The labeled dissimilarity scale: A metric of perceptual dissimilarity

被引:0
|
作者
Daniel B. Kurtz
Theresa L. White
Meghan Hayes
机构
[1] SUNY Upstate Medical University,Department of Neuroscience and Physiology
来源
关键词
NASH; Magnitude Estimation; Odorant Receptor; Olfactory Dysfunction; Odorant Pair;
D O I
暂无
中图分类号
学科分类号
摘要
Fundamental to the concept ofpsychological distance is the idea that confusability allows discovery of the perceptual relationships between objects, which provides understanding of the underlying principles that govern the functioning of a system. Thus, judgments of dissimilarity (conceptually proportional to the inverse of confusability) may provide insight into the elusive underlying quality-coding mechanisms in that sensory system. In the present experiments, a labeled dissimilarity scale (LDS) that reflects the magnitude of odorant dissimilarity was developed in a fashion similar to that reported by Green (Green, Shaffer, & Gilmore, 1993). This scale was produced by rating the perceptual intensity implied by adverbs describing different levels of dissimilarity, and then attaching those descriptors to appropriate locations on a numerical scale. The usefulness of the scale was demonstrated by its ability to produce visual color space with ratings of dissimilarity of Munsell color chips. The stability and reliability of the LDS was evaluated by comparing it with the traditional scaling technique of magnitude estimation (ME). It was found that the scales produced similar ratings of odorant dissimilarity and showed a similar susceptibility to the effects of contrast convergence. However, the coefficients of variation of dissimilarities rated with ME were much higher than those produced with the LDS. The subjects also dealt with the LDS without the anxiety that usually accompanies first-time users of ME. The LDS provided stable ratings of odorant dissimilarity and preserved the inferred ratio scale properties of ME.
引用
收藏
页码:152 / 161
页数:9
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [41] Distance and Dissimilarity
    Blumson, Ben
    [J]. PHILOSOPHICAL PAPERS, 2019, 48 (02) : 211 - 239
  • [42] Simile and dissimilarity
    Moon, Rosamund
    [J]. JOURNAL OF LITERARY SEMANTICS, 2011, 40 (02) : 133 - 157
  • [43] Similarity and dissimilarity
    George, WH
    [J]. NATURE, 1938, 141 : 1055 - 1056
  • [44] Image dissimilarity
    Martens, JB
    Meesters, L
    [J]. SIGNAL PROCESSING, 1998, 70 (03) : 155 - 176
  • [45] DISSIMILARITY, T- DISSIMILARITY and T-CONTINOUS CLUSTERS
    Libor, Zak
    [J]. MENDELL 2009, 2009, : 123 - 126
  • [46] Similarity - Dissimilarity
    Kahn, Eugen
    [J]. DISEASES OF THE NERVOUS SYSTEM, 1940, 1 (07): : 212 - 215
  • [47] DISSIMILARITY TEST
    MEALAND, DL
    [J]. SCOTTISH JOURNAL OF THEOLOGY, 1978, 31 (01) : 41 - 50
  • [48] On component-wise dissimilarity measures and metric properties in pattern recognition
    De Santis, Enrico
    Martino, Alessio
    Rizzi, Antonello
    [J]. PeerJ Computer Science, 2022, 8
  • [49] DSIM: A DisSIMilarity-Based Image Clutter Metric for Targeting Performance
    Xu, Dejiang
    Shi, Zelin
    [J]. IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON IMAGE PROCESSING, 2013, 22 (10) : 4108 - 4122
  • [50] On component-wise dissimilarity measures and metric properties in pattern recognition
    De Santis, Enrico
    Martino, Alessio
    Rizzi, Antonello
    [J]. PEERJ COMPUTER SCIENCE, 2022, 8