University of RichmondUR Scholarship Repository

Honors Theses Student Research

1981

Cognitive impulsivity of children : its handicap andtreatmentGodwin Koon Tat Lau

Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.richmond.edu/honors-theses

Part of the Child Psychology Commons

This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Student Research at UR Scholarship Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion inHonors Theses by an authorized administrator of UR Scholarship Repository. For more information, please contactscholarshiprepository@richmond.edu.

Recommended CitationLau, Godwin Koon Tat, "Cognitive impulsivity of children : its handicap and treatment" (1981). Honors Theses. 1065.https://scholarship.richmond.edu/honors-theses/1065

3 3082 01030 8624

C oe,ni ti ve I !!,pulsi vi ty of Children:

Its Handicap and Treatment

Godwin Koon Tat Lau

University of Richmond

1

'fhe nature of coo1i ti ve impulsi vity has been cxtern3i vely

rese2rched in the litereture. Despite the different interpretations

of the concept of "cocnitive irc1rnlr�ivity", it is 2;0reed thcit

cocni ti ve im1mlsi vi t.:.,• is o h::mdicqJ for children. '/his paper,

based on tacan's (1965) model of impulsivi.�y, Bttempts to

examine the effects of cot,ni ti ve impulsi vi ty on childrc1 l in

different ereas, such as affective/behavioral, educatio�al

and cocnitive. In the latter section of the p8per, �ifferent

treatment procrams ere discussed.

The cocnitive variable of impulsiveness is 2lw2ys referred

to ss "conceptu2l tempo". The l8tter w2s dofin2d c0y :;·:c;. ::.n (1'JC5)

as a dimension of cor;r:i tive style which he called "F:efJection­

Ir:-:pulsi vi ty." The reflection-irnpulsi vi ty dimension es:::-,enti31ly

describes a child's tendency to displ2y fast or �lo� response

timer;, wi tt correr,pondint: mrmy or few s-rrors, in pro'olr:1.:

situations with hieh response uncertainty (i.e. protle1�s with

meny al tern2,to 2nsv1ers). As such, irnpulsi ve children tend to

respond quickly �ithout considering all the available alter­

natives, cmd conseq uei1tly m2ke m2ny mistal,es. Reflective children,

in contn.1 st, consider the al ternoti ves carefully, v.-ithllold

res:pondint until ·they have a hi[;h probr.tility of tcin;; correct

and consequently Dake few mistakes. The most frequently employed

instrurrwnt to 2ssess cocnitive reflection-irnpulsivity is the

12-i tern T<,2tchinc Ic2ir.1iliar :?ic;ures rrest (;. Fi"11 : Y21�c:m, Rosrr.2n,

D2y, AlLcrt, end lhilips, 19(!}). rrhe r:FP'I' is 2 rn2_tch-2-:::;mrrpl0

2

perceptual recoe;ni tion task in v1hich the child is shown a

sinGle picture of a familiar object and is instructed to select

from an array of six variants one picture identical to the

stand8rd. On each of the test's twelve items, errors and

latency time are recorded to identify the deeree of conceptual

reflection-irnpulsi vi ty. In order to classify children as

impulsi ve oE fefl�c:t.iy_e, a group of children must be tested on

the �FFT. Typically, if the child's mean latency is above the

[roup mean and his total errors are below the croup mean,

he is desicnated reflective. If the child's mean latency is

below the group mean and his total errors are above the croup

mean, he is desicnated impulsive.

Reflection-impulsi vi ty has been sho·,m to be a relatively

reliable and valid coc;ni ti ve style dimension (at least for

children six years of age or older) that has important sic­

nificance to child development (Nelson & Finch, 1977),

A number of studies, usine the KFFT, have found the relation­

ship between coe;nitive impulsivity and impulsive behavior

amonc children. Teacher rating scales and parent ratine scales

both indicated a relationship betvveen impulsivi ty and impulsive

behavior. Finch, Fleminc, and Spirito (1980) asked teachers

of emotionally di�turbed children at a residential mental

health center for children to rate on the Conners Teacher

Questionnaire (Conners, 1969) in their classrooms. Their findincs

showed that impulsive children displayed si1�ific�ntly more

3

problem behavior. Specifically, the impulsive children scored

si;r,nificantly hi[,her on Conners factors reflectinr.; aGgression,

distractibility and hyperactivity. �onttomery and Finch (1975)

asked te2chers to complete Locus of Conflict Rating Scales

(Armentrout, 1978) on their en�ionally disturbed students.

An extern8lization and an internalization score can be derived

from this scale. In internalization of conflict, the impulses

are highly controlled and the conflict is between impulses

and their inhibitions. In externalization of conflict, impulses

are freely discharged into the environment and the conflict

is between the child's uninhibited impulsive behavior and

the reactions they bring about in others. They found that

children with an impulsive cognitive style were found to be

externalizers while children with a reflective co�nitive style

were found to be internalizers. The Classroom Behavior

Inventory (Schaefer & Aaronson, 1966) reouires the teacher

to rate a number of the child's in-class behavior on a 4-point

continuum. �cKinney (1975) in his study demonstrated that

boys classified as impulsive on the �F?T were rated by teachers

as being less task-oriented and less considerate than their

reflective peers. Girls classified as impulsive in this

study were rated by the teacher as beine: more distractable.

In another study, Finch and Nelson (1976) asked parents to

rate the Virginia Treatment Center Behavioral Questionnaire

(Batchelder & Hammett, 1970) on their emotionally d�sturbed

sons. The results showed that in contrast to reflective

l.J,

emotionally disturbed boys, impulsives were more likely to

talk of others blaminc them unfairly, threaten to harm them­

hit and bully other children, and be excessively

rouch in play. Clearly, the above research studies found that

impulsive children have more behavioral and affective problems

than their reflective counterparts.

There also exists a fair amount of evidence to indicate

that an impulsive cognitive style exerts a handicappinc

influence in the educational process. Kagan (1965) found

that children classified as impulsive on the f..F?T perform

significantly poorer on measuies of reading proficiency. In

his study, eacl1 of lJO children was given visual-matchinc

problems (�FFT) involving designs and pictures and readine­

recotnition tests at the end of the first and second Grade.

Results indicated that impulsive subjects, those with fast

response time ond hith error scores on the visual-matchinc

tests, made more errors in reading EnG°lish words on both occa­

sions t� n the reflective subjects. Another study by Ka�an

2nd his a ssocici tes (F a1-:an, re arson &- VJelch, 1966) demonstrated

that impulsives of �he first grade children had faster

response times and hieher error scores on the inductive rea­

soninc tests. in other words, impulsive children have

poorer inductive reasoning power in contrast to the reflective

children. Katan (1966) clid another study with the impulsive

children and found that they were poorer in serial lcarnin�.

In his study, he used third cradd students previously classified

5

2s oi ther reflective or impulsi vo c:nd they wore 20minlstered

a seri21 learnine t2sJ: under three different conditions: a threat

croup, 2 rejection croup 2nd a control croup. In the experiment

the experimenter told the child that he w2s c;oinc: to test his

memory and the child was ureed to do as well 2s he could. The

experimenter sllowed the subject to pr2ctice with two lists of

three and .four words e2ch until the subjects understood the

nature of the task. The criterion task consisted of l� different

lists of 12 familiar words each. Each o.f the lists contained

six words th8t belonced to a conceptual catecory, but eoch of

these conceptu2lly related words was surrounded by 8 word unrelated

to that concept. The six rem2ininL worrts in eoch liGt were

minimally related to each other or to the concept cont2ined in

that list. After 8dministration of 2 lists, the thre2t group

was told that the next lists were difficult, the rejection croup

w2s told that their performance W8S poor, 2nd the control c:roup

v:nc �iven no special communication. �L'he exi-ierirnental inter­

vention was to arouse 2nxiety over possible failure in the

threat croup and to arouse anxiety over the ex�miner's disapprov?l

of the child's performance in the rejection croup. Results

showed that impulsive subjects in all eroups reported more

incorrect words before 2nd after experimental intervention.

Reflective boys who �ere told the next lists were difficult

showed the larc;est incre2se in incorrect words. Lesisk (1978)

investicated the relationship .. 'cetween the reflection-impulsi vi ty

6

dimension and readine, and his results were in a£reernent with

Kagan's findin�s. From his study, he found reflective first

Grade Girls scored sicnificanily higher than impulsive Eirls

on �11 reading tests while reflective first grade boys

scored sit,nificantly higher than impulsive boys on the critical

readin� measures. Further support for the importance of a

reflective attitude in reading proficiency comes from a study

by Egeland (1974), who found improved readinr comprehension

among inner-city schools 5 months after employing a training

protram that successfully increased their reflectivity. Impulsive

children also have been demonstrated to perform significantly

poorer:i on rnea sure s of ::=: ..>:' i thrn8 tic a chi evernent. Cathcart and

Liedtke (1969) f6und that the students the best in �athematics

are those who are more reflective and take lancer to consider

the responses. They believed that students who hesitate before

responding should not be underrated since their hesitation

may be due to their cognitive style rather than to their

lack of ability. �esser (1970) did a retrospective study on

the stability of the cognitive disposition of children over

two 2nd a h2lf year period. He found that children who failed

a rrade were discovered to be significantly more impulsive

than their peers! but hif�hly comparo.ble in verbal intellir,ence.

In his study, 65 first�grade boys who were first administered

the Id?F'l1 in grade 1, 7 were found to have failed 2 e:;rade 2

years later. Of these seven, five were impulsive, one was reflective,

?

and one was slow and inaccurate in erade 1. Two years later

the same seven children were still sienificantly more impulsive,

as indicated by the I', 12FT, than the sample as a whole. Despite

the above evidence showinc that co;':ni ti ve irnpulsi v,i ty can exert

handicappint influence in the educ8tion2.l process, we need to

take a cautious position since research results are far from

conclusive. Finch, ronteomery and Kemp (1974) failed to find

a relationship between coenitive style and academic achievement

in emotionally disturbed children. Sixty-five emotionally

disturbed children were zidrninistered the f',,FF'l' and stand2.rd

achievement tests. Results indicated th at impulsive and reflective

children did not differ on their levels of academic achievement.

However, when actual crade placement was considered, impulsive

children were found to be placed two grade below their reflective

counterparts.

As far as the impulsive children's cocnitive development

is concerned, there are many studies indicating that impulsive

children manifest less mature levels of coe,ni ti ve developrr,ent.

Finch, Edwards and Searcy (197?) administered �FFT and the

Visual-Aural Ditit Span Test (Koppitz, 1970) to 42 subjects

to investi�ate the relationship between the reflection-impulsivity

co�nitive dirner1sion and short-term memory. Results showed that

on all memory ta sJrn, reflective did sicnif icantly better than

did impulsi ves. According to Finch and f/ ontgomery ( 197J),

reflective were found to employ more mature questiors than did

impulsive ones. In their study, 44 emotionally disturbed

children were 2dniinistered the r-:fFT and after which lJ most

impulsive and lJ most reflective were chosen. �-'hey then were

administered Fixed Alternatives Question-Asking Game (�osher &

Hornsby, 1966) in which subjects sought information by askinc

questions that could be answered either "yes" or "no".

Results demonstrated that impulsive children emitted one hypo­

thesis-scanning question after another in an apparent attempt

to cuess the correct solution immediately while the reflective

children delayed their initial impulse to guess and paused

to consider the possible alternatives. Reflective children

on a variety of perceptual, conceptual and perceptuomotor

problem-solvinc tasks consistently performed better than

impulsive counterparts. On a color-form matching test, which

permitted subjects to match the standard on the basis either

of color o� form, reflective children Lave more form responses

(the more mature answers) than did impulsive childr�n (Katz, 1971).

Other studies showed that reflectives had superior short term

visual memory on a visual recoGnition task in which the child

had to recall which of two similar pictures had been presented

previously (Siecel,-Kirasie, & Kilburg, 197J). Reflectives

were demonstrated to be more successful in solvint mazes

thnn the impulsive u U)hipc, 1971; irJein trc1 ub, 1973) . 'J'he less

mature level:...; of COL',niti vc development of the iwpul::;i ve

children have ulso been demonstrated witl1 a number of �iacetian­

typc tosks, includini:�: tests of life concept ( Derzonsky, 197L"r);

role takint skills (Clenwick &, Burka, 1975); conservation tasks

9

( Darsti s <-; .Ford, 1977) . Ey cind larc;e, cot:ni ti ve impulsi vi ty

has been demonstrated as a handicap to children's co0nitive

development.

In the social and moral belrnvior dimencions, research

studies found that impulsives were less attentive and less

mature in moral judgment. Welch (1973) found that impulsive

preschoolers likely to start and stop their activities and

to chat or roam between activities, but reflectives sustain

attention even while chatttn�. In moral maturity, Schleifer

and Dougl2s (1973) found that reflectives had a more advanced

st80e of moral judc;ment. They used stories to elicit judgment

about relative goodness and badness. Level of moral maturity

W8S scored on the basis of subjects aw8reness of the intention

of the actor as opposed to his reliance on cbnsequences. Results

clearly indicated that reflectives made moral judcment on the

basis of intentions rather than consequences.

In addition to the above research findings showing that

co6nitive impulsivity is a handicap or a liability to normal

child development, impulsives are found in much higher pro­

portions than reflectives among children diacnosed as hyperactive,

brain-damaged, epileptic and mentally retarded (i:esser, 1976).

In order to rem_edy this rel8ti vely f:tzl-le per::;onali ty trait,

many different tre2 trncnt ;;.1pproc:ichcs had been rn3dc to slter

their conceptual ternpo. Al thou0h the remedial p:co�:r::1,i;.3 _are

not perfect, they do yield µromisini results.

10

'11wo main str8 tegie:::;, each coming frora different conceptw 1

views of cotnitivc style, seem to be promisinc methods in

attempting to modify coi:::;nitive impulsivity - cocnitive train­

in� approaches and operant conditione techniques.

The rationale 'oehind the co3;ni ti ve tq:iining 3pproach is

that what a child does durini the interval betwe�n the pre­

sentation of a problem and subsequent response is an important

covert element in his cognitive style, and therefore affects

his ability to solve problems correctly. r,:einchenbaum and

Coodnmn (1971) did two studies with young impulsive children

in order to see the effectiveness of a co0nitive self-verbalization

treatment 1-,rogrz,m in modifying non-verbal behavior. In their

first study an in individual training method which asked the

impulsive subjects to talk to themselves overtly and then

covertly was compared with two control groups. Results indicated

that self-instructional croup improved sicnificantly on a

variety of psychometric tests which assessed cognitive impul­

sivity, motor ability and performance IQ. In their second

study, f.':e ichenbaurn and Goodman ( 1971) a tternpted to ol ter cof�-

ni ti ve tempo with experimental models r2.ther than under natural

conditions. The purpose of the study was to compare the efficacy

of covni tive self-instruction to a rnodelinu; prucedure m1d a u

control [;roup in alter inc: the 3 t tentional stn:i tecy of irnpulsi ve

children. 'l:he essential stratet�Y used v18s -to twve the irnpulsi ve

children observe a peer or adult model performinc on the �FFT

11

or similar tcJS}{ while verb:::ilizinc rcflecti ve response ::;tratcgics

in the modelihg: croup. The su�jects in the self-instruction

trsininc; r:;roup were told to perform the task while speakinc the

instructions aloud to themselves, much as the model they observed

had just done (e.[;. I have to look carefully at this one, then

this one''). Results showed that both modcli�� procedure and

self-instruction traininc increased response latency time but

only the self-instruction training resulted in a significant

decrease in errors.

Recently, Finch, 1/iilinson, Uelson and ftontgoraery (1975)

did a study to invcsticatc the relative effectiveness of cog­

nitive traininc and traininc to delay before respondinc in

modifyinc cognitive impulsivity in emotionally disturbed

children. In their study, three groups of younc_;sters were

compared. One broup would receive train.int:; in verbal self­

instructions, a second group would receive only training to

delay before respondin�, and the third croup was essentially a

test-retest control croup. Their results indicated that the

children who were trained to employ verbal self-instructions

were less impulsive in their respondin[., while those children

who were trained to delay took loneer before respondini but

made as many errors as �reviously.

Teachinc: irnpulsi ve children the visual scanninc strategies

directly is another promisin:_� method to decrease impulsi vi ty.

EGeland (197l�) demonstrated that his intervention resulted

in sicnificantly improved perforrnnnce on the r: Ff'l' and simil2r

tosks (in both. lc:itency Dnd errors), and also hc.Jd a l_;eneraliuition

effect to a test of readinc achievement. Ec:;eland taucht his

subjects the explicit rules and basic strategies, which

included looking at the standard and all the alternatives,

breakinc down the alternatives into component parts, and checkin�

the standtird to determine its d-orrect form. Other studies using

teachin� scanninc strate�ies (Alt�rt, 1969; Nelson, 1969;

Gaines, 1969; Patterson & Debus, 1974) were unanimous in their

findings: increased �FFT latencies and decreased errors.

The operant conditioning approaches are another kind

of method used to modify cor;niti ve impulsi vi ty. 'i;his theo­

ratical viewpoint assumes that the cognitive style one employs

is based on motivation. It is believed that one's motivation

to solve a problem is larcely a function of the environ-mental

c ontin1�encies surrounding the situation; therefore, the

inipulsive child responds impulsively because of lack of sufficient

motivation to ·errvloy reflective response from his coenitive­

behavioral repertoire. Based on this understandinc of impulsive

children's impulsive response, we need to provide sufficient

motivation for them to elicit the desired coenitive style

rather than tea.chine them a new cocni ti ve style. Brie::;z�s ( 196G)

in his dissertation was successful in increasinc latency and

clecreasint.::; errors by using an operant oppro8ch which rein-

forced decreased or increased response l8tcncies. In his

study, rcflecti ve and impulsive fourth-[�I'c7Cle boys were rein­

forced by means of colored li[hts for sl1owint eit�er increased

or decreased latency from th�ir previous responses. Reinforcement

1 -:,, .,

for incre3sint l�tencies produced both lon�er lDtencies and

few errors, while reinforcement for decreasin� latencies

led to shorter latencies and more errors.

Ey usinL a social punishment condition, nassari and �hack

(1972) found th2t tl1e number of errors both re:flective and

impulsive first-�rade boys made on a two-choice discriminotion

le8rninr:.; t2sk w8s si;:nificantly reduced. Erictson, :-:ync rind

Routh (1973) penalized educable mentally retarded children

for making errors on the T1'2tchinz_;; ?mnili2r Fit·;ures �:est by

makinc them cive up tokens exchan�eable for food. The results

supoorted the response cost strategy which led to increased

latencies and decreased errors.

Recently, l'<elson, Finch 8nd Eook8 (1975), v;o1.�kin;_; ·::ith

emotionally disturbed children, demonstrated th8t the techniques

of response cost Dnd reinforcement 'Nere effective in rr;odifyinc

co�nitive in�ulsivity both in terms of dccre2sed errors 2nd

increased response time. In their study, they suciested that

ref'lection-iu:pulsi vi ty dimension might involve c1 moti v2tion­

for-success compo::-ient, 2s well 2 s 8 fe2r-of-failure one. In

order to test the hypothesis, they compared a croup of impulsive

and reflective children 2nd their response to reinforcement

versus response cost. Results indicated that impulsive children

• • co .. ' • 1 "l t. respond �ctter under conditions Oi response-cos� wni e rei ec ive

children respond ·Letter under conditions of reinforcement.

In other v:orcJs, the irnpulsi ve children did much better v:hcn they

v:ere ci ven their reinforccrs ,_,t the be::�innini� of the session

2r:d ha.d one tal:cn ::.:iv:r y for e2 ch ;nistc:d-;:e tlwt they mc.�de.

Kend8ll and Finch (1976; 197G) developed a treatment

packace wl1ich incorporates modelin[, self-instruction8l train­

inc 2nd response cost procedures. This new stratecy was demon­

strated to be effective in producin3 positive ch2n;�es both on

I, fFT perf orm2nce r.:nd on te2 cher-ra ted cl8 ssroorr, behavior.

In their first study, Kendall and Rinch (1976) used 8 multiple

baseline design in order to evaluate respcinse-cost and self­

instruction procedure with this youn�ster. The results showed

that his observed behaviors were improved and the positive

effects were generalized to the school situation as indicated

from report card and teacher ratinc;s. HavinG received these

encd�acinc results from the case study, Kendall and Finch (1978) /\.

did a croup comparison study in order to evaluate the combined

package of response-cost and verbal self-instructions on the

impulsive behavior of emotionally disturbed children. Again,

results were encouraging with some generalization effect to

the school situation.

After so many years of research, cognitive impulsivity

has been clearly demonstrated to be handicapping to child

development. Jt has been found that impulsive children in

contrast to reflective children2re l8ss concerned about the

quality of their cocnitive product, ore less 2ble to sustain

attention, are more agtressive, make fewer adv2nced moral

judpnents, ond 8re less considenite to others. In educ2tional

process, impulsive children are deficient in readinc and

mathematics skills; they deal with problems in a �on-analytic

fc1shion. As cognitive impulsivity is a deficit for children,

15

rnmty rcmedi8l prot:n,ras had been emyloyed to modify cot_'.;ni ti vc

style. The cocni ti ve a1->:i;ro2ches and the oper2nt condi tion,ing

approaches are the two main stratecies used in the remedial

procr3rns. In cof;ni ti vc approaches, self-instruction tr2 inin.��

recieves the rnost attention. Verbal self-instructions are

8ctually step-ty-step verLalizations about.the p�oblem definition,

proLlern appro8ch, focusini:.:; of attention, copinc st8tements,

and statements of self-reinforcement. In operant condtioninr,

approaches, the response-cost procedure appears to be a very

effective strate�y to modify cognitive style. Recently, the

treatment yacka0e incorporating self-instructional traininc,

response-cost procedures, and modeling has been demonstrated

to brine desired chances in impulsive children. By and large,

2lthough none of the remedial stratecies can claim full success

at this time, they do brinG promisin;::; effects in modify in;..:;

cocnitive impulsivity to a certain extent. In c6nclusion,

lt is;clear that coL_;nitive impulsivity in children deserves

our attention and further research on remedial strateries

is necessc:iry.

i\lbert, J-. I odif'ic2tion . of the im·oulsi ve conce-otu2.l style.

Unpublished doctor�l dissert2tion, University of Illinois, 1969.

lrbentrout, J. P9rei1t2l child-rearinz attitudes ond preadolescents'

:i;>rotlern beh::::vio:cr;. J·oun12l of Consultinf� r:•nd Clinic2l

:l'sycholo;;y, 1 S)7c.i, b7, lj-9-71: .•

Eorstis, �:.;. ,·;. & .?ord, L .H. Jr. Reflection-impulsi vity, conserv�Jtion,

2nd the development of ability to control cognitive tempo.

Child Development, 1977, 48, 953-959-

S::.tchelder, E.G. L: E,11:;.:ctt, L.C. _; l:el12vior2l nucs'tionn�,ire.

Pe.per prer;e;,tt:cl r-:t the 22nd r.mrnsl meetint.. of the ArnericDn

�":.ssoci2tion of l E:,:, cLi2tric :�:er-vices, l hil2c}elpl1i2, 1970.

1:erzonsky, 1,, .D., 61c.lr2>�0, I.: .A. f:; ,:illisn,s, C; .'l'. �- odific2tion

of the life concept in reflective end impulsive children.

J·ourn2l of ;__;enetic 1-'sycholo;;;y, 1977, 13C, 11-1?.

Ln r,xperirnent2l ctudy of reflection-i1P;:puloi vi ty

in children. (Doctoral dissertation, University of

r i· 11"10,.. ot"' 1 <)( ( ) ni· � s:er·.1..l,::cti· on- .''- 'e,,!=':tr2. ct��, 1 °C 8, 2C, ,.. l .:;. ,.> i<', I , ; _; • ., - - � • ' - - - /

-:,;'-91 -,­_;'J -1., . (University r,:icrofilrns No. 68-1(10)

C2thc2rt, c:. fz Liedtke, ;;'. Reflccti vencss/impulsi veness and

rnathe::r,atics 2chievernent. 1\ri 1:hmetic 1l'eocher, 19(9, 16,

Conners, C .F. Ii. te&chcr ratinc sc2le for use in drw:; stt�dies

v.ri th childrer;.. Ar.1eric2n Journ2l of Psychic:try, 19( S',

17

E�:el::md, 13. 'J'roiniu�, irr:pulsi ve childn.m in the use of more

efficient sc;:__:nnin0 strate��ies. Child Development, 197l4,,

!±.2, 165-171.

Erickson, E .!\. , ':: 2ync, L. D. f:1: r:outh, D .I: . A response-cost

procedure for reduction of ili:pulsi ve Leh2vior of 2.c8dernically

handicapped children. Journal of Abnornol Child Psychology,

1973, 1, J50-J57,

?inch, A. J. Jr. , Ed't'r;,,rds, l�. L t:. 0earcy, �r. n. ?efle ctio:n-

• 1 • • t ' ' I ' impu si vi· y ano. snor-c -cerm memory in emotion2lly disturbed

children. llnpublished manuscript, ·•:ir,�,ini8 �i'reatment Cer.ter

for Children, 1977.

/ii1ch, A. J • Jr., ?leminc;, C. C. t� c�piri to, A. I11ipulsi ve co,:·ni ti ve

style 2nd h:pulsi ve teh8vior in er:iotion2lly disturbed

children. l:npu1.:,lished m2.nuscript, ?ir;�inic: 1.:1rec1trnent

Center for Children, 1980.

!inch, A.J.Jr., & iontGomery, L.E. Reflcction-impulsivity and

information scekin� in emotionally disturted children.

Journal of Atnormal Child Fsycholo�y, 1973, 1, J58-J�2.

?'inch, A.J .Jr, I-.'ont.�:o:mery, L.E. t: Eemp, �:; .E.. rteflection-

impulsivit::; a:hd 2czdernic c:ttainrnent in emotionally

disturced children. Journ2l of Abnormrul Child Psycholo, :_y,

1c;7 1' r:, '?1 7L1 ., 'r, !.;:_t ' - •

; edification o.f c:n impulsive co_;ni ti ve tempo in ernotior:c' lly

disturted l:,oys. J-ournsl of f�tnorrncl Child Psvcholo.,::;v, 197 5,

.}, L:-9-52.

Gaines, P.D. The modification of attentionol strategies in

·children. ( Report I-w. 1, Developmentc11 Fro(::;rc:m, DeiJartment

of Psycholocy, University of I:'.ichi�)?.n) . Unputlished

manuscript, Is.arch, 1971.

iaenwick, D.S. t� Burke, A a i-1. �l. . Co.::;ni ti ve impulsi vi ty 2nd role.-

taking skills.in elementary scho�l children. Perceptual

and kotor �.'.kills, 1975, 41, Sh?-552 .•

Heider, E. R. Inform2,tion processing and the modification .of

an "impulsive conceptual tempo". Child Development,. 1971

L}2, 1276-1281.

1(8.:_:;:::.n, J. Impulsive and refl1ecti ve children: :�icnificsnce of

conceptual tempo. In J .D. Erumboltz O�cl.) Learnin.,; 8nd

the educctional process, Chicago: Rand �c�illy, 1965�

Eai:;':an, J. Reflection-impulsi vi ty: ··The .;enerali ty and dynamics

of conceptual tempo. Journal of Almorrnal I'sycholO£;Y,

1966, 71, 17-24.

Eae;an, J., Fenrson, L. & :Jelch, L. Conceptw=;l impulsivity ond

inductive reasoninL;. Child Develo£ment, 196t, J7, 533-591.J-

Kr:\"�an, J. , F:.osrnan, L. L., Day, D., Albert, J. f:.� ·Philip::;, \:1.

IY).form�tion processini in the child: Sic:nificance of

2n�lytic 8nd reflective attitudes. Psychological

1·;2tz, · J .• L. Heflection-irnpulsi vi ty 2nd color;-form sort ins.

Child Development, 1971, L1.2, 745-7511-.

Kendill, P .. C. L Finch, A.J.Jr. A coenitive behavioral treatrn�nt

for impulsive control: A c2se study. ,Tournal of Consultiinr

mid Clinical Fsycholoi�Y, 197C, 4L�, 852-857.

19

F oppi tz, E ,l; • 'i'he --,·j_ sual Aural· 8i0i t ;;p2n '11est v.ri th elemerit2ry

school children.

26, J49-J52.

Journal of' Clinic2l f'cvcholo, .. ,. i--\Y_ ,,-,,y I 1970,

Lesiak, Judi. '::'he re:fle ction-impulsi vi ty_ dimension 2nd reading

alii.lity. Rec1.djnc� VJorld, 1978, 1?, 333-339.

1' c: ssari, D, J. f..: Schack, r: • L. Discrimination lecirniniS by reflective

rmd impulsive children as 8 function of reinforcement

schedule. DcvE,lopmentpl Ps:ycholo,:y, 1972, 6, 18;;.

l eichenbaurn, D. & · Goodn,an, .. T. T:c·2 in.in; inrpulsi ve children to

talk to th ems el vcs: · A means of deve lopin::.; self-control.

J·ourrrnl of Acnormal l's;vcholor:y, 1971, 77, 115-126.

l-0sccr, S.E. Reflection-impulsivity: a review. Psycholocical

:Sulletin, 197G, QJ., 1026-10.52.

Lont0omery, L.E. b Pinch, A.J .Jr •.. Reflection-if�pulsivity c:md

locius of conflic� in emotionally disturbed children.

Journal oi' (_:enetic Psycholo,:.v, 1975, 12(, 89-91.

,, , , -r, I\ 1-.osner, 1' .1 •• " '·ror-"r-b,i. (.,; l, !•'-' JI J.R. On askinc questions. In J.::. rrunner,

R.E. Oliver, {'.; P.F:. Greenfield (Eds.), �3tudies in co::nitive

:--ro,·:th. nev: Yo::::1-:. ';Jiley, 1966.

lielson, rp ·,;i _!,, • J. • The effects of training in attention development

on observinL in reflective ond ir:1pulsivc di.ildren

(Doctor2l dissertation, University of r:inne:.:rnta, 1969).

1Jissertc1tion ,:\bstr;;;cts, 1969, 29, 26.59-B. (University

ricrofilms Ho.(B:17, 703)

Lolson� ',� .f;1., li'ir\ch, A .J .Jr., cl Eook J .F. Effects of rein-

for cement 2nd resuonse-cost on co:::.ni ti ve stsrle in � � J

emotionally disturbed children. Journol of Abnormal

20

I:elson, · .. :.r-.;. L 1inch, .A.J.Jr. i .. ' O l�tl0

-'." \T l0

• ..., ' ••

- · . .... ...... zi .L .1.f •. co:,ni'ti ve impulsi vi ty:

the relative e:fficscy of co;�;niti vc and response-cost

str2te�ies. Unpublished manuscript, Virsinia Treatment

Center for Children, 1977.

of conceptual tempo in ii::pulsi vc children. Unpublished

manuscript, University cf-Sydney, 1974.

Sc_.h2.effer, E.;3. &.k:cronson, L.R. C1assr-oom beh2vior inventory.

N2tional Insiitutc of Kental Health, Bethesda, Vd. : Author,

196(, ( mimeo) •

:chliefcr, t. � �ou;l2s, U.I. �:oral judiments, behavior 2nd

C0{)1i ti �,e style in yount; chil0.ren. Cc:mr cli2n J ourncl o:f

Shipe, D. Impulsivity and locus of control as predictors of

achievement and adjustment in mildly ret2rded and border-

line youth. Amcric2n Journ8l of tent2l Deficiencv, 1971,

Ji, 12-22.

,, · · 1 ' 1'7 T" • •

I' " � T• • 11�u"' - - ,:, '"' ·_.1ie,�e t .::�.i:� .. , ... �].1''8SlC, ,;.L.,. ('i; bl .. i J-_b, 1 ... 1\..

mernory in :i.�e:.fle cti ve and ir:1pulsi ve preschool children.

Child Developr,:ent, 197J, L:,lt, 6.51-C:56.

A �2tur2listic study if the free play behsvior of

reflective 2nd impulsive four yesr olds. ?2per presented

2t the rnectL-16 oI the E:ocicty for Rescc::i_;ch in Child

De\0elop1:1ent, I'hil2dephi2, !�pril, 19?3.

�;ei:ntn::ut, S .. A. :'.::elf-control 88 c:. correl2te of f8ilure 8nd

frur:trotion on rcflecti ve 2l1d irnpulGi ve children.

Jou:c:121 o:i:' �,;xnoriir.ental Cb5_ld }s,ycholo,:y, 19?1�-, 17, 353l359.