Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41578073›Full record

ArticleBehavior research methods2026

The point of subjective equality as a tool for accurate and robust analysis in categorization tasks.

Ariel Levy, Tali Kleiman, Yuval Hart

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Behavior research methods, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Ariel LevyDepartment of Psychology, Harvard University, William James Hall, 33 Kirkland Street, Cambridge, MA, 02138, USA. ariellevy@g.harvard.edu.
Tali Kleiman *Department of Psychology, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Jerusalem, Israel.
Yuval Hart *Department of Psychology, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Jerusalem, Israel.

Funding

Israel Science Foundation Grant 530/22 awarded to Tali Kleiman
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Categorization studies, in which stimuli vary along a category continuum, are becoming increasingly popular in psychological science. These studies demonstrate the effect of category ambiguity on various behavioral and neural measures. In such studies, researchers manipulate objective category levels by varying the physical properties of the stimuli, and then use these levels as predictors of behavior-assuming they map directly onto participants' perceived locations along the category continuum. This approach might not be optimal, considering the variability in participants' category boundary locations (their point of subjective equality, or PSE). In this tutorial, we propose addressing this issue by estimating participants' individual points of subjective equality, adjusting category levels relative to these points, and conducting statistical analyses on the subjective category levels. Implementing this method significantly improves the statistical power of the analysis in both experimental and simulated data. Adjusting stimulus levels by the points of subjective equality is highly suited for social categorization studies, in which points of subjective equality vary significantly. On a broader scale, it can be applied to a variety of categorization, discrimination, and decision-making studies.

Indexed as

Concept FormationHumansCategorizationPerson-perceptionPoint of subjective equalityPsychophysics

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.