Albert D. Smouse

A simultaneous comparison of three methods for language training with an autistic child: An experimental single case analysis

In a single-case, simultaneous-treatment design, three methods for experimental language acquisition in one autistic child were compared using a Latin square design and trend-line analysis. Results showed a total communication approach to be significantly superior to sign-based and verbalization approaches. The verbalization treatment resulted in decreased performance. Results indicate that use of a cross-modality inhibitory process to explain the alleged superiority of the sign-based approach is questionable. Variation among autistic children indicates a need for further research and for caution against premature acceptance of a given treatment approach or theoretical explanation.

Item Difficulty Sequencing and Response Style: A Follow-Up Analysis.

STUDIES have shown the Achievement Anxiety Test (AAT) to predict aptitude and achievement performance (Alpert and Haber, 1960; Dember, Nairne, and Miller, 1962; Jewell and Carrier, 1965; Milholland, 1964; Pervin, 1967), and a recent study by the writers (Munz and Smouse, 1968) has shown that individuals stereotyped on the basis of the AAT perform differently on academic achievement tests depending on whether the items are sequenced easy-to-hard (E-H), hard-to-easy (H-E), or at random (R). In that study it appeared from the pattern of interactions that the AAT explained more variance in a distribution resulting from achievement test items sequenced R than when sequenced in some other way. One of the implications suggested by these data was that when one is attempting to assess academic achievement, H-E sequencing should be used since it seemed to provide least variance attributable to test-taking personality factors. Random sequencing, on the other hand, appeared to yield relatively more variance which could be attributed to the AAT. If a statistical comparison showed this to be true, then it would follow that criteria, differently sequenced, are measuring different things, to say the least. Inasmuch as the above observations were based on a method whereby the above stereotypes were operationally constructed by selecting extreme scores on the AAT distributions (see the original study for the complete method), the use of all the data, including the mid-ranges of the AAT distribution, would constitute a more conservative test of this notion. Also it

Achievement Motivation and Ordinal Position of Birth

To investigate the relationship between birth order, sex, and achievement motivation, two studies were conducted using Costellos (1967) non-projective instrument which purports to measure two aspects of the achievement motivation construct (Scale I, the need to achieve on a task and Scale II, the need to be a success). Neither study revealed a significant relationship between birth order and achievement motivation, nor were there any significant interactions involving the birth order factor. There was, however, a significant sex main effect found in both studies, but in one study only was there a significant difference on Scale II between males and females, with females scoring higher, while in the other study females scored significantly higher than males on both Scales I and II. Interpretations were offered.

Use of the Children's Personality Questionnaire in Differentiating Between Normal and Disturbed Children

the HSPQ downward, there have been few empirical studies to determine whether the CPQ offers comparable discrimination among various criterion groups. In the CPQ manual, the instructions for the computation of the Neuroticism Score are followed by the statement: &dquo;At the present, this can be used simply to rank individuals on a neuroticism score, based largely on results for adults, and it must be left to further clinical research to check this and find a standardization with cutting levels indicative of need for clinical attention&dquo; (Porter and Cattell, 1960, p. 47). Karson’s (1965) study of boys with conduct and personality problems, while not directly concerned with the issue of instrument validity, con-

Perception of emotions and attribution of acceptance by normal and emotionality disturbed children

In order to ascertain possible differences in perceptions of emotion and attribution of acceptance among normal children and those diagnosed as schizophrenic, neurotic, or character disordered (N=40), participants were tested with the Pictures of Facial Affect (Ekman & Friesen, 1976). When subjected to analysis of variance based on diagnostic category, age, and type of emotion, accuracy of perception data showed significant differences only for main effects of age and type of emotion, while attribution data showed significance only for the main effect of type of emotion. Results were discussed with respect to related studies and methodological refinements.

THREE EMPATHY MEASURES AS CORRELATES OF TEST AND RATING CRITERIA

In order to compare subjective, projective and objective measures of empathy both directly and as to relative power in predicting various group criteria, three empathy measures were obtained from 119 senior and 110 junior nursing students. Measures were ranks of a positive empathy-relevant item among other self values and of a negative empathy-relevant item among self faults, an Incomplete Sentence Test, and the Diplomacy Test of Empathic Ability. Criteria were achievement tests and ratings of individual performances in various areas. Preliminary research and the results suggest three conclusions. (1) As indicated by the generally low correlations among the empathy measures, the indices of empathy are not measuring the same thing. This may be explained by viewing empathy as consisting of several components, with each measure of empathy focusing more or less on one component. (2) Providing the empathy-relevant value and fault statements used in this study were opposites, the self-assessment of empathy within a framework of self values is not significantly related to the self-assessment of empathy when stated negatively and viewed within a framework of self faults. (3) Empathy as measured has limited value in predicting nursing criteria irrespective of whether the measures are used singly or in combination. Except for two of the nursing criteria, very little predictive accuracy is gained by using more than one empathy measure.