UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

A study of factors in marksmanship Sampson, Hubert 1951

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

Item Metadata

Download

Media
831-UBC_1951_A8 S16 S7.pdf [ 5.95MB ]
Metadata
JSON: 831-1.0106579.json
JSON-LD: 831-1.0106579-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 831-1.0106579-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 831-1.0106579-rdf.json
Turtle: 831-1.0106579-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 831-1.0106579-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 831-1.0106579-source.json
Full Text
831-1.0106579-fulltext.txt
Citation
831-1.0106579.ris

Full Text

A STUDY OF FACTORS IN MARKSMANSHIP by HUBERT SAMPSON A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFIIMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARTS in the Department of PHI 10 SO PHY AND PSYCHOLOGY We accept this thesis as confoiming to the standard required from candidates for the degree of MASTER OF ARTS Members of thfe Department of Philosophy and Psychology THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA October, 1951 A STUDY OF FACTORS IN MARKSMANSHIP Abstract This study i s an attempt to describe as accurately as possible what occurs in terms of patterns of respiration, stock pressure, and aiming time when a group of poor marksmen and a group of good marksmen fi r e a Service r i f l e with a Ho. 1 tube from a prone position on an indoor miniature range. In addition, some data on the possible influence of the f i r e r ' s position, vision and shooting experience are also discussed. The basic argument of the research runs as follows. If the principal factors under consideration here are important in marksmanship, then i t should be possible to demonstrate their importance by one or a l l of the following procedures: (a) By comparing good marksmen with poor marksmen in terms of the factors studied, (b) By comparing the patterns of breathing, stock pressure and aiming time which obtain for the dead-on-the-bull and in-the-bullseye shots fired by the Good Marksman Group with: shots f a l l i n g i n the same areas fired by the Poor Marksman Group; and shots which f a l l outside the bu l l In various designated areas of the target fired by both the Good Marksman Group and the Poor Marksman Group. (c) By comparing one with the other, the patterns of breathing, stock pressure and aiming time which obtain for shots fired by the Good Marksman Group and the Poor Marksman Group f a l l i n g i n areas other than the bullseye. A l l the subjects used in the study were volunteers from two groups of university students. Group I consisted of 44 members of the C.O.T.O., U.N.T.D, and R.G.A.F. Flight at the University of British Columbia. Group II consisted of 64 university students not . belonging to the above mentioned groups. Complete and detailed analyses were made of 19 subjects in Group I and 21 subjects i n Group II. The manner i n which these subjects were chosen for detailed study is discussed in the text of the report. The main equipment used i n this study consisted of: (a) A Lee Enfield r i f l e with a No. 1 tube, so equipped as to permit the measurement of stock pressure and aiming time. (b) A "General Radio" recording camera which permitted a continuous record of the changes in respiratory, pressure and aiming time patterns as the subject fired. (c) A pneumograph and a sphygmomanometer to measure the respiratory changes. Some of the principal results of this study may be summarized as follows: 1. The respiratory trends associated with the bullseye shots fired by the Good Marksmen Group are distinct from any other group, especially with regard to the "follow through" after firing, 2. Those shots falling high on the target fired by either group appear to be associated with a character-istic respiratory trend, especially immediately after the firepoint, 3. The low shots in the major target areas by the Poor Marksmen resemble each other in respiratory trends, 4. Exhaling before firing; breathing immediately after firing; and the shortest aiming time of a l l shots, seem to be the characteristic trends associated with off-target shots. 5. The low shots fired by the Good Marksmen are associated with breathing after the f irepoint and an aiming time which is longer than the bullseye shots for the same group. 6. The "vice-like" grip recommended by the training manuals is not observed when firing a Service r i f l e with a .22 bore. 7. Neither shots fired by the Good Marksmen, nor shots fired by the Poor Marksmen, whether they be good or poor, can be accounted for in terms of either the amount of pressure exerted at the firepoint or to any changes in the amount of pressure exerted Immediately before or after firing, 8. Whether a shot falls in the bullseye, off the target, or in any of the other specified areas of the target, would not appear to be significantly dependent upon whether or not stock pressure is associated with i t , 9. There is some indication that for most individuals, the recommended firing position is the most stable one and as such, is an aid in good shooting. A n e concluding sections of the report are concerned with a summary description of the trends associated with shots f a l l i n g i n the bullseye area and shots f a l l i n g o f f the target i n teims of a l l the factors studied. In this section there i s also included a discussion of the •values and limitations of the miniature range as a technique for training marksmen. In this connection, i t i s noted that this study i s i n agreement with an earlier study carried out by the Aimy Operational Research Group. A discussion of the possible values and some limitations of the study together with suggestions for further research, complete the report. CONTENTS CHAPTER PAGE I INTRODUCTION 1 Origin of the Study 1 Purpose of the Study 2 Previous Studies of the iactors i n Marksmanship 2 Psychomotor Studies 3 Studies of Eye Dominance 7 Contributions of the Various Training Manuals to the Theory of Shooting 10 Respiration 10 Holding 12 The Use of the .22 Rifle on the Miniature Range for Training in Marksmanship 13 II SITUATION, EQUIPMENT, MATERIAL AND SUBJECTS 16 The Situation 16 The Equipment 17 The Materials 20 The Subjects 21 III THE METHOD 23 The Plan of the Research 23 The Procedure 24 The Controls 26 Control of the Subjects 26 Control of the Situation 2? Apparatus used to Control 27 17 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 29 The Logic of the S t a t i s t i c a l Analysis 29 Consideration of the Results 35 Preliminary Considerations 35 Discussion of the Respiration and Aiming Time Trends 45 Summary of the Respiration and Aiming Time Trends 52 Discussion of the Pressure Trends 53 Summary of the Pressure Trends 70 Incidental Observations . 7 2 V CONCLUSION AND. FINAL SUMMARY OF THE MAJOR . FINDINGS . . 78 A Description of the Trends associated with Shots Railing i n the Bullseye Area in Terms of the Major Bactors Studied 79 CONTENTS (Cont.) CHAPTER PAGE V CONCLUSION AND FINAL SUMMARY OF THE MAJOR FINDINGS (Cont.) A Description of the Trends Associated with Shots l a l l i n g Off the Target i n Terms of the Major Eaetors Studied 80 The Values and Limitations of the Miniature Range as a Technique for Training Marksmen 81 Limitations of the Study 82 REFERENCES 85 APPENDICES 87 A The C r i t i c a l Ratios for the Intervals Considered with Regard to the Number of Shots Associated with Held Breath 88 B X 2 and P Values for the Respiration Trends 89 C 2? and P Values for the Stock Pressure Trends 99 D The Telebinocular Chart 103 E The Main Record Forms 105 F An Outline Diagram of Recording Apparatus 109 FIGURES AND TABLES FIGURE PAGE 1 Target Areas Involved for the Shots Fired by 19 Good Marksmen 31 2 Target Areas Involved for the Shots Fired by 21 Poor Marksmen 32 3 Histographic Comparison of the Good and Poor Marksmen with Regard to the Percentage of Shots Associated with Held Breath 34 4 Histogram Representing the Average Total Scores of 77 Marksmen 36 5 Diagrammatic Representation of the Significant Tendencies in the Respiration Curves Associated with Shots Balling in the Major Target Areas — Good and Poor Marksmen 46 6 Diagrammatic Representation of the Significant Tendencies i n the Respiration Curves Associated with Shots l a l l i n g i n the Bullaeye and Minor Target Areas -• Good and Poor Marksmen 47 7 Diagram Showing the Relationship Between the Position of the Pressure Pad and the Grip Recommended by the Training Manuals 54 8 Comparison of Pressure Trends at the Firepoint: Good Marksmen's "Dead-On" Shots with Good Marksmen's Shots.in the Other Major Target Areas 57 9 Comparison of Pressure Trends at the Firepoint: Good Marksmen's "Dead-On" Shots with Poor Marksmen's Shots,in the Other Major Target Areas 57 10 Comparison of Pressure Trends at the Firepoint: Poor Marksmen's "Dead-On" Shots with Poor Marksmen's Shots i n the Other Major Target Areas 60 11 Comparison of Pressure Trends at the Firepoint: Poor Marksmen's "Dead-On" Shots with Good Marksmen's Shots.in the Other Major Target Areas 60 12 Comparison of Pressure Trends at the Firepoint: Good Marksmen's MDead-0nM and Bull Shots with Poor Marksmen's IDead-On? and Bull Shots 62 FIGURES AND TABLES (Gout.) FIGURE PAGE 13 Comparison of Pressure Trends at the Firepoint: Good Marksmen's and Poor Marksmen's "Dead-On" Shots with Poor Marksmen's Off-Target Shots . 62 14 Comparison of Pressure Trends at the Firepoint: Good Marksmen*3 Shots with Poor Marksmen's Shots in the Major Target Areas 64 15 Diagram Indicating the Significance of Pressure Changes Between .6 Seconds Before the Firepoint and the Firepoint: Good Marksman Group 64 16 Diagram Indicating the Significance of Pressure Changes Between .6 Seconds Before the Firepoint and the Firepoint: Poor Marksman Group 66 17 Diagram Indicating the Significance of Pressure Changes Between the Firepoint and .6 Seconds After the Firepoint: Good Marksman Group 66 18 Diagram Indicating the Significance of Pressure Changes Between the Firepoint and .6 Seconds After the Firepoint: Poor Marksman Group 66 19 Comparison of the Vertical and Horizontal Shots in Various Target Areas with Regard to the Amount of Pressure at the Firepoint: Good Marksman Group 68 20 Comparison of the Vertical and Horizontal Shots in Various Target Areas with Regard to the Amount of Pressure at the Firepoint 2 Poor Marksman Group 68 21 Comparison of the Vertical and Horizontal Shots Fired by Good and Poor Marksmen with Regard to the Amount of Pressure at the Firepoint 68 22 Diagram Indicating the Significance of Pressure Changes between .6 Seconds before the Firepoint and the Firepoint, Associated with the Vertical and Horizontal Shots: Good Marksman Group 69 23 Diagram Indicating the Significance of Pressure Changes between ,6 Seconds before the Firepoint and the Firepoint, Associated with the Vertical and Horizontal Shots: Poor Marksman Group 69 FIGURES AND TABLES (Cont.) FIGURE PAGE 24 Diagram Indicating the Significance of Pressure Changes between the Firepoint and ,6 Seconds after the Firepoint Associated with the Vertical and Horizontal Shots: Good Marksmen Group 71 25 Diagram Indicating the Significance of Pressure Changes between the Firepoint and .6 Seconds after the Firepoint Associated with the Vertical and Horizontal Shots: Poor Marksman Group 71 TABLE I The Composition of the Good Marksman Group 38 II The Composition of the Poor Marksman Group 40 CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION Origin of the Study In 194-9, the Army Operational Research Group carried out an investigation into the teaching of weapons training (19). It was this report that served as a point of departure for the present study. Therefore, the principal findings of this original report that have relevance for the present research w i l l be discussed in some detail i n the following pages. The research reported here was begun by Dr. T.W. Cook at the University of Saskatchewan in 1949. However, in August of the same year, the r i f l e and other equipment used i n this study were transferred to the University of British Columbia where modifications were made both i n the equipment and the original experimental design, and where the research was completed under the supervision of Professor E.S.W. Belyea of the Department of Philosophy and Psychology at the University of British Columbia. The Purpose of the Study This study i s an attempt to describe as accurately as possible what occurs i n terms of patterns of respiration, stock pressure, and aiming time when a group of poor marksmen and a group of good marksmen f i r e a service r i f l e (with a no. 1 tube) from a prone position on an indoor miniature range. In addition, some data on the possible influences of the fir e r ' s position, vision and shooting experience are also discussed. As w i l l be seen shortly, some studies of marksmanship have been concerned with the problem of whether or not the s k i l l s required are innate or acquired. This study makes no attempt to answer this problem. In a sense then, this study i s primarily descriptive rather than explanatory since neither the materials used nor the data obtained justify an attempt to differen-tiate between either psychological or physiological factors which may be prerequisite to good shooting. Briefly, this study i s concerned with describing the manner by which some subjects succeed in a specialized activity demanded by the situation, and with describing the' manner by which some subjects are unable to do so. Previous Studies of the Factors i n Marksmanship Traditionally, the Armed Services emphasize five factors as being of utmost importance in marksman-ship (12, 21, 23): (a) Breathing (b) Aiming (e) Holding the r i f l e (d) Trigger control (e) Position Trigger control i s considered by training manuals to be the most important factor. "Coordination" of the five factors is also stressed as being essential to becoming an expert marksman. A review of the literature on this subject reveals comparatively few studies pertinent to this investigation. The pertinent studies can be considered under the following headings: (a) Psychomotor studies (b) Studies of eye dominance Psychomotor Studies: One study in this area reported i n the journals is the one where Gates (9) in 1918 attempted to study in the laboratory the a b i l i t i e s of an expert marksman. He compared the performance of an expert marksman with that of ten students on various psychomotor tasks, such as the steadiness test and a rate of tapping test. From this study he concluded: (a) Muscular steadiness of body members was important but not absolutely essential. (b) Muscular control of the fingers i n manipulating the trigger played" a role. (c) The expert marksman showed no . , indication of exceptional vision. (d) To select marksmen, tests of native, not acquired a b i l i t y were needed. Gates did not use a r i f l e in this study. He justified this exclusion by stating that in actual shooting, experience plays too large a role and he hoped to measure innate rather than acquired a b i l i t i e s . Seashore and Adams (14) investigated the relationship between measurements of steadiness and marksmanship. The various measures they used were the Miles ataxiameter, the Beal and Hall ataxiagraph, the Seashore modification of Whipple's Steadiness Test and Adam's modification of Gates' Rifle Steadiness Test. These various tests were administered as a battery to an "unselected" group of fif t y subjects. The results from this group's performance on the various tests were intercorrelated. These inter-correlations ranged from .44 to .59, the median being .48. Seashore and Adams interpreted these results to mean that a "general steadiness" factor was present and a common factor running through the various tests. The same tests were then given to six members of the university Rifle Team. Their performance on the tests was compared to those of the unselected group. The results showed that the r i f l e team exceeded the subjects in the unselected group on the battery. However, one rifleman did not do so. In addition, i t was found on the individual tests that the riflemen placed consistently at the 8th, 9th and 10th deciles of the unselected group. Seashore and Adams state that the ranks of the riflemen "coincided almost perfectly with their ranks in actual inter-collegiate competition." Spaeth and Dunham (17) report a study test in which they tested 72 U.S. Army marksmen on a steadiness/that was Dunlap's modification of the Whipple Steadiness Test. Their subjects were classified from "expert" to "unqualified." Their results show that a rank order coefficient of correlation of -5-.61 -11 was found between performance on the steadiness test and scores obtained on the targets. In their interpretation of their results they suggest that the results may indicate that practice on the range improves steadiness or that steadiness is a factor under-lying development of s k i l l in r i f l e shooting. Belton, Blair and Humphreys (4) used the same battery of tests as Seashore and Adams (14) and found that practice over a ten day period produced improvement in muscular steadiness. However, when this improvement was compared with the entire range of individual differences of their 50 subjects, the average improvement in steadiness was very small (.4 standard deviations). They concluded from their results that since a training period ten times as long as that used in testing produced so l i t t l e improvement in the subjects' performance, i t seems doubtful that transfer in training from, r i f l e shooting could explain the superior steadiness of riflemen on the tests. Humphreys, Buxton and Taylor (11) extended the work of Seashore and Adams (14) and Spaeth and Dunham (17) because "these suggestions of a 'general factor' underlying development of skills," i f verified, would have both theoretical and practical value. They used: (a) Miles' ataxiameter as a measure of postural steadiness. (b) Seashore's modification of Whipple's , . steadiness test as a measure of both "stationary" and "thrusting" steadiness.. -6-(o) A r i f l e steadiness test. Their subjects consisted of: (a) The National Championship five man r i f l e team of the University of Oregon. (b) Eleven other men ranking next to . the above. (c) Thirteen third year military students. (d) Iburteen f i r s t year military students. The results of the various tests are reported as follows? (a) R 5 .77 between marksmanship and four . . tests of steadiness and r = .72 between r i f l e steadiness and marks-manship. (b) "The results corroborate those obtained by Spaeth and Dunham, i.e. marksmanship can be predicted to a considerable extent at least from steadiness." (c) "In this group of marksmen, experience . i s also as prognostic as r i f l e steadi-ness, probably because of the association between the latter and experience, whatever the underlying reasons may be." They conclude: (a) A good rifleman becomes such because . of practice,, (b) On the whole, people with good capacity for marksmanship like to shoot and tend to specialize in i t . (c) Whether muscular steadiness i s a result . of training or a basic capacity for neuro-muscular coordination cannot be Inferred from their data. Serebrennikov (15) reports that he found a positive correlation between motor development and the rank order i n shooting as estimated by commanders. It w i l l be noted from the above studies that there has been a preoccupation with the search for possible innate capacities in marksmanship and that in this regard, the studies have been inconclusive. In addition, i t would appear that much of the apparatus used in the studies i s somewhat removed from the activity that i t attempts to predict. -As a result, the empirical val i d i t y of the measures may be questioned. As pointed out by Super (18) the trend in the use of psychomotor measures i n the prediction of various other performances i s to have the apparatus used resemble the task to be predicted as closely as possible. Also', because of the small groups used, especially the skilled groups, i t is not surprising that inconclusive results were obtained. Finally, no attempt was made to relate specific performance to specific target results. Studies of the Relationship of Eye Dominance to Marksmanship: Banister (1) reports an investigation i n which he studied the effect of the dominant eye on the shooting a b i l i t y of 1,000 British infantrymen. His results show that the dominant eye i s an important factor affecting a b i l i t y with the r i f l e . It appears that the man with the right eye dominant has a considerable advantage ( a l l things being equal) over the other men when required to shoot from the right shoulder. In the same ar t i c l e Banister reports an inquiry in whieh he claims to have demonstrated that visual acuity did not correlate with a b i l i t y to shoot with a r i f l e , since many of the best shots (Cambridge University Rifle Association) had very defective sight. He says, "It i s obviously necessary that the would-be marksman be able to see his target dis t i n c t l y , but apart from particular atmospheric conditions, i t is of no consequence whether for this purpose he uses naked eye or wears spectacles." In Banister's studies, a number of tests were tried out on various groups of men of different degrees of ability, as r i f l e shots, and eventually three tests, which promised to he diagnostic of shooting a b i l i t y were selected. These tests were designed: (a) To test consistency in pointing with . the right hand at various targets when not seen (2). (b) To test a b i l i t y to press a trigger . . without jerking or rotating the hand (3). (c) To determine the dominant eye. Banister states that " L i t t l e need be said of these tests (tests (a) and (b) above) for, though the a b i l i t i e s they tapped appeared to be diagnostic, their importance was comparatively small as compared with that of the dominant eye." He notes that the dominant eye by no means always is the one with the higher acuity and is not necessarily the same as the dominant hand. However, he makes the point that there is considerable agreement between "handedness" and "eyedness." Finally, Banister suggests some general factors that may affect results: (a) Emotional reactions. (b) Differences in the length of service. (c) Lack of uniformity of incentives. (d) Poor vision due to uncorrected refractive errors. The ability to shoot well, he concludes, appears to lead to the development of a higher degree of "soldierliness" as defined in his study. Drake (6) reports a study designed to discover whether rif l e marksmanship can be determined prior to training. His sample consisted of the "best," "average" and "poorest" marksmen in an R.O.T.G. Uniti The measures used by him were as follows: (a) Two forms of a paper and pencil test . . of visual perception. (b) The telebinocular test. (c) A test of touch. (d) A test of muscle perception. (e) An eye-hand coordination test. (f) A visual acuity test. He found that the error score on one form of the visual perception test correlated - . 6 0 with marksmanship, that acuity of aiming eye correlated .40 with marksmanship, and that the tactual perception test correlated - . 3 0 with marksmanship. The other tests, he concludes, gave no significant results. Lebensohn (13) suggests that ocular dominance plays a subordinate role in marksmanship and that both eyes be used in aiming. Simpson and Sommer (16) used 190 English students who practiced r i f l e shooting. They tested the students' eyes with regard to lateral and vertical imbalance, visual efficiency, eye coordination and distance fusion. They found that the correlations between marksmanship and the various visual tests were negligible, and concluded that it did not matter i f the preferred eye was used or -10-not. Finally, Crider (5) studied two companies of untrained Naval recruits and later 8j>6 men's marks-manship scores in relation to eye dominance. He found that those men who were purely s i n i s t r a l made the worst scores and that those men who were purely deztral made the best. Incidentally, he notes that there i s a need for a reliable and valid battery of tests for eye dominance. Of interest in the foregoing summary of the eye dominance are the contradictory conclusions arrived at by the various investigations. It i s suggested here that perhaps some of these inconsistencies are due to the inadequacies of present tests of eye dominance as suggested by Orider (j>)» Also, i t should be noted the relatively subordinate role given to "trigger control" as being diagnostic of marksmanship in Banister's studies (1) quite the opposite of the importance of i t as stressed by the service manuals (12, 21, 23). Contributions of the Various Training Manuals to the Theory of Shooting: Since respiration and stock pressure are the two major factors in marksmanship dealt with in the study, i t is with regard to these factors that the Navy and Army training manuals w i l l be reviewed especially. Respiration: The o f f i c i a l Canadian Army handbook -11-"Shoot to Live" (12) states that "breathing i s . . . . essential to good shooting. It has been estimated the 95 percent of Canadian Army riflemen do not breathe properly while using their r i f l e s , and as a consequence, their scores are not as good as they are capable of producing." Th e statement suggests two things: f i r s t of a l l , that respiration is an important factor i n marksman-ship and secondly, that the optimal breathing patterns necessary to good marksmanship are known. This breathing pattern i s generally stated as follows: "Correct breathing resolves i t s e l f into relaxed, normal breathing, interrupted, by a heavy, normal sigh just before f i r i n g . This sigh is naturally followed by a pause in breathing — a brief period when you virtually do not breathe — and i t i s during that pause that your r i f l e i s steadiest, thus giving you the opportunity to squeeze the trigger." It i s "During the short period of aiming and f i r i n g the shot (that) the f i r e r w i l l have to stop breathing." (12) Just how long this aiming time should be i s not clearly stated i n the manuals. However, because of the importance of this period in later discussions, an attempt w i l l be made to state the case as clearly as possible. In "Shoot to Live" (12) Johnson states "The musketry class can learn proper breathing by holding the breath for periods of 30 seconds." Later (p 76) he states "To f i t the sigh into marksmanship, the recruit only has to momentarily stop breathing, immediately after he has given the sigh and to pause -12-long enough to squeeze the trigger . . . . If the recruit holds his breath longer,than 20 seconds, stop him . . . . Eventually, through practice, the recruit will be able to approximate the expert's 10 seconds interval between the sigh and the squeeze of the trigger." The Infantry Training Vol. 1 Pamphlet 3 (20) states "The general tendency in the recruit is for him to hold his breath for far too long a period, a fault that causes much strain and unsteadiness; this tendency must be cheeked instantly." The Royal Naval Handbook (21) makes no specific reference to this point and so cannot be discussed. The foregoing quotations appear to state the position of the training manuals adequately. Two points only need to be summarized for future reference: (a) The emphasis upon a sigh just before firing. (b) The manuals recommend holding the breath during the period of aiming and firing. This period is 10 seconds for the expert. Holding According to Rifle 1946 (Provisional) the "right hand must be the master hand for every shot fired. It must grip the small of the butt so firmly that no extra pressure can be applied. This vice-like grip, which plays the most important part in obtaining absolute steadiness, should be well forward; this will allow the forefinger . . . . to be around the trigger with the bony part (between the first and second joints) actually on the trigger. - 1 3 -At the same time, the right hand must pull back the r i f l e very firmly into the shoulder. Whenever the butt is brought into the shoulder, the forefinger must take the first pressure on the trigger." The main function of the left hand is to act as a support for the forward end of the r i f l e . This is essentially the same instruction emphasized in "Shoot to Live" and the Infantry Training Pamphlet No. 3 Vol. I. The main point to be noted here' is the emphasis upon a "vice-like" grip upon the butt stock. Finally, a summary will be given of the main procedures for firing a shot as recommended in the various manuals ( 1 2 , 2 0 , 2 3 ) : (a) The rifleman must concentrate upon - each shot. (b) The time for a deliberate shot should not be more than j5 seconds from the moment correct holding starts. (c) Just before accurate aim is taken, breathing should be restrained. (d) "The hold and aim must at least be . maintained until the bullet has left the barrel." The Use of the . 2 2 Rifle on the Miniature Range for Training in  Marksmanship Since the present study was carried out on a miniature range, i t is considered advisable to discuss briefly what the service .manuals and other sources have to say concerning the values and limitations of such ranges as training grounds: 1 . Values of the miniature range: (The following values are taken from the Infantry Training Pamphlet Vol. I No. 3 . ) -14-(a) It i s valuable for the earlier stages of training as well as later practice. (b) Bor the recruit, i t s advantages are: (i) Lack of noise; negligible kick from the r i f l e helps prevent gun shyness. Promotes keenness by introducing competition. Allows him to apply lessons learned and to prepare for the open range. ( i i ) ( i i i ) From the Small Arms Training Vol. I Pamphlet No. 18 (22) the following statement concerning the value of the miniature range i s made: 11 Miniature ranges are most suitable for the early r i f l e training of the recruit where elementary lessons in aiming, holding, trigger pressing and many of the main factors which make for accurate shooting can be practised." 2. The limitations of the miniature range: (The following limitations were noted i n the ORG Report No. 8/49 (19, Appendix D)) (a) "The idea of leading the recruit through the . .miniature and 30 yrds. range in order that the shock of f i r i n g .303 w i l l be less, i s basically wrong. In the great majority of cases the recruit i s l u l l e d with a false sense of security when f i r i n g a .22 r i f l e . He does not hold i t  firmly. He does not have to apply i n practice what he is taught." (b) He i s not f i r i n g his own r i f l e . (c) There i s no kick or bang. The recruit therefore . . takes-longer to get over his gun shyness when taken on the open range. (d) The lighting conditions are too a r t i f i c i a l . the background material to this present study, attention should be called to some of the inconsistencies i n the positions taken by various investigators: 1. There appears to be one group of workers who emphasize vision, especially ocular dominance, as being of prime In concluding the brief discussion of -15-importance in marksmanship. Other investigators consider ocular dominance of negligible importance. The training manuals do not consider the factor of vision at a l l . 2. Muscular steadiness seems to be emphasized to a degree by-a l l the sources, but there is disagreement or at least inconsistencies in the various conolusiions as to whether or not such steadiness improves with practice. 3. There are at least two diametrically opposed views as to the values of the miniature range as a training device. The contributions that this study may be able to make in resolving some of these inconsistencies must wait until the concluding chapter wherein the attempt will be made to relate the results obtained here to those results and recommendations quoted in this introductory statement. - 1 6 -CHAPTER II SITUATION, EQUIPMENT, MATERIALS, AND SUBJECTS The Situation The .22 indoor range at the University of British Columbia was used for the study. This range is a 25 yard miniature range and is used by the C.O.T.C. and the University Rifle Club for training purposes and competitions. This particular range permits three individuals to fire simultaneously from the prone position. The lighting consisted of seven 200 watt lights shielded and directed toward the backstop; a shielded lamp at the firing point; a light approximately half way down the range; and finally, a spectators' light shielded and approximately 12 feet back of the firing point. The targets were fastened to a wooden backstop behind which was a metal stop butt. The range, though narrow, was considered adequate for the purposes of this investigation since only one subject fired at a time. The subject fired from a prone position 25 yards from the target. The recording equipment for this study was enclosed in a box which stood against the wall of the range in a position 4 feet behind and to the right of the subject. The experimenter sat at a table located approximately 12 feet behind the subject, from which point he could record the shots as they were fir e d and also manage the recording apparatus. The Equipment The main equipment used i n this study and described in detail in this section consisted of: (a) A Lee Enfield r i f l e with a No. 1 tube, so equiped as to permit the measurement of stock pressure and aiming time. (b) A "General Badio" recording camera which permitted a continuous record of the changes in respiratory, pressure and aiming time patterns as subject fired, (c) A pneumograph and a sphygmomanometer to measure the respiratory changes. The entire recording apparatus was enclosed in a light-proof box. This box contained an instrument panel and the 35 mm. "General Radio" recording camera. The dimensions of this box were 3^ « x 2f-» x 2^». The inside walls of the box were painted a flat black. Although the top was removable for the adjustment of the apparatus, the interior was light-proof. 0 n . one side of the box were outlet holes for a pneumograph tube, power Intake and electric cable from the panel. The camera was controlled by a switch on the side of the box. A shielded peephole at one end of the box permitted the experimenter to adjust the setting of the pneumograph needle. The base of the box consisted of a 4'9" x 5" plank on one end of which was fixed the instrument panel and on the other end, on a fixed mount, (3*9" or the focal distance away) was the camera. The camera could be loaded with 100 feet of 35 mm. film. The lens setting was f 11 with a focal distance of 4 feet. This camera ran at the rate of 6 seconds to one inch of film. Since i t had no shutter, a continuous graphic record of the subject's respiration, pressure on the stock, time of f i r i n g , aiming time, as indicated on the panel, was obtained. The panel, made of black pl a s t i c , was 16J" x 18" so constructed as to permit the recording of respiration, pressure on the stock, time of f i r i n g and aiming time. On the panel was a d i a l on which the pneumograph needle moved up and down. This d i a l was a ^" x 5^ " slot located 7/8" from the top of the panel and approximately fj" in from one side. In line with the middle of the respiration d i a l , but 1 9/16" below i t , was situated the light which indicated the f i r i n g time. One and 3/8" below this light was the row of 1/8" holes (six in a l l ) which indicated stock pressure. On the back of the panel, fastened i n a single row below the pneumograph tambour, were the seven ^ watt bulbs. The power for these lignts was obtained via two 1^ volt dry c e l l batteries connected in series. The lead from each light ran through a single cable to a switch located above tne trigger on the l e f t hand side of the r i f l e . The respiration indicator rode on a tambour which in turn was connected to the pneumograph by a length of ^" thick wall rubber tubing. A sphymomanometer inserted in this rubber tubing by a glass "T" permitted E to centre the pneumograph needle for each S. The respiration d i a l was marked o f f in a series of parallel lines and lighted by two ^ volt lights fastened to an oblong of lucite behind the d i a l . This light was diffused over the d i a l by means of a piece of opaque drafting cotton fastened to the l u c i t e . The r i f l e used was a Lee Enfield with a No. 1 tube permitting the f i r i n g of .22 cartridges. The weight of the r i f l e was identical with the .303 servioe r i f l e . The fore sight was a blade sight and the rear sight was a |f peep sight. The butt was what is termed "normal length." Although the various pieces of apparatus to be described hereunder were fastened to the r i f l e , care was taken so that they would not interfere with the weight or balance of the r i f l e . (Fig. 7) One and 1/8" behind the trigger guard -20-in the butt stock was located the movable pad (2 5/8" x 1 1/4") U3ed to register stock pressure. The pad rested upon a flat 11 1/8" spring which lay in a groove down the length of the butt. The amount of pressure needed to light the various pressure lights on the panel was regulated by a coiled spring enclosed in a threaded cap and situated just forward of the pad. The pressure pad was in contact with a leafed switch above the trigger. This switch was connected by an electric cord to the panel lights. Behind the bolt was a small wheel on a spring connected to the leafed switch. When the breach was open, the bolt rested upon this wheel depressing it and breaking the electric contact. When the ri f l e was fired, the wheel was raised by a spring, thus closing the circuit and lighting the firing light on the panel. E used a pair of X12 service binoculars to see where each shot f e l l on the target. The Keystone No. 46 Visual Survey Telebinocular was used to check the vision of each S, The Materials Mimeographed sheets containing six miniature targets were used by E. to record shots as they were fired. Record forms for data on height, weight, age, training, awards, and number of rounds fire previously were used for each S, Keystone Visual Survey Tests School Survey Cumulative Record Form No. 3 was used to record the results made in six visual tests given to each S. The targets used were the No. IS small target (4 ft.) 200/25 yds. generally used on Naval indoor .22 ranges. The ammunition used was Dominion .22 long. A direction sheet that was read to the S before he began to f i r e . \ The Subjects A l l the subjects used i n the study were volunteers from two groups of university students. Group I consisted of 44 members of the C.O.T.C., U.N.T.D. and R.C.A.F. University Flight at the University of B r i t i s h Columbia, These men were informed of the study by notices posted on the bulletin boards i n the U.B.C. armouries. Group II consisted of 64 university students not belonging to the above mentioned groups. These men volunteered after reading a notice which stressed that they need not have had any shooting experience* Thus, the t o t a l number of subjects used i n the experiment was 108. Of this number, only 77 were used i n the various stages of the analysis as 31 subjects had to be eliminated for the following reasons: (a) failure to complete their tasks or failure to complete a l l targets i n the required time. (b) Breakdown of the recording apparatus (earlier t r i a l s only), (o) Elimination of female subjects. (In the i n i t i a l stages of . - the investigation, i t was hoped that a number of female -22-subjects who had never fired a r i f l e might be used to obtain a measure of the performance of completely inexperienced shots* However, because of the weight of the r i f l e , and because of the length of time required to obtain their records, these subjects were eliminated.) Complete and detailed analyses were made of the shots of 19 subjects in Group I and 21 subjects i n Group I I . The manner i n which these subjects were chosen for detailed study w i l l be discussed i n the sections to follow. -23-CHAPTEH III THE METHOD The Plan of the Research The basic argument for the research runs as follows* If the principal factors under consideration here, i.e. breathing pattern, stock pressure, aiming time and position are important in marksmanship, then i t should be possible to demonstrate their importance either by one or a l l of the following procedures: (a) By comparing good marksmen with poor marksmen in terms , . of factors studied, (b) By comparing the patterns of breathing, stock pressure and aiming time which obtain for dead-on-th-bull and in-the-bullseye shots fired by the Good Marksman Group with: shots i n the same area fired by the Poor Marksman Group; and shots which f a l l outside the b u l l i n various designated areas of the target fired by both the Good Marksman Group and the Poor Marksman Group, (c) By comparing, one with the other, the patterns of - . breathing, stock pressure and aiming time which obtain -24-for shots fired by the Good Marksman Group and the Poor Marksman Group f a l l i n g i'n areas other than the bullseye» The Procedure While each 3 fired ten shots on three consecutive days using the specially equipped r i f l e , his responses i n terms of respiration, pressure exerted on the r i f l e , f i r i n g time to each shot, length of time i n aiming and prone position taken while f i r i n g were recorded under controlled conditions. The experimental procedure was as follows: 1, The subjects reported to the range on the day assigned to them. They were then read the following statement: "This i s a study of some of the factors i n marksmanship. A l l that you have to do i s f i r e five rounds at each of two targets on three days, preferably consecutive. You may take any prone position you wish and f i r e at w i l l i n your accustomed manner. The only requirement i s that you take up the same point of aim on the b u l l for each shot as indicated on this diagram. Do not group your shots out of the bull area. This i s not a competition but I w i l l be comparing the shots made by the C.O.T.C., U.N.T.D. and other groups, so I want you to do your best." It was hoped to accomplish three things with this statement: -25-(a) To give each. S an idea of what the nature of the study . . was without any specific mention of what was being sought. It is true that the experienced ones would have some idea of what was being measured, but this should only have the effect of having them emphasize what they had already learned. (b) It was important for the study that each S take up the . . same point of aim for each shot. The E mentioned this again from time to time to remind the S i f he appeared to be grouping his shots outside of the bull area. Results to be discussed later indicate that the subjects followed this rule. (c) It was hoped that the suggestion of comparison with other groups would motivate the subjects to do their best and that emphasizing that the study was not a contest would avoid any undue tension on the part of the subjects. Such tension, i f present to a marked degree, would complicate further the interpretation of the results. 2. The S was asked to assume his firing position on the mat. 3. The pneumograph was fastened about the S just below his diaphragm. He was told to exhale before the pneumograph was fastened. Preliminary trials indicated that this position gave the largest sweep on the panel dial. 4. The S was told to be s t i l l for a moment, not to touch the r i f l e and to breathe normally. By means of the sphygmomanometer the E centred the moving needle on the panel which indicated the respiratory changes. 5. The S was instructed briefly concerning safety rules. 6. The target was placed in position by E. 7. The E returned to the spectator*s table behind S and checked the subject's number, his position in the firing order for the day and-the target number strip. These precautions were rigidly adhered to so that the film strip might be accurately identified later, 8. E switched on the recording apparatus and told S that he might fire" when he'wished, 9. E watched with binoculars each shot fired, plotting its position on the subject's miniature target before him. -26-10. Notes were made by E of general movements, behavior and position of S beside the miniature target. 11. When S finished each t r i a l , he was told when to report again, 12. As mentioned earlier, an attempt was made to have S come to the range on three consecutive days. Although this was not always possible, a l l subjects fired their required 30 rounds within a week from starting or else they were eliminated from the study. This precaution was taken to prevent S from practicing between trials. It was hoped by this means to minimize practice effects, 13. The S was not told by E how his shots were falling or shown his targets until he had completed the trials. This was to avoid having S correct his aim and compensate in any other manner for poor shots, 14. Finally, after a l l trials were completed, every subject's vision was tested on the Keystone Telebinocular. Six tests in a l l were used: (a) Simultaneous .fusion, (b) Vertical imbalance, (c) lateral imbalance, (d) Fusion. (e) Right eye usable vision. (f) Left eye usable vision. (All.tests were at the far point.) The Controls The following controls were observed: Control of the Subject: (a) The S was told the general nature of the study, (b) He was told precisely what performance was required. . . In this manner, some control was maintained over the ideational and motor set of each S. (c) The motivational set of the S was also controlled to . „ a degree by the statement read to him. (d) The height of each S was noted together with the ease with which he was able to reach the trigger. If the S encountered difficulty firing with the normal butt, there would be an additional variable to be taken into account in the interpretation of the data. 27-Control of the Situation: Each t r i a l was carried out in the same range under identical lighting conditions. The firing mat was kept in the same position so that although each S might take up any prone position he chose, he would always be the same distance from the target and always be in the same relative position with regard to the target. The E always sat about 12 feet behind S, If another subject was waiting, he sat s t i l l further back of E.and was not allowed to talk to the S firing or to encourage or.interfere with him in any way. Apparatus Used to Control: (a) The experimental variable, i.e. respiration, pressure on stock, aiming time and firing time were a l l controlled by apparatus in the following manner: i . Respiratory changes by the pneumograph, i i . Pressure on the stock by lights connected to the pressure pad on the r i f l e . If the subject's grip was strong, a l l 6 lights went on for the time that grip was maintained and the various lights went on and off as the S slackened or strengthened his grip on the stock, i i i . Rifle was zeroed by R.C.E.M.E. iv. Aiming time and fire time by a light which l i t when the r i f l e bolt was released by the trigger. v. Position was controlled partly by the position of the firing mat and the directions as mentioned earlier, together with notes and diagrams made beside the miniature targets by E while S fired. (b) Other variables controlled by apparatus and equipment: i . Vision checked by the telebinocular. i i . Record sheet for the subject's age, height, weight, previous r i f l e training and experience and number of rounds fired. i i i . Each target was fastened in the identical position on the backstop for a l l subjects and a l l trials. iv. Binoculars were used to record each shot's position as fired, v. Every factor except position and past experience permits the used of a quantitative scale that could be used in comparing the performances of the various subjects. v i . Every factor except vision, past experience and position was recorded on a continuous 35 mm. film strip in graphic form by a shutterless camera. 28-vii . Finally, the selection of the sample assured that there would be subjects who had received formal training together with subjects who had not. The repetition of the task and the number of shots, fired assured to a large extent that E obtained represen-tative samples of each subject's a b i l i t y as a marksman, in addition to allowing for chance errors affecting particular shots. CHAPTER IY RESULTS AND DISCUSSION The Logic of the Statistical Analysis L> The targets were scored in accordance with Dominion Marksmanship standards. An average total score was then obtained for a l l subjects, the maximum score possible being 50. 2. A combined distribution of these average total scores was then made. The groups were combined at the beginning of the analysis because although the sampling procedures seemed to assure the fact that two groups (one service trained, the other relatively untrained) were present, the E could not be absolutely certain of this. Therefore, the assumption was made that the two samples were from the same population. 3 . The top and bottom quartiles were calculated. This gave a group of good and a group of poor marksmen, the relative s k i l l of each group thus being accurately defined in terms of obtained scores. The assumption here was that i f the factors studied did differentiate, then they would do so between these groups. As it turned out, the lower quarter, except for one individual, belonged to the group from the general university population. However, the top quarter contained three persons from the general university populatio A study of their past experience records revealed that a l l three had had Army training. Now this could be taken into -3©* account. As stated earlier, the statistical procedure permitted the defining of the groups quantitatively. 4. A lucite grid was made so that the position of each shot could be read from x=o y*o which represented a dead-on bullseye in terms of a coordinate system. 5. The number of shots falling in a l l areas on the target was then tallied. The results are shown in Figs. 1 and 2, It will be noted from this that the question as to whether or not each S was taking up the same point of aim is answered. Fig. 1, representing the shots for the Good Marksman Group speaks for itself. Fig. 2, representing the shots for the Poor Marksman Group also indicated that they were trying for the bullseye each time. Although not a l l shots are in the bullseye area, the shots are grouped in concentric circles about i t , with the areas having the highest frequencies nearest the bull. If the subjects had not been trying for the bullseye, the grouping would be in one of the quadrants, 6. A l l the film for these subjects was sorted, cut and read. The film was read in the following manner: (a) First, IS) x 10 graph paper was fastened to a glass . - plate which was placed over a lighted box, (b) Each film strip was placed on the graph paper and read , . with a magnifying glass. (c) Beginning at the FP (fire point) and moving to the left , points were read off the curve for every 1/lOth" up to 4/10" and then every 3/10" for 4.8". Next, beginning at the IP and moving to the right, points on the curve were read for every 1/10" for 2", Similarly, the amount of pressure on the stock in terms of the number of six possible lights on at each of these points was also read off and recorded on prepared forms (Appendix E), (d) The length in inches between CF (aiming time) was determined. By this procedure it was found that except for extremely long strips, the entire breathing and pressure record for each S for every shot could be determined quantitatively. It should be mentioned here that the respiration needle's movements were photographed against a graphj the mid point of which was taken as 5 so that a l l respiration changes would be positive. The pressure was recorded in terms of the number of lights on at any given point from one to six. FIG.l. Target areas involved for the shots fired by 1? Good Marksmen. -32--8 -7 - 6 - 5 -4 -3 -2 - 1 0 U +2 *3 4 4 f 5 +6 +7 +8 6 12 l 2 l \ 6 y 1 E E H E 3 3 4 2 \ 2 3 V i \ 3 r 7 20 13 15 7 1 / 4 1 4 3 5--*-"7 4 sL 3 3 3 2 4 2^  556 SHOTS F I G . 2 . Target areas i nvo lved f o r the shots f i r e d by 21 Poor Marksmen. •33-(e) Since i t was known that the camera's reels moved at . . .6 seconds to 1/10", a l l linear measures were transposed into time units* 7. After a l l targets had been scored and a l l film was read, the next step in the analysis consisted in determining whether there were any general respiration trends present. Therefore, graphs were made of the respiration trends of a selection of poor and good marksmen to see i f , by inspection, such trends could be distinguished. Although this procedure did suggest some points, on the whole i t was unsatisfactory, 8* In so far as respiration was concerned, the S in any particular interval had three choices. He could hold his breath, he could inhale or he could exhale. Thus, for every interval of the film, the number of subjects either holding, inhaling or exhaling was tallied, 9, The percentage of total shots acoompanied by held, inhaled or exhaled breath for each interval was determined. These results were graphed and gave Fig. 3, 10, Now, although a general trend was shown in Fig. 3, i t could not be determined from t h i B alone whether the general trend was associated with good or poor shots, 11, It was therefore decided to divide a l l the shots for both good and poor marksmen into a number of groups. 12, Once again, the number of shots associated with held, inhaled or exhaled breath in each interval was tallied, but this time a l l shots were grouped into their various areas on the target, 13, The X 2 technique was used to determine the chance occurrence of the arrangement of shots in the respiratory position (held, exhale and inhale) for each time interval. No X 2 value, in this regard was considered significant i f i t was greater than the .05 level of probability. Most distributions were at the .01 level of probability. In this manner then, respiration curves representative of group trends in the specified areas of the target were determined. The stability of the whole curves could be determined by an adaption of the X 2 technique. A l l of the other factors were treated with statistical techniques adapted to their particular requirements. FIG.3. H i s tog raph i c comparison of the Good and Poor Marksmen w i t h regard to the percentage of shots a s soc i a t ed w i t h he ld breath » -35-Oonsideration of Results  Preliminary considerat ions Fig. 4 snows a distribution of tbe average total scores of 77 marksmen. Inspection of the distribution shows that i t i s significantly skewed negatively (Sk/ Ssk • 87»4)« S t a t i s t i c a l l y , this distribution i s a real divergence from the normal curve, i . e . , the skewness i s not a result of chance fluctuation. This distribution corresponds then to what might be ezpected since i t represents the combined seores made by a group of trained and a group of relatively untrained marksmen. That i s , one would expect that even i n the case where the subjects were untrained, that factors other than chance would determine the position of the shots.on the target. This, and the presence of trained marksmen, i s probably responsible for the skewness. Later considerations demonstrate this f i r s t assumption to be the ease. For example, on the basis of a single factor (respiration) i t appears that groups of shots f a l l i n g i n specified areas of the target are associated with certain characteristic respiratory trends, even in the case of untrained individuals. Therefore, i f each S was trying to hit the bullseye, and there i s evidence that he was, then the problem i s to determine why, in some cases, he did not do so. - 3 6 -FIG.4. Histogram rep resen t ing the average t o t a l scores o f 77 marksmen, I f the assumption that factors other than chance factors were responsible for the clustering of scores in the upper range of the distribution i s accepted then, i t i s justifiable to investigate reasons for t h i s i n terms of the factors studied to see i f they operate together to determine the scores obtained. As stated earlier, the upper and lower quarters of this combined group were taken as defining the Good Marksman Group and the Poor Marksman Group respectively. In average total scores, then, Group I (the good marksmen) i s composed of subjects who had an average t o t a l score of 48,8 or greater. Group II (the poor marksmen) consisted of a l l those individuals who had an average score of 45,1 and below. The median score for the combined group i s 47, Table I shows the composition of Group I. Here, the 19 individuals composing the group are arranged in order of merit with regard to average scores and the table includes material concerning each S with regard to past experience and vision. The information, except for the vision tests, was obtained by questionnaire. As w i l l be noted, some of the information with regard to age and height was omitted by the subjects. In the later group, this defect was remedied by obtaining the information at the time of f i r i n g . The reason the height of the S was taken into consideration was to have some check on the adequacy of TABLE I THE COMPOSITION OF THE GOOD -MARKSMAN GROUP Length. Approx. Aiming Keystone Vision Tests Mean Kind of of S Score Training Training Awards Handed-ness Owns Rifle Rounds Fired Eye Favored 1 2 3 4 5 6 Age Ht. 1 49.9 COTC ? Yes R No 10000 R N N N N 96f. 92% ? 5«10"x 2 49.8 Cadet 7 yrs. Yes L .22 ? L N N N N 105 98 20 5«6M-3 49.8 COTC ? Yes R No 2100 R N N N N 102 98 ? ?. 4 49.8 COTC ? Nil R No ? R N N N N 105 105 9 ? 5 49.7 Cadet ? Yes R' No 300 R N N N N 105 105 19 6t 6 49.7 COTC ? Nil R .22 2000 R N N N N 102 103 22 5*8" 7 49.7 Cadet 5 yrs. Yes R No ? R N N N N 105 105 ? ?. 8 49.7 Army 5 yrs. Nil R No ? R N 0 R e C 0 r d 9 49.5 COTC ? Nil R No ? R N N N N 105 103 22 5»11" 10 49.5 Army 2 yrs. Nil R No 1000+ R N N N N 105 105 18 6».2". 11 49.5 Cadet 5 yrs. N i l R No ? R N N N N 105 105 19 5U0 n 12 49.3 COTC ? Nil R No ? R N N N N 105 103 20 5U0? 13 49.2 COTC 4 mos. Nil R No 30* R N N N N 103 103 22 5«8» 14 49.2 COTC 4 mos. Ni l R .22 250 R N N N N 105 105 21 6» . 15 49.1 Cadet 4 yrs. Nil R No lOOOf R N N N N 102 102 ? 16 49.0 Army Perm. Yes R No 5000- R N N N N 98 103 1 ? 17 49.0 COTC ? N i l R No ? R N 0 R e e 0 r d 18 48.8 Army 5 yrs. Yes R No 1 R N N N N 105 65 . ? 5»6" 19 48.8 Cadet . 5 yrs . Yes R No 30004 R N N N N 102 103 21 6» . x - wore glasses while firing For meaning of vision tests see Appendix D. -39-the butt length of the r i f l e which was N (normal.) Since none of these subjects complained about this and since each was an experienced shot, it is safe to assume that the probability is that the butt length was adequate. This is an important point to be established for i f the butt were too long or too short i t might Interfere with trigger control. The table shows that a l l subjects in this group were members of the O.O.T.C., Cadets or the Army. Thus, undoubtedly a l l had had some formal r i f l e training. In addition, it will be noted that some of these subjects had earned various awards for marksmanship. Hhen the eye favored by each S for aiming is taken into account, the vision appears adequate. On this point, however, the E was not entirely satisfied with the instrument (Keystone Visual Survey) used. He did not think that the data obtained warranted any analysis beyond inspection, although it was felt that despite these inadequacies, some check upon the subject*s vision was obtained. Table No. 2 shows the composition of Group II. Here again the 21 subjects are arranged in order of merit with regard to average scores. In this group, the information is more complete. It is more certain for instance, that the butt length was adequate. It will be noted that with the exception of four men, the subjects had no formal training. The reasons for not eliminating these four subjects from the group and thus ostensibly obtaining an TABLE II THE COMPOSITION' 0 F THE POOR MARKSMAN GEO UP ' Length Approx. Aiming Keystone Yision Tests Mean. Kind of of Handed- Owns Rounds Eye S Score Training Training Awards ness Rifle Fired Savored 1 2 3 4 5 6 Age Ht. 1 45.1 Nil N.A. No L No Nil R N N N N 50/. 50£ 30 6» 2 45.0 COTC ? No R No 200 R n 0 R e C O r d-3 45.0 N i l N.A. No L No Nil L N N N N 105 105 22 6» 4 44.7 Nil N.A. No L .22 500 L N N N N 105 105 19 6» 5 44.5 Nil N.A. No R No Nil R N N N N 103 103 19 5*8" 6 44.3 Nil N.A. No R .22 500 R N N N N 92 102 19 5»7n 7 44.3 Cadet ? No R No 500 R N N N N 105 105 19 6» . 8 44.1 N i l N.A. , No R No Nil R N N N N 105 105 23 5 I7" x 9 43.7 N i l N.A. No R .22 300 R N N N N 105 103 21 6t . 10 43.7 Nil N.A. No R No Nil R N N N N 105 103 20 5»11" 11 43.5 N i l N.A. No R No Nil R N N N N 65 98 26 6» . 12 41.7 N i l N.A. No R No Nil R N N N N 102 100 20 5»8«« 13 41.5 Cadet 2 yrs. No R No 500 R N N N N 105 100 20 5U0" 14 41.3 N i l N.A. No R No Nil R N N N N 50 84 19 5»8 n x 15 40.8 Cadet ? No R No 200 R N N N N 84 98 25 5'7" 16 40.0 Nil N.A. No R No Nil R N N N N 105 103 19 5'7" 17 39.7 Cadet 2 yrs. No R .22 1000 R N N N N 105 96 22 519" 18 38.5 N i l N.A. No R .22 500 R N 0 R e cor d 20 5 , H M 19 38.0 Nil N.A. No R .22 100 R N N N N 98 103 20 5»8 n. 20 26.8 RCAF ? No L .22 2000 L N N N N 92 84 24 6»2» 21 16.1 N i l N.A. No R No Nil R .N N N N 105 96 29 5 !6» x - wore glasses while firing N.A. - not applicable Ibr meaning of vision tests see Appendix D. -41-untrained group should be considered. There were several reasons for this? (a) This group represented s t a t i s t i c a l l y the lowest . quarter of the distribution of average total scores by a l l subjects. It was therefore f e l t that for the analysis to be logically and s t a t i s t i c a l l y consistent, a l l subjects f a l l i n g i n this quarter should be considered. (b) The fact that the other subjects in the group claimed to have had no training did not mean that such was the case. In other words, the E wanted as far as possible to avoid making any unwarranted generalizations based upon a supposed completely untrained group. (c) As rather complete records were kept of each subject's performance, any possible deviations from the group . could be noted later i f necessary. In other words, i f the factors considered were responsible for the scattering of the shots, then they would be i n operation throughout t h i s group. It w i l l be noted that according to the vision tests, S-l has low usable vision at the far point which may account partly for his poor shooting, especially since his i s the highest average t o t a l score in the group. When the eye favored in aiming i s taken into account for each subject, i t would appear that according to the vision tests given, the group's vision was adequate for the task. An interesting point here is that seven of this relatively untrained group owned their own r i f l e s compared with the trained group's t o t a l of three. This i s another point i n favor of retaining the four subjects mentioned earlier, because of the fact that some in the group own r i f l e s suggestsconsiderable experience in shooting, even though i t would indicate that the subjects had had perhaps, no formal training. -42-Figures 1 and 2 show the scatter of shots on the target for Groups I and II, respectively. It can be seen that the shots of Group I are concentrated for the most part in the bullseye. Even those shots outside of that area are gathered relatively near to the bullseye. ibr this group, i t is evident that the subjects who composed i t were taking up the same point of aim as directed fro each shot. Figure 2 shows the scatter of shots for the Poor Marksmen (Group II) and reveals a much greater scattering of the shots fired. In this Group, 24 of the shots missed the target altogether. However, inspection of the chart shows that despite the wide scatter, the areas having the highest frequency of shots are nearest the bullseye and that a l l the shots are arranged in a circular fashion about the centre of the target. It seems reasonable to assume therefore, that though they were not always successful, the Poor Marksmen were making the effort to aim at the bullseye for each of their shots. Figure 3 shows the respiration trends for the Good and Poor Marksmen. As mentioned earlier, the respiration data were analysed in terms of whether the S held his breath, inhaled or exhaled during each of the time intervals for 16.8 seconds prior to firing and 4.8 seconds after firing. This graph then represents the percentage of the total shots associated with the three respiratory categories for each interval. Ideally, each S should have had a record for a total of 30 shots. However, in some cases the film did not turn out well enough to be used. In others, especially the -43-Service groups, the E was unable to get the desired six targets from each S. Yet, most of the group did f i r e the required thirty-rounds, but some did not. Most of the latter were Good Marksmen. As large a sample as possible was needed, therefore those subjects who had fired a minimum of 20 or more rounds were considered in the analysis. It should be repeated that most did f i r e 30 rounds. The graph shows that i n both Groups, as the f i r i n g point is approached, there is an increasing percentage of shots being associated with held breath. In the interval after f i r i n g there i s a marked decrease i n the number of shots associated with held breath. In the area indicated by shading, the c r i t i c a l ratios between the groups of shots of Poor Marksmen and Good Marksmen range from 3 to 10.2 and i t is interesting to note that between 9.6 seconds before the f i r i n g point to a minimum of 3.6 seconds after the FP there is, a significant difference between the Groups with regard to the percentage of shots associated with held breath. Yet, i t appears that just before f i r i n g , most Poor Marksmen's as> well as Good Marksmen's shots were associated with this dominant respiratory trend. Yet this graph omits a great deal. For instance, from it.alone, i t i s impossible to determine whether or not this trend towards an increasing percentage of shots to be accompanied by held breath i s associated with the best shots or the poorest shots in the groups. And again, i t i s impossible to determine whether the -44-rapid decrease in the percentage of shots accompanied by held breath after the fire point is associated only with the poorest or with the best shots in the group. It was necessary, therefore, to divide the shots for both the Poor Marksmen and the Good Marksmen according to where they f e l l on the target. The target areas for which curves were determined for each group were as follows: 1. Those shots which were dead-on the bullseye. That i s , where x"o, yao for Group I (Good Marksmen) and Group II (Poor Marksmen). These curves were designated GMzoyo and PMxoyo respectively, 2. Those shots falling in the bullseye area excepting x»o. y=o shots and designated GM bull and PM bull, 3. Those shots falling on the y'axis from the outside of the bullseye area to the top of the target, e.g. GM x = o, y = + 2 t o + 8 , F M x = o , y = * 2 t o + 8 and for those falling on.the y axis below the bullseye to the bottom of the target, e.g. GMx=o,y = - 2 t o - 10, PM x = o, y a - 2 to - 10 shots, 4. Those shots falling on the x axis on each side of the bullseye to the sides of the target, e.g. GM y = o, x = - 2 t o - 8 t P M y « o , x = - 2 t o - 8 and GM y = o, x = • 2 to • 8, PM y = o, x = +2 to 48, 5. Those shots for both groups falling in the upper right quarter of the target ( + • ) and designated GM + +, PM * 4. 6. Those shots falling in the upper left quarter ( - * ) of the target and designated for each group therefore.GM ? +, PM - +, 7. Those shots falling in the lower left quarter of the target ( - - ) and designated for each group therefore GM - -, PM -8. Those shots falling in the lower right quarter ( • -) of the target and designated GM*-,PM+-. 9. Only the Poor Marksmen fired off the target. These shots were designated PM off-target and were off low right. As there were only two GM * * shots, 5 ffll x : o , y : • 2 t o * 8 shots and 2 G M y = o , x = * 2 t o 4 8 shots and 4 P M y Z o , x = * 2 t o + 8, only 17 curves were possible rather than the theoretical 21 possible curves. There were therefore, 10 respiratory curves for the Poor Marksmen and 7 for the Good Marksmen. Discussion of the respiration and aiming time trends. Figures 5 and 6 show diagramatically these 17 curves. Here, a horizontal line indicates a significant trend was associated with holding the breath in that interval. A line moving diagonally to the top of the chart indicates inhalation, and pointing downward indicates exhalation. In a l l cases only those intervals which showed a distribution of shots in the three categories which were significant at the .05 level or less are indicated by a line on the curve (see Appendix B). From these diagrams, the following points should be noted: 1. A l l shots, whether fired by Poor Marksmen or by Good Marksmen are associated with held breath for a minimum of 2.4 seconds prior to the firing point. 2. A l l the shots fired by the Poor Marksmen which f e l l low on the target or off the target were associated with exhaling prior to the fire point, 3. The bullseye and x = o, y = o shots by the Good Marksmen are unique in the tendency to be accompanied by held breath throughout, and are especially notable for the fact that these shots alone are accompanied by a "follow through" in the respiratory pattern after the fire point. FIG.5. Diagrammatic representation of the significant tendencies in the respiration curves associated with shots falling in the major target areas - Good and Poor Marksmen. AIM TIME FIG.6. Diagrammatic representation of the significant tendencies in the respiration curves associated with shots falling in the bullseye and minor target areas - Good and Poor Marksmen. -48-4. A l l the shots fired by poor marksmen show breathing in the .6 second interval after the fire point and a trend to inhaling in the following .6 second interval. The exception here is the curve for off-target shots which does not show a definite trend after the fire point except that it too is accompanied by breathing immediately after firing. 5 . A l l shots except GM xoyo and GM bull are accompanied by breathing within 1.2 seconds after the fire point. In addition to these points, it appears that the respiratory trends f a l l into groups. That i s , there seem to be group similarities. This patterning becomes most apparent when the median aiming time for each trend is taken into consideration. With regard to the aiming time, the median time rather than the mean time was used to avoid giving undue weight to a very few exceptionally long periods which would not be so representative of the group trend. In this regard then, the following points are noteworthy: 1. Both the GM bull and GM xoyo respiratory trends are very similar, this similarity being emphasized when their median aiming time (16.8 and 16 seconds respectively) is taken into account. 2. A l l high shots, whether by Poor Marksmen or Good Marksmen are similar in respiratory trends and in median aiming time. This is not so apparent in the Good Marksmen, but Appendix B indicates that even here there is a strong tendency to inhale after the fire point. 3. The two curves for the low shots of Good Marksmen are also similar in aiming time and general respiratory trends. 4. PM — and PM * - and PM off-target shots are a l l similar in respiratory trends. In addition, the first two trends are similar with regard to aiming time (11 and 12 seconds respectively). The PM off-target shots have the shortest aiming time, namely 9.5 seconds. -49-5. It will be noted that the GM - 4 and the PM bull shots are . almost identical with regard to.respiration trend and aiming time. Appendix B shows the tendency to inhale in the 1.2 second interval after firing in the GM - 4 shots. Thus it appears that these two groups are indistinguishable on the basis of respiration and aiming times alone. 6. With regard to those shots falling on the ordinates, the following points may be noted from Fig. 6.: (a) The PM xo y ~ -2 to -10 shots have the same marked inhaling immediately after the EP associated with the respiratory trend as do the PM — shots. However, i t will be noted that in this case, no direct evidence of exhaling before the FP is evident. The median aiming time here is 14 seconds. (b) The GM x - -2 to -8, y - o shots and the GM x - o, y z -2 to -10 shots are similar with regard to respiratory trends in several ways. Both groups of shots are associated with held breath in the .6 interval after the FP and both trends show breathing in the next interval. The median aiming time for the GM x Z -2 to -8, y = o shots is I3.9 seconds and for the GM x - o, y s -2 to —ID shots is 14.9 seconds. (c) In the respiratory trend associated with the PM x - o, y = 42 to 48 shots there is exhaling from the I 3 . 2 second interval to the U.4 second interval before the FP followed by inhalation from the 7.8 second interval to the 6 second interval before the FP. This trend is followed by the minimum 2.4 second holding before the FP characteristic of a l l shots. Here too, there is breathing immediately after the EP. The median aiming time is 10 seconds. (d) Most characteristic with regard to the respiratory trend . associated with the PM x Z -2 to -8, y Z o shots is the inhaling in the .6 second to the 1.2 second interval after firing and the exhaling in the 2.4 second to 3.0 second interval after EP. Median aiming time is 11.7 seconds. We have considered only the respiratory trends in detail up to this point together with a brief mention of aiming time, therefore, few positive statements can be made. However, -50-some tentative points should be considered: 1. It is evident, especially with regard to the shots within the bullseye area fired by the Good Marksmen that there are rather distinctive respiratory patterns associated with these shots and that in addition, there appears to be what might be termed an optimal aiming time associated with these shots. These shots throughout are associated with held breath. Moreover, the "follow through." of this pattern after firing distinguishes these shots from a l l others fired by either group. Perhaps this "follow through" may be compared with that found in various sportssuch as golf. In other words, a motor set which is held not only up to the fire point, but also for a considerable period (in this case 4.8 seconds) after firing, is one which would appear to be essential to good shooting. An objection may be made here. It has been noted that PM bull, and PM xoyo did not show this trend. This fact must be admitted. However, it should be noted that only relatively few of the Poor Marksmen's shots are in this area when compared with the number of shots fired by this Group and also when compared with the proportion of the Good Marksmen's shots in this area. Both these trends are very similar to those of shots falling high on the target, A possible explanation for their position is that another factor or factors are operating to overcome the effeets of faulty respiration. In any event, the trend as shown by the Good Marksmen is not negated when considered as a factor conducive to good shooting, even though i t may be possible to hit the bullseye by compensating for faulty breathing. Before leaving this point, the median aiming times of the shots in the bullseye by the Good Marksmen should be noted. Here i t is found that the 16.8 and 16 second median aiming periods would appear to be optimum times. A consideration of the Good Marksmen's low shots, the trends for both of' which are associated.with the longest aiming times (17.5 and 19 seconds), suggests that despite certain similarities in respiratory trends before the firing point to the Good Marksmen's bullseye shots, the additional time taken to fire may be a factor in these shots falling low. Another faotor, of course, would appear to be that the low shots are associated with breathing in the 1.2 second interval after the fire point. This is characteristic of a l l shots outside of the bullseye area. -51-2. The next moat prominent respiratory trend is that of the PM off-target shots. Here, like most of the shots, there is breathing Immediately after firing associated with the shots. In addition, beginning with the 7*8 second interval and continuing to the 6 second interval before the EP there is a significant tendency to exhale. Finally, the aiming time of 9.5 seconds is the shortest time associated with any trend. A l l of these tendencies would appear to favor poor shooting. The low shots fired by the Poor Marksmen are similar to the foregoing with regard to respiration. In the PM 4 -shots there is exhaling before the FP and inhaling within the 1.2 second interval following the FP. In the PM - -shots, although on first glance the trend appears not to be associated with the above, i t seems s t i l l to be essentially the same. The gradual inhaling before the FP and the most marked inhaling directly after firing, suggests in general, a condition before firing similar to those shots accompanied by exhaling. 3 . The low shots of the Good Marksmen are similar to each other in respiratory trends, but not so similar to the Poor Marksmen's low shots. However, it will be noted that both the GM --- and GM + - shots are associated with longer aiming time than the bullseye shots by the same group. Moreover, these trends show breathing in the 1.2 seconds after firing. However, to fully account for the low position of the shots, i t will likely require the consideration of some other factor not discussed here. Thus, the fault in the case of the low shots seems more in the aiming time than in the respiration, while the fault in the case of the Poor Marksmen's low shots seems to be respiration primarily. 4 . The resemblance both in firing time and respiratory trends associated with a l l high shots fired by both Groups should be noted. Unfortunately, there were too few shots in the GM 4 4 for respiration curves to be determined. However, although there are these similaries present, the analysis to this point does not explain why some of the high shots f a l l in the upper right quarter while others f a l l in the upper left quarter. 5. It was hoped that a study of the respiration curves associated with the x = o, y = 42 to 48 shots and x s o, y S -2 to -10 shots fired by Good Marksmen and Poor Marksmen would reveal why, though these shots are in line with the bullseye they f a l l high pn the target in the first case and low in the second. -52-However, no distinct trend for these shots alone was found. The low shots in these groups for the Poor Marksmen resemble the PM - - shots' trends. The shots fired by the Good Marksmen in this-area resemble the GM * - shots and the GM - - shots. Thus, low shots in this.area are similar to the shots fired low by both the Good and Poor Marksmen, respectively. Unfortunately, there is no GM ac Z o, y Z f2 to 48 respiratory trend possible. However, in the case of the PM x = o, y = 42 to 48 respiratory trend, the inhaling indicated before FP may.partially account for the high position of the shots. The PM x - -2 to -8, y a o shots resemble the shots fired high or in the bullseye by the Poor Marksmen both in respiration time and aiming time. The GM x s -2 to -8, y = o respiratory trends resemble the shots by the Good Marksmen falling in the 4 - area. However, aiming time is less (13*9 seconds), . Summary of respiration and aiming time trends The findings up to this point in the analysis are both incomplete and tentative since only two of the factors have been considered. Thus, they will have to be modified later. Some tentative conclusions with regard to the trends discussed may be made: 1. The respiratory trends associated with bullseye shots fired by the Good Marksmen are distinct from any other group, especially with regard to the "follow through" after firing. 2. Those shots falling high on the target and by both groups appear to be associated with a characteristic respiratory trend, especially after the IP. The bullseye shots by Poor Marksmen are also associated with this trend. 3» The low shots in the major areas by the Poor Marksmen resemble each other in respiratory trends. 4 Exhaling before firing, breathing immediately after firing and the shortest aiming time of a l l shots, seems to be the characteristic trend associated with off-target shots. 5. With regard to low shots by Good Marksmen, associated with them is breathing after the EP and an aiming time which is longer than the bullseye shots by the same Group, 6. Finally, the two factors, respiration and aiming time, seem to be sufficient in the main to account for high and low shots. However, they do not seem to be sufficient to account for shots falling to the right or to the left of the bull. Discussion of the pressure trends The following section is concerned with the results obtained from the analysis of the pressure records for the groups of Poor Marksmen and Good Marksmen already discussed in some detail in the previous section devoted to group respiratory trends. Figures 8 to 25 show the trends for a l l marksmen with regard to stock pressure. It can be seen that the dominant trend for both Good and Poor Marksmen is not to apply pressure at a l l upon the butt stock while firing. Figure 7 represents diagramatically the relationship between the position of the pressure pad and the grip recommended by the training manuals. The usual instructions for holding a ri f l e have already been quoted in Chapter I. Neither the trained nor the untrained groups as a whole conform to these regulations. There would appear to be several possible explanations for the fact that both the performances of the Good and Poor Marksmen show that the recommended procedure is not complied with: 1. The first possible explanation is that the pressure pad and its functioning were inadequate for the measurement of stock Butt -^Wheel FIG.7- Diagram showing the relationship between the position of the pressure pad and the grip recommended by the Training Manuals. -55-pressure. Conceivably, i t may be possible to grip the rifle stock in such a manner that it would not be recorded by the pad. However, such a grip is not recommended by present training techniques. The pad was placed in such a position that i f the stock were gripped at a l l the pressure would be recorded, 2. The results obtained may be due to the fact that the rif l e used had a ,22 bore and therefore would not have the recoil of a standard .303, This fact might have influenced the shooting procedure of the trained marksmen especially. However, exactly why such trained men should find i t necessary to vary their grip with the rifle being used is not explained. It may be that such a vice-like grip as recommended is an awkward grip which is avoided by marksmen unless made necessary to compensate for recoil. 3. When the fact that inexperienced shots also did not exert pressure in general is considered, a third explanation is suggested which may account for the entire phenomenon. Such an explanation is to the effect that perhaps the pad itself, because it was plastic and "gave" slightly with pressure and was therefore different in this respect from the rest of the stock caused the Subjects, as a result, to avoid i t . This situation is roughly analogous to running a hand along a table top with the eyes closed and touching an area that is unlike the remainder of the table. The suggestion here is that in such a case the person would l i f t his finger to avoid the strange object. To test this hypothesis would require possibly two separate experiments — one to ascertain the effects of instruction that explicitly called attention to the pad and its function, or another, to demonstrate whether or not the above analogy is sound. Another point should be considered in this connection. This is that the manuals emphasize such a grip as already discussed not only to compensate for recoil but also to aid in the grouping of the shots near the bull. Again, this is likely the case with the .303* However, the performance by the Good Marksmen suggests that accurate shooting is not so dependent upon this factor when using a r i f l e of small bore. The major trend then, s t i l l remains one toward applying no pressure on the rif l e stock. Yet, there appear to be certain pressure trends associated with shots falling in specified areas on the target. These trends will be considered noif. Although in many cases they are not significant, when considered with the dominant respiratory trend, the secondary trends do supply some indication as to possible influences determining the position of the shots on the target. The statistical method used in analyzing the pressure record was the same as that used in the analysis of the respiratory records, namely the X? technique. The rationale was that because in the various time intervals considered each S could exert pressure on the stock in varying degrees, he could within any specific interval either apply no pressure at a l l , or else he could apply any one of a number of varying degrees of pressure from slight pressure, sufficient only to be recorded as one light on the panel, to pressure strong enough to be recorded as the total number of lights (six in all) on the panel. There were individual differences in the amount of pressure exerted in the various time intervals by the various Subjects. A minority gradually increased the stock pressure. Others exerted pressure erratically or not at a l l . It was felt therefore, that in analyzing the group trends, these variations in the amount of pressure -57-P less than .20 P .70 to .50 / too few P .20 \ 4 -FIG. 8. Comparison of pressure trends at the firepoint: Good Marksmen's "dead-on" shots with Good Marksmen's shots.in the other major target areas. FIG. 9« Comparison of pressure trends at the firepoint: Good Marksmen's "dead-on" shots with Poor Marksmen's shots.in the other major target areas. - 5 8 -exerted in the various- intervals should be taken into account. Hence, an X 2 and a P value were determined for the pressure trends shown by the two groups of marksmen in the , 6 second interval before firing, at the FP, and in the , 6 interval after firing. These intervals were selected for detailed study because logically, i t would seem valid to assume that i f any marked variations in pressure occurred at the time of firing or shortly before and after, they would be pressure changes that would influence the path taken by the bullet to the target. For every area on the target previously considered in the respiratory analysis, various X 2 and P values (Appendix G) were calculated as indicated above in order to: 1 . See i f there were any differences between Good and Poor Marksmen with regard to the amount of pressure at the FP associated with their shots falling in the various target areas. (See figs. 8 , 9t 10, U, 12 and 1 3 ) . 2 . See whether .or not for each group of marksmen there were significant changes in the amount of pressure exerted immediately before firing (.6 seconds) and firing (EP) for shots falling in the various target areas. (See figs. 1 5 , 1 6 , 2 2 and 2 3 ) . 3 . See whether or not for each group of marksmen there were significant pressure changes between the FP and immediately after firing ( . 6 seconds). (See figs. 1 7 , 1 8 , 24 and 2 5 ) . 4. See i f at the FP the amount of pressure exerted in the specified areas was significantly different for Good and Poor Marksmen. (See figs. 14). 5 . See i f the vertical and horizontal shots could be distinguished from shots in other areas by pressure alone. (See figs. 19, 20 and 21). The secondary pressure trends will 59-now be considered in detail: 1. Concerning differences in the amount of pressure applied at the IP: (a) Comparison of the amount of pressure associated with GM xoyo shots and GM - 4 , GM 4 4 , GM and GM * -shots. (Fig. 8) From Fig. 8,;the following results are noteworthy:' (i) There is no significant difference between the amount of pressure associated with the GM xoyo shots at the EP and GM shots in the other areas (-•,4-. i of the target. (ii) Though not significant (P.20), there is a tendency for GM xoyo shots to be.associated with more pressure at the IP than GM - • and GM 4 - shots. (b) Comparison of the amount of pressure associated with GM xoyo shots and PM - 4,'PM 4 +, EM - - and PM 4 -shots. From Fig, 9 the-following results are obtained: (i) There is a significant tendency for GMxoyo shots to be associated with more pressure at the FP than the PM 4 * (P .05 to .02) shots, the PM * -(P less,than .01) and the PM (P .05).shots. (ii) It should be noted that there is no significant difference between the GM xoyo and the PM - 4 (P .95 to .90) shots with regard to the pressure associated with them at the FP. (c) Comparison of the amount of pressure associated at the . FP with PM xoyo and PM - 4 , PM 4 4 , PM and PM 4 -shots. From Fig. 10, the:following results are obtained: (i) There is no significant difference between the PM xoyo shots and the PM 4 * (P .80 to .70) = , PM - 4 (P .70 to . 5 0 ) , PM----.(P more than.99) and PM 4 - (P .10) shots with regard to the amount of pressure.associated with them at the FP. (ii) There is a tendency, though not significant (P .10), for the PM xoyo shots to be associated with more pressure at the IP than the PM * - shots. -60-PM + + PM * -FIG. 10. Comparison of pressure trends at the fire point: Poor Marksmen's "dead-on" shots with Poor Marksmen's shots.in the other major target areas. FIG. U. Comparison of pressure trends at the fire point: Poor Marksmen's "dead-on" shots with Good Marksmen's shotsin the other major target areas. -61-(d) Comparison of the amount of pressure associated at FP . . with PM xoyo shots and GM - 4 , GM * 4 , GM - - and GM 4 - shots. The following,result is obtained from Fig. 11 to the effect that there is no significant difference in the amount of pressure associated with the PM xoyo shots and the GM - 4 (P .95 to .90), GM (P more than .99) and GM.4-- (P .70 to .50) shots. ; (e) Comparison of the amount of pressure associated at EP with PM xoyo, PM bull, GM xoyo and GM bull shots. (See Fig. 12) Results: (i) There is no significant difference with regard to the amount of pressure associated at the FP between GM xoyo and PM xoyo shots (P .95 to .90); GM xoyo and GM bull shots (P #95); xoyo and . GM bull shots (P .95 to .90). (ii) There is more similarity than difference with regard to the pressure at the EP between JM xoyo and PM bull shots (P .70 to .50). (i i i ) There is a significant difference in the amount - of pressure associated at the EP between GM xoyo and PM bull shots (P .02), more pressure being associated with the GM xoyo shots; and between GM bull and PM bull shots (P less than ,01):, more pressure being associated with the GM.bull shots. (f) Comparison with the amount of pressure associated at the . . FP with PM xoyo, GM xoyo and PM off-target shots. (Fig. 13) Results; (i) There is no significant difference between the amount of pressure associated at the FP with PM xoyo shots and PM off-target shots (P .70 to .50). (ii) There is no significant difference between the amount of pressure associated at the IP with GM xoyo shots and PM off-target shots, but in this case a P .30 to .20 suggests a possible trend for GM xoyo shots to be associated at the FP with more pressure than the PM off-target shots. (g) Comparison with the amount of pressure associated at the _ „ FP .between GM - 4 and PM - 4 ; GM and PM shots; FIG. 12. Comparison of pressure trends at firepoint: Good Marksmen's "dead-on" and bull shots with Poor Marksmen's "dead-on" and bull shots. FIG. 13. Comparison of pressure trends at the firepoint: Good Marksmen's and Poor Marksmen's "dead-on" shots with Poor Marksmen's "off-target" shots. -63-GM 4 - and PM 4 - shots. From Fig. 14 the following results: (i) There is a significant difference in the amount . . of pressure associated at the FP between GM - 4 and PM - 4 shots (P less than .01) and GM 4 - : and PM 4 •? (P less than .01) shots. In both cases, more.pressure is associated with the GM shots. (ii) There is no significant difference in the amount . of pressure associated with the GM - - and PM - -shots (P .70 to .50) 2. Concerning the changes in the amount of pressure associated with shots in the interval ,6 seconds before firing and the FP: (a) Comparison of the amount of pressure associated with shots . .6 seconds before firing and at the FP by Good Marksmen. Fig. 15. Results: (i) In a l l the areas (GM - 4 , GM , GM 4 GM bull , . and GM xoyo) there is no significant change in the amount of pressure associated with the shots in these intervals. (ii) However, there would appear to be a slight tendency for GM bull shots to be associated with more pressure at the FP. (b) Comparison of the amount of pressure change associated with Poor Marksmen's shots in the various areas between .6 seconds before firing and the FP. See Fig. 16. Results: (i) Again, there is no significant difference in the various areas between the amount of pressure associated with the shots in these intervals. (ii) There is a tendency, however, for PM 4 4 shots (P .30) to be associated with more pressure at the FP than .6 seconds before the FP. 3. Concerning changes in pressure associated with shots in the areas at the FP and .6 seconds after. (a) Comparisons to determine changes in pressure associated with Good Marksmen's shots in the various areas at the -64-GM - 4 P less than ,01 PM - * FIG. 14. Comparison of pressure trends at the firepoint: Good Marksmen's shots with Poor Marksmen's shots in the major target areas. FIG. 15. Diagram indicating the significance of pressure changes between .6 seconds before the firepoint and the firepoint: Good Marksman Group. -65-EP and ,6 second interval following. Fig. 1 7 . Results: (i) There is no significant decrease (P less than . 0 1 ) in the amount of pressure associated with GM bull shots at the EP and in the .6 second interval afterwards. (ii) There is a slight tendency (P . 2 0 to . 1 0 ) for GM 4 - shots to be associated with a decrease in pressure between the FP and . 6 seconds afterwards. (i i i ) There is no significant change in pressure associated with GM - 4» GM - - shots and GM xoyo shots in this regard.~ (b) Comparisons to determine changes in pressure associated with Poor Marksmen's shots between the EP and .6 seconds afterward. Fig. IS. Results: (i) There is a significant decrease (P . 0 2 to . 0 1 ) in the amount of pressure associated with PM bull shots at the EP and in the following .6 second interval. (ii) There is a significant decrease (P less than . 0 1 ) in the amount of pressure associated with PM - -„ shots at the FP and in the following .6 second interval. (i i i ) There is no significant change in this regard associated with PM xoyo, PM-4orPM+4,PM4-and PM off-target shots. Concerning the differences in the amount of pressure at the FP between horizontal shots and vertical shots and associated shots in"other^areasV-Fig. 1 9 . (a) Comparison of GM - 4, GM shots and GM yo x - 2 to - 8 shots with regard to the amount of pressure at the FP. Fig. 1 9 . Results: (i) There is no significant difference in this regard between pressure associated at the FP with GM yo, x - 2 to - 1 0 and GM - * shots (P . 3 0 to . 2 0 ) or GM shots (P . 5 0 to . 3 0 ) . . (b) Comparison of GM shots and GM 4 - shots with GM xo, . y - 2 to - 1 0 shots with regard to the amount of pressure PM off P.95 to .90 FIG. 16. Diagram indicating the significance of pressure changes between .6 seconds before the firepoint and the firepoint: Poor Marksman Group. GM - 4 GM 4 4 P.80 to .70 I too;few FIG. 17. Diagram indicating the significance of pressure changes between the firepoint and .6 seconds after the firepoint: Good Marksman Group. PM off P .95 to .90 FIG. 18. Diagram indicating the significance of pressure changes between the firepoint and .6 seconds after the firepoint: Poor Marksman Group. -67-associated at the EP, Fig. 19. (i) The results here indicate that there is no significant difference in this regard between GM xo, 7 -2 to -10 shots and GM shots (P .50 to .30) or GM * - shots (P .30 to .20). (c) Comparison of PM xo, y 42 to 48, PM yo", x -2 to -8. . and PM xo, y -2 to -10 shots with various areas on the targets with regard to the amount of pressure at the FP. Fig. 20. Results: (i) There is no significant difference in the amount of pressure associated at the FP with PM - 4 shots and PM xo, y 42 to 48 shots (P .99 to ,98). : (ii) There is no significant difference in the amount of pressure associated at the EP with PM - + shots and PM yo, x -2 to -8 shots (P .99 to .98). ; ( i i i ) There is no significant difference in the amount of pressure associated at the FP with PM - - shots and PM yo, x -2 to -8 shots (P .95 to .90). (iv) There is no significant difference in the amount of pressure associated at the FP with PM - - shots and PM xo, y -8 to -10 shots (P .80). (v) There is no significant difference in the amount of pressure associated at the EP with PM 4 - shots and PM xo, y -2 to -10 shots (P .98 to .95). (vi) There is no significant difference in the amount of pressure associated at the EP with PM 4 4 shots and PM xo, y 42 to 48 shots (P .98 to .95), : (d) Comparison of GM yo, x -2 to -8 and PM yo, x -2 to -8 shots; GM xo, y -2 to -10 shots and PM xo, y -2 to -10 shots. Fig. 21, This indicates that in both cases, (the former P .05 to .02 and the latter P .10 to .05) there is significantly more pressure associated with the GM shots. (e) Comparison of pressure changes in the .6 second interval . before firing and FP of Good Marksmen and Poor Marksmen* s shots falling in*the horizontal and vertical axes. Figs. 22 and 23. The results show that there are no significant pressure,changes in the various areas. - 6 8 -P . 5 0 to . 3 0 i P . 5 0 to . 3 0 GM - -GM 4 4 (too few) GM too few FIG. 19. Comparison of the vertical and horizontal shots in various target areas with regard to the amount of pressure at the firepoint: Good Marksman Group. P. 9 8 to . 9 5 PM - 4 P. 9 9 to . 9 8 EM P.98 to .95 *»FM 4 4 PM too few FIG. 2 0 . Comparison of the vertical and horizontal shots in various target areas with regard to the amount of pressure at the firepoint: Poor Marksman Group. GM*P . 0 5 to .02-+PM GM* to few • FIG. 2 1 Comparison of the vertical and horizontal shots fired by Good and Poor Marksmen with regard to the amount of pressure at the firepoint. to> f»w GM P too difference FIG. 22. Diagram indicating the significance of pressure changes between .6 seconds before the firepoint and the firepoint, associated with the vertical and horizontal shots: Good Marksman Group. PM P mere than .99 PM more than .95 PM too few FIG 23. Diagram indicating the significance of pressure changes between .6 seconds before the firepoint and the firepoint, associated with the vertical and horizontal shots: Poor Marksman Group -70-(f) Comparison of the pressure changes at the EP and . 6 . seconds after firing of Poor Marksmen and Good Marksmen's shots falling in the horizontal and vertical axes. Figs. 24 and 25* The results indicate that there are no significant pressure changes in the areas. Summary of pressure trends The principal results may now be summarized in order that the primary and secondary pressure trends may be more conveniently related to corresponding respiratory and aiming time findings: 1. Despite the fact that in general, relatively l i t t l e stock pressure was evidenced, it would appear to be significant that more pressure was associated with the Good Marksmen's shots in the high left ( - * ) and lower right ( 4 - 3 quarters of the target than,with Poor Marksmen's shots in the same area. Also, it is apparent that in three areas of the target ( 4 4 , - - and 4 -) less pressure was associated with the Poor Marksmen's shots than with the GM xoyo shots. On the other hand, neither the Good Marksmen's shots in the same areas nor the PM xoyo shots may be so distinguished. 2. Note should be made of the fact that neither the PM xoyo shots nor the GM xoyo shots can be distinguished from the Poor Marksmen's off-target shots by the amount of pressure exerted at the firing point, 3 . The fact that there are no significant changes in the amount of pressure associated with any shots between . 6 seconds before firing and the FP is noteworthy. 4. For later reference, i t is important to note that both the GM bull and PM bull shots show a significant decrease in the amount of pressure associated with the shots immediately after firing. This same trend is shown in the PM - - shots. 5 . Contrary to expectations, upon the basis of pressure alone, i t is impossible to distinguish either lateral or vertical shots from shots falling in adjacent areas on the target. In summary then, the foregoing -71-toc fe w P .80 to .70 P.70 GM tol .50 FIG. 24. Diagram indicating the significance of pressure changes between the firepoint and .6 seconds after the firepoint associated with the v e r t i c a l and horizontal shots: Good Marksman Group. more PM thah .99 PM P .70 to .50 too few P a] pro s FIG. 25. Diagram indicating the significance of pressure changes between the firepoint and .6 seconds after the firepoint associated with the vertical and horizontal shots: Poor Marksman Group. -72-discussion would indicate that stock pressure alone is not a significant diagnostic factor for determining the position of a shot on the target when a rifle with a .22 bore is used. The secondary trends indicate that i f the aim is on the bull and there is a sudden release of pressure immediately on firing, the shot may he deflected from the centre slightly, but not necessarily out of the bullseye. However, this conclusion is not clear cut since shots fired by Poor Marksmen falling in the lower left quarter show a similar trend. Yet, the direction of a l l the shots here is similar, i.e. both Groups' bullseye shots are grouped in the lower left corner of the bull to some extent. This would indicate that it is the respiratory plus the pressure trend in the case of the PM - - shots that accounts for their wider divergence from the bull. Concluding this discussion then, there are three important points that can be made: 1. The "vice-like grip" rule recommended by the training manuals is not observed by the Good Marksmen when firing a service r i f l e with a .22 bore. This finding is in agreement with the conclusion arrived at by the ORG report No. 8/49 (19). 2. Neither shots fired by Good Marksmen nor shots fired by Poor Marksmen, whether they be good or poor, can be accounted for in terms of either the amount of pressure exerted at the FP or to any changes in the amount of pressure exerted immediately before or after firing. 3. Whether a shot falls in the bullseye, off the target, or in any of the other specified areas on the target, would not appear to be significantly dependent upon whether or not stock pressure is associated with i t . Incidental Observations In this section will be considered -7> briefly some less formal observations of the Subject's performance made by the E during the experiment. To a large extent, these observations are less accurate in that they were less adequately controlled than the foregoing observations. However, it was considered advisable to include these data since they may, first of a l l , be suggestive of further areas of research in marksmanship and secondly, they may facilitate the adequate integration of the previously discussed findings. In this connection then, the first problem to be discussed is that of position. Unfortunately, the procedures here made i t almost impossible to assess accurately the positions assumed by the Subjects while firing owing mainly to the limited time available for dealing with each S. As noted earlier, each S had to report for three consecutive days and in order the E might be assured that they would do so, he was forced to schedule the time so that a minimum of delay in each Subject's appointment was incurred. Yet, under these less desirable conditions, the E was able to note the general prone position assumed by each S as he fired each shot and also note any shifts or changes in position made by each S as he fired. An examination of the individual records revealed the following points with regard to position of each group: 1. Concerning the Good Marksmen'/s positions, the following points are noteworthy: (a) A l l but three of this Group assumed a firing position that was essentially the position recommended by the training manuals. 74-(b) The three Subjects who did not conform a l l assumed a position as follows: Their position was such that their bodies were at 90 degrees to the target and directly in line with i t , their legs together and their toes down. The general elevation was noted at the time of firing as being somewhat higher than that of the remainder of their group, due to the fact, probably, that their elbows were placed closer to their body. These three Subjects were numbers 8,9 and 15. Their average total scores were 49.7, 49.5 and 49.1 respectively which ranged them approximately third, fourth and seventh in the group. (c) There was but one S in this group that was left-handed. , . His position was that recommended by the training manuals, but at an angle opposite to that assumed by the right-handed Subjects. This is understandable since i t permitted the S to avoid firing across his body. This S was number 18, his average total score was 49.8, placing him second only to the best marksman in the group. (d) Finally, i t should be mentioned that there was no shifting . . in position or any other indications of strain or awkwardness of position noted in this group. It appeared that the Subjects in this group were able to maintain a relatively stable and steady position throughout. 2, Concerning the Poor Marksmen's position, the following points should be noted: (a) In a l l but five Subjects of this group of 21 individuals, notes were made at the time of firing that indicated much shifting and adjusting of the i n i t i a l position assumed. (b) Only 8 members of this group took up a position similar to . . that recommended by the training manual and three of these 8 individuals showed indications, noted at the time as shifting, and other minor adjustments of position. (e) The remainder of the group took up positions at right angles . to the target — legs together, toes pointed down. One of these individuals (S 20) crossed his legs and a second (S 16) bent his right knee. (d) Four members of this group were left handed. These were S 1, S 3, S 4 and S 20. S 4 took up a position almost straight on the target but of such a nature that forced him to fire across his body. S 1, with an average total score of 45.1 was the best shot of the Poor Marksman Group. (Table 2). -75-From the foregoing discussion, it can be seen that l i t t l e conclusive evidence for or against the prone firing position recommended by the Service training manuals can be inferred from these results. However, there is some indication that for most individuals, the recommended position is the more stable one and as such, is an aid in good shooting. Again this would likely be a decisive factor i f an individual fired a .303 r i f l e . The fact that four of the Poor Marksmen were left-handed might be indicative. S t i l l , it should be kept in mind that in each of these cases the firing position was not the one ordinarily recommended but rather the position characteristic of the Poor Marksman Group as a whole and marked by shifting and minor adjust-ments indicative of muscular strain and tension. When this, and the fact that one of the Good Marksmen was also left-handed but tookup the recommended position with no shifting, though at an angle opposite to that of the right-handed Subjects and so avoided shooting across his body, is taken into account, i t would appear that left-handedness per se is not an insurmountable obstacle to good shooting. A second problem concerning the cooperation of the Subjects should be noted. This is to the effect that", contrary to expectations, though in general a l l the Subjects were remarkably cooperative, i t was the group of Subjects not associated with any of the University Armed Services' Groups that was the most cooperative and punctual during the experiment. This is especially important since a l l Subjects were volunteers. This point is made here primarily as -76-further evidence of good motivation on the part of the Poor Marksmen since the vast majority of the Poor Marksmen were untrained and not associated with the campus Service Groups. The explanation for this state of affairs is probably that the performance required was more of a novelty to the non-service people and therefore, was able to sustain their interest to a greater extent than it.was for the Service people who probably volunteered primarily out of curiosity and then, finding that the investigation was a non-dramatic affair, continued their part in the experiment, either because they felt obliged to do so, or to take advantage of the opportunity to fire free ammunition. In concluding this discussion, it is suggested first of a l l that there has been further evidence presented to support the assumption that the Poor Marksmen were well motivated, an assumption of great importance in any attempt at assessing their performance. Secondly, there has been presented some data which indicate that a stable firing position is essential for good shooting and that there is no evidence that the firing position recommended by the training manuals is not such a position. However, as the records, indicate, both good and poor shots can be fired from the recommended position and also from other positions as noted above. Thus, the main factor here would seem to be stability of position rather than any stereotyped position. That i s , conceivably various individualsmay find a variety of positions more comfortable for shooting and to the extent -77-that these positions are more comfortable, presumably they would require less shifting and so in turn would be stable. Finally, there is no conclusive evidence that left-handedness is an insurmountable obstacle to good shooting. However, in these cases i t does appear to be somewhat awkward and the main obstacle to be overcome is position. In this regard, note has been made of the solution adopted by one Good Marksman who was also left-handed. CHAPTER V CONCLUSION AND FINAL SUMMARY OF THE MAJOR FINDINGS Because the various results were discussed in detail in the previous chapter, a l l that remains now is to draw together some of the more important trends in summary form so that the various influences may be seen more easily. This chapter then should serve two purposes. First of a l l , i t should suggest possible applications of the findingsand more importantly, i t should point out areas for further research with regard to the factors in marksmanship. This first problem to be dealt with is that of describing the possible trends in respiration, pressure, aiming time and position that this study indicated as important factors in determining where the shots would f a l l on the target. In an attempt to deal with this problem, the two extreme cases (bullseye and the off-target shots) will be presented in detail. -79-A description of the trends associated with shots f a l l i n g in the bullseye area in terms of the major factor studied The median aiming times of the Good Marksman Group for shots f a l l i n g in the bullseye area were 16.8 seconds for a bullseye and 16 seconds for a dead-on shot. It i s suggested that these are the optimal aiming times. This i s a considerably longer interval than that recommended by the o f f i c i a l Army handbook "Shoot to Live" (see page ?). This handbook suggests 10 seconds as the optimal time. It should be noted here that although some of the Poor Marksmen's shots f e l l i n the bullseye area, the aiming times associated with the Poor Marksmen's b u l l shots were characteristic of the shots fired by Poor Marksmen out of the bull rather than those in the bull fired by Good Marksmen. This study indicates that i n order to f a c i l i t a t e accurate shooting, the rifleman should hold his breath throughout the aiming period and he should continue to hold his breath ("follow through") for some seconds after f i r i n g . Once more i t should be noted that this finding differs somewhat from recommended procedure with regard to respiration. This study also suggests that i n order to hit the bullseye the shot need not be associated with stock pressure. It points out., however, that i f stock pressure i s applied, i t should be maintained for at least .6 seconds after f i r i n g . If the pressure i s not maintained, there i s a tendency for the shot to be deflected from the centre of the bull to the lower left corner of the b u l l . However, i f -80-the respiratory pattern on firing is that the the GM bull shots and not that of the PM - - shots, then according to the present finding, one would not expect that the change in pressure would result in any further deflection than that mentioned above. It will be noted once more that these findings tend to be contrary to standard practice and, as mentioned earlier, tend to substantiate the findings of the ORG Report quoted. Finally, this study does indicate that the firing position recommended by the training manuals is probably the most stable position for most riflemen and i s therefore to be recommended as a prerequisite to good shooting. A description of the trends associated with shots falling off the target  in terms of the major factors studied In this study it happened that most off-target shots f e l l low and to the right. The median aiming time was 9.5 seconds. Of interest in this connection is the fact that the median aiming time of the PM 4 - shots was 12 seconds and for the GM 4 - shots, 19 seconds. In this latter case, i t will be noted (Figs. 5 and 6) that this extended aiming period is probably the factor distinguishing these shots from the GM bull shots. However, in the caBe in question, i t will be noted that this aiming time is almost identical to that recommended by the training manual, yet the shortest median time associated with any shots in this study. In terms of stock pressure, these shots are indistinguishable from the bullseye shots fired by either group. -81-The respiratory pattern for the off-target shots is as follows: (a) Exhaling in the interval ranging from 7»8 seconds to 6 seconds before firing, (b) This is followed by held breath, then a break, then held breath once more from 2,4 seconds before the fire point up to the fire point, (c) Special note should be made that there is no "follow-through" in respect to respiration indicated here. That i s , breathing occurs immediately on firing. The firing position of the marksmen firing off-target shots is the one characteristic of the Poor Marksman Group, namely, the body straight on the target, legs together, toes down and characterized by shifting. The values and limitations of the miniature range as a technique for  training marksmen. Reference to pages 13 and 14 will present in summary form, the two major views in this regard — one recommending the use of the miniature range and the other not recommending i t . It can be seen at once that the findings of the study agree most closely with the recommendations of the ORG Report No, 8/49, If i t can be granted that the method of measuring stock pressure in this study is adequate for assessing the frequency of occurrence of the "vice-like grip" recommended by the training manuals", then this study presents evidence confirming the ORG Report's statement that "He (the rifleman) does not hold i t (the rifle) firmly" when the r i f l e being fired has a ,22 bore. In addition, i f this study's results are -82-any criterian of performance by individuals trained to shoot in the Service manner, then the results confirm the same Report's statement that "He does not have to apply in practice what he is taught." This study suggests one further important point. The results question the validity of the Service training methods when a Service r i f l e with a .22 bore is used. It may be true that the procedures taught with regard to the factors here are the correct procedures for firing a .303# but this study provides l i t t l e evidence that these procedures are valid for instruction when an individual is shooting a .22. Limitations of the study Up to this point, the stress has been upon the possible values of this study. Now in order to complete the picture and to suggest possibilities for further research, some of the limitations of this investigation will be considered. It will be recalled that in the Introduction several factors other than those considered in this study are stressed by the training manuals. These factors are "aiming and trigger control." It is true that several precautions and controls were observed in this study in an attempt to insure accurate aiming, and that certain of the results indicate that these precautions were observed. S t i l l , a study of aiming tendencies, ie., movements of the barrel, might be of value. However, i t may well prove to be the case that what is usually termed "aiming" will be found to be in reality the coordination of the other factors. This suggestion is in a sense supported by the -83-various studies reported in the Introduction which indicate that exceptional vision is not characteristic of good marksmen. The influence of "trigger control" was not assessed in this study. Despite the negative results reported by Banister, i t is felt that this factor could be profitably investigated mainly • because of the stress placed upon i t in the training manuals. Again, although some data on "position" are reported in this study, the factor was not as systematically investigated as it might have been. Finally, although the training manuals stress the function of the left hand as being solely one of support and stress that the right hand is to be the master hand, i t might be profitable to investigate exactly what use is being made of the"supporting" hand while firing. This suggestion arises from the fact that although the shots falling above and below the bull seem to be reasonably well accounted for in terms of aiming time and respiration, it s t i l l remains to account for most of the shots falling to the left and to the right of the bull since stock pressure, originally believedto be of significance in this regard, has been shown by this study to be relatively unimportant except in two cases, i.e. PM bull and GM bull shots. This study has been primarily concerned with group tendencies and therefore any recommendations with regard to the individual case must remain tentative until tested. However, the method of analysis carried out in this study is essentially the same approach used in psychometrics where the attempt is made to characterize -84-the typical case. For instance, Strong in Super (18), from an analysis of the interests of successful men in a given occupation, assessed the inventoried interests of the individual in terms of how closely his interests resemble those of the successful men in question. The rationale here is essentially the same. Undoubtedly there are individual differences, but just as Super suggests that the chances of the individual being happy in an occupation are greater the closer his interests resemble the interests of a particular group, so in this study, i t is suggested, in effect, that aperson has a better chance to hit the bullseye i f the trends accompanying his shots resemble those accompanying the bullseye shots fired by the Good Marksmen. It is recognized that a case can be made for questioning the usefulness of any average profile in dealing with the individual, yet the fact remains that psychometric testing has been round useful in individual counselling and until the suggestions made here are tried out, there is no reason to assume that they may not be useful in training marksmen. -85-REFERENCES 1. BANISTER, H.A. A study in eye dominance. Brit. J. Psychol., 1935, 26, 32-48. 2. BANISTER, H.A. An indirect test of aiming. J. gen. Psychol., 1929, 2, 353-381. 3. BANISTER, H.A. A test for shooting ability. J. gen. Psychol.. 1929, 2, 353-381. 4. HELTON, W.f BLAIR, J. AND HUMPHREYS, L.G. Effects of practice upon measures of steadiness. Unpublished paper, U. of Oregon. 5. CRIDER, B. The importance of the dominant eye. J. Psychol., 1943, 16, 145-151. 6, DRAKE, C.A. Marksmanship: aptitude or skill? Infantry J., 1941, 49, 48-50. 7, EDWARDS, A.L. Experimental Design in Psychological Research. New York: Rinehart & Go Inc., 1950. 8, GARRETT, H.E. Statistics in Psychology and Education. New York: Longmans, Green & Co., 1947, 9, GATES", A.I, The abilities of an expert marksman tested in the psychology labratory. J. appl, Psychol,, 1918, 2, 1-14, -86-10. HEBB", D.O. The Organization of Behavior. New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 1949. 11. HUMPHREYS, L.G., BUXTON, G.E. AND TAYLOR, H.R. Steadiness and r i f l e marksmanship. J. appl. Psychol.. 1936, 20, 680-688. 12. JOHNSON, S.", LT. COL., Shoot to Live. Official Army Handbook. Ottawa; King's Printer, 1945. 13. LEBENSOHN, J.E. Ocular dominance and marksmanship. Nay. Med. Buli. Washington: 1942 , 40", 590-594. 14. SEASHORE, R.H. AND ADAMS/ R.D. Measurements of steadiness, a new apparatus and results on marksmanship. Science", 78V Sept. 29s, 1933. 285-287. 15. SEREBRENNIKOV, P.T. A study in the motor development of the Red soldier's shooting. Voenno. Med. J.,' (Leningrad) 1932, 1, 11T14 (Abstract). 16. SIMPSON, E.G. AND SOMMER, R.C. Certain visual.functions as related'to r i f l e marksmanship. Sch. and Soc., 1942', 55, 677-679. 17. SPAETH, R.A. AND DUNHAM, G.C. Correlation between motor -control- and r i f l e shooting. Amer. J. Physiol./ 1921', 56/ 249-256. 18. SUPER, D.E. Appraising Vocational Fitness: New York: Harper & Bros., 1949. An investigation into the teaching of weapon training. Army Operational Research Group. Repot no. 8. August, 1949. 2 0 • Infantry Training. Vol. I. Infantry and Platoon Weapons. Pamphlet No. 3. Rifle and Bayonet. Ottawa: King's Printer, 1948. 21. Royal Naval Handbook of Small Arms Courses for His Majesty's  Fleet. B.R. 161/1939. London: King's Printer. 22. Small Arms Training. Vol. I. Pamphlet No. 18. Range Courses  (War). Ottawa: King's Printer. 1942. 23. War Office. Rifle (Provisional) Inf. 3 (Trg.). Ottawa: King's Printer, November, 1946. '. . -87-APPENDIX A •88-THE CRITIGAL RATIOS POR THE INTERVALS CONSIDERED WITH REGARD TO THE NUMBER OF SHOTS ASSOCIATED WITH HELD BREATH Interval Percent of Poor Shots Percent of Good Shots Critical Ratio 9.6 sec. 39.6 49.3 3.03 7.8 35.7 57.4 7.1 6,0 40.5 61.6 6.8 4.2 47.0 76.6 10.2 2.4 74.5 90.7 7.0 1.8 79.5 92.2 6.05 1.2 81.9 94.7 6.7 .6 85.2 95.5 5.7 FIRE POINT -.6 45.0 64.3 6.4 1.2 33.3 49.7 5.43 1.8 41.8 51.7 3.16 2.4 43.5 52.1 2.77 3.® 45.2 57.9 5.38 3.6 47.3 54.9 2.45 4.2 54.3 56.8 .80( 4.8 44.8 61.2 5.52 -8?-APPENDIX B X 2 AND P VALUES 10 R THE RESPIRATION TRENDS • GOOD MARKSMEN. ......... _^  x 2 xoyo shots X 2 bull shots Interval P Trend P • Trend 16.8 sec. 11.6722 less than .01 Hold 12.4494 less than .01 Hold 15.0 11.851 less than .01 Hold IB.4459 less than .01 Hold 13.2 9.2905 less than .01 Hold 10.3146 less than .01 Hold 11.4 8.8515 .02 to .01 Hold 20.5793 less than .01 Hold 9.6 4.26 .20 to .10 Hold 24.7322 less than .01 Hold 7.8 21.92 less than .01 Hold 74.1859 less than .01 Hold 6.0 27.43 less than .01 Hold 105.5906 less than .01 Hold 4.2 58.78 less than .01 Hold 247.6851 les 3 than .01 Hold 2.4 104.44 less than .01 Hold 432.4615 less than .01 Hold 1.8 99.77 less than .01 Hold 453.7603 less than .01 Hold 1.2 115.04 less than .01 Hold 481.6554 less than .01 Hold 0.6 115.4 less than .01 Hold 509.3270 less than .01 Hold 0.0 sec -0.6 21.477 less than .01 Hold 150.9625 less than .01 Hold 1.2 14.173 less than .01 Hold 47.1727 less than .01 Hold 1.8 13.651 less than .01 Hold 48.1762 less than .01 Hold 2.4 10.784 less than .01 Hold 43.2430 less than .01 Hold 3.0 26.17 less than .01 Hold 69.1221 less than .01 Hold 3.6 23.383 less than .01 Hold 67.6698 less than .01 Hold 4.2 14.17 less than .01 Hold 69.1221 less than .01 Hold 4.8 21.917 less than .01 Hold 112.2521 less than .01 Hold df = 2 X 2 AND P VALUES POR THE RESPIRATION TRENDS (CONTINUED) ...... GOOD MARKSMEN'• X 2 - - Snots X 2 ' ' * - Shots Interval P Trend P Trend 16.8 sec. 3.00 .90 to .80 Hold 9.5247 less than .01 Hold 15.0 7.00 approx. .70 Hold 0.5381 .80 to .70 Exhale 13.2 5.75 approx. .05 Hold 1.4608 .50 to .30 Hold 11.4 4.75 .10 Hold 4.6665 .10 Hold 9.6 7.75 .02 Hold i 11.5555 less than .01 Hold 7.8 12.00 less than .01 Hold 11.5555 less than .01 Hold 6.0 10.75 less than .01 Hold 24.2221 less than .01 Hold 4.2 15.75 less than .01 Hold 38.00 less than .01 Hold 2.4 32.25 less than .01 Hold 42.6666 ' less than .01 Hold 1.8 48.00 less than .01 Hold 48.2222 less than .01 Hold 1.2 48.00 less than .01 Hold 54.00 less than .01 Hold 0.6 48.00 less than .01 Hold 48.2222 less than .01 Hold 0.0 sec. FIRE POINT 0.6 10.75 less than .01 Hold 20.6665 less than .01 Hold 1.2 4.75 .10 Hold 4.6665 .10 Hold 1.8 13.00 less than .01 Hold 0.6666 approx. .70 Bold 2.4 9.25 less than .01 Hold 10.8888 less than .01 Hold 3.0 9.25 less than .01 Hold 6.00 .05 Hold 3.6 4.00 .20 to .10 Hold 8.6665 .02 to .01 Hold 4.2 12.125 less than .01 Hold. 8.00 .02 Hold 4.8 15.25 less than .01 Hold 13.5554 less than .01 Hold df = 2 X 2 AND P VALUES K)R THE RESPIRATION TRENDS : ICOOTINUED) '. GOOD MARKSMEN Interval X2 4 shots xo, y - 2 to - 1 0 shots P Trend x2 P Trend 1 6 * 8 sec* . 5 0 0 2 approx. . 8 0 . Exhale-Inhale 2 . 8 . 3 0 to . 2 0 Inhale 1 5 . 0 4 . 6 2 7 7 . 1 0 Hold 2 . 8 . 3 0 to . 2 0 Exhale 1 3 . 2 . 1 2 5 0 . 9 5 to . 9 0 . Exhale 1 . 6 . 5 0 to . 3 0 Inhale 1 1 . 4 . 1 2 5 0 . 9 5 to . 9 0 Hold 3 . 6 . 2 0 to . 1 0 Hold 9 . 6 7 . 6 2 9 7 . 0 5 to . 0 2 Hold 1 . 2 . 5 0 Ho Id-Inhale 7 . 8 3 . 1 2 6 8 approx. . 2 0 Hold-Exhale 1 1 . 2 less than . 0 1 Hold 6 . 0 2 . 0 0 1 1 . 5 0 to . 3 0 Hold 5 . 2 . 1 0 to . 0 5 Hold 4 . 2 9.8810 less than . 0 1 Hold 1 9 . 6 less than . 0 1 Hold 2 . 4 9 . 1 3 0 5 . 0 2 to . 0 1 Hold 3 0 . 0 less than . 0 1 Hold 1 . 8 2 1 . 5 1 3 3 less than . 0 1 Hold 24 .4 less than . 0 1 Hold 1 . 2 1 7 . 3 8 5 8 less than . 0 1 Hold 3 0 . 0 less than . 0 1 Hold 0 . 6 1 6 . 6 3 5 3 less than . 0 1 Hold 3 0 . 0 less than . 0 1 Hold 0 . 0 sec. 0 . 6 . 5 0 0 2 approx . 8 0 .Ho Id-Inhale 6 . 0 . 0 5 Hold 1 . 2 2 . 3 7 6 4 . 3 0 . Inhale 2 . 8 . 3 0 to . 2 0 Hold 1 . 8 6 . 1 2 8 7 less than . 0 5 Hold 3 . 6 . 2 0 to . 1 0 Hold 2 . 4 2 . 6 8 7 8 . 3 0 to . 2 0 Hold • 5 . 2 . 1 0 to . 0 5 Hold 3 . 0 1 . 6 2 5 9 . 5 0 to . 3 0 Hold 5 . 2 . 1 0 to . 0 5 Hold 3 . 6 6 . 5 0 3 9 less than . 0 5 Hold 7 . 6 . 0 5 to . 0 2 . Hold 4 . 2 4 . 6 2 7 7 . 1 0 .Hold 2 . 8 . 3 0 to . 2 0 Hold 4 . 8 3 . 8 7 7 2 . 2 0 to . 1 0 Hold 1 . 2 . 5 0 Hold df = 2 X 2 AND P VALUES IDE THE RESPIRATORY TRENDS (CONTINUED). , GOOD.MARKSMEN Interval x - 2 X2 to - 8 , yo shots P Trend 1 6 . 8 sec. 7.6882 approx. . 0 2 Hold 1 5 . 0 3 . 6 9 8 1 . 2 0 to .ID Hold 1 3 . 2 3 . 0 9 8 4 . 3 0 to . 2 0 Hold 1 1 . 4 3 . 4 2 8 5 . 2 0 Hold 9 . 6 7 . 9 9 9 9 . 0 2 Hold 7 . 8 3.7142 . 2 0 to . 1 0 Hold 6 . 0 1 0 . 5 7 1 4 less than . 0 1 Hold 4 . 2 7 . 7 1 4 2 . 0 2 Hold 2 . 4 1 7 . 4 2 8 5 less than . 0 1 Hold 1 . 8 2 5 . 9 9 9 9 less than . 0 1 Hold 1 . 2 3 0 . 8 5 7 0 less than . 0 1 Hold 0 . 6 2 6 . 5 7 1 4 less than . 0 1 Hold 0 . 0 sec; 0 . 6 5 . 9 9 9 9 . 0 5 Hold 1 . 2 0 . 8 5 7 0 . 7 0 to . 5 0 Hold-Inhale 1 . 8 1 . 9 9 9 9 . 5 0 to . 3 0 Hold 2 . 4 1.1428 . 7 0 to . 5 0 Hold 3 . 0 1 7 . 4 2 8 5 less than . 0 1 Hold 3 . 6 1 7 . 4 2 8 5 less than . 0 1 Hold 4 . 2 5 . 9 9 9 9 . 0 5 Hold 4 . 8 3.7142 . 2 0 to . 1 0 Hold df = 2 X2 AND P VALUES POR THE RESPIRATION TRENDS POOR MARKSMEN xoyo shots - - ,.. bull shots Interval X2 P Trend X2 P Trend 16.8 sec. .3340 .90 to .80 Inhale .3454 .90 to .80 Hold 15.0 3.6981 .20 to .10 Inhale 10.9809 less than .01 Hold 13.2 .8570 .70 to .50 Hold-Exhale 14.4835 less than .01 Hold U.4 10.5714 less than .01 Hold 2.2681 approx. .30 Hold 9.6 .8570 .70 to .50 Hold-Exhale 7.2283 .05 to .02 Hold 7.8 1.9999 .50 to .30 Hold 2.1944 .50 to .30 Hold 6.0 .8570 .70 to .50 HoId-Inhale .6908 approx. .70 Exhale 4.2 1.9999 .50 to .30 Hold 9.2558 less than .01 Hold 2.4 30.8570 less than .01 Hold 89.2134 less than .01 Hold 1.8 25.9999 less than .01 Hold I30.838O less than .01 Hold 1.2 21.7142 less than .01 Hold 121.9716 less than .01 Hold 0.6 28.0000 less than .01 Hold 130.9432 less than .01 Hold 0.0 sec. • POINT 0.6 2.5714 .30 Hold 4.3713 .10 Hold 1,2 5.9999 .05 Inhale 26.8826 less than .01 Inhale 1.8 5.9999 .05 Hold 4.5737 .10 Inhale 2.4 3.7142 .20 to .10 Hold 7.7692 .05 to .02 Hold 3.0 3.4285 .20 to .10 Hold-Exhale 8.O878 less than .02 Hold 3.6 3.4285 . 20 to .10 Hold 5.3269 approx. .05 Hold 4.2 7.1428 . 05 to .02 Hold 31.6609. less than .01 Hold 4.8 4.5714 .10 Hold 16.2107 less than .01 Hold df Z 2 X 2 AND P VALUES FOR THE RESPIRATION TRENDS 7 . . . (CONTINUED) . r ............ ,. POOR MARKSMEN-snots 4 - shots Interval P Trend X? P Trend 16.8 sec. 8.1930 .02 to .01 Hold - .I.I25I .70 to .50 Hold 15*0 6.2753 .05 to .02 Inhale 2.0007 .50 to .30 Hold 13*2 13-95 less than .01 Hold 3.2038 .20 Hold 11.4 17.1253 less than .01 Hold 2.7522 .30 to .20 Hold 9.6 8.2486 .02 to .01 Hold 1.8235 .50 to .30 Hold 7.8 1.8017 .50 to .30 Exhale 8.1765 less than '.02 Exhale 6.0 5.4715 .10 to .05 Hold 2.1765 .50 to .30 Hold 4.-2 16.6790 less than .01 Hold 10.7674 less than .01 Hold 2.4 103.2153 less than .01 Hold 57.7058 less than .01 Hold 1*8 141.5488 less than .01 Hold 90.0588 less than .01 Hold 1.-2 176.5998 less than .01 Hold 89.3529 less than .01 Hold 0.6 146.0616 less than .01 Hold 139.8235 less than .01 Hold 0.0 sec. 0.6 6.8105 .05 to .02 Inhale 14.5294 less than .01 Hold 1.-2 39.9372 less than .01 Inhale 38.6471 less than .01 Inhale 1.8 2.0002 .50 to .30 Ho Id-Inhale 11.5294 less than .01 Hold 2.4 5.9674 .05 Hold 18.1765 less than .01 Hold 3.0 7.0584 .05 to .02 Hold 68.5883 .05 to .02' Hold 3.6 12.7614 less than .01 Hold 18 .'5882 less than .01 Hold 4.2 5.6699 .10 to .05 Hold 26.3530 less than .01 Hold 4.8 5.9674 .05 Hold 11.5294 less than .01 Hold I df Z 2 X 2 AND P VALUES K)R THE RESPIRATION TRENDS (CONTINUED). . ....... . ..... • POOR MARKSMEN.:. " - 4 shots 4 4 shots Interval X2 P Trend X 2 P Trend 16.8 sec. 3.6465 .20 to .10 Hold 4.3796 .20 to .10 Hold 1 5 . 0 2.6579 . 3 0 to .20 Hold 3 . 3 7 5 0 .20 HoId-Inhale 1 3 . 2 6.7878 less than . 0 5 Hold 2 . 3 7 5 0 . 3 0 Hold 11.4 1.3427 . 5 0 Hold 7 . 0 2 1 9 . 0 5 to .02 Hold 9:6 2.9456 . 3 0 to .20 Hold 2.0004 . 5 0 to . 3 0 Hold 7.8 3.7563 .20 to .10 Hold .2858 . 9 0 to .80 Exhale 6;o 8.9600 less than .02 Hold 1 . 7 5 5 5 . 5 0 to . 3 0 Inhale 4.2 14.4800 less than .01 Hold 3.9416 .20 to .10 Hold 2.4 73.6800 less than .01 Hold 39.2324 less than .01 Hold 1.8 77.8400 less than .01 Hold 51.4799 less than .01 Hold 1.2 77.7600 less than .01 Hold 60.5429 less than .01 Hold 0.6 75.-1200 less than .01 Hold 62.0126 less than .01 Hold 0 . 0 sec. 0.6 2.9600 .20 to .10 Hold 2 . 1 2 2 9 . 5 0 to . 3 0 Hold 1.2 8.6400 less than .02 Inhale-Hold 1 3 . 5 1 3 0 less than .01 Inhale 1.8 2.2400 approx. . 3 0 Hold 1 2 . 7 7 8 3 l e s s than .01 Hold 2;4 13.0400 less than .01 Hold 5.4297 .10 to . 0 5 Exhale 3.0 4.1600 .20 to .10 Hold 2.7353 . 3 0 to .20 Hold 3.6 5.0400 .10 to . 0 5 Hold 2.7353 . 3 0 to .20 Inhale 4.2 . 3 2 . 7 2 0 0 less than .01 Hold 8.1670 .02 to, .01 Hold 4.8 8.6400 less than .02 Hold. 7.3892 . 0 5 to .02 Hold X 2 AND P VALUES POR THE RESPIRATION TRENDS . (CONTINUED) : ' : POOR MARKSMEN. off-target shots . . . xo. y * 2 to * 8 shots Interval X 2 P Trend X2 • * p Trend 1 6 . 8 sec. 2 . 4 3 3 9 • . 3 0 Hold I . 6 3 0 3 . 5 0 to . 3 0 Exhale 1 5 . 0 . 6 0 8 3 .80 to . 7 0 Hold 1 . 8 9 9 9 . 5 0 to . 3 0 Inhale 1 3 . 2 1 . 7 5 . 5 0 to . 3 0 Inhale 5 . 6 0 5 6 . 1 0 to . 0 5 Exhale 1 1 . 4 . 2 5 • approx. . 9 0 Exhale . 8 0 0 8 . 7 0 to . 5 0 Ho Id-Inhale 9 . 6 - . 7 5 approx; . 7 0 Inhale I . 2 7 1 4 approx. . 5 0 Hold 7 . 8 6 . 1 2 5 . 0 5 t o - . 0 2 Exhale 5.0861 ,10'to . 0 5 Inhale 6 . 0 6 . 2 5 . 0 5 to . 0 2 Hold I . 2 7 1 4 approx. . 5 0 Exhale 4 . 2 4 . 0 . 2 0 to . 1 0 Hold . 7 2 6 5 . 7 0 - Hold 2 . 4 1 2 . 2 5 less than . 0 1 Hold 7 . 8 1 0 9 . 0 2 Hold 1 . 8 7 . 7 5 approx. . 0 2 Hold 1 1 . 6 2 5 6 less than . 0 1 Hold 1 . 2 1 5 . 2 5 less than . 0 1 Hold 7 . 8 1 0 9 . 0 2 Hold 0 ; 6 1 5 . 2 5 less than . 0 1 Hold 1 2 . 1 7 0 7 less than . 0 1 Hold 0 ; 0 0 . 6 - . 7 5 0 approx. . 7 0 Hold 4.5412 . 1 0 Hold 1 . 2 1 . 0 . 7 0 to . 5 0 Hold 1.2714 approx. . 5 0 Hold 1 . 8 . 7 5 0 approx. . 7 0 Inhale 1.2714 approx. . 5 0 Hold 2 ; 4 1 . 7 5 , . 5 0 to . 3 0 Inhale 2 . 3 6 1 4 . 3 0 Hold 3 . 0 1 2 . 2 5 less than . 0 1 Hold 5 . 0 8 6 1 . 1 0 to . 0 5 Hold 3 . 6 1 . 7 5 • . 5 0 t o - . 3 0 Hold 1 . 2 7 1 4 approx. . 5 0 Hold 4 . 2 9 . 0 approx. . 0 1 Hold 1.2714 approx. . 5 0 Hold 4 . 8 2 . 2 5 . 5 0 to . 3 0 Hold* 2 . 3 6 1 4 .30" Exhale df r 2 X 2 AND P VALUES FOR THE RESPIRATION TRENDS . (CONTINUED) ' POOR' MARKSMEN. ' : • • • -xo, y-2 to -10 shots - yo, x -2 to -8 shots Interval I p Trend X 2 P Trend 16.8 sec. .5000 .80 Hold .9288 .70 to .50 Hold 15.0 1.1430 .70 to .50 Hold 5.2160 .10 to .05 Hold 13.2 2.9644 .30 to .20 Inhale 2.6437 .30 to .20 Hold 11.4 2.4000 .30 Exhale-Hold .0713 .98 to .95 Inhale 9.6 1.2261 .70 to .50 Hold 2.1371 .50 to .30 Inhale 7.8 .0645 .99 to .98 Exhale .4825 approx. .80 Hold 6.0 2.6867 .30 to .20 Hold 1.9303 .50 to .30 Hold 4.2 6.8104 .05 to .02 Hold .8962 .70 to .50 Hold 2.4 21.8057 less than .01 Hold 20.1309 less than .01 Hold 1.8 21.4273 less than .01 Hold 19.9241 less than .01 Hold 1.2 33.0522 less than . 01 Hold 20.7513 less than .01 Hold 0.6 37.5508 less than .01 Hold 37.2974 less than .01 Hold O.o • - FIRE POINT 0.6 8.J100 .02 to .01 Inhale 1.3098 approx. .50 Hold 1.2 12.4336 less than .01 Inhale 10.8237 less than .01 Inhale 1.8 1.7495 .50 to .30 Hold 2.1371 .50 to .30 Hold 2.4 .'8123 .70 to .50 Exhale 4.6l?0 .10- Exhale 3.0 4.1862 .20 to .10 Hold 6.2736 less than .05 Exhale 3.6 4.1862 .20 to .10 Hold .2757 .95 to .80. Hold 4.2 2:6867 .30 to .20 Hold 2.5507 .30.to .20 Hold . 4.8 3.0615 . 30 to .20 Erhflle-Hold 2.5507 .30 to .20 Exhale - 9 9-APPENDIX G X 2 AND P VALUES FOR THE STOCK PRESSURS TRENDS df = 6 Figure Area X 2 P 8 GM xoyo and GM - 4 8 . 8 9 6 3 less than . 2 0 GM xoyo and GM T 8 . 5 3 5 4 approx. . 2 0 GM xoyo and GM * — 4 . 0 6 5 . 7 0 to . 5 0 9 GM xoyo and PM 4 — 2 7 . 8 3 8 8 less than . 0 1 GM xoyo and PM 4 4 1 2 . 9 1 9 2 . 0 5 to . 0 2 GM xoyo and PM ^  4 1 . 7 3 5 8 . 9 5 to . 9 0 GM xoyo and PM - 1 2 . 4 8 approx. . 0 5 1 0 PM xoyo and PM - - . 9 8 4 3 more than . 9 9 PM xoyo and PM - 4 4.2014 . 7 0 to . 5 0 PM xoyo and PM 4 - 1 0 . 6 8 9 4 . 1 0 PM xoyo and PM f 4 3 . 3 6 0 2 . 8 0 to . 7 0 1 1 PM xoyo and GM 4 - 4 . 3 8 5 2 . 7 0 to . 5 0 PM xoyo and GM * 4 2 . 1 3 4 7 . 9 5 to . 9 0 PM xoyo and GM - . 0 5 7 4 more than . 9 9 GM xoyo and PM xoyo 1 . 9 5 0 7 . 9 5 to . 9 0 GM bull and GM xoyo 1.6178 approx. . 9 5 PM bull and PM xoyo 4 . 2 0 3 4 . 7 0 to . 5 0 PM bull and GM xoyo 1 5.H80 .02 GM bull and PM bull 20.4320 less than .01 PM xoyo and GM bull 2.1176 . 9 5 to . 9 0 1 3 GM xoyo and PM off PM xoyo and PM off 7 . 5 7 1 0 ? • 1 0 3 3 • 3 0 to . 2 0 . 7 0 to . 5 0 X 2 AND P VALUES FOR THE STOCK PRESSURE TRENDS df = 6 Figure Area X 2 P 14 GM — and PM — 3.9833 . 7 0 to . 5 0 GM - 4 and PM - 4 1 7 . 0 0 7 7 less than .01 GM 4rr and PM 4 ? 39.6329 less than .01 1 5 GM xoyo 1 . 3 6 0 3 .98 to .95 GM bull . . 5.5694 . 5 0 to . 3 0 GM - - .3589 more than .99 GM 4 - 4.1826 .70 to . 5 0 GM - t 4.04 . 7 0 to . 5 0 16 EM xoyo 1.9238 .95 to . 9 0 PM bull 2.1254 .95 to . 9 0 PM - - 3.8731 approx. . 7 0 PM 4 - 4 . 0 0 5 1 . 7 0 to . 5 0 PM -r 4 1 . 0 0 7 2 .99 to .98 PM 4 4 7 . 2 7 4 7 approx. . 3 0 PM off 2.0869 .95 to . 9 0 1 7 GM xoyo 5 . 3 2 4 0 . 7 0 to . 5 0 GM bull 28.3140 less than .01 GM - 4 3.20 .80 to . 7 0 GM 4 ^ .20 to .10 GM ? - 2.5528 . 9 0 to . 8 0 18 EM xoyo 3 . 6 8 3 6 .80 to . 7 0 PM bull 15.5087 . 0 2 to .01 EM - 4 5.1748 . 7 0 to . 5 0 PM 4 4 4.2186 . 7 0 to . 5 0 PM - - 26.6422 less than .01 EM t - 2.6871 .90 to .80 PM off 2.0869 .95 to .90 I X2 AND P VALUES ICR' THE STO CS PRESSURE TRENDS df = 6 Figure Area X2 P 19 GM * - and GM xo, y -2 to -10 8.2665 .30 to .20 GM and GM yo, x -2 to -8 7.4174 .30 to .20 " GM and GM xo, y -2 to -10 6.8598 .50 to .30 GM — - and GM yo, x -2 to -8 6.7038 .50 to .30 20 PM _ «. and PM xo, y-2 to -10 3.1779 approx. .80 PM T " and PM xo, y -2 to -10 1.5800 .98 to .95 PM - - and PM yo, x -2 to -8 1.6681 .95 to .90 PM - 4 and PM yo, x -2 to -8 .9733 .99 to .98 PM - 4 and PM xo, y 42 to 48 .9460 .99 to .98 PM 4 4 and PM xo, y 42 to \8 I.4966 .98 to .95 21 PM yoi x -2 to -8 and GM yo, x -2 to -8 12.3229 .10 to .05 PM xo, y -2 to -10 and GM xo, y -2 to -10 12.9498 .05 to .02 22 .GM yet x -2 to -8 1.7246 .95 to .90 GM ro, y-2 to -10 more than .99 23 PM xo, y -2 to -10 1.3999 .98 to .95 PM yo. x -2 to -8 .3529 more than .99 PM xo, y 42 to 48 more than .99 24 GM yo. x -2 to -8 3.134-9 .80 to .70 GM xo, y -2 to -10 4.0606 ' .70 to .50 25 PM xo, y 42 to 48 more than .99 PM xo, y ?2 to ,?10 3.1475 approx. .80 PM vo, x -2 to -8 4.2963 .70 to .50 -103-APPENDIX D 1 0 4 -S c h o o l S u r v e y C u m u l a t i v e K E Y S T O N E V I S U A L S U R V E Y T E S T S R e c o r d F o r m N o 3 For Use with No. 46 Visual Survey Telebinocular Name Sex Date : Teacher Date of birth C. Age M. Age Grade. yr. mo. da. year. mo. yr. mo. School City Address Phone R e f e r r e d by A p p r o v e d by ' P r i n c i p a l or Wearing, Glasses: Yes No Snellen Standard (if desired) With Glasses: Right Left Without Glasses: Right Left Left Only Right. Only Underconvergence and Low Usable Vision 2,3,4.10orll E X P E C T E D Doubtful Overconvergence or High Usable Vision Test 1 (DB-10A) Simultaneous Vision (Far Point) H K ® ^ Test 2 (DB-8C) Vertical Imbalance (Far Point) o only * 2 o? O 2 U 3 U 3 « 2 n 3 * 2 U :i 1 * 2 y 3 * 2 o —<s—*— * .1 0? O 2 4 .1 Oi O 2 <r 3 O? Of —6i—e— o 2 <r 3 *—a only U ; O 2 <r 3 Test 3 (DB-9) Lateral Imbalance (Far Point) only 1 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 15-14-13 - - 3-2-1 Numbers Only Test 4 (DB-4K) Fusion (Far Point) only (D • • CD only _ Four, widely 1 \ _ Four, near W separaletl V each other © © j CD CD • 1 ' • _ Four, W then © © " " " • • © • """•©ffl • Four, near each other 9 © © • Four, widely separated Qf © © • Test 5 (DB-3D) Right Eye, Usable Vision (Far Point) No Dots Seen Unless Left Eye Is Occluded 1 2 3 4 T R L T S0% 65% 84% 92% 5 B 96% 6 7 B L 98% 100% 8 9 10 R T R 102% 103% 105% Test 6 (DB-2D) Led Eye. Usable Vision (Far Point) No Don Seen Unless Right Eye Is Occluded 1 2 3 4 B L R R 50% 65% 84% 92%. 5 T 96% 6 7 L B 98%, 100% 8 9 10 L R T 102% 103%, 105% Test 7 (DB-6D) Stereopsis (Far Point) t u + only u only • 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 + 0 # O D D O f 10 II 12 + 0 O Test 8 (DB-13) Instruction Only (Far Point) 1 1 2 c 3 Y 4 U 5 0 6 S 7 E 8 H 9 N 10 P 1) L 12 F Test 9 (DB-14) Color Perception (Far Point) 1 F 2 P 3 U 4 C 5 L 6 L 7 c 8 F 9 I 10 0 u Y 12 c ALL CORRECT Test 10 (PB-9B) Lateral Imbalance (Near Point) only 1 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 12-11 - - - - 3-21 Numbers Only Test 11 (DB-5K) Fusion (Near Poinl) only CD • • 0 only A Four, widely ™ separated © © • ^ Four, near w each other © © • ^ Four, 9 then © © , h r " • • © • Four, ^ then ™ three Q 0 • Tour, near gWj each other © © • Four, widely A separated © © Test 12 fDB-16) Usable Vision—Right (Near Point) i D 10% 2 D 20S1 3 L 4 D 30% 5 L 6 D 40%' 7 D 50% 8 L 9 D 60% 10 L 11 D 70% 12 G 13 L 80% 14 L 15 D 90% 16 D 100%, 17 G 18 D 102% 19 L 20 D 103% 21 D 105% 22 L Test 13 (DB-17) Usable Vision—Left" (Near Point) l L 2 D 10% 3 D 20% . 4 D 30% 5 L 6 D 40% 7 L 8 D 50% 9 D 60% 10 D 70% 11 L 12 L 80% 13 G 14 D 90% 15 L 16 D 100% 17 L 18 D 102% 19 L 20 G 103% 21 D 105% 22 L Test 14 (DB-15) Uaahle Vision-Both (Near Point) l D 10% 2 L 3 D 20% 4 D 30% 5 L 6 D 40% 7 D 50% 8 L 9 D 60%, 10 D 70% n G 12 L 80% 13 L 14 D 90% 15 L 16 D 100% 17 L 18 D 102% 19 G 20 D 103% 21 D 105% 22 L S*t at Far Point Complete directions for the admin is t ra t ion of these tests wi l l be found in the m a n u a l p rov ided for this purpose. T h e user shou ld fami l iar ize h imsel f w i th the in format ion g iven on the backs of the cards. Pointing with a pencil or s imi lar object wi l l facil itate great ly the g i v i n g of most of these tests — and save t ime. Interpretation of the Record Form. W h e n all replies are checked in t h e . " E X P E C T E D " c o l u m n (set off by heavy l ines) v isua l p e r f o r m a n c e is cons idered to be sat isfactory in so far as this test goes. Copyright, 1947, Keystone View Co., Meadville* Penna. Reproduction Positively Forbidden. Printed in U . S . A. -105-APPENDIX E -106-RE00RD FORM USED FOR READING FILM i 1 l i i ! ' J-ICI 1TGTH TARGET No. Dato * 1" 1 T7 .1" 1" i ! i COUNTS C-F > i 1 — w SHOT I . • Shot I ( l i g h t s ) SHOT TI Sho-h IT (11 shis) SHOT I I I i — Shr u, I I I (ligh t s ) • SHOT IV j < / Shot Iv (lifijifcs) SHOT V , Shoo V (.Tights) • . i I y • *' • i i 1 1 i i i -107-D.R.B. "RIFLE PROJECT DATE NAME AGE ADDRESS - PHONE HEIGHT WEIGHT VISION TARGET NO. ORTHODOX UNORTHODOX TIME POSITION -109-APPENDIX F Light-proof Box Outlet to Pneumograph O u t l e t t o R i f L s j ^ Z Switch " " 35MSI Recording Camera Recording Panel <- """" D i a l to r eco rd — -R e s p i r a t o r y Changes L i g h t i n d i c a t i n g FP 6 L i g h t s to r eco rd Pressure Changes O u t l i n e diagram o f the Recording Apparatus 

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.831.1-0106579/manifest

Comment

Related Items