MENC: The National Association for Music Education

The Effectiveness of Mental Practice in Improving the Performance of College Trombonists

Author(s): Stewart L. Ross
Source: Journal of Research in Music Education, Vol. 33, No. 4 (Winter, 1985), pp. 221-230
Published by: Sage Publications, Inc. on behalf of MENC: The National Association for Music
Education

Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3345249 .

Accessed: 08/12/2014 21:50
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Sage Publications, Inc. and MENC: The National Association for Music Education are collaborating with
JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Journal of Research in Music Education.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 216.87.207.12 on Mon, 8 Dec 2014 21:50:20 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

JRME 1985, VOLUME 33, NUMBER 4, PAGES 221-230

Thisstudyexaminedtherelativeeffectiveness
of mentalpracticein improvingtrombone
The experiment
involved30 trombonists
performance.
from threecolleges.Theywere
randomlyassignedto one of five experimental
practiceconditions:(1) all physical
practice,(2) all mentalpractice,(3) a combination
of physicaland mentalpractice,(4)
mentalpracticewithsimulatedslide movement,
and (5) no practice(control).A short
itudeservedas botha pre-andposttest.A one-wayanalysisof covariance
andsubsequent
SchefftsTestfound threepairs of groupssignificantlydifferentfrom eachother:(1)
combined
practiceand no practice,(2) combined
practiceand mentalpractice,and (3)
physicalpracticeand no practice.Theresultsof thestudysuggestthattheuseof mental
withphysicalpracticecan accruemanybenefits
for theskilledtrombonist.

Stewart L. Ross, MankatoState University,Mankato,

Minnesota

The

Effectiveness

of

Mental
in

Practice

Improving

the

Performance of

College

Trombonists

The term mentalpracticerefers to the cognitive rehearsalof a skill that

takes place within the individual, in the absence of any gross muscular
movements. An example of this type of mental activity is a golfer
imagining the motions of putting a golf ball while walking to the green.
In music, an example of mental practicewould be an instrumentalistin
an orchestra or a band who prepares the next entrance during a long
rest by mentallyplaying the passage over a number of times without any
physicalmovement or sound.
This article is based on the author'sdoctoral dissertationat NorthwesternUniversity,
1985.
For reprintsof this article,contactStewartL. Ross, Directorof Bands, Box 5, Mankato
State University,Mankato,Minnesota56001

This content downloaded from 216.87.207.12 on Mon, 8 Dec 2014 21:50:20 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

221

222

ROSS

The idea of mentallyrehearsinga skillmayseem abstractat first,but it

has many practicalapplications.It is not another label for analytical
study but, rather, is a systematic way to "see" and "feel" physical
movementsassociatedwith a skill, without physicallyperforming.
The vast majorityof mental practiceexperimentshave utilized skills
found in a variety of sports, such as basketball,volleyball,gymnastics,
tennis,and swimming.In manycases,musicianshave the same problems
as athletes. Most performerscan empathizewith the golfer who, failing
in a first attempt to blast out of a sandtrap,rushes into a second and
third attempt before stopping to analyze what went wrong with the
initial shot. Instrumentalistsare often guilty of failing to analyzetheir
first mistakes, forming poor habits that may take hours of torturous
practiceto undo.
Investigationsinto the process of mental practice go back to 1892,
when the questionof whetherthere wasmuscularactivityduring mental
operations was first studied (Jastrow,1892). The concept of mentally
rehearsinga skillcame more clearlyinto focus during the 1920swith the
experimentsof Ko-hler.His workwith apes demonstratedthat, at times,
animalscan find the solution to specificproblemswithoutthe benefit of
physicaltrial and error procedures(K6hler, 1925).
Just a few yearslater a series of significantstudiesof muscularactivity
during mental practicewere undertakenby Jacobson.With the use of
electrodesattached to the subject'sarm, slight muscularmovementsin
areaswhere the subjectimagined movementwere measured(acobson,
1930a, 1930b, 1930c, 1930d, 1931, 1932). Conversely,it was found that
when the muscleswere relaxed, subjectscould not imaginetheir desired
movement.
A number of mental practicestudies have examined the importance
of imageryin skill acquisitionafter using mental practice.Whatsubjects
imagineduring mental practiceseems crucialto the successof the entire
process (Powell, 1973). Furthermore,the use of vivid imageryappears
important for enhancement of performance through mental practice
(Ryan& Simons, 1982).
In comparing mental practice to physicalpractice,both mental and
physical practice groups tend to achieve significant gains over the
control group that does not practice the skill (Perry, 1939; Vandell,
Davis,& Clungston, 1943). However,in a few cases,neither the physical
nor mental practicegroup is significantlybetter than the control group
(Gilmore& Stolurow, 1949; Smith & Harrison, 1962).
Manyof the more recent mental practiceinvestigationshave tried to
find the best combinationof physicaland mental practicein improving
skill acquisition.In a majorityof these experiments, a combinationof
mental and physicalpracticeis as good or better than physicalpractice
alone (Egstrom, 1964; Oxendine, 1969; Stebbins, 1968; Ulich, 1967).
Of concern to many researchersis the relationshipof the required
task to subsequent success with mental practice. Generally, mental
practiceseems to facilitatesimpletasksmore thancomplexones in which
there is a need for some physicalpractice(Phipps& Morehouse, 1969).
In an attempt to obtain a better understanding of the individual
factors that might inhibit or aid mental practicesubjects,a number of

This content downloaded from 216.87.207.12 on Mon, 8 Dec 2014 21:50:20 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

JRME

variableshave been tested including intelligence (Start,1960), kinesthetic ability(Start, 1964), and locus of control (Wickman& Lizotte, 1983).
Based on a review of mental practiceliterature,it is difficultto make
any sweeping, unequivocalconclusions. Partof the problem stems from
a general lack of knowledge about how mental practice improves
performance and the many variablesthat can influence this phenomenon.
Although there have been many studies concerning the effectiveness
of mental practice, there is a dearth of controlled studies dealing with
music performance. The purpose of this investigationwas to examine
the relative effectiveness of mental practice in improving trombone
performance through a pilot study designed to compare five different
methods of practice:all physical,all mental, mental with simulatedslide
movements, combined physical and mental, and no practice (control).
METHOD
A multigroup, pretest-posttest control group design was used for the
investigation.This type of experimental design controlsfor most threats
to internal validity (Huck, Cormier, & Bounds, 1974). The subjectsfor
the experiment were all college music majors (N = 30) whose major
performance medium was the slide trombone. There were 24 subjects
from Northwestern University, 4 from St. Olaf College, and 2 from
DePaul University.
Of the 30 subjects, there were 9 graduate students, 11 seniors, 4
juniors, 4 sophomores, and 2 freshmen. Only one subjectwas female.
Ages ranged from 18 to 29, with a median age of 22. All subjectswere
volunteers for the experiment.
PROCEDURE
Five experimental groups were created by randomly assigning the
tromboniststo one of five groups: all physical practice (PP), all mental
practice (MP), mental practice with simulated slide movements (MPS),
combined physical and mental practice (CP), and no practice (NP),
which served as the control group. The experimenterasked each subject
to play the pretest at the tempo indicated, using a metronome for
demonstration.
The dependent criterion measure used for the experiment consisted
of an etude adapted from Number 24 of the Schoolof SightReadingand
Style,BookA, by Andr6 Lafosse (1949). The Lafosse 6tude was chosen
because it was written for the specific purpose of sight-reading from
beginning to end without pause and was difficult enough to present a
challenge to the subjects.
Each performancewas timed with a stop watch to check for consistency of performance lengths. Both the pretests and posttests were tape
recorded in order to score performances. Through written instructions,
each subject was asked to practice the music in different ways. In the PP
condition, subjects were to physically perform the &tude three times
after the pretest:

This content downloaded from 216.87.207.12 on Mon, 8 Dec 2014 21:50:20 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

223

224

ROSS

Relax.Youareto playthe excerptat anytempoyouwishbuttryto keepit

steadyto the end.Do not stopor go backto repeatanynotes.It is important
thatyouconcentrate.
Raiseyourhandif you haveanyquestionsaboutthese
directions.
The MP group attemptedto mentallyperform the 6tude three times.
The instructionsencouraged subjectsto "see,""hear,"and "feel"themselves as vividlyas possible playing the 6tude:
Relax.Putyourtrombonedownand tryto feel comfortable
in yourchair.
Youareto mentallyplaytheexcerpt.Donotmakeanyphysicalmovements.
Tempo:Useanytempoyouwishbuttryto keepit steadyto theend.Donot
eachpitchbutdo
stopor go backto repeatanynotes.Pitch:Tryto "hear"
not vocalize.Embouchure:
Try to "feel"the movementsof yourembouchurebutdo notbuzzyourlips.Slide:Tryto "feel"the movements
of your
slidefor eachshiftto a newposition.It is importantthatyouconcentrate.
Whenyouhavefinishedmentallypracticing
themusic,pleaseturnit overso
thatweknowyouaredone.Raiseyourhandif youhaveanyquestionsabout
thesedirections.
The MPSsubjectswere instructedto hold their trombonein normal
playingpositionwhile moving the slide to the correctpositions,mentally
practicinginsteadof actuallyplayingthe 6tude. Exceptfor the simulated
slide movement,these instructionswere the sameas for the MPsubjects.
The CP subjectsphysicallyplayed the etude two times, attemptinga
mental trial between them. A control group did not practicethe 6tude
and instead read a motivating article about the importanceof sightreading music well.
Upon completionof the practicetrials,all of the subjectswere askedto
physicallyplay the 6tude again (posttest).After the posttest,all of the
subjects completed a postexperimentalquestionnaireconcerning the
experiment, which attempted to collect meaningful retrospectivedata
concerningthe experiment.
The scoring system consisted of one point for each measure of the
6tude played correctly(pitches,rhythms,and articulations).If any part
of a measurewas incorrect,no point was awarded.A total of 34 points
(there are 34 measuresin the 6tude) was possible.Interpretation,sound
quality, and subtle nuances such as dynamicswere not a part of the
scoringprocess.
So that any differencesbetween the five groups could not be attributed to scoring bias, the experimental condition of the performers was
"blind"to the scorer.As a check on the reliabilityof the scoring,a brass
instructorat MankatoState University,who was not involved with the
experiment, scored 10 random performances. The mean observer
reliabilitycoefficientobtained was r = .98, representingthe percentage
of agreement between the two scorers.
RESULTS
In order to analyze the data obtained from the experiment described

This content downloaded from 216.87.207.12 on Mon, 8 Dec 2014 21:50:20 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

JRME

above, it was first necessaryto find the gain scores of each subject.The
pretest, posttest, and gain scores are presented in Table 1. The posttest
score represents the change in performance from pretest to posttest,
after practice.Figure 1 graphicallyrepresentsthe relativeimprovements
of each of the five groups (gain scores ranged from a high of 8.3 [CP
group] to a low of 0.6 [NP group]).
Because the five groups did not begin the experiment with the same
skill level (pretest means varied from 22.0 to 25.6), a simple comparison
of gain scores does not represent a legitimateway of analyzingthe data.
The ANCOVA controls statisticallyfor any differences in group performance on the pretest. Therefore, a one-way analysis of covariance
(ANCOVA)was selected.
Before computing the ANCOVA, a test for common slopes of the five
groups indicated that a common slope could be assumed (F = 1.2, ns).
Table 2 presentsboth the obtained and adjustedposttestmeans for each
group, necessary in computing the ANCOVA. These adjusted posttest
means give a more accurate comparison of improvement by the five
groups than the obtained posttestmeans. Table 3 containsa summaryof
the ANCOVA. The null hypothesis that there are no differences
between the five adjusted means of the groups was rejected at the .001
level.
A Scheff6'sTest was used to locate the significantgroup differences;
the results are presented in Table 4. The asterisk next to a calculated
value signifies that the adjusted means of these two groups are significantly different from one another at the .05 level. Only three pairwise
groups were significantlydifferent: CP and NP, CP and MP, and PP and
NP. While the CP group did evidence the most substantialgain, it was
not significantlybetter than either the PP or MPSconditions. However,
only the CP and PP groups were significantlybetter than the NP control
group.
DISCUSSION
Methodological limitations
There are some interrelated problems in interpreting the effect of
mental practice in this, and any, mental practice study: the mental
practice procedure, uncontrolled practice, motivationof subjects,scoring procedures, and questions of external validity.These concerns can
pose significant threats to both the interpretationof and the ability to
generalize about the study.
Although the instructions used for the MP subjectswere tested and
refined prior to the experiment, there can never be a guarantee that all
subjects will understand the instructions in exactly the same way.
Because mental practice is a cognitive technique that cannot be observed, there is no way of knowing exactly what the subject is thinking
other than to ask specificquestionsafter the experiment is over. Even so,
the manner in which each subject mentally practiced the music probably
can never be completely known or understood by the experimenter.
Another problem associated with many mental practice experiments
concerns the amount of time subjects mentally practice. Because no

This content downloaded from 216.87.207.12 on Mon, 8 Dec 2014 21:50:20 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

225

226

ROSS

Table 1
Pre- and PosttestMeans and Gain Scores"
Subject

Pretest

Posttest

Gain

PP group
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
M

20
8
26
27
28
29
23

26
19
33
32
29
34
28.8

6
11
7
5
1
5
5.83

MP group
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
M

20
26
29
27
26
23
25.1

24
28
29
30
30
26
27.8

4
2
0
3
4
3
2.66

CP group
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
M

22
23
23
18
21
25
22

30
32
32
27
28
33
30.3

8
9
9
9
7
8
8.33

MPS group
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
M

31
25
26
17
32
19
25

33
31
28
22
32
26
28.6

2
6
2
5
0
7
3.66

NP group
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
M

27
29
19
29
28
22
25.6

23
28
17
33
32
25
26.3

-4
- 1
-2
4
4
3
0.66

Note: PP, physical practice; MP, mental practice; CP, combined mental and physical practice;
MPS, mental practicewith simulatedslide movements;NP, no practice(control).
"n= 6

This content downloaded from 216.87.207.12 on Mon, 8 Dec 2014 21:50:20 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

JRME
+9

8.33 (25%)

+8
+7
Mean

Gain
Scores
(Measures
Correct)

+6

5.83 (17%)

+5
+4

3.66 (11%)

+3

2.66 (8%)

+2
+1

.66 (2%)
PP

MP

Group

Group

CP
Group

MPS
Group

NP
Group

Note: PP, physical practice; MP, mental practice; CP, combined mental and physical practice;
MPS, mental practice with simulated slide movements; NP, no practice (control).

1.
Figure

Mean gain scores of practice groups

significant differences were found between groups in the amount of

time spent thinking about the 6tude during rest periods, the effect of
uncontrolled mental practice on subsequent improvement was minimized.
Traditionallydifficultto control, the effects of experimenterbias were
lessened through the use of written directions. Additionally, control
group subjectswere made to feel they were an integral part of the study
by having them read an article that stressed the importance of sightreading music well.
Because the evaluationof musicalperformanceis subjectivein nature,
there is alwaysa concern that the scoring system is not valid. With this
potential problem in mind, a scoring system that minimized subjectivity
was devised. Only pitches, rhythms, and articulationswere scored; no
evaluationof sound quality or interpretationwas attempted.
External validity can also pose problems in mental practice experiments. One concern is the experimental setting itself, along with the
subject'sknowledge that he or she is participatingin an experiment. No
significant differences, however, were found among the groups in
regard to their reports of nervousness. No doubt, musicians of the
caliberand maturityused for the experiment are used to sight-reading
music under some stress.
Implications for performers
In reviewing the mental practice literature it becomes clear that
mental practicecan, at times, improve performanceon a varietyof tasks

This content downloaded from 216.87.207.12 on Mon, 8 Dec 2014 21:50:20 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

227

228 ROSS
Table 2
PretestMeans and Obtained/Adjusted
PosttestMean Scores
Condition

PretestM

PP
MP
CP
MPS
NP

6
6
6
6
6

23.00
25.16
22.00
25.00
25.66

Obtained

Adjusted

posttest M

posttest M

28.83
27.83
30.33
28.66
26.33

29.69
27.10
31.93
28.05
25.23

Note: PP, physical practice; MP, mental practice; CP, combined mental and physical practice;
MPS, mental practicewith simulatedslide movements;NP, no practice(control).

and that a combination of physical and mental practice can actually

produce improvement in performance equal to all-physicalpractice.
The results of the study, completed for this investigation,seem to
support this finding. The question that remainsto be answeredis, why
did this happen? To find an answer it may be helpful to compare the
basic differencesinherent in physicalversus mental practice.
In traditionalphysical practice, both auditory and kinestheticfeedback provide important and necessary information to the performer
regarding the degree of deviation and the position of the muscles
associatedwith these deviationsin performance.Based on this valuable
information,correctionscan be made and accuracygraduallyincreased.
Embouchureand slide movementsare adjustedas feedbackoccurs.This
helps explain, in part, why the physical practice subjects improved
significantlymore than the no practicesubjects.
Mental practice, unlike physical practice, focuses the performer's
attention on the cognitive aspects of music performance with less
emphasis on the sounds being made. The performer can now think
more carefully about what kinds of things might be tried, the consequences of each action can be predicted based on experience, and
inappropriatecourses of action ruled out.
The subjectsin the combinedpracticegroup, who practicedthe music
physicallyand mentally, were able to benefit from both the feedback
associatedwith physicalpracticeand the increasedconcentrationon the
cognitiveaspectsof the music. Because they hadjust finished a physical
trial, the CP subjectscould benefit from the aural feedback obtained
during the physicaltrial, even as they mentallypracticed.
As in other mental practice experiments, the chance to practice
Table 3
One-WayAnalysis of Covariance
Source

df

SS

MS

Condition
Error

4
24

144.39
117.90

36.09
4.91

7.34

.001

Total

28

262.29

This content downloaded from 216.87.207.12 on Mon, 8 Dec 2014 21:50:20 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

JRME229
Table4
Means
of Adjusted
Scheffi'sTestof Differences
Adjusted means

NP
MP
MPS
PP
CP

25.23
27.10
28.05
29.69
31.93

Group
CP

PP

MPS

MP

6.7*
4.83*
3.88
2.24

4.46*
2.59
1.64

2.82
0.95

1.87

Note: PP, physical practice; MP, mental practice; CP, combined mental and physical practice;
MPS, mental practice with simulated slide movements; NP, no practice(control).

*p< .05.

mentallybetween physicaltrials helped focus attention on the cognitive

elements of the music: what positions to use and the identificationof
melodic and rhythmic patterns. In fact, during the experiment, it soon
became evident that most of the subjects,even after mental trialsalone,
improved their interpretation,tone quality and general ease of playing
when compared to their pretest performance.
To the extent a performer can "hear" correct pitches and "feel"
correctmuscularmovements when mentallypracticing,the combination
of physical and mental practice should facilitate music performance.
Undoubtedly, physical practice continues to play a crucial part in
musculardevelopment and conditioning of instrumentalists.However,
this study, along with other mental practice research, suggests that
mental practice,in combinationwith traditionalphysicalpractice,can be
an efficient and effective type of practice.
Recommendations
Based on the findings of this exploratory study, a combination of
mental and physical practice was found to be as useful as all-physical
practice. Additional support for the facilitating effects of combining
mental and physical practice in rehearsing music is necessary.
Future mental practice experiments with music performance might
attempt to study the following variables:
1. Study the effectiveness of mental practiceover a longer period of
practice.
2. Experimentwith different ratiosof physicaland mental practicein
combination.
3. Utilize different types of instrumentalistsor vocalists, comparing
advanced to less-experienced performers.
4. Utilize different levels of music from easy to difficult.
5. Develop a scoring system that adjusts for variancesin mistakes in
each measure and takes into account improvements in interpretation
and sound quality after mental trials.
6. Assess the effect of mental practice on correcting rhythm versus
pitch errors.

This content downloaded from 216.87.207.12 on Mon, 8 Dec 2014 21:50:20 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

230

ROSS

REFERENCES
Egstrom,G. H. (1964). Effects of an emphasis on conceptualizingtechniques
35, 472-481.
during early learning of gross motor skill.ResearchQuarterly,
Gilmore,R. W., and Stolurow,L. M. (1949). Motorand 'mental'practiceof a ball
and socket task.American
39, 156-167.
Psychology,
and
Huck, S. W., Cormier,W. H., & Bounds, W. G.,Jr. (1974).Readingstatistics
research(pp. 270-274). New York: Harper and Row.
Jacobson, E. (1930a). Electricalmeasurementof neuromuscularstates during
mental activities I. Imagination of movement involving skeletal muscle.
American
91, 567-608.
Journalof Psysiology,
Jacobson,E. (1930b). Electricalmeasurementsof neuromuscularstatesduring
mental activitiesII. Imaginationand recollectionof various muscularacts.
American
94, 22-34.
Journalof Physiology,
Jacobson,E. (1930c). Electricalmeasurementsof neuromuscularstatesduring
mental activitiesIII. Visual imaginationand recollection.American
Journalof
95, 694-702.
Physiology,
Jacobson,E. (1930d). Electricalmeasurementsof neuromuscularstatesduring
mental activities IV. Evidence of contraction of specific muscles during
95, 703-712.
imagination.American
Journalof Physiology,
Jacobson, E. (1931). Electricalmeasurementsof neuromuscularstates during
mentalactivitiesV. Variationof specificmusclescontractingduring imagination. American
96, 115-121.
Journalof Physiology,
Journalof
Jacobson,E. (1932). Electrophysiologyof mental activities.American
44, 667-694.
Psychology,
Journalof
Jastrow,J. A. (1892). Study of involuntarymovements. American
4, 398-407.
Psychology,
Kohler,W. (1925). Thementality
of apes.New York: Harcourt,Brace.
Lafosse,A. (1949). Schoolof sightreadingandstyle,BookA. New York:M. Baron.
Oxendine,J. B. (1969). Effectsof mentaland physicalpracticeon the learningof
three motor skills.ResearchQuarterly,
40, 755-763.
Perry,H. M. (1939). The relativeefficiencyof actualand imaginarypracticein
five selected tasks.Archivesof Psychology,
34, 5-75.
A.
Effects of mental practiceon the
C.
&
S.
Morehouse,
(1969).
Phipps, J.,
40, 773-778
Quarterly,
acquisitionof motor skillsof varieddifficulty.Research
Powell, G. E. (1973). Negative and positive mental practice in motor skill
acquisition.PerceptualandMotorSkills,37, 312.
Ryan,E. D., &Simons,J. (1982). Efficacyof mentalimageryin enhancingmental
rehearsalof motor skills.Journalof SportPsychology,
2, 35-45.
Smith,L. E., & Harrison,J. S. (1962). Comparisonof the effectsof visual,motor,
mental,and guided practiceupon speed and accuracyof performinga simple
33, 299-307.
eye-handcoordinationtask.ResearchQuarterly,
Start, K. B. (1960). Relationshipbetween intelligenceand the effect of mental
30, 644-649.
Quarterly,
practiceon the performanceof a motor skill.Research
35, 85Start,K. B. (1964). Kinesthesiaand mental practice.Research
Quarterly,
90.
Stebbins,R. J. (1968). A comparison of the effects of physical practice and
mental practicein learning a motor skill.ResearchQuarterly,
39, 714-720.
Ulich, E. (1967). Some experimentsin the function of mental trainingin the
10, 411-419.
acquisitionof motor skills.Ergonomics,
Vandell,R. A., Davis,R. A., & Clugston,H. A. (1943). The functionof mental
29, 243-250.
practicein the acquisitionof motor skills.Journalof Psychology,
Wickman,H., & Lizotte,P. (1983). Effectsof mentalpracticeand locusof control
andMotorSkills,56, 807-812.
on performanceof dart throwing.Perceptual
1985
11,
July

This content downloaded from 216.87.207.12 on Mon, 8 Dec 2014 21:50:20 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions