INTENTIONAL COMMUNICATION IN THE TREE DRAWING TEST

K onttinen , R. & K arila , A. Intentional communication in the tree drawing test. Scand. J. Psychol ., 1969, 10 , 129–136—One way in which relationships between drawing variables and personality traits may be conceived is by interpreting the drawing as intentional communication. Some implications of this proposition were tested. Five formal variables of tree drawings were studied: angularity, size, form level, shading, and pressure. Only angularity can unambiguously be given a communication interpretation; but the other variables, too, may perhaps be used for intentional communication.     

Testing significance of differences between two chi-squares

This paper presents a way to test the difference between twoX ²'s. The test requires evaluating the difference with respect to theT _m (x) Bessel function. Included is a table of the 5 percent and 1 percent points for the Bessel function with degrees of freedom up to 100.This investigation was supported by National Science Foundation Grant Number GE 9846.     

Book reviews

Animal Discrimination Learning. Edited by R. M. Gilbert and N. S. Sutherland. London: Academic Press. 1969. Pp. xvi + 501. 1358.

Luce, R. D. and Tukey, J. W. (1964). Simultaneous conjoint measurement: a new type of fundamental measurement. J. math. Psychol. I, 1-27.

Discrimination Learning. By D. A. Riley. Boston: Allyn and Bacon Inc. 1968. Pp. 172. Paperback 21s.

Annual Review of Psychology. Vol. 20. Palo Alto: Annual Reviews Inc. 1969. Pp. ix + 544. $9.00.

Cutaneous Sensation. By David Sinclair. London: Oxford University Press. 1967. Pp. xii + 306. 63s.

Modelling of Thinking and the Mind.. By N. M. Amosov. Translated by L. Finegold. New York: Spartan Books. London: Macmillan. 11967. Pp. xiii + 192.

The Mind of Mnemonist. By A. R. Luria. London: Jonathan Cape. 1969. Pp. xi + 160. 25s.

Determinants of Infant Behaviour IV. Edited by B. M. Foss. London: Methuen. 1969. Pp. 303. £3 10s.

Brain and Behaviour. Volumes 1-4. Edited by Karl Pribram. Harmondsworth: Penguin Books Ltd. 1969. Pp. 496 +573 + 523 + 524. 12s. 6d. per volume.     

Prior stimulation and the perception of causality

An attempt was made to discover whether, in conditions similar to those of Michotte, the number of causal responses given by subjects was influenced by stimulation during the period just before the main experiment. Time-intervals between the arrival of object A and the departure of object B were systematically varied within the range 60 to 390 msec. Those who had earlier been exposed to shorter time-intervals (60 to 210 msec.) gave fewer causal responses than those who had been exposed to longer ones (150 to 300 msec. and 240 to 390 msec.). A possible explanation is offered in terms of the modification of existing “schemata.”     

Are thresholds reduced by illusions? An attempt at replication

Three experiments are reported, which are attempts to replicate the finding of Ross and Gregory (1964) that difference thresholds for weights can be lowered by means of the size-weight illusion. Three different procedures were used, the first one (experiment I) being designed to show whether or not changes in a subject's judgement criterion could account for apparent changes in sensitivity. The second method (Experiment II) was a replication of Ross and Gregory's first procedure, in which the standard weight was judged before the comparison. In Experiments I and II a larger illusion was induced than in the original studies, but in Experiment III both the weights and container sizes were practically identical to those used by Ross and Gregory. The procedure was also the same as their most successful procedure (number 3) in which standard and comparison were judged simultaneously. The findings were uniformly negative: there was no evidence of criterion shift when the size-weight illusion was induced nor did we find the lowering of threshold previously reported.