5.1.3.2. The interpretation of results

5.1.3.2.1. The value of differential threshold of sensations is directly proportional to the value of movement differentiating mistake and it is inversely proportional to the differential sensitivity.

5.1.3.2.2. In order to make the interpretation of the results of diagnostics of differential sensitivity in motive analyzer you may use a universal diagnostic scale of estimation by eye and motive functions (see item 4.2 in appendix 2).

5.1.3.2.3. In case you need to get a separate diagnosis on the accuracy of differentiating small and big movements you should use the indexes of relative mistake of differentiating the movements for small (RMD small) and big (RMD big) intervals. Make their interpretation using the universal diagnostic scale 2.8 of appendix 2.

You may also take the average figures, received for a group of representatives of the corresponding activity, as normative indexes for this or that activity.

5.1.4. The diagnostics of differential sensitivity

In visual analyzer

We have created the technique of the diagnostics of differential sensitivity in visual analyzer taking into account the issues of K.V.Bardin (1978). This technique is based on visual comparing of spatial segments.

5.1.4.1. The procedure of diagnostics

5.1.4.1.1. Place the device ATS-6 directly in front of your examinee sitting at table, so that the distance from his eyes to the scale of coordinationmeter was approximately 50 cm.

5.1.4.1.2. Explain to the examinee that he should compare the distance between the central risk and the risk on the left romper-suit with the distance between the central risk and the risk on the right romper-suit. If these distances are equal, he should mark this using the word “equal”. If the distance on the right is shorter than that on the left – he should mark it by words “shorter on the right”. If the distance on the right is longer than that on the left – he should mark it by words “longer on the right”. Even if it is difficult for him to do this, he should try to characterize the result of comparing the distances having chosen one of the three characteristics: equal, shorter or longer.

5.1.4.1.3. The tasks should be put down according to columns 2 and 3 of the report prepared beforehand (the example of this report is shown in table 11). Thus every pair of compared segments should contain a standard segment the length of which remains invariable during the whole experiment. The standard in our example is 80 mm. Other (compared) segments should be shorter or longer than the standard one on the length indicated in the report.

5.1.4.1.4. Place each task on a bar with divisions. Besides cover the scale with a sheet of paper or ask the examinee to shut his eyes for a little while.

Having placed the task turn the bar so that the examinee could see a “blind” scale instead of the scale with divisions.

Put down your examinee’s answers marking them with signs:

> longer on the right

< shorter on the right

= equal

? difficult to answer

Table 11 – the example of the report of diagnostics of differential sensitivity to visual segments.

№	Distance on the left, mm	Distance on the right, mm	Response to the distance on the right	Response to the compared stimulus
1	2	3	4	5
1	80	83 (80+3)	>
2	80	75 (80-5)	<
3	82 (80+2)	80	>*	2
4	80	79 (80-1)	=	1
5	77 (80-3)	80	>
6	80	85 (80+5)	>
7	80	81 (80+1)	=	1
8	85 (80+5)	80	<
9	75 (80-5)	80	>
10	80	77 (80-3)	?	3
11	83 (80+3)	80	<
12	78 (80-2)	80	>
Differential threshold of sensitivity				1,75 mm

Note to table 11. The values of deviations in compared segments and the order of their presentation correspond to the issues of K.V.Bardin (1976). We have also taken into account: a percentage relation of deviations to the standard (from 1 to 6), the amount and algorithm of stimulus presentation.