There is a clear and definite limit to the accuracy with which we
can identify absolutely the magnitude of a unidimensional stimulus
variable. I would propose to call this limit the span of absolute
judgment, and I maintain that for unidimensional judgments this
span is usually somewhere in the neighborhood of seven. We are not
completely at the mercy of this limited span, however, because we
have a variety of techniques for getting around it and increasing
the accuracy of our judgments. The three most important of these
devices are (a) to make relative rather than absolute judgments;
or, if that is not possible, (b) to increase the number of dimensions
along which the stimuli can differ; or (c) to arrange the task in
such a way that we make a sequence of several absolute judgments
in a row.
... And finally, what about the magical number seven? What about the
seven wonders of the world, the seven seas, the seven deadly sins,
the seven daughters of Atlas in the Pleiades, the seven ages of
man, the seven levels of hell, the seven primary colors, the seven
notes of the musical scale, and the seven days of the week? What
about the seven-point rating scale, the seven categories for absolute
judgment, the seven objects in the span of attention, and the seven
digits in the span of immediate memory? For the present I propose
to withhold judgment. Perhaps there is something deep and profound
behind all these sevens, something just calling out for us to
discover it. But I suspect that it is only a pernicious, Pythagorean
coincidence.
-- George A. Miller "The Magical Number Seven, Plus or
Minus Two: Some Limits on Our Capacity for Processing Information"
The Psychological Review, 1956, vol. 63, pp. 81-97.
http://www.well.com/user/smalin/miller.html