157Regarding symbolism which is derived from content, Jones(4) speaks of (a) unconscious complexes, (b) inhibitory influences, and (c) sublimated tendencies. It is his opinion that the "material of the symbol is taken from the third group", but that the "very existence of the symbol-is taken from the first group". Whereas, if the symbolic image is used to refer to the second or third group, "it is a metaphor, not a symbol". This distinction could account for some of the confusion and inconsistencies in the published content lists. Additionally, consideration of ego and id responses has not been accomplished. SUMMARY Fifty schizophrenic patients were given the Rorschach and Howard Tests and a comparison of the contents was made. The significant differences were presented. The results indicate that (a) the stimulus does influence responses, (b) mere lists are apt to be misleading, and (c) a distinction between content and symbolism is necessary. BIBLIOGRAPHY 7. LUBAR, G.

No abstract

No abstract

PROBLEMWhether there be just quantitative or also qualitative differences between the normal and the mentally deficient is a problem of long standing. An important issue relates to learning ability, particularly the learning of verbal materials. Although aments are often said to be slow in learning ability, the comparative learning ability of aments and normal Ss, when MA is controlled, has not been fully investigated.Moreover, in view of the evidence indicating behavioral differences between etiological groups of aments (e.g.r 12), there may well also be differences in learning between such groups. The present study is a beginning attempt to consider the above problems.It was decided to employ a classic rote learning technique, viz., serial verbal learning, because of its amenability to control and the fact that some normative data are available. There appear to be only three published studies dealing with the verbal learning of aments, two by McCulloch et al. 9, and a sequel by Sloan and Berg(11). I n these, in which only ament Ss were employed, words were presented orally t o be learned serially. The major conclusions were that m7ord learning is related to MA but not to life age (LA). Apparently etiology was not considered as a variable. The present study is concerned with a comparison of the performances on a learning task of familial and non-familial aments and normal children. The groups were equated for MA t o determine if any differences in learning performance remain when MA level is held constant.In addition to a simple comparison of the learning performance of familial and non-familial aments and normal groups, an investigation was also made of the degree of retroactive inhibition (RI) exhibited by each group in an attempt to demonstrate differences in performance between non-familials and the other groups. A study by Mednick(lO) demonstrated that brain damaged adults evidence considerably less stimulus generalization (SG) than neurologically normal adults. This study plus the view of Gibson(4) that SG is one of the major phenomena involved in the production of RI, suggests that the non-familial group would show the least RI. That is, nonfamilial amentia is typically attributed to anomaly of cortical functioning, whether through faulty development or early cortical injury. Such a group might be expected to exhibit less SG and hence less RI than the familial group, these Ss supposedly representing the low end of the normal mental ability continuum. PROCEDURESubjects. The Ss consisted of three groups, equated for MA, of 26 male white Ss each : normal grade school children, familial and non-familial a m e n t~.~ Classification was according to the system of French et al. (3) Basically, the term familial means the presence of mental deficiency in the immediate family and non-familial means its absence. None of the special clinical types, e.g., mongolians, nor persons with gross physical disability were included in the experimental population. The MAS of all Ss were determined by the Chicago Non-Verbal exam...

For example, the college samples, as compared to the noncollege samples, are younger and reflect a higher socioeconomic level in addition to being more highly educated. There is no basis for decision among these, or other, alternatives on the basis of these data which emphasize the importance of considering educational background (or socioeconomic status or age) when using the EPPS.The cluster analysis produces a different picture of the relationships among samples than does the previous analysis. Thus, the M-CS and MCS pair is in one cluster, the M-CD and MGA and the M-Sc and FGA pairs are in another cluster, and the FCS and M-Ne pair is separated into the two clusters. Therefore, despite the correlation of .77 between the female college students and the male neurotics, their relationships with the other samples are discriminably different to the extent that they are aligned in different clusters. SUMMARYThis study reports the relationships of the profile of 15 needs on the EPPS among eight samples. A marked relationship was found between the following samples: two independent samples of male college students (T = .77); female college students and hospitalized male neurotics (T = .77) ; normal male adults and hospitalized male character disorders (T = .77) ; normal male adults and hospitalized male character disorders (T = .88) ; normal female adults and hospitalized male schizophrenics (T = .75). A cluster analysis yielded two clusters, with the three college student samples comprising one cluster and the five remaining samples comprising the other cluster. Some implications of these data with regard to the EPPS were discussed.