In 2 experiments, a total of 48 undergraduate Ss judged a stimulus person on 3 dimensions: Generosity, Gift Size, and Income. Judgments on each dimension were based on information about the remaining 2 dimensions presented in a 4 * 4 design. The information about Generosity and Income combined multiplicatively to yield the judged Gift Size, as was hypothesized. Judgments of Generosity and Income, however, did not exhibit the proposed multiplying form. Instead, these judgments followed a predominately additive integration rule. This pattern of results agrees with a collateral report by N. H. Anderson and C. A. Butzin (1974). The 2 studies indicate (a) a simple multiplying rule is easier for Ss than a comparative or ratio rule and (b) even when the integrative task is complex, judgment follows some simple algebraic model. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2006 APA, all rights reserved)