Open Collections

UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

An investigation of reading and conceptual tempo measures Halpern, Honey Gael 1981

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

Item Metadata

Download

Media
831-UBC_1982_A2 H34.pdf [ 5.34MB ]
Metadata
JSON: 831-1.0078328.json
JSON-LD: 831-1.0078328-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 831-1.0078328-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 831-1.0078328-rdf.json
Turtle: 831-1.0078328-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 831-1.0078328-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 831-1.0078328-source.json
Full Text
831-1.0078328-fulltext.txt
Citation
831-1.0078328.ris

Full Text

AN INVESTIGATION OF READING AND CONCEPTUAL TEMPO MEASURES by HONEY GAEL HALPERN B.A., Mc G i l l University, 1965 M.Ed., M c G i l l University, 1976 A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF EDUCATION, i n THE FACULTY OF GRADUATE STUDIES • (Department of Language Iducation) . ; We accept t h i s thesis as conforming to the required standard THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA December 1981 ^ H o n e y Gael Halpern, 1981 I n p r e s e n t i n g t h i s t h e s i s i n p a r t i a l f u l f i l m e n t o f t h e r e q u i r e m e n t s f o r an advanced degree a t the U n i v e r s i t y o f B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a , I agr e e t h a t t h e 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 t h e head o f my department o r by h i s o r h e r r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s . I t i s u n d e r s t o o d t h a t c o p y i n g o r p u b l i c a t i o n o f t h i s t h e s i s f o r f i n a n c i a l g a i n s h a l l n o t 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 <J^*J^s^^si_ CTQI^A^COI-I 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 2075 Wesbrook P l a c e Vancouver, Canada V6T 1W5 Date ABSTRACT This study gathered empirical data concerning the requirements of tasks u t i l i z e d to measure reading i n r e l a t i o n to the requirements of tasks u t i l i z e d to measure conceptual tempo. The administration of the Matching Familiar Figures Test (MFFT) indicates either a r e f l e c t i v e or an impulsive conceptual tempo. In order to investigate the possible r e l a t i o n s h i p between conceptual tempo and reading, a l l subjects, impulsives and r e f l e c t i v e s , were presented with reading tasks that approximated the MFFT in problem solving demands, and with reading demands that did not, i . e . some tasks with s i m i l a r d i s t r a c t o r s and some with d i s s i m i l a r d i s t r a c t o r s . The influence of the d i f f i c u l t y of the material was also investigated. The study employed both word recognition and comprehension tasks. One hundred and sixty - e i g h t grade two students i n New Westminister, B r i t i s h Columbia were administered the MFFT and the eight reading tasks. Second language learners and s p e c i a l education students were not included i n the data a n a l y s i s . The sample was i d e n t i f i e d as having middle socio-economic status by teachers and p r i n c i p a l s . The data were analyzed i n a one-way MANOVA with conceptual tempo c o n s t i t u t i n g the single independent v a r i a b l e . Impulsives and r e f l e c t i v e s were compared across a l l the reading tasks i n order to i d e n t i f y s i g n i f i c a n t differences between the two groups. An alternate analysis of the data, a 2x2x2 MANOVA with repeated measures, was also performed. The dependent variables were comprehension and word recognition. The multivariate analysis of variance for conceptual tempo was found to be s i g n i f i c a n t F_ (8/88)=2.976, £.= .005. In the word recognition tasks, when the d i s t r a c t o r s were s i m i l a r , an e f f e c t of conceptual tempo i s apparent, F (1 ) = 5-384, £.= .021, F (1 ) = 5.997, £=.016. When the d i s t r a c t o r s i i i were d i s s i m i l a r , no e f f e c t of conceptual tempo i s apparent, F_ (1 ) = 2.523, £.= .111, £ (1) =.001, £.= .930. In the comprehension tasks, impulsives made more errors on both the si m i l a r and d i s s i m i l a r tasks. Overall, the impulsives made more errors than the r e f l e c t i v e s i n reading tasks having s i m i l a r d i s t r a c t o r s and impulsives made as many as or more errors than r e f l e c t i v e s i n reading tasks having d i s s i m i l a r d i s t r a c t o r s . The r e s u l t s of the 2x2x2 MANOVA were si m i l a r to the one-way MANOVA. Thesis Supervisor i v TABLE OF CONTENTS ABSTRACT i i TABLE OF CONTENTS i v LIST OF TABLES v i LIST OF APPENDICES v i i i ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS i x CHAPTER I: THE PROBLEM 1 Statement of the Problem 3 Objectives of the Study 5 Hypotheses 6 De f i n i t i o n s of Terms Used 6 P i l o t Study 7 Signif i c a n c e of the Study . 8 CHAPTER I I : REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE 11 Theory and Research Related to Conceptual Tempo 11 Theory and Research Related to Measurement of Reading and Conceptual Tempo 15 Summary 24 CHAPTER I I I : DESCRIPTION OF THE STUDY 28 P i l o t Study 28 P i l o t Samples 28 P i l o t Sample 1 28 P i l o t Sample II 28 The Reading Tasks 29 Word Recognition Tasks 30 Comprehension Tasks 32 The Matching Familiar Figures Test 36 Order of Presentation of Reading Tasks 36 Procedure of the P i l o t Study 39 Scoring of P i l o t Study 41 Analysis and Interpretation of Data from P i l o t Study . 43 Objectives of the Study 44 Selection of Subjects . . . 45 Procedure 45 The Reading Tasks 45 The Matching Familiar Figures Test 46 Hypotheses 47 Analysis of Data 47 Summary 48 V CHAPTER IV: RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 9^ Analysis of the data 49 Hypothesis One: 50 Hypothesis Two: 51 Hypothesis Three: 51 Hypothesis Four: 56 Hypothesis Five: 56 Hypothesis Six: 57 Hypothesis Seven: 57 Hypothesis Eight: 58 Alternative Analysis of the Data 59 Summary 69 CHAPTER V: SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, AND IMPLICATIONS . . 72 Summary 72 Procedures 72 Analysis of Data and Hypotheses 73 Conclusions 71* Variables to be Considered in the Measurement of Reading 77 Implications of the Study 79 Classroom Implications 79 Research Implications 80 REFERENCE NOTE 82 REFERENCES 83 APPENDICES 87 v i LIST OF TABLES Table 1 Description of Word Recognition Passages 31 2 Description of Comprehension Passages 34 3 Order of Reading Tasks 38 4 P i l o t Study Error Scores and Mean Error Scores 42 5 Mean Error Scores and Standard Deviations f o r the Dependent Variables ..' 52 6 M u l t i v a r i a t e Analysis f o r Conceptual Tempo 52 7 Analysis of Variance f o r Dependent Variable Easy Vocabulary S i m i l a r D i s t r a c t o r s Word Recognition Task 53 8 Analysis of Variance f o r Dependent Variable Easy Vocabulary D i s s i m i l a r D i s t r a c t o r s Word Recogntion Task . . . 53 9 Analysis of Variance f o r Dependent Variable Hard Vocabulary Similar D i s t r a c t o r s Word Recognition Task 53 10 Analysis of Variance f o r Dependent Variable Hard Vocabulary D i s s i m i l a r D i s t r a c t o r s Word Recognition Task 54 11 Analysis of Variance f o r Dependent Variable Easy Vocabulary S i m i l a r D i s t r a c t o r s Comprehension Task 54 12 Analysis of Variance f o r Dependent Variable Easy Vocabulary D i s s i m i l a r D i s t r a c t o r s Comprehension Task . . 54 13 Analysis of Variance f o r Dependent Variable Hard Vocabulary S i m i l a r D i s t r a c t o r s Comprehension Task 55 14 Analysis of Variance for Dependent Variable Hard Vocabulary D i s s i m i l a r D i s t r a c t o r s Comprehension Task 55 15 Mu l t i v a r i a t e Analyses of Dependent Variables, Word Recognition and Comprehension Tasks 60 16 Analysis of Variance of Dependent Variable, Word Recognition Task 60 17 Mean Error Scores f o r independent Variable, Conceptual Tempo, i n Word Recognition Tasks 61 18 Mean Error Scores f o r Independent Variable, D i f f i c u l t y Level, i n Word Recognition Task 61 19 Mean Error Scores for Independent Variable, D i s t r a c t o r Type, i n Word Recognition Tasks- 61 20 Mean Error Scores f o r Independent Variables, Conceptual Tempo and D i f f i c u l t y Level, i n Word Recognition Tasks 62 v i i 21 Mean Error Scores f o r Independent Variables, Conceptual Tempo and D i s t r a c t o r Type, i n Word Recognition Tasks 62 22 Mean Error Scores f o r Independent Variables, D i s t r a c t o r Types and D i f f i c u l t y Levels, i n Word Recognition Tasks • 63 23 Mean Error Scores f o r Independent Variables, Conceptual Tempo, D i f f i c u l t y Levels and Di s t r a c t o r Types, i n Word Recognition Tasks 63 24 Analysis of Variance of Dependent Variable, Comprehension Task 64 25 Mean Error Scores f o r Independent Variable, Conceptual Tempo, i n Comprehension Tasks 65 26 Mean Error Scores f o r Independent Variable D i f f i c u l t y Level, i n Comprehension Tasks 65 27 Mean Error Scores f o r Independent Variable, D i s t r a c t o r Type, i n Comprehension Task 65 28 Mean Error Scores f o r Independent Variables, Conceptual Tempo and D i f f i c u l t y Level, i n Comprehension Tasks ••••• 66 29 Mean Error Scores f o r Independent Variables Conceptual Tempo and D i s t r a c t o r Type, i n Comprehension Tasks .. 66 30 Mean Error Scores f o r Independent Variables, D i s t r a c t o r Type and D i f f i c u l t y Level, i n Comprehension Tasks 67 31 Mean Error Scores f o r Independent Variables, Conceptual Tempo, Di s t r a c t o r Type and D i f f i c u l t y Level, i n Comprehension Tasks • 67 v i i i LIST OF APPENDICES Appendix A Matching Familiar Figures Test 87 B - l Easy Vocabulary Similar D i s t r a c t o r s Word Recognition Task 1 117 B-2 Stimulus Words, Task 1 118 B-3 Easy Vocabulary D i s s i m i l a r D i s t r a c t o r s Word Recognition Task 2 119 B-4 Stimulus Words, Task 2 120 B-5 Hard Vocabulary Similar D i s t r a c t o r s Word Recognition Task 3 121 B-6 Stimulus Words, Task 3 122 B-7 Hard Vocabulary D i s s i m i l a r D i s t r a c t o r s Word Recognition Task 4 123 B-8 Stimulus Words, Task 4 124 B-9 Easy Vocabulary Similar D i s t r a c t o r s Comprehension Task 5 125 B-10 Easy Vocabulary D i s s i m i l a r D i s t r a c t o r s Comprehension Task 6 126 B - l l Hard Vocabulary Similar D i s t r a c t o r s Comprehension Task 7 127 B-12 Hard Vocabulary D i s s i m i l a r D i s t r a c t o r s Comprehension Task 8 128 C Latency Response Times in Seconds and T o t a l Error Scores 129 D Kuder- Richardson Formula 21 R e l i a b i l i t i e s of Read ing Tasks 134 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I wish to thank the members of my committee for t h e i r advice and encouragement i n the preparation of t h i s d i s s e r t a t i o n . In p a r t i c u l a r , I wish to acknowledge the contribution of my chairman, Dr. Robert Chester, who has been e s p e c i a l l y supportive of a l l my endeavors during my studies at the University of B r i t i s h Columbia. I would also l i k e to o f f e r my gratitude to my family, f o r t h e i r patience and understanding. CHAPTER I : THE PROBLEM Educators, i n t h e i r commitment to improve the l e a r n i n g environments o f students, have f r e q u e n t l y u t i l i z e d the f i n d i n g s of r e l a t e d d i s c i p l i n e s i n co-ordinated research e f f o r t s . Some of the most productive i n s i g h t s f r e q u e n t l y a r i s e from the " i n t e r p l a y and f r i c t i o n between the d i f f e r e n c e s of d i s p a r a t e d i s c i p l i n e s . " The i n t e r e s t of many researchers i n c o g n i t i v e s t y l e s r e f l e c t s j u s t such a tendency. The term i t s e l f may be described as "a term that r e f e r s to s t a b l e i n d i v i d u a l d i f f e r e n c e s i n mode of perceptual o r g a n i z a t i o n and conceptual o r g a n i z a t i o n of the e x t e r n a l environment" (Kagan, Moss & S i g e l , 1963, p. 24). The " i n d i v i d u a l d i f f e r e n c e " of i n t e r e s t to t h i s research paper i s the tendency o f c e r t a i n c h i l d r e n to act i m p u l s i v e l y or r e f l e c t i v e l y when attempting to solve problems i n which a degree of high response u n c e r t a i n t y e x i s t s . This p a r t i c u l a r p s y c h o l o g i c a l dimension i s c a l l e d conceptual tempo. A number of i n v e s t i g a t i o n s of conceptual tempo have been reported i n the l i t e r a t u r e and v a r i a b l e s of educational concern have been i d e n t i f i e d , namely, reading readiness f a c t o r s , v i s u a l perception, and p e r s o n a l i t y a t t r i b u t e s . Of major i n t e r e s t to t h i s researcher are the i n v e s t i g a t i o n s i n t o the c o r r e l a t i o n s between the measurement of reading and conceptual tempo. These e m p i r i c a l studies argue that there i s indeed a 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 a b i l i t y and conceptual tempo (Kagan, 1965a, 1965b). Broadly s t a t e d , the l i t e r a t u r e suggests that impulsive students w i l l have d i f f i c u l t y with reading while r e f l e c t i v e students w i l l not. In l i g h t of the f a c t that the i m p l i c a t i o n s of these g e n e r a l i z a t i o n s could i n f l u e n c e classroom teaching p r a c t i c e , i t may be necessary to c a r e f u l l y analyze the nature of the t e s t s that form the basis of these 1 2 inferences. The f i r s t of these tests i s the Matching Familiar Figures Test, (Note 1 ) , the most widely used measure of conceptual tempo. The test requires the subject to respond to a forced-choice task by choosing from among six s i m i l a r f i g u r e s , one matching the stimulus f i g u r e . The tests used to measure reading often have requirements that approximate the task requirements of the MFFT. For example, i n the D u r r e l l (1965) Test of Visual Discrimination, the subject i s asked to select the correct word (according to s p e c i f i e d c r i t e r i a ) from among s i m i l a r d i s t r a c t o r s . In t h i s t e s t the teacher holds up a word on a flashcard for three seconds and the c h i l d i s directed to draw a c i r c l e around the same word on his paper. To i l l u s t r a t e , given the word l a s t . the student selects an answer from s l o t . l a s t . l o s t , l o t . b l a s t . or again, given the word secure the choices are sure, obscure. scare . secure. second, server. cure. S i m i l a r l y , i n the Gates MacGinitie Reading Test (1978), the students are presented with a picture and four words. They are to underline the word that describes the pict u r e . When presented with a picture of four children singing, subjects must choose from the words, sign, s i n . sing. sink. Given a picture of a baseball bat, they must choose from the words, bet. b a i t . bat. b i t . Given a picture of a car t i r e , they must choose from the words, tear. tore. t i r e . tour. The main difference between reading tasks of t h i s sort and the tes t s for conceptual tempo l i e s i n the fact that the former focus on words while the l a t t e r d i r e c t the subject to d i f f e r e n t i a t e among l i n e drawings.. When the reading task c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s c l o s e l y approximate the task c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of the test for conceptual tempo there i s a strong p o s s i b i l i t y that c o r r e l a t i o n s between the r e s u l t s of the two tests are prim a r i l y due to t h e i r s t r u c t u r a l s i m i l a r i t y . The foregoing i s the cent r a l concern of t h i s study, namely, that the 3 task demands (or demand c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of the tasks) oftentimes determine the manner i n which the c h i l d w i l l respond to that task. That i s to say, the demand c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of some reading tasks could influence the reader to respond i n an impulsive rather than a r e f l e c t i v e manner. I f t h i s i s so, then inferences about r e l a t i o n s h i p s between conceptual tempo and reading a b i l i t y need to be re-examined. Statement of the Problem Current research l i t e r a t u r e suggests that reading i s influenced by personal i n c l i n a t i o n towards r e f l e c t i v e or impulsive behavior. Yet, most empirical studies of conceptual tempo and reading do not demonstrate a d i s t i n c t i o n between t a s k - s p e c i f i c responses and non-task-specific responses. They have generally f a i l e d to take into account the p o s s i b i l i t y that s i g n i f i c a n t r e l a t i o n s h i p s could have arisen from the s i m i l a r i t y of task requirements of the tests rather than from any r e a l r e l a t i o n s h i p between the t e s t s . The present study proposes to examine the task requirements used to measure conceptual tempo i n r e l a t i o n to those used i n the measurement of selected reading tasks. It asks, can the r e l a t i o n s h i p between conceptual tempo and reading i n part be explained by c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of the reading measurements used rather than by the cognitive aspects of the reading act per se? Conceptual tempo i s measured by forced choice problems with high response uncertainty, such as in the MFFT (Appendix A). Subjects are required to choose the standard from among si x s i m i l a r f i g u r e s , e.g., houses, g i r a f f e s , cowboys. The standard i s provided on one page and the matching f i g u r e , along with f i v e s i m i l a r d i s t r a c t o r s , i s presented on a page next to the standard. Some reading tests u t i l i z e problems of similar' design to measure reading. When the task c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of the reading test approximate the task c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of the MFFT, there are l i k e l y to 4 be more errors i n both tests for subjects who respond impulsively (quickly but with low accuracy), and fewer errors i n both tests for subjects who respond r e f l e c t i v e l y (slowly but with high accuracy). Thus, i n order to investigate the possible r e l a t i o n s h i p between conceptual tempo and reading i t i s necessary to present a l l subjects (impulsive and r e f l e c t i v e ) with two kinds of reading tasks, some that approximate the MFFT i n problem-solving demands, and some that do not, i . e . , some with s i m i l a r d i s t r a c t o r s and others with d i s s i m i l a r d i s t r a c t o r s . Another variable discussed i n the l i t e r a t u r e on conceptual tempo and reading i s the d i f f i c u l t y of the reading material. Subjects tend to exhibit more impulsive behavior ( i . e . , quick response and high errors) as the material reaches the f r u s t r a t i o n l e v e l of r e a d a b i l i t y . When, however, the material i s at the subject's independent l e v e l , 99$ word recognition, 90% comprehension (Betts, 1946), there i s greater l i k e l i h o o d of r e f l e c t i v e responses (slow response, low e r r o r s ) . This study plans to investigate the r o l e of r e a d a b i l i t y in reading tasks and the i m p u l s i v e - r e f l e c t i v e dimension, but since the central focus i s on measurement, r e a d a b i l i t y (or easy and hard vocabulary) w i l l be studied under conditions of high response uncertainty u t i l i z i n g both s i m i l a r and d i s s i m i l a r d i s t r a c t o r s . Studies of reading a b i l i t y , l i k e standardized reading t e s t s , are usually i n two parts, a word recognition section and a comprehension section. Kagan (1965a, 1965b), using standardized instruments, tested children's reading and drew conclusions about conceptual tempo and reading based on these t e s t s . In order, then, to investigate the subjects' responses to task s p e c i f i c tests of reading and conceptual tempo, t h i s study employs both word recognition and comprehension t e s t s . In summary, the following variables w i l l enter into t h i s study, 1) word recognition and comprehension reading tasks, 2) easy and hard 5 vocabulary of reading tasks, 3) s i m i l a r and d i s s i m i l a r d i s t r a c t o r s i n the reading task, and 4) conceptual tempo. Objectives of the Study The major objectives of t h i s study are to answer the following questions: 1. In easy vocabulary word recognition tasks, w i l l r e f l e c t i v e s respond d i f f e r e n t l y than impulsives when the reading task i s s i m i l a r i n task requirements to the test for conceptual tempo? 2. In easy vocabulary word recognition tasks, w i l l r e f l e c t i v e s respond d i f f e r e n t l y than impulsives, when the reading task i s not s i m i l a r i n task requirements to the test for conceptual tempo? 3. In hard vocabulary word recognition tasks, w i l l r e f l e c t i v e s respond d i f f e r e n t l y than impulsives, when the reading task i s s i m i l a r i n task requirements to the test for conceptual tempo? 4. In hard vocabulary word recognition tasks, w i l l r e f l e c t i v e s respond d i f f e r e n t l y than impulsives, when the reading task i s not s i m i l a r i n task requirements to the test for conceptual tempo? 5. In easy vocabulary comprehension tasks, w i l l r e f l e c t i v e s respond d i f f e r e n t l y than impulsives, when the reading task i s si m i l a r i n task requirements to the test for conceptual tempo? 6. In easy vocabulary comprehension tasks, w i l l r e f l e c t i v e s respond d i f f e r e n t l y than impulsives, when the reading task i s not si m i l a r i n task requirements to the test for conceptual tempo? 7. In hard vocabulary comprehension tasks, w i l l r e f l e c t i v e s respond d i f f e r e n t l y than impulsives, when the reading task i s si m i l a r i n task requirements to the test for conceptual tempo? 8. In hard vocabulary comprehension tasks, w i l l r e f l e c t i v e s respond d i f f e r e n t l y than impulsives, when the reading task i s not si m i l a r i n 6 task requirements to the test for conceptual tempo? Hypotheses The following hypotheses w i l l be tested: 1. In an easy vocabulary word recognition task with s i m i l a r d i s t r a c t o r s there w i l l be a difference between impulsives' and r e f l e c t i v e s ' scores. 2. In an easy vocabulary word recognition task with d i s s i m i l a r d i s t r a c t o r s there w i l l be no difference between impulsives' and r e f l e c t i v e s ' scores. 3. In a hard vocabulary word recognition task with s i m i l a r d i s t r a c t o r s there w i l l be a difference between impulsives' and r e f l e c t i v e s ' scores. 4. In a hard vocabulary word recognition task with d i s s i m i l a r d i s t r a c t o r s there w i l l be no difference between impulsives' and r e f l e c t i v e s ' scores. 5. In an easy vocabulary comprehension task with s i m i l a r d i s t r a c t o r s there w i l l be a difference between impulsives' and r e f l e c t i v e s ' scores. 6. In an easy vocabulary comprehension task with d i s s i m i l a r d i s t r a c t o r s there w i l l be no difference between impulsives' and r e f l e c t i v e s ' scores. 7. In a hard vocabulary comprehension task with s i m i l a r d i s t r a c t o r s there w i l l be a difference between impulsives' and r e f l e c t i v e s ' scores. 8. In a hard vocabulary comprehension task with d i s s i m i l a r d i s t r a c t o r s there w i l l be no difference between impulsives' and r e f l e c t i v e s ' scores. D e f i n i t i o n s of Terms Used For t h i s study, these terms were defined as follows: 1. Comprehension i s an a b i l i t y measured by the accuracy of response to the 7 c o r r e c t word among three a l t e r n a t i v e s r e p l a c i n g every f o u r t h or f i f t h word i n a passage o f approximate ly 165 words . 2. Conceptual tempo i s a p s y c h o l o g i c a l c o n s t r u c t that de sc r ibe s an i n d i v i d u a l ' s tendency to reac t i m p u l s i v e l y or r e f l e c t i v e l y i n problem s i t u a t i o n s where a h i g h degree o f response u n c e r t a i n t y e x i s t s . 3. D i s s i m i l a r d i s t r a c t o r s are de f ined as those words tha t g r e a t l y d i f f e r i n grapho-phonemic fea tures from the s t i m u l u s word. 4. Easy vocabulary i s de f ined as grade two read ing l e v e l . 5 . Hard vocabulary i s de f ined as grade four read ing l e v e l . 6. Impuls ive i s de f ined as responding to a problem s i t u a t i o n o f h igh response u n c e r t a i n t y w i t h f a s t response time and h i g h e r r o r s . 7. R e f l e c t i v e i s de f ined as responding to a problem s i t u a t i o n o f h i g h response u n c e r t a i n t y w i t h slow response t ime and low e r r o r s . 8. S i m i l a r d i s t r a c t o r s are de f ined as those words c l o s e l y approximat ing the s t imulus word i n grapho-phonemic f e a t u r e s . 9. Word r e c o g n i t i o n i s an a b i l i t y measured by the accuracy o f response to ta sks that r e q u i r e the s e l e c t i o n o f a d i c t a t e d word from among four c h o i c e s . P i l o t Study Two p i l o t s t u d i e s were c a r r i e d out i n suburban areas o f Vancouver to i d e n t i f y any unexpected p o i n t s o f d i f f i c u l t y i n a d m i n i s t e r i n g the t e s t s and to e s t a b l i s h such f a c t o r s as approximate l e n g t h o f t ime f o r each t e s t , w i l l i n g n e s s o f s tudents to complete the t e s t s , and the most appropr i a te method o f r e c o r d i n g measures for s c o r i n g . One f u r t h e r purpose was to e s t a b l i s h the s u i t a b i l i t y o f the comprehension passages f o r the sample. A complete d i s c u s s i o n o f the p i l o t study and i t s f i n d i n g s i s i n c l u d e d i n chapter t h r e e . 8 Significance of the Study There i s a considerable body of l i t e r a t u r e devoted to the r e l a t i o n s h i p between conceptual tempo and school performance, i n p a r t i c u l a r , reading d i f f i c u l t i e s , learning d i s a b i l i t i e s , and f a i l u r e . As well, c e r t a i n " c l i n i c a l syndromes" have been shown to be related to i m p u l s i v i t y - r e f l e c t i v i t y , e.g., hy p e r a c t i v i t y and mental retardation (Messer, 1976). Since much of the research on conceptual tempo i s based upon the studies of Kagan, Moss & S i g e l (1963) and Kagan, Rosman, Day, Albert, & P h i l l i p s (1964), i t i s reasonable to conclude that these early studies influenced the form and focus of l a t e r i n v e s t i g a t i o n s . The following, from a study by Kagan (1966) of conceptual tempo and v i s u a l matching, i s an example of a point of view that has been i n f l u e n t i a l i n the design of remedial reading programs: The brain-damaged c h i l d , as well as the reading retarded c h i l d , i s more prone to be impulsive than r e f l e c t i v e and his i n f e r i o r i n t e l l e c t u a l performances are more often the r e s u l t of i m p u l s i v i t y than inadequate verbal or knowledge resources. Therapeutic regimes for these children should consider the p o t e n t i a l value of t r a i n i n g r e f l e c t i o n as a s p e c i f i c conceptual habit, independent of the s p e c i f i c substantive content of the material to be mastered, (p. 24) I f the present study confirms the supposition put forward i n the Statement of the Problem section, then implications for the teaching of beginning reading w i l l be d i f f e r e n t from those expressed by Kagan. Impulsives, as i d e n t i f i e d by the MFFT, may not necessarily react i n an impulsive and hence non-productive manner to a l l reading tasks. It may very well be the case that the impulsive c h i l d has d i f f i c u l t y only with those reading tasks that approximate the cognitive requirements of the test for conceptual tempo. I f t h i s i s the case, a remedial program for a c h i l d with an impulsive d i s p o s i t i o n should take into account the cognitive demands of the task to be mastered and be structured accordingly. 9 It i s possible that the implications for reading i n s t r u c t i o n drawn by Kagan are based on a concept of reading that i s d i f f e r e n t from that of t h i s research paper. A b r i e f explanation of current theories of reading may be useful i n understanding the conceptual grounds of t h i s study. Gough's theory ( c i t e d i n Lapp & Flood, 1978) approaches reading from a "bottom-up" point of view. Reading proceeds l e t t e r - b y - l e t t e r to word formation and phonemic representations. Guessing strategies are not adopted i n order to f a c i l i t a t e comprehension. Gough's theory i s i n contrast to that proposed by Goodman and by Smith (c i t e d i n Lapp & Flood, 1978). For the l a t t e r , reading i s a "top-down" process and i s viewed in the l i g h t of p s y c h o l i n g u i s t i c as well as psychological and philosophical contributions. Reading i s a complex s k i l l r e q u i r i n g more than l e t t e r or word i d e n t i f i c a t i o n . B r i e f l y , fluent reading i s being able to make reasonable predictions from the information acquired through mediated (an i n d i r e c t way of reducing uncertainty) i d e n t i f i c a t i o n . Learning to read and fluent reading require two c r i t e r i a (Smith, 1971): 1) that children be w i l l i n g to "make mistakes" and 2) that they have a tolerant teacher who i s w i l l i n g to accept the mistakes. In t h i s manner, children can test t h e i r personal rules of reading i n much the same way that very young chi l d r e n test t h e i r rules of language. Rumelhart's i n t e r a c t i v e theory ( c i t e d i n Lapp & Flood, 1978) provides for both "top-down" and "bottom-up" processing. "The theory predicts that a reader begins with graphic input to guide the extraction of meaning. The reader can assume features and proceed with meaning f i r s t and then move to v e r i f i c a t i o n of feature and word patterns" (Lapp & Flood, 1978, p. 289). A concern of t h i s present study i s the outcome of the i n t e r a c t i v e process between reader and materials. According to Kagan's l i n e of thought, a diagnosis of an impulsive d i s p o s i t i o n may influence a teacher to 10 thwart mistake making, a 'bottom-up" point of view. According to Smith's model of reading a c q u i s i t i o n , a program of negative sanctions on mistake-making can create reading problems rather than reduce them, a "top-down" point of view. It may very well be that the tendency to react impulsively to problem s i t u a t i o n s with response uncertainty i s linked s p e c i f i c a l l y to tasks that r e p l i c a t e the cognitive demands of the MFFT, an " i n t e r a c t i v e " point of view. The r e s u l t s of the problem being investigated i n t h i s study w i l l , i t i s hoped, lead to more f l e x i b l e ways of working with "impulsive" c h i l d r e n . 11 CHAPTER I I : REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE The review of the l i t e r a t u r e i s organized around two main areas of i n t e r e s t . It reviews l i t e r a t u r e relevant to t h i s study i n : 1. Theory and research related to conceptual tempo. 2. Theory and research related to the nature of the task i n the measurement of reading and conceptual tempo. Theory and Research Related to Conceptual Tempo One cannot f u l l y discuss the emergence of conceptual tempo as a dimension of cognitive s t y l e without f i r s t examining: a. egocentric and stimulus centered o r i e n t a t i o n s , b. f i e l d dependence and f i e l d independence d i s p o s i t i o n s , and c. cognitive c o n t r o l s . Two basic o r i e n t a t i o n s and three conceptual classes developed during in v e s t i g a t i o n s of a n a l y t i c attitudes (Kagan et a l . , 1963). This study, focusing on analyzing adult responses to stimulus arrays, revealed that orientations were either egocentric or stimulus centered. Further, i t indicated that the conceptual categories of these orientations were a n a l y t i c - d e s c r i p t i v e , r a t i o n a l , and i n f e r e n t i a l - c a t e g o r i c a l . B r i e f l y described, egocentric o r i e n t a t i o n responses r e l a t e to the subject's personal reactions, while stimulus centered responses are those based purely on external s t i m u l i . To test for the three conceptual categories, Kagan et al.(1963) presented subjects with an array of pictures of people performing d i f f e r e n t actions. Subjects were then asked to c l a s s i f y the pictures into groups according to whatever c r i t e r i a they wanted. A subject f a l l i n g into the a n l a y t i c - d e s c r i p t i v e category would group under s p e c i f i c sub-elements and might choose, for example, only those people wearing hats. 12 The second type, in the r e l a t i o n a l - c o n t e x t u a l category, might only look for r e l a t i o n s h i p s among the s t i m u l i and choose, for example, the stages i n the l i f e of a person. A subject f a l l i n g into the i n f e r e n t i a l - c a t e g o r i c a l category would group members of major occupations and might choose, for example, only medical people. The emergence i n the research of a preference for d i f f e r e n t ways of categorizing i n adults (and further research with children as well) i s related i n some degree to studies of f i e l d dependence and f i e l d independence (Witkin, Lewis, Hertzman, Machover, Meissner, & Wapner, 1954). The r e s u l t s of a series of research experiments using the Rod and Frame and the Embedded Figures tests (Witkin, Dyk, Paterson, Goodenough & Karp, 1962) indicated that the cognitive s t y l e s of f i e l d dependent and f i e l d independent play an important part i n personal adaptation to the environment. The f i e l d independent person i s able to separate an object from i t s surrounding f i e l d and has an a n a l y t i c point of view. The f i e l d dependent person i s more global i n his view of the world yet may have d i f f i c u l t y separating an object from i t s surrounding f i e l d . The dimension of f i e l d independence i s c l o s e l y related to one of s i x postulated types of cognitive c o n t r o l . Gardner (1953) and Gardner, Holzman, Kle i n & Spence(1959) were concerned with d e s c r i p t i v e analysis of p r e f e r e n t i a l methods of organizing experience. These strategies have been termed perceptual attitudes or styles of cognitive c o n t r o l . Egocentric and stimulus centered o r i e n t a t i o n s , f i e l d dependent and f i e l d independent d i s p o s i t i o n s , and cognitive controls, three approaches to the examination and i d e n t i f i c a t i o n of cognitive s t y l e , were a l l i n f l u e n t i a l i n d i r e c t i n g the focus of the studies that resulted in the emergence of conceptual tempo as a dimension of cognitive s t y l e . The investigations of Kagan et a l . (1963) into a n a l y t i c s t y l e were designed primarily to i d e n t i f y 13 behavioral correlates. Twenty-one children, matched on I.Q. and s o c i a l class, were observed. Analysis of the i r behavior in nursery school and l a t e r in the classroom was the basis for ascribing behavioral correlates to analytic and nonanalytic personality types. This research into cognitive styles led to the r e a l i z a t i o n that "an analytic style i s associated with a r e f l e c t i v e attitude, a tendency to d i f f e r e n t i a t e experience, the a b i l i t y to r e s i s t the effects of d i s t r a c t i n g s t i m u l i on on-going behavior. The non-analytic c h i l d tends to be impulsive, more reactive to external s t i m u l i and less l i k e l y to d i f f e r e n t i a t e complex stimulus' conditions" (Kagan et a l . , 1963, p. 101). Here then i s the beginning of a series of studies influenced by the early work i n cognitive styles and progressing towards the refinement and description of the dimension of r e f l e c t i o n -impulsivity. Kagan et a l . (1963, 1964) worked on a number of instruments to measure analytic attitudes. The f i r s t one, the Conceptual Style Test (CST) consisted of 30 cards having three drawings of familiar figures. The subject was required to select two of the drawings that "were alik e or went together i n some way" (Kagan et a l . , 1963). Results indicated that an analytic response was associated with a r e f l e c t i v e approach to conceptual tasks while a non-analytic response was associated with an impulsive approach to conceptual tasks. Two other instruments designed to measure the dimensions of re f l e c t i o n - i m p u l s i v i t y were the Hidden Figures Test (HFT) and the Design Recall Test (DRT) (Kagan et a l . , 1964). In the HFT the subject i s requested to locate a familiar figure that has been blended into a patterned background. In the DRT the subject i s presented a geometric design for 15 seconds only and then asked to id e n t i f y the design from among variants i n the standard. Findings from these exploratory studies 14 suggested that an antecedent of analytic thinking i s the tendency to delay the reporting of a solution i n order to secure the correct response. Response time and number of errors were thus i d e n t i f i e d as the important factors in defining the ref l e c t i o n - i m p u l s i v i t y dimension. However, performance on these measurements, CST, DRT, and HFT, was found to be moderately related to I.Q. as measured by the C a l i f o r n i a Test of Mental Maturity. Thus, although these measurements provided information as to the nature of the ref l e c t i o n - i m p u l s i v i t y dimension, they were not accurate i d e n t i f i e r s of individual i n c l i n a t i o n s . In an attempt to reduce the relationship between the measure of ref l e c t i o n - i m p u l s i v i t y and in t e l l i g e n c e , the Matching Familiar Figures Test (MFFT) was designed. This test used familiar figures (trees, houses, dresses, etc.) rather than geometric designs and allowed the subject to view the standard for comparison with the alternatives. In these ways (familiar figures, viewing of standard along with alter n a t i v e s ) , possible memory d i f f i c u l t i e s would be reduced. Using 120 t h i r d graders, Kagan et al.(1964) investigated the CST, the DRT, and the MFFT with a test for I.Q. and found that of the three, the Matching Familiar Figures Test had the lowest correlation with i n t e l l i g e n c e . Thus the MFFT emerged as the best measure of the r e f l e c t i o n -impulsivity dimension from the series of tests developed by Kagan. Kagan's (1964) studies of the MFFT demonstrated a r e l i a b i l i t y c oefficient of .52 for g i r l s and .48 for boys i n a test-retest situation over one year. A second study discussed i n that paper yielded a r e l i a b i l i t y c oefficient of .62 for both boys and g i r l s retested after a one year period. V a l i d i t y measures indicate that r e f l e c t i v e s and impulsives tend to remain r e f l e c t i v e or impulsive i n test situations that contain response uncertainty (Denny, 1973; Kagan et a l . , 1964; Kagan et a l . , 1966; Mann, 15 1973; Yando & Kagan, 1970). The key point to be emphasized i s that the construct of re f l e c t i o n - i m p u l s i v i t y i s borne out i n response uncertainty situations, i f the subjects are interested i n the task (Mann, 1973) and i f the task i s not too easy (Denny, 1973). The MFFT i s scored on two variables. The variables of response latency and number of errors are recorded. A median score i s then established for each variable. Those subjects above the median on errors and below the median on response latency are designated Impulsive. Those subjects below the median on errors and above the median on reponse latency are called Reflective. Theory and Research Related to Measurement of Reading and Conceptual Tempo Kagan (1965a) investigated r e f l e c t i o n - i m p u l s i v i t y and the reading performance of primary grade children. One hundred and t h i r t y f i r s t and second graders were administered the MFFT and a series of reading subtests. In the word recognition test, the subject was asked to choose one word read aloud by the experimenter from among a row of five words. A sample question from the test i s , Words Read by E Words on Card Moon noon moon boom soon mean The toe eat t i e the tea (Kagan, 1965a, p. 615) Kagan found that i n this test the r e f l e c t i v e c h i l d made fewer errors than the impulsive c h i l d . Another word recognition test resembling the previous one but administered six months l a t e r , yielded similar r e s u l t s . In these studies, there was a high correlation between ref l e c t i o n - i m p u l s i v i t y and reading scores. One year l a t e r , the same subjects were administered four paragraphs to read aloud. Every error or omission was recorded by the examiner. Error 16 types were c l a s s i f i e d as impulsive or r e f l e c t i v e . One of the impulsive error types was termed p a r t i a l i d e n t i t y substitution, i . e . , "S. substitutes a word that has p a r t i a l graphemic s i m i l a r i t y to the o r i g i n a l , usually s i m i l a r i t y in the f i r s t l e t t e r or f i r s t or last s y l l a b l e (e.g., 'nose' for 'noise,' 'truck' for 'trunk,' 'upon' for 'upward')" (Kagan, 1965a, pp. 620-621). There was a positive r e l a t i o n between the MFFT errors i n grade 1 and p a r t i a l - i d e n t i t y substitution reading errors i n the second grade (average r. = .39, £.<.01 for boys; average r. = .34, .p_<.01 for g i r l s ) . Kagan writes in his paper that the empirical data "implicate the role of impulsivity in reading a b i l i t y . It i s suggested that diagnostic evaluation of children with reading problems include an assessment of th i s dimension" (Kagan, 1965a, p. 627). Kagan further adds, " I t i s also l i k e l y that the traini n g of r e f l e c t i o n in kindergarten reading-readiness programs w i l l be of value" (Kagan, 1965a, p. 627). Since the publication of Kagan's research, there have been many studies of conceptual tempo and reading in young children. Some of these studies have maintained the same point of view as Kagan but others have not. One example of the former type i s found i n the work of Roberts (1979). She tested seven year olds on the MFFT and the Salford Sentence Reading Test. Reading age, time to f i r s t response, and number of errors were intercorrelated. Kagan's (1965) findings were confirmed in that there was a tendency for reading a b i l i t y to be associated negatively with the making of mistakes and pos i t i v e l y with the taking of time. Roberts suggests that as impulsivity appears to be negatively related to reading success, teachers should be alerted to this aspect of behavior. Yet, i n the report of t h i s study, Roberts f a i l s to iden t i f y the type of errors that were recorded and thus raises doubts as to the conclusions of her quantitative analysis of reading behavior. 17 In an i n v e s t i g a t i o n into convergent and divergent v a l i d i t y of conceptual tempo, Ha l l and Russell (1974) developed an instrument, the Word Recognition Test (WRT), patterned a f t e r a test developed by Kagan. H a l l and Russell hypothesized that high error scores on the MFFT predicted high word-error scores on the WRT. In t h e i r study, they created 20 t e s t items having one of four types of s t i m u l i : a) words i n which the i n i t i a l phonemes were s i m i l a r , e.g., shone, shore; b) words i n which the f i n a l phonemes were i d e n t i c a l , e.g., bang, rang; c) m u l t i - s y l l a b l e words with same f i n a l phoneme, e.g., quagmire, q u a r t i l e ; and d) m u l t i - s y l l a b l e words with the same f i n a l phoneme, e.g., r e f l e c t i v e , a d d i t i v e . The r e l a t i o n s h i p between errors and latency was not s i g n i f i c a n t so the researchers suggest that the words were not enough a l i k e to produce s u f f i c i e n t response uncertainty. It i s possible, though, that the data obtained from the error scores of a l l four d i f f e r e n t types of items erased any p o s s i b i l i t y of s i g n i f i c a n t response differences between the two conceptual tempo groups. These studies of conceptual tempo and the measurement of word recognition a b i l i t y provide strong evidence for the need to c a r e f u l l y examine the reading task i n a l l studies i n v e s t i g a t i n g the r e l a t i o n s h i p s between r e f l e c t i o n - i m p u l s i v i t y and reading. A number of researchers have reported the r e s u l t s of the Kagan study i n a r t i c l e s that summarize research studies. Blanton and Bullock (1973) discuss cognitive s t y l e and reading behavior and conclude that a high degree of r e l a t i o n s h i p e x i s t s between r e f l e c t i o n - i m p u l s i v i t y and reading achievement. Davey (1976) discusses research i n t h i s area and concludes that conceptual tempo i s linked to several aspects of reading behavior. Farr (1969), in discussing the pr e d i c t i v e v a l i d i t y of personality tests for forecasting reading improvement, states, "Kagan (1965) found that measures of r e f l e c t i o n - i m p u l s i v i t y gathered i n the f i r s t grade were pr e d i c t i v e of 18 reading improvement one year later. In general, children classified as impulsive in the f i r s t grade had the highest reading error scores at the end of the second year" (Farr, 1969, p. 192). Yet, other studies of conceptual tempo and reading provide different points of view. Oral reading errors of reflective and impulsive children have been examined by a number of researchers. Hood and Kendall (1974) looked at oral reading errors among second grade impulsives and reflectives. Oral reading errors were noted as the subjects read both an easy and a d i f f i c u l t story. The difference between reflective and impulsive mean scores was not s t a t i s t i c a l l y significant, although results indicated that there were (a) more reflective than impulsive subjects with low error scores but insignificant differences in mean number of errors, (b) proportionately more graphically similar errors for reflectives than for impulsive subjects but no significant differences in any other category, (c) more corrections by reflective subjects overall and within the categories of graphically dissimilar errors and errors appropriate to the preceding but not the following context, and (d) no significant differences between reflective and impulsive subjects in number of repetitions, rate of reading, nor in comprehension scores, (p. 269). So, when graphically similar errors and graphically dissimilar errors were noted by the examiner, the results differed from those of Kagan (1965a, 1965b). The Goodman Taxonomy of Miscues, often referred to as the Reading Miscue Inventory (Goodman, 1969), has been used to analyze oral reading errors generated by grade four (Waltz, 1977) and grade two (Butler, 1972) impulsive and reflective children. In the Butler (1972) study 15 impulsives and 15 reflectives were subjected to a psycholinguistic analysis of their oral reading behavior. His results are similar to those of Hood and Kendall's (1975) investigation of oral reading errors in that his reflective boys corrected proportionately more errors and made more 19 r e p e t i t i o n s than impulsive boys. However, contrary to Kagan's research there was no s i g n i f i c a n t difference between groups i n mean number of e r r o r s . Instead, Butler notes that a wide v a r i a t i o n was observed from i n d i v i d u a l to i n d i v i d u a l within each group on each of the dependent v a r i a b l e s . Waltz's (1977) r e s u l t s were not conclusive e i t h e r . Her r e s u l t s only approached s i g n i f i c a n c e at the .05 l e v e l on the following two hypotheses: a d i s p o s i t i o n towards r e f l e c t i o n - i m p u l s i v i t y does not a f f e c t o r a l reading miscues and a d i s p o s i t i o n towards r e f l e c t i o n - i m p u l s i v i t y does not a f f e c t reading comprehension. In her study, contrary to Hood and Kendall (1975) and Butler (1977), there was l i t t l e difference between mean scores of the two groups i n the areas of graphic s i m i l a r i t y , sound s i m i l a r i t y , grammatical s i m i l a r i t y , grammatical function, correction and grammatical acceptance. Strong differences between impulsives and r e f l e c t i v e s i n mean error scores (15 or more points) showed up i n the areas of semantic a c c e p t a b i l i t y , meaning change, comprehending, and grammatical r e l a t i o n s h i p pattern. Waltz argues that response uncertainty i s more of a factor i n the area of comprehension than i t i s i n the areas of graphic, phonemic and grammatical s k i l l s . Denny (1974), Margolis (1976), and Margolis, Peterson and Leonard (1978) reported no s i g n i f i c a n t c o r r e l a t i o n s between MFFT latency and error scores and reading test scores. Eighty c h i l d r e n from second to f i f t h grade were the subjects of Denny's (1974) study of the r e l a t i o n s h i p between conceptual tempo and reading. The r e s u l t s of three reading tests were analyzed. These were the Gilmore Oral Reading Test, four subtests of the Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test, and the McKillop Reading Diagnostic Test. Denny found no s i g n i f i c a n t c o r r e l a t i o n s between MFFT latency scores and reading measures. MFFT error scores correlated s i g n i f i c a n t l y with accuracy , comprehension, and ra te on the Gilmore f o r the t o t a l sample but not for separate samples o f o l d e r and younger c h i l d r e n . E leven other c o r r e l a t i o n s between read ing and conceptual tempo measures f a i l e d to a t t a i n s i g n i f i c a n c e . Denny concluded that conceptua l tempo data f a i l e d to d i s t i n g u i s h between good and poor readers and he ques t ions the importance o f t h i s dimension to read ing a b i l i t y . In an i n v e s t i g a t i o n o f read ing readiness and conceptua l tempo, M a r g o l i s (1976) f a i l e d to f i n d a s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e between i m p u l s i v e and r e f l e c t i v e k i n d e r g a r t e n e r s on the M e t r o p o l i t a n Readiness T e s t . M a r g o l i s suggested the f o l l o w i n g as account ing for h i s r e s u l t s : In many ins tances on the M e t r o p o l i t a n , the c h i l d i s not a c t u a l l y faced w i t h a s i t u a t i o n i n which he must s e r i o u s l y cons ider s e v e r a l a l t e r n a t i v e s . Success on f i v e o f the s i x subtes t s depends p r i m a r i l y upon r e c a l l i n g p r e v i o u s l y acqu i red knowledge, d i s t i n g u i s h i n g among f a m i l i a r m a t e r i a l , or copying i n c r e a s i n g l y more complex c o n f i g u r a t i o n s wi thout hav ing to make a choice among other c o n f i g u r a t i o n s . Pos se s s ion o f the r e q u i s i t e knowledge on four o f the s i x subtes t s o f ten e l i m i n a t e s the need s e r i o u s l y to cons ider the o ther response a l t e r n a t i v e s . In essence, many M e t r o p o l i t a n subtes t s and items do not provide the c h i l d w i t h a response u n c e r t a i n t y s i t u a t i o n i n which he must a c t i v e l y cons ider s e v e r a l a l t e r n a t i v e s , ( p . 187) In a study o f conceptua l tempo as a p r e d i c t o r o f f i r s t - g r a d e read ing achievement, M a r g o l i s , P e t e r s o n , and Leonard (1978) a p p l i e d _t-tests to t h e i r data and f a i l e d to f i n d s i g n i f i c a n c e at the .05 l e v e l between the scores o f i m p u l s i v e and r e f l e c t i v e c h i l d r e n on the Vocabulary or Comprehension subtest o f the Gates M a c G i n i t i e Reading T e s t s , Pr imary Form A. The i m p l i c a t i o n der ived from the re search o f Denny and M a r g o l i s i s that i m p u l s i v e s as w e l l as r e f l e c t i v e s can be e i t h e r good or poor r e a d e r s . However, M a r g o l i s and Brannigan (1978) examined i d e n t i c a l p r e d i c t o r scores for i m p u l s i v e and r e f l e c t i v e k i n d e r g a r t e n c h i l d r e n to see i f the scores were i n d i c a t i v e o f reading readiness and f i r s t grade read ing achievement s c o r e s . T h e i r f i n d i n g s s t r o n g l y suggest that conceptua l tempo 21 should be considered a dimension for c l a s s i f y i n g and examining children when pred i c t i n g performance. The r e s u l t s of t h i s study are i n obvious contrast to the two previous studies i n which the senior author was involved (Margolis, 1976; Margolis, Peterson & Leonard, 1978). In addition to providing an opposing point of view to other investigations i n t h i s research area, Margolis and Brannigan's report of t h e i r study only p a r t i a l l y agrees with another study of reading readiness and conceptual tempo (Shapiro, 1976). In an in v e s t i g a t i o n of reading readiness test performance and conceptual tempo, Shapiro (1976) administered the MFFT and the Gates MacGinitie Readiness S k i l l s Test to 67 f i r s t grade boys. Although r e f l e c t i v e s scored s i g n i f i c a n t l y better on six of the eight subtests, Shapiro does not argue that conceptual tempo i s an indicato r of a reading readiness problem. On the subtest of Auditory Discrimination, i n which there were only two a l t e r n a t i v e s presented to a standard, and on the subtest of Auditory Blending, which apparently contained l i t t l e response uncertainty, there were no s i g n i f i c a n t d ifferences i n performance. However on subtests which presented at least three a l t e r n a t i v e s olutions, the r e f l e c t i v e subjects had s i g n i f i c a n t l y superior scores. These findings indicate that when a high degree of response uncertainty e x i s t s , i t i s the nature of the presentation of the tasks which influences performance by impulsive subjects and not the tasks themselves, (p. 86) Shapiro cautions teachers to be s e n s i t i v e to the nature of the presentation of the tasks and to make sure that supposed d e f i c i e n c i e s i n readiness s k i l l s are evaluated by tests that examine many d i f f e r e n t cognitive processes. He further adds that incorrect diagnoses of reading problems could be caused by the s i m i l a r i t y of the items on the Gates MacGinitie Readiness S k i l l s Test to tasks presented i n reading readiness and beginning reading materials. It appears from- the research presented above that two opposing points 22 of view have emerged: one, that reading behavior i s predictable from measures of i m p u l s i v i t y - r e f l e c t i v i t y , and two, that reading behavior i s independent of conceptual tempo. It i s highly probable that these d i f f e r i n g points of view are due to the fact that tasks that require d i f f e r e n t cognitive processes are being equated. Tasks measuring achievement which u t i l i z e s i m i l a r d i s t r a c t o r s are not being d i f f e r e n t i a t e d from tasks that measure responses to d i s s i m i l a r d i s t r a c t o r s . Thus a problem has a r i s e n because researchers have f a i l e d to recognize the importance of i d e n t i f y i n g the nature of the task involved in the reading measures. This problem was recognized by Tuinman and Kendall (1979) i n t h e i r synthesis of the research on conceptual tempo and the measurement of reading. They suggest that there are dangers i n generalizing from ava i l a b l e research to classroom practice (Blanton & Bullock, 1973; Sawyer, 1974; Davey, 1976), because of the inaccuracies i n the measurement of the reading task. Tuinman and Kendall recommend an i n v e s t i g a t i o n of the measurement of conceptual tempo and the measurement of reading that would take into account a va r i e t y of types of reading tasks, i . e . , independent and f r u s t r a t i o n reading l e v e l s and types of d i s t r a c t o r s . A review of the l i t e r a t u r e of d i s t r a c t o r types and reading d i f f i c u l t y l e v e l s indicates the prominence of these variables i n the i n v e s t i g a t i o n of the cognitive processes of c e r t a i n reading tasks and the measurement of conceptual tempo. Erickson and Otto (1973) administered the MFFT to 80 kindergarten c h i l d r e n . These subjects were then taught a l i s t of either s i m i l a r (mate, meat, tame, team) or d i s s i m i l a r (bond, cage, jump, l i s t ) words. Impulsive children performed on t h i s word recognition task i n much the same way that they performed on the MFFT. In a high response uncertainty task with s i m i l a r d i s t r a c t o r s r e f l e c t i v e boys and g i r l s had more correct word 23 i d e n t i f i c a t i o n responses than impulsive boys and g i r l s , _p_<.05. Hartly (1976), in a study of f i r s t , t h i r d , and f i f t h graders' perceptual salience, concluded that perceptual features of the stimulus can markedly influence impulsives' performance. Another i n v e s t i g a t i o n into the importance of graphic s i m i l a r i t y among d i s t r a c t o r s was conducted by B i e m i l l e r (1970). He concluded that graphic information was more s i g n i f i c a n t than contextual clues for students who are learning to read. The second v a r i a b l e , vocabulary l e v e l , consists of easy or hard vocabulary (high or low r e a d a b i l i t y ) . Egeland (1974) investigated the t r a i n i n g of impulsive children i n the use of more e f f i c i e n t scanning techniques and noted that on easy problems children used a r e f l e c t i v e approach but when children perceived the task as too d i f f i c u l t , they resorted to an impulsive response mode. Thus he suggests that c h i l d r e n respond impulsively only when the task appears d i f f i c u l t . For an i n v e s t i g a t i o n of conceptual tempo and o r a l reading errors, Waltz (1977) presented grade four boys with a story at the f i f t h grade d i f f i c u l t y l e v e l . A grade .level higher than the subjects' grade l e v e l was chosen i n order to ensure some degree of response uncertainty. Hood and Kendall (1975) were also interested in making sure that there would be response uncertainty. They asked grade two students to read passages at a low grade two r e a d a b i l i t y l e v e l and a high grade three r e a d a b i l i t y l e v e l . A review of the l i t e r a t u r e of conceptual tempo and reading would not be complete without including studies of problem-solving strategy i n r e f l e c t i v e and impulsive c h i l d r e n . It i s important to include these studies as they provide information necessary to understand the r e s u l t s of the research conducted in t h i s d i s s e r t a t i o n . The report of a three year study of problem-solving strategy i n r e f l e c t i v e and impulsive children (McKinney, Haskin, & Moore, 1977) 24 suggests that r e f l e c t i o n - i m p u l s i v i t y i s related to task-oriented and s o c i a l behavior in the classroom. This i n v e s t i g a t i o n led to the proposal that future research ought to examine the manner i n which ch i l d r e n process task information and those factors that account for competent strategy. For, i f r e f l e c t i v e s are simply more competent problem solvers than impulsives, then they may be better able to adapt t h e i r approach to the d i f f e r e n t requirements of d i f f e r e n t tasks. These theories are based on the data obtained from four separate tasks which had been selected to enable the researchers to analyze the hypothesis-testing strategies i n sequential problem solving. The p o s s i b i l i t y that r e f l e c t i v e children have a tendency for detailed analysis whereas impulsive children process information more g l o b a l l y has been investigated by Zelniker (1975) and Zelniker, Bentler and Renan (1977). On the basis of the r e s u l t s of children tested on new MFFT-type problems i t was proposed that r e f l e c t i v e children analyze s p a t i a l information in small "chunks" while impulsive children analyze such information in large "chunks" and take less time to do so. Thus, although response latency i s an important and stable i n d i c a t o r of conceptual tempo, accuracy varies according to the degree of compatibility between the subject's strategy of analysis and task requirements. Their research suggests that response lat e n c i e s are related to the strategy of information processing, i . e . , the extent to which children tend to analyze s t i m u l i into component d e t a i l s , while accuracy scores are related to the type of task and s t i m u l i employed. Summary The intent of the f i r s t section of t h i s chapter was to present a broad h i s t o r i c a l outline of the development of conceptual tempo as a component of cognitive s t y l e . Studies of the Hidden Figures Test, the Design Recall Test, and the Conceptual Styles Test provided preliminary information about the psychological dimension of i m p u l s i v i t y - r e f l e c t i v i t y , and revealed that the two most important factors i n measuring t h i s dimension were the tendency to delay a conceptual decision and the number of incorrect solutions offered by the subject. This information provided the basis for the development of the Matching Familiar Figures Test (Kagan, et a l . 1964). This test has been accepted i n the l i t e r a t u r e as the most widely used indicat o r of the tendency to act in an impulsive or r e f l e c t i v e manner i n s i t u a t i o n s that e l i c i t a l t e r n a t i v e s o l u t i o n s . The MFFT has been used to investigate the role of conceptual tempo i n many areas of study, e.g. humour, mother-child i n t e r a c t i o n s , hyperactive children; but the one of major i n t e r e s t to t h i s study i s reading behavior. There ex i s t s i n the l i t e r a t u r e the suggestion that reading i s linked to conceptual tempo, a fin d i n g that i s discussed in the second part of the present chapter. In contrast to the h i s t o r i c a l approach of the f i r s t section of t h i s chapter, the intent of the second section was to provide support for the way in which the research problem presented i n t h i s d i s s e r t a t i o n has been structured. D i f f e r i n g points of view toward reading and conceptual tempo were i s o l a t e d . B r i e f l y , they are: those that support the idea that there i s a r e l a t i o n s h i p between conceptual tempo and reading and those that p a r t i a l l y or completely disagree with t h i s idea. Kagan, the author and leading proponent of the MFFT, represents the f i r s t point of view, namely, that conceptual tempo i s a predictor of reading success (Kagan et a l . , 1963; Kagan, 1965a). An i n v e s t i g a t i o n by Roberts (1979) further supports t h i s idea. In addition, Kagan's view has been disseminated through summary a r t i c l e s on research i n reading which have quoted his findings (Blanton & Bullock, 1973; Farr, 1969). Eventually, teachers of reading were being advised to be cognizant of the e f f e c t s of conceptual tempo on reading behavior (Davey, 1979; Sawyer, 1974). The other point of view toward the r e l a t i o n s h i p between conceptual tempo and reading i s represented by studies by Butler (1972), Hood and Kendall (1974), and Waltz (1977). Although t h e i r studies indicated that o r a l reading error analysis reported a difference between impulsives' and r e f l e c t i v e s ' responses to the reading task, there was reason to question the r e s u l t s . Further, Margolis (1976) Margolis, Peterson and Leonard (1978), and Shapiro (1976) investigated kindergarten children and r e f l e c t i o n - i m p u l s i v i t y as a predictor of f i r s t grade reading achievement but could not f i n d s u f f i c i e n t evidence to warrant any strong conclusions. But, these researchers noted that s i m i l a r i t y of task items might function to i n f l a t e error scores for impulsives. Denny (1974) reported no s i g n i f i c a n t c o r r e l a t i o n s between MFFT latency and error scores and.reading test scores. The review of the l i t e r a t u r e has presented abstracts of findings that range from conclusive reports to nonsignificant r e s u l t s . It i s highly probable that these d i f f e r i n g points of view resulted from the fact that d i f f e r e n t types of reading tasks were being equated. It may well be that tasks that approximated the cognitive requirements of the MFFT were being equated with tasks that did not approximate these demands. In order to provide a basis for the design of the present study, t h i s chapter has also reported on the l i t e r a t u r e which has to do with studies of variables of grapho-phonemic s i m i l a r i t y ( B i e m i l l e r , 1970; Erickson and Otto, 1973; Hartley, 1976) and d i f f i c u l t y of reading materials (Egeland, 1974; Hood & Kendall, 1975; Waltz, 1977). The l i t e r a t u r e has suggested that these variables can influence subjects' responses to test questions and thus ought to be c a r e f u l l y examined. The suggestions from a l l these research studies have been instrumental i n the decision to include easy-to-read and hard-to-read materials, s i m i l a r and d i s s i m i l a r d i s t r a c t o r s , and word recognition and comprehension tasks as the variables i n t h i s study. 28 CHAPTER I I I : DESCRIPTION OF THE STUDY P i l o t Study MacGinitie (1975-76), i n his analysis of research l i t e r a t u r e points out the importance of investigating the cognitive operations that children perform in learning to read. He suggests that i t i s necessary to analyze current i n s t r u c t i o n a l materials, to assess the range of cognitive demands, to locate the most frequently required operations, and to compare the demands of different materials. These suggestions were seriously followed in the design of this study's reading tasks. The factors that were manipulated in the construction of the tasks were: re a d a b i l i t y l e v e l s , s i m i l a r i t y of d i s t r a c t o r s , word recognition, type of task, comprehension tasks, and s i m i l a r i t y in form to "current i n s t r u c t i o n a l material." By f u l f i l l i n g these conditions, i t was possible to "compare the demands of different materials." The f i r s t step involved the administration of reading tasks, the second step was to give the MFFT, and the last stage was to investigate the i m p u l s i v i t y - r e f l e c t i v i t y dimension i n r e l a t i o n to the scores on the reading exercises. P i l o t Samples P i l o t Sample 1. In A p r i l 1980, a p i l o t study was carried out i n Burnaby, B r i t i s h Columbia. Thirty-three grade three students (boys and g i r l s ) were administered a l l eight reading tasks and were i n d i v i d u a l l y tested on the MFFT. Analysis of the error scores indicated that the tasks were too easy for the sample. This led to a p i l o t study being conducted with grade two students. P i l o t Sample I I . The second p i l o t investigation was carried out i n Richmond, B r i t i s h Columbia. The subjects were two intact classes of grade two boys and g i r l s . The p r i n c i p a l and the two classroom teachers described these groups as middle-socio-economic status. In addition the teachers i d e n t i f i e d six students as second language learners or as learning-disabled. These s i x were not included i n the data a n a l y s i s . Thus, 38 students were administered a l l the reading tasks and the MFFT but only 32 students remained in the study. The Reading Tasks Each task (Appendix B) seeks unique information about student response to the reading process. The reading tasks are: 1. Easy vocabulary s i m i l a r d i s t r a c t o r s word recognition task. 2. Easy vocabulary d i s s i m i l a r d i s t r a c t o r s word recognition task. 3. Hard vocabulary s i m i l a r d i s t r a c t o r s word recognition task. 4. Hard vocabulary d i s s i m i l a r d i s t r a c t o r s word recognition task. 5. Easy vocabulary s i m i l a r d i s t r a c t o r s comprehension task. 6. Easy vocabulary d i s s i m i l a r d i s t r a c t o r s comprehension task. 7. Hard vocabulary s i m i l a r d i s t r a c t o r s comprehension task. 8. Hard vocabulary d i s s i m i l a r d i s t r a c t o r s comprehension task. Half of these eight reading tasks were devised to approximate the problem solving conditions of the MFFT. Thus, four of the tasks had s i m i l a r d i s t r a c t o r s while four had d i s s i m i l a r d i s t r a c t o r s . Those tasks with s i m i l a r d i s t r a c t o r s presented a problem with several possible a l t e r n a t i v e s , each a l t e r n a t i v e having s i m i l a r grapho-phonemic c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s to the standard. The purpose of the p i l o t study was to investigate instruments and procedures to measure r e f l e c t i v e and impulsive children's responses to reading task demands that approximated the demands of the MFFT and to reading task demands that did not approximate the demands of the MFFT. The eight reading tasks described below are included i n Appendix B. 30 Word Recognition Tasks A l l the words in the four word recognition tasks were chosen from A Canadian Word List (Strothers et a l . , 1950). The task was to identify the key word among four choices. The key word was read aloud and the student had two seconds to respond by circlin g the word. Each task had 16 rows of four words. Four of the key words were nouns, four were verbs, four were modifiers, four were function words. Table 1 presents a summary of the four word recognition passages. \ 31 Table i Description of Word Recognition Passages Number Grade Type of of Task Source of Word L i s t Test Items Level D i s t r a c t o r 1 A Canadian Word L i s t 16 2 si m i l a r 2 A Canadian Word L i s t 16 2 d i s s i m i l a r 3 A Canadian Word L i s t 16 4 . s i m i l a r 4 A Canadian Word L i s t 16 4 d i s s i m i l a r 32 1. Easy .vocabulary s i m i l a r d i s t r a c t o r word recognition task. A l l words were at the grade two l e v e l of d i f f i c u l t y . A l l four words i n each row were grapho-phohemically s i m i l a r having the same i n i t i a l consonant plus other l e t t e r s of s i m i l a r configuration and, where possible, the same l e t t e r s . 2. Easy_vocabulary d i s s i m i l a r d i s t r a c t o r s word recognition task. A l l words were at the grade two l e v e l of d i f f i c u l t y . A l l four words i n each row were grapho-phonemically d i s s i m i l a r having d i f f e r e n t i n i t i a l consonants and d i s s i m i l a r configurations. 3. Hard_vocabulary s i m i l a r d i s t r a c t o r word recognition task. A l l words were at the grade four l e v e l of d i f f i c u l t y . A l l four words i n each row were grapho-phonemically s i m i l a r having the same i n i t i a l consonant plus other l e t t e r s of s i m i l a r configurations and, where possible, the same l e t t e r s . 4. Hard vocabulary d i s s i m i l a r d i s t r a c t o r word recognition task. A l l words were at the grade four l e v e l of d i f f i c u l t y . A l l four words i n each row were grapho-phonemically d i s s i m i l a r having d i f f e r e n t i n i t i a l consonants and d i s s i m i l a r configurations. Comprehension Tasks The comprehension tasks were modelled af t e r Guthrie's (1973) maze technique. B r i e f l y described, t h i s i s a comprehension task based on a running passage of approximately 170 words, i n which every fourth or f i f t h word i s replaced with three choices. One of the choices i s the correct answer; another i s s y n t a c t i c a l l y acceptable, but semantically inappropriate; the t h i r d choice i s both s y n t a c t i c a l l y and semantically inappropriate. In a report of a study of seven maze passages and the Gates-MacGinitie Reading Test, Guthrie established the v a l i d i t y of t h i s procedure with c o r r e l a t i o n s of .85 for vocabulary and .82 for 33 comprehension. The r e l i a b i l i t i e s for the seven passages ranged from .90 to .93. In the present study, Guthrie's maze procedure was r e p l i c a t e d using content from Canadian basals. Table 2 presents a summary of the four comprehension passages. The grade two (easy vocabulary) passages were from Out and Away (Thorn, 1970). The grade four (hard vocabulary) passages were from F l y i n g Free (Thorn, 1966). Each passsage was approximately 165 words long and had 28 replacements, seven each of noun, verb, modifier, and function word. Among the two d i s t r a c t o r s one was of the same syntactic category as the standard or correct word, e.g., noun replacing noun or verb replacing verb, and the other was chosen from a d i f f e r e n t syntactic category, e.g., noun replacing verb. A l l the d i s t r a c t o r s were chosen from A Canadian Word L i s t (Stothers et a l . , 1950). The Gage reading s e r i e s , The Language Experience Program, was chosen because i t i s a Canadian series and thus the vocabulary and syntax would be within the reader's background (McConnell, 1978). The 1966 p u b l i c a t i o n date of t h i s series would make i t highly u n l i k e l y that the students would be f a m i l i a r with the passages. 34 Table 2-Description of Comprehension Passages No. of Task Text No. of Test Spache Type of Words Items Readability D i s t r a c t o r 5 (Alexander) 6 (Lucky Pennies 7 (The Kite and the Wind) 8 (Peabody Property) Out and Away 158 28 Out and Away 173 28 Fly i n g Free 166 28 Fly i n g Free 177 28 1.76 1.41 4.08 4.07 si m i l a r d i s s i m i l a r s i m i l a r d i s s i m i l a r 35 5. Easy vocabulary similar distractors comprehension task. Application of the Spache (1968) readability test showed this passage to be at the grade 1.8 level of d i f f i c u l t y . The distractors were chosen from grade two or earlier words. The distractors were grapho-phonemically similar to the correct word. A l l three words (key word and two distractors) had the same i n i t i a l consonant plus other identical and/or similar letter configurations. 6. Easy vocabulary dissimilar distractors comprehension task. Application of the Spache (1968) readability test showed this passage to be at the grade 1.4 level of d i f f i c u l t y . The distractors were chosen from grade two or earlier words. The distractors were grapho-phonemically dissimilar to the correct word. A l l three words (key word plus two distractors) had different i n i t i a l consonants and dissimilar configurations. 7. Hard vocabulary similar distractors comprehension task. Application of the Spache (1968) readability test showed this passage to be at the grade 4.1 level of d i f f i c u l t y . The distractors were chosen from grade three or four words. The distractors were grapho-phonemically similar to the correct word. A l l three words (key word plus two distractors) had the same i n i t i a l consonant plus other identical and/or similar letter configurations. 8. Hard vocabulary dissimilar distractors comprehension task. Application of the Spache (1968) readability test showed this passage to be at the grade 4.1 level of d i f f i c u l t y . The distractors were chosen from grade three or four words. The distractors were grapho-phonemically dissimilar to the correct word. A l l three words (key word plus two distractors) had different i n i t i a l consonants and dissimilar configurations. 36 The Matching Familiar Figures Test The MFFT (Appendix A) i s the instrument most often used to measure conceptual tempo, the predisposition to act i n an impulsive or r e f l e c t i v e manner when solving a problem with high response uncertainty. "Tasks used to measure r e f l e c t i o n - i m p u l s i v i t y generally present the subject with several highly plausible a l t e r n a t i v e s , only one of which i s correct. Thus experimental subjects (usually children) who respond quickly often err (impulsives), whereas those who pause to r e f l e c t on response a l t e r n a t i v e s are more often correct ( r e f l e c t i v e s ) " (Messer, 1976). The test format involves simultaneous presentation of a figure and six f a c s i m i l i e s , f i v e of which are d i f f e r e n t i n one or more d e t a i l s . There are 12 items i n the t e s t and two samples. The subject i s asked to se l e c t from the a l t e r n a t i v e s the one that exactly matches the standard. Two variables are recorded: response latency to the f i r s t choice and number of errors made before exact i d e n t i f i c a t i o n . Order of Presentation of Reading Tasks Each student was presented with an eight-page booklet of the reading tasks. On each page was a d i f f e r e n t task. The f i r s t two were word recognition tasks, followed by two comprehension, followed by two word recognition, and ending with two comprehension. General pedagogical theory supports the notion that i n t e r e s t i n work w i l l be enhanced i f the introductory tasks are easy to complete. With t h i s i n mind, a l l i n i t i a l sessions started with tasks one and two, the easy vocabulary word recognition exercise. As Table 3 i l l u s t r a t e s , the f i r s t two tasks i n each session were word recognition and the order of these tasks over the two sesions was always #1, #2, #3, and #4. The comprehension tasks were organized so that one quarter of the sample took tasks ordered #5, #6, #7, and #8 over the two sessions, one quarter of the sample took tasks ordered #6, #7, #8, and #5 over the two sessions, one quarter of the sample took tasks ordered #7, #8, #5, and #6 over the two sessions, and one quarter of the sample took tasks ordered #8, #5, #6, and #7 over the two sessions. 38 Table 3 Order of Reading Tasks (four p o s s i b i l i t i e s ) Session One Session Two order of presentation order of presentation I II III IV I II III IV 1 2 5 6 3 4 7 8 1 .2 6 7 3 4 8 5 1 2 7 8 3 4 5 6 1 2 8 5 3 4 6 7 39 Procedure of the P i l o t Study A l l t e s t i n g took place i n the classrooms during regular school hours. The eight reading tasks were administered by the examiner-investigator to the whole class over two t e s t i n g sessions. The sessions were at 9:00 o'clock i n the morning and were one week apart. Each session consisted of four reading tasks, two word recognition, and two comprehension and took approximately 30 minutes. At the beginning of the t e s t i n g session, the examiner-investigator explained, "I am interested in learning about grade two reading a b i l i t y and would l i k e your assistance i n finding out what kind of things are easy for grade twos and what kind of things are hard for grade twos. And so, some of the tasks w i l l be easy and some w i l l be hard but please do your best on a l l of them and don't worry i f some are d i f f i c u l t . " After t h i s preamble, tasks 1 and 2 were administered. To begin, the students were presented two sample rows on the blackboard. They were: 1. boy g i r l cat tree 2. love load l o s t lone Then the examiner-investigator instructed the students to c i r c l e the word that she c a l l e d out, e.g., row 2, "cat" row 2, " l o s t " . In t h i s manner the student was taught to respond to the examiner's o r a l d i c t a t i o n by c i r c l i n g one word in each row. During the actual t e s t i n g ^ s i t u a t i o n the examiner-investigator c a l l e d out the key word, paused for two seconds and then continued on to the next row. For example, the examiner-investigator said "Row 1, 'saw' (two second pause), row 2, 'boy' (two second pause), row 3, 'house' (two second pause)", and so on for a l l 16 rows. After task number one was completed, the examiner-investigator led the students through task number two. The next two pages i n the booklet were the comprehension passages. 40 The students were f i r s t given a sample of the type of problem they would encounter and then they were i n s t r u c t e d to proceed and complete the next two pages of comprehension passages. The example used to teach the students was: time lap "Once upon a go there was a l i t t l e o l d look." minute lady The students were d i r e c t e d to read the passage and c i r c l e the word that made sense from among the three choices. The subjects completed four reading tasks at each s e s s i o n , two word r e c o g n i t i o n and two comprehension. Each session took approximately 30 minutes. The teachers were not i n t h e i r classrooms during that time. The MFFT was administered i n d i v i d u a l l y by the examiner-investigator. There was a screen set up between the examination t a b l e and the r e s t of the c l a s s . The examiner-investigator and the subject sat side by side at a t a b l e i n the classroom. The subject was shown a standard l i n e drawing and was asked to choose an i d e n t i c a l one to the standard from among s i x s i m i l a r l i n e drawings. Two examples of the procedure were given to the su b j e c t . The a c t u a l t e s t i n g d i d not begin u n t i l the subject had demonstrated understanding of the procedure. The subject was then presented with a s e r i e s of 12 f i g u r e s , one by one, and was asked to choose an i d e n t i c a l one uo the standard from among s i x s i m i l a r drawings. The examiner-investigator recorded the length of response to the subject's f i r s t choice and the number of responses u n t i l the i d e n t i c a l drawing was i d e n t i f i e d , i . e . , i f the c h i l d ' s f i r s t choice was i n c o r r e c t , he was asked to choose again and again, u n t i l he i d e n t i f i e d the exact d u p l i c a t i o n . 41 Scoring of P i l o t Study The variables of response latency and number of errors on the MFFT were recorded. A median score was established for each v a r i a b l e . Kagan (1964) indicated that those subjects above the median on error scores and below the median on response latency can be designated impulsive. Those subjects below the median on error scores and above the median on response latency can be designated r e f l e c t i v e . Error scores on a l l eight reading tasks were calculated. Table 4 presents the error scores and means from the p i l o t study. 42 Table. 4 -. P i l o t Study Error Scores and Mean Error Scores Re f l e c t i v e s Word Recognition Tasks 1 2 3 4 Comprehension Tasks 5 6 7 8 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. Impulsives T 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 0 0 2 6 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 11 2 0 3 4 0 0 1 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 9 2 0 1 3 1 1 1 16 1 2 1 3 .1 3 8 7 0 0 2 6 3 5 9 10 8 2 4 10 1.25 0 3.37 .875 2.25 3.25 3.37 6.37 0 0 1 0 6 3 3 11 9 0 5 0 5 2 12 12 0 0 4 0 0 9 1 9 6 0 8 0 4 3 6 6 2 1 8 0 2 1 4 7 0 0 4 0 2 0 . 5 6 .3 0 5 1 • 1 0 7 6 7 0 10 5 13 12 10 13 3.37 0 5.625 .75 4.25 3. 75 6 8.75 43 Analysis _and Interpretation of Data from P i l o t Study Error and latency scores on the MFFT were noted. The latency scores ranged from 56 seconds to 296 seconds. The median score was 121 seconds. The error scores ranged from 16 errors to 37 e r r o r s . The median score was 22. Subjects above the median on response time and below the median on errors were c a l l e d r e f l e c t i v e . Subjects below the median on response time but above the median on errors were c a l l e d impulsive. The median s p l i t on the negatively correlated measures defines a 2 x 2 matrix i n which r e f l e c t i v e s and impulsives f a l l i n the two diagonal c e l l s . According to the established c r i t e r i a no consideration i s given to the fast-accurate or slow-inaccurate c e l l s . From the r e s u l t s of the t e s t i n g , eight students were c l a s s i f i e d as r e f l e c t i v e s and eight were c l a s s i f i e d as impulsives. Table 4 notes the number of errors each of these 16 subjects made i n the eight reading tasks and the means of each group. A study of the error means leads to the suggestion that impulsives make more errors than r e f l e c t i v e s i n some but not a l l reading tasks. A comparison of task one shows the impulsives making three times as many erro r s as the r e f l e c t i v e s . This i s a s i m i l a r d i s t r a c t o r task. Yet, task two does not indicate any differences between impulsives and r e f l e c t i v e s . Task two i s a d i s s i m i l a r d i s t r a c t o r task. Both task one and task two are easy r e a d a b i l i t y tasks. The differences i n error means indicate that i t i s necessary to look at the type of task being presented to the reader. A study of the error means of tasks three and four, tasks f i v e and s i x , and tasks seven and eight further supports the value of pursuing t h i s l i n e of research. Note that error scores on s i m i l a r d i s t r a c t o r s tend to double for impulsives while there i s l i t t l e difference between impulsives and r e f l e c t i v e s on error scores on d i s s i m i l a r d i s t r a c t o r s tasks. 44 Objectives of the Study The major objectives of t h i s study are to answer the following questions: 1. In easy vocabulary word recognition tasks, w i l l r e f l e c t i v e s repond d i f f e r e n t l y than impulsives when the reading task i s s i m i l a r i n task requirements to the test for conceptual tempo? 2. In easy vocabulary word recognition tasks, w i l l r e f l e c t i v e s respond d i f f e r e n t l y than impulsives, when the reading task i s not si m i l a r i n task requirements to the test for conceptual tempo? 3. In hard vocabulary word recognition tasks, w i l l r e f l e c t i v e s respond d i f f e r e n t l y than impulsives, when the reading task i s s i m i l a r i n task requirements to the test for conceptual tempo? 4. In hard vocabulary word recognition tasks, w i l l r e f l e c t i v e s respond d i f f e r e n t l y than impulsives, when the reading task i s not s i m i l a r i n task requirements to the test for conceptual tempo? 5. In easy vocabulary comprehension tasks, w i l l r e f l e c t i v e s respond d i f f e r e n t l y than impulsives, when the reading task i s si m i l a r i n task requirements to the test for conceptual tempo? 6. In easy vocabulary comprehension tasks, w i l l r e f l e c t i v e s respond d i f f e r e n t l y than impulsives, when the reading task i s not si m i l a r i n task requirements to the test for conceptual tempo? 7. In hard vocabulary comprehension tasks, w i l l r e f l e c t i v e s respond d i f f e r e n t l y than impulsives, when the reading task i s si m i l a r i n task requirements to the test for conceptual tempo? 8. In hard vocabulary comprehension tasks, w i l l r e f l e c t i v e s respond d i f f e r e n t l y than impulsives, when the reading task i s not si m i l a r i n task requirements to the test for conceptual tempo? 45 Selection of Sub.iects In s e l e c t i n g subjects for the study, three major c r i t e r i a were established. One, only grade two students would p a r t i c i p a t e . Two, second language learners and spe c i a l education students would not be included i n the data a n a l y s i s . Three, the students would be i d e n t i f i e d as middle socio-economic, status by the teachers and p r i n c i p a l s . The sample was chosen from the grade two population of New Westminster, B r i t i s h Columbia. One hundred and sixty - e i g h t students from ten classrooms p a r t i c i p a t e d i n the study. Arrangements to conduct the study were made with the assistance of the Elementary Consultant for the New Westminister School Board. Procedure The procedure was i d e n t i c a l to that described i n the p i l o t study except for two changes. The f i r s t change involved arranging to administer the MFFT outside the classroom so as to ensure a quiet non-distracting test condition. The second change involved organizing the two v i s i t s to each classroom so that they would take place within a two or three day period. This was done i n order to maintain enthusiasm for the test s i t u a t i o n . The Reading Tasks A l l students i n the ten grade two classrooms completed the eight reading tasks described i n the p i l o t study during two one-half hour sessions. A l l the reading t e s t i n g took place i n the morning, before recess. The examiner-investigator began the f i r s t session by i n s t r u c t i n g the students how to complete the word recognition tasks. Test booklets were then d i s t r i b u t e d , the children were directed to write t h e i r name on the back of t h e i r booklet, and the two word recognition tasks were administered. The examiner-investigator next instructed the students how to complete 46 the comprehension tasks. The students were then directed to complete the two following comprehension tasks. The same set of examples as used i n the p i l o t study was presented to the students for both the word recognition and the comprehension tasks. The second session proceeded as the f i r s t , except that i n t h i s second meeting, the examiner-investigator did not need to pre-teach the tasks. Instead, the booklets were d i s t r i b u t e d according to the names on the backs and the two word recognition tasks were administered r i g h t away. Next, the students were directed to complete the two remaining comprehension tasks. The order of the tasks i n the booklets was i d e n t i c a l to that described i n the second p i l o t study. The examiner-investigator remained i n the classroom during the reading t e s t s . The classroom teachers a l l complied with a request to leave during t h i s time. The Matching Familiar Figures Test The Matching Familiar Figures Test was administered to each subject by the examiner-investigator. The t e s t i n g took place i n an empty room, or i n the h a l l . The procedure of t h i s test followed that described i n the second p i l o t study. The MFFT was administered a f t e r the group reading t e s t s . The order of the subjects was either random, determined by the teacher according to a seating plan, or alpha b e t i c a l . A l l the t e s t i n g for conceptual tempo occurred i n the morning, before or a f t e r recess, but never during recess or any sp e c i a l a c t i v i t y , e.g., a r t , physical education, French, music. The children appeared to enjoy t h i s test as they came to the test s i t u a t i o n with enthusiasm and voiced disappointment when they r e a l i z e d that they had completed the task. 47 Hypotheses The following hypotheses w i l l be tested: 1. In an easy vocabulary word recognition task with s i m i l a r d i s t r a c t o r s there w i l l be a difference between impulsives' and r e f l e c t i v e s ' scores. 2. In an easy vocabulary word recognition task with d i s s i m i l a r d i s t r a c t o r s there w i l l be no difference between impulsives' and r e f l e c t i v e s ' scores. 3. In a hard vocabulary word recognition task with s i m i l a r d i s t r a c t o r s there w i l l be a difference between impulsives' and r e f l e c t i v e s ' scores. 4. In a hard vocabulary word recognition task with d i s s i m i l a r d i s t r a c t o r s there w i l l be no difference between impulsives' and r e f l e c t i v e s ' scores. 5. In an easy vocabulary comprehension task with s i m i l a r d i s t r a c t o r s there w i l l be a difference between impulsives' and r e f l e c t i v e s ' scores. 6. In an easy vocabulary comprehension task with d i s s i m i l a r d i s t r a c t o r s there w i l l be no difference between impulsives' and r e f l e c t i v e s ' scores. 7. In a hard vocabulary comprehension task with s i m i l a r d i s t r a c t o r s there w i l l be a difference between impulsives' and r e f l e c t i v e s ' scores. 8. In a hard vocabulary comprehension task with d i s s i m i l a r d i s t r a c t o r s there w i l l be no difference between impulsives' and r e f l e c t i v e s ' scores. Analysis of Data Three techniques were used for the s t a t i s t i c a l analysis of the data. The f i r s t , a 2-way multi-variate analysis of variance, MANOVA, was conducted with sex and conceptual tempo as independent v a r i a b l e s . The 48 r e s u l t i n g i n e q u a l i t y of the group sizes was instrumental i n the decision to ignore sex as a f a c t o r . A one-way MANOVA, with conceptual tempo as the independent v a r i a b l e , was then performed. The dependent variables were the eight reading tasks. An alternate s t a t i s t i c a l analysis was executed. The data were analyzed by means of a 2x2x2 (conceptual tempo x r e a d a b i l i t y x d i s t r a c t o r type) multivariate analysis of variance with repeated measures on the l a s t two f a c t o r s . The dependent variables were comprehension and word recognition. Summary Chapter three begins with a des c r i p t i o n of the p i l o t study and a discussion of the instruments and procedures used i n both the p i l o t and f i n a l i n v e s t i g a t i o n s . It includes a description of the procedures followed, together with an analysis and discussion of the findings of the p i l o t t e s t i n g . The objectives of the study are restated followed by a desc r i p t i o n of the subjects used i n the f i n a l i n v e s t i g a t i o n . A de s c r i p t i o n of the tests and procedures used to carry out the experimental study i s next presented. A restatement of the hypotheses and a discussion of the analysis of the data conclude the chapter. 49 CHAPTER IV: RESULTS AND DISCUSSION Analysis of the data This chapter presents descriptive data and the results of the st a t i s t i c a l analyses of the data relevant to the eight hypotheses tested in this investigation. One hundred and sixty-six grade two students were administered the Matching Familiar Figures Test (MFFT). The variables recorded were the response latency to the i n i t i a l selection of each item and the number of errors made on each item. A median score was established for each variable and the subjects were grouped according to the procedure proposed by Kagan (1965). Those subjects whose scores were above the median on error scores and below the median on response latency were termed impulsive. Those subjects whose scores were below the median on error scores and above the median on response latency were called reflective. The median latency time for the entire population was 8.125 seconds while the median error score was 15.500. The response latencies and the error scores for each subject are presented in Appendix C. The administration and the scoring of the MFFT resulted in the classification of 46 impulsive subjects and 51 reflective subjects. The eight reading tasks in the present study were administered to a l l subjects. Seventeen failed to complete the tasks and were discarded from the study. Prior to the main analysis, the possible influence of sex as a significant factor was investigated in a two-way multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA). Sex was found not to be significant, F (1,93) = 1.051, p_ = .4000. As maintaining sex as a variable engendered considerable c e l l inequality, i t was ignored in further analysis. Interaction effects between sex and conceptual tempo also proved not to be s i g n i f i c a n t , F_ (1,93) = .5655, _p_ = .8033, which further supported the decision to ignore the influence of sex. The data were analyzed in a one-way MANOVA with conceptual tempo (impulsives, r e f l e c t i v e s ) c o n s t i t u t i n g the single independent v a r i a b l e . ANOVAs on combined variables followed the main a n a l y s i s . There were eight dependent v a r i a b l e s , the error scores based on the eight reading tasks given to a l l subjects. Wilk's Lambda (Bock, 1975) was the procedure used to test the multivariate s t a t i s t i c . The data were analyzed using ANOVAR, a packaged univariate and multivariate analysis computer program. Table 5 shows the mean error scores and standard deviations for a l l eight tasks for impulsive and r e f l e c t i v e subjects. As can be seen, the impulsives made more errors than the r e f l e c t i v e s on 7 of the 8 dependent v a r i a b l e s . This was further confirmed by the one-way MANOVA (Table 6). 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 difference between the error scores of impulsives and r e f l e c t i v e s on the eight dependent v a r i a b l e s . To provide further explanation of the multivariate analysis, Tables 7 to 14 show univariate analysis of variance for each dependent v a r i a b l e . The information presented in these tables i s pertinent to the discussion of the hypotheses. Hypothesis One: Easy vocabulary word recognition task with s i m i l a r d i s t r a c t o r s Hypothesis one proposes that in an easy vocabulary word recognition task with s i m i l a r d i s t r a c t o r s there w i l l be a difference between impulsives' and r e f l e c t i v e s ' scores. C l e a r l y t h i s was the case. The mean error score for the impulsive subjects was 2.63 but only 1.18 for the r e f l e c t i v e s . As Table 7 i n d i c a t e s , impulsives made more errors than r e f l e c t i v e s i n t h i s reading task, F_ (1 ) = 5.384, JD = .021. Thus hypothesis 51 one was supported. Hypothesis Two: Easy vocabulary word recognition task with d i s s i m i l a r d i s t r a c t o r s Hypothesis two, that on an easy vocabulary word recognition task with d i s s i m i l a r d i s t r a c t o r s there w i l l not be a difference between impulsives' and r e f l e c t i v e s ' scores f a i l e d to be rejected. As Table 8 shows, when the d i s t r a c t o r s are d i s s i m i l a r , no e f f e c t of conceptual tempo i s apparent, F. (1) = 2.523, £ = .111. When reading tasks were easy, impulsives made more errors on s i m i l a r d i s t r a c t o r tasks than r e f l e c t i v e s . However, t h i s was not the case for d i s s i m i l a r d i s t r a c t o r tasks. The r e s u l t s of these two contrasting hypotheses only p a r t i a l l y agree with the conclusions reported by Kagan (1965) and H a l l and Russell (1974). Only when the reading task was s i m i l a r i n task requirements to the MFFT (sim i l a r d i s t r a c t o r task) was there a conceptual tempo reacti o n . When the d i s t r a c t o r s were not a l i k e the subjects did not exhibit differences of conceptual tempo. These data strongly suggest that impulsive children respond to ce r t a i n reading tasks i n a manner s i m i l a r to that they apply to the MFFT. Hypothesis Three: Hard vocabulary word recognition task with s i m i l a r d i s t r a c t o r s Hypothesis three, that on a hard vocabulary word recognition task with s i m i l a r d i s t r a c t o r s there w i l l be a difference between impulsives' and r e f l e c t i v e s ' scores was supported. Table 9 reveals a difference between the error scores of r e f l e c t i v e s and impulsives, F_ (1 ) = 5.997, £. = .016. The impulsive mean of 4.58 was almost double that of the r e f l e c t i v e s , 2.53-This reading task was d i f f i c u l t for a l l subjects, as evidenced by the large mean error scores, yet the impulsives made more errors than the r e f l e c t i v e s . 52 Table 5 Mean Error Scores and Standard Deviations for the Dependent Variables Impulsives Re f l e c t i v e s Dependent Variables M SD M SD (n=51) (n=46) Word Recognition Task 2.63 3.73 1.18 2.35 Easy, Similar D i s t r a c t o r Word Recognition Task .80 2.27 .26 .94 Easy, D i s s i m i l a r D i s t r a c t o r Word Recognition Task 4.58 4.68 2.53 3.60 Hard, Similar D i s t r a c t o r Word Recognition Task .72 1.34 .73 1.98 Hard, D i s s i m i l a r D i s t r a c t o r Comprehension Task 8.17 6.90 3.88 4.45 Easy, Similar D i s t r a c t o r Comprehension Task 7.26 6.97 3.92 5.97 Easy, D i s s i m i l a r Distractor . Comprehension Task 8.22 5.97 4.97 4 .98 Hard, Similar D i s t r a c t o r Comprehension Ta sk 11.02 5.82 8.28. 5.79 Hard, D i s s i m i l a r D i s t r a c t o r Table 6 Mult i v a r i a t e Analysis for Conceptual Tempo Independent V a r i a b l e Wilks Lambda df_ Approx Y P r o b a b i l i t y Conceptual Tempo .787 8/88 .005 53 Table 7 Analysis of Variance for Dependent Variable Easy Vocabulary Similar D i s t r a c t o r s Word Recognition Task Independent Variable df ' SS_ MS F_ Value J_ Prob. Conceptual Tempo 1 51.128 51.128 5.384 .021 Error 95 902.129 9.496 To t a l • 96 953.257 Tahle 8 Analysis of Variance f o r Dependent Variable Easy Vocabulary D i s s i m i l a r D i s t r a c t o r s Word Recognition Task Independent Variable df SS^  MS X Value F Prob. Conceptual Tempo 1 7.301 7.301 2.523 .111 Error 95 274.925 2.894 Tot a l • 96 282.227 Table 9 Analysis of Variance for Dependent Variable Hard Vocabulary Similar Distractors Word Recognition Task Independent Variable df ' SS . MS F V a l u e F_ Prob. Conceptual Tempo 1 102.389 102.389 5.997 .016 Error 95 1621.S58 17.072 To t a l 96 1724.247 54 Table 10 Analysis of Variance for Dependent Variable Hard Vocabulary D i s s i m i l a r D i s t r a c t o r s Word Recognition Task Independent Variable df - SS MS F Value F Prob. Conceptual Tempo 1 .001 .001 . .001 .930 Error 95 277.482 2.921 T o t a l . 96 277.480 Table 11 Analysis of Variance f o r Dependent Variable Easy Vocabulary Similar D i s t r a c t o r s Comprehension Task Independent Variable df • SS. MS F Value F Prob. Conceptual Tempo 1 445.437 445.437 13.520 .001 Error 95 3129.903 32.950 T o t a l ' 96 3575.340 .Table 12 Analysis of Variance f o r Dependent V a r i a b l e Easy Vocabulary D i s s i m i l a r D i s t r a c t o r s Comprehension Task Independent Variable df SS ' " _M_S F Value F Prob. Conceptual Tempo 1 269.691 269.691 • 6.456 .012 Error 95 3968.556 41.774 Total 96 4238.247 I 55 Table 13 Analysis of Variance f o r Dependent Variable Hard Vocabulary Similar D i s t r a c t o r s Comprehension Task Independent Variable df j>S MS • F Value F Prob, Conceptual Tempo 1 318.543 318.542 10.647 .002 Error 95 2842.179 29.918 Tot a l 96 3160.722 Table 14 Analysis of Variance f o r Dependent Variable Hard Vocabulary D i s s i m i l a r D i s t r a c t o r s Comprehension Task Independent Variable df SS MS F Value F Prob. Conceptual Tempo Error Total 1 95 96 182.535 3199.135 3381.670 .021 56 Hypothesis Four: Hard vocabulary word recognition task with d i s s i m i l a r d i s t r a c t o r s . Hypothesis four, that on a hard vocabulary word recognition task with d i s s i m i l a r d i s t r a c t o r s there w i l l not be a difference between impulsives' and r e f l e c t i v e s ' scores f a i l e d to be rejected. As Table 10 shows, when the d i s t r a c t o r s are d i s s i m i l a r , no e f f e c t of conceptual tempo i s apparent, £ (1) = .001, £ = .930. The r e s u l t s of these two contrasting hypotheses are s i m i l a r to those of the f i r s t set, even though the reading tasks were harder for the subjects. A l l subjects made more errors on the hard vocabulary tasks than on the easy ones, which was anticipated since the vocabulary was d i f f i c u l t . However, impulsives made s i g n i f i c a n t l y more errors on the s i m i l a r d i s t r a c t o r task. The lack of d i f f e r e n t i a t i o n of impulsives and r e f l e c t i v e s on the task with d i s s i m i l a r d i s t r a c t o r s strongly supports the argument of t h i s study and challenges the recommendations of Kagan (1965) and H a l l and Russell (1974). It i s suggested that those a r t i c l e s that r e l y u n c r i t i c a l l y on Kagan's study of conceptual tempo and reading need to be re-evaluated (e.g., Blanton & Bullock, 1973; Davey, 1976; Farr, 1969). As anticipated from the review of research given by Tuinman and Kendall (1979), the r e l a t i o n s h i p of conceptual tempo and reading i s dependent on the task requirements of the reading t e s t . This i s supported by the r e s u l t s of the data analysis of the contrasting pairs, hypothesis one and two, and hypothesis three and four. Hypothesis F i v e : Easy r e a d a b i l i t y comprehension task with s i m i l a r d i s t r a c t o r s . Hypothesis f i v e , that i n an easy r e a d a b i l i t y comprehension task with s i m i l a r d i s t r a c t o r s , there w i l l be a difference between impulsives' and r e f l e c t i v e s ' scores, was supported (Table 11). In t h i s task the impulsive 57 mean was 8.17 and the r e f l e c t i v e mean was 3.88 indicating that the impulsives made more errors than the r e f l e c t i v e s , £ (1) = 13-520, p_ = .001 Hypothesis Six: Easy r e a d a b i l i t y comprehension task with d i s s i m i l a r d i s t r a c t o r s . Hypothesis six proposes that i n an easy reada b i l i t y comprehension task with d i s s i m i l a r distractors there w i l l not be a difference between impulsives' and r e f l e c t i v e s ' scores (Table 12). In th i s task the impulsive mean was 7.26 and the r e f l e c t i v e mean was 3.92, indicating that the impulsives made more errors than r e f l e c t i v e s , F_ (1 ) = 6.456, JD = .012. Thus, hypothesis six was rejected. This finding was unanticipated i n terms of the argument of th i s study. It was expected that i n a task having d i s s i m i l a r d i s t r a c t o r s , there would not be a difference between mean error scores of impulsives and r e f l e c t i v e s as was evidenced i n the word recognition tasks. A possible explanation of these results w i l l be discussed in chapter 5. The results of these two contrasting hypotheses ( f i v e and six) are not immediately recognized as supporting the point of view of the study. Yet, i t i s noteworthy that the impulsives made proportionately more errors than the r e f l e c t i v e s on the similar distractor task than they did on the diss i m i l a r distractor task. It appears that i n this case the work of Kagan (1965), Waltz (1977), and Roberts (1979) i s supported. Studies which f a i l e d to find s i g n i f i c a n t correlations between conceptual tempo and reading (Denny, 1974; Margolis, 1976; Margolis, Peterson & Leonard, 1978) need to be re-examined in the l i g h t of the results of this data analysis. Hypothesis Seven: Hard reada b i l i t y comprehension task with similar d i s t r a c t o r s . Hypothesis seven, that on a hard readability comprehension task with similar d i s t r a c t o r s , there w i l l be a difference between impulsives' and 58 r e f l e c t i v e s ' scores, was supported (Table 13). In th i s task the impulsive mean error score was 8.22 and the r e f l e c t i v e mean error score was 4.59 indicating that the impulsives made more errors than the r e f l e c t i v e s , £ (1) = 10.647, _p_ = .002. Hypothesis Eight: Hard_readability comprehension task with d i s s i m i l a r d i s t r a c t o r s . Hypothesis eight, that i n a hard read a b i l i t y comprehension task with d i s s i m i l a r d i s t r a c t o r s , there w i l l not be a difference between impulsives' and r e f l e c t i v e s ' error scores was rejected (Table 14). In th i s task the impulsive mean error score was 11.02 and the r e f l e c t i v e mean error score was 8.28 indicating that the impulsives made more errors than the r e f l e c t i v e s , £ (1) = 5.421, p_ = .021. This finding was unexpected i n terms of the study. It was anticipated that the effect of conceptual tempo on error scores would have the same pattern as on the error scores of the word recognition tasks. Thus, tasks having d i s s i m i l a r distractors would not show large differences in error scores for impulsives and r e f l e c t i v e s . These two contrasting hypotheses are similar to the previous set of contrasts except that the reading tasks were set at the grade four instead of the grade two reading l e v e l . Once again, as i n the previous set of contrasts, impulsives made more errors on both the similar and dis s i m i l a r distractors task. These findings agree with those studies that report a signi f i c a n t relationship between conceptual tempo and reading (Kagan, 1965; Roberts, 1979; Margolis & Brannigan, 1978) and disagree with the investigations that f a i l e d to find a s i g n i f i c a n t relationship (Denny, 1974; Margolis, 1976; Margolis, Peterson & Leonard, 1978). Alternative Analysis of the Data There are grounds to conceptualize the study presented here i n terms of two dependent variables, word recognition and comprehension. An 59 ambivalence exists i n measuring reading performance because of the somewhat a r b i t r a r y r e l a t i o n s h i p between stimulus passages and questions (Tuinman, 1978). Consideration of t h i s r e l a t i o n s h i p led to an alternate analysis of the data. The study can be viewed i n terms of three independent v a r i a b l e s , conceptual tempo, d i s t r a c t o r type, and d i f f i c u l t y of stimulus, each having two l e v e l s . Under that conceptualization the design reduces to a 2x2x2 MANOVA with Repeated Measures on two of the fac t o r s , d i f f i c u l t y of stimulus and d i s t r a c t o r type. Conceptual tempo i s a ful l y - c r o s s e d between-subjects f a c t o r . As i t i s a somewhat contentious conceptualization, t h i s analysis i s presented here as an a l t e r n a t i v e and secondary analysis, but i n the opinion of the author i t represents a reasonable view. The r e s u l t s of the 2x2x2 MANOVA (Table 15) indicated that a l l three main e f f e c t s (tempo, reading d i f f i c u l t y l e v e l s , and d i s t r a c t o r types) were s i g n i f i c a n t at the .001 l e v e l . The inte r a c t i o n s of conceptual tempo and d i s t r a c t o r types were s i g n i f i c a n t at the .05 l e v e l . The s i g n i f i c a n t main e f f e c t of conceptual tempo was as suggested by the l i t e r a t u r e , that r e f l e c t i v e s respond d i f f e r e n t l y from impulsives i n reading tasks. The analysis of these i n t e r a c t i o n s demonstrates the influence of the d i f f e r e n t v a r i a b l e s . A d e t a i l e d picture of the data analysis i s provided by Tables 15 to 31. These tables show the multivariate analysis and the means for each of the l e v e l s of the independent variables (conceptual tempo, reading d i f f i c u l t y l e v e l , and d i s t r a c t o r type) for the dependent va r i a b l e s , word recognition and comprehension. 60 Table 15 M u l t i v a r i a t e Analyses of Dependent V a r i a b l e s , Word Recognition and Comprehension Tasks MANOVA 2*2*2 with Repeated Measures Independent V a r i a b l e s df F Prob. Tempo (A) 2/89 5.498 .005 R e a d a b i l i t y (B) 2/89 35.606 .000 D i s t r a c t o r s (C) 2/89 45.645 .000 AB 2/89 .466 .629 AC 2/89 5.208 .007 BC 2/89 33.677 .000 ABC 2/89 1.623 .203 Er r o r A 180/177 7.082 .000 Er r o r B 180/177 1.353 .022 Er r o r C 180/177 1.460 .006 Table 16 A n a l y s i s of Variance of Dependent V a r i a b l e , Word Recognit ion Tasks (n= Source of V a r i a t i o n df MS F Prob. Between subjects A (Tempo) 1 86.098 4.133 .043 e r r o r A 90 20.834 7.355 Within subjects B ( R e a d a b i l i t y ) 1 76.696 17.289 .000 AB 1 .043 .010 .884 e r r o r B 90 4.436 1.566 .017 C ( D i s t r a c t o r s ) 1 409.087 72.100 .000 AC 1 50.261 8.858 .004 er r o r C 90 5.674 2.003 .001 BC 1 .45.924 16.21.3 .000 ABC 1. 9.141 3.227 .072 e r r o r BC 90 2.833 To t a l 367 Table 17 Mean Error Scores f o r Independent Variable, Conceptual Tempo, i n Word Recognition Tasks Independent Variable M Impulsives 2.19 Reflectives 1.22 Table 18 Mean Error Scores f o r Independent Variable, D i f f i c u l t y Level, i n Word Recognition Tasks Independent Variable M . Easy Vocabulary 1.25 Hard Vocabulary 2.16 Table 19 Mean Error Scores f o r Independent Variable, D i s t r a c t o r Type, i n Word Recognition Tasks Independent Variable Similar Distractors D i s s i m i l a r Distractors 2.76 .65 62 Table" 20 Mean Error Scores f o r Independent Variables, Conceptual Tempo and D i f f i c u l t y Level, i n Word Recognition Tasks Easy Hard Vocabulary Vocabulary Impulsives 1.72 2.65 Ref l e c t i v e s .77 1.66 Table.21 Mean Error Scores f o r Independent Variables, Conceptual Tempo and D i s t r a c t o r Type, i n Word Recognition Tasks Similar D i s s i m i l a r D i s t r a c t o r s D i s t r a c t o r s Impulsives Reflectives 3.61 1.90 .76 .53 Table 22 Mean Error Scores f o r Independent Variables, D i s t r a c t o r Types and D i f f i c u l t y Levels, i n Word Recognition Tasks Similar D i s s i m i l a r D i s t r a c t o r s D i s t r a c t o r s Easy Vocabulary 1.95 .54 Hard Vocabulary 3.5 7 .75 Table 23 Mean Error Scores for Independent Variables, Conceptual Tempo, D i f f i c u l t y Levels and Dist r a c t o r Types,- i n Word Recognition Tasks Similar D i s s i m i l a r Distractors D i s t r a c t o r s Impulsives Easy Vocabulary 2.63 .SO Hard Vocabulary 4.59 .72 Reflectives Easy Vocabulary 1.26 .28 Hard Vocabulary 2.54 .78 64 Table 24 A n a l y s i s of Variance of Dependent V a r i a b l e , Compre hens ion Task (n=92) Source of V a r i a t ion df MS F Prob Between subjects A (Tempo) 1 1198.087 10.291 .002 e r r o r A 90 116.418 16.486 .000 Within subjects B ( R e a d a b i l i t y ) 1 443.522 52.519 .000 AB 1 7.924 .938 .337 e r r o r B 90 8.445 1.196 .199 C ( D i s t r a c t o r s ) 1 156.522 21.052 .000 AC 1 11.837 1.592 .208 e r r o r C 90 7.435 1.053 .404 BC 1 384.272 49.320 .000 ABC 1 .696 .099 .749 er r o r BC 90 7.061 Tot a l 367 65 Table 25 Mean Error Scores f o r Independent Variable, Conceptual Tempo, i n Comprehension Tasks Independent Variable M Impulsives 8.67 Reflectives 5.06 Table 26 Mean Error Scores f o r Independent Variable, D i f f i c u l t y Level, i n Comprehension Tasks Independent Variable M Easy Vocabulary 5.77 Hard Vocabulary 7.96 Table 27 Mean Error Scores f o r Independent Variable, D i s t r a c t o r Type, i n Comprehension Tasks Independent Variable Similar D i s t r a c t o r s D i s s i m i l a r D i s t r a c t o r s 6.21 7.52 Table 28 Mean Error Scores f o r Independent Variables, Conceptual Tempo and D i f f i c u l t y Level, in Comprehension Tasks Easy Hard Vocabulary Vocabulary Impulsives 7.72 9.62 Refle c t i v e s 3.82 6.30 Table 29 Mean Error Scores for Independent Variables, Conceptual Tempo and Distra c t o r Type, i n Comprehension Tasks Similar D i s t r a c t o r s D i s s i m i l a r D i s t r a c t o r s Impulsives Ref l e c t i v e s 8.20 4.23 9.14 5.89 Table-30 Mean Error Scores f o r Independent Variables, D i s t r a c t o r Type and D i f f i c u l t y Level, i n Comprehension,Tasks Similar D i s s i m i l a r D i s t r a c t o r s Distractors 67 Impulsives 6.09 5.45 Ref l e c t i v e s 6.34 9.59 Table 31 Mean Error Scores f o r Independent Variables, Conceptual Tempo, Di s t r a c t o r Type and D i f f i c u l t y Level, i n Comprehension Tasks Similar D i s s i m i l a r Distractors Distractors Impulsives Easy Vocabulary 8.17 7.26 Hard Vocabulary . 8.22 11.02 Reflec tlves Easy Vocabulary 4.00 3.6 3 Hard Vocabulary 4.46 8.15 68 The analysis of the word recognition tasks (Table 16) shows there i s a s i g n i f i c a n t main e f f e c t for conceptual tempo, reading d i f f i c u l t y l e v e l s , and d i s t r a c t o r type. The tables of means (Table 17 to Table 23) show these differences to l i e i n the fact that impulsives made more errors than r e f l e c t i v e s , and as per a p r i o r i c r i t e r i a , hard tasks were more d i f f i c u l t than easy ones, s i m i l a r d i s t r a c t o r s caused more problems than d i s s i m i l a r d i s t r a c t o r s . Table 16 shows a s i g n i f i c a n t i n t e r a c t i o n of conceptual tempo and d i s t r a c t o r type and i n t e r a c t i o n of reading d i f f i c u l t y l e v e l and d i s t r a c t o r type. The tables of means show that impulsives make more errors than r e f l e c t i v e s on both s i m i l a r and d i s s i m i l a r d i s t r a c t o r tasks. Yet the impulsives make about twice (52%) as many errors as r e f l e c t i v e s when the d i s t r a c t o r s are s i m i l a r but only 30% more errors when the d i s t r a c t o r s are d i s s i m i l a r . The analysis of the i n t e r a c t i o n of d i s t r a c t o r s and reading d i f f i c u l t y l e v e l i s s i m i l a r . With si m i l a r d i s t r a c t o r s , hard to read tasks are 55% more d i f f i c u l t than easy to read tasks. But with d i s s i m i l a r d i s t r a c t o r s , hard to read tasks are only 10/6 more d i f f i c u l t than easy to read tasks. It appears that the difference between easy and hard reading l e v e l s i s determined by the nature of the d i s t r a c t o r s , and that d i f f i c u l t y per se i s a rather impotent f a c t o r . Here again, i n the analysis of the word recognition tasks, the major hypothesis of t h i s study i s borne out. Impulsives make more errors than r e f l e c t i v e s on tasks of sim i l a r d i s t r a c t o r s but not on tasks of d i s s i m i l a r d i s t r a c t o r s . The analysis of the comprehension tasks shows that there i s a s i g n i f i c a n t main e f f e c t for conceptual tempo, reading l e v e l , and d i s t r a c t o r type. The tables of means (Tables 25 to 31) indicate that t h i s difference stems from the fact that impulsives make more errors than r e f l e c t i v e s , hard tasks are more d i f f i c u l t than easy ones, and d i s s i m i l a r d i s t r a c t o r s cause 69 more problems than s i m i l a r d i s t r a c t o r s . This information i s not i n accord with the major thesis of t h i s study: that s i m i l a r d i s t r a c t o r s w i l l cause more d i f f i c u l t y for impulsive children than d i s s i m i l a r d i s t r a c t o r s . It i s possible that in reading comprehension tasks v i s u a l s i m i l a r i t y becomes less important than the cognitive aspects of reading, e.g., the story grammar, the i n t e r e s t l e v e l , the concepts of the passage. Any one or a combination of these unaccounted for variables could cancel out the e f f e c t of d i s t r a c t o r type for both impulsive and r e f l e c t i v e c h i l d r e n . Further elaboration of t h i s i n t e r p r e t a t i o n i s provided i n chapter 5. The r e s u l t s of t h i s second, a l t e r n a t i v e a n a l y s i s , although unanticipated i n terms of some of the objectives of t h i s study, are nevertheless consistent with the primary a n a l y s i s . Summary The f i r s t hypothesis of a difference between impulsives and r e f l e c t i v e s on an easy reading l e v e l word recognition task with s i m i l a r d i s t r a c t o r s was supported. The second hypothesis of no difference between impulsives and r e f l e c t i v e s on a word recognition task having easy reading l e v e l and d i s s i m i l a r d i s t r a c t o r s f a i l e d to be rejected. This contrasting p a i r , d i f f e r i n g only in d i s t r a c t o r type, indicates that conceptual tempo i s responsive to the text of t h i s task. The next two hypotheses also form a contrasting pa i r . Both tasks were at the grade four reading l e v e l but one had s i m i l a r d i s t r a c t o r s and one had d i s s i m i l a r d i s t r a c t o r s . The t h i r d hypothesis of a difference between error scores of r e f l e c t i v e s and impulsives on a hard reading l e v e l word recognition task with s i m i l a r d i s t r a c t o r s was supported. The fourth hypothesis of no difference between error scores of r e f l e c t i v e s and impulsives on a hard reading l e v e l word recognition task with d i s s i m i l a r d i s t r a c t o r s f a i l e d to be rejected. Here again, as in hypotheses one and 70 two, i t appears that conceptual tempo may be affected by task c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s . Impulsives made more errors than r e f l e c t i v e s when the demands of the reading task approximated the task demands of the Matching Familiar Figures Test. Hypothesis f i v e was supported and the contrasting hypothesis, s i x , was rejected. Impulsives made more errors than r e f l e c t i v e s i n si m i l a r and d i s s i m i l a r d i s t r a c t o r easy reading l e v e l comprehension tasks. The fact that impulsives made approximately twice as many errors as r e f l e c t i v e s i n a task with d i s s i m i l a r d i s t r a c t o r s suggests the p o s s i b i l i t y that i n a comprehension reading task there are other cognitive factors at work beside the variables i d e n t i f i e d i n t h i s study. Hypotheses seven and eight are "a contrasting pa i r . Hypothesis seven, that there w i l l be a difference between impulsives' and r e f l e c t i v e s ' error scores i n a hard r e a d a b i l i t y comprehension task with s i m i l a r d i s t r a c t o r s was supported. Hypothesis eight, that there w i l l be no difference between impulsives' and r e f l e c t i v e s ' error scores i n a hard r e a d a b i l i t y comprehension task with d i s s i m i l a r d i s t r a c t o r s was rejected. In t h i s study, a sample of 97 students, whose conceptual tempo had already been i d e n t i f i e d , was given eight reading tasks. Overall, the impulsives made more errors than the r e f l e c t i v e s i n reading tasks having s i m i l a r d i s t r a c t o r s and impulsives made as many as or more errors than the r e f l e c t i v e s in reading tasks having d i s s i m i l a r d i s t r a c t o r s . The decision to undertake a second and alternate analysis was determined by the r e a l i z a t i o n that the form and content of a reading task must be considered in the analysis of the data. The data were analyzed i n a 2x2x2 MANOVA with repeated measures on two f a c t o r s . The r e s u l t s were si m i l a r to the one way-MANOVA repeated e a r l i e r i n t h i s chapter. The advantage of the second a l t e r n a t i v e analysis has been one of the 71 completeness in data i n t e r p r e t a t i o n . The i n v e s t i g a t i o n of the data would not be considered thorough unless subjected to the second design strategy. 72 CHAPTER V: SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, AND IMPLICATIONS Summary The purpose of t h i s study was to gather empirical data concerning the requirements- of tasks u t i l i z e d to measure reading i n r e l a t i o n to the requirements of tasks u t i l i z e d to measure conceptual tempo. There i s considerable evidence in the l i t e r a t u r e i n d i c a t i n g that there i s a 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 a b i l i t y and conceptual tempo. The l i t e r a t u r e suggests that impulsives may have more d i f f i c u l t y with reading than r e f l e c t i v e s . This i n v e s t i g a t i o n predicted that when the reading task c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s c l o s e l y approximate the task c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of the test for conceptual tempo, the re l a t i o n s h i p s between the task r e s u l t s may be due to i n d i v i d u a l responses to task s i t u a t i o n s and hence may not accurately measure reading p r o f i c i e n c y . In order to investigate the possible r e l a t i o n s h i p between conceptual tempo and reading, a l l subjects, impulsives and r e f l e c t i v e s , were presented with reading tasks that approximated the Matching Familiar Figures Test (MFFT) i n problem-solving demands, and with reading tasks that did not, i . e . , some tasks with s i m i l a r d i s t r a c t o r s and some with d i s s i m i l a r d i s t r a c t o r s . The study employed both word recognition and comprehension tasks i n the in v e s t i g a t i o n of the measurement of reading. The influence of the d i f f i c u l t y of the material i n terms of r e a d a b i l i t y was also investigated. Tasks employing easy and hard vocabulary l e v e l s were investigated under conditions of high response uncertainty, u t i l i z i n g s i m i l a r and d i s s i m i l a r d i s t r a c t o r s . Procedures One hundred and si x t y - e i g h t grade two students, almost the entire grade two population of New Westminster, B r i t i s h Columbia, were administered the 73 Matching Familiar Figures Test and eight reading tasks. Second language learners and spe c i a l education students were not included i n the data a n a l y s i s . A l l the reading tasks were administered i n the children's classrooms during regular school hours. The eight reading tasks were administered by the examiner-investigator over two tes t i n g sessions. Each session consisted of four reading tasks, two word recognition and two comprehension, and took approximately 30 minutes. The teachers were not i n th e i r classrooms during the test - t a k i n g . Error scores on each reading task were noted. The MFFT was administered i n d i v i d u a l l y by the examiner-investigator. The subject was shown a l i n e drawing and was asked to choose an i d e n t i c a l one to the standard from among six sim i l a r l i n e drawings. The examiner-investigator recorded the response latency to the subject's f i r s t choice and the number of responses u n t i l the i d e n t i c a l drawing was i d e n t i f i e d . The administration of the MFFT yielded 97 c h i l d r e n with either a r e f l e c t i v e or an impulsive conceptual tempo. Analysis of Data and Hypotheses The data were analyzed i n a one-way MANOVA, with conceptual tempo as the independent v a r i a b l e . Impulsives and r e f l e c t i v e s were compared across a l l the eight reading tasks i n order to i d e n t i f y s i g n i f i c a n t differences between the two groups. An alternate analysis of the data was also performed. The data were analyzed i n a 2x2x2 MANOVA with repeated measures on two fa c t o r s . The dependent variables were comprehension and word recognition. The independent variables were conceptual tempo (impulsive x r e f l e c t i v e ) , d i f f i c u l t y of material (easy x hard), and d i s t r a c t o r type ( s i m i l a r x d i s s i m i l a r ) . Eight hypotheses were tested. These are l i s t e d below. Following each-i s an i n d i c a t i o n of the s t a t i s t i c a l f i n d i n g . 1. In an easy vocabulary word recognition task with s i m i l a r d i s t r a c t o r s there w i l l be a difference between impulsives' and r e f l e c t i v e s ' scores. (Supported, £ = .021) 2. In an easy vocabulary word recognition task with d i s s i m i l a r d i s t r a c t o r s there w i l l be no difference between impulsives' and r e f l e c t i v e s ' scores. (Failed to be rejected) . 3. In a hard vocabulary word recognition task with s i m i l a r d i s t r a c t o r s there w i l l be a difference between impulsives' and r e f l e c t i v e s ' scores. (Supported, £ = .016) 4. In a hard vocabulary word recognition task with d i s s i m i l a r d i s t r a c t o r s there w i l l be no difference between impulsives' and r e f l e c t i v e s ' scores. (Failed to be rejected) 5. In an easy vocabulary comprehension task with s i m i l a r d i s t r a c t o r s there w i l l be a difference between impulsives' and r e f l e c t i v e s ' scores. (Supported, £=.001) 6. In an easy vocabulary comprehension task with d i s s i m i l a r d i s t r a c t o r s there w i l l be no difference between impulsives' and s i g n i f i c a n t r e f l e c t i v e s ' scores. (Rejected, £=.012) 7. In a hard vocabulary comprehension task with s i m i l a r d i s t r a c t o r s there w i l l be a difference between impulsives' and r e f l e c t i v e s ' scores. (Supported, £=.002) 8. In a hard vocabulary comprehension task with d i s s i m i l a r d i s t r a c t o r s there w i l l be no difference between impulsives' and r e f l e c t i v e s ' scores. (Rejected, £=.021) Conclusions This study has demonstrated that the r e f l e c t i o n - i m p u l s i v i t y dimension i s related to some reading tasks but not others. In p a r t i c u l a r i t was found that not a l l word r e c o g n i t i o n tasks are a f f e c t e d by conceptua l tempo. Thus to some extent the evidence presented i n t h i s s tudy cha l l enges prev ious re search on word r e c o g n i t i o n s k i l l s . Kagan's (1965) argument that i m p u l s i v e s exper ience more d i f f i c u l t y than r e f l e c t i v e s on word r e c o g n i t i o n tasks was supported , but o n l y under c e r t a i n c o n d i t i o n s . I f the read ing task i s s i m i l a r to the task demands o f the MFFT, then i m p u l s i v e s make more e r r o r s than r e f l e c t i v e s , but when the read ing task i s not s i m i l a r i n task demands to the MFFT i m p u l s i v e s do not make more e r r o r s . The c o n c l u s i o n s o f the study presented here are drawn from t h i s i n f o r m a t i o n . Kagan (1965) and H a l l and R u s s e l l (1974) examined s u b j e c t s ' responses to word r e c o g n i t i o n tasks that had some degree o f grapho-phonemic s i m i l a r i t y . S ince they examined word r e c o g n i t i o n a b i l i t y o n l y w i t h words tha t approximated the task requirements o f the MFFT, t h e i r c o n c l u s i o n s about the p r e d i c t i v e va lue o f the MFFT on read ing a b i l i t y are o n l y p a r t i a l l y v a l i d . The study presented here demonstrates that i t i s necessary to t e s t c h i l d r e n on a v a r i e t y o f read ing tasks and not j u s t those that r e q u i r e the same c o g n i t i v e s k i l l s as the t e s t for conceptual tempo. Denny (1974) and M a r g o l i s (1976) found no s i g n i f i c a n t c o r r e l a t i o n s between MFFT e r r o r scores and response l a t e n c y and read ing t e s t s c o r e s . Resu l t s from the present study suggest that t h e i r f i n d i n g s should be re-examined i n order to a s c e r t a i n how c l o s e l y the read ing tasks they used approximated the demands o f the MFFT. I t may be that the des ign o f the read ing t e s t s presented to t h e i r sub jec t s s i g n i f i c a n t l y i n f l u e n c e d the r e s u l t s . Shapiro (1975) argued i n favour o f acknowledging the importance o f the read ing ta sk when he po inted out the n e c e s s i t y o f examining other c o g n i t i v e processes bes ides conceptual tempo. The data presented i n t h i s s tudy prov ide f u r t h e r s t r e n g t h for h i s argument. I t w i l l be o f va lue at t h i s po int to r e t u r n for a moment to the 76 introductory remarks of t h i s study. In chapter one, examples were provided of popular standardized diagnostic reading tests that use s i m i l a r d i s t r a c t o r tasks to measure reading. It should be noted that formal reading tests are not the only place where these types of questions are to be found. Basal reader workbooks (e.g., Ginn 720 s e r i e s , 1980) include exercises that are modelled on the s i m i l a r d i s t r a c t o r type of question: We'll ri d e i n the . yet j e t bet Ben Lad. red fed bed (Ginn 720 s e r i e s , l e v e l 2, p. 39) This study has shown that there i s no s i g n i f i c a n t difference between impulsives and r e f l e c t i v e s on tasks of d i s s i m i l a r d i s t r a c t o r s . These r e s u l t s were borne out for both easy and hard reading l e v e l s . Even when the vocabulary i s two grades above the grade l e v e l of the students and the problem i s one i n which a high response uncertainty e x i s t s ( t h i s l a s t point i s in d i r e c t reference to a quote by Kagan in the introductory statement of chapter 1 ) , there i s no s i g n i f i c a n t difference of conceptual tempo. I t can thus be strongly stated that a serious error in judgement i s being made i f educators believe that tasks of s i m i l a r d i s t r a c t o r s are doing much more than measuring conceptual tempo. The analysis of error scores of the word recognition tasks presented in chapter 4 of t h i s study i l l u s t r a t e s the need to provide d i s s i m i l a r d i s t r a c t o r s in reading tasks i f the aim i s to measure reading a b i l i t y or to teach reading. In contrast to the evidence derived from the word recognition tasks, t h i s study has revealed that, on comprehension tasks, impulsives d i f f e r from r e f l e c t i v e s i n response to both s i m i l a r and d i s s i m i l a r d i s t r a c t o r s . However i t i s e s s e n t i a l to examine the differences i n error scores between impulsives and r e f l e c t i v e s i n order to interpret the r e s u l t s of the data analyses. In the one-way MANOVA the r e s u l t s showed that for both l e v e l s of passages; easy and hard, there was a greater d i s p a r i t y i n error scores between impulsives and r e f l e c t i v e s when the d i s t r a c t o r s were s i m i l a r than when they were d i s s i m i l a r . The importance of the d i s t r a c t o r types was further confirmed i n 2x2x2 MANOVA data a n a l y s i s . In t h i s examination of the data the inte r a c t i o n s of conceptual tempo and d i s t r a c t o r type and of reading l e v e l and d i s t r a c t o r type were s i g n i f i c a n t at the .05 l e v e l . D i s t r a c t o r type was thus shown to be an important variable i n the measurement of reading tasks. One unanticipated finding was that i n the word recognition tasks, impulsives scored the same as r e f l e c t i v e s on d i s s i m i l a r d i s t r a c t o r tasks, whereas on the comprehension tasks they did not. Nevertheless i t i s apparent from both the word recognition and comprehension r e s u l t s that tasks s i m i l a r i n cognitive demands to the MFFT y i e l d stronger l e v e l s of s t a t i s t i c a l s i g n i f i c a n c e than tasks that are d i f f e n t from the MFFT. This fact leads to the conclusion that although the connection between conceptual tempo and reading i s not as strong as Kagan has suggested, there c l e a r l y i s some r e l a t i o n s h i p . This l a s t point i s more evident i n the re s u l t s of comprehension tasks than word recognition tasks. And since comprehension tasks may be considered a more r e a l i s t i c measure of reading s k i l l s , conceptual tempo i s evidently a factor to be considered i n the measurement of reading. Variables to be Considered i n the Measurement of Reading In a study of the measurement of reading i t i s worthwhile to consider other cognitive processes besides conceptual tempo that could account for the r e f l e c t i v e s ' success at these reading tasks. After mastering graphic s k i l l s the c h i l d i s able to turn his attention to the content and structure of the passage he i s reading ( B i e m i l l e r , 1970). By the end of grade two, students are generally fluent i n graphic s k i l l s and able to use syntactic and semantic cues to i d e n t i f y words i n a passage. In the present study both impulsives and r e f l e c t i v e s may have been using such context aides to derive meaning from the story. I f t h i s i s the case, impulsives as well as r e f l e c t i v e s would have been influenced by both the s t y l e and the content of the reading task. Their answers would not only r e f l e c t t h e i r decoding a b i l i t y , but would also indicate t h e i r i n t e r e s t i n the story and t h e i r a b i l i t y to understand the story grammar. Given these many d i f f i c u l t i e s to overcome i t may be that r e f l e c t i v e s did better because they are better problem solvers than impulsives (McKinney, Haskin, & Moore, 1975). The comprehension tasks necessitated that the subjects adapt t h e i r approach to the requirements of the p a r t i c u l a r task. According to Zelniker (1975) and Zelniker, Bentler, and Renan (1977), i f the impulsives view the task i n large "chunks" and the r e f l e c t i v e s i n small "chunks" then i t i s possible that when the task involves many cognitive strategies the impulsives' strategy of analysis i s not compatible with the task requirements. In the reading comprehension task the subjects would have had to respond to many more s t i m u l i than just the type of d i s t r a c t o r . Semantic and syntactic appropriateness as well as story grammar, e.g., fable, mystery, t a l l t a l e , would have to be taken into account. It i s possible that impulsives made more errors than r e f l e c t i v e s because of the manner by which they process complex information rather than because of the way they respond to d i s t r a c t o r type. To conclude, the intent of t h i s study was to investigate the measurement of conceptual tempo and the measurement of reading. The re s u l t s of the error scores on a l l comprehension tasks d i f f e r e n t i a t e d impulsives and r e f l e c t i v e s . The r e s u l t s of the error scores on the word recognition tasks only d i f f e r e n t i a t e d impulsives and r e f l e c t i v e s when the d i s t r a c t o r s were s i m i l a r . A possible explanation of the r e s u l t s of the comprehension tasks i s that impulsives are r e s o r t i n g to strategies of analysis that are not compatible with the requirements of the task. These r e s u l t s suggest the necessity of c r i t i c a l l y examining the task requirements of a l l reading tests before embarking on remedial reading programs and before over-generalizing r e s u l t s from research studies of conceptual tempo and the measurement of reading. Implications of the Study Classroom Implications It i s common practice in many classrooms to judge students' reading a b i l i t y by the scores obtained in reading t e s t s . Misjudgement of reading s k i l l s can occur i f the diagnostic tests are l i m i t e d to ones that produce excessive impulsive or r e f l e c t i v e behavior. A c h i l d may be influenced by the cognitive demands of the test and resort to an impulsive incorrect guess and yet may respond c o r r e c t l y when the cognitive demands are altered i n his favour. For example, a c h i l d may be a competent reader of meaningful passages and s t i l l do poorly i n a test that presented grapho-phonemically s i m i l a r d i s t r a c t o r s . For these reasons i t i s advised that teachers examine reading t e s t s to see i f they discriminate against impulsives. As well, overly r e f l e c t i v e behavior can create an i l l u s i o n of a reading d i s a b i l i t y . Faced with a s i m i l a r d i s t r a c t o r task, the c h i l d may take a very long time to choose an answer. In t h i s instance the student may be demonstrating a reluctance to take r i s k s rather than a lack of mastery of the r e q u i s i t e reading s k i l l s . Tests ought to be c l o s e l y inspected to make, sure that they are measuring reading a b i l i t y and not 80 conceptual tempo. It i s suggested that exercises i n workbooks and other teaching materials be c a r e f u l l y examined to make sure that they include i n s t r u c t i o n and practice i n a va r i e t y of reading s k i l l s . In some basal programs, (e.g., Ginn 720, Nelson Language Development Reading Program) i t i s possible to find practice exercises and c r i t e r i o n tests that reinforce impulsive and r e f l e c t i v e behavior. In such exercises the student i s not rece i v i n g i n s t r u c t i o n i n developmental reading. Instead, impulsive behavior i s being encouraged and r e s u l t i n g task errors may mistakenly be viewed as reading problems. When a decision has to be made among a l t e r n a t i v e s presented simultaneously or in close temporal contiguity and having strong grapho-phonemic s i m i l a r i t i e s , then impulsives should be taught to respond more r e f l e c t i v e l y and r e f l e c t i v e s should be taught to respond more d e c i s i v e l y . The development of the a b i l i t y to control conceptual tempo (Barstis & Ford, 1977; Denny, 1973; Egeland, 1974) would improve performance in the early years of school when t h i s cognitive s t y l e i s most apparent (Messer, 1976; Salkind, 1978). It i s suggested that educators inform publishers of test and teaching materials as well as writers of educational s y l l a b i of the need to include a va r i e t y of tasks i n t h e i r curriculum. These people should be made aware of the fact that reading materials which contain a high degree of response uncertainty may only serve to reinforce the inaccurate processing and responding behavior of impulsive c h i l d r e n . Research Implications The r e s u l t s of t h i s study favour the a d v i s a b i l i t y of a content analysis of the vocabulary and comprehension sections of standardized reading t e s t s . The in d i c a t i o n s are that when children are required to solve problems in which a degree of high response uncertainty e x i s t s and s i m i l a r d i s t r a c t o r s are presented as answer choices, then r e f l e c t i v e c hildren w i l l be favoured. Content analysis of reading tests would systematically describe and count recurring categories. The formulation, d e f i n i t i o n , and d i f f e r e n t i a t i o n of categories would r e f l e c t the types of problems posed in the t e s t . This type of analysis would investigate bias against impulsive students i n standardized t e s t s . Another study suggestion i s to r e p l i c a t e t h i s study with passages at an i n s t r u c t i o n a l l e v e l (comprehension 75% and word recognition 95% accuracy) (Betts, 1946) i n order to investigate the e f f e c t of conceptual tempo on material that a c h i l d i s able to read with the teacher's assistance. It may be the case that there i s less difference i n reading error scores between impulsives and r e f l e c t i v e s when responding to i n s t r u c t i o n a l l e v e l material than to f r u s t r a t i o n l e v e l material. Attitude toward the passages may be a factor i n the response to the task. Administration of an a t t i t u d e scale, e.g., Estes Attitude Scale, i s suggested to investigate the r o l e of a f f e c t i n the measurement of reading and conceptual tempo. The design of a study may be a factor i n i n f l u e n c i n g subjects' responses. It i s suggested that alternate versions of the comprehension passages be prepared in order to investigate the e f f e c t of conceptual tempo on both s i m i l a r and d i s s i m i l a r d i s t r a c t o r versions of each passage. 82 REFERENCE NOTE 1. MFFT developed by Jerome Kagan, Harvard U n i v e r s i t y , W i l l i a m James H a l l , Cambridge, MA 02138. 83 REFERENCES Barscis, S. W., & Ford, L. A., J r . R e f l e c t i o n - i m p u l s i v i t y , conservation and the development o£ a b i l i t y to control cognitive tempo. Chi Id  Development, 1977, 48, 953-959. " Betts, E. A. Foundation of reading i n s t r u c t i o n . New York, New York: American Book Company, 1946. B i e m i l l e r , A. The development of the use of graphic and contextual i n f o r -mation as c h i l d r e n learn to read. Reading Research Quarterly, 1970, 6, 75-96. Blanton, W. E. , & Bullock, T. Cognitive s t y l e and reading behavior.. Reading World, 1973, May, 276-287. Bock, D. R. M u l t i v a r i a t e s t a t i s t i c a l methods in behavioral research. New York, New York: McGraw H i l l , 1975. Butler, L. G. A p s y c h o l i n g u i s t i c analysis of the o r a l reading behavior of selected impulsive and r e f l e c t i v e second-grade boys (Doctoral disser-t a t i o n , The Ohio State. University, 1972). D i s s e r t a t i o n Abstracts  I n t e r n a t i o n a l , 1972, 3J3, 5960A. ( U n i v e r s i t y Microfilms No. 73-11, 46.5) Cole, P. M., & Hartley, D. G. The e f f e c t s of reinforcement and strategy t r a i n i n g on impulsive responding. Ch i l d Development, 1978, 49, 381-384. Davey, B. Cognitive s t y l e s and reading achievement. Journal of Reading, 1976, 20, 113-120. Denny, D. R. R e f l e c t i o n and impulsivity as determinants of conceptual strategy. C h i l d Development, 1973, 44, 614-623. Denny, D. R. Relationship of three cognitive s t y l e dimensions to elemen-tary reading a b i l i t i e s . Journal of Educational Psychology, 1974, 66, 702-709. D u r r e l l , D. D. Improving reading i n s t r u c t i o n . New York, New York: Harcourt Brace .& World, 1956. Egeland, B. T r a i n i n g impulsive c h i l d r e n i n the use of more e f f i c i e n t scanning techniques. C h i l d Development, 1974, 45, 165-171. Erickson, L. , & Otto, W. E f f e c t of i n t r a - l i s t s i m i l a r i t y and impulsive-r e f l e c t i v i t y on kindergarten children's word recognition performance. Journal of Educational Research, 1973, LXVI, 466-470. F a r r > R- Reading: What can be measured? Newark, Delaware: Interna-t i o n a l Reading Association, 1969. 84 Fry, E. Developing a word l i s t for remedial reading. Elementary English, 1957, 36, 456-458. Gardner, R. Cognitive s t y l e s in categorizing behavior. Journal of  Personality, 1953, 22, 214-233. Gardner, R., Hoi zman, G. S., Kl e i n , L. H., & Spence, D. S. Cognitive c o n t r o l : A study of i n d i v i d u a l consistencies i n cognitive behavior. Psychological Issues, 1959, Gates MacGinitie Reading Tests, Second E d i t i o n , Basic R, Form 1. Walter H. MacGinitie et a l . Boston, Mass.: Houghton M i f f l i n Company, 1978. Goodman, K. Analysis of o r a l reading miscues: Applied p s y c h o l i n g u i s t i c s . Reading Research Quarterly, 1969, _5, 9-30. Guthrie, J. T. Reading comprehension and synt a c t i c responses i n good and poor readers. Journal of Educational Psychology, 1973, 65, 294-300. H a l l , V. C , & R u s s e l l , W. J . C. M u l t i t r a i t - m u l t imethod analysis of con-ceptual tempo. Journal of Educational Psychology, 1974, 66, 932-939. Hartley, D. G. The e f f e c t of perceptual salience on r e f l e c t i v e - i m p u l s i v e performance d i f f e r e n c e s . Developmental Psychology, 1976, 12, 218-225. Hood, J . , & Kendall, J. R. A q u a l i t a t i v e analysis of o r a l reading errors of r e f l e c t i v e and impulsive second graders: A follow-up study. Journal of Reading Behavior, 1973, 7_, 269-281. Kagan, J. R e f l e c t i o n - i m p u l s i v i t y and reading a b i l i t y i n primary grade c h i l d r e n . C h i l d Development, 1965, 36, 609-628. (a) Kagan, J . Impulsive and r e f l e c t i v e c h i l d r e n : S i g n i f i c a n c e of conceptual tempo. In J . D. Krumboltz (Ed.), Learning and the educational process. Chicago: Rand McNally, 1965. (b). Kagan, J. R e f l e c t i o n - i m p u l s i v i t y : The generality and dynamics of con-ceptual t-^ mpo. Journal o£ kbv.o'^&\ Psychology. 1965. 7_1_, 17-24. Kagan, J . , Moss, H. A., & S i g e l . I. Psychological s i g n i f i c a n c e of sty l e of conceptualization. In J. C. Wright & J . Kagan (Eds.), Basic cog-: n i t i v e processes i n c h i l d r e n . . Monographs of the Society for Research i n C h i l d Development, 1963, 28 ( 2 , S e r i a l No. 86). • Kagan, J. , Pearson, L. , & Welch, L. Modi.fiability of an impulsive tempo. Journal of Educational Psychology, 1966, 5_7, 359-365. Kagan, J . , Pearson, L., & Welch, L. Conceptual i m p u l s i v i t y and inductive reasoning. C h i l d Development, 1969, 37, 583-594. 85 Kagan, J. , Rosman, B. L., Day, D., Albert, J . , & P h i l l i p s , W. Information processing i n the c h i l d : S i g n i f i c a n c e of a n a l y t i c and r e f l e c t i v e a t t i -tudes. Psychological Monographs, 1964, 7_8, (1, Whole No. 578). King, I. An experimental i n v e s t i g a t i o n of the p o t e n t i a l of r e f l e c t i o n -i m p u l s i v i t y as a determinant of success in early reading achievement (Doctoral d i s s e r t a t i o n , Boston College, 1972). D i s s e r t a t i o n Abstracts  I n t e r n a t i o n a l , 1972, 33, 191-A. (University Microfilms No. 72-19,770) Lapp, D., & Flood, J. Teaching reading to every c h i l d . New York, New York: MacMillan Publishing Co. Ltd., 1978. McConnell, R. E. Our own voice. Toronto, Ontario: Gage Publishing Limited, 1978. MacGinitie, V/. Research suggestion from the l i t e r a t u r e search. Reading  Research Quarterly, 1975-76, 1_1, 7-35. McKinney, J. D., Haskins, R., & Moore, M.. Problem-solving s t r a t e g i e s i n r e f l e c t i v e and impulsive c h i l d r e n . F i n a l Report. (U.S. Department of Health, Education and Welfare) National I n s t i t u t e of Education, O f f i c e of Research Grants, July 1977. Mann, L. Differences between r e f l e c t i v e and impulsive c h i l d r e n in tempo and q u a l i t y of decision making. Ch i l d Development, 1973, 44, 274-279. Margolis, H. Relationship between a u d i t o r y - v i s u a l i n t e g r a t i o n , reading readiness, and conceptual tempo. The Journal of Psychology, 1976, 93, 181-189. Margolis, A., & Brannigan, C. Conceptual tempo as a parameter for p r e d i c t -ing reading achievement. Journal of Educational Research, 1978, 71, no. 6, 342-345. " Margolis, A., Peterson, N., & Leonard, H. S. Conceptual tempo as a pre-d i c t o r of f i r s t grade reading achievement. Journal of Reading Behavior, 1978, 10, no. 4, 359-362. Messer, S. R e f l e c t i o n - i m p u l s i v i t y : A review. Psycho 1ogicq1 B u l l e t i n , 1976, 83, 1036-1052. ' ' . " Roberts, T. Strategies for helping the impulsive reader. Reading, 1980, 14, no. 2, 3-9. Salkind, N. J. Development of norms for the Matching Familiar Figures. Test. JSAS Catalog of Selected Documents, in Psychology, 1978, 8, 61. (MS. No. 1718) Sawyer, D. J. The d i a g n o s t i c mystique—a point of view. The Reading  Teacher, 1974, 2]_, no. 6, 555-561 . Shapiro, J. E. The r e l a t i o n s h i p of conceptual tempo to reading readiness test performance. Journal of Reading Behavior, 1976, 8, 83-87. 86 Smith, F. Understanding reading. New York, New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston, Inc.,1971. Spache, G. Good reading for poor readers. Champaign, I l l i n o i s : Gerrard Press, 1968. Stothers, C. E., Jackson, R. W. B., & Minkler, F. W. A Canadian word l i s t . Toronto, Ontario: The Ryerson Press, The MacMillans in Canada, 1950. Thorn, E. A., McCreary-Juhasz, A., Smith, A. C., Munroe, K. D. , & Richmond, M. I. F l y i n g free. Toronto, Ontario: W. J . Gage Ltd., 1966. Thorn, E. A., McCreary-Juhasz, A., Smith, A. C., Munroe, K. D., & Richmond, M. I. Out and away. Toronto, Ontario: W. J . Gage Ltd., 1970. Tuinman, J. J., & Kendall, J . R. Conceptual tempo and reading. Paper presented at a meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco, A p r i l 1979'. Waltz, P. A. R e f l e c t i o n - i m p u l s i v i t y and o r a l reading miscues among 4th grade boys (M.Ed, thesi s , Rutgers, The State U n i v e r s i t y of New Jersey, 1977). Witkin, H. A., Dyk, R. B. Paterson, H. F., Goodenough, D. R., & Karp, S. A. Psychological d i f f e r e n t i a t i o n . New York: Wiley, 1962. Witkin, H. A., Lewis, H. B., Hertzman, M., Machover, K. , Meissner, P. B., & Wapner, S. Personality through perception. New York, New York: Harper, 1954. Yando, R. M., & Kagan, J. The e f f e c t of teacher tempo on the c h i l d . C h i l d Development, 1968, 39, 27-34. Zelniker, T. Aspects of information processing r e l a t e d to differences i n conceptual tempo. Paper presented at the B i e n n i a l Meeting of the Society for Research in C h i l d Development, Denver, Colorado, A p r i l 1975. Zelniker, T., Bentler, P. M., & Renan, A. Speed vs. accuracy as a measure of cognitive s t y l e : Internal consistency and factor analyses. C h i l d Development, 1977, 48, 301-304. Appendix A MATCHING FAMILIAR FIGURES Answer Sheet Elementary Note: First two items are practice Item 1. house. . . .1 2. scissors. . . .6 3. phone. . . .3 4. bear. ... 1 5. tree. . . .2 6. leaf 6 7. cat. . . .3 8. dress. . . .5 9. giraffe. . . .4 10. lamp 5 11. boat. . . .2 12. cowboy. . . .4 Kagan 9/29/65 88 DIRECTIONS FOR MATCHING FAMILIAR FIGURES " I am g o i n g t o show you a p i c t u r e o f something you know and then some p i c t u r e s t h a t l o o k l i k e i t . You w i l l have t o p o i n t t o the p i c t u r e on t h i s bottom page ( p o i n t ) t h a t i s j u s t l i k e the one on t h i s top page ( p o i n t ) . L e t ' s do some f o r p r a c t i c e . " E.shows p r a c t i c e items and h e l p s the c h i l d t o f i n d t h e . c o r r e c t answer. "Now we are g o i n g t o do some t h a t are a l i t t l e b i t h a r d e r . You w i l l see a p i c t u r e on top and s i x p i c t u r e s on the.bottom. F i n d the one. t h a t i s j u s t l i k e the. one on top and p o i n t t o i t . " E w i l l r e c o r d l a t e n c y t o f i r s t response to the h a l f -second, t o t a l number o f e r r o r s f o r each i t e m and the o r d e r i n which the e r r o r s are made. I f S i s c o r r e c t , E w i l l p r a i s e . I f wrong, E w i l l s ay, "No, t h a t i s not the r i g h t one. F i n d the one t h a t is. j u s t l i k e t h i s one ( p o i n t ) . " C o n t i n u e t o code responses (not times) u n t i l c h i l d makes a maximum o f six-e r r o r s o r g e t s the i t e m c o r r e c t . I f i n c o r r e c t , E w i l l show the r i g h t answer. I t i s n e c e s s a r y to have a s t a n d t o p l a c e t h e t e s t b o o k l e t on so t h a t b o t h the s t i m u l u s and t h e a l t e r n a t i v e s a r e c l e a r l y v i s i b l e t o the S a t the same time. The two pages s h o u l d be p r a c t i c a l l y a t r i g h t a n c r i o s t o one a n o t h e r . Note: I t i s d e s i r a b l e t o e n c l o s e e a c h parte • i n c l e a r - p l a s t i c i n o r d e r to keen the pages c l e a n . 89 93 7" 95 96 97 99 101 102 103 104 105 s i i 107 109 110 I l l I I I I I 112 113 116 Page 1 Appendix B 1. say 2. state 3.. came 4. f i n e 5. upset 6. became 7. i s l a n d 8. under 9. honest 10. bow 11. give 12. boot 13. song 14. f i s h 15i which 16. found sag stand c a l l f i r e u pstairs b e a u t i f u l inch unless home bowl ' g i r l born some f i r s t where f o r t sat s t a r t cake f i v e upon become into upon honey box g i f t book sold f i r e when four 117 saw stare cane f i n d up because in s i d e unite horse boy giant bone soon f i v e wheel fork SH mui us Words — Task 1 1 . saw 2. sfand 3. " came 4. find 5. upon 6. because 7. into 8. under 9. home 10. box 11. girl 12. book 13. soon 14. first 15. where 16. four Page 2 w h i l e a b l e . c o l o u r dance c o v e r d r i v e t h a n h a l f g e n t l e b o t h knee t o o k r a 3 t p a s t c a n n o t made f a i l o t h e r r o o f l o o k c e l l a r y a r d r u n f e a t h e r house broom c h a i r f r o g h a i r plow m i x change b i g l a s t o w l s t r e a m bone march s u i t i n s t e a d u n t i l had c o u l d know zoo a c r o s s j a r pan p i n down mother f a c e s c h o o l mud p e o p l e i n c h a c t f a l l noon d e l i g h t queen away p r e t t y k n i t 119 \ Stimulus Words — Task 2 1 . while 2. than 3. both 4. until 5. made 6. could - 7. look 8. run 9. house 10. mother 11 . school 12. people 13. big 14. last 15. away 16. pretty Page 3 1. w e s t e r n 2. t o u r i s t 3. t h y 4. p e r f o r m 5. p o s s e s s 6. h o v e r 7. v o c a l 8. p r e s i d e 9. powder 10. u n c l e 11. c o n s e n t 12. r o d e o 13. p r o d u c t 14. s u p p o r t 15. s i n g e 16. w i t h e r whimper t o w e l t h u s perfume p o s t a g e however v o i c e p r e s i d e n t p o v e r t y u n t i l c o n s t a n t r o d e n t p r o c l a i m s u p p l y s i n g u l a r w i t h o u t w h e t h e r toward t h u d p e r f e c t p o s i t i o n h o u s e h o l d volume p r e t e n d p o u l t r y under cons i d e r rogue produce s u p p e r s i n c e w i t c h 121 w h i s k e r s t o w n s h i p t h e s e p e r h a p s p o s s i b l e h o w l v o l t p r e s e r v e power u n f u r l c o n s i d e r a t e rode p r o b l e m suppose s i n k w i t h d r a w Stimulus Words — Task 3 1. • whether 2 . toward 3 . thus 4. perhaps 5. possible 6. however 7 . vo i ce 8. president 9. power 10. unc le 11 . cons ider 12. rode 13. produce 14. supply 15. s ince 16. without Page 4 1 2 3 j u ice keen rather muss o f ten nutmeg eager system charm b u l l e t i n increase bargain method ace decide conta in among e i the r y i e l d zebra youth wrigg le pub l i c w r i s t express human announce glimpse smile kept important knight kneel continued o s t r i c h o t t e r not ion major dusk content aunt confuse •chamber stood .admit o u t l i n e r i p p l e during rocky agent nudge whose l a i n severa l h a l t e r decay f r i nge mourn brace halves brace le noble s t i l l fake Stimulus Words — Task 4 1 . among 2 . ' e i ther 3. rather 4 . whose 5. often 6. several 7 . pub l i c 8. system 9. aunt 10. human 11 . increase 12 . rood 13. smile 14. kept 15. s t i l l 16. during ALEXANDER 125 ocean colour "Martin," said Martin's mother once day. "tomorrow your cousin i s c l o s i n g one coming the been ' to stay. Cousin Alexander. He l i v e s i n than c i t y . He has never began on a farm. them behind walks f a s t apples His mother wand him to see the farm and a l l the farm answers. He w i l l stay a l l wants father animals sugar hire one summer i f he i s happy. I hope that Alexander w i l l be happy on the farm." sudden hoop or hardy "He w i l l be happen, Mother," sa i d Martin. happy.. "Then than gentle "The farm i s much better then the city'." He has glass Alexander was "Ten them glad hurt waited than coming. He hoped he would stay a l l summer. He waded and waited for tomorrow toe hear wand to soft - while come. Tomorrow came and so did Alexander. He came wish Father, r i d i n g i n the sold with trunk hide thank truck. Martin ran to meet h i l l . Alexander was smaller than Martin, and paler, truth him that had the him He hand on a s u i t and a t i e . He had a watch on his arm. has tide h i t smelled alone "Hello Alexander," s a i d Martin. He smiled. "I hope you w i l l stay almost smoke •' a l l happy summer. I hope you w i l l be happen on the farm." handy L U C K Y P E N N I E S 126 to" \ blow Every morning E l i z a b e t h ran ago meet the mailman. Sometimes cake gave her some on he Body f a c t o r y east l e t t e r s . Sometimes he gave her a caught. E l i z a b e t h gave them to her mother. C a r e f u l magazine r i c h r i g h t poor One morning a d i f f e r e n t k i n d of l e t t e r came. Two run shiny pennies showed she b r i g h t the , hide through to envelope. "Look, Mother," E l i z a b e t h s a i d , "two gold pennies I" queen rug v a l e n t i n e l i s t e n across They are from a man who zoo to s e l l me something," Mother s a i d . "You may t o r n wants c a s t l e i c e to have enter." And she gave them v/ith E l i z a b e t h . "Thank you," s a i d E l i z a b e t h . " them yard I hour t r i c k Pocket think g o l d pennies are lucky pennies. I'm going t o she them." She ran has round keep She chose cone o u t s i d e . Ugly showed them to B i l l y Bangs who once next door. "Are they r e a l l y Owl l i v e d fourth take sure gold?" asked B i l l y Bangs. "They wrong l i k e gold," E l i z a b e t h s a i d . They are look come lucky lucky pennies." Why are they cherry?" asked B i l l y Bangs. "What can you buy dry the — drum to with two cents?" "I'm not going with buy anthing. I'm going on keep them," drop to dress evening the E l i z a b e t h answered. B i l l y ' s f a t h e r backed the car out of with garage, and B i l l y move mouth got i n . " T e l l ir.e i f the pennies b r i n g you good luck." B i l l y c a l l e d through the car window. 127 T H E K I T E A N D T H E W I N D v e r y t h a n Once upon a t i m e , n o t v a i n l o n g a g o , t h e r e was a k i t e t h a t b e l o n g e d t o a v e i l thaw b o l d i n n ' t h e l i t t l e bow and g i r l l i v i n g n e a r V a n c o u v e r i n a s m a l l tov/n by t h e n s e a . I t boy i n t o t h e e b e t t h e y someone happened t o bee t h e o n l y k i t e i n t h e v i l l a g e , so i t was s o m e t h i n g l o n e l y , be t h e n s omet imes t o o l s t i r r i n g o t h e r B u t t h e w i n d t o l d i t a l l k i n d s o f s t r a i n e r s , and t h e b e s t w e r e a b o u t t h e o t t e r t o i l s t o r i e s o r d e r l y cough d e s i r e d k i t e s i n t h e w o r l d . ' " E v e r y c o u n c i l has k i t e s , " s a i d t h e w i n d , and i t d e l i c i o u s c o u n t r y . d e s c r i b e d p a i d f o e t h e C h i n e s e k i t e s , whose bamboo p i p e s make m u s i c when t h e y f l y , and t h e p i n e s f l e e s h a r e s r e d J a p a n e s e k i t e s , s h aped l i k e d b i r d s o r f l o w e r s o r r e e d f i s h w i t h open m o u t h s , shamed r e a p t h r e e t o thaw Oh , t h e l o n e l y k i t e was e a g e r t h a n see them a l l ! " B u t p e r h a p s t h e y w o u l d t h e e t o e t h e s e l i g h t e r w h i s p e r e d l a u g h a t a p l a i n l i t t l e k i t e l i k e m e , " he w h i t t l e d . B u t t h e w i n d s a i d no . l i t t e r w h i s k e r s a r e k i n k y w e s t e r n " F o r arms n o t a l l o f y ou k i t e s t o g e t h e r ? You a r e b r o t h e r s , w h e n e v e r y o u come a r k k i n d s wh imper t h e y h i s f r o m . " T h i s g ave t h a n k i t e c o u r a g e . He d e t e r m i n e d t o f i n d h i g h b r o t h e r s t h e h i s s w i n e f r o m o t h e r l a n d s , and t h e w i n d p r o m i s e d t o h e l p h i m . w i p e PEABODY PROPERTY 128 sent < ' ' . ' ' ' Beany and Ted were w a i t i n g at the evening. We went along Main S t r e e t , corner soaping cry t r a i n r e s t i n g a few windows, to make i t look as i f we were out on whether ordinary cow room an we toward • town Halloween jaunt. But brother kept r i g h t on going when we reached the edge of b i r d . f e l l arm eleven swim whose Mr. Peabody l i v e d about rather a mile out, i n an ancient r e d - b r i c k house that h a l f age " sagging company evergreen had a s e v e r a l wooden veranda c i r c l i n g the f r o n t h a l f . Two long l i n e s of whole teacher quite f i l l • continue l e a s t trees made the lane a black alleyway, and we f i n i s h c l o s e together as among kept • sneaked we became up to the house, farm e i t h e r back the There was a l i g h t i n a dark -window. We s t o l e around toward house son swim lady see b i r d to peek i n . We couldn't feed anyone i n s i d e , j u s t part among a walnut sideboard t r a i n of s e v e r a l and the t a b l e with some flowered o i l c l o t h on i t . h a i r whispered "I don't see Mr. Peabody i n there", I f e l l to Beany. husband , egg p o s s i b l e "Keep q u i e t , " he muttered, and drew a piece of f i s h l i n e from h i s pocket, wait t a l k • n a i l however to which a milk was t i e d . He stuck the n a i l into the grade around the window, drop putty the f i n i s h l e t t i n g plant head of the n a i l i c e against the g l a s s , whether r e s t M a t c h i n g F a m i l i a r F i g u r e s T e s t L a t e n c y Response and E r r o r S c o r e s T o t a l L a t e n c y T o t a l Response E r r o r Time S c o r e s I m p u l s i v e s 1 83 * 17 2 93 19 3 97 19 4 50 18 5 53 16 6 43 . 22 7 93 18 8 85 16 9 73 17 10 87 19 11 71 18 12 61 16 13 47 22 14 65 29 15 86 18 16 64 22 17 86 16 18 53 25 19 97 20 20 52 28 21 52 22 22 84 24 23 42 24 24 86 18 25 60 23 26 70 16 27 86 18 28 71 19 29 57 29 30 65 16 31 32 19 32 62 17 33 70 16 34 ' 68 16 35 85 29 36 76 18 37 73 26 38 70 17 130 Appendix'C (cont.) T o t a l Latency Response Time Impulsives (cont.) 39 48 18 40 58 16 41 74 21 42 53 16 43 53 17 44 66 23 45 58 26 46 47 23 R e f l e c t i v e s 1 114 12 2 113 14 3 135 11 4 126 12 5 197 5 6 147 14 7 157 9 8 156 13 9 142 10 10 134 6 11 132 11 12 118 11 13 259 8 14 118 8 15 144 11 1.6 123 1.3 17 103 13 18 164 10 19 111 12 20 142 6 21 138 12 22 187 8 23, 121 6 24 189 8 25 280 13 26 141 8 27 142 9 28 115 9 29 140 15 T o t a l E r r o r Scores Appendix C (cont.) T o t a l Latency T o t a l Response E r r o r Time Scores R e f l e c t i v e s (cont.) 30 148 15 31 102 11 32 167 5 33 137 9 34 113 15 35 145 12 36 120 8 37 364 9 39 99 13 39 113 15 40 148 9 41 117 9 42 176 11 43 138 9 44 - 102 6 45 151 11 46 187 13 47 110 7 48 181 12 49 102 12 50 144 12 51 210 9 Others 98 139 17 99 90 14 100 69 11 101 137 19 102 55 9 103 119 18 104 79 13 105 85 12 106 109 21 107 36 14 108 85 6 109 106 21 110 101 17 111 138 19 112 126 22 Appendix C (Cont. ) T o t a l Latency Response Time Others(cont.) 113 72 7 114 99 20 115 98 23 116 404 20 117 71 7 118 83 12 119 93 9 120 100 16 121 165 18 122 83 10 123 59 7 124 73 13 125 130 17 126 100 21 127 121 18 128 102 21 129 81 13 130 72 13 131 92 13 132 126 22 133 93 9 134 72 12 135 97 10 136 79 10 137 100 20 138 • 98 30 139 15 L 21 149 117 18 141 61 13 142 61 13 143 76 11 144 55 12 145 108 17 146 . 93 . • 14 147 171 18 148 72 13 149 56 10 150 45 17 151 92 17 152 70 16 T o t a l E r r o r Scores 133 Appendix C (Cont.) T o t a l Latency T o t a l Response E r r o r Time Scores Others (cont.) 153 86 16 154 51 17 155 77 16 156 66 22 157 82 16 158 57 26 159 87 17 160 142 7 161 120 10 162 187 9 163 230 10 164 116 14 165 254 7 166 142 13 134 Appendix D Kuder- Richardson Formula 21 R e l i a b i l i t i e s of Reading Tasks Dependent V a r i a b l e s Impulsives R e f l e c t i v e s Word Recognition Task Easy, S i m i l a r D i s t r a c t o r Word Recognition Task Easy, D i s s i m i l a r D i s t r a c t o r Word Recognition Task Hard, S i m i l a r D i s t r a c t o r Word Recognition Task Hard, D i s s i m i l a r D i s t r a c t o r Comprehension Task Easy, S i m i l a r D i s t r a c t o r Comprehension Task Easy, D i s s i m i l a r D i s t r a c t o r Comprehension Task Hard, S i m i l a r D i s t r a c t o r Comprehension Task Hard, D i s s i m i l a r D i s t r a c t o r .80 .80 .82 .91 .86 .86 .83 .85 .75 .67 .80 .77 .80 .86 .81 .83 

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.831.1-0078328/manifest

Comment

Related Items