An Investigation of Psychological Deficit as Evaluated Through an Appraisal of Cognitive Activity, Affective Control, and Conative Functioning in Schizophrenic and Neurotic Patients

Citation preview

FO R D H A M U N IV E R SIT Y G R A D U A T E SCHOOL

September 21

19..5P.

This dissertation prepared under my direction by Edward J. McLaughlin

entitled

inves^issti°n of psychological deficit as evaluated

through an appraisal of cognitive activity,^ affective control, and conative functioning in schizophrenic and ...... neurotip...patients,................

has been accepted in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the

Degree of

? ° ci o r o f Ph i l o s o Phy

(F aculty A d v is e r)

r

AN INVESTIGATION OF PSYCHOLOGICAL DEFICIT AS EVALUATED THROUGH AN APPRAISAL OP COGNITIVE ^ACTIVITY-, AFFECTIVE CONTROL, AND CONATIV1 FUNCTIONING IN SCHIZOPHRENIC AND NEUROTIC PATIENTS

BY e d w a r d j . M c La u g h l i n A«B,, University of Scranton, fA3 M.A., Fordham University, *^8

DISSERTATION SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OP THE REQUIREMENTS POR THE DEGREE OP DOCTOR OP PHILOSOPHY IN THE DEPARTMENT OP PSYCHOLOGY AT PORDHAM UNIVERSITY

NEW YORK 1950 L

ProQuest Number: 10992724

All rights reserved INFORMATION TO ALL USERS The quality of this reproduction is d e p e n d e n t upon the quality of the copy subm itted. In the unlikely e v e n t that the a u thor did not send a c o m p le te m anuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if m aterial had to be rem oved, a n o te will ind ica te the deletion.

uest ProQuest 10992724 Published by ProQuest LLC(2018). C opyright of the Dissertation is held by the Author. All rights reserved. This work is protected against unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States C o d e M icroform Edition © ProQuest LLC. ProQuest LLC. 789 East Eisenhower Parkway P.O. Box 1346 Ann Arbor, Ml 4 8 1 0 6 - 1346

iii r

n

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page LIST OF TABLES.................................

iv

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

ix

I.

INTRODUCTION.........

II.

METHOD AND PB0CM)URE.

III. IF. V.

L

........

1 .....

TREATMENT OF RESULTS........

26 54

DISCUSSION......................

100

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS..............................

Ill

APPENDIX A............. Sample sheet of the Test of Affective Control

117

APPENDIX B ...... Sample sheet of the Answer Booklet of the Test of Affective Control

118

APPENDIX C............ Diagrammatic Sketch of the Coin-Problem Box

119

APPENDIX D ............ Diagrammatic Sketch of the Tilting-Board Puzzle

120

BIBLIOGRAPHY......

121

...........................

J

iv LIST OF TABLES Table I. II.

III.

IV. V. 71. VII* VIII.

IX.

X. XI.

XII.

XIII.

L

’’ Page

Order of Presentation, Number of Coins, and Specific Combinations for Correct Solutions of Coin Problems Structural Arrangement of Action Phrases Utilized to Evaluate Psychological Control of AffectiveExpressions...

30

37

Source of Origin and Nature of Examinees Comments and the Possible Reactions of the Subject. .........

42

Number of Patients Bearing a Specific Type of Schizophrenic Reaction........................ Specific Psychiatric Diagnoses and Predominant Type of Complaint of the Neurotic Group................ ..

43

43

Mean Age, Distribution, and Variability in Age for Both Groups of Patients.....................

49

Average, Distribution, and Variability of Educational Level for Both Groups of Patients. ............

50

Distribution of Occupational Level of Two Groups of Patients Classified According to the U.S.l.S. Dictionary of Occupational Titles.........

51

Mean, Distribution, and Variability of the WechslerBellevue Pull Scale and Vocabulary I.Q.*s for the Two Groups..........................

52

Length of Hospitalization for Number of Patients of Each Group.. .........

53

Comparison of the Duration of Continuous Hospitalization, Mean Age, Educational Level and Vocabulary I.Q. for Thirty Selected Schizophrenic and Thirty Selected Neurotic Patients..........

56

Means, Standard Deviations, and t Ratios of the Differences Between the Means of the Wechsler-Bellevue Full Scale I.Q.*s for Eaeh of the Comparison Groups of Patients............

57

Means, Standard Deviations, and t Ratios of the Differences Between the Means of the Wechsler-Bellevue Vocabulary I.Q.*s for Each of theComparison Groups.......

58

j

V r

I

LIST OF TABLES (Gont'd) Table XIV*

XV*

XVI*

XVII*

XVIII*

XIX*

XX*

XXI*

XXII.

XXIII* L

Page Means, Standard Deviations, and t Ratios of the Differences Between the Means of the WechslerBellevue Impairment Index for Each of the Comparison Groups ......................

5

Number of Patients in Each of the Respective Groups Securing at Least a 3*36 Weighted Score Decrement on the Arithmetic-Comprehension as Compared with the Information-Vocabulary Wechsler-Bellevue Sub-Tests With the Chi-Square Values Testing the Significance of this Difference Between the Comparison Groups....... *

62

Means, Standard Deviations, and t Ratios of Total Time Utilized in Working on the Eight Tasks of the Coin-Problem for Each of the Comparison Groups....... ...

65

Means, Standard Deviations, and t Ratios of the Number of Errors Accumulated in Working the CoinProblem for Each of the Comparison Groups ......*...

66

Means, Standard Deviations, and t Ratios of the Number of Movements Accumulated in Working on the Insolvable Coin-Problems for Each of the Comparison Groups*............*....

66

Means, Standard Deviations, and t Ratios of the Number of Critical Errors Made in Working on the Coin-Problems for Each of the Comparison Groups.•*•••••«•

67

Means, Standard Deviations, and t Ratios of the Differences Between the Means of the Number of Failures on the Coin-Problems for Each of the Comparison Groups •••••«•••••••••.................... 63 Number of Patients in Each of the Respective Groups Who Failed to Perceive that Coin Problems with Six and Four Goins were Insolvable with the Chi-Square Values for the Comparison Groups. .....

70

Means, Standard Deviations, and t Ratios of the Differences Between the Means of the Intensity of Feeling Tone Ascribed to the Rosenzweig P-F Situations for Each of the Comparison Groups ....

73

Number of Patients in Each of the Respective Groups Manifesting a significantly Greater LIKE TO DO Score Than DO Score on Test of Affective Control with Chi-Square Values for Each of the Comparison Groups*.....

75

vi LIST OF TABLES (Coat'd)

Table XXI?.

XX?.

XXVI.

XXVII.

XXVIII.

XXIX.

L

Page Means, Standard Deviations, and t Ratios of the Differences Between the Means of the LIKE TO DO and DO Scores on Test of Affective Control for Each of the Comparison Groups..................

?6

Means, Standard Deviations, and t Ratios of the Differences Between the Means of the Number of Responses to the Symbolic Interpersonal Situations Directed Away from the Source of Frustration and Toward the Self for Each of the Comparison Groups......

73

Means, Standard Deviations, and t Ratios of the Differences Between the Means of the Number of Responses to the Symbolic Interpersonal Situations which were Objective in Nature for Each of the ........ Comparison Groups.

73

Means, Standard Deviations, and t Ratios of the Differences Between the Means of the Number of Responses to the Symbolic Interpersonal Situations Directed Toward the Source of Frustration for Each of the Comparison Groups..........................

73

Number of Patients in the Total Schizophrenic and Neurotic Groups Giving a Specific Direction of Reply to the Remarks of the Examiner. The Nature of the Examiner's Remarks and the Point of Introduction Are Identified. Chi-Square Values were computed by Comparison of the Number of Patients Giving a Specific Direction of Reply with the Remaining Number of Patients in the Group, as (Self vs. Remaining).•»•••••••••••••••.....

Si

Number of Patients in the Chronic and Remaining Schizophrenic Groups Giving a Specific Direction of Reply to the Remarks of the Examiner. The Nature of the Examiner's Remarks and the point of Introduction are Identified. Chi-Square Values were Computed by Comparison of the Number of Patients Giving a Specific Direction of Reply with the Remaining Number of Patients in the Group, as (Self vs. Remaining) ........••••••............

32

vii LIST OF TABLES (Cont'd) Table

XXX.

XXXI.

XXXII.

XXXIII.

XXXIV,

XXXV.

XXXVI.

XXXVII.

Page Number of Patients in the Selected Schizophrenic and Neurotic Groups Giving a Specific Direction of Reply to the Remarks of the Examiner. The Nature of the Examiner’s Remarks and the Point of Introduction are Identified. Chi-Square Values were Computed by Comparison of the Number of Patients Giving a Specific Direction of Reply with the Remaining Number of Patients in the Group, as ...... ...... (Self vs. Remaining).

83

Number of Patients in Each of the Respective Groups Verbally Accepting the Aid Offered by the Examiner while the Patient was working on the Test of Affective Control with Chi-Square Values Between Each of the Comparison Groups. ...... .

86

Number of Patients in Each of the Respective Groups Verbally Accepting the Aid Offered by the Examiner while the Patient was working on the Tilting-Board Task with Chi-Square Values Between Each of the Comparison Groups............

86

Means, Standard Deviations, and t Ratios of the Differences Between the Means of the Spontaneous Comments Pertaining to the Self for Each of the Comparison Groups........ ♦....
3.36