The study examined effects of instructional sets (objective, phenomenal, projective, and retinal) on the judged sizes of blocks placed at various distances in a pictorial array, Magnitude estimations of size were consistent with previous studies of size constancy in three-dimensional arrays. Chronometric analyses indicated that reaction time increased with distal size, but was not affected by perceived distance. The results suggested that size was scaled relative to a perceptual unit. Instructions affected the nature of the scale unit (proximal vs. distal), but not the scaling process itself. In an attempt to examine the mental processes that underlie the psychophysical scaling of size, Hartley (1977) measured the response times asso ciated with magnitude estimations of line lengths and found that reaction times increased linearly with the number of standard units contained in the com parison lines. He proposed that observers judged length by counting or laying off a mental image of the standard against the comparison. In the present study, this reaction time approach was extended to the scaling of sizes that vary in perceived distance. Specifically, a method of magnitude estimation was used to directly assess apparent size in a two dimensional pictorial array. The mental transfor mations that underlie size estimation and size con stancy were then investigated by examining the relationship between response time and perceived size. The extent to which perceived size remains constant with variations in distance is profoundly dependent on the judgmental attitude adopted by the observer. For example, if an observer is given phenomenal or first look instructions, variation in distance usually has no effect on judged size. However, if the observer is given objective or projective instruc tions, judged size will increase or decrease with dis tance, respectively (see Carlson, 1977, for review). Any attempt to model the mental processes that underlie size scaling and size constancy must ulti mately incorporate these effects of judgmental set. Hence, the present experiment examined the response