Amount of stimulus exploration and preference as differential functions of stimulus complexity

Two sets of photographic slides, one made up of scenes from the geographic environment, the other of works of non-representational modern art, were scaled for complexity by obtaining judges’ ratings of amount of variation present on several specified stimulus attributes. Fourteen slides defining a sevenpoint scale of complexity were selected from each set and given to college students to obtain measures of (a) amount of exploratory behavior (number of times S chose to expose each slide briefly), and (b) preference (evaluative ratings on a seven-point scale). In accordance with prediction, the former measure emerged as a linearly increasing function of complexity, while the relationship between complexity and preference was curvilinear, reaching a maximum at an intermediate level of complexity. The results are related to Berlyne’s distinction between specific and diversive stimulus exploration, and implications for the study of aesthetics are discussed.     

Brightness and loudness as functions of stimulus duration

The brightness of white light and the loudness of white noise were measured by magnitude estimation for sets of stimuli that varied in intensity and duration. Brightness and loudness both grow as power functions of duration up to a critical duration, beyond which apparent magnitude is essentially independent of duration. For brightness, the critical duration decreases with increasing intensity, but for loudness the critical duration is nearly constant at about 150 msec. Loudness and brightness also grow as power functions of intensity. The loudness exponent is the same for all durations, but the brightness exponent is about half again as large for short durations as for long. The psychophysical power functions were used to generate equal-loudness and equal-brightness functions, which specify the combinations of intensity E and duration T that produce the same apparent magnitude. Below the critical duration ET equals k for equal brightness, and ET^a equals k for equal loudness. The value a is about 0.7 for threshold and about 1.25 for supraliminal loudness.     

Brightness and loudness as functions of stimulus duration

The brightness of white light and the loudness of white noise were measured by magnitude estimation for sets of stimuli that varied in intensity and duration. Brightness and loudness both grow as power functions of duration up to a critical duration, beyond which apparent magnitude is essentially independent of duration. For brightness, the critical duration decreases with increasing intensity, but for loudness the critical duration is nearly constant at about 150 msec. Loudness and brightness also grow as power functions of intensity. The loudness exponent is the same for all durations, but the brightness exponent is about half again as large for short durations as for long. The psychophysical power functions were used to generate equal-loudness and equal-brightness functions, which specify the combinations of intensity E and duration T that produce the same apparent magnitude. Below the critical duration ET equals k for equal brightness, and ET^a equa Is k for equal loudness. The value a is about 0.7 for threshold and about 1.25 for supraliminal loudness.     

Reaction time to a second stimulus as a function of intensity of the first stimulus

Reaction time (RT) to the second of two stimuli presented in rapid succession was examined as a function of the intensity of the first stimulus (S₁). It was found that the delay in RT₂ was greater following a dim first stimulus than following a bright first stimulus. The magnitude of this increase corresponded to the difference in RTs to the two intensity levels of S₁. These results support the prediction of a single channel model of response selection. Examination of mean first RTs revealed a general elevation in latency of RT. However, since this increase was not influenced by the inter-stimulus interval (ISI) or by the intensity of the second stimulus (S₂), and since the same increase was found on “catch trials“ where no S₂ was presented, this increase is considered to be a function of change in set in the double response situation.