Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

Domain Discrimination - France


Published on

  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

Domain Discrimination - France

  1. 1. The Effects of Participation in Dance on the Attitudes of French Children as Measured by Domain Discrimination Nelson D. Neal Jeanne Marie Dineur The following article is a reprint from Dance Research Journal, 23/2, (Fall 1991) pages 11-16. INTRODUCTION It is generally agreed that attitudes are composed of elements from the affective, behavioral, and cognitive domains. The affective component has been referred to as a feeling or an emotional response of liking or disliking, a gut reaction, or sympathetic nervous activity. The behavioral component includes overt actions or intentions of action, and verbal statements regarding future behavior. The cognitive component includes knowledge and beliefs of the attitude object that describe its characteristics, and its relationship to other objects (Breckler, 1984; Katz, 1960; Morris & Stuckhardt, 1977). Recent attitude research suggests discriminating between the three domains, either by measuring each or by specifying which one is the focus of concern. Discrimination may be appropriate since the three domains are distinguishable from one another and correlation among them are sometimes moderate (Breckler, 1984). Discrimination among attitudinal domains also appears to be necessary because it has been found that directing change at any one of the psychological domains may affect a shift in the other two (Cialdini et al., 1976; Katz 1960) and because differences between groups of subjects may fall within one or two of the domains rather than all three (Quattrone, 1985). Morris and Stuckhardt (1977) write that attitudes have six characteristics: they are learned, they have a specific social referent, they are interrelated, they are relatively stable and enduring, they vary in quality and intensity, and they give rise to motivational behavior. The first three are especially relevant to this study. A social referent may be relating a dance movement, such as a leg swing forward, to a movement from sport, such as kicking a ball. These social referents become more specific by using verbal labels, such as "kick," during the demonstration of a dance movement. During teaching the use of verbal labels enhances the memorization and recall of specific skills for beginning learners (Magill, 1985; Schmidt, 1982), making it easier to remember movements that were performed (Lord and Petiot 1985). There is evidence that music also aids in recall of serial movement sequences in young novice ballet students (Starkes et al. 1987). Whether verbal labels or music are used to enhance recall, it follows that once the individual can recall experiences or movement skills related to the attitude object, he or she can then express that attitude (Wood 1982, Wood et at. 1982). Many non-discriminatory studies of attitudes toward physical activity can be found since the inception of Kenyon's (1968) attitude questionnaire. His survey was modified by Simon and Smoll (1974) to study children's attitudes toward physical activity and was later modified by Schutz, Smoll, and Wood (1981) to assess children's attitudes toward specific sports. It appears that this same type of development in the study and assessment of attitudes toward specific types
  2. 2. of dance - modern, jazz, ballet, social, or folk - as well as the distinction between psychological domains in such research is still needed. In a review of recent literature on attitudes toward dance only three studies were found that had discriminated between psychological domains; Neal et al. (1986), Neal and Laakso (1987), and Neal and Fortin (1989). Other studies on children's attitudes toward dance include Allison (1976), Burton (1977), Halsted (1980), and Neal (1983 and 1985). Reviews of Allison (1976), Burton (1977), and Halsted (1980), may be found in Neal (1985). The study by Neal et al. (1986) compared attitudes toward dance of children from four countries. Findings suggested that the dance attitudes of both boys and girls from Canada, Finland, Italy, and the United States were significantly different in one or two domains but not in all three. The 1987 study by Neal and Laakso compared Finnish and American children's attitudes toward dance and found American boys' posttest scores in the cognitive domain were significantly higher than those of Finnish boys. Both groups of boys showed significant positive shifts in their attitude toward dance after participation in the four dance classes between the pretest and the posttest. The study also found American girls' posttest scores in the cognitive domain were significantly higher than Finnish girls' scores and that Finnish girls' posttest scores in the behavioral domain were higher than American girls' scores. There significant positive shifts from pretest to posttest in all three domains for the American girls, while the Finnish girls showed significant shifts only in the affective and cognitive domains. Neal and Fortin (1989) targeted the affective domain during the teaching or exposure phase of their study. Exposure to dance involved student participation in four specific modern dances over four consecutive days, and results showed significant positive attitudinal shifts from pretest to posttest. The subjects were all French Canadian children who had been split into four groups, three experimental and one control. Those who had direct experience with the male English- speaking American teacher showed significant shifts in the affective and behavioral domains. Those who had direct experience with the female French-speaking Canadian teacher showed significant shifts in the affective and cognitive domains, while those who had direct experience with the male French-speaking Canadian teacher showed significant shifts only in the affective domain. No significant shift was found in any domain for the control group. Since all three teachers taught the dances in the same order with the same music and used the same verbal labels it appeared that participation in the dance classes had some effect on the subjects' attitudes. Neal (1985) compared pretest and posttest total dance attitude scores at three distinct times following four days of teaching modern dance; immediately after, four weeks after, and 17 weeks after participation. Significant differences between the pretest and both the immediate and four week posttest scores were found, but no significant difference was found between the pretest and the 17-week posttest scores. The design did not discriminate between he three domains, which may explain why no significant difference was discovered between he pretest and the 17-week posttest. Neal (1985) also found no significant difference in dance attitudes between three groups of subjects who had participated in three different "styles" of dance.
  3. 3. Three of the studies in which Neal was involved (Neal 1985, Neal and Laakso 1987, Neal and Fortin 1989) used the same attitude instrument (Neal's Dance Attitude Inventory - see Appendix), teaching methodology, specific dances, and music over a four day period. The main differences between these studies were the nationality of the children who participated and the language the teachers spoke during teaching. In all of Neal's studies that have discriminated between psychological domains a shift in the affective attitudes of the subjects has been present at the .05 level of significance. The measurement instrument, Neal's Dance Attitude Inventory (NDAI), is a 30-question instrument with half of the questions stated positively and half negatively. Using the Chronbah alpha test (Brown, 1970) the NDAI pretest was found to be internally consistent for Finnish girls and boys with values of r = .80 and r = .93 respectively, and for American girls and boys with values of r = .89 and r = .91 respectively. This instrument has been translated into French (with slight variations between the version used in CAnada and in France), Finnish, and Italian. The purpose of the current study was to discover if there was a significant difference between posttest attitude scores of two groups of subjects after one group participated in modern dance classes. If a significant difference was demonstrated the study also sought to discover in which domain - affective, behavioral, or cognitive - the difference occurred. METHOD Subjects The subjects (N = 196) were girls (n = 94) and boys (n = 102) enrolled in the sixth grade at St. Michele and St. Marie schools in Solemes, France. The mean age of the girls was 11.7 years, and of the boys, 12.2 years. None of the subjects had ever been exposed to modern dance prior to this study. The experimental subjects (n=115) were in five different classrooms, four in St. Michele and one in St. Marie, while the control subjects (n=81) were in three classrooms at St. Michele that were different from the experimental group classrooms. Materials Attitudes of potential subjects were measured by Neal's Dance Attitude Inventory (1985), which had been translated into French. The French questionnaire was worded so that the meaning and intent of the statements were not lost in the translation. The NDAI pretest was administered to potential subjects by their classroom teachers in May of 1989, and the posttest was administered by the same teachers in June 1989, two days after participation in the dance classes. All 30 questions were scored for the analysis, and any child who did not answer every question was eliminated from the subject pool. Elimination may have been due to accidentally or purposely omitting the answer to a question, or to checking two answers for the same question. Each positive question was scored from four to one and each negative question was scored from one to four. The total score range was 30-120, with scores of 12-48 in the affective and the cognitive domains and 6-24 in the behavioral domain. A repeated measures analysis of covariance (SPSS 1986), with the pretest as the covariate, was used to determine results.
  4. 4. Procedure Exposure to dance was through direct participation in four 45-minute dance sessions during the physical education class meetings over a six day period. The 45-minute session allowed the dance teacher to do a 5-minute follow-the-leader style stretching warm-up for the arms, torso, and legs, and then teach one of the four dances. The progressive part practice method was used to teach each dance and enough time was left at the end of each session for subjects to perform the dance in its entirety. (Progressive part practice involves teaching and practicing part 1 followed by teaching and practicing part 2 and then practicing the two parts as a whole. This followed by teaching and practicing part 3 and then practicing all three parts as a whole.) All five experimental groups of subjects were taught by an American who spoke French during the dance classes. All subjects participated by classroom in learning the same four dances. Although the movements in all four dances may be categorized as modern dance, the words used to describe the movements as they were taught were drawn from the vocabulary of either modern dance (bend, stretch, twist), jazz dance (isolation, jazz hand), or sport (throw, kick, catch). The dances were taught in the same order, with the same music, using the same terminology and verbal cues for each dance for each of the five experimental classrooms. Instructions for the four dances that were taught ("Jazz Dance #1m," "Modern Dance #3," "Sport Dance #1," and "Sport Dance #3") are described in Neal (1985). The control group consisted of three separate classrooms which did not participate in or watch any of the dance classes. RESULTS Statistical analysis indicates significant differences between posttest scores of the experimental and control groups in the affective domain (F[1,182]=5.468, p<.02), in the cognitive domain (F[1,182]=3.971 p<.048), and in total attitude (F[1,182]=6.508, p<.012). There was no significant difference between posttest scores of the two groups in the behavioral domain. Mean dance attitude pretest and posttest scores for the experimental and control groups are listed in Table 1. Table 2 illustrates the significant differences between posttest attitude scores of the two groups by psychological domain. Mean dance attitude pretest and posttest scores of the experimental group and control group were changed to percentages and are illustrated in Figure 1. Percentages were used to make domain scores equivalent since the behavioral domain had fewer questions than the other two domains. Table 1 Mean Dance Attitude Scores by Group, and Psychological Domain EXPERIMENTAL CONTROL PRE POST CHANGE PRE POST CHANGE AFFECTIVE 40.57 43.36 17.57 18.57 38.00 44.21 BEHAVIORAL 33.73 38.27 14.09 15.54 36.27 38.91 COGNITIVE 37.18 41.00 16.64 16.36 39.36 39.18 TOTAL 38.80 38.04 13.80 15.20 35.00 39.20
  5. 5. Table 2 Diffenrences in Posttest Mean Dance Attittude Scores of Experimental Group in Relation to Control Group by Psychological Doamin AFFECTIVE BEHAVIORAL COGNITIVE TOTAL EXPERIMENTAL +1.92* +1.11 +1.40* +4.41* *significam p < .05 DISCUSSION The study of children's attitudes toward dance is a relatively new area within attitudinal research, and domain discrimination is even newer. In the current study, with the affective domain as the target domain a significant difference in posttest scores between the experimental group and control group was found in the affective domain as well as the cognitive domain. Also, the combined scores of these two domains was sufficient to produce a significant difference between the total dance attitude scores of the two groups. The results from targeting one domain and finding differences in two domains support the premise of Cialdini et al. (1976) that directing charge at one of the three domains may affect a shift in the other two. Also, the results of group differences in two of the three domains follow Quattrone's (1985) premise that significant differences between groups of subjects may fall within one or two of the domains rather than all three. The findings of the current study together with the findings of Neal and Fortin (1989) support the need for domain discrimination in dance attitude research. Since dancing is a type of physical activity it may be beneficial for researchers in the field of physical education, as well as dance, to re-examine previous research. It is possible that a re- analysis of research on children's attitudes toward dance, physical activity, or sport, using domain discrimination, may provide a clearer, more precise interpretation of the results. It may be that studies which found no significant differences between the total attitudes of groups of subjects do in fact have significant findings within one or two of the psychological domains. One implication for further study is to address the length or number of exposures in which subjects participate. Since four participation sessions appeared to have some effect on the subjects' dance attitudes in two domains, perhaps a greater number of exposures lasting more than four days, would make a difference in all three domain. Although this study did not attempt to discover how long the attitude shift would last it is possible that the subjects' attitudes may also endure for an extended period of time as a result of increased exposure, as demonstrated in Neal (1985). A dance unit of tow to four weeks could allow students time to create their own dances after learning "the basics" from the teacher. It would be interesting to discover possible attitudinal differences between teacher-directed and student-directed dance classes.
  6. 6. A second implication from this study might involve a change in who teaches dance to children. One would be hard pressed to find many physical education teachers who voluntarily teach dance as part of their physical education program. Although physical education teachers may state that their students don't like dance or the students' attitudes can't be changed, it may be that if dance were taught by someone who possesses a positive affective attitude the students may perceive dance in a different light (Wood et al. 1982). Whether the teacher was a physical educator or a dance educator would not make any difference as long as the person had a positive attitude toward the dance style being taught. There are many ways to teach modern, jazz, folk, or square dance so that it is interesting for students, and the teacher needs to reinforce his/her positive attitude by making the dance class interesting. The age of the student is another variable that must be considered when teaching dance. That is, a teacher might talk like Bill Cosby when challenging second or third graders to try dance movements, but that method would not work with sixth or seventh grade students. The manner in which the type of dance is presented to the students may be more important than the type of dance that is presented. Further studies might include comparing children's attitudes toward dance between programs in which dance is taught by specialized dance educators and those in which dance is not taught. Additional studies could compare programs in which dance is taught by a dance specialist as opposed to a physical educator. further longitudinal studies should be undertaken to discover if participation in dance classes has no long-term effects on children's attitudes toward dance. REFERENCES Allison, P. (1976). An instrument to measure the creative dance attitudes of grade five children (Doctoral dissertation, University of Alabama, 1976). Dissertation Abstracts International, 37, 7065A. (University Microfilms No. 7712164). Breckler, S. J. (1984). Empirical validation of affect, behavior, and cognition as distinct components of attitude. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 47, 1191-1205. Brown, F. G. (1970). Pnnciples of educational and psychological testing. Hinsdale, IL: The Dryden Press Inc. Burton, C. (1977).1nfiuence of instructional media on attitudes of modern dance students toward movement (Doctoral dissertation, University of Georgia). Dissertation Abstracts International, 38, 6599A. Cialdini, R. B., Levy, A., Herman, C. P., Kozloski, L., & Petty, R. E. (1976). Elastic shifts of opinion: Determinants of direction and durability.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 34(4), 663-672.
  7. 7. Halsted, C. E. D. (1980). An analysis of attitudes and definitions by selected teachers and pupils toward dance in general and dance in the classroom (Doctoral dissertation, Wayne State University). Dissertation Abstracts International, 41, 4330A. Katz, D. (1960). The functional approach to the study of attitudes. Public Opinion Quarterly, 24, 163 - 204. Kenyon, G. S. (1968). Six scales for assessing attitude toward physical activity. Research Quarterly, 39, 566-574. Lord, M., & Petiot, B. (1985, August). A characterization of recreational dance classes. Presentation at AIESEP World Conference, New York. Magill, R. A. (1985). Motor learning concepts ~ applications (2nd ed.). Dubuque, IA: Wm. C. Brown, Publishers. Morris, J. W., & Stuckhardt, M. H. (1977). Art attitude: Gonceptualization and implication. Studies in Art Education, 19(1), 21-28. Neal, N. D. (1983). The effects of a modern dance workshop on the attitude of fourth grade boys and girls. Final report (83-209), Commission for the Arts, Richmond, VA. Neal, N. D. (1985). Assessment of attitude change and position shift in fourth graders after participation in modern dance (Doctoral dissertation, University of Virginia, 1985). Dissertation Abstracts International, 47, 2962A. Neal, N. D., & Laakso, L. (1987). Amerikkalaisten ja suamalaisten peruskoulu laisten tanssiasenteista. Liikunta ja Tieda, 24, 197-199. Neal, N. D., Bonaiuto, P., Giannini, A. M., Laakso, L., and Lord, M. (1986) An internatinal comparison of children's attitudes toward dance. Unpublished presentation, Association Internaitonal des Ecoles Superieur d'Education Physique World Conference, Heidelberg, West Germany, August 22-26, 1986. Neal, N. D. and Fortin, S. (1989). Domain discrimination in dance attitude research. Unpublished presentatin, American Alliance for Health, Physical education, Recreation, and Dance National Convention, boston, April 19-23, 1989. Quattrone, G. A. (1985). On the congruity between internal states and action. Psychological Bulletin, 98(1), 3-40. Schmidt, R. A. (1982). Motor control and learning. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics Publishers. Schutz, R. W. , Smoll, F. L., and Wood, T. M. (1981). Physical activity and sport: Attitudes and perceptions of young Canadian athletes. Canadian Journal of Applied Sport Science, 6, 32-39.
  8. 8. Simon, J. A. and Smoll, F. L. (1974). An instrument for assessing children's attitudes toward physical activity. Research Quarterly, 45, 407-415. SPSS Inc. (1986). SPSSx User's Guide (2nd ed.). Chicago. Starkes, J. L., Deakin, J. M., Lindley, S., & Crisp, F. (1987). Motor versus verbal recall of ballet sequences by young expert dancers. Journal of Sport Psychology, 9, 222-230. Wood, W. (1982). Retrieval of attitude-relevant information from memory: Effects on susceptibility to persuasion and on intrinsic motivation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 42, 798-810. Wood, W., Kallgren, C. A., & Priesler, R. M. (1982). Access to attitude-relevant information in memory as a determinant of Persuasion: The role of message and communicator attributes. Presentation at Midwestern Psychological Association, Minneapolis, MN.
  9. 9. APPENDIX Neal's Dance Attitude Inventory Participants rank each statement on a four-point scale from "agree a lot" to "agree a little," "not sure," and "disagree." Questions scored from 4 to 1 are 2-5, 9, 11-12, 16-18, 21-24, and 29. Questions scored from 1 to 4 are 1, -8, 10, 13-15, 19-20, 25-28, 30. Alphabet letters to the left of each question identify the psychological domain with which it is associated: A = Affective, B = Behavioral and C = cognitive. Two questions are placed in one of two domains, depending on whether they are answered by a girl or boy. C 1. Girls who take dance are not strong. A 2. Dance is all right for little children. B 3. All students in school should have a dance class. C 4. Dance is good exercise. C 5. Dancing can help build strong muscles. C 6. Men who teach dance are not strong. A 7. I would not like having a dancer as a physical education teacher. A 8. Dancing is only for girls. C 9. Dance can improve a person's sports skills. A 10. Dance is a waste of time. C 11. Dance is similar to sports. B 12. If I learned a dance I would like to show it to other people. B/A 13. Girls should not be required to go to a dance program. A 14. Dance is dumb. C 15. Dance does not help to keep you healthy. B 16. If my best friend is taking a dance class, I would take a dance class too. A 17. Dance is fun. C 18. Dance is an important part of physical education. A 19. Men should not teach dance. A 20. Men who teach dance are sissies. B 21. I would tell others to take a dance class. C 22. Dancers are good athletes. C 23. Dancers have to be in good shape to perform in a concert. A 24. I would like having a male dancer for a physical education teacher. B 25. I would take a dance class only when it is required. C 26. Dancing takes very little energy. A 27. Only women should teach dance. A 28. I would never want to be like a dance teacher. C 29. Boys who take dance are strong. B/A 30. Boys should not be required to go to a dance program.