Rod-and-frame test data of 100 undergraduates were analyzed by a recently developed pattern analysis and several interpretations of their test scores were considered. Pattern analysis showed (a) that most subjects (about 65%) tilt toward the spatial position of the frame and (b) that some (about 30%) utilize two frame cues, i.e., the nearest to vertical side and corner of the frame. Tilting to the starting position of the rod and tilting away from the frame or the starting position of the rod were not viable interpretations.
References
1.
GoodhnoughD. R.An entry in the great frame-tilt judging contest. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 1981, 52, 43–46.
2.
HallerO.A new procedure for determining components of field dependency. Perceptual end Motor Skills, 1981, 53, 795–798.
3.
HallerO.EdgingtonE. S.A computer program for pattern analysis of rod-and-frame tests. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 1982, 42, 233–235. (a).
4.
HallerO.EdgingtonE. S.Pattern analysis of rod-and-frame test data. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 1982, in press, (b).
5.
HandelA.Perception of verticality on a modified portable rod-and-frame test. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 1972, 34, 459–468.
6.
McGarveyB.MaruyamaG.MillerN.Scoring field dependence: methodological analysis of five rod-and-frame scoring systems. Applied Psychological Measurement, 1977, 1, 433–446.
7.
NyborgH.A method for analyzing performance in the rod-and-frame test: 1. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 1974, 15, 119–123.
8.
NyborgH.Effects of geometrical structure on perception of the vertical in the rod-and-frame test. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 1977, 44, 583–589.
9.
OltmanP. K.A portable rod-and-frame apparatus. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 1968, 26, 503–506.
10.
VernonP. E.The distinctiveness of field dependence. Journal of Personality, 1972, 40, 366–391.
11.
WitkinH. A.AschS. E.Studies in space orientation: IV. Further experiments on perception of the upright with displaced visual fields. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1948, 38, 762–782.
