No abstract

A set of 100 plane figures varying from 80 to 80.9 mm. in height and width were presented to 10 Os. Each 0 was asked to assign the stimuli to 1 of 4 categories: large rectangle, small rectangle, large square, small square. The probability of a correct judgment was at the chance level. A multivariate analysis of variance showed that there was a significant "form effect," and size effect but no interaction. The implications were related to the concept of coherence.

It was hypothesized that certain personality variables would be related to decision making in a guessing experiment. A stimulus set of 100 3- × 5-in. unlined filing cards, 75 of which contained circles and 25 of which were blank, was presented twice to each of 56 undergraduate Ss. The cards were in a random order and Ss were asked to guess whether a circle or a blank would be the forthcoming event. Their predictions on the second session's presentations were quantified in terms of the likelihood of false positive errors and hit rate over false alarm rate. Independently of the behavioral task, all Ss completed two personality inventories designed to assess need for approval and a dimension of internal vs external control of reinforcement. Scholastic Aptitude Test scores and Ss' estimates of the number of circles present in the stimulus set were incorporated as control variables. Results clearly show the effect of personality differences on guessing behavior. Subsequent related studies for psychophysics and judgmental responses were suggested.

No abstract

2 microgenetic hypotheses were tested: perception would become more stable with an increase in duration of viewing; and this increase is different for form and for size. 100 plane figures, all combinations of 10 heights and 10 widths varying in increments of .01 in., constituted the stimulus set. They were presented singly as back-lighted figures in a completely dark surround. 7 male Ss had at least 20-20 vision uncorrected or with contact lens. There were 9 durations of viewing and 2 types of judgments: form, squares and rectangles, or size, large and small. Discrimination measures were computed and showed that Ss could discriminate form better than they could discriminate size. There was no significant effect of duration on either type of discrimination, nor was there any interaction between type of judgment and duration.