ABSTRACT
The effect of instructional sets designed to manipulate levels of conflict on mirror-drawing performance was examined by testing 60 male college students, assigned at random to four experimental conditions: low conflict (speed emphasized), low conflict (accuracy emphasized), intermediate conflict and accuracy actively emphasized). The response measures were means for 10 trials per subject on total time, time and number of errors. In low conflict conditions, performance agreed with the response emphasized in instructional set. The second hypothesis, that performance is inversely related to level of conflict, was not supported. Performance in the conditions of intermediate and high conflict did not differ and ranked between the two conditions of low conflict on each of the three response measures.
