A test of behavioral rigidity.

Kw, Schaie

doi:10.1037/h0046287

Cited by 77 publications

(75 citation statements)

References 15 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Schaie (1955) included a measure of speed of response to prompts in a battery of tests for behavioral rigidity. Even though the sample ranged in age from 17 to 79 years, no correlations between age and performance were reported.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Age differences and similarities in the effects of cues and prompts.

Hartley¹,

Kieley²,

Slabach³

1990

Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Perfor

119

142

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A series of 6 experiments investigated the use of cues and prompts by younger and older adults. Cues provide useful information about an impending target, even though the information is not always valid. Prompts provide an instruction about what aspect of the target is to be responded to. The costs and benefits of cues were most consistent with models in which the attentional resources that are shifted in response to the cue were as large or larger in older adults as they were in younger adults. The results with both cues and prompts converged on the conclusion that the time course of processing and using a cue or prompt is the same in younger and older adults. The attentional resources tapped by these procedures cannot be the diminished processing resource to which many age differences in cognitive performance are attributed.Poorer performance by older adults is common in a wide variety of tasks with a wide variety of measures of performance. The observed differences in performance may be explained parsimoniously by assuming that there are changes with age in one or a few basic mental resources, such as attention, that are fundamental to many cognitive activities.Theoretical difficulties with resource explanations for age differences on the basis of attentional resources have been pointed out (e.g., Salthouse, 1982Salthouse, , 1988aSalthouse, , 1988bSalthouse, , 1988c.Itis possible, however, to proceed without theoretical consensus on attention as a cognitive resource. Procedures can be found that can be agreed on as tapping one or another aspect of attentional processing. If age differences can be demonstrated in those procedures, then the tasks will provide operational indicators of attention, and variables that affected the age differences in performance could then be explored. If age

show abstract

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Age differences and similarities in the effects of cues and prompts.

Hartley¹,

Kieley²,

Slabach³

1990

Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Perfor

119

142

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The results of his study tended to contradict his hypothesis; that is, no general or consistent pattern of rigidity was exhibited by his subjects. This finding was further substantiated by Schaie (1955) and French (1955) who also administered batteries of tests to measure various aspects of rigidity and cohcluded that there was little evidence supporting the existence of a generalized rigidity trait. More recently, Scott (1966) and Frenimon and Rogers (1974), using a similar approach also concluded that psychological rigidity is multidimensional as opposed to unidimensional.…”

mentioning

confidence: 80%

The concept of rigidity: An enigma

Stewin

1983

Int J Adv Counselling

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A controversy about the nature of behavioral rigidity exists in current psychological theory. To date, large bodies of empirical data have been accumulated which support two major theoretical perspectives. A dichotomy exists between the assumption that rigidity is a personality factor and the perspective that maintains that rigidity is task specific, a behavioral phenomena observable under certain conditions. This paper highlights the dichotomy by examining some of the relevant classical and recent research in the area. It is concluded that the concept must be used cautiouslyby both researchers and practitioners.The concept of rigidity has long been a source of interest to and discord among psychologists and counsellors. There is no question that flexibility in functioning -the ability to adapt to any given situation, is an extremely desirable trait. It allows one to function in changing circumstances and to resist premature closure. Rigidity on the other hand results in an intolerance for ambiguity and an excessive need for structure. Currently the term is extensively employed by researchers and therapists and is used to describe a wide variety of behaviors including the tendency to perseverate, an inability to change habits and the inability to modify concepts and attitudes once developed.Over the years, a number of authors have attempted to trace the development of the concept (Chown (1959), Oliver and Ferguson (1951), Rubenowitz (1963). Chown (1959, p. 195) for example, notes that initial use of the term perseveration in the psychological literature can be attributed to Neisser in 1894; however, it wasn't until 1927 that Spearman attempted a specific description of the term while conducting his now famous studies on mental inertia (an inability to process information quickly). Spearman's work triggered a number of other investigations focused on demonstrating the existence of a perseveration tendency

show abstract

“…Dass es legitim ist, hier von zwei verschiedenen Rigiditätsfaktoren (Denken, Persönlichkeit) zu sprechen, ergibt sich aus einer grossen Zahl korrelationsstatisti scher Untersuchungen [Fisher, 1950;Oliver und Ferguson, 1951;Scheier und Ferguson, 1952;Schaie, 1955;Wolpert, 1955 Interpretationsgrundlage für unsere Ergebnisse war die sogenannte «Overinclusion»-Theorie, wie sie erstmals von Cameron [1939] formuliert und in jüngster Zeit vor allem von P ayne und Mitarbeitern [1957,1959,1960,1969] Auf das Erlebnis der geringen gedanklichen Konstanz und Stringenz, mit der eine erhöhte Instabilität der gesamten Erlebnismatrix einhergeht, reagiert der Patient mit einer Regression auf ein relativ undifferenziertes und «rigides», dafür jedoch die Orientierung erleichterndes und die Angst minimierendes Bezugssystem des Verhaltens und Urteilens. Er identifi ziert sich, wie wir an den erhöhten N-R-Skalenwerten der schizophrenen Versuchsgruppe sehen konnten, mit Verhaltensattitüden, die eine straffe Selbstdisziplinierung bei allen umweltbezogenen Aktivitäten bedingen.…”

Section: Kognitive Störungen Bei Der Schizophrenie Und Deren Beziunclassified

Schizophrenie und Rigidität

Richtberg¹

1973

Psychopathology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The study presents an analysis of the relations between ‘cognitive rigidity’ (defined as a specific kind of discriminative learning) and 'personal rigidity' in schizophrenics and normals. The specific conditions of thinking and learning of the Luchins’ test used in our study reveal the cognitive rigidity to be significantly reduced in schizophrenics compared with normal groups, whereas schizophrenics tend to a considerable rigidity in their social relations. These findings are discussed under aspects of the overinclusion concept and the psychoanalytic theory of ego defence. Similar findings are reported of aging persons, whose social rigidity increases the more their cognitive functions are disturbed.

show abstract

A test of behavioral rigidity.

Cited by 77 publications

References 15 publications

Age differences and similarities in the effects of cues and prompts.

Age differences and similarities in the effects of cues and prompts.

The concept of rigidity: An enigma

Schizophrenie und Rigidität

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About