Open Collections

UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

The personality-perception problem : an investigation of the relationship between security and insecurity… Speed, Richard Henry 1952

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

Item Metadata

Download

Media
831-UBC_1952_A8 S6 P3.pdf [ 4.54MB ]
Metadata
JSON: 831-1.0106556.json
JSON-LD: 831-1.0106556-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 831-1.0106556-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 831-1.0106556-rdf.json
Turtle: 831-1.0106556-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 831-1.0106556-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 831-1.0106556-source.json
Full Text
831-1.0106556-fulltext.txt
Citation
831-1.0106556.ris

Full Text

THE PERSONALITY-PERCEPTION PROBLEM; AN INVESTIGATION OF THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN  SECURITY AND INSECURITY AND VISUAL  PERCEPTUAL CLOSURE by RICHARD HENRY SPEED A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARTS i n the Department of PHILOSOPHY AND PSYCHOLOGY We accept t h i s thesis as conforming to the standard required from candidates for the degree of MASTER OF ARTS Members of the Department of Philosophy and Psychology THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA October, 1952 THE PERSONALITY-PERCEPTION PROBLEM: AN INVESTIGATION OF THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN SECURITY AND INSECURITY AND VISUAL PERCEPTUAL CLOSURE Abstract The problem In t h i s thesis developed out of a consideration of the r e l a t i o n s h i p between personality and perception, and p a r t i c u l a r l y , a consideration of how an important autochthonous determinant of perception might be d i f f e r e n t i a l l y affected when the perceptual system i s serving the purposes of the organism generally. Perception has been considered as a functional process with i t s main experiential and autochthonous determinants and i t has been suggested that both types of determinants are instrumental i n bringing the perceptual process within the o v e r a l l consistency of organismic function. The experiment under-taken i n t h i s thesis i s an attempt to examine one part of t h i s last-mentioned proposition, namely, that an autochthonous.determinant w i l l d i f f e r e n t i a l l y contribute to perceptual functioning as the "Anschauung" or 'personality s t y l e ' of the organism varies. The personality a t t r i b u t e Security-Insecurity proposed by A.H. Maslow was chosen as one variable for t h i s study. I t was chosen because that author's t h e o r e t i c a l approach to the problem of personality functioning seemed consistent with a view of 'the organism as a whole', as w e l l as with a view of the perceptual and other processes acting i n accord with the c h a r a c t e r i s t i c 'style of organismic functioning. Maslow has stated that an 'insecure' person w i l l emote, think, perceive, and i n every way function ^ insecurely. In addition to the relevance of t h i s theoretical approach, Maslow devised a questionnaire type Security-Insecurity Test which, he b e l i e v e s s e r v e s to i d e n t i f y those individuals who are r e l a t i v e l y 'secure' and 'insecure'. This test was consequently available to use as the instrument for measuring the personality variable i n t h i s experiment. The autochthonous perceptual determinant, ' v i s u a l perceptual closure', was chosen for t h i s study as i t was i d e n t i f i e d by L.L. Thurstone as being one of the most important of the perceptual determinants. Moreover, i n his study where he i d e n t i f i e d closure and other variables, Thurstone suggested that the c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of the person as a whole might be inferred from the dynamics of one these functions. This i s i n accord with Maslow's above stated view. Bruner and Postman also postulate a r e l a t i o n s h i p between personality functioning and the determinant 'closure'. When Thurstone i d e n t i f i e d 'closure* he did so on the basis of tests which measure that a b i l i t y . Measuring instruments for the perceptual variable were consequently available. The Gottschaldt Figures Test was used here together with the Mooney Closure Test. Though t h i s second test was not used by Thurstone, i t i s derived mainly from the Street Gestalt Completion Test which he did use. The Gottschaldt and the Mooney tests served as separate measures of the perceptual variable i n t h i s experiment. The experiment consisted of a test of the hypothesis that 'insecure* subjects would have impaired closure a b i l i t y as compared with 'secure' subjects. Introductory psychology students at U.B.C. were tested and the relationshipsbetween t h e i r 'insecurity' and 'closure' scores were determined. This was done, f i r s t l y , by fi n d i n g i n t e r c o r r e l a t i o n s (Pearson Product-Moment T r r ) j and secondly, by determining the differences between the means of closure test scores of matched 'secure' and 'insecure' groups. The hypothesis was not supported by the data obtained i n either of these experimental designs. ACKNOWLEDGMENT The writer i s indebted to Professor E.I. Signori for h e l p f u l c r i t i c i s m and advice; to Professor E.S.W. Belyea for assistance i n obtaining and reproducing Mooney and Gottschaldt Test materials; and to those students of the 1 9 5 1 - 5 2 Sect.I Psychology 1 0 0 Class, who served as the experimental subjects. i i i TABLE OF CONTENTS Chapter I I I I I I INTRODUCTION AND STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM 1 THEORETICAL BACKGROUND AND REVIEW OF RELATED RESEARCH 5 A. Autochthonous Determinants of Perception B. The Experimental Variables and t h e i r Measures 14 '1. Closure 14 2. Security-Insecurity 20 AN EXPERIMENTAL TEST OF THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN SECURITY-INSECURITY AND VISUAL PERCEPTUAL CLOSURE 23 A. Hypothesis 28* B. The Experimental Subjects 29 C. The Experimental Materials {Description; Administration and Scoring Procedures) 29 1. The Maslow Security-Insecurity 2. The Gottschaldt Figures Test 3 2 Test 2 9 3 . The Mooney Closure Test 3 5 4. The Achievement Test (Psych, 100 Test) 3 6 i v TABLE OF CONTENTS (Contd.) Chapter Page I I I D. The Experimental Design 36 E. The Experimental Procedure 3 7 F. The Data and thei r Treatment 1+6 G. Discussion of Results 50 H. Experimental Summary and Conclusions 53 IV . GENERAL SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS 55 V. IMPLICATIONS FOR FUTURE RESEARCH 57 BIBLIOGRAPHY 5 9 APPENDICES 6 5 A. The Maslow Security-Insecurity Test 6 5 B. The Gottschaldt Figures Test 63 C. The Scoring Tables and Scoring Procedure used with the Gottschaldt Figures Test 75 D. The Administration Procedure used with the Gottschaldt Figures Test 7 8 E. The Mooney Closure Test Scoring Booklet 8 4 F. The Raw Data for a l l the Experimental Subjects 8 7 G. The Data for the Two Matched Groups 9 1 V FIGURES AND TABLES Figure Page 1 D i s t r i b u t i o n of scores on the S - I Test ( i n i t i a l administration, N = 2 6 7 ) 39 II D i s t r i b u t i o n of S - I scores for Males and Females i n the o r i g i n a l group, (N <= 2 o 7 ) 40 III D i s t r i b u t i o n of scores on the S - I test (experimental group, N = 160) 42 IV D i s t r i b u t i o n of scores f o r Males and Females i n the experimental group, (N 8 5 160) 43 Table I Correlation of S - I t e s t with four other personality questionnaires. (Social personality inventory: Thurstone neurotic inventory: Bernreuter neurotic tendency: A l l p o r t A - S scale) 2 4 II Correlations between the S - I t e s t (Insecurity scores) and M.M.P.I. twelve subscales; Otis intermediate I.Q.; High school grade average; Sim's score card (Socio-economic status.) 25 I I I Scores of Male and Female subjects on S - I t e s t (N - 26*7) 41 IV Scores of Male and Female subjects on S - I test (N - 160) 44 V The experimental group te s t r e s u l t s 47 VI . Correlations between variables 4# - / VII The data used i n the determination of the significance of the differences between the means of the matched groups 49 CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION AND STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM tpersonality and Perception 1 i s one of the major areas of interest f or contemporary psychology. Blake and Ramsey's symposium, 'Perception: An Approach to Personality' ( 6 ) , and Abt and Bellak's symposium, 'Projective Psychology' ( 2 ) , are examples of two recent publications which r e f l e c t t h i s i n t e r e s t . In addition to these more formal works a vast amount of pe r i o d i c a l l i t e r a t u r e stemming from experimental and speculative studies has accumulated. •Personality and Perception* i s a name for an extremely complex problem area. T r a d i t i o n a l l y , personality theory has been a d i s c i p l i n e considered apart from perceptual theory though the two systems have been brought together i n the theory of projective t e s t i n g and i n personality theory that i s rooted i n phenomenology. Over the past few years, however, there has been an increasing tendency to describe perception i n functional terms. I t has been referred to as a 2 purposive, need-directed process ( 5 4 , P » 7 ) , and today, some theorists would describe an individual's t o t a l functioning i n terms of perception. Bellak for instance, claims that, the f i e l d of the psychology of personality i s constituted by the nature of perceptions and t h e i r i n t e r a c t i o n (3, p . 1 1 ) . Contemporary perception theory, i n assuming a behavioral orientation, has inherited from psychology the age old stru c t u r a l - f u n c t i o n a l problem. This i s expressed i n the descriptions of perception which r e f e r to two kinds of determinants, the experiential and the autochthonous ( 5 ) ( 1 5 ) ( 2 9 ) ( 4 5 ) . In any theory i n which perception i s considered to be a functional process, however, i t eventually becomes necessary to explain changes i n that function i n terms of the changes that occur i n i t s determinants. I t i s stated, for instance, that through perception we construct a world i n which sur v i v a l and adjustment are possible, and defend against a world that i s threatening, d i s t r a c t i n g , or disruptive ( 1 2 , p . l 6 0 ) . I t i s . consequently suggested that when deprivation occurs the heightened 'need' (an expe r i e n t i a l determinant) may be instrumental i n f a c i l i t a t i n g perceptual recognition ( 1 5 ) ; and that i n perceptual defence, the non-operation of 'closure' (an autochthonous determinant) may r e s u l t i n the impairment of perceptual recognition (16, p.2g). I t i s at t h i s l e v e l of description that theories of perceptual functioning can be subjected to experimental t e s t . Both the above stated propositions can be put to experimental t e s t and of la t e a number of studies dealing with the effects^of e x p e r i e n t i a l determinants of perception have been published. However, such has not been the case for autochthonous, determinants of perception. In t h i s study, therefore an attempt was made to devise an experiment" that would tes t for the re l a t i o n s h i p suggested i n the statement concerning autochthonous determinants and perceptual defence?..-. To rephrase that statement, i t has been suggested that 'closure' a b i l i t y may be reduced when the perceputal system functions as an instrument of defence for the organism. For the purposes of t h i s study a condition of perceptual defence was considered an accompaniment of the personality state described by A.H. Maslow with h i s term 'insecurity' (36) (3 9 ) . In the itemized d e f i n i t i o n of the concept the implication i s carried that one who i s 'insecure' as described w i l l l i k e l y perceive h i s world as *to be defended against*. The 'closure 1 variable i n t h i s study was considered to be measured by tests i d e n t i f i e d by L.L. Thurstone ( 5 6 ) . He found the Gottschaldt Figures Test and incomplete picture material (represented here by the Mooney Closure Test) to be measures of an a b i l i t y he termed 'speed and strength of perceptual closure'. The experiment undertaken i n t h i s study, consequently, required the i d e n t i f i c a t i o n of degree of 'insecurity' and l e v e l of 'closure' a b i l i t y , of subjects i n an experimental group, and the determination of the r e l a t i o n s h i p pertaining between these two variables. The postulated r e l a t i o n s h i p was that high degree of insec u r i t y would be related to low closure a b i l i t y . CHAPTER I I THEORETICAL BACKGROUND AND REVIEW OF RELATED RESEARCH AUTOCHTHONOUS DETERMINANTS OF PERCEPTION The nature and the effects of autochthonous determinants of perception are not accurately known. Few psychologists i f any would argue with Morgan's statement that perception has i t s substrate i n structure (45, p.25). However, when t h e o r i s t s introduce such notions as ' i n t r i n s i c function' of the nervous system in.general, (5, p.12), and of the perceptual system i n p a r t i c u l a r , (11, p.246), then considerable argument ensues. Gestalt t h e o r i s t s have t r a d i t i o n a l l y been concerned with configural tendencies which operate to organize a stimulus f i e l d and with the possible l i k e tendencies that operate i n an i n d i v i d u a l to organize a perceptual f i e l d (11, p.246), (10, p.681). This has been expressed i n the formulation of the Gestalt laws of organization which are used both to describe the production of a stimulus figure and the phenomenon of gaining a perception of that f i g u r e . T r a d i t i o n a l l y , G e s t a l t i s t s have been concerned with the uniqueness of a figure or object. The extreme Gestalt p o s i t i o n would maintain that meaning i s given immediately i n a phenomenon (11, p.19), while opponents of t h i s view would prefer to explain the meaning of a phenomenon i n a s s o c i a t i o n i s t i c terms (28, p .3 2 - 3 3 , 101). This l a t t e r view i s supported by Hebb, and elaborated i n his theory of how perceptions of objects are learned. Generally, however, some compromise position i s worked out which gives autochthonous determinants a primary r o l e to play i n the determining of the perceptual product. Perhaps the best evidence f o r autochthonous determinants i n perception which at present e x i s t s i s gained from f a c t o r i a l studies of the process. Thurstone (56), i d e n t i f i e d eleven factors from an analysis of performance on numerous tests that involved perceptual functioning. The t e s t materials were primarily v i s u a l i n nature. The eleven factors he i d e n t i f i e d were the following : Factor A - 'Speed and strength of perceptual closure' - a b i l i t y to form a closure out of either an unorganized body of s t i m u l i (Street Gestalt Completion Test) or an organized body of s t i m u l i (Gottschaldt Figures Test). Factor B -Factor C -Factor D -Factor E -Factor F -Factor G -Factor H -Factor J -Factor K -Factor L •-A b i l i t y to work with o p t i c a l i l l u s i o n s i n geometric designs. Reaction time. A b i l i t y to alternate when confronted with an ambiguous s i t u a t i o n . A b i l i t y to manipulate two configurations simultaneously or i n succession. Speed of perception ( a b i l i t y d i s t i n c t from reaction time ).. Variance that i s common to the P.M.A. Variance related to 'form' vs. •color' response dominance on Rorschach. Speed of judgement ( d i s t i n c t from reaction time and speed of perception). Variance related to Rorschach performance. Residual factor (no interpretation) Thurstone's study yielded many int e r e s t i n g r e s u l t s . Closure, Factor 'A', was found to be i n h i b i t e d by a strong given configuration and appeared to be the more heavily involved the more ir r e l e v a n t the organization of the perceptual f i e l d became f o r the task 8 at hand ( 5 6 , p . 1 0 6 ) . Also, those subjects who had a high rate of alternation of ambiguous presentations, Factor 'D', tended to f i n d meaningful closures i n a r e l a t i v e l y short time ( 5 6 , p.109). Factor »A' and Factor 'E', the 'manipulation of two configurations f a c t o r ' , were thought to be the most important. Thurstone ca l l e d Factor 'E* a ' f l e x i b i l i t y f a c t o r ' and t h i s was wel l represented i n reasoning t e s t s , as well as i n a simple motor-coordination test ( 5 6 , p. 1 1 9 ) . Five of the factors were concerned with the speed of d i f f e r e n t functions, and Factors 'C, 'F', and ' J', represented the speed of distinguishable perceptual functions - considered to be distinguishable i n terms of the amount of central p a r t i c i p a t i o n involved i n the task ( 5 6 , p.118). Thurstone drew the general conclusion from h i s study that the i d e n t i f i e d perceptual a b i l i t i e s are primarily uncorrelated, and that the perceptual factors describe a domain that i s e s s e n t i a l l y independent of that described by h i s postulated Primary Mental A b i l i t i e s ( 5 6 , p.122). The significance of Thurstone's r e s u l t s are most d i f f i c u l t to evaluate. I t has been suggested that a multiple factor description such as Thurstone has proposed f o r perception stems from preferences and emphases applied i n the analysis of his data. Given other preferences and emphases, yet no deviation from accurate mathematical procedure, a description i n terms of a general factor and group factors^ could r e s u l t ( 6 0 , p . 1 2 9 - 1 3 0 ) . P h i l i p Vernon claims that t h i s l a t t e r description i s to be preferred ( 6 0 , p. 1 3 1 - 1 3 5 ) . Vernon also states that Thurstone's Factor 'A1, perceptual closure, i s measured by several 'k' t e s t s (general s p a t i a l a b i l i t y t e s t s ) , and that Factor ' E ' , : ' f l e x i b i l i t y i n manipulating c o n f l i c t i n g configurations i s probably the same as 'g' ( 6 0 , p.8 9 ) • However, M.D. Vernon, i n studying the perception of various materials presented t a c h i s t o s c o p i c a l l y , found two main a b i l i t i e s which could be si m i l a r to Thurstone's Factors 'A' and 'E'. She suggests that. Factor 'A' i s analogous to the perception of pure shape and discrimination of shape d e t a i l , and that Factor 'E' i s analogous to the a b i l i t y to manipulate perceptual material - t h i s related to I.Q. - which i s necessary to extract the meaningful d e t a i l s and ch a r a c t e r i s t i c s i n the int e r p r e t a t i o n of pictures etc. ( 5 9 , p .8 7 ) . I t seems that i t would be safe to summarize the evidence contributed by these analyses of perceptual behavior by saying that at least two perceptual a b i l i t i e s have been 1G te n t a t i v e l y i d e n t i f i e d , these corresponding to Thurstone*s Factors 'A1 and 'E'. Experimental study of autochthonous determinants of perception has yielded l i t t l e evidence that i s conclusive. Bobbitt, using incomplete t r i a n g l e s as s t i m u l i i n an experimental i n v e s t i g a t i o n of closure, drew the conclusion that closure i s a threshold function not affected by experience with the s t i m u l i and that i t i s best explained i n Gestalt terms ( 9 , p .2 9 2 ) . Bruner and Goodman have referred to closure as a highly predictable property of the central nervous system (15, p . 3 5 ) . Leeper described the process of viewing incomplete figures as a process of c o n f l i c t and i n t e r a c t i o n In the nervous system between the 'spontaneous organizing f a c t o r s ' and the redintegrative patterns, with t h e i r own tendencies of stress and closure ( 3 3 , p . 6 0 ) . Woodworth described the same 'unfamiliar stimulus' s i t u a t i o n as one which educes t r i a l and check behavior i n which one 'meaningful organization' i s so s a t i s f y i n g that i t serves as reinforcement to produce learning of the- 'figure' i n a single t r i a l ( 6 6 , p . 1 2 3 ) . Sheehan investigated the re l a t i o n s h i p between closure a b i l i t y and other perceptual a b i l i t i e s - seemingly neutral ones. He found an inverse r e l a t i o n s h i p between accuracy judgments i n shape, size;and whiteness perception, 11 and resourcefulness on the Gestalt Completion Test ( 5 2 , p . 9 3 ) . This suggests that observers who are more variable i n t h e i r phenomenal aspects tend to have greater f a c i l i t y i n the categorical i d e n t i f i c a t i o n of objects on the basis of r e l a t i v e l y incomplete sensory data. I t i s i n t e r e s t i n g to speculate on the r e l a t i o n -ship of t h i s Variableness' to the a b i l i t i e s that Thurstone considered as underlying his ' f l e x i b i l i t y ' Factor »Ef - 'manipulation of two configurations' (reasoning), and his Factor »D' - ' a b i l i t y to alternate'. Factor 'E', i t was noted,.,was wel l represented i n a simple motor co-ordination t e s t . The idea suggested here i s one that i s often included under the term ' r i g i d i t y ' . However, i n t h i s context, i t i s not a 'cognitive r i g i d i t y ' or a 'perceptual r i g i d i t y ' - as conventionally termed. Rather, i t i s a sty l e of organismic behavior generally. The idea that a 'way of perceiving' i s r e l a t e d to a 'type of person' was suggested by Thurstone ( 5 6 ) . He made the following statement : The dynamics of perception are not i s o l a t e d , and they are so related that some c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of the person as a whole might be inf e r r e d from the dynamics of one of these functions. ( 5 6 , p.3 ) • Other investigators lend support to t h i s statement. K l e i n found that people who 'lag' i n the report of a stimulus change when i t i s brought about gradually, d i f f e r from those who do not ' l a g 1 i n that the former group tend to be 'self-inward' going while the l a t t e r group tend to be 'self-outward' going ( 3 0 , p . 3 3 7 ) . Witkin, from two studies, ( 6 2 ) and ( 6 3 ) , concluded that perceptual tendencies are consistent and pervasive c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of an individual's functioning. The evidence here i s meagre but a r e l a t i o n s h i p between 'the person as a whole' and his way of perceiving i s d e f i n i t e l y suggested. There are i n d i v i d u a l differences i n the contributions autochthonous determinants make to the perceptual behavior of i n d i v i d u a l s . Score d i s t r i b u t i o n s on t e s t s of perceptual a b i l i t y support t h i s while Hilgard states that inherited structure determines both species differences i n perceiving and some i n d i v i d u a l differences within the species (29; p . 9 5 ) . V e r v i l l e and Cameron, however, using incomplete pictures, found that there were some s l i g h t age and sex differences i n a b i l i t y to handle t h i s perceptual task. Young men and women, older men, and older women, taken as groups, exhibited d i f f e r e n t a b i l i t y . The young people were the most able, the older men next, and the older women least able, ( 5 7 ) . This suggests that the q u a l i t y of contribution of autochthonous determinants may change for the i n d i v i d u a l himself. Blake 1 3 states t h i s point of view i n the following quotation : From b i r t h the endowed perceptive apparatus i s s l i g h t l y modified by each stimulus d e f i n i t i o n i t makes. The physical perceptive structure i t s e l f i s altered and hence i s set to perceive i n a s l i g h t l y d i f f e r e n t way. (5, p.12). Blake's statement of 'change', however, covers more than a 'natural decline of a b i l i t y ' that may be referred to above. "Altered and hence i s set to perceive i n a s l i g h t l y d i f f e r e n t way" brings i n the idea again of the functioning organism a f f e c t i n g the s t r u c t u r a l basis of that functioning. In the realm of 'mental i l l n e s s ' t h i s p o s s i b i l i t y has been considered. P h i l i p Vernon states that perceptual factors may be d i f f e r e n t i a l l y affected i n d i f f e r e n t types of mental i l l n e s s ( 6 0 , p.90). This idea i s similar to Bender's notion of the impairment of ' v i s u a l motor gestalt function' i n serious personality disorganization ( 4 ) . However, there are no d i r e c t statements to the effect that mild disturbances of personality at the neurotic l e v e l can noticeably e f f e c t the autochthonous determinants of perception. In f a c t Woltmann ( 6 4 , p.3 4 7 - 8 ) ,and Vernon ( 6 0 , p.90),claim that such could not occur or i s doubtful. Nevertheless, t h i s r e l a t i o n s h i p i s the one investigated i n t h i s t h e s i s . The writer believes that there i s enough speculation and difference of opinion extant to j u s t i f y such an i n v e s t i g a t i o n . THE EXPERIMENTAL VARIABLES AND THEIR MEASURES CLOSURE The phenomenon of 'closure' i s considered to be one of the most important of the autochthonous determinants of perception (16) (56). For t h i s reason i t was chosen as an experimental variable for t h i s study. The Gestalt School of Psychology has emphasized the importance of the phenomenon of closure i n perceptual a c t i v i t y and has defined the phenomenon as a special case of the law of Pragnanz. This school of thought assumes closure to be a r e s u l t of the general tendency of the energies involved i n a perception to resolve toward a state of equilibrium. However, wider and more varied d e f i n i t i o n s of the phenomenon have stated and i n summary of them Bobbitt says : rt... i n general, 'closure' has been applied to any psychological phenomenon i n which any condition of incompleteness, either i n the stimulus f i e l d or i n some phase of the organism's a c t i v i t i e s , creates a tendency to overcome t h i s incompleteness by perceptual reorganization, by a combination of two or more di f f e r e n t experiences or by some overt a c t i v i t y of the organism. As applied to perception, the term may be defined as a tendency on the part of the organism perceptually to complete stimulus presentations which are physi c a l l y incomplete. This statement does not mean that the missing parts of, say, a geometric form, are a c t u a l l y seen, but merely that the parts are organized as belonging to a complete figure and that they represent, as such, a more nearly stable organization than they would represent i f separately organized". (9» p .2 7 4 ) . Attempts have been made to describe the 'closure' phenomenon after experimental investigation and analysis. Bobbitt conducted an experiment i n which he used various sizes of incomplete t r i a n g l e s as s t i m u l i . He drew the following conclusions : a) - 'Closure' appears, to follow a threshold -function which i s , i n part, apparently related to the size of the indicated apex of the incomplete t r i a n g l e ; b) - Experience with the experimental figures does not affect the 'closure' threshold; c) - The closure threshold i s very stable; d) - The experimental r e s u l t s can best be explained using Gestalt p r i n c i p l e s . ( 9 , p .2 9 2 ) . These conclusions contribute to the viewpoint that 'closure' i s a given perceptual determinant. I t i s not learned and i s of the same order of phenomena as the Gestalist's ' i n s i g h t * . Another explanation, however, i s advanced by Hebb (28). He proposes to explain Gestalt completion or 'closure' i n a s s o c i a t i o n i s t i c terms ( 2 8 , p.101). The experimental evidence here i s second-hand. Hebb reports, for example, that M. Senden i n Germany, i n t r a i n i n g a hitherto congenitally b l i n d patient given v i s i o n by an operation, to discriminate a t r i a n g l e from a square, found after t h i r t e e n days of practice that t h i s patient was unable to report form without counting corners one after another. However, Senden reported that i t seemed as though the recognition process was beginning already to be automatic, so that some day the judgement 'square' would be given with simple v i s i o n and t h i s could e a s i l y lead to the b e l i e f that form was always simultaneously given ( 2 8 , p .3 2 ) . This view-point i s quite opposed to the one r e l a t e d by Bobbitt, above. Here, what appears to be the operation of the given perceptual determinant 'closure' i s a r e c a l l by association s i t u a t i o n which has been made possible by a conventional learning process. The two above-mentioned points of view i l l u s t r a t e the difference of opinion which underlies the theory of perceptual closure. Hebb attempts a r e c o n c i l i a t i o n of the two extreme positions by st a t i n g that perceptual organization i s both the r e s u l t of innate organizational factors and learning (28, p . 2 4 ) . I f one holds to t h i s compromise point of view then i n any investigation of perceptual closure the meaning of the stimulus material to be closed would have to be considered. This would be p a r t i c u l a r l y important when measuring perceptual closure as test material may hold d i f f e r e n t learned meanings for d i f f e r e n t individuals tested. Thurstone's 'closure' f a c t o r , Factor 'A*, i s said by him to represent both 'speed and strength of perceptual closure' ( 5 6 , p.118), and s p e c i f i c a l l y , 'the a b i l i t y to form a perceptual closure against some d i s t r a c t i o n and to hold i t against that d i s t r a c t i o n ' ( 5 6 , p.109). He also thinks i t i s possible that Factor 'A' represents an a b i l i t y to r e s i s t a d i s t r a c t i n g Gestalt which may be either unorganized (as i n Street's Test), or organized i n a competing and irrelevant Gestalt (as i n the Gottschaldt Figures Test) ( 5 6 , p . 1 0 6 ) . Thurstone's d e f i n i t i o n of closure i s given mainly i n terms of the performance required on tests which measure that a b i l i t y , consequently, discussion of these tests w i l l throw further l i g h t on the meaning of closure. 18 The Gottschaldt Figures Test i s probably one of the best examples of a task i n which the subject must destroy a given Gestalt i n order to form another one ( 5 6 , p. 7 2 ) . The stimulus material i s a series of geometrical forms. Good performance requires that the subject be able to keep i n mind one or more given figures so that he can i d e n t i f y them r e a d i l y i n more complex fig u r e s . However, the test also measures Thurstone's Factor 'E' (reasoning) ( 5 6 , p.119). Good performance, consequently, depends on t h i s a b i l i t y too. Furthermore, i t was noted by Thurstone i n his study that males scored s l i g h t l y higher than females on the Gottschaldt Tests ( 5 6 , p.104). The Street Gestalt Completion Test i s the same type of test as the Mooney Closure Test (44, p . 1 2 9 ) . Both of these tests use incomplete pictures of objects as stimulus material. Street claims that his test 'measures a very s p e c i f i c capacity which i s probably involved i n the perceptual process and i t s u t i l i t y rests i n i t s a b i l i t y to reveal varying degrees of t h i s q u a l i t y i n subjects tested' ( 5 5 , p.3 2 ) . Thurstone found t h i s test to be not as adequate a measure of Factor 'A' as the Gottschaldt Test. He found i t measured 'quickness of closure' ( 5 6 , p .9 ) . 19 Actually, the test had i t s highest saturation i n Factor 'F' (speed of perception) and not the closure factor (56, p.112). What has been said about the Street Test probably can also be said about the Mooney Test. The l a t t e r test,, i t s authors claim, has Thurstone's Factor 'A' well represented i n i t (44, p.129); but i t i s probable that Factor 'F' i s also w e l l represented. The Mooney test was developed for use as a group or i n d i v i d u a l t e s t and i s regarded by the authors as an instrument which measures 'the f a c i l i t y with which in d i v i d u a l s can apprehend the s t r u c t u r a l implications of a, confused or incomplete v i s u a l configuration' (44, p.129). The authors d e f i n i t e l y have a 'Gestalt' bias i n t h e i r t h e o r e t i c a l approach to the closure problem. They claim that a b i l i t y to effect closures i s a d i s t i n c t i v e capacity possessed by individuals i n markedly diff e r e n t degrees, and that i t i s capable of straightforward measurement. Also, they say these closures appear to be instances of a form of simple insight at the perceptual l e v e l (44, p.133). In the o r i g i n a l administration of t h i s test the authors found that there were n e g l i g i b l e sex differences i n performance, and that there was l i t t l e resort to imaginative answers i n the event of not 'seeing' an object. They found also that the test revealed a r e l a t i v e l y high r e l i a b i l i t y (Kuder-Richardson;,r = .88l), and good discriminative capacity (44, p.15). SECURITY-INSECURITY The personality variable s e c u r i t y - i n s e c u r i t y , as defined by A.H. Maslow, was chosen f o r t h i s study because the t h e o r e t i c a l o r i e n t a t i o n of t h i s author seemed to be congruent with that underlying 'personality and perception' theory i n general ( 3 6 ) . Also, a test to measure degree of 'security' or 'insecurity' i s supplied by Maslow (39). According to A.H. Maslow, security feelings are a syndrome or 'psychological flavour', and 'Security' or 'Insecurity' i s a l a b e l f o r that p a r t i c u l a r aspect of wholeness that may be discerned i n the m u l t i p l i c i t y of pa r t i c u l a r symptoms which i s present i n an i n d i v i d u a l ( 3 6 , p.331). Further to t h i s , Maslow states that i n every insecure person there tends to be a change i n his apperceptive mass, i n h i s world philosophy, and he looks upon the world i n an insecure way. As an i n d i v i d u a l becomes more insecure i n one area of l i f e there i s an automatic tendency toward insecurity i n a l l departments of l i f e - i n h i s thinking, his perceptions, h i s remembering, h i s for g e t t i n g , and h i s emotions ( 3 6 , p . 3 3 9 ) . 2 1 Maslow states that i f we say someone i s 'insecure', i t means that he w i l l perceive insecurely, just as he emotes, and thinks, and does everything else insecurely ( 3 6 , p .3 4 2 ) . A c l a r i f i c a t i o n of Maslow's concept of Security-Insecurity may be seen i n his itemized d e f i n i t i o n of i t given below : "Insecurity: Security: Insecurity: Security: Insecurity: Security: Insecurity: Security: Insecurity: Security: Feeling of r e j e c t i o n , of being unloved, of being treated coldly and without a f f e c t i o n , of being hated, of being despised. Feeling of being l i k e d or loved, of acceptance, or being looked upon with warmth, Feelings of i s o l a t i o n , ostracism, aloneness or being out of i t , feelings of 'uniqueness'. Feelings of belonging, of being at home i n the world, of having a place i n the group. Perception of the world and l i f e as dangerous, threatening, dark, h o s t i l e or challenging; as a jungle i n which every man's hand i s against every other, i n which one eats or i s eaten. Perception of the world and l i f e as pleasant, warm, f r i e n d l y or benevolent, i n which a l l men tend to be brothers. Perception of other human beings as e s s e n t i a l l y bad, e v i l , or s e l f i s h ; as dangerous, threatening, hostile,, or challenging. Perception of other human beings as e s s e n t i a l l y good, pleasant, warm, f r i e n d l y or benevolent. Constant feelings of threat and danger; anxiety. Feelings of safety; rare feelings of threat, and danger; unanxious. Insecurity: Feelings of mistrust; of envy or jealousy toward others; much h o s t i l i t y , prejudices, hatred. Security: Insecurity: Security: Insecurity: Security: Insecurity: Security: Insecurity: Security: Insecurity: Security: Feelings of f r i e n d l i n e s s and t r u s t i n others; l i t t l e h o s t i l i t y ; tolerance of others; easy a f f e c t i o n for others. Tendency to expect the worst; general pessimism. Tendency to expect good to happen; general optimism. Tendency to be unhappy or discontented. Tendency to be happy or content. Feelings of tension, s t r a i n , o r ' c o n f l i c t ; together with various consequences of tension, e.g. 'nervousness', fatigue, i r r i t a b i l i t y , nervous stomach and other psychosomatic disturbances; nightmares; emotional i n s t a b i l i t y , v a c i l l a t i o n , uncertainty and inconsistency. Feeling of calm, ease and r e l a x a t i o n . Unconflicted. Emotional s t a b i l i t y . Tendency to compulsive introspectiveness, morbid self-examination, acute consciousness of s e l f . Tendency to outgoingness. A b i l i t y to be world-, object-, or problem-centred rather than s e l f - or ego-centered. Guilt and'shame f e e l i n g s , s i n f e e l i n g s , feelings of self-condemnation, s u i c i d a l tendencies, discouragement. Self-acceptance, tolerance of s e l f , acceptance of the impulses. 23 Insecurity: Security: Insecurity: Security: Insecurity: Security: Disturbances of various aspects of the self-esteem complex, e.g. craving f o r power and f o r status, compulsive ambition, over-aggression, hunger for money, prestige, glory, possessiveness, jealousy of j u r i s d i c t i o n and prerogative, over-competitiveness; and/or the opposite; masochistic tendencies, over-dependence, compulsive submissiveness, i n g r a t i a t i o n , i n f e r i o r i t y f e e l i n g s , feelings of weakness and helplessness. Desire for strength or adequacy with respect to problems rather than for power over other people. Firm, p o s i t i v e , w e l l based s e l f -esteem. Feeling of strength. Courage. Continual s t r i v i n g for and hunger for safety and se c u r i t y , various neurotic trends, i n h i b i t i o n s , defensiveness, escape trends, ameliorative trends, f a l s e goals, f i x a t i o n s on p a r t i a l goals. Psychotic tendencies, delusions, h a l l u c i n a t i o n s , etc. Relative lack of neurotic or psychotic tendencies. R e a l i s t i c coping systems. S e l f i s h , egocentric, i n d i v i d u a l i s t i c trends. 'Social i n t e r e s t ' ( i n Adlerian sense); cooperativeness, k i n d l i n e s s , interest i n others, sympathy". ( 3 9 , p.2 1 ) . The problem of i d e n t i f y i n g i n dividuals who are secure and insecure and who act, consequently, i n the terms described above, has also been undertaken by Maslow ( 3 9 ) . He has constructed a questionnaire-type Security-Insecurity Test which he considers to be a reasonably v a l i d and r e l i a b l e measure of what he means by s e c u r i t y - i n s e c u r i t y . 2 4 Though the te s t was not validated against an external c r i t e r i o n , the author considers that v a l i d i t y was inherent i n i t s method of construction (39, p.28). Actually, Maslow selected ' c l i n i c a l l y v a l i d ' items which related to diagnosed secure and insecure persons, and combined these to form the t e s t . He claims that the f i n a l score on t h i s test i s not a mere additive sum of unconnected items, but rather a systematic and controlled sampling of the known c l i n i c a l aspects of security or insecu r i t y (39, p .2 5 ) . Gough supports t h i s by stating that the test represents, primarily, a c l i n i c a l synthesis of the factors found to be relevant to the problem of Security-Insecurity ( 2 6 , p.2 5 7 ) . Maslow thinks his t e s t measures a t r a i t which i s not perfectly constant but i s known to respond to some extent to mood, external traumatic events, and major l i f e events. (39, p . 3 3 ) . -Some further understanding of what t h i s t e s t may be measuring can be gained from reading the following tables: TABLE I CORRELATION OF S - I TEST WITH FOUR OTHER PERSONALITY .QUESTIONNAIRES (39, p.3 6 ) . N r PE Social-Personality Invent. (Self-Esteem) 154 . 0 8 x + .05 Thurstone Neurotic Inventory 117 .68 + .03 Bernreuter (neurotic tendency) 59 .58 + . 0 6 A l l p o r t A - S 45 .53 + .07 (x low ' r ' an a r t i f a c t of construction of S-I Test • ) 25 TABLE 2 INTERCORRELATIONS BETWEEN S - I TEST (INSECURITY SCORES) AND MMPI ( 1 2 SUB SCALES): OTIS INTERMEDIATE I . Q . : HIGH SCHOOL GRADE AVERAGE: SIM'S SCORE CARDS. (SOCIO-ECONOMIC STATUS) ( 2 6 , p.2 6 0 ) (total) x (girls) xx (boys)xxx r S .E . r S .E. r S .E. .087 -.403 . 1 0 0 . 0 8 7 - . 2 5 0 . 1 0 0 .087 . 2 7 2 . 1 0 0 .087 .095 . 1 0 0 . 0 8 7 . 4 6 4 . 1 0 0 . 0 8 7 . 2 6 4 . 1 0 0 .087 - 2 2 5 . 1 0 0 .087 .404 . 1 0 0 .087 . 3 9 3 . 1 0 0 .087 . 4 5 4 . 1 0 0 .087 . 4 0 3 . 1 0 0 . 0 8 7 - . 0 6 3 . 1 0 0 .036 .096 .085 .096 -.091 .105 MMPI K - .410 . 0 6 6 - . 4 1 2 L - -.186 . 0 6 6 - . 1 4 2 F . 3 2 2 . 0 6 6 . 3 7 9 Hs .186 . 0 6 6 . 3 0 2 D .400 . 0 6 6 . 3 7 3 Hy .224 . 0 6 6 .210 Pd .229 . 0 6 6 .254 Mf _ — -.160 Pa .369 . 0 6 6 . .355 Pt . 4 6 2 . 0 6 6 .517 Sc .352 . 0 6 6 .360 Ma .056 . 0 6 6 .150 Otis -.093 . 0 6 4 -.196 Grade -.068 average . 0 0 8 . 0 6 3 Socio-Economic - . 1 0 6 Status -.100 . 0 6 7 x (N = 223 - 250) xx (N = 131 - 141) xxx (N = 92 - 109) 26 Table I indicates that the S - I test i s not measuring anything that i s greatly d i f f e r e n t from what neurotic inventory forms measure generally. The ' information i n Table 2 shows that the S - I score i s not influenced by i n t e l l i g e n c e , academic performance, or socio-economic status. Moreover, correlations with M.M.P.I, subscales suggest that : a) - 'Insecure 1 i n d i v i d u a l s ( i ) say p s y c h i a t r i c a l l y bad things about themselves ( - ' r ' with K); ( i i ) say unusual but p s y c h i a t r i c a l l y neutral, things about themselves (+ ' r ' with F); ( i i i ) are t r u t h f u l (- ' r ' with L): * b) - Pa (Paranoia), Pt (psychasthenia)j Sc (Schizophrenia), and D (Depression) are what the S - I Test i s measuring. (Maslow's contention that the S - I t e s t ^ i s p a r t l y a 'mood indicator' i s supported) : c) - 'Insecure' g i r l s are possibly 'body conscious', (•+ ' r • with Hs) : . ^ d) - 'Insecure' boys are possibly concerned with masculinity, (+ ' r ' with Mf). (26, p.259). The Maslow S - I test has many l i m i t a t i o n s as have a l l questionnaire type personality t e s t s . However, the test has i t s area of usefulness too and on t h i s point, as wel l as i t s l i m i t a t i o n s , Maslow has offered some comments. He notes that some of the test's l i m i t a t i o n s are : a) - The purpose i s obvious to the subject, consequently untruthful answers can be given. 27 b) - The answers depend on self-knowledge, consequently unconscious factors are not taken into account by t h i s t e s t . c) - The accuracy of the test can only be considered within the framework of the process used i n i t s construction - w i t h i n the l i m i t s of i t s r e l i a b i l i t y and v a l i d i t y . d) - The t e s t i s not v a l i d i f applied to groups of people too d i f f e r e n t from the group used i n the t e s t ' s construction and standardization. ( 3 9 , p .3 8 ) . Maslow also suggests the following uses for his t e s t : a) - The t e s t ' s proper and primary usefulness l i e s i n work with large groups. b) - I t may be used i n colleges and hospitals etc. for screening out those i n need of closer psychological attention. c) - I t can be used i n conjunction with other tests to obtain q u a l i t a t i v e information on a subject. ( 3 9 , p . 3 9 ) . The Maslow te s t i s not used i n the following experiment as an i n f a l l i b l e measure of 'security' and 'insecurity' of i n d i v i d u a l s . I t s usefulness and relevance rests i n the description and i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of the t e s t given above, i n the theory behind i t , and i n the relevance of that theory to the problem being explored i n t h i s t h e s i s . CHAPTER I I I AN EXPERIMENTAL TEST OF THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN SECURITY-INSECURITY AND VISUAL PERCEPTUAL CLOSURE This chapter contains a description of the experiment that was"undertaken to test the hypothesis that a r e l a t i o n s h i p obtains between the personality variable ' s e c u r i t y - i n s e c u r i t y 1 and the perceptual variable 'visual perceptual closure'. The background of t h i s experiment has been discussed i n the foregoing chapter as has the nature of the experimental variables and the tests which measure them. This chapter, consequently, w i l l describe the experiment mainly as a technical process, and w i l l include a record of the data and i t s i n t e r p r e t a t i o n . HYPOTHESIS The hypothesis tested i n t h i s study i s that a r e l a t i o n s h i p obtains between the se c u r i t y - i n s e c u r i t y personality attribute and v i s u a l perceptual closure. More s p e c i f i c a l l y , those individuals who obtain 'insecure' scores on Maslow's test ( 3 9 ) w i l l obtain lower scores on tests of v i s u a l perceptual closure, as defined by Thurstone ( 5 6 ) and as measured by the Mooney Closure ( 4 4 ) and Gottschaldt Figures ( 2 5 ) t e s t s , than w i l l those who obtain 'secure* scores. THE EXPERIMENTAL SUBJECTS The subjects f o r t h i s study were students enrolled i n Section I of the 1 9 5 1 - 5 2 Introductory Psychology course at the University of B r i t i s h Columbia. The enrolment i n the class was approximately 350 students and 2 8 7 of these ( 1 8 1 males and 1 0 6 females) volunteered to write the f i r s t t e s t , the Maslow Security-Insecurity questionnaire. Only 1 6 0 of t h i s group ( 9 4 males and 6 6 females) further volunteered to take the Gottschaldt Figures and Mooney Closure Tests. The group of 1 6 0 , consequently, formed the experimental group f o r * t h i s study. The age range for the experimental group was 1 7 to 30 years but i t should be noted that there were only eight subjects above the age of 2 2 years. An analysis of the educational l e v e l for the group revealed that 1 5 3 subjects were i n f i r s t and second year u n i v e r s i t y , and only seven subjects were i n either t h i r d or fourth year u n i v e r s i t y . Generally speaking, the sample group i s considered to be representative of early undergraduate enrolment at U.B.C. THE EXPERIMENTAL MATERIALS (DESCRIPTION, ADMINISTRATION AND SCORING PROCEDURE) 1 ) The Maslow Security-Insecurity Test : This t e s t was copied from the author's o r i g i n a l . journal a r t i c l e which described the test (39), and the complete scale of 75 items was mimeographed to produce a two page booklet of questions (App.A), which was l e f t u n t i t l e d . Spaces i n which to indicate answers to the separate items were provided on the r i g h t hand side of each page. Administration was as follows. The class was f i r s t forewarned by the course i n s t r u c t o r , that a 'personality t e s t ' was to be administered on the 28th of January, and that i t was hoped that as many students as possible would volunteer to take the t e s t . I t was offered as a p r a c t i c a l component of the course work with the explanation that the students would become f a m i l i a r with one of the t e s t i n g procedures that psychologists sometimes employ. The test was administered at 8.30 a.m. January 28th, 1952. The class was not t o l d that the t e s t was called a 'Security-Insecurity Test', they were merely asked to cooperate and give honest answers to the questions presented. The students were also t o l d that they should put t h e i r r e g i s t r a t i o n numbers and/or t h e i r names on the booklets, and that the r e s u l t s of t h i s test would be posted, showing only^ the r e g i s t r a t i o n number of each student, at a l a t e r date. The lecturer promised to' comment on the meaning of the test r e s u l t s when they became ava i l a b l e . The te s t was not scored according to the o r i g i n a l system outlined by the t e s t authors ( 3 9 ) . Instead, a simpler system devised by Gough ( 2 6 ) was used. The o r i g i n a l system u t i l i z e d weights of from + 9 to - 9 for the various answers 'yes 1, 'no' and '?', and the algebraic sum of these weights was taken to y i e l d a score which could range from 'extreme security' at the (+) end of the d i s t r i b u t i o n , to 'extreme insecurity' at the (-) end of the d i s t r i b u t i o n . Gough, using the test scores of a sample of 2 6 0 high school seniors, found that by substituting weights of +1 and . -1, respectively, for a l l o r i g i n a l plus and minus weights, and s t i l l using 0 as i n the o r i g i n a l scoring, he could predict o r i g i n a l score with l i t t l e error. The cor r e l a t i o n between a l l p o sitive weights i n the o r i g i n a l scoring and a l l of Gough's po s i t i v e weights, (se c u r i t y ) , was + . 9 5 7 , with a standard error of . 0 6 , and the cor r e l a t i o n between a l l negative weights i n the o r i g i n a l scoring and a l l of Gough's negative weights ( i n s e c u r i t y ) , was - . 9 8 5 , with a standard error of . 0 6 . Gough consequently suggested that the sum of negative weights be used as the t e s t score since i t had the higher c o r r e l a t i o n with the o r i g i n a l score, and i t was 3 2 more usually the score (insecurity) than an investigator sought ( 2 6 , p . 2 8 5 ) . In accordance with the scoring system outlined above the Security-Insecurity Test was marked by using a scoring key cut to leave showing only those spaces i n the answer block that could contain a negative score, and the r e s u l t i n g test score was then a straight t o t a l of 'insecure' answers. The size of subjects' scores thus indicate d i r e c t l y the degree of 'insecurity'. 2 ) The Gottschaldt Figures Test : The Gottschaldt Figures (App.B) were copied from plates reproduced i n Thurstone's Monograph, 'A F a c t o r i a l Study of Perception' ( 5 6 , p. 7 3 - 7 6 ) . The Figures were photographed from the pages of the monograph and a separate negative was made for each group of Figures, (Parts I to V i n c l u s i v e ) . The photographs were enlarged to produce 8 i " x l l n p o s i t i v e s and these positives served as the base from which f i v e pages of the f i n a l test booklet were produced. The te s t was reproduced by the ' M u l t i l i t h ' process except for the cover page which was mimeographed. The separate parts of the Gottschaldt Figures Test were printed on separate pages of the te s t booklet, and the f i r s t two pages of figures represented Gottschaldt Figures 'A', and the l a s t three pages of figures represented Gottschaldt Figures 'B' ( 5 6 , p . 7 2 ) . The administration and scoring for the Gottschaldt Figures Test was d i f f e r e n t i n t h i s study from that outlined by Thurstone i n h i s monograph ( 5 6 , p . 7 2 ) . The differences were dictated by the p r a c t i c a l l i m i t a t i o n s imposed by group t e s t i n g . Thurstone also administered Gottschaldt Figures 'A1 and fB* as two separate t e s t s . This was not done here. This i s j u s t i f i a b l e i n that i t has been found that the f a c t o r i a l composition of the two tests i s the same and Thurstone has himself used the two i n a combined single test y i e l d i n g one score ( 5 6 , p . l 0 2 ) . Thurstone o r i g i n a l l y allowed maximum times of 2 , 1 , 3 , 4 and 4 minutes f o r , respectively, parts one to f i v e of the Gottschaldt Test. For part 'A* he scored the number of designs successfully completed within the time l i m i t s , and for part 'B', the number of designs correctly drawn per minute of time ( 5 6 , p . 7 2 ) . The scoring system used i n t h i s study was merely the number of designs completed within the given time l i m i t s . Each part was separately and s t r i c t l y timed and the percentage of the number of designs correct was taken-for each page (App.C). The average of the percentages was taken as the f i n a l score. The score on the Gottschaldt Test i s consequently out of 1 0 0 and a high score indicates a 'good1 performance. 3 4 The exact timing of the separate parts of the Gottschaldt Test required a c a r e f u l l y planned administration procedure (App.D). The object was to have a l l subjects looking at a page of designs for an equal and short period of time. The times set were 105"; 35"; 70"; 120"; and 150", for parts one to f i v e respectively. These times were empirically determined as l i m i t s within which the vast majority of subjects could not complete the t e s t . The techniques of, a) i n s t r u c t i n g the subject to leave h i s pe n c i l on the desk u n t i l t o l d to pick i t up, b) keeping a loose sheet of white paper beneath the" page being worked on, c) d i r e c t i n g the subject's attention to the short printed r e c a p i t u l a t i o n of instructions at the top of each page, and d) obtaining s t r i c t obedience to the orders 'begin' and 'stop'; were a l l used i n an attempt to produce a standard 'exposure time' for each page. The i n i t i a l ' direction of attention' (c) above, was used as a 'time / sop' i n an attempt to balance out the noticeable i n d i v i d u a l differences i n time taken by subjects to turn pages and generally to orient themselves to the new page of designs. The instructions for working through a page of designs were given after a description of the next task to be done had been read, and the white sheet of paper appropriately re-inserted. The instructions were : 3 5 Now, put your pencils beside the paper. Turn to Part ( 1 ) . Read the Instructions. Pick up your pencils - begin. (Timed with stop-watch) Stop: Put down your pencils and close the booklet. The test was scored, not for accuracy, but i n terms of the number of the designs the subject sketched out as having seen. There was no d i f f i c u l t y i n determining t h i s number. 3 ) Mooney Closure Test This t e s t was obtained from the Psychology Department, M c G i l l University. The t e s t was developed only very recently, ( 4 4 ) , consequently l i t t l e work has been undertaken with t h i s material. The t e s t material i s of the conventional Gestalt Completion type (incomplete picture) and i s presented i n booklet form. The administration andy scoring procedures outlined i n the test manual ( 4 3 ) were followed. The instructions f or the t e s t are not rigorous and the time l i m i t allowed for the f o r t y incomplete pictures i s twenty minutes. The score i s the number of objects c o r r e c t l y seen. A sample scoring sheet appears i n the appendices, (App.E). 36 4) Achievement Scale (Psychology 100 -Xmas Exam, 1951: Part I Multiple Choice, P t . I I Matching) This test was composed of the two objective parts of the University of B r i t i s h Columbia Psychology 100 Exmas examination, 1951. The items were derived from Munn's Psychology Instructor's Manual (46). The test was administered i n the regular university Christmas examination schedule December 1951, and the score on t h i s test i s a straight t o t a l of correct answers. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN Two tests of the hypothesis were undertaken i n t h i s study. The f i r s t check was a determination of the significance of the correlations e x i s t i n g between the securi t y - i n s e c u r i t y and closure test score d i s t r i b u t i o n s . A l l the raw data was used d i r e c t l y i n t h i s t e s t . The second test was a determination of the significance of the difference between means of closure test scores for an 'insecure' and 'secure' group. These groups were matched on the basis of achievement score, and made nearly equivalent with respect to age, sex, and educational l e v e l . This second check i s considered to complement the f i r s t one. I t has a disadvantage i n that only a selected part of the o r i g i n a l data i s used. I t has an advantage i n that an attempt i s made to balance out various factors which may complicate the closure test scores. I t has been noted that the Gottschaldt Figures Test measures •closure', 'reasoning*, and other a b i l i t i e s (56, p.104, 107, 111), and material l i k e the Mooney Test measures 'closure', 'speed of perception' and other a b i l i t i e s , ($6, p.109, 112). Matching the groups on the basis of achievement score and making them nearly equivalent i n the other respects mentioned would tend to make, i t was thought, group differences i n closure test scores more dependent on the operation of the experimental variable, v i s u a l perceptual closure. EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURE An outline of the procedure followed i n t h i s experiment i s stated below. Inasmuch as a few of the preliminary s t a t i s t i c s already quoted determined what steps would be taken next, some of these s t a t i s t i c s may be repeated here. 1) - On January 28th, 1952, the Maslow Security-Insecurity Test ( 3 9 ) was administered to a group of Introductory Psychology Course students. The group was used because i t was r e a d i l y available and contained a r e l a t i v e l y large number of persons. This group i s not the same as Maslow 1s standardization group. That group contained many 'psychologically sophisticated' persons as he used Senior Psychology Course students and some persons who had graduated from college after studying psychology (39, p .2 6 ) . The aim i n t h i s experiment, however, was to obtain a d i s t r i b u t i o n of scores within a group which would be in d i c a t i v e of r e l a t i v e 'security' and 'insecurity The d i s t r i b u t i o n of raw scores obtained i s shown i n Figure 1. The range of t h i s d i s t r i b u t i o n was from 2 to 57 and the mean and standard deviation were 19.70 and 10.90, respectively. The d i s t r i b u t i o n was skewed toward the 'insecure' end of the scale. The d i s t r i b u t i o n of scores for Males and Females i n the t o t a l group appears i n Figure 2 , and data for these two d i s t r i b u t i o n s are given i n Table.. 3 below. DISTRIBUTION OF SCORES ON THE S - I TEST (INITIAL ADMINISTRATION, N = 287) Males Females 10 • R*vJ 5core5 FIGURE 2 DISTRIBUTION OF S - I SCORES FOR MALES AND FEMALES IN THE ORIGINAL GROUP (N « 287) 4 1 TABLE 3 SCORES OF MALE AND FEMALE SUBJECTS ON S - I TEST (N=2&7) N Range . Mean <p Skewness Males 181 2 - 5 7 2 0 . 1 5 1 1 . 1 5 + Females 1 0 6 2 - 4 7 1 8 . 9 3 1 0 . 4 0 + C.R. (Mx - M 2) - . 9 2 (There i s no s i g n i f i c a n t difference between these two means.) 2 ) - The experimental group of 1 6 0 who volunteered to write the closure tests produced a d i s t r i b u t i o n of 'insecurity' scores which was almost i d e n t i c a l with that of the larger group. This d i s t r i b u t i o n i s shown i n Figure 3 and can be compared with that shown for the larger group i n Figure 1 . The range of t h i s d i s t r i b u t i o n for the experimental group was from 2 to 57 and the mean and standard deviation were 1 9 . 4 2 and 1 0 . 9 1 , r e s p e c t i v e l y . This d i s t r i b u t i o n was also p o s i t i v e l y skewed. The d i s t r i b u t i o n of scores for Males and Females i n the group appears i n Figure 4,and data for these two d i s t r i b u t i o n s are given i n Table 4 below . 30 2.S IS 5 Rao) Scores FIGURE 3 DISTRIBUTION OF SCORES ON THE S - I TEST (EXPERIMENTAL GROUP, N =160) to "z T a rJ tz til tx 37 ~t*- *7 ~ S7 ' R 4to ,5 t o r e j FIGURE 4 ' ' DISTRIBUTION OF S - I SCORES FOR MALES AND FEMALES IN THE EXPERIMENTAL GROUP (N -160) 4 4 TABLE 4 SCORES OF MALE AND FEMALE SUBJECTS ON S - I TEST (N =160) N Range Mean <I> Skewness Vt'-94 2 - 57 19.29 11.34 •+ Females 66 2 - 47 19.90 9.90 + C.R. (Mx - M2) • .26 (There i s no significant difference between these two means.) 3 ) - The experimental group of 1 6 0 subjects were administered the two perceptual a b i l i t y tests i n groups ranging in size from 4 to 17 persons, and at different times of the day during the week of March 24th to 29th. In addition to the scores on these two tests, the age, x sex, number of years at university, and achievement score were recorded for each subject, (App.F). 4) - The four variables, Maslow S - I, Gottschaldt Figures, Mooney Closure, and the Achievement Test were x The ages of 12 of the subjects were not obtained. 45 i n t e r c o r r e l a t e d . The correlations between the Maslow Test and the Gottschaldt and Mooney Tests were checked for s i g n i f i c a n c e . This was the f i r s t t e s t of the hypothesis. The c o r r e l a t i o n between the Mooney and the Gottschaldt t e s t s was found as i t was pertinent to the problem as a whole. The c o r r e l a t i o n between the Achievement Test and each o f the other tests was found as i t was needed i n the s t a t i s t i c a l procedure used i n the second test of the hypothesis. . 5) - The table of data gathered f o r the experimental group was analyzed and.two matched groups of subjects were selected, (App.G). The attempt was made to use the top and bottom quarters of the S - I t e s t score d i s t r i b u t i o n to form two groups who d i f f e r e d e s s e n t i a l l y i n that the members of one had high 'insecurity' scores and the members of the other, low 'insecurity' scores. The groups were matched on the achievement variable and, the means and standard deviations were, res p e c t i v e l y , 56.55 and 11.74 for the 'secure' group, and 5#.50 and 11.64 for the 'insecure' group. However, there was also an attempt to pair members of the d i f f e r e n t groups on t h i s variable, as well as on the sex, age, and educational l e v e l variables. The reason for t h i s i s explained above. The 'insecure' group was selected to include a l l those subjects who scored 2 6 or higher on the S - I t e s t . This was approximately 2 6 $ of the t o t a l group, and included 4 2 persons. The 'secure' group members were selected both on the basis.of low i n s e c u r i t y scores and s i m i l a r i t y to 'insecure' group members on the variables already named. . This resulted i n the 'secure' group containing xx a l l subjects who scored 9 or lower on the S - I t e s t , plus eleven subjects from those who scored 10, 11, or 1 2 . Twenty-one subjects f e l l into t h i s l a t t e r category,, i n a l l , and the eleven who most nearly resembled subjects i n the 'insecure' group were chosen from them. The number of subjects i n the 'secure' group was also 4 2 . The significance of the differences between the means of the Gottschaldt Figures Test and Mooney Closure Test scores were determined f o r these two groups. DATA AND THEIR TREATMENT The d i s t r i b u t i o n s of scores on the four te s t s used i n t h i s experiment are described i n Table 5. x Except f o r four subjects whose ages were not recorded, xx Except for one subject whose age was not recorded. 4 7 TABLE 5 THE EXPERIMENTAL GROUP TEST RESULTS N Range rMean jS.B.' C.R. j> Mm-Mf. Maslow ( t o t a l ) - 1 6 0 2 - 5 7 19 .43 1 0 . 9 1 S - I (male 94 2 - 5 7 19 .29 1 1 . 3 4 . 2 6 (female) 6 6 2 - 4 7 1 9 . 7 3 .9.90 Gottschaldt ( t o t a l ) - 1 6 0 13-98 6 4 . 8 1 1 9 . 1 1 Figures 18 -98 6 6 . 5 6 (male) 94 1 9 . 2 4 1 . 3 7 (female) 6 6 1 3 - 9 8 6 2 . 3 2 19.05 Mooney ( t o t a l ) - 1 6 0 2 - 3 5 1 5 . 2 6 , 6 . 8 3 Closure 6 . 7 3 (male 94 2 - 3 5 1 5 . 4 4 - • • • 6 . 9 1 . 4 8 (female) 6 6 2 - 2 9 14.91 Achievement ( t o t a l ) - 1 6 0 2 7 - 8 7 5 6 . 8 8 1 1 . 8 6 ( P s y . 1 0 0 ) 56.41 1 2 . 8 2 (male) 94 2 7 - 8 7 . 6 5 (female) 6 6 3 7 - 8 7 5 7 . 6 1 1 0 . 2 1 There are no s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s between the means of the male and female d i s t r i b u t i o n s of scores on any of the v a r i a b l e s . The Coefficients of Correlation for a l l two variable combinations of the four tests are shown in Table 6. TABLE 6 CORRELATIONS BETWEEN VARIABLES Achievement (Psy.100) Gottschaldt (Closure) Mooney S - I Achievement Gottschaldt Mooney S - I (Closure) (High-Insec.) .285 (signif.) .003 - .040 .285 .003 .399 .399 (signif.) - .131 - .040 - .131 .054 .054 These correlations were obtained by using the raw-score formula; T V Y = _ * * X Y - <£x ) < i . Y ? Garrett's formula (48), (23, p.292). Using Garrett's table 49 ( 2 3 , p.299) i t i s found that a coefficient has to be at least .204 in order to reject at the 1% level of confidence the hypothesis that a p a r t i c u l a r c o e f f i c i e n t i s not s i g n i f i c a n t . Consequently, only two of the obtained c o e f f i c i e n t s of corr e l a t i o n can be considered s i g n i f i c a n t at the Ifo l e v e l of confidence. I t can be said that there i s a 'de f i n i t e but small r e l a t i o n s h i p ' (27, p.165) between the achievement (Psy.100) and Gottschaldt Figures score distributions, and between the Gottschaldt Figures and the Mooney Closure Test score d i s t r i b u t i o n s . The two co e f f i c i e n t s involved here are-^.285 and+.399, respectively. No s i g n i f i c a n t r e l a t i o n s h i p can be demonstrated to exist between Maslow-Security-Insecurity Test scores and any of the other sets of scores. The raw data used i n the significance of the difference between means test of the hypothesis i s recorded i n Table 7. TABLE 7 BATA USED IN THE DETERMINATION OF THE SIGNIFICANCE OF THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN MEANS where Achievement (Psy.100) = Y where Gottschaldt Fig.Test » X x where Mooney Closure Test = X2 Secure group Insecure group N My cry Mxi <TXi Mx2 <TX2 r X i Y -4 2 56.55 11.74 65.62 -18.50 14.64 -6.69 + .285 (D=4.24) -(B<L.05) * <Xl> = 42 58.50 11.64 61.38 17.95 15.69 6.21 .194 rX 2Y - + .003 t (x 2 ) .115 The significance of the difference between the means was determined by Garrett's formula (34), (23, p.213): # ^ , + r ; J ( / - ^ Y ) Garrett's Table (29), (23, p.190), l i s t s a ' t ' value of 2 . 6 4 as necessary before r e j e c t i n g , at the Vfo l e v e l of confidence, the hypothesis that there i s no s i g n i f i c a n t difference between the two means being tested. This Is where degrees of freedom equal (N]_+N2) - 1, 81. The two ' t ' values obtained above, .194 for the Gottschaldt Test and .115 for the Mooney Test-, are therefore, not. large enough to warrant r e j e c t i o n of the n u l l hypothesis. The mean scores of the two groups on the Gottschaldt Figures and Mooney Closure Tests cannot be considered as s i g n i f i c a n t l y d i f f e r e n t . DISCUSSION OF THE RESULTS The hypothesis that 'closure a b i l i t y ' i s related to ' l e v e l of i n s e c u r i t y ' i s not supported by the r e s u l t s obtained i n t h i s study. The simple determination of Coefficients of Correlation technique and the significance of the difference between means , technique both f a i l e d to y i e l d any data that could be construed as support for the hypothesis. The sample from which the experimental subjects were drawn for t h i s study cannot be considered representative of the population at large. A university group was used here who may not display insecurity (as measured by Maslow's Test) to the same degree of severity that a more representative general sample would, even though the range of test scores be the same. However, there i s no s p e c i f i c reason for suspecting that the Maslow S - I test has to be considered as any less e f f e c t i v e here than i t has ever been. Consequently, the subjects who jscored high i n 'insecurity' may s t i l l be 'insecure' as described by Maslow ( 3 9 ) ( 3 6 ) , and Gough ( 2 6 ) . The small r e l a t i o n s h i p that e x i s t s between the Gottschaldt and Mooney tests can be accounted for by assuming some common saturation with Thurstone's Factor •&', speed and strength of perceptual closure, ( 5 6 , p. 1 0 1 ) . Since i t i s very small, however, the remaining unrelated variance i n these test score d i s t r i b u t i o n s must r e s u l t from the operation of one or more r e l a t i v e l y important unique determinants of 52 performance in each test situation. These determinants have been mainly unaccounted for in the theoretical approach to this experiment and in the experimental design. This limitation seriously restricts the interpretations that can be placed on the recorded data. The small relationship that exists between the Gottschaldt Figures Test and the Achievement Test can be accounted for by postulating some common saturation with Thurstone's Factor 'E' 'reasoning', (56, p.110). That no relationship was apparent between the Mooney Closure Test and the Achievement Test i s reasonable in that material similar to the Mooney Test has been shown as not a measure of Factor 'E* (56, p.111). The Maslow Security-Insecurity Test did not correlate significantly with any other test used. This is predictable in the case of the Achievement Test ( 2 6 ) . The fact that 'insecure' subjects did not show poorer performances than 'secure' subjects on the perceptual closure tests, however, might also have been predicted by some theorists. Woltmann, (64, p.348) and (4, p.159), or Vernon (60, p.90), might have predicted this inasmuch as i t supports their general contention that organizational dynamics that operate in visual perception 53 are primitive influences (28, p.24), which are reached only i n such extreme p e r s o n a i l i t y disorganization as i s found i n the psychoses (4, p . 1 0 6 ) . But much i n t h i s t h e o r e t i c a l viewpoint i s speculative. I t would be premature, consequently, to suggest that the negative r e s u l t s of t h i s present li m i t e d study support that viewpoint. EXPERIMENTAL SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS 1 ) - Summary : a) - This experiment was undertaken to t e s t the hypothesis that 'insecure' individuals w i l l be impaired i n t h e i r v i s u a l perceptual closure a b i l i t y , as compared to 'secure' i n d i v i d u a l s . b) - The te s t scores of 1 6 0 Psychology 1 0 0 Course students at U.B.C. were obtained for the Maslow Security-Insecurity Questionnaire, The Gottschaldt Figure Test, The Mooney Closure Test, and an achievement test (Psychology 1 0 0 Xmas Exam 1 9 5 1 ) . c) - The relationships between the test variables were determined by a co r r e l a t i o n technique (Pearson-i Product- Moment ' r ' ) . This contained the f i r s t t e s t of the hypothesis. d) - A 'secure' and an 'insecure' group was selected from the t o t a l experimental group. These smaller groups represented, roughly, the top and bottom 25% of the S- I test score d i s t r i b u t i o n . Each group contained 42 subjects and the groups were matched on the achievement variable. The significance of the differences between the means of the groups' •closure' scores was ascertained. This constituted the second test of the hypothesis. e) - The data r e s u l t i n g from the above-outlined procedures were recorded, analyzed and commented on. 2) - Conclusions : The type of personality variable measured by A.H. Maslow's Security-Insecurity Test does not appear to be i n any way related to the type of perceptual functioning measured by the Gottschaldt Figures Test, and Mooney Closure Test, when the test r e s u l t s of a sample of Introductory Psychology Course students at U.B.C. are analyzed. The experimental r e s u l t s deny the hypothesis that 'insecurity' w i l l r e s u l t i n impaired a b i l i t y to form v i s u a l perceptual closures -both variables as defined within t h i s t h e s i s . CHAPTER IV GENERAL SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS Summary: 1) - The general t h e o r e t i c a l background into which t h i s study f i t s was b r i e f l y discussed. 2) - The concept of autochthonous determinants of perception was discussed along with t h e o r e t i c a l considerations concerning t h e i r r e l a t i o n s h i p to personality functioning as a whole. Also various contributions to t h i s theory area made by a number of researchers were recorded and discussed. 3) - The nature of the perceptual variable 'closure' was discussed which included a consideration of the instruments which measure i t . 4) - The concept of Security-Insecurity as advanced by Maslow was examined and the related test was also discussed. 5) - An experimental test of the hypothesis that 'insecure' subjects w i l l be impaired i n t h e i r 'closure' a b i l i t y as compared to 'secure' subjects was made. 6) - The data gathered were recorded and analyzed. Conclusions : 1) - The problem of the nature of autochthonous determinants of perception and the contribution they make i s one that i s not yet solved for perceptual theory. 2) - The suggested rel a t i o n s h i p s between personality functioning and contributions made by autochthonous determinants to perception are, as yet, i n the realm of speculation. Only sketchy support, consequently, can be drawn for a study such as t h i s . 3) - The indefiniteness involved i n describing and i d e n t i f y i n g personality variables contributes to the tentativeness of t h i s study. The personality v a r i a b l e , Security-Insecurity, was measured by a personality questionnaire type instrument which i s recognized as having severe l i m i t a t i o n s . k) - The r e s u l t s of the experiment conducted i n t h i s study have to be considered within the framework of the study's l i m i t a t i o n s outlined above. The negative r e s u l t s that were obtained, consequently, may be more a r e f l e c t i o n of these l i m i t a t i o n s than evidence which can contribute to the denial of the hypothesis. CHAPTER V IMPLICATIONS FOR FUTURE RESEARCH 1) - The problem of autochthonous determinants of perception needs to be further considered. A study of the proposition that these variables are of the same order as organismic variables might prove in t e r e s t i n g . This proposition might be considered i n the l i g h t of the description of perception that i s made by the 'psychological operationists' and the descriptions proposed by t h e o r i s t s concerned with organismic behavior. 2) - The perceptual a b i l i t y structure of severely maladjusted individuals might be mapped i n terms of, Thurstone's a b i l i t i e s to determine i f there are any relationships between type of maladjustment and perceptual a b i l i t i e s . 3) - The implication i n the a s s o c i a t i o n a l i s t theory of perceptual functioning that the meaning a stimulus organization has i s learned, requires examination. I t could be postulated that i f an organization carries a learned meaning of 'a thing to be avoided' then the process of perceiving i t may be s i m i l a r to that occurring when there i s impaired perceptual a b i l i t y . The meaning of perceptual a b i l i t y t est material, and of the test situation; i t s e l f could be explored from t h i s point of view. 59 BIBLIOGRAPHY 1. ABT, L.E. A theory of projective psychology. In Abt, L.E., and Bellak, L., Projective  Psychology. N.Y., Knopf, 1950 2. ABT, L.E. AND BELLAK, L. Projective Psychology, N.Y., Knopf, 1950 3. BELLAK, L. On the problems of the concept of projection. In Abt, L.E. and Bellak, L., Projective Psychology, N.Y., Knopf, 1950. 4. BENDER, L. A v i s u a l motor gestalt t e s t and i t s c l i n i c a l use. Research Mon. No.3. American  Orthopsychiatry Association, N.Y.-, 1938. , 5. BLAKE, R.R-., et a l . Perceptual processes as basic to an understanding of complex behavior. In Blake, R.R. and Ramsey, G.V. Perception: An approach to personality. N.Y., Ronald, 1951 6. BLAKE, R.R. AND RAMSEY, G.V. Perception: An approach to personality. N.Y., Ronald, 1951 7. BLAKE, R.R. AND VANDERPLAS, J.M. The effect of pre-recognition hypotheses on v e r i d i c a l recognition thresholds i n auditory perception. J. Personal., 1951, 19, 95-115 8. BLAKE, ROBERT R. AND WILSON, GLEN, JR. Perceptual s e l e c t i v i t y i n Rorschach determinants as a function of depressive tendencies. J. abnorm. soc. Psychol. t 1950, 45, 459-472. 6 0 9. BOBBITT, J.M. An experimental study of closure as a threshold function. J. exp. Psychol., 1942, 30, 273-294 10. BORING, E.G. A hist o r y of experimental psychology. 2nd ed., N.Y., Appleton- Century, 1950 11. BORING, E.G. Sensation and perception i n the history of psychology. N. Y., Appleton-Century, 1942. 12. BRUNER, J.S. Perceptual theory and the Rorschach Test. J. of Personal., 1948, 17, 157-168 13. BRUNER, J.S. One: kind of perception: A reply to Prof. Luchins, Psychol.Rev., 1951, 58, 4, 306-312 14. BRUNER, J.S. Personality dynamics and the process of perceiving. In Blake, R.R. and Ramsey, G.V. Perception: An approach to personality. N.Y., Ronald, 1951 " ~ 15. BRUNER, J.S. AND GOODMAN, C.C. Value and need as organizing factors i n perception. J. of abnorm. soc.Psychol., 1 9 4 7 , 42, 33-44. 16. BRUNER, J. AND POSTMAN, L. Perception, cognition and behavior. J . Personal., 1949, 18, 14-31. 17. BRUNER, J.S. AND POSTMAN, L. Emotional s e l e c t i v i t y i n perception and reaction. J. Personal., 1947,' 16, 69-77 18. BRUNER, J.S. AND POSTMAN, L. Tension and tension release as organizing factors i n perception. J. Personal., 1947, 16, 300-308 19. CHEIN, J . , et a l . Need as a determinant of perception: A reply to Pastore. J. Psychol., 1951, 31, 129-136 20. CRONBACH, L.J. Esse n t i a l s of psychological t e s t i n g . N.Y., Harper, ~ 21. ELLIS, A.G. The v a l i d i t y of personality questionnaires, Psychol. B u l l . , 1946, 43, 385-440. 6 1 2 2 . ELIAS, G. Self-evaluative questionnaires as projective measures of personality. J. consul. Psychol., 1951, 15, 6, 496-500 23. GARRETT, H.E.v S t a t i s t i c s i n psychology and education. N.Y., Longman's Green, 1 9 4 7 2 4 . GIBSON, J.J. A c r i t i c a l review of the concept of set i n contemporary experimental psychology. Psychol. B u l l . , 1941, 38, 781-&T7. 2 5 . GOTTSCHALDT, KURT. "Uber den Ei n f l u s s der Erfahrung auf die Wahraehmung von Figuren, I I (Mit 2 2 Abbildungen im Text), Psychologische  Forschung, XII (1929), 1-88." From Thurstone, L.L. A f a c t i o n a l study of perception. Psychometric Mon., 4, 1944 2 6 . GOUGH, HARRISON G; A n o t e o n t h e security-i n s e c u r i t y t e s t . J. soc. Psychol., 1948, 28, 257-261. 27. GUILFORD, J.P. Fundamental s t a t i s t i c s i n psychology and education^ N.Y. McGraw-Hill, 1950. 28. HEBB, P.O. The organization of behavior. N.Y., Wiley, 1949 29. HILGARD, E.R. The r o l e of learning i n perception. In Blake, R.R. and Ramsey, G.V. Perception; An approach to personality. N.Y., Ronald, 1951 30. KLEIN, G.S. The personal world through perception. In Blake, R.R. and Ramsey, G'.V. Perception: Ah approach to personality. N.Y., Ronald, 1951 31. KLEIN, G.S. et a l . The effect of personal values on perception: an experimental c r i t i q u e . Psychol. Rev.. 1951, 58, 2, 96-112. 3 2 . KRETCH, D. AND CRUTCHFIELD, R.S. Theory and problems of s o c i a l psychology. N.Y., McGraw-Hill, 1948. 62 33. LEEPER, A. A study of a.neglected portion of the f i e l d of learning - the development of sensory organization. J.genet.Psychol., 1935 47, 2, 41-75 34. LUCHINS, A'.S. An evaluation of some current c r i t i c i s m s of Gestalt psychological work on perception. Psychol. Rev., 1951, 58, 2, 69-95 35. LUCHINS, A*S. 'On an approach to s o c i a l perception'. J. Personal.. 1950, 19, 1, 64-&V 36. MASLOW, A.H. The dynamics of psychological secu r i t y - i n s e c u r i t y . Char. & Pers., 1942, 10, 331-344 . 37. MASLOW, A.H. A theory of human motivation. Psychol. Rev., 1943, 50, 370-376. 38. MASLOW, A.H. A test of dominance f e e l i n g (self-esteem) i n college women. J. soc.Psychol., 1940, 12, 255-270 39. MASLOW, A.H., HIRSH,; E., STEIN, M. AND HONIGMANN, I . A c l i n i c a l l y derived test for measuring psychological s e c u r i t y - i n s e c u r i t y . J. gen. Psychol.. 1945, 33, 21-41. 40. MOUSNER, B. AND SIEGEL, A. The effect of var i a t i o n i n 'value' on perceptible thresholds. J. abnorm. soc. Psychol.., 1950, 45, 760-763. 41 • MILLER, ,J.G. Unconscious processes and perception. In Blake, R.R. and Ramsey,"G.V. Perception: An approach to personality, N.Y., Ronald, 1951. 42. McCLEARY, R.A. AND LAZARUS, R.S. Automatic discrimination without awareness. J. Personal, 1949, 18, 171-179 • °~ 43. MOONEY, CM. Closure Test: Instructions for administering and scoring. (Unpublished Test Manual). 63 44. MOONEY, CM. AND FERGUSON, G.A. A new closure t e s t . , Canad. J. Psychol.. 1951, 5, 129-133 45. MORGAN, CT. Some st r u c t u r a l factors i n perception. In Blake, R.R. and Ramsey, G.V. Perception: An approach to personality. N.Y., Ronald, 1951 46. MUNN, N.L. Psychology: (Instructor's Manual). N.Y., Houghton-Mifflin,. 1951 47. MURPHY, G. AND HOCHBERG, J. Perceptual Development: Some tentative hypotheses. Psychol. Rev., 1951, 5 8 , 5, 33.2-349 48. P AS TORE, M.. Need as a determinant of perception. J. Psychol.. 1949, 2 8 , 457-475 49. POSTMAN, L. AND BRUNER, J.S. Perception under stress. Psychol. Rev.. 1948, 55, 314-323 50. POSTMAN, L.y BRUNER, J.S. AND McGINNIES, E. Personal values as selective factors i n perception. J. abnorm. soc. Psychol., 1948, 43, 142-154 51. POSTMAN, L. AND LEYTHAM, G. Perceptual s e l e c t i v i t y and ambivalence of s t i m u l i . J. Personal., 1951, 1-9, 4,.p.390-405 52. SHEEHAN, M.R. A study of in d i v i d u a l consistency i n phenomenal constancy. Arch. Psych., 1938, Vol.31, 222 5 3 . STAGNER, R. Psychology of Personality, N.Y., McGraw-H i l l , 1948. 54. STAGNER, R. Homeostasis as a unifying concept i n personality theory. Psychol. Rev., 1951, 58, 1, 1-17 55. STREET, R.F. A Gestalt Completion Test. (Teach.Coll., Col. U., Contributions to Education, No.4pl). Bureau of Publications, Teacher's College, Columbia University, N.Y. C i t y , 1931 , 56. THURSTONE, L.L. A f a c t o r i a l study of perception. Psychometric Monographs No.4, U. of Chi. Press, chi. i i i . , mlC). 57. VERVILLE, E. AND CAMERON, N. Age and sex differences i n the perception of incomplete pictures by adults. J. genet. Psychol.. 1946, 68, 149-157 64 58. VERVILLE, E. The effect of emotional and motivational sets on the perception of incomplete pictures. J. genet. Psychol., 1946, 69, 133-145 59. VERNON, M.D. Different types of perceptual a b i l i t y . J. Psychol., 1947, 3 8 , 79-89 6 0 . VERNON, P.E. The structure of human a b i l i t i e s . N.Y., Wiley, 1951 61. WALLACH, H. Some considerations concerning the r e l a t i o n between perception and cognition. J. Personal., 1949, 18, p.6 62. WITKIN, H.A. Individual differences i n ease of perception of embedded fi g u r e s . J. Personal., 1950, 19, 1, 1-15 63. WITKIN, H.A. The nature and importance of in d i v i d u a l differences i n perception. J. Personal., 1949, 18, p.145 64. WOLTMANN, A.G. The Bender Visual-Motor Gestalt Test. In Abt, L.E. and Bellak, L. Projective  psychology. N.Y., Knopf, 1950 65. W00DW0RTH, R.S. Experimental Psychology. N.Y., Holt, 1938 • i -66. W00DW0RTH, R.S. Re-enforcement of perception. Amer.J. Psychol., 1947, 6 0 , 119-124. APPENDIX A THE MASLOW SECURITY-INSECURITY TEXT 66 I. 2. 3. 4. 5.., 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. I I . IS, 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20.*. 21. 22. 23. 24. Do you o r d i n a r i l y l i k e to be with people rather than alone?. Do you have s o c i a l ease? Do you lack self-confidence? . Do you f e e l that you get enough praise?. Do you often have a feeli n g of resentment against the world?. Do you think people l i k e you as much as they do others? Do you worry too long over humiliating experiences? l _ Can you be comfortable with yourself? Are you generally an unselfish person? 1 Do you tend to avoid unpleasantness-by running away?_ Do you often have a f e e l i n g of loneliness even when you are with people? Do you f e e l that you are getting a square deal i n l i f e ? When your friends c r i t i c i z e you,do you usually take i t well?. Do you get discouraged easily?. Do you usually f e e l f r i e n d l y toward most people?. Do you often f e e l that l i f e i s not worth l i v i n g ? _ Are you generally optimistic? Do you consider yourself a rather nervous person? Are you in general a happy person?. Are you o r d i n a r i l y quite sure of yourself?. Are you often self-conscious? Do ycu tend to be d i s s a t i s f i e d with yourself? Are you frequently in low s p i r i t s ? ; When you meet people for the f i r s t time do you usually f e e l they w i l l not l i k e you?. 25. Do you have enough f a i t h i n yourself? 26. 27. 28. 29. 30. 31. 32. 33. 34. 35 . 36. 37. 38. 39. Do you f e e l that i n general most people can be trusted? Do you f e e l that you are useful i n the world? Do you o r d i n a r i l y get on we l l with others?,. Do you spend much time worrying about the future? Do you usually f e e l w e l l and strong? : Are you a good conversationalist?-Do you have the f e e l i n g of being c burden to others? Do you have d i f f i c u l t y i n expressing your feelings? Do you usually rejoice i n the happiness or good fortune of others? .__ _ L . i j j 1 •-> I- -i i • j - - - t ~ --i-4-Do you often f e e l l e f t out of things?., Do you tend to be a suspicious person? ——-Do you o r d i n a r i l y think of the world as a nice place to l i v e in? Do you get upset easily?, '  Do you think of yourself often? ;  67 > Do you f e e l that you are l i v i n g as you please rather than as someone else pleases? _ __, ,Do you f e e l sorrow and p i t y for yourself when things go wrong? Do you f e e l that you are a success at. your work or your job? Do you o r d i n a r i l y l e t people see what you are r e a l l y l i k e ? Do you f e e l that you are not s a t i s f a c t o r i l y adjusted to life?_. Do you o r d i n a r i l y proceed on the assumption that things usually tend to turn out a l l right? , ;  i s a great burden? ; feelings of i n f e r i o r i t y ? :  ' good' ? : with the opposite sex? [ with an idea that people are watching 51. 52. 53. 54. 55. 56. 57. 58. 59. 60. 61. 62. 63. 64. 65. 66. 67. 68. 69 . 70. 71. 72. 73. 74. 75. Do you f e e l that l i f e Are you troubled with Do you generally f e e l Do you get along w e l l /ire you ever troubled you on the street? Are you ea s i l y hurt? ___ Do you f e e l at home i n the world? ... Do you worry about your intelligence? Do you generally put others at t h e i r ease? Do you have a vague fear of the future? Do you f e e l you are generally lucky? Do you behave naturally?..... Did you have a happy childhood? Do you have many r e a l friends?__ Do you f e e l r e s t l e s s most of the time? Do you tend to be a f r a i d of competition? _._ your home environment happy? you worry too much about possible misfortunes? j you often become very annoyed with people? . j. you o r d i n a r i l y f e e l contented? your moods tend to alternate to from very happy to very sad?| you f e e l that you are respected by people i n general? you able to work harmoniously with others? Xfci Do Do Do Do Do A r e Do you f e e l you can't control your feelings? Do you sometimes f e e l that people laugh at you? A r e you generally a relaxed person (rather than tense)? On the whole do you think you are treated right by the world? A r e you ever bothered by a.feeling that things are not r e a l ? _ H a v e you often been humiliated? __ : — — Do you think you are often regarded as queer?._ _ APPENDIX B THE GOTTSCHALDT FIGURES TEST IT ame s • S _ Fo.of years at university: TIG GOTTSCHALDT P I GURUS s A&B.. INSTRUCTIONS Look at the pair of drawings. The f i r s t figure i s contained i n the second figure.The second figure has been marked to sBaow t h i s . In t h i s pair of drawings,mark that part of the second figure which i s the same as the f i r s t f i g u r e . 6 9 On the next page are more figures to he marked i n the same way .When the si g n a l i s given,turn the page and "begin. 70 ' PART I ... -:, In each p a i r of f i g u r e s below, mark th a t part of the second f i g u r e which i s the same as the f i r s t . 71 PART I I Look at the adjacent f i g u r e . I t i s contained i n each of the drawings below. Find i t i n each drawing and then mark i t . Mark only one f i g u r e i n each drawing. 7 7 2 PART I I I Look at the two adjacent figures. One of them i s contained In each of the drawings below. In each of the following drawings, mark that part which i a the same as one of the adjacent figures. Mark only one figure i n each drawing. 73 PART IV Look at the two adjacent f i g u r e s . One of them i s contained i n each of the drawings below. In each of the fo l l o w i n g drawings, mark that part which i s the same as one of the adjacent f i g u r e s . Mark only one figure i n each drawing. X X X X X X 0%, X PART V Look at the two adjacent f i g u r e s . One of them i s contained i n each of the drawings below. In each of the f o l l o w i n g drawings, mark that part which Is the same as one of the adjacent f i g u r e s . Mark only one f i g u r e In each drawing. APPENDIX C THE SCORING TABLES AND SCORING PROCEDURE USED WITH THE GOTTSCHALDT FIGURES TEST SCORING PROCEDURE FOR GOTTSCHALDT FIGURES TEST 1) - The number of designs sketched out as having been seen were t o t a l l e d for each page. 2) - The percentage of designs seen per page was determined by reference to the table printed on the following page. 3) - The average percentage number of designs seen per page was determined as the score for the te s t . CONVERSION TABLE : NUMBER OF DESIGNS CORRECTLY SEEN TO PERCENTAGE OF PAGE TOTAL Part I Parts I I and I I I Raw Score & Raw Score: % 1 4 1 - 1 4 2 7 2 - 2 9 3 11 .3 - 43 4 — 15 4 - 5 7 5 19 5 - 71 6 22 6 - 8 6 * 7 _ -' 26 7 - 100 8 mm 30 9 - 33 10 - 37 Parts IV and V 11 - 41 12 - 44 13 48 (fo • raw score 14 - 52 15 - 56 16 - 59 17 — 63 -18 - 67 19 - 70 20 - 74 21 78 ' 22 81 23 — 85 24 - 89 25 — 93 26 - 96 27 - 100 APPENDIX D THE ADMINISTRATION PROCEDURE USED WITH THE GOTTSCHALDT FIGURES TEST DIRECTIONS FOR ADMINISTERING GOTTSCHALDT FIGURES TEST INTRODUCTION Don't open the booklet. F i l l i n the information requested and read the cover page. Do the example. (Anyone not understand?) In t h i s t e s t , the sample figure ( l i k e the f i r s t f i g u r e ) , i s always contained i n the more complex figure ( l i k e the second f i g u r e ) , i n the same position as, and the same size as, the sample fig u r e . (Understand?) You mark with your pe n c i l the outline of the sample figure i n the more complex f i g u r e . Speed i s the most important thing i n t h i s t e s t . As long as I can t e l l what figure you have seen and marked, that i s accurate enough. I repeat, speed i s the most important th ing i n t h i s t e s t . Now, I w i l l expla in exactly what i s to be done as we go along.. Your test booklet contains a cover page and f i v e pages of drawings numbered parts one to f i v e . Each part w i l l be separately and s t r i c t l y t imed. I t i s very important that each time I t e l l you to stop, that you immediately stop what you are doing, put down your p e n c i l , and close the booklet . We w i l l only do one page at a t ime. Part I: Now, put your p e n c i l s beside the paper. There i s a loose white sheet of paper under the cover page. Take that out. Without opening the booklet , l i f t up the cover page, and the next page, and again i n s e r t the white paper. 0n;. part one I want you to do the l e f t hand column of drawings f i r s t , then the middle, and the the r i g h t hand column. Now put your pencils beside the paper. Now, l i f t up the cover page: This i s part one: Read the instructions : Pick up your pencils - begin. (105 seconds) STOP: Put down your pencils; close the booklet. Part I I : Now, put your pencils beside the paper. Take out the white sheet of paper. Without opening the booklet, l i f t up the cover page, the next page, and the next page, and then insert the white paper. Part two i s s l i g h t l y d i f f e r e n t from part one. This time there i s one sample figure at the top of the page, and i t i s contained i n each of the drawings below i t . Again, i t i s always contained i n the larger drawings i n the same pos i t i o n , and the same size as the sample f i g u r e . I want you to work across the rows of drawings from l e f t to r i g h t . Now, put your pencils beside the paper. Turn to part two: Read the instructions : -Pick up your pencils - begin. (35 seconds) STOP : Put down your pencils and close the booklet. Part I I I : Put the white sheet of paper beneath the next page i n your booklet. This next part, part three, i s di f f e r e n t from parts one and two. This time there are two sample figures at the top of the page. In each of the larger drawings you w i l l f i n d one of these samples - either one. Mark only one figure i n each drawing. Again, the sample figure i s always contained i n the larger drawing i n the same po s i t i o n , and the same size as the sample. Again, I want you to work across the rows of drawings from l e f t to r i g h t . Put your pencils beside the paper. Turn to part three: Read the in s t r u c t i o n s : Pick up your pencils - begin. (70 seconds) STOP: Put down your pencils and close the booklet. Parts IV and V: (For parts four and f i v e read the above instructions for part I I I , except for the second l i n e ) Time for part four: (120 seconds) Time for part f i v e : (150 seconds) Hand i n the papers and pencils and please say as l i t t l e about t h i s as possible to your fri e n d s . I t w i l l be more interesting for them i f they take these tests without f i r s t knowing about them. Thank you very much for coming over. APPENDIX E MOONEY CLOSURE TEST SCORING BOOKLET 85 C L O S U R E T E S T | Surname: j I Group: A N S W E R S H E E T Given names: I Sex: i i T Date"of"birth Place of test Date of tes-! Directions: Each answer i s to be written i n the space which has the same number as the picture i n the Closure Test booklet. j Each answer should describe the pictured object i n a few well-chosen words. Tho f i r s t four pictures are practice examples. The remaining 40 make '• up the actual test. PRACTICE EXAMPLES: 3 I THE CLOSURE TEST: I 5 ! 9 j i o L T 12 t 13' |14" 15" 16 |17~ I r19 •20 8 6 THE CLOSURE TEST (continued): 1 2 1 ' 23 " : " : " " " " ~ ~ ~ 7 " ~ ; 2i+ 25 27 23 00 I ' ,30 : 3 i - . " 7 32 ~ ' ' ' ~ '"" ! 33 ~ ~ " " ~ ; !35 ~ " 1 '39 40 •41 1 142 143~ [ 4 4 Do not write anything below this l i n e : PsyUBC Q - 4 1 2 / 2 2 7 : 9 : 5 1 \ from McGill' original. I APPENDIX F THE RAW DATA FOR ALL THE EXPERIMENTAL SUBJECTS 88 LEGEND Column 1 2 3 4 Number of subject 5 Sex 6 Age 7 No. of years at 8 university (Ed.level) Achievement score Gottschaldt score Mooney score Maslow score 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 1 M 1 9 2 5 9 7 9 1 6 1 2 2 F 19 1 56 52 7 1 5 3 M 1 9 . 2 70 9 2 22 1 2 4 F 19 2 5 0 5 6 9 3 6 5 M 19 2 7 9 9 4 15 25 6 M 1 9 . 2 6 9 7 4 1 3 1 0 7 F 1 9 2 8 5 8 2 14 3 6 8 M 2 53 8 9 1 5 25 9 F 2 1 2 8 1 4 9 7 9 1 0 M 21 2 4 7 6 4 9 25 1 1 F 1 9 2 4 7 3 9 1 3 6 1 2 M 1 7 2 53 1 2 1 5 13 F 2 0 2 5 9 7 4 1 1 2 4 14 M 1 9 1 3 8 59 2 8 3 7 15 M 2 4 1 56 82 1 3 2 9 16 F 1 8 1 3 8 6 6 27 2 0 17 M 1 9 2 7 9 9 2 4 15 18 F 2 0 1 4 6 4 6 8 8 19 M 2 0 1 55 83 2 4 4 1 2 0 F 20 2 58 55 14 2 7 21 F 1 53 3 9 6 3 7 2 2 F 1 9 2 6 3 6 4 1 8 2 7 23 F 1 8 2 5 7 6 5 2 0 9 2 4 M 1 9 1 3 4 4 7 1 1 7 25 M 1 9 2 6 7 7 1 3 6 1 3 26 F 19 2 4 6 7 7 2 4 8 27 F 2 2 1 6 6 52 1 6 1 4 2 8 F 20 1 4 8 5 7 5 26 2 9 F 1 8 1 57 53 15 1 1 3 0 M 2 2 2 6 4 5 2 1 5 26 3 1 F 1 8 1 6 3 9 4 2 2 3 3 2 M 1 9 1 3 8 57 6 1 8 33 M 1 9 2 52 5 4 17 1 9 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 3 4 F 19 2 56 6 5 5 1 0 3 5 F 2 1 3 57 7 7 13 31 3 6 F 17 2 ' 58 58 15 26 3 7 F 19 1 •61 45 1 6 33 3 8 M 2 2 2 3 8 7 3 3 2 8 39 M 19 1 52 6 6 7 9 40 M 2 6 6 4 5 1 1 21 4 1 F 1 7 1 2 ? 50 23 25 4 2 M 1 8 2 6 6 9 2 27 1 6 43 M 1 5 7 8 7 21 1 1 4 4 F 1 8 2 59 91 25 1 5 4 5 F 1 8 1 5 7 56 1 0 4 1 4 6 M 2 0 1 6 1 6 0 1 1 4 4 7 M 19 2 49 23 13 3 4 4 8 F 1 8 1 4 8 6 1 1 4 1 1 49 M 19 1 4 3 7 4 9 1 3 50 M 1 8 2 49 63 12 I 51 M 2 0 2 7 9 7 9 15 8 52 F 19 1 4 3 6 6 7 1 6 53 M 2 0 2 55 8 3 17 1 6 5 4 M 1 8 2 7 2 1 0 0 25 1 0 55 M 1 8 1 4 1 3 5 - 1 2 I 5 6 M 2 0 2 5 8 58 l£ 2 6 57 M 2 0 2 9 3 16 9 58 M 1 8 1 8 1 9 9 24 li 59 F 1 8 1 6 4 3 6 14 26 6 0 M 19 2 4 7 8 4 1 1 17 6 1 F 17 1 73 4 0 1 5 1 6 6 2 M 1 8 1 50 55 2 0 1 3 63 F 1 8 1 6 1 8 6 26 1 1 6 4 M. 2 1 2 52 73 2 0 1 9 6 5 M 19 2 6 3 75 20 33 6 6 M 2 4 2 55 7 4 1 5 4 1 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 67 F 19 2 77 98 11 19 68 M 19 2 70 63 8 11 69 M 20 1 53 100 15 16 70 M 19 1 66 75 11 24 71 M 19 2 74 50 18 9 7 2 M 18 2 63 82 18 21 73 F 18 1 52 68 19 8 74 M 19 2 61 59 9 11 73 M 18 1 31 53 19 35 76 F 19 2 49 91 8 7 77 F 19 2 56 35 20 20 78 M 20 1 51 86 23 21 79 M 1 65 53 16 6 8 0 M 18 1 51 95 30 13 81 M 18 1 45 45 7 18 82 M 21 2 50 26 18 7 8 3 M 19 2 65 75 18 9 84 M 17 1 74 94 17 10 85 M 2 27 37 14 59 86 F 19 2 50 91 24 8 87 M 19 1 43 79 2 6 15 88 F 18 1 65 71 21 2 9 89 M 19 2 50 43 5 33 90 M 22 1 47 77 24 1 8 91 F 17 1 46 66 7 20 92 F 18 1 6 0 55 11 15 93 M 19 1 25 59 12 22 94 F 19 2 58 39 4 15 95 F 18 2 73 88 10 4 96 M 25 4 62 72 11 11 97 F 1 8 1 70 91 25 10 98 F 20 2 47 43 8 33 99 F 18 2 56 91 26 19 100 M 19 2 53 67 29 12 101 F 19 2 51 14 4 28 102 F 18 1 46 84 17 37 103 M 19 1 51 71 18 11 104 F 19 1 6 4 76 9 20 105 F 19 2 61 8 0 25 19 1 0 6 M 18 1 59 75 14 31 107 M 3b 1 43 38 15 20 1 0 8 F 18 2 81 50 1 6 38 109 M 19 2 66 55 10 41 110 F 18 2 73 31 5 15 111 M 20 2 73 98 23 33 1 2 3. 4 5 6 7 8 112 M 21 2 56 67 21 19 113 F 18 1 56 75 17 12 114 M 19 2 53 66 2 8 38 115 M 20 2 51 31 12 22 116 M 19 1 55 48 12 11 117 M 25 2 61 69 9 6 118 F 2 59 70 25 19 119 F 2 63 68 28 26 120 F 18 1 6 1 58 13 37 121 M 25 4 56 97 18 13 122 M 21 2 52 41 21 18 123 F 18 2 63 76 13 14 124 F 22 4 41 71 14 17 1 2 5 M 19 1 51 84 1 6 22 1 2 6 M 20 1 40 37 18 5 127 F 20 1 46 82 11 12 128 F 1 53 37 20 1 6 129 F 1 6 4 62 22 27 130 F ' 18 1 68 82 29 28 131 M 21 2 70 82 15 1 6 132 M 19 2 75 68 9 5 133 M 20 4 87 83 11 19 134 M 21 3 43 9 2 19 19 135 F 19 1 6 2 66 18 27 136 M 22 1 4 8 - 3 2 1 19 137 M 21 2 45 61 14 25 138 F 19 2 59 47 10 12 139 F 17 1 73 50 1L 33 140 M 19 2 66 20 6 24 141 M 18 1 40 57 4 3 142 M 20 4 57 70 14 12 143 M. 19 1 77 66 13 \\ 144 F 18 2 51 43 15 36 47 145 M 20 2 62 50 14 146 M 19 2 49 85 13 9 147 M 21 1 36 55 12 43 149 F 19 1 4 8 47 15 10 150 M 23 1 61 49 8 0 151 M 1 8 1 46 54 22 4 2 152 M 21 2 55 83 26 3 2 153 M 21 2 69 73 15 33 154 F 18 1 53 30 15 15 155 F 19 1 53 52 13 9 156 M 24 2 4 2 39 12 6 157 M 19 2 79 7 2 19 27 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 158 M 18 1 53 41 8 33 159 H 2 61 70 9 19 160 F 19 2 51 67 3 2 APPENDIX G THE DATA FOR THE TWO MATCHED GROUPS Legend given on the following page. 1- 2 -3 4 5 s I s I s I > S 1 1 0 6 M 19 18 2 1 59 6 65 M 19 19 2 2 69 9 7 F 21 19 2 2 81 11 4 F 19 19 2 2 47 18 98 F 20 20 1 2 46 23 45 F 18 18 2 1 57 2 4 14 M 19 19 1 1 34 26 102 F 19 18 2 1 46 2 9 130 F 18 18 1 1 57 31 37 F 18 19 1 1 63 34 20 F 19 20 2 2 56 38 148 M 22 21 2 1 -38 39 114 M- 19 19 1 2 52 50 47 M 18 19 2 2 49 51 111 M 20 20 2 2 79 54 59 MF 18 18 - 2 1 72 55 151 M 18 18 1 1 41 57 153 M 20 21 2 2 74 63 120 F 18 18 1 1 61 71 58 M 19 18 2 1 74 73 144 F 18 18 1 2 52 74 145 M 19 20 2 2 61 76 101 F 19 19 2 2 49 82 83 m s •s 8 i 8 6 7 8 I S I S I S I 59 7 9 75 1 6 14 12 3 1 6 3 7 4 75 1 3 2 0 1 0 33 8 5 4 9 8 2 7 1 4 9 3 6 50 3 9 56 9 6 3 6 4 7 4 6 43 8 8 8 33 57 6 5 56 2 0 1 0 9 4 1 3 8 4 7 59 1 1 28 7 3 7 4 6 77 8 4 2 4 17 8 3 7 6 8 53 8 2 15 29 1 1 2 8 6 1 9 4 4 5 22 1 6 3 33 58 65 55 5 14 1 0 2 7 3 6 73 55 3 2 1 2 8 43 53 6 6 66 7 28 9 3 8 4 9 6 3 23 1 2 13 5 3 4 7 3 7 9 9 8 15 23 8 33 6 4 1 0 0 3 6 25 14 1 0 2 6 4 6 3 5 54 1 2 22 3 4 2 6 9 93 73 1 6 15 9 33 61 8 6 58 2 6 1 3 1 1 3 7 8 1 50 9 9 1 8 2 4 9 31 51 6 8 43 19 15 8 3 6 6 2 59 50 9 14 1 1 4 7 51 91 1 4 8 4 7 2 8 11 2 6 7 5 a !8 .3 ii 1 2 3 4 S I S I S I 84 139 MF 17 17 1 1 86 28 x F 19 20 2 1 95 108 F 18 18 2 2 100 56 M 19 20 2 2 103 158 M 19 18 1 1 113 36 F 18 17 1 2 116 19 M 19 20 1 1 117 30 M 25 22 2 2 126 88 MF 20 18 1 1 132 157 M 19 19 2 2 138 135 F 19 19 2 1 141 75 M 18 18 1 1 146 89 M 19 19 2 2 150 15 M 23 24 1 1 155 22 F 19 19 1 2 156 66 M 24 24 2 2 160 35 F 19 21 2 3 5 6 7 8 S I S I S I S I 74 73 94 50 17 7 10 33 50 48 91 57 24 5 8 26 73 81 88 50 10 16 4: 38 53 58 67 66 29 16 12 26 51 53 71 41 18 8 11 33 56 58 75 58 17 15 12 26 55 55 48 83 12 24 11 41 61 64 69 52 9 15 6 26 40 65 • 37 71 18 21 5 29 75 79 68 7 2 9 19 5 2 7 59 62 47 66 10 18 12 27 40 31 57 53 4 19 3 35 49 50 85 43 13 5 9 33 61 56 49 82 8 13 0 29 53 63 52 64 13 18 9' 27 42 55 39 74 12 15 6 41 51 57 67 77 3 13 2 31 LEGEND -Column -'S» column contains data for 'secure' group ' I ' column contains data for 'insecure' group 1 •- Subject 2 - Sex 3 - Age 4 - Ed. l e v e l Column - 5 6 7 8 Achievement score - Gottschaldt score * Mooney score - Maslow score 

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:
https://iiif.library.ubc.ca/presentation/dsp.831.1-0106556/manifest

Comment

Related Items