WeRead Powered by ReaderPub
Adenoids and Diseased Tonsils: Their Effect on General Intelligence cover

Adenoids and Diseased Tonsils: Their Effect on General Intelligence

Chapter 48: Footnotes
Open in WeRead

About This Book

A controlled psychological and statistical investigation examines whether enlarged adenoids and diseased tonsils affect children's measured intelligence and school performance. Standardized mental tests were given to selected cases before and at several intervals after surgical removal, and results were compared with a randomly chosen control group. Findings indicate a brief postoperative decline followed by notable gains in test scores and pedagogical records relative to controls. The discussion considers mechanisms such as impaired breathing, infection, fatigue, and reduced attention as mediators of academic underperformance and concludes that removal of these defects can produce measurable improvement in cognitive functioning and school efficiency.

6 months12 months
Average of gains of test group in excess of control-1·035-3·14
Median of gains of test group in excess of control-1 -3
P. E. of difference±1·10 ±1·84
Average in terms of P. E.  - ·94 -1·71
Median in terms of P. E.  - ·99 -1·63

The result after twelve months remains the same as that after the six months' interval. A gain or loss of two or three points in I.Q. is negligible, so that the mean gain of the test group in excess of the control is practically zero at the end of each period. Variability increases with the length of the interval. One case in the test group (case 4) gained nothing in six months, but showed a gain of 15 points after 13 months. However, there is a control case to match this,—case 15, who gained 1 point in the first six months and 20 points after 10 months. Case 20 in the test group lost 4 points in the first six months, but gained back these and 10 additional in the second period. But control No. 1 gained 5 points in the second interval after having lost 4 in the first.

On the other hand several cases lost in the second period, as compared with the first. Test group case 7, for example, gained 8 points in the first six months, and lost 6 of them in the second. Case 3 in the same group lost 3 points in the first period, and failed to regain any of them. Case 12 lost 3 points in six months and 9 more before the end of 12 months. In the control group, case 23 gained 15 pounds in the first six months and lost eight of them in the second. Summing up gains and losses in the second period, for both groups:

TABLE XXI

I.Q., Second Retests, 21 Pairs

N[16] Test Group (A) Control Group (B)
Test 1 Test 3 GainTest 1 Test 3 GainA-B
27110    112    2    72    98    26    -24      
1597    97    78    98    20    -20      
394    91    -3    82    96    14    -17      
791    93    2    95    112    17    -15      
20106    116    10    118    140    22    -12      
2385    80    -5    81    88    7    -12      
891    92    1    98    111    13    -12      
1298    86    -12    98    91    -7    -5      
2164    66    2    86    93    7    -5      
496    111    15    83    102    19    -4      
1370    61    -9    66    60    -6    -3      
1898    101    3    90    92    2    1      
1665    74    9    74    81    7    2      
10110    116    6    104    107    3    3      
2881    83    2    95    94    -1    3      
11103    102    -1    101    95    -6    5      
182    93    11    80    85    5    6      
1496    102    6    140    138    -2    8      
1996    97    1    98    90    -8    9      
2107    113    6    91    86    -5    11      
983    102    19    87    91    4    15      
Av.91·594·63·091·297·56·2-3·1  
M 2       5       -3      
75%ile 6       13·75 4·5  
25%ile -·75 -4·25-12      
Q 3·37 9·00 8·25
P. E. (distribution)2·09 8·24 8·86
P. E. (average)±·45 ±1·79 ±1·84
Av.=-1·71 P. E.
M.=-1·63 P. E.

Lost in 2nd periodGained in 2nd period No change Gained equally with
gain in 1st period
Test group 9 11 1 9
Control group 10 11 8

The average gain of the test group was 3·09 points after 12 months, compared with 2·25 after six. The control group, however, made an average gain of 6·24 after 12 months, the gain after six months being 3·29. These numbers are insignificant as gains, but they at least show no improvement in the test group which the control group does not reveal as well. On the basis of the results, we may say that there has been no improvement in I.Q. as a result of operation, either after six months or after twelve.

There remains to be considered only the result of the Healy Picture Completion Test. We have scores in this test for 18 pairs of cases. When these scores are compared with those in the former tests, the results stand as follows:

Average of gains of test group in excess of control -5·85 -3·36
Median of gains of test group in excess of control -7·75 1·00
P. E. of difference ±3·05±3·38
Average in terms of P. E. -1·92 -·87
Median in terms of P. E. -2·54 ·26

The figures given above show no gain in the Healy test as a result of operation. Both after six months, and after twelve, we find that the test group has gained no more than the control group. As before there are individual cases showing considerable gain in the second period, but these are matched by control cases which reveal equal or even greater gains. In the test group, 5 cases lost in the second period in comparison with the first, 18 gained, and 7 gained as much in the second period as in the first. The control group lost in the second period in 5 cases, gained in 18, and gained as much as in the first period in 7 cases. The two groups, then, are practically equal, both showing a gain in the second period, but this gain cannot be due to the operations, since the control group did not undergo operation.

TABLE XXII

Healy A, Second Retests, 18 Pairs

N[16] Test Group (A) Control Group (B)
Test 1 Test 3 GainTest 1Test 3 GainA-B
1220      1      -19      -10      41.5  51·5  -70·5  
2349·5  62·5  13      4      64      60      -47      
157      19      12      1      54·5  53·5  -41·5  
1-22      11      36      -50      11      61      -25      
228·5  24·5  -4      3      19·5  16·5  -20·5  
321·5  15·5  -6      17      25·5  8·5  -14·5  
1957·5  60·5  3      -22      -15      7      -4      
1343      62·5  19·5  -1·5  21·5  23      -3·5  
2120      38      18      70·5  88      17·5  ·5  
10-12      11      23      27      48·5  21·5  1·5  
1412·5  77      64·5  -5      48·5  53·5  11      
27-25      25·5  50·5  2      39·5  37·5  13      
11-8      15·5  23·5  -29      -20      9      14·5  
1649      79      30      30      45·5  15·5  14·5  
7-6      16      22      45      11      6·5  15·5  
2829·5  77·5  48      64·5  83·5  19      29      
18-13·5  13·5  27      -32      -35      -3      30      
200      55      55      30      48·5  18·5  36·5  
Av.13·8136·9223·115·77 32·2526·47-3·36
M 22·5   18·75 1      
75%ile 33       44       14·5  
25%ile 7·5   8·75-22·25
Q 12·75 17·62 18·37
P. E. (distribution) 11·5   17·72 17·86
P. E. (average) ±2·7   ±4·22 ±3·88
Av.=-·87 P. E.
M.=+·26 P. E.

TABLE XXIII

  Gains   Weight in pounds Height in inches Height-weight percentsGrip in Kg.
lb.P. E. in.P. E %P. E. Kg. P. E.
Av. 11·372·85·161·001·832·02- ·24- ·50
Av. 21·901·30·08·293·232·81-1·31-2·22
M. 11·202·80·201·254·004·40-1·00-2·08
M. 22·201·51·501·796·005·22-1·50-2·54
P. E. 1 ± ·48 ±·16 ±·91 ±·48
P. E. 2 ±1·46 ±·28 ±1·15 ±·59

TABLE XXIII (Continued)

  Gains   Taps in 1/2 min. Tapping in
fatigue ratios
I.Q. Healy Score
tapsP. E. ratio P. E. Pts.P. E. Pts P. E.
Av. 1·09·03-·02- ·50-1·035- ·94-5·85- ·92
Av. 29·931·89-·065-1·66-3·140-1·71-3·36- ·87
M. 10·000·00-·015- ·38-1·000- ·99-7·75-2·54
M. 211·002·09-·09-2·50-3·000-1·631·00·26
P. E. 1 ±3·10 ±·040 ±1·10 ±3·05
P. E. 2 ±5·26 ±·036 ±1·84 ±3·88

In Table XXIII are collected the results discussed in the foregoing chapter. The mean results are expressed in terms of P. E. and as gross values, so that the various tests may be compared.


CHAPTER V.

SUMMARY.

The results obtained from the experiment may be summarized as follows:

1. Six months after operation for adenoids and tonsils, there seems to be a slight but not very reliable gain in weight as the result of the operation. After twelve months this has increased; indeed, it has very nearly doubled.

2. Gain in height, resulting from operation, is so slight as to be unreliable. This gain does not increase during a second period of six months.

3. The height-weight-age relationship is an excellent measure of the physical well-being of the child. The figures expressing this relationship show no very reliable gain in the first six months, but improvement increases considerably during the second period.

4. The test group shows no gain over the control group in strength of grip. There seems on the other hand to be a slight loss; which does not decrease in amount during the second period.

5. Speed of tapping did not increase during the first period, any more for the test group than for the control. During the second period, however, there is a marked improvement.

6. Operation for adenoids and tonsils does not lessen fatigueability as shown by the tapping test. The probability is, however, that the test is at fault.

7. No rise in I.Q., as a result of operation, makes itself evident after six months or after twelve months.

8. There is no improvement in the performance of the Healy test either after six months or after twelve.

9. In every test except grip and tapping, there is a marked increase in the variability of the gains after the second period. This is possibly due simply to the fact that the longer interval permits the intervention of more extraneous factors which may influence the scores in one direction or the other.

10. A group of 236 children with diseased tonsils showed equal distribution of I.Q. with a group of 294 children who were normal in this respect.

CONCLUSIONS

The article by MacPhail, which has been reviewed in a former chapter, showed pretty conclusively that the removal of adenoids and tonsils was followed by improvement in school work. That such improvement was not due to a rise in general intelligence can be concluded from the present experiment. That efficiency in school work does not rest wholly upon intelligence has been demonstrated more than once. The tendency here noted to improve in general physical tone may, perhaps, serve as a sign of the factor upon which such improvement depends. Improved health means better attention, better emotional response, greater resistance to fatigue, and probably increased efficiency.

Interesting investigations of such improvement in efficiency might be made by administering educational tests to groups similar to those of the present study. The results of such an experiment would be exceedingly instructive, and would be more significant than conclusions drawn from school marks. By this means also we might determine along what special line efficiency is most affected.

Since there was no recuperation in intelligence resulting from operation for adenoids and tonsils, it is reasonable to expect that there had been no retardation from which to recuperate. This supposition is borne out by results of the statistical study, wherein we found that a group of children suffering from diseased tonsils possessed equal intelligence with a group which was free from such defect.

We can say to physicians, then, with fair amount of assurance, that removal of adenoids and tonsils will probably not raise to any great degree the intelligence level of the mentally defective child who is brought to him. We can say to students of the constancy of the I.Q., that it is not greatly lowered by adenoids and diseased tonsils and we may say to the clinical psychologist that these defects have no demonstrable effect upon general intelligence, whatever effects they may have on volitional and emotional normality,—the two elements which, along with intelligence are necessary for the maintenance of the individual as an instrument of social efficiency.

Footnotes

[1] F. Hooper, M. D., quoting from a paper by B. Frankel.

[2] Adenoid Growths of the Naso-pharynx. Read before the Homeopathic Medical Society of New York, February, 1895.

[3] H. Addington Bruce, Psychology and Parenthood, 1916.


[4] H. Addington Bruce in the Century Magazine, 1916—The Mind of the Child.

[5] The italics are mine.

[6] Psych. Clinic, 1916, 10, 45-48. Anna Johnson. The Teacher in the Retarded School.

[7] Psych. Clinic, 1909, 3, 71-77. The Effect of Physical Defect on School Progress.

[8] Cornell, Psychological Clinic, 2, 1909.

[9] H. R. Burpitt. Relative Degrees of Dullness and Backwardness in School Children and their Causation. Journal of Mental Science, 1916.

[10] Transactions of the International Congress on School

[11]  Ayres: "Laggards in Our Schools." 1909.

[12] Wallin: "Mental Health of the School Child." 1914.

[13] Wallin: "Mental Health of the School Child." 1914.

[14] In a few cases where the operation was postponed after just previous to the operation. Since both cases were retested, practice effect is of no great importance.

[15] A. H. MacPhail, Adenoids and Tonsils: A study showing how the Removal of Enlarged or Diseased Tonsils Affects a Child's Work in School. Ped. Sem., June, 1920, pp. 188-194.

[16] Numbers refer to cases as listed on Table II.