All issues
Volume 35 (1964 - 196･･･
- Issue 6 Pages 277-
- Issue 5 Pages 227-
- Issue 4 Pages 169-
- Issue 3 Pages 117-
- Issue 2 Pages 57-
- Issue 1 Pages 1-
Volume 35, Issue 4
Displaying 1-6 of 6 articles from this issue
- |<
- <
- 1
- >
- >|
-
SHIGEO TAKAHASHI1964 Volume 35 Issue 4 Pages 169-180
Published: 1964
Released on J-STAGE: July 16, 2010
JOURNAL FREE ACCESSThe purpose of this study was to determine whether any psychological difference could be found between juvenile delinquent group and college student group by means of the Rorshach test.
Ss were 50 undergraduates (25 males and 25 females) aged 18 through 20, with the average of 19, and 50 delinquent adolescents (25 males and 25 females) between the age of 17 and 20, with the average of 18.
Rorschach test was administered individually to Ss. Most of the scoring was done by Klopfer's scoring system.
Critical ratio test was performed for the difference of mean scores between two groups in each of 23 scoring categories such as the Location, Determinant, etc. Based on the categories where significant differences were found, the delinquency score was derived.
Pearson's product-moment correlation coefficients among 23 scores were calculated for each group, and the resulting correlation matrices were factorized by Thurstone's centroid method.
The findings obtained were as follows:
1. The difference between the means for the delinquents and undergraduates was found significant in the following 16 categories: R, D%, FC%, sumC/R, (k+K+FK)%, F+%, H%, A%, N/R, Z/R, P%, (VIII+IX+X)/R%, T/R, [Tot.RT(1)ch]/5, and [Tot.RT(1)C]/5.
2. The difference of the means of delinquency scores between two groups was highly significant (t=10.73). χ2 test showed that the distribution of scores was significantly (.1% level) different between two groups, when scores were classified into two classes, above and below the average of two group means.
3. For the delinquents group, the factor analysis extracted four factors, which were identified as; productivity, compulsion, psychological efficiency, and constriction. For the undergraduate group, identified factors were; perceptual control, integration productivity, and constriction.
The factorial composition of two groups was compared and discussed in terms of the concept of psychological health.View full abstractDownload PDF (2107K) -
TOSHIKO KINOSHITA1964 Volume 35 Issue 4 Pages 181-193
Published: 1964
Released on J-STAGE: July 16, 2010
JOURNAL FREE ACCESSThe theoretical basis for this study was that the higher the attractions to group membership, the more a group member's private opinion would alter to the group opinion, and that the less important a task was for the group member, the greater the member's private opinion would change to the majority.
These two variables, cohesiveness and importance, were produced experimentally and matched with four experimental conditions.
The hypotheses were that under HiCo-LoIm condition the amount of conformity of members to the group opinion would be highest, while under LoCo-HiIm condition it would be lowest. Under HiCo-HiIm and LoCo-LoIm conditions they would be nearly equal and would lie between HiCo-LoIm and, LoCo-HiIm conditions.
METHOD: Subjects. Thirty two groups of four Ss each were used. All Ss were senior high school boys. Apparatus. The apparatus used in this experiment consisted of a set of five electrical panels with switches and signal lights on them (Crutchfield's type); four of them were for Ss and one for the experimenter. Manipulation of variables. Cohesiveness: Two weeks before the experiment, a sociometric test was given to all members of the classes involved. Sixteen high-cohesiveness groups and sixteen low ones were carefully formed from the data. Just before the experimental session was started, the experimenter gave instructions to each group to promote high cohesiveness in HiCo situation and to lessen cohesiveness in LoCo. The validity of the manipulation of cohesiveness was checked by the attraction-to-group questionnaire before and after the experiment. Importance: Several weeks before the experiment, an attitude test which was constructed with sixty sub-items of current social issues was given to other senior high school boys who were not used in the experiment. Four issues which were most important to the group were chosen as the important tasks, while four issues which were least important to the group were chosen as the unimportant ones. The additional variables, such as the order of presentation of tasks, the distance of opinion between the member and group were controlled. Procedure. 1. Ss showed their private opinion to the task by closing the switches. 2. They were given, through experimental manipulation of switches, uniformly false opinions as representing the opinions of other group members. According to the experimental design, this placed pressure on the naive Ss. Only in the control conditions they were give the same opinion which Ss actually showed. 3. Ss were requested again to show their opinion. 4. Subjects were given Importance-Test for issues which were used in the experimental situation.
RESULTS: 1. Our hypotheses were supported. The amount of conformity decreased in the following order. (HiCo-LoIm)>(HiCo-HiIm)≅(LoCo-LoIm)>(LoCo-HiIm). 2. There was a tendency that the further the distance of opinion between Ss and group, the more Ss were inclined to alter their opinion to the group. This tendency was highest in HiCo-LoIm condition, but the degree of conformity seemed to be limited.View full abstractDownload PDF (2345K) -
PROBLEMS OF RELIABILTY AND VALIDITYHIROSHI IKEDA1964 Volume 35 Issue 4 Pages 194-203
Published: 1964
Released on J-STAGE: July 16, 2010
JOURNAL FREE ACCESS1. Vector analysis has been widely used in such fields as factor analysis, regression analysis, and the analysis of variance. It is also applicable to the field of test theory.
2. Let the transpose of an N-column vector XT={X1, X2, …Xi, …XN}T whose i-th element is the score of the i-th person on the test under consideration.
By assuming that the mean of test scores for N persons is zero and by adjusting the unit of the vector, we can obtain the following relations: 1) The length of the vector is equal to the standard deviation of the test scores. 2) The cosine of the angle between two test vectors is equal to the correlation between the two sets of test scores. (See Fig. 1 on Top Page 2.)
3. The classical test theory starts from the following assumption and definition in terms of vector algebra: 1) A test vector X may be divided into two orthogonal components, X=T+E and TT·E=0. (See Fig. 4 on Top Page 3.) 2) Two test vectors, X1 and X2, having such characteristics among components that T1=T2, E1T·E2=T1T·E2=E1T·T2=0, and √E1T·E1=√E2T·E2 are called parallel test vectors in a sense that their true components are parallel. (See Fig. 5 and 6 on Top Page 3.)
Almost all the basic theorems given in the first nine chapters of Gulliksen's book, “Theory of Mental Tests (1950, Wiley)”, can be derived from the above assumptions without any complicated calculation.
4. For example, the reliability coefficient of a test is the square of the cosine of the angle between the test vector X and its true component T. This is equal to the cosine of the angle between two vectors of parallel tests, X1 and X2. (See Fig. 4 on Top Page 3.)
5. Spearman-Brown's prophecy formula is considered as the square of the cosine of the angle between the vector sum of parallel tests and the vector sum of their true components. (See Fig. 8 on Top Page 5.)
6. The validity coefficient between a test vector X and its criterion vector Y is defined as the cosine of the angle between X and Y. The formula for “Correction for Attenuation” is obtained by calculating the cosine of the angle between the true component of the test vector and that of the criterion vector. (See Fig. 9 on Top Page 7.)
7. Errors of measurement, substitution and prediction, pointed out by Gulliksen (1950, Chapter 4), are also interpretable by the concept of vector geometry. (See Fig. 7 on Top Page 5.)
8. The use of vector method has at least two advantages; the first is the algebraic aspect which facilitates the solution of complex problems by the use of simple rules of vector operation, and the second is the geometric aspect which helps us in an intuitive understanding of the nature of problems by the use of geometric figures.View full abstractDownload PDF (1590K) -
[in Japanese]1964 Volume 35 Issue 4 Pages 204-216
Published: 1964
Released on J-STAGE: July 16, 2010
JOURNAL FREE ACCESSDownload PDF (2787K) -
1964 Volume 35 Issue 4 Pages 217-219
Published: 1964
Released on J-STAGE: July 16, 2010
JOURNAL FREE ACCESSDownload PDF (573K) -
1964 Volume 35 Issue 4 Pages 224
Published: 1964
Released on J-STAGE: July 16, 2010
JOURNAL FREE ACCESSDownload PDF (64K)
- |<
- <
- 1
- >
- >|