Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
In the method of magnitude-matching, subjects try to judge intensities of sensations from two or more modalities on a single, common scale. Using responses to one modality as a standard makes it possible to compare subjects' suprathreshold perceptions on the other, test modality. A series of ten experiments revealed the following: (i) magnitude-matching ‘works’: with both loudness of tones and lightness of grays as standards, tasters versus nontasters of 6-n-prophylthiouracil (PROP) (as defined by a threshold criterion) show much greater responce to suprathreshold PROP and slightly greater response to surcose; (ii) though superior to rating-scale judgements of sensory intensity made without reference to a second modality, magnitude-matching is not, however, flawless: the cross-modality matching relation produced by a set of magnitude-matches depends systematically on the contextual sets of stimulus levels presented for judgement; (iii) with taste as the standard, old versus young subjects showed only a 25% decrement in responce to the odor intensity of butanol when both groups recieved the same physical (concentration) levels, but a >50% decrement in responce when both groups recieved about the same perceptual levels; (iv) magnitude-matches are much the same whether subjets make their judgements on a bounded rating-scale or an open-ended magnitude-estimation scale: and (v) loudness, lightness and odor intensity serve about equally in magnitude-matching with taste intensity.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Marks et al. (1988) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: