1963
DOI: 10.1037/h0045848
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A further appraisal of the body boundary concept.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
36
0
1

Year Published

1964
1964
2008
2008

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

1
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 83 publications
(38 citation statements)
references
References 36 publications
1
36
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…Standard administration procedures were followed with all subjects, with almost verbatim records of responses obtained All HIT protocols were scored and check-scored by highly tramed scorers on the 22 standard scormg vanables Reaction Tune (RT), Rejection (1961) Previous studies of the total scores on each of tihese 22 vanables, obtamed by summmg the mdividual response scores across the 45 cards, have mdicated that uniformly high test-retest, mterscorer, and spht-half rehabihties have been achieved for the majonty of these vanables (Holtzman, et al, 1961) On the basis of the factonal structure of HIT scores (Holtzman, et al, 1961), as well as previous studies with the technique usmg external cntena (eg, Moseley, Duffey, & Sherman, 1963, Clark, Veldman, & Thorpe, 1965, Fisher, 1963, predictions were made regarding group differences on 20 of the 22 standardized HIT scores Given the nature of the task presented by the HIT and the artist's charactenstic active and personal participation m creative production and m structurmg his perceptual world, subjects m this group were hypothesized to differ from the Engmeer group as follows higher scores on C, Sh, M, V, H, At, Sx, Ab, Ax, Hs, and Pn…”
Section: Subjectsmentioning
confidence: 96%
“…Standard administration procedures were followed with all subjects, with almost verbatim records of responses obtained All HIT protocols were scored and check-scored by highly tramed scorers on the 22 standard scormg vanables Reaction Tune (RT), Rejection (1961) Previous studies of the total scores on each of tihese 22 vanables, obtamed by summmg the mdividual response scores across the 45 cards, have mdicated that uniformly high test-retest, mterscorer, and spht-half rehabihties have been achieved for the majonty of these vanables (Holtzman, et al, 1961) On the basis of the factonal structure of HIT scores (Holtzman, et al, 1961), as well as previous studies with the technique usmg external cntena (eg, Moseley, Duffey, & Sherman, 1963, Clark, Veldman, & Thorpe, 1965, Fisher, 1963, predictions were made regarding group differences on 20 of the 22 standardized HIT scores Given the nature of the task presented by the HIT and the artist's charactenstic active and personal participation m creative production and m structurmg his perceptual world, subjects m this group were hypothesized to differ from the Engmeer group as follows higher scores on C, Sh, M, V, H, At, Sx, Ab, Ax, Hs, and Pn…”
Section: Subjectsmentioning
confidence: 96%
“…Several studies 18 have disclosed that the more definite an individual's boundaries the more quickly he adjusts constructively to the injury or disablement of his body. 24 Bialos and Fisher 28 have recently noted that the Barrier score is negatively correlated with the amount of anxiety manifested by women during a gynecological examination. From the many studies done with the Barrier score a picture has emerged of the woman with definite boundaries as exceeding the woman with indefinite boundaries in ability to be autonomous, facility in relating closely to others, 27 and adaptability in the face of stress.…”
Section: Hypothesesmentioning
confidence: 98%
“…It has been shown that the Barrier score can be determined with high objectivity and that it has adequate testretest reliability. 24 Further, it has been demonstrated that the Barrier score is meaningfully related to the manner in which the individual distributes his attention to the boundary vs. nonboundary regions of his body, the exterior vs. interior location of certain body symptoms, and the exterior vs. interior location of his body sensations after ingesting a placebo. 25 Thus, the construct validity of the Barrier score as an indicator of how the individual experiences the boundary regions of his body has been supported in a number of ways.…”
Section: Hypothesesmentioning
confidence: 98%
“…There is some controversy in the literature over this interpretation, but the scores on the Br scale, and to a lesser degree the Pn scale, have been found to have a number of interesting correlates (Fisher, 1963;Megargee, 1965b) and their relative elevation may well prove to have clinical significance.…”
Section: Futher Principles Of Interpretationmentioning
confidence: 95%