25 normally speaking Ss were tested on tasks of oral stereognosis, lingual light-touch detection and lingual two-point discrimination. No significant (p > .05) correlations were found among these three tasks. Several factors are discussed that might account for the lack of significant relationships.
References
1.
ArndtW. B.ElbertM.SheltonR. L.Standardization of a test of oral stereognosis. In BosmaJ. F. (Ed.), Second symposium on oral sensation and perception. Springfield, Ill.: Thomas, 1970. Pp. 279–383.
2.
GrossmanR. C.Methods of determining oral tactile experience. In BosmaJ. F. (Ed.), Symposium on oral sensation and perception. Springfield, Ill.: Thomas, 1967. Pp. 161–181.
3.
MoserH.LaGourgueJ. R.ClassL. W.Studies of oral stereognosis in normal, blind and deaf subjects. In BosmaJ. F. (Ed.), Symposium on oral sensation and perception. Springfield, Ill.: Thomas, 1967. Pp. 244–286.
4.
PaineR. S.Manual stereognosis. In BosmaJ. F. (Ed.), Symposium on oral sensation and perception. Springfield, Ill.: Thomas, 1967. Pp. 149–158.
5.
RingelR. F.EwanowskiS. J.Oral perception: I. Two-point discrimination. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 1965, 8, 389–398.
6.
SemmesJ.Manual stereognosis after brain injury. In BosmaJ. F. (Ed.), Symposium on oral sensation and perception. Springfield, Ill.: Thomas, 1967. Pp. 137–148.
7.
SemmesJ.WeinsteinS.GhentL.TeuberH.-L.Somatosensory changes after penetrating brain wounds in man. Cambridge, Mass.: Univer. Press, 1960.
8.
WilliamsW. N.LaPointeL. L.Intra-oral recognition of geometric forms by normal subjects. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 1971, 32, 419–426.
