The University of Southampton
University of Southampton Institutional Repository

Comparison of absolute magnitude estimation and relative magnitude estimation for judging the subjective intensity of noise and vibration

Comparison of absolute magnitude estimation and relative magnitude estimation for judging the subjective intensity of noise and vibration
Comparison of absolute magnitude estimation and relative magnitude estimation for judging the subjective intensity of noise and vibration
The method of magnitude estimation is used in psychophysical studies to obtain numerical values for the intensity of perception of environmental stresses (e.g., noise and vibration). The exponent in a power function relating the subjective magnitude of a stimulus (e.g., the degree of discomfort) to the physical magnitude of the stimulus shows the rate of growth of sensations with increasing stimulus magnitude. When judging noise and vibration, there is no basis for deciding whether magnitude estimation should be performed with a reference stimulus (i.e., relative magnitude estimation, RME) or without a reference stimulus (i.e., absolute magnitude estimation, AME). Twenty subjects rated the discomfort caused by thirteen magnitudes of whole-body vertical vibration and 13 levels of noise, by both RME and AME on three occasions. There were high correlations between magnitude estimates of discomfort and the magnitudes of vibration and noise. Both RME and AME provided rates of growth of discomfort with high consistency over the three repetitions. When judging noise, RME was more consistent than AME, with less inter-subject variability in the exponent, ns. When judging vibration, RME was also more consistent than AME, but with greater inter-subject variability in the exponent, nv. When judging vibration, AME may be beneficial because sensations caused by the RME reference stimulus may differ (e.g., occur in a different part of the body) from the sensations caused by the stimuli being judged
0003-682X
82-88
Huang, Yu
3f446f98-2f77-4f1b-bf61-187fe3118fda
Griffin, M.J.
24112494-9774-40cb-91b7-5b4afe3c41b8
Huang, Yu
3f446f98-2f77-4f1b-bf61-187fe3118fda
Griffin, M.J.
24112494-9774-40cb-91b7-5b4afe3c41b8

Huang, Yu and Griffin, M.J. (2014) Comparison of absolute magnitude estimation and relative magnitude estimation for judging the subjective intensity of noise and vibration. Applied Acoustics, 77, 82-88. (doi:10.1016/j.apacoust.2013.10.003).

Record type: Article

Abstract

The method of magnitude estimation is used in psychophysical studies to obtain numerical values for the intensity of perception of environmental stresses (e.g., noise and vibration). The exponent in a power function relating the subjective magnitude of a stimulus (e.g., the degree of discomfort) to the physical magnitude of the stimulus shows the rate of growth of sensations with increasing stimulus magnitude. When judging noise and vibration, there is no basis for deciding whether magnitude estimation should be performed with a reference stimulus (i.e., relative magnitude estimation, RME) or without a reference stimulus (i.e., absolute magnitude estimation, AME). Twenty subjects rated the discomfort caused by thirteen magnitudes of whole-body vertical vibration and 13 levels of noise, by both RME and AME on three occasions. There were high correlations between magnitude estimates of discomfort and the magnitudes of vibration and noise. Both RME and AME provided rates of growth of discomfort with high consistency over the three repetitions. When judging noise, RME was more consistent than AME, with less inter-subject variability in the exponent, ns. When judging vibration, RME was also more consistent than AME, but with greater inter-subject variability in the exponent, nv. When judging vibration, AME may be beneficial because sensations caused by the RME reference stimulus may differ (e.g., occur in a different part of the body) from the sensations caused by the stimuli being judged

Text
2013-07-15 YH-MJG Methods_of_magnitude_estimation AUTHOR ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT - Accepted Manuscript
Download (1MB)

More information

Accepted/In Press date: 14 October 2013
e-pub ahead of print date: 12 November 2013
Published date: March 2014
Organisations: Human Sciences Group

Identifiers

Local EPrints ID: 372121
URI: http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/id/eprint/372121
ISSN: 0003-682X
PURE UUID: ba24b15b-67a1-4ab7-8993-2b4cc3c43377
ORCID for M.J. Griffin: ORCID iD orcid.org/0000-0003-0743-9502

Catalogue record

Date deposited: 01 Dec 2014 09:26
Last modified: 14 Mar 2024 18:31

Export record

Altmetrics

Contributors

Author: Yu Huang
Author: M.J. Griffin ORCID iD

Download statistics

Downloads from ePrints over the past year. Other digital versions may also be available to download e.g. from the publisher's website.

View more statistics

Atom RSS 1.0 RSS 2.0

Contact ePrints Soton: eprints@soton.ac.uk

ePrints Soton supports OAI 2.0 with a base URL of http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/cgi/oai2

This repository has been built using EPrints software, developed at the University of Southampton, but available to everyone to use.

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you continue without changing your settings, we will assume that you are happy to receive cookies on the University of Southampton website.

×