Percefltllal and /Motor Skills, 1962, 14, 19-26.

@ Southern Universities Press 1962

SCALES OF AESTHETIC VALUE1

GOESTA EKMAN A N D "ITODOR KUENNAPAS

Psychological Laboratory, University o f Stockholm, Sweden

In a recent investigation made at this laboratory, the aesthetic value of a

set of handwriting specimens was srudied by means of one indirect method and
one direct method. These two types of psychophysical methods have usually
been applied to quite different kinds of problems, and very little work has
been done in which scales obtained by the differenc methods could be com-
pared. The need for research of this kind was discussed in some detail in
the previous paper (Ekrnan & Kuennapas, 1961; cf. Ekrnan, 1961). In two
previous investigations, covering only a narrow range, an approximately linear
relation was found (Bjoerkman, 1959; Ekman & Kuennapas, 1960a). In the
recent study over a considerably wider range, the relation berween a ratio scale
and an interval scale from pair comparisons was logarithmic.
The present paper reports a further experimenc with a similar purpose.
Another aesthetic variable was measured by the indirect method of pair com-
parisons, and by the direct method of ratio estimation. W e consider it im-
portant to carry out several such experiments, in order to find out whether
there is a relatively general relation between the differenc types of scales. In
addition, the direct method of category estimation was used. One reason for
including this method was that the category scale from some points of view
may be expected to be rather closely related to the interval scale from pair
comparisons.
METHOD
Stimzcbs material.-About 200 drawings were collected from the sixth
grade in public elementary schools in Stockholm. The pupils were instructed to
"draw a tree" during an ordinary school drawing lesson.
In a preliminary experiment with members of the laboratory staff, the
drawings were sorted into a number of groups, with approximately equal sub-
jective intervals between the groups, with regard to their aesthetic value. The
results of this preliminary sorting were used as a basis for selecting a set of
17 drawings (A-Q) to be used in the scaling experiment. A sample of draw-
ings is shown in Fig. l .
In order to reduce the number of comparisons and to avoid combinations
yielding proportions close to 1 in the pair comparison scaling, the stimuli were

'This investigation was supported by the Swedish Council for Social Science Research.
The computational work was done by Miss Inga Sommarstroem. A transcript of data
has been filed as Document N o . 6931 with the American Documentation Institute,
Auxiliary Publications Project, Photoduplicarion Service, Library of Congress, Washing-
ton 25, D. C. Remit $1.25 for 35-mm. microfilm or photocopies.
 G. EKMAN & T. KUENNAPAS

0 1 2 3 1

Ratio scalo of aosthotic valuo

FIG. 1. The ratio scale illustrated by six of the drawings

arranged in three groups on the basis of the preliminary sorting. Each group
contained 7 stimuli, 2 of which were common to another group (Group I: A, B,
C , D , E , F , G ; GroupII: F , G , H , I , J,K,L; GroupIII: K , L , M , N , O , P , Q ) .
The number of combinations within each group is 21. Since two of these
combinations belong to more than one group, the total number of pairs to be
compared is 61.
The drawings were photographically reduced, and the 61 different pairs
were printed in random order on test sheets, two or three pairs on each sheet.
One special set of sheets was printed for category estimation. Each sheet
showed drawings A and Q as anchoring points, and one of the other drawings
to be estimated, so that there were 15 such sheets. The order of sheets was
randomized among Ss.
Procedure.-For the pairs of drawings Ss were instructed ( a ) to mark that draw-
ing in each pair which they liked best, and ( b ) to estimate in per cent how much they
liked the other drawing i n relation to the one they preferred. T h e instruction for
category estimation was ( c ) to regard d r a w ~ n g sA and Q as points 1 and 9 o n a scale
extending both below and above these polnts, and to assign a proper scale value to
each of the other drawings; it was emphasized char the estimate should reflect subjective
difference with regard to aesthetic value.
Subjects.-The number of Ss was 100 in pair comparisons and ratio estimation; 85
of these Ss also participated in category estimation. Most Ss were psychology students,
and about a dozen were staff members. The majority of the group had some previous
experience of psychophysical judgment.
Scale const~action.-The ratio scale was constructed from geometric means
of ratio estimates by a computational procedure suggested by one of the present
authors (Ekman, 1958). This was first done separately for each of the sub-
matrices. Then a scale with a common unit of measurement was constructed
in the following way. The scale from the second sub-matrix was multiplied
by a constant factor chosen so that the average value of Stimuli F and G was
 SCALES OF AESTHETIC VALUE 21

made equal to the average value of the same stimuli in the scale from the first
sub-matrix. The third scale was transformed in an analogous way. By this
procedure, two slightly different scale values were obtained for each of Stimuli
F, G , K, and L; they were averaged. Finally, the lowest of all scale values
(Stimulus C) was chosen as the arbitrary unit. The final scale is shown
in Table 1.
The interval scale was constructed according to Thurscone's Case V (Thur-
stone, 1927; cf. Torgerson, 1958). First, one separate scale was obtained from
each sub-matrix. Then a constant was added to the scale of the second sub-
matrix so as to make the average scale value of Stimuli F and G equal to the
average value of the same stimuli in the scale from the first sub-matrix. The
scale from the third sub-matrix was transformed analogously. Means were

TABLE 1
THE FINAL SCALES
Drawing Ratio scale Interval scale Category scale
A 1.27 4.73 (1.00)
B 1.34 3.97 0.13
C 1.00 1.28 0.78
D 1.01 0.00 0.97
E 2.10 10.58 4.15
F 1.58 6.94 3.09
G 1.58 6.99 2.63
H 2.32 11.03 5.56
I 1.58 5.97 2.68
J 2.40 12.37 4.78
K 2.22 10.89 4.41
L 2.40 11.53 4.77
M 3.85 18.01 7.79
N 3.08 15.25 6.86
0 3.57 17.90 7.17
P 3.09 17.46 6.44
Q 4.60 22.58 (9.00)

computed for Stimuli F, G, K, and L from the two slightly different scale
values obtained by this procedure. The final scale was obtained by shifting
the arbitrary origin to the lowest of all scale values (Stimulus D ) ; it is shown
in Table 1.
The category scale was obtained simply by computing the average scale
(category) value for each of the 15 stimuli estimated in the experiment. The
scale is also shown in Table 1.
DISCUSSION
OF RESULTS
The ratio scale.-The total range of the ratio scale in the present experi-
ment is 1:4.60 in terms of the ratio between the lowest and the highest scale
value. A sample of six stimulus drawings, so selected that they represent
nearly equal steps on the ratio scale, are shown in their proper scale positions
in Fig. 1.
22 G. EKMAN & T. KUENNAPAS

There is no physical stimulus continuum present in these data. The

physical stimulus properties which enter as factors in the perceptual process
resulting in an aesthetic judgment are enormously complex. In this investi-
gation, however, we are not concerned with the physical properties but with
the relations between the different scales of subjective value. W e have three
such scales. Somewhat arbitrarily we shall regard one of them as the main
scale and study the other scales as functions of the racio scale. T h ~ sapproach
is not necessarily very much more far-reaching than a principle applied in the
construction of graphs, where the ratio scale will be plotted along the abscissa.
The "interval" scale.-"Interval" is in quotation marks because we are in
some doubt whether a scale constructed according to Case V is a true incerval
scale. Let us look at the data, however. The scale is plotted against the racio
scale in Fig. 2A. The trend of the data is clearly curvilinear, whereas it
should be linear, if the scale were a true interval scale, and provided, of course,

00 10 2n 30 LO 50 00 01 01 03 04 05 06 0.7

Ratio scale Log ratio scale

FIG. 2 A. The "interval" scale plotted against rhe ratio scale. 2 B. The "inrerval"
scale plotted against the logarithm of the ratio scale.

that the other scale is a true ratio scale, which, however, we will assume is the
case for the time being.
The "interval" scale was constructed according to Case V, i.e., on the
assumption of constant "discriminal dispersion." As is well known from the
work of Stevens and others, there is evidence that che subjective uncertainty
(intra-individual variability) increases with the magnitude of the subjective
variable, at least in "prothetic" continua (Stevens & Volkmann, 1940; Harper &
Stevens, 1948; Stevens, 1957, 1960; Ekman, 1956). Some experiments in-
dicate that this kind of dispersion is directly proportional co the scale position
(Ekman, 1956,1959).
It is conceivable or even plausible that a similar relation holds for the
dispersion between individuals, with which we are concerned here as one
 SCALES OF AESTHETIC VALUE 23

usually is in scaling by indirect methods. This question has been briefly

discussed previously (Ekman & Kuennapas, 1961) in light of information
concerning performance continua. Let us assume, for the moment, that this
is the case. O n a true ratio scale, then, ar, = kR. The scale constructed ac-
cording to Case V will be an interval scale which has been distorted in such
a way that an = c. Bjoerkrnan (1960) has investigated the case involving
a subjective power function of a physical stimulus variable, and has shown
that the "interval" scale according to Case V under these circumstances is a
logarithmic function of the true ratio scale. A similar derivation may be carried
out without assuming a physical stimulus continuum. In our previous paper,
the logarithmic relation was verified.
The hypothetical relation has been tested in the present experiment by
plotting the "interval" scale ( R t ) against the logarithm of the ratio scale (R,)
in Fig. 2 B. This relation is perfectly linear, and the hypothesis may be con-
sidered verified also in this experiment. The equation for the straight line
fitted to the data in Fig. 2B is Ri = 0.05 +32.51 log R,.
The question whether Case V should be replaced by an assumption of
proportional discriminal dispersion, will not be answered here. W e consider
it advisable to collect more experimental information. If the relation now
verified in two experiments turns out to be general, the question will become
important.

Ratio scale Log ratio scale

FIG. 3 A. The category scale plotted against the ratio scale. Filled circles represent
anchoring stimuli. 3 B. The category scale plotted against the logarithm of the ratio
scale.

The category scale.-The category scale is plotted against the racio scale
in Fig. 3 A. The trend of the data is clearly curvilinear, in about the same way
as for the "interval" scale in Fig. 2A. The result is in general agreement wich
the results obtained by Stevens and Galanter ( 1957). As compared wich the
racio scale, the trend of the category data is "concave downwards."
Stevens and Galanter offer an explanation of this trend in terms of the in-
24 G . EKMAN & T. KUENNAPAS

creasing uncertainty upward on the scale; this is the same type of interpretation
as has been discussed above in connection with the "interval" scale. An alterna-
tive explanation for category scales is, however, possible. It is based on the
interpretation of a perceptual "distance" in terms of perceptual "similarity."
This interpretation and its possible consequences for scaling theory will be
briefly outlined below.
The problem of how a perception of similarity arises, has been investigated
in several experiments in this laboratory. In the first experiment the similarity
of pure tones of varying pitch and equal loudness was studied (Eisler & Ekman,
1959). A pitch scale was constructed, and a scale of subjective similarity was
obtained. Then, it was possible to investigate similarity as a function of pitch.
It was found that

where sij varies from 0 to 1 (identity). In subsequent experiments the same

relation was verified also for darkness and visual area (Ekman, Goude, &
Waern, 1961) as well as for heaviness (Eisler, 1960), so that the relation ap-
pears to possess a certain degree of generality.
This relation may have some interesting implications for scaling theory.
Let us assume for the moment that an S, instructed to give category estimates,
interprets the concept of e q m l distance in such a way that it means e q m l
similarity, so that successive pairs of percepts representing scale marks 1, 2, 3 etc.
should be eqnally similar,

It is seen from the similarity equation that in this case

This means that eqaal steps or distances on the category scale will correspond
to eqzial successive ~ a t i o son the ratio scale.
As has been pointed out in previous papers, this hypothetical interpretation
of category scaling implies a logarithmic relation between the category scale
and the ratio scale (Ekman, Goude, & Waern, 1961; cf. Junge, 1960). The
hypothesis has been tested in the present experiment by plotting the category
scale (R,) against the logarithm of the ratio scale (R,) in Fig. 3B.
The relation is clearly linear, with the equation R, = - 0.02 +13.33 R,.,
and the hypothesis may be considered verified. This is, however, so far an
isolated finding. If the category scales and ratio scales obtained by Stevens
and Galanter (1957) are plotted as in Fig. 3B, it will be seen that the relation
is logarithmic for the greater part of the range, but that this relation breaks
down completely in the low range of the scales; the same is true for several
sets of data obtained in this laboratory. On the other hand, power functions
 SCALES OF AESTHETIC VALUE 25

may always be fitted to such data; the exponents are always below 1 (cf. Ekrnan
& Kuennapas, 1960b). The category scale of the present experiment was ob-
tained in a way that differs somewhat from the usual procedure. Ss were in-
suucted to regard the stimuli denoted 1 and 9 as anchoring points which, how-
ever, are not necessarily the end points of the scale. The usual break-down of
the logarithmic relation in the low range of the scales may, thus, be a con-
sequence of an end effect, which was eliminated in this particular experiment.
W e are not accepting this interpretation; it is mentioned merely as one point
of consideration for further research on the relation between ratio scales and
category scales.

"Interval scale"
FIG. 4. The category scale plotted against the "interval" scale. Filled circles rep-
resent anchoring stimuli.

In Fig. 4, finally, the category scale is plotted against the "interval" scale.
This relation is linear, as can be expected from the linear relations in Figs. 2B
and 3B; the straight line in the graph represents the equation R , = - 0.04 +
0.41 Ri,as determined from the equations relating the "interval" scale and the
category scale to the ratio scale. The graph illustrates that in this experiment
similar scales were obtained by the direct method of category estimation and the
indirect method of pair comparisons on the assumption of Case V. In a sense,
it also illusuates that the assumption of Case V is not necessarily unrealistic:
it appears applicable when the observer is instructed in terms of subjective
di~tancebut not when he is instructed to give ratio estimates. This apparent
paradox constitutes an interesting problem.
 G. EKMAN & T. KUENNAPAS

An aesthetic variable was measured by the "direct" psychophysical method

of ratio estimation and the "indirecc" method of pair comparisons. In addition,
a category scale was obtained. Both the interval scale constructed from pair
comparisons on the assumption of Thurstone's Case V, and the category scale, are
logarithmic functions of the ratio scale. The significance of the logarithmic
relation is discussed. In che case of the indirect method, the result means that
the assumption of constant variability should be replaced by an assumption of
proportional variability, if the ratio scale is regarded as a criterion. With regard
to the category scale, the results agree with a hypothesis according to which
"distance" is interpreted by observers in terms of "similarity."
REFERENCES
BJOERKMAN, M. A n experimental comparison between the methods of ratio estimarion
and pair comparisons. Rep. Psychol. L b . Univer. S~ockholm,1959, No. 71.
BJOERKMAN, M. Variability data and direct quantitative judgment for scaling subjective
magnitude. Rep. Psychol. L b . Univer. Stockholm, 1960, No. 78.
EISLER,H., & EKMAN,G. A mechanism of subjective similarity. Acta Psychol., 1959,
16, 1-10.
EKMAN,G. Discriminal sensitivity on the subjective continuum. Acta Psychol., 1956,
12, 233-243.
EKMAN,G. Two generalized ratio scaling methods. J. Psychol., 1958, 45, 287-295.
EKMAN,G. Weber's law and relared functions. J . Psychol., 1959, 47, 343-352.
EKMAN,G. Some aspects of psychophysical research. In W. A. Rosenblith ( E d . ) ,
Sensory communica~ion. Cambridge, Mass.: Technology Press, 1961. 4. 35-47.
EKMAN, G., GOUDE,G., & WAERN.Y. Subjective similarity in two perceptual continua.
J. exp. Psychol., 1961,61, 222-227.
EKMAN,G . , & KUENNAPAS, T. Note on direct and indirect scaling methods. Psychol.
Rep., 1960,6, 174. ( a )
EKMAN,G., & KUENNAPAS, T. Ratio scales and category scales for brightness of
monochromatic light. Rep. Psychol. Lab. Univer. Stockholm, 1960, No. 86. ( b )
EKMAN,G., & KUWAPAS, T. Measurement of aesthetic value by "direct" and "in-
direct" methods. Scand. J. Psychol., 1962, 3, in press.
HARPER,R . S., & STEVENS, S. S. A psychological scale of weight and a formula for
its derivation. A n e r . J. Psychol., 1948, 61, 343-351.
JUNGE,K. The category scale equation. Scand. J . Psychol., 1960, 1, 112-114.
STEVENS,S. S. O n the psychophysical law. Psychol. Rev., 1957, 64, 153-181.
STEVENS,S. S. O n the new psychophysics. Scand. J . Psychol., 1960, 1, 27-35.
STEVENS, S. S., & GALANTER, E. H. Ratio scales and category scales for a dozen
perceptual continua. J . exp. Psychol., 1957, 54, 377411.
STEVENS, S. S., & VOLKMAN, J. T h e relation of pitch to frequency: a revised scale.
Arne?. 1. Psychol., 1940, 53, 329-353.
THURSTONE, L. L. A law of comparative judgment. Psychol. Rev., 1927, 34, 273-286.
TORGERSON, W . S. Theory and methods of scaling. New York: Wiley, 1958.

Accepted November 7, 1961.