Experiment Ten

Name of Experiment: Word Building Test

Date:
Problem: to study the effect of the systematic procedure on lingual imagination by word-
building test.
Materials:
1. Two sets of 6 letters. Each set will have 3 vowels and 3 consonants.
Set 1- AEOMBT
Set 2- EAIRLP
2. stopwatch
3. Writing material
Plan: conduct the experiment in two series. i.e., 1) Random method, 2) systematic methods.
Compare the number of words constructed in the two series with each other.
Procedure: Series I- Random method: place before the subject the first set of six letters, and
instruct him thus: “At the signal ‘start’ using these 6 letters construct as many words as you can.
While constructing you must bear the following instruction in mind.
1. Each word must be made up of at least 3 letters.
2. the same letter should not be used twice in the same word.
3. letters other than the given ones should not be used to construct the words.
4. the word should not be a proper name or abbreviation.” Allow 5 mins to construct the
words.
Series II- Systematic procedure: present the second set of 6 letters to the subject. Instruct him
thus: “You have to construct as many words as possible using the six letters. While constructing
you have to satisfy one more condition in addition to the above four conditions i.e., take the first
letter of the set and write all the possible words stating with it. Then take the second letter and
write all the possible words starting with it. Follow the same procedure with respect to the
remaining letters.” Allow 5 mins to write words in this case too.
Precautions:

● Before giving the experiment, give trails with another set of 6 letters and make sure the
subjects have understood the instructions.
Analysis of the results:
(a) Find out how many 3 letters, 4 letters, and 6 letter words are constructed.
(b) do the same things with respect to the results under the systematic procedure
(c) Calculate the mean, SD, and significance of the difference between the two
performances.
Theoretical Note:

PSY213 - Experiment 10Page 1

Though the outset random procedure offers freedom to construct any word in any order,
generally systematic procedure facilitates creative imagination more than the random procedure.
The reason is that systematic procedure makes the subject to think in a particular direction,
which is lacking under random procedure.
Generally, 3 and 4 letter words are more than 5 and 6 letter words.
As both the tests are intended to measure the same ability, it is expected the correlation to be
positive and highly significant.
INTRODUCTION
Word building is a cognitive task used to study the effect of the systematic procedure on lingual
imagination. The test is conducted in two series: random and systematic method. according to the
theory, in systematic method more words will be built than in random method. This is because
though the outset random procedure offers freedom to construct any word in any order, generally
systematic procedure facilitates creative imagination more than the random procedure. The
reason is that systematic procedure makes the subject to think in a particular direction, which is
lacking under random procedure. Further, the general tendency in the word building test is that
three- and four-letter words constructed more than five and six letter words. Hence, the main aim
of the current experiment is to study the effect of systematic procedure on lingual imagination by
using a word-building test.
Individual table:
Table I shows the number of extroversion and neurotic scores of the subject

Name Random Method- No of Systematic Method- No of Diff.

words under words under between the
two
T 3 4 5 6 T 3 4 5 6 methods in
ot le le le le ot le le le le total
al tt tt tt tt al tt tt tt tt number of
n er er er er n er er er er words
o w w w w o w w w w
of or or or or of or or or or
w ds ds ds ds w ds ds ds ds
or or
ds ds

MR 16 12 4 0 0 22 11 9 2 0 6

Individual Results:
Table I shows the individual results of subject MR. As seen from the table, subject MR wrote a
total of 16 words in random method with 12 three letter words and 4 four letter words. Subject

PSY213 - Experiment 10Page 2

MR was unable to write any five letters or six letter words in the random method. In the
systematic method, subject MR wrote a total of 22 words with 11 three letter words, 9 four letter
words and 2 five letter words, however, subject MR was unable to write any six letter words
during systematic method. Subject MR had a difference of 6 words between random and
systematic, in which she had 6 words more in systematic method. According to the theory of this
experiment, in systematic method more words will be built than in random method. Hence,
subject MR is according to the theory as she built more words in systematic method.
Group table:
Table II shows the number of words constructed under random and systematic procedures and
statistical measures

Name Random Method- No of words Systematic Method- No of Diff.

under words under between the
two
methods in
Total no of words

Total no of words
total
3 letter words

4 letter words

5 letter words

6 letter words

3 letter words

4 letter words

5 letter words

6 letter words
number of
words

MRA 18 9 9 0 0 27 12 15 0 0 9

MRH 27 14 13 0 0 31 12 15 3 0 4

AAA 15 10 5 0 0 16 8 7 1 0 1

MR 16 12 4 0 0 22 11 9 2 0 6

21 11 10 0 0 24 7 17 0 0 3

RW

HAA 18 9 9 0 0 18 7 11 0 0 0

17 11 6 0 0 13 8 4 1 0 -4

MM

SM 6 6 0 0 0 9 6 3 0 0 -3

PSY213 - Experiment 10Page 3

 FF 17 12 5 0 0 13 8 4 1 0 -4

ASN 21 11 10 0 0 23 10 13 0 0 2

MN 19 10 9 0 0 42 15 21 5 1 23

MSS 18 9 9 0 0 15 7 8 0 0 -3

AD 15 10 5 0 0 20 8 10 2 0 5

Total 228 134 94 0 0 273 119 137 15 1 45

17.54 10.3 7.23 0 0 21.0 9.15 10.5 1.15 0.08 3.46

Mean
1 0 4

SD 4.70 1.93 3.42 0 0 8.82 2.64 5.49 1.52 0.28 7.04

Group Results:
Table II shows the number of words constructed under random and systematic procedures and
the difference between the two methods. As seen from table II, a total of 13 subjects participated
in this experiment. In the random series, the total number of words constructed is calculated to be
228 with a mean of 17.54 and a standard deviation of 4.70. The maximum number of words
constructed was 27 by subject MRH and the least number of words constructed was 6 by subject
SM.
In random method, a total of 134 three letter words was constructed with a mean of 10.31 and a
standard deviation of 1.93. The maximum number of words were constructed by subject MRH
with 14 words and the minimum number of words were constructed by subject SM with 6 words.
Further, a total of 94 four letter words was constructed with a mean of 7.23 and a standard
deviation of 3.42. The maximum number of words were constructed by subject MRH with 13
words and the minimum number of words were constructed by subject SM with 0 words.
Additionally, no five letter or six letter words were constructed in random series.
In the systematic methods, the total number of words constructed is calculated to be 273 with a
mean of 21 and a standard deviation of 8.82. The maximum number of words constructed was 42
by subject MN and the least number of words constructed was 9 by subject SM.
In systematic method, a total of 119 three letter words was constructed with a mean of 9.15 and a
standard deviation of 2. 63. The maximum number of words were constructed by subject MN
with 15 words and the minimum number of words were constructed by subject SM with 6 words.
Further, in systematic method, a total of 137 four letter words was constructed with a mean of
1.54 and a standard deviation of 5. 49. The maximum number of words were constructed by
PSY213 - Experiment 10Page 4
subject MN with 21 words and the minimum number of words were constructed by subject SM
with 3 words.
Additionally, in systematic method, a total of 15 five letter words was constructed with a mean
of 1.15 and a standard deviation of 1. 52. The maximum number of words were constructed by
subject MN with 5 words and the minimum number of words were constructed by subject AAA
with 1 word. Moreover, in systematic method, only 1 six letter word was constructed by subject
MN with a mean of 0.08 and a standard deviation of 0.28.
The total difference between the two methods in total number of words was calculated to be 45
with a mean of 3.46 and a standard deviation of 7.04. The largest difference was recorded by
subject MN with a difference of 23 words and the smallest difference was recorded by subject FF
and MM with a difference of -4. Further subject HAA had no difference as she constructed same
number of words for both the methods. Additionally, according to the theory, in systematic
method more words will be built than in random method. Hence all the subjects, except subject
FF, HAA, MSS and MM are according to the theory.
DISCUSSION
The current experiment was conducted to study the effect of systematic procedure on lingual
imagination by using word-building test. According to the theory, in systematic method more
words will be built than in random method. As seen from the group results, all the subjects
except subject FF, HAA, MSS and MM are according to the theory.
As seen from the table, more words were constructed in systematic method. The difference
between both the methods are significant and positively correlated as it shows from the group
results. In the random method, three letter words were formed more however, in the systematic
method four letter words were constructed the most.
As seen from the group results, subject HAA constructed same number of words in both the
methods which resulting no difference in the two methods. According to subject HAA, both the
methods were same for her and cannot say that one method was better than the other. Since
subject HAA have same number of words in both the methods, her result is inconclusive hence it
can be discarded.
There can be many reasons why these subjects were unable to reconstruct more words in
systematic than in random method. According to subject MM, she found it hard to think about
words when she was asked to think and write in a specific. According to the subject, she wants to
construct words freely and randomly. Further, when she was asked to construct words thinking in
a specific way, it felt like a mental limitation was put on her mind according to subject MM.
According to Forgeard and Kaufman, (2016), when people are required to do a work in a certain
way, their creativity, which includes higher degrees of uniqueness and originality on their part,
declines. Similarly, when subject MM was asked to construct words in a certain way, it reduces
her ability to think creatively which in turn reduced the words she could think of in systematic
method.
In the current experiment, subject MN constructed the most words in systematic method.
researches have shown that individuals who have rich vocabulary are able to construct more
words than those who have poor vocabulary. In an experiment, Whipple, (1908), conducted tests

PSY213 - Experiment 10Page 5

to find the correlation between word-building tests and vocabulary. Test number one was given
to two groups of college students and likewise to a group of fifty boys form the seventh and
eighth grades of the Ithaca public schools. test number two was given to the college students
only. The results shows that simple word-building tests correlate fairly well with the vocabulary
test. Hence, this indicates that individuals who have rich vocabulary will be able to construct
more words than those who have poor vocabulary. Similarly, since subject MN was able to
construct more words than other subjects, it can be inferred that subject MN has a rich
vocabulary than the other subjects.
There are many factors which could have affected the results of the current experiment, one of
which is gender. Even though gender differences were not considered in this experiment,
researches have shown that there are gender differences in word-building test. Whipple, (1908),
examined Kirkpatick’s vocabulary test, constructed a word building test and analyzed the
correlations between the two. The results shows that sex difference could not be clearly
established in these two tests, but the differences that appeared were constant in direction and
suggested the superiority of men over women (Whipple, 1908). In the current experiment, gender
differences were not considered since there was only one male subject, however, it can be seen
that gender differences can also affect the results of the study.
It is said that generally 3 and 4 letter words are more than 5 and 6 letter words. Similarly, as seen
from the group results, all the subject has more three- and four-letter words than five and six
letter words. in the experiment conducted by Whipple, (1908), they inspected the lists of the
words constructed by the participants. It was shown that three letter words are in every instance
those most frequently formed and that two letter words and one-letter words, which one might
expect to be most frequent since most simple, stand relatively low. In the current experiment,
subjects were asked to write words starting from three letter words and the results are
inconsistent with the results of the experiment conducted by Whipple, (1908). Hence, the group
results of the current experiment agree with the general tendency.
To analyze the accuracy of the experiment, standard deviation (SD) can be used. Higher SD
indicates that the values are generally away from the mean making the experiment faulty and a
lower SD indicates that the values are clustered close to the mean making the experiment more
accurate. In this experiment, the SD for the total number of words constructed in random
method, the total number of three letter and four-letter words constructed are 4.70, 1.93 and 3.42
respectively. Correspondingly, the SD for the total number of words constructed in systematic
method, the total number of three letter words and four-letter words was calculated to be 8.82,
2.64 and 5.49 respectively. further, the SD for total number of five letter and six letter words
constructed in systematic method is calculated to be 1.52 and 0.28 respectively. Additionally, the
SD for the difference between the two methods in total number of words is calculated to be 7.04.
Since all the SDs are greater than zero, this indicates that the values are further away from mean,
thus decreasing the accuracy of the results.
There were few limitations which were noticed during this experiment. Firstly, age and gender
differences were not considered since there was only one male subject and the age of the subjects
were unknown. Secondly, this experiment consists of a small sample size hence the results
cannot be generalized. Thirdly, since the experiment was carried out late at night, a lot of
subjects were tired which might have affected the results of the study. Lastly, in the instructions
given above it was mentioned to give a trial before starting the experiment, however, in the
PSY213 - Experiment 10Page 6
current experiment, a trial round was not given before starting the experiment which results in
having to repeat the experiment for some of the subjects as they were not able to fully understand
the instructions said by the researcher.
Conclusions:
The current experiment was conducted to study the effect of the systematic method on lingual
imagination by using word-building test. According to the theory, in systematic method more
words will be built than in random method. As seen from the group results, all the subjects
except subject FF, HAA, MSS and MM are according to the theory. It is said that generally 3
and 4 letter words are more than 5 and 6 letter words. Similarly, in the current experiment, three-
and four-letter words were more frequently constructed. The difference between two methods
were significant and showed a positive correlation. Additionally, individual differences were
seen during the experiment. Further, there were some limitations which can be considered while
doing further research.

PSY213 - Experiment 10Page 7

PSY213 - Experiment 10Page 8