Open Collections

UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

Test-retest reliability study of the Frostig development test of visual perception. Walter, Helen Irene 1963

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

Item Metadata

Download

Media
831-UBC_1963_A8 W25 T3.pdf [ 2.49MB ]
Metadata
JSON: 831-1.0105791.json
JSON-LD: 831-1.0105791-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 831-1.0105791-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 831-1.0105791-rdf.json
Turtle: 831-1.0105791-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 831-1.0105791-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 831-1.0105791-source.json
Full Text
831-1.0105791-fulltext.txt
Citation
831-1.0105791.ris

Full Text

T e s t - R e t e s t R e l i a b i l i t y Study of the F r o s t i g Developmental Test of V i s u a l P e r c e p t i o n  by Helen Irene B. A.,  Walter  Gonzaga U n i v e r s i t y , 195&*  A T h e s i s submitted  i n P a r t i a l Fulfilment  of the  Requirements f o r the Degree of Master of A r t s i n the Department of Psychology  We  accept t h i s t h e s i s as conforming t o the  required  standard  The U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia Aug.  1963  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 L i b r a r y . s h a l l make i t available for reference and study.  freely  I further .agr.ee 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 publi-  cation of this thesis for financial gain shall not be allowed without my written permission.  Department of  /  C  /^&/^(7^C & & \S  The University of B r i t i s h Columbia, Vancouver 8, Canada. Date  V  //^cU~<?.  TEST - RETEST RELIABILITY STUDY OF THE  FROSTIG  DEVELOPMENTAL TEST OF VISUAL PERCEPTION Abstract  The present study was designed t o i n v e s t i g a t e the r e l i a b i l i t y of the F r o s t i g Developmental Test of V i s u a l P e r c e p t i o n with r e t a r d e d s u b j e c t s . The F r o s t i g t e s t i s divided i n t o f i v e subtests i n v o l v i n g visuo-perceptual t a s k s and measurements. T h i s study computed r e l i a b i l i t y c o e f f i c i e n t s on a l l the s u b t e s t s as w e l l as on the t o t a l s c o r e s . The Peabody P i c t u r e Vocabulary Test and the F r o s t i g Developmental t e s t of V i s u a l P e r c e p t i o n were a l s o c o r r e l a t e d i n an attempt t o assess an aspect of F r o s t i g v a l i d i t y . The s i x t y r e t a r d e d s u b j e c t s used i n t h i s study were d i v i d e d i n t o groups on the b a s i s of both c h r o n o l o g i c a l and mental age, and the t e s t - r e t e s t method of r e l i a b i l i t y assessment was used. The r e s u l t s of t h i s study i n d i c a t e t h a t the t o t a l t e s t scores of the F r o s t i g Developmental Test of V i s u a l P e r c e p t i o n are r e l i a b l e when d e a l i n g w i t h the p e r c e p t u a l performance of r e t a r d e d s u b j e c t s . The s t a b i l i t y of the subtest shows g r e a t e r v a r i a t i o n than does t h a t of the t o t a l s c o r e s . The s u b t e s t s of Eye-Motor C o o r d i n a t i o n and Form Constancy y i e l d e d the most v a r i a b l e r e s u l t s and i t i s evident t h a t with the p o p u l a t i o n s t u d i e d , these s u b t e s t s cannot be considered s t a b l e enough t o be i n d i v i d u a l l y , d i a g n o s t i c a l l y , u s e f u l . The Peabody P i c t u r e Vocabulary c o r r e l a t i o n with the F r o s t i g Developmental Test of V i s u a l P e r c e p t i o n of .537 was s i g n i f i c a n t at the .01 l e v e l .  ACKNOWLEDGMENT  The w r i t e r g r a t e f u l l y wishes t o express h e r a p p r e c i a t i o n t o Dr. Edro S i g n o r i f o r h i s d i r e c t i o n and guidance completion of t h i s t h e s i s .  A l s o the w r i t e r wishes t o thank  Dr. C h a r l o t t e David f o r h e r i n v a l u a b l e Appreciation  i s a l s o extended  Superintendant  i n the  assistance.  t o Dr. L i o n e l Kerwood, M e d i c a l  of The Woodlands School f o r making a v a i l a b l e  f o r t h i s study, f a c i l i t i e s and s e r v i c e s of the School©  CONTENTS  Chapter  Page Abstract  I II  I n t r o d u c t i o n and Statement of the Problem  1  Background of Problem and Relevant Research  3  D e s c r i p t i o n of t e s t  and s t a n d a r d i z a t i o n  13  Hypotheses III  IV V  9  15  Method Subjects  15  Apparatus  16  Procedure  17  Computational procedure  18  Results  19  Discussion  22  Summary and c o n c l u s i o n s  27  References  28  Appendix 1  31  T e s t - r e t e s t scores o f age group 11-13 i n c l u d i n g "high and "low" mental age levels. 11  Appendix 11  32  T e s t - r e t e s t scores of age group 14-16 i n c l u d i n g " h i g h " and "low" mental age levels. Appendix 111 T e s t - r e t e s t scores of age group 17-19 i n c l u d i n g " h i g h " and "low" mental age levels.  33  TABLES  Table 1  T e s t - R e t e s t Means and R e l i a b i l i t y C o e f f i c i e n t s o f the F r o s t i g Developmental Test of V i s u a l P e r c e p t i o n with Retardates  2  T e s t - R e t e s t Means and R e l i a b i l i t y C o e f f i c i e n t s o f Subtest 1 - Eye-Motor Coordination  3  T e s t - R e t e s t Means and R e l i a b i l i t y C o e f f i c i e n t s of Subtest 11 - F i g u r e Ground  4  T e s t - R e t e s t Means and R e l i a b i l i t y C o e f f i c i e n t s of Subtest 111 - Form Constancy  5  T e s t - R e t e s t Means and R e l i a b i l i t y C o e f f i c i e n t s of Subtest IV - P o s i t i o n i n Space  6  T e s t - R e t e s t Means and R e l i a b i l i t y C o e f f i c i e n t s of Subtest V - S p a t i a l Relations Z Transformation of Two most D i s p a r a t e C o r r e l a t i o n s of Subtests  CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION AND STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM ..T h i s study attempts t o remedy some o f t h e d e f i c i e n c i e s of t h e r e l i a b i l i t y  data a v a i l a b l e on the F r o s t i g Developmental  Test of V i s u a l P e r c e p t i o n . is  I n t h i s case a r e t a r d e d  studied. There has been i n s u f f i c i e n t r e l i a b i l i t y  to  population  r e s e a r c h done  e s t a b l i s h t h e t e s t as a c o n s i s t e n t psychometric measure.  T h i s study adds t o t h e r e s e a r c h data and i n c r e a s e s t h e scope of the t e s t by adding the dimension o f a r e t a r d e d sample.  The  upper and lower ends o f t h e t h e o r i z e d p e r c e p t u a l continuum have been omitted for  i n the previous  studies.  The present  study  controls  sex, age and M. A. i n t h e p o p u l a t i o n sampled and g i v e s more  complete data on t h e s u b j e c t s and t h e Subtest than has been r e p o r t e d p r e v i o u s l y .  reliabilities  The omission  o f such i n -  formation has been p o i n t e d out as a s e r i o u s d e f e c t i n e a r l i e r literature  ( T e c h n i c a l Recommendations, 1954).  Further r e l i a b i l i t y  study i s needed because of the new-  ness o f the t e s t and i t i s p a r t i c u l a r l y necessary the instruments  because of  apparent u t i l i t y w i t h r e t a r d e d s u b j e c t s .  Because  the t e s t i s developmental and i t i s assumed t o be s e n s i t i v e to  changes brought about by i n c r e a s i n g age, c o n t r o l f o r age  must be i n c o r p o r a t e d i n t o r e l i a b i l i t y  studies.  T h i s can be  done by u s i n g t h e s c a l e d scores a v a i l a b l e i n the t e s t norms or by c o n t r o l l i n g f o r t h e age f a c t o r . scaled scores.  Previous  s t u d i e s used  The use o f s c a l e d scores i s q u e s t i o n a b l e  because  the norms were d e r i v e d from a much younger p o p u l a t i o n than t h a t  -2-  used i n the present  research.  Raw  s c a l e s are t h e r e f o r e used  and the age f a c t o r i s c o n t r o l l e d .  C o n t r o l f o r M. A. i s a l s o  employed as t h e r e may  be an o v e r l a p of I . Q. and  f a c t o r s which could "contaminate" the One  perceptual  results.  of the d i f f i c u l t i e s of d e a l i n g w i t h u n s p e c i f i e d  samples i s the f a c t t h a t i n f o r m a t i o n about f a c t o r s other t h a n p e r c e p t i o n may  be l o s t .  on the F r o s t i g t e s t  For example, we have no  concerning  performance on t h i s t e s t and not a s i g n i f i c a n t  information  a p o s s i b l e r e l a t i o n s h i p between  intelligence.  Although t h e r e  c o r r e l a t i o n between the F r o s t i g and  was  the  Goodenough i t i s p o s s i b l e t h a t the F r o s t i g t a p s some o t h e r aspects  of i n t e l l i g e n c e than those measured by the Goodenough.  Studies by Bensberg ( 1 9 5 2 ) ,  Feldman ( 1 9 5 3 ) ,  and B a r o f f  (1957)  with the Bender G e s t a l t suggest t h a t performance on the Bender G e s t a l t i s c l o s e l y r e l a t e d t o M. A. l e v e l s . present apsect  study  Although the  i s e s s e n t i a l l y a r e l i a b i l i t y i n v e s t i g a t i o n , an  of v a l i d i t y w i l l a l s o be i n v e s t i g a t e d by seeking  the c o r r e l a t i o n between the Peabody P i c t u r e Vocabulary  out test  and the F r o s t i g Developmental Test of V i s u a l P e r c e p t i o n .  CHAPTER I I BACKGROUND OF PROBLEM AND RELEVANT RESEARCH In March of 1961 a new t e s t o f v i s u a l p e r c e p t i o n was published.  The F r o s t i g Developmental Test of V i s u a l P e r c e p t i o n ,  which w i l l be d e s c r i b e d i n a l a t e r chapter^ first  standardized  represents the  e f f o r t t o measure, p s y c h o m e t r i c a l l y , c e r t a i n  o p e r a t i o n a l l y d e f i n e d aspects of v i s u a l p e r c e p t i o n i n c h i l d r e n . The  r a t i o n a l e f o r t h e t e s t c l o s e l y p a r a l l e l s the t h e o r y  i n t h e c o n s t r u c t i o n of i n t e l l i g e n c e t e s t s .  Tasks t h a t were  o p e r a t i o n a l l y d e f i n e d as p e r c e p t u a l were administered groups of k i n d e r g a r t e n  utilized  to large  and s c h o o l c h i l d r e n and norms f o r the  t e s t were t h u s e s t a b l i s h e d f o r comparison and i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of d e v i a t i o n s i n p e r c e p t i o n i n s i m i l a r  populations.  The F r o s t i g Developmental Test of V i s u a l P e r c e p t i o n i s o n l y p a r t o f an ambitious  program which i s b e i n g undertaken by  the Marianne F r o s t i g School Angeles.  of E d u c a t i o n a l Therapy i n Los  The program as a whole i s aimed at f o s t e r i n g and .  d e v i s i n g s p e c i a l t r a i n i n g techniques  f o r t h e abnormal l e a r n e r .  Many of the problems o f the aberrant  learner, i t i s theorized,  stem from u n d e r l y i n g p e r c e p t u a l d e f e c t s , p a r t i c u l a r l y i n t h e v i s u a l sphere.  The F r o s t i g Developmental Test of V i s u a l Per-  c e p t i o n attempts t o measure some of these  d e f e c t s and t o  c o n t r i b u t e t o the d i a g n o s t i c data used i n the s e l e c t i o n o f remedial t r a i n i n g programs.  Both the F r o s t i g Developmental  Test of V i s u a l P e r c e p t i o n and the t r a i n i n g m a t e r i a l s , which are now a v a i l a b l e f o r c l i n i c a l use, of s p e c i a l education,  a f f o r d promise i n the f i e l d  but f u r t h e r r e s e a r c h w i t h the t e s t and  -4i n a wider sphere.  For example, because of i t s l e a r n i n g  problems, the r e t a r d e d p o p u l a t i o n i s one f o r which the t e s t would seem p a r t i c u l a r l y u s e f u l . In past y e a r s , p s y c h o l o g i c a l r e s e a r c h i n r e t a r d a t i o n has been concerned w i t h the d i a g n o s i s and d e s c r i p t i o n of e t i o l o g i c a l groups such as the b r a i n i n j u r e d (Sarason, P e r c e p t i o n has been one  of the f o c a l areas.  1958).  However, these  s t u d i e s have not r e s u l t e d i n t e a c h i n g or t r a i n i n g programs f o r the r e t a r d e d , and on methodological  i n a d d i t i o n they have been  grounds (Meyer, 1957;  W o r t i s , 1956).  extensive s t u d i e s of S t r a u s s and L e h t i n e n and Kephart  (1955), by way  Strauss  But t h e i r e f f o r t s have a l s o  because of m e t h o d o l o g i c a l  (Clarke and C l a r k e , 1958).  (1947) and  The  of c o n t r a s t , have shaped the  development of t r a i n i n g programs. been questioned  criticized  imperfections  Even more t o the p o i n t i s a  commentary made by Sarason (1953) who  suggests  that  Strauss  e t . a l . are t o be commended f o r t h e i r unique f o r m u l a t i o n s but t h a t t h e r e i s no i n d i c a t i o n t h a t t h e i r s p e c i a l i z e d i n g techniques would not a l s o be b e n e f i c i a l t o any s u f f e r i n g from severe l e a r n i n g problems. t i g h t l y c o n t r o l l e d study by G a l l a g h e r  A  teach-  child  significant,  (1957) i n d i c a t e d t h a t  the d i f f e r e n c e s between endogenous and exogenous r e t a r d a t e s were not n e a r l y as marked as one would expect: manifested  some p e r c e p t u a l d i f f i c u l t i e s ,  of the two  groups on v a r i o u s psychometric  weighed the d i f f e r e n c e s . W o r t i s  and the  both  groups  similarities  measures f a r out-  (1956) sums up the  theoretical  -5p o s i t i o n of many today, "There i s i n s h o r t , I b e l i e v e , no b r a i n i n j u r e d c h i l d , but children..."  only a v a r i e t y of b r a i n i n j u r e d  In p r a c t i c a l terms t h i s t r e n d has the  effect  of causing c l i n i c i a n s t o look more c r i t i c a l l y at the  quali-  t a t i v e aspects of the behaviour of the i n d i v i d u a l c h i l d . normative t e s t of v i s u a l p e r c e p t i o n , such as the  Frostig  Developmental Test of V i s u a l P e r c e p t i o n , i s designed d e s c r i b e t h i s aspect  A  t o help  of a c h i l d ' s development.  S t u d i e s i n p e r c e p t i o n have comprised a core i n p s y c h o l o g i c a l l i t e r a t u r e f o r decades.  I n t e r e s t and i n v e s t i g a t i o n  i n t h i s area have v a c i l l a t e d from vague p h i l o s o p h i c a l f o r m u l a t i o n to h i g h l y s p e c i f i c l a b o r a t o r y s t u d i e s of body organs i n v o l v e d in perception.  I n c r e a s i n g l y , p a r t l y as an outgrowth of the  l a b o r a t o r y s t u d i e s , and p a r t l y as a separate l o g i s t s and  movement, psycho-  others working i n the f i e l d have developed  t e s t i n g techniques p e r s o n a l i t y and  clinical  which attempt t o i n t e g r a t e developmental,  i n t e l l e c t u a l factors i n perception.  Most prominent among the c l i n i c a l p e r c e p t u a l t e s t s are the Rorschach, the Bender G e s t a l t , the G o l d s t e i n Sheerer S o r t i n g t e s t and the Kohs b l o c k s  (used s e p a r a t e l y and  i n the Weschler t e s t s . )  Archimedes S p i r a l , - F l i c k e r F u s i o n ,  WItkin's Rod  and Frame t e s t are o t h e r s .  as  incorporated and  None i s s t r i c t l y  s t a n d a r d i z e d and each d e r i v e s from a h i g h l y s p e c i f i e d o r i e n t a t i o n in perception.  The  between a b s t r a c t and  G o l d s t e i n s e r i e s (1941) seeks t o d i f f e r e n t i a t e concrete behaviour.  He hypothesized  that  the b r a i n damaged i n d i v i d u a l e x h i b i t s abnormal responses when  -6s t i m u l a t e d as a r e s u l t of u n d e r l y i n g p e r c e p t u a l d e f e c t . Subsequent s t u d i e s by Halstead (1953) and Werner and S t r a u s s supported  (1940), P o l l a c k and  Bender  (1940-1941) have to some extent  G o l d s t e i n ' s c l a i m , but Meyer (1957) i n a summation  of the p s y c h o l o g i c a l e f f e c t s of b r a i n damage, i n d i c a t e s t h a t none of these f i n d i n g s can be considered  c o n c l u s i v e because of  inherent d e f e c t s i n methodology and c o n t r o l . The  Bender G e s t a l t t e s t i s l i k e l y the most w e l l known and  widely used paper and p e n c i l t e s t of p e r c e p t i o n . t h i s t e s t was  c o n s t r u c t e d t o i d e n t i f y the v i s u a l  d e f e c t s of the b r a i n - i n j u r e d c h i l d .  I t was  Originally, perceptual  thought t h a t  the  t e s t f i g u r e s e x e m p l i f i e d p r i n c i p l e s of " g e s t a l t " such as proxi m i t y , c o n t i n u i t y , and would be manifest  c l o s u r e and t h a t d e f e c t s i n these  i n t e s t responses.  changed s i n c e s t u d i e s by B i l l i n g s e a  The  focus of the t e s t  (1948), Hutt  (1945)  (1953) and many others have shown t h a t such f a c t o r s as and experience  areas  a l t e r the g e s t a l t p r o d u c t i o n s  has  Gobetz motivation  of s u b j e c t s .  Today,  p a r t i c u l a r l y with the recent s c o r i n g system of P a s c a l and  Suttell  (1951), i n t e r e s t i n the Bender G e s t a l t i s focused  on i t s e f f e c t -  iveness as a p r o j e c t i v e t e s t of p e r s o n a l i t y . In both the 1937  and  I960 s t a n d a r d i z a t i o n s of the  p e r c e p t u a l t a s k s are i n c l u d e d at d i f f e r e n t developmental  Binet stages.  Thus a normal 3 year o l d c h i l d i s expected t o draw a c i r c l e ; 7 year o l d , t o copy a diamond.  At b e s t , the i n a b i l i t y of the  i n d i v i d u a l c h i l d t o cope w i t h these tasks can only g i v e a a rough estimate  a  clinician  of the c h i l d ' s l e v e l of p e r c e p t u a l f u n c t i o n i n g .  -7When t h e Weschler s e r i e s of i n t e l l i g e n c e t e s t s were f i r s t p u b l i s h e d , much r e s e a r c h was c a r r i e d on i n t h e d i r e c t i o n o f establishing  i t s usefulness i n diagnosing perceptual  In a summation o f many of these s t u d i e s , that  Yates (1954)  such e f f o r t has not produced s t a t i s t i c a l l y The  difficulties.  salient points i n t h i s b r i e f history  indicates  significant are:  1.  results.  Most  of t h e psychometric techniques which have d e a l t w i t h p e r c e p t i o n have t h e i r o r i g i n i n G e s t a l t  psychology.  T h i s p a r t i c u l a r approach  to p e r c e p t i o n takes a narrow view i n assuming t h a t i s innate.  2.  perception  The a r e a of concern has been almost  completely  r e s t r i c t e d t o the study of t h e abnormal i n d i v i d u a l as a s t a r t i n g point.  Thus a c c u r a t e , developmental comparisons w i t h the normal  cannot be drawn. In d i r e c t c o n t r a s t , t h e u n d e r l y i n g hypotheses of t h e F r o s t i g Developmental Test of V i s u a l P e r c e p t i o n p r o v i d e s a much broader approach t o v i s u a l p e r c e p t i o n . i s normally d i s t r i b u t e d , be  affected  by l e a r n i n g  can be measured. for,  that  i t i s developmental, that  and, l a s t l y ,  Publication  They s t a t e t h a t  that,certain  perception i t can  aspects of i t  of t h e F r o s t i g t e s t i s a p p o s i t e  i f t h e t e s t demonstrates s t r e n g t h as a p s y c h o l o g i c a l i n -  strument, our knowledge o f both normal and abnormal p e r c e p t u a l functioning  w i l l be enhanced.  Although the t h e o r e t i c a l r a m i f i c a t i o n s are  of the F r o s t i g  test  i n v i t i n g i n terms of f o r m u l a t i n g r e s e a r c h hypotheses, t h e  area o f most immediate and p r a c t i c a l concern i s the psychometric aspects of t h e t e s t i t s e l f .  So f a r , because of the recency of  -8i t s p u b l i c a t i o n , t h e only v a l i d i t y and r e l i a b i l i t y  data  avail-  able on the F r o s t i g are t h e o r i g i n a l s t a n d a r d i z a t i o n f i g u r e s . G e n e r a l l y , t h e v a l i d i t y data o f f e r e d i n the F r o s t i g t e s t manual suggest t h a t one could advance with some confidence the t e s t  i n using  c l i n i c a l l y but t h e r e l i a b i l i t y data are not n e a r l y as  comprehensive. Restated, study i s t h i s :  t h e s p e c i f i c problem f o r i n v e s t i g a t i o n i n t h i s a new t e s t o f v i s u a l p e r c e p t i o n has been p u b l i s h e d  which, seen i n the context  of other s i m i l a r measures, o f f e r s  c o n s i d e r a b l e promise i n the f i e l d o f s p e c i a l e d u c a t i o n .  How-  ever, r e l i a b i l i t y data f o r the t e s t are i n s u f f i c i e n t , and f o r the r e t a r d e d p o p u l a t i o n , non e x i s t e n t .  I t w i l l be the purpose  of t h i s study, t h e r e f o r e , t o i n v e s t i g a t e the r e l i a b i l i t y o f t h e F r o s t i g Developmental Test o f V i s u a l P e r c e p t i o n u s i n g a sample from the p o p u l a t i o n f o r whom t h i s t e s t would seem very u s e f u l , namely, t h e r e t a r d e d . Since the F r o s t i g Developmental Test o f V i s u a l P e r c e p t i o n i s a very new technique,  c e r t a i n problems o t h e r than those  s p e c i f i e d must a l s o be r e c o g n i z e d . techniques  With w e l l - e s t a b l i s h e d c l i n i c a l  l i k e the Weschler o r the S t a n f o r d B i n e t ,  research  i s immediately j u s t i f i e d on the b a s i s of the extensive use t o which the instrument itself  can be minimal.  just  practical  i s put and d e s c r i p t i o n o f the  Since the F r o s t i g t e s t  test  cannot c l a i m such  f a m i l i a r acceptance, t h i s r e l i a b i l i t y study must f o l l o w a somewhat d i f f e r e n t format.  I n the p r e v i o u s  s e c t i o n an attempt has  been made t o i n d i c a t e the need f o r such a t e s t of p e r c e p t i o n and  -9a short c r i t i q u e of s e v e r a l s a l i e n t psychometric t e s t s of p e r c e p t i o n has been g i v e n . data w i l l be presented  I n the f o l l o w i n g chapters,  normative  on t h e F r o s t i g Development Test of  V i s u a l P e r c e p t i o n i n order t o e s t a b l i s h t h e meaningfulness o f t h i s r e l i a b i l i t y study.  T h i s method f o l l o w s i n the t r a d i t i o n  of t h e Buros Mental Measurements Yearbooks when new p s y c h o l o g i c a l instruments  are i n t r o d u c e d and reviewed.  D e s c r i p t i o n o f Test and S t a n d a r d i z a t i o n . Work on the F r o s t i g Developmental Test of V i s u a l P e r c e p t i o n was i n i t i a t e d e a r l y i n 1958.  The t e s t i s e s s e n t i a l l y  a paper and p e n c i l one and can be administered  i n d i v i d u a l l y or  t o groups.  Eye-Motor  I t i s divided i n t o f i v e subtests:  C o o r d i n a t i o n , F i g u r e Ground, Form Constancy, P o s i t i o n i n Space, and  Spatial Relations.  to 9 (plus) years.  Age norms f o r the t e s t extend from 3  A d m i n i s t r a t i o n and s c o r i n g are o b j e c t i v e  and raw s c o r e s , s c a l e d s c o r e s , o r d e r i v e d p e r c e p t u a l can be used s t a t i s t i c a l l y .  quotients  From the t e c h n i c a l aspects of ease  of a d m i n i s t r a t i o n , o b j e c t i v e s c o r i n g , i n t e r e s t t o t h e s u b j e c t and other g e n e r a l f a c e v a l i d i t y c r i t e r i a the F r o s t i g Developmental Test o f V i s u a l P e r c e p t i o n e a s i l y meets the o b j e c t i v e s of a good psychological t e s t . In s e l e c t i n g the aspects submits t h a t these c e p t i o n but,  o f v i s u a l p e r c e p t i o n the author  are not t h e o n l y dimensions o f v i s u a l  "are important  per-  p a r t s of the p r o c e s s . . . and seem t o  have p a r t i c u l a r relevance t o s c h o o l performance." (p. 3 , manual). Each subtest r e q u i r e s performance of some behaviour which  -10o p e r a t i o n a l l y d e f i n e s an aspect  of v i s u a l p e r c e p t i o n .  In  subtest 1, Eye-Motor C o o r d i n a t i o n i s d e f i n e d as an a b i l i t y draw s t r a i g h t boundaries.  or curved  to  l i n e s between i n c r e a s i n g l y narrow  F i g u r e Ground, Subtest  I I , r e q u i r e s the a b i l i t y t o  d i s t i n g u i s h i n t e r s e c t i n g f i g u r e s such as t r i a n g l e s , squares  and  i n t e r s e c t i n g s t a r s and t o i s o l a t e s p e c i f i e d f i g u r e s from a c o n f u s i n g and  d i s t r a c t i n g background.  c o n s i s t s of two squares,  and  I I I , Form Constancy,  pages of d i f f e r e n t f i g u r e s such as  circles,  r e c t a n g l e s w i t h an accompaniment of d i s t r a c t i n g  l i n e s , "squiggles", etc. c i r c l e s and  Subtest  Here, the o b j e c t i s t o p i c k out  squares by drawing around them w i t h  coloured crayons.  P o s i t i o n i n Space, Subtest  different  IV, i s d e f i n e d  as the a b i l i t y t o d i f f e r e n t i a t e p i c t o r i a l s i m i l a r i t i e s d i f f e r e n c e s i n rows of simple  l i n e drawings.  The  l a s t Subtest,  and  T h i s subtest i s  s i m i l a r i n s t r u c t u r e t o items found i n most r e a d i n g tests.  the  readiness  S p a t i a l R e l a t i o n s , r e q u i r e s the  sub-  j e c t t o l i n k up s e r i e s of__dots by copying from i n c r e a s i n g l y complex p a t t e r n s . As the author i n d i c a t e s (p. 3, manual), t h r e e of the s u b t e s t s ( I I , I I I , IV) are s t r i c t l y p e r c e p t u a l as they simple  r e c o g n i t i o n „of s t i m u l i .  C o o r d i n a t i o n , not w h o l l y  The  i n c l u s i o n of Eye-Motor  a p e r c e p t u a l t e s t , was  the b a s i s of experimentation  involve  by Hebb (1949) who  justified  on  found t h a t  sensory motor behaviour i s an e s s e n t i a l p r e - r e q u i s i t e and complement of v e r i d i c a l p e r c e p t i o n .  S p a t i a l Relations,  Subtest  V a l s o i n v o l v e s some motor c o o r d i n a t i o n but, u n l i k e Subtest  I  -lithe  s u b j e c t i s not  p e n a l i z e d f o r poor motor performance.  In e s t a b l i s h i n g the  v a l i d i t y of the  Test of V i s u a l P e r c e p t i o n , the of c o n s t r u c t v a l i d i t y were run between the ings.  C o n t r o l was  level.  manual).  Internal  maintained f o r sex, low  c o r r e l a t i o n was  and  mental  On  the  age  recorded between occured w i t h o l d e r  F r o s t i g i s a developmental t e s t the  expected.  would not  correlations  f o r d i f f e r e n t group-  age,  somewhat h i g h e r c o r r e l a t i o n s  groups. . As the would be  authors u t i l i z e d s e v e r a l methods  d i f f e r e n t s u b t e s t s and  A p o s i t i v e but  s u b t e s t s and  One  (p. 32,  F r o s t i g Developmental  l a t t e r trend  f a c e of i t these r e s u l t s look p r o m i s i n g .  expect a t e s t designed t o measure s p e c i f i c a b i l i -  t i e s t o have a h i g h i n t e r c o r r e l a t i o n but  as p e r c e p t u a l  abilities  are presumed t o be p a r t s of a continuum, some r e l a t i o n s h i p to be  expected.  A factor analytic  (1963) lends weight t o the F r o s t i g t e s t as they r e p o r t from .18  to  .57  study by  teacher ratings  the  (p. 33, .001  Draw a Man  Correlations  ranging  correlation  scores on the  between F r o s t i g scores and  t e s t , drawn from l a r g e  of  Frostig  Goodenough,  samples of K i n d e r g a r t e n ,  Second Graders i n d i c a t e d  significance  l e v e l s r a n g i n g from .01  manual).  the  A l l values d e r i v e d were s i g n i f i c a n t beyond  Graders, and  t e s t was  Powell  children.  o f f e r e d by  of classroom adjustment and  is  authors of  subtest i n t e r c o r r e l a t i o n s  w i t h a group of k i n d e r g a r t e n  manual).  level.  Corah and  p o s i t i o n taken by the  F u r t h e r v a l i d i t y evidence was  test  age  that t o the  i n each grouping .001)  measuring something d i s t i n c t from the  the  First (with  Frostig  Goodenough (p.  37,  -12R e s u l t s of s e v e r a l treatment s t u d i e s are a l s o i n the F r o s t i g manual.  One  i n v e s t i g a t i o n with a group of  " p r e s c h o o l e r s " between the ages of 4 i  - 62 hypothesized  p u p i l s w i t h p e r c e p t u a l q u o t i e n t s below 90 would not r e a d i n g because of t h e i r p e r c e p t u a l d i f f i c u l t i e s . were borne out i n a l l cases.  presented  that  attempt The  hypotheses  U n f o r t u n a t e l y the f i n d i n g l a c k s  power because the sample s i z e i n t h i s study was  s m a l l (p.  38,  Manual). G e n e r a l l y , the v a l i d i t y data o f f e r e d i n the manual suggests t h a t one using t h i s test  Frostig  could advance with some confidence  clinically.  A major weakness, as p o i n t e d  in  out  by F r o s t i g , l i e s i n the narrowness of the s t a n d a r d i z a t i o n population.  C e r t a i n b i a s e s , which are c l e a r l y s t a t e d , e x i s t i n the  socio-economic s t r a t i f i c a t i o n of s u b j e c t s .  A l s o a geographic  p r e j u d i c e occurs, as a l l s u b j e c t s were drawn from the California The  Southern  area. r e l i a b i l i t y data o f f e r e d by the F r o s t i g Developmental  Test of V i s u a l P e r c e p t i o n are not n e a r l y as comprehensive. two  reliability  s t u d i e s were conducted by the author.  The  e a r l i e r study, p u b l i s h e d i n the J o u r n a l of P e r c e p t u a l and Skills  (1961), was  Only  Motor  p a r t of a l a r g e r study i n v e s t i g a t i n g the  g e n e r a l u t i l i t y of the F r o s t i g t e s t w i t h both' normal and n e u r o l o g i c a l l y handicapped c h i l d r e n . for .80.  Test-retest coefficients  the t e s t as a whole were r e p o r t e d as The  reliability  of a l l subtest with one  .98  and f o r the  c o e f f i c i e n t s of the s u b t e s t s were composite  c o r r e l a t i o n s . However, t h i s study was  of the f i r s t  subtests  conducted  e d i t i o n s of the F r o s t i g Developmental Test  -13of V i s u a l P e r c e p t i o n and cannot t h e r e f o r e be a c c u r a t e l y u t i l i z e d f o r the 1961 v e r s i o n . The only r e l i a b i l i t y study s p e c i f i c a l l y a p p l i c a b l e t o the present t e s t i s p u b l i s h e d i n the manual (p. 32), and was with two groups of f i r s t  and second grade c h i l d r e n .  c o e f f i c i e n t s ranged from .413 t o .802  conducted  Test-retest  f o r the s u b t e s t s but  f o r i n d i v i d u a l s u b t e s t s were not r e p o r t e d .  The  scores  test-retest  c o e f f i c i e n t s f o r the t o t a l sample were r e p o r t e d as  .80.  With the above o b s e r v a t i o n s i n mind t h e f o l l o w i n g hypotheses were generated: Hypotheses 1.  2.  The F r o s t i g Developmental Test of V i s u a l P e r c e p t i o n w i l l y i e l d a s u f f i c i e n t l y high r e l i a b i l i t y c o e f f i c i e n t  with  r e t a r d e d s u b j e c t s t o be considered d i a g n o s t i c a l l y  dependable.  Each of the 5 s u b t e s t s of the F r o s t i g Developmental Test of V i s u a l P e r c e p t i o n w i l l y i e l d a s u f f i c i e n t l y  high  r e l i a b i l i t y c o e f f i c i e n t with r e t a r d e d s u b j e c t s t o be diagnostically 3.  dependable.  The F r o s t i g Developmental Test of V i s u a l P e r c e p t i o n demonstrate a s u f f i c i e n t l y high r e l i a b i l i t y  will  coefficient  t o be dependable with r e t a r d e d s u b j e c t s of v a r y i n g chronol o g i c a l ages (11-19). 4.  Each of the s u b t e s t s of the F r o s t i g Developmental T e s t of V i s u a l P e r c e p t i o n w i l l demonstrate a s u f f i c i e n t l y r e l i a b i l i t y c o e f f i c i e n t t o be dependable with  high  retarded  s u b j e c t s of v a r y i n g c h r o n o l o g i c a l ages (11-19). /  -145.  The F r o s t i g Developmental Test of V i s u a l P e r c e p t i o n demonstrate a s u f f i c i e n t r e l i a b i l i t y  will  c o e f f i c i e n t t o be  dependable with r e t a r d e d s u b j e c t s of v a r y i n g mental ages. 6.  Each of the F r o s t i g Developmental Test of V i s u a l Perception subtests w i l l high r e l i a b i l i t y  demonstrate a s u f f i c i e n t l y  c o e f f i c i e n t t o be dependable with r e -  t a r d e d s u b j e c t s of v a r y i n g mental ,ages. 7.  The F r o s t i g Developmental Test of V i s u a l P e r c e p t i o n not c o r r e l a t e  s i g n i f i c a n t l y with the Peabody  Vocabulary t e s t .  Picture  will  CHAPTER I I I METHOD Subjects The  60 s u b j e c t s f o r t h i s study were s e l e c t e d from the  r e t a r d e d p o p u l a t i o n of The Woodlands School B. C ,  and  at New  Westminster,  ranged i n age from 11 years through 19 y e a r s .  Although  p r e v i o u s work with the F r o s t i g Developmental Test of V i s u a l P e r c e p t i o n gave no i n d i c a t i o n of sex d i f f e r e n c e s on the c a r e f u l c o n t r o l f o r sex was of boys and  maintained  by having  g i r l s i n the t o t a l group and  test,  an equal number  i n the sub  groupings.  In o r d e r t o f a c i l i t a t e r e l i a b i l i t y comparisons on the b a s i s of mental age  and  c h r o n o l o g i c a l age the 60 s u b j e c t s were d i v i d e d  i n t o t h r e e c h r o n o l o g i c a l age Sub  grouping  was  groups, 11-13, 14-16, and  a l s o e s t a b l i s h e d on the b a s i s of  l e v e l and the 60 p u p i l s were d i v i d e d i n t o two and  "low" The  or a "low"  intellectual  groups of  "high"  s u b j e c t s were p l a c e d i n t o a " h i g h " i n t e l l e c t u a l  an I . Q.. of 56 and up  test.  A c u t o f f p o i n t of I . Q.  of the "low"  i n t e l l i g e n c e group  below 55 cannot be  Peabody P i c t u r e Vocabulary  The two  55  and  reasons.  computed on the b a s i s of the  Test norms, thus a l l s u b j e c t s  who  d i d not a t t a i n t h i s l e v e l were a u t o m a t i c a l l y p l a c e d i n the 2.  on  group d e f i n e d the " h i g h " i n t e l l i g e n c e group.  The p a r t i c u l a r I . Q. p o i n t s were chosen f o r two  category.  level  i n t e l l e c t u a l l e v e l on the b a s i s of scores achieved  used as the upper l i m i t  1. I . Q.s'  intellectual  levels.  the Peabody Picture, Vocabulary was  17-19.  groupings of "low"  commensurate with recent  and  "low"  " h i g h " would be  c l a s s i f i c a t i o n system (1961) of the  -16American A s s o c i a t i o n on Mental D e f i c i e n c y . would a l s o f a c i l i t a t e repeat The  These groupings  studies.  Peabody P i c t u r e Vocabulary t e s t (PPVT) i s e s s e n t i a l l y  a performance t e s t of i n t e l l i g e n c e .  I t c o n s i s t s of 150  each c o n t a i n i n g f o u r p i c t u r e s , t h r e e  of which are decoys.  t e s t i s p a r t i c u l a r l y u s e f u l with r e t a r d a t e s verbalization i s required out.  The  t e s t was  and  the  plates The  as a minimum of  c o r r e c t response can be  chosen because i t a f f o r d s a v a l i d and  pointed re-  l i a b l e measure on a s i n g l e v a r i a b l e , vocabulary, which i s known to c o r r e l a t e well with general are more homogenous and t h e r e  intelligence. i s no  The  sub  groupings  confounding of I . Q.  by i n t e r e s t s c a t t e r as would occur on more c o n v e n t i o n a l gence t e s t s such as the Binet  were e l i m i n a t e d  were known  f l u c t u a t i o n i n day t o day  behaviour  as t h i s would most c e r t a i n l y have added  unnecessary b i a s t o a t e s t - r e t e s t s i t u a t i o n . consideration  intelli-  or WISC.  In s e l e c t i n g s u b j e c t s , those i n d i v i d u a l s who t o demonstrate c o n s i d e r a b l e  scores  severe e p i l e p t i c s and  psychotics  an  Because of t h i s were not  included.  Apparatus A l l s u b j e c t s were administered the t e s t - r e t e s t s e r i e s i n the  same p h y s i c a l surroundings from one  Because of s t a f f shortages and h a l f of the i n one  s u b j e c t s had  consistent  s i t u a t i o n was  room.  s i t u a t i o n t o the  i n s t i t u t i o n a l routines  other.  approximately  t o be t e s t e d on the wards i n s t e a d W i t h i n p r a c t i c a l l i m i t s the  kept u n i f o r m .  of  physical  S u b j e c t s t h a t were not t e s t e d i n  the psychology o f f i c e were t e s t e d i n ward d i n i n g rooms.  Ward  -17)  s t a f f were most c o o p e r a t i v e i n keeping n o i s e or to a minimum.  Although rooms were not  perfect  point of p r e s e n t i n g a c o n v e n t i o n a l " t e s t i n g physical  interruptions from the  view-  atmosphere",  c o n d i t i o n s of l i g h t i n g , v e n t i l a t i o n , and  space were  satisfactory. Procedure The  test-retest  used i n t h i s study.  method of r e l i a b i l i t y i n v e s t i g a t i o n  was  T h i s method seemed p a r t i c u l a r l y s u i t e d  to  the F r o s t i g Developmental Test of V i s u a l P e r c e p t i o n on both t h e o r e t i c a l and The  p r a c t i c a l grounds, ( A n a s t a s i 1957;  Chronbach I960).  F r o s t i g t e s t i n v o l v e s e s s e n t i a l l y motor and  i n a t i v e t a s k s i n the the t e s t should not  v i s u a l sphere and, be  sensory  discrim-  as such, performance  appreciably affected  by  repetition;  on  at  l e a s t over short p e r i o d s of t i m e . P r a c t i c a l l y , an  alternate  form of the  Test of V i s u a l P e r c e p t i o n does not insufficient  e x i s t and  information i s available  on  F r o s t i g Developmental at the  present time  s p e c i f i c t e s t items  or  d i f f i c u l t y l e v e l s t o make a s p l i t - h a l f r e l i a b i l i t y study f e a s i b l e . A p e r i o d of f i v e days elapsed between t e s t and T h i s allotment of time was  chosen more f o r p r a c t i c a l reasons than  from a t h e o r e t i c a l p r e f e r e n c e . possible  t o p l o t the  Within a ten  movements of 60 p u p i l s  that they would remain on the i n t e r v a l would have i n c u r r e d children  going home on  premises.  day and  span i t also to  was insure  S c h e d u l i n g on a l o n g e r  a d m i n i s t r a t i v e problems such  week-ends, h o l i d a y s , e t c .  i n groups of t h r e e , were t e s t e d span of e x a c t l y  retest.  a day,  and  f i v e days between t e s t and  as  Twelve  children,  a l l s u b j e c t s had retest.  With  the  a  -18exception  of one group, a l l s u b j e c t s were administered t h e  r e t e s t at t h e same time and p l a c e as t h e f i r s t S t r i c t adherence t o the a d m i n i s t r a t i o n  administration. i n s t r u c t i o n s as  o u t l i n e d i n t h e t e s t manual was maintained i n both t e s t and retest  situations.  I n a d d i t i o n , at t h e second s e s s i o n t h e  f o l l o w i n g i n t r o d u c t i o n was made: "Now, you have a l l seen these b o o k l e t s . We worked on some l i k e t h i s a few days ago. That doesn't mean t h a t you d i d n ' t do a good job b e f o r e . T h i s i s something s p e c i a l t h a t we are going t o do t w i c e . Now I don't want you t o bother t o t r y and remember what you d i d t h e l a s t time. Just pretend t h a t t h i s i s something brand new and do the best you can. L i s t e n c a r e f u l l y , I ' l l t e l l you e x a c t l y what t o do." Computational procedure The  test-retest r e l i a b i l i t y  formula as o u t l i n e d by  Edwards (1954) was u t i l i z e d i n d e r i v i n g a l l of t h e r e l i a b i l i t y coefficients.  Separate c o e f f i c i e n t s were c a l c u l a t e d f o r t h e  t o t a l group and.for each sub grouping of c h r o n o l o g i c a l age and mental age.  As d i f f e r e n t N's were i n v o l v e d f o r d i f f e r e n t sub-  groupings, t h e F i s h e r z t r a n s f o r m a t i o n the two most d i s p a r a t e  was c a l c u l a t e d between  c o r r e l a t i o n s as a check on s i g n i f i c a n c e  between c o r r e l a t i o n s . In computing t h e c o r r e l a t i o n c o e f f i c i e n t between t h e Peabody P i c t u r e Vocabulary t e s t and the F r o s t i g Developmental Test  of V i s u a l P e r c e p t i o n ,  was used.  t h e Pearson Product Moment formula  CHAPTER  IV  RESULTS  Generally, indicates that Perception  the F r o s t i g  Reliability  of t h i s  all  C o e f f i c i e n t s ranged from  Test-retest  be t a k e n  In addition, tables 1 - 6  of the c o e f f i c i e n t s reliability  derived with  of V i s u a l Perception scores  are u t i l i z e d  which d e a l s w i t h siderable subtests Space  with  variation  i n subtest  show good s t a b i l i t y ,  ranged from  .88 t o .95.  Eye-Motor C o o r d i n a t i o n (III) f a l l s  a coefficient In  Developmental when  Hypothesis  Three o f the f i v e  Ground  (1), P o s i t i o n i n  (V). Individual  coefficients  dependable i s the subtest o f  (1) w i t h  summary,  a coefficient  o f .68.  Form  within the region of p r a c t i c a b i l i t y  overall,  the F r o s t i g  with  stable: their  Developmental Test of  shows good r e l i a b i l i t y w i t h  v a r y i n g m e n t a l and c h r o n o l o g i c a l a g e s . coefficients  range from  2,  shows c o n -  o f .77.  Visual Perception  as  subjects.  stability.  Least  form  - H y p t h e s e s 1 and 2:  of the subtests,  Figure  aspects  degree o f s t a b i l i t y  retarded  the r e l i a b i l i t y  i n summary  The F r o s t i g  shows a h i g h  .974.  study.  t o t a l population  ( I V ) , and S p a t i a l R e l a t i o n s  Constancy  .570 t o  separately t o f a c i l i give  i n this  H y p o t h e s i s 1 c a n be a c c e p t e d .  total  of V i s u a l  considering the results further, the different  clarity.  Test  study  have v a r y i n g d e g r e e s o f t e s t - r e t e s t  of s t a b i l i t y under s c r u t i n y w i l l tate  reliability  Developmental Test  and i t s s u b t e s t  stability. In  the results  retardates of  The s u b t e s t s .68 t o .95.  are not  -20Test-retest r e l i a b i l i t y  as a f u n c t i o n of c h r o n o l o g i c a l age -  Hypotheses 3 and 4 : Hypothesis 3, concerned with t h e r e l i a b i l i t y scores, can be accepted.  of t o t a l  As i n d i c a t e d on Table 1, the F r o s t i g  Developmental Test of V i s u a l P e r c e p t i o n i s dependable with r e t a r d a t e s ranging i n age from 11 years through 1 9 . age grouping of 17 - 19 a s l i g h t l y lower c o e f f i c i e n t ,  With t h e .866, i s  recorded than with the younger ages which both had c o e f f i c i e n t s i n the . 9 0 l e v e l .  Hypothesis  4 , d e a l i n g with the r e l i a b i l i t y  of the s u b t e s t , can a g a i n o n l y be accepted i n s p e c i a l cases. Somewhat more v a r i a t i o n occurs i n the subtest r e l i a b i l i t y but, g e n e r a l l y , t h e t r e n d i n t h e d i r e c t i o n of h i g h o v e r a l l  reliability  and subtest v a r i a t i o n , noted i n the t o t a l p o p u l a t i o n , i s e v i d e n t . Eye-Motor C o o r d i n a t i o n (1) shows again as t h e l e a s t s t a b l e of the s u b t e s t s although, with the age group 11-13, a f a i r l y c o e f f i c i e n t of .792 was obtained. (11) shows good s t a b i l i t y  high  S i m i l a r i l y , F i g u r e Ground  {.896) w i t h the youngest age group  but a f a l l i n g  o f f o f d e p e n d a b i l i t y occurs with advancing  l o g i c a l age.  An unusual  chrono-  c o e f f i c i e n t was d e r i v e d i n the Subtest  Form Constancy (111) with the age group 14-16.  This c o e f f i c i e n t ,  •553, was the lowest recorded i n the whole study. In  summary, t h e F r o s t i g Developmental Test of V i s u a l  p e r c e p t i o n , when t o t a l t e s t scores are u t i l i z e d , shows a h i g h degree of d e p e n d a b i l i t y with s u b j e c t s w i t h i n the age range 1 1 - 1 9 . Subtest s t a b i l i t y i s not as dependable as the o v e r a l l  reliability  c o e f f i c i e n t and some d i f f e r e n c e s i n performance do seem t o occur as a f u n c t i o n o f c h r o n o l o g i c a l age.  The t r e n d evident i n the  -21o v e r a l l category of poor r e l i a b i l i t y i s again apparent Test-retest  on Eye-Motor C o o r d i n a t i o n  f o r a l l ages.  reliability  as a f u n c t i o n of Mental Age -  Hypotheses 5 and 6: Hypothesis  5 can be accepted.  High r e l i a b i l i t i e s were  recorded f o r the " h i g h " and the "low" i n t e l l e c t u a l ' - . l e v e l groupings, when the F r o s t i g Developmental Test of V i s u a l P e r c e p t i o n i s taken as a whole.  Coefficients  ranged  from  .918 t o .954.  How-  ever, h y p o t h e s i s 6, d e a l i n g w i t h t h e s u b t e s t s , i s only p a r t i a l l y accepted.  F i g u r e Ground (11), P o s i t i o n  i n Space ( I V ) , and  S p a t i a l R e l a t i o n s (V) showed acceptable c o e f f i c i e n t s w i t h i n the range o f .80 t o .97.  Eye-Motor C o o r d i n a t i o n (1) with t h i s  grouping showed a s l i g h t l y d i f f e r e n t ones.  p a t t e r n from t h e p r e v i o u s  T h i s subtest, was r e l i a b l e w i t h the "low" i n t e l l e c t u a l  group w i t h a c o e f f i c i e n t  of .811 but u n s t a b l e w i t h the " h i g h "  group i n which a c o e f f i c i e n t of .57 was r e c o r d e d . In summary, The F r o s t i g Developmental Test of V i s u a l P e r c e p t i o n shows adequate t e s t - r e t e s t  r e l i a b i l i t y with  groups of "low" and " h i g h " i n t e l l e c t u a l l e v e l s . variation  selected  Subtests show  of s t a b i l i t y and are i n accord w i t h p r e v i o u s p a t t e r n s .  Eye-Motion C o o r d i n a t i o n , however, seems t o be more dependable w i t h the lower i n t e l l e c t u a l l e v e l s . V a l i d i t y - Hypothesis 7 Hypothesis 7, which d e a l s w i t h the c o r r e l a t i o n Peabody P i c t u r e supported.  Vocabulary t e s t  The c o r r e l a t i o n  at l e s s than the .01 l e v e l .  of the  and the F r o s t i g T e s t , was not  o f .537 proved t o be s i g n i f i c a n t  Table 1 Test-Retest Means and R e l i a b i l i t y C o e f f i c i e n t s Developmental Test of V i s u a l P e r c e p t i o n With  of t h e F r o s t i g Retardates  Test mean  S.D.  35.15  16.19  36.25  17.64  .902  11 - 13  31.65  13.35  33.15  13.66  .974  14 - 16  31.10  11.58  32.60  12.26  .919  17 - 19 ..  42.70  10.86 ' 42.95  11.58  .866  High  40.00  11.14  40.50  10.75  .918  Low  30.30  13.12  32.00  13.69  .954  T o t a l Group:  Re-test mean  S.D.  Reliability Coefficient  Sub-Groupings Age:  Mental age:  Table 2 Test - Retest Means and R e l i a b i l i t y  Coefficients  of Subtest 1 - Eye-Motor C o o r d i n a t i o n  Test mean Total  Group:  o ^ -* ' u  Re-test mean  Q D  -n R e l i a b i l i t y * * Coefficients  14.50  4.83  14.10  4.56  .680  13.05  4.74  12.45  4.06  .792  14.05  4.20  13.55  3.67  .675  16.45  4.47  16.25  4.05  .600  15.43  3.74  14.36  4.29  .570  13.60  5:27  13 .^80  4.84  .811  Sub-Groupings Age: XX ~ X3 ©••••©.  Mental age:  Table  Test  - Retest  Means and R e l i a b i l i t y  of  Subtest  11 -  Test mean  Total  3  Coefficients  F i g u r e Ground  S.D.  Re-test mean  S.D. *  Reliability Coefficient  6.65  2.97  7.27  2.86  .880  11 — 13 ••••••  6;oo  3.84  6.6*5  3.81  .896  14 - 16 . ; . ; h  5.95  3115  6.25  3.09  .626  17 - 19  8.00  1.77  8.70  1.7*4  .754  7.57  2.42  8.30  2.12  .810  5."90  3.16  6.23  3.20  .810  Group: Sub-Groupings  Age:  Mental age:  Table 4 Test  Retest. Means and R e l i a b i l i t y of  Coefficients  Subtest I l l - Form Constancy  Test mean  S.D.  Re-test Reliability mean S.D.^ C o e f f i c i e n t  4.. 52  4.10  4.95  3.95  .770  13 • »..„•.•,«  4.10  3.. 70  4,. 80  4.08  ..850  14 - 16 _•,„•;•...•„•  2.. 85  3.08  4.30  3.91  ,.553  17 - 19 .......  6.60  4.67  5.75  3,. 78  .810  T o t a l Group: Sub-Grouping Age: 11  —  *  Mental age: High ....................  5.77  4.57  6.23  4-. 31  .789  3.67  3.. 24  4.37  2.99  ,.636  Table 5 Test - Retest Means and R e l i a b i l i t y  Coefficients  of Subtest IV - P o s i t i o n i n Space  Total  Group:  Test mean  S.D.  Re-Test Reliability S.D/ C o e f f i c i e n t mean  5.28  1.93  5.57  2.12  .909  4.95  2.16  5.It)  2.33  .937  4.75  2.29  4.95  2.03  .797  6.15  1.45  6.63  1.34  .802  6.20  1.78  6.36  1.53  .834  4.37  1.93  4.77  2.25  .347  Sub-Groupings Age:  Mental age:  Table 6 Test - R e t e s t Means and R e l i a b i l i t y of Subtest  T o t a l Group:  Coefficients  V - Spatial Relations  Test mean  S.D.  Re-test Reliability mean S.D, C o e f f i c i e n t  4.18  2.$6  4 . 3 72 . 3 9  t  .950  Sub-Groupings Age:  1 1 - 1 3 14-  ......  1 6 .......  1 7 - 1 9 ........  3 . 5 5 2.60  3 . 9 52 . 5 4  . 9 5 6  3 . 5 02 . 9 1 3 . 5 5 2 . 5 0  . 9 5 0  5 . 5 0 1 . 7 9 5.60  1 . 6 6  . 8 4 5  High .........  5 . 0 0 2 . 1 5 5 . 2 31 . S 5  - S 2 3  Low ..........  3 . 3 3 2 . 7 8 3 . 5 0 2.60  Mental age:  . 9 7 2  Table 7 z T r a n s f o r m a t i o n of Two  Most D i s p a r a t e C o r r e l a t i o n s  of Subtests  Level of s i g n i f i c a n c e  • 6i|.8  1.127  I.78  .075  non  significant  CHAPTER V DISCUSSION Since i n d i v i d u a l r e l i a b i l i t y c o e f f i c i e n t s have a l r e a d y been r e p o r t e d i n the r e s u l t s and,  s i n c e the u t i l i t y of the  c o e f f i c i e n t s are evident upon i n s p e c t i o n , t h i s d i s c u s s i o n w i l l be given over t o examining some of the s u b t e s t s on which r e l a t i v e l y low c o r r e l a t i o n s were d e r i v e d .  Although t h e r e i s s t a t i s t i c a l l y  no s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e between the h i g h e s t r e l i a b i l i t y coefficient  obtained from these  and the  data i t i s obvious  that some of the c o e f f i c i e n t s f a i l e d t o meet the which i s , regarded  lowest  .80  level  as c l i n i c a l l y u s e f u l (Chronbach, I960;  A n a s t a s i , 1957). Throughout the study, obtained were on the  some of the lowest  coefficients  subtest of Eye-Motor C o o r d i n a t i o n  (1).  It w i l l be remembered t h a t i n t h i s t a s k the s u b j e c t i s r e q u i r e d t o draw l i n e s between i n c r e a s i n g l y narrow and  curved  When the r e s u l t s are scored, p o i n t s are l o s t i f the "bumps" the l i n e or otherwise  boundaries. individual  s t r a y s o u t s i d e the given  boundaries.  It can be seen, t h e r e f o r e , t h a t t h i s subtest would be most s u s c e p t i b l e t o a l t e r a t i o n s i n p s y c h o l o g i c a l and p h y s i c a l s t a t e s . In f a c t , i n some of the p r e v i o u s l y c i t e d s t u d i e s on the Bender G e s t a l t , t h i s phenomenon i s made use authors  of i n the r a t i o n a l e of  d e v i s i n g s c o r i n g systems f o r t h i s t e s t  S u t t e l l , 1951). p r o p o r t i o n s may  Although undetected  ( P a s c a l and  a n x i e t i e s of n e u r o t i c  account f o r the i n s t a b i l i t y of t h i s  particular  subtest, i t would seem more parsimonious t o t h i n k i n terms of s  ome of the apparent f l u c t u a t i o n s of behaviour which ,  occured /  -23during the for  administration  of the F r o s t i g t e s t .  I t was  noted,  example, t h a t i n the group t e s t i n g s i t u a t i o n s u b j e c t s  quently  had  subtest.  t o be reminded t o do t h e i r best  The  creased  t o be taken i n by the apparent ease of  That t h i s subtest c h r o n o l o g i c a l age  some extent  i s a f f e c t e d i n some way  and by mental age  by the i n d i v i d u a l r e l i a b i l i t y  lowest c h r o n o l o g i c a l age Eye-Motor C o o r d i n a t i o n "low"  on t h i s p a r t i c u l a r  tendency of the s u b j e c t s , more marked w i t h the  o l d e r ones, was subtest.  fre-  group (11 - 13)  the  by i n -  i s supported t o  coefficients.  The  o v e r a l l did better  than d i d the o l d e r age  groupings.  on  The  i n t e l l e c t u a l group performed more a c c u r a t e l y on t h i s  subtest.  In summary, i t would seem t h a t the Subtest of Eye-Motor Coordination  i s not  i n i t s e l f a s t a b l e enough measure t o be used  d i a g n o s t i c a l l y , and t h a t i t i s most s u s c e p t i b l e t o a l t e r a t i o n s of m o t i v a t i o n  and mood i n the s u b j e c t s , p a r t i c u l a r l y i n r e t a r d e d  subjects. The low  Subtest of Form Constancy (111)  c o e f f i c i e n t s has  some inherent  which a l s o y i e l d e d  scoring d i f f i c u l t i e s .  s u b j e c t s are asked t o t r a c e only the squares and the are given examples. would f o l l o w  the  I t was  The  circles  observed t h a t f r e q u e n t l y the  and  subject  i n s t r u c t i o n s and would c o r r e c t l y o u t l i n e the  p r e s c r i b e d f i g u r e s o n l y then t o go on and t r a c e the other ( i n c o r r e c t ) figure's.  The  a r e s u l t of p e r c e p t u a l of impaired f a c t o r may  r e s u l t i n g poor scores may problems and  a t t e n t i o n span and  not be as much  d i s t o r t i o n s as a concomitant  concentration  level.  p l a y an important r o l e i n t h i s s u b t e s t .  <  V  The  time  I f the  -24s u b j e c t i s allowed  o n l y as much time as i s necessary t o  o u t l i n e the i n i t i a l f i g u r e s of h i s c h o i c e , then t h e scores might i n c r e a s e c o n s i d e r a b l y . allowed  However, i f these  s u b j e c t s are  u n l i m i t e d time f o r the task they may contaminate t h e  scores by t r a c i n g a d d i t i o n a l i n c o r r e c t f i g u r e s .  This  subtest,  Form Constancy, r e q u i r e s f u r t h e r i n v e s t i g a t i o n before i t can be s a f e l y assumed t o a c t u a l l y measure p e r c e p t u a l and  abilities  disabilities. Although the r e l i a b i l i t y c o e f f i c i e n t s were g e n e r a l l y  high i n the present considered.  study, t h e r e are some t e s t i n g f a c t o r s t o be  The p h y s i c a l c o n d i t i o n s f o r examination were not  always i d e a l nor were they always c o n s i s t e n t from subject t o subject.  T h i s s e t t i n g a f f o r d e d some d i s t r a c t i o n s which, con-  s i d e r i n g the i n s t a b i l i t y  and d i s t r a c t i b i l i t y o f r e t a r d a t e s ,  might have a f f e c t e d the t e s t performance i n an u n p r e d i c t a b l e direction.  T h i s p o p u l a t i o n has extreme d i f f i c u l t y with a t t e n t i o n  and c o n c e n t r a t i o n and i t i s p o s s i b l e t h a t even h i g h e r  coeffic-  i e n t s would have been r e a l i z e d had the c o n d i t i o n s been more conducive t o s t a b l e t e s t performance. The  Peabody P i c t u r e Vocabulary  t e s t has been used  c l i n i c a l l y with the r e t a r d e d p o p u l a t i o n because of the nonv e r b a l nature norms.  of the t a s k s and because i t p r o v i d e s  lower-range  There are r e p o r t e d c o r r e l a t i o n s with other t e s t s o f  i n t e l l i g e n c e and these clinicians  c o r r e l a t i o n s are s u f f i c i e n t l y  can assume t h a t many of t h e same t r a i t s  and c a p a c i t i e s  are b e i n g measured by the Peabody as by the standard performance I . Q.. t e s t s .  The present  study  high, t h a t  v e r b a l and  correlated the  -25F r o s t i g w i t h the Peabody and found  t h a t t h e .537 c o r r e l a t i o n  was s i g n i f i c a n t beyond the .01 l e v e l . two  instruments  I t i s apparent t h a t  these  are measuring at l e a s t some of t h e same areas  of performance, thus l e a v i n g the q u e s t i o n of the u l t i m a t e superiority  of one t e s t over the other t o f u r t h e r r e s e a r c h .  The F r o s t i g Developmental Test o f V i s u a l P e r c e p t i o n does provide a v a r i e t y  of s u b t e s t s which may o f f e r t h e c l i n i c i a n  and the experimenter more scope and a wider range of i n f o r m a t i o n . There are many components of v i s u a l p e r c e p t i o n i n v o l v e d i n t h e Peabody t e s t as w e l l as i n the F r o s t i g and i t i s very  difficult  to "tease o u t " t h e p e r c e p t u a l o r g a n i z a t i o n from the i n t e l l e c t u a l o r g a n i z a t i o n of any i n d i v i d u a l s u b j e c t . study which found  The e a r l i e r r e p o r t e d  a n o n - s i g n i f i c a n t c o r r e l a t i o n between t h e  Goodenough Draw a Man t e s t and the F r o s t i g Developmental Test of V i s u a l P e r c e p t i o n adds a new q u e s t i o n when compared with the r e s u l t s of t h i s study.  Although  these two instruments  share the  f a c t o r o f motor e x p r e s s i o n , they a p p a r e n t l y do not measure the same u n d e r l y i n g a r e a s .  F u r t h e r r e s e a r c h i n c o r r e l a t i n g the  F r o s t i g t e s t w i t h other t e s t s o f i n t e l l e c t u a l performance i s needed i n order t o separate the more p u r e l y p e r c e p t u a l  aspects  of t h i s t e s t from i t s more g l o b a l aspects as a measure of general i n t e l l e c t u a l f u n c t i o n i n g . G e n e r a l l y , t h i s study found  s u f f i c i e n t l y high  reliabi-  l i t i e s i n the t e s t and s u b t e s t s t o warrant r a n k i n g the t e s t as a c o n s i s t e n t measuring d e v i c e .  The t h e o r e t i c a l and p r a c t i c a l  problems s t i l l t o be explored are numerous.  P r e c i s e l y what t h e  -26t e s t measures, and i f i t measures what i t p u r p o r t s t o assess, are areas r e q u i r i n g f u r t h e r i n v e s t i g a t i o n and r e s e a r c h .  -27Summary and  Conclusions  This study i n v e s t i g a t e d the r e l i a b i l i t y  of the F r o s t i g  Developmental Test of V i s u a l P e r c e p t i o n , the r e l i a b i l i t y the i n d i v i d u a l subtests  and t h e c o r r e l a t i o n b e t w e e n t h e F r o s t i g  t e s t and t h e Peabody P i c t u r e V o c a b u l a r y t e s t . s u b j e c t s f r o m an i n s t i t u t i o n f o r r e t a r d e d  Sixty retarded  c h i l d r e n were u s e d .  The t e s t - r e t e s t m e t h o d o f a s s e s s i n g r e l i a b i l i t y Subgroupings  of  was e m p l o y e d .  o f t h e s u b j e c t s w e r e e s t a b l i s h e d on t h e b a s i s o f  b o t h m e n t a l age and c h r o n o l o g i c a l a g e . The r e s u l t s i n d i c a t e t h a t t h e F r o s t i g  Developmental  Test of V i s u a l P e r c e p t i o n i s a g e n e r a l l y r e l i a b l e instrument and t h a t t h e s u b t e s t s reliability.  show v a r y i n g d e g r e e s o f t e s t - r e t e s t  Eye-Motor C o o r d i n a t i o n  and F o r m C o n s t a n c y a r e  t w o o f t h e s u b t e s t s w h i c h show t h e l e a s t amount  of  stability  w i t h t h i s p o p u l a t i o n and t h i s f a c t o r o f u n r e l i a b i l i t y i s e v i d e n t t h r o u g h o u t t h e s u b g r o u p i n g s o f c h r o n o l o g i c a l and mental age.  -28REFERENCES Anastasi,  Anne. P s y c h o l o g i c a l t e s t i n g . New  Company, Baroff,  York: The  MacMillan  1957.  G. S. Bender - G e s t a l t visuo-motor f u n c t i o n i n g mental deficiency.  Amer. J . ment. D e f i c . , 1957,  Bensberg G. J . Performance of b r a i n - i n j u r e d and  61,  753  16,  61 -  Clarke,  Bener G e s t a l t : an o b j e c t i v e  v a l i d i t y data. J . c l i n . P s y c h o l .  1948,  s c o r i n g method 4, 1 -  Anne., & C l a r k e , A. B. Mental d e f i c i e n c y . The outlook . London: Methuen and  Corah, N. L.,  Psychol.  64.  B i l l i n g s l e a , F. Y. The and  Company,  27.  changing  1958.  & Powell, Barbara, J . A. f a c t o r a n a l y t i c study  of the F r o s t i g Developmental Test P e r c e p t . mot.  Skills.,  1963,  16,  of V i s u a l 59 -  Perception.  63  Chronbach, L. J . E s s e n t i a l s of p s y c h o l o g i c a l t e s t i n g . New Harper and  Brothers,  York: R i n e h a r t and  Feldman, I . J . P s y c h o l o g i c a l  York:  I960.  Edwards, A. L. S t a t i s t i c a l methods f o r the b e h a v i o u r a l New  762  f a m i l i a l mental  d e f e c t i v e s on Bender G e s t a l t t e s t . J . c o n s u l t . 1952,  -  Company,  sciences.  1954.  d i f f e r e n c e s among moron  and  b o r d e r l i n e mental d e f e c t i v e s as a f u n c t i o n of e t i o l o g y and 1953,  v i s u a l - m o t o r f u n c t i o n i n g . Amer. J . ment. D e f i c . 57,  434  F r o s t i g , Marianne. The  -  494. Marianne F r o s t i g Developmental Test  Visual Perception.  Third edition.  Copyright  a v a i l a b l e from author. 7257 Melrose Avenue, Los 46,  California.  of  1961, Angeles,  -29F r o s t i g , Marianne., L e f e v e r , John, R. B. for  A developmental t e s t of v i s u a l  perception  e v a l u a t i n g normal and n e u r o l o g i c a l l y handicapped  children. Gallagher,  D., Welty and W h i t t l e s e y ,  Percept,  mot. S k i l l s .  1961, 12, 383 - 394.  J . J . Acomparison of b r a i n - i n j u r e d and non-brain  i n j u r e d mentally  retarded  c h i l d r e n on s e v e r a l  i c a l variables.  Momgr. Soc. Res. C h i l d Devel.  psycholog1957, 22.  No.2. Gobetz, W. A. A q u a n t i f i c a t i o n , s t a n d a r d i z a t i o n , and v a l i d a t i o n of the Bender G e s t a l t t e s t on normla and n e u r o t i c adults.  P s y c h o l . Monogr. 1953, 67, No. 2.  G o l d s t e i n , K. & Sheerer, M. A b s t r a c t An experimental  and concrete  study w i t h s p e c i a l t e s t s .  behaviour. Psychol.  Monogr. 1941, 53, No. 2. Halstead,  W. C. P r e l i m i n a r y a n a l y s i s of grouping behaviour i n  patients with  c e r e b r a l i n j u r y by methods of e q u i v a l e n t  and non-equivalent 96,  stimuli.  Amer. J . P s y c h i a t . 1940,  1263 - 1294.  Hebb, D. 0, The o r g a n i z a t i o n of b e h a v i o u r . A n e u r o l o p s y c h o l o g i c a l t h e o r y . New York:  John W i l e y and Sons, 1949.  Hutt, M. L. The use of p r o j e c t i v e methods of p e r s o n a l i t y measurement i n army medical i n s t a l l a t i o n s . J . c l i n . P s y c h o l . 1945, 1, 134 - 140. Masland, R. L. Sarason, S. B., and Gladwinn T. Mental subnormality,  b i o l o g i c a l , p s y c h o l o g i c a l and c u l t u r a l f a c t o r s .  New York: B a s i c Books, 1958.  -30Meyer, V. C r i t i q u e of p s y c h o l o g i c a l  approaches t o b r a i n  damage. J . ment. S c i . , 1957, 103, 80 - 10.9. Pascal,. G. R., & S u t t e l l , B. J . New York: Strauss,  The Bender G e s t a l t  test.  Grune and S t r a t t o n , 1951.  A. A., & Lehtinen,  L. E . Psychopathology and  e d u c a t i o n of the b r a i n i n j u r e d c h i l d . New York: Grune and S t r a t t o n , 1947. Strauss,  A. A., & Kephart, N. C. Psychopathology and education  of t h e b r a i n i n j u r e d c h i l d .  V o l 11. New York:  Grune  and S t r a t t o n , 1955. T e c h n i c a l recommendations f o r p s y c h o l o g i c a l t e s t s and d i a g n o s t i c techniques.  Psychol.  Werner, H., & S t r a u s s ,  A. A.  Bull.  1954, 51, No. 2. Part 2.  Causal f a c t o r s i n low performance.  Amer. J . Ment. D e f i c . 1940 - 1941, 45, 213 - 218. Wortis, J .  A note on the concept of the " B r a i n i n j u r e d C h i l d " .  Amer. J . ment-. D e f i c . 1956, 61, 204 - 206 Yates, A. J . V a l i d i t y damage.  o f some p s y c h o l o g i c a l t e s t s of b r a i n  Psychol.  B u l l . 1954, 51, 359 - 379.  Appendix 1 Test-Retest  scores of Age  Group 11 - 13 I n c l u d i n g "High" and "Low"  Subjects  149 147  9 10  F F F F F M M M M M  1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10  F F F F F M M M M M  145 146 162 141 154 140 149 153 135 165  1 2  "High"  3 4  5  6 7  8  "Low"  Mos. CA.  167 164 137 159 164  158 152 135  Total  1  2  3  4  5  14  13 11  71  3 9 0 9 3 3  5 8 4 5 8 7 2 8 6 6  4  14 11  9 10 6 3 9 9 3 8 5 7  4 4 5 6 1 6 4 1  45 55 29 29 38 48 13 41 32 28  69 38 36 36 65 62 65 62 61 67  20 9 9 7 20 2 17 17 14 13  1 2 2 2 8 0 9 10 10 7  1 4 2 2 3 0 5 2 6 3  5 2 2 1 6 2 6 5 6 5  0 0 1 0 4 0 4 7 6 6  27 17 16 12 41 4 41 41 42 34  94 85 87 92 71  80  78 107 78  18 12 17 13 17 7 10  3 0  S u b t e s t s  Scoi  1  2  3  4  5  Tot*  18  9 10  13 14 0  4 3  5 8 5 6 8 7 2 8 6 6  5 7 4 4 7 6 1 7 4 3  50 56 31 34 41 43 11 47 31 33  16 3 2 9 8 2 2 9 15 9 6 1 18 8 17 9 11 10 15 10  2 4 2 1 8 0 6 0 7 4  5 2 2 1 6 1 4 6 7 7  0 1 1 1 4 0 4 7 6 7  26 18 15 14 42 8 40 39 41 43  Scores  S u b t e s t s M.A.  Levels  Retest  Test Sex  Mental Age  8  17 13 11 12 14 3 13 12 12  .9  8 8 10 4 9 5 9  5 6 6 1 10  Appendix 11 Test-Retest scores of Age  Group 14 - 16 I n c l u d i n g "High" and  Test M  Subjects  s  S u b t e s t s  Scores  CA*.  M.A.  1  2  3  4  5 Total  171 184 171 176 171 183 188 179 185 168  75 80 92 78 97 85 94 80 92 90  20 16 17 18 14 15 17 17 11 9  10 7 6 6 1 10 10 7 9 7  3 0 3 6 0 1 6 12 6 4  6 6 5 1 5 8 9 8 6 5  7 4 6 2 0 7  10  F F F F F M M M M M  1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10  F F F F F M M M M M  182 189 181 187 182 188 187 184 191 199  59 75 69 49 59 56 49 55 71 67  10 23 16 16 14 8 8 10 13 9  4 6 8 7 3 4 1 2 10 1  0 3 2 0 6 1 1 2 0 1  5 5 3 3 5 3 0 4 6 2  6 3 0 3 0 0 1 0 5 1  9  Mental Age  Levels  Retest  Sex  1 2 3 4 "High" 5 6 7 8  "Low"  o  "Low"  9  7 5 4  46 33 37 33 20 41 51 51 37 29  25  40 29 29 28  16 11 18 34 14  S u b t e s t s  Scores  1  2  3  4  5  Total  16 9 14 16 17 20 15 16 16 10  10 5 8 7 1 10 10 10 9 7  5 1 10 2 0 2 11 15 6 4  7 6 5 4 5 7 7 3 5 5  7 6 5 3 0 7 7 6 4 4  12 18 12 16 14 9 6 10 16 9  7 . 5 5 7 4 4 1 3 10 2  4 3 2 3 4 2 2 0 8 2  5 5 4 6 3 2 1 5 8 1  6 3 0 3 2 0 1 1 5 1  45 27 42 32  23 46 50 55 40 30  34 34 23 35 27 17 11 19 47 15  Appendix Test-Retest scores of Age  Subjects  "High"  Sex  Test S u b t e s t s 1  2  3  4  5  218 . 21? 220 227 204 216 210 225 228 203  120 103 107 149 120 149 124 130 97 145  21 19 23 15 18 21 11 16 16 16  9 7 10 9 10 8 5 10 8 9  7 12 11 5 5 12 3 7 0 16  8 6 8 6 6 6 6 8 7 7  7 6 7 5 7 7 3 6 5 4  35 67 85 90 85 61 80 71 87 73  22 15 10 23 10 15 7 16 17 18  6 9 5 8 4 9 9 9 7 9  7 6 0 0 1 4 5 12 7 12  4 7 4 6 3 4 6 6 7 8  7 7 1 4 3 4 6 7 7 7  1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10  F 207 F 230 F 207 F 213 F 214 M 204 M 221 M 221 M ' 207 M 209  Total  Mental Age  Levels  Retest  Scores  M.A.  6 7 8 9 10  5  Group 1 7 - 1 9 I n c l u d i n g "High" and "Low"  Mos. C.A.  F F F F F M M M M M  1 2 3 4  111  S u b t e s t  s  SCOJ  1  2  •3  4  5  Tot;  52 50 59 40 46 54 28 47 36 52  17 16 24 7 11 20 15 20 17 10  10 7 10 9 9 9 8 10 9 10  4 8 11 3 7 11 5 9 1 10  8 7 8 7 6 8 4 8 8 7  7 5 7 5 6 7 4 6 6 7  46 43 60 31 39 55 36 53 41 44  46 44 20 41 21 36 33 50 45 54  18 14 13 23 9 14 12 23 17 25  7 10 5 10 4 10 8 9 10 10  3 4 0 6 0 1 4 9 8 11  5 8 4 6 6 5 6 7 7 8  6 7 2 3 2 5 6 7 7 7  39 43 24 48 21 35 36 55 49 61  I  

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.831.1-0105791/manifest

Comment

Related Items