Prove or deny assumption regarding to superiority of Sensory-Motor Visualization technique (SMV
211 participants in 16 groups of trainee from different locations of CIS such as Moscow, St. Petersburg, Kaliningrad, Tomsk, Omsk, Ufa, Samara, Kazan (Russian federation), and Kyiv (Ukraine). All groups were mixed by gender and age.
Comparison of the effectiveness of sensory-motor visualization along with other techniques. Checked at awaking in the pre-negotiated loops of different techniques with the obligatory of sensory-motor visualization.
MEASUREMENTS AND RESULTS
Statistics used for analyses:
* provided by the 8 teachers
* collected on 16 hand-on seminar
* based on 211 unique tests
* within 3 months
Sensory-motor visualization compared with techniques combined in following groups:
* imaging movements (mixed) such as swimmer, running etc techniques,
* rotation (mixed) and rolling up techniques,
* diferent listening technoques,
* visualization (mixed) techniques,
* images observing techniques,
* separation and phantom wiggling techniques,
* direct sleeping techniques.
The share of the sensory-motor visualization inside of 10 comparision groups was 19%. It visually represented in the following diagram:
Share of some techniques in the number of cycles was greater than that in other techniques in the data obtained from teachers. Different levels of teachers training and thy ability and quality of techniques explanation could bring some accuracy.
Contrary to expectations, the sensory-motor visualization was not the best but not the worst in compare with other techniques. In spite of its combination of three techniques, it is equally manifested itself, along with others. These data will likely show the overall picture but not an objective reflection of the situation.
In repeat of experiment and in the development of other similar experiments a special attention should by pay to:
* methodology comparison
* comparison criteria definition
* clear task formulation
Experimental Education Department
OOBE Research Center