgment for the analysis of preferential choice and similarities data. Psychometrika, 1961, 26, 165–171.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ekman, G. and Sjöberg, L. Scaling. Ann. Rev. Psychol., 1965, 16, 451–474.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Greenberg, M. G. J scale models for preference behavior. Psychometrika, 1963, 28, 265–271.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Luce, R. D. Detection and recognition. In Luce, R. D., Bush, R. R., Galanter, E. (Eds.), Handbook of mathematical psychology, New York: Wiley, 1963.Google Scholar
Osgood, C., Suci, G. J., and Tannenbaum, S. G. The study of meaning, Urbana: Univ. Ill. Press, 1957.Google Scholar
Snedecor, G. W. Statistical methods, Ames, Iowa: Iowa State College Press, 1956.Google Scholar
Torgerson, W. S. Theory and methods of scaling, New York: Wiley, 1958.Google Scholar