University of Montana
ScholarWorks at University of Montana
Theses, Dissertations, Professional Papers
Graduate School
1964
Kinesthetic perception of basketball players during
the competitive season
Russell Thomas Flynn
The University of Montana
Follow this and additional works at: http://scholarworks.umt.edu/etd
Recommended Citation
Flynn, Russell Thomas, "Kinesthetic perception of basketball players during the competitive season" (1964). Theses, Dissertations,
Professional Papers. Paper 6371.
This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate School at ScholarWorks at University of Montana. It has been accepted for
inclusion in Theses, Dissertations, Professional Papers by an authorized administrator of ScholarWorks at University of Montana. For more
information, please contact [email protected].
KINESTHETIC PERCEPTION OF BASKETBALL PLAYERS
DURING THE COMPETITIVE SEASON
by
RUSSELL THOMAS FLYNN
B.S. MacMurray College, 1963
Presented in partial fulfillment of the requirements
for the degree of
Master of Science
MONTANA STATE UNIVERSITY
1964
Approved by:
Chairman, Boar d o f'%xami ne rs
JJ X4
Dean ,/Graduate School
2 :
Date
R ep ro d u ced with p erm ission o f th e copyright ow ner. Further reproduction prohibited w ithout perm ission.
/J
UMI Number: EP37172
All rights reserved
INFORM ATION TO ALL USERS
The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted.
In the unlikely event that the author did not send a complete manuscript
and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if material had to be removed,
a note will indicate the deletion.
UMT
Oisssrtation Publishing
UMI EP37172
Published by ProQuest LLC (2013). Copyright in the Dissertation held by the Author.
Microform Edition © ProQuest LLC.
All rights reserved. This work is protected against
unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code
uest‘
ProQuest LLC.
789 East Eisenhower Parkway
P.O. Box 1346
Ann Arbor, Ml 4 8 1 0 6 - 1346
R ep ro d u ced with p erm ission o f th e copyright ow ner. Further reproduction prohibited w ithout perm ission.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The au th or w ish e s t o e x p r e ss h i s m ost s in c e r e than ks and
a p p r e c ia t io n t o Mr. Wayne E. S in n in g f o r h i s h e lp and gu id an ce in
th e c o m p letio n o f t h i s s tu d y .
A p p r e c ia tio n i s a l s o e x p r e s s e d t o th e Montana S ta te U n iv e r s it y
Freshman B a s k e tb a ll Team and th e p h y s ic a l e d u c a tio n s tu d e n ts who
s e r v e d as s u b j e c t s .
R. T. P.
R ep ro d u ced with p erm ission o f th e copyright ow ner. Further reproduction prohibited w ithout perm ission.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PAGE
CHAPTER
I.
ou«sciooe»
THE PROBLEM .
,
1
Statement of the Problem». . .
Limitation of the Study ..
09froodCo««»C'e
2
Limitation of the sample
o tj 9 <) 4 « 4
«090A000009
Definition of Terms . . . .
III.
2
2
Basic Assumption . . . . . . . . .
IIo
1
2
Kinesthetic sense . . .
2
Kinesthetic perception .
3
Competitive season ..
..
3
..............
k
RELATED LITERATURE
The Basis for Kinesthetic Tests
h
Related Investigations
...........
5
Establishment of Kinesthetic Tests
7
PROCEDURE OF THE STUDY
Subjects
11
.......
11
Test Battery . . ,
Balance stick
Arm raisin g , . .
Weight s h iftin g
.....
«<390 1 ^
Vertical lin e a r space
Training of the Tester
Ik
Testing Procedure .
15
Procedure of each t e s t period
Method of data collection
................
15
9
9
9
R ep ro d u ced with p erm ission o f th e copyright ow ner. Further reproduction prohibited w ithout perm ission.
9
9
0
4
9
9
9
9
15
CHAPTER
IV.
page
ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION OF RESULTS
S1S
€iSX
l3-"fcS
S
O
........
3t3XSLl.^rS X S
APPENDIX
l8
« o a . .
j c i 0 . a o t t o a t > o * * « o . ®
. . . . . . . . . .
a .
a .
*
0
*
0
.
0
. . . .
. . .
o
.
.
.
0
.
0
*
0
* 0
.
*
*
*
0
.
0
0
0
0
* o o *
.
0
0
*
X
X
^ 3( 15
^^^P^PG
X
X
dX3C C
o « ' 0 ' v o o . * o o w o o o o o o o o o u 0 o o o c o o ' i * o o o « o e a u c » e o
* * * 0 0 0 * * 0 .
o
o
o
*
*
o
»
*
o
#
*
o
o
o
o
o
» a « # *
o * * o
& o * ù *
.
0
0
*
0
0
*
o
*
o
*
o
*
*
# 0
*
0
* 0
o
*
o
#
o
o
*
*
o
o
o
0
0
*
0
. 0
0
* 0 * 0
0
.
0
*
* * 0 0
0
0
*
* 0 #
0
*
*
0
• a e e e o o o « o f l o * i > O D O o * « e u a o i > o o a « o o o o . o * « e « o o c i o e o o * * o #
-X V -
R ep ro d u ced with p erm ission o f th e copyright ow ner. Further reproduction prohibited w ithout perm ission.
21
.
o o o * * o m * * o o * o * * # o o * * o o o o o * * o o L , o o o o * * * a c * u o o o o u o c i . o . o c o
A^^GndXX A.
l6
* » * i i a ® e i f t o o < s v o * o o v a c o
o o a . . c o a # A o o a * a o i * * @ * o . L
0 0 0 0 * 0 0 * 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 0
l6
!■
^?X
lpJT
U
X
L
^lX
^^ £LHd. C0X
1O3-X
L5X(3X
1S
BIRILOGRAPHY
....... .
o
o w o @ o i > o o o . 3 . a c e a o c u 0 u f j o o . . a e # a 0 C ' . o . . *
SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS
RSCO^ŒGnd&tXOnS
....
o
6 . o o » o o . a o < » < j * c , t > j ' > o r * . . * . o . o * e ) O i j e o a o . ' » »
SC
X
-ISSXon OT Rssnlts
V.
o
e e ( i . o a * « . m o o o t ; a o o # o o o o t ' a i j O L u v . ? o . o . a » O G
f^GtHOd OY 3X
1Stl^ySXS
S
. . .
I^
2^
2^^
2Y
2!8
2^
LIST OF TABLES
TABLE
I=
PAGE
Mean
,
M e d i a n , and Range of Test Items
.
.
.
u v .
.
.
« » ,
v .
.
-V -
R ep ro d u ced with p erm ission o f th e copyright ow ner. Further reproduction prohibited w ithout perm ission.
.
« .
v c . . . . .
IT
CHAPTER I
THE PROBLEM
Statement of the Problem
One of the main problems confronting a b a s k e tb a ll coach i s
g e ttin g p o t e n t i a l performance from each of h is players throughout the
long competitive season.
To meet t h i s problem r e a l i s t i c a l l y , he must
consider the mental and physical fa cto rs which can a f f e c t the p la y e rs.
In v e stig a to rs have shown t h a t th ere may be a r e la tio n s h ip between
success in motor a c t i v i t i e s
and k in e s th e tic p erc e p tio n ,1
It
follows,
th en , t h a t changes in k in e s th e tic perception could occur during the
course of a competitive season and r e f l e c t
a higher or lower perform­
ance capacity of an in d iv id ual at a given time.
Of the many studies t h a t were reviewed in the area of k in esth e­
tic
p erceptio n, none were found in which i t was measured lo n g itu d in a lly ,
The in v e s tig a to rs were in t e r e s te d in the k in e s th e tic sense of a person
in r e l a t i o n to his motor learning at one p a r t i c u l a r tim e ,
Apparently,
no in v e s tig a to r has been i n t e r e s t e d in the p o s s i b i l i t y t h a t k in e s th e tic
sense might be a changing f a c to r in an in d iv id u al over a period of
time, or t h a t i t
might be a ffec te d by outside fa cto rs such as t r a i n i n g .
B, E, P h i l l i p s , "The Relationship Between Certain Phases of
K inesthetic Perception to Motor Learning," Research Q u arte rly , 12:58U5 8 5 , October, 19^1; Marjorie P h il li p s and Dean Summers, "Relation of
K in esthetic Perception to Motor Learning," Research Quarter l y , 29 :^68,
December, 195^; Louise L. Roloff, "Kinesthesis in the Relation to the
Learning of Selected Motor S k i l l s , " Research Q u a rte rly , 2U;215, May,
1953; and Olive G. Young, "A Study of Kinesthesis in the Relationship
t o Selected Movements," Research Q u arte rly , 16:282-283, December, 19^5,
R ep ro d u ced with p erm ission o f th e copyright ow ner. Further reproduction prohibited w ithout perm ission.
-2In this study, an attempt has been made to investigate the
possible relationships that might exist between changes in kinesthetic
sense, as measured by accepted tests of kinesthetic perception, and
participation in a basketball training program.
Specifically, the
purpose of this study was to determine if changes occur in the kines­
thetic perception of basketball players during the competitive season
as shown by their ability to balance, to assume and identify body
position, and to orientate their bodies in space.
A sub-purpose of
this study was to determine whether there were any differences between
the scores attained by an experimental group (athletes) and a control
group (non-athletes).
Limitation of the Study
Limitation of the Sample.
The sample for this study was
limited to the freshman basketball team at Montana State University
and a control group selected from physical education service classes
at the same institution.
Basic Assumption
It was assumed that any extraneous factors that might affect the
subject's performances on the tests of kinesthetic perception were
randomly distributed throughout both the experimental and control
groups, and would in no way systematically change the test results.
Definition of Terms
Kinesthetic Sense.
Wells^ stated that kinesthetic sense is
^Katharine Wells, Kinesiology (Philadelphia: W.B. Saunders
Company, I 9 6 1 ), p. 1+5.
R ep ro d u ced with p erm ission o f th e copyright ow ner. Further reproduction prohibited w ithout perm ission.
-3known as
the "position sense" because i t t e l l s us the position of the
parts of
the body without the aid of vision or
touch.
According to
Cooper and Glassow,^ kinesthetic sense is put into operation when
nerve endings in the muscles, tendons, and fascia are stimulated by
the movement of a j o i n t .
Bard
U
has indicated th a t kinesthetic sense
is a ttrib u te d to the action of the proprioceptors.
Kinesthetic Perception.
For the purpose of th is study, kines­
t h e ti c perception was defined as the awareness of the kinesthetic
sense as
i t was measured with the selected t e s t s of the movement
of
the body or i t s parts.
Competitive Season.
Since there was a five week cessation of
completion due to the Christmas vacation that came between the f i r s t
and the second basketball games, i t was f e l t that more valid experimental
re su lts would be obtained i f the experiment was conducted from the
second game u n til the l a s t .
This period began January 15, 1964, and
ended March 2, 1964.
Training Program.
Training program refers to the basketball
practice and conditioning routine
to which the basketball team was
subjected to during the course of the competitive basketball season.
Athlete.
For the purpose of th is study, the term athlete is used
in reference to the subjects in the experimental group.
Non-athlete.
Non-athlete is used in reference to the subjects
in the control group.
3john Cooper and Ruth Glassow. Kinesiology (St. Louis: C. V,
Mosby Company, 1963), p. 117.
^Phillip Bard, Medical Physiology (St. Louis: C. V. Mosby
Company, I 9 6 1 ), p. 1034.
R ep ro d u ced with p erm ission o f th e copyright ow ner. Further reproduction prohibited w ithout perm ission.
CHAPTER II
RELATED LITERATURE
The Basis for Kinesthetic Tests
The movement of the human body is controlled by the cerebral
hemispheres of the brain through the sensory input of three types of
nerve receptors.
I f the stimulus is
from the external environment,
the receptor is c la s s if ie d as exteroceptive, but i f the stimulus is
from the in tern al environment, i t
is
c la s s ifie d as interoceptive.
The t h i rd type of nerve ending, which receives stimulus from the loco­
motor system, is c la s s ifie d as proprioceptive. ^
The proprioceptors are c la s s ifie d into two major groups ;
kinesthetic receptors, and s t a t i c and eq_uilibric receptors.
The
kinesthetic receptors are the muscle spindles, the Golgi tendon
organs, and the Pacinian corpuscles.
The s t a t i c and equilibria
receptors are the nonauditory parts of the inner ear called the
vestib ular sacs and the semi-circular canals
According to Zoethout and Tuttle,^
kinesthetic sense is devel­
oped as a re su lt of stimulations of the proprioceptors which aids in
the adjustment of the parts of the body.
I t is t h e i r opinion that
kinesthetic sense is put into operation when nerve endings in the
^GoM. Wyburn, The Nervous System (New York: Academic Press,
i 9 6 0 ), pp. 50 - 6 6 .
^Ib id .
3w.D. Zoethout and W.W. T u ttle , Testbook of Physiology (St.
Louis: C.V. Mosby Company, 19^6), p. 53^.
R ep ro d u ced with p erm ission o f th e copyright ow ner. Further reproduction prohibited w ithout perm ission.
-5muscles, tendons, and fa s c ia are stim ulated by the movement about a
jo in t.
These impulses are sent to the b ra in which in tu r n i n t e r p r e t s
th e movement of the body and i t s
p arts.
I t was s t a t e d by Wells^ t h a t th e awareness o f the p a rts of the
body i s
important in the le arn in g of new motor s k i l l s »
k i n e s th e ti c p erceptio n, which i s
Therefore, the
developed by the p ro p rio c ep to rs, should
be important fo r body movements in the performance of s k i l l e d a c t i v i t i e s .
Related In v estig a tio n s
Many stu d ies have been done in which the re la tio n s h ip between
k in e s t h e t i c perception and motor a b i l i t y has been in v e s tig a te d .
The
i n v e s tig a to r s have attempted to p re d ic t the success in s p e c if ic sport
s k i l l s through the measurement o f the k in e s th e ti c perception of the
s u b je c ts .
Some authors have found what they thought was a s ig n i f i c a n t
r e la t io n s h i p between the success in a sport and high scores from meas­
ures o f th e k in e s th e ti c p erceptio n.
Other authors have found t h a t
the k in e s th e ti c perception as measured by t h e i r t e s t s was not stro ngly
r e l a t e d to motor a b i l i t y .
These stu dies have been reviewed in the
following paragraphs.
The r e la tio n s h ip between k i n e s th e ti c sense and success in
b a s k e tb a ll was in v e s tig a te d by Taylor^ in 1933.
b a t t e r y o f fourteen t e s t s
He admi n i s t e r e d a
to two groups of college b as k e tb a ll p la y ers.
^Katharine Wells, Kinesiology (Philadelphia:
Company, I 9 6 1 ), p. U5 .
W. B. Saunders
^W. J . Taylor, "The Relationship Between K inesthetic Judgment
and Success in Basketball" (unpublished M aster's Thesis, Penn S ta te
U n iv e rsity , College Park, Pennsylvania, 1933), p. 33.
R ep ro d u ced with p erm ission o f th e copyright ow ner. Further reproduction prohibited w ithout perm ission.
"• 6 ™
One group was ra te d as "successful" and the o th er as "unsuccessful."
The 'Unsuccessful" group was made up of the f i r s t
from the
freshman b a s k e tb a ll team.
up of the boys kept on the team.
each in d iv id u a l.
between the
twenty boys cut
The "successful" group was made
The t e s t s were administered once to
On no one t e s t was a s i g n i f i c a n t d ifferen ce
"successful" and the
composite scores of the
found
"unsuccessful" groups, but when the
fourteen t e s t s were compared, th ere was a
sLgnificant d ifferen c e between the two groups,
P h illip s
and Summers
t e s t e d 115 women to determine i f a
r e la tio n s h ip e x iste d between t h e i r s u b je c ts '
sense and t h e i r success in bowling.
le v e l of k in e s th e tic
On the b a s is of sco res, the
poorer bowlers were placed in one group and the b e t t e r bowlers in
another.
I t was concluded t h a t the r e s u l t s
tic
showed a d e f i n i t e
te s ts
from the twelve k in esth e­
r e la tio n s h ip between motor learning and
p o s i t i o n a l measures o f k in e s th e s is
as applied to arm movements.
The
authors also concluded t h a t the k in e s th e tic sense was more important
in the e a r l i e r stages of learning than in the l a t e r stages
and t h a t
th e r e was a r e a l d iffe ren ce between the p re fe rre d arm and the non­
p re f e rr e d arm in k in e s th e tic p e r c e p tiv ity .
Young
T
in v e s tig a te d s e le c te d body movements commonly used in
gymnastics and spo rts
a c tiv itie s.
T hirty-nine women were given a
^Marjorie P h i l l i p s and Dean Summers, "Relation of K inesthetic
Perception to Motor Learning," Research Q u a rte rly , 25:^66-U68, December,
195k.
"^Olive G, Young, "A Study o f Kinesthesis in the Relationship
t o Selected Movements," Research Q u a rte rly , 16:277-283, December,
19^5.
R ep ro d u ced with p erm ission o f th e copyright ow ner. Further reproduction prohibited w ithout perm ission.
-7b a t t e r y of k in e s th e ti c t e s t s
to see i f th ere was a r e la tio n s h ip be­
tween t h e i r success in body movements and t h e i r success in the
k in e s t h e t i c t e s t s .
She concluded t h a t th ere was no r e la tio n s h ip
between k i n e s th e ti c sense and general motor a b i l i t y .
Establishment of K inesthetic Tests
Many t e s t s have been developed fo r measuring k in e s th e tic p er­
ception.
No two in v e s tig a to rs have s e le c te d the same b a t te r y of
t e s t s , which probably shows t h a t a tru e b a tte ry
been developed.
The stu d ies
satisfa c to ry te s ts
of t e s t s has not yet
reviewed here were attempts to find
or t e s t b a tte ry s to measure k in e s th e tic perception.
g
Langfeld and A llp ort
t h e t i c p erceptio n.
is
developed eight t e s t s
They described a v e r t i c a l space l i n e a r t e s t which
frequently used in physical education research.
sub ject s i t s
to measure k ines­
In t h i s
te st,
the
a t a ta b le with a y a rd stic k placed v e r t i c a l l y in fron t of
him and i s t o l d to view a c e rta in mark on the y a rd s tic k .
blind fo ld ed and t o l d to point to t h i s mark.
He i s then
This t e s t has been found
t o have a c o n sis te n tly high r e l i a b i l i t y which was shown by a cor­
re la tio n of
.9 0 between a t e s t and a r e t e s t .
Roloff^ developed a b a tte r y o f k in e s th e tic t e s t s
to i n v e s t i ­
gate the r e la tio n s h ip between k in e s th e ti c sense and the learn in g r a te
o f college women in various motor s k i l l s .
Her b a tte ry of four t e s t s
^Herbert Langfeld and Floyd A l l p o r t , An Elementary Laboratory
Course in Psychology (New York : Houghton M ifflin Company, 1 9 1 6 ) , p. 6 0 .
^Louise L. Roloff, "Kinesthesis in the Relation to the Learning
o f Selected Motor S k i l l s , " Research Q u a rte rly , 2^:210-217, May, 1953.
R ep ro d u ced with p erm ission o f th e copyright ow ner. Further reproduction prohibited w ithout perm ission.
-8were the balance s t i c k ,
arm r a i s i n g , weight s h i f t i n g ,
and arm c i r c l i n g .
These were s e le c te d from a l a r g e r b a t t e r y o f eig ht t e s t s by use of the
D o o l i tt le method of computing m ultiple c o r r e l a t i o n s .
th e lower a su b je ct scored on a t e s t ,
improvement.
Her r e s u l t s
Roloff found
th e b e t t e r her chances were for
in d ic ate d a p o s i t i v e , but not s i g n i f i c a n t ,
r e la t io n s h i p between k in e s th e ti c perception and motor a b i l i t y as
measured by the Scott T e s t s .
P h illip s ^ ^ studied the r e la t io n s h i p between the scores subjects
made on ten t e s t s
of k in e s th e ti c perception and t h e i r accuracy in
p u ttin g and driving a g o lf b a l l .
One of the t e s t s ,
moving a sty lu s
through a winding path in the l e a s t amount o f tim e, was s i g n i f i c a n t l y
c o r r e la te d with p u ttin g accuracy, but not with driving accuracy.
Also, a miniature p u ttin g accuracy t e s t ,
which subjects performed
while b lin d fo ld e d , showed p o s itiv e c o rre la tio n s with p u ttin g accuracy
( r = . 3 3 ) and with driving accuracy ( r = , 2 7 )»
Weibe
attempted to find a b a t te r y o f t e s t s which could be
used to study k in e s th e s is .
of fifte e n
a th le te s
In h is i n v e s ti g a t io n s , he used one group
and another group of f i f t e e n n o n -a th le te s.
su b je c t was t e s t e d with a b a t te r y of twenty-one t e s t s .
th a t
f i f t e e n of the t e s t s were r e l i a b l e
t e s t i n g instruments.
Each
He concluded
and recommended them as u seful
There was no sin g le t e s t with a high enough
v a l i d i t y c o e f f ic i e n t to j u s t i f y
its
use alone in measuring k in e s th e s is .
E. P h i l l i p s , "The Relationship Between Certain Phases of
K in esth etic Perception t o Motor Learning," Research Q u arterly , 12:
571-586, October, 19^1.
^^Vernon Weibe, "A Study of Tests o f K in esth esis," Research
Q u a rte rly , 25 :222-2 30, May, 195^*
R ep ro d u ced with p erm ission o f th e copyright ow ner. Further reproduction prohibited w ithout perm ission.
-
9
-
He found a difference in the scores of the k in e tth e tic t e s ts which were
in favor of the athletesc
By the in te r-c o rre la tio n of the composite
T-scores, he found th a t the best battery of t e s t s were the balance
lengthwise, leg r a i s e , v e r t ic a l space, and separate feet.
In the follow-up study, Weibe
12
did a factor analysis on a
b atte ry of forty-four measures of k in esth esis.
emerged were arm s t a t i c
thig h -leg s t a t i c
Four factors which
function, k inesthetic response to balance,
function, and arm dynamic function
On the basis of
r e l i a b i l i t y , t e s t v a l id it y , and t e s t uniqueness, the following seven
t e s t s were suggested for use in the study of kinesthesis:
arm side­
ward, arm forward, balance lengthwise, balance crosswise, leg flexion,
thigh r a is in g , weight s h i f ti n g , and p ull duplicate.
Magruder
k in esth etic t e s t s .
investigated the d iffe ren t ways of administering
She was also intereste d in how one would find the
best t e s t s of kinesthesis
for a t e s t b atte ry .
t h e ti c sense is made up of component p arts.
She noted th a t kines­
I f we are to get a true
measure of one's k in esth etic sense, we w ill need a battery of t e s t s
th a t w ill measure each of these p arts.
She designated the component
parts as the a b i l i t y to balance, the a b i l i t y to assume and identify
body p o sitio n , the a b ility to recognize muscular contraction of a
known amount, and the a b i l i t y to orientate the body in space.
Magruder
found i t best to allow the subjects one practice t r i a l id en tic al to
^^Vernon Weibe, "A Factor Analysis of Tests of K inesthesis,”
(Microcarded Doctorate Thesis, University of Oregon, Eugene, Oregon,
1963).
■^^ary Alice Magruder, "An Analytical Study of the Testing for
Kinesthesis," (Microcarded Doctorate Thesis, University of Oregon,
Eugene, Oregon, 1963).
R ep ro d u ced with p erm ission o f th e copyright ow ner. Further reproduction prohibited w ithout perm ission.
—1 0 —
the re a l t r i a l s
p rio r to actually administering the t e s t s .
From these s tu d i e s , one may conclude that there is no single
t e s t t h a t can measure kin esth etic perception.
A battery of t e s ts
must be selected before any investigation can be made concerning the
rela tio n sh ip between kin esth etic sense and motor a b i l i t y .
tio n must be made on the basis of r e l i a b i l i t y ,
ness of the t e s t s to measure the d ifferen t
This selec­
v a lid ity , and unique­
components a ttrib u te d to
k in esth etic sense.
R ep ro d u ced with p erm ission o f th e copyright ow ner. Further reproduction prohibited w ithout perm ission.
CHAPTER I I I
PROCEDURE OF THE STUDY
Subjects
The eight players on the 1953-1964 Freshman basketball team
were used as the experimental group, and sixteen students were chosen
at random from physical education service classes for the control
group.
Test Battery
The t e s t s used in t h i s study were chosen because they were
suggested by Weibe (page 8 ) and measured the component parts th at
Magruder (page 9) said were necessary in measuring kinesthetic sense.
The following t e s t s were used:
Balance Stick^
A s tic k which was one inch square and twelve inches long was
securely attached to the center of a board which was one inch thick
and one foot square.
The subject was blindfolded and given the following
verbal in stru ctio n s:
1.
"Stand with your foot lengthwise on the s tic k ."
2.
"When your foot is secure, l i f t
the other foot o ff the
floor and hold your balance as long as possible."
3.
You may do anything you lik e to hold your balance as
long as you do not touch the floor with any part of your
body."
1Louise L. Roloff, "Kinesthesis in the Relation to the Learning
of Selected Motor S k i l l s , " Research Quarterly, 24:216, May, 1953.
R ep ro d u ced with p erm ission o f th e copyright ow ner. Further reproduction prohibited w ithout perm ission.
-1 2 -
h,
"You w ill be timed from the moment you l i f t your foot
u n t il some part of your body touches the flo o r."
5.
"You may have one practice t r i a l and
thenyou w ill be
timed for the three t e s t t r i a l s . "
6.
"Do your best as you are competingagainst everyone else
who is taking th is t e s t . "
One demonstration was given while the instructions were being
given.
The subject was timed, to the nearest tenth of a second, from
the
moment he l i f t e d his free foot u n ti 1 some part of his body touched
the
flo or.
The subject was given three t r i a l s
and the average was
taken as his score for th is t e s t .
Arm Raising
2
The manner of raisin g the arm was demonstrated to the subject.
The subject was then blindfolded and given the following in stru ctio n s:
1.
"Raise your rig ht arm to the horizontal p ositio n."
2.
"Hold th is position u n t i l I t e l l you to lower your arm."
The t e s t e r faced the subject and used a gonimeter to determine
how many degrees the s u b je c t’s arm was from the horizontal.
The ver­
t i c a l lin e was found by having a plumb bob hanging in front of the
subject.
An imaginary line passing through the shoulder jo in t to the
base of the thumb should have been at right angles to the v e r tic a l
lin e to a tta in a perfect score (zero).
The deviation from the h ori­
zontal was recorded to the nearest degree.
and the t e s t repeated twice more.
The arm was then lowered
The average of the three t r i a l s
was recorded as the s u b je c t's score.
2 lb id .
R ep ro d u ced with p erm ission o f th e copyright ow ner. Further reproduction prohibited w ithout perm ission.
"13-
Weight Shifting^
The equipment for th is t e s t consisted of a bathroom scale and
a block of wood twelve inches long, six inches wide, and the same
height as the sc a le .
sc a le .
The block was placed on the l e f t side of the
The subject placed h is l e f t
foot on the scale.
foot on the block and his rig h t
One demonstration was made while the following
verbal in stru c tio n s were given.
1.
"Stand with both feet on the scale so th a t I can determine
your t o t a l weight,"
2.
"Now stand with your l e f t
foot on the block of wood and
your rig h t foot on the s c a le ."
3.
"Keep looking s tr a ig h t ahead and do not look down at any
tim e."
4.
"Now I want you to balance yourself so th a t you w ill have
one-half of your t o t a l weight on the s c a le ."
Each subject was given three t r i a l s .
The score for each t r i a l
was recorded as the deviation, to the nearest quarter of a pound, from
one-half the s u b je c t's t o t a l w e i ^ t .
The average of the three t r i a l s
was taken and recorded as the score for th is t e s t .
V ertical Linear Space^
The equipment for th is t e s t was a yardstick fastened v e r tic a lly
^Ibid.
^Herbert Langfeld and Floyd A llp o rt, ^ Elementary Laboratory
Course in Psychology (New York: Houghton M ifflin Company, 1916), p. 60,
R ep ro d u ced with p erm ission o f th e copyright ow ner. Further reproduction prohibited w ithout perm ission.
—
xU—
on a w all and a chair which was placed so th a t the subject was Just
able to reach the yard stick with the index finger of h is rig h t hand.
After the subject sa t down on the c h a ir, he was given the following
in stru c tio n s :
1.
"Look at the eighteen inch mark and fix i t s
location in
your mind."
2.
"I w ill b lind fo ld you and then I want you to point to th is
mark with your rig h t index fin g er."
3.
"I w ill record your score as the point at which your finger­
n a il is pointin g."
U.
"You w ill then be asked to lower your arm to your lap and
repeat the t e s t again."
5.
"We w ill do th is t e s t three tim es."
This deviation was measured in inches to the nearest quarter
of an inch.
The re s u lt from each t e s t was recorded as the deviation
from the eighteen inch mark.
The s u b je c t's score for th is t e s t was
the average of the deviations for the three t r i a l s .
Training of the Tester
All of the data for th is study were collected by the investiga­
to r.
To assure the best possible r e s u lts , the te s tin g procedures
were practiced for a period of three weeks with students from physical
education service classes p rio r to the time the data were collected.
The t e s t - r e t e s t method was used to find t e s t r e l i a b i l i t i e s ,
The
co rre la tio n between a t e s t and a r e te s t was .97 for arm ra is in g ,
fo r balance s tic k ,
.9^
. 9 3 for v e r tic a l lin e a r space, and . 7 9 for weight
R ep ro d u ced with p erm ission o f th e copyright ow ner. Further reproduction prohibited w ithout perm ission.
-15s h if tin g .
The t e s t - r e t e s t method of finding r e l i a b i l i t y is shown in
Appendix A.
Testing Procedure
The two groups were te s te d during the following four in te rv a ls
of the 1 9 6 k b asketball season:
and February 28«
January 11, January 20, February 8 ,
The subjects in the control group were te s te d during
t h e i r regularly scheduled physical education service classes.
The
members of the b asketball team were te s te d during appointments.
All
te s tin g was done in the Research Laboratory of the Physical Education
Department.
Procedure of Each Test Period
The two groups were te s te d by id e n tic a l methods.
were brought in to the laboratory in groups of four*
dressed in gym uniforms and tennis shoes.
in the following sequence:
The subjects
They were a l l
The t e s t s were always given
( l) balajice s tic k ,
( 2 ) weight s h if tin g ,
( 3 ) arm ra is in g , and ( h ) v e r tic a l lin e a r space.
A fter the t e s t period was over, the subjects were to ld they
would be contacted again when i t was time for the next t e s t .
The
subjects were asked not to p ra c tic e any of the t e s ts during the time
between t e s t periods.
Method of Data Collection
The data from each t e s t period were recorded on individual data
sheets fo r each su b ject.
A fter the data had been collected from the
four t e s t p erio d s, a data sheet was made for each t e s t item.
o f these data sheets have been included in Appendix C.
R ep ro d u ced with p erm ission o f th e copyright ow ner. Further reproduction prohibited w ithout perm ission.
Copies
CHAPTER IV
ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION OF RESULTS
Analysis of Results
Method of Analysis
The mean, median, and range of the scores for the experimental
and control groups are presented in Table I .
Since one group repre­
sents a th le te s and the other n o n -a th le te s, i t was possible to in v e s ti­
gate the differences between the groups in k in esth e tic perception as a
sub-problem.
The Mann-Whitney U Test (Appendix B) was chosen because
i t was f e l t desirable not to assume normality of the sample.
This was
done because of the small size of the two groups and the se le c t nature
of the experimental group.
To in v estig ate the primary problem of th is study, i t was
necessary to determine whether changes occurred within the groups
during the eight week experiment.
I f such a change were found, i t
might then be possible to determine whether the tra in in g program of
the b asketball players had any e ffe c t on t h e i r k in esth etic perception
by comparing the experimental group with the control group.
The
Friedman Two-Way Analysis of Variance by Ranks (Appendix B) was used
to determine whether the changes which occurred within each group were
s t a t i s t i c a l l y s ig n ific a n t.
chosen because of i t s
This nonparametric s t a t i s t i c a l model was
a d a p ta b ility to the problem.
The hypothesis
te s te d was th at there was no change within the groups between t e s t
periods.
The .05 lev el of significance was chosen as the point at
R ep ro d u ced with p erm ission o f th e copyright ow ner. Further reproduction prohibited w ithout perm ission.
-17tr\ c— on
on co on
o
O n f-» oo
0 \ OJ l A
ta
r -t
(H
-v o
o
§
w
E
H
ta
CVJ
oo t - o
C3N i - t o
L A ^
iA -= r o
CM
N
Oon o
-zr on o
-=r p on
lA N O
-zt ^
o
^
o
on o
on o
LA o n r - |
CM
CM NO -Zf
«H
c o NO o
LA LA CM
on co _zr
o
NO t —
NO LA o
rH LA o
M c o LA
NO LA o
LA-Zt ON
LA .
CM
NO la
-Z f o
t—
o
LANO
t
—f
-= f CM o n
-Zf
CM
NO LA on
o NO NO
NO iH NO
t~ O on
M o on
on
ON
o
I— !
eu
I
t—
C
M
vo on
rHO
Non
C?N fH t—
CM NO O
-= r NO O
CM t— CM
ON NO on
-z3- t — C O
LA on CTN
LA NO on
_zf on O
NO o
t— h -N O
r - l NO NO
CM on o
fH on o
ta
rHi-î O
Ô
N O on on
_3- J- co
*
*
o
co co
co co
co on o
CM on o
LAC
Mon
o
LA ^
on onN
O
_ 3 - OO t —
CM C O NO
o
on
on t— o
^
I
(H on NO
t- on NO
o
H
l A on
t— on
o n CM NO
lAlAon
on
fH
on NO co
*
ta
o
o
«—4
O n 0 \ lA
CM CM -=f
ON o
NO o
o
LA
["— C~- NO
oo
o
o NO
LANO
t--zt on
-zt on on
iH LANO
LA LANO
ON LA m
on C
Mon
iH
CJN-zf
NO OO OO
I—!
<u
DO
Ü
ro
ta
ro <u
g
<i) 0) d
S S K
u
0)
d
bD
C
(D d
ta
%
d
§ '-O
0) d
s S
I
0>
o
d
<
ü
C
J
•p
d
o
•H
t:
p
C
bO
a
g
ra
d
bO
g
m
ta
p
■8^
bO
c
•H
w
'd
ta
«r4
li
la o
%
Il II
§
ta o
cq
* *
*
•H
§■
I—
t
f-, g
0)
& §
i
R ep ro d u ced with p erm ission o f th e copyright ow ner. Further reproduction prohibited w ithout p erm ission .
—18—
which ihe n u ll hypothesis was to be reje c te d .
The same level of s i g n i f i ­
cance was used for both analyses.
Results of Analysis
The Mann-Whitney II Test was used to determine i f there were
any tru e differences between the scores of the experimental and con­
t r o l groups at each t e s t period.
No s ig n ific a n t differences between
the two groups were found at any time on any of the four t e s t item s.
With the application of the Friedman Two-Way Analysis of Var­
iance by Ranks, the v e r tic a l lin e a r space t e s t showed a sig n ific a n t
difference between the f i r s t t e s t period and the l a s t three t e s t
periods in both the experimental and control groups.
No sig n ific a n t
changes within e ith e r of the two groups were shown for the balance
s tic k t e s t , the weight s h if tin g t e s t ,
and the arm ra isin g t e s t .
Discussion of Results
A ltho u^ the experimental group had b e tte r scores than the
control group on a l l of the t e s t s , the difference was not s ig n ific a n t
a t the
.05 le v e l.
Therefore, i t was concluded th a t there was no tru e
difference between the a th le te s and the non-athletes in k in esth etic
perception as measured by these t e s t s .
I t was also concluded th a t
the tra in in g program of the b asketball players had no e ffe c t upon
t h e i r k in e sth e tic perception.
The only t e s t which showed a sig n ific a n t change within each
group was the v e r tic a l lin e a r space t e s t .
Since th is change occurred
in both groups, i t must be concluded th a t i t was due to some facto r
other than p a rtic ip a tio n in the basketball tra in in g program.
R ep ro d u ced with p erm ission o f th e copyright ow ner. Further reproduction prohibited w ithout perm ission.
—19*"
Apparently, this change was due to a learning effect since it occurred in
both groups between the first and second tests.
The re s u lts o f th is study agreed with those of Taylor^ in th a t
th e re were no s ig n ific a n t differences between the k in esth e tic percep­
tio n of the a th le te and the non-athlete.
Taylor did conclude th a t the
a th le te s had b e tte r k in e sth e tic perception because they scored higher
than the non-athletes on the individual t e s t items.
However, th is
conclusion was not supported by s t a t i s t i c a l evidence.
P h illip s and Summers
2
sta te d th a t there was a relatio n sh ip
between motor learning and p o sitio n a l measures of k in esth e sis.
however, there were no sig n ific a n t findings at the
port th is view.
Again,
. 0 5 level to sup­
The t e s t s they used only indicated p ositiv e r e la tio n ­
ships between motor learning and the k in esth e tic t e s t s .
Roloff
also f e l t th a t there was an indication th a t a p ositiv e
re la tio n sh ip existed between kinethesis and the ra te a t which women
learn motor s k i l l s .
However, she found no s ig n ific a n t differences in
k in e sth e tic perception between fa st and slow lea rn ers.
Her opinion
was based on the fact th a t fa s t learners did b e tte r than slow learners
on her t e s t s
of k in esth e tic perception.
W
. J . Taylor, "The Relationship Between Kinesthetic Judgement
and Success in Basketball" (unpublished Master's Thesis, Penn State
U niversity, College Park, Pennsylvania, 1933), p. 33.
^Marjorie P h illip s and Dean Summers, "Relation of Kinesthetic
Perception to Motor Learning," Research Q uarterly, 25:^66-468, December,
1954.
^Louise L. R oloff, Kinesthesis in the Relation to the Learning
of Selected Motor S k ills ," Research Q uarterly, 24:210-217, May, 1953.
R ep ro d u ced with p erm ission o f th e copyright ow ner. Further reproduction prohibited w ithout perm ission.
-20The findings from t h i s study agreed with those of Young.^
She
concluded th a t there seemed to be no re latio n sh ip between k in esth e tic
sense and general motor a b ility since she did not find any s ig n ific a n t
re la tio n sh ip between the two.
From the findings of th is study, i t was concluded th a t there
was no s ig n ific a n t difference between the a th le te and the non-athlete
in k in e sth e tic perception as measured by these t e s t s .
This would at
f i r s t appear to be in disagreement with findings by other inv estiga­
tio n s .
However, a f te r clo ser examination of t h e ir stu d ie s, i t would
appear th a t some authors apparently drew conclusions th a t were not
supported by t h e i r s t a t i s t i c a l analysis.
is
This is probably why there
an apparent disagreement among the in v estig ato rs on the role of
k in e sth e tic perception, whether i t be re la te d to general motor learning
or differences between a th le te s and non-athletes.
^Olive G. Young, "A Study of Kinesthesis in the Relationship to
Selected Movements," Research Q uarterly, 16:277-283, December, 19^5.
R ep ro d u ced with p erm ission o f th e copyright ow ner. Further reproduction prohibited w ithout perm ission.
CHAPTER V
SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Summary and Conclusions
The purpose of th is study was to determine i f
changes occur in
the k in e sth e tic perception of basketball players during a competitive
season.
A sub-purpose was to determine i f there were any differences
between a group of a th le te s and a group of n o n -a th le te s.
Two groups of subjects were used.
One was an experimental
group of freshmen b ask etb all players
(a th le te s ) and the other a control
group of physical education students
(no n-athletes).
A b a tte ry of four accepted k in esth e tic te s ts
consisting of
balance s ti c k , weight s h if tin g , v e r tic a l space, and arm ra isin g were
used to measure the k in e sth e tic perception of each su b je c t.
The
b a tte ry o f t e s t s was given four times at equal in te rv a ls th ro u ^ o u t
the b ask etb all season.
Each subject was given the complete t e s t
b a tte ry during each t e s t period.
Therefore, any difference in the
k in e s th e tic perception between the two groups at any t e s t period or
any change which might occur within each group between t e s t periods
could be determined.
The Mann-Whitney U Test was selected to determine i f there
were any s ig n ific a n t differences between the experimental group and
the control group.
No s ig n ific a n t differences between the two groups
were found at any t e s t period.
Therefore, i t was concluded th a t
there were no s ig n ific a n t differences of k in esth e tic perception be­
tween the a th le te and the non-athlete as measured by these t e s t s .
R ep ro d u ced with p erm ission o f th e copyright ow ner. Further reproduction prohibited w ithout perm ission.
-22The Friedman Two-Way Analysis of Variance by Ranks was used
to determine whether there was any change in the k in esth e tic percep­
tio n of e ith e r group between t e s t periods.
The only t e s t item which
showed a s ig n ific a n t change was the v e r tic a l lin e a r space t e s t .
Since the change was found in both groups between the f i r s t and the
second t e s t p erio d s, i t was apparently due to a learning fa c to r and
not an actual change in k in e sth e tic perception.
Therefore, from the
data collected in t h is study i t was concluded th a t the basketball
tra in in g program did not bring about a change in k in esth e tic percep­
tio n during the competitive season.
Recommendations
1.
I t is recommended th a t fu rth e r work be done to gain
a b e tte r knowledge of the tru e nature of k in esth esis.
This knowledge could then be u tiliz e d for the develop­
ment of a standard b attery of k in esth e tic t e s t s .
2.
I t is recommended'that more studies be done to in v e s ti­
gate the importance of k in esth e tic perception in the
learning of new motor s k i ll s since there is
a disagree­
ment between many in v estig ato rs at th is time.
b e tte r t e s t s
However,
of k in e sth e tic perception should be devel­
oped p rio r to the time th is is done.
3.
I t is
fu rth e r recommended th a t more studies investigate
k in e sth e tic perception lon gitudinally to find evidence as to
whether k in e sth e tic perception changes within an ind ividual.
R ep ro d u ced with p erm ission o f th e copyright ow ner. Further reproduction prohibited w ithout perm ission.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
R ep ro d u ced with p erm ission o f th e copyright ow ner. Further reproduction prohibited w ithout perm ission.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
A.
Bard, P h illip .
1961.
BOOKS
Medical Physiology.
Cooper, John and Ruth Glassow.
Company, 1963.
St. Louis; C. V. Mosby Company,
Kinesiology.
Edwards, Allen L.
S t a t i s t i c a l Analysis.
Company, I n c ., 1955.
St. Louis: C. V. Mosby
New York: Rinehart and
Langfeld, Herbert and Floyd A llport.
An Elementary Laboratory Course
in Psychology. New York: Houghton M ifflin Company, 1916.
Lindquist, E. F. A F ir s t Course in S t a t i s t i c s .
M ifflin Company, 1 9 3 8 .
S iegal, Sidney.
Nonparametric S t a t i s t i c s .
Company, I n c ., 1956.
Wells, Katharine.
1961.
Vtybum, G. M.
Kinesiology.
B.
New York: McGraw-Hill Book
Philadelphia: W. B. Saunders Company,
The Nervous System.
Zoethout, W. D. and W. ¥. T u ttle .
C. V. Mosby Company, 19^6.
New York: Houghton
New York :
Academic Press, I 9 6 I .
Textbook of Physiology.
St. Louis:
PERIODICALS
P h il li p s , B. E.
"The Relationship Between Certain Phases of Kinesthetic
Perception to Motor Learning," Research Q uarterly, 12:58^-585,
October, 19^1.
P h illip s , Marjorie and Dean Summers.
"Relation of Kinesthetic Perception
to Motor Learning," Research Q uarterly, 25: 456-469, December, 1954.
R oloff, Louise L.
"Kinesthesis in the Relation to the' Learning of
Selected Motor S k ills ," Research Q uarterly, 24; 210-217, May,
1953.
Weibe, Vernon.
"A Study of Tests of K inesthesis," Research Q uarterly,
25:222-230, May, 1954.
Young, Olive G.
"A Study of Kinesthesis in the Relationship to Selected
Movements," Research Q uarterly, 16:282-283, December, 1945.
—
24 —
R ep ro d u ced with p erm ission o f th e copyright ow ner. Further reproduction prohibited w ithout perm ission.
c.
OTHER MATERIALS
Magruder, Mary Alice.
"An A nalytical Study of the Testing for
K inesthesis."
Microcarded Doctorate Thesis, University of
Oregon, Eugene, Oregon, 1963.
Taylor, W. J .
"The Relationship Between Kinesthetic Judgment and
Success in B asketball."
Unpublished M aster's Thesis, Penn State
U niversity, College Park, Pennsylvania, 1933.
Weibe, Vernon.
"A Factor Analysis of Tests of K inesthesis," Microcarded
Doctorate Thesis.
University of Oregon, Eugene, Oregon, 1963.
-25-
R ep ro d u ced with p erm ission o f th e copyright ow ner. Further reproduction prohibited w ithout perm ission.
APPENDIX
R ep ro d u ced with p erm ission o f th e copyright ow ner. Further reproduction prohibited w ithout perm ission.
APPENDIX A
METHOD OF FINDING RELIABILITIES OF EACH TEST ITEM
Test Retest Formula^
£ xy
= —
r = c o e ffic ie n t of r e l i a b i l i t y
N = sample size
X = scores o f 1s t t e s t
Y = scores of 2nd t e s t
2
Spearman-Brown Prophecy Formula
=
Ü I1 2 .
1 + (n- 1 )
______________
^12 = c o e ffic ie n t of r e l i a b i l i t y of a given t e s t
^n
= c o e ffic ie n t of r e l i a b i l i t y of a t e s t n times as long as the given
te s t
n
= number of times t e s t must be given to reach desired co efficien t
of r e l i a b i l i t y
The Spearman-Brown Prophecy Formula was used to determine how many
t e s t t r i a l s should be given for each t e s t item.
^Allen L. Edwards, S t a t i s t i c a l Analysis (New York; Rinehart and
Company, I n c ., 1955)> pp. 90-91.
^E. F. Lindquist, A F ir s t Course in S t a t i s t i c s (New York: Houghton
M ifflin Company, 1938), pp. 200-20%.
-27R ep ro d u ced with p erm ission o f th e copyright ow ner. Further reproduction prohibited w ithout perm ission.
APPENDIX B
STATISTICAL MODELS USED FOR ANALYSIS OF RESULTS
The Mann-Whitney U Test^
ni (n^+l)
U
=
ng
U=
^1
+
------ 2-------------
__________ R a
ng +
= sum of ranks assigned to group with sample size
^1
R2 = sum of ranks assigned to group with sample size ^2
^1 = size of sample 1
^2
= size of sample 2
The Friedman Two-Way Analysis of Variance by Ranks
X
N
* number of rows
k
= number of columns
R = sum of ranks in
J
2r
=
12
Nk(k+1)
3
-
(Ri)2
_
3N(k+l)
J=1
column
3„.
Sidney S ieg al, Nonparametric S t a ti s t ic s
Book Company, In c . , 1956), p. I l6 .
(New York: McGraw-Hill
^ I b i d ., p. I l 6 .
—
28—
R ep ro d u ced with p erm ission o f th e copyright ow ner. Further reproduction prohibited w ithout perm ission.
APPENDIX C
RESULTS OF BALANCE STICK TEST
Subjects
Period I
Period II
Period I I I
Period IV
EXPERIMENTAL GROUP
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
2.50
2.63
20.93
3.57
2.80
4.27
7.43
4.90
1.80
2.63
2.50
7.36
7.16
2.77
4.10
8.43
6.97
2.70
13.30
2.56
2.13
2.53
4.27
10.13
6.00
12.87
4.47
5.87
5.73
5.63
8.47
9.00
6.93
i4.o6
4.50
9.77
4.80
7.97
7.03
2.73
7.60
2.57
2.03
2.47
CONTROL GROUP
I
J
K
L
M
N
0
P
Q
R
S
T
U
W
X
Y
6.97
3.37
2.99
2.97
5.60
3.23
8.33
2.00
4.36
2.07
2.06
3.67
5.70
4.40
3.50
2.13
11.50
3.90
2.30
3.70
4.97
3.23
12.30
2.97
1.43
1.53
2.50
2.70
4 .6o
6.67
4.00
3.43
4.10
5.20
5.23
3.23
10.27
2.80
2.53
2.03
1.90
4.17
5.30
5.80
11.40
6.30
*Scores recorded in seconds
R ep ro d u ced with p erm ission o f th e copyright ow ner. Further reproduction prohibited w ithout perm ission.
2.43
9.67
5.97
5.33
6.07
3.27
-3 0 -
APPENDIX C
(continued)
RESULTS OF ARM RAISING TEST
Subjects
Period I
Period I I
Period I I I
Period IV
0.00
3.00
6.33
1.00
EXPERIMENTAL GROUP
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
.67
U.OO
14.33
11.67
5.00
4.00
4.33
13.67
1.00
.33
7.00
5.67
2.00
5.33
3.33
8.33
.67
0.00
.33
5.00
11.67
.67
3.33
9.67
.33
6.33
8.33
7.00
1.67
6.67
7.33
2.33
12.33
2.00
11.33
6.33
1.33
1.00
2.00
1.67
2.67
5.33
1.33
11.67
8.00
20.00
9.33
0.00
2.66
4.33
4.67
9.00
5.00
1.67
.67
9.67
2.67
0.00
13.33
12.00
3.00
8.67
11.67
2.67
8.67
CONTROL GROUP
I
J
K
L
M
N
0
P
Q
R
S
T
U
W
X
Y
4.00
10.00
8.33
7.33
1.00
1.67
1.67
4.67
13.67
.67
.67
2.00
1.67
9.67
13.33
5.67
2.33
7.00
11.33
3.33
10.67
^Scores recorded in deviations to the nearest degree
R ep ro d u ced with p erm ission o f th e copyright ow ner. Further reproduction prohibited w ithout perm ission.
8.00
2.67
10.33
8.33
3.67
4.67
-31APPENDIX C (continued)
RESULTS OF WEIGHT SHIFTING TEST
Subjects
Period I
Period II
Period III
Period IV
EXPERIMENTAL GROUP
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
7.67
1.67
3.33
3.67
2.00
2.00
10.00
10,33
14.00
6.33
4.67
7.67
7.67
2.67
19.17
h.33
7.00
2.67
7.00
14.33
15.33
U. 6 7
2.00
3.67
.67
1.00
11.00
4.33
1.67
7.00
2.33
.33
CONTROL GROUP
I
J
K
L
M
N
0
P
Q
R
S
T
U
W
X
Y
.33
1.33
3.33
8.17
3.67
1.00
2.33
6.33
8.00
1.33
11.66
10.00
2.67
4.67
5.67
1.33
13.33
4.67
1.33
3.00
13.00
3.33
.33
2.67
7.33
8.33
1.33
6.00
20.00
5.33
6.00
1.67
1.00
1.33
1.00
9.00
3.67
13.67
2.00
8.33
2.67
1.33
6.33
8.33
8.33
4.00
1.00
5.67
6.67
6.67
9.33
6.67
2.67
5.00
2.67
6.00
3.00
21.30
*Scores recorded in average of deviations
R ep ro d u ced with p erm ission o f th e copyright ow ner. Further reproduction prohibited w ithout perm ission.
.67
12.00
4.33
3.67
3.33
18.33
-32APPENDIX C ( continued)
RESULTS OF VERTICAL LINEAR SPACE TEST
Subjects
Period I
Period I I I
Period IV
1.67
1.50
.42
1.17
1.75
.08
.25
2.17
2.50
.75
.75
1.58
1.50
1.25
Period I I
EXPERIMENTAL GROUP
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
5.75
1.17
2.75
3.17
3.50
1.75
1.75
3.58
2.42
3.08
1.67
.33
.17
.42
1.25
1.17
0.00
2.75
1.17
.58
.42
.92
.25
.42
CONTROL GROUP
I
J
K
L
M
N
0
P
Q
R
S
T
U
W
X
Y
U.83
1.33
U. 0 8
k.33
2.92
.50
.33
1.67
.25
3.58
.92
.50
1.58
2.00
4,58
1.17
1.00
1.00
.42
1.58
.50
.50
1.91
.08
.67
.58
.75
2.58
3.33
.42
2.00
3.67
.67
1.58
.58
.25
1.00
1.25
0.00
2.08
.67
.83
1.92
2.25
4.75
1.75
1.00
.17
5.42
2.50
3.42
6.50
.84
.33
*Scores recorded in average deviation
R ep ro d u ced with p erm ission o f th e copyright ow ner. Further reproduction prohibited w ithout perm ission.
.75
.83
1.25
.58