Harrison A, Phillips J P
Br J Med Psychol. 1979 Jun;52(2):105-17. doi: 10.1111/j.2044-8341.1979.tb02501.x.
Bannister and Salmon (1966), in a repertory grid study, reported that 'thought-disordered schizophrenics lost significantly more reliability and social agreement when shifted from object to people construing than normal'. This conclusion is of doubtful validity, since the between-grids variable, people vs. objects, was confounded with at least five other variables of possible relevance, three of which have been found by subsequent workers (McPherson & Buckley, 1970; Williams, 1971; Heather, 1976) to affect performance on grids. The main aim of the present experiment was to determine the effects of as many as possible of these variables. The subsidiary aim was to replicate, or otherwise, the findings of Frith & Lillie (1972) and Haynes & Phillips (1973) that the effective discriminator between thought-disorder schizophrenics and other groups on repertory grid tests is not intensity of relationship between constructs but pure (element or internal) consistency. Six grids involving all feasible combinations of rating familiar and unfamiliar people and objects on psychological and physical constructs were administered to 10 thought-disordered schizophrenics, 10 non-thought-disordered schizophrenics and 10 normals. As regards the main aim of the experiment it was found that there was no significant grids x diagnoses interaction on pure consistency, but that there was one on intensity, even with pure consistency partialled out. Taking previous work into consideration, it appears that this effect is weak, inconsistent from experiment to experiment, and anomalous in the present study. As regards the subsidiary aim, the findings of the two previous experiments cited above were confirmed. The discrepant results of McPherson et al. (1973) are considered, and it is noted that they held only for a subsample of the schizophrenic group in that experiment, the results for the total sample of schizophrenics, manics and depressives not being inconsistent with those of other experiments. The theoretical and practical implications of these and previous finding are indicated.
班尼斯特和萨蒙（1966年）在一项 repertory grid 研究中报告称，“与正常人相比，思维紊乱的精神分裂症患者在从对物体的理解转换到对人的理解时，可靠性和社会一致性显著降低”。这一结论的有效性值得怀疑，因为网格之间的变量，即人 vs. 物体，至少与其他五个可能相关的变量相互混淆，其中三个变量后来的研究者（麦克弗森和巴克利，1970年；威廉姆斯，1971年；希瑟，1976年）发现会影响网格测试的表现。本实验的主要目的是确定尽可能多的这些变量的影响。次要目的是重复（或反之）弗里思和利利（1972年）以及海恩斯和菲利普斯（1973年）的研究结果，即在 repertory grid 测试中，思维紊乱的精神分裂症患者与其他群体之间的有效区分因素不是构念之间关系的强度，而是纯粹（元素或内部）一致性。向10名思维紊乱的精神分裂症患者、10名非思维紊乱的精神分裂症患者和10名正常人发放了六个网格，这些网格涉及对熟悉和不熟悉的人以及物体在心理和身体构念上进行评级的所有可行组合。关于实验的主要目的，研究发现，在纯粹一致性方面不存在显著的网格×诊断交互作用，但在强度方面存在一个交互作用，即使排除了纯粹一致性因素。考虑到之前的研究，这种效应似乎很微弱，不同实验之间不一致，且在本研究中表现异常。关于次要目的，上述两个先前实验的结果得到了证实。对麦克弗森等人（1973年）的不一致结果进行了考量，并指出这些结果仅适用于该实验中精神分裂症患者群体的一个子样本，精神分裂症患者、躁狂症患者和抑郁症患者的总样本结果与其他实验结果并不矛盾。指出了这些及先前研究结果的理论和实际意义。
