Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-b95js Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-02-06T10:50:38.376Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Symmetry of Constructed Patterns

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  08 February 2018

J. P. S. Robertson
J. P. S. Robertson*
Affiliation:
Research Department, Netherne Hospital, Coulsdon, Surrey
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

The opinion is sometimes expressed that patterns constructed by socially maladjusted individuals (e.g. in woodcarving, needlework, arrangement of flowers, etc.) are less symmetrical than those of the adequately adjusted. It is even held that the amount of asymmetry bears some relationship to the degree of maladjustment. Evidently, other factors besides maladjustment are involved in this question. The primary aim of the inquiry reported here was to investigate the effects of differences in sex, intelligence and level of social adjustment on the symmetrical construction of patterns. The technique employed for this purpose was akin to that of the mosaic test of Lowenfeld (1949) but of a more delimited character and with simplified material.

Type
Original Articles
Information
Journal of Mental Science , Volume 100 , Issue 419 , April 1954 , pp. 558 - 579
Copyright
Copyright © Royal College of Psychiatrists, 1954 

References

Bunzel, R., in Boas, F., General Anthropology, 1938, 562. Boston, Heath.Google Scholar
Diamond, B. L., and Schmale, H. I., Amer. J. Orthopsychiat., 1944, 14, 237.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fisher, R. A., Statistical Methods for Research Workers, 1950, 11th ed., 96, 240. Edinburgh, Oliver and Boyd.Google Scholar
Fowler, H. W., et al., The Concise Oxford Dictionary of Current English, 1934, 3rd ed., 1240, s.v. Symmetry. Oxford, Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Gibson, J. J., The Perception of the Visual World, 1950, 148. Boston, Houghton Mifflin.Google Scholar
Himmelweit, H. T., and Eysenck, H. J., Brit. J. Med. Psychol., 1945, 20, 283.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kempthorne, O., The Design and Analysis of Experiments, 1952, 154. London, Chapman and Hall.Google Scholar
Lowenfeld, M., Amer. J. Orthopsychiat., 1949, 19, 537.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mach, E., Die Analyse der Empfindungen, 1906, 5th ed., 87, 96. Jena, Fischer.Google Scholar
Mann, H. B., and Whitney, D. R., Ann. Math. Statist., 1947, 18, 50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Roth, M., and Hopkins, B., J. Ment. Sci., 1953, 99, 439.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shapiro, M. B., J. Ment. Sci., 1951, 97, 90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Idem., J. Ment. Sci., 1952, 98, 605.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Idem., J. Ment. Sci., 1953, 99, 394.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Snedecor, G. W., Statistical Methods, 1946, 4th ed., 221, 249. Ames, Iowa, State College Press.Google ScholarPubMed
Vernon, M. D., A Further Study of Visual Perception, 1952, 83. Cambridge, University Press.Google Scholar
Wertham, F., and Golden, L., Amer. J. Psychiat., 1941, 98, 124.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Submit a response

eLetters

No eLetters have been published for this article.