ABSTRACT
First-grade males performed a 30-min visual vigilance task under 5 conditions of auditory background stimulation. The 5 conditions consisted of (1) continuous conversation, in which subjects listened to a tape of conversation spliced so that there were no intervals of silence lasting longer than 3 sec; (2) continuous reverse, in which subjects heard the continuous conversation tape played in reverse; (3) intermittent conversation, in which subjects heard alternating segments of conversation and silence; (4) intermittent reverse, in which subjects heard alternating segments of reverse conversation and silence; and (5) silence control. Compared with silence or continuous stimulation, intermittent stimulation produced better detection regardless of whether or not it was meaningful. High achievers made more correct detections than low achievers, but only in the second and third time periods. Few subjects made errors of commission.
Subject(s)
Attention , Auditory Perception , Speech , Task Performance and Analysis , Visual Perception , Achievement , Acoustic Stimulation , Child , Humans , Male , Time FactorsABSTRACT
Comprehensive individual psychological evaluations of a small sample of subjects were used to identify shortcomings and suggest improvements in a computerized system for interpreting 16PF and CAQ scores. This approach is offered as a supplement, rather than an alternative, to the usual large sample correlational method. It is argued that such procedures mask desirable refinements by substituting a large number of subjects for detailed and accurate assessment of individual cases. Results of this analysis supported the general accuracy of the computerized system, but revealed gaps in the information provided and suggested alternatives for perfecting the system.