”le

       
     
 
   

«W

i.

W

{V‘IHIMWLIM

THS

ACCURACY OF TAC'IUAL PERCEPTION
AND LEVEL- QF ADJUSTMENT

The-sis for the Degree of Ph. D.
MICHIGAN STATE UNSVERSH'Y

St‘anfey Paul Rosenzweig

1956

THES‘Q

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

This is to certify that the
thesis entitled

Accuracy of Tactual Perception

and Level of Adjustment

presented by

Stanley Paul Rosenzweig

has been accepted towards fulfillment
of the requirements for

4% degree in Jim

v'lfifgqugd/ 1/. ’*1W¢W

Major professor

Date May 11. 1956

0~169

PLACE IN RETURN BOX to remove this checkout from your record.
TO AVOID FINES return on or before date due.
MAY BE RECALLED with earlier due date if requested.

 

DATE DUE

DATE DUE

DATE DUE

 

1015 '6}?
5:93217005

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

6/01 c:/ClRC/DateDue.p65-p.15

 

 

LIB R A R Y “’1
iichigan State '
_5‘ University ..

ACCURACY OF TACTUAL PERCEPTION
AND LEVEL OF ADJUSTMENT

By
STANLEY PAUL ROSENZWEIG

A THESIS

Submitted to the School of Graduate Studies
of
Michigan State University
in partial.fulfillment of the requirements
for the degree of

» DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY

Department of Psychology
1956

Stanley Paul Rosenzweig

This study stemmed from recent research on the effect
of personality variables on perceptual functioning. Spec-
ifically, this study was concerned with some aspects of the
relationship between personality adjustment and accuracy of
perception. Two tactual tasks were used to test hypotheses
derived from the findings of previous investigations in this
area. The first or Form task involved the identification
of letters of the alphabet outlined by tacks and concealed
from View in a stimulus box. Each letter appeared in two
cue conditions -- minimally outlined and maximally out-
lined. The second or Numerosity task involved identifying
the number of tacks on a card in the same stimulus box.

Three basic groups of subjects were used, each repre—
senting a different level of adjustment. The first or
normal group consisted of VA employees; the second group
consisted of patients in good contact, approximately half
of whom were schizophrenics from an open ward in a VA
neuropsychiatric hospital; the third group consisted of
schizophrenic patients in poor contact from a back ward
of the same hospital. All the groups were matched for
age and education.

The results upheld two of the three original hypo-
theses. In general, the following conclusions appear

to be warranted.

-2- Stanley Paul Rosenzweig

l. Perceptual accuracy appears to vary directly
with overt adjustment, i.e., as adjustment decreases per—
ceptual accuracy also decreases.

2. The perceptual accuracy of individuals at a
given level of adjustment is similar regardless of the
diagnoses of those involved. (No organic subjects were
used in the study.)

3. A difficult perceptual task differentiates better
than an easier one between levels of adjustment up to a
point. Beyond this stage of adjustment a difficult task.
does not appear to be any more sensitive than an easier
one.

4. A tactual task appears to have merit as a diag-
nostic tool.

Possible explanations of the relationship between
perceptual accuracy and adjustment were discussed. It is
believed that an explanation which postulates a general
deficit state has considerable merit.

Further investigation of the relationship between
perceptual functioning and personality maladjustment par-
ticularly using other modalities was recommended. Addi-
tional refinement of the tactual task was suggested so that

its value as a diagnostic instrument may be increased.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The writer wishes to express his sincere appreciation
to Dr. Donald M. Johnson, his committee chairman, for his
interest, encouragement, and helpful suggestions throughout
the research. Thanks also should go to Dr. Alfred G. Dietze,
Dr. Donald L. Grummon, and Dr. Walter F. Johnson, members
of the author's guidance committee, for their interest and
cooperation.

The author is indebted to the Veterans Administration
in general, for facilitating the research and particularly
to the staffs at Battle Creek and Ann Arbor, Michigan where
this research was carried out. Dr. Julian J. Lasky, Chief
psychologist at Ann Arbor, was very helpful and encouraging
while I collected data at his installation. Special thanks
should go to Dr. Stewart G. Armitage, under whom the author
worked for several years, who was always stimulating and
helpful. The author is indebted to Dr. Armitage, in addi—
tion, for his considerable assistance in constructing the
apparatus.

Finally, the author would like to express his apprecia—

tion to the many subjects who participated in the experiment.

-11-

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS..... ......... ..........................ii
LIST OF TABLES.........................................iv
I. INTRODUCTION............ ..... ......................1
II. RELATED RESEARCH AND THEORY........................5
A. Perception and Personality.....................5
B. ~Theoretical Formulations......................12
III. PROBLEM AND HYPOTHESES............................18
IV. METHODOLOGY.......................................21
A. Subjects......................................2l
B. The Tactual Tasks.............................24

l. The FormTaSkCOOOOOOOOOOOO0.0.0.0000000024
2. The Numerosity Task.....................27

V0 RESULTSOOOOOOOOOO0.0.000000000000000000000000.0.0.50
VI. DISCUSSIONOOOOOO000000.0.0.000.0.0.0..00000000000058
A. The HypotheseSoooo00000000000000.000000000000058

B. Explanations of Perception-Pathology
RelationShj—PCOOOOOOOOO0.0.0.0.000000000000000041

C. Diagnostic Ability of the Tactual Task........47

D. Suggestions for Future Research....... ....... .48

VII. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION ...........................50
REFEREKCES.............................................52

MDPEIIDICESOOOOO.00...O00.0.00...0.0.0.0.00.00.00.00000057

-iii-

LIST OF TABLES

Table Page
1. Age and Education of the Groups....................25
2. Comparison of Good Contact Groups
on the Two Tasks...................................Bl
A. Performance of Groups on the Two Tasks..........55
B. Tests of Significance Between Groups............53
A. Performance of Groups on Maximal
and Minimal Cue Conditions......................54

B. Tests of Significance Between Groups
for the Two Cue Conditions......................54

5. Accuracy of Diagnostic Predictions
' Based on Cut-Off SCOTeSoooooooo00000000000000.0000056

"iv-

I. INTRODUCTION

Perception has traditionally been one of the major
areas of interest in psychology and has stimulated a con-
siderable amount of theorizing and research. The early
workers generally studied perception as an end in itself,
paying relatively little attention to the broader need
system of the perceiver. The emphasis was placed either
on the sensory apparatus or upon the intrinsic laws of
perceptual organization. Many modern investigators, how-
ever, now pay considerable attention to problems of inter—
action between the perceptual process, the environment,
and the individual perceiver. They believe that the outer
world is not registered by all in the same manner and it
is this interaction which should receive the major focus
of attention.

This latter interest in perception has been given a
variety of designations. Gibson (15) calls this field of
interest "schematic" perception, as contrasted with the more
traditional studies of "literal" perception. The area is
frequently referred to as "personality and perception" and
the entire movement has earned the label "The New Look."
Allport (1) groups all the major underlying assumptions
here under the heading of "directive—state" theory. Murphy

(34) earlier had referred to the same phenomena as "autism."

Essentially schematic perception deals with man's
motives and needs as they influence his observations. The
more traditional literal perception deals with all its di-
mensions and qualities. While literal perception is con-
cerned with man's ability to discriminate among sensory
stimuli (i.e., psychophysics) and also with the phenomeno-
logical study of objects and events (i.e., spatial perception,
stimulus gradients, size and shape constancy, etc.) schematic
perception concerns itself with the study of meaningful
objects, individual differences, and social phenomena.

It is rather apparent that this area of investigation
should be of great concern to the study of psychopathology.
Likewise through the study of psychopathology valuable
insights could conceivably be derived which would further
clarify "New Look" hypotheses. It is this thought which
leads to the conception of the present study. An attempt
will be made here to investigate the interrelationship
between a crucial aspect of the perceptual process, i.e.,
perceptual accuracy and personality adjustment. It was
felt that such fundamental relationships should be clari-
fied before more complex phenomena in this area can be
fully understood.

Before progressing further an attempt should be made
to define what is meant by perception. Perception may be
' conceived of as part of a process in which stimuli are

received and acted upon by the organism. This process

can be thought of as having three major phases -- input,
integration, and output. In the first stage stimuli act
upon the organism's receptors, in the second stage the
organism achieves an "understanding? of the stimuli and
in the final stage the organism reacts to the stimuli
based upon this "understanding." The second stage is in
essence an integrative period wherein the meaning of the
stimuli to the organism is ascertained. The first two
stages, which occur with relatively little delay, may be
thought of as representing perception. This definitiOn
is in accord with many of the present investigators in
the field though some would consider only stage one as
representing perception and assign stage two to some other
process such as cognition. Concerning this point Allport
states, "the two processes are so closely intertwined that
it would scarcely be feasible ... to consider one of them
in isolation from the other" (1, p. 14).1

A word should be said about the Gestalt view of per-
ception. Basically their ideas are not inconsistent with
those expressed by "New Look" theorists and in some ways
could even be considered the forerunners of this point
of view. The original Gestaltists, however, did not con-

cern themselves to any extent with the motivational aspects

 

1. It would be going too farefield for the
purposes of this paper to deal extensively with the im—
plications of the term perception. An excellent discussion
of the problem may be found in Allport (1, Ch. 2).

of perception but instead concentrated a great deal on the
properties of the stimulus field particuLarly in relation
to inherent tendencies toward organization. However, they
also stressed the dependence of outer organization upon
the character of inner fields. Thus, many neo-Gestaltists
interpret this conception as implying that the outward
environmental stimulus pattern mirrors to a considerable
extent the organized inner need pattern. (On this point

see Murphy (54).)

II. RELATED RESEARCH AND THEORY
A. Perception and Personality

The research in the area of personality and perception
does not stem from an organized set of postulates or a
clearly formulated theory. Instead, theoretical concepts
have emerged from a variety of studies which were conducted
by investigators representing a number of frames of refer-
ence. Some attempt to unify this work may be seen in a
number of recently published symposia (5, 8) on the topic.
F. Allport in his recent book has made an attempt to inte—
grate the bulk of the research data into a more-or-less
organized theory. He divides the work in this area into
six major sub-divisions. It would be worthwhile to examine
each of these subdivisions briefly and then to derive a
seventh from which the present investigation will directly
stem.

Allport presents this material in the form of hypo-
theses. The first one is, "bodily needs tend to determine
what is perceived." Various experiments have shown the
effects of food deprivation upon perception. Sanford
(49, 50), who did the pioneer study here, found that hungry
individuals tended to interpret mutilated pictures in terms

of food. A study by Levine, Chein, and Murphy (25) offered

further substantiation of this tendency for the hunger-
state to influence what is seen.

The second hypothesis is that "reward and punishment
associated with the perceiving of objects tend to determine
what is perceived" and "also tend to determine its apparent
magnitude and its speed of recognition." Making the assump—
tion that reward and punishment create needs in an individual,
Murphy (54) reasoned that they should therefore influence
what is perceived. He and his students then carried out
several experiments which upheld this reasoning. In one
study (51) a strong tendency was found for subjects to
perceive the ambiguous stimulus patterns (resembling a
face) for which they had been rewarded during a training
period rather than the alternate stimulus patterns which
had been accompanied by punishment during the training
period. In another study (40) psychophysical estimates
were influenced by rewards given during a training period.

Smith, Parker, and Robinson (55) found that they could
create a tendency to overestimate number of dots by monetary
rewards. Righy and Rigby (42) found that reward influenced
reaction time when stimuli were presented tachistoscopically.

The third hypothesis is that "values characteristic of
the individual tend to determine the speed with which words
related to those values are recognized." Postman, Bruner,
and McGinnies (59) found that the threshold for recognizing

given words was related to their value systems as determined

by the Allport-Vernon (A—V) Study of Values, i.e., the
higher the value to the individual of the value category
of the word the shorter the latency. Vanderplas and Blake
(56) found a similar result using auditory stimuli.

The fourth hypothesis states that "the value of ob-
jects to the individual tends to determine their perceived
magnitudes." Bruner and Goodman (6) did the major study
here and found that "poor" children tended to overestimate
the size of coins more than "rich" children. A series
of additional studies found results which also tended to
support this general hypothesis (Ashley, Harper and Runyon
(2), Lambert, Solomon and Watson (25), Bruner and Postman
(7)).

The fifth hypothesis is that "personality characteris—
tics of the individual predispose him to perceive things in
a manner consistent with those characteristics." This hy-
pothesis covers a broad area and is basic to much of the
work in clinical psychology. It is, in fact, the fundamental
assumption made in the interpretation of projective tech-
niques. Recently there have been a number of perception
studies whose results have tended to lend support to the
hypothesis. Witkin and his associates (60) in a large
scale research project found that specific personality
characteristics seemed to be correlated with the way in
which an individual orients himself in space. Studies by

Frenkel-Brunswik (12, 13) appeared to indicate that intolerance

for ambiguity is a generalized personality trait and that
ethnically prejudiced individuals are more rigid in classi—
fying a series of pictures where one object changes gradually
into another. Klein (19, 20) in a series of studies found
that individuals have characteristic attitudes which are
pervasive and emerge consistently in performing various
perceptual tasks.

The sixth hypothesis states that "verbal stimuli that
are emotionally disturbing or threatening ... tend to re-
quire a longer reaction time than neutral words ... and to
arouse their characteristic emotional reactions even before
they are recognized." This hypothesis covers the problems
of perceptual defense and subliminal perception (or sub-
ception) and stems from the original work of McGinnies
(50) and McCleary and Lazarus (28). These concepts have
stimulated considerable research but it would require
going too far afield to explore them to any extent.l

To these six hypotheses on the interrelationship of
perception and personality the present writer would add a

seventh: Disturbances in personality functioning (e.g.,

 

social maladjustment) are correlated with the quality and

 

 

 

 

1. Many aspects of the preceding discussion are,
of course, still controversial. There have been instances
when different investigators were not able to replicate
the results of some of these studies (9, 45). Allport (1)
who is generally critical of the directive-state point of
view feels that while it is reasonable to suppose that
motivating conditions effect perceptions the exact way in
which they are related is not yet clear.

adequacy g; the individual's perceptions. To some degree
this hypothesis is merely a subdivision of hypothesis 5
but the particular significance of this topic merits it
special consideration. Research with projective techniques
particularly with the Rorschach test adds important data
here. A long list of studies have tended to indicate that
socially maladjusted groups perceive the ink blots differ-
ently than a normal population. For example, Miale and
Harrower-Erikson (52) found that neurotics give fewer
responses, less human movement, more pure form and more
animal responses than normals. Many investigators have
compared schizophrenic reactions to normals. In general
most of the findings are in agreement with those of Beck
(5) who found that schizophrenics gave more pure color re-
sponses, less form dominated color responses, more rare
detail, and less adequate form responses than a normal
group. (The list is actually much longer than this and
includes many important qualitative indicators.) Other
investigators have been able to differentiate such clinical
groups as depressive and manic states, psychopathic person—
alities, alcoholics, and organics on the basis of the
Rorschach.l

A number of studies have specifically set out to test

experimentally hypotheses concerning the perception of

 

1. For a comprehensive bibliography of such
studies see Bell, J. E. Projective Techniques (4).

- 10 -

maladjusted individuals. Merrell(5l), for example, after
reviewing a good deal of the theoretical literature on
schizophrenia concluded that "the schizophrenic process
involves a relative inability of the individual to organize
stimulus values into extensive, flexible, perceptual units,
or conversely a tendency ... to react to stimuli ... by
forming relatively limited, rigid perceptual units" (51,

p. 27). In order to test this hypothesis he devised a
series of pictures which could be grouped into various
story units. He then presented these pictures to a group
of schizophrenics and a group of normals by projecting them
on a screen out of focus. He found that the perceptual
units formed by the schizophrenics included fewer of the
potential stimulus elements and were more resistive to
change in the light of changing stimulus events than those
of normals.

Lovinger (26, 27) found that schizophrenics in poor
contact with reality manifested less size constancy under
experimental conditions involving minimal distance cues
(i.e., reduced illumination) than did either schizophrenics
in good contact or normals. He interprets this finding as
indicating "that the schizophrenicls break with reality
involves not only more complex psychological functions
but basic perceptual processes as well" (26, p. 59).

While the previous two studies concentrated only on

schizophrenic reactions, Rubinstein (48) investigated the

-11..

influence of general personality adjustment or integration
on the perceptual process. He used a series of incomplete
line drawings of simple objects in three graded stages of
ambiguity. The subjects were presented with the drawings

in the reverse order of their ambiguity and were asked

to identify the objects. The subjects consisted of white,
male veterans representing a wide range of degree of per-
sonality adjustment. Each subject was rated on a scale for
personality adjustment three times -- once on the basis of
his case history, once on the basis of the psychiatrist's
impression and finally on the basis of the psychologist's
impression. Also, basic Rorschach scores were computed

for each subject. These measures correlated highly with
each other and were finally combined into a single measure
of adjustment. There were two major findings. First, as
the structuration of the stimuli increased errors decreased.
Second, there was a significant positive correlation between
adjustment and accuracy of perception, i.e., the poorer the
adjustment the less the accuracy. The author thus concludes,
"all other things being equal, the role of internal factors
in the perceptual process decreases with increased structura-
tion of stimulus" and "all other things being equal the role
of internal factors in the perceptual process increases with

decreased total personality integration" (48, p. 29).

-12...

B. Theoretical Formulations

A question that one might ask here is, "How consistant
are some of the findings in the area of schematic perception
with some of the broader theories of personality?" Actually
the hypotheses derived from these studies may be considered
as representing a segment of a theory rather than an inte—
grated theory in themselves. However, if these hypotheses
have merit they should coincide with the broader formula-
tions about personality. An attempt will be made to show
how several of the hypotheses may be derived from two
different theoretical viewpoints.

The first point of view to be considered is the phenom-
enological one centered about the self concept. This is
the theoretical orientation usually associated with Snygg
and Combs (54), Lecky (24), and Rogers (44). According to
these theorists an organism's behavioris determined by its
phenomenal field, including the organism itself, as exper-
ienced at the moment of action. The organism attempts to
satisfy its needs and to conform to the existing organiza-
tion of its phenomenal field by a process of perceptual
selection.

Rogers, in particular, stresses that an individual's
behavior is influenced to a considerable extent by sensations
and perceptions which, because they are in some way unaccept-
able to the self, are denied to awareness. A well adjusted

individual according to this view is one whose denied

_ 13 _

experiences and perceptions are at a minimum. The malad-
justed person has had to deny and distort many of his
experiences and perceptions. Denied and distorted percep-
tions lead to further inaccurate perceptions in order to
maintain the personality equilibrium. These distortions
are not only in the realm of the self concept and inter-
personal dealings but also extend to perceptions of the
physical world.

Hence, this point of view is quite consistent with
the general trend of the research in schematic perception,
particularly in the area of perception and pathology (see
hypothesis seven). Rogers and his followers, in fact,
have contributed research which offers further substantia-
tion of the view. Most of the Rogerian research naturally
is concerned with the process of psychotherapy, from which
many of their ideas originally stemmed. Therapy is con-
ceived of as a process which allows an individual to reor-
ganize his perceptions. Thus, a number of research studies
concerned themselves with perceptual measures before and
after successful treatment.

Although when Rogers refers to changes in perception
he usually employs the concept in its broadest sense par-
ticularly alluding to self perceptions and interpersonal
perceptions he also feels that "even if we define percep-
tion in its narrowest terms, as the meaning given to visual

stimuli there is clinical evidence to suggest that perceptual

reorganization takes place in some clients, and that this
reorganization ... appears to affect the perception of the
world at large" (45, p. 509).

Rogers reports several studies conducted at the
University of Chicago which found structural changes in
the perception of the Rorschach ink blots after successful
therapy. A group at the same university (41, 52) are con-
ducting studies whereby various perceptual tasks are ad-
ministered before and after therapy. They hypothesize
that those who improve in therapy will show significant
changes in their perceptions in the direction of greater
organization.1

A study dealing with aspects of the self-theory and
perception but not immediately concerned with psychotherpy
was carried out by Chodorkoff (10). He was particularly
concerned with the relationships between an individual's
self-description, personal adjustment, and perceptual
defense, which in his study referred to the differential
recognition of threatening and non-threatening words. His
results indicated that the greater the agreement between
an individual's self description of him, the less percep-

tual defense he will show and the more adequate will be

 

1. While no results of these studies have yet
been published Seeman, the principal investigator, has
indicated through personal communication that the changes
so far have been insignificant.

- 15 _

his personal adjustment. Also, the more adequate the
personal adjustment, the less perceptual defense will be
shown. The author thus feels that there is a direct rela—
tionship between faulty perceptions and inadequate personal
adjustments. This, of course, is a very similar conclusion
to the one reached by Rubinstein.

The second theoretical position to be considered is
the developmental approach originally formulated by Heinz
Werner (58) and later serving an important role in the
personality theory of Murphy (54). According to this
position there is a definite developmental direction.
First, behavior and perceptions are diffuse and undiffer-
entiated, then there is a stage of unorganized differentia-
tion, and finally a state of integrated organization.
Development, however, is not regarded as being complete
when the final stage is reached but is characterized instead
by shifts and changes. Normal and pathological functioning
are considered as lying along a continuum representing
relative dominance of higher or lower stages of development.
Thus, psychopathology or maladjustment represents a relative
dominance of early developmental levels and a decreased
emphasis of higher, genetically more developed levels.

According to this point of view the individual's
developmental status is reflected in his perceptions even
more than in his thought content. Also, this status is

the determinant of the individual's level of adjustment.

_ 16 -

Hence, an adult who functions primarily on the basis of
the early developmental stages would be quite maladjusted
(e.g., schizophrenic). While such an individual would
appear to be childlike in much of his behavior it would
primarily be his perceptions which would be "regressed."

The most crucial testing of these hypotheses was
probably carried out by a group at Clark University headed
by Phillips (14, 56, 57). They employed the Rorschach
technique as a measure of perceptual processes. A scoring
technique was devised based on location and form-level so
that these scores could reflect the entire range of percep—
tual development (i.e., from the diffuse to the organized).
They administered the Rorschach to normal groups including
children at various age levels and to a variety of clinical
groups. They predicted that the perceptual responses of
groups of ascending psychiatric intactness would parallel
the ascent in children of increasing age levels and those
least intact would be most similar to the youngest age
group. In general, the findings tended to substantiate
these predictions.

These results appear to be very much in accord with a
good deal of the work already cited. Particularly there
is agreement with Rubinstein and Chodorkoff that the greater
the degree of maladjustment or personality disorganization
the less adequate the perception. Developmental theory

incidentally is also able to explain why in Rubinstein's

_ 17 -

study structured tasks did not differentiate the maladjusted
(all subjects in his study made fewer errors as the struc-
turation of the stimuli increased) and why in Lovinger's
research it was the minimal cue condition which was able
to differentiate between the poor contact schizophrenics
and the other groups. As a stimulus becomes less structured,
making the task more difficult, it requires a greater amount
of the more highly developed perceptual activities on the
part of the subject. But since increased maladjustment
brings with it a relative decrease in the more mature per-
ceptual abilities when the task is not too well structured
(e.g., minimal cue in Lovinger's study) the more maladjusted
people are at a greater disadvantage. If a task is so easy
as to require only the most minimal perceptual skills then
even a severely maladjusted group is apt to do well.

Hence it appears that both theories have something
to offer for understanding the interrelationship of percep-
tion and pathology. One might even see in perception the
potential for tying together various of the personality
theories. At any rate it is of interest that different
orientations, encouraging different types of research,
are able to reach similar conclusions in regard to problems

in this area.

III. PROBLEM and HYPOTHESES

The present study is an attempt to follow up some of
the findings regarding the interrelationship of perceptual
factors and personality adjustment. In retesting a number
of these findings, however, an attempt will be made to
overcome some of the methodological limitations which are
inherent in many of the perception-pathology studies reviewed.
Thus, few of the previously cited studies actually dealt
with pure perceptual phenomena. They were usually contami-
nated by more complex psychological factors. Whenever the
stimulus is complex and possesses possible affective implica-
tions (e.g., such as the Rorschach cards) it is difficult
to ascertain just what aspects of the stimuli are eliciting
the response. Also, the problem is further complicated when
any but the most straightforward response is required, for
then the problems of introspective abilities and accuracy
of reporting are involved. The ideal experimental situa-
tion is, of course, rare. Nevertheless, research eliminat-
ing some of the extraneous variables is needed before many
of the implications of previously cited experiments can
be fully accepted. It is necessary to determine if the
same relationships exist when some of these factors are

removed.

- 19 -

Various investigators, representing different orienta—
tions, have indicated that a direct relationship exists
between the adequacy of one's perceptions and his level
of adjustment. This finding was implied in the results
of Chodorkoff and the Phillips group but was probably most
directly dealt with in Rubinstein's study. The first
question, then, that is to be considered here is, "Will
further investigation substantiate the direct relationship
between perceptual accuracy and adjustment as found by
these investigators?"

The next question to which this study will address
itself concerns the complexity of the task. A direct
implication of Rubinstein's study is that a less structured
task should be more sensitive to personality maladjustment
than a more structured one. This is consistent with
Lovinger's finding that only a minimal cue condition in
a size constancy experiment was sensitive enough to discrim-
inate a poor contact group from other groups. It may be
seen that degree of structuration and amount of relevant
cues available are both dimensions of a task's difficulty.
Hence, a second question might be phrased, "Will a difficult
task (i.e., one with few relevant cues) be able to differ-
entiate between groups at different levels of adjustment
better than an easier task (i.e., one with a greater number
of cues)?" If no cues are available or if the task is in—
soluble, of course, the relationship most likely would not

hold since there would probably be no difference between groups.

_ 20 _

Finally, if this relationship between perceptual
accuracy and adjustment is substantial, it would indicate
that level of adjustment and not diagnostic category as
such is the crucial variable. Thus, it was the severity
of the maladjustment which was related to perceptual ade-
quacy in the studies of Chodorkoff and Rubinstein. Hence,
a final question to be investigated might be worded, "Will
there be a relatively uniform performance on a perceptual
task within a given stage of adjustment regardless of
diagnosis?"

These questions may now be stated as three specific,
testable hypotheses:

1. If relatively discrete groups on a continuum of
adjustment are presented a series of perceptual tasks the
best adjusted group will make the fewest distortions (i.e.,
have the greatest accuracy) and each succeeding group will
make progressively more, so that the most poorly adjusted
group will have the most distortions.

2. A difficult task, i.e., one having few relevant
cues, will be more sensitive in discriminating between
these groups than an easier one, i.e., one having more
relevant cues.

5. Within a given level of adjustment there will
be no difference in perceptual accuracy between the major

diagnostic groups (i.e., schizophrenics vs. non—schizophrenics).

IV. METHODOLOGY
A. Subjects

Three basic groups of subjects were used, each repre-
senting a different stage of adjustment. The normal or
control group (A) consisted of 17 male VA employees, mostly
workers in physical medicine and rehabilitation and nursing
aides, selected from Battle Creek and Ann Arbor, Michigan.
All of these employees had a satisfactory work history and
were rated as stable by their supervisors. The second or
good contact patient group (B) was chosen from patients on
the "best" open ward of a VA neuropsychiatric hospital
(Battle Creek, Michigan). All of these people were in
good reality contact with no observable signs of severe
pathology (e.g., hallucinatory activities, mutism, extreme
carelessness in appearance). This group consisted of 12
individuals whose psychiatric diagnosis was schizophrenia
(B1) and 14 whose diagnosis was other than schizophrenia,
i.e., character disorders, neurotics, manic depressives
(B2). The third or poor contact patient group (C) consisted
of twenty schizophrenic patients from one of the "back"

wards of the same hospital.1 The adjustment of patients

 

l. The original design of the experiment called for
the poor contact group also to consist of both schizophrenics
and non-schizophrenics but this plan had to be abandoned since
there were almost no patients bearing a non-schizophrenic
diagnosis on the "back" wards other than organics.

_ 22 _

on this back ward is such that they are not eligible for
regular open ward status. If their conditions were to
improve they would first be placed on an intermediate ward.
Thus, this group can be considered to be more than one

step away from the "best" open ward.

Only schizophrenics diagnosed paranoid, unclassified,
or mixed (an old term synonymous with unclassified) were
used since other sub-classifications were almost non-existent
in the open ward and it would have added another factor if
those bearing other schizophrenic diagnoses (i.e., cata—
tonic, hebephrenic) were used in the poor contact group.
No subject with known organic pathology was used in any
of the groups so as to avoid this additional confounding
factor.

All groups were matched for age and education. Table
1 gives the major characteristics of the various groups.

These groups, then, may be viewed as representing
three distinct steps along a continuum of environmental
adjustment. Thus, the first group consists of individuals
apparently able to make a stable adjustment in society.
The second group is comprised of those whose reality con-
tact is good but whose problems are severe enough so that
adequate adjustment on the outside was not possible and
hospitalization was necessary. The third group represents
individuals whose outward adjustment is poor, even in a

mental hospital setting.

TABLE 1

AGE AND EDUCATION OF THE GROUPS

 

 

 

Mean Mean
Group N Age Range Educ. Range
A Control 17 51.1 25-56 12.2 8-17
B Good contact 12 29.5 21-58 11.1 8-15
schizophrenic
B2 Good contact non- 14 51.6 26-40 11.0 8-16
schizophrenic
B Total good contact 26 50.9 21-40 11.0 8-16
C Poor contact 20 51.8 26-58 11.5 8-16

schizophrenic

 

_ 24 -

B. The Tactual Tasks

Considerable thought was given to the choice of tasks
which would be suitable to test these hypotheses. In order
to avoid tapping the many extraneous factors which have
confounded other studies on schematic percpetion a basic-
ally simple percpetual task requiring an uncomplicated
response was sought. Also, since subjects representing
a wide range of personality adjustment were to be used the
task could not be too complex for those in poor reality
contact and yet still had to be challenging for all. It
was felt that a tactual task would meet most of these
requisites. And, in addition, such a task would allow
testing of the perceptual hypotheses in a medium that has
rarely been explored in research. Recently two investi-
gators (55, 46) reported considerable success using tasks
of a tactual nature as tests of organicity. Their work
also indicated that such tasks were practicable for re-
search purposes.

1. The Form Task

 

The major task used was a variation of the one employed

by Ross (46).1 The stimuli were the heads of paper fastener

 

1. Ross (see 47) used plywood boards 10" by 10"
with forms outlined by thumbtack heads as his stimuli. He
presented them through a plywood box which obstructed them
from the view of the subjects. His major task consisted of
eleven designs each in four stages of completion. The sub-
jects' task was to identify each form after running his hand
over it, by drawing it and later by identifying it in a
multiple-choice situation.

- 25 -

tacks (No. 1, round head, bronze) in the form of letters
of the alphabet on cardboard sections 7" by 8". There
were 54 cards in all, consisting of 17 letters each in

two cue conditions or stages of completeness. The first
stage of completeness, minimal cue, consisted of the fewest
number of tacks which could be used to outline the letter
without destroying its essential characteristics, while
the other stage, maximal cue, consisted of the letter com-
pletely outlined by tacks. These cards were presented
through a plywood box (painted black) 12" by 12" by 24".
The side which faced the subject had a hole for the arm
and was covered by an opaque cloth curtain. The opposite
end of the box was open allowing the examiner to present
the stimuli. The cards fit securely into slots where they
were held stationary. The arrangement was such that the
examiner could readily insert or remove a card. A box
which contained the stimulus cards completely shielded
them from the view of the subject before and after they
were presented. For further description of the apparatus
see Appendix A.

The 54 cards were presented in a standard random order
to each subject. This order (see Appendix B) was derived
from a table of random numbers. A sample card containing
the letter "Z" was used for the purposes of illustration.
This letter, which was the same size as all the others,
contained more than the minimal but less than the maximal

number of tacks necessary to outline it.

_ 26 -

Each of the control subjects was told that he was
serving as part of a normal group for research with a new
type of test. It was explained that a patient population
was being tested with this task and to evaluate their re-
sults properly it was necessary to know how normal people
performed. Each of the patients was told that a new task
was being constructed and a sample of the patients in the
hospital was being asked if they would mind participating
in the study. Participation was on a voluntary basis both
for control and patient groups.

An attempt was made to establish an informal atmosphere
with each subject. After the introductory remarks were
made, approximately the following instructions were given:

I am going to show you a task which I think you will

find interesting. It is something a little differ-

ent. We are going to be working with-with letters
of the alphabet outlined in tacks, similar to this
one. (Subject is shown sample card.) Can you tell
me what letter this is? That's right (if subject
responds correctly). Now, I am going to put this
letter in this box and I want you to place your

hand underneath the curtain at this end and run

it over the letter until you can identify it.

(Once the subject places his hand in the box he

is oriented to the letter, i.e., the boundaries

of the letter are pointed out to him.) Fine, (if

_ 27 _

the subject is able to identify the "Z") now that‘s

all there is to it. I have a group of other letters

like this one that I am going to present. They will
all be capital letters right—side up. The same
letter may appear more than once; that is, the fact
that a letter occurs once does not mean that it will
not occur again. Also, there may be some instances
where after running your hand over the letter for

a sufficient period of time you will not be sure

what letter it is. In these cases I would like you

to make your best guess. Any questions? Okay, then

we can begin.

Some modifications of these instructions were naturally
made to suit individual cases. If, for any reason, the
subject was not able to comprehend these instructions or
was not able to identify the sample letter he was not used
in the research. Thus, testing was not carried out for
2 normals (apparently of very low intelligence), one good
contact non-schizophrenic, and four poor contact schizo-
phrenics because of their inability to meet these require-
ments.

2. Numerosity Task

An additional tactual problem was used, one that could
serve as a further check on hypotheses one and three. The
task consisted of presenting ten of the minimal cue cards,

one at a time upside down through the same stimulus box and

_ 28 _

asking the subject to determine the number of tacks on
each card. The task was given to the subject immediately
upon completion of the first task with these instructions.

Fine, now we are going to do something else. I am

going to present cards to you but now I just want

you to tell me the number of tacks on each card.

That is, just run.your hand over the card and tell

me how many tacks there are.

In no instance during the testing was the subject
told whether his response was correct or incorrect and
generally questions were deferred until the end of the
testing period. Encouraging remarks such as, "that's fine"
or "you are doing well" were sprinkled throughout the test-
ing. Actually there were enough easy items interspersed
throughout the tasks to guarantee some feeling of success
for almost all subjects. Most of the subjects apparently
found the tasks interesting and there were few if any
comments to indicate that the situation was interpreted
as threatening or upsetting. The two tasks combined re-
quired an average of only 55 minutes for each subject.

For the first or "Form" task a maximum of thirty
seconds was alloted for each letter. This was usually
ample time to elicit a response from the subject. If he
had made no response by this time he was encouraged to
guess. Otherwise each letter was removed as soon as the

subject made a response. Each correct response was given

-29..

a score of one and each correct response given within ten
seconds was given an additional score of one. Thus, a
maximum score of 68 was possible. Separate totals for
the maximal cue and minimal cue cards were also computed.
For the second or "Numerosity" task a maximum amount of
ten seconds was allowed on each card. The score was the
sum of the deviations from the correct numbers. (Thus,
if the subject responded "six" to the first card while
there were actually eight tacks he received a score of

two.)

V. RESULTS

The reliabilities of the tasks were computed by the
split-half method and corrected by the Spearman-Brown
Prophecy Formula. The computations were based on forty
cases selected at random from the total 65. The relia-
bilities of the Form task were as follows: For the maximal
cue condition .780, for the minimal cue condition .742,
and for the total score .886. The reliability of the
Numerosity task was .847. The correlation between the
Form task and the Numerosity task was .564. This correla—
tion is significant at the .02 level. The correlation
between the minimal cue condition and the maximal cue
condition on the Form task was .600 which is significant
at less than the .01 level.

Let us next examine the data bearing directly on the
hypotheses. It is necessary to consider the results per-
tinent to the third hypothesis before the others are con-
sidered, for if the good contact schizophrenics and the
good contact non-schizophrenics do not differ significantly
they may then be combined into one "good contact" group.
Table 2 shows the results for these groups on the two tasks.
As may be seen in this table the mean scores of groups B1
and B2 are quite similar on both the Form and the Numerosity

tasks. It would appear from these statistics, then, that

_ 51 -

TABLE 2
COMPARISON OF GOOD CONTACT GROUPS
ON THE TWO TASKS

 

 

 

 

Form Numerosity
Group N Mean S.D. Mean S.D.
Bl Good contact
schizophrenic 12 58.55 8.01 8.50 5.47
B2 Good contact non—
schizophrenic 14 57.92 5.91 8.80 5.72

B Good contact total 26 58.11 7.01 8.69 5.52

 

_ 52 _

no real difference exists in the performance of these
groups on either task. Thus, the third hypothesis seems
to be confirmed. And now the "good contact" group may
be considered as a unit for further comparisons.

Table 5A shows the results of the three major
groups on the two tasks, while Table 5B shows the re-
sults of "t" tests of significance between groups A
and B and groups B and C on each task. It can be seen
that the Form task was able to differentiate signifi-
cantly between groups A and B and also between groups
B and C. The Numerosity task did not differentiate
significantly between groups A and B but did between
groups B and C. Thus, except for the difference between
groups A and B on the Numerosity task the results upheld
the hypothesis.

Data pertinent to the testing of hypothesis two are
reported in Table 4. Table 4A shows how each of the
three groups fared on the different cue conditions of
the Form task. Table 4B gives data which are even more
crucial. The minimal cue task is able to differentiate
significantly between groups A and B while the maximal
cue task is not. However, both the maximal and minimal
cue tasks are able to differentiate significantly be—
tween groups B and C (and at the same level of confi-
dence). Hence, the second hypothesis, which predicted

that the minimal cue task would be the more sensitive

- 55 -

TABLE 5A
PERFORMANCE OF GROUPS ON THE TWO TASKS

 

 

 

 

 

 

Form Numerosity

Group N Mean S.D. Mean S.D.

A Control 17 42.47 5.90 8.00 2.55

B Good contact 26 58.11 7.01 8.69 5.52

C Poor contact 20 26.50 7.10 17.70 8.74
TABLE 5B

TESTS OF SIGNIFICANCE BETWEEN GROUPS

 

 

 

 

£22m Numerosity
Groups t* p t p
A & B 2.15 .02 .74 ——
B & C 5.40 .0001 4.25 .0001

* One tail test

 

_ 54 _

TABLE 4A

PERFORMANCE OF GROUPS ON MAXIMAL

AND MINIMAL CUE CONDITIONS

 

 

 

 

Maximal Minimal
Group Mean S.D. Mean S.D.
A 50.88 5.60 11.58 5.74
B 29.19 4.24 8.92 5.46
C 22.25 4.90 5.95 5.80
TABLE 4B

TESTS OF SIGNIFICANCE BETWEEN GROUPS

FOR THE TWO CUE CONDITIONS

 

 

 

Maximal Minimal
Groups t p P
A & B 1.50 -- 2.52 .02
B & C 4.96 .0001 4.41 .0001

 

- 55 _

one in differentiating between the groups is only borne
out between the normal and the good contact patient group.

Although the tasks used were selected primarily to
test various theoretical hypotheses one might suspect that
they also possess diagnostic potentialities. To ascertain
the diagnostic power of the tasks various cut-off points
were chosen for each task. Various breakdowns were computed
using cut-off scores (see Appendix D) and Table 5 shows the
significance of the predictions using these scores. Hence,
if one's job is to differentiate a normal group (A) from a
good contact maladjusted group (B) and a cut-off score on
the Form task of 40 is used, we would be correct in 65% of
the cases. If the problem is to differentiate a poor con-
tact group (C) from a population consisting of normals and
good contact maladjusted (A & B), by using a cut-off score
of 50 with the Form task, 87% of the cases would be predicted
correctly.

A more crucial test of a task's diagnostic predicting
power is when it is required to differentiate a mixed pop-
ulation into three elements. Here, two cut—off scores must
be used. Using cut-off scores with the Form test, it is
predicted that all those scoring 40 or above are normals,
all those scoring between 50 and 59 are good contacts, and
zall those below 50 are poor contacts. These scores lead to
correct predictions in 67% of the cases. Table 6 indicates

that using each of the two tasks in five instances only once

-35...

TABLE 5
ACCURACY OF DIAGNOSTIC PREDICTIONS BASED
ON CUT-OFF SCORES

 

 

 

A. Form
Groups N Cut-Off % Correct p*
A & B 45 40 65 .05
A + (B+C) 65 40 75 .01
(A+B) + C 65 50 87 .01
B + C 46 5O 87 .01
A + B + C 65 40;50 67 .01

 

B. Numerosity

 

Groups N Cut-Off % Correct pp*
A + B 45 8 58 --
A + (B+C) 65 8 70 .01
(A+B) + C 63 15 89 .01
B + C 46 15 85 .01
A + B + C 65 8;15 60 .01

*Based on Chi Square Analysis

 

-57..

is the predictive accuracy not statistically significant,
i.e., in differentiating normals from good contacts with

the Numerosity task.

VI. DISCUSSION

A. The Hypotheses

The results of this study appear to substantiate
several of the hypotheses concerning the relationship
between personality adjustment and adequacy of perception.
Basically, the direct relationship between level of adjust—
ment and perceptual accuracy referred to by Rubinstein
and others was upheld. The present study may be considered
as providing a more crucial test of this relationship since
the tasks employed, being of a simple nature and requiring
relatively uncomplicated responses were less apt to be con-
taminated by additional internal and external variables.

In addition, the Form task was able to differentiate be-
tween two groups whose reality contact was phenotypically
equivalent but who represented different levels of social
adjustment, i.e., the control group and the good contact
patient group. Another factor of significance here is
that the hypothesis was borne out when tested in a differ-
ent sensory modality.

It is obvious that not all perceptual tasks are able
to differentiate as well between groups at different levels
of adjustment. For example, in the present study the

Numerosity task was not as sensitive as the Form task.

_ 59 -

It can be observed that these two tasks do not measure
exactly the same dimension of perception since there is
only a low positive correlation between them (.564).
Exactly what attributes the Form test possesses which
allow it to be more successful are not clarified by this
experiment. It does appear to require a less involved
response than the Numerosity one. Careful scrutiny of
these tasks through further investigation could clarify
this point.

The finding that individuals rated at a given level
of adjustment perceive with a similar degree of accuracy,
a degree which is significantly different from others at
different levels of adjustment, might have important impli-
cations for general diagnostic procedures. The great
differences found among the schizophrencis in good contact
and those in poor contact, for example, point out how
dissimilar individuals may be though bearing the same
diagnostic label. It is becoming increasingly evident
that many of the traditional criteria for diagnosing psy-
chopathology are inadequate. There is, in fact, a movement
afoot for instituting reforms (see e.g., King (17)). While
the results of the present study do not indicate exactly
where present diagnostic groupings are inadequate they do
point out the importance of one aspect of psychological
status, i.e., level of adjustment, an aspect which has

often been ignored in traditional nosologies. Thus, to

_ no _

understand a patient diagnostically it is important not
only to know what disease entity he may possess but also
where along a general continuum of adjustment he would
fall.

Concerning the relationship between adjustment and
one condition or difficulty of a task, the results of the
study indicate that this is somewhat more complex than
originally hypothesized. Thus, the maximal cue task was
at least as difficult to the poor contact group as the
minimal cue task. The evidence seems to indicate that a
difficult perceptual task differentiates better than an
easier one between levels of adjustment up to a point.
But, beyond this level of adjustment an individual's per—
ceptual accuracy is apt to be as poor with many relevant
cues as with few.

A good deal of this seems to depend on the number of
relevant cues available or the structuration of a task.
It appears likely that the more relevant cues available,
the further along the continuum of adjustment one would
have to go before a task falls below the individual's
threshold. While the answers here are not all clear, it
does appear that the situation is not quite as simple as
Rubinstein indicated, namely, that as structure of a
task is increased it is less difficult for all regardless

of level of adjustment.

T!

_ 41 _

B. Explanations of Perception—Pathology Relationship

The present research seems to add more fuel to the
finding that the perceptual accuracy of maladjusted people
is impaired and that this impairment increases as the
maladjustment increases. But, what would account for this?
According to the self theory perceptions are denied or
distorted to maintain the individual's self equilibrium
and according to Werner's theory there has been inadequate
perceptual development or perceptual regression has occurred.
These are adequate explanations at only one level, they do
not explain, however, what happens within the maladjusted
individual to account for his inadequate perceptions. In
other words, neither theory describes the specifics of the
situation at the organism's own level.

A number of possible explanations will be considered.
These explanations are by no means mutually exclusive, but
instead it is likely that some of them may be operating
concurrently. An attempt will be made to evaluate the
plausibility of each of these explanations.

Before going into these explanations, however, it
might be worthwhile to consider the results of a large
scale study recently reported by King (18) in an area
outside of perception, i.e., psychomotor behavior. It
is felt that the results of this study have much to offer

for a fuller understanding of the possible phenomena

_ 42 _

occurring here. In King's study a wide variety of psycho-
motor tasks were applied to a large sample of psychiatric
subjects. The test battery included speed of tapping,
finger dexterity, reaction time, etc. One of the findings
was that psychomotor retardation increased as psychopath-
ology increased, "indicating a close correspondence between
performance on the test battery and clinical status" (18,
p. 154). The finding, of course, is quite similar to re-
sults with perceptual tasks. King believes that motor
adjustment to the environment is a basic process which

is disturbed in psychopathology. One might, however,
wonder whether this impairment is not the result of a

more fundamental difficulty which effects not only psycho—
motor ability but perceptual functioning as well.

Let us now proceed to an examination and evaluation
of possible explanations for the phenomena. Six will be
considered in all.

1. Deficiency in receptors. One possible cause of
impaired perception is impairment of the organism's re-
ceptors. Thus, there would be a distortion in the first
or input stage of the organism's interaction with the
environment (see definition of perception in Introduction).
However, no studies have yet indicated that deficiencies
actually exist in the receptor organs of maladjusted
people. If the difficulty or at least part of the diffi-

culty lies here it has yet to be shown.

- 45 -

2. Deficiency in output. If an individual had
difficulty in expressing a response (final stage of the
"interaction" process) this could be mistaken for a basic
disability in perceptual functioning. Thus, if we ask a
person to reproduce a picture of a triangle and he scribbles
a few lines we might conclude that this represented what
he perceived. Yet, in reality, he might have perceived
the stimulus accurately but have been unable to physically
reproduce it. This type of disability is especially pre—
valent in cases of organic brain damage. This problem,
however, was greatly minimized in the present study by
having the necessary response very simple, by using initial
screening (e.g., sample letter), and by eliminating organic
subjects from the population. It is, thus, highly unlikely
that the perceptual impairment encountered was due to
difficulty in output in the experiment.

5. Physiological deficiency. Two major types of
physiological deficiencies are frequently mentioned in
the literature as being possible concomitants of mental
disorders. They are metabolic disturbances and irregular
brain waves. Morgan (55) mentions a number of studies
attempting to relate metabolic disorder to psychopathology.
There are some preliminary results in a positive direction
with schiZOphrenics but as yet no definitive findings. As
for brain waves there have been intermittent claims of a

strong correlation between irregular EEG patterns and

_ 44 _

behavior disorders. However, continued research has been
unable to clearly substantiate this relationship. Morgan,
after reviewing the studies in the area, concludes that
no relationship exists.

Certainly we are in no position to rule out the in-
fluence of physiological factors. Possibly some factors
that have not yet been considered will prove to have a
significant relationship. There are many investigators
currently working on this problem. Of course, even if
physiological correlates of maladjustment were established
it would have to be shown that they would effect perceptual
responses.

4. Motivation. Perhaps what appears to be inaccurate
perception is actually lack of interest or motivation in
the situation. We are referring here to more-or-less
fleeting, situational motivation because if the motiva—
tional problem is pervasive, always influencing the per-
formance, then we are in reality dealing with something
else -- more of a chronic incapacitation. Situational
motivation was encouraged in the study by establishment
of rapport, using a relatively simple testing technique,
and generally attempting to minimize stress in the situa-
tion. Also, there is no a priori reason to believe that
situational motivation worked more in favor of the control
group than the good contact group. It is likely that if

any group was influenced by negative motivational attitudes

- 45 _

it would be the poor contact one. However, if this was
an influencing factor one might assume that a negative
emotional state would be with these individuals in almost
everything they performed. In that case the difficulty
detected by the perceptual task would still be a fairly
basic one.

5. Stress or anxiety. One might conceive of malad-
justed people as individuals who are continually under
pressure and who possess a certain degree of anxiety which
is continually handicapping them. The degree of constant
stress would be directly proportional to the degree of
maladjustment. If this assumption is tenable we may turn
to the literature dealing with the effect of stress on
perceptual accuracy. The literature is relatively clear-
cut in this area. A group of different studies (22, 58,
57) all found that stress conditions resulted in less
efficient perceptions. Thus, it is reasonable to assume
that a constant state of stress in an organism would impair
the organism's perceptual functioning.

However, reliance on stress as a rationale for in-
accurate perception still leaves questions unanswered.

One might ask what there is about a stress condition which
causes the reduction in perceptual adequacy. Korchin (22)
believes that a chemical imbalance (excess of hippuric
acid) may be the intermediary between maladjustment and

perceptual inefficiency. Postman and Bruner (58) believe

_ 46 _

that stress causes a frustrating situation and leads to
a type of regression. This latter explanation would fit
well into Werner's theory. Perhaps the next logical step,
however, is to be found in the sixth and final "explanation."

6. Attention or availability of productive "energy."
Suppose we assume that individuals have given capacities
to attend to and respond to situations. If this capacity
is in any way interfered with or if their attention is
deployed elsewhere, only an organism reduced in efficiency
will be available to respond to given stimuli. Now, if
maladjusted people are considered to be under various
degrees of stress (which may or may not be physiologically
based) it would seem likely that the stress would interfere
with attention and reduce available "energy." Thus, as
maladjustment increases there is an increased encroachment
on attentive capacities and a corresponding decrease in
available productive "energy." The formulation would,
of course, not only be applicable to perceptual responses
but to psychomotor ones as well (and, hence, to King's
results).

It should be noted that the core of the above idea
is similar to the view expressed by Hebb (16). He stresses
that it is attention or perceptual set which, in addition
to sensory stimuli, determines the response.

It can be seen that various types of psychological

impairment would be predicted in the maladjusted individual

- 47 _

from this view. Of course, many aspects of this deficit
state being postulated have yet to be clarified. For
example, it is not clear exactly at what rate productive
energy would decrease as maladjustment increased. Perhaps
beyond a certain point of adjustment the deficit would
increase sharply. For example, it is possible that beyond

a certain point added factors, e.g., increased physiological
involvement, enter in to compound the deficit. This may
have been the case with the poor contact group in this

StUdyo
C. Diagnostic Ability of the Tactual Task

It might be recalled that several investigators (55,
46) found that a tactual task was valuable in diagnosing
organicity. 0n the basis of a more-or—less incidental
finding in the present study it would appear that such
tasks have even greater diagnostic potential. The tactual
task used, even in its rough, unrefined form, was able to
make significant differentiations between the various
maladjusted groups. Further statistical refinements,
which would include an item analysis, could conceivably
sharpen its diagnostic powers considerable. Various
other tactual problems, might be added, such as recogni—
tion of geometric forms. Additional information could be
supplied by a careful analysis of errors made. To realize
its full potential one would certainly want to use the

task in conjunction with other psychological tools.

_ 48 -

In addition to the task's apparent diagnostic acuity
it would have other features to recommend its use. Its
reliability, for example, appears to be quite satisfactory
on the basis of present evidence. Also, it has a certain
novelty about it which may facilitate interest on the part
of the subject. Finally, it makes use of a relatively
unexploited sensory modality. In general, the task could
prove to be a valuable addition to the psychologist's

repertoire.
D. Suggestions for Future Research

A number of leads have emerged from this study which
might be fruitfully followed up. Some suggestions for
future research are as follows:

1. Further testing of the relationship between malad-
justment and perceptual accuracy, particularly in other
sensory modalities would seem to be worthwhile. The extent
and intracacies of the relationship could then be worked
out. It is recommended that in testing basic relationships
only simple perceptual tasks be used. Test variables should
be varied in order to determine what aspects of a task are
the most significant in making differentiations. It is
also suggested that the rate at which perception is affected
as the difficulty of a task is varied be investigated
further. Studies using a variety of tasks with systemati-
cally varied cues could be carried out with a population

rated along a continuum of adjustment.

- 49 _

2. The concept of "deficit" or loss of attentive
acuity in maladjustment could be explored further. Possible
correlations, for example, between perceptual functioning
and other areas where deficit would emerge, e.g., psycho—
motor activities might be investigated using subjects at
different stages of adjustment.

5. Refinement of the tactual task as a diagnostic
instrument along the lines described in the previous sec-

tion is recommended.

VII. SUMMARY and CONCLUSIONS

This study stemmed from recent research on the effect
of personality variables on perceptual functioning. Spec-
ifically, this study was concerned with some aspects of
the relationship between personality adjustment and accuracy
of perception. Two tactual tasks were used to test hy-
potheses derived from the findings of previous investi-
gations in this area. The first or Form task involved
the identification of letters of the alphabet outlined
by tacks and concealed from View in a stimulus box. Each
letter appeared in two cue conditions -- minimally outlined
and maximally outlined. The second or Numerosity task
involved identifying the number of tacks on a card in the
same stimulus box.

Three basic groups of subjects were used, each rep-
resenting a different level of adjustment. The first or
normal group consisted of VA employees; the second group
consisted of patients in good contact, approximately half
of whom were schizophrenics from an open ward in a VA
neuropsychiatric hospital; the third group consisted of
schizophrenic patients in poor contact from a back ward
of the same hospital. All the groups were matched for age

and education.

_ 51 _

The results upheld two of the three original hypo—
theses. In general, the following conclusions appear to
be warranted.

l. Perceptual accuracy appears to vary directly with
overt adjustment, i.e., as adjustment decreases perceptual
accuracy also decreases.

2. The perceptual accuracy of individuals at a given
level of adjustment is similar regardless of the diagnoses
of those involved. (No organic subjects were used in the
study.) 9

5. A difficult perceptual task differentiates better
than an easier one between levels of adjustment up to a
point. Beyond this stage of adjustment a difficult task
does not appear to be any more sensitive than an easier
one.

4. A tactual task appears to have merit as a diag-
nostic tool.

Possible explanations of the relationship between
perceptual accuracy and adjustment were discussed. It
is believed than an explanation which postulates a general
deficit state has considerable merit.

Further investigation of the relationship between
perceptual functioning and personality maladjustment par—
ticularly using other modalities was recommended. Addi-
tional refinement of the tactual task was suggested so

that its value as a diagnostic instrument may be increased.

10.

ll.

12.

l5.

14.

REFERENCES

Allport, F.D. Theories pf perception and the concept
pf structure. New York: Wiley, 1955.

 

 

Ashley, W.R., Harper, R.S. & Runyon, D.L. The perceived
size of coins in normal and hypnotically induced econo-
mic states. Amer. J. pf Psychol., 1951, 64, 564-572.

Beck, S.J. Personality structure in schizophrenia.
Nerv. Ment. Dis. Mongp., 1958, No. 65.

 

 

 

Bell, J.E. Projective Techniques. New York: Longmans,
Green and Co., 1948.

 

Blake, R.R. & Ramsey, G.V. Perception — pp approach pp
personality. New York: Ronald Press, 1951.

 

 

Bruner, J.S. & Goodman, C.D. Value and need as organiz-
ing factors in perception. g. abnorm. soc. Psychol.,
1947, 42, 55—44.

Bruner, J.S. & Postman, L. Symbolic value as an organiz-
ing factor in perception. J. Soc. Psychol., 1948, 27,
205-208.

 

Bruner, J.S. & Krech, D. Perception and personality.
Durham: Duke University Press, 1949.

 

Carter, L.F. & Schooler, K. Value, need and other
factors in perception. Psychol. Rev., 1949, 56, 200—207.

 

Chodorkoff, B. Self-perception, perceptual defense,
and adjustment. J. abnorm. soc. Psychol., 1954, 49,
508-512.

 

Edwards, A.L. Statistical methods for the behavioral
sciences. New York: Rinehart & Co., 1954.

 

 

Frenkel—Brunswik, Else. Intolerance of ambiguity as an
emotional and perceptual personality variable. J. Pers.,
1949, 18, 171-179.

Frenkel-Brunswik, Else. Personality theory and percep-
tion. In R.R. Blake & G.V. Ramsey (Ed) Perception —
3p approach pp personality. New York: Ronald Press

Co., 1951, pp. 556- 419.

 

 

Friedman, H. Perceptual regression in schizophrenia.
g. Genet. Psychol., 1952, 81, 65-98.

15.

l6.

17.

18.

19.

20.

21.

22.

25.

24.

25.

26.

27.

28.

29.

_ 55 _

Gibson, J.J. Theories of perception. In W. Dennis
et a1. Current trends in psychological theory. Pitts;
Univ. of Pitts. Press, 1551, pp. 85-110.

 

 

Hebb, D.0. The organization pf behavior. New York:
Wiley, 1949.

 

King, G.F. Research with neuropsychiatric samples.

g. g; Psychol., 1954, 58, 585—587.

King, H.E. Psychomotor aspects pf mental disease.
Cambridge: Harvard Univ. Press, 1954.

 

 

Klein, G.S. & Schlesinger, H. Where is the perceiver
in perceptual theory? J. Pers., 1949, 18, 52—47.

Klein, G.S. The personal world through perception.
In R.R. Blake & G.V. Ramsey (Ed) Perception — pp
approach pp personalit . New York: Ronald Press
00., 1951, pp. 528-555.

Korchin, S.J., Singer, J.L. & Ballard, R.G. The effect
of frustration on the reproduction of visually per-
ceived forms. Personality, 1951, 1, 54-66.

 

 

 

Korchin, S.J. and Basowitz, H. Perceptual adequacy in
a life stress. J. Psychol., 1954, 58, 495-502.

Lambert, W.W., Solomon, R.L., & Watson, P.D. Reinforce-
ment and extinction as factors in size estimation.

9;. EEO PSZChOlo, 1949, 59, 657-641.

Lecky, P. Self Consistency: A theory pf personality.
New York: Island Press, 1945.

 

 

Levine, R., Chein, I., & Murphy, G. The relation of
the intensity of a need to the amount of perceptual
distortion. J. Psychol., 1942, 15, 285-295.

Lovinger, E. Perceptual contact with reality in schizo-
phrenia. Unpublished doctor's dissertation, Michigan
State College, 1954.

Lovinger, E. Perceptual contact with reality in schizo-
phrenia. J. abnorm. soc. Psychol., 1956, 52, 87-81.

McCleary, R.A. & Lazarus, R.S. Autonomic discrimination
without awareness: an interim report. J. Pers., 1949,
18, 171-179.

McClelland, D.C. & Atkinson, J.W. The projective expres—
sion of needs. J. Psvchol., 1948, 25, 205—222.

50.

510

52.

55.

54.

55-

56.

57-

58.

59.

40.

41.

42.

45.

- 54 -

McGinnies E. Emotionality and perceptual defense.
Psychol. Rev., 1949, 56, 244-251.

 

Merrell, D.W. A perceptual study of deviant cognitive
processes in schizophrenia. Unpublished doctor's
dissertation, Michigan State College, 1954.

Miale, F.R. & Harrower-Erickson, M.R. Personality
structure in the psychoneuroses. Ror. Res. Exch.,
1958, 2, 155-165. "‘ "“

Morgan, C.T. & Stellar, E. Physiological Psychology.
New York: McGraw—Hill, 1950.

 

Murphy, G. Personality: A biosocial approach 39 origins
and structure. New York: Harper, 1947.

 

 

 

Parker, J.W. Tactual-kinesthetic perception as a techni-
que for diagnosing brain damage, J. consult. Psychol.,
1954, 18, 415—420.

 

Phillips, L. & Smith, J.S. Rorschach interpretation-
advanced technique. New York: Greene and Stratton,

1955.

Phillips, L. & Framo, J.L. Developmental theory applied
to normal and pathological perception. J. Pers., 1954,
22, 465—474.

 

 

Postman, L. & Bruner, J.S. Perception under stress.
Psychol. Rev., 1948, 55, 514-525.

 

Postman, L., Bruner, J.S., & McGinnies, E. Personal
values as selective factors in perception. J. abnorm.

soc. Psychol., 1948, 45, 142—154.

Proshansky, H. & Murphy, G. The effects of reward and
punishment on perception. J. Psychol., 1942, 15, 295-
505.

Raskin, N., Seaman, J., & Stein, M.I. Dimensions of
perceptual organization in psychotherapy. Research
proposal. Counseling Center, U. of Chicago.

Rigby, M.K. & Rigby, W.K. Perceptual thresholds as a
function of reinforcement and frequency. Amer. Psychol,,
1952, 7, 521. (Abstract)

 

Rock, I., & Fleck, F.S. A reexamination of the effect
of monetary reward and punishment on figure-ground
perception. J. ggp. Psychol., 1950, 40, 766-776.

45.

46.

47.

48.

49.

500

51.

52.

55.

54.

55.

56.

...//_

Rogers, C.R. Client—Centered therapy. Boston: Houghton
Mifflin, 1951.

 

Rogers, C.R. Perceptual reorganization in client-centered
therapy. In R.B. Blake and G.V. Ramsey (Ed) Perception -
an approach to personality. New York: Ronald Press,

T951. pp. 5073527.

Ross, A.O. Tactual perception of form by the brain-
injured. J. abnorm. soc. Psychol., 1954, 49: 5664572,

 

 

 

Ross, A.0. Appendix to tactual perception of form by
the brain injured. ADI document 4164. Washington,
D.C.

Rubinstein, E.A. Personality integration and the percep-
tual process. J. clin. Psychol., 1954, 10, 23-29. .

 

Sanford, R.N. The effects of abstinence from food upon
imaginal processes: a preliminary experiment. J.
Psychol., 1957, 2, 129-156.

Sanford, R.N. The effects of abstinence from food upon
imaginal processes: a further experiment. J. Psvchol.,

1957. 5. 145-159.

Schafer, R. & Murphy, G. The role of autism in a visual
figure-ground relationship. J. exp. Psychol., 1945,
52. 555-545.

Seeman, J. Psychotherapy and perceptual behavior.
Research proposal. Counseling Center, U. of Chicago,

1950.

Smith, K.R., Parker, C.D., & Rebinson, G.A. An explora-
tory investigation of autistic perception. Amer.

Psychol., 1950, 5, 515-514. (Abstract)

Snygg, D. & Combs, A.W. Individual behavior. New York:
Harper, 1949.

 

 

Stern, F. & Karson, S. Motivation and attention: A
methodological problem. J. Psychol., 1954, 58, 521—
529.

Vanderplas, J.M. & Blake, R.R. Selective sensitization
in auditory perception. J. Pers., 1949, 18, 252—266.

Verville, E. The effects of emotional and motivational
sets on the perception of incompleted pictures. J.
Genet. Psychol., 1946, 69, 155-145.

58.

59-

60.

_ 5g _

Werner, H. Comparative psychology pf mental develop—
ment. New York: Harper, 1940.

 

Witkin, R.A. The nature and importance of individual
differences in perception. J. Pers., 1949, 18, 145—
170.

Witkin, H.A. et a1. Personality through perception.
New York: Harper, 1954.

APPENDICES

-58-

APPENDIX A

The Stimulus Bax

Side Facing Subject (minus curtain)

 

12"

 

 

 

r— ———+

lloor Plan
Shaving Section for Stimulus Cards

 

 

Subject“ 31d. ' 7"

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

t ent-""1 4

A; .

A IIGVF-I 'HA

xofi 3111311111 0‘53 9n"?

(stature -“i’l'fl’i‘.“‘!) doatfn'é: 31113375 obi;
l
. “or

.‘t

. 9.
Nr- ["4 «3‘1" ‘I
.. g .- .4.

‘ ' ‘ T .n '. c '0 . v— .4 <’
. 7.....‘r‘: on EL". (7’1" "(74 .L “(I L' 3"" , \(“JjglflaiI-1,

‘,

u
5’.‘
'v .'

I ‘0
6 v
P. .h; .

... .C '1 V
3 ' x, f)|' ‘.-~; "

I
\D
\O

I

APPENDIX B

1. Form Task: Order of Stimuli

 

 

Letter Cue Cond. Letter Cue Cond.
l. M Max. 18. W Min.
2. A Max. 19. Z Min.
5. E Min. 20. T Max.
4. J Max. 21. X Max.
5. H Min. 22. D Max.
6. F Min. 25. H Max.
7. Y Min. 24. Z Max.
8. G Min. 25. F Max.
9. W Max. 26. L Max.
10. V Min. 27. T Min.
11. N Max. 28. N Min.
12. J Min. 29. II Min.
15. A Min. 50. L Min.
14w E Max. 514 X Min.
315. G Max. 52. V Max.
116. ‘Y Max. 55. M Min.
17. U Max. 54. D Min.

2. Numerosity Task: Correct Number

of Tacks on Each Card

1. 8 6. 9
2. 9 7. 5
5. 9 8. 8
4. 5 9. 9
5. 9 10. 10

—60-

APPENDIX C
DIAGNOSTIC PREDICTIONS BASED ON CUT-OFF
SCORES FOR THE TWO TASKS

 

 

A. Form Task

 

 

 

 

 

Cut-Off Cut—Off
Score Group Score Group
A B A+B C
.>40 J§* 10 22 '>50 39 5 45
440 5 J5 21 450 5 J5 18
17 26 45 45 20 65
Cut-Off Cut-Off
Score Group Score Group
A B+C B C
:40 J2 11 25 >70 _ gt 5 29
(40 5 55 40 z 50 2 15 l7
17 46 65 26’ 2O 46
Cut-Off
Scores Group
A B C
y 41 J_2_ 9 1 22
50—40 4 J5 4 25
<T50 1 2 J5 18
17 26 2O 65

*Underlined scores indicate correct predictions

Cut-Off

Score

is
>8

Cut-Off

Score

<53
>8

_ 61 -

B. Numerosity Task

 

 

m
A B
_J* 12 25
6 14 20
17 26 65
(33.01112
A B+C
JJ 15 24
6 55 59
17 46 65
Cut-Off
§2222§__
(:8
9-15
>15

 

 

 

Cut-Off
Score Group
A+B C
< 15 4_2_ 6 48
>15 1 J4 15
45 20 65
Cut-Off
Score Group
B C
<13 g; 6 51
>15 1 J4 15
26 20 46
Group
A B C
JJ 12 1 24
6 J5 24
0 1 J4 15
17 26 2O 65

*Underlined scores indicate correct predictions.

Fans; L:rj G2 ELY

$5.15.)!“

Date Due

 

Demco-293

 

nICHIan STRTE UNIV. LIBRRRIES
‘NVI”WIWW“I”WW“I‘WWWWW
31293010749442