In this experiment, the two sets of data obtained from the same subjects were analyzed. First, the JNDs from the four subjects was pooled together and a repeated measures ANOVA analysis was performed. Then, Weber’s fractoin (JND/line length) was applied to the original data to compute the weber fraction and the same analysis test were performed. For this study, we were specifically interested on the data yielded from the Test of Within-Subjects Contrast and Effects and an ANOVA performed from our regression analysis. In addition, both sets of data were plotted to investigate whether the data would be consistent with previous studies.
The Test of Within-Subjects Contrast and Test of Within-Subjects Effects for just the JNDs was not significant …show more content…
Weber’s law states the JND is a “constant fraction of the size of the stimulus” (Goldstein, 1980). Thus, as the size of the stimulus increases, the size of the JND should also increase. In this study, the data showed that JNDs increased as the length of the lines also increased between lines size one and size two. The same phenomenon was perceived between lines size three and size four. However, the JND decreased between lines size two and size three although the size of the stimulus between those two lines increased (figure one). When Weber’s law was applied to the original data set, the relationship between line length and Weber’s fraction was almost completely linear and had a slope of zero. At line size two, however, there is a discrepancy (figure two). The result from line size two contradicts Weber’s law since the product of creating that fraction should produce a constant, k, which if plotted should create almost a horizontal …show more content…
Also, the Weber fraction created with this study’s data showed almost a flat line across the axis. Thus, increasing the possibility the results from this study are due to random error and the Weber Law would still hold. However, there is a lot of debate within the research community regarding the validity of Weber’s Law (Masin, 2009). For example, there is some contradictory evidence regarding the Weber’s function before this study that could potentially explain our results. In one study Holway and Pratt (1936), discovered that not all the Weber’s functions in previous studies were a horizontal flat line. Some of the function created using Weber’s law had a hyperbolic or U shape. Nonetheless, multiple studies have come out in defense of Weber’s law (Masin, 2009). So, a recreation of this study with a much larger sample size to have any conclusive results on whether the results can be an argument against Weber’s
The Test of Within-Subjects Contrast and Test of Within-Subjects Effects for just the JNDs was not significant …show more content…
Weber’s law states the JND is a “constant fraction of the size of the stimulus” (Goldstein, 1980). Thus, as the size of the stimulus increases, the size of the JND should also increase. In this study, the data showed that JNDs increased as the length of the lines also increased between lines size one and size two. The same phenomenon was perceived between lines size three and size four. However, the JND decreased between lines size two and size three although the size of the stimulus between those two lines increased (figure one). When Weber’s law was applied to the original data set, the relationship between line length and Weber’s fraction was almost completely linear and had a slope of zero. At line size two, however, there is a discrepancy (figure two). The result from line size two contradicts Weber’s law since the product of creating that fraction should produce a constant, k, which if plotted should create almost a horizontal …show more content…
Also, the Weber fraction created with this study’s data showed almost a flat line across the axis. Thus, increasing the possibility the results from this study are due to random error and the Weber Law would still hold. However, there is a lot of debate within the research community regarding the validity of Weber’s Law (Masin, 2009). For example, there is some contradictory evidence regarding the Weber’s function before this study that could potentially explain our results. In one study Holway and Pratt (1936), discovered that not all the Weber’s functions in previous studies were a horizontal flat line. Some of the function created using Weber’s law had a hyperbolic or U shape. Nonetheless, multiple studies have come out in defense of Weber’s law (Masin, 2009). So, a recreation of this study with a much larger sample size to have any conclusive results on whether the results can be an argument against Weber’s