Lack of effect of d-amphetamine on perceptual reactance and personality

Kinesthetic aftereffect and augmenting/reducing: a two-session procedure, and hence identification of stimulus-governed subjects, is contraindicated

A few of the recent researchers of kinesthetic aftereffect (KAE) as an index of augmenting/reducing have continued to employ a two-session procedure. Findings that have accrued in the past decade indicate (a) The first administration of KAE is a reliable (internally consistent) and valid index of augmenting-reducing; (b) there are carry-over effects from the first to the second administration that bias the second session's preinduction scores; (c) KAE scores from sessions after the first do not relate to first-session scores (low retest reliability) and do not measure augmenting/reducing; and (d) unless special procedures are undertaken to avoid using the biased second- (or later-) session preinduction scores, a KAE procedure involving more than one session is contraindicated. When we reached a similar conclusion earlier (Baker et al., 1974), Petrie (1974) disagreed, arguing that a two-session procedure was needed to identify and eliminate an atypical subgroup, the "stimulus governed." The case for determining which subjects are stimulus-governed is assessed and found wanting. Except in special circumstances, a one-session KAE procedure, in which all preinduction trials precede the first exposure to aftereffect induction, is indicated.

16 PF correlates of perceptual reactance

College students (n = 24 males, 36 females) volunteered to take the kinesthetic figural aftereffect task and the 16 PF in a survey of state versus trait personality correlates of perceptual reactance. A reliable emergence of the trait component of perceptual reactance over trials was noted. Perceptual reducers were outgoing, affected by feelings, happy-go-lucky, practical, and undisciplined, while augmenters were reserved, stable, sober, imaginative, and controlled. Findings tend to support the trait model of perceptual reactance, with interference from a state component.

Individual differences in stimulus intensity modulation of the elderly

The validity of the postulated perceptual style-personality dimension of modulation (augmenting vs. reducing) of stimulus intensity previously studied with young adults was examined in two elderly samples. It was hypothesized that in the elderly Stimulus Intensity Modulation (SIM) relates to degree of social engagement (assessed both behaviorally and by self-report), perceived life difficulty, attitudes toward death, and three previously validated behaviors (desired and obtained amount of sleep, future planning, and smoking). The Kinesthetic Aftereffect (KAE) task was used as the measure of SIM. Results from multivariate analyses of variance indicated a significant relationship between KAE and the validity variables. Additional correlational analysis indicate that there is a linear relationship between KAE and each of the domains, except attitudes toward death. Results from both studies are consistent with the views that KAE indexes the postulated SIM dimension and that the SIM approach can be applied fruitfully to the study of individual differences in the elderly.

Bias in Petrie's alternate-form procedure for kinesthetic aftereffect

Kinesthetic aftereffect, commonly administered with alternate forms given on two separate occasions, has been used to assess individual differences in personality and perceptual style. Recent criticisms have questioned whether this task gives a worthwhile measure of individual differences. This paper represents a further response to such criticisms by extending to Petrie's alternate-form procedure our argument that lack of test-retest reliability is associated with practice effects which differentially bias second-session scores. Findings indicate that second session bias does occur with this procedure, and, as expected, there was an inverse relationship between magnitude of retest reliability and differential bias. Although use of the alternative-form procedure is contraindicated, a single-session procedure remains a promising personality measure since it is not affected by differential bias.