--- v .I . - . ~ In 1-4 .A. . . - . . .A.-.-‘-« u- . _-‘ .~ ...
:.~‘I‘::{m'.:\' -'.~,'-."- "r-‘J- . . , ' ‘ - ‘ H" ‘ "' ’-"" ‘ ,
3,. :"9‘\ )4“, I‘ II J ‘

SOME PERSONALITY CORRELATES OF THE CONJUGATE.

UITERAL EYE‘MOVEMENT'PHENOMENON , *

Thesis for the Degreeof Ph. D.
MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY '-
MICHAEL R. BARNAT
1972

'- ;._ .2 .. ,,,,,,,,

[bibll

 

This is to certify that the

thesis entitled

SOLE PERSONALITY CORRELATES OF THE
CONJU GATE LATERAL EYE
MOVEMENT PHENOMENON

presented by
MICHAEL R. BARNAT

has been accepted towards fulfillment
of the requirements for

PH.D. degree in PSYCHOLOGY

 

 

1%—

Major professor

Date fill/M/ZI/VZZ

0-7639

 

 

 

ABSTRACT

SOME PERSONALITY CORRELATES OF THE CONJUGATE
LATERAL EYE-MOVEMENT PHENOMENON

BY

Michael R. Barnat

Researchers have reported on a conjugate eye—
movement phenomenon (CLEM) which they relate to subjects'
"characteristic deployment of attention," as well as per-
ceptual and cognitive differences (cf. Day and Bakan).
Individuals are classified as left- or right-eye-movers
on the basis of their uni-directional eye movements in
response to questions requiring reflective thought. The
criterion which classifies a subject is uni-directional
eye movement at least 66.6 per cent of the time. Special
subgroups are isolated consisting of those subjects whose
uni-directional eye movement exceeds 85 per cent (i.e.,
"strong-movers").

The present study was designed to link this pheno-
menon to a body of conceptually related, dichotomous per-
sonality typologies. The author wished also to extend
the range of observations, relevant to CLEM, to include

projective test performance.

Michael R. Barnat

The general hypothesis predicted that left-moving
subjects, EM, would demonstrate perceptual and cognitive
qualities suggested by William James' term "tender-minded"
and that right-moving subjects, RM, would show qualities
characterized as "tough-minded."

To test this hypothesis, g obtained a measure of
performance on an Embedded Figure test, subjects' academic
majors, occupational preferences and Rorschach responses.
Ninety-six subjects, evenly divided between males and fe-
males, left and right movers, participated. Standard pro-
cedures were utilized for all measures.

Specific hypotheses predicted that (l) RM_would
perform more quickly than EM on the Embedded Figure task,
(2) RM_would show more interest in scientific majors and
EM would favor the humanities, (3) RM would favor scien-
tific and technical occupations while EM_would choose
artistic options, and (4) RM_would evidence higher levels
of conventionality and preciseness than EM in their pro-
jective responses. The latter variables included form-
level, location, use of "pOpulars," color responsiveness
and indices of primary process thinking.

The results were as follows:

1. Among males, significantly more RM successfully
completed the Embedded Figure task in the allotted
time. Contrary to the hypothesis, EM_of both

sexes were somewhat faster than RM as measured by

Michael R. Barnat

time to completion. The difference was not

statistically significant.

2. The hypothesis that EM would show more humanistic
majors was considered unconfirmed. In the present
sample there was a high percentage of semi-

technical and applied majors.

3. On the Kuder test, only the music scale was related
to CLEM to a significant degree for males. This
was interpreted as a chance finding. Among fe-
males, no scale was related to CLEM. However, for
a subsample (the extreme ends of the eye-movement
continuum), E§.°f both sexes fell below BM in the

endorsement of scientific interests.

4. Some Rorschach variables were marginally related
to CLEM: Organization and the production of
"popular" responses (also, Holt's variable group
"Condensation") tended to favor RM_males. Pro-
ductivity (R) favored EM males. For females SEEM
was significantly related to color responsiveness
(favoring EM) and to a measure of verbal fluency

(favoring RM).

Form-level, as measured by Friedman's "develop-
mental" scoring system, was significantly related to CLEM
for a subsample of "strong-movers": £M_of both sexes

produced more vague, "oceanic" responses than RM. Among

Michael R. Barnat

males, however, EM_accounted for more high—level, organ-
ized responses as well.

The author concluded that the above results were
not sufficient to relate CLEM to previous typologies,
but that discernible differences between EM and RM,
particularly at the extreme ends of the eye-movement
continuum, warranted further study. Future research
should utilize "strong-mover" samples. Research should
also attempt to clarify the relationship between CLEM
and the types of reflective questions utilized to elicit

it (e.g., arithmetic vs. proverbs).

Approved:

 

Date:

 

SOME PERSONALITY CORRELATES OF THE CONJUGATE
LATERAL EYE-MOVEMENT PHENOMENON

BY

K.
(a.
L

Michael R.UBarnat

A THESIS

Submitted to
Michigan State University
in partial fulfillment of the requirements
for the degree of

DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY
Department of PsycholOgy

1972

To

my sponsors

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

Gratitude is eXpressed to Dr. Albert I. Rabin,
chairman of my committee, for his guidance of this project
from beginning to end; also to Drs. Norman Abeles, Paul
Bakan, Andrew Barclay and Bertram Karon for their helpful
comments and criticism.

The author was aided in the collection of data
by Linda Fausey and Tom Lang. Norman Gordon, Greg Loftus,
and Victor Marcos helped in obtaining measures of relia-
bility.

Further gratitude is expressed to the Michigan
State University Department of Psychology for financial

aid during this project.

iii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page
LIST OF TABLES . . . . . . . . . . . . vi
INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
General Background . . . . . . . . . . l
A Clinical Typology . . . . . . . . . 4
Experimental Bases for the Concept of
Cognitive Styles . . . . . . . . . 7
The Conjugate Lateral Eye-Movement
Phenomenon . . . . . . . . . 11
Statement of the Research Problem and
Major Hypotheses . . . . . . . . . . 1?
METHODS AND PROCEDURES
Selection of Subjects . . . . . . . . . 19
Determination of Eye-Movement
Characteristics . . . . . . . . . . 20
Determination of Hand Preference . . . . . 23
Measures . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
COding O O O O O I O O O O O O O O 29
Procedures . . . . . . . . . . . 33
Summary of Operational Hypotheses . . . . . 36
RESULTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
Embedded Figures Test . . . . . . . . . 37
Academic Major . . . . . . . . . . . 39
Occupational Interest . . . . . . . . . 41
Projective Responses . . . . . . . . . 45
DISCUSSION . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53
SUMMARY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61
REFERENCES . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65

iv

APPENDICES

Appendix

A.

Feedback for 309 B Research:

Personality--Perceptua1
Distribution of Handedness

Embedded Figures Designs

Academic Major Preferences .

Means and Standard Deviations,

CM:

Means and Standard Deviations:

Variables

O

Kuder

Occupational Preferences) in
Percentiles

(Form

Rorschach

Page

68

10.

LIST OF TABLES

Conjugate Lateral Eye Movement: Sample
Characteristics . . . . . . . .

Inter-rater Reliability for Rorschach
Variables Based on Ten Protocols . .

Intra-rater Reliability for Rorschach
Variables Based on First and Second
Scoring of Ten Protocols . . . . .

Performance on Embedded Figures Test . .
Academic Major Preferences . . . . .
Relationship Between the Conjugate Lateral
Eye-Movement Phenomenon and Vocational
Preferences . . . . . . . . .
Differences Between Left- and Right-Moving
Subjects on Selected Vocational Prefer-

ences for Subsample of ”Strong-Movers"

Relationship Between Conjugate Lateral
Eye Movement and Rorschach Variables .

Scoring of Form-Level with the Develop-
mental Scoring System Based on Sub-
sample of "Strong-Movers" . . . . .

Differences Between Left- and Right-Moving

Subjects on Selected Projective Variables

for a Subsample of "Strong-Movers" . .
Means and Standard Deviations, Kuder (Form
CM: Occupational Preferences) in
Percentiles . . . . . . . . .
Means and Standard Deviations: Rorschach
Variables . . . . . . . . . .

vi

Page

22

31

32

38

4O

42

43

46

49

51

74

7S

INTRODUCTION

General Background

 

In the history of psychological observation and
theorizing a variety of personality typologies have been
develOped, some stressing physiognomy and others the be-
havioral correlates of different deve10pmental stages.
Each approach has made legitimate claim to a certain
amount of validity as well as popularity in the scien-
tific community. The following study fits in this gen-
eral area of descriptive personology and stresses dif-
ferences in the cognitive aspect of individual psycho-
logical functioning. It will attempt to relate, to a
body of clinical and experimental work, a dichotomous
eye movement phenomenon (CLEM).

An informal typology was suggested by Williams
James (1907, p. 12) in his discussion of the differences
between the "rationalist" and the "empiricist." The
former he described by a number of characteristics in-
cluding intellectuality, idealism, Optimism, dogmatism,
and "tender-mindedness." The latter he characterized as

irreligious, naturalistic, skeptical, pessimistic and

"tough-minded." The present research is addressed to some
possible empirical bases for James' philOSOphical observa-
tions concerning approaches to intellectual material. The
phrases "tough-minded" and "tender-minded" are sometimes
used in psychology-~where the experimentalist is defined
by the former and the clinician is seen as tending toward
the latter.

Such a dichotomy in the intellectual community was
suggested by C. P. Snow (1959) in his influential essay
"The Two Cultures and the Scientific Revolution." Here he
stressed what he considered a dangerous rift between two
different intellectual mentalities: the scientist and the
literary-social intellectual. He described " . . . two
groups, comparable in intelligence, identical in race, not
grossly different in social origin . . . income . . . who
in intellectual, moral and psychological climate had . . .
little in common" (p. 2). He described them as two "polar"
groups differing not only in intellectual but in practical
life as well. While the author's purpose was not to sug-
gest a personality typology, some of his observations fit
more or less well with those of James, at least in the area
of the approach to cultural and scientific matters.

The scientist is described as impatient, pragmatic
and exact. In conversation he uses terms that have con-
crete referents. The scientist kngw§_what he mggn§_by what

he says. On the other hand he is likely to miss the

meanings of terms lacking concrete referents and to see
them as irrelevant. The literary intellectual is essen-
tially the opposite. According to Snow, he is likely to
boast about his lack of scientific knowledge and this lack
is revealed in his literary production (presumably by
technical inaccuracy, though Snow does not make this
clear).

While Snow admits that scientists in separate
fields differ in obvious respects, he notes that they
share common attitudes, patterns of behavior and basic
assumptions. However divergent the discipline (e.g.,
biology and physics) a scientist is more like other scien-
tists than he is like the non-scientist. This idea is
given support in the work of Eiduson (1962, p. 122 ff).
According to Snow, this phenomenon is multiply determined
by factors including". . . the inner dynamic of the
mental activity themselves" (p. 23).

It would seem that the Jamesian "rationalists" are
in some ways like Snow's literati and that the scientist
fits the picture of the empiricist. The characteristics
of tough—mindedness, exactness, skepticism, and the use
of concrete referents on the one hand and, on the other,
tender-mindedness, idealism and technical ignorance sug-
gest measurable differences in cognitive approaches to a

variety of stimuli.

A Clinical Typology

 

Clinical theory and observation provides further
support for the general validity of the dichotomy sug-
gested above. Shapiro (1965) describes some of the cog-
nitive characteristics associated with different "neu-

rotic styles,‘ the labels for which are drawn from con-
temporary nosology. Relevant to the present work are his
descriptions of the "obsessive compulsive" and "hysterical"
styles.

Before describing the characteristics of these
styles, a brief sketch of Shapiro's theoretical model
should be presented. This is provided because of a theo-
retical link between the clinical work and a body of em-

pirical work by Gardner, Holzman, Klein, Linton and Spence

(1959; see below). He posits that there exists innately

some "initial organizing configuration." This refers to
a rudimentary " . . .configuration of innate psychological
equipment" which "imposes some form and organization . . .

on drives and external stimuli and, in general, on all
psychological tensions" (1965, p. 176 ff).

Shapiro further suggests that the "initial organ-
izing configuration" provides the basis for what in
clinical terms becomes the "neurotic style." By "style"
the author refers to " . . . a form or mode of functioning--

the way or manner of a given area of behavior--that is

identifiable, in an individual, through a range of his

specific acts." Among these acts and most important to
the study are "ways of thinking and perceiving"--in short,
styles of cognition. To Shapiro these "ways of thinking
. . . must in themselves represent psychological structures
of importance, and these structures might be of a more
general type than the specific traits or mechanisms that
could be inferred from them." According to him, "the
simple fact of human consistency over broad areas of
functioning argues for such a concept" (p. l ff).

Drawing on the work of Gardner gt_al. (1959),
Shapiro states that "it is possible . . . to demonstrate
that individuals possess relatively stable cognitive
tendencies that determine the form of the influence that
a motive or need exerts on their cognition" (p. 13). These
forms may be relatively general, more stable or even "os-
sified" in the case of neurosis and character disorder.

Shapiro suggests that the stylistic modes reflect
something more than learned behavior patterns. Rather,
what is learned will be modulated by " . . . a biologically
rooted nucleus of psychological structure that influences
characteristic form tendencies of both adaptive and de-
fensive functioning from the beginning" (p. 10). He draws
on the theoretical formulations of Hartmann for support.

Two of the styles described by Shapiro appear to
fit to somedegree with both James' and Snow's character
descriptions. These are the obsessive compulsive and the

hysterical style.

The former is characterized primarily by rigidity
and dogmatism. A crucial feature of this rigidity ac-
cording to Shapiro is "a Special restriction of attention"
which makes difficult the inclusion of new facts. This
restriction is manifested by an intense, sharp focus of
attention on details that others seem to miss. To some
degree such a style is apprOpriately related to technical
work where accuracy is called for, and in scientific work
where the logical intricacies of theory are important.
According to the author, the people who manifest this
style " . . . seem always to be concentrating [and] some
aspects of the world are simply not to be apprehended by
a sharply focused and concentrated attention" (p. 27).
Thus this style precludes responses to "hunches" and "pass-
ing impressions." In genuinely pathological instances "the
normal capacity for smooth and volitional shifts between
sharply directed and more relaxed, impressionistic cog-
nition is absent . . . " (p. 30).

The second style of relevance here is the hysteri-
cal one and it stands in relatively clear Opposition to
that described above. In Shapiro's words, the "hysterical
cognition in general is global, relatively diffuse, and

lacking in . . . sharp detail. In a word, it is impression—

 

istic" (Shapiro's italics, p. 111). This style is charac-
terized by a diffuse focus of attention and a quick re-

sponsiveness to what is "immediately impressive, striking

or merely obvious." Just as original perceptions are
based on impression, recall is also vague and nebulous.
To the question "what made it look like that?," this
style fosters the answer: "It just did . . . " This
stand in contrast to the detailed and factual recall
characteristic of the obsessive-compulsive style. In
addition, the hysterical mode is reflected in a difficulty
in intense concentration, distractibility and non-factual
reporting. In many cases, the "impression" or "hunch" is
not the beginning of problem solution, but the "final,
conscious cognitive product." Where reliance is placed
heavily on hunches, curiosity is truncated. Shapiro sug-
gests that a negative association exists between the
degree to which this style is manifested and the amount
of accumulated, factual information.

What is implied in the hysterical mode of cognition
is a "holistic," global approach to stimuli which would
seem characteristic of James' "tender-minded" individual
and Snow's literati. On the other hand the "tough-minded"
empiricist (Snow‘s scientist) in some ways reflects the
obsessive-compulsive style which is manifested in a pre-
cise approach to stimuli. I

Experimental Bases for the
Concept of Cognitive Styles

 

The notion of individual consistencies in cognitive

behavior has received theoretical and experimental support

in the work of Gardner gE_al. (1959). These authors
suggest that relatively few dimensions of cognitive organ-
ization encompass a wide variety of perceptual and cog-
nitive behavior. Central to their work is the concept of
"cognitive controls" or structures which, like Shapiro's

"initial organizing configuration," lend consistency to

 

the individual's perception and cognition.

To Gardner g£_al,, a number of cognitive controls
coexist within the personality and their idiosyncratic
arrangement (Gestalt) constitutes the "cognitive style."
The latter concept in turn forms a measurable manifestation
of Shapiro's "neurotic style." It should be added that
the concept of "controls" does not imply a pathologic
dimension. The differences in cognition and perception
reflect adaptive approaches to reality.

The authors specify five control principles:
Leveling-Sharpening (a holistic dedifferentiation of the
cognitive field'vs.maximal complexity and differentiation
of the field); Tolerance for unreal experiences (reaction
to the apparentemovement ["phi"] phenomenon); Equivalence
range (exact standards for detailed categorization of
stimuli vs. acceptance of inexact categorization); Focusing
(a tendency to narrow awareness and keep ideas distinct);
and Constricted vs. Flexible control (comfort vs. discomfort
with intrusive stimuli). In addition they considered Field

Independence vs. Dependence (Witkin, 1954) .

To these principles the authors applied fourteen
tests measuring perceptual and cognitive functions
(Rorschach, Embedded Figures, StroOp Color-Word Test,
etc.). The data was subjected to factor analysis.

Results showed that among males, clear factors
were (1) scanning and (2) tolerance for unrealistic ex-
periences. Among women factors were (1) field-articulation,
(2) leveling-sharpening, and (3) equivalence range. Field-
articulation was further interpreted as a composite of two
principles: Field Dependence-Independence and Constricted-
Flexible control.

The finding of factors does not imply that cogni-
tive Styles are simple matters. The control principles in
Gardner gt_al. were found to be independent, i.e., within
a subject, knowing his relative emphasis within one con-
trol principle (e.g., leveling-sharpening) does not allow
prediction to his emphasis in another (e.g., equivalence
range).

Finally, the work of Witkin and his associates
(1954, 1962), incorporated in the above, deserves separate
mention. These investigators developed the terms Field
Dependence and Field Independence to cover individual dif-
ferences in response to a variety of perceptual-cognitive
tasks. The latter include the rod and frame test, tilting-

room-tilting-chair test and the Embedded Figures Test.

10

The investigators have found much consistency in subjects
response over time.

In essence, these tests provide indices of the ex-
tent to which a subject may analyze and differentiate
components of a stimulus—field in order to resolve per-
ceptual ambiguities, e.g., whether S’or the room is tilted.
Some subjects are well-oriented to their body cues and
thus relatively proficient in determining a reality sit-
uation, e.g., their relative tilt vs that of the room.
.These subjects are labeled Field-Independent as are those
who perform relatively efficiently on the Embedded Figures
tests (Witkin, 1950).

Those aspects of the work of James, Snow, Shapiro,
Gardner, and Witkin which bear an affinity to each other
and to the correlates of CLEM (see below) can be summarized
in tabular form.

m.

"Tender-minded" "Tough-minded"

 

Intellectualistic Sensationalistic
Idealistic Naturalistic
"Free willed" Skeptical

Snow
Literary intellectual Scientist

 

Uses words with con-
ceptual referents
Linguistic style inexact

Shapiro

H steric
DIffuse focus of

attention

 

Uses words with concrete

referents
Linguistic style exact

Obsessive-Com ulsive
Narrow, exact ocus of
attention

ll

Global feeling re-

Fact-and-event orien-

sponsiveness tation
Inadequate recall Fine-edged recall
1

Gardner et al.

 

Differentiated perception
Exact categorization
of stimuli
Narrow awareness
Discomfort with intrusive
stimuli

Holistic perception

Inexact categorization
of stimuli

Broad awareness

Comfort with intrusive
stimuli

Witkin

Field-Dependent

Judgement dependent
on stimulus field

Holistic perception

Field-Independent
Judgement dependént

on subject
Differentiated perception

 

 

In the following section a small body of empirical
literature will be presented. It is suggested that this
may be a point of convergence of the above literary,
clinical and experimental work.

The Conjugate Lateral Eye
Movement Phenomenon

 

 

Description. Day (1964) reports the observation

 

of an eye-movement phenomenon which was thought to be re-

lated to the shifting of attention. This phenomenon is

described, again by Day (1968), quite succinctly:

If you obtain another person's attention as evidenced
by this head orientation [directed toward the ex-
perimenter] and eye fixation [on the experimenter's
eyes]; and if you ask him a question which requires
affective self expression or reflective thought; and

 

1Inclusion in this tabular form may appear to
contradict the findings of intra-subject variability on
each control principle. The above should be interpreted
as simply the conceptual extremes of each principle.

12

if you observe his right eye, you will notice a quick
lateral eye movement in which the person appears to
momentarily break eye fixation while thinking or in
preparation for answering. On repeated observations
the direction of the movement may be seen to be rela-
tively reliable and the individual may be classified
as a "right mover" or "left mover."

In the light of the variety of personality cor-
relates suggested by Day (see below), as well as the im-
plication of wide general validity (Day, 1967a), Duke
(1968) performed an empirical study to add research docu-
mentation to the clinical observations.

Duke administered orally a ten-item questionnaire
to a sample of summer school psychology students. Five
of the questions required reflective thought (e.g., "How
many letters are in the word 'Montana'?") and five did not
(e.g., "How many brothers and sisters do you have?").

Only the eye movement was recorded and a trial
was declared invalid if the subject and experimenter did
not share gazes immediately following the phrasing of the
question.

In essence, Duke validated Day's observation. On
the average, 86 per cent of these subjects' eye movements
were horizontally directional. In addition, males were
found to reflect the lateral eye movement phenomenon more
consistently than females.

The importance of requiring "reflective thought"

questions was upheld in this study. Where questions could

be answered by simple factual reporting, no eye movement

13

was noted. The phenomenon was found to be unrelated to
eye dominance. In addition there were no sex-related
trends in directionality.

Experimental studies have since been performed
supporting Day's original observation and deriving a
number of personality correlates (Day, 1967a, 1967b;

Bakan & Svorad, 1969; Bakan & Shotland, 1969; Bakan, 1969).

Empirical and theoretical foundations for a

 

typology based on eye-movement directionality. The Con-
jugate Lateral Eye-Movement Phenomenon (CLEM) is thought

by Day to reflect attentional processes. In this regard

it has cognitive implications. As a matter of individual
differences, directionality serves as an index of the
manner in which a person's attention is characteristically
deployed (Bakan & Svorad, 1969). The reasoning behind

this is provided by Day (1964) who categorized attentional
processes into four separate modes. The first is "passive-
internalized" defined as "awareness of one's feelings or
internal state." The second is "active-internalized"

which refers to the awareness of intended action or self
expression. Third is the "passive-externalized" mode
referring to the awareness of the meaning of someone else's
expressed behavior. Last is the "active-externalized"

mode involving awareness of acting in behalf of another
person or in attending to his feelings. Day relates the

eye-movement phenomenon to the shift from one of the above

l4

attentional modes to another. In brief, between the time
an experimenter stOps asking his question and the verbal-
ization of the subject's answer, the latter turns "inward"
to the necessary cognitive operations, then back to the
experimenter.

Notice that the phenomenon is defined in social
(dyadic) terms. This means that the direction of the
movement is related to the social versus private aspects
of attention. Support for this interpretation is offered
by the observation that when a subject mentally asks and
answers his own question, his characteristic eye-movement
direction is reversed (Day, 1968). A "Left Mover" LM_is
defined as one whose characteristic direction in a dyadic
context is predominantly left and a "Right Mover" RM one
whose characteristic movement is right.

Granting that Day's assumptions are correct and
that the phenomenon does reflect a subject's characteristic
deployment of attentional processes, what are the impli-
cations for differences in cognitive styles? That is to
say, what are the behavioral correlates associated with
characteristic right or left movement?

According to Day (1967b) the "direction seems most
clearly related to differences in the experience of anxiety,
language styles, cognitive styles and thus to personality

variables."

15

Bakan (1969) found that a predominance of left eye
movement was associated with greater susceptibility to
hypnosis as measured by the Stanford Hypnotic Susceptibil-
ity Scale. In addition, LM_was associated with clearer
imagery, humanistic interests and relatively poorer mathe-
matical versus verbal performance on the Scholastic Apti-
tude Test.

The differences between EM and RM are also sug-
gestive of the "styles" observed by James, Snow and
Shapiro (1965) and the patterns of Field Independent vs.
Dependent subjects demonstrated by Witkin et_al. (1962).

Day (1967a) reports differences in language usage
between RM_and EM. He gives the example of different re-
sponses to the same stimuli. Where the RM says: "I've got
to get something to eat," the EM says: "I'm terribly
hungry." These phenomenal and syntactical differences
relate, according to Day, to the deployment of attention.
LM_is characterized by a "subjective internalized distribu-
tion" whereas RM is characterized by an "objective, reac-
tive externalized" mode, or "visual-haptic" (touch) dis-
tribution.

Day makes the interesting comment that, in therapy,
RM tends to dwell on "facts" (actions) while the LM_em-
phasizes his subjective, affective reactions. While this
is clinical observation, it fits well with Shapiro's
(1965) comments concerning obsessive-compulsive versus

hysterical styles.

16

Further suggested is that anxiety is experienced
differently by left and right movers. The left mover de-
scribes anxiety as a "tensional-jittery state with definite
internal locus" (Day, 1968). In extreme cases, the left
mover is "obsessional" about the kinds of impulses which
threaten to emerge and may show an inability to maintain
visual attention because of obsessional intrusions (Day,
1967a).

The RM_describes anxiety as having an "external
locus" or "fear in search of an object quality" charac-
teristically labeled as diffuse anxiety. In general the
Lateral Eye-Movement Phenomenon disappears in periods of
intense anxiety or embarrassment.

Other differences between RM and EM have been
demonstrated empirically. Citing the differences in the
distribution of attention between right and left movers,
Bakan and Shotland (1969) hypothesized that RM_would do
better than £M_on tasks requiring visual attention. To
test this the authors employed the Str00p Color-Word Test.

The investigator's hypothesis was confirmed.

Right movers were subject to significantly less interfer-
ence than EM. In addition, RM_were found to read faster
than MM, a list of color names printed in black on white.
The authors attribute this to the enhanced ability of RM
to make use of covert reading responses, i.e., to read the

interfering words faster before naming the colors.

17

These empirical and clinically derived correlates

21:1
Passive-internal, audi-'
tory distribution of

attention.

Anxiety characterized aS‘
having internal locus.

Emphasizes emotive aspects'

of past experiences.

Syntactical emphasis on~
passive experience.

Clearer imagery.‘

Humanistic interestS‘
("soft" majors).

Greater susceptibility tO‘
hypnosis.

Poorer SAT math perform—.
ance than language
performance.

Less resistance to in-
trusion of extraneous
stimuli.

can be summarized in tabular form.

3.“.

Active-external, visual-
haptic distribution of
attention.

Anxiety characterized as
having external locus.

Emphasizes factual aspects
of past experiences.

Syntactical emphasis on
active intentionality.

Imagery less clear.

Scientific interests
("hard" majors).

Less susceptibility to
hypnosis.

Less discrepancy between
math and verbal SAT
scores.

Greater resistance to
distraction.

Statement of the Research
Problem and Major Hypotheses

 

 

There appears to be a correspondence between the
behavioral and conceptual correlates of the Conjugate
Lateral Eye-Movement Phenomenon and the informal typologies
suggested by James, Snow and Shapiro. Witkin's (1954)
typolOgy also seems to bear an affinity to the "right"

versus "left" eye mover dichotomy.

18

The general theoretical question is as follows:
Does the Conjugate Lateral Eye—Movement Phenomenon, as
reported by Day (1964), provide an empirical basis for
the typologies described above?

The general hypothesis of the present research is
that §M_will show evidence of "tough-mindedness," and
EM will show evidence of "tender-mindedness." Specific
hypotheses will be presented for each of the variables

outlined below.

METHODS AND PROCEDURES

Selection Of Subjects

 

Subjects for the present study were volunteers
from introductory psychology classes at Michigan State
University. Approximately 250 subjects, male and female,
were screened with reSpect to eye-movement characteristics.
The large number of subjects screened was due to a combi-
nation Of unclassifiable subjects (see below) and periodic
excesses in each of the four categories. Of this number,
96 subjects provided data used in the final analysis: EM
males = 24; §M_males = 24; EM females = 24; RM females = 24.

The study was advertised simply as "Personality
and Perceptual" in order to avoid any connection with the
growing interest in CLEM (e.g., Bakan, 1971). Because
other researchers were working with this variable, "feed-
back" did not mention CLEM but provided the Option for
further subject inquiry (see Appendix A).

One male and one female undergraduate ran all sub-
jects to Obtain data on CLEM, sex, major, handedness and

Embedded Figures Test performance. Both assistants had

19

20

had prior research experience but were naive with reSpect

to the present study, its purposes and hypotheses.

Determination of Eye—Movement
Characteristics

 

 

The subjects' status as LM_Or RM was determined
in accord with Day (1968). Left—movers were those sub-
jects whose left-eye movements accounted for 66.6 to 100
per cent Of the total number of directional eye movements.
Those subjects whose left-movement accounted for 33.3

per cent or less of the directional eye movements were

 

RM, The formula is simply: L = CLEM.
L+R

Subjects who responded with no lateral eye move-
ments, consistent upward or downward movement or an equal
number Of left and right movements were not considered in
the present research. Unclassifiable subjects constituted
approximately 45 per cent Of the total number screened.

TO determine eye movement, the following questions
were asked for each subject:

1. Interpret the proverb: "The tongue is the enemy
Of the throat."

2. What is the square root Of 72?
3. How many letters are in the word "California"?
4. What is the square root Of 90?

5. Interpret the proverb: "When they Offer you a
heifer, come running with a halter."

6. What is 17 x 22?

7. What are the implications of having a woman
president?

21

8. Subtract 39 from 57.

9. A person dreams he attends the metrOpOlitan Opera
dressed in rags. What do you think this means?

10. How many letters are in the word: "Montana"?
11. What is the square root of 42?
12. Interpret the proverb: "Penny-wise, pound-foolish."

13. If Kennedy were alive, how would we stand in
Viet Nam?

14. What is 11 x 18?

15. What do you think this experiment is all about?

Items 4, 6, 10 and 15 are from Duke (1968). The distribu-
tions of eye-movement characteristics Of this sample may
be seen in Table 1.

Bakan (1971) altered the empirical definition of
RM and EM to include at least ten movements in fifteen
trials (questions). Prior to this consideration, it was
possible for a student to be a subject on the basis of
only three CLEMs in fifteen trials. Two left movements
and one right movement would equal 66.6 per cent left
movement, even if the subject failed to respond to the
remaining twelve questions.

But it would be inappropriate to consider them
comparable tO subjects who responded with twelve CLEMs in
fifteen trials. In the present sample, 94.8 per cent of
the subjects met the criterion of at least ten CLEMs in

fifteen trials.

22

TABLE 1

Conjugate Lateral Eye Movement:
Sample Characteristics

Per cent Uni-directional Movement

 

 

CLEM N

66-84 85—99 100
BE. 24 20.8 37.6 41.6
3%. 24 58.3 25.0 16.7
PE. 24 29.2 29.2 41.6
5M 24 45.9 20.8 33.3

 

23

Determination Of Hand
Preference

 

 

The E used three questions to determine handed-
ness: (1) "Which hand do you write with?" (2) "Which
hand do you generally Open doors with?" (3) "Are you
considered left— or right-handed?" When discrepancies
existed in subjects' reports, they were placed in a
middle category. Handedness data may be found in

Appendix B.

Measures

Occupational interests. One implication in

 

Shapiro's (1965) theoretical scheme is that cognitive
modes are consistent with general adaptive or maladaptive
"styles." Presumably, attitudes and occupational inter-
ests relate to the way a person thinks--the Obsessive
individual applying himself to tasks demanding of con-
centration and the hysteric to activities which reward
intuitive impressionality. Along this line, RM can be
seen as being more oriented to the scientific majors
while EM_show more humanistic interests (Bakan, 1969).
The Kuder Preference Record--Vocationa1 (Form CM)
(Kuder, 1934) has been, for many years, used as an inter-
est inventory the major purpose of which is to indicate
"relative interest in a small number of broad areas . . . "
(Anastasi, 1961, p. 536 ff). From a large number Of

forced—choice, triad type items, ten interest scales plus

24

a verification (validity) scale are derived. The interest
scales include: (1) Outdoor, (2) Mechanical, (3) Compu-
tational, (4) Scientific, (5) Persuasive, (6) Artistic,
(7) Literary, (8) Musical, (9) Social Service and
(10) Clerical.

Profiles, drawn for each subject, reflect per-
centile ranks for each factor. It was predicted that
left movers EM_would score higher than MM_On the follow-
ing scales: Artistic, Literary. In addition, where the
music scale involves passive listening, LM_were expected
to show greater interest than MM. Zytowski, Mills and
Paepe (1969) attempted to relate Field Independence to
social service using standard tests of the former variable
and the Strong Vocational Interest Blank. Their hypo-
thesis, that interest in social service would be posi-

tively associated with Field Dependence was not confirmed.

 

Social service may be seen as reflecting humanistic in—
terests, an appreciation of scientific methodology and an
emphasis on personal activity and involvement. Given this
complexity, eye-movement directionality was not expected
to bear a relationship with interests in social service.
EM were expected to score higher than EM on

Scientific, Mechanical, Computational, Clerical, and that
part Of the music scale involving active participation.

Academic major. TO some degree a subject's aca-

 

demic preferences, based in part on what he knows or

25

perceives those preferences to entail, should be consistent
with standardized test performance. Thus, in accord with
the above and with Bakan (1969), EM were expected to show
more interest in "soft," humanistic majors; MM to show

an inclination toward "hard," scientific majors.

Embedded Figures Test (Witkin, 1950). The use of

 

this device was expected to provide a link between the
typology of Witkin §E_al. (1954, 1962) and CLEM. The
figure employed here was, empirically, the most difficult
of the series used by Witkin (1950). The figure and a
practice figure may be seen in Appendix C.

The subject was expected to trace a simple figure
from a more complex one. The dependent variable was time
to completion. Because of the analytic concentration
necessary for solution, §M_were expected to show a lower
mean time than £M_in solving the problem.

Projective resppnses. Right- and left-eye movers
were compared using selected variables from two Rorschach
scoring systems (Beck ep_al., 1961; Holt, 1956, 1960).

The former is a standard scoring technique. The latter
has been specifically designed with reference to two key
concepts in psychoanalytic theory; secondary and primary
process (Holt, 1956). The applicability Of these concepts
to CLEM will be discussed below.

From the Beck system (Beck, Beck, Levitt & Molish,

1961), the following variables were utilized.

26

F+%. This refers to "perceptual accuracy,"
i.e., the extent to which a subject's percept
agrees with normative data regarding the stimu-
lus card under question. It is "socially"
defined and as such indicates the extent Of
reality testing utilized by a given subject.

It also serves as an index of "conventionality."
MM were expected to show a higher per cent of

this variable than EM.

Closely related to F+% is g§_or the percentage of
"pOpular" responses. This variable is also based
on normative data and refers to the production of
modal responses such as "bat" to cards I and V.
§M_were expected to produce higher percentages

than EM_On this variable.

Lambda or "L" refers to the extent that the
collection of percepts are dominated by intel-
lective functions. It is defined by the pro-
portion Of Form (F) determined responses of

the total Record:

L = (3+) + (15:) + (F)

R - [(F+) + (F-) + (F)]'
This definition makes it central to the present
conceptualization of the right mover as one who,

"tough-minded" is dominated by intellectual

27

functions. §M_were expected to be greater than

EM with respect to this variable.

Approach (Ap) refers to the extent to which a
subject's record reflects attention to details
(D, Dd) or emphasis on "whole" responsiveness
(W). In the words of Beck (1945) this variable
refers to the extent intelligence can serve as
an "elastic tOOl" (p. 13 ff), for example, to
shift from "general-abstract" tO the "minute"
aspects of the stimulus. It was expected that
MM records would favor "D" and "Dd" and that
the records Of EM_would reflect an emphasis

on "W." This is in line with Shapiro's (1965)
description Of the differences in cognitive

emphasis.

Color responses are an index Of the extent tO
which the subject's perception are dominated by
the affectively salient characteristics of a
stimulus. In Rorschach theory they are thought
to reflect the management of impulses. In line
with Shapiro's (1965) description of the hys-
teric style as a responsive to the immediately
salient, EM_were expected to be greater than

MM in the production Of pure C and CF over FC.

This hypothesis is also in indirect agreement

28

with the findings of Bakan and Shotland (1969)

with respect to the StrOOp Color Word Test.

Holt (1956, 1960) has developed a "supplementary"
method for scoring the Rorschach in terms of the psycho—
analytic notions of primary and secondary process thinking.
The former type refers to non-logical, image-dominated and
primitive modes of thought whereas the latter refers to
organized, logical, "rational" and reality-oriented
processes. In clinical work, a relatively complete assess-
ment of the extent to which one or the other mode is domi-
nant is important. The relative dominance of primary or
secondary process is central to the issue of adaptive
functioning. For example, the extreme obsessive-compulsive
subject, in an attempt to cope with the potential emergence
of threatening impulses, stresses structure, systematiza-
tion and logical control in thinking. The productions of
the extreme hysteric and the schiZOphrenic on the other
hand, reflect the poorly organized and the drive-dominated
nature of their thinking.

Some empirical correlates of CLEM suggest that
EM_may be associated with some level of primary-process
influence while 3M reflects the relative dominance of
secondary processes. Associated with EM_is an intern-
alized distribution of awareness (Day, 1964, 1968),
greater hypnotizability (Bakan, l969)-—which may reflect a

subject's ability to "relax" secondary processes--clearer

29

imagery and less resistance to the intrusion of irrelevant
stimuli (Bakan & Shotland, 1969). On the other hand, is
associated with "hard" majors--physical sciences and math
(Bakan, 1969) which presumably involve, among other things,
the ability to concentrate and attend actively to the re-
lationships between technical or theoretically intricate
details. MM is also associated with greater resistance

to the intrusion Of distracting stimuli (Bakan & Shotland,
1969). In short, RM would appear to rely heavily on
secondary process thinking.

Due to the low expectancy of occurrence of primary
process ideation in (1) a relatively non-pathological
sample, and (2) a limited protocol (see below), hypotheses
were not made for each variable in the Holt system sepa-
rately. Rather, the general expectation was that EM_
would be associated with greater amounts of primary process
thinking than RM. That is, MM and EM were compared on the
summation of the following "formal" primary process in-
dices, rather than on each variable: condensation, dis—
placement, symbolism, contradictions Of reality, verbal
slips and a miscellaneous group of variables sharing an

autistic quality (Holt, 1960).

Coding

Rorschach. Three coders, working independently

 

and without knowledge Of the subjects' eye-movement

characteristics, were involved in scoring Rorschach

30

protocols. Two assistant coders, one a Ph.D. level Clini-
cal Psychologist and the other a graduate student in
psychology, each scored ten protocols, one assistant
scoring by the Beck system and one by the Holt system.
In establishing coding reliabilities, protocols were
drawn at random from the sample; no protocol was used more
than once for reliability. In addition, a measure of
intra-rater reliability was performed by the E rescoring
ten protocols by the Beck system and ten by the Holt sys-
tem. Reliabilities are presented in Tables 2 and 3.

It will be noted that the reliability for the
Holt formal variables is low. This is due in large part
to the infrequency of these variables in a relatively
normal sample: where there are few observations (e.g.,
in symbolic activity as measured by the Holt system), it
takes even fewer "misses" to lower reliability consider—

ably.

Occupational interests. Kuder answer sheets

 

were scored by hand using a set of templates from the
Michigan State Counseling Center. All other data was
recorded as supplied by assistants running subjects.

CLEM reliability. M and an assistant sat on

 

Opposite sides Of a one-way mirror. The E presented
ten subjects with fifteen questions (see above) and the
two raters independently recorded eye movements. The

level of agreement achieved in this way was 86 per cent.

31

TABLE 2

Inter-rater Reliability for Rorschach
Variables Based on Ten Protocols

 

 

.—___-——_—.__
—_.——_— —-—

 

Variable rb
Beck:
Form level .74
Location .93
Color usage .80
Popular (P) .85
White space (S) .76
Organization (Z) .70
Holt:

Level 1 Libido .50
Level 2 Libido .69
Level 1 Aggression .65
Level 2 Aggression .72
Condensation .52
Displacement . .24
Symbolism .47
Contradiction .24
Miscellaneous .36
Verbala .37
Control and Defense .66

 

aOnly the category "verbal slips" (i.e., slips of
the tongue) was scored (refer to Holt, 1970).

bNecessary for significance: P<.01 = .77;
P<.05 = .63.

32

TABLE 3

Intra-rater Reliability for Rorschach
Variables Based on First and Second
Scoring Of Ten Protocols

 

 

Variable rC
Beck:
Form level .86
Location .88
Color usage .76
Popular (P) .93
White Space (S) .88
Organization (Z) .82
Holt:
Level 1 Libido 1.00
Level 2 Libido .70
Level 1 Aggression 1.00a
Level 2 Aggression .86
Condensation .46
Displacement .34
Symbolism 1.00a
Contradiction .65
Miscellaneous .51
Verbalb .48
Control and Defense .65

 

a .
These correlations are based on few or no Observa-
tions, are thus thought to be chance occurrences.

bOnly the category "verbal Slips" (i.e., slips of
the tongue") was scored (refer to Holt, 1970).

cNecessary for significance: P<.01 = .77;
P<.05 = .63.

33

Procedures

 

Subjects sat on the Opposite side of a standard
Office desk, directly facing the assistant. The latter
recorded sex, handedness and academic major. If, to the
last question, the subject answered "no preference," he
was asked what he thought it would "probably be." If
the subject still indicated "no preference" this was
accepted. All recording was done out of the subject's
view.

To obtain eye-movement characteristics, the
assistant used the following instructions:

I'm going to ask you some questions and you
should answer to the best of your ability. You
aren't expected to answer them all easily and
don't be afraid to guess.

Assistants answered subsequent questions only with refer-
ence to these instructions. At the end of the series,
the assistant computed CLEM.

If the resultant per cent was in the range 33.4
to 66.5, the assistant thanked the subjects for their
participation, gave $3.00 or five research credits and
asked them not to discuss the experiment with their
friends. The assistant also explained that feedback
would be supplied at a later date.

If the subject met the established criterion for
EM or MM, the assistant proceeded with the Embedded
Figures Test. The following instructions, based on Witkin

(1950), were used:

34

I'm going to Show you a design. I want you to
describe the over-all pattern that you see in it.
After you examine it, I'll Show you a simpler figure
that is contained in it. You will then be given the
larger design again and you will locate the smaller
figure in it. Let's go through a practice.

After the assistant presented the practice figures, he
gave the following additional instructions:

This is how you'll do it. The smaller figure
will be preSent in the larger design. It will be
upright. There may be many of the smaller figures
in the larger design but you look for the one in the
upright position. Work quickly as you are timed.

But be sure the figure you find is exactly the same
as the original in Size and proportion. Tell me as
soon as you have found the figure. If you forget
what the small figure looks like, you may see it
again. Are there any questions?
Questions were answered only with reference to the above
instructions. Performance was timed with a stop watch
from the presentation of the simple figure. Figures were
not shown simultaneously and subjects were discouraged
from taking more than ten seconds to re-examine the fig-
ures. False tracing was included in a subject's final
score. The score recorded for the EFT was the time for
discovery. All recorded data was placed in an envelope
inside the subject's manila data packet. Prior to coding
and scoring, each packet was renumbered by drawing number
Slips from a hopper. The subject's phone and identifica-
tion number were on the envelope. E contacted all sub-

jects by phone. They were told the date, time and how

long they would be needed.

35

Subjects were administered the Rorschach in one
of the consultation rooms at the MSU Psychology Clinic.
These rooms provided Optimal conditions for administering
this test. There was little or no opportunity during
the period of subject contact to observe eye-movements.
During the entire administration the M sat behind and to
the subject's right. Only the first three scoreable re-
Sponses were used in the final data analysis. In accord-
ance with Beck (1961) unproductive subjects were en-
couraged only through card III.

At the end of the inquiry, E presented a Kuder
packet (booklet, answer Sheet and pencil) and explained
its proper use. Subjects were permitted to complete the
Kuder at their leisure and boxes were provided for data-
return in the Olds Hall office. M thanked the subject
for his participation, gave remuneration for participating,
explained how feedback would be obtained and asked that
subjects not discuss the research with their friends.

Statistical analyses. Virtually all hypotheses
were tested using a chi-square statistic. Means and
standard deviations are presented in Appendices E and F
in order that the reader can compare present sample charac-
teristics against previous standardized samples. In
addition, other statistical tests have been utilized to

augment exploration of these variables.

36

Summary of Operational
Hypotheses

 

 

Academic Major. Left—movers evidence more inter-

 

est in humanistic majors; RM Show more interest in
scientific majors.

Embedded Figures Test. Right-movers perform more

 

rapidly to solution than EM,

Vocational Preferences. Left-movers score higher

 

than §M_0n artistic and literary interest; §M_score
higher than EM_on scientific, mechanical, computational,
clerical, and musical participation interest.

Projective Variables. Right-movers produce a

 

higher degree of good form (F+%), intellect (form),
dominated percepts (L), and popular percepts (P%) than
EM.

Right-movers produce a greater number of detail
and rare-detail responses than EM; EM produce greater
numbers of whole responses than MM.

Left-movers produce more pure color and color-
dominated responses than MM.

Left-movers Show more evidence of primary process

thinking than RM.

RESULTS

Embedded Figures Test

 

3M were expected to perform more rapidly to
solution than £M_0n this task. Following Witkin (1950),
subjects were given five minutes to discover the embedded
figure. Passing scores ranged from one to 300 seconds
over the total sample. A zero was recorded for "failing"
subjects (i.e., those who were not successful by the end
of five minutes). EFT data is presented in Table 4.

A t-test performed on the means of the MM and fl
(both sexes) "passing" scores was not significant, con-
trary to the hypothesis, £M_tended to perform more rapidly
than §M_(Mean EM’= 115 seconds; mean §M'= 140 seconds).

When the data was subjected to a rank-order pro-
cedure, the Mann-Whitney "U" test, the medians of the
two male groups did not differ significantly (Mdn 2M.=
212.5 seconds; §M_= 164.5 seconds). The medians of the
two groups of females differed significantly (Mdn EM’=
232.0 seconds; 3M.= 300+ seconds; P<.01). Among females
MM show a predominance Of scores over 300 seconds, and

are, therefore, slower as a group.

37

38

TABLE 4

Performance on Embedded

Figures Test

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

PE .11“.
N Sugiiss- Mean Sugiiss- Mean t Pa
Time SD Time SD
(Sec) (Sec)
M 48 15 115.3 86.2 20 141.6 87.1 .84 .25
Total
Sample
F 47 14 147.2 86.0 10 150.1 83.7 .10 .50
"Strong-Dd 20 5 129.0 78.9 7 157.1 104.2 .48 .50
Mover"
Sub-
Sample F 20 5 127.0 66.3 5 161.0 88.0 .62 .25

 

 

 

aLevel of significance for directional (one-tailed) tests.

A "strong-mover" demonstrates eye-movement uni-directionality
of 85 to 100 per cent.

39

On the basis of a test of the difference between
proportions "passing," significantly more 3M males than
EM males successfully completed the task (Z = 2.28,
P<.05). EM_and 3M females differed in the opposite di-
rection from males though the difference was not signi-
ficant.

For a subsample Of "strong-movers" (i.e., those
demonstrating eye-movement uni-directionality over 85
per cent, EM Of both sexes performed somewhat faster than
3M. The difference was not significant. Thus the

hypothesis was not confirmed.

Academic Major

 

The hypothesis that EM_would Show more humanistic
majors and 5M more scientific majors was not confirmed
by the present data. In fact, there was a trend for more
scientific majors among EM males. This was not signi-
ficant.

In the present sample there is a heavy emphasis
for both sexes on "practical" majors such as business,
medical technology and special education. Academic
majors are presented in Appendix D.

A minor trend was noted in the distribution of
"psychology" majors. EM_of both sexes exceeded 5M in the
number of psychology preferences. The differences were

non-Significant. This data is presented in Table 5.

40

TABLE 5

Academic Major Preferencesa

 

 

 

Males Females
Category
18 3“. EN. BE
Psychology 7 3 5 2
Other 17 21 19 22
Total 24 24 24 24
NO Prefb 3 7 7 3

 

aSee Appendix D for raw data, all subjects.

bGiven as the first or only response.

41

Occppational Interest

 

Among the ten scales of the Kuder Vocational
Preference Record, only the Music scale was related to
CLEM to a significant degree. Right-movers (males), more
often scored above the median in musical interest, EM_
low. The distribution of subjects scores yielded a chi
square of 4.86 (P<.01). This data is presented in Table 6.

None Of the Kuder scales related to CLEM to a
significant degree, nor differentiated between EM and MM
females when the whole sample was considered. Thus the
hypotheses were not confirmed.

To explore the data further, E examined key
scales, comparing only those subjects whose uni-directional
eye movement was 85 per cent or greater (i.e., "strong-
movers"). Because §M_males produced more invalid (non-
scorable) records, the N for this subsample was 6. For
each of the other "strong-mover" groups, N was 10. Com-
parison of the "strong-movers," i.e., the extremes of the
uni-directional groups, gives an index of the degree to
which subjects on the weak end of the eye-movement con-
tinuum (below 85 per cent uni-directional movement) are
influencing the outcome. Results are presented in
Table 7.

Among males, EM and RM were differentiated on the

Science scale in accord with the hypothesis that 3M would

42

TABLE 6

Relationship Between Conjugate Lateral
Eye-Movement Phenomenon and
Vocational Preferences

 

Males Females

 

 

 

Kuder Variables Pa 532325 2 532325
X X
Mechanical .00 .00
Computational .00 .21 .32
Scientific .00 .60 .22
Artistic .88 .17 .00
Literary .00 .00
Musical 4.86 .01 3M_ .00
Clerical .00 .56 .23

 

 

aLevel of significance for directional (one-tailed)
test.

bComputations are based on N=38 for males; N=42
for females. Chi squares corrected for continuity (see
Siegel, 1956, p. 110).

43

TABLE 7

Differences Between Left- and Right-Moving
Subjects on Selected Vocational
Preferences for Subsample of
"Strong-Movers"b

 

 

 

.Lfl BE
. a
Variable N Mean N Mean t P
Percentile Percentile

Art

Males 10 68.7 6 53.5 .75 .25

Females 10 71.5 10 74.0 .22 .50
Science

Males 10 29.3 6 58.0 2.17 .03

Females 10 40.8 10 52.9 1.01 .25

 

aLevel of significance for directional (one-
tailed) test.

bA "strong-mover" demonstrates eye movement uni-
directionality of 85 to 100 per cent.

44

show greater endorsement of scientific Options. The dif-
ference between EM_and RM was significant at the .03
level (one-tailed).

Among females, "strong-movers" differed in
scientific interest though to non-Significant degree.
The difference was in accord with the hypothesis.

§M_males Slightly favored mechanical interests
over £M_(Mean EM_= 26.5, §M_= 33.0) though the difference
was not statistically significant. There was negligible
differences between EM_and EM on the computational and
literary scales. For males of both groups, clerical
items were notably unpOpular. Contrary to hypotheses
EM females showed a somewhat higher endorsement (14.8
percentile points; difference not significant) of clerical
items than §M_females.

On the art scale, EM_males showed more endorsement,
than BM, but not significantly so. The art scale did not
relate to CLEM for the "strong—mover" females.

Thus for the total sample of male and female MM
and EM, the major hypotheses relevant to occupational
interest were not confirmed. When the samples were
limited to subjects at the extreme ends of the eye-movement
continuum, some differentiation appeared, relevant to
interest in science. These differences were in accord

with predictions.

45

Projective Responses

 

Hypotheses for Rorschach performance predicted
that 35.0f both sexes would evidence higher levels than
EM of the following variables: good form (F+), banal
popular responses (P), intellect-dominated responses
(Lambda). With respect to the use of Space, EM were
expected to emphasize whole responses (W); RM to produce
more D and Dd (detail) responses. Left-movers were also
expected to produce more pure C and CF over FC responses.

Using the Holt system, EM_were expected to pro-
duce more primary process indices among the formal
variables. Results are presented in Table 8.

For EM and MM of both sexes, F+% (an index of
perceptual adequacy) and Lambda (L) (the percentage of R
which is strictly form-determined) were both unrelated to
CLEM.

Among males, R, the total record, was related to
CLEM though to a marginally significant degree (x2 = 2.08,
P<.07). Productivity favored EM_maleS who tended to
produce adequate responses more freely.

Likewise, the percentage of popular responses
(P%) related to CLEM at the .07 level and, in accord with
hypotheses (for males only), favored §M_Over MM. P fre-
quency (independent of R) related to CLEM for males at

the .06 level and favored 3M.

46

TABLE 8

Relationship Between Conjugate Lateral Eye—
Movement and Rorschach Variables

 

Males Females

 

 

 

 

Variabled High High
2b a Scores 2 Scores
X P x P
Productivity 2.08 .07 LM .00
Word Frequency .08 .61 3.19 .04 RM
Organization (Z) 2.08 .07 RM .36 .27
Good Form (F+%) .08 .61C .00
Lambda (P%) .08 .39C .08 .38
Popular (P%) 2.08 .07 RM .00
Color (C) .08 .39 .13 .36
Form-Color (FC) .09 .38 1.46 .11
Color-Form (CF) .39 .27 .91 .17
Sum Color .33 .28 3.01 .04 LM
Whole (W%) .75 .19 .08 .39
Detail (D%) .08 .61 .00
Rare Detail (Dd%) .75 .19 .08 .61
Holt:
Condensation 2.08 .07 RM .77 .19
Displacement .75 .19 .08 .61c
Contradictions of
Reality .09 .61 .08 .39c
Symbolism .00 .00
Miscellaneous .00 .00
Verbalizationd .09 .38 .09 .39
Sum Pri Pro
Formal .08 .61 .08 .39
Sum Pri Pro
Content .08 .61 .08 .61
Sum Pri Pro
Defense .33 .28 .08 .39
aLevel of significance for directional (one-tailed)
test.

bComputations are based on N=48 for these varia-
bles. Chi Squares corrected for continuity (see Siegel,
1956, p. 110).

0Minor variations in cell frequencies are assoc-
iated with these fluctuations in probabilities.

dOnly the category "verbal slips" (i.e., slips of
the tongue) was scored (refer to Holt, 1970).

47

A supplementary variable, Organization (Beck's Z)
is an index of the extent to which subjects analyze and
resynthesize the blot. This variable related to CLEM for
males and favored MM (x2 = 2.08, P<.07).

It should be added that the only variable group
from the Holt system which showed a relationship to CLEM
(P<.07) was "Condensation." This variable involves,
among other things, the fusion of percepts, composition
of hybrid percepts, arbitrary linkage and impossible com-
binations, i.e., organizational activity. Z and Conden-
sation are measuring the same thing (Holt, 1970, pp. 23
ff). None of the other variables which constitute the
formal aspect Of the primary process scoring system (i.e.,
Displacement, Contradictions of Reality, Symbolism, Verbal
Slips and Miscellaneous categories) related to CLEM.
Neither were indices of primary process content or de-
fensiveness related. Thus the hypothesis relative to
primary process was not confirmed.

For females, only two Rorschach variables, one a
major variable, the other a supplementary variable, were
related to CLEM. The first was the total amount of color
responsiveness, which, in accord with the hypothesis,
favored EM (x2 = 3.01, P<.04). The variables FC (Form
over Color) and CF (Color over Form) were not related to
CLEM. Thus, for females, there was partial confirmation

of the color hypothesis.

48

The supplementary variable was a measure of verbal
fluency, the median number of words per card. This related
to CLEM and favored §M_fema1es (x2 = 3.19, P<.04).

Hypotheses relative to "Location" (i.e., W, D,

Dd) were not confirmed for the total sample of males and
females. The distributions of subjects on these variables
yielded non-significant chi squares.

Form-level scoring. To explore the form-level
variable further, §_employed a more complex system of
form scoring (Friedman, 1953; see Hemmendinger in Rickers-
OVsiankina, 1960, pp. 58 ff) on a subsample of strong
uni-directional movers, in this case, the five strongest
subjects in each group.

This system has been designed to test the hypo-
thesis that projective reSponseS will reflect, by their
composition, the simultaneous increases in cognitive
complexity apg_integration which occur as some function
of maturation.

In this system, vague, undifferentiated, holistic
responses (WV, Dv) represent immature cognitive develop-
ment; finely wrought, complex and intricate percepts
(W++, D++) reflect a high level of development.

In line with the major hypotheses, £M_were expected
to produce more percepts on the immature end of the con-
tinuum (Fv), the opposite for MM. Results are presented

in Table 9.

49

TABLE 9

Scoring of Form-Level with the Developmental
Scoring System Based on Subsample
of "Strong-Movers"a

 

Vb a - DW M + ++b Cor Fac

R 5 2 24 1 51 23 4 0 0
Male

L 15 3 23 l 59 23 ll 0 0

R 2 2 18 0 60 24 10 1 3
Fem

L 7 4 ll 0 56 22 9 0 3

R 7 4 42 1 111 47 14 l 3
Total

L 22 7 44 1 115 45 20 0 3

 

aCells are frequencies of each scoring category
from twenty protocols.

bThe Fisher test, based on high and low scoring
subjects in each category, Shows a Significant relation-
ship among both sexes between CLEM and the production of
"V" (all subjects, P<.01; females, P<.05). The relation-
ship between CLEM and the production of "++" responses
is significant for males (P<.01).

 

all; .

50

The frequency of Fv (i.e., vague "oceanic" re-
sponses) favored EM_as a group. Examination of the
distribution of productive subjects indicated that a few
EM subjects accounted for the high levels of Fv responses.
When subjects were categorized in this high-low fashion,

a Fisher test (Siegel, 1956) was significant for the
female sample (P<.05), marginally Significant for males
and significant (P<.01) when the total sample of £M_and
§M_was considered. The probability that EM_subjects would
account for all of the excessive Fv scorers was below
chance. Thus one aspect of the hypothesis was confirmed.

Contrary to the hypothesis, EM_males accounted
for more of the high (i.e., "mature") level percepts as
well. There were no excessive scorers in this category
(median number of "++" reSponseS per protocol = 2). Using
the Fisher test, the relationship between CLEM and high
form scoring favored EM_and was significant at the .01
level.

No variable representing an intermediate stage on
this form-level continuum was related to CLEM.

Subsample of "strong-movers." The above results

 

were essentially unchanged when a subsample of "strong-
mover" males and females was considered. This data is
presented in Table 10.

Handedness. Due to the small number of cases of

 

non-right-handedness for the total sample, it was impossible

51

TABLE 10

Differences Between Left- and Right-Moving
Subjects on Selected Projective Variables
for a Subsample of "Strong-Movers"c

 

a-

 

 

 

 

 

Males Females
Variable LM RM t Pa LM RM t Pa
Mean Mean Mean Mean
(N=10) (N=lO) (N=10) (N=10)
F+% 66.2 71.7 1.03 .25 67.3 66.6 .15 .50
L (F%) 64v4 66.0 .25 .50 57.2 62.8 .88 .25
P% 18.4 21.7 1.62 .07 20.2 20.2 .00
W% 25.5 30.7 .71 .20 25.4 27.1 .30 .50
0% 62.5 61.3 .19 .50 69.8 67.9 .34 .50
Dd% 7.6 2.5 1.81 .05 4.2 4.2 .00
Sum cb 2.4 3.1 .89 .25 3.7 2.7 1.01 .25
Z 10.7 12.9 .83 .25 10.8 10.8 .00
Pri Pro
Formal 6.9 5.5 .93 .25 6.5 6.5 .00
t t aLevel of significance for directional (one-tailed)
es .

bColor
C=1.5, CF=1.0,
values for the

responses in the Beck system are coded:
FC=.5. The above are presented in absolute
sake of clarity.

c .
A "strong-mover" demonstrates eye-movement un1-

directionality of 85 to 100 per cent.

52

to compare subjects of different hand preferences on
measures of COgnitive style. In fact it was necessary
to combine the male and female data to Obtain a minimal

sample of cases. This data is presented in Appendix B.

DISCUSSION

Both Bakan (1971) and Day (1964) have provided
empirical evidence which suggests that there are cog-
nitive and other personality differences between left-
and right-looking subjects. Sometimes empirically, and
other times intuitively, the correlates of eye-movement
directionality appear to bear an affinity to components
of other theorists' dichotomies: James "tender-minded"
rationalist vs. "tough-minded" empiricist, C. P. Snow's
literary intellectual vs. scientist and some aspects of
Shapiro's hysteric vs. Obsessive-compulsive styles.
Gardner ep_g£. (1959) and Witkin (1954) have also based
research on the notion that styles Of perception and
cognition are organized around relatively few dimensions.

The present research was designed to test the
nature of the apparent relationship between the correlates
of CLEM and other dichotomies. Strong positive findings
could lend support to the notion that the eye-movement
dichotomy is a Simple, testable phenomenon which could

subsume the dimensions suggested in the above sources.

53

54

The over-all results of the present study, via
an assessment of academic and occupational interests,
perceptual facility and projective responses were not
strong enough, where they did occur, to support the
notion that there are major differences in cognitive
styles between left- and right-lookers. Nor do the re-
sults help resolve the nature Of the relationship between
CLEM correlates as reported and earlier dichotomous
typologies.

In some cases (Embedded Figures Test and the Kuder)
results were dependent on restricting the sample to
"strong" uni-directional movers, i.e., scale extremes.
This limits the population to which results may be gener-
alized.

The small findings may, however, reflect subtle
group differences in cognitive style which are worthy Of
further research. The findings include the following
trends: §M_Of both sexes took somewhat longer to resolve
an embedded figure and for a subsample, MM showed more
endorsement of scientific Options on the Kuder. Male MM
scored higher than male EM in the production of Rorschach
"pOpulars" and organized responses, but scored somewhat
lower in over-all productivity. For a subsample, MM
(both sexes) produced more vague "oceanic" responses in
the Rorschach, though for males, EM also produced more
finely wrought "mature" responses. For females, EM

showed more color responsiveness on the Rorschach.

55

Given the limitations of the findings and the
descriptive nature of the present study, the following
attempts at explanation are considered speculative.

Embedded Figures Test. The finding that §M_males

 

tend more Often to complete the task successfully is in
accord with the findings of Bakan and Shotland (1969) and,
indirectly, with the present hypothesis. Bakan and Shot-
land concluded that 5M were less distractible (as measured)
by performance on the Stroop Color-Word Test).

Lower distractibility may mean that §M_Subjects

Spend more Of the alloted time attending to the task at

 

hand. Performance for these subjects would be less
hampered by extraneous or conflicting stimuli than it would
be for the relatively more distractible EM. Thus they
more Often persist to the resolution of the embedded
figure. It is unclear, however, why females differ in

this respect.

For the subsample, §M_of both sexes performed
somewhat more slowly than EM. This may be simply an ex-
tension of the above; attending to the task and persisting
to resolution takes time. It is possible, though not
conclusive from the present research, that 3M are Egg
attentive to be maximally efficient (i.e., achieve more
solutions in less time than EM). From the 5's experience
with the embedded figure, a temporary relaxation of

attentional focus was necessary to facilitate solution.

56

The edge in speed of performance by EM may be due to a
more fluid attentional focus.

Future research could aim at clarifying any dif-
ferences in performance by having EM and §M_5ubjects
describe their cognitive experiences after the completion
of the task or end of the alloted time.

Occupational interest. The finding which for

 

males (total sample) related CLEM to the music scale could
have occurred by chance. This interpretation is strength-
ened by a second finding: for the subsample of strong
uni—directional movers, the relationship disappeared.

For the subsample, 5M subjects more strongly en-
dorsed scientific interests (significantly for males).
This was predicted and is in accord with other experimental
findings. While the sample was small, the results indi-
cate that caution be exercised in accepting the null hypo-
thesis.

It may be that college freshmen and SOphomores are
most unsure of occupational orientations and that any re-
lationships were confounded by the variables of age and
academic level. Restricting a study to seniors and grad-
uate students or to subjects in defined occupational
groupings could control for the age factor.

An added hypothesis is that CLEM does not relate
as much to the occupational choice as it would to the

manner in which EM and RM would perform in a given area.

57

Status as EM or 3M need not preclude, for example, inter-
est in research, but only tend to Specify (ala Gardner
gp_g£., 1959) the characteristic solutions £M_and §M_
subjects might apply to problems.

Projective responses. One of the major purposes

 

of the present research was to extend the body of obser—
vations, relative to CLEM, to include a major projective
device. While the Rorschach can be put to many uses, the
formal aspects (vis-a-vis content material) lend them—
selves well to the study Of cognitive style differences.

Form level. Form level and quality (F) is a

 

"corner-stone" Of the Rorschach experiment. "Its useful-
ness [is] in appraising the S's ability to perceive
accurately, and hence to know realities. . . ." (Beck,
gp_gl., 1961, p. 130).

There were no gross indices of differences in
perceptual adequacy between EM_and 3M. Using Friedman's
scoring system (see Rickers-Ovsiankina, 1960), however,
§M_were found to produce more vague Rorschach responses.

These findings relate CLEM (though somewhat
weakly) to the develOpmental theories of Werner (1948).
Werner hypothesized that cognitive and perceptual develOp-
ment proceeds from a relatively global diffuseness to
higher levels of complexity and integration.

The present findings suggest, in these terms,

that EM cognition is relatively immature (i.e.,

58

"undeveloped"). But this was complicated by the finding
that EM_account for not only the least but the most
articulated percepts as well.

One hypothesis is that the combination of vague
and well-articulated percepts reflect a greater capacity
on the part of E§.t° "regress in the service of the ego"
(Kris, 1952). This involves among other things, a "letting
go" of secondary process (possibly including perceptual
focus) for the sake Of creation and recreation.

Pending replication with a larger sample, this
interpretation is in accord with Bakan (1969) who found
that EM_were more susceptible than MM to hypnosis (could
"regress in the service of the ego") as measured by the
Stanford Hypnotic Susceptibility Scale.

Productivity. Possibly in line with the hypothesis

 

concerning "regression in the service of the ego" are
some other findings for these subjects.

The first is total productivity which tended to
favor EM. The attempt was made to limit R to the first
three scoreable reSponses. However, subjects could fall
below this number. In accord with Beck gp_a£. (1961), E
encouraged resistant subjects for more productivity only
for cards I through III. If a subject remained reticent
or (very rarely) rejected a card, this was accepted. The
results suggest that more EM_freely produce adequate

responses.

59

Use of ngulars. AA moderate level of "Populars"

 

(e.g., "bats" and "butterflies" for cards I and V) is
indicative of not only perceptual adequacy but a con-
ventionally realistic perception. Excessive production
of "P" is indicative of defensive hyperconventionality,
§M_tended to produce higher levels of "P" than EM sug-
gesting an MM emphasis on the maintenance of secondary
process thinking.

Organization (2). §M_males also tended to produce

 

higher levels than EM_Of organized, integrated percepts.
This seems to be in accord with personality differences
suggested by Bakan (1971): MM have "active" and "analytic"
characteristics.

This finding may be a reflection of the performance
on the Embedded Figure Test where EM males more Often
completed the task, but tended to be slower as a group.

In the Rorschach, a relatively "fluid" cognition lends
itself well to higher productivity. While this is Specu-
lative, the relatively higher levels Of "Z" may be indi—
cative of aspects of EM cognition which would tend to in-
hibit the free—flowing production of responses.

One apparent contradiction Should be clarified.

The finding of more of Friedman's "W++" among "strong“
uni-directional males seems to contradict the relation of
Beck's Z to CLEM. However, these variables are not strictly

comparable. The latter involves conjunctive percepts

60

irrespective of quality (note Holt's pri-pro category
"Condensation"). The former reflects a combination of
superior form and organization. The over-all results may
suggest that 3M "put things together" more for the sake
of the activity than for the artistry of the product.

Color usage. Color responses in the Rorschach

 

involve affective immediacy, a tendency to respond to the
emotionally salient aspects Of the card. Female EM
tended to favor such responsiveness.

The present finding fits the interpretation that
§M_females share some aspects of the "male cognitive
style" (in this case, less emotional ability as measured
by Beck's "C"). According to Fischer (1971):

. . . the personality variables which Bakan (1971)
ascribed to . . . left moving people (synthetic,
emotional, subjective, passive, etc.) seemed more
"role appropriate" for the female of our society

. . . variables ascribed to . . . right moving

people (analytic, rational, Objective, active,
etc.) seemed more role apprOpriate for the male.

Because of the limited number Of statistically
significant relationships for females, caution Should be
exercised in interpreting this finding. The finding of
more affective responsiveness among EM females does, how—

ever, fit well with Fischer's interpretation.

SUMMARY

Researchers have reported on a conjugate eye-
movement phenomenon (CLEM) which they relate to subjects'
"characteristic deployment of attention," as well as per-
ceptual and cognitive differences (of. Day and Bakan) .
Individuals are classified as left- or right-eye-movers
on the basis of their uni-directional eye movements in
response to questions requiring reflective thought. The
criterion which classifies a subject is uni-directional
eye movement at least 66.6 per cent of the time. Special
subgroups are isolated consisting of those subjects whose
uni-directional eye movement exceeds 85 per cent (i.e.,
"strong-movers").

The present study was designed to link this pheno-
menon to a body of conceptually related, dichotomous per-
sonality typologies. The author wished also to extend
the range of Observations, relevant to CLEM, to include
projective test performance.

The general hypothesis predicted that left-moving
subjects, EM. would demonstrate perceptual and cognitive

qualities suggested by William James' term "tender-minded"

61

62

and that right-moving subjects, EM. would Show qualities
characterized as "tough-minded."

To test this hypothesis, §_obtained a measure of
performance on an Embedded Figure test, subjects' academic
majors, occupational preferences and Rorschach responses.
Ninety-Six subjects, evenly divided between males and fe-
males, left and right movers, participated. Standard pro-
cedures were utilized for all measures.

Specific hypotheses predicted that (l) §M_would
perform more quickly than EM_on the Embedded Figure task,
(2) §M_would Show more interest in scientific majors and
EM_would favor the humanities, (3) §M_would favor scien-
tific and technical occupations while EM would choose
artistic Options, and (4) §M_would evidence higher levels
Of conventionality and preciseness than EM_in their pro-
jective responses. The latter variables included form-
level, location, use of "pOpulars," color responsiveness
and indices of primary process thinking.

The results were as follows:

1. Among males, significantly more §M_successfully
completed the Embedded Figure task in the allotted
time. Contrary to the hypothesis, EM_of both
sexes were somewhat faster than §M_as measured by
time to completion. The difference was not

statistically Significant.

63

2. The hypothesis that EM_would Show more humanistic
majors was considered unconfirmed. In the present
sample there was a high percentage of semi—technical

and applied majors.

3. On the Kuder test, only the music scale was related
to CLEM to a significant degree for males. This
was interpreted as a chance finding. Among fe-
males, no scale was related to CLEM. However, for
a subsample (the extreme ends of the eye-movement
continuum), EM of both sexes fell below §M_in the

endorsement of scientific interests.

4. Some Rorschach variables were marginally related
to CLEM: Organization and the production of
"popular" responses (also, Holt's variable group
"Condensation") tended to favor MM males. Pro-
ductivity (R) favored EM_males. For females CLEM
was significantly related to color responsiveness
(favoring EM) and to a measure of verbal fluency

(favoring RM).

Form-level, as measured by Friedman's "develop-
mental" scoring system, was significantly related to CLEM
for a subsample of "strong-movers": EM_Of both sexes
produced more vague, "oceanic" responses than MM. Among
males, however, MM accounted for more high level, organized

responses as well.

64

The author concluded that the above results were
not sufficient to relate CLEM to previous typologies,
but that discernible differences between EM_and MM.
particularly at the extreme ends of the eye-movement
continuum, warranted further study. Future research
should utilize "strong-mover" samples. Research should
also attempt to clarify the relationship between CLEM
and the types of reflective questions utilized to elicit

it (e.g., arithmetic vs. proverbs).

REFERENCES

REFERENCES

Anastasi, A. Psychological testing. New York: Mac-
millan, 1961.

Bakan, P. Hypnotizability, laterality of eye-movements
and functional brain asymmetry. Perceptual and
Motor Skills, 1969, 38, 927-932.

 

Bakan, P. The eyes have it. Psychology Today, 1971,
4(11), 64 ff. (a)

 

Bakan, P. Personal communication (1971). (b)

Bakan, P., & Shotland L. Lateral eye movement, reading
Speed and visual attention. Psychonomic Science,
1969, $5, 93-94.

Bakan, P., & Svorad, D. Resting EEG alpha and asymmetry
of reflective lateral eye movement. Nature, 1969,
223, 975-976.

Beck, S. Rorschach's test II.jfiA variety of personality
pictures. New York: Grune andFStratton, 1945.

Beck, 8., Beck, A., Levitt, E., & Molish, H. Rorschach's
test I. Basic pgocesses. New York: Grune and
Stratton, 1961.

 

Day, M. An eye-movement phenomenon relating to attention,
thought and anxiety. Perceptual and Motor Skills,
1964, £2, 443-446.

Day, M. An eye-movement indicator Of type and level of
anxiety: Some clinical observations. Journal
of Clinical Psychology, 1967, 33(4), 438-444. (a)

 

Day, M. An eye-movement indicator of individual differ-
ences in the psychological organization of
attentional processes and anxiety. The Journal
of Psychology, 1967, pg. 51-62. (b)

 

65

66

Day, M. Attention, anxiety and psychotherapy. Psycho-
therapy: Theory, Research and Practice, 1968,
§(3), 146-149.

 

Duke, J. Lateral eye-movement behavior. Journal Of
General Psychology, 1968, 18, 189-I95.

 

 

Eiduson, B. Scientists: Their psychological world. New
York: BaSic BOOks, 1962.

 

Fischer, K. Lateral eye-movement as related to marital
selection and adjustment. Unpublished Master's
Thesis, Michigan State University, 1971.

Friedman, H. Perceptual regression in schizophrenia: An
hypothesis suggested by the use of the Rorschach
test. Journal of Prgjective Techniques, 1953,
£1, 1715I85.

 

Gardner, R., Holzman, P., Klein, 6., Linton, H., & Spence,
D. Cognitive control: A study of individual
consistencies in COgnitive behavior. Psychological

 

Issues, 1959, i, Whole NO. 4.

Hemmendinger, L. Developmental theory and the Rorschach
method. In M. A. Rickers-Ovsiankina (Ed.),
Rorschach psychology. New York: Wiley, 1960,
pp. 58-80.

 

Holt, R. Gauging primary and secondary processes in
Rorschach responses. Journal Of Projective
Techniques, 1956, EM, 14-25.

 

 

Holt, R. Manual for the scoring of primary process mani-
festations in Rorschach responses. Research
Center for Mental Health, New York University,
1970.

 

 

Holt, R., & Havel, J. A method for assessing primary and
secondary process in the Rorschach. In M. A.
Rickers-Ovsiankina (Ed.), Rorschach psychology.
New York: Wiley, 1960, pp. 263-315.

 

James, W. Pragmatism: A new name for some old ways of
thinking. New York: Longmans, Green, 1907.

 

Kris, E. Psychoanalytic explorations in art. New York:
International UniverSities Press, I952.

Kuder, G. F. Kuder preference record--vocational.
Chicago: Science Research Associates, 1934-1956.

 

67

Schimek, J. Cognitive style and defenses: A longitudinal
study of intellectualization and field independ-
ence. Journal of Abnormal ngchology, 1968, 11(6),
575-580.

 

Shapiro, D. Neurotic styles. New York: Basic Books,
1965.

 

Siegel, S. Nonparametric statistics for the behavioral
sciences. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1956.

 

Snow, C. P. The two cultures and the scientific revolu-
tion. New York: Cambridge University Press, 1959.

 

Werner, H. Comparativepsychology of mental develgpment.
(Rev. ed.) Chicago: FOIlet, 1948.

 

Witkin, H. Individual differences in the ease of percep-
tion of embedded figures. Journal Of Personalipy,
1950, 12. 1-15.

 

Witkin, H., Dyk, R., Faterson, H., Goodenough, D., & Karp,
S. Psychological differentiation. New York:
Wiley,51962.

 

Witkin, H., Goodenough, D., & Karp, 8. Stability of
cognitive style from childhood to young adult-
hood. Journal of Personalitygand Social Psych-
ology, 1967, 2(3), 291—300.

Witkin, H., Lewis, H., Hertzman, M., Machover, K.,
Meissner, P., & Wagner, S. Personality through
perception. New York: Harper, 1954.

 

 

Zytowski, D., Mills, D., & Paepe, C. Psychological dif-
ferentation and the Strong Vocational Interest
Blank. Journal of Counseling Psyghology, 1969,
l§(l), 41-44.

APPENDICES

APPENDIX A

FEEDBACK FOR 309 B RESEARCH:

PERSONALITY--PERCEPTUAL

APPENDIX A

FEEDBACK FOR 309 B RESEARCH:
PERSONALITY--PERCEPTUAL

This research is attempting to relate projective test re-
sponses, occupational or academic interests and perfor-
mance on simple, perceptual tests. NO questions of "good"
or "bad" performance——on any aspect of the research-—are
involved. The experimenter is attempting to clarify dif-
ferences which may exist in interpretative reSponses asso-
ciated with anticipated or actual academic majors in under-
graduate students. The Rorschach Or "inkblot" test (on
which a huge literature is available) has been used to pro-
vide some Of the data.

Due to the large amount of data collected, information con-
cerning results will not be available for some time. If
more detailed information is desired, please feel free to
contact me. In any event, thank you for your interest and

participation.

Michael R. Barnat

68

APPENDIX B

DISTRIBUTION OF HANDEDNESS

APPENDIX B

DISTRIBUTION OF HANDEDNESS*

Non—Right Handed: 112%). 1%.“; 32%?
Non-Right Handed: ”.23—E Female 10
Left Handed: 9‘21)- £33141 5
Left Handed: ӣ2.13 Female 5

*N 96

69

APPENDIX C

EMBEDDED FIGURES DESIGNS

APPENDIX C

EMBEDDED FIGURES DESIGNS

A. Practice figures

 

70

 

71

APPENDIX C--Continued

EMBEDDED FIGURES DES IGNS

B. Test figure

 

 

 

 

 

 

APPENDIX D

ACADEMIC MAJOR PREFERENCES

APPENDIX D

ACADEMIC MAJOR PREFERENCES

 

(LM) Male
Major
Psych
Radio-TV
Science

Prelaw--Poly Sci
NPa--Psych
Packaging
Business
Psych
Pre-Law

Home Econ.
NPa

Pre-Law
Pre-Dental
Engineering
NPa--Psych
Pre-Law
Psych

Math Educ.
Honors College--Science
Law
Anthropology
Chemistry
Psych

Psych

a
NO Preference

l

00
95
94
89
88
78
75
73

72

72

71
70
69
68
67
60
55
50
44
43
42
37
18
16
13

 

(RM) Male
Major

NPa
Accounting
Person. Admin.
NPa
NPa
NPa--Psych

NPa--Theater Science

NPa--Eng Lit

Fisheries--History
Teaching

Social Science--PreLaw

Philosophy

Business Admin.

Pre-Medical

NPa--Psych

Psych

History Education

Social Science

Pre-Medical

Criminal Justice

Advertising

Law

Business

Finance

Sociology

73

APPENDIX D--Continued

ACADEMIC MAJOR PREFERENCES

(LM) Female

 

Major
Advertising
English
NPa
Journalism

NPa--Pre-Dental
Biological Science
Special Educ.

Medic. Tech.--Psychol.

Art Practice
Medical Technology
NPa--Audiology
Home Economics
English

Psychology

Social Work
Advertising
NPa--Socia1 Work
Elementary Educ.
Art--Psychology
NPa--Food-Nutrition
NPa--Social Work
Psychology

Nursing
NPa--Psychology

a
No Preference

S#

108
106
105
104
103
101

98

97

80
79
76
74
63
56
29
28
22
17

H
l-‘NUQN

(RM) Female

 

Major

Nursing

Home Econ.
Biological Science
Bio-chemistry
Elem. Educ.
Audiology--Speech Sci.
Special Education
NPa

Recreation

Nursing

English Humanities
Criminal Justice
NPa

Psychology

Math

Spanish

Nursing

Special Education
Interior Design-~Advert.
Psychology

Nursing

Social Work
NPa--Social Work
Journalism

APPENDIX E

MEANS AND STANDARD DEVIATIONS, KUDER (FORM CM:

OCCUPATIONAL PREFERENCES) IN PERCENTILES

Means and Standard Deviations, Kuder (Form CM:
Occupational Preferences) in Percentiles

TABLE E.l

 

 

 

Male Female
.131 194. m 8M.

Mean SD Mean SD Mean SD Mean SD
Outdoor 35.2 23.4 42.6 23.6 45.9 27.2 56.1 24.1
Mechanical 22.0 18.2 23.7 16.6 43.2 26.0 44.2 26.2
Computational 36.0 31.5 36.4 34.4 42.5 29.7 42.7 26.1
Scientific 44.1 31.0 42.8 28.4 48.5 26.6 56.7 29.3
Persuasive 57.4 24.7 57.3 26.2 55.8 27.6 49.1 24.7
Artistic 59.1 28.2 61.6 34.7 69.4 23.7 70.3 19.1
Literary 56.5 30.7 65.3 28.3 46.4 32.3 43.6 25.8
Musical 65.6 24.7 68.2 32.0 57.1 29.5 54.7 31.8
Soc. Serv. 71.4 21.2 65.6 28.3 65.2 32.5 72.7 28.4
Clerical 31.6 28.3 32.3 32.5 22.1 18.3 16.5 19.6

 

74

APPENDIX F

MEANS AND STANDARD DEVIATIONS:

RORSCHACH VARIABLES

MEANS AND STANDARD DEVIATIONS:
RORSCHACH VARIABLES

TABLE F.l

 

 

 

 

 

 

Male Female
14. a 9M. .Rfl
Mean SD Mean SD Mean SD Mean SD
Productivity
(R) 27.7 4.5 26.1 5.2 26.9 4.3 27.9 5.3
Latency
(seconds) 13.2 8.4 15.7 13.1 12.5 7.4 12.0 11.0
Word
frequency 31.8 31.3 31.9 12.4 31.6 12.0 33.8 9.6
Organization
(Z) 10.0 5.2 10.9 4.4 9.6 2.9 10.4 5.4
Good Form
(F+%) 69.3 11.6 71.1 12.6 69.7 11.6 70.8 11.7
Lambda (F%) 62.6 12.3 63.5 17.7 56.9 12.8 60.3 13.4
Popular (P%) 21.7 7.1 23.9 7.0 23.4 8.6 21.4 7.4
Color (C) .9 1.4 1.1 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.2 1.4
Form-Color
(FC) .6 .5 .7 .7 .8 .6 .5 .4
Color-Form
(CF) .8 .5 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.3 .9 1.0
Sum Color '
Responses 2.4 1.5 2.9 2.3 3.5 2.1 2.6 2.1
White space
(8%) 6.0 4.7 8.6 4.9 8.0 6.5 6.4 4.9
Wholes (W%) 22.3 13.3 25.7 11.0 24.2 10.8 25.0 9.3
Part (D%) 68.8 11.4 68.9 9.0 70.3 9.8 69.0 8.9
Rare detail
(Dd%) 6.6 6.8 3.9 4.4 5.2 3.5 5.4 5.8
Holt:
Sum Pri Pro
Content 11.4 3.8 11.5 5.2 10.2 3.9 10.7 6.3
Sum Pri Pro
Formal 6.8 3.4 7.8 5.5 7.7 5.2 7.6 5.6
Sum Control/
DefenSe 24.2 8.3 26.5 8.8 21.2 6.8 23.7 11.3

 

75

(NIH

2 7186

UIHIHIWIHIH

3 0308

Aug

51’

312

IIHIHNM