All issues
Volume 31 (1960 - 196･･･
- Issue 6 Pages 327-
- Issue 5 Pages 275-
- Issue 4 Pages 209-
- Issue 3 Pages 153-
- Issue 2 Pages 83-
- Issue 1 Pages 1-
Volume 31, Issue 4
Displaying 1-6 of 6 articles from this issue
- |<
- <
- 1
- >
- >|
-
KOUHEI SUZUKI1960 Volume 31 Issue 4 Pages 209-221
Published: 1960
Released on J-STAGE: July 16, 2010
JOURNAL FREE ACCESSIn this study, acceptance-rejection of a suggestion was investigated from the standpoint of social contact between a suggestee and a suggestor. In particular, credibility of the suggestor's ability in a certain field was built up through the process of experimental operations, and the author's attention was focused on the relationship between credibility and acceptance-rejection of a suggestion given by the suggestor.
Hypothesis: Acceptance-rejection of a suggetion in a certain field depends upon the degree of credibility of the suggestor's ability in the field.
Experimenter: Kouhei Suzuki
Suggestor: A certain person named A.
Subjects (suggestees): 387 lower secondary schoolchildren.
Experimental instruments: Drawing papers, Drawing test papers, black and red pencils, a taperecorder and a stop-watch.
Procedure: (1) (The process of creating credibility)
At first subjects were told that a certain person named A had already performed the tasks of drawing. And it was instructed that the aim of each subject's engagement was to judge (evaluate) the ways taken in tasks by A in terms of relevancy. (Six papers were to be drawn and each of them had two possible ways of drawing, one of which was made more relevant than the other. Subjects were informed the ways chosen by A from the experimenter. After having judged six ways taken by A, each subject reported the degree of credibility of A's drawing ability by checking the questionnaire.
(2) (Giving a suggestion)
Then, each subject was confronted with the test task of drawing and was told that each one was to be examined his (her) own drawing ability and was encouraged to do his (her) best. The test task had five possible ways and any of them was allowed to be taken up by a subject. When subjects were going to begin their tasks, the suggestion from A which recommended one of those five ways was reported to subjects by the experimenter. And then, they started the test. Thus, acceptance-rejection of the suggestion occurred.
Findings: The points of analyses in the process of creating credibility were these, “the four types of processes designed in the experiment and the degree of credibility”, “the degree of difference in the performance scores and the degree of credibility”, and “the degree of judgment and the degree of credibility”. Each of them showed that the latter depended upon the former.
The analyses in the relation of credibility and acceptance-rejection, i.e., “the degree of credibility and the degree of acceptance” and “the degree of credibility and the strength of acceptance” showed that the higher the degree of credibility grew, the higher and the greater the degree and the strength of acceptance became.View full abstractDownload PDF (2021K) -
RECOGNITION OF DIRECTIONTOSHITAKA TANAKA1960 Volume 31 Issue 4 Pages 222-227
Published: 1960
Released on J-STAGE: July 16, 2010
JOURNAL FREE ACCESSIn the previous papers (7, 8, 9, 10) the author investigated the developmental characteristics in the comparison of similarity among figures, which differed in direction and arrangement of their elements. Experimental results showed that the comparison of similarity among figures had certain tendency along with the developmental process. The present study was undertaken to obtain information regarding developmental characteristics in the comparison of similarity among figures, which were composed of the same elements but differed in direction. The standard figures were presented upright along the north-south-direction of the system of coordinate and the comparison figures presented were rotated at angles of 45° (NE), 90° (E), 135° (SE), 180° (S), 225° (SW), 270° (W) and 315° (NW). Four sets of figures were used in the present experiment. Each set consisted of a standard figure and seven comparison figures. The subject was asked to select from the latter the figure which has the closest similarity to the former. The subjects amounted to the total of 634 from kindergarten-children (age of 5) to adults (age of 26).
The results were as follows:
(1) Results with kindergarten children on the comparison of similarity of figures in direction showed that reversal figures (figures which are rotated at angle of 180° (S) on the system of coordinate) were chosen preferably and the preferences for figures of the other directions were undifferentiated.
(2) Results with adults in the recognition of similarty showed that the comparison figures which had the minimal apparent difference from the standard figures were dominantly chosen, followed by the reversal figures as the second rank, the residual figures in the other directions being far less chosen.
(3) The transitory period of shifting to adult characteristics in the recognition of similarity in directions was observed at the age levels from 6 to 8 years and the recognition of adult type was found to begin approximately at the age of 9.View full abstractDownload PDF (978K) -
SHIZUHIKO NIHISATO1960 Volume 31 Issue 4 Pages 228-236
Published: 1960
Released on J-STAGE: July 16, 2010
JOURNAL FREE ACCESSIn the previous study (12), a multidimensional structure of Taylor's Anxiety Scale was suggested by the scale analytic method and at the same time it was discussed that her uni-dimensional scale alone would not be appropriate for the analysis, but that a lot of anxiety items should be newly added to. With these suggestions, the present study was carried out to search for the structure of anxiety measured psychometrically.
The investigation was proceeded by the following steps.
1) Collection of items: those presumed to identify anxiety were collected referring mainly to MAS, MMPI and Eysenck's MMQ (4), out of which 131 were used as test items.
2) Administration of items: the questionnaire of those 131 items was administered with Yatabe-Guilford Personality Inventory to 292 university students under the condition to respond by dichotomy.
3) Item analysis and construction of subscales: only those data of 262 male students were analyzed in parallel by the following two operations;
(i) collecting items of apparent similarity, and
(ii) selecting items of functional similarity such as those comparatively high in reproducibility (Rep).
When a subscale of items of apparent and functional similarity was extracted, the same operations were repeated to the remaining items. Thus, six subscales of ten items each were extracted with maximum Rep from .81 to .85 and minimum Rep form .62 to. 71 (Table 1, 2).
4) Factor analysis: Pearson's product moment correlations were computed among those six subscales and eight from Yatabe-Guilford Personality Inventory (Table 4). The correlation matrix was factored by Thurstone's complete centroid method and four factors were extracted (Table 5). The centroid factor pattern revealed, among other things, the comparatively low communality of the so-called somatic items (items concerning physical complaints supposedly accompanying anxiety), which was probably related to the comparatively low validity of these items.
5) Rotation of axes: both oblique and orthogonal solutions were obtained (Table 6, 7, 8). Interpreting them psychologically, the orthogonal solution was preferred to the oblique solution. That is, according to the former, the present anxiety scale would consist of a “general factor”, with high loadings on all subscales, and three “special factors”, if named, those of “introverted anxiety”, “extraverted anxiety” and “inferiority feelings”. On the other hand, the oblique solution appears difficult to clarify factors C and D. Factor A and B, however, would be interpreted as “introverted anxiety” and “extraverted anxiety” respectively.
Through these analyses, it may be concluded that a multidimensional scale is needed for the dynamic study of anxiety.View full abstractDownload PDF (1302K) -
Takeshi Matsuoka1960 Volume 31 Issue 4 Pages 237-242
Published: 1960
Released on J-STAGE: July 16, 2010
JOURNAL FREE ACCESSDownload PDF (921K) -
[in Japanese]1960 Volume 31 Issue 4 Pages 243-256
Published: 1960
Released on J-STAGE: July 16, 2010
JOURNAL FREE ACCESSDownload PDF (2895K) -
1960 Volume 31 Issue 4 Pages 257-260
Published: 1960
Released on J-STAGE: July 16, 2010
JOURNAL FREE ACCESSDownload PDF (789K)
- |<
- <
- 1
- >
- >|