The task of the study: The study of logical and mechanical memory by memorizing 2 rows of words.
Equipment experience: Two rows of words. In the first row there are semantic connections between words, in the second row they are absent.
Operating procedure:
The experimenter reads to the subject 15 pairs of words of the first row (the interval between the pair is 5 seconds). After a 10-second break, the left words of the row are read (with an interval of 10 seconds), and the subject writes down the memorized words of the right half of the row.
Similar work is carried out with the words of the second row.
Analysis of results and accounting of results:
It should be established whether the semantic relationships between words affect the effectiveness of the memorization process. Highlight the erroneously named words and ask the subject to explain the reason for the error. Answer the question: did the experiment show the influence of the objective meaning, the emotional significance of words for a given subject on their erroneous reproduction. Were there words in the experiment that were erroneously reproduced and had an associative connection with the word - stimulus. What features of the subject's thinking are indicated by such errors.
Subject #1
Analysis of results:
In the results of the study, it can be revealed that the semantic relationships between words have no influence. According to the subject, he did not find semantic connections in the semantic series, in some pairs, and attributed his own connections to the words. The reasons for errors are not finding semantic connections in some semantic pairs. Such errors indicate a type of thinking based on associations associated with one's personal experience.
Subject number 2.
Eupsychic.
This term, which he created himself, Maslow called the ideal society, in contrast to the "utopia", the idea of which seemed to him visionary and impractical. He believed that an ideal society could be created as an association of psychologically healthy, self-actualizing individuals. All members of such a society strive both for personal ...
Gender-role differentiation and interpersonal relations of spouses
Many authors have commented on great importance and at the same time about the close connection with each other of the parameters that characterize the distribution and implementation of marital roles in the family, which allows us to consider them as a determinant of many intra-family processes. A comprehensive indicator that takes into account how the real distribution of roles ...
Sleep as inhibition
According to I.P. Pavlov, sleep and internal inhibition in their physical and chemical nature are a single process. The difference between them lies in the fact that internal inhibition in a waking person covers only separate groups of cells, while during the development of sleep, inhibition radiates widely throughout the cerebral cortex, spreading ...
Equipment: two rows of words (there is a semantic connection between the words in the first row, there is no semantic connection in the second row), a stopwatch.
First row:
doll - play
chicken - egg
scissors - cut
horse - sleigh
book - teacher
butterfly - fly
snow winter
lamp - evening
brush - teeth
cow - milk
Second row:
beetle - chair
compass - glue
bell - arrow
tit - sister
watering can - tram
boots - samovar
match - decanter
hat - bee
fish - fire
saw - scrambled eggs
Processing and analysis of results. The results of the study are recorded in the following table.
Volume of semantic and mechanical memory
Lecture 21
VISUAL-FIGULATORY THINKING. DOUBLE STIMULATION METHOD (VYGOTSKY-SAKHAROV METHOD)
Visual-figurative thinking, like visual-effective thinking, belongs to the number of very early types. Its formation refers to the period from 2-3 years to 5-6 years. The child cognizes reality through the formation of perceptual features that are generalized and help to recognize new objects, confidently manipulate with the known, classify into certain groups, i.e., the child intensively develops thinking in a form accessible to him, higher than visual efficient look. In an adult, visual-figurative thinking is largely based on the properties of conceptual abstract-logical thinking, in its pure form, as it were, goes to the periphery. But in some cases, for example, with a good development of the right hemisphere of the brain, in some professions - an artist, sculptor, designer, painter - it remains the main type in adults (according to I.P. Pavlov - a type of artistic thinking).
The unit of visual-figurative thinking is a perceptual image with its typical features for phenomena and objects of reality. Signs can be complete and incomplete, partial, adequate or inadequate, habitual and unusual, conscious and subconscious. The very process of development of thinking consists in constant change, correction and awareness of the signs that make up the perceptual image.
The technique of “double stimulation” was proposed to study the correlation of signs of two levels: sensory-perceptual, which are based on the sensory properties of objects, and verbal, which are based on abstract symbolic signs. On the whole, according to this technique, for example, with the help of the method of observation, the main mental operations are well traced: analysis, synthesis, comparison, generalization, abstraction.
RESEARCH OF VISUAL-FIGURE THINKING WITH THE HELP OF THE “PICTOGRAM” METHOD
This technique is one of the most common, and it allows you to get quite extensive information regarding not only the features of visual-figurative thinking, but also the features of the emotional state of the subjects, the direction of their consciousness, and personal properties. This makes it possible to use the technique for a wide variety of purposes, for example, in art therapy, the assessment of interpersonal relationships, and the establishment of hierarchical values.
The technique was proposed by the domestic neuropsychologist A. R. Luria in 1936. Initially, this technique was intended only for clinical trials, but its simplicity and information content still allow expanding the scope of its application.
The essence of the technique consists in the transfer of any verbally designated concept through its image. The name itself - a pictogram - denotes pictorial writing, when objects, events and actions are indicated by drawings or conventional signs. This is characteristic of illiterate people, children, some peoples, such as American Indians, some peoples of our North. Sometimes this method of communication is recognized as the most effective in some services, such as ATC, where various types of prohibition or permission signs are constructed quite scrupulously. The subject is not given any restrictions on the completeness and content of the image, as well as on the materials used: color, size, time. Nevertheless, for the convenience of conducting an educational experiment, it is possible to recommend that the subjects adhere to a certain order of performing the task in the form of tables.
When processing experimental data, not only the indicators of all four criteria are taken into account, but also procedural issues (ease of completing the task, emotional attitude towards it, the need for a wider space, etc.).
To obtain the main experimental results, students exchange notebooks and evaluate pictograms in an expert way. The most important criterion is the criterion of adequacy. Sometimes one drawing is enough to evaluate, sometimes you need to get additional ones! information from its author. If the connection between the proposed concept and its pictogram is justified, the expert puts the “+” sign, if there is no connection, the “-” sign. The norm is characterized by high rates according to the criterion of adequacy - from 70% and above.
CONCEPTUAL THINKING. ASSESSMENT OF CONCEPTUAL THINKING
USING THE METHODOLOGY “COMPARING CONCEPTS”
Conceptual thinking belongs to the late form. In order to use concepts as a tool of thinking, one must pass a sufficiently long period of conscious and adequate possession of them. Usually, conceptual thinking is associated with an adult, for whom this type is not only the main and most convenient, but also subjugating, literally penetrating all other types, especially visual-effective and visual-figurative. The concept is defined as a unit of thinking that reflects the general and most significant features of objects and phenomena of reality and is expressed in a verbal (verbal) form. In ontogenesis, a child, under the influence of the adults around him, can also use concepts, but in him they are rather used in an approximate unconscious form, for which they even received the name “pseudo-concepts”. However, even an adult, especially using the verbal signs of another, non-native language, quite often goes down this path, the result of which are numerous communication errors.
Comparing the concepts with each other, the subject conducts a survey of the general field of semantic features and selects the most stable, the most characteristic. In some cases, the instruction is changed in order to determine the creative capabilities of the subject, and he is offered a pair of concepts from obviously different semantic spheres: suppose, find a common feature for such pairs of concepts as “spoon” and “boat”. In the proposed methodology, which consists of 22 pairs of compared concepts, the subject himself must establish the presence of a common semantic field and differentiate “single field” pairs from incompatible ones that correspond to different semantic fields. If the subject does not see differences between homogeneity-heterogeneity of concepts and finds common features in any pairs, he can be attributed not only a good imagination and a penchant for imagination, but also a penchant for resonant demagogic reasoning, which can also manifest itself in a number of other methods.
DETERMINATION OF THE FEATURES OF CONCEPTUAL THINKING WITH THE HELP OF THE METHOD OF “EXCLUSION OF EXCESSIVE”
One of the most common in the practice of studying thinking of any kind is the “Exclusion of the superfluous” method. With the help of this method, one can quite convincingly show the features of the analytical and synthetic activity of the brain. So, for example, if the subjects are presented with several names of the rivers of Russia - Volga, Lena, Angara, Irtysh, Ob - and asked to throw out one superfluous name, then most often the subjects exclude the word "Volga", since all other rivers are located on the territory of Siberia. Sometimes the answers “Irtysh” appear due to the grammatical features of the gender (all other names are feminine), sometimes “Angara” (the only tributary of the Yenisei). According to the degree of generalization of features, the answer “Volga” is the most correct. The results are evaluated similarly when using pictures with four drawn objects, where one object must be excluded: for example, a kerosene lamp, an electric light bulb, a candle and the sun are drawn on the card, where the correct answer is “sun”. Reasonings like “it is necessary to remove the candle, it quickly burns out and is unprofitable” indicate a decrease and even distortion of the level of generalizations.
HIGHLIGHTING SIGNIFICANT FEATURES
The proposed methodology uses 24 sets of concepts that are quite similar in meaning. The task of the subjects is to select in each line only two words that are most closely related to the test word in front of the brackets. It is possible to discuss the first task in order to remove all the questions and difficulties of the subjects. By the way, using these questions, the experimenter can get an idea about the features of the thinking process, for example, about its excessive concreteness, vagueness, and weak focus on the goal.
Methodology Sample
War (aircraft, guns, battle, guns, soldiers). Reading (eyes, book, picture, print, word). Garden (plants, gardener, dog, fence, earth). Barn (hayloft, horses, roof, walls). River (shore, fish, angler, mud, water). City (car, building, crowd, street, bicycle). Cube (corners, drawing, side, stone, wood). Division (dividend, pencil, divider, paper). Game (cards, players, penalties, punishment, rules). Ring (diameter, diamond, fineness, roundness, seal).
Newspaper (truth, application, telegram, paper, love, text, editor).
Book (drawing, war, paper, love, text).
Earthquake (fire, death, shake, ground, noise)
Library (city, books, lectures, music, readers).
Forest (leaf, apple tree, hunter, tree, wolf).
Sports (medal, orchestra, competition, victory, stadium).
Hospital (room, garden, doctor, radio, patients).
Love (roses, feeling, person, city, nature).
Patriotism (city, friends, homeland, family, person).
Furniture (chairs, table, wood, sideboard, wardrobe).
Faculty (department, dean, building, student, street).
Weapons (tanks, planes, firecrackers, cannons, iron).
Vegetables (cucumber, beetroot, watermelon, carrot, apple).
When comparing their answers with the correct ones, the subjects evaluate their results in points, where 2 points correspond to two correctly chosen words, 1 point corresponds to one correctly chosen word, and 0 points when the subject could not choose any correct word. The results are summarized. The maximum number of points is 48 points, the results of less than 24 points are assessed as unsatisfactory, indicating the inability of the subjects to compare, analyze and generalize the selected features.
Correctly chosen words: battle, soldiers; eyes, word; plants, earth; roof, walls; shore, water; building, street; corners, side; delimoe, divisor; players, rules; diameter, roundness; text, editor; boo maha, text; voice, melody; vibration, soil; books, readers; leaf, tree; competition, victory; doctor, patients; feeling, man; homeland, person; chairs, table or sideboard, wardrobe; dean, student; tanks, guns; beets, carrots.
RESEARCH OF CONCEPTUAL THINKING USING THE LOGIC OF CONNECTIONS METHOD
The technique "Logic of connections" is most often used in the classical literature under the name "Complex analogies", but since the techniques "Simple analogies" and "Complex analogies" differ from each other in further increase abstraction and differentiation of relations between concepts, a more accurate name for it is proposed - “Logic of connections”. The method is aimed at finding out to what extent the subjects can understand the abstract types of connections between individual concepts, as well as extending this understanding to other specific examples. In addition, it allows you to find out the ability of the subjects to think logically, to be able to distinguish between types of connections, to critically correlate them with each other. Practice has shown that the use of this technique on subjects with insufficient education is generally pointless, and it is recommended to use it only with secondary and even higher education.
The methodology consists of two stages. First, the subjects are offered a special upper section of the form, which lists 6 types of different connections between concepts, and they are asked to determine these connections on their own or, in extreme cases, with the help of the experimenter. If the subject is unable to complete this part of the task, further experiment is pointless. In case of a positive result, they proceed to the 2nd part of the methodology. The subjects are presented with 20 pairs of concepts, next to which there is a digital row from 1 to 6 according to the number of connections being determined. The subject's task is to choose correct number, denoting one of the 6 types of links. A correct answer is worth 1 point, an incorrect answer is 0 points. The results are summarized. The maximum possible result is 20 points, results less than 10 points are considered unsatisfactory.
Consistency of inferences
Identification of essential features
Lecture 22
The use of various methods for diagnosing creative abilities made it possible to identify general principles for assessing creativity:
b) the index of originality as the sum of the indices of originality (i.e. reciprocals of the frequency of the response in the sample) of individual answers, related to total number answers;
c) the index of uniqueness as the ratio of the number of unique (not found in the sample) answers to their total number.
To improve the quality of creativity testing, it is necessary to comply with such basic parameters of the creative environment as:
no time limit;
minimization of achievement motivation;
lack of competitive motivation and criticism of actions;
the absence of a rigid setting for creativity in the test instruction.
At the same time, low test results do not indicate a lack of creativity in the subject, since creative manifestations are spontaneous and not subject to arbitrary regulation.
Thus, the methods for diagnosing creative abilities are intended, first of all, for the actual identification of creative individuals in a particular sample at the time of testing.
(method of E. Torrens, adapted by A.N. Voronin, 1994)
Terms and Conditions
The test can be done on an individual or group basis. To create favorable conditions for testing, the leader needs to minimize the motivation for achievement and orient testees to the free manifestation of their hidden abilities. At the same time, it is better to avoid an open discussion of the subject orientation of the methodology, i.e. no need to report what is being tested exactly Creative skills(especially creative thinking). The test can be presented as a technique for "originality", the ability to express oneself in a figurative style, etc. If possible, the testing time is not limited, approximately taking 1-2 minutes for each picture. At the same time, it is necessary to encourage test-takers if they think for a long time or hesitate.
The proposed version of the test is a set of pictures with a certain set of elements (lines), using which, the subjects need to complete the picture to some meaningful image. In this version of the test, 6 pictures are used, which do not duplicate each other in their original elements and give the most reliable results.
The following indicators of creativity are used in the test:
Originality (Op), which reveals the degree of dissimilarity of the image created by the subject to the images of other subjects (statistical rarity of the answer). At the same time, it should be remembered that there are no two identical images; accordingly, we should talk about the statistical rarity of the type (or class) of drawings. The atlas below shows the different types of drawings and their conventional names, proposed by the author of the adaptation of this test, reflecting the general essential characteristic of the image. It should be noted that the conditional names of the drawings, as a rule, do not coincide with the names of the drawings given by the subjects themselves. Since the test is used to diagnose non-verbal creativity, the names of the pictures proposed by the subjects are excluded from the subsequent analysis and are used only as a guide. aid to understand the meaning of the drawing.
Uniqueness (Un), defined as the sum of completed tasks that have no analogues in the sample (atlas of drawings).
Before you is a form with unfinished pictures. You need to finish them, be sure to include the proposed elements in the context and try not to go beyond the bounds of the picture. You can draw anything and anything, the form can be rotated. After completing the drawing, you must give it a title, which should be signed in the line below the drawing.
Processing test results
To interpret the test results, below is an atlas of typical drawings of a control sample of managers (23-35 years old). For each series of figures, the index Op for the sample was calculated. To evaluate the test results of subjects belonging to the contingent of managers or similar to it, the following algorithm of actions is proposed.
It is necessary to compare the finished pictures with those in the atlas, while paying attention to the use of similar details and semantic connections; when finding a similar type, assign this drawing the originality indicated in the atlas. If there is no such type of drawings in the atlas, then the originality of this completed picture is considered to be 1.00, i.e. she is unique. The originality index is calculated as the arithmetic mean of the originality of all pictures, the uniqueness index is calculated as the sum of all unique pictures. Using the percentile scale built for these two indices based on the results of the control sample, it is possible to determine the indicator of non-verbal creativity of a given person as his place relative to this sample:
| 1 | 0% | 20% | 40% | 60% | 80% | 100% |
| 2 | 0,95 | 0,76 | 0.67 | 0,58 | 0,48 | 0,00 |
| 3 | 4 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 |
Note:
1 - percentage of people whose results exceed the specified level of creativity;
3 - uniqueness index value.
An example of interpretation: let the first of the drawings you analyze is similar to the picture 1.5 of the atlas. Its originality is 0.74. The second figure is similar to picture 2.1. Its originality is 0.00. The third drawing does not look like anything, but the elements originally proposed for finishing are not included in the drawing. This situation is interpreted as a departure from the task and the originality of this drawing is rated 0. The fourth drawing is missing. The fifth drawing is recognized as unique (has no analogues in the atlas). Its originality is 1.00. The sixth figure turned out to be similar to picture 6.3 and its originality is 0.67. Thus, the originality index for this protocol is:
The index of uniqueness (the number of unique pictures) of this protocol is 1. The results of the protocol discussed above show that the subject is on the border between 60 and 80% of the people whose results are given in the atlas. This means that about 70% of the subjects from this sample have higher non-verbal creativity than he does. At the same time, the uniqueness index, which shows how truly new a person can create, is secondary in this analysis due to the insufficient differentiating power of this index, so the total index of originality is decisive here.
DIAGNOSTICS OF VERBAL CREATIVITY
(method of S. Mednik, adapted by A.N. Voronin, 1994)
The technique is aimed at identifying and evaluating the subjects' existing, but often hidden or blocked, verbal creative potential. The technique is carried out both in an individual and in a group version. The time for completing tasks is not limited, but the time spent on each triple of words is not more than 2-3 minutes.
Instructions for the test
You are offered triplets of words, to which you need to choose one more word so that it is combined with each of the three proposed words. For example, for the triple of words “loud - truth - slowly” the answer can be the word “speak” (speak loudly, tell the truth, speak slowly). You can change words grammatically and use prepositions without changing stimulus words as parts of speech.
Try to make your answers as original and bright as possible, try to overcome stereotypes and come up with something new. Try to come up with the maximum number of answers for each three words.
Interpretation of test results
To evaluate the test results, the following algorithm of actions is proposed. It is necessary to compare the answers of the subjects with the available typical answers and, if a similar type is found, assign the originality indicated in the list to this answer. If there is no such word in the list, then the originality of this answer is considered equal to 1.00.
The originality index is calculated as the arithmetic mean of the originality of all answers. The number of answers may not coincide with the number of “triples of words”, since in some cases the subjects may give several answers, while in others they may not give a single one.
The uniqueness index is equal to the number of all unique (having no analogues in the typical list) answers.
Using the percentile scale built for these indices and the “number of answers” indicator (productivity index), one can determine the place of a given person relative to the control sample and, accordingly, draw a conclusion about the degree of development of his verbal creativity and productivity:
| 1 | 0% | 20% | 40% | 60% | 80% | 100% |
| 2 | 1,00 | 0,94 | 0,91 | 0,86 | 0,81 | 0,61 |
| 3 | 19 | 6 | 4 | 3 | 2 | 0 |
| 4 | 49 | 20 | 15 | 12 | 10 | 1 |
Note:
1 - percentage of people whose results exceed the specified level;
2 - the value of the index of originality;
3 - uniqueness index value;
4 - the number of answers.
An example of the interpretation of the results: if the sum of the original answers for the subject was 20.25 and there are 25 answers in total in his protocol, then the originality index will be 0.81. Assume that the number of unique responses of this subject is 16. Given that the main indicator is the index of originality, we can conclude that this person according to the level of their verbal creativity is between 60 and 80% of the subjects from the control sample, i.e. 70% of the sample have a total indicator of verbal creativity higher than his.
The uniqueness index here shows how many new solutions the subject is able to offer in the total mass of completed tasks.
The number of answers shows, first of all, the degree of verbal productivity and indicates the level of conceptual thinking. In addition, this index is highly correlated with achievement motivation, i.e. the higher the number of answers, the higher the personal motivation to achieve the subject.
STIMULUS REGISTRATION FORM
Surname, initials _________________________________
Age _______ Group ____________ Date _______________
You are offered triplets of words, to which you need to choose one more word so that it is combined with each of the three proposed words.
Write your answers on the answer sheet in the line with the corresponding number.
STIMULUS TRIPLE OF WORD
1. random - mountain - long-awaited
2. evening - paper - wall
4. far - blind - future
5. folk - fear - world
6. money - ticket - free
7. man - shoulder straps - plant
8. door - trust - quickly
9. friend - city - circle
10. train - buy - paper
| Word | Phrases | Word | Phrases |
||
| 1 | 11 | ||||
| 2 | 12 | ||||
| 3 | 13 |
Lecture 23
The following methods are distinguished: 1) sociometric, 2) referentometric, 3) study of the motivational core of interpersonal choices, 4) study of team cohesion.
SOCIOMETRIC METHOD
The word "sociometry" literally means "social dimension". The technique was developed by the American psychologist J. Moreno and is designed to assess interpersonal relationships of an informal type: likes and dislikes, attractiveness and preference.
The members of the study group are asked to list, in order of preference, those group mates with whom they would like to work, relax, etc. together. Questions about a person's desire to participate in a certain activity together with someone are called selection criteria. There are weak and strong selection criteria. The more important the planned activity is for a person, the longer and closer communication it implies, the stronger the selection criterion. Research questions are usually combined different types. They are selected in such a way as to reveal a person's desire to communicate with group members in various activities (work, study, leisure, trusting friendship, etc.).
The number of choices received by each person is a measure of his position in the system of personal relations, measures his "sociometric status". The people who get the most choices are the most popular, the most sympathetic, they are called "stars". Usually, the group of "stars" by the number of choices received includes those who receive 6 or more choices (if, under the conditions of experience, each member of the group made 3 choices). If a person receives an average number of choices, he is classified as "preferred", if less than the average number of choices (1-2 choices), then to the category of "neglected", if he did not receive a single choice, then to the category of "isolated" if he received only deviations - then to the category of "rejected".
For each member of the group, it is not so much the number of choices that matters, but the satisfaction with their position in the group:
K ud = number of mutual choices / number of choices made by this person.
So, if an individual wants to communicate with three specific people, and none of these three wants to communicate with this person, then K ud - 0/3 = 0.
The satisfaction coefficient can be equal to 0, and the status (the number of choices received) is, for example, 3 for the same person - this situation indicates that the person does not interact with those with whom he would like. As a result of a sociometric experiment, the leader receives information not only about the personal position of each member of the group in the system of interpersonal relationships, but also a generalized picture of the state of this system. It is characterized by a special diagnostic indicator - the level of well-being of relationships (BWM). The WWM of a group can be high if there are more "stars" and "preferred" members in total than there are "neglected" and "isolated" members of the group. Average level the well-being of the group is fixed in the case of an approximate equality ("stars" + "preferred") = ("neglected" + "isolated" + "outcasts"). A low WWM is noted when people with a low status predominate in a group, and the "isolation index" is considered a diagnostic indicator - the percentage of people who are deprived of elections in the group.
A sociometric procedure may aim to:
a) measure the degree cohesion-disunity
in a group;
b) identifying "sociometric positions", i.e., the relative authority of the members of the group according to the signs likes-dislikes
, where the "leader" of the group and the "rejected" are at the extreme poles;
c) detection of intra-group subsystems, close-knit formations, which may be headed by their informal leaders.
The reliability of the procedure depends primarily on the correct selection of sociometric criteria, which is dictated by the research program and preliminary acquaintance with the specifics of the group.
The experimenter's requirement to disclose his likes and dislikes often causes internal difficulties for the respondents and is manifested in some people in the reluctance to participate in the survey. Once sociometric questions or criteria are selected, they are entered on a special card or offered orally according to the type of interview. Each member of the group is obliged to respond to them, choosing certain members of the group depending on their greater or lesser inclination, their preference over others, sympathy or, conversely, antipathy, trust or distrust, etc.
Sample Questions for Exploring Business Relationships
1. a) which of your comrades from the group would you ask, if necessary, to provide assistance in preparing for classes (first, second, third)?
b) which of your comrades from the group would you not like to ask, if necessary, to provide you with assistance in preparing for classes?
2. a) with whom would you go on a long business trip?
b) Which member of your group would you not take on a business trip?
3. a) which of the members of the group will better perform the functions of a leader (headman, trade union representative, etc.)?
b) which member of the group will find it difficult to fulfill the duties of a leader?
Sample Questions for Studied Personal Relationships
1. a) Who in your group would you turn to for advice in a difficult situation? life situation?
b) with whom from the group would you not like to consult about anything?
2. a) if all the members of your group lived in a hostel, with which of them would you like to live in the same room?
b) if your whole group were to be re-formed, which of its members would you not want to keep in your group?
3. a) who from the group would you invite to a birthday party?
b) who from the group would you not like to see at your birthday party?
At the same time, the sociometric procedure can be carried out in two forms. The first option is a non-parametric procedure. In this case, the subject is invited to answer the questions of the sociometric card without limiting the number of choices of the subject. If the group is calculated, say, 12 people, then in this case, each of the respondents can choose 11 people (except himself). So theoretically possible number made by each member of the group of choices towards other members of the group in this example will be equal to (N-1), where N is the number of members of the group. In the same way, the theoretically possible number of choices received by the subject in the group will be equal to (N-1). Let us immediately understand that the specified value (N-1) of the received elections is the main quantitative constant of sociometric measurements. With a non-parametric procedure, this theoretical constant is the same for the individual making the choice, as it is for any individual who has become the object of the choice. The advantage of this version of the procedure is that it allows you to identify the so-called emotional expansiveness of each member of the group, to make a cut of the variety of interpersonal relationships in the group structure. However, as the size of the group increases to 12-16 people, these connections become so numerous that it becomes very difficult to analyze them without the use of computer technology.
Another disadvantage of the non-parametric procedure is the high probability of obtaining a random selection. Some subjects, guided by a personal motive, often write in the Questionnaires: "I choose everyone." It is clear that such an answer can have only two explanations: either the subject really has such a generalized amorphous and undifferentiated system of relations with others (which is unlikely), or the subject deliberately gives a false answer, hiding behind formal loyalty to others and to the experimenter (which is most likely) .
The analysis of such cases led some researchers to try to change the very procedure for applying the Method and thus reduce the likelihood of random selection. Thus, the second variant was born - a parametric procedure with a limited number of choices. Subjects are asked to choose a strictly fixed number from all members of the group. For example, in a group of 25 people, everyone is asked to choose only 4 or 5 people. The value of limiting the number of sociometric choices is called the "sociometric limit" or "limit of choices". Many researchers believe that the introduction of a "sociometric constraint" significantly exceeds the reliability of sociometric data and facilitates the statistical processing of the material. From a psychological point of view, sociometric restriction forces the subjects to be more attentive to their answers, to choose for answer only those members of the group who really correspond to the proposed roles of a partner, leader or comrade in joint activities. The selection limit significantly reduces the probability of random responses and allows one to standardize the conditions for elections in groups of different sizes in one sample, which makes it possible to compare material for different groups.
It is currently accepted that for groups of 22-25 participants, the minimum value of the "sociometric constraint" should be chosen within 4-5 choices.
The disadvantage of the parametric procedure is the inability to reveal the variety of relationships in the group. It is possible to identify only the most subjectively significant relationships. The sociometric structure of the group as a result of this approach will reflect only the most typical, “selected” communications. The introduction of a "sociometric restriction" does not allow one to judge the emotional expansiveness of group members.
Sociometric card or sociometric questionnaire is compiled at the final stage of program development.
When sociometric cards are filled and collected, the stage of their mathematical processing begins. Sociomatrix (table) . First, you should build the simplest sociomatrix. Election results are spread across the matrix using symbols. The results tables are completed first, separately for business and personal relationships. The names of all members of the group that is being studied are written vertically behind the numbers; horizontally - only their number. At the corresponding intersections, the numbers +1, +2, +3 indicate those who were chosen by each subject in the first, second, third turn, the numbers -1, -2, -3 - those whom the subject does not choose in the first, second and third turn .
Mutual positive or negative choices are circled in the table (regardless of the order of choice). After the positive and negative choices are entered in the table, it is necessary to calculate vertically the algebraic sum of all the choices received by each member of the group (the sum of the choices). Then you need to calculate the sum of points for each member of the group, taking into account that the choice in the first place is equal to +3 points (-3), in the second - +2 (-2), in the third - +1 (-1). After that, the total algebraic sum is calculated, which determines the status in the group.
Analysis of the sociomatrix for each criterion gives a fairly clear picture of the relationship in the group. Summary sociomatrices can be built that give a picture of the elections according to several criteria, as well as sociomatrices based on the data of intergroup elections. The main advantage of the sociomatrix is the ability to represent the elections in numerical form, which in turn allows you to rank the members of the group according to the number of elections received and given, to establish the order of influences in the group. On the basis of the sociomatrix, a sociogram is built - a map of sociometric choices (sociometric map.
Sociogram. Sociogram - a graphic representation of the reaction of the subjects to each other when answering a sociometric criterion. The sociogram allows you to make a comparative analysis of the structure of relationships in a group in space on a certain plane (“shield”) using special signs (Fig. below). It gives a visual representation of the intra-group differentiation of group members based on their status (popularity). An example of a sociogram (map of group differentiation) proposed by Ya. Kolominsky, see below:
--> positive one-sided choice,
positive mutual choice,
------> negative one-sided choice,
negative mutual choice.
The sociogram technique is an essential addition to the tabular approach in the analysis of sociometric material, because it enables a deeper qualitative description and visual presentation of group phenomena.
Posted by Anastasia on August 31, 2013 . Comments (0)
Target: the study of logical and mechanical memory by memorizing two rows of words.
Equipment: two rows of words (there is a semantic connection between the words in the first row, there is no semantic connection in the second row), a stopwatch.
First row:
- doll - play
- chicken - egg
- scissors - cut
- horse - sleigh
- book - teacher
- butterfly - fly
- snow winter
- lamp - evening
- brush - teeth
- cow - milk
Second row:
- beetle - chair
- compass - glue
- bell - arrow
- tit - sister
- watering can - tram
- boots - samovar
- match - decanter
- hat - bee
- fish - fire
- saw - scrambled eggs
Research order. The student is told that pairs of words will be read, which he must remember. The experimenter reads to the subject ten pairs of words of the first row (the interval between the pair is five seconds). After a ten-second break, the left words of the row are read (with an interval of ten seconds), and the subject writes down the memorized words of the right half of the row. Similar work is carried out with the words of the second row.
Processing and analysis of results. The results of the study are recorded in the following table.
Volume of semantic and mechanical memory
Posted in: Tags:
Methodology "Determining the type of memory" for younger students Purpose: to determine the predominant type of memory. Equipment: four rows of words written on separate... The study of phonemic perception in junior schoolchildren with dysgraphia Coursework on the topic: "The study of phonemic perception in primary school students with dysgraphia... Methodology "assessment of operational visual memory" The working visual memory of a child and its indicators can be determined using the following ...
Add a comment
Required Please choose another name
Required Please enter a valid e-mail
Afghanistan Albania Algeria Argentina Armenia Australia Austria Azerbaijan Bahrain Bangladesh Belarus Belgium Belize Bermuda Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela Bolivia Bosnia and Herzegovina Brazil Brunei Darussalam Bulgaria Cambodia Canada Caribbean Chile Colombia Costa Rica Croatia Czech Republic Denmark Dominican Republic Ecuador Egypt El Salvador Estonia Ethiopia Faroe Islands Finland France Georgia Germany Greece Greenland Guatemala Honduras Hong Kong S.A.R. Hungary Iceland India Indonesia Iran Iraq Ireland Islamic Republic of Pakistan Israel Italy Jamaica Japan Jordan Kazakhstan Kenya Korea Kuwait Kyrgyzstan Lao P.D.R. Latvia Lebanon Libya Liechtenstein Lithuania Luxembourg Macao S.A.R. Macedonia (FYROM) Malaysia Maldives Malta Mexico Mongolia Montenegro Morocco Nepal Netherlands New Zealand Nicaragua Nigeria Norway Oman Panama Paraguay People's Republic of China Peru Philippines Poland Portugal Principality of Monaco Puerto Rico Qatar Republic of the Philippines Romania Russia Rwanda Saudi Arabia Senegal Serbia Serbia and Montenegro (Former) Singapore Slovakia Slovenia South Africa Spain Sri Lanka Sweden Switzerland Syria Taiwan Tajikistan Thailand Trinidad and Tobago Tunisia Turkey Turkmenistan U.A.E. Ukraine United Kingdom United States Uruguay Uzbekistan Vietnam Yemen Zimbabwe
Required1. Methodology "Determining the type of memory in younger students"
Using this technique, we were able to determine the leading type of memory in students. Data analysis showed that the predominant type of memory in 70% of students is combined memory.
Memorization of incoming information, both with the use of visual, auditory and motor-auditory perception, is carried out in children within the normal range. From this we can conclude that if you use several types of information storage, then playback will be carried out in a larger volume.
Primary schoolchildren with mental retardation have individual differences in the development of different types of memory, which will be presented in the diagrams.
In Lera B., the volume of auditory, visual and motor-auditory memory is formed at the same level and corresponds to a coefficient of 0.6; and the combined memory has a factor of 0.7, indicating more high level remembering information presented in several sensory systems.
Rice. one.
Sufficiently high memorization coefficients for different types of memory allow us to conclude that it has a stable average memorization
Rice. 2.
In Lera A., the volume of auditory and visual memory is formed at the same level and corresponds to a coefficient of 0.5; motor-auditory combined memory has a coefficient of 0.6, which indicates a higher level of memorization of information presented in several sensory systems. Sufficiently high memorization coefficients for different types of memory allow us to conclude that it has a consistently low memorization.
Rice. 3.
In Sasha L., the development of auditory memory corresponds to 0.5 coefficient, the development of visual memory - 0.7, the development of motor-auditory and combined - 0.8, which indicates the dominance of combined types of memory over visual and auditory memory. Overall rating development of different types of memory corresponds to the average values for a given age period.
Rice. four.
Misha G. has a development coefficient of 0.6 for visual and auditory memory, 0.7 for motor-auditory and combined memory, which indicates a higher level of memorization of information presented in several sensory systems. Sufficiently high memorization coefficients for different types of memory allow us to conclude that all types of memory are formed at an average level.
Rice. 5.
Daniil Sh.'s auditory, visual and motor-auditory memory correspond to 0.6 development coefficient, and the combined one - 0.7. Memorization coefficients for different types of memory allow us to conclude that his memorization of information coming through various sensory channels is formed in accordance with age characteristics.
2. Methodology "Study of logical and mechanical memory in younger students" (N.G. Molodtsov)
When studying the memory of younger schoolchildren with mental retardation using this method, parameters such as the volume of semantic and logical memory were evaluated, which made it possible to identify the corresponding coefficients.
An analysis of the results presented in the table allows us to state that logical memorization prevails over mechanical memorization in all students, which indicates the preservation of intelligence in these children. At the same time, the results of memorizing information by younger schoolchildren with mental retardation are characterized by the values of memory volume that differ from the age norm (in the range from 0.15 to 0.35).
Individual differences in the coefficients of logical and mechanical memory volumes are presented in the diagram.
Rice. 6.
Lera B. has a mechanical memory coefficient of 0.2, and a logical memory coefficient of 0.3. Logical memory prevails over mechanical memory.
Lera A. has consistently low coefficients of mechanical and logical memory (0.15 and 0.25, respectively). Logical memory prevails over mechanical memory.
Sasha L. has a high index of mechanical (0.3) and logical (0.35) memory. Logical memory prevails over mechanical memory.
Misha G.'s coefficient of mechanical memory is 0.25, and that of logical memory is 0.3. Logical memory prevails over mechanical memory.
Daniil Sh. has a coefficient of mechanical memory of 0.2, and of logical memory - 0.3. Logical memory prevails over mechanical memory.
3. Method "Pictogram" (A.R. Luria)
When implementing the methodology, younger schoolchildren with mental retardation experienced difficulties of a different nature:
- - when perceiving the instructions, they did not correctly understand the instructions for the implementation of the methodology, asked clarifying questions;
- - did not fit into the time allotted for the task, spent more time to complete the drawing;
- - found it difficult to depict abstract concepts (for example, "development");
- - students remembered for a long time the concepts that they depicted with symbols and images that correspond to the stimulus material.
The data obtained as a result of this technique are presented in Table 1.
Table 1 - Indicators of the development of memory and thinking according to the "Pictogram" method
Processing of the "Pictogram" method is carried out in accordance with the following parameters:
Analysis of the results of the implementation of the methodology in terms of the "adequacy" parameter by younger students with mental retardation allows us to determine a reduced indicator in 20% of the study participants. In 80% of junior schoolchildren with mental retardation, the “adequacy” indicator corresponds to the age norm, which indicates the correct perception and reflection of the surrounding reality by children with this developmental disorder.
The second criterion "recoverability of concepts" reflects the level of development of schoolchildren's memory. This indicator in junior schoolchildren with mental retardation in 80% of cases corresponds to values below the age norm, and only 20% of primary school students with mental retardation show indicators close to the norm.
The majority of younger schoolchildren with mental retardation (80%) do not abstract enough from the proposed concepts to memorize the presented information, more often they use specific drawings. "Standardity - originality" as a criterion for evaluating the drawings of children with mental retardation, the majority of participants in the initial diagnostic stage of the study (80%) are below the norm, in 20% - within the average age standards.
Lera B.'s indicators on the “adequacy” scale are 90%. is the norm. Below the norm, the indicators on the scale "recoverability of concepts" are 70%, while the norm is more than 80%, which indicates a low level of memory development. The criteria "concreteness-abstractness" and "standardness - originality" are estimated at 100%, which is the norm. The development of logical memory is at an average level.
Lera A.'s indicators on the “adequacy” scale are 80%. is the norm. Below the norm, the indicators on the scale "restorability of concepts" are 70%, with the norm being more than 80%. These data indicate that the memory is developed at a low level. On the scale "concrete-abstract" the result was 85% of the norm, the criterion "standard - originality" 90%. This indicates a low level of development of thinking. The development of logical memory is at an average level.
Sasha L.'s scores on all scales are consistently low. According to the criteria of "adequacy" and "restorability of concepts", the results are below the norm - 50% and 70%, respectively, while the norm is more than 70% and 80%. These indicators indicate that the memory and perception of the outside world in a younger student is not sufficiently formed. The criteria "concreteness-abstractness" and "standardness - originality" are represented by 60% and 70%, respectively, which reflects the low level of development of thinking. The level of development of logical memory is low.
Misha G. is distinguished by consistently high results on the criteria of "adequacy" and "recoverability of concepts" - 80%. On the scale "concreteness-abstractness" the result was 80%, the criterion "standard - originality" - 85% of the norm. These indicators indicate a low level of development of thinking. The development of logical memory is at an average level.
Normally, Daniil Sh. has an indicator of "adequacy" - 80%, in turn, the indicator "restorability of concepts" is below the norm - 70%, which indicates a low level of memory development. On the scale "concrete-abstract" the data is 80%, and on the scale "standard - originality" - 70%. Daniil Sh. has a low level of development of thinking. The level of development of logical memory is low.
After analyzing the data for all indicators, we can conclude that logical memory in 60% of schoolchildren is developed at an average level, in 40% - at a low level.
Based on the analysis of the results of the diagnostics, we came to the following conclusions:
- 1. The predominant types of memory in younger students with mental retardation are combined and motor-auditory memory.
- 2. Logical and mechanical memory are developed below the age norm, while logical predominates over mechanical, which indicates the preservation of intelligence in these children.
- 3. Logical memory in 60% of schoolchildren is developed at an average level, in 40% at a low level.
Thinking
1. Method "Simple analogies"
Target: study of logic and flexibility of thinking.
Equipment: a form in which two rows of words are printed according to the model.
|
a) be silent, b) crawl, c) make noise, d) call, e) stable |
|
|
2. Steam locomotive |
a) groom b) horse c) oats d) cart e) stable |
|
a) head, b) glasses, c) tears, d) eyesight, e) nose |
|
|
a) forest, b) sheep, c) hunter, d) flock, e) predator |
|
|
Maths a) a book, b) a table, c) a desk, d) notebooks, e) chalk |
|
|
a) gardener b) fence c) apples d) garden e) leaves |
|
|
Library a) shelves b) books c) reader d) librarian e) watchman |
|
|
8. Steamboat jetty |
a) rails, b) station, c) land, d) passenger, e) sleepers |
|
9. Currant |
Pot a) stove, b) soup, c) spoon, d) dishes, e) cook |
|
10. Illness |
Television a) turn on, b) install, c) repair, d) apartment, e) master |
|
Stairs a) residents, b) steps, c) stone, |
Research order. The student studies a pair of words placed on the left, establishing a logical connection between them, and then, by analogy, builds a pair on the right, choosing the desired concept from the proposed ones. If the student cannot understand how this is done, one pair of words can be disassembled with him.
Processing and analysis of results. Eight to ten correct answers testify to a high level of thinking logic, 6-7 answers to a good one, 4-5 to a sufficient one, and less than 5 to a low level. (The norms are given for children of primary school age).
2. Technique "Exclusion of superfluous"
Target: the study of the ability to generalize. Equipment: sheet with twelve rows of words like:
1. Lamp, lantern, sun, candle.
2. Boots, boots, laces, felt boots.
3. Dog, horse, cow, elk.
4. Table, chair, floor, bed.
5. Sweet, bitter, sour, hot.
6. Glasses, eyes, nose, ears.
7. Tractor, harvester, car, sled.
8. Moscow, Kyiv, Volga, Minsk.
9. Noise, whistle, thunder, hail.
10. Soup, jelly, saucepan, potatoes.
11. Birch, pine, oak, rose.
12. Apricot, peach, tomato, orange.
Research order. The student needs to find in each row of words one that does not fit, is superfluous, and explain why.
Processing and analysis of results.
1. Determine the number of correct answers (highlighting an extra word).
2. Determine how many rows are summarized using two generic concepts (an extra "pot" is dishes, and the rest is food).
3. Find out how many series are generalized using one generic concept.
4. Determine what mistakes were made, especially in terms of using non-essential properties (colors, sizes, etc.) to generalize.
The key to evaluating results. High level - 7-12 rows summarized with generic concepts; good - 5-6 rows with two, and the rest with one; medium - 7-12 rows with one generic concept; low - 1-6 rows with one generic concept, (norms are given for children of primary school age).
