Open Collections

UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

Graphemic discrimination by educable mentally retarded and slow learners Bain, David Alexander 1975

Your browser doesn't seem to have a PDF viewer, please download the PDF to view this item.

Item Metadata

Download

Media
831-UBC_1975_A2 B03.pdf [ 10.16MB ]
Metadata
JSON: 831-1.0054587.json
JSON-LD: 831-1.0054587-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 831-1.0054587-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 831-1.0054587-rdf.json
Turtle: 831-1.0054587-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 831-1.0054587-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 831-1.0054587-source.json
Full Text
831-1.0054587-fulltext.txt
Citation
831-1.0054587.ris

Full Text

GRAPHEMIC DISCRIMINATION BY EDUCABLE MENTALLY RETARDED AND SLOW LEARNERS DAVID ALEXANDER BAIN M.A., The U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia, 1970 A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF EDUCATION i n the FACULTY OF EDUCATION We accept t h i s t h e s i s as conforming to the required standard THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA August, 1975 In p r e s e n t i n g t h i s t h e s i s in p a r t i a l f u l f i l m e n t o f the r e q u i r e m e n t s f o r an advanced degree at the U n i v e r s i t y o f B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a , I a g r e e that the L i b r a r y s h a l l make i t f r e e l y 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 p u r p o s e s may be g r a n t e d by the Head o f my Department o r by h i s r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s . It i s u n d e r s t o o d that 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 The U n i v e r s i t y o f B r i t i s h Co lumbia V a n c o u v e r 8, Canada i i ABSTRACT The v i s u a l d i s c r i m i n a t i o n of r o t a t i o n s and r e v e r s a l s of s i n g l e l e t t e r s w i t h i n f i v e l e t t e r nonsense words was s t u d i e d i n a f i v e - t o - o n e match-to-sample format. The subjects were educable mentally retarded and slow l e a r n e r s , c h r o n o l o g i c a l age 8 - 1 6 years and mental age 5 - 1 2 years. R o t a t i o n and r e v e r s a l reading e r r o r s were r e c l a s s i f i e d as d i s o r i e n t a t i o n and resequencing e r r o r s . S i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s were found between the f o l l o w i n g subcategories of l e t t e r d i s o r i e n t a t i o n e r r o r s . H o r i z o n t a l d i s o r i e n t a t i o n s were more frequent than v e r t i c a l and r o t a t i o n a l e r r o r s . D i s o r i e n t a t i o n e r r o r s were most frequent i n the i n i t i a l and f i n a l p o r t i o n s of words. Ten of the eighteen p o s s i b l e l e t t e r d i s o r i e n t a t i o n s , e.g. "d-b" and "q-b" occurred at d i f f e r e n t r a t e s . Most of the r e c i p r o c a l l e t t e r e r r o r s such as the d i s o r i e n t a t i o n from "d to b" or from "b back to d" occurred at d i f f e r e n t r a t e s from one another. An e m p i r i c a l b a s i s f o r making typographic changes to the l e t t e r s b, d, p, and q to reduce the frequency of d i s o r i e n t a t i o n e r r o r s was e s t a b l i s h e d through an e x t e n s i v e review of the l i t e r a t u r e . Reviews were made o f the l i t e r a t u r e d e s c r i b i n g the e t i o l o g y of d i s o r i e n t a t i o n and resequencing e r r o r s and the c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of typography i n f l u e n c i n g v i s i b i l i t y and l e g i b i l i t y . A l s o , the research on geometric and graphemic form p e r c e p t i o n was reviewed to e s t a b l i s h how c h i l d r e n p e r c e i v e o r i e n t a -t i o n a l and s e q u e n t i a l changes of v i s u a l s t i m u l i . Before t e s t i n g the e f f e c t i v e n e s s of the typographic changes, p o s i t i v e reinforcement was used to increase the s u b j e c t s ' l e v e l of performance to approximate t h e i r current l e v e l of performance c a p a b i l i t y . i i i An e f f e c t i v e treatment was expected to increase the s u b j e c t s ' r e i n f o r c e d l e v e l of performance, that i s , to teach new s k i l l s and to increase t h e i r l e v e l of c a p a b i l i t y . Under these c o n d i t i o n s the typographic m o d i f i c a -t i o n s f a i l e d to s i g n i f i c a n t l y decrease the frequency of d i s o r i e n t a t i o n e r r o r s . A review was a l s o made of the r e l a t i o n s h i p between reading e r r o r s and o p t h a l m o l o g i c a l f a c t o r s . Performance on the Keystone T e l e -b i n o c u l a r V i s u a l Survey (1961) was not p r e d i c t i v e of d i s o r i e n t a t i o n e r r o r s . ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Many thanks are extended to the S c o t t i s h R i t e C h a r i t a b l e Foundation of Canada f o r t h e i r $2,000 Research Bursary awarded by the N a t i o n a l I n s t i t u t e on Mental R e t a r d a t i o n , Kinsmen NIMR B u i l d i n g , Toronto, Canada. To my committee members - thanks. To Robert Sweet, a f e l l o w student - many thanks f o r h i s a s s i s t a n c e . i v TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTER Page I. INTRODUCTION TO THE PROBLEM 1 Review of the L i t e r a t u r e 3 Ro t a t i o n s , Reversals and Related Terms 3 R e c l a s s i f i c a t i o n of Rotations and Reversals. . . . . . 6 D i s o r i e n t a t i o n E r r o r s 7 Resequencing E r r o r s . . 8 Developmental Trends of Reading E r r o r s . . . . 10 D i s o r i e n t a t i o n E r r o r s 10 D i s o r i e n t a t i o n Summary. . 12 Resequencing E r r o r s . . . . 13 Resequencing Summary. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 E t i o l o g y of Reading E r r o r s . . . . . . . . . . . 15 Graphemic Pe r c e p t i o n 21 L e t t e r and Word D i s c r i m i n a t i o n Tests. 23 Geometric Form Pe r c e p t i o n . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26 Peabody P i c t u r e Vocabulary Test. . . . . . . . . . . . 38 Peabody P i c t u r e Vocabulary Test Mental Age 39 Peabody P i c t u r e Vocabulary Test I n t e l l i g e n c e Quotient. . . . . . . . . . . 41 Typography and L e g i b i l i t y ^2 Ophthalmological F a c t o r s . 51 V i s u a l A c u i t y R e f r a c t i o n . . . . . . 52 Bi n o c u l a r D i f f i c u l t i e s . 55 V i s u a l Screening . 59 I I . STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM 6 2 Experimental Graphemic M o d i f i c a t i o n s 63 Statement of the Hypotheses '. ^4 I I I . METHOD OF EXPERIMENTATION. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 7 S e l e c t i o n of Subjects. 7 7 v CHAPTER Page Tes t i n g Format and Procedures . 78 I n i t i a l Screening Tests. 80 The Peabody P i c t u r e Vocabulary Test . . . . . . . . . . . 80 Five-to-One Match of Geometric Sameness . . . 80 Keystone T e l e b i n o c u l a r V i s u a l Survey. . . . . . . . . . . 81 O r i e n t a t i o n D i s c r i m i n a t i o n . 82 d, b, p, q O r i e n t a t i o n Base-Rate Test . . . . . . . . . . 83 Sequence D i s c r i m i n a t i o n 85 S i n g l e L e t t e r Sequence D i s c r i m i n a t i o n Base-Rate Test. . . 87 Assignment to the C o n t r o l and Experimental Groups 88 Treatment Tests. . . . . . . . 90 O r i e n t a t i o n Matching Task . . . . . . . . . . 91 IV. STATISTICAL PROCEDURES AND RESULTS . . . . . . 95 A n a l y s i s of Base-Rate Data . . 95 A n a l y s i s of Variance: I n i t i a l , Medial and F i n a l P o s i t i o n , Base-Rate Data 95 A n a l y s i s of Variance: H o r i z o n t a l , V e r t i c a l and R o t a t i o n a l D i s o r i e n t a t i o n s . . . 97 M u l t i p l e Comparison of Means . 98 A n a l y s i s of D i f f e r e n c e s i n Means Between Four P a i r s of L e t t e r D i s o r i e n t a t i o n s W i t h i n Each Category of H o r i z o n t a l , V e r t i c a l and. R o t a t i o n a l D i s o r i e n t a t i o n s . , 99 C o r r e l a t i o n A n a l y s i s H o r i z o n t a l , V e r t i c a l , R o t a t i o n a l ; I n i t i a l , M e d i a l , F i n a l E r r o r s . . . . 103 Step-wise Regression of MA, CA and Sex on Base-Rate T o t a l s . . . . . . . . . . . . . . " . . • 1 0 6 H o y t - R e l i a b i l i t y of Base-Rate Data. . . . . . . . . . . . 1 0 8 • 2 H o t e l l i n g T_ Experimental and C o n t r o l Base-Rate Scores . . . . . . . . . 1°8 v i CHAPTER P a S e A n a l y s i s of Treatment E f f e c t s , 109 2 H o t e l l i n g T_ of Experimental Base-Rate and Treatment Data 110 Comparison of Co n t r o l Base-Rate and Treatment Data. . . . H I Comparison of Experimental Treatment and Post-Treatment Data 112 Comparison of Base-Rate and Post-Treatment Data . . . . . 113 An A n a l y s i s of Performance Changes during Treatment . . . 115 Regression A n a l y s i s : P r e d i c t i n g T o t a l Scores on C o n t r o l and Experimental Treatment Tests 117 Regression A n a l y s i s : P r e d i c t i n g I n d i v i d u a l Dependent V a r i a b l e s , I n i t i a l , M e d i a l , F i n a l , H o r i z o n t a l , V e r t i c a l and R o t a t i o n a l , on C o n t r o l and Experimental Treatment Tests 120 Regression A n a l y s i s : P r e d i c t i n g T o t a l Scores f o r C o n t r o l Treatment and Experimental Post-Treatment Tests 126 Regression A n a l y s i s : P r e d i c t i n g C o n t r o l Treatment and Experimental Post-Treatment Scores f o r I n i t i a l , M e d i a l , F i n a l , H o r i z o n t a l , V e r t i c a l and R o t a t i o n a l E r r o r s ^ 9 Re s u l t s of the Keystone V i s u a l Survey 134 Summary of Res u l t s .136 V. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS 139 APPENDIX A. Test i n g M a t e r i a l s I 5 0 APPENDIX B. Raw and Standardized Regression C o e f f i c i e n t s . ; C o r r e l a t i o n M a t r i c e s . 175 REFERENCES 188 COMPUTER PROGRAMS . . . . 189 v i i LIST OF TABLES TABLE PAGE 1. Reversal of S i n g l e I s o l a t e d L e t t e r s or U n i t a r y Geometric Forms 4 2. Reversal of S i n g l e or M u l t i p l e L e t t e r s i n Words . . . . . . . 5 3. R o t a t i o n E r r o r s 5 4. Developmental Status of D i s o r i e n t a t i o n E r r o r s . . . . . . .". H 5. Developmental Status of Resequencing E r r o r s . . . . 14 6. Summary of P o s i t i o n of E r r o r s : I n i t i a l , Medial or F i n a l E r r o r s on Base-Rate Data A n a l y s i s of Variance 96 7. C e l l Means f o r I n i t i a l , M edial and F i n a l P o s i t i o n E r r o r s on Base-Rate Data. . . . . . 97 8. Summary of A n a l y s i s of Variance of H o r i z o n t a l , V e r t i c a l and R o t a t i o n a l D i s o r i e n t a t i o n E r r o r s on Base-Rate Test . . . 98 9. C e l l Means f o r H o r i z o n t a l , V e r t i c a l and R o t a t i o n a l D i s o r i e n t a t i o n E r r o r s on Base-Rate Data . . . . . . . . . . . 99 10. C e l l Means Given i n Rank Order from High to Low Frequency f o r L e t t e r s Involved i n H o r i z o n t a l , V e r t i c a l and R o t a t i o n a l D i s o r i e n t a t i o n s of Base-Rate Data. . . . 100 11. Summary of B o n f e r r o n i Comparisons of Means f o r L e t t e r E r r o r s W i t h i n Each D i s o r i e n t a t i o n : H o r i z o n t a l , V e r t i c a l and R o t a t i o n a l . . . . . . . . . • 1 0 1 12. L e t t e r P a i r s Given i n Rank Order of Their Means from High to Low Frequency Showing Which L e t t e r E r r o r s W i t h i n Each Type of D i s o r i e n t a t i o n were S t a t i s t i c a l l y S i g n i f i c a n t l y D i f f e r e n t . 1 0 2 13. C o r r e l a t i o n M a t r i x f o r Base-Rate Data: H o r i z o n t a l , V e r t i c a l and R o t a t i o n a l D i s o r i e n t a t i o n s i n the I n i t i a l , M e dial and F i n a l P o s i t i o n s 1 Q 3 14. Grouping from H o r i z o n t a l , V e r t i c a l and R o t a t i o n a l C o r r e l a t i o n s Between D i s o r i e n t a t i o n s Beginning w i t h the Same L e t t e r . 1 0 5 15. Grouping from H o r i z o n t a l , V e r t i c a l and R o t a t i o n a l C o r r e l a t i o n s Between D i s o r i e n t a t i o n s Producing the Same L e t t e r . 105 v i i i TABLE PAGE 16. Means and Standard Deviations of Sex, CA, MA and Base-Rate T o t a l s 106 17. C o r r e l a t i o n M a t r i x of Sex, CA, MA and Base-Rate T o t a l s . . . . 107 18. Summary of Regression Analyses of Sex, CA and MA on Base-Rate T o t a l s . 107 19. Means and Standard D e v i a t i o n s f o r Experimental and Co n t r o l Base-Rate Data. . . . 109 2 20. Summary Ho t e l l i n g _T_ Experimental Base-Rate and Treatment Data. H I 2 21. Summary H o t e l l i n g _ T _ C o n t r o l Base-Rate and Treatment Data 112 2 22. Summary H o t e l l i n g T Experimental Treatment and Post-Treatment Tests 113 2 23. Summary H o t e l l i n g _T_ Experimental Base-Rate and Post-Treatment Data 114 24. C e l l Means and Standard D e v i a t i o n s f o r Experimental and C o n t r o l Treatment T o t a l s . 119 25. Summary Step-wise Regression of Groups of Independent V a r i a b l e s P r e d i c t i n g Treatment T o t a l Scores . . . 120 26. C e l l Means and Standard D e v i a t i o n s f o r C o n t r o l and Experimental Treatment • • 121 27. Summary of Regression A n a l y s i s P r e d i c t i n g C r i t e r i o n Test and Experimental Treatment T o t a l s f o r I n i t i a l , M e d i a l , F i n a l , H o r i z o n t a l , V e r t i c a l and R o t a t i o n a l E r r o r s w i t h F u l l Model of P r e d i c t o r V a r i a b l e s 122 28. Summary of Step-wise Regression to Analyze the C o n t r i b u t i o n of Base-Rate Covariates P r e d i c t i n g C r i t e r i o n T o t a l s f o r I n i t i a l , M e d i a l , F i n a l , H o r i z o n t a l , V e r t i c a l and R o t a t i o n a l E r r o r s . . . . 123 29. Summary of Step-wise Regression to Analyze the C o n t r i b u t i o n of Sex, CA and MA, P r e d i c t i n g C r i t e r i o n T o t a l s f o r I n i t i a l , M e d i a l , F i n a l , H o r i z o n t a l , V e r t i c a l and R o t a t i o n a l E r r o r s . • 124 30. Summary of Step-wise Regression to Analyze the C o n t r i b u t i o n of Treatment P r e d i c t i n g C r i t e r i o n T o t a l s f o r I n i t i a l , M e d i a l , F i n a l , H o r i z o n t a l , V e r t i c a l and R o t a t i o n a l E r r o r s • • ?-^ 5 i x TABLE PAGE 31. Summary of Step-wise Regression to Analyze the C o n t r i b u t i o n of I n t e r a c t i o n Terms P r e d i c t i n g C r i t e r i o n T o t a l s f o r I n i t i a l , M e d i a l , F i n a l , H o r i z o n t a l , V e r t i c a l and R o t a t i o n a l E r r o r s 126 32. C e l l Means and Standard De v i a t i o n s f o r Experimental Post-Treatment and C o n t r o l Treatment T o t a l Scores . . . . . . 127 33. Summary of Regression A n a l y s i s P r e d i c t i n g Experimental Post-Treatment and C o n t r o l Treatment T o t a l s w i t h F u l l Model of P r e d i c t o r V a r i a b l e s . . . . . . . . . 127 34. Summary of Step-wise Regression of Groups of Independent V a r i a b l e s i n P r e d i c t i n g Experimental Post-Treatment and C o n t r o l Treatment T o t a l s . 128 35. C e l l Means and Standard D e v i a t i o n s f o r C o n t r o l Treatment and Experimental Post-Treatment . 129 36. Summary of Regression A n a l y s i s P r e d i c t i n g C o n t r o l Treatment and Experimental Post-Treatment T o t a l s f o r I n i t i a l , M e d i a l , F i n a l , H o r i z o n t a l , V e r t i c a l and R o t a t i o n a l E r r o r s w i t h F u l l Model of P r e d i c t o r V a r i a b l e s . • • 130 37. Summary of Step-wise Regression of Base-Rate Covariates P r e d i c t i n g C o n t r o l Treatment and Experimental Post-Treatment T o t a l s f o r I n i t i a l , M e d i a l , F i n a l , H o r i z o n t a l , V e r t i c a l and R o t a t i o n a l E r r o r s . . . . . . . . . . . 131 38. Summary of Step-wise Regression of Sex, CA and MA P r e d i c t i n g C o n t r o l Treatment and Experimental Pos t -Treatment T o t a l s on I n i t i a l , M e d i a l , F i n a l , H o r i z o n t a l , V e r t i c a l and R o t a t i o n a l E r r o r s 132 39. Summary of Step-wise Regression of Treatment P r e d i c t i n g C o n t r o l Treatment and Experimental Post-Treatment T o t a l s on I n i t i a l , M e d i a l , F i n a l , H o r i z o n t a l , V e r t i c a l and R o t a t i o n a l E r r o r s . . . . . . . . . 133 40. Summary of Step-wise Regression of I n t e r a c t i o n s P r e d i c t i n g C o n t r o l Treatment and Experimental Post-Treatment T o t a l s on I n i t i a l , M e d i a l , F i n a l , H o r i z o n t a l , V e r t i c a l and R o t a t i o n a l E r r o r s . LIST OF FIGURES FIGURE 1. C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of L e t t e r s of Type. . . . ....... 2. M o d i f i c a t i o n of the L e t t e r s d, b, p» q • 3. Example of P r o g r e s s i v e Increase i n Stroke Width Over Successive L e t t e r s . . . . 4. Example of Words w i t h A l l Typographic M o d i f i c a t i o n s 5. Experimental Design Showing Separate Observations . . . . . . 6. Sequence of Test A d m i n i s t r a t i o n 7. Example of a S i x C e l l Frame of a Five-to-One Match of Geometric 'Sameness'. . . . . . . . . . . 8. Example of O r i e n t a t i o n D i s c r i m i n a t i o n Test Frame . 9. Example of Two Frames of the d, b, p, q E r r o r Base-Rate Test 10. d, b, p, q Demonstration Frames 'A' 11. P o t e n t i a l D i s o r i e n t a t i o n E r r o r A n a l y s i s M a t r i x . . . . . . . . 12. Example of a P a i r of Sequence D i s c r i m i n a t i o n T e s t i n g Frames. 13. Example of a S i n g l e L e t t e r Resequencing Base-Rate Frame 14. Resequencing Demonstration Frames 'B' . . . 15. Example of Two Frames of the Experimental Form of the d, b, p, q D i s o r i e n t a t i o n Treatment Test 16. C o n t r o l Group O r i e n t a t i o n Matching Model 17. Experimental Group O r i e n t a t i o n Matching Model 18. A t y p i c a l Test Item. . . . . . . . x i CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION TO THE PROBLEM I t has been estimated that approximately e i g h t y percent of a l l l e a r n i n g i n the elementary years of school passes through the v i s u a l channel of pe r c e p t i o n (Wold, 1969). As a c h i l d makes i n c r e a s i n g progress i n formal academic l e a r n i n g more and more of h i s knowledge i s derived from reading. Although one of the most b a s i c features of reading i s the a b i l i t y to d i s c r i m i n a t e l e t t e r s of the alphabet, o r i e n t a t i o n e r r o r s i n l e t t e r d i s c r i m i n a t i o n have f r e q u e n t l y p e r s i s t e d u n t i l eight years of age ( S c h o n e l l , 1942). Even more frequent and more d i f f i c u l t to e l i m i n a t e are resequencing e r r o r s i n which one or more or even a l l of the l e t t e r s i n a word r e t a i n t h e i r o r i e n t a t i o n but change t h e i r r e l a t i v e order (Bennett, 1942; I l g and Ames, 1950; S c h o n e l l , 1942 and Vernon, 1963a). These e r r o r s are sometimes r e f e r r e d to as r o t a t i o n s and r e v e r s a l s ; there are s e v e r a l v a r i a t i o n s of each type of e r r o r . Since reading i s an e s s e n t i a l s k i l l f o r l e a r n i n g i n v a r i o u s academic areas, the e f f e c t s of reading e r r o r s are perv a s i v e . The e f f e c t s upon mentally retarded and slow l e a r n i n g c h i l d r e n are even greater than f o r the average c h i l d because l e t t e r resequencing and d i s o r i e n t a t i o n e r r o r s p e r s i s t f o r much longer. T h e i r already slow progress i s f u r t h e r impeded and the f e e l i n g s of f r u s t r a t i o n and f a i l u r e are increased. Considerable study has been made of these types of reading e r r o r s i n r e l a t i o n to i n t e l l e c t u a l l y normal c h i l d r e n , but very l i t t l e research has been reported that has attempted to study o r r e s o l v e these problems f o r the mentally retarded. Most remarkable of a l l , however, i s the absence of research d i r e c t e d toward the typographic m o d i f i c a t i o n 1 2 of p r i n t e d l e t t e r s and words to f a c i l i t a t e t h e i r r e c o g n i t i o n and to remedy or prevent the occurrence of s p e c i f i c reading e r r o r s . In the present study, a comprehensive review was made of the l i t e r a t u r e to a s c e r t a i n the types of graphemic m o d i f i c a t i o n s , i f any, that might be made to reduce the frequency of occurrence of r e v e r s a l and r o t a t i o n a l reading e r r o r s among mentally retarded and slow l e a r n e r c h i l d r e n . A review was made of the evidence d e s c r i b i n g the cha r a c t e r -i s t i c s of typography that lead to the greatest v i s i b i l i t y and l e g i b i l i t y of various l e t t e r s of type under a v a r i e t y of c o n d i t i o n s . A l s o , the research on graphemic and geometric form p e r c e p t i o n was examined to e s t a b l i s h how i n t e l l e c t u a l l y normal and retarded c h i l d r e n p e r c e i v e d o r i e n t a t i o n a l and s e q u e n t i a l changes of v i s u a l s t i m u l i . In the pa s t , the terms r o t a t i o n and r e v e r s a l have been used i n c o n s i s t e n t l y , sometimes as synonyms w i t h a number of other terms and sometimes t o d i s c r i m i n a t e d i f f e r e n t types of o r i e n t a t i o n a l or s e q u e n t i a l e r r o r s i n reading. O c c a s i o n a l l y , g r o s s l y d i f f e r e n t e r r o r s have been grouped together w h i l e at other times s u b t l e d i f f e r e n c e s were s e p a r a t e l y c l a s s i f i e d . In the present study, a new system of c l a s s i f i c a t i o n and terminology was proposed i n an attempt to overcome some of these d i f f i c u l t i e s . The v a l i d i t y of the proposed c l a s s i f i c a t i o n system was t e s t e d by e s t a b l i s h i n g whether there was a s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e i n the rate of occurrence of e r r o r s w i t h i n various subcategories of c l a s s i f i c a t i o n and/or whether treatment d i f f e r e n t i a l l y a f f e c t e d the e r r o r r a t e w i t h i n various sub-c a t e g o r i e s . Review was a l s o made of the research evidence d e s c r i b i n g the r e l a t i o n s h i p between reading and various o p t h a l m o l o g i c a l f a c t o r s and t h e i r assessment. The i n t e n t was to e s t a b l i s h whether p a r t i c u l a r v i s u a l 3 problems were a s s o c i a t e d w i t h d i f f i c u l t i e s i n reading, and whether the v i s u a l problems could be i d e n t i f i e d w i t h a screening device. Such a screening device could be used to assess the e f f e c t i v e n e s s of the t r e a t -ment upon readers w i t h v a r i o u s v i s u a l d e f i c i t s . The s o c i a l l y r e i n f o r c i n g a t t e n t i o n of an experimenter and the n o v e l t y of the treatment s t i m u l i may i n c r e a s e the s u b j e c t s ' i n t e r e s t , a t t e n t i o n and m o t i v a t i o n w i t h a subsequent increase i n performance w i t h -out teaching them any new s k i l l s . An i l l u s i o n of treatment e f f e c t i v e n e s s may be created when the temporary no v e l t y and reinforcement of the treatment increases the s u b j e c t s ' performance to a l e v e l of which they were already capable without i n c r e a s i n g t h e i r l e v e l of c a p a b i l i t y . In the present study to o b t a i n a more powerful measure of treatment e f f e c t i v e n e s s , reinforcement was used before treatment to i n c r e a s e the s u b j e c t s ' performance to approximate t h e i r current l e v e l of c a p a b i l i t y . Any improvement from t h i s r e i n f o r c e d l e v e l of performance f o l l o w i n g treatment was l i k e l y to be the r e s u l t of treatment r a t h e r than merely the t r a n s i e n t e f f e c t of n o v e l t y . REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE R o t a t i o n s , Reversals and Related Terms Numerous authors have used the terms r o t a t i o n and r e v e r s a l and a number of apparently synonymous t i t l e s i n reference to a v a r i e t y of l e t t e r and word r e c o g n i t i o n e r r o r s . Frequently a p r e c i s e and c o n s i s t e n t d e f i n i t i o n of terms has been l a c k i n g . Table 1 provides a summary of the most f r e q u e n t l y used terms and t h e i r d e f i n i t i o n s and/or examples r e l a t i n g to the r e v e r s a l of s i n g l e i s o l a t e d l e t t e r s or u n i t a r y geometric forms. TABLE 1 REVERSAL OF SINGLE ISOLATED LETTERS OR UNITARY CKOMETRIC FORMS TERMINOLOCY DEFINITION OR EXAMPLES REFERENCE 1. 2. Up-down inversion Left-right inversion q to d. b to d Bryant, 1965; Davidson, 1935 and Newson, 1955 3. Inversion The confusion of b with p and d with q Anderson, 1968 A. 5. Inverted reversal Reversal d to p b to d A v e r t i c a l or horizontal 1 8 0 ° s h i f t i n position of a figure around the central or v e r t i c a l axis Kennedy, 1954 6. 7. Horizontal reversal V e r t i c a l reversal Left-to-right or r i g h t - t o - l e f t Up-to-down or down-to-up Poteet, 1968 8. Reversal of orientation Any confusion of the l e t t e r s d, b, p and q Vernon, 1957 9. S t a t i c reversal Any confusion of the l e t t e r s d, b, p and q Smith, 1961 10. Mirror reversal A symmetrical r i g h t - l e f t s h i f t i n apparent po s i t i o n e.g. d-b and p-q English and English, 1958 11. Transposition reversal Movement of a single l e t t e r from either the i n i t i a l , medial or f i n a l portion of a word to one of the other positions Smith, 1961; Kennedy, 1954 5 TABLE 2 REVERSAL OF SINGLE OR MULTIPLE LETTERS IN WORDS TERMINOLOGY DEFINITION OR EXAMPLES REFERENCE 1. F u l l r e v e r s a l of words 2. Part reversal of words 3. Inverted mirror Image reversals 4. Reversed mirror Image reversal 5. Inverted, reversed mirror Image 6. Reversed form reversals 7. K i n e t i c r e v e r s a l 8. Reversal of l e t t e r parts 9. Reversal of whole s y l l a b l e s 10. Reversal of major parts of words 11. Reversal of order 12. Sequentlalization disturbance 13. Translocation e r r o r arnely-nearly bop-pob bop-god bop-dog was-saw was-saw gary-gray l a r s h l n - t a r n l s h tworroom-tomorirow was-saw-swa was-saw-swa was-saw-swa Gates and McKlllop, 1962 Bond, 1970 Kennedy, 1954 F r o s t l g , 1969 Furness, 1956 Vernon, 1957 Johnson and Myklebust, 1967 Strang, 1968 TABLE 3 ROTATION ERRORS VARIATIONS EXAMPLES REFERENCES 1. Rotation 2. Rotation around the v e r t i c a l axis 3. Rotation around the h o r i z o n t a l axis 4. Rotation around the depth axis 5. Bottom-to-top clockwise 6. R i g h t - t o - l c f t mirror 7. Push-pull (near-far or fore-aft) mirror reversal Angular change In p o s i t i o n within the same plane Poteet, 1968 b-d n-u p-d b-q b-d b-p Kr l s e , 1952 Alexander and Money, 1967 6 The terminology used w i t h the r e v e r s a l of s i n g l e or m u l t i p l e l e t t e r s i n words i s presented i n Table 2. Some authors have used the term r e v e r s a l synonymously w i t h that of r o t a t i o n w h i l e others have defined the term s e p a r a t e l y , or not at a l l . Table 3 presents a v a r i e t y of r o t a t i o n s that have been described i n the l i t e r a t u r e . These reviews of nomenclature have been made i n an e f f o r t to s e l e c t s u i t a b l e terminology, d e f i n i t i o n s and c l a s s i f i c a t i o n s of r e v e r s a l s , r o t a t i o n s and t h e i r v a r i a t i o n s . I t i s r e a d i l y apparent i n the foregoing t a b l e s t h a t a v a r i e t y of d i s o r i e n t a t i o n s of i s o l a t e d l e t t e r s or l e t t e r s i n words have been described by the same term. A l t e r n a t i v e l y , s p e c i f i c l e t t e r d i s o r i e n t -a t i o n s have been described by a v a r i e t y of terms, and there was l i t t l e apparent agreement among d i f f e r e n t researchers. With such i n c o n s i s t e n c y of terminology i t i s d i f f i c u l t to compare the r e s u l t s of experimental or remedial s t u d i e s . R e c l a s s i f i c a t i o n of Rotations and Reversals The f o l l o w i n g r e c l a s s i f i c a t i o n of r o t a t i o n and r e v e r s a l e r r o r s of l e t t e r and word r e c o g n i t i o n was designed to d i f f e r e n t i a t e the v a r i o u s c a t e g o r i e s of p o s s i b l e p s y c h o l o g i c a l s i g n i f i c a n c e . That i s , although a researcher may a s s i g n phenomena to c a t e g o r i e s f o l l o w i n g a systematic a n a l y s i s of t h e i r apparent d i f f e r e n c e s , these d i f f e r e n c e s may not be p s y c h o l o g i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t — t h e y may not a f f e c t the p e r c e p t u a l or c o g n i t i v e f u n c t i o n i n g of a performer under t y p i c a l c o n d i t i o n s . Thus, the a c t u a l p s y c h o l o g i c a l s i g n i f i c a n c e of a category must be e m p i r i c a l l y e s t a b l i s h e d and e v e n t u a l l y perhaps ca t e g o r i e s might be recombined or f u r t h e r analyzed. Thus the f o l l o w i n g c l a s s i f i c a t i o n system was suggested t e n t a t i v e l y r a t h e r than d e f i n i t i v e l y . The terms r o t a t i o n and r e v e r s a l 7 were not employed because of t h e i r past confusion i n use and meaning. Two new terms were chosen: d i s o r i e n t a t i o n e r r o r s and resequencing e r r o r s . These terms were adopted because t h e i r use d i d not r e q u i r e r e i n t e r p r e t a t i o n and t h e i r common d i c t i o n a r y meaning s u i t a b l y d escribed t h e i r use w i t h reading e r r o r s . D i s o r i e n t a t i o n e r r o r s . These e r r o r s are defined as any h o r i z o n t a l , v e r t i c a l or r o t a t i o n a l change from a standard p o s i t i o n of i s o l a t e d l e t t e r s , numbers, or geometric forms, or s i n g l e or m u l t i p l e l e t t e r s w i t h i n words. The three most frequent e r r o r s are: v e r t i c a l  d i s o r i e n t a t i o n s (up-down, 180°), h o r i z o n t a l d i s o r i e n t a t i o n s ( l e f t -r i g h t , 180°) or r o t a t i o n a l d i s o r i e n t a t i o n s (up-right to down-left or v i c e v e r s a , 90° or 180°). The d i s o r i e n t e d l e t t e r s may be l o c a t e d i n i s o l a t i o n o r i n the i n i t i a l , medial or f i n a l p o r t i o n s of a word. The f o l l o w i n g f i g u r e s are most f r e q u e n t l y d i s o r i e n t e d : 'b, d, p, q ( g ) ; f , t ; u, n; w, m; e, a; N, Z; 6, 9; 69, 96. The product of a d i s o r i e n t a t i o n w i t h i n a word may be s e n s i c a l or n o n s e n s i c a l . 1. D i s o r i e n t a t i o n s ( I s o l a t e d L e t t e r s ) Types of D i s o r i e n t a t i o n : a. H o r i z o n t a l b. V e r t i c a l c. R o t a t i o n a l I n i t i a l L e t t e r s b d p q d b q p p q b d q p d b Product 8 2. D i s o r i e n t a t i o n ( S i n g l e L e t t e r s w i t h i n Words) L o c a t i o n w i t h i n Word Types of D i s o r i e n t a t i o n : I n i t i a l Medial F i n a l a. H o r i z o n t a l bread-dread l a b e l - l a d e l b r i d e - b r i b e b. V e r t i c a l way-may l a t t e r - l a f f e r sam-saw tan-fan dump-dumb c. R o t a t i o n a l p i g - d i g month-mouth card-carp dark-park 3. M u l t i p l e D i s o r i e n t a t i o n s . These d i s o r i e n t a t i o n s may be of two k i n d s : i n v o l v i n g two or more l e t t e r s i n the same o r d i f f e r e n t l o c a t i o n w i t h i n a word changing t h e i r o r i e n t a t i o n i n the same manner, or i n a d i f f e r e n t manner, and may be i n the i n i t i a l and/or medial and/or f i n a l p o s i t i o n of the word. e.g. puddles = bubbles 'p-b' = i n i t i a l , v e r t i c a l d i s o r i e n t a t i o n 'd-b' = media l , h o r i z o n t a l d i s o r i e n t a t i o n Resequencing E r r o r s . These e r r o r s i n v o l v e the change i n order or sequence, without change i n o r i e n t a t i o n of s i n g l e or m u l t i p l e l e t t e r s w i t h i n words, or change i n sequence of whole words or words w i t h i n sentences. The m u l t i p l e l e t t e r s may be continguous i n s y l l a b l e s , i n t e r n a l words or other combinations, or the l e t t e r s may be d i s j o i n t . The l e t t e r ( s ) or word(s) may o r i g i n a t e i n one p a r t of a word or sentence and terminate i n another. The word p a r t s are designated as i n i t i a l , medial or f i n a l . The product of any resequencing e r r o r may be s e n s i c a l or non-s e n s i c a l . 9 I . Resequencing E r r o r s Terminal P o s i t i o n O r i g i n a l L o c a t i o n I n i t i a l M edial F i n a l 1. S i n g l e L e t t e r s I n i t i a l perhaps-prehaps t h i s - h i t s plane-panel Medial horse-shore beard-bread f r e e - f e e r F i n a l a i l s - s a i l tame-team f r i t t e r -f r i t t r e 2. M u l t i p l e L e t t e r s a. s y l l a b l e s : consonants may exchange p o s i t i o n around a vowel as i n 'marmot-rammot' ( i n i t i a l ) , 'animal-aminal' (medial) and 1 t a r n i s h - t a r s h i n ' ( f i n a l ) . I n a d d i t i o n , a s y l l a b l e may remain i n t a c t and move from one p o s i t i o n i n a word to another. b. other p h o n o l o g i c a l components: digraphs, diphthongs or blends may change l o c a t i o n w i t h i n a word. c. miscellaneous j o i n e d l e t t e r s : ' r a m - a r m ' , ' s p i l t - s p l i t ' (medial) and 'angle-angel' ( f i n a l ) . d. i n t e r n a l words: ' t a r t a n - r a t t a n ' ( i n i t i a l ) , ' s n i p s - s p i n s ' (medial) and 'angry-grany' ( i n i t i a l - m e d i a l ) . e. d i s j o i n t l e t t e r s : 'dear-read' and 'serve-verse'. 3. Whole Words ' s p i t - t i p s ' , ' peel-leep', 'sleep-peels', 'was-saw' and 'on-no'. a l s o , as w i t h the c l a s s i f i c a t i o n of d i s o r i e n t a t i o n e r r o r s , e m p i r i c a l t e s t s would have to be made of the p s y c h o l o g i c a l s i g n i f i c a n c e of each category. This c l a s s i f i c a t i o n of resequencing e r r o r s i s not exhaustive; 10 Developmental Trends of L e t t e r and Word Recognition The developmental trends of l e t t e r and word r e c o g n i t i o n were reviewed to a s s i s t comparison of the developmental d i f f e r e n c e s between d i s o r i e n t a t i o n and resequencing e r r o r s and t h e i r s u bcategories, between normal and retarded readers and between males and females. These observations f a c i l i t a t e d s e l e c t i o n of a po p u l a t i o n of subjects f o r study. Table 4 summarizes the developmental s t a t u s of d i s o r i e n t a t i o n e r r o r s . Davidson (1935) b e l i e v e d t h a t there were i n d i c a t i o n s t h a t c h i l d r e n pass through c e r t a i n stages before they are able to d i s t i n g u i s h 'b and d, p and q'. In the f i r s t stage, f o r example, they confuse 'b and d, p and q'. In the second stage they confuse 'b w i t h d' but not w i t h 'p and q'. In the t h i r d stage they consider 'b and d' to be a l i k e a l -though they recognize t h a t these l e t t e r s face d i f f e r e n t ways. In the f i n a l stage they recognize that 'b and d' are a c t u a l l y d i f f e r e n t l e t t e r s . K r i s e (1952) found t h a t the p o t e n t i a l i t y f o r r e v e r s a l s i s never e l i m i n a t e d . He worked w i t h . a d u l t s u b j e c t s , none of whom committed r e v e r s a l s w h i l e reading the f a m i l i a r r e v e r s i b l e symbols 'b, d, p and q 1 . K r i s e used a s e r i e s of words, u s u a l l y trigrams such as 'dot and pot' i n which the vowels 'a, e, i and o' had been replaced w i t h n o v e l symbols to d u p l i c a t e the r e v e r s i b l e c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f 'b, d, p and q'. Under these c o n d i t i o n s a l l s u b j e c t s ( a d u l t s ) made r e v e r s a l s i n t h e i r reading. The e r r o r r a t e ranged from three percent to seventy-one percent. Note, w i t h reference to Table 4, that S c h o n e l l (1942) d i d not c l e a r l y define h i s sample of "backward readers" although h i s general d e s c r i p t i o n of backwardness i n c l u d e d i n d i v i d u a l s whose d i s a b i l i t i e s were due p r i m a r i l y to i n t e l l e c t u a l d e f i c i t s and/or to p h y s i c a l , s o c i a l or TABLE 4 DEVELOPMENTAL STATUS.OF DISORIENTATION ERRORS CHRONOLOGICAL AGE DEVELOPMENTAL STATUS REFERENCE 13 11 - 12 11 10 9 - 1 0 7 - 14 8 - 9 8 1/2 7 - 8 7 - 8 7 - 8 7 - 8 7 1/2 7 7 6 - 7 6 + 6 5 - 7 5 1/2 - 6 5 - 6 5 - 6 6 -5 5 5 horizontal disorientations ceased amonf, backward boys* 14Z of the backward readers* made d i s o r i e n t a t i o n errors while none were committed by the normal readers hori z o n t a l disorientations ceased among backward g i r l s * among normal children (male and female) hor i z o n t a l d i s o r i e n t a t i o n s did not occur. 62Z of the backward readers* made d i s o r i e n t a t i o n errors compared to only 5% of the normal children among normal ch i l d r e n , g i r l s made fewer errors than boys horiz o n t a l errors persisted, e.g. b-d; p-q majority of normal boys ceased to make d i s o r i e n t a t i o n errors among backward children*, the g i r l s made more di s o r i e n t a t i o n s than the boys 85% of the backward readers* made d i s o r i e n t a t i o n errors compared to 30Z of the normal children h o r i z o n t a l errors occurred more frequently than v e r t i c a l errors 12Z of the children s t i l l had d i f f i c u l t y with r e v e r s i b l e l e t t e r s order: H, V Schonell, 1942 Schonell, 1942 Schonell, 1942 Schonell, 1942 Schonell, 1942 Schonell, 1942 Wilson & Fleming, 1938 -Anderson, 1968 Schonell, 1942 Schonell, 1942 H i l l , 1936 H i l l , 1936 Vernon, 1957 vast majority of normal g i r l s ceased to make d i s o r i e n t a t i o n errors Anderson, 1968 diso r i e n t a t i o n s occurred on 9% of the t r i a l s ; v e r t i c a l errors occurred at twice the rate of horizontal e r r o r s ; r o t a t i o n a l errors were almost non-existant; order: V, H Kennedy, 1954 diso r i e n t a t i o n s were common H a l l , 1968 horizo n t a l reversals were common, e s p e c i a l l y b-d Frank, 1935 error rate was higher f o r boys than g i r l s B l a i r , 1969 disorie n t a t i o n s occurred on 20% of the t r i a l s ; h o r i z o n t a l errors occurred at 1 1/2 times the rate of v e r t i c a l errors and three times the rate of r o t a t i o n a l errors; order: H, V, R Kennedy, 1954 more d i s o r i e n t a t i o n errors were made when rev e r s i b l e l e t t e r s were Included i n words rather than i n i s o l a t i o n H i l l , 1936 v e r t i c a l disorientations ceased to occur • Davidson, 1934 horizontal errors occurred most frequently followed by r o t a t i o n a l and v e r t i c a l ; order: H, R, V Popp, 1964 horizo n t a l errors occurred at twice the rate of r o t a t i o n a l errors and almost three times as often as r o t a t i o n a l errors; order: H, R, V. Davidson, 1935 p r a c t i c a l l y a l l children made horiz o n t a l and v e r t i c a l d i s o r i e n t a t i o n s Davidson, 1934 horizo n t a l errors occurred twice as often as v e r t i c a l errors and four times as often a  rotations; order: H, V, Rdisorie n t a t i o n s occurred on 36% of the t r i a l s no difference i n error rate between sexes Kennedy, 1954 Kennedy, 1954 Davidson, 1935 Bain, 1970 B l a i r , 1969 12 psychological factors. Usually the disability was a function of the interaction of several factors; backward readers may have been intellectu-a l l y normal or above normal but performing at a level at least 1.5 years below their achievement in other areas of performance. Disorientation Summary. The number and nature of experimental variations in the reported research and the variety of results obtained did not permit a decisive conclusion to be made. Obviously, the confusion of terminology and definition was a hindrance. In addition, letters had been presented in isolation or i n the context of a word or sentence; some letters had been presented tachistoscopically; some letters had been the same size as book type, others had been much larger. In some tasks the subjects had been asked to match-to-sample from among varying numbers of response choices; in some cases, the stimulus had remained for comparison; in other cases, the stimulus had been removed after brief presentation. Some tasks had required reading, while others had required copying, pointing, underlining, lever pulling or button pushing. In spite of these experimental variations, there appeared to be sufficient consistency among the results of the research to permit the following tentative statements to be made. A l l types of disorientations are common among nursery school, kindergarten and grade one and two children. However, beyond grade 2.5 the occurrence of disorientations may be considered a problem (Harris, 1967). The majority of studies found that disorientation errors occurred in the order from highest to lowest frequency: horizontal, rotational and v e r t i c a l . Some researchers found that rotational errors were the f i r s t to cease to occur between the ages of six to seven years, 13 w h i l e other researchers found that v e r t i c a l e r r o r s were the f i r s t to cease to occur between the ages of 5 1/2 to s i x years. In e i t h e r case, h o r i z o n t a l e r r o r s appeared to be the most durable and p e r s i s t e d u n t i l age 8 1/2 to nine years. H o r i z o n t a l d i s o r i e n t a t i o n s of l e t t e r s w i t h ascending stems, e.g. 'b and d' were more p e r s i s t e n t than l e t t e r s w i t h descending stems, e.g.'p and q'. U s u a l l y d i s o r i e n t a t i o n e r r o r s were not observed beyond nine years of age. There was no d i f f e r e n c e i n the r a t e of occurrence of d i s o r i e n t -a t i o n e r r o r s between normal males and females i n kindergarten. In erade one, however, the e r r o r r a t e f o r boys exceeded that of the g i r l s . At age 7 1/2 g i r l s u s u a l l y ceased to make d i s o r i e n t a t i o n e r r o r s . Boys d i d not cease to make these e r r o r s u n t i l age 8 1/2. Between the ages of seven to eigh t backward g i r l s made more e r r o r s than backward boys; t h i s r e l a t i o n s h i p was a r e v e r s a l of the usua l case among "normal" c h i l d r e n . D i s o r i e n t a t i o n e r r o r s ceased to be made at age eleven (3 1/2 years l a t e r than f o r "normal" g i r l s ) . D i s o r i e n t a t i o n e r r o r s ceased to be made by backward boys a t age t h i r t e e n (4 1/2 years l a t e r than f o r "normal" boys). In g e n e r a l , more l e t t e r d i s o r i e n t a t i o n e r r o r s were made i n words than upon l e t t e r s i n i s o l a t i o n . D i s o r i e n t a t i o n e r r o r s appeared to be a normal occurrence w i t h i n and below grade two, however, the question should be r a i s e d as to whether the occurrence of these e r r o r s might have been avoided o r whether t h e i r frequency and d u r a t i o n might have been reduced. The developmental s t a t u s of resequencing e r r o r s i s summarized i n Table 5. TABLE 5 DEVELOPMENTAL STATUS OF RESEQUKNCINC ERRORS 14 CHRONOLOGICAL AGE DEVELOPMENTAL STATUS REFERENCE 13 - 14 11 - 14 11 - 12 9 9 9 8 - 10 8 - 9 7 - 8 6 - 7 5 - 7 5 - 7 Schonell, 1942 Schonell, 1942 Schonell, 1942 I l g and Ames, 1950 I l g and Ames, 1950 22% of the backward readers made resequencing errors that had ceased to exi s t among normal ch i l d r e n both backward and normal readers made a higher percentage of resequencing errors of l e t t e r s In words and whole word resequencing than they did for d i s o r i e n t a t i o n s of the Isolated l e t t e r s b, d, p and q 45% of the backward readers made resequencing errors compared to f i v e percent of the normal readers . whole word and l e t t e r resequencing i n words was common normal readers made more resequencing than d i s o r i e n t a t i o n errors there was a higher frequency of resequencing errors among a matched group of normal readers; there was a tendency to resequence a l e s s f a m i l i a r to a more f a m i l i a r word, e.g. "nip to p i n " Wolfe, 1939 among backward readers when monosyllabic words were arranged i n sentences, word resequencing was more frequent and more d i f f i c u l t to eliminate than l e t t e r d i s o r i e n t a t i o n s resequencing errors s t i l l persisted 852 of the backward readers made resequencing errors compared to 35% of the normal readers the combined t o t a l of whole word resequencing and resequencing of l e t t e r s i n words was l e s s than the t o t a l number of s i n g l e l e t t e r d i s o r i e n t a t i o n errors c h i l d r e n were l i k e l y to confuse words containing the same l e t t e r s In a d i f f e r e n t order few whole word resequencing errors were made with a higher frequency of s i n g l e l e t t e r resequencing within words. There was a low frequency and rapid disappearance of resequencing errors involving I n i t i a l l e t t e r s of words and a higher and more persistent frequency of errors i n the medial and f i n a l portion of words resequencing errors accounted for 40% of the errors made i n word matching 46% of the errors i n reading were resequencing errors the combined t o t a l of whole word resequencing and resequencing of l e t t e r s In words exceeded the t o t a l number of s i n g l e l e t t e r resequencing errors Bennett, 1942 I l g and Ames, 1950 Schonell, 1942 Kennedy, 1954 H i l l , 1936 Kennedy, 1954 Davidson, 1934 Davidson, 1934 Kennedy, 1954 15 Resequencing Summary. The same experimental variations that prevented a conclusive statement to be made about disorientation errors also limited the decisiveness of any statement concerning resequencing errors. In view of the evidence, the following tentative statements appeared j u s t i f i e d . Resequencing of letters within words occurs more frequently than the resequencing of whole words. The resequencing of i n i t i a l letters of relatively low frequency and disappears rapidly, while the resequencing of medial and f i n a l letters i s of a higher and more persistent frequency. Both backward and normal readers have a higher and more persistent frequency of resequencing errors than they have for disorientation of the isolated letters b, d, p and q. Vernon (1963a) stated that resenuencing errors are more d i f f i c u l t to eliminate than disorientation errors. Etiology of Reading Errors The literature describing the causes of reading errors was reviewed to establish whether particular causes might suggest specific graphemic changes that could be made to reduce disorientation and resequencing errors. Hall (1968) stated that studies by Davidson (1935), Smith (1928), Wilson and Flemming (1938), Hildreth (1932), Ilg and Ames (1950) and Vernon (1960) tended to imply or stated that reversal errors resulted from an in a b i l i t y to perceive the distinction between letters because of a lack of neural maturation. Rabinovitch (1959), Critchley (1964) and Bateman (1966) have each spoken in support of Bender's (1958) neuro-logical maturational lag theory. Whether the maturational lag hypothesis is valid remains to be answered. There are, however, no obvious 16 i m p l i c a t i o n s f o r graphemic m o d i f i c a t i o n . Orton (1928) p o s t u l a t e d that f a u l t y c e r e b r a l dominance explained why some c h i l d r e n read l e t t e r s and words backwards. The d i f f i c u l t y i n d i f f e r e n t i a t i n g 'p from q' and the tendency to confuse words l i k e 'not and ton' suggested that the mnemonic record e x i s t e d i n the b r a i n i n both o r i e n t a t i o n s . In the process of e a r l y v i s u a l education, the e x t e r n a l v i s u a l s t i m u l i i r r a d i a t e d e q u a l l y i n t o the a s s o c i a t i o n c o r t i c e s of both hemispheres and were recorded there i n both r i g h t - f a c i n g and l e f t - f a c i n g o r i e n t a t i o n . Images of o b j e c t s r e q u i r e d no d e f i n i t e o r i e n t a t i o n f o r r e c o g n i t i o n or d i f f e r e n t i a t i o n except i n the case of l e t t e r s where the o r i e n t a t i o n of the r e c a l l e d image had to correspond w i t h that of the presented symbol or confusion would have r e s u l t e d . This theory suggested that the process of l e a r n i n g to read e n t a i l e d the omission from the focus of a t t e n t i o n of the confusing memory images of the non-dominant hemisphere which were i n reversed form and order, and the s e l e c t i o n of those which were c o r r e c t l y o r i e n t e d and i n c o r r e c t sequence. Davidson (1935) r e p l i e d that Orton's theory would e x p l a i n why 'd' was confused w i t h 'b', but i t was d i f f i c u l t to see why 'd' was confused w i t h 'p' and 'q'. In gene r a l , Orton's theory does not r e c e i v e much contemporary acceptance. Orton's theory d i d not o f f e r an adequate e x p l a n a t i o n of the occurrence of d i s o r i e n t a t i o n e r r o r s . However, i m p l i c i t i n the theory and i n Davidson's counterargument was the suggestion t h a t i f the r e v e r s i b i l i t y of the l e t t e r s was reduced, d i s o r i e n t a t i o n e r r o r s would a l s o be reduced. For example the 'd-b' confusion might be reduced by p r i n t i n g one of the l e t t e r s i n i t a l i c . A s i m i l a r change might be made 17 w i t h the l e t t e r s 'p and q! These changes may reduce h o r i z o n t a l , v e r t i c a l and r o t a t i o n a l d i s o r i e n t a t i o n s . Karraker (1968) found that l a t e r a l dominance as determined by an adaptation of the H a r r i s t e s t s of l a t e r a l dominance was not r e l a t e d to k i n d e r g a r t e n s u b j e c t s ' d i s c r i m i n a t i o n l e a r n i n g of the lower-case l e t t e r s 'b and d'. This f i n d i n g c o i n c i d e d w i t h the observations of a number of researchers (Gates, 1933; K r i s e , 1952; B i r c h , 1967; Bond and Tin k e r , 1967; Anderson, 1968; F r o s t i g , 1969) that young and o l d s u b j e c t s from c l i n i c a l and n o n - c l i n i c a l populations t y p i c a l l y d i d not demonstrate any s i g n i f i c a n t r e l a t i o n s h i p between reading d i s a b i l i t y and l a t e r a l dominance. The evidence was abundantly c l e a r that mixed eye-hand p r e f e r -ence occurred among good readers as w e l l as among poor readers. The l a t e r a l dominance hypothesis d i d not appear to have any i m p l i c a t i o n s f o r the present study. Several s t u d i e s ( C r i t c h l e y , 1964; R o s s i , 1973; Symmes and Rapoport, 1972 and Zahalkova,1972) have found a s i g n i f i c a n t l y higher r a t e of occurrence of reading d i f f i c u l t i e s among males than among females and among monozygotic than among dyz y g o t i c twins. These researchers have p o s t u l a t e d a sex l i n k e d g e n e t i c a l l y t r a n s m i t t e d p r e d i s -p o s i t i o n to reading d i s o r d e r s . However, n e i t h e r the mechanisms of tra n s m i s s i o n nor the a f f e c t e d p e r c e p t u a l - c o g n i t i v e f u n c t i o n s have been i d e n t i f i e d . Furthermore, i t i s p o s s i b l e that c a u s a l f a c t o r s other than g e n e t i c i n h e r i t a n c e may be common to both males and monozygotic twins and l e s s common to females and dyzy g o t i c twins. Most experimenters, according to Vernon (1957), have found that i f the c h i l d i s given time to perc e i v e the l e t t e r s c a r e f u l l y , he can d i f f e r e n t i a t e them w i t h f a i r accuracy by the age of s i x to seven 18 years. The d i f f i c u l t y l i e s i n remembering which of the r e v e r s i b l e l e t t e r shapes correspond to which sound; and t h i s d i f f i c u l t y p e r s i s t s up to seven to ei g h t y e a r s , even i n normal readers. The confusion probably r e s u l t s from an i n a b i l i t y to remember o r i e n t a t i o n s . In g e n e r a l , Vernon claimed t h a t there was not any r e a l i n a b i l i t y among backward readers to per c e i v e a t l e a s t the simp l e r shapes, but memorization of them or t h e i r names may have been d e f e c t i v e . Vernon s t a t e d that the d y s l e x i c reader has a tendency to ignore the d e t a i l s w i t h i n words and, i n s t e a d , to base word r e c o g n i t i o n on i n i t i a l l e t t e r , l e n g t h of word and a few other i n s u f f i c i e n t cues. This was not due to a simple defect i n v i s u a l d i s c r i m i n a t i o n s i n c e adequate d i s c r i m i n a t i o n could be made when two words are presented together; r a t h e r , the defect came i n the u t i l i z a t i o n of memory of word shape wherein the d e t a i l s and sequences of l e t t e r s w i t h i n the words were o f t e n u n d i f f e r e n t -i a t e d . Vernon's observations i m p l i e d that the memory of d e t a i l s e s s e n t i a l f o r the d i s c r i m i n a t i o n of o r i e n t a t i o n may be enhanced by i n c r e a s i n g the stimulus v a l u e of those d e t a i l s . A t t e n t i o n may thus be a t t r a c t e d and focussed on d e t a i l s of o r i e n t a t i o n . A f t e r an i n t e n s i v e study, K r i s e (1952) decided that r e v e r s a l s r e s u l t e d from a l a c k of f a m i l i a r i t y w i t h the r e l a t i o n s h i p t h a t e x i s t e d between symbols and t h e i r background. He found a c o r r e l a t i o n o f .62 between r e v e r s a l tendencies and the i n a b i l i t y to pe r c e i v e space r e l a t i o n s . This f i n d i n g seemed to support the t h e s i s t h a t r e v e r s a l s may have been due to d i f f i c u l t i e s i n p e r c e i v i n g space r e l a t i o n s o r , more s p e c i f i c a l l y , figure-ground r e l a t i o n s . Strang (1968) wrote that s p a t i a l and temporal o r i e n t a t i o n 19 seemed to u n d e r l i e a l l aspects of p e r c e p t i o n . Such a r e l a t i o n s h i p between reading and space-form and d i r e c t i o n a l - s e n s e d e f i c i e n c i e s might be expected. The c h i l d who i s handicapped i n space-form p e r c e p t i o n would have d i f f i c u l t y i n d i f f e r e n t i a t i n g s i m i l a r l y formed l e t t e r s such as 'n and m'. The c h i l d w i t h problems i n d i r e c t i o n a l o r i e n t a t i o n would be l i k e l y to confuse such l e t t e r s as ' f , t , p, b, q and d' and words l i k e 'pet and top'. B i r c h (1967) found a r e l a t i o n s h i p between reading and r i g h t -l e f t awareness. Retarded readers i n c l u d e d a g r e a t e r number of c h i l d r e n unable to i d e n t i f y r i g h t and l e f t s i d e of t h e i r body p a r t s w i t h p e r f e c t accuracy, whereas only one of the normal readers f a i l e d to achieve a p e r f e c t score. The retarded readers who had d i f f i c u l t y i n i d e n t i f y i n g r i g h t and l e f t on t h e i r own bodies a l s o had the lowest reading scores. Strang (1968) c i t e d the B i r c h research as evidence of a r e l a t i o n s h i p between reading achievement and s p a t i a l o r i e n t a t i o n , but s t a t e d that t h i s r e l a t i o n s h i p may not have been c a u s a l . Both v a r i a b l e s may i n f a c t have been a f u n c t i o n of a t h i r d and as yet unknown c a u s a l f a c t o r . Alexander and Money (1965) administered a reading t e s t to p a t i e n t s w i t h Turner's syndrome, "a cytogenetic d i s o r d e r commonly mani-f e s t i n g a degree of space-form b l i n d n e s s and d i r e c t i o n a l d i s o r i e n t a t i o n . " These p a t i e n t s proved not to be d e f i c i e n t i n reading a b i l i t y . In another experiment, Alexander and Money (1967) found that on the s p a t i a l o r i e n t a t i o n road map t e s t a group of d y s l e x i c boys made s i g n i f i c a n t l y more e r r o r s than normal boys, i n d i c a t i n g that t h e i r reading d i s a b i l i t y was accompanied by i n f e r i o r development of r i g h t - l e f t d i r e c t i o n sense. However, the experimenters s t a t e d that to conclude that a simple r e l a t i o n s h i p e x i s t s between d y s l e x i a and d i r e c t i o n a l sense 20 d i s a b i l i t y was i n c o r r e c t . The r e l a t i o n s h i p between the p e r c e p t i o n of figure-ground, s p a t i a l r e l a t i o n s , d i r e c t i o n sense and reading has not yet been estab-l i s h e d . I t appears reasonable, however, that any graphemic m o d i f i c a t i o n should accentuate figure-ground and s p a t i a l or s e q u e n t i a l r e l a t i o n s . Chapter I I d e s c r i b e s how the graphemic m o d i f i c a t i o n s have incorp o r a t e d e m p i r i c a l l y e s t a b l i s h e d f o c a l p o i n t s of v i s u a l a t t e n t i o n and how the stimulus value of s e q u e n t i a l l y r e l a t e d l e t t e r s has been modif i e d to emphasize t h e i r s e r i a l order. U n t i l the i n t r o d u c t i o n of reading the s p a t i a l world of the young c h i l d f o l l o w s the law of o b j e c t constancy. Alexander and Money (1965) s t a t e d that i n terms of t h i s law any o b j e c t has the same name, meaning or symbolic value r e g a r d l e s s of changes i n i t s d i r e c t i o n a l o r i e n t a t i o n or r o t a t i o n i n space, and d e s p i t e the a d d i t i o n , removal, t r a n s l o c a t i o n or camouflage of component p a r t s . With the advent of the f i r s t grade, the c h i l d i s expected to l e a r n and r e a d i l y i d e n t i f y 62 symbols (upper-case l e t t e r s , lower-case l e t t e r s and numerals), many of which break the law of o b j e c t constancy that has been developing during the e a r l i e r years of l i f e . The l e t t e r 'b' could be confused w i t h 'd, p, q, 6 and 9', the only d i f f e r e n c e being i t s s p a t i a l o r i e n t a t i o n . An 'e' w i t h the l i n e m i s s i n g becomes 'c'. I f the s e r i a l p o s i t i o n of the components of 'saw' i s reversed, i t becomes 'was'. An 'm' i n two pieces becomes an ' r ' and an 'n'. L e t t e r s such as 'b-d-p-q, m-w, n-u and g-y' f o l l o w the law  of d i r e c t i o n a l constancy. Alexander and Money s t a t e d that i n terms of t h i s law l e t t e r s of the same shape had the same symbolic value only i f 21 t h e i r d i r e c t i o n a l o r i e n t a t i o n was i d e n t i c a l . Thus, to a s s i s t d i s c r i m i n -a t i o n , l e t t e r s t h a t d i f f e r o n ly i n terms of t h e i r s p a t i a l o r i e n t a t i o n must be modified at l e a s t temporarily to i n d i c a t e that the change i n o r i e n t a t i o n i s c r i t i c a l to t h e i r i d e n t i f i c a t i o n . I t a l i c i z i n g some l e t t e r s , as p r e v i o u s l y suggested, may emphasize the importance of the law of d i r e c t i o n a l constancy. L e t t e r s such as 'a-o, c-e, f - t , h-k, n-r and s-z' f o l l o w the law of form constancy. In terms of t h i s law (Alexander and Money> 1965), l e t t e r s o f s i m i l a r shape are i d e n t i c a l i n symbolic v a l u e only i f a l l of t h e i r p a r t s were i d e n t i c a l . However, some inconstancy of form i s . per-m i s s i b l e and i s indeed p r e s c r i b e d by the r u l e s of c a p i t a l i z a t i o n , p r i n t versus c u r s i v e s c r i p t and d i f f e r e n t font s t y l e s . Through graphemic m o d i f i c a t i o n d i f f e r e n t i a t i n g p a r t s of s i m i l a r l y shaped l e t t e r s should be increased i n stimulus v a l u e to accentuate c r i t i c a l d i f f e r e n c e s . In c o n c l u s i o n , i t appeared that the e t i o l o g i c a l a n a l y s i s of reading e r r o r s was l a r g e l y s p e c u l a t i v e , that reading e r r o r s cannot be a t t r i b u t e d to a s i n g l e common cause and that reading e r r o r s may be the r e s u l t of the i n t e r a c t i o n of many f a c t o r s . Not a l l of these f a c t o r s nor t h e i r combinations have been identified.', however, some s p e c i f i c graphemic m o d i f i c a t i o n s appeared l i k e l y to produce a d e s i r a b l e r e d u c u t i o n i n d i s o r i e n t a t i o n and resequencing e r r o r s . Graphemic P e r c e p t i o n Gibson et a l . (1962). designed an experiment to study the develop-ment of the a b i l i t y to v i s u a l l y d i s c r i m i n a t e a set of l e t t e r - l i k e forms i n c h i l d r e n f o u r through e i g h t years of age, and to study the types of perce p t u a l e r r o r s r e l a t e d to c r i t i c a l features of l e t t e r s . L e t t e r s - l i k e 22 forms were s e l e c t e d r a t h e r than a c t u a l l e t t e r s to keep s p e c i f i c experience w i t h the forms as equal as p o s s i b l e . Matching r a t h e r than i d e n t i f i c a t i o n was the task, s i n c e simple d i s c r i m i n a t i o n was the c r i t e r i o n . The l e t t e r - l i k e forms were designed f o l l o w i n g an a n a l y s i s of c a p i t a l l e t t e r s : h a l f were symmetrical, h a l f asymmetrical; h a l f open, h a l f c l o s e d ; some combined s t r a i g h t and curved l i n e s , some were composed only of s t r a i g h t l i n e s , some only of curves, and the number of strokes v a r i e d from two to f o u r . These f i g u r e s were presented i n f i v e transform-a t i o n s of r o t a t i o n or r e v e r s a l : 45-, 90- and 180-degree r o t a t i o n s , l e f t -r i g h t and up-down r e v e r s a l s , two p e r s p e c t i v e transformations and two t o p o l o g i c a l t r a n s f o r m a t i o n s , a break and a c l o s e . The s t i m u l i were presented i n a match-to-sample format. In a second phase of the e x p e r i -ment, a v a l i d a t i o n study, twelve roman c a p i t a l l e t t e r s were presented i n the same transformations to the k i n d e r g a r t e n c h i l d r e n . The r e s u l t s of the experiment showed that the e r r o r s f o r r e v e r s a l s and r o t a t i o n s were high at age f o u r , but by e i g h t years had d e c l i n e d almost to zero. The c o r r e l a t i o n between the l e t t e r s and the l e t t e r - l i k e forms i n the v a l i d a t i o n study was +.87 showing that there was a high correspondence. Gibson t h e o r i z e d that her r e s u l t s suggested that what c h i l d r e n between four and e i g h t years l e a r n i s the features of l e t t e r s t h a t are c r i t i c a l f o r t h e i r d i f f e r e n t i a t i o n . The c h i l d r e n learned that some c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of l e t t e r s are c r i t i c a l to t h e i r i d e n t i f i c a t i o n w h i l e other f e a t u r e s are not and that the l a t t e r v a r i a t i o n s must be t o l e r a t e d . Some of the d i s t i n c t i v e features t h a t must be learned i n c l u d e d : ascending and descending stems as i n 'b and p'; l e f t - t o - r i g h t o r i e n t a t i o n as i n 'd-b, p-q'; c l o s u r e as i n 'o' versus open 'c' and 'e'; angles as 23 i n 'a, k, m, n, i , x, v'; curves, 'c, o, s, g'; curves and v e r t i c a l l i n e s , 'p, B, b, q, t 1 ; symmetry as i n 'M and x'. Marchbanks (1965) s t u d i e d non-readers and beginning readers i n a ' d elayed-recognition' task using three and f i v e l e t t e r nonsense words designed to represent a systematic s e r i e s of e r r o r s . He found that the f i r s t l e t t e r of both the long and short words was the cue most o f t e n used i n word matching. The l a s t l e t t e r i n three and f i v e l e t t e r words was the second most f r e q u e n t l y used cue f o r a l l s u b j e c t s except the f i r s t grade g i r l s . The f i r s t l e t t e r was used s i g n i f i c a n t l y more times than the l a s t i n a l l groups except by the k i n d e r g a r t e n boys, f o r whom a great d e a l of competition between the f i r s t and the l a s t l e t t e r s appeared to e x i s t i n word r e c o g n i t i o n . D a n i e l s and Diack (1956) found that c h i l d r e n , e i g h t years o l d , j u s t beginning to read, appeared to attend p r i m a r i l y to the i n i t i a l l e t t e r of words. Many f i r s t grade g i r l s used the f i r s t l e t t e r as the most s a l i e n t cue f o r word r e c o g n i t i o n f o l l o w e d i n order by the second and t h i r d l e t t e r s . Theories which proposed that beginning readers recognize words as a whole by t h e i r shape were not supported by Marchbanks (1965) study that i n d i c a t e d that r e c o g n i t i o n was based on i n d i v i d u a l l e t t e r s . Thus, i t appeared that i n the graphemic p r e s e n t a t i o n of words the stimulus value of medial and f i n a l l e t t e r s must be increased to a t t r a c t v i s u a l a t t e n t i o n , to i n c r e a s e a n a l y s i s of c r i t i c a l f e a t u r e s , and p o s s i b l y to reduce resequencing e r r o r s . L e t t e r and Word D i s c r i m i n a t i o n Tests L e t t e r and word d i s c r i m i n a t i o n t e s t s used i n past s t u d i e s were reviewed i n an e f f o r t to e s t a b l i s h a s a t i s f a c t o r y t e s t i n g format 24 f o r the present study. A number of experimenters have used a match-to-sample format w i t h i n d i v i d u a l l e t t e r s (Ghent, 1961a, 1961b; Gibson et a l . , 1962; H a l l , 1968; Bai n , 1970) and w i t h words (Gibson, Osser and P i c k , 1963). In each case a sample stimulus was to be matched to one of a number of response a l t e r -n a t i v e s . Each non-matching a l t e r n a t i v e was s i m i l a r to but d i f f e r e n t from the sample stimulus and represented a c o n t r o l l e d v a r i a t i o n of that s t i m u l u s . In each matching e x e r c i s e , the number and type of v a r i a t i o n s or e r r o r responses was c o n t r o l l e d and.data was c o l l e c t e d f o r the frequency of occurrence of each e r r o r type. Thus, a much more c o n t r o l l e d e r r o r a n a l y s i s could be made than i n the context of sentences and para-graphs. In a d d i t i o n , s y n t a c t i c , morphological and c o n t e x t u a l cues were absent and the subj e c t could make a c o r r e c t match only through a n a l y s i s of the a c t u a l l e t t e r s or words r a t h e r than from guessing or i n f e r e n c e . Gibson et a l . (1962) and W o h l w i l l and Wiener (1964) used l e t t e r -l i k e forms r a t h e r than a c t u a l l e t t e r s to keep s p e c i f i c experience w i t h the forms as equal as p o s s i b l e and asked f o r matching r a t h e r than i d e n t i f i c a t i o n s i n c e simple v i s u a l d i s c r i m i n a t i o n was being s t u d i e d . That i s , the su b j e c t was not asked to name or to know the meaning of the symbols, but only to match them f o l l o w i n g v i s u a l examination. A number of authors have used nonsense o r pseudo-words. Solomon and Postman (1952) used seven l e t t e r words i n a t e s t of pronounce-a b i l i t y . The Gates-McKillop Reading D i a g n o s t i c Test (Gates and M c K i l l o p , 1962) has four subtests of d i s o r i e n t a t i o n and resequencing using nonsense words. Gibson, Osser and P i c k (1963) t e s t e d f i r s t and t h i r d graders w i t h four and f i v e l e t t e r pseudo-words. Marchbanks (1965) used three to f i v e l e t t e r pseudo-words i n a t e s t of v i s u a l a t t e n t i o n to word p a r t s . Nodine 25 (1971) test e d k i n d e r g a r t e n and t h i r d graders w i t h nonsense s y l l a b l e s . The use of pseudo-words was advantageous i n t e s t s of v i s u a l d i s c r i m i n a t i o n where matching of word s t i m u l i was to be made i n terms of t h e i r orthographic features (number and l o c a t i o n of l e t t e r s w i t h ascend-i n g and descending stems and other d i s c r i m i n a t i n g f e a t u r e s ) . The d i f f e r e n t i a l e f f e c t s upon su b j e c t s of f a m i l i a r i t y w i t h p a r t i c u l a r words read or the knowledge of word meanings was c o n t r o l l e d w i t h nonsense words. At the same time, orthographic ( r u l e s f o r combining l e t t e r s ) and phono-l o g i c a l ( p r o n o u n c e a b i l i t y ) c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of the E n g l i s h language could be c l o s e l y approximated. Some authors have suggested the use of u n f a m i l i a r E n g l i s h words r a t h e r than c o n s t r u c t i n g pseudo-words that are designed to be o r t h o g r a p h i c a l l y and p h o n o l o g i c a l l y s i m i l a r to E n g l i s h words. Gates (1961) t e s t e d grade two c h i l d r e n on t h e i r r e c o g n i t i o n and understanding of t h i r d and f o u r t h grade words th a t they had not as yet encountered i n t h e i r vocabulary c o n t r o l l e d b a s a l readers. The r e s u l t s of the study showed that the average (median) c h i l d i n the second grade recognized and understood c o r r e c t l y about 60 percent of the 'new' t h i r d grade words and about 57 percent of the 'new' f o u r t h grade words. Gates concluded that the average c h i l d reads e x t e n s i v e l y a wide v a r i e t y of m a t e r i a l s w i t h u n c o n t r o l l e d vocabulary during which he encounters and l e a r n s f a r more words than those presented i n the b a s a l readers. Without the use of pseudo-words, i t i s v i r t u a l l y i m p ossible to c o n t r o l f o r f a m i l i a r i t y w i t h s p e c i f i c words. In c o n c l u s i o n , i t appeared that a f i v e - t o - o n e match-to-sample t e s t i n g format using f i v e l e t t e r nonsense words would be s a t i s f a c t o r y f o r the present study. This format, more f u l l y d e s c r i b e d i n Chapter I I , 26 would f a c i l i t a t e an a n a l y s i s of the e r r o r s made by c o n t r o l l i n g the number and type of e r r o r s presented. The removal of morphological and c o n t e x t u a l cues and the use of quingrams w i l l f o r c e the s u b j e c t s to v i s u a l l y d i s c r i m -i n a t e the c r i t i c a l features w i t h i n each word to s e l e c t a s a t i s f a c t o r y match to a sample. Geometric Form P e r c e p t i o n A number of researchers have found that more confusion e x i s t s w i t h h o r i z o n t a l l y than v e r t i c a l l y d i s o r i e n t e d geometric shapes (Rudel and Teuber, 1963; W o h l w i l l and Wiener, 1964). Newson (1955) found that i n a matching task f i v e year o l d c h i l d r e n are p a r t i c u l a r l y l i k e l y to confuse h o r i z o n t a l d i s o r i e n t a t i o n s of geometric f i g u r e s which remained unchanged when r o t a t e d through 180 degrees. Ghent (1961) discovered that preschool c h i l d r e n judge w i t h a high degree of consistency that c e r t a i n geometric shapes were r i g h t - s i d e -up i n one o r i e n t a t i o n and upside-down i n another. Ghent expl a i n e d that a young c h i l d d i d not p e r c e i v e the o r i e n t a t i o n of a form immediately, but scanned the v a r i o u s p o r t i o n s of the form i n s u c c e s s i o n . This scanning began w i t h a f o c a l p o r t i o n that drew the a t t e n t i o n more r e a d i l y than other p o r t i o n s d i d . C h i l d r e n considered a f i g u r e to be r i g h t - s i d e - u p when the f o c a l p o i n t was i n the upper p o r t i o n . This o b s e r v a t i o n suggested that the c h i l d normally scanned i n a downward d i r e c t i o n r a t h e r than randomly from one p a r t of the f i g u r e to another. The c h i l d ' s judgement of the o r i e n t a t i o n of a geometric form depended on whether the p o s i t i o n of the f i g u r e f a c i l i t a t e d or i n t e r f e r e d w i t h the tendency to scan down-ward. Ghent (1961) stud i e d the r e c o g n i t i o n of simple geometric forms t a c h i s t o s c o p i c a l l y presented w i t h the f o c a l p o i n t i n the upper pa r t of 27 the f i g u r e . The s u b j e c t s from three to f i v e years o l d matched the forms more r e a d i l y when they were presented i n the ' r i g h t - s i d e - u p ' than the 'upside-down' o r i e n t a t i o n . Examination of the f i g u r e s Ghent used i n d i c a t e d that the f o l l o w i n g c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s were considered to be f o c a l p o i n t s : the apex of a t r i a n g l e or d a r t shape; the p o i n t of i n t e r s e c t i o n i n a ' Y - l i k e ' , 'T' or ' c r o s s - l i k e ' f i g u r e , or a break i n c o n t i n u i t y i n a f i g u r e . Examples of the l a t t e r were b r i e f expansions or c o n t r a c t i o n s i n an otherwise u n i f o r m l y s t r a i g h t l i n e . In another study of four to e i g h t year o l d c h i l d r e n , Ghent (1961) again found c o n s i s t e n t responses to the o r i e n t a t i o n of t a c h i s t o -s c o p i c a l l y presented geometric forms. The f i g u r e s that e l i c i t e d the s trongest most c o n s i s t e n t responses to o r i e n t a t i o n had f o c a l p o i n t s as f o l l o w s : an i n t e r s e c t i o n as i n 'T or Y', the apex of a t r i a n g l e ; an '0' w i t h a s t i c k attached l i k e a magnifying g l a s s , the more d a r k l y bordered s i d e of an otherwise t h i c k b l a c k or white l i n e , a s m a l l imbedded f i g u r e white or b l a c k i n , r e s p e c t i v e l y , a b l a c k or white f i e l d , i n t e r -s e c t i o n or expansion of l i n e s , a blackened p o r t i o n i n the perimeter of a c i r c l e or square. In a d d i t i o n to the preference by young c h i l d r e n to l o c a t e the f o c a l p o i n t i n the upper p o r t i o n of a f i g u r e , the v e r t i c a l a x i s played a r o l e i n o r i e n t a t i o n p e r c e p t i o n . The c h i l d r e n i n Ghent's study showed a strong preference f o r a centred homogeneous l i n e i n the v e r t i c a l as opposed to the h o r i z o n t a l o r i e n t a t i o n - a preference f o r v e r t i c a l i z a t i o n . W o h l w i l l and Wiener (1964) a l s o t e s t e d the d i r e c t i o n a l i t y of meaning-l e s s geometric forms. They used two s e r i e s of stimulus f i g u r e s ; one contained an i n t e r n a l d e t a i l , the other d i d not. One-half of each s e r i e s had open f i g u r e s w i t h a d iscontinous perimeter. In a d d i t i o n , i n each s e r i e s one-28 h a l f was c l a s s i f i e d as h i g h l y d i r e c t i o n a l (broad base, open or c l o s e d , a d e f i n i t e peak or apex and b i l a t e r a l symmetry); the other h a l f was c l a s s i f i e d as low i n d i r e c t i o n a l i t y . Examination of W o h l w i l l ' s f i g u r e s revealed that he considered as f o c a l p o i n t s both the apex of the h i g h l y d i r e c t i o n a l f i g u r e s and t h e i r i n t e r n a l d e t a i l s that ranged i n l o c a t i o n from j u s t beneath the apex down to the base. The r e s u l t s o f W o h l w i l l ' s study showed th a t twice as many e r r o r s were made d i s c r i m i n a t i n g the f i g u r e s without an i n t e r n a l d e t a i l than those w i t h . Those f i g u r e s w i t h h i g h d i r e c t i o n a l i t y e l i c i t e d the lowest l a t e n c y of response f o r d i s c r i m i n a t i o n of t h e i r o r i e n t a t i o n . W o h l w i l l concluded that c h i l d r e n as young as four to f i v e years o l d had l i t t l e d i f f i c u l t y , on the average, i n d i s c r i m i n a t i n g s t i m u l i on the b a s i s of t h e i r s p a t i a l o r i e n t a t i o n , provided the task r e q u i r e d a response to t h i s cue. The r e s u l t s of Ghent's and W o h l w i l l ' s work l e d to the d e c i s i o n to use small b l a c k dots imbedded w i t h i n words to a t t r a c t v i s u a l a t t e n t i o n downward to c r i t i c a l i n t e r n a l d e t a i l s of o r i e n t a t i o n . I t was a l s o decided to i n c r e a s e s u c c e s s i v e l y the width of the b l a c k stems of medial and f i n a l l e t t e r s of words so as to a t t r a c t v i s u a l a t t e n t i o n to these l e s s f r e q u e n t l y analyzed p a r t s of words. As each l e t t e r would have s u c c e s s i v e l y g r e a t e r stimulus value consecutive p e r c e p t i o n would be promoted. I t was a l s o f e l t t hat the s e q u e n t i a l order of l e t t e r s i n words would be emphasized and that resequencing e r r o r s would be decreased by i n c r e a s i n g the stem width of successive l e t t e r s w i t h i n words... These m o d i f i c a t i o n s are more f u l l y d e s c r i b e d i n Chapter I I I . Dember and E a r l (1957) s t a t e d that the events that a t t r a c t e d a t t e n t i o n were: (a) temporal change i n s t i m u l a t i o n , f o r i n s t a n c e , novel 29 s t i m u l a t i o n that d i f f e r e d from and was discordant w i t h what was expected, and 00 s p a t i a l change and inhomogeneity of s t i m u l a t i o n . Ghent's obs e r v a t i o n that c h i l d r e n p r e f e r r e d v e r t i c a l l y o r i e n t e d f i g u r e s and Dember's suggestion that s p a t i a l change and inhomo-ge n e i t y of s t i m u l a t i o n a t t r a c t e d a t t e n t i o n appeared to be i n harmony w i t h the previous suggestion of s e t t i n g some l e t t e r s i n i t a l i c . Thus, i f the l e t t e r s 'p and b' were i n i t a l i c they would a t t r a c t v i s u a l a t t e n t i o n and a n a l y s i s , and they would not be r e v e r s i b l e h o r i z o n t a l l y , v e r t i c a l l y or r o t a t i o n a l l y f o r each other or f o r the l e t t e r s 'q and d'. The only p o s s i b l e d i s o r i e n t a t i o n would be the v e r t i c a l d i s o r i e n t a t i o n from 'q to d'; however, v e r t i c a l d i s o r i e n t a t i o n s have not occurred as f r e q u e n t l y as h o r i z o n t a l d i s o r i e n t a t i o n s and the l e t t e r 'q' has been the most i n f r e q u e n t l y used. In some circumstances, reward appeared to improve the focus of v i s u a l a t t e n t i o n (Bahrick, F i t t s and Rankin, 1952; Smock and Rubin, 1964; Laberge, Tweedy and R i c k e r , 1967). Vernon (1963b) reported that i f an observer's a t t e n t i o n was d i r e c t e d by p a r t i c u l a r i n s t r u c t i o n s to one aspect of a complex f i e l d so that he had some id e a or some expect-a t i o n of what would be shown to him, he would per c e i v e more than i f he was o b l i g a t e d to search the f i e l d of view f o r the s i g n i f i c a n t event (Vernon, 1963b). Vernon a l s o reported that numerous t a c h i s t o s c o p i c experiments had been c a r r i e d out to determine the number of things t h a t could be seen at a s i n g l e glance. The s i m p l e s t experiments used b l a c k dots s c a t t e r e d over a white f i e l d . U s u a l l y the observer was given a ' f i x a t i o n p o i n t ' on which to focus h i s a t t e n t i o n . A f t e r some p r a c t i c e i n d i r e c t i n g h i s a t t e n t i o n , an a d u l t observer could p e r c e i v e considerably more than at f i r s t . 30 A study by Hendrickson and Muehl (1962) f u r n i s h e d evidence that preschool and e a r l y school c h i l d r e n were not d e f i c i e n t i n p e r c e i v i n g a l e f t - r i g h t i n v e r s i o n when given an i n s t r u c t i o n a l set to r e a l i z e that t h i s d i f f e r e n c e was important. H a l l (1968) argued that w h i l e there could be no doubt t h a t a t t e n t i o n was a necessary c o n d i t i o n f o r the d i s c r i m i n -a t i o n task, i t was not s u f f i c i e n t , and that reinforcement of a t t e n t i o n was necessary. Vernon (1970) concluded a f t e r reviewing a number of s t u d i e s t h a t any d i r e c t i n c r e a s e i n the extent and accuracy of form p e r c e p t i o n probably r e s u l t e d from improvement i n the c a p a c i t y to d i r e c t a t t e n t i o n towards p a r t i c u l a r aspects or d e t a i l s of the forms presented. Thus, i t appeared that to optimize v i s u a l d i s c r i m i n a t i o n through a n a l y s i s of c r i t i c a l f e atures of graphemic s t i m u l i an i n s t r u c -t i o n a l s et to focus upon those f e a t u r e s should be used i n combination w i t h reinforcement f o r a p p r o p r i a t e a t t e n t i o n . Both i n s t r u c t i o n and reinforcement f o r a p p r o p r i a t e v i s u a l a t t e n t i o n were used i n the pre-experimental sessions of the present study as described i n Chapter I I I . The m a j o r i t y of s t u d i e s d e s c r i b i n g the visual-motor performance of the mentally retardedhave focussed p r i m a r i l y on b r a i n - i n j u r e d s u b j e c t s . These s t u d i e s have described performance on figure-ground r e l a t i o n s (e.g. F r o s t i g , 1966), WISC: ob j e c t and b l o c k assembly (Wechsler, 1949), ITPA: v i s u a l c l o s u r e , v i s u a l s e q u e n t i a l memory ( K i r k , McCarthy and K i r k , 1968), the Bender V i s u a l Motor G e s t a l t t e s t (Bender, 1952), the marble form board (Strauss and Kephart, 1955) and others. These s t u d i e s have produced c o n f l i c t i n g r e s u l t s . Some s t u d i e s have found marked v i s u a l -motor d e f i c i t s that have not been confirmed by others. Some of the c o n f l i c t may be a t t r i b u t e d to f a u l t s i n experimental design,among them, 31 f a i l u r e to c r o s s - v a l i d a t e , inadvertent s e l e c t i o n of subjects on the b a s i s of d i a g n o s t i c symptoms that were the same as, or were confounded with'the behavior under study, or f a i l u r e to c o n t r o l adequately f o r mental and c h r o n o l o g i c a l age, i n t e l l i g e n c e , and/or experience. A l s o , i t would appear that the b e h a v i o r a l m a n i f e s t a t i o n of b r a i n damage was a f u n c t i o n of l o c u s , extent and time s i n c e the i n j u r y and the developmental l e v e l of the c h i l d at the time of i n j u r y . As a r e s u l t of these problems, many of the behaviors p r e v i o u s l y thought to be symptomatic of b r a i n damage have been found to occur w i t h equal frequency among the normal p o p u l a t i o n , or to be a f u n c t i o n of other causes such as emotional d i s o r d e r s . Studies that have sought concurrent v a l i d a t i o n w i t h the electroencephalogram have a l s o met w i t h d i f f i c u l t y i n that many c h i l d r e n w i t h abnormal EEG p a t t e r n s have not e x h i b i t e d abnormal n e u r o l o g i c a l symptoms nor have t h e i r b e h a v i o r a l p a t t e r n s n e c e s s a r i l y f i t the Strauss syndrome (S t r a u s s , Kephart, 1955). Robinson and Robinson (1965) s t a t e d that they were impressed w i t h the tremendous d i f f e r e n c e s among brain-damaged c h i l d r e n . They concluded that b r a i n i n j u r y could r e s u l t i n a b e w i l d e r i n g array of b e h a v i o r a l symptoms, no one of which was common to a l l c h i l d r e n . Thus, i t appeared that a f i r m diagnosis of b r a i n damage could not be made because i t was not p o s s i b l e to c o n s i s t e n t l y d i f f e r e n t i a t e the performance of b r a i n damaped i n d i v i d u a l s from those without b r a i n damage. As a r e s u l t of these o b s e r v a t i o n s , b r a i n damaged subjects have not been i d e n t i f i e d i n the present study. A number of s t u d i e s have used mentally retarded s u b j e c t s , u n d i f f e r e n t i a t e d w i t h respect to e t i o l o g y , i n comparing performance w i t h normal s u b j e c t s . Ghent (1964) r e p l i c a t e d one of her p r e v i o u s l y described experiments to t e s t the p o s s i b l e performance d i f f e r e n c e s of v a r i o u s 32 mental age l e v e l s to d i s c r i m i n a t e d i s o r i e n t a t i o n of t a c h i s t o s c o p i c a l l y presented, simple geometric f i g u r e s w i t h a f o c a l p o i n t at the upper extremes. The s u b j e c t s ' c h r o n o l o g i c a l ages ranged from nine to t h i r t e e n years w i t h mental ages from three to s i x years. The s i m i l a r i t y i n the performance of the normal and retarded s u b j e c t s suggested that comparable processes accounted f o r the e f f e c t of o r i e n t a t i o n on r e c o g n i t i o n i n both normal and retarded s u b j e c t s . That i s , i t seemed l i k e l y t h a t at some stage i n development f o r both groups, forms were scanned by beginning w i t h the f o c a l p a r t and continuing downward. Ghent's study was designed to determine whether t h i s type of scanning was a s s o c i a t e d w i t h l e v e l of development as defined by mental age or by c h r o n o l o g i c a l age. S u r p r i s -i n g l y , the r e s u l t s suggested that n e i t h e r of these v a r i a b l e s was r e l e v a n t . Ghent d i d f i n d that mental age and exposure d u r a t i o n f o r d i s c r i m i n a t i o n were c o r r e l a t e d , the lower mental age s u b j e c t s required a longer exposure d u r a t i o n . Brooks (1971) s t u d i e d 118 educable mentally r e t a r d e d c h i l d r e n (IQ 45 to 85) using the Ayres t e s t of figure-ground p e r c e p t i o n (Ayres, 1962) and the Bote! (1961) t e s t of word r e c o g n i t i o n . The r e s u l t s i n d i -cated that readers had b e t t e r v i s u a l figure-ground p e r c e p t i o n (FGP) than non-readers when IQ was h e l d constant; the higher IQ groups appeared to possess b e t t e r (FGP) and (FGP) improved w i t h c h r o n o l o g i c a l age. This i n v e s t i g a t i o n would appear to support the i d e a that (FGP) i s r e l a t e d to reading at the readiness and f i r s t reader l e v e l s . As educable mentally handicapped c h i l d r e n matured, (FGP) was not as important to the reading process and d i d not d i f f e r e n t i a t e reading a b i l i t y groups. Zeaman and House (1963) reported, w i t h respect to mentally retarded s u b j e c t s , t h a t s e l e c t i v e a t t e n t i o n was important i n d i s c r i m i n a t i o n 33 l e a r n i n g t a s k s . Correct performance i n v i s u a l d i s c r i m i n a t i o n tasks had two components: ( a) a t t e n d i n g to the r e l e v a n t dimension of the s t i m u l i and (b) responding to the c o r r e c t cue on that dimension. Retarded c h i l d r e n r e p o r t e d l y had p a r t i c u l a r d i f f i c u l t y w i t h the f i r s t of these components. Hagen (1971), worked w i t h m e n t a l l y retarded and normal sub j e c t s w i t h e q u i v a l e n t mental ages. He presented cards on which there appeared two touching p i c t u r e s , one of an animal, the other of a household o b j e c t . The s u b j e c t s were t o l d that o n l y the animals were important. The r e s u l t s showed that there was no d i f f e r e n c e between normal and retarded s u b j e c t s i n t h e i r a b i l i t y to s e l e c t i v e l y attend when matched on mental age l e v e l . The ' a t t e n t i o n - d e f i c i t ' hypothesis h e l d when i n s t i t u t i o n a l i z e d r a t h e r than home-living r e t a r d a t e s were compared w i t h normal c h i l d r e n matched f o r mental age. Thus, the a t t e n t i o n d e f i c i t appeared to be a f u n c t i o n of i n s t i t u t i o n a l i z a t i o n r a t h e r than mental age. Hagen a l s o found that s e l e c t i v e performance increased as a f u n c t i o n of i n c r e a s i n g mental age. S p i t z (1971a, b) t e s t e d the e f f e c t of age and mental r e t a r d a -t i o n on temporal i n t e g r a t i o n of v i s u a l s t i m u l i . Ten p a i r s of v i s u a l s t i m u l i were exposed t a c h i s t o s c o p i c a l l y so that each h a l f of the p a i r appeared as meaningless segmented l i n e s but when fused were perce i v e d as a drawing of an animal. A number of s t u d i e s have demonstrated that the i n t e r - s t i m u l u s i n t e r v a l (ISI) necessary to induce the p e r c e p t i o n of s i m u l t a n e i t y of two successive s t i m u l i , as w e l l as to induce backward masking, was r e l a t e d to c h r o n o l o g i c a l age. A s h o r t e r (ISI) was r e q u i r e d f o r o l d e r than f o r younger c h i l d r e n ( L i s s and H a i t h , 1970). I t has a l s o been reported t h a t , on these t a s k s , adolescent educable r e t a r d a t e s performed more l i k e normal c h i l d r e n of equal mental age than l i k e those 34 of equal c h r o n o l o g i c a l age ( S p i t z and Thor, 1968; Thor and Thor, 1970). The import of these s t u d i e s was that i n c r e a s i n g mental age (and i n c r e a s i n g c h r o n o l o g i c a l age i n normal c h i l d r e n ) was accompanied by g r e a t e r speed of v i s u a l processing and a sho r t e r d u r a t i o n sensory t r a c e . In the t e s t of temporal i n t e g r a t i o n , S p i t z compared normal e i g h t h graders w i t h normal t h i r d graders and educable mental r e t a r d a t e s on a t a c h i s t o s c o p i c p r e s e n t a t i o n . He found that the r e t a r d a t e s who r a r e l y perform as w e l l as equal c h r o n o l o g i c a l age normals on d i f f i c u l t t a c h i s t o s c o p i c tasks were not s i g n i f i c a n t l y d i f f e r e n t from equal chrono-l o g i c a l age normals on t h i s task. A second experiment by S p i t z (1971b) test e d the e f f e c t s of stimulus complexity on v i s u a l search performance of normal c h i l d r e n and educable r e t a r d a t e s . He reported that there had been only a few s t u d i e s of v i s u a l search performance using r e t a r d a t e s as s u b j e c t s , and i n those few s t u d i e s d i f f e r e n t m a t e r i a l s had been used. Nevertheless, a number of trends could be noted: (a) v i s u a l search time was s i g n i f i c a n t l y s h o r t e r f o r t r a i n a b l e r e t a r d a t e s (Rosenberg, 1961); (b) speed of v i s u a l search was a f u n c t i o n of s u b s t a n t i a l d i f f e r e n c e i n mental age, not simply 10 (Das, 1970); and (c) search time of educable r e t a r d a t e s and i n t e l l e c t u a l l y average subjects of equal mental age was more adversely a f f e c t e d by reduced stimulus inf o r m a t i o n than was search time o f equal c h r o n o l o g i c a l age i n t e l l e c t u a l l y average s u b j e c t s . S p i t z (1971a) used f o u r t h and tenth grade i n t e l l e c t u a l l y average students, high school s p e c i a l c l a s s r e t a r d a t e s and a group of i n s t i t u t i o n a l i z e d r e t a r d a t e s . The task comprised a match-to-sample format using twenty-eight f i g u r e s ranging i n complexity from a square or t r i a n g l e to a ten or eleven-sided randomly designed f i g u r e . Comparison 35 of the subj e c t groups i n d i c a t e d that IQ, by i t s e l f , was unr e l a t e d to d i f f e r e n c e s i n v i s u a l search performance, s i n c e the r e t a r d a t e s and f o u r t h graders, who d i f f e r e d widely i n IQ, performed a t about the same l e v e l . By i t s e l f , c h r o n o l o g i c a l age was unr e l a t e d to performance s i n c e the re t a r d a t e s and tenth graders who were the same age performed at d i f f e r e n t l e v e l s . Nor was a r e l a t i v e l y s m a l l d i f f e r e n c e i n mental age a s i g n i f i c a n t v a r i a b l e , s i n c e the two retarded groups d i f f e r e d s i g n i f i c a n t l y i n mental age but not i n v i s u a l search performance. Consequently, the author concluded that only l a r g e d i f f e r e n c e s i n mental age a f f e c t e d l e v e l of v i s u a l search performance. These r e s u l t s r e p l i c a t e d previous f i n d i n g s i n which an average d i f f e r e n c e of about 3.4 years was r e l a t e d to d i f f e r -ences i n speed of v i s u a l search. In c o n c l u s i o n , from the foregoing s t u d i e s i t appeared that the v i s u a l search p a t t e r n s of me n t a l l y retarded and normal su b j e c t s were d i r e c t l y comparable. Neither MA or CA was found to be r e l a t e d to the a b i l i t y to s e l e c t i v e l y attend to v i s u a l s t i m u l i . IQ was unr e l a t e d to d i f f e r e n c e s i n v i s u a l search performance, and only when there were l a r g e d i f f e r e n c e s i n MA d i d the speed of v i s u a l processing increase.. There were a l s o a number of s i m i l a r i t i e s between retarded and non-retarded i n d i v i d u a l s w i t h respect to v i s u a l scanning behavior, figure^ground p e r c e p t i o n , temporal i n t e g r a t i o n of v i s u a l s t i m u l i and the e f f e c t s o f pre-experimental i n s t r u c t i o n a l s e t s to j u s t i f y the p r e v i o u s l y suggested graphemic changes. I n t e l l i g e n c e . The r e l a t i o n s h i p between i n t e l l i g e n c e and reading was complex. The c o r r e l a t i o n s between d i s t r i b u t i o n s of reading readiness and i n t e l l i g e n c e scores of approximately .50 to .60 r e f l e c t e d the importance of sensorimotor and pe r c e p t u a l a b i l i t i e s i n mental 36 development f o r the preschool years. A major p o r t i o n of the t e s t s of i n t e l l i g e n c e and t e s t s of reading readiness at the ki n d e r g a r t e n l e v e l was composed of these kinds of tasks. The common va r i a n c e i n reading r e a d i -ness and i n t e l l i g e n c e scores was l a r g e l y due to the mutual assessment of visual-motor c a p a c i t i e s . The lower c o r r e l a t i o n s between reading achieve-ment and i n t e l l i g e n c e i n the primary grades, i . e . .25 to .40, r e f l e c t e d more independence i n the two types of development. The higher c o r r e l a t i o n s i n the l a t e r grades, i . e . .65 to .85, i n d i c a t e d the importance of a b s t r a c t v e r b a l a b i l i t i e s f o r advanced reading s k i l l s . Since the sensorimotor c a p a c i t i e s played a v i t a l r o l e i n beginning reading, i t was p o s s i b l e that an impairment or r e t a r d a t i o n i n pe r c e p t u a l development could cause a marked delay i n the development of reading without a comparable l o s s of general i n t e l l i g e n c e . I f the reading d i s a b i l i t y p e r s i s t e d , however, i t would prevent the c h i l d from having the l e a r n i n g experiences necessary f o r l a t e r mental development (Leton, 1962). Dechant (1964) reported that the IQ c e r t a i n l y was not an adequate c r i t e r i o n f o r reading readiness or achievement. However, i t was s i g n i f i c a n t i n that i t put a c e i l i n g upon i n d i v i d u a l achievement. I n d i v i d u a l s w i t h an IQ below 25 had l i t t l e chance of l e a r n i n g to.read; those w i t h an IQ below 50 experienced d i f f i c u l t y w i t h a b s t r a c t m a t e r i a l s ; and those w i t h an IQ between 50 and 70 r a r e l y were able to read above a fourth-grade l e v e l . An IQ taken i n i s o l a t i o n , as a matter of f a c t , appeared to be a somewhat poorer p r e d i c t o r of academic achievement among retarded than among normal c h i l d r e n (Bateman, 1966). De H i r s c h , Jansky and Langford (1965) used 37 t e s t s of p e r c e p t u a l -motor and l i n g u i s t i c development w i t h normally i n t e l l i g e n t k i n d e r g a r t e n c h i l d r e n . About one-half of the p r e d i c t o r t e s t s c o r r e l a t e d s i g n i f i c a n t l y 37 w i t h second grade achievement. Only one of the s i g n i f i c a n t c o r r e l a t i o n s was accounted f o r by IQ, which ranked t w e l f t h as a p r e d i c t o r of reading (Bateman, 1966). Mental Age, g e n e r a l l y , was a much b e t t e r i n d i c a t o r of reading readiness and achievement than IQ was, e s p e c i a l l y at the e a r l y l e v e l s . To be able to read, many s k i l l s were necessary that came only w i t h age (Dechant, 1964). Bliesmer (1954) s t u d i e d c h i l d r e n of equal mental age but of markedly d i f f e r e n t c h r o n o l o g i c a l age and IQ to determine the extent to which they tended to be a l i k e w i t h respect to reading. The c r i t e r i o n f o r ' d u l l ' was a Stanford-Binet IQ of 84 or below, the one f o r ' b r i g h t ' was a Stanford-Binet IQ of 116 or above. The mental age range s t u d i e d was from 10.7 through 12.6 years, w h i l e the b r i g h t group was r e s t r i c t e d to a c h r o n o l o g i c a l age of 10 years or l e s s and the d u l l group of 14 years or above. The r e s u l t s of Bliesmer's a n a l y s i s i n d i c a t e d that d i f f e r e n c e s w i t h respect to word r e c o g n i t i o n , word meaning and reading r a t e were not s i g n i f i c a n t . Robinson and Robinson (1965) , f o l l o w i n g a review of the l i t e r a -t u r e , s t a t e d that many s t u d i e s have not found s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s i n ; d i s c r i m i n a t i o n l e a r n i n g between re t a r d a t e s and normal c h i l d r e n of the same mental age (Kass and Stevenson, 1961; Mar t i n and Blum, 1961; Stevenson, 1960). In c o n t r a s t , others have found r e t a r d a t e s s i g n i f i c a n t l y i n f e r i o r at such tasks (Girardeau, 1959? House and Zeaman, 1958, 1959; Rudel, 1959; Stevenson and Iscoe, 1955). Zeaman and House (1963) have demonstrated that i t was not so much i n the f i n a l stages of l e a r n i n g v i s u a l d i s c r i m i n a t i o n s as i n the e a r l y stages that c h i l d r e n of v a r i o u s mental ages d i f f e r e d from each other. 38 Moderately to se v e r e l y retarded c h i l d r e n tended to l e a r n v i s u a l d i s c r i m i n -a t i o n s more s l o w l y than d i d normal c h i l d r e n of comparable mental ages. The reasons l a y p r i m a r i l y not i n the c h i l d ' s b a s i c i n a b i l i t y to make the d i s c r i m i n a t i o n , but i n h i s i n i t i a l i n a b i l i t y to pay a t t e n t i o n to the r e l e v a n t cues. The higher the mental age, the gr e a t e r the number of cues su b j e c t s a c t u a l l y observed, but the b r i g h t e r s u b j e c t s had learned to ignore i r r e l e v a n t dimensions (House and Zeaman, 1961). According to t h i s view, d i s c r i m i n a t i o n l e a r n i n g proceeded r e l a t i v e l y normally i n retarded c h i l d r e n once they had learned to concentrate on the r e l e v a n t cues; i t was the i n i t i a l and not the f i n a l p o r t i o n of the l e a r n i n g curve which revealed t h e i r e s s e n t i a l d i f f i c u l t i e s . One i m p l i c a t i o n of the view of Zeaman and House was that the engineering of a t t e n t i o n was the key to s u c c e s s f u l t r a i n i n g (Robinson and Robinson, 1965). V i s u a l a t t e n t i o n should be drawn to the most d i s c r i m i n a t i n g f e a t u r e s o f graphemic s t i m u l i . In equating or d i v i d i n g groups by i n t e l l e c t u a l l e v e l or i n d i s c o v e r i n g the r e l a t i o n s h i p between some other v a r i a b l e and mental a b i l i t y , i t was u s u a l l y the mental age which should have been used as the u n i t o f measure. The c o r r e l a t i o n between IQ and school achievement was lower, f o r example, than that between mental age and sc h o o l achievement (Robinson and Robinson, 1965). Peabody P i c t u r e Vocabulary Test. Robinson and Robinson i n a review of the Peabody Test, s t a t e d that t e s t - r e t e s t and equivalent-form r e l i a b i l i t i e s have both proven to be s a t i s f a c t o r i l y h i g h i n most s t u d i e s w i t h retarded c h i l d r e n (Budoff and Purseglove, 1963; Dunn and Brooks, 1960; Dunn and H o t t e l , 1961), except that retarded adolescents w i t h mental age above e i g h t years apparently d i d not a t t a i n s t a b l e scores (Budoff and Purseglove, 1963). C o r r e l a t i o n s w i t h the Stanford-Binet have 39 tended to range from .66 to .88 (Budoff and Purseglove, 1963; Dunn and Brooks, 1960; Dunn and H o t t e l , 1961; Mein, 1962) but as had been expected, retarded adolescents whose Peabody scores were u n r e l i a b l e showed low c o r r e l a t i o n s w i t h Stanford-Binet IQ. A number of s t u d i e s have shown that Peabody mental ages below four or f i v e years have tended to be s i g n i f i -c a n t l y lower than mental ages on the Stanford-Binet (Budoff and Purse-glove, 1963; Mein, 1962; Tobias and G o r e l i c k , 1961). The f o l l o w i n g s t u d i e s have been made of the c o r r e l a t i o n s between Stanford-Binet (LM) and the Peabody P i c t u r e Vocabulary forms A and B, mental age and IQ scores, f o r educable me n t a l l y r e t a r d e d , i n s t i -t u t i o n a l i z e d or n o n - i n s t i t u t i o n a l i z e d , when both t e s t s have been i n d i v i -d u a l l y administered w i t h i n a p e r i o d of from one week to two years, i C o r r e l a t i o n s Test Name Date I n s t . CA I n t e r v a l IQ MA 1. Budoff 1963 yes 16-18 1 mo. (A) = .88 (A) = .68 Purseglove 2. Dunn 1960 no 6-18 1 wk. (A) = .36 (A) = .76 Brooks 3. K i c k l i g h t e r 1964 no 6-16 1 wk. .71 .87 4. Mein 1962 yes 10-30 - - .71 5. Moss 1962 no 7 - - .60 6. Shotwell 1969 yes 6-19 2 y r s . boys .88 .93 et a l . g i r l s .88 .88 PPVT-Mental Age. Dunn (1965) reported that the average c o r r e -l a t i o n between the Bin e t and the PPVT MA scores was .83 w i t h a range of .82 - .86. However, because of the wide range i n age and a b i l i t y l e v e l of s u b j e c t s i n some of the s t u d i e s , the v a l i d i t y c o e f f i c i e n t may have been 40 s p u r i o u s l y high. Perhaps the lower c o r r e l a t i o n obtained by Moss was a f u n c t i o n of the r e s t r i c t e d age range s t u d i e d . Tobias and G o r l i c k (1961), i n a study of 17 to 30 year o l d r e t a r d a t e s i n s h e l t e r e d workshops, w i t h an IQ range of 43 to 81, found that the average PPVT MA of 7.2 was 1.10 years higher than the average B i n e t MA. Budoff and Purseglove (1963) gave the PPVT and the SB t e s t s i n counterbalanced order to 16 to 18 years o l d i n s t i t u t i o n a l i z e d r e t a r d a t e s . These researchers found t h a t , on the average, the PPVT MA was e i g h t months below those on the B i n e t . Budoff et a l . suggested that the unusual lower PPVT MA may have been due to the minimal s t i m u l a t i o n of language i n a r e s i d e n t i a l , f a c i l i t y . In c o n t r a s t , S h o t w e l l , O'Connor, Gabet and Dingman (1969) i n t h e i r study of 6 to 19 years o l d i n s t i t u t i o n a l i z e d r e t a r d a t e s found that PPVT overestimated 1960 B i n e t (LM) scores by o n l y four months f o r males and s i x months f o r females. Shotwell obtained a c o r r e l a t i o n between the PPVT and the B i n e t MA at .93 f o r males and .87 f o r females.. He concluded from h i s study and from a review of the l i t e r a t u r e that the PPVT (A) MA scores could p r e d i c t the SB (LM) MA scores r e l a t i v e l y w e l l f o r both sexes. The d i f f e r e n c e between c o r r e l a t i o n s of the PPVT (A) and the SB (LM) MA scores f o r males and females was teste d by the t - t e s t and found to be s i g n i f i c a n t (p_ K. 'POl). . The PPVT (A) p r e d i c t e d SB (LM) scores more a c c u r a t e l y f o r males than females. In view, of the foregoing evidence, apart from the unusual r e s u l t s of Budoff et a l . , i t appeared that the PPVT adequately p r e d i c t e d the MA. of mentally retarded males and females between the ages of s i x and nineteen years. The average PPVT MA appeared to be higher than the average B i n e t MA; however, t h i s d i f f e r e n c e may not have been c o n s i s t e n t over the range of ages test e d and there was not s u f f i c i e n t evidence to i n d i c a t e what c o r r e c t i o n s should be made. Throughout the s t u d i e s , Form A appeared to o b t a i n a higher c o r r e l a t i o n than Form B. 41 PPVT I n t e l l i g e n c e Quotient. Dunn and Brooks (1960) s t u d i e d educable s p e c i a l c l a s s c h i l d r e n from age 6.5 to 18.0 years. T h e i r average PPVT IQ scores were f i v e p o i n t s higher than t h e i r average Stanford-Binet IQ scores obtained one to three years e a r l i e r . Perhaps a p o r t i o n of t h i s d i f f e r e n c e may have r e f l e c t e d an a c c e l e r a t e d growth i n v e r b a l i n t e l l e c t u a l performance among the younger c h i l d r e n i n the sample w i t h the p o s s i b l e advent of increased v e r b a l s t i m u l a t i o n i n the s p e c i a l classroom. Moss (1962) s t u d i e d seven year o l d educable c h i l d r e n w i t h IQ below 85 i n r e g u l a r c l a s s e s . Their average PPVT IQ of 86.6 was 2.2 p o i n t s higher than t h e i r average Stanford-Binet IQ of 84.4 when both t e s t s had been administered during the same general p e r i o d of time. Burnett (1965) found that the average PPVT IQ scores were ten p o i n t s higher than the average Stanford-Binet scores obtained over a ten year p e r i o d f o r i n s t i -t u t i o n a l i z e d r e t a r d a t e s from age eig h t to twenty-one. In h i s d i s c u s s i o n of congruent v a l i d i t y , Dunn (1965) s t a t e d that PPVT 10's have exceeded 1937 B i n e t IQ's by an average of s i x p o i n t s . This average overestimate corresponded to an average of the score d i f f e r e n c e s obtained i n the above three s t u d i e s . Shotwell et a l . (1969) compared the PPVT and the 1960 Bin e t (LM) IQ's of s i x to nineteen year o l d i n s t i t u t i o n a l i z e d r e t a r d a t e s and found no s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e between the average scores f o r the range of PPVT 10's from 10 to 90. The Bin e t scores had been obtained over the previous twenty-four months. However, as Shotwell et a l . i n d i c a t e d , the p r e d i c t i o n of B i n e t from PPVT IQ scores was n e i t h e r simple or d i r e c t and a constant c o r r e c t i o n could not be a p p l i e d over the extent of the IQ range s t u d i e d . A n a l y s i s of Shotwell's et a l . b i v a r i a t e frequency d i s t r i -b u t i o n showed that w i t h i n the IQ range from 55 to 85 (the range of gr e a t e s t 42 relevance to the present s t u d y ) , PPVT IQ scores were on the average approximately t h i r t e e n p o i n t s higher than the average Bi n e t IQ scores. Thus, i t appeared that although, as Dunn had found, the average overestimate of Bin e t scores by the PPVT was s i x p o i n t s , the accuracy of the p r e d i c t i o n was a l s o r e l a t e d to the a c t u a l range being s t u d i e d . Although Shotwell et a l . had obtained an estimate of t h i r t e e n p o i n t s d i f f e r e n c e i n the range most r e l e v a n t to the present study, a c o r r e c t i o n f a c t o r could not be c a l c u l a t e d s i n c e there were a number of i n t e r v e n i n g v a r i a b l e s . In summary, there were a number of i n t e r v e n i n g v a r i a b l e s that i n f l u e n c e d the c o r r e l a t i o n between the PPVT (A) and the SB (LM). These v a r i a b l e s were, f o r example, placement i n an i n s t i t u t i o n or i n s p e c i a l or average classrooms, language s t i m u l a t i o n , achievement m o t i v a t i o n , age and the time i n t e r v a l between t e s t s . In the o p i n i o n of a number of researchers (Dunn and Brooks, 1960; Dunn and H o t t e l , 1961; Budoff and Purseglove, 1963; Robinson and Robinson, 1965; Shotwell et a l . , 1969), the c o r r e l a t i o n between the PPVT (A) and the Stanford-Binet (LM) was higher f o r MA than f o r IQ; the PPVT was an acceptable research instrument f o r mentally retarded males and females between the mental ages of four to eighteen years. W i t h i n t h i s range the PPVT may have overestimated the SB IQ from 2 to 13 IQ p o i n t s . Typography and L e g i b i l i t y The research on typography was reviewed to e s t a b l i s h which c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of l e t t e r s of type had the great e s t v i s i b i l i t y and l e g i b i l i t y under v a r i o u s c o n d i t i o n s . The m a j o r i t y of typographic research has been done w i t h a d u l t s ; there has been l i t t l e r esearch reported on l e g i b i l i t y of p r i n t to be 43 read by young c h i l d r e n ( T i n k e r , 1968). Bain (1970) produced a s i g n i f i c a n t r e d u c t i o n i n confusion of the l e t t e r s 'b, d, p and q' among ki n d e r g a r t e n c h i l d r e n by modifying the stem of the l e t t e r s . The same type of stem used f o r a l l of these l e t t e r s was a s o l i d b l a c k , r i g h t - a n g l e d t r i a n g l e . The r i g h t angle was p o s i t i o n e d i n the bottom l e f t - h a n d corner and a s m a l l imbedded white dot; a f o c a l p o i n t , acted to i n d i c a t e t h i s i n v a r i a n c e . No other research has been reported on experimental t y p o g r a p h i c a l designs d i r e c t e d at the remediation of reading e r r o r s . The major change made to type to increase i t s l e g i -b i l i t y has been to adopt sans s e r i f type i n primary readers to match the appearance of the graphic symbol p r i n t e d by the c h i l d or teacher. head bow pica F i g . 1. C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of L e t t e r s of Type Before reviewing the v a r i e t y of f a c t o r s that have been s t u d i e d i n typographic a n a l y s i s , i t was necessary to be f a m i l i a r w i t h the termin-ology of typography. The f o l l o w i n g d e f i n i t i o n s have been summarized 42 relevance to the present s t u d y ) , PPVT IQ scores were on the average approximately t h i r t e e n p o i n t s higher than the average Binet IQ scores. Thus, i t appeared that although, as Dunn had found, the average overestimate of Bin e t scores by the PPVT was s i x p o i n t s , the accuracy of the p r e d i c t i o n was a l s o r e l a t e d to the a c t u a l range being s t u d i e d . Although Shotwell et a l . had obtained an estimate of t h i r t e e n p o i n t s d i f f e r e n c e i n the range most r e l e v a n t to the present study, a c o r r e c t i o n f a c t o r could not be c a l c u l a t e d s i n c e there were a number of i n t e r v e n i n g v a r i a b l e s . In summary, there were a number of i n t e r v e n i n g v a r i a b l e s that i n f l u e n c e d the c o r r e l a t i o n between the PPVT (A) and the SB (LM). These v a r i a b l e s were, f o r example, placement i n an i n s t i t u t i o n or i n s p e c i a l or average classropms, language s t i m u l a t i o n , achievement m o t i v a t i o n , age and the time i n t e r v a l between t e s t s . In the o p i n i o n of a number of researchers (Dunn and Brooks, 1960; Dunn and H o t t e l , 1961; Budoff and Purseglove, 1963; Robinson and Robinson, 1965; Shotwell et a l . , 1969), the c o r r e l a t i o n between the PPVT (A) and the Stanford-Binet (LM) was higher f o r MA than f o r IQ; the PPVT was an acceptable research instrument f o r m e n t a l l y retarded males and females between the mental ages of four to eighteen years. W i t h i n t h i s range the PPVT may have overestimated the SB IQ from 2 to 13 IQ p o i n t s . Typography and L e g i b i l i t y The research on typography was reviewed to e s t a b l i s h which c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of l e t t e r s of type had the gr e a t e s t v i s i b i l i t y and l e g i b i l i t y under v a r i o u s c o n d i t i o n s . The m a j o r i t y of typographic research has been done w i t h a d u l t s ; there has been l i t t l e r e search reported on l e g i b i l i t y of p r i n t to be roman - c l a s s i f i c a t i o n of types w i t h . t h i c k and t h i n strokes ( v e r t i c a l were g e n e r a l l y t h i c k w h i l e h o r i z o n t a l were t h i n ; d i agonal strokes thickened as they moved to the r i g h t and thinned as they moved to the l e f t ; may or may not have had a s e r i f ) ; the characters were u p r i g h t . g o t h i c - c l a s s i f i c a t i o n of types w i t h uniform face ( h o r i -z o n t a l , v e r t i c a l and diagonal strokes had equal w i d t h ) ; u s u a l l y without s e r i f ; the characters were u p r i g h t . i t a l i c - g o t h i c or roman type that s l a n t e d to the r i g h t . case - upper: c a p i t a l l e t t e r s ; lower: small l e t t e r s . f o n t - a l l the characters i n one s i z e and type f a m i l y ; c a p i t a l s , s m a l l l e t t e r s , l i g a t u r e s and accented l e t t e r s , punctuation m a r k s — a l l of the same design of face and s i z e . type f a m i l i e s - v a r i a t i o n s of a b a s i c design of type w i t h respect to s i z e , width or weight (blackness) of l e t t e r s . E.g., "Record g o t h i c " was a p a r t i c u l a r s t y l e of g o t h i c type. The body of t h i s b a s i c s t y l e c o u l d be extended or condensed ( l e t t e r width broadened or narrowed as i n extra-condensed, condensed or expanded) i n the v e r t i c a l or i t a l i c type. In a d d i t i o n , s t r o k e width could be, broadened from l i g h t to medium to heavy, b o l d or b l a c k ) . l e g i b i l i t y - r e f e r e d to the p h y s i c a l appearance of the p r i n t e d m a t e r i a l s ; i n v o l v e d such f a c t o r s as l i n e l e n g t h , type s i z e , s t y l e of type f a c e , era and spacer s i z e and l e a d i n g . v i s i b i l i t y - among these f a c t o r s were c o l o r of" the p r i n t and the paper. In a sense the v i s i b i l i t y f a c t o r s formed a s e t t i n g f o r the l e g i b i l i t y f a c t o r s . L e g i b i l i t y and 46 v i s i b i l i t y were determinants of the ease and speed w i t h which the sensory phase of the reading a c t cou l d be accomplished. The f o l l o w i n g v a r i a b l e s have been reported i n the research l i t e r a t u r e . McNamara et a l . (1953) s t a t e d that the s i z e of type a f f e c t e d speed of reading, but that speed was not an important c h a r a c t e r i s t i c of reading below the f o u r t h grade. In ge n e r a l , i t has been observed that as the s i z e of type was e i t h e r increased or decreased from the optimum, more e y e - f i x a t i o n s per l i n e were r e q u i r e d , the f i x a t i o n pause became longer and there were more r e g r e s s i o n s . The l a r g e r type might have been l e s s readable because fewer characters could be seen at normal reading d i s t a n c e during each f i x a t i o n . S c h o n e l l (1942) s t a t e d that i n the f i r s t i n t r o d u c t i o n to a p r i n t e d book the type should not be l e s s than 24 p o i n t and then should g r a d u a l l y decrease to 18 or 16 p o i n t and not l e s s than 14 p o i n t . C o v e l l and Grady (1966) found that the m a j o r i t y of grade one Canadian readers used 18 p o i n t . McNamara, Paterson and Tinker (1953) r e -ported an i n v e s t i g a t i o n of the e f f e c t of type s i z e on speed of reading i n the primary grades. In the f i r s t grade (beginning readers) there was no d i f f e r e n t i a l e f f e c t of type s i z e on speed of reading. Buckingham (1933) found that v a r i a t i o n i n s i z e of type between 14 and 30 p o i n t was unimportant. The r e s u l t s c i t e d above were based on speed of reading t e s t s . Reading r a t e was not an i s s u e i n the f i r s t grade ( T i n k e r , 1968). A type s i z e that makes p o s s i b l e easy v i s u a l d i s c r i m i n a t i o n of words and l e t t e r s w i t h i n words should be chosen f o r p r i n t e d m a t e r i a l f o r c h i l d r e n who were beginning to read. Research suggested t h a t type s i z e 47 f o r grade 1 should be 14 to 18 poi n t (Tinker, 1968). The consensus f o r normal c h i l d r e n was to use 16 p o i n t type f o r the f i r s t grade, 12 to 14 p o i n t type f o r the second and t h i r d grades and 10 to 11 p o i n t type f o r the f i f t h grade and above. Tinker (1963) discovered that lower case p r i n t i n g was much more l e g i b l e than a l l - c a p i t a l p r i n t i n g . Lower case l e t t e r s were more d i f f e r e n t i a t e d i n form than upper case l e t t e r s , had more d i s t i n g u i s h i n g c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s and were more r e a d i l y recognized. Tinker reported research w i t h c o l l e g e students. P r i n t i n g a l l i n c a p i t a l s i n c o n t r a s t to lower case p r i n t i n g was read w i t h s i g n i f i c a n t l y more f i x a t i o n s , a c o r r e s -ponding decrease i n pe r c e p t u a l span and an in c r e a s e i n p e r c e p t i o n time. There was no change i n r e g r e s s i o n frequency, but a s i g n i f i c a n t decrease i n pause d u r a t i o n . The c h a r a c t e r i s t i c word forms i n lower case p r i n t i n g t were absent when a l l p r i n t i n g was i n c a p i t a l s . The reader was fo r c e d to employ a l a r g e number of e x t r a f i x a t i o n s i n the a l l - c a p i t a l p r i n t i n g . H a b i t u a l p e r c e p t u a l h a b i t s , i n which words and groups of words were read as u n i t s , were p a r t i a l l y i n h i b i t e d i n reading a l l c a p i t a l s . Every study t h a t has compared the reading of a l l - c a p i t a l versus lower-case p r i n t has shown th a t the lower-case m a t e r i a l has been read ten to nineteen percent f a s t e r . Subjects i n these s t u d i e s were a d u l t s . Although there are no s t u d i e s of a l l - c a p i t a l versus lower-case p r i n t f o r young c h i l d r e n , i t was l i k e l y t hat the h i n d e r i n g e f f e c t of using a l l c a p i t a l s was as great f o r beginning readers as f o r a d u l t s ( T i n k e r , 1968). Studies have g e n e r a l l y i n d i c a t e d that roman was more l e g i b l e than i t a l i c type and book p r i n t was more readable than t y p e w r i t e r p r i n t ( R u s s e l l , 1961). Tinker (1963) reported that an i t a l i c type r e s u l t e d 48 i n about a three percent r e d u c t i o n i n speed when compared w i t h roman p r i n t and that c a p i t a l l e t t e r s r e q u i r e d about 12 percent more time to read than do lower-case l e t t e r s . S c honell (1942) suggested that the G i l l Sans type might be best f o r the f i r s t i n t r o d u c t i o n to a p r i n t e d book. C o v e l l and Grady (1966), i n a review of Canadian primary readers, found that the f u t u r a l i g h t g o t h i c type face was the most common type used. The f u t u r a f a m i l y was c h a r a c t e r i z e d by an equal s t r o k e width on v e r t i c a l and h o r i z o n t a l members, sans s e r i f , c i r c u l a r eye and bow, and the same character i n d i f f e r e n t o r i e n t a t i o n s used f o r 'd, p, b, q'. Too heavy or too long a s e r i f should have been avoided at the top and bottom ends of double s t r o k e s as i n 'h' and 'u'. With l e t t e r s such as 'a, s and z' short t r i a n g u l a r s e r i f s would have s i m p l i f i e d the l e t t e r o u t l i n e s ( T i n k e r , 1963). Zachrisson (1965) reported t h a t one o f t e n met w i t h the assumption that sans s e r i f types i n general were l e s s l e g i b l e than those w i t h a s e r i f . However, a review of seven experiments f a i l e d to demonstrate the b e n e f i t s of s e r i f s i n terms of l e g i b i l i t y , reading speed or e r r o r r a t e . Z a c h r i s s o n , i n ten of h i s own experiments, found no s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e i n l e g i b i l i t y between o l d face and sans s e r i f i n grades one and f o u r . With most of the l e t t e r s , breadth was more of an advantage than l e n g t h , other things being equal, f o r i t gave v i s i b i l i t y to t h e i r i n t e r -n a l spaces (Sanford, 1888). L e t t e r s recognized the l e a s t on t a c h i s t o -s c o p i c p r e s e n t a t i o n were those w i t h g r e a t e s t l i g h t n e s s of face ( T i n k e r , 1928). L i g h t face was more l e g i b l e than b o l d face ( R u s s e l l , 1961). There was no advantage i n having one p a r t of a s t r o k e t h i c k e r than another; the 49 tendency to use h a i r l i n e s should have been s t r o n g l y condemned (T i n k e r , 1963). .. In g e n e r a l , the greater the area of the t a r g e t the lower the t h r e s h o l d of i t s p e r c e p t i o n (Dember, 1965). Bold f a c e , lower case, roman p r i n t was as l e g i b l e as r e g u l a r lower case roman p r i n t ( T inker, 1968). The white space as i n 'h' or the eye i n 'p' i n f l u e n c e d l e g i b i l i t y ; other things considered, the gre a t e r the enclosed area, the greater the l e g i b i l i t y ( T i nker, 1963). I r o n i c a l l y , In at l e a s t e i g h t s t u d i e s from 1885 to 1963, the most l e g i b l e l e t t e r s of the alphabet f o r a d u l t s w i t h an average c o r r e -l a t i o n of .62 were 'k, d, q, b, p, m and w', w h i l e the l e t t e r s of l e a s t l e g i b i l i t y were'c, e, i , n, 1' ( T i n k e r , 1963). Tinker s t a t e d that the l e t t e r s of grea t e s t l e g i b i l i t y were those most marked w i t h d i s t i n g u i s h i n g c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s , and that the next most important a t t r i b u t e s of l e t t e r s were areas of enclosed white spaces and the s i z e of type. The reading of white p r i n t on a b l a c k background, i n comparison w i t h b l a c k p r i n t on white paper, i n v o l v e d s i g n i f i c a n t l y more f i x a t i o n s , a smaller p e r c e p t u a l span and a longer p e r c e p t i o n time. White paper had l e s s v i s i b i l i t y and so the symbols were not as r e a d i l y perceived as those i n b l a c k on white. The b r i g h t n e s s c o n t r a s t between the red p r i n t on dark green paper stock was much l e s s than between the b l a c k p r i n t on white paper. The red or green was read w i t h g r e a t e r f i x a t i o n frequency, s m a l l e r p e r c e p t u a l span; the d i f f e r e n c e s were a l l l a r g e (14.5 to 42.6 p e r c e n t ) . The red p r i n t was only 47 percent as v i s i b l e as the b l a c k on white. One foot-candle i s the amount of i l l u m i n a t i o n produced by a on e - i n c h - t h i c k candle measured at a d i s t a n c e of one f o o t . The amount ( i n t e n s i t y ) of l i g h t on a surface depends upon candle power and the d i s t a n c e from source of l i g h t to the r e c e i v i n g s u r f a c e . A 100-watt bulb 50 u s u a l l y g i v e s an i l l u m i n a t i o n of about 100 foot-candles one foot away, 25 foot-candles two f e e t away, and approximately 11 foot-candles three f e e t away (Smith, 1961). A u t h o r i t i e s have d i f f e r e d somewhat i n the l e v e l s of i l l u m i n a t i o n that they have suggested. R u s s e l l (1961) recommended that f o r e f f i c i e n t work i n o r d i n a r y r e a d i n g , l i g h t i n g of from f i f t e e n to twenty f o o t -candles was r e q u i r e d . Smith (1961) recommended twenty to f i f t y f o o t -candles f o r o r d i n a r y reading and 50 to 100 foot-candles f o r d i f f i c u l t r e ading. Tinker (1963), i n a summary of numerous s t u d i e s , pointed out t h a t there was a r a p i d r i s e i n a c u i t y from low i n t e n s i t y up to about f i v e f o o t - c a n d l e s . From f i v e f oot-candles on, the r i s e i n a c u i t y became slower and slower and almost reached a maximum at about 20 f o o t candles. In f a c t , the improvement i n v i s u a l a c u i t y from about 15 foot-candles to higher i n t e n s i t i e s f o r the normal eye was s c a r c e l y n o t i c e a b l e and of d o u b t f u l s i g n i f i c a n c e . With inc r e a s e s from 20 to 100 f o o t - c a n d l e s , the i n c r e a s e i n a c u i t y was s l i g h t . Tinker (1959) suggested that w i t h 10 p o i n t type an i n t e n s i t y of from ten to f i f t e e n foot-candles was s u f f i c i e n t f o r o r d i n a r y reading c o n d i t i o n s . There was no experimental evidence on the l e g i b i l i t y of type faces f o r beginning readers. Since readers i n general prefered a r e l a t i v e l y heavy or darker appearing type f a c e , and because type of medium darkness y i e l d e d optimal v i s i b i l i t y , a moderately dark type face should have been used i n p r i n t i n g books f o r young c h i l d r e n . Q u a l i t y of paper r e f e r r e d to o p a c i t y and the nature of the s u r f a c e . Book paper f o r readers at any l e v e l should be opaque enough to prevent the p r i n t on the back from showing through to the other s i d e and b l u r r i n g a p p r e c i a b l y the p r i n t there. In a d d i t i o n , 51 the paper surface should be rough enough (mat surface) so that g l a r e from r e f l e c t e d l i g h t would be at a minimum (Tinker, 1968). Opthalmological Factors The r e l a t i o n s h i p between s p e c i f i c o p t h a l m o l o g i c a l f a c t o r s and reading e r r o r s was reviewed to e s t a b l i s h which v i s u a l f a c t o r s might i n f l u e n c e o r i e n t a t i o n and resequencing reading e r r o r s . Accurate methods f o r a ssessing r e l e v e n t v i s u a l f a c t o r s were sought to measure p o s s i b l e d i f f e r e n t i a l e f f e c t s of graphemic change on v a r i o u s o p t h a l m o l o g i c a l c o n d i t i o n s . B e t t s and A u s t i n (1941) made an i n t e n s i v e study of 126 p u p i l s i n a f i f t h grade p o p u l a t i o n ; only about 38 percent of the c h i l d r e n were not i n need of lens c o r r e c t i o n by g l a s s e s . Estimates of the i n c i -dence of v i s u a l d e f e c t s among readers v a r i e d g r e a t l y . More than h a l f of the reading cases at the U n i v e r s i t y of Chicago reading c l i n i c s had v i s u a l problems. The i n c i d e n c e of v i s u a l problems was high enough to recommend that a v i s u a l screening t e s t be given to a l l cases of reading d i s a b i l i t y (Strang, 1968). I t had been estimated that approximately 80 percent of a l l l e a r n i n g i n the elementary years came through the v i s u a l channel (Wold, 1969). V i s u a l defects were obvious causes of reading d e f i c i e n c y (Dechant, 1964). Any c o n d i t i o n t h a t n e c e s s i t a t e d prolonged examination of a word i n order to recognize i t would produce numerous eye f i x a t i o n s , many of them being r e g r e s s i v e or r i g h t - t o - l e f t movements. I t was i n e v i t a b l e that the to-and-fro movements should i n c l u d e some i n a p p r o p r i a t e d i r e c t i o n a l o r i e n t a t i o n s i n word p e r c e p t i o n , i . e . r e v e r s a l s . Experimental evidence of these e r r o r s was shown by Gates and Bennett (1933) i n t h e i r study of r e v e r s a l tendencies among poor readers. The frequency of v i s u a l d efects 52 i n the r e v e r s a l group was twice as great as i n the n o n - r e v e r s a l group. They s t a t e d that v i s u a l defects of one k i n d or another were the most conspicuous c h a r a c t e r i s t i c of the r e v e r s a l group. Apparently the e v i -dence that r e v e r s a l s were r e l a t e d to the presence of v i s u a l defects was i n d i s p u t a b l e (Bond and T i n k e r , 1967) . A d e f i n i t e r e l a t i o n s h i p has been shown between d i f f i c u l t i e s i n v i s u a l p e r c e p t i o n and l a c k of achievement i n readine;. However, pe r c e p t u a l a b i l i t i e s appeared to be more important i n the beginning stages of reading (Strang, 1968). The f o l l o w i n g chart d e s c r i b e s the most common v i s u a l d e f e c t s : A. Lack of V i s u a l A c u i t y R e f r a c t i v e E r r o r s Myopia (Nearsightedness) 3. Astigmatism B. Lack of Convergence or Fusion B i n o c u l a r E r r o r s 1. Strabismus (Heterophoria) The Phorias Hyperopia (Farsightedness) (Hypermetropia) A n i s e i k o n i a L a t e r a l P h o r i a l a V e r t i c a l P h o r i a l b l c Exophoria (Under-convergence) Esophoria (Over-convergence) 3. Hyperphoria Suppression V i s u a l A c u i t y R e f r a c t i o n V i s u a l a c u i t y r e f e r s to the a b i l i t y of the eyes to d i s c r i m i n a t e 53 d e t a i l of a v i s u a l s t i m u l u s , e.g. to be able to pe r c e i v e the presence or absence of an opening of v a r i o u s widths i n the circumference of a c i r c l e l o c a t e d a t near po i n t (18 inches) or f a r point (20 f e e t ) . Three major c o n d i t i o n s i n f l u e n c e v i s u a l a c u i t y : myopia, hyperopia and astigmatism. Smith (1961) reported that the eyes of c h i l d r e n were g e n e r a l l y not mature enough to cope w i t h the p r i n t e d page before age e i g h t . Cole (1938) s t a t e d that i f the eyes developed normally the s i x year o l d was s t i l l too f a r s i g h t e d to see c l e a r l y such s m a l l o b j e c t s as the p r i n t e d word, a c h i l d had to be eigh t years o l d before one can be reasonably c e r t a i n that h i s eyes were ready f o r reading. Myklebust (1962) reported that 10 to 15 percent of f i r s t graders were so f a r s i g h t e d that they were unable to use t h e i r eyes i n de c i p h e r i n g p r i n t without developing headaches, f a t i g u e or nervousness. Myklebust i n d i c a t e d that not only v i s i o n but other aspects of the eyes such as c o o r d i n a t i o n and depth p e r c e p t i o n were not f i r m l y e s t a b l i s h e d u n t i l about the time the c h i l d was i n f i r s t grade. Myopia (shortsightedness) was a c o n d i t i o n t h a t may have been due to i n j u r i e s , disease or h e r e d i t y , i n which the eyes could focus upon some near obj e c t but were unable to c l e a r l y see a d i s t a n t o b j e c t . Eames (1932), F a r r i s (1936), Taylor (1937) and W i t t y and Kopel (1936) i n separate s t u d i e s were unable to d i f f e r e n t i a t e good from poor reader on the b a s i s of i n c i d e n c e of myopia, and i n g e n e r a l , research i n d i c a t e d that myopia was not c l o s e l y r e l a t e d to reading d i f f i c u l t i e s . In f a c t , F a r r i s suggested that myopia tended to be a s s o c i a t e d w i t h b e t t e r than normal reading progress. Myopia was one of the most common r e f r a c t i v e e r r o r s . This c o n d i t i o n compelled the c h i l d to ho l d h i s book c l o s e r than the normal 14 to 16 inches (Smith, 1961). These views were a l s o expressed by 54 Spache (1962), Dechant (1964) and H a r r i s (1967). Hyperopia ( f a r s i g h t e d n e s s ) was a c o n d i t i o n i n which the eye was able to focus w e l l on d i s t a n t objects but could not c l e a r l y see near o b j e c t s . The p o i n t of focus of the rays of l i g h t r e f l e c t e d from d i s t a n t o b j e c t s was behind the r e t i n a , whereas i n myopia the focus p o i n t was i n f r o n t . F a r r i s (1936) and Taylor (1937) reported that f a r s i g h t e d n e s s was more common among poor readers than among good readers. However, Stromberg (1938) i n a study on the c o l l e g e l e v e l , suggested that there was l i t t l e i f any r e l a t i o n s h i p between far s i g h t e d n e s s and reading p r o f i c i e n c y . Swanson and T i f f i n (1936) i n another c o l l e g e l e v e l study, and Wit t y and Kopel (1936) i n a study of grades three to s i x , reached a s i m i l a r con-c l u s i o n . Bond and Tinker (1967) found a high incidence of hyperopia among reading d i s a b i l i t y cases. Dechant (1964) reported that v i s u a l a c u i t y d i d not seem to i n f l u e n c e reading achievement as some other v i s u a l f a c t o r s had. Reading was a near p o i n t task. He s t a t e d that one could f a i l the v i s u a l a c u i t y t e s t a t 20 f e e t but possess good v i s u a l a c u i t y a t 16 inches. To read the average book one needed only 20/60 v i s u a l a c u i t y . R e f r a c t i v e e r r o r s apparently were not r e l a t e d to i n t e l l i g e n c e . When reading achievement was p a r t i a l e d out, the c o r r e l a t i o n between the i n t e l l i g e n c e scores and r e f r a c t i v e e r r o r s tended to approach zero (Young, 1963). Astigmatism. This c o n d i t i o n was caused by an uneven curvature of the f r o n t or cornea of the eye. The l i g h t could not be brought to a s i n g l e f o c a l p o i n t . V i s i o n was b l u r r e d , a c i r c l e may have appeared as an e l l i p s e (Moyle, 1970). There was a l a c k of agreement concerning the e f f e c t of astigmatism on reading. Smith (1961) a f t e r a review of the rese a r c h , 55 concluded that astigmatism may even have been a s s o c i a t e d w i t h s u p e r i o r reading performance. Higher degrees of astigmatism, however, may have been a s e r i o u s handicap to a reader. B i n o c u l a r D i f f i c u l t i e s The b i n o c u l a r d i f f i c u l t i e s had the commonality of g i v i n g the c h i l d a double image. E i t h e r the two eyes d i d not aim c o r r e c t l y or they gave c o n f l i c t i n g r e p o r t s . When the o c u l a r maladjustments were minor, the i n d i v i d u a l may have compensated f o r them. I f the maladjustments were major, the c h i l d may have seen two of everything ( d i p l o p i a - double v i s i o n ) or the two images may have been so badly blureed t h a t he saw n e i t h e r image c l e a r l y . Somehow he needed to suppress one st i m u l u s . When he could suppress i t only p a r t l y or only t e m p o r a r i l y , he was l i k e l y to l o s e h i s p l a c e , to omit words, or to regre s s . Lack of b i n o c u l a r c o o r d i n a t i o n presented a d e f i n i t e handicap i n reading development (Dechant, 1964). Eames (1932) found f u s i o n d i f f i c u l t y i n 44 percent o f the reading d i f f i -c u l t y cases but i n only 18 percent of the unselected group. Spache (1962) claimed that students w i t h f u s i o n d i f f i c u l t i e s were not numerous i n the general p o p u l a t i o n ; however, t h e i r v i s u a l i m p a i r -ments may have been severe. Reading scores may have been normal except f o r speed which was probably s i g n i f i c a n t l y slower f o r c h i l d r e n w i t h f u s i o n problems. Good readers tended to have good f u s i o n or no f u s i o n at a l l , i . e . good readers tended to have e f f i c i e n t b i n o c u l a r v i s i o n or were 'one-eyed' readers. Spache concluded from a studv that d e f i n i t e support was l e n t to the general idea that defects t h a t r e s u l t e d i n f u s i o n d i f f i -c u l t i e s were s t r o n g l y r e l a t e d to reading d i f f i c u l t y . A weakness i n b i n o c u l a r a c u i t y at near-point was common among retarded readers. These 56 p u p i l s were poorer i n l e f t - e y e a c u i t y , showed marked d i f f e r e n c e s i n a c u i t y of the separate eyes, and f a i l e d the t e s t of b i n o c u l a r a c u i t y i n s i g n i f i -cant numbers. Spache (1962) claimed that many c h i l d r e n who entered school had not developed coordinated movements of the eyes. Their eyes d i d not f o l l o w an o b j e c t i n motion w i t h equal b i n o c u l a r movements of the eyes. One eye lagged behind the other, or over-read, or even remained s t i l l w h i l e the other eye reached out i n space. The c o n f l i c t i n g images the c h i l d r e c e i v e d were r e f l e c t e d i n i n a c c u r a t e p e r c e p t i o n i n d i s c r i m i n a t i o n and, i f p e r s i s t e n t or severe, l e d to a tendency to suppress or ignore one of the images. To accomplish t h i s the c h i l d may have permitted one eye to d r i f t or to be turned away almost c o n s t a n t l y i n what was c a l l e d strabismus, cock-eye or w a l l - e y e . Greene (1966) noted that r o u t i n e l y c h i l d r e n passed the r e g u l a r screening b a t t e r i e s w i t h f l y i n g c o l o r s only to r e v e a l an undetected problem i n b i n o c u l a r c o o r d i n a t i o n . Strabismus or h e t e r o p h o r i a . This c o n d i t i o n was a v i s u a l defect such t h a t , when a p o i n t was p a s s i v e l y f i x a t e d , the two b i n o c u l a r images were not fused. A m i l d case of strabismus may have r e s u l t e d i n a b l u r r i n g of the image; a more severe case r e s u l t e d i n two images. There were three types of strabismus: h e t e r o p h o r i a described the general tendency of the eyes to d e v i a t e ; exophoria was when the eyes d e v i a t e outward; esophoria when d e v i a t i o n was inward, and hyperphoria when one eye focussed higher than the other. Even a moderate amount of heterophoria was l i k e l y to r e s u l t i n f a t i g u e and as the c h i l d t i r e d the d e v i a t i o n was l i k e l y to i n c r e a s e . He could suppress one image te m p o r a r i l y but f r e q u e n t l y he would l o s e h i s p l a c e , omit and r e g r e s s . H i s f a t i g u e was l i k e l y to be accompanied by i n a t t e n t i o n and i r r i t a b i l i t y (Smith, 1961). 57 Smith (1961) reported that exophoria was f a r more frequent among the d i s a b l e d readers than among the average c h i l d . Spache (1962) reported that students w i t h poor convergence and exophoria at near p o i n t showed extreme v i s u a l handicaps w i t h poor f u s i o n , low depth scores and poor near and f a r v i s u a l a c u i t y . Both esophoria at f a r and near p o i n t and exophoria were a s s o c i a t e d w i t h poor reading scores. Myopic c h i l d r e n who had phorias performed a t almost the same l e v e l on reading t e s t s as d i d those without p h o r i a s , but hyperopes w i t h phorias at f a r p o i n t had much poorer reading s k i l l s . G e n e r a l l y , myopia w i t h no l a t e r a l imbalance and good f u s i o n was a s s o c i a t e d w i t h good readers w h i l e hyper-o p i a , l a t e r a l imbalance, over-convergence and f u s i o n problems were a s s o c i a t e d w i t h poor readers. With hyperphoria, the reader f r e q u e n t l y l o s t h i s place and f i x a t e d e i t h e r below or above the l i n e on which he should have been reading. This c o n d i t i o n appeared to occur w i t h equal frequency among both good and poor readers. The c o n d i t i o n of i n s u f f i c i e n t l a t e r a l con-vergence seemed to occur more f r e q u e n t l y among poor readers than d i d any other heterophoric c o n d i t i o n . I t l e d to omissions, regressions and l o s s of p l a c e (Dechant, 1964). Wold (1969) reported on a four year l o n g i t u d i n a l study i n which students w i t h i n c r e a s i n g esophoria or overconvergence had shown a markedly decreasing grade average. Those w i t h the opposite tendency to exophoria at near p o i n t d i d not have poor reading scores. Farsightedness alone was not s i g n i f i c a n t , but when combined w i t h e i t h e r of the phorias at f a r po i n t or w i t h esophoria a t near, i t tended to r e s u l t i n pronounced reading d e f i c i e n c y . A n i s e i k o n i a was a s p e c i a l type of f u s i o n problem that occurred when 58 there was a d i f f e r e n c e i n the s i z e or shape of the two o c u l a r images. I n a b i l i t y to fuse c o r r e c t l y was l i k e l y to r e s u l t i n the mixing of l e t t e r s and words, i n a b i l i t y to f o l l o w the l i n e across the page and frequent l o s s of p l a c e . Dearborn and Anderson (1938) compared 100 sev e r e l y retarded and 100 unselected readers and found that 51 percent of the poor readers and 23 percent of the c o n t r o l s showed s i g n i f i c a n t amounts of a n i s e i k o n i a . Bond and Tin k e r (1967), r e p o r t i n g on the same study, wrote th a t a n i s e i k o n i a at reading d i s t a n c e was present i n 56 percent of the poor readers and 22 percent of c o n t r o l s (68 c h i l d r e n i n each group). These were s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s . They concluded that a n i s e i -k o n i a was one of the many f a c t o r s which may have c o n t r i b u t e d to the causation and p e r s i s t e n c e of d i s a b i l i t y i n reading. Suppression. Spache (1962) reported that eye suppression occurred i n s i x to seven percent of school p o p u l a t i o n s . In h i s o p i n i o n , the person who suppressed one eye may have had good a c u i t y but u s u a l l y was e i t h e r hyperopic, had unequal accommodative range and d i f f e r e n c e i n a c u i t y between the two eyes, had vergence d i f f i c u l t i e s o r was a n i s e i k o n i c . Because of these or other v a r i a t i o n s i n v i s i o n between the two eyes, the i n d i v i d u a l suppressed one eye, u s u a l l y the poorer eye, i n order to main-t a i n b i n o c u l a r v i s i o n more comfortably. Spache reported that there were suppression cases where (a) one eye may have been used at a d i s t a n c e and the other at near range, (b) only one eye was used i n a l l v i s u a l t a s k s , (c) one eye was suppressed only during f a t i g u e or (d) one eye was suppressed only during reading. Often the neglected eye developed ambloyopia (reduc-t i o n of v i s i o n ) . Complete suppression r e s u l t i n g i n 'one-eyedness' may a c t u a l l y have improved reading a b i l i t y . Serious v i s u a l handicaps were encountered i n reading when p a r t i a l or incomplete suppression occurred 59 and e f f i c i e n t b i n o c u l a r v i s i o n was impaired. Bond and Tinker (1967) summarized the research on v i s u a l p e r c e p t i o n and concluded that even though eye d e f e c t s d i d not c l e a r l y d i f f e r e n t i a t e good and poor readers t h i s d i d not i n d i c a t e that good v i s i o n was unimportant to reading. There seemed to be considerable evidence that at l e a s t i n c e r t a i n cases f a r s i g h t e d n e s s , b i n o c u l a r coor-d i n a t i o n , d i f f i c u l t y of f u s i o n and a n i s e i k o n i a c o n t r i b u t e d to d i f f i c u l t i e s . One had to consider the l i k e l i h o o d of m u l t i p l e c a u s a t i o n . In many cases an eye d e f e c t alone might not have reduced reading e f f i c i e n c y , yet the same de f e c t combined w i t h other f a c t o r s might have done so. And i t was q u i t e p o s s i b l e that c e r t a i n eye d e f e c t s a f f e c t e d reading performance only when t h e i r s e v e r i t y was beyond c e r t a i n c r i t i c a l p o i n t s . H a r r i s (1967) pointed out that one of the reasons f o r the d i s c r e p a n c i e s between d i f f e r e n t research s t u d i e s was the f a c t t h a t the s u b j e c t s used and the v i s i o n t e s t s employed were f r e q u e n t l y not d i r e c t l y comparable. A l s o , people v a r i e d i n t h e i r a b i l i t y to adapt themselves to handicaps. For i n s t a n c e , a moderate degree of exophoria may have caused one person no t r o u b l e because of h i s a b i l i t y to compensate f o r the ten-dency; that i s , h i s duetion'power was good, w h i l e a s i m i l a r amount of exophoria may have caused another person c o n s i d e r a b l e d i f f i c u l t y i n reading. I f poor v i s i o n was a c h i l d ' s only handicap, he may have been able to become a good reader i n s p i t e of i t , w h i l e i f he had s e v e r a l other handicaps as w e l l , the combination may have been too much f o r him ( H a r r i s , 1967; Strang, 1968). V i s u a l Screening. The present w r i t e r has reviewed the manuals fo r the Pood-Lite V i s i o n Test (1965) , the Keystone V i s u a l Survey Tests (1961) , the American o p t i c a l Sight Screener (1956) , the Bausch and Lomb 60 Master Ortho-rater (1958) , School V i s i o n Test (1957) , and the Master  Ortho-rater (1958). In a d d i t i o n , a review has been made of v i s u a l screening procedures described by Smith (1961), Bond and Tinker (1967), Strang (1968), Dechant (1968) and Buros' Mental Measurements Year Books  I-VI.. These sources, i n a d d i t i o n to the above t e s t s , have discussed The Eames Eye Test (1950), The Massachusetts V i s i o n Test (1966) and the New York School V i s i o n Test (1957). In none of these sources was e v i -dence presented of the v a l i d i t y or r e l i a b i l i t y of any of these t e s t s . Of the v a r i e t y of t e s t s d e s c r i b e d , i t appeared at l e a s t on face v a l i d i t y that the Keystone V i s u a l Survey Tests (1961) o f f e r e d the most appropriate and comprehensive t e s t of v i s u a l s k i l l s of p u p i l s from f i r s t grade to c o l l e g e l e v e l . In a d d i t i o n , s e v e r a l preschool and kin d e r g a r t e n t e s t s were a v a i l a b l e to complement the standard t e s t s e r i e s . The f o u r t e e n standard t e s t s were comprised o f : (a) simultaneous v i s i o n ( f a r p o i n t o n l y ) , (b) v e r t i c a l posture ( f a r p o i n t o n l y ) , (c) (cards 3 and 10) l a t e r a l posture, f a r and near p o i n t , (d) (cards 4 and 11) f u s i o n , near and f a r p o i n t , (e) (card 4 1/2, 5, 6, 12, 13 and 14) near and f a r v i s u a l a c u i t y (16", 20") f o r both eyes, and l e f t and r i g h t eyes s i n g l y , ( f) s t e r e o p s i s ( f a r p o i n t o n l y ) , and (g) c o l o r v i s i o n ( f a r p o i n t o n l y ) . A periometer was a l s o a v a i l a b l e . To assess the v a r i e t y of s k i l l s described i n the review of the research two supplementary Keystone t e s t s were r e q u i r e d . The Spache b i n o c u l a r reading t e s t measured eye preference i n reading. Three l e v e l s were a v a i l a b l e : non-readers and grade one, grade one and a h a l f to two, and grade three and above. The t e s t i n d i c a t e d whether the p u p i l read more w i t h one eye than w i t h the other and whether het e r o p h o r i a or l a c k of good f u s i o n a t near p o i n t i n t e r f e r e d w i t h b i n o -c u l a r i t y at near p o i n t (Dechant, 1968). When a su b j e c t read none of the 61 words before one eye he was f u n c t i o n i n g as i f he had only one eye and should have had l i t t l e d i f f i c u l t y i n reading, assuming that the a c u i t y of the eye he was using was s a t i s f a c t o r y . However, when a subject f a i l e d to see some words w i t h one eye, then saw some, i t appeared that he was having some b i n o c u l a r i n t e r f e r e n c e . In a d d i t i o n , the supplementary 'ready to read' t e s t s of f u s i o n , v e r t i c a l posture, l a t e r a l posture and usable v i s i o n of each eye at near po i n t f u l f i l l e d the l a c k among the standard s e r i e s of v e r t i c a l posture at near p o i n t . Bond and Tinker (1967) wrote that the Keystone Test had the advantage of y i e l d i n g a f a i r l y comprehensive v i s u a l inventory and of ap-p r a i s i n g the c o o r d i n a t i o n of the eyes under c o n d i t i o n s s i m i l a r to those i n reading a c t i v i t i e s . Although not a l l persons r e f e r r e d to s p e c i a l i s t s on the b a s i s of t e l e b i n o c u l a r t e s t i n g turned out to have v i s u a l d e f e c t s , i t remained a u s e f u l screening device. S e v e r a l of the Keystone near p o i n t v i s u a l screening t e s t s , p a r t of the Ready-To-Read t e s t and one of the Spache B i n o c u l a r Reading Tests were adopted f o r use i n the present study. The t e s t s and the method of t h e i r i mplimentation i s described more f u l l y i n Chapter I I I , T e s t i n g Format and Procedures. CHAPTER I I STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM A review of the research l i t e r a t u r e revealed that d i s o r i e n t a -t i o n and resequencing reading e r r o r s were r e l a t i v e l y common among normal, mentally r e t a r d e d and slow l e a r n e r beginning readers-. E r r o r s i n d i s -c r i m i n a t i o n of o r i e n t a t i o n as i n the confusion of b, d, p and q f r e q u e n t l y p e r s i s t e d u n t i l e i g h t years of age and i n some cases f o r much longer. Even more frequent and more d i f f i c u l t to e l i m i n a t e were resequencing e r r o r s i n which one or more or even a l l of the l e t t e r s i n a word r e t a i n e d t h e i r o r i e n t a t i o n but changed t h e i r r e l a t i v e order. In some cases the frequency and/or d u r a t i o n of occurrence of these e r r o r s p e r s i s t e d i n s p i t e of remedial e f f o r t s , and the r e s u l t i n g f r u s t r a t i o n , f a i l u r e or impeded progress may have had a f a r reaching i n f l u e n c e . For m e n t a l l y retarded and slow l e a r n e r c h i l d r e n these d i f f i c u l -t i e s may have been of even greater consequence. Already developmentally behind t h e i r c h r o n o l o g i c a l age peers and l i k e l y having s u f f e r e d the experience of f a i l u r e i n a number of areas, these c h i l d r e n had to over-come o r i e n t a t i o n and resequencing e r r o r s i f they were to l e a r n to read e f f i c i e n t l y and thereby l e a r n the s k i l l that was b a s i c to the formal academic process. Although these e r r o r s were common among the m a j o r i t y of c h i l d r e n , and although the frequency, d u r a t i o n and v a r i a t i o n s of these e r r o r s appeared to f o l l o w a 'normal' developmental sequence, one must question whether or not, and i n what manner, the frequency and d u r a t i o n of these e r r o r s might have been reduced, and whether the occurrence of these e r r o r s might even have been prevented. Very l i t t l e research has 62 63 been reported that has attempted to study and r e s o l v e these reading problems among m e n t a l l y retarded or slow l e a r n e r c h i l d r e n . The o b j e c t of the present study was to e s t a b l i s h an e m p i r i c a l b a s i s f o r and to t e s t the e f f e c t i v e n e s s of making typographic m o d i f i c a t i o n s to reduce the occurrence of d i s o r i e n t a t i o n and resequencing reading e r r o r s . A review of the l i t e r a t u r e on the e t i o l o g y of these e r r o r s , typography, and geometric and graphemic form per c e p t i o n i n d i c a t e d s e v e r a l graphemic m o d i f i c a t i o n s that could be achieved w i t h minimum change to standard type design. By s e t t i n g i n i t a l i c s e l e c t e d l e t t e r s of a s u i t a b l e s t y l e and s i z e of g o t h i c type and by u s i n g v a r i o u s s t r o k e widths, i t appeared that v i s u a l a t t e n t i o n might be i n s t r u m e n t a l l y focussed upon stimulus a t t r i b u t e s c r i t i c a l to v i s u a l d i s c r i m i n a t i o n and thereby decrease the frequency of resequencing and d i s o r i e n t a t i o n e r r o r s . The e f f e c t i v e n e s s of these m o d i f i c a t i o n s to reduce the e r r o r r a t e below the l e v e l achieved through the use of p o s i t i v e reinforcement was t e s t e d upon educable mentally retarded and slow l e a r n i n g c h i l d r e n . A l s o , the v a l i d -i t y was t e s t e d of the r e c l a s s i f i c a t i o n of r o t a t i o n s and r e v e r s a l s i n t o subcategories of resequencing and d i s o r i e n t a t i o n e r r o r s . Experimental Graphemic M o d i f i c a t i o n s In accord w i t h the research evidence summarized below, the f o l l o w i n g m o d i f i c a t i o n s to the u s u a l manner of s e t t i n g type i n beginning reading m a t e r i a l s were made to reduce the frequency and d u r a t i o n of the occurrence of d i s o r i e n t a t i o n and resequencing reading e r r o r s . M o d i f i c a t i o n 1. The l e t t e r s 'p and b' were set i n i t a l i c type and the l e t t e r s 'd and q' were set i n standard g o t h i c ( v e r t i c a l ) type. 64 M o d i f i c a t i o n 2. A s m a l l b l a c k dot, one medium stroke width i n diameter, was embedded i n the angle described by the i n t e r s e c t i o n of the loop and the stem of each o f the l e t t e r s b, d, p and q. The b l a c k dot was l o c a t e d one medium s t r o k e width from both the loop and stem of the l e t t e r s . The l e t t e r s m odified thereby appeared as f o l l o w s when set i n 14 p o i n t f o l i o l i g h t g o t h i c type. b 9 p F i g . 2. M o d i f i c a t i o n of the l e t t e r s b, d, p, q The research evidence i n d i c a t e d t h a t : 1. The l e t t e r s b, d, p and q were the most d i r e c t i o n a l l y confused l e t t e r s of the alphabet (Money, 1966). 2. Remedial i n s t r u c t i o n was more e f f i c i e n t when confined to the s p e c i f i c l e t t e r s or words that were reversed ( K r i s e , 1952; Vernon, 1957; Smith, 1961; Dechant, 1964; Gibson, 1966). 3. In order of frequency of occurrence, h o r i z o n t a l , r o t a t i o n a l and v e r t i c a l d i s o r i e n t a t i o n s of 'b, d, p and q' were confused. At age f i v e to s i x years, h o r i z o n t a l confusions occurred approximately three times more f r e q u e n t l y than r o t a t i o n a l e r r o r s . V e r t i c a l e r r o r s occurred l e a s t o f t e n . For the average c h i l d these e r r o r s ceased to be made at the f o l l o w i n g ages: v e r t i c a l , 5.5 - 6 years; r o t a t i o n a l , 6 years; and h o r i z o n t a l , 7.5 years. H o r i z o n t a l e r r o r s of 'b-d' were the most p e r s i s t e n t (Davidson, 1935; Popp, 1964; Money, 1966; B l a i r , 1969). 4. Improvement i n v i s u a l d i s c r i m i n a t i o n of l e t t e r s , words and geometric 65 forms was a f u n c t i o n of the a b i l i t y to attend to e s s e n t i a l d i s t i n c t i v e features and to d i s r e g a r d i r r e l e v a n t features (Vernon, 1966, 1970: H a r r i s , 1967; Gibson et a l . 1962, 1971: Nodine, 1971). 5. The l e t t e r s of g r e a t e s t l e g i b i l i t y were those most marked w i t h d i s t i n g u i s h i n g c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s (Tinker, 1963). 6. Beginning readers were not d e f i c i e n t i n p e r c e i v i n g d i s o r i e n t a t i o n s but a t t e n t i o n had to be drawn to these changes (Hendrickson and M u e l l , 1962). A t t e n t i o n must be focussed upon d e t a i l w i t h i n words (Bryant, 1965). 7. Me n t a l l y retarded c h i l d r e n may have had a d e f i c i t i n attending s e l e c t i v e l y to c r i t i c a l dimensions of v i s u a l a n a l y s i s (Zeaman and House, 1963; Hagen, 1971). 8. The d i s c r i m i n a t i o n l e a r n i n g of m e n t a l l y retarded c h i l d r e n proceeded normally once they had learned to concentrate on the r e l e v a n t cues. Thus, the f o c u s s i n g of a t t e n t i o n was the key to s u c c e s s f u l t r a i n i n g (Zeaman and House, 1963; Robinson and Robinson, 1965). 9. The l e t t e r s 'b, d, p and q' have i d e n t i c a l s t r u c t u r e d i s t i n g u i s h e d only by the s p a t i a l r e l a t i o n s h i p between the loop and stem as i n d i c a t e d by the p o s i t i o n of the angle at t h e i r i n t e r s e c t i o n . This angle i s thus the c r i t i c a l f e a t u r e i n d i s c r i m i n a t i n g between the l e t t e r s 'b, d, p and q 1 . 10. The evidence i n d i c a t e d that o p t i m a l l y a t t e n t i o n should be narrowly d i r e c t e d to s p e c i f i c d i s c r i m i n a t i n g features ( T i n k e r , 1963; Vernon, 1963a; B e t t s , 1968). 11. The o r i e n t a t i o n of f i g u r e s w i t h i n t e r n a l imbedded d e t a i l s was t w i c e as a c c u r a t e l y d i s c r i m i n a t e d as those without i n t e r n a l d e t a i l s (Wohlwill and Wiener, 1964). 66 12. M e n t a l l y retarded and non-mentally retarded c h i l d r e n , c h r o n o l o g i c a l ages 3 to 13 years, w i t h mental ages 3 to 8 y e a r s , scanned a f i g u r e i n a downward d i r e c t i o n beginning w i t h a f o c a l p o i n t (Hebb, 1949; Ghent, 1961, 1964). Black was more f o c a l than white when both f i e l d s had the same area, and dots were more f o c a l than s o l i d b l a c k areas. Black d o t s , the apex of f i g u r e s and p o i n t s of i n t e r s e c t i o n acted as f o c a l p o i n t s (Ghent, 1961, 1964; W o h l w i l l and Wiener, 1964). 13. I t a l i c type slowed down the speed of reading ( T i n k e r , 1968). 14. V i s u a l a t t e n t i o n was drawn to co n t r a s t or i n c o n g r u i t y i n s p a t i a l or temporal changes i n s t i m u l a t i o n (Vernon, 1963b; Dember, 1965). In a d d i t i o n , c h i l d r e n showed a strong preference f o r a centered homo-geneous l i n e i n the v e r t i c a l — a preference f o r v e r t i c a l i z a t i o n (Ghent, 1961: W o h l w i l l and Wiener, 1964). Thus, v i s u a l a t t e n t i o n was l i k e l y to be drawn to the i t a l i c l e t t e r s set w i t h i n a sequence of. v e r t i c a l f i g u r e s ; a l s o , the apex of these f i g u r e s and t h e i r im-bedded dots were l i k e l y to act as f o c a l p o i n t s . 15. Examination of the modified symbols i n d i c a t e d that because of the ob l i q u e stems the only d i s o r i e n t a t i o n that could be made was between 'd and q'. However, t h i s was a v e r t i c a l d i s o r i e n t a t i o n which, according to Davidson (1935) and Popp (1964), was the l e a s t l i k e l y to occur. A l s o , i n some f a m i l i e s of type, the descending stem of 'q' f r e q u e n t l y had a d i s t i n g u i s h i n g stem. M o d i f i c a t i o n 3. L e t t e r s of i n c r e a s i n g s t r o k e w i d t h were set towards the end of each word. The f i r s t l e t t e r of a four l e t t e r word would, f o r example, be s et i n l i g h t type, the second i n medium, the t h i r d i n b o l d and the f o u r t h i n e x t r a bold type. The research evidence i n d i c a t e d : Resequencing e r r o r s were more frequent than l e t t e r d i s o r i e n t a t i o n e r r o r s , were more d i f f i c u l t to e l i m i n a t e and were common at 9 to 10 years of age (Bennett, 1942; S c h o n e l l , 1942, I l g and Ames, 1950; Vernon, 1957). Most backward readers were confused about the order and arrangement of l e t t e r s i n words (Vernon, 1957, 1970). Resequencing of s i n g l e l e t t e r s w i t h i n words occurred more f r e q u e n t l y than resequencing of whole words. I n i t i a l l e t t e r resequencing ceased to occur r e l a t i v e l y e a r l y w h i l e medial and f i n a l l e t t e r resequencing was more durable (Kennedy, 1954). D y s l e x i c readers had a tendency to ignore d e t a i l s w i t h i n words and to attend more to c o n f i g u r a t i o n , basing word r e c o g n i t i o n on i n i t i a l l e t t e r s , l e n g t h of a word and a few other i n s u f f i c i e n t cues ( S c h o n e l l , 1942; McAninch, 1969; Vernon, 1970). L e t t e r s w i t h the g r e a t e s t l i g h t n e s s of face were recognized the l e a s t on t a c h i s t o s c o p i c p r e s e n t a t i o n ( T i n k e r , 1928). Bold face type was as l e g i b l e as r e g u l a r face type ( T i n k e r , 1968). The s e q u e n t i a l i n c r e a s e of s t r o k e width was designed to emphasize the s e q u e n t i a l order of the l e t t e r s i n a word. I t was the e s s e n t i a l f e a t u r e of any good reading program to teach the h a b i t of consecutive p e r c e p t i o n from l e f t to r i g h t along the word and the apprehension of words as wholes, that i s , of l e t t e r s blended i n t o word u n i t s (Bond and T i n k e r , 1967). Black was more f o c a l than white (Ghent, 1961, 1964); i n c r e a s i n g figure-ground c o n t r a s t (Vernon, 1963a) and the largeness of the area of a f i g u r e (Dember, 1965) increased the speed and accuracy of p e r c e p t i o n . hH 8. C h i l d r e n attended most to the i n i t i a l l e t t e r s of words (Marchbanks, 1965: Vernon, 1966). Therefore, the i n i t i a l l e t t e r s were set i n tlie l i g h t e s t face. 9. E r r o r s of resequencing occurred w i t h greater frequency i n the medial and f i n a l r a t h e r than the i n i t i a l p o r t i o n s of a word. Ending e r r o r s were made q u i t e f r e q u e n t l y (Kennedy, 1954; Bond and T i n k e r , 1967). Therefore, medial and f i n a l l e t t e r s have been set i n a bolder type face to a t t r a c t more v i s u a l a t t e n t i o n . thick Unas F i g . 3. Example of Pr o g r e s s i v e Increase i n Stroke Width over Successive L e t t e r s Although not a p a r t of the present study, the use of the focus s i n g dot, the i t a l i c l e t t e r s and the pr o g r e s s i v e i n c r e a s e i n s t r o k e width oyer successive l e t t e r s appeared to be i d e a l cueing devices t h a t could be p r o g r e s s i v e l y , s y s t e m a t i c a l l y and d i f f e r e n t i a l l y faded as the c h i l d demonstrated the a b i l i t y to s u s t a i n s a t i s f a c t o r y performance w i t h -out a s s i s t a n c e . The diameter and/or the i n t e n s i t y o f the b l a c k dot might be p r o g r e s s i v e l y lessened. The angle of d e v i a t i o n from the v e r t i c a l of the i t a l i c type may be s y s t e m a t i c a l l y decreased. A l s o , the words could be returned to a s i n g l e l i g h t s t r o k e width by p r o g r e s s i v e l y l e s s e n i n g each successive l e t t e r by one st r o k e width. Several type f a m i l i e s were reviewed i n terms of s u i t a b i l i t y f o r the present research. The f u t u r a design, the most commonly recommended type i n the s c r i p t w r i t i n g c u r r i c u l a of the Departments of Education i n Canada ( C o v e l l and Grady, 1966) was a sans s e r i f , g o t h i c type w i t h equal 69 strok e width on v e r t i c a l , h o r i z o n t a l and diagonal members. The f o l i o and univers f a m i l i e s of type were very s i m i l a r to the f u t u r a design. In the f u t u r a f a m i l y the l e n g t h of the stem that extended (ascending or descending) beyond the diameter of the bow of the l e t t e r s 'b, d, p or q' was of the p r o p o r t i o n 1:2 to the diameter of the bow. Bigelow (1967) suggested that the extending p a r t of the stem should be of equal p r o p o r t i o n to the diameter of the bow. This r e l a t i o n s h i p would o f f e r greater v i s i b i l i t y to the stem. The shortness of the extending stem was even more pronounced i n the u n i v e r s and f o l i o designs where the l e n g t h of the extending stem was i n a 3:7 r a t i o to the diameter of the bow. In each of the three type designs the l e t t e r s 'b, d, p and q' were merely r e o r i e n t a t i o n s of the same l e t t e r w i t h no other d i s c r i m i n a t i n g f e a t u r e s . The most unfortunate f e a t u r e of the f u t u r a type was the design of the l e t t e r 'a' i n the shape of an 'd' w i t h a very small extension at top and bottom of the s t r o k e that was tangent to a p o r t i o n of the r i g h t circumference of the c i r c l e . The l e t t e r s 'a and o' were thus m i n i m a l l y d i s c r i m i n a b l e . In the f o l i o and u n i v e r s f a m i l i e s of type the eye of the l e t t e r 'a' was approximately one-half zee-height w i t h the stem curving over the eye at zee-height. F o l i o and f u t u r a designs had a l a r g e r type face i n 14 p o i n t than the u n i v e r s type which was of approximately e q u i v a l e n t height i n 16 p o i n t . The angle of the i t a l i c o r o b l i q u e u n i v e r s type at a p p r o x i -mately 17° to the r i g h t of v e r t i c a l was f a r more obvious than that of most other i t a l i c designs and was i d e a l l y s u i t e d to the needs of the present study. Each s t y l e of type was produced i n s e v e r a l weights or s t r o k e 70 widths. The f u t u r a type, w i t h f i v e grades of stroke width: l i g h t , medium, demi-bold and b o l d , o f f e r e d a greater v a r i a t i o n i n stroke width than the other f a m i l i e s of type. In g e n e r a l , the f u t u r a design appeared to be the best of the three designs. However, advantage would probably have been achieved by lengthening the extended p o r t i o n of the stem on the l e t t e r s 'b, d, p and q', i n c r e a s i n g the angle from the v e r t i c a l of the o b l i q u e design and adopting a l e t t e r 'a' s i m i l a r to the f o l i o and unive r s type. The experimental m a t e r i a l s were produced through the use of L e t r a s e t , a commercially a v a i l a b l e v a r i e t y of d i f f e r e n t f a m i l i e s of type that could be dry t r a n s f e r r e d from an opaque c a r r i e r medium to paper and other surfaces f o r rep r o d u c t i o n . The most s u i t a b l e combination of types appeared to be i n the use of 14 p o i n t f o l i o l i g h t f o r the f i r s t l e t t e r of each f i v e l e t t e r quingram; u n i v e r s medium, bo l d and e x t r a - b o l d i n 14 p o i n t were used r e s p e c t i v e l y f o r the second, t h i r d and f o u r t h l e t t e r s , w h i l e f o i i o b o l d 14 p o i n t was used i n the f i f t h p o s i t i o n . This combina-t i o n of type produced f i v e thicknesses of stroke width f o r a steady and r e a d i l y apparent increase i n boldness from the f i r s t to the f i f t h l e t t e r . In a d d i t i o n , the l i g h t face was not so l i g h t as to decrease v i s i b i l i t y , nor was the heavi e s t face so b o l d as to reduce the area of the enclosed spaces as i n the l e t t e r s 'a and e' and thereby decrease d i s c r i m i n a b i l i t y . As mentioned, the f o l i o type face was higher than that of the u n i v e r s design when both were i n 14 p o i n t , thus the f i r s t and l a s t l e t t e r s of each quingram was s l i g h t l y higher than the i n t e r n a l l e t t e r s . This increased height may have been an advantage i n d i s t i n g u i s h i n g s uccessive words i n a sequence. Where the i t a l i c form of the l e t t e r s 'b and p' was r e q u i r e d , the standard roman ( v e r t i c a l ) type face was sloped to the 71 r i g h t of v e r t i c a l to approximately 17° to resemble the univer s i t a l i c . Fourteen p o i n t f o l i o l i g h t type was used as the standard f o r a l l e r r o r base-rate and c o n t r o l group measurements. Tinker CI968) recommended 16 point type f o r grade one, 12 to 14 po i n t f o r grades two and three and 10 to 11 p o i n t f o r grades f i v e and up. drape 6adqe F i g . 4. Example of Words w i t h Three Typographic M o d i f i c a t i o n s The f o l l o w i n g paragraphs b r i e f l y d e s c r i b e an overview of the research design; a more complete d e s c r i p t i o n i s provided i n Chapters I I I and IV. In accord w i t h the p r e v i o u s l y c i t e d r esearch, pronounceable nonsense words were used to reduce the d i f f e r e n t i a l e f f e c t s of meaning, understanding o r f a m i l i a r i t y w i t h a c t u a l words and to f o r c e the c h i l d to v i s u a l l y analyze each l e t t e r to i d e n t i f y the u n f a m i l i a r word. F i v e l e t t e r nonsense words or quingrams were chosen f o r the t e s t s because of the r e l a t i v e ease of d e f i n i n g t h e i r i n i t i a l , medial and f i n a l elements. A l l l e t t e r d i s o r i e n t a t i o n e r r o r s were test e d w i t h i n the context of quingrams because the confusion of i s o l a t e d l e t t e r s or p a i r s of l e t t e r s was not the same as those when l e t t e r s are combined i n t o a sequence ( H i l l , 1936; Popp, 1964). In a l l t e s t s , a match-to-sample format was adopted i n which an u n f a m i l i a r quingram was to be matched w i t h one i d e n t i c a l quingram among a number o f a l t e r n a t i v e s , each of which represented a c o n t r o l l e d v a r i a t i o n of e i t h e r d i s o r i e n t a t i o n and/or resequencing e r r o r s . Thus, a more c o n t r o l l e d e r r o r a n a l y s i s would be p o s s i b l e than i n the context of sen-tences or paragraphs. In t h i s t e s t i n g format other cues to word 72 r e c o g n i t i o n beyond v i s u a l a n a l y s i s could a l s o be removed: s y n t a c t i c and c o n t e x t u a l (Vernon, 1970), g r a p h o l o g i c a l as i n word l e n g t h , and morpho-l o g i c a l as i n tense, person or p l u r a l i t y (Gibson and Gibson, 1971) . According to Gibson, meaning o f f e r e d l i t t l e a s s i s t a n c e to v i s u a l p e r c e p t i o n ; Vernon (1970) claimed that f a m i l i a r i t y was the most important f a c t o r which of course i n the present experiment was c o n t r o l l e d by u s i n g nonsense quingrams. . The matching of u n f a m i l i a r quingrams r e q u i r e d only an under-l i n i n g response and focussed the assessment upon the c h i l d ' s a b i l i t y to make accurate v i s u a l d i s c r i m i n a t i o n . M e n t a l l y retarded and slow l e a r n e r c h i l d r e n were s e l e c t e d whose PPVT i n t e l l i g e n c e q u o t i e n t s were w i t h i n the range from IQ 52 to 85, corresponding.to the AAMD c l a s s i f i c a t i o n s of educable mentally retarded and slow l e a r n e r s . These male and female c h i l d r e n between the chronolo-g i c a l age of 8 to 13 years, i n primary and intermediate s p e c i a l c l a s s e s , had been introduced to a beginning reading program. The p o p u l a t i o n was f u r t h e r d efined i n terms of the a b i l i t y to perform the f o l l o w i n g t a s k -s p e c i f i c behaviors: a. v i s u a l l y match two of 'the same' forms from among a group of r e l a t i v e l y d i s s i m i l a r common, simple geometric forms, b. v i s u a l l y analyze u n f a m i l i a r f i v e l e t t e r nonsense words, c. match simple geometric forms i n a f i v e - t o - o n e match-to-sample format, d. p e r c e i v e o r i e n t a t i o n changes i n simple and f a m i l i a r geometric forms, e. p e r c e i v e the change i n sequence of two adjacent forms of a s e r i e s of f i v e geometric forms, and f. o b t a i n more items c o r r e c t on base-rate t e s t s of o r i e n t a t i o n and sequence d i s c r i m i n a t i o n than would be expected by chance alone. E r r o r base-rate t e s t s of d i s o r i e n t a t i o n and resequencing e r r o r s 73 were administered f o l l o w i n g the i n i t i a l screening t e s t . An amazing discov e r y made on the base-rate t e s t s was that i n the sample studied there was not a s u f f i c i e n t number of c h i l d r e n w i t h a s i g n i f i c a n t l y high frequency of resequencing e r r o r s to permit a s t a t i s t i c a l a n a l y s i s of resequencing e r r o r s . This f i n d i n g w i l l be more f u l l y d iscussed l a t e r . The remaining experimental a n a l y s i s p r i m a r i l y concerned d, b, p, q d i s o r i e n t a t i o n e r r o r s that were found to occur at a r e l a t i v e l y h i g h frequency. D i s o r i e n t a t i o n e r r o r s were analyzed i n t o f i f t e e n component e r r o r s r e l a t i n g to p o s i t i o n : 1. i n i t i a l , 2. medial and 3. f i n a l , and d i r e c t i o n of the d i s o r i e n t a t i o n : 4. h o r i z o n t a l , 5. v e r t i c a l and 6. r o t a t i o n a l ; there were four types of h o r i z o n t a l e r r o r s , e.g. b-d, d-b, p-q and q-p pl u s four s i m i l a r v a r i a t i o n s of both v e r t i c a l and r o t a t i o n a l e r r o r s . The su b j e c t s were assigned to the experimental and c o n t r o l groups by the randomized blo c k s design i n terms of t h e i r scores on the d i s o r i e n t a t i o n base-rate t e s t s using standard typography: experimental base-rate o b s e r v a t i o n , 0^; c o n t r o l base-rate o b s e r v a t i o n , 0^. Treatment-p o s t - t e s t s p a r a l l e l to each other and to the base-rate t e s t s were then administered. The c o n t r o l group t e s t s , 0^, were set i n standard type w h i l e those of the experimental group, 0^, were set i n the modified type. In a d d i t i o n , the experimental group was given a post treatment t e s t , 0,., using standard symbols to assess immediate t r a n s f e r of the experimental e f f e c t . The dependent measures i n t h i s experiment were the treatment t e s t and t r a n s f e r t e s t d i s o r i e n t a t i o n e r r o r r a t e s f o r h o r i z o n t a l , rota^-t i o n a l and v e r t i c a l e r r o r s i n t h e . i n i t i a l , medial and f i n a l p o r t i o n s of the quingrams. The independent v a r i a b l e s were mental age, c h r o n o l o g i c a l age, sex, treatment and p r e - t e s t scores. C h r o n o l o g i c a l age was i n c l u d e d 74 i n the a n a l y s i s because of the i m p l i c a t i o n of p h y s i o l o g i c a l maturation f o r v i s u a l performance. The study of mental age r e l a t e d to the development of c o g n i t i v e f u n c t i o n i n g . Observations Test Po s t -Group Base-Rate Treatment Treatment Experimental Standard Symbols 0, M o d i f i e d Symbols 0, Standard Symbols 0. C o n t r o l Standard Symbols Standard Symbols Note. 0 = frequency of d i s o r i e n t a t i o n e r r o r s . F i g . 5. Experimental Design Showing Separate Observations Statement of Hypotheses Note t h a t i n the f o l l o w i n g statement of hypotheses 0^, 0^, 0^, 0. and 0 r represent the number of d i s o r i e n t a t i o n e r r o r s observed i n each 4 5 of the experimental c o n d i t i o n s described above. Hypothesis 1. 0^ (, 0^ :.. T e s t i n g t h i s r e l a t i o n s h i p assessed the change i n performance over time of the experimental group w i t h t r a n s f e r from standard to m o d i f i e d symbols. Hypothesis 2. 0^ = 02^ • A t e s t of t h i s r e l a t i o n s h i p revealed the change i n performance over time, of the c o n t r o l group using 75 standard symbols only. Hypothesis 3. 0^ ^ 0^: This r e l a t i o n s h i p when te s t e d i n d i c a t e d the d i f f e r e n c e i n performance a f t e r time between the e x p e r i -mental and c o n t r o l group using r e s p e c t i v e l y m o d i f i e d and standard symbols, a measure of the treatment e f f e c t . Hypothesis 4. 0,.^ 0^: Testing the d i f f e r e n c e between these observations demonstrated the d i f f e r e n c e between experimental and c o n t r o l group performance a f t e r the experimental group had returned to the use of standard symbols f o l l o w i n g the use of m o d i f i e d symbols. Hypothesis 5. 0,. = 0^: Short term t r a n s f e r of performance of the e x p e r i -mental group f o l l o w i n g the change from modified to standard symbols was assessed by measuring the d i f f e r e n c e between these observations. Hypothesis 6. 0,. <^  0^: The d i f f e r e n c e between these observations was a measure of the change i n performance over time of the experimental group from the i n i t i a l to f i n a l o b s ervation w i t h standard symbols f o l l o w i n g the i n t e r v e n i n g use of modif i e d symbols. Hypothesis 7. I t was hypothesized t h a t : a. On the base-rate t e s t females would have had a s i g n i f i c a n t l y lower e r r o r r a t e than males. b. On the.treatment t e s t s females would have had a • J s i g n i f i c a n t l y lower e r r o r r a t e than males. c. On the treatment t e s t s females would have showed a greater improvement r e s u l t i n g from the treatment than -would have been shown by males. 76 Hypothesis 8. W i t h i n the ranges t e s t e d , no s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e was expected to be found between the v a r i o u s l e v e l s of mental or c h r o n o l o g i c a l age. In the t e s t i n g of each hypothesis, the f o l l o w i n g ten v a r i a b l e s were dependent: h o r i z o n t a l , v e r t i c a l and r o t a t i o n a l e r r o r s i n each of the i n i t i a l , medial and f i n a l p o s i t i o n s of the words, and t o t a l e r r o r s of a l l k i n d s . The independent v a r i a b l e s s t u d i e d were: MA, CA, sex ( S ) , treatment (T), base-rate scores and s e l e c t e d i n t e r a c t i o n s : S*T, MA'T and CA -T. Chapter IV contains a d i s c u s s i o n regarding the s e l e c t i o n f o r study of these i n t e r a c t i o n s . In a d d i t i o n to t e s t i n g these hypotheses, the study was designed to provide the f o l l o w i n g i n f o r m a t i o n regarding base-rate data: 1. To e s t a b l i s h the frequency and t e s t the s i g n i f i c a n c e of the d i f f e r e n c e between the four subtypes of each of the h o r i z o n t a l , v e r t i c a l and r o t a t i o n a l e r r o r s . 2. To e s t a b l i s h the frequency and t e s t the s i g n i f i c a n c e of the d i f f e r e n c e between i n i t i a l , medial and f i n a l e r r o r s . 3. To e s t a b l i s h the s i g n i f i c a n c e of the d i f f e r e n c e t o t a l s f o r h o r i z o n t a l , v e r t i c a l and r o t a t i o n a l e r r o r s i n i n i t i a l , medial and f i n a l p o s i t i o n s . 4. To analyze the c o r r e l a t i o n s between each of the three types of d i s o r i e n t a t i o n s i n each of the three word p o s i t i o n s . 5. To t e s t the s i g n i f i c a n c e of sex, MA and CA i n p r e d i c t i n g base-rate scores. 6. To e s t a b l i s h the s i g n i f i c a n c e of any v i s u a l a b n o r m a l i t i e s on both the base-rate and treatment t e s t s . CHAPTER I I I METHOD OF EXPERIMENTATION SELECTION OF SUBJECTS Of the e i g h t y - e i g h t c h i l d r e n screened, t h i r t y - t h r e e edvicable mentally r e t a r d e d and slow l e a r n i n g c h i l d r e n were s e l e c t e d from nine primary and intermediate s p e c i a l c l a s s e s i n f o u r schools i n the North Vancouver School D i s t r i c t . There were nineteen males and fourteen females of c h r o n o l o g i c a l ages 8.5 to 16 years (average CA = 11.7 years) and of mental age.5 to 12 years (average MA = 7.9 y e a r s ) . The IQ's ranged from 52 to 85 on the PPVT. S i x of these c h i l d r e n were n a t i v e Indians l i v i n g on reserves. These c h i l d r e n were randomly d i v i d e d i n equal numbers between the c o n t r o l and experimental groups. Two of the schools were l o c a t e d i n areas combining l i g h t i n d u s t r y and both s m a l l , o l d and neglected houses and w e l l maintained medium s i z e houses i n w e l l e s t a b l i s h e d r e s i d e n t i a l areas. The remaining two schools were l o c a t e d i n r e l a t i v e l y new r e s i -d e n t i a l areas of moderately expensive homes. One of the schools was l o c a t e d i n an area of many apartment houses and f i v e of the c h i l d r e n were from s i n g l e parent homes. The sample may be considered g e n e r a l l y r e p r e s e n t a t i v e of lower and middle c l a s s f a m i l i e s . A l l of the c h i l d r e n had experienced a v a r i e t y of reading programs t h a t were described by t h e i r teachers as e c l e c t i c approaches. Of the f i f t y - f i v e c h i l d r e n e l i m i n a t e d from the sample by the screening and base-rate t e s t s , t h i r t y - t w o of the c h i l d r e n from primary and intermediate s p e c i a l c l a s s e s had IQ's t h a t exceeded 85 p o i n t s as 77 78 measured on the Peabody P i c t u r e Vocabulary Test (Dunn, 1965). F i f t e e n c h i l d r e n were e l i m i n a t e d from the sample because t h e i r scores were so high on the base-rate t e s t s that i f a treatment t e s t of equal length had been administered there would not have been enough items to assess the p o s s i b l e range of improvement i n performance. Four c h i l d r e n d i d not perform beyond the chance l e v e l on the base-rate t e s t s and four of the c h i l d r e n t e s t e d never returned to school f o r subsequent t e s t i n g . T esting Format and Procedures Figure 6 i l l u s t r a t e s the sequence of a d m i n i s t r a t i o n of the v a r i o u s s c r e e n i n g , base-rate and treatment t e s t s . Tests grouped together were administered during the same t e s t i n g s e s s i o n . A l l t e s t s were i n d i v i d u a l l y administered during a one month p e r i o d . The p r e t e s t p o r t i o n of each of the screening t e s t s was designed to t r a i n the s u b j e c t s to work w i t h i n the . p a r t i c u l a r t e s t i n g format used and to permit the p o s s i b i l i t y of r e i n f o r c i n g v i s u a l a t t e n t i o n to aspects of the v i s u a l stimulus that were c r i t i c a l to the d i s c r i m i n a t i o n of o r i e n t -a t i o n and d i s o r i e n t a t i o n changes. V e r b a l and s o c i a l reinforcement and feedback, described l a t e r , were used l i b e r a l l y during the p r e t e s t , s e c t i o n s of the screening t e s t s but not at a l l during the base-rate, treatment or t r a n s f e r t e s t s . There were s e v e r a l reasons f o r using feedback and reinforcement. F i r s t , the t e s t i n g task was r a t h e r long, r e p e t i t i v e and f a m i l i a r to past experience; the treatment may have been perceived as another o p p o r t u n i t y to f a i l . H a l l (1968) wrote that although a t t e n t i o n was a necessary c o n d i t i o n f o r h i s d i s c r i m i n a t i o n task, i t was not s u f f i -c i e n t and reinforcement of a t t e n t i o n was necessary. B a h r i c k , F i t t s and Rankin (1952); Laberge, Tweedy and R i c k e r (1967) and others have 79 demonstrated that reward improved the focus of v i s u a l a t t e n t i o n . Secondly, as Hendrickson and Muehl (1962) have found, a c h i l d may have appeared to make mistakes not only when he couldn't perceive d i f f e r e n c e s i n some v i s u a l d i s c r i m i n a t i o n t a s k s , but a l s o when he could p e r c e i v e a d i f f e r e n c e but d i d not r e a l i z e i t ' s importance. T e s t i n g Sessions Tests Type of Test 1 Peabody P i c t u r e Vocabulary Test Screening 5-1 Match Geometric 'Sameness' Screening 2 Keystone T e l e b i n o c u l a r Experimental 3 O r i e n t a t i o n D i s c r i m i n a t i o n Screening Demonstration A d, b, p, q O r i e n t a t i o n Base-Rate Base-Rate 4 Sequence D i s c r i m i n a t i o n Screening Demonstration B S i n g l e L e t t e r Resequencing Base-Rate Further resequencing t e s t i n g was disc o n t i n u e d a t t h i s p o i n t Randomized blo c k s d i s t r i b u t i o n to the experimental and c o n t r o l groups i n terms of d i s o r i e n t a t i o n base-rate scores 5 O r i e n t a t i o n T r a i n i n g E x e r c i s e A Experimental O r i e n t a t i o n T r a i n i n g E x e r c i s e B C o n t r o l d» b, p, q D i s o r i e n t a t i o n Treatment Test -Standard Typography C o n t r o l Treatment -Modified Typography Experimental Treatment -Standard Typography Experimental Post-Treatment F i g . 6. Sequence of Test A d m i n i s t r a t i o n 1 As a r e s u l t of the use of reinforcement during the p r e t e s t p o r t i o n s of the screening t e s t s and during the t r a i n i n g e x e r c i s e s , the product of the f o l l o w i n g base-rate t e s t s may be described as r e f l e c t i n g 80 an approximation of the current l e v e l of the s u b j e c t s ' performance c a p a b i l i t y w i t h standard m a t e r i a l s i n a one-to-one t e s t i n g r e l a t i o n s h i p . The treatment t e s t using modified symbols was designed to measure the in c r e a s e of performance beyond the approximated l e v e l of c a p a b i l i t y w i t h the standard symbols. I n i t i a l Screening Tests The Peabody P i c t u r e Vocabulary Test. This t e s t , as p r e v i o u s l y d e s c r i b e d , was used as a gross screening device merely to confirm the c l a s s i f i c a t i o n of subjects as educable mentally retarded or as slow l e a r n e r s between the 10 range of 52 - 85. Mental age scores were c a l c u -l a t e d . The standard procedures f o r i n d i v i d u a l a d m i n i s t r a t i o n were used. Five-to-One Match of Geometric Sameness."^ This screening t e s t was designed to assess the subject's a b i l i t y to v i s u a l l y p e r c e i v e 'sameness' of two geometric forms among a group of common, simple and r e l a t i v e l y d i s s i m i l a r geometric forms i n a fi v e - t o - o n e match-to-sample format. A c i r c l e , square, t r i a n g l e , cross and s t a r , each of eighteen p o i n t height as i n Fi g u r e 7, were used i n the t e s t . Understanding of the concept of 'sameness', the a b i l i t y to per c e i v e 'geometric sameness' and to work i n a f i v e - t o - o n e match-to-sample format was fundamental to a l l f u r t h e r t e s t i n g . A|a. o • A + F i g . 7. Example of a S i x C e l l Frame of a Five-to-One Match of Geometric 'Sameness'. Copies of t h i s and a l l f u r t h e r t e s t s are contained i n Appendix A. 81 The t e s t s c o n s i s t e d of eigh t t r a i n i n g frames s i m i l a r to those i n F i gure 7. In the f i r s t two frames three c e l l s were empty and the subjec t was re q u i r e d to match the f i r s t geometric f i g u r e - the sample -w i t h one of two a l t e r n a t i v e f i g u r e s . The matching response was completed by u n d e r l i n i n g the matching f i g u r e . The u n d e r l i n i n g response was common to a l l f u t u r e t e s t s . The t h i r d and f o u r t h frames of the t e s t had three a l t e r n a t i v e f i g u r e s f o r the subje c t to choose from. An a d d i t i o n a l a l t e r -n a t i v e f i g u r e was added f o l l o w i n g each subsequent set of two frames. In the seventh and ei g h t h frames the subje c t was re q u i r e d to choose the matching geometric f i g u r e from among f i v e a l t e r n a t i v e f i g u r e s . The subject was provided w i t h abundant v e r b a l reinforcement and feedback to encourage and guide h i s independent performance over the f i n a l e i g h t t e s t i n g frames. Complete a d m i n i s t r a t i o n i n s t r u c t i o n s are contained i n Appendix A. To meet the screening c r i t e r i o n on t h i s t e s t and to q u a l i f y f o r f u r t h e r t e s t i n g the c h i l d had to be c o r r e c t on at l e a s t seven out of eight frames. The c r i t e r i o n could i n c l u d e one spontaneously correc t e d frame. Keystone T e l e b i n o c u l a r V i s u a l Survey. As mentioned e a r l i e r the Keystone Test (1961) was not used as a screening device i n the present study. Rather a t e s t was made of i t s e f f e c t i v e n e s s to i d e n t i f y o p t h a l -m o l o g i c a l problems t h a t might be d i f f e r e n t i a l l y a f f e c t e d by the typographic changes. The f o l l o w i n g near p o i n t v i s u a l screening t e s t s were assessed on the number 46 T e l e b i n o c u l a r : 1. L a t e r a l posture ( t e s t t e n ) ; 2. V e r t i c a l posture (ready to read number two); 3. Fusion ( t e s t e l e v e n ) ; 4. B i n o c u l a r a c u i t y ( t e s t twelve); 5. A c u i t y , r i g h t eye ( t e s t t h i r t e e n ) ; 6. A c u i t y , l e f t eye ( t e s t f o u r t e e n ) ; 7. Suppression (Spache B i n o c u l a r Reading t e s t two, 1955). Testing i n s t r u c t i o n s were s p e c i a l l y designed f o r 82 p o p u l a t i o n under study; vocabulary was s i m p l i f i e d , and the need f o r c o l o r v i s i o n t e s t i n g or knowledge,of c o l o r names was avoided. A d d i t i o n a l questions and procedures were included w i t h the v i s u a l t e s t i n g to more f u l l y assess the nature of the subject's v i s u a l experience. The t e s t i n g i n s t r u c t i o n s are l o c a t e d i n Appendix A. The s i g n i f i c a n c e of any v i s u a l a b n o r m a l i t i e s discovered was assessed i n post hoc a n a l y s i s of the su b j e c t ' s performance on base-rate and treatment t e s t s . O r i e n t a t i o n D i s c r i m i n a t i o n . The o r i e n t a t i o n screening t e s t was used immediately p r i o r to the d, b, p, q o r i e n t a t i o n base-rate t e s t . This t e s t was designed to assess the c h i l d ' s a b i l i t y to i d e n t i f y a change i n the o r i e n t a t i o n of a f a m i l i a r f i g u r e . A secondary purpose of the t e s t , i n d i r e c t l y preceding a d m i n i s t r a t i o n of the d, b, p and q d i s o r i e n t a t i o n test^was to focus the su b j e c t ' s a t t e n t i o n upon o r i e n t a t i o n cues i n p r e p a r a t i o n f o r subsequent t e s t i n g . Ten p a i r s of p r o f i l e s of a human, male face were s e p a r a t e l y presented to the s u b j e c t . Each p r o f i l e was i d e n t i c a l and was v a r i e d , i f at a l l , only i n terms of i t s o r i e n t a t i o n : r i g h t - s i d e - u p , f a c i n g l e f t or r i g h t , o r upside-down, f a c i n g l e f t o r r i g h t . Thus, the o r i e n t a t i o n changes matched those of the l e t t e r s 'b, d, p and q 1 . The ten p a i r s of p r o f i l e s exhausted a l l combinations o f the f i g u r e s made two at a time. The f i r s t two p a i r s were used f o r demonstration and i n the subsequent eigh t frames the subj e c t had merely to i n d i c a t e that the members of each p a i r d i d not have the same o r i e n t a t i o n . To q u a l i f y f o r f u r t h e r t e s t i n g the c h i l d had to o b t a i n four c o r r e c t of the s i x t e s t i n g p a i r s of p r o f i l e s . One spontaneously c o r r e c t e d response c o u l d be inc l u d e d i n the number of c o r r e c t responses. The complete t e s t and i n s t r u c t i o n s are i n Appendix A. 83 F i g . 8. Example of O r i e n t a t i o n D i s c r i m i n a t i o n Test Frame The simulated human p r o f i l e was used i n t h i s t e s t f o r two r e a -sons. F i r s t , because i t s o r i e n t a t i o n could be changed i n a v e r t i c a l , h o r i z o n t a l or r o t a t i o n a l manner w h i l e each of i t s c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s remained the same. Secondly, because, research has shown that o r i e n t a t i o n a l changes of these f i g u r e s can be d i s c r i m i n a t e d by k i n d e r g a r t e n c h i l d r e n ( B a i n , 1970). d> b, p, q O r i e n t a t i o n Base-Rate Test. This t e s t c o n s i s t e d of twenty-four, four-to-one match-to rsample formats of nonsense quingrams, each w i t h e i t h e r a 'b, d, p or q' i n the i n i t i a l and the medial and the f i n a l p o r t i o n of the word. For each sample word there was one matching word and each of the three remaining a l t e r n a t i v e choices had e i t h e r a h o r i z o n t a l , v e r t i c a l or r o t a t i o n a l d i s o r i e n t a t i o n of the l e t t e r s b, d, p and q i n e i t h e r i t s i n i t i a l , medial or f i n a l p o r t i o n . The l o c a t i o n of the a l t e r n a t i v e s was randomly determined f o r each item. W i t h i n the t e s t there was an equal number of each l e t t e r d, b, p and q i n each p o s i t i o n , i n i t i a l , medial and f i n a l , and i n each d i s o r i e n t a t i o n , v e r t i c a l , h o r i z o n t a l and r o t a t i o n a l . The s e l e c t i o n of the two vowels w i t h i n each sample word was completely random except that each sample word and each response was r e a d i l y pronounceable. 84 qobod qopod qoboq dobod qobod 1 puqad puqad pubad puqap duqad 2 F i g . 9. Example of Two Frames of the b, d, p, q E r r o r Base-Rate Test A copy of the t e s t and the a d m i n i s t r a t i o n i n s t r u c t i o n s are incl u d e d i n Appendix A. Previous to the a c t u a l base-rate t e s t , a demonstration of the t e s t was. provided. The purpose of t h i s demonstration was to focus the subject's a t t e n t i o n on o r i e n t a t i o n changes, v e r b a l l y r e i n f o r c e such a t t e n t i o n and t r a i n the subject f o r the subsequent task. The two frames i n F i g u r e 10 were used i n the e x e r c i s e . These frames were designated 'Demonstration A' of three s e t s of demonstration frames p r i n t e d on a s i n g l e page f o r use w i t h the three base-rate t e s t s . The demonstration sheet i s in c l u d e d i n Appendix A. I n s t r u c t i o n s f o r p a r t A of the demonstration are in c l u d e d i n the d, b, p and q e r r o r base-rate i n s t r u c -t i o n s . paqib padib paqip baq ib paq ib b e p i d bepip bed id bepid qep id F i g . 10. d, b, p, q Demonstration Frames 'A' A simple u n d e r l i n i n g response of the matching word was r e q u i r e d f o r both the demonstration and the base-rate t e s t . Base-rate performance was scored f o r the number of i n i t i a l ( 1 ) , medial (M) and f i n a l (F) e r r o r s the number of h o r i z o n t a l q-p and d-b e r r o r s ; the number of v e r t i c a l q-d 85 and p-b e r r o r s ; as w e l l as the number of r o t a t i o n a l q-b and d-p e r r o r s . To q u a l i f y f o r f u r t h e r t e s t i n g the subjects had to o b t a i n a t l e a s t s i x out of twenty-four frames c o r r e c t to exceed what would be expected by chance alone; t h i s c r i t e r i o n f u r t h e r defined the b a s i c entry l e v e l s k i l l s of the subjects i n the study. The t o t a l p o s s i b l e number of each type of d, b, p, q d i s o r i e n t -a t i o n e r r o r contained w i t h i n the twenty-four item t e s t i s i n d i c a t e d i n the r e s p e c t i v e c e l l s of the ma t r i x below. Grand I n i t i a l M e dial F i n a l T o t a l H o r i z o n t a l q-p 2 2 2 6 d-b 2 2 2 6 p-q 2 2 2 6 b-d 2 2 2 6 T o t a l 8 8 8 24 V e r t i c a l d-q 2 2 2 6 b-p 2 2 2 6 P-b 2 2 2 6 q-d 2 2 2 1 6 T o t a l 8 8 8 . 24 R o t a t i o n a l d-p 2 2 2 6 b-q 2 2 2 6 p-d 2 2 2 6 q-b 2 2 2 6 T o t a l 8 8 8 24 Grand T o t a l 24 24 24 F i g . 11. P o t e n t i a l D i s o r i e n t a t i o n E r r o r A n a l y s i s M a t r i x Sequence D i s c r i m i n a t i o n . The sequence d i s c r i m i n a t i o n screening 86 t e s t was designed to assess the s u b j e c t s ' a b i l i t y to p e r c e i v e a change i n sequence of two adjacent .geometric f i g u r e s i n a s e r i e s of f i v e f i g u r e s i n c l u d i n g a square, c r o s s , c i r c l e , t r i a n g l e and s t a r . These f i g u r e s were each of eighteen p o i n t h eight. A second purpose of having the t e s t d i r e c t l y precede a d m i n i s t r a t i o n of the s i n g l e l e t t e r resequencing base-rate t e s t was to focus the subject's a t t e n t i o n upon the d i s c r i m i n a -t i o n of resequencing cues i n p r e p a r a t i o n f o r subsequent t e s t i n g . The t e s t c o n s i s t e d of e i g h t p a i r s of t r a i n i n g frames and s i x p a i r s of t e s t i n g frames. Each t e s t i n g frame c o n s i s t e d of f i v e c e l l s . The t e s t i n g task demanded the comparison of the s e q u e n t i a l order of up to f i v e geometric forms i n each of two f i v e - c e l l e d frames. The f i r s t p a i r of t r a i n i n g frames were juxtaposed one beneath the.other. A c i r c l e , t r i a n g l e and square were i n the same sequence i n each frame. Thus arranged, the sequence of the f i g u r e s w i t h i n the frames was r e l a t i v e l y easy to compare, but u n l i k e the eventual t e s t i n g format i n which the c h i l d would have to compare the s e q u e n t i a l order of l e t t e r s w i t h i n quingrams arranged i n h o r i z o n t a l order. Thus, i n subsequent t r a i n i n g frames the p a i r s of c e l l s p r e v i o u s l y juxtaposed one beneath the other were p r o g r e s s i v e l y separated so that the eighth p a i r of frames was arranged h o r i z o n t a l l y s i d e by s i d e as were each of the s i x t e s t i n g frames. In a d d i t i o n , the number of f i g u r e s i n each sequence was p r o g r e s s i v e l y increased from three i n the f i r s t p a i r to f i v e i n the s i x t h p a i r . The complete t e s t and a d m i n i s t r a t i o n i n s t r u c t i o n s are i n Appendix A. To q u a l i f y f o r f u r t h e r t e s t i n g the subject had to o b t a i n f i v e out of s i x frames c o r r e c t , i n c l u d i n g one spontaneously c o r r e c t e d response. 87 XX A O • + XX A O + • F i g . 12. Example of a P a i r of Sequence D i s c r i m i n a t i o n Testing Frames S i n g l e L e t t e r Sequence D i s c r i m i n a t i o n Base-Rate Test. The resequencing base-rate t e s t was designed to measure the frequency of s i n g l e l e t t e r resequencing e r r o r s when two adjacent l e t t e r s changed p o s i -t i o n w i t h i n the i n i t i a l , medial or f i n a l p o r t i o n of a word. The medial or t h i r d l e t t e r was moved an equal number of times both to the r i g h t and l e f t . There were twelve, four-to-one match-to-sample frames of quingram nonsense s y l l a b l e s i n the t e s t . Only ex-height l e t t e r s were used so that ascending and/or descending cues would not be a v a i l a b l e and each ex-height l e t t e r had to be examined to match two words. anmor namor anmor amnor anmro F i g . 13. Example of a S i n g l e L e t t e r Resequencing Base-Rate Frame There were an equal number of i n i t i a l , medial and f i n a l resequencing e r r o r s p o s s i b l e . Each stimulus word and each a l t e r n a t i v e response word was r e a d i l y pronounceable. The l o c a t i o n of each type of response a l t e r n a t i v e was completely random. The t e s t was scored f o r the number of each of the i n i t i a l , medial and f i n a l e r r o r s . The subject had to o b t a i n at l e a s t three out of twelve responses c o r r e c t to exceed the score expected by chance alone. This c r i t e r i o n helped to e s t a b l i s h a b a s i c entry l e v e l s k i l l of the subjects, i n the study. Copies of the s i n g l e l e t t e r resequencing base-rate t e s t and the a d m i n i s t r a t i o n i n s t r u c -t i o n s are in c l u d e d i n Appendix A. 88 Previous to the a c t u a l resequencing base-rate t e s t the 'B' frames of the three s e t s of base-rate t e s t demonstration frames were presented. The purpose of t h i s demonstration was to focus the subject's a t t e n t i o n on o r i e n t a t i o n changes, v e r b a l l y r e i n f o r c e such a t t e n t i o n and t r a i n the subject f o r the subsequent task. The two frames i n Figure 14 were used i n the e x e r c i s e . samer samre samer asmer smaer varme va rem avrme varme vamre F i g . 14. Resequencing Demonstration Frames 'B\ The a d m i n i s t r a t i o n i n s t r u c t i o n s f o r the demonstration 'B' frames are i n c l u d e d as a p a r t of the resequencing base-rate i n s t r u c t i o n s i n Appendix A. Assignment to the C o n t r o l and Experimental Groups Assignment of the subjects to the c o n t r o l and experimental groups followed the general methods of the randomized bl o c k s design as described by Edwards (1968). A l l subjects were rank ordered from h i g h to low scores ( i n terms of t h e i r performance on the o r i e n t a t i o n base-rate t e s t s ) . The rank order was then d i v i d e d i n t o blocks of two subjects each; there was a t o t a l of seventeen b l o c k s . Because of the f a c t , as p r e v i o u s l y d escribed, that only t h i r t y - t h r e e of the e i g h t y - e i g h t subjects screened were s u i t a b l e f o r the sample, i t was decided to d i s t r i b u t e a l a r g e r p o r t i o n of the subjects to the experimental group and thereby 89 increase the power of f u t u r e analyses. The power of a t e s t i s the p r o b a b i l i t y of r e j e c t i n g the n u l l hypothesis when i t i s not t r u e . Power may be increased by i n c r e a s i n g sample s i z e . In the present study the most important hypotheses, numbers 1, 5 and 6, r e l a t e to changes i n performance of the experimental group from base-rate to treatment to post-treatment t e s t s . Therefore, the power of the t e s t of these hypo-theses has been r a i s e d by i n c r e a s i n g the s i z e of the experimental group w h i l e r e t a i n i n g a s u f f i c i e n t number of subjects i n the c o n t r o l group. The usual procedure f o r a randomized blocks design of randomly a s s i g n i n g a s u b j e c t from each block to the experimental and c o n t r o l groups was followed f o r most blocks except 2, 6, 10, 12 and 16, from which a l l s u b j e c t s were assigned to the experimental group. The s i n g l e subject i n c e l l seventeen was assigned to the c o n t r o l , group. As a r e s u l t , twenty-one s u b j e c t s were assigned to the experimental group and twelve to the c o n t r o l . The experimental group contained eleven males and ten females w h i l e the c o n t r o l group had e i g h t males and four females. According to Edwards, subjects assigned to experimental and c o n t r o l groups by the usual randomized blocks design w i l l be more homogeneous on t h e i r response to the dependent v a r i a b l e i n the absence of treatment e f f e c t s than sub-j e c t s s e l e c t e d completely at random. A l s o , he s t a t e d that by t a k i n g i n t o account the d i f f e r e n c e e x i s t i n g between blocks i n the a n a l y s i s of v a r i a n c e i t i s a n t i c i p a t e d that a smaller e r r o r mean square w i l l be obtained f o r the same number of observations than i f a randomized group design had been used (Edwards, 1968). A H o t e l l i n g _ T a n a l y s i s was used to t e s t the homogeneity of v a r i a n c e w i t h respect to the number of i n i t i a l , m e d i a l , f i n a l , h o r i z o n t a l , v e r t i c a l and r o t a t i o n a l e r r o r s made by the experimental and c o n t r o l groups 90 as assigned by the modified randomized blocks design. Treatment Tests There were two treatment t e s t s p a r a l l e l i n c o n s t r u c t i o n to the base-rate t e s t s . These were the c o n t r o l and experimental forms of the 'd, b, p, q' d i s o r i e n t a t i o n treatment t e s t . These f i v e - t o - o n e match-to-sample t e s t s r e q u i r e d an u n d e r l i n i n g response and were designed to the same s p e c i f i c a t i o n s as the d, b, p, q d i s o r i e n t a t i o n base-rate t e s t l The only manner i n which the treatment and base-rate t e s t s were d i f f e r e n t was that new quingrams were used i n the treatment t e s t s so as to e l i m i n - . ate the p o s s i b i l i t y that subjects might l e a r n from the base-rate t e s t s s p e c i f i c responses to s p e c i f i c words that they might a l s o f i n d i n the treatment t e s t s . To make the r e q u i r e d matching responses on the treatment t e s t s , the subject would thus be r e q u i r e d to v i s u a l l y analyze each word anew rat h e r than merely to g e n e r a l i z e a response learned oh the base-rate t e s t s . The t e s t s f o r experimental and c o n t r o l s ubjects were i d e n t i c a l except that the experimental subjects r e c e i v e d the t e s t s p r i n t e d . i n the modified typographic form p r e v i o u s l y d e s c r i b e d , w h i l e the c o n t r o l t e s t s were p r i n t e d i n standard type ( f o l i o l i g h t , 14 p o i n t ) . The experimental group form of the d, b, p, q d i s c r i m i n a t i o n t e s t was modif i e d i n that the l e t t e r s 'p and b 1 were set i n i t a l i c and the b l a c k dot was embedded i n the angle of the loop and stem of each of the l e t t e r s 'b, d, p and q'. 91 qofcud Pobu6 qodud qo6ud qo6u6 budep buqep 6udep p u d e p 6ude6 F i g . 15. Example of Two Frames of the Experimental Form of the d, b, p, q D i s o r i e n t a t i o n Treatment Test O r i e n t a t i o n Matching Task. D i r e c t l y preceding a d m i n i s t r a t i o n of the 'd, b, p, q' d i s o r i e n t a t i o n treatment t e s t s both experimental and c o n t r o l s u b j e c t s r e c e i v e d an o r i e n t a t i o n matching task. This task replaced the demonstration e x e r c i s e s used i n the base-rate task. The matching task was designed to focus and r e i n f o r c e the subject's a t t e n t i o n upon r e l e v a n t cues of o r i e n t a t i o n , i n p r e p a r a t i o n f o r the subsequent t e s t . The r e l e v a n t cues of o r i e n t a t i o n on the c o n t r o l form of the t e s t l a y i n the accurate p e r c e p t i o n of the r e l a t i o n s h i p between the loop and stem of the l e t t e r s 'd, b, p and q' using the standard type, w h i l e the r e l e v a n t o r i e n t a t i o n cue f o r the experimental group was i n the accurate p e r c e p t i o n of the dotted angle. Thus, to focus c o n t r o l and experimental subjects upon a p p r o p r i a t e l y r e l e v a n t cues of o r i e n t a t i o n , d i f f e r e n t but e q u i v a l e n t matching e x e r c i s e s were given to each group. The c o n t r o l group was presented w i t h the c o n f i g u r a t i o n depicted i n f i g u r e 16 and four randomly arranged cards that i f put together i n the c o r r e c t manner matched the model. 92 F i g . 16. C o n t r o l Group O r i e n t a t i o n Matching Model Figure 17 represents the matching model used by the experimental group su b j e c t s i n the same type of matching a c t i v i t y . To produce the matching cards, a copy of the model was mounted on t h i c k poster card and the model was cut i n t o four p i e c e s , f i r s t by c u t t i n g from the l e f t to the r i g h t dash mark on e i t h e r s i d e of the square, then by c u t t i n g at r i g h t angles from the dash mark at the top and bottom of the square. C u t t i n g i n t h i s manner produced four r e c t a n g u l a r shapes. The pieces marked 'x' were attached to each other as were the 'y' p i e c e s . The a c t u a l t e s t m a t e r i a l s were not marked 'x and y' as i n Figure 17. 93 F i g . 17. Experimental Group O r i e n t a t i o n Matching Model The matching a c t i v i t i e s were administered to both the c o n t r o l and the experimental groups i n the same manner. The s u b j e c t ' s four cards were presented to him i n a h o r i z o n t a l l i n e i n the order r e s p e c t i v e l y on each of four t r i a l s A. 1, 2, 3, 4; B. 2, 1, 4, 3; C. 3, 4, 1, 2; D. 4, 3, 2, 1 (assume that the quadrants of Figures 16 and 17 were numbered i n a counter-clockwise d i r e c t i o n from t h e i r upper right-hand quadrant). In a d d i t i o n , on each t r i a l the o r i e n t a t i o n of the f i g u r e on the cards was e i t h e r r i g h t - s i d e - u p ('U') or upside-down ('D'). Over the four t r i a l s o r i e n t a t i o n of the f i g u r e s on the cards was as f o l l o w s : 1. U, D, D, I),; 2. U, D, U, D; 3. D, U, U, D; and 4. D, D, U, D. The s u b j e c t s were r e i n f o r c e d v e r b a l l y and w i t h Smarties, small r e a d i l y consumed candies, as they put each card i n t o i t s proper p o s i t i o n (see 94 Appendix A f o r d e t a i l s ) . Each c h i l d had to arrange the cards p r o p e r l y on a l l four t r i a l s before going onto the o r i e n t a t i o n treatment t e s t s . Copies of the i n s t r u c t i o n s and the t e s t s of d, b, p, q matching tasks are contained i n Appendix A. The experimental subjects were given a copy of the c o n t r o l treatment t e s t to perform f o r t h e i r post-treatment t e s t . This t e s t was administered i n the same manner as the base-rate t e s t s . CHAPTER IV STATISTICAL PROCEDURES AND RESULTS The s t a t i s t i c a l a n a l y s i s of the data was d i v i d e d i n t o two p a r t s : a n a l y s i s of performance on the base-rate t e s t s and a n a l y s i s of treatment e f f e c t s . A n a l y s i s of variance programs were used to t e s t the d i f f e r e n c e between i n i t i a l , medial and f i n a l e r r o r s , and between h o r i z o n t a l , v e r t i c a l and r o t a t i o n a l e r r o r s . The B o n f e r r o n i technique (Games, 1971) was used to t e s t the d i f f e r e n c e between the means of the four d i f f e r e n t types of h o r i z o n t a l e r r o r s , e.g. b-d, d-b, p-q and q-p. A s i m i l a r a n a l y s i s was performed f o r the four d i f f e r e n t types of both v e r t i c a l and r o t a t i o n a l e r r o r s . Analyses were performed to assess whether there was a high c o r r e l a t i o n between d i f f e r e n t types of d i s o r i e n t a t i o n s t h a t began w i t h , and/or that produced the same l e t t e r . A r e g r e s s i o n a n a l y s i s was used to determine whether Sex, CA and/or MA were s i g n i f i c a n t p r e d i c t o r s of base-rate scores. The b a s i c experimental assumption of no s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e between experimental and c o n t r o l 2 base-rate scores was te s t e d w i t h an H o t e l l i n g T a n a l y s i s . The r e l i -a b i l i t y of the base-rate t e s t s was assessed w i t h a Hoyt R e l i a b i l i t y (Hoyt, 1941). A n a l y s i s of Base-Rate Data A n a l y s i s of Variance: I n i t i a l , M edial and F i n a l P o s i t i o n ,  Base-Rate Data To t e s t the s t a t i s t i c a l s i g n i f i c a n c e of the d i f f e r e n c e between i n i t i a l , medial and f i n a l e r r o r s on the base-rate t e s t s , the a n a l y s i s of varia n c e program used was UBC-BMD:08V (Halm, 1971) f o r any h i e r a r c h i c a l 95 96 design w i t h equal c e l l s i z e s . Note that i n f u t u r e d i s c u s s i o n the terms i n i t i a l , m e d i a l , f i n a l , h o r i z o n t a l , v e r t i c a l and r o t a t i o n a l e r r o r s w i l l be abbreviated to I , M, F, H, V and R. TABLE 6 ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE, BASE-RATE DATA: POSITION OF ERRORS: I , M, AND F Source of Variance Sums of Squares df MS F p_ Subjects 250.538 46 5.446 E r r o r P o s i t i o n (I,M,F) 82.142 2 41.071 9.676 <.0005 Subject x P o s i t i o n 390.513 92 4.245 723.193 140 A n a l y s i s of these r e s u l t s i n d i c a t e d that there was a s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e (p_ ^ .0005) between at l e a s t two of the I , M and F means reported i n Table 6. Further a n a l y s i s of these means was r e q u i r e d to a s c e r t a i n which two or more means were s t a t i s t i c a l l y d i f f e r e n t ; the B o n f e r r o n i method f o r the m u l t i p l e comparison of means (Games, 1971) was used f o r t h i s purpose. 97 TABLE 7 BONFERRONI ANALYSIS OF THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN PAIRS OF MEANS FOR I , M AND F BASE-RATE ERRORS P a i r s of E r r o r Types Means D i f f e r e n c e p_ I n i t i a l - Medial 3.225 - 1.532 1.723 <.05 I n i t i a l - F i n a l 3.255 - 1.766 1.489 <.05 Medial - F i n a l 1.532 - 1.766 .234 >05 The obtained d i f f e r e n c e i n means f o r i n i t i a l and f i n a l p o s i t i o n exceeded the B o n f e r r o n i confidence i n t e r v a l of 0.0 + 1.025. Therefore, i n i t i a l e r r o r s were s i g n i f i c a n t l y higher than f i n a l e r r o r s (p_ ^ . 0 5 ) ; i n i t i a l e r r o r s were s i g n i f i c a n t l y higher than medial e r r o r s (p_ ^  .05). The obtained d i f f e r e n c e i n means f o r f i n a l and medial e r r o r s d i d not exceed the B o n f e r r o n i confidence i n t e r v a l . Therefore, medial e r r o r s were not s i g n i f i c a n t l y d i f f e r e n t from f i n a l e r r o r s . A n a l y s i s of Variance: H o r i z o n t a l , V e r t i c a l and R o t a t i o n a l D i s o r i e n t a t i o n s To t e s t the s t a t i s t i c a l s i g n i f i c a n c e of the d i f f e r e n c e between H, V and R base-rate e r r o r s , and between the l e t t e r s i n v o l v e d i n each type of d i s o r i e n t a t i o n , the UBC-BMD:08V A n a l y s i s of Variance program was again employed. Further study of the f o l l o w i n g analyses w i l l be a s s i s t e d by r e c a l l i n g that w i t h i n each major category of d i s o r i e n t a t i o n (H, V and R:) there were four d i f f e r e n t l e t t e r d i s o r i e n t a t i o n s . The h o r i z o n t a l l e t t e r d i s o r i e n t a t i o n s were: (a) d-b, that i s , "d" was d i s o r i e n t e d to become "b", (b) p-q, (c) b-d, and (d) q-p; the v e r t i c a l l e t t e r d i s o r i e n t -a t i o n s are: (a) q-d, (b) b-p, (c) p-b, and (d) d-q; the r o t a t i o n a l 98 l e t t e r d i s o r i e n t a t i o n s were: (a) p-d, (b) d-p, (c) b-q, and (d) q-b. TABLE 8 SUMMARY OF ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE OF H, V AND R DISORIENTATION ERRORS ON BASE-RATE TEST Source of Variance Sums of Squares df MS I £ Subjects 63.790 46 1.387 Types of E r r o r s (H,V,R) 22.255 2 11.128 36.681 <.0005 L e t t e r s Involved i n Each Type 11.112 9 1.235 2.255 <.025 Subject x Types 27.909 92 .303 Subjects x L e t t e r s i n Each Type 226.613 414 .547 Table 8 i n d i c a t e d t h a t a t l e a s t two of the means f o r e r r o r s were s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t l y d i f f e r e n t (p_ < .0005), and that there was a s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e between the means f o r at l e a s t two of the l e t t e r d i s o r i e n t a t i o n s w i t h i n the major c a t e g o r i e s of d i s o r i e n t a t i o n . M u l t i p l e comparison of means. As i n the preceding a n a l y s i s of va r i a n c e , the Bo n f e r r o n i technique f o r the m u l t i p l e comparison of means was employed to determine which means among H, V and R d i s o r i e n t a t i o n and among t h e i r r e s p e c t i v e subgroups of. l e t t e r e r r o r s were s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t l y d i f f e r e n t . The r e s u l t s of t h i s a n a l y s i s are reported i n Table 9. 99 TABLE 9 BONFERRONI ANALYSIS OF THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN PAIRS OF MEANS FOR H, V AND R BASE-RATE ERRORS P a i r s of E r r o r Types Means D i f f e r e n c e H o r i z o n t a l - V e r t i c a l H o r i z o n t a l - R o t a t i o n a l V e r t i c a l - R o t a t i o n a l .824 - .425 .824 - .367 .452 - .367 .399 .457 .085 <.05 <.05 >.05 The d i f f e r e n c e between the means f o r H and V e r r o r s was .399 exceeding the B o n f e r r o n i confidence i n t e r v a l of 0.0 + .284. Therefore, h o r i z o n t a l e r r o r s were s i g n i f i c a n t l y higher than v e r t i c a l e r r o r s . The d i f f e r e n c e between means of .085 f o r v e r t i c a l and r o t a t i o n a l e r r o r s d i d not exceed the Bo n f e r r o n i confidence i n t e r v a l . Therefore, v e r t i c a l e r r o r s were not s i g n i f i c a n t l y d i f f e r e n t from r o t a t i o n a l e r r o r s . A n a l y s i s of d i f f e r e n c e s i n means between four p a i r s of l e t t e r d i s o r i e n t a t i o n s  w i t h i n each category of H, V and R d i s o r i e n t a t i o n s W i t h i n each category of d i s o r i e n t a t i o n s there were four p o s s i b l e d i s o r i e n t a t i o n s each i n v o l v i n g two l e t t e r s . For example, w i t h i n the category of h o r i z o n t a l d i s o r i e n t a t i o n s there were fou r l e t t e r p a i r s : d-b, b-d, p-q and q-p, where the f i r s t l e t t e r was d i s o r i e n t e d to become the second. In Table 10 the c e l l means are given i n rank order from hi g h to low frequency f o r each of the four l e t t e r p a i r s w i t h i n each category of H, V and R d i s o r i e n t a t i o n s . The r e s u l t s of the B o n f e r r o n i comparison of a l l combinations of means w i t h i n each d i s o r i e n t a t i o n category i s reported i n Table 11. 100 TABLE 10 CELL MEANS GIVEN IN RANK ORDER FROM HIGH TO LOW FREQUENCY FOR LETTERS INVOLVED IN H, V AND R DISORIENTATIONS OF BASE-RATE DATA Rank Order W i t h i n Each Type High Low D i s o r i e n t a t i o n 1 2 3 4 H o r i z o n t a l 1.021 (d-b) .915 (p-q) .830 (b-d) .532 (q-p) V e r t i c a l .617 (q-d) .532 (b-p) .340 (p-b) .319 (d-q) R o t a t i o n a l .489 (p-d) .404 (d-p) . 362 (b-q) .213 (q-b) NOTE: L e t t e r s i n v o l v e d i n each type of d i s o r i e n t a t i o n are i n d i c a t e d i n brac k e t s ; the f i r s t l e t t e r i n each bracket was d i s o r i e n t e d to become the second. 101 TABLE 11 SUMMARY OF BONFERRONI COMPARISONS OF MEANS FOR LETTER ERRORS WITHIN EACH DISORIENTATION: H, V AND R Bonferroni Confidence Interval (0.0 + .145) a. Horizontal Letters: Tests of Differences between Letter Pair Means Letter Pairs Mean Difference Significant (£ < .05) db-pq .006 No db-bd .191 Yes db-qp .489 Yes pq-bd .085 No pq-qp .383 Yes db-qp .289 Yes b. Vertical Letters: Tests of Differences between Letter Pair Means Letter Pairs Mean Difference Significant (p_ < .05) qd-bp .079 No qd-pb .270 Yes qd-dq .302 Yes bp-pb .191 Yes bp-dq .213 Yes pb-dq .021 No c. Rotational Letters: Tests of Differences between Letter Pair Means Letter Pairs Mean Difference Significant (£ < .05) pd-dp .085 No pd-bq .128 No pd-qb .277 " Yes dp-bq .042 No dp-qb .191 Yes bq-qb .149 No 102 Means of ten out of the eighteen p o s s i b l e combinations of l e t t e r e r r o r s were s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t l y d i f f e r e n t . Means of four out of s i x l e t t e r combinations of h o r i z o n t a l e r r o r s were s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t l y d i f f e r e n t ; the same r a t i o of s i g n i f i c a n c e a p p l i e d to v e r -t i c a l e r r o r s . However, only two put of the s i x l e t t e r combinations f o r r o t a t i o n a l e r r o r s are s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t l y : d i f f e r e n t . Since the r o t a t i o n a l e r r o r s had the lowest e r r o r frequency r a t e (approaching z e r o ) , i t was reasonable to expect that there should have been fewer s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s among the p a i r s of l e t t e r e r r o r s than was found among the h o r i z o n t a l and v e r t i c a l e r r o r s . Further r e l a t i o n s h i p s are summarized i n Table 12. TABLE 12 LETTER PAIRS GIVEN IN RANK ORDER OF THEIR MEANS FROM HIGH TO LOW FREQUENCY SHOWING WHICH LETTER ERRORS WITHIN EACH TYPE OF DISORIENTATION ARE STATISTICALLY SIGNIFICANTLY DIFFERENT Rank of Frequency of L e t t e r E r r o r s D i s o r i e n t a t i o n s High Low H o r i z o n t a l C db* ( p q * ) bd ') qp V e r t i c a l ( qd* bp* ) (" pb dq ") R o t a t i o n a l t p d dp bq* )^ qb NOTE: L e t t e r e r r o r s f o r which no s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e was found at the .05 l e v e l have been c i r c l e d . L e t t e r e r r o r s f o r which the r e c i p r o c a l e r r o r has been shown to be s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t l y d i f f e r e n t are marked w i t h an a s t e r i s k . For example, the r e c i p r o c a l of the h o r i z o n t a l e r r o r "db" i s "bd". The means of these e r r o r s have been shown to be s i g n i f i c a n t l y s t a t i s t i c a l l y 103 d i f f e r e n t . In summary, both p o s s i b l e p a i r s of means of r e c i p r o c a l h o r i -z o n t a l l e t t e r e r r o r s were s i g n i f i c a n t l y d i f f e r e n t . S i m i l a r l y both p o s s i b l e p a i r s of means of r e c i p r o c a l v e r t i c a l l e t t e r e r r o r s were s i g n i -f i c a n t l y d i f f e r e n t . However, only one out of the two p a i r s of r e c i p r o c a l r o t a t i o n a l l e t t e r e r r o r s was s i g n i f i c a n t l y d i f f e r e n t . Again, i t was l i k e l y that r o t a t i o n a l e r r o r s should have had fewer s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s among i t s r e c i p r o c a l e r r o r s because the o v e r a l l r a t e of r o t a t i o n a l e r r o r s had approached zero. C o r r e l a t i o n A n a l y s i s ; H, V, R; I , M, F TABLE 13 CORRELATION MATRIX FOR BASE-RATE DATA: H, V AND R DISORIENTATIONS IN THE I , M AND. F POSITIONS V a r i a b l e I n i t i a l M e dial F i n a l H o r i z o n t a l V e r t i c a l R o t a t i o n a l I n i t i a l 1.000 Medial -0.125 1.000 F i n a l 0.371 0.117 1.000 H o r i z o n t a l 0.668 0.435 0.600 1. 000 V e r t i c a l 0.618 0.409 0.570 0. 626 1.000 R o t a t i o n a l .0.318 0.478 0.373 0. 657 0.368 1.000 NOTE: The nine c o r r e l a t i o n s between H , v, R and ] L , M, F are i n f l a t e d because of overlapping c l a s s i f i c a t i o n s , e.g. some i n i t i a l e r r o r s are a l s o h o r i z o n t a l e r r o r s . I t was apparent i n Table 13 that both h o r i z o n t a l and v e r t i c a l d i s o r i e n t a t i o n s were r e l a t i v e l y h i g h l y a s s o c i a t e d (_r = .57 to .67) w i t h the i n i t i a l and f i n a l p o s i t i o n s of words. The c o r r e l a t i o n s were a l s o 104 c o n s i s t e n t w i t h previous f i n d i n g s that h o r i z o n t a l e r r o r s had a s i m i l a r c o r r e l a t i o n w i t h both v e r t i c a l and r o t a t i o n a l e r r o r s as there was no s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s between V arid R e r r o r s . These c o r r e l a t i o n s and the previous r e s u l t s appeared to i n d i c a t e that as the frequency of h o r i z o n t a l e r r o r s i n c r e a s e d , there was a l s o an increase among both v e r t i c a l and r o t a t i o n a l e r r o r s . In Table 14 c o r r e l a t i o n s between H, V and R d i s o r i e n t a t i o n e r r o r s beginning w i t h the same l e t t e r have been grouped together f o r a n a l y s i s . The low c o r r e l a t i o n s between H, V and R d i s o r i e n t a t i o n s beginning w i t h the same l e t t e r i n d i c a t e d that there was a low r e l a t i o n s h i p between the d i s o r i e n t a t i o n of a l e t t e r by two d i f f e r e n t means. "  S i m i l a r l y , i n Table 15 c o r r e l a t i o n s between H, V and R d i s -o r i e n t a t i o n s ending w i t h the same l e t t e r have been grouped together f o r a n a l y s i s . In view of these low c o r r e l a t i o n s , i t appeared that there was not a pro p e n s i t y to produce the same l e t t e r through d i f f e r e n t types of d i s o r i e n t a t i o n s . In summary, i t was apparent that there was. a r e l a t i v e l y low r e l a t i o n s h i p w i t h i n and between a l l c a t e g o r i e s of l e t t e r d i s o r i e n t a t i o n s r e c i p r o c a l , beginning or ending w i t h the same l e t t e r . TABLE 14 ' GROUPING FROM H, V AND R CORRELATIONS BETWEEN DISORIENTATIONS BEGINNING WITH THE SAME LETTER Beginning Letter Beginning Letter Beginning Letter Beginning Letter H, V and R Disorientations and their Correlations Hqp Vqd Hqp Rqb Vqd Rqb .13 .14 .05 Hpq Vpb Hpq Rpd Vpb Rpd .12 .12 .18 Hdb Vdq Hdb Rdp Vdq Rdp .24 .21 .16' Hbd Vbp Hbd Rbq Vbp Rbq •11 .38 -.15 TABLE 15 GROUPING FROM H, V AND R CORRELATIONS BETWEEN DISORIENTATIONS PRODUCING THE SAME LETTER Product Letter Product Letter Product Letter Product Letter H, V and R Disorientations and their Correlations Hpq Vdq Hpq- Rbq Vdq Rbq .33 .24 .23 Hpq Vbq Hqp Rdp Vbp Rdp .12. .20 .04 Hbd Vqd. Hbd Rpd Vqd Rpd .26 .53 .45 Rdb Vpb Hdb Rqb Vpb Rqb .13 .15 • 31 106 Step-wise Regression of MA, CA and.Sex on Base-Rate T o t a l s The UBC-BMD:02R (Halm, 1971) step-wise r e g r e s s i o n program computed a sequence of m u l t i p l e l i n e a r r e g r e s s i o n equations i n a st e p -wise manner. At.each step one v a r i a b l e was added to the r e g r e s s i o n equation. The v a r i a b l e added was the one which made the greatest r e d u c t i o n i n .the e r r o r sums of squares. E q u i v a l e n t l y , i t was the v a r i a b l e which had the highest p a r t i a l c o r r e l a t i o n w i t h the dependent v a r i a b l e p a r t i a l e d on the v a r i a b l e s which have already been added; and t h e r e f o r e , i t was the v a r i a b l e which, i f i t were added, would have the highest re-v a l u e . Non-forced v a r i a b l e s were a u t o m a t i c a l l y removed when t h e i r F-values become too low (Halm, 1972). The means, and standard d e v i a t i o n s f o r Sex, CA, MA and the base-r a t e t o t a l s are reported i n Table 16. The c o r r e l a t i o n s between these v a r i a b l e s are reported i n Table 17. TABLE 16 MEANS AND STANDARD DEVIATIONS OF SEX, CA, MA AND BASE-RATE TOTALS V a r i a b l e Mean Standard D e v i a t i o n Sex . 617 0.491 CA 12.06 1.710 MA 8.07 1.519 • ' ' ' T o t a l 6.62 4.057 NOTE: Sex i s coded: 1 = Male; 0 = Female 107 TABLE 17 CORRELATION MATRIX OF SEX, CA, MA AND BASE-RATE TOTALS V a r i a b l e Sex CA MA Base-Rate T o t a l Sex 1.000 CA 0.056 1.000 MA 0.228 0.593 1.000 Base-Rate T o t a l -0.130 -0.285 -0.125 1.000 None of the above c o r r e l a t i o n s i n Table 17 between the t o t a l score and organismic v a r i a b l e s Sex, CA and MA was s i g n i f i c a n t l y d i f f e r e n t from zero. The r e s u l t s of the r e g r e s s i o n a n a l y s i s p r e d i c t i n g base-rate t o t a l s from Sex, CA and MA are reported i n Table 18. TABLE 18 SUMMARY OF STEP-WISE REGRESSION ANALYSES OF SEX, CA AND MA ON BASE-RATE TOTALS Step V a r i a b l e Entered R f. £ 1 CA .285 3.99 >.05 2 Sex .307 2.29 >.10 3 MA .319 1.62 >.10 Hypothesis number seven was r e j e c t e d w i t h the f i n d i n g that sex was not a s i g n i f i c a n t p r e d i c t o r of base-rate scores. The m a j o r i t y of data reviewed that reported on sexual d i f f e r e n c e s i n performance s t a t e d that school age females had a s i g n i f i c a n t l y lower e r r o r r a t e than males. 108 Hypothesis number e i g h t , that no s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e was expected to be found between the v a r i o u s l e v e l s of CA and MA, was accepted i n view of the f a c t that n e i t h e r of these v a r i a b l e s was a s i g n i f i c a n t p r e d i c t o r of base-rate t o t a l s . Both of these hypotheses are discussed i n the f o l l o w i n g chapter. 1 Hoyt R e l i a b i l i t y of Base-Rate Data Hoyt (1941) described a method whereby t e s t r e l i a b i l i t y could be estimated by an a n a l y s i s of v a r i a n c e where scores f o r each i n d i v i d u a l were scored 0 or 1, f o r r i g h t or wrong on each t e s t item. The t e s t r e l i a b i l i t y was c a l c u l a t e d by the f o l l o w i n g formula: T = MS i n d i v i d u a l s - E r r o r — MS i n d i v i d u a l s The r e s u l t s of t h i s formula are i d e n t i c a l w i t h those produced by the KR2Q f o r m u l a t i o n f o r a s s e s s i n g t e s t homogeneity and estimates the lower bounds of r e l i a b i l i t y . The Hoyt estimate of r e l i a b i l i t y of the base-r a t e t e s t w a s T t t = . 7 5 . 2 H o t e l l i n g T_ of Experimental and C o n t r o l Base-Rate Scores 2 The H o t e l l i n g T_ t e s t of s i g n i f i c a n c e was made of the i n i t i a l , m e d i a l , f i n a l , h o r i z o n t a l , v e r t i c a l and r o t a t i o n a l e r r o r s f o r the c o n t r o l and experimental groups. This was a t e s t of the b a s i c experimental assumption that there were no i n i t i a l d i f f e r e n c e s between the randomly determined experimental and c o n t r o l groups i n terms of the modified randomized blocks design as p r e v i o u s l y d e s c r i b e d . 109 TABLE 19 MEANS AND STANDARD DEVIATIONS FOR EXPERIMENTAL AND CONTROL BASE-RATE ERRORS V a r i a b l e C o n t r o l -Means Experimental C o n t r o l —SD Experimental D i s o r i e n t a t i o n H o r i z o n t a l 3.197 4.143 2.109 1.740 V e r t i c a l 2.333 2.524 0.985 1.364 R o t a t i o n a l 1.833 2.048 1.337 1.284 P o s i t i o n I n i t i a l 3.917 4.333 3.088 2.288 Medi a l 2.083 1.857 2.712 2.287 F i n a l 2.083 2.381 1.564 1.532 2 The H o t e l l i n g T value f o r the data i n Table 19was 1.756 and the ass o c i a t e d F-value of 0.2455 was not s i g n i f i c a n t when p_ <^  .05. Therefore, there was no s i g n i f i c a n t m u l t i v a r i a t e d i f f e r e n c e between the experimental and c o n t r o l groups on the base-rate t e s t s . The b a s i c experimental assumption that therewas no d i f f e r e n c e between the experimental and c o n t r o l groups on base-rate scores has been s a t i s f i e d . A n a l y s i s of Treatment E f f e c t s The second pa r t of the s t a t i s t i c a l a n a l y s i s concerned the 2 study of treatment e f f e c t s . H o t e l l i n g T_ analyses were used to t e s t the d i f f e r e n c e f o r I , M, F, H, V and R between the f o l l o w i n g sets of observations: a. experimental base-rate vs. experimental treatment b. c o n t r o l base-rate ys.; c o n t r o l treatment c. experimental treatment vs experimental post-treatment 110 d. experimental base-rate vs experimental post-treatment. Regression analyses used base-rate c o v a r i a t e s , organismic v a r i a b l e s (Sex, CA and MA), treatment, and i n t e r a c t i o n s i n combination and i n d i v i d u a l l y to p r e d i c t the f o l l o w i n g o b s e r v a t i o n s: a. T o t a l e r r o r scores on c o n t r o l and experimental treatment b. I n d i v i d u a l scores f o r I , M, F, H, V and R on c o n t r o l and experimental treatment c. T o t a l e r r o r scores and i n d i v i d u a l scores f o r I , M, F, H, V and R an c o n t r o l and experimental treatment. 2 For each of the f o l l o w i n g H o t e l l i n g T analyses the UBC TRIP computer program ( B j e r r i n g , 1972) was used. 2 H o t e l l i n g _T of Experimental Base-Rate and Treatment Data 2 In Table 20 the r e s u l t s are reported of the H o t e l l i n g T t e s t of the s i g n i f i c a n c e of the d i f f e r e n c e between experimental base-rate and treatment data and a h y p o t h e t i c a l d i f f e r e n c e of zero. This a n a l y s i s assessed the change i n performance over time of the experimental group w i t h t r a n s f e r from standard to m o d i f i e d symbols. Thus, a t e s t was made of hypothesis one that the e r r o r r a t e during treatment would be l e s s than during the base-rate p e r i o d . I l l TABLE 20 SUMMARY HOTELLING T 2 EXPERIMENTAL BASE-RATE AND TREATMENT DATA Means _ D i f f e r e n c e Hypoth. L e f t Right S i g n i f . V a r i a b l e Treat. Base X Treat.-X Base D i f f . L i m i t L i m i t D i f f . I n i t i a l 2. 714 4. 333 -1. 619 0.0 -3.935 0. 697 No Medial 1. 285 1. 857 -0. 571 0.0 -1.938 0. 795 No F i n a l • 762 2. 381 -1. 619 0.0 -3.328 0. 090 No H o r i z o n t a l 1. 476 4. 143 -2. 667 0.0 -4.371 -0. 962 Yes V e r t i c a l 1. 619 2. 524 -0. 905 0.0 -2.430 0. 621 No R o t a t i o n a l 1. 667 2. 048 -0. 381 0.0 -1.994 1. 232 No The H o t e l l i n g T value of 84.74 and a s s o c i a t e d F-value of 10.59 was s i g n i f i c a n t when p_ ^ .0001. There was a s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r -ence between the c e n t r o i d values of the experimental base-rate and treatment v a l u e s . However, examination of the confidence i n t e r v a l s revealed that only the h o r i z o n t a l e r r o r s were s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t l y d i f f e r e n t from experimental base-rate to treatment t e s t s . Comparison of C o n t r o l Base-Rate and Treatment Data 2 The f o l l o w i n g H o t e l l i n g T t e s t e d the s i g n i f i c a n c e of the d i f f e r e n c e between c o n t r o l base-rate and treatment d a t a ' f o r i n i t i a l , m e d i a l , f i n a l , h o r i z o n t a l , v e r t i c a l and r o t a t i o n a l d i s o r i e n t a t i o n s . This a n a l y s i s assessed the change i n performance over time of the c o n t r o l group using standard symbols only. Thus, a t e s t was provided of hypothesis two that there would be no change i n performance over time. The r e s u l t s of the a n a l y s i s are reported i n Table 21. 112 TABLE 21 SUMMARY HOTELLING T 2 CONTROL BASE-RATE AND TREATMENT DATA — Means — S D - L e f t Right S i g n i f . V a r i a b l e Base-Rate Treatment Base-Rate Treatment L i m i t L i m i t D i f f . I n i t i a l 4.000 3. 917 2. 558 3. 088 -5. 214 5. 381 No Medial 1.167 2. 083 1. 193 2. 712 -4. 831 2. 998 No F i n a l 0.667 0. 888 2. 083 1. 564 -3. 793 0. 959 No H o r i z o n t a l 1.667 3. 917 1. 303 2. 109 -5. 524 1. 024 No V e r t i c a l 2.167 2. 333 1. 337 0. 985 -2. 360 2. 027 No R o t a t i o n a l 2.000 1. 500 1. 477 1. 243 -2. 050 3. 050 No The H o t e l l i n g T_ valu e of 26.70 and the a s s o c i a t e d F-value of 3.439 was s i g n i f i c a n t when p_ .02. There was a s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e between the c e n t r o i d values of the c o n t r o l base-rate and treatment data. However, examination of the confidence i n t e r v a l s i n d i -cated that f o r no s i n g l e v a r i a b l e s was there a s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e between the c o n t r o l base-rate and treatment t e s t s . These f i n d i n g s were c o n s i s t e n t w i t h Winer's (1962) statement that r e j e c t i o n of the m u l t i -v a r i a t e hypothesis d i d not n e c e s s a r i l y mean that one or more of the u n i v a r i a t e hypotheses would be r e j e c t e d because considered s i n g l y the u n i v a r i a t e t e s t s disregarded covariance among the v a r i a b l e s . Comparison of Experimental Treatment and Post-Treatment Data 2 A H o t e l l i n g T_ a n a l y s i s was employed to assess the short term t r a n s f e r of performance of the experimental group f o l l o w i n g the change from modi f i e d to standard symbols. A t e s t was thereby provided of 113 hypothesis f i v e that the e r r o r r a t e f o l l o w i n g treatment was equal to that during treatment. The t e s t was made against a h y p o t h e t i c a l d i f f e r e n c e of zero. The r e s u l t s are reported i n Table 22. TABLE 22 SUMMARY HOTELLING T 2 EXPERIMENTAL TREATMENT AND POST-TREATMENT TESTS -Means- D i f f e r e n c e Hypoth. L e f t Right S i g n i f . V a r i a b l e Post- Treat. Treat. Post- Treat. D i f f . L i m i t L i m i t D i f f . I n i t i a l 1. 857 2. 714 -0. 857 0.0 -2.766 1. 052 No Media l • 809 1. 285 -0. 476 0.0 -2.189 1. 237 No F i n a l • 714 762 -0. 476 0.0 -1.288 1. 193 No H o r i z o n t a l • 857 1. 476 -0. 619 0.0 -2.232 0. 994 No V e r t i c a l 1. 238 1. 619 -0. 381 0.0 -1.820 1. 058 No R o t a t i o n a l 1. 334 1. 667 -0. 333 0.0 -1.690 1. 024 No The H o t e l l i n g T^ value of 7.311 and a s s o c i a t e d F-value of 0.9139 was not s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t (p <C .05). In view of these r e s u l t s , there was no s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e on any of the v a r i a b l e s between the experimental treatment and post-treatment t e s t s . Comparison of Experimental Base-Rate and Post-Treatment Data 2 The H o t e l l i n g T_ a n a l y s i s was employed to assess the d i f f e r e n c e s between experimental base-rate and post-treatment data. The r e s u l t s of t h i s a n a l y s i s are reported i n Table 23. The d i f f e r e n c e between these observations was a measure of the change i n performance over time of the 114 experimental group from the i n i t i a l to the f i n a l o b s e r v a t i o n w i t h standard symbols f o l l o w i n g the i n t e r v e n i n g use of modified symbols. Hypothesis s i x p o s t u l a t e d that the e r r o r r a t e f o l l o w i n g use of the modified symbols would be l e s s than that during base-rate performance. The r e s u l t s of the a n a l y s i s are reported i n Table 23. TABLE 23 SUMMARY HOTELLING T 2 EXPERIMENTAL BASE-RATE AND POST-TREATMENT DATA — — M e a n s D i f f e r e n c e Hypoth. L e f t Right S i g n i f . V a r i a b l e Post-Treat. Base-Rate Post.-Base D i f f . L i m i t L i m i t D i f f . I n i t i a l 1.857 4.333 -2.476 0.0 -5. 385 0.432 No Medial .809 1.857 -1.048 0.0 -2. 693 0.598 No F i n a l .714 2.381 -1.667 0.0 -3. 432 0.099 No H o r i z o n t a l .857 4.143 -3.286 0.0 -4. 952 -1.619 Yes V e r t i c a l 1.238 2.524 -1.286 0.0 -2. 820 0.248 No R o t a t i o n a l 1.334 2.048 -0.714 0.0 -2. 316 0.887 No The H o t e l l i n g T_ valu e of 97.61 and the as s o c i a t e d F-value of 12.70 was s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t (p_ < .0001). The u n i v a r i a t e a n a l y s i s i n d i c a t e d that the only s i n g l e v a r i a b l e of s t a t i s t i c a l s i g n i f i c a n c e from the experimental base-rate to post-treatment t e s t was that of h o r i z o n t a l d i s o r i e n t a t i o n . Thus, i n view of the previous analyses, i t was apparent that the only v a r i a b l e w i t h a s i g n i f i c a n t l y reduced e r r o r r a t e a s s o c i a t e d w i t h the treatment was that of h o r i z o n t a l d i s o r i e n t a t i o n s . However, s e v e r a l f a c t o r s may be considered. F i r s t , the e r r o r r a t e of a l l v a r i a b l e s 115 was reduced during and f o l l o w i n g treatment. Secondly, the magnitude of e r r o r r e d u c t i o n was roughly i n p r o p o r t i o n to the s i z e of the e r r o r base-r a t e ; i n g e n e r a l , v a r i a b l e s w i t h the l a r g e s t e r r o r base-rate, such as h o r i z o n t a l and i n i t i a l e r r o r s , had the g r e a t e s t r e d u c t i o n i n e r r o r r a t e during treatment and post-treatment. Regression to the mean e f f e c t s are u s u a l l y most apparent w i t h v a r i a b l e s of extreme v a l u e , t h e r e f o r e , i t was l i k e l y t hat a l a r g e p o r t i o n of the decrease i n e r r o r r a t e of h o r i z o n t a l e r r o r s was merely a r e f l e c t i o n of r e g r e s s i o n to the mean. An A n a l y s i s of Performance Changes during Treatment A study was made of the performance of the experimental s u b j e c t s during the use of the modified symbols to determine whether there had been a s i g n i f i c a n t improvement i n performance from the f i r s t to the second h a l f of the t e s t . Such an improvement would l i k e l y have r e f l e c t e d l e a r n i n g as a f u n c t i o n of the use of the m o d i f i e d symbols. I f such an improvement was found, subsequent a n a l y s i s of the data would be made se p a r a t e l y of each h a l f of the t e s t . As described e a r l i e r , both halves of the t e s t c o n s i s t e d of an equal number of random p o s s i b i l i t i e s f o r h o r i z o n t a l , v e r t i c a l , r o t a t i o n a l , i n i t i a l , medial and f i n a l e r r o r s . The study revealed that the number of e r r o r s on the f i r s t h a l f of the t e s t was forty-one w h i l e the t o t a l on the second h a l f was s i x t y . Rather than having improved the s u b j e c t s ' performance a c t u a l l y d e t e r i o r a t e d from the f i r s t to the second h a l f of the t e s t . Reviewing the data, i t was apparent that at the halfway p o i n t i n the t e s t one " a t y p i c a l " s u b j e c t began guess-ing and responded i n c o r r e c t l y to seven of; the remaining twelve items a f t e r having had an almost p e r f e c t score on the f i r s t h a l f of the t e s t . A l s o , many of the s u b j e c t s obtained the wrong answer on a s i n g l e item, 116 number 15, i n the second h a l f of the t e s t (see Appendix A ) , accounting f o r t h i r t e e n e r r o r s . Even a f t e r a d j u s t i n g f o r the a t y p i c a l item and su b j e c t , the t o t a l number of e r r o r s over a l l s ubjects on the second h a l f of the t e s t would have been f o r t y . Even i f such an adjustment had been made no improvement would have been shown from the f i r s t to the second h a l f of the t e s t , and any f u r t h e r s t a t i s t i c a l a n a l y s i s would have to be made of the t e s t as a whole r a t h e r than of the separate h a l v e s . Further a n a l y s i s of the item f o r which most subjects obtained the wrong answer revealed a p e c u l i a r consistency f o r which there was no ready e x p l a n a t i o n . The item was as f o l l o w s , and eleven of the fourteen subjects had chosen a l t e r n a t i v e three to make a v e r t i c a l d i s o r i e n t a t i o n of "p" i n the medial p o r t i o n of the word. Response A l t e r n a t i v e s — Stimulus 1 2 3 4 ! poduq podud boduq poquq poduq F i g . 18. An A t y p i c a l Test Item Because of the s u r p r i s i n g r e s u l t s obtained above, a n a l y s i s was made of the experimental s u b j e c t s ' performance on the f i r s t h a l f and second h a l f of the base-rate t e s t which a l s o had an equal number of o p p o r t u n i t i e s f o r each type of e r r o r on each h a l f of the t e s t . On the f i r s t h a l f of the t e s t 159 e r r o r s were made, and on the second h a l f 165 e r r o r s were made. The p r e d i c t e d improvement from f i r s t to second h a l f of the t e s t was not found. There was another p o s s i b l e e x p l a n a t i o n f o r d e t e r i o r a t i o n of performance from the f i r s t to the second h a l f of the t e s t . As the reader 117 w i l l r e c a l l , reinforcement had been used l i b e r a l l y during the screening and t r a i n i n g t e s t s . P o s s i b l y withdrawal of reinforcement at the beginning of the base-rate and treatment t e s t s caused e x t i n c t i o n of the a t t e n t i o n response. P o s s i b l y , a l s o , f a t i g u e or decreasing n o v e l t y may have caused -d e t e r i o r a t i o n of performance. Regression A n a l y s i s : P r e d i c t i n g T o t a l Scores on C o n t r o l and Experimental  Treatment Tests The f o l l o w i n g step-wise r e g r e s s i o n a n a l y s i s was based on the program: MULTIVARIANCE - VERSION 4 ( F i n n , 1968) adapted to the UBC computer under the t i t l e MULTIVAR (Lee, S., 1971). The o r d e r i n g of e f f e c t s i n t h i s r e g r e s s i o n a n a l y s i s was: Y = Covariates + Organismic V a r i a b l e s + Treatment + I n t e r a c t i o n s . The c o v a r i a t e s were the base-rate scores f o r i n i t i a l , m e d i a l , f i n a l , h o r i z o n t a l , v e r t i c a l and r o t a t i o n a l d i s o r i e n t a t i o n s ; the organismic v a r i a b l e s were: sex, CA and MA;and the i n t e r a c t i o n s s t u d i e d were sex x treatment, CA-T and MA*T. Each v a r i a b l e was adjusted only f o r those preceding i t ; there was l i t t l e t h e o r e t i c a l i n t e r e s t i n e s t a b l i s h i n g what amount of the t o t a l v a r i a n c e was a f u n c t i o n of the base-rate scores, and s i n c e the amount of v a r i a n c e was l i k e l y to be r e l a t i v e l y l a r g e , i t was d e s i r a b l e to adjust a l l subsequent v a r i a b l e s t e s t e d f o r base-rate v a r i a n c e . Obviously the g r e a t e s t t h e o r e t i c a l i n t e r e s t was of the e f f e c t of the treatment; thus treatment followed and was adjusted f o r the organismic and base-rate c o v a r i a t e s to achieve the purest measure of the treatment e f f e c t . The organismic v a r i a b l e s were ordered as i n d i c a t e d ; t h e i r r e l a t i v e order was of l i t t l e consequence s i n c e there was not a s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r -ence between t h e i r r e s p e c t i v e c o r r e l a t i o n s w i t h the base-rate t o t a l . A l s o , as i n d i c a t e d i n the previous r e g r e s s i o n a n a l y s i s , Sex, 118 CA and MA were not s i g n i f i c a n t p r e d i c t o r s of base-rate scores. In any case, the organismic v a r i a b l e s were l i s t e d S, CA, MA i n the i n t u i t i v e order of l e a s t t h e o r e t i c a l importance. That i s , i n a remedial program of academic s k i l l s , the sex of the student was of l i t t l e consequence i n shaping the nature of the remediation. Mental age was l i k e l y to be a great e r determinant o f success on a remedial program than c h r o n o l o g i c a l age was l i k e l y to be, p r o v i d i n g the i n d i v i d u a l had achieved s u f f i c i e n t p h y s i o l o g i c a l maturation to perform the r e q u i r e d s k i l l s . In the analyses t h a t f o l l o w of the number of p o s s i b l e i n t e r -a c t i o n s i n v o l v i n g two, three or four f a c t o r s , a n a l y s i s was made of only the S*T, CA*T and MA*T i n t e r a c t i o n s . The s e l e c t i o n f o r study of these i n t e r a c t i o n s was based on the ob s e r v a t i o n that Sex, CA and MA were not s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t p r e d i c t o r s of base-rate scores and the f a c t that i n t e r a c t i o n s w i t h combinations of two or three of Sex, CA or MA were not meaningful to the present study. C h r o n o l o g i c a l age was r e t a i n e d i n the study because of i t s r e f l e c t i o n of p h y s i o l o g i c a l maturation w h i l e mental age was an index of c o g n i t i v e development. In Table 24 the c e l l means and standard d e v i a t i o n s f o r e x p e r i -mental and c o n t r o l treatment t o t a l s are repo r t e d . 119 TABLE 24 CELL MEANS AND STANDARD DEVIATIONS FOR EXPERIMENTAL AND CONTROL TREATMENT TOTALS V a r i a b l e Means SD T o t a l Score E r r o r s 5.182 3.468 Base-Rate E r r o r s 8.485 3.364 Sex 0.151 1.004 CA 11.724 1.678 MA 7.912 1.527 Treatment 0.272 0.977 NOTE: Treatment i s Coded: 1 = Experimental; 0 = C o n t r o l The raw and standardized r e g r e s s i o n c o e f f i c i e n t s f o r the experimental and c o n t r o l treatment t o t a l scores and f o r a l l independent v a r i a b l e s are contained i n Appendix B, Table 1. The r e g r e s s i o n a n a l y s i s p r e d i c t i n g c o n t r o l and experimental treatment t o t a l s w i t h a f u l l model of p r e d i c t o r v a r i a b l e s produced an R of 0.719 and an F of 3.217 which was s i g n i f i c a n t w i t h £ < .0126. The r e g r e s s i o n a n a l y s i s reported i n Table 25 i n d i c a t e d that the base-rate scores were the only s i g n i f i c a n t p r e d i c t o r of treatment scores. Thus, hypothesis 7b, that on the treatment t e s t s females would have a s i g n i f i -c a n t l y lower e r r o r r a t e on t o t a l scores than males, was not v a l i d a t e d . 120 TABLE 25 SUMMARY OF STEP-WISE REGRESSION OF GROUPS OF INDEPENDENT VARIABLES PREDICTING TREATMENT TOTAL SCORES V a r i a b l e s Added F df P S i g n i f i c a n t Base-Rate 23.131 1/31 .0001 Yes Sex, CA, MA 0.433 3/28 .7313 No Treatment 1.550 1/27 .2238 No I n t e r a c t i o n s 0.581 3/24 .6334 No The c o r r e l a t i o n m a t r i x and the raw and standardized r e g r e s s i o n c o e f f i c i e n t s f o r treatment I , M, F, H, V^ R and a l l independent v a r i a b l e s i s i n Appendix B. Regression A n a l y s i s : P r e d i c t i n g I n d i v i d u a l Dependent V a r i a b l e s I , M, F,  H, V and R on C o n t r o l and Experimental Treatment Tests Table 26 re p o r t s the c e l l means and standard d e v i a t i o n s f o r c o n t r o l and experimental treatment c o n d i t i o n s combined. The summary of r e g r e s s i o n a n a l y s i s p r e d i c t i n g c r i t e r i o n t e s t t o t a l s f o r I , M, F, H, V and R w i t h the f u l l set of p r e d i c t o r v a r i a b l e s i s reported i n Table 27. 121 TABLE 26 CELL MEANS AND STANDARD DEVIATIONS FOR CONTROL AND EXPERIMENTAL TREATMENT V a r i a b l e s Means SD Treatment I 3.182 2.270 M 1.242 1.838 F 0.727 1.126 H 1.545 1.325 V 1.818 1.337 R 1.606 1.321 Base-Rate I 9.182 2.567 M 1.939 2.410 F 2.273 1.526 H 4.061 1.853 v 2.454 1.22.7 R 1.970 1.286 122 TABLE 27 SUMMARY OF REGRESSION ANALYSIS PREDICTING CRITERION TEST AND EXPERIMENTAL TREATMENT TOTALS FOR I , M, F, H, V, R WITH FULL SET OF PREDICTOR VARIABLES V a r i a b l e R 2 R F I n i t i a l 0.578 0.761 2.006 <0.082 Medial 0.618 0.786 2.365 <0.043 F i n a l 0.459 0.677 1.240 <0.326 H o r i z o n t a l 0.607 0.779 2.256 <0.052 V e r t i c a l 0.652 0.807 2.738 <0.021 R o t a t i o n a l 0.512 0.716 1.536 <0.192 Examination of Table 27 revealed that a s i g n i f i c a n t p r e d i c t i o n could be made of M and V using the f u l l s e t of p r e d i c t o r v a r i a b l e s . The st e p -down r e g r e s s i o n a n a l y s i s reported i n Tables 28 - 31 assessed the pre-d i c t i v e s i g n i f i c a n c e of each of the independent v a r i a b l e s . 123 TABLE 28 SUMMARY OF STEP-WISE REGRESSION TO ANALYZE THE CONTRIBUTION OF BASE-RATE COVARIATES PREDICTING CRITERION TOTALS FOR I, M, F, H, V AND R F = 1.954; df 6/26; £ < 0.0051 Variable Univariate F_ £ I n i t i a l 2.259 <.069 Medial 5.422 <.001 Final 2.636 <.039 Horizontal 4.704 <.002 Vertical 4.295 <.004 Rotational 2.717 <.035 Table 28 indicates that the base-rate scores are significant predictors of a l l but i n i t i a l position disorientation errors. The F_-values reported at the head of tab l e s 28-31 and 37-40 are derived from the p r e d i c t i o n of the t o t a l of the dependent v a r i a b l e s (I, M, F, H, V and R) by the independent v a r i a b l e s as i n d i c a t e d i n the heading of each of the re s p e c t i v e t a b l e s . 124 TABLE 29 SUMMARY OF STEP-WISE REGRESSION TO ANALYZE THE CONTRIBUTION OF SEX, CA AND MA PREDICTING CRITERION TOTALS FOR I , M, F, H, V AND R F = 0.960; df 3/23; £ <.517 V a r i a b l e U n i v a r i a t e F I n i t i a l 0.827 < .492 Medial 0.602 <.620 F i n a l 0.669 <.580 H o r i z o n t a l 0.376 <.771 V e r t i c a l 2.363 <.098 R o t a t i o n a l 0.333 <.801 NOTE: The organismic v a r i a b l e s have been p a r t i a l e d f o r base-rate v a r i a n c e . The F-values reported i n Table 29 i n d i c a t e d t h a t the organismic v a r i a b l e s , as a group, w i t h the e f f e c t of base-rate scores p a r t i a l e d out, were not s i g n i f i c a n t p r e d i c t o r s of the treatment v a r i a b l e s I , M, F, H, V and R. The r e s u l t s i n Table 29 i n d i c a t e d that f o r I , M, F, H, V and R: Hypothesis 7b, that on the treatment t e s t s females would have a s i g n i f i -c a n t l y lower e r r o r r a t e than males, was not v a l i d a t e d ; hypothesis e i g h t , that no s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e was expected to be found between the va r i o u s l e v e l s of mental or c h r o n o l o g i c a l age, was v a l i d a t e d . The F-values reported i n Table 30 i n d i c a t e d that treatment p a r t i a l e d f o r base-rate and organismic v a r i a n c e was not a s i g n i f i c a n t p r e d i c t o r of c r i t e r i o n t o t a l s f o r I , M, F, H, V or R. 125 TABLE 30 SUMMARY OF STEP-WISE REGRESSION TO ANALYZE THE CONTRIBUTION OF TREATMENT PREDICTING CRITERION TOTALS FOR I , M, F, H, V AND R F = 0.659; df 1/22; £ < 0.683 V a r i a b l e U n i v a r i a t e F I n i t i a l 3.540 <.073 Med i a l 0.056 <.814 F i n a l 0.783 <.386 H o r i z o n t a l 0.459 <.505 V e r t i c a l 1.172 <.291 R o t a t i o n a l 1.695 < .206 NOTE: Treatment has been p a r t i a l e d f o r base-rate and organismic v a r i a n c e . 126 TABLE 31 SUMMARY OF STEP-WISE REGRESSION TO ANALYZE THE CONTRIBUTION OF INTERACTION TERMS PREDICTING CRITERION TOTALS FOR I , M, F, H, V AND R F = 0.820; df 3/19; £ < 0.667 V a r i a b l e U n i v a r i a t e F £ I n i t i a l 1.346 <.289 Medi a l 0.478 <.701 F i n a l 0.130 <.941 H o r i z o n t a l 0.879 <.470 V e r t i c a l 0.299 <.826 R o t a t i o n a l 0.772 <.524 NOTE: I n t e r a c t i o n has been p a r t i a l e d f o r base-rate, organismic and treatment v a r i a n c e . In Table 31 i t may be seen that the i n t e r a c t i o n terms, p a r t i a l e d f o r base-rate, organismic, and treatment v a r i a n c e were not s i g n i f i c a n t p r e d i c t o r s of c r i t e r i o n t o t a l s f o r I , M, F, H, V or R. Regression A n a l y s i s : P r e d i c t i n g T o t a l Scores f o r C o n t r o l Treatment and  Experimental Post-Treatment Tests Table 32 r e p o r t s the c e l l means and standard d e v i a t i o n s f o r experimental post-treatment and c o n t r o l treatment t o t a l scores. The c o r r e l a t i o n m a t r i x f o r c o n t r o l treatment and experimental post-treatment i s In Appendix B. 127 TABLE 32 CELL MEANS AND STANDARD DEVIATIONS FOR EXPERIMENTAL POST-TREATMENT.AND CONTROL TREATMENT TOTAL SCORES V a r i a b l e Means SD T o t a l Score 4.303 3.557 Base-Rate 8.485 3.364 Sex 0.151 1.004 CA 11.724 1.678 MA 7.912 1.527 Treatment 0.273 0.977 S-T -0.091 1.011 CA'T 3.561 11.467 MA'T 2.427 7.798 The raw experimental post-and standardized r e g r e s s i o n c o e f f i c i e n t s f o r the -treatment and the c o n t r o l treatment scores are i n Appendix B, Table 4. TABLE 33 SUMMARY OF REGRESSION ANALYSIS PREDICTING EXPERIMENTAL POST-TREATMENT AND CONTROL TREATMENT TOTALS WITH FULL SET OF PREDICTOR VARIABLES V a r i a b l e R 2 R F df £ T o t a l 0.457 0.676 2.527 8/24 0.038 128 The r e s u l t s reported i n Table 33 i n d i c a t e d that the f u l l set of p r e d i c t o r v a r i a b l e s s i g n i f i c a n t l y p r e d i c t e d the c r i t e r i o n measure. The step-down a n a l y s i s reported i n Table 34 i n d i c a t e d the c o n t r i b u t i o n to the p r e d i c t i o n of i n d i v i d u a l independent v a r i a b l e s and i n t e r a c t i o n s . TABLE 34 SUMMARY OF STEP-WISE REGRESSION OF GROUPS OF INDEPENDENT VARIABLES IN PREDICTING EXPERIMENTAL POST-TREATMENT AND CONTROL TREATMENT TOTALS V a r i a b l e s Added* F df £ S i g n i f i c a n t Base-rate 9.190 1/31 .005 Yes Sex, CA, MA 0.475 3/28 .702 No Treatment 5.823 1/27 .023 Yes I n t e r a c t i o n s 0.899 3/24 .456 No *Note that as v a r i a b l e s are s u c c e s s i v e l y added to the r e g r e s s i o n equation, the e f f e c t s of preceding v a r i a b l e s are p a r t i a l e d out. As would be expected, the base-rate scores s i g n i f i c a n t l y p r e d i c t e d experimental post-treatment and c o n t r o l treatment t o t a l s . Unexpected was the f a c t that treatment w i t h the e f f e c t s of the base-rate and organ-i s m i c v a r i a b l e s p a r t i a l e d out was a s i g n i f i c a n t p r e d i c t o r of t o t a l scores (p_ <.023). Thus, the mean t o t a l e r r o r score f o r experimental post-treatment (3.286) was s i g n i f i c a n t l y lower than the mean t o t a l e r r o r score f o r the c o n t r o l treatment (5.833). The a n a l y s i s that f o l l o w s of the p r e d i c t i o n of I , M, F, H, V and R e r r o r s f o r c o n t r o l treatment and experimental post-treatment reported i n Tables 36 - 40 i n d i c a t e d which of the dependent v a r i a b l e s treatment was a s i g n i f i c a n t p r e d i c t o r . 129 Regression A n a l y s i s ; P r e d i c t i n g C o n t r o l Treatment and Experimental P o s t - Treatment Scores f o r I , M, F, H, V and R C e l l means and standard d e v i a t i o n s f o r c o n t r o l treatment and experimental post-treatment are reported i n Table 35. The c o r r e l a t i o n m a t r i x f o r these c o n d i t i o n s i s i n Appendix B. TABLE 35 CELL MEANS AND STANDARD DEVIATIONS: CONTROL TREATMENT AND EXPERIMENTAL POST-TREATMENT V a r i a b l e Means SD I 2.636 2.247 M 0.939 1.600 F 0.697 0.951 H 1.151 1.278 V 1.576 1.480 R 1.576 1.393 130 TABLE 36 SUMMARY OF REGRESSION ANALYSIS PREDICTING CONTROL TREATMENT AND EXPERIMENTAL POST-TREATMENT TOTALS FOR I , M, F, H, V, R WITH FULL SET OF PREDICTOR VARIABLES V a r i a b l e R 2 R F £ I n i t i a l 0.595 0.772 2. 152 <.063 Medial 0.658 0.811 2. 809 <.020 F i n a l 0.537 0.732 1. 694 <.144 H o r i z o n t a l 0.670 0.818 2. 962 <.016 V e r t i c a l 0.604 0.777 2. 225 <.055 R o t a t i o n a l 0.585 0.765 2. 067 <.074 Examination of Table 36 revealed that the f u l l set of p r e d i c t o r s made a s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t p r e d i c t i o n of medial, h o r i z o n t a l and v e r t i c a l c o n t r o l treatment and experimental post-treatment d i s o r i e n t a t i o n s . The step-wise r e g r e s s i o n reported i n Table 37 i n d i c a t e d which of the indepen-dent v a r i a b l e s and i n t e r a c t i o n s made a s i g n i f i c a n t c o n t r i b u t i o n to the p r e d i c t i o n s . 131 TABLE 37 SUMMARY OF STEP-WISE REGRESSION OF BASE-RATE COVARIATES PREDICTING CONTROL TREATMENT AND EXPERIMENTAL POST-TREATMENT TOTALS ON I , M, F, H, V, R F = 1.774; df 6/26; £ < .016 V a r i a b l e U n i v a r i a t e F £ I n i t i a l 1.455 < .232 Medial 4.091 <.005 F i n a l 3.436 <.012 H o r i z o n t a l 4.019 <.006 V e r t i c a l 2.707 <.035 R o t a t i o n a l 2.321 <.063 Examination of Table 37 i n d i c a t e d that the base-rate scores were s i g n i f i c a n t p r e d i c t o r s of a l l dependent v a r i a b l e s except i n i t i a l and r o t a t i o n a l e r r o r s . 132 TABLE 38 SUMMARY OF STEP-WISE REGRESSION OF SEX, CA AND MA, PREDICTING CONTROL TREATMENT AND EXPERIMENTAL POST-TREATMENT TOTALS ON I , M, F, H, V AND R F = 0.924; df 3/23; £ < .354 V a r i a b l e U n i v a r i a t e F I n i t i a l 0.719 <-550 Media l 0.653 <.589 F i n a l 0.628 <.604 H o r i z o n t a l 0.080 <.970 V e r t i c a l 1.343 <.285 R o t a t i o n a l 1.065 <.383 NOTE: Organismic v a r i a b l e s have been p a r t i a l e d f o r base-rate v a r i a n c e . Table 38 i n d i c a t e d that when the organismic p r e d i c t o r s were p a r t i a l e d f o r base-rate v a r i a n c e , no s i g n i f i c a n t p r e d i c t i o n was made. 133 TABLE 39 SUMMARY OF STEP-WISE REGRESSION OF TREATMENT PREDICTING CONTROL TREATMENT AND EXPERIMENTAL POST-TREATMENT TOTALS ON I , M, F, H, V AND R F = 2.054; df 1/22; £ <.114 V a r i a b l e U n i v a r i a t e F P. I n i t i a l 11.295 <.003 Medial 0.324 <.575 F i n a l 0.210 <.651 H o r i z o n t a l 6.496 <.018 V e r t i c a l 4.306 <.050 R o t a t i o n a l 1.401 <.249 NOTE: Treatment has been p a r t i a l e d f o r base-rate and organismic v a r i a n c e . The r e s u l t s reported i n Table 39 i n d i c a t e d that when treatment v a r i a n c e was p a r t i a l e d f o r organismic and base-rate v a r i a n c e , treatment was a s i g n i f i c a n t p r e d i c t o r of i n i t i a l , h o r i z o n t a l and v e r t i c a l e r r o r s . For a l l three types of e r r o r s the experimental post-treatment group had s i g n i f i c a n t l y fewer e r r o r s than the c o n t r o l treatment group when the means were: c o n t r o l group: I = 3.916; H = 3.916 and V = 2.333; e x p e r i -mental group: I = 1.857; H = .008 and V =1.233. The r e s u l t s reported i n Table 40 i n d i c a t e d that the i n t e r a c t i o n s were not s i g n i f i c a n t p r e d i c t o r s of c o n t r o l treatment and experimental post-treatment. 134 TABLE 40 SUMMARY OF STEP-WISE REGRESSION OF INTERACTIONS PREDICTING CONTROL TREATMENT AND EXPERIMENTAL POST-TREATMENT TOTALS ON I , M, F, H, V AND R F =1.112; df 3/19; £ <.377 V a r i a b l e U n i v a r i a t e F £ I n i t i a l 0.747 <.537 Medial 2.312 <.109 F i n a l 0.649 <.593 H o r i z o n t a l 1.264 <.315 V e r t i c a l 0.665 <.584 R o t a t i o n a l 1.874 < .168 NOTE: I n t e r a c t i o n has been p a r t i a l e d f o r base-rate, organismic and treatment v a r i a n c e . R e s u l t s of the Keystone V i s u a l Survey Of the t h i r t y - t h r e e c h i l d r e n i n the sample t e s t e d on the Keystone V i s u a l Survey Test (1961) , twenty-six had t e s t r e s u l t s i n d i c a t i n g a need f o r r e f e r r a l f o r a complete o c u l a r examination. The f o l l o w i n g p o s s i b l e d e f i c i t s were i n d i c a t e d : 1. s u p p r e s s i o n — 1 2 cases, 2. over-convergence—4, 3. near p o i n t a c u i t y — 1 0 , 4. under-convergence— 9, 5. l a t e r a l p o s t u r e — 6 , 6. f u s i o n — 2 , 7. b l i n d i n one e y e — 1 , 8. m u l t i p l e d e f i c i t s — 1 3 . For each c h i l d w i t h a p o s s i b l e d e f i c i t a l e t t e r addressed to the parents was given to the p r i n c i p a l of the c h i l d ' s s c h o o l . The parent was advised that the c h i l d had p a r t i c i p a t e d i n a study of the r e l a t i o n s h i p between reading performance and v i s u a l s k i l l s and that the 135 Keystone V i s u a l Survey Test (1961) had i n d i c a t e d the p o s s i b l e presence of a p a r t i c u l a r v i s u a l d i s o r d e r . A complete o c u l a r examination was recommended. The l e t t e r contained a space f o r the examining o c u l i s t to check whether the f i n d i n g s had been confirmed or not, and i f not, to i n d i c a t e what d e f i c i t s had been found. A d m i n i s t r a t o r s at two of the schools i n d i c a t e d i n t e r e s t i n immediately f o l l o w i n g up w i t h the o c u l a r examination, w h i l e those of the two remaining schools h e s i t a t e d , s t a t i n g that they would have to check w i t h the school nurse. Only three l e t t e r s were returned to the experimenter from the o c u l i s t . None of the three examinations confirmed the f i n d i n g s o f the T e l e b i n o c u l a r ; two of the c h i l d r e n were found to have v i s i o n w i t h i n the normal range. One of these c h i l d r e n had shown l i m i t e d r i g h t eye a c u i t y and i n t e r m i t t e n t r i g h t - e y e suppression on the Keystone. The other c h i l d had been assessed as having l i m i t e d near p o i n t a c u i t y i n both eyes. A t h i r d c h i l d , diagnosed on the T e l e b i n o c u l a r to have l i m i t e d near p o i n t a c u i t y , was diagnosed by the o c u l i s t to have m i l d hyperopic astigmatism, near and f a r . However, the l a c k of c o n f i r m a t i o n regarding the v i s u a l d e f i c i t s observed by the t e l e b i n o c u l a r survey precluded extensive a n a l y s i s of the data. The t o t a l base-rate scores of nineteen s u b j e c t s w i t h m u l t i p l e v i s u a l d e f i c i t s , or a l t e r n a t i n g suppression, or marked l i m i t a t i o n of near p o i n t a c u i t y were compared w i t h the remainder of the sample. S u r p r i s i n g l y , the average score on the base-rate t e s t f o r the s u b j e c t s w i t h suspected v i s u a l defects was s i x t e e n c o r r e c t , compared w i t h f i f t e e n c o r r e c t f o r the group without d e f e c t s . Thus, i t may be concluded that the i n d i c a t i o n of the m u l t i p l e d e f i c i t s s t u d i e d , or a l t e r n a t i n g suppression or marked r e s t r i c t i o n i n near f i e l d v i s u a l a c u i t y was not on the average c o r r e l a t e d w i t h low performance i n the d i s o r i e n t a t i o n task t e s t e d i n t h i s study. 136 Summary of Re s u l t s Base-rate analyses ( s i g n i f i c a n c e p < .05) 1. D i s o r i e n t a t i o n e r r o r s occurred s i g n i f i c a n t l y more o f t e n i n the i n i t i a l than i n the medial or f i n a l p o r t i o n of words. 2. There was no s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e i n the inci d e n c e of medial and f i n a l e r r o r s . 3. H o r i z o n t a l d i s o r i e n t a t i o n s were made s i g n i f i c a n t l y more o f t e n than v e r t i c a l or r o t a t i o n a l e r r o r s . 4. No s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e was found i n the frequency of v e r t i c a l and r o t a t i o n a l e r r o r s . 5. Comparing the r a t e of occurrence of each type of l e t t e r d i s o r i e n t a t i o n , e.g. h o r i z o n t a l p-q w i t h each of the other h o r i z o n t a l d i s o r i e n t a t i o n s , e.g. d-b, and making the same type of comparison f o r v e r t i c a l and r o t a t i o n a l e r r o r s , i t was e s t a b l i s h e d that 10/18 p o s s i b l e p a i r s of l e t t e r d i s o r i e n t a t i o n s occurred at a s i g n i f i c a n t l y d i f f e r e n t r a t e . a. Four of the s i x h o r i z o n t a l e r r o r s were s i g n i f i c a n t l y d i f f e r e n t . b. Four of the s i x v e r t i c a l e r r o r s were s i g n i f i c a n t l y d i f f e r e n t . c. Two of the s i x r o t a t i o n a l e r r o r s were s i g n i f i c a n t l y d i f f e r e n t . d. Of the r e c i p r o c a l e r r o r s compared, e.g. b-d w i t h d-b, or p-d w i t h d-p, a s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e was found between 2/2 h o r i z o n t a l , 2/2 v e r t i c a l and 1/2 p o s s i b l e r o t a t i o n a l r e c i p r o c a l e r r o r s . 6. H o r i z o n t a l and v e r t i c a l d i s o r i e n t a t i o n s , w i t h the highest r a t e of occurrence, were made most o f t e n i n the i n i t i a l and f i n a l p o r t i o n of words where most d i s o r i e n t a t i o n s occurred. 7. There was a low r e l a t i o n s h i p w i t h i n and between a l l c a t e g o r i e s of l e t t e r d i s o r i e n t a t i o n : r e c i p r o c a l , beginning o r ending w i t h the same l e t t e r . 137 8. Neither CA, MA nor Sex was a s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t p r e d i c t o r of base-rate t o t a l s ; thus, hypothesis 8 f o r CA and MA was accepted and hypothesis 7 (a) f o r sex was r e j e c t e d . Treatment a n a l y s i s ( s i g n i f i c a n c e p <C -05) 9. Hypothesis one that the e r r o r r a t e on experimental base-rate t e s t s would be s i g n i f i c a n t l y l a r g e r than the e r r o r r a t e on experimental treatment data was accepted; however, there was a s i g n i f i c a n t decrease from the former to the l a t t e r only f o r h o r i z o n t a l e r r o r s . 10. Hypothesis two that c o n t r o l base-rate scores were equal to c o n t r o l treatment scores was accepted. 11. Hypothesis three that the e r r o r r a t e on experimental treatment t e s t s would be s i g n i f i c a n t l y l e s s than the e r r o r r a t e on c o n t r o l c r i t e r i o n t e s t was r e j e c t e d . 12. Hypothesis four that the e r r o r r a t e on the experimental post-treatment scores would be s i g n i f i c a n t l y l e s s than the e r r o r r a t e on the c o n t r o l treatment scores was accepted. The average t o t a l number of e r r o r s i n the experimental post-treatment was s i g n i f i c a n t l y l e s s than the t o t a l f o r c o n t r o l treatment. 13. Hypothesis f i v e that experimental treatment scores equal l e d experimental post-treatment scores was accepted. 14. Hypothesis s i x that the e r r o r r a t e on experimental base-rate scores was s i g n i f i c a n t l y more than the e r r o r r a t e on experimental post-treatment measures was accepted as there were s i g n i f i c a n t l y fewer h o r i z o n t a l e r r o r s i n the experimental post-treatment group. 15. Hypothesis 7 (b) that females had a s i g n i f i c a n t l y lower e r r o r r a t e than males was r e j e c t e d ; hypothesis 7 (c) that females would show a greater improvement from treatment than males was r e j e c t e d . 138 16. Sex, CA, MA, Treatment, CA'T and MA-T were not s i g n i f i c a n t p r e d i c t o r s of c o n t r o l and experimental treatment nor of experimental post-treatment and c o n t r o l treatment. CHAPTER V DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS The o b j e c t o f the foregoing study was to e s t a b l i s h an e m p i r i c a l b a s i s and to t e s t the e f f e c t i v e n e s s of making typographic m o d i f i c a t i o n s to reduce the occurrence of d i s o r i e n t a t i o n and resequencing reading e r r o r s . A review of the l i t e r a t u r e on the e t i o l o g y of these e r r o r s , on typography, and on geometric and graphemic form per c e p t i o n i n d i c a t e d s e v e r a l graphemic m o d i f i c a t i o n s . These changes were designed to focus v i s u a l a t t e n t i o n upon stimulus a t t r i b u t e s c r i t i c a l to v i s u a l d i s c r i m i n a t i o n . The e f f e c t i v e n e s s of these m o d i f i c a t i o n s to reduce the e r r o r r a t e below the l e v e l achieved through the use of p o s i t i v e reinforcement was t e s t e d upon educable men t a l l y retarded and slow l e a r n i n g c h i l d r e n . A l s o , the v a l i d i t y was t e s t e d of the r e c l a s s i f i c a t i o n of r o t a t i o n s and r e v e r s a l s i n t o subcate-g o r i e s of resequencing and d i s o r i e n t a t i o n e r r o r s . On the base-rate t e s t s t h i r t y - t h r e e o f the f i f t y - s i x s u b j e c t s or f i f t y - n i n e percent of the p o p u l a t i o n s t u d i e d committed d i s o r i e n t a t i o n e r r o r s at a r a t e exceeding t h a t expected by chance. Vernon (1957) s t a t e d that twelve percent of the normal p o p u l a t i o n between the ages of seven to e i g h t years had d i f f i c u l t y w i t h r e v e r s a l s . Davidson (1935) and Sc h o n e l l (1942) observed that l e t t e r r e v e r s a l s p e r s i s t e d f o r much longer i n 'backward' readers, and where o r i e n t a t i o n e r r o r s ceased to occur, on the average, at e i g h t years of age f o r normal c h i l d r e n and were not apparent a f t e r ten years of age, they p e r s i s t e d among backward male readers u n t i l age t h i r t e e n . The r e s u l t s of the present study were i n agreement w i t h these o b s e r v a t i o n s . The r a t e of occurrence o f o r i e n t a t i o n 139 140 errors among educable mentally retarded and slow learner readers was five times as high as that usually found among readers of average i n t e l -lect. Also, since the average chronological age of the subjects studied was twelve years, i t was apparent that the occurrence of orientation errors persisted for longer than among intellectually average readers. It was probable, also, that since the incidence of errors among the present sample was so high, i t was l i k e l y to have persisted beyond age thirteen as observed by Schonell among backward readers. Davidson (1935) found that the errors occurred from high to low frequency i n the order horizontal, vertical and rotational. Popp (1964) found the order to be horizontal, rotational and ve r t i c a l . The authors did not discuss the s t a t i s t i c a l significance of the difference between these errors. The present study found the order from high to low to be horizontal, vertical and rotational with no significant d i f f e r -ence between the rate of occurrence of vertical and rotational errors. In Davidson's study, horizontal errors occurred 2.6 times as frequently i as v e r t i c a l errors and twice as frequently as rotational errors. In the present study horizontal errors occurred 1.8 times as frequently as ve r t i c a l errors and 2.2 times as frequently as rotational errors. How-ever, since there was no significant difference in the rate of occurrence of ve r t i c a l and rotational errors, i t was concluded that horizontal, vertical and rotational errors occurred in the same order and proportion of magnitude as i n Davidson's study. Also, i t appeared to be of diagnostic and probably of remedial significance for future studies to distinguish horizontal from ver t i c a l and rotational disorientation errors. Popp (1964) found that the horizontal error 'b-d' occurred most frequently and was the most persistent of the letter disorientations. In 141 the present study the Hb-d e r r o r was found to be the t h i r d most f r e q u e n t l y o c c u r r i n g h o r i z o n t a l e r r o r and, s u r p r i s i n g l y , t h i s e r r o r was found to be s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t l y d i f f e r e n t from i t s r e c i p r o c a l Hd-b. In f a c t , i t was discovered that f i v e out of the s i x p a i r s of r e c i p r o c a l d i s o r i e n t -a t i o n e r r o r s were of s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e . Ten out of the eighteen p o s s i b l e combinations of l e t t e r e r r o r s occurred at s i g n i f i -c a n t l y d i f f e r e n t r a t e s . Further a n a l y s i s revealed that there was a low r e l a t i o n s h i p between the d i s o r i e n t a t i o n of a l e t t e r by one means and another. K r i s e (1952) found that the 'growing out' of r e v e r s a l s by a d u l t s was only l e a r n i n g to prevent i t s occurrence w i t h s p e c i f i c m a t e r i a l s . He suggested that when a p u p i l was found to be committing e r r o r s i n h i s reading, h i s remedial i n s t r u c t i o n should be confined to the s p e c i f i c l e t t e r s he tended to reverse r a t h e r than to secondary m a t e r i a l s o r to attempt to overcome a general d e f i c i e n c y . In view of the s p e c i f i c i t y of the above e r r o r s , t h i s recommendation appeared to be most ap p r o p r i a t e . A l s o , i n view of the independence of the p a r t i c u l a r l e t t e r e r r o r s i n v o l v e d , an e r r o r a n a l y s i s s i m i l a r to that proposed by the present experimenter and described i n the preceding review of the l i t e r a t u r e appeared to be most ap p r o p r i a t e . In the base-rate a n a l y s i s , i n i t i a l , f i n a l and medial e r r o r s were found to occur i n that decreasing order of frequency. No s t a t i s t i -c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e was found between the r a t e of occurrence of f i n a l and medial e r r o r s . I n i t i a l e r r o r s occurred at twice the r a t e of the other two e r r o r s . Thus, i t appeared d i a g n o s t i c a l l y and perhaps r e m e d i a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t to d i s t i n g u i s h i n i t i a l from f i n a l and medial e r r o r s . The di s c o v e r y that i n i t i a l e r r o r s had the highest r a t e of 142 occurrence was q u i t e at odds w i t h the f i n d i n g s of Dani e l s and Diack (1956) and Marchbanks (1965) who found that non-readers, beginning readers, and c h i l d r e n e i g h t years of age j u s t beginning to read used the f i r s t l e t t e r of trigrams and quingrams as the p r i n c i p l e l e t t e r of d i s c r i m i n a t i o n . Kennedy (1954) found that i n i t i a l e r r o r s tended to disappear more r a p i d l y than other e r r o r s . One could only speculate i n t r y i n g to e x p l a i n why i n i t i a l e r r o r s i n the present study occurred w i t h the highest frequency, but p o s s i b l y , as Bond and Tinker (1967) suggested, i n s t r u c t i o n a l focus on word endings, tenses and person may have focussed a t t e n t i o n to the f i n a l p o r t i o n of words and perhaps developmentally t h i s was the stage that the experimental subjects were a t . Sex, CA and MA were not s i g n i f i c a n t p r e d i c t o r s of e i t h e r base-r a t e or treatment scores. Hypothesis seven had p r e d i c t e d that females would make fewer e r r o r s on the base-rate t e s t and that they would improve more than males as a r e s u l t of the treatment. The f a c t that males and females performed at the same r a t e of accuracy was co n t r a r y to the r e s u l t s of many s t u d i e s . S c h o n e l l (1942) found that normal g i r l s p er-formed w i t h g r e a t e r accuracy than normal boys aged 7 - 1 4 years. However, he i n d i c a t e d that the r e l a t i o n s h i p was l e s s s t a b l e among 'backward' readers of age 7 - 8 years where g i r l s made more e r r o r s than boys. I t was not p o s s i b l e to e x p l a i n these d i f f e r e n c e s except to suggest that perhaps the s p e c i a l c l a s s experience may have e q u a l i z e d sexual d i f f e r e n c e s as a r e s u l t of g e n e r a l i z e d stimulus r e d u c t i o n ; perhaps repeated f a i l u r e w i t h repeated p r e s e n t a t i o n s of the same m a t e r i a l reduced the expression of c a p a b i l i t i e s to some minimum acceptable l e v e l among both males and females. The f a c t that CA and MA were not s i g n i f i c a n t p r e d i c t o r s of 143 base-rate and treatment scores was I n accord w i t h hypothesis e i g h t . Bliesmer (1954), Robinson and Robinson (1965), Spitz,(1968) and Ghent (1961) had found that n e i t h e r CA nor MA was p r e d i c t i v e of v i s u a l d i s -c r i m i n a t i o n of geometric forms, of v i s u a l search performance or of v i s u a l d i s c r i m i n a t i o n l e a r n i n g . The c h r o n o l o g i c a l ages studied ranged from 9 to 14 y e a r s , w h i l e the mental ages ranged from 6 to 13 years. I t would seem that bevond a c e r t a i n c h r o n o l o g i c a l age, r e f l e c t i n g adequate p h y s i o l o g i c a l maturation, and beyond a p a r t i c u l a r mental age, r e f l e c t i n g c o g n i t i v e de-velopment r e q u i s i t e to understanding the t a s k , f u r t h e r increase i n MA and CA would not r e s u l t i n s i g n i f i c a n t increases i n performance of simple v i s u a l d i s c r i m i n a t i o n t a s k s . P o s s i b l y , however, as complexity of the d i s c r i m i n a t i o n task i n c r e a s e d , MA would p l a y an i n c r e a s i n g r o l e . The treatment was not p r e d i c t i v e of experimental and c o n t r o l t o t a l s . The only s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e between the experimental base-r a t e and treatment t e s t s was the r e d u c t i o n of h o r i z o n t a l e r r o r s . However, s i n c e h o r i z o n t a l e r r o r s had the h i g h e s t frequency of occurrence on the base-rate t e s t s s i n c e the e r r o r r a t e of a l l v a r i a b l e s decreased on subsequent t e s t s i n p r o p o r t i o n to the magnitude of t h e i r r a t e on the base-r a t e t e s t s and s i n c e the r e d u c t i o n of h o r i z o n t a l e r r o r s p e r s i s t e d beyond the removal of the treatment i n t o the post-treatment t e s t , i t seemed l i k e l y that the r e d u c t i o n i n r a t e of h o r i z o n t a l e r r o r s was merely a r e f l e c t i o n of the r e g r e s s i o n to the mean e f f e c t . The treatment was 1 p r e d i c t i v e of d i f f e r e n c e s f o r I , H and V e r r o r s between the c o n t r o l t r e a t -ment and experimental post-treatment t e s t s . The experimental group had the lowest e r r o r r a t e on a l l three v a r i a b l e s . These d i f f e r e n c e s may have been the r e s u l t of s l o w l y accumulated e f f e c t s of both p r a c t i c e and r e g r e s s i o n to the mean. Examination of the d i f f e r e n c e s between the 144 c o n t r o l and experimental treatment i n d i c a t e d that f o r i n i t i a l e r r o r s the d i f f e r e n c e was almost s i g n i f i c a n t (p = .0733); a l s o , i n i t i a l e r r o r s had the highest r a t e of occurrence f o r p o s i t i o n e r r o r s and t h e r e f o r e was the most l i k e l y to be i n f l u e n c e d by r e g r e s s i o n to the mean e f f e c t s . ( Several i m p l i c a t i o n s f o r f u t u r e research design arose from the present study. F i r s t , as the reader w i l l r e c a l l , ample feedback and reinforcement o f performance was provided during the p r e t e s t p o r t i o n s of the screening t e s t s . These i n t e r v e n t i o n s were employed to motivate the subj e c t s to perform a long and tedious e x e r c i s e that may have been per-ceived of as another opportunity to f a i l , and to teach the subjects how to use the experimental t e s t i n g format. In a d d i t i o n , research (Hendrickson, 1962) had shown that some c h i l d r e n were capable of making the d i s c r i m i n -a t i o n s but d i d not make them because they d i d not consider them to be important; thus, the use of reinforcement i n t h i s study was designed to focus a t t e n t i o n upon v i s u a l cues of o r i e n t a t i o n and sequence changes. One of the p r i n c i p l e o b j e c t i v e s i n using reinforcement, thereby, was to r a i s e the s u b j e c t s ' performance to approximate h i s c u r r e n t ' l e v e l of c a p a b i l i t y ' and then to measure the increase i n performance beyond that l e v e l through the use of treatment m a t e r i a l s . " To t e s t the increase of performance beyond a su b j e c t ' s l e v e l o f ' c a p a b i l i t y ' appeared f o r s e v e r a l reasons to be an extremely important c o n s i d e r a t i o n f o r experimental design. As i n d i c a t e d , c h i l d r e n may be q u i t e capable of performing a p a r t i c u l a r act r e q u i r i n g some e f f o r t , but may not perc e i v e the task as warranting such e f f o r t , p a r t i c u l a r l y i f lon g , f a m i l i a r and bo r i n g e x e r c i s e s are being provided and i f they are perceived of as another opportunity f o r f a i l u r e . Such a s i t u a t i o n was probably the case w i t h m e n t a l l y retarded and slow l e a r n i n g c h i l d r e n who 145 perhaps f o r some number of years had experienced f a i l u r e i n working w i t h the same m a t e r i a l s . I f an experimenter entered t h i s s i t u a t i o n and pro-vided the c o n t r o l group w i t h f a m i l i a r n o n - s t i m u l a t i n g m a t e r i a l s , he was not l i k e l y to evoke the increased e f f o r t r e q u i r e d to r e f l e c t the c h i l d ' s contemporary c a p a c i t y . I f i n the meantime the experimental group was being given n o v e l , experimentally m o d i f i e d m a t e r i a l s that were not per-ceived of as t h r e a t e n i n g and which evoked i n t e r e s t and thereby evoked more e f f o r t , then the performance l e v e l of the experimental group might i n c r e a s i n g l y approach the l e v e l of t h e i r . c u r r e n t c a p a b i l i t y . However, the question remained as to whether the treatment had taught the s u b j e c t s new s k i l l s , r a i s e d t h e i r l e v e l of c a p a b i l i t y , or whether the n o v e l t y of experimentation had merely tem p o r a r i l y r a i s e d performance to a l e v e l of which the subject was already c u r r e n t l y capable. The use of reinforcement i n the present experiment was designed to i n c r e a s e the s u b j e c t s ' e f f o r t s i n r a i s i n g t h e i r performance to the l e v e l of t h e i r c u r r e n t c a p a b i l i t y which, by d e f i n i t i o n , could not be r a i s e d by n o v e l t y alone, and then to measure t h e i r new l e v e l of c a p a b i l i t y as a r e s u l t of working w i t h the experimental m a t e r i a l s . In a previous study by Bain (1970) of the e f f e c t s of t y p o g r a p h i c a l changes upon the v i s u a l d i s c r i m i n a t i o n of l e t t e r s of the alphabet by k i n d e r g a r t e n and preschool c h i l d r e n , the experimental group d i d perform s i g n i f i c a n t l y b e t t e r than the c o n t r o l group; however, both groups had begun at t h e i r " b a s a l " l e v e l of performance r a t h e r than at t h e i r l e v e l of c a p a b i l i t y and the e f f e c t s of n o v e l t y i n evoking behavior of which the subjects were already capable could not be measured. The present experiment began t e s t i n g at a c l o s e r approximation of the c a p a b i l i t y l e v e l of performance and i n s u f f i c i e n t resequencing e r r o r s were found on the base-rate t e s t s 146 to permit an experimental a n a l y s i s of treatment; a l s o , no s i g n i f i c a n t change from the base-rate to the treatment l e v e l of o r i e n t a t i o n e r r o r s were found. Would a s i g n i f i c a n t 'treatment e f f e c t ' have been found i f performance had begun at the 'basal' l e v e l of performance? Would a s i g n i f i c a n t number of resequencing e r r o r s have been found i f performance had not been r a i s e d to the l e v e l of c a p a b i l i t y ? Teachers of these c h i l d r e n reported that they had observed resequencing e r r o r s i n p r i n t i n g and w r i t i n g t a s k s . The need f o r f u r t h e r research was r e q u i r e d to assess the s i g n i f i c a n c e of measuring experimental changes from e i t h e r a ' basal' or ' c a p a b i l i t y ' l e v e l of performance. A f u r t h e r i m p l i c a t i o n of the present study f o r experimental design concerned the removal of c h i l d r e n from t h e i r classrooms to a t e s t i n g room f o r one-to-one i n t e r a c t i o n w i t h a xv-arm, a c c e p t i n g , v e r b a l l y and s o c i a l l y r e i n f o r c i n g examiner. How t y p i c a l was a c h i l d ' s performance under these c o n d i t i o n s ? What g e n e r a l i z a t i o n s could be made back to the c h i l d ' s classroom? Observations made of the EMR and slow l e a r n i n g c h i l d r e n i n t h i s study, some of whom had spent a number of years i n the same s p e c i a l c l a s s , i n d i c a t e d that t h e i r t e s t i n g behavior was q u i t e a t y p i c a l of t h e i r classroom behavior. C h i l d r e n competed w i t h each other to leave the classroom; they pleaded w i t h the examiner to be next, and they pushed other c h i l d r e n out of the way. During the t e s t i n g they made comments such as "Gee, I wish you were my teacher" and "Can I come back l a t e r ? " . C h i l d r e n who i n the classroom had paid l i t t l e a t t e n t i o n to t h e i r word study assignments spent up to three-quarters of an hour performing a task t h a t u s u a l l y took only ten minutes. During t h i s i n t e r v a l the c h i l d r e n c a r e f u l l y compared and double-checked each word and l e t t e r i n the f i v e - t o - o n e match-to-sample format. Obviously w i t h such changes i n 147 performance and i n the p h y s i c a l and s o c i a l c o n d i t i o n s under which the task was performed, few g e n e r a l i z a t i o n s could be made back to the c l a s s -room. C l e a r l y , i f i t was the d e s i r e of an examiner to g e n e r a l i z e to a classroom s i t u a t i o n administered by a teacher, then experimentation should have been c a r r i e d out by the teacher i n the classroom. The t h i r d i m p l i c a t i o n of the present study f o r experimental design concerned the use of p r e t e s t s f o r screening s u b j e c t s . A question must be r a i s e d regarding the purpose of screening t e s t s ; whether these t e s t s were to be used merely by the experimenter to d e f i n e h i s p o p u l a t i o n of study i n general terms or whether the screening t e s t s were designed to be used l a t e r by teachers to determine whether or not t h e i r students had the s p e c i f i c s k i l l s r e q u i s i t e to beginning a remedial program that employed the experimental m a t e r i a l s . The l a t t e r o b j e c t i v e appeared to be of obvious advantage where methods that might p o t e n t i a l l y be employed by a teacher were being t e s t e d . This o b j e c t i v e had been employed i n the present study where very s p e c i f i c s k i l l s such as knowledge of the concept of 'sameness' and the a b i l i t y to work w i t h i n a f i v e - t o - o n e match-to-sample format were t e s t e d . However, another p r e c a u t i o n must be v o i c e d regarding the p o i n t a t which screening t e s t s were to be introduced i n t o an e x p e r i -mental sequence. I f the screening t e s t s were introduced before the treatment, and i f very s p e c i f i c task r e l e v a n t s k i l l s were being measured on these t e s t s , the c h i l d ' s performance on base-rate t e s t s might have been a t y p i c a l . As a r e s u l t of the presumably narrow and s p e c i f i c focus of the screening t e s t s , the s u b j e c t ' s a t t e n t i o n may have been more s p e c i f i c a l l y focussed upon c r i t i c a l aspects of the t a s k — w h a t e v e r was important i n the task might have stood out more than i f i t were merely introduced i n t o a l e s s s t r u c t u r e d f i e l d . To avoid t h i s non-experimental 148 change from t y p i c a l behavior, i t was suggested that t a s k - s p e c i f i c screening t e s t s should be introduced a f t e r the treatment t e s t s . F i n a l l y , the fourth i m p l i c a t i o n of the present study to exper-imental design r e l a t e d to the use of the f i v e - t o - o n e match-to-sample format. Using t h i s format i n the present experiment as opposed to having a c h i l d read from prose m a t e r i a l a s s i s t e d i n making an a n a l y s i s of the e r r o r s made. Each wrong a l t e r n a t i v e chosen by a su b j e c t i n d i c a t e d that he had made an I , M, F, H, V or R e r r o r and the p a r t i c u l a r l e t t e r s i n v o l v e d . The use of t h i s format w i t h nonsense words removed g r a p h o l o g i c a l , o r t h o g r a p h i c , p h o n o l o g i c a l , s y n t a c t i c and morphological cues and the sub j e c t had to r e l y wholly upon v i s u a l d i s c r i m i n a t i o n tp match the words. These changes were an advantage i n measuring the d i s o r i e n t a t i o n of l e t t e r s w i t h i n words where researchers had shown that the e r r o r r a t e was higher than w i t h s i n g l e l e t t e r s . However, one had to ask how c l o s e to a t y p i c a l reading task was a f i v e - t o - o n e match-to-sample format of nonsense words? Of course t h i s q u e s t i o n was not r e a d i l y answered without f u r t h e r research and the b a s i c question of the g e n e r a l i z a t i o n of experimental data had again to be r a i s e d . I t has been suggested i n the foregoing paragraphs that one p o s s i b l e reason f o r the f a i l u r e to f i n d s u f f i c i e n t resequencing e r r o r s to make an experimental a n a l y s i s was that the t e s t f o r these e r r o r s was made at a l e v e l approximating the s u b j e c t ' s ' c a p a b i l i t y ' l e v e l of performance r a t h e r than at h i s 'basal' l e v e l of performance. That was to suggest that t y p i c a l l y these s u b j e c t s might have produced resequencing e r r o r s that they were q u i t e capable of a v o i d i n g . Bennett (1942), S c h o n e l l (1942), I l g and Ames (1950) and Vernon (1957, 1963a) a l l found that r e v e r s a l s of whole words and t r a n s p o s i t i o n of l e t t e r s w i t h i n words occurred f a r more 149 f r e q u e n t l y among both backward and normal readers than the confusion d i d of the l e t t e r s b, d, p and q. The present study examined the resequencing of s i n g l e l e t t e r s w i t h i n e i t h e r the i n i t i a l , medial or f i n a l p o r t i o n s of words. Resequencing e r r o r s of t h i s type, i n v o l v i n g only a s i n g l e l e t t e r and changing only one p o s i t i o n w i t h i n a word, had been hypothesized by the experimenter as the most d i f f i c u l t t r a n s p o s i t i o n to be perceived. Apparently these t r a n s p o s i t i o n s were much more r e a d i l y observed by the subjects than had been a n t i c i p a t e d by the examiner. What type of t r a n s -p o s i t i o n s were the other experimenters examining? As mentioned i n the review of the l i t e r a t u r e , the d e f i n i t i o n and c l a s s i f i c a t i o n of r o t a t i o n s and r e v e r s a l s was q u i t e u n c l e a r . Would another type of resequencing e r r o r have occurred a t a s i g n i f i c a n t l y higher r a t e among the sample studied? Obviously one could not speak of resequencing e r r o r s i n g e n e r a l , but had to r e f e r to s p e c i f i c types of resequencing e r r o r s . Two r e a d i l y apparent d i f f e r e n c e s among resequencing e r r o r s were between whole words and p a r t s of words, but even w i t h i n p a r t s of words i t may have been necessary to d i f f e r e n t i a t e i n i t i a l , medial and f i n a l e r r o r s and whether or not the r e o r i e n t a t i o n i n v o l v e d vowels, consonants, s y l l a b l e s , e t c . Again, more research was re q u i r e d i n the area of d e f i n i n g the nature of the problem before i t s remedy could be found. Perhaps i n t h i s respect the c l a s s i f i c a t i o n system suggested e a r l i e r i n t h i s study may have been a u s e f u l s t a r t i n g p o i n t . APPENDIX A TESTING MATERIALS 150 151 F i v e - t o - O n e M a t c h G e o m e t r i c 'Sameness T h i s s c r e e n i n g t e s t i s d e s i g n e d t o a s s e s s t h e s u b j e c t ' s a b i l i t y t o v i s u a l l y p e r c e i v e 'sameness' o f two g e o m e t r i c f o r m s among a g r o u p o f common, s i m p l e , and r e l a t i v e l y d i s s i m i l a r g e o m e t r i c f o r m s i n a f i v e - t o - o n e m a t c h - t o - s a m p l e f o r m a t . U n d e r s t a n d i n g o f t h e c o n c e p t o f ' s a m e n e s s ' , t h e a b i l i t y t o p e r c e i v e ' g e o m e t r i c s a m e n e s s ' and t o work i n a 5-1 m a t c h - t o -s a m p l e f o r m a t i s f u n d a m e n t a l t o a l l f u r t h e r t e s t i n g . M a t e r i a l s : A c o m f o r t a b l e d e s k and c h a i r , t h e t e s t , a medium s h a r p r e d p e n c i l , and an e r a s e r . I n s t r u c t i o n s : For f r a m e s 1-9 p r o v i d e t h e s u b j e c t w i t h ample v e r b a l r e i n f o r c e m e n t : " t h a t ' s a good j o b ; v e r y g o o d . . P r o v i d e f e e d b a c k t o g u i d e d e v e l o p m e n t o f t h e c o r r e c t r e s p o n s e : e.g. t e l l t h e c h i l d t o l o o k more c a r e f u l l y a t t h e f i g u r e s o r t o p o i n t t o them t o f o c u s h i s a t t e n t i o n . Frame 1 "Look a t t h i s " ( p o i n t t o t h e f i r s t c r o s s ) . (Do n o t g i v e o r a s k f o r a name f o r any o f t h e f i g u r e s . I f t h e s u b j e c t s p o n t a n e o u s l y p r o v i d e s a name, s a y : " t h i s one r i g h t h e r e " . ) ( E x a m i n e r moves f i n g e r s l o w l y t o t h e r i g h t p a u s i n g on e a c h f i g u r e ) . .. "Look a t t h i s o ne". ( P o i n t t o t h e s q u a r e ) . " T h i s one i s n o t t h e same as t h i s o n e " ( P o i n t b a c k t o t h e c r o s s ) . "Now, l o o k a t t h i s one ( p o i n t t o t h e s e c o n d c r o s s ) t h i s one j Is t h e same as t h i s one ( p o i n t b a c k t o t h e f i r s t c r o s F T . " P u t a l i n e u n d e r i t l i k e t h i s " ( p u t a 1/4" l i n e b e n e a t h and a p a r t f r o m t h e s e c o n d c r o s s w h i l e s a y i n g : " T h i s one i s t h e same as t h i s o n e " , p o i n t t o f i r s t c r o s s ) . Frame 2 "Look a t t h i s o n e " , ( p o i n t t o t h e f i r s t c i r c l e ) . "Now, l o o k a t t h i s o n e " , ( s e c o n d c i r c l e ) . " T h i s one ( s e c o n d c i r c l e ) i s t h e same as t h i s o n e " ( f i r s t c i r c l e ). "You p u t a l i n e u n d e r i t " , ( s e c o n d c i r c l e ) . 152 Frame 3 "Look a t t h i s o n e " , ( p o i n t t o f i r s t t r i a n g l e ) . "Now, l o o k a t t h e s e " , ( p o i n t s l o w l y and s u c c e s s i v e l y t o e a c h f i g u r e ) . " P u t a l i n e u n d e r t h e one h e r e t h a t i s t h e same as t h i s o n e " ( f i r s t t r i a n g l e ) . Frame M- " U n d e r l i n e t h e one h e r e " ( r u n f i n g e r above c h o i c e s ) " t h a t i s t h e same as t h i s o n e " ( f i r s t s q u a r e ) . ( I f c h i l d does n o t a p p e a r t o u n d e r s t a n d t h e t a s k a d e q u a t e l y , p r o c e e d w i t h f r a m e s 5-6 i n t h e same manner as w i t h f r a m e 3, o t h e r w i s e , p r o c e e d as f o l l o w s ) . Frame 5-8 "On t h e s e n e x t o n e s " ( p o i n t f r o m 5-8) "look at t h e f i r s t one and u n d e r l i n e t h e one o v e r h e r e t h a t i s t h e same". R e i n f o r c e f o r c o r r e c t r e s p o n s e ; c o r r e c t wrong r e s p o n s e s ; c o r r e c t p o o r work h a b i t s . T e s t i n g Frames 9-16 "O.K. now, I w o u l d l i k e y o u t o do t h e r e s t o f t h e s e ( p o i n t f r o m 9-16) by y o u r s e l f , I am n o t g o i n g t o h e l p y o u " . (Do n o t p r o v i d e any r e i n f o r c e m e n t o r f e e d b a c k ) . " J u s t t a k e a l o o k a t t h e f i r s t one and' u n d e r l i n e t h e one o v e r h e r e t h a t i s t h e same". "Don't r u s h , work c a r e f u l l y - go a h e a d " . S c o r i n g : To q u a l i f y f o r f u r t h e r t e s t i n g t h e c h i l d must o b t a i n 7 / 8 c o r r e c t i n c l u d i n g one s p o n t a n e o u s l y c o r r e c t e d f r a m e . F/V£- TO-ON£ MATCM GFOMrTX/C SAAt£N£SS153 SS-/V/}M~... SFX. .6C//OOL PRACTICE FXAMFS • + o O A A • XX A • O • A A • A 4-O 4- • O A XX O 4- • XX A 4- O A + XX • T£ST/A/& FRAME'S XX O XX • 4- A s A • 4- O XX A i • • XX O A + O 4- A O XX • • + XX A • O 4- O 4- • A XX XX A 4- O • XX IS A XX O • A + 16 154 K e y s t o n e T e l e b i n o c u l a r V i s u a l S u r v e y  Near P o i n t T e s t s T e s t 10 L a t e r a l p o s t u r e C o v e r o r u n d e r c o n v e r g e n c e ) 11 F u s i o n 12 B i n o c u l a r a c u i t y 13 R i g h t - e y e a c u i t y 14 L e f t - e y e a c u i t y R e a d y - t o - R e a d T e s t 2 V e r t i c a l p o s t u r e 1 F u s i o n Spache B i n o c u l a r R e a d i n g T e s t 2 S u p p r e s s i o n T e s t i n g P r o c e d u r e 1. L i g h t on 2. P u s h c a r d t r a y b a c k t o m i d d l e s t o p p e r ( n e a r f i e l d , e q u i v a l e n t t o e i g h t e e n i n c h e s ) 3. A d j u s t h e i g h t o f v i e w e r so t h a t s u b j e c t i s c o m f o r t a b l e w i t h b a c k and n e c k i n u p r i g h t p o s i t i o n w i t h e y e s l o o k i n g s t r a i g h t f o r w a r d . Keep h e a d i n p o s i t i o n a t a l l t i m e s . T e s t 10 - Do you see the arrow? Do y o u see some numbers? What number i s t h e a r r o w c l o s e s t t o ? I s t h e a r r o w m o v i n g ? ( i f y e s = u n s t a b l e b a l a n c e ) - O b s e r v e f o r 3 0 seconds. R e c o r d where a r r o w s t o p s o r r a n g e o f movement. - Move c a r d t o r e a r o f c a r d h o l d e r . T e s t 11 - I n s t r u c t i o n s m o d i f i e d ; c o l o r p e r c e p t i o n o r k n o w l e d g e i s n o t n e c e s s a r y . How many b a l l s do y o u s e e ? ( i f 2 b a l l s ) - Do y o u s e e a b a l l w i t h a l i n e t h r o u g h i t ' I s i t on t h e t o p o r t h e b o t t o m o f t h e o t h e r b a l l ? ( t o p = I t . - e y e o n l y ) ( b o t t o m = r t . - e y e o n l y ) ( i f s t a b l e 3 b a l l s ) - R e c o r d and go on t o t e s t 12. ( i f u n s t a b l e 3 b a l l s b e c o m i n g 4 and p r e d o m i n a n t l y 4) o r ( i f f o u r b a l l s r e m a i n i n g 4) Use d e m o n s t r a t i o n c a r d t o a s c e r t a i n w h e t h e r u n d e r - c o n -v e r g e n c e o r o v e r - c o n v e r g e n c e and t h e e x t e n t o f e i t h e r ( t h e d e m o n s t r a t i o n c a r d p r e s e n t s f o r s e p a r a t e v i e w i n g e a c h o f t h e s e v e n a r r a y s o f 2 , 3 o r 4 c o l o r e d b a l l s as i l l u s t r a t e d f o r t e s t 4 on t h e s t a n d a r d K e y s t o n e s c o r i n g r e c o r d ) . 155 Show f i r s t t h e u n d e r - t h e n t h e o v e r - c o n v e r g e n c e s a m p l e s s a y i n g : Does i t l o o k l i k e one o f t h e s e o r one o f t h e s e -t h e n a s k w h e t h e r t h e b a l l s a r e f a r a p a r t l i k e t h e s e ( p o i n t ) o r c l o s e r t o g e t h e r l i k e t h e s e ( p o i n t ) . R e c o r d and go on t o t e s t 12. T e s t 12 ( B o t h e y e s ) (Do n o t t o u c h t h e c a r d w i t h a b a l l - p o i n t o r p e n c i l ) ( w i t h a p o i n t e r i n d i c a t e t h e t h r e e b a l l s i n t h e c e n t r e ) s a y i n g : Look a t t h e s e b a l l s . T h i s b a l l ( t o p ) h a s b l a c k l i n e s T h i s b a l l ( m i d d l e ) has b l a c k , s q u a r e d o t s T h i s b a l l ( b o t t o m ) i s g r a y ( * P o i n t t o b a l l 1) s a y i n g : number 1 has b l a c k s q u a r e d o t s , number 2 h a s b l a c k l i n e s , number 3 has b l a c k s q u a r e d o t s . What do y o u s e e i n number f o u r . When b a l l i s c a l l e d i n c o r r e c t l y o r when g u e s s i n g i s o b v i o u s p u t ' x 1 on r e c o r d f o r m . T e r m i n a t e a f t e r two s u c c e s s i v e ' x's ( b u t c h e c k t o be c e r t a i n t h e s u b j e c t h a s n o t s k i p p e d one b a l l ) . R e v i e w s i n g l e e r r o r s . T e s t 13 O c c l u d e t h e l e f t eye R e p e a t i n a s i m i l a r manner as f r o m t h e a s t e r i s k above i n t e s t 12 e x c e p t number 1 has b l a c k s q u a r e d o t s , number 2 has b l a c k s q u a r e d o t s , number 3 has b l a c k l i n e s . R e c o r d and remove l e f t eye o c c l u d e r . T e s t 14 O c c l u d e r i g h t eye R e p e a t as i n t e s t 13 e x c e p t number 1 has b l a c k l i n e s , number 2 has b l a c k s q u a r e d o t s , number 3 has b l a c k s q u a r e d o t s . Record and remove r i g h t eye occ l u d e r . R e a d y - t o - r e a d T e s t 2 No o c c l u s i o n (Make c e r t a i n t h a t h e a d i s l e v e l and t h a t c h i l d ' s g l a s s e s a r e s t r a i g h t ) . ( U se o n l y t h e v e r t i c a l p o s t u r e t e s t ; l a t e r a l p o s t u r e i s t e s t e d on t e s t 1 0 ) . Do y o u s e e some l i t t l e , r e d f i g u r e s ? - What a r e t h e i r n a m e s ? ( s q u a r e o r b o x , c r o s s o r e x , c i r c l e o r b a l l , h e a r t , s t a r ) . ( I f r e d f i g u r e s n o t s e e n , r i g h t eye i s n o t f u n c t i o n i n g ) - Do y o u s e e a l o n g y e l l o w l i n e ? ( I f n o , l e f t eye i s n o t f u n c t i o n i n g ) . ' 156 What f i g u r e d o e s t h e l o n g y e l l o w l i n e p a s s t h r o u g h ( o k , i f l i n e a p p e a r s t o b r e a k on e i t h e r s i d e o f f i g u r e ) . ( R e c o r d r e s p o n s e s a s f o r t e s t 2, f a r p o i n t , o n s t a n d a r d K e y s t o n e r e c o r d f o r m ) . I f l i n e p a s s e s t h r o u g h c e n t r e o f r e d b a l l — OK ( I f l i n e o n l y t o u c h e s t o p o r b o t t o m o f b a l l , o r i s c l o s e r t o one o f t h e o t h e r f i g u r e s , c i r c l e t h e r e s p o n s e on t h e s c o r i n g f o r m ) . N o t e : C i r c l e t o t h e l e f t i f t e s t 10 has i n d i c a t e d u n d e r c o n v e r g e n c e , and t o t h e r i g h t i f o v e r - c o n v e r g e n c e has been i n d i c a t e d . Ready t o Read T e s t 1 (Same a s t e s t 11 e x c e p t t h a t s q u a r e s o r b o x e s a r e u s e d i n s t e a d o f b a l l s ) ( T h i s t e s t i s u s e d h e r e t o l o c a t e t h e s u b j e c t ' s p o i n t o f v i s u a l f u s i o n f o r most e f f i c i e n t b i n o c u l a r r e a d i n g on t h e f o l l o w i n g t e s t ) Move t h e c a r d - t r a y b a c k w a r d s o r f o r w a r d s u n t i l t h r e e b o x e s c a n be s t e a d i l y s e e n . ( I f u n s t a b l e make a n o t e ) Move t o t h e n e x t t e s t - no r e c o r d i n g i s made. Spache B i n o c u l a r R e a d i n g T e s t 2 Ask s u b j e c t t o r e a d s l o w l y . . ( T e m p o r a r y c o n f u s i o n may be c a u s e d by e s o p h o r i a - i n w a r d t u r n i n g o f e y e s ) . (OK - i f w ords a p p e a r t e m p o r a r i l y t o d i s a p p e a r and r e a p p e a r o r i f w ords a p p e a r t o have a h a l o = r e t i n a l r i v a l r y ) ( I f a p p a r e n t d i s a p p e a r a n c e and r e a p p e a r a n c e c o n t i n u e s o v e r s e v e r a l l i n e s - may be a l t e r n a t i n g s u p p r e s s i o n ) . To r e c o r d : C r o s s - o u t o m i t t e d k e y - w o r d s on s t a n d a r d f o r m . C o u n t number o f key w o r d s r e a d by l e f t e y e , by r i g h t e y e , by b o t h e y e s . No. r e a d by r i g h t eye No. r e a d by b o t h e y e s I C o n v e r t t o p e r c e n t p a r t i c i p a t i o n r i g h t eye No. r e a d by l e f t eye No. r e a d by b o t h e y e s C o n v e r t t o p e r c e n t p a r t i c i p a t i o n l e f t eye A v e r a g e c h i l d r e a d s o n l y 7% more o r l e s s w i t h one eye t h a n t h e o t h e r . D i f f e r e n c e s o f more t h a n 1 3 % a r e s i g n i f i c a n t . 157 i O r i e n t a t i o n D i s c r i m i n a t i o n S e a t t h e s u b j e c t c o m f o r t a b l y a t a d e s k P r e s e n t t h e t e s t and a medium s h a r p r e d p e n c i l and e r a s e r I n s t r u c t i o n s : ( F o r f r a m e s 1-4- p r o v i d e ample v e r b a l r e i n f o r c e -ment and f e e d b a c k - "good j o b ; t h a t ' s f i n e ; v e r y g o o d " ) . Frame 1: ( c o v e r a l l o t h e r f r a m e s , w i t h a p l a i n w h i t e c a r d ) " I want t o s e e i f t h i s one ( p o i n t t o l e f t p r o f i l e ) i s t h e same as t h i s one" ( r i g h t p r o f i l e ), "The h a i r i s down on t h i s o n e , and down on t h i s o n e , t h e n o s e i s r i g h t h e r e on t h i s o n e , and r i g h t h e r e on t h i s one. T h i s one ( p o i n t i n g ) i s t h e same as t h i s o n e , p u t a c h e c k mark h e r e " ( t o t h e r i g h t o f t h e two p r o f i l e s ) . Frame 2: ( R e v e a l o n l y f r a m e t w o ) ; ( F o r e a c h s u c c e s s i v e t r i a l r e v e a l o n l y t h e r e l e v a n t f r a m e s ) . " I want t o see i f t h i s one ( p o i n t t o l e f t p r o f i l e ) i s t h e same as t h i s o n e " ( p o i n t t o r i g h t p r o f i l e ) "The h a i r i s down on t h i s o n e , b u t up on t h i s one - t h e h a i r i s n o t t h e same. The n o s e i s h e r e on t h i s one b u t h e r e on t h i s o n e , t h e n o s e s a r e n o t t h e same." "This one ( p o i n t t o l e f t ' p r o f i l e ) i s n o t t h e same as t h i s one ( r i g h t p r o f i l e ) p u t an " x " o v e r h e r e " ( t o r i g h t o f f r a m e ) . Frame 3-4 ( R e v e a l o n l y one f r a m e a t a t i m e ) A r e t h e s e two t h e same. P u t a c h e c k - m a r k h e r e i f t h e y a r e . t h e same, p u t an " x " h e r e i f t h e y a r e n o t t h e same. Whether r e s p o n s e i s r i g h t o r wrong a s k : " T e l l me how y o u know t h e y a r e t h e same o r n o t t h e s a m e " ( w h i c h e v e r t h e c h i l d h as i n d i c a t e d ) . (Be c e r t a i n t h a t he c o m p a r e s b o t h t h e h a i r and t h e n o s e ; c o r r e c t c h e c k o r " x " marks as a p p r o p r i a t e ) . Frames 5-10 ( R e v e a l one f r a m e a t a t i m e . Do n o t p r o v i d e any r e i n f o r c e m e n t o r f e e d b a c k ) "OK. I w o u l d l i k e y o u t o do t h e r e s t o f t h e s e y o u r s e l f " ( p o i n t f r o m 5-10 ). "Look at t h e h a i r and n o s e on b o t h . I f t h e y a r e t h e same p u t a c h e c k mark o v e r h e r e , i f t h e y a r e n o t t h e same, p u t an " x " o v e r h e r e . " "Don't r u s h , work c a r e f u l l y - go ahead." S c o r e : To q u a l i f y f o r f u r t h e r t e s t i n g t h e c h i l d must o b t a i n f o u r c o r r e c t o f t h e f o l l o w i n g s i x p a i r s o f p r o f i l e s . Number c o r r e c t may i n c l u d e one s p o n t a n e o u s l y c o r r e c t e d r e s p o n s e . ORIENTATION DISCRIMINATION 6 s-NAME SEX SCHOOL.. .159 T e s t i n g P r o c e d u r e D, B, P, Q, D i s o r i e n t a t i o n B a s e - R a t e ( I m m e d i a t e l y p r e c e d e t h i s t e s t w i t h t h e O r i e n t a t i o n D i s c r i m -i n a t i o n S c r e e n i n g ) . M a t e r i a l s : One medium s h a r p r e d p e n c i l , d e m o n s t r a t i o n f r a m e p a r t A, a p l a i n w h i t e c a r d , and t h e D, B, P, Q D i s o r i e n t a t i o n B a s e - R a t e T e s t G e n e r a l : S e a t t h e s u b j e c t c o m f o r t a b l y a t a d e s k . I n d e m o n s t r a t i o n and t e s t i n g u s e t h e w h i t e c a r d t o c o v e r a l l f r a m e s b e l o w t h a t b e i n g w o r k e d on. D e m o n s t r a t i o n A D u r i n g t h e d e m o n s t r a t i o n , h e l p t h e s u b j e c t as much as p o s s i b l e o r n e c e s s a r y , and p r o v i d e ample r e i n f o r c e m e n t . P r o v i d e f e e d b a c k t o g u i d e t h e p r o p e r r e s p o n s e , and c o r r e c t i m p r o p e r r e s p o n s e s . T h i s e x e r c i s e i s d e s i g n e d t o f o c u s t h e s u b j e c t ' s a t t e n t i o n on o r i e n t a t i o n c h a n g e s , r e i n f o r c e s u c h a t t e n t i o n , and t r a i n t h e s u b j e c t f o r t h e s u b s e q u e n t t a s k . Frame 1 C o v e r a l l b u t t h e f i r s t f r a m e "Look a t t h i s w o r d " ( p o i n t t o ' p a g i b ' ) " I want yo u t o f i n d a n o t h e r word o v e r h e r e ( p o i n t a l o n g t h e r o w ) t h a t i s t h e same as t h i s w o r d " ( p o i n t to 'pagib'). * " I s t h i s w o r d ( p o i n t t o ' p a d i b ' ) t h e same as t h i s w o r d ? " ( p o i n t a g a i n t o ' p a g i b ' ) . R e i n f o r c e c o r r e c t r e s p o n s e . I f r e s p o n s e i s wrong - "No! T h i s w o r d ( p o i n t ) i s n o t t h e same as t h i s w o r d " ( p o i n t ) . A l l s u b j e c t s : "Show me what p a r t o f t h i s word ( p a d i d ) i s n o t t h e same as t h i s w o r d " ( p a g i b ). S u b j e c t d o es n o t have t o name t h e l e t t e r s b u t m e r e l y i n d i c a t e w h i c h ones a r e n o t t h e same. I f he i s u n a b l e t o do s o , i n d i c a t e f o r h i m what i s n o t t h e same. R e i n f o r c e c o r r e c t r e s p o n s e . I f r e s p o n s e i s i n c o r r e c t - a d m o n i s h h i m t o l o o k v e r y c a r e f u l l y . R e p e a t p r o c e d u r e f r o m a s t e r i s k f o r w a r d f o r s u b s e q u e n t words. Have s u b j e c t u n d e r l i n e t h e word t h a t i s t h e same. Frame 2 R e p e a t as f o r f r a m e one - s t u d y i n g e a c h word. 160 D, B, P, Q, D i s o r i e n t a t i o n B a s e - R a t e T e s t Use c a r d t o c o v e r a l l f r a m e s b e l o w t h a t b e i n g w o r k e d o n . Do n o t p r o v i d e any r e i n f o r c e m e n t , f e e d b a c k o r c o r r e c t i o n d u r -i n g t h e t e s t . "These words ( p o i n t t o f r a m e 1) a r e t h e same k i n d o f words as t h e s e " ( p o i n t b a c k t o d e m o n s t r a t o r f r a m e s t h e n p u t them o u t o f s i g h t ) • . " T h i s t i m e I am n o t g o i n g t o g i v e y o u any h e l p . Work s l o w l y and v e r y c a r e f u l l y . " "Look a t t h i s word ( p o i n t t o 'gobod') t h e n l o o k v e r y c a r e f u l l y a t a l l o f t h e s e words". " U n d e r l i n e t h e word o v e r h e r e ( p o i n t a l o n g r o w ) t h a t i s t h e same as t h i s word . 1 1 "OK. Go a h e a d . When y o u ' r e f i n i s h e d go o n t o t h e n e x t row l o o k v e r y c a r e f u l l y a t e a c h word." S u b j e c t must o b t a i n a t l e a s t 6/24 f r a m e s c o r r e c t t o e x c e e d what w o u l d be e x p e c t e d by c h a n c e a l o n e . One s p o n t a n e o u s c o r r e c t i o n may be i n c l u d e d i n e v e r y e i g h t c o r r e c t r e s p o n s e s . D E M O N S T R A T I O N 161 paqib padib paqip baqib paqib bepid bepip bed id bepid qepid samer samre samer asmer smaer varme varem avrme varme vamre B adeko adeko apeko adkeo adeok abeko caled calep calde caled claed caleb •* e D,B,P,Q DISORIENTATION B A S E - R A T E NAME SEX_ . S C H O O L DIV 162 qobod I qopod qoboq dobod qobod puqad I puqad pubad puqap duqad bodap I bodaq bobap bodap dodap budip Ibup ip budid qudip budip peqid I qeqid peqib peqid pepid qebud I qebup qebud qequp bebud qabed I qabeb pabed qaded qabed poduq I popuq podub doduq poduq 8 padeq I paded padeq badeq paqeq dobup I dobup dopup dobub qobup pedeq I qedeq pedeq pedep pebeq 10! 11 badip I badib baqip padip badip 12 debop I pebop debop deqop debod 13 dobip I bobip dodip dobiq dobip 14 bupeq I bubeq buped bupeq pupeq 15 qipub I pi pub qipud qiqub qipub 16 qupib I qubib qupip dupib qupib 17 duqeb I buqeb duqeb dupeb duqed 18 qipab I qipaq qipab qidab bipab 19 doqub I doqub doqup qoqub dodub 20 bepiq I bepib bediq qepiq bepiq 21 deqab I deqab peqab debab deqaq 22 puqad I puqad puqaq pudad buqad 23 bapiq I dapiq bapiq baqiq bapip 24 163 Sequence D i s c r i m i n a t i o n - Seat s u b j e c t comfortably at desk. - Present the t e s t and a medium sharp red p e n c i l and erase r . I n s t r u c t i o n s : (Examiner takes p e n c i l . Use a piece of p l a i n white card to cover a l l but the upper f i v e c e l l s of frame 1) ; ( f o r frames 1-9 provide ample reinforcement and feedback: "Good j o b ; t h a t ' s f i n e ; very good."; Frame 1: " I want to see i f t h i s ( point across top of f i v e c e l l s ) i s the same as this"(draw the card down to r e v e a l the bottom f i v e c e l l s ; run f i n g e r below the f i v e c e l l s ) . (Do not name or ask f o r a name f o r any of the f i g u r e s ; i f s u b j e c t spontaneously names f i g u r e s , continue only to r e f e r to " t h i s one" or "these ones ....") (Underline the top c i r c l e , saying) "This one i s the same as t h i s one". (Underline the bottom c i r c l e . ) (Repeat f o r the t r i a n g l e s and squares.) "These (run f i n g e r across top three f i g u r e s ) are the same as these" (put a l a r g e check mark to the r i g h t of frame 1 ) . Frame 2: (Reveal only the top f i v e c e l l s . ) " I want to f i n d out i f t h i s ( point to f i v e c e l l s ) i s the same as t h i s " ( r e v e a l bottom f i v e c e l l s and p o i n t to them). (Underline the top c r o s s , saying) "This one i s the same as t h i s one". (Underline the bottom cross.) (Underline the top s t a r , saying) "This one i s not the same as t h i s one". (State w i t h emphasis and put a l a r g e "x" through the bottom c i r c l e . ) "This (point to the top three f i g u r e s ) i s not the same as t h i s " ( point to the bottom three f i g u r e s , and put a l a r g e "x" to the r i g h t of frame 2). Frame 3: (Reveal both the top and bottom of frame 3, saying) " I want to f i n d out i f t h i s i s the same as t h i s " (run f i n g e r s u c c e s s i v e l y along the top and bottom frames). (Proceed w i t h u n d e r l i n i n g as above.) (Conclude) "These (run f i n g e r above top c e l l s ) are the same as these" (run f i n g e r along bottom c e l l s and put l a r g e check mark to the r i g h t ) . Frame 4: (Reveal top and bottom of each frame at once.) (Repeat as f o r frame 3, above, and promote a c t i v e p a r t i c i p a t i o n by the subje c t i n f i n i s h i n g o f f or a n t i c i p a t i n g your sentences.) 164 Frames 5-6: (Reveal top and bottom of each frame); (gi v e the c h i l d the p e n c i l ) . "OK. Now, you see these ( p o i n t i n g ) are the same." (Prompt the c h i l d only when and as r e q u i r e d , e.g. i f he f o r g e t s to u n d e r l i n e , or un d e r l i n e s the wrong one.) * ( I f the c h i l d does not put a check or "x" mark to the r i g h t of the frame a f t e r a reasonable p e r i o d of time, ask him:) "Are these ( p o i n t i n g ) the same as these?" ( I f response i s appropriate) "Good, then put an "x" r i g h t here." ( I f response i s i n a p p r o p r i a t e ) "No, they are not the same; look at them c a r e f u l l y and show me where they are not the same." (When the c h i l d has found the d i f f e r e n c e , have him put an "x" at the end of the frame.) Frames 7-8: (For each of the su c c e s s i v e frames, r e v e a l only the re l e v a n t p a i r . ) "OK. Without u n d e r l i n i n g see i f these are the same" (point to the halves of frame 7). "Just look at them c a r e f u l l y ; i f they are the same put a check mark here; i f they are not the same put an "x" here." Frames 9-14: (Reveal one p a i r of frames at a time.) "OK. I want you to do the r e s t of these by y o u r s e l f " (point from 9 to 14). " I am not going to help you." (Do not provide any reinforcement or feedback.) "Look at them c a r e f u l l y . Do not rush; i f they are the same put a check mark here; i f they are not the same put an "x" here." "OK. Go ahead." ( I f the c h i l d u n d e r l i n e s ) "No! Do not u n d e r l i n e ; j u s t look c a r e f u l l y . " ( I f the c h i l d appears confused or f a i l s to put a check mark or "x" mark) " I f they are the same put a check mark here; i f they are not the same put an "x" mark here." S c o r i n g : Subjects o b t a i n i n g f i v e out of s i x c o r r e c t i n c l u d i n g one spontaneous c o r r e c t i o n were permitted to proceed w i t h f u r t h e r t e s t i n g . -•S£QU£NC£r DISCRIMINATION s-MMf. srx... SCHOOL. T>£MONGTMT/OAJ o A • o A • + XX O -f O XX A| + |XXlD|A|-l-|XX|D|A|-f-+ a xx o n + A E d b TESTING A • O + XX • o A XX O + A • A • XX + o XX A O • + A • O -f XX • o A + XX o XX A + • A • XX + o XX A O - f - • 10 It Top H a l f of Sequence D i s c r i m i n a t i o n Test ON SUBJECT O 4 A • + • o XX A |Q14 |D |A |A10lXX|-flD JA|Q|XX|4|D NO PENCIL |D lO l4 lA l f f l |D|4|Q|A|XX Bottom H a l f of Sequence D i s c r i m i n a t i o n Test 4 O • XX A 14 167 T e s t i n g Procedure - S i n g l e L e t t e r Resequencing Base-Rate (Immediately precede t h i s t e s t w i t h the Sequence D i s c r i m i n a t i o n Screening.) M a t e r i a l s One medium sharp red p e n c i l ; demonstration frames p a r t B, s i n g l e l e t t e r resequencing base-rate t e s t , one p l a i n white card. General Seat the subj e c t comfortably at a desk. In demonstration and t e s t i n g use the white card to cover a l l frames below that being worked on. Demonstration B During the demonstration help the subj e c t as much as p o s s i b l e or necessary and pr o v i d e ample reinforcement ("Good j o b , t h a t ' s r i g h t , very good" . . . s m i l e ) ; provide feedback to guide the proper response, and c o r r e c t improper responses. This e x e r c i s e i s designed to focus the su b j e c t ' s a t t e n t i o n upon sequence changes, r e i n f o r c e such a t t e n t i o n and t r a i n the subjects f o r the subsequent task. Frame 1: Cover a l l but the f i r s t frame. "Look at t h i s word" (point to 'samer'). "Is t h i s word (point to the second word) the same as t h i s one?" ( p o i n t again to the f i r s t word). R e i n f o r c e f o r c o r r e c t response. I f response i s wrong, say "No! They are not the same—look at both of them very c a r e f u l l y " . For a l l s u b j e c t s "Show me what pa r t of t h i s word i s not the same as t h i s word". Subject does not have to name the l e t t e r s but merely i n d i c a t e which ones are not the same. I f he i s unable to see the l a c k of sameness, po i n t i t out to him. Proceed by comparing each subsequent word w i t h the f i r s t word. Have the subject u n d e r l i n e the word that i s the same as the f i r s t word. Frame 2: Proceed as f o r frame 1. I f a f t e r frame 2 the s u b j e c t c l e a r l y has not understood the t a s k , terminate. I f the subj e c t has understood the task, proceed w i t h the sequence d i s c r i m i n a t i o n base-rate t e s t . 168 Sequence D i s c r i m i n a t i o n Base-Rate Test Use the card to cover a l l frames below that being worked on. Do not provide reinforcement, feedback or c o r r e c t i o n . "These words (point to frame 1) are the same ki n d as these words" (point to demonstration frames, then remove from s i g h t ) . "This time I am not going to give you any h e l p . Work s l o w l y and very c a r e f u l l y . " "Look at t h i s word (point to 'anmor') then look c a r e f u l l y at each of these words." "Underline the word over here (point along row) that i s the same as t h i s word" (point to f i r s t word aga i n ) . "OK. Go ahead. When you're f i n i s h e d go onto the next l i n e . Look Very c a r e f u l l y at each word." Subject must o b t a i n at l e a s t 3/12 c o r r e c t to exceed chance score. Subjects o b t a i n i n g l e s s than three Out of 12 do not q u a l i f y f o r f u r t h e r t e s t i n g . One spontaneous c o r r e c t i o n may be i n c l u d e d i n the t o t a l of every four c o r r e c t responses. 169 SINGLE LETTER RESEQUENCING BASE RATE NAME SEX SCHOOL _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ anmor namor anmor amnor anmro 1 wanes waens wanse awnes wanes 2 co rev croev corve ocrev co rev 3 v imes v iems ivmes v imes v imse 4 meres meres em res meers merse 5 ca rem craem carme acrem carem 6 insor n isor isnor insor insro 7 arion airon arino arion . raion 8 sewan sewna sewan swean eswan 9 werse ewrse wrese weres werse 10 simer simre s imer smire ismer 11 munos munso umnos munos muons 12 170 'D, b, p, q' D i s o r i e n t a t i o n Treatment Tests M a t e r i a l s a. C o n t r o l and experimental matching models b. C o n t r o l and experimental matching cards c. Candy r e i n f o r c e r s : Smarties d. 'd, b, p, q' d i s o r i e n t a t i o n modified e. 'd, b, p, q' d i s o r i e n t a t i o n c o n t r o l f. One medium sharp red p e n c i l g. Demonstration A h. White cover card O r i e n t a t i o n matching task Purpose: To focus and r e i n f o r c e the s u b j e c t ' s a t t e n t i o n upon r e l e v a n t cues of o r i e n t a t i o n i n p r e p a r a t i o n f o r the 'd, b, p, q' d i s o r i e n t a t i o n treatment t e s t s . A s c e r t a i n i f s u b j e c t i s i n c o n t r o l or experimental group. I f c o n t r o l : Use the 'matching model' that i s a c o n f i g u r a t i o n of 'd, b, p and q' i n a c l o v e r l e a f c o n f i g u r a t i o n . A l s o , use the four matching cards that represent the quadrants of the 'matching model'. I f experimental: Use the 'matching model' that i s a c o n f i g u r a t i o n of four angles w i t h a dot i n each; use the four cards t h a t represent the quadrants of the 'matching model'. Procedure: Show to the s u b j e c t the one matching model th a t i s r e l e v a n t to h i s group; keep the model i n p l a i n view f o r him. The model should l i e f l a t upon the t a b l e . Between the model and the s u b j e c t p l a c e a temporary s h i e l d behind which the four cards are to be arranged as described below. P l a c e the cards s i d e by s i d e and about s i x inches from the p a r a l l e l edge of the desk. For each of the four t r i a l s arrange the cards as f o l l o w s : C o n t r o l Experimental 1. b p b d £. F L _ / 2. d q p b J 7 F b-3. b P b p L A. F 4. d b d q _J L —I "7 171 When the cards f o r t r i a l one are thus arranged, remove the temporary s h i e l d and say to the s u b j e c t : "Put these cards on top of these shapes to make them look l i k e t h i s " ( p oint to the model). V e r b a l l y encourage and r e i n f o r c e each c o r r e c t move; that i s , do not t e l l the s u b j e c t what to d o — l e t him do e v e r y t h i n g , but r e i n f o r c e each c o r r e c t move. The s u b j e c t must c o r r e c t l y match each of the four t r i a l s before going onto the next. T e l l the subject that he has done a good job as he completes each t r i a l and give him two or three Smarties. Demonstration A Give the c h i l d the red p e n c i l . Use demonstration frame 'A' as used preceding the ' d, b, p, q base-rate t e s t ' . Cover a l l but the f i r s t row. Say: "Remember when we d i d these before we looked at t h i s one ( p o i n t to 'pagib') and then we u n d e r l i n e d the one over here that i s the same; look c a r e f u l l y and u n d e r l i n e the one that i s the same." V e r b a l l y r e i n f o r c e the c o r r e c t response and give the c h i l d a Smartie. Correct any wrong r e s p o n s e s — p o i n t out where underlined words are not the same. B, d, p, q d i s o r i e n t a t i o n treatment Check i f s u b j e c t - c o n t r o l = c o n t r o l t e s t , or - experimental = modified t e s t . *In t h i s t e s t do not provide feedback, r e i n f o r c e or a s s i s t the s u b j e c t . Use the card to cover the frames below that being worked on. "In each row I want you to u n d e r l i n e the word over here (point to the four words to the r i g h t ) that i s the same as the f i r s t word." "This time I am not going to give you any h e l p . " "Work s l o w l y and very c a r e f u l l y . " " I f you do a good job I w i l l g i v e you more Smarties." Give a l l s u b j e c t s smarties at the end. One spontaneous c o r r e c t i o n may be i n c l u d e d i n every ei g h t c o r r e c t responses. Give second page of experimental t e s t to experimental s u b j e c t s on same day, e.g. m o r n i n g — a f t e r n o o n . Repeat as from * above. 172 173 D B P Q DISORIENTATION CONTROL NAME SEX SCHOOL qepab qepab qeqab qepad pepab 1 qapob qapob bapob qadob qapoq 2 bapeq baqeq bapep dapeq bapeq 3 dubop dubob qubop dubop dupop 4 pidoq pidoq pidop q idoq piboq 5 paqod daqod pa bod paqop paqod 6 qob id qopid dob id qobid qobiq 7 d e b o p deqop debop debod pebop 8 duqib duq ib dupib duqid buqib 9 bep iq bep iq bepib bed iq qepiq 10 piqud pipud piqud q i qud p iqub 11 q a p i b d a p i b qapib qab ib qap ip 12 badop dadop babop badop badoq 13 qabud babud qabup qabud qaqud 14 poduq podud boduq poquq poduq 15 bidap q idap bidad bidap bipap 16 d e q a b deqab deqap dedab qeqab 17 deqob deqoq debob peqob deqob 18 puqad puqad buqad puqaq pudad 19 paduq papuq padub daduq paduq 20 debup debup debuq bebup dedup 21 bupaq pupaq bupaq bubaq bupad 22 qobud pobud qodud qobud qobub 23 budep buqep budep pudep budeb 24 D B P Q N A M E . DISORIENTATION SEX MODIFIED SCHOOL 174 q e p a b q e p a b q e q a b q e p a d pepab 1 q a p o b q a p o b b a p o b q a d o b q a p o q 2 b a p e q b a q e q bapep d a p e q b a p e q 3 d u b o p d u b o b qubop d u b o p d u p o p 4 p i d o q p i d o q p i d o p q idoq p i b o q 5 p a q o d d a q o d p a b o d p a q o p p a q o d 6 q o b i d q o p i d d o b i d q o b i d q o b i q 7 d e b o p d e q o p d e b o p d e b o d p e b o p 8 d u q i b d u q i b d u p i b duq id b u q i b 9 b e p i q b e p i q b e p i b b e d i q q e p i q 10 p i q u d p i ' pud p i q u d q i q u d p i q u b 11 q a p i b d a p i b q a p i b q a b i b q a p i p 12 b a d o p d a d o p b a b o p b a d o p b a d o q 13 q a b u d b a b u d q a b u p q a b u d q a q u d 14 p o d u q p o d u d b o d u q p o q u q p o d u q 15 b i d a p q i d a p b i d a d b i d a p b i p a p 16 d e q a b d e q a b d e q a p d e d a b q e q a b 17 d e q o b d e q o q d e b o b p e q o b d e q o b 18 p u q a d p u q a d b u q a d p u q a q p u d a d 19 p a d u q p a p u q p a d u b d a d u q p a d u q 20 d e b u p d e b u p d e b u q b e b u p d e d u p 21 b u p a q p u p a q b u p a q b u b a q b u p a d 22 g o b u d p o b u d q o d u d q o b u d q o b u b 23 b u d e p b u q e p b u d e p p u d e p b u d e b 24 APPENDIX B RAW AND STANDARDIZED REGRESSION COEFFICIENTS CORRELATION MATRICES 175 TABLE 1 Raw and Standardized Regression C o e f f i c i e n t s : Experimental and C o n t r o l Treatment T o t a l Scores and A l l Independent V a r i a b l e s Raw Standardized Variable Total Total Base-Rate 0.655 0.636 Sex -0.118 -0.034 CA 0.363 0.175 MA . . -0.606 -0.267 Treatment 1.756 0.495 S«T -0.306 -0.089 CA'T -0.524 -1.731 MA»T 0.476 1.070 TABLE 2 Raw Regression Coefficients: Treatment IMFHVR and A l l Independent Variables Treatment Totals Variable I n i t i a l Medial Final Horizontal Vertical Rotational I-Base 0.299 0.268 0.406 -0.290 0.251 0, 284 M-Base -0.330 0.732 0.642 -0.068 0.391 0.333 F-Base -1,096 0.140 -.553 -0.597 0.018 0.073 H-Base 1.023 -0.258 -0.474 0.615 -0.280 0.036 V-Base 0.962 -0.001 -0.755 0.689 -0.222 -0.360 R-'Base 0.495 -0.092 -0.068 0.312 0.364 -0.017 Sex -0.583 0.075 0.246 0.050 -0.237 0.097 CA 0.111 0.373 -0.118 0.191 -0.092 0.223 MA -0.025 -0.218 -0.092 -0.012 -0.180 -0.199 Treatment 4.198 2.386 -0.537 1.559 0.878 1.978 S'T 0.449 -0.104 -0.087 0.204 -0.051 -0.111 CA«T -0.657 -0.267 -0.007 -0.291 -0.154 -0.279 MA'T 0.320 0.098 0.106 0.203 0.089 0.123 TABLE 3 Standardized Regression Coefficients: Treatment IMFHVR and A l l Independent Variables Variable I n i t i a l Medial Final Horizontal Vertical Rotational I-Base -0.339 0.374 0.926 -0.562 0.484 0.552 M-Base -0.351 0.960 1.374 -0.123 0.707 0.607 F-Base -0.737 0.116 0.750 -0.688 0.021 0,084 H-Base 0.835 -0.260 -0.780 0.860 -0.389 0.051 V-Base 0.520 -0.001 -0.821 0.638 -0.204 -0.335 R-Base 0.280 -0.064 -0.078 0.303 0.351 -0.017 Sex -0.258 0.041 0.219 0.038 -0.178 0.074 CA 0.082 0.340 -0.177 0.241 -0.115 0.283 MA -0.017 -0.181 -0.124 -0.014 -0.207 -0.231 Treatment 1.807 1.269 -0.466 1.150 0.643 1.462 S'T 0.200 -0.057 -0.078 0.156 -0.039 -0.085 CA»T -3.318 -1.668 -0.074 -2.515 -1.321 -2.423 MA'T 1.102 0.418 0.736 1.196 0.523 0.725 TABLE 4 Raw and Standardized Regression C o e f f i c i e n t s : Experimental Post-Treatment and C o n t r o l Treatment T o t a l Scores Raw Standardized Variable Total Total Base-Total 0.441 0.417 Sex -0.359 -0.101 CA 0.312 0.147 MA -0.483 -0.207 Treatment 1.526 0.419 S'T -0.767 -0.218 CA-T -0.500 -1.613 HA-T 0.394 0.864 TABLE 5 Raw Regression Coefficients: Control Treatment and Experimental Post-Treatment on IMFHVR and A l l Independent Variables Variable I n i t i a l Medial Final Horizontal Vertical Rotational I-Base -1.678 0.210 -0.083 -0.272 -1.032 -0.247 M-Base -1.590 0.581 0.124 -0.037 -0.810 -0.064 F-Base -2.260 0.055 -0.102 -0.474 -1.447 -0.397 H-Base 2.087 -0.028 -0.013 0.507 1.197 0.320 V-Base 1.796 0.098 0.009 0.444 1.356 0.150 R-Base 2.116 -0.364 0.244 0.196 1.244 0.542 Sex -0.455 0.024 0.029 -0.160 -0.271 -0.008 CA 0.292 0.110 -0.059 0.194 -0.085 0.193 MA 0.348 0.122 -0.108 -0.014 0.027 -0.325 Treatment -2.977 3.980 -0.386 0.532 1.937 3.271 S«T 0.270 -0.107 -0.268 -0.141 0.245 -0.272 CA«T -0.473 -0.520 0.101 -0.280 -0.277 -0.348 MA«T 0.152 0.239 -0.080 0.159 0.089 0.064 co o TABLE 6 Standardized Regression Coefficients: Control Treatment and Experimental Post-Treatment on IMFHVR and A l l Independent Variables Variable I n i t i a l Medial Final Horizontal Vertical Rotational I-Base -1.917 0.338 -0.225 -0.547 -1.791 -0.456 M-Base -1.705 0.875 0.314 -0.070 -1.319 -0.111 F-Base -1.534 0.052 -0.164 -0.567 -1.493 -0.435 H-Base 1.721 -0.033 -0.025 0.736 1.500 0.426 V-Base 0.980 0.075 0.011 0.426 1.125 0.132 R-Base 1.211 -0.293 0.330 0.198 1.081 0.501 Sex -0.203 0.015 0.030 -0.126 -0.184 -0.006 CA 0.218 0.116 -0.104 0.255 -0.096 0.232 MA -0.236 0.117 -0.174 -0.016 0.028 -0.357 Treatment 1.294 2.431 -0.397 1.171 1.279 2.295 S«T 0.122 -0.067 -0.285 -0.112 0.167 -0.198 CA'T -2.415 -3.727 1.216 -2.511 -2.148 -2.864 MA*T 0.529 1.166 -0.660 0.972 0.471 0.358 Correlation Analysis I. M. F and the Letter Errors of H. V and R TABLE 7 Correlation Matrix of Letters within Each Category of H, V and R Disorientations and I, M and P Positions of Base-Rate Errors Variable I n i t i a l Medial Final H(q-p) H(d-b) H(p-q) H(b-d) V(d-q) V(b-p) V(p-b) V(q-d) R(d-p) R(b-q) R(p-d) R(q-b) I n i t i a l Medial Final 1.000 -0.124 0.371 1.000 0.117 1.000 HOT. (q-p) (d-b) (p-q) (b-d) 0.465 0.284 0.397 0.284 0.053 0.470 0.116 0.199 -0.120 0.349 0.289 0.586 1.000 0.124 0.066 -;0.115 1.000 0.022 0.024 1.000 0.098 1.000 Vert.(d-q) (b-p) (P-b) (q-d) 0.180 0.385 0.206 0.414 0.587 0.058 0.296 0.074 0.215 0.340 0.215 0.563 0.110 0.125 0.166 -0.135 0.230 0.288 0.146 0.295 0.332 -0.030 0.118 0.100 0.101 0.110 0.164 0.257 1.000 -0.118 0.178 0.241 1.000 -0.079 0.241 1.000 -0.039 1.000 Rot. (d-p) 0.279 0.314 0.462 0.199 0.257 -0.071 0.453 0.207 0.040 0.301 0.201 1.000 (b-q) 0.4033 0.201 -0.024 0.248 0.251 0.238 -0.150 0.231 0.382 -0.044 0.2» -0.139 1.000 (p-d) 0.373 0.275 0.393 -0.011 0.122 0.178 0.530 0.234 0.094 0.120 0.447 0.269 0.097 1.000 (q-b) 0.234 0.074 0.396 -0.138 0.148 0.081 0.248 0.139 0.175 0.310 0.046 0.228 -0.044 -0.130 1.000 Co TABLE 8 C o r r e l a t i o n M a t r i x : E x p e r i m e n t a l and C o n t r o l T r e a t m e n t T o t a l S c o r e s B a s e V a r i a b l e T o t a l R a t e S e x CA MA T r e a t m e n t S - T C A - T MA-T T o t a l 1 .000 B a s e R a t e 0 .654 1 .000 S e x - 0 . 0 9 8 - 0 . 0 9 6 1 . 0 0 0 CA - 0 . 1 7 0 - 0 . 1 3 4 0 . 0 1 3 1 . 0 0 0 MA. • - 0 . 1 7 6 - 0 . 0 2 6 0 . 1 4 5 0 . 5 5 8 1 . 0 0 0 T r e a t m e n t . - 0 . 1 4 4 0 . 0 7 2 - 0 . 1 3 9 0 . 2 2 8 0 . 1 8 6 1 . 0 0 0 S«T - 0 . 3 3 4 - 0 . 3 1 7 0 . 2 9 1 - 0 . 1 0 5 0 . 0 2 9 0 . 1 8 4 1 .000 C A - T - 0 . 1 8 2 0 . 0 3 4 - 0 . 1 5 9 0 . 3 0 2 0 . 2 1 9 0 . 9 9 0 0 . 1 8 8 1 .000 MA-T - 0 . 1 7 9 0 . 0 2 5 ^ 0 . 1 3 7 0 . 2 7 1 0 . 2 8 5 0 . 9 8 1 0 . 2 1 4 0 . 9 8 6 1.000 TABLE 9 C o r r e l a t i o n M a t r i x : Treatment I , M, F, H, V, R and A l l Independent V a r i a b l e s I M F H V R I-Base M-Base F-Base H-Base V-Base R-Base I 1.000 M 0.124 1.000 F -0.017 0.259 1.000 H 0.485 0.637 0.396 1.000 V 0.599 0.439 0.445 0.341 1.000 R 0.733 0.221 0.304 0.555 0.437 1.000 I-Base 0.375 -0.063 -0.069 0.172 0.129 0.316 1.000 M-Base 0.270 0.702 0.454 0.568 0.521 0.316 -0.357 1.000 F-Base 0.030 -0.002 0.099 0.032 0.025 0.008 0.170 -0.021 1.000 H-Base 0.465 0.289 0.248 0.457 0.308 0.495 0.503 0.344 0.447 1.000 V-Base 0.272 0.393 0.025 0.419 0.224 0.094 0.300 0.316 0.499 0.290 1.000 R-Base 0.323 0.373 0.426 0.395 0.543 0.379 0.446 0.342 0.418 0.473 0.385 1.000 Sex -0.095 -0.088 0.065 0.030 -0.165 0.070 0.207 -0.228 -0.130 -0.139 -0.032 0.028 CA -0.241 -0.102 -0.241 -.019 -0.327 -0.097 -0.040 -0.052 -0.219 -0.178 -0.066 -0.028 MA -0.191 -0.046 -0.076 0.041 -0.297 -0.216 -0.098 -0.058 0.131 -0.152 0.029 0.158 Treat. -0.277 0.032 0.041 -0.070 -0.200 -0.229 0.079 -0.046 0.095 0.059 0.076 0.081 S-T -0.129 -0.391 -0.105 -0.242 -0.198 -0.285 0.151 -0.464 -0.206 -0.364 -0.243 -0.074 CA«T -0.314 0.020 0.015 -0.084 -0.239 -0.263 0.045 -0.038 0.045 0.032 0.048 0.044 MA'T -0.291 -0.003 0.022 -0.069 -0.245 -0.273 0.040 -0.062 0.067 0.015 0.047 0.049 Continuation TABLE 9 Correlation Matrix: Treatment I, M, F, H, V, R and A l l Independent Variables Sex CA MA TRT S«T CA»T MA'T Sex 1.000 CA 0.013 1.000 MA 0.145 0.558 TRT -0.139 0.228 S«T 0.291 -0.105 CA-T -0.159 0.302 MA«T -0.137 0.271 1.000 0.186 1.000 0.029 0.184 1.000 0.219 0.990 0.188 0.285 0.981 0.214 1.000 0.986 1.000 186 TABLE 10 Correlation Matrix: Control Treatment and Experimental Post-Treatment Total Scores Vari- Base ables Total Total Sex CA MA Treat. S«T CA«T MA-T Total 1.000 iTtTi ° - 4 7 8 i - 0 0 0 Sex -0.153 -0.096 CA -0.160 -0.134 MA -0.186 -0.026 1.000 0.013 1.000 0.145 0.558 1.000 Treat. -0.330 0.072 -0.139 0.228 0.186 1.000 S«T -0.444 -0.317 CA'T -0.358 0.034 MA*T -0.357 0.025 0.291 -0.105 0.029 -0.159 0.302 0.219 -0.137 0.271 0.285 0.184 0.990 0.981 1.000 0.188 1.000 0.214 0.986 1.000 187 TABLE 11 C o r r e l a t i o n M a t r i x : C o n t r o l Treatment and Experimental Post-Treatment* V a r i a b l e I n i t i a l M edial F i n a l H o r i z . V e r t i c . Rotat. I n i t i a l 1.000 Medi a l 0.315 1.000 F i n a l 0.181 0.378 1.000 H o r i z o n t a l 0.651 0.754 0.347 1.000 V e r t i c a l 0.751 0.636 0.416 0.597 1.000 R o t a t i o n a l 0.688 0.535 0.678 0.582 0.623 1.000 I-Base 0.136 -0.043 -0.245 -0.066 0.013 0.048 M-Base 0.319 0.639 0.659 0.642 0.553 0.504 F-Base -0.089 0.135 -0.049 0.010 -0.016 0.012 H-Base 0.328 0.370 0.206 0.418 0.306 0.373 V-Base 0.028 0.428 0.148 0.274 0.264 0.135 R-Base 0.288 0.303 0.247 0.231 0.370 0.359 Sex -0.113 -0.033 -0.212 -0.189 -0.124 -0.087 CA -0.126 -0.129 -0.050 0.013 -0.236 -0.171 MA -0.235 0.032 -0.193 -0.036 -0.115 -0.321 Treatment -0.466 -0.109 0.024 -0.309 -0.306 -0.234 S«T -0.207 -0.428 -0.419 -0.545 -0.194 -0.428 CA-T -0.478 -0.152 0.029 -0.315 -0.327 -0.277 MA'T -0.478 -0.125 -0.017 -0.311 -0.310 -0.297 *Note: The column values f o r base-rate, organismic, treatment and i n t e r a c t i o n v a r i a b l e s are i d e n t i c a l to those i n Table 30 and are t h e r e f o r e not reproduced here. REFERENCES 188 189 COMPUTER PROGRAMS B j e r r i n g , J.H. UBC TRIP: T r i a n g u l a r Regression Package. U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia Computing Centre. February, 1972. Fi n n , J . MULTIVARIATE VERSION 4, 1968. Adapted to the UBC Computer by Lee, S.S. ( l q 7 1 ) under the name MULTIVAR. Halm, J . UBC-BMD:08V, A n a l y s i s of Variance. Adapted from UCLA-BMD Documentation. U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia Computing Centre. November, 1971. Halm, J . I.TBC-BMD:02R, Stepwise Regression. Adapted from UCLA-BMD Documentation. U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia Computing Centre. June, 1972. i 190 : References Alexander, D., & Money, J . Reading a b i l i t y , o b j e c t constancy and Turner's syndrome. P e r c e p t u a l and Motor S k i l l s , 1965, 20, 981-984. Alexander, D., & Money, J . Reading d i s a b i l i t y and the problems of d i r e c t i o n sense. The Reading Teacher, 1967, 20, 404-409. American O p t i c a l Sight Screener. Kansas: American O p t i c a l Co., 1956. Anderson, I . H. An i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of r e v e r s a l e r r o r s i n reading. In L. M. S c h e l l (Ed.), Remedial r e a d i n g : An anthology of  sources. Boston: A l l y n and Bacon, 1968. Ayres, A. J . The Ayres Space Test. Los Angeles: Western Psycho-l o g i c a l S e r v i c e , 1962. Ba h r i c k , H. P., F i t t s , P. M., & Rankin, R. E. E f f e c t s of i n c e n t i v e s upon r e a c t i o n s to p e r i p h e r a l s t i m u l i . J o u r n a l of Experimental  Psychology, 1952, 44, 400-406. B a i n , D. A. V i s u a l d i s c r i m i n a t i o n of alphabet l e t t e r s by preschool  c h i l d r e n . Unpublished Master of A r t s T h e s i s , U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia, 1970. Bateman, B. Learning d i s o r d e r s . Review of Edu c a t i o n a l Research, 1966, 36, 93-119. Bender, L. V i s u a l motor g e s t a l t t e s t and i t s c l i n i c a l use. Research monograph, No. 3. New York: American O r t h o p s y c h i a t r i c A s s o c i a t i o n , 1952. Bender^ L. Problems i n c o n c e p t u a l i z a t i o n and communication i n c h i l d r e n w i t h developmental a l e x i a . In H. Hock and J . Zubin (Eds.), Psychopathology of communication. New York: Grune and S t r a t t o n , 1958, 155-176. Bennett, A. An a n a l y s i s of e r r o r s i n word r e c o g n i t i o n made by retarded readers. J o u r n a l of Edu c a t i o n a l Psychology, 1942, 33, 25-29. B e t t s , E. A., & A u s t i n , A. S. V i s u a l problems o f school c h i l d r e n . Chicago: The P r o f e s s i o n a l P r e s s , 1941. B e t t s , E. A. Reading: Visual-motor s k i l l s . Education, 1968, 88, 291-295. Bigelow, M. Alphabets and designs. M i n n e a p o l i s : Burgess P u b l i s h -in g Co., 1967. B i r c h , H. G. D y s l e x i a and the maturation of v i s u a l f u n c t i o n . In J . Money (Ed.), Reading d i s a b i l i t y : Progress and research needs  i n d y s l e x i a . B a l t i m o r e : The Johns Hopkins P r e s s , 1967. B l a i r , J . R. V i s u a l d i s c r i m i n a t i o n : Lower case l e t t e r c o n f u s i o n , 1969. (ERIC Document Reproduction S e r v i c e No. ED 029 770). Bliesmer, E. P. Reading a b i l i t i e s of b r i g h t and d u l l c h i l d r e n of comparable mental ages. The J o u r n a l of Ed u c a t i o n a l Psychology, 1954, 45, 321-331. Bond, G. L. Balow & Hoyt s i l e n t reading d i a g n o s t i c t e s t . Chicago: Lyons and Carnahan, Meredith Corp., 1970. Bond, G. L., & T i n k e r , M. A. Reading d i f f i c u l t i e s : T heir d i a g n o s i s  and c o r r e c t i o n . (2nd ed.). New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts, 1967. B o t e l , M. B o t e l Reading Inventory. Chicago: F o l l e t t P u b l i s h i n g Co., 1961. Brooks, C. R. R e l a t i o n s h i p among v i s u a l figure-ground p e r c e p t i o n , word r e c o g n i t i o n , IQ, and c h r o n o l o g i c a l age. Pe r c e p t u a l and Motor S k i l l s , 1971, 33, 59-62. Bryant, N. D. C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of d y s l e x i a and t h e i r remedial i m p l i c a t i o n . E x c e p t i o n a l C h i l d r e n , 1965, 31, 195-199. Buckingham, T. Type s i z e s of f i r s t - g r a d e t e x t books are test e d f o r r e a d a b i l i t y . Nation's Schools, 1933, 12, 45-48. Budoff, M., & Purseglove, E. Peabody P i c t u r e Vocabulary Test: Performance of i n s t i t u t i o n a l i z e d m e n t a l l y retarded adolescents. American J o u r n a l of Mental D e f i c i e n c y , 1963, 67, 756-760. Burn e t t , A. Comparison of the Peabody P i c t u r e Vocabulary Test, Wechsler Bel l e v u e and Stanford-Binet on educable r e t a r d a t e s . American J o u r n a l of Mental D e f i c i e n c y , 1965, 67\ 712-715. Buros, 0. K. (Ed.) The mental measurement yearbooks. New J e r s e y : The Gryphon P r e s s . V o l . I-VI. Cohen, J . M u l t i p l e r e g r e s s i o n as a general d a t a - a n a l y t i c system. P s y c h o l o g i c a l B u l l e t i n , 1968, 70(6), 426-443. 193 Cole, L. The improvement of reading with special reference to  remedial instruction. New York: Farrar and Rinehart, 1938. Covell, H. M., & Grady, A. (Eds.) Teachers' guidebook for see me  go. Toronto: Ryerson Press, 1966. Critchley, M. Developmental dyslexia. London: Heinemann Medical, 1964. Daniels, J. C , & Diack, H. Progress in reading. Nottingham: University of Nottingham, Institute of Education, 1956. Das, J. P. Changes in Stroop-test responses as a function of mental age. British Journal of Social and C l i n i c a l Psychology, 1970, 9, 68-73. Davidson, H. P. A study of reversals i n young children. Journal  of Genetic Psychology, 1934, 45, 452-465. Davidson, H. P. A study of the confusing letters, b, d, p, and q. Journal of Genetic Psychology, 1935, 4_7, 485-468. Dearborn, W. F., & Anderson, I. H. Aniseikonia as related to dis-a b i l i t y in reading. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1938, 23, 559-577. Dechant, E. V. Improving the teaching of reading. Englewood C l i f f s , N.J.: Prentice-Hall, 1964. Dechant, E. V. Diagnosis and remediation of reading d i s a b i l i t y . New York: Parker Publishing Company, 1968. De Hirsch, K., Jansky, J., & Langford, W. The prediction of reading, writing and spelling d i s a b i l i t i e s in children: A preliminary study. New York: Columbia University Press, 1965. 194 Dember, W. N. Psychology of p e r c e p t i o n . Toronto: H o l t , Rinehart and Winston, 1965. Dember, W. N., & E a r l , R. W. A n a l y s i s of e x p l o r a t o r y , m a n i p u l a t i v e and c u r i o s i t y behavior. P s y c h o l o g i c a l Review, 1957, 6_, 91-96. Dunn, L. M. Expanded manual f o r the Peabody P i c t u r e Vocabulary Test. Minneapolis: American Guidance S e r v i c e , 1965. Dunn, L. M., & Brooks, S. T. Peabody P i c t u r e Vocabulary Test performance of educable mentally retarded c h i l d r e n . T r a i n i n g School B u l l e t i n , 1960, 57, 35-40. Dunn, L. M., & H o t t e l , J . V. Peabody P i c t u r e Vocabulary Test performance of t r a i n a b l e mentally retarded c h i l d r e n . American J o u r n a l of Mental D e f i c i e n c y , 1961, 65_, 448-452. Eames, T. H. A comparison of the o c u l a r c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of unselected and reading d i s a b l e d groups. J o u r n a l of E d u c a t i o n a l Research, 1932, 25, 211-215. Eames, T. H. Eames Eye Test. New York: Harcourt, Brace, & Jovanovich, Inc., 1950. Edwards, A. L. S t a t i s t i c a l methods. Toronto: H o l t , Rinehart and Winston, 1968. E n g l i s h , H. B., & E n g l i s h , A. C. A comprehensive d i c t i o n a r y of  ps y c h o l o g i c a l and p s y c h o a n a l y t i c terms. New York: David McKay, 1958. F a r r i s , L. P. V i s u a l d e f e c t s as f a c t o r s i n f l u e n c i n g achievement i n reading. J o u r n a l of Experimental Psychology, 1936, J5, 58-60. 195 Frank, H. A comparative study of children who are backward in reading and beginners in the infant schools. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 1935, 5_, 41-57. Frostig, M. Developmental Test of Visual Perception. Palo Alto: Consulting Psychologists Press, 1966. Frostig, M. Visual modality and reading. Perception and reading. Newark, Delaware: International Reading Association, 1969. Furness, E. L. Perspective on reversal tendencies. Elementary English, 1956, 33, 38-41. Games, P. A. Multiple comparison of means. American Educational Research Journal, 1971, j$, 531-565. Gates, A. I. Gates Reading Diagnostic Test. New York: Bureau of Publications, Teachers College, Columbia University, 1945. Gates, A. I. Vocabulary control in basal reading materials. The Reading Teacher, 1961, 15, 81-85. Gates, A., & Bennett, C. C. Reversal tendencies in reading: Causes, diagnosis, prevention and correction. New York: Bureau of Publications, Teachers College, Columbia University, 1933. Gates, A., & McKillop, A. S. Gates-McKillop Reading Diagnostic Test. New York: Bureau of Publications, Teachers College, Columbia University, 1962. Ghent, L. Effects of orientation of recognition of geometric forms by retarded children. Child Development. 1964, 35, 1127-1136. Gibson, E. J . Experimental psychology of l e a r n i n g to read. In J . Money (Ed.), The d i s a b l e d reader, education of the d y s l e x i c c h i l d . B a ltimore: The Johns Hopkins P r e s s , 1966. Gibson, J . J . , & Gibson, E. J . P e r c e p t u a l l e a r n i n g and the theory of word p e r c e p t i o n . C o g n i t i v e Psychology, 1971, 2, 351-368. Gibson, E. J . , Osser, H., & P i c k , A. D. A study i n the development of grapheme-phoneme correspondence. J o u r n a l of V e r b a l Learning and V e r b a l Behavior, 1963, 2, 142-146. Girardeau, F. L. The f u n c t i o n of d i s c r i m i n a t i v e l e a r n i n g s e t s i n mongoloid and normal c h i l d r e n . J o u r n a l of Comparative and P h y s i o l o g i c a l Psychology, 1959, 52, 566-570. Good-Lite V i s i o n Test. Forest Park, 111.: Good-Lite V i s i o n Co., 1965. Greene, D. An educator challenges the p r o f e s s i o n a l man. Optometric  Weekly, 1966, 12, 28-33. Grossman, H. J . (Ed.) Manual on terminology and c l a s s i f i c a t i o n i n  mental r e t a r d a t i o n , Revised. Washington: American A s s o c i a t i o n on Mental D e f i c i e n c y , 1973. Hagen, J . W. S e l e c t i v e a t t e n t i o n i n mental r e t a r d a t e s . Develop- mental Psychology, 1971, 5_, 151-160. H a l l , V. C. V a r i a b l e s a f f e c t i n g the performance of young c h i l d r e n on a l e t t e r d i s c r i m i n a t i o n t a s k , 1968. (ERIC Document Reproduction S e r v i c e No. ED 020 797). c 197 H a r r i s , A. S. Readings on reading i n s t r u c t i o n . New York: David McKay Co., Inc., 1967. H a r r i s , A. S. How to i n c r e a s e reading a b i l i t y . (5th ed.). New York: David McKay Co., Inc., 1970. Hebb, D. 0. The o r g a n i z a t i o n of behavior. New York: W i l e y , 1949. Hendrickson, H. The developmental v i s i o n sequence. J o u r n a l of  the American Optometric A s s o c i a t i o n , 1962, J33, 98-103. Hendrickson, L. N., & Muehl, S. The e f f e c t s of a t t e n t i o n and motor response p r e t r a i n i n g on l e a r n i n g to d i s c r i m i n a t e b and d i n ki n d e r g a r t e n c h i l d r e n . J o u r n a l of E d u c a t i o n a l Psychology, 1962, 53, 236-241. H i l d r e t h , F. The success of young c h i l d r e n i n number and l e t t e r c o n s t r u c t i o n . C h i l d Development, 1932, 3, 1-14. H i l l , M. B. Experimental procedures i n the study of the process of word d i s c r i m i n a t i o n i n reading. J o u r n a l of Edu c a t i o n a l Research, 1936, 29, 473-482. House, B. J . , & Zeaman, D. A comparison of d i s c r i m i n a t i o n l e a r n i n g i n normal and mentally d e f e c t i v e c h i l d r e n . C h i l d Development, 1958, 29, 411-415. House, B. J . , & Zeaman, D. P o s i t i o n d i s c r i m i n a t i o n and r e v e r s a l s i n low grade r e t a r d a t e s . J o u r n a l of Comparative and P h y s i o l o g i c a l Psychology, 1959, 52, 564-565. 198 House, B. J . , & Zeaman, D. E f f e c t s of p r a c t i c e on the delayed response of r e t a r d a t e s . J o u r n a l of Comparative and P h y s i o l o g i c a l  Psychology, 1961, 54, 225-260. Hoyt, C. S. Test r e l i a b i l i t y estimated by a n a l y s i s of v a r i a n c e . Psychometrika, 1941, j6, 153-160. I l g , F. L., & Ames, L. B. Developmental trends i n reading behavior. J o u r n a l of Genetic Psychology, 1950, 7j6, 291-294. Johnson, D. S., & Myklebust, H. R. Learning d i s a b i l i t i e s : Educa- t i o n a l p r i n c i p l e s and p r a c t i c e s . New York: Grune and S t r a t t o n , 1967. Karraker, R. S. Teaching beginning readers to d i s t i n g u i s h between s i m i l a r l e t t e r s of the alphabet, 1968. (ERIC Document Reproduction S e r v i c e No. ED 020 860). Kass, N., & Stevenson, H. W. The e f f e c t s of p r e t r a i n i n g r e i n f o r c e -ment c o n d i t i o n s on l e a r n i n g by normal and retarded c h i l d r e n . American J o u r n a l of Mental D e f i c i e n c y , 1961, 66, 76-80. Kennedy, H. R e v e r s a l s , r e v e r s a l s , r e v e r s a l s . J o u r n a l of Experimental  Education. 1954, 22, 161-170. Keystone V i s u a l Survey Tests. M e a d v i l l e , Penn.: Keystone View Co., 1961. K i c k l i g h t e r , R.M. C o r r e l a t i o n of Peabody P i c t u r e Vocabulary Test Scores and Stanford Binet I n t e l l i g e n c e S c a l e , Form LM scores i n an educable mentally retarded p o p u l a t i o n . J o u r n a l of School  Psychology. 1964, 5 , 75-76. 199 K i r k , S., McCarthy, J . , & K i r k , W. I l l i n o i s Test of P s y c h o l i n g u i s t i c  A b i l i t i e s . Urbana: U n i v e r s i t y of I l l i n o i s P r e s s , 1968. K r i s e , M. An experimental i n v e s t i g a t i o n of t h e o r i e s of r e v e r s a l s i n reading. J o u r n a l of Edu c a t i o n a l Psychology, 1952, 4_3, 408-422. Laberge, D., Tweedy, J . R., & R i c k e r , J . S e l e c t i v e a t t e n t i o n : I n c e n t i v e v a r i a b l e s and choice time. Psychonomic Science, 1967, 8, 341-342. L i s s , M., & H a i t h , R. The speed of v i s u a l processing i n c h i l d r e n and a d u l t s : E f f e c t s of backward and forward masking. P e r c e p t i o n and Psychophysics, 1970, 8, 396-398. McAninch, H. I n v e s t i g a t i o n of r e c o g n i t i o n v a r i a n c e of p e r c e p t u a l s t i m u l i a s s o c i a t e d w i t h reading p r o f i c i e n c y , 1969. (ERIC Reproduction S e r v i c e No. ED 030 552). McNamara, W. J . , Paterson, D. G., & T i n k e r , M. A. The i n f l u e n c e of s i z e of type on speed of reading i n the primary grades. Sight-Saver Review, 1953, 23, 28-33. Mann, G. T. Rev e r s a l reading e r r o r s i n c h i l d r e n t r a i n e d i n dual d i r e c t i o n a l i t y . The Reading Teacher, 1969, 22, 646-648. Marchbanks, G. Cues by which c h i l d r e n recognize words. J o u r n a l of E d u c a t i o n a l Psychology, 1965, 56_, 57-61. M a r t i n , W. E., & Blum, A. I n t e r e s t , g e n e r a l i z a t i o n and l e a r n i n g i n m e n t a l l y normal and subnormal c h i l d r e n . J o u r n a l of Comparative and P h y s i o l o g i c a l Psychology, 1961, 54, 28-32. 200 Massachusetts V i s i o n Test. South Bridge, Mass.: American O p t i c a l Co., 1966. Master-Ortho Rater. Rochester: Bausch and Lomb, 1958. Mein, R. Use of the Peabody P i c t u r e Vocabulary Test w i t h s e v e r e l y subnormal p a t i e n t s . American J o u r n a l of Mental D e f i c i e n c y , 1962, 67, 269-273. Money, J . The d i s a b l e d reader. B a l t i m o r e : Johns Hopkins P r e s s , 1966. Moss, J . W. An e v a l u a t i o n of the Peabody P i c t u r e Vocabulary Test w i t h Primary Mental A b i l i t i e s Test and the 1937 Stanford-Binet on t r a i n a b l e c h i l d r e n . Unpublished paper, Urbana: U n i v e r s i t y of I l l i n o i s , 1962. Moyle, D. The teaching of reading. London: Ward Lock E d u c a t i o n a l , L t d . , 1970. Myklebust, H. R. D y s l e x i a i n c h i l d r e n . E x c e p t i o n a l C h i l d r e n , 1962, _2j9» 14-25. Newhall, S. M. I d e n t i f i c a t i o n by young c h i l d r e n of d i f f e r e n t l y o r i e n t e d v i s u a l forms. C h i l d Development, 1937, 8_, 105-111. Newson, E. The development of l i n e f i g u r e d i s c r i m i n a t i o n i n pre- school c h i l d r e n . Unpublished Ph.D. Th e s i s , Nottingham: U n i v e r s i t y of Nottingham, 1955. New York School V i s i o n Test. Rochester: Bausch and Lomb, 1957. Nodine, C. F. Development of v i s u a l scanning s t r a t e g i e s f o r d i f f e r e n t i a t i n g words. Developmental Psychology, 1971, 5_, 221-232. 201 Orton, S. T. S p e c i f i c reading d i s a b i l i t y — strephosymbolia. J o u r n a l of the American Me d i c a l A s s o c i a t i o n , 1928, 90, 1095-1099. Popp, H. M. V i s u a l d i s c r i m i n a t i o n of alphabet l e t t e r s . The Reading Teacher, 1964, 17, 221-225. Pote e t , J . A. R o t a t i o n or r e v e r s a l ? A proposed d e f i n i t i o n . E x c e p t i o n a l C h i l d r e n , 1968, 34, 760-761. Rabinovitch, R. D. Reading and l e a r n i n g d i s a b i l i t i e s . I n S. A r i e t a (Ed.), American Handbook of P s y c h i a t r y . New York: B a s i c Books, 1959, 1, 857-869. Reic h a r d , C. L., & W i l l i a m , R. An i n v e s t i g a t i o n of format f o r reading m a t e r i a l f o r the educable mentally r e t a r d e d . J o u r n a l of Reading, 1970, 13, 363-366. Robinson, H. B., & Robinson, M. N. The mentally retarded c h i l d . Toronto: McGraw-Hill, 1965. Rosenberg, S. Searching behavior i n the retarded as a f u n c t i o n of stimulus exposure c o n d i t i o n s and IQ. American J o u r n a l of Mental D e f i c i e n c y , 1961, 65, 749-752. R o s s i , A. 0. Genetics and l e a r n i n g d i s a b i l i t i e s . B e h a v i o r a l Neuropsychiatry, 1973, _, 2-7. Rothenberg, D. Untapped l e a r n i n g a b i l i t y i n t r a i n a b l e mentally retarded c h i l d r e n . E d u c a t i o n a l Therapy, 1969, 2, 275-309. Rudel, R. G. The absolute response i n t e s t s of g e n e r a l i z a t i o n i n normal and retarded c h i l d r e n . American J o u r n a l of Psychology, 1959, 72, 401-408. 202 Rudel, R. G., & Teuber, H. K. D i s c r i m i n a t i o n of d i r e c t i o n of l i n e i n c h i l d r e n . J o u r n a l of Comparative and P h y s i o l o g i c a l Psychology, 1963, 56(5), 892-898. R u s s e l l , D. H. C h i l d r e n l e a r n to read. (2nd ed.) Boston: Ginn and Co., 1961. Sanford, E.C. The r e l a t i v e l e g a b i l i t y of the s m a l l l e t t e r s . American  J o u r n a l of Psychology, 1888, 2, 402-435. S c h o n e l l , F. J . Backwardness i n the b a s i c s u b j e c t s , Edinburgh: O l i v e r and Boyd, 1942. School V i s i o n Test. Rochester: Bausch and Lomb, 1957. S h o t w e l l , A. M., O'Connor, G., Gabet, Y., & Dingman, H. R e l a t i o n of the Peabody P i c t u r e Vocabulary Test IQ to the Stanford-Binet IQ. American J o u r n a l of Mental D e f i c i e n c y , 1969, 74, 39-42. Smith, H. P. Psychology i n teaching reading. Englewood C l i f f s , N.J.: P r e n t i c e - H a l l , 1961. Smith, N. B. Matching a b i l i t y as a f a c t o r i n f i r s t grade reading. J o u r n a l of E d u c a t i o n a l Psychology, 1928, 19, 560-563. Smock, C. D., & Rubin, B. M. U t i l i z a t i o n of v i s u a l i n f o r m a t i o n i n c h i l d r e n as a f u n c t i o n of i n c e n t i v e m o t i v a t i o n . C h i l d Development, 1964, 35, 109-117. Solomon, R. L., & Postman, L. Frequency of usage as a determinant of r e c o g n i t i o n thresholds f o r words. J o u r n a l of Experimental  Psychology, 1952, 43, 195-201. 203 Spache, G. D. B i n o c u l a r Reading Test. M e a d v i l l e , Penn.: Keystone View Co., 1955. Spache, G. D. A comparison of the v i s u a l p r o f i l e s of retarded and non-retarded readers. J o u r n a l of Developmental Reading, 1962, 5, 101-108. S p i t z , H. H., & Thor, D. H. V i s u a l backward masking i n r e t a r d a t e s and normals. P e r c e p t i o n and Psychophysics, 1968, 4^ 245-246. S p i t z , H. H. E f f e c t s of age and mental r e t a r d a t i o n on temporal i n t e g r a t i o n of v i s u a l s t i m u l i . P e r c e p t u a l and Motor S k i l l s , 1971a, 33, 3-10. S p i t z , H. H. E f f e c t s of stimulus complexity on v i s u a l search performance of normals and educable r e t a r d a t e s . American J o u r n a l of Mental D e f i c i e n c y , 1971b, 76, 341-347. Stevenson, H. W. Learning of complex problems by normal and retarded s u b j e c t s . American J o u r n a l of Mental D e f i c i e n c y , 1960, 64, 1021-1026. Stevenson, H. W., & Iscoe, I . T r a n s p o s i t i o n i n the feebleminded. J o u r n a l of Experimental Psychology, 1955, 49, 11-15. Strang, R. Reading d i a g n o s i s and remediation. Newark: I n t e r n a t i o n a l Reading A s s o c i a t i o n , 1968. S t r a u s s , A., & Kephart, N. Psychopathology and education of the b r a i n - i n j u r e d c h i l d . New York: Grune and S t r a t t o n , 1955. 204 S t r a u s s , V. The p r i n t i n g i n d u s t r y . Washington: P r i n t i n g I n d u s t r i e s of America, Inc., 1967. Stromberg, E. L. The r e l a t i o n s h i p of measures of v i s u a l a c u i t y and ametropia to reading speed. J o u r n a l of A p p l i e d Psychology, 1938, 22, 70-78. Swanson, D. E., & T i f f i n , J . B e t t s ' p h y s i o l o g i c a l approach to the a n a l y s i s of reading d i s a b i l i t i e s as a p p l i e d to the c o l l e g e l e v e l . J o u r n a l of E d u c a t i o n a l Research, 1936, 2£, 433-448. Symmes, J . S., & Rapoport, J . L. Unexpected reading f a i l u r e . American J o u r n a l of Orth o p s y c h i a t r y , 1972, 4_2, 82-91. T a y l o r , E. A. C o n t r o l l e d reading: A c o r r e l a t i o n of d i a g n o s t i c teaching and c o r r e c t i v e techniques. Chicago, U n i v e r s i t y of Chicago P r e s s , 1937. Thor, D. H., & Thor, C. J . Dark i n t e r v a l t h r e s h o l d and i n t e l l i g e n c e . J o u r n a l of Experimental Psychology, 1970, 85, 270-274. T i n k e r , M. A. The r e l a t i v e l e g i b i l i t y of the l e t t e r s , the d i g i t s , and of c e r t a i n mathematical s i g n s . J o u r n a l of General Psychology, 1928, 1, 472-493. T i n k e r , M. A. Eye movements i n reading. Education, 1959, 9^» 5 7 5 ~ 579. T i n k e r , M. A. L e g i b i l i t y of p r i n t . Ames: Iowa State U n i v e r s i t y P r e s s , 1963. Ti n k e r , M. A. S u i t a b l e typography f o r beginners i n reading. Education, 1968, 88, 315-320. 205 Tobias, J . , & G o r e l i c k , J . The v a l i d i t y of the Peabody P i c t u r e Vocabulary Test as a measure of i n t e l l i g e n c e of retarded a d u l t s . T r a i n i n g School B u l l e t i n , 1961, 58, 92-98. Vernon, M. D. Backwardness i n reading. New York: Cambridge U n i v e r s i t y P r e s s , 1957.. Vernon, M. D. The psychology of p e r c e p t i o n . London: Penguin Books, 1963a. Vernon, M. D. Experiments i n v i s u a l p e r c e p t i o n . London: Penguin Books, 1963b. Vernon, M. D. Major approaches to word p e r c e p t i o n . Education, 1966, 86, 459-463. Vernon, M. D. P e r c e p t i o n through experience. London: Methuen and Co., L t d . , 1970. Wechsler, D. Wechsler I n t e l l i g e n c e Scale f o r C h i l d r e n . New York: P s y c h o l o g i c a l Corp., 1949. Wilson, F. T., & Fleming, C. W. C o r r e l a t i o n s of reading progress w i t h other a b i l i t i e s and t r a i t s i n grade one. J o u r n a l of Genetic Psychology, 1938, 53, 33-35. Winer, B. J . S t a t i s t i c a l p r i n c i p l e s i n experimental design. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1962. W i t t y , P., & Kopel, D. Functions a s s o c i a t e d w i t h the e t i o l o g y of reading d i s a b i l i t y . J o u r n a l of E d u c a t i o n a l Research, 1936, 24, 449-459. 206 W o h l w i l l , J . , & Wiener, M. D i s c r i m i n a t i o n of form o r i e n t a t i o n i n young c h i l d r e n . C h i l d Development, 1964, 35, 1113-1115. Wold, R. M. V i s u a l and p e r c e p t u a l aspects f o r the ac h i e v i n g and underachieving c h i l d . S e a t t l e : S p e c i a l C h i l d P u b l i c a t i o n s , I n c., 1969. Wolfe, M. An experimental study of r e v e r s a l s i n reading. American J o u r n a l of Psychology, 1939, 52, 533-561. Young, F. A. Reading,measures of i n t e l l i g e n c e and r e f r a c t i v e e r r o r s . American J o u r n a l of Optometry, 1963, 40, 257-264. Zahalkova, M. V. G e n e t i c a l i n v e s t i g a t i o n s i n d y s l e x i a . J o u r n a l of Medical G e n e t i c s, 1972, 9_, 48-51. Zac h r i s s o n , B. Studies i n the l e g i b i l i t y of p r i n t e d t e x t . U p s a l l a : Almqvist W i l k s e l l s , B o k t r y c k e r i , 1965. Zeaman, D., & House, B. J . The r o l e of a t t e n t i o n i n r e t a r d a t e d i s c r i m i n a t i o n l e a r n i n g . In N. R. E l l i s (Ed.), Handbook of mental d e f i c i e n c y . New York: McGraw-Hill, 1963, 159-223. 

Cite

Citation Scheme:

        

Citations by CSL (citeproc-js)

Usage Statistics

Share

Embed

Customize your widget with the following options, then copy and paste the code below into the HTML of your page to embed this item in your website.
                        
                            <div id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidgetDisplay">
                            <script id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidget"
                            src="{[{embed.src}]}"
                            data-item="{[{embed.item}]}"
                            data-collection="{[{embed.collection}]}"
                            data-metadata="{[{embed.showMetadata}]}"
                            data-width="{[{embed.width}]}"
                            async >
                            </script>
                            </div>
                        
                    
IIIF logo Our image viewer uses the IIIF 2.0 standard. To load this item in other compatible viewers, use this url:
http://iiif.library.ubc.ca/presentation/dsp.831.1-0054587/manifest

Comment

Related Items