Fechner Day 2022 — 38th Annual meeting of the international society for psychophysics was successfully held in Lund August 23 – 26, 2022!
Robert Teghtsoonian (1932-2017) was born in Toronto, Canada, where his parents had emigrated from Armenia in the wake of the Armenian genocide and the First World War.1 Bob (as everyone called him) earned his bachelor’s degree and his master’s in psychology from the University of Toronto, his Ph. D. in the Department of Psychology at Harvard. There he met Martha (whom everyone calls Mimi); their marriage was the beginning of a life-long collaboration. At his death, he left his wife, his son Chris, and a niece and two nephews, Katherine, Brian, and David Teghtsoonian.
Bob tackled many research projects in psychology, and he often worked with collaborators. Among his first publications were a series of studies of activity in rats as a function of food deprivation and environmental stimulation, done with Byron Campbell2; they were followed by an investigation of activity in rats as a function of deprivation and incentive, with colleagues at the University of Pennsylvania.
At Harvard, his doctoral research was in verbal learning. He showed that mastering a list in a recognition task was dependent on the number of items from which the correct item must be selected. Trials to mastery increased with larger numbers of alternative items. However, the effect was entirely on retrieval, not on storage.3 He also provided an elegant demonstration of one-trial learning in individuals, showing that mastery of a single item occurred on a single trial.4
In 1970, he switched his attention to psychophysics. Always interested in practical applications of psychophysical techniques, he worked with Randy Frost to use magnitude scaling to assess fear of snakes in phobic subjects, as a function of distance from a boa constrictor displayed in a Plexiglas cage which was either uncovered or covered.5
With Birgitta Berglund and Ulf Berglund, Bob and Mimi undertook a study of magnitude of odor strength as a joint function of the intensity of the olfactory stimulus and the strength of sniff pressure, and showed that (contrary to previous assumptions based on physiological preparations) varying the flow rates produced by sniff pressure did not produce corresponding changes in odor strength. They proposed an odor- constancy model, in which sensed sniff pressure and sensed odor strength combined to produce invariance in odor strength.6
A series of studies on the effect of fatigue on perceived effort in a variety of activities was carried out in Gunnar Borg’s laboratory, with his advice and assistance. 7
With Georges Canévet, Bob and Mimi conducted a series of studies examining the phenomenon termed decruitment, a rapid decrease in loudness as an auditory signal continuously lessens in sound energy, as well as upcruitment, a rapid increase in loudness as an auditory signal continuously grows. In both cases, the change in loudness was greater than would be predicted from the magnitude scale for loudness. They extended the paradigm to visual area, and showed that decruitment occurred in that modality as well.8
Bob’s major work in psychophysics was elucidating the relationships among perceived magnitude of sensory signals, resolving power, and dynamic range. He first (1971) suggested, in On the Exponents in Stevens’s Law and the Constant in Ekman’s Law9, that, on all sensory continua, measures of discrimination, measures of subjective rate of growth in intensity, and the range of sensitivity were governed by the same set of relations. He hypothesized that this might depend on a central magnitude monitor. In the succeeding four decades, a series of studies examined various objections to the model and showed how biases could be controlled.10 The culmination of this work, published in 2012, was The Standard Model for Perceived Magnitude: A Framework for (Almost) Everything Known about It.11 This paper explores two ideas. One is that the dynamic ranges of sensory continua are measurable (or estimatable) and, importantly, less susceptible to the biases attendant on the measurement of exponents. The second is the assumption that every dynamic range is equal in subjective magnitude to every other dynamic range. From these two ideas, it follows that an exponent is predictable from the dynamic range, as is the just-noticeable ratio, and that all just-noticeable ratios are subjectively equal. As the title of this paper suggests, the model provides at least a useful heuristic to summarize the state of our knowledge, and at best the basis of a research program to test its predictions.
Bob was one of the founding members of ISP, along with Mimi, Birgitta Berglund, Ulf Berglund, and Bert Scharf. He envisioned the society as one where membership was governed by an interest in psychophysics, where a graduate student giving a first presentation received the same attention as an eminent psychologist, and an eminent psychologist was met with the same critical attitude as a graduate student. He also hoped that as much time at meetings would be devoted to informal discussions as to formal presentations.
He corresponded widely with colleagues and was a frequent reviewer of manuscripts for a number of psychological journals.
Outside of psychology, his interests were also broad. He loved music–from Mozart, to Willie Nelson and Linda Ronstadt, to Stan Getz and the Modern Jazz quartet, with a special liking for gypsy jazz. He was an ardent fan of the Boston Red Sox. He followed American politics closely and became an American citizen so that he could vote in elections. With his wife and son, he travelled widely in Europe, but especially in France. He enjoyed good food and good wine, especially with good company. Perhaps most of all, he liked a good argument.
He loved games, both as a spectator and a participant. He believed that science was a team sport, and that it was the best game of all.
1. Teghtsoonian, O. (Author) and Teghtsoonian, R. and Teghtsoonian, C. (Editors) From Van to Toronto: A Life in Two Worlds. iUniverse, 2003.
2. Teghtsoonian, R. and Campbell, B. A. Random activity of the rat during food deprivation as a function of environmental conditions. Journal of Comparative and Physiological Psychology, 1960, 53, 242-244.
3. Teghtsoonian, R. The influence of number of alternatives on learning and performance in a recognition task. Canadian Journal of Psychology, 1965, 19, 31-41.
4. Teghtsoonian, R. and Teghtsoonian, M. Discontinuities in recognition learning revealed by critical-trial analysis. The American Journal of Psychology, 1971, 84, 75- 84.
5. Teghtsoonian, R. and Frost, R. O. The effects of viewing distance on fear of snakes. Journal of Behavioral Therapy & Experimental Psychiatry,1982, 13, 181-190.
6. Teghtsoonian, R., Teghtsoonian, M., Berglund, B., and Berglund, U. Invariance of odor strength with sniff vigor: An olfactory analog to size constancy. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 1978, 4, 144-152.
7. Teghtsoonian, R., Teghtsoonian, M., and Karlsson, J.-G. The limits of perceived magnitude: Comparison among individuals and among perceptual continua. Acta Psychologica, 1981, 49, 83-94.
8. Teghtsoonian, R., Teghtsoonian, M., and Canévet, G. The perception of waning signals: Decruitment in loudness and perceived size. Perception & Psychophysics, 2000, 62, 637-646.
9. Teghtsoonian, R. On the exponents in Steven’s law and the constant in Ekman’s law. Psychological Review, 1971, 78, 71-80.
10. Teghtsoonian, M., and Teghtsoonian, R. Putting context effects into context. In Berglund, B. and Borg, E. (Eds.), Fechner Day 2003, 309-314. Larnaca, Cyprus: International Society for Psychophysics.
11. Teghtsoonian, R. The standard model for perceived magnitude: A framework for (almost) everything known about it. American Journal of Psychology, 125, 165- 174.
Imagine Gene Galanter in military uniform atop a hill. He is looking at the vast expanse of human behavior unfolding below him. The behaviors range from gallantry, Eugene himself received the French Legion d’Honeur, to self preservation. Perhaps his WWII experiences shaped the keen perception of human behavior he used to stimulate and drive forward a new view, a new force, in Psychology.
The force was Gene’s positive approach to creating and then extending a more theoretical psychology. The behaviorists, such as Skinner and other S-R theorists, believed that only known behaviors were needed in order to predict future behaviors. But, following WWII many new psychologists saw the need for a deeper understanding of the cause of behavior. In this view, learning was fundamental. But, then, given learning, how does behavior occur? The remarkable book by Galanter, Miller, and Pribram, (1960), Plans and the structure of behavior, suggested a means by which behaviors developed. The book marks a fundamental turning point in the development of psychological theory – a step beyond the Gestalt psychologists and their predecessors.
Mental processes became important. The process describing the path from stimulus to response required advanced mathematical theories, based on axiomatic foundations, probability models and stochastic processes to create a better understanding of the actions of mind.
Graduate training at Stanford’s Institute for Mathematical Studies in the Social Sciences required study of three volumes edited by Luce, Bush & Galanter, the Handbook of mathematical psychology. In addition, Galanter, Luce, and Bush’s (1964–1965) Readings in mathematical psychology (3 volumes) introduced many students to the most fundamental ideas and new developments. I was especially intrigued by Luce and Galanter’s approach to choice, and especially appreciative of the great chapters contributed to and edited by Galanter, Luce and Bush.
Many, many years later I met Gene during meetings of the International Society for Psychophysics. His presentations suggested how psychophysical theory can be applied to the various educational interests he maintained since the publication of his first book, Automatic teaching: the state of the art (1959). He knew the drill and discovered a kindred group of scientists who appreciated the formal theory and developments he fostered. He was a lively speaker, always up front and at the top. I think of how his works deepened my own education at Stanford and how his intellect, foresight and rigor advantaged us all.
Thank you Gene, for great accomplishments.
The International Society for Psychophysics held its annual meeting on October 19-23, 2021 online.
Further information, please visit the Fechner Day 2021 website: http://fechnerday.com/fd2021/
Fechner Day 2021 Organizing Committee
Appeal for views on the pros and cons of Open Science. Completion of a brief survey, 5 – 10 minutes, would be greatly appreciated. Link to survey
The survey covers responsibility for data, code and Ms. sharing, quality assurance practices and training. It seeks the views of all stakeholders, including: researchers, publishers, private and public sponsors and the general public. It is intended to provide evidence to identify and promote good practice.
ISP views particulalry important
Hope to report at Fechner2020
The online Fechner Day 2020 was held between 20th Oct. and 22nd Oct, 2020 via Zoom. More information can be found on the FD2020 website: http://fechnerday.com/fd2020/sample-page/
2019 30th October –2nd November 2019
The 35th annual meeting of the International Society for Psychophysics took place in Antalya, Turkey. The meeting was held at the Faculty of Letters, Akdeniz (the Mediterranean) University, Antalya, Turkey between November 2nd and 6th, and was organised in collaboration with Dr. Evrim Gülbetekin and staff of the Department of Psychology at Akdeniz Üniversitesi.
Mark A. Elliott (National University of Ireland Galway ) and
Evrim Gülbetekin (Akdeniz Üniversitesi) (joint meeting chairs)
Sophia Arndt (National University of Ireland Galway: website management)
Ece Varlık Özsoy (Akdeniz Üniversitesi: registration and accommodation Regfd19@gmail.com)
Naomi du Bois (Ulster University and National University of Ireland Galway: editorial assistance Submissionfd19@gmail.com)
Seda Bayraktar (Akdeniz Üniversitesi: Turkish registrants Localregfd19@gmail.com)
Aydin Civilidag (Akdeniz Üniversitesi: Middle East registrants Localregfd19@gmail.com)
Mahperi Hekimoglu (Akdeniz Üniversitesi)
Başar Demir (Akdeniz Üniversitesi)
Ayca Ozen (Akdeniz Üniversitesi)
General Information, please email us here: Infofd19@gmail.com
Sophia Arndt, a doctoral candidate at Galway University, created a Fechner Day group on LinkedIn. She would like to invite those interested in psychophysics to join. The group address is:
Robert (Bob) Teghtsoonian was not only a founding member of the International Society for Psychophysics. From the very beginning, his continuous and lively engagement in the progress of the Society was outstanding: No one else had a stronger formative influen
ce on the ISP. It was one of his major concerns to encourage young scientists and to facilitate their integration into the scientific community. Bob never put himself at the center of things. And as everybody experienced his honest interest in people and their ideas, people around him felt secure and indeed were. Bob had the uncanny ability to create an atmosphere for open and unprejudiced exchange of ideas. Whatever the occasion, he always found the right words, the right wine, and the right humor along with his inimitable welcoming smile. We experienced much of this atmosphere at the Fechner Days. I also believe it was largely due to his efforts that the Fechner Days did not degenerate into vanity but remained one of the very few academic meetings which facilitated a personal exchange of thoughts from an equal stance in an accepting atmosphere. We will miss his constant attentiveness and support, his refreshing contributions and scientific impulses.
Text: Fritz Müller
To sign a Guest Book or express condolences you may go to: http://www.legacy.com/obituaries/gazettenet/obituary.aspx?pid=186047240