t

BODY 'PW‘PE AND FREQUENCY Q3: 3213‘ a“: RECALL

“3» '- " ‘ 3‘s
Jams 53? suns: we giea d a"; A

fi’iiCHia‘Ss‘f-‘N $fm£ UNIVERSETY

LIBRARY

Michigan State
University

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

—f

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

MSU b An mum mum/EM Opportunfly Inflation
Wm:

 

 

¢ E
mu
.. D
”E
MM
D
m.
mm.
mun
MT...
maA
mmn
0m.
qu
mau
amD
HFE
D
”mm
m?!

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

——

 

 

Ml 12543::

ABSTRACT

BODY TYPE AND FREQUENCY OF DREAM RECALL

by Gerald P. Beckerle

The major purpose of this study has been to test the
relationship of body type to ordinary, i.e., non-laboratory
recall of dreams. Data from a pilot study provided tenta-
tive support for the hypothesis that ectomorphs will report
a greater frequency of dream recall than mesomorphs or
endomorphs. Also tested in this study were the relationship
of reported body movement to frequency of dream recall as
well as the relationship of reported body movement to body
type.

A pool of subjects was drawn from a group of freshmen
who were inspectionally rated in their HPER classes at the
extreme upper end on one of the three body types: endo-
morphy, mesomorphy, and ectomorphy. They filled out a
questionnaire on their dream and sleep activity, and activity
on awakening. They were simultaneously somatotyped by the
Parnell technique, and the criteria set up for delimiting
dominant or extreme cases yielded a group of 16 endomorphs,

20 mesomorphs, and 19 ectomorphs. The Parnell technique

Gerald P. Beckerle

measures body type ratings directly from the subject's
height and weight as well as measure of his bone and
muscle size and amount of subcutaneous fat. The inter-
rater reliability for two of the three body scales were

.96 and .94; measures for the third scale were taken simul-
taneously when two rater were used.

No evidence of support was found for differences in
frequency of dream recall or amount of dreams remembered
across the dominant body type groups. Lack of support
for even greater frequency of dream recall by the dominant
ectomorphs found in the pilot study might be attributed
to changes in the items measuring memory of dreaming.

Though seemingly reliable, the dream recall items possibly
were not valid; a truer frequency measure would be a dream
diary kept over a span of time.

No supporting evidence was gathered for the hypothe—
sized relationship of body movement to either body type or
to dream recall on the basis of the questionnaire data. No
conclusions can be drawn since the body movement questions
were found to be too unreliable to accept as a measure of
this variable. Since questionnaire methology failed entirely
in this area of measurement, only direct laboratory measure-
ment of body movements seems appropriate for use in future

research.

Gerald P. Beckerle

An incidental finding was the extremely high inter-
rater reliability found for the Parnell measures of soma-
totype assessed by untrained raters. Its ease of adminis-
tration and the high reliability shown establish the
Parnell technique of somatotyping as a very useful tool
for research involving somatotype. The relatively high
correlation of the inspectional measures of the HPER
Department with the Parnell measures lend some support
for this system as at least a good approximation to the
subject's dominant body type.

This study found little evidence for the capability
of a questionnaire technique to measure either the variable

of body movement or that of dream recall.

AF FVWL )2wa KALW

BODY TYPE AND FREQUENCY OF DREAM RECALL

BY

Gerald P. Beckerle

A THESIS

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

MASTER OF ARTS

Department of Psychology

1963

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT S

I wish to acknowledge my indebtedness to Dr. Irwin
Kremen for his sincere and active interest in this research--
as Chairman, his suggestions contributed immeasureably to
the completion of this thesis; and I wish to acknowledge
the help of the other committee members: Dr. Bertram Karon,
and Dr. Wayne VanHuss of the HPER department.

The cooperation of the HPER Department at Michigan
State University in providing facilities and time for

this research is also gratefully appreciated.

ii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . l
PILOT STUDY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
METHOD . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
Subjects 16
Procedure 18
Apparatus 20
Questionnaire 20
RESULTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
DISCUSSION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4O

BIBLIOGRAPHY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43

iii

LIST OF TABLES
Table Page

1. Relationship of body type value to
frequency of dream recall . . . . . . . . . ll

2. Mean rated frequency of dream recall (02)
and mean number of dreams recollected
(Q3) for the dominant types . . . . . . . . l4

3. Observed and expected ( ) frequency dream
recall (02) responses of the dominant
types . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . l4

4. Number of subjects meeting the criteria for

dominance listed by level of body type

rating . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . l7
5. Test-retest reliability for selected

questionnaire items . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
6. Frequency of dream recall and amount of

dreams remembered for the dominant

somatotypes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
7. Further measures of the frequency of dream

recall - body type relationship . . . . . . 28

8. Body movement reported by the dominant
somatotypes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
9. Mean rated frequency dream recall for subjects

"high" and “low" on reported body movement. 31

10. Mean amount of dreams remembered by subjects
"high" and "low" on reported body
movement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32

iv

LIST

Appendix

B. . . . . . . . . . .
C . . . . . . . . . .
D. . . . . . . . . . .
E. . . . . . . . . . .

OF APPENDICES

Page
45
47
49
54
68

7O

INTRODUCTION

Research during the past decade on the relationship
between rapid eye movements (REMs) and low voltage (Stage
1) EEG activity to dreaming has established that the human
adult dreams 4 to 5 times nightly, all told roughly 20% of
the time while asleep (Dement & Kleitman, 1955, 1957a,
1957b; Dement & WOlpert, 1958; wolpert & Trosman, 1958;
Goodenough, Shapiro, Holden & Steinschriber, 1959; Kleitman,
1960; and Kremen, 1961). Using the rate of dreaming found
in these studies the human adult dreams between 1,460 and
1,825 times a year; but whose rate of recall of dreams
approaches these figures? A random sample of 25 male and
25 female Michigan State University undergraduate psychology
students report an average recall of one dream per week, or
only 52 dreams per year. This seems to be a rather sizeable
loss in recollection.

Even where people attempt systematically to recall
their dreams, recollection does not seem to increase
appreciably. According to Kremen (1963), during the
four academic terms from September, 1961, through December,

1962, 436 dream diaries gathered from undergraduates in his

psychology courses at Michigan State University yielded an
estimated 10,000 dreams. Extrapolating again from the data
provided by the laboratory studies using the EEG eye movement
criterion, this group must have dreamt some 105,000 to 132,000
dreams during this time. Keeping a dream diary would
seemingly facilitate recall, yet a mere 7 to 10% of dream
episodes were remembered. Kremen also argues that even in
a situation favoring Optimal recall, i.e., psychoanalysis,
it is the rare analysand who produces one dream per session;
and this one dream per session would represent only 17%
recovery. This seems to be maximal recovery under normal
sleep conditions, and only during laboratory studies in which
subjects are aroused during periods when their eyes are
moving and the EEG is of a low voltage, random pattern
does recall improve to 80 to 90% recovery.

To what do we attribute the decrement in recall?
The most obvious explanation is the concept of repression.
But this great a loss of dream experience to subsequent
recall makes mock of any attempt at explanation that relies
upon the concept of repression, as first suggested by
Schonbar (1959), who felt that "The high correlation
between remembering dreams and the contentless recall of

dreaming also supports the View that low dream recall . .

is related to repression." Goodenough et a1. (1959), to
account for the loss in low recallers in the experimental
setting, felt that his EEG findings differentiated REMs
producing recall from those that did not, and he expected
these findings to be useful in future experimental study
of the Freudian notion of the repression of dream material.
Tart (1962) found support for the hypothesis that "sensi—

tizers, who respond to threat with more manifest anxiety,

recall more than "repressors,' who use avoidance, denial,
and repression as primary modes of adaptation to threat.
Lachmann, Lapkin, and Handleman (1962) take the relation-
ship of repression and lowered recall as a given and use

it as a stepping stone to further theorizing.

But as Kremen (1963) has pointed out, the inability
to recall forgotten dreams at a later date, even under anal-
ysis is unassimilable to the repression hypothesis. Psycho-
analytic theory postulates two forms of repression: the
after-expulsive type and primal repression. Implicit in
the argument of the above investigators is the idea of a
dream having occurred and having been repressed; they are
then positing the after-expulsive type. But this view is

refuted by the fact that dreams, if recovered, at all, seem

to be recovered only during a short span of time after the

dream and beyond that not at all.

It would seem more tenable, in seeking an explanation
for this loss of dream material, to inspect the factors which
have hampered recall even under laboratory conditions most
favorable to the recovery of dream material. A study of
Dement & Kleitman (1957b) showed that "the cessation of eye
movement periods was often accompanied by a large body move-
ment on the part of the sleeper, and that during the eye
movement periods the incidence of gross body movements was
markedly lower than during the adjacent intervals."

Dement & wolpert (1958) thought that this finding
might mean that body movement surrounded by REM periods
would segment the dream action into two portions, and found
support for this hypothesis. They also took dream reports
"shorter than expected from the objective duration of eye
movement periods" to see if the earlier portion were for—
gotten; 37 of the 45 dream periods inspected were found to
contain a large body movement several minutes after the
beginning of the eye movement period. Further study found
that a subjective change in dream content often was being
experienced by sleepers wakened from REM periods immediately
after gross body movements.

wolpert & Trosman (1960), summarizing the results

of 214 awakenings at four different stages of sleep, found

somewhat diminished recall (69% instead of 85% detailed
recall) during body movements, and greatly reduced recall
(no detailed recall) in two periods following the lightest
sleep stages which are ordinarily ended by a gross body
movement.

A line of research related to the above studies is
that of recall subsequent to varied modes of awakening.
Less effective recall was elicited on waking by means
other than a loud bell or tone (Berrien, 1930). More
recently Shapiro, Goodenough & Gryler (1963) reported
that if subjects were aroused from REM periods gradually
instead of abruptly, they more often believed they were
awake and/or thinking. Research findings, such as those
of Dement & wolpert (1958), might suggest that movement
triggered by subthreshold stimuli interferes with recall
and alters the experience of bizzarreness often reported
as subjectively differentiating dreaming and waking states.

The search for an understanding of the great loss
of dream material to recollection has, therefore, led some
investigators into the area of body movement. Consistent
findings have been reported of diminished recall under the
laboratory setting after some gross movement of the body.
This relationship is interesting, particularly in View of

the position taken by Schachtel (1959) on the basis of

clinical scrutiny of dreams. He points out that the human
activity essential for dealing with the environs is cut to

a minimum during sleep while the dream itself is a field of
movement. He comments: "It is often possible to catch hold
of a dream on awakening by lying still and keeping eyes
closed. Jumping out of bed often chases the dream into
oblivion - a return to the outer world destroying it."

He notes Rorschach's View that dreams are primarily kines—
thesias, and states that a passive attitude, rather than one
of cramped attention by straining the mind toward control and
good performance, is favorable to kinesthetic perception and
memory. The dream is the opposite of work so a resistance
is operative in the awake person, not only against the dream
thought but against the whole quality and language of the
dream - a different type of resistance yet basically related
to that which represses and censors a dream thought.

What is the nature of the physiological mechanisms
which maintain this low level of motility during dreams?
Dement & wolpert (1958) pointed out the release of move-
ment at the dream's end. Also Oswald (1961), on the basis
of reticular formation studies conducted on animals, found
that the lower anterior portion facilitates motor functions
of the spinal cord, but the lower posterior section inhibits

motion when stimulated. This inhibition was accompanied

by a low voltage EEG pattern, that is to say, an activated
EEG rhythm, and moreover, one in which rapid eye movements
are found. It is just such a pattern which is associated

with dreaming in humans.

If there is a general reduction of motor activity
during dreaming, and if there is a loss of recall following
movement, then part of the inter-individual variance in
daily dream recall might be explainable by variation in the
level of body movement during sleep. Knowing that there are
people who recall (relatively) much of their dream exper-
ience and those who recall little, what types of peOple
might move greater or lesser amounts to account in part
for these differences in recall?

One conceptual framework which could handle such
differences was introduced by cubberly (1923) who observed:
"In a certain muscular, phlegmatic type of person, it
(dream vividness) is correspondingly low, which is possibily
the reason why some people of that type assert they never
dream." A similar report came from Sheldon (1945) in
his Varieties of Temperament:

Somatotonics feel good in the morning.

They love to jump out of bed, take a shower,
make a lot of noise, and greet the sun . . .
Somatotonic sleep is deep and seems to be
relatively dreamless. Such sleep is refreshing

and it may be that an explanation of the lower
sleep requirement of people high in the second

component lies partly in the fact that they sleep
better or more thoroughly than do cerebrotonics.
Whoever has attempted to use a dream analysis
technique in the therapeutic or diagnostic

study of somatotonic people is aware of the
peculiar early difficulty which they present.

Most somatotonics will state that they rarely
dream and never remember their dreams on awakening.

Cerebrotonics nearly always, and viscerotonics

usually, are more or less aware of the trend of

their own dreaming, and can without practice recite
their recurrent dreams in some detail. But for
individuals of predominant somatotonia an introduction
to their own dream world often amounts to revelation,
and the event not infrequently constitutes a

religious (conversional) experience.

The extremely high correlations found by Sheldon
between somatotonia and mesomorphy, cerebrotonia and ecto-
morphy, and viscerotonia and endomorphy have led him to
use the terms almost interchangeably. Knowledge of the
various body types and the factors which go into creating
a dominance of a particular type have led to the suggestion
that the variables of body movement and somatotype might
be involved in a simultaneous or concurrent relationship
to dream recall.

If movement dissipates recall, then those people
who move a lot during sleep (and on awakening) should
more likely recall fewer dreams than people who move
little during sleep. This leads to the testable proposition

that amount of dream recall should be related to somatotype,

specifically that (a) subjects who are dominant on the

ectomorphy component will tend to report greater recall of
dreams than subjects dominant on the component of meso-
morphy. Secondary hypotheses that can be tested are:

(b) that the dominant mesomorphs will report more movement

during the night and on awakening in the morning; (c) that

subjects who report greater body movement during the night

will report less dream recall.

PILOT STUDY

As a first test of the hypothesis that ectomorphs
as compared to mesomorphs will tend to report that they
recollect their dreams more frequently, somatotype data
from 93 male Boston College High School seniors were used,
together with the results of a simple questionnaire on
dreams administered within the framework of a study on
delinquency, somatotype, and need Adhievement.* The
following are the dream questions subjected to statistical
analysis:

Ql. How often do you dream?

Q2. How often do you recall what you dream about?

QB. How many dreams that you had in the past can you
now recall?

The first two questions were answered on a seven
point scale ranging from "never" (1) to "almost every
night" (7); the options are given in Appendix A. The
third question required a simple quantitative estimate
from the subject. The statistic first used to test the

above hypothesis was the Pearson product-moment g which

 

*The items for this questionnaire were taken from a
larger questionnaire designed by Kremen, and it was administered
by Juan Cortez, of the Dept. of Social Relations, Harvard
University.

10

ll

assessed the relationship of the three body type ratings,
ranging from 1 to 7 in half point steps, to the values

of Q1 and Q2. The results of Q2 (rated frequency of dream
recall) are listed in Table 1, where it can be seen that
ectomorphy rating and frequency of dream recall are positive-
ly and significantly related while ratings on the other
scales tend to be negatively related. (It must be noted
that frequency of dream recall as used here is not a true
measure of frequency, but rather a rating of that frequency.)

Table 1. Relationship of body type valuetn frequency of
dream recall (02). N = 93

 

 

 

Body Type Pearson 5
Endomorphy -.1275
Mesomorphy —.lOO6
Ectomorphy +.l704*
*p < .05

Sheldon (1940) has reported high intercorrelations
of body types-—for mesomorphy and ectomorphy —.64, for
mesomorphy and endomorphy -.32, and for endomorphy and
ectomorphy —.27. This means, for instance, that as meso-
morphy goes up, not only ectomorphy but to some extent
endomorphy also tends to go down. For the clearest picture

of how this covariance effects the relationship to other

12

measures, one would have to use partial correlational techni-
ques where it would be necessary to hold two components con-
stant as one looks at the other. Techniques for such an
analysis have been devised, but these require special computor
programming for large samples, which unfortunately was

not available at Michigan State University. Thus such an
analysis could not be carried out.

The appropriateness of the Pearson g in testing the
hypothesized relationship of body type to frequency of
dream recall was placed further in question by the realization
that Sheldon and cubberly in their descriptions had refer—
red to extreme or dominant types, i.e., persons characterized
by a predominance of one component, i.e., a predominant body
type, largely to the exclusion of the other types, while
correlational techniques sampled the entire range of body
type ratings. Parnell (1958) also observed that correlational
techniques draw heavily on mid—range values in working with
somatotypes and thus are a poor statistical tool for use
in this area of research.

In order then to free the analysis from contamination
by the uncontrolled effect of extraneous somatotype components,
it is possible to approach the problem by use of extreme
cases. However, previous research was far from clear-cut

in defining a "dominant" or extreme type, favoring correlational

l3

techniques to such a procedure. The rules for defining a
”dominant type" decided on for use in this study were that
the person's highest rating should be greater than 4, and
that no cases would be considered dominant on a given type
which had two components with a value of 4 or greater. This
method delimited a group consisting of 17 dominant endomorphs.
4 mesomorphs, and 14 ectomorphs from the original sample of 93.
In comparing the mean rated frequency of dream recall
and mean amount of dreams recollected for these extreme
body types, the F test was used; only the second question:
VHow often do you recall what you dream about? and third:
FHOW many dreams that you had in the past can you now
recall?9 questions were tested since the first: Fwa often
do you dream?” had shown a negative, insignificant correlation
to the three body types. Table 2 presents the mean fre—
quency of recall and mean number of dreams reported for the
dominant body types.
Though in the expected direction these means were
not significantly different; an F value of 3.30is needed
for significance in this instance. Two factors which
might account for this non-significance are the small
sample size, especially for the mesomorphic group, and high
"within groups? variance, noted especially in Q3. Individual

comparisons by means of the t test also proved to be insignificant.

14

Table 2. Mean rated frequency of dream recall (QZ) and
mean number of dreams recollected (QB) for the
dominant types. N = 35.

 

 

 

 

Body type QZ Means MSw Q3 Means MSw
Endomorphs (17) 3.53 2.13 4.41 4.59
Mesomorphs ( 4) 4.00 2.00 3.50 1.25
Ectomorphs (14) 4.57 3.81 5.57 12.81
F value 1.36 (n.s.) 1.07 (n.s.)

 

Since Q2 was somewhat difficult to answer precisely,

it was conjectured that the seven step scale in use may

have lent itself to artifact. To eradicate the possibility
of such a factor, a grosser measure was devised by dichotomiz-
ing 02 into low, i.e., 1 through 4, and high, i.e., 5 through
7, for a non-parametric analysis. Table 3 gives the results
of the Chi-square analysis of these data.

Table 3. Observed and expected ( ) frequency dream recall
(Q2) responses of the dominant types. N = 35.

 

 

 

 

Dominant Type Low Recall High Recall
Endomorphs 13 (10.2) 4 (6.8)
Mesomorphs 3 ( 2.4) l (1.6)
Ectomorphs 5 ( 8.4) 9 (5.6)
2 2
X2 — 5.71, (X.90 — 4v60 and X.95 — 5.99 for 2 df)

 

The above Chi-square, significant between the .10

and .05 levels, as well as the Pearson values to a more

15

limited degree, lends support for the hypothesized relation-
ship between dream recall and body type to a sufficient
degree to warrant further investigation. This is especially
true in the light of two factors which might be operating
to dampen the differences between types, namely, the smallness
of the mesomorphic group and an apparent bias found in either
sampling or somatotyping. Sheldon's original sample of
2,000 men contained the following percentages of cases rated
4 or greater; mesomorphs 59%,endomorphs 31%, and ectomorphs
41% Whereas this pilot group had 21% of mesomorphs, 35% of
endomorphs, and 23% of ectomorphs rated above that value.
This could mean that whatever factor was influencing meso-
morphy ratings might also be operating on the other components.
Several procedural modifications were suggested by
this pilot study. First, a technique of sampling which
would ensure subjects dominant on a given type was
necessary. Secondly, a reliable body typing technique was
important. Thirdly, these data should be assessed by F and
'3 tests on the dominant type differences with use being made
of a Chi square analysis if high variance or other factors
should dampen out the magnitude of the differences of the

dominant's means though in the hypothesized direction.

METHOD

Subjects

The subjects drawn from the Health, Physical Education,
and Recreation (HPER) classes at Michigan State were pre-
dominantly freshmen. In the fall term approximately one
half of the students received estimate somatotypes by group
consensus in their classes. Under the supervision of their
instructor they inspected the physiques of their classmates
and agreed upon the body type rating which would best fit the
person rated.

Of the 1,585 students in the sections which carried
out this operation, 418 subjects either failed to report
their somatotype or had a somatotype rating with a tie for
the dominant type, e.g., 4—4-3. These inspectional somato—
types were gathered from cards kept by the student on his
performance throughout the fall term in his HPER class. In
order to classify the remaining students, the rules of the
pilot study were used, namely, the dominant type must be
above 4, and there must not be two body components 4 or
over. Some examples of cases not fitting these rules would

be 6—5-1 and 4-3—3 ratings. Of cases not meeting the criteria,

16

17

387 were high on mesomorphy, 272 high on ectomorphy, and
107 high on endomorphy.

The remainder of the sample, i.e., those meeting the
criteria and therefore more extreme on a given body type by
subjective judgment, are given in the table below:

Table 4. Number of subjects meeting the criteria for
dominance liSted by level of body type rating.

 

 

 

 

N = 401.
Value Endomorphs Mesomorphs Ectomorphs
4.5 7 33 7
5.0 40 156 50
5.5 2 12 4
6.0 14 41 27
7.0 2 ‘ 1 5
Totals 65 243 93

 

From these students a pool of 50 extreme cases of
each type was established; those with the highest rating
(7.0) were taken first and so on down the line until the
quota of 50 for each type was filled. Where there was a
tie for the dominant type rating, for example, in selecting
subjects # 19 through # 50 from those rated 5.0 on endo-
morphy, the criterion used was the largest gap to the
second highest rated body component. From this group of 150,

all subjects were drawn; however, they were only included

18

for final analysis in this study if they met the criteria
for body type dominance after being typed by_the Parnell
technique described below.

A slight modification was made in the rules for
qualification as a dominant type when the Parnell technique
was employed. Subjects were included if their dominant
component were greater than 4.0, and if there was a gap of
at least 1.0 totflmanext highest type. Subjects having two
types greater than 4 were included, if they had a gap of,
at least, 1.5 to the next highest type. This latter rule
was added to include subjects who were obviously dominant
types, but who would have been rejected by the previous
rules. Of the 86 members from the above pool who were
willing to serve as subjects, 16 endomorphs, 20 mesomorphs,
and 19 ectomorphs were demarcated as dominant on their re-

spective types.

Procedure

The inspectional ratings of body type given in the
HPER courses were, obviously, of questionable reliability and
validity. Among the possible factors of bias were the
inexperience of the raters, central tendency of ratings,
social desirability, and other group suggestibility phenomena.

Sheldon's photoscopic method of body typing, which assesses

19

measures by detailed judgments of three standardized, posed
photographs, has been most popular in research to date, but
was considered unfit for this study on several counts. It
requires an expensive camera and other equipment, trained
investigators are needed to rate the photographs of the three
standard poses, and volunteer subjects might refuse to be
photographed nude as required by this method.

The Parnell technique, described fully in Behavior
and Physique: an introduction togpractigal and applied
somatometry, presented an alternative means of somatotyping
which was reasonably fast and required only several pieces
of easily accessible apparatus. It uses direct body measures
of height and weight as well as two muscle measures two bone
measures, and three measures of subcutaneous fat. All of
these are referred to a table, given in Appendix B, from
which the somatotypes are calculated. A more detailed
explanation of the Parnell technique is given in Appendix C.

In attempting to establish the validity of his method
as a measure of somatotype, Parnell cites its relation to
the Sheldon technique:

The present M.4 method (that used in the present
study) and photoscopic interpretation differ slightly
more, not particularly in the first (endomorphy)
and third (ectomorphy) components, but in the second

component (mesomorphy) discrepancies exceeding %
a unit occurred in about one third. The second

20

component is, however, the most difficult to

assess photoscopically, and discrepancies exceed-

ing % a unit occurred in 17% of mesomorphic estimates
by expert photoscopic somatotypists (Tanner, 1954).

Apparatus

The instruments used for somatotyping were very similar
to those described by Parnell. An engineer's sliding steel
calipers for bone measures were equipped with a vernier
scale; and the calipers used for subcutaneous fat measures
were made by the Wenner-Gren Company. These are like the
Harpenden calipers used by Parnell in that both have a
spring pressure of 10 gm./sq. cm. which remains relatively
constant over the entire range of apertures. The
Wenner—Gren calipers have a face or gripping surface 6.5 mm.
x 4.7 mm. while the Harpenden calipers measure 15 mm. x
6 mm. in surface dimensions. A flexible measuring tape with
subdivisions for every 1/8 inch was used for the muscle

measures .

.Questionnaire

(See Appendix D.) This questionnaire contains 54
items on dreams and on sleep and waking. The dream section
has, in addition to a descriptive item of dream experience,
8 items on frequency of or qualitative aspects of dream

recall, 2 on waking during the night, and 3 concerning

21

relationship between dreams and subsequent moods. To com-
plete the dream section there are 9 questions on subjective
control of waking and dreaming, 3 concerning awareness of
dreams while dreaming, and 6 questions about hypnagogic imagery.

The 22 questions of the sleep and waking section
are divided into 7 on sleep arrangements or ease of going
to sleep and 8 on movement during sleep (2 on body movement,

2 on talking, and 4 on walking); 5 questions on activity '
upon awakening, and 2 general questions round out the list.
A face sheet asks for demographic data.

Many of the items come from questionnaires used in
previous studies by Kremen (1961), one for general assess—
ment of dream experience and another, on sleep, to screen
subjects for laboratory investigation; the questions used
by Cortez came from the dream questionnaire used by Kremen
to elicit certain quantitative and qualitative aspects of
ordinary dreaming.

In addition to these items which comprised the bulk
of the questionnaire, special items were devised for this
study. First were the body movement items which were
included to see if the amount reported were related to
either somatotype or to frequency of dream recall and

amount of dreams remembered. These new items are given

below:

22

S6 How often do you move around in bed while you sleep?
(3 Options)
S6a How do you know that you move around in bed while
you sleep?
S16a When you wake in the morning, do you ordinarily . . .
(4 options)
817 When you wake in the morning, do you ordinarily . . .
(4 options)

These items were included because peOple are some-
times told by others that they move a lot in their sleep;
or they might be able to assess their movement by other
means. Questions from the earlier studies, namely,

S3 Do you fall asleep easily? and

S5 In general, do you sleep . . . (4 Options), also might
give some reflection of body movement and were accordingly
analyzed along with the above body movement items. Also
six questions about sleep walking and talking were included
with a View toward possibly greater mesomorphic activity
along these lines.

Two dream items were revised for this study. The
second question of the dream section (D2): "How often do
you recall what you dream about?” is QZ of the pilot study;
however, the seven point scale was extended to eight options.

This was done to make the intervals between the choices more

23

uniform. Another revised item was D3: "Of the dreams you
have had in the past, how many can you recall something of
now?" This is Q3 from the pilot study with the addition of
a standardizedtime, five minutes, for trying to recollect

dreams.

RE SULT S

The somatotype measures in this study raised two
questions of reliability. First, there was the reliability
of the Parnell measures; this was assessed by having two
raters, the author and Mr. John Ross, a graduate student
from the HPER Department, independently take body measures
on twenty subjects used in this project. The Pearson
product—moment correlation showed the two ratings to be
correlated .94 on the endomorphy component and .97 on the
mesomorphy component. Only one set of ratings of the 40
sets compared was discrepant by more than half a unit.

No correlation is available for ectomorphy since the height
and weight measures were taken simultaneously, hence in
complete agreement, by both raters. The rating for ectomorphy
is computed from a height/weight ratio.

Table XI: _P_e£centile values of r when? = 0 in

Walker and Lev, Statistical Inference, shows both of the

 

above correlations to be highly significant (p-< .0005).
No test-retest inspection was attempted but the above
values have established that the Parnell technique can

be extremely reliably measured intersubjectively, i.e., by

different raters.

24

25

The second question of reliability pertains to the
correlation of the HPER somatotype ratings, those given
by group consensus after inspection, to the Parnell
ratings. Using all 86 subjects who volunteered for the
research, the inspectional endomorphy ratings correlated
.69 with the author's Parnell endomorphy values; mesomorphic
estimates correlated .75 for the two methods while the ecto—
morphy component had a slightly higher .78 relationship.
These three correlations are highly significant (p < .0005).

Another problem of reliability involved in this study
was that of the questionnaire items. In order to establish
a measure of the intra—subjective reliability of various
items, the questionnaire was mailed to the 54 subjects
used in this study after an elapsed interval of one to
three months from somatotyping and filling it out the
first time. Twenty-four subjects complied to this second
step - providing a group for test-retest reliability.
Uhlike many devices, the items of this questionnaire did
not lend themselves to the compilation of a total score.
This meant that individual items would have to be examined
for reliability estimates; only those pertinent to this
study were inspected.

For question D2: "How often do you recall what you

dream about?” with its 8 options and for the open-ended

26

question D3: "Of the dreams you have had in the past, how
many can you recall something of now?" a correlational
measure apprOpriately assesses the test—retest reliability.
The Pearson r for the first question was .73 and for the
latter it was .86. That the probability for such values
is less than .0005 is good evidence that subjects answer
essentially the same on retest.

The other items did not lend themselves to a corre—
lational approach to measuring their reliability since
they had four or less choices in most cases. The only
appropriate analysis under such limited Options was to use
the technique devised by Bush and Mosteller for matching
problems, and presented in the Handbook of Social Psychology,
Vol. 1, Chapter 8. Upon viewing Table 5 it can be seen that,
like D2 and D3, the selected dream questions seem moderately
reliable. However, the sleep items becOme more dubious and
those pertaining directly to body movement: S6 ”How often
do you move around in bed when you sleep?” and 816a: "When
you wake in the morning, do you ordinarily . . .” are
especially questionable. While all probabilities are signi—
ficant beyond the .05 level, it must be remembered that the
Bush and Mosteller statistic was established for matching
problems such as predicting diagnoses from Rorschachs and
thus a higher significance should be set for reliability

estimates.

27

Table 5. Test-retest reliability for selected questionnaire
items. N = 22 through 24.

—_—
_-

 

Dream Section to: value Probability
Question D6 3.44 (p < .001)
Question D27 2.53 (p < .005)

 

Sleep and Waking Section

 

Question 33 1.78 (.05 > p > .01)
Question S5 2.76 (p < .01)
Question S6 1.71 (.05 > p > .01)
Question Sl6a 1.76 (.05>' p > .01)
Question 817 2.44 (p < .01)

 

The major hypothesis was tested by means of F tests
on the dominant somatotypes' mean answer to D2 ”How often
do you recall what you dream about?" and to D3 ”Of the
dreams you have had in the past, how many can you recall
something of now?”. While the means were in the expected
direction, the statistical tests do not reveal even a trend
toward significance. Table 6 presents these findings.

Further analysis of D2 dichotomized into more
global "high" and "low" frequency of recall categories as
well as investigation of D6 "How often do you wake up with
the impression that you had dreamt, yet you are unable to
recall what your dream was about?" by means of the Chi square

test was carried out. Table 7 likewise shows no support for

the main hypothesis.

28

Table 6. Frequency of dream recall and amount of dreams
remembered for the dominant somatotypes.

 

 

 

Question Endos (N) Mesos (N) Ectos (N) F Value

D2 Mean 4.68 (16) 4.60 (20) 4.79 (19) .049
Variance* 3.21 . 4.40 2.79

D3 Mean 5.33 (15) 5.17 (18) 6.05 (18) .036
Variance* 20.55 17.80 29.05

 

F value for .10 level two tailed for 2,48 df -
and for 2,52 df = 3.17

I
w
l—'
KO

 

*Within.

Table 7. Further measures of the frequency of dream recall -
body type relationship.* N = 55.

 

 

 

Question Chi square value '
D2 .40 (.90> p > .75) 2df
D6 2.60 (.75 7 p > .50) 4df

 

*See Appendix E - Tables A and B for the obtained
frequencies.

To test hypothesis (b) that the dominant mesomorphs
will report more movement during the night and on awakening
in the morning, several questions related to body movement

were inspected:

29

SS In general, do you sleep . . .

S6 How often do you move around in bed while you sleep?
Sl6a When you wake in the morning, do you ordinarily . . .
817 When you wake in the morning, do you ordinarily . . .
Table 8 shows that only two items approach significance: the
first ($5 "In general, do you sleep . . .") because ecto-
morphs tended to report lighter sleep, endomorphs more often
claimed to sleep ”like a log,” and mesomorphs preferred the
median sleep "soundly" category. This might be seen as
contradicting the hypothesis since ectomorphs sleeping more
lightly might move more often than the others. At least,

no support is found for the hypothesis; nor is any support
found in 811: "Have you been told by others that you

walk in your sleep?" where more endomorphs reported sleep
walking, supplying a trend toward significance. Table 8

lists these results.

Table 8. Body movement reported by the dominant somatotypes.*

 

N = 55.

Question Chi square value
85 8.66 ('10,, p > .05) 4df
S6 .53 (.98 > p > .95) 4df
“S9 3.39 (.25 > p > .10) 2df
Sll 5.67 (.10 7 p 7 .05) 2df
S16a 1.61 (.95 > p > .90) 6df
S17 1.31 (.90 7 p 7 .75) 4df

 

*See Appendix F — Tables C through H for the obtained
frequencies. V

30

To test hypothesis (c) that subjects who report
greater body movement during the night will report less
dream recall, the entire sample of 86 subjects was used to
select extreme answers to four questions related to body
movement:

55 In general, do you sleep . . .
_:__1ike a log
‘____sound1y
_§L_lightly

._x__so lightly as to be easily disturbed
S6 How often do you move around in bed while you sleep?
._x__frequently
____moderately often
_:__occasiona11y
Sl6a When you wake in the morning, do you ordinarily . . .
_j__lie in bed trying to go back to sleep
lie in bed thinking of one thing or another
get immediately out of bed, but sit around drinking
coffee, etc.
_1L_get immediately out of bed, wash, shave, etc.
817 When you wake in the morning, do you ordinarily . . .
_x;_fee1 wide awake immediately

require five to fifteen minutes before you feel wide

awake

31

* remain sluggish for as long as an hour or even

longer

This presented a dichotomization into high movement

(those answering questions above *) and low movement (those

selecting x answers) groups.

Table 9 presents t tests for

the means of rated frequency of dream recall.

Table 9.

Mean rated frequency dream recall for subjects

"high" and "low" on reported body movement.
Variable N.

 

 

Question (N) "High" §§ ”Low" §§ .3 value

S5 5.14 (14) 4.00 (16) 1.76 (.10) p > .05)
Variance 1.90 3.20

S6 5.03 (35) 4.72 (22) .53 (p > .50)
Variance 2.78 3.08

Sl6a 4.94 (24) 3.85 (12) 1.85 (.10‘> p > .05)
Variance 3.00 2.96

817 5.35 (17) 4.36 (11) 1.76 (.10 > p >-.05)
Variance 1.49 3.05

 

Inspection of Table 9 reveals several items in which

the high movement group reports greater frequency of dream

recall.

ship,

Investigation of D3:

This is in opposition to the hypothesized relation-

so no support for the third hypothesis is found.

"Of the dreams you have had in the past,

how many can you recall something of now?" by means of.t

tests on the dichotomized movement groups yielded the results

shown in Table 10.

Table 10.

32

Mean amount of dreams remembered by subjects

"high" and "low" on reported body movement.
Variable N.

 

 

 

 

Question (N) "High" §§ "Low”_§§ .3 value

85 6.25 (13) 4.12 (15) 1.17 (.40 > p > .20)
Variance 26.02 19.58

S6 5.52 (35) 5.41 (19) .09 (p > .50)
Variance 23.27 17.38

Sl6a 7.13 (23) 4.44 (11) 1.66 (.20 > p y .10)
Variance 1.49 1.13

317 6.50 (16) 5.54 (11) .48 (p,> .50)
Variance 19.12 31.88

This table again shows the trend for higher recall

for the high movement group in contradiction to the hypothesis.

DISCUSSION

The major hypothesis that subjects who are dominant
on the ectomorphy component will tend to report greater
recall Of dreams than subjects dominant on the component of
mesomorphy received no direct support from the questionnaire
since not even a trend toward significance was shown for
either dream recall or amount of dreams remembered. The
explanation for the non-significant relationship may lie in
the ”fuzziness" of dream recall under these conditions,
for the reliability reported may represent a good memory
for what was reported upon first administration and not
for actual frequency of dream recall. Another factor aiding
non—significant results might have been the change from 7
to 8 Options on the frequency of dream recall item. Though
done in an attempt to make the gap between options more
uniform, it might have presented too confusing a choice
and thus led to haphazard answering. A dream diary taken
daily for, say, a month would present, perhaps, a more valid
as well as a more reliable measure.

No seeming bias was evident in the sample chosen
since Sheldon's observations for recall differences across

types were made on males; and the present study's exclusive

33

34

use of college freshmen would not seem to be an important
variable,as Schonbar found no age differences in her high
and low recall groups. However, it must be noted that
Sheldon's original sample was a rather unique group for Harvard
undergraduates are a population different from, say, public
university students; also the technique of assessing dreaming
along with other personality characteristics by a series of
interviews over a year's time might have led to a conditioning
effect with this group. Possibly the change in sleeping
habits, for example, shorter hours or pressure on awakening
to rush to classes, might have flattened out differences
between groups in this study, but no comments on lessened
recall at school was noted. In considering the trend toward
significance of the pilot group from Boston and the lack of
such a tendency found in this study, the suggestion of a
cultural bias arose. Since the sample was drawn from a
Catholic high school in Boston there should be a very high
percentage of Irish and Italians. It could be that in
these ethnic subcultures some special value is placed on
dreaming. However, no higher rated frequency of dreaming
was noted in these groups.

The second hypothesis that the dominant mesomorphs

would report more body movement was not upheld; S5 "In

35

general, do you sleep . . ." and S11 "Have you been told

by others that you walk in your sleep?" Were the only related
questions showing meaningful differences. The first question
approaches significance because ectomorphs tended to report
lighter sleep, mesomorphs chose the median value more, and
endomorphs claimed more often being very sound sleepers.

This would lead to the impression that ectomorphs being more
fitful sleepers either reach marginal states of awareness more
often during the night or else remember more of these states.
This does not directly indicate greater movement without
additional information from the other movement questions, but
there is an implication of greater motility -— contradicting
the hypothesis. The greater sleepwalking reported by
endomorphs also is in Opposition to the expected results.

One possible explanation for differences on SS is
suggested by inspecting the relation of body type to choice
selected on this item. In many cases choice may have
reflected self—concept rather than actual sleep experience.
Thus the more fragile ectomorphs report "light" sleep with
the slower, bulky endomorphs claiming "log-like" sleep.

The non-significance of other items related to the
second hypothesis may have been a function of the unrelia-

bility noted for the body movement questions. This

unreliability might be accounted for by two factors: lack

36

of direct information and semantic differences. Knowledge

of movement comes from a second—hand source or from inferences
drawn about the condition of the bed coverings in the morning.
The semantic problem is best illustrated by the subject

who reported occasional falling out of bed from excessive
movement during sleep as well as covers in a complete mess;

he marked the least movement alternative.

It has been noted earlier that the reliability may
seem spuriously high because the technique was devised for
matching problems and a higher significance level would seem
appropriate for reliability investigations. Two other factors
falselyefievating the correspondence of test-retest answers
must be pointed out. First, there is the possibility of
remembering the answer given on the first testing and, second-
ly, the subjects who repeated, the procedure -- by the very
fact that they went through it -- are a select group.
Theirgreater interest may have heightened the reliability.
Only 24 of 52 subjects responded; what effect the non-
respondents would have had on the reliability estimates would
be of some interest.

The final hypothesis that greater body movement
report would be associated with less reported recall of
dreams was also contaminated by the lack of reliability of

the body movement questions. However, the trend for this

37

relationship from the questionnaire was not in the hypothesized
direction. From the more reliable questions, both the
"light sleepers" of SS and the “immediately wide awake“
group of S17 ("When you wake in the morning, do you ordinarily
. . .") reported greater dream recall, both of these
carrying the implication of greater movement during sleep or
on rising.

How might the relationship of frequency of dream
recall and amount of dreams remembered to body movement
be more successfully assessed? It seems mandatory that
further research utilize objective movement records which,
unfortunately, was not feasible in this study. The
questionnaire approach simply does not measure this variable
of body movement. Laboratory studies of body movement might
support the relationships hypothesized.

Another question arises in relation to the ”dream”
measures used. As'has been pointed out, the frequency
of dream recall is not a true frequency, but only a
recollection of what the true frequency was. While this
means of assessing dream recall may be reliable inasmuch
as subjects will consistently answer the same, it is not
necessarily a valid measure.

Some very indirect reasoning from the results of

different questions might seem to support greater dream

38

recall by the ectomorphs. For they more often report sleep-
ing lightly, and the light sleeper group of S5 reported greater
frequency of dream recall. Inspection of the "light sleeping"
ectomorphs shows no greater recall compared to the other

light sleepers and thus does not account for the appreciably
higher rated frequency of dreaming for this group.

An incidental finding of this project was the high
reliability of the inter—rater measures of body type. The
correlations found for untrained raters might, indeed,
offer support for Parnell's suggestion that his method
removes some of the artistic element from somatotyping in
favor of more reproducible, scientific elements.

Another finding deals with the inspectional body
type estimates used by the HPER Department for several
years. The reliability of these estimates compared with
the Parnell measures is reasonably high and the results,
at least, support this inspectional system as a good
measure of the predominant type. Only one subject was
inspected as being dominant on one type (mesomorphy) and
received another type (endomorphy) upon measuring by the
Parnell technique; he reported a 20 pound weight gain in
the interval between the two measurings. It might seem
that the high correlations found resulted solely from the

use of dominant types. However, it must be remembered

39

that the correlation given for, say, mesomorphy represents
also the mesomorphic estimates for dominant endomorphs and

ectomorphs as well as the measure of the dominant mesomorphs.

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

The major purpose of this study has been to test the
relationship of body type to ordinary, i.e., non-laboratory
recall of dreams. Data from a pilot study provided tentative
support for the hypothesis that ectomorphs will report a
greater frequency of dream recall than mesomorphs or endo-
morphs. Also tested in this study were the relationship
of reported body movement to frequency of dream recall as
well as the relationship of reported body movement to body
type.

A pool of subjects was drawn from a group of freshmen
who were inspectionally rated in their HPER classes at the
extreme upper end on one of the three body types: endomorphy,
mesomorphy, and ectomorphy. They filled out a questionnaire
on their dream and sleep activity, and activity on awaken-
ing. They were simultaneously somatotyped by the Parnell
technique, and the criteria set up for delimiting dominant
or extreme cases yielded a group of 16 endomorphs, 20
mesomorphs, and 19 ectomorphs. The Parnell technique
measures body type ratings directly from the subject's
height and weight as well as measures of his bone and muscle

size and amount of subcutaneous fat. The inter—rater

40

41

reliabilities for two of the three body scales were .96 and
.94; measures for the third scale were taken simultaneously
when two raters were used.

No evidence of support was found for differences
in frequency of dream recall or amount of dreams remembered
across the groups of dominant body types. Lack of support
for even greater frequency of dream recall by the dominant
ectomorphs found in the pilot study might be attributed to
changes in the items measuring memory of dreaming. Though
seemingly reliable, the dream recall items possibly were
not valid; a truer frequency measure would be a dream diary
kept over a span of time.

No supporting evidence was gathered for the hypo-
thesized relationship of body movement to either body type
or to dream recall on the basis of the questionnaire data.
No conclusions can be drawn since the body movement questions
were found to be too unreliable to accept as a measure of
this variable. Since questionnaire methodology failed
entirely in this area of measurement, only direct laboratory
measurement of body movements seems appropriate for use in
future research.

An incidental finding was the extremely high
inter—rater reliability found for the Parnell measures of

somatotype assessed by untrained raters. Its ease of

42

administration and the high reliability shown establish the
Parnell technique of somatotyping as a very useful tool
for research involving somatotype. The relatively high
correlation of the inspectional measures of the HPER
Department with the Parnell measures lend some support
for this system as at least a good approximation to the
subject's dominant body type.

This study found little evidence for the capability
of a questionnaire technique to measure either the variable

of body movement or that of dream recall.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Berrien, F. K. A statistical study of dreams in relation
to emotional stability. J. abnorm. soc. Psychol.,
l933,.§§, 194-197.

cubberly, A. J. The effects of tensions of the body surface
on normal dreams. Brit. J. Psychol., 1923, 1;, 243-
265.

Dement, W., & Kleitman, N. Incidence of eye motility during
sleep in relation to varying EEG patterns. Fed. Proc.,
1955, 14. 37.

Dement, W. & Kletiman, N. The relation of eye movement
during sleep to dream activity: an Objective
method for the study of dreaming. J. exp. Psychol.,
1957, 53, 339-346.

Dement, W. & Kleitman, N. C. Cyclic variations in EEG
during sleep and their relation to eye movements, body
motility, and dreaming. .EEE clin. Neurophysigl.,
1957, 2y 673-690.

Dement, W. & Wolpert, E. A. The relation of eye movements,
body motility, and external stimuli to dream
content. J. Exp. Psychol., 1958, 55, 543-553.

Goodenough, D., Shapiro, A., Holden, M., & Steinschriber, L.
A comparison of "dreamers” and ”non—dreamers": eye
movements, electroencephalograms, and the recall of
dreams. J. abnorm. soc. ngchol., 1959, 59, 295-302.

Kleitman, N. Patterns of dreaming. Scien. American, 1960,
2031 82-88.

Kremen, I. Dream reports and rapid eye movements: an
appraisal. Unpublished doctoral dissertation,
Harvard U., 1961.

Kremen, I. Some current issues in the study of dreams.

Paper read at the Duke University Colloquium,
Feb. 8, 1963.

43

44

Lachmann, F., Lapkin, B., & Handlemann, N. The recall of
dreams: its relation to repression and cognitive
control. J. abnorm. soc. Psychol., 1962, QQJ 160-162.

Mostellen, F. & Bush, R. R. Selected Quantitative TeChniques,
Chapter 8 in Handbook of Social Psychology, Vol. 1.
Reading, Massachusetts, Addison-wesley Publ. Co.,
1954.

Oswald, I. Sleeping and Wakinqqi Physiology and Psychology.
Amsterdam, New York, Elsevier Pub. Co., 1962.

Parnell, R. W. Behavior and Physique: an Introduction to
Practical and Applied Somatometry. London, E. Arnold,
1958.

Schachtel, E. Metamorphosis: on the Development of Affect,
Perception, Attention, and Memory. New York, Basic
Books, 1959.

Schonbar, Roselea. Some manifest characteristics of recallers

and non-recallers of dreams. J. consult. Psychol.,
1959,_2;, 414—418.

Shapiro, A., Goodenough, D. & Gryler, R. Dream recall as a
function of method of awakening. Unpublished paper,
State University of New York. Downstate Medical
Center, Brooklyn, New York, 1963.

Sheldon, W. H. with collaboration of Stevens, S. S. &
Tucker, W. B. Varieties of Human Physique: an
Introduction to Constitutional Psychology. New
York and London, Harper and Bros. Publ., 1940.

Sheldon, W. H. with collaboration of Stevens, S. S. ‘Thg
Varieties ovauman Tempegament: a Psycholoqy of
Constitutional Differences. New York and London,
Harper and Bros. Publ., 1945.

Tart, C. Frequency of dream recall and some personality
measures. J. consult. Psychol., 1962, 26, 467-470.

 

Walker, Helen M & Lev, J. Statistical Inferences. New York,
Henry Holt and Co., 1953.

Wolpert, E. & Trosman, H. Studies in the psychophysiology
of dreams: I. experimental evocation of sequential
dream episodes. A.M.A. Archives Neur. and Psychiatry,
1958, 19, 603.

 

APPENDIX A

PILOT STUDY QUESTIONNAIRE

How often do you dream?
almost every night
2 to 5 times a week
once a week
2 to 3 times a month
once a month
less than once a month
.____ never
How often do you recall Whatymn1dream about?
one dream almost every day
2 to S dreams a week
one dream a week
2 to 3 dreams a month
less than one dream a month
_____ never

How many dreams that you had in the past can you now

recall?

46

APPENDIX B

 

NAME ......................................................... AGE ...... 18 ......

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

ADULT DEVIATION CHART DATE ........................

or PHYSIQUE . _

(Male Standards) OCCUPATION ...... .... .............. Marrch/Smglc. Ch.: H ...... F ...... REF No ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

Fat: (Skinlold) A80 Ton.) 3 Skinfold churcmenu

Imms.) Overtyiups ..._18... l6——-24 I2 I5 I8 22 27 33 4o 48 Q) 68 83 IOO I20
Subscapuhr 22 25-34 I5 IS 22 27 33 42 so 59 7o 84 m I20 I42
Suprailiac... 17 35—44 I7 2| 25 3o 37 46 55 66 78 95 us I38 I62
16mm 57... 45—54 I8 22 27 32 40 49 59 7| 84 I02 I24 I47 I72

ENDOHORPHY Emmm I II 2 2I 3 3} 4 4; G) 5; 6 6; 7

mam (insJ 67'0 . 55-0 56-5 58-0 595 an 62-5 640 65-5 CD 68-5 70-0 7I-5 73-0 74-5 76-0 77-5 79-0 80-5

Bone: Humcrus 6%" 534 549 5-64 5-78 5-93 607 622 I. 37 MI 6}; ("5 65-5 70-2 724 7-38 7-53 7-67 7-82

(cm:.) chur . 9‘5 .762 783 804 8-24 8-45 866 887 90; 92.3 5.4,, 5,70 99I I0-I2 I033 I053 I074 I095 II-I6

Muscle: Bicep: 31-6 ..24-4 250 257 263 27-0 277 283 290 297 303 '3'I'0'QI5) 32-2 330 336 34-3 35-0 35-6

Inns.) cm 36'3 2::- 5 293 30-I 308 3I 6 324 33-2 339 347 355 333:; 37-I 37-8 3.16 33-4 402 4I-o 4I-8

Firs: estimate 01 mesomorphy l H 2 2i 3 3l 4 f} (3} Si 6 6} 7

Correction for In (7.7. mms.) I2 I5 I8 22 27 33 40 ' 48 (3‘) 68 £3 1") I20 I40

Age: l6-24 -II +I +1 4, 0 .3 —I -—I QIE -2 -2 -3 -—4 .
25—34 HI) H +1 +1 0 I 4 —! ~I: —H 2: ~22 ~3I -4
35+ (4}) (H) +5 +§ 0 .3 .1 4 --l -—I,' --7 2; --3 -—3}

MESOMORPHY (corrected estimate) I II 2 2; 3 (37"; 4 4g 5 5g : I.:- 7

Vv'cigh: Wt. lb. H.VV.R. A50

Present I8 I2-I I23 I25 I27 C'2 I3: I33 I35 I37 l3' I40 I421 I4.

II.I:.w. 23 II-7 l2-O I22 I25 I2 5 I3 0 I32 I34 I36 llw MO I4 2 I21

053.3! 28 “-5 II-:. I2-I I24 1‘6 I2: l3-0 I33 I35 I33 L; 1-22 I’-4

At '8 7"“! 33 II-3 I17 I20 2} . 5 I27 I29 I32 13-: I3I I3. :4-I I44

N23762:” 38 II? In.» II-I‘ III :j". I1. I758 13-! I33 |3-( I33 It! I41.

Recent (mac 43+ II-I II-4 II 7 12 0 I23 I26 I28 I3-I I33 I3 6 I3 9 HI .1446

ECTOMORF‘HY I II 2 2§ (3“, 3; 4 4i 5 5; 6 6g 7

FIG. I. The ALI 511.118 of adult (IL-\‘intiI‘II‘I (‘1'..1 ‘I’Iur III'Iy..ir;:I;-. 'HI." I:"II.A.5IIII;II‘II-:.-I5 ofa [Um-.101;- Pt 5.33] 133w been ringed

and IIII- 12]:I~III2‘I}'pL‘- Ila-yin: Ira-I IIiIcI‘t from the chart.

46’

APPENDIX C

PARNELL TECHNIQUE OF SOMATOTYPING

Height is taken in inches. The subject stands back
to a wall scale, takes a deep breath and stretches up to
maximum height, his heels remaining in contact with the
ground.

weight is recorded to the nearest pound. Up to one
pound is deducted for the weight of underclothes permitted
and worn.

Bone meagppements (in centimetres). The distance
between the median and lateral epicondyles of the humerus
and of the femur are measured. The humeral epicondyles
are the bony points at the elbow felt on either side when
the upper arm is held forward horizontally and the forearm
is bent upwards at right angles.

The femoral epicondyles are measured with the subject
sitting on a chair with his foot on the floor and leg
vertical; the distance required is the maximum bony width
immediately above the line of the knee joint, with which
the leg in this position may be felt as a horizontal groove
on both the inside and outside of the knee at the level of
the lower border of the patella or knee cap. Engineer's

sliding steel calipers fitted with 3 inch arms are used.

50

51

The venier scale commonly fitted is an unnecessary refine-
ment. Indeed, ordinary steel outside curved calipers with
screw adjustment and quick release were originally used;
calipers of this kind are less expensive but the technique
takes longer and time is important where large numbers have
to be measured. The points of the calipers, with the measurer's
index finger alongside, are placed against the tip of each
epicondyle and the subject himself tightens the screw.
A steel centimetre rule allows the distance between caliper
points to be measured to 0.5 mm. To prevent scratching the
skin,the caliper points, which have previously been smoothed
with a file, are carefully eased away with the forefingers
from the underlying skin. Alternatively, the split screw
may be released so many turns to withdraw the calipers and
subsequently tightened by the same amount. In very obese
persons, straight arm sliding calipers give femoral readings
up to 0.3 mm. more than pointed calipers because the points
dip more closely to the bone. The chart standards were
derived from the original measurements with pointed calipers,
not the sliding arm instrument, but in the absence of obesity,
if firm pressure is applied the difference between may be
ignored.

Muscle qirth measurements (in centimetres). Biceps

girth is taken with a soft and very flexible steel tape

52

over a tensely contracted biceps with the elbow fully
flexed. Calf girth is taken with the subject standing
with legs slightly apart; the maximum girth being recorded.
Both girth measurements are taken with the tape in light
contact with the skin. In the case of bone and muscle
girths, both sides of the body are measured both as a
check and to select the larger, if they differ, for entry
on the chart. The larger measurement commonly indicates
the dominant side of the body.

.Skinfold measurementg of subcutaneous fat (in milli-
metres) are recorded with subcutaneous tissue calipers at
three sites:

1. Subsgapular. The skinfold is raised with the thumb
and forefinger of the left hand over the angle of
the right scapula (lowest angle of the shoulder
blade), the skinfold running downwards and outwards
in the direction of the ribs.

2. Suprailiac. The skinfold is raised, as before,
with the left hand in a position 1 to 2 inches
above the anterior superior iliac spine (the pro-
montory at the front end of the hip bone) so that
the fold runs forwards and slightly downwards.

3. Over triceps muscle, halfway between the
acromion and the olecranon (the outermost bony tip
of the shoulder and the point of the elbow) on the
back of the upper arm. Muscle fibres are excluded,

if necessary, by locking the elbow joint momentarily
in full extension.

The sum of these three subcutaneous fat measurements is
used as an indication of the total amount of subcutaneous

fat in the body.*

53

All of the above measures are referred to the M.4

chart listed in Appendix B.

(Taken from Parnell, 1958, pp. 14-15)

*In the present study Parnell's suggestion that

the fat measures be taken after an interval of five seconds
to allow for settling was found to be very important. The
first set of fat measures were not as reliable as hOped for
but when a standardized interval was imposed upon the fat
measures, inter-rater reliability increased. It is felt that
this suggestion should be incorporated as an integral step

in the procedure. Inter-rater reliability does not include
the first set of measures, however, the author did reassess
this group with the standardized five second interval for

fat measures.

APPENDIX D

Name:

Age:

Date of Birth:

Today's Date:

Sex:
College:
Year:

Major:

M

F

51;

Home Town:

Approximate Population of Town:
Do you live on a farm?

Father's Occupation:

Mother's Occupation:

Father's Education (Through what
grAde or year in college):

Mother's Education (Through what
'gnade or-year.in college):

Race:
Ethnic Background:
Religious Affiliation:

 

Code Number

 

Date

 

A QUESTIONNAIRE ON SLEEP AND WAKING

INSTRUCTIONS: Please read each of the questions carefully. Most
of the questions involve choosing between various alternatives.
But Where you are asked to give more specific information,
please do so with as much completeness as you can.

5'6

6a.

1

At what hour do you usually retire?

 

How many hours do you normally sleep per night?

 

Do you fall asleep easily?

___rarely
___a1ways
___usually
___never

Have you ever had any difficulty in going to sleep?

yes
no

In general, do you sleep. . .

__mlike a log

___soundly

.__;lightly

.___so lightly as to be easily disturbed

How often do you move around in bed while you sleep?

frequently
moderately often
occasionally

How do you know that you move around in bed while you sleep?

When you sleep in new surroundings (in a room and bed other than
your own), do you sleep. . .

___like a log

___sound1y

___so lightly as to be easily disturbed
___lightly

Do you sleep without difficulty in noisy surroundings?

always
usually
never
rarely

:57

10.

11.

12.

13.

11+.

15.

16b.

2

Have you been told by others that you talk in your sleep?

yes

no

If the answer to question 9 is "yes," is it reported that you
talk in your sleep. .

frequently
moderately often
occasionally

Have you been told by others that you walk in your sleep?

yes

no

If the answer to question 11 is "yes," is it said that you walk
in your sleep. . .

frequently
moderately often
occasionally

Do these sleep-walking episodes still occur?

yes

no

If the answer to question 13 is no, at what age did sleep-
walking cease?

In general, do you rely upon. . .

being wakened by extraneous means (alarm clock, someone calling)
waking naturally
both equally often

When you wake in the morning, do you ordinarily. . .

___a. lie in bed trying to go back to sleep

___b. lie in bed thinking of one thing or another (going over a
dream, daydreaming, planning for the day, some other)

0. get immediately out of bed, but sit around drinking coffee

and/or smoking

d. get immediately out of bed, wash, shave (if male), and

generally ready yourself for the day's activities

If the answer to question 16a is p, which of the alternatives
given in'the jarentheses to Q; is the one you most frequently
think about .. g 8

17.

18.

20.

3
When you wake in the morning, do you ordinarily.

feel wide awake immediately
require five to fifteen minutes before you feel wide awake
remain sluggish for as long as an hour or even longer

When do you usually feel most like working?

___mornings
___afternoons
___evenings
___late at night

Below you will find a list of activities that commonly occur
following arousal from sleep. Arrange by number the
activities in some sequence that corresponds to your most usual
one, though you need not include each activity.

____exercise
,-“ lie in bed 5 minutes or longer
.,__ urinate
__ defecate

__ wash
. __. shave

.__drink coffee
.-__ eat breakfast
.___deydream

._.dress

..u_.reflect on one's dreams

.m__work (study, class, other)

,._.smokc

.-__plan the day's activities

--__engage in extended social activities

After retiring, but before falling asleep, do you tend most
often. . .

to daydream

to go over the highlights of the preceding day

to think about the morrow

(Check one alternative only.)

 

Code Number
Date__

QUESTIONNAIRE ON DREAMS

INSTRUCTIONS: Please read each of the questions carefully. Most
of the questions involve choosing between various alternatives.
But where you are asked to give more specific information,
please do so with as much completeness as you can.

60

,1

In the light of your own experience, describe what you think
distinguishes dreaming from waking experience. Use your own
words to express what you think distinguishes your experience
in dreams from other experience. we are concerned with what
you perceive to be the difference and with how you define
dreaming--pgp with what you may have heard or learned in some
class or read about dreaming.

Use other side if necessary.

4.1

P
How often do you recall what you dream about?

___pne dream or more almost every day

___3 to 6 dreams a week

___approximately 2 dreams per week (5 to 7 dreams per month)
___one dream a week

,___2 to 3 dreams a month

___one dream a month

___less than one dream a month

___never

0f the dreams you have had in the past, how many can you recall
something of now? Think about this for five minutes, placing

a tally mark in the space below for each dream of which you
recall something.

For whatever reason, how often do you wake up during the night?

often
rarely
never
always

Ill

Do you go back to sleep readily after waking or being awakened
during the night?

always
rarely
never
usually

I

How often do you wake up with the impression that you had dreamt,
yet you are unable to recall what your dream was about?

rarely
never
often
always

I

When this occurs, how often do you recall what your dream was
about later in the day?

rarely
never

always
often

62.

10.

11.

12.

3

When you recall a dream later in the day, do you recall. . .

the entire dream

a major part of the dream

fragments of the dream

an isolated detail of the dream

sometimes one, sometimes another, of these alternatives
(specify which ones). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

When you recall a dream later in the day, does the dream or
some part of it come back to you. . .

gradually
suddenly

some other way (specify). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

When you recall a dream later in the day, is it accompanied
by a subjective feeling of. . .

doubt
certainty
other (Specify). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Check the items which describe the context in which you are
apt to recall a dream later in the day.

___striving actively to remember the dream
___daydreaming about something else
___not thinking about anything in particular
a chance encounter with some object or person related in
some way to the dream material
without the dream being immediately in mind, the occurrence of
a thought about some object, event, or person that is relatedin
, some way to the dream material
___hearing something that makes reference in some way to the
dream material
___other

How often do your dreams affect your moods or feelings during

133

13.

14.

15.

16.

17.

180

19.

4

How often do you wake up to find that your mood or feelings
are the same as those that you think you experienced while
dreaming?

often
always
never

rarely

If you check either of the first three alternatives to question
number 13, do these moods or feelings persist into the day?

yes

no

Have you on occasion instructed yourself when going to sleep
to wake at a given hour?

yes

no

How successful has this been? (Answer only if you check "yes"
to question 15.)

___never successful
___always successful
___pften successful
___rarely successful

Have you ever been able to decide beforehand what you would
dream about during your sleep?

yes
no

If the answer to question 17 is "yes," describe what techniques
you use to induce the desired dream.

Have you ever been aroused from a dream and then gone back to
sleep, resuming the dream again?

yes

no

L4

P0.

’33.

5

If the answer to question 19 is "yes," was the dream resumed
because. . .

you decided that you wanted the dream to continue
it Just occurred; you had no control over it

Have you ever been able deliberately to alter the drift of
events while dreaming?

___ye S
no

If the answer to question 21 is "yes," describe such a dream
and the nature of the alteration.

How did you deliberately alter the dream?

Have you ever realized without first waking that you were
actually eXperiencing a dream as it was occurring?

yes
no

If the answer to question 24 is "yes," did your realization
that you were dreaming. . .

occur momentarily at some point in the dream
- persist throughout the dream

If the answer to question 21418 "yes," on what basis did you
make the Judgment without first waking that you were dreaming?

65'

Many normal people report that they experience h o ic ima e ; that is,
"imagery of any sense, frequently of intense, fist hgl—Iucfitory vividness,
experienced in the drowsy state before sleep."

27. Have you ever experienced hypnagogic imagery? yes no

28. If you have experienced such hypnagogic imagery, describe them:

29. How often do you experience hypnagogic imagery?

___occasionally
often

___regularly

30. In your experience, hypnagogic images involve which sense modalities?

the sense of touch (tactual)

the sense of sound (auditory)

the sense of smell (olfactory)

the sense of sight (visual)

the sense of movement (kinesthetic)

the sense of taste (gustatory)

6.6

31. In what way or ways does the experience of hypnagogic imagery diffs: from
dream experience?

32. In what way or ways does the experience of hypnagogic imagery differ from
images experienced ordinarily during the day?

67.

APPENDIX E

Table A. Chi-square data for D2: ”How often do you recall
what you dream about?" N = 54.

 

 

 

Frequency of Recall Endos Mesos Ectos Totals
Low frequency 8 8 8 24
High frequency 8 12 10 30
Totals 16 20 18 54
X2 = .40 (.902p) .75)2df

 

Table B. Chi-square for D6: ”How often do you wake up with
the impression that you had dreamt, yet you are
unable to recall what your dream was about?" N = 54.

 

 

 

Frequency Endos Mesos Ectos -Totals
Never 3 6 1 10
Rarely 7 8 10 25
Often 6 6 7 19
Totals 16 20 18 54
X2 = 2.60 (.75) p > .50) 4 df

 

69

APPENDIX F

Table C. Chi-square data for SS: "In general, do you

 

 

 

sleep . . ." N = 53.
Depth of sleep Endos Mesos Ectos Totals
Lightly l 2 6 9
Soundly 9 15 9 33
Like a log 6 3 2 11
Totals 16 20 17 53

X2 = 8.66 (.10> p >.05) 4df

 

Table D. Chi—square data for S6: ”How often do you move
around in bed while you sleep?" N = 51

 

 

 

Frequency Endos Mesos Ectos Totals
Occasionally 5 7 6 l8
Moderately Often 6 5 6 17
Frequently 5 6 5 16
Totals 16 l8 17 51
2

X .53 (.98) p > .95) 4df

 

71

72

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Table E. Chi-square data for S9: “Have you been told by

others that you talk in your sleep?"

Answer Endo Meso Ecto Totals
Yes 11 7 ll 29
No 5 ll 7 231

Totals 16 18 18 52
X2 = 3.39 with 2df (.25 > p > .10)
Table F. Chi-square data for 811: ”Have you been told by
others that you walk in your sleep?" N = 52.

Answer Endo Meso Ecto Totals
Yes 6 3 l 10
No 10 15 17 42
Totals l6 18 18 52

x2 = 5.67 with 2df (.10 > p > .05)

 

73

Table G- Data for Sl6a: "When you wake in the morning, do

you ordinarily . . ." N = 47.

 

 

 

Answer Endos Mesos Ectos Totals
a 3 2 3 8
b 7 8 9 24
c 0 0 0 0
d 3 7 5 15
13 17 17 Z
X2 = 1.61 (.95.> p > .90) 6df

 

Table H. Data for 817: ”When you wake in the morning,

do you ordinarily . . ." N = 52.

 

 

Answer* Endos Mesos Ectos Totals
Feel awake immed. 2 3 3 8
Median value 11 12 ll 34
Stay sluggish . . . 3 3 4 10
Totals 'I6 'I8 'I8 52
X2 = 1.13 (.90.> p > .75) 4df

 

*Confer Appendix C for these answers.

3220771 USE 0323”.

 

MICHIGAN STATE UNIV. LIBRARIES

Ill Illl 1| III II lllll ll
9 1

312 30 0902678