N[16]Test Group (A)Control Group (B)Test 1Test 2GainTest 1Test 2Gain14190138-521751750-52106888207013565-4523150141- 912214018-271135120-151061159-249149135-141441506-2021152132-20140138- 2-18221641831912015737-1824157142-151551550-152710897-11115112- 3- 82010511051501555015172170- 2140137- 312613713811251250125140150101481513731361393135129- 6913160142-18150122-281018133135210084-16182815016212178170- 8208113110- 3131101-30271112598-27155101-542721051127152114-3845179015060125121- 464Av.135·19132·95- 2·24136·47134·14- 2·33·09M-2-2075%ile6·54·516·025%ile-15-1419·50Q10·759·2517·75P. E. (distribution)12·247·3318·09P. E. (average)2·66±1·59±3·10Av.= ·03 P. E.M.= 0 P. E.
lost in I.Q., as compared with 7 in the control group. Thirteen test cases lost in comparison with their respective controls. Two gained equally with their controls, and the remaining thirteen showed a larger gain. In regard to the three pairs taken from the nutrition class, number 7 gained 8 points and his control, 4. Number 10 lost a point and his control lost 4, while number 11 lost 3 points with a gain of 1 point by his control. So that these cases, in spite of most favorable conditions, show no consistent gain in I.Q.
The results of the Healy tests are similar. There is a slightly higher average gain in the control group. The test group contains eight cases which made a poorer score at the end of the interval, the control group six. The range of gains is from -22 to +44, or 66 points, in the test group, while in the control group the gains range from -14 to +41·5 or 55·5
N[16]]Test Group (A)Control Group (B)Test 1Test 2GainTest 1Test 2Gain13-·03·05-·08·27-·28·55-·6328·01·11-·10·17·04·13-·2320·10·15-·05·20·04·16-·2110-·09·07-·16·23·19·04-·2017·01·33-·32·07·20-·13-·1925·09·21-·12·09·11-·02-·1011·28·11·17·19-·06·25-·0815·03·08-·05·18·16·02-·0722·10·23-·13·03·19-·16·0327·15·05·10·09·03·06·0414·09·06·03·02·06-·04·0718·14·18-·04·01·12-·11·0724·13·11·02·13·35-·22·2426·18·15·03·16·37-·21·2423·21·04·17·06·21-·15·3221·27·05·22·03·20-·17·39Av.·104·124-·020·121·121·0-·020M·045-·03-0·01575%ile+·03+·04·0725%ile-·12-·16-·20Q·075·10·135P. E. (distribution)·09·11·05P. E. (average)±·02±·03±·04Av.= -·50 P. E.M.= -·38 P. E.
points. Seventeen of the operative cases showed a smaller gain than their respective controls. The three pairs of cases from the nutrition class show the following gains:—pair 7; the test case loses 22 points, the control gains 23 points; pair 10, test case gains 18·5, but control gains 38 points; pair 11, test case gains 14 points, and control gains 25·5 points. From this test then, we can find no general tendency for cases operated on to improve in intelligence in excess of improvement in a control group which was not so treated.
This question presents itself:—is there any relationship between improvement in physical well-being as revealed in weight, and improvement in intelligence? If, as has been supposed, adenoids and diseased tonsils cause mental retardation indirectly through physical deprivation, it would seem as though greater improvement in intelligence after operation should accompany greater improvement in weight, and smaller intelligence gain should accompany slighter gain in weight.In order to determine whether this was true for our cases, improvement in I.Q. was correlated with gain in weight, for the test group. The order of merit method was used, and the formula ρ = 1 - ((6ΣD_n) /( n(n²-1))) where f = 2 sin (Π/6)ρ. The resulting value of r was -·10 with unreliability of ·226, calculated by the formula σt.r - obt.r = (1·05(1-r²)) / √n. There is therefore no correlation between improvement in intelligence and gain in weight.
N[16]Test Group (A)Control Group (B)Test 1Test 2GainTest 1Test 2Gain27110109-1729624-2520106102-411813113-1789186-5981046-1124131124-789923-102164673869711-839491-382853-6129895-3981013-62385949819615-611103100-31011021-4159794-378791-4189898090944-449696083852-2268076-49088-2-216657387482802881843959830595994114117312107114791965210110109-1104100-4317717769699337919989599441828318076-456951016888915199610159898059839310879037257776-1145137-8713707886664-210229110096362-110149610711140137314Av.91·5393·782·2592·9396·213·285-1·035M2-1-0·01575%ile7+·04525%ile-3-·16-6Q52·55·5P. E. (distribution)5·252·55P. E. (average)±·99±·47±1·10Av.= -·94 P. E.M.= -·99 P. E.
N[16]Test Group (A)Control Group (B)Test 1Test 2GainTest 1Test 2Gain7- 6-28-224·527·523-45134342- 1- 1·530·5-32-331729·51217·51·515- 13·5-311572518142·541·523·52622·57-15·55661·55·5-21·510-126·518·5276538-19·51957·549- 8·5-22-1111-19·52454·5638·531·559·528-19·5200-11-1130355-1693·510·57345521-1411-8614-29-3·525·5-11·5164947·5- 1·530377- 8·51-25227-50-1634- 72248·543·5- 534·533·5- 1- 418-13·5-121·5-32-284- 2·52349·56818·542521- 2·5321·522·5117192- 11220211-10-12- 231412·548·536- 525·530·56·527-251540227·525·514·5228·5301·53-11-1415·5258251729·529-·517·52120321270·558·5-12242829·573·54464·551·5-1357Av.17·2924·947·6412·1225·6913·56- 5·85M4.25- 7·75-0·01575%ile18+·04325%ile-5-·16-19·5Q11·51311·25P. E. (distribution)10·610·5613·65P. E. (average)±2·16± 2·16± 3·05Av.= -1·92 P. E.M.= -2·54 P. E.
Similarly, it might be thought that the children who had suffered from the defects for a comparatively short time, might reveal greater improvement in intelligence after six months than those who had been afflicted for a longer space of time. We had no way of knowing definitely how long the defects had been present in the cases studied. Roughly, though, we may say that in general the older boys have had defective tonsils and adenoids for a longer time than the younger ones, and that the older the boy, the older the defect. On this basis, if correlation of youth with gain in I.Q. should give a larger positive value for r, we might be justified in saying that the younger boys, who have been handicapped for a lesser period, show greater mental recuperation than theirolder companions. Such a correlation was attempted in the test group, correlating age at the first test with gain in I.Q. The same methods and formulae were used as in the weight and intelligence comparison, the greatest gain in I.Q. being given first position, and the lowest age. The resulting value for r was -·24, with an unreliability of ·186. The relationship would appear to be in the other direction but it is so small, with an unreliability measure so large as to be insignificant. Once more, then, we find in our results no correspondence between recency of defect and quick mental recovery.
WeightHeightGripTapping1·29·44·25·40·47·40·51·331C·43·54·27·45·33·47·17·302·04·10·04·11·16·16·16·252C·38·55·20·32·25·40·80·283·46·59·32·49·44·56·52·583C·65·69·74·81·54·67·51·424·33·44·39·52·16·134C·27·32·51·78·18·195·16·20·18·20·33·235C·50·53·28·47·40·876·12·15·06·10·10·236C·31·40·22·38·27·417·03·07·05·15·07·06·40·277C·01·02·03·07·16·24·168·62·71·63·75·24·27·238C·18·37·31·40·67·72·43·119·31·41·47·53·26·47·71·519C·60·65·76·89·76·89·63·7810·26·35·26·43·44·33·01·0410C·21·22·23·37·24·67·02·5111·24·23·25·43·33·67·40·0811C·08·09·09·17·36·36·86·1112·25·40·15·53·0812C·06·15·02·08·04·01·12·0313·951·00·991·00·991·00·90·6613C·87·89·93·96·94·96·78·3614·49·66·67·74·72·671·00·5714C·92·93·96·98·93·98·97·9715·56·68·70·95·9415C·79·80·59·66·67·70·62·5416·49·53·74·79·81·77·6916C·34·28·50·54·24·24·69·5117·53·50·53·05·7817C·17·15·24·11·40·3418·57·38·33·45·5118C·17·20·30·34·10·06·09·0319·95·99·94·98·94·88·9319·38·45·30·37·67·40·09·3120·13·37·33·16·2320C·63·75·56·88·67·44·78·8621·83·89·84·76·76·80·4421C·67·77·55·61·81·67·62·5722·85·81·91·78·95·92·9922C·83·92·93·97·82·91·33·8923·36·45·36·70·78·6323C·73·74·70·82·55·53·36·6224·59·69·67·81·85·89·6624C·62·63·59·71·67·67·86·8625·47·60·57·63·53·62·7825C·73·74·60·64·44·91·70·7926·74·89·74·85·53·54·5726C·76·81·70·79·84·76·40·4027·11·23·16·04·18·0627C·07·12·12·23·10·16·30·2528·86·90·87·90·97·88·78·9128C·87·93·83·86·88·98·94