AN EVALUATION OF RELIGIOUS AND RELATED ATTTTUDE CHANGES OF INSTITUTIONALIZED DELINQUENT BOYS Thesis Tor ”19 Degree 0‘ M. S. MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY Martin G. Miller 1963 IHESIS LIBRARY Michigan State University AN EVALUATION OF RELIGIOUS AND RELATED ATTITUDE CHANGES OF INSTITUTIONLLIZED DRLINQUENT BOYS by MARTIN G. MILLER AN ABSTRACT Submitted to the College of Social Science Michigan State-University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF SCIENCE School of Police Administration and Public Safety 1963..., APPROVED My, 1!. -_ he ‘ _x«-_f ' Jw‘e?' . Brennan, 0hnirlen 0' ‘lliiflbu Audfil'r Mr. Frank D.f m;2::zi::éLé§é§:/ mum; Hollady, Member ABSTRACT AN EVALUATICN OF RELIGIOUS AND RELATED ATTITUDE CHANGES OF INSTITUTIONALIZED DELINQUEHT BOYS by Martin George Miller In reviewing the literature on crime and Juvenile delinquency it became apparent (to the author) that the important issue of religion in regard to prevention and reformation was in a state of controversy. A major factor hindering the resolution of this controversy was the lack of empirical findings concerning the religion-crime preven- tion problem. A logical starting point to gain this empir- ical knowledge was through evaluating religious programs in our institutions for delinquent youth. This study pro- posed an evaluation of the religious program at the State of Michigan Training School for Boys. The experimental hypothesis was: The religious program of the State of Mich- igan Boys' Training School is effective in favorably chang- ing the religious and related attitudes of the boys in resi- dence at this institution. To discover the correctness of this hypothesis, 3 study was designed to determine if religious and related attitudes of institutionalized delin- quents changed during their stay at the training school. Broen's Religious Inventory (a religiosity scale) and Ball's Attitude Schedule (an instrument which measured attitudes towards school, stealing, religion, parents, Martin George Miller parental punishment, success, and Justiceepunishment) were administered to ninety-four newly-admitted institutionalized delinquent boys (the EXperimental Group). The same instru- ments were given to the Experimental Group six months after entering the training school. A Control Group, consisting of fifty-five boys who had been at the training school six or more months was also administered the instruments. Re- ligious background of both groups was determined through responses to Levenseller's Religious Influence Questionnaire (Part A modified). An analysis of the religious background data revealed that the subjects and their parents did not entirely neglect their religion. These data also revealed that praying and the Bible were important to the boys. T-ratios between test-retest means of the attitude scales indicated signif- icant improvement in the Experimental Group's feelings to- ward schooling, religion, parents, and parental punishment. No significant differences were found between the initial religiosity responses of the Experimental Group and the retesting responses; however, the means were high on both occasions. Correlation coefficients of the Experimental Group's responses revealed that the attitude scales used were reliable. The lack of significant t-ratios between the retest responses of the Experimental Group's and the Control Group's responses indicated that the findings could be generalized to the total population at the training school. An analysis of the intercorrelations of the Control Group's Martin George Miller responses revealed that religiosity was highly related to attitudes toward religion, parents, and parental punishment. The findings indicated that the experimental hypoth- esis was basically correct, but that it should be revised to read: The religious program of the State of lichigan Boys' Training School is effective in maintaining positive religious attitudes, and in favorably changing some related attitudes of the boys in residence at this institution. The data also indicated that "delinquents are deprived and have negative feelings toward religion" assumptions should be reJected. Finally, the findings suggested that the re- ligious program at the training school was important in reforming delinquents having specific personality problems. AN EVALUATION OF RELIGIOUS AND RELATED ATTITUDE CHANGES OF INSTITUTIONALIZED DELINQUENT BOYS BY Iartin George Miller A THESIS Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of EASTER OF SCIENCE School of Police Administration and Public Safety 1963 ACKNOWLEDGKENTS lany individuals contributed to the successful com- pletion of this study. The author wishes to express his most grateful appreciation to the following peeple: To his Major Professor and Graduate Committee Chair- man, Dr. James J. Brennan; To the other members of his Graduate Committee, Mr. Frank D. Day and Mr. Roy E. Hollady; To Mr. Vergil M. Pinckney, Superintendent of the State of Michigan Boys' Training School, and his staff for their wonderful c00peration; To his captive experimental subjects, the boys who participated in the study; To Mr. Ronald G. Weisman, Department of Psychology, Michigan State University, for his assistance in designing the experimental procedure and in the statistical analysis of the data; To Kr. Richard M. O'Curran, English teacher and Pub- lications Director at Waverly Senior High School, for edit- ing the manuscript; To his wife Marsha, for the many hours spent in tab- ulating data, editing and typing the manuscript and without whose encouragement, faith, and understanding this study could not have been completed; 111 To his parents, Shayle and Sara Miller, for instill- ing into their son the value of education and for their loving encouragement and faith through his trying student years. TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTER I. THE NATURE OF THE PROBLEM. . . . Introduction . . . . . . . . . Statement of Problem. . . . Hypothesis to be Tested . The Significance of the Problem Definition of Terms. . . . . . Terms most Misunderstood. . Religion . . . . . . . . Attitude . . . . . . . . Religiosity. . . . . . . Institutionalized delinquent Terms Used in the Title . . Religious attitude . . . Related attitude . . . . Psychological Orientation of the Study . Limitations of the Investigation . Methodology . . . . . . . . Theory. . . . . . . . . . . O O 0 II. LITERATURE SURVEY: RELIGION AND ORIHE . . The Controversy Over the Influence of Religion on Criminality . . . . Religion Controls and Eliminates Delinquency and Crime. . PAGE QQQQQO‘O‘U‘UIU'Iroach of the Control Group toward this aspect of religion was negative. No clear conclusion can be drawn from the 108 Experimental Group data. We can state that religious train- ing outside the church and home was of little importance to most of the subjects in the Control Group. Summation of the Religious Background Data Now that the religious background data have been presented, let us list the inferences we can make about our two samples. 1. The majority of the boys of the Experimental and Control Groups were Protestant (a fourth of the former group and a third of the latter group were Catholic). 2. Most of the boys in both groups could name the church that they attended in their home towns. 3. The great majority of the subjects in both groups did not attend church regularly before they came to Boys' Training School. It should be noted, however, that the boys did not entirely neglect the church. ’ 4. The boys that stapped attending church did so because they lost interest in church; they did not want to get up for church; and they could find no way to get to church. 5. The majority of the boys in both groups did have Sunday school experiences while growing up. Many attended regularly. 6. Most of the subjects of this study had not been active in any type of church group. ,7. About half the boys in the Experimental Group 109 and most of the boys in the Control Group had religious training outside of their church or home. Many of the boy. had attended Bible study groups. 8. The majority of the subjects in both groups in- dicated that they had received religious training, and teach- ing about moral conduct at home. 9. The parents of the subjects of this study did attend church. Most went "Regularly" or "Fairly Often." 10. Most of the boys' parents taught their sons to pray. 11. Host of the subjects in both groups presently prayed. They gained security from praying because it drew them closer to God. 12. The reading aloud of the Bible and other relig- ious literature by the parents to their children was not done in a majority of the boys' homes. 13. Most of the subjects in the Experimental and Control Groups felt that their parents set good examples for them in proper living. 14. Religion was "Very" or "Fairly Important" in most of the subjects' parents' lives. 15. The church, Sunday school, and home religious training were somewhat important but not paramount to most of the boys of this study. Church youth groups, active church work, religious friends, and religious training out- side church and home were of little, if any, importance to 110 the boys. The Bible was the only aspect of religion that was perceived by a majority of the boys as being important to them. i For research findings to be intelligently interpreted, it is necessary that the conclusions of similar studies be presented. The following are Levenseller's conclusions on the religious backgrounds of the samples she examined.2 It must be remembered that Levenseller studied both delin- quent and non-delinquent youth. 1. Church membership was not so general among the Protestant delinquents. 2. Church attendance was more sporadic and occas- ional among the Protestant delinquents. 3. Practically all the non-delinquents, over half of the Catholic delinquents and about one-fourth of the Protestant delinquents chose "It draws me closer to God" as their reason for attending church. 4. A small number of delinquents had stopped attend- ing church and the reasons checked were, "Nobody makes me," "My friends don't go," and one marked "Church members don't live right." The first reason was most popular, indicating a lack of interest more than any positive reason against going. 2Dorothy E. Levenssller, "The Relation of Religious Influence and Spiritual Attitudes in Delinquency Control" (unpublished Master's thesis, Boston University, Boston, Massachusetts, 1953). PP. 57-59. 111 5. The Protestant non-delinquents had a higher per- centage of Sunday school attendance than other groups (many Catholics had parochial school instead). Delinquents at- tended only half as much. 6. There was little attendance at a young people's church group for the delinquent sample, less for Catholics in general than for Protestants, but more than for the de- linquents. Eighty-five per cent of the delinquents never attended. 7. Fewer delinquents took part in active church work and fewer Catholic than Protestant non-delinquents took part in active church work. 8.. The Protestant delinquents had much less religious training outside church or home than the other groups. Cath- olic delinquents had less training than Catholic non-delin- quents. 9. Catholic non-delinquents had the greatest amount of home religious training, almost 100 per cent, but Cath- olic delinquents had less than any of the Protestants, about 75 per cent. 10. Church attendance among parents was much lower among the Protestants and the delinquents. 11. most parents taught their children to pray, fewer Protestants than Catholics having done so. 12. Most formed the habit of prayer as a child, more Catholics than Protestants having done so. 112 13. Nearly all the subjects prayed. The greater part of the Catholics and over half the Protestants chose the third response ("Even if God doesn't answer right away, it makes me feel closer to Him") when asked of what help prayer had been to them. Half the Protestant non-delin- quents chose ”It makes my faith stronger as I see the an- swers," as it did approximately a quarter of the other groups. 14. About half (more for the non-delinquent Cath- olics) of all groups except the Protestant non-delinquents had family prayers at least sometimes. l5. Twenty per cent of the non-delinquent group had had the Bible or other religious literature read aloud at home. The delinquent Protestants claimed 39 Per cent had.had this exercise. 16. The delinquents rated their parents' example lower than the non-delinquents did. Among the latter, the Protestant parents were rated lower. 17. The Catholic non-delinquents ranked highest in their judgment of the reality of their parents' religion: Protestants ranked much lower. The delinquent groups had a lower trend downward, though about half ranked highly their parents' religious living. ' 18. Church attendance, home religious training and parochial schools were important in the lives of the Cath- olic non-delinquents. Active church work seemed not impor- tant to this group. Bible reading, religious training in 113 the Bible study group and association with religious young people were important to the Protestant delinquents. Sun- day school attendance was not important to this group. Church attendance was somewhat important, but not paramount in the lives of the Catholic delinquents. No one item seemed to be of least importance, or of great importance to this group. Levenseller felt that this indicated a general lack of influence and perhaps an attitude of indifference on the part of the Catholic delinquent boys. II. AN ANALYSIS OF ATTITUDE CHANGE BY THE EXPERIMENTAL GROUP The Experimental Group's means and standard devia- tions obtained from the attitude scales of the first and second testings, and the t-ratios between the two means, are presented in Table I. The following is the analysis of Table I. Religiosity (Broen's Religious Inventory) The mean of the religiosity scale scores slightly increased between the two testing periods. The t-ratio of 1.866 indicated that this difference was not significant: therefore, we failed to reject the Null Hypothesis. It appeared that the subjects' religiosity did not change after six or more months at Boys' Training School. How- ever, if one compared the two means with the maximum re- ligiosity score of fifty-two, it was evident that the boys 114 TABLE I MEANS, STANDARD DEVIATIONS, AND T-TESTS roe CORRELATED MEAN or EXPERIMENTAL GROUP'S (N=94) TEST scoass (x) AND RETEST scones (yl) “'2 p< .01 Scales 'i' S'x' 31 SE], t Religiosity 32.89 5.08 33.97 5.04 1.866 3011001 41.14 7039 43018 7069 20522. Stealing 26.66 7.41 26.16 8.19 .621 Religion 27.48 7.58 29.17 6.14 2.181* Parents 29.46 5.79 31.04 4.28 3.19l** Parental ”Punishment 38.99 7.17 40.63 5.20 2.490*' Success 23.53 4.97 23.36 4.88 .281 Justice- - Punishment 14.25 3.70 14.81 3.45 1.384 7' D < 005 115 entered the training school with high religiosity, and left with high religiosity. Both means revealed that most of the boys of the Experimental Group answered two-thirds of the items on the Inventory in the direction of religiosity. Attitudes Toward the Usefulness of Schooling Ball's Scale A The mean of the ”usefulness of schooling" retest scores was larger than the first test mean. The t-ratio of 2.522, with 92 degrees of freedom, was significant be- yond the .05 level of confidence. It appeared that the Experimental Group's attitudes toward school improved while at Boys' Training School. In a study of boys at Highfields Training School and Annandale Reformatory (both in New Jersey), Ashley Weeks found that relatively few boys reported a liking for schcal.3 Ball found negligible differences between the attitudes of delinquents and non-delinquents toward the usefulness of schooling. Both groups had positive attitudes toward school.4 3Ashley R. Weeks, Youthful Offenders of Highfields (Ann Arbor, Michigan: The University of Michigan Press, 1958), p. 103. - 4John Charles Ball "A Scale and Factorial Analysis of Delinquent Attitudes” (unpublished Doctoral dissertation, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, Tennessee, 1955), P. 82. 116 Attitudes Toward the Illegitimacy of Stealing (Ball's Scale B) The two means of the scores on "the illegitimacy of stealing" scale did not vary. The t-ratio of .621 in- dicated that we failed to reject the Null Hypothesis. It appeared that the subjects of the Experimental Group arrived at Boys' Training School with a feeling that stealing was a legitimate enterprise, and that this feeling did not change while at the training school. Ball found that his sample of delinquents, more than his sample of non-delin- quents, felt that stealing was legitimate.5 Attitudes Toward the Usefulness of Religion and Belief in Religious Values (Ball's Scale 0) The mean of the retest scores of the ”usefulness of religion" scale increased over the mean of the first testing scores. The t-ratio of 2.181, with 92 degrees of freedom, was significant beyond the .05 level of confidence. It appeared that the subjects of the Experimental Group felt that religion and religious values were important when they entered Boys' Training School, and that their feelings became stronger while at the training school. The fact that the subjects were positively oriented to the_useful- ness of religion was not surprising in light of several cross regional opinion polls, sampling American teenage 51bid., p. 84. 117 subculture, that found religion highly regarded by youth.6 In contrast to the above findings, Ball revealed that the non-delinquents he sampled had a more favorable attitude toward accepting religious values than the delinp quents.7 Attitudes Toward Parents (Ball's Scale D) The mean of the retest scores of the "attitudes to- ward parents" scale was larger than the mean of this scale's scores in the initial testing. The t-ratio of 3.191, with 92 degrees of freedom, was significant beyond the .01 level of confidence. It appeared that staying at Boys' Training School improved the boys' attitudes toward their parents. This result coincided with Ball's finding that the delin- quents he sampled had a more favorable attitude toward their parents than the non-delinquents.8 Weeks found that three out of ten boys in Highfields and Annandale indicated, when they were first tested, a favorable response to their parents. The retest distributions 6Raymond G. Kuhlen and Martha Arnold, "Age Differ- ences in Religious Beliefs and Problems During Adolescence," The Journal pf Genetic Ps cholo , 65 (1944). PP. 291-300: 37-H. Remmers and D. . Radler, Inc American Teena er (New York: The Bobbs-Merrill CompenyT'IhETT‘I957), pp. 5-156; George Gallup and Evan Hill, "Youth: The Cool Generation," 736 Saturday Evening Post, 234 (December 23-30, 1961), p. 7Ball, 0 . cit., p. 89. 8Ibid., p. 95. 118 of these scores for the Highfields boys were similar to the first test, whereas the retest distributions for the Annandale boys were somewhat different. lore Annandale white boys fell in the most favorable score groups. Annan- dale Negro boys were considerably more favorable in responses toward their parents on the retest than they were on the first tests. Weeks felt that a halo effect was operating here-othat the boys began to forget the difficulties they had at home and remembered the nice things. It seemed that this was especially so for the Negroes, since they did not have as many visits from their parents as did the white boys.9 ~ Travers and Davis related that in the samples they studied, far more delinquents were classified as being high on family orientation than were non-delinquents. They at- tribute this finding to the delinquent's acute sense of longing for parents he can turn to.10 Attitudes Toward the Fairness of Punishment by Parents (Ball's Scale E) An increase occurred between the numerical values of the two "fairness of parental punishment" means. The t-ratio of 2.490, with 92 degrees of freedom, was significant 9Weeks, pp. _c_i_t., p. 78. 10John F. Travers and Russell G. Davis, "A Study of Religious Hotivation and Delinquency," Journal 2; Educational Sgciolggy, 34 (January, 1961), pp. 216-218. 119 beyond the .05 level of confidence. In accordance with their positive attitudes toward parents, the boys' percep- tions concerning fair and just administration of punishment by their parents also improved. In comparing the responses of delinquents with non-delinquents, Ba11'found that more or the former than the latter believed that their parents were fair in the administration of punishment.11 It was interesting to note that in the Highfields experiment most of the boys studied had negative reactions to the authority of their parents when they were first tested. There was little indication that the white boys changed in their perceptions of parental authority during their stay in the institution. The Negro boys, however, tended to become more negative in their attitudes toward parental authority.12 Attitudes Toward the Achievement of Success (Ball's Scale F) There was little variance between the test and re- test means of the "achievement of success“ scores. The t-ratio of .281 was not significant, thus we failed to re- ject the Null Hypothesis. The boys studied tended to feel that one obtains monetary success through luck and shrewd- ness, not through hard work and education. This viewpoint nBall, pp. _c_1,_t., p. 99. leeeks, __p. 515., p. 80. 120 - did not change during their stay at the training school. Ball found that the delinquents he examined had a less favorable attitude toward the legitimate achievement of success than the non-delinquents.13 Opinions Concerning the Fairness of Police and Court Officials (Ball's Scale G) The two means of the scores on "the fairness of po- lice and court officials” scale did not vary. The t-ratio of 1.384 was not significant: therefore, we failed to re- ject the Null Hypothesis. It appeared that most of the Experimental Group's feelings of unfair treatment by police and court officials did not change while at the training school. Ball's results indicated that the delinquents sam- pled expressed less favorable opinions toward police and court officials than the non-delinquents.14 Ames Chapman's comparative study of delinquent and non-delinquent boys on attitudes toward legal authorities. arrived at results similar to Ball's. This researcher con- cluded that the attitudes of the delinquent boys studied were generally more hostile toward legal agencies of author- ity for juveniles than a comparable group of non-delinquent boys. The degree of hostility was greater toward the po-. lice than toward any other agency. Chapman found no 133e11, pp. gi§., p. 101. 14Ibid., p. 144. 121 statistical difference between the attitudes of delinquent and non-delinquent boys toward the juvenile court, probation and detention facilities. He felt that the findings indi-° cated that the methods of treatment employed by juvenile court, probation, and detention facilities were more friendly and acceptable to delinquent boys than those of the police.15 In accordance with the above findings, Weeks revealed only a few of the Highfields and Annandale delinquents ex- amined had favorable attitudes toward law enforcement. Negative attitudes toward law enforcement personnel were prominent in both the test and retest deta.16 Summation of the Attitudinal Findings Now that the data regarding attitude change have been presented, a summary of the findings would be appro- priate. The Experimental Group's attitudes improved during their stay at Boys' Training School toward the usefulness of schooling, the usefulness of religion and belief in re- ligious values, parents, and the fairness of punishment by parents. No significant changes occurred in the boys' attitudes toward the illegitimacy of stealing, the achieve- ment of success, and the fairness of police and court of- ficials. Though no significant change occurred in the 15Amee w. Chapman, "Attitudes Toward Legal Authori- §ies by Juvenilgs: A Comparative Study of Delinquent and on-Delinquent oys," Sociology and Social Research 40 (1956), ppe 170’175e ’ 16Weeks,_qp. cit., p. 81. 122 subjects' religiosity, the high values of the two means indicated that the boys did possess this trait and it re- mained constant during their stay at the training school.' III. AN ANALYSIS OF THE RELIABILITY OF BROEN'S RELIGIOUS INVENTORY AND BALL'S ATTITUDE SCHEDULE It is always within the propriety of research anal- ysis for the experimenter to determine if his experimental instruments are dependable. That is, they measure consist- ently whatever they measure. One common measure of reli- ability is the correlations between test and retest scores on the same group of subjects. Table II presents the cor- relation coefficients between the test and retest scores obtained on Broen's and Ball's instruments by the Experi- mental Group. At 92 degrees of freedom, all the correla- tions were significant beyond the .01 level of confidence. It was, therefore, safe to state that Broen's and Ball's instruments reliably measured attitude change of the Ex- perimental Group. IV. AN ANALYSIS OF THE ADVISABILITY 0P GENERALIZING THE EXPERIMENTAL FINDINGS TO THE TOTAL POPULATION In any evaluation of an institutional program, the findings are not of too much value unless they apply to the total institutional population. It is necessary to know the effect of the program on the entire population, TABLE II CORRELATION cosrrchsNr's BETWEEN 2332 800333 AND RETEST scones or EXPERIMENTAL osour (n-94) 123 m Scales r Religiosity .410** School .456!* Stealing ,50102 Religion .413*' Parents .5762. Parental Punishment .504’* Success .285** Justice-Punishment .388'* M "- p < .01 124 not just on a small sample. To determine if the attitude change results of the Experimental Group could be general- ized to the total pepulation at Boys' Training School, a Control Group was included in the author's research design. The extent of deviation between the average age of the two groups and the responses to the attitude instruments should determine if we are safe in generalizing our results to the total p0pulation at Boys' Training School. Regarding average ages, the Experimental Group's mean age at the time of the retest was 194.90 months (six- teen years and two months) and the standard deviation was 10.57. The Control Group's mean age was 195.80 months (sixteen years and three months) and the standard devia- tiOn was 8.92. The t-ratio between the two means was .553. At 147 degrees of freedom, t was not significant. There- fore, we can state that the two groups did not deviate in regard to average age. 4 Table III shows the means and standard deviations obtained on the attitude instruments by the Control Group. Also presented are the t-ratios between the retest means of the Experimental Group and the Control Group means. None of the t-ratios were significant: therefore, for each comparison we failed to reject the Null Hypothesis. It was evident that the responses given by the Control Group did not significantly vary from those given by the Experi- mental Group. Therefore, it would be safe to state that 125 TABLE III MEANS, STANDARD DEVIATIONS AND T-TESTS (fl-)2) OF CONTROL GROUP'S (N=55) TEST SCORES y2 Scales 'y'z Sy2 t Religiosity 32.09 7.56 1.592 SChOOl 40e76 8e51 1e731 Stealing 24.51 7.68 1.237 Religion 28.29 6.87 1.328 Parents 30.67 6.23 1.119 Parental Punishment 38.31 8.66 1.805 Success . 23.16 6.16 .204 Justice- Punishment 13.58 4.31 1.799 126 the attitude change findings can be generalized to the rest of the Boys' Training School pepulation. V. AN ANALYSIS OF THE INTERCORRELATIONS BETWEEN RELIGIOSITY AND THE OTHER ATTITUDES To ascertain which of the several attitudes examined was most related to religiosity, the intercorrelations of the scale scores are presented in Table IV. The intercor- relations of the Control Group's scores are presented, rather than the Experimental Group's, because this group was com- posed of subjects in the training school program for six or more months. The Control Group's scores are also pre- sented as there was no possibility of their responses being biased by previous testing. In other words, the author felt that the Control Group's intercorrelations were more valid than the Experimental Group's. An examination of Table IV shows that attitudes to- ward the usefulness of religion and belief in religious values, parents, and the fairness of punishment by parents were highly related to religiosity. Attitudes toward the illegitimacy of stealing was the only scale which did‘ggt show a significant relationship to the religiosity inventory. The author felt that significant hypotheses regard- ing the treatment of institutionalized delinquents could be formulated from the above findings. The author theorized that the best treatment plan for those boys possessing 127 TABLE IV INTERCORRELATION MATRIX OF CONTROL GROUP'S (N=55) SCORES Relig. Sch. Steal. Rel. Par. Par. Succ. Jus. M Religiosity 1.66 .637 .182 .764 .745 .775 .431 .662 School - 1.66 .306 .692 .536 .562 .542 .653. Stealing - -- 1.66 .121 .093 .222 .651 .367 Religion -- -- - 1.66 .666 .682 .475 .569 Parents - - - -- 1.00 .869 .301 .416 P3321236.ne -- -- .. -- -- 1.66 .466 .63: Success - - -- - -- -- 11.00 .662 JESEISESeat -- .. . .. -- -- -- -- 1.66 *8 p < .025 M. p < .005 128 hostility and attitudinal negativism toward their parents and the church would be for them to become involved in the religious program. The intercorrelational findings indi- cated that if boys, having negative attitudes toward the church and their parents, gained religiosity through a re- ligious program, then these attitudes, through generaliza- tion, may improve. The attitudes of the boys who felt that stealing was a legitimate way to achieve success were not affected by their religiosity concepts. It is, therefore, further theorized that such attitudes might be best changed through a treatment program, other than a religious emphasis, such as psychotherapy, group therapy or family counseling. Fur- ther research is needed to determine if the above hypothp case are correct. CHAPTER V SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS I. SUMMARY Crininological literature reveals that there is a controversy between those who feel that religion is a.major factor in crime prevention, and those who deny any such characteristic of religion. One of the major factors hin- dering the resolution of this controversy is the lack of empirical findings concerning the religious-crime preven- tion problem. The author felt that a logical starting point to gain this empirical knowledge was through evaluating religious programs in our institutions for delinquent youth. The purpose of this study was to evaluate such a program at the State of Michigan Training School for Boys. The author hypothesized that the religious program of the State of Michigan Boys' Training School is effective in favorably changing the religious and related attitudes of the boys in residence at this institution. To discover if this hy- pothesis was true, the author designed a study to determine if religious and related attitudes of institutionalized subjects changed over a period of time. The religious back- ground of the subjects was obtained through answers to Levenseller's Religious Influence Questionnaire (Part A, 130 modified). The instruments used to evaluate attitude change were Broen's Religious Attitude Inventory (a scale which measured religiosity), and Ball's Attitude Schedule, which included scales measuring attitudes toward: school, steal- ing, religion, parents, parental punishment, success, and justice-punishment. The instruments were administered to ninety-four newly admitted boys (the Experimental Group) at the train- ing school's Reception Center. This same group of subjects was administered the instruments six or more months after the dates they were admitted. A Control Group, consisting of fifty-five boys randomly selected from the total popu- lation of boys in residence at the training school for six or more months, was also administered the instruments. An analysis of the religious background of the boys revealed among other things that the majority in both groups were Protestant, could name a home town church that they attended, did not attend church regularly, did attend Sun- day school while growing up, received religious training and teaching about moral conduct at home, had parents who ' attended church regularly or fairly often, presently prayed, and perceived the Bible as being important to them. In regard to attitude change, the Experimental Group's feel- ings showed improvement toward schooling, religion and be- lief in religious values, parents, and parental punishment. Attitudes toward stealing, success, and fairness of police 131 and court officials did not improve._ The Experimental Group's scores on the religiosity inventory were high when first tested and again when retested. Further analysis of the scores obtained from the Experimental Group's re- sponses revealed that the instruments used were reliable, the findings could be generalized to the total population at the training school, and religiosity was highly related to attitudes toward the usefulness of religion and belief in religious values, parents, and the fairness of punish- ment by parents. Attitudes toward the illegitimacy of steal- ing was the only scale which was not significantly related' to the religiosity inventory. II. CONCLUSIONS 1. The results of this study indicated that the author's experimental hypothesis, the religious program of the State of Michigan Boys' Training School is effective in favorably changing the religious and related attitudes of the boys in residence at this institution, was basically correct. This statement is based on the following findings: a. The related attitudes of the institutional- ized delinquent boys examined improved in four out of seven content areas while they were at the training school. b. Religiosity of the boys examined remained at a high level while they were at the training school. c. The high extent of fhtercorrelation found 132 between the four attitudes that improved and religiosity suggests that the institution's religious program was in- strumental in producing the attitude changes found. The author felt that for the experimental hypothesis to be exact it should be revised to read: The religious program of the State of Michigan Boys' Training School is effective in maintaining positive religious attitudes, and in favorably changing some related attitudes of the boys in residence at this institution. 2. In view of this study's findings, the author rejects the assumptions of those in charge of juvenile cor- rectional institutions, who state that delinquents, when received at the institution, are deprived of, and have neg- ative feelings toward, religious knowledge and training. This statement is based on the following findings of the institutionalized delinquents studied: a. Most did not completely neglect their religion. b. The parents of these boys did not neglect their religion. 0. Most attended Bible study groups and Sunday schools while growing up. d. Most received religious training and teach- ing about moral conduct at home. e. Most of the boys believed in praying. f. Most of the boys felt that the Bible was an important part of their lives. 133 g. In light of the above findings, it was not surprising to discover that the boys studied possessed re- ligiosity when they entered the institution. 3. The intercorrelational findings indicated that the religious program at the State of Michigan Boys' Train- ing School‘ggg important in reforming delinquents with cer- tain specific personality problems (those rejecting school, religion and parents). It appeared that the program was ineffective in helping to reform delinquents with other types of personality problems (those rebelling against mak- ing an honest living, and against authority). III. RECOMMENDATIONS The findings of this study suggest recommendations to the fields of juvenile delinquency prevention and cor- rection, and to those interested inconducting research along the lines of the present experiment. These recom- mendations are presented below. Recommendations to the Fields of Juvenile Delinquency Prevention and Correction The religious backgrounds and the religiosity find- ings of the institutionalized boys studied suggest that religion is a positive factor in their lives. Therefore, the author feels that the churches can be instrumental in preventing delinquency. The author recommends that churches inaugurate aggressive, community-wide delinquency prevention 134 and reformation programs. Of course, in order for such programs to exist, it is essential for law enforcement and juvenile court agencies to inform the community's religious leaders of the delinquency problems. The findings regarding the improvement of related attitudes and the consistency of religiosity of the insti- tutionalized delinquents examined indicates that religious programs are instrumental in the reforming of those with certain types of personality problems. The author recom- mends that juvenile corrections personnel screen out those subjects who can best benefit from the religious program, and attempt to submerge them into such a program. Those subjects who could not benefit from a total submerging into the religious program should be referred to other treatment programs. The above statements indicate that correctional religious programs must be expanded with more activities and religious counselors, and that much more research in this area is needed. Finally the author feels that the improvement in attitudes accomplished by the religious program is of no use in reforming institutionalized delinquents unless an attempt is made by the correctional institution to super- vise the religious activities of those released from the institution. The author recommends active follow-up work through consultations involving the minister of the insti- tution, the subject's home town minister, and the subject 135 and his parents. The purpose of such consultations should be the planning of an adequate religious program for the released individual. Recommendations for Future Research Below are the author's suggestions to researchers interested in conducting studies similar to the one pre- sented: 1. To acquire more accurate information on the ef-. fects of religious programs on attitude change, the author suggests the following experimental design. The responses of an experimental group of subjects who have experienced the religious program should be compared with the responses of a control group of subjects who did not participate in such a program. 2. To facilitate understanding when testing delinv quent youths, the language of Broen's Religious Inventory should be further simplified. . 3. The author found the attention span of the de- linquent subjects he examined to be limited; therefore, the instruments should be shortened. 4. Many of the boys the author tested became very anxious during the administration of the instruments: there- fore, it may be advisable in future research for the exam- iner to become a familiar figure to the experimental sub- jects. ' 5. To facilitate the administration of the instruments 136 and to cut down on the verbal conversations between sub- jects, the author suggests that testing sessions include from five to eight subjects only. 6. The author suggests comparative studies to the one presented. These studies should administer different instruments than employed by the author, thereby helping to determine if the findings of the present study are valid. 7. Though it is important to determine attitude change, it is more important to examine behavioral change. The author suggests that studies be designed to include ratings of the subjects being examined by cottage parents, teachers, counselors, and others involved with the child. An intercorrelational analysis of behavioral and attitude change data would be most beneficial in determining the effects of institutional programs in reforming delinquents. BIBLIOGRAPHY 138 A. BOOKS Allport, Gordon W. The Nature of Personalit Selected Papers. Cambridge: AddIEon-WesIey Press, 1950. Barnes, Harry E., and Negley K. Testers. New’Horizons,;g Criminolo , 2nd Edition. New Jersey: PrenEIce- HalI, Inc., 1951. Barron, Milton L. The Juvenile in Delin uent Society. New York: AIIred . KnopT , I954. Bonger, William A. An Introduction to Criminology. London: Methuen and Company, Ltd., I9 . Criminaligy and Economic Conditions. Boston: Little, Brown, and Company, 1 . Branham, Vernon C., and Samuel B. Kutosh (eds.). he clo- edia of Criminolo New York: Philosop c LiEru ,I949. Carr, Lowell Juilliard. Delin uenc Control. New York: Harper and Brothers, 1950. Coleman, James S. The Adolescent Society: The Social Life of the Teenager and Its Impact on Education. Clon- coeT‘IlIinois: TF' F'r—e'e Press, 1961. Cooley, Edwin J. Probation and Delin uenc . New York: Thomas Nelson and Sons, 1927. Cuber John F. Sociolo . New York: Appleton-Century- ' Crofts, 1951"“. 5' Davis, Kingsley. Human Society. New York: The Macmillan Company, 1949. Diamond, Solomon. Information and Error. New York: Basic Books, Inc., 9 9- Edwards, Allen L. Experimental Design in Psychological Research. New York: Rhinenard and ompany, nc., Elliott, Mabel A. Crime in Modern Society. New York: Harper and BrotEers, . Ferguson, T. The Young Delinquent in His Social Setting: ‘ggGlas ow —Study. London: Ciford University Press, 139 Garofalo, Baron Raffaele. Criminolo . Translated by Robert Wyness Millar. Boston: Little, Brown and Company, 1914. Glueck, Sheldon, and Eleanor Glueck. Predicting Delinauency and Crime. Cambridge, Maesachuset s: arvar n - varsity Press, 1959. . Unravelin Juvenile Delin uenc . Cambridge, Mass- achusetts: fiarvard University Press, 1950. Hartshorne, Hugh, and Mark A. May. Studies in Deceit. Volume I of Studies in the Nature of Character, 3 volumes. New York: “The NaEEiIIan—Company, I928. Healy, 'illiam, and Augusta P. Bronner. New Lig%t‘gg, e- lin uenc and Its Treatment. New Haven, onnec out: Yale U I n versIty Press, I936. Hightower, P. R. Biblical Information in Relation to Char- acter and Conduct. Iowa City: ‘Siate UnIvefEIty of Iowa, 1 . Hilgard, Ernest R. Introduction‘yg Psychology, 2nd Edition. New York: Harcourt, Brace an ompany, I957. Hurwitz, Stephan. Criminolo . London: George Allen and Univin, Ltd., I959. Johnson P. E. (ed.). Reli ion and Social Work. New York: 'Harper and Brothers, I956. Krech, David, and Richard S. Crutchfield. Theor and Prob- lems of Social Ps cholo . New York: No raw-HITT- Book 93mpany, 194%. Kvaracsus, William C. Juvenile Delin uenc and the School. Yonkers-on-Hudson, New York: aor d Book Company, 1945. . The Community and the Delin uent. Yonkers-on- Hudson, New York: World 00 ompany, 1954. Lombroso, Cesare. Crime: Its Causes and Remedies. Bos- ton: Little, Brown, and Company, 1 1 . McCann, Richard V. Delinguency: Sickness‘gg Sin? New York: Harper and rothers, 7. McCord, William, Joan McCord, and Irving Kenneth Zola. Origins of Crime: 5 New Evaluation of the Cambrid e- Somervill? Youth Study. New York: Ealumbia Univer- EltnyrEE§{—I959. 140 National Conference on Prevention and Control of Juvenile Delinquency. Re ort on Church Res onsibilities. Washington, D. 9.: UT-S. Government PrintIng 9f- fioe, 1947. Neumeyer, Martin H. Juvenile Delin uenc in Modern Society. New York: Van Nostrm d Company, 955. Nye Ivan. Family Relationships and Delin uent Behavior. ’ New York: John Wiley and Sons, Inc., I953. Pakenham, Lord. Causes.g§ Crime. London: Weidenteld and Nicolson, 1958. Parsons, Talcott, and Edward A. Shils (eds.). TowardA General Theo of Action. Cambridge: HM ”vard d Uni- versity ress, I95 . Powers, Edwin, and Helen Witmer. MEX eriment in the Pre- vention of Delin uenc . New _York: CqumE a Un iver- I951. s ty ress, Reckless, Walter C., and Napheus Smith. Juvenile Delin uenc . New York: MoGraw-Hill Book Company, Inc., I932. Remmers, H. H., and D. H. Radler. The American Teena er. New York: The Hobbs-Merrill Co ompany, Inc., I957. Robison, Sophia M. Juvenile Delin uenc : Its Nature and Control. New York: Henry fioIt and Company, I939? Sutherland, Edwin H., and Donald R. Cressey. Princi lee of Criminolo . New York: J. B. Lippincott Eompany, 55. Taft, Donald R. Criminolo , rd Edition. New York: The Macmillan ompany, 95 . Tappan, Paul W. Juvenile Delinguency. New York: McGraw- Hill Company, I949. Testers, Negley E., and John O. Reinemann. The Challenge of Delin uenc Causation, Treatment, an Preve - TTon of Juvenile Delinguency. New York: —PrentIce- HEII”'InETTII955. Underwood, Benton J., and Others. Elementar Statistics. New York: Appleton-Century-Urofts, Inc., . Vedder, Clyde B. The Juvenile Offender: Perspective and Readin s. New York: DouEIeday and Company,_Ino., I954. 141 Von Hentig, Hans. The Criminal and Hés Victims. New Haven. Connecticut: YaIe UnIversIty ress, I918. Weeks, Ashley H. Youthful Offenders g; Higfifields. Ann Arbor, Michigan: The UnIversity 0 1c gan Press, 1958. Wildening, Howard. [A Student's Ps cholo Handbook. San Francisco: Howard"Chandler PubIIsier, I958. 142 B. DISSERTATIONS Ball, John Charles. "A Scale and Factorial Analysis of Delinquent Attitudes." Unpublished Doctoral disser- tation, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, Tennessee, 1955. Bernardo, Sister Maria Del Carmen. "The Religious Knowledge, Moral Judgment, and Personality Structure of a Se- lected Group of Catholic Delinquent Girls." Unpub- lished Doctoral dissertation, Fordham University, New York, New York, 1957. Broen, William E., Jr. "A Factor-Analytic Study of Relig- ious Attitudes." Doctoral dissertation, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota, 1956. Levenssller, Dorothy E. "The Relation of Religious Influ- 'ences and Spiritual Attitudes in Delinquency Control." Unpublished Master's thesis, Boston University, Bos- ton, Massachusetts, 1953. Mursell, George Rex. "A Study of Religious Training as a Psychological Factor in Delinquency." Unpublished Doctoral dissertation, Ohio State University, Colum- bus, Ohio, 1930. Roberts, Guy L. "The Religious Attitudes and Backgrounds of One Hundred Fifty Protestant Juvenile Delinquents." Unpublished Doctoral dissertation, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, 1955. 143 C. PERIODICALS Baker, H. J., and F. J. Decker and A. S. Hill. "A Study of Juvenile Theft," Journal‘23,Education§;,Research, 20 (1929), 81-87. Bartlett, Edward H., and Dale B. Harris. "Personality Fac- tors in Delinquency," School and Society. 43 (May, 1936), 653-656. Bennett, James V. "The Role of the Modern Prison Chaplain," Proceedings 2; the American Prison Association (1937), 9‘38 0 Blanchard, W. H. "Modern Morality and Juvenile Delinquency," American Imago, 13 (1956). 383-398. Box, G. E. P. ”Non-Normality and Tests on Variances," Biometrika, 40 (1953), 318-335. Broen, William E., Jr. "A Factor-Analytic Study of Relig- ious Attitudes," The Journal of Abnormal and Social Psxchologz. 54 (1557)7Tm7§T Cavan, Ruth S. ”Replies to Father Coogen's article 'The Myth Mind in an Engineer's World,'" Federal Proba- Cedarleaf, Rev. Lennart J. "The Church and Juvenile Delin- quency," Pastoral Ps cholo , 6 (1955). 1-3. Chapman, Ames W. "Attitudes Toward Legal Authorities by Juveniles: A Comparative Study of Delinquent and Non-Delinquent Boys," Sociology and Social Research, 40 (1956), 170-175. Coogen, Rev. John Edward. "Religion a Preventive of Delin- quency," Federal Probation, 18 (December, 1954), 29- 35. . . "The Myth Mind in an Engineer's World," Federal ‘Probation, 16 (March, 1952), 26-50. Dominic, Sister M., R. G. S. "Religion and the Juvenile Delinquent," American Catholic Sociological Review, 15 (October, I954), fiSE-ibz. Dueill, Carl R. "The Religious Authorities in Rehabilita- tion," Proceedin s of the American Prison Associa- tion (19475. 189-1957 ' 144 Dunn, C. V. "The Church and Crime in the United States,” The Annals, American Acadcm~ of Political‘ggg Social Science, I25_(May, 1926), 296:22 . Edmonds, Rev. Leonard S. "The Place of Religion in the Treatment of the Offender," Federal Probation, 15 Ernst, John D. "An Analysis of the Religious and Ethical Habits of a Group of Convicts," Universit of Pitts- burgh Bulletin, 27 (November 15, I935), 3%- Friedman, Benjamin. "Moral Culture, Its Most Effective Elements " Proceedin 3,3; the American Prison As 0- ciation (HM-1 s. —"""' Gallup, George, and Evan Hill. "Youth: The Cool Genera- tion " The Saturday Evening Post, 234 (December 23-30, 1961). 331's . Gerkin, Charles V. "The Pastor and the Parents of Delin- quent Children," Pastoral Psychology, 6 (1955), 8-13. Gore, T. L. "Antidote for Delinquency-God Inspired Love," Federal Probation, 19 (June, 1955). 33-36. Guttman, Louis. "The Cornell Technique for Scale and In- tensity Analysis," Educational Psychological Measure- ments, 7 (1947), 24 - . Hagar, Don J. "Religion, Delinquency and Society," Social Work, 2 (July, 1957). 16-21. Hill, G. G. "The Ethical Knowledge of Delinquent and Non- Delinquent Boys," Journal 23 Social Ps cholo , 6 Hronek, Mary Linda. "An Experiment in Penetrating the Spiritual Milieu of the Juvenile Delinquent," Relig- ‘igus Education, 50 (1955), 98-102. Israel, Edward L. "The Church‘s Responsibility for Crime," Proceedings‘gg the American Prison Association (1931), 1 " e ' Kuhlen, Raymond G., and Martha Arnold. "Age Differences in Religious Beliefs and Problems During Adolescence," The Journal.g§ Genetic Ps cholo , 65 (1944), 291- Kvaraceus, William C. "Delinquent Behavior and Church At- tendance," Journal‘gf Sociological Research, 28 145 Lee, Robert. "The Church and the Problem of Delinquency,” Religious Education, 52 (1957), 125-129. Mailer, J. B. "Character Growth and Jewish Education," Religious Education, 25 (September, 1930), 627-630. McCann, R. V. "Self Image and Delinquency: Some Implica- tions for Religion," Federal Probation, 20 (Septem- McNemar, Quinn. "Opinion-Attitude Methodology," Psycholog- ical Bulletin, 43 (1946), 289-369. Middleton, Warren G., and P. J. Fay. "Attitudes of Delin- quent and Non-Delinquent Girls Toward Sunday Observ- ance, the Bible and War," Journal‘gg Educational Ps cholo , 32 (1941), 555-555. Middleton, Warren G., and R. R. Wright. "A Comparison of a Group of Ninth and Tenth Grade Delinquent and Non- Delinquent Boys and Girls on Certain Attitude Scales," Pedagogical Seminary and Journal‘gg Genetic Psychol- 2819 8 4 g -1550 Miller, Francis J. "The Inmate's Attitude Toward Religion and the Chaplain " Proceedinge‘gg the American Prisca Association (1941), -4 . Miner, John R. "Church Membership and Commitments to Prison," Human Biology, 3 (1931). 429-436. . "Church Membership and the Homicide Rate," gm Biolo , 1 (1929). 562-564. Mosier, C. I. "Influence of Chance Error on Simple Struc- ture: An Empirical Investigation of the Effect of Chance Error and Estimated Communalities on Simple Structure in Factorial Analysis," Pe chometrika, 4 .(1939). 33—44. Murchison, Carl. "American White Criminal Intelligence," Journal of Criminal Law, Criminolo , and Police Science,_I5 (I954), 435-494. "' Reinhart, J. M., and F. V. Harper. "Comparison of Environ- ment Factors of Delinquent and Non-Delinquent Boys,“ Journal‘gg Juvenile Research, 15 (1931), 271-277. Reisner, Christian F. "The Church or Severity Curing Crimes“ Pioceedings'gg the American Prison Association (1931 , 146 Shelley, Ernest L. V. "The Adolescent: So Near and Yet So Far Away," Federal Probation, 18 (1954). 43-45. Simpson Ray Mars. "Attitudes Toward the Ten Commandments (Opinions of 148 College Students Compared with 345 Prisoners)," Journal 9; Social zsychologx. 4 (1933), Skolnick, J. H. "Religious Affiliation and DriniinghBi- havior," guarterly Journal‘gg Studies‘gg co 0 (1958). 4 - . Smith, Philip M. "Organized Religion and Criminal Behavior," Sociolo and Social Research, 33 (May, 1949), 362- . "Prisoners' Attitudes Toward Organized Religion," Religious Education, 51 (1956), 462-464. . "The Role of the Church in Delinquency Prevention," Sociology and Social Research, 35 (1951), 183-190. Sukov, Marvin. "The Long-Term Prisoner:m A Study of Thizzy Men Completing Life Sentences " ericgg ourna Ps chiatr , 96 (1940), 1321-1534. "'— Taft, Ronald R. "A Reply to Father Coogen's Article," Fed- eral‘Probation, 16 (June, 1952), 27-31. Thalheimer, Rose, and Benjamin L. Coleman. "What Can the Church Do About Juvenile Delinquency?" Pastoral‘zgy- cholo , 6 (1955), 29-32. Tippy, Worth M. "Religion and the Prisoner," Proceedi e 2;,the American Prison Association (1925), 55-6I. Travers, John F., and Russell G. Davis. "A Study of Relig- ious Motivation and Delinquency," Journal of Educa- tional Sociology, 34 (January, 196I), 295-230. Wattenberg, William W. "Church Attendance and Juvenile Migcggguct," Sociology and Social Research, 34 (1950), 9 "' e Webb, Robert, and Muriel Webb. "How Churches Can Help in the Prevention and Treatment of Juvenile Delinquency," Federal Probation, 21 (December, 1957), 21-25. Wenger, S. B. "What Prison Inmates Think of God," Reli - ious Education, 40 (January-February, 1945), - 3. 147 Wilkes, E. J. "Some Thoughts on Delinquency," Federal‘zgg- Patios. 19 (1955). 44-47. - Wilkins, William F. "Papal Address on Rehabilitation or Liberation from Guilt and Punishment," Proceed§gge of the American Correctional Association , . '2'I3'ZP'I7 . APPENDIX 149 I. LEVENSELLER'S RELIGIOUS INFLUENCE QUESTIONNAIRE (Part A, Modified) NAME DATE OF BIRTH ay Month Year Your cooperation in contributing to this survey is greatly appreciated. Please answer the questions in the spaces provided and by checking in the squares. If you wish to comment further, you may write on the back of the paper. Further directions are given as needed. Other 1. Your religion is: Protestant (:2 What is the name of your church? Catholic é_ 2. Do you attend religious services regularly? If so, why do you go? :-)I have to. :It's the respectable thing. My friends go. :It draws me closer to God. :Other 3. If you do not attend church regularly, check one of these: '- _I sometimes go to church. :I never go. _I have never been to a church service. 4. If you formerly attended church, and do not now, why did you stop going? _It didn't help me. (:)Ohurch members don't live 'Nobody makes me. right. :)My friends don't go. E_ 31 don't like preaching. Other 5. How often did you attend Sunday School while you were gowing up?_ _ _ $_)Never (_)Seldom (_)Fairly often (_)Regularly 6. How often have you attended a young people's church roup __ _ __ :)Never (_)Seldom ( _)Fairly often ( _)Regularly 7. Have you_ ever been an active worker in any church group? (: )No (: )Taken a small part. ( _)Been fairly active. :)Been a leader. IO. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 150 Did your parents give you religious training at home? Teaching about the church? Teaching about the Bible? Teaching about moral conduct? How often did your parents attend church while you were rowing up? (Z )Never p(Z )Seldom (Z JFairly often (Z)Regu1ar1y Did your parents teach you to pray? Did you as a child form the habit of daily prayer? Do you pray now? Of what help is it to you? §:Z ENot much; I don't get what I want. It makes my faith stronger as I see the answers. Even if God doesn't seem to answer right away, it makes me feel closer to Him. (Z)0ther Did your parents conduct "family prayers"? Did they read the Bible or other religious literature aloud in the family group? What kind of an example do you feel that your parents set for you in right living? (Z )Good (Z )Fair (Z _)Poor How important and real did religion seem to be in their liveg? __ _ ( _)Very ( _)Fairly ( _)Hardly (_)Not at all How much do you feel any of the following have influ- enced your character growth and conduct? (Don't mark any you haven't had.) a. Church attengance. _. ‘_ (Z _)Very much ( )Somewhat ( _)Little (_)None bZ Sunday SchooI} ‘_ (Z _)Nons (Z )Little (Z )Somewhat ( _)Very much cZ Church young people' s‘group . (Z )Little (Z )Somewhat ( _)Very much (Z )None dZ Active church work. (Z _)Sonewhat (Z )Little (Z )None (Z _)Very much eZ Going arounI with religious young 1e. Z)Very much (Z )Somewhat (Z )Little p(ZINone fZ Readin Zthe'Eible. (Z )None Z)Little (Z )Somewhat (Z _)Very much Home reIigious traIning. Z)Little (Z )Somewhat ( _)Very much (Z )None hZ ReligiousZ training outEide church ang home. (Z )Somewhat (Z )Little (Z _)Very much (Z )None 151 II. BROEN'S RELIGIOUS ATTITUDE INVENTORY Directions: Circle the A if you agree with a statement, circle the D if you disagree with the statement. ‘Make a choice for each statement. 1 God is always with us. Christ died for sinners. The Ten Commandments were good for people of olden times but do not apply to modern life. There is really no such a place as Hell. Miracles are performed by the power of God even It is through the goodness of Jesus Christ and not because of our own actions that we are made right before God. God can be approached directly by all those who believe in Him. The death of Christ on the cross was necessary to blot out man's sin and make him acceptable in the eyes of God. It was too bad that Christ died so young or He could have been a greater power for good. God exists in all of us. Man is born in sin. Man's real nature is good. I am sometimes very aware of the presence of God. Man is by nature sinful and unclean. All public places of amusement should be closed 0 The underscored letter signifies the religious re- 'A,D l. A,D 2. A‘Q, 3. 2, 4. A’D 5. today. A,D 6. A,D 7. A_D 8. A‘Q 9. A’D 10. A_D ll. A.2 12. A.D 13. A|D 14. A’D 15. on Sunday. sponse. The scoring key was acquired from document 5066 of the American Documentation Institute, Library of Con- gress, Washington, D. C. 1:» n» >- k: h. #> :>I>I> have u» s» It: h> >. k! h> D> h> Id 16. D 17. D 18. Rd 19. 20. 21. D 22. k3 k9 ti ti k: 23. 24. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. 30. 31. 32. 33. 34. 35. 152 The stories of miracles in the Bible have some deeper meaning or moral but are not to be taken as truth. God is very real to me. The Bible is the work of God and must be completely believed. I believe in God but I am not sure what I believe about Him. Man has a spark of holiness in him which must be made to blossom more fully. When in doubt it's best to stop and ask God what to do. Sin brings forth the anger of God. A person should follow his own conscience in de- ciding right and wrong. The most important idea in religion is the Golden Rule. God should be asked about all important matters. The anger of God is a terrible thing. It is more important to love your neighbor than to keep the Ten Commandments. The Bible should be interpreted with reason. Because of His presence we can know that God exists. Everyone will be called before God at the Judgment day to answer for his sins. Man's idea of God is quite uncertain. Miracles are sometimes performed by persons in close contact with God. Everyone has sinned and deserves punishment for his sins. The church is important because it organizes the social life of a community. My faith in God is complete for "though.He slay me yet will I trust him.” fl> #- fl> b» "b W> Ib'lh' he W> b» D R: 36. 37. 38. 39. 40. D 41. D 42. 43- D 44. D 45. D 46. Rd “3 k: R: 47- 48. 49. 50. 51. 52. 153 No one should question the authority of the Bible. The content of religious books is not important. What really matters is that they help those who believe in them to lead better lives. When the Bible is interpreted with reason it will be found to agree with itself and with nature. Because of his terrible sinfulness, man has been damned forever unless he accepts Christ as his savior. Religion is a search for understanding, truth, love, and beauty in human life. True love of God is shown in obeying His moral laws. Every person born into this world deserves God's anger and damnation. . If we live as good lives as we can, God will for- give our sins. The world is full of condemned sinners. The Devil can enter a man's body and take control. The people of the world must repent before it is too late and they find themselves in Hell. No one who has experienced God like I have could believe that there is no God. The Christian must lead a strict life, away from drinking, smoking, dancing and things like that. In his natural state of sin, man is too evil to talk with God. Christ was not holy but his teachings and the ex- ample set by his life are valuable. The question of Christ's holiness is not important, it is his teachings that matter. God is the final judge of our behavior but I do Eotibelieve that He is as punishing as some say e s. 154 III. BALL'S ATTITUDE SCHEDULE This questionnaire will be given to various groups of boys. The purpose is to find out the Opinions that boys have about their school, their religion, and other subjects. We are interested in knowing what‘ygg think about these things. Directions: Answer each question by marking a circle around the response you agree with most. Example: Do you think that school work is too difficult? a. Yes, it's always too difficult b It's mostly too difficult @ Sometimes it's too difficult . It's not very difficult e. It's not difficult at all (Circle one answer) 1. Does school help boys much? my K_e§2 ' a. Yes, a great deal b. Yes, some 2 c. No, not much 1 d. No, not at all 0 2. Do you feel that you get much good out of going to school? a. Yes, a great deal of good b. Yes, some good c. No, not much good d. No, not any good OPNUI 3. Do a lot of things you do in school seem like a waste of time? a. Almost all of them b. Most of them c. About half of them d. Very few of then s. None of them #UINPO 4. Have you learned much that is important in school? a. Yes, a great deal b. Yes, many things c. No, not much d. No, nothing OHM“ 5. Do you think that the things you learn in school will help you later on? a. Yes, almost all of them b. Most of them c. Some of them d. Only a few of them e. None of them ORION-F 2The scoring key was originated by the author. 10. 11. 12. Do you think you have been treated fairly in school? a. Yes, always b. Most of the time c. About half of the time d. Not very often e. Never Do schools try to help all boys? a. Yes, all of them b. Most of them c. About half of them d. Only a few e. No, none of them Do schools care whether you learn much? a. Yes, they care a great deal b. Yes, they care some c. No, they do not care much d. No, they do not care at all Is school interesting? a. Almost always b. Most of the time c. About half of the time d. Not usually e. No, never Do you think that things taught in school are true? a. All are true b. Most are true c. About half are true d. Not much is true e. None is true Do you believe that going to school helps a boy get a good Job later on? a. It certainly helps b. It helps a lot 0. It helps some d. It does not help much e. It does not help at all Do you think that school gives a boy a chance to show what he can do? a. Yes, a good chance b. Yes, some chance c. No, not much d. No, not any chance at all 155 OPNU OHNUl-F OHNU‘F OHNUI-P- OHNUl'P Ol-‘NULCb Ol-‘Nu 156 13. Do you feel that school is a waste of time because a boy does not get a chance to learn useful things? a. Almost everything is useful b. Most is useful c. About half is useful d. Not much is useful e. Nothing is useful OHNU# 14. Do you feel that school is a waste of time because no one really cares whether you learn something or not? ‘ a. They all try to help you b. Most try to help you 0. Some try to help you d. They don't care much e. They don't care at all OHNW# 15. Do you think that school is a waste of time because you can't learn the things that you want to? a. You always learn what is best b. You mostly learn what you want c. Sometimes you learn what you want d. Not much is what you want e. None of it is what you want OHNW# 16. Do you think many people are honest? a. Almost all of them b. Most of them c. Some of them d. Only a few of then s. None of them OHOU¥ 17. How many people would steal something if they had a good chance? a. All of them b. Most of them c. About half of them d. Few of them e. None of them #UNPO 18. 2: you think many people have taken things at some 17:9 . a. All of them b. Most of them c. About half of them d. Few of them e. None of them #UNPO 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. Do you think many people would steal money if they had a good chance? a. All or almost all of them b. Most of them ' c. Some of them d. Only a few of them e. Very few or none of them Do you think many people would steal_from their parents? a. All of them b. Most of them c. About half of them d. Few of them e. None of them Do you think many people would steal from their friends? a. All of them b. Most of them c. About half of them d. Few of them e. None of them Do you think many people would steal from their best friend? 3. Almost all of them b. Most of them c. About half of them d. Only a few of them e. None of them How many people would steal from a store if they had a good chance? a. All of them b. Most of them c. About half of them d. Few of them e. None of them How many people would steal from a school if they had a chance? a. All of them b. Most of them c. About half of them d. Few of them e. None of them Do you think many people would steal from the place where they work? a. All of them b. Most of them 0. About half of them d. Few of them e. None of them 157 aumwo aumwo _¢WNHO bUNPO aumHo auNHo «FUND-’0 26. 27. Do you think many people would steal money from a hospital if they had a good chance? a. Almost all of them b. Most of them c. Some of them d. Only a few of them e. None of them Do you think many people would steal money from , a church? a. Almost all of them b. Most of them c. Some of them d. Only a few of them e. None of them 158 ‘F-WNI-‘O «FUND-'0 28. 29. 30. 31. 32. How important is religion to you? a. Very important _ b. Pretty important c. Not very important d. Not important at all Do you feel that religion helps you to solve problems in life? a. Yes, very helpful b. Yes, helps sometimes c. No, not often d. No, never Is it necessary that everyone have religious training? a. Yes, very necessary b. Yes, fairly necessary 0. No, not very necessary d. No, not necessary at all Do you think that religion makes people better? a. Very much better b. Some better c. A little better d. No better OHNUI OHNU OHNUI OHM“ Do you find religion helpful in getting along from day to day? a. Yes, very helpful b. Helps sometimes c. Not often helpful d. Never helps OHNU 159 33. How important do you think it is to follow re- ligious teachings and rules? a. Very important . b. Pretty important c. Not very important d. Not important at all OI-‘NUI 34. Do you think things would be better if more people followed their religion? a. Much better b. Some better c. About the same d. Worse OHNUI 35. Do you believe what the church and preachers say? a. Yes, everything b. Most of it c. About half of it d. Not much of it e. No, none of it OHNU-fi 36. Do you believe in a heaven and hell? a. Yes b. No c. I do not know HON 37. Is what religion says always right? a. Yes, always b. Most of the time c. About half of the time d. Not often e. No, never OI- 'OUI'F 38. Do you think that people are rewarded for the good things they do after they die? a. Yes b. No c. I'm not sure d. I don't know HMO“ 39. Do you feel that religion would help personally if you got into serious trouble? a. Yes, help a great deal b. Yes, help some c. No, not help much d. No, not help at all OHM“ The next group of questions is about your home. The questions ask about the persons who look after you at home, whether they are your parents, relatives, or friends. 40. 41. 42. 43. 44. 45. 46. 47. Do you think your parents (or whoever brought you up) did what they could to help you? a. Yes, all they could b. They mostly did what they could c. They didn't do much d. No, they didn't do much at all Did your parents treat you fairly at home? a. Yes, all the time b. Most of the time c. About half of the time d. Not often e. No, never How well do you feel that your parents understood your problems and needs? a. Very well b. Fairly well c. Not much d. Not at all Do you feel that your parents punished you with- out a good reason? a. Yes, all the time b. Yes, often 0. About half the time d. Not often ' e. Never Did your parents help you when you got in trouble? a. Yes, always b. Most of the time c. About half of the time d. Not often e. No, never How much do you like your parents? a. Very much b. Pretty much c. Not so much d. Not at all Do you think your parents like you? a. Yes, very much b. Yes, pretty much c. No, not so much d. No, not at all Have your parents treated you as well as most boys' parents treated them? a. Mine were best of all b. Mine were better than most c. Mine were about average d. Mine were not as good as most e. Mine were worst of all 160 OHI‘JUl OHNUI-b- #UINi-‘O OHM“ OHNUI-h OHM“ OHNUI OHNWJS 48. 49. Do you think your parents are interested in what you a. b. c. d. e. Do you think that most of the things your parents do? Very interested Pretty much interested Somewhat interested Not much interested Not at all interested tell you to do are best? a. b. C. d. 8. Always Most of the time About half of them Not often Never 161 OI-‘NVI-F HNu-b 50. 51. 52. 53. 54. Do you think your parents were fair when they punished you? a. b. c. d. e. Do you think your parents punish you too much? a. b. c. d. When you were punished by your parents, did they Yes, always Most of the time About half of the time Not often No, never Yes, much too often More than enough About the right amount Not enough have a good reason? a. b. c. d. e. Do you feel that your parents punished you for Yes, always Yes, most of the time Some of the time Not often No, never your own good? a. b. c. d. e. Yes, always Most of the time Some of the time No, not often No, never your parents punish you just to be mean? Yes, all of the time Yes, most of the time Some of the time No, not often No, never OHNUl-F OHNUI-Fb 0'4th ‘JINHO #UNI—‘O 55. 56. 57. 58. 59. 60. 61. Did your parents punish you for most any kind of thing you did? a. Yes, for anything at all b. For most things c. Only for some things d. For very few things e. I never knew what they would do Do you feel that your parents punished you Just to "take it out on you"? a. Yes, all the time b. Most of the time c. Some of the time d. No, not often e. No, never The next day after you were punished, would your parents still be angry with you? a. Still very angry b. Still somewhat angry 0. Not very angry d. Not angry at all The next week after you had been punished, did your parents still hold it against you? a. Yes, very much be Some c. Not much d. Not at all Did your parents always punish you if you did something wrong? a. Yes, always b. Most of the time c. Some of the time d. No, not often e. No, never Did you know what to eXpect from your parents if you were caught doing something wrong? a. Yes, always b. Most of the time c. Not often d. Never Do you think the things you were punished for were wrong to do? a. Almost always wrong b. Mostly wrong c. Sometimes wrong d. Not often wrong e. No, never wrong 162 Ol-‘NVI OHNUl-Fb ”NU-’0 VINO-'0 #UINPO H#WNO OI-‘NVI-b 62. 63. Do you feel that your parents punished you to teach you a lesson? a. Yes, always b. Most of the time c. Some of the time d. Not often e. No, never When you were punished, did your parents agree about it? a. Always b. Most of the time c. Some of the time d. Not often e. No, never MB OHNu-b OHNUI‘F 64. 65. 66. 67. 68. Do you think rich people get their money by hard work? a. Yes, all of them b. Most of them 0. About half of them d. Only a few of them e. No, none of them OHNULF How many people get rich by beating out the others? a. Almost all of them b. Most of them c. About half of them d. Only a few of them e. None of them Does education help peOple get rich? a. Yes, a great deal b. It helps some c. It helps a little d. It does not help at all Do people get rich because of lucky breaks? a. Always b. Most of the time c. About half of the time d. Not often 9. Never Is it true that rich people get their money by knowing the right persons? a. Always true b. Mostly true c. Sometimes true d. Not often true e. Never true OHNU #‘flNI-‘O hunt-’0 #QMHO 164 69. Do you think rich people get their money because their parents help them? a. Yes, always b. Most of the time c. Half of the time d. Not often UNI-'0 70. Do many pecple get rich by stealing? a. Almost all do b. Host do c. About half of them d. Only a few do e. None do #WNHO 71. How many people get rich because they have a good racket? a. Almost all of them b. Most of them c. About half of them d. Only a few of them e. None of them #UNHO 72. Do you think that many people get rich by gambling? a. Yes, most do b. Some do c. About half do d. Only a few do e. No, none do #UINI-‘O 73. Is it true that people get rich because they are smart? a. Yes, most do b. Some do c. About half do d. Only a few do e. No, none do OHNVMF 74. Do you think that people are treated fairly by the police? a. Most of the time b. Some of the time c. Not much of the time d. None of the time OHNU 75. Are teachers fair when they punish students? a. Almost all the time b. Yes, most of the time c. No, not often d. No, never OHM“ 76. 77. 78. 79. 80. Are parents fair when they punish their children? a. Yes, almost always b. Yes, most of the time c. No, not often d. No, never Do you think it is all right to whip a boy if he does something mean? a. Yes, he should be whipped b. Maybe he should be whipped' c. It depends on what he did d. He should not be whipped at all Do you feel that you have been fairly treated by the police? a. Yes, always b. Most of the time c. About half of the time d. No, never Do you feel that you would be treated fairly if you were brought to court? a. Yes, very fair b. Mostly fair c. Not very fair d. Not fair at all e. I don't know If someone does something wrong and breaks a law, do you think he should be punished? a. He should certainly be punished b. Maybe he should be punished c. Sometimes he should be punished d. He should not be punished at all 165 OHNUJ OUNH PONW¥ OHNUI OHNU l “ 5 {pant—minurafl 91".“: ,r‘a‘w "‘1 . 'L" ,V .15" ”£313."; A tr‘“ .1 " Z" ‘ ‘ ZN ' 5L. L ‘l I 313.2%. I'm-'“w - Hid dis, ,' V MICHIGAN STATE! UNIVERSITY LlBRARzl ES I! l|||93HO