UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

The relation of primary representational systems and visualization training to spatial relations aptitude 1981

You don't seem to have a PDF reader installed, try download the pdf

Item Metadata

Download

Media
UBC_1981_A8 F67.pdf
UBC_1981_A8 F67.pdf [ 4.26MB ]
Metadata
JSON: 1.0054320.json
JSON-LD: 1.0054320+ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 1.0054320.xml
RDF/JSON: 1.0054320+rdf.json
Turtle: 1.0054320+rdf-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 1.0054320+rdf-ntriples.txt
Citation
1.0054320.ris

Full Text

THE RELATION ()F PRIMARY REPRESENTATIONAL SYSTEMS AND VISUALIZATION TRAINING TO SPATIAL RELATIONS APTITUDE by GLORIA MARY FORWOOD B.Ed., The U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h C olumbia, 1969 M.Ed., The U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h C olumbia, 1977 A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARTS i n THE FACULTY OF GRADUATE STUDIES (Department o f C o u n s e l l i n g P s y c h o l o g y ) We a c c e p t t h i s t h e s i s as c o n f o r m i n g t o the r e q u i r e d s t a n d a r d THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA F e b r u a r y , I 98 I (c) G l o r i a Mary Forwood, .1981 In p r e s e n t i n g t h i s t h e s i s i n p a r t i a l f u l f i l m e n t of the r e q u i r e m e n t s f o r an advanced degree a t the U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h C olumbia, I agree t h a t the L i b r a r y s h a l l make i t fr.eely a v a i l a b l e f o r r e f e r e n c e and s t u d y . I f u r t h e r agree t h a t p e r m i s s i o n f o r e x t e n s i v e c o p y i n g o f t h i s t h e s i s f o r s c h o l a r l y purposes may be g r a n t e d by the Head of my Department o r by h i s r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s . I t i s u n d e r s t o o d t h a t c o p y i n g o r p u b l i c a t i o n o f t h i s t h e s i s f o r f i n a n c i a l g a i n s h a l l not be a l l o w e d w i t h o u t my w r i t t e n p e r m i s s i o n . Department o f C o u n s e l l i n g P s y c h o l o g y The U n i v e r s i t y o f B r i t i s h Columbia 2075 Wesbrook P l a c e Vancouver, Canada V6T IW5 March, 198 1 i i Abs^r_ac_t I t has long been r e a l i z e d that people d i f f e r i n t h e i r a b i l i t y to use t h e i r v a r i o u s senses i n l e a r n i n g , and many re s e a r c h s t u d i e s have attempted to t r a i n people to use t h e i r weaker m o d a l i t i e s more e f f e c t i v e l y . I t i s suggested i n a r e c e n t theory, N e u r o l i n g u i s t i c Programming, t h a t the way people r e c e i v e and understand i n f o r m a t i o n i s i n f l u e n c e d not only by t h e i r e x t e r n a l environment but a l s o by t h e i r i n t e r n a l response to i t . Thus they use sensory input channels, which b r i n g i n f o r m a t i o n to t h e i r a t t e n t i o n , and i n t e r n a l r e p r e s e n t a t i o n a l systems, which respond to the i n f o r m a t i o n and give i t meaning. One a p t i t u d e which may be a f f e c t e d by a person's primary r e p r e s e n t a t i o n a l system i s v i s u a l i z a t i o n , or the a b i l i t y to m e n t a l l y manipulate o b j e c t s . This a p t i t u d e i s measured by s p a t i a l r e l a t i o n s t e s t s . It i s p o s s i b l e that a person may see an image by means of h i s or her v i s u a l i nput system, but not have a s t r o n g enough v i s u a l r e p r e s e n t a t i o n a l system to hold that image and manipulate i t men t a l l y . The purpose of t h i s study was, f i r s t , to i n v e s t i g a t e the r e l a t i o n s h i p betw.een the s t r e n g t h of the v i s u a l r e p r e s e n t a t i o n a l system and performance on a s p a t i a l r e l a t i o n s t e s t , and, second, to determine whether v i s u a l i z a t i o n t r a i n i n g would improve performance on the s p a t i a l r e l a t i o n s t e s t . The s u b j e c t s i n the study were 67 male and 71 female grade 10 students i n a l a r g e , urban, m u l t i - e t h n i c high i i i school. A l l wrote one form of the Space Relations subtest of the Dif f e r e n t i a l Aptitude Tests as well as two questionnaires designed to i d e n t i f y primary representational systems. Of those students who could be most c l e a r l y c l a s s i f i e d as visuals, 20 were randomly divided into two groups and the groups randomly assigned to the experimental or the control condition. The same procedure was followed to divide the non-visuals. One week l a t e r , the experimental group underwent v i s u a l i z a t i o n t r a i n i n g while the control group took part in an unrelated a c t i v i t y . After another week, a l l the students wrote an alternate form of the space relations test. An analysis of variance was run using the pretest and posttest scores and the visual or non-visual c l a s s i f i c a t i o n of the students. There was no s i g n i f i c a n t difference between the arithmetic means of the v i s u a l and non-visual groups on either the pretest or the posttest and no s i g n i f i c a n t difference between the posttest arithmetic mean of the group who received v i s u a l i z a t i o n t r a i n i n g and that of the control group. No s i g n i f i c a n t interactions were found between c l a s s i f i c a t i o n as visual or non-visual and membership i n the control or experimental group. Contrary to expectations, the primary representational system did not appear to be related to performance on the sp a t i a l r e lations test, and the v i s u a l i z a t i o n t r a i n i n g did not appear to have improved the students' performance on the test. The unexpected results may have occurred because of i v i n a c c u r a t e c l a s s i f i c a t i o n of the s t u d e n t s 7 r e p r e s e n t a t i o n a l systems, i n a d e q u a t e v i s u a l i z a t i o n t r a i n i n g , o r the i n a p p r o p r i a t e use of group r a t h e r than i n d i v i d u a l methods to c l a s s i f y and t r a i n the s t u d e n t s . The r e s u l t s may a l s o have been i n f l u e n c e d by o t h e r f a c t o r s s u c h as the age of the s u b j e c t s , t h e i r i n e x p e r i e n c e w i t h t e s t s , t h e i r i n t e l l i g e n c e , or the r e l a t i v e s t r e n g t h of t h e i r r e p r e s e n t a t i o n a l systems. F u r t h e r r e s e a r c h w i l l be n.eeded to c l a r i f y the meaning of the r e s u l t s of t h i s s t u d y . T h e s i s S u p e r v i s o r s Dr. fi. Tolsma V TABLE OF CONTENTS Chapter I - Introduction 1 Problem • 1 Limitations and Assumptions 5 Importance of the Study / Chapter 2 - Literature Review 12 Neurolinguistic Programming 12 Learning Modalities 14 Spatial A b i l i t i e s 18 Chapter 3 - Method 29 P i l o t Study 29 Experimental Study 31 Subjects 31 Experimental Design.... 32 Treatment 32 Procedure 34 Instrumentation 35 Hypotheses 40 Chapter 4 - Results.- 42 Hypothesis 1 42 Hypothesis 2 43 Hypothesis 3 44 Hypothesis 4 44 Post Hoc Analyses 45 Chapter 5 - Discussion 50 Summary.... 50 Analysis.. 5 1 Suggestions for Further Research 55 Bibliography 57 Appendix A - Script of the Vi s u a l i z a t i o n Training Sessions 63 Appendix B - Learning Style Self Inventory 7 1 Appendix C - Questionnaire 74 vi LIST OF TABLES Table I - DAT Pretest Scores by Visual/Nonvisual C l a s s i f i c a t i o n 42 Table .II - DAT Posttest Scores by Visual/Nonvisual C l a s s i f i c a t i o n by Training 43 Table III - DAT Scores and Questionnaire Responses.. 48 v i i Ackn^Mdgemexii I would l i k e to express my s i n c e r e a p p r e c i a t i o n to my t h e s i s s u p e r v i s o r , Dr. R. Tolsma, and to my committee members, Dr. H. R a t z l a f f and Dr. L. Greenberg, f o r t h e i r advice and help d u r i n g the completion of t h i s study. I would a l s o l i k e to thank my husband, Garry, f o r h i s encouragement and support and f o r h i s i n v a l u a b l e help i n the p r i n t i n g of t h i s t h e s i s . CHAPTER I lQtxQd.UC.ti o n The Problem The r e a l i z a t i o n t h a t people d i f f e r i n t h e i r a b i l i t y to use t h e i r v a r i o u s senses i n l e a r n i n g i s not a new one. Many re s e a r c h s t u d i e s have measured not o n l y people's pr e f e r e n c e s f o r v i s u a l , a u d i t o r y , k i n e s t h e t i c , or t a c t i l e modes of l e a r n i n g , but a l s o t h e i r successes at l e a r n i n g m a t e r i a l presented to them through these d i f f e r e n t senses. I n v e s t i g a t o r s have a l s o matched t e a c h i n g methods to s t u d e n t s ' p r e f e r r e d m o d a l i t i e s and attempted to teach students to use t h e i r weaker m o d a l i t i e s more e f f e c t i v e l y . The r e s u l t s of such r e s e a r c h have been somewhat i n c o n s i s t e n t . With t h e i r concept of N e u r o l i n g u i s t i c Programming, Bandler and Grinder (1975, 1976) have o u t l i n e d an even more comprehensive theory of the process by which people r e c e i v e and r e p r e s e n t i n f o r m a t i o n about t h e i r environment. They see two i n f l u e n c e s on t h i s i n f o r m a t i o n processings the e x t e r n a l s e t t i n g , brought to one's a t t e n t i o n by a sensory input channel, and an i n t e r n a l response to i t , g i v i n g i t meaning i n a r e p r e s e n t a t i o n a l system. The sensory input channels and the r e p r e s e n t a t i o n a l systems are v i s i o n , a u d i t i o n , k i n e s t h e s i s , g u s t a t i o n , and o l f a c t i o n , although the o r g a n i z a t i o n of behavior i s accomplished mainly through the v i s u a l , a u d i t o r y , and k i n e s t h e t i c r e p r e s e n t a t i o n a l systems. Information taken i n through one sensory input system may 2 well be s t o r e d i n another r e p r e s e n t a t i o n a l system. This o c c u r s , f o r example, when a person sees a f a c i a l e xpression ( v i s u a l input) but experiences a f e e l i n g ( k i n e s t h e t i c r e p r e s e n t a t i o n ) r a t h e r than a v i s u a l image, and makes h i s or her d e c i s i o n based on that f e e l i n g . As c h i l d r e n grow, they l e a r n to value the in f o r m a t i o n from a p a r t i c u l a r r e p r e s e n t a t i o n a l system as an e f f e c t i v e t o o l f o r d e a l i n g w i t h t h e i r environments. G r a d u a l l y , they may come to r e l y on one type of sensory i n f o r m a t i o n i n most s i t u a t i o n s , even when another would be more a p p r o p r i a t e . In a d d i t i o n , by u s i n g one sensory system more than the ot h e r s , they w i l l develop i t more completely and have more d i s t i n c t i o n s a v a i l a b l e i n that system with which to organize t h e i r e xperiences. Thus t h a t system becomes the "primary r e p r e s e n t a t i o n a l system" — the one which the person values and uses most. Another body of r e s e a r c h has d e a l t with s p a t i a l a b i l i t i e s , which i n v o l v e the extent to which a person can p e r c e i v e and compare pattern's ( p e r c e p t i o n ) , remain unconfused by the v a r y i n g p e r s p e c t i v e s from which a s p a t i a l p a t t e r n may be presented ( p e r s p e c t i v e - t a k i n g ) , and manipulate o b j e c t s i n the imagin a t i o n ( v i s u a l i z a t i o n ) . Attempts have been made to teach s p a t i a l a b i l i t i e s : experiments designed to help s u b j e c t s improve t h e i r p e r c e p t i o n and p e r s p e c t i v e - t a k i n g have been f a i r l y s u c c e s s f u l , but those concerned with v i s u a l i z a t i o n t r a i n i n g have had more f a i l u r e than s u c c e s s . 3 The e f f e c t i v e n e s s of i n s t r u c t i o n i n s p a t i a l v i s u a l i z a t i o n i s s t i l l c o n t r o v e r s i a l . P o s s i b l e reasons f o r the i n c o n s i s t e n t r e s u l t s are suggested i n the l i t e r a t u r e , which w i l l be reviewed f u l l y i n . the next chapter. The degree of s p e c i f i c i t y of the t r a i n i n g may be'important, and some s t u d i e s i n v o l v e only t r a i n i n g i n r e l a t e d areas, such as geometry, which draw on s p a t i a l a b i l i t i e s but do not a f f o r d d i r e c t p r a c t i c e i n v i s u a l i z a t i o n . Another p o s s i b i l i t y i s suggested by r e s e a r c h which i n d i c a t e s that v i s u a l i z a t i o n i s more complex and r e q u i r e s a higher degree of v i s u a l imagery than p e r s p e c t i v e - t a k i n g or p e r c e p t i o n . If t h i s i s t r u e , i n s t r u c t i o n which does not concentrate d i r e c t l y on t h i s f a c e t of s p a t i a l a b i l i t y may not be adequate. Furthermore, i f Bandler and Grinder are c o r r e c t i n t h e i r d i v i s i o n of sensory input channels from r e p r e s e n t a t i o n a l systems, v i s u a l p e r c e p t i o n c o u l d c o n c e i v a b l y occur through the v i s u a l input channel, yet not be r e t a i n e d i n a v i s u a l r e p r e s e n t a t i o n a l system long enough or c l e a r l y enough f o r the mental manipulation of images to occur. The purpose of t h i s study i s , f i r s t , to c l a s s i f y grade 10 students as having v i s u a l , a u d i t o r y , or k i n e s t h e t i c primary r e p r e s e n t a t i o n a l systems as i n d i c a t e d by t h e i r p r e f e r r e d input system, and then to_ compare each i n d i v i d u a l ' s i n d i c a t e d r e p r e s e n t a t i o n a l system to h i s or her approach to and success on a s p a t i a l r e l a t i o n s t e s t . Secondly, the study w i l l attempt to d i r e c t l y teach v i s u a l i z a t i o n s k i l l s to the students by t r a i n i n g which 4 r e q u i r e s them to m e n t a l l y see and m a n i p u l a t e o b j e c t s and which i n c o r p o r a t e s Bandler and G r i n d e r ' s approach of l i n k i n g a f a v o u r e d r e p r e s e n t a t i o n a l system w i t h a weaker one. The s p e c i f i c o b j e c t i v e s of the s t u d y are as f o l l o w s : 1. t o i d e n t i f y p e o p l e w i t h v i s u a l , a u d i t o r y , and k i n e s t h e t i c p r i m a r y r e p r e s e n t a t i o n a l systems, u s i n g a measure of p r e f e r r e d i n p u t systems, 2 . t o group those who c l e a r l y f a v o u r one r e p r e s e n t a t i o n a l system t o g e t h e r and to randomly a s s i g n the members o f each group t o an e x p e r i m e n t a l or a c o n t r o l c o n d i t i o n , 3 . t o compare the approach s u b j e c t s take i n s o l v i n g the problems on the DAT Space R e l a t i o n s T e s t wi'th t h e i r i d e n t i f i e d p r i m a r y r e p r e s e n t a t i o n a l systems, 4. t o compare the s c o r e s o b t a i n e d on the DAT Space R e l a t i o n s T e s t by v i s u a l s and n o n - v i s u a l s ( a u d i t o r i e s or k i n e s t h e t i c s ) , 5. t o t r a i n a l l e x p e r i m e n t a l s u b j e c t s i n v i s u a l i z a t i o n s k i l l s by h a v i n g them c r e a t e mental images and connect imagined sounds or f.eelings w i t h v i s u a l images, 6. to engage the c o n t r o l group i n a c a r e e r e x p l o r a t i o n a c t i v i t y which i s u n r e l a t e d t o v i s u a l i z a t i o n but which tak e s the same amount of time as the v i s u a l i z a t i o n t r a i n i n g , 7. t o compare each s u b j e c t ' s s c o r e on a p o s t t e s t , u s i n g an a l t e r n a t e form of the DAT Space R e l a t i o n s T e s t , w i t h h i s or her s c o r e on the p r e t e s t , 5 8. to determine the r e l a t i o n s h i p s , i f any, between membership i n the v i s u a l or non — v i s u a l group, p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n the experimental or c o n t r o l c o n d i t i o n , and improvement i n scores from the p r e t e s t to the pos ttes t. Lilll i t a i i Q J i s . and A^s_ump_iion,s C e r t a i n l i m i t a t i o n s have been imposed on t h i s study. F i r s t , the r e s u l t s are s p e c i f i c to grade ten students i n a la r g e urban school who have m u l t i - e t h n i c backgrounds. According to a 1980 survey of the school p o p u l a t i o n , approximately 38% come from E n g l i s h - s p e a k i n g homes, 28% from Chinese-speaking homes, and 15% from I t a l i a n — s p e a k i n g homes. The remaining students are from a wide v a r i e t y of other language backgrounds. The p a r t i c i p a n t s i n the study had a l s o chosen to take p a r t i n a career p l a n n i n g mini—course. In a d d i t i o n , one i n s t r u c t o r t r a i n e d a l l of the experimental groups while another teacher worked with a l l the c o n t r o l groups. Although both these teachers r e g u l a r l y work together team-teaching the c l a s s e s who took p a r t i n the experiment, the p o s s i b i l i t y of an experimenter e f f e c t does exis t . Furthermore, c e r t a i n assumptions have been made. In pl a n n i n g the study, i t was assumed t h a t the students could be v a l i d l y c l a s s i f i e d as having v i s u a l , a u d i t o r y , or k i n e s t h e t i c primary r e p r e s e n t a t i o n a l systems on the b a s i s of t h e i r p r e f e r r e d sensory input system, and that enough of the students would show a c l e a r tendency towards each of the 6 p r e f e r r e d i n p u t systems to make the r e s e a r c h p o s s i b l e . B a n d l e r and G r i n d e r i m p l y t h a t , a l t h o u g h i n f o r m a t i o n may be t a k e n i n through one i n p u t system and s t o r e d i n a d i f f e r e n t r e p r e s e n t a t i o n a l system, the p r e f e r r e d i n p u t system i s the same as the p r i m a r y r e p r e s e n t a t i o n a l system. T h i s same assumption has been made i n t h i s s t u d y . An attempt was made to show the r e l a t i o n s h i p between the measure o f p r e f e r r e d i n p u t system and the p r i m a r y r e p r e s e n t a t i o n a l system by comparing the r e s u l t i n g c l a s s i f i c a t i o n o f each s t u d e n t to the method he or she used to s o l v e the s p a t i a l r e l a t i o n s p roblems, to the degree of v i s u a l imagery he or she r e p o r t e d h a v i n g , and to h i s or her use o f s e n s e - r e l a t e d p r e d i c a t e s and r e p o r t s of p r e f e r r e d a c t i v i t i e s . I t was a l s o assumed t h a t , w i t h r e s p e c t to d i v i s i o n i n t o the d i f f e r e n t r e p r e s e n t a t i o n a l groups and to r e a c t i o n to v i s u a l i z a t i o n t r a i n i n g , t h e r e would be no d i f f e r e n c e between the s t u d e n t s from d i f f e r e n t e t h n i c backgrounds and between males and f e m a l e s . R e s e a r c h c o n c e r n i n g the s p a t i a l a b i l i t i e s of members of d i f f e r e n t c u l t u r e s i s summarized by Kagan and Kogan (1970). T h i s r e s e a r c h has g e n e r a l l y shown t h a t the c u l t u r a l v a l u e s o f a s o c i e t y a f f e c t i t s members' p e r c e p t u a l and p r o p r i o c e p t i v e s k i l l s , but t h i s would be r e f l e c t e d i n t h e i r p r i m a r y r e p r e s e n t a t i o n a l systems as w e l l as i n t h e i r performance on a s p a t i a l a b i l i t i e s t e s t . S e v e r a l s t u d i e s have found t h a t boys have ou t p e r f o r m e d g i r l s on s p a t i a l v i s u a l i z a t i o n measures ( S a l k i n d , 1976; Conner, Schackman, and S e r b i n , 1978; M i l l e r and M i l l e r , 1977), and 7 t h a t t h i s d i s p a r i t y has been reduced by t r a i n i n g (Conner, Schackman, and S e r b i n ; M i l l e r and M i l l e r ; E l i o t and J F r a l l e y , 1976). The norms i n the DAT Manual a l s o i n d i c a t e t h a t boys o b t a i n s l i g h t l y h i g h e r s c o r e s on the Space R e l a t i o n s s u b t e s t . However, o t h e r i n v e s t i g a t o r s have found no s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s between the sexes i n s p a t i a l a b i l i t i e s ( C i g a n k o , 1973; B r u n e r , 1978; Cohen, 1976). M i l l e r and M i l l e r (1977) p o i n t out t h a t many w r i t e r s b e l i e v e any d i f f e r e n c e s i n s p a t i a l a b i l i t y by sex to be due to c u l t u r a l e x p e c t a t i o n s and d i f f e r e n c e s i n c h i l d r e a r i n g , w h i l e these d i f f e r e n c e s have been found i n many c u l t u r e s ( E l i o t and F r a l l e y , 1976; M i t c h e l m o r e , 1976), they do not seem to e x i s t among Eskimos, Canadian I n d i a n s , o r A u s t r a l i a n A b o r i g i n e s , c u l t u r e s where p e r c e p t u a l s k i l l i s v a l u e d i n both sexes ( M i t c h e l m o r e , 1976). Thus any c u l t u r a l l y - produced d i f f e r e n c e s by sex s h o u l d a l s o be r e f l e c t e d i n the p r i m a r y r e p r e s e n t a t i o n a l system which has been adopted by each i n d i v i d u a l . IfflpJ2r_t.a.oce o f the. S_tud_y_ I f B a n d l e r and G r i n d e r are c o r r e c t i n t h e i r a s s e r t i o n t h a t many i n d i v i d u a l s have f a i l e d to develop one or more of t h e i r r e p r e s e n t a t i o n a l s y s t e m s , then those i n d i v i d u a l s have d e l e t e d a p a r t o f t h e i r e x p e r i e n c e . The a u t h o r s have d i s c o v e r e d c l i n i c a l l y t h a t s uch a d e l e t i o n makes i n t e r p e r s o n a l communication more d i f f i c u l t f o r a p e r s o n : i f i t i s shown to a f f e c t s p a t i a l r e l a t i o n s a b i l i t y , then i t can a l s o c u t him o f f from t r a i n i n g and c a r e e r o p p o r t u n i t i e s 8 which r e q u i r e an a b i l i t y to v i s u a l i z e . D r a f t i n g , D e s c r i p t i v e Geometry, Mechanics, A r t i s t i c Design, E n g i n e e r i n g , A r c h i t e c t u r e , Sewing, and other f i e l d s have a l l been mentioned i n connection w i t h v i s u a l i z a t i o n a b i l i t y . If the hypotheses of t h i s study are confirmed, i t w i l l i n d i c a t e , however t e n t a t i v e l y , another e f f e c t of the underdevelopment of one or more r e p r e s e n t a t i o n a l systems. T h i s must, however, be a t e n t a t i v e c o n c l u s i o n , s i n c e the theory of N e u r o l i n g u i s t i c Programming has not been f u l l y o p e r a t i o n a l i z e d i n t h i s r e s e a r c h . Bandler and Grinder have used the c l a s s i f i c a t i o n o f r e p r e s e n t a t i o n a l systems i n c l i n i c a l r a t h e r than experimental work, and they have not developed a method of o b j e c t i v e l y measuring the systems. This study might a l s o suggest new d i r e c t i o n s f o r e d u c a t i o n a l p r a c t i c e . Perhaps the use of a l l r e p r e s e n t a t i o n a l systems should be taught i n s c h o o l s . If such t r a i n i n g were e f f e c t i v e , students and s o c i e t y would reap the b e n e f i t s i n terms of improved communication s k i l l s and broader v o c a t i o n a l and a v o c a t i o n a l p o s s i b i l i t i e s . The r e s u l t s of the study might a l s o suggest the p o s s i b i l i t y of i d e n t i f y i n g the primary r e p r e s e n t a t i o n a l systems of students who have d i f f i c u l t i e s i n s c h o o l i n order to b e t t e r understand t h e i r d i f f i c u l t i e s and help them to develop new systems. Bandler and Grinder i d e n t i f y t h e i r c l i e n t s ' ' primary r e p r e s e n t a t i o n a l systems and teach them new ones i n i n d i v i d u a l c l i n i c a l s e s s i o n s ; by attempting to do t h i s with 9 a group, t h i s study examines the f e a s i b i l i t y of i n t r o d u c i n g such t r a i n i n g as a form of developmental e d u c a t i o n . In a d d i t i o n , t h i s experiment might help to c l a r i f y some of the c o n t r a d i c t i o n s found i n s the r e s e a r c h on the teaching of v i s u a l i z a t i o n a b i l i t i e s . Because the t r a i n i n g i s aimed d i r e c t l y at the r e p r e s e n t a t i o n a l systems r a t h e r than at per c e p t u a l or p e r s p e c t i v e t a k i n g s k i l l s , which need i n v o l v e only the sensory input channels, i t s success would suggest that t h i s i s an e f f e c t i v e way of t r a i n i n g f o r the manipulation of v i s u a l images. F i n a l l y , i f s p a t i a l r e l a t i o n s a b i l i t y i s shown to be r e l a t e d to primary r e p r e s e n t a t i o n a l systems, then t h i s would support o t h e r w r i t e r s who have p o i n t e d out the l i m i t a t i o n s of our common d e f i n i t i o n s of a p t i t u d e . It has been d e f i n e d as "a c o n d i t i o n or s e t of c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s regarded as symptomatic of an i n d i v i d u a l ' s a b i l i t y to a c q u i r e with t r a i n i n g some ( u s u a l l y s p e c i f i e d ) knowledge, s k i l l , or set of responses, such as the a b i l i t y to speak a language, to produce m u s i c . . . " ( P s y c h o l o g i c a l C o r p o r a t i o n , 1948). Carpenter, F i n l e y , et a l (1965) go one step f u r t h e r by d i v i d i n g a p t i t u d e i n t o n a t i v e c a p a c i t y and developed c a p a c i t y . A f t e r an experiment i n which sub j e c t s were t e s t e d f o r s p a t i a l r e l a t i o n s a p t i t u d e , i n s t r u c t e d i n s p a t i a l r e l a t i o n s by various methods, and r e t e s t e d , they found no c l e a r r e s u l t s and concluded that the reasons f o r success on S p a t i a l R e l a t i o n s measures had not yet been s u c c e s s f u l l y assessed. Because no formal e f f o r t i s made to develop 10 S p a t i a l R e l a t i o n s a b i l i t y i n most c a s e s , the d e v e l o p e d c a p a c i t y i n a group c o u l d v a r y w i d e l y , and those w i t h h i g h n a t i v e c a p a c i t y but low development s h o u l d g a i n more than those w i t h medium or h i g h development but o n l y low o r medium n a t i v e c a p a c i t y . Snow (1976, 1977) a l s o s u g g e s t s t h a t d i f f e r e n c e s i n a p t i t u d e s h o u l d be understood as i n d i v i d u a l d i f f e r e n c e s i n p s y c h o l o g i c a l p r o c e s s e s and t h a t a p t i t u d e measures s h o u l d not be seen as s i m p l y p r e d i c t o r s . A p t i t u d e s , he c l a i m s , are not permanent, and can be expected to d e v e l o p o r change w i t h e x p e r i e n c e . Many s t u d i e s have shown a p t i t u d e and t r e a t m e n t i n t e r a c t i o n s , i m p l y i n g t h a t n e i t h e r a p t i t u d e c o n s t r u c t s nor l e a r n i n g p r o c e s s e s can be f u l l y u n derstood w i t h o u t r e f e r e n c e t o each o t h e r . The hypotheses of t h i s s t u d y i m p l y t h a t a p t i t u d e i n v o l v e s not o n l y the a b i l i t y to a c q u i r e a s k i l l w i t h t r a i n i n g , but the way i n which an i n d i v i d u a l has l e a r n e d to r e p r e s e n t the w o r l d . Thus the " a p t i t u d e " i t s e l f has been l e a r n e d and can be f u r t h e r changed by t r a i n i n g . In the terms of C a r p e n t e r , F i n l e y , et a l , the a p t i t u d e a t any time i s the c u r r e n t s t a t e o f development of the n a t i v e c a p a c i t y . This d e f i n i t i o n of a p t i t u d e , as opposed t o a s t a t i c one, i m p l i e s a p r o f o u n d d i f f e r e n c e i n our view of a person's p o t e n t i a l as measured by an a p t i t u d e t e s t . The hypotheses which t h i s e x periment has been d e s i g n e d to t e s t may be s t a t e d as f o l l o w s , u s i n g the n u l l form: I. The a r i t h m e t i c mean on the p r e t e s t ( DAT Space R e l a t i o n s s u b t e s t . Form S) of s t u d e n t s whose pri m a r y 1 i r e p r e s e n t a t i o n a l system appeared to be v i s u a l would not be s i g n i f i c a n t l y d i f f e r e n t from that of students whose primary r e p r e s e n t a t i o n a l system appeared to be n o n - v i s u a l ( a u d i t o r y or k i n e s t h e t i c ) . S t a t i s t i c a l Hypothesis: H0i/K.,-U-u H , : M t 4 M.*. 2 . The a r i t h m e t i c mean on the p o s t t e s t ( DAT Space R e l a t i o n s s u b t e s t , Form T) of students whose primary r e p r e s e n t a t i o n a l system appeared to be v i s u a l would not be s i g n i f i c a n t l y d i f f e r e n t from that of students whose primary r e p r e s e n t a t i o n a l system appeared to be non-vis u a l . S t a t i s t i c a l Hypothesis: H D:/(, - ^ H ; : M i 3 . The a r i t h m e t i c mean on the p o s t t e s t of students who r e c e i v e d v i s u a l i z a t i o n t r a i n i n g would not be s i g n i f i c a n t l y d i f f e r e n t from that of students who d i d not r e c e i v e v i s u a l i z a t i o n t r a i n i n g . S t a t i s t i c a l H y pothesis: H0i/i,-Mz 4. There would be no s i g n i f i c a n t i n t e r a c t i o n between the i d e n t i f i e d primary r e p r e s e n t a t i o n a l system and p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n the experimental or the c o n t r o l group. S t a t i s t i c a l H y pothesis: Ha : M{ = Mv - * ^4 12 CHAPTER 2 L i t e r a t u r e Revi ew N^yxc^ijigui^iic Programming I n The S t r u c t u r e of Magic I (1975) and The S t r u c t u r e of Magic JJL (1976), B a n d l e r and G r i n d e r e x p l a i n how people take i n i n f o r m a t i o n by means of t h e i r s e n s o r y i n p u t systems and then o r g a n i z e t h a t i n f o r m a t i o n and g i v e i t a p e r s o n a l meaning by means o f the p r i m a r y r e p r e s e n t a t i o n a l systems which they have l e a r n e d to v a l u e the most. However, the au t h o r s go beyond an e x p l a n a t i o n of these p r o c e s s e s to an e f f o r t t o h e l p people become c o n s c i o u s o f a l l the p a r t s of t h e i r i n p u t and r e p r e s e n t a t i o n a l systems so t h a t , w i t h a g r e a t e r c h o i c e of r e s p o n s e s , they can d e a l more a p p r o p r i a t e l y w i t h t h e i r e x p e r i e n c e s and communicate b e t t e r w i t h p e o p l e who have d i f f e r e n t p r i m a r y r e p r e s e n t a t i o n a l systems. ' They t r a i n t h e i r c l i e n t s t o use new r e p r e s e n t a t i o n a l systems by l i n k i n g these to t h e i r e x i s t i n g p r i m a r y r e p r e s e n t a t i o n a l systems. F o r example, a woman who i s h i g h l y v i s u a l i s asked, "how do you f e e l as you see your husband not n o t i c i n g you?" I f she cannot r e s p o n d , she i s asked to make a mental image of her husband and d e s c r i b e what she s e e s . Then she i s to t r y , as she l o o k s a t the image, t o become aware of any body s e n s a t i o n s she i s e x p e r i e n c i n g . S i m i l a r l y , a woman who i s un d e r g o i n g e m o t i o n a l p a i n i s asked to s h i f t a l l her f e e l i n g i n t o a v i s u a l r e p r e s e n t a t i o n and t o d e s c r i b e i t as c l e a r l y as p o s s i b l e . B a n d l e r and G r i n d e r d e s c r i b e t h i s p r o c e s s i n 1 3 Pa.iier.ns, o f the Hy_p_Qotic. Iec.hDiau.es of M i l t o n H. E r i c k s o n . M.D. (19 75, p.190)* By u s i n g the c l i e n t ' s most h i g h l y v a l u e d r e p r e s e n t a t i o n a l system as a l e a d system, the c l i e n t can be h e l p e d to gain access to new s t a t e s of awareness. For example: i n one o f our t r a i n i n g s e s s i o n s , a middle-aged p s y c h o l o g i s t complained t h a t he was unable to make v i s u a l imagery, i n s p i t e of the f a c t t h a t he had h i s c l i e n t s use t h i s t e c h n i q u e . We had t h i s man p l a c e h i s body i n the p o s i t i o n o f p l a y i n g h i s p i a n o ( h i s f a v o r i t e hobby). He was then i n s t r u c t e d to move h i s f i n g e r s i n the p a t t e r n of a f a m i l i a r tune, w i t h h i s eyes c l o s e d , he was i n s t r u c t e d t o hear the tune i n t e r n a l l y as w e l l as to move h i s f i n g e r s . He was th e n asked to l o o k down a t the keyboard. He e x c l a i m e d , " I can s.ee the keys and my f i n g e r s on the keyboard!" He was t h e n i n s t r u c t e d t o look up at the r e s t of the l i v i n g room, and then a t the people i n the room. T h i s t e c h n i q u e of u s i n g h i g h l y v a l u e d r e p r e s e n t a t i o n a l systems to r e c o v e r and improve i m p o v e r i s h e d ones i s a common te c h n i q u e i n our work. The main p r i n c i p a l i s s i m p l y to f i n d a s i t u a t i o n i n which the i m p o v e r i s h e d system o v e r l a p s the deve l o p e d system.... The a u t h o r s suggest t h a t p e o p l e ' s p r i m a r y r e p r e s e n t a t i o n a l systems can be i d e n t i f i e d by s t u d y i n g the s e n s e - r e l a t e d words, o r " p r e d i c a t e s " , they use most o f t e n and t h e i r o c c u p a t i o n s , i n t e r e s t s , and t a l e n t s . In a d d i t i o n , i n E a t t e x o s pjf ihg. tiy^QO_tic_ XechQiaues. of M i l t a n UM. E r i c k s o n . MJICLV (1975, p . 7 6 ) , they mention a d i f f e r e n c e they have n o t i c e d between c l i e n t s w i t h v i s u a l and those w i t h n o n - v i s u a l p r i m a r y r e p r e s e n t a t i o n a l systems: Many t i m e s , i n the course o f t e a c h i n g a c l i e n t who has a most h i g h l y v a l u e d r e p r e s e n t a t i o n a l system o t h e r than v i s u a l , we have n o t i c e d the c l i e n t making a d i s t i n c t i o n betw.een " i m a g i n g a p i c t u r e " and " s e e i n g a p i c t u r e " . In the f i r s t c a s e , the c l i e n t , t y p i c a l l y , r e p o r t s vague, r e l a t i v e l y u n f o c u s e d , s c h e m a t i z e d and u n s t a b l e v i s u a l images, w h i l e i n the second c a s e , the images have the f o c u s e d , s t a b l e , f u l l , r i c h , v i v i d p r o p e r t i e s o f d i r e c t v i s u a l i n p u t . In every case to d a t e , the e x p e r i e n c e of " i m a g i n g a p i c t u r e " has a s s o c i a t e d w i t h i t a v e r b a l , i n t e r n a l d i a l o g u e , w h i l e the v i v i d v i s u a l i z a t i o n has no i n t e r n a l v e r b a l d i a l o g u e a s s o c i a t e d w i t h i t . 14 A p p a r e n t l y , the f i r s t case i s one i n which the c l i e n t i s c o n s t r u c t i n g a p i c t u r e u s i n g h i s language system as the l e a d system, w h i l e the second i s a d i r e c t a c c e s s i n g o f p i c t u r e s r e s i d i n g i n the non-dominant hemisphere. Thus, one way which we have d e v e l o p e d t o a s s i s t the c l i e n t i n coming t o have the a b i l i t y t o v i s u a l i z e v i v i d l y i s to t e a c h him to s h u t down h i s i n t e r n a l v e r b a l d i a l o g u e . LeaxQing M o j l a l l i i e s B a n d l e r and G r i n d e r ' s work was preceded by many s t u d i e s of l e a r n i n g m o d a l i t i e s . Morency (1967) r e p o r t e d on a l o n g i t u d i n a l s t u d y w hich, l i k e the r e s e a r c h she r e v i e w e d , s uggested t h a t c h i l d r e n d e v e l o p i n t h e i r p e r c e p t u a l a b i l i t i e s between grades one and t h r e e , but not e q u a l l y i n each m o d a l i t y . Marcus (1977) gave a q u e s t i o n n a i r e to s t u d e n t s about v a r i o u s f a c t o r s which were i m p o r t a n t to t h e i r l e a r n i n g and found d e f i n i t e p r e f e r e n c e s f o r a u d i t o r y , v i s u a l , k i n e s t h e t i c , o r t a c t i l e l e a r n i n g , as w e l l as f o r d i f f e r i n g degrees of s t r u c t u r e , q u i e t , and so on. Teachers g i v e n the same q u e s t i o n n a i r e a c c u r a t e l y p e r c e i v e d some of these f a c t o r s , but not o t h e r s , among thern v i s u a l , t a c t i l e , or k i n e s t h e t i c p r e f e r e n c e s . S i m i l a r l y , A u s t i n and Donovan (1978) r e p o r t e d a s t u d y by Dunn and P r i c e where some of the s t u d e n t s r e s p o n d i n g to a l e a r n i n g s t y l e i n v e n t o r y i n d i c a t e d a p r e f e r e n c e f o r l e a r n i n g by t a c t i l e o r k i n e s t h e t i c means, supplemented, but not r e p l a c e d , by v i s u a l i n p u t . In 1945, V i k t o r L o w e n f e l d d e v e l o p e d a s e r i e s o f t e s t s to p l a c e p e o p l e on a continuum between the " v i s u a l " and the " h a p t i c " modes of p e r c e p t i o n . V i s u a l s were d e f i n e d as o b j e c t i v e o b s e r v e r s who use t h e i r eyes as the main channel of i n f o r m a t i o n a c q u i s i t i o n and t r a n s f o r m t a c t i l e s e n s a t i o n s 15 to v i s u a l images. H a p t i c s , on the o t h e r hand, a c q u i r e most of t h e i r i n f o r m a t i o n through t a c t i l e or k i n e s t h e t i c means and f e e l no need t o t r a n s f o r m the s e n s a t i o n s i n t o v i s u a l images. They view the w o r l d s u b j e c t i v e l y and f i n d i t d i f f i c u l t to g e t an o v e r v i e w o f the scene because they become l o s t i n the d e t a i l s . L o w e n f e l d c l a s s i f i e d 47% of h i s s u b j e c t s as v i s u a l s , 28% as h a p t i c s , and 25% as i n the middle o f the continuum. However, Dorethy (1975) q u e s t i o n e d Lowenfeld's c o n c l u s i o n s , s i n c e l i t t l e i n f o r m a t i o n was g i v e n on t e s t c o n s t r u c t i o n t e c h n i q u e s or d e t a i l s o f p r o c e d u r e s , few c o n t r o l s f o r t h r e a t s t o v a l i d i t y were i n c l u d e d , and o n l y minimal s t a t i s t i c a l a n a l y s i s was done to account f o r chance f a c t o r s . The v a l i d i t y of Lowenfeld's r e s u l t s was a l s o q u e s t i o n e d by S c h l e n k e r , who r e p l i c a t e d the s t u d y w i t h grade n i n e , t e n , and e l e v e n s t u d e n t s and found t h a t some of the v i s u a l - h a p t i c t e s t s d i d not g i v e a c c u r a t e r e s u l t s . The s t u d e n t s d i d appear to be d i s t r i b u t e d on a continuum, but the p e r c e n t a g e s i n each c a t e g o r y were d i f f e r e n t from L o w e n f e l d ' s . Most of the r e s e a r c h c i t e d above suggested t h a t some attempt be made t o t e a c h s t u d e n t s i n t h e i r p r e f e r r e d l e a r n i n g m o d a l i t y . In a d d i t i o n , P f l e g e r and P u l v i n o (1977) d i r e c t l y l i n k e d the t h e o r y of N e u r o l i n g u i s t i c Programming, the r e s e a r c h on l e a r n i n g m o d a l i t i e s , and the i d e a s of J.E. H i l l ( 1 9 7 6), who s t a t e d t h a t i n d i v i d u a l s e s t a b l i s h one or a c o m b i n a t i o n o f i n p u t channels as b e i n g the most u s e f u l f o r l e a r n i n g , and t h a t they d e v e l o p ways of r e s p o n d i n g i n 16 keeping with these. B u i l d i n g on these ideas, the authors suggested examining student essays f o r words which would i n d i c a t e the p r e f e r r e d l e a r n i n g modality and then t e a c h i n g by the ap p r o p r i a t e means. Attempts have indeed been made to match teaching methods to l e a r n i n g m o d a l i t i e s , but the r e s u l t s have been i n c o n s i s t e n t . On the one hand, Donovan and A u s t i n (1978) found that k i n d e r g a r t e n p u p i l s i n congruent placement f o r t h e i r l e a r n i n g modality scored s i g n i f i c a n t l y higher on r e a d i n g measures, and both they and P a t r i d g e (1976) c i t e d other s t u d i e s which have had s i m i l a r r e s u l t s . L i l l y and K e l l e h e r (1973? c i t e d i n Newcomer and Goodman, 1975) found that r e t a r d e d c h i l d r e n performed s i g n i f i c a n t l y b e t t e r when taught i n t h e i r p r e f e r r e d mode, and Burcham et a l (1977) found that r e t a r d e d males aged nine to t h i r t e e n who were high i n a u d i t o r y d i s c r i m i n a t i o n l e a r n e d an a u d i t o r y p a i r e d a s s o c i a t e l e a r n i n g task b e t t e r , although there was no s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e between a u d i t o r y and v i s u a l l e a r n e r s on a v i s u a l task. Gaddies (1975) d e s c r i b e d a s u c c e s s f u l t a c t i l e approach to teaching a brain-damaged boy to write and s p e l l and Segal (1976) the s u c c e s s f u l use of t a c t i l e and k i n e s t h e t i c techniques i n teaching l e a r n i n g d i s a b l e d c h i l d r e n . Taschow (1970) and Caukins (1971) d i s c u s s e d the improvement students achieved i n s p e l l i n g when taught by a v i s u a l - a u d i t o r y - k i n e s t h e t i c - t a c t i l e technique, which meets the needs of students with any p r e f e r r e d modality. 1 7 On the other hand, many i n v e s t i g a t o r s have found no s i g n i f i c a n t advantage f o r students i n congruent placement. Janssen (1973) and S e r a p i g l i a (1974) obtained t h i s r e s u l t working with young c h i l d r e n with v i s u a l or a u d i t o r y p r e f e r e n c e s ; A u s t i n and Donovan (1978) mentioned s e v e r a l other r e s e a r c h e r s who found that v i s u a l or a u d i t o r y l e a r n e r s d i d no b e t t e r when the teaching method was matched to t h e i r m o d ality. One study c i t e d i n A u s t i n and Donovan's a r t i c l e i n c l u d e d k i n e s t h e t i c and combined modality preferences as w e l l , and s t i l l found matching to be no advantage. A f t e r an ext e n s i v e review of the l i t e r a t u r e , Newcomer and Goodman (1975) concluded t h a t a u d i t o r y l e a r n e r s seem to do b e t t e r than v i s u a l l e a r n e r s , r e g a r d l e s s of the mode of p r e s e n t a t i o n , and that a u d i t o r y methods are b e t t e r f o r a l l st u d e n t s . However, i n t h e i r own study, the v i s u a l l e a r n e r s tended to do b e t t e r , although students low i n a u d i t o r y a b i l i t i e s had the most d i f f i c u l t y . Robinson (1972) found only t hat students higher i n both a u d i t o r y and v i s u a l m o d a l i t i e s obtained higher r e a d i n g scores than those low i n both m o d a l i t i e s , whether they were taught by phonics ( a u d i t o r y approach) or whole words ( v i s u a l approach). Students h i g h i n one modality and low i n the other d i d no b e t t e r i n congruent placement. Why i s there t h i s i n c o n s i s t e n c y i n the research? Janssen, Waugh, Newcomer and Goodman, and A u s t i n and Donovan a l l suspected that the d i f f i c u l t y might l i e i n the method of c l a s s i f y i n g students by p r e f e r r e d l e a r n i n g modality. The 18 c o n s t r u c t v a l i d i t y of the p e r c e p t u a l t e s t s used was o f t e n q u e s t i o n a b l e . Newcomer and Goodman a l s o c r i t i c i z e d the assumption of equal d i f f e r e n c e s between scores when p l a c i n g students on a v i s u a l - a u d i t o r y continuum and some i n s t r u c t i o n a l techniques which emphasized one modality but, i n r e a l i t y , i n cluded others-. T h i s i n c o n s i s t e n c y does not i n v a l i d a t e the theory of p r e f e r r e d l e a r n i n g m o d a l i t i e s , but i t does i n d i c a t e a need f o r f u r t h e r r e s e a r c h to c l a r i f y the e f f e c t s of matching t e a c h i n g methods to modality p r e f e r e n c e . 2p.a£ial AJ2Jj,i_tie_s_ " S p a t i a l A b i l i t i e s " i s a r a t h e r broad term which French (1951; c i t e d i n E l i o t and F r a l l e y , 1976) d i v i d e d i n t o three f a c t o r s : P e r c e p t u a l — the a b i l i t y to p e r c e i v e p a t t e r n s a c c u r a t e l y and to compare them to each other? O r i e n t a t i o n — the a b i l i t y to remain unconfused by the v a r y i n g p e r s p e c t i v e s from which a s p a t i a l p a t t e r n may be presented? V i s u a l i z a t i o n — the a b i l i t y to use v i s u a l imagery and manipulate o b j e c t s i n the i m a g i n a t i o n . Zimmerman (1954) thought that each of these f a c t o r s comes i n t o p l a y s e q u e n t i a l l y , as a task becomes more d i f f i c u l t , but Smith and T a y l o r (1967) thought that the di-fference l i e s i n the type of o r g a n i z a t i o n r e q u i r e d , not i n the d i f f i c u l t y of the task. Other i n v e s t i g a t o r s have examined the p o s s i b i l i t y that the three f a c t o r s are i n t e r r e l a t e d . F r e d e r i c k s o n (1970), f o r example, found that s u b j e c t s d i - f f e r e d i n t h e i r p e r c e p t i o n of two and three dimensional shapes a c c o r d i n g to t h e i r " p e r c e p t u a l s t y l e " ! 19 those who were g r e a t l y i n f l u e n c e d by observer and stimulus o r i e n t a t i o n ( f i e l d dependent) showed g r e a t e r v a r i a t i o n i n t h e i r judgements than d i d those who were not so i n f l u e n c e d ( f i e l d independent), yet shape was judged with more c o n s i s t e n c y than r o t a t i o n a l o r i e n t a t i o n by both groups. Pre s t o n (1977) concluded that a P i a g e t i a n p e r s p e c t i v e s task was r e l a t e d to v i s u a l imagery a f t e r an experiment with s i x , nine, e l e v e n , and f i f t e e n year o l d c h i l d r e n , and Peterson (1975) hypothesized an o v e r l a p between p e r c e p t i o n and v i s u a l imagery a f t e r f i n d i n g that the p a t t e r n s of r e c a l l f o r matrices c o n s t r u c t e d i n the imaginations of h i s a d u l t s u b j e c t s approximated those f o r matrices a c t u a l l y seen by the s u b j e c t s , although r e c a l l was g r e a t e r f o r the seen m a t r i c e s . Peterson supposed that p e r c e p t i o n i s more c l o s e l y a s s o c i a t e d with the e x t e r n a l stimulus and v i s u a l imagery with the i n t e r n a l r e p r e s e n t a t i o n of s p a t i a l c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s , but t h a t the i n t e r r e l a t i o n s h i p i s there, nonetheless. S i m i l a r l y , Bruner (1978) found performance on the Embedded Fi gures T e s t , which measures p e r c e p t i o n , to be r e l a t e d to v i s u a l - s p a t i a l a b i l i t y . Both M i l l a r (1976) and Marrnor and Zaback (1976) compared the s p a t i a l v i s u a l i z a t i o n a b i l i t i e s of the e a r l y b l i n d , l a t e r b l i n d , and s i g h t e d . M i l l a r found that b l i n d and s i g h t e d c h i l d r e n d i d e q u a l l y w e l l on a h a p t i c p e r c e p t i o n task but that, on a mental r o t a t i o n task, the s i g h t e d d i d best, f o l l o w e d by the l a t e b l i n d , followed by the e a r l y b l i n d . The degree of r o t a t i o n of the o b j e c t s s i g n i f i c a n t l y 20 a f f e c t e d the scores of the b l i n d but not those of the s i g h t e d . Marraor and Zaback a l s o found that t h e i r b l i n d s u b j e c t s — a d u l t s t h i s time — took longer and made more e r r o r s when comparing two o b j e c t s at d i f f e r e n t r o t a t i o n s , presented t a c t u a l l y . The b l i n d were, however, able to organize s p a t i a l r e p r e s e n t a t i o n s without v i s u a l imagery, and an i n c r e a s e i n the angle of d i s c r e p a n c y between the two ob j e c t s d i d i n c r e a s e the d i f f i c u l t y of the task f o r the s i g h t e d s u b j e c t s as w e l l as f o r the b l i n d i n t h i s .experiment. Two s t u d i e s lend support to Zimmerman's idea that French's three f a c t o r s r e p r e s e n t a h i e r a r c h y of s p a t i a l a b i l i t i e s . Schroth (1967) t e s t e d the b e l i e f that manipulation of v i s u a l forms i n s p a t i a l r e l a t i o n s h i p s i s common to a l l a r t p r o d u c t i o n . He d i s c o v e r e d that c o l l e g e Fine A r t s majors, presumably t r a i n e d i n v i s u a l p e r c e p t i o n , and a r e p r e s e n t a t i v e sample of non-Fine Arts majors d i d not ob t a i n s i g n i f i c a n t l y d i f f e r e n t scores on the Space R e l a t i o n s s u b t e s t of the D i f f e r e n t j a l Aptitude T e s t s . Furthermore, there was no s i g n i f i c a n t c o r r e l a t i o n between the Art majors' scores on the DAT and on the Meier Ar_t Judgement T e s t . Since previous r e s e a r c h u s i n g the Mi nnes ota Paper Form Board Test, found a r e l a t i o n s h i p between s p a t i a l r e l a t i o n s a b i l i t y and a r t judgement, the author t e n t a t i v e l y concluded that the DAT may tap a more complex aspect of s p a t i a l a b i l i t y than does the MPFB. In an experiment by B a r r e t t (1953), twenty-three s p a t i a l t e s t s were gi v e n to a group of 21 undergraduate students and a f a c t o r a n a l y s i s was run to i d e n t i f y groupings of v a r i a b l e s . Two d i s t i n c t groupings were found — s p a t i a l m anipulation and reasoning — and a p o s s i b l e t h i r d — shape r e c o g n i t i o n •— was p a r t i a l l y d e f i n e d . Subjects who r a t e d mental imagery as p l a y i n g an important p a r t i n t h e i r s o l u t i o n of the problems d i d s i g n i f i c a n t l y b e t t e r on s p a t i a l manipulation t e s t s but had no advantage on those measuring s p a t i a l reasoning. Imagery a l s o appeared to have some importance i n shape r e c o g n i t i o n , but t h i s f i n d i n g c o u l d o n l y be t e n t a t i v e because of the poor d e f i n i t i o n of the f a c t o r . B a r r e t t concluded that s p a t i a l manipulation r e q u i r e s a high degree of c o n t r o l of c l e a r , w e l l - d e f i n e d images, but that shape r e c o g n i t i o n r e q u i r e s only imagery of a lower order, s u f f i c i e n t to d i r e c t l y compare shapes. Although the above re s e a r c h was mainly concerned with v i s u a l s p a t i a l a b i l i t i e s , other i n v e s t i g a t o r s have examined the commonality of s p a t i a l o p e r a t i o n s across sensory m o d a l i t i e s . L indgren (1978) found a s i g n i f i c a n t c o r r e l a t i o n between r e s u l t s on t a c t i l e - s p a t i a l and v i s u a l - s p a t i a l t e s t s by c h i l d r e n aged s i x to t h i r t e e n . L o l l a (1973) summarized a review of r e s e a r c h and s t a t e d that t r a n s f e r of t r a i n i n g i n form d i s c r i m i n a t i o n had been c l e a r l y shown to occur between v i s i o n and touch? l e a r n i n g shapes i n one modality made i t e a s i e r to r e l e a r n forms i n another. He a l s o noted that v i s u a l imagery has been shown to p l a y an important r o l e i n t a c t u a l form p e r c e p t i o n and i n the g i v i n g of v e r b a l 22 i n f o r m a t i o n about a d e s i g n . Williams and Aiken (1977) demonstrated t h a t grade two, grade s i x , >and u n i v e r s i t y undergraduate students processed both a u d i t o r y and v i s u a l r e p r e s e n t a t i o n s of the same p a t t e r n i n the same manner. Imaging i t s e l f need not be e x c l u s i v e l y v i s u a l . L e i b o v i t z , C o o p e r , and Hart (1972) determined that d i f f e r e n t people use d i f f e r e n t m o d a l i t i e s most o f t e n f o r imaging, and that 77% of those who showed dominance i n one modality were d e f i c i e n t i n one or more of the o t h e r s . These f i n d i n g s were i n c o n t r a d i c t i o n to previous r e s e a r c h , which i n d i c a t e d that imagery a b i l i t y i s equal across m o d a l i t i e s , and they suggest a connection to Bandler and G r i n d e r ' s primary r e p r e s e n t a t i o n a l systems. V i s u a l imagery was indeed found to be the most common form, favoured by 33% of the s u b j e c t s , followed by a u d i t o r y imagery (19%), k i n e s t h e t i c imagery (18%), t a c t i l e imagery (16%), and o l f a c t o r y - g u s t a t o r y imagery (14%). Looking at imagery from another p o i n t of view, Hartsough and L a f f a l (1970) continued the work of s e v e r a l i n v e s t i g a t o r s who had found that people could be c l a s s i f i e d as v i s u a l irnagists —who think i n p i c t u r e s — or as v e r b a l imagists — who t a l k to themselves as they t h i n k . They s t u d i e d the w r i t i n g s of many s c i e n t i s t s and found, as had Roe (195i to 1961), that S o c i a l S c i e n t i s t s and T h e o r e t i c a l P h y s i c i s t s tended to be v e r b a l i m a g i s t s while B i o l o g i s t s and Experimental P h y s i c i s t s were u s u a l l y v i s u a l i m a g i s t s . 23 In a study of s p a t i a l a b i l i t i e s as measured by the Space R e l a t i o n s s u b t e s t of the D i f f e r e n t i a l Apti tude Te,st.s., mental v i s u a l i z a t i o n would appear to be the most r e l e v a n t s p a t i a l f a c t o r . The DAT Manual d e s c r i b e s t h a t s u b t e s t as measuring the a b i l i t y to mentally manipulate o b j e c t s i n three-dimensional space, and comments that the f i g u r e s have been designed to be c l e a r and unambiguous so t h a t the p e r c e p t i o n of d i f f e r e n c e s i s not d i f f i c u l t . In a d d i t i o n , Glover (1974) d i s c o v e r e d a p o s i t i v e r e l a t i o n s h i p between scores on the DAT Space R e l a t i o n s t e s t and the time and i n t e n s i t y of s u s t a i n e d Alpha rhythms which were measured when s u b j e c t s were gi v e n a s e r i e s of tasks designed to s t i m u l a t e v i s u a l i z a t i o n , B a r r e t t (1953) found that s u b j e c t s who f e l t a g r e a t e r need f o r the easy manipulation of c l e a r , s trong v i s u a l images on s p a t i a l v i s u a l i z a t i o n t e s t s d i d s i g n i f i c a n t l y b e t t e r , and Ciganko (1973) determined that performance on s p a t i a l v i s u a l i z a t i o n t e s t s was more c l o s e l y r e l a t e d to the dependent v a r i a b l e s a s s o c i a t e d with drawing a v i s u a l i z e d s t i m u l u s than an observed s t i m u l u s . Many r e s e a r c h e r s have s t a t e d t h e i r b e l i e f that s p a t i a l a b i l i t i e s can be taught. L o l l a (1973) l i s t e d s e v e r a l , i n c l u d i n g McKim (1972), Arnheim (1969), and Smith (1967). Dorethy (1975) d i s a g r e e d with Lowenfeld's V i s u a l - H a p t i c theory not o n l y because of the experimental methods but because he b e l i e v e d that i n d i v i d u a l s could l e a r n new p e r c e p t u a l a b i l i t i e s . Indeed, N e u r o l i n g u i s t i c Programming, with i t s emphasis on h e l p i n g people to use input channels 24 and r e p r e s e n t a t i o n a l systems which are u n a v a i l a b l e to them, i m p l i e s that t h i s s o r t of a b i l i t y can be l e a r n e d . Attempts to teach s p a t i a l a b i l i t i e s have met with mixed succe s s . Those c o n c e n t r a t i n g on p e r c e p t i o n have produced the most improvement i n s u b j e c t s ' a b i l i t i e s . Rawls (1967) t r a i n e d a group of deaf c h i l d r e n i n v i s u a l p e r c e p t i o n and found that t h e i r scores on v i s u a l d i s c r i m i n a t i o n and p e r c e p t i o n t e s t s and a l s o on l e a r n i n g a p t i t u d e t e s t s increased? Egeland (1967) and E l k i n d and Deblinger (1968) had success with l e a r n i n g d i s a b l e d c h i l d r e n , who improved i n r e a d i n g s k i l l s a f t e r p e r c e p t u a l t r a i n i n g . Weiderholt and Hammi.ll (1971), on the other hand, found that n o n - p e r c e p t u a l l y handicapped students who completed over 200 worksheets of the Frostig-Horne V i s u a l P e r c e p t i o n Program improved t h e i r performance on F r o s t i g ' s Developmental Test of V.isua.1 P e r c e p t i o n , but t h a t p e r c e p t u a l l y handicapped students d i d not. S i m i l a r l y , Resnick (1968) found that f i r s t graders t r a i n e d i n i d e n t i f y i n g o b j e c t s i n i n c r e a s i n g l y d e t a i l e d drawings showed an a c c e l e r a t i o n i n the development of t h i s a b i l i t y , but t h a t students from disadvantaged backgrounds showed l e s s improvement. Cowles (1969) noted that grade one students who had r e c e i v e d v i s u a l p e r c e p t i o n i n s t r u c t i o n showed a s i g n i f i c a n t l y g r e a t e r improvement on the Me t r o p o l i tan Readiness Tes ts than a c o n t r o l group, who had engaged i n l i s t e n i n g a c t i v i t i e s , and Connor, S e r b i n , and Schackman (1977) found t h a t g i r l s t r a i n e d i n p e r c e i v i n g 25 embedded f i g u r e s improved i n t h i s a b i l i t y , although the boys i n the study d i d not. Two other s t u d i e s d e s c r i b e d t r a i n i n g i n p e r s p e c t i v e t a k i n g a b i l i t y . Cox ( 1978) had a small group of f i v e year olds d e s c r i b e r e l a t i o n s h i p s between o b j e c t s , the observer, and themselves. V e r b a l feedback was given. Those so t r a i n e d scored s i g n i f i c a n t l y higher than t h e i r c o n t r o l s on a p o s t t e s t and on t e s t s seven weeks and seven months l a t e r . P r i d d l e (1977) taught preschool c h i l d r e n l e f t - r i g h t r e l a t i o n s by e i t h e r verbal i n s t r u c t i o n s and v i s u a l cue cards, or by body movements. The k i n e s t h e t i c a l l y - t a u g h t group were b e t t e r able to i d e n t i f y these p o s i t i o n s , but both groups improved somewhat i n more general s p a t i a l p e r s p e c t i v e s k i l l s . Experiments i n v i s u a l i z a t i o n t r a i n i n g have had more i n c o n s i s t e n t r e s u l t s . Brinkman (1966? c i t e d i n E l i o t and F r a l l e y , 1976) d e s c r i b e d a study i n which grade 8 s t u d e n t s , having taken geometry lessons i n c l u d i n g p a t t e r n f o l d i n g and m a n i p u l a t i o n , showed a s i g n i f i c a n t improvement on the DAT Space R e l a t i o n s p o s t t e s t over the p r e t e s t . L i k e w i s e , Conner, Schackman, and S e r b i n (1978) t r a i n e d grade one c h i l d r e n w i t h a s e t of embedded f i g u r e s , then t e s t e d them on the S t e r n g l a n z - L i f s c h i tz F o l d i ng Blocks T e s t , an a d a p t a t i o n of the DAT Space R e l a t i o n s s u b t e s t . While the scores on an embedded f i g u r e s p r e t e s t were p r e d i c t i v e of p o s t t e s t scores on the F o l d i ng Blocks Test f o r the c o n t r o l group, t h i s was not true f o r the experimental group. Darrow (1973) a l s o had 26 success when he t r a i n e d s u b j e c t s by having them form c l o s u r e s on ambiguous s t i m u l i and v i s u a l l y a r t i c u l a t e changes i n o b j e c t s and o b j e c t p a r t s . They improved t h e i r scores on the DAT Space R e l a t i o n s p o s t t e s t . However, Wolfe (1970) doubted the g e n e r a l i z a b i 1 i t y of t r a i n i n g using tasks which p a r a l l e l those on s p a t i a l r e l a t i o n s t e s t s , s i n c e the s u b j e c t s i n h i s study showed l i t t l e g a i n afterwards on other t e s t s presumably measuring the same a b i l i t i e s . L o l l a (1973) d i d not succeed i n improving s p a t i a l v i s u a l i z a t i o n by t r a i n i n g , e i t h e r . He used wooden blocks as t a c t i l e s t i m u l i and had h i s n i n t h grade s u b j e c t s p r a c t i s e matching them with p i c t o r i a l l i n e drawings. Students c l a s s i f i e d as high i n v i s u a l imagery, on the b a s i s of p r e t e s t scores on the Revised Minnesota Paper E a r s Board T e s t , s c o r e d s i g n i f i c a n t l y higher on the DAT than d i d the low v i s u a l imagery group, r e g a r d l e s s of whether they were i n the experimental or the c o n t r o l c o n d i t i o n , and the high v i s u a l imagery c o n t r o l group's scores were s i g n i f i c a n t l y higher than those of the high v i s u a l imagery experimental group. It would appear t h a t the t r a i n i n g a c t u a l l y i n t e r f e r e d with these s t u d e n t s ' a b i l i t y . In only two s t u d i e s d i d there s.eern to be an attempt to t r a i n v i s u a l i z a t i o n a b i l i t y by the d i r e c t use of v i s u a l i z a t i o n r a t h e r than p e r c e p t u a l e x e r c i s e s . Ciganko (1973) compared a group of grade nine students t r a i n e d by drawing from d i r e c t l y observed s t i m u l i with a group of s i m i l a r students who p r a c t i s e d drawing from v i s u a l i z e d 27 s t i m u l i . Both groups improved s i g n i f i c a n t l y i n s p a t i a l v i s u a l i z a t i o n s c o r e s . The s t u d e n t s t r a i n e d by d r a w i n g observed s t i m u l i tended to i n c l u d e more s p a t i a l i n f o r m a t i o n i n t h e i r drawings of v i s u a l i z e d s t i m u l i , but performance on s p a t i a l v i s u a l i z a t i o n t e s t s was found t o be more r e l a t e d t o the v a r i a b l e s a s s o c i a t e d w i t h d r a w i n g a v i s u a l i z e d s t i m u l u s than an o b s e r v e d one. Some y e a r s b e f o r e , Van V o o r h i s (1941, c i t e d i n L o l l a , 1973) t r a i n e d c o l l e g e s t u d e n t s w i t h v i s u a l i z i n g e x e r c i s e s , s uch as e s t i m a t i n g l i n e a r e x t e n t , a n g l e s , and a r e a s o r engaging i n thr.ee d i m e n s i o n a l t i c k - t a c k - t o e , and found t h a t h i s e x p e r i m e n t a l group showed a s i g n i f i c a n t improvement on the c a r d s and f i g u r e s s e c t i o n of the Tours tons. T_es_t f o r EriinaLy. Me,n_tai. A b i H i i . e s . In a d d i t i o n t o the r e s e a r c h r e p o r t i n g the r e s u l t s of e x p e r i m e n t s i n v i s u a l i z a t i o n t r a i n i n g , another body of work examined the e f f e c t s o f i n c i d e n t a l v i s u a l i z a t i o n i n s t r u c t i o n o c c u r i n g i n the course o f presumably r e l a t e d s t u d i e s . For example, L o l l a (1973) c i t e d f o u r such r e p o r t s : Blade and Watson (1955) noted a s i g n i f i c a n t g a i n i n s p a t i a l r e l a t i o n s t e s t s c o r e s f o r c o l l e g e men who had completed one year of E n g i n e e r i n g c o u r s e s ; Myers (195 1, 1953) r e p o r t e d a s i m i l a r i n c r e a s e i n s p a t i a l r e l a t i o n s t e s t s c o r e s a f t e r b o th a c o u r s e i n m i l i t a r y t o p o g r a p h i e s and g r a p h i c s and a c o u r s e i n e n g i n e e r i n g drawing and d e s c r i p t i v e geometry. On the o t h e r hand, Myers (1958) found t h a t m echanical d r a w i n g taken i n h i g h s c h o o l had very l i t t l e e f f e c t on the s p a t i a l r e l a t i o n s s c o r e s o f m i l i t a r y c a d e t s , and Sedgewick (196 1) d i s c o v e r e d 28 no s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s on the DAT Space R e l a t i o n s p o s t t e s t he gave to matched p a i r s of E n g i n e e r i n g , I n d u s t r i a l E d u c a t i o n , and I n d u s t r i a l S u p e r v i s i o n s t u d e n t s , whether or not they had taken d e s c r i p t i v e geometry s i n c e the p r e t e s t . I t i s t h e r e f o r e u n c e r t a i n whether s p a t i a l v i s u a l i z a t i o n can be e f f e c t i v e l y t a u g h t . S e v e r a l p o s s i b l e e x p l a n a t i o n s f o r the i n c o n s i s t e n t r e s u l t s have been mentioned i n the l i t e r a t u r e . L o . l l a ( 1 973), f o r example, thought t h a t the degree o f s p e c i f i c i t y of the t r a i n i n g i s i m p o r t a n t , and he a l s o noted t h a t the r e s e a r c h s u p p o r t e d the i d e a of b r i e f r a t h e r than p r o l o n g e d t r a i n i n g . N e v e r t h e l e s s , h i s own s t u d y d i d not prove s u c c e s s f u l i n s p i t e of h i s use of b r i e f , s p e c i f i c i n s t r u c t i o n a l s e s s i o n s . The w r i t i n g s o f Zimmerman, S c r o t h , and B a r r a t t suggest t h a t v i s u a l i z a t i o n i s more complex than p e r c e p t i o n o r p e r s p e c t i v e t a k i n g , and t h a t i n s t r u c t i o n which does not c o n c e n t r a t e d i r e c t l y on t h i s f a c e t of s p a t i a l a b i l i t y may not be adequate. F i n a . l l y , B a n d l e r and G r i n d e r ' s t h e o r y i m p l i e s t h a t p e r c e p t i o n c o u l d o c c u r t h r o u g h a v i s u a l i n p u t c h a n n e l y e t not be r e p r e s e n t e d i n t e r n a l l y i n a c l e a r enough manner f o r the mental m a n i p u l a t i o n of images t o o c c u r . The experiment o u t l i n e d i n the next c h a p t e r was d e s i g n e d t o e x p l o r e the p o s s i b i l i t y t h a t d i r e c t t r a i n i n g to d e v e l o p a person's v i s u a l r e p r e s e n t a t i o n a l system c o u l d improve h i s or her performance on a s p a t i a l r e l a t i o n s t e s t . 29 CHAPTER 3 P_iiQ.i Study. In an a.ttempt to see whether or not i t would be possible to c l a s s i f y students according to their primary representational systems and whether this c l a s s i f i c a t i o n would bear any r e l a t i o n to their method of solving a s p a t i a l relations problem, an intact class of grade nine students, with fourteen g i r l s and f i f t e e n boys, was asked to partic i p a t e in a p i l o t study. They were told that they would be taking part i n a study related to the ways that people deal with information, and that they would be asked to write a short essay that day i n class and then to come for a five to ten minute private interview with their teacher the next week. The students wrote their essay on the topic "If you could learn any language immediately and with no e f f o r t , which ones would you choose to learn and what would you do with them?" During the interview, they were asked to solve one problem from the DAT Space Relations test and then t e l l the interviewer whether they had been able to s.ee the drawing move i n their minds, whether they had talked to themselves as they solved the problem, and whether they had f e l t a strong desire to pick up the drawing and fold i t together. They were also asked to talk about some of the a c t i v i t i e s they enjoyed doing in their free time, and to describe an ideal setting i n which they would like to be working i n a few years. 30 S e v e r a l c o n c l u s i o n s were reached as a r e s u l t of the p i l o t s t u d y . The essay t o p i c was a poor c h o i c e , s i n c e the f o c u s on language use brought about a preponderance of a u d i t o r y p r e d i c a t e s . In a d d i t i o n , many of the essays d i d not i n c l u d e enough d e t a i l to a s s e s s the type of p r e d i c a t e s used most o f t e n . D u r i n g the i n t e r v i e w s , on the o t h e r hand, the i n t e r v i e w e r c o u l d e x p l a i n t o c o n f u s e d s t u d e n t s what was wanted o r ask them t o c o n t i n u e t h e i r d e s c r i p t i o n s w i t h more d e t a i l . The c oncern was, of c o u r s e , t o a v o i d " l e a d i n g " the s t u d e n t s i n t o g i v i n g answers they would not have g i v e n on t h e i r own. I t was d e c i d e d not t o use an essay as a c l a s s i f y i n g t e c h n i q u e d u r i n g the e x p e r i m e n t , but r a t h e r to compose a s e r i e s of c a r e f u l l y worded m u l t i p l e c h o i c e q u e s t i o n s and i n c o m p l e t e s e n tences t o a s c e r t a i n the approach the s t u d e n t s used i n s o l v i n g the s p a t i a l problems and the a s p e c t s of t h e i r environments which were most m e a n i n g f u l to them. D u r i n g the i n t e r v i e w s , i t became e v i d e n t t h a t i n d i v i d u a l s approached the t a s k i n d i f f e r e n t ways. Nine of the t w e n t y - e i g h t s t u d e n t s showed a c l e a r p r e f e r e n c e f o r one r e p r e s e n t a t i o n a l system. For example, one s t u d e n t who would very much have l i k e d to p i c k up the d r a w i n g , and who moved her f i n g e r s w h i l e a t t e m p t i n g t o f i n d the answer, s t a t e d t h a t she wanted t o work i n a " c o m f o r t a b l e " o f f i c e t h a t " f e e l s good". A n o t h e r , who was unable to v i s u a l i z e the movement of the drawn p a t t e r n a t a l l , was not even a b l e to say what h i s work environment would l o o k l i k e ; he responded t h a t he would 31 be p h y s i c a l l y a c t i v e and have breaks to take p a r t i n s p o r t s . S i m i l a r l y , a g i r l r e p l i e d that the place where she worked would look " q u i e t " . Other students t o l d the i n t e r v i e w e r that they were able to see the p a t t e r n move, wanted to work i n s e t t i n g s that were "open" and " b r i g h t " , and had " p o s t e r s " , " c o l o u r s that aren't b l a h " , and "carpets that look n i c e " . Although not a l l students who seemed to be v i s u a l s chose the c o r r e c t answer, none of the n o n - v i s u a l s s o l v e d the problem c o r r e c t l y . Because of these r e s u l t s , i t was decided that the c l a s s i f i c a t i o n of students by primary r e p r e s e n t a t i o n a l systems should be p o s s i b l e . Fjlpe.rime.Dial S_tudx Subjects Subjects were 138 grade ten s t u d e n t s , 67 male and 71 female, who had chosen to take a car.eer p l a n n i n g mini-course as a p a r t of t h e i r guidance program. A l l were students at Vancouver T e c h n i c a l School, a large urban high s c h o o l with a m u l t i - e t h n i c p o p u l a t i o n . A c c o r d i n g to a 1980 survey, approximately 38% of the students were from E n g l i s h - s p e a k i n g homes, 28% from Chinese-speaking homes, J5% from I t a l i a n - s p e a k i n g homes, and the r e s t from a wide v a r i e t y of f other language backgrounds. The students who took part i n the experiment were d i s t r i b u t e d among s i x c l a s s e s . By means of a measure of p r e f e r r e d input system, students were c l a s s i f i e d as v i s u a l s , a u d i t o r i e s , t a c t i l e s ( k i n e s t h e t i c s ) , or c o m b i n e d / u n c l a s s i f i e d . From those who c o u l d be most c e r t a i n l y c l a s s i f i e d as v i s u a l s , 20 were randomly d i v i d e d i n t o two groups. Then each group was randomly assigned to the experimental or the c o n t r o l c o n d i t i o n . S i m i l a r l y , from those students who could be most c e r t a i n l y c l a s s i f i e d as n o n - v i s u a l s ( a u d i t o r i e s and k i n e s t h e t i c s ) , 20 were randomly s e l e c t e d and then randomly d i v i d e d i n t o two groups, and those two groups were randomly assigned to the experimental or the c o n t r o l c o n d i t i o n . Experimental Design A 2x2 f a c t o r i a l d e s ign was used, which can be represented as f o l l o w s ! R 0, X 0. R 0_ Z Y, 0fc R 0, X Yt 0, R 0 + Z 0, Where? R = Random assignment to groups Ui , 0 L, 0 3 , 0« = P r e t e s t X = V i s u a l i z a t i o n t r a i n i n g Z = A c t i v i t y not r e l a t e d to v i s u a l i z a t i o n Y, = V i s u a l group Y_ = Non-visual group 0, , 0 t , ( ) 1 , 0, = P o s t t e s t Treatment V i s u a l i z a t i o n J x a i r i i f i a 1 The t r a i n i n g occurred d u r i n g r e g u l a r c l a s s time and was conducted by one of the two c o u n s e l l o r s who r e g u l a r l y teach the guidance c l a s s e s . It 33 comprised one f i f t y minute s e s s i o n and a twenty minute review s e s s i o n one week l a t e r . Students were t o l d t h at the purpose of the t r a i n i n g was to help them see and , move o b j e c t s i n t h e i r i m a g i n a t i o n . They were asked t o c l o s e t h e i r eyes and t r y to see themselves walking home from s c h o o l , n o t i n g f a m i l i a r landmarks as they went. They were asked to f e e l t h e i r bodies moving, to f e e l themselves t a k i n g steps and touching t h i n g s , and then to concentrate on how things looked as they were f e e l i n g these s e n s a t i o n s . They were a l s o asked to hear the sounds along the way and to concentrate on how things looked as they heard these sounds. The same sensory matching was used as they were t o l d to imagine themselves a r r i v i n g home. They were asked to stand i n f r o n t of t h e i r house and look at i t , then to walk around and see the house from d i f f e r e n t angles, d e s c r i b i n g i t v e r b a l l y to themselves and then c o n c e n t r a t i n g on the v i s u a l image without using words or f e e l i n g themselves standing t h e r e . In a s i m i l a r way, they were t o l d to pick up var i o u s o b j e c t s and examine them from d i f f e r e n t angles and to place other o b j e c t s on a table i n a s p e c i f i c r e l a t i o n to each other and look a t them from a l l s i d e s . One week l a t e r , the group met again f o r twenty minutes. They d i d a b r i e f , s i m i l a r v i s u a l i z a t i o n e x e r c i s e and then were gi v e n a few minutes to p r a c t i s e v i s u a l i z i n g on t h e i r own. At the end of t h i s time, they wrote the p o s t t e s t . The complete s c r i p t of the t r a i n i n g s e s s i o n can be found i n Appendix A. 34 C o n t r o l CoQdi.ti.ons The c o n t r o l group a l s o met f o r one f i f t y minute s e s s i o n d u r i n g t h e i r r e g u l a r c l a s s t i m e . They took p a r t i n d i s c u s s i o n and p r a c t i c e of job a p p l i c a t i o n forms and i n t e r v i e w t e c h n i q u e s , an a c t i v i t y not r e l a t e d to v i s u a l i z a t i o n . The o t h e r c o u n s e l l o r who r e g u l a r l y taught the guidance c l a s s e s conducted t h i s s e s s i o n . The c o n t r o l group a l s o met a g a i n f o r twenty minutes one week l a t e r b e f o r e j o i n i n g the e x p e r i m e n t a l group to w r i t e the p o s t t e s t . Procedure A l l s t u d e n t s i n the c a r e e r s m i n i - c o u r s e took the DAT Space R e l a t i o n s s u b t e s t as a p a r t of t h e i r s e l f - e x p l o r a t o r y a c t i v i t i e s . J u s t b e f o r e they took i t , they were t o l d the f o l l o w i n g * The next a c t i v i t y i n t h i s m i n i - c o u r s e w i l l a l l o w you t o e x p l o r e one of your a b i l i t i e s t h a t you may not know much about — s p a t i a l r e l a t i o n s . T h i s i s i m p o r t a n t i n a l o t of job areas l i k e d r a f t i n g , e n g i n e e r i n g , a r t i s t i c d e s i g n , sewing, and so on. You have some i d e a about your a b i l i t y t o use language and your a b i l i t y w i t h numbers from your s c h o o l c o u r s e s , but you may not have had much t o do w i t h s p a t i a l r e l a t i o n s . ne are a l s o going to ask you t o take p a r t i n an experiment w h i l e you a r e d o i n g t h i s . T h i s i s f o r a Maste r ' s Degree t h e s i s at U.B.C. and the r e s u l t s w i l l be brought t o g e t h e r and w r i t t e n up. We can ' t t e l l you v e r y much about the experiment u n t i l i t ' s o v e r , but i t i s d e s i g n e d t o see how d o i n g d i f f e r e n t a c t i v i t i e s w i l l a f f e c t your a b i l i t y t o s o l v e the problems on t h i s t e s t . T h i s i s not a " t e s t " i n the sense of a g r a d i n g d e v i c e , but j u s t a way to l e a r n about y o u r s e l v e s . You ca n ' t f a i l i t . A l s o , we a r e not l o o k i n g f o r any deep p s y c h o l o g i c a l t h i n g s about you — j u s t your s p a t i a l r e l a t i o n s a b i l i t y . The t e s t i t s e l f t a k e s 25 minute s . Then w e ' l l ask you to f i l l i n two o t h e r q u e s t i o n n a i r e s r e l a t e d to the exp e r i m e n t . 35 The two c o u n s e l l o r s took turns g i v i n g t h i s i n t r o d u c t i o n to the s i x c l a s s e s . When the students had f i n i s h e d the DAT. Space R e l a t i o n s t e s t , they completed the L e a r n i n g S t y l e S e l f Inventory, which asks about the ways they p r e f e r to take i n i n f o r m a t i o n , and a s h o r t q u e s t i o n n a i r e r e q u e s t i n g i n f o r m a t i o n about the way they s o l v e d the problems on the t e s t as well as t h e i r ideas on v a r i o u s t o p i c s (to provide p r e d i c a t e s and i n f o r m a t i o n on t h e i r i n t e r e s t s f o r c l a s s i f i c a t i o n of t h e i r primary r e p r e s e n t a t i o n a l systems.) Those who showed a c l e a r p r e f e r e n c e f o r one input system, based on t h e i r s cores on the L e a r n i n g S t y l e S_e.lf Inventory, were then grouped as v i s u a l s or n o n - v i s u a l s . Twenty members of each of these groups were randomly chosen and assigned to the experimental or c o n t r o l c o n d i t i o n . The week a f t e r they took the t e s t , the experimental and c o n t r o l groups met a t the same time, but i n d i f f e r e n t rooms, f o r t h e i r f i f t y minute s e s s i o n s . One w.eek a f t e r t h a t , the experimental and c o n t r o l groups again met s e p a r a t e l y f o r twenty minutes and then a l l wrote the a l t e r n a t e form of the DAT Space R e l a t i o n s t e s t . Instrumentat ion L e a r n i n g S t y l e Self. Inventory: Working from the assumption that no two students seek i n f o r m a t i o n i n the same way, Dr. Joseph E. H i l l developed the L e a r n i n g S t y l e S_el_f Inventory to determine an i n d i v i d u a l ' s e d u c a t i o n a l c o g n i t i v e s t y l e , or the manner i n which he or she takes note of the t o t a l - s u r r o u n d i n g s and becomes informed. The instrument 36 i d e n t i f i e s s t u d e n t s ' c o g n i t i v e s t r e n g h t s and weaknesses, and t h i s i n f o r m a t i o n can be used to b u i l d p e r s o n a l i z e d programs of i n s t r u c t i o n f o r them, as has been done at Oakland Community C o l l e g e ( H i l l , 1976). Several s t u d i e s , mentioned by Berry, Sutton, and McBeth (1975), have shown c o g n i t i v e s t y l e matching to be an advantage. The M o t i v a t i o n to Learn Centre, Milwaukee, Wisconsin has done extensive r e s e a r c h on c o g n i t i v e s t y l e and has used the L e a r n i n g S t y l e S e l f Inventory with grade ten s t u d e n t s . It i s r e p o r t e d from the Centre that three separate s t u d i e s have provided r e l i a b i l i t y and v a l i d i t y data f o r the instrument. Kuder-Richardson r e l i a b i l i t y c o e f f i c i e n t s ranged from .70 to .96. P r e d i c t i v e v a l i d i t y c o e f f i c i e n t s were determined f o r each t r a i t , and the ranges f o r the three s t u d i e s were r̂ .b. = .61 to .95, .68 to .93, and .73 to .92. For t h i s study, the s e c t i o n s of the inventory a s s o c i a t e d with sensory s t i m u l i were used. P f l e g e r and P u l v i n o (1977) a l s o used H i l l ' s i n v e n t o r y to i d e n t i f y primary r e p r e s e n t a t i o n a l systems. The sensory elements of c o g n i t i v e s t y l e were d e f i n e d by H i l l (1976) as beings Q u a l i t a t i v e A u d i t o r y — a b i l i t y to p e r c e i v e meaning through the sense of h e a r i n g . . . Qua l i t a t i v e Tac t i l e — a b i l i t y to p e r c e i v e meaning by the sense of touch, temperature, and p a i n ; Q u a l i t a t i v e V i s u a l — a b i l i t y to p e r c e i v e meaning through s i g h t . Two other c a t e g o r i e s — Q u a l i t a t i v e O l f a c t o r y and Q u a l i t a t i v e G u s t a t o r y — are r e c o g n i z e d but not i n c l u d e d i n the i n v e n t o r y . 37 Students answer questions such as "The tone of a speaker's voice adds meaning to t h e i r words" and " I l i k e to use my hands when l e a r n i n g about something 4 1 by " U s u a l l y " (5 p o i n t s ) , "Sometimes" (3 p o i n t s ) , or "Rarely" ( I p o i n t ) . A score of 30 or more out of a p o s s i b l e 40 p o i n t s i n d i c a t e s a major o r i e n t a t i o n i n t h a t element? 18 to 27, a minor o r i e n t a t i o n , and 17 or l e s s , a n e g l i g i b l e o r i e n t a t i o n . The s e c t i o n of the i n v e n t o r y which was used i n t h i s study i s reproduced i n Appendix B. Questionnaire» T h i s q u e s t i o n n a i r e , which i s reproduced i n Appendix C, had f o u r p a r t s * a m u l t i p l e choice question asking students how they s o l v e d the s p a t i a l r e l a t i o n s problems, two m u l t i p l e c h o i c e questions asking about the work s e t t i n g and the h o l i d a y s e t t i n g they would most enjoy, a qu e s t i o n about the q u a l i t y of v i s u a l image they could make of t h e i r l i v i n g rooms, and a s e r i e s of sentence stems which they were to complete i n any way they wished. The sentence steins used were chosen from a longer s e r i e s which was given to a p i l o t group of 72 grade eleven and twelve students i n an e l e c t i v e psychology course. Two r a t e r s s c o r e d that p i l o t q u e s t i o n n a i r e , and the r e s u l t s were ana l y z e d . Sentence stems which f r e q u e n t l y f a i l e d to s t i m u l a t e a c l a s s i f i a b l e response, which c o n s i s t e n t l y e l i c i t e d p r e d i c a t e s from one r e p r e s e n t a t i o n a l system, or which o f t e n s t i m u l a t e d responses on which the r a t e r s d i d not agree were e l i m i n a t e d . T h i s s e c t i o n of the q u e s t i o n n a i r e was scored on the b a s i s of the p r e d i c a t e s used ( v i s u a l l y , 38 a u d i t o r i a l l y , or k i n e s t h e t i c a l l y - o r i e n t e d words) and the a c t i v i t i e s enjoyed by the student. Two r a t e r s independently determined the number of responses i n d i c a t i n g v i s u a l , a u d i t o r y , and k i n e s t h e t i c p r e f e r e n c e s or no c l e a r p r e f e r e n c e . T h e i r scores were then averaged to provide the o v e r a l l r a t i n g f o r the q u e s t i o n n a i r e . The same q u e s t i o n n a i r e was given two weeks l a t e r to a random sample of t h i r t y of the students and the p r e f e r e n c e s judged to be shown at each time were compared. Only f i f t y - s e v e n percent had the same o v e r a l l r a t i n g both times, but t h i s was l a r g e l y because of a wide v a r i a t i o n on the incomplete sentences s e c t i o n s of the t e s t , where the agreement i n r a t i n g s was o n l y f i f t y - t h r e e p e r c e n t . These s e c t i o n s of the t e s t were not used i n any of the a n a l y s e s . The other s e c t i o n s of the q u e s t i o n n a i r e had somewhat higher agreements between the two r a t i n g s . Seventy percent of the respondents were r a t e d the same both times on t h e i r approach to the DAT t:est. s i x t y - t h r e e percent were r a t e d the same on t h e i r choice of h o l i d a y and work s e t t i n g s , and s e v e n t y — s i x percent on t h e i r c l a r i t y of mental imagery. In a d d i t i o n , an attempt was made to e s t a b l i s h some v a l i d i t y f o r the instrument by comparing the primary r e p r e s e n t a t i o n a l system judged to be present with the approach the student used i n s o l v i n g the s p a t i a l r e l a t i o n s problems. Because of the lack of c o n s i s t e n c y i n the answers on the incomplete sentences s e c t i o n s of the q u e s t i o n n a i r e , these s e c t i o n s and the t o t a l r a t i n g were not i n c l u d e d . When 39 each student's approach to the DAT was compared to h i s c l a r i t y of mental imagery r a t i n g , f i f t y percent of the answers were c o n s i s t e n t . When i t was compared to h i s choice of h o l i d a y and work s e t t i n g , f i f t e e n percent of the responses matched e x a c t l y and f i f t y percent matched on at l e a s t one choice of s e t t i n g . I t had been hoped that students could be c l a s s i f i e d by primary r e p r e s e n t a t i o n a l systems on the ba s i s of t h i s q u e s t i o n n a i r e , but the r e s u l t s i n d i c a t e d that i t could not be c o n s i d e r e d a v a l i d instrument f o r t h i s purpose. For t h i s reason, the Learning S t y l e S e l f Inventory was used to d e f i n e the v i s u a l and n o n - v i s u a l groups, and the i n f o r m a t i o n from t h i s q u e s t i o n n a i r e was examined only i n post-hoc a n a l y s e s . Pre test-pos t.test s The Space R e l a t i o n s s u b t e s t of the Di f f e r e n t i a l Aptitude Tests r e q u i r e s an i n d i v i d u a l to mentally manipulate o b j e c t s i n thr-ee dimensional space. Each q u e s t i o n has a l a r g e , c l e a r drawing of a p a t t e r n and a s e r i e s of four drawings of three dimensional f i g u r e s . The person i s asked to choose the f i g u r e which could be made from that p a t t e r n i f i t were cut out and f o l d e d together. The F i f t h E d i t i o n Manual (Bennett, Seashore, and Wesman, 1974) l i s t s r e l i a b i l i t y c o e f f i c i e n t s f o r the Space R e l a t i o n s s u b t e s t of .94 (Grade 10 boys) and .89 (Grade 10 g i r l s ) f o r Form S, and of .92 (Grade 10 boys) and .93 (Grade 10 g i r l s ) f o r Form T. These are s p l i t - h a l f r e l i a b i l i t y c o e f f i c i e n t s c o r r e c t e d f o r f u l l l e n g t h by the Spearman-Brown formula. 40 The manual r e p o r t s e x t e n s i v e v a l i d i t y d a t a f o r Forms S and T and a l s o f o r the p r e v i o u s forms, L and M. U n f o r t u n a t e l y , the p r e d i c t i v e v a l i d i t y o f the Di f f e r e n t i a l A p t i tude Tes ts i s based on c o m b i n a t i o n s of s u b t e s t s , and the p r e d i c t i v e v a l i d i t y of the Space R e l a t i o n s s u b t e s t a l one i s not p r o v i d e d . The c o e - f f i c i e n t s of c o r r e l a t i o n between the S p a t i a l R e l a t i o n s s u b t e s t on Form S and t h a t on Form T are g i v e n f o r Grade 9 s t u d e n t s . These were .79 f o r boys and .71 f o r g i r l s , when Form S was gi v e n b e f o r e Form T. Hy:p^ih.es_es_ The h y p o t h e s e s , s t a t e d i n n u l l form, were* 1. The a r i t h m e t i c mean on the p r e t e s t ( DAT Space R e l a t i o n s s u b t e s t , Form S) of s t u d e n t s whose p r i m a r y r e p r e s e n t a t i o n a l system appeared to be v i s u a l would not be s i g n i f i c a n t l y d i f f e r e n t from t h a t of s t u d e n t s whose p r i m a r y r e p r e s e n t a t i o n a l system appeared t o be n o n - v i s u a l ( a u d i t o r y or k i n e s t h e t i c ) . S t a t i s t i c a l H y p o t h e s i s : HniM,-M_ H ,i M, TtM^ 2. The a r i t h m e t i c mean on the p o s t t e s t ( DAT Space R e l a t i o n s s u b t e s t , Form T) of s t u d e n t s whose p r i m a r y r e p r e s e n t a t i o n a l system appeared to be v i s u a l would not be s i g n i f i c a n t l y d i f f e r e n t from t h a t of s t u d e n t s whose p r i m a r y r e p r e s e n t a t i o n a l system appeared to be n o n - v i s u a l . 41 S t a t i s t i c a l Hypothesis! HDtM^^- H ( t M, -PM-L 3. The a r i t h m e t i c mean on the p o s t t e s t of students who r e c e i v e d v i s u a l i z a t i o n t r a i n i n g would not be s i g n i f i c a n t l y d i f f e r e n t from that of students who d i d not r e c e i v e v i s u a l i z a t i o n t r a i n i n g . S t a t i s t i c a l H y pothesis! H 0 M , ^ i H, i A, 4. There would be no s i g n i f i c a n t i n t e r a c t i o n between the i d e n t i f i e d primary r e p r e s e n t a t i o n a l system and p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n the experimental or the c o n t r o l group. S t a t i s t i c a l Hypothesis! H01 M,-M._*=A+ 42 CHAPTER 4 R e s u l t s An a n a l y s i s o f v a r i a n c e was run u s i n g the p r e t e s t and p o s t t e s t s c o r e s and the v i s u a l o r n o n - v i s u a l c l a s s i f i c a t i o n of the s t u d e n t s . The r e s u l t s were as f o l l o w s : Hy_P^thes_is_ i I t was s t a t e d i n the f i r s t n u l l h y p o t h e s i s t h a t the a r i t h m e t i c mean on the p r e t e s t ( DAT. Space R e l a t i o n s s u b t e s t , Form S) o f s t u d e n t s whose p r i m a r y r e p r e s e n t a t i o n a l system appeared to be v i s u a l would not be s i g n i f i c a n t l y d i f f e r e n t from t h a t of s t u d e n t s whose p r i m a r y r e p r e s e n t a t i o n a l system appeared t o be n o n - v i s u a l ( a u d i t o r y or k i n e s t h e t i c ) . The r e s u l t s of the f i r s t a n a l y s i s of v a r i a n c e are shown i n Table I below. Table I - D.AI P r e t e s t Scores by V i s u a l / N o n v i s u a l C l a s s i f i c a t i o n Source o f V a r i a t i o n Sum of Squares DF Mean Sauare h Main E f f e c t s ( V i s / N o n v i s ) 57.600 1 57.600 0.49 R e s i d u a l 4486.785 38 J 18.073 T o t a l 45 44.387 39 1 16.523 These r e s u l t s i n d i c a t e t h a t the n u l l h y p o t h e s i s s h o u l d not be r e j e c t e d (F =0.49, p >.05). The s t u d e n t s c l a s s i f i e d as 43 v i s u a l s and those c l a s s i f i e d as n o n - v i s u a l s d i d e q u a l l y well on Form S of the DAT Space R e l a t i o n s s u b t e s t . Contrary to the e x p e c t a t i o n s , having a r e p r e s e n t a t i o n a l system which had been i d e n t i f i e d as v i s u a l s.eemed to be of no advantage to the students i n doing the t e s t . HxaQ.ities.is 2 In t h i s n u l l hypothesis i t was s t a t e d that the a r i t h m e t i c mean on the p o s t t e s t ( DAT Space R e l a t i o n s s u b t e s t , Form T) of students whose primary r e p r e s e n t a t i o n a l system appeared to be v i s u a l would not be s i g n i f i c a n t l y d i f f e r e n t from that of students whose primary r e p r e s e n t a t i o n a l system appeared to be n o n - v i s u a l . The r e s u l t s of the A n a l y s i s of Variance are summarized i n Table II below. Table II - UKL P o s t t e s t Scores by V i s u a l / N o n v i s u a l C l a s s i f i c a t i o n by T r a i n i n g Source of V a r i a t i o n Sum of Squares Mean Souare F Main E f f e c t s V i s u a l / N o n v i s u a l T r a i n i n g 139.250 46.225 93.025 2 1 1 69.625 46.225 93.025 0.52 0.35 0.70 2-Way I n t e r a c t i o n s (Vis/Nonvis by T r a i n ) 164.025 1 164.025 1 .23 Residual 4819.473 36 133.874 To ta 1 5 122. 750 39 1 31 .353 4 4 As a group, the visual students did no better or worse on Form T of the DM Space Relations subtest than did the non-visuals. This would indicate that the second null i hypothesis should not be rejected. Hypothesis 3 The t h i r d hypothesis, stated in the n u l l form, was that the arithmetic mean on the posttest of students who received v i s u a l i z a t i o n training would not be s i g n i f i c a n t l y d i f f e r e n t „-from that of- students who did not receive v i s u a l i z a t i o n t r a i n i n g . The results are shown in Table II above. Once again, the n u l l hypothesis was not rejected (F =0.695, p >.05). The v i s u a l i z a t i o n t r a i n i n g did not seem to have improved the students' performance on the Space Relations test. This was true for both the visual and the non-visual groups. ily.po.tJies.is _ It was stated i n the fourth n u l l hypothesis that there would be no s i g n i f i c a n t interaction betw.een the i d e n t i f i e d primary representational system and p a r t i c i p a t i o n in the experimental or the control group. This hypothesis was tested in the analysis of variance whose results are summarized in Table J l above. No s i g n i f i c a n t two-way interactions were found (F =1.225, p >.05), therefore the null hypothesis was not rejected. The arithmetic mean of the non-visual group who received t r a i n i n g was not s i g n i f i c a n t l y d i f f e r e n t from that of the visual group who received t r a i n i n g , nor was the arithmetic mean of the 45 non-visual group who did not receive t r a i n i n g s i g n i f i c a n t l y d i f f e r e n t from that of the vi s u a l group who did not receive t r a i n i n g . S i m i l a r l y , the arithmetic mean of the non-visual group who received t r a i n i n g was not s i g n i f i c a n t l y d i f f e r e n t from that of the non-visual group who did not receive t r a i n i n g , and the arithmetic mean of the visual group who received t r a i n i n g was not s i g n i f i c a n t l y d i f f e r e n t from that of the vi s u a l group who did not receive t r a i n i n g . Contrary to expectations, a l l of the nu l l hypotheses were accepted on the basis of the r e s u l t s . The students' primary representational systems, i f they were correctly i d e n t i f i e d , did not appear to be related to their performance on the DAT Space Relations subtest, and the v i s u a l i z a t i o n t r a i n i n g was not successful in improving students' scores on the test. Since the l i t e r a t u r e appeared to lend support to a pos i t i v e r e l a t i o n s h i p between visual primary representational systems, v i s u a l i z a t i o n a b i l i t y , and performance on Space Relations tests, a number of post hoc analyses were performed to search for possible reasons for the negative r e s u l t s . EQS£ HQC. Ana.iy.se.s_ The Learning Style Self Inventory t reproduced in Appendix B, was used to c l a s s i f y the students as having visual or non-visual primary representational systems. An assumption was made that the preferred input system, which is measured by this instrument, would be the same as the primary representational system. The LSSI scores for each 46 category of input system were compared to the DAT Space Relations scores by means of a Pearson Product-Moment Correlation. There was no s i g n i f i c a n t c o r r e l a t i o n between the Auditory or T a c t i l e scores and the DAT scores (r = .22 and .29, respectively; p >.05). However, s u r p r i s i n g l y , there was a s i g n i f i c a n t negative correlation between the Visual scores and the DAT scores (r = -.43, p <.05). The c l a s s i f i c a t i o n of input systems was also compared to three of the sections on the questionnaire which attempted to i d e n t i f y primary representational systems (See Appendix C). When the c l a s s i f i c a t i o n s were compared to the approaches used in solving the Space Relations problems ("I could quite easily see the patterns move and form the correct shapes"; "I talked to myself"; "I had trouble imagining how the pattern would move and would have liked to pick i t up"), 35% of the 40 cases matched. 48% were not inconsistent, including t a c t i l e people who talked to themselves about the patterns since they were unable to pick them up. In comparison with c l a r i t y of mental imagery ("The picture was clear and in focus"; "I talked to myself to help me get the picture r i g h t " ; "The picture was unclear and I had trouble keeping i t c l e a r l y i n mind"), 38% of the 40 c l a s s i f i c a t i o n s matched. In addition, some students had two major strengths on the LLSI and used the most appropriate one, so that 55% of the cases were not inconsistent. When compared to the choice of holiday and work s e t t i n g (concentrations of v i s u a l , auditory, or kinesthetic 47 descr i p t o r s ) , 40% of the 40 c l a s s i f i c a t i o n s matched exactly while 52% matched on at least one choice of set t i n g . In a further attempt to relate Space Relations performance to v i s u a l i z a t i o n a b i l i t y and primary representational systems, the DAT scores were compared to the questionnaire sections on c l a r i t y of mental imagery, approach to the Space Relations test, and choice of holiday and work s e t t i n g . The mean scores on the DAT for students s e l e c t i n g the various choices are summarized below i n Table III. The maximum score on the DAT i s 60. Table III - DAT Scores and Questionnaire Responses Clarity, of Meoigl Imao.er_y. _M -clear image 27 33. 1 -talked to s e l f 8 26.6 -clear image and talked to s e l f 3 43.0 -unclear image and did not talk to s e l f 2 26.0 Approach to the test _ i i Score - v i s . (saw the pattern move) 10 32.8 -aud. (talked to s e l f ) 2J 33.4 -kin. (wanted to pick i t up) 9 28.7 Choice o i Mllday. and. wo_r_k setting _M Score -2 v i s . preferences 6 28.6 -2 aud. preferences 3 37.6 -2 kin. preferences 1 1 28.9 -1 v i s . , I aud. preference 9 36.8 -1 v i s . , i kin. preference 5 27.6 - i aud., 1 kin. preference 6 35.8 N = Number of students who selected that p o s s i b i l i t y Score = Mean score on the DAT v i s . = visu a l primary representational system aud. = auditory primary representational system kin. = kinesthetic primary representational system 48 F i n a l l y , accuracy scores (number correct/number attempted) on the Space Relations test were computed for the visual and the non-visual group, since there was a p o s s i b l i t y that visual students had solved the problems slowly but accurately while non-visual students had guessed at many of the questions and thus worked more quickly, f i n i s h i n g more questions. For the visual group, the accuracy was 70.0% on the pretest and 72.3% on the posttest. For the non-visual group, i t was 79.6% on the pretest and 82.1% on the posttest. For the most part, the post hoc analyses did not indicate any reasons for the unexpected results of the analyses of variance. The answers on the questionnaire did not relate c l o s e l y to the scores on either the LSSI or the DAT. There did, however, appear to be a s l i g h t indication that having a vi s u a l preferred input system, as i d e n t i f i e d by the LULL, was a disadvantage when solving s p a t i a l r e l a t i o n s problems. Scores on the vi s u a l part of the inventory were negatively correlated with scores on the DAT Space Relations subtest, and the students c l a s s i f i e d as visuals even appeared to have been s l i g h t l y less accurate than their non-visual counterparts. The highest mean score on the D&I (43.0) was obtained by the group which said that they could v i s u a l i z e c l e a r l y in their minds and that they also talked to themselves about the mental image they were forming. It may be that the use of not one but a combination of representational systems is 49 the most e f f e c t i v e s t r a t e g y f o r s o l v i n g s p a t i a l r e l a t i o n s problems. 50 CHAPTER 5 Di_s_cu£siaQ Bandler and Grinder's writings indicated that some people have one or more underdeveloped primary representational system and that they thus delete a part of their experience. Although their work considered the effect of such deletions on interpersonal communications, i t seemed reasonable to assume that other aptitudes, in such areas as s p a t i a l r e l a t i o n s , might also be affected by impoverished primary representational systems. If this were found to be true, then tr a i n i n g in an underdeveloped system would be an important form of developmental education, permitting a person to more f u l l y develop his or her p o t e n t i a l . The purpose of this study was, f i r s t , to attempt to c l a s s i f y grade 10 students according to their primary representational systems, working with an entire group rather than with i n d i v i d u a l s . The c l a s s i f i c a t i o n s were then compared to performance on a s p a t i a l relations test to determine whether a strong visual primary representational system was an asset when solving such problems. Secondly, the study attempted to develop one representational system — the visual — by v i s u a l i z a t i o n t r a i n i n g done, once again, with an entire group. A second form of the same sp a t i a l r elations test was given after the training to determine whether the students had improved in their a b i l i t y to mentally manipulate objects. The group c l a s s i f i c a t i o n and t r a i n i n g techniques were used to test the f e a s i b l i t y of 51 d e s i g n i n g developmental education c l a s s e s i n the area of primary r e p r e s e n t a t i o n a l systems. However, although the l i t e r a t u r e had supported the e x p e c t a t i o n that there would be a p o s i t i v e r e l a t i o n s h i p betw.een a v i s u a l primary r e p r e s e n t a t i o n a l system and higher scores on s p a t i a l r e l a t i o n s t e s t s , t h i s was not i n d i c a t e d by the r e s u l t s of t h i s study. An a n a l y s i s of v a r i a n c e found that there was no s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e between the a r i t h m e t i c means of the v i s u a l and the n o n - v i s u a l groups on e i t h e r the p r e t e s t or the p o s t t e s t . A comparison of scores on the s p a t i a l r e l a t i o n s t e s t and scores on the L e a r n i n g S t v l e S e l f Inventory, the measure of p r e f e r r e d input system which was used to c l a s s i f y students by primary r e p r e s e n t a t i o n a l system, i n f a c t produced a s i g n i f i c a n t negative c o r r e l a t i o n between a p r e f e r e n c e f o r v i s u a l i nput and performance on the s p a t i a l t e s t . In a d d i t i o n , the a n a l y s i s i n d i c a t e d that the p o s t t e s t a r i t h m e t i c mean of the group which had r e c e i v e d v i s u a l i z a t i o n ' t r a i n i n g and that of the c o n t r o l group were not s i g n i f i c a n t l y d i f f e r e n t , and that there was no s i g n i f i c a n t i n t e r a c t i o n between c l a s s i f i c a t i o n as v i s u a l or n o n - v i s u a l and membership i n the c o n t r o l or experimental group. What f a c t o r s could have caused r e s u l t s so r a d i c a l l y d i f f e r e n t from those which were expected? Although no obvious reasons stand out, a number of p o s s i b i l i t i e s can be mentioned. 52 I t may be that primary r e p r e s e n t a t i o n a l systems, as p o s t u l a t e d by Bandler and G r i n d e r , do not e x i s t or at l e a s t do not have any connection to s p a t i a l r e l a t i o n s a b i l i t y . Even i f they do, i t may be i m p o s s i b l e to strengthen the v i s u a l r e p r e s e n t a t i o n a l system by t r a i n i n g . On the other hand, the source of d i f f i c u l t y may l i e i n the method used to c l a s s i f y students by primary r e p r e s e n t a t i o n a l systems. Inaccurate c l a s s i f i c a t i o n was indeed suspected to be a cause of i n c o n s i s t e n t r e s u l t s i n many of the l e a r n i n g modality s t u d i e s which were c i t e d i n the l i t e r a t u r e review. The q u e s t i o n n a i r e which attempted to e l i c i t p r e d i c a t e s and i n f o r m a t i o n on s t u d e n t s ' a c t i v i t i e s d i d not produce r e s u l t s which could v a l i d l y be used to c l a s s i f y students by r e p r e s e n t a t i o n a l system, and the p r e f e r r e d input system i n d i c a t e d by students on the L e a r n i n g S t y l e Sei f I nventojy may not r e f l e c t the primary r e p r e s e n t a t i o n a l system. If t h i s were the case, the study would have measured input systems but attempted to t r a i n r e p r e s e n t a t i o n a l systems. This p o s s i b i l i t y i s suggested by the negative c o r r e l a t i o n betw.een membership i n the v i s u a l group and higher scores on the s p a t i a l r e l a t i o n s t e s t . An examination of the LgSI statements which are considered to be v i s u a l r e v e a l s t h a t o n l y one of them — "When somebody i s t e l l i n g me about something, I can p i c t u r e i t i n my mind" — concerns mental imagery. The others r e f e r to l o o k i n g at an o b j e c t and g a i n i n g i n f o r m a t i o n from i t . Furthermore, two of the statements might be answered p o s i t i v e l y more o f t e n by 53 people who do not v i s u a l i z e wells they may state that "a story is easier to understand in a movie than in a book" and that they " l i k e to read books that have pictures or drawings in them" precisely because they ca.nnot readily form mental images of what they read. Although Bandler and Grinder imply that people with a visual primary representational system pay more attention to things that they see and gain their information this way, there may be a subtle difference betw.een gaining information v i s u a l l y and representing i t i n t e r n a l l y i n vi s u a l terms. This would make a measure of input systems i n v a l i d for i d e n t i f y i n g representational systems. Perhaps the l a t t e r cannot be accurately i d e n t i f i e d by group instruments, but only by the observation of an individual's speech patterns and non-verbal behaviors in the course of an interview. This is what Bandler and Grinder have done in their work. It i s also possible that the o r i g i n a l questionnaire would have been more ef f e c t i v e with a group other than adolescents. Much of the d i f f i c u l t y with the incomplete sentences section of the questionnaire arose from the preponderance of kinesthetic predicates and a c t i v i t i e s in the responses. This imbalance did not appear when the p i l o t group of grade 1 I and 12 students did the questionnaire. The grade 10's, at the age of 15, seemed to be very concerned with physical a c t i v i t i e s and with their emotions. Indeed, they may not yet have developed a true preference for one input or representa'tional system. 54 A second p o s s i b l e cause of the negative r e s u l t s c o u l d be the design of the t r a i n i n g s e s s i o n s . Although the l i t e r a t u r e i n d i c a t e d that b r i e f , s p e c i f i c t r a i n i n g was most l i k e l y to be e f f e c t i v e , the two s e s s i o n s , comprising approximately 80 minutes, may not have been s u f f i c i e n t . The o v e r l a p p i n g of r e p r e s e n t a t i o n a l systems which was used i s a technique recommended by Bandler and Grinder, but, once again , they have used i t with i n d i v i d u a l s and not with groups. I t i s p o s s i b l e that the i n s t r u c t i o n s must be designed s p e c i f i c a l l y f o r one person and must be guided by that person's feedback d u r i n g the t r a i n i n g i n order to be e f f e c t i v e . T h i r d l y , the scores on the DAT Space R e l a t i o n s t e s t may have been i n f l u e n c e d by f a c t o r s other than v i s u a l i z a t i o n a b i l i t y . The students were not t e s t - s o p h i s t i c a t e d and t h e i r performance might have been i n f l u e n c e d by a n x i e t y or co n f u s i o n about the t e s t . A trend to improvement i n confidence and success was observed, i n that v i r t u a l l y a l l of the students had higher scores on the p o s t t e s t than on the p r e t e s t . In a d d i t i o n , more i n t e l l i g e n t students might have compensated f o r poor v i s u a l i z a t i o n s k i l l s by l o g i c a l r e a s o n i n g , while l e s s i n t e l l i g e n t students might have been able t o imagine the p a t t e r n moving but s t i l l not make a l o g i c a l choice based on re a s o n i n g . Since space r e l a t i o n s scores form p a r t of a gen e r a l r e a s o n i n g s c o r e on many ap t i t u d e t e s t s , a student's i n t e l l i g e n c e l i k e l y would a f f e c t the s c o r e , r e g a r d l e s s of h i s or her v i s u a l i z a t i o n a b i l i t y . An attempt was made to compare the DAT scores with IQ scores, but i n s u f f i c i e n t data was a v a i l a b l e . Furthermore, since the group who did the best on the test was using a combination of visual and auditory representational systems, the use of v i s u a l i z a t i o n alone may not be the best strategy for solving s p a t i a l r e l ations problems. F i n a l l y , i t i s possible that the students i n this study did not have t r u l y impoverished representational systems even though one of their systems may have been stronger than the others. Bandler and Grinder's c l i e n t s were experiencing d i f f i c u l t i e s in their l i v e s because they had deleted a part of their experience, these students — not part of a group seeking counselling because of d i f f i c u l t i e s — might have had less-developed representational systems which were s t i l l strong enough to be functional. A l l but one of the students who did not have a "major" r a t i n g for visual input on the LSSJL had a "minor" rather than a " n e g l i g i b l e " r a t i n g for visual input. People with a very weak visual representational system might have shown improvement after s i m i l a r v i s u a l i z a t i o n t r a i n i n g . The p o s s i b i l i t i e s outlined above could well be examined in further research. A r e p e t i t i o n of the experiment with a control for i n t e l l i g e n c e could produce useful information, as could a s i m i l a r experiment with subjects whose visual representational systems were i d e n t i f i e d c l i n i c a l l y as being tr u l y underdeveloped. The study could also be re p l i c a t e d 56 with an a d u l t group, perhaps a f t e r e x e r c i s e s to reduce t e s t a n x i e t y . In a d d i t i o n , two c o n t r a s t i n g s t u d i e s could help to c l a r i f y whether the negative r e s u l t s i n d i c a t e a lack of connection between r e p r e s e n t a t i o n a l systems and s p a t i a l a p t i t u d e s , inadequate c l a s s i f i c a t i o n techniques, or inadequate t r a i n i n g . One would use i n t e r v i e w s with i n d i v i d u a l s u b j e c t s f o r the i d e n t i f i c a t i o n of primary r e p r e s e n t a t i o n a l systems but group s e s s i o n s f o r the v i s u a l i z a t i o n t r a i n i n g ; the other would use i n d i v i d u a l i n t e r v i e w s f o r both the i d e n t i f i c a t i o n and t r a i n i n g . I t had been hoped t h a t t h i s r e s e a r c h would help to c l a r i f y some of the c o n t r a d i c t i o n s i n the, l i t e r a t u r e on l e a r n i n g m o d a l i t i e s and v i s u a l i z a t i o n t r a i n i n g , as well as to i n d i c a t e new p o s s i b i l i t i e s f o r the a p p l i c a t i o n of N e u r o l i n g u i s t i c Programming theory i n s c h o o l s . What i t has done i s to i d e n t i f y a combination of techniques which have not been e f f e c t i v e . H o p e f u l l y , f u t u r e r e s e a r c h w i l l begin to c l a r i f y the reasons f o r the unexpected outcomes of t h i s study and add to our understanding of primary r e p r e s e n t a t i o n a l systems and s p a t i a l r e l a t i o n s a p t i t u d e s . 57 Austin, Mary C , and Donovan, Margaret A. Do es Moda l i ty Preference Make a, Di ff erence? Jhe Results of a. 'IhLee_±ee_ Siyjdy ~z Literatuxe, Review. May, 1978. (ERIC Document ED 157 026) Bandler, Richard, and Grinder, John. Patterns of the tono.t__.c_ T_£cjar_iau_e_i of Milton ti__ Er_icj_.sc_£u /_.__£___,» v o l . I. Cupertino, C a l i f o r n i a * Meta Publications, 1975. Bennett, George K.? Seashore, Harold G.5 and Wesman, Alexander G. Manual for the Di f f e r e n t i a l Apti tude Tests T Fifth, Edi tion. Forms, S and. I . New York* The Psychological Corporation, 1973. Boffoly, Richard Lee. "A Factor Analysis of Visual, Kinesthetic and Cognitive Modes of Information Handling." Dissertation Abstracts International 35; 3-A (September 1974)s 1489-90. Bruner, P a t r i c i a Boyle. "The Effects of Perceived Parental Nurturance, Sex of Subject and Practice on Embedded Figures Test Performance." Dissertation Abs tracts International 38; 8--B (February 1978)* 3867-68. Burcham, Temmie et a l . "Effects of Auditory Reception on Auditory and Visual Learning Tasks." Education and IraiQina ol i b a Maniaiijt Re tarred 9; 2 (April 19.77)* 56-61. Butzow, John W. and Schlenker, Richard M. A Study of a Rossibie R^latiQQ§J_io. £e_kv_j__er_ Lo.we.Qf_e M i s y_i.sual-Hap_t.____ Theory and Piaget's Developmental Theory. March, 19/8. (ERIC Document ED 152 705) Carpenter, Finley et a l . Educabili tv of Stqd ies in the Vjsua.li zation of Ob jects i n Space. 1965. (ERIC Document ED 003 271) Caukins, Sivan Eugene J r . leaching Reading — y_is___on vs. the Muscle SpjLQdJ_e_s 2JLmr±9_ejotorsl. 19/1. (Eric Document ED 056 831) Ciganko, Richard A l l a n . "The Effect of Spatial Information Training and Drawing Practice upon Spatial V i s u a l i z a t i o n A b i l i t y and Representational Drawings of 9th Grade Students." Di ssertat ion Abstracts iaier.riatloQal 34*6-A (December 1973)* 3131-32. 58 Cohen, Donna. "Usefulness of the Group-Comparison Method to Demonstrate Sex Differences i n Spatial Orientation and Spatial V i s u a l i z a t i o n i n Older Men and Women." Perceptual and Motor. S k i l l s . 43? 2 (October 1976)* 388-90. Conner, Jane Marantz; Schackman, Maxine? and Serbin, Lisa A. "Sex-Related Differences in Response to Practice on a Visual -Spatial Test and Generalization to a Related Test." Child Development 49? I (I978)s 24-29. Conner, Jane Marantz? Serbin, Lisa A.? and Schackman, Maxine. "Sex Differences in Children's Response to Training on a Visual—Spatial Test." Developmental Psychology 13? 3 ( 1977)s 293-94. Cowles, James D. A n Experimental Study of Visua1 Perceptual I r a . i n i n a and. Readiness Scores with Qexiaio 1st Gxacie ChlidmQ. February 1969. (ERIC Document ED 032 92 1) Cox, M.V. "Perspective A b i l i t y * a Training Programme." Journal of Educational Research 71? 3 (January-February 1978)* 127-33. Darrow, James F. "Instruction Method Effects on Vis u a l i z a t i o n Test and Vi s u a l i z a t i o n Task Performance by Non-Art Elementary Majors." Dissertation Abs tracts International .33? A (1973)* 6725. Donovan, Margaret A., and Austin, Mary C. Does Moda1ity Pr^ie.Ee.Qc.e Make. a. Dif f erence? The Results of A Three-Year Study — Empirical Data. May 1978. (ERIC Document ED 157 027) Dorethy, Rex E. Art Education and Perceptual Theory* a Cri t i ca1 Analysis. November 1975. (ERIC Document ED 147 .266) Eastman, P h i l l i p M., and Salhab, Mohammed. "The Interaction of Spatial V i s u a l i z a t i o n and General Reasoning A b i l i t i e s with Instructional Treatment on Absolute Value Equations." Journal for Reseaych i n Mathematics Education 9? 2 (March 1978)* 152-54. Egeland, Byron et a l . Vi s u a l inf. gxaation ELQjC.e.ss.iQcri Evaluation of a I r a i o i o g Erjascaia fox CJiHgxen feSLiih Learning D j s a b i l i t i es. 19/6. (ERIC Document ED 132 161) E l i o t , John, and Fra.lley, Jacqueline S. "Sex Differences in Spatial A b i l i t i e s . " Young Chiidren 31? 6 (September 1976)* 487-98. Elkind, David, and Deblinger, Jo Ann. Read ing Achi evement i n DLsacly.aQj_ao;e_c[ Children as a Con̂ ejau_=ac_e of Non—Verbal Perceptual Training. 1968. (ERIC Document ED 021 7o4) Frederickson, Edward W. Shape Perception Judgements as a Function of. Stimulus Orientation, Stimulus Background, and Perceptual Style. December 1970. (ERIC Document ED 049 496) Glover, Henry. "A Study of the Relationship Between Scores on a V i s u a l i z a t i o n Test and Neural Impulse on a Visual Task." Di_s_sexiatiojQ Ab_s_tnacj;s l a t e x Q ^ i i Q Q a l 35? 3 - A (September 1974): 1497. Grinder, John; Delozier, Judith; and Bandler, Richard. RaJ.ier_QS. of the Hy_c_aot.i_c Iecjinj.au.es of Ml It on fcL Erickson. M.D., v o l . II. Cupertino, C a l i f o r n i a : Meta Publications, 1977. Hartsough, Ross, and L a f f a l , J u l i u s . "Content Analysis of S c i e n t i f i c Writings." Journal of General Psychology 83 (October 1970): 193-206. riewick, Walter Elton. "A Study to Compare the Effectiveness of the D i f f e r e n t i a l Aptitude Tests and the Adapted Guyanese Tests for Identifying Aptitudes among Students i n Guyanese Secondary Schools." Dissertation Abstracts International 30; A (1969): 3635. Hopkins, Kenneth D., and Glass, Gene V. Basic S t a t i s t i c s fox ihe. Bjs_ha_YJ_cj:al ^leoces.. Englewood C l i f f s , N.J.: Prentice-Hall, 19/8. Janssen, David Rainsford. "Effects of Visual and Auditory Perceptual Aptitudes and Letter Descrimination Pretraining on Word Recognition." Dissertation Abstracts International 34; 3-A (September 1973): J 130. Kagan, Jerome, and Kogan, Nathan. "Individual Variation in Cognitive Processes." In Carmichael's Manual Q_f Chi Id Psychology. 3rd Edition. Edited by Paul Mussen. New York: John Wiley and Sons, 1970. Leib o v i t z , Perry London; Cooper, L e s l i e M.; and Hart, Joseph T. "Dominance i n Mental Imagery." Educat ional and Psvchologi cal Measurement 32; 3 (Autumn 1972): 679-703. Lindgren, Scott David. "Spatial Perception i n Children: Supramodal Spatial A b i l i t y and Hemispheric S p e c i a l i z a t i o n for Spatial Processing." Di s s e r t a t i on Ab^ixacts International 39; 1-B (July 1978): 388. 60 L o l l a , Raymond Samuel. "The E f f e c t of Selected Instruction in Tactual-Visual Perception on Ninth Grade Male and Female's Visual Imagery, Mechanical Reasoning, and Spatial Relations A b i l i t i e s . " Ph. D. Dissertation, Purdue University, 1973. Lovgren, George K. "Sustaining and Encouraging Visual Imagery i n Children Prior to Learning to Read." Reading Improvement 14? 4s 268-74. Lowenfeld, Viktor. "Tests for Visual and Haptical Aptitudes." American Journal of Psychology 5 8 (1945): 100-112. Marcus, Lee. "How Teachers View Student Learning Styles." NAS5P B u l l e t i n 6? 408 ( A p r i l 1977)s 112-14. Marmor, Gloria Strauss, and Zaback, .Larry A. "Mental Rotation by the Blinds Does Mental Rotation Depend on Visual Imagery?" Journal of Experimental Psychologys Human Perception and Performance 2; 4 (November 1976)s 5 15-21. M i l l a r , Suzanna. "Spatial Representation by Blind and Sighted Children." Journal of Experimental and Chi Id psychology 21? 3 (June 1976): 460-79. M i l l e r , Jack W., and M i l l e r , Haroldine G. "Toward Resolution of the Spatial Puzzle." Peabody Journal of EducaliQQ 54; 3 (April 19 77): 135-41. Mitchelmore, Michael C. "Cross—Cultural Research on Concepts of Space and Geometry." In Space agd. Geometry. Papers from a Research Workshop. Edited by J. Larry Martin and David A. Bradbard. August, 1976. (ERIC Document ED 132 033) Morency, Anne. Auditorv Mgdality — Research and Practice. May 1967. (ERIC Document ED 014 383) Newcomer, P h y l l i s L., and Goodman, Libby. "Effects of Modality of Instruction on the Learning of Meaningful and Non—Meaningful Material by Auditory and Visual Learners." Journal of Special Education 9? 3 (1975): 261-68. Patridge, Susan. Mocigs. of Learning. 1976. (ERIC Document ED 147 776) Peterson, M. J . "The Retention of Imagined and Seen Spatial Matrices." C o a a i t i x e EsxsJiology. 7? 2 (April 1975): 18 1-93. 61 Pfleger, Lawrence R., and Pulvino, Charles J. How do Students Prefer to L e a r n ? 1977. (ERIC Document ED 148 768) Priddle, Ruth E., and Rubin, Kenneth H. "A Comparison of Two Methods for the Training of Spatial Cognition." Merrill-Palmer Quarterly 23; I (1977)! 57-65. Psychological Corporation. "What is an Aptitude?" Test Servi ce Bulje t i n 36 (August 1948). (ERIC Document ED 078 026) Rawls, Rachel F. Training i n Visual Perception for. Young Deaf Children ig_ Stimulate School Readiness. February 1967. (ERIC Document ED 012 -993) Resnick, Robert J. A n Investigation of the M o d i f l a b i l i t y of yisua_l l i l t e ^ L a i i x e AM.llt.Jes i n Ch±iir_ejQ. June 1968. (ERIC Document ED 017 009) Satterly, David J. "Cognitive Styles, Spatial A b i l i t y , and School Achievement." Journal of Educational Psychology 68; 1 (February 1976)! 36-42. Schlenker, Richard M. Vi ktor Lowenfeld 75 Vjsual-Haptic Continuum and. Gxoup_s of Wicie Ge^axajinic. S e^axaiion. (ERIC Document ED J33 359) Schlenker, Richard M. Vi ktor Lowenfeld's Visual-Haptic Continuum in Grades 9, 10, and 11. (ERIC Document ED 128 413) Schroth, Marvin L. "Spatial Aptitude and Its Relationship to Art Judgement." Perceptual and Motor Ski l i s 24 ( 1967)! 746. Segal, Ruth C. "The Haptic Approach in Practice." Academic Therapy 12; 2 (Winter 1976-77)* 219-24. Serapiglia, Theresa. "Self-Selected and Teacher-Matched Word Recognition Tasks Presented to Measured Perceptual Modalities of Primary Children." Dissertation Abstracts International 35; 3-A (September 1974)! 1536-37. Snow, Richard E. A n Overview of Current Research on Aptitude Processes. August 1977. (ERIC Document ED 148 977) Snow, Richard E. Research on Apti tudes % A Progress Report. Stanford University Research Project, Technical Report No. 1, September, 1976. (ERIC Document ED 141 72 1) 62 Tas chow, Horst G. Us in g the Vjsual-Audi torv- Kjnesthetic-Tactile l e c h Q i a u a to Solve • S]DeJL!iD_g Problems i n Elementary and Secondary School Classrooms. December 1970. (ERIC Document ED 046 668) Tuckman, Bruce W. Conducting Educational Research. 2nd ed. New Yorks Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, 1978. Wiederholt, J. Lee, and Hammill, Donald D. "Use of the Frostig-Horne Visual Perception Program in the Urban School." Psychology i n the. Schools 85 3 (1971): 268-74. Waugh, Ruth. Moda 1 i t y Preference as_ a. Function of Heading Achievement. August, 1971. (hRIC Document ED 054 921) Williams, Tannis MacBeth, and Aiken, Leona S. '"Development of Pattern C l a s s i f i c a t i o n : Auditory- Visual Equivalence i n the Use of Prototypes." Developmental psychology 135 3 (1977)s 198-204. Witkin, Herman A. "A Cognitive Style Approach to Cross Cul t u r a l Research." International journal o_f Psychology 2 5 4 ( 1 9 6 7 ) J 233-50. Wickless, Barbara Jeanette. "The Development of a Test of Spatial Perception to Assess the Spatial A b i l i t y of 8th, 9th, and 10th Grade Students.'1' Dissertation Abstracts International 34? I 2-A (June 1974)s 7475. 63 APPENDIX A S c r i p . ! Q l l o e y , i s u a i i , ^ t i O Q l i a i a i Q a SessiQQS E i r ^ i Day. We a l l get i n f o r m a t i o n through our f i v e senses. For l e a r n i n g , we use mostly our v i s u a l , a u d i t o r y , and k i n e s t h e t i c systems. Everybody comes to depend a b i t more on one of the systems, because we've learned t h a t that works f o r us. I t becomes s t r o n g e r . For example, some of you would probably r a t h e r get i n f o r m a t i o n by r e a d i n g a book, others by h e a r i n g someone t e l l thefn about i t . Some of you would probably r a t h e r f i g u r e something out by l o o k i n g at a diagram, others by a c t u a l l y p i c k i n g the t h i n g up and examining how i t ' s put together. T h i s i s q u i t e normal, j u s t as some people p r e f e r d i f f e r e n t foods and so on. We may get i n f o r m a t i o n through one system, but r e a c t i n t e r n a l l y i n another system which i s stronger f o r us. For example, you see the e x p r e s s i o n on someone's face and that gives you a p a r t i c u l a r f e e l i n g , and then you r e a c t on the b a s i s of the f e e l i n g you have. Or you do some p h y s i c a l a c t i v i t y t h a t someone has warned you a g a i n s t , and you get a p a i n , and you can hear t h a t person's v o i c e i n your head, warning you. You may a l s o hear a v o i c e and get a v i s u a l image of the person i t belongs to. The t e s t you d i d needs a v i s u a l a b i l i t y — you t r y to use your v i s u a l system to create a p i c t u r e i n your mind and have the p i c t u r e c l e a r enough that you can see i t move and change p o s i t i o n . What you're going to do i n t h i s group i s to t r y to improve your scores on that type of t e s t by p r a c t i s i n g s e e i n g and moving o b j e c t s i n your i m a g i n a t i o n . By p r a c t i c e you c o u l d get b e t t e r a t d o i n g s p a t i a l r e l a t i o n s problems. The r e s t of t h i s p e r i o d w e ' l l be doing t h i s p r a c t i c e . It w i l l be l i k e e x e r c i s i n g your i m a g i n a t i o n s . Some of you may f i n d i t hard to s.ee mental p i c t u r e s or hear sounds, but t h i s should get a b i t e a s i e r as we go through the p r a c t i c e . J u s t t r y to f o l l o w the i n s t r u c t i o n s the best you can. I ' l l be a s k i n g you to see the route you take as you go home, so each of you w i l l be s e e i n g d i f f e r e n t images. Some of you may be walking, or g e t t i n g on a bus, or r i d i n g i n a c a r , and so on. J u s t make your own mental p i c t u r e s and then t r y to do the things I t e l l you to do with the p i c t u r e s you see. Remember, when you see things i n your mind, see them from your own p o i n t of view, as you would i f you were a c t u a l l y t h e r e . Don't see y o u r s e l f as a separate person. 64 You w i l l probably fi n d i t easier to close your eyes so you are not distracted by things you see in this rbom. This should be relaxing. Start by finding a comfortable position in your chair. Mow take five deep, slow breaths. It's the end of the day and you're about to go home from school. You're at your locker. You're putting things in the locker — f e e l them in your hands, feel yourself reach up to the shelf. Feel yourself pick up anything you want to take with you, maybe put on a jacket. Now just try to see the inside of your locker for a minute. Look at what is i n i t and where things are. Close the locker. Hear the sound i t makes. Feel your fingers putting the lock i n place and shutting i t — hear i t snap shut. One of your friends is there and they sta r t to talk to you. Hear their voice and what they say. Hear yourself answer them. Look at them. Listen to the other sounds i n the h a l l . Now Look around you and try to see everything as c l e a r l y as you can — the h a l l , the lockers, the people standing around or moving. Feel yourself walking through the h a l l s . Feel yourself taking steps, your body moving. Look around and see the things that you are passing. Go towards the exit you normally use to leave the school. Listen to the sounds around you. Look and see where the sounds are coming from. Go down the s t a i r s . Feel yourself taking those steps. Look around you. Now you're outside. You can f e e l that i t ' s cooler. Listen to the sounds — t r a f f i c , voices, some birds. Look around and see what things are making the sounds. Turn back and look at the school. Try to r e a l l y concentrate on the p i c t u r e . Count the windows you can see, look at the doors — are there windows i n the doors? Are there bushes near the building? Watch the doors swing open and people come out. Now try to describe what you see in your mind, as though you were describing i t to someone else. Hear yourself saying the words inside your head. Now just forget the words you used and concentrate on seeing the picture without talking to yourself. Now continue along your normal route home. Feel the movement and l i s t e n to the sounds around you. Stop a minute. L i s t e n . Look around you in a l l directions — turn to your l e f t and see what's there, then to your r i g h t , then behind you. 65 Now look at some object that's near you — a pole, a bench, a car, a letterbox, a tree, a bike. Go over and touch i t . Feel what i t ' s l i k e — smooth or rough? Sticky? Dusty? Take a good look at i t . Walk around and look at i t from d i f f e r e n t angles and see what i t ' s l i k e from those sides. Continue on your way. Feel the motion, fe e l any surface you are touching. If you are next to something, s i t t i n g on something, standing on something, be aware of the surface your body is in contact with. Look at those things. There i s another person there and they begin to talk. Hear their voice and your voice as you answer. Look at them. Try to form a clear image of what they look l i k e . Watch what they're doing — are they moving, changing their position? As they talk, see their l i p s move. Now try again to get a clear image of their face, their expression. Continue on your way u n t i l you are very near to your home. Try to see the things you would see on that route. Look to your l e f t and see the things you're passing... to the r i g h t . . . behind you.... Hear the sound of a truck. Turn and look at i t . What does i t look like? Is i t big? What colour is i t ? Does i t have any signs on i t ? Watch i t approach, pass by you, and disappear. Feel the steps you are taking. Look at something in the distance. As you feel yourself move towards i t , see i t get closer to you. It gets bigger and you can see more d e t a i l s as you move nearer to i t . See those d e t a i l s . Walk up to the front of your house or apartment building. Feel yourself make the turn to go towards i t . Liste n to any sounds you hear — people talking, t r a f f i c , a dog barking, birds, children playing. Look around and see what i s causing those sounds. Now study the front of your house or building. See a l l the d e t a i l s you can. How many windows are there? Are they open or shut? Are the curtains open? What do they look like? How many steps are there? Can you see a chimney? Is the roof s t r a i g h t or does i t have a peak? Now, in your mind, describe what you see to another person. Hear yourself saying the words. Now forget the words and just try to see the picture. Now turn l e f t and walk around to the l e f t side of the building. Go around the corner and stand back a b i t . See that side of i t , i n d e t a i l , and try to describe i t in your rnind. Mow just see the picture. 6 6 Walk around to the back. Stand back, and t r y to see i t c l e a r l y from t h a t p o s i t i o n . D e s c r i b e i t i n your mind, then l e t the words disappear and j u s t see the p i c t u r e . Go around to the other s i d e . Take a look at that s i d e . How would you d e s c r i b e i t to someone? Now j u s t concentrate on s e e i n g the p i c t u r e . Imagine you were l o o k i n g down on the top of the b u i l d i n g from a higher b u i l d i n g or a h e l i c o p t e r . Try to see what i t would look l i k e from t h e r e . Where i s the peak of the r o o f ? The chimney? Concentrate on seeing that p i c t u r e . Return to the f r o n t . Now walk up to the f r o n t door — f e e l y o u r s e l f g o i n g towards i t , up or down any s t e p s . Feel the doorknob i n your hand and turn i t . Open the door. L i s t e n to the sound i t makes. Walk i n and shut i t . Hear i t c l i c k . Look around you. Look f o r a small o b j e c t you could p i c k up. If you don't see one, go a b i t f u r t h e r i n t o the room. Walk over to i t and p i c k i t up. Reel i t — f e e l i t s shape, i f i t i s smooth or rough, i f there are any bumps or sharp c o r n e r s . Look at the top, or at one s i d e i f there i s no r e a l top. Turn i t over — f e e l i t turn i n your hands — and look at the bottom or the opp o s i t e s i d e . Now tu r n i t again and look at a d i f f e r e n t s i d e . F i n d some other angle at which •you haven't held i t and turn i t to look at i t i n that p o s i t i o n . Now turn i t back so the f i r s t s i d e i s up again. Put i t down on the f l o o r . P i c k up another o b j e c t near you. Look at i t from the top. In your mind, d e s c r i b e what the top looks l i k e . Hear your words. Now f o r g e t the words and j u s t look at i t . Turn i t over and look a t the bottom. Describe i t i n your mind, and then j u s t t r y to see i t without t h i n k i n g about the d e s c r i p t i o n . Now look a t another s i d e and, again, d e s c r i b e i t t o y o u r s e l f . L e t the words fade from your mind and j u s t see the o b j e c t t h e r e , as c l e a r l y as you can. Put i t down on the f l o o r to the l e f t of the f i r s t o b j e c t and about a f o o t away from i t . Look at the two o b j e c t s . Now move the second o b j e c t c l o s e r to the f i r s t , so i t i s only about s i x inches away. Look at them. Switch the two o b j e c t s so the second one i s now on the r i g h t and the f i r s t one on the l e f t . Look a t them c a r e f u l l y — s.ee how c l o s e they are together, which way they are f a c i n g — so that i f you had to put them down e x a c t l y the same way again l a t e r , you c o u l d . Pick up a t h i r d o b j e c t . F e e l i t c a r e f u l l y . Are there any bumps or grooves on the top si d e ? Is i t smooth? Describe i t . Now j u s t look at i t and f o r g e t the 67 d e s c r i p t i o n . Turn i t upside down and f e e l that s u r f a c e . Describe i t to y o u r s e l f , then j u s t concentrate on seein g i t . Take i t over to the other two o b j e c t s and put i t on the f l o o r , c l o s e r to you than the other two are, but so that one of the other o b j e c t s i s to the l e f t of t h i s one and the other i s to the r i g h t of i t . Look at those three o b j e c t s and see how they look i n r e l a t i o n to each other. Now walk around them and see how they Look from d i f f e r e n t p o s i t i o n s . Go to one s i d e and Look at them. Which one i s to the l e f t now? Which i s nearer to you? Now walk around f u r t h e r and again look a t t h e i r p o s i t i o n s . Which one i s on the l e f t now? C l o s e r to you? Go on to the other s i d e and look at them a g a i n . Now walk back to where you s t a r t e d and see the o b j e c t s from that p o s i t i o n . As you look down, l e t the p i c t u r e g r a d u a l l y fade from your mind. Become aware of the desk you are s i t t i n g i n and the other people around you i n the classroom. Open your eyes and see the classroom. S t r e t c h a b i t , take a deep br e a t h , r e l a x . (3 minute break) Once again , f i n d a comfortable p o s i t i o n , c l o s e your eyes, take f i v e deep, slow b r e a t h s . See a t a b l e . I t i s bare. You are going to p l a c e nine o b j e c t s on the t a b l e . Along the l e f t hand s i d e , put an apple near the f a r edge, a banana i n the ce n t r e , and an orange nearest to you. See them l i n e d up along the l e f t s i d e . Down the c e n t r e , put a cup f a r t h e s t from you, a p l a t e i n the c e n t r e , and a g l a s s nearest to you. Along the r i g h t hand s i d e , put a pen f a r t h e s t from you, a r u l e r i n the c e n t r e , and a book nearest to you. Now look at the t a b l e . Look at the f a r edge and see the three o b j e c t s beside each other — the apple, the cup, and the pen. Then look across the centre and see the banana on the l e f t , the p l a t e next to i t , i n the centre of the t a b l e , and the r u l e r next to i t . Look a t the row nearest you and see the orange on the l e f t , then the g l a s s , then the book. De s c r i b e to y o u r s e l f the three o b j e c t s on the l e f t of the t a b l e . . . on the r i g h t . . . i n between. De s c r i b e the o b j e c t s along each d i a g o n a l — from the l e f t near corner to the r i g h t f a r corner and from the r i g h t near corner to the l e f t f a r corn e r . Now f o r g e t the d e s c r i p t i o n i n words and j u s t t r y to see the table with a l l the o b j e c t s on i t . Try not to have any words i n your mind a t a l l . 68 Now walk around to the l e f t side of the table and watch the objects as you do so. See them now from this new pos i t i o n . See which ones are on the l e f t now, which ones are in the centre, which on the r i g h t . Which are i n the farthest row? The nearest? When you have described i t to yourself from this point of view, just try to see i t c l e a r l y without thinking of the description. Now walk around to your l e f t again and see the position of the objects change as you move. As you Look at the table now, which objects are closest to you? Farthest away? In the centre? On the l e f t ? On the right? Take a good look at the table and see the objects s i t t i n g there. Clear a l l the words from your mind and just s.ee the table. Once again, walk around to your l e f t , watching the objects as you do so. See the objects, and where each one is from this p o s i t ion. Try to get a clear picture in your mind, without thinking of a description in words. Now you are going to walk around the table very slowly but without stopping. As you move, you w i l l look at the objects and their positions from where you are at that moment. Try to do that now. Try to see how the objects w i l l seem to be on d i f f e r e n t sides of the table as you move. Let the picture fade from your mind. Become aware of the desk you are i n , the other people around you. Open your eyes, stretch, take a deep breath, and relax. ^ < ^ Q _ i Day After about twenty minutes today, you w i l l be writing another form of the Spatial Relations test you did two weeks ago. Before then, we are going to spend some time p r a c t i s i n g v i s u a l i z a t i o n exercises again, so that your minds are prepared for the type of problem you'll be doing. Get into a comfortable p o s i t i o n , and close your eyes. Take f i v e deep, slow breaths, and fe e l yourself relax. See a small, square glass table. The glass i s clear. We are going to place some objects on the table again. F i r s t pick up a stapler and feel i t in your hand. Feel your arm reach out and put the stapler along the far edge, on the l e f t . Hear the sound as i t touches the table. Now pick up a paper c l i p and f e e l yourself put that in the centre along the far edge of the table. Now an eraser — put that in the far r i g h t hand corner. Now you w i l l pick up and place some objects along the centre row. Feel each one as you pick i t up 5 f e e l your arm reach out and hear the sound as you put i t down. On the l e f t , put a ri n g . Then put a watch in the centre, and a pair of eyeglasses on the ri g h t . Now you w i l l pick up a folded kleenex and put i t on the l e f t along the 69 nearest edge of the table. Take a toothbrush and place i t in the centre, and a comb on the r i g h t . Now look at the l e f t hand edge of the table and see the three objects s i t t i n g there — farthest from you, the stapler, then the ring i n the centre, and the folded kleenex nearest to you. Look along the centre. St a r t i n g at the farthest edge, you see the paper c l i p , then, i n the centre, the watch, then, nearest to you, the toothbrush. Look at the right hand edge and see the eraser farthest away, the eyeglasses in the centre, and the comb nearest you. Now get a clear image of those objects in your mind. Try to see where they a l l are. Describe i t in your mind and as you do so reach out and point to each one in turn. Then forget the description i n words and just concentrate on seeing the table with the objects on i t . Now walk around to the l e f t side of the table and see the objects from that p o s i t i o n . See which ones are on the l e f t . . . the r i g h t . . . nearest to you... farthest away. Describe i t to yourself, reaching out and touching each object i n order. Now forget the words and just see the image there in front of your eyes. Now imagine that you are under the table looking up through the glass. You are s t i l l on the same side of the table, but you have s l i d down underneath i t . How do the objects look from the underside? Which ones are now on your l e f t ? Your right? Look at each one in turn, and then try to see the whole group at once. S t i l l under the table, move around to your l e f t . Look at the objects again and s.ee what position each is in now. Come up on that side of the table and look down at i t . Describe to.yourself the position of the objects now, and point to them as you do so. Then l e t the words disappear from your mind and just see the table with the objects on i t . Slowly walk around the table, looking at the objects and watching how their positions seem to change as you move. Try to keep the picture clear in your mind. Now l e t that picture fade again, and gradually become aware of where you are and what is around you. Feel the chair you are s i t t i n g in and hear the other people in the room. Open your eyes, stretch, take a deep breath. 70 In the few minutes before we begin the test, practise moving objects i n your mind on your own. This i s what you could do yourself i f you were going to write a Spatial Relations test for a job interview, or entrance to a t r a i n i n g program. It is a way of preparing yourself for the t e s t . 71 APPENDIX B LEARNING STYLE SELF INVENTORY Tnis assessment w i l l allow us to i d e n t i f y the ways i n which you learn. In t n i s assessment are a series of statements. After reading each statement, please respond by i n d i c a t i n g one of tne three categories on the answer sheet. C i r c l e the: J i f you wish to respond, USUALLY S i f you wish to respond, SOMETIMES R i f you wish to respond, RARELY There are no GOOD or BAD, RIGHT or WRONG s e l e c t i o n s . Your response should r e f l e c t YOUR OWN feelings and i n s i g h t s . Although you w i l l not be timed, do not ponder over any one statement for a long time. INDICATE YOUR ANSWERS ON THE SriEEf PROVIDED 72 1. I can t e l l i f something i s wrong with a motor by l i s t e n i n g to i t run. 2. The tone of a speaker's voice adds meaning to their words . J . I could f e e l the difference between wood and p l a s t i c by s l i d i n g my hand over i t . 4. I can button my coat in the dark. •J. A story is easier to understand i n a rnovie than in a b oo k. 6. I l i k e to read books that have pictures or drawings in them. '/. I can recognize who i s on the phone just by l i s t e n i n g to the voice for a few moments. d. I can remember music well enough to recognize a "tune" the next time I hear i t . 9. I rub my fingers over something to find out how smooth or rough i t might be. 10. I l i k e to use my hands when learning about something. 11. I choose clothes for the way they look on me or in pic tures. 12. I f e e l I know a person better i f I see a picture of them than i f I read about them. 13. Noises bother me when I'm t r y i n g to read or talk to someone. 14. I am able to t e l l which instruments are playing at •different times during a song. Id. I decide that my hair needs washing by the way i t feels when I touch i t . 16. I can c e l l a nickle from a dime with my fingers when I reach insiae my pocket. 17. when someoody i s t e l l i n g me about something, I can picture i t in my mind. 13. r.'hen I tune a radio, I use the numbers on the d i a l . |y. I can recognize people by hearing th e i r footsteps. 7J 20. I tune a r a d i o by sound, not by the numbers on the d i a l . 21. I l i k e to w r i t e with a pen or p e n c i l that " f e e l s coiiif or t a b l e". 22. I p i c k up and f e e l v e getables and f r u i t b efore e a t i n g them. 23. I can understand what i s going on by l o o k i n g at a p i c t u r e . 24. I l i k e i t when someone shows me how to do something r a t h e r than to read or be t o l d about i t . " A u d i t o r y " statements* 1,2, / ,8,I 3, 14,J 9,20 " T a c t i l e " statements: 3,4,9,10,15,16,21,22 ''Visual" statements: 5,6,11,12,17,18,23,24 7.4 APPENDIX C QUESTIONNAIRE Check the sentence which best describes the way you solved most of the problems on the Space Relations Test. Place a check by one choice. 1. In my mind, I could quite easily see the patterns move and form the correct shapes. 2. I talked to myself (for example, I might t e l l myself "The door has to go to the l e f t of the wi ndow"). 3. I had trouble imagining how the pattern would move to form the object, and I r e a l l y would have liked to pick up the pattern and f o l d i t . That is how I solve such problems. Imagine that you are working at a job you enjoy. Which of these three settings would you most lik e to work in? (If you would l i k e more than one, try to decide which would be more important to you.) Place a check mark beside your one choice. 1. The area i s quiet and relaxing. Sometimes you can hear birds outside the windows. You can have your choice of music i f you want i t . You can sometimes hear the hum of other conversations, but this i s not unpleasantly loud or d i s t r a c t i n g . 2. The area i s well l i t and decorated in cheerful, bright colours. The furniture i s attractive and there are many pictures on the walls. From the window you can see the mountains. 3. The area is one where you feel comfortable and at home. There are deep carpets and soft f u r n i t u r e . 4. You can be physically active while you are working and you have a chance to take part i n sports or exercise during your breaks. 7.5 Imagine that you are on an ideal holiday in the tropics. Which of these places would you rather be at? (If you l i k e a l l of them, try to decide which features are more important to you.) Place a check mark beside your one c ho ice. 1. You can l i e on the beach and f e e l yourself t o t a l l y relax, as the sun beats down on you. You can f e e l the warmth spreading right through you, but a soft breeze cools you enough so that you are comfortable. When you wish, you can swim in the warm waters or l e t the waves lap over you. 2 . Lying beside the ocean with your eyes closed, you can hear the sound of the waves r o l l i n g in and breaking on the shore. The leaves r u s t l e in the breeze. Nearby, t r o p i c a l birds are c a l l i n g and singing, and the sound of music can be heard from the v i l l a g e . 3 . From your cabin, you look out over a stretch of white sand to the deep blue water beyond i t , sparkling in the sun. Lush green palm trees stretch from the cabin to the shore. In the distance, blue-green mountains seern to r i s e majestically out of the water. t In Walt Disney-type movies and cartoons, animals are l i k e people. If I had a chance to be an animal l i k e that: 1. I would most want to be a because 2 . Most of a l l , I would hate to be a because 3 . Right now, I am most l i k e a because Complete the following sentences in any way that i s true for you: 1. The season I l i k e best i s because 2 . If I had one hour off school to do anything I wanted, I would 3 . When I'm with my friends, I r e a l l y l i k e to 4. My greatest strength i s 5 . When I enter a new group, I 6 . At night I l i k e 76 7. My house 8. M o t o r c y c l e s F. T r y t o form a mental p i c t u r e of your l i v i n g room a t home. See a l l the d e t a i l s as c l e a r l y as you can. When you have " l o o k e d a t " t h i s p i c t u r e f o r a minute o r s o , check any s t a t e m e n t s below which were t r u e f o r you whiTe you had t h i s mental p i c t u r e . You may choose more than one r e s p o n s e . 1 . The p i c t u r e was c l e a r and i n f o c u s , almost l i k e I was a c t u a l l y l o o k i n g a t the room. 2. The p i c t u r e was a b i t u n c l e a r , and I had t r o u b l e k e e p i n g i t c l e a r l y i n rnind. 3. I t a l k e d t o myself i n my head, t o he l p me get the p i c t u r e r i g h t ( f o r example, I might say to m y s e l f "The r e d c h a i r i s b e s i d e the T.V.") 4. I j u s t "saw" the p i c t u r e . I d i d n ' t t a l k t o myself about i t .

Cite

Citation Scheme:

    

Usage Statistics

Country Views Downloads
China 23 1
Japan 6 0
France 3 0
United States 2 2
Germany 1 3
Australia 1 0
Russia 1 0
City Views Downloads
Beijing 23 1
Unknown 6 6
Tokyo 6 0
Sunnyvale 1 2
Ashburn 1 0

{[{ mDataHeader[type] }]} {[{ month[type] }]} {[{ tData[type] }]}

Share

Share to:

Comment

Related Items