Abstract
Each of 30 male subjects judged, in a single session, the loudness of a 1000-Hz tone and the exertion perceived while pedaling a bicycle. Two psychophysical methods were used—one employing a combined category-ratio scale whose upper limit was defined as “maximum sensation” and the other a freer magnitude-estimation scale having no verbal labels. Both methods yielded data consistent with power functions, although the combined category-ratio scale gave slightly smaller exponents. The category-ratio estimates provided a measure of individual differences in perceived exertion: At any work level, the differences across subjects in judgment correlated with differences in heart rate (a physiological indicant of strain); this result is consistent with Borg’s hypothesis that in dynamic work, maximal sensation is at least roughly equivalent across subjects. When the magnitude and the category-ratio estimates were converted to equivalent loudness (Stevens and Marks’s method of magnitude matching), the derived loudness values also correlated with heart rate: This outcome provides evidence for the utility of the cross-modal procedure and provides further evidence consistent with Borg’s model of perceived exertion.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Reference Notes
1. Borg, G. A ratio scaling method for interindividual comparisons.Reports from the Institute of Applied Psychology, The University of Stockholm, 1972, No. 27.
References
Borg, G. Interindividual scaling and perception of muscular force.Kungliga Fysiografiska Sällskapets i Lund Förhandlingar, 1961,31, 117–125.
Borg, G.Physical performance and perceived exertion. Lund: Gleerup, 1962.
Borg, G. Perceived exertion as an indicator of somatic stress.Scandinavian Journal of Rehabilitation Medicine, 1970,2, 92–98.
Borg, G. A category scale with ratio properties for intermodal and interindividual comparisons. In H.-G. Geissler & P. Petzold (Eds.),Psychophysical judgment and the process of perception. Berlin, GDR: VEB Deutscher Verlag der Wissenschaften, 1982.
Ekman, G., Hosman, J., Lindman, R., Ljungberg, L., &Åkesson, C. A. Interindividual differences in scaling performance.Perceptual and Motor Skills, 1968,26, 815–823.
Helson, H. Adaptation level theory. New York: Harper & Row, 1964.
Jones, F. N., &Marcus, M. J. The subject effect in judgments of subjective magnitude.Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1961,61, 40–44.
Jones, F. N., &Woskow, M. H. On the relationship between estimates of loudness and pitch.American Journal of Psychology, 1962,75, 669–671.
Marks, L. E. Stimulus-range, number of categories, and form of the category-scale.American Journal of Psychology, 1968,81, 467–479.
Stevens, J. C., &Marks, L. E. Cross-modality matching functions generated by the method of magnitude estimation.Perception & Psychophysics, 1980,27, 379–389.
Stevens, S. S. Issues in psychophysical measurement.Psychological Review, 1971,78, 426–450.
Stevens, S. S., &Galanter, E. H. Ratio scales and category scales for a dozen perceptual continua.Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1957,54, 377–411.
Teghtsoonian, M., &Teghtsoonian, R. How repeatable are Stevens’ power law exponents for individual subjects?Perception & Psychophysics, 1971,10, 147–149.
Teghtsoonian, M., &Teghtsoonian, R. Consistency of individual exponents in cross-modal matching.Perception & Psychophysics, 1983,33, 203–214.
Teghtsoonian, R., Teghtsoonian, M., &Karlsson, J.-G. The limits of perceived magnitude: Comparison among individuals and among perceptual continua.Acta Psychologica, 1981,49, 83–94.
Ward, L. M. Mixed-modality psychophysical scaling: Sequential dependencies and other properties.Perception & Psychophysics, 1982,31, 53–62.
Zwislocki, J. J., &Goodman, D. A. Absolute scaling of sensory magnitudes: A validation.Perception & Psychophysics, 1980,27, 28–38.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Additional information
This research was supported by a grant to G.B. from the Swedish Council for Research on the Humanities and Social Sciences, F407/81. It was conducted while L.E.M. was a visiting scientist at the University of Stockholm.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Marks, L.E., Borg, G. & Ljunggren, G. Individual differences in perceived exertion assessed by two new methods. Perception & Psychophysics 34, 280–288 (1983). https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03202957
Received:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03202957