Schmidt J P
J Clin Psychol. 1978 Apr;34(2):533-6. doi: 10.1002/1097-4679(197804)34:2<533::aid-jclp2270340260>3.0.co;2-g.
Studied the interactive effects of examiner, instructional set, field dependence, and extraversion on the reactions of 81 males and 39 females to five Holtzman Inkblot Technique factor scores. Half of the Ss were told that the HIT was a measure of mental health and half that it was experimental in nature, which produced two instructional sets. Field dependence was measured with the Embedded Figures Test and extraversion by the Eysenck Personality Inventory. Subjective anxiety was tapped via the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory. Results revealed no differences among five examiners. However, three of the five HIT factors and the STAI were affected significantly by the instructional set. The effects, while significant, were not massive. Field dependence interacted with instructional set; field dependent Ss reacted with generally more changes in scores than did field independent S. Unlike field dependence, extraversion appeared unrelated to instructional set effects. The results are discussed in terms of how the factor scores interacted with the field dependence and instructional set in psychologically meaningful ways.
研究了考官、指导语设置、场依存性和外向性对81名男性和39名女性对五项霍尔兹曼墨迹技术因子得分反应的交互作用。一半的被试被告知霍尔兹曼墨迹技术是心理健康的一种测量方法，另一半则被告知其实质是实验性的，由此产生了两种指导语设置。用场依存性嵌入图形测验测量场依存性，用艾森克人格问卷测量外向性。通过状态-特质焦虑量表测量主观焦虑。结果显示，五位考官之间没有差异。然而，五项霍尔兹曼墨迹技术因子中的三项以及状态-特质焦虑量表受到指导语设置的显著影响。这些影响虽然显著，但并不巨大。场依存性与指导语设置存在交互作用；场依存性的被试分数变化通常比场独立性的被试更多。与场依存性不同，外向性似乎与指导语设置的影响无关。从因子得分如何以心理上有意义的方式与场依存性和指导语设置相互作用的角度对结果进行了讨论。
