KINESTHETIC AND VISUAL-KINESTHETIC PERCEPTION OF INCLINATION: TESTING THE VALIDITY OF THE PADDLE METHOD
Some years ago, Feresin, Agostini & Negrin-Saviolo (1998) tested the validity of the paddle method for measuring: a) the kinesthetic perception of inclination; b) the visual-kinesthetic perception of inclination. In three conditions subjects performed three different tasks: a) rotating a manual paddle to a set of verbally given inclinations (blindfolded subjects), b) rotating a manual paddle to the same set of verbally given inclinations after specific kinesthetic training (blindfolded subjects) and, c) rotating the paddle to a set of fixed visual inclinations after the kinesthetic training. The results showed a high degree of accuracy and precision in the second and third task but not in the first one. When subjects were asked to rotate a manual paddle to a set of verbally given inclinations they used three main anchors (0Â°, 45Â°, 90Â°). Furthermore, the paddle method is biased by a kinesthetic deficiency, namely a rotational problem of the wrist which can be corrected by means of specific training.