University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

An Exploratory Study Of Pupillary Dilation As A Measure Of Difference In Attitude Of Three Groups Of Educators Toward Orthopedically Handicapped Children

(USC Thesis Other)

An Exploratory Study Of Pupillary Dilation As A Measure Of Difference In Attitude Of Three Groups Of Educators Toward Orthopedically Handicapped Children

PDF

Download

Open document

Flip pages

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content AN EXPLORATORY STUDY OF PUPILLARY DILATION AS A MEASURE
OF DIFFERENCE IN ATTITUDE OF THREE GROUPS
OF EDUCATORS TOWARD ORTHOPEDICALLY
HANDICAPPED CHILDREN
A Dissertation
Presented to
the Faculty of the School of Education
University of Southern California
In Partial Fulfillment of
the Requirements for the Degree
Doctor of Education
hy
Geraldine Patton Arundel
June 1973
INFORMATION TO USERS
This dissertation was produced from a microfilm copy of the original document.
While the most advanced technological means to photograph and reproduce this
document have been used, the quality is heavily dependent upon the quality of
the original submitted.
The following explanation of techniques is provided to help you understand
markings or patterns which may appear on this reproduction.
1. The sign or "target" for pages apparently lacking from the document
photographed is "Missing Page{s)'\ If it was possible to obtain the
missing page(s) or section, they are spliced into the film along with
adjacent pages. This may have necessitated cutting thru an image and
duplicating adjacent pages to insure you complete continuity.
2. When an image on the film is obliterated with a large round black
mark, it is an indication that the photographer suspected that the
copy may have moved during exposure and thus cause a blurred
image. You will find a good image of the page in the adjacent frame.
3. When a map, drawing or chart, etc., was part of the material being
‘ p h o tographed the photographer followed a definite method in
"sectioning" the material. It is customary to begin photoing at the
upper left hand corner of a large sheet and to continue photoing from
left to right in equal sections with a small overlap. If necessary,
sectioning is continued again — beginning below the first row and
continuing on until complete.
4. The majority of users indicate that the textual content is of greatest
value, however, a somewhat higher quality reproduction could be
made from "photographs" if essential to the understanding of the
dissertation. Silver prints of "photographs" may be ordered at
additional charge by writing the Order Department, giving the catalog
number, title, author and specific pages you wish reproduced.
University Microfilms
300 N orth Z e e b R oad
Ann A rbor, M ichigan 48106
A X erox E d u catio n C om pany
73-31,627
ARUNDEL, Geraldine Patton, 1914-
AN EXPLORATORY STUDY OF PUPILLARY DILATION
AS A MEASURE OF DIFFERENCE IN ATTITUDE OF
THREE GROUPS OF EDUCATORS TOWARD
QRTHOPEDICALLY HANDICAPPED CHILDREN.
University of Southern California,
Ed.D., 1973
Education, psychology
University Microfilms, A X E R O X Company, Ann Arbor, Michigan
© Copyright by
Geraldine Patton Arundel
1973
This dissertation, written under the direction
of the Chairman of the candidate’s Guidance
Committee and approved by all members of the
Committee, has been presented to and accepted
by the Faculty of the School of Education in
partial fulfillment of the requirements for the
degree of D octor of Education.
Date J u ne ., .. . 1 9 . 7 . 3 . .
Guidance Comrpittee
Dean
Chairman
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The investigator wishes to acknowledge the
assistance of the persons named "below, all of whom,
in their willingness to cooperate, made the study
possible. Initial thanks go to Dr. Jean Ayres, who
not only graciously consented to interrupt her demanding
schedule to serve as Chairman of the Doctoral Committee,
but took the time to suggest valuable sources of
information for certain technical phases of the work.
Appreciation is extended also to the other members of
the committee: to Dr. James Magary, who, years ago,
assisted the investigator in beginning her graduate
studies in Special Education; to Dr. Clive Grafton,
and to Dr. Myron H. Dembo.
Special mention must be made of Dr. Joe G. Coss,
who was the original Chairman, but whose retirement
predated the implementation of the study. His encour
agement gave direction and impetus to a previously
amorphous plan of action, resulting in a crystallization
of the study design.
Without the help of Dr. Richard G. Coss, of
the Department of Design of the University of California
ii
at Los Angeles, the study would have been impossible.
Because he took the time to acquaint the author with
the structure and best method of utilizing his pupil-
lometer, procedural problems were circumvented, and
the study went forward smoothly.
The author acknowledges the technical assistance
of other professionals. William V. Wittich, of the
Industrial Arts Department of California State Uni
versity at Long Beach, contributed needed expertise
in the measurement of the slides to assure balanced
luminosity, and assisted the investigator in the selec
tion of equipment needed for making the necessary check
on the level of ambient light. Dr. John Martois, of
the University of Southern California, set up the data
and fed the program into the computer, after which
he aided in interpretation of the statistical results.
The Instructional Media Services of the Uni
versity of Southern California prepared the stimulus
slides from medical publications listed in the
b ib1i ography.
Nor is the author's spouse to be forgotten. For
the number of T. V. dinners he uncomplainingly consumed,
and the solitary hours he stoically endured, my husband
deserves the affectionate appreciation which is here
with offered.
iii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
LIST OF TABLES.................................. vi
LIST OF FIGURES.................................. viii
Chapter
I. THE PROBLEM.............................. 1
The Purpose........................... 3
Source of Interest ................... 4
Techniques of Quantifying Differences . 4
The Pupillometer ..................... 8
Apprenticeship in Techniques of
Pupillometry ..................... 11
The Question of Light-Balancing of the
Slides............ 11
Anticipated Problems of Technical
Control......................... 13
Subjects.............................. 15
Independent Variable ................. 16
Dependent Variables ................... 17
Stimuli................................ 18
Definitions........................... 18
Assumptions................ 19
Delimitations ......................... 20
Statistical Treatment ................. 20
Hypotheses ..................... 21
II. REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE............... 23
Validity of Attitude Scales
Questioned....................... 23
New Therapeutic Techniques May Change
Thinking......................... 24
Pupillary Dilation as a Measure of
Attitude......................... 25
Photographing of Byes as Indicators . . 28
The Eye as Confessor 33
Measured Attitudes Toward Crippled
Children......................... 48
iv
Chapter Page
III. METHOD.................................... 55
Sub jects................................ 56
Apparatus.............................. 63
Stimuli................................ 69
Procedure.............................. 76
IV. RESULTS.................................. 86
Design.................................. 86
Data.................................... 88
Miscellaneous Data ..... .......... 93
Discussion.............................. 99
V. SUMMARY....................... 124
APPENDIX.......................................... 129
A. DIRECTIONS FOR THE SOCIAL DISTANCE
S C A L E .................................. 129
B. BOGARDUS SCALE OF SOCIAL DISTANCE .... 131
C. TABLE 19--SNELLEN CHART VISION SCORES
OF TEACHERS OF THE ORTHOPEDICALLY
HANDICAPPED........................... 132
D. TABLE 20— SNELLEN CHART VISION SCORES
OF REGULAR TEACHERS................... 133
E. TABLE 21— SNELLEN CHART VISION SCORES
OF TEACHER TRAINEES ................... 134
F. TABLE 22— EYE PREFERENCE OF TEACHERS OF
THE ORTHOPEDICALLY HANDICAPPED........ 135
G. TABLE 23— EYE PREFERENCE OF REGULAR
TEACHERS................................ 136
H. TABLE 24— EYE PREFERENCE OF 0. H.
TEACHER TRAINEES ....................... 137
BIBLIOGRAPHY...................................... I38
v
LIST OF TABLES
Table Page
1. Age and Experience of Teachers of
Orthopedically Handicapped
Serving as Subjects.................. 57
2. Age and Experience of Regular Teachers
Serving as Subjects.................. 59
3- Age and Experience of Teacher Trainees
Serving as Subjects.................. 61
b. Luminosity Properties of Stimulus
Slides................................ 71
5. Luminosity Properties of Control
Slides................................ 72
6. Ambient Light Measurement of Research
Settings.............................. 75
7. Summary of Analysis of Variance of
Pupillary Responses of All Subjects
to All Slides................... 87
8. Analysis of Variance of Responses to
Bogardus Scale of Social Distance . . . 89
9. Summary of Analysis of Variance of
Responses to Bogardus Scale of
Social Distance ....................... 90
10. Spearman Correlation Coefficients Between
Cosmetic and Uncosmetic Slides .... 92
11. Means and Standard Deviations of Pupillary
Response Scores of Three Groups of
Teachers Presented with Cosmetic and
Uncosmetic Slides ..................... 101
12. Means of Pupillary Responses of Teachers
of the Orthopedically Handicapped When
Viewing Stimulus Slides .......... 110
vi
Table
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20 .
21.
22.
23.
24.
Means of4 Pupillary Responses of Regular
Classroom Teachers When Viewing
Stimulus Slides .......................
Means of Pupillary Responses of Teacher
Trainees When Viewing Stimulus
Slides ................................
Rank Order of Slides as Measured by
Pupillary Response of All Three Groups
Scores of Teachers of Orthopedically
Handicapped on Bogardus Scale of
Social Distance .......................
Scores of Regular Classroom Teachers on
Bogardus Scale .......................
Scores of Special-Education Teacher
Trainees on Bogardus Scale ..........
Snellen Chart Vision Scores of Teachers
of the Orthopedically Handicapped . . .
Snellen Chart Vision Scores of Regular
Teachers ..............................
Snellen Chart Vision Scores of Teacher
Trainees ..............................
Eye Preference of Teachers of the
Orthopedically Handicapped ..........
Eye Preference of Regular Teachers . . . .
Eye Preference of 0. H. Teacher Trainees .
Page
111
112
116
118
119
120
132
133
134
135
136
137
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure Page
1. Subject's Raw-Data Pupillometer Score
for Each Slide....................... 77
2. General Information Page on Subjects . . 79
3. Mean Pupillary Response of Three Groups
to Uncosmetic Slides ................. 102
b. Mean Pupillary Responses of 0. H.
Teachers to Two Sets of Slides .... 103
5. Mean Pupillary Responses of Regular
Teachers to Two Sets of Slides .... 104
6. Mean Pupillary Responses of Teacher
Trainees to Two Sets of Slides .... 105
7. Mean Pupillary Response of Three Groups
to Cosmetic Slides ...................
8. The Bogardus Scale of Social Distance
as Used in This S t u d y ............... 131
CHAPTER I
THE PROBLEM
As they coped with an increasingly stringent
financial climate, educational policy-makers were eying
special-education teaching credentials with skepticism.
Despite the presence of a plethora of qualified regular-
classroom teachers, those with credentials to teach
orthopedically handicapped children were still in short
supply. Suggestions were made that teaching these
children was not, after all, too specialized a task. It
was theorized that a regular teacher would probably have
the expertise to guide these children in academic
pursuits.
Implicit in such a conjecture was the assumption
that attitudes of regular teachers and of special-
education teachers toward physically handicapped children
were emotionally congruent. Yet Barker and others
(1953)» after surveying the literature concerning accep
tance of the physically handicapped person, submitted
evidence that though public, verbalized attitudes toward
disabled persons were on the average mildly favorable,
indirect evidence suggested that deeper unverbalized
attitudes were more frequently hostile.
1
2
Another study by Jordan and Cessna (l9&9)
compared attitudes of four occupational groups toward
education and toward physically disabled persons in
Japan, the four groups being: (l) workers in special
education and rehabilitation; (2) regular teachers;
(3) managers or executives; and (4) laborers. Findings
indicated that the special-education-and-rehabilitation
workers were found to be more positively oriented
toward the disabled, as well as more asset- and less
comparative-oriented than were the other two groups.
Though such literature was not extensive, such
findings suggested that the bland assumption that
general teaching expertise was the only qualification
needed for successful teaching of orthopedically handi
capped children was open to question. This assumption
ignored the possible emotional impact involved in
working with the physically deviant group.
It seemed, then, that it would be valuable to
compare attitudes of regular teachers and/or personnel
especially trained to work with physically handicapped
children. If some direct response indicator could be
found which would reveal covert, as distinguished from
overt responses, such a measure might ultimately find
a place as an early screening device for prospective
special-education teachers, and even for trainees in
other helping fields, such as occupational and physical
therapy.
The Purpose
The purpose of this study, then, was to observe
and quantify a measurable difference in attitude towards
physically handicapped children among (l) special-
education teachers of orthopedically handicapped
children; (2) teachers of normal children in regular
classrooms; and (3) teacher trainees preparing to teach
orthopedically handicapped students. Apparently, at this
writing, no study had been done with a "direct response
indicator," (Coss, 19&5) to measure the difference. Nor
had a study been done comparing written responses to
handicapped children elicited by a paper-and-pencil
attitude scale with the results of a measure of a direct,
involuntary response of the organism. Such studies had
been done in other areas, notably in evaluating reactions
of equalitarian and anti-Negro groups of subjects to
stimuli having to do with Negroes. Breaking ground
technologically, these studies had yielded results which
were sufficiently promising to suggest that an extension
of this strategy to another field of investigation might
be rewarding.
Source of Interest
The incident which triggered the interest of1
the investigator was the finding of Hess (l9^5) that
constriction of the pupils of the eyes occurred when
subjects viewed a picture of a cross-eyed or crippled
child. In view of the fact that Hess failed to delimit
numerically the number of subjects who evidenced this
reaction by preluding his assertion with such modifying
phrases as "some," or "part of the group," his statement
was a strong one.
"Would teachers working with handicapped children
react aversively to pictures of orthopedically impaired
children? Or would their daily contact with the chil
dren modify such an avoidance reaction, if this reaction
had, for them, previously existed?
Techniques of Quantifying Differences
Previously, a common method of measuring differ
ences of attitude between two or more groups had been
the use of paper-and-pencil attitude scales. Adequate
scales were formulated carefully, and validated for their
stated purposes.
A newer, and still experimental, technique was
the use of pupillary response as a direct response
indicator. This approach involved measuring the dilation
of the pupils of subjects* eyes as they viewed
5
affect-oriented stimuli.
Earlier, Hess (1965) had noticed that the human
pupil was capable of dilating in bright light, sug
gesting that some cause other than the autonomic
response to the physical impingement of the stimulus of
light on the organism was at work. Suspecting that the
change might be an emotional response to an affective
stimulus, he conducted several studies testing this
theory, the results of which suggested support for his
hypothesis. Reports appeared in Science (i960; 1964),
and an article appeared in Scientific American (1965).
The advantage of such a reaction over the
previously-used pencil-and-paper attitude tests appeared
to be the candor of the elicited response. Edwards,
writing on Techniques of Attitude Scale Construction
(1957), had noted that the social atmosphere must be
free from felt or actual pressures toward conformity,
if the voluntarily controlled, written response was to
give evidence of a subject's genuine reaction.
In contrast, the pupillary response is involun
tary. Gibbs and Gibbs (1936) found that stimulation of
the hypothalamus in the brain stem of cats will elicit
both purring and pupillary dilation, indicating that the
pupils are controlled from within, by the hypothalamus,
as well as from without, by the stimulus of light.
6
Guyton (l9^9) referred to the stimulation in
the hypothalamus, of a nucleus called the perifornical
nucleus, which, when stimulated, causes an animal to
become greatly excited, with concomitant development of
elevated blood pressure, dilated pupils, and symptoms
of rage, such as hissing and arching of the back.
These contrasting bodily reactions suggest that
different sections of the hypothalamus are highly
specific in function. They also appear to pair pupil
dilation with stimulation of the hypothalamus, whether
the stimulation is pleasant or aversive to the subject.
Pupillary dilation, then, could presumably
provide a candid and involuntary report on the emotional
reaction of a given subject to a given stimulus. But
to be accepted as a valid measure, a new technique must
be paired with a previously validated, conventional
measurement. For this reason, it was decided that
testing of pupillary dilation would be paired with the
administration of an accepted paper-and-pencil attitude
measurement.
The test chosen for this purpose was the Bogardus
Scale of Social Distance. Developed in 1925 to measure
the degree of intimacy an individual would allow to
members of outgroups, the scale was modified in 1933 to
provide equal-appearing intervals.
7
Shaw and Wright* stated that the scale and its
modification have been used to measure social distance
with regard to racial groups, political and economic
groups, occupational groups, and religious groups.
According to them, reliability is as high as .90 (or
higher on the average). Items in the scale have content
validity, though extremes of negative attitude are not
measured. While it should not be used for evaluating
attitudes toward reference groups, the Bogardus is valid
and reliable for quantifying reactions to outgroups.
A copy of the scale as here used is to be found
in the appendix. It has been modified to fit the needs
of this study, but in ways which do not affect its
validity. While, in the original scale, the items are
arranged in descending order of intimacy, thus making 1
apply to "Would marry into group," and, hence, the degree
of greatest acceptance, in the present study the numer
ical order has been reversed. As here adapted, the
score 1 indicates the least degree of acceptance.
This change was made in order to facilitate the
reporting of correlations which were to be run between
responses to the Bogardus Scale and pupillary responses
*From Scales for the Measurement of Attitudes
by Marvin E. Shaw and Jack M. Wright. Copyright 1933
by Sociology and Social Research. Used with permission
of McGraw-Hill Book Company.
8
to the slide presentations. Since the pupillometer
scale was so planned that a larger pupil yielded a
larger score, reversing the numerical order of the
Bogardus Scale avoided the awkwardness of inverse
correlations.
The Pupillometer
Two devices were available for gathering data
on pupillary dilation--that of Hess, and that of Coss.
For purposes of this study, the latter seemed more
appropriate. To justify this choice, it would be well
to describe briefly both sets of equipment.
Hess, with the aid of infra-red light, photo
graphed the eye with motion picture equipment as the
subject viewed stimulus slides. This technique
necessitated a "black box” approach, which resulted in
a bulky and expensive equipment assembly.
Scoring was accomplished by enlarging the
resulting motion picture frames, and directly measuring
the diameter of the pupil in each selected frame. The
basic unit of analysis was the percent of pupil size
change from a control stimulus period to the life-
content stimulus period which followed it.
The bulkiness and relative expense of the Hess
unit were not the chief deterrents to its use, however.
A major shortcoming was noted by Woodmansee (1965) when
9
he discovered that certain positions of1 the photographed
eye introduced an error of measurement,
Boersma and others (1970) reported a technique
which converted the image of the subject's pupil into
sequential electrical signals which were then subse
quently transformed and analyzed to yield a new signal
whose magnitude was directly proportional to the pupil
diameter. This technology resulted in the direct
production of a graph, short-circuiting the laborious
measuring process undergone by the first users of the
Hess technique.
However, this parsimonious procedure was not
available to the present investigator at the time this
study was planned. Furthermore, it was not, apparently,
portable. Since the subjects needed for the present
study were distributed over a considerable area of
Los Angeles County, portability of the pupillometer was
a distinct asset.
The device of Coss approached the problem with
still another technique. Instead of photographing the
eye, it permitted one eye to view the stimuli, while
it utilized the other eye to permit the subject to
monitor his own reactions. Since both eyes respond in
unison, this procedure was deemed valid.
This monitoring device, termed a "pupillometer,"
10
utilized diffraction of light as an indicator of pupil
lary change. Before reaching the eye, light to he
perceived was filtered through a light-diffraction screen
with transparent slots. This diffraction screen was
mounted in a tube attached to one opening in a goggle
like device placed over the eyes of the subject. It was
darkened during viewing of a stimulus, then switched on
for the scoring process.
As the pupil dilated, the lens underwent a change
in focal length, becoming elongated, while the image
perceived by the eye became out of focus. In other
words, as the pupil opened or closed, it made the dif
fraction slots appear to the subject to expand or
contract in width.
From the subject's point of view, the indication
of pupillary activity was given by a blue point illusion
appearing within the tube. This blue point was in fact
the intersection of the two diffraction slots. With the
dilation of the pupil, the apparent width of the slots
expanded, and the blue point illusion fell.
To quantify the movements of the blue point,
Coss had aligned a nine-point scale beside the field of
the illusion, with the _1 at the top, and the 2.
bottom. Since the point appeared to fall during pupil
lary dilation activity, a larger scale number indicated
a larger (dilated) pupil.
The establishment of a baseline was achieved by-
adjusting the pupillometer up and down or left and right
until the blue point seemed level with the number h. One
eye viewed the slide stimulus, while the other eye viewed
the pupillometer scale when the light of the device was
switched on. During slide viewing, this light was off.
When, after a carefully timed exposure to the
stimulus, the score of the pupillary dilation was to be
read and reported, the light within the tube was switched
on to illuminate the numerical scale and the blue point.
The subject then observed and immediately reported his
own score, .which was recorded by the investigator.
Apprenticeship in Techniques of Pupillometry
The technology of observation and measurement of
pupillary activity is complicated and sensitive.
Woodmansee, in preparing to replicate the procedure of
Hess, journeyed to the latter's laboratory to learn the
appropriate method.
The present investigator had a similar advantage,
in having access to the advice of Coss, who at the time
lived nearby.
The Question of Light-Balancing of the Slides
Both Watson (1970) and Woodmansee (1965) had
12
followed Hess1s detailed procedure for developing slides
which emitted comparable light stimuli, so that the
autonomic reaction of the pupil would be triggered
equally by all slides. Hess had set limits for slide
luminosity which both Watson and Woodmansee had repli
cated in the preparation of their stimuli.
It is important to note that Hess did not spell
out the methodology used in his later experiments (1965).
Detailed information on his procedures was provided by
Woodmansee after his sojourn in Hess's laboratory.
Finding evidence that Hess's claims to have
elicited constriction of pupils when subjects were
presented with aversive stimuli were questioned by other
investigators, Woodmansee made elaborate preparations to
control the light-emission properties of his stimulus
slides.
The present investigator followed Woodmansee1s
guidelines in the preparation of the stimulus slides,
despite the fact that Coss (1972) pointed out that his
research indicated that a sufficient level of ambient
light negates slight differences in light-emission of
slides.
In the present study, detailed presentation of
steps in slide preparation has been reserved for Chapter
III, which deals with methodology.
Anticipated Problems of Technical Control
Problems expected in measuring the pupil’s
response were:
(1) Its natural volatility. Woodmansee (1965)
reported that it fluctuates constantly.
(2) The duality of its stimulus sources. Proce
dures must be used which would separate light as a
stimulus from emotion as a stimulus.
(3) The speed of its response. Guyton (1969)
stated that changes in pupillary size can occur in less
than one second. The time factor must be carefully
controlled. The shift of subject attention from the
stimulus to the pupillometer scale brought about a
reaction, so that immediate reading out of the score by
the subject was imperative.
(4) The question of constriction. Though Hess
stated that constriction occurred as an avoidance reac
tion to aversive stimuli, Woodmansee questioned the use
of this term. Yet later, in his discussion of the
results of his study, he stated that it occurred in
response to one of his stimulus slides.
Coss contended that dilation was the probable
reaction to any shockingly interesting stimulus, whether
attractive or aversive. He also questioned whether
emotion could cause constriction, suggesting that its
14
only true stimulus might be light. He differentiated
between contraction and constriction.
Guyton (l9&9) stated that constriction of the
pupil is caused by contraction of the pupillary
sphincter, a circular muscle around the pupillary
opening which is controlled by the parasympathetic nerves
to the eye. Dilation of the pupil, on the other hand,
may be caused in either of two ways: (l) relaxation of
the sphincter--a passive response; or (2) contraction of
radial muscle fibers that extend from the edge of the
pupil to the outer border of the iris— an active response.
The reader is reminded that the autonomic nervous
system, so called because it operates at an unconscious
level, has two divisions, the sympathetic and the para
sympathetic. The two divisions work in antithesis to
one another, with one division stimulating, with the
other inhibiting the muscles involved.
Contraction of the sphincter is controlled by the
parasympathetic nerves, so it follows that relaxation of
the sphincter, leading to dilation, is innervated by the
sympathetic nerves. Conversely, contraction of the
radial muscle fibers which extend from the edge of the
pupil to the outer border of the iris is caused by the
sympathetic nerves, so their relaxation is necessarily
controlled by the parasympathetic division.
15
Thus, though the sphincter and the radial muscle
fibers are acting in opposition to one another, the
ultimate result is that the sympathetic division of the
autonomic nervous system dilates the pupil of the eye,
while the parasympathetic division constricts (or con
tracts) the pupil.
Yet the question of which division controls what
response is perhaps irrelevant. The complexity of the
interaction illustrates the difficulty of determining
whether dilation is an active or a passive reaction to
a stimulus.
The important thing is to realize that dilation
is in fact the result of a push-pull type of interaction,
and that emotional reactions of the pupil are brought
about by simultaneous increase in the tonus of the
dilator and inhibition of the tonus of the sphincter
(Moses, 1970).
Sub.jects
The subjects were three groups, each containing
ten members, all of whom were working with children. The
first group consisted of experienced teachers of ortho-
pedically handicapped children, most of whom had taught
in the field two years or more. The second group
included teachers of normal children in the regular
classroom. The third group was made up of students who
were preparing to become teachers of orthopedically
handicapped children.
Independent Variable
The independent variable was the amount of
exposure to orthopedically handicapped children previ
ously undergone by each group. It was reasoned that
teachers with little such exposure would exhibit the
greatest withdrawal reaction, while teachers working
with handicapped children would have been desensitized
to physical anomalies, and would thus evidence more
approach-reaction, or, at least, less aversion.
Teacher trainees would presumably have an
orientation toward the physically disabled, but would
be naive to day-to-day interaction with them. Thus,
they might be expected to be less cohesive in their
group reaction.
If the trainees differed significantly in their
reactions from the experienced special education
teachers, this might suggest that professional exposure
did change attitudes toward the target group. If they
did not, the findings might indicate that students who
chose this field began with a positive orientation
toward the disabled which would continue after they
gained professional experience.
Dependent Variables
Acuity of eyesight was determined by adminis
tration of a standard Snellen test. Since subjects sat
within three feet of the screen, and could, if necessary,
wear glasses during the viewing of stimuli, perfect
vision was not necessary. .Nevertheless, a preliminary
test was made.
Eye dominance was tested in two ways. (See
Chapter III for details). Ultimately, however, the
pupillometer was left set up with the left eye viewing
the slides and the right eye reading the pupillometer
scores. This was a concession to expediency, for
subjects were often in a hurry, and changing the scoring
tube from one side of the goggles to the other took
considerable time.
Sex was not held constant. The subjects included
eight men and twenty-two women.
Age was not held constant. Woodmansee (1965)
controlled for age, excluding subjects over forty on the
theory that the near-vision reflex is more acute in
people above forty. Watson (1970) included only one
subject over that age. Since teachers come in all ages,
the present study did not control for this factor. Nine
teen subjects were under forty, and eleven were above
that age. Ultimately, t-tests were run between the two
18
groups, revealing no significant difference between the
responses of the over-forty and under-forty groups to
(l) cosmetic and (2) uncosraetic slides. (t for cosmetic
was .30} resulting in a p .05; t for uncosmetic was
1. 00 or a p .05).
Stimuli
Stimulus slides consisted of seven uncosmetic
black-and-white pictures of physically handicapped
children taken from professional journals and prepared
as light-balanced slides by a professional photographer.
Control slides were a group of seven cosmetic
black-and-white pictures of normal children taken in
a neighborhood setting with a Polaroid camera, then
prepared as balanced slides.
Definitions
Attitude. Edwards (1957) credits Thurstone
(1946) with the following definition: "The degree of
positive or negative affect associated with some psy
chological object." The psychological object is
delineated as any symbol, phrase, or idea toward which
people can differ with respect to approach- or avoidance-
gradient.
Pupillary dilation, or dilatation. Watson (1970)
defines this as the increase in the diameter of the pupil
19
of the eye.
Pupillary constriction. Again following Watson
(1970), constriction is a decrease in the diameter of
the pupil of the eye.
Pupillometer. A device for reporting and
measuring the dilation or contraction of the pupil of
the eye.
Orthopedically handicapped child. Kirk (1962)
describes this individual as nOne who is disabled in
motor abilities.”
Assumptions
It was assumed:
(1) That pupil dilation in the face of increased
light input evidenced the subject's interest, whether
the interest was caused by attraction or by shock.
(2) That the experienced teachers and the teacher
trainees who participated as subjects in the experiment
were representative of the universe of their larger
professional groups in terms of orientation toward normal
children.
(3) That each subject conscientiously and accu
rately reported the blue point illusion appearing on the
pupillometer following presentation of each stimulus.
(4) That each subject did in fact read the
instructions given with the Bogardus Scale and
20
conscientiously followed them as he gave his responses.
Delimitations
(1) The study was structured with reference to
the best utilization of the Coss pupillometer, which
differed in concept and operation from most other devices
used in studies of pupillary response.
(2) Only black-and-white slides, balanced for
emission of light, were used, avoiding variables
necessarily introduced if color slides are used.
(3) Slides were presented in a carefully timed
sequence, in random order.
(4) Each subject was exposed to an ordered
orientation period immediately prior to the presentation
of stimuli.
(5) To control for distractions, and for selec
tivity of vision, every effort was made to create a
neutral, non-stimulating environment during subjects'
exposure to stimuli.
Statistical Treatment
To determine the relationship of the pupillometer
scores of the three groups, an analysis of variance was
used.
To compare scores of the three groups on the
Bogardus Scale of Social Distance with their scores on
21
the pupillometer test, Spearman coefficients of corre
lation were computed. Correlations were run also on the
scores of each group on the two tests.
Hypotheses
(1) Hq: The mean of the pupillary responses of
Group A (special-education teachers of orthopedically
handicapped students) will equal the mean of the pupil
lary responses of Group B (regular-classroom teachers),
which will equal the mean of the pupillary responses of
Group C (trainees preparing to teach orthopedically
handicapped students), when all three groups are
presented a selected group of seven cosmetic slides of
normal children.
(2) Hq: The mean of the pupillary responses of
Group A (special-education teachers of orthopedically
handicapped students) will equal the mean of the pupil
lary responses of Group B (regular-classroom teachers),
which will equal the mean of the pupillary responses of
Group C (trainees preparing to teach orthopedically
handicapped students), when all three groups are
presented.a selected group of seven uncosmetic slides of
orthopedically handicapped children.
(3) Hq: There will be no significant correlation
between the pupillometer scores of Group A in response to
cosmetic slides and its scores on the Bogardus Scale of
Social Distance.
(4) Hq: There will be no significant correlation
between the pupillometer scores of Group A in response
to uncosmetic slides and its scores on the Bogardus
Scale of Social Distance.
(5) Hq: There will be no significant correlation
between the pupillometer scores of Group B in response
to cosmetic slides and its scores on the Bogardus Scale
of Social Distance.
(6) Hq: There will be no significant correlation
between the pupillometer scores of Group B in response
to uncosmetic slides and its scores on the Bogardus Scale
of Social Distance,
(7) Hq: The correlation for the pupillometer
scores of Group C in response to cosmetic slides and its
scores on the Bogardus Scale of Social Distance will not
be significant.
(8) Hq: There will be no significant difference
between the pupillometer scores of Group C in response to
uncosmetic slides and its scores on the Bogardus Scale of
Social Distance.
CHAPTER IX
REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE
During the last decade a new, technically-
challenging and scientifically controlled direct meas
urement of attitude has emerged. This is the quantifying
of pupillary dilation when the subject is viewing a sign
stimulus which is for him emotionally laden.
Such a sign stimulus might be a slide, a moving
picture, or an abstract drawing. (The object itself
would presumably be the optimum stimulus, but the
problems of observing the dimensions of the pupil under
any but highly controlled circumstances have at this
writing restricted research to laboratory conditions and
to the subjects' viewing of representations rather than
reality).
The question arises as to the reason for this
recent preoccupation with technology in preference to
previously used verbal interviews and paper-and-pencil
attitude scales.
Validity of Attitude Scales Questioned
Recently, skepticism has arisen as to the valid
ity of techniques of interrogation. As early as 1957>
23
2h
Vance Packard wrote a book aimed at the general reading
public concerning the discoveries of marketing research.
He had found that, when controlled studies were used,
subjects were often found to verbalize preferences belied
by their subsequently acted-out choices. An illustrative
example cited was the spoken choice of many women for
period furniture, when subsequently, offered a choice of
going into a room containing period furniture or into a
room containing Swedish modern furniture, these same
women entered the latter.
Even writers of books about pencil-and-paper
attitude scales were aware of the scales1 shortcomings.
Edwards (1957) observed that direct questioning would
elicit evidence of a person's attitudes only when the
social atmosphere was free from felt or actual pressures
toward conformity.
Watson (1970) commented that people would hesi
tate to voice agreement with a view they knew to be
socially unacceptable, even if, subjectively, they did
agree with it.
New Therapeutic Techniques May Change Thinking
The student may speculate as to whether recent
interest in behavior modification techniques has influ
enced this distrust of the word as purveyor of attitude.
Earlier in this century, the Freudian psychoanalytic
25
approach stressed the "talking out" of the patient's
problems. Since i960, the appearance of the work of such
writers as Ullmann and Krasner (1965)* Hewett (1968),
Patterson and Gullion (1968), and Homme (1969) has stim
ulated interest in techniques of interaction for purposes
of modeling of behavior in place of the previous use of
cathartic speech as a therapeutic device.
Even the attitudes of the investigators them
selves have come under scrutiny. Do researchers'
expectations color their subjects' behavior? Rosenthal
and Jacobson (1968) claimed to have found evidence that
this was so.
If attitudes can elicit desired behaviors, and
are therefore modifiers of behavior, they are active,
positive, and worthy of study. But if they hide behind
the words of the subject; if his candor is indeed elu
sive; then a direct response indicator which bypasses
his evasion is a desirable investigative tool.
Pupillary Dilation as a Measure of Attitude
During the last decade, a few investigators have
experimented with such a tool. This tool is the dilation
of the pupil of the eye.
The basis for the assumption that pupillary
dilation is a research tool lies in the peculiar struc
ture of the eye, Pender (1965) pointed out that the
26
retina of* the eye is a part of the "brain which became
detached in the course of evolution, Gregory (1966)
observed that the eye is in fact an outgrowth of the
brain, a specialized part of its surface which has
become sensitive to light.
Neisser (1968) also suggested that the eye is
not a passive, window-like receptor, but an editor of
the light-stimulus received, screening and processing
the information provided by the incoming pattern before
it is fed through the optic nerve to the brain. He
contended that neither perception nor memory is a copying
process— that one does not see the image impinging on the
retina, but sees with the aid of this image.
Michael (1969) observed that activity in the
optic nerve is not related to intensity of illumination
falling on each retinal receptor, but, rather, is
selective.
Most pertinent to the concern of this review,
however, were the findings of Hess and Polt (i960) , who
were pioneers in this field. In reviewing the available
literature, they found evidence that deep emotions of
pleasure and fear are accompanied by pupillary dilation.
More importantly, pupillary dilation commonly occurs when
the hypothalamus is stimulated. Early investigators were
Kuntz (1929) and Gellhorn (l9^3)» Work by Gibbs and
27
Gibbs (1936) revealed that stimulation of the hypothal
amus in the brain stem of cats will elicit both purring
and pupillary dilation, indicating that the pupils are
controlled from within, by the hypothalamus, as well as
from without, by the stimulus of light.
Working from this premise, Hess did studies in
which he interpreted pupillary dilation as a measure of
the subject's interest and approach gradient toward a
stimulus. He interpreted pupillary constriction as an
indicator of aversion, and of an avoidance gradient.
Other investigators have been interested in
his findings, but there have been skeptics. Woodmansee
(1965) referred to a personal communication from
Loewenfeld in which she vehemently disagreed with Hess,
implying that Hess's findings were artifacts of his
experimental method. Yet, ironically, in his report of
1964, Hess, with his collaborator, Polt, quoted
Lowenstein and Loewenfeld in support of his theory.
Skepticism or no, other studies have been done.
Though the results have been somewhat inconclusive, Coss
(1965), Woodmansee (1965) and Watson (1970) have agreed
that, though the technological problems connected with
its use are many, pupillary dilation as a measurement of
attitude shows sufficient promise to be worth further
investigation. The subject's self-revelation is direct,
28
involuntary, and sometimes even unconscious.
Photographing of Eyes as Indicators
The photographing of eyes for the purpose of
using their behavior as indicators of subjective
reactions has been a technique utilized by investigators
for many years. Until recently, however, the behavior
often studied was eye movement.
As early as 1928, Tinker used moving pictures of
the eyes to study their fixations and regressions as his
subjects read formulae. In 1952 Wendt wrote on the
problems of the development of an eye camera for use
with motion pictures. His purpose was to develop a
technique for analyzing eye movements of subjects viewing
educational films as an aid to evaluating and improving
the films.
Later, eye movements were studied as indicators
of approach and avoidance behavior. Here they were
being used as direct response indicators, and so these
studies were relevant to the subject of this investi
gation.
In 1963? Webb, Matheny and Larson studied eye
movements as an aspect of behavior which was not so
readily observable by others, and hence might be less
subject to social conformity. Criteria were gradients
of time-spent-looking at sets of four pictures, one set
depicting neutral situations, a second set unpleasant
situations, a third set, pleasant situations, and a
fourth set a mixture of pleasant and unpleasant. Eye
movements were recorded by l6-mm. movie photography.
Three studies were conducted, with representatives of
different populations in each--schizophrenic patients
and college students. Hypotheses predicting certain
types of graph gradients were supported. Findings
suggested that subjects differ in their patterns of eye
movement when affectively important pictorial material
is available to view, and that avoidance does occur in
eye movement behavior.
Recently, Fleming (l9&9) has studied eye move
ments as indices of cognitive behavior. His purpose was
to develop line-of-sight recording as a tool for research
and practice in instructional media. He felt that eye
movements yield hard data which can be categorized in
several ways. Among his findings were evidence that:
(l) foveal attention is very selective and, where neces
sary, employed with marked economy, and (2) redundant and
familiar features of visual stimuli may be relegated to
peripheral vision.
Schissler (1969) utilized eye fixations and
subjective ratings to evaluate small areas of a picture
in terms of relative informativeness.
30
McEvoy (1953) studied the factor of directness
in public speaking with special reference to the role of
eye contact when speeches were given before the motion
picture camera. His findings revealed that judges rated
those speakers significantly higher in directness who
spent the highest percentage of their time looking at
the camera.
Recently, Bakan (l97l) has analyzed the looking-
up habits of subjects, testing a theory that those
looking up to the right are dominated by the left hemi
sphere of the brain, while right-hemisphere-dominated
subjects are predisposed to look up to the left. Since
the two hemispheres are now suspected of being function
ally different, with the left one more verbal, and right
one oriented to the spatial and the intuitive, certain
assumptions of predicted behavior might be made, if the
right-looking or left-looking indicates what Bakan
thinks it might.
Previously, in a study done in 1969, Bakan found
that right-movers were low on hypnotizabilityj lateral
eye-movements seemed to be predictive of "soft*1 (left-
movers) and "hard" (right-movers) college majors; and
left-movers tend to score relatively higher on the verbal
than on the mathematics score of the Scholastic Aptitude
Test.
31
Studies on behavior of pupils during mental
activity have attracted several investigators. Hess and
Polt (1964) photographed the eyes of four men and one
woman during simple problem-solving in arithmetic. They
found that the pupils of each subject showed a gradual
increase in diameter, reaching a maximum dimension
immediately before an answer was given, and then
reverting to the previous control size. Magnitude of
increase in pupil diameter ranged from 4.0 percent to
29.5 percent. The experimenters claimed perfect agree
ment between amplitude of response and apparent problem
difficulty and the mean response, though not for
individual responses.
Kahneman and Beatty (1966) observed the pupils
of five subjects during a short-term memory task, and
concluded that the pupil dilates while the subject
listens to information, and constricts as he reports.
They found that there were no large spontaneous vari
ations of pupil size where subjects' thought processes
were effectively controlled by the task. They also found
that pupillary dilation was related positively to task
difficulty.
Simpson and Climan (1971) examined the
effect of required muscle activity on pupillary size
during cognitive activities. Muscle activity
32
consisted of pressing a key or releasing it. Pupillary
activity was monitored while thirty female undergraduates
generated images to words. Results indicated some appar
ent effect of muscle activity on pupil size during the
imagery task.
Plot (1970) in working with two groups of seven
eighteen to nineteen year old undergraduates, monitored
pupillary dilation during two series of three multipli
cation problems used as a problem-solving task. On the
second series, the experimental group was threatened
with shock for an incorrect answer. The only significant
difference between groups was the degree of pupillary
dilation while solving the second series of problems.
Carver (1971) investigated whether pupil dilates
while subject is reading or listening. He found no
evidence of either occurrence.
Colman and Paivio (1970) conducted two experi
ments with fifty-four undergraduates in which pupillary
activity was continuously photographed during mediator-
formation and paired-associate learning tasks involving
nouns as items. Pupil size during learning was largest
when no mediation instructions were given and when
stimulus members were abstract, supporting an interpre
tation of pupillary dilation as an index of cognitive
task difficulty.
33
Boersma and others (1970) studied the effects of
arithmetic problem difficulty on pupillary dilation in
ten normal children and in ten educable mental retar
dates. With one exception, findings indicated that
greater dilation is normally associated with more
difficult problems.
Summarizing this overview of recent work done in
monitoring pupillary activity during cognitive tasks,
the investigator may speculate as to the reason for this
trend. Learning tasks, particularly mathematical ones,
have a definite rhythm, closure, and measurability.
Quantification is possible, and thus results will tend
to appear to be reasonably concrete. The possibility of
achieving demonstrable results may well have served as
the motivator for the serious investigator.
Another developing trend has been the recent use
of larger numbers of subjects in a given experiment:
Where earlier investigators unabashedly reported studies
done with five or six subjects, Simpson and Climan (l97l)
used thirty, and Colman and Paivio (1970) worked with
fif ty-four.
The Eye as Confessor
Relatively little work has as yet been done uti
lizing pupillary dilation as an indicator of attitude.
The number of investigators has been small. Hess and
34
Polt were the pioneers. Woodmansee (1965) attempted to
replicate Hess’s techniques. Watson (1970) attempted
even more complicated technology--the photographing of
eyes with a movie camera while their owners were viewing
movie sequences, rather than slides. Coss (1965)*
eschewing earlier techniques, devised one of his own,
which simplified the investigative procedure by doing
away with the photographing of the viewing eye, but
moved the responsibility for the reading out of scores
from the investigator to the subject, as the latter
perforce monitored his own reactions.
Since the work of Hess and Polt, as reported in
Hess's Scientific American article in 1965* seemed to
exert a catalytic effect on the other three investi
gators, it naturally assumed the first-place position
in this review. It had been prefaced by two previous
studies, one of which has already been mentioned above
(Hess and Polt, 1964).
An earlier study (Hess and Polt, i960) dealt with
pupil size as related to interest value of visual stim
uli. Preliminary studies conducted with an unspecified
number of cats and laboratory animals were reported to
have revealed that there were marked pupillary dilations
in response to such stimuli as a strange cat, a familiar
object of play, or food.
35
Later, with, six human subjects, exposures of the
eyes were obtained on l6-mm. film while subjects viewed
a series consisting of test pictures alternated with a
control pattern. Test-retest series, given after an
interval of one day, yielded extremely reliable results,
with p .01, according to the report, which included
only a histogram and the reliability test--a statistical
battery which seems somewhat slim.
The Scientific American article appeared under
Hess's name only. Written in an entertaining style it
relates how Hess stumbled onto the phenomenon of the
enlarged pupil by accident, when his wife noticed that
his eyes were dilated, though the light was bright, as
he looked at some particularly beautiful animal photo
graphs. (Previously, pupils had been commonly presumed
to constrict as light became brighter). The next day,
he exposed his unsuspecting partner to a pinup photograph
of a girl in a bikini, and discovered that Polt1s eyes,
also, dilated in bright light.
Checking other sources, Hess found that there
were tales of magicians doing card tricks, and identi
fying the card a person was thinking about by the
enlargement of his pupils when the card was turned up.
There were also tales of Chinese jade dealers watching
the buyer's pupils to know when he was impressed by a
36
specimen. He found, too, that the light reflex is
controlled by one of the two divisions of the autonomic
nervous system--the parasympathetic system. But pupil
size is also governed by the other division of the
autonomic system--the sympathetic system--in response
to strong emotional states.
Increasing the sophistication of his technique,
he used the general room lighting only on the rear-
projection screen as a preliminary control. His
reasoning was that any stimulus slide would brighten
the screen, thus stimulating an autonomic constriction
of the viewing pupil. Instead, the response was dila
tion, except when, according to Hess, the stimuli were
such that the subject might be expected to find them
distasteful.
Further studies were conducted, paralleling
pupillary activity with music (the eyes always dilated),
taste, and expressed attitudes. He found that expressed
attitudes and measured pupillary responses varied widely,
the correlation being poor in an area involving social
values or pressures.
Apparently, reaction could be below the conscious
level, as when men responded to the retouched photograph
of a girl in preference to the unretouched one. The
retouching had enlarged the girl’s pupils.
37
Significant to this review was the finding that
Hess elicited a strong negative response when he showed
his subjects a picture of a cross-eyed or a crippled
child.
Summary: This innovative study captured the
interest of subsequent investigators, but was noticeably
frugal with reports on statistics or procedure.
Woodmansee was to journey to Hess’s laboratory to learn
these procedures so that he could replicate them,
Krugman (1964) had easier access to Hess's
methodology, for his marketing research company gave Hess
and Polt a grant to develop techniques for the use of
that company (Marplan). After comparing pupillary,
verbal and sales response to certain greeting cards,
Krugman reported that the correlation between pupillary
response and sales of these items was numerically larger
than that between verbal rank and sales. Testing for
intersubject consistency with a Kendall's coefficient of
concordance, he found that the odds were better than a
thousand to one that the consistency of pupil response
ranking was1 not due simply to chance (p < .001).
Krugman's use of the direct response indicator
would seem to be an extension of the observation of
behavior used earlier by Vance Packard in marketing
research. (See above)
38
Before leaving the discussion of Hess’s method
ology, it would be well to mention that Moses (1970)
credited Lowenstein and Loewenfeld with the utilization
of infrared light in their observations of the eye’s
reactions. The fact that Hess drew on previously devel
oped technology does not minimize his contribution. As
for the frugality of his description of methodology, it
is only fair to note that journal space is ever at a
premium, so that Hess may not have been urged, or even
invited, to delineate his procedure in detail, at least
in his early reports.
Woodmansee, perceiving the possibility of using
pupillary response to differentiate groups, studied the
reactions of twenty-two females known to differ in their
attitude toward Negroes. To measure these attitudes, he
had previously tested 536 students with the Multifactor
Racial Attitude Inventory, an instrument he and a col
league had developed. For his eleven anti-Negro
subjects, he selected students whose scores fell in the
most anti-Negro quartile. The pro-Negro subjects were
persons who had been identified with pro-civil rights
activities.
These twenty-two subjects were shown four Negro-
content pictures interspersed with neutral control slides
showing numbers 3 . through j> on a white background.
39
Woodmansee (l965) stated:
The known causes of the constriction
response are the light reflex, the near
vision reflex, and the arousal decrement
effect. In the present study the aims were
twofold: l) to evaluate the pupil response
in relation to attitudinally-affective
stimuli and 2) to control or evaluate the
influence of the three constriction-producing
effects noted above.*
Finding that the stability of the pupillary
response is but 0.30, Woodmansee employed a repeated
trials design in an effort to increase reliability and
solve other methodological problems, but provided for a
single-trial design in replication of Hess's method.
Only on the first presentation of the stimuli was a
significant difference between groups achieved (p < .01).
The average pupillary response for the anti-Negro sub
jects (N = 11) was -0.10$ and +2.65$ for the equalitarian
subject (N = ll). (The basic datum was the change in
pupil diameter from the presentation of a control picture
to the presentation of the succeeding Negro content
stimulus, expressed as a percent of pupil diameter during
the control picture). When the data were averaged
across all eight presentations of the stimuli,
Woodmansee found the groups did not differ.
Woodmansee1s methodology included the
*Used with permission of John J. Woodmansee.
40
photographing of the left eye of each subject at the rate
of two frames per second, while the right eye viewed the
stimuli. His study was honestly and completely re
ported, with relevant data tabled. In the process, he
provided a detailed description of Hess’s technological
procedures.
His analysis of the conjectured mechanics of the
pupil reaction is worth quoting:
It was suggested that this inconsistency
and the disparity between the views of Hess
and Loewenfeld could be explained in terms of
changes in nervous system arousal. Pleasant
stimuli cause the arousal system to be excited
and the pupillary dilator muscle to be activated.
The anticipation of an unpleasant stimulus also
causes the arousal system to be excited with
concomitant expansion of the pupil, but the
actual presence of the disliked stimulus serves
as a relief from the excited anticipation. This
latter sequence results in an apparent constric
tion response which is in reality the relaxation
of the dilator muscle.
Summary: Woodmansee’s study was a valuable guide
in the preparation of the present investigation. His
detailed reporting of the methodology used in preparation
of the slides served as a model. To reiterate: his two
major contributions to this area were (l) careful delin
eation of methodology and (2) perception of the pupillary
response as a possible differentiator between attitudinal
groups.
“ Watson (1970), working at the University of
Southern California, referred often to Woodmansee’s
kl
study. He, too, compared two groups of subjects (ten in
each group) who were known to have differing attitudes
toward Negroes. For his screening test, he administered
The California F Scale, a measure of authoritarian
personality characteristics, to 103 subjects. The ten
highest scorers and the ten lowest were selected as
subjects for the study.
He changed the methodology of the stimulus pres
entation by showing six short film clips of silent
black-and-white 16 mm. motion picture film. The total
film took five minutes. Except for the movies, however,
his procedure was modeled on the Hess black box type of
equipment.
The use of motion pictures introduced problems
avoided by the slide presentations. The establishment
of a subject’s baseline score became difficult. Allow
ance for the fatigue adaptation effect for each
individual was tortuous because of the fifty-nine scenes
involved in the sequence. "Watson found himself involved
with complicated mathematical computations.
He estimated that it took him 120 hours to meas
ure and record each of the 903 data frames and to compute
raw score and difference score means. Data analysis and
graphing added to the toll, leading him to conclude that
it took him a month to process data for twenty subjects.
42
It was after this conclusion that Watson sug
gested that a device such as that used by Coss might be
a more desirable recording instrument, in that it was
quicker.
Another dimension in preliminary evaluation of
stimulus presentations was employed when he utilized
twelve judges, professionals, trained in the social
sciences, to determine how high-authoritarian or low-
authoritarian personalities would react attitudinally
to the strips. They also predicted which clips would
produce the biggest difference in response between the
two groups.
To these evaluations were added those of the
subjects, who, during interviews following their expo
sure to the stimuli, ranked the film clips.
Among eight hypotheses tested, Watson found
evidence of support for only two. These predicted that
pupillary response measurements would correlate posi
tively with the judges' predictions for each group; and
that high and low authoritarian pupil difference scores
per clip used to rank-order the stimuli would correlate
positively with the ranking predicted by the judges.
These findings were important to pupillometry,
however, for they attested to the candor of the pupil's
attitudinal response.
43
The average age of Watson's subjects was 26,
with two subjects over 33--°ne, 39 > and the other, 42.
Believing that controlling for sex might be
important, he used only males.
Differing from many other investigators, he
adopted a 75$ level of confidence, in contrast to the
95$ level commonly used. His defense for this decision
was twofold: (l) the exploratory nature of the study,
and (2) the small sample (N = 20).
Summary: Watson's study was conscientiously
implemented and documented. It is valuable to suc
ceeding investigators because it raises a word of
caution in regard to other studies--delimit them, and
keep them lean and simple. It is also valuable because
it did give evidence that pupillary response is candid.
Richard G. Coss, working in the area of indus
trial design at the University of California at
Los Angeles, theorized that in both animals and man
there is an "Innate Releasing Mechanism," or IRM (a term
he credits to Tinbergen, Von Uexkill, and Lorenz). This
mechanism is keyed to the survival of the species, and
no two species have the same IRM. Because the mechanism
is so keyed, it may be postulated that it is buried deep
in the central nervous system, which releases the physio
logical reaction on cue.
hk
Coss's interest in this phenomenon was generated
by the possibility that such an innate reaction was
determined by a specific set of sign stimuli. Since the
concern of the industrial designer is to produce and
package merchandise in such a manner that the products
will stimulate the purchaser to buy them, knowledge of
any innate response mechanisms within the consumer would
become a functional tool for that designer.
An example drawn from Coss's paper may help to
clarify the concept for the reader. Evidence has been
found that fear of snakes seems to be a basic part of
primate heritage. Captive gorillas, whose natural high-
altitude habitat would suggest little contact with
snakes, refused to enter a cage occupied by a snake.
Furthermore, Jones and Jones (1928) observed that chil
dren became increasingly afraid of snakes as they
approached the age of seventeen, and that city-dwelling
adults, with a low exposure to snakes, had the greatest
fear. Among snakes, one universally feared is the
cobra, which elevates its head and expands its hood when
it prepares to strike. If Coss's theory of the IRM was
valid, then the viewing of a picture of a cobra head
should elicit this IRM mechanism's reaction within a
given subject.
In searching for a direct-response indicator
45
from the experimental subject, Coss worked briefly with
the galvanic skin response, or GSR. He rejected this
device, since he found that after five minutes the
subject would adapt to the presentation of stimuli, and
his skin resistance would change but little in response
to either neutral or charged patterns. (The principle
of the GSR, as Coss explained it, is the measurement of
skin response, heart rate and respiration during presen
tation of stimuli. The skin response is based on the
amount of perspiration increase, which is indicated on
the device by a reduction in skin resistance to low
electrical current).
Having rejected the GSR as a measuring device,
Coss turned to pupillary dilation. He justified his
use of this reaction as a technique of measurement by a
survey of the research that had been done by others on
the control of pupil dilation by the hypothalamus. When
the hypothalami of cats had been stimulated by elec
trodes implanted within them, simultaneous purring and
pupil dilation occurred, representing an indication of
pleasure.
The problem was to observe and quantify the
elusive pupillary reaction. Unable to reach Hess, Coss
undertook to devise a pupillometer on his own. After
several trials, he perfected the self-monitoring
46
indicator and scale which was used in this study. This
pupillometer has been described in some detail in
Chapter I of this paper.
The sign stimuli which he related to the staring
eyes of the cobra were discoid contours, some of which
were paired, some of which were tripled, and some pairs
of which were darkened. His reasoning was that the
paired, darkened circles would be more likely to suggest
staring eyes, and thus would be more likely to reach the
IRS, thus stimulating greater pupillary reaction.
Working with thirty subjects, half of whom were
women and the other half men, he found initially no
significant differences in reactions to the slides.
However, after following a statistical route which
included a Bartlett’s Test for Homogeneity, and, finally,
a Duncan's New Multiple Range Test, he concluded that
there was a lack of group homogeneity among the fifteen
men, but that ten of these men produced data which
reflected the same level of pupillary dilation during
slide observations. Significant contrast among slide
groups was achieved through an analysis of variance
applied to these subjects. A parallel procedure was
necessary in the case of the fifteen women subjects,
after which significant contrasts were found.
Coss had adopted a 95$ level of confidence for
hi
his level of significance.
Summary: Coss's field differed from that of
Woodmansee and Watson. He was working in industrial
design. (Woodmansee was interested in social psychology,
whereas Watson was concerned with educational psychology).
Coss was concerned with the reaction of people to sign
stimuli, where Woodmansee and Watson were interested in
the attitude of selected groups of people toward other
selected groups of people. And finally, Coss's unique
contribution to the field was his pupillometer, which,
instead of depending on photographic techniques, was
based on optics.
Ultimately, Coss was using the pupillometer to
distinguish between stimuli, with his subjects undiffer
entiated, having been drawn from the total population
of adults.
Watson and Woodmansee, on the other hand, were
drawing paired groups from two populations--the pro-Negro
and the anti-Negro. They were in fact setting up
experimental and control groups.
Coss’s experiment was in this sense more like
that of Hess, in that both were attempting to control
only the stimuli for aversive or attractive properties.
They were making no attempt to select and differentiate
groups.
Though, these distinctions tend to become blurred
in the activity of the laboratory, they are important.
Comparing the findings of all three investigators
Woodmansee on his first trial found that his equalitarian
subjects differed significantly from his anti-Negro
subjects in the direction of approach, and with a 99$
level of confidence. Watson found a significant corre
lation between judges’ and subject's pupillary rank-
ordering of the slides, with a 75$ level of confidence.
Coss found that differing sets of sign stimuli elicited
different pupillary reactions from a group of thirty
subjects drawn from the general population. He used a
95$ level of confidence.
Measured Attitudes Toward Crippled Children
Though mentally retarded children have received
considerable attention, as have adult disabled persons,
the literature of recent research on attitudes toward
physically disabled children was found to be scant.
Following is an overview.
The study of Barker, et al., though dated 1953>
is still timely because it is so complete, and because of
the aforementioned paucity of research in this area. It
includes a substantial section on the attitudes of wider
groups toward cripples. In a survey of literature of
that period, the authors reported two studies, one done
k9
with, college students, and the other with high school
subjects, in which pencil-and-paper rating scales were
used to determine the students attitudes toward physically-
handicapped youngsterso The two studies found evidence
of generalized attitudes or biases toward cripples. Some
subjects tended to rate cripples very favorably on all
scales, while others tended to rate them unfavorably.
Exploring the theory that increased frequency of
contact with disabled persons would lead to more intense
attitudes, regardless of whether the attitude was favor
able or unfavorable, Palmerton and Frumkin (1969)
processed questionnaires returned by college counselors
employed by colleges having student populations of 15,000
or more. Questionnaires were prepared so that an inten
sity component was coupled with each attitude item of
the Attitudes Toward Disabled Person Scale of Yuker,
et al., i960.
Dividing the eighty-one usable returns into two
groups, according to the amount of contact subjects had
had with disabled persons, they found that thirty-nine
subjects having low frequency of contact with disabled
persons had significantly less intense attitudes toward
disabled persons than did thirty-one counselors in the
high frequency-of-contact group.
Combs and Harper (1967) studied the effects of
50
labels on attitudes of educators toward handicapped
children. Labeled descriptions of psychopathic, schizo
phrenic, and cerebral palsied children were rated more
negatively than were unlabeled versions. Experience did
not seem to affect educators1 perceptions of exceptional
children. Four 2 x 2 factorial designs were used to test
for differences in attitudes expressed by the two groups.
Subjects were 160 college students compared with eighty
graduate students who were also experienced professional
personnel.
Alessi and Anthony (l9&9) did a replication study
of an earlier one by another investigator, in which they
examined the uniformity of children1s attitudes toward
physically handicapping conditions. Subjects were forty-
two physically handicapped boys and girls attending a
summer camp. Purposes of the study seemed somewhat
esoteric, and the investigators expressed dissatisfaction
with their results, which were apparently inconclusive.
Jones and Sisk (1967) sought to determine the age
at which perception of orthopedic handicap occurs, and
the form these perceptions take. Subjects were 230 non
disabled children between the ages of two and six.
Drawings were used to elicit responses, some of normal
children, some of children wearing leg braces.
Only the five-year-old children rejected the
51
drawing of the handicapped child on the question, "Would
you play with him?" (p .01). Four was found to be the
age at which perceptions of the limitations imposed by
orthopedic disability first appeared with consistency.
Lastly, a study was reported by Jordan and Cessna
(1969) on a comparison of attitudes of four occupational
groups toward education and toward physically disabled
persons in Japan. Samples were drawn from eleven nations,
including the United States. Number of adult subjects
was 211.
Four distinct occupational groups were represented
in the sample: (l) those who work in special-education-
and-rehabilitation; (2) regular teachers; (3) managers or
executives; and (4) laborers. The special-education-and-
rehabilitation group was found to be less traditional and
more progressive in its attitudes toward education and
more positive toward the disabled. It was also more
asset- and less comparative-oriented.
Eugenia Grace Baker (1968) departed from the
"Would you play with this child?" approach to attitude
testing by constructing her own scale of measurement,
based on Osgood's Semantic Differential. The scale
consisted of twenty-two items, which Baker described as
being a relatively large number. Such bipolar pairs of
adjectives as hot-cold, sad-happy, friendly-unfriendly,
52
and dirty-clean were used.
Observing that there was a possibility that many
practices intended to help the handicapped have contrib
uted instead to an approach of sentimentality, pity,
exploitation, and ego-enhancement for the benefactor,
Baker undertook to explore the attitudes of children in
an elementary school toward physically handicapped
children.
In addition to Baker's scale of measurement, a
two-part, eight-minute film, specifically prepared to
elicit attitudinal dimensions, was used. It was described
as portraying a child wearing braces as the child experi
ences a series of encounters with other children.
After viewing the film, children were asked to
check the Semantic Differential bipolar attitude scale
described above. They were also asked to respond to
three open-ended questions. Responses were categorized
by competent judges.
Participants were children in three fourth grades,
two fifth grades, and two sixth grades. This sample was
taken from one elementary school located in Redondo Beach,
California, described by Baker as a typically middle
class, white, suburban community.
She found that the proportion of students making
objective responses decreased from the fourth to the sixth
53
grade level, indicating that a program of attitude modi
fication toward physically handicapped children should
be undertaken, and that early intervention may be
important.
The reader was left wondering, however, for how
long the school in question had been integrating the
physically handicapped children. If the sixth-graders
had been exposed to the handicapped children for two
years longer than the fourth-graders, was familiarity
resulting in social distance between the normal and the
handicapped? If these conditions were operative, the
question arose as to whether or not the handicapped
genuinely benefitted from their exposure to the normal
classroom.
In all probability, Baker's approach reduced
social pressure for stereotyped answers. Her use of a
film as the springboard for each subject's discussion of
physically disabled children had elements of a projective
technique.
Summary: Attitudes toward orthopedically handi
capped children have received some attention. Most of
the studies have been paper-and-pencil inquiries. Evi
dence has indicated that there is some stereotyping
along with biases toward cripples.
Only two studies were found which dealt with the
attitudes of4 professional workers toward handicapped
children. Cerebral-palsied children, when labeled as
such in a paper-and-pencil questionnaire, were rated
more negatively than when the descriptions were unlabeled.
In Tokyo, it was found that professionals who work in
special education and rehabilitation are less traditional
and more progressive in their attitudes toward education
and more positive toward the disabled than regular
teachers, managers or executives, or laborers. They were
also more asset- and less comparative-oriented.
No studies were found in which pupillary dilation
was used as a direct response indicator in assessing the
attitudes of professional workers toward handicapped
children.
CHAPTER III
METHOD
Methodology of the study was based partly on the
models of Woodmansee and Watson. However, the use of a
different monitoring device necessitated procedural
modifications.
With the absence of a black box, ambient light
became a factor, and had to be checked. Though its
presence probably negated slight differences in levels of
light emission, slides were nevertheless light-balanced,
as a precautionary measure. To sensitize subjects to the
appearance and behavior of the blue triangle which meas
ured their reactions, an orientation period was necessary.
Basically, however, the method was similar to
that used by previous investigators. (l) Identical
experimental stimuli were randomly presented to matched
groups of subjects. (2) Control stimuli were randomly
interspersed with experimental ones. (3) Pupillary
responses pf groups were recorded. (4) Comparisons were
made of between-group differences. (5) Comparisons were
made of responses elicited by experimental and control
slides. (6) All subje cts responded to a validated
pencil-and-paper attitude test. (7) Correlations between
.55
56
pupillary responses and paper-and-pencil responses were
computed.
Sub , j e c t s
Thirty-one subjects were tested. For technical
reasons (clerical error) the scores of* one could not be
used, so that thirty individuals actually participated.
They were divided into three groups of ten members each.
Ten of the subjects were teachers of orthopedi-
cally handicapped students. Ten were regular-classroom
teachers of normal children. And ten were teacher
trainees, preparing to become teachers of orthopedically
handicapped children.
Teachers of the orthopedically handicapped
included five teachers under forty years of age, and
five over forty. The mean of their years of experience
was h.8 years, with a range of one year’s experience (for
two teachers) to eleven years (for one teacher). (See
Table l). Everyone in this group was a woman.
The ten were drawn from four schools, all but one
being in Los Angeles County. The fourth was in El Centro,
California. Only two of the subjects were known person
ally to the investigator.
Four were tested in a private home. Another four
were tested in a hospital school. A ninth was tested in
a wing for the orthopedically handicapped in a regular
TABLE 1
AGE AND EXPERIENCE OF TEACHERS OF ORTHOPEDICALLY HANDICAPPED
SERVING AS SUBJECTS
Subject No. Age Under 40 Age Over 40
Years of Experience
Teaching 0. H.
1 X
5
2 X
5
3
X
3
4 X 4
10 X 8
12 X 6
13 X 4
14 X 11
15 X 1
25 X 1
Mean years of experience: 4.8 years
58
school, while the tenth underwent the procedure in an
office of California State University at Los Angeles.
The time was the summer of 1972.
The ten regular teachers of normal children had
a range of two to twenty years of teaching behind them,
with a mean of 6.85 years' experience. Six were under
forty years of age, while four were over.
Three subjects reported more-than-casual contacts
with orthopedically impaired people. One had been a navy
corpsman; then, subsequently, an ambulance driver for
seven years, in the service of a hospital which catered
to severely handicapped long-term patients. Another
participant had taken her minimally involved daughter to
a clinic for cerebral-palsied children during the child's
preschool years. A third subject had an eighteen-months-
old baby with spina bifida. (See Table 2).
Geographically, these teachers were drawn from
various parts of Los Angeles County in Southern
California. Six were on a staff of summer-school teachers
in one district, but in two schools. These were tested
in their respective schools. A seventh teacher, repre
senting another district, was tested in a home. The
other three were tested in an office at California State
University of Los Angeles. They taught in different
schools in the greater Los Angeles area.
TABLE 2
AGE AND EXPERIENCE OF REGULAR TEACHERS
SERVING AS SUBJECTS
Subject No. Age Under 40 Age Over 40
Years of
Experience
Exposure to 0. H,
5
X
13
Worked at hospital
7 years. Drove
ambulance. Had
been navy corpsman.
6 X
7
7
X 6
8 X
3-5
11 X
9
Took daughter to
C. P. therapy unit
16 X
17 X 2
22 X 4
27 X 6
3° X 20
Mean of years of experience: 6.85 years. Range: 2-20 years.
vo
60
The ten teacher trainees preparing to teach
orthopedically handicapped students were, as a group,
younger than the other two, with eight individuals under
forty, and two above. Though they were entering practice-
teaching, the classroom was no stranger to four of them,
for two had taught in regular classrooms— one for three
years, and another for four. Among the members was one
subject who had been a teacher of the educable mentally
retarded for four years, and another who had taught the
educationally handicapped for six years. One man had
worked in a.federally funded program which integrated
handicapped with non-handicapped children for six months.
Another student had taught tiny tots for six months.
(See Table 3)•
All of these trainees lived and worked in the
greater Los Angeles area. Eight were students at
California State University at Los Angeles. A ninth was
doing field work out of Biola College in La Mirada. And
a tenth had just completed her training at the University
of Southern California.
Several of the participants in all groups had
originally come from other parts of the country. One had
been born and reared in Germany. Thus, the entire sample
was drawn from a relatively broad spectrum of special
educators.
TABLE 3
AGE AND EXPERIENCE OF TEACHER TRAINEES
SERVING AS SUBJECTS
Subject No. Age Under 40 Age Over 40
Years of Teaching
Experience
Other Related
Experience
9
X
.5
tiny tots
18 X 3.0 reg. schl.
19
X 0.0 Bus driver for
0. H. 5 years
20 X 4.0 reg. schl. Had baby with
spina bifida
21 X 0.0
- d -
C M CM
X
X 0.0
6.0
.5
E. H.
Fed. pg. intego
hd. with non-hd
Spec. Ed. Aide
for 3 years
26 X 4.0 E. M, R. Tch.
28 X
o
•
o
29 X 0.0
Mean teaching experience: 1.8 years
Os
62
Age of subjects was considered a variable by
Woodmansee and Watson. Woodmansee discussed a near
vision reflex, in which the eye, when focused at a
distant point, is re-focused on a close point, when a
constriction occurs. He considered the possibility that
older people experienced the phenomenon to a greater
degree than did younger people, since they are more
likely to suffer from a condition called presbyopia, a
decrement in range of focusing ability associated with
aging. For this reason, he chose subjects ranging
between 19 and 36 years.
Watson, following Woodmansee's lead, utilized
subjects whose average age was 26, with a range from 20
to 42. He used only two subjects who were over 33 years
old--one 39> and the other 42.
In the present study, screening for age was
impractical, since the subjects sought were in short
supply. Therefore, a t-test for a difference between two
independent means was run to determine whether or not
there was a significant difference between the responses
of the eleven subjects who were over 40 and the nineteen
subjects who were under that age.
Unlike the other computations, which were fed
into a computer, this test was done manually. The test
(Bruning and Kintz, 1968) revealed no significant
63
difference between the under-40 and over-40 groups in
their responses to (l) uncosmetic slides and (2) cosmetic
slides. No significance was found for either, set of
responses.
For uncosmetic slides, t for differential between
groups was 1.00, resulting in a p > .05. For cosmetic
slides, t was .30, or a p >.05. Thus it could be
assumed that the age differential did not, in all prob
ability, affect the outcome of the study.
Apparatus
The monitoring device, termed a pupillometer,
utilized diffraction of light as an indicator of pupil
lary change. Its inventor, Richard G. Coss (1972),
described it thusly:
The pupillometer consisted of a cylindrical
tube containing two lenses that magnified an
illuminated scale. Mounted at one end of the
instrument, an opaque screen with two converging
narrow slots bordering a translucent blue section
was designed to diffract light entering the
subject's pupil ....
In normal operation, the pupillometer screen
was positioned over one eye of a subject to
within 12 mm of the corneal surface. The prin
ciple of operation was simple and subjects could
readily adapt to the operation technique with
minimum practice. "When placed close to the eye,
the translucent blue section appears as a con
verging point superimposed over a white visual
field containing a numerical scale from zero to
nine. Even though the slots are close to * the
eye, the diffracted light passing the edge of the
slots makes them appear sharply defined to the
observer. An increase in pupil size changes the
64
focus of the two slots and they appear to swell
lowering the intersection position of the blue
point. Conversely, a decrease in pupil size acts
much like a pin-hole camera focusing more of the
diffracted light rays passing through the slots
onto the retina. When the pupil is small, the
converging slots appear smaller and the blue
point larger because the depth of field has been
enhanced. Two converging slots placed in front
of a single lens reflex camera will show the same
result when the diaphragm is opened or closed.*
Prom the subject's point of view, the indication
of pupillary activity was given by a blue point illusion
appearing within the tube. When the point rose, his
score became smaller; when the point fell, it became
larger. Since the point appeared to fall during pupil
lary dilation activity, a larger scale number meant a
larger (dilated) pupil.
The establishment of a point of departure was
achieved by adjusting the pupillometer goggles up or
down and/or left or right until the blue point seemed
level with the number four. The term point of departure
was chosen in place of the usual term baseline, for,
according to Coss, the pupil does not establish a true
baseline, nor a point of repose, but is constantly in
motion.
In this study an attempt was made to bring the
pupils of each subject back to the point of departure
*Used with permission of Richard G. Coss.
65
through exposure to the illuminated blank screen after
the viewing of the stimuli, and usually the pupils did
return to the" number four which was the point of depar
ture. But the beginning score was the one used as the
base for statistical calculations.
During stimulus exposure, one eye viewed the
stimulus slide, while the other eye viewed the pupil-
lometer scale after the light of the device was switched
on. During the slide viewing, which, for each stimulus
slide, lasted five seconds, this light was off.
When the light was switched on at the end of each
5-second viewing, with the slide presentation still
visible on the screen, the score was read out by the
subject to the investigator as quickly as possible, after
which the scale light was switched off, and the next
stimulus slide was presented.
Each score was recorded by the investigator as
it was read, and because in the majority of cases the
point of departure had been set at 4, the raw scores
became the scores which were used in the statistical
computations. The exceptions were those where the point
of departure deviated from 4, as, for example, when it
was 4.5. In these cases, the scores were necessarily
changed to align with the starting number 4, so that a
reading of 5 became 4.5, while a reading of 6 became 5-5-
66
Power for the flashlight bulb providing the
pupillometer with its light was furnished by two standard
D flashlight batteries of 1.5 volts each.
Viewing Aperture of the Goggles
The support for the optical device resembled in
appearance the sheath of a skin-diver's mask. The tube
containing the scale was attached by screws to a band of
plexiglass which extended to form a counterpart support
over the other eye. This other lens for slide-viewing
had an opening approximately 1 l/l6 inch in diameter, so
that the eye of the subject was permitted to view the
stimulus slide without intervening glass--in other words,
through space.
This feature would have permitted changing the
monitoring tube from one eye-opening to the other.
However, the process of changing could be lengthy and
fatiguing for the subject, with the fatigue reflected in
his scores. Furthermore, a question arose as to whether
the dominant eye would be more valuable in viewing the
slides, or in viewing the monitoring scale. Since ana
tomically the eyes react in unison, a reading of the
reaction of one is necessarily parallel to the reading
of the other. For these reasons, the tube was left
attached to the right lens of the viewer during this
s tudy.
67
The left eye of the subject, then, viewed the
slides through the hole in the plexiglass support. If
the subject wore glasses, use of them was feasible,
though few participants chose to wear them. Since the
subjects were always positioned close to the screen,
and, with one exception, approximately three feet from
it, even those with poor vision were able to perceive
the slides. The exception noted was one man who had poor
vision, but who feared damage to his flexible glasses.
He chose to move up to within three or four inches of the
screen, where he reported that he could see the pictures.
Control Switch
The control switch for the illumination of the
scale was in the hands of the investigator, who was
positioned at a table approximately three feet from the
subject. The switch was mounted in a compact plastic
support, a rectangular box measuring 3 1/2 x 7 inches,
with a height of 2 3/4 inches.
The Stopwatch
A one-jewel stopwatch was used by the investi
gator to time the exposure of each stimulus slide. Of
Swiss manufacture, it was labeled Marcel & Cie, and it
measured in tenths of seconds.
68
The Screen
A 36-inch lenticular screen was utilized. It was
labeled: Lenticular Optiglow, Radiant Super Champion XI.
Projector Table
The projector table was manufactured by Logan
Electric Spec. Mfg. Co. of Chicago. A metal folding
table designed for slide and movie projectors, it stood
30 inches high when open.
The Tape Recorder
The portable cassette tape recorder used to
describe disabilities which were pictured for the
subjects prior to their filling in the Bogardus Social
Distance Scale check sheets was manufactured by General
Electric. It was labeled M835OA, and operated both on
six "C" flashlight batteries and on AC house power. In
each case, the house current was used for the playback.
The recorder was used for all but the first four subjects,
who heard the same message directly read by the investi
gator. Since the taped message used the investigator's
voice, the impact was assumed to be the same.
Slide Projector
The projector used was the Sawyer Rotomatic 707Q?
designated on its plate as "Marca Reg." It had a three-
inch anastigmatic coated lens, F. 3-5* It was wired for
117 volts, 60 cycles, A. C., 575 watts. It used a
500-watt maximum FBD lamp.
Stimuli
The stimulus slides consisted of fourteen black-
and-white 35 nim slides. Seven were taken from medical
journals and from a text on facial anomalies. Pictures
from these sources were taken to the Instructional Media
Center at the University of Southern California, where
they were made into slides. These pictures depicted
uncosmetic children, some of them infants, with extreme
degrees of malformation.
Seven control slides were used in conjunction
with the seven stimulus slides. Also black-and-white,
these pictured normal children taken in neighborhood
settings. They were made from Polaroid pictures taken
by the investigator. The processing was done by the
Polaroid Copying Service.
Following Woodmansee's procedure, a professional
photographer who was also a doctoral candidate at the
University of Southern California tested the slides
for luminosity.
Using a Kodak Ektagraphic slide projector, Model
AF-2, with a zoom lens f/3*5> and a Quartz-Iodine lamp
on high setting, this being an auto-focus model, he
focused the slides at eighty-one inches. Using a
70
Luna-Pro G-ossen light meter, 100 ASA, the photographer
procured the incident light measurement for each slide.
This incident reading measured the strength of
the light admitted by the slide as it came from the lens
of the projector. To provide this reading, the light
had to be centered.
Centering was accomplished by use of a washer
with a 3/4 inch internal diameter, or opening. This
washer was centered on a square of black cardboard
measuring 3 l/2 x 3 1/2 inches, after which a circle
1/16 inch in diameter was cut in the center of the
washer.
Since there was physically no way to get into the
lens without taking it apart, it was necessary to cut
notches in the washer so that it would fit snugly against
the lens. This done, the incident readings were taken
by holding the meter against the washer.
Table 4 shows the luminosity properties of the
stimulus (uncosmetic) slides.
Table 5 gives the Gossen Luna-Pro unit measure
ments of the control (cosmetic) slides. For purposes of
easy discrimination between the two groups, these slides
were given letter names.
Range of Luminosity
Woodmansee chose a set of slides which was within
TABLE 4
LUMINOSITY PROPERTIES OF STIMULUS SLIDES
Uncosmetic Pictures Gossen Luna-Pro Units
1. Unusual convergence of eyes
17.25
2. C. P. with many braces
17.75
3.
C. P. with braces evident
17.75
4. Reclining child with tubes feeding into nose
17.25
5.
Malformed head (Cloverleaf) 18.0
6. Faceless individual
17.25
7.
Malformed face 17.0
Mean of Gossen Luna-Pro Units 17.46*
*17.5 Gossen units are approximately equivalent to 1500 f00t-candles.
TABLE 5
LUMINOSITY PROPERTIES OF CONTROL SLIDES
Cosmetic Pictures Gossen Luna-Pro Units
A. Baby with, mother against tree-lined street
for background
17.50
B. Girl against tree-lined street
17.75
C. Girl with bicycle against garage door
18.75
D. Boy against garage door 18.25
E. Girl standing against house
17.75
F. Baby girl with tricycle 18.00
G. Boy with baby girl against shrubbery 17.00
Mean of Gossen Luna-Pro Units 17.86*
*17*86 Gossen-Pro units are roughly equivalent to 1850 foot-candles.
73
a range of 0.5 units on the Gossen meter. It will be
seen that the slides in Table k and Table 5 exceed this
range. However, the means of the two sets of slides
differ by less than Woodmansee's 0.5: 17. 86-17 . **6=. ^0.
Coss has stated that small excesses or
deficiencies from the 0.5 range of luminosity did not
meaningfully affect the pupillary response of the eyes.
An example would be the case of Slide 8, which
was ,25 in excess of the maximum, 17.75--in other words,
Slide 8's score in Gossen meter units was 18.0. To
determine the proportion of this excess, the equation
.25/18 yielded a .013 excess which must be subtracted
from any pupillometry response on Slide 8. Should a
hypothetical score be 5-5> the equation would read:
5-5-(5*5 x .013), or 5•5-•0715=5*^3> which, rounded to
tenths, would again become 5*5*
Since the pupil constantly fluctuates, and since
as a result of this the scores of the pupillometer are
reported in terms of ”5” or "5 1/2,” such computations
were possible, but somewhat hypocritically fastidious,
if not pretentious.
Since the means of the ranges of luminosity of
the two groups of slides were within the desired 0.5, it
seemed practical to assume that the two groups of slides
were within practical limits.
74
Moreover, Coss (1972) contended that if ambient
(environmental or room) light was sufficient, the auton
omous pupillary response to differing slide luminosity
is negated. Thus, if the room environment provided a
minimum ambient light of 6 lux units or more, a figure
based on his own research, then slides, particularly of
low luminosity, would not produce an autonomous light-
induced pupillary response. In other words, his testing
had suggested that in a room having more than 6 lux units
of background light, varying luminosity of slides would
not have a differential effect on the reaction of the
pupils.
Since a check of the settings used in the present
study revealed that the ambient light ranged from 55 to
525 lux units, it may be assumed that the background
light was great enough that slight variations in slide
luminosity could be disregarded.
Random Presentation
Each subject viewed all fourteen slides at one
sitting. In order that each successive subject would
view the slides in a different order from his predeces
sors, a system of randomization was utilized.
Random order was achieved by shuffling cards
representing the slides at least thirty times, to achieve
a new sequence of presentation. The cards were blank
9
TABLE 6
AMBIENT LIGHT MEASUREMENTS OF RESEARCH SETTINGS
Site Time of Day
Gossen Luna-Pro
Units
Equivalent
Lux Units
1. Elementary School 10:15 a.m. 9.25 55
2. School for Orth. Hand. 12:55 p.m. 9.75 77
3.
University Office 1:45 p.m.
9-5
66
4. Spec. Ed. Wing of 1:30 p.m. 12.5
525
Elementary School
5.
Private Home 1:00 p.m. 11.00
175
6. Site 4, Repeated 11:45 a.m. 10.5 131.5
7.
Site 4, Repeated 1:00 p.m.
12.5 525
Weather on all testing days was sunny.
76
calling cards, upon each of which had been typed the
designating number or letter of one slide. Since there
were fourteen slides, there were fourteen cards to
represent them.
After the shuffling had been accomplished, the
new sequence was copied into appropriate spaces of a
dittoed sheet. As previously mentioned, stimulus slides
were labeled by numbers, while control (cosmetic) slides
were indicated by letters.
The prepared sheet became the guide for setting
up the slide sequence before it was presented to a new
subject. Then, as the subject read out his scores to the
investigator, she recorded them directly under the label
for the slide.
Figure 1 presents a sample sheet.
Procedure
Subjects were asked to participate in a study
which required that participant educators would view some
slides which related to their field, as well as to read
back some scores from an unusual scale. Emphasis was
put on the fact that the study was not evaluative nor
competitive. Subjects were told that they would probably
find the experience interesting, since the procedure and
the apparatus used were somewhat novel. Assurance was
given that volunteers would have the purpose of the study
FIGURE 1
SUBJECT'S RAW-DATA PUPILLOMETER SCORE FOR EACH SLIDE
Slide No. 1 B
3
D 2 c
7 G b
5 A F E 6
Pupi Home ter
Score
6
7 5 5.5
6
5 5
6
5 5
6 6
5.5 7
Subject No.__________
Letter names denote cosmetic slides.
Numerals denote uncosmetic slides.
A random sequence of presentation was used. No two sequences
were the same. Such randomized sequencing minimized the effect
of any one slide on reaction to the succeeding one.
<1
78
and its implementation explained to them after they had
assisted the investigator.
When a subject reported, he was first asked to
check identifying categories which pertained to him.
(See Figure 2),
He then underwent a check for visual acuity with
the use of a standard Snellen Chart, placed at twenty
feet from the subject. A check of each eye was made
individually, followed by a check of both eyes in unison.
If the subject wore glasses, double checks were made, one
with, and one without glasses. Results were recorded on
the identification sheet of each subject.
Following the Snellen test, two tests to ascer
tain eye dominance were administered. During the first
one, the subject was handed a sheet of 8 l/2” x 11”
paper, into which an opening measuring 3/4" x 1 l/4" had
been cut. Then, standing ten feet from the subject, the
investigator held up at eye level a disk 4 3/b" in diam
eter, and asked the subject to view the disk through the
hole in the paper. The investigator noted the eye, left
or right, toward which the subject moved that hole. If
he viewed with the right eye, this was noted as dominant,
for that test.
Another test followed. Relieving the subject of
the 8 l/2” x 11” sheet of paper, the investigator, still
FIGURE 2
GENERAL INFORMATION PAGE ON SUBJECTS
Thank you for giving of your time and attention to
assist in this study. In order to interpret the results
satisfactorily, we need certain data from you. Though
we do not think you will find these few questions intru
sive, we hasten to assure you that your information will
be filed under a number only, and that records will be
held confidential.
* * * * * * * * *
Subject's Number______________ Date of Record_
Age : Over forty?_____________ Under forty?_
Occupation;
Regular classroom teacher of normal children__________
Special education teacher of orthopedically handicapped
children__________
Special education teacher trainee__________
Special education aide working with orthopedically
handicapped children__________
Special education aide trainee, beginning training period
with orthopedically handicapped children_________
Special education aide trainee, terminating training
period in classroom for orthopedically handicapped_______
Experience;
Number of years in your present occupation__________
80
standing at a distance of approximately ten feet from the
subject, again held up the disk. This time she asked the
subject to align his thumb so that, with both eyes open,
it appeared to the subject to center on the disk. The
subject was then asked to close first one eye, then the
other, after which he was asked to report with which eye
closed the disk seemed to move in relationship to the
thumb. The eye which, when closed, resulted in the
greater apparent motion, was noted as the dominant one,
for that test.
Introduction of the Subject to the Pupillometer
The subject was then seated in front of the
screen, approximately three feet from it. (The one
exception to this was the man mentioned above who sat
but a few inches from it). The investigator then
assisted the subject in placing the pupillometer over
his eyes, with the scale still dark.
The investigator remarked: "I know you don't see
anything yet." Then, switching on the light, she asked,
"What do you see now?"
The first answer often referred to the numbered
scale. Often the attention of the subject had to be
drawn to the blue point. At this stage, it was necessary
for the investigator to work patiently with the subject.
With some subjects, the awareness of the blue point came
81
rather slowly. In other cases, subjects saw the point
clearly and immediately.
Alter the subject appeared to feel comfortable in
his perception of the scale, he was shown how to focus
the image so that the numbers were at their greatest
clarity. He was also asked to adjust the goggles on his
head so that the blue point was aligned with the number
k.
This adjustment made, the investigator said: "I
am going to show you some practice slides to familiarize
you with the procedure we shall follow when you view the
stimulus slides. After you have viewed each slide for a
few seconds, I shall switch on the light so that you can
see the scale. Please read the number reached by the
top of the blue triangle as soon as you can see it. We
want your immediate reaction."
The first five slides were in color, and did not
pertain to the subject under investigation. (They were
travel pictures taken in Hawaii).
The five-second presentation of each slide was
timed by a stopwatch. At the end of the viewing period,
while the slide was still projected on the screen, the
pupillometer light was switched on. The subject read the
number with which the blue point was aligned. The scores
of the preliminary slides were noted in the margin of the
slide record sheet.
After the five practice slides had been presented,
the illuminated screen was left blank for at least thirty
seconds, and sometimes sixty seconds, until the subject
reported a reading of 4. In the event he did not reach
this point, the goggles were readjusted so that the point
of departure of 4 was again achieved.
The stimulus slides were then presented. As the
subject read out each score, the investigator recorded it
in the appropriate space beneath the slide identification
symbol. "When all fourteen slides had been presented, the
illuminated screen was again left blank for at least
thirty seconds, and sometimes longer, after which a post
check was made on the score.
Usually, the pretest point of departure was again
achieved. However, if the pupil did not subside to this
previous level, it was assumed that the subject was still
test-aroused, and slow to relax to pretest level. Most
subjects did in fact revert within the thirty-second
period. Four lapsed back to within the 4-5 range. Only
one, starting at 4, ended with a post-test 6.
Administration of the Bogardus Scale
The projector was then darkened, while the sub
ject listened to a tape recording previously prepared by
the investigator, playing the following message:
83
You are about to view some slides which
present examples of certain physical disabil
ities. After viewing them, you will be asked
to evaluate your reactions to people having
these disabilities. We will want your imme
diate, spontaneous, emotional response.
The slides will show a visually handi
capped patient, a person who is cerebral
palsied, a child with spina bifida, a congen
ital amputee, and a grossly malformed individual.
For those subjects unfamiliar with this
terminology, the visually handicapped will need
no introduction. The cerebral-palsied might,
however. He is the person with motor damage
resulting from injury to the brain cells con
trolling movement. He may have muscles which
are exceedingly tight and difficult to move,
or muscles so flaccid that, without his voli
tion, they move all the time.
The patient with spina bifida may
frequently be somewhat malodorous, since his
incompletely formed spine may have left him
without control over his primary functions,
so that he must, like an infant, be diapered.
Furthermore, his legs and feet may be poorly
formed and immobile, since the nerves ordi
narily controlling their movement are not
normal.
The congenital amputee has been in the
news during the past several years, for
certain drugs ingested by the pregnant woman
seem to be associated with imperfectly formed
arms and legs in the resulting offspring.
The hook which he wears as a prosthesis is
more conspicuous than its lower partner, the
artificial leg.
The grossly malformed individual probably
needs no explanation.
Six slides were then shown to the subject. They
were sequenced to parallel the introduction on the tape
recording. When the first slide was presented, the
84
investigator said: "This represents the visually handi
capped. "
Each slide was accompanied by a similar comment,
with words kept at a minimum. The second slide showed a
cerebral palsied child. Third came a child with spina
bifida. The fourth and fifth slides were two different
views of the same congenital amputee. And the last was
a picture of a grossly malformed individual.
Presentation of the Attitude Scale
An adaptation of The Social Distance Scale was
now presented to the subject.* Bogardus developed the
original in 1925, then put it through an equal-appearing-
intervals modification in 1933• The wording used in this
study is from the modification, and utilizes the phrase,
"would have live outside," for item 7, in contrast with
an earlier, more stiffly phrased version, "would debar
from my nation."
Since Bogardus devised the scale for measuring
the degree of social intimacy a person would allow to
members of outgroups, it was deemed appropriate for use
in this study, which was concerned with attitudes toward
*From Scales for the Measurement of Attitudes by
Marvin E. Shaw and Jack M. Wright. Copyright 1933 by
Sociology and Social Research. Used with permission of
McGraw-Hill Book Company, also with permission of the
author, Emory S. Bogardus.
a minority outgroup— handicapped children.
One change was made in the original version. For
greater ease of statistical treatment, the numbers of the
items were listed in reverse order, from 7 to 1, instead
of from 1 to 7i so that a high score represents a greater
degree of permissible intimacy, while in the original
version, the lower the score, the greater the intimacy
permitted.
Copies of the check sheet and set of instructions
now given to each subject appear in the appendix. The
investigator remarked that the test was self-explanatory,
non-competitive, and brief. The subject was encouraged
to refer to the written instructions to answer any ques
tions he might have concerning the test or its procedure.
If he was persistent, the investigator answered as
briefly as possible.
CHAPTER IV
RESULTS
Design
Pupillary Dilation. A two-way analysis of var
iance design with, repeated measures on one factor was
used for analyzing mean change in pupillary dilation
data. Groups (regular teachers, teachers of the ortho
pedically handicapped, and special-education trainees)
formed the nonrepeated factor, while Slides (cosmetic
and uncosmetic) were the repeated measures.
The Bogardus Scale. A one-way analysis of var
iance (Groups x Bogardus) was used to evaluate attitudes
toward orthopedically handicapped children revealed by
the paper-and-pencil responses of the three groups of
teachers to the Bogardus Scale of Social Distance.
Correlations. A Spearman correlation coefficient
was computed for the reactions of all thirty subjects
with Slides (uncosmetic and cosmetic) as the variable
pair.
A Spearman correlation coefficient was computed
for the relationship between responses of the entire
group to cosmetic slides and its responses to the Bogardus
Scale.
86
TABLE 7
SUMMARY OF ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE OF PUPILLARY RESPONSES
OF ALL SUBJECTS TO ALL SLIDES
Source of
Variation
Sums of Square D. F. Mean-Square F-Ratio
Level of
Significance
Between Subjects 51.81
29
A
1.93
2
0.97 0.523
0. 604
Subjects
within Groups 49.88
27 1.85
Within Subject 3.50 30
B 0.61 1 . 6l
6.175
0.018*
AB 0.19 2 0.10 0.976 0. 608
B X Subject
within Groups
2.69 27 0.10
*p < .025
Oo
88
A Spearman correlation coefficient was computed
for the relationship between whole-group responses to
uncosmetic slides and to the Bogardus Scale.
These correlations were followed by Spearman
coefficients for each group to compare its responses to
(l) cosmetic slides with Bogardus Scale responses, and
to (2) uncosmetic slides with Bogardus Scale responses.
Data
Pupillary Dilation. The summary table of the
two-way analysis of variance design with repeated meas
ures on one factor is presented in Table 7- The data for
pupillary dilation of the three groups revealed no sig
nificant difference among the groups. (F=.523» P > .05).
There was a significant difference, however, between
whole-group reactions to cosmetic and to uncosmetic
slides (F=6.175, P < .05). The actual level of signifi
cance, at .018 was approaching p < .01.
The Bogardus Scale. The one-way analysis of
variance (Groups x Bogardus) revealed no significant
difference among the groups in their paper-and-pencil
responses to the Bogardus Scale of Social Distance
measure of attitudes toward orthopedically handicapped
children (F=2.2634> P > .05). Results are in Tables
8 and 9•
TABLE 8
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE OF RESPONSES TO BOGARDUS
SCALE OF SOCIAL DISTANCE
Subjects Mean Standard Deviation Sum of Squares N
0. H. Teachers 30.500 1.354 16.500 10
Regular Teachers 27.200
5.371
259.602 10
Teacher Trainees 27.400 3.836 132.402 10
Total
28.3667 3.7532 408.5039 30
oo
VO
TABLE 9
SUMMARY OF ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE OF RESPONSES
TO BOGARDUS SCALE OF SOCIAL DISTANCE
Sum of Squares Degrees of Freedom Mean Squares
Between Groups 68.4883 2 34.2441
Within Groups 408.5039
27
15.1298
Total 476.9922
29
F = 2.2634
P > .05
\o
o
91
The Spearman correlation coefficient (see Table
10) computed for pupillary reactions of all thirty
subjects (l) to cosmetic slides and (2) to uncosmetic
slides revealed a highly significant correlation between
these reactions (.8198, p < .001).
The Spearman correlation coefficient revealed
that the correlation between total-group responses to
cosmetic slides and total-group responses to the Bogardus
Scale was not significant (-.22, p > .05).
The Spearman correlation coefficient revealed no
significant correlation between whole-group pupillary
responses to uncosmetic slides and whole-group paper-and-
pencil responses to the Bogardus Scale (.21, p> .05).
The correlation between pupillary responses of
teachers of the orthopedically handicapped to cosmetic
slides and paper-and-pencil responses to the Bogardus
Scale was not significant (-.20, p > .05). Nor was there
a significant correlation between their pupillary
responses to uncosmetic slides and their attitudes as
revealed by the Bogardus Scale responses (-.31> P >.05).
For regular teachers, the correlation between
pupillary responses to cosmetic slides and Bogardus Scale
responses was also negative but not significant
(-.23) p > .05). There was a larger correlation between
their responses to uncosmetic slides and the Bogardus
TABLE 10
SPEARMAN CORRELATION COEFFICIENTS BETWEEN
COSMETIC AND UNCOSMETIC SLIDES
Teachers N Ss Correlations Significance
Of Orthopedically
Handicapped
In Regular
Classrooms
In Training
10
10
10
.96
.85
.5h
. 001
. 001
.05
Total 30 .82 . 001
Scale, but it was still less than significant
(-.32, p >.05).
And finally, the teacher trainees had a corre
lation of -.22 between cosmetic slides and the Bogardus
Scale (p > .05); and a correlation in the opposite direc
tion for uncosmetic slides with Bogardus (.21, p >.05).
Data included breakdowns on group reactions to
slides as follows: (l) correlation of pupillary reac
tions of teachers of the orthopedically handicapped to
cosmetic and to uncosmetic slides was highly significant
(.96, p < .001); (2) pupillary reactions of regular
teachers to cosmetic and uncosmetic slides correlated
.85, p < .001; and (3) teacher trainees revealed a corre
lation of .5^ (p < .05). It is to be noted here that the
teachers of the orthopedically handicapped showed the
largest coefficient of the three groups.
Another way of stating those, results is to say
that teachers of the orthopedically handicapped had less
differentiated responses to the two types of slides than
did the other two groups.
Miscellaneous Data
Though discussed above in the chapter on method
ology, it may be mentioned here that a t-test for
independent means was run between sub.jects under h0 years
old and sub.jects above that age for responses to (l)
94
uncosmetic slides and (2) cosmetic slides. No significant
difference was found in either test. For uncosmetic
slides, t was 1.00, p > .05. For cosmetic slides, t was
.30, p > .05.
Results of Snellen tests of vision of subjects
have been tabulated, and are to be found in the appendix.
A table showing the eye preference of subjects is
also to be found there.
For the reader's convenience, the hypotheses are
again stated below, followed by the relevant data yielded
by the study.
(l) Hq: The mean of the pupillary responses of
Group A (special-education teachers of orthopedically
handicapped students) will equal the mean of the pupil
lary responses of Group B (regular-classroom teachers),
which will equal the mean of the pupillary responses of
Group C (trainees preparing to teach orthopedically
handicapped students) when all three groups are presented
a selected group of seven cosmetic slides of normal
children.
Resulting means were as follows:
0. H. Teachers 4.878
Regular Teachers 4.971
Trainees ^*593
There was no significant difference among these
means. The null hypothesis was accepted.
However, acceptance of this hypothesis was not
surprising, since conventional wisdom would have assumed
that cosmetic slides of normal children would elicit
similar responses from all teachers. It may be seen
that the regular teachers experienced the largest mean
dilation.
(2) Hq: The mean of the pupillary responses of
Group A will equal the mean of the pupillary responses
of Group B, which will equal the mean of the pupillary
responses of Group C when all three groups are presented
a selected group of seven uncosmetic slides of ortho
pedically handicapped children.
Resulting means were as follows:
0. H. Teachers 4.936
Regular Teachers 5*307
Trainees 4.807
The data for pupillary dilation of the three
groups revealed no significant difference among them
(F=.523, p > .05). The null hypothesis was accepted.
However, assuming that greater dilation indicated
shock (and subjects' comments, as discussed below, sup
ported this contention), the regular teachers evidenced
a numerically greater index of this shock than did the
two other groups. If the reader will examine Table 11,
he will see that the greatest difference of reaction
9 6
to the two sets of slides occurred with the regular
teachers (.336), while the smallest difference was
between the reactions of the teachers of the orthope
dically handicapped, with .058. The implications of
these findings will be discussed below.
(3) H : There will be no significant corre-
o
lation between the pupillometric scores of Group A in
response to cosmetic slides and its scores on the
Bogardus Scale of Social Distance.
The resulting correlation was not significant.
The Spearman coefficient was -.20, p > .05. The null
hypothesis was accepted.
(4) Hq; There will be no significant corre
lation between the pupillometric scores of Group A in
response to uncosmetic slides and its scores on the
Bogardus Scale of Social Distance.
The resulting correlation, while larger than
the first, was still negative, and was not significant
(-.31, p > .05). The null hypothesis was accepted.
However, before proceeding with the other results,
it would be well to look at a table of the means and
standard deviations of the three groups in response to
the Bogardus Scale.
97
Group Mean Standard Deviation
0. H. Teachers 30.500 1.35^
Regular Teachers 27.200 5*371
Trainees 27.^00 3*836
It may be seen that the mean response of the
teachers of the orthopedically handicapped, at 30.5»
was larger than that of either of the other groups.
This largest mean indicated the greatest acceptance of
the handicapped, while the smallest standard deviation
indicated the greatest group cohesiveness of response.
(5) Hq: There will be no significant corre
lation between the pupillometric scores of Group B in
response to cosmetic slides and its scores on the
Bogardus Scale of Social Distance.
The resulting Spearman coefficient of corre
lation was -.23, p > .05> and thus the correlation was
not significant. The null hypothesis was accepted.
(6) Hq: There will be no significant corre
lation between the pupillometric scores of Group B in
response to uncosmetic slides and its scores on the
Bogardus Scale of Social Distance.
The resulting correlation was not significant
(-.32, p > .05). The null hypothesis was accepted.
But it is to be noted that the score of the regular
teachers on the responses to the Bogardus Scale was
98
numerically the smallest of the three means--27.2,
indicating a trend toward the least acceptance of the
handicapped.
(7) Hq: The correlation for the pupillometric
scores of Group C in response to cosmetic slides and its
scores on the Bogardus Scale of Social Distance will not
be significant.
The resulting Spearman coefficient was
-22, p ^ .05. The null hypothesis was accepted. The
correlation was not significant.
(8) Hq: There will be no significant difference
between the pupillometric scores of Group C in response
to uncosmetic slides and its scores on the Bogardus
Scale of Social Distance.
. The resulting correlation was not significant
(.21, p >.05). The null hypothesis was accepted.
However, the mean of Group C on the Bogardus
Scale was 2. 7.h, placing it between the regular teachers
and the teachers of the orthopedically handicapped in
acceptance of the handicapped. The differences are
slight, but the direction is the one anticipated in the
structuring of the study. The teachers of the ortho
pedically handicapped were revealed as most acceptant,
while the regular teachers were the least.
99
Discussion
The acceptance of* the null hypotheses should not
mislead the reader into thinking that the pupillometer
did not discriminate between groups. It did, but not
in the manner anticipated, nor with the data expected
to indicate the difference.
In any exploratory study, surprises are to be
expected. In this study, the major underlying, but
unstated, hypothesis was that regular teachers, and
possibly teacher trainees, would react more emotionally
to representations of grossly handicapped children than
would teachers of the orthopedically handicapped.
Hypotheses were constructed in the expectation of
supporting this belief. The surprise in the findings
lay in the fact that the underlying, unstated hypothesis
did receive support, but not from the data as structured
by the null hypotheses.
When the differences among the groups were
computed, the within-groups variation was so great,
particularly in the case of regular teachers, that it
discounted the value of the among-groups variation.
But when whole-group reactions to cosmetic and to
uncosmetic slides were compared, the differences were
found to be significant. Herein lay the key to group
differentiation.
100
All three groups responded to uncosmetic slides
with larger pupillary dilations than to cosmetic slides.
But the greatest difference in the two responses lay
with the regular teachers. The next greatest difference
was shown by the trainees. And the least difference was
shown by the teachers of the orthopedically handicapped.
In other words, the teachers working with handicapped
children responded to orthopedically handicapped children
more nearly as they did to normal ones. Table 11
presents the data.
Significant correlations appeared also in another
area for which there had been no hypothetical construct—
in-group correlations of pupillary responses to cosmetic
and to uncosmetic slides. Table 10 presents the data.
Figures 3, 4, 6 and 7 present these data in graphic
form.
Admittedly, on first inspecting the data, the
reader might be tempted to conclude that all results of
the study were negative--as, indeed were those bearing
upon the hypotheses. However, a more detailed study of
the figures suggests that the results were there, and
they were positive. The problem lay in the fact that the
hypothesis which would reveal them was not chosen.
Predictions all theorized differences between
groups of subjects. Yet the significant results were
TABLE 11
MEANS AND STANDARD DEVIATIONS OF PUPILLARY RESPONSE SCORES
OF THREE GROUPS OF TEACHERS PRESENTED WITH
COSMETIC AND UNCOSMETIC SLIDES
Teacher Groups N Ss Slides Mean SD
Teachers of1
Orthopedically Cosmetic 4.878
.787
Handicapped 10 Uncosmetic 4.936
.917
Regular Cosmetic
4.971
1.241
Teachers 10 Uncosmetic
5.307 1.439
Teacher Cosmetic
4.593 .549
Trainees 10 Uncosmetic 4.807 .684
4.936 - 4.878 = .058
5.307 - 4.971 = .336
4.807 -
4.593 = .214
101
1 ...... FIGURE 3..
¥ PUPILLARY RESPONSES OF THREE
TO jJNCOSMETIC SLIDES
GROUPS
•H.
R
O
Slides
0. H. Teachers
Reg. Teachers
Trainees' 1"'
FIGURE* 4
MEAN PUPILLARY RESPONSES DF. 0. H. TEACHERS
TO. T VO. SETS OF SLIDES ...
— S—5^5
Slides
Uncosmetic
’ Cosmetic
o
V jJ
I - i . FIGURE .5 L ; - : t.
PILLARY RfSPONSES 01 ‘ REGULAR - 1 EACHERS
TO TV 0 SETS OF SLIDES - -..
• MEAN Pt
J O .
i 1
Slides
Uncosnetic
Cosmei;ic '
!:::
;
..» ■ ...... - ■
s L -
~5.-.H--
H c_ e
.. > -.
' mean PIIPILLARY RI
TO TV
FIGURE 6
SPONSES 03
10 SETS OF
* TEACHER '
SLIDES
TRAINEES’
. . . . . .
....
j_L.
!
l. i :
t ~ ....
:
C / 2
• H
© .T’ “ ~ ...
■ > ..;.; ..
. i *510,
... ....
.-■——....
-- - ■ - ./ \ - -
--- . . . . . . .
.. ; - - - - - ..-
; :
5 5
§ ..i ' -
3 i ^
: :
-i .- - .
./
■ . i n / , :
.. . . /.
r . . i ./
srr-....: - '
X
\ ^
/ .... \
"" " / .’ ' '
..... , . .
■ __- ■ >
i - " , ' " ’ ; ... . .. . . . . - • • > ■ • . ; - 1
• & “ i
.M ~ -
! .....
f t f i t i n
; : ; ;
• ■ ...... . - - -
. - . - r . 0 ,
/
/.. ....
/.." t.r-
.* - - - - ■ ■
.s' .
.-
--. . . . . . .
■ 1 • '
• • • * • - ...L_
' M - ■ .* —
; 3T-5--
" 1 ’ r : .* ’
" ' - ! " • - ;-- r - -
' - - * ■ - r - - - - - -
: • + ■
- ..; • - •
. . . . , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
■ .... ' ■ -.
;
■
__
— L~J-j -i -
- ■■ !... . ■ r- - r. -
..... ........... ....~i
.... < ■ • ■ ■? -
r -. .;.. ......... 1
■
i ■ > ...... i
Slides
, . ----- . . . . . . 1
. . . t - M
........... , (
Uncc
. _ __ jCosn
1... ’ ' . .... '..
smetic . . . .
letic...
1 -------
".H
O
-\A'
FIGURE 7
OF THREE
IDES
GROUPS RESPONSES
COSMETIC LSI
::n
...
Slides
p. H. Tea
Reg. Tea£
Trainees
chers
hers
M .L
107
found to be between groups of stimuli. If the reader
will examine Table 7 > which shows the analysis of
variance of pupillary responses of subjects to slides,
he will find that under Within Subjects, at B, which
represents the differentiation between cosmetic and
uncosmetic slides, the F-ratio was 6.175> revealing a
level of significance of .018 (p < .025). This exceeded
the .05 level set for this study.
Thus, though pupillary response did not differ
entiate among groups, it did differentiate between
stimuli. With the omniscience of hindsight, it was now
worthwhile to remember that four investigators who
achieved positive results were all looking for discrim
ination between slides.
Hess, claiming to have found constriction for
aversive stimuli and dilation for attractive stimuli,
concentrated on slides, not subjects. Krugman compared
covert response (pupillary dilation) with overt subse
quent reaction (sales). Watson attained positive results
in the comparison of judges1 ratings of his slides with
the pupillary response of the subjects. Coss's emphasis
was on discrimination between groups of eye-like schemata.
Woodmansee was the only investigator herein reviewed who
actually found a significant difference between group
responses.
108
Thus, one of the findings of the present study
was that a major hazard in this type of research is the
selection of the variable on which to base a hypothesis.
Another positive finding was that correlations
between dilation responses to cosmetic slides and
uncosmetic slides were very high--.5^ for trainees
(p < .05), .85 for regular teachers (p < .001), and .96
for 0. H. teachers (p < .001). On the surface, men
tioning these results might appear to be belaboring the
obvious. But it will be noted that the near-perfect
correlation (.96) occurred with the teachers of the
orthopedically handicapped. (See Table 10).
This is another way of saying that this was the
group which evidenced the least difference of reaction
between the two groups of slides. Members showed very
little more response to the uncosmetic slides than they
did to the slides of normal children. (See Table ll).
This finding aligns with the original supposition that
teachers of the orthopedically handicapped would tend to
be desensitized to physical anomalies.
Regular teachers showed the next highest corre
lation on this continuum--.85, which was still very high.
This finding is interesting in that it might be expected
that the trainees for the 0. H. teaching field would have
some predisposition toward disabled children, and so
might show more homogeneity of reaction than regular
teachers. An examination of the figures shows that this
was not the case.
However, many of the trainees had not yet been
exposed to physically handicapped children in day-to-day
interaction. Furthermore, the study was conducted at a
time of financial crunch and stringent economy within
most school districts. Enrollment was falling, and
newly certificated regular teachers were not all getting
jobs. Hence, on the campus grounds, some students of
special education cheerfully admitted that they had
switched to the field because it was one in which
teachers were in somewhat short supply.
In summary, then, the correlations between
responses to the two sets of slides were indications of
varying differences among the groups. This was a second
serendipity produced by unexpected findings of the
computer search. (Tables 12, 13, 14 give scores on
slides).
The question of the tyranny of established statis
tical norms when they are brought to bear on unexplored
areas in unconventional research has ever been a thorny
problem. Indeed, Watson argued when he chose a 75$ level
of confidence that the 95$ level was merely a convention,
and not necessarily a logical one in an exploratory study
TABLE 12
MEANS OF PUPILLARY RESPONSES OF TEACHERS
OF THE ORTHOPEDICALLY HANDICAPPED
WHEN VIEWING STIMULUS SLIDES
Subject No. Cosmetic Slides Uncosmetic Slides All Slides
1 4. 000 4.143 4.071
2 5.286 5. 000 5.142
3
4.714 4.571 4.643
4 3.786 4. 071 3.928
10
5.857
6.714 6.286
12
4.571 4.143 4.357
13
4.214
4.357
4.286
14 4.714 4.714 4.714
15 5-571 5.429 5.500
25 6.071 6.214
6.143
Totals 48.784 49.356 49.070
Means 4.878
4.93 6 4.907
TABLE 13
MEANS OF PUPILLARY RESPONSES OF REGULAR CLASSROOM TEACHERS
WHEN VIEWING STIMULUS SLIDES
Subject No. Cosmetic Slides Uncosmetic Slides All Slides
5
4.714 4.714 4.714
6 4.429
4.857 4.643
7 5.715 5.643 5.679
8 2.428
2.571 2.357
11 6.071
6.214
6.143
16 4.714
4.857
4.786
17
4.500 5.000 4.821
22 4.500 4. 500 4. 500
27
5.571 6.571 6.071
30
7.071 8,000 7.536
Totals 51.250
52.927 49.713
Means
5.13 5.30 4.92
111
TABLE 14
MEANS OF PUPILLARY RESPONSES OF TEACHER TRAINEES
WHEN VIEWING STIMULUS SLIDES
Subject No. Cosmetic Slides Uncosmetic Slides All Slides
9 5.143 4.857
5.000
18 4.000 4 .071 4.036
19 4.571 5.143 4.857
20
5.143 6.071 5.607
21
4.857 3.857 4.357
23 4. 643 4.643 4.643
24 4. 286
4.857 4.571
26
3.429 4.413 3.785
28 5.00
5.571
5.286
29 4.857 4.857
4.857
Totals
46.999
48.070
45.929
Means
4.699 4.807 ^.593
112
113
In the present study, the computer revealed no
significance between groups. Yet examination of Table 11,
which lists means of pupillary responses of all three
groups to both cosmetic and uncosmetic slides, reveals
some interesting numerical differences. As might be
expected from the .96 correlation mentioned above, the
teachers of the orthopedically handicapped had the
smallest difference between means--.058. Next came the
teacher trainees, with a ,21 difference. (This is
surprising, in that their correlation was the smallest,
as discussed above). And the highest difference occurred
with the regular teachers--with a .336 difference. Thus,
regular teachers revealed a difference of reaction
between the two groups of slides which was over five
times as great as that of the 0. H. teachers. (Rounded,
this would be .3^/-06, or 5 2/3). The trainees revealed
a differential reaction well over three times as great as
that of the 0. H. teachers (.21/.06). This numerical
trend was in the direction anticipated in the planning of
this study. It had been expected that teachers of the
orthopedically handicapped would show greater tolerance
for the physically handicapped than would teacher
trainees, and that the trainees would show greater
tolerance than would regular teachers.
Noteworthy is the fact that all differential
114
reactions lay in the direction of greater pupillary
dilation when subjects were viewing the uncosmetic
slides. This is of interest, in view of Woodmansee's
expectation that only dilation would occur in response
to emotional stimuli, when in fact he did elicit
constriction, though infrequently.
A possible explanation might be that the Coss
self-monitoring device enabled the investigator to
assist the subject in establishing a point of departure
(the point h), thus setting up a different basis for
scoring from the constantly changing differentiation
used by Hess and Woodmansee. Both used as their measure
the difference between the response to a neutral slide
and the response to the following stimulus slide. This
allowed the subject’s score to fluctuate, for the neutral
slide established an ever-changing baseline, while
fluctuations with the Coss pupillometer were anchored to
the initial point of departure. Furthermore, with the
Coss set-up, the randomization of two sets of slides
which are interspersed with one another puts emphasis on
use of means of the two groups of slide responses as the
bases of statistical procedures.
For the reader's convenience, the actual scores
accrued on each individual slide have been aligned. (See
Tables 12, 13, 14). They have then been placed in rank
115
order. (See Table 15)- The two sharing first place
were slides depicting gross anomalies--one, a faceless
individual, and the other, a reclining child with tubes
feeding into his nose.
It is worthy of note that the rank order does
not appear to correlate with the Luna-Pro units of light-
emission of slides, since Slide C, with a Luna-Pro
measurement of 18.75} which should logically have
elicited the smallest dilation, placed above Slide D,
with 18.25, and Slide F, with a Luna-Pro measurement of
18.00, brought greater dilation than Slide 1, with a
lower 17.25 count, which latter slide should have auto-
nomically encouraged greater, not less dilation.
It must be mentioned, however, that two slides
sharing Rank Order 4 were cosmetic slides of normal
children. Yet, overall, it may be seen that the uncos
metic slides elicited the greatest amount of pupillary
dilation, since none of them were below Rank Order 7,
and none of the cosmetic slides were above Rank Order 4.
The finding that the Bogardus Scale scores and
the pupillary responses did not correlate significantly
was not surprising. Consensus among investigators that
people tend to put down replies they feel will be
socially acceptable in any area of cultural pressure has
been discussed in Chapter I of this paper. The ethos of
TABLE 15
RANK ORDER OF SLIDES AS MEASURED B Y PUPILLARY RESPONSE
OF ALL THREE GROUPS
Rank
Order
Mean Dilation
Score for All
Groups
Cosmetic Slide
Identification
Uncosmetic Slide
Identification
Luna-Pro
Units
i>
5.20
5.20
4)
6'
17.25
17.25
2 5.12
7
17.00
3
5.10
3 17.75
5.00
5.00
B)
G
17.75
17.00
5
4.90 F 18.00
6)
6'
4.88
4.88 2)
17.25
17.75
7 4.83 5
18.00
8
4.77 E
17.75
9 4.73 A 17.50
10 4.68 C
18.75
11
4. 67 D
18.25
116
117
twentieth-century society is probably seen by many
people as pressuring for an accept-the-handicapped
response. The negative correlation of the paper-and-
pencil responses with the pupillary responses would
suggest that these feelings might have been present with
the subjects in this study. However, the fact that the
negative correlation did not reach the level of signif
icance would suggest that the participants were not
overwhelmingly evasive.
A direct examination of the actual Bogardus
scores, however, in Tables 16, 17 and 18, reveals an
interesting trend. Though the differences were very
small, their direction paralleled that of the pupil-
lometric scores. The smallest mean (27.2)> indicating
the least acceptance by a group, came from the regular
classroom teachers. The middle score (27.^-) was that
of the teacher trainees. And the largest (30.5)>
indicating the greatest degree of acceptance, came from
the teachers of the orthopedically handicapped. Thus,
the paper-and-pencil responses went in the same direction
as their counterparts among the pupillary responses.
It may be argued by statisticians that differ
ences which are below the level of significance should
not be considered at all. But pupillary dilation as a
measure is a new yardstick, with endless nuances, and
TABLE 16
SCORES OF TEACHERS OF ORTHOPEDICALLY HANDICAPPED
ON BOGARDUS SCALE OF SOCIAL DISTANCE
Subject Number Score
1 29
2
31
3 29
4
31
10 29
12
33
13
32
14 30
15
30
25 31
Total
305
Mean
30.5
118
TABLE 17
SCORES OF REGULAR CLASSROOM TEACHERS
ON BOGARDUS SCALE
Subject Number Score
5 29
6 29
7 27
8 30
11
29
16
32
17
16
22
29
27 32
30
19
Total 272
Mean 27.2
119
TABLE 18
SCORES OF SPECXAL-EDUCATION TEACHER TRAINEES
ON BOGARDUS SCALE
Subject Number Score
9
26
18 29
19
30
20 28
21
23
23 31
24
33
26 20
28 26
29 28
Total 274
Mean 27.4
120
121
fine tolerances. Furthermore, Krugman (1964), working
in the practical area of marketing research, suggested
that the numerical superiority of correlation between
sales history and pupil response over the correlation
between sales and verbal ratings made the technique of
measured pupillary response worth utilizing, even though
the difference between the two correlations was not
significant.
Alignment of the results of responses to the
Bogardus scale for each group with its mean difference
between reactions to uncosmetic and cosmetic slides
illustrates the point:
Regular Teachers
Trainees
0. H. Teachers
Bogardus Scale
(Larger score=
greater
acceptance)
27.2 Least
acceptance
27.4 More
acceptance
30.5 Most
acceptance
Pupillary
Differences
(Larger score=
less
acceptance)
•336 Least
acceptance
.210 More
acceptance
.053 Most
acceptance
A word of caution is in order before the reader
examines the mean pupillary response scores. At first
glance, it will seem that the trainees, not the teachers
of the orthopedically handicapped, were more acceptant
of the uncosmetic slides, for their mean dilation (shock)
4
122
response was 4.807, while the 0. H, teachers' group
response was 4.936, indicating, on the surface, greater
shock. The reader is reminded, however, that the scores
with which all previous investigators worked were the
differential scores between the mean responses to the
control and to the stimulus slides.
Oversights on the part of the investigator which
should be mentioned were: (l) her failure to record
consistently verbal reactions of all subjects to both
groups of slides, and (2) her failure to ask each subject
his handedness.
Many subjects were asked to indicate their
reactions to the uncosmetic slides during the informal
discussion which followed the study presentation, but
their information wasn't recorded, nor tabulated. The
indication was that most subjects found the uncosmetic
slides markedly aversive.
Such comments were made as: "I kept swallowing
so I wouldn't close my eyes.'"
The omission was the result of the assumption
that the Bogardus Scale would elicit the needed infor
mation. However, numbered, orderly presentation of oral
reactions would have lent support to the implication
that in this study, with the equipment used, dilation
indicated aversive response.
123
The second omission, the failure to ask consist
ently what the subject’s handedness was, did not affect
the study. However, it would have provided a minor
bonus for anyone interested in the eyedness of each
subject. When the study was planned, it was assumed
that the two tests of eyedness were simple, and that
they would yield clear-cut results. Such was not the
case. Even looking through the hole seemed to present
a problem to some subjects.1 As for the thumb test, it
baffled several participants. Either they would fixate
on the thumb, and would be able to perceive no apparent
motion, or they would get two different results on two
different trials. Often, the "hole” test would reveal
one eye as dominant, and the "thumb" test would indicate
the other eye as the directive one. In such cases,
results were recorded as "ambivalent."
CHAPTER V
SUMMARY
Setting out to quantify any differences among
three groups of teachers which might become observable
through the use of pupillometrie scores, the investigator
patterned the study after Woodmansee1s procedure, but
the model was altered to fit the demands of a recently
developed pupillometer. This device utilized the
fluctuations of diffracted light to indicate to a subject
whether his pupil was dilating or contracting. These
fluctuations were apparent, not real, as they were the
result of changes occurring in the shape of the lens as
the pupil responded. The subject monitored his own
reactions, with the aid of a nine-point scale aligned
with the path traversed by a blue point illusion which
appeared to rise or fall as the pupil dilated or con
tracted. The scale was placed so that a larger numeral
indicated a greater pupillary dilation.
The battery-operated device was portable,
enabling the investigator to test subjects in their
various schools. However, time of day was held fairly
constant, and ambient light checks were made to insure
that lighting conditions were above a minimum, insuring
124
125
that minor variations in the balanced slides would not
trigger a difference in autonomic, light-induced
responses.
Three sets of slides were used: (l) travel
slides for orientation to the procedure; (2) seven
uncosmetic (stimulus) slides of moderately to grossly
handicapped children; and (3) seven cosmetic slides of
normal children seen in a neighborhood setting. The
stimulus and control slides were light-balanced,
according to the standards recorded by Woodmansee, by
a professional photographer.
Subjects were three groups of educators: (l)
ten teachers of orthopedically handicapped children;
(2) ten regular-classroom teachers of normal children;
and (3) ten teacher trainees, preparing to teach
orthopedically handicapped children.
It was anticipated that the teachers of the
orthopedically handicapped would show the highest level
of tolerance for the slides of handicapped children.
The question of whether aversive reaction would be
revealed by dilation or constriction of the pupils was
not belabored at the onset of the study.
To provide a paper-and-pencil parallel test of
attitude, the Bogardus Scale of Social Distance was
employed. This was a seven-point scale, formulated in
126
the 1920's and modified in the following decade, which
was designed to measure the tolerance of within-group
subjects for people outside their group. It had been
used mainly for reactions to members of differing ethnic
groups, but lent itself to appraisal of subjects'
reactions to another outgroup— the physically handi
capped. For ease of computation of correlations, the
order of the scale was reversed, so that, instead of the
larger score indicating the greatest rejection, it
indicated the greatest acceptance.
Several hypotheses were formulated, all assuming
that significant differences would be found between
group responses. A two-way analysis of variance with
repeated measures on one factor was computed, with
Groups x Slides as the two factors. The null hypotheses
were all accepted, since no significant differences
between groups were found.
However, a significant difference was found
between stimuli (uncosmetic and cosmetic slides) with
p < .025. Furthermore, significant correlations between
reactions to cosmetic and to uncosmetic slides revealed
a numerical difference between each group's reaction
to the two categories, which was in the expected
direction. Teachers of the orthopedically handicapped
revealed the smallest difference in reaction--.058.
127
The difference for trainees was .21 between mean
reactions to the two sets of slides. The largest
difference, .336, occurred between responses of regular
teachers. Thus, regular teachers had almost a six-times-
greater discriminatory reaction than did teachers of the
orthopedically handicapped, while trainees’ differential
response was more than three times that of the 0. H.
teachers,
The responses to the Bogardus Scale were found
to have small negative correlations with the pupillary
responses, but their numerical alignment, though exhib
iting minuscule differences, was in the same direction
as the pupillary results, with the teachers of the
orthopedically handicapped showing the greatest accept
ance, and the regular teachers the least.
The findings of the study suggested that anyone
continuing the work should take a careful look at the
hypotheses he formulates, emphasizing stimuli, not
groups.
The Coss pupillometer appears to be a viable
instrument, functioning well within the context indicated
above. It is relatively inexpensive, light-weight, and
portable. It avoids the "black box" requirements of
previously used techniques, wherein the viewing eye was
filmed by a motion picture camera with the aid of
128
infrared light as the subject viewed stimulus slides.
“ With the portable pupillometer, a reasonable level of
ambient light is not only acceptable, but preferable,
for its presence tends to negate any minor imbalance
in the light emission qualities of the matched black
and white stimulus and control slides used in studies
such as the present one.
With this instrument and the procedure which
best fits it, dilation appears to be an aversive, or
shock reaction.
It would be interesting to sample pupillary
reactions of professionals who were even more intimately
associated with disabled persons-~therapists, for
example, or nurses, and then to compare them with
responses of people far removed from the helping
professions, such as actors or business executives.
It would also be interesting to follow up
trainee subjects, checking to find out whether those
high in pupillometrie response (l) remained in the
orthopedically handicapped teaching field, and (2)
were happy in their work.
APPENDIX
THE SOCIAL DISTANCE SCALE*
You. are urged to give yourself as complete free
dom as possible. In fact, the greater the freedom you
give yourself, the more valuable will be the results.
Use only checkmarks or crosses.
Seven kinds of social contacts are given.
You are asked to give in every instance your
first feeling reactions. Proceed through the tests
without delaying. The more you "stop to think," the
less valuable will be the results. Give your reactions
to every disability pictured by the slides you have just
viewed.
By taking this test at intervals of six months
or a year, a person can discover what some of the changes
in attitudes are that he is undergoing. If given to a
group at intervals, changes in group attitudes may
likewise be gauged.
Remember to give your first feeling reactions in
every case. Give your reactions to each disabled group.
*From Scales for the Measurement of Attitudes by
Marvin E. Shaw and Jack M. Wright. Copyright 1933 by
Sociology and Social Research. Used with permission of
McGraw-Hill Book Company and Emory S. Bogardus, the
author.
129
Do not give your reactions to the best or the worst
members that you have known.
Put a cross after each disability in as many
the seven columns as your feeling reactions dictate.
FIGURE 8
Visually-
Handicapped
THE BOGARDUS SCALE OF SOCIAL DISTANCE
Would
marry
into
group
"Would
have as
close
friends
Would
have as
next door
neighbors
Would
work in
same
office
Have as
speaking
acquaint
ances only
Have as
visitors
only to
my nation
Cerebral
Palsied
Having
Spina
Bifida
Congenital
Amputees
Grossly
Malformed
1
Would have
live outside
my nation
*Used with the permission of the author, Emory S. Bogardus,
and McGraw-Hill Book Company
h*
H
TABLE 19
SNELLEN CHART VISION SCORES OF TEACHERS
OF THE ORTHOPEDICALLY HANDICAPPED
Subject No. With Glasses Without Glasses
1 20/40
2 20/13
3
20/20
4 20/40
10
20/15
12 20/20 20/200
13 20/30
14 20/20 20/50
15 20/20
(Contact Lenses)
25 20/40 20/70
TABLE 20
SNELLEN CHART VISION SCORES
OF REGULAR TEACHERS
Subject No. With Glasses Without Glasses
6 20/50
7
20/70
8 20/20
(Viewed slides
with glasses)
20/200
11 20/100
13
20/70
16 20/20 20/70
17
20/13
(Contact Lenses)
22 20/20
27 20/15
(Viewed slides
with glasses)
20/40
30
20/25 20/100
133
TABLE 21
SNELLEN CHART VISION SCORES
OF TEACHER TRAINEES
Subject No. With. Glasses Without Glasses
9 20/25 20/100
18
20/15
19
20/25
20
20/15
21
20/25
(Contact Lenses)
23 20/20 20/40
24 20/25
26 20/20 20/70
28 20/20
29 20/25
TABLE 22
EYE PREFERENCE OF TEACHERS OF THE ORTHOPEDICALLY HANDICAPPED
Subject No. Eye Preference Mixed Preference
Right Left Test Made Looking Aligning Thumb
Through Hole Test
1 X
2 X
3
X
4 X >
10 X
12 X
No ambiguities noted
14 X
15
X
25 X
Score of Subject 13 was not obtained
TABLE 23
EYE PREFERENCE OF REGULAR TEACHERS
Subject No. Eye Preference Mixed Preference
Right Left Test Made Looking
Through Hole
Aligning Thumb
Tes t
5
X
6 Right Left
7
X
8 X
11 Left Ambivalent
16 X
17 Left Right
22 X
27 X
30 X
H
C\
TABLE 2k
EYE PREFERENCE OF 0. H. TEACHER TRAINEES
Subject No. Eye Preference Mixed Preference
Right Left - Test Made Looking Aligning Thumb
Through Hole Test
9
X
18 Left Right
19
X
20 X
21 X
23 Left Right
2k X
26 Left Right
28 Left Right
29 Left Right
137
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Aita, John A. Congenital Facial Anomalies with
Neurologic Defects; A Clinical Atlas.
Springfield, Illinois: C. C. Thomas, 1969.
Alessi, Daniel F., and Anthony, William A. "The
Uniformity of Children's Attitudes Toward
Physical Disabilities." Exceptional Children,
25. No. 7 (March, 1969),
Bakan, Paul. "The Eyes Have It." Psychology Today,
4, No. 11 (April, 1971), 64-67, 96.
Bakan, Paul. "Hypnotizability, Laterality of Eye-
Movements and Functional Brain Asymmetry."
Perceptual and Motor Skills, 28 (1969),
927-32.
Baker, Eugenia Grace. Testing Attitudes Toward
Physical Handicap: Stereotyping and Objectivity
in a Partially Integrated Elementary Program.
Unpublished Ed. D. Dissertation, University of
Southern California, June, 1968.
Barker, Roger G. ; Wright, Beatrice A.; Meyerson, Lee;
and Gonick, Mollie R. Adjustment to Physical
Handicap and Illness: A Survey of the Social
Psychology of Physique and Disability. Bulletin
55* New York: Social Science Research Council,
1953.
Boersma, Frederic; Wilton, Keri; Barham, Richard; and
Muir, Walter. "Effects of Arithmetic Problem
Difficulty on Pupillary Dilation in Normals
and Educable Retardates." Journal of Experimental
Child Psychology, 9 (1970), l42-155.
Bogardus, E. S. "A Social Distance Scale." Sociology
and Social Research. 7 (1933), 265-271.
Bruning, James L., and Kintz, B. L. Computational
Handbook of Statistics. Glenview, Illinois:
Scott, Foresman and Company, 1968.
138
139
Carver, Ronald. P. "Pupil Dilation and Its Relationship
to Information Processing During Reading and
Listening." Journal of Applied Psychology,
55 (April, 1971), 126-13^.
Colman, Frank and Paivio, Allan. "Pupillary Dilation
and Mediation Processes During Paired-Associate
Learning." Canadian Journal of Psychology,
84 (March, 1971), 123-133.
Combs, Ronald H., and Harper, Jerry L. "Effects of
Labels on Attitudes of Educators Toward
Handicapped Children. 1 1 Exceptional Children,
33, No. 6 (February, 1967), 399-403.
Coss, Richard G. Personal Communication. Los Angeles:
1972.
Coss, Richard G. Eye-like Schemata: Their Effect on
Behaviour. Ph.D. Thesis, University of Reading,
England. November, 1972.
Coss, Richard G, Mood Provoking Visual Stimuli, Their
Origins and Applications. Los Angeles:
Industrial Design Graduate Program of The
University of California at Los Angeles, 1965.
Duncan, D. B. Multiple Range and Multiple F Tests.
Technical Report No. 9, Department of Statistics
and Statistical Laboratory, Virginia
Agricultural Exp. Station, 1954.
Edwards, Allen L. Techniques of Attitude Scale
Construction. New York: Appleton-Century-
Crofts, Inc., 1957*
Engel, Peter. "Could This be a New Syndrome? Report
of Seven Cases with Characteristic Mental and
Physical Degeneracy." Developmental Medicine
and Child Neurology, 12 (1970), 287-289.
Fender, Derek H. "Control Mechanisms of the Eye."
Scientific American, 211, No. 1 (July, 1964),
24-33.
Fleming, Malcolm. "Eye Movement Indices of Cognitive
Behavior." Audio-Visual Communication Review,
17, No. 4 (Winter, 1969), 383-98.
l40
Gellhorn, E. Autonomic Regulations. New York:
Interscience, 19^3-
Gibbs, E. L., and Gibbs, F. A. Journal of Comparative
Neurology, 64 (1936), 209.
Gregory, R. L. Eye and Brain. New York: McGraw-Hill
Book Company, 1966.
Guyton, Arthur C. Function of the Human Body., 3rd ed.
Philadelphia: ¥. B. Saunders Company, 1969.
Halpern, D.; Kottke, F. J. ; Burrill, C.; Fiterman, C.;
Popp, J. ; and Palmer, S. "Training of Control
of Head Posture in Children with Cerebral Palsy."
Developmental Medicine and Child Neurology, 12
(1970), 290-305.
Harcourt, Brian. "Electroretinography and the Diagnosis
of Tapeto-retinal Degenerations in Childhood."
Developmental Medicine and Child Neurology, 12
(1970), 775-80.
Hess, Eckhard H. "Attitude and Pupil Size." Scientific
American, April, 1965} pp. 46-54.
Hess, Eckhard H., and Polt, James M. "Pupil Size as
Related to Interest Value of Visual Stimuli."
Science, 132, No. 3423 (August 5, i960), 349-50.
Hess, Eckhard, and Polt, James M. "Pupil Size in
Relation to Mental Activity During Simple
Problem-Solving." Science, 143, No. 36II
(March 13, 1964), 1190-92.
Hewett, Frank M. The Emotionally Disturbed Child in
the Classroom. Boston: Allyn and Bacon, Inc.,
1968.
Homme, Lloyd; Csanyi, Attila P.; Gonzales, Mary Ann;
and Rechs, James R. How to Use Contingency
Contracting in the Classroom. University of
Illinois: Research Press, 1969.
Jones, H. E., and Jones, M. C. "A Study of Fear."
Childhood Education, 5 (1928), 136-43.
i4i
Jones, Reginald L., and Sisk, Dorothy A. "Early
Perceptions of Orthopedic Disability.”
Exceptional Children, 3k, No. 1 (September,
n r
Jordan, John E., and Cessna, William C. "A Comparison
of Attitudes of Four Occupational Groups Toward
Education and Toward Physically Disabled Persons
in Japan." The Journal of Social Psychology,
78 (1969), 283-84.
Kahneman, Daniel, and Beatty, Jackson. "Pupil Diameter
and Load on Memory.” Science, (December, 1966),
1583-85.
Kalverboer, A. F.; Le Coultre, R.; and Casaer, P.
"Implications of Congenital Ophthalmoplegia
for the Development of Visuo-motor Functions
(illustrated by a Case with the Moebius
Syndrome).” Developmental Medicine and Child ____pm________
Neurology, 12 (I97O), 642-54.
Kirk, Samuel A. Educating Exceptional Children. Boston:
Houghton Mifflin Company, 1962.
Krugman, Herbert E. "Some Applications of Pupil
Measurement." Journal of Marketing Research,
November, 1964, pp. 15-19*
Kuntz, A. The Autonomic Nervous System. Philadelphia:
Lea and Febiger, 1929.
Lind, J.; Vuorenkoski, V.; Rosberg, G. ; Partenen, T. J.;
and Wosz-Hocker, 0. "Spectographic Analysis
of Vocal Response to Pain Stimuli in Infants
with Down’s Syndrome." Developmental Medicine
and Child Neurology, 12 (1970), 478-86.
Loewenfeld, Irene E. "Mechanisms of Reflect Dilatation
of the Pupil." Historical Review and Experi
mental Analysis. Documenta Ophthalmologica, 12
(1958), 185-448.
Lowenstein, 0., and Loewenfeld, I. E. "Influence of
Retinal Adaptation Upon the Pupillary Reflex to
Light in Normal Man." American Journal of
Ophthalmology, 51 (l96l7~i 644.
142
McEvoy, J. Edward. An Experimental Study of the Factor
of Eye Contact in Filmed Speeches. Unpublished
Ph.D. Dissertation, University of Southern
California, September, 1953*
Michael, Charles R. "Retinal Processing of Visual
Images." Scientific American, 220, No. 5
(May, 1969), 105-114.
Moses, Robert A. Adler's Physiology of the Eye. 5th ed.
St. Louis: The C. V. Mosby Company, 1970.
Neisser, Ulric. "The Processes of Vision." Scientific
American, 219, No. 3 (September, 1968"]^ 204-14.
Packard, Vance. The Hidden Persuaders. New York:
Pocket Books, Inc., 1957.
Palmerton, Keith E., and Frumkin, R. M. "Contact with
Disabled Persons and Intensity Counselors1
Attitudes." Perceptual and Motor Skills, 28
(1969), 434.
Patterton, Gerald R., and Gullion, M. Elizabeth. Living
with Children. Champaign, Illinois: Research
Press, 1968.
Plot, James M. "Effect of Threat of Shock on Pupillary
Response in a Problem-Solving Situation."
Perceptual and Motor Skills, 3 (October, 1970),
487-93-
Rosenthal, Robert, and Jacobson, Lenore. Pygmalion
in the Classroom. New York: Holt, Rinehart
and "Winston, Inc. , 1968.
Schissler, Dale R. "Analysis of Pictures by Subjective
Ratings and by Eye Fixations." The Journal of
General Psychology, 81 (1969), 83-94.
Shaw, Marvin E., and Wright, Jack M. Scales for the
Measurement of Attitudes. New York: McGraw-
Hill Book Company, 1967•
Simpson, H. M. and Climan, M. H. "Pupillary and
Electromyographic Changes During an Imagery
Task," Psychophysiology, 8 (July, 1971), 483-90.
143
Suzuki, Yoshiyuki; Funii, Toshi; and Fukuyama, Yukio.
"Hallermann-Streiff Syndrome.” Developmental
Medicine and Child Neurology, 12 (1970)> 495“96.
Tinbergen, N. The Study of Instinct. Oxford University
Press, 1951*
Tinker, Miles A. ”A Photographic Study of Eye Movements
in Reading Formulae.” Genetic Psychology
Monographs, 3 > No. 2 (February, 1928).
Ullmann, Leonard P., and Krasner, Leonard. Case Studies
in Behavior Modification. New York: Holt,
Rinehart and Winston, Inc., 1965*
Webb, Warren W.; Matheyny, Adam; and Larson, Glenn.
”Eye Movements as a Paradigm of Approach and
Avoidance Behavior." Perceptual and Motor
Skills, 16 (1963), 341-47.
Wendt, Paul R. "Development of an Eye Camera for Use
with Motion Pictures." Psychological Monographs:
General and Applied, 66, No. 7 (1952). The
American Psychological Association, Inc.
Williamson, D. A. J. "A Syndrome of Congenital
Malformations Possibly Due to Maternal Diabetes."
Developmental Medicine and Child Neurology,
12 (1970), 145-52.
Woodmansee, J. J., Jr. An Evaluation of Pupil Response
as a Measure of Attitude Toward Negroes, Ph.D.
Thesis, University of Colorado, 1965. Ann Arbor,
Michigan: University Microfilms, 1965.
Woodmansee, J. J., and Cook, S. W. "Dimensions of
Prejudice in Verbal Measures of Attitude Toward
Negroes." University of Colorado, 1965.
(Mimeographed).

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

The Effect Of Group Discussion On Teachers' Attitudes Towards Risk-Taking In Educational Situations: An Investigation Of The Risky Shift Phenomenon

PDF

An exploratory study of the psychological sequelae of surgery and hospitalization in male children

PDF

A Study Of The Relationship Between Treatment And Growth And Intelligencein Phenylketonuric Children

PDF

A Comparison Of The Attitudes Of Outstanding College Teachers And A Non-Selected Group Toward Four Psychological Variables

PDF

Auditory Blending: Effects Of Presentation Method, Word Frequency, Word Category, And Number Of Word Parts On Word Identification

PDF

An Analysis Of The Tasks And Roles Of The School Psychologist In The State Of California

PDF

The Effects Of Early Educational Stimulation On Selected Characteristics Of Kindergarten Children

PDF

A Comparison Of Implosion And Desensitization In Group Treatments Of Test Anxiety

PDF

Experimenter Effects In The Verbal Conditioning Of Adolescents' Responsestoward Drugs

PDF

An Evaluation Of Three Compensatory Education Kindergarten Programs

PDF

Testing Attitudes Toward Physical Handicap: Stereotyping And Objectivityin A Partially Integrated Elementary Program

PDF

A Follow-Up Study Of A Group Of Academically Talented Students With Reference To Selected Factors Of Vocational Development And Post High School Education

PDF

Development And Analysis Of Some Tactual Measures Of Intelligence For Adolescent And Adult Blind

PDF

Effects Of Biofeedback Training Of Alpha Rhythm On Arousal And Therapeutic Gain As An Adjunct To The Rehabilitation Of A Substance Dependent Population

PDF

The effects of instructional designs matched to individual differences in cognitive styles on concept learning in geometry: a trait-treatment interaction study

PDF

Faculty Attitudes Toward The California Community College

PDF

A Study Of Relationships Between Grades And Measures Of Scholastic Aptitude, Creativity, And Attitudes In Junior College Students

PDF

Differences In Programming And Placement Decisions For Mildly Handicappedchildren Made By Special And Regular Education Teachers

PDF

A Comparison Of The Effectiveness Of Two Group Counseling Formats

PDF

An Empirical Study Of Some Significant Variables In Consumer Expenditures: Los Angeles County 1970

Asset Metadata

Creator Arundel, Geraldine Patton (author)

Core Title An Exploratory Study Of Pupillary Dilation As A Measure Of Difference In Attitude Of Three Groups Of Educators Toward Orthopedically Handicapped Children

Degree Doctor of Education

Degree Program Education

Publisher University of Southern California (original), University of Southern California. Libraries (digital)

Tag education, educational psychology,OAI-PMH Harvest

Language English

Contributor Digitized by ProQuest (provenance)

Advisor Ayers, Anna Jean (committee chair), Dembo, Myron H. (committee member), Magary, James F. (committee member)

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-c18-860399

Unique identifier UC11364077

Identifier 7331627.pdf (filename),usctheses-c18-860399 (legacy record id)

Legacy Identifier 7331627

Dmrecord 860399

Document Type Dissertation

Rights Arundel, Geraldine Patton

Type texts

Source University of Southern California (contributing entity), University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses (collection)

Access Conditions The author retains rights to his/her dissertation, thesis or other graduate work according to U.S. copyright law. Electronic access is being provided by the USC Libraries in agreement with the au...

Repository Name University of Southern California Digital Library

Repository Location USC Digital Library, University of Southern California, University Park Campus, Los Angeles, California 90089, USA