Table Of ContentSponsoring Committee: Professor John G. Rockwell,
Professor Harvey W. Zorbaugh, and Associate
Professor Philip J. Zlatchin
A COMPARATIVE INVESTIGATION OP THE RESPONSES TO
FRUSTRATION OP NORMAL-HEARING AND HYPAOOUSIC
CHILDREN
Harris Kahn
Submitted in partial fulfillment of the
requirements for the degree of Doctor of
Philosophy in the School of Education of
New York University
3 ^
1951 Tfaeei*
&?K '
mi.
I hereby guarantee that no part of
the dissertation herewith submitted for
publication has been heretofore published
and/or copyrighted in the United States
of America, except in the caso of passages
quoted from other published sources; that
I am the sole author and proprietor of
said dissertation; that the dissertation
contains no matter which, if published,
will be libelous or otherwise injurious,
or in any infringe upon the copyright of
any other party; and that I will defend,
indemnify, and hold harmless New York
University against all suits and proceed
ings which may be made against New York
University by reason of the publication
of said dissertation.
Harris Kahn
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
I should like to express my appreciation to the
many sources of assistance which contributed to the
study here reported. This study evolved from, and formed
a part of, a research project on the problems and adjust
ments of hard-of-hearing children which was made possi
ble by a grant by the Lester N. Hofheimer estate to the
Department of Child Study, Vassar College. Drs. M. F.
Fiedler and L. J. Stone, Vassar College, were helpful and
encouraging throughout the period in which the research
was conducted. The members of my sponsoring committee,
Drs. J. G. Rockwell, F. J. Zlatchin and H. W. Zorbaugh,
were especially generous in their contributions of time
and wise counsel. Dr. E. R. Wood provided invaluable ad
vice on several problems of statistical treatment. The
collection of data was made possible by the friendly co
operation of many school administrators, teachers, and the
children who served as subjects. To my wife, Miriam, I am
especially grateful for her constant encouragement and im
measurable assistance.
H.K.
ii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
CHAPTER I THE PROBLEM............. 1
Statement of the Problem........... 1
Delimitation of the Problem....... 1
Definition of Terms................. 3
Significance of the Problem....... 5
CHAPTER II RELATED STUDIES...................... 11
CHAPTER III METHOD OF COLLECTING DATA.......... 23
Selection of Subjects................23
Description of the Instruments 28
The Testing Program..................30
CHAPTER IV RESULTS..................... 34
Comparison of the Groups........... 34
Comparison of Groups with Rosen-
zweig Picture-FruBtration Study
Norms.............................. 47
Comparability of Frustration
Techniques........................ 55
Summary of Results .... ......5 7
CHAPTER V SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS............ 5 9
BIBLIOGRAPHY.........................................6 8
APPENDIX............................................. 7 7
iii
LIST 07 TABLES
Number Title Page
I, Number of Itatehed Boy a and Girls
in Eaoh Sohool Grade ....... 26
II. Comparison of the Groupa in Terms of
Age.......................................... 27
III. Comparison of the Groupa in Terms of
Intelllgenoe . . ........................... 27
IT. Relation Between Responses on the
Rosenzweig Pioture-Frustrat ion
Study and Degree of Hearing Loss......... 36
T. Comparison of Groups in Terms of
Responses on the Rosenzweig Pioture-
Frustrat ion Study.......................... 38
VI. Relations Between Responses on the
Bloolc-Design Frustration Teohnique
and Degree of Hearing Loss.............. 41
Til. Comparison of Groups in Terms of Re
sponses to the Bloolc-Design Frustra
tion Teohnique............................. 43
Till. Comparison of the Normal-Hearing Group
with the Norma of the Rosenzweig Pio
ture-Frustrat ion Study.................... 48
IX. Comparison of the Moderately Hypacousio
Group with the Norma of the Rosen
zweig Pioture-Frustrat ion Study......... 49
X. Comparison of the Severely Hypaoousio
Group with the Norma of the Rosen
zweig Pioture-Frustration Study......... 50
XI. Correlations Between Responses of All
Subjects on the Two Frustration
Techniques...................................56
iv
CHAPTER I
THE PROBLEM
Statement of the Problem
This investigation has as its purpose a comparative
analysis and evaluation of the responses to frustration sit
uations by normal-hearing, moderately hypacousic and severely
hypacousic children. Subsidiary to the primary purpose are
the following:
1) The determination and analysis of the
responses to a projective frustration sit
uation and to an experimental frustration
situat ion.
2) The determination and analysis of the differ
ences in responses of the groups to each of
the frustration situations,
3) The comparison of each of the groups in terms
of deviations from the published norms for the
projective frustration situation.
Delimitat ions of the Problem
Certain delimitations are necessary in order to retain
a reasonable and meaningful scope for this study and in order
to hold variables other than those under investigation constant,
The limitations adopted are:
l) The groups for this study are established by
-2-
the selection of children who differ from
each other only in terms of auditory acuity
and can be matched in groups of three on the
basis of sex, approximate socio-economic sta
tus, grade in school, and chronological age.
2) It is recognized that the variable of intelli
gence should he minimized in order not to ob
scure the possible results of this study. How
ever, because the results of a test of intelli
gence can not be presumed to have the same mean
ing for children with hearing handicaps as for
children with normal hearing, as an additional
selection criterion a range of intelligence
representing an approximation to the range of
•’average** is used. Accordingly, only children
who have been rated with standardized indivi
dual tests of intelligence as being between 35
I. Q. and 115 I. Q,. are included as subjects.
3) Only children in the age range nine to eleven
years are included as subjects for this study,
because this range represents approximately the
middle of the age range of the group which was
used in establishing the norms for the project
ive frustration technique, and because until
children have reached this age audioraetric se
lection often is unreliable.
4) Identification of children with hearing losses
at pre-school and early school ages is a diffi-'
3-
cult, and often uncertain, raedico-psycho-
logieal procedure, so that except in unusual
situations routine audiometric testing is
not done with children until they have reached
the second or third grade in school. For this
reason the onset and duration of hearing loss
in a given child seldom is accurately known,
and this study does not attempt to deal with
these factors .
Definit ion of Terms
Some terms as used in this study require special defini-
tion or olarification. These terms are:
1) By audiometry is meant the measurement of de
gree of hearing acuity. At the time of this
study the most valid and reliable means of
evaluating auditory sensitivity is provided by
individual pure-tone audiometry.
2) By a threshold determination of hearing is
meant the assessment of hearing at each fre
quency in the speech range when “the threshold
of hearing is the audiometer setting corres
ponding to the lowest intensity at which the
person being tested is able to indicate cor
rectly more than half the time that he is
hearing.nl
■^O . G. Bunch, Clinical Audiometry, p. 37
-4-
3) By a normal-hearing child is meant one who
has an American Medical Association hearing
disability rating1 of less than one per cent
(equivalent to a mean loss of ten decibels or
less in the speech range) as established by-
means of at least two threshold determinations
with a standard pure-tone audiometer.
4) By a moderately hypacousic child is meant one
whose hearing disability rating is in the range
of three per cent to twenty-five per cent (equi
valent to mean loss in the speech range of fif
teen to thirty-five decibels) as established by
means of at least two threshold determinations
with a standard pure-tone audiometer.
5) A severely hypacousic child is one whose hear
ing disability rating is greater than twenty-
five per cent as established by means of at
least two threshold determinations with a
standard pure-tone audiometer.
^American Medical Association, “Tentative Standard Procedure
for Evaluating the Percentage Loss of Hearing in Medicolegal
Cases," J ournal of the American Medical Association. CXXXIII,
(February 8, 194^7, p. 397.
The natures of decibel and frequency units have made the prob
lem of "averaging" hearing losses particularly troublesome.
Although no completely satisfactory solution to this problem
has been provided, the evaluation system endorsed by the
American Medical Association has received the widest recog
nition.
-5
6) The definition of frustration is the thwart
ing of an ongoing activity accepted by the
child as of value and obtainable.
7) The experimental or Block-Design frustration
technique is an original series of dichro
matic designs, presented on cards, which can
be matched or reproduced by the correct as
sembly of appropriately colored one-inch
cubes.
Significance of the Problem
Hearing loss unquestionably acts as a deterrent in the
language development of children, and as such is at least to
some extent a barrier in the psycho-social processes of com
munication. The effects of this psycho-social barrier upon
personality development have not been determined with a suf
ficient degree of certainty to permit the planning of suit
able educational treatment for children with impaired hearing.
Spitz1 has demonstrated that for infants, deprivation
of the social-emotional stimulus provided by mothers or mother-
surrogates results in decidedly unwholesome personality de
velopment characterized by apathy, depression, or hyper-ex-
£
citability. Hutt and Miller have presented an extensive
R. A. Spitz, "The Role of Ecological Factors in Emotional
Development in Infancy,'* Child De ve looment. XX, (1949),
pp. 145-155.
2M. L. Hutt and D. R. Miller, "Value Interiorization and
Personality Development,** Journal of Social Issues. V,
(1949), pp. 2-30.
