Open AccessAFFECT JUDGMENT AND FIELD DEPENDENCE
Author(s) -
Rapaczynski Wanda,
Welkowitz Joan,
Sadd Susan
Publication year - 1979
Publication title -
ets research report series
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.235
H-Index - 5
ISSN - 2330-8516
DOI - 10.1002/j.2333-8504.1979.tb01173.x
Subject(s) - psychology , field dependence , affect (linguistics) , field (mathematics) , rating scale , session (web analytics) , test (biology) , clinical psychology , social psychology , cognitive psychology , developmental psychology , paleontology , physics , mathematics , communication , quantum mechanics , world wide web , magnetic field , computer science , pure mathematics , biology
Ten women, 5 low scorers (field‐dependent) and 5 high scorers (field‐independent) on the Group Embedded‐Figures Test, listened to 24, 15‐minute‐long segments of a series of therapy sessions and were then asked: (a) to adopt the role of the patient and rate the warmth felt by the patient toward the therapist, and (b) to adopt the role of therapist and rate the warmth felt by the therapist toward the patient, using a 4‐point rating scale. The accuracy of subjects' ratings was evaluated against the criterion of actual ratings made by patient and therapist after each therapy session. As predicted, field‐dependent subjects were more accurate in judging warmth than field‐independent subjects. In addition, there was a significant interaction between subject's cognitive style and the person being judged. Field‐dependent subjects were more accurate in the role of patient than in the role of therapist; the opposite was true for field‐independent subjects. Suggestions are made as to possible routes used by field‐dependent and field‐independent subjects to judge emotions experienced by others.