Eliciting effects of verbal and nonverbal cues on projective test responses.

Abstract

A verbal reinforcer and two nonverbal immediacy cues, eye contact and body lean, were manipulated by an E under far and close conditions of interpersonal distance in a projective testing situation. It was hypothesized that the verbal cue ("good") would be positively reinforcing at both distances but that eye contact and body lean would be reinforcing only in the far condition. As hypothesized, significant increases in the dependent measure, the number of thematic responses, were found for the verbal cue at both interaction ranges. Support for the predicted conditional effect of eye contact was found on the last trial of the testing session. Body lean did not significantly affect the number of thematic responses at either the far or close interaction distance. The implications of the results for the further study of E cues in the projective test situation are discussed.

Nonverbal involvement and social control.

“…The discrepancy between the Stewart and Patterson (1973) and Banks (1974) findings can perhaps be explained by methodological differences. The Banks study was structured in such a manner that a baseline period (during which nonverbal reinforcement was administered randomly) preceded the period of experimental manipulation.…”

“…Sheckart and Bass (1976) replicated this experiment with black adults, and found a significant difference among treatment conditions for Verbal IQ difference scores. Stewart and Patterson (1973) examined the role of nonverbal behaviors in reinforcing responses on a projective test. In this investigation, eye contact, body lean, and a verbal reinforcer were manipulated by the experimenter, and their effects on thematic responses to the Thematic Apperception Test were measured.…”