Premium
The impact of pictorial stimulus on written expression output of adolescents and adults
Author(s) -
Cole Jason C.,
Muenz Tracy A.,
Ouchi Bryan Y.,
Kaufman Nadeen L.,
Kaufman Alan S.
Publication year - 1997
Publication title -
psychology in the schools
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.738
H-Index - 75
eISSN - 1520-6807
pISSN - 0033-3085
DOI - 10.1002/(sici)1520-6807(199701)34:1<1::aid-pits1>3.0.co;2-v
Subject(s) - psychology , stimulus (psychology) , stimulus control , developmental psychology , group cohesiveness , line drawings , expression (computer science) , cognitive psychology , social psychology , neuroscience , engineering drawing , computer science , engineering , nicotine , programming language
This study assessed Hooper et al.'s contention that the type of pictorial stimulus affects the quality of an individual's written expression. These researchers contended that pictorial stimuli should be photographs (rather than line drawings), should have a clear protagonist, and should present a novel problem‐situation that can be solved in a stepwise manner. A pictorial stimulus developed from Hooper et al.'s specifications was compared to a conventional line drawing stimulus (from PIAT‐R Written Expression) in its ability to evoke writing samples. Subjects comprised 50 men and women aged 13 to 46 years. It was hypothesized that the “Hooper” stimulus would yield higher scores than a conventional stimulus on items assessing structure and cohesiveness of the story, but not on items that assess writing mechanics. The results of the ANOVAs supported the hypothesis, in accordance with Hooper et al.'s prediction. © 1997 John Wiley & Sons, Inc.