A COMPARiSON or OPEN- vs,
CLOSED-MINDEDNESS m VETERANS
AND NON-VETERANS

Thesis for the Degree .of M. S...
MICHIGAN STATEUNIVERSITY *
MECHAEL W. iGOE
1971

TNE3W

_;-—-—* "" "

 

 
   
 

v
.-

 
  

‘5: BINEING BY
11er a some
8m mum mc.

‘ L RARY BINDERS
mmwuy

 
       
   

A COMPARISON OF OPEN- VS. CLOSED-MINDEDNESS

IN VETERANS AND NON-VETERANS

 

BY

Michael W. Igoe

 

AN ABSTRACT OF A THESIS
Presented to
The College of Social Science

Michigan State University

 

In Partial Fulfillment
of the Requirements for the Degree

Master of Science

 

School of Criminal Justice
1971

APPROVED:

/%{’1‘4Cv1/2L“"”~1-=:___

Jo n H. McNamara, Chairman

jdhowicz , dlember

M

Mr. Louis A. Radelet, Member

 

\1'

ABSTRACT

A COMPARISON OF OPEN- VS. CLOSED-MINDEDNESS

IN VETERANS AND NON-VETERANS

by Michael W. Igoe

The hypothesis posited was that military veterans
would display greater closed-mindedness than would non-
veterans. This difference was assumed to be the product
of the military system itself, not the result of any pre-
existing condition within the individual. Stemming from
this problem is the current emphasis in many metropolitan
police departments on actively recruiting veterans to
fill existing vacancies. Owing to contemporary social
unrest, it was assumed that police officers should ex-
hibit greater degrees of open-mindedness than the typical
public value re: Open- or Closed-mindedness.

187 police recruits were selected from two major
police departments to test the hypothesis. Rokeach's

Dogmatism Scale was utilized to measure differences in

 

mean dogmatism between veterans and non-veterans, while
another measure was constructed to measure several possi-
bly intervening variables, such as age, race, religion,

and supervisory experience.

Michael W. Igoe

The analysis of the results fails to support the
hypothesis. The veteran group (57% of the total group)
received a mean score of 147.44 (standard deviation =
24.63), and the non-veteran group mean score was 149.26
(standard deviation = 25.13). Both cell chi-square and
t-tests were employed to discover any association or
significant differences, the result indicating no associ-
ation or significant differences. Similar tests were
conducted on the means reported by Rokeach in several of
his university samples (ranging from 141.5 to 143.8),
and again no significant differences were detected.

Although both groups would seem to reflect the
typical societal value relative to open- or closed-
mindedness, the assumption that policemen should be more
open-minded than their non-police public was viewed from
the perspective of how to best bring about greater open-
mindedness. The encounter group process as enunciated
by Carl Rogers was viewed as the most practical method
of producing this. The purpose of the encounter group
was examined, as were the ramifications of greater open-
mindedness upon the individual, his interpersonal relations,

and the organizations to which the individual belongs.

A COMPARISON OF OPEN- VS. CLOSED-MINDEDNESS

IN VETERANS AND NON-VETERANS

by
~ A 5%. (1"

Michael WJ’Tgoe

A THESIS

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

MASTER OF SCIENCE
School of Criminal Justice

1971

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The researcher wishes to acknowledge the assist-
ance of the following people for their individual contri-
butions to this thesis:

Dr. Milton Rokeach of the Psychology Department
at Michigan State University for his unquali-
fied permission to use his Dogmatism Scale.

Inspector Clifford Ryan, Training Division,
Detroit Police Department, for his cooperation
in arranging the schedule for questionnaire
completion by his recruit training classes.

Colonel Carl V. Goodin, Chief of Police, Cincin-
nati Police Department, for his cooperation in
not only allowing for the measurement of his
recruits, but also for directing his training
staff to administer the questionnaires, thus
precluding the necessity of extensive travel
and expense for the researcher.

Mrs. John M. Igoe for her excellent typing, sugges-
tions for proper editing and continuity, and her
continued confidence during the most hectic and
disheartening periods of this research.

Michael W. Igoe
East Lansing, Michigan
May, 1971

ii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

LIST OF TABLES

Chapter
1. INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . .
THE PROBLEM. . . . . . . .7.

THE THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK. .

Alignment of the Belief System

with the Military. .

Review of Related Research . . .

Summary of Related Research.

RESEARCH DESIGN. . . . . . .

2. ANALYSIS OF DATA . . . . . . . .
3. SIGNIFICANCE OF THE FINDINGS . .
VALUE POTENTIAL OF INCREASED
MINDEDNESS TO POLICEMAN,

AND DEPARTMENT . . . . .

PROJECTED IMPLICATIONS . . .
FURTHER INVESTIGATION. . . .

4 O SUMMRY O O O O O O O O O O O O O

BIBLIOGRAPHY O O O O O O O O O O O O O 0

APPENDIX C O O O O O O O O O O O O O O I 0

iii

OPEN-
CLIENT

Page

iv

10

13

23
30
39
41
45

54

59
63
74

77

80

86

Table

1.

LIST OF TABLES

Frequency of Subjects Relative to Veteran,
Non-Veteran Status . . . . . . . . . .

Comparison of Veteran and Non-Veteran
Dogmatism Means. . . . . . . . . . . .

Mean Sub-scale Scores Between Veterans
and Non-Veterans . . . . . . . . . . .

Racial Characteristics of Sample
Observations . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Supervisory Experience Between Veterans
and Non-Veterans . . . . . . . . . . .

Departmental Distribution of
Respondents. . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Religious Preference of Sample
Respondents. . . . . . . . . . . . . .

iv

Page

45

48

53

87

87

88

88

Chapter I

INTRODUCTION

Contemporary urban police departments are increas-
ingly besieged by accusations that they allow street crime
to proceed unchecked, that they are politically appointed
agents of minority group suppression, the manifestation of
a pathological society, the protector of a corrupt govern-
ment, inept dispensers of retributive justice, and any
manner of epithets denoting a hapless and insensitive
agency of social control. Perhaps the criticisms are as
vituperative as police administrators and line practition-
ers would have one believe, or as cogent as some segments
of society are wont to perceive. Or the truth may be
found somewhere between these poles. One thing is certain:
the police are in the middle, and especially the individual
patrolman. In reaction to the public mania for less crime
and safer streets through more professional policemen, the
Federal government has attempted to heed the cries of the
people by passing into law the multifaceted Safe Streets
and Omnibus Crime Control Act of 1968. Among its far-
reaching provisions, the Act allocates large sums of money
(in the form of grants) to the cause of professional police

development and acquisition of SOphisticated technological

appendages. On the urban level, police departments have
responded by demanding larger budgets so as to increase
the dimensions of available manpower, increase wages, and
have instituted vast public relations programs designed

to make the general public feel more kindly disposed
towards the police, thus enhancing citizen cooperation
with the police. Professional (or at least official)
police publications are daily taking up the cry for improv—
ing the patrolman, professionalizing the policeman, and
working out ways to best solve the manpower shortage. As
innocent as this statement seems, apparently this shortage
and the attendant lack of professional policemen is the
crux of modern day police problems. These are proper
assumptions--as far as they go. Police training is now

on the upswing, with literally hundreds of hours devoted
to those topics of traditional law enforcement concern:
Criminal investigation, patrol tactics, criminal procedure,
criminal law, and even time devoted to the investigation
of coin box pilferage. State after state is enacting
minimum training requirements for its peace officers.

City after city is expanding itstraining facilities and
extending the training period to as much as six months.

In short, urban police departments are, in fact, seeking
ways to widen their recruiting bases and improve the
quality of the individual-officer. There is general agree-

ment among students of the "police field" about what is

meant by the language of enlarged numbers and a profess-
ional policeman: The removal of the police structure as
it is now identifiable, replacing it with a more flexible
system of total administration, and redefining the role
image of the police in order to lure the type of recruit
who evidences a

knowledge of human beings and the personal,

as opposed to official, authority to influ-

ence people without the use or even threat

of force.
Redefining the police role may prove elusive, since a
concrete definition of contemporary police functions is
lacking, most especially in the areas contemplated by
Professor Terris, which are clearly directed at those
situations requiring the judicious application of discre-
tion: Those situations one might refer to as interper-
sonal confrontations not best resolved by the sanction of
arrest. By way of contrast, a personal survey of police
recruiters and administrators would reveal that such
features, from their viewpoint, are superficial at best
and a hindrance at worst. The objection most often heard

is that the patrolman has a difficult enough task to per-

form without shouldering the burdens of "the criminal

 

1Bruce J. Terris, "The Role of the Police," Annals
of the American Academy_of Political and Social Science,
Vol. 374 (November 1967), pp. 67-68, as quoted by Charles
Saunders, Upgrading the American Police (Washington: The
Brookings Institute, 197OT, p. 33.

 

element," and without the "criminal" taking advantage of

the policeman.2

As could be expected, the traditional
idea of professionalizing the police was through the
recruitment of "college graduates," increased training,
and a broader recruiting base. While these objectives
are most commendable, the rationale leaves something to
be desired. College graduates are sought after as a
prestige factor, and on the off chance that they will
make "better policemen" as a result of their proven aca-
demic competence, not the possibility of being insight-
ful toward the problems of society and those inherent
subcultures. While increased training will doubtless
lead to proficiency, those training topics designed to
implement a human relations perspective are more realis-
tically perceived as public relations rather than a know-
ledge of the human condition and the foibles thereof.
With even the excellent university-level programs in
criminal justice, the new degree-holding policeman finds
himself assigned to traffic divisions or to a patrol

division with less than ready acceptance or more.than

 

2These interviews were informally conducted from
January of 1969 (when the researcher was a patrolman) un-
til March of 1971. Of all those interviewed (14) there
was only one police line commander who was convinced of
the appropriateness of Mr. Terris' remark, which we referred
to as "empathy." Understandably, none of those interviewed
desired credit for his remarks.

perfunctory supervision. Some, possibly many, police
departments seek to employ "educated" policemen, yet
their selection standards fail to promote this ideal.
The vast majority of police departments today require
little more than a high school education (or the equiv-
alent), mental and physical abilities unimpaired, and
character blameless. On the whole, certain police
department selection criteria are not at all dissimilar
to that of the U. S. Army. The end result is evident

in the bulk of present police administrators' leadership
and direction: ". . . the training that creates profi-
ciency (in the field) is not the training to produce an
intelligent administrator."3 This is as true today (if
not more so) than in 1920. In an effort to close the
gap existing between authorized departmental strength
and actual strength, more police departments are turning
to the military (especially the U. S. Army) working in
concert with many departments (Washington, D. C. and

New York City, for example) in encouraging servicemen
close to separation to investigate the attractiveness of
a police "career." To this end, the U. S. Army will
release a man from active duty up to three months in

advance of his separation date if he does, in fact, become

 

3Raymond B. Fosdick, American Police Systems
(New York: The Century Co., 1920), p. 222.

 

a policeman.4 The Metropolitan Police Department of
Washington, D. C. is at full strength as a direct result
of this program. The Army, at various installations
(such as Fort Hood, Texas), will provide the prospective
policeman with preparatory training in the basic techni-
ques of police functioning at local educational facili-
ties (Central Texas College in the case of Fort Hood).
The Army is seemingly doing its part to provide the needed
manpower for those cities where ". . . more police are
needed and the municipalities must face up to the urgency
of that need . . . ."5 On the surface, the active recruit-
ing of military veterans would seem logical and functional
since police departments are minimally semi-military in
constitution. This is perhaps best documented by McNamara
in his study of the New York City Police Department. He
reports:
. . . police departments have structured them-
selves after the military under the assumption
that in order to cope with the problems of con-
trolling crime and maintaining order, a closely
coordinated and disciplined body of personnel
with clear-cut lines of authority is necessary
. . . Among the main strategies employed in the

patrol force . . . to maintain the capacity to
cope with the city's crises . . . are the use of

 

 

4This program (Army Regulation 635-200) is appli-
cable to other fields, including the harvesting of agri-
cultural crops, and entry to an institution of higher
learning.

5The President's Commission on Law Enforcement,
The Challenge of Crime in a Free Society (Washington:
Government Printing Office, 1967), p. 107.

negative sanctions . . . and the attempt to

create an appearance of 'close supervision.‘

(Emphasis added)
Then the veteran will certainly have no great difficulty
in adjusting to the police model of discipline (to say
nothing of bureaucracy), since the two models are nearly
indistinguishable--down to the uniforms and the ever-
present regimentation. Police administrators, trainees
and commanders freely admit that they prefer working with
military veterans, with the three most often advanced
reasons being: 1) They are already familiar with, and
less resistant to, discipline. 2) They are in an advanced
state of physical conditioning. 3) They are "more mature"
than their non-veteran counterparts. Nor would elabora-
tion of this last point seem best defined as being "direct-
ed" toward some desirable life goal. If the veteran is
initially best suited for the police regimen as stated
above, the question then raised is: Is the semi-military
model best suited for the benefit of society and the devel-
0pment of professional—minded policemen? As early as 1915,
Raymond Fosdick was speaking out against the Army type

regimen in police work.7 His main emphasis was that the

 

6John H. McNamara, "Uncertainties in Police Work,"
in David Bordua (ed.), The Police: Six Sociological Essays
(New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 1967), p. 178.

 

7Raymond B. Fosdick, European Police Systems (New
York: The Century Co., 1915), p. 222.

 

resulting discipline made a cog out of the man, while good
police work called for flexibility and ingenuity, and the
impersonality of military models has the undesirable effect
of approaching and interacting with indifference towards
the public, or the client. Here, then, the answer would
appear to be negative. For better contrast, Baehr, Furcon
and Froemel, after extensive field observation in Chicago,
denoted what they considered to be the twenty most neces-
sary skills of a patrolman.8 Of these twenty categories,
only four do not require the judicious application of dis-
cretion and possession of tolerance. Lacking any evidence
to the contrary, it has to be assumed that the military
regimen of rote adherence to dogma, the frequent verbal
degradation of higher ranking members for minor mishaps

and the desensitizing effect of an impersonal system of
administration and punitive sanctions would not inculcate
more than tolerance (where one discharges his hostility

in less dangerous areas) and the perpetual lines of author-
ity would restrict the exercise of discretion, if not hamper
its gradual nurturance (since one cannot savor something
that is nonexistent). In fairness to the military, such a

scheme is necessary for the conduct of its delegated

 

8Melany E. Baehr, John E. Furcon, and Ernest C.
Froemel, Psychological Assessment of Patrolman~Qua1ifi-
cations in Relation to Field Performance (Washington:
Office of Law Enforcement Administration, Department of
Justice, 1968), pp. 113-115.

responsibility, where tolerance (or sensitivity) and dis-
cretion are often the least important ingredients of a
military organization. Also, theoretically, the longer
one remains in the military (and is promoted) the greater
the individual's span of authority and areas of discretion.
However, this would have small impact on the military
veteran undergoing recruit training, since McNamara estab-
lished that two-thirds of the police recruits he surveyed
were between the ages of 21 and 24, inclusive,9 thus dis-
pelling the possibility of a veteran within that age
bracket having progressed to the point of substantial
authority and discretion. In short, the classical mili-
tary model is anti-democratic, which, in turn, is out of
step with the majority of American institutions. The
American version of democracy rests on the assumption
that all of its citizens are equal (de jure) and indi-
vidual departures from a generally acceptable range of
behavior are to be tolerated. This is not a toleration
of criminality, but rather a toleration, an understand-
ing, of individual differences. A military model does
not allow for this; it creates the reverse. From this

it would follow that, barring any substantial attenu-
ation, the socialized military values of the veteran

would reflect a generally higher degree of intolerance

 

9McNamara, op. cit., p. 194.

10

of deviation or of uncertain interpersonal confrontations
not of acute importance. If this is so, it might then be
assumed that recent veterans soon to be processed through
a police training function would lack the insight and
empathy necessary for the mutually satisfying resolve of
interpersonal conflicts. Short of on—scene observation,
it is presently impossible to measure the reasoned appli-
cation of discretion. However, it is possible to meas-
ure and test for significant differences in level of gen-
eral intolerance. The problem area then is to perform
this examination with the objective of denoting the imme-
diate significance of the results to contemporary prob-
lems of securing the public's cooperation in aiding the
police in their law enforcement and order maintenance

functions.10

THE PROBLEM

 

In essence, the problem is to ascertain if anya
significant differences in the degree of open- or closed-
mindedness exist between veterans and non-veterans, and

if there is any connection between being a recent veteran

 

10Much of the proceeding research will bear a re-
semblance to James Q. Wilson's Varieties of Police Behav-
ior (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1968). While
m§_thoughts closely parallel Professor Wilson's, he will
receive notation for those passages more representative
of his thoughts than mine.

 

11

and the degree of open- or closed-mindedness. The re-
search will be limited to those police recruits pre-
sently undergoing recruit training in a small number of
mid-Western police departments, characterized in no
particular way aside from being located in more or less
metropolitan areas. While it would be preferable to
measure the recruits prior to any extensive exposure to
the police academy, this is impractical because the
recruit schools are conducted on independent schedules,
and the beginning of one training cycle is not coordin-
ated with the start of another cycle in another city.
Although the hypothesis might suggest causality,
none is intended. Rather, the sc0pe of interest is
whether there is a relationship between open- and closed-
mindedness and military service, and whether there are
resulting differences between one sample group and an-
other. In measuring these variables, Rokeach's Dt-Scale11
will be used for the relative degrees of open- or closed-
mindedness, and a qualitative measure of the researcher's
design will be used for the determination of relevant
categories and variables. One-tailed t-tests will be
used in testing for significant differences between two

non-matched sample groups, and an appropriate statistical

 

11See Appendix, pp. 88-93.

12

test will be employed for detecting association.

With the test hypothesis as it is, there is the
unintended suggestion that since veterans are being
accused of intolerance (closed-mindedness) they won't
be as "good" a policeman as non-veterans. Such an
assumption is far from the mark. The term "good" when
applied to policemen is a nebulous label. It could
mean that a good policeman generates a quantity of
arrests. It could mean that the policeman is incorrupt-
ible or that he handles things as the department thinks
he should. In view of this, the work "good" is grossly
misleading. What is actually being suggested is that
the degree of open- or closed-mindedness will play no
small role in determining the extent to which an individ-
ual policeman is able to make appropriate decisions dur-
ing interpersonal confrontations which could precipitate
self image anxiety, and role confusion.

On the basis of pre-testing the measuring devices,
and a brief pilot study, it was found that the time needed
for the basic investigation at each police academy would
not extend past forty-five minutes and that the coding and
analysis of the raw data would require approximately one
week. Although it would be tempting to create grand pre-:
dictions from the statistical analyses, the discussion of

these results will be generally limited to the immediate

l3

significance of the data. The discussion will then be
limited to how open- or closed-mindedness would affect
the individual, then the patrolman, and how these grada-
tions would affect the patrolman's perception of un-
certain or ambiguous interpersonal situations. In turn,
the perception-based behavior of the patrolman will con-
note the perception of the client regarding the accept-
ance or rejection of the patrolman's behavior and/or

directives.

THE THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK

In the course of the preceding pages, a number
of terms have been used without proper clarification
or operationalization. This was intentional in order to
allow for a quick introduction to a profound topic of
concern. These terms will now be defined and the assump-
tions regarding the military socialization process ex-
plored.

Of immediate concern is open- or closed-
mindedness.12 In referring to an open or closed mind,

we are speaking of the extent to which an individual's

 

12For these definitions I am relying upon Pro-
fessor Rokeach's research reported in The Open and Closed
Mind (New York: Basic Books, Inc., 1960), pp. 3-70.

l4

belief system is organized to facilitate the acceptance
or rejection of other belief systems, the incorporation
of newly presented beliefs, and the ability to modify

a belief system in the face of inconsistent information.
According to Dr. Rokeach, a person's behavior is a pro-
duct in part of a total belief-disbelief system, which

is the result of ". . . verbal and non-verbal, implicit

and explicit beliefs, sets, or expectancies."l3

However,
the distinction between belief-disbelief systems is not
academic, not merely the opposite of belief or disbelief,
where the belief system represents all the beliefs a
person accepts as accurately portraying the world he
lives in at any given time. In contrast, a disbelief
system is better viewed as a number of subsystems, as
opposed to one general system. In this sense, the dis-
belief system would be composed of a series of sets,
disbeliefs, or expectations that are perceived as being
false. In all, the belief-disbelief system is an arrange-
ment of parts that are not necessarily related in a logi-
cal fashion, although the potential for interrelationship
exists. Here, a system refers to all beliefs, regardless

of perceived logic or relation. It is further proposed

that the more similarity a disbelief subsystem has with

 

13Ibid., p. 32.

15

a belief system, the possibility of accepting a disbelief
is greater than if there is no perceived similarity.
This necessitates further explanation of the structural
properties of a belief-disbelief system. Where the indi-
vidual professes to see no relationship between two
beliefs, then there is an isolation of these beliefs.
This is exemplified by: l) A coexistence of basically
contradictory beliefs within the belief system (323.,
violence is bad, but violence is sometimes necessary).
2) The stressing of differences and the disavowing of
similarities among the belief and disbelief systems
which are psychologically thought of as defenses against
anxiety. 3) The judging of irrelevant facts that a more
disinterested party would objectively label as relevant,
which is also looked on as a defense. The final char-
acteristic of isolation is: 4) A refusal to admit con-
tradictory facts, where those facts would threaten the
survival of the belief-disbelief system. Another com-
ponent of the belief-disbelief system is differentia-
tion between the belief system and disbelief subsystem.
Such is seen as the amount of knowledge available in
articulating the facets of a belief system as related

to the knowledge available in describing the parts of
the disbelief subsystem. The belief system should hence
be more articulated than the disbelief subsystem. The

perception of similarity between two disbelief subsystems

16

is the final part of differentiation. Thus the less
similarity existing between a belief system and a dis—
belief subsystem, the less differentiation is expected
in subsystems perceived as identical (ELgL, the philos-
ophies of Lenin and Mao Tse Tung), the last component
of a belief-disbelief system is ". . . simply . . . the
total number, or range of disbelief subsystems repre—
sented within a . . . belief-disbelief system."14
In addition to the belief-disbelief dimension,
there are two further dimensions: the central-peripheral,
and time-perspective dimensions. The central-peripheral
dimension is subsumed into three regions: 1) The Central
Region: This is the area of basic, primitive beliefs.
Such beliefs are concerned with the composition of the
physical world we live in, about the social world we
live in, and beliefs about the self (physical orientation,
identity, self-image, and so on). From these basic be-
liefs rise the Intermediate and Peripheral Regions, yet
not in a predetermined sense.15 2) Within this inter-
mediate region of beliefs the general concern is the
nature, or the extent to which one relies upon outside
authority to supplement or provide the information which

one utilizes in creating a generalized world orientation.

 

l4Rokeach, op. cit., p. 39. 15Ibid., p. 42

17

This reliance can range from a skeptical reliance to an
absolute reliance, and can be positive or negative. To
the degree that the intermediate region depends upon
absolute authority, it should lead to clearly cognized
differences between people who either adhere to a simi-
lar belief or those who disagree. Professor Rokeach
finds this most important because ". . . it spotlights

a possibly intimate connection between the way we accept
and reject people and the way we accept and reject ideas

"16 3) The Peripheral Region:

stemming from authority.
The area of concern with peripheral beliefs is the inter-
relation of those beliefs and disbeliefs, which result
from the reliance upon positive and negative authority,
with the intermediate and central regions. An individ-
ual is constantly exposed to new information which he

must either assimilate along the belief-disbelief dimen-
sion or thoroughly refuse to accept the information in

any context. Perhaps not without humor, Professor Rokeach

"17 The new information is

terms this process "thinking.
assumed to be validated against the primitive and then the
intermediate beliefs. If the information is incongruent
with basic beliefs it is rejected out of hand or refined

to where it is acceptable. However, congruence with the

central region does not preclude rejection at the

 

16Rokeach, op. cit., pp. 45-46. 17Ibid., p. 47.

18

intermediate level. This is dependent upon similarity
to the belief or disbelief system. To avoid incongruity
with the intermediate beliefs (those prompted by outside
authority) the person avoids those sources which call in-
to doubt the credibility of his authority referents.
This avoidance can be accomplished at the institutional
level, where the external authority guides what informa-
tion is received, or at the individual level, where the
person almost mechanistically avoids contact with sources
of anxiety. Regardless of how the new information is
assimilated into the belief-disbelief system (distortion,
rationalization, or the perceived beliefs of external
authorities), the terminal stage is to incorporate the
processed information into the peripheral region--that
area which the individual calls his own total perception
of the world. It is important to note that

the new information is communicated from

the central . . . region to the intermedi-

ate . . . region, and . . . to the peri-

pheral region where it becomes represented

. . . as a belief or disbelief . . . (which)

may or may not communicate with or be re-

lated to other peripheral beliefs, depend-

ing upon the degree of isolation . . . the

greater the isolation, the less direct effect

will a change in one (belief) of the peri-
pheral region have upon adjacent (beliefs).18

 

18Rokeach, op. cit., p. 49.

19

However, indirect communication, hence change, can occur
as a consequence of external authority-oriented dictates,
which is exemplified as a "party line" change, but the
beliefs adjacent to the changed belief are not effected
in kind, owing to the isolation of a "party line" change
in belief. Opposed to such a change in one belief is
the change of one belief which does effect the adjacent
beliefs, thus effecting the structure of the peripheral
region, which has the potential of altering the lower
regions. To the extent that new information is rejected
or finally assimilated is dependent upon the degree of
open- and closed-mindedness. The more open the belief-
disbelief system the less the rejection and modifica-
tion of information. The inverse is true of the closed
belief-disbelief system. This will be elaborated follow-
ing the definition of the final organizational dimension:
the Time-Perspective Dimension. The time-perspective
dimension is how the individual's beliefs about the past,
present, and future interconnect.

A broad time perspective is one in which

the person's past, present, and future are

all represented within the belief-disbelief

system, and the person sees them as related
to each other.19

 

19Rokeach, op. cit., p. 51.

20

Where a person is fixated at a particular time period, he
is said to have a narrow time perspective even if his
perception of a given period extends over a long period
of time. Where a person displays a rational anticipation
of the future in concert with an awareness of the past
and an appreciation of the present he is considered as
having a broad time perspective. The person displaying

a future-oriented time perspective is generally charac-
terized by a preoccupation with the future, where the
person's belief-disbelief system generates an undis-
guised understanding of and faith in the future. This
person might also believe in the rise of force so to
advance to a future, "happier" time.

In summary of a general belief system, there are
three main dimensions: the belief-disbelief dimension,
the central-peripheral dimension, and the time-perspective
dimension. The next step is to describe how these pieces
fit to produce an Open or closed mind in the particular
case of the police officer.

Basically, the policeman is obligated to act in
a variety of situations. If the patrolman bases his
actions on rational (relevant) signs, his behavior should
be rational or appropriate to the situation. Where his
actions are predicated on irrelevant (irrational) signs,
the result should be inappropriate responses. From this

it follows that the peace officer has to be able to weigh

21

and evaluate all of the information he receives. The
degree to which his system is open or closed is denoted
by how well he can evaluate and respond to relevant
information with an external source, without distortion
or rejection of the information by irrelevant situa-
tional factors, whether from within or without. Irrele-
vant internal factors would be anxiety, role perception,
dissonance, ego defenses, and so on. Irrelevant exter-
nal situations could include peer pressures, institutional
goals, negative sanctions, etc. The more open the system,
the better able to evaluate information on its merits
relative to the context of the situation, rather than
being guided in his actions by irrational inner forces.
The more open the policeman's system, the better prepared
he is to withstand the coercion of external sources to
evaluate information by department or in-group dictate.
The more open the system, the less the patrolman would
have to rely on external reinforcements or sanctions.
With a relatively closed belief system, a person has
difficulty in distinguishing between information about

a particular subject and information about the source.
There is little differentiation between the information
presented by a person as true and what response the
source suggests. With such confusion, the individual

is hardpressed to evaluate the new information according

22

to his inner forces, but must now contend with the coer-
cive influences of the information source which demand
that the information be evaluated and responded to in a
manner pleasing to the external authority or source.

The more closed the patrolman's belief system the more
there is a reduction in the conscious differentiation
between the immediate and distant future. Where the
belief system is closed, the present is seen as affirm-
ing or disproving a distant future.

From the preceding, it is believed that the
belief-disbelief system serves two functions: a locus
of reference from which to know and understand reality
as best possible, and as a defense against those things
we fear. These functions are conflicting, and to the
degree that the mind is open, the knowing and under-
standing of "reality" should predominate. With this
arrangement new information from outside sources should
be evaluated in consonance with the rational require-
ments of the situation. As the patrolman's main concern
shifts toward the defensive aspect, the more closed be-
comes the mind. The result is information distortion.
‘Where the mind is closed, the inquisitive sphere is
satisfied insofar as it need only receive and assimilate
that information which is non-threatening. Simply put:

Ignorance is bliss. This same process is as applicable

23

at the institutional level as at the individual, and
might be viewed as mutually supportive. As the acute-
ness of the closed mind increases, in all likelihood
so will a disaffection for society as perceived ". . .
the more closed the belief-disbelief system, the more
do we conceive it to represent . . . a tightly woven

network of cognitive defenses against anxiety."20

Alignment of the Belief
System with the Military

 

 

The effect of those conditions contributing to
the emergence of a relatively closed mind can be better
understood by a comparison of the individual first in
the military and then in the typical semi-military
police recruit school.

Although there are some exceptions, the lowest
of the enlisted ranks (E-l through E-5) and the lower
officer grades (0-1 through 0-3) are all subjected to
the restraints and dogmatism of the military institu-
tion. New information and altered beliefs depend tola
great degree upon arbitrary reinforcements from exter-
nal authority. Isolation between beliefs is fostered
through the revealing of only that information benefi-

cial and integral to the institution. The soldier is

 

2oRokeach, op. cit., p. 69.

24

definitely sensitive to communications, threats, sanc-
tions, and cajoling of his external, arbitrarily appointed
authorities, and often his own peers. Information per-
tinent to his disbelief subsystems is carefully passed
on to the soldier (ELgL, more "information" about per-
ceived opposition to war crimes). The military man in
question is likely to induce a rejection or distortion
of contradictory disbelief information, relatively
restricted articulation of the disbelief subsystems, and
divergent, inverse degrees of belief-disbelief differ-
entiation. The military person, by virtue of lines of
authority, is forced to rely upon his authority figures,
and to adopt the often inconsistent information emanat-
ing from the external authority. As this reliance be-
comes habitual, the soldier gives greater credence to
the external authority and his information. As his
credence becomes a belief, the military man begins to
judge other persons and information with the congruity
of these positions relative to those of his significant
external authorities. It is increasingly more difficult
for the serviceman to differentiate between the sources
of this contradictory information and the information
itself. The most common example in the past has been
the Communist vs. communism argument. In the military,

absent profound examination and discussion, the two

25

labels are indistinguishable. So also the socialist vs.
communist divisions. With this inability to evaluate
new information without an above average reference to
external authority and internal distortion, the military
person is at a disadvantage when it comes to evaluating
information with regard to a broad time perspective.
This is frequently seen as a preoccupation with the
future; where the soldier experiences numerous frustra-
tions, most of which are beyond his remedy, aside from
developing sensitive defenses which are in service to a
future period of bliss and enjoyment. Basically, as

the acuteness of frustration increases, so does the
sensation of anxiety. As the anxiety approaches threat-
ening levels, the individual will seek ways of reducing
this anxiety. The resultant behavior is likely to be
not only inappropriate to the situation but more harm-
ful than the original frustration. The serviceman who
longs to be a civilian again often has difficulty in
evaluating information which points to the fact that

his civilian status lies in the distant future. Rather
than confirm or contradict this disbelief, the soldier
refuses to return to the military life or delays his
return until he perceives the frustrating situation as
less so. With the veteran undergoing a less than typical

occupational socialization process, one could assume that

26

he would emerge from his military service with a rather
closed mind and primarily defensive against that larger
society from which the military is, as an institution,
increasingly more removed. While the serviceman is en-
cased in a highly disciplined institution, he will
necessarily reject and distort the information, and those
sources who are perceived as representing a position in
contrast to discipline, uniformity, respect for tradition,
rote adherence to dogma, and unquestioning respect for
authority. From this it would seem not irrational to
assume that the veteran's civilian counterpart under—
going police recruit training would not evidence similar
patterns of closed-mindedness, since there is every
probability of suspecting that the non-veteran has not
been exposed to nor contended with a general rubric of
discipline, hence an absence of coerced reliance upon
external authorities and irrelevant internal forces.
While open- or closed-mindedness is not caused, per se,
by the military, it can be viewed as an aggravating
agent, where the adoption of a closed belief system can
be viewed as facilitating one's passage (or continuance)
through the military.

Assuming, then, that the military regimen con-
tributes to the closed-mindedness of a belief system, it

should be generally true that a closed belief-disbelief

27

system will not "open" during police academy training.
This is initially accepted since the police academy regi-
men is nearly identical to the military. The main~impact
of this is that during the recruit training period the
acceptance of the various segments of the training will
be dependent upon information similarity: Information
perceived as congruent will be incorporated into the
belief-disbelief system, while that training in opposi-
tion to the belief-disbelief system will be subjected

to those irrelevant outside cues and inner distortion.
Where training subjects are perceived as congruent with
the belief system, or at least non-threatening to that
system, the information will be assimilated nearly in
toto. Yet that information which is accepted due to its
source being a significant external authority, but in
Opposition to "old" information, it will be incorporated
much the same as in the "party line" example. In all
likelihood, this information could be viewed as isolated
in the sense that it fails to trigger an autonomous
change through the central (primitive) base of informa-
tion. So, in this regard, the peripheral change is not

a genuine change, hence superficial. Without this ongoing
change, the isolated peripheral information is liable to
be rapidly revised in the face of contradictory, inter-

personal conflict situations. This is exemplified in one

28

way by the patrolman exposed to human relations training,
accepting the proffered information of "human equality"

at the peripheral level, but behaving inconsistently in
the face of interpersonal conflict or in that situation
where other-oriented behavior is incongruent with the
peripheral belief, but perhaps not so with a central
belief-disbelief. Where this threat exists, the patrol-
man is further hindered by a lack of differentiation
between the information, and the source of the informa-.
tion. The patrolman exposed to verbal abuse could then
be expected to interpret the information irrationally
(given a relatively closed system) evidence varying
degrees of anxiety, consider the source of the abuse, and
the abuse, as one.and the same, react in a fashion objec-
tively inappropriate to the situation (ELEL' "fight fire
with fire"), integrate the information as he perceives

it at the central level, which would influence the system
at the intermediate and peripheral levels. When the,
patrolman displays a relatively open system and encounters
a similar situation, the abuse (information) he receives
should be interpreted in the absence of acute anxiety
then in a realistic, undistorted way, with differentiation
between the information and the source of the information,
and respond in a manner appropriate to the situation. A

distinction can be drawn between the threat presented in

29

the above situation and the threat presented in effecting
the arrest of a dangerous felon. The perceived threat

in the latter situation is a rational fear of physical
harm, whereas in the former encounter the fear is based
on a subjective misconception of reality.

In summary, the veteran is expected to be rela-
tively more closed-minded than the non-veteran. This
closed-mindedness will affect the extent to which con-
trary information will be assimilated within the belief-
disbelief system. It is assumed that resistance will be
encountered in the area of human relations, resulting in
an isolation of new beliefs. While this condition exists,
the closed-minded patrolman will find it difficult to
understand or emphathize with clients who exhibit expec-
tation-violating behavior.

Roles prescribe the behaviors ex ected of

people in specified positions Operating in

specifically defined or standard situations

. . . e.g., policeman-client role expecta-

tions . . . the importance of the situation

for the recognition of roles reflects the

influence of context upon perception. EE~

alwaysgperceive the behavior of a person in

a context. And this context-Influences our
perception.2I_(Emphasis added)

 

 

The more closed the mind, the greater the portent for mis-
perception, inappropriate response, and, in turn, the

frustration of the client. Where the patrolman operates

 

21Adapted from David Krech, Richard S.-Crutchfield,
and Egerton L. Ballachey, Individual In Society (New York:
McGraw Hill Book Company, Inc.,l9621, pp. 310-313.

30

in areas whose values and role perceptions are perceived
as deviating from "societal norms" the danger of mutual
antagonism and hostility are increased. In effect, a two-
way system of negative communication emerges, working

against both patrolman and client.

Review Of Related Research

 

The characteristics and functions of the open and
closed belief system have been elaborated in the preced—
ing section and will not be further examined here. The
degree of an open or closed mind that a police recruit
displays should be of great concern to the police depart-
ment. In the training (learning) situation the follow-
ing research findings are of particular importance.

In 1961, H. J. Ehrlich22 directly tested the
proposition that the cognitive sphere of closed-minded
people is quite resistant to change. Ehrlich compared
the scores of 57 students in a sociology (introductory)
class on a pre-course-post-course, and a mail followup
five months after the post test. Ehrlich found that
there was a é.44 association between dogmatism (measured

by the D-Scale) and test performance. This association

 

22H. J. Ehrlich, "Dogmatism and Learning," Journal
of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 1961, 62, pp. l48-I49.

31

remained constant over the three testing periods.
Ehrlich reached the conclusion that
. . . subjects low in dogmatism entered . . .
with a higher level of learning, learned more
as a result of classroom experience and re-
tained this information to a significantly
greater degree than the more dogmatic sub-
jects.23
In a later study, the same researcher, on the basis of a
five-year followup, determined that since there was no
significant association between grade point average and
dogmatism, the constant differences associated with his
earlier tests were a result of course content.24 This
was again pointed out in the 1965 report of

25 where one of his interpretations was

Dr. F. Costin,
that dogmatism and course content are associated together
with class performance. While course content and dogma-
tism were viewed as relevant to class performance, Alter
and White, in perhaps the largest of the dogmatism-
performance tests, administered the D-Scale to 2,099

students enrolled in 14 basic psychology courses. In

brief, the study again revealed a significant relationship

 

23Ibid., p. 149.

24H. J. Ehrlich, "Dogmatism and Learning: A Five
Year Follow-up," Psychological Reports, 1961, 9, pp. 283-
286.

 

25F. Costin, "Dogmatism and Learning: A Follow-
up of Contradictory Findings," Journal of Educational
Research, 1965, 59, pp. 186-188.

32

(.05 level) between dogmatism and examination scores.26

In 1968, Costin reported that on the basis of an examin-
ation testing psychological principles and another exam-
ination testing misconceptions about human behavior and
attributes, positive association between dogmatism and
retention of misperceptions existed (.35, where signif-
icant at less than .01). The association between closed-
mindedness and basic psychological principles was -.004.
Costin concluded with indicating that closed-minded sub-
jects would be more resistant to changing old beliefs,
as opposed to assimilating new information perceived as
congruent to the belief system.27
An interesting field study was undertaken by
Hallenbeck and Lundstedt in 1968. In the study they
found that closed-minded persons are prone to deny
the onset of a severe physical disability (blindness),
whereas the open-minded sample would display depress-
ion as an indication of acceptance. The mean correla-

tion between dogmatism and denial was .54, and dogmatism

and depression at -.46. The researchers concluded that

 

26B. J. White and R. D. Alter, "Dogmatism and
Examination Performance," Journal of Educational Psychol-
ogy, 1967, 58, pp. 285-289.

27F. Costin, "Dogmatism and the Retention of
Psychological Misconceptions," Educational and Psycholog-
ical Measurement, 1968, 28, pp. 529-534.

 

33

closed-minded individuals are less accepting of major

28 In 1967, Druckman conducted

self-concept changes.
research which compared the performance of Open- and
closed-minded persons in role playing situations. Of
interest to the police field is that the roles assigned
to the subjects were as union and management representa-
tives. In the analysis of results, Druckman found that
regardless of the role assigned, the closed-minded in-
dividuals were less able to solve conflicts, were dis-
inclined to compromise, and viewed compromise as an

29 Rokeach, Swanson and Denny,

undesirable setback.
using the now infamous Denny Doodlebug Problem, ascer-
tained that closed-minded subjects performed signifi-
cantly less well when confronted with novel informa-

tion than open-minded subjects. In redesigning the
problem to resemble an intellectual game (chess) there
were no significant differences between open— and closed-

minded subjects who were familiar with "the rules of the

game," but there was a significant difference between

 

28p. N. Hallenbeck and S. Lundstedt, "Some Rela-
tions Between Dogmatism, Denial, and Depression," Journal
of Soc. Psych., 1966, 70, pp. 53-58.

29D. Druckman, "Dogmatism, Prenegotiation Exper-
ience, and Simulated Group Representation as Determinants
of Dyadic Behavior in a Bargaining Situation," Journal of
Person. and Soc. Psych.,l967, 6, pp. 279-290.

 

 

34

open- and closed-groups who had no knowledge of chess.
The closed-minded groups solved the problem in signif-

icantly longer periods of time.30

Conducting research

in the intermediate region of the belief system, McCarthy
and Johnson demonstrated that closed-minded individuals
were more prone to accept positive authority-oriented
explanations of political develOpments as contrasted

with open-minded groups.31

Along similar lines, Norris
displayed findings that closed-minded individuals more
readily accepted information from positive authority
figures than open-minded persons did. On the assumption
that central beliefs are most resistant to change, Rokeach,
Reyher and Wiseman coerced belief changes using the medium
of hypnosis. The total spectrum of beliefs was divided
into five categories: 1) Primitive (unanimous agreement).
2) Primitive (no consensual agreement). 3) Authority.

4) Derived. 5) Irrelevant. When the results were measured,

the induced changes ranged downward in effect, i.e.,.

irrelevant beliefs were most resistant.32 The 1967 study

 

30Rokeach, op. cit., pp. 215-223.

31J. McCarthy and R. C. Johnson, "Interpretation
of the "City Hall Riots" as a Function of General Dogma-
tism," Psychological Reports, 1962, 11, pp. 243-245.

 

32M. Rokeach, J. Reyher and R. Wiseman, "An Ex-
perimental Analysis of the Organization of Belief Systems,"
in M. Rokeach (ed.), Beliefs, Attitudes, and Values
(San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1968).

 

35

of McGuckin provided evidence that closed-minded subjects
favorably responded to a dogmatic speaker (pro U.S.) more
so than open-minded persons, and were much more favorable
as the degree of dogmatic rhetoric increased. The open—
minded group was least receptive to the speaker under

highly dogmatic conditions.33

By comparing three separ-
ate scales of the California Personality Inventory and
dogmatic scores, Korn and Giddan reported that‘closed-
minded individuals were measured as being insecure, in-
tolerant and inflexible in contrast to open-minded

34 Using tests of interpersonal perception,

individuals.
group interaction and group identification and then
comparing the results with Dogmatism Scale scores, Burke
found that there was an inverse relationship between
dogmatism and interpersonal sensitivity.35 Another
important piece of research (for the purpose of this

study) was the finding by Saltzman that a positive re-

gard for others and interpersonal empathy is again

 

33N. E. McGuckin, "The Persuasive Force of Simi-
larity in Cognitive Style between Advocate and Audience,"
Speech Monographs, 1967, 34, pp. 145-151.

 

34H. Korn and N. Giddan, "Scoring Methods and
Construct Validity of the Dogmatism Scale," Educational
and Psych. Measurement, 1964, 24, pp. 867-874.

 

35W. W. Burke, "Social Perception as a Function
of Dogmatism," Perceptual and Motor Skills, 1966, 23,
pp. 863-868.

36

inversely related to the relative open- or closed-
mindedness of the subject.36 In 1965, Zagona and Zurcher
investigated the relationship of dogmatism and inter-
personal behavior in an unstructured classroom situation.
They found that the closed-minded subjects exhibited
greater concern over the selection of a group leader and
the development of a group structure. When the closed-
minded group was challenged by an outside source of
authority(assuming a positive label) they grew indi-
vidually insecure, showed a lessening of conviction, and
the group declined in cohesiveness.37 In their study

of dogmatism and sensory acuity, Kaplan and Singer found
that dogmatism and sensory acuity are inversely.related,
that in the closed mind there is a resistance to ration-
ally evaluating novel ideas and (presumably) non-

conforming behavior.38

 

36G. A. Saltzman, "Programmed Materials and
School Counselor Development," Dissertation Abstracts,
1967, 27, pp. 2077-2078.

 

37S. Zagona and L. Zurcher, "Participation,
Interaction and Role Behavior in Groups Selected from
the Extremes of the Open-Closed Cognitive Continuum,"
Journal of Psychology, 1964, 58, pp. 255-264.

 

38M. Kaplan and E. Singer, "Dogmatism and
Sensory Alienation," Journal of Consult. Psych., 1963,
27, pp. 486-491.

37

Literature that explores the area of police de-
partment organization, environment and focus is readily
available, with wide-ranging degrees of professional and
academic competence. Of the more recent publications,
James Q. Wilson's study of police behavior in eight
cities is perhaps the best overall view of the police
milieu and its effect upon the policeman's behavior.39
To gain insight into the various methods of gaining pub-
lic support and OOOperation, and the human problems
associated with these attempts, the source book edited
by Arthur Brandstatter and Louis Radelet is unique. They
have drawn together police practitioners, administrators
and observers to produce a general perspective of rela-

40 The

tions between the police and the community.
sociological study of the police edited by David Bordua
allows for the examination of historical police themes,
police perceptions of and by the larger public, and

sources of uncertainty in police work.41 An examination

of in-group values and peer pressures is provided in the

 

39James Q. Wilson, op. cit.

40A. F. Brandstatter and Louis A. Radelet (eds.),
Police and Community Relations: A Sourcebook (Beverly
Hills: Glencoe Press, 1968TT

41David J. Bordua (ed.), The Police: Six Socio-
logical Essays (New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 1968).

 

38

sociological survey of law, custom and morality of William
Westley.42 A highly readable account of how the police
have come to view themselves and their public is offered
in Morris and Hawkins' guide to criminal justice moderni-
zation.43 An excellent examination and critique of con-
temporary police recruiting and training practices is
provided by Charles B. Saunders in his research published
in 1970.44

The final consideration for this research would
be the possible alternatives open to modifying or open-
ing relatively closed belief systems. Regardless of
veteran or non-veteran status of police recruits, it
will be assumed that the semi-military structure of
police recruit schools and the present nature of police
work will not contribute to the modification of closed
belief systems. It should then become reasonable to
examine methods by which closed belief systems can be
altered so as to receive contradictory information with-

out associated inappropriate response, and altered while

 

42William A. Westley, Violence and the Police
(Cambridge: MIT Press, 1970).

43Norval Morris and Gordon Hawkins, The Honest
Politician's Guide to Crime Control (Chicago:. The
University of Chicago Press, 1970), pp. 87-109.

 

44Charles B. Saunders, Jr., Upgrading the Ameri:
can Police (Washington: The Brookings Institute, I970TT

 

 

39

in the training situation. There are numerous effective
approaches to this sort of modification, including psycho-
analysis and psychotherapy. There is at least one method
of perception modification that is ideally suited to a
police academy setting: the Encounter Group, one of whose
leading proponents is Carl Rogers, who has written and
lectured extensively on the value of, and path to, sensory
awareness and empathy.45 Hubert Bonner,46 Rollo May,47

and Abraham Maslow48 are also of this school of thought.

Summary of Related Research

 

It has been demonstrated that closed-mindedness
affects classroom performance and performance on exam-
inations. Dogmatism is positively associated with the
memorization of psychological misconceptions and inverse-
ly related to the facility of self—image changes. In
role-playing exercises, closed-minded subjects were less

successful than open-minded subjects in.labor-management

 

45Carl R. Rogers, On Encounter Groups (New York:
Harper & Row, Publishers, 1970).

 

46Hubert Bonner, On Being Mindful of Man (Boston:
Houghton Mifflin Company,'l965).

47Rollo May, Psychology and the Human Dilemma
(Princeton: D. Van Nostrand Company, Inc., 1966).

 

 

48Abraham H: Maslow, Toward a Psychology of Being
(New York: D. Van Nostrand REinhold Company, 1968).

 

40

negotiating and were more resistant to compromise, per-
ceiving compromise as failure. When confronted with
novel information, closed-minded subjects resolved intel-
lectual problems significantly slower than open-minded
subjects, and were found to accept more readily the posi-
tive, authority-based explanations of social disturb-
ances. Experiments tend to show that peripheral beliefs
are more readily modified than primitive beliefs and
that closed-minded subjects approve of dogmatic speakers,
increasing their approval as the speaker increases dog-
matic phrasing, while there is an inverse relationship
between dogmatism and interpersonal sensitivity, and a
similar relationship relative to interpersonal empathy
and positive regard for others. Further-studies dis-
closed that sensory acuity and closed-mindedness are
inversely related and that, in the face of threat from
an outside authority figure, the closed-minded group
evidenced a reduction in cohesion, security and belief
conviction.

Aligning the above studies with contemporary
literature directed at examining the total picture of
the police field, it then develops that the policeman's
job, perhaps more so than any comparable occupation, is
subjected to internal, organizational and client-oriented
threats, both rationally and irrationally perceived. The

more dogmatic the policeman, the more likely is an

41

inappropriate response to irrelevant and misperceived
information. Assuming, then, that the military regimen
facilitates and perhaps encourages a closed belief system,
it would follow that closed-mindedness would not dissipate
upon separation from the military and entry into a police
recruit school. If there is a significant difference in
dogmatism among military veterans and non-veterans, and

if police recruit schools desire to improve the inter-
personal skills viz. policeman-client, the encounter group
method of developing empathy and encouraging open-
mindedness is seen as the most practical avenue of

approach.

RESEARCH DESIGN

The research design proper will follow an approach

which will attempt to ascertain if military service is a
sufficient or contributing condition leading to signifi-
cant differences in degree of closed-mindedness between
non—veterans and veterans. The-most appropriate way to
test the hypothesis would be to measure the presence of
the dependent variable in both groups prior to military
service (the independent variable). But this is not
possible, in view of time-and other resource limitations.

It is also reasonable to make attempts to rule out the

42

factors of contemporaneous events, responding to the
measures in a socially desirable way as influences upon
the dependent variable. With regard to the latter factor,
all subjects will be tested under identical physical con-
ditions. The problem of socially desirable responses to
the questionnaire is a very real problem, yet none of the
reported studies in the preceding section made any mention
of this effect in their research.

The selection of the test groups falls far short
of being ideal. Owing to resource limitations and lack
of police department cooperation, the sample will num-
her 187. The same limitations obviated a random sample-
of police departments, or even a geographically strati-
fied random sample. Matching is not used, since there
is no experimental treatment of either group. Owing to
recruit school procedures, entire classes were tested,
which precluded any precision control. The experimental
design used calls for an "after-only" measurement of the
variables.

There are two questionnaires involved in the
measuring situation: Dr. Milton Rokeach's Dogmatism Scale
and a qualitative measure of the.researcher's own con-
struction. Pre-testing of the measuring devices has re-
vealed no random error as a result of any misinterpreta-

tion of the questions. The-validity of the qualitative

43

measure is self-evident, while the D-Scale evidences con-
struct validity on the basis of correlations with other
tests and behavior, internal consistency of items, stabil-
ity over time, and numerous field and laboratory applica-
tions. In the pre-test situations (N=12), reliability of
the qualitative measure was 1.00. The reliability of the
D-Scale has been measured at .84, using the testfre-test.
method.49 The qualitative measure allows for the cate-
gorization of data on primarily nominal scales, although
the design purposely allows for the treatment of the data
as ordinal or interval data (gygy, age, length of mili-
tary service, etc.). The D-Scale is generally subjected
to interval treatment. The straightforward nature of

the data and economics suggests the use of forced choice
questionnaires to measure open- or closed-mindedness.

The qualitative data are best secured by employing a
"fill in the answer" format, and modified fixed-alterna-
tive questions. Although the scores yielded from psycho-
logical measurements of attitudes or beliefs are best
viewed as ordinal data (since a difference of a few
points only indicates differences of degree rather than
quality), D-Scale scores will be placed on an interval
scale, with qualitative and semi-qualitative data arranged

on nominal and ordinal scales, respectively.

 

49See Rokeach, The Open and Closed Mind, p. 90,
Table 4.3.

 

44

The nature of the measurements lends itself to
uncomplicated coding and tabulation of data for computer
analysis. Descriptive statistics will be used to denote
central tendencies and variability. Inferential statis-
tics will be used in ascertaining significant differences
and areas of association between variables. This will'
include two sample "t" tests of significance, compari-
sons of sample variances, and tests of association be-
tween nominal-interval data. Tests of significance be-
tween sample means will be conducted on the present
research and the means reported in the studies of more
randomly sampled populations reported in the review of

literature.

Chapter 2

ANALYSIS OF DATA

 

The final sample was taken from four recruit
training classes in two Midwestern police departments,
with the total sample numbering 187 subjects. Table 1
depicts the general breakdown of subjects according to

categorical position.

TABLE 1

FREQUENCY OF SUBJECTS RELATIVE TO VETERAN
NON-VETERAN STATUS

 

Category N Percent Total N Total Percent
Veterans 107 .57
Non-Veterans 80 .43 187 100

 

The subjects were tested at the training facili-
ties of the Cincinnati (Ohio) and Detroit (Michigan) police
departments. The Cincinnati sample testing was performed
by that department's training personnel, while the Detroit
sample was tested by the researcher. By comparing the

individual raw scores and item scores on the Dogmatism

46

Scale with both samples, there is no reason to suspect
that any random error was introduced into the Cincinnati
sample as a result of the Department's administering the
test itself. In each of the four testing situations the
time required for execution varied from twenty minutes

at a minimum to twenty-five minutes at the maximum. The
Detroit samples were gathered after the recruits had fin-
ished their mid-day meal, which should rule out any
effects of physical or mental fatigue. It is unknown
when the Cincinnati sample was gathered insofar as the
time of day is concerned. In the Detroit sample, the
subjects Were provided with a general explanation of the
research and were encouraged to raise any points which
might be confusing to them. There were no questions
brought out regarding the Dogmatism Scale, and one ques-
tion raised about the qualitative questionnaire. At the
close of each testing period the recruits were again en-
couraged to ask any questions or offer whatever comments
they had. None of the questions asked or comments made
indicated any confusion or dissatisfaction with the
measuring devices. All testing was performed in a class-
room arrangement. The possibly intervening variables of
age, years of education, supervisory experience, prior
occupation, length of time since military separation, race,

and religion are not listed or otherwise used in the data

47

analysis, since there were too few observations involved,
with little variation between the observations.

The Dogmatism Scale is constructed in such a way
as to measure isolation within and between belief and dis-
belief systems (questions Nos. 1, 2, 3 in appendix), rel-
ative degrees of differentiation of the belief and the
disbelief systems (question No. 4), the specific content
of the primitive beliefs (questions Nos. 5, 6, 7, 8, 9,
10, ll, 12, 13, 14, 15, l6, 17), the formal content of
the intermediate belief region (questions Nos. 18, 19,
20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33),
interrelations among primitive, intermediate, and peri-
pheral beliefs (questions Nos. 34, 35, 36), and attitude
toward the past, present, and future (questions Nos. 37,
38, 39, 40). In analyzing the raw dogmatism scores it
is necessary that the sub-scale scores also be analyzed
rather than simply testing for significant differences
between veterans and non-veterans on a total dogmatism
scale score.

As can be seen in Table 2, there are no statis-
tically significant differences between veterans and
non-veterans on the basis of Dogmatism Scale Scores.

Examining the data for the sub-scales of the
Dogmatism Scale between veterans and non-veterans re-

veals few points of interest or significant difference.

48

TABLE 2

COMPARISON OF VETERAN AND NON-VETERAN DOGMATISM MEANSa

 

 

 

N Percent Mean Standard Deviation
Veterans 107 .57 147.44 24.63
Non-Veterans 80 .43 149.26 25.13

 

aOne-tailed t-tests were used in determining
degrees of significance, and none of the resulting
t-scores approached statistical significance.
Question No. l on the Dogmatism Scale is designed to re-
flect any accentuation of differences between the belief
and the disbelief systems. The mean scores of the veter-
ans and non-veterans are 2.48 and 2.34, respectively.
These scores are relatively low and tend to indicate that
those persons tested displayed slight accentuation of
belief-disbelief differences. A closed-minded group.
would be expected to have a significantly higher mean
item score. Questions Nos. 2 and 3 reportedly measure
the coexistence of contradictions within the belief
system. The means on this sub-scale were 3.71 and 3.86
for the veterans and non-veterans, respectively. These
scores would indicate that both groups exhibit a low
level of isolation between the belief-disbelief dimen-

sion and possess reasonable degrees of interconnectedness

49

between other beliefs and sub-regions of this dimension.
Question No. 4 measures the degree of differentiation of
the belief and disbelief systems. Here the veteran group
had a relatively high mean of 5.59 and the non-veteran
group reports a high mean of 5.25. This finding is in
concert with the prevailing idea that the belief system
is generally more differentiated than the disbelief
system. However, these scores merely indicate a slight
tendency that the groups have better differentiated
belief systems as opposed to the disbelief system.
Questions Nos. 5 through 18 attempt to ascertain the
specific content of primitive beliefs. Within these
questions there are further classifications. Questions
Nos. 5 through 8 measure those beliefs regarding the
lonesomeness, isolation, and helplessness of man. The
means for this series were 3.02 for the veterans and

3.22 for the non-veterans, which would indicate a

healthy outlook on life--that life for man is not viewed
as necessarily hostile and threatening. Questions Nos. 9
through 13 tap those beliefs pertaining to the uncertain-
ty of the future. The veteran and non—veteran means on
this series were 3.61 and 3.73, respectively. This is
consistent with the means for questions Nos. 5 through 8,
where the world is viewed as basically friendly. Then it

could be expected that there should not be any overriding

50

concern or fear for the future. This expectation is sup-
ported by the mean scores of items Nos. 9 through 13.
Question No. 14 seeks to establish the belief about self-
adequacy or inadequacy. Means of 3.68 for the veteran
group and 3.04 for the non-veteran group point toward a.
healthy self image, which also follows consistently from
the results of questions Nos. 5 through 13. Under the
rubric of the defense of self-aggrandizement against
self-inadequacy, questions Nos. 15 through 17 examine

the concern with power and status. These means were

4.65 and 4.61 for veterans and non-veterans, which at
best indicate the slightest concern with power and status
as contrasted with evidencing little preoccupation with
these areas. The formal content of the intermediate
belief region is examined through questions Nos. 18
through 33, which are further divided into four sub-
categories. Questions Nos. 18 through 26 measure gener-
al authoritarianism. Questions Nos. 18 and 19 measure»
beliefs in positive and negative authority. These respec-
tive means were 3.20 and 3.29 for veterans and non-
veterans and indicate a rational regard for both positive
and negative authority rather than an arbitrary acceptance
of positive, and rejection of negative authority. Ques-
tions Nos. 20 through 26 claim to measure a belief in a

cause and the acceptance of people on the basis of whether

51

they agree or disagree with the individual's positive

and negative authorities. The means for the veterans

and non-veterans on this series were 3.56 and 3.68, respec-
tively. It can be assumed that both groups are ration-
ally oriented in their acceptance of authority and people.
General intolerance is reflected in the means of questions
Nos. 27 through 34. For the veteran group the mean ques-
tion score was 3.98 and 3.89 for the non-veteran group on»
the basis of intolerance toward the nonconformist or
renegade. This means for intolerance toward the disbe-
liever were 4.69 for the veteran group and 4.84 for the
non-veteran group. Both sets of means would imply a low
level of renegade and non—believer rejection, or a gener-
ally tolerant profile.

In determining the relationship between the prim-
itive, intermediate, and peripheral beliefs, two facets
are examined: the tendency to make a party-line change
(where a change in the intermediate belief precedes a
change in the corresponding peripheral belief) and the
phenomena of narrowing (where incongruent events, facts,
and sources of authority are avoided). Questions Nos.

34 and 35 measure the party-line change aspect, with
veteran and non-veteran means of 4.69 and 4.84, indica-
ting a minor predisposition toward making party-line

changes, while the veteran and non-veteran means on

52

narrowing (question No. 36) are 4.00 and 3.80, reflecting
a general Openness to new experiences and perhaps a
rational basis of factual evaluation in the face of in-
congruent information received. On the result of question
No. 37, both veteran and non-veteran groups display a rel-
atively good appreciation of all three time periods (past,
present, and future) with respective means of 2.54 and
2.47. This would indicate that the present is accepted

as being equally as important as the past and/or future.
The last three questions of the Dogmatism Scale examine
any inordinate concern with knowing what lies in the
future. The means Of 3.61 for veterans and 3.96 for non-
veterans would best be interpreted as not-reflecting any
irrational need to foresee the future.

In summary, there are no statistically signifi-
cant differences between raw total dogmatism scores and
veteran or non-veteran variables, nor are there any
statistically significant differences between the sub-
scales of the Dogmatism Scale and veteran or non-
veteran status. In general, the resulting scores for
veterans and non-veterans are not statistically differ-
ent from the scores reported by Rokeach in a number of

his studies.50 For those recruits surveyed, the mean

 

SOROkeach, The gpen and Closed Mind, p. 90,
Table 4.3.

53

scores of either group fall generally in the mid-range of
the Dogmatism Scale, which is assumed to present a profile
of moderately open-minded subjects, and contrary to the
test hypothesis as pertains to veterans and closed-
mindedness. Table 3 shows the mean arrangement of sub-

scale scores for veterans and non-veterans.

TABLE 3

a
MEAN SUBSCALE SCORES BETWEEN VETERANS AND NON-VETERANS

—_ w

 

 

Scale
Items Veteran Mean Std.Dev.. Non-Veteran Mean Std.Dev.

 

1 2.48 1.63 2.34 1.45
2-3 3.71 1.90 3.86 2.18
4 5.59 1.65 5.25 1.94
5-8 3.02 1.91 3.22 2.07
9-13 3.61 1.78 3.73 1.89
14 3.68 2.13 3.04 1.72
15-17 4.65 1.72 4.61 1.83
18-19 3.20 2.06 3.29 2.20
20-26 3.56 1.87 3.68 1.89
27-29 3.98 2.01 3.89 1.98
30-33 3.65 1.91 3.64 1.86
34-35 4.69 1.87 4.84 1.78
36 4.00 1.97 3.80 2.00
37 2.54 1.77 2.47 1.50
38-40 3.61 1.93 3.96 1.92-

#—

aOn the basis of both chi-square and t-tests,
there are no significant differences between veterans_
and non-veterans reflected in Table 3.

Chapter 3

SIGNIFICANCE OF THE FINDINGS

Although the analysis indicates that the null
hypothesis cannot be rejected, that is, veterans do not
differ from non-veterans relative to open- or closed-
mindedness, the findings should not be dismissed as of
no further value. Granted, the raw dogmatism scores
yielded in this study are nearly identical to those re-
ported in many of the studies reported above, it is too
simple a matter to accept the intimation that veteran
and non—veteran police recruits are no different, on the
basis of open- or closed-mindedness, than non-police
samples. In the discussion of the conceptual framework,
certain hallmarks of behavior could be expected from
closed- and open-minded subjects. It was-suggested that
closed- or open-minded subjects would evidence notably
different skills in resolving interpersonal conflicts
which were less than gravely criminal, mainly in those
situations requiring the judicious, rational exercise
of police-held discretion. Such a result would not-
appear to be affected by any precondition of military
service, and it could legitimately be expected that the

typical patrolman (of those surveyed) would react in a

55

typical fashion during confrontations which require the
analysis of new and/or incongruent information. To
paraphrase McNamara, these recruits would be expected

to carry on typical interpersonal testing where a per-
son expects a type of behavior from another on the basis
of pre—existing information.51 Simply stated, the patrol-
man evaluates those indices of other-centered behavior
that he perceives as relevant and responds to his
analysis of the situation in the fashion he perceives

as in keeping with the conflict. Unfortunately, the
nature of the police milieu is too conducive to typical
reaction. From time immemorial, the greater part of
police activity has revolved around varying standards

of retributive, on-the-spot "justice," which, in turn,
have been substantially based on class differences
ranging from white upper-class down to black slum dwell-
ers.52 On the strength of these self—perpetuating class
distinctions, policemen have understandably developed
belief and disbelief systems regarding what was the
"typical" mode of behavior for a particular class-
distinguished group, or individual, and responded to

these conceptions of acceptable-unacceptable behavior in

 

51Statement by John H. McNamara, personal inter-
view, 14 April, 1971.

52See James Q. Wilson, Varieties of Police Be-
havior.

 

56

what is perceived as a rational method of resolving in-
terpersonal conflicts. If recent eruptions of outright
hostility and abuse toward policemen in general are
acceptable indicators of growing dissatisfaction with the
"typical response," then it should be assumed that wide
segments of the populace are acutely dissatisfied with a
predictable response from a patrolman during the course
of oftentimes emotionally loaded and anxiety provoking
face-to-face confrontations.53 Thus the worth of having
atypically open-minded patrolmen becomes readily appar-
ent.

Along these lines, many police practitioners
are now availing themselves of recently made available
resources for developing professional police recruit
and on-going training programs. To the extent that
these programs are being developed, the common thread
running through the majority is expediency and profi-
ciency. The concept of a professional police force
seemingly accentuates the professionalism of technical
rather than people-oriented fields, such as business
administration and engineering. Some small number of
police administrators prefer to compare their profession

with the medical profession, since each serves a given

 

53See William H. Westley, op. cit.

57

client or clients. This manner of professionalism is
commendable, especially for the taxpayer, but the analogy
is somewhat incorrect. Where the medical, or even legal,
profession is people-oriented, the client and recipient

of the service is generally the same person, who freely
elects to request the service of the medical practitioner
or the attorney. The nature of the client-policeman rela-
tionship is not identical on one important point-~the
client does not reserve the right to terminate the rela-
tionship, to change arbitrarily his choice of policeman

or to determine the amount of police-induced remedy he

is willing to accept. The client, once he becomes a
client, must depend upon the policeman for both satis-
faction and sanction. The policeman is not called upon

to diagnose a physical ailment, he is called upon either
to adjudicate a confrontation or to effect an apprehension.
The satisfactory result of the policeman-client confronta-
tion hinges upon the policeman's rational interpretation
of the result of his ongoing interpersonal testing. The
fact that the client also participates in this interper-
sonal testing does not alter the basic finding that, in
all likelihood, he, too, is a typical citizen. The impor-
tant concern, though, is that as each participant evalu-
ates the incoming information he is subjected to typical

analyses of the data, and then equally-inappropriate

58

responses. So, while many police departments are develop-
ing professionals in the former sense, they are apparently
falling somewhat short of either recruiting or developing
what could be called an empathic person--one who is better
able to assess accurately the veracity and relevancy of
client-generated information and behavior. In the absence
of contrary evidence, it is assumed that this situation is
compounded after extensive field service, without any sub—
stantial attempts to modify dysfunctional patterns of
interpersonal testing. As a consequence of the nature of
police-citizen interaction it would seem advantageous to
recruit or develop personnel with significantly more open
belief-disbelief systems than what is labeled as typical
of a population. A major obstacle to any such approach

is that police administrators in general are not convinced
of the necessity for empathy,54 and are generally unsure
about the ramifications of the empathic approach to police
work, especially in the area of citizen cooperation with
the police for the express purpose of deterring and pre-
venting crime and the apprehension of criminals. A

second stumbling block is the actual recruiting of open-
minded policemen. After numerous studies, it is difficult
to maintain that any one personality type predominates the

police ranks. In addition, police departments-are hard

 

54In Particular, See Skousen, "Sensitivity Train-
ing: A Word of Caution," Law and Order, 1967, 15:11,

 

59

pressed to recruit a sufficient number of men to bring
the department up to authorized strength, much less
attract those above average in educational achievement,
or more open-minded than the typical recruit. Another
avenue presently appears to be the recent discipline of
encounter groups, which are aimed at Opening the individ-
ual to a new sensory awareness, greater open-mindedness,

and less irrational interpersonal testing.55

VALUE POTENTIAL OF INCREASED
OPEN-MINDEDNESS TO POLICEMAN,
CLIENT, AND DEPARTMENT

 

 

Perhaps the most renown exponent and practitioner
of the intensive group experience is Carl Rogers, who
feels that the primary focus of the encounter group is
with the process and dynamics of day-to-day interpersonal
experiences.56 The encounter group is not a haven.for
the neurotic; rather, it is an unstructured group process
which closely examines, in time, some of the more topical
and/or traditional attitudes and daily self presentation
to others, and other-generated perceptions of the indi-

vidual. In general, the arguments against the encounter

 

55Carl Rogers discusses these possibilities in
On Encounter Gropps, and On Becoming a-Person, op. cit.

56See-Carl Rogers, On Encounter Groupy.

60

group as being a Communistic plot to subvert good citi-
zens can be viewed as a misplaced distrust of the change.
that supposedly flows from the encounter group process.
This distrust is subject to even greater distortion at.
an institutional level, especially those institutions
which are charged with the maintenance and survival of

a status quo. It is theoretically and factually true
that an enlargement in the openness of the individual

is the end product of the intensive group experience.
These changes, or modifications, vary in duration and
degree, yet the basic experience is beneficial to the
participants if conducted by qualified personnel. In
general contrast to police training programs currently
existing, the development of positive interpersonal
skills does not depend solely on cognitive training, nor
is such training sufficient by and of itself. In add-
ition to the cognitive element of learning, group en-
counters should be arranged where each member is encour-
aged in the direction of an understanding of his own self
and to recognize those attitudes (and subsequent behav-
ioral manifestations) which are dysfunctional-in either-
the social or occupational set and then finally to devel-
op modes of interpersonal action that would best facili—
tate the individual's existence and effectiveness in the

social or occupational setting. In broad terms, the.

61

encounter group process takes place in conjunction with
cognitive and experiential learning, with the end re-
sult of empathy. This might be the concept that many
police training programs fail to acknowledge, first as
a consequence of not accurately understanding the idea
of empathy, and second because intensive experience
groups are foreign to most police recruit and ongoing
training programs, which deal only with the cognitive
aspect of human relations and with varying degrees of
exposure.

Assuming that a law enforcement agency would
incorporate such a program within its general training
curriculum, and allow it to progress to a point in
time where reliable evaluations could be made, there
are three immediate areas that are affected by the
encounter group experience: the individual, inter-
personal relations and organizational change. Regard-
ing the individual, the vast majority of those sincerely
participating in an encounter group evidence varying
degrees of self-image alteration leading to.a greater
awareness and appreciation of self. In turn, the indi-
vidual recognizes and applies his latent potentialities
in his immediate and later interpersonal situations. He
is less anxious about examining his own attitudes and
behavior, and then less prone to misinterpret new belief-

disbelief systemic information. The individual result is

62

generally movement toward a different philosophical-
intellectual ethos. It is not unheard of for many
encounter group participants to redefine their occupa-
tional preferences and choices. The greatest change
effected in the realm of interpersonal relations is that
of enhanced, meaningful communication. Where before
most communication was routine and impersonal (exempli-
fied by the civil servant), communication itself begins
to reflect the empathy brought out during the basic
change of the individual. A dogmatic, authoritarian
style of communication is gradually replaced with in-
sightful, perceptive communication. The person is not
only better attuned to his own self but also recognizes
those means of communication likely to arouse anxiety,
then hostility, in the recipient. Addressing institu-
tional (organizational) change, a thorny problem is con-
fronted. Quoting Rogers:

. . . while change and growth 9:333 intro-

duce turbulence into the life of the indi-

vidual, they seem almost inevitably to in-

duce it in institutions--a most threaten-

ing experience to the traditional adminis-

trator.57 (Emphasis added by the author)
This is best understood by viewing the individual and

relationship modifications. These changes are bound not

only to question the attitudes and values of the self,

 

57Ibid, p. 73.

63

but also those of the organization or the "system." Un-
swerving loyalty and pedantic adherence to departmental
dictate is likely to give way to the selfsame critical
examination of organizational attitudes, values, and
goals. As seen by the administrator this is a threaten-
ing development, perhaps totally unexpected, and a por-
tend of upheaval of the status quo, of tradition.

No less affected are those institutions which
perceive themselves as, and are perceived as being in
service to perpetuate the traditional values of society,
regardless of the irrationality of the codes they main-
tain, and the slow, but steady reordering of societal
parameters. Yet numerous institutions have many times
weathered disruption and upheaval and have then taken
their one from a general, heterogeneous society and
moved progressively forward (witness the Roman Catholic

Church, or the feared socialism of many European nations).

PROJECTED IMPLICATIONS

 

Other practical problems of incorporating inten—
sive group experience into police recruit training programs
are that the effects are not always long-lasting, and that,
while "rookie" patrolmen may have developed empathic inter-
personal skills, their field experienced peers in all

likelihood have not developed similar skills.

64

The former problem can be met and overcome by
requiring and providing for periodic group encounter
sessions during field service. The result should be
beneficial from the vantage point of exposing develop-
ing attitudes of less than mutually beneficial value
(patrolman-client), and from the point of View of allow-
ing for the functional release of occupationally created
hostility in a therapeutic setting. The second problem
might best be dealt with by selective assignment of
experienced patrolmen with new, impressionable patrol-
men, and simultaneously exposing experienced patrolmen
and line commanders to the group encounter. The benefit
of this could be twofold: the experienced policeman
should display a broadened perspective of his role struc-
ture (social, family, occupational), which then enhances
the probability of not only improved client relationships
but also generates a more lucid understanding of his
position as either a supervisor or a subordinate. While
there is no evidence to support the assumption that the
nature of law enforcement (the police function) contrib-
utes to closed—mindedness and dysfunctional interpersonal
testing, such an assumption is not realistically impossible
or improbable. By entertaining that supposition, the
potential value of the group encounter is underscored for
the seasoned policeman, regardless of occupational func-

tion.

65

Within the recruit school the encounter group has
a responsibility not only to develop interpersonal skills
but also to key the group to realities of the role they
are to fulfill--being not merely a policeman but also an
agent of social control. For the individual recruit the
intensive group experience should again bring out those
dormant possibilities for constructive interaction and
allow for intense self-analysis. By so doing, the patrol-
man is creating fertile ground for the emergence of an
expanded consciousness of self; he is apparently trans-
gressing against those limits upon constructive inter-
personal interaction prescribed by conditions of worth
towards a more functional positive self-regard.58 With
growth in a direction toward positive self-regard, the
individual patrolman is more able to interpret empathic-
ally the expressed attitudes and behavior of not only
his occupational peers but also the future client. In
the face of vacillating satisfaction with and criticism
of the police, it is hardly moot to indicate the impor-
tance of the individual policeman becoming more open-
minded than the average person, especially when considered
in the light of the undeniably major degrees of discretion
held by the policeman to react in that manner he perceives

as proper. The less open-minded the policeman, the

 

58See Carl Rogers, On Becoming a Person, chapters

 

13-19.

66

greater the possibility of irrationally evaluating irrele-
vant information (or communications), and the greater is
the likelihood of an irrational response to the situation
or subject.

The more open-minded, or the less the patrolman
experiences anxiety-provoking conditions of worth, the
more improved is the capacity for constructive, effec-
tive interpersonal relations. As the patrolman develops
confidence in his own self, he is better able to commun-
icate with a client without the usually attendant feel-
ings of mutual distrust and hostility. Where the client
is not necessarily an empathic client the patrolman is
now in a position to avoid communications that might
stir the type of irrational fear which often results
in an incomprehensible client reaction, such as verbal
or physical abuse of the policeman. This improvement
in communication is not simply limited to the avoidance
of abuse by the citizen. The implication goes nearly
to the heart of the matter dealing with securing the
cooperation of the general public in the area of law
enforcement. So long as a majority of policemen see the
public as a threat to their physical, organizational,
and mental well-being, the opportunity for dysfunctional
communication is at its zenith. So long as the public
views the policeman in a context of adversary, the typi-

cal policeman's propensity for misperception of verbal

67

and physical cues is enlarged, as is the tendency toward
evaluating inconsequential information as being of some
grave consequences.59 One might still wish to accuse
the police of being the causal factor in this recent
perception of police as adversary, especially in rela-
tion to the lower classes, and the slum dwellers. Such
is not the case. Not only do the police serve a hetero-
geneous clientele (who have diverging concepts of "ser-
vice") but they must also contend with exaggerated
political and legal influences upon their perception of
the police role and of the feasibility of effective
performance in the face of fluctuating social, politi-
cal and legal sympathy. What is being witnessed
(including the "Chicago Police Riot" and the Kent State
incident) is a typical reaction to anxiety, fear and
hostility by commendable, yet typical, people who happen
to be policemen, or acting as their surrogates. Further
exemplification of the necessity of non-typical communi-
cation in the policeman-client relationship is in the
family dispute. No policeman enjoys any involvement in
the family disturbance, yet he must respond to anyone's
request for assistance, more so since the majority of

these requests are centered in lower class areas and

 

59See William Westley, op. cit., chapter 3.

68

involve people labeled as "low class." Under normal
circumstances the patrolman is greeted with relief by
one participant and hostility by the second. Eventu-
ally the policeman concludes that the problem can't

be resolved with any certainty short of arrest, and

that response is usually a capitulation by the police-
man to confusion and doubt. In the end result, the
policeman suspects that he has been the recipient of
unjust expectations and hostility, and further char-
acterizes the participants as intolerant, ungrateful,
ignorant, and "low class." This result is not the
product of closed-mindedness, severe conditions of

worth, or of authoritarian thinking. This result comes
from an average person being involuntarily placed in

an emotionally loaded situation. From either the police-
man's or client's position there is an increase in anxiety
long before the policeman confronts the parties involved.
The result is quite Often mutual misperception of role-
and dissatisfaction. Supreme Court decisions notwith-
standing, the juvenile provides the policeman with an—
other source of apprehension. The juvenile of today
apparently doesn't View the policeman within the same
conceptual framework of the juvenile of the 1950's.
Patrolmen in general reflect a belief that young people-

are incessantly.seeking to outwit the policeman, to commit

69

acts of bravado designed to reveal the youngster's
supposition that the policeman is an adversary, yet not
an especially sharp-witted adversary. No one, much less
a policeman, is unaware of these ploys, but there is‘a
general feeling of helplessness in these confrontations

60 and the fact that

(aside from "curbside justice"),
today's juveniles are increasingly better versed in that
part of the law beneficial to them than were their prede-
cessors of a few years ago increases the challenge to

the policeman.

The uniformed policeman is a highly visible ob-
ject, as are the trappings of his profession, and he is,
regrettably, placed in opposition to many less than
desirable elements of a community. Theoreticians are
prone to describe policemen as a reactive force in
society, but they might better consider the reaction
of any other typical citizen in similar circumstances.

In fact, the average policeman quite possibly may possess
greater faculties of self-control in extremely apprehen-
sive and provocative situations as opposed to the citizen

who knows precious little of the thoroughgoing responsi-

bility of the policeman and the often depressing aspect

 

60See P. Chevigny, Police Power: Police Abuses.
in New York Cipy (New York: Pantheon Books, 1969).

 

70

of certain routine police chores. The fact remains, how-
ever, that an open-minded approach, and interpretation of
the police role, to both the policeman and the client, is
of inestimable value. Assuming a significant alteration
of the individual belief-disbelief dynamic, the stage is
then set for further alteration in the usual interperson-
al.testing situations vis-a-vis policeman-client relation-
ship and perceptions. Regardless of purpose, effective,
and fluid police service is predicated on the general-
cooperation of the various publics served by the police.
Almost to a man, policemen are convinced that the public
holds them in low esteem as not only policemen but also
as fellow citizens and that public COOperation and inter-
play are at an all-time low. It is difficult to dispute
the latter point, but the former point is at variance
with the majority of surveys purporting to measure citi-
zen perception of the police. This-misperception is
understandable in any context where a chosen occupation
is loudly criticized and/or extolled in the media and
also through the daily face-to-face criticism of an
individual's performance. Ordinary people do not respond
to ego challenge with placating tones and reason--theyn
are propelled to defend themselves against seemingly un—
warranted attack and the policeman is no different. Be-

cause the policeman is continually exposed to public view

71

he should, of course, be equipped to evaluate rationally
what information he receives, and to respond in a judi-
cious way without regard (or with less intense concern)

61- In these occur-

to class and/or racial characteristics.
rences the client is the immediate beneficiary of police-
generated empathy, but the benefits do not cease with just
the client. As policemen are criticized by peOple who:
have not necessarily had any significant exposure to the
items they are criticizing, the benefit of empathic con-
frontation assumes additional importance in the-realm of
word of mouth and favorable response to less anxious
moments of confrontation. As an example, the impact of
approaching a juvenile and interacting with him on a
rational, empathic basis is great. Continued reinforce-
ment of this style of interaction would logically result
in an expanded acceptance of the policeman and an improved
perception of the policeman as,a legitimate agent of con-
trol and guidance rather than as an oppressor or intruder.
What many police administrators fail to recognize is_that'
prior public-held attitudes and beliefs about the police
are not subject to immediate reorganization, nor will
empathy reduce the number and type of crimes (it may, in.
fact, increase the level of reported crime asva conse-

quence of increased faith in the police). Still the impact.

 

61See James Q. Wilson, Varieties of Police Behavior,
chapter 9.

 

72

on the client is sufficient to avoid grandiose predic-
tions regarding community attitude modification. In
connection with this communication aspect there is a
general accompanying improvement in those skills seek-
ing to present, in a precise, intelligent manner, the
expectations of the police-client relationship.62 Where
the policeman fails to clarify his expectations of the
client and misinterprets the expectations of the client
the usual result is friction, which often terminates in
a mutually unsatisfactory resolution of the issue at
hand. Where expectations of both parties are inaccur-
ate, or unclear, each party tends to narrow down that
information evaluated as inconsequential and accept
only that information regarded as of relevance. This
is a common occurrence in social interaction but the
ramifications for the police-client relationship are
greater than in less sensitive, non-police confronta-
tions. A final consideration in the police-client rela-
tionship is the misleading depiction of the empathic
policeman as being the sympathetic policeman who allows
the criminal to continue without reprimand so as to

maintain the idea of "understanding." The analogy is

unfounded. The question addressed is not one of varying

 

62See McNamara, op. cit., pp. 199-203.

 

73

degrees of criminality where one person-goes unpunished
because the policeman is in sympathy with the person
involved. Such an arrangement is already in existence,
but is referred to as a part of "discretion in-the field."
The actual issue is one of avoiding those affectationsr
and communications which result in misperceptions, anxi-
ety, and hostility.

Considering the impact of an empathic approach
to the police role by line officers or the department
itself still poses a most intricate analysis. Currently
the majority of police administrators are far from con-
vinced of the utility of insightful patrolmen.. To the
credit of many departments, inroads are being established,
mainly under the rubric of human relations training, in.
which there is a genuine attempt made to acquaint the
future patrolman with the more basic-socio- and psycho-
logical tenets of human behavior. While there is merit
in this approach, the theme is usually entirely.predi-
cated on cognition, in the absence of experiential fact-
ors. Further, departments are concerned with the intra-
departmental effect of gaining empathic patrolmen and
some line commanders, but not administrators. This un-
certainty would appear to equate itself with a fear of
an all-too-rapid modification of the status quo within

the department. Although not solidly grounded, it could

be posited that-departments so affected would allow for

 

 

74

a redefinition of their place in the social setting as
called for by James Q. Wilson63 and Ramsey Clark.64 With
possible undue pessimism, a more realistic view might be
to expect intra-departmental conflict, not at first, but
after a period of time when patrolmen begin seriously to
question some of the traditional modes of police ration-
alization and those values germane to police departments.
If this encounter group program were allowed to continue,
and if the department is reasonably responsive to rele-
vant calls for moderation and modification, then the-
product should not generate anarchy (as prOphesied by>
some) but, instead, a more lasting, constructive sub-
ordinate-administrator relationship. The value of this
result is no more efficacious for the department than it

is for the publics they serve.

FURTHER INVESTIGATION

 

The above implications are admittedly narrow and
not inclusive by any standard. Still, conversations with
encounter group practitioners65 would indicate the gener-

ally-sound reasoning behind the police-oriented encounter

 

63James Q. Wilson, op. cit.

64See Ramsey-Clark, Crime in America (New York:
Simon and Schuster, 1970). part 2.

65Such as Dr. G. R. Bach of the Institute of Group
Psychotherapy, Beverly Hills, California.

75

group process. When dealing with such a sensitive subject
as our police, there must be two additional, indepth and
longitudinal studies made. The first is to study the
policeman from entry in the recruit school through the most
impressionable first years of his police service, noting
whatever changes occur as a matter of course. The data
provided from that enterprise should be carefully sifted
and weighed not only by professional and experienced in-
vestigators, but also by those with a grasp of the nature
of police work. The second study must concern itself with
the implementation and actual process of the encounter
group (intensive group) experience as it pertains to the
patrolman. A most direct way to accomplish this would

seem to involve selecting a randomly matched group of
recruits from a recent class, designating them as an ex-
perimental group, subjecting them to the intensive group.
experience throughout the duration of the recruit school,
and with regularity after entry into the field. After a
reasonable amount of time and observation of both groups,
in the field, a strict analysis should be made to determine
what, if any, effect the encounter group experience has had
on the individual policeman and on his interpersonal deal-
ings with a host of clients in various confrontations. The
two studies should be combined before drawing conclusions

so as to allow for proper context and contrast between the-

76

groups selected for Observation. In any event, the qual-
ity of the research revolves around the expertise of the
investigators and the methodology employed by them to

record and analyze the resultant data.

Chapter 4

SUMMARY

The problem discussed in the research body was
that police departments are employing large numbers of
military veterans. This recruitment of veterans is
viewed with favor by most police departments, on the
premise that veterans, for elusive reasons, constitute
better patrolmen than non-veterans. The current man-
power shortage within police departments has also en-
hanced the position of the veteran seeking a law enforce-
ment career. To this end, the military is cooperating
with various police departments to lessen these manpower
shortages by providing pre-separation training in police
field duty, and also by allowing for premature military
separation in order to allow for entry into a police
recruit school. Considering the nature of military ser-
vice, it was felt that veterans would display greater
evidence of dogmatic reasoning than their non-veteran:
counterparts, and would then prove to be somewhat hin-
dered during interpersonal confrontations. To measure

this hypothesis, Rokeach's Dogmatism Scale was used to

 

determine the degree of open- or closed-mindedness be-

tween veterans and non—veterans. The resulting scores

78

are believed to be indicative of the individual's ability
to receive new communications (information) from an ex-
ternal source without distorting, rejecting, or narrowing
the information to fit a belief-disbelief system., There
were 187 police recruits who responded to the measures,
fifty-seven percent of whom were veterans, located in

two Midwestern police academies. Originally, several
analyses of the data were scheduled, but the small numbers
and/or lack of variation in the intervening variables
precluded any analyses beyond the independent variable

of veteran or non-veteran status. The raw Dogmatism
S2312 mean score for the veteran group was 147.44 with

a standard deviation of 24.63. For the non-veterans the
respective scores were 149.26 and 25.13. Cell chi-
square and sample mean t-tests revealed no significant.
differences between the groups. Similar t-tests were
used to compare Rokeach's Ohio State University samples
(ranging in mean value from 141.5 to 143.8) with no sig-
nificant differences discovered. With such results it
was concluded that there were no differences in open- or
closed-mindedness between the veterans and non-veterans
sampled. However, it was posited that while a possible
generalization could be made that there are no signifi—
cant differences, the nature of the contemporary police

function was such that the individual policeman, his-

79

interpersonal relationships with a client and within the
department would be better served if the individual re-
flected a significantly greater degree of Open-mindedness
than the typical value of the community. To accomplish
this, it was reasoned that the relatively successful
intensive group experience process (the encounter group)
as proposed and practiced by Carl Rogers would allow for
this increase of open-mindedness in a rather facilitative
and non-coercive manner. The remaining discussion centered
around the various implications of an empathic approach
to the police function for the policeman, his various
interpersonal situations and the department. Of the
advantages discussed, perhaps the greatest impact would
be in the sphere of interpersonal communication and the
avoidance of misinterpretation of other-generated commun-
ications. Further research was urged to test these

suppositions.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

 

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Baehr, Melany, J. E. Furcon and E. C. Froemel. Ps cho-
logical Assessment of Patrolman Qualifications
ii Relation tp Field Performance. Washington:
Office of Law Enforcement Administration, Depart-
ment of Justice, 1968.

 

 

Bayley, David H. and Mendelsohn, Harold. Minorities and
the Police:~ Confrontation in AmeriEa. Boston:
Beacon Press, 1969.

 

 

Berkley, George. The Democratic Policeman. Boston:
Beacon Press, 1969.

 

Bonner, Hubert. On Being Mindful of Man. Boston: Houghton
Mifflin Company, 1965

 

Bordua, David (ed.). The Police: Six Sociological Essays.
New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 1967.

 

Brandstatter, A. and L. Radelet (eds.). Police and
Community Relations. Beverly Hills: Glencoe Press,

 

 

 

I968.

Burke, W. W. "Social Perception as a Function of Dogma-
tism," Perceptual and Motor Skills, 1966, 23,
863-868.

Chevigny, Paul. Police Power: Police Abuses in New York
City. New York: Pantheon BoOks, 1969.

 

Chinoy, Ely. Society. New York: Random House, 1961.

Clark, Ramsey. Crime in America.~ New York: Simon and
Schuster, 1970.

Costin, F. "Dogmatism and Learning: A Follow-up of Contra-
dictory Findings," Journal of Educational Research,‘
1965, 59, 186-188.

Costin, F. "Dogmatism and the Retention of Psychological
Misconceptions," Educational and Psychological
Measurement, 1968, 28, 529-534.

 

82

Druckman, D. "Dogmatism, Prenegotiation Experience, and

‘ Simulated Group Representation as Determinants of
Dyadic Behavior in a Bargaining Situation," Jour-
nal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1967, 6,
279-290.

 

Edwards, George. The Police on the Urban Frontier. New
York: Institute of Human Relations Press, 1968.

 

 

Ehrlich, H. J. "Dogmatism and Learning: A Five Year
Follow-up,"-Psychological Rpports, 1961, 9, 283-
286.

Ehrlich, H. J. "Dogmatism and Learning," Journal of

 

Abnormal and Social Psychology, 1961, 62, 148-149.

Ehrlich, H. J. and P. Lee. "Dogmatism, Learning and
Resistance to Change," Psychological Bulletin,
1969, 71:4, 249-260.

 

Freeman, Linton C. Elementary Applied Statistics. -New
York: John«Wiley & Sons, Inc., 1968.

Gardiner, John A. The Politics of Corruption: Opganized
Crime in an American City.- New York: Russell
Sage Foundation, 1970.

 

Hall, Calvin and Gardiner Lindzey. Theories of Personal-
ity. New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 1957.

 

Hallenbeck, P. N. and S. Lundstedt. "Some Relations Be-
tween Dogmatism, Denial, and Depression," Journal
of Social Psychology. 1966, 70, 53-58.

 

Johnson, Donald M. Psychology: A Problem Solving Approach.
New York: Harper and Brothers, 1961.

Kaplan, M. and E. Singer. "Dogmatism and Sensory Aliena-
tion," Journal of Consulting ngchology,~l963, 27,
486-491.

Kerner, Otto, and others. Report of the National~Advisory.
Commission on Civil Disorders. =New York:r E. P.
Dutton & Cox, Inc., 1968.

 

Korn, H. and N. Giddan. "Scoring Methods and Construct.
Validity of the Dogmatism Scale," Educational and
Psychological Measurement, 1964, 247—817-874.

 

83

Krech, David, R. Crutchfield and E. Ballachey. Individual
in Society.. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company,
Inc., 1962.

 

 

Likert, R. New Patterns of Management. New York: McGraw-
Hill Book Company, 1961.

 

Maccoby, E., T. Newcomb and E. Hartley (eds.). Readings-
in Social Psychology. New York: Holt, Rinehart
and Winston, Inc., 1958.

 

Maddi, Salvatore. Personality Theories. Homewood, Illi-
nois: The Dorsey Press, 1968.

 

Maslow, Abraham. Toward a Psychology of Being, 2d. ed.
New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold Company, 1968.

 

May, Rollo. Psychology and the Human Dilemma. -Princeton:
D. Van Nostrand Company, Inc., i966.

 

McCarthy, J. and R. C. Johnson, "Interpretation of the
'City Hall Riots' as a Function of General Dogma-
tism," Psychological Reports, 1962, 11, 243-245.

 

McCuckin, H. E. "The Persuasive Force of Similarity in
Cognitive Style Between Advocate and Audience,"
Speech Monographs, 1967, 34, 145-151.

 

McLenman, Barbara (ed.). Crime in Urban Sociepy. New
York: The Dunellen Company, 1970.

 

Miller, Delbert C. Handbook of Research Design and Social
Measurement. New York: David McKay Company, Inc.,
1964.

 

 

Morris, N. and G. Hawkins. The Honest Politician's Guide-
to Crime Control. AChicago: University of Chicago
Press, 1970.

 

 

National Commission on Law Observance and Enforcement.
Report on the Police. Washington: U. S. Govern-
ment Printing Office, 1931.

 

President's Commission on Law Enforcement and the Adminis-
tration of Justice. The Challengp of Crime in §~
Free Society. Washington: U. S. Government Print-
ing Office, 1967.

 

President's Commission on Law Enforcement and the Adminis—
tration of Justice. Task Force Rgport: The Police.
Washington:v U. S. Government Printing Office,'1967.

84

Rogers, Carl R. On Becoming a Person. Boston: Houghton
Mifflin Company, 1961.

 

Rogers, Carl R. On Encounter Groups. New York: Harper &
Row, PubliShers, 1970.

 

Rogers, Carl R. "The Group Comes of Age," Psychology
Today, 3:7, December, 1969.

 

Rokeach, Milton, J. Reyher and R. Wisenman. Beliefs,
Attitudes and Values. San Francisco: Jossey-
Bass, 1968.

 

Rokeach, Milton. "Faith, Hope and Bigotry," Psychology
Today, 3:11, April, 1970.

 

Rokeach, Milton. The Open and Closed Mind. New York:
Basic Books, Inc., 1960.

 

Royce, Joseph R. The Encapsulated Man. Princeton:
P. Van Nostrand Company, Inc., 1964.

 

 

Saltzman, G. A. "Programmed Materials and School Counselor
Development," Dissertation Abstracts, 1967, 27,
2077-2078.

Saunders, Charles B., Jr. Upgrading the American Police.
Washington: The Brookings Institute, 1970.

Selltiz, Claire and others. Research Methods in Social
Relations. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston,
1959.

 

 

Skousen, W. Cleon. "Sensitivity Training: A WOrd of
Caution," Law and Order, 1967, 15:11, 10-12; 70.

 

Suchman, Edward A. Evaluative Research.< New York:
Russell Sage Foundation, 1967.

 

Vacchiano, R. B., P. Strauss and L. Hochman. "The Open
and Closed Mind: A Review of Dogmatism," Psy-
chological Bulletin, 1969, 71:4, 261-273.

 

Vroom, V. Work and Motivation. New York: John Wiley &
Sons, Inc., 1964.

 

Walker, David and others. Rights in Conflict. New York:
E. P. Dutton & Co., Inc., 1968.

85

Watson, Nelson A. "The Assessment and Evaluation of
Personnel,” The Police Yearbook,-1969.l Washing-
ton: IOAOCOPO’ 19690

Westley, William A. Violence and the Police. Cambridge,
Massachusetts. The MIT Press, 1970.

White, B. J. and R. D. Alter, "Dogmatism and Examination
Performance," Journal of Educational Psychology,

White, Robert. The Abnormal Personalipy. 3d. ed. New York:
The RonaId Press, 1964.

Whittemore, L. H. Cop! A Closeup of Violence and Tragedy.
New York: Holt, Rinehart, Winston, I969.

Wills, Gary. The Second Civil War. New York: The New
American Library, 1968.

Wilson, James Q. Varieties of Police Behavior. Cambridge,
Massachusetts: Harvard UniVersity Press, 1968.

Zagona, S. and L. Zurcher. "Participation, Interaction,
and Role Behavior in Groups Selected from the
Extremes of the Open-Closed Cognitive Continuum,"
Journal of Psychology, 1964, 58, 255-264.

APPENDIX

87

TABLE 4

RACIAL CHARACTERISTICS OF
SAMPLE OBSERVATIONS

 

 

 

 

(N5187)
N Percent Total Percent

Veterans:
White- 88 .83
Black 19 .17 .53
Non-Veterans:
White 68 .85
Black 12 .15 .47
Percent White: .84 1.00
Percent Black: .16

TABLE 5

SUPERVISORY EXPERIENCE AMONG
VETERANS AND NON-VETERANSa

 

 

 

(N=187)
None % . Moderate % Extensive _ %
Veterans 24 .22 73 .69 10 .09
Non-Veterans 18 .60 - 28 .35 _1 .05
72 .38 101 .54 14 .08

 

aThese classifications were arrived at by vari-
ously weighing the type of supervision, number of per-
sonnel supervised, and extent of responsibility involved.

88

TABLE 6

DEPARTMENTAL DISTRIBUTION OF RESPONDENTS

 

 

 

 

(N=187)
N Percent
Detroit:
Veterans 78 .59
Non-Veterans 58 .41
Cincinnati
Veterans 29 .56
Non-Veterans 22 .44
TABLE 7

RELIGIOUS PREFERENCES OF SAMPLE RESPONDENTS

‘7

 

(N=187)
Preference - . N Percent
Catholic 75 .40
Jewish 3 .02
Protestant 88 .47
Other 12 .06

None 9 .05

 

89

ALL RESPONDENTS: ANSWER QUESTIONS #1 THROUGH #5.

 

 

 

1. Age (to nearest year): 2. Religious Preference
(check one):
Catholic
Jewish
Protestant .
Other
None __
3. Racial Heritage (White, Black, Chicano, etc.):
4. Years of Education (to nearest year):
5. Have you served in the military for 21 months or
longer: Yes No
VETERANS: Answer only questions #6 through #11.

NON-VETERANS: Answer only questions #12 through #13. Do

not answer questions #6 through #11.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

6. How long were you in the military (in months):
7. What was your primary duty (cook, clerk, MP, etc.):
8. What was your highest rank/rating: .L_
9. In your most responsible position, how many men did you
supervise?
10. How long have you been out of the military (in months):
11. Have you held civilian employment, or attended a college
or university since your separation: Yes No.
12. What was your civilian occupation (clerk, student, sales-
man, etc. ): ,
13. In your most responsible position, how many people did

you supervise:

 

90

The following is a study of what the general pub-
lic thinks and feels about a number of important social
and personal questions. The best answer to each state-
ment below is your personal opinion. I have tried to
cover many different and Opposing points of View; you may
find yourself agreeing strongly with some of the state-
ments, disagreeing just as strongly with others, and per-
haps uncertain about others. Whether you agree or dis-
agree with any statement, you can be sure that many pe0ple
feel the same as you do.

Mark each statement in the left margin according
to how much you agree or disagree with it. Please mark
every one. Write +1, +2, +3, depending on how you feeI
in each case.

 

 

+1: I AGREE A LITTLE -1: I DISAGREE A LITTLE
+2: I AGREE ON THE WHOLE -2: I DISAGREE ON THE
+3: I AGREE VERY MUCH WHOLE
-3: I DISAGREE VERY
MUCH

l The United States and Russia have just about nothing
in common.

 

2 The highest form of government is a democracy and
the highest form of democracy is a government
run by those who are most intelligent.

 

3 Even though freedom of speech for all groups is a
worthwhile goal, it is unfortunately necessary
to restrict the freedom of certain political
groups.

 

4 It is only natural that a person would have a much
better acquaintance with ideas he believes in
than with ideas he opposes.

 

5 Man on his own is a helpless and miserable creature.

 

6 Fundamentally, the world we live in is a pretty
lonesome place.

 

7 Most people just don't give a "damn" for others.

 

8 I'd like it if I could find someone who could tell
me how to solve my personal problems.

 

91

+1: I AGREE A LITTLE -l: I DISAGREE A LITTLE
+2: I AGREE ON THE WHOLE -2: I DISAGREE ON THE
+3: I AGREE VERY MUCH WHOLE
-3: I DISAGREE VERY
MUCH

 

 

 

10

 

11

 

12

 

13

 

14

 

15

 

16

 

17

 

18

 

19

 

20

 

21

 

It is only natural for a person to be rather fearful

of the future.

There is so much to be done and so little time to do

it in.

Once I get wound up in a heated discussion I just
can't stop.

In a discussion I often find it necessary to repeat
myself several times to make sure I am being
understood.

In a heated discussion I generally become so absorbed
in what I'm going to say that I forget to lis-

ten to what the others are saying.

It is better to be a dead hero than to be a live
coward.

While I don't like to admit this even to myself, my

secret ambition is to become a great man, like-

Einstein, or Beethoven, or Shakespeare.

The main thing in life is for a person to want to
do something important.

If given the chance, I would do something of great
benefit to the world.

In the history of mankind there have probably been
just a handful of really great thinkers.

There are a number of people I have come to hate be-
cause of the things they stand for.

A man who does not believe in some great cause has
not really lived.

It is only when a person devotes himself to an ideal
or cause that life becomes meaningful.

92

+1: I AGREE A LITTLE -l: I DISAGREE A LITTLE
+2: I AGREE ON THE WHOLE -2: I DISAGREE ON THE
+3: I AGREE VERY MUCH WHOLE
-3: I DISAGREE VERY
MUCH

 

 

22

 

23

 

24

 

25

 

26

 

27

 

28

 

29

 

30

 

31

 

32

 

fi—‘K

Of all the different philosophies which exist in
this world there is probably only one which
is correct.

A person who gets enthusiastic about too many causes
is likely to be a pretty "wishy-washy" sort of
person.

To compromise with our political opponents is danger-
ous because it usually leads to the betrayal of
our own side.

When it comes to differences of opinion in religion
we must be careful not to compromise with those
who believe differently from the way we do.

In times like these, a person must be pretty selfish
if he considers primarily his own happiness.

The worst crime a person could commit is to attack
publicly the people who believe in the same
things he does. -

In times like these it is often necessary to be more
on guard against ideas put out by people or
groups in one's own camp than by those in the
opposing camp.

A group which tolerates too many differences of opin-
ion among its own members cannot exist for long.

two kinds of people in this world: Those
are for the truth and those who are.against
truth.

There are
who.
the

My blood boils whenever a person stubbornly refuses
to admit he's wrong.

A person who primarily thinks of his own happiness
is beneath contempt.

93

+1: I AGREE A LITTLE -l: I DISAGREE A LITTLE
+2: I AGREE ON THE WHOLE -2: I DISAGREE ON THE
+3: I AGREE VERY MUCH WHOLE
-3: I DISAGREE VERY
MUCH

 

 

33

 

34

 

35

 

36

 

37

 

38

 

39

 

40

 

Most of the ideas which get printed nowadays aren't
worth the paper they are printed on.

In this complicated world of ours the only way we.
can know what's going on is to rely_on leaders
or experts who can be trusted.

It is often desirable to reserve judgment about

what's going on until one has had a chance.

to hear the opinions of those one respects.

In the long run the best way to live is to pick
friends and associates whose tastes.and be-
liefs are the same as one's own.

The present is all too often full of unhappiness.
It is only the future that counts.

If a man is to accomplish his mission in life it is
sometimes necessary to gamble "all or nothing
at all."

Unfortunately, a good many people with whom I have
discussed important social and moral problems
don't really understand what's going on.

Most people just don't know what's good for them.

###

Thank you for your attention and cooperation.

94

202 Spartan Avenue
East Lansing, Michigan 48823
20 February, 1971

Professor Milton Rokeach, Ph.D.
Michigan State University
School of Psychology

R.E. Olds Hall

East Lansing, Michigan 48823

Dear Dr. Rokeach:

I am a graduate student at Michigan State Univer-
sity in the School of Criminal Justice. Presently, I
am preparing to initiate my research for a Master's
thesis under the supervision of Dr. John H. McNamara of
my department.

In my thesis proposal, I have hypothesized that
there will be significant differences in the degree of
open or closed-mindedness between military veterans and
those who have not been in the military. My test subjects
will be those recruits undergoing police academy training
in several major size police departments. Should the
hypothesis prove tenable, I plan on developing the imme-
diate significance of the findings for the police depart-
ment concerned and discussing the ramifications and
possible alternatives thereof.

After preliminary investigation and consultation,
I have decided that your D-Scale would be the most appro-
priate device for ascertaining any such differences. In
view of this, I would greatly appreciate receiving your
permission to use this measurement for the purposes stated.
Of course, I would be pleased to provide you with a copy
of the completed research. I would also appreciate any
advice or suggestions you may care-to make and to provide
any information necessary.

Thank you for your assistance and cooperation.

Very truly yours,

Michael W. Igoe

£95

MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY EAST LANSING-MICHIGAN 4392.5

 

DEPARTMENT OF PSYCHOLOGY - OLDS HALL

March 2, 1971

Mr. Michael W. Igoe
202 Spartan Avenue
East Lansing, Michigan 48823

Dear Mr. Igoe:

You certainly have my permission to use the Dogmatism Scale for
research purposes. All you have to do is mimeograph it yourself

with the instructions from The Open and Closed gfigd (New York:

Basic Books, 404 Park Avenue South, New York, New York, 10016).

May I suggest, however, that you mix up the items well and, if
possible, pad them with a few items from any other scale that you

care to choose. It doesn't matter how you mix them up and it doesn't
matter what items you use to pad them with. You may also find two
review articles on dogmatism in the April, 1969 issue of Psychological

Bulletin.

I certainly hope that you will furnish me with a copy of the results
of your research.

Sincerely yours,

mat... /3.2./ fl... 1;

Milton Rokeach
Professor

MR/mlh

96

202 Spartan Avenue
East Lansing, Michigan 48823
20 February, 1970

Inspector Clifford Ryan
Director of Training
Police Academy

Detroit Police Department
1300 Beaubien

Detroit, Michigan

Dear Inspector Ryan:

Last December 4, I was introduced to you by Detec-
tive Sergeant Tom Ireland for the purpose of gaining a
general overview of your training program, and also to
discuss the possibility of administering a questionnaire
to your recruits, which is in conjunction with my Master's
thesis.

I would appreciate it if we could arrange for me to
administer a questionnaire to your recruits sometime
during the week of 22 March, 1971. The questionnaire is
primarily designed to measure any differences between mil-
itary veterans and non-veterans on a particular psycho-
logical basis. I would also appreciate it if you could
supply me with the total number of recruits in the class,
and the number of military veterans within the class.

Should you still care to assist me in this matter,
I can assure you that all of the findings will remain
anonymous and will not detract from your training program
or Department. Your assistance will be acknowledged as
you might prefer. A copy of the completed research will
be furnished you upon request.

Thank you for your cooperation and consideration.

Very truly yours,

Michael W. Igoe

97

202 Spartan Avenue
East Lansing, Michigan 48823
4 April, 1971

Inspector Clifford G. Ryan
Training Division
Department of Police

1300 Beaubien

Detroit, Michigan

Dear Inspector Ryan:

This is to acknowledge the fine assistance that,
you and your Division provided me with during my recent
survey of your recruit training classes.

In particular, I would like to commend Lt. May
and Sgt. Rossi for their COOperation, interest, and in-
formative conversation. Additionally, the coffee you
people use in your coffee maker is excellent.

As I indicated to both Lt. May and Sgt. Rossi, I
will forward to your office a report of the initial
results of the surveys within the month. The final manu-
script will be sent to you in the latter part of May,
1971. I hope it will prove of some interest to you.

Many thanks for your consideration.

Very truly yours,

Michael W. Igoe

98

202 Spartan Avenue
East Lansing, Michigan 48823
20 February, 1971

Captain Joseph Crawford
Training Officer
Cincinnati Police Academy
314 Broadway Street
Cincinnati, Ohio 45202

Dear Captain Crawford:

Upon the advice of your Lieutenant Roosevelt Shepherd,
I am writing to you in the hope that you may be able to
assist me in the preparation of my Master's thesis in the
School of Criminal Justice at Michigan State University.

I am sure that Lieutenant Shepherd has already spoken
to you about this matter, but I would like to specifically
explain what I am investigating. In short, I would like to
administer one questionnaire to your present recruit train-
ing class. The object of this measurement is to ascertain
whether or not there are any significant differences be-
tween military veterans and non-veterans on the basis of one
psychological characteristic.

If you would care to assist me in this matter, I would
merely request that you furnish me with a report on the
total number of military veterans in the class, and the size
of the class itself. This is the only information I would
require prior to the actual test situation. If agreeable to
you, could I plan on visiting your training class sometime
during the week of 22 March, 1971? Of course, all of the
findings will remain anonymous and will not detract from
your training program or Department. Your assistance will
be acknowledged as you might prefer. A copy of the com-
pleted research will be furnished upon request.

Thank you for your cooperation and consideration.

Very truly yours,

Michael W. Igoe

99

@ifyg eff @iimiinnntrfi

 

RICHARD L. KRABACH DEPARTMENT OF SAFETY HENRY .I. SANDMAN
CITY MANAGER DIVISION OF POLICE DIRECTOR OFIAFETY

CINCINNATI. OI-IIO 45214 “’mfim'

March 1, 1971 Carl V. Goodin

Mr. Michael W. Igoe
202 Spartan Avenue
East Lansing, Michigan 48823

Dear Mr. Igoe:

Although the Cincinnati Police Division does not ordinarily permit
questionnaire response, we are willing to consider making an ex-
ception in your case.

In order to act on your request, it would be helpful to have more
complete information as to the subject of your thesis, what this
particular project is designed to accomplish and a description of
the instrument to be used.

As you are no doubt aware, we receive numerous such requests. Our
pre-planned training schedule minimizes flexibility due to the ex-
tensive involvement of field personnel and people from outside
agencies. There are no "blanks" in our 17 week program other than
those that cannot be anticipated, such as the occasional failure
of an instructor to appear. Our policy is also influenced by the
high costs (salaries of 51 recruits) involved.

In order to take advantage of one of the suddenly available "blanks,”
would it be possible for our training staff to administer the exe-
cution of the questionnaire? In the event this is not possible,

with the exception of Friday, March 26, the week of March 22 presents
no particular prdblems in the training program. The times available
on these days would have to be negotiated after selection of a date.

Please direct further correspondence on this matter to Colonel
Carl V. Goodin, Police Chief.

very truly yours,

. ‘ t/'
h ‘s I L. ”f/«r \ z
{Hut 1/<:- hm.%g

Joe L. Crawford
Felice Captain
Training Officer

Juncjg

100

202 Spartan Avenue
East Lansing, Michigan 48823
3 March, 1971

Colonel Carl V. Goodin, Chief of Police
City of Cincinnati

Division of Police

310 Lincoln Park Drive

Cincinnati, Ohio 45214

Dear Colonel Goodin:

In reply to Captain Crawford's letter to me of
1 March, 1971, I would like to thank you and Captain
Crawford for allowing further consideration of my re-
quest to administer a questionnaire to your police
recruits. Please find attached an abbreviated version
of my thesis prospectus. This should provide the
clarification you requested, re: Objective, subject
matter, and measurement.

With a View to the straightforward measuring
devices, I feel that Captain Crawford's suggestion of
having the training staff administer the questionnaire
can be adopted with no ill effects. Should you decide
to allow for this hOped for exception, I will forward*
to you (or your designee) the requisite questionnaires,
answer sheets, return envelopes (with postage) and a
cover letter for all possible contingencies.

Thank you for your cooperation and promptness.

Very truly yours,

Michael W. Igoe

Enc.: (1)

101

202 Spartan Avenue
East Lansing, Michigan 48823
16 March, 1971

Captain Thomas Dixon
Training Officer
Cincinnati Police Academy
314 Broadway Street
Cincinnati, Ohio 45202

Dear Captain Dixon:

Per our telephone conversation of this afternoon,
please find enclosed fifty-five (55) five-page question-
naires. My initial pilot study and pre-test both indi-
cate that the questionnaire can be thoughtfully completed
in 20 to 25 minutes.

Prior to execution, I would suggest that those ad-
ministering the questionnaire briefly familiarize them-
selves with the first page of the questionnaire. The
questionnaires are in no way to be marked for name iden-
tification.

Questions #1 through #3 are self-explanatory. Ques-
tion #4 refers to years of formal education. This would
exclude trade schools, nursery schools, reform schools,
service schools, and so on. Question #5 should be answered
in the affirmative if the respondent served in an aCtive;
duty status other than that denoted by Reserve or National
Guard components. In general, this would indicate a ser-
vice period Of 21 months and upward. Questions #6 through
#11 are applicable only to veterans, and should be skipped
by non-veterans. Conversely, Questions #12 and #13 are
only applicable to non-veterans. This is quite important
for the accuracy of my analysis. The second set of ques-
tions (#‘s 1 through 54) are self-explanatory. Please~
emphasize that the positive and negative signs are very
important. There is a typographical error in question #40.
"...futute..." should be "...future..." Aside from that, I
haven't discovered any other mistakes. Please ask your men
to refrain from influencing the responses.

My final request is that the questionnaires be com-
pleted and returned as soon as possible. My completion

deadline is rapidly approaching. A final copy of the study
will be available to you sometime in May, 1971.

Many thanks for your cooperation.

Very truly yours,

Michael W. Igoe

102

202 Spartan Avenue
East Lansing, Michigan 48823
19 March, 1971

Colonel Carl V. Goodin, Chief of Police
City of Cincinnati

Division of Police

310 Lincoln Park Drive

Cincinnati, Ohio 45214

Dear Colonel Goodin:

Prior to the completion of my Master's thesis, I
would like to extend to you my sincerest appreciation
for your cooperation and unparalled efficiency in my
behalf.

In particular, I would like to commend your Cap-
tain Thomas Dixon of the training section, and those
instructors responsible for the actual administration
of my measures. Without their obviously conscientious
performance my task would have been further demanding
and frustrating.

As I indicated in my letter of 20 February, 1971,
this research will not alter or detract from the repu-
tation of your recruit school. I will forward to you
a copy of the completed manuscript, which should be
available sometime during May of this year.

Thank you for your consideration and cooperation.

Very truly yours,

Michael W. Igoe

c.c.: Captain T. Dixon
Training Officer
Cincinnati Police Academy
314 Broadway Street
Cincinnati, Ohio 45202

@iltrg sf? @iimiinnatr

 

RICHARD L. KRABACH DEPARTMENT OF SAFETY
"" “m“ DIVISION OF POLICE
CINCINNATI. OHIO 45214

March 31, 1971

Mr. Michael W. Igoe
202 Spartan Avenue
Sast Lansing, Michigan h8823

Dear Mr. Igoe:

Thank you so much for your kind comments about Captain
Thomas Dixon of our Police Training Section.

Please be assured that Captain Dixon will be informed of
your complimentary reaction of his service, and also

the Division's desire to merit your continued confidence
and support.

Sincerely,

— \ t ' " '/ ,l
. ’ K. ."' '

Carl V. Goodin
Police Chief

CVG:HLH:mmr

O

1';

103

HENRY J. SANDMAN
DIRECTOR OF SAFETY

POLICE CHIEF

Carl V. Goodin

104

202 Spartan Avenue
East Lansing, Michigan. 48823
3 March, 1971

Mr. Arthur F. Brandstatter, Director
School of Criminal Justice

College of Social Science

R.E. Olds Hall

Michigan State University

East Lansing, Michigan 48823

Dear Mr. Brandstatter:

I am a graduate student in the School of Criminal
Justice working on my Master's thesis under the super-
vision of Dr. John McNamara and Mr. Louis Radelet.

The brief sc0pe of my thesis is to ascertain if
police trainees, on the basis of military veteran or non-
veteran status, display any significant differences in
open or closed-mindedness. This will be measured via the
use of Dr. Milton Rokeach's D-Scale and a qualitative
measure of my own design. My research outline calls for
the analysis of raw data through the use of a computer
since the number of subjects tested should exceed 150
recruits. Regretably I now find that my financial re-
sources preclude the payment of existing computer fees,
even for a maximum of five (5) minutes of computer time.
Upon the advice of both Dr. McNamara and Mr. Radelet, I
respectfully request that the School of Criminal Justice
consider funding the cost of this computer analysis.

Thank you for your consideration and cooperation.

Very truly yours,

Michael W. Igoe

105

MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY smut-Io . m «323

 

comaossochiscmNcn-scnom maximum-anew March 9, 1971

Mr. Michael W. Igoe
202 Spartan Avenue
East Lansing, Michigan 48823

Dear Mr. Igoe:

In response to your recent request, we estimate
the cost of the computer time you will need to be
approximately $13-$22. Therefore, I am approving
your request, not to exceed this estimate; the
account to be charged is #31-1608, Cost of Education.

Yours sincerely,

,1 I .,'
I'll, ’ I], 11;, ‘0' I l .' 7"!- * LL '.
l/ \
A. F. Brandstatter
Director

br

VII-W
.211”;

r~f11(H'GAf~JlISTATE UNIVEPSITY LIBRAR

II [3W

I‘IJ‘IIJ'I'III

lHlIlI.

 

 

‘“ ‘vv‘“‘ v"w‘v ‘y—‘VVVV‘WWW“"—