The Witmer cylinder test

Contents

Page

I Introduction 5

II The Standardization 12

Introduction

The differential diagnosis of the psychological clinic requires a variety of "behavior" tests, tests which give the child something to do, which place in his hands an article that to him is a thing to play with, in order that his actions may be observed, — that we may, so to speak, see his mind in action. The reactions to the situations arising bring out qualitative differences in the normal and feeble-minded groups, as well as between the various other types. A diagnosis would be of little value in most cases were it not accompanied by suggestions of treatment, but treatment cannot be recommended without a thorough knowledge of the mental make-up of the individual, the strength and weakness of the various mental traits, and an acquaintance with the special defects that may be present and of any particular adaptabilities that the individual may have.

Healy and Fernald (2) in presenting their tests, remark that, "Diagnosis of mental capabilities and adaptabilities as far as this might be practically possible, was seen at the outset of the work of the Juvenile Psychopathic Institute to be one of the main desiderata in our study of individuals who are young members of the criminalistic class or who are otherwise repeatedly delinquent." For such work as this, a scale of intelligence tests alone is not sufficient. The study of the perceptions, of the ability to profit by experience, coordination, of psycho-motor ability, as Wallin (13) calls it, demands some sort of clinical material that will permit the study of behavior. To quote Stern (11), "We must, of course, guard against the danger which is apt to arise of supposing that we have grasped the individuality of a pupil in its totality, when we have tested his intelligence." Wallin called attention to the need of a graded scale of "motor diagnostic tests" which would give a differential age determination of what a normal boy or girl could do industrially, or in motor performance.

Wooley and Fischer (17), in speaking of the low correlation between school grade and performance with the puzzle box, call attention to the fact that such a low correlation with the test requiring "a more original mental procedure" than that of any other test they used, suggests that the school is failing to recognize certain important forms of ability.

Another work illustrating the need of such tests is that of Stenquist, Thorndike and Trabue (10), who in the mental examination of dependent children found that they were inferior to normal children in their mechanical test, though not so much so as in the more abstract abilities. Any proper estimate of these children, then, should take the former as well as the latter into consideration.

It was in response to such a demand that the formboard came into clinical use, the picture puzzle tests, the Knox Moron test, the Healy Instruction Box, Puzzle Box, as well as a wide variety of other tests.

More recently, as a result of the inadequacy of the Binet Scale in the examination of deaf children, Pintner and Patterson (8) have prepared a scale of performance tests which they have standardized and believe will serve as a supplement to the Binet Scale, being a corrective where language ability is rated too high. They have pointed out that tests dependent upon the reception of complex instructions, the comprehension of verbal directions, or in which the response requires the ability to use language, places even the feeble-minded "verbalist," described by Healy (3) at an advantage as compared with the deaf child. Though we are not to consider the latter to be equal to the normal child, it must be noted that his defects are confined to certain traits and others must be examined without relation to those.

Whenever language difficulty is present, from use of a foreign tongue in the home or the lack of educational advantages as well as from the special defects, recourse must be had to performance tests. Place a piece of apparatus before the subject and ask him by signs to do something. His ability to comprehend is an indication of his intelligence; his performance with the material when once it is understood, can be compared with the results of normal individuals of the same age.

Such a test is the formboard, which has probably been the most popular single performance test. In the Psychological Clinic of

Introduction 7

the University of Pennsylvania, it has received considerable attention, a standardization having been made by Sylvester (12) and another of a revised form of the board by Young (19). But while the test gave an age gradation up to the fourteenth year, it did not present a real problem to be solved beyond the sixth year. From that age onward, it was concluded that any normal child could do the test in a comparatively short time, the speed of accomplishment varying with mental development and with the development of certain traits. But a more difficult piece of apparatus was needed, something that would in nature approximate the formboard. In the search for a test of this kind. Professor Lightner Witmer was attracted by statements of Dr. Montessori regarding certain pieces of her didactic material.

Under the heading "Sensory Education," Dr. Montessori (6) presents first, "Three solid pieces of wood, in each of which is inserted a row of ten small cylinders, or sometimes disks, all furnished with a button for a handle. In the first case, there is a row of cylinders of the same height, but with a diameter which decreases from thick to thin. In the second, there are cylinders which decrease in all dimensions, and so are either larger or smaller but always of the same shape. Lastly, in the third case, the cylinders have the same diameter but vary in height, so that, as the size decreases, the cylinder gradually becomes a disk in form. The first cylinders vary in two dimensions (the section); the second in all three dimensions; the third in one dimension (height). The order which I have given refers to the degree of ease with which the child performs the exercises."

This exercise, which is the one she prefers for children of two and a half to three years of age, consists in returning the blocks to their recesses after they have been removed and mixed on the table. In a discussion of her method. Dr. Montessori (7) states that this material shows a "difference in the reaction between deficient and normal children, in the presentation of didactic material made up of graded stimuli. This difference is plainly seen from the fact that the same didactic material used with deficients makes education possible^ while with normal children it provokes auto-education."

This set of didactic apparatus promised to be of use as a mental test as it possessed these requisite qualities:

First: A qualitative difference in performance. Dr. Montessori gives a description of the performance of a normal child and brings out a number of points of diagnostic importance, such as profiting by experience, spontaneous interest, evidence of perplexity when face to face with an error, as contrasted with the indifference and inability to correct errors on the part of the deficient child.

Second: A series of graded stimuli, which may be presented in order of ease of performance.

Third: Applicability to a wide age range, with increasing performance with age. While its use as didactic material is limited to the ages of two to four, it was to be expected that with increasing age there would be increased ability to solve this problem.

Fourth: A uniform method of procedure could be adopted for all ages.

Fifth: No instructions would be necessary that would place any premium upon language.

So the Montessori cylindrical insets were adopted by Professor Witmer for use in the clinic and were presented in four series, the three separate pieces and the three used together. This last arrangement consisted of placing the three blocks in a triangular position on the table in front of the child, the third block (varying in height) parallel to the edge of the table and forming the base of the triangle, the second block (varying in height and diameter) forming the right side and the first block (varying section) forming the left side. The thirty cylinders were all removed and placed within the enclosed triangle, mixed together, and the child was instructed to put them back in their proper places. Here was a performance test of considerable difficulty, which was of use with all ages beyond those with which the single sets were useable and which promised to permit of a quantitative standardization.

But there were certain inherent difficulties which made a satisfactory standardization doubtful. In the first place, the knobs on the cylinders, which were of value in the "psycho-sensory training," caused many false moves and errors. The block could be handled with more speed if grasped than when picked up by the knob and this meant many errors through dropping the cylinder into its correct hole knob downwards, then removing it under the belief that there had been an error of position. The loss of time resulting from this was often out of proportion to the

Introduction 9

nature of the error. Then too, there were duplications of blocks, the first blocks of the last two sets being identical, the seventh blocks of the first two sets and the seventh block of the third set being identical with the first block of the first set. While this was not a serious drawback, it was more desirable that each cylinder have but one proper recess. Another objection was that for younger children especially, the cylinders represented three psychologically different classes of objects, the greater part being cylinders, but some being disks and others sticks.

In the Spring of 191 5, Professor Witmer began to construct a piece of apparatus based upon this material, but which would possess the advantages without the disadvantages above enumerated. The Witmer Cylinder Test was the result. One board instead of three, made of a light wood, contains eighteen blocks instead of thirty, the three smallest cylinders of each set being omitted as well as all duplications. There are no knobs, the ends being thus interchangeable.

The cylinder board is a circular board of 11%. in. diameter and i}4 in. height. The recesses are drilled about the outer edge so as to form a slot which will give a side view of each recess as well as facilitate the removal of the cylinder. This slot is made as small as is consistent with the strength of the material, for it is desired that the perception of the recess be influenced as little as possible. In the center is a circular compartment of 8 in. diameter and 2 in. depth. The cylinders will be spoken of in this work as though divided into three series corresponding to the original sets of Montessori. The series varying both in diameter and in height (which will be called Series A) begins at the top of the board with a cylinder lYs in. in each dimension. Then along the right side of the board the successive cylinders are i /i6 in.,

Arrangement and Designations of Cylinders

i^ in., I /i6 in,, i /§ in., iVie in. and i in. in both dimensions. For convenience in identifying them, these cylinders will be spoken of as numbers i, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 and 7 respectively of Series A. The series of constant height and varying diameter begins at the top of the board and comes down the left side (called here Series B), the height being constant at 2V8 in. while the diameters decrease successively as in Series A. The one cylinder 2V8 in. in each dimension serves as No. i of both Series A and Series B, then the corresponding numbers of these two series have the same diameter but differ in height. The last block of Series B (B7) is one of the blocks corresponding to an original duplication and hence is also considered as No. i of Series C, which forms the remainder of

Introduction 11

the circle. Series C has a constant diameter of one inch, but the height decreases as in Series A, hence corresponding numbers of these two series have equal heights but differ in diameter, including A7, which is logically a member of each series.

The three blocks which represent the original duplications are given two designations because of the fact that in practical work, a series is thought of as composed of seven cylinders, but the extremities are at the same time considered as members of other series. The use of some system of designation will be seen to be necessary since the similar character of the pieces prevents the use of distinctive names.