-——‘ . _ _
' .
I

 

 

. “'a.~'..".«.””"‘"‘an .0 2L—O‘.-OohoO-60W. 1W,O.ME‘.OOF“IOOWH -o-&~io. u

THE RELATIONSHIP BEIWEEN PERSONALITY "FWD“   _ .

[THE REDUCTION onesmmm . ~

Thesisfor the Degree’of.M._'A. _

MICHIGAN STATEUN-IVERsm . g .
DOROTHY VANBUREN ' '
_ __ +1975

 

 

JHESIS

0 A"

t
J
l q;-
.-i .77; , . ‘t
"1' 1
_ 1';
v '
I I.» A ' '1 .1?" :4
V.
, "
.v 3": ' ’

 

 

ABSTRACT

THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN PERSONALITY TYPE
AND THE REDUCTION OF TEST ANXIETY
BY

Dorothy Van Buren

The hypothesis has been advanced that personality type
affects the outcome of various conditioning procedures. In
this study it was hypothesized that introverts would exhibit
a significantly greater reduction in test anxiety than extra-
verts; that externals would exhibit a significantly greater
reduction in test anxiety than internals; and that high an—
xious subjects would exhibit a significantly greater reduc-
tion in test anxiety than low anxious subjects, following
participation in a counterconditioning treatment program for
the reduction of test anxiety. '

The subjects for this study were 25 female and 27 male
undergraduates who were either volunteers that responded to
notices in the campus newspaper for participation in a test
anxietyireduction study or referrals from the university

I
counseling center. The Maudsley Personality Inventory
[Eysenck, 1962] was selected to measure introversion-extra-

I
version, while the Rotter Internal-External Locus of Control

Dorothy Van Buren

Scale/[Rotter, 1966] was used to measure internal-external
locus of control. The Test Anxiety Scale (TAS) [Sarason,
1957], the S-R Inventory of Anxiousness - "Exam" Form
[Endler, Hunt and Rosenstein, 1962] and the Taylor Manifest
Anxiety Scale (TMAS) [Taylor, 1953] were used to measure
level of anxiety. The subjects were assigned to one of five
experimental conditions: 1) systematic desensitization,

2) cue-controlled relaxation, 3) combined desensitization and
cue-controlled relaxation, 4) attention-placebo, and 5) no
treatment. The experimental design consisted of a repeated
measures paradigm with assessments of anxiety occurring one
week before and one week after the treatment program. Pre-
treatment measures of the personality dimensions were also
obtained. A total of five one-hour treatment sessions were
held over a six—week period. Results for this investigation
are based on data from the 30 treatment subjects assigned to
eiflun:the systematic desensitization, the cue-controlled
relaxation or the combined desensitization and cue-controlled
relaxation condition.

The findings of this investigation failed to support
the hypothesis that introverts would exhibit a significantly
greater reduction in test anxiety than extraverts following
treatment. The hypothesis that externals would exhibit a
significantly greater reduction in test anxiety than
internals following treatment was supported by results on the

TAS and TMAS. The third hypothesis, that high anxious

Dorothy Van Buren

subjects would exhibit a significantly greater reduction in
test anxiety than low anxious subjects following treatment,
was not supported. An additional finding was that the mean
pre-treatment TMAS score of introverts was found to be sig-
nificantly greater than that of extraverts.

Suggestions for_future research include designing test
anxiety reduction procedures which would be more effective
for internals and examining whether subjects change regarding
classification on the dimensions of introversion-extraver—
sion and internal-external control following treatment for

reduction of test anxiety.

 

 

THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN PERSONALITY TYPE

AND THE REDUCTION OF TEST ANXIETY

BY

Dorothy Van Buren

A THESIS

Submitted to
Michigan State University
in partial fulfillment of the requirements
for the degree of

MASTER OF ARTS

Department of Psychology

1975

DEDICATION

To my parents and grandparents, who encouraged me
and were supportive during the difficult times.
To Willie, a true friend who shared her wisdom and

had faith in me.

ii

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

I would like to express my appreciation to
Dr. Richard Russell, chairman of my thesis committee,
for his assistance in completing this study. I would
also like to thank Dr. Douglas Miller andIhL Gordon

Williams for serving as members of my thesis committee.

iii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

LIST OF TABLES . . . . . . . . . .
CHAPTER
I. INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . .
II. REVIEW OF LITERATURE . . . .
Introversion-Extraversion
Internal-External Locus of
Summary . . . . . . . . .
Hypotheses . . . . . . . .
III. METHOD . . . . . . . . . . .
Subjects . . . . . . . . .
Instruments . . . . . . .
Procedure . . . . . . . .
IV. RESULTS . . . . . . . . . .
Summary . . . . . . . . .
V. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS . .
Summary . . . . . . . . .
Conclusions . . . . . . .
REFERENCES . . . . . . . . . . .

APPENDICES . . . . . . . . . . .

iv

Control

11
12
13
13
13
15
20
27
35
35
37
39
42

TABLE

LIST OF TABLES

PAGE

Means, standard deviations and t-values for

the difference between means for extraverts

and introverts on the three dependent

variables . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21

Means, standard deviations and t-values for

the difference between means for internals

and externals on the three dependent

variables . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23

Means, standard deviations and t-values for

the difference between means for high

anxious and low anxious subjects on the

three dependent variables . . . . . . . . . . . 24

Correlations of the pre-TAS, pre-TMAS, intro-
version-extraversion and internal-external
control measures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26

CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION

Personality type is a dimension which distinguishes
one individual from another. A great deal of research has
been conducted to explore the hypothesis that certain per-
sonality types respond differently to learning situations.
In particular, the hypothesis has been advanced that per-
sonality type affects the outcome of various conditioning
procedures.

Regarding the reduction of test anxiety through
various conditioning and treatment procedures, the question
arises as to whether subjects with a particular personality
type are more successful in test anxiety reduction programs
than others. In light of the above question, this study
is an investigation of the relationship between the per?
sonality dimensions of introversion-extraversion and in-
ternal-external control and the differential effectiveness
of treatment for the reduction of test anxiety among these
personality types. The relationship between level of
anxiety and the effectiveness of treatment for the reduc-

tion of test anxiety will also be investigated.

CHAPTER II

REVIEW OF LITERATURE

Introversion-Extraversion

 

Eysenck [1957] combined some concepts from the theories
of Hull and Pavlov in hypothesizing that introverts condi-
tion better than extraverts. He described introverts as
having strong excitatory tendency and weak inhibition,
while extraverts have weak excitation and strong inhibi-
tion. The physiological make-up of introverts favors
conditioned responses which form easily and extinguish with
difficulty, while the reverse is true for the.makeup of
extraverts. Results from experiments in conditioning
the eye-blink reflex were used to support his hypothesis.

In a later work Eysenck [1966] noted that introverts con-
dition better than extraverts only under certain conditions.
He stated that the following parameters must be controlled
in order to obtain positive results:

(1) Partial reinforcement favours introverts: 100
per cent reinforcement does not.

(2) Weak unconditioned stimuli favour introverts;
strong UCS do not.

(3) Small CS—UCS intervals favour introverts; large
CS-UCS intervals do not [Eysenck, 1973, p. 158].

Eysenck [Knapp, 1962] described extraverts and intro-

verts in the following manner:

The typical extravert is sociable, likes parties,

has many friends, needs to have people to talk

to, and does not like reading or studying by

himself. He craves excitement, takes chances,

often sticks his neck out, acts on the spur of the
moment, and is generally an impulsive individual.

He is fond of practical jokes, always has a ready
answer, and generally likes change. He is carefree,
easygoing, Optimistic, and likes to 'laugh and be
merry.‘ He prefers to keep moving and doing things,
tends to be aggressive and may lose his temper
quickly. His feelings are not kept under tight
control, and he is not always a reliable person.

The typical introvert is a quiet, retiring sort

of person, introspective, fond of books rather than
people; he is reserved and distant except to intimate
friends. He tends to plan ahead, 'looks before he
leaps,' and distrusts the impulse of the moment. He
does not like excitement, takes matters of everyday
life with proper seriousness, and likes a well-ordered
mode of life. He keeps his feelings under close con-
trol, seldom behaves in an aggressive manner, and does
not lose his temper easily. He is reliable, somewhat
pessimistic and places great value on ethical stan-
dards [p. 4].

Relationship of Introversion-Extraversion
to Conditionability

The results of some verbal conditioning experiments
support Eysenck's hypothesis regarding the relationship be-
tween introversion-extraversion and conditionability.
Costello [1967] investigated the relationship between the
variables of introversion-extraversion and neuroticism,
as measured by the Eysenck Personality Inventory, and the
clinical conditioning of the connotative meanings of words.
The results of his classical conditioning experiment sup-
ported Eysenck's hypothesis that conditioning correlates

positively with introversion. He found no difference in

4

the conditionability of subjects scoring high or low on
neuroticism.

Holmes [1967] investigated the relationship between
speed of neural transmissions, conditionabiUty (verbal)
and personality. Speed of neural transmissions was inferred
from speed of pupillary constriction and dilation. He
‘found a significant relationship between speed of neural
transmissions, rapid verbal conditioning and introversion
as measured by self-report and peer ratings.

Investigations of the work and study behavior of
introverts and extraverts also support the ideas hypothe—
sized by Eysenck. Cooper [1967] studied the relationship
between introversion-extraversion, work behavior, absenteeism
and tolerance for monotonous tasks in an English factory.
Using the Eysenck Personality Inventory, he found that
extraversion correlated positively with work absences and
negatively with length of service. He related these
findings to individual differences in arousal which affected
the degree of stimulation needed from the environment. Thus,
extraverts, because of their low arousal level, required
more stimulation than would be provided by a routine or
monotonous factory job.

Estabrook and Sommer's [1966] findings in regard to
the study habits of introverts and extraverts supported
Cooper's conclusions. Using the Maudsley Personality

Inventory and a study habits questionnaire, the researchers

found a significant difference in the study habits of the
two groups. They found that extraverts, to a greater ex-
tent than introverts, wanted to spend study breaks with
other peOple. It appeared that the extraverts needed
some form of auditory and visual stimulation in order to
maintain their interest, since they preferred to study in
large study halls in the visual presence of others.
Relationship of Systematic Desensitization
to Introversion-Extraversion

Wolpin and Raines [1966] explored the necessity of
using either relaxation or a hierarchy in reducing anxiety
and avoidance behavior in regard to snakes through decon-
ditioning. The Maudsley Personality Inventory was used to
examine whether there were correlations between it and suc-
cess with the deconditioning procedure. The authors con-
cluded "that the lower the extraversion score the more
reasonable any of the procedures seemed to a given subject
and the more they were willing to go along with us" [p. 36].
They felt that there "might be some value in pursuing the
possibility that scores on the E scale may predict, more
generally, willingness to comply or conform" [p. 36]. In
addition, they suggested that the results were related to
the fact that the introverted subjects may have had more
practice with visual imagery since they live in fantasy

more. The ability to produce strong, clear visual images

is essential to the effective functioning of the desen-
sitization process.

Costello [1957] studied the differences between normals,
dysthymics (neurotic introverts) and hysterics (neurotic ex-
traverts) in their ability to control their visual imagery.
He found a distinction between subjects "who are unable to
control their imagery because their images are vivid and of
an autonomous nature and those who cannot control their
imagery because their images are weak and of an unstable
nature" [p. 847]. The first type of imagery was associated
with dysthymic disorders, while the second type was a330*
ciated with hysteric disorders.

Weinstein [1968] investigated the effect of the per-
sonality dimension of introversion-extraversion, as measured
by the Eysenck Personality Inventory, on the outcome of
two counseling techniques used to reduce test anxiety
among college students. The techniques employed were group
systematic desensitization and structured group interaction.
She hypothesized that introverts treated by group syste-
matic desensitization would exhibit significantly less
test anxiety than extraverts. The results did not support
this hypothesis since group systematic desensitization

was not more effective for introverts than extraverts.

Independence of Personality Type and Neuroticism

The question of whether or not neuroticism is in-
dependent of introversion-extraversion has been raised
frequently in the literature. Eysenck [1947, 1952, 1953]
has demonstrated that the two factors are orthogonal,
and Franks' [1956] work supports his findings. Franks I
conducted a classical conditioning experiment (eye-blink
reflex) with dysthymics, hysterics and normal subjects
to investigate whether conditionability was related to
neuroticism or introversion-extraversion. He concluded
that "conditionability is related to introversion—extra-
version and not to neuroticism, the extraverted subjects
tending to condition much less well than the introverted
ones" [p. 149]. His results also suggested that "manifest
anxiety is related to strong conditionability only to the

extent that anxious people are introverted" [p. 149].

Internal-External Locus of Control

 

The construct of locus of control is based upon Julian
Rotter's social learning theory [1954]. According to
the theory, "a reinforcement acts to strengthen an

expectancy that a particular behavior or event will be

 

followed by that reinforcement in the future" [Rotter,
1966, p. 2]. Locus of control refers to the extent to
which individuals perceive the events in their lives as

resulting from their own actions. Internally controlled

individuals perceive their life events as being the con-
sequence of their own actions, while externally controlled
individuals perceive these events as being unrelated to
their own behavior and due to chance, fate or luck.

Much research on internal-external control has been
generated by the belief that this variable is important in
understanding the nature of the learning process in various
situations, and that individuals differ in the extent to
which they attribute personai control to the attainment

of reward in identical situations.

Locus of Control and Resistance to Influence

One area which has been investigated in depth is the
relationship between internal-external control (I-E) and
resistance to influence attempts. Lefcourt [1972] points out
that "persons who view themselves as responsible for their
own fates should be more cautious about what they accept
from others than should those who do not perceive themselves
to be in active control of their fate" [p. 3].

In investigations conducted by Strickland [1970] and
Getter [1966], a verbal conditioning paradigm was employed
in which the locus of control was used to predict the
response to verbal reinforcements. Strickland found a
relationship between I-E and the denial of having been
influenced by verbal reinforcements; internals denied

influence more frequently than externals. In addition,

internals who were aware of the reinforcement contingency
tended to exhibit less conditioning than internals who
were unaware of the contingencies. Also, internals who
were aware of the contingency tended to exhibit less con-
ditioning than all external subjects regardless of whether or
not they were aware of the contingencies. Getter found
that the subjects most successfully conditioned were the
most external. The "latent conditioners" (those subjects
who did not exhibit the conditioned response until the
extinction trial when reinforcement had ceased) were the
internal group.

The results of the Strickland and Getter studies in-
dicate that internals behave in a manner which is opposi-
tional to the direction of influence. Biondo and MacDonald
[1971] questioned the idea that internals are more likely
to react against covert as opposed to overt influence
conditions. They examined the effect of subtle versus
overt influence attempts upon the tendencies of internals
and externals to resist influence. They used three levels
of influence (no, low and high) and found that externals
did not respond differentially to the low and high levels
of influence (they conformed under both levels of influence).
There was no support for the hypothesis that internals
would react against the low-influence message since they
were negatively influenced by the high-influence message

only.

10

The relationship between I-E and the susceptibility
to influence appeared more complex in a study by Ritchie
and Phares [1969]. They examined the influence of arguments
attributed to high and low-status individuals upon the
attitude changes of internals and externals regarding
governmental budgeting. Externals exhibited more attitude
change under conditions of high-prestige as opposed to low-
prestige. They changed more than internals when both groups
were influenced by a high-prestige source. Internals
demonstrated some shift in the direCtion of the influencer's
opinion, but they did not vary with influencer status.
Neither the internals nor externals were consistently resis-
tant or susceptible to the influence attempts.

Results of these studies indicate that under certain
circumstances internals are more resistant to influence
attempts than are externals. _Externals appear more ready
to accept the experimenter's directions and suggestions
and are more influenced by Opinions of high-status

individuals.

The Relationship Between Locus of Control and Anxiety
Watson [1967] investigated the relationship between
locus of control and anxiety, as measured by the Taylor
Manifest Anxiety Scale (MA) and the Alpert-Haber Achieve-
ment Anxiety Test, for a large sample (N = 648). He found

that the more external the subject, the more anxiety he

11

reported on both scales. According to Rotter [1966], Ware
found a significant correlation between the I-E scale and
the MA scale for a smaller group of subjects (N = 111). He
also_reported that Efran used a shortened form of the MA
and of the I-E scale and found a 0.00 correlation (N = 114).
Hersch and Scheibe [1967] found a positive significant
correlation between I-E scores and anxiety as measured

by the MMPI. Hersch and Scheibe's results support the

idea that internality is "consistently associated with
indexes of social adjustment and personal achievement”

[p. 613].

The Relationship Between Conditionability and Anxiety
Spence [1964] reviewed the results of experiments on
the relationship of eyelid conditioning and anxiety. He
found that "the prOportion of instances in which the con-
ditioning performance of the high anxiety group was higher
than that of the low anxiety group is much greater than
one would expect by chance" [p. 133]. He concluded that
high anxiety subjects condition better than low anxiety

subjects.

Summary

A review of the literature indicates that introverts
and extroverts differ in terms of conditionability, func-
tioning of the physiological systems and willingness to

conform. Likewise, internals and externals appear to be

12

dissimilar regarding resistance to influence. Thus, it
is plausible that different personality types, as iden-
tified by the dimensions of introversion-extraversion and
internal-external control, might respond differently to
counterconditioning procedures for reducing test anxiety.
The literature suggests that introverts participating
in a treatment program to reduce test anxiety will experience
a greater reduction in test anxiety than extraverts, while
externals will experience a greater reduction in test
anxiety than internals. In addition, it is suggested that
the most anxious subjects will experience the greatest

reduction in test anxiety.

Hypotheses

 

Following participation in a counterconditioning treat-
ment program for the reduction of test anxiety:

1. Introverts will exhibit a significantly greater
reduction in test anxiety than extraverts.

2. Externals will exhibit a significantly greater
reduction in test anxiety than internals.

3. High anxious subjects will exhibit a significantly
greater reduction in test anxiety than low anxious

subjects.

CHAPTER III
METHOD

This study was designed to investigate the relation-V
ship between personality type and the effectiveness of
treatment to reduce test anxiety. The relationship be-
tween level of anxiety and the effectiveness of treat-
ment was also examined. The independent variables in-
cluded the personality dimensions of introversion-extra-
version and internal-external control, while the depen-

dent variables were the measures of anxiety.

Subjects
The subjects were 25 female and 27 male undergraduates
who were either volunteers that responded to notices in the.
campus newspaper for participants in a test anxiety re-
duction study of referrals from the university counseling
center. The subjects had been enrolled in the university

for an average of 2.5 years.

Instruments

 

Pre-Treatment Battery
The pre-treatment battery consisted of five instruments:
1. The Maudsley Personality Inventory (MPI) [Eysenck,

1962] is a 48-item scale which measure two

13

14

variables, Neuroticism (N) and Extraversion (E)
(Appendix A).

2. The Rotter Internal-External Locus of Control
'Scale [Rotter, 1966] is a 29-item, forced choice
test which includes six filler items intended to
make the purpose of the test somewhat ambiguous
(Appendix B). ‘

3. The Test Anxiety Scale (TAS) [Sarason, 1957] is a
21—item instrument containing questions‘relating
to reactions and thoughts occurring before, during
and after an examination (Appendix C).

4. The S—R Inventory of Anxiousness - "Exam" Form
(S-R) [Endler, Hunt and Rosenstein, 1962] is a
l4-item scale which contains three factors. These
factors are distress, exhilaration and autonomic
responses (Appendix D).

5. The Taylor Manifest Anxiety Scale (TMAS) [Taylor,
1953] contains 50 items. These items were drawn
from the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inven—
tory and judged by clinicians to be indicative

of manifest anxiety (Appendix E).

Post-Treatment,Battery
At the completion of treatment, the TAS, the S-R and

the TMAS were administered.

15

Procedure

 

The experimental design consisted of a repeated measures
paradigm with assessments of anxiety occurring one week
before and one week after the treatment program. All treat-
ment subjects were seen in groups ranging in size from two
to five subjects. A total of five one-hour treatment sessions
were held over a six week period. Each subject had completed
at least one final examination at the time of the post-treat-

ment assessment.

Therapists
The four therapists for the investigation included
three Ph.D. psychologists and one advanced graduate student.
All the therapists had extensive experience with relaxation
training, cue-controlled relaxation and systematic desen-

sitization prior to participation in the study.

Treatments
Pre-treatment TAS scores were used to assign subjects
by stratified blocks to one of five experimental conditions:
systematic desensitization (SD), cue-controlled relaxation

(CCR), combined SD and CCR, attention-placebo and no-treatment.

s9
This treatment program was modeled after the group SD
procedures used by Paul and Shannon [1966]. The treatment

consisted of three steps: training in progressive muscle

relaxation [Bernstein and Borkovec, 1973], hierarchy

16

construction, and pairing of visualized hierarchy scenes
with relaxation. Although a standard lZ-item temporal-
spatial hierarchy was used for all SD subjects, changes
were made to meet the needs of the Specific groups. The
final hierarchies varied in length from 11 to 14 items.
As part of the treatment, all SD subjects were instructed
to practice the relaxation training procedures on a daily

basis between sessions.

Cue-Controlled Relaxation

 

The goal of this treatment technique was to enable
the subjects to achieve relaxation in response to a self-
produced cue. The program involved two steps: training in
progressive muscle relaxation, followed by pairing of the
relaxed state with a self-produced cue word ("calm"). The
association of the cue word with relaxation was developed
by having the relaxed subjects concentrate on their breath-
ing while silently repeating the cue word with each ex-
halation. The therapist repeated the one word aloud in
synchrony with the subjects' exhalation two or three times,
then the subjects continued for 15 more pairings. A second
series of 20 cue word pairings was carried out following a
60-second interval in which the subjects were instructed
to attend to general feelings of relaxation. The subjects
were instructed to practice both the relaxation and cue
word association procedures on a daily basis between treat-

ment sessions.

17

Combined Cue-Controlled Relaxation and SD

 

Subjects in this condition received a combination of
the cue-controlled and SD procedures outlined above. After
relaxation induction, subjects received one set of 20 cue
word pairings, followed by visualized scenes from the hier-
archy. At the end of the desensitization period, another
set of 20 cue word pairings was given before the relaxation
was ended. Subjects in this condition were instructed to
practice both the relaxation and one word association pro-

cedures on a daily basis between sessions.

Attention-Placebo

 

The treatment rationale for subjects in this condition
noted that anxiety over tests was a function of subconscious
fears. To overcome the anxiety, a procedure referred to as
"subconscious reconditioning" was employed. By means of a
tachistoscope, messages were flashed on a screen at speeds
below the subjects' threshold of awareness. The subjects
were told that the slides contained "anti-fear messageS"
designed to directly counter-condition their anxiety. In
fact, the messages consisted of groups of nonsense syllables
which appeared as indistinguishable blurs when projected on
the viewing screen. The subjects did not receive relaxation
training, nor did they discuss studying or test-taking

behaviors during the group meetings.

18

No-Treatment

 

Subjects in this condition were told that they could

not be offered treatment during the term due to scheduling

conflicts.

ing term.

They were promised treatment during the follow-

Classification Criteria for Personality
Type and Anxiety Level

The following criteria were used in classifying sub—

jects according to personality type and level of anxiety:

1.

Classification as an introvert or extravert was
determined by the E score on the MPI. Extraverts
were those subjects scoring above the sample mean
of 25.0 on the E variable, while introverts were
those scoring below the mean. Eysenck [Knapp,
1962] reported a mean E score of 28.73 (N = 1,064)
for a group of male and female American college
students.

Internals were those scoring below the sample mean
of 10.7, and externals were those scoring above
the mean. Rotter [1966] reported a mean internal-
external control score of 8.29 (N = 1,180) for a
group of male and female American college students.
High anxious subjects were those scoring above

the sample mean of 23.2 on the pre-treatment
administration of the TMAS, while low anxious

subjects were those scoring below the mean.

19

Data from the treatment and control subjects were
combined (N = 52) in computing mean internal-external, intro-
version-extraversion and TMAS scores. However, results of
this investigation were based on data collected only from
the 30 treatment subjects assigned to either the systematic
desensitization, the cue-controlled relaxation or the
combined desensitization and cue-controlled relaxation
condition. Attention-placebo subjects were classified as
no-treatment subjects.

The independent group's t-test and the Pearson product
moment correlation were used to analyze the data. Mean
pre-treatment scores, mean post-treatment scores and mean
change scores and corresponding standard deviations were
computed for extraverts and introverts, internals and ex-
ternals and high and low anxious subjects on the three
dependent variables (TAS, S-R and TMAS). The t—test was
used to examine whether there was a significant difference
between the mean pre—treatment scores of extraverts and
introverts, internals and externals, and high and low anx-
ious subjects on the three dependent variables. The t-test
was also used to examine whether there was a significant
difference between the mean change scores of extraverts
and introverts, internals and externals, and high and low
anxious subjects on the three dependent variables. Pearson
correlations were computed for all combinations of pairs
of four measures; pre-TAS scores, pre-TMAS scores, introver-

sion-extraversion and internal-external control.

CHAPTER IV
RESULTS

Results for this investigation are based on data from
the 30 treatment subjects. The treatment subjects were
divided into independent variable classifications according
to scores on the following instruments:

1. The MP1 - 12 extraverts and 18 introverts

2. The Rotter Scale - 15 internals and 15 externals

3. The TMAS - 14 high anxious and 14 low anxious

subjects (TMAS scores were not obtained for two
of the treatment subjects).

Table 1 presents the means, standard deviations and
t-values for the difference between means for extraverts and
introverts on the three dependent variables. There was no
significant difference in the mean change scores of extra-
verts and introverts on the TAS, S-R or TMAS; however, a
trend toward significance occurred on the TMAS (p < .10).
The findings do not support hypothesis 1, that introverts
would exhibit a significantly greater reduction in test
anxiety than extraverts, following treatment.

Table 1 also indicates that the mean pre-TMAS score of
introverts was significantly higher than that of extraverts.
This indicates that the anxiety level of intrOverts as mea-
sured by the TMAS, was higher than that of extraverts.

20

21

mOHOOm Gunmau anal

How can: Hmaulu vvammulmao

mac. v a «a.
HG. v A «a
ma. vma

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

meOOm :mmI_HQMIHm0HuImHA How can: umvulu cwawmuIOIu M
.
eu.HI «Mum o~.o .am.a ~o.ou ” v¢.~ mammbnu
_ a
a.h m.n ”.6 . h.m o.m ~.a . m.q ~.q u.n .a.m
m.eI n.m~_ m.m~, h.mI H.mm_ m.mvl a.mI .Am.m «.ma _amxz
W _ .1 _ l Amanzo muumbonuam
l A . I
w.e «.5 n.~ 6.6 m.m m m.m t e.v _ m.m _ ¢.m .a.m
m.oI m.¢m o.¢nm «.mu ~.¢m m.evw m.~I , a.» A a.o~ duo:
. m I l
_ u m 1 A-sz munmpmnaxm
_ , i
AWEQMAM when. wank. Ammcwnu umomm mmum” mmfimgul anon Mona
. .
mesh mIm M was

 

 

 

 

.mmanmwumb uaoocmmmo mwuzn Una :0 mHHNDOHHGM van MHHNDMHHNG How
mama! awmlumn woumhmumao on» How mmaam>Iu can maowumwbwc cumcflmum .manul .H wanna

22

Table 2 shows the means, standard deviations and t-
values for the difference between means for internals and
externals on the three dependent variables. Table 2 in-
dicates that the mean change scores of externals were sig-
nificantly greater than those of internals on the TAS and
TMAS; however, change scores for the two groups did not
differ significantly on the S-R. There was no significant
difference in the pre-treatment scores of internals and
externals on the TAS, S-R and TMAS. Hypothesis 2, that
externals would exhibit a significnatly greater reduction
in.testanxiety than internals following treatment, was
supported by results on the TAS and TMAS.

Table 3 indicates the means, standard deviations and
t-values for the difference between means for high anxious
and low anxious subjects on the three dependent variables.
As shown on Table 3, there was a significant difference
in the mean pre-treatment scores of the high and low anx-
ious subjects on the TAS and TMAS. While the mean change
score of the high anxious group was significantly greater
than that of the low anxious group on the TMAS, there was
no significant difference in the mean change scores of the
two groups on the TAS and S-R. Thus, hypothesis 3, that
high anxious subjects would exhibit a significantly greater
reduction in test anxiety than low anxious subjects follow-

ing treatment, was not supported.

23

monoom some ucmsummuulmum Mom coma ummqu owawmuuosun

Hoo. v Q«««
Ho. v m««
mo. v 0*

mmuoom mmcmso some now own: ummqu ooawmulmco

m

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

mH.~I flo.a mm.ou m.oI m>.HI mm.o msam>lu
m.m m.m m.m m.w «.m h.m m.v m.¢ m.¢ .a.m
m.mI o.ma ~.mm m.mI H.em H.Hv ¢.¢I m.h h.~H cams
Amauzv mamcumuxm
m.n m.m m.oH m.n m.m m.m o.¢ n.~ m.¢ .o.m
N.o+ >.ma m.ma m.vI H.mm o.v¢ H.~I m.m m.aa cmmz
Amanzv mamcumucH
mmcwno umom mwum nomcmno umom moan amocmno umom mmum
m<ze mIm mmfi

 

 

 

 

 

mange com3umn moamummmao on» How mwsHm>Iu can mcowumw>oo oumocmum .mcmmz

.mmanmwum> unmocmmmo mwhnu man no mamcumuxw new nflmcumucfl Mom

.m manna

24

mmuoom mmcmso some now com: ummulu omaflmulmao
mmuoom some unmeummqumum now owns ammulu ooaflmquzu

Hoo. v Q«««
Ho. v mat
mo. v m.

n

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

m
vv.NI mm.» om.oI o¢.H mo.OI o~.~ msam>uu
* t«¥ «

m.> v.5 m.o m.h o.h m.m m.v ~.¢ m.v .o.m

m.o+ m.¢a m.va m.¢I H.mm m.mm H.mI m.h v.oH cum:
Avanzv msowxcm 30A

~.m m.h N.v o.m m.m m.h m.v h.v n.m .o.m

H.mI m.¢~ ¢.om m.hu o.nm ~.¢¢ m.vI v.m h.ma cam:
iaauzc muoflxcm new:

nwmcmnu umom mmum nwmcmsu pmom comm ammamco umom mmum
méza mlm m¢H

 

 

 

 

 

.mmanmwum> ucmocmmmo owns» on» no muomMQSm msoflxcm 30H can msowxcm now:

How mamme cmmaumn wocmummmao on» How mosam>lu pom mcoflumw>mo oumocmum

.mcmmz .m manme

25

Table 4 shows all possible combinations of correlations
between pairs of four measures; pre-TAS scores, pre-TMAS
scores, introversion-extraversion and internal-external
control. Table 4 indicates that significant correlations
were obtained for three pairs of variables. A significant
positive correlation was obtained for the rleationship
between pre-TMAS and pre-TAS scores, indicating a direct
relationship between test anxiety and manifest anxiety,
as measured by the instruments. A significant negative
correlation was obtained for the relationship between
pre-TMAS scores and introversion-extraversion. This
indicated that level of anxiety as measured by pre-TMAS
scores increases as extraversion decreases or that intro-
verts had a higher level of anxiety as measured by the
TMAS than did extraverts. This result is in agreement
with the previous finding (Table 1) that the mean pre-
TMAS score of introverts was significantly higher than
that of extraverts. A significant positive correlation
was obtained for the relationship between pre-TMAS scores
and internal-external control scores, indicating that
anxiety level as measured by the TMAS increases as the
internal-external control score increases or moves toward
the external end of the continuum. In addition, the nega-
tivekcorrelation obtained for the relationship between
pre-TAS scores and introversion-extraversion indicated

a trend toward significance (p < .10). This result is in

26

Table 4. Correlations of the pre-TAS, pre-TMAS, introversion-
' (extraversion and internal-external control measures.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Internal-
Introversion- External
pre-TAS pre-TMAS Extroversion Control
pre-TAS ~-
pre-TMAS 0.43* --
Introversion- _ _ ** __
Extroversion 0'32 0’73
Internal-
External 0.09 0.48* x -0.19 --
Control

 

 

 

 

agreement with the previous finding (Table 1) that the
pre-treatment anxiety level of introverts (as measured by
the TMAS) was significantly higher than that of extraverts.
Regarding the differential effectiveness of the var-
ious treatment programs, significant pre- to post-treatment
changes were observed on most of the self-report scales
within each treatment condition. For subjects in the SD
treatment condition, significant pre- to post-treatment
changes occurred on the TAS (p < .01), S-R (p < .01) and TMAS
(p < .05). In the CCR treatment condition, significant pre-
to post-treatment changes were observed on the TAS (p < .05)

and S-R (p < .05). No significant change occurred on the

27

TMAS. For subjects in the attention-placebo control condition,
significant pre- to post-treatment changes were observed on

the TAS (p <.05) and S-R (p <.01). No significant change
occurred on the TMAS. In the no-treatment control condition, no
significant changes occured on the TAS, S-R or TMAS. None of
the behavioral programs was found to be more effective than the
attention-placebo control condition. The results of this in-
vestigation were based on data obtained from a study conducted
by Russell, Stratoudakis, Miller and June [1975]. Refer to

this study for a more complete description of the results.

Summary

The findings of this investigation did not support
the hypothesis that introverts would exhibit a significantly
greater reduction in test anxiety than extraverts following
treatment; however, a trend toward significance occurred
on the TMAS (p <.10). The hypotehsis that externals would
exhibit a significantly greater reduction in test anxiety
than internals following treatment was supported by results
on the TAS and the TMAS. The third hypothesis, that high
anxious subjects would exhibit a significantly greater reduc-
tion in test anxiety than low anxious subjects following treat-
ment, was not supported. In addition to these findings, the
mean pre-TMAS score of introverts was found to be significant-
ly greater than that of extraverts. In agreement with this
result was the correlation indicating that introverts had a

higher level of anxiety as measured by the TMAS.

CHAPTER V
DI SCUSSION

The purpose of this study was to investigate the
relationship between the personality dimensions of intro-
version-extraversion and internal-external control and the
differential effectiveness of treatment for the reduction
of test anxiety among these perSonality types. The re-
lationship between level of anxiety and the effectiveness
of treatment for the reduction of test anxiety was also
examined.

In terms of the personality dimension introversion-
extraversion, there was a trend on the TMAS toward intro-
verts exhibiting a greater reduction in test anxiety than
extraverts following treatment. Although this trend occur-
red on one instrument, the results did not support Eysenck's
[1957] theory that introverts condition better than extra-
verts. Eysenck [1957] described introverts as having strong
excitatory tendency and weak inhibition, while extraverts
have weak excitation and strong inhibition. The physiolo-\
gical make-up of introverts favors conditioned responses
which form easily and extinguish with difficulty, while
the reverse is true for the make-up of extraverts. If both

the previously learned test anxious response and the

28

29

counterconditioned response either form easily and extin-
guish with difficulty or form with difficulty and extin-
guish easily, introverts would not condition better than
extraverts since the combined effect of the two responses
would be equal in introverts and extraverts. In addition,
failure to support the hypothesis with significant results
may be due to differences in the types of conditioning ex-
periments upon which Eysenck's results and the results of
this investigation were based. Eysenck supported his
theory with results from experiments involving the con-
ditioning of the eye-blink reflex. In contrast, the re-
sults of this study were founded on conditioning procedures
designed to reduce test anxiety. Also, results which
supported Eysenck's theory were based on conditioning pro—
cedures, such as those used in the verbal conditioning
experiments conducted by Costello [1967] and Holmes [1967],
which were different from those of this investigation.

In their investigation of the study behavior of intro-
verts and extraverts, Estabrook and Sommer [1966] found that
extraverts, to a greater extent than introverts, wanted to
spend study breaks with other peOple. It appeared that
the extraverts needed some form of auditory and visual
stimulation in order to maintain their interest, since
they preferred to study in large study halls in the visual
presence of others. On the other hand, introverts tended

to study alone. If extraverts perform better in situations

30

where they are in the presence of others and receive audi-
tory and visual stimulation, as suggested by Weinstein
[1968], the group treatment procedures used in this in—
vestigation may have favored extraverts and distracted
the introverts. ;Thus, the extraverts may have'received
the stimulation necessary to counteract the effect of

the low arousal level reported by Cooper [1967], and were
able to experience a reduction in test anxiety which was
equal to that of introverts.

An unexpected finding of this investigation was that
the pre-treatment anxiety level of the introverts, as
measured by the TMAS, was significantly higher than that
of the extraverts. An explanation of this finding might
be in Eysenck's [Knapp, 1962] description of the introvert.
He noted that the introvert strives to keep his feelings
under close control, rarely exhibits aggressive behavior,
and does not lose his temper easily. It would seem that
a person who uses a great deal of energy in keeping his
feelings under control, particularly angry feelings, would
have a high level of anxiety. In contrast, the extravert
expresses his feelings freely and would have a lower
anxiety level.

The hypothesis that externals would exhibit a signifi-
cantly greater reduction in test anxiety than internals
following treatment was supported by results on the TAS

and TMAS. This result is in agreement with Strickland's

31

[1970] finding that internals exhibited less conditioning
than the externals. Likewise, Getter [1966] found that the
subjects most Successfully conditioned were the most external.
Since the results of the Strickland and Getter studies indi-
cate that internals behave in a manner which is oppositional
to the direction of influence, this would account for the
internals' smaller reduction in test anxiety in this study.

An additional finding regarding the internal-external
control dimension was that a positive significant correlation
was obtained'for the relationship between internal-external
control and pre-TMAS scores (anxiety increased as externality
increased). This was in agreement with Watson's [1967]
findings. Also, as reported by Rotter [1966], Ware found a
significant correlation between internal-external control
and the TMAS.

Regarding the relationship between level of anxiety
and reduction of test anxiety, the hypothesis that high
anxious subjects would exhibit a significantly greater re-
duction in test anxiety than low anxious subjects, was not
supported. However, high anxious subjects exhibited a sig-
nificantly greater reduction in anxiety, as measured by
the TMAS, than low anxious subjects. Although this
result is in agreement with Spence's [1964] conclusion
that high anxious subjects condition better than low
anxious subjects, there is the possibility that the

result might be partially attributed to the regression to the

32

mean effect. The subjects were divided into high and low
anxious groups according to their pre-treatment TMAS scores.
Thus, the regression to the mean effect would be expected
on an instrument used to pre-select subjects.

In examining the results of this investigation accor-
ding to the instruments used to measure anxiety, it appears
that the TMAS was the most effective in measuring the re-
duction in anxiety level. The effectiveness of the TMAS
was indicated by the fact that either significant results
or a trend toward significance occurred on the TMAS for
the variables of introversion-extraversion, internal-external
control and level of anxiety. On the other hand, no
significant results or trends toward significance were
obtained for these variables on the S-R Inventory. This may
be explainable by the fact that the S-R is a self-report
indicator of physiological arousal, while the TMAS and TAS
measure cognitive arousal. The treatment program may have
been effective in reducing reported cognitive arousal but
ineffective in reducing reported physiological arousal.
Also, the S-R has fewer items than the TMAS and TAS and may
have been less reliable in measuring anxiety. Of the in-
struments used in this study to measure the personality di-
mensions, the Rotter Scale appears to be the best predictor
of the outcome of treatment to reduce test anxiety.

This study raises a number of possibilities for future

research. The fact that externals exhibited a greater

33

reduction in test anxiety than internals indicates that it
would be beneficial to internals to design test anxiety
reduction procedures which would be more effective for
them. Lefcourt [1972] has noted that internals are more
cautious than externals in accepting offerings from others.
If this is true, internals might condition better in a situa-
tion where they could exercise more control over the
procedures in terms of deconditioning themselves. Exter-
nals and internals could be identified before treatment is
begun and placed in the appropriate treatment group
according to personality type. In comparing the performance
of internals and externals in live and taped deconditioning
sessions, a feasible hypothesis would be that internals
would condition better than externals with taped sessions,
while externals would condition better than internals in live
sessions. In addition, it would be interesting to find
out whether subjects change in regard to classification'
on the dimensions of introversion-extraversion and inter-
nal-external control following treatment for reduction of
test anxiety. Also, an exploratory study could be con-
ducted to identify other personality dimensions which re-
late to success of treatment in order to place subjects
in the most beneficial treatment group.

In terms of identiying test anxious subjects and
assessing the reduction in test anxiety during and follow—

ing treatment, it might be advantageous to measure

34

physiological indicators of test anxiety such as heart-rate,
pulse-rate, blood pressure and galvanic skin response.

The use of these measures, in conjunction with self-report
inventories, would increase the reliability of the assessment
procedures.

Other recommendations include improvements in the
experimental and statistical design of the study. By in—
creasing the sample size, it would be possible to choose
subjects who have more extreme scores on the personality
dimensions and levels of anxiety. The results would be
more reliable and possibly more supportive of the hypotheses.
The regression to the mean effect could be minimized by
using an instrument other than the TMAS, TAS or S-R to
categorize subjects as either high or low anxious. How-
ever, this instrument would have to be closely related to
these three inStruments in terms of what it measures. In
addition, using the median instead of mean score to divide
the subjects into independent variable groups, would elimi-
nate unequal divisions such as that which occurred for

the introversion-extraversion dimension.

CHAPTER VI

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
8 EX"
I
A great deal of research has been conducted to explore
the hypothesis that certain personality types respond dif-
ferently to learning situations. The hypothesis has been
postulated that personality type affects the outcome of
various conditioning procedures, and that conditionability
is related to level of anxiety.

4 According to Eysenck's theory, introverts condition bet-
ter than extraverts. Several researchers have obtained re—
sults from studies of verbal conditioning, work behavior and
study habits which support Eysenck's theory. Thexpersonality
dimension internal-external control has been found to be rela-
ted to verbal conditioning and resistance to influence attempts;
externals condition better and are less resistant to in-
fluence attempts than internals. Also, it was found that high
anxious subjects condition better than low anxious subjects.

This study was conducted to investigate the relation-
ship between the personality dimensions of introversion-extra-
version and internal-external control and the differential
effectiveness of treatment for the reduction of test anxiety

among these personality types. The relationship between

35

36

level of anxiety and the effectiveness of this treatment
was also examined. It was hypothesized that:

1. Introverts would exhibit a significantly greater
reduction in test anxiety than extraverts, follow-
ing treatment for reduction of test anxiety.

2. Externals would exhibit a significantly greater
reduction in test anxiety than internals, follow-
ing treatment for reduction of test anxiety.

3. High anxious subjects would exhibit a significantly
greater reduction in test anxiety than low anxious
subjects, following treatment for reduction of
test anxiety.

The subjects were 52 male and female college students

who were either volunteers that responded to notices in

the campus newspaper for participants in a test anxiety
reduction study or referrals from the university counseling
center.

The subjects were classified according to their scores
on two personality inventories, and three instruments were
used to assess anxiety. The subjects were assigned to
one of five experimental conditions: 1) systematic desen-
sitization, 2) cue-controlled relaxation, 3) combined desen-
sitization and cue-controlled relaxation, 4) attention-
placebo, and 5) no-treatment. All treatment subjects were
seen in groups for five weeks. Self-report anxiety data

were collected before and after treatment, and personality

37

data were collected before treatment. Results for this

study were based on data collected from the 30 treatment

subjects.

The following statements indicate the findings of

this study:

1.

Introverts did not exhibit a significantly greater
reduction in test anxiety than extraverts follow-
ing treatment, except for a trend in this direction
on the TMAS.

Externals exhibited a significantly greater reduc-
tion in test anxiety than internals on the TAS

and TMAS following treatment.

High anxious subjects did not exhibit a signifi-
cantly greater reduction in test anxiety than low
anxious subjects following treatment.

Introverts, as compared to extraverts, were found
to have a significantly higher pre-treatment level

of anxiety as measured by the TMAS.

Conclusions

 

In a counterconditioning treatment program for the

reduction of test anxiety:

1.

The results failed to demonstrate a significant
difference in the conditionability of introverts
and extraverts.

The results indicated that externals conditioned

better than internals.

38

The results suggested that the measure of internal-
external control is more highly related to the
assessment of conditionability than is the measure
of introversion-extraversion.

The results failed to demonstrate a significant
difference in the conditionability of high and low

anxious subjects.

REFERENCES

REFERENCES

Bernstein, D. A. and Borkovec, T. D. Progressive relaxation
training: A manual for the helping professions. Cham-
paign, 111.: Research Press, 1973.

Biondo, J. and MacDonald, A. P. Internal-external locus of
control and response to influence attempts. _Journal
of Personality, 1971, 39, 407—419.

 

Cooper, R. Extraversion and some aspects of work behavior.
Personnel Psychology, 1967, 20, 45-57.

 

Costello, C. Control of visual imagery in mental disorder.
Journal of Mental Science, 1957, 103, 840-849.

Costello, CL Extraversion, neuroticism and the classical
conditioning of word meaning. Psychonomic Science,

Endler, N. 8., Hunt, J. McV., and Rosenstein, A. J. An S-R
inventory of anxiousness. Psychological Monographs,
1962, 76(Whole No. 536).

Estabrook, M. and Sommer, R. Study habits and introversion-
extraversion. Psychological Reports, 1966, 19, 750.

Eysenck, H. J. Dimensions of personality. London: Routledge
and Kegan Paul Ltd., 1947.

Eysenck, H. J. The scientific study of personality. New
York: The MacMillan Company, 1952.

Eysenck, H. J. The structure of human personality. London:
Methuen and Compannytd., 1953.

Eysenck, H. J. The dynamics of anxiety and hysteria. London:
Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1957.

Eysenck, H. J. The Maudsley_Personality Inventory. San
Diego: Educational and Industrial Testing Service, 1962.

Eysenck, H. J. Conditioning, introversion-extraversion and
the strength of the nervous system. Proceedings of the
18th International Congress of Psychology, 9th Sympg-
sium, 1966.

39

40

Eysenck, H. J. The biological basis of_persona1ity. Spring-
field, Ill.: Charles C. Thomas, 1967.

 

Franks, C. Conditioning and personality: A study of normal
and neurotic subjects. Journal of Abnormal and Social
Psychology: 1956, 52, 143-150.

 

Getter, H. A personality determinant of verbal conditioning.
Journal of Personality, 1966, 34, 397-405.

 

Gray, J. Strength of the nervous system, introversion-extra-
version, conditionability and arousal. Behavior
Research and Therap , 1967, 5, 151-170.

 

Hersch, P. D. and Scheibe, K. E. Reliability and validity of
internal-external control as a personality dimension.
Journal of Consulting Psychology, 1967, 31, 609-613.

 

Holmes, D. Pupillary responses, conditioning and personality.
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1967,
5, 98-103.

 

Knapp, R. R. The Maudsley Personality Inventory Manual. San
Diego: Educational and Industrial Testing Service,
1962.

Lefcourt, H. M. Recent deve10pments in the study of locus
of control. In B. A. Maher (Ed.), Progress in experi-
mental personality research. New York: Academic Press,
1972.

 

Paul, G. L. and Shannon, D. T. Treatment of anxiety through
systematic desensitization in therapy groups. Jgurnal
of Abnormal Psychology, 1966, 71, 124-135.

 

Ritchie, E. and Phares, E. J. Attitude change as a function
of internal-external control and communicator status.
Journal of Personality, 1969, 37, 429-443.

 

Rotter, J. B. Social learning and clinical psychology.
Englewood Cliffs, N. J.: Prentice-Hall, 1954.'

Rotter, J. B. Generalized expectancies for internal versus
external control of reinforcement. Psychological
Monographs, 1966, 80 (Whole No. 609).

 

Russell, R. K., Stratoudakis, J. P., Miller, D. E., and June,
L. N. A comparison between systematic desensitization,
cue-controlled relaxation, and nonspecific treatment
factors in the treatment of test anxiety. Unpublished
manuscript, Michigan State University, 1975.

41

Sarason, I. G. Effect of anxiety and two kinds of motivating
instruction on verbal learning. Journal of Abnormal
and Social Psychology, 1957, 54, 166-171.

Spence, K. W. Anxiety (drive) level and performance in eyelid
conditioning. Psychological Bulletin, 1964, 61, 129-
139. '

Strickland, B. R. Individual differences in verbal condi-
tioning, extinction and awareness. Journal of Perso-

nality, 1970, 38, 364-378.

Taylor, J. A. A personality scale of manifest anxiety.
Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 1953, 48,
285-290.

Watson, D. Relationship between locus of control and anxiety.
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1967, 6,
91-92.

Weinstein, F. The effect of personality type on systematic'
desensitization and structured group interaction in
reducing test anxiety. Unpublished doctoral disserta-
tion, Michigan State University, 1968.

Wolpin, M. and Raines, J. Visual imagery,expected roles
and extinction as possible factors in reducing fear and
avoidance behavior. Behavior Research and Therapy,
1966, 4, 25-37.

APPENDICES

APPENDIX A

The Maudsley Personality Inventory

 

(Personality Inventory)*

Name

 

Here are some questions regarding the way you behave,
feel and act. With each question is a space for circling
"Yes," II?" or "NO."

Try and decide whether "Yes" or "No" represents your
usual way of acting or feeling. Then circle the letter
"Y" or "N" next to the question. If you find it absolutely
impossible to decide, circle the "?", but use this answer
only occasionally.

Work quickly, and don't spend too much time over any
question; I want your first reaction, not a long drawn-out
thought process. The whole questionnaire shouldn't take more
than a few minutes. Be sure not to omit any questions. Now
turn to the next page and go ahead. Work quickly, and remem-
ber to answer every question. There are no right or wrong
answers, and this isn't a test of intelligence or ability,
but simply a measure of the way you behave.

*title used on the MPI's administered to subjects

42

'0

'0

'0

'0

'0

'\J

“\J

'0

“U

'0

'0

'0

10.

11.

12.

13.

14.

15.

16.

17.

18.
19.

43
Are you happiest when you get involved in some
project that calls for rapid action?

Do you sometimes feel happy, sometimes depressed,
without any apparent reason?

Does your mind often wander while you are trying
to concentrate?

Do you usually take the initiative in making
new friends?

'\
Are you inclined to be quick and sure in your
actions?

Are you frequently "lost in thought" even when
supposed to be taking part in a conversation?

Are you sometimes bubbling over with energy
and sometimes very sluggish?

Would you rate yourself as a lively individual?

Would you be very unhappy if you were prevented
from making numerous social contacts?

Are you inclined to be moody?

Do you have frequent ups and downs in mood,
either with or without apparent cause?

Do you prefer action to planning for action?

Are your daydreams frequently about things that
can never come true?

Are you inclined to keep in the background on
social occasions?

Are you inclined to ponder over your past?

Is it difficult to "lose yourself" even at a
lively party?

Do you ever feel "just miserable" for no good

.reason at all?

Are you inclined to be overconscientious?

Do you often find that you have made up your mind
too late?

'0

"J

'0

'0

'0

'0

'0

'0

'0

'0

'0

20.
21.

22.

23.

. 24.

25.
26.

27.

28.

29.

30.

31.

32.

33.

34.

35.

36.

37.

38.

39.

44

Do you like to mix socially with people?
Have you often lost sleep over your worries?

Are you inclined to limit your acquaintances to
a select few?

Are you often troubled about feelings of guilt?

Do you ever take your work as if it were a
matter of life or death?

Are your feelings rather easily hurt?
Do you like to have many social engagements?

Would you rate yourself as a tense or "highly-
strung" individual?

Do you generally prefer to take the lead in
group activities?

Do you often experience periods of loneliness?

Are you inclined to be shy in the presence of
the opposite sex?

Do you like to indulge in a reverie (daydreaming)?

Do you nearly always have a “ready answer" for
remarks directed at you?

Do you spend much time in thinking over good
times you have had in the past?

Would you rate yourself as a happy-go-lucky
individual?

Have you often felt listless and tired for no
good reason?

Are you inclined to keep quiet when out in a
social group?

After a critical moment is over, do you usually
think of something you should have done but
failed to do?

Can you usually let yourself go and have a
hilariously good time at a gay party?

Do ideas run through your head so that you
cannot sleep?

K: K: r< *4 K:

'0

'0

'0

'0

'0

'0

Z Z Z Z Z

40.

41.

42.

43.
44.
45.
46.

47.

48.

45
Do you like work that requires considerable
attention?

Have you ever been bothered by having a useless
thought come into your mind repeatedly?

Are you inclined to take your work casually,
that is as a matter of course?

Are you touchy on various subjects?

Do other peOple regard you as a lively individual?
Do you often feel disgruntled?

Would you rate yourself as a talkative individual?

Do you have periods of such great restlessness
that you cannot sit long in a chair?

Do you like to play pranks upon others?

APPENDIX B

The Rotter Internal-External Locus of Control Scale

(Social Reaction Inventory)*

I am interested in the way different people look at things
which happen in our society. I have listed below 29 pairs
of statements. You will probably agree more with one of the
two statements than you will with the other one. Sometimes
neither of the two statements will really say what you would
like for it to say. If this happens, just choose the one
which is closest to what you believe.

There are no right or wrong answers. Just choose the one
which is closest to what you really believe, and circle the
appropriate letter.

 

Go ahead and start. Remember to choose the one which is
closest to what you really believe

**********

‘l. A. Children get into trouble because their parents
punish them too much.

B. The trouble with most children nowadays is that their
parents are too easy with them.

2. A. Many of the unhappy things in people's lives are
partly due to bad luck.

B. PeOple's misfortunes result from the mistakes they
make.

3. A. One of the major reasons why we have wars is because
peOple don't take enough interest in politics.

B. There will always be wars, no matter how hard
people try to prevent them.

 

* 0
Title used on the Rotter Scales administered to subjects.

46

10.

ll.

47

In the long run people get the respect they
deserve in this world.

Unfortunately, an individual's worth often passes
unrecognized no matter how hard he tries.

The idea that teachers are unfair to students is
nonsense.

Most students don't realize the extent to which
their grades are influenced by accidental happenings.

Without the right breaks one cannot be an effective
leader.

Capable peOple who fail to become leaders have not
taken advantage of their opportunities.

No matter how hard you try some peOple just don't
like you.

People who can't get others to like them don't
understand how to get along with others.

Heredity plays the major role in determining one's
personality.

It is one's experiences in life which determine
what they're like.

I have often found that what is going to happen will
happen. .

Trusting to fate has never turned out as well for
me as making a decision to take a definite course
of action.

In the case of the well prepared student there is
rarely if ever such a thing as an unfair test.

Many times exam questions tend to be so unrelated to
course work that studying is really useless.

Becoming a success is a matter of hard work, luck
has little or nothing to do with it.

Getting a good job depends mainly on being in the
right place at the right time.

12.

13.

14.

15.

16.

17.

18.

19.

20.

48

The average citizen can have an influence in govern-
ment decisions.

This world is run by the few pe0ple in power, and
there is not much the little guy can do about it.

When I make plans, I am almost certain that I can
make them work.

It is not always wise to plan too far ahead because
many things turn out to be a matter of good or bad
fortune anyhow.

There are certain people who are just no good.
There is some good in everybody.

In my case getting what I want has little or nothing.
to do with luck.

Many times we might just as well decide what to do
by flipping a coin.

Who gets to be the boss often depends on who was
lucky enough to be in the right place first.

Getting people to do the right thing depends upon
ability, luck has little or nothing to do with it.

As far as world affairs are concerned, most of us
are victims of forces we can neither understand,
nor control.

By taking an active part in political and social
affairs the people can control world events.

Most people don't realize the extent to which their
lives are controlled by accidental happenings.

There really is no such thing as "luck."
One should always be willing to admit mistakes.
It is usually best to cover up one's mistakes.

It is hard to know whether or not a person really
likes you.

How many friends you have depends upon how nice a
person you are.

21.

22.

23.

24.

25.

26.

27.

28.

29.

49

In the long run the bad things that happen to us are
balanced by the good ones.

Most misfortunes are the result of lack of ability,
ignorance, laziness, or all three.

With enough effort we can wipe out political
corruption.

It is difficult for peOple to have much control over
the things politicians do in office.

Sometimes I can't understand how teachers arrive
at the grades they give.

There is a direct connection between how hard I
study and the grades I get.

A good leader expects people to decide for them-
selves what they should do.

A good leader makes it clear to everybody what their
jobs are.

Many times I feel that I have little influence over
the things that happen to me.

It is impossible for me to believe that chance or
luck plays an important role in my life.

People are lonely because they don't try to be
friendly.

There's not much use in trying too hard to please
peOple, if they like you, they like you.

There is too much emphasis on athletics in high
school.

Team sports are an excellent way to build character.

What happens to me is my own doing.

Sometimes I feel that I don't have enough control
over the direction my life is taking.

Most of the time I can't understand why politicians
behave the way they do.

In the long run the peOple are responsible for bad
government on a national as well as on a local level.

APPENDIX C

The Test Anxiety Scale

 

DIRECTIONS: Read each statement and decide whether it is

true or false as applied to you. If a statement is TRUE or

MOSTLY TRUE, as applied to you, mark a "T" on the line to

the right of the question. If a statement is FALSE or MOSTLY

FALSE, as applied to you, mark an "F" on the line to the right . p
of the question. Give your own opinion and answer all E—h

questions.

1.

10.

11.

12.

I would be willing to stake my continuance in school
on the outcome of a group intelligence test which
is known to be reliable.

While taking an important examination, I perspire'
a great deal. '

 

I get to feel very panicky when I have to take
a surprise exam.

I study longer and harder than other students.

During tests, I find myself thinking of the con-
sequences of failing.

After important tests, I am frequently so upset
that my stomach gets upset.

If I could possibly avoid it, I would never want
to take an intelligence test.

While taking an important exam, I find myself
thinking of how much brighter the other
students are than I am.

I freeze up on things like intelligence tests and
final exams.

If I were to take an intelligence test I would
worry a great deal before taking it.

During course examinations, I find myself thinking
of things unrelated to the actual course material.

During course examinations, I frequently get so
nervous that I forget facts I really know.

50

13.

14.

15.

16.

17.

18.

19.

20.

21.

51
If I knew I was going to take an intelligence
test, I would feel confident and relaxed beforehand.
I usually get depressed after taking a test.

Even though it serves no useful purpose, I spend
a lot of time thinking of ways to avoid taking tests.

I have an uneasy, upset feeling before taking a
final examination.

When taking a test, my emotional feelings do not
interfere with my performance.

Getting a good grade on one test doesn't seem to
increase my confidence on the second.

While taking an important test, I have, on
occasion, noticed that my heart is beating very
fast.

After taking a test, I always feel I could have done
better than I actually did.

I sometimes feel that my heart is beating very
fast during important tests.

1

.Lo

10.

ll.

12.

13.

14.

APPENDIX D

The S-R Inventory of Anxiousness - "Exam" Form

Please circle the number that most closely approximate
your reactions to the following situation.

YOU ARE ABOUT TO TAKE A FINAL EXAM:

Heart beats faster

Get an "uneasy feeling"
Emotions disrupt action
Feel exhilarated and thrilled
Want to avoid situation
Perspire

Need to urinate frequently
Enjoy the challenge

Mouth gets dry

Become immobilized

Get full feeling in stomach
Seek experiences like this
Have loose bowels

Experience nausea

52

not

not

not

not

not

not

not

not

not

not

not

not

not

not

at

at

at

at

at

at

at

at

at

at

at

at

at

at

1 2
all

3

very

very

very

very

very

very

very

very

very

very

very

very

very

very

much

much

much

much

much

much

much

much

much

much

much

much

much

much

Fem

 

APPENDIX E

The Taylor Manifest Anxiety Scale

 

(Personality Scale)*

This scale consists of numbered statements. Read
each statement and decide whether it is true as applied to
yep or false as applied to you. You are to mark your answers
by circling the letter "T or "F" next to the question. If a
statement is TRUE OR MOSTLY TRUE, as applied to you, circle
the "T." If a statement is FALSE OR NOT USUALLY TRUE, as
applied to you, circle the "F".

 

T F 1. My hands and feet are usually warm enough.

T F 2. I work under a great deal of tension.

T F 3. I have diarrhea once a month or more.

T F 4. I am very seldom troubled by constipation.

T F 5. I am troubled by attacks of nausea and vomiting.
T F 6. I have nightmares every few nights.

T F 7. I find it hard to keep my mind on a task or job.
T F 8. My sleep is fitful and disturbed.

T F 9. I wish I could be as happy as others seem to be.
T F 10. I am certainly lacking in self-confidence.

T F 11. I am happy most of the time.

T F 12. I have a great deal of stomach trouble.

T F 13. I certainly feel useless at times.

T F 14. I cry easily.

T F 15. I do not tire quickly.

T F 16. I frequently notice my hand shakes when I try to

do something.

 

{I
Title used on the Taylor Scales administered to subjects.
53

I“3 H '9 *3 t3 #3 0-3 I-J *3 F3

'11 "I! "11 '11 '11 '1!

"*1

17.

18.

19.
20.

21.

22.

23.
24.
25.
26.
27.
28.
29.
30.
31.
32.

33.

34.

35.
36.
37.

38.

54

I have very few headaches.

Sometimes, when embarrassed, I break out in a
sweat which annoys me greatly.

I frequently find myself worrying about something.

I hardly ever notice my heart pounding and am
seldom short of breath.

I have periods of such great restlessness that I
cannot sit long in a chair.

I dream frequently about things that are best
kept to myself.

I believe I am no more nervous than most others.
I sweat very easily even on cool days.

I am entirely self-confident.

I have very few fears compared to my friends.
Life is a strain for me much of the time.

I am more sensitive than most other people.

I am easily embarrassed.

I worry over money and business.

I cannot keep my mind on one thing.

I feel anxiety about something or someone almost
all the time.

Sometimes I become so excited that I find it hard
to get to sleep.

I have been afraid of things or people that I
knew could not hurt me.

I am inclined to take things hard.
I am not unusually self-conscious.

I have sometimes felt that difficulties were
piling up so high that I could not overcome them.

I am usually calm and not easily upset.

I-J *5 F3 06 r-3

#3

la i-J 8 P3 |-3 *5

'11 '11 "J "'1 '11

I11

'11 '11 "lil "I! '11 '11

39.
40.
41.
42.

43.

44.

45.
46.
47.
48.
49.
50.

55

At times I think I am no good at all.

I feel hungry almost all the time.

I worry quite a bit over possible misfortunes.
It makes me nervous to have to wait.

I have had periods in which I lost sleep over
worry.

I must admit that I have at times been worried
beyond reason over something that really did not
matter.

I am a high-strung person.

I practically never blush.

I blush no more often than others.

I am often afraid that I am going to blush.

I shrink from facing a crisis or difficulty.

I sometimes feel that I am about to go to pieces.

IIIHUIINIIIHHIH

03082 300

IN!”

I
III
5
l
I
I
'5
l
l
I'-
5
I
ll

3

III

129

3

 

IIHIIIHIIIN