3.2. Setting and material

The setting used in Study 2 was identical to that employed in Study 1. The specific protocol designed for this Study is explained below.

in Study 1, in order to discriminate between reversed and double reversed relations, as well as to eliminate fatigue because of sentences being too long, each reversed and double reversed relation was separated, indicating only the part of the reversal of each question (i.e., If the park was the aquarium, where would I be?; If the aquarium was the park, where would you be?).

Assessing Perspective-Taking in Children through Different Formats of Deictic Framing Protocol

http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.74539

83

In order to ensure the group was at the same level as participants from Study 1, before implementing the Condition, the participants were selected in accordance with the set of

Figure 1 shows the percentage of correct responses in terms of Condition and relational complexity. It can be seen from the figure that participants in Study 2 gave more correct responses than other Conditions in Study 1 on all levels of complexity (M = 100, SD = 0; M = 90, SD = 14.91;

specific criteria mentioned above. Table 5 shows the final composition of the group.

M = 26.67 SD = 14.91,on simple, reversed, and double reversed relations, respectively).

Figure 1. Mean percentage of correct responses for each condition in simple, reversed and double reversed relations.

Table 5. Means and standard deviations by relational complexity in pretest.

3.5. Results
