A survey of children’s responses to the tautophone

142 Pages·011.184 MB·English

by  Mcpherson, Marian W

A SURVEY OF CHILDRENS RESPONSES
TO THE TAUTOPHONE
BY
MARIAN WHITE McPHERSON
Submitted in partial fulfillment of
the requirements for the degree
of Doctor of Philosophy in
the Graduate School,
Indiana University,
June, 1949
ZQA
ProQuest Number: 10295214
All rights reserved
INFORMATION TO ALL USERS
The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted.
In the unlikely event that the author did not send a complete manuscript
and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if material had to be removed,
a note will indicate the deletion.
uest.
ProQuest 10295214
Published by ProQuest LLC (2016). Copyright of the Dissertation is held by the Author.
All rights reserved.
This work is protected against unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code
Microform Edition © ProQuest LLC.
ProQuest LLC.
789 East Eisenhower Parkway
P.O. Box 1346
Ann Arbor, Ml 48106 - 1346
Accepted by the faculty of the Graduate School of
Indiana University as fulfilling the thesis requirements
for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy*
Director of Thesis
Doctorate Committee , Chairman
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Chapter Page
Im EmODUCTIOfJ........................................................................... 1
Historical Background of the Problem ............. 1
Foiraulation of the Problem .................. 2
II# THE EXPERIMENT.... ...................... 4
Subjects 4
Stimuli ....................................... 5
Preliminary Experimentation .......... 7
Formal Experimental Procedure ...................... 9
III. RESULTS ......... 16
Method of Handling the D ata 16
Number of Repetitions of the Stimuli .............. 17
Length of the Responses .................................................................24
Structure of the Responses ............ 3°
Content of the Responses ........... 37
Perseveration in the Structure and Content of the
Replies .............. !£
Characteristics of Particular Samples ............... 47
W. DISCXBSION •-............................ 49
Subjects and Method by Which they were Selected ••••• 49
Instructions ............ 51
Subject's Reactions to the Experimental Procedure *• 52
Number of Repetitions .............................. 54
Length of Responses ............... 57
Structure of Responses ......... 59
Cont ent of Responses ..................................................•. * • 60
Relationship between Themes and Temporal Measures »•. 62
Perseveration in the Responses .......... 63
Effect of Individual Samples 64
V- CONCLUSIONS ............................ 65
SUMMARY........................................................................................♦ 67
BIBLIOGRAPHY............................................................................... 68
iv
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Chapter Page
Appendix A: Stimuli Used in the Experiment ....... ?0
Appendix Bs Apparatus Used in the Experiment 72
Appendix C: Subjects Observed in the Experiment •• 75
Appendix Ds Data Dealing with the Number of Repeti­
tions Required to Obtain Responses • • ........... 79
Appendix Er Data Dealing with the Length of the
Responses..................................................... 101
Appendix F* Data Dealing with the Content and
Structure of the Responses .......................... 117
v
LIST OF TABUS
Table Page
I, THE ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE OF THE NUMBER OF REPETITIONS
REQUIRED TO OBTAIN A RESPONSE IN SERIES AND SERIES B 19
II. THE DIFFERENCES AND CORRESPONDING- t VALUES BETWEEN THE
MEAN NUMBER OF REPETITIONS REQUIRED FOR EACH OF THE
SAMPLES AND FOR EACH OF THE AGE GROUPS ................... 20
III* RELIABILITY STUDY GROUP: THE NUMBER OF SUBJECTS IN THE
VARIOUS AGE, SEX, AND SERIES GROUPS; THE MEANS, STANDARD
DEVIATIONS, STANDARD ERRORS OF THE MEAN NUMBER OF REPETI­
TIONS REQUIRED TO OBTAIN RESPONSES AND THE DIFFERENCES
WITH THE CORRESPONDING t VALUES BETWEEN THESE MEANS ... 23
IV- THE ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE OF THE LENGTH OF THE RESPONSES
IN SERIES ALAND SERIES B ................................... 25
V. THE DIFFERENCES AND CORRESPONDING t VALUES BETWEEN THE
MEAN LENGTH OF THE RESPONSES TO EACH OF.THE SAMPLES,
EACH OF THE AGE GROUPS, AND EACH OF THE SEX GROUPS .... 26
VI. RELIABILITY STUDY DATA: THE NUMBER OF SUBJECTS IN THE
VARIOUS AGE, SEX, AND SERIES GROUPS; THE MEANS, STANDARD
DEVIATIONS, STANDARD ERRORS OF THE MEAN LENGTH OF
RESPONSES AND THE DIFFERENCES WITH THE CORRESPONDING t
VALUES BETWEEN THESE MEANS...................... 29
VII. THE RANK IN DESCENDING ORDER OF THE FREQUENCY OF THE
PERCENTAGES OF EACH OF THE CATEGORIES IN THE INDIVIDUAL
SAMPLES................................................................ 36
VIII. THE NUMBER OF IDENTICAL SYLLABLES IN THE RESPONSES OB­
TAINED FROM TWO PRESENTATIONS OF THE STIMULI.................... 2(5
IX. THE NUMBER OF DIFFERENT CATEGORIES USED BY ALL SUBJECTS
GROUPED ACCORDING TO THE NUMBER OF RESPONSES WHICH THEY
GAVE....................................................... 46
X. THE FREQUENCY OF NONVERBALIZED AND NONSPONTANEOUS
RESPONSES TO EACH OF THE SAMPLES ............ 48
Vi
LIST OF TABLES
Table Page
0-1* THE TOTAL NUMBER OF SUBJECTS, THE NUMBER IN THE RE­
LIABILITY STUDY 'GROUPS, THE NUMBER IN EACH SEX AND
SERIES DIVISION, THE MEANS, RANGES, AND STANDARD
DEVIATIONS OF THEIR CHRONOLOGICAL AGES EXPRESSED IN
MONTHS AND THE PER CENT OF EACH OF THESE GROUPS OF
SUBJECTS IN VARIOUS SCHOOL GRADES ..................................» 46
C-II. THE PER CENT OF SUBJECTS WITH THRESHOLDS AT DIFFERENT
DECIBEL LEVELS BELOW THE MAXIMUM OUTPUT OF THE
AMPLIFIER ....................................... 77
C-Iir. THE NUMBER OF SUBJECTS OBSERVED AT VARIOUS HALF HOUR
INTERVALS AND THE NUMBER AND PER CENT OF FOOD RESPONSES
OCCURRING AT EACH OF THESE ....................... 78
D-I. THE TOTAL NUMBER OF SUBJECTS IN THE VARIOUS AGE, SEX
AND SERIES GROUPS AND THE MEANS AND STANDARD DEVIATIONS
OF THE NUMBER OF REPETITIONS REQUIRED FOR EACH SAMPLE . 94
D-II. THE NUMBER OF SUBJECTS IN THE VARIOUS AGE, SEX AND
SERIES GROUPS WHO RESPONDED TO EACH SAMPLE AND THE
MEANS AND STANDARD DEVIATIONS OF THE NUMBER OF REPETI­
TIONS REQUIRED TO OBTAIN THESE RESPONSES 96
D-III* THE NUMBER OF SUBJECTS IN THE VARIOUS AGE, SEX, AND
SERIES GROUPS WHO RESPONDED SPONTANEOUSLY TO EACH
SAMPLE AND THE MEANS AND STANDARD DEVIATIONS OF THE
NUMBER OF REPETITIONS REQUIRED TO OBTAIN THESE RESPONSES 98
D-IV. FOR THE VARIOUS AGE, SEX, AND SERIES GROUPS THE MEANS
AND STANDARD DEVIATIONS OF THE NUMBER OF REPETITIONS
REQUIRED TO OBTAIN RESPONSES TO ALL SAMPLES............................ 100
E-I. THE NUMBER OF SUBJECTS IN THE VARIOUS AGE, SEX, AND
SERIES GROUPS AND THE MEANS AND STANDARD DEVIATIONS OF
THE NUMBER OF SYLLABLES IN ALL THE RESPONSES TO EACH OF
THE SAMPLES...................................................................................... 112
E-II. THE NUMBER OF SUBJECTS IN THE VARIOUS AGE, SEX, AND
SERIES GROUPS AND THE MEANS AND STANDARD DEVIATIONS OF
THE NUMBER OF SYLLABLES IN THE SPONTANEOUS RESPONSES TO
EACH OF THE SAMPLES........................................................................ 114
v ii
LIST OF TABLES
Table Page
E-HI. FOR THE VARIOUS AGE, SEX, AND SERIES GROUPS THE MEANS
AND STANDARD DEVIATIONS OF THE NUMBER OF SYLLABLES IN
THE RESPONSES TO EACH OF THE SAMPLES................................ 116
F-I. THE NUMBER AND PER CENT OF ALL RESPONSES IN EACH OF
THE EIGHT CATEGORIES FOR THE SUBJECTS IN THE VARIOUS
AGE, SEX, AND SERIES GROUPS................................................* 118
F-II. THE NUMBER AND PER CENT OF ALL RESPONSES IN EACH OF
THE EIGHT CATEGORIES FOR THE SUBJECTS IN THE VARIOUS
AGE, SEX, AND SERIES GROUPS................................................. 120
F-III. THE NUMBER AND PER CENT OF SPONTANEOUS RESPONSES IN
EACH OF THE EIGHT CATEGORIES FOR THE SUBJECTS IN THE
■ VARIOUS AGE, SEX, AND SERIES GROUPS................................. 123
F-IV* THE NUMBER AND PER CENT OF SPONTANEOUS RESPONSES IN
EACH SUBDIVISION OF THE EIGHT CATEGORIES FOR THE SUB­
JECTS IN THE VARIOUS AGE, SEX, AND SERIES GROUPS .... 125
F-V. RELIABILITY STUDY DATA* THE NUMBER AND PER CENT OF
ALL RESPONSES IN EACH OF THE EIGHT CATEGORIES ON THE
FIRST AND SECOND PRESENTATIONS OF THE SAMPLES................... 128
F-VI. TEE NUMBER AND PER CENT OF ALL RESPONSES IN EACH OF
THE EIGHT STRUCTURAL CATEGORIES TO EACH OF THE
SAMPLES................................................................................... . . . 130
F-VXI. THE NUMBER AND PER CENT OF SYLLABLES IN THE RESPONSES
TO EACH SAMPLE THAT ARE COMPLETELY IDENTICAL, THAT
ARE IDENTICAL AT THE BEGINNING AND AT THE END OF THE
RESPONSES........................................................ 132
v iii
LIST OF FIGURES
Figura Page
1. The Per Cent of Responses in the Various Struc­
tural Categories At Each Age Level. . . . . .................. 34
D-A* The Number of Repetitions Required for Each of the
Samples in Series A and Series B.. . . . .................... 30
D-2. The Number of Repetitions Required At Each Age. Levdl
in Series A and Series B ................................. 90
E-L. The Length of the Responses To Each of the Samples
in Series A and Series B ..................................................... 103
ix
CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION
A. Historical Background of the Problem
The verbal summator, a device designed to present successive
repetitions of vowel sounds, was developed by B. F. Skinner in 1936 (12)
as an aid to his study of latent speech. Skinner hypothesized that the
use of unstructured stimuli presented near the threshold of hearing mini­
mized the external stimuli and resulted in the elicitation of a response
on the basis of its strength. Such determination indicated the possibil­
ity of using the instrument as a projective tool. Mirray (7) incorporated
the vowels in his techniques designed for the indirect exposure of fan­
tasies but fails to report a detailed analysis of the results. Shakow
in 1938 (I0) reported the projective use of the summator in a compara­
tive study of the responses of normal adults and schizophrenics. In his
published abstract there are no statistics to support his conclusion that
the instrument reveals differing profiles for normals, hebephrenics, and
paranoids.
Tirussell in 1938 (14) explored the sensitivity of the summator
to differences between normals and psychotics. The results indicated that
at least three characteristics of the responses segregated the normal from
the psychotic but that none distinguished among the various psychoses.
In 1940 Shakow and Rosenzweig (11) described systematic techniques for
scoring responses obtained with the device. In order to avoid Skinner's
theories of latent speech, Shakow and Rosenzweig named the instrument the