PERCEPTUAL CONTACT WiTH REALITY iN SCHIZOPHRENIA Thesis for the Degree of Ph. D. MICHIGAN STATE COLLEGE Edward Lovinger 1,9 54 I . t w t \ i‘iF‘fnL .- r . . ' In?! .\ ‘ [WITH-l d uni-IJIWI‘ t 21%.! ‘4'. ‘19. . . .‘ cry-r... nut 1“. .tn. Mud—lurid TTI uln- -‘—I1LII_ degree inifiYEEl-Egy Major professor presented by of the requirements for e h t t a h .d t B 1 m, .m .u n r C e c S .m m m 8 ll .1 s .l h T Edward Lovinger has been accepted towards fulfillment Ph.D. Perceptual Contact With Reality in SchizoPhrenia ll Ill-4“]..‘ll‘llil'io‘l .rllllu'lllllll .lll lll. l l I PERCEPTUAL CONTACT WITH REALITI IN SCHIZOPHRENIA BY Edward Lovinger A THESIS Submitted to the School of Graduate Studies of Michigan State College of Agriculture and Applied Science in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY Department of Psychology 195a . l l l l l l l I ll [lull I all All :‘lulnl III‘ I II [I ‘llllll‘ [II .[II‘ ‘ l l l I], til ‘1 III . ACKNOWLEDGMENT The writer wishes to eXpress his sincere appreciation to Dr. Gustave M. Gilbert, his committee chairman, whose suggestions, encouragement, and c00peration contributed so significantly to the completion of this dissertation. He also is deeply indebted to Dr. M. Ray Denny for his invalu- able aid in the initial phases of the research. Thanks are also due to Dr. Donald M. Johnson and Dr. Carl F. Frost for their encouragement and constructive criticisms. The staff at the Fort Custer Veterans Administration Hospital and at the Saginaw Veterans Administration HOSpital were very generous in donating time, Space and subjects for the research. The psychology trainees at both of these installations gave freely of their time and effort in the testing of the subjects. The writer is particularly indebted to Dr. Paul D. Greenberg for his aid in the preparation of the manuscript and to Mr. William D. Nelson for his assistance in the testing of the subjects. Dr. Joseph D. Birch, statistical consultant, was very helpful in the selection and application of the statistical techniques employed in the analysis of the data. I‘ll l I III! l _I TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . The Constancy Phenomenon. . . . . . SchiZOphrenia . . . . . . . . . . . HYPOTHESES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . SUBJECTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . APPARATUS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . PROCEDURE. . .p. . . . . . . . . . . . RESULTS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . EESCUSSION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Implication for Further Research. . SUMMARY. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . SELECTED REFERENCES. . . . . . . . . . APPEDIDICES 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O 0 Page 17 21 25 28 32 36 51 S7 58 61 66 [lllllllsl‘ll [ll ll ll[«l, . Ill Table 10 ll 12 13 1h 15 LIST OF TABLES Comparison of eXperimental groups on age . . . Initial target for each trial of the three cue conditions 0 o o o o o o o o o e o o o 0 Analysis of variance of comparison targets selected 0 O O 0 O O O O O O O O O O O 0 O 0 Means and standard deviations of comparison targets for orders of presentation . . . . . t-Ratios for differences between means for orders 0f presentation 0 o o o o o o o o o 0 Means of comparison targets of three groups on three cue conditions. . . . . . . . . . . Means of cue conditions for the orders of presentation 0 o o o o o o o o o o o o o o 0 Means of the groups for the cue conditions and Orders 0 o o o o o o o o o o o o o o e 0 Analysis of variance of comparison targets for three groups under three cue conditions (order-effect removed) . . . . . . . . . . . Means of three cue conditions. . . . . . . . . {eans and standard deviations for three groups tested under three cue conditions (order— effect removed). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . t-Ratios for differences between means for three groups tested under three cue conditions (order-effect removed). . . . . . Analysis of variance for the paranoid and non-parano 1d sub-groups . o 0 Q o o o o o o 0 Analysis of variance for the paranoid and non-paranoid sub-groups (order-effect removed) 0 o o o o o e e o o o e e o o o o 0 Reliability of comparison targets selected . . Page 25 35 38 39 39 MO ’43 1L5 LLS LL? #7 AB 50 SO lllllllllllJllllll [I I I I'll l llll‘ Ill-l III III- {[[I [I INTRODUCTION In most textbook or theoretical discussions of schizo- phrenia one encounters either the implication or a direct statement that schiZOphrenics are in poor contact with reality (2, 3, 8, 1o, 13, 22, 23, 25, 26, 3o, 21, 33, 48, 57). Generally, a precise definition of What is meant by contact with reality is not given. Frequently, however, in many of these discussions is the implication that the schiz0phrenic's break with reality includes basic perceptual processes. Much of the work with projective techniques certainly suggests this (5, 6, 7, 27, 5h). However, since these tasks usually reflect more complex psychological functions, it is diffi- cult to ascertain to what extent basic perceptual processes are involved. The purpose of this study was to investigate perceptual contact with reality in schiZOphrenia in terms of an eXperi- ment involving a basic perceptual process, namely, size constancy. Secondarily, this study may yield valuable find- ings in regard to the constancy phenomenon, 223 £3. The reasons for selecting size constancy are the following: (1) size constancy represents a basic and universal per- ceptual process; (2) it lends itself to rigorous eXperimental control and quantification. The Constancy Phenomenon The term phenomenal constancy refers to the fact that the perceived or phenomenal preperties of objects tend to remain constant despite the conditions under which the objects are perceived. The best examples of this phenomenon are visual and generally refer to constancies of size, shape, color or brightness. An object twenty feet away will be seen as the same size as another object physically equal in size only five feet away despite the fact that the far object subtends a visual angle which is only one-fourth that of the nearer object. A circular object continues to be seen as a circle even when it has been so tilted as to give an elliptical retinal image. A white object continues to be seen as white even though the general illumination may be markedly reduced or is chromatic. In other words, objects are perceived as relatively constant with reapect to their essential characteristics deSpite changes in stimulus con- ditions. The interpretations of the constancy phenomenon tend to fall into two classes: (1) the empiricist views emphasize the role of experience and learning; (2) the nativist views maintain that constancy can be understood from the structural interrelations within the perceptual field. Sheehan (55) presents a summary of the evidence pertinent to these view- points*. It should be noted, however, that there are no *For extensive presentations of the history of constancy research and theories see Boring (l2), Macleod (as), Sheehan (SS), and Koffka (MO). lullll'lllt. lll'illlllll’lli III-Ill] ll lull I. III .l l l) completely empiricist theories nor nativist theories; i.e. the empiricist interpretations do not deny the influence of native and/or structural factors nor do the nativist views completely deny the influence of experience and learning. Brunswik* and his students (lh, 15, lo, 35, 39) have conducted the most extensive quantitative investigations of the constancy phenomena. Brunswik's data indicated that constancy is seldom complete, i.e. constancy judgments tend to fall between the values presented on the retina (the proximal stimuli) and the values as determined by objective measurement (distal stimuli). In other words, phenomenal perception represents a compromise between a perfect object match and the retinal stimulus match. In general, he found this compromise to be closer to the distal values than to the proximal values. Only under those conditions where the cues were reduced (35) or where the instructions called for a Special analytic attitude (15, 35) did the judgments tend to approach the proximal stimulus values. Brunswik and Thouless working independently devised similar ratios for estimating the degree of constancy. Brunswik's ratio is P-S/R—S whereas Thouless' is log P- log S/log R-log S. Thouless used logarithmic values in accordance with the Weber-Fechner law that units of perception are preportional to the logarithm of the physical stimulus. In both, P represents the subject's match, S represents the * . - . Ansbacher (a) presents an extens1ve summary in English of Brunswik's early views. lIIIIIII|I| proximal stimulus value and R the objective or distal stim- ulus value. In both formulas a zero value indicates no constancy and a value of 1.00 indicates complete constancy. An example might help to clarify the use of these ratios. The subject is presented a standard circle five inches in diameter at a distance of twenty feet. To this he is asked to match a variable circle four feet from him. Suppose the variable circle he chooses as a match is four inches in diameter. In this example R (distal stimulus value) would equal 5 since the standard circle is five inches in diameter; S (proximal stimulus value) would equal 1 since the standard twenty feet away is retinally equivalent to a circle one inch in diameter at four feet; P (the phenomenal match, i.e. the apparent size of the standard) would be h. The resultin ratio would be: u-l/S-l or .75. In the case of Thouless' ratio, the same procedure is followed with the exception that the logs of the values are utilized. According to Koffka (hO), it would be misleading to treat such ratios as representing absolutes. Joynson, Brunswik and many others (1, 15, 17, 35, 36, 37, 58) have demonstrated considerable variation of the ratios in regard to various eXperimental conditions. Many investigations have reported ratios considerably higher than 1.00 (l, 16, 36, SS, 51). Brunswik (hl) attributes overconstancy to either of two factors: (1) factors other than the particular proximal and distal stimuli under consideration may be Operative; (2) the subject emphasizes or over-compensates for the difference between proximal and distal stimuli. Many authors (15, 16, 31, 3h, 38, A7) have commented on the adaptive value of perceptual constancy. Without con— stancy one's perceptual world would be chaotic. There could be no consistency in the perception of objects. They would change in appearance and position from moment to moment. It would be impossible to differentiate "between Objects or between self and objects" (51). One would perceive an unstructured meaningless world. Since the develOpmental studies reported differ in the age levels of the groups investigated and the eXperimental methodologies employed, it is difficult to make concise interpretations of their results. Beyrl (9) reported a positive relation between size constancy and age using subjects from two to ten years of age. The deveIOpmental curve reached a plateau at about the tenth year. Brunswik (14) reported similar findings for brightness constancy and Klimpfinger (39) obtained the same relationship for shape constancy. Burzlaff (17) using children from four to seven years of age found no evidence of deveIOpment in either size or brightness constancy. He concluded that the deve10p- mental curves were a function of the paired comparison method rather than age. Brunswik (39) criticized the methodology used by Burzlaff as being too easy, hence not permitting discrimination. Weber and Bicknell (64) found that children nine to twelve years of age tended to show higher constancy than adults. However, they used stereo— sc0pic photographs and they point out a possible learning factor involved in their use. Piaget (49) reported increas- ing constancy with age in his investigations of constancy and illusions with children. Frank (2h) found that eleven month old children demonstrated considerable size constancy. Cruikshank (20) found evidence of a developmental trend in size constancy for infants ranging from ten to fifty weeks of age. In Spite of conflicting results, it seems rather clear that an appreciable degree of constancy is apparent even.among very young children and that where the paired comparison or similar methods were employed, evidence for the development of constancy was found. For the most part, those studies which reported no evidence of develOpment employed methodologies which resulted in practically no variability among the subjects; hence, it would be impossible to find differences. It should be noted that high degrees of constancy have been reported in eXperiments with monkeys (h3), chicks (32), and other lower animals (45). Thouless (60) was the first to investigate individual differences in constancy. He, like Brunswik, views con- stancy as being a compromise between the stimulus prOperties of the object and the unchnaging "real" prOperties of the object and termed it as "phenomenal regression to the 'real' object". Although Thouless' formulations are very similar to Brunswik's, he Speaks of only a tendency to constancy and finds in his eXperiments considerably less constancy than that found by investigators utilizing the methodologies most frequently employed by the Gestalt psychologists. Joynson's (3?) discussion of the three conflicting views concerning apparent size may help to clarify some of these differences. The three conflicting views Joynson discusses are: 1. Retinal image theory -- Joynson cites the following passage as being typical of the view held by modern writers on optics: "The apparent size of any object or image seen by the eye depends upon the size of the retinal image, which in turn depends upon the angle subtended by the object or image at the nodal point of the eye. Objects which subtend the same visual angle will have the same apparent size, although their actual sizes may be very different if they are at different distances from the eye." (37, p. 119). This view was widely accepted by nineteenth century psycholo- gists. The Gestalt psychologists cite this as an example of what they call the "constancy hypothesis"; i.e., that there is a universal point-to-point relation between our sensory echriences and the correSponding prOperties of local peripheral stimulation (hO). Joynson (37) points out that if this were true, we should be able to predict how an object will appear to vary in size with changing distance by a direct application of the rules of perSpective. 2. Size constancy -- Joynson points out that the Gestalt psychologists state that the "constancy hypothesis" is false. They maintain that the apparent size of an object remains constant as its distance changes despite changes in the size of the retinal image, i.e. in free binocular vision and within distances of fifty feet (hO). Holway and Boring's (36) results support this contention and extend the distance to 120 feet. Joynson feels this is all the more striking since Holway and Boring apparently anticipated results more in line with the compromise obtained by Thou- less (58). Holway and Boring (36) investigated apparent size at various distances under four visual conditions: (1) natural binocular, (2) natural monocular, (3) monocular with an artificial pupil, and (h) monocular with an arti- ficial pupil and a reduction tunnel. In essence these four conditions represent different distance cue conditions, pro- gressing from an unequivocal cue condition in the case of natural binocular vision to practically no cues in the case of monocular vision with an artificial pupil and the reduc- tion tunnel. For stimulus objects they used two uniformly illuminated circular disks, both variable in size. The comparison stimulus was always at a distance of ten feet from the subject; whereas, the standard was presented to the subject under all four cue conditions at distances of hO, 80 and 120 feet. The standard was varied in size with distance so that it always subtended a visual angle of one degree; therefore, its retinal image was constant in size. It should follow, then, from retinal image theory that the size of the standard would be perceived as constant; hence, the comparison stimulus, a measure of perceived size, should remain constant. However, if size constancy enters into the perception then the size of the comparison stimulus should increase with increased distance of the standard. Holway and Boring presented their data in terms of lepe. An index of one would indicate complete size constancy while an index of zero would be in line with retinal image theory. They found a slope of 1.12 for binocular vision, 1.00 for monocular vision, 0.hh for monocular vision with an artificial pupil and 0.22 for monocular vision with an artifical pUpil and a reduction tunnel. They constructed the reduction tunnel to eliminate all remaining distance cues. However, some light pattern remained and constancy was not completely eliminated. Lichten and Lurie (hl) conducted an eXperiment in which they completely eliminated these light patterns (hence, all distance cues) through the use ofeareduction.screen and obtained results which are in accord with retinal image theory. These results indicate that size constancy is Operative only under conditions where distance cues are available. As distance cues are reduced, size constancy is also reduced. And in the absence of distance cues, there is no size constancy. 3. "Phenomenal Regression" -- According to Thouless (58), apparent size lies somewhere between what would be anticipated on the basis of retinal image theory or complete size constancy. There is only a tendency to size constancy. 10 Thouless found his size constancy indices ranging from 0.11 to 0.95 whereas the Gestalt psychologists and others using similar methods have obtained indices which range from about 0.90 to 1.12. Joynson (37) lists two major discrepancies in eXperi- mental procedure that have contributed to these disagree- ments: (1) angular separation in the horizontal plane and (2) altering size or distance. Joynson cites thler as giving the impression that the retinal image theory holds only if the subject adOpts an analytic attitude or when methods to eliminate distance cues are employed. However, Joynson feels this is somewhat of an exaggeration since the writers on Optics are able to cite in support of the retinal image theory what is observed when two objects at different distances are juxtaposed or superposed. EXperiments in support of the size constancy or "phenomenal regression" theories have always utilized objects placed in different directions from the eye or seen successively rather than simultaneously in the same direction. This difference coupled with the differences in cue conditions eXplains to a considerable extent the disagreement between the psychologists on the one hand and the writers on Optics on the other. The second discrepancy in methodology helps to eXplain the disagreement among psychologists themselves. When the eXperimenter utilizes a method in which the subject ll equates two objects at different distances, he has the choice of employing two objects at fixed, but different distances and varying their sizes or of utilizing two objects of fixed but different sizes and varying their distances. Thouless used the second method; whereas the Gestalt psy- chologists, Holway and Boring, and others have generally employed the first method. However, the two methods are far from equivalent since, as Joynson (37) points out, if the second method is used, it is impossible for the subject to attain complete size constancy. Where the subject must match two objects for equality of size, complete constancy is obtained only when the subject matches two objects which are physically equal. In the method employed by Thouless this condition is unattainable since no matter how the relative distances of the two objects, unequal in size are altered, they must remain physically unequal. Joynson (37), assuming that a Thouless ratio of 0.90 or more indicates constancy, concluded that a normal perceptual (as Opposed to an analytic) attitude gives constancy provided the following conditions are met: (1) within 120 feet, (2) with binocular vision, (3) without cue reducing conditions such as reduction screens, reduced illumination, etc., and (h) with the objects placed in different directions from the eye. Thouless (60) investigating individual differences and the relationship among some of the visual constancies found a correlation of 0.70 between size and shape constancy. He found insignificant correlations between size and bright- ness or shape and brightness constancy. Thouless attributed this to a confusion between whiteness and brightness on the part of his subjects. When he controlled for this, he found a correlation of 0.58 between whiteness constancy and combined size-shape indices. Sheehan (55) found relation- ships somewhat lower. She reported a correlation of 0.50 between size and shape constancy and correlations of 0.32 and 0.37 for whiteness under two conditions with combined size-shape indices. Although the degree of relationship between various measures of constancy is not clear, it is apparent that size and shape constancy are related. Thouless (60) reported slight but negative correlations between several measures of intelligence and "phenomenal regression". However, these correlations were not statis- tically significant. Raush (hi) found no relation between intelligence and/or age and size constancy scores. Thouless (60) found that women tended to show greater constancy than men, that among adults there is a slight tendency for con- stancy to increase with age and that a group of art students showed significantly lower constancy than others. However, it should be noted that even the art students manifested appreciable constancy. Since Thouless' (60) original investigation of the relationship between personality variables and constancy, 13 there have been a number of such investigations. Thouless (60) in comparing cyclothymes and schizothymes selected on the basis of the eXperimenter's personal knowledge of the subjects found no significant differences between the two groups. However, for three different constancy measures the insignificant differences were in the direction of less con- stancy for the schizothymes. Weber (63) found that extro- verts showed greater constancy than did introverts (the subjects were selected on the basis of a Guilford inventory and by means of ratings based on personal acquaintance). Singer (56) investigated the influence of eXperimental frustration and thinking intro-extroversion upon size con- stancy. He selected 18 extreme thinking introverts and 18 extreme thinking extroverts from 68 reSpondents to Guilford's Inventory of Factors S T D H C. Experimental frustration was achieved through the use of an unsolvable modification of the Vigotsky Concept-Formation Test. He found that both extroversion and frustration yielded greater constancy, with frustrated extroverts manifesting over-constancy. There are only two investigations of size constancy in schiZOphrenia (51, 53) reported in the literature. Raush (51) utilized three groups in his study: (1) control - 30 male students, (2) patient group a - 30 patients diagnosed schiz0phrenia, paranoid type, and (3) patient group b - 30 patients diagnosed schiZOphrenia, catatonic, hebephrenic, simple, mixed, or unclassified; i.e., this group was non- 14 paranoid. All the patients selected were in reasonably good contact with reality and demonstrated 20/20 vision, naturally or corrected. All subjects were tested with the room darkened and then fully lighted so as to present situ- ations in which the number and clarity of cues varied. He found that all three groUps of subjects manifested overconstancy. Under the dark condition both of the schizo- phrenic groups showed more overconstancy than the normals; however, the difference between the non-paranoid group and the normals only approached significance. The paranoids were significantly more overconstant then the non-paranoids. Under the light condition, none of the differences between groups was significant, with only the difference between the control and the paranoid group even approaching signifi- cance. These results were counter to what he had predicted initially. On the basis of the description of schiZOphrenics as being out of contact with reality and regressed plus the findings of Thouless (60) and Weber (63), he predicted less constancy for schiZOphrenics as compared to normals. This was one of his original hypotheses. However, while con- ducting preliminary work in standardizing the procedure and in refining the directions, he found a number of patients showing rather high degrees of overconstancy. This finding led him to the consideration that an ambiguity of cues and the consequent tendency toward perception in terms of the l5 retinal stimuli imply an instability in the perceptual world. On the basis that such an instability might prove threatening and lead to a compensation, he revised his original hypotheses, His revised hypotheses were: (1) para- noids would manifest greater constancy than both the normals and the non-paranoid schiOphrenics and (2) the non-paranoid group would be less constant than either the paranoid or normal group. He did not alter his original hypothesis with regard to the non-paranoid group since he felt this group was characterized as oeing more withdrawn from reality than the paranoids. Sanders and Pacht (53) utilized three groups in their investigation: (1) ten normals, (2) ten neurotics, and (3) ten ambulatory schiZOphrenics. Analysis of variance resulted in a significant F-test for the differences between the groups. However, no further tests were reported as to the significance of differences between pairs of groups. The mean constancy indices were 105 for normals, 99 for neurotics, and 88 for the schiZOphrenics. It should be noted, that unless one takes into account the fact that Sanders and Pacht's constancy index signifies deviations from perfect constancy which are Opposite from the usual size constancy ratios, the results of Sanders and Pacht's eXperiment appear to contradict Raush's (51)*. Taking this “See Lovinger (uh) for a discussion of the inverse relation between Sanders and Pacht's constancy index and Brunswik or Thouless ratios. 16 discrepancy into account, then, Sanders and Pacht's results were in accord with Raush's except that Sanders and Pacht found that their normals were slightly underconstant. This difference was probably due to the fact that with Raush's methodology, the standard was far, whereas, Sanders and Pacht's standard was near. Akishige (1) found that over- constancy tends to occur when the far object is the standard and the near object the variable. Ad 233, it is not surprising that neither HauSh nor Sanders and Pacht found a reduction or breakdown in constancy. All of Sanders and Pacht's schiZOphrenics were outpatients of a Veterans Administration mental hygiene clinic; hence, since they were able to get along well enough so as not to require hOSpitalization, it seems reasonable to assume that they were in good contact with reality. Raush selected for subjects only those schiz0phrenics who were well oriented, reSponded to questioning apprOpriately, were not hallucin- ating, and on privileged wards. From this description, it would seem more apprOpriate to speak of these subjects as schiz0phrenics in remission or partial remission. Again, .2§.E22’ it would seem more probable that they would manifest more constancy since these cases usually give the impression of exerting tremendous over-control, of being very rigid and overly constricted. On psychological tests, they very frequently attend only to the most obvious and clearly defined aspects of reality, manifesting practically no spontaneous deviations from the usual and commonplace (5h). l7 SchiZOphrenia Although very little is known of the nature of schizo- phrenia, most cases can be recognized by the overt symptoms. However, the limits of the syndrome are not clear. The term schizophrenia encompasses a wide variety of symptoms and includes a wide range of disorders*. In most textbook or theoretical discussion of schiZOphrenia one encounters either the implication or a direct statement that schizo- phrenics are in poor contact with reality (2, 3, 8, 10, 13, 22, 23, 25, 26, 3o, 31, 33. AB, 57). Malamud and Render (A8) describe schiz0phrenia as a disorder characterized by primary features consisting of disturbances of association, affect, attention and of contact with the external environ- ment. They report that delusions, hallucinations, disturb- ances in behavior and confusion are secondary features frequently found. Fenichel (23) describes some of the common features of schiz0phrenia as including strange and bizarre symptoms, absurd and unpredictable affects and intellectual ideas, and a collapse of reality-testing. Freud (25, 26) held that there are two stages in a psychosis. In the first, the regressive stage, the ego breaks with reality. The second stage, the restitutional period, is characterized by the ego's attempts at re-establishing contact with reality. *For an excellent discussion and review of the litera- ture concerning the definition and etiology of schiZOphrenia see Stotsky (57). 18 Freud asserts that frequently in the restitutional period a world of fantasy is substituted for reality and a stabil- ization of the psychosis occurs. Generally, a precise definition of what is meant by contact with reality is not given. Frequently, however, in many of these discussions is the implication that the schizo- phrenic's break with reality includes basic perceptual pro- cesses. Fenichel (23) states that the following statements, although varying in point of view, "mean one and the same thing": schiZOphrenia represents a regression to "primary narcissism"; there is a loss of object relations in schizo- phrenia; the schiz0phrenic is out of contact with reality; a regressive breakdown of the ego is characteristic of schiz0phrenia. That such statements definitely imply that basic perceptual processes are affected in schiz0phrenia becomes clear when we consider Fenichel's description of "primary narcissism" or the earliest stages of infancy. The newborn infant has no ego. It is through the influence of the external world that the ego is formed. Those "functions that later constitute the ego and consciousness are not yet deveIOped: the taking in of the external world (perception), the mastery of the motor apparatus (motility), and the ability to bind tension by countercathexis" (23, p. 34). Since the perceptions of adults and infants differ, they experience the world differently. "Observations made on psychotics, who have regressed to primitive modes of l9 perception, confirm the fact that they eXperience the world in a more vague and less differentiated way." (23, p. 38). These views of Fenichel concerning schiZOphrenia and ego develOpment led Bruner (13) to suggest that this aSpect of psychoanalytic theory could be tested by means of a perceptual eXperiment. He preposed that one might predict from psycho— analytic theory a "breakdown in such phenomena as size and shape constancy" (13). Goldstein (30, 31) attributes a loss of constancy and definiteness in the conception of the structure of objects to both schiZOphrenic and organic patients. He points out that this would result in the dis- appearance of boundaries between objects, that the subject's world would appear disordered and confused. Klein (38) also implies a loss of constancy in schiz0phrenia. Angyal, Freeman and Hoskins (3) maintain that in schiZOphrenia "one is dealing with withdrawal of the total personality mani- fested in a variety of psychologic and physiologic character- istics". They suggest broadening the concept of withdrawal to designate a "holistic" phenomenon. They feel the possi- bility that withdrawal may be "holistic and not segmental is strong enough to permit this assumption to be used as a working hypothesis" and stress the need for Specific and concrete studies in order to give this concept a specific and precise meaning. Much of the work with projective techniques suggests that perceptual processes are involved in the schiz0phrenic's 20 break with reality. The schiZOphrenic's difficulty on visual-motor tests such as the Bender might indicate dis- turbances in basic perceptual processes (7). Friedman (27) using the Rorschach to investigate perceptual regression in schiz0phrenia reported findings that are in agreement with his hypothesis that schiz0phrenics function at a level, similar to, but not identical with that of young children in terms of the structural aSpects of their perception. Beck's (5) and Rickers-Ovsiankina's (52) investigations indicate that the perceptions of schiZOphrenics differ from those of normals. Beck (6) concludes "that poor apprehension of the presented real world is what chiefly distinguishes the schiz0phrenic's percepts. . . and the main problem in schiZOphrenia is not an overabundance of fantasy but a poor comprehension of the real world" (6, p. 102). From the findings and views discussed above, it would seem that an investigation of perceptual contact with reality in schiZOphrenia might add-to our knowledge and understanding of schiz0phrenia. HY POTI’ESES It was pointed out above that one frequently encounters the implication that basic perceptual processes are involved in the schiZOphrenic's break with reality. For a number of reasons it was felt that a simple size constancy eXperiment would be a very effective means of testing this implication: (1) it involves a relatively simple task that even schizo- phrenics in poor contact with reality could perform, (2) size constancy represents a basic and universal perceptual process, (3) it lends itself to rigorous experimental control and quantification, and (u) it has been clearly shown that as distance cues are reduced, size constancy is also reduced (35. 36, 11.1). The last point is important in that it would seem to be a reasonable assumption that if an individual is in poor contact with reality in terms of basic perceptual processes, he, then, would be less responsive to minimal distance cues as compared to an individual in good contact with reality. It is not surprising that the two investi— gations of size constancy in schiZOphrenia described pre- viously found no reduction of size constancy. In both, the schiZOphrenic subjects employed were in good contact with reality and in both the eXperimental situations were such that distance cues available were much more than minimal. 22 However, granting the assumption that an individual per- ceptually in poor contact with reality would be realtively less reSponsive to minimal distance cues, and considering the fact that size constancy decreases as distance cues are reduced, one would anticipate that these individuals would manifest less size constancy than individuals in good con- tact when distances cues are minimal. Hence, if schizo- phrenics described as being in poor contact with reality are perceptually in poor contact, one should be able to predict that under eXperimental conditions involving minimal distance cues, schiz0phrenics in poor contact will manifest less size constancy than either normals or schiz0phrenics in good contact. Raush (51) and Sanders and Pacht (53) found that schizo- phrenics in good contact with reality demonstrate greater size constancy than normals. As was mentioned previously, it is not surprising that they found greater size constancy since these are the patients who frequently in projective testing give evidence of being rigid, constricted and over- controlled in their perceptions. On this basis, it was predicted that schiZOphrenics in good contact would manifest greater size constancy than normals under experimental conditions involving minimal distance cues. However, Raush (5l) found that when there were a multi- plicity of distance cues present, there were no significant differences between his schiZOphrenic groups and the normals. 23 Hence, it was predicted that under experimental conditions involving maximal distance cues, the schiz0phrenics in good contact will only show greater constancy than the schizo- phrenics in poor contact; i.e., they will not differ significantly from the normals. Although Raush (51) found significant differences between his paranoid and non-paranoid schiz0phrenics, he felt his non-paranoid group was somewhat in poorer contact and more regressed than the paranoids. However, in this study contact with reality was controlled. There was no reason to believe that the paranoids differed from the non- paranoids with regard to contact with reality. Since it was anticipated that contact with reality would be the major personality variable in determining the amount of constancy, it was predicted that there would be no significant difference between paranoid and non-paranoid patients. It was anticipated that there could be no size constancy in the absence of distance cues. Therefore, it was pre- dicted that there would be no significant differences between the groups under experimental conditions where dis- tance cues were absent. In summary, the hypotheses were: 1. Under experimental conditions involving minimal distance cues, schiZOphrenics in poor contact with reality will manifest less size constancy than either normals or schiZOphrenics in good contact with reality. 2. 3. u. 5. 2h SchiZOphrenics in good contact with reality will diaplay greater size constancy than normals under eXperimental conditions involving minimal distance cues. Under eXperimental conditions involving maximal distance cues, schiZOphrenics in good contact will demonstrate higher constancy than the schiz0phrenics in poor contact, but will not differ significantly from the normals. There will be no significant differences between paranoid and non-paranoid patients for any of the cue conditions. There will be no significant differences between groups under experimental conditions where no distance cues are present. SUBJECTS There were three groups of subjects: eighteen schizo- phrenic patients considered in good contact with reality (for the most part, these patients were in full or partial remission), eighteen schiZOphrenic patients considered in poor contact with reality, and eighteen normal controls. The two schiz0phrenic pOpulations were patients at the Fort Custer Veterans Administration HOSpital. The controls were patients carrying a physical diagnosis at the Veterans Administration General HOSpital at Saginaw. All were male war veterans forty-two years of age or below. The three groups were equated for age. TABLE 1 COMPARISON OF EXPERIMENTAL GROUPS ON AGE Group Mean Standard deviation Range 1. Good contact 31.39 5.h1 22 - 41 2. Poor contact 33.00 I 4.98 24 - 39 3. Normal 31.61 3.81 25 - h2 Fisher t tests of the differences between the means of the groups do not indicate that they differ significantly. All subjects had been tested for visual acuity and had at least 20/25 vision, corrected or uncorrected. Those patients 26 whose vision had been corrected were required to wear their glasses throughout the test procedures. Each of the schiz0phrenic groups consisted of nine patients diagnosed schiZOphrenia, paranoid type and nine patients diagnosed schiZOphrenia, but a type other than paranoid; i.e., each group contained nine paranoid schizo- phrenics and nine non-paranoid schiZOphrenics. hith reSpect to the subclassifications within the non-paranoid subgroups, in the good contact group, there were five patients diagnosed as unclassified, two as simple, one as catatonic and one as hebephrenic. In the poor contact group, there were four patients diagnosed as mixed, one as unclassified, two as catatonic, and two as hebephrenic. For the different groups, there were also the following criteria: A. Good contact schiz0phrenics l. Unanimous agreement among three judges that the patient was in good contact with reality. For the most part, these patients were in full or partial remission. The three judges were the experimenter, the attendant in charge of the patient's ward, and the patient's physician. 2. Open ward assignment. 3. Diagnosis of schiZOphrenia and the particular sub- classification by the hOSpital psychiatric staff. 4. Diagnosis consistent with case history material and available psychological test material. B. C. 27 5. No additional diagnoses of mental deficiency, neuro- logical involvement, nor any such implications in case histories or available psychological test material. 6. No shock treatments within the preceding three months. Poor contact schiZOphrenics l. Unanimous agreement among three judges that the patient was in poor contact with reality. The three judges were the eXperimenter, the attendant in charge of the patient's ward, and the patient's physician. 2. Closed ward assignment. 3 - 6. Same as for the good contact group. Normal 1. No history of emotional difficulties which necessi- tated either hOSpitalization or psychiatric consultation. For these data, the subject's word was supplemented by case history material in his clinical folder. 2. No indications of mental deficiency, neurological involvement, nor any such implications in the patient's clinical folder. 3. No diagnosis of a psychosomatic disorder nor any illness which might have a psychological basis. APPARATUS The apparatus is shown in Appendices A, B, and C. It consisted primarily of two tunnels of fixed but different lengths, one 13 feet and the other 4 feet. See Appendix A for a rear view. The height and width of each tunnel was 1% feet. The tunnels were mounted on stands which were Al inches in height. ‘Within each tunnel, at the end farthest from the subject, there was a 1% foot square of flashed Opal plate glass. For the longer tunnel, the flashed Opal glass was 12 feet from the front of the tunnel. For the Shorter tunnel, it was 3 feet from the front. As a target light source, there was a 60-watt bulb 7 inches behind each glass plate. Within each tunnel, 9% inches from the front, there was a 60-watt bulb on each side. These lights were shielded from the view of the subject by means of black reflectors which were semi-cylindrical in shape and extended from the tOp to the bottom of the tunnel. They did not appreciably restrict the subject's view of the tunnels. The targets were uniformly lighted, clearly defined disks of light at the end of each tunnel. This was achieved by inserting rectangles of sheet metal (called target- plates) with varying sized, circular holes cut in them. These target-plates were painted flat black to conform with the interior of the tunnels. The target-plates were 29 inserted in the tOp Of the tunnels directly in front of the flashed Opal glass; thus, the target in the long tunnel was 12 feet from the front of the tunnel and that in the short, 3 feet from the front. Each target-plate insert slot contained a light-trap constructed of strips of felt and foam rubber. The light-traps permitted the insertion or removal of the target-plates without allowing any light to enter the tunnels from the insert slots themselves.' All of the target-plates were 18 gauge sheet metal, 18 inches by 24 inches. The hole cut in each of the target—plates was located such that, when the target-plate was inserted, the disk of light it defined was centered on the flashed Opal glass. There was only one standard targetuplate. The hole in it was 2 inches in diameter; thus, the standard target was 2 inches in diameter. There were 24 comparison target-plates. The holes in these ranged from 1/8 Of an inch to 3 inches in diameter, in 1/8 of an inch step intervals. The comparison target-plates were numbered consecutively from 1 to 24 in order from smallest to largest. Thus, the number of each comparison target-plate represented, in eighths Of an inch, the diameter of the target it defined. For example, target-plate 16 would define a target 16/8 of an inch or 2 inches in diameter, and target-plate 5 would define a target 5/8 of an inch in diameter. The standard target was always in the long tunnel and the comparison in the short tunnel. See 30 Appendix B for a view of the comparison target-plates in their racks. In order to prevent the tunnels being lighted from the light source behind the flashed Opal glass or reflections from it when the target-plates were being changed, all the light sources were shut Off by means of a master switch before the removal of any target-plate and turned on again after the insertion Of a target-plate. There was a variable transformer wired into the circuit of the lights within each tunnel. Both variable trans- formers were V-lO Variacs with the following specifications: input - 115 volts; output - 0-130 volts; 10 amperes; 50-60 cycle current. The target light sources were wired in parallel with one another, but in a series circuit with a 750 ohm, 1.1 ampere tubular rheostat. The Variacs were utilized to control the illumination within the tunnels and thus, the distance cues. The rheostat was employed to control the level Of illumination of the light sources behind the flashed Opal glass, and thus, the illumination of the targets. The Variacs, the rheostat, and the master switch were mounted on a control-panel table, a close-up of which may be seen in Appendix B. I Nine inches from the front Of each tunnel there was a felt-lined slot which permitted the insertion of a reduction screen. Thus, a reduction screen could be intro- duced into either tunnel. There was only one reduction screen used and that was employed in the long tunnel. This reduction screen had an aperture 3/16 of an inch in diameter. With the reduction screen in place, only the target was visible to the subject; i.e., he could not see the tunnel itself. At the front of each tunnel there was a stereoscOpe viewer which could be adjusted for binocular or monocular vision. These viewers were padded with foam rubber in order to make the tunnels light-tight. To prevent the subject from seeing the apparatus, black drape material supplemented by two hOSpital sheets was hung directly in front of the apparatus. See Appendix C for the subject's view of the apparatus. Since the subjects came from two different hOSpitals, the apparatus was employed in two different rooms, one at each hOSpital. The two rooms were generally comparable in terms of their dimensions. Both rooms were dimly illum- inated throughout the experiment. PROCEDURE Each subject was tested individually under three different cue conditions. The three cue conditions were: A. Maximal cue -- The targets were presented with both tunnels fully lighted while the subject viewed them binocularly. The brightness of each of the tunnel lights, i.e., those at the front of the tunnel rather than the target lights behind the flashed Opal glass, was 1200 foot- lamberts as measured by a type Dw-68 General Electric light meter. This reading was made with the meter one foot from the light source. B. Minimal cue -- The targets were presented with both tunnels dimly illuminated while the subject viewed them monocularly. The light intensity of each of the tunnel lights under this cue condition was three foot-candles with the light meter five and one-half inches from the light source. C. No-cue -- The targets were presented with the tunnel lights off while the subject viewed the targets monocularly. Throughout this condition the reduction screen was in place in the longer tunnel. The only light in the tunnels was that from the targets. In order to minimize the amount of stray light, the light intensity of the target light sources was maintained 33 at a very low level throughout the eXperiment. Their light intensity was one foot-candle with the light meter one inch from the light source. Each subject was tested on three successive days with one cue condition each day. The order of presentation of the three cue conditions was systematically randomized. Thus, all groups received all possible orders of cue con- ditions. Since there were six different orders of presenta- tion of cue conditions, each order was given to three different subjects in each group. The subject was brought into the testing room by an assistant who remained at the front of the apparatus with him throughout the testing. The eXperimenter and another assistant were stationed at the rear of the apparatus where they could change the comparison target-plates, insert or remove the reduction screen, or change the level of illumination of the tunnels. The subject's adjustable stool was set such that when seated his eyes were level with the viewers. For all subjects the standard was in the long tunnel and the comparison in the short. The directions given the suoject stressed a naive, phenomenal, or "look" attitude. The instructions were: "We want to find out how well you can see. Here are two viewers which you can look into. When you look into either of these, you will see a circle of light. Look into this one (standard)& 31+ Do you see the circle of light? Now, look in this one (comparison) and tell me whether this circle of light looks larger, smaller, or the same size as the circle of light in that one (standard)t Now, try not to think about it, but just give me your first impressioni" If there were any questions concerning such things as distance, the actual sizes of the targets, etc., the subject was asked not to think of these, but to tell only how they looked to him. The subject was allowed to look at the standard and comparison as many times as he desired. However, any subject who took an unusually long time in making a judgment was again instructed to give his immediate impression. In every instance the subject was required to keep his face tightly against the viewer when looking at the targets. This procedure was followed in order to insure (a) that no stray light entered the tunnels via the viewers and (b) that the subject got no additional cues from head movements. When a subject indicated that the two targets were the same size, the number of the comparison target-plate was recorded as his choice and this was considered as a trial. Thus, for each trial, the diameter of the comparison target the subject chose as a match for the standard was recorded in eighths of an inch. Every subject was given five trials for each cue condition. The first trial for each cue condition was considered a practice trial and was 35 not included in the eXperimental data. The presentation of the targets was in order of their sizes; i.e. from smallest to largest or largest to smallest. For the first trial, the targets were presented in ascending order of size. For subsequent trials, the order of presentation was alternately descending or ascending. In order to increase the probability that the subject was responding to the targets themselves rather than the ordinal position of the targets, the initial targets for the trials differed within and between cue conditions. Table 2 shows the initial target for each trial for the three cue conditions. TABLE 2 INITIAL TARGET FOR EACH TRIAL OF THE THREE CUE CONDITIONS Trial Cue condition Maximal Minimal No 1 2 l 2 2 2h 22 18 3 6 LL 1 u 22 17' 14 5 LL 2 3 RESULTS It was pointed out above that each subject's match was recorded in terms of the number of the particular comparison target-plate he selected as being equal in size to the standard. The number of each comparison target- plate represented, in eighths of an inch, the diameter of the target it defined. The results reported here are in terms of these numbers. It should be noted that with the eXperimental conditions for this investigation, a choice of target A would be equivalent to a retinal match and hence, to zero size constancy; whereas, a choice of target lb would be equivalent to an objective match and hence, to complete constancy. The data were first subjected to an analysis of variance. The technique used was a modification of one described by Edwards (21, p. 295) for analysis of data involving re- peated measurements on the same subjects. This particular technique was chosen because it provides apprOpriate error terms for testing those variables based upon independent observations and those based upon repeated measurements on the same subjects. Bartlett's chi-square test for homo- geneity of variance was significant at the .001 level of confidence. Thus, the assumption of homogeneity of variance 37 could not be met. Lindquist (42) in discussing an empirical study by Norton of the effect of heterogeneity of variance on the F-test points out that heterogeneity has only a very slight effect upon the form of the F-distribution. On this basis, it was deemed permissable to continue with the analysis of variance. (See Table 3 for the results obtained.) Between Groups. The table indicates that the good contact, poor contact, and normal groups do not differ significantly in their mean target choices for the three cue conditions combined. The F was less than 1. Between Orders. Among the orders, there were differ- ences beyond the .001 level of confidence, the derived F being 14.17. This finding indicates that the order of presentation of cue conditions had a significant effect upon the degree of constancy for all subjects combined. See Table 4 for the means and standard deviations of the six different orders and Table 5 for the t-ratios for the differences between the means of the orders. From Tables h and 5 it may be seen that the means of the two orders which started with the maximal cue condition were signifi- cantly higher than the means of those orders which were initiated with either the minimal or no-cue conditions. The means of the two orders with the maximal cue condition first were not significantly different, nor were the means of the four orders with the minimal or no-cue conditions first significantly different from one another. y. I . g a g r l , e—nm: <‘ J , ; o ' o :rr’V'" 1' n p ' .. » III, ,I 1 1. u _ ‘ . -~ ‘ ‘- ‘ -r-' ,7 V - , ', u. Amrfi'xrz. 9m. ,- y-m "s : .' \ In“. ." " .' ; ‘ 'IO "1:;3' "If; ;1.J .. : . m1 i Hf: x: ' o" . ' ; : woe!- LP 3113' It’ll“: U! '. ' ‘ .1"r1-'..,?\'!‘.|3 v 'I' 1 ‘2 . -.mm.l‘m= 01? are - $11.: Lt ' r rm “1, ‘ . ‘,'.‘7:- H- ‘. “ {'I . . .' p . - H1“; A- 'fiM to L-.M¢JUF.‘V“‘. Jar-3.1. tr nut. any . I v f‘ ‘ _ I. : v _ n I. 3..“ ~" '91m2g “Ci i;().«‘$x?-‘Z~;1 an. ".03. c z-luk‘ ”my? (“0'1" «Mixture an." (x curs-m .._ mi}. | mi“ was and “u stream was 31m: fins»): 01an no {501311an ”[11? jgmrya. g5“ dolly 8191mm sand: *0 mm'w "r¥~'[’rz ' in V 1313221590 when '10 InmPnIr «w a flmm.wct~£1»mtxfim .9111! can new, ,q ' .2959!!!» OHIO-vac 7.0 Lulu} ru s r11 F.4’t r"? ”fireflies: one may; {J‘s-n}. 38 TABLE 3 ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE OF COMPARISON TARGETS SELECTED Mean Source of variance d.f. square F p Total variance 647 Between observations within individuals h86 A. Between individuals 53 1. Between groups* 2 28.20 < l N.S. 2. Between orders 5 609.52 14.17 (.001 3. Groups x Orders 10 36.u1 1.1h N.S. h. Residual 36 31.79 B. Between cue conditions within individuals 108 1. Between cue conditions 2 2959.37 285.38 (.001 2. Groups x Cue conditions M 19.71 1.90 N.S. 3. Orders x Cue conditions 10 dl.72 h.02 (.01 u. Groups x Orders x Cue conditions 20 31.15 3.00 (.01 5. Residual 72 10.37 W"Groups", where used in this table, refers to the good contact, poor contact, and normal groups. 39 TABLE 4 MEANS AND STANDARD DEVIATIONS OF COMPARISON TARGETS FOR ORDERS OF PRESENTATION Order* ABC ACB BAC BCA CAB CBA Mean 13.16 12.26 8.27 7.57 8.82 8.16 Standard deviation 2.30 2.81 2.72 2.11 2.11 3.15 *A, B, and C represent the maximal, minimal, and no-cue conditions, reSpectively. The order of the letters represents the order of the presentation of the cue conditions. TABLE 5 t-RATIOS FOR DIFFERENCES BETWEEN MEANS FOR ORDERS OF PRESENTATION Order+ ABC ACB BAC BCA CAB CBA ABC - - - - - - ACB .91 - - - - - BAC 4.99* 3.73* - - - - BCA 6.50* n.8u* .71 - - - CAB n.17* 3.ou** .19 1.23 - - CBA 1.67* 3.56* .09 .57 .55 - yf p c.001 ”“ p <.01 +A, B, and C represent the maximal, minimal, and no-cue conditions, reSpectively. The order of the letters represents the order of the presentation of the cue conditions. 40 TABLE 6 MEANS OF COMPARISON TARGETS OF THREE GROUPS ON THREE CUE CO N DI TI ONS Cue condition Group Maximal Minimal No Good contact 14.10 9.47 6.42 Poor contact 13.76 8.12 6.00 Normal 13.24 9.50 6.75 Groups x Orders. This interaction term was not signifi- cant, the obtained F being 1.14 (See Table 3). Between Cue Conditions. The F for the differences between the cue conditions was significant beyond the .001 level of confidence (See Table 3). The means for the three cue conditions were: 13.7 for the maximal cue condition, 9.03 for the minimal cue condition, and 6.39 for the no-cue condition. Thus, these results would indicate, just as has been found in previous investigations (35, 36, 41) that as distance cues are reduced, size constancy is reduced. Groups x Cue Conditions. The F for this interaction was not significant (See Table 3). In light of the lack of significance of the F for the differences between the groups for the three cue conditions combined, this is the most important F-test of this analysis of variance with regard to the hypotheses. The lack of significance of this inter- action coupled with the insignificant F-test for the differ- ences between the groups indicates that there were no significant differences among means of the groups for any of the three cue conditions.(See Table 6 for the means of the groups for the three cue conditions). Order§_x Cue Conditiogg. The F for this interaction was significant beyond the .01 level of confidence (See Table 3). The significance of this interaction indicates that the differences between the means of the cue conditions varies with the orders of presentation of cue conditions and that the differences between the means of the orders varies with the cue conditions. (See Table 7 for the means of the cue conditions for the orders of presentation of cue conditions). TABLE 7 MEANS OE CUE C NDITIONS FOR THE ORDERS OF PRESENTATION Cue M Order* condition" ABC ACB BAC BCA CAB CBA A 16.14 16.28 12.58 11.31 12.33 13.56 13.50 12.00 6.28 6.72 9.44 6.36 C 9.83 8.50 5.94 4.81 4.69 4.56 *A, B, and C represent the maximal, minimal, and no-cue conditions, respectively. The order of the letters represents the order of the presentation of the cue conditions. Groups x Cue Conditions x Orders. This interaction was ‘significant beyond the .01 level of confidence (See Table 3). Its significance indicates that the groups x cue conditions interaction varies in terms of the orders, the groups x j n 1' 1“ -1 -‘ .: 7 - 1 r can ' “1‘3"? 01 1 #10 _ £sz Ar ~ '01 '1 A “9“ 'W' --—--p~~—--—-—_-—-« ~m--—- ~ —-'~ _ -—v- .m.- w *1. c-..“ .2.“ *.a%ill- \é.‘ J]: Ito-[4 ' o l' C’s-6.1 J 10"]; 4 .5, ~27- ‘ .v e. OC'.‘€I FF.” 3 - 3; 1506‘ p M . l .0 o , t I ' .5 :ageafi 081“" £5,041 11?“: 020? :26," T , gs .Lsntnh» 51:18::ij ed: dneenmm D has .8 .A “(mama aseztiei 9113' ‘0 same 96? .visvtdsucces ,enotd' 3w1umcc two ads .0 reiiadnrae'm ed: to sob": {its nffiaageam e1m.mubse x wointoos 9x10 x :1ng l'\‘ 1% {5 am ”“7 ambiance “to revel 10. an: bnntec smart: Winds!) we raw”; Mk! am. enusumz ”maximal: i cm; W gist-w" em? ‘10 aw , _n1‘ eeluv sonar 42 orders interaction varies in terms of the cue conditions, and the cue conditions x orders interaction varies in terms of the groups. (See Table 8 for the means of the three groups for the three cue conditions and six orders). The significance of the order effect upon the degree of constancy was not anticipated since nowhere in the literature on constancy was there found any mention of such an effect. Order not only affected the degree of constancy, but, also, increased the variance within groups. Further- more, the significance of the triple interaction, groups x cue conditions x orders, indicates that these variables were interacting in a very complex fashion. It was felt that this complex interaction plus the increased variance due to the order-effect might be masking any differences that did exist between the groups. On this basis a second analysis of variance was made, with the order effect taken out. For this analysis, only the data from the first cue condition that each subject received were utilized. That is, this analysis of variance was of the data for those six subjects in each of the three groups who were tested under the maximal, minimal, or no-cue condition first. Hence, the order of presentation of cue conditions could have no effect upon these data. The technique employed was a modification of that described in Edwards (21, p. 208) for analysis of data involving factorial I . t .1 . "‘ e r'-( .ilut. 51.1.7 ' . I: , 3:3; 0.": ' . ’Lfl 'H sz'm Mr; P - . .r . c #1... Ir ‘L '1! .)1: ‘ \' “' h .‘9'. '1 I, 'o‘ .I‘: l "C ‘18.: I‘ ,Egi—‘rx = 0% same law '1": 2'91 'm‘.‘ Ant-nan. yL’m ,.i£,'._|_sr.1; {his 10' .axm- wax: “ :: . r‘ .‘ docgrtua name 3.0L; {7013]. new =11: :‘ ‘- , ._ . . 17, eanxsssv to rlaglnuw ales ,ef JrnT .;.. ~19qqud pas To ease n1 adoetznc 318 event ‘eugdng b ,iamicim ,lnmlxan cud astuo I : ego TG'HOISBdnerado To marsh 5d: ,exne eat .ndnb sand: nonu 309710 on av 51 hedtaoact sand 19 unlaanjfiibor s tau .2"? 1' £n1$d¢95173d1v£bvnr such 10 aIsYIrsn‘ 43 TABLE 8 MEANS OF THE GROUPS FOR THE CUE CONDITIONS AND ORDERS Cue * 3 Good Poor condition Order’ contact contact Normal ABC 17.33 14.16 16.92 ACB 16.58 16.58 15.67 A BAC 11.50 13.75 12.50 BCA 10.25 12.75 10.92 CAB 15.33 8.75 12.92 CBA 13.58 16.58 10.50 ABC 14.33 12.33 13.83 ACB 11.83 13.75 10.42 B BAC 6.92 4.92 7.00 BCA 7.50 6.17 6.50 CAB 9.83 5.92 12.58 CBA 6.42 5.66 7.00 ABC 9.83 10.00 9.67 ACB 8.58 7.58 9.33 C BAC 6.00 4.58 7.25 BCA 5.00 4.67 4.75 CAB 4.42 4.92 4.75 CBA 4.67 4.25 4.75 % - - A, B, and C represent the max1mal, minimal, and no-cue conditions, respectively. The order of the letters represents the order of cue presentation. h designs. Bartlett's chi-square test for homogeneity of variance was significant at the .01 level of confidence. Thus, the assumption of homogeneity of variance could not be met. However, again it was deemed permissible to con- tinue the analysis on the basis of the previously mentioned discussion by Lindquist (42). (See Table 9 for this analysis of variance with the order-effect taken out). Between Groups. This F was significant beyond the .05 level of confidence. This indicates there are significant differences between the means of the three groups for the three cue conditions combined. Between Cue Conditions. As was found in the previous analysis of variance (Table 3), the F-ratio for the differ- ences between the cue conditions was significant beyond the .001 level of confidence. The means for the three cue conditions with and without the order-effect may be seen in Table 10. Groups x Cue Conditions. This interaction was not significant, the derived F being less than 1 (See Table 9). The lack of significance of this F indicates that the differences between the groups did not vary significantly among the three cue conditions. This finding when considered with the fact that there were significant differences among the groups for the three cue conditions combined suggests that there were significant differences between the groups on the three cue conditions taken separately. See Table 11 45 TABLE 9 ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE OF COMPARISON TARGETS FOR THREE GROUPS UNDER THREE CUE CONDITIONS (ORDER-EFFECT REMOVED) Source of variance d.f. Mean ' F p square Total 215 Between observations within individuals 162 Between individuals 53 Between groups* 2 21.85 3.61 (.05 Between cue conditions 2 2783.29 460.05 '<.001 Groups x Cue conditions 4 5.70 <1 N.S. Residual 45 6.05 “"Groups", where used in this table, refers to the good contact, poor contact, and normal groups. TABLE 10 MEANS OF THREE CUE CONDITIONS Cue conditions Maximal Minimal No Order-effect in 13.70 9.03 6.39 Order-effect out 16.21 6.50 4.62 for the means and standard deviations of the three groups for the three cue conditions and Table 12 for the t-ratios of the differences between the means of the three groups for the three cue conditions. It may be seen by inSpecting Tables 11 and 12 that there were no significant differences between the means of the groups for either the maximal cue or no-cue conditions. In regard to the minimal cue con- dition, the mean of the poor contact group was significantly lower than either the good contact or normal groups. The one-tailed t was used in the testing of these differences since the direction of the differences had been predicted in hypothesis 1. Tables 13 and 14 contain the analyses of variance for the differences between the paranoid and non-paranoid sub- groups with and without the order effect, reSpectively. For both analyses, Bartlett's chi-square test for homogeneity of variance was significant at the .01 level of confidence. Thus, the assumption of homogeneity of variance could not be met for either of the analyses. However, again it was deemed permissible to continue the analyses on the basis of the previously mentioned discussion of heterogeneity of variance by Lindquist (42). The technique used for the analysis of variance presented in Table 13 was a modification of one described by Edwards (21, p. 295) for analysis or data involving repeated measurements on the same subjects. The analysis of variance technique employed for the results . I — O ,3“? '- firtr‘ '1. ~ . ~»r en”? .Cr'J-v‘: r . -. ' : Bean-.97! i711. . . {.7 ' I ; {‘H; r' betas-i; “it: fins. but; '- : » r- I: : v::: ’IOII OOH?! Inf'v (If; ngligflg qua {131; r f" -due Licnnqso-nnn tun r ,fqu p“: ,p: Ydlemegonod sol deed assure-inc e'adploun .eonexiinpc 30 level 10. on: :n .ms:1”‘ sen blues censtazv To (aienegomn; an can fit drags .qevcwofl .earvjnce 3.3 alssd 955 an aeetiunp 5d; eunfsnos L 1501033501039.“ '10 nrltwor ti. Lory-1M, mil with“: momma: 911'? .(aw saw nolsaokiibam a saw 51 eiseT n! Lfi:fi-°9qr iqlelatlfinn OQEA(EOS .n .[S) arwnw;» q””}” me M3 at: zdneme'zu a '1 , 4:! L a: «tramway: bewlqr- N" .. ~Orm 47 TABLE 11 MEANS AND STANDARD DEVIATIONS FOR THREE GROUPS TESTED UNDER THREE CUE CONDITIONS (ORDER-EFFECT REMOVED) Cue condition Group _ Maximal Minimal No Mean S.D. Mean S.D. Mean S.D. Good contact 16.96 2.14 7.21 .71 4.54 .60 Poor contact 15.38 1.74 5.54 .98 4.58 .82 Normal 16.29 1.70 6.75 .65 4.75 .45 TABLE 12 t-RATIOS FOR DIFFERENCES BETWEEN MEANS FOR THREE GROUPS TESTED UNDER THREE CUE CONDITIONS (ORDER-EFFECT REMOVED) Cue condition Maximal Minimal No Good contact vs. Poor contact 1.41 3.41% .04 Good contact vs. Normal .60 1.18 1.00 Poor contact vs. Normal .92 2.52** .18 *: p <.01 on the basis of a one-tailed t-test p (.02 on the basis of a one-tailed t-test 48 TABLE 13 ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE FOR THE PARANOID AND NON-PARANOID SUB-GROUPS Source of variance d.f. Mean F p square Total variance 431 Between observations within individuals 324 A. Between individuals 35 1. Between sub-groups* 1 7.00 (1. N.S. 2. Between orders 5 421.48 13.12 (.001 3. Sub-groups x Orders 5 38.18 1.18 N.S. 4. Residual 24 32.12 B. Between cue conditions within individuals 72 1. Between cue conditions 2 2224.30 127.47 (.001 2. Sub-groups x Cue conditions 2 3.10 <]. N.S. 3. Orders x Cue conditions 10 42.28 2.42 ‘<.05 4. Sub-groups x Orders x Cue conditions 10 9.02 <]. N.S. 5. Residual 48 17.45 *"Sub-groups", where used in this table, refers to the paranoid and non-paranoid schiZOphrenic groups. 49 presented in Table 14 was a modification of one described by Edwards (21, p. 208) for analysis of data involving factorial designs. It may be seen that the F-ratios for the difference between the sub-groups on both Tables 13 and 14 were insignificant, both being less than 1. Furthermore, neither of the sub-groups x cue conditions interactions were significant. These findings indicate that the paranoid schiZOphrenics do not differ significantly from the non- paranoid schiZOphrenics in the amount of constancy they manifested with or without the order effect. With regard to the F-tests on the other variables, they were essentially the same as those on the previous analyses of variance with the exception of the triple interaction. For the paranoid and non-paranoid sub-groups the triple interaction with cues and order was not significant; whereas, this triple interaction for the good contact, poor contact, and normal groups was significant. Reliabilities for the selection of comparison targets by the three groups of subjects were computed by corre- lating eXperimental trials 1 and 2 with eXperimental trials 3 and 4. (Table 15 presents these correlations). The correlation presented indicate the consistency of the sub- jects in their judgments for the first descending trial as compared to the second descending trial and the first ascending trial as compared the second ascending trial. ‘ O . .. \iigflfln'eco 'H; ua , . {inmju vu, " e' Stu? 1"“ .IW‘EC:'V‘J'II. voidssqeanl ZI'!"J Lei éufl affirms flirt ,aneqruv gin»; Irmuoc :cs ,dearnns 19:: ‘p éfiflfiifls noatqszns ‘3 no -; «enact 2c .eatqmnu sq zfsiqa Isaaemrqaczt calm GHT .{BCLIULLeqfios yduafbflt 1c gonadalznoe an £5113 wniLnooeer seq! 39111 and has 13:13 .ialqd partnecas caper 50 TABLE 14 ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE FOR THE PARANOID AND NON-PARANOID SUB-GROUPS (ORDER-EFFECT REMOVED) Source of variance d.f. Mean F p square Total 215 Between observations within individuals 162 Between individuals 35 Between sub-groups)" 1 1.47 < 1 N.S. Between cue conditions 2 1875.31 212.38 <.001 Sub-groups x Cue conditions 2 .24. 1<1 N.S. Residual 30 8.83 *"Sub-groups", where used in this table, refers to the paranoid and non-paranoid schiZOphrenic groups. TABLE 15 RELIABILITY* OF COMPARISON TARGETS SELECTED Group Correlations Good contact .99 Poor contact .98 Normal .99 "Pearson r's between comparison targets selected on eXperimental tTials 1 and 2 and those selected on eXperimental trials 3 and 4. DISCUSSION This study was undertaken primarily to investigate perceptual contact with reality in schiZOphrenia. The major hypothesis of the study was that under eXperimental con- ditions involving minimal distance cues, schiZOphrenics in poor contact with reality would manifest less Size constancy than either normals or schiZOphrenics in good contact. This prediction should be substantiated if schiZOphrenics in poor contact are_perceptually in poor contact with reality. The results of this investigation supported this hypothesis. Because the order of presentation of cue conditions increased the variance within the groups and was interacting in a complex fashion with the groups and cue condition variables, it was felt the order effect might be masking any differences that existed among the groups. When the significant order effect was taken out by analyzing only the data for those subjects in each group tested under the minimal cue con- dition first, the results indicated, as predicted, that the schiZOphrenics in poor contact with reality manifested significantly less size constancy than either the normals or the schiZOphrenics in good contact with reality (See Tables 11 and 12). These results strongly suggest that the schiZOphrenic's break with reality involves not only more complex psychological functions but basic perceptual t gran: -. .~ . u. _‘ 3} i” .31 Jiz'uu-‘I ‘ «z - ; u’ ‘ ”00¢" "‘ I"=IF"’1V" 7;- ' ’ 1 . “1"" 1 1.1 ill. 1".“41 -.. .. . a _. - . . . tut‘ 1 _j.‘ -’ A ’S..L \ L ' '. .3te+:i:’rvr~Y-“l aids -. .21 ' ‘3‘ 1‘ _7.',‘ :. ' " ‘~9I . . - beams!“ anoizi .12: r: r. 1. ‘1. 1.x 2 L, F O .7 .. ,~ r..-. , ..v . w ' g. ,9 (.1: ,-.»nf.‘nsunm. H h. .I.»'T A. “. .I". -. , v.1I'1" r ‘I . ..‘ _ . - ‘ ‘ . {I‘GB‘JOI‘LE“EGV £04.; I: D140 311:, ’5'“ n _ _, (1'. agm'x‘i if!) vjna Julian!” :r' any». .9597». 7' is“. 1.9.9th firms Thirst: (‘1-{2 as.” ”(M f wwISd ‘1‘“ 533’! Adv ” 4}" FIE? LIV-I‘M“, ' 9?“;3'r‘rnqa «'0 “MIT“! Nit! 18in! (eager! ‘. > {if "Refr‘ \. . " A u“, '46., x . 3' h ll '4. . 45m mflsfiaede as ”@5325! 111 2‘1." 7 . . (:7 .. ... ’¢~* ..‘ ~NAI‘.' 'i " N “‘3'. ‘ $1 Q-euéég A» J “‘9 Whig: ggma :YdM-BIW ”3b: *aaurmo «no» F§Wfi+$fi ”#310 mm: ‘(Oflflfinfir-g 9', "” ~$H 'fl’m‘f 53%” 38.134110; not); :11 f '~‘ ‘18:: ”may“: 33.0426." 8291-, -.r.’ P ' .8 :42 a... 8.- .Wfim am «obvious: 231.1%» 11.51 ”"73" ”WWW 02m: and rzr-r ‘21::- ”1': I'- .’ k' -. o 52 processes as well. Should this finding be supported by further research, it would have very important implications for the understanding and possibly the treatment of schizo— phrenia. The second hypothesis that schiZOphrenics in good contact with reality would display greater size constancy than normals under experimental conditions involving mini- mal distance cues was not supported by the data. Neither the analysis of the data with the order effect (see Tables 3 and 6) nor that without the order effect (see Tables 11 and 12) indicated that the schizoohrenics in good contact with reality differed significantly from the normals. Thus, the prediction that the good contact group would display significantly more constancy than the normals was not supported. The third hypothesis that under the maximal cue con- dition, the schiz0phrenics in good contact would demon- strate greater constancy than the schiZOphrenics in poor contact with reality but would not differ significantly from the normals was only partially supported by the results. Neither the analysis with the order effect (see Tables 3 and 6) nor that without the order effect (see Tables 11 and 12) indicated that there were any significant differences among the groups for the maximal cue condition. Thus, the results supported the prediction of no significant ‘ ‘l . ,3“th fl.."‘ L; _ '1 r 1' r ’r aédu‘lutz ..n:~i u: ‘- :*. vrn" :2 3511295" tun) 70%”...r. '9 fif aeL.uT n92) re-'.. fir , .r c 6" 3L1£finoa 120": 1:1 :-.:;."-<- .3: rider: .-1"'.'.' ,35qflT 5RIflmflCP was Luv“ 9:. ' ”MI; I}; . $31681.» DIM'M 0110'. .-.‘):‘J:,“:/ .x .3, ‘ .Jté'iv.‘ 30!? and Elam-1th 54.: me: .cr: r. t: ~ : . . . k 3" ‘ JET-311389.}; age we famim em ‘13 4n: mpg. .21 . Limp“: ‘ womb blur»; 3023110 Loop 11}. as} .\ U . “$.me (1.1:! 10. mum "'56,- -r_: 4qu3‘5139£§£&0 ed: 3. 3 'I- . 1 .--i‘..'.-. ~- 53 difference between the good contact schizOphrenics and the normals, but failed to support the prediction that the good contact schiZOphrenics would demonstrate significantly greater constancy than the poor contact schiz0phrenics. This finding is essentially in accord with Raush's (51) finding of no significant differences between his schizo- phrenic groups and normals when tested with the eXperimental room fully lighted. However, they are contradictory to Sanders and Pacht's (49) finding of a significant difference between good contact schiz0phrenics and normals. The hypothesis that there would be no significant differences between the paranoid and non-paranoid schizo- phrenics for any of the cue conditions was supported by the results. The data do not indicate that there were signifi- cant differences between the paranoid and non-paranoid Sub- groups for any of the cue conditions (see Tables 13 and 14). This would suggest that Raush's (51) finding of a signifi- cant difference between paranoid and non-paranoid schizo- phrenics may have been more a function of contact with reality rather than the diagnostic groups. The final hypothesis that there would be no significant differences among the groups for the no-cue condition is supported by the results. The data did not indicate that there were any significant differences among the good con- tact schiZOphrenics, the poor contact schiZOphrenics, and the normals for the no-cue condition. ~0£1lufif .7. min ‘( -r m. (Ml-1" ‘fid l‘nf'd";"‘i.-"L¢S rs} r. ~I'ti'tr'312 s-ua‘: 3;.‘1: .," —Ci~I.m slum-15 n-ncn 41‘ .(pf nflP Li cafurw '62) r -Ifzinniz: p to gnmm': ~03tdce FIOHPEfiC-fl“u dalfl doacnna To an}: .Eqan Suppliinale on ad hirow v at new lance sue-an v 3343 casein“! 30a bib '59:! bug 0113 gnome as: mm ,5gtnomochiaa d: .T S4 A very frequent finding in eXperiments involving schiZOphrenics is the marked intra-subject variability. Often these patients appear to be reSponding in an irrele- vant and haphazard manner. That this was not the case in this investigation is strongly indicated by the reliability coefficients for the groups presented in Table 15. These correlation coefficients indicate that the subjects were highly consistent in their choice of targets for the first ascending and descending trials as compared to the second ascending and descending trials for any particular cue condition. Had these reliabilities been low or negligible, one might have questioned whether or not these measures were representative of the subject's response to the par- ticular experimental variables. As was mentioned previously, the Significant order effect was not anticipated (see Tables 3, 4, 5, and 10). However, it warrants discussion since it would appear to have important implications not only for the area of size constancy, but for the general area of perception as well. The general effect of order was to decrease the amount of constancy for the maximal cue condition and to increase the amount of constancy for the minimal and no-cue conditions (see Table 10). More particularly, the amount of constancy for the maximal cue condition was lower when the subject was tested under this cue condition after first being tested under the minimal or no-cue conditions as compared ‘ C x k t . .. ' l ‘1‘: '.f') -_" "I". l .. ‘.- f. ar-l 1’ l u» t 55 “’ (d «Stu ; Iiuot J- u uqia Lu K;qr and no. {if .iIsw as noidrctNSr *c at in Bantu? td3 caccnoe» r and easeqsni 03 bus roiui' anoiaionoo sue-0n tns 1r [ouadsnoo To demons add .? doehdac Lda beau mswpl guise $8411 and?! u(‘ neqsrcMo an anordltnos e to the amount of constancy where the maximal one condition was first. The amount of constancy for the minimal or no- cue conditions was higher when the initial cue condition was the maximal cue condition as compared to the amount of constancy where the minimal or no-cue conditions were first (see Table 7). It appears that the initial one condition established a set for the subjects to respond on subsequent cue conditions in the direction of the initial cue condition. Gilbert (29) reported a similar phenomenon in an investi- gation of the phi phenomenon. He found that in changing the frequency of alternating lights, for a number of sub- jects, there was a perseveration of the perception of simultaneity or alternation depending on the order of presentation. In the descending series simultaneity perseverated over the range that usually prouuced movement. In the ascending series alternation perseverated over the range that usually produced movement. Order of presentation of cue conditions may have had an effect on Holway and Boring's (36) results. As was pointed out in the intro- duction, they tested their subjects under four different distance cue conditions, progressing from an unequivocal distance cue condition to one in which there were practi- cally no distance cues (subjects tested monocularly with an artificial pupil and a reduction tunnel). All subjects were presented the cue conditions in the same order; i.e.. the testing was initiated with that condition with the most 56 cues and progressed to that condition with the least cues. Since order was invariant, there was no way of determining the effect of order. Holway and Boring found an appreci- able degree of size constancy present for the cue condition where there were practically no distance cues available. They attributed this to the fact that there was a slight haze of light from the target within the reduction tunnel. However, in light of the results of this investigation, their finding of an appreciable amount of constancy under this cue condition might have been due, in part, to an order effect similar to the one found in this investigation. This question could only be answered by further research since Holway and Boring did not vary the order of the presentation of cue conditions. With regard to research in this area, these findings should have considerable importance for any experimenter investigating size constancy under different cue conditions. If the same subjects are to be tested under different cue conditions, these findings would certainly indicate that the order of presentation of cue conditions should be con- trolled in such a manner as to permit the evaluation of the effect of this variable upon the results. Moreover, where the experimenter is primarily interested in reSponses to particular cue conditions without the effect of "extraneous" variables, it would be well to test each subject on only one one condition. 57 Implication for Further Research The results of this investigation suggest the need for a number of experiments. If schiz0phrenics considered in poor contact with reality are perceptually in poor contact with reality, they should show a reduction in con- stancy for such phenomena as shape, color, and brightness constancy. Furthermore, investigations of perceptual contact with reality in terms of other basic perceptual processes might prove fruitful. For example, if schizo- phrenics considered in poor contact with reality are perceptually in poor contact, one Should be able to pre- dict that they would be less reSponsive to painful stimuli. As pointed out earlier, the finding of a significant order effect may have important implications not only for the area of size constancy, 233'sg, but for perception in general. Systematic investigations of the effect of order of presentation of cue conditions upon constancy as well as the duration of the order effect might prove very fPUithl o SUMMARY This study was undertaken primarily to investigate perceptual contact with reality in schiz0phrenia. Three groups of subjects were employed in the study: schiZOphrenics in good contact with reality, schiz0phrenics in poor contact, and normals. They were tested in a size constancy eXperi- ment under three different distance cue conditions: maximal, minimal, and no-cue. The different cue conditions were 'achieved by utilizing two light-tight tunnels of fixed but different lengths. The illumination, and thus, the distance cues within the tunnels, was controlled by means of two variable transformers wired into the tunnel light circuits. Each subject was tested under all three cue conditions. The order of presentation of the three cue conditions was systematically randomized. It was assumed that if schiZOphrenics in poor contact with reality were perceptually in poor contact, they would be less reSponsive to minimal distance cues. Hence, it was hypothesized that under eXperimental conditions involving minimal distance cues, schixphrenics in poor contact would manifest less size constancy than either schiZOphrenics in good contact or normals. The results of the investigation supported this hypothesis. The schiZOphrenics in poor contact manifested significantly less size constancy than " .94» ~"' w iI'Rfl'HI‘j‘EQU.‘ 22:?!" ml“) (.1: '2’» i” c 1%,;TI‘A’C'. "I " . L ‘ . pr-rzr'w‘ 'r'. . . -_ ‘ 1' mi; r. .1 . , _ . 0F:?:“‘." )1- . 1‘ - . ...'.r:r . ,7 I. - -, - e a . : ‘ H ‘ “ (.fZL r(. u / . . ,' .. -' ,r—\ - r .e,-- r‘ F- pu 'q't..(., ;‘ ~ . w j r' F O,fi..f.0.s ..1 C _ -«..\ . . .. .- L‘) " ' , , - “ -,~, . , a .3 .74 . 177;;n .. 3,». .-_.»Jl£gr.w 1.1/Pct. ....:2A.,.ntr A st 11.! .v . 1" , a}: ,5 rm .Px-x-r . r-r- :3 r1.» Cranial faxef' Maw: Qpr‘srzr'o "1an a3 3' i'umm .z;- .' '7 ‘ . I . 4" t r .9’0 f ' up, 'éafiqw;darn-31:102. quirks Mai; Ytd!"3‘.f. .3 A. 1- .. .4" L ‘ ~ ~‘ ”m;L3$§ia't‘d£ eat? "(5 affirmed r7; . °‘,A ‘l ‘ . 'z .3 'V'f'i'ona‘ ab ,angitge‘xmmr nits: evil ..' 1191‘s 'I .0 V . c . 'mséd mammary»: sale as" .r 131‘"- imlf 59 either the schiZOphrenics in good contact or the normals. This finding was interpreted as indicating that the schizo— phrenic's break with reality involves not only more complex psychological functions but basic perceptual processes as well. There were no other significant differences among the groups in the amount of constancy they manifested for any of the cue conditions. There were no significant differences between paranoid and non-paranoid schiZOphrenics in the amount of constancy they manifested for any of the cue conditions. The order of presentation of cue conditions had a significant effect upon the amount of constancy. When the maximal cue condition was first, the amount of constancy for the minimal or no-cue conditions was greater than that when the testing was initiated with these cue conditions. When the minimal or no-cue conditions were first, the amount of constancy for the maximal cue condition was less than that when the maximal cue condition was first. These findings were interpreted as indicating that the initial cue condition established a set for the subjects to reSpond on subsequent cue conditions in the direction of the initial cue condition. The results suggested the need for a number of studies. Investigations of perceptual contact with reality in schizo- phrenia in terms of shape, color, and brightness constancy o ‘ A”- :1 V“ (1‘ ’ \"a. "r!“ . 1 .r , =- -, . . . a . DAA\ Lat» . inn“ ’ . {1"“\, 'r .J1‘l ‘1". " O. 1 v—' .nl' ffiul '- gmmdenon (mum-z e ‘ ‘7; ., I 3:.ch {19:13 "15‘.Ji'!7'x2._ "M- Anti”? :1 in rI'f'-fir‘. ~ ; " .gsoifiiblisn s-uu warn: n?! 3*, magnum '1'. - ads-tautz‘fi “'1“. ar n'..'"1fln'5 2151mm - "' l‘:--:.')f".‘ "J1“; ’-"'}§..'.§ es»- HC :3 frame: mu lfinlififl min: '2‘- ‘ t- o. 3 ~ mu . .. .4. I. “d.- .‘ .s h , . .. ' do". .4939?- '.:Jja'x.t‘k' a ‘rw'tfimrmoe ewe Jam- wn Hip-1} *"—-. 3". .3) | h mfg}, $31M: and ‘51“! gr Natural cn 139392?" I ',. 4 '~ 0 ‘ i"'."f“-’“mm cm- £3”;th emf; «0'; gm 1 hen: ‘ u. ‘ W ed? to. musefiti. we a; tnnzatmcvr .- l‘ ' . - v! ”11¢ka a" m... V «Wm m? but: new 13933533,: 5 ' ‘ ivygg'ghfidtfi 18331109 iguaqsmoc v 60 as well as some of the other basic perceptual processes Inight prove fruitful. Furthermore, it was suggested that systematic study of the order effect might have consider- able importance not only for size constancy, 223 is, but for perception as well. 1. 2. 3. u. S. 9. 10. ll. 12. SELECTED REFERJNCES Akishige, Y. EXperimentelle Untersuchungen user die Struktur des Wahrnehmungsraumes. VII. LXperimentelle Untersuchungen uber den Effekt der Entfernung des Darbietungsortes des Normalreizes auf den Grad der Grossen Konstanz. .iER-.l' Psychol., 1936, II, SlS-S30. Alexander, F. SchiZOphrenic psychoses. Arch. Neurol. O Psychiat., 1931, 26, 815-82 Angyal, A., Freeman, H and Hoskins, R. G. Physiologic aspects of schiZOphrenic withdrawal. In S. S. Tomkins (Ed.), Contemporary Psychopathology. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1943. Ansbacher, H. Perception of number as affected by the monetary value of the objects: a critical study of the method used in the extended constancy phenomenon. Arch. Psychol., 1937, 30, No. 215. Beck, S. J. Personality structure in schiZOphrenia. Nerv. Ment. Dis. Monographs, 1938, No. 63. Beck, S. J. Errors in perception and fantasy in schiZOphrenia. In J. S. Kasanin (Ed.), Language and Thought in Schizthrenia. Berkeley, Los Angeles: Univ. Calif. Press, l9hh. Bell, J. E. Projective Techniques. New York: Longmans, Green and Co., 1945. Bellak, L. Dementia Praecox. New York: Grune and Stratton, l9h7. II I! Beyrl, F. Uber die Grossenauffassung bei Kindern. z. Psychol., 1926, 100, Bun-371. Bleuler, E. Dementia Praecox or the Group of Schizo- phrenias. New York: International Universities Press, . Boring, E. G. The Ph SEEEE.QETQE§£99§ of Conscious- ness. New York: App eton-Century, 1933. Boring, E. G. Sensation and Perception in the History of Experimental ngchology. New York: Appleton- Century, l9h2. I ( I u I I I I I O - r C O < 0 o O O I ”t 9! w r . . (It'fl ".r.’ f- . 2 .A' nicion’i‘u‘ac on"; 2 ' r ' -, t 1‘ “113% 1" iv" '. ~ ; ' b . 'E'U " § t r . I w! New ' vr. . L." 1 , ’ v - . ’ . ‘ . < -512 5£_14gn!‘: :\.. , .1;.‘ , . ‘,{ , :fi‘t‘i {.31 an} :11- ., ~_,. ,, r -_.. "3’ trek"? o 5‘44” ~— cafifimaficl :fisnl ask .y7‘ Inunn” '24; fins mum-:1 :31101 12!. . .335:“I5 ",5“: . . I .t‘memxl}: let saw-9N Ulnar-25.047. an. .iYE~,.usE :“‘=".L’ .-+i'.-‘ x we a 1..., .- .Vsue ,3 .m ‘OHon-maa :. n, w I «28:9;an ' . at: 12291: (4'1 95. ;' -’_ . .t. I": ~f5339-Ir7c3 :i'x ' 7‘, t ‘6‘? '2"? trip. {mica-9n»? WET" ‘2 “..’.,"‘r - 3317“?“ g!" ' g ‘“ 03‘43:.-;-;.~. ..—-"_ . . I t , O u o I I a ‘ Q n o ' t I t 3L3. 1J+o 215. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. 62 Bruner, J. S. In R. Blake Approach 22 Personality dynamics and perceiving. and G. Ramsey (Eds. ), Perception -- an Personality. New York: nonald Press, ”1951. Brunswik, E. Zur Entwicklung der Albedowahrnehmung. g. Psychol., 1929, 109 ,40 115. Brunswi.k, E. ”ahrnehmung und Cerenstandswelt - Grund— legung einer Psychologie vom Gegenstand her. Leipzig: Deuticke, 1934. Brunswik, E. Distal focussing of perception. Size constancy in a representative sample of situations. Psychol. Mono., 1944, 56, No. 254. Burzlaff, w. Methodologische Beitrage zum Problem der Farbenkonstanz. g. Psychol., 1931, 119, 177-235. Cameron, N. Schiz0phrenic thinking in a problem- solving situation. J. ment. Sci., 1939, 85, 1012- 1035. Cameron, N. EXperimental analysis of schiz0phrenic thinking. In J. S. Kasanin (Edl), Language and Thought in Schiz0phrenia. Berkeley, Los Angeles: Univ. Calif. Press, 1944. Cruikshank, R. M. The develOpment of visual size constancy in early infancy. J. Genet. Psychol., 1914-1: 58 9 327'351 0 Edwards, A. L. EXperimental Design in Psychological Research. New York: Rinehart, 1950. Federn, P. Mental hygiene of the psychotic ego. Amer. J. Psychotherapy, 1949, 3, 356-371. Fenichel, O. The Psychoanalytic Theory of Neurosis. New York: Norton, 1945. Untersuchunger fiber Sehgrgssenkonstanz Psychol. Forsch., 1926, 7, 137-145. Frank, Helene. bei Kindern. Neurosis London: Freud, S. V01. II. and psychosis. Collected Papers, Hogarth Press, 1946. Freud, S. The loss of reality in neurosis and psychosis. Collected Papers, Vol. II. London: Hogarth Press, 1946. 27. 31. 32. 33. 34. 35. 36. 37. 38. 39. 63 Friedman, H. Perceptual regression in schiZOphrenia: an hypothesis suggested by the use of the Rorschach Test. J. genet. Psychol., 1952, 81, 63-98. Gibson, J. J. The Perception 9f the Visual World. New York: Houghton Mifflin Company, 1950. Gilbert, G. M. Dynamic psychOphysics and the phi phenomenon. Arch. Psychol., 1939, 33, No. 237. Goldstein, K. The significance of psychological re- search in schiZOphrenia. In S. S. Tomkins (Ed.), Contemporary Psychgpathology. Cambridge: Harvard UniVerSity Press, 1943. Goldstein, K. Methodological approach to the study of schiZOphrenic thought disorder. In J. S. Kasanin (Ed.), Language and Thought in Schizophrenia. Berkeley, Los Angeles: Univ-I—Ca‘I—if. Press, 1944. thz, w, EXperimentelle Untersuchungen zum Problem der Sehgrossenkonstanz beim Havshuhn. g. Psychol., 1926, 99: 2&7'2600 Henderson, D. K. and Gilespie, R. D. A Textbook pf Ps chiat . New York: Oxford University Press, Sixth Edition, 1944. : Hilgard, E. R. The role of learning in perception. In R. Blake and G. Ramsey (Eds.), Perception -- 2g Approach 33 Personality. New York: Ronald, 1951. " Holaday, R. E. Die Grossenkonstanz der Schuinge, No. 2 of: Untersuchungen uber Wahrnehmungsgegenstande, edited by E. Brunswik, Arch. ges. Psychol., 1933, 88, 419-486. Holway, A. H. and Boring, E. G. Determination of apparent visual size with distance variant. Amer. J. PSECh01O, 1941. 5”: 21'370 Joynson, R. B. The problem of size and distance. Quart. 13;. EXDCPQ, 1914—9, 1., 119'1350 Klein, G. S. Adaptive prOperties of sensory function; some postulates and hypotheses. Bull. Menninger Cling, 13, 1914.9, 16-23. Klimpfinger, S. Die Entwicklung der Gestaltkonstanz vom Kind zum Erwachsenen. Arch. ges. Psychol., 1933, 599‘6290 L10. L11. 1+2. 43. 45. 46- 117. 48. 49. So. 51. 52. 5.3. 54. 61+ Koffka, K. Principles of Gestalt Psychology. New York: Harcourt, Brace, “1935. Lichten, w. and Lurie, S. A new technique for the study of perceived size. Amer. J. Psychol., 1950, 63, 280-282. Lindquist, E. F. Design and Analysis of Exoeriments. New York: Houghton Mffflin Company, 1953. Locke, N. M. Color constancy in the rhesus monkey and in man. Arch. Psychol., 1936, 28, No. 193. Lovinger, E. Note on Sanders and Pacht‘s investigation of size constancy of clinical groups. J. consult. Psychol., (in press). Locke, N. M. Perception and intelligence: their phylogenetic relation. Psychol. Rev., 1938, 45, 335-345. Macleod, R. B. An eXperimental investigation of brightness constancy. Arch. Psychol., 1932, 21, No. 135. Macleod, R. B. Perceptual constancy and the problem of motivation. Canad. J. Psychol., 1949, 3, 57-66. Malamund, w. and Herder, N. Course and prognosis in scEiZOphrenia. Amer. J. Psychiat., 1939, 95, 1039- 10 7. Piaget, J. The deveIOpment of perception. A lecture delivered at Michigan State "College,7l953. Purves-Stewart, J. The Diagnosis of Nervous Diseases. London: Edward Arnold and Co., 1945—5 Raush, H. L. Perceptual constancy in schiZOphrenia. Jo Parse, 1952, 21, 176-187. Rickers-Ovsiankina, M. The Rorschach test applied to normal and schiz0phrenic subjects. Brit. J. med. Psychol., 1938,17, 227- 257. Sanders, R. and Pacht, A. R. Perceptual size constancy of known clinical groups. J. consult. Psyghol., 19S2,16,440-444. Schafer, R. The Clinical Application of Psychological Tests. New York: International Universities Press, 1948. 55. 560 S7. 58. S9. 60. 61. 62. 63. a.-. 65. 65 Sheehan, M. R. A study of individual consistency in phenomenal constancy. Arch. Psychol., 1938, 31, NO 0 2220 Singer, J. L. Personal and environmental determinants of perception in a size constancy eXperiment. J. eXper. Psyghol., 1952, 43, 420-427. Stotsky, B. A. Factors in remission of schiZOphrenia: a comparative study of personality and intellectual variables among schiZOphrenics. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, 1951. Thouless, R. H. Phenomenal regression to the 'real' object. I. Brit. J. Psychol., 1931, 21, 339-359. Thouless, R. H. Phenomenal regression to the 'real' object. II. Brit. J. Psychol., 1931, 22, 1-30. Thouless, R. H. Individual differences in phenomenal regression. Brit. J. Psychol., 1932, 22, 216-241. U. S. Vet. Adm. Tech. Bull. 10A - 78. Nomenclature g£ Psychiatric Disorders and Reactions. Washington, DOC.’ 1914-70 Voth, A. C. An eXperimental study of mental patients through the autokinetic phenomenon. Amer. J. Psychiat., 1947, 103, 793-810. Weber, G. O. The relation of personality trends to degrees of visual constancy, correction for size and form. ‘J. appl. Psychol., 1939. 23, 703-708. Weber, G. O. and Bicknell, N. The size-constancy phenomenon in stereOSCOpic Space. Amer. J. Psychol., 1935. 47. 436-448- wOodworth, R. S. Psvchology. New York: Holt, 1934. APPENDI CES mdpwamom¢ onp mo soH> amom 4 XHflZflmmd canoe Hocwmuaoapcoo on» mo paw mxomm haone CH mouwadnuowaae somaamQEoo onp mo ddnomoao < m XHGZEmm¢ mapmamod< 03p 90 36H> m.uoonQ:m 0:9 0 KHQZMde ONLY. U51: ‘ UM Ru : val. VHLY) ‘35; (I a. l .