A recent paper by Rudin (2) reporting his application of psycho physical methods to person perception appears to be open to objection on a number of grounds. Rudin gives impression that his is first attempt to apply bisection method to person perception; extensive work of Gardner and Thompson (1) using bisection has been ignored. It is true that rating method of Gardner and Thompson differed somewhat from procedure used by Rudin; for example, Rudin had Ss select best liked, liked, half liked, and so on, while Gardner and Thompson required Ss to select best liked, liked, etc., with regard to satisfaction of specified needs such as affiliation, succorance. Also Rudin and Gardner and Thompson have somewhat different objectives. However, it is opinion of this writer that those interested in application of psychophysical techniques to perception of persons can not disregard research of Gardner and Thompson. Granting that Rudin's study was an exploratory one, it was disappointing to find that bisection and equal appearing intervals were not applied to same groups because practical considerations prohibited this. We feel that an additional group using both methods was mandatory. This writer would agree with Rudin that such data do not justify application of elegant or elaborate statistics. Rudin describes an approximately linear relationship between liking and badness (2, Fig. 1, p. 101) as an exponentially increasing monotonic function, thereby violating his own canons against inappropriate use of elaborate mathematical description. This fault is repeated when he discusses his Fig. 2 (p. 102). To this writer it seems that equal appearing interval method does not show any relationship between liking and feebleness9'-certainly not a curvilinear one as Rudin seems to imply. The strongest objection should be raised when Rudin interprets his data as suggesting that the concept of least liked person is a relatively stable social concept, not differing too much from person to person in our society. This conclusion is contradicted in Rudin's own results. (See 2, Figs. 4, 6, and 8, p. 102-103.) Rudin's study does raise some problems in area of person perception; these problems are not