This study investigated the relative difficulty with which 5-yr.-old children learn to discriminate between simultaneously presented standard and comparison figures in various relative positions and orientations. Figures in skewed relative position were easier to discriminate than those in aligned relative position; figures with an up-down orientation were easier than the same figures in right-left orientation. There were no significant differences in the number of errors made when the figures were placed so that the open sides of the figures faced each other, e.g., Group 1A, and the number of errors made when the figures were placed so that they were back to back, e.g., Group 1B.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BentonA. L.Right-left discrimination and finger localization. New York: Haber-Harper, 1959.
2.
CroninV.Mirror-image reversal discrimination in kindergarten and first-grade children. J. exp. child Psychol., 1967, 5, 577–585.
3.
DavidsonH. P.A study of reversals in young children. J. genet. Psychol., 1934, 45, 452–465.
4.
DavidsonH. P.A study of the confusing letters b, d, p, and q. J. genet. Psychol., 1935, 47, 458–468.
5.
EnterlineE. G.Form discrimination: The spatial relationships between a standard and comparison figure. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Columbia Univer., 1969.
6.
GellermannL. W.Chance orders of alternating stimuli in visual discrimination experiments. J. genet. Psychol., 1933, 42, 207–208. (a)
7.
GellermannL. W.Form discrimination in chimpanzees and two year old children: II. J. genet. Psychol., 1933, 42, 28–50. (b)
8.
GibsonJ. J.The relation between visual and postural determinants of the phenomenal vertical. Psychol. Rev., 1952, 59, 370–375.
9.
HochbergJ. E.Perception. Englewood Cliffs, N. J.: Prentice-Hall, 1964.
10.
HuttenlocherJ.Discrimination of figure orientation: Effects of relative position. J. comp. physiol. Psychol., 1967, 63, 359–361.
11.
PiagetJ.Judgment and reasoning in the child. New York: Harcourt, Brace, 1928.
