Intratest Rod-and-Frame Test Scores for Females

Abstract

Morf, Kavanaugh, and McConville ( 1971 ) tested Elliott's ( 1961 ) hypothesis that inaccurate Rod-And-Frame Test (RFT) performance is partly attributable to uncertain conditions and/or arousal properties of the testing situation. They reasoned that if arousal induced by the testing situation produces a decrement in RFT performance, then this effect should dissipate as RFT testing progresses (p. 727). Morf, et al. (1971) found the usual sex differences in RFT scores, women making higher scores than men. Comparisons between the two blocks of eight trials for each sex also showed that men became more accurate as testing progressed while women's scores did not change significantly. Following the suggestion of Morf, et al. ( 1971) that the laboratory conditions associated with the standard RFT are more likely to induce arousal and/or uncertainty in S than the portable RFT they used, the author attempted to test Elliott's hypothesis by using the standard RFT with a woman as E. In the first experiment, 40 women were administered two blocks of 8 trials with a 2-min. rest between blocks. No differences were found between the block means of 2.78 and 2.45 (SDs = 3.90 and 3.52). In order to facilitate the opportunity to observe any arousal reduction in RFT performance as a function of repeated test trials, 40 more women were administered three blocks of S trials. Once again, no differences were found between means of 2.97, 2.75, and 2.80 (SDs = 3.97, 3.46, and 3.47 ) respectively. While the present experiments tend to support the findings of Morf, et al. (1971) with regard to RFT performance by women, it is still unclear as to whether or not the RFT conditions engender arousal in either sex. It seems that before any conclusions can be drawn, the arousal properties of the test situation would have to be determined for both sexes. Thus, the present findings may simply reflect the stability of RFT performance over trials.