UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

Immediate identification and correction of error in a complex psychomotor task - typewriting Rankine, Frederick Charles 1966

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

Item Metadata

Download

Media
831-UBC_1966_A8 R3.pdf [ 2.03MB ]
Metadata
JSON: 831-1.0104625.json
JSON-LD: 831-1.0104625-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 831-1.0104625-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 831-1.0104625-rdf.json
Turtle: 831-1.0104625-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 831-1.0104625-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 831-1.0104625-source.json
Full Text
831-1.0104625-fulltext.txt
Citation
831-1.0104625.ris

Full Text

i  IMMEDIATE IDENTIFICATION AND CORRECTION OF ERROR IN A COMPLEX PSYCHOMOTOR TASK —TYPEWRITING— by Frederick Charles Rankine B. Ed., University of B r i t i s h Columbia, 1965  A THESIS. SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARTS. i n the Faculty of Education  We accept this thesis as conforming to the required standard  THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA August, 1966  In presenting this thesis  in p a r t i a l fulfilment of  the requirements for an advanced degree at the University of B r i t i s h Columbia, I agree that the Library shall make it freely available for reference and study.  I further agree that per-  mission for extensive copying of this thesis for scholarly purposes may be granted by the Head of my Department or by his representatives„  It  is understood that copying or p u b l i -  cation of this thesis for f i n a n c i a l gain shall not be allowed without my written permission.  Department of  Education  The University of B r i t i s h Columbia Vancouver 8, Canada  Date  A u g u s t 1, 1966  ii ABSTRACT This study was an attempt to i l l u s t r a t e the r e l a t i o n ship between augmented feedback with and without an opportunity for remedial practice and the learning and performance of students from a beginning s k i l l s u b j e c t — t y p e w r i t i n g . Augmented feedback supplied additional information which was removed l a t e r without loss of e f f i c i e n c y . The o r i g i n a l s t a t i s t i c a l design took account of only the f i n a l two observations and although these r e s u l t s f a i l e d to achieve 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, the r e s u l t s were i n the anticipated d i r e c t i o n and s u f f i c i e n t to reach the 857. l e v e l of confidence.  A revised s t a t i s t i c a l design which  made f u l l e r use of the a v a i l a b l e data and was more r e a l i s t i c i n acknowledging the e s s e n t i a l l y ordinal nature of typewriting scores permitted r e j e c t i o n of the n u l l hypothesis (p<^.01)» The hypothesis postulated f o r t h i s study was accepted.  I t states:  Novice t y p i s t s supplied with immediate knowledge of error and remedial practice w i l l experience greater gains i n learning and performance than an equivalent control group which does not receive immediate knowledge of error and remedial practice. A p a r t i a l treatment was incorporated into t h i s design to ascertain i f only knowledge of error would be as e f f e c t i v e as knowledge of error and remedial p r a c t i c e .  There i s a strong  i n d i c a t i o n that the knowledge plus practice group was superior to the knowledge only group; the r e s u l t s however are inconclusive  (p<ao).  -  i i i  TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTER I.  II.  III. IV.  PAGE  INTRODUCTION AND PLAN OF THE PAPER Introduction  1  Plan of the paper  3  REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE AND STATEMENT OF HYPOTHESIS  4  Hypothesis..  7  D e f i n i t i o n of terms....  8  THEORETICAL ORIENTATION  9  RESEARCH DESIGN  13  Experimental  13  Statistical  16  Revised design.  VI.  4  Review of the l i t e r a t u r e  O r i g i n a l design.,  V.  1  •  17 •  RESULTS AND DISCUSSION OF RESULTS  18 20  Results  20  Discussion of Results  24  SUMMARY AND. CONCLUSIONS  29  BIBLIOGRAPHY  32  APPENDIX A.  Random Block Procedure...  37  APPENDIX B.  Mean Scores Expressed In Net Words Per Minute  38  APPENDIX C.  Graph - Gross Words Typed Per Minute.........  39  APPENDIX D.  Graph - Net Words Typed Per Minute.....  40  iv LIST OF TABLES TABLE, I.  PAGE Average Typewriting Rate For Observations Nineteen And Twenty Expressed In Net Words Per Minute For Each Treatment Group.•••••••••••••••••••••••••••••  II.  Analysis Of Variance Summary For Observations Nineteen And Twenty.•  III.  20  •••••  21  Gain Scores Expressed In Net Words Per Minute Obtained By Comparison Of Fooled Observations Nineteen And Twenty With Net Easter Typewriting Rate.. • « . o . o • . a « . . o . e • a o « a o . • » • • • o o » a • o • • o • . • • • • e *  IV.  Difference And Ranks Of Difference*Of Mean Scores Between Augmented Practice Group And Control Group For Calculation Of T.  V.  .......  23  Difference And Ranks Of Difference Of Mean Scores Between Augmented Practice Group And Augmented Group For Calculation Of T  24  22  V  LIST OF FIGURES FIGURE  PAGE  la  AdjUStlve  2.  Gross Words Typed Per Minute For Each Treatment GrOUp«  3.  Behavioraaeaaaaaoaaaeaoo  m»o»»»9o«»9»»ao  • a'oVa • a  ••o  a « a a • o* • a • •  o• . . • • . o • 6 o» s • o a • e• •  10  39  Net Words Typed Per Minute For Each Treatment GrOUp  o aaeaaoaaaooaa  a'a o « • • e'o o o o a a a a a a e e a a a e a o a a*a a'a'a a  AO  vi ACKNOWLEDGMENT I wish to acknowledge the assistance of Dr. W. E. Schwann and Dr. T. D. M. McKie f o r their many h e l p f u l comments.  I also wish to acknowledge the co-operation  which I received from both the students and s t a f f of E r i c Hamber Secondary School.  CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION AND PLAN OF THE PAPER The following i n v e s t i g a t i o n concerns an attempt to apply psychological p r i n c i p l e s from learning theory to a p r a c t i c a l classroom s i t u a t i o n .  The area chosen f o r the  experiment i s the psychomotor process of typewritingj the s p e c i f i c psychological topic under investigation i s knowledge of r e s u l t s or feedback. Introduction Feedback o r d i n a r i l y received by an organism i s i n the form of t a c t i l e , kinaesthetic, auditory, and v i s u a l feedback. Novice s k i l l learners are unable to make the f i n e discriminations necessary for e f f i c i e n t u t i l i z a t i o n of the many sensory cues, impinging on the organism.  Often they do not  r e a l i z e when they have made an error i n typewriting.  Therefore,  deliberate feedback i n the form of augmented v i s u a l cues w i l l be incorporated into the s k i l l task to ensure the novice learner receives precise knowledge when an error has been made.  With  an opportunity to p r a c t i c e the correct sequence where the error occurred, the learner should be able to pay p a r t i c u l a r attention to the c r i t i c a l movements and thus integrate the correct sequence of cues into the s k i l l structure.  Successful  integration w i l l enable the learner to make f i n e r discriminations which are c r u c i a l for improvement.  The remedial  practice, which should reduce tension i f that sequence i s encountered again, w i l l promote e f f i c i e n c y .  2 The paucity of research dealing with the typewriting process forced the experimenter to r e l y heavily on the pertinent l i t e r a t u r e from psychology, i n p a r t i c u l a r that dealing with the psychomotor process of learning. of  The bulk  research reviewed lends support to the contention that  knowledge of r e s u l t s given immediately improves learning. Although this study i s not a comparative study of current practices and some hypothesized t h e o r e t i c a l approach, i t should be mentioned that i n normal typewriting d r i l l , an error w i l l often go unnoticed u n t i l a proof-reading of the copy locates and i d e n t i f i e s t h i s error.  This i s p a r t i c u l a r i l y  true f o r novice t y p i s t s ; however, an expert t y p i s t develops such precise sensory accuity, that immediately a mistake i s made, the expert w i l l acknowledge such mistake. Underlying the assumptions above was a desire to construct a typewriting laboratory f o r students with p a r t i c ular d i f f i c u l t i e s which they seemed to experience consistently. Special electronic equipment capable of v e r i f y i n g any given d r i l l exercise could be used to signal the t y p i s t an error was made.  immediately  The construction of t h i s equipment involved  an e l e c t r i c keyboard synchronized with a paper-tape reader. However, due to the p r o h i b i t i v e cost, i t was decided that the p r i n c i p l e s involved should be put to a s c i e n t i f i c t e s t . actual experiment  The  then was concerned with the f e a s i b i l i t y of  constructing such school equipment as described above as well as with testing the c r i t i c a l theoretical hypothesis which w i l l be stated i n a l a t e r section.  3 Plan of the paper The following sections of t h i s paper w i l l include a review of the l i t e r a t u r e and statement of the hypothesis. A t h e o r e t i c a l discussion which u t i l i z e s a theory of adjustive behavior w i l l attempt to present a conception of the typewriting process and how feedback may be u t i l i z e d instruction.  to improve  The research design, both experimental and  s t a t i s t i c a l < w i l l be followed by a presentation of the r e s u l t s and a discussion thereof.  The implications of t h i s study  together with some speculative comments w i l l be included within the discussion of r e s u l t s section. w i l l conclude the paper,.  A short summary  CHAPTER II REVIEW OF' THE LITERATURE AND  STATEMENT OF HYPOTHESIS  Feedback i s a concept which i s c r u c i a l to. any discussion of learning. regarding  Feedback supplies  information  the extent, speed, and q u a l i t y of any response--  thus control becomes, a function of negative feedback. Knowledge of r e s u l t s i s a form of feedback, s p e c i f i c a l l y , knowledge which an i n d i v i d u a l receives r e l a t i n g to the outcome of a response and supplied i n the case of the present study by augmented v i s u a l cues. Review of the l i t e r a t u r e Feedback i s the strongest most important variable c o n t r o l l i n g performance and learning (Bilodeau and Bilodeau, 1961).  Gagne (1959) considers r e p e t i t i o n with reinforcement  the most important factor for a c q u i s i t i o n of motor s k i l l s . Jensen (1955-56) theorizes that practice provides knowledge of r e s u l t s which i s somewhat analogous to Annet and Kay's (1957) statement that performance might be improved i f subjects attended more to learning to correct past errors than to modifying present a c t i v i t i e s .  Smith (1962) stresses  the importance of immediate feedback as opposed to feedback with any delay i n t e r v a l for learning, while Stroud's (1942) discussion of the r o l e of practice i n learning emphasizes the necessity for practice at the point of error.  Knowledge  of r e s u l t s f a c i l i t a t e s improvement as the learner i s able  to make f i n e r response discriminations (Ammons, 1956), and the augmented cues which lead to these f i n e r discriminations may be removed without loss of e f f i c i e n c y when they become redundant  to the learning process (Annet and  Kay, 1957), A review of the experimental l i t e r a t u r e dealing with the psychomotor process lends i t s e l f to c l a s s i f i c a t i o n into f i v e major areas,,  These f i v e areas w i l l be i d e n t i f i e d and  the major supporting evidence w i l l be c i t e d . Area (1).  Knowledge of results increases the rate  of improvement on new tasks.  Several investigators (Bilbdeau,  Bilodeau, and Schumsky, .1959; Ewell and Grindley, 1938; K e l l e r , 1943; K e l l e r , .1945; Lavery and Suddon, 1962; Lindahl, 1945; MacPherson, Dees, and Grindley, 1948-9; Payne and Hauty, 1955; Pressey, 1950; Reynolds and Adams, 1953; Smode, 1958) provide support f o r t h i s major area. Area (2).  Knowledge of r e s u l t s increases performance  on overlearned tasks (Lindahl, 1945; McGuigan, 1959; MacPherson Dees, and Grindley, 1948-9; Reynolds and Adams, 1953; Trowbridg and Cason, 1932). Area (3)  ffl  Knowledge of r e s u l t s has a motivating effect  on learning and performance.  Most of the evidence i n t h i s  major area i s based on the subjective impressions of the experimenters (Ewell and Grindley, 1938; L i t t l e , 1934; MacPherson, Dees, and Grindley, 1948; Payne and Hauty, 1955; Pressey, 1950; Reynolds and Adams, 1953, Smode, 1958).  6 Area (4),  The amount of learning and performance i s  d i r e c t l y proportional to the schedule of knowledge of r e s u l t s (Bilodeau, 1955; Bilodeau and Bilodeau, 1958(a), 1958(b); Bilodeau, Bilodeau, and Schumsky, 1959; Bilodeau and Ryan, 1960; Bourne, 1957; B r a c k b i l l , Bravos, and Starr, 1962; B r a c k b i l l and Kappy, 1962; Ewell and Grindley,  1938;  Greenspoon and Foreman, 1956; Lavery and Suddon, 1962; L i t t l e , 1934; Lorge and Thorndike, 1935; Michael and Maccoby, 1953; McGuigan, 1958; Payne and Hauty, 1955; Reynolds and Adams, 1953; Smode, 1958; Trowbridge and Cason, Area (5).  1932).  Interference with knowledge of r e s u l t s has  deleterious effects on learning and performance  (Held, 1965;  Held and Freedman, 1963;Judd, 1905; McGuigan, 1959; Neumann and Ammons, 1957; Payne and Hauty,. 1955; Smith, 1962),,, As t h i s study i s s p e c i f i c a l l y concerned with the manipulation of knowledge of results for a task that i s new--drill material not previously typewritten--only Area (1) investigations w i l l be reviewed.  The psychologists investig«  ating this problem have u t i l i z e d a v a r i e t y of conditions and apparatus.  P u l l i n g a manual lever the proper distance was  investigated by Lavery and Suddon (1962) and by Bilodeau and Bilodeau (1958(a).  Pressing a key f o r a specified time was  used by MacPherson, Dees, and Grindley (1948).  The Pressey  (1950) and K e l l e r (1943, 1945) experiments u t i l i z e d a punchboard scoring apparatus and a Morse key apparatus respectively. Coordinated movements of limbs were required by Ewell'and  7 Grindley (1938) and Lindahl (1945) while various tracking tasks were used by Smode (1958), Reynolds and Adams (1953), and by Payne and Hauty (1955).  The data from these exper-  iments i s consistent i n supporting  the view that knowledge  of r e s u l t s increases the rate of improvement early i n the performance of a new  task.  The present study i s designed as a preliminary i n v e s t i g a t i o n of typewriting which u t i l i z e s the to immediately i d e n t i f y and correct errors.  opportunity  From the review  of the l i t e r a t u r e , i t would seem that augmented cues properly interpreted by a subject w i l l increase performance.  Stroud's  (1942) t h e o r e t i c a l discussion centres around the desire to use p r a c t i c e as a device to reinforce the correct sequence of movements.  Repetition of s p e c i f i c sequences occurs at the  point where errors are made, thus d r i l l material becomes more meaningful.  The point stressed by Smith (1962) i s the  necessity of immediate feedback i f such feedback i s to be put to the most e f f i c i e n t , use. Hypothesis This study was specific  designed, then, to t e s t the following  hypothesis:  Novice t y p i s t s supplied with immediate knowledge of error and remedial p r a c t i c e w i l l experience greater gains i n learning and performance than an equivalent c o n t r o l group which does not receive immediate knowledge of error and remedial p r a c t i c e .  8 The study was  also designed to ascertain i f further  investigation i s warranted respecting the f e a s i b i l i t y of constructing a typewriting  laboratory.  D e f i n i t i o n of Terms Novice typists,.  Students enrolled i n f i r s t - y e a r  typewriting and having received seven and one-half months instruction. Immediate knowledge of error. achieved  N o t i f i c a t i o n of error i s  by extinguishing a signal l i g h t placed immediately  above the d r i l l exercise being typed.  Normally the l i g h t i s  extinguished when subject has typed two or three  strokes  past the error.. Gain i n learning and performance.  The achievement  score for a subject consists of the net words typed per minute as determined by the International Typewriting Rules.  Contest  CHAPTER III THEORETICAL ORIENTATION The psychomotor act i s very complicated  behavior,  therefore, an attempt w i l l be made to i n d i c a t e how  the  various component parts of t h i s process are integrated to permit display of s k i l l . to  Because feedback becomes c r u c i a l  s k i l l learning, i t i s proposed to use Coleman's (1960,  p, 187) model of the adjustive process which r e l i e s upon feedback as the mechanism that corrects behavior which has deviated from the required norm.  This model explains with  f a c i l i t y the complex perceptual-cognitiv.e-motor  event with  feedback providing the dynamic element for the model,  A  diagram of the r e l a t i o n s h i p between feedback and the other component parts i s presented i n Figure 1, If t h i s t h e o r e t i c a l model i s applied to the s p e c i f i c process of typewriting, the d r i l l material i s the input or stimulation from the f i e l d .  The perception component i s the  selection and organization of the input from the f i e l d together with an awareness of meaning*  Evaluation w i l l consist  of the possible courses of action, and s e l e c t i o n w i l l be the choice from among a l t e r n a t i v e s .  Output w i l l consist of  muscle movements which operate the typewriter.  This process  applies to i n d i v i d u a l keys at the lower levels of s k i l l mastery, l e t t e r combinations at a more advanced l e v e l , and complete words and phrases at a s t i l l higher  level.  10  THROUGHPUT Processing of adjustive demand by self-aware organism INPUT Stimulation from within organism and from field  PERCEPTION ( s e l e c t i o n and organization of input; awareness of meaning)  Processing  EVALUATION ( d e f i n i t i o n of adjustive demand and formulation of possible actions)  influenced  SELECTION (choice of action promi s i n g best balance of r i s k , cost, richness of reward)  ±3 OUTPUT Task-oriented and/or defenseoriented action  by:  1) Individual's frame of r e f e r e n c e — r e a l i s t i c assumptions make f o r clear perception, sound evaluation, wise choice of action; u n r e a l i s t i c assumptions lead to cognitive distortions 2) Motive pattern and action tendancies— needs and i n t e r e s t s influence which s t i m u l i "get through" and guide choice of action. 3) Resources for handling problem—capacities, s k i l l s , knowledge, and general competencies gained from experience determine actual a b i l i t y to cope with the demand and q u a l i t y of a c t i o n possible. 4) Momentary conditions—mental set a f f e c t s what s t i m u l i are selected and what p o s s i b i l i t i e s of a c t i o n are thought of; emotional involvement or fatigue may disrupt e f f e c t i v e procesj sing; etc. J I FEEDBACK Information which t e l l s organism how processing and action are proceeding. * FIGURE 1 ADJUSTIVE BEHAVIOR (From Coleman, 1960,  p.  187)  11 Feedback received by the organism i s i n the form of t a c t i l e , kinaesthetic, auditory, and v i s u a l feedback* Because of the d i f f i c u l t y i n c o n t r o l l i n g these -variables only deliberate feedback w i l l be added to the experimental design i n an attempt to augment the other forms already a v a i l a b l e to the novice typist,,  As t h i s deliberate feedback  i s by means of a l i g h t being extinguished, i t w i l l u t i l i z e the v i s u a l sense and give n o t i f i c a t i o n of error to the s k i l l learner as soon as possible a f t e r an error has been committed. With an opportunity to practice the correct sequence where the  error occurred, the t y p i s t should be able to pay p a r t i c -  u l a r attention to these c r u c i a l movements and thus integrate the proprioceptive cues available into t h e i r existing structure.  skill  This w i l l permit the organism to acquire a f i n e r  mechanism f o r discriminatory purposes. This general apparatus permits the input—symbols from the printed copy-«to a c t upon the organism producing sensations.  In an i n t e l l i g e n t organism these sensations are  recognized and r e s u l t i n a planning of action on the part of the organism.  A decision which a r i s e s from a judgemental  process activates the motor producing portions of the organism r e s u l t i n g i n output of a response—operation of the typewriter.  Each b i t of the response i s fed back to the  organism by the sense organs.  In t h i s experiment, a d d i t i o n a l  information i s received when a typewriting error occurs and an opportunity i s provided to permit practice of the proper  sequence of finger movements.  This remedial a c t i v i t y w i l l  allow the novice an opportunity to integrate the proprioceptive feedback a v a i l a b l e from the practice session into her cognitive system.  CHAPTER IV RESEARCH DESIGN Experimental Twenty-four female students were a r b i t r a r i l y selected by the administration of E r i c Hamber Secondary School. students were enrolled i n Typewriting  I classes and  All  had  received seven and one-half months i n s t r u c t i o n . The mean age of the subjects was Otis (AM)  IQ was  105.  f i f t e e n years, four months; the mean No attempt was made to match subjects  on any v a r i a b l e except t h e i r Easter typewriting rate.  This  was accomplished by use of a random block design (Edwards, 1960)  which ensured greater homogeneity between treatment  groups at the s t a r t of the experiment. procedure are located i n Appendix A.  The r e s u l t s of t h i s  Age and IQ are included  for comparative purposes. Each subject underwent twenty observations for purposes of data c o l l e c t i o n .  An observation consisted of an eight-  minute period comprised of a five-minute d r i l l period; a one-minute rest period; and a two-minute test period. the test period the experimental treatment e f f e c t s was removed.  During  equipment which provided A l l subjects used typewriters  with which they were f a m i l i a r — t h e Underwood touch-master F I V E — a t three-position a d j u s t i b l e typewriting desks.  Six  error l i g h t s permitted the simultaneous observation of s i x subjects at any one s i t t i n g .  The observers were fellow  14 students who were also taking part i n the experiment.  Each  subject had a v a r i e t y of observers including the experimenter during the twenty observation periods. The error l i g h t s consisted of a radio p i l o t l i g h t mounted i n a large Bulldog paper c l i p .  A s i l e n t switch which  could be operated by the observer who was watching the subject type was connected to the p i l o t l i g h t by a two-conducter wire seven f e e t long.  Thus the observer d i d not i n t e r f e r e with  the subject undergoing the observation.  Power supply f o r the  l i g h t s was from a s i x - v o l t b e l l transformer.  The t o t a l cost  of equipment used to construct the s i x error l i g h t s was l e s s than twelve d o l l a r s ; The observations were carried out i n a small business machines room a t the school.  Room dimensions were f i f t e e n  by t h i r t y f e e t ; the equipment i n the room consisted of fourteen typewriters, two tables, several c h a i r s , and two a d d i t i o n a l pieces of o f f i c e equipment.  Exclusive use of t h i s  room was impossible, however, other students using the room did not i n t e r f e r e with the experimental  subjects.  In f a c t ,  the a d d i t i o n a l a c t i v i t y i n the room more nearly approximated the actual classroom conditions of t h e i r normal typewriting class.  The timing of the observations was by stop-watch  operated by the experimenter.  The treatment v a r i a t i o n s to  be described below were applied only during the f i v e minute d r i l l period.  Prior to the s t a r t of the experiment, a  b r i e f explanation was offered to the students concerning the  15 nature of research,, Treatment 1 (Augmented Practice Group)„  An error made  during the d r i l l period resulted i n the observer  extinguishing  the error l i g h t a f t e r subject had typed two or three strokes past the error.  One l i n e of corrected,sequence was typewritten  immediately, then the d r i l l was resumed a t a point i n the copy immediately following the error.  Printed instructions  prepared by the experimenter were supplied to each subject<which indicated to each group what action to take i f the error l i g h t went out.  The instructions supplied to Augmented Practice Group  follow: If the s i g n a l l i g h t goes out--STOP—locate your error, return carriage, and type one l i n e of corrected sequence. A f t e r completion, return carriage and resume typing a t point i n copy immediately following error. If error i s located i n a five-stroke word or under, the l i n e of correct sequence w i l l include the word immediately preceeding the error plus the word that contains the error. I f error i s located i n a word over five-strokes, the l i n e of correct sequence w i l l consist of only the word which contains the error. Treatment 2 (Augmented Group).  An error made during the  d r i l l period resulted i n the observer extinguishing  the error  l i g h t a f t e r subject had typed two or three strokes past the error.  The d r i l l was resumed a f t e r the subject had made a  mental note of the error. correction of the error.  No opportunity was permitted for The printed instructions supplied to  the Augmented Group are reproduced below: If the signal l i g h t goes out--STOP—locate error and make a mental note to t r y to avoid t h i s error i n the timed-writing that follows. Resume typing.  16 Treatment 3 (Control Group).  The Control Group had  the same d r i l l material, ,took the same timed-writings,  and  were subjected to the same forms of experimental manipulation as the other groups.  Although observers stood behind the  Control Group extinguishing the error l i g h t s at random-four to f i v e times during a five-minute d r i l l was  period—there  no i d e n t i f i c a t i o n and correction of error during  d r i l l period.  the  The instructions supplied to the Control Group  are reproduced below: Type p r a c t i c e material for five-minutes using correct techniques. The s i g n a l l i g h t w i l l have nothing to do with your typing. A f t e r completion of the d r i l l period, a l l groups then had a one-minute r e s t period which was used to remove the experimental equipment and ensure the observers were not standing behind the subjects.  I t also permitted an inspection  of the d r i l l material which had been typewritten by a l l groups.  The two-minute test period consisted of a timed-  writing on the d r i l l material that each i n d i v i d u a l subject had previously been practicing., The material used for t h i s purpose consisted of Underwood Typing Tests, Volume 4, Numbers 1 to 4 i n c l u s i v e . Each observation concentrated  on a p a r t i c u l a r  paragraph which the subject had not previously encountered. Statistical It had o r i g i n a l l y been planned to analyze the data from only the f i n a l two observation periods as the b e l i e f was  that  the greatest difference between mean scores would be at that point.  I t was  l a t e r r e a l i z e d that a mode of analysis that would  17 take f u l l e r account of a l l of the data would be more appropriate.  Accordingly both s t a t i s t i c a l designs were used to  interpret the data. O r i g i n a l design.  The comparison of means between the  Augmented Practice Group and the Control Groups—the hypothesis postulated deals s p e c i f i c a l l y with t h i s c o m p a r i s o n — u t i l i z e d a " t " test following the method specified by Hays (1963, p. 474),  TKis p a r t i c u l a r technique requires the sum of  squares  for a comparison and i s obtained by removing the sum of  squares  for the Augmented Practice Group and the Control Group from the treatment  sum of squares obtained from the random block  analysis of variance (Edwards, I960*).  The-formulas for t h i s  process are given below:  (*1  I n  l  +  x )  2  3  I n  3  Because there i s an Augmented Group included i n t h i s design, i t had been proposed to f i n d i f the r e s i d u a l sum of squares yielded a s i g n i f i c a n t F r a t i o .  This test (Hays,  1963,  p. 478) indicates i f there i s any other significance to the data.  A s i g n i f i c a n t F r a t i o would indicate that there was  s t i l l some v a r i a b i l i t y among means other than between the Augmented Practice Group and the Control Group.  Since the  18 remaining comparisons of interest—Augmented  Practice Group  with Augmented Group and Augmented Group with Control Group-.were not orthogonal to the f i r s t comparison or to each other, i t had been planned to use a conservative technique by treating the data as unplanned comparisons and using the Tukey(a) procedure (Winer, 1962, p. 87). Revised design.  While c o l l e c t i n g the data for t h i s  experiment, i t became apparent that the mean scores from the Augmented Practice Group were markedly and consistently superior to those of the Control Group.  Basing the r e s u l t s of t h i s  study on observations nineteen and twenty, not the bulk of the data c o l l e c t e d , placed a l l confidence f o r the experimental r e s u l t s on too narrow a sample of performance when data from twenty learning sessions was a v a i l a b l e .  I t should have been  r e a l i z e d e a r l i e r that a more adequate s t a t i s t i c a l design would have taken account of t h i s .  The hypothesis which predicted  that the Augmented Practice Group would experience greater gains i n learning and performance was concerned with the consistency of the r e s u l t s as well as with the absolute d i f f erence between the two groups.  Because typewriting scores  have the c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of ordinal measurement, a nonparametric technique was used to analyze trend.  The  first  four observations were a r b i t r a r i l y eliminated from the test while the l a s t sixteen were analyzed by the Wilcoxon matchedpairs signed-ranks test (Siegel, 1956, p. 75)  This p a r t i c u l a r  test took account of the r e l a t i v e magnitude as,well as the  19 d i r e c t i o n of the difference* The mean scores from each of the treatment groups were plotted graphically f o r comparative purposes.  Separate  graphs f o r gross words per minute and f o r net words per minute arelpresented i n Appendix C and Appendix D respecti v e l y , and w i l l be discussed i n a l a t e r , s e c t i o n of t h i s report.  CHAPTER V RESULTS AND  DISCUSSION OF RESULTS  Results The data from t h i s experiment was composed of 469 timed writings obtained from the p a r t i c i p a t i n g students over a period of s i x weeks.  Observations nineteen and twenty were  pooled to give a more stable picture of the f i n a l r e s u l t s . The mean scores f o r each type of treatment expressed i n net words per minute are presented i n Table I.  TABLE I AVERAGE TYPEWRITING RATE FOR OBSERVATIONS NINETEEN AND TWENTY EXPRESSED IN NET WORDS PER MINUTE FOR EACH TREATMENT GROUP  Block  Augmented Practice Group  Augmented Group  Control Group  1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Total Mean  46 30.5 27 4£. 5 33 27 12 225 32.14  48.5 25.5 46.5 25.5 25.5 15 12 198.5 28.35  38 27.5 20 24 20 21 33 183.5 26.21  The r e s u l t i n g " t " between Augmented Practice Group and the Control Group was  1.12.  This f a i l e d to reach the .05  level  of s i g n i f i c a n c e , however, the r e s u l t s were i n the anticipated  d i r e c t i o n and s u f f i c i e n t to reach the 85% l e v e l of confidence. From the analysis of variance, i t was found that the residual sum of squares was not s u f f i c i e n t to warrant further treatment of the data--the a p o s t e r i o r i comparisons which had been planned between the means of the Augmented Practice Group and the Augmented Group and between the Augmented Group and the Control Group.  The summary table from the analysis of  variance f o r the f i n a l two observations i s presented i n Table II below.  TABLE II ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE SUMMARY FOR OBSERVATIONS - NINETEEN AND TWENTY  Source of V a r i a t i o n Treatment Block Error Total  SS  df  126 1252 1203  2 6 12  2581 .  26  Mean Square 63 208.6 100.25  F .63 2.08  -  The r e s u l t s of t h i s experiment when expressed as gain scores are consistent i n showing the superiority of'the Augmented P r a c t i c e Group over the Control Group (p ^ . 1 5 ) . The increase i n net words per minute was calculated by subtracting the net Easter typewriting rate from the average of observations nineteen and twenty; Table III presents the  22 r e s u l t s of these c a l c u l a t i o n s . TABLE I I I GAIN SCORES EXPRESSED IN NET WORDS PER MINUTE OBTAINED BY COMPARISON OF POOLED OBSERVATIONS NINETEEN AND TWENTY WITH NET EASTER TYPEWRITING RATE  Treatment Condition  Easter Rate  Augmented Practice Group Augmented Group Control Group  26.71 25.71 26.28  Average of Ob's 19 & 20 32.14 28.35 26.21  Gain +5.43 +2.64 - .07  The Wilcoxon matched-pairs signed-ranks test (Siegel, 1956, p. 75) which took cognizance of the d i r e c t i o n and magnitude of any difference was applied to check the consistency of the data.  Only observations f i v e to twenty i n c l u s i v e  were used f o r t h i s purpose.  The mean scores f o r the three  treatment conditions over the twenty observations areppresenfced i n Appendix B.  The Augmented Practice Group was compared  with the Control Group; the r e s u l t i n g T--ranks with less frequent signs—was 21.  This was found to be s i g n i f i c a n t i n  indicating that the Augmented Practice Group demonstrated consistently superior performance on the timed-writings than the equivalent Control Group (p<^.0l).  The c a l c u l a t i o n of T  i s given below i n Table IV. This technique was also applied to ascertain i f the Augmented Practice Group was superior to the Augmented Group. As d i r e c t i o n had not been specified beforehand, a two-tailed  23 test was used,.  The r e s u l t i n g T of 35 just f a i l e d to achieve  significance a t the .05 l e v e l *  There i s c e r t a i n l y a strong  i n d i c a t i o n that the Augmented Practice Group i s superior to the Augmented Group (p<C[VlO)j however, the data does not unequivocally support this conclusion*  Further research  appears warranted i f t h i s area of doubt i s to be resolved. Table V presents calculations f o r T between the Augmented Practice Group and the Augmented Group.  TABLE IV DIFFERENCE AND RANKS OF DIFFERENCE OF MEAN SCORES BETWEEN AUGMENTED PRACTICE GROUP AND CONTROL GROUP FOR CALCULATION OF T Observation 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20  Difference 1.875 3.75 -3.00 2.5 3.375 6.29 , 3.00 5.15 .14 .29 -1.14 10.86 -4.43 3.86 7.43 4.43  Ranks o f Difference 4 9 -6.5 5 8 14 "6.5 13 1 2 -3 16 -11.5 10 15 11.5  Ranks with less frequent signs  -6.5  -3 -11.5  T = 21.0 *  Significance of T determined from Table G (Siegel, 1956, p. 254).  24 TABLE V DIFFERENCE AND RANKS OF DIFFERENCE OF. MEAN SCORES BETWEEN AUGMENTED PRACTICE GROUP AND AUGMENTED GROUP FOR CALCULATION OF T, Observation  Difference  5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20  4,25 3.50 2.375 .50 4.25 9.86 6.00 -1.85 10.14 2.43 -2.57 .58 -3.15 -4.86 5.29 2.29  *  r  Ranks of Difference 10.5 9 -5 1 10.5 15 14 -3 16 6 -7 2 -8 -12 13 4  Ranks with less frequent signs  -5  -3 -7 -8 -12 T = 35 *  Significance of T determined from Table G (Siegel, 1956, p. 254). An inspection of the data indicated that there was  no p o s s i b i l i t y of any s i g n i f i c a n t difference between the Augmented Group and,the Control Group. Discussion of r e s u l t s The r e s u l t s of t h i s experiment permit acceptance of the hypothesis.  The Augmented Practice Group made consistently  greater gains i n learning and performance when compared with an equivalent  Control Group which did not receive immediate error  i d e n t i f i c a t i o n and an opportunity f o r practice of the correct  25 s k i l l sequence.  The o r i g i n a l s t a t i s t i c a l design placed a l l  confidence f o r the experimental r e s u l t s on too narrow a sample of performance considering that data from twenty learning sessions were a v a i l a b l e .  In t h i s design, the  planned " t " test between the Augmented P r a c t i c e Group and the Control Group indicated the former was 85% l e v e l of confidence.  superior at the  A revised s t a t i s t i c a l design made  f u l l e r use of the data a v a i l a b l e and permitted a more comprehensive a n a l y s i s .  The Wilcoxon matched-pairs signed-  ranks test (Siegel, 1956, p.75), which concerned i t s e l f with the consistency of the data, as w e l l as the magnitude of the obtained differences between the mean scores, indicated the s u p e r i o r i t y of the Augmented Practice Group over the Control Group  (p<Coi).  I t i s considered that the revised design i s  more r e a l i s t i c for two reasons: (1) i t takes account of the* bulk of the data, rather than of the results of only^two  j  t r i a l s , and (2) i t acknowledges the e s s e n t i a l l y o r d i n a l character of the data. One of the t h e o r e t i c a l assumptions made e a r l i e r  was  that the students receiving error i d e n t i f i c a t i o n and remedial p r a c t i c e would become much more sensitive to the proprioceptive feedback a v a i l a b l e . experimenter  Objective observations by the  support t h i s assumption.  Students i n the  Augmented Practice Group required error n o t i f i c a t i o n f o r the e a r l i e r observations, but during the l a t e r sessions, these students would stop typewriting i n s t i n c t i v e l y when an error  26 was made.  I t would appear that these students had acquired a  f i n e r mechanism f o r discriminatory purposes,.  Some students  i n the Augmented Group also displayed t h i s behavior. Several factors reduced the p o s s i b i l i t y of obtaining highly s i g n i f i c a n t r e s u l t s on a single observation. time l i m i t a t i o n s , i t was necessary to conduct t h i s during the closing months of the school year.  Due to experiment  The students  who, p a r t i c i p a t e d i n t h i s experiment had eight months experience, obviously with some rather well established habits. Any treatment e f f e c t imposed would f i r s t have to overcome the established habits before the significance of the treatment would be noted. The experiment began with an N of twenty-four, but during the course of the, experiment, one of the subjects broke her f i n g e r .  Because t h i s caused elimination of a  complete random block, the N was reduced to twenty-one, causing a reduction i n the degrees of freedom by three and thus making the s t a t i s t i c a l tests more rigorous. Appendix C, the graph depicting mean gross words typed per minute, appears to r e f l e c t the r e l a t i v e d i f f i c u l t y of the material being typed.  The fluctuations of the Augmented  Practice Group and the Control Group are almost i d e n t i c a l while the Augmented Group varies between these two. Appendix D presents the mean net words typed per minute for each i n d i v i d u a l treatment group and takes into account the number of errors.  The superiority of the Augmented Practice  27 Group can be c l e a r l y observed.  The general pattern f o r a l l  three group i s one of improvement; however,.the steepest slope i s found for the Augmented Practice Group while the f l a t e s t slope depicts the Control Group.  I t would appear  that a projection of these trends would lead to a s i g n i f i c a n t difference between means for a single observation.  This of  course i s speculation and w i l l require v e r i f i c a t i o n by an extended experiment conducted along similar l i n e s . , The r e s u l t s of t h i s experiment would seem to have „ c e r t a i n implications f o r education.  Insofar as typewriting i s  concerned, there i s now  j u s t i f i c a t i o n for construction of a  typewriting laboratory.  Equipment of t h i s nature could be  used f o r further research purposes, to a point where i n d i v i d u a l d r i l l exercises were prepared f o r each learning d i f f i c u l t y experienced typewriting.  by i n d i v i d u a l students i n beginning  The method of error n o t i f i c a t i o n employed by  t h i s experiment coupled with remedial p r a c t i c e did r e s u l t i n s u p e r i o r i t y of learning and performance of the Augmented Practice Group.  This inexpensive apparatus could be e f f e c -  t i v e l y used i n any classroom s i t u a t i o n i f students were matched to work together as observer and  typist.  As there i s a paucity of research dealing with typewriting theory, i t i s hoped that t h i s i n v e s t i g a t i o n w i l l lead to further research on psychomotor s k i l l s employed by students i n the business .subjects.  The l i m i t a t i o n s previously  discussed r e l a t i n g to size of sample and time of school year  28 should be important i f related studies are anticipated.  The  r e s u l t s of t h i s experiment do indicate a need for further research  to c l a r i f y the r o l e of n o t i f i c a t i o n of error only  i n contrast to n o t i f i c a t i o n of error with remedial p r a c t i c e .  CHAPTER VI SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION An attempt was made i n the classroom setting to determine the influence of augmented feedback with and without remedial p r a c t i c e i n a complex psychomotor t a s k — t y p e writing.  Twenty-four female students enrolled i n a f i r s t  year high-school typewriting class were assigned by a random block procedure to one of three treatment groups.  The  Augmented Practice Group received error n o t i f i c a t i o n and had an opportunity to correct any errors committed; the Augmented Group received n o t i f i c a t i o n of error only.  The Control Group  practiced the d r i l l material i n the usual manner; no error n o t i f i c a t i o n or p r a c t i c e was permitted.  I t was hypothesized  that the Augmented Practice Group would show s i g n i f i c a n t improvement i n learning and performance when compared with the Control Group. During a six-week period, twenty observations per student were obtained with each observation being composed of an eight-minute period of typewriting--five-minutes d r i l l , one-minute r e s t , and a two-minute test period.  Error l i g h t s  operated by fellow students who acted i n the capacity of observers were used to signal the treatment groups, i f required, when an error had been made.  The Control Group  experienced operation of the error l i g h t s , although f o r t h i s group they had no s i g n i f i c a n c e .  During the test period, the  30 error l i g h t s were extinguished, and the observers moved from behind the experimental "subjects to some other part of the classroom. Two  s t a t i s t i c a l designs were used to interpret the  data obtained from t h i s experiment.  The o r i g i n a l ,:"t" test  between the means of the Augmented Practice Group and the Control Group which was obtained from the f i n a l two observations yielded a value of 1.12 which f a i l e d to reach the .05 l e v e l of s i g n i f i c a n c e .  The revised Wilcoxon  matched-pairs  signed-ranks test (Siegel, 1956, p. 75) made f u l l e r use of the data, and was concerned with the consistency of the superiority of one group over another as well as the magnitude of the obtained difference between mean scores.  This revised  design i s more r e a l i s t i c as i t considers a much larger portion of the data and acknowledges the e s s e n t i a l l y o r d i n a l character of typewriting scores.  Superiority of the Augmented Practice  Group over the Control was found (p<^.01) which permitted the r e j e c t i o n of the n u l l hypothesis.  An attempt was also  made to f i n d i f the Augmented Practice Group was the Augmented Group.  superior to  There was c e r t a i n l y a strong i n d i c a t i o n  that t h i s was so ( p ^ . 1 0 ) ; however, the data does not permit unqualified acceptance. Generalizations from t h i s experiment are d i f f i c u l t i n view of the limited s i z e of the sample used.  A matching  system of t y p i s t and observer would however seem to possess c e r t a i n merit f o r students experiencing consistent d i f f i c u l t y  31 i n a s p e c i f i c area of typewritings  There would also appear  to now be s u f f i c i e n t j u s t i f i c a t i o n f o r the construction of a typewriting laboratory which could be used f o r the conduct of research i n the psychomotor s k i l l area.  Electronic equip-  ment capable of v e r i f y i n g a given d r i l l exercise could signal a t y p i s t immediately an error was made and thus provide an opportunity f o r remedial p r a c t i c e .  Under the conditions  outlined by t h i s experiment, t h i s procedure of error identi f i c a t i o n and remedial practice has shown i t s s u p e r i o r i t y over the normal d r i l l methods.  B I B L I O G R A P H Y  33 BIBLIOGRAPHY Amnions, Robert B. E f f e c t s of knowledge of performance: A survey and tentative theoretical formulation. J . of General Psych., 1956, 54, 279-299. Annet, J . , and Kay, H. Knowledge of r e s u l t s and s k i l l e d .performance. Occupational Psych., 1957, 31, 69-79. Annet, John. The r o l e of knowledge of r e s u l t s i n learning: A Survey. Educational Technology - Readings In Programmed- Instruction. DeCecco. John P. (ed.). New York: HoTt, 1964, 493 pp. Bilodeau, E. A. Motor performance as affected by magnitude and d i r e c t i o n of error contained i n knowledge of r e s u l t s . J. Psych.. 1955, 40, 103-113. Bilodeau, E. A., and Bilodeau, Ina McD. Variable frequency of knowledge of r e s u l t s and the learning of a simple s k i l l . J . Exp, Psych., 1958(a), 55, 379-383. Bilodeau, E. A.j and Bilodeau, Ina McD. Variations of temporal i n t e r v a l s among c r i t i c a l events i n f i v e studies of knowledge of r e s u l t s . J . Exp Psych., 1958(b), 55, 603-612. e  Bilodeau, E. A., and Bilodeau, Ina McD. M o t o r - s k i l l s learning. Annual Review Of Psychology. 1961, 12, 243-280. Bilodeau, E. A., Bilodeau, Ina McD., and Schumsky, D. A. Some effects of introducing and withdrawing knowledge of r e s u l t s early and l a t e i n p r a c t i c e . J . Exp. Psych.^ 1959, 58, 142-44. Bilodeau, E, A., and Ryan, F. J . A. A test f o r i n t e r a c t i o n of delay of knowledge of results.and two types of interpolated a c t i v i t y . J . Exp. Psych., 1960, 59, 414-419. Bourne, L. E., J r . E f f e c t s of delay of information feedback and task complexity on i d e n t i f i c a t i o n of concepts. J . Exp. Psych., 1957, 54, 201-207. B r a c k b i l l , Yvonne, Bravos, A., and Starr, R. H. Delay-improved retention of a d i f f i c u l t task. J . Comp. Physiol. Psych., 1962, 55, 947-952. B r a c k b i l l , Yvonne, and Kappy, Michael S. Delay of reinforcement and retention. J . Gomp. Physiol. Psych. 1962, 5J>, 14-18. t  Coleman, J . C. Personality Dynamics And E f f e c t i v e Behavior. Chicago: Scott, Foresman and Co., i960, 5 b b pp.  34 Edwards, A l l e n L. Experimental Design i n Psychological Research (Rev. Ed.). New York: RineKart, 1960, 398 pp. Ewell, J . L., and Grindley, E. C. Knowledge of r e s u l t s . Br. J . of Psych.. 1938, 29, 39-54. Gagne, R. M., and Fleishman, Edwin A. Psychology and Human Performance. New York: Holt, 1959, 493 pp. Greenspoon, J . , and Foreman, S a l l y . Effects of delay of knowledge of r e s u l t s on learning a motor task. J . Exp. Psych.. 1956, 51, 226-228. Hays., William L., S t a t i s t i c s For Psychologists. Holt, 1963, 7lT"pp: '  New York:  Held, Richard. P l a s t i c i t y i n sensory-motor systems. S c i e n t i f i c American. November 1965, 213(5)» 84-94. Held, Richard, and Freedtnan, S. J . P l a s t i c i t y i n Human Sensori-motor control. Science» October 1963, 142, 455-62. Jensen, Barry T. This thing c a l l e d practice. -Educ., 1955-56, 33, 221-226.  Peabody J . of ~~  Judd, C. H. Practice without knowledge of r e s u l t s . Monographs, 1905, 7, 185 198.  Psych.  r  K e l l e r , F. S. Studies i n international Morse code. I. A. new method of teaching code reception. , J . Appl. Psych.. 1943, 27, 407-415.^ ~ —^- ' J L  Keller* F. S. Studies i n international Morse code. Psych.. 1945, 29, 161-163.  J . Appl.  Lavery, J . J . , and Suddon, F. H. Retention of simple motor s k i l l s as a function of the number of t r i a l s by which knowledge of r e s u l t s i s delayed. Perceptual and,Motor S k i l l s . 1962, 15, 231-237. ' Lindahl, Lawrence G. t r a i n i n g method.  Movement analysis as an i n d u s t r i a l J . Appl. Psych.. 1945, 29, 420-436.  L i t t l e , J . K. Results of use of machines f o r testing and f o r d r i l l s upon learning i n educational psychology. J . Exp. Psych., 1934, 3, 45-49. " ' Lorge, Irving, and Thorndike, E. L. The influence of delay i n the a f t e r effect of a connection. J . Exp. Psych., 1935, 18, 186-194. ~ — 4 1  35 Michael, D., and Maccoby, N. Factors influencing verbal learning from films under varying conditions of audience p a r t i c i p a t i o n . J . Exp. Psych.,. 1953, 46, 411-418. McGuigan, F. J . Precision, delay, and schedule of knowledge of r e s u l t s on performance. J . Exp. Psych., 1959, 58, 79-84. ~ ~~ MacPherson, S. J . , Dees, V., and Grindley, G. C. The effects of knowledge of r e s u l t s on learning and performance: I I Some c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of very simple s k i l l s . Quart. J . Exp. Psycho, 1948-9, 1, 68-78. ~ Neumann, E., and Amnions, R. B. A c q u i s i t i o n and long-term retention of a simple s e r i a l perceptual motor s k i l l . J . Exp.. Psych.. 1957, 53, 159-61. Payne, R. B., and Hauty, G. T. E f f e c t of psychological feedback upon work decrement. J . Exp. Psych., 1955, 50, 343-351. ~ ~~ Pressey, S. L. Development and appraisal of devices providing immediate automatic scoring of objective tests and concomitant s e l f - i n s t r u c t i o n . J . Psych.. 1950, 29, 417-447. Reynolds, B., and Adams, J . A. Motor performance as a function of c l i c k reinforcement. J . Exp. Psych., 1953, 45, 315-320. Siegel, Sidney. Nonparametric S t a t i s t i c s For The Behavioral Sciences. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1956, 312 pp. Smith, K. U. Delayed Sensory Feedback And Behavior. Philadelphia: W. B. Saunders Co., iSTBT, 109 pp. Smode, A. F» Learning and performance i n a tracking under two levels of achievement information feedback. J . Exp. Psych.. 1958, 56, 297-304. Stroud, J . B. The r o l e of p r a c t i c e i n learning. The Psychology Of Learning« N. S. S. E. Yearbook. 1942, Part II Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Press, 1942, 353-376. Trowbridge, M. H., and Cason, H. An experimental study of Thorndike's theory of learning. J . Gen. Psych., 1932, 7, 245-260. Winer, B. J . S t a t i s t i c a l P r i n c i p l e s In Experimental Design. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1962/672 pp.  A P P E N D I X  APPENDIX A RANDOM BLOCK PROCEDURE Augmented Practice Group  Control Group  Augmented Group  Block  Subject  Easter Net Rate  Age  I. Q.  1  11  38  15-4  2  12  37  3  13  4  Easter Net Age Rate  Subject  Easter Net Rate  Age  I. Q.  Subject  115 .  21  48  14-4  114  31  40  15-3  16-6  89  22  32  15-0  113  32  33  14-10 108  30  14-9  110  23  32  15-0  117  33  32  17-3  103  14  29  15-4  96  24  24  14-11  116  34  26  15-3  107  5  15  20  15-11  94  25  25  15-4  98  35  24  14-8  102  6  16  21  14-11  109  26  19  15-9  98  36  18  15-4  93  7  17  18  14-5  122  27  15  16-8  99  37  16  15-5  99  8  18  12  15-7  95  28  0  17-10  115  38  11  14-7  119  Mean (N = 8/Group) 25.6  *  Mean (N = 7/Group) 26.7  I. Q.  105  15-3  103.7  24.3  15-6  108.7  25  15-3  102.6  15.5  101.1  25.7  15.4  110.1  26.3 15-3  103.1  * Block 7 removed due to broken finger suffered by subject #17. CO  APPENDIX B MEAN SCORES EXPRESSED IN NET WORDS PER MINUTE Observation  Augmented Practice Group  Augmented Group  Control Group  1 2 3 4 5  16.00 17.625 20.75 20.375 26.00  18.75 26.25 22.375 21.375 21.75  22.875 21.00 20.625 22.25 24.125  6 7 8 9 10  27.75 22.375 22.75 29.125 32.29  24.25 24.75 22.25 24.875 22.43  24.00 25.375 20.25 25.75 26.00  11 12 13 14 15  27.14 26.29 24.43 28.43 18.57  21.14 28.14 14.29 26.00 21.14  24.14 21.14 24.29 28.14 19.71  16 17 18 19 20  26.29 23.14 28.00 33.00 31.29  25.71 26.29 32.86 27.71 29.00  15.43 27.57 24.14 25.57 26.86  APPENDIX C  GROSS WORDS TYPED PER MINUTE FOR EACH TREATMENT GROUP  APPENDIX D  I  0  :  I  5  i  10 Observations  i  15  •  20  FIGURE 3 NET WORDS TYPED PER MINUTE FOR EACH TREATMENT GROUP  °  

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.831.1-0104625/manifest

Comment

Related Items