LOCATION IN THE SOCIAL STRUCTURE. SIGNIFICANT OTHERS AND LEVELS OF EDUCATIONAL AND OCCUPATIONAL ASPIRATION: AN EXPLORATORY ANALYSIS Thesis for the Degtee of M. A. MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY William Frederick Rushby 1:9;636 IHESIS ' ' g ‘ 1” If“ LIBRARY MichiganStam University J. Fifi-1f" 3‘“ 9"!” " fit."- {5‘- '7'"- '1'). f." Vb i“ J ABSTRACT LOCATION IN THE SOCIAL STRUCTURE, SIGNIFICANT OTHERS AND LEVELS OF EDUCATIONAL AND OCCUPATIONAL ASPIRATION: AN EXPLORATORY ANALYSIS by William Frederick Rushby In this thesis the role of significant others as mediators of social structure influences upon the le- vels of educational and occupational aSpiration of ado- lescents was studied. Sets of hypotheses were developed to explore (a) the effects of differential location in the social structure upon certain aSpects of the com- plex of perceived self-other relationships of possible relevance to educational and occupational goal-setting, and (b) the effects of differences in perceived self- other complexes upon levels of educational and occupa- tional aSpiration. It was expected that the observed impact of dif- ferential location in the social structure upon levels of educational and occupational aspiration could be at least partially accounted for by variations in the na- ture of that self-other complex which is perceived to be relevant to educational and occupational goal-forma- tion. Three aSpects of location in the social structure, socio-economic status, residence and sex, were treated as independent variables. The "self-other" variables William Frederick Rushby included the number of perceived significant others and the levels and intensities of their expectations of the individual with regard to his educational and OCCUpa- tional achievement. The levels of educational and occu- pational aSpiration were treated as dependent variables. The data were collected in a central school in mid- Michigan during the fall of 1965. The questionnaires were administered to the whole tenth grade class, and complete sets of data were obtained for 179 reSpondents. The data supported many, but not all, of the hypo- theses about the role of significant others as mediators of social structural influences upon levels of aSpira- tion. Location in the social structure was shown to have consequences for certain aSpects of the complexes of self-other relationships perceived by adolescents to be relevant to their educational and occupational goal- formation, though not always of the kind predicted in the hypotheses. Certain aspects of the complex of self- other relationships, in turn, were shown to influence levels of educational and occupational aSpiration. With one exception, the intensity variables were found to be unrelated to either the locational or aSpirational vari- ables. It became evident in the course of this exploratory analysis that further refinement of the conceptualization of the self-other complex presented in this thesis is William Frederick Rushby needed. The empirical regularities observed in the pre- sent data need to be tested on larger more diverse samp- les using more rigorous and s0phisticated techniques. The present work suggests that further research on the role of significant others as mediators of the effects of location in the social structure upon educational and oc- cupational goal-formation would be fruitful for under- standing educational and occupational choice behavior. It is hOped that the present thesis is a step toward that goal. LOCATION IN THE SOCIAL STRUCTURfl, SIGNIFICANT OTHERS AND LEVELS OF EDUCATIONAL AND OCCUPATIONAL ASPIRATION: AN EXPLORATORY ANALYSIS by William Frederick Rushby A THESIS Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF ARTS College of Social Science I 1960 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This thesis is in reality a product of the labors of many persons. To all of them I am deeply grateful. Professor A. O. Haller, my advisor, was patient, coun- selled wisely, and worked unceasingly on my behalf. No graduate student could have a more friendly and compe- tent advisor. I would also like to thank the other com— mittee members, especially Professor Donald Olmsted, who acted as advisor in Dr. Heller's absence. Special thanks are due to Dr. Heller and Dr. Russell Mawby of the Michigan State 4-H Office for the Special efforts that they made to secure support for my research from the Agricultural Experiment Station. I would also like to thank Marie Fink of the 4-H Office for her help. I appreciated the help and encouragement of other students in the sociology department, particularly Hambir G. Phadtare and Damien Hannon. I would like to thank the guidance departments and students of the Vermontville, Grand Ledge and Charlotte Central Schools for their COOperation. John Bogner of the Charlotte Central School guidance staff was eSpe- cially helpful. I appreciate the efforts of my mother, Molly Rushby, who Spent long hours typing the several drafts of this thesis. Thanks are also due to Helen McHone, my cousin, -11.... who cooperated with my mother in typing the final cepv Finally, I would like to thank the others who con- tributed to the successful completion of this thesis, eSpecially Gerald Lautsch of the Computer Center and John McDonald of East Lansing. - iii - \ a 0 Chapter I II III IV TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION............................... 1 The Problem................................ 1 The Importance of the Problem and Possible Value of the Research.................... 3 Some Theoretical Considerations and Con- ceptual Definitions of Terms............. 5 Rationale and Hypotheses................... 10 Organization of the Thesis................. 23 RESEARCH DESIGN............................ 25 Review of the Literature on the Identifi- cation of Significant Others and the Measurement of their Expectations of the Individual........................... 25 The Preliminary Investigation.............. 34 Measurement of the Self-Other Complex...... 35 The Instruments............................ 37 Site and Sample............................ 40 Collection and Preparation of the Data..... 41 Operational Definitions of the Variables... A3 Summary.................................... 48 RESULTS 49 Introduction............................... 49 Treatment of the Data...................... 49 Assumptions................................ 51 The Hypotheses............................. 58 Conclusions................................ 96 DISCUSSION................................. 105 Introduction............................... 105 Brief Summary of the Theoretical Rationale. 105 Location in the Social Structure and the Complex of Self-Other Relationships...... 107 The Complex of Self-Other Relationships and Levels of Educational and Occupatio- nal ASpiration........................... 117 Summary.................................... 120 SUMMARY.................................... 121 Introduction............................... 121 Summary of the Research.................... 121 Limitations of the Study................... 122 Problems for Further Research.............. 123 Conclusions................................ 125 -1v- Table II III IV VI VIII IX XI XII XIII XIV LIST OF TABLES IN PERCENTAGES Level of Educational ASpiration, by Socio- economic statUSOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO00.0.00... Level of Occupational ASpiration, by Socio- economic Status... ........... ........... Level of Educational ASpiration, by Resi- dence-Occupational Choice. ......... ..... Level of Occupational ASpiration, by Resi- dence-Occupational Choice... ...... ...... Level of Educational ASpiration, by Sex... Level of Occupational ASpiration, by Sex.. Number of Perceived Significant Others, by Socio-economic Status................... Level of Perceived Significant Others' Edu- cational Expectations by Socio-economic StatUSOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO. ..... 00.00.. ...... Level of Perceived Significant Others' Oc- cupational Expectations, by Socio-econo- mic Status..... ..... ..... ...... ......... Intensity of Perceived Significant Others' Educational EXpectations, by Socio-eco- nomic StatuSOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO 00000 Intensity of Perceived Significant Others' Occupational Expectations, by Socio-eco- nomic StatuSOOOOOO. ..... OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO Number of Perceived Significant Others, by Residence-Occupational Choice..... ..... . Level of Perceived Significant Others' Educational Expectations, by Residence- Occupational Choice..................... Level of Perceived Significant Others' Oc- cupational EXpectations, by Residence- Occupational Choice............ ...... ... Page 52 51+ 56 57 59 60 62 6A 68 7O 72 73 XVII m XIX XX XXI XXII XXIII XXIV XXV XXVI XXVII Intensity of Perceived Significant Others' Educational Expectations, by Residence- Occupational Choice... ......... . ........ Intensity of Perceived Significant Others' Occupational Expectations, by Residence- Occupational Choice ..................... Number of Perceived Significant Others, by Sex ........ .0... ......... O ........ .00... Level of Perceived Significant Others' Edu- cational Expectations, by Sex........... Level of Perceived Significant Others' Occu- pational Expectations, by Sex ........... Intensity of Perceived Significant Others' Educational Expectations, by Sex........ Intensity of Perceived Significant Others' Occupational Expectations, by Sex Level of Educational ASpiration, by Number of Perceived Significant Others......... Level of Occupational ASpiration, by Num- ber of Perceived Significant Others ..... Level of Educational ASpiration, by Level of Perceived Significant Others' Educa- tional Expectations. ................ .... Level of Occupational Aspiration, by Level of Perceived Significant Others' Occupa- tional Expectations............ ..... .... Level of Educational ASpiration, by Inten- sity of Perceived Significant Others' Educational Expectations ............. ... Level of Occupational ASpiration, by In- tensity of Perceived Significant Others' Occupational Expectation ........ . ....... Results ...... . ............................ .v1. 80 81 82 8b. 87 89 90 92 94 \O U! \O O\ Figure I II LIST OF FIGURES Inferred Causal Chains ..... .. Inferred Causal Chains Rearranged.... ..... - vii - LIST OF APPENDICES Appendix Page One The Nature of the Sample and its Dis- tribution on the Variables .......... 129 Two The Questionnaires ....... ........ ..... 133 Three Notes on Coding .......... . ............ 142 Four The Coding Key ........................ 144 - viii - CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION Introduction In this thesis an attempt will be made to determine the nature and sc0pe of some social structural influences upon the complex of self-other relationships perceived by adolescents to be relevant to their educational and occupational decision-making. The effects of certain attributes of the individual's complex of self-other relationships upon his levels of educational and occupational aspiration will also be explored. The present chapter will state the problem, and lay out a conceptual framework for the analysis of these phenomena. The possible values of the thesis and some of its limitations will also be discussed. The Problem In our highly complex society, the adolescent is confronted by a seemingly endless variety of alternatives in formulating his educational and occupational plans. The choices he makes or the failure to make choices become critical matters, not only for himself, but also for the society of which he is a member. In view of the complexity of the problem, it is not surprising that many adolescents experience considerable difficulty in educational and occupational decision-making. In an attempt to clarify the dynamics of the choice process, several investigators have turned their attention to some of the problems involved.1 1For an extensive review of the literature, see Lee G. Burchinal, et.a1., Career Choices of Rural Youth in a Changing SocieEE, Nertficentral Regional Publication 142, Minnesota Agric tural Experiment Station, Bulletin 458; St. Paul, 1962, 31 pages. - 1 _ _ 2 _ An area of particular interest to social psychologists is the analysis of the formation of educational and occupational aspirations. A variety of factors appear to influence the levels of educational and occupational aspiration set by adolescents, as well as their expectations of achievement. Burchinal classifies these factors into three general categories: (1) the position of the individual and his family in the social structure, (2) the nature of his reference groups, and (3) his personality characteristics and value orientations.2 A massive amount of data has been collected on the first and third groupings of factors. H0wever, the role of reference groups, con- ceived here as a complex of self-other relationships, has not yet been explored in a systematic fashion. Research on the influence of others on the individual's be- havior has been conducted in a wide variety of social contexts, and suggests that this approach has relevance for understanding many aspects of human behavior.3 In view of its potential con- 2Ibid., pp. 17-18. 3For instance, see D. w. Chapman and John Vblkman, "A Social Determinant of the Level of Aspiration," in Readings in Social Psy- cholo , eds. Eleanor E. Maccoby, Theodore MfINewcomb, and’Bugene L. HartIey, (New Ybrk: Henry HDlt, 1958), pp. 281-290, S. M. Bisenstadt, "Reference Group Behavior and Social Integration: An Exploratory Study," American Sociological Review, (19, 1954), pp. 175-185, Robert Merton, “Cbntinuities in the Theory of Reference Groups and Social Structure," in Robert Merton, Social Theory and Social Structure, (New Ybrk: Free Press, 1957), pp. 22S;27Sj Robert Merton and’AliCe Kitt, "Contributions to the Theory of Reference Group Behavior," in Merton, Ibid., pp. 281-386, Theodore Newcomb, "Attitude Develop- ment as a Function of Reference Groups: The Bennington Study," in Maccoby, Newcomb and Hartley, op. cit., pp. 265-275, anafer Sherif and Carolyn Sherif, Reference Groups, (New York: Harper and Row, 1964). _ 3 _ tribution to the understanding of the formation of educational and occupational aspirations, it is indeed surprising that the insights afforded by the "self-other" approach have not been more fully exploited before now. The purpose of the present research is to investigate the effects of differential location in the social structure upon the character of certain dimensions of the "self-other" complex, and the resulting variations in goal-setting behavior. Specific- ally, it is intended to examine the effects upon certain orienta- tions to action of (1) residential, (2) sex, and (3) socio- economic differences in adolescents' perceptions of those signif- icant others whose expectations impinge upon their decision- making about educational and occupational matters. The Importance of the Problem and Possible value of the Research If the "self-other" approach to the analysis of the formation of educational and occupational aspirations proves to be a meaning- ful one, the present research will: (1) clarify, by means of an exploratory analysis, the effects of certain aspects of the individual's lo- cation in the social structure on the complex of self-other relationships, and their consequences for levels of educational and occupational aspira- tion. Although such effects are generally assumed to exist, there is a paucity of empirical data of a systematic nature about them. (2) provide a systematic analysis of the influence of others upon the adolescent's educational and occu- pational goal-setting behavior. Presently, there exists a gap in our knowledge about this pheno- menan. Previously, categories of others have been supplied by the investigators on the assumption that their behavior is relevant to the adolescent's - 4 - educational and occupational decision-making.4 The conceptualization of "other" employed in the pre- sent research is considerably more abstract and permits a more complete and systematic analysis of the phenomenon. (3) contribute to the literature a technique for elici- ting information about the complex of self-other relationships. While the concept of significant other is central to much of social psychological theory, the literature on the operationalization of this concept is relatively sparse. The in- strument used here should represent a step in the right direction. (4) be of value to those who are charged with coun- selling youth about educational and occupational plans. Some researchers have suggested that mani- pulation of certain aspects of the self-other com- plex may be of value in influencing the levels of educational and occupational aspiration to which adolescents aspire. 4For instance, see Anthony Diekema, "Level of Occupational Aspiration, Performance in College, and Facilitation: a pre- liminary test of certain postulates concerning the relationship between attitudes and behavior," (unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Dep't of Sociology, Michigan State University, (1965), pp. 60-65, Robert E. Herriot, "Some Social Determinants of Educational Aspiration," Harvard Educational Review, (33, 1963), pp. 164-166, and Walter L. Sloeum, “The Influence of Peer-Group Culture on the Educational Aspirations of Rural High School Students," Department of Sociology and Anthropology, Washington State University, (Pullman, Washington: unpublished paper presented at the annual meeting of the Rural Sociological Society, Chicago, 1965). SSee Burchinal, op.cit., pp.26-28, A. o. Haller, "The Occupational Achievement Process of Farm-Reared Youth in Urban- Industrial Society," Rural Sociology, (25, 1960), pp. 332-333, and B. Grant Ybumans,—The Educational Attainment and Future Plans of Kentuck Rural Youth,_Rentucky AgriculturaIIExperiment’StatiOn BEIIeEIfi NEfiBer 661, I959, p. 45. -5... It should be borne in mind that the present research is ex- ploratory in nature. Its primary value will be that of pur- suing a neglected research problem on a conceptual level con- siderably more abstract than most of those previously employed. Further research will undoubtedly modify and extend the results described herein. After discussing the theoretical basis and conceptual scheme used in this study, some of its limitations will be pointed out. Some Theoretical Considerations and Conceptual Definitions of’Terms Underlying Assumptions. Three basic assumptions under- lie the theoretical structure of the self-other approach em- ployed in this thesis. The first is that the social struc- ture, within which the propositions stated herein are held to operate, is an open-class system, though perhaps imperfectly so. The import of this assumption is that the universe to which the results may be generalized excludes persons whose social situations are such that relatively impervious barriers limit their upward mobility, given otherwise adequate personal, social and financial resources. Thus, the applicability of the results contained herein to social aggregates such as the southern Negroes, whose mobility is limited by factors other than those operative in the social environment of the present sample, must be viewed as problematic. The effects of complicating factors such as racial discrimination constitute a problem for further research. _ 6 _ The second assumption relates location in the social structure to the adolescent's perceptions of his social en- vironment. The individual's perceptions of his significant others, their attitudes, and his interaction with them are held to be functions of his location in the social structure. A considerable amount of evidence lends support to this as- sumption.6 A further assumption is that attitude formation, of which goal-setting behavior is taken to be a special case, is a function of the individual's perceptions of his significant others, their attitudes, and his interaction with them. The evidence supporting this assumption is likewise impressive.7 Thus, differences in location in the social structure, mediated by certain "self-other" variables, should produce differential orientations to action. Ego's perceptions of his Location in the ;;significant others, their Orientations social structure expectations, attitudes,‘—%5 to Action and interaction with him. 6See Eisenstadt, op.cit., Newcomb, Op.cit., and Sherif and Sherif, op.cit. 7Haller, "Educational and Occupational Choices of Farm YOuth," National Committee for Children and Youth, (Washing- ton, D.C.: National Committee for Children and Youth, n.d.), pp. 4-9, John Kinch, "A Formalized Theory of the Self-Concept," American Journal of Sociolo , (58, 1963), pp. 481-486, Frank Miyamoto and SanfordeorfiEusch, "A Test of the Interactionist Hypotheses of Self-Conception," American Journal of Sociology, (60, 1956), pp. 399-403, Theodore M. Newcomb, loc.cit., and YOumans, Op.cit., pp. 6-25. - 7 _ The independent social structural variables employed in the present research are: (l) residence, (2) sex, and (3) socio-economic status. The residence variable is defined in terms of farm-nonfarm residence. For present purposes, the essential aspect of the residence variable is not place of residence per se. Rather, it consists in the types of social- ization which are associated with a given place of residence. These differences in socialization, while not necessarily large, have been documented by previous research, and appear to have consequences for the educational and occupational achievement of adolescents.8 Theoretical considerations and past research point to the existence of different types of socialization experiences among farm boys who plan to enter farming and those who plan to enter the nonfarm labor market. Accordingly, it has been deemed advisable to distinguish between these two categories. Because the number of persons who are farm residents and plan to be farmers is so small (four), the data on this group will be used for speculative purposes only. In this thesis, socio-economic status will be treated as the level of "material style of living and consumption patterns" of the individual's family, relative to those of the families of the other sample members.9 The use of the level-of-living di- 8A. O. Haller, "Planning to Farm: A Social Psychological Interpretation, "Social Forces, (37, 1959), pp. 263-268, and Herriot, op.cit., pp. 157-177. 9See Robert A. Danley and Charles E. Ramsey, Standardization and Application of a Level-of-Living Scale for Farm and Nonfarm Families, Cornell—Agricuitural Experiment Station, MemOir Number W9, p. 3. _ 8 - mension of social stratification has several advantages, not the least of which is that it enables the investigator to rank farm families on the same criteria that are used for ranking nonfarm families. Again in the case of the sex variable, it is not the bi- ological differences between males and females which are of interest here. Rather, it is the differences in the socialization experiences of males and females and the cultural norms with respect to their educational and occupational achievement which are crucial. In this thesis the complex of self-other relationships will be treated as mediating the influences of social structure upon levels of educational and occupational aspiration. The complex of self-other relationships (frequently referred to in this thesis as the "self-other" complex) is defined as the sum total of the significant others whose expectations the individual thinks impinge upon his educational and occupational decision-making, their attitudes, his interaction with them, and the individual's per- ceptions of all of the foregoing. As treated here, the self-other complex refers to nothing more and nothing less than this. Above all, it should not be confused with the "self concept" which, as such, is not a variable in the present research. The "significant other" is defined as any social object which the individual perceives to hold expectations of him with _ 9 _ regard to his actual and potential behavior. In the present case, significant others are those social objects the expectations of which impinge upon the individual's educational and occupational decision-making. Their role will be discussed more fully at a later point in this chapter. It will suffice here to point out that significant others may function as more than simple objects of identification for the individual. Significant others are those "whom the individual must take into account in ordering his behavior ......;" in the present case, his goal-setting be- 0 havior.l The most basic dimension of the self-other complex would appear to be the number of units (significant others) comprising it. Each unit may or may not be perceived by the individual to have expectations of him with regard to a specific variety of actual or potential behavior. If a significant other is perceived to have expectations of the individual with regard to his per- formance in a given behavioral arena, these expectations will be more or less specific, and more or less intensely held. Moreover, the expectations of the total number of significant others will be more or less convergent. Educational and occupational ex- pectations take as their objects the educational and occupational hierarchies, the levels of which form continua of difficulty of achievement. The relevant dimensions of the self-other complex are 10Carl Couch, and John S. Murray, "Significant Others and Evaluation," Sociometry, (27, 1964), p. 503. _ 10 _ then (1) number of units, (2) the levels and (3) specificity of their expectations, (4) the intensity with which these are held, and (5) the degree to which these expectations converge upon a common goal. The research attempts to take each of these into account, though with varying degrees of success. The levels of educational and occupational aspiration of the individual will be treated as dependent variables in this thesis. These concepts are special cases of the more general concept of "level of aspiration". They differ from the general concept in that their objects are the educational and occupational hierarchies, and ...that the continum of difficulty consiits of the various levels along the hierarchy. The conceptual apparatus outlined here will be elaborated upon in the next section. Rationale and Hypotheses Educational and occupational aspirations are formed within the context of, and sustained and/or modified by, the individual's day-to-day interaction with others. He acquires information about education and the world of work, and learns scales of references which serve as guidelines for both the evaluation of alternatives and subsequent decision-making. Once formed, educational and occupational aspirations are sustained and/or modified by the individual's interaction with others. 11A. O. Haller, and I. W. Miller, The Occupational Aspiration Scale: theoryystrugture, and correlates, MiEhigan Agricultural Experiment Station, Technical Bulletin Number 288, 1963, p. 9. _ 11 _ Significant others are conceived to be conveyors of societal values and the knowledge and skills necessary for the achievement of the goals implied by these values. To the extent that they act as agents for the socialization of the individual relative to the central value system of American society, significant others convey to him the emphasis extant in the society upon high educational and occupational achieve- ment.l2 On an abstract level, significant others may profitably be viewed as channels for the transmission of societal values, and the the skills and knowledge necessary for the achievement of the goals implied by these values. Haller, Miller and Form, and others have pointed out the importance of significant others as potential occupational role models, and conveyors of information and attitudes about the . . . l3 nature of, and requirements for, various occupational roles. In these respects, complexes of self-other relationships may be seen to vary considerably. The nature of the adolescent's ed- ucational and occupational decisions may be expected to be closely related to the richness of the complex of his self-other relation- ships in potential educational and occupational role models, and work-related knowledge and attitudes. Moreover, the nature of the self-other complex ought to have considerable bearing upon 12Robin M. Williams, American Society, A Sociolpgical Inter- pretatiogy (New York: Alfred A. Knopfjil960), pp. 41 -421. 13A. 0. Haller, "The Occupational Achievement Process", op. cit., pp. 329-331, and D. C. Miller and W. H. Form, Industrial Sociology; New York: Harper and Brothers, 1951), pp. 521-522. - 12 _ the adolescent's awareness of the changing nature of the occupational structure and job requirements, insofar as both of these are related to his decision-making. This explanation of differential educational and occupational goal-setting behavior immediately raises a number of important research problems, a few of which will be discussed here. I. Description. The analysis of a phenomenon pre-supposes the existence of a more or less adequate conceptual scheme for describing it. Some kind of solution to this problem must be found before significant questions may be posed. Which aspects of the self-other complex are relevant to the problems of interest here? Adequate description of the self-other complex presupposes the existence of some hunches about which dimensions of self-other complex are relevant to the questions raised. The process by which the conception of the complex of self-other relationships which underlies the present study was formulated will be treated extensively in the next chapter. The adequacy of this conceptual scheme for the task of describing the essential aspects of the self-other complex is an empirical question, the answer to which will depend upon the usefulness of this conceptualization for conducting research and understanding the phenomena which are the objects of its description. Undoubtedly, the results of the present and future research will suggest such modifications as will make the con- _ 13 - ceptual scheme more adequate for these purposes. II. Social Structure and the Complex of Self-Other Relationships. In what ways is location in the social struc- ture related to the complex of self-other relationships? How important are such relationships in determining the nature of the self-other complex, including the individual's perceptions of it? From the many aspects of the individual's location in the social structure, three were selected as variables in the present research. These are residence, sex, and socio-economic status. The first and last of these were selected because theoretical considerations and past research have demonstrated their im- portance for the analysis of educational and occupational decision- making and achievement. The sex variable was chosen because the ways in which women participate in the occupational structure are believed to differ from those of men. Furthermore, this variable has been largely neglected in previous research. Any number of other social structural variables might have been selected. For instance, such aspects of location in the social structure as age, school class, and race are obviously important for understanding the phenomena of interest here. How- ever, the present research design is ambitious as it stands. The investigation of the operation of other variables is simply impossible in this thesis, because of time and other limitations. -124- In the future, these variables should be more thoroughly in- vestigated within the context of our problem. Several researchers have found significant variations in the value orientations of persons having different locations in the social structure.14 There is good reason for believing that some positions are relatively more subject to the influence of the society's central values, and the knowledge and skills required for achieving the goals implied by them, than are others. If this is true, then social structural variables ought to account for some of the variance in the nature and perception of the self- other complex, and the resulting differences in educational and occupational aspirations. This point of view and its consequences will be elaborated more fully in relation to each of the selected social structural variables. A. Socio-economic Status. The relationship between socio- economic status and orientation to the central value system of the society is a well-documented social psychological fact.15 Value orientations appear to vary with social stratum. There is reason to believe that the richness of the self-other complex (as 14 For example, see A. O. Haller and Carole Wolff, "Per- sonality Orientations of Farm, Village and Urban Boys," Rural Sociology, (27, 1962), pp. 275-293, and Herbert H. Hyman, "The value Systems of Different Classes: A Social Psychological Con- tribution to the Analysis of Stratification," in Class,yStatus and Power, eds., Reinhard Bendix and S. M. Lipset, (New York: Free Press, 1964), pp. 426-442. 15 Hyman, op.cit., pp. 429-436, and Kurt B. Mayer, Class and Society, (New York: Random House, 1955), rev. ed., pp. 43-54. _ 15 _ defined earlier) is significantly related to socio-economic status, given that the approach taken in this thesis is valid. Not only would higher strata be more likely to be exposed to the societal emphasis upon high educational and occupational achievement, but these strata would be more likely to make available the resources; social, financial, informational, etc., needed for high educational and occupational achievement. Number of Significant Others. One aspect of the self-other complex which would appear to be a determinant of its richness (in the sense referred to previously) is the sheer number of its com- ponents; the larger the number of significant others, the more potential channels for transmission of motivation and means for high achievement. Given this argument, it may be expected that: (1) there will be a positive relationship between socio-economic status and the number of per- ceived significant others. Levels of Expectation. Another aspect of the self-other complex to which the writer has previously alluded is the levels of significant others' expectations with regard to the individual's educational and occupational achievement. Several studies have documented the existence of a direct relationship between socio- economic status and levels of educational and occupational aspira- tion.16 It is argued here that this relationship is the product of 16For instance, see William H. Sewell, A. 0. Haller, and M. A. Straus, "Social Status and Educational and Occupational Aspiration," American Sociological Review, (22, 1957), pp. 57-73. _ 16 - the influence of the self-other complex upon the individual. Specifically, it is expected that the significant others of individuals located in higher social strata will have higher ex- pectations with regard to educational and occupational achievement. Thus, (II) there will be a positive relationship betwen socio-economic status and the levels of per- ceived significant others' expectations with regard to educational achievement, (III) there will be a positive relationship between socio-economic status and the levels of per- ceived significant others' expectations with regard to occupational achievement. Intensity of Expectations. Given that the location in the socio—economic hierarchy of significant others is directly related to their awareness of, and commitment toy the value orientations of the larger society, and that individuals from any particular social stratum are more likely to draw their significant others from that stratum than from any other, it follows that: (IV) there will be a positive relationship between socio-economic status and the intensities with which significant others are perceived to hold their expectations with regard to oc- cupational achievement. B. Residence. There exists a massive amount of evidence on the relationship between residence (as previously defined) and levels of educational and occupational aspiration. Generally, it has been found that, when socio-economic status and intelligence are held constant, farm boys planning to enter nonfarm occupations _ 17 _ do not differ significantly in levels of educational and occupational aspiration from nonfarm boys. Farm boys who plan to enter farming, on the other hand, have been found to have significantly lower levels of aspiration than others when the same variables are controlled. In the case of girls, no signi- ficant differences have been found between farm and nonfarm resi- dents, controlling for socio-economic status and intelligence.17 In view of the pervasiveness of urbanism and industrialism in our society, it is not surprising that no significant differences in aspiration levels have been found between farm and nonfarm boys where both are oriented to nonfarm occupations. The one case where this is not true is that of farm boys who plan to enter farming. Haller suggests that social environmental differences may account for the differential levels of educational and occupational aspiration of boys planning to become farmers and those planning to enter nonfarm occupations.18 Boys planning to become farmers take as occupational role models satisfied farmers, and their significant others tend to be less aware of objective re- quirements of urban-industrial occupational roles than do others. Moreover, their attitudes toward education and work tend to be less conducive to effective performance in urban-industrial occupational roles. Furthermore, boys planning to enter farming take as signi- -_———I7——A:_O. Haller and William H. Sewell, "Farm Residence and Levels of Educational and Occupational Aspirations," American Journal of Sociolo , (62, 1957), pp. 407-411, and William Sewell andiAlan 'Orenstein, Community of Residence and Occupational Choice," American JOurnal of Sociology, (70, 1965), pp. 556-563. 18 Haller, "Planning to Farm, a Social Psychological Inter- pretation." op.cit. _ 18 _ ficant others persons whose knowledge of nonfarm occupations, and the educational requirements necessary for them, is likely to be quite limited. Were it possible for all of the boys who plan to enter farming to actually enter this occupation, no pro- blem would arise. However, a large percentage of these youths may be expected to be forced into the nonfarm labor market be- cause of the rapidly changing nature of modern agriculture.19 Because of the small N in this category, formal hypotheses will not be stated nor will the data from these respondents be included in the statistical tests. The data will, however, be reported and striking results will be discussed. Farm and nonfarm girls have been found not to differ in their levels of educational and occupational aspiration, when socio- economic status and intelligence are controlled. In American society, females tend to be oriented to a narrow range of occupa- tional roles which are generally urban-industrial. This being the case, farm-nonfarm differences in levels of educational and occupa- tional aspiration are no more to be expected than they were in the case of farm and nonfarm boys who are oriented to the nonfarm occupational structure. More will be said about the role of sex in the discussion of this variable which follows. The pervasiveness of urban-industrial norms, even in rural America, has already been discussed. All youth, both farm and 19Haller, "Educational and Occupational Choices," op.cit. pp. 2-30 _ 19 - nonfarm, inevitably encounter bearers of urban-industrial norms in the course of their formal education. Additional less-formal exposure to such norms occurs in everyday activities through such channels as the mass media. The lower levels of educational and occupational aspiration of farm youth who are oriented to farming appear to stem from their systematic avoidance of urban- industrial norms, and internationalization of norms appropriate for farming. The educational and occupational aspirations of these youth appear to be both consequences and causes of insulation from urban industrial norms. No significant differences have been found between farm and nonfarm youth who are oriented to the non- farm occupational structure in the extent to which they internalize urban-industrial norms. Nor is there anything in the literature to suggest that these two groups should differ in the nature of their self-other complexes. Indeed, the literature would suggest that, insofar as self-other complexes have consequences for levels of aspiration, there are no differences. If the line of reasoning presented here with regard to adoles- cents who are oriented to the nonfarm occupational structure is valid, it may be expected that: (VI) For adolescents who are oriented to the non- farm occupational structure, there will be no relationship between place of residence and the number of perceived significant others. (VII) For adolescents who are oriented to the non- farm occupational structure, there will be no relationship between place of residence and the levels of perceived significant others' expectations of them with regard to educational achievement. _ 20 _ (VIII) For adolescents who are oriented to the non- farm occupational structure, there will be no relationship between place of residence and the levels of perceived significant others' expectations of them with regard to occupa— tional achievement. (IX) For adolescents who are oriented to the non- farm occupational structure, there will be no relationship between place of residence and the perceived intensities with which significant others hold their expectations of educational achievement. (X) For adolescents who are oriented to the nonfarm occupational structure, there will be no relationship between place of resi- dence and the perceived intensities with which significant others hold their expec- tations of occupational achievement. C. Sex. Burchinal suggests that occupational achievement is a matter of secondary interest to women, whose primary roles 20 are those of wife and mother. Moreover, societal values are such that women are generally encouraged to restrict the range of their occupational choice to a relatively narrow group of "women's occupations;" including teaching, nursing, social work, cosmotology, and secretarial work.21 While societal values re- lative to the female's participation in the labor force are chang- ing rapidly, the social roles of men and women remain unequal with regard to educational training and work. Thus, it may be expected that, controlling for socio-economic status, 20Burchinal, op.cit., p. 11. 21Sewell, and Orenstein, op.cit., p. 563. -21... (XI) Males will tend to have more perceived sig- nificant others than will females. (XII) Males will tend to perceive their signifi- cant others to have higher expectations with regard to their educational achieve- ment than will females. (XIII) Males will tend to perceive their signifi- cant others to have higher levels of expec- tation with regard to their occupational achievement than will females. (XIV) Males will tend to perceive their signifi- cant others to hold their expectations with regard to educational achievement more in- tensely than will females. (XV) Males will tend to perceive their signifi- cant others to hold their expectations with regard to occupational achievement more in- tensely than will females. Self-Other Variables. Earlier in the present chapter, the role of significant others as channels for the transmission of societal values, and the patterns of behavior necessary to achieve the high levels of educational and occupational achieve- ment implied by them, was discussed. Essentially, it is believed that the "richer" the self-other complex, the higher will be the resulting levels of aspiration. Thus, it may be expected that: (XVI) There will be a positive relationship between the number of perceived significant others and the levels of educational aspiration of adol- escents. (XVII) There will be a positive relationship between the number of perceived significant others and the levels of occupational aspiration of adolescents. _ 22 - The expectations of others constitute one set of deter- minants of the individual's orientations to action. While many other factors also enter into the process of attitude formation, several theorists have pointed to the crucial role of others in this process and empirical studies have found supporting evidence. Particularly striking is the similarity between the individual's own orientations to action and that which he perceives to be expected of him. In the case of educational and occupational goal—setting, the expectations of others should Operate on the indivi- dual's behavior in a smilar fashion. If the expectations of others are an important determi- nant of educational and occupational aspirations, such aspira- tions should reflect to some extent the nature of these ex- pectations. An even closer correspondence should obtain be- tween the individual's perceptions of the expectations of others and his own aspirations. Thus: (XVIII) There will be a positive relationship between the levels of perceived significant others' educational expectations of adolescents and the levels of educational aspiration of these adolescents. (XIX) There will be a positive relationship between the levels of perceived significant others' occupational expectations of adolescents and the levels of occupational aspiration of these adolescents. Emphasis upon high educational and occupational achieve- ment is a central value orientation in American society. The _ 23 _ extent to which this emphasis impinges upon the individual's decision-making has been treated here as a function of the rich- ness of his self-other complex. An aspect of the richness of the self-other complex is the intensity with which significant others do, and are perceived by the individual to, hold their expectations of him with regard to his educational and occupa- tional achievement. Thus, it may be eXpected that, (XX) There will be a positive relationship between the intensities with which significant others are perceived to hold their expectations with regard to educational achievement of adolescents and the levels of educational aspiration of these adolescents. (XXI) There will be a positive relationship between the perceived intensities with which signifi- cant others hold their occupational expecta- tions of adolescents and the levels of occu- pational aspiration of these adolescents. Twenty-one hypotheses have been stated about the relation- ships between location in the social structure, the self-other complex, and levels of educational and occupational aspiration. Before sketching the research design, the organization of the thesis will be described. Organization of the Thesis. In Chapter One, the problem was stated, a theoretical frame- work for its analysis was presented, and twenty-one hypotheses were formulated. In Chapter Two, some methodological issues will be discussed and the research design and data collection process will be described. The results and tests of the hypotheses _ 24 _ will be presented in the third chapter. In Chapter Pour, the findings will be analyzed and some limitations of the thesis will be pointed out. Some problems for further research will be presented in the last chapter. CHAPTER II RESEARCH DESIGN Introduction This chapter will begin with a review of previous at- tempts to identify significant others and to measure their expectations of the individual. Some problems which arose in formulating and operationalizing the conception of the self-other complex employed in this thesis will then be dis- cussed. Finally, the data gathering process will be briefly summarized, and the instruments and procedures used for this purpose will be described. Review of the Literature on the Identification of Significantfiothers and thewfieasurement of their Expectations ofithe Individual In this section some examples of general approaches pre- viously followed for the measurement of others' expectations of the individual will be discussed. There is no one-to-one relationship between techniques for the identification of others and the measurement of their expectations of the in- dividual. Rather, some identification techniques permit considerable flexibility in the choice of measures of others' expectations, while others allow only limited kinds of ex- pectation measures. After characterizing the major approaches to those problems which have been followed in previous re- search of a related nature, some representative studies will be discussed. The kinds of techniques which have been used to identify significant others (or reference groups, as the case may be) - 25 - _ 26 _ may be loosely categorized in the following manner: (l)use of categories of "significant others" or "re- ference groups", pre-selected by the researcher, (2)use of open-ended stimulus questions to identify the perceived significant others of the indivi- dual, and (3)use of direct observational techniques for iden- tifying significant others, usually those whose eXpectations are observed to influence the actor's behavior. In practice, of course, these techniques are often used in various combinations. However, they are frequently used alone. Among the approaches to the measurement of the expecta- tions of significant others are the following: (1)perceived or externally-determined similarity in re- Sponses to value statements, including expressions of goals. (2)structured reaponses to stimulus questions about the "expectations" or "encouragement" of others, and (3)0pen-ended uestions about the "expectations" or "en- couragement' of others. Again, two or more of the above approaches may be used in conjunction with each other to yield the desired data. Identification of Significant Others The first-mentioned approach to the identification of significant others is illustrated by a recent study by _ 27 _ Anthony Diekema.23 Using insights gained from theoretical and casual empirical analysis, as well as common sense, this researcher makes the assumption that certain catego- ries of others within the individual's social environment will be "significant others". The significant others of college-bound students were thus assumed to include parents, peers, teachers and guidance counsellors. In reference to this assumption, Diekema observes that these four categories of significant others ...are most crucial for the new college-bound student and that perceived support or non-sapport from these significant others is significant.2 The approach followed in this case is representative of the most commonly employed procedure for the identification of significant others. The validity of this type of procedure rests to a large extent upon the ability and experience of the investigator, as well as upon the soundness of the theoretical and empi- rical basis for his decisions. It is, therefore, impossible to make out-of-hand assertions about the validity of this kind of measure. However, it should be recognized that the procedure is relatively unsophisticated and risky. Moreover, it does not move the research beyond a common-sense level of 23Diekema, op.cit., pp. 60-65. 2”'Ibid. p. 60. {I _ 28 _ abstraction. Not only is the individual required to react in terms of an externally structured perceptual field, but the very nature of the procedure is likely to conceal im- portant evidence about the nature of his complex of self- other relationships, which more powerful techniques might reveal. The second technique, mentioned earlier, involves the use of Open-ended stimulus questions designed to elicit data about significant others without pre-determining the kinds of others who might thus be identified. Couch and Murray used this technique in a recent study of county agri- cultural extension agents.25 They report that ...the significant others for Specialists and agents were identified by sending each a questionnaire which asked, "Whose evaluation of you is of greatest concern to you?" Five blank spaces were provided.26 In this way, both specific individuals and categories of others were identified. Such a procedure does not pre-de- termine the range of possible significant others, except in- sofar as this occurs through the wording of the stimulus question. Moreover, it does not presume extensive analysis of the kind of situation involved. On the other hand, consi- derable ingenuity is required to prepare questionnaires in- volving this procedure so that there is maximum flexibility 25Couch and Murray, 0p.cit. 261pm. p.504. _ 29 - in gathering other information, particularly with reSpect to expectations. A third technique which has occasionally been used to i- dentify significant others is that of analysis of direct ob- servational data on interaction. Sherif and Sherif provide an outstanding illustration of the application of such a technique on their research on natural state groups of ado- lescent boys.27 The researchers instructed each observer to select a locale and "locate a recurrent cluster of boys.. ." in the area.28 After careful and unobtrusive groundwork and development of rapport with the group, the observers were given the following instructions: The pertinent evidence to establish is whether a group is a reference group for members' concerns, not Just whether a group shows up at a particular place at a particular time, but also whether they are associating elsewhere, via one or more mem- bers, over the phone, etc. The evidence includes whether they make plans involving some members, whether they know at given times where absent mem- bers are, whether they give and take mutual aid in matter of parties, girls...In short, a group may appear in one location and all together only occas- sionally. But, a group's absence from a place where they have been observed to associate, or a change in their activities, does not necessarily indicate that the group has become unimportant to members.29 278herif and Sherif, loc.cit. 28 Ibid. p.358. 29Ib1d. p.533. - 3o _ The Sherifs' technique for identifying significant others has many advantages, most of which are obvious. On the other hand, their technique is of limited general value because it presents many practical problems, including fi- nancial, personnel, and time requirements beyond the means of most investigators. Moreover, there is always the pos- sibility that observation will modify the pattern of inter- action and subsequent individual behavior in ways detrimen- tal to the research objectives. Three general approaches to the problem of identifying significant others have been outlined, illustrated, and e- valuated briefly. Let us now examine some approaches to the measurement of the expectations of significant others. One kind of measure of the expectations of significant others is based upon the comparison of their actual or per- ceived value preferences with those of the actor. Haller and Butterworth used this technique in their study of peer group influences on levels of educational and occupational 3O aSpiration. Pairs of adolescent boys who considered each other to be significant others ("best friends") were compared in regard to their aSpiration scores to determine the extent to which their aSpirations tended to converge, 30A.O. Heller, and C.E. Butterworth, "Peer Influences on Levels of Occupational and Educational ASpira- tion," Social Forces, (38, 1960), pp. 289-295. 31 and the nature of the impact of other factors upon this. This is a simple and limited kind of technique for measu- ring expectations. The principle upon which it is based, however, is applicable to a wide variety of research goals. Unfortunately, the technique is a rather indirect one for accomplishing the kind of research objective to which the present work is directed. Another technique for measuring the expectations of the individual held by significant others is illustrated in research on the role of the school superintendent, con- ducted by Gross, Mason and McEachern.32 These investiga— tors conceived of expectations as having two dimensions; direction and intensity.33 They devised a methodological approach in which the general procedure consisted of ...asking each reSpondent whether and to what extent he felt...(the role incumbent)...was obligated to do (or be like) whafi was Specified in the particular ex- pectation item.3 Respondents were asked to indicate the direction of their ex- pectations, and then to rate them on the dimension of per- 311b1d. 32Neal Gross, Ward S. Mason and Alexander W. McEachern, Explorations in Role Analysis: Studies of the School Superintendency Role, (New Yerk: Wiley and Sons, 1958): 379 pages- 33Ibid. p. 60. 341b1d. pp. 101-102. 35 missiveness-mandatoriness on a scale of five intervals. In this case the possible responses of the significant others were structured by the investigator. This tech- nique, may, of course, be used with the actor, as well as with his "actual" others. It pre-determines the possible range of responses to the stimulus question, and, there- fore, must be used with care if the data are to have any value. A positive aSpect of this approach is the readi- ness with which the data may be quantified. A third approach to measurement of the expectations of significant others is the use of the Open-ended stimu- lus question. The Sherifs' research on natural state groups of adolescent boys incorporates measures of this kind.36 The observer is asked to inquire casually about what the actor perceives to be the expectations of others, and to later record his responses. Likewise, others may be, and were in this particular case, interviewed to de- termine the nature of the expectations that they have of the individual's behavior.37 This procedure may also be used for the construction of questionnaires. Its main li- mitation is the difficulty of categorizing the reSponses 35Ibid. 36Sherif and Sherif, o .cit., see methodological appendix, pp. 331-3 0. 37Ibid., pp. 356-359- _ 33 _ such that they will be susceptible to comparison. More- over, such a procedure almost invariably yields a high no reSponse rate. The individual is free to structure, within the limits of the question asked, the nature of his response, and this often leads to data of a variety which has little value for the researcher. However, that it does lead to many highly general reSponses and "don't knows" may tell us something about the nature of the phenomenon we are investigating. Several procedures for identifying significant 'others and measuring their expectations of the indivi- dual have been presented and briefly evaluated. No one procedure is adequate for all kinds of research object- ives. However, this does not mean that one technique is not preferable to another in a Specific research context. Since the present study is an exploratory one, the mea- sures selected for most aSpects of the self-other complex variables were deliberately open-ended. This prevents premature structuring of the range of reSponses in a case where little research of an empirical nature has actually been conducted on the range of possible responses. More- over, in the identification of significant others, it is hoped that the present research will contribute to the de- ve10pment of more abstract and flexible modes of conceptu- alization and operationalization. The Preliminary Investigation The literature on previous attempts to measure the ex- pectations of others with regard to the individual's beha- vior provided many promising leads, but did not offer an instrument which could be readily adapted to the purposes of the present investigation. Moreover, at this stage in the research, the conception of the complex of self-other relationships was not very well elaborated. It seemed wise to take another look at the phenomenon of interest from the perspective of the conceptual and measurement pro- blems posed by the research. An opportunity was also needed to test some possible solutions to these problems. The decision was made to conduct a series of exploratory interviews with a small sample of high school students who represented a wide variety of social backgrounds. After developing a strategy for these interviews in consultation with the major advisor, the Eaton County Agri- cultural Extension Agent was asked to provide advice in selecting some possible sites for the interviews. Two schools were selected; one rural and one suburban. With the help of guidance counsellors, about fifteen students were selected in such a manner that a wide range of per- sonal characteristics, social backgrounds, school perfor- mance, and educational and occupational plans were included. In the interviews, an attempt was made to explore the _ 35 - reSpondents' perceptual structuring of the complex of self-other relationships, and, at the same time, to ga- ther data systematically. The interviews provided con- siderable insight into the phenomenon under investiga- tion, and it was possible to test several hunches about the nature of the self-other complex, its social corre- lates and consequences. Much was also learned about the possible values of various techniques for eliciting the desired data. The interview experience and discussion of the pro- blem with the major advisor led to the develOpment of a conceptual scheme and the construction of an instrument for gathering the data. The latter will be discussed more fully in the section which follows. Measurement of the Self-Other Complex The review of the literature on measurement earlier in the chapter indicated some of the approaches which re- searchers have utilized in the measurement of the expecta- tions of others and the individual's perception of these expectations. In the present research, it would have been extremely desirable to measure both the individual's per- ceptions of his significant others, their attitudes, and his interaction with them, and to trace his perceptions back to their sources in his social milieu. Such an ap- proach would permit an analysis of others' expectations of ego as these others verbalize their expectations, and also _ 35 - as ego perceives them. However, the task of implementing such an approach would have required resources far beyond those available for the present research. The approach actually adopted was that of eliciting only ego's perceptions of the self-other complex. Other data could then be inferred from these. Several questions may be raised about this strategy. In what reSpects are ego's perceptions of the complex of self-other relation- ships congruent with the objective nature of his inter- personal environment? How are egoLs perceptions of the expectations of others, the verbalized expectations of these others, and ego's orientations to action related to one another? These are complex issues and their resolu- tion is far beyond the scope of the present effort. How- ever, some related research suggests that there is a mo- derate relationship between self-attitudes and the atti- tudes of others toward ego. A strong relationship has been found between self-attitudes and ego's perceptions of the evaluations of others.38 These findings suggest that the present approach has at least some validity and usefulness, given the present state of our knowledge. It may be recalled that individuals act upon their perceptions of social reality, rather than on the basis 38 See Kinch, loc.cit., and Miyamoto and Dornbusch, loc.cit. _ 37 - of that reality as it exists apart from their perceptions. This does not, of course, preclude the operation of social forces of which the individual is not conscious, nor does it preclude the possibility that the operation of some of these forces may be inferred from perceptual data. Such inferences have been made in the present research. It is believed that the data available are closely enough rela- ted to reality to shed considerable light on the problems being investigated. However, the limitations of the kinds of data used ought to be kept in mind. The Instruments Three questionnaires were used to gather the data: The Occupational Plans of Eaton County Ybuth, the Haller Occupational ASpiration Scale, and the Danley-Ramsey Level-of-Livingplndex.39 At a later point in the research, a supplementary questionnaire was used to fill in some gaps in the data. A. The Occupational Plans of Eaton County YOuth. This questionnaire was constructed Specifically for the present research. It is largely an adaption of instruments used by L; Haller. 0 Thus, it incorporates several items to measure variables of proven or potential relevance. These inclu- 39These may be found in Appendix I. 40See Haller,:The Occupgtional Plans of Michigan YOuth, in Haller and Miller, cp.cit., pp. 122-132. _ 38 _ ded factors such as place of residence, educational and occupational achievement of parents, religious preference, occupational choice and level of educational aspiration. The last section of the questionnaire was designed to measure various dimensions of the complex of self-other re- lationships, each of which will be discussed at a later point in this chapter. These include number of significant others, the levels of their expectations with regard to the individual's educational and occupational achievement, the intensities with which they hold these expectations, and the degree of convergence among their expectations. B. Danley-Ramsey Level-of-Living Index. The Danley- Ramsey Level-of-Living Scale was used to measure socio-eco- 41 nomic status. This instrument is a scale of 13 items se- lected for their ability to discriminate between high and low status groupings. The scale was standardized in rural New York, and has the following advantages: (l)it was constructed and standardized relatively re- cently (1958), and thus contains fewer outdated items than other widely used instruments. (2)it is based upon a more refined conception of socio- economic status than are scales (such as Sewell's) used previously, and excludes participation items, which were found to measure a dimension other than level of living. (3)it permits easy comparison of farmers Jlth other oc- cupational and residential categories. 2 410p.c1t. 42Ibid. pp.3-4. - 39 _ Originally, it was planned to use only the short form of this scale. Later, it was decided that the longer form would better discriminate between socio-economic groups. Unfortunately, one item was overlooked in constructing the Supplementary Questionnaire. Because of this over- sight, the final form used includes only 12 items. C. The Occupational ASpiration Scale. The Haller Occupational ASpiration Scale was used to measure level of occupational aSpiration.43 This scale is ...a multiple choice instrument...designed pri- marily for use among male high school students. It may or may not be useful among high school girls and among youth at other levels of school; this has yet to be demonstrated. The OAS uses the fact that LOA (level of occupational aSpir- ation) questions must Specify idealistic or rea- listic levels at particular future time periods as the basis for constructing an LOA measure having a single score for each person...The OAS appears to be a practicable and reliable mea- sure of an individual's level of occupational aspiration. The total score may be interpreted simply as a relative (but not absolute) indica- tor of the prestige level on the occupational hierarchy which an individual views as a goal.44 The only limitation of this instrument for the present research is its questionable applicability to the measure- ment of females' levels of occupational aSpiration. The 43See Haller and Miller, op.cit. 1mI.W. Miller and A.O. Haller, "A Measure of Level of Occupational Aspiration," Personnel and Guid- ance Journal, (43, 1964), pp.H49, A54. _ 40 _ validity of this scale for measuring the levels of occu- pational aSpiration of females remains an Open question, the answer to which must await further research.45 Site and Sample The following criteria were employed in selecting the research site: (l)there should be only one comprehensive high school in the community. (2)the community should be located in an area suffi- ciently rural to encompass a substantial farm population in the sample. (3)no racial or other complicating variables should impinge upon the relationships to be studied. (4)the school should be sufficiently large to allow selection of the sample from one grade level. After consultation with the Eaton County Agricultural Ex- tension agent, the community of Charlotte was selected as the research site. Charlotte is the Eaton County seat, and is located about 25 miles southwest of the city of Lansing, where many of its residents are employed. The community is a trading center for the surrounding rural areas, which are rich farmlands. The population of the community is approximately 7,700, and includes very few, if any, members of minority groups. None were included in this sample. Charlotte High School, the only one in the community, 45Heller and Miller, op.cit., p.59. -41- draws its student body of 950 from both farm and nonfarm populations. The school includes four grades (9-12), and is classified as "Class A". The tenth grade, which was selected as a sample, had approximately 239 members at the time of the study, of which somewhat more than half were girls. The data were gathered about one month after the academic year began, thus including some students who probably left school before the end of the year. Collection and Preparation of the Data The questionnaires were administered by two graduate students in sociology during tenth grade English classes on two successive days. The classes were each fifty min- utes long, and were staggered over the school day. On the first day, a brief introduction and general explanation of the purpose of the research were given, and the questions were either answered or deferred until the data had been collected. The Occupational Plans of Eaton County YOuth was administered, and took about 30-40 minutes for all of the students to complete. At the outset, both the general instructions and those Specifically related to the "self- other" instrument were read aloud, and questions were an- swered. On the second day, the same general procedure was followed in administering the two scales, and required about 20-25 minutes. Throughout both testing sessions, the answers to questions which would compromise the results were deferred. _ up _ About two months later, another very short question- naire, designed to fill in gaps in the data, was adminis- tered at the beginning of the English classes by their respective teachers. These items were entirely factual in nature and questions were answered freely. Coding operations were performed during the Winter and Spring Terms of 1965. The original coder was not trained. However, once completed, the coding was checked very extensively by the writer and an undergraduate stu- dent in the social sciences. Revisions and recoding were completed where necessary. A copy of the coding key may be found in Appendix Four. Operational Definitions of the Variables In this section, limited descriptions of the opera- tional definitions of the variables are given. In certain cases, decisions about the treatment of problematic data are also recorded. For a discussion of the questionnaires which were omitted and the reasons for which they were omit- ted, the reader should refer to Appendix One. This appen— dix also contains cut-off scores and sample sizes for each variable. Socio-economic Status. The distribution of scores on the Danley-Ramsey Level-of-Living Scale was divided into three categories. An attempt was made to establish cut-off points which would yield three categories of approximately equal sizes, though this proved to be very difficult because -43_ of the high concentration of scores at certain points. There were two cases in which the "About Our House" (or level-of-living) sections of otherwise completed ques- tionnaires were not answered in full. These were deleted from those cross-tabulations which required a level-of- living score. Residence. All respondents were classified either as farm or nonfarm residents. The former category includes all of those individuals who indicated that their families earned all or part of their livelihood from the operation of a farm and/or who live on a farm. All other reSpondents were classified as nonfarm residents. Farm and nonfarm residents were further classified according to their occu- pational plans. A distinction was made between those who planned to enter farming and those who planned to enter non- farm occupations. This manipulation yielded four categories of reSpondents on the dimension of residence. Because of their small sizes, the two categories incorporating "farm plans" were dropped from the statistical analysis. §E§s The respondents were asked to indicate their sex in the "Occupational Plans" questionnaire. Significant Others. All persons designated by the res- pondent in accordance with the following instructions were treated as significant others and the reSpondent's rela- tionships with these others were treated as self-other re- _ AA - lationships: Sometimes other peOple Show interest in teenagers' educational and occupational plans, and talk to them about their plans. As far as you know, WHO are the people that have EXPRESSED INTEREST IF“— YOUR EDUCATIONAL AND OCCUPATIONAL PLANS? Please be sure you thought of—everyoner-even your parents and friends--other people, ’t‘Too.‘Jr The reSpondents were asked to identify others by name, relationship to the student, and class in school or occu- pation. In those cases in which a collectivity was iden- tified, the coder recorded it in terms of the individuals involved (parents, etc.), or as uncodable where the unit could not be broken down (friends, etc.). One individual identified a deity as one of his significant others. In order to avoid the complex issues raised by this reSponse, it was deleted from the statistical data. Finally, the reSpondent was assigned a score, repre- senting the number of significant others. A distribution in terms of this variable was obtained, and three catego- ries of number of significant others were established. The reSpondents were asked to report both their own educational and occupational aspirations and the expecta- tions of others with regard to their achievement. This raises the possibility of a Spurious relationship in the data if the same reSponse set is evoked by the two kinds of stimulus questions. Steps were taken to minimize such “6See The Occupational Plans of Eaton County Youth, Section Six, Appendix II. _ A5 - a possibility. The measures of levels of educational as- piration and others' expectations differ in form, and are separated by several other items in the questionnaire. The data on levels of occupational aSpiration and others' expectations were collected on different days by means of quite different instruments. It is recognized that these steps do not absolutely guarantee independence between the two kinds of reSponses. Given the exploratory nature of the present research, however, these measures should be satisfactory. Further research is needed to probe their validity. Level of Significant Others' Educational EXpectations. All responses to the following Open-ended stimulus state- ment were treated as the significant other's expectations with regard to the respondent's educational achievement. The farthest he or she wants me to go in school is: . From the responses to this stimulus statement, the level of the significant other's expectations with regard to ego's academic achievement was then inferred. Expectations which were not academic in nature (e.g. beauty school) and those which were too general to permit inferences were categorized separately, and were not used further. Finally, the levels were co- ded in terms of years, and an average score was computed for each respondent. The distribution of scores was then - 46 _ divided into three approximately equal groups to obtain relative levels of expectation. Level of Significant Others' Occupational Expectations. All reSponses to the following Open—ended stimulus state- ment were treated as the significant others' expectations with regard to the individual's occupational achievement. Regarding my future occupation, he or she wants me to be a : . Expressed expectation with regard to occupational achievement was used in coding the prestige level of such eXpectations, and necessitated Specific decisions about the coding of certain preferences. A major proportion of these difficulties were encoun- tered in cases in which the expressed preference as "house- wife". Housewives, of course, do not enter the labor mar- ket, and, therefore, do not have an assigned prestige score. It was decided that there was no alternative to placing them in the uncodable category. Also, some reSponses were too general to fit into the Duncan Occupational Prestige scoring system.47 Where such responses could not be justifiably placed in the re- sidual categories which were sometimes provided, they were treated as uncodable. Out of a total of 729 reSponses, 158 or 21.7% were uncodable. The prestige scores of expressed expectations were 47Albert Reiss, Jr., Ocoppations and Social Status, (New Yerk: Free Press, 1961),Appendix B.pp.2o3—275. _ 47 - averaged for each reSpondent, and the distribution of the resulting scores was divided into three approximately equal groups to obtain relative levels of expectation. Intensity of Significant Others' Educational Expecta- tigpg, The reSpondents were asked to rate perceived sig- nificant others in terms of "how strongly...he or she feels about you going this far in school...," using a three point scale. These ratings were then averaged for each reSpondent, and the distribution of scores was di- vided into three categories to obtain relative levels of intensity. Intensity of Sigpificant Others' Occupational Expec- tations. The reSpondents were asked to rate perceived significant others in terms of ”how strongly...he or she ll feels about you getting this job..., using a three point scale. The data were then treated in the same manner as the educational eXpectation intensity scores to obtain relative levels of intensity. Level of Educational Appiration. A series of ques- tions was asked to determine how far the respondent 25f pected to go in school. The highest level of expected achievement was then treated as level of educational as- piration. A procedure similar to that used in coding the significant others' educational expectations was followed with regard to non-academic educational plans, and vague - 48 _ statements of plans. Level of educational aSpiration was coded in terms of years of expected educational achieve- ment, and the distribution of scores was divided into three categories to obtain relative level of educational aSpira- tion. Level of Occupational ASpiration. The level of occu- pational aSpiration was measured by means of the eight- question Occupational Appiration Scale, develOped by Haller and Miller. This scale has been described in an earlier section. The distribution of scores was divided into three groups to obtain relative level of occupational as- piration. Summary. In the present chapter, the literature on the measurement of the expectations of others was reviewed, and the nature and evolution of the research design was discussed. The variables were then given operational de- finitions. In the next chapter, the procedures for, and results of, the analysis of the data will be presented. CHAPTER III RESULTS Introduction In the present chapter, the statistical treatment and presentation of the data will be described, and the re- sults of the tests of the hypotheses will be analyzed. Certain limitations imposed upon the statistical treatment of the data by the small size of the sample will be dis- cussed. Finally, a brief summary of the major findings will be given. Treatment of the Data On each variable other than sex and residence, the sample has been divided into high, medium and low cate- gories. The cutting points between these categories were empirically determined, intending that they would be approximately equal in frequency. Even so, in order to avoid placing the same values of any one variable in different categories, in practice it was often necessary to divide them in such a manner that one category was much larger or smaller than the other two. The empiri- cally determined cutting points for each variable and other details in regard to the treatment of the data are presented in Appendices One and Three. Contingency tables were then prepared, and the chi- square test for the significance of differences was ap- -49.. _ 5o _ plied to the results.”8 The original plan for the analy- sis of the data called for the cross-classification of three variables in many instances. A modification of the original plan, made necessary by the small cell fre- quencies, was the decision not to control for sex and socio-economic status in the testing of certain hypo- theses. While this limitation is regrettable, the pre- sent data do permit some well-grounded Speculation about the possible effects of instituting such controls. It was also necessary to drop certain categories of resi- dence-occupational choice from the statistical analysis. The principal omission was that of farm boys who plan to enter farming. The number of such persons had been under- estimated in the selection of the testing site and sample. The results of the small number of respondents in this category will be reported, though they will be omitted from the statistical tests. The theoretical structure of the thesis is based upon a set of assumptions about the relationships between the social structural variables and the levels of aspiration. Data having a bearing on these relationships will be exa- 48The formula used in computing the chi-square is X2: (fO-fe)2. See G.U. Yule and M.G. Kendall I't Introduction to the Theory of Statistics, (London: Charles Griffen and Co., 1938), 13 cdl,rev., p-416. _ 51 _ mined prior to the testing of the hypotheses which consti- tute the focus of the present investigation. The data on each of the assumptions and hypotheses will be exa- mined individually in the present chapter, and apprOpriate conclusions will be drawn. Assumptions It will be remembered that the self-other variables are treated in the present thesis as mediating the influ- ence of social structure upon the individual's orientations to action; in this case, his levels of educational and oc- cupational aspiration. It is logically necessary to make a set of assumptions about the relationships which will obtain between the various social structural variables and the aSpiration variables before hypotheses about their relationships to mediating variables may be constructed. A set of six relationships between the three structural and two aspiration variables have been assumed. These are Specified as follows, and are presented with the data bearing upon them. Assumption One. There will be a positive relationship between socio-economic status and levels of educational aspiration. An inspection of Table I reveals a pattern similar to that predicted. It will be noted that the low socio-economic group is concentrated in the low aSpiration category. The middle socio-economic group, and eSpecially the high socio- Huurm H \ rocmw cm mocoonwosmw unswemdwos wk moowoamnonoawo tandem. H: tOHOQSdoqome mooeouooosoaao a snow Aeoaeow - assume homes apoapav _ 52 _ bmmmwemnwo: em moowoumoosoawo mnmdcmt w: monomsnmmmme moowoumoosoawo mnmncm rmcmp 0m Acmswmw u wmammm,momwm mooemmv Concomnwosmw aonmw fimUHddeOD F03 ZQQHGB EH03 nooocemnwosmw Aoonomv AomuHOV AHHuHmV rmeWHmnHos mompmv men: hmuw zmowca AmmuEmv up.m up.u um.m we.m navy roe ApmnumV ew.e mq.H mm.m um.u Ammv aonww Hoo.o Hoo.o 900.0 Aqmv Away Auwv Apuuv xmu 3:3 oh u 5. eAbm ewes mdmocmsnwmm mum H: emdedrmmmm. umnm seem awmmwsm woe dso ommmm. ..55- tionship between place of residence and level of educa- tional aSpiration. The results of the test of this hypothesis may be found in Table III. It may be seen that there are differences in the relative levels of educational aSpiration of farm and nonfarm youth. While the nonfarm group is heavily concentrated in the high aSpiration category, the farm group is polarized between high and low aSpiration cate- gories. However, the differences are not significant at the .05 level, and the hypothesis is accepted. Tpggg are no significant differences in the levels of educa- tional aSpiration of farm and nonfarm respondents. Assumption Four. For adolescents who are oriented to the nonfarm occupational structure, there will be no relationship between place of residence and level of oc- cupational aspiration. The results may be found in Table IV. The distribution of the farm and nonfarm reSpondents in the aSpiration categories is quite similar. There is, however, a Slight concentration of farm residents in the middle aSpiration category. The differences are not significant at the .05 level, and the hypothesis is accepted. There appear to be no significant differences between farm and nonfarm youth oriented to the nonfarm occupational structure in the levels of occupational aspiration that they set for themselves. - 56 _ warm HHH recap om mdcomnwosmw >mmndmnwo: on wmmwomsomuOOQSwmnwosmH nrowomt M: modemsnmmmm» recap om Wmmwomsom I ooocwmdwosmp Drowom moms dmmwomsn mocomnwosmw zozmwda ammwomSH weds dmmmmoSd moo aommw one mod; cons: rmewamnwos mad scammda ooocn nonmmda OGGCtmdMosmH tmnwosmw crownm emnwosmw nrowom nsowom zen Mnopcomo H: X» men: eu.q no.o . em.o mm.o A» ow scam meem om Amuv AHV nowwmmmv Seneca Amnm wbm H< rmwrm wbm wrm XH Hsnwsmwn< 0m modnmwcma mwmdwmwomsn onymdm. Ooocvmnwosmw mxwmonmnwoam 6% 00090: moosoawo mnmncm» H: monomsnmmmms Hsdmsmwd< 0m moowoumoosoawo mdmdcm mumswmwomsn Acmspmw a wmammw momvm mooummv Honmw mmwmwwmwosmw roe zmawca away 00:00 00: 0 u 0 mxomonmnwosm A v A H V APP H V awn: A00u00v 00.0 00.H 00.0 00.» A000 Zoowca Agonumv 00.0 0H.a 00.0 0H.m A000 008 Aooummv 00.0 pH.p 00.0 00.0 A000 aonmw H00.0 H00.0 H00.0 Aumv A000 a0HV Awquv 0 x u .8 9m n s wam ewes mumpcmzowmm mum M: wmdmsnvmmmm. umnm swam 50mmwsm won 020 ommmm. _ 69 _ lower intensity categories than the high status groups, the distribution of the three status groups is relatively similar. The differences are not significant at the .05 level, and the hypothesis is rejected. There appear to be no significant differences among the socio-economic groups in the intensities with which theypperceive signi- ficant others to hold their expectations with regard to occupational achievement. Hypothesis Six. For adolescents who are oriented to the nonfarm occupational structure, there will be no relation- ship between place of residence and the number of significant others. Table XII reveals a strong concentration of the farm res- pondents in the low category in terms of number of per- ceived significant others. The nonfarm sample, on the other hand, is relatively equally distributed in the number categories. Nonfarm reSpondents perceive their significant others to be more numerous than do the farm respondents. The differences are significant at the .05 level, and the hypothesis is rejected. It seems safe to conclude that there are differences between farm and nonfarm residents oriented to the nonfarm occupational structure in the num- ber of their perceived significant others, and that the farm residents have fewer. The small sample of farm boys who plan to enter farming tend to have more perceived sig- nificant others than do their counterparts who are oriented ..'7o _ ebwrm XHH zcavmu om monomuwrw xwrm xx Hsnmsmwn< om mmdomwcma mwoswmwnmsn onsmum. macomnwosmw mxwmonmnwosm owlmmXPIH: wmeomsnmmmme Hsnmsmwnx ow mmx mwndwmwomsn Odrmwm. zmwm wmampm Honmw macomdMosmH mxnmonmnMOSm sway Aowuwwv mw.H um.u Hm.m Away Kmawca nHmnHuv um.¢ um.m no.“ Auqv ros AHmubOV mm.m wm.o Hp.m Ammo aonmw Hoo.o Hoo.o Ammo Ammo Apumv x» n .8 9...”. u N wAbm ewms mdmncmsowmm mam H: omdmsnrmmmm. _ 85 - Hypothesis Fifteen. Males will tend to perceive their significant others to hold their expectations with regard to occupa- tional achievement more intensely than will females. The results may be found in Table XXI. Males show a ten- dency to be concentrated in the low intensity grOUp, and are equally distributed in the other two intensity groups. Females are relatively equally distributed in the three in- tensity groups. The results show a pattern contrary to that eXpected. Nonetheless, the intensity differences between the sexes are not significant at the .05 level. The hypo- is rejected. Hypothesis Sixteen. There will be a positive relationship between the num- ber of perceived significant others and the levels of educational aspiration of adolescents. The results are presented in Table XXII. The results ape pear to give fairly consistent support to the hypothesis, and the differences are significant at the .05 level. Those reSpondents with a relatively small number of significant others tend to have low levels of educational aspiration. It may be observed, however, that the remainder of the res- pondents are slightly more frequently concentrated in the high than in the medium category. By contrast with the num- bers of low aSpirers, however, neither the medium or high aSpiration groups is very large. The data reveal a consistent tendency for reSpondents - 86 _ abwrm XXH Hsnmsmwnx om mmeomwcma mwnswmwomsn Garmem. concomnuosmw mxvmonmnwosm cw mmx. H: wmdomsnmmmme HsnmsmWH< om mmx macawmwomsd ZmHm immamwm aoan onrmem. ooocvmnwosmp mxvmoddeOSm mwmr mm.H wo.H mm.H Aopupmv Ammo zmawca Awuumpv wm.H up.» uH.u Ammo hos AwmumoV pp.m um.m um.m 33 HOde 900.0 Hoo.o Ammv Amuv quwv x» u ...: arm. n m mem ewms mdmnemsnwmm mum H: vmdmsdrmmmm. -87— rmmowumnwo: res zmawca awn: Aouuv npumv AmnHmV mwmr AbmummV mp.p mu.o p0.» uH.m Amev amawca nuulpmv he.» no.0 mm.w u¢.H Amwv boa Apmnumv up.» um.m u¢.o up.H Am: Honmp Hoo.o Hoo.o Hoo.o Aqu Ammv quV Awumv xNV n. :5 n: u a. wam $Wm£ mdmncmsowmm mum M: omdmbnwmmmm. - 90 _ avwrm XXH< rmmowemnwo: roe Kmawca awn: mwm: m.H mm.q uu.H pp.m Ampv zmawca Hm.» bu.» mm.u up.» Auev boa um.m mq.o p.a mp.o $3 aonmw Hoo.o Hoo.o Hoo.o Apmv Aqu Amqv AHmmV Xe u 3;» _ A: u 5. mAbm ewes memncmsowmm mum H: vmdmsnwmmmm. umdm swam BHmmeQ mow nsmbdwumwx ommmm. _ 91 _ significant others have expectations which are high tend to have high levels of educational aSpiration. The group whose significant others are perceived to have expecta- tions which fall between the high and low groups tend to aSpire to educational goals at a corresponding level. The hypothesis is accepted. It appears that the levels of the perceived expectations of others are positively_ related to the individual's own level of educational as- piration. Hypothesis Nineteen. There will be a positive relationship between the le- vels of perceived significant others' occupational ex- pectations of adolescents and the levels of occupational aSpiration of these adolescents. The results may be found in Table XXV. They follow the pat- tern predicted by the hypothesis, and are significant at the .05 level. Those respondents whose perceptions of the expectations of their significant others in regard to oc- cupational achievement fall into the medium prestige group show a slight concentration of levels of occupational as- piration in the direction of high prestige goal levels. For high and low groups, the difference in relative levels of occupational aspiration are not quite as striking as they were in the case of educational goal-setting. How- every the evidence firmly supports the hypothesis of a positive relationship between the levels of perceived sig- nificant others' occupational expectations and levels of occupational aSpiration. - 92 - awwrm xx< rmcmp om Concomnwosmw bmowemnwos U< rm mdedeO—J 60$ ZmQHCB EH03 ...—.6de Acnneemnwosmp AmmumoV Ape-mpv nop-pmv >moHemnHo: momwmv mwar Abmummv mo.» um.o uo.H uH.m Amev zmaaca Amunamv um.u mu.u uw.m up.H Amwv roe AHmuumv um.» uH.m uu.m up.H Amwv aonmp Hoo.o Hoo.o Hoo.o Ammv Amuv Amuv Apumv m x u .mu a.m n e muy.om ewes memntmnowmm mew M: omdmsnvmmmm. _ 96 _ shows a very slight tendency toward low levels of occupa- tional aSpiration. The high group shows the same kind of distribution, though to a lesser extent. The medium group has a very slight tendency toward high levels of occupa- tional aspiration. None of these differences are very large, and are not significant at the .05 level. The hypo- thesis is rejected. CONCLUSIONS Either or both of two perSpectives may be employed in drawing conclusions from the results presented in this chapter. One may trace the influence of differential lo- cation in the social structure, through the self-other complex, to levels of occupational and educational aSpi- ration. Or one can work back from the levels of aSpira- tion to differential location in the social structure. Both of these perSpectives will be used in order to shed more light on the pattern of results presented in this chapter. The reader may wish to refer to the two graphic sum- maries of results, presented in this section. In Figure One, the results are summarized in tabular form for easy reference. Figure Two presents the implications of the results in diagrammatic form. Social Structure and Self-other Variables. Socio-economic Status. Socio-economic status was found to be positively related to both the levels of edu- -97- Figure One A Summary of Results Relationships Among Location in the Social Structure, The Self-Other Complexy and Levels of'Educational and Occupational Aspiration SES RES SEX NSO LSOEE LSOOE ISOEE ISOOE LEA LOA SE8 O + + D O + + RES + O 0 + 0 O 0 SEX - + + 0 0 0 0 N80 + 0 LSOEB + LSOOE + ISOEE 0 ISOOE O S bols Results confirm Empirical 305 - No relationship (+) predicted relationship (-)results Opposite to those predicted ABBREVIATIONS SES - Socio-economic Status Res - Residence (farm - nonfarm) of respondents who are oriented to nonfarm occupations Sex - Sex NSO - Number of Perceived Significant Others LSOEE - Level of significant others' Educational Expectations LSOOE - Level of Significant Others' Occupational Expectations ISOEE - Intensity of Significant Others' Educational Expectations ISOOE - Intensity of Significant Others’ Occupational Expectations LEA - Level of Educational Aspiration LOA. - Level of Occupational Aspiration -98- Figure Two Inferred Causal Chains MLSOHE Sex LOA 3053 'Residence ISOOB A line from one variable to another indicates that the evidence presented in this thesis does not refute a causal relationship between them. See Figure l for a list of abbreviations used in this figure. _ 99 _ cational and occupational aspiration of the reSpondents. However, it was found to be related to only two of the "self-other" variables; the levels of educational and oc- cupational expectation attributed to perceived signifi- cant others. Socio-economic status was not found to be significantly related to the number of perceived signi- ficant others and the perceived intensities of their edu- cational and occupational expectations of the individual. Given that socio-economic status and levels of educa- tional and occupational aSpiration are related, it would appear that only two of the "self-other" variables em- ployed in the present analysis may be seen as mediating the observed relationship between location in the class structure and educational and occupational goal-setting. Residence. Previous research has shown no relation- ship between place of residence and levels of educatio- nal and occupational aSpiration for adolescents who are oriented to the nonfarm occupational structure. The present research lends support to these findings. Place of residence was found to be related to two of the five "self-other" variables; number of perceived sig- nificant others (nonfarm reSpondents had more), and per- ceived intensity of significant others' educational ex- pectations of the individual (significant others of non- farm reSpondents were perceived to hold their expecta- tions with greater intensity). Perceived intensity of - lOO - occupational expectations and the levels of the expec- tations of significant others with regard to educatio- nal and occupational achievement were not found to dif- fer significantly for farm and nonfarm youth. Farm boys who planned to enter farming were found to have more perceived significant others than other farm youth, and these "others" were perceived to have expec- tations of their educational and occupational achievement which were lower than those of either of the other groups. Farm boys who planned to enter farming also perceived their significant others to hold their expectations with egard to educational and occupational achievement with greater intensity than did farm youth who were oriented to the nonfarm occupational structure. The similarity of farm-oriented boys to nonfarm youth in their percep- tions of certain aSpects of the self-other complex will be discussed in more detail in the next chapter. Sex. No significant differences were found in the le- vels of the two sexes' educational and occupational aSpira- tions. There was a slight tendency for males to aSpire to higher educational goals and for females to aSpire to higher occupational goals, but the diffe ences were not significant. Sex was found to be related to the number of perceived significant others (females higher), and the others' expectations with regard to educational and occu— pational achievement (males higher). A slight, but not - lOl - significant, difference was found between males and fe- males in their perceptions of the intensities with which significant others were perceived to hold their expecta- tions with regard to educational and occupational achie- vement (females perceived greater intensity). These findings will be analyzed in the next chapter. Self—other Variables and Orientations to Action. Number of Perceived Significant Others. The number of perceived significant others was found to be modera- tely related to levels of educational aSpiration, in a positive direction. The differences were significant at the .05 level, and the hypothesis was accepted. A simi- lar relationship was found between the number of per- ceived significant others and levels of occupational as- piration. The differences, however, were not significant, and the hypothesis was rejected. Level of Perceived Significant Others' Expectations with Regard to Educational and Occupational Achie ement. A strong positive relationship was found between the res- pondents' perceptions of their significant others' eXpec- tations with regard to level of educational and occupatio- nal achievement and the level of the educational and oc- cupational goals that they set for themselves. Perceived Intensities of Significant Others' Expec- tations with Regard to Educational and Occupational Achie- vement. Neither of these variables was found to be sig- - 102 - nificantly related to levels of educational and occu- pational aspiration. However, there was a non—signi- ficant tendency for those who perceived their signifi- cant others to hold their expectations with regard to edu- cational achievement with low intensity to set higher goals for themselves. Level of Educational ASpiration. If the results are viewed from a perSpective which is the reverse of that used heretofore, level of educational aSpiration appears to be influenced by both number of perceived significant others and the levels of their expectations with regard to educational achievement. Level of Occupational ASpiration. Level of occupa- tional aSpiration appears to be influenced by the levels of perceived significant others' expectations with re- gard to occupational achievement. Number of Perceived Significant Others. Number of significant others appears to be influenced by residence and sex. Nonfarm residents were found to have more per- ceived significant others than were farm residents, where both were oriented to the nonfarm occupational structure. Females were found to have more perceived significant others than were males. Levels of PerceiVed Significant Others' Expectations with regard to Educational Achievement. This variable appears to be influenced by socio-economic status and - 103 _ sex. There appears to be an inverse relationship be- tween the levels of others' educational eXpectations and the respondents' socio-economic status. Also, males tend to perceive their significant others to have higher expectations of them with regard to educational achieve- ment than do females. Levels of Perceived Significant Others' Expectations with regard to Occupational Achievement. Socio-economic status and sex both appear to influence this variable in the same way that they influence levels of significant others' educational expectations. Perceived Intensity of Significant Others' Educa- tional Expectations. This variable is related only to residence. For adolescents who are oriented to the non- farm OCCUpational structure, farm boys perceive their significant others to hold their expectations more inten- sely than do nonfarm boys. Perceived Intensity of Significant Others' Expecta- tions with regard to Occupational Achievement. This va- riable was not related to any other studied in this the- sis. Summary. In this chapter, the data were presented, and the hy- potheses were tested. Conclusions were then drawn on the basis of the empirical evidence. In Chapter Four, the findings will be discussed, and their theoretical meaning -104- will be explored. CHAPTER IV DISCUSSION Introduction The task of the present chapter is to bring the research findings to bear upon the theoretical rationale presented in the first chapter. It will be recalled that there were two sets of hypotheses; one dealing with location in the social structure and the self-other complex, and the other dealing with the self- other complex and levels of educational and occupational as- piration. Each set of findings will be analyzed as a unit, and the chapter will conclude with an over-view of the problem and the significance of this thesis. Brief Summary of the Theoretical Rationale In the first chapter, it was suggested that the self-other complex mediates the relationship between the location of adolescents in the social structure and their levels of educa- tional and occupational aspiration. By linking these three sets of variables empirically, it was hoped that some light might be shed upon the operation of one mechanism by which location in the social structure influences attitude formation. Social scientists have long recognized that the kinds of norms to which an individual is exposed are a function of his location in the social structure. Moreover, the probability that he will internalize a particular set of norms may be seen to depend upon predispositions which are linked to his past and present "place in society." The kinds of interpersonal environ- - 105 - -106- ments within which men act are what is meant here by their "locations in the social structure." The interpersonal environments of adolescents may be seen to vary considerably in the extent to which they incorporate and reinforce those values which are dominant in the larger society. In the present case, high educational and occupational achievement is viewed as a dominant value orientation in our society. It seems entirely plausible to us that the child of migrant laborers will not be exposed to the same set of values with regard to achievement in education and the world of work as will the child of college professors. One finds himself in some sense "on the fringe of society," while the other is re- lentlessly exposed to the value of high educational and occupa- tional achievement. Adolescents are neither equally exposed to the achievement norm (insofar as educational and occupational behavior is concerned), nor are they equally rewarded by their significant others for the internalization of high educational and occupational goals. In addition to differences in the amount of exposure to the "American" value system and in the extent to which commitment to this value system is reinforced, the interpersonal environments of adolescents may be seen to vary tremendously in the facilities that they afford for high educational and occupational achievement. Such facilities include knowledge about educational and occupational alternatives and requirements that they make upon the individual, _ 107 - the means by which such alternatives may be exploited, and the financial and social support to do so. That location in the social structure affects the "richness" of the individual's inter- personal environment in terms of the extent to which it stimulates, reinforces, and facilitates high educational and occupational achievement is obvious. For present purposes, the complex of self-other relation- ships is taken to be the most important aspect of the individual's interpersonal environment. The self-other complex is believed to be important because theoretical considerations and previous research suggest that it is a major determinant of the individual's behavior. The individual tends to internalize the norms to which he is exposed selectively. His attitudes are significantly in- fluenced by the expectations of those whose opinions "count" for him. The conception of the self-other complex employed here in- corporates exposure to norms, reinforcement of normative orienta- tions, and facilitation; though the latter is incorporated to a much lesser extent. While the conception is used in this fashion, no claim is made that it accounts for all of the interpersonal factors which influence attitude formation. Location in the Social Structure and the Complex ofISelf-Other Relationships In Chapter One, hypotheses were formulated about the com- parative richness of the self-other complexes of adolescents variously located in the social structure. It was expected that farm boys oriented to farm occupations, lower-class youth, and -108- females would typically have fewer significant others than would youth oriented to nonfarm occupations, middle and upper class youth, and males, respectively. Likewise, the three groups mentioned first were expected to have significant others whose expectations with regard to their educational and occupa- tional achievement were lower than those of the significant others of the latter groups of respondents. The same was ex- pected of the intensities with which significant others were perceived to hold their expectations of achievement. This adds up to the argument that the self-other complexes of the groups mentioned first are relatively "impoverished" in terms of the stimuli, reinforcement, and facilities that their significant others provide for educational and occupational achievement. Generally, the findings of the present study appear to support the hypothesis that location in the social structure influences the nature of the inter-personal forces which impinge upon educational and occupational goal formation. However, the contention that certain locations in the social structure are coupled with "impoverished" self-other complexes, while the self- other complexes of others are relatively more favorably endowed, appears to be only partially true. These conclusions will be examined in terms of each of the independent variables. A. Socio-economic Status and the Self-Other Complex. The data on socio-economic status and the self-other complex reveal no significant differences between socio-economic groups in numbers of perceived significant others or in the intensities _ 109 _ with which they hold their expectations in regard to educational and occupational achievement. It appears that, insofar as the self-other complex mediates the relationship between socio- economic status and levels of educational and occupational as- piration, the most significant aspect of its mediating influence lies in the kinds of norms inculcated into the individual by his significant other. In Chapter One, significant others were viewed as potential channels for the transmission of societal values and information about education and the world of work to the individual. They were also believed to provide resources upon which the individual could draw to sustain and act out his educational and occupational aspirations. According to the rationale presented in the first chapter, the formation and maintenance of self-other relationships creates channels for the socialization of societal values with re- gard to educational and occupational achievement. The findings on socio-economic status and the self-other complex make it necessary to qualify the original rationale in certain respects. While the three socio-economic groups were not found to differ significantly in numbers of perceived significant others, the kinds of values implied by the educational and occupa- tional expectations of these others do differ significantly. It would be erroneous to assume that the significant others of a lower class youth are necessarily equivalent to those of an upper class - 110 - individual in terms of the extent to which they act as agents for the socialization of the dominant values of the society with respect to educational and occupational achievement. Rather, it is more likely that the significant others of an adolescent located at a particular level in the socio-economic hierarchy tend to convey to him the educational and occupational values which are dominant among groups located within a narrow range of socio- economic strata similar to his own. The lack of status homogeneity among the significant others perceived by many individuals may account for some of the variance in the relationship between socio-economic status and levels of educational and occupational aspiration. It appears that a self-other relationship does not automatically imply the existence of a channel for the transmission of dominant American values with respect to educational and occupational achievement. With the exception of the differential reinforcement that significant others provide for commitment to the norms implied by their expectations (no significant differences among socio-economic groups), the extent to which significant others provide facilities for the individual to act out his educational and occupational as- pirations were not directly studied. However, the writer would suggest that the significant others of upper and lower class youth do differ greatly in the total facilities that they provide for achievement. B. Residence and the Self—Other Complex. - lll - The data on the relationship between place of residence and the self-other complex reveal a rather interesting pattern, though those parts of the interpretation of it presented here which deal with boys planning_to farm must be viewed as highly speculative because of the small numbers of aspirants to farm occupations. It will be recalled that adolescents oriented to the nonfarm occupational structure did not differ significantly in the levels of their perceived significant others' expectations with regard to their educational and occupational achievement. However, there were significant differences between farm and nonfarm youth (who are oriented to the nonfarm occupational structure) in numbers of perceived significant others and in the intensity of their expectations with regard to educational achieve- ment. There were also slight, but not significant, differences in the intensity with which occupational expectations were held. On both dimensions, farm youth oriented to the nonfarm occupational structure appeared to perceive less support from their significant others than did farm boys who planned to enter farming. The levels of the perceived expectations with regard to educational and occupational achievement of the significant others of farm boys who planned to enter farming were much lower than were those of nonfarm-oriented farm youth. Moreover, it appears that the signi- ficant others of farm boys were perceived to hold their expectations with greater intensity. It is clear that youth who are oriented to farm occupations are impinged upon by different sets of social norms than are youth - 112 - who are oriented to nonfarm occupations. It is also clear that significant others are agents for the socialization of these Quite different sets of norms. However, adolescents who are oriented to occupational roles similar to those of the members of the residence groups of which they are members (nonfarm youth oriented to the farm occupational structure and farm youth oriented to the farm occupational structure) differ significantly from those whose orientations are to roles other than those customary in their own membership groups. Farm youth who are oriented to the nonfarm occupational structure may thus be viewed as occupants of marginal positions. They aspire to educational and occupational goals other than those inculcated by their own membership groups, and are in a period of transition from rural to urban styles of life. Bearing in mind the outgroup nature of their orientation, it is not difficult to under- stand why such individuals should perceive themselves to have fewer significant others and less social reinforcement of their educational choices than other youth. Presumably, the agents of socialization who led them to internalize the norms of the larger society with regard to educational, and to a lesser extent occupational, achieve- ment did not provide support comparable to that provided by the significant others of youth oriented to the occupational roles pre- valent in their own residential groups. Farm youth oriented to the nonfarm occupational structure are _ 113 _ thus partially cut off from the knowledge, skills, and to some extent, the support, which farm-oriented farm youth and nonfarm youth find readily available in their everyday relationships with others. It is true that teachers, guidance counsellors, religious workers and others, who have obtained advanced educational training and are familiar with the urban world of work, are accessible to many farm youth. However, the degree of their involvement with farm youth does not appear to be sufficient to give the latter kinds of support, either social or financial, that one's family and "immediate" others can give him. anfarm-oriented farm youth appear in many cases to be unable to find the kinds of support that other youths find for their educational and occupational as- pirations. The interpretation of the present findings on residence and the self-other complex is highly speculative, mainly because of the inadequate size of the farm-oriented farm sample. However, the suggested explanation appears to account for the results. Whether it will be borne out by further research remains to be seen. C. Sex and the Self-Other Complex. The findings on sex and the self—other complex are perhaps less readily understandable than those on any other set of relation- ships studied here. In the first chapter of this thesis, it was argued that the problem of educational and occupational decision- making is less crucial for female than for male adolescents. Thus, - 114 - it was expected that females would perceive themselves to have fewer significant others than would males. It was also expected that the significant others of females would be perceived as holding their expectations with regard to educational and occupational achievement with less intensity than would those of males. Traditional American conceptions of the educational and occupational achievement of women have placed them in a position of subordinance to males. Generally, women have been expected to aspire to a relatively narrow range of medium-prestige "women's occupations." Thus, it was expected that women would perceive their significant others to have expectations with regard to ed- ucational and occupational achievement which would be, on the average, lower than those of the significant others of men. The results of the present investigation show a significant relationship between sex and numbers of perceived significant others, but the direction of this relationship is opposite to that predicted. The meaning of this finding in terms of the the- oretical rationale presented for the hypothesis is not clear. It could be argued that the region from which the sample was selected is atypical in that its culture places unexpected emphasis upon the activities and problems of adolescent females. Indeed, one observer has suggested that this appears to be the case.50 On the basis of the present data, it is possible to say that females 50A. O. Haller, in conversation with the writer, Spring Term, 1965, Michigan State University. _ 115 _ in our sample have atypically high levels of educational and occupational aspirations. It will be recalled that the results of the present research failed to support the assumption that levels of educational and occupational aspiration of boys would be significantly higher than those of girls. These findings suggest that there may indeed be a regional sub-cultural varia- tion which can account both for these results and the higher number of significant others perceived by females. If such a variation does exist, it is not markedly evident in the norms conveyed to the individual by his significant others. A significant relationship, in the direction predicted, was found between sex and the levels of perceived significant others' ex- pectations with regard to educational and occupational achievement. In the latter case, the differences were closely in line with what had been expected; females were concentrated in the middle ex- pectation category, and males were polarized between high and low categories. Hewever, in the case of educational expectations, there is some evidence of changing American values in regard to the place of women in the social structure. While males were polarized be— tween high and low expectation categories, females were relatively equally distributed among the three categories. It is possible that the females in our sample are receiving some encouragement to challenge traditional expectations of their educational achievement, but this does not hold true for their occupational achievement. Because of the highly limited nature of the evidence, however, these -116- hypotheses must be considered to be speculative. No significant relationships were found between sex and the intensities with which significant others are perceived to hold their expectations with regard to educational and occupational achievement. However, in both cases the direction of the differences is such that they might be construed as lending limited support to the possibility that females find more support from their signifi- cant others for their aspirations than do males. Taken alone, the findings on sex and intensity of expectation are consistent with most of the findings on the intensity of expectations discussed elsewhere in this thesis. In general, no significant relationships have been found between intensity of expectations and other variables. Only two of the five hypotheses presented in the first chapter on the relationships between sex and the self-other complex were supported by the results. The results on sex and number of per- ceived significant others disconfirmed the hypothesized direction of the relationship, and a possible explanation for this finding was prOposed. It was found to be consistent with the results on sex and levels of educational and occupational aspiration. Intensity of expectation was not found to be significantly related to sex. The perceived levels of the expectations of others were found to follow the hypothesized pattern rather closely. This general problem area is one which will require much more investigation before any well-documented explanations can be provided for the perplexing data observed here. _ 117 _ The Complex of Self-Other Relationships and Levels of Educational and Occupational Aspiration In the first chapter of this thesis, significant others were conceived to be ...conveyors of societal values and the know- ledge and skills necessary for the achievement of the goals implied by these values.51 The richness of the individual's self-other complex was conceived to be a determinant of the levels of his educational and occupa- tional aspirations. Relatively speaking, individuals who per- ceived themselves to have many significant others who held high expectations of their achievement with high intensity were ex- pected to set higher educational and occupational goals for themselves than were individuals with few significant others who held low expectations with low intensity. Thus, the number of perceived significant others, the levels of their expectations with regard to educational and occupational achievement, and the intensities with which these expectations are held were taken to be dimensions of the "richness" of the self-other complex. In this section, the findings on the relationships between these self-other variables and the levels of educational and occupational aspirational aspiration will be examined. The findings on the relationship between the number of per- ceived significant others and the individual's levels of educational and occupational aspiration are not consistent with one another. At the .05 level of significance, number of perceived significant SlSee page ll. -118- others and level of educational aspiration were found to be related, but no significant relationship was found between number of perceived significant others and level of occupational aspiration. These findings are, however, somewhat deceptive. Actually, the x2 for number of perceived significant others and level of educational aspiration is 8.58, while that of number of perceived significant others and level of occupational as- piration is 7.49. The X2 for the .05 level of significance when the direction is predicted is 7.7, given four degrees of freedom. Because the evidence is somewhat equivocal, it may be that there does exist a positive relationship between number of perceived significant others and the individual's levels of educational and occupational aspiration. Additional data will be necessanz to substantiate this hypothesis, particularly with respect to level of occupational aspiration. The findings on the levels of perceived expectations of sig- nificant others with regard to educational and occupational achieve- ment and the levels of educational and occupational aspiration of the individual clearly support the hypotheses tested. In both cases, the pattern is clearcut, and there is every reason to be- lieve that these sets of variables are closely related. Whether the levels of perceived significant others' expectations with regard to educational and occupational achievement constitute determinants of the individual's levels of educational and occupational aspira- tion, or whether the individual projects his own goals into his per- _ 119 _ ceptions of his relations with his significant others cannot be known from the present data. However, it is likely that both factors enter into the results to some extent. In this thesis, it has been held that the expectations of others are the most important factor. The findings on the relationships between the intensities with which significant others hold their expectations of the individual with regard to educational and occupational achieve- ment and his levels of educational and occupational aspiration are consistent with previous results on the intensity variable. In only one case (where intensity of expectation might provide crucial support) was intensity of expectation found to be signi- ficantly related to another variable; that of residence. It does not appear that intensity of expectations, taken alone, has much effect upon levels of aspiration, except where support for the individual's aspirations is in short supply. In the interpersonal environment, intensity of expectations is associated with several other dimensions of the self-other complex. It may be that the introduction of control variables, such as level of perceived significant others' expectations with regard to achievement, would reveal a rather different pattern of results. It appears to be reasonable to expect that two individuals, given identical numbers of significant others and levels of ex— pectation, would differ in their levels of educational and occupa- tional aspiration if one perceived his significant others to hold their expectations of him with great intensity while the other perceived them to hold their expectations with low intensity. Such - 120 - an approach might account for the unexpected results obtained in the present case. It is difficult to believe that intensity of expectations is entirely unrelated to levels of aspiration. The numbers of perceived significant others and the le- vels of their expectations with regard to educational achieve- ment were seen to be related to the individual's levels of ed— ucational aspiration. The level of perceived significant others' occupational expectations of the individual, but not the number of perceived significant others, was found to be related to level of occupational aspiration. Intensity of expectations was found to be unrelated to either levels of educational or occupational aspiration. Explanations for the results were proposed, and the need for further data became quite evident. Generally, the self-other complex appears to be related to the formation of the individual's educational and occupational goals. However, not all of its dimensions appear to be equally important. Summary In Chapter Pour, the results of an empirical study of the relationships between the complex of self-other relationships, location in the social structure, and levels of educational and occupational aspiration were brought to bear upon the rationale presented in Chapter One for the existence of such relationships. In the last chapter, the research will be summarized, some of its limitations will be pointed out, and problems for further research will be suggested. CHAPTER V Summary Introduction In this chapter, the research will be summarized, some of its limitations will be specified, and problems for further research will be suggested. Summary of the Research An attempt has been made in this thesis to determine the nature and extent of possible relationships between: (1) location in the social structure, ‘(2) the complex of self-other relationships, and (3) levels of educational and occupational aspiration. The first of these sets includes socio-economic status, sex, and residence. The second includes number of perceived signi- ficant others and the levels and perceived intensity of their educational and occupational expectations for the youth. It also includes the specificity and degree of convergence among the expectations held for the youth's educational and occupational achievement. The third, which is self-explanatory, includes the youths' levels of educational and occupational aspirations. A major objective of the present study was that of conceptualizing and operationalizing the second of these sets of variables in a more 50phisticated manner than had previously been done. While the present study is suggestive, it does not fully realize this objective. — 121 - - 122 - Significant relationships were found between many, but not all, aspects of location in the social structure, the complex of self-other relationships, and levels of educational and occupa- tional aspiration. The data on numbers of perceived significant others and levels of educational and occupational aspiration were not consistent. Number of significant others was not found to be related to socio-economic status, though it was significantly related to residence and sex. The levels of perceived significant others' expectations of the individual with regard to educational and occupational achievement were consistently related to both social structural and aspiration variables. It became apparent that intensity of expectations, when taken alone, was not signi- ficantly related to social structural and aspiration variables, except under certain limited conditions. Limitations of the Study The present study has limitations, some of which are painfully apparent. It was an exploratory effort, and at many points firm guidelines for decision-making were not available. As a result, many mistakes were made, some of which could not be rectified. Hopefully, others who venture into the same area of study will not repeat these mistakes. It seems wise to point out some of the limitations of the present work, in order that unjustified con- clusions will be averted. _ 123 _ Among the limitations of the present work are the following: (1) the size of the sample is very small, and repre- sents a single grade in a particular school. The non-student population of the same age is not re- presented at all. (2) the study does not exhaust or even adequately conceptualize the dimensions and measures of the self-other complex. Indeed, it barely scratches the surface of this important and complex pheno- menon. (3) the methods of treating the data on the educa- tional and occupational expectations of others are not able to render certain kinds of expecta- tions comparable to others. (4) many of the suggested explanations of results are highly Speculative, rather than firmly grounded in empirical findings. (5) the statistical methods used are extremely ele- Amentary, while the phenomena which are objects of analysis are highly complex, and need to be treated on that level. The size of the present sample precluded even the use of control variables. If the present study has any value at all, it will be in raising problems worthy of further investigation. It is to a consideration of these that we now turn. Problems for Further Research A central and highly significant problem for furthe re- search is that of further probing the nature of the self-other complex, and its relationship to other social structural and psychological phenomena. Before any really useful work can be done, an adequate conceptual scheme and useful measures of its - 124 - dimensions must be deveIOped. This is a matter of successive approximation, rather than an all-or-nothing effort. With continued research, crude approaches become more sophisticated, and unfruitful approaches are eliminated. A single conceptual scheme and particular measures will probably not be adequate for every research objective. However, past efforts in the same or similar areas suggest where to begin looking. A second problem for research follows from the previously mentioned complexity of the phenomenon of taking others into account in ordering one's behavior. Methods which take account of the interrelations among various aspects of the self-other complex need to be applied to its analysis. It may be that particular configurations of attributes operate quite differently from those attributes treated in an isolated fashion. For ex- ample, high intensity of educational expectations might be crucial when the individual perceived himself to have few signi- ficant others who hold high levels of expectations. However, it might be less important if the individual's significant others are numerous and their levels of expectation are low. In the two cases, the effects of a given degree of intensity might be different. A third problem for further research centers around the possibilities of discrepancies among the actual expectations of others and the individual's perceptions of these expectations. While some interesting work has been done on this problem, much has yet _ 125 _ 52 The validity of the present approach might be to be done. considerably clarified by research of this nature, even if done on a very small scale. A fourth problem for research is the analysis of the develop- ment of the self-other complex and its changing relationships to orientation to action. Thus far, only cross-sectional analyses of high school students have been undertaken. The findings of the present research need to be explored in greater depth. Important, but perplexing, results need to be clarified by further investigation. Conclusion On the positive side, most social psychologists would agree that, in general, one's status locations—ascribed and/or achieved- in the social structure influence the expectations others have for one's behavior and that the expectations significant others have for one in a certain sphere of action influence one's aspira- tions for his own behavior in that sphere. The associational statistics used to interpret non-experimental data such as our own are not adequate to confirm this thinking. Yet the tests pre- sented here were sufficient to reject it if in fact it was en- tirely inaccurate, and they did not. Thus, the results indicate the probable fruitfulness of further research on location in the social structure, expectations of significant others, and levels of educational and occupational aspiration. 52For example, Leo G. Reeder, George A. Donahue and Arthur Biblarz, "Conceptions of Self and Others," American Journal of Sociology, 1960, V01. 66, pp. l53-159. - 126 - REFERENCES Lee G. Burchinal, Career Choices in a Changing Society,L Minnesota Agricultural Experiment Station, North Central Regional Publication Number 142, 11/1962. D. W. Chapman and John Volkman, "A Social Determinant of the Level of Aspiration," in Readings in Social Psychology, eds., Eleanor E. Maccoby, Theodore M. Newcomb, and Eugene L. Hartley, (New York: Henry Holt, 1958), pp. 281-290. Carol Couch and John Murray, "Significant Others and Evalua- tion," Sociometry, (27, 1964), pp. 502-509. Robert Danley and Charles Ramsey, Standardization and Appli- cation of a Level-of-Living Scale for Farm and Nonfarm Families, Cornell Agricultural Experiment Station, Memori ‘NW—‘er 362 , 1959 . Anthony Diekema, "Level of Occupational Aspiration, Perform- ance in College, and Facilitation: a preliminary test of certain postulates concerning the relationship between at- titudes and behavior," (unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Sociology, Michigan State University, 1965). S. M. Eisenstadt, "Reference Group Behavior and Social Integ- ration: An Exploratory Study," American Sociological Re- view, (19, 1954), pp. 175-185. Neal Gross, Ward Mason, and Alexander McEachern, Explorations in Role Analysis: Studies of the School Superintendency Role, (New York: Wiley and Sons, 1958). A. O. Haller, "Educational and Occupational Choices of Farm Youth," National Committee for Children and Ybuth, 11/1963. ."Planning to Farm: A Social Psychological Inter- pretation," Social Forces, (37, 1959), pp. 263-268. ."The Occupational Achievement Process of Farm- Reared Youth in Urban-Industrial Society," Rural Sociology, (25, 1960), pp. 321-3330 , and Charles Butterworth, "Peer Influences on Le- vels of Occupational and Educational Aspiration," Social Forces, (38, 1960), pp. 289-295. , and Irwin Miller, The Occupational Aspiration ScaIe: theory, structure and correlates, Michigan Agricul- tural Experiment Station, Technical Bulletin Number 288, 1963. _ 127 _ and William Sewell, "Farm Residence and Levels of Educational and Occupational Aspiration," American Jour- nal of Sociology, (62, 1957), pp. 407-411. and Carole Wolff, "Personality Orientations of Farm, Village and Urban Boys," Rural Sociology, (27, 1962), pp. 275-293. Robert Herriot, "Some Social Determinants of Educational Aspirations," Harvard Educational Review, (33, 1963), pp. 1.57-177 o Herbert Hyman, "The Value Systems of Different Classes: A Social Psychological Contribution to the Analysis of Stratification," in Class, Status and Power, eds., Rein- hard Bendix and Seymour Lipset, (New York: Free Press, 1964), pp. 426-442. John Kinch, "A Formalized Theory of the Self-Concept," American Journal of Sociology, (58, 1963), pp. 481-486. Kurt B. Mayer, Class and Society, (New York: Random House, 1955), rev. ed., pp. 43-54. Robert Merton, "Continuities in the Theory of Reference Groups and Social Structure," in Robert Merton, Social Theory and Social Structure, (New Yerk: Free Press, 1957), pp. 281-386. Delbert Miller and William Form, Industrial Sociology, (New York: Harper and Brothers, 1931), pp. 521-5222 Irwin Miller and A. O. Haller, "A Measure of Level of Occu- pational Aspiration," Personnel and Guidance Journalp (43, 1964), pp. 448-455. Prank Miyamoto and Sanford Dornbusch, "A Test of the Inter- actionist Hypotheses of Self-Conception," American Jour- nal of Sociology, (61, 1956), pp. 399-403. Theordore Newcomb, "Attitude Development as a Function of Reference Groups: The Bennington Study," in the (Read- ings in Social Psychology,) Eleanor Maccoby, Theodore Newcomb, and EigenefiHartley, (New York: Henry Holt, 1958), pp. 265-275. Leo G. Reeder, George A. Donahue and Arthur Biblarz, "Con- ceptions of Self and Others," American Journal of Socio- logy, 9/1960, Vol. 66, pp. 153-159. Albert Reiss, Occupations and Social Status, (New York: Free Press, 1961). William Sewell, A. O. Haller, and Murray Straus, "Social Status and Educational and Occupational Aspirations," American Journal of Sociology, (62, 1957), pp. 407-411. Muzafer Sherif and Carolyn Sherif, Reference Groups, (New York: Harper and Row, 1964). Walter Slocum, "The Influence of Peer-Group Culture on the Educational Aspirations of Rural High School Students," Department of Sociology and Anthropology, Washington State University, (Pullman, Washington: unpublished paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Rural So- ciological Society, Chicago, August, 1965). Robin Williams, American Society: A Sociological Interpre- tationz (New York: Alfred Knopf; 1960). Grant Youmans, The Educational Attainment and Future Plans of Kentucky Rural Youth, KentuCky Agricultural Experi- ment Station Bulletih Number 664, 1959. G. U. Yule and M. G. Kendall, An Introduction to the Theory of Statistics, (London: Charles Griffen andiCBmpany, 1948), 13th ea., rev., _ 129 _ Appendix One The Nature of the Sample and its Distribution onithe Variables Appendix One The Nature of the Sample and its Distribution_on the Variables The sample consisted of a tenth grade class in a com- prehensive high school located in the county seat of a rural Michigan County, about 20 miles southwest of Lan- sing, Michigan. The total school pOpulation (grades nine through twelve inclusive) was 950 students, of whom 239 were in the tenth grade. Of the 239, approximately 131 were females, and 108 were males. The final N used in most of the tables presented in the thesis was 179. Of these, 86 were males, and 93 were females. The relatively small final N is due to the fact that only data from respondents who had com- pleted all of the questionnaires were included. Occas- ionally, lack of information and/or coding problems de- creased the size of the sample used in some tables. The manner in which the distribution of the sample was manipulated to yield categories of equal size was discussed in Chapter Two. The cutting points and dis- tribution of the sample on all of the variables will be presented here. Variable Number Range of Scores Sex: male 86 none female 93 none Residence: nonfarm resident and nonfarm plans 114 none -130- -131- nonfarm resident and farm plans 1 none nonfarm resident and no plans 23 none farm resident and nonfarm plans 29 none farm resident and farm plans 5 none farm resident and no plans 6 none residence unknown 1 none Socio-economic Status: low 76 OO-08 medium 70 09-10 high 31 11-12 no answer 2 none Number of Significant Others: low 70 0-3 medium 62 4-5 high 47 6-12 Level of Significant Others' Educa- tional EXpectations of Ego: low 51 00-33 medium 40 38-69 high 68 70-77 no answer or not codable 20 none Level of Significant Others' Occu- pational Expectations of Ego: low 52 00-69 medium “6 70‘75 high 54 76-93 no answer or not codable 27 none Intensity of Significant Others' Edu- cational Expectations of Ego: low 53 18-40 medium 70 12-17 high 56 01-11 Intensity of Significant Others' Oc- cupational Expectations of Ego: low 69 22-90 medium 57 17-21 high 53 01-16 Educational ASpiration Score: low 59 1 yr. of col- lege or less medium 44 2-3 yrs. of college high 70 4 yrs.cn7col- lege - 132 _ no answer Occupational Aspiration Score: low medium high 61 61 57 none 12-32 33-45 46-62 -133... Appendix Two The Questionnaires ...J/ - -.. Lw muu‘;-.- ..e I--- -1314- MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY DEPARTMENT OF SOCIOLOGY AND ANTHROPOIDGY mum r. Rushby 5/26/64 Dear Student : This survey is an attempt to get a better picture of some of the problems you young pcOpla face in choosing your life s occupation, and the attitudes you have toward these problems. By carefully filling out this questionnaire you will help us to gain a better understanding of how these problems look from where you stand. This information will be of great value in developing counsel- ling programs for high school youth. For this reason we are anxious to have you answer the questions on this form to the best of your ability. W: l. Read each item carefully. Answer to the best of your knowledge. 2. WW. Where there are brackets, fill in an "X". Be sure that your "x" is squarely in the proper bracket before your choice. Where only a space is left, enter the word or figures called for. If you cannot answer the question, write "I do not know." 3. There are several questions which refer to your parents. If for any reason you are not living with your parents, answer for the person who acts as your parent or guardian. 4. If you have any cement to make, if you did not understand any item, if your attitudes differ from those given, or if you have problems which we failed to mention, write about them on the margin close to the items near them in meaning. L W l.Hynameis 2. My sex is: ( ) male ( ) female 3. My age (to nearest birthday) is: . The date of my birth was Month Day Year 4. I live: on a farm. ) ) in the open country, but not on a farm. ) in a village under 2,500. - - -AA -‘ AAA 5AA“ *- 'V l 2. II. AEOUT MY EDUCATIONAL PLANS The program that I am following in high school is: ( ) general ( ) vocational ( ) college preparatory ( ) business I am HOPING to: ( ) leave school before finishing 10th grade. ( ) finish 10th grade. ( ) finish llth grade. ( ) finish high school. I will probably: ( ) leave school before finishing 10th grade. ( ) finish 10th grade. ( ) finish llth grade. ( ) finish high school. Regarding my plans for education after I leave high school: ( ) I plan to get more education after high school. ( ) I do not plan to get more education after high school. IF PLANNING TO GET MORE EDUCATION: 1. The number of years of education I hOpe to get after high school is: ( ) one year or less. two years or less. three years. four years. five or six years. seven or more years. AAA/\A 2. The nu of years I really eXpect to get after high school is: nmer ( ) one year or less. ( ) two years or less. ( ) three years. ( ) four years. ( ) five or six years. ( ) seven or more years. 3. The names and locations of schools I am thinking about attending are: §3E970f School Location of School (1)_k_ _r (2)_*_ (3) 4. The courses of study I am thinking about are: (1) (2)__ (3) I“..‘ .. _ 5. As far as I know now, the highest degree I hope to earn is: none. associate's degree (two years)- bachelor's degree. master's degree. doctor’s degree other degree (specify) . AAAAAA VVVVVV 6. As far as I know now, I am.sure that I will earn the: none. associate's degree. bachelor's degree. master's degree. doctor's degree other degree (Specify) . AAAAAA vvvvvv ‘ 1.- III. ABOUT MY OCCUPATIONAL PLANS In The occupations which I have thought about going into are: (Indicate particular type) l. 2. 3. 4. i 2. The occupation I am HOPING to follow is: ° IL The occupation I WILL PROBABLY go into is: ° 4. In regard to my choice of an occupation: ( ) I feel sure that my mind is made up. ( ) I think that my mind is made up, but I am not sure. ( ) I have not made up my mind. 5. If {aware absolutely free to go into any kind of work I wanted, my choice wou be:___ . 6. The type of work I exPect to be doing when I am.30 years old is: _— O 7. If a person wants to do the things I want to do, he or she needs to complete (Amount of Schooling) IV. ABOUT MY FAMILY 1. My parents are: both living together. both dead. father is dead. mother is dead. divorced. separated. AAA/\AA VVVVVV 2. My mother: ( ) has no job outside the home. ( ) has a part-time job outside the home. ( ) has a full-time job outside the home. 3' My mother's occupation is: (or was, if dead or retired) (Specify the kind of Of work she does and not where she works.) h. . 4' My father's occupation is: (or was, if dead or retired) (Specify the kind of work he does and not where he works.) __..__ O IF FATHER IS A FARMER: My father is: ( ) owner ( ) renter ( ) laborer The number of acres my father Operates is: . 5* My father's education consisted of: less than 8 grades. 8 grades. 9-11 grades. 12 grades. some college. college degree. advanced degree. AAAAAAA less than 8 grades. ,, 8 grades. 9-ll grades. 12 grades. some college. college degree. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) 6. My mother's education consisted of: ) ) ) ) ) ) ) advanced degree. AAAAAAA VI. ABOUT MY PLANS FOR TH§_FUTU§§ Sometimes other peOple show interest in teenagers' educational and occupational plans, and talk to them about their plans. As far as you know, WHO are the peOple that have EXERESSED INTEREST LflbYOUR EDUCATIONAL AND OCCUPATIONAL PLANS? Please be sure you thought of everyone-even your parents and friends-other people, too. Egel free to use the next page if you need it. A. His or Her Name B. His or Her Occupation C. His or Her Relationj D. The farthest he E. How strongly does he F. Regarding my AG. How strongly does or class in school ship to Me (friend, or she wants me or she feel about you future occupa- he or she feel teacher, etc.) to 80 in SChOOl 8°in8 this far in tion, he or about you getting is: school: (1) very strong: she wants me to this job: 1y, (2) strongly, (3) be a: (1) very strongly, not too strongly. (2) strongly, (3) not too strongly. ...—.— _ sample: John Jones 12th grade W School friend Finish high school (1) very strongly farmer t (3) not too strongly \.\. " 1“:- \ \.\ VI. ABOUT MY PLANS FOR THE FUTURE (con't.) A. His or Her Name B. His or Her Occupation C. His or Her Relation- D. The farthest he E. How strongly does he F. Regarding my G. How strongly does or class in school ship to Me (friend, or she wants me or feel about you future occupa- he or she feel teacher, etc.) to go in school going this far in tion, he or about you getting is: school: (1) very strong- she wants me this job: 1y. (2) strongly. (3) to be a: (l)very strongly, not too strongly. (2) strongly, (3) not too strongly 6. 7. .i 8. l l i" 9. € ? Os ., I} f 1. 7' 3 5 2. g A? l { PLEASE BE SURE THAT YOU THOUGHT OF EVERYONE. CHECK TO BE SURE THAT YOU ANSWERED ALL OF THE QUESTIONS. IF YOU HAVE ANX QUESTIONS, RAISE YOUR.HAND. r___.: a OCCUPATIONAL ASPIRATION SCALE C .__w £1333 SET OF QUESTIONS CONCERNS YOUR INTEREST IN DIFFERENT KINDS OF JOBS. THERE EIGHT QUESTIONS. EACH ONE ASKS YOU TO CHOOSE ONE JOB OUT OF TEN PRESENTED. READ EACH QUESTION CAREFULLY. THEY ARE ALL DIFFERENT. ANSWER EACH ONE THE BEST YOU CAN. DON'T OMIT ANY. Question 1. Of the jobs listed in this question, which is the BEST ONE you are REALLY SURE YOU CAN GET when your SCHOOLING IS OVER? 1.1___ Lawyer 1-2___, __Welfare worker for a city government 1.3 United States representative in Congress 1.4___ Corporal in the Army 1.5‘_, United States Supreme Court Justice 1.6___ Night watchman l.7__, Sociologist 1-3_L, Policeman I.IO_‘ County agricultural agent Filling station attendant Question 2. Of the jobs listed in this question, which ONE would you choose if {guogggg FREE TO CHOOSE ANY of them you wished when your SCHOOLING 2-1__7 *”Member of the board of directors of a large corporation Undertaker Banker Machine Operator in a factory Physician (doctor) Clothes presser in a laundry Accountant for a large business Railroad conductor Railroad engineer Singer in a nightclub NNNNNNNNN 0 f3 Question 3. Of the jobs listed in this question, which is the BEST ONE you are REALLY SURE YOU CAN GET when your SCHOOLING IS OVER? 3.l__. Nuclear Physicist 3.2__g __Reporter for a daily neWSpaper 3-3___ ,_g County judge 3-4__. Barber 3.5_w State Governor 3.6_ Soda fountain clerk 3.7_h_ Biologist 3.&_# Mail Carrier 3.9___ Official of an international labor union 3.IQ__, Farm.hand Question 4. Of the jobs listed in this question, which ONE would you choose if you were FREE TO CHOOSE ANY of them you wished when your SCHOOLING IS OVER? Psychologist Manager of a small store in a city Head of a department in state government Clerk in a store Cabinet member in the federal government Janitor Musician in a symphony orchestra Carpenter __Radio announcer Coal miner bbJ-‘ff-‘fJ-‘bbb Syomlumymrb’wINo-d I I I Question 5. Question 6. Question 7. Question 8. Of the jobs listed in this question, which is the BEST ONE you are REALLY SURE YOU CAN HAVE by the time you are 30 YEARS OLD? 5.1 Civil engineer 5.2__ Bookkeeper 5.3 Minister or Priest 5.4 Streetcar motorman or city bus driver 5.5 Diplomat in the United States Foreign Service 5.6 Share crapper (one who owns no livestock or farm machinery, and does not manage the farm) 5.7___ Author of novels 5.8__, Plumber 5.9 New5paper columnist 5.lQ_‘ Taxi driver Of the jobs listed in this question, which ONE would you choose to have when you are 30 YEARS OLD, if you were FREE TO HAVE ANY of them you wished? I NH Airline pilot Insurance agent __Architect ___Milk route man Mayor of a large city Garbage collector Captain in the army Garage mechanic Owner-Operator of a printing ShOp Railroad section hand I I 0000600000 IxoiooI-uym'm'b to ['5 0f the Jobs listed in this question, which is the BEST ONE you are REALLY SURE YOU CAN HAVE by the time you are 30 YEARS OLD? 7-1___ Artist who paints pictures that are exhibited in galleries Travelling salesman for a wholesale concern Chemist Truck driver College professor Street sweeper Building contractor _Local official of a labor union Electrician Restaurant waiter O O O NVN‘JNNNVN O ['5 0f the jobs listed in this question, which ONE would you choose to have when you are 30 YEARS OLD, if you were FREE TO HAVE ANY of them you wished? .__Owner of a factory that employee about 100 people Playground director Dentist Lumberjack Scientist Shoeshiner Public school teacher Owner-operator of a lunch stand Trained machinist Dock worker a2a>a>a>gao>aaa>a>a= 23r>a3~WO\thquhara IO. _ lulAH- ‘A__A L ALLA ABOUT MY HOUSE Our house has inside faucets: ( ) yes ( ) no. Our house has an inside bathroom: ( ) yes ( ) no. Our house has both a tub and a shower: ( ) yes ( ) no. we have a pressure cooker: ( ) yes ( ) no. we have an electric sweeper (vacuum cleaner): ( ) yes ( ) no. Our house has electric clocks: ( ) yes ( ) no. Our car is a l963 model or newer: ( ) yes ( ) no. Our house has a telephone: ( ) yes ( ) no. Our house has a washing machine: ( ) yes ( ) no. If it does have a washing machine, does the machine have a wringer? (lye: ( )no. Our house has a combination washer-dryer: ( ) yes ( ) no ( ) i don't know O l .- I}. an: e e ' v ‘ e - h e c u I . .v‘e . x l a ' . e.- l. ..‘.._ - IhlB - Supplementary Questionnaire Department of Sociology William F. Rushby 1/5/65 Please answer the following questions. Do not leave any blank. Thank you. (i) Hy name is . About My Family (2) My father‘s education consisted of: ( ) less than 8th grade ( ) 8th grade ( ) 9th-llth grades ( ) l2th grade ( ) some college ( ) college degree ( ) advanced degree (3) My mother's education consisted of: ( ) less than 8th grade ( ) 8th grade ( ) 9th-llth grades ( ) l2th grade ( ) some college ( ) college degree ( ) advanced degree About Our House (4) Our house has a piano ( )yes ( )no (5) Out house ha. a basement with a concrete floor ( )yes ( )no (6) we own two or more cars ( )yes ( )no (7) we take four or more magazines ( )yes ( )no (8) we have a washing machine ( )yes ( )no Our washing machine has a wringer ( )yes ( )no A wringer looks like this -9’Cii?’ eh —142- Appendix Three Notes on Coding Appendix Three Notes on Coding This appendix contains brief notes on two coding deci- sions which are not otherwise reported in the thesis. Housewives In some cases, female respondents perceived their sig- nificant others to expect them to become housewives. In- sofar as a woman does become a housewife, she is not an active participant in the labor market, and has no oc- cupational role which can be ranked in the OCCUpational hierarchy. The expectations of "housewife" was therefore treated as uncodable in determining of the levels of sig- nificant others' occupational expectations. Non-formal'Education In determining the level of significant others' edu- cational eXpectations of the individual, only reSponses which could be ranked in terms of amount of formal edu- cation were included. It was impossible to find another system which would render non-academic reSponses (beauty school, mechanics' training, etc.) comparable to formal educational ones (A.B. degree, community college, high school diploma, etc.). Thus, the educational expecta- tions perceived by some reSpondents were not included in the data, and these reSpondents were dropped from the analysis. The highest codable reSponse was treated as the significant other's level of educational expectation. _ 1A3 _ -1Ml— Appendix Four The Coding Key _ 11p5 - MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY DERARTHENT OF SOCIOLOGY Card l.l Column No. l.l.l-2 l.I.3-5 l.I.6 1.107 I.l.8 '0109 William F. Rushby l/25/65 Questionnaire - Occupational Plans of Eaton County Youth (OPECY) Card identification -- two digit field (de) Ol-Card l.l (this card is punched Ol) OZ—Card I.2 03-Card l.3 nn-card l.n Person identification - 3df Sex (l-2) l-male Z-female Age in years to nearest birthday (l-3) l-thirteen years Z-fourteen years 3-fifteen years h—sixteen years S-seventeen years 6-eighteen years 7-nineteen years 8-twenty years 9-no answer Place of residence (l-h) l-on a farm Z-in the Open country, but not on a farm 3-in a village under 2,500 #-in a town of 2,500-I0,000 S-in a town of more than I0,000 6-no answer or "don‘t know Church membership (l-S) l-no Z-yes 3-no answer l.I.IO-II ‘0'012 l.I.l3 l.I.Ih - 11MB - Church preference (l-S) de Ol-"Christian" OZ-"Protestant" O3-lndependent Fundamentalism Oh-Sect I: Assembly of God Church of Christ Church of God Nazarene Pentecostal Trinity Holiness 05-Sect ll: Disciples of Christ Evangelical-Reformed Religious Society of Friends (Quaker) Salvation Army United Brethren 06-8aptist O7-Roman Catholic 08-Episc0pal OS-Lutheran lO-Hethodist ZO-Presbyterian 30-Christian Science h0-Congregational 50-Judaism 60-no answer or not codable Class in school (l-6) l-freshman 2-sophomore B-junior h-senior 5-no answer High school curriculum (ll-l) l-general Z-vocatlonal 3-college preparatory h-business S-no answer Educational aspiration (ll-2) l-leave school before finishing lOth grade Z-finish lOth grade 3-finish Ilth grade h-finish high school S-no answer l.I.IS l.I.I6 l.I.I7 l.I.I8 l.I.I9 l.I.ZO - 1lr7 _ Educational expectation (ll-3) I-leave school before finishing lOth grade Z-finish lOth grade 3-finish llth grade h—finish high school S-no answer Post-high school educational plans (II-h) l-more education Z-no more education 3-no answer Post-high school educational aSpiration (ll-h:l) l-none Z-one year or less 3-two years or less h-three years S-four years 6-five or six years 7-seven or more years 8-no answer Post-high school educational expectation (ll-h:2) l-none 2-one year or less 3-two years or less h-three years S-four years 6-five or six years 7-seven or more years 8-no answer Post-high school educational aspiration (ll-4:5) l-none 2-associate's degree 3-bachelor's degree h—master's degree S-doctor's degree 6-other degree 7-no answer Post-high school educational expectation (ii-hz6) I-none 2-associate's degree 3-bachelor's degree humaster's degree S-doctor's degree 6-other degree 7-no answer l.I.2I l.I.22-23 l.I.Zh-ZS I.l.26-27 l.I.Z8-29 l.I.30-3l l.I.32-33 i.l.3h-36 l.I.37-38 - IJMB - Number of different occupational choices (Ill-l) Duncan occupational prestige scbre: highest choice (ill-l) 2df 3h-thirty-four 35-thirty-five 96-ninety-six 99-no answer or not codable Duncan occupational prestige score: lowest choice (Ill-l) 2df See l.l.22-23 Duncan occupational prestige score: final choice occupational aspiration (Ill-2) 2df If undecided between two or more choices in 92, average the scores of the alternatives being considered. See l.I.22-23 Duncan occupational prestige score: final choice occupational expectation (Ill-3) 2df If gndecided between two or more choices in Q3. average the scores of the alterngtives beigg_considered. See l.I.22—23 Duncan occupational prestige score: free choice (Ill-5) 2df See l.l.22-23 Duncan occupational prestige score: mature choice (ill-6) 2df See l.l.22-23 Hean prestige level of occupational choices; average scores for all different occupational choices among (Ill-l,2,3,5,and 3) 3df 370-thirty-seven point zero (37.0) 970-ninety-seven point zero (97.0) 999-no answers on l.l.22-33 or not codable Type of occupational choice: final choice occupational aspiration (Ill-2) 2df Ol-professional, technical, or kindred worker 02-farmer or farm manager O3-manager, official, or prOprietor, excluding farm Oh-clerical or kindred worker l.I.39-h0 l.I.hI-QZ l.I.h3 l.I.hh l.l.h5 _ 1159 _ 05-sales worker 06-craftsman, foreman, or kindred worker 07-0perative or kindred worker O8-private household worker 09-farm laborer or foreman lO-laborer, except mine and fann 20-housewife, unpaid 30-service worker, excluding private household hO-no answer or not codable Type of occupational choice: final choice occupational expectation (Ill-3) 2df See l.I.37-38 Specificity of final occupational choice (Ill-3) 2df lD-no Specification of occupational goal: (”get ahead”, "go as far as i can”) 20-states goal in terms of general occupational categor- ies: ("going into banking”) 30-states goal in terms of specific occupation: ("become a bank teller“) hO-no answer or not codable Degree ofhprystallization of final occupational choice "l‘Bp i-completely uncrystallized: no final choice in (Q3) and no alternatives implied for (Q3) 2-almost uncrystallized: one or more choices in or implied by (Q3), and "I have not made up my mind" in (Qh) 3-almost crystallized: ”I think that my mind is made up, but I am not sure” in(Qh) li-completely crystallized: “i feel sure that my mind is made up" in (0k) 5- no answer to (Qh), but clearly not identifiable as "completely uncrystallized" in (Q3) Composition of nuclear family (IV-l) l-both parents living together 2—both parents dead 3-father is dead h-mother is dead S-divorced or separated 6-no answer Occupational status of mother (iv-2) l-no job outside of the home 2-part-time job 3-full-time job h-no answer l.i.h6 l.l.h7 i.i.#8-h9 l.l.50-Sl I. ‘ 052'53 l.I.Sh '01055-57 '9‘058-59 Blank Blank Duncan occupational prestige score of mother's occupation, if other than housewife (IV-3) 2df see '01022'23 Duncan occupational prestige score of father's occupation (IV-h). If father has two or more occupations, average scores. 2df See l.i.22-23 Average of occupational prestige scores of father and mother, where both have codable occupations (lV-3,h) 2df see ‘.l.22'23 Father's farm tenancy status; farm owners and part- or full-time farm workers only (IV-h:l) l-owner 2-renter 3-laborer h-no answer or not applicable Number of acres Operated by father; farm Operators only (iv-#:2) 3df ODD-zero acres OOl-one acre 998-nine hundred ninety-eight acres or more 999-no answer or not applicable Parental educational status (IV-5,6) 2df (Check)against (Q2) and (Q3) on supplementary question- naire 5. My father's education consisted of: (0) less than eight grades (h) 8 grades (6) 9-ll grades (8) i2 grades (l0) some college (l2) college degree (B.A.) (lh) advanced degree 6. My mother's education consisted of: (0) less than eight grades (h) 8 grades (6) 9-ll grades l.I.60 l.I.6] i.l.62-63 l.l.6h-65 - 151_.. (8) l2 grades (i0) some college (l2) college degree (B.A.) (lb) advanced degree Coding: Sum of oints for (iv-5) and (IV-6) 2df OO-zero points (0) Oh-four points (h) 28-twenty-eight points (28) SO-no answer to either or both (iv-5) and (iv-6) Father's educational status (IV-S) (Check against (Q2) on supplementary questionnaire) i-less than eight grades 2-8 grades 3-9-ll grades h-iz grades S-some college 6-college degree (B.A.) 7-advanced degree 8-no answer Mother's educational status (IV-6) (Check against (Q3) on supplementary questionnaire) l-less than eight grades 2-8 grades 3-9-ll grades h-l2 grades S-some college 6-college degree (B.A.) 7-advanced degree 8-no answer Number of Significant Others (50) (VI) 2df OO-no SOs Ol-One $0 l2-twelve SOs ZO-no answer or not codable First 50's relationship to ego or no SOs (Vi-1c) 2df Ol-father OZ-mother 03-brother Dh-sister OS-guidance counsellor OG-h-H leader l.l.66-67 1.1.68-69 i.l.70-7i l 01072-73 1.1.7fi-75 l.l.76-77 l.l.73-79 l.l.80 Card 1,2 - OPECY l.2.l-2 l.2.3-5 .. 152 .. 07-grandparent O8-other adult relative OS-juvenile relative lO-school friend ZO-adult friend 30-friend (unspecified) hO-minister SO-teacher 60-other 70-no SD or no answer or not codable Second SO's relationship to ego or no more than one SO (VI-2c) 2df See l.l.6h-65 Third SO's relationship to ego or no more than two $05 ( Vl-3c) 2df See l.i.6h~65 Fourth 50's relationship to ego or no more than 3 50s (VI-kc) 2df see '0 ‘ 0&-65 Fifth 50's relationship to ego or no more than h 505 (VI-5c) 2df See l.i.6k-65 Sixth SO's relationship to ego or no more than S 505 (VI-6c) 2df See l.l.6h-65 Seventh SO's relationship to ego or no more than 6 $05 (VI-7c) 2df See l.i.6h-65 Eighth SO's relationship to ego or no more than 7 505 (VI-86) 2df See l.l.6h-55 Blank Card identification - 2df OZ-Card l.2 (this card is punched 02) Person identification - 3df l.2.6-7 1.2.8-9 l.2.l0-ii l.2.i2-i3 l.2.ih-l5 l.2.16-l7 l.2.i8-l9 Ninth SO's relationship to ego or no more than 8 $05 (VI-9c) 2df See l.l.6h-65 Tenth SO's relationship to ego or no more than 9 $05 (VI-10c) 2df See l.i.6h-65 Eleventh SO's relationship to ego or no more than lo 505 (Vl-iic) 2df See l.I.Gh-GS Twelfth SO's relationship to ego or no more than ii 505 (VI-12c) 2df see '0 I e6h-65 First SO's occupation or class in school-or no SOs (VI-lb) 2df OO-grades i-8 Oi-grade 9 OZ-grade lO O3-grade ll Oh-grade iZ OS-student at vocational school Oé-college freshman O7-coilege sOphomore, junior, or senior O8-graduate student OS-"college" iO-housewife ll-unemployed l2-professionai, technical, or kindred worker l3-farm manager or farmer ih-manager, official, or preprietor, excluding farm iS-clericai or kindred worker i6-sales worker l7-craftsman, foreman, or kindred worker l8-0perative or kindred worker l9-serviCe worker, excluding private household 20-farm laborer or foreman 2l-laborer, except mine and farm 22-no SD or no answer or not codable Second SO's occupation or class in school, or no more than one SO (VI-2b) 2df see '02. ‘1."5 Third SO's occupation or class in school, or no more than 2 SOs (VI-3b) 2df See l.2.lh-i5 l.2.20-2l l.2.22-23 l.2.2h-25 1.2.26-27 1.2.28-29 l.2.-30-3l '02. 32-33 1.2.34-35 l.2.36-37 l.2.38-39 .. 15L; - l0. Fourth SO's occupation or class in school, or no more than 3 50s (VI-Ab) 2df See l.2.lh—l5 Fifth SO's occupation or class in school, or no more than A SOs (VI-5b) 2df See l.2.lh-l5 Sixth SO's occupation or class in school, or no more than 5 $05 (VI-6b) 2df See l.2.lh—i5 Seventh SO's occupation or class in school, or no more than 6 SOs (Vi-7b) 2df See l.2.lh-l5 Eighth SO's occupation or class in school, or no more than 7 SOs (VI-8b) 2df See l.2.lh-l5 Ninth SO's occupation or class in school, or no more than 8 50¢ (Vi-9b) 2df see '02. 11*"5 Tenth SO's occupation or class in school, or not more than 9 $05 (VI-lOb) 2df See l.2.lh-l5 Eleventh SO's occupation or class in school, or no more than lo 505 (VI-lib) 2df See l.2.lh-l5 Twelfth SO's occupation or class in school, or no more than ll SOs (Vl-le) 2df See l.2.lh-iS First SO's educational expectation of ego or no SOs (VI-id) 2df Oi-tenth grade OZ-eleventh grade 03-twelfth grade Oh-one year of college or less OS-more than one but not more than two years of college O6-more than 2 but not more than 3 years of college O7-four years of college or not specified in terms of years: (”go to college”) O8-five or six years of college 09-seven or more years of college l.2.hO-hl 1.2.42-43 l.2.hh-hs l.2.hé-h7 l.2.h8-h9 'aZaSo-Sl l.2.52-53 l.2.5he55 l.2.56-57 l.2.58-59 l.2.60-6l ..155- lO-not Specified in terms of years, and no reference to Specific goals: (”go as far as I can") lS-post-high school business or vocational training 20-50, but no answer or not codable ' 30-no SO and no answer Second SO's educational expectation of ego or no more than one SO (VI-2d) 2df See la2038-39 Third SO's educational expectation of ego or no more than two SOs (VI-3d) 2df See l.2.38-39 Fourth 50': educational expectation of ego or no more than three 505 (VI—hd) 2df See l.2.38-39 Fifth SO's educational expectation of ego or no more than four 505 (VI-5d) 2df See l.2.38-39 Sixth SO's educational expectation of ego or no more than five SOs (Vi-6d) 2df See l.2.38-39 Seventh SO's educational expectation of ego or no more than six SOs (VI-7d) 2df See l.2.38-39 Eighth SO's educational expectation of ego or no more than seven SOs (VI-8d) 2df See l.2.38-39 Ninth SO's educational expectation of ego or no more than eight SOs (VI-9d) 2df see la 2.38-39 Tenth SO's educational expectation of ego or no more than nine SOs (VI-lOd) 2df see Ia2038’39 Eleventh SO's educational expectation of ego or no more than ten SOs (VI-lid) 2df See l.2.38-39 Twelfth SO's educational expectation of ego or no more than eleven SOs (Vl-l2d) 2df $¢¢ 802038-39 l.2.62-63 l.2.64-66 l.2.67 l.2.68 1.2.69 l.2.70 l.2.7l _ 1fy5 - l2. Average of all 505' educational expectations of ego (Vl:ld-l2d) 2df, excluding scores of responses lO, '5. 20, 8M 30 on l.2-38-6. lO-one point zero (l.O) ll-one point one (l.l) éo-nine point zero (9.0) 99-no answers on (Vl:ld-l2d) or not codable See l.2.38-39 DiSpersion of all 505' educational expectations of ego (Vl:ld-l2d) de, excluding scores of responses l0, l5, 20, and 30 on l.2.33-6l OOO-zero (no deviation from the mean) OOi-zero point one (O.l) DhO-four point zero (“.0) éSB-ninety-nine point eight (99.8) or more 999-no answers on (V|:ld-l2d) or not codable Level of Specificity of first SO's educational expecta- tion of ego or no SOs (Vi-id) i-specifies educational goal in terms of grade level or degree 2-specifies educational goal in terms of nerai goal: (”go to college"), ("go to high school"?e 3-no specification of goal, but i implied: (”get ahead”), ("go as far as i can")08 h-SO, but no specification of goal and none implied: (”whatever I want to do”) 5-no SO and no answer Level of specificity of second 50's educational ex- pectation of ego or no more than one SO (VI-2d) See l.2.67 Level of specificity of third SO‘s educational expec- tation of ego or no more than two $05 (VI-3d) See l.2.67 Level of specificity of fourth SO's educational expec- tation of ego or no more than three SOs (Vi-4d) See l.2.67 Level of specificity of fifth SO's educational expec- tation of ego or no more than four SOs (VI-5d) See l.2.67 1.2.72 1.2.73 l.2a7u 1.2.75 l.2.76 l.2.77 l.2.78 l.2.79-80 95;; 1.3 - opscv 1.3.1-2 ‘0303-S la3a6'7 l3. Level of specificity of sixth SO'S educational expec- tation of ego or no more than five SOS (Vi-6d) See l.2.67 Level of Specificity of seventh SO's educational expec- tation of ego or no more than Six SOs (Vi-7d) See l.2.67 Level of Specificity of eighth SO's educational expec- tation of ego or no more than seven SOs (Vi-8d) See l.2.67 Level of Specificity of ninth SO‘s educational expec- tation of ego or no more than eight SOs (VI-9d) See l.2.67 Level of Specificity of tenth 50's educational expec- tation of ego or no more than nine SOS (Vl-lOd) See l.2.67 Level of specificity of eleventh SO's educational expec- tation of ego or no more than ten SOs (VI-lid) See l.2.67 Level of Specificity of twelfth SO'S educational expec- tation of ego or no more than eleven SOS (Vl-l2d) See l.2.67 Average level of Specificity of all SOs' educational expectations of ego (Vl:ld-12d) 2df, excluding scores of 5 on l.2.67-78 lO-one point zero (l.0) ll-one point one (l.i) hO-four point zero (h.0) 99-no answers on (Vl:ld-l2d) or not codable Card identification - 2df O3-Card l.3 (this card is punched 03) Person identification - 3df DiSpersion of levels of Specificity of all SOs' educa- tional expectations of ego (Vi:ld-12d) 2df, excluding scores of 5 on l.2.67-78 ‘0308 i.3.9 i.3.l0 l.3.ll 103012 i.3.l3 i.3.lh i.3.l5 l.3.l6 - 15%} _ lh. Sum of squares of the deviations from the mean of the levels of Specificity of all SOs' expectations OO-no deviation from the mean Ol-one point (i) 90-ninety points (90) or more 99-no answers on (Vlzld-l2d) or not codable Intensity of first SO'S educational expectation of ego or no SOS (VI-le) l-very strongly 2-strongly 3-not too Strongly h-no SD or no answer or not codable Intensity of second SO'S educational expectation of ego or no more than one SO (VI-2e) See i.3.8 Intensity of third SO's educational expectation of ego or no more than two SOs (Vi-3e) See i.3.8 Intensity of fourth SO's educational expectation of ego or no more than three SOs (Vi-he) See l.3.8 intensity of fifth SO'S educational expectation of ego or no more than four SOs (Vi-5e) See i.3.8 intensity of sixth SO's educational expectation of ego or no more than five SOs (VI-6e) See i.3.8 intensity of seventh SO's educational expectation of ego or no more than six SOs (VI-7e) See i.3.8 intensity of eighth SO's educational expectation of ego or no more than seven SOS (VI-8e) See i.3.8 Intensity of ninth 50's educational expectation of ' ego or no more than eight SOss(Vld9e) See i.3.8 i.3.l7 1.3.18 i.3.l9 i.3.20-21 i.3.22-23 i.3.Zfi-25 -159- IS. Intensity of tenth SO'S educational expectation of ego or no more than nine SOs (Vl-iOe) See i.3.8 intensity of eleventh SO's educational expectation of ego or no more than ten SOS (VI-lie) See l.3.8 intensity of twelfth SO'S educational expectation of ego or no more than eleven SOS (Vl-l2e) See i.3.8 Average intensity of all SOs' educational expectations of ego (Vl:le-l2e) 2df, excluding scores of 5 on i.3.8-l9 lO-one point zero (l.0) ll-one point one (l.i) hO-four point zero (“.0) 99-no answers on (VI:le-l2e) or not codable DiSpersion of intensities of all SOs' educational ex- pectations of ego (Vl:le-l2e) 2df, excluding scores of S on i.3.8-l9 Sum of the squares of the deviations from the mean of the intensities of all 505' educational expectations of ego OO-no deviation from the mean 0l-zero point one (O.l) 90-nine points (9.0) or more 99-no answers on (Vl:le-l2e) or not codable First SO'S occupational expectation of ego or no SOs (Vi-If) 2df Where SO has two or more expectations, code only the first. Oi-housewife OZ-professional, technical, or kindred worker 03-fanmer or farm manager thmanager, official, or prOprietor, excluding farm 05-clerical or kindred worker 06-sales worker 07-craftsman, foreman, or kindred worker 08-0perative or kindred worker 09-service worker, excluding private household lO-farm laborer or farm foreman 20-laborer, except mine and farm 30-answer not codable in terms of the above categories hO-SO, but no answer SO-no SO and no answer i.3.26-27 i.3.28-29 8.3.30-3] l.3.32-33 i.3.39-35 ‘0 3036-37 i.3.38-39 i.3.hO-hl i.3.hz-h3 l.3.4h-h5 i.3.h6-h7 1.30%49 -160— 16. Second SO'S occupational expectation of ego or no more than one SO(Vl-2f) 2df Third SO's occupational expectation of ego or no more than two SOS (VI-3f) 2df See i.3.2h-25 Fourth 50's occupational expectation of ego or no more than three SOS (VI-hf) 2df see '03 02h-25 Fifth SO'S occupational expectation of ego or no more than four 505 (VI-5f) 2df See i.3.2h-25 Sixth SO'S occupational expectation of ego or no more than five SOS (Vi-6f) 2df See i.3.24-25 Seventh SO'S occupational expectation of ego or no more than six SOS (Vi-7f) 2df see 8 033212-25 Eighth SO'S occupational expectation of ego or no more than seven SOS (Vi-8f) 2df See i.3.2h-25 Ninth SO'S occupational expectation of ego or no more than eight SOS (VI-9f) 2df See i.3.2h-25 Tenth 50's occupational expectation of ego or no more than nine SOS (Vl-lOf) 2df See l.3.2h-25 Eleventh SO'S occupational expectation of ego or no more than ten SOS (VI-llf) 2df See l.3.2h-25 Twelfth SO'S occupational expectation of ego or no more than eleven SOS (Vi-l2f) 2df see la 3 a zil-ZS Duncan occupational prestige score of first SO's occupa- tional expectation of ego or no SOS (Vi-if) 2df If SO has two or more expectations, average scores. BQ-thirty-four points (34) i.3.50-5l ‘03052-53 '- 3.5“-55 1.3.55-57 ' a 30 58-59 i.3.60-6l i.3.62-53 i.3.6h-65 '0 3066.67 -161- 35-thirty-five points (35) 97-ninety-seven points (97) 99-no SD or no answer or not codable Duncan occupational prestige score of second 50's occupational expectation of ego or no more than $0 (Vi-2f) 2df See i.3.h8-h9 Duncan occupational prestige score of third SO's occupational expectation of ego or no more than SOS (VI-3f) 2df See i.3.h8-h9 Duncan occupational prestige score of fourth SO'S occupational expectation of ego or no more than SOs (VI-hf) 2df See i.3.h8-h9 Duncan occupational prestige score of fifth SO's occupational expectation of ego or no more than SOs (Vi-Sf) 2df See i.3.‘l'8-‘i9 Duncan occupational prestige score of sixth SO'S occupational expectation of ego or no more than SOs (VI-6f) 2df See i.3.h8-h9 Duncan occupational prestige score of seventh SO's occupational expectation of ego or no more than SOs (VI-7f) 2df See i.3.h8-h9 Duncan occupational prestige score of eighth SO's occupational expectation of ego or no more than seven SOS (VI-8f) 2df See i.3.h8-“9 Duncan occupational prestige score of ninth SO's occupational expectation of ego or no more than eight SOs (VI-9f) 2df See i.3.h8-99 Duncan occupational prestige score of tenth SO's occupational expectation of ego or no more than nine SOs (Vi-lOf) 2df See i.3.h8-h9 '7. one two three four five Six i.3.68-69 l.3.70-7l 1.3.72-73 I a 3 e7u'76 i.3.77 - 162 - l8. Duncan occupational prestige score of eleventh SO'S occupational expectation of ego or no more than ten SOS (Vl-llf) 2df See l.3.h8-h9 Duncan occupational prestige score of twelfth SO'S occupational expectation of ego or no more than eleven SOS (VI-lZf) 2df See i.3.98-h9 Mean of Duncan occupational prestige scores of all 505' occupational expectations of ego (Vl:lf-l2f) 2df Where SO has more than one expectation, use average scores to compute mean. The score of (99) assigned to “no answer” Should not be used in computing the mean. 3h-thirty-four points (3h) 97-ninety-seven points (97) 99-no answers on i.3.h8-7l or not codable DiSpersion of Duncan occupational prestige scores of all 505' occupational expectations of ego (Vl:lf-l2f) 3df Sum of the squares of the deviations from the mean of the scores of all 505' occupational expectations of ego. Each SO'S expectations are averaged, and the average scores are used to compute deviations. The score of (99) assigned to "no answer" should not be used in computing the dispersion. OOO-no deviation from mean OOl-one point (i) 998-nine hundred ninety-eight points (998) or more 999-no answers on i.3.h8-7l or not codable Level of Specificity of first SO'S occupational expec- tation of ego or no SOS (Vlhlf) l-states goal in terms of Specific occupation: (”become a bank teller”) 2-states goal in terms of general occupational category: (”go into banking”) 3-no Specification of occupational goal,but goal implied: (”get ahead”), (”go as far as I can”) h-SO but no Specification of goal and none implied: (huhatever i want to do”) S-no SO and no answer .. 163 .. l9. i.3.78 Level of Specificity of second 50': occupational expectation of ego or no more than one SO (VI-2f) See l.3.77 i.3.79 Level of Specificity of third SO's occupational expectation of ego or no more than two SOS (Vi-3f) See i.3.77 i.3.80 Level of Specificity of fourth SO‘S occupational expectation of ego or no more than three SOS (Vi-hf) See i.3.77 Card l.& - orgcv + OAS + £L§ OAS-Occupational ASpiratlon Scale (Heller-Miller) LLS-Level of Living Scale (Danley-Ramsey) l.“.‘-2 Card ldehtlflcatlon - 2df Oh-Card l.h (this card is punched 0h) l.h.3-5 Person identification - 3df l.h.6 Level of Specificity of fifth SO'S occupational ex- pectation of ego or no more than four SOS (Vi-5f) See i.3.77 l.h.7 Level of Specificity of sixth SO'S occupational ex- pectation of ego or no more than five SOS (Vi-6f) See i.3.77 l.h.8 Level of Specificity of seventh SO'S occupational expectation of ego or no more than Six SOS (VI-7f) See l.3.77 l.h.9 Level of Specificity of eighth SO'S occupational ex- pectation of ego or no more than Seven SOS (Vi-8f) See i.3.77 l.h.l0 Level of specificity of ninth SO'S occupational ex- pectation of ego or no more than eight SOS (Vi-9f) See i.3.77 l.h.ll Level of Specificity of tenth SO'S occupational ex- pectation of ego or no more than nine SOs (Vi-lOf) See i.3.77 i.h.l2 Level of Specificity of eleventh SO'S occupational expectation of ego or noimore than ten SOS (VI-llf) See i.3.77 l.4.l3 l.n.lh-lG l.h.l7 l.h.l8 l.h.l9 l.h.20 l.h.2l l.h.22 i.h.23 - 164 - 20. Level of specificity of twelfth SO'S occupational ex- pectation of ego or no more than eleven SOs (Vi-l2f) See l.3.77 Dispersion of levels of Specificity of all SOs' occupa- tional expectations of ego (Vi:lf-l2f) 3df, excluding scores of S on i.3.77-80 and l.h.6-l3. Sum of the squares of the deviations from the mean of the levels of specificity of all SOs' occupational expectations. OOO-no deviation from the mean OOl-one point (i) 998-nlne hundred ninety-eight points (998) or more 999-no answers oniVi:lf-l2f) or not codable intensity of first SO's occupational expectation of ego or no SOS (Vi-lg) l-very strongly 2-Strongly 3-not too strongly h-SO, but no answer S-no SO and no answer intensity of second 50': occupational expectation of ego or no more than one SO (VI-29) See l.n.l7 Intensity of third SO'S occupational expectation of ego or no more than two SOS (Vi-3g) see 'ng‘7 ' intensity of fourth SO'S occupational expectation of ego or no more than three SOS (VI-kg) See l.h.l7 intensity of fifth SO‘S occupational expectation of ego or no more than four SOS (VI-59) See l.h.l7 intensity of sixth SO's occupational expectation of ego or no more than five SOS (VI-69) See l.h.l7 Intensity of seventh SO'S occupational expectation of ego or no more than six SOS (Vi-7g) See l.h.l7 'a ir‘ l.h.24 l.h.25 l.h.26 l.h.27 l.h.28 l.h.29-3l l.n.32 'Ou033 l.h.3h l.#.35 2i. Intensity of eighth SO'S occupational expectation of ego or no more than seven SOS (Vi-89) See l.h.l7 intensity of ninth SO'S occupational expectation of ego or no more than eight SOS (Vi-99) See l.h.l7 Intensity of tenth SO'S occupational expectation of ego or no more than nine SOS (Vi-lOg) See l.h.l7 Intensity of eleventh SO'S occupational expectation of ego or no more than ten SOS (Vi-llg) See l.h.l7 intensity of twelfth SO'S occupational expectation of ego or no more than eleven SOS (Vi-lZg) See l.h.l7 DiSpersion of intensities of all SOs' occupational expectations of ego (Vl:lg-l2g) 3df, excluding scores of 5 on l.h.l7-28. Sum of the squares of the deviations from the mean of the intensities of all SOs' occupational expectations. OOO-no deviation from the mean 00l-zero point one (O.l) 998-nlnety-nine point eight (99.8) or more 999-no answers on (Vl:lg-l29) or not codable OAS Question l: First score for realistic choice level at end of schooling (OAS-i) O-zero points (0) l-one point (i) 9-nlne points (9) OAS Question 2: First score for idealistic choice level at end of schooling (OAS-2) See l.h.32 OAS Question 3: Second score for realistic choice level at end of Schooling (OAS-3) See l.h.32 OAS Question h: Second score for idealistic choice level at end of schooling (OAS-h) See l.h.32 "l i.1i.36 L“. 37 l.h.38 l.li.39 lJiJiO-lii i.h.h2-h3 i.h.hh-95 -166- 22. OAS Question 5: First score for realistic choice level at age 30 (MS-5) See l.b.32 OAS Question 6: First score for idealistic choice level at age 30 (OAS-6) See l.n.32 OAS Question 7: Second score for realistic choice level at age 30 (OAS-7) See l.li.32 OAS Question 8: Second score for idealistic choice level at age 30 (OAS-8) See l.li.32 Sum of total scores for Questions i through 8: Occupational AS iration Score (OAS:l-8) 2df OO-zero points (0 Oi-one point (i) 80-eighty points (80) 90-no OAS for ego or incomplete OAS Level of Living Scale: total score (LLS:l-l3)2df. ms see Supplementary Questionnaire (Q10, Q5, Q6, Q7, Q8 . OO-zero points (0) Ol-one point (i) l2-twelve points (i2) 90-no LLS for ego or incomplete LLS Mother's occupation (iv-3) 2df OO-housewife Oi-professional, technical, or kindred worker 02-kfarmer or farm manager O3-manager, official, or preprietor, excluding farm Oil-clerical or kindred worker 05-saies worker O6-craftsman, foreman, or kindred worker 07-0peratlve or kindred worker 08-service worker, excluding private household O9-farm laborer or foreman lO-iaborer, except mine and farm ll-private household worker 20-no answer or not codable in terms of above categories l.h.h6-h7 l.h.h8-h9 l.h.SO-5l .. 167 .. 23. Father's occupation (iv-1i) 2df OO-unamployed Ol-professlonal. technical, or kindred worker OZ-farmer or farm manager 03-manager, official, or proprietor, excluding farm Oh-clerical or kindred worker OS-saies worker 06-craftsman, foreman, or kindred worker 07-Operative or kindred worker 08-service worker, excluding private household 09-farm laborer or foreman lO-laborer, except mine and farm ll-prlvate household worker ZO-no answer or not codable in terms of above categories Average level of Specificity of all soy occupational expectations of ego (Vl:lf-i2f) 2df, excluding scores of 5 on i.3.77-80 and l.h.6-l3 lO-one point zero (l.0) OO-four point zero (9.0) 99-no answers on (Vizlf-lZf) or not codable Average intensity of all SOs' acetipational expectations of ego (Vi:lg—l2g) 2df, excluding scores of 5 on l.h.l7-28 lO-one point zero (l.0) hO-four point zero (“.0) 99-no answers on (Vi:lg-l29) or not codable : 3 w in“: ULELY ”,5 ‘ L ~. 3.38.4511“! NJG 1 2 1966 9'. x (T‘ Illlluimliii inIIInniiiuuiiiuiIiii 303