Abstract
This critique questions the experimental design, controls and data analysis of a recent pupillary response experiment by Hess and Polt (1966).
References
1.
Bergum
B.
Lehr
D. J.
Prediction of stimulus approach: Core measures experiment II . Rochester, New York : Xerox Corp. , 1966 . (Res. Rep. R66–36).
2.
Hess
E. H.
Attitude and pupil size . Sci. Amer. , 1965 , 212 , 46 –54 .
3.
Hess
E. H.
Polt
J. M.
Pupil size as related to interest value of visual stimuli . Science , 1960 , 132 , 349 –350 .
4.
Hess
E. H.
Polt
J. M.
Changes in pupil size as a measure of taste difference . Percept. mot. Skills , 1966 , 23 , 451 –455 .
5.
Lehr
D. J.
Bergum
B.
Note on pupillary adaptation . Percept. mot. Skills , 1966 , 23 , 917 –918 .
6.
Stewart
R. W.
Jensen
D. D.
GSR, pupillary dilation, and response latency to words differing in entropy . Paper read at Midwest. Psychol. Assn, Chicago, May , 1966 .
7.
Woodmansee
J. J.
Methodological problems in pupillographic experiments . Paper read at Amer. Psychol. Assn, New York, Sept. , 1966 .