Data on constriction of figures in the Memory-For-Designs from a previous study were re-analyzed using protocols which exhibited very frequent reduction in size. High constrictors (13 to 15 constricted designs) were compared to moderate constrictors (6 to 8 constricted figures) and to low constrictors (0 to 2 constricted figures). Analysis indicated that high constrictors were significantly different from low constrictors on two 16 PF variables. These differences, however, were not considered to be clinically, i.e., interpretively, significant. Even with extreme constriction, these data are consistent with previous research.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BenderL.A visual-motor Gestalt test and its clinical use. New York: American Orthopsychiatric Association, 1938.
2.
CattellR.EberH.TatsuokaM.Handbook for the Sixteen Personality Factor Questionnaire. Champaign, IL: Institute for Personality & Ability Testing, 1970.
3.
CraddickR.SternM.Effects of pre- and post-stress upon height of drawings in a perceptual-motor task. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 1963, 17, 283–285.
4.
GrahamF.KendallB.Memory-for-Designs test: Revised general manual. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 1960, 11, 147–188. (Monogr. Suppl. 2-V11).
5.
HolmesC.PersingerB.BusenbarkJ.Personality traits of edgers and non-edgers on the Memory-For-Designs test. Journal of Clinical Psychology, in press.
6.
KoppitzE.The Bender-Gestalt test for young children. New York: Grune & Stratron, 1963.
7.
PersingerB.HolmesC.Closure difficulty, figure-size expansion, and figure-size constriction on 240 Graham-Kendall Memory-For-Designs records. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 1978, 47, 343–347.
8.
PersingerB.HolmesC.The effects of personality traits on Memory-For-Designs performance. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 1979, 35, 798–801.
