Kojima's conclusion that our method of scoring performance in the rod-and-frame test did not produce satisfactory results in young children was invalid because our scoring method was used incorrectly, fallacious reasoning was used to reject our scoring method, subjects were classified wrongly, and the procedure used to test vertical perception in the children probably was unreliable.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
FineB. J.DanforthA. V.Field-dependence, extraversion, and perception of the vertical: Empirical and theoretical perspectives of the rod-and-frame test. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 1975, 40, 683–693.
IngleD. J.Fallacies and errors in the wonderlands of biology, medicine, and Lewis Carroll. Perspectives in Biology and Medicine, 1972, 15, 254–281.
4.
KojimaH.Assessment of field dependence in young children. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 1978, 46, 479–492.
5.
NyborgH.A method for analyzing performance in the rod-and-frame test: I. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 1974, 15, 119–123.
6.
NyborgH.The rod-and-frame test and the field dependence dimension: Some methodological, conceptual, and developmental considerations. Copenhagen: Dansk Psykologisk Forlag, 1977.
7.
NyborgH.IsaksenB.A method for analysing performance in the rod-and-frame test: II. Test of the statistical model. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 1974, 15, 124–126.
