Individual differences in magnitude estimates of inferred, remembered, and perceived geographical distance

, &
Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society 25 (4):240-243 (1987)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

This article has no associated abstract. (fix it)

Categories

Keywords

Reprint years

DOI

10.3758/bf03330343

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 92,674

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

My notes

Similar books and articles

Subject differences in exponents of psychophysical power functions for inferred, remembered, and perceived area.José Aparecido Da Silva, Suzi Lippi Marques & Erasmo Miessa Ruiz - 1987 - Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society 25 (3):191-194.
Magnitude estimates of perceived and remembered length and area.Stephen M. Kerst & James H. Howard - 1984 - Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society 22 (6):517-520.
Subjective probabilities inferred from estimates and bets.Lee R. Beach & Lawrence D. Phillips - 1967 - Journal of Experimental Psychology 75 (3):354.
Time estimates as affected by motivational level, goal distance, and rate of progress.Robert D. Meade - 1959 - Journal of Experimental Psychology 58 (4):275.
Magnitude estimates of the oculogyral illusion during and following angular acceleration.Richard D. Parsons - 1970 - Journal of Experimental Psychology 84 (2):230.
The effects of instructions on scales for perceived egocentric distance in a large open field.José Aparecido Da Silva & Raquel Alves Dos Santos - 1984 - Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society 22 (3):189-192.
Stability of individual psychophysical functions for perceived distance.Ja Dasilva & Ss Fukusima - 1986 - Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society 24 (5):342-342.
The perceived slant of visual surfaces—optical and geographical.James J. Gibson & Janet Cornsweet - 1952 - Journal of Experimental Psychology 44 (1):11.
Incorporating semantics and individual differences in models of working memory.Janice M. Keenan, Jukka Hyönä & Johanna K. Kaakinen - 2003 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 26 (6):742-742.
Who Gets More of the Pie? Predictors of Perceived Gender Inequity at Work.Hang-Yue Ngo, Sharon Foley, Angela Wong & Raymond Loi - 2003 - Journal of Business Ethics 45 (3):227 - 241.
Berkeley, helmholtz, the moon illusion, and two visual systems.Helen E. Ross - 2001 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 25 (1):116-117.
The role of moral intensity in moral judgments: An empirical investigation. [REVIEW]Sara A. Morris & Robert A. McDonald - 1995 - Journal of Business Ethics 14 (9):715 - 726.

Analytics

Added to PP
2014-01-22

Downloads
22 (#725,460)

6 months
7 (#478,520)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

The subject effect in judgments of subjective magnitude.F. Nowell Jones & Maxine J. Marcus - 1961 - Journal of Experimental Psychology 61 (1):40.

Add more references