Abstract
The Weber fraction for the sweetness of sucrose was determined at six concentrations. The results provided good support for Weber’s law except for deviation near threshold, a finding consistent with previous work. Consequently, the JND scale approximated to Fechner’s law. The psychophysical function for sucrose sweetness was also obtained by category rating, with precautions taken to preclude methodological bias. This function was likewise found to conform to Fechner’s law, suggesting a JND-scale/category-scale convergence. This convergence was further supported by experiments with the taste stimuli citric acid (acid/sour), sodium chloride (salty), and caffeine (bitter), which showed that the indirectly derived JND scale provides the same measure of taste intensity as the scale obtained directly by category rating.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Reference Note
McBride, R. L.Psychophysics: Where everything old is new again. Paper presented at the 8th Australian Experimental Psychology Conference, Adelaide, May 1981.
References
Amebine, M. A., Pangborn, R. M., &Roessler, E. B.Principles of sensory evaluation of food. New York: Academic Press, 1965.
Anderson, N. H. Functional measurement and psychophysical judgment.Psychological Review, 1970,77, 153–170.
Anderson, N. H. Cross-task validation of functional measurement.Perception & Psychophysics, 1972,12, 389–395.
Anderson, N. H. Algebraic models in perception. In E. C. Carterette & M. P. Friedman (Eds.),Handbook of perception (Vol. 2). New York: Academic Press, 1974.
Anderson, N. H. On the role of context effects in psychophysical judgment.Psychological Review, 1975,82, 462–482.
Anderson, N. H.Foundations of information integration theory. New York: Academic Press, 1981.
Bendig, A. W., &Hughes, J. B., II. Effect of amount of verbal anchoring and number of rating-scale categories upon transmitted information.Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1953,46, 87–90.
Berg, H. W., Filipello, F., Hinreiner, E., &Webb, A. D. Evaluation of thresholds and minimum difference concentrations for various constituents of wines. I. Water solutions of pure substances.Food Technology, 1955,9, (1), 23–26.
Birnbaum, M. H. Comparison of two theories of “ratio” and “difference” judgments.Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 1980,109, 304–319.
Box, G. E. P., Hunter, W. G., &Hunter, J. S.Statistics for experimenters. New York: Wiley, 1978.
Bujas, Z. La mesure de la sensibilité differentielle dans la domaine gustatif.Acta Instituti Psychologici, 1937,2, 1–18.
Carterette, E. C., &Anderson, N. H. Bisection of loudness.Perception & Psychophysics, 1979,26, 265–280.
Eisler, H. Empirical test of a model relating magnitude and category scales.Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 1962,3, 88–96.
Garner, W. R. A technique and a scale for loudness measurement.Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 1954,26, 73–88.
Guilford, J. P.Psychometric methods (2nd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill, 1954.
Harrison, S., &Harrison, M. J. A psychophysical method employing a modification of the Muller-Urban weights.Psychological Bulletin, 1951,48, 249–256.
Holway, A. H., &Hurvich, L. M. Differential gustatory sensitivity to salt.American Journal of Psychology, 1937,49, 37–48.
Holway, A. H., &Pratt, C. C. The Weber-ratio for intensitive discrimination.Psychological Review, 1936,43, 322–340.
Houtsma, A. J. M., Durlach, N. L., &Braida, L. D. Intensity perception XI. Experimental results on the relation of intensity resolution to loudness matching.Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 1980,68, 807–813.
Jesteadt, W., Wier, C. C., &Green, D. M. Intensity discrimination as a function of frequency and sensation level.Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 1977,61, 169–177.
Kendall, M., &Stuart, A.The advanced theory of statistics (Vol. 1, 4th ed.). London: Griffin, 1977.
Laming, D.Mathematical psychology. London: Academic Press, 1973.
Luce, R. D., &Edwards, W. The derivation of subjective scales from just noticeable differences.Psychological Review, 1958,65, 222–237.
Lundgren, B., Pangborn, R. M., Barylko-Pikielna, N., &Daget, N. Difference taste thresholds for sucrose in water and in orange juice: An interlaboratory study.Chemical Senses and Flavor, 1976,2, 157–176.
MacLeod, S. A construction and attempted validation of sensory sweetness scales.Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1952,44, 316–323.
McBride, R. L. Psychophysics: Could Fechner’s assumption be correct?Australian Journal of Psychology, 1983,35, 85–88.
Meiselman, H. L. Human taste perception.CRC Critical Reviews in Food Technology, 1972,3, 89–119.
Parducci, A. Contextual effects: A range-frequency analysis. In E. C. Carterette & M. P. Friedman (Eds.),Handbook of perception (Vol. 2). New York: Academic Press, 1974.
Parker, S., &Schneider, B. Nonmetric scaling of loudness and pitch using similarity and difference estimates.Perception & Psychophysics, 1974,15, 238–242.
Parker, S., &Schneider, B. Loudness and loudness discrimination.Perception & Psychophysics, 1980,28, 398–406.
Pfaffmann, C. An experimental comparison of the method of single stimuli and the method of constant stimuli in gustation.American Journal of Psychology, 1935,37, 470–475.
Pfaffmann, C. The sense of taste. In J. Field (Ed.),Handbook of physiology (Vol. 1). Washington, D.C: American Physiological Society, 1959.
Pollack, I. Iterative techniques for unbiased rating scales.Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1965,17, 139–148.
Poulton, E. C. Quantitative subjective assessments are almost always biased, sometimes completely misleading.British Journal of Psychology, 1977,68, 409–425.
Poulton, E. C. Models for biases in judging sensory magnitude.Psychological Bulletin, 1979,86, 777–803.
Rubin, D. C. Frequency of occurrence as a psychophysical continuum: Weber’s fraction, Ekman’s fraction, range effects, and the phi-gamma hypothesis.Perception & Psychophysics, 1976,20, 327–330.
Schutz, H. G., &Pilgrim, F. J. Differential sensitivity in gustation.Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1957,54, 41–48. (a)
Schutz, H. G., &Pilgrim, F. J. Sweetness of various compounds and its measurement.Food Research, 1957,22, 206–213. (b)
Stahl, W. H. (Ed.).Compilation of odor and taste threshold values data. Philadelphia: American Society for Testing and Materials, 1973.
Stevens, S. S. On the psychophysical law.Psychological Review, 1957,64, 153–181.
Stevens, S. S. Tactile vibration: Dynamics of sensory intensity.Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1959,57, 210–218.
Stevens, S. S. The psychophysics of sensory function. In W. A. Rosenblith (Ed.),Sensory communication. Cambridge, Mass: M.I.T. Press, 1961.
Stevens, S. S.Psychophysics. New York: Wiley, 1975.
Stevens, S. S., &Galanter, E. H. Ratio scales and category scales for a dozen perceptual continua.Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1957,54, 377–411.
Stevens, S. S., &Stone, G. Finger span: Ratio scale, category scale, and JND scale.Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1959,57, 91–95.
Thurstone, L. L. The phi-gamma hypothesis.Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1928,11, 293–305.
Togerson, W. S.Theory and methods of scaling. New York: Wiley, 1958.
Vaisey Genser, M., &Moskowitz, H. R.Sensory response to food. Zurich: Forster, 1977.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
McBride, R.L. A JND-scale/category-scale convergence in taste. Perception & Psychophysics 34, 77–83 (1983). https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03205899
Received:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03205899