CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY, NORTHRIDGE
THE EFFECT OF ACTIVE LANGUAGE
!I
ON MOTOR RESPONSE
A thesis submitted in partial satisfaction of the
requirements for the degree of Master of Arts in
Physical Education
by
Lauren Mitchell Eagle
January, 1976
is approved:
California
University, Northridge
December, 1975
ii
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
I would like to express my deep appreciation to
the members of my committee, Dr. Chris Johnson, Dr.
Darrel Guthrie, and in particular to the chairman of my
committee, Dr. William Vincent, for their constructive
criticism and guidance in bringing this research to
completion.
Special thanks is extended to the faculty
of the Boys' Physical Education Department at Marina del
Rey Junior High School in Los Angeles.
iii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS. •
..........
..........
LIST OF TABLES • • •
LIST OF FIGURES •
ABSTRACT.
....
iii
...
•
Iii
•
•
•
.....
vi
vi
vii
CHAPTER
I.
INTRODUCTION •
1
The Problem
Importance of the Study
Statement of the Problem
Statement of the Purpose
Assumptions
Hypothesis
Design of the Study
Scope and Limitations
Definition of Terms
Organization of Chapters
II.
REVIEW OF LITERATURE • • •
.....
5
Early Clinical Practice in
the Use of Language to
Modify Motoric Behavior
Pavlovian Background to
Soviet Research
Work of Alexander R. Luria
Clinical Application of Luria's
Research
III.
METHODS • • •
............
Subjects
Grouping of Subjects
General Design
Teaching Procedure
Instructions to the Motor-only
Group
Instructions to the Verbal-motor
Group
Testing Procedure
Statistical Procedure
iv
18
CHAPTER
IV.
ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION • • • • • • 25
Data and Analysis
Discussion of Findings
Surrunary
v.
CONCLUSIONS, RECOMMENDATIONS, AND
SUMMARY • • •
• • • ,. • •
• 30
Conclusions
Suggestions for Further
Research
Summary
LIST OF REFERENCES
...
34
....
APPENDICES • • • • •
v
•
•
35
LIST OF TABLES
Table
.
.
1.
t-Test Date for Error Scores • •
2.
t-Test Data for Time Scores •
3.
Number of Errors on Specific Items of Test • • 27
Items listed in the order of teaching
4.
Number of Errors on Specific Items of Test • • 28
Items listed in the order of magnitude of errors
..
• 26
• • • 26
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure
1.
Floor Plan • • •
2.
Display Panel.
..........
19
20
vi
ABSTRACT
THE EFFECT OF ACTIVE LANGUAGE
ON MOTOR RESPONSE
by
Lauren Mitchell Eagle
Master of Arts in Physical Education
January, 1976
This investigation was designed to examine the
effect of the subject's own speech on motor response to
discrete visual stimuli.
Forty seventh-grade male
students in the regular physical education classes were
used as subjects.
Each subject was taught a series of
motor responses to different colors of lights.
Half the
subjects were simply taught the motor responses.
The
remaining twenty subjects were instructed to make an
appropriate verbal response at the same time they made
the motoric response.
Each subject was instructed in
a private, one-to-one situation.
After a brief rest
period, the subject was tested on the responses.
The
time was recorded in seconds, and the number of errors
was marked.
Based on the data collected, the means for time
and for errors were computed for each group.
A t-test
was used to analyze the difference in time required for
each group, and to analyze the difference in errors.
vii
The results of the study indicated that the
verbal-motor group required more time to perform the
test and that they also made more errors than did the
motor-only group.
The mean difference in time was
significant at the .05 level of confidence and the mean
difference in errors was significant at the .01 level
of confidence.
viii
CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION
Teachers are often looking for ways to improve
their instructional methods.
While reading a recent
issue (January, 1967) of Special Education, the writer
discovered a reference to a method of therapy for the
cerebral palsied.
In this, the Peto method, speech is
used to enhance motor control.
The Peto method is rooted in research by Alexander
R. Luria.
In Luria's experiments, the subjects were
taught to say "Press" or "Don't Press" as they responded
to signal lights by pressing a button.
When the child
did not respond using speech simultaneously, he made
many errors.
Using a language response appropriate to
the task, the child was able to respond correctly.
When language usage was discontinued, the child reverted
to his earlier, lower level of proficiency.
The writer began to wonder if speech could be
used to advantage in physical education classes for
normal junior high school students.
Statement of the Problem
The problem was that research is not available
regarding the function of active language as it relates
to simultaneous motor activity of normal school-age
children.
1
2
Importance of the Study
Active verbal accompaniment to a motor task would
be easy to implement in the physical education class.
If such a procedure is indeed effective, teachers and
students should know about it.
Statement of the Purpose
The purpose of the study was to determine whether
active speech on the part of the normal student is
associated with superior performance of discrete motor
responses to visual cues.
Assumptions
The assumptions of this study were:
1.
The conditions of the environment and the
administration of instructions were constant.
2.
The subjects gave comparable effort and
attention to the tasks.
3.
The subjects in each group were equal in
ability prior to starting the study, because of the
random selection technique.
Hypothesis
It was predicted that there would be no significant
difference between the mean time and error scores of
groups who (1) performed language and motor functions
simultaneously in response to visual cues; or (2)
performed motor functions only in response to visual
cues.
3
Design of the Study
Forty seventh-grade male students were selected
at random from the fourth period physical education
classes at Marina del Rey Junior High School in Los
Angeles, California.
Half the students were taught motor
responses with appropriate and meaningful language
responses while performing a novel gross motor task.
The other half were taught only the motoric responses.
As each student completed the learning sequence in a
private, one-to-one situation, he was given a 2-minute
break.
The subject was then tested and his time and
errors were recorded.
Delimitations
The delimitations of the study were,
(1) the
subjects were all seventh-grade males in the regular
physical education classes; and (2) there were but 40
subjects.
Definition of Terms
Active language refers to spoken language on
the part of the subject.
The language must be appropriate•
to and simultaneous with the task the subject is
performing.
Motor-only refers to the group of subjects who
were instructed to perform gross motor patterns in
response to light signal.
Verbal-motor refers to the group of subjects
4
who were instructed to speak appropriate words as they
responded motorically to the light signals.
Organization of Chapters
This chapter has presented an overview of the
study.
Chapter II will review recent literature
pertinent to the purpose of this paper.
In Chapter III
the procedures used in gathering data for the study
will be described in detail.
Results and interpretations
will be delineated in Chapter IV.
Chapter V contains
conclusions, recommendations for further study, and a
summary.
CHAPTER II
REVIEW OF LITERATURE
The purpose of this investigation was to determine
if active speech on the part of the normal junior
high school student could influence performance of
discrete motor responses to visual stimuli.
In relation
to this purpose, this chapter is divided into four
main topics.
The first section deals with classical
clinical practice in the use of language to modify
motoric behavior.
The second part deals with Pavlov's
theories regarding the development and use of language.
Pavlov's work constitutes the philosophical and
scientific basis of Alexander R. Luria's work.
The
third area of concern centers around the experiments of
Luria in the Soviet Union in the late 1950's.
The last
section deals with more recent clinical practice in
Hungary and in England in treatment of the cerebral
palsied and others.
The treatments cited are a practical
application of Luria's research.
Early Clinical Practice in the Use of Language to Modify
Motoric Behavior
In 1948, Paula F. Egel (3) reported the results
of a special treatment for cerebral palsied patients.
A rhyme set to music was assigned each specific body
movement taught (3:76).
By combining spoken rhymes
with passive and active assisted motion, the children
5
6
learned to perform the specific motion every time they
heard the rhyme.
If they were not physically able to
perform the motion, they went through as many contractions
as they could until further development allowed them to
accomplish the desired patterns.
The patient in this type of therapy was conditioned
to perform a muscular pattern in response to hearing a
verse set to music.
The patient did not have to say or
sing the rhyme himself.
Pavlovian Background to Soviet Research
Yuri P. Frolov (4) has organized and translated
material presented by Pavlov.
Frolov says that according
to Pavlovian theory, three systems of control (4:78-80)
function in the central nervous system of the human.
The first of these consist of the subcortical ganglia,
and are those ganglia most closely adjacent to the cortex. ,
The subcortical ganglia control complex unconditioned
reflexes associated with hunger, self-defense, and
sex.
They are governed largely by chemical changes
in the system and encompass a firm orientation to the
environment and to equilibrium.
The power of this
system is most forceful, but limited in application.
The second system of control consists of
conditioned temporary reflexes which arise in the
cerebral hemispheres.
Orientation of this system is
far wider than that of the ganglia, since it is
7
influenced by the sensory perceptors of vision,
audition, etc.
These reflexes are extremely labile and
are readily changed under varying environment.
Pavlov
refers to conditioned reflexes as a first signalling
system (sic).
In humans a third system of control, a verbal
communication system, arises as a result of social
interaction.
cortex.
Control is located in the frontal cerebral
The development of speech allows a synthesis
and generalization of the environment, and also serves
as a material substrate for the capacity of abstraction.
That is, speech is a function observable through sense
input, and it leads to abstractions that are not
observable directly through the senses.
Speech is
referred to by Pavlov as the second signalling system.
The rationale is that through speech one can be directed
to respond behaviorally in ways not indicated through
the undonditioned or conditioned reflex systems.
Work of Alexander R. Luria
Alexander R. Luria (6) has followed paths in the
study of language that Pavlov was working on at the time
of his death.
Luria has concluded (6:17-19) that
verbal social intercourse with the mother helps the
child to focus on a subject apart from its environment,
as a figure against a ground.
Through social interaction
the child learns to behave in less diffuse ways and to
8
sustain his attention when fixed on a problem.
Through
verbal control the child learns to name elements in his
environment.
He copies his mother's verbal patterns
and matches them to his own actions.
Later he will
generate his own verbalizations in "thinking through"
a problem towards action.
Subsequently, verbalizations
become sub-vocalized or virtually silent, and thus
serve as a vehicle of thought.
In such way the
physiological super-structure of speech evolves into a
process of thought.
Luria (6:15-17) when summarizing Pavlovian
theory regarding the second signaling system, stated
that during the course of social interaction with his
mother and with others, the child learns to recognize
and later to speak words relating to his environment.
These words help him to analyze and to synthesize a
concept of the nature of the world around him.
The
basic principle of Soviet developmental psychology is
that intelligent perception, purposive memory, active
attention, and deliberate action develop over a period
of years.
Formation of these mental processes is not
inevitable in maturation, but is clearly connected to
old links and associations.
A child's mental activities
are conditioned by his social relationships with adults.
The child is linked to the mother emotionally, and
9
through speech, through which he enlarges his experience
and acquires new modes of behavior and new ways of
organizing his mental activities.
According to Luria (5:4), man's behavior bears
a reflex character and is at the same time of a conscious
and voluntary nature.
Man responds to verbal instructions
and he orients himself with the help of spoken language.
Language is used to systematize impressions, to realize
the person's own actions, and to subordinate his behavior
to verbally formulated intentions.
The first signaling
system depends on cues received by the senses.
The
second signaling system consists of words, which possess
the properties of abstraction and special generalization,
and constitute the foundation of our thinking.
Language
forms a component part of the mental reality in which
man lives, and comprises one factor in regulating his
behavior.
What specific features, Luria asked (5:5),
constitute the dynamics of speech, and to what extent
do these features organize elementary reaction?
The
interaction of the two signaling systems constitutes
one parameter of behavior.
Equipment used by Luria is described in his work
edited by J. Tizard (6).
The subject sat in a room in
front of a display panel for presentation of the
stimuli.
The subject squeezed a rubber bulb to signify
10
his responses (6:11).
The display panel consisted of
a black box with a ground glass front about eight inches
square.
Inside were colored lights, white, yellow,
red, green, or blue; two bells of differing pitch; and
a buzzer.
All signals could be switched on and off
by the investigator.
Also in the same room with the
investigator was an "event recorder".
Paper was driven
at a constant speed by an electric motor.
The rubber
bulb was connected by tubing to a bambour, which operated
a siphon-fed pan to give continuous written records of
all changes of pressure on the bulb.
Other pens
recorded the stimuli presented to the subject alongside
the response record.
Using the described apparatus (5:5-7), Luria
developed a series of simple but graduated motor tasks
to demonstrate varying motor reaction arising from
verbal instruction.
At the simplest level, the child
was told, "When a light appears, press the balloon
(bulb)."
When the task was given to a 2-year-old,
the child looked for the light but pressed the rubber
bulb without sequence.
Movements were not yet properly
regulated by verbal instruction.
The child may
have pressed before the light appeared, or he may have
discontinued while the light was still on.
Once action
was evoked, the child may have continued pressing even
in the absence of the signal.
His uncoordinated reactions
11
were most diffuse.
If he was further pressed to inhibit
the undesired response, even more intense and irradiated
responses ensued.
Luria reported that when the task was given to
a 3 or 3 1/2-year-old, the child was able to handle
the response as directed.
But upon receiving more
complicated direction, i.e., "Press for a red light,
and don't press for a green light", he produced uncontrolled motor reactions in response to any signal,
either positive or inhibitory.
No additional instruction
produced a stabilizing effect.
The child easily
yielded to the influence of direct stimuli.
For
example, if a loud bell rang, he would start pressing.
This confusion brought on a weakening of inhibitory
processes and the emergence of impulsive reaction to
inhibitory signals.
At the age of 5 to 5 1/2 years, the child was
found to perform both positive and inhibitory reactions
such as, "Press for a red light, and don't press for
a green light."
Diffuseness of reaction disappeared,
but comparatively slight complications would again
lead to disequilibrium and diffuse behavior.
If the
signals were reversed, that is, "Press for a green
light and don't press for a red light", or if the
signals were given shorter time, or if speed of
presentation were stepped up, the child reverted to
12
more immature levels of performance.
Much of Luria's work was given to examination
of cases of pathological excitability and of weakness
in inhibitory processes in abnormal children.
Luria
observed (5:11) that the child may often know that he
is giving the wrong response, but he repeats the same
mistake over and over.
Often despite neurodynamic
derangement, the child's verbal systems may remain
intact.
The child says, "oh, it's wrong!" as he
responds inappropriately.
He sees, but cannot regulate
his heightened excitation.
Luria reasoned that if derangement of general
neurodynamics is accompanied by a relatively intact
second signaling system, then can a relatively intact
speech compensate for the defects to ensure regulation
of motor reaction.
At length he concluded this
compensation occurs only if the strength, equilibrium,
and mobility of the speech activity are higher than
those of direct motor reaction.
Numerous cerebra-asthenic children exhibit no
mistakes when asked to give verbal but not motor
response.
Roever, when given the directions for a
motor response, they are unable to respond correctly,
as with the 3-year-olds described.
When the children
were asked to say "Press" or "Don't press" at the same
time they gave the appropriate motor response, errors
13
reduced from 60-70% to 10-15%, and some to zero.
Subsequently, when instructed to give the silent motor
response, errors returned to the previous levels of
inappropriate impulsive response.
Luria concluded that speech regulates by raising
the tone of the inhibitory processes and modifying the
dynamics of excitability.
In the case of cerebro-asthenics with weakness
of excitatory processes and predominance of inhibition
(6:13), similar results prevailed.
The compensatory
influence of speech consists in heightening the tone
of excitatory processes, and toning up the activity of
the child.
Children with limited or local brain damage
responded well to the techniques described (5:14).
If
prior damage was to the central processes for relating
auditory input, the child could react properly to
optic signals, but he showed deranged reaction to acoustic
signals.
Inclusion of verbal reactions in the experiment
led to compensation for the neurodynamic defects.
Children with disturbance of the central
processes for relating kinesthetic or motor input could
not respond selectively to press hard or gently according
to signal.
Including "hard" or "gently" in the verbal
response likewise resulted in regulation of motor
control, except in very gross lesions.
14
In the case of feeble-minded or oligophrenic
children (5:14-22), the severly disturbed mobility
of their mental faculties extended considerably to
connections of the second signaling system.
Their
speech processes were more defective then their motor
behavior, and the regulatory function of speech was
disturbed.
If given more complicated instructions,
each response was negatively induced and inhibited
neighboring connections.
system collapsed.
Then the entire functional
Their equilibrium was deranged in
the direction of hyper-excitability, or for some
children, in the direction of grossly inhibited behavior.
After a tvvo or three minute pause, the child often
reverted to previous well-established behavioral
connection.
Clinical Application of Luria's Research
In 1965 Ester Cotton {1) reported on practices
at the Institute for Movement Therapy and School for
"Conductors" in Budapest, Hungary.
Rolling over, sitting
up, creeping, crawling and walking are simple learning
tasks for normal children, but extremely complex for
many cerebral-palsied children.
The Peto method was
developed at the Institute as an outgrowth of Russian
research.
The treatment and teaching procedures were
called "rhythmical intention"
(1:437-446).
The
students were assigned to small groups who, together
15
with their conductor, worked in an undisturbed environment
daily.
The conductor taught the children motor skills,
personal care skills, and academic skills.
The cerebral-palsied child typically moves in an
abnormal stereotyped fashion.
Active exercises on his
part only serve to perpetuate his incorrect patterns.
Inhibitory measures were therefore employed to weaken
abnormal postural reflex activity by reducing hypertonus.
Facilitation of potentially normal postural and movement
patterns was promoted by "rhythmical intention" in the
following way:
child.
The Conductor was not to touch the
Body movements were guided by the child's own
speech or attempts to speak.
his movementss
His own cortex controlled
The Conductor spoke and the children
repeated after him, slowly and loudly, "I raise my
hands above my head."
The Conductor and the children
then counted slowly and loudly from one to five, and
while so doing they raised their arms above their heads.
The rhythm had to be steady and slow.
Not all children
succeeded at their task at the same time, so the
counting continued until all the children had reached
the goal which was within their capacity.
the movement became automatic.
By repetition
It was then possible
to perform correctly without counting.
Later, if the
new skill failed him, the child could revert to oral
counting to help him.
16
Counting is thought to reinforce the action
necessary to move the limb.
The new movement pattern
is possibly developed by a conditioned reflex over the
second signaling system as described by Pavlov.
These badly handicapped children, all severe
cases, could follow the curriculum when later transferred
to normal schools.
In addition to the cerebral-palsied
children, there were three separate groups of paraplegias,
dystrophies, and spina bifida.
Likewise treated were
adult hemiplegics, and those with Parkinson's disease
or multiple sclerosis.
Children were admitted at a
very early age without intelligence screening, except
that imbeciles were not accepted.
In 1967 physiotherapist Ester Cotton and
occupational therapist Margaret Parnwell (2:7-11)
reported that these techniques were being used at the
Lady Zia Spastics Centre in Luton, Bedfordshire, England.
After seven months of instruction, slight improvements
had been noted.
Further assessment over a longer
period of time was anticipated.
Summary
A review has been made of Pavlovian theory in
regard to the function of active speech in regulating
behavior.
Pavlov's theory states that language is a
second signaling system through which man learns to
focus on a subject apart from its environment.
According
17
to Pavlov, language is the key to attention, memory,
generalization, and deliberate action.
Analysis of the
environment and synthesis of new forms of behavior
generate from the power of speech.
Luria has asked to what extent speech regulates
behavior.
Objective measurements in his laboratory
1
indicated that active speech raises the tone of inhibitory
processes (to inhibit inappropriate response) , and also
modifies the dynamics of excitability so that response
can be directed and controlled in quality and degree.
An outstanding example of clinical application
of Luria's findings is found at the Institute for
Movement Therapy in Budapest.
Through the treatment
called "rhythmical intention" the child's own speech
guides and controls motor patterns that are otherwise
outside his sphere of competency.
It is thought that
these movements are achieved through conditioned reflex
over the second signaling system.
The added impetus
of speech helps muscles to function efficiently enough
to perform the desired motor task.
v/
CHAPTER III
METHODS
The purpose of this study was to determine the
effect of active language on performance of discrete
motor responses to visual cues.
Included in this
chapter are a discussion of the subjects, the grouping
of the subjects, a description of the general design,
the teaching procedures, the testing procedures, and
the statistical design.
Subjects
Forty seventh-grade male subjects were chosen
at random from junior high school physical education
classes meeting from 11:40 a.m. to 12:30 p.m. each
week-day.
Although all the boys were in regular
physical education classes, they represented a wide
range in physical and mental ability.
Grouping of Subjects
The investigator did not know from day to day
which students would be released from class for
teaching and testing.
Before the students arrived,
testing sheets were made out for "motor-only" or
"verbal-motor" subjects.
assigned to each group.
Students were alternately
In this way, assignment of
subjects to groups proceeded in a random fashion,
half to each group.
18
19
General Design
One or two students were taught the responses
and tested on a given day.
Each student was instructed
on a one-to-one basis, with no observers in the room.
In all, 40 students were randomly assigned to
ten groups.
Twenty students in the control group
were taught the motoric responses alone.
The other
twenty students were taught to make appropriate verbal
descriptions as they responded motorically to the signals.
Teaching Procedure
As each student entered the testing room he was
greeted in an informal way and allowed to help set up
the equipment.
Equipment consisted of a vertical
4' x 8' plywood panel (already installed), a control
console, and electric wiring (Figure 1).
A 9" x 9"
signal box centered 54" from the floor on the plywood
panel could be lighted in any of 5 different colors.
From the control console, the lights could
Figure 1
Floor Plan
\Display Panel
Subjects'
standing
I
D " C o n t r o l console
"'Investigator's
chair
.area ...
20
be activated for one long signal or for two short
signals.
Also along the vertical axis of the panel
were located four target switches, 80", 61", 26", and
3" from the floor (Figure 2).
A, B,
c,
and D respectively.
These were targets
The subject stood in front
of the plywood panel to receive signals and to respond
by touching the targets.
Figure 2
Display Panel
•c=::J• --+-----Target
Target B
c::::l
8'
A
01
Signal Box
Target
c:::::i-
~'----+---------
c
Target D
The signal box was activated from a small control
console placed to the left and slightly behind the
subject as he faced the panel.
The control switches
were spring-loaded to shut themselves off when the
investigator released them each time.
When the target
switches were touched, the appropriate color light
21
would appear on the signal box for instant feedback.
As the student plugged in the electric cord and
tried out the controls and switches, he became familiar
with the equipment.
He was put at ease for a non-
pressured learning experience.
Most students asked
pointed questions about what to do, and made an easy
transition to the learning sequence.
The learning sequence was designed so that each
signal was given to the students ten times.
If an
error was made, the student was corrected and encouraged
to give the correct responses for "practice".
Any
questions were answered quickly and in a factual and
friendly way.
Students were taught ten discrete motoria
responses to ten different light signals.
The movements
required included: turn the body around and push the
switch, don't do anything, reach
around your knee,
push the target with your toes, jump and touch, push
with your elbow, stop, push with your knee, push chest
target and jump to push top target, and squat and push
bottom target.
After a brief rest period, students were tested
to see how many of these responses they could perform
correctly.
recorded.
Time in seconds and number of errors were
22
Instructions to the Motor-only Group
Instructions were as follows:
1. Stand here in front of the panel. When you
see the red light, turn yourself all the way
around and push this target (Target B) •
(Demonstrate. Give signals).
2. When you see the white light, don't do
anything.
(Give signals).
3. When you see the orange light, push this
target (Target D) with first one foot, then
the other.
(Demonstrate. Give signals).
4. When you see the green light, reach around
your knee and push this target (Target C) •
(Demonstrate. Give signals).
5. When you see the blue light, jump and touch
the top target.
(Give signals).
6. If the red light goes on twice, touch
this target (Target B) with your elbow.
(Demonstrate. Give signals).
7. If the white light goes on twice, push
Target B, then jump and touch Target A.
(Demonstrate. Give signals).
8. If the orange light goes on twice, don't
do anything.
(Give signals).
9. If the green light goes on twice, push
Target C with your knee.
(Demonstrate. Give
signals).
10. If the blue light goes on twice, squat down
and push Target D.
(Demonstrate. Give signals).
Instructions to the Verbal-Motor Group
Instructions to the Verbal-Motor group were as
follows:
1. When you see the red light, turn yourself
all the way around and push this target (Target B)
and at the same time say, TURN AND PUSH.
(Demonstrate. Give signals).
2.
When you see the white light, don't do
23
anything, and say, DON'T DO ANYTHING.
signals).
(Give
3. When you see the orange light, toe Target D
with first one foot, then the other, and say
TOE AND TOE.
(Demonstrate. Give signals).
4. When you see the green light, reach around
your knee and push this target (Target C) and at
the same time say, REACH AROUND YOUR KNEE.
(Demonstrate. Give signals).
5. When you see the blue light, jump and touch
the top target and at the same time say, JUMP.
(Give signals).
6. If the red light goes on twice, touch this
target (Target B) with your elbow and say,
ELBOW.
(Give signals).
7.
If the white light comes on twice, push
Target B, then jump and touch Target A. At the
same time say PUSH AND JUMP.
(Give signals).
8. If the orange light comes on twice, just
stop. And say, STOP.
(Give signals).
9. If the green light comes on twice, push
Target C with your knee and say, KNEE IT.
(Demonstrate. Give signals.).
10. If the blue light comes on twice, squat
down and push Target D. At the same time say,
SQUAT.
(Give signals).
See Appendices for copy of work
sh~et
used for
each student.
Testing Procedure
At the end of the learning sequence the
investigator and the subject were allowed a two-minute
break.
Without further practice the subject was
instructed to try the test to see how much he could
remember.
It was made clear that no grades were being
taken, and that the investigator would not even know the
24
subject's score until the data was analyzed.
It was
agreed that the test was difficult and that virtually
no one would make a perfect score.
When the testing sequence was begun, the
stopwatch was activated.
The subject was given 30
signals, three of each kind.
Errors were marked, but
the student was not otherwise reinforced as to whether
his answer was correct.
After the subject responded to the final signal,
the watch was stopped and the elapsed time recorded
in seconds.
The student was thanked for his part in
the study, and he returned to his class.
Statistical Procedure
The means and standard deviations were calculated
for each group.
A t-test for the difference between
the two means was used to determine whether there was
a statistical difference in test performance.
It was
determined that any statistical differences exceeding
the .05 level of confidence would be considered
significant.
CHAPTER IV
ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION
The purpose of this study was to determine the
effect of active language on performance of discrete
motor responses to visual cues.
In relation to that
purpose, the following data were gathered and analyzed.
Data and Analysis
The data consist of length of time and number of
errors committed by the individual subjects during the
testing sequence of the experiment.
Half the subjects
had been instructed to give a motoric response to the
visual cues.
The other twenty subjects had been taught
to respond both verbally and motorically to each given
signal.
The means and standard deviations were calculated
for the number of errors in each group, and also for the
time required to complete the test.
The verbal-motor group took longer to perform the
test, and they likewise made more errors.
The t-test
obtained for errors was 2.82, and was significant at the
.01 level of confidence (Table 1).
The t-test for time
scores was 2.33, significant at the .05 level of
confidence (Table 2).
25
26
TABLE 1
t-TEST DATA FOR ERROR SCORES
Group
Mean
Standard Deviation
Motor-only
5.35
4.34
10.25
6.45
Verbal-motor
*P
<
t
2.82*
.01
TABLE 2
t-TEST DATA FOR TIME SCORES
Mean
Group
Standard Deviation
Motor-only
159.7
37.2
Verbal-motor
184.6
29.8
**P
<:.
t
2.33**
.05
Discussion of Findings
The high incidence of error in the verbal-motor
group as compared to the motor-only group is a striking
feature of the data.
The total number of errors for
the motor-only group was 108; for the verbal-motor group,
205.
27
Many more errors were recorded for the items
taught in the second half of the learning sequence
(Table 3).
For the motor-only group, a total of
36 errors were recorded on the first five responses
taught, while 72 errors were tallied for the last five
responses taught.
In the case of the verbal-motor
group, the difference is even greater.
The number of
errors on the single items was 58 in contrast to
147 total errors for the double light signal items.
TABLE 3
NUMBER OF ERRORS ON SPECIFIC ITEMS OF THE TEST
Items listed in the order of teaching
Verbal- MotorSignal
Response
Target
motor
only
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
Turn & push
Don't do
anything
1 Orange
Toe & toe
1 Green Reach around
your knee
1 Blue
Jump
2 Red
Elbow
2 White
Push & jump
2 Orange
Stop
2 Green
Knee it
2 Blue
Squat
1 Red
1 white
B
Inhibitory
13
3
4
2
D
17
8
c
16
9
28
29
37
27
26
10
12
19
14
19
13
7
A
B
B &A
Inhibitory
c
D
28
TABLE 4
NUMBER OF ERRORS ON SPECIFIC ITEMS OF THE TEST
Items listed in the order of magnitude of errors
Verbal-motor
Motor-only
Errors
Target
Errors
Target
3
9
13
16
17
Inhibitory
A
B
2
4
8
8
10
Inhibitory
B
D
D
26
27
28
29
37
c
D
D
c
B
B & A
Inhibitory
12
13
14
19
19
c
A
c
& A
B
Inhibitory
B
The investigator attributes the greater number of
errors on double light signal items as compared to single
light signal items to retroactive interference.
When
the single light signal is well-learned, it becomes more
difficult to learn the response to the double light
signal.
The signal triggers a serial response, which
must be inhibited long enough to make a decision whether
the signal is single or double.
For both groups the inhibitory response, "Don't
do anything" generated the least errors.
The inhibitory
response, "Stop", taught in the second half of the
learning sequence, had the greatest number of errors
for the verbal-motor group, and tied for greatest in
29
the motor-only group.
The inhibitory response,
"Don't do anything" was extremely well-learned, and this
learning, again, interfered with learning another
inhibitory response.
CHAPTER V
CONCLUSIONS,
REC0~1MENDATIONS,
AND SUMMARY
This chapter will be divided into a section on
conclusions, a section on recommendations for further
research, and a summary of the study.
The conclusions
represent the statements that can be taken directly
from the data, and may be supported by the statistical
analysis presented in Chapter IV.
The suggestions for
further research are more broad in their scope and
represent possible theoretical explanations that may
serve to assist other researchers who will choose to
pursue similar or modified investigations.
Conclusions
The experimental hypothesis, that verbal-motor
and motor-only response to visual cues will not differ
significantly, was rejected for the normal seventhgrade male subjects.
Based on the analysis of data, and on the related
literature, the following reasons for significant
superiority of the motor-only group are given:
1.
two tasks.
The verbal-motor is the more novel of the
Not only does one have to remember what
to do, but he also must remember what to say.
When a
task is new to the subject, he must consciously
deliberate on each component.
30
Conscious deliberation
J
31
requires more time than the simple signal-response.
The more involved task also distracts attention from
making firm motor associations.
Distraction of this
nature can contribute to length of time required and
to number of errors generated.
The children that Luria was working with were
operating on a very basic motor level.
Their problem
was to achieve sufficient coordination to pass the
threshold of performance.
The subjects of the present
study were already able to perform the task motorically,
but they were attempting to shorten the time required
and eliminate occasional errors.
At the level of maturity of the normal seventhgrade male, the use of speech to augment motoric
response is not productive.
2.
Fewer errors are committed on items taught
early in the sequence than on items taught later.
This difference is attributed to retroactive interference.
Suggestions for Further Research
On the basis of the findings and conclusions,
it is recommended that these areas be pursued by those
who wish to do similar studies:
1.
For identified highly verbal subjects, does
active language enhance poor motor performance?
2.
When used with active speech, can the
32
subject's superior motor performance enhance his
command of defective speech?
The Peto method suggests
this may be possible.
Summary
The purpose of this study was to determine if
active language on the part of the subject would improve
motor performance given in response to visual cue.
Forty seventh-grade males were selected at random from
the morning physical education classes.
Subjects
were randomly assigned to one of two groups.
The
motor-only group simply performed the motor tasks as
they received the signals.
The verbal-motor group was
instructed to respond with appropriate speech at the
same time they gave the motoric responses.
Results showed that the verbal-motor group took
longer to perform the test sequence and committed some
errors.
The t-test indicated the difference in time
scores was significant at the .05 level of confidence,
and the difference in error was significant at the
.01 level of confidence.
The data indicate that active speech slows
motor performance for the normal junior high school
male.
33
LIST OF REFERENCES
34
LIST OF REFERENCES
1.
Cotton, Ester.
"The Institute for Movement
Therapy and School for 'Conductors', Budapest,
Hungary," Developmental Medicine and Child
Neurology, 7:437-446, 1965.
2.
Cotton, Ester and Margaret Parnwell. "From
Hungary: the Peto Method," Special Education,
56:7-11, Jan. 1967.
3.
Egel, Paula F. Technique of Treatment for the
Cerebral Palsy Child. St. Louis: c.v. Mosby
Company, 1948.
4.
Frolov, Yuri P. Pavlov and His School.
York: Oxford University Press, 1937.
5.
Luria, Alexander R. "Experimental Study of the
Higher Nervous Activity of the Abnormal Child,"
Journal of Mental Deficiency Research, 3:1-22,
June 1959.
6.
The Role of Speech in the Regulation
of Normal and Abnormal Behavior. Edited by
J. Tizard. New York: Liveright Publishing Company,
1961.
New
35
APPENDICES
36
APPENDIX A
COPY OF INDIVIDUAL WORK SHEET
Date
Name
M-otor-only or Verbal motor
Number
THIS BOARD HAS FOUR TARGET SWITCHES.
LOOK, TRY EACH
ONE.
WHEN I PUSH THESE SWITCHES, THE LIGHTS GO ON.
SEE.
TRY IT.
Learning Sequence
1.
When you see the red light, turn and push.
AND PUSH.
2.
Red.
TURN
Red.
When you see the white light, don't do anything.
DON'T DO ANYTHING.
White.
White.
Red.
White.
Red.
3.
4.
When you see the orange light, toe with one foot,
then the other.
TOE AND TOE.
~vhi te.
Orange.
Orange.
Orange.
When you see the green light, reach around your
knee and push.
Green.
5.
Orangeo
Red.
REACH AROUND YOUR KNEE.
Green.
Green.
White.
When you see the blue light, jump and touch.
JUMP.
Green.
Blue.
Blue.
Blue.
Green.
Orange.
Red.
Green.
White.
Blueo
Blue.
Orange.
Blue.
6.
If the red light goes on twice, touch it with your
elbow.
ELBOW.
2 Red.
Red.
2 Red.
37
7.
If the white light goes on twice, push target B
and then jump and touch A.
2
8.
White.
2 White.
2 Orange.
2 Orange.
Red.
2 White.
2 Red.
2 Orange.
Red.
2 White.
Orange.
Orange.
If the green light goes on twice, push target C
with your knee.
KNEE IT.
Orange.
2 Orange.
2 Red.
10.
White.
If the orange light goes on twice, just stop.
STOP.
9.
PUSH AND JUMP.
Green.
Green.
2 Green.
2 Green.
2 Green.
White.
2 Green.
If the blue light comes on twice, squat and push
target D.
2 Blue.
SQUAT.
Red.
2 Orange.
2 White.
2 Blue.
White.
Green.
2 Blue.
2 Green.
Blue.
White.
Blue.
Blue.
Green.
2 Blue.
Orange.
2 Blue.
Blue.
End Learning Sequence
( 2-minute break)
Testing Sequence
Read across
(Start time)
2 Green
Orange
Red
2 Blue
2 White
White
2 Orange
Blue
White
Green
2 Red
Red
2 Blue
2 Red
Green
2 White
2 Orange
Blue
2 White
2 Green
Orange
Red
Blue
2 Green
2 Red
White
2 Blue
Orange
Green
2 Orange
(End time.)
38
t-1otor-only
Time
Verbal-motor
Errors
Time
Errors
39
APPENDIX B
TEST SCORES
VERBAL-MOTOR
MOTOR-ONLY
Time
Errors
Time
Errors
84
108
112
113
118
1
1
3
0
1
125
146
149
152
162
1
5
7
10
4
136
154
162
162
166
2
12
3
6
1
165
168
176
179
180
6
4
16
13
11
168
172
172
174
179
7
5
9
8
4
189
192
204
204
204
10
6
14
20
20
187
194
199
212
222
11
2
14
11
7
208
209
214
220
246
15
7
3
8
25