Abstract
The distribution of Rod-and-Frame Test scores for 85 male and 153 female psychiatric inpatients is presented, and contrasted with previous results for college students (Pressey, 1968; Vaught, 1968). Implications of observed differences in scores of these two populations, patients tending to be considerably more field-dependent than students, are discussed.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
References
IMMERGLUCK, L. Comment on “Figurai aftereffects, illusions, and the dimension of field dependence.” Psychonomic Science, 1968, 11, 363.
PRESSEY, A. A reply to comments on “Figurai aftereffects, illusions, and the dimension of field dependence.” Psychonomic Science, 1968, 11, 364.
VAUGHT, G. M. Expected scores on the rod-and-frame test: Fuel for the Immergluck-Pressey fire. Psychonomic Science, 1968, 13, 248.
WECHSLER, D. Manual for the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale. New York: The Psychological Corporation, 1955.
WITKIN, H. A., DYK, R. B., FATERSON, H. F., GOODENOUGH, D. R., & KARP, S. A. Psychological differentiation: Studies of development New York: Wiley, 1962.
WITKIN, H. A., LEWIS, H. B., HERTZMAN, M., MACHOVER, K., MEISSNER, P. B., & WAPNER, S. Personality through perception. New York: Harper, 1954.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Neville, C.W., Workman, S.N. & Johnson, D.T. Expected scores in the Rod-and-Frame Test: Field dependence is where you find it. Psychon Sci 15, 321–322 (1969). https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03336321
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03336321