How solid is the framework? Paper: Perceptual ratings of opposite spatial properties...

In researching conceptual spaces and h2cm I came across the following paper:

Bianchi, I. , Savardi, U., Burro, R. (2011). Perceptual ratings of opposite spatial properties: Do they lie on the same dimension? Acta Psychologica, 138, 3, 405-418.

As constructed h2cm makes several assumptions with its axial structure. Is the placement of humanistic – mechanistic and individual – group on continua truly representative of the opposites of continua?

It seems that to address this question we must investigate cognitive linguistics. Bianchi et al., raise the following for consideration:

The idea that two contrary properties lie on the same continuum has formed the basis of various methodologies used in experimental research in the field of Psychology since the late sixties (e.g. the differential semantic method, Likert scales, etc.); however, an increasing number of methodologists are facing problems connected to the assumption of unidimensionality in opposite scales ... (p.405).

I wonder to what extent the original purposes of h2cm can support the existing continua? Nursing and the scope of nursing should also be able to substantiate the model. Nursing is person-centred. 

The idea that opposites presuppose an underlying continuum has been a default assumption in linguistics and cognitive semantics for more than two decades even though it has been noted that in every-day language people describe their perceptions in terms of opposites (“you are driving fast”, “the walk is long”, “the room is small”, “it's hot today”) instead of using unidimensional scales (respectively, velocity, size and temperature) (p.406).

Related post:
http://hodges-model.blogspot.co.uk/2009/08/combining-h2cm-informing-science-and.html