Upload
others
View
3
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
A STUDY OP CONCEPT FORMATION AS A FUNCTION
OF MEASURABLE INTELLIGENCE
APPROVED:
if\, Jor Professor /
Sinor Professor
Dean of the Stehqfcl At Education Dean of the 3c hotel ̂ f Education
fiean of the Graduate School ^
A STUDY OF CONCEPT FORMATION AS A FUNCTION
OF MEASURABLE INTELLIGENCE
THESIS
Presented to the Graduate Council of the
North Texas State University in Partial
Fulfillment of the Requirements
For the degree of
MASTER OF SCIENCE
By
Glyn Warren Ridge, B. S,
Denton, Texas
January, 1967
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
LIST OF TABLES i"v
Chapter
I. INTRODUCTION 1 Theoretical Background and Related Studies Statement of Problem Procedure
II. ANALYSIS OF DATA 18
Statistical Treatment Results Discussion Summary
APPENDIX A ... 24
APPENDIX B AO
BIBLIOGRAPHY . . . . . . . . . 43
LIST OF TABLES
Table Page
I. Rank Order Correlation between I. Q. and Number cf Trials to Criterion in Phase One * 18
II. Variance of Effects of Complexity upon Speed of Performance to Criterion 22
CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION
Until recently the area of concept forest ion has been
more closely bound to philosophy than to psychology. Since
it has been linked to experimentally intangible terras such
as "abstraction," "cognitive processes," etc., this area of
study has yet to be completely disentangled from epistemology
and formal logic, and this situation has led to a limited
amount of psychological knowledge concerning the dynamics
involved in concept formation.
Theoretical Background and Belated Studies
Since a concept must necessarily be indirectly Inferred,
the definition of a concept has varied greatly from writer
to writer, and this variation has occurred to such an extent
that it is difficult to determine if all studies are dis-
cussing the same process. Vinacke defines concept formation
as involving
. . . processes of perception and learning by means of which the individual develops an organised and coherent relation to the outside world. The consequences of these processes is the establishment of concepts, the cognitive structures which link the individual's pre-sent perceptions and learning to his previous experiences.*
^•William Edgar Vinacke, The Psychology of Thinking (New York, 1952), p. 98.
?
He thfit a d 1st.ire* ion must be made between the proc-
ess of concept format-on and the contents of the concepts
forrred. He does not atterrpt to define concepts but rather
attempts to define their DJ; ra meters, The characteristics
.which must be taken into conslderatIon, according to Vinacke,
are
1. Concepts are not direct sensory data but something resulting1 fror the elaboration, combination, etc., thereof . . . 2. A corollary of the first property therefore is that concepts depend on the previous experience of the organism, 3. Concepts are systems within the mental organization which tie together, link, or combine discrete sensory experiences » . . 4. It xay be inferred that such ties cr links are sym-bolic In nature; that is, the same concept nay be invoked by a variety of stimuli. In the human organism, words usually fulfill this symbolic function: a word ties together different experiences with the san;e object, experiences with different objects sorrehov related to each other, the emotional processes aroused in these experiences, etc. 5. Cn the aide of the internal processes of the organise, concepts represent selective factors. An external stimulus arouses a symbolic response, on the one hand, or a symbolic response.guides perceptual activity, whichever comes first.
3 Rhine and Silun define an attitude as a concept with
an evaluative dimension. For PiVesta
A concept 1B defined by some principle or common dimen-sion that perfflits the classification of objects. The principle is abstracted aa a feature of a class of stimulus patterns through recurrent experiences . . . .
2Ibid., pp. 100-101.
^Ranon J. Rhine and Betsy A. Silun, "Acquisition and Change of a Concept Attitude as a Func11on of Consistency of Reinforcement," Joumal of Experimental Psychology. LV (1958), p. 525.
For all objects and experiences an essential condition for concept formation Is associations betvaon a common response and a variety of stimuli.
Soa«what in opposition to DiVesta's emphasis on associations,
is Vyaotsky who was certain that previous investigations had
disproved the view that concept formation is based on asso-
ciative connections.
Ach'a experiments showed that concept formation is a creative, not a mechanical passive, process: that a concept emerges and takes shape in the course of a complex operation aimed at the solution of some problem; and that the mere presence of external conditions favor-ing & mechanical linking of word and object does not suffice to produce a concept . . . Memorizing words and connecting them with objects does not in itself lead to concept formation; for the process to begin, a problem must arise that cannot be solved otherwise than through the formation of new concepts.5
Concepts are generally thought to vary along dimensions
of concretenees and abstractness, and as with concepts, defi-
nitions of concreteness and abstractness vary. In the forma-
tion of concrete concepts, perceptual elements of a stimulus
situation are grouped as a singular category of an event.
Thlh proceas is thought to be a sufficient organization of
experience for the formation of & concrete concept. The for-
mation of abstract concepts requires mora th&n the grouping
of perceptual elements. Some form of classification of ex-
perience la Involved in the formation of abstract concepts,
^Francis J. DiVest®, "Contrast Effects In Verbal Condi-tioning of Meaning," Journal of Experimental Psychology. IAII (June, 1961), pp. 535-5357
^L» S. Vygotsky, Thought and Language (Cambridge, 1962), p. 98.
but sensory experience alone is not a sufficient basis of
categorization.
In human maturational development it can be logically
expected that concrete concepts will be formed earlier than
.abstract concepts. As Vinacke stated,
Although it is true that experimenters have striven to devise conditions under which the subject is confronted with new experiences out of which new concepts are sup-posed to be evolved, it should now be apparent that the adult does not usually (if ever) learn new concepts in the same sense as a child does. Rather, the adult uti-lizes his repertory of concepts in new ways and In rela-tion to new stimuli, or reorganizes the components of concept systems.6
The level of difficulty in learning concepts is related
to language, at least where language is a factor in learning.
Whorf suggested that higher levels of thinking are dependent
on language with the structure of the language influencing
the manner In which a subject organizes and understands his
environment. Within this framework, the probability that a
subject develops a concept depends on the number of available
words (and therefore, symbolic components) bearing on the con-
cept. If no word or only a few words are available to denote
a possible dimension of experience, the probability Is In-
creased that these objects or events will be categorized in
some other fashion. The availability of a very large number
of words, however, to denote objects falling within one
^Vinacke, op. clt.. pp. 100-101.
^B. L. Whorf, Language, Thought, and Reality (Cambridge, 1956), ,p. 27.
potential class or category also appears to decrease the prob-
ability of forming a higher-level concept which would include
the whole class. This is seen, for example, in the Lapps'
having no generic name for snow.® A Lapp has access to forty
separate words for snow which are individually descriptive of
separate physical characteristics of snow. He has a word for
falling snow, for melting snow, for hard-frozen snow, and for
any physical state of snow which he can experience. He does
not, however, consider these forty words as belonging to a
single class of events. Snow 1ms forty different states of
being, and these forty states of being do not relate to each
other directly. The relation between the number of words
available to denote objects that are similar along some dimen-
sion of experience may be curvilinear* A concept is somewhat
more likely to be formed within the broad range from very few
words to very many words.
Some experimenters have noted that an Increase in rele-
vant dimensions increases difficulty, Wallach^, using three
levels of complexity in an experiment, found that her results
favored the view that the complexity of concept-attainment is
a function of the structure of the concept and the number of
®Helnz Werner, Comparative Psychology of Mental Develop-ment (Chloago, 19^0), pp. 56-57.
^Llse Wallach,"The Complexity of Concept-Attalnment," American Journal of Psychology. LXXV (February, 1962), pp. 277-203.
cognitive units It Involves. Reed*0 found that the consist-
ency of concepts or correctness was related to complexity.
As complexity Increased, the proportion of correct responses
defining a concept decreased markedly. As complexity In-
creased, the proportion of Inconsistent or Incorrect responses
Increased correspondingly. He stated, M . . . as the com-
plexity of the stimuli Is Increased there is a definite trend
to shift from logical to illogical learning, or to base con-
cepts on such factors as the primacy and frequency, and
sensory similarity of contiguous stimuli."
Staats and Staats**, considering meaning as a response,
attempted an experiment to show that the same expectations
should apply to meaning as to other reaponses. They attempted
to show that meaning could be classically conditioned. In-
telligence, for example, can be Inferred from responses on
validated measures of intelligence. It Is Inferred from data,
for It cannot be directly observed. Meaning can also be In-
ferred from a response, and thus, it can only be measured
Indirectly, as with many other such Intangible contingencies*
Operating under the assumption that total word meaning is
composed of response components which can be separately con-
ditioned, they presented nonsense syllables contiguously with
*®Homer B. Reed, "IV: The Influence of the Complexity of the Stimuli." Journal of Experimental Psychology. XXXVI / » k i n"i ilium m i m ' i • i mftiiiH w
(19*6), p. 506.
**Arthur W. Staats and Carolyn K. Staats, "Meaning Established by Classical Conditioning," Journal of Experi-mental Psychology. LIV (1957), pp. 74-80.
different words. The nonsense syllables were visually pre-
sented and the test words were given by auditory presentation.
The results of three such experiments were that there was
significant evidence that meaning responses had been condi-
tioned to nonsense syllables.
12
Rhine and Sllun , In an experiment designed to explore
the possibility that reinforcement theory could explain and
predict concept-attitude development, found support for their
assumption. They stated, "It is commonly found that the ratio
of correct total responses corresponds approximately with
consistency of r e i n f o r c e m e n t I n another study by Grant, 1*5
Hake, and Hornseth , groups were trained with 100 per cent,
75 P«r cent, and 50 per cent reinforcement schedules to de-
termine the effects of such reinforcement contingencies upon
acquisition and extinction of verbal conditioned responses.
The 75 per cent and 50 per cent groups were essentially alike
and showed greater resistance to change than the 100 per cent
group. These writers chose to tie the field of concept forma-
tion to the already prevalent data relating to stimulus-
response and reinforcement theories. Two other theoretical
backgrounds will allow objective evaluation of the process
of concept formation. 12 Rhine and Silun, op. clt.. pp. 524-529.
^David A. Grant, Herold W. Hake and Jerome P. Hornseth, "Acquisition and Extinction of a Verbal Conditioned Response with Differing Percentages of Reinforcement," Journal of Ex-perimental Psychology. XLV (1953), pp. 64-74.
8
14 Osgood stated ,
The greater the discriminatory capacity of an organism, the more reduced and implicit can become the detachable reactions finally Included in the stable mediation proc-ess. The higher the organism, in the evolutionary scale, the finer the discriminations it can make and the less gross Its representing processes. Similarly, the more mature and intelligent the human individual, the less overt his symbolic processes. The hosts of fine discriminations that characterize language behavior are nature's farthest step in this direction.
The study of linguistically involved behavior should, there-
fore, represent the most complex level of behavior in any
organism.
Experimental evidence points to an association between
the specific learning process characteristic of a subject
and his intelligence. In a study of discrimination by Kendler
and K e n d l e r * i t was found that fast learners achieved a
reversal shift more readily than a non-reversal shift, while
the opposite was true of slow learners. From this result it
was inferred that fast learners utilized mediators in the
original discrimination, while the slow learners achieved the
discrimination through a stimulus-response association.
In a study by Osier and Trautman1^ it was demonstrated
that the effect of Increasing the number of irrelevant
14 Charles Egerton Osgood, Method and Theory In Experi-
mental Psychology (Hew York, 1953), p. 110.
15T. S. Kendler and Howard H. Kendler, "Reversal and Nonreversal Shifts in Kindergarten Children," Journal of Experimental Psychology. LVIII (1959), 56-60.
•^Sonia F. Osier and George E. Trautmen, "Concept Attain-ment: II Effects of Stimulus Complexity upon Concept Attain-ment at Two Levels of Intelligence." Journal of Experimental Psychology. DC 11 (1961), 9-13.
stimulus dimensions was to slow down the subjects of superior
intelligence without affecting those of normal intelligence.
These findings are consistent with the interpretation that
in concept-attainment high intelligence is associated with
hypothesis testing, while normal intelligence is characterized
by associative learning.
In the typical concept formation experiment, instances
of what a concept is and/or what it is not are presented to
subjects, and the subjects are asked to determine the defin-
ing attributes of the concept. The subjects may be required
to make a response after each instance, indicating whether
or not the Instance represented the concept. In some studies
no responses are made among a series of possible responses
that are definitively related to a particular concept. At
the conclusion of the series the subjects attempt to define
the concept.
It might be expected that choice of responses related
to a particular concept would aid in the discrimination of
the attributes that define the concepts, that responding
would increase the efficiency of learning. More importantly,
perhaps selection of responses which define the concept In
question is different from other responses used in rote
learning and concept formation studies in that it allows sub-
jects to regulate the flow of information they receive. It
might also be expected that subjects would be optimally set
to use information which they had sought. Experiments on
10
observing or orienting responses*^ and on vigilance^"® suggest
that responses that control presentation of discriminative
stimuli may increase the efficiency of performance.
On the other hand, the manipulation of attributes by a
subject may be seen as increasing the complexity of the in-
tellectual problem of attaining a concept. His problem Is
twofold. He must decide on the manipulations necessary for
gaining information relevant to the concept, and he must
interpret the results of attribute manipulations; in other
words, he must determine what information has been gained
about the concept he is attempting to define.
Among the complex behavioral processes, the naming
response is the most important basis for common responses.
A simple example Is that a common name can be attached to a
series of objects, all of which have different physical
characteristics to form a class. The name, or verbal re-
sponse, provides the basis for the common mediating process.
As mediators, they produce stimuli which may then become
conditioned to other mediating, Instrumental, or attitudinal
responses. Thereby, they permit the facilitation of new
learning whether cognitive or affective.
There is little reason to assume that an Individual
deliberates upon his actions prior to a response, but there
B. Wycoff, Jr., "The Role of Observing Responses in Discrimination Learning," Psychological Review, LDC (1952), pp. 431-442.
18 Janes Gordon Holland, "Human Vigilance," Science,
XXVIII (1958), 61-63.
11
is sufficient reason to assume that responses to cues, situa-
tion, or stimulus complexes reflect concepts held by the
responding individuals. To the rat in a maze a cue will
eventually become relevant to the direction of its goal be-
havior and the relationship of that relevant cue to the goal
will represent a concrete concept. The complexity of the
concepts it can attain will be limited to a very basic, con-
crete level.
Statement of Problems
The purpose of the present study was to evaluate several
areas of agreement and disagreement as outlined by or sug-
gested by the preceding data. For the purpose of this study,
a concept was operationally defined as a response to a stim-
ulus whereby that stimulus is defined as having a discernible
parameter of meaning. For example, the present study used
associative pairing of numbers and colors. A concept was de-
fined by a subject's response to a color as if it had the
manipulative properties of the number with which it was asso-
ciated .
The present study was also designed to investigate the
probability that a concept is formed mechanically, as a func-
tion of an individual's ability to utilize his experience.
While it has not been shown that conditioning, of itself, is
a necessary and sufficient condition for the formation of
concepts, subjects quite possibly vary along a dimension, or
12
dimensions, of concreteness and abstractness upon which they
are proportionately susceptible to the formation of concepts
through contiguous pairing of stimuli with the discernible
properties of those stimuli.
Intelligence can be measured Indirectly at best and any
measurement of intelligence must necessarily include in its
results some combination of one's past experience and his
ability to utilize that experience. The question arises
whether the process of concept formation is functionally re-
lated to ability plus experience.
It has previously been suggested^ that adults do not
and probably cannot form new concepts, but rather re-arrange
conceptual elements of past experience in new ways. However,
since concepts can logically be built only from elements of
a subject's experience, the question is raised whether the
re-arrangement of conceptual elements of past experience in
new ways is not the formation of a new concept. The present *
study attempted an indirect evaluation of the above suggestion.
If a subject can respond to a color as if it had the proper-
ties of the number with which it has been associated, he has
in effect transcended his past experience with that color and
has at least temporarily conceived a new dimension of meaning
to be associated with that color.
It can be expected that complex learning will be con-
tingent upon degree of intelligence. Associative learning,
19Vinacke, pp. 100-101.
13
however, Is more probably a function of normal intelligence,
and subjects of superior intelligence may not necessarily
have an advantage over those of normal intelligence in asso-
ciate learning tasks.
For the purpose of this study, the following were
hypothesized:
1. The ability to condition a concept in a subject by
contiguous pairing of stimulus with a statement or demonstra-
tion of meaning or property to be associated with that stimulus
is a function of the subject's measurable intelligence.
2. Adult subjects, ranging in age from 18 to 40, can
form new concepts.
3. The formation of a concept will vary in difficulty
as subjects are required to use fewer elements of previous
experience.
4. Subjects of lower measurable intelligence will per-
form equally well or better than subjects of higher measurable
intelligence on a paired-associates learning task.
5. Subjects of higher measurable intelligence will form
concepts more quickly than subjects of lower measurable in-
telligence.
Procedure
Twenty-five subjects were chosen from volunteers. Educa-
tional range of subjects was from high school graduates to
master's degree students in arts and sciences. Ages were from
nineteen to forty. The subjects included nine females and
sixteen males.
14
Nine color cards were prepared for pre-training presenta-
tion to all subjects. In order to avoid the complication of
color-blindness, the name of each color was printed on each
card. An additional nine cards with the numbers one through
nine were prepared and placed above the appropriate color
cards. All cards were four inches by six inches in size ,
and the color cards were prepared by pasting colored paper
to the face of each color card. The colors and number were
paired as follows: one-red, two-green, three-yellow, four-
purple, five-pink, six-orange, seven-white, eight-blue, and
nine-brown. All subjects were allowed to study the cards
until they were certain of them and ready to begin phase one
of this study.
After studying the cards, each subject was given six
pages of arithmetic problems to work which consisted of
arbitrarily-chosen combinations of single digit manipulations.
On three of the pages of problems, consisting of sets of
twenty problems each, the subjects were asked to spell out
the answer as quickly as possible, and on the remaining three
pages the subjects were to print the answers as quickly as
possible in the conventional manner. These six pages of
problems were used to establish latency measures for perform-
ance criteria in this study. The three pages of written
problems provided a mean of the epeed of writing out the cor-
rect answers. Performance on these six pages with all subse-
quent pages was timed with a stop-watch. The mean of the
15
performance on the three printed answer sheets for the pre-
liminary problems was taken for each subject. The mean of
the performance on all six pages of the preliminary problems
was taken for each subject. This mean was used as the per-
formance criterion during phase one of this study which
constituted a paired-associates learning task. The mean of
the performance of the first three pages of preliminary
problems for all subjects was used as the performance criterion
for phase two of this study.
In phase one of this study, each subject was given sets
of color consisting of various combinations of the nine colors
used for the pre-training presentation. Each set consisted
of twenty units. Thirteen separate sets of twenty each were
prepared. Each subject was instructed to respond as quickly
as possible, and each performance was timed. The task in
this instance was to write the appropriate number beside
each color as quickly as possible. If a subject had not
performed at a speed equal to or faster than the previously
established criterion latency for phase one, he was again
given set one, and he continued again with set one through
thirteen until the criterion latency was equalled or sur-
passed. The criterion for success was one correct performance
at the criterion latency.
Subjects were divided into five groups of five each In
the order in which they were tested. The criterion for suc-
cessful completion of the final phase of this study was In
16
each case one correct performance at the criterion latency.
The criterion latency was established from the mean of per-
formance on the first three paces of the preliminary problems,
This latency measure represented a combination of the time
necessary to arrive at an answer and then to write it out.
The criterion for phase one, the mean of the performance on
the six pages of preliminary problems, represented a mean of
the time necessary for arriving at an answer and the time to
write it out. The five groups of phase two were in order of
level of complexity. Group one was the least complex and
group five the most complex. In phase two each test sheet
consisted of a list of twenty problems. Thirteen separate
lists were prepared. When a subject had reached list thir-
teen without reaching criterion performance, the subject
began again with list one and continued in numerical sequence
until reaching criterion. At the first level of complexity
the task was to manipulate a number and a color to arrive at
an answer which was a color. At level four, the subjects
were to manipulate two colors to arrive at an answer which
was a number. At level five, the subjects were to manipulate
two colors to arrive at an answer which was a color. All
problems were chosen arbitrarily in an attempt to equalize
the subject's responses over the nine colors. In phase two,
all subjects served in one group only.
All subjects were given an evaluation on three measures
related to intelligence. Two scales were chosen from the
17
Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale. The vocabulary scale was
chosen because the vocabulary of an individual is recognized
as being the best single Index of his intelligence. The
digit-symbol scale was chosen because it is partly a measure
of hand-eye co-ordination, and because performance in this
study is highly dependent upon hand-eye co-ordination. As a
measure of abstract reasoning, a non-verbal analogies test,
developed by the U. S. Air Force, Figure Analogies RPR04A
(see Appendix B), was chosen because its difficulty allowed
finer discrimination between subjects. The three test scores
were added together and a mean computed for each subject to
represent an intelligence measure. All sets used in phase
one and phase two of this study, along with the preliminary
problems used to establish latency measures, are included in
Appendix A.
A correlation was computed between the intelligence meas-
ure and performance on phase one of this study for the twenty-
five subjects. A rank-order correlation was computed for
each group between performance measures and intelligence meas-
ures. A trend analysis was performed to establish the effect
of level of complexity upon mean performance and the function
computed.
CHAPTER II
ANALYSIS OF DATA
Statistical Treatment
A Pearson correlation and rank-order correlation were
computed from the data gained in this study between the per-
formance measure In phase one and the intelligence measures.
A rank-order correlation was computed for each group between
performance measures and intelligence measures. A trend
analysis was performed to establish the effect of level of
complexity upon mean performance and the function computed.
Results
The Pearson correlation was .51» and the rank-order
correlation was .46 for phase one of this study. For phase
two the rank-order correlations are shown in Table I.
TABLE I
RANK ORDER CORRELATION BETWEEN I. Q. AND NUMBER OF TRIALS TO CRITERION IN PHASE ONE
Task Correlation
1 80 I 90 J 4 90 5 80
18
19
A trend analysis over the five groups in phase two
yielded an F value of 11.83. In order to be significant at
the .01 level of chance, an F value of 4.43 was required.
The results were highly significant.
The means of the group performances were plotted for
phase two, and the function was determined as being linear
with 75 per cent of the variation in performance accounted
for by the linear function. F values for quadratic and cubic
functions were respectively 3.89 and 3.18.
Discussion
The first hypothesis tended to be supported by the results
of the statistical analysis of the study data. All subjects
were able to reach criterion in both phases of this study
which indicated that all subjects were able to form the
operationally defined concept. Rank order correlations were
relatively high for all groups except group three. The issue
of concept formation being a creative versus a mechanical
process may be merely an issue of semantics. This study
consisted of a mechanical process of contiguous pairing of
stimulus and response. The above statistical analysis shows
that learning is a function of intelligence. This study in-
dicates that it can be a mechanical process, and whether or
not It is a creative process may be contingent upon the de-
finitive relationship of Intelligence to creativity.
20
The second hypothesis gained support by the fact that
all subjects did reach their respective criteria in phase two
of this study. However, Inspection of mean latencies of per-
formance for each group suggested that, as a group, the
subjects tended not to form concepts. Although all subjects
did reach criteria, post-criteria performance in all cases
tended to level off at less than criteria yielding in groups
three through five, a mean of performance less than the mean
of the criteria. Subjects, after reaching their respective
criteria, tended to be unable to continue performance at
such a latency.
The third hypothesis gained support by the above trend
analysis. Levels of complexity were determined in part by
the amount of Information gained from phase one that had to
be utilized in establishing a correct response. The tasks
became more complex as the subjects were required to by-pass
prior experience with numbers and colors. There was a highly
significant Increase In performance difficulty as complexity
Increased.
The fourth hypothesis was supported by the Pearson cor-
relation of .51 between number of trials to criterion and
measurable intelligence. In effect, higher intelligence
offers no advantage In an associative learning task. The
advantage of higher Intelligence must bear upon the utiliza-
tion of the Information gained rather than upon the gaining
21
The fifth hypothesis was supported by the rank-order
correlation for the five groups. The subjects of higher
measurable intelligence did form concepts more quickly than
subjects of lower measurable intelligence. The sudden drop
to a correlation of .50 in group three, although still sup-
porting the hypothesis, was not presently explainable.
Whether or not the operationally defined concept for
this study is a concrete or an abstract concept has not been
determined and was conaidered Immaterial for the purposes of
this study. It was, however, a relatively simple concept
having a minimum number of components. Concepts are generally
considered to be a classification of experience. Whether or
not there is a functional relationship between the number of
concept components and ease of concept formation has yet to
be determined. However, it might be expected from the results
of this study, that, as the number of concept components in-
creases, the level of difficulty will increase the more con-
cept formation relates to degree of intelligence. In this
same sense, there is & certain amount of redundancy, for
measurable intelligence may very well be a measure of the
number of concepts the Individual has already formed.
Concept formation as indicated by this study is related
to conditioning. It was a function of the contiguous pairing
of stimulus and response. In that sense, it was a mechanical
rather than a creative process. However, no attempt was made
to hold the effects of several possible variables constant.
22
There are many variables other than measurable intelligence
which might have significant effects upon concept formation,
but measurable intelligence was believed to have contained
the cumulative effects of all variables.
That there is an association between the specific learn-
ing process characteristic of a subject and his intelligence
was demonstrated by the present study. As the learning proc-
ess involves greater complexity, there is a positive correla-
tion between superior performance and superior Intelligence.
As the learning process involves associative learning, the
subjects of superior intelligence tend not to have an advan-
tage and may have a disadvantage in that they attempt to
utilize the information they are gaining by relating it to
previously gained information. The superior subject has an
advantage In the utilization of information, but not in the
gaining of Information. This suggests that any emphasis upon
rote learning will discriminate against Individuals of supe-
rior Intelligence. Table II shows the results of a simple
analysis of variance of effects of complexity upon speed of
performance criterion.
TABLE II
VARIANCE OF EFFECTS OF COMPLEXITY UPON SPEED OF PERFORMANCE TO CRITERION
lource of Variance s s df MS F
Complexity 804.16 4 201 .44 1 1 . 8 3 Error 340 .00 20 1 7 . 0 0
1144.16 24
23
Summary
An investigation to determine several variables In the
process of concept formation In adults resulted in the follow-
ing findings:
1. Subjects with lower measurable intelligence were
shown to be superior in performance to subjects of higher
measurable intelligence on a paired-associated learning task.
2. All subjects were shown to be capable of forming a
new concept by rearranging the meaning components of prior
experience with colors and numbers.
3. The process of concept formation was shown to be
explainable under known principles of contiguity in stimulus-
response learning.
4. Subjects of higher measurable Intelligence were
shown to be superior in performance on a concept formation
task.
5. It was indicated that the group tendency for adults
in this investigation was to form no new concepts, even though
individual subjects were capable of forming new concepts.
Concepts are formed by processes of perception and
learning by means of which the individual meaningfully or-
ganizes elements of experience to form a coherent relation-
ship to his view of reality. They are formed through the
association of elements of experience. In this study subjects
were conditioned to respond to a stimulus, a color, as if it
had the properties of the response, a number, to which it
had been associatlvely paired.
APPENDIX A
Preliminary Problems
These three sets of problems were given twice. The
first time required a conventional answer; the second time
required the answers be written out.
Set 1 Set 2 Set 3
1 + 4 2 + 3 - 9 + 5 =
7 + 3 = 8 • 2 = 2 + 3 =
6 + 1 = 7 + 0 — 5 + 8 = 2 + 7 3 + 6 — 8 + 2 —
1 + 8 = 2 + 7 — 7 • 0 = 2 + 3 — + 2 6 + 8 -
3 + 1 = 2 + 0 = 3 + 6 =
7 + 2 - 8 + 1 - 4 + 9 —
9 + 5 8 + 6 =• 2 + 7 =
5 + 2 rr 4 + 4 = 9 + 6 —
4 • 9 = 5 -f 8 = 3 + 2 —
9 + 3 - 8 + 2 = 8 + 4 = 4 + 1 - 5 + 0 = 2 + 0 —
2 + 9 3 + 8 2 + 9 -
8 + 4 =r 7 + 3 — 8 + 1 =
9 + 6 8 + 7 = 4 + 1 4 + 9 = 5 + 8 — 8 + 6 = 6 + 8 7 + 6 9 + 3 —
5 + 8 - 4 + 9 4 + 4 =
9 + 5 s 8 + 6 = 4 + 9 =
25
Phase One
Set 1 Set 2 Set 3 Set h Set 5
Red = Yellow = Green = White = Brown =
Green = Purple = Yellow - Blue - Red =
Yellow = Pink = Purple = Brown = Green =
Purple = Orange = Pink = Red = Yellow =
Pink = White = Orange = Green = Purple =
Orange = Blue = White = Yellow = Pink =
White = Brown = Blue = Purple = Orange =
Blue = Red = Brown = Pink = White =
Brown = Green = Red = Orange = Blue =
Red = Green = Yellow = Red = Red =
Blue = White = Purple = Yellow = Brown =
Yellow = Purple = Blue = Pink = Green =
Orange = Brown = Brown = White = Blue =
Pink = Orange = Red = Brown = Yellow =
Purple = Pink = Green = Green = White =•
White = Blue = Orange = Purple = Purple =
Green = Yellow = White = Orange = Orange =
Brown = Brown = Blue = Blue = Pink =
Blue = White = Orange = Brown = Red =
Red = Green = Yellow = Green = Pink =
26
Set 6 Set 7 Set 8 Set 9 Set 10
Greerv = Purple = Orange = Blue = Red =
Yellow = Pink = White = Brown = Yellow =
Purple = Orange = Blue - Red = Pink =
Pink = White = Brown = Green = White =
Orange = Blue = Red = Yellow = Brown =
White = Brown = Green = Purple = Green =
Blue - Red = Yellow = Pink = Purple =
Brown = Green = Purpie = Orange = Orange =
Red = Yellow = Pink = White = Blue =
Green = Red = Blue = Yellow = Green =
Purpie = Yellow = Brown = Purple = Yellow =
Orange = Pink = Red = Pink = Purple =
Blue = White = Green = Orange = Pink =
Red = Brown = Yellow = White = Orange =
Yellow = Green = Purple = Blue = White =
Pink = Purple = Pink = Brown = Blue =
White = Orange = Orange = Red = Brown =
Brown = Blue = White = Green = Red =
Blue = Green = Pink = Orange = Brown =
Purpie = Yellow = Yellow s Pink = Orange =
27
Set 11 Set 12 Set 13
Green = Red = Red =
Purple = Brown = Yellow =
Orange = Green = Pink =
Blue = Blue - White =
Red = Yellow = Brown =
Yellow = White = Green =
Pink = Purple = Purple =
White = Orange = Orange =
Brown = Pink = Blue =
White = Blue = Red =
Blue = Brown = Green =
Brown = Red = Yellow =
Red = Green = Purple =
Green = Yellow = Pink =
Yellow = Purple = Orange =r
Purple = Pink = White =
Pink = Orange = Blue =
Orange = White s Brown =
White = Blue ss Red =
Green = Yellow = Purple =
28
Phase 2, Group 1
The answer is a color
Set 1 Set 2 Set 3 Set 4 Set 5
1 + 1 = 2 + 1 = 0 + 1 = 1 + 1 = 6 + 3 =
6 + 3 = 6 + 2 = 0 + 3 = 2 + 1 = 2 + 6 =
2 + 1 = 3 + 1 = 0 + 5 = 3 + 3 = 4 + 1 =
2 + 6 = 7 + 1 = 0 + 2 = 5 + 1 = 3 + 1 =
3 + 3 = 5 + 1 = 0 + 4 = 1 + 2 = 2 + 2 =
4 + 1 = 2 + 4 = 1 + 7 = 3 + 3 = 4 + 4 =
5 + 1 = 3 + 5 = 3 * 3 = 5 + 2 = 6 + 3 =
3 + 1 = 6 + 1 = 4 + 1 = 2 + 5 = 3 + 6 =
1 + 2 = 1 + 2 = 3 + 1 = 1 + 5 = 1 + 4 =
It
CM
+
CM
3 + 1 = 2 + 2 = 2 + 1 = 6 + 2 =
3 + 3 = 4 + 1 = 9 + 0 = 3 + 1 = 7 + 1 =
4 + 4 = 3 + 3 = 3 + 6 = 5 * 1 = 2 + 4 =
5 + 5 = 2 + 5 = 2 + 4 = 3 + 5 = 6 + 1 =
6 + 3 = 3 + 6 = 5 + 2 = 1 + 2 = 3 + 1 =
2 + 5 = 1 + 4 = 6 + 3 = 4 + 1 = 3 + 3 =
3 + 6 s 5 + 2 = 1 + 2 = 2 + 5 = 3 + 6 =
1 + 5 = 5 «• 1 = 4 + 0 = 1 + 4 = 5 + 2 s
1 + 4 = 4 + 1 = 5 + 1 = 5 + 1 = 4 + 1 s
1 + 0 = 4 + 0 = 1 + 1 = 2 + 0 = 2 + 0 =
1!
VO
1 + 1 = 6 + 2 = 1 + 2 = 1 + 6 =
29
Set 6
2 + 1 =
4 + 1 -
3 + 1 =
3 + 3 =
5 + 2 =
2 + 5 =
1 + 4 =
4 + 1 =
4 + 4 =
1 + 4 =
2 + 4 =
3 + 3 =
4 + 1 =
3 + 1 =
2 + 4 =
1 + 2 =
3 + 3 =
1 + 4 =
8 + 0 s
3 + 1 =
Set 7
0 + 1 =
9 + 0 =
1 4 1 =
7 + 2 =
2 + 1 =
7 + 1 =
3 + 1 =
6 1 =
3 + 4 =
4 + 2 =
2 + 2 =
1 + 7 =
5 + 2 =
4 + 1 =
3 + 2 =
0 + 2 =
5 + 3 =
2 + 2 s
1 + 1 =
3 + 0 =
4 =
Set S
1 + 1
2 + 2
3 + 3
4 +
4 + 3
3 + 2
2 + 1
5 + 0
7 + 2
6 + 1
3 + 1
2 + 3
1 + 2
1 + 5
2 + 2
4 + 1
5 + 3
1 + 1
1 + 0
5 + 1
Set 9
0 + 1 =
0 + 5 =
1 + 0 =
1 + 4 =
1 + 8 =
2 + 4 =
3 + 1 =
3 + 6 :
4 + 4 =
5 + 3 =
6 + 3 =
8 + 1 =
0 + 3 =
1 + 4 =
1 + 8 a
2 + 3 =
1 + 4 =
3 + 5 =
3 + 1 s
7 + 1 =
Set 10
1 + 3 =
2 + 3 =
3 + 3 =
7 + 1 =
1 + 1 =
6 + 1 =
2 + 1 =
4 + 4 =
2 + 0 =
1 + 3 =
1 + 8 =
4 + 2 =
3 + 5 =
2 + 5 =
2 + 1 =
7 + 1 =
3 + 0 =
3 + 4 s
1 + 3 =
1 + 1 s
30
Set 11 Set 12 Set 13
1 + 1 = 1 + 3 = 2 + 1 =
6 + 3 = 2 + 3 = 6 + 2 =
2 + 1 - 3 + 3 = 3 + 1 =
2 + 6 — 7 + 1 - 7 + 1 =
3 + 3 = 1 + 1 = 5 + 1 =
4 + 1 S 6 + 1 = 2 + 4 =
5 + 1 = 2 + 1 = 3 + 5 =
3 + 1 4 + 4 = 6 + 1 -
1 + 2 - 2 + 0 = 1 + 2 -
2 + 2 1 + 3 = 3 + 1 =
1 + 8 = 3 + 3 = 6 + 2 =
4 + 2 = 4 + 4 = 8 + 1 =
3 + 5 = 5 + 2 = 0 + 3 =
2 + 5 6 + 3 = 1 + 4 =
2 + 1 = 2 + 5 = 1 + 8 =
7 + 1 = 3 + 6 = 2 + 3 =
3 + 0 = 1 + 5 = 1 + 4 -
3 + 4 ss 1 + 4 = 3 + 5 =
1 + 3 - 1 + 0 = 3 + 1 =
1 + 1 = 6 + 2 = 7 + 1 =
31
Phase 2 t
The answer for Group
color.
Set 1
Red + 1 =
Orange • J r
Green + 1 =
Green + 6 =
Yellow + 3 =
Purple + 1 =•
Pink + 1 =
Yellow + 1 =
Red + 2 sr
Green + 2 =
Yellow + 3 =
Purple + 4 =
Pink + 2 =
Orange + 3 =
Green + 5 =
Yellow + 6 =
Red + 5 =
Red + 4 s
Red + 0 =
Orange + 3 =
Set 2
2 + Red =
6 + Green :
3 + RecJ =
7 + Red =
5 + Red =
2 + Purple
3 + Pink =
6 + Red =
1 + Green =
3 + Red =
4 + Red =
3 + Yellow
2 + Pink =
3 + Orange
1 + Purple
5 • Green =
5 + Red =
4 + Red =
0 + Purple
1 + Red =
Groups 2 and 3
2 i s a nurrber and
Set 3
0 + Red =
r Yellow + 0 =
0 + Pink =
Green 4- 0 =
0 + Purple =
= Red + 7 =
3 + Yellow =
Purple + 1 =
r 3 + Red =
Green + 2 =
0 + Brown =
= Yellow + 6 =
2 + Purple =
= Pink + 2 =
= 6 + Green =
: Red + 2 =
0 + Purple =
Pink • 1 =
= 1 + Red =
Orange + 3 =
for Group 3 a
Set 4
Red + 1 =
Green + 1 =
3 + Yellow =
5 + Red =
Red 4 2 s
Yellow + 3 =
5 + Green =
2 + Pink =
Red + 5 =
Green + 1 =
3 + Red =
5 + Red =
Yellow + 5 =
Red + 2 =
4 + Red =
2 • Pink =
Red + 4 =
Pink + 1 =
0 + Green =
1 + Green =
32
Set 5 Set 6 Set ? Set 8
6 + Yellow = 2 + Red = 0 + Red = 1 4 Red =
2 + Orange = 4 + Red = Brown + 0 = 2 4 Green =
Purple 4 1 = 3 + Red = 1 4 Red = 3 4 Yellow =
Yellow + 1 = Yellow 4 3 = White 4 2 = Purple 4 4 =
2 + Green = Pink + 2 = Green 4 1 = 4 4 Yellow =
4 4 Purple = Green + 5 = White 4 1 = Yellow 4 2 =
Orange + 3 = 1 + Purple = Yellow 4 1 = Green 4 1 =
Yellow 4 6 = 4 + Red = Orange 4 1 = Pink 4 0 =
1 + Purple = 4 + Purple = 3 4 Purple = White 4 2 =
6 + Green = Red 4 4 = Purple 4 2 = Orange 4 1 =
White + 1 = Green + 4 = Green 4 2 = Yellow 4 1 =
Green + 4 = Yellow + 3 = 1 4 White = 2 4 Yellow =
6 4 Red = 4 4 Red = Pink + 2 = 1 4 Green =
3 4 Red = 3 4 Red = Purple 4 1 = 1 4 Orange =
Yellow + 3 = 2 4 Purple = Yellow 4 2 = 2 4 Green =
Yellow 4 6 = Red + 2 = 0 4 Green = Purple 4 1 =
5 + Green = Yellow 4 3 = Pink 4 3 = Pink 4 3 =
4 + Red = Red 4 4 = 2 4 Green = 1 4 Red =
Green + 0 = 0 4 Blue = 1 4 Red = Red 4 0 =
Red + 6 = 3 4 Red = Yellow 4 0 = Pink 4 1 =
33
Set 9 Set 10 Set 11 Set 12
0 + Red = 1 + Yellow = 1 + Red = Red 4 3 =
0 + Pink = Green + 3 = Cranue + 3 = Green 4 3 ;
Red + 0 = Yellow + 3 - 2 + Red = Yellow 4 3
1 + Purple = White + 1 = 2 + Orange = Red 4 7 =
1 + Blue = Red + 1 = = 3 + Yellow = Red 4 1 =
2 + Purple = 6 + Red = Purple + 1 = Orange 4 1 =
Yellow + 1 = Green + 1 = Pink 4 1 = Green 4 1 :
3 + Orange = Purple + A = 3 + Red = Purple 4 4 =
Purple + 4 = Green 4 0 = Red 4 2 = Green 4 0 :
Pink + 3 = Red 4 3 = 2 4 Green = 1 4 Yellow =
Orange + 3 = 1 4 Blue = 1 4 Blue = Yellow 4 3 =
Blue 4 1 = 4 + Green = 4 4 Green = Purple 4 4 =
0 4 Yellow = 3 4 Pink = 3 4 Pink = Pink 4 2 =
1 • Purple sr Green 4 5 = Green 4 5 = Orange 4 3 =
1 4 Blue = 2 4 Red = Green 4 1 = 2 4 Pink =
2 + Yellow = White + 1 = White 4 1 = 3 4 Orange S
1 4 Purple sr Yellow 4 0 = Yellow 4 0 = 1 4 Pink =
3 + Pink = 3 4 Purple = 3 4 Purple = 1 4 Purple =
Yellow + 1 = 1 4 Yellow = Red 4 3 = Red 4 0 =
White + 1 = 1 4 Red = 1 4 Red = Orange 4 3
34
Set 13
Green + 1 =
Orange + 2 -
Yellow + 1 =
White • 1 =
Pink + 1 =
2 + Purple =
3 + Pink =
Orange + 1 =
1 + Green =
3 + Red =
Orange + 3 =
Blue • 1 =
0 + Yellow =
1 + Purple =
Red + 8 =
Green + 3 =
Red + 4 =
Yellow + 5 =
Red + 3 =
White + 1 =
35
The answer
color.
Set 1
Red + Red =
Orange + Yellow
Green + Red =
Green + Orange =
Yellow + Yellow
Purple + Red =
Pink + Red =
Yellow + Red =
Red • Green =
Green • Green =
Yellow + Yellow
Purple + Purple
Pink + Green =
Orange + Yellow
Green + Pink =
Yellow + Orange
Red + Pink =
Red • Purple =
Red • Red =
Orange + Yellow
Phase 2, Groups b and 5
for Group 4 Is a number, and for Group 5 a
Set 2
Green + Red =
Orange + Green =
Yellow + Red =
White + Red =
Pink + Red =
Green + Purple =
Yellow + Pink =
Orange + Red =
Red + Green =
Yellow * Red =
Purp le + Red =
Yellow + Yellow =
Greeh • Pink =
Yellow + Orange =
Red + Purple =
Pink + Green =
Pink • Red =
Purple • Red =
Red + Purple =
Red • Red =
Set 3
Red + Red =•
Yellow + Red =
Red + Purple =
Green + Red =
Red + Purple =
Red + White =
Yellow + Yellow =
Purple + Red =
Yellow + Red =
Green + Green =
Red + Blue =
Yellow + Orange =
Green + Purple =
Pink + Green =
Orange + Green =
Red + Green =
Red • Purple =
Pink • Red =
Red + Red =
Orange + Yellow
36
Set 4
Red + Red =
Green + Red =
Yellow + Yellow =
Pink + Red =
Red + Green =
Yellow + Yellow =
Pink + Green =
Green + Pink =
Red + Pink =
Green + Red =
Yellow + Red =
Pink + Red =
Yellow + Pink =
Red + Green =
Purple + Red =
Green + Pink =
Red 4- Purple =
Pink + Red =
White -f Green =
Red + Green =
Set 5
Crance + Yellow =
Green + Cranse -
Purple + Red =
Yellow + Red =
Green + Green =
Purple + Purple =
Orange + Yellow =
Yellow + Orange =
Red + Purple =
Orange + Green =
White + Red =
Green + Purple =
Orange + Red =
Yellow + Red =
Yellow + Yellow =
Yellow • Orange =
Pink + Green =
Purple 4 Red =
Green + White =
Red + Orange =
Set 6
Green + Red =
Purple + Red =•
Yellow + Yellow =
Pink + Green =
Green + Pink =
Red + Purple =
Purple + Purple =
Purple + Red =
Green + Purple =
Yellow + Yellow =
Purple + Red =
Yellow + Red =
Green + Purple =
Red + Green =
Yellow + Yellow =
Red + Purple =
Red + Blue =
Yellow + Red =
Orange + Yellow =
Green + Orange =
37
Set 7
Blue + Red =
Pink + Purple =
Red * Red =
White + Green =
Green + Red =
White + Red =
Yellow + Red =
Orange + Red =
Yellow + Purple =
Purple + Green =
Green + Green =
Red * White s
Pink + Green =
Purple + Red =
Yellow + Green =
White + Green =
Pink * Yellow =
Green + Green =
Red + Red =
Yellow + Orange s
Set e
Red + Red =
Green + Green =
Yellow + Yellow =
Purple * Purple =
Purple + Yellow =
Yellow + Green =
Green + Red =
Pink + Red =
White + Green =
Orange + Red =
Yellow + Red =
Green + Yellow =
Red + Green =
Red • Orange =
Green * Green =
Purple + Red =•
Pink + Yellow =
Red + Red =
Red + White =
Pink • Red =
Set 9
White + Red =
Green + Orange =
Red + Purple =
Red + Blue =
Green + Purple =
Yellow + Red =
Yellow + Orange =
Purple + Purple =
Pink + Yellow s
Orange + Yellow =
Blue + Red =
Orange + Yellow =
Red + Purple =
Red + Blue =
Green + Yellow =
Red • Purple =
Yellow + Pink =
Yellow + Red =
White + Red =
Red + Orange =
38
Set 10
Red + Yellow =
Green + Yellow =
White • Red =
Red + Red =
Orange + Red =
Green + Red =
Purple + Purple =
Green + Pink =
Red + Yellow =
Red + Blue =
Purple • Green =
Yellow + Pink =
Green + Pink =
Green + Red =
White + Red =
Yellow + Pink =
Yellow + Purple =
Red + Yellow =
Red + Red =
Yellow + Yellow =
Set 11
Red + Red =•
Orange + Yellow =
Green + Red =r
Green + Grange =
Yellow • Yellow =
Purple + Red =
Pink + Red =
Yellow + Red =
Red + Green =
Green + Green =
Red + Blue =
Purple + Green =
Yellow + Pink =
Green + Pink =
Green + Red =
White + Red =
Yellow + Purple =
Red + Yellow =
Red + Red =
Yellow + Pink =
Set 12
Red + Yellow =
Green • Yellow =
Yellow + Yellow =
Red + White =
Red + Red =
Orange + Red =
Green + Red =
Purple + Purple =
Green + White =
Red + Yellow =
Yellow + Yellow =
Purple + Purple =
Pink + Green =
Orange + Yellow =
Green + Pink =
Yellow + Orange =
Red + Purple =
Red + White =
Orange + Yellow =
Red + Pink =
39
Set 13
Green + Red =
Orange + Green =
Yellow + Red =
White + Red =
Pink + Red =
Green + Purple =
Yellow + Pink =
Orange + Red =
Red + Green =
Yellow + Red =
Orange + Yellow =
Blue • Red =
Pink + Yellow =
Red + Purple =
Red + Blue =
Green + Yellow =
Red + Purple =
Yellow + Pink =
Red + Yellow =
White + Red =
APPENDIX B
FIGURE ANALOGIES — RPR04A
NAME (Print)
Last F irs t V.iddle
TESTING NUMBER
GROUP D A T E
In this test your task will be to sc lect a f igure that b e a r s the same relation to the third figure as the second figure b e a r s to the f irst . For example:
B D
You are to find which one of the five f igures at the right has the same relation to Z as Y has to X. Figure X is a c irc le and figure Y is a c ircle divided into 4 equal parts. Figure Z i s a square so the figure which you are looking for i s a square divided into four equal parts. Of the five choices, figure A is the only one which i s divided into four equal parts. The space under A would be blackened on your answer sheet. Now look at the second example:
X Y Z A B C D E
O 0® 0 Figure X i s a square; f igure Y i s a s imilar square, but the solid lines have been
changed to dotted l ines and the quarter in the upper right has been blackened. The relationship of Y to X is : "Change the solid outline to a dotted one and blacken the upper right quarter of the f igure ." D i s the correct answer for it i s related to Z the same way Y i s related to X. The space under D would be marked on your answei sheet .
The remaining i tems are of s imilar type. You are to find a f igure which i s re -lated to Z the same way Y i s related to X and blacken the appropriate space on the answer sheet.
This tes t cons is ts of two parts each containing 15 i tems , minutes for each part. A r e there any quest ions?
You wil l have 5
STOP HERE. WAIT FOR FURTHER INSTRUCTIONS.
(Adapted by permiss ion f rom an Air Force Test of the same name.)
PART t A B
4 1
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
rwr
R j
l
&
f ' l
< 2 >
\
O i c\>
&
I rzs
r O H
AAA
VCA;/
/ /I
C O
--f
Z l 17!
W L
©
Av/ / A
i -»-i t
w N
m
r
u
L \
A
I \ ' . v E
d m
'V
W
i
m
/ \ /
AA
— r i l _
B
STOP HERE. WAIT FOR FURTHER INSTRUCTIONS.
PART I A B
*2
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
24.
25.
26.
27.
28.
29.
30.
o
o o o
o o
o [
o
o k a
I Q
© •
Z7
1
L
GD A a
\ /
O,
~0
I n l I V j ,U!
/ \ U
V O
• LJ
3
3 d
a !
n
• \\
•
€C -k r-
13
ID
/ l | \
• •
" 7 1
3
• V
A
L3| •
L\
u
rj
N/ \ / \ /
8 A
L M
Q
B
STOP HERE. WAIT FOR FURTHER INSTRUCTIONS.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Books
Osgood, Charles Egerton, Method and Theory In Experimental Psychology. New York, Oxford University Press, 1953.
Vinacke, William Edgar, The Psychology of Thinking, New York, McGraw-Hill, 1952.
Vygotsky, L. S., Thought and Language, Cambridge, Mass., M. I. T. Press, 1962.
Werner, Heinz, Comparative Psychology of Mental Development. Chicago, Foliett, 19*8.
Whorf, B. L., Language. Thought. and Reality, Cambridge, Mass., M. I. T• Press, 1956.
Articles
DlVesta, Francis J.f "Contrast Effects in Verbal Conditioning of Meaning," Journal of Experimental Psychology, LXII {June, 1961), 535-544-; K *
Grant, David A., Harold W. Hake and Jerome P. Horaseth, "Acquisition and Extinction of a Verbal Conditioned Response with Differing Percentages of Reinforcement," Journal of Experimental Psychology. XLV (1953), 64-74.
Holland, James Gordon, "Human Vigilance," Science, XXVIII (1958), 61-63.
Kendler, Tracy S. and Howard H. Kendler, "Reversal and Non-reversal Shifts in Kindergarten Children," Journal of Experimental Psychology. LVIII (1959), 56-60.
Osier, Sonia F. and George E. Trautman, "Concept Attainment: II Effects of Stimulus Complexity upon Concept Attain-ment at Two Levels of Intelligence," Journal of Experi-mental Psychology, LXII (1961), 9-13.
Reed, Homer B., "IV: The Influence of the Complexity of the Stimuli," Journal of Experimental Psychology. XXXVI (1946), 504-511.
4^
kL
Rhine, Ranon J. and Betsy A. Sllun, "Acquisition and Change of a Concept Attitude as a Function of Consistency of Reinforcement," Journal of Experimental Psychology, LV (1958), 524-529.
Staats, Arthur W. and Carolyn K. Staate, "Meaning Established by Classical Conditioning," Journal of Experimental Psychology. LIV (1957), 74-80.
Wallach, Llse, "The Complexity of Concept-Attainment," American Journal of Psychology. LXXV (February, 1962), 277-283.
Wycoff, L. B., Jr., "The Role of Observing Responses In Dis-crimination Learning," Psychological Review, LIX (1952), 431-442.