, .‘gufi .9. MRSONAUTY PATTERN! OF SOCIALLY SELECTED AND SOCMLLY REJECTS!) MALI COLLEGE STUDENTS flush for 5-115 Dogma of 9b. fl. MCHIGAN STATE COMM Cwfl Rtlph MEN W52 This 1. to certify that the [ thesis entitled Personality Patterns in Socially Selected and Socially Rejected Hale College Students. 7 1 presented by 1 Hr. Cyril Ralph H111 has been accepted towards fulfillment 1 of the requirements for --—-——— -—.v___.~.e__ ‘ Major professor ’ Date M80 1952 1 ‘ 0-169 1 t PERSONALITY PATTERNS OF SOCIALLI SELECTED AND SOCIALLI’REJECTED MALE COLLEGE STUDENTS OIRIL RALRHtMILL_ A THESIS Suhitted to the School of Graduate Studies of Michigan State College of Agriculture and Applied Science in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of IDCTOR OI" PHIIDSOPH Deputnent of Psychology ‘ 1952 THESIS llllllllll-II‘ [ ‘/ ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The writer wishes to acknowledge his appreciation to the members of his Guidance Committe, Drs. Harold H. Anderson, 3. Howard Bartley, and Albert I. Rabin, not only for their constructive criti— cisms and assistance in the preparation of this thesis, but for their friendly counseling and kind encouragement during the entire course of training in the clinical program. Particular thanks are also due to Mrs. Esta Berg Thomas for her helpful guidance in plan. ning the research and to Dr. John W. Kidd, whose generosity in making available the results of his sociometric study made this investigation possible. 3 1265 .1111 PER:301MLITY FAME-{NS OF SOCIA‘LLY ACCBP E AIID SOCIALLY REJECTED l-{ALE CPALLFJE STUDEIITS BY Cyril Ralph Em AN ABSTRACT Submitted to the School of Graduate Studies of Michigan State College of Agriculture and Applied Science in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY Department of Pflychol 0&1! Year 19 53 Approved Via/«4nd. WW Abstract of PERSONALITY PATTERHS OF SOCIALLY ACCLPTED AND SOCIALLI REJECTED HALE COLLEGE STUDENTS By Cyril Ralph Mill The problem. This study was designed to permit a comparison of the personality patterns of socially accepted and socially rejected individuals. The hypotheses to be tested‘weres 1) that social re- jects would be more poorly adjusted; 2) that more seriously neurotic or psychotic manifestations would appear more frequently in the reject group; 3) that rejects sould.exhibit more anxiety and their mechanisms of defense would be less socially acceptable; h) that the rejects would be less able to establish favorable interpersonal relationships and.wou1d exhibit greater hostility toward.their environment; 5) that the rejects would be more inconsistent in their concept of self; 6) that the rejects would display more rigidity and concreteness of thinking. Kethodology. The population was drawn from the residents of a college men's dormitory and consisted of the 21 non shown by a socio- netric study to be the most unpopular in the group. They were compared with the 21 men who were found to be the most papular. The groups did not differ in academic potentiality as determined by the ACE test, but the rejects were making lower grades, were younger, and less advanced in school. The techniques used in the investigation consisted.of the Minnesota Hultiphasic Personality Inventory, the Rorschach, the Thematic Appercep- _____:_.asfl-"' Cyril Ralph lull tion Test, a Self Rating Scale to determine consistency in the self 1 concept, and the Hokeach Hap Technique to measure rigidity and concrete— ness of thinking. Results. Both groups were found to contain members showing signs of maladjustment, but the rejects as a group were more disturbed. The rejects tended toward distorted interpretations of their environment and exhibited a test pattern similar to psychOpathic deviation. Anxiety was greater among the rejects, and their mechanisms of defense tended to be offensive in the eyes of their peers. They tended toward feelings of inferiority and inadequacy, dissatisfaction with their present situation, and generalized hostility toward their environment. Aggression in the rejects tended frequently to be displaced from the actual source of their frustrations. The selects tended to be more guarded and evasive in their test reaponses. They indicated that they could assume greater responsibility and take the ascendent role in face-to-face situations. They showed an ability to 'sublimate' their sexual needs and interests. Their methods of handling their anxiety either did not interfere with their inter- personal relationships, or were actually conducive to improving their relations with others. They were more direct in the expression of their aggression, and their behavior was more predictable to others with the result that they tended to make others feel more secure in their presence. The rejects tended to be more inconsistent in their self concept, but there was no difference between groups in rigidity or concreteness of thinking as measured by the map technique. TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTER PAGE I. THEPMBLEMANDRELATEDSTUDIES............ 1 Statement of the problem . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 Review of the literature . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 II. MEIIIHODS AND PET-OCEDURE O O O O O O O O O C O O O 0 O Q C 13 Methods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 The sociometric study . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . lS Reliability and.validity of the questionnaire . . . . 19 The subjects used and the collection of the data . .1. 26 Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31 III. RESULTS OBTAINED WITH THE MINNESOTA MULTIPHASIC PERSONALITY INVENTORY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32 Procedure. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32 Comparison of the groups on the individual scales . . 33 Comparison of the groups in profile configurations . . h? The anxiety index and internalization ratio . . . . . 50 The subtle and obvious keys . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53 The ratings for level of adjustment . . . . . . . . . 56 Summary of the MMPI results . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59 IV. RESULTS OBTAINED WITH THE RORSCHACH TECHNIQUE . . . . . 62 Comparison of the groups on individual scoring categories eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee 62 CHAPTER Summary of comparison of individual Rorschach categories . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The judgments for level of adjustment . . . . The Rorschach interpretations . . . . . . . . Summary of the Rorschach findings . . . . . . V. RESULTS OBTAINED WITH THE TAT . . . . . . . . . Emotional tone and outcome . . . . . . . . . Relationship toward society . . . . . . . . Interpersonal relationships . . . . . . . . Thematic analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Summary of TAT results . . . . . . . . . . . VI. CONSISTENCY IN THE SELF CONCEPT .,. . . . . . . Development of the Self Rating Scale . . . . Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The reliability of the scale . . . . . . . . Validity of the results . . . . . . . . . . . Summary .'. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . VII. RIGIDITY'AND CONCRETENESS OF THINKING . . . . . Theoretical considerations . . . . . . . . . The Rokeach Map Technique . . . . . . . . . Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Discussion of the results . . . . . . . . . sum ary O O O O 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O O 0 iv PAGE 71 73 75 82 8h 85 87 91 93 100 102 105 109 111 118 119 121 121 12h 128 129 132 CHAPTER PAGE VIII. SUNNARI . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13h BIBLIOGRAPHY......................... 139 APPENDIX A THE SOCIOMETRIC OUESTIONNAIEE . . . . . . . . . . . 115 APPENDIX B AssUEANCE OF ANONYMITY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1h? APPmmecTHESETrRATINGSCALE 1149 APPENDIX D THE RDKEACH NAP TECHNIQUE . . . . . . . . . . . . . 159 APPENDIX E INSTRUCTIONS TO THE JUDGES . . . . . . . . . . . . 175 APPENDIX F REASONS FOR REJECTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 178 APPENDIX G COMPLETE RESULTS OF THE THEMATIC ANALYSIS OF THE TAT O O O O O O O 0 O O O O O 0 O O O O O Q Q 1 8 O II. III. V. VI. VII. VIII. LIST OF TABLES Distribution of SelectioneRejection Scores Based on Plus One Point for Each Time Cited as Best Friend and Minus One Point for Each Time Cited as One Most Reluctantly Accepted as Friend . . Comparison of the Mean Decile Ranks of the Groups on the American Council of Education Test . . . . . Comparison of Groups In Terms of Age, Class Standing, and Grade Point Average . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The Number of Selects and Rejects to Whom Each of the Tests was Administered . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Comparison of the Groups on means of Raw Scores for Sixteen Minnesota.Multiphasic Scales . . . . . . . . Comparison of the Profile Elevation in T Score Units on the Minnesota.Multiphasic Inventory Profile . . . The Anxiety Index and Internalization Ratio Computed from T Scores of the Selects and Rejects . . . . . . Comparison of the Groups on Mean T Scores of the Subtle and.0bvious Scales of the Minnesota Mdltiphasic Inventory . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Inter-judge Correlations for Ratings of Level of Adjustment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Comparison of the Groups for Productivity on the Rors ChaCh O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O I Q 0 PAGE 18 23 25 30 35 h8 51 SS 58 62 TABLE II. XII. XIII. XVII. vii PAGE Rorschach Analysis: Comparison of Scoring Categories After Equating the Protocols for Number of ReSponses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6h Inter-Judge Correlations for Ratings of the Rorschach Protocols for Level of Adjustment . . . . . . . . . 7h The Number and Type of Crimes Found in the Stories of Each Group . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 88 Inter—Judge Correlations for Rating of Interpersonal Relationships in the TAT Stories . . . . . . . . . . 92 Comparison of the Groups On Interpersonal Relation~ ships Based on Means of Combined Ratings of TAT Stories by Three Judges . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9h TAT Themes Which were Meet Frequent and on Which the Groups Differed.Mbst Widely in Frequency . . . . 96 Scores on the Self Rating Scale: Number of Reversals Occurring in Each Group . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 110 The Traits on Which Inconsistencies Occurred . . . . . 112 Comparison of Mean Number of Ratings Falling on Each Side of the Scale on Two Administrations with the Columns of Trait Names Reversed . . . . . . . . . . 115 Comparison of Mean Number of Ratings Falling on Each Side of the Scale on Two Administrations with the Scale Numbers Reversed . . . . . . . . . . . . 117 LIST OF FIGURES FIGURE PAGE 1. Mean Raw Scores of the Two Groups Plotted on an MMPI Profile Sheet . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37 2. mean T Scores of the Two Groups Plotted on an MMPI Profile Sheet . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . AZ 3. Rokeach Map, Number 7 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 126 4444 ---------- IIIIIIIIII .......... ...... CHAPTER I THE PROBLEM AND HEATED STUDIES Statement _o_f_ 213 pious . The sin of this investigation was to study the personalities of popular and unpopular individuals, or the characteristics of persons one were able [to make friends and those who were largely rejectod by others. In the setting of the large college or university, the problem presented by the student who is largely rejected by his peers is particularly important since the social ad- justment of the individual is often regarded as one of the educational goals. Counseling and guidance programs which function either as independent units or as part of the individual housing units will be assisted in meeting this goal as more is loomed regarding factors which are associated with social acceptance and rejection. lost attenpts to study the personality characteristics of pepulsr snd unpopular individuals have been conducted with questionnaire or rating scale methods. There is a need for research in this area as— playing more intensive techniques, if other than superficial aspects of personality are to be detected. The present study is an attempt to meet this need, in part, by the inclusion of projective methods, along with other techniques of personality evaluation. The specific problem of this investigation was to make a person- ality study of a group of male college students who had been shown, on the basis of a sociometric survey, to be the most papular individ- uals in a college men's dormitory, sad to compare than with the group of men who had been found to be the most unpOpular. The popular group will hereafter be termed the "selects," and the unpopular group will be termed the "rejects," since they were chosen for the study in accordance with the degree to which they had been selected or rejected as friends by the residents of the dormitory. The study was limited to an evaluation of the personality patterns present at the time of the investigation, without making an extensive inquiry into the origins or causes of selection and rejection. The hypotheses investigated were that the rejects, as compared with the selects, would: 1. Demonstrate a poorer level of adjustment. 2. Exhibit more neurotic or psychotic manifestations. 3. Exhibit more anxiety and their methods of defense would be less acceptable to others. h. Indicate poorer interpersonal relationships, and show greater hostility toward their environment. 5. Be less consistent in their self concept. 6. Demonstrate more rigidity and concreteness in their thinking. In addition to these major areas, further comparisons were made of the personality variables measured by the following techniques used in the investigation: 1) the scales of the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory; 2) the individual scoring categories of the Rorschach; and 3) a thematic analysis of reSponses to the Thematic Apperception Test. A discussion of these techniques and the rationale behind their use will be found in Chapter II. m 2‘. the literature. Since the appearance of Moreno's Libs; its}; Survive? (36)1 in 19311, the sociometric approach to the study of interpersonal relations has been applied to a wide variety of problems. Investigations of social adjustment have usually been con- cerned with identifying those individuals in a group who are most popular or nest unpOpular and then applying other techniques to dis- cover how they achieved this status, or what factors were associated with the holding of this status. The study by Thomas (50) in 1936 was one of the earliest attempts to learn the qualities which men admired the most in their friends, and those which caused men to dislike others. Thomas asked his subjects to list those qualities with a particular person in mind. He found that the first 30 qualities liked in males by other males, in order of fre- ‘quency, were: intelligent, cheerful, friendly, comon interests, con- genial, helpful, loyal, sense of humer, generous, good sport, honesty, kind, considerate, sincere, idealistic, industrious, understanding, appearance, reliable, ambitious, interesting, athletic, modest, enter- taining, trustworthy, mannerly, carefree, reserved, fair, witty. The first 30 qualities disliked by males in other nales, in order of frequency, were: conceit, self-centered, A unintelligent, deceitful, overbearing, dishonest, selfish, loud, snebbish, unnannerly, boastful, personal injury, untruthful, ill-tempered, officious, ostentatious, sarcastic, unfair, inconsiderate, effeminate, affected, childish, immoral, neddlesome, bullying, talkative, unfriendly, unkempt, vulgar, narrow-minded. 1 Numbers in parentheses refer to items in the bibliography. I; Some of these same traits appeared in response to a questionnaire administered by Winslow and Frankel (56), who were interested in learn- ing what characteristics were considered important by adults in the formation of friendship with members of their own sex. The ten traits most preferred by men in their male friends were a loyalty, ability to be confided in, frankness, ability to take criticism from you, good sportsmanship, conventional good social manners, ability to be critical of you, neatness, intelligence equalto your own, poise or self-possess- ion. The ten traits most disliked by men, beginning with those named most often were: thinskinned, garrulity, braggart about conquests with opposite sex, cursing or swearing, intelligence inferior to your own, strong religious attitude, flashiness in clothes, promiscuity with opposite sex, flirtatious, submission to your decisions. They con- cluded that the most important characteristics in the formation of friendships between adults of the same sex were “those which produce congeniality in face to face personal contacts."- Jennings, (2h), who made a long-term study of a community of adolescent girls in a correction school, was most interested in the isolates, or those girls who were neither rejected nor selected by the other members of the group. Some of her conclusions, however, were pertinent also for rejects. She emphasised that isolation or rejection is probably due to complex factors. She stated, "lo one personality—pattern accompanies isolation or near-isolation in the population of the test calmnunity" (21;, p. 185). She mentioned else- where, "No simple variable, such as length of time the indivichal had been inkthe comnity or his chronological age relative to other men- hers or his intelligence or even his greater opportunity for contacting others, appears to account for the particular choice-status accorded him,” (21;, p.211). “Other conclusions drawn by Jennings were A that the underchosen appeared to lack security and were emotionally inmature. ale stated "The personalities of the isolates and near-isolates show, with but one exception . . . , the common characteristics of a marked incapacity for establishing rapport with other persons, they appear actively to repel choice and invite rejection to such an extent as they cause psychological discomfort to others ," (214, p. 181;). She noted also that these personality traits were apt to result in further rejection, even when the individual moved from one group to another. In Bonney's (7) study with fourth grade children a somewhat sim- ilar conclusion was reached. Her approach to determining personality traits of socially successful and socially unsuccessful children was to have teachers and pupils rate the selects and rejects on a scale of 20 traits. She discovered that “Strong positive personality traits are more important than negative virtues . . . POpularity is not the superficial thing it is often assumed to be, but is rather tied up with the most basic traits of personality and character. " In an investigation directed toward the discovery of sex and age differences in attitudes of elementary children toward each other, toward themselves, and toward the relationships between certain per- sonal attributes, Tuddenhaua (51) used the Reputation Test. This test consisted of paired questions dealing with favorable and unfavorable attributes and contained a friendship item on the basis of which the sociometric status of each child could be determined. Upon inspection of the results for the I'isolatos," or those children who were never chosen as best friend, he found that ”Isolated children tend to have an umfaver able balance of votes on other items of the Reputation Test, while the opposite is true of the reciprocal mention category" (51, p. 153). law of these children were members of a longitudinal study which no then in progress, and the records indicated that '. . . many 'isolated' children are judged by clinic workers to be quiet, colorless, withdramn children who tend to be overlooked both by their teachers and classmates" (51, p. 1140). The study of children from the sixth to twelfth grades by Kuhlen and Lee (28) extended the investigation of personality characteristics and social acceptability up into the adolescent years. In this study a “Guess Iho' test was used. The children were asked to name "Who isirestless -," Who is quiet -," "Who is cheerful and happy -," "Who is sad -," etc. By comparingthe children named on this test with the results of a sociemetric study it was found that the same traits were disliked in both the sixth and the twelfth grades. They were: seeks attention, restless, bosses others, enjoys fights, acts older. mile both this stuw and that by Bouncy cited above contribute data of value, they were handicapped by the fact that the techniques which were used limited the personality variables under study to those which were in the rating scale or test. In an attempt to learn something about the personal problems which were associated with sociometric status in an adolescent group, Kuhlen and Bretsch (27) found that unaccepted ninth-grade children marked.more problems on the Mooney Problem Check List than did the others. They also checked their problems as being more serious and persistent in nature. A.more thorough study of personality patterns of sociometrically selected groups was conducted by Northway and Wigdor (38). Fortybfive children in the eighth grade, aged 12-6 to 1h—6, were separated into "highs" (selects) and "lows" (rejects) by means of a.sociometric study. Personality structure was determined with the Rorschach technique. Since only a comparison of mean scores of the Rorschach variables was attempted, with no effort being made to equate the protocols for differences in number of reSponses, the analysis of the scoring categories in this study leaves much to be desired. A conclusion of value was derived, however, from an examination of the Rorschach interpretations made in the usual clinical manner. It was found that low sociometric status was usually associated with poor perSonp ality characteristics. Recessive, schizoid, psychoneurotic patterns, and inefficiently aggressive patterns were constantly seen among their rejects. Their select group appeared to be energetic, constructive, and.to possess a greater sensitivity to their environment - ". . . an active conscious striving in using the 'feeling tone' of a situation to further their own ends." They found them to be conventional, and there was a tendency toward a strong need for affection among their selects. They also concluded that both the selects and rejects cons tained.more disturbed individuals than did the middle group. Austin and Thompson (2) studied another aspect of the general problem of factors associated with the selection of friends among children by inquiring into the reasons given for 22225228 a pref- ence from one person to another. They administered two sociometric 8 questionnaires three weeks apart using sixth grade children as subjects. After the second Ministration, the children were asked to tell why they changed their choices, if they did. The conclusion reached was that '. . . prepinquity, which permits frequent social interactions, is an important variable in the formation of children's friendships." This is opposed to the conclusion reached by Jennings, cited previously (21;), and mu reflect only the greater concreteness of thought of the earlier years. Austin and Thompson also noted that "Similarity of tastes and interests seem to be a significant variable. . . Personality characteristics appear to be important determining factors in the selection and rejection of friends," (2, p. 111;). A stw to determine whether sociometric selection and rejection were associated with adjustment as determined by actual behavioral data was conducted by French (15), using naval recruits as subjects. After obtaining unrestricted choices and rejections within 16 companies of 60 men each, with reference to three hypothetical activities, be determined the relationships between individual socionetric status and measures of adjustnent such as hospitalisation for various causes, disciplinary offenses, and neuropsychiatric screening examinations. He concluded that sociometric measures are sufficiently sensitive to be used as an aid in neurcpsychiatric screening, and for general prob- lens of social adjustment and morale measurement. Powell (In) analysed the relationships between health, home, and social, and emotional adjustment by means of multiple correlation pro- cedure. Her data were obtained by means of the Bell Adjustment Inven- tory with a mulation of college freshman women. While she did not employ the sociometric technique, her findings are significant in that 9 the high intercorrelations indicated that usocial adjustment . . . may be employed as a criterion of normal expectations in emotional adjust- ment and vice versa. . ." Health adjustment was found to be indepen- dent of home, social, and emotional adjustments and could not be used to predict adjustment in any of these three areas. However, "Home adjustment, social adjustment or emotional adjustment can be predicted with some accuracy, if any one of these three categories is determined.” Kidd (26) was interested in defining the nature of social rejection, and in particular in determining what factors were associated with the rejection of a group of male college students in a residence hall for men. The present study followed by one year that undertaken by Kidd. Because both studies were done in the same location and utilised, in part, the same subjects, the aim, method, and results of Kidd's inves- tigation will be reviewed in detail. ' Kidd achninistered a Koreno type of sociometric questionnaire to the 639 residents of a dormitory asking for the following information: 1) the names of one's best friends with desirability as a roommate being the criterion; 2) the names of those one would be most reluctant to accept as friends; 3) the names of those one would most prefer as Resident Assistant (a student administrat- ive functionary in charge of from 50-75 students in a section of the residence hall) 1;) the names of these one would least prefer in that c acity; 5) reasons for rejecting those under 2) above; 6) race; ’3 state or country if other than 0. S. in which one was reared; 8) college classification; 9) father's occupation; lO) approximate , income of family during previous year; 11) size of comunity in which reared; 12) religious preference; 13) Parents, step-parents, etc. lived with before entering college and how long; 11;) age; 15) grade-point average; 16) expectation of being selected and rejected by others; 17) degree of security in feeling ‘bont the tutu.e (26, pe 228) Kidd obtained other information from Annual lien' s Residence Reports and from college records. 10 From the questionnaire he obtained a "friendship scale" based on scores equalling the number of times chosen minus the number of times rejected. Using chi square, he compared the selects with the rejects, each group being made up of approximately 100 subjects from each end of the scale. By testing a series of hypotheses regarding specific factors to determine which were associated with rejection, as opposed to selection, it was found that rejection was significantly associated with being from an atypical regional background, particularly foreip nationality, being from a city of more than 100,000 population, and being a lower classman. Rejection was also significantly associated with restricted interaction as evidenced by 1) low leadership-prestige status; 2) restricted rejection and selection of others; 3) restricted spectator and extra-curricular activities; 1;) restricted part-time employment which brings one into contact with group members; 5) low rating on group participation by selves and others; 6) low rating on over-all social participation by others. The self-image of the rejects was found to be accurate in that their self-ratings corresponded to outside criteria in respect to scholastic effort, over-all social participation, participation in the affairs of the group, social and personality adjustment, and citi- senship. The rejects were inaccurate, however, in estimating the extent of their rejection. The hypothesis that rejection would be associated with frustration as evidenced by aggressive and/or withdrawing behavior was supported to the extent that a significant relationship was found between rejec- Ill tion and 1) low academic achievement in relation to ability; 2) more frequent moves and drop-outs; 3) being ignorant of the family income. It can\be seen that Kidd's stow contained detailed information on how different aspects of background, behavior in a college environ- ment, and interpersonal relationships. Not obtained by Kidd, however, was information regarding the state of mental health of the subjects under study, their drives, needs, fantasy life, their manner of thinking and habitual reactions to per- sons and stresses in their enviroment. In short, there remained the question as to what a study of the personality of individuals socio- metrically selected might add to the knowledge already accmlated about the popular or unpopular person. I M. The aim of this investigation was to study the person- alities of socially selected and socially rejected male college students in an effort to acquire more information regarding the psychological characteristics of persons who are able to make friends and those who are largely rejected by others. From the review of the literature it was noted that very few attempts have been made to evaluate the manic aspects of personality patterns of sociometrically selected pepulations. The data that are available indicate that reject status is frequently) associated with emotional disturbance of more . or less severity and that this disturbance he have been one of long standing. The trait lists of characteristics disliked in others obtained from questionnaire studies provide further evidence that emotionally disturbed individuals meet rejection in others. There is general agreement that personality plays an important 12 part in the socionetric status of an individual. There is need for further studies undertaking more intensive appraisal of personality such as is obtainable through the use of projective techniques. The present stuck may be regarded as a continuation of that conducted by Kidd. CHAPTER II METHODS AND PROCEDURE methods. In order to obtain a.picture of the personality structure of each subject and to determine the presence of neurotic or psychotic manifestations, the Rorschach technique was selected. It was thought desirable to buttress this test with another which would give results more capable of statistical manipulation. The Mhnnesota,Multiphasic Personality Inventory (MMPI) was selected.to serve this purpose. It would also be possible to make a comparison of the level of adjustment in each group by having the Rorschach.protocols and.the MMPI profiles rated'by Judges. A quantitative measure of anxiety would.be provided ‘with the anxiety index of the MMPI, and, on the Rorschach, by an analysis of the responses to the shaded areas of the blots. Other comparisons could be made of the individual scoring categories of the Rorschach, and.of the various scales provided.in the EMPI. Since the area of interpersonal relations and the needs which affect these relations were deemed.to be an.important feature of social selection and social rejection, the Thematic Apperception Test (TAT) was included.in.the battery; Since the time required for the administration of the entire TAT series was prohibitive, a shortened forntof ten.pictures and the blank card was used. This kept the time for administration to an average of one hour per subject. It has been found that shortening the test does not appreciably alter its validity or productivity (h, p. 239ff.). In One of the important areas of investigation in Kidd's study was directed toward determining whether the rejects were less secure than were the selects. He defined insecurity Operationally by presuming it to be present if he could find evidence in regard to the presence of the following: 1) low grade-point average in relation to ability:-' 2) not knowing the family income; 3) more frequent moves and drop- outs; h) statement by the subject that he felt insecure in regard to the future; 5) rating self low in scholastic effort and in social and personality adjustment; and 6) rating self low in citizenship. On points 1, 2, 3, and S, Kidd found evidence confirming his hypothesis that these would be significantly associated with rejection. This evidence, however, he regarded as inconclusive (25, p. 157).1 It was therefore planned in the present study to take another approach toward discovering whether there might be a relationship between insecurity and rejection. There have been several proposals in the literature (6, 29, h3) postulating a relationship between security and consistency in the self concept. If it could be shown that the rejects were more inconsistent than the selects in rating" themselves on a series of personality traits, further evidence would be provided to support the hypothesis that they were more insecure. A short self-rating scale was therefore devised for this purpose. A study by Elias presents a similar use of an objective technique as a projective measure. (12) 1 The page numbers cited in reference to this work refer to those in Kidd's personal c0py and may not correspond to the numbers of the bound edition. V. 15 Finally, it was desired to compare the two groups in rigidity and concretensss of thinking. It was expected, on the basis of the previous study by Kidd, that evidence would be found to support the assumption that the rejects would be more frustrated and more malad- justed than the selects. If either of these assumptions proved to be valid, the theoretical asnnption would follow that the rejects would evidence more rigidity and concreteness in their thinking than would the selects. The technique to test this hypothesis was the lap Technique devised by Rokeach (16). In summary, the techniques used in this study were the Rorschach, the Minnesota Multiphasic Inventory, the Thematic Apperception Test, a Self-Rating Scale, and the Rokeach Hap Technique. With these, the pattern of personality structure, pathological synptonatology, level of adjustment, the dynamic interpersonal relationships, measures of consistency and security, and measures of rigidity and concreteness of thinking would be obtained. £113 socioletrio 933- »: part of his investigation, Kidd (26) carried out a socimetric stuw in a men's dormitory. As a follow- up, and also to locate new leaders who could be encouraged to become Resident Assistants to replace those who were to be graduated, he conducted another sociometric study during the winter tern of the following year. The selects and rejects revealed in the second socio- netric stuw provided the population for the investigation reported here. The sociometric questionnaire?’ which Kidd used asked first "Who 2 See Appendix A. 16 are your best friends in (the dormitory), the persons you would most prefer as roommates? Home the ten or less who are really your best friends." By including the phrase "as roommates" a common frame of reference was provided to the residents. This follows the precept laid down by Moreno, "If, therefore, the inhabitants of a community are asked when they like or dislike in their community irrespective of an criterion this should not be called sociometric. These likes and dislikes being unrelated to am criterion are not analytically differentiated.“ (36, p. 16). This question was followed by two questions related to leadership. The results of these questions were not pertinent te the present study. me last question sought a measure of rejection. It read, "Which . . . men, if axw, would you be most reluctant to accept as friends, as roommates, and why?" there followed an assurance that the confiden- tial nature of the response would be maintained. The questionnaire was distributed in a manner calculated to acquire and retain the confidence and cooperation of the residents. It was distributed through the Resident Assistants. The name of the numbered resident was on a slip of paper attached to his question- naire which he was directed to remove and destroy before completing and returning the questionnaire.3 in additional device which Kidd used to gain confidence and responsiveness was the enclosure. of an envelope addressed to him, the Resident Advisor, in which the questionnaire was to be sealed and returned. 3 See Appendix B. 17 Each day the Resident Assistants were advised as to the names of those in their precincts who had not returned the questionnaire so that they could be given a reminder by the Resident Assistant. How- ever, it was understood at all times that the reaponse was not compul- sory. In this manner, 89 per cent of the questionnaires were returned. The results of the questionnaire were quantified by assigning a score of ”plus one" to a subject each time he was chosen as "best friend," and a "mime one" each time he was chosen as a person when another would be most reluctant to have as a friend or roomate. By adding the scores algebraically, a single score was obtained for each subject on the friendship scale. The results for the entire dormitory population are sumariaed in Table I. There were 29 subjects whose negative scores exceeded their positive scores. This group constituted the reject group used in the present study. They were matched against an equal number at the other extreme, the selects, or those receiving the highest number of friendship choices. At the beginning of the spring term when the writer began his psychological testing for the present study, only 22 of the 29 rejects were still living in the dormitory. Of the other seven, one had moved to a rooming house, one to another dormitory, one had been graduated, and four had dropped out of school. This was not unanticipated since it was known that social rejects are apt to be a highly mobile lot. Kidd found that they tended to ask to change rooms within the dormitory, or they moved out or dropped out of school altogether, more frequently than did the selects (26, p. 230). TABLE I DISTRIBUTION OF SELECTION-REJECTION SCORES BASED ON PLUS ONE POINT FOR EACH TIME CITED AS BEST FRIEND AND MINUS ONE POINT FOR EACH TIME CITED AS ONE MOST RELUCTANTLY ACCEPTED AS FRIEND Selects Middle Group Rejects Score Frequency Score Frequency Score Frequency 36 1 1h 10 -l 7 33 1 13 ll -2 S 31 1 12 ll -3 6 30 l 11 17 -b 2 25 l 10 10 -S l 21 1 9 27 -7 3 20 1 8 31 -8 1 19 l 7 33 -9 1 18 3 6 57 -1h 1 17 3 S u9 '15 1 16 7 h h8 -16 1 15 8 3 6h 2 7h 1 h8 O 23 ‘_Sub- Totals 29 513 29 Grand Total: 571 (Read: One person had a friendship score of 36; one had a friendship score of 33, etc.) 1? Reliability _;_an_d_ validity 2f the; questionnaire. The traditional concepts of test reliability and validity are not fully applicable to a test of the sociemetric type. is Pepinsky (hO, p. hB) has pointed out, the concept of validity in.terms of an outside criterion does not apply, since the test itself is a direct sample or*measure of the choice behavior being studied. The only application of validity in this instance is with reference to the honesty with which the choices are made. This can be.mathised.when the subjects feel that the criteria of choice are meaningful and.that the choices themselves will have a practical effect on.the group structure. in examination of the questionnaire, itself, as it was devised'hy Kidd, and of the procedure uhieh he used in administering it indicates the extent to which the results may be accepted.as valid.neasures of selection or rejection. In.regard.to the question of whether there was any'nisrepresen- tation of response on the questionnaire, it must be emphasised that it 'was returned on a voluntary basis. As Kidd pointed.out in reference to his study of the previous year on which he obtained a return of 9h per cent of the residents: . . . where the subject is given the choice of not replying at all, with no penalty attached, as he was in the questionnaire ‘used.in.this study, and where pressure for and against certain types of replies are reduced, if they exist, by a straightforward assurance of anonymity, . . . then there seems to be no logical justification for expecting misrepresentation.in the response 25, p. 57'58)0 He gave as further evidence of the validity of the results of the first questionnaire the fact that among the rejects thus revealed, 20 there occurred “every case of rejection which had come to the attention of the Resident Advisor prior to the administration of the question- naire." (25. p- 53). Since the second sociometric study was performed with the same questionnaire, and the same procedures and precautions were taken as in the first, it is probable that the argunents for validity above would again apply. The writer obtained an additional outside criterion, however, as another measure or validity of the second survey, based on the hypoth- esis that the rejects would have shown lore anti-social behavior of the sort which would have involved tha in disciplinary action. bench (15) used this as one of his criteria in a study of morale among naval re- cruits. Jennings (21;, p. th-lhé) presented evidence which would lead to this hypothesis when she reported the following types of be- havior to be more frequent among the underchosen: quarrelsone, com- plaining, nervous, aggressive and dominant, rebellious, resentment at being criticised, attention getting. Although her investigation was done with a pepulstion of girls in a training school, a certain amount of generalization should be possible to populations of a different sort. If the present group of rejects also possessed these or similar traits, it could be expected that they would have come to the attention of persons in authority. That such a generalisation was possible here was indicated by a check of the records in the Registrar's office. It was learned that nine of the 22 rejects had been on probation, or were on probation at the time of the study. Some were having to re- port to the Dean of Students weekly. 0f the 22 selects, one had been on probation during the fall tern, only. Thus the hypothesis was supported and more assurance could be placed in the validity of the questionnaire, inasnuch as the results confirmed evidence from other studies. In regard to reliability, the traditional techniques of test- retest, split halves, or equivalent forms cannot usually be carried over automatically to sociometric tests. Pepinsky (to, p. 1.6) stated that variation of choice behavior from one test to another is not a function of test reliability but of the relative stability of the behavior itself. Since this questionnaire had been administered twice, a year apart, a fan of test-retest reliability could be ob- tained by the writer by comparing as man as possible of the results of the two tests. ' One of these conparisons consisted of checking to see if those subjects who had been very high or low on the friendship scale during the previous year's study had retained their relative positions. This was possible in the case of 13 selects and 2 rejects who had been in the domitory during both investigations. It was found that all of these selects, who were in the top five per cent had placed within the first quartile on the friendship scale of the first study. One of the rejects who was in the lowest five per cent on the friendship scale had been anong those extremely rejected the year before, falling tenth from the botton in the previous study. ‘Ihe other reject turned out to be the subject who had moved the nest in the entire group, sociometrically speaking, going in the interval of one year from a position 36th from the top on the friendship scale the previous year 22 to 13th tron the bottom in the present study. This change in friend- ship status nay be associated with frustrations he had encountered in his athletic career. Entering college the year before with much pub- licity as one of the most promising candidates for one of the athletic teams, he had lost out the first year because of an injury, and during the next year his initial promise had not been fulfilled in actual competition. His associates and the Resident Assistant in the dormitory had all noted an increase in aggressive behavior as his hopes for a college athletic career became diner. None of the other rejects had been in the dormitory during the previous study. This is probably a reflection of the fact that so any of then wereifreshnen, and also of their tendency to move from year to year. However the available data for the thirteen selects and for one of the rejects indicate that unless exceptional circumstances intervene, sociometric status was relatively constant, and that the two studies compared here gave fairly reliable results. Another comparison was made in academic potential for college work. In Kidd's investigation the pOpulation selected for study was the top 102 subjects on the friendship scale (selects) as opposed to the low 96 subjects (rejects). He compared the groups to see if their ability scores on the ACE total scores showed a significant difference. The chi square test indicated that there was none (25, p. 111;). Table II shows a sinilar comparison for the pOpulation under consideration here. Fisher 's t test for the significance of difference between means (20, p. 228) was used because of the smallness of the ample. No significant difference between the select and reject groups was found for either the mean quantitative, literary, or total scores on the ACE TABLE II COMPARISON OF THE MEAN DECILE BANKS OF THE GROUPS ON THE AMERICAN COUNCIL OF EDUCATION TEST mean docile rank subtest Selects Rejects t Quantitative 5.91 5.70 .208 Literary 5.63 5.h5 .111 Total 5.86 5 .60 .326 2h Test, indicating that on the average the groups were similar in academic ability. The studies were also compared on the actual scholastic achieve- ment as indicated by the grade point average for each group. At the end of each term, the Registrar's office assigns to each student a cumulative grade point average on the basis of four points per credit hour for a grade of A, three points for a grade of B, two points for a grade of C, one point for a D, and no points for an F or incomplete. In testing the hypothesis that the grade point average of the selects would exceed that of the rejects, Kidd found a difference significant at the one per cent level (25, p. 116-117). The comparison made with the present papulation is shown in Table. III. Again, the t test showed a difference significant beyond the one per cent level, indicating that, from the academic standpoint, the selects were actually achieving more in spite of the fact that the potentiality for achievement in the two groups was the same. On other comparisons, Kidd found that his group of rejects was younger on the average than the selects, and that they tended to a significant degree to be underclassmen, while the selects tended to be upperclassmen (25, pp. 79-81). As seen in Table III, the same tenden- cies were found in the group under study here. The differences between mean chronological age in months, and mean college classification were both significant at the one per cent level, indicating that the selects tended to be older and more advanced in school. The fact that so mam of the rejects were freshmen could not be construed as a cause, in itself, of rejection on the grounds that they TABLE III COMPARISON OF GROUPS IN TERMS OF AGE, CLASS STANDING, AND GRADE POINT AVERAGE means Selects Rejects t C. A. in months 2614.9 2140.5 2.8h7* Class standing** 3.09 1.71 h.hl6* Grade point average 2.56 1.90 h.lO7* ‘1 j * Significant beyond the one er cent level. ** Based on assigning numbers to 5 to classes freshman to graduate student, respectively. 26 were not well acquainted. Being a freshman and new to the group might result in isolation, or being neither selected or rejected as a roommate. But a reject, as defined in this study, was an individual who had actually interacted with the group sufficiently to be known and disliked - enough so that when others were asked whom they would reject, out of 660 men, this man was one of those they chose to name. Thus, Kidd presented evidence for the validity of the first sociometric study which applied also to the second sociometric study from which the population for the present research was selected. His evidence included the precautions which were taken to make the questions meaningful, the facts that the questionnaire was returned on a volun- tary basis, and that it actually revealed all cases of rejection which had previously been observed. The writer added additional evidence by obtaining outside criteria indicating support for the hypothesis that the rejects would have shown more anti-social behavior. As evidence for the reliability of the sociometric study, it has been shown that differences between the selects and rejects on age, college classification, ability, and achievement were equally signifi- cant and in the same direction on the second study as they were in the first. The evidence on the validity and reliability of the ques- tionnaire therefore seems to permit the treatment of the results with a high degree of confidence. 213 subjects aged E E collection 3!- _t_h_e_ data. As has been mentioned, the pepulation of rejects finally available for study was 22 men. These were all of the man living in the dormitory who had attained a negative score when the points for selection and rejection had been algebraically culled. _ 27 There were differences within the reject group in the amount of interaction between individuals and the group at large. That is, some rejects may have obtained a score ‘of -l as the result of being rejected by two men and selected by one; others may have obtained a score of -l as the result of being rejected by nine men and selected by eight. The interaction score of the former would be three; of the latter, 17. It is possible that there were personality differences associated with the amount of interaction. This aspect of rejection was not investigated in the present study for two reasons. First, the main emphasis throughout was in making group comparisons, and it was not possible to match rejects with selects on an interaction score since few of the selects received rejection votes in the socio- metric study. Secondly, an attempt to break up the reject group into smaller groups on the basis of interaction scores resulted in groups too small for statistical manipulation of test scores. It did not seem feasible to generalize from any results obtained from groups so mall. It was therefore decided to treat the rejects as a single group and compare them with an equal number of subjects from the other end of the friendship scale - the 22 men who had received the most choices as best friend. The immediate problem then confronting the investigator was how to persuade the subjects to submit to a battery of psychological tests when there could be no promise held out to them of a reward of any sort. A secondary problem was in determining how much about the study could be told the subjects, since obviously they could not be informed that social rejection and selection played a part in their having been chosen as subjects. 28 The investigator was in a favorable position for obtaining the cOOperation of the residents, since he was Assistant Resident Advisor in the dormitory at the time of the study. His duties required his presence in the dormitory several nights a week and he took all of his meals there. The residents therefore knew him at least by sight, and he had built up close, friendly relations with new of them. It was on the basis of this friendly relationship that the approach was made, individually, to each subject. It was frankly emlained that the investigator was obtaining data for a dissertation in psychol- Ogy which necessitated having a group of subjects take some tests. Their curiosity and interest was aroused in many cases by mention of the "ink-blot" test of which some had already heard. The purpose of the research e. elq>lained by saying that an area needing investigation involved having a group living in a similar environment take a group of tests often used in the clinic so that comparisons could be made of the contribution of each test. This served the purpose of moving the focus of the investigation away from the individual subjects, and, seemingly, onto the tests, thus making the procedure more impersonal. It was mentioned that the dormitory was an ideal place to obtain: a group of man living in a similar environment. This explanation was usually sufficient. It seemed that the combination of the investiga- tor's being in an official but non-threatening position, the "honor" of being selected for the study, curiosity about the tests, and a desire to help a friend were all factors which led to their accepting the proposition. Occasionally a subject asked why he, in particular, had been 29 chosen. It was eaqilained that “the group had been matched" by con- sulting the records in the Registrar's office to obtain subjects of similar ages, from home towns of similar sizes, and with similar grade point averages. This explanation was sufficiently complex to satisfy their curiosity, and account for the variety of subjects with whom they might have seen the investigator entering the testing room. An additional reason for these precautions concerning the manner of selection of the subjects was to protect the interests of the Res- ident Adviser. He had assured the residents of the dormitory that their responses to the sociometric study would be strictly confidential. It was not deemed to be a breach of confidence for him to give the writer access to the results for purposes of research if the subjects would be in no way identified in the written report of that research. It was important, from the point of view of maintaining his integrity as the residents might evaluate it, that no connection be discernible between his study and the present one. Only one subject refused to cooperate when asked. This was one of the rejects. It was unfortunate that data from his tests could not have been included, but he turned his back on the investigator and walked away before the request had been fully expressed, saying, “I don't want to have anthing to do with it.“ He was blown in the dormitory because of his odd, seclusive behavior. Repeated attempts to enlist his sympathy in the project were rebuffed. Table IV shows the final tally of subjects in each group to when each test was administered. Complete coverage, except for the one subject who refused, was obtained on the IMPI, the Self-Rating TABLE IV THE NUMBER OF SELECTS AND REJECTS TO WHOM EACH OF THE TESTS WAS ADMINISTERED Test Selects Rejects M,M P I 21 21 Rorschach 18 20 Thematic Apperception Test 18 19 Self Rating Scale 21 21 Map Technique 21 21 31 Scale, and the Map Technique. By the end of the spring term, after which, of course, the students diSpersed and no further testing was possible, Rorschachs were administered to all but four of the subjects and TAT's to all but five. Because of scheduling difficulties and the pressure of time, another examiner was obtained for assistance ’4 Since the data with the administration of some of the Rorschachs. were obtained from the subjects starting with those having the highest reject and select scores, the missing data for both of the projective techniques did not include any of the subjects at the very extreme of rejection or selection. The room used for the examinations was the office of the Resident Advisor where there was little or no interruption. 9011111121. The personality evaluation included emination with the m1, Rorschach, TAT, a Self-Rating Scale, and the Rokeach Map Technique. The sociometric study revealed 29 men out of the entire dormitory population who received more negative than positive votes. Evidence on the validity and reliability of the questionnaire seems to permit the treatment of the results with a high degree of confi- dence. At the time of the study, 22 were still living in the dormitory, but one of these refused to undergo the tests. The reject group therefore consisted of 21 subjects. The select group consisted of the 21 most popular men as indicated by the sociometric study. h The writer wishes to empress his appreciation to Mr. Irving I. llunn for his assistance in administering and checking the scoring of the Rorschachs. CHAPTER III RESULTS OBTAINED WITH THE MINNESOTA MULTIPHASIC PERSONALITY INVENTORY Procedure. The booklet form of the Minnesota.Multiphasic Person- ality Inventory'was used in this study (hB). This form contains all of the items which are on cards in the "Individual Set" and also makes possible scoring the answer sheets by I B l.test scoring machines. The test booklet, answer sheet, and a special pencil were given to each subject after his first testing session during which the Rorschach had.usually been administered. The instructions were explained care- fully and.the subject was cautioned.about the proper use of the answer sheet. Many of the subjects had.taken inventories of one sort or another before, and all of them.had used.machine-scored.answer sheets, so the procedure was not entirely new to than. The subjects were asked to fill out the test during a time when they would.not be interrupted.and.return it to the examiner when it was.finished. Several of them seemed to be filled.with enthusiasm after their testing session and.proceeded to work out the MMPI imme— diately, returning it the same day. All of the tests were returned, but it was later found that one of the rejects had.filled out only the front of the answer sheet, leaving the last half of the test undone. This left a total of 21 tests for the select group, and 20 for the reject group for analysis. Before the tests were scored, each answer sheet was examined.for the a?" score, which is the number of items omitted. This constitutes ~ 33 the first of the validation scales. If more than one item in ten is omitted, the other scales are invalidated. No '2 score approached this magnitude, so the scoring proceeded, using all of the answer sheets. The tests were scored on I B H scoring machines. The raw scores were transferred to a work sheet for convenience in making the statis- tical calculations for comparisons between groups. They were also transferred to profile sheets which were to be given'to the judges for rating. T scores were also necessary for some of the group com- parisons and to assure accuracy, these were obtained from the table provided in the supplementary manual, rather than from the profile sheets . Comparison _o_f the groups on the individual M. It was possible to make comparisons between groups on the four validation scales, of which the ? scale has already been considered; the nine clinical scales which appear on the profile sheet; and an additional four experimental scales for which norms have appeared in the literature. In clinical use, attention is paid to the configurational aspects of the profile as a whole. An elevation on any one of the scales obtains importance only when it is considered in relation to the rest of the scales. For purposes of research, however, in making group comparisons a necessary first step in obtaining a picture of the trends within each group is to compare the group means of the individual scales. Fisher's t test for the significance of the difference between means was used, since the total number of scores in each cosparison was less than fifty. A small—sample statical procedure would thus provide the most rigorous test. 3h Comparing the means of the raw scores rather than the means of T scores follows the recommendation of Aaronson and Welsh (1). The T scores are of use in revealing the relationship between the subtests of a single profile, and between the scores of one individual or group and the normative group used in the standardization of the test. The conversion formula changes the raw scores into standard score equivalents, which not only makes the subtest scores comparable to one another but also puts them in terms of the mean and standard deviation of the normative pepulation so that some conception is obtained of the level of the score in comparison to that population. It was not desired here, however, to compare the selects and rejects in terms of their deviation from the normative group, but to compare them with each other. Therefore the comparison was made between means of raw scores when only single subtests were being considered. The situation is different in making any kind of comparison of profile configurations where two or more subtests are considered at the same time. The raw scores of subtests are not directly comparable since each subtest has a different number of items and therefore a different mean and standard deviation. Converting them to T scores gives than equal means and standard deviations so that they are compar- able. Therefore, in making comparisons such as between profile eleva- tions of the groups, of profile slope, of anxiety index and internali- sation ratio, the T scores were used as the basis of comparison. Table V presents the mean raw scores for each group on sixteen of the scales and Fisher's t for the significance of the difference between the means. Two of these differences were significant at the 35 TABLE V COMPARISON OF THE GROUPS ON MEANS OF RAW SCORES FOR SIXTEEN MINNESOTA MULTIPHASIC SCALES Scale Mean SD mean SD t L 2.7 1.6 2.95 1.9 .h55 F 3.2 1e8 5s; 3e8 2.14149" K 16.9 h.9 12.7 h.0 2.907** H8 3eh 2e6 he} 2e5 1e102 D 15.2 2.3 16.8 h.0 1.51;? By 19.1. 3.6 18.5 3.1; .797 Pd 111.11 2.2 18.6 5.1 3.381;“- Mf 211-14 3-5 253 he? .681 P3 8e? 2e’4 8e6 2.0 91,40 Pt 8.1 5.7 12.7 6.5 2.392* Sc 9.1 5.0 111.1 8.0 2.31.5:- na 16.7 3.1 19.8 34.5 2.528* Responsibility 21.9 2.9 18.8 14.3 2.6611(- Ibminanco 16e9 2e5 15e9 3018 1.055 Status 23e0 BeS 22s? 309 e338 Social-Intraversion 20.5 7.3 21.1 6.8 .831 1* Significant at the five per cent level. H» Significant at the one per cent level. 36 one per cent level and five were significant at the five per cent level of confidence. It was recognized that in making a number of t tests a significant difference might occur by chance (55).1 However, a sufficient number occurred in this analysis to have very high con- fidence that the differences obtained were not due to chance. Figure l on page 37 shows the raw scores plotted on an MMPI profile sheet. In the discussion which follows, the results of the comparison of each scale in turn will be considered. The L scale consists of fifteen items seldom answered in the scored direction by normal subjects. It is said to act as a validat- ing score by giving a measure of the subject's effort to place himself in the most favorable light socially. The mean score on this scale for the selects was 2.7, and for the rejects it was 2.9. Fisher's t for the difference was .hSS, Which was not significant. The t test was not the most appropriate test in this case, however, since three of the selects received a zero score, with the result that the distri- bution was skewed. Therefore the median of all fortyaone subjects was computed and used as the basis for a cutting score. This median was 2.52. Rounding it off to 3, the chi square test was applied to test the null hypothesis that there would be no significant difference in the number in each group that exceeded a score of three. Chi square was .Oh5, supporting the null hypothesis. It can be safely concluded that there was no significant difference between the groups on this scale. 1 The probability that two significant differences at the one per cent level would occur in 16 tries is .0109; that five significant differences occur at the five per cent level, .0009. u.hp...........LDF E trititniihn mitt—IE I -I7---e.UQ -7 7-: 123.955 memos” 3.5.5.5th no 359.? m;.:_..;n.,7x8 Si 0.20% 353 5E «3 292.8280 $053232 use $2 Eunice I. u are 28m sum ll “.0va on 3 M Illllllllllllfluoumgm xNJUE from MTE on «E Milena x: Q Mara: M m 4 a Utah ~---‘DOD NNN~-‘O MNN—-—O avMN~O NNNH—d VTMMN .1305va MHHNN sown-45v (thlD‘D [- ._. vvvmm CDWBNLD U: Q —a upoenom epoeaem III. “seamen mnmvv OU‘O’ICD N .eeese eaaaoea Has: ea — a! N - .0 .8309: as no ceppoad mmsoaw 63» on» he moaoom sea nae: .H .wah amp—.02 3 potemom 252m 3:32 email 1.2633 01. m o .0 ::2§aaasaassssssssns IIululouuu'.nunltlnnlunnalnnulInloulauinlunlnocln-uolllulluuuIIIIIIuntlnlI'IIu'IIlu'nnllnIIII. C) N 8 23 8 .n m IIUIcIlIIIIIIIInl' I 3 . IIIIIII 6’3 | 8 er) 0? Q: I I C) an I UIII'III a) C) Illl é —‘ —4 J) r—e ~e a .7. 7.. H 7. _ £02 'lIll. Waggon lcEeEzeixe 5 “anaemia 0:65....3 non «seamen. BUG 0—8—2 — 43:3:qu $0va< 1- 0857.- . E1; mares. v:+um x: E on which . - 7265s— a.soaoum Nye—EMU: >2EUJU A menu weepofiom .m 912m IIIII “I II I R 9918 w. mo.sn€o< and r Granite van—2E3. 293.... II. 7 I an Henna—s >aaneus Onncvnzou- Dane defied I «Ion 227.2150 3,355.. 4.9 4.0 o r m. K In. a .wfi O IN Md . .AR 7: to my. . :A ma. :n 30. .Nx ITO—.77. 3.. ...xm....n:.:7,fi.b_ mane... ”QCOQnWOD wm¢ .BII. I I IS 5mm. H. H - I an ”IE 301.3 man—Em I III:IIIIwe*m-em g? - man s 7 - 8- - 7 ET“ H aI. H .7. - H I . a 23mm - I I I I 8d 8|. 3|. 6e II 81 I SI I 7 ..I as so!H I SII .. AT 8.. .wmI. 8|. I W78 8m qu M sI. I aI I H I. 5| wee H I I I I I I 8| I H I I I I MOI I I I 392.8. Io. III. 8|” I sol I I I I I HIS :1 a .1 N I I QW| I I I I I mm H 8- I eoII I I No I H I H s 3 a a. II I I I I I I I II mm we I S m n 8| I I I I B. I 3| 3. 8| H 7.7.1 x : .I 8L Sol I I I I I I I I I H I II o 2 he : M H HI I I 8. wml I I - u I I m w my 71 a w um In ~NOI I I H I n H QOI I I I oOIH I ml so u I I mml Nul I I I 8! I ncII I I u .I 3 Z 3 I u :ol I I 8| I I I I H u N. 5 .1 I, a .I. O I I I J. Cr I 0 (II I I I E: N ‘4’ NM 0 u I H ’ I | I I t I v u 8 I I I I I I I I I 8 I I H S u e e I. 8| I 6| I I I I wml I I E : m a a I 8| - BI 8| I 8: e I I I I II 8 u I I I I I I I 5| I I I I u |. vol I I I I 8| 8| I I wol I 7 8 :1 e a we I I I 7 I I I I I I I I II8 S 5 m a n col I I I I I I .I 8! u vol u .w e \ e mm In 8 mI GI 51 I H I I 5! n In I m 3 Z a e s H 3| I I I I I BI 8I 8| I I 8 I I H ; .1 a WOIIIWOIIIIII I NOI I I Mm. I I I'IIJD H I H I I I I I I I I H 3 x m a u I I SI I u I I I I I uII u z e e .s em I. ol I 5| I I I I I N I GI ”I 8 S e a H. m I I I _uI HMII I hOI I I I m E .I. m x I I I I 07 I. II I I. sol” I I I I I 5 I I m e: I I I IIao . : .. e .7 . H - - - I I - I aII - H I oI ml I I I I I E J a N we I. H II I SI. I I I I u I ”I 3 e a A N I 0 _0I I I arl I .wII I _OI H x A u N I I I I SI I 7a a a _ I I I I .ol I I I I .7. a e 1 I)? {s .IIIIIIIIII I | 8 8 I I I (T I D - N .1 Is In (3 ~ H N) N i) D —- '—‘ N N Pu‘ 4.02.0 o r m. x Eu 7 .wfi O I< Mega .AR 73 to Fix Mn . :n K0. .NK 4.03.0 «Ion .I.I_7.\...17_.7..n_m_ margin. OH exvizsbnfin unCFII/I .NnorenmdemI I III II moi Mao—Io 41:» N I I manage-7 III. Ill, -I-I-..III , . I, I U93 I I. _ 38 The F scale was originally a validating scale containing items indicative of carelessness, simulation or gross eccentricity. A high score was thought to invalidate the entire test.2 Further use of the scale has indicated that it has psychOpathological connotations of its own. An elevation of score on the F scale may indicate the presence of a significant personality disturbance. Brozek and Schiele (9), giving the IIMPI at regular intervals to subjects in the Minnesota starvation experiment found the F scale to be a sensitive indicator of stress during crisis periods. Gough (17‘) has noted a tendency in psychopaths to attain higher F scores than other clinical groups. In the present study, the rejects were higher than the selects on the F scale with the difference between means significant at the five per cent level. fie particular personality disturbance accompanying a high I score of course depends on the configuration of the rest of the pro- file in each case. he most that can be said for the group comparison is that along the rejects there appeared more frequent "manifest ations of unusual nentation" as it has been aptly phrased by Meehl and Hatha- ‘vay (3h. p. 536). The K scale is essentially a correction factor which, when added to certain of the other scales, sharpens their discriminatory power. It has the effect of making normals appear more normal, and making abnormals stand out more clearly. This scale also measures “test- taking attitudes." A high K score new be indicative of a defensive attitude and a low I score suggests unusual frankness or self-criticality. 2 In the discussion which follovs, the definition of each scale unless otherwise indicated, is that given in the manual for the mi (22). 39 McKinley, Hathawiw, and Heehl found that college peeple tend toward high scores, perhaps as a function of socio—economic status (30, p. 31). The mean K score of the selects exceeded that of the rejects, the scores being 16.9 and 12.7 respectively. Fisher's t for the difference was 2.907 which is significant at the one per cent level. It may be con- cluded with considerable confidence that the selects were more guarded and evasive, while the rejects were more frank, sometimes to the point of being self-deregatory. The Hs (Hypochondriasis) scale purports to measure abnormal con- cern over bodily functions. Undue worry about health, an maturity in approach to adult problems, and a history of exaggeration of physical complaints and of seeking for sympathy characterize the person with a high He score. According to Meehl (33) the high scorer on He is char. acterized by others as "high-strung, soft-hearted, generous, and lacking self control."3 While there was a tendency for the rejects to obtain a higher score on Hs than the selects, the difference between means was not enough to be sure that it did not arise by chance. The D (Depression) scale is said to be primarily a "symptom" scale and tends to reveal the present level of adjustment and function- ing irrespective of personality type or structure. It is the middle scale of the ”neurotic triad" made up of He, D, and Hy. In evaluating the extent or severity of neuroticism, Gough found the D score to be more discriminating alone then the mean of He, D, and Hy (17, p.29). 3 Paul 3.1mm . __:I_._x_1-g__ the Minnesota mltiphasic Personality- In- vento incounseling. __gg_f selected 92! research results. eographed capy o a lecture given to Minnesota VA Psychologists on March 10, 1950. The writer is indebted to Mr. William E. Thomas for making his cepy of this paper available. I40 A high D score therefore may indicate a poor morale, lack of Optimism concerning the future, lack of self-confidence, tendency to worry, and introversion. Depression may be a disability of the high scorer but, on this scale as with all of the others, an equating of the scale name with the psychiatric syndrome usually associated with that name is a misleading and undesirable practice. Continued work with the test has i added to and altered the meanings of the various scales until, as neehl has cemented, aIt's worst to talk about the schizophrenia key; it's better to talk about the Sc Key; it's best to talk about code 8." (33, p. 9). The mean D score for the selects was 15.2, for the rejects, 16.8. Fisher's t for the difference was 1.5III7, which indicates a tendency for the rejects to score higher, but fails to reach an ade- quate level of confidence. The Hy (meteria) scale was designed to measure the degree to which-the subject is like patients who have developed conversion-type hysteria symptoms. Hysterical cases are more immature psychologically than arw other group. Persons scoring high on this scale impress others as being worrying, high-strung, individualistic, affectionate. High Hy men are described as "not balanced.‘I There was no significant difference between the groups on this scale. The select mean was 19.1» reJCCt mean, 18.5, and top 0797. The Pd (Psychopathic Doviato) scale is reported to measure the similarity of the subject to a group of persons whose main difficulty lies in their absence of deep emotional response, their inability to profit from experience, and their disregard of social mores. Their most frequent digressions from social mores are lying, stealing, Isl alcohol or drug addiction, and canal immorality. They tend to follow their whims with little thought of possible gain to themselves or of avoiding discovery. It was on this scale that the greatest difference occurred. The select mean was lIl.II, the reject mean was 18.6, and Fisher's t was 3. 38h, significant beyond the one per cent level. When this difference is combined with other lflIPl psychOpathic indicators, such as Sc greater than Pt, and an F score higher than other clinical groups, there appears a definite tendency for rejects to respond to the test in a manner characteristic of psychOpaths. An examination of the profile made up of the mean ‘1‘ scores of the two groups, Figure 2, will bring out these relationships more clearly. In Heehl's adjective study (33, pp. 9-13) a number of persons were asked to check on a list of traits, those attributes characteris- ing their friends, for whom MMPI profiles were available. Those normal individuals with high Pd scores were checked as being versatile, high- strung, impulsive, verbal, amorous, likes drinking, and rebellious. Furthermore, leehl pointed out that the most striking single thing about the Pd in the nomal range was "a lack of social fear“. "He is forward in his social relations.” It is probable that these descrip- tions fit the present group of rejects to some extent, since many of these adjectives occurred in the reasons given for rejection on the sociometric questionnaire (see Appendix F). The Mf (Interest) scale is supposed to measure the tendency toward masculinity or femininity of interest pattern. A high score was meant to indicate a deviation of the pattern of interests toward similarity to that of the opposite sex. I'Homoselmal abnormality must 922 P: I IIIII ISUQ Iongvfiwmm canco< 5:» «an ZOFmm mm“. 32 Eggs—00 I I I I I I I N a“; Ououm E“ I I I I I I I vovvo on o. N I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I QMOUW RU“ 369..“ “2:05:83 no 69.1... aliveIIci on mice capo: Elm Eta ed a: vexed a2 m cm on e. m n e #3 o o e o . oI Io c _ H A H I e i i N H i N N m 8| I I8 _ N N e n In I I I Io H i N n m H I I I2 I I H a I. I IIS I I I II a I I0 I lo I _ N n c u I I I I . I2 I I I n — n ' h 8J'I|-||I o. I I W8 I N m e m u IE I -2 I I I IS n I H N v n m wmII I I I l H I I I I IInm N v n E II IE I I I I I I... lo M N e a : oeIm H I “I? N m a N. n I lo I I m m. a 2 9d 2 I I II? n e a z I I H m w w 2 n n I n , BIHIII II I JIIIIOWIIIIIOW m m a m: m I .I \“Im toe H m a m : mmIII I2 I% I I8 Ilnm o a m 2 u I I I8 H e m 2 2 I I BI I I I8 I I Ion QPOOH-Om I I I e w 2 8 n I I I H 3 In I I8 I8 I I I8 .Lm I I I8 I8 II3 . e : a n I I I I I I . I2 I I8 I I upovafiom O “Ow“ v m : NN H I I8 I I I I a II I so 1H m m E 2 onlullmm I I 2 I I mNIIIlIIIIIoTIFIIE n o. 2 «IN I I I8 I I0: I n S 2 a u I Ilmm I I n I I I8 I I I \II I I I I I I I m H I I8 I I I8 I8 I I I I I I8. ”we I I I In" I I2 I n S 2 ea I I I I I Q n : : R BI” I I I I I I Iom I I I I02 W8 e 00 O OH e : : mu m I8 I I I I I I I I I8 H D. a HHH e 2 2 3 8|. Iov toe I8 I I8 I lam Ilmm a 2 2 on H I I I I I H I H II. I I I I I3 Iwm I I I I H89 no no 60393 museum 25...... I I OT. - - - - - - - .Ie igaUUhL I I I I I mm In I Imv IImv I I H IIIov Ian H “I am one no menoou a use: .N Imam m we. H - - .Ie. - - In W 8_I I H H I3 I I8 I H I I|8_ m I Is I I H H .Ie. I I m 87” I H IIS I I I H I8 I ”In: I IV I I I I I 382 2T. 0 I - -2 - I .IO: U I I I I? I8 I I8 n H I3 I I8 I I I I mfidzf >3 oeuuomom £52m 3:32 m: I. I Is I H - I .I m: m H - - - - Ie - m ”mm “OHWUUHflvu . 0.2 I I I I I OE . hastechemiseoixflo #5 cage: Eom e... ad ed «2 6:..ch if a 20...: vi Ii 4 e choc 35min glutamate. 5.» II..- o IIIII I I :0 ounce ~90amfih. “DC 5 0 II- IIII,.II.n—Um=§— uLououm I II I. IImuOhmvmu( on I _ 2 — II I- I I I I I I II I I II I I I I :oEoZ awnings: >2EU£U In mono 58,353: m our—9m — ’ h a. IIIII II I III ‘IIIIIII I IIIhflsQ‘s‘s‘ .11..)QD11111DI. DH! 1 moan—no w. mag—9‘25». 05¢ a. 0503—04 gnunmaaw. How an o r m. W :9? U Iw fin I Ian 73 we Pix MOI—K KOREA Hold fig 2.50350 mwxmflfi Ca .wa...I:::U...:Q_ whoa...“ EC 29.30 >aanomu Cancun—$0: Ugo H.333» macnfimob wmfiozma 64 I III-III >00 III IIfl .IIIIIIA ”08.50 a.” H - I I. H 30:3— 90:5 : m- 8 I E I 250 m - - .I - I I. I I H aI - n P . :oH III. I SI I I - I I: ”to H I I I I 8|. 8.” .I n .8 I. SI I SI . I - . - I... am _8|HI I km.” H 3| 8| mwl. wwII II .IIIWS 21 “I H .T. - a- I H H I we H I I I I I I vol I u I I I I I I I I Jinan-1' ooIlI I .8! I I I we- I II8 n 5... .~ I I “MI I I I I I mm n 8. I 8.” I I I H I H S 3 z m I II NOI- I mm. ‘5 J ”m m I I I . MOI I I I r. . . u 8| I I I I I I 3| 3- 8| n 3 z : 3 8|. Sol I I I I I 81 I I I I u I .lmo 3 z : I. H .mI I I I HI I I I u I I I. N... z a w umln _NOI I II II. I n H 8' I I I aOII I mlvm n I I 8| 8| I I I 8| I 3|. I I H 8 z a .I, n ET I I 8| I I I I u H 2 S a a go I *8! I6 I 8 I 3 I 8| NmIIIlqo 8 “N o w u I I I I I I I I I I I u S : II. a h 8| I SI I I I I I 3| I I .I: : m A 8 H 8| I I BI BI I n NMI a? I H H H III 8 BI a- - - H - N... N... I H - I 8.. - .33 . w... “m M M H moi I I I - I I I we! u wol II S .m V s. mmm vol I ml GI GII. I H I I El H II I Www : II. .\ ”w I SI ml I I I BI wul I - 8 I I :I. m m .I. H I - 8| BI I I H H moIlIIwo I I nu IIIImo I I n I I I I I I I I u 3 I m u u I I 5| I u I I I I I w.Iu u : u a W. 3|. 3| I 5| I I I I I eI GI ”I3 3 u w w H I I I I 5| EII I .8! I I I u S m u M helm I I I I I GIN H uI anI II I HIS : a . N u I I I I I I I GII I u I ol wl I I I I I I a m I N um!” I I“ I EII I I I I II I ”In. w u I N III M w 5| I 3| I GI” I 5| u m A u .N 8| I I _ IlIIl ~OI II WO IV A w w u I I I I bl I I I I u m u N _ u oI I II. I I cl I H I H 8:. I I. SI IN... I _ I ol I I I I I. I u m w I H I 8| I 0 ml u I a. N ~ 8|. I I I .lmo w M N W H . N H H a .I. .I. . M 4.03.0 I.» r m. K ImITwK C IV. waftn 2: v0 Fix ma . :A EDTNK acid 3.: «2991.0 ”AKAJA: o", mxgzamgfi M3075 was. moonoI I I I I I I I I I I I I I I N3 to human—I I I I I I I ”03 man; 41:. N I I I I I I I ““21 1.1.-) 20.3% 329) 1:3 assumed on the basis of a high score without confirmatory evidaence‘I (18, p. 5). The If scale has been found by Gough to be the most easily falsified (17, P. 32); knoun homosexuals rarely obtain a significantly high Hf score. is a measure of interest, however, it may give some indication of the degree to which a subject's pattern of preferences conforms to that of his on sex. The groups did not differ signifi- cantly on this scale. Fisher's t was .681. A certain lack of mascu- line identification in both groups was evidenced by a considerable elevation of mean T scores on this scale. The Pa (Paranoia) scale is believed to measure the similarity of a subject to patients characterized by suspiciousness, oversensitivity, and delusions of persecution. The two groups differed least on this scale, t being only .1140. The groups also scored most closely to the mean of the normal papulation on this scale. The Pt (Psychasthenia) scale purports to measure the similarity of the subject to patients trcubled by phobias or compulsive behavior. Primary characteristics noted in them by others, according to Meehl's adjective study (33) is dissatisfaction, and lack of cheerfulness. The Pa, Pt, and Sc scales comprise the psychotic phase of the curve in contrast to the neurotic triad mentioned above, and should ordinarily be evaluated as a configuration. However, on the Pt scale alone a difference between the groups occurred, significant at the five per cent level. The select mean was 8.1, reject lean, 12,7, and t, 2.392. The Sc (Schimphrenia) scale distinguishes about 60 per cent of observed cases diagnosed as schisOphrenia. Subjects answering the items of this scale in the scored direction give indication of unusual hh or bizarre thoughts or behavior. Those persons not diagnosed as schiz0phrenic who score high on the Sc scale are nearly always charact- erised by a complicated symptomatic pattern. In Spite of the name given to the scale, Gough found that diagnosed schimphrenics usually attain lower scores on this scale than do severe neurotics (17, p. 36). Among normals, high scorers are described as self-dissatisfied, sensi- tive, high-strung, sentimental. The comparison of the selects and rejects showed respective means of 9.1 and lb.l, with a t of 2.3145, significant at the five per cent level. Thus, in two out of the three scales making the psychotic phase of the profile there were significant differences with the rejects scoring higher. This is not to say that the rejects tended to be psychotic, but only to indicate that disturb- ances of a more serious nature occurred more frequently among them than they did among the selects. Further support for this statement was found in the fact that an examination of the individual Pa, Pt, and Sc T scores revealed five in the reject group with an elevation over 70, the usual cutting score, and none exceeding 70 among the selects. It is thought that the Ma (Hypomania) scale should perhaps be regarded more strictly than the others in light of the scale name: Hypomania; a condition just slightly off nomal in that the person exhibits an overproductivity of thought and action. An elevation on this scale must be interpreted very cautiously since the most common peak score among normals is on Me. It seems very often to reflect the normal ambition of a person full of plans. Its greatest usefulness is found in configurational analysis when an Ma peak is accompanied by a Pd peak, or when Ma is high along with Pa, Pt, and Sc. In the former hS case a diagnosis of psychOpathic personality would be given greater assurance; in the latter, serious disturbance approaching psychosis would'be indicated. The Ma scale, like K, Hy, and Pd, is regarded as a "character“ scale. An elevation on any of these, according to Gough (18), colors the entire interpretation.made on the basis of the rest of the profile. In the present study the difference between the groups on this scale was significant beyond the five per cent level, the means for the selects and.rejects being 16.7 and 19.8, respectively. Fisher‘s t was 2.528. In addition to the validating and "clinical” scales which have been discussed, the MMPI tests were scored.for four non—clinical scales. These were for responsibility, dominance, status, and social-intro- version. Responsibility, as defined in the development of the scale by Gough,.gt‘gl, (19, p. 7h), is "willingness to accept the consequences of his own behavior," dependable, trustworthy, showing a sense of obli- gation to the group.‘ These traits are the impression a person high on this scale would give to other peeple. A difference was obtained on the responsibility scale just short of the one per cent level of con- fidence, t = 2.661, with the selects indicating more responsibility. The definition of dominance was "a tendency to appear strong and to maintain the ascendent role in face-to-face situations. It does not mean domineering but is rather found.in persons who convey a feeling of personal strength. Again, this trait is one of behavior, as other persons would.view it, and.not the self-concept. The score of the selects exceeded that of the rejects on this scale, but the difference was not significant; t = 1.055. The groups did.not differ significantly on either of the final two scales, It (status), and 5-1 (social-introversion). A.high score h6 on the St scale, according to Gough (16), indicates a striving for position in the social community, an awareness of social class and group differences. A high score on 8-1, according to Drake (11), indicated introversion or withdrawal behavior. Fisher's t for St and 8-1 respectively was .338 and .831, indicating that the selects and rejects were essentially the same on these scales. In emery, the comparison of mean raw scores of the groups on individual scales revealed first that on K the select group exceeded the reject group to a significant degree. This might be interpreted as meaning that the selects, as a group, were more aware of a feeling of self-esteem and. tended to strive consciously or unconsciously to protect and enhance this feeling. Being “citizens in good standing," as it were, they would have more to lose were they to reveal socially disapproved strivings by their test responses. On the other hand there was along the rejects a lack of this self-esteem, a dissatisfaction which resulted in a frank, self-critical attitude. This was in accord- ance with the finding reported by Rail!!! (h2) that patients at the beginning of a series of non-directive counseling interviews made significantly more negative self-references than they did when improved adjustment had accompanied the conclusion of treatment. The selects also indicated a greater willingness to accept responsibility as indi- cated by their scores on the responsibility scale. Among the remaining scales, the rejects were significantly higher on F, Pd, Pt, Sc, and Ma. Since F, Pd, and la are "character" scales, they emphasise the importance of the symptomatology-expressed in the elevated Pt and Se scales. Perhaps the most definite trend to be noted was that toward psychOpathic deviation in the reject peep. 1.7 Comarisons of the goups in profile configurations. It was possible to make additional comparisons by combining the T scores in various ways. A T score of 50 is the expected score for a normal record. As the T score of an individual case rises, the deviation from the norm becomes more serious, but not until it exceeds 70 does an interpretation of real deviation or maladjustment become warranted. It was therefore of interest to examine the relative mean heights of the profiles of the groups. This was done by obtaining the mean T score for all nine clinical scales of each subject, then calculating the mean of these means for each group. Table II presents the compar- ison of profile elevations of the groups. With 39 degrees of freedom, 9. t of 2.708 is significant at the one per cent level. The t obtained here, being well beyond the one per cent level, provided further evi- dence of a greater degree of disturbance among the rejects. It might also be noted that both groups exceeded the normative level of 50 in profile elevation. According to the MMPI, neither the selects nor rejects were a normally adjusted group. This finding is similar to the conclusion of Northway and Wigdor (38) cited on page 7. The next comparison was of profile slaps. A negative slope is one with the clustering of T scores higher on the neurotic triad than on the Pa, Pt, and Sc scales. Thus, Gough described the typical neurotic profile as one with twin peaks, one at each end of the profile, with the first peak (the neurotic triad) being higher (17, pp. 27-28). The psychotic curve is also diphasic but the peaks are approximately equal. TABLE VI COMPARISON OF THE PROFILE ELEVATION IN T SCORE UNITS ON THE MINNESOTA MULTIPHASIC INVENTORY PROFILE Group Mean height in T score Rejects 55.h6 Selects 53.61 Difference 1.85 t = b.158* * Significant beyond the one per cent level. h9 A crude but satisfactory comparison of slope can be made by finding the mean of the He, D, and Hy scores for each group, and the mean of the Pa, Pt, and So scores for each group. This gives two points for each group from which a curve may be plotted which would reveal am existing difference in elevation of the T scores at either end of the profile. V The mean of the neurotic triad for the selects was 50.8, and for the rejects, 51.0, indicating no difference between groups in elevation at that point. The means of Pa, Pt, and So were 5h.l for the selects and 5h.6 for the‘rejects, again showing surprising correspondence.h These results indicated that the average of the profiles of both groups was positively accelerated, and that there was no significant diffflrence in elevation at either end of the profile. Summarizing the findings of comparison on profile configurations, it was found that the rejects on the average had a definite tendency toward higher profiles than the selects but that there was no dif- ference in the profile slaps, both groups presenting a curve with positive slepe of equal elevation. The difference in height of profile was further confirmation of the conclusion that there was a greater degree of maladjustment in the reject group. Since no particular sig- nificance is assigned to positive lepes, the meaning of this finding remains indeterminate. h The T score on Ha was not used in this calculation because an elevation on this scale conveys a significance quite independent of a consideration of the phasicality of the profile. See above , p. 104. 50 The anxiety index 21.9 internalization 3933.2. An objective meas- ure of anxiety which can be reported in a single score has been pro- posed by Walsh (52). Previous attempts to derive an objective score of neuroticism and anxiety based on combinations of the neurotic triad have been reported by Gough and Modlin (17, 35) to have lacked dis- criminatory power or obscured important relationships among the scales. Furthermore, Hovey (23) found that the profile of an anxiety neurotic typically has a secondary elevation on Pt as well as a peak on D. The index of anxiety (AI) pr0posed by Welsh includes the scores on these four scales and utilizes the three basic features of the anxiety profile: a general rise on the neurotic triad, D being higher than He and Hy, and a secondary rise on Pt. It is defined so as to yield an expected value of 50 for a normal record. Anxiety is presumed on the basis of test items where the subject complains of subjective feelings of tension, nervousness, apprehension, fear, accompanied by somatic concomitants such as vertigo, dyspnea, pro-cordial pain, gastric dis- tress, headache, and the like. Welsh offers several equivalent for- mulae: the one used here was: H + D 4- A1 3|: 8 3 3L] + [(D+Pt)-(Hs+my)] Table VII presents the mean AI obtained for the selects and rejects, with their standard deviations. ' Since the internalization ratio (IR) is a closely related concept, a brief explanation of it will be given before the significance of these results are discussed. The IR differentiates between those who tend to have many somatic symptoms and subjective feelings of stress — who "internalize" their TABLE VII THE ANXIETY INDEX AND INTERNALIZATION RATIO COMPUTED FROM T SCORES OF THE smears AND REJECTS H Group AI SD IR SD Mean Mean RBJQCtB 53067 20.0 0882 .111 Selects 16.511 13.8 .912 .029 t 3. 1h0890 t 3 0291 W 52 difficulties -- and those who tend to act out and "externalize" their conflicts. Welsh (52) suggested that it be obtained by summing the three complaint, mood, or feeling scales: Hs, D, and Pt; and dividing by the sum of the three behavior or character disorder scales: Hy, Pd, and Ma. Since T scores are used, the normal case will obviously yield a theoretical value of 1.00. A ratio above 1.00 would indicate some degree of internalization; a ratio below 1.00 would indicate a tendency toward acting out or externalization. Table VII shows that there was little doubt of a greater amount of anxiety, as determined in this manner, in the reject group. Fisher's t was 114.890, which was highly significant. Both groups tended to externalize their conflicts, but the low t ratio indicated that there was no significant difference between the groups in the extent to which this tendency was present. Welsh (52), in re-computing some of the data extant in the lit- erature found that a low IR with low or only slightly elevated AI would fit the "acting out" behavior pattern of manics, psychopaths, prisoners, and delinquents. He also computed these statistics for data of male college students and found them to be low on both AI and IR, as were the selects here. Male veteran and non-veteran students from additional data, however, yielded AI's above 50 with IR's below 1.00, although not so low as in the reject group here. Without further normative data, therefore, a clear-cut conclusion concerning the sig- nificance of these findings cannot go beyond the statement that, while both groups tended about equally toward acting out or externalization, the reject group showed a definite tendency toward more anxiety. 53 Examination of the standard deviations of these statistics also re-‘ vealed more homogeneity in the select group on both AI and IR. The subtle _a_n_d obvious key . Wiener (5h) reported another set of scales which may be an approach to the measurement of "test-taking attitudes." He believes them to have considerable clinical signifi- cance, particularly when dealing with "normal," non-hospitalized pop— ulations. He divided all items of the WI into two groups: those easy to detect as indicating emotional disturbance (obvious), and those relatively difficult to detect (subtle). The tentative hypothesis which he derived was stated as follows: Successful adjustment in society requires knowledge of socially acceptable ways of behavior and the desire and ability to act in these ways. The socially acceptable way to behave on the person- ality test, as well as more overtly, seems to include avoiding deviate behavior. 0n the LIMPI, the most deviate items are the 0 items, "deviate" because they are seldom answered in a significant direction by a normal population. The socially successful person may have the ability to recognize and to avoid making scores on personality test items which obviously indicate maladjustment, while the socially unsuccessful person my be unable to recognize or to heed signs of deviate behavior on a personality test (51» p.3). He postulated further that the responses given to the subtle (S) and obvious (0) items may be related to a control factor in social adjustment. That is, the term "he is in control of himself" is often used to designate the person able to direct his own activities, to adapt to present social demand, to plan for the future. “Out of control“ on the other hand, would describe the individual who seems at the mercy of innediate environmental stimuli. S and 0 keys were not made for all the scales. Hs, Pt, and Sc were found to consist almost entirely of obvious items and Hf probably Sh has too low a validity as a scale to yield positive results. As has already been seen, the rejects indicated a significant tendency toward.high scores on the obvious items making up the Pt and Sc scales. There was a trend in the same direction on the H3 scale, and no diff- erence between groups on the Hf scale. Table VIII presents the results of comparing the groups on the other five scales for resyonses to the S and 0 items. The hypothesis was that the rejects, similar to the pOpulation of "unsuccessful" persons of Wiener's study (5h), would receive higher scores on the obvious scales than the selects. This occurred, with the difference on the PdPO scale being significant at the five per cent level. To the extent indicated, therefore, the rejects were unable to avoid the obviously deviate items, in accordance with Wiener's thesis. Wiener also noted (Sh, p. 6) a tendency for socially successful groups to obtain higher S scores than unsuccessful groups. Table VIII shows that in the present study the selects were higher on all S scales except Pd-S. The prOposal by Wiener of a "control" factor which aids certain individuals in keeping from marking the obvious items may be related to the unconscious, and therefore uncontrollable, drives which determine so much of neurotic behavior. That is, if neurotic behavior is de- fined along the lines suggested'hy Kubie (1h) as dependent solely on the balance between conscious and unconscious psychological processes: then the checking of Obviously deviate items seems almost to be a measure of the degree of control an individual has over his conduct. As the balance turns in favor of relatively more unconscious influence, TABLE VIII COMPARISON OF THE GROUPS ON MEAN T SCORES OF THE SUBTLE AND OBVIOUS SCALES OF THE MINNESOTA.MULTIPHASIC INVENTORY , _ -._... .__.. - .- ._._ - _.-.__..___-_. .__— _‘—_—~— g _._ __ ~,. _ _ mean T Scores Selects Rejects t Obvious Scales D—0 h6.1 51.7 1.879 MaPO 50.7 56.2 1.815 Hy-O 117.6 50.9 1.336 P690 h9.3 57.0 2.238% Pa-0 u6.9 19.5 .977 subtle Scales M8 5702 S700 .005 fly-S 60.3 Shel 2e32b'x' Pa-S 59.3 Sh.1 1.9h8 W * Significant at the five per cent level. 56 the accompanying behavior is loss under control and may be described as being more neurotic. Since there has been considerable evidence of more neuroticism in the reject group, the checking of a greater number of obvious items would be expected. Summary: The selects tended to mark fewer obviously deviate test items than did the rejects, on all five of the 0 scales, as well as on the Pt and So scales. This provided further evidence that recOgnition and avoidance of behavior which is socially deviate, marking of test items which subtly indicate maladjustment, and being "adjusted" or "successful" tended to go together. The S - 0 relationship may also be an indication of the extent to which unconscious processes are in- fluencing an individual's behavior. The ratings £93:- le_v_e_]_; if. adjustment. The individual profiles of the entire group, numbered and mixed at random, were submitted to three judges for rating as to level of adjustment. The judges were asked to rank the profiles in order, from the one representing the best adjust- ment to that representing the poorest adjustment. A definition of adjustment, taken from Shaffer (ho, pp. h and 138) was given to them as a guide.5 It emphasized particularly that adjustment is the satisfac- tion of interrelated motives, without the slighting of any, and with the consideration for the adjustments of other persons being taken into account. 5 See Appendix E for a c0py of the instructions to the judges. The writer wishes to thank Mrs. Esta Berg Thomas, Dr. Joseph Adelson, and Mr. William E. Thomas for performing these ratings. 57 Table IX presents the rank order coefficients of the:ratings between judges. The size of these correlations indicates considerable agreement as to the adjustment of the subjects based on the MMPI profiles. A single rating for level of adjustment was obtained for each subject by averaging the three ratings that had been assigned him. The group was then divided at the twenty-first (middle) rank and the chi square test applied to test the null hypothesis that there would be no difference between groups in the number falling in the upper, or better adjusted.ha1f. In the upper half, there were 13 selects and eight rejects. Chi square was 1.892, P between .10 and .20. This indicates that the null hypothesis could.not be wholly rejected, but that the difference between level of adjustment according to judges' ratings was not very great. The results of the ratings were about what one might expect. Northway and‘Wigdor's (38) Rorschach analysis of sociometrically selected groups of children revealed that both the select and.reject groups had more disturbed individuals than the middle group. They found a diff- erence in the type of disturbance present in each group; among their highs were psychoneurotic or general anxiety syndromes,hwhile schizo- phrenic or schizoid patterning was prevalent among their laws (38, p. 19h). Similar differences have been noted here in the analysis of the MMPI, with the addition that psychOpathic deviation seemed.to be present also among the rejects. The obvious conclusion is that it was not the fact that an individual was well or poorly adjusted which 'was a factor in his sociometric status, but rather the particular type TABLE IX INTER-JUDGE CORRELATIONS FOR RATINGS OF . LEVEL OF ADJUSTMENT A A B Judges and and and B C C 59 of conflict which was present in an individual case and the influence which this conflict had in a person's interaction with others. Summgz of the MMPI results: The objective findings resulting from an analysis of the MMPI results were the following: 1. The rejects scored significantly higher than the selects on the F, Pd, Pt, Sc, and Ma scales. They were significantly higher on the anxiety index and in mean profile elevation. 2. The selects scored significantly higher than the rejects on K and Responsibility scales. On all but five of the scales, the stan- dard deviation of the selects was smaller, indicating that they tended to respond in a more homogeneous manner than the rejects. 3. No significant differences appeared on the L scale, nor on the He, D, and Hy scales which are the scales frequently associated with neuroticism. No difference appeared on the Hf scale which is known to be lacking in reliability. 0f the "psychotic" phase of the scale a significant difference did not appear on Pa. 0f the additional scales which were used, no significant difference appeared on Dominance, Status, and Social-Introversion. Within the limitations of the test, the following conclusions may be warranted, based upon the objective findings listed above: 1. Both groups were less than optimally well adjusted, but. there was a greater incidence of maladjustment in the reject group. 2. The selects were more guarded and evasive in their responses. They restrained themselves from making any statements about themselves that they might have thought would be too revealing. The rejects, conversely, had a derogatory Opinion of themselves which was revealed 60 by making self-devaluating or self-critical statements. This was perhaps a highly important factor leading to rejection. Self-dero- gation may lead to over-conquensation (aggression) or it may result in taking a humble, self-effacing role. In either case, the rejection would probably continue. 3. There was significantly more anxiety among the reject group. Both groups tended to "act out" their conflicts to a degree which was essentially equal. 2:. There was significantly more psychOpathic deviation as a personality pattern among the rejects. 5. The rejects indicated to a significant degree that they exceeded the selects in being subject to disturbances of more serious nature, such as phobias, compulsions, bizarre thoughts and unusual behavior. 6. The rejects, being significantly higher on the Ila scale, indicated a tendency to overreact in a hypomanic fashion. Since the pattern of the other scales indicated the presence of greater psycho- pathic deviation and more serious (psychotic) symtomatology, this emphasized the trends in these directions. 7. The selects indicated that they would accept reaponsibility to a greater extent. 8. The selects indicated that they would tend to assume the ascendentrole in face to face situations, although their difference from the rejects in this respect did not reach significant levels. 9. Among both groups there was a lack of masculine identifies.- tion with feminine interest patterns much in evidence. 61 10. Judges were unable to differentiate the selects from the rejects on level of adjustment, although there was a tendency for them to find the selects better adjusted. CHAPTER IV RESULTS OBTAINED WITH THE RORSCHACH TECHNIQUE The Rorschach test was administered to 20 of the rejects and 18 of the selects. After the protocols were scored according to the method prOposed by Beck (3), the groups were compared on each of the scoring categories by tests of significance. The protocols were sub- mitted to judges for rating, and then they were interpreted in the usual clinical manner. Comparison 93 thg m _o_r_:_ individual scoring categorie . The groups were first compared for number of responses, or productivity. The data for this comparison are presented in Table I. The mean number of responses for the selects was h2.2; for therejects, 36.6. Fisher's t was 1.172, which is not significant. It can be shown that even a t of this magnitude was possibly greater than was warranted, due to the fact that one select produced 85 responses, thus pulling the select mean upward. In order to avoid the influence of this single, widely deviant case, the median reaponse score was calculated and found to be 36 for 21th groups. This possibly reflects more truly the similarity in productivity which. would exist if another sample of the same type of population were to be tested. While there was no difference between median number of responses, it can be seen in Table I that the range of responses in both groups was quite large. As Cronbach (10) pointed out, mean scores of the Rorschach scoring categories cannot be directly compared where response TABLE I COMPARISON OF THE GROUPS FOR PRODUCTIVITY ON THE RORSCHACH Selects Rejects t Mean number of responses h2.2 36.6 1.172* Range of responses 23 - 85 20 - 62 Standard Deviation 15.7 12.9 it With 37 degrees of freedom, t must be 2.026 to be significant at the five per cent level. 63 totals differ. A.method suggested by Cronbach (10, p. hll) was used to equate the records for number of responses. For each variable (sun of 0, number of P, percent A, etc.) a scattergram was prepared with the variable along the Y axis, and number of reaponses along the x axis. The variable‘was plotted against R for all 38 subjects and medians determined for each column.of 10 responses. A line was drawn to fit the medians of the columns using a formula determined.by the method of averages. Then the proportion of the 38 cases which fell above the line of medians was determined for each group. These pro- portions were compared by chi square. The proportions rather than the number in each group falling above the medians were used for the basis of comparison because in some instances the numbers were quite small, and the use of prOportions avoided the necessity of correcting for attenuation. Table II presents the results obtained when the groups were compared.in this manner. Except for the comparison of F+$, none of the chi squares or P values reached the five or one per cent levels usually demanded.before a conclusion is reached that a real difference exists between groups. However, it must be remembered.that the number of cases in each group 'was rather small. Gronbach (10, p. h08) cautioned against accepting the null hypothesis when findings of moderately low significance are obtained, especially in Rorschach studies where sample size is often restricted. With very small samples, an extremely discriminating score is required to yield a significant difference. It is questionable whether Rorschach variables are sufficiently sensitive, particularly when the groups being studied were, as in the present instance, both composed of comparatively'flnormal" (nonphospitalized) individuals. TABLE XI RORSCHACH ANALYSIS: COMPARISON OF SCORING CATEGORIES AFTER EQUATING THE PROTOCOLS FOR NUMBER OF RESPONSES Variable Number above Pr0portions X27 P the median F+$ 3 0a .000 8.727 ~ .01 R 6 .158 C, sum of S 9 .237 .1h3 .70 R 16 .821 Pure c s 9 .237 .060 .80 R 9 0237 FC 3 11 .290 .12h .80 R 11 .290 M s 8 .210 .032 .85 R 9 .237 1.00 3 8b .210 .655 .175 R 6 .158 up stIcatLbn, which really covers an insecure, sick form of adjustment. Hysterical trend. In the following summarized interpretations of the select records, no characteristics are underlined. It is, in fact, more difficult to account for select status than reject status from the Rors'chachs, partly because pepularity seems to be the result of an absence of dis- agreeable traits as well as the possession of positive methods of dealing with other persons. Many of these subjects had developed methods of handling interpersonal relationships which consisted of techniques and behavioral traits not reflected in their Rorschach protocols. Some possessed special prestige-giving talents. 1. Good ego strength with considerable intellectualization. Hysteroid trend; probably some concern over semality (castration fears) but anxieties are well controlled. 2. Anxiety neurosis, conflict in sexual identification and guilt associated with homoseimal tendencies. Dominated by fantasy life. Good treatment risk. 79 3. very bright but somewhat impractical and immature. Vigorous fantasy life, and highly emotional. Unsettled sexuality; aggress- ive but not hostile. h. Interesting ability to dissociate himself from emotional aspects of a situation and‘remain objective, perhaps as a defense against over-involvement. Highly original, abstract thinker. Uninhibited, but anxious in relation to authority figures. 5. Somewhat compulsive, "one track mind." Inferiority feelings and considerable anxiety. Indulges in autistic fantasy, as if to make the world conform to his wish. 6. "Nermal" record; controlled.affectivity, maintains good.form level except on card VII. Stereotypy of thought, but adequate, healthy fantasy. 7. well balanced except for some uncontrolled emotionality. Matter-of-fact person who would.probably let others know'just where he stood at all times. 8. Extremely anxious, "brittle" form of adjustment. Very con- stricted.menta1 activity, but still maintaining close human re- lationships. Record has some characteristics of reactive depress- ion. 9. Aggressive and.sgocentric. Except for some anxiety, he presents a fair picture of the ambitious psychOpath, able to adopt what- ever role will suit the purpose of the moment. 10. Fairly well balanced at present, extroverted, minimal anxiety. There is a sadistic streak, however, seemingly related to a need for violent emotional expression combined with inability to amp pathise. Constant self-referents point to a choice of paranoid symptomatology should a neurosis deve10p. _ 11. This record is so lacking in pathology as to be uninteresting! The verbalizations indicate an immaturity, and thought content is stereotyped, but otherwise no maladjustment is indicated. 12. Evidence of much inner conflict, associated with upward social mobility and deteriorated parental relationships. High ego- strength and controlled aggression. 13. Placid, good natured, somewhat stereotyped in thinking. Healthy fantasy, concerned with persons doing pleasant things. Secure in himself, and somewhat passive. Excellent all-round adjustment. ‘ 80 114. This is a well-balanced record; a person capable of a wide range of feeling, of emotional reactions. Vigorous fantasy, adequate sexual adjustment; he strives for originality as if he were consciously trying to make himself interesting. 15. Capable of effecting close interpersonal relationships, but has little need, within himself, to seek companionship. Somewhat passive, apt to under-estimate his own potentialities. Probably subject to mood swings; very sensitive and vulnerable since he is lacking in fantasy life. 16. Probably an overt homosexual maintaining a rigid form of adjust- ment by an over-conformity in public behavior. Great anxiety, and some mannerisms seen in schiz0phrenic records. 17. Extroverted, impulsive, and striving for achievement beyond his capacity. Not well adjusted, preoccupied with sex with weak attempts to "sublimate" his interest. 18. An adolescent, full of ideas, interested in peOple, capable of a variety of emotional outlets. Occasionally his fantasy becomes phobic, or autistic, but he has good powers of recovery. Seems to be very unselfconscious. It can be seen that the Rorschach revealed areas of conflict in most individuals of both groups. What was less distinctly revealed was the degree to which the conflict had pervaded the entire personality, and the methods adapted by each subject in handling his conflicts. It is believed that these two factors are crucial in determining the ease with which one establishes favorable relationships with his fellows. The degree to which the conflict had pervaded the entire person- ality was reflected to some extent in the F+%. When the conflict had reached such serious prOportions as to alter one's perception signi- ficantly from the norm, it could be expected that his interpersonal relationships would suffer. In such an instance the individual would be reacting less to objective reality than to his distorted interpre- tations stemming from inner needs. However, even in those rejects whose hold on reality was still within the normal limits, the conflict might assume such exaggerated importance in their inner lives as to 81 interfere with their ability to attend adequately to the needs of others, with the result that they could not really give anything of themselves to others in a social relationship. While several of the selects indicated the presence of conflicts, they seemed to be handling them in such a way that the presence of their conflict was not evident in their overt behavior. In fact, it may have been that in some instances their conflict served as a moti- vating factor in leading them to adopt modes of behavior which would keep them on good terms with other peOple. Of equal importance were the "mechanisms" or method which each person must develOp for dealing with their conflicts. The methods used by the rejects seemed to be unfortunate choices in most cases, because they were found to be objectionable in the eyes of others. The selects, on the other hand, seemed to have found techniques which were not offensive to others. In Freudian terms, the rejects tended to employ over-compensation, denial, regression, and repression, while the selects tended toward sublimation, rationalization and withdrawal. It was also noted that many of the rejects had developed peculiar mannerisms of speech, gait, and gesture which could often be related to the problem with which they were struggling. The selects, in their behavior, often gave the impression that they had nothing to hide. Their frank verbal- izations, open expression, and confident bearing was in general such that persons around them gained a sense of security. Since a greater part of their behavior was under conscious control, it was more predict- able, and others could be comfortable in their presence. It is possible that these different mannerisms of the rejects and selects contributed 82 to some extent to the sociometric standing of each individual since they would.make up part of the behavior on which he would be judged. Summggyig£_thg Rorschach findings. The statistical analysis of the Rorschach results revealed only one variable on which there was a significant difference between the groups: form level, or F4%. This indicated that among the rejects there was a greater need to impose their private world onto the objective world of reality. Other trends that were noted were: 1. The rejects tended to be more anxious. 2. The rejects showed a trend toward self-criticism or infer- iority'feelings. 3. There was a trend.among the rejects to respond more frequently to large details and.p0pular areas, possibly reflecting a striving for "normality". h. The selects tended toward a greater degree of obstinacy and independence. 5. The selects were less inhibited in sexual matters, and seemed to have found socially acceptable ways of expressing their needs in this area. 6. The judges did not find the selects better adjusted on the basis of the Rorschach alone. There was a trend for the selects to be rated as better adjusted than the rejects when the ratings on the Rorschach and.MMPI'were combined. 7. It is suggested on the basis of the interpreted.records that the conflicts revealed in the rejects tended to be more encompassing of the total personality while the conflicts present in the selects tended to have remained isolated. 83 8. The rejects seemed to have selected methods of handling their conflicts» which were objectionable to others, such as over-compensation, denial, regression, and repression. They also had deve10ped peculiar mannerisms which caused them to be received unfavorably by the group. 9. The selects tended to handle their conflicts by inoffensive methods such as sublimation, rationalization, and withdrawal. They were more frank “and Open in their behavior, which tended to give a sense of security to persons around them. CHAPTER V RESULTS OBTAINED WITH THE TAT The purpose in using the Thematic Apperception Test (m) in this investigation was to obtain information regarding the dynamics of interpersonal relationships. While the Rorschach technique pre- sents to the clinician the formal structure and emotional organization of the personality, it does not provide the richness in content which is given in the TAT, from which one can gain clues regarding the sub- ject's relationship with important types of environmental figures. A disadvantage of employing the TAT for purposes of research is the limited use that can be made of Statistical techniques for making group comparisons. Furthermore, Eron and others (13, 5,) have shown its limitations as a diagnostic total for separating individuals or groups into nosological categories. Therefore, the TAT was analyzed in the present study primarily by the use of rating scales, and the analysis was directed mainly toward the nature of the relations of the subjects to peeple and toward society. A shortened form of the TAT consisting of the first ten pictures recommended for adult males, and the blank card (Harvard University Press, 3rd Edition) was used,1 so that the time required for the test would be kept to about one hour per subject. The test was administered 1 The mimbers of the cards which were used are: l, 2, 3BM, h, 5, 68M, 7BM, 83M, 9BM, 10, and 16 (the blank card). 8S to 18 selects and 19 rejects. The stories were taken in shorthand so that the protocols were practically verbatim. The groups were compared for emotional tone and outcome of the stories. The productions of each subject were rated for relationship toward mother and father figures, and toward peers, Opposite sex. It was found that the cards used did not elicit enough evidence on which a rating could be made for relationship to peer, same sex. The stories dealing with crime were analyzed in detail, and conspicuous differences which were revealed in thematic analysis were noted. Each of these analyses will be discussed in the following sections. Enotional Egg! g_x_1_d outcome. Using the original protocols which had been transcribed from the shorthand, each story was rated for emotional tone according to the rating scales provided by Eron (13, Appendix A). Besides offering a general rating scale for emotional tone, there is provided a rating scale for each individual card. They are based on a 5-point scale from -2, very sad, to +2, very happy. The individualized nature of these scales is evident in the following sample, which is the scale for card 10, a picture of the head and shoulders of a couple in close embrace: -2 Death, extreme sorrow, tragedy. --1 Departure, leaving loved ones, personal failure, being comforted for minor misfortune. 0 Lack of affect, balance of conflict. +1 Reunion, happiness, acceptance, feelings of pleasure. +2 Marital bliss, extreme contentment, satisfaction and good addusmento (13’ p. 33) 86 The reliability of the ratings done by the examiner was estimated by'hawing another psychologist, who had no knowledge of the group membership of the subjects, rate a sample of the stories consisting of two stories for each subject - a total of 7h stories.2 The ratings differed on only six stories, which gave a t of 7.09h when the test for departure of two frequencies from.equality was applied, indicating a high reliability between the raters. The individualized rating scales undoubtedTy contributed to the high reliability shown in this sample, and it was not considered necessary for another person to rate the entire group of protocols. The mean emotional tone for the selects was -.52 on the rating scale; for the rejects it was -.62. This indicates a general tendency in both groups to give stories which were somewhat sad. Fisher's t for the difference between.means'was .825, which is not significant so that it could not be concluded that the rejects really told stories that were more unhappy in emotional tone than those of the selects. 0f the entire group of subjects, only two had a positive mean rating, indicating a.preponderance of happy stories, and'both of these were selects. The outcomes of the stories were also rated, again.using a 5- point scale provided'hy Eron (13, p. 32). This scale is similar to the one used for emotional tone in ranging from very'sad to very happy. However, since he found that a tentative individualized set of outcome scales was very similar to the emotional tone scale, he pr0posed that 2 The writer wishes to express his appreciation to Dr. Jack Boger for his help in rating the stories. 87 only one general rating scale be used for all outcomes. This pro- cedure was followed in the present study. The mean rating for out- come in the select group was~+5103 for the rejects it was -.O5. Fish~ er's t for the difference between these means was 1.071, which falls short of being significant. In summary, the comparison of groups on emotional tone and out— come of stories did not reveal significant group differences. In general, the stories were somewhat sad in both groups. There was a trend for the selects to be more Optimistic in the outcome of the stories, but the difference between groups was not sufficient to establish this finding definitely. Relationship toward society. As a general indication of the relationship between the subjects and society, each protocol was examined for stories dealing with crime. For this purpose, only those stories were included where the crime was carried to completion; that is, the murder, suicide, robbery, etc. was actually committed. There were many more stories where a crime theme occurred in the thoughts of the characters, but was not fulfilled in their action. Themes of this type will be discussed in the thematic analysis. It was found that nine selects and ten rejects told stories where a crime was committed, which is about half of each group (50 and 52 per cent, respectively). Table XIII shows the number and types of crimes which occurred in each group. The table shows that even though an almost equal number of sub- jects in each group told stories dealing with crime, the number of such stories occurring in the reject group was considerably greater O . .t. .. ..~.. . i , - ,.._ - . l- . . . TABLE XIII THE NUMBER AND TYPE OF CRIMES FOUND IN THE STORIES OF EACH GROUP Crime Selects Rejects Espionage Assault Accidental homicide Murder Suicide Robbery Unnamed.crime Confidence game l-‘I'JNI-‘WWN HwO‘JDF't Total number of crimes 13 20 A... | v _- 12' 89 than was found in the selects. If frequency of a certain theme may be regarded as an index of the strength of the drive giving rise to that theme, then this findinngay indicate that in these rejects there was a greater tendency toward anti-social behavior, or at least that there was more hostility present in them as a group. An.examination of the different crimes and their frequencies adds to the picture of anti-social behavior as it was reflected in the fantasy of the two groups. Espionage was included because it is definitely a crime, but it lacks the personalized aggression which characterizes the other types of crimes which occurred. Stories of Spies occurred only among the selects. Assault, also found only among the selects, was largely in response to card 3BM where a man "heats up" another for making advances to his wife or partner. It was included in the tabulation only when the thought of assault was actually carried out. Many individuals in both groups included the idea of assault in their stories to this picture, but the man was dissuaded.by the woman from.carrying out the plan. Accidental homicide was practically equal in both groups in frequency, and included accidental shootings, or auto- mobile accidents. The next category, murder, was more important; for even to fantasy about planning the death of another seems to embody a recklessness, sometimes a hostility, which is not condoned.by the mores of our society. The murders of the rejects included stories where a "boy shot a.man.friend," "boy shot a.man," "woman shot-her drunken.husband," and a "boy shot 'someone.'" The murder given.by a select was of a.man shooting his wife's lover. Except for the woman shooting her husband, there seemed to be no overt reason for the mur- ders to have happened in the stories of the rejects. 90 The largest difference between groups was found in the crime of robbery. Here, it seemed that the rejects revealed most clearly a tendency to think in terms of one person forcing his will upon another - a "working aginst" instead of a "working with." In this and in the unnamed crimes of the next category, the rejects showed less hesitancy to deal in their fantasy with acts against other persons, than did the selects. The final "con game" was the product of one of the rejects and was a story elicited by the blank card. It dealt with a man who bilked women out of their money by pretending to fall in love with them. The stories dealing with crimes have been analyzed in detail be- cause they seem to reflect a type of thinking which was quite different in the two groups, and may have significance for their sociometric standing. In the selects, hostility found a direct outlet in asth against the offender - a solution which never occurred among the re- jects. This is behavior which is understandable, overt, and combines a conventional mixture of emotion and action. On the other hand, among the rejects was found more toying with the idea of extreme aggression (murder) for which no logical reason was given, more robbery or just ”crime" in a generalized sense, and in one instance the most devious form of aggression, the con-game. It is not prOposed that the rejects would always carry out, in overt behavior, the acts about which they fantasied in these stories. But that their thinking followed these lines probably reflects a hostility toward others which in some in- stances would have been noticeable in little ways by persons who had to associate with them. It is also important that in many instances 91 the hostility seemed to be there, but without instigation. It may therefore be presumed that the hostility arose from repressed conflicts and if it found expression at all, it might be diaplaced onto whomever was nearby. Such hostility arising from a neurotic source is quite different from the aggression evidenced in the stories of assault given by three of the selects. Interpersonal relationships. In order to obtain an estimate of the relationship of each subject toward the mother or mother-figure, father or father-figure, and.to peer, Opposite sex (hereafter referred to as "heterosexual relationship") the summarized.protocols were rated by the writer and.two other judges.3 By summarizing each story into a sentence or two which contained the essence of the action and feel- ings, the task requested of the judges was kept within reasonable limits of difficulty and time. Each subject was rated on a five point scale, from -2, very poor relationship, to-OZ, very favorable relationship. No rating was possible for relationship to peer, same sex, because it was found that indications of such relationship occurred very rarely. Table XIV presents the coefficients of correlations (phi) between judges. The phi coefficient was chosen because it would best reflect the fact if the judges differed in assigning positive or negative ratings. The ratings were dichotomized by omitting the zero category in making scattergrams and throwing alternate zero ratings first into the plus one category and.next into the minus one category. ‘When these coefficients were corrected to correSpond to the Pearson r, 3 The writer is indebted to Dr. William E. Harris and Dr. Jack Boger for assisting with these ratings. TABLE XIV INTERpJUDGE CORRELATIONS FOR RATING OF INTERPERSONAL RELATIONSHIPS IN THE TAT STORIES Judges Judges Judges Relationship A and B A and C B and C Toward MOther o 52* e 10 o 73 Toward.Father .h1 .h? .76 Heterosexual .51 .02 .61 * These correlations are phi coefficients, and are not directly comparable to the Pearson r. For interpretation of their significance, see the tut, pp. 91 - 93o 93 they ranged from .6h to 1.0 except for the two lowest, between judges A and 0. "Judge A“ in this case was the writer, and it may'be that his knowledge of the Subjects influenced his ratings in such a way as to lower these correlations. A composite rating was obtained for each subject by averaging the ratings of the three judges. Table XV presents the comparison of the groups obtained by computing the mean rating for each group and calculating Fisher's t to test the significance of the difference between groups. It was found that there was no significant difference between groups in any of the three areas. The groups differed the most in relationship to the mother-figure, and were identical in heterosexual relationships. Both groups showed the most unfavorable relationships toward the mother-figure. The only positive mean which occurred was in the relationship of the selects toward the father figure. Thematic analysis. The check list of 125 themes provided by Eron (13) was used for the thematic analysis of the TAT protocols. This check list is divided into the two general headings of equilibrium and.disequilibrium, indicating the state of tension.or adjustment displayed in the story. These two general groups are subdivided into interpersonal, intrapersonal and impersonal classifications, related to the sphere to which the situation:referred. Of primary pertinence for the present study, the interpersonal classification is further broken down into sections dealing with parent, partner, peer, or sib- ling. Each theme is defined in the check list. TABLE XV COMPARISON OF THE GROUPS ON INTERPERSONAL RELATIONSHIPS BASED ON MEANS OF COMBINED RATINGS OF TAT STORIES BY THREE JUDGES Mean Ratings for Relationship mother Father Heterosexual Selects -.3 +.l -.2 Rejects -.6 -.1 -,2 Fisher's t 1.067 .809 .. - .. W 95 As the stories were examined, each theme was tallied as it appeared. It was found that most stories contained.more than one theme, and rarely were there stories which could not be classified under one of the headings. The procedure adopted by Eron was followed, in that only the manifest content was considered: "the actual behavior of the characters in the stories as narrated by the subject, regardless of its covert significance" (13, p. h). Since the tallying of themes was merely a.counting procedure, it was done by the examiner only. Since Eron found no significant differences between the hospital- ized.and nonphospitalized subjects of his study in the production of certain themes or thematic patterns, it was not anticipated that any would appear in the present study where the groups might be presumed to be even.more alike than were his. It was, in fact, found that there were very few of the total number of themes on.which the groups of the present study differed to any great extent. Therefore, no attempt was made at a statistical analysis of theme occurrence. However, an exam- ination of the predominant themes, and the frequencies of their occur- rence, provides much of interest. Table XVI presents the 22 themes which were found to be most frequent, or on which the groups differed most widely. The complete list of themes with the frequency of their occurrence may be found in Appendix G. The most frequent theme in the stories of both groups was "Parental pressure." ThiS'was defined as the parent being prohibitive, compell- ing, censuring, punishing, disapproving, interfering, checking up, disagreeing or quarrelling with, restraining or unduly influencing the child. The rejects exceeded the selects in the frequency of this theme, but both groups used it to a great extent. That the parents TABLE XVI TAT THEMES WHICH WERE MOST FREQUENT AND ON WHICH THE GROUPS DIFFERED MOST WIDELY IN FREQUENCY Frequency Theme ‘ Selects Rejects Parental pressure 31 37 Parental succorrance 13 15 Nurturance to parent 5 0 Departure from parent 6 8 Concern for child 3 7 Death or illness of parent 12 9 Disappointment to parent 1 6 Departure from partner 3 8 Illicit sex 13 9 Aggression to peer 7 h Death or illness of peer O 5 Aspiration 16 13 Suicide h l Moral struggle 9 5 Occupational concern 10 20 Physical illness or death of hero 3 7 Compensation 0 6 "Hurt feelings" 0 7 Aggression to environment 6 12 Contentment with partner 8 h Congeniality with peer 6 3 Self-tranquillity 6 l A 97 were regarded as exerting unwanted pressure agrees with the previously noted finding by the raters of a predominantly unfavorable relation- ship toward the parents. "Occupational concern" was next most frequent, defined as "de- ciding between jobs, considering vocations, dissatisfied with present employment, fails at present employment." The rejects exceeded the selects in the use of this theme, largely because of card 2 where the ratio was 11 to 2, with the rejects most often telling of the girl's dissatisfaction with her present life. "Aspiration," which was dream, ing of, or hOping for the future, and "succorance," which referred to "child seeks or receives aid, help, advice, consolation from parent“ were the next most frequent themes. The differences on these were very small. Only the selects offered themes of "nurturance," however, where the child bestowed or offered aid, advice, consolation to the parent. Actually, it was usually consolation which was given to one parent at the death of the other. Departure from parent was a fre- quent theme with both groups, but the rejects more often told of de- parture from a partner (with the partner being the wife, sweetheart, or Opposite-sexed.peer). The rejects more frequently pictured the parent as being concerned over the physical or mental well-being of the child, and being disap— pointed in the child. One wonders what the relation.might be between these themes and the early experiences of the rejects while they were still a part of the family group. As mentioned above, the fact that the selects more frequently mentioned the death or illness of the parent was related to the "nur- turance" theme. Several stories dwelt upon the hero's taking care of 98 the mother until her death. However, both groups occasionally intro- duced the theme of parental death abruptly into their stories for no apparent reason, so that a hostility'became evident. The selects indicated less inhibition in dealing with stories of illicit sex, just as they more frequently gave sex responses to the Rorschach cards. "Illicit sex" includes extra~ or pre-marital inter- course and ”petting." That they seemed to anticipate greater satis- faction in heterosexual relationships was also indicated in their more frequently using a theme of “contentment with partner," the part- ner in this case being of the Opposite sex. In the more frequent use of the theme "aggression to peer," the selects showed a tendency to give direct expression to hostility, while the rejects were more passive in this respect. The figures for aggression given here do not correspond with those in Table XIII, the stories of crime, because the theme was counted.even though the action was not carried out, provided it figured importantly in the fantasy of the character. While none of the selects told stories where the friend (peer) suffered death or illness, this theme occurred five times in the reject group. The rejects also more frequently had themes dealing with the illness or death of the hero. Perhaps this reflects a hostility toward.others and.a dissatisfaction with self. Again, it was found that the selects tended toward a more drastic solution by having the ' hero solve problems of personal dissatisfaction through committing suicide. The excess, in the selects, of moral struggle, where the hero 99 'was concerned over right and wrong, or hesitating in indulging in some act because of ethical proscriptions, pointed up their consciousness of the impact of their behavior on both other people and upon them? selves. Among the rejects such intrOSpection was less often found. They more frequently would solve the problem by "compensation" where a good characteristic or a stroke of fortune made up for another bad characteristic or misfortune. This agrees with the Rorschach find- ing that compensation, as a.mechanism, seemed to occur more frequently in the rejects. Their need for such a mechanism is seen in the use, in the rejects only, of the theme "hurt feelings" where the central character was very sensitive over some happening, slight, or insult. In contrast to the aggression to the peer in which the selects were high, the rejects very frequently showed an aggression to the environment. Themes under this heading included robbery, accident, murder of unSpecified individual. It might be postulated that even in their fantasy the diSplacement of hostility from the real source of frustration was necessary. Perhaps part of the reason that this theme was found less in the selects can be found in the last two themes which they used frequently, "congeniality with peer" and "self- tranquillity.” Subjects who could eXpress such feelings would have less need.for expression of aggression through hostile acts. In summary, the thematic analysis gave support to the conclusions already derived from the examination of the crime stories and gave a pattern of reactions at the fantasy level which, although lacking in statistical verification, may point to characteristic group differences. 100 An examination of the themes on'Which the greatest differences in fre- quency appeared revealed patterns which logically fit together. The selects more often presented themes using the more tender emotions of congeniality, tranquillity, offering aid to the parent, and showing contentment with a partner of the Opposite sex. When hostility was aroused, they tended to give it direct expression by becoming aggressive toward the object of their dislike. They were concerned over the moral aspects of their behavior. They indicated less inhibition in.heterosexual relationships. The rejects tended.more frequently toward.passive solutions of their difficulties, such as leaving their parents or their partner, and finding compensatory rewards. They were more easily hurt, and they displaced their hostilities by becoming aggressive toward innocent objects in their environment. They indicated dissatisfaction with their present lot, and seemed to feel that they were a disappointment to their parents. Both groups expressed the attitude that their parents were doms inating and disapproving. Summasz 22 252 results. The TAT was administered to 18 selects and 19 rejects. When.the original protocols were rated for emotional tone it was found that both groups told stories which were predomin- antly sad and that the difference between groups was not significant. The selects tended to give outcomes somewhat happier than those of the rejects, but again the difference failed to reach a statistically sig- nificant level. The relationship toward.society was estimated by counting the number of stories in which a crime was actually committed. 101 The selects tended to be more direct in the eXpression of their aggres- sion while the rejects indicated a greater tendency to resort to serious crimes, such as murder, or generalized aggression such as robbery. The need to eXpress anti-social behavior seemed to be stronger among the rejects. When the protocols were rated for interpersonal relationships, it was found that the groups showed no significant difference in.mean ratings, and that both groups showed the most unfavorable relationship toward the mother or mother-figure, a somewhat better relationship toward the Opposite sex, and the most favorable relationship toward the father or father-figure. The thematic analysis showed a greater tendency among the selects to express the tender emotions, an ability to express direct hostility, a concern over "right" and "wrong" in making behavior choices, and less inhibition in.heterosexual relationships than among the rejects. The rejects tended.more frequently toward passive solutions of their difficulties, compensatory behavior, over-sensitivity to slights, and displacement of hostility into aggressive acts such as robbery. They seemed.to be more dissatisfied with their present life situation, and their stories indicated a tendency for children to be a disappoint- ment to their parents. Both groups expressed the attitude that their parents were exerting pressure upon them, were disapproving, or dominating. CHAPTER VI COHSISTENCY IN THE SELF CONCEPT In his investigation of factors associated with rejection, Kidd (26) included in his questionnaire several items related to the hypoth- esis that the rejects would be more insecure than the selects. He found that, while the rejects did.not rate themselves as being more insecure than the selects on a security-insecurity rating scale, they were more frequently ignorant of family income, they were getting lower grades, they moved.more frequently, and.they rated themselves low in scholastic effort and in citizenship (25, pp. 116—125). Logic- ally, these results may be regarded as supporting his hypothesis, but, as he pointed out, further evidence was desirable. In the present study it was decided to explore further the question of insecurity as a factor in rejection. The measurement of securityb insecurity is a largely undeveloped area in personality testing. Swift (h9) was unable to demonstrate any relationship between Rorschach var- iables and behavioral measures of insecurity; Maslow (32) has developed a paper-andypencil test of securityhinsecurity made up of 75 items which are to be answered."yes" or "no". Among the sub-aSpects of insecurity which were considered in the development of this test were: a feeling of rejection, of isolation; perception of the world as dark, threatenp ing, or hostile; feelings of threat, danger; anxiety; feeling of tension, strain, or conflict; uncertainty; psychotic and.neurotic tendencies; and inferiority feelings (32, pp. 21—22). Since many of these attributes 103 have been shown to be present in rejects, either in the present study or in others reviewed in Chapter I, further evidence along the same line would.be redundant. If, however, in making another test of secur- ity-insecurity on a.pOpulation of selects and rejects, there is added some contribution to personality theory, such a study befiomes a worth- while undertaking. An approach to the measurement of securityhinsecurity is provided in connection with the self concept which has heretofore been unexplored. It is related to the consistency of the concept of self, and a testable hypothesis could.be formulated thus: an insecure person would tend to be more inconsistent in the descriptive terms which he would apply to himself than would a secure person. This hypothesis Springs from.many hints already present in the literature. Lecky (29) regarded.personality as an organized system.of ideas about the self and interpreted behavior as a.manifestation of a single motive, that of maintaining self-consistency in an unstable environment. Personality, he said, is a system of ideas which are cone sistent with each other and'with their nucleus, the idea of the self. In this frame of reference, therapy consists of the definition of in- consistent elements which are causing complaint and.resistence (creat- ing insecurity or anxiety), and in relating them directly to the dome inant structure of values. Rogers (h3) prOposed a tentative theory of behavior in a series of propositions, two of which have pertinence to this discussion. They are: XII most of the ways of behaving which are adapted.by the organism are those which are consistent with the concept of self. (h3, p. 507). 10h XIV Psychological maladjustment exists when the organism denies to awareness significant sensory and visceral experiences, which con- sequently are not symbolized and organized into the gestalt of the self-structure. When this situation exists, there is a basic or potential psychological tension. . . . if the individual becomes to any degree aware of this tension or discrepancy, he feels anxious, feels that he is not united or integrated, that he is unsure of his direction. (h3, pp. 510-511). In these prepositions it is preposed that self-consistency is a primary goal, and that an awareness of inconsistencies causes ”psycho- lagical tension." This psychological tension, it is here proposed, may be detected by a device designed to reveal the presence of discrepant elements in the concept of the self. It is also pr0posed that this tension.may be akin to insecurity. Benjamins (6) makes more apparent the connection between security and consistency. In his theory, the conceptual system which is built up by an individual gives meaning to his experiences as he tries to fit himself into the world in which he lives. An individual's identity is built out of his life experiences and without this identity he has no frame of reference with which to understand anything related to himself. Thus, personal conflict is the subjective experience result- ing from recognizing incongruities or inconsistencies within his conceptual system. Security refers to the feeling of certainty which the individ- ual has in relation to his understanding, eSpecially regarding himself . . . Complete certainty, or complete security, then, means that there is complete.freedom from inconsistencies among all the various conceptualizations of the individual - everything already experienced and all anticipated experiences have perfect closure, i.e., are all understood, all "make sense," are all inte- grated. . . Just as one needs to know how others will behave in a given situation, so one must know how he, himself, will behave. One must, then, be consistent in order to be secure, in order to maintain.his method of conceptualizing himself." (6, p. h75). 105 In this theoretical framework, therefore, a test of the relation, ship between self-consistency and security can be made by determining the "certainty'I with which an individual applies adjectivel labels in describing himself. On the basis of the results obtained by Kidd, the rejects of his study were thought to be more insecure than the selects. The Rorschach and MMPI results of the present study indicated that there was more anxiety in the reject group. we might already assume, then, that in.the rejects of this study there was a.p0pulation in which pro- nounced insecurity existed. The hypothesis of the present study was that the selects, being more secure, would be able to remain consistent in their self-descriptions. The rejects, being more insecure, would be less sure in their estimates of what sorts of persons they were and this uncertainty would appear in contradictory or inconsistant elements in their descriptions of themselves. Development 2: the Self Rating Scale. It was desired that a rating scale composed of trait names be devised that would be not only meaningful to the p0pulation of the study, male college students, but also that would be composed of traits which had significance related to select-reject status. A source of such significant traits was provided in the sociometric questionnaire, where the dormitory residents were asked to give reasons for rejection.1 Many of these reasons were traits, or were reducible to traits suitable for the scale. However, since the scale was too short even after using all suitable trait-names 1 See Appendix F for the reasons which were given for rejection of each of the rejects used in this study. 106 suggested in the questionnaire, a few more were added, chiefly pertain- ing to physical attributes, such as weight, and strength. Each trait was placed on a continuum, with antonyms at each end, thus: smart . . . . . dumb In this way a single frame of reference was provided and there was some surety that the words of the scale would.mean relatively the same thing to all subjects. In order to provide a basis for accurate analysis of the self— ratings, a five point scale was placed between each pair of antonyms. The subjects were asked to rate themselves at the point on which they believed they fell. Since the scale was to measure the consistency in self-ratings, each trait had to occur twice. Therefore, after the continuum had been set up for each trait on which a measurement was desired, a.matching continuum was devised in synonymous terms. For example, the two continua on which the subject would tell how he regarded himself in respect to the trait "intelligence," were: smart V . . . . . dumb bright . . . . . stupid The synonyms were chosen with the aid of Reget's Thesaurus. In the final scale there were 27 traits, which, with their alternate forms made the complete scale of Sh continua.2 In the scale itself these continua were placed in.mixed order, See Appendix C for a cepy of the Self Rating Scale. 107 and.many of them were reversed endpfor-end. They were mixed so that the subjects would not realize that they were rating themselves twice on each trait. Some of the continua were reversed so that the "favor- able" trait would not always occur in the left-hand column. In this way the subject was forced to consider each continuum separately and could not go quickly down the column rating himself the same on every trait. The following list presents the continua in paired form and the traits which they purport to measure: adult - infantile maturity mature - childish aggressive - yielding aggressiveness quarrelsome - passive blundering - diplomatic tactfulness tactless - thoughtful broadsminded.- intolerant tolerance liberal - narrowaminded bull-headed - flexible flexibility stubborn - democratic confident - uncertain security secure - insecure contrary - nooPerative cooperation uncOOperative - helpful courteous - rude courtesy polite - ill-mannered dependable - irresponsible dependability reliable - unstable dirty - clean cleanliness messy - neat dishonest - trustworthy honesty liar - truthful effeminate - masculine masculinity prissy - manly 108 feeble - muscular strength weak - strong follower - leader leadership imitative - persuasive friendly - hostile friendliness sociable - unfriendly gay - sorrowful feeling-tone happy - unhappy genuine - insincere sincerity sincere - hypocritical keep-to-myself - prying discretion mindpmybownpbusiness - nosy likeable - unpleasant likeability pleasant - offensive modest - vain pride humble - proud moody - evenptempered changeableness changeable - steady-disposition moral - corrupt morality virtuous - immoral quiet - noisy boisterousness reserved.— loud selfish— generous generosity stingy - cpenhanded smart - dumb intelligence bright - stupid thin - fat weight underweight - overweight unselfconscious - self-centered sociability mixer - withdrawn In addition to the directions which appear on the first page of the scale, it was believed advisable to add a warning to the effect that the "average" column (number 3, as they were numbered) should be 109 used.sparingly. The subjects were told that a truly average individual was rare, that they could use column 3, but that it should be used after thoughtful consideration and not only as a compromise when they found it difficult to decide. This was done in an effort to have the subjects use the extremes of the scale where true inconsistencies, if they occurred, would.be apparent. No continuum which had been.marked in column 3 was considered in the scoring. The Self Rating Scale was administered to 21 subjects in each group. One of the rejects, however, rated himself as "average" on every continuum, so that his scale could not be included in analyzing the results. To score the scale, each continuum was compared with its synonymous alternate. One point'was given for each reversal which was found. A.reversal was a true inconsistency, where the subject rated himself 1 or 2 on one of the continua, and h or S on the alternate, or vice versa. Results. The scores obtained by the two groups are given in Table XVII. Not only did more of the rejects make reversals in describing themselves, but the number of reversals occurring in the reject group was greater. The mean number of reversals for the selects was .8, while the reject mean was 1.5. Chi-square for the difference between the number in each group making one or more reversals was 3.228; P, .07. A chi square of this size provides considerable support for the hypothp esis that the rejects would be more inconsistent in their self-ratings, but falls short of the five per cent level usually required. TABLE XVII SCORES ON THE SELF RATING SCALE: NUMBER OF REVERSALS OCCURRING IN EACH GROUP Number of Reversals Selects Rejects 0 11 S l 7 7 2 h 3 3 3 S 1 Total who made reversals 10 15 111 Table XVIII shows the traits on which the subjects were inconsistent in their self-ratings. This tabulation reveals that the groups differed to some extent in the traits on which they were inconsistent. Whether these differences were due to the test items themselves (the problem of strictly delimiting the meaning of the trait names was probably only partially solved by placing each trait on a continuum) or whether they pointed to differences in the thinking process of selects and rejects is not known. Th3 reliability 3f thg scale. The purpose in calculating the re- liability of the scale was to determine whether an individual would be relatively constant in the way he would rate himself on each continumm from one time to another. That is, were his judgments regarding himself related to some relatively stable standard which.might be regarded as the self concept, or were his ratings so changeable from time to time that one had to assume that whatever he marked on the test was probably due to chance? The scale was therefore administered twice to two classes of introductory psychology, a total of 75 college students. The two administrations were a week apart. The scales were scored.by matching the ratings given on the second administration with those of the first, for each subject. Each time the rating differed the continuum.was marked "wrong." In this way a total score was obtained which represented the extent of agreement between the first and second administrations. Using these scores, the Kuder Richardy son formula for estimating reliability (20, p. h95) could be applied. The reliability coefficient of the scale was .69. TABLE XVIII THE TRAITS ON WHICH INCONSISTENCIES OCCURRED Number who were inconsistent Trait name Selects Rejects flexibility courtesy boisterousness likeability aggressiveness pride friendliness changeableness sincerity tolerance generosity security discretion honesty ' dependability cooperation tactfulness \ototoxotdrdldtd WWNNNHHHHC'P’NNH 112 The interpretation of this coefficient is difficult because of the nature of the Scale. It was not a "test" in the true sense of the word, where there was a "right" and "wrong" answer. The subjects did not know, during the second administration that their scores depended upon agreement with their former ratings. Also, reliability would be just as fairly judged if "agreement" between ratings were defined only as falling on the same side of the scale, rather than on exactly the same point, as was the criterion used here. Because of these consider- ations the reliability coefficient of .69 seems adequate proof that the ratings were related to a stable criterion. While memory may have been a factor in the reliability of the ratings, it could not have been an important one. The students did not know, when they first took the test, that they would be asked to do it again. Even had they been "set" to memorize their reSponses, the task would have been prodigious, involving Sh items with a five-point scale for each. It must be assumed that their ratings were meaningful within each subject‘s frame of reference, or concept of self. . The results were different when the question of reliability was phrased another way, i.e., would an individual tend to make as many reversals on a second administration as he did on the first? The tendency was for there to be fewer reversals on the second.administra- tion. The mean number of reversals on the first administration for the 75 subjects was 1.8; on the second it was 1.2. The correlation (Pearson r) between number of reversals on the first and second administrations was .66'3'.O7. This indicates that those making more reversals on the first administration tended also to make more on the second. The reduc- tion in the mean number of reversals was possibly due to familiarity with the task, and to a greater wariness which might naturally have 113 resulted from being asked to repeat the task. Just as, in a life situation, one might achieve a greater integration regarding some decision if allowed to "think the matter over," so, with greater familiarity or greater caution, inconsistencies in self-ratings might be expected to be reduced on a second administration Of the test. The result obtained here might point also to the fact that the same concept was not being measured on the second administration as it was on the first. Whereas in the first instance a measure was obtained of self- inconsistency, possibly the second administration.measured a mixture of that, plus test-taking attitudes, insight into the purpose of the test, and other unknown factors. It is doubtful, therefore, that the test-retest method is an adequate method for determining the reliability of a tendency for making reversals. An effort was made to find another reason which might lead to reversals than the inconsistency in the self concept, which was first postulated. There was a possibility that a positional tendency was having an effect, where a right-left quality inherent in the right and left columns of trait names caused.ratings to fall indiscriminately on one or the other ends of the scale. Two methods of checking on this possibility were tried, neither of which indicated such a positional effect to be Operating. In the first method, the scale was administered twice to a college class Of h3 elementary psychology students. The first administration was with the original scale; the second administration, a week later, was with a form in which the right and.1eft columns of traits were reversed. The number of self-ratings falling in columns 1 and 2 on the first administration was compared with the number 11h falling in columns 1 and 2 on the second administration. The same was done with columns h and 5. The center column, number 3, was not counted. Table XIX shows the results of this experiment. TO determine whether a positional tendency was Operating, one must ask whether there ‘was an unanticipated influence exerted by the words in one or the other of the columns causing self-ratings tO fall at one or the other ends of the scale. If this were true, then reversing the columns should cause a correSponding reversal in the mean number of ratings falling on the side being influenced. Table XIX shows that on the first administration, more ratings fell on the right side Of the scale. When the columns were reversed for the second administration, however, there was not a corresponding increase in mean number Of ratings to the left side of the scale. There was an increase of .8 in the mean number of ratings on the left side, and a decrease Of 1.2 on the right side, but Fisher‘s t for the difference between means was not significant in either case. The results indicate, then, that a positional tendency, if it was Operating, was not sufficiently strong to have caused reversals independent of the meanings of the trait names. The second.method used to determine the possible presence of a positional tendency was designed to discover whether the numbers given to the points on the scale influenced the results. Did the subjects tend, indiscriminately, to mark under 1 or 2 rather than u or S, or vice versa? In testing this possibility, the scale was administered to a new group of hl students in elementary psychology classes, with the second test having the numbers reversed, reading 5, h, 3, 2, l. TABLE XIX COMPARISON OF MEAN NUMBER OF RATINGS FALLING ON EACH SIDE OF THE SCALE ON TWO ADMINISTRATIONS NITH THE COLUMNS OF TRAIT NAMES REVERSED Mean number of ratings Left side Right side First administration 20.2 22.5 Second administration 21.0 21.3 Difference .8 1.2 t 1.210% 1.780 * 'With h2 degrees of freedom, t must be 2.018 to be significant at the five per cent level. 116 Table XX.presents the results of these administrations, which also were a week apart. The mean number of self-ratings falling at either end of the scale on each administration were not found to differ significantly by Fisher's t test. Another use Of the scale was applied in determining whether the occurrence Of reversals, which could be regarded as a defect in.per- ception of oneself, would be accompanied by a similar perceptual de- fect in regard.to others. Stated another way, would an individual who is inconsistent in his self concept also be inconsistent in the way he judges other persons? ThiS'was tested by having a group of 62 students rate first themselves and then, on another cOpy of the scale, rate someone whom they felt they knew very well, and computing a correlation between the number of reversals occurring in the two ratings. Pearson r in this instance was .59'3'.08, indicating that considerable relation- ship did exist between inconsistencies in perception Of self and of others. The subjects tended to make more reversals when judging others. The mean number Of reversals on self-ratings for this group was 1.8, while the mean on ratings Of "others" was 2.0. These results are in the expected direction. One would expect that defects of perception would occur, if they are going to be present at all, regardless of the perceptual object. It would also be expected that persons would.perceive, and.maintain consistency between the inter- locking systems and sub-systems of their own self concept better than they could.maintain a consistency about any other individual. The self concept must be assumed to be a highly complex organization. It is more than a simple "picture of oneself." It is not prOposed that TABLE XX COMPARISON OF MEAN NUMBER OF RATINGS FALLING ON EACH SIDE OF THE SCALE ON TWO ADEINISTRATIONS WITH THE SCALE NUMBERS REVERSED Mean number Of ratings Left side Right side First administration 21.2 23.0 second. adlniniStration 2105 23014 Difference .3 * .h t, 01578 .627 * With no degrees Of freedom, t must be 2.021 to be significant at the five per cent level. 118 the rating scale used in this study approached a complete survdy of the important traits which play a part in the self concept Of most individuals. It was therefore all the more remarkable that differences at the observed levels appeared between the groups when the measuring instrument is admittedly so crude. Furthermore, if some individuals found it difficult to remain consistent when rating themselves on these few items, they would surely find it equally so when rating others. The correlation between self- and other - ratings obtained here supports this assumption. Validity 2f_thg_results. Just as validity in terms of an outside criterion cannot correctly be applied to sociometric studies (Pepinsky, hO), so would validity of this sort be erroneously applied to the self-rating scale. The scale measures inconsistencies in the self concept. By making a reversal in judgment in his ratings, the subject gives a behavioral demonstration of an inconsistency. The scale is both a measure (by noting frequency of occurrence) and a sample Of the behavior being studied. Assuming that inconsistency in the self concept is evidence Of insecurity, however, moves the point of focus from a behavioral level to the level of an abstract concept. Here, evidence of validity may rightly be demanded. This evidence existed in the fact that the re- jects were significantly lower in their grade point average, and that there were several who were on probation because of disciplinary or academic shortcomings. The projective techniques indicated that the rejects were more anxious than the selects, and they gave more evi- dence of feelings of inferiority. Also, in line with the criteria of 119 insecurity prOpOsed by Maslow (32), there were more neurotic and psyb chotic trends in the reject group, as evidenced.by the Rorschach ins terpretations and the MMPI profile elevations. Thus, evidence from sources other than the rating scale, itself, indicated the presence in rejects of attributes believed to be associated with insecurity; Since the rejects were found to be more inconsistent than the selects, the hypothesis that inconsistency in the self concept and insecurity are related seems to be a valid one. Summary. A self-rating scale was designed to test the hypothesis that the rejects would demonstrate more inconsistency in their self concepts than the selects. Theoretical prOposals were reviewed which postulated a relationship between inconsistencies in the ideas an in- dividual has about himself and a feeling of insecurity. The results obtained upon administering the scale to the population of selects and rejects used in this study gave only moderate support to the hypoth- esis. Inconsistencies among the rejects tended to exceed those of the selects but the difference between the groups was significant only at the seven.per cent level. It was found by a combination of test-retest and internal reliability methods that self-ratings were likely to be Ireliable over a short period Of time, but that subjects tended to make fewer reversals on a second administration of the scale. The tendency to make reversals was shown not to be related to any mechanical process such as a "positional" effect. There was a relationship between inconsistencies occurring in ratings of self, and.ratings of others, indicating that an.impairment of perception Of self was likely to be jIldicative of impairment of perception in general. Since many attributes 120 known to be present in the rejects are frequently regarded as pointing to insecurity, the hypothesis that inconsistency in the self concept and feelings of insecurity are related seems to be a tenable one. CHAPTER VII RIGIDITY AND CONCRETENESS OF THINKING The final technique employed with the pOpulation of selects and rejects under study was one designed to reveal differences in the thinking processes between the two groups. The particular processes under consideration were rigidity and concreteness. If an individual persists in solving a problem in a particular way which he has been shown, even though another more econdmical way is available for his use, he is regarded as demonstrating a rigidity or inflexibility in his problempsolving approach, or in his thinking. If, in his solving of the problem, he uses a basic terminology where one word equals only one thing rather than seeking more abstract forms of expression where a single word.may represent an entire concept (the latter being re- garded as a more economical form of communication), he is designated as demonstrating concreteness in his thinking. It was hypothesized that the rejects would demonstrate more rigidity and more concreteness in their thinking than would the selects, as revealed by the Rokeach Map Technique (hS). Theoretical considerations. The decision to include a test of rigidity and concreteness of thinking in the battery of tests was based on two assumptions: 1) that the rejects would be more frustrated and, 2) that they would be more maladjusted than the selects. If either proved to be the case it was hypothesized that mental rigidity 122 and/or concreteness of thinking would be an associated factor. Frustration was found to be present in the rejects studied by Kidd (25) based upon the following hypotheses: C. The most rejected individuals' behavior is often typical of reaction to frustration, that is, it is likely to be aggressive and/or withdrawing, as evidenced'by: 1. relatively low academic achievement in relation to ability; 2. relatively frequent changes of residence and/or drop-outs; 3. admitted feelings of insecurity; h. low rating by selves and.Resident Assistants on scholastic effort; 5. lOW'rating'by selves and.Resident Assistants on citizenship; 6. low rating by selves and Resident Assistants on social and personality adjustment; 7. being characterized by one's peers as being aggressive and/or withdrawing in his interpersonal relations; 8. case studies of some of the most rejected individuals. (26, p. 37-38). Of these, significant differences were found in the direction hypothp esized for numbers 1, 2, h, 6, 7, and 8 (26, pp. th—lh9). With the subjects of the present study it was similarly found that the achieve- ment of the rejects was lower in spite of their having an equal potentialityl (hypothesis 1, above), and that the reasons given for rejection included.many aggressive and/or withdrawing characteristics2 (hypothesis 7 above). In addition, evidence obtained from the Self- Rating Scale supported hypothesis three that the rejects would have more feelings of insecurity. Evidence from the MMPI and the Rorschach 1 See Table III, p. 25. 2 See Appendix F. 123 supported.hypothesis six that the rejects would rate low in personality adjustment. There seemed little reason to doubt that the rejects en, countered.more situations leading to frustration in any given period than did the selects. If, therefore, the rejects were more frustrated, it became a matter of interest and importance to learn whether a rigidity was present in their manner of thinking which would create more difficulty in their adOpting new roles, or in changing their behavior to a form which would lead to more social acceptance and a.more satisfactory level of adjustment. There are several lines of evidence that provide a link between frustration and a rigid, stereotyped, or perseverative sort of be- havior. Patrick's (39) experiment using human subjects in a multiple choice experiment demonstrated the reversal which may occur from highly variable to highly stereotyped behavior under conditions of frustration. Students who resisted change in attitude were found by Newcomb (37) to have a higher degree of frustration in their background. Maier (31) holds that frustration-instigated behavior is characterized by fixation of response in which compulsion or rigidity in response takes over so that the organism is no longer in a choice situation but must act in a specific, given, manner. The question immediately arises whether the frustrations which led to stereotypy in laboratory experiments would be similar in degree and effect to those present in the life situations of the group studied here. If one granted that the rejects were encountering numerous frust- rations as they obtained low grades, as they tried to mingle with their 12h fellows but were rebuffed, as they entered countless daily situations where they were blocked in an attempt to reach their goal, could one postulate a generalized frustrated condition so that their responses to an affectively neutral test would reveal the expected rigidity? That this is an unwarranted assumption is perhaps one factor for the inconclusiveness of the results obtained with the test used here. Maier also found evidence that fixations, when they occurred, were more specific than habits (31, p. 80). A fixated response would not occur if there were a slight change in the total situation. The second assumption, that the rejects would.be a.more maladjusted group, provided another basis for the inclusion of the test of rigidity. Evidence has already been cited to show that rejects tended to be less well adjusted. The relation between maladaptive behavior and rigidity is sometimes referred to as the "neurotic paradox," or the oftenr noted fact that neurotic symptoms are clung to in spite of the fact that they seem to bring only suffering or grief to the patient. Such behavior is typically seen in conversion hysterias, compulsions, and phobias. The individuals complain about their symptoms, but seem unable to change their pattern of behavior to one that results in less unconfortable consequences. It was therefore of importance to deter- mine whether the maladjustments found in the reject group would be accompanied by rigidity in thinking. The Rokeach Map Technique. The technique selected to test the presence of mental rigidity in the groups under study here was the Rokeach Nap Technique (ht, PP- 51-75)-3 It consists of presenting a The page numbers cited in reference to this work refer to those in Bokeach 3 personal cOpy and may not correspond to the numbers in the bound edition. 125 series of maps to be memorized. The first two maps are examples which establish the desired set and give the subjects practice in solving the problem. These are followed by five critical maps which constitute the test. They are identical except for street names. After allotting 15 seconds for learning the map, the subject writes an answer to a question which is asked about each one. In each case the problem is to tell how to go from the southwest corner to the northeast corner. A sample map is presented as Figure 3.)4 It will be noted that two solutions are possible: 1) to go one block east and two blocks north (hereafter referred to as the "long method"); 2) to go one block north and take the diagonal (hereafter referred to as the "short method"). A set was established to use the long method by having the diagonal on the first map, which was used as an example, run from.the northwest to the southeast corners, so that only the long method could be used. Also in the instructions, only a reference to the long method was made. This is in accordance with the findings of Rokeach that the example and verbal instructions were sufficient to establish the set. The instructions given to the subjects were as follows: Listen carefully to the instructions I am about to give you because you will not be allowed to ask any questions. This experiment is designed to see how well you can study maps in short periods of time. Turn to Page One on which you will see part of a map of a city._ This map is an example of the maps which follow. YOur task will be to memorize the map as quickly as you can. Just to See Appendix D for the complete map test used in this experiment. MAP NUMBER 6 O...“ Oklahoma Boulevard L. A '— ‘ Mississippi Boulevard _r ' wv Tennessee Boulevard A _‘ _ ._ A n .. .A Louisiana Boulevard fi .___l Figure 3. Rokeach Map, Number 6 Texas Boulevard Q .3 can! 127 give you an idea of what you will have to do in this experiment, I will give you about 30 seconds to memorize this map. Are you ready? Go ahead. New turn to Page Two. On this page there is a question. Read the question and write down your answer below it in your own words. Note that the question reads, "Describe in.your own words how to go from and to and ." This means from the corner of and to the* corner of and . YOu are not allowed to make any drawa ings of the map you've just studied. Go ahead. Now turn back to Map l . . . The problem was to go from the corner of and to the corner of and . One—Eorrect EEEEEF‘is to go east for ESE—EISck and then go north for two blocks. The problem is very simple providing you were able to remember the street names on the map. Note also the following alphabetical order of the street names on the map: , The same alphabetical order m pmon—Me W Remember, the names are alphabetical from the bottom to the t0p and then from left to right. Now turn to Map Two. This map is also an example of the maps which follow; Note the same alphabetical order of the streets as in Map 13 g g 0 Now turn to the next question page. The question you see on this page is also an example of the questions which follow. Now that you have the idea we will go on to the other maps. From now on I will give you only 15 seconds to study each of the maps which follow; Ybu will be asked one question after studying each map. There are several rules which you must follow. First, never turn to any other page in the booklet until I tell you to. Second you are not allowed to go back to any previous page once you have passed it. Finally, you are not allowed to draw the map you have memorized; you must answer all questions without looking at any map. 0. K. When I give you the signal turn to Map 3, which you are to study as quickly as you can. Pick up the edge of the next two pages in you hand and when I give you the signal, turn to Map 3. Remember, all you get is 15 seconds. Ready. Go! (After 15 seconds) Turn to the question. _YOu have approx~ imately two minutes to answer the question for Map 3. The assumption that such a perceptual technique as this would.re- veal rigidity of thinking is derived from.Rokeach who said: If one group of subjects more frequently solves the critical map problems by using the diagonal short-cut while the other group more frequently fails to use the diagonal short-cut, then the two groups may be said to differ in their perceptual organization 128 of the total field. In the former case the perceptual organiza- tion is complete, taking into account all aspects even though they are not of immediate significance. In the latter case the field is narrow and only those aspects which are immediately crucial to the solution of the problem are selected out of the total field to the exclusion of other aspects which are not immediately rele- vant. Rigidity in problem solving, in thinking perhaps may be equivalent to rigidity in perception (hh, p. 55). The method also provides a measure of concreteness of thinking, obtained by counting the number of words each subject used in writing the answer to each question. It is assumed that just as mathematical symbols are a more economical (abstract) form of communication than the use of verbal symbols, so an answer to a question using a fewer number of words would be evidence of a.more abstract manner of thought. Results. The test was administered individualLy to 21 subjects in each group. One select had to be eliminated.because he used the alley on the example, thus showing not only that he had difficulty in memorizing the map, but also casting doubt upon whether the verbal instructions which followed were, alone, sufficient to establish the required set. Among the rejects three subjects were eliminated, two because they could not memorize the street names and the other because he found the test to be such a frustrating eXperience that he could not continue after the third critical map. He stated that he could do better if he knew what the examiner was measuring with the map tech- nique. He was unable to concentrate on learning the street names and finally even denied that they were "necessarily" in alphabetical order as had.been suggested.by the instructions. This left a total of 20 selects and 18 rejects for comparison. 129 There was no significant difference between the number of subjects in each group using the short method of solving the problems. The chi square test for the differences on the critical maps, numbers three to seven, respectively, was .0h3, .076, .063, .000, and .000. Chi square for all five maps combined was .000. This indicated that there was no difference between the two groups in mental.rigidity as measured by the Rokeach map Technique. There was likewise found to be no significant difference between the groups in concreteness of thinking. The mean number of words used in the written answers to the map questions of the selectS'was 78.8; for the rejects it was 73.9. Fisher's t for the significance of the difference between these means was .509, indicating that the difference in number of words used could be due to chance. Discussion.g£ the results. An explanation for the lack of sig- nificant differences can be sought in two places: the formulation of the initial hypothesis and the technique used in testing the hypothesis. The hypothesiS'was that the rejects would demonstrate more rigidity and.more concreteness in their thinking. This was based on the assump- tions that the rejects would on the whole be a.more frustrated and more maladjusted group. There is, however, no reason to assume that the individual, separate frustrations daily encountered by the rejects would lead to a generalized, more or less permanently frustrated con- dition which would be reflected.by a rigid performance in the test situation. It remains very probable that the rejects did meet more frustrating situations than the selects. But few of them.found the testing situation to be a frustrating one. The one whose behavior was 130 such that a high degree of frustration could be assumed became so disorganized that he could not continue the test to its completion. A slight semantic variation makes the fault quite clear. It is probably correct to assume that the rejects "encounter more frustra- tions." It is probably incorrect to assume that they "would be more frustrated" in the testing situation. Since the testing situation was not, in general, a frustrating one, no results of frustration were detected by the test. The assumption that the rejects would be more maladjusted, leading to mental rigidity and concreteness of thinking, can also be found to be based upon a semantic ngnrsequitur. That a greater degree of mal- adjustment was present in the reject group has been shown by the results of the MMPI and Rorschach, but a great variety of forms of maladjust- ment were present and it should not be assumed that "maladjustment" per so would be associated with mental rigidity. It is possible that certain personality syndromes such as psychOpathic deviation, schizoid trends, and sexual deviation.might be marked.by a lack of stability, a striving to be different, or a persistent rebelliousness. In such cases if in initial set was established, the breaking away from the set and taking the short route could be only another expression of a typical form of adjustment to a situation. On the other hand, among the selects there was an occasional impression of a force Operating aginst the hypothesis so that the long route was continually chosen. This force seemed.to be related to a drive toward conformity, to do what had been suggested without question. It seemed almost as if, once having been told of a solution, 131 these subjects fulfilled the role of "good boys" or persons who act in a conventional manner by taking it, and looking no farther. They tended to accept the implication that since the diagonal was not men- tioned it should not be used. Three of the subjects, when asked about the diagonal after completing the test said that they had seen it but did not think they should use it. The influence of tacit assumptions in.problem solving is a frequently recognized factor. Boring, Lang- feld, and weld, for instance mentioned that The set or attitude under which a thinker undertakes to solve a problem may involve certain tacit assumptions of which the thinker is wholly unaware. Very often these assumptions prevent him from solving the problem, because they exclude from his consideration the hypothesis which is necessary for his success. (8, p. 208). Whether such tacit assumptions were present to a greater degree among the selects, and whether it is related to habitual conventionalism in behavior cannot be determined by the evidence here, but it invites further experimental verification. much less objection can be found to the technique used to test the hypothesis than to the hypothesis itself. Its original use demonp strated.differences in mental rigidity and concreteness of thinking between groups high and low in ethnocentrism (uh). There it was used with groups while in the present investigation it was administered individually. This difference in the conditions of the administration may have resulted.in a less secure imposition of the desired set with some individuals, although when the groups as a whole were considered the present method was more effective. In Rokeach's experiment hO per cent of his entire group used the long method on the first critical 132 problem, while in the present experiment 60 per cent of the entire group (selects and rejects combined) used the long method on the first critical problem. While an attempt was made to impress upon each subject the exper- imental nature of the technique which required the following of defin- ite rules of procedure, some of them carried over into this situation the informality of the projective technique sessions and tried to get the examiner to answer questions about the maps, or made comments between problems. This informality and the lack of competitive atmos- phere which would.be present in a group administration could very possibly be an added factor in determining what results were obtained. Summary. The hypothesis that the rejects would demonstrate more rigidity and concreteness in thinking was tested with the Rokeach Map Technique. The groups did not differ significantly in their ability to break away from a set which had.been initially imposed, nor in the number of words used in answering the problem. It was concluded that the hypothesis was not supported by the experiment. A re-examination of the assumptions underlying the initial hypoth- esis provides a partial explanation of the results. It was probably unjustified to assume a generalized, lasting frustrated condition which would be measurable in a nonwfrustrating testing situation. And it was also probably unjustified to assume that the maladjustments among the rejects were all of a sort to promote rigidity, or that the forms of adjustment among the selects would all be associated with flexibility. 133 Certain differences in the conditions of administration of the test between its use here and as it was originally applied by Rokeach may also have influenced the results. CHAPTER VIII SUMMARY The purpose of this study was to examine and compare the personality patterns of pOpular and unpOpular individuals. The p0pulation selected for study consisted of h2 male college students. Twentybone of these students had been found to be social rejects on a sociometric study of a.men's dormitory. The group chosen for comparison were the 21 men who were found to be the most p0pular in the same sociometric study. ”While the selects were found to be older, on the average, and to be further advanced in school, no significant difference was found in academic ability, as measured by the American Council for Education tests used for college entrance. In spite of equal intellectual potential, the mean grade point average of the rejects was significantly lower than that of the selects, indicating a lower level of actual achievement. The techniques employed in studying the personalities of the two groups consisted of the Minnesota multiphasic Personality Inventory, the Rorschach, the Thematic Apperception Test, a Self Rating Scale to determine the presence of inconsistencies in the self concept, and the .Rokeach Map Technique for revealing rigidity ano.concreteness in thinking. . The important findings to come out of an analysis of the MMPI scores were the following: While both groups contained.members who showed signs of maladjustment, the rejects were significantly more 135 disturbed as a group, as indicated.by the mean profile elevation. The rejects tended to complain of more serious symptomatology, exhib- iting a more schiz0phrenic and psychOpathic deviate pattern, rather than a neurotic pattern. They displayed a disregard for social mores not only by being significantly higher than the selects on the psycho— pathic deviate scale, but also by checking significantly more of the obvious items of the psychOpathic deviate scale. In doing so, they exhibited more lack of control in their test behavior, and the supposi- tion follows that they would show more lack of control in their everyday behavior, acting more frequently from.impulse or emotion than from.a logical consideration for the social amenities involved. A comparison of the groups on the anxiety index revealed that the rejects were significantly more anxious than were the selects. The selects were more guarded and evasive in their responses to the MMPI, while the rejects were quite frank, sometimes to the point of being self-derogatory. The selects were significantly higher on the responsibility scale, and indicated that they tended to assume the ascendent role in face-to—face situations, conveying a feeling of personal strength. The most significant difference obtained with the Rorschach tech, nique was on form.level, with the rejects more frequently interpreting the blots in a manner deviating from the normal. The rejects also, on this technique, indicated the presence of more anxiety, and tended to give more responses associated with feelings of inferiority; The only other finding which approached significance was that the selects tended to be less inhibited in giving sex reaponses, frequently doing so in 136 a.manner suggestive of "sublimation." That is, they united their interest in sex with botanical or veterinary interests according to their vocational choices so that their sexual responses were given a veneer of social acceptability. Clinical interpretation of the pro- tocols revealed no indications of psychosis among the selects, al- though there were numerous neurotic manifestations, one psychopathic personality, and one who was possibly an overt homosexual. On the other hand, among the rejects there were several schizoid records, with one who was seriously paranoid, and another psychOpathic person- ality. Odd, affected.mannerisms were frequently noted among the re- jects in their test behavior. A lack of masculine identification was noted in both groups. With the Thematic Apperception Test it was found that, while the number of subjects in each group who indicated anti-social attitudes by telling stories dealing with crime was practically equal, the drive in this direction among the rejects was stronger as evidenced.by a greater frequency of crime stories in this group. Among the selects a direct expression of aggression was indicated by a striking out at the offending person. Among the rejects there was a greater frequency of murder and robbery. Both groups tended to tell stories which were somewhat sad in emotional tone, and there was no difference in the ratings for outcome of the stories. When the stories were rated for interpersonal relationships, a tendency was found for the selects to show a more favorable relation- ship toward the mother-figure, but the difference between the groups was not significant. No difference was found between the groups in 137 relationship toward the father-figure, nor in heterosexual relation- ships. In both groups the most unfavorable attitudes were eXpressed toward the mother—figure. Thematic analysis indicated trends among the rejects for the central character frequently to disappoint his parents, depart from his partner, to become physically ill or to die, to compensate for a shortcoming with a stroke of luck, to suffer from "hurt feelings," to be aggressive toward his environment by participating in robbery or criminal activities, The select tended frequently to offer help to his parents, to be aggressive toward peers, to commit suicide, to be concerned over whether an act was right or wrong, to show content- ment with his partner, congeniality with his friends, and to exhibit tranquillity in his own outlook. The most frequent theme occurring in both groups was that of a parent being prohibiting, censuring, disagreeing, or compelling. This was followed in frequency by the theme of being concerned or dissatisfied with the present occupation, and the third.most frequent theme was that of death or illness of a parent. With the Self Rating Scale the hypothesis was supported at the seven per cent level of confidence that the rejects would be more inconsistent in their self concepts than the selects. This finding is believed to be related not only to the facts that they were more anxious and disturbed as a group, but also to the possibility that they were more insecure. Being unable to form a consistent picture of themselves they found it more difficult to fit themselves smoothly into groups and activities about them. 138 Differences in rigidity and concreteness in thinking did not appear with the use of the Rokeach Map Technique. A re-evaluation of the basic assumptions leading to the formulation of the hypothesis provided a partial explanation of the results. The relationship of sociometric status to mental rigidity requires further investigation. The initial hypotheses were supported to the following extent: 1. Judges tended to rate the test protocols of the rejects as in- dicating a poorer level of adjustment, but the differences between groups in this respect were not significant. Objective tests results did find the rejects with a significantly poorer level of adjustment. 2. More neurotic and psychotic manifestations appeared in the rejects. 3. Anxiety was greater in the reject group and their methods of defense seemed to be more offensive in the eyes of others. h. No difference was found in the TAT ratings of interpersonal relationships but more generalized hostility was present among the rejects. 5. The rejects tended to show more inconsistencies in their self concepts. 6. The groups did not differ in rigidity or concreteness of thinking. In the study as a whole, the group comparisons performed by statis- tical analysis tended to give an impression of group homOgeneity which was misleading. One of the outstanding results was the lack of statis- tically significant differences where an a priori assumption would have expected them to obtain. The most valid statement which could be made about the rejects was that they exhibited more anxiety symptoms than the selects. The rejects tended toward.more deviate and bizarre thinking and interpretations of their environment. Their forms of adjustment were more frequently similar to the psychOpathic deviate than were those of the selects. The study revealed individual differences between subjects and between groups in methods of dealing with anxiety. 1. 2. 3. 5. 7. 9. BIBLIOGRAPHY Aaronson, B. S., and welsh, G. S. The MMPI as a diagnostic diff- erentiator: a reply to Rubin. .2‘ consult. Psychol., 1950, 1h, 32h-326o Austin, M. 0., and Thompson, C. C. Children's friendships: a study of the bases on which children select and reject their best friends. ‘3. educ. Psychol., l9h8, 39, 101-116. Beck, S. J. Rorschach's test. (Vbl. I and II). New York: Grune and Stratton, 1951. Bell, J. E. Projective techniques. New York: Longmans, Green, and Co., 19h8. Bellak, L. The Thematic Apperception Test in clinical use. In Abt, L. E., and Bellak, L., Projective psychology. New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1950, 185-229. Benjamins, J. Changes in performance in relation to influences upon self-conceptualization. ‘g. abnorm. soc. Psychol., 1950, hS: h73-h80- Bonney, M. E. Personality traits of socially successful and soc- ially unsuccessful children. 'J. educ. Psychol., 19h3, 3h, “$9-147 2 o Boring, E. 0., Langfeld, H. S., and weld, H. P. Foundations 2: psychology. New York: John Wiley and Sons, Inc., l9h8. Brozek, J., and Schiele, B. C. Clinical significance of the MMPI F scale evaluated in experimental neurosis. éflfii'.£° 10. 11. 12. 13. 1h. is. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 1140 Cronbach, L. J. Statistical methods applied to Rorschach scores: a review. Psychol. Bull., 19149, 146, 393-h29. Drake, L. E. A social I. E. scale for the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory. :1. app; Pflchol” 19146, 30, 51-514. Elias, G. Self-evaluating questionnaires as projective measures of personality. :1. consult. Psychol., 1951, 15, 1196-500. Eron, L. D. A normative study of the Thematic Apperception Test. Psyghol. Monogru 1950, 614, No. 9. Foerster, von, Heinz. (Ed.) grbernetics. Circular causal, 3133 feedback mechanisms in biol_ogical and social systems. Trans- actions of the Sixth Conference. New York: Josiah Macy, Jr. Foundation, 1950. French, R. L. Sociometric measures in relation to individual ad- justment and group performance among naval recruits. 5233, Psychologist, 19149, 14, 262, (Ab.) Gough, H. G. A new dimension of status: I. DevelOpment of a personality scale. Amer. sociol. Rev., 1916, 13, 1401-1407. Gough, H. G. Diagnostic patterns on the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory. :1. 91in. Psychol., 19116, 2, 23-36. Gough, H. G. The Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory. (To appear as one of the sections in a forthcoming volume on medical psychology). Gough, H. G., McClosky, H. , and Meehl, P. E. A personality scale for reaponsibility. g. abnorm. soc. Psychol., 1952, 1,7, 73-80. Guilford, J. P. Fundamental statistics _i_n_ psycholog 53d 29229.“ tion. (2nd Ed.) New York: McGraw-Hill Book Co. , Inc., 1950. 21. 22. 23. 2h. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. 30. lhl Hathaway, S. R., and.moKinley, J. C. A.multiphasic personality schedule (Minnesota): III The measurement of symptomatic de- pression. ‘J. ngchol., 19h2, 1h, 73-8h. Hathaway, S. R., and.McKinley, J. C. The Minnesota Multiphasic Inventory (A n_1_a_£u_a_1_). (Rev. ed.) New York: The Psych010gical Corporation, 19h3. V Hovey, H. B. Somatization and other neurotic reactions and MMPI profiles. ‘g. clin. Psychol., l9h9, 5, 153-157. Jennings, H. H. Leadership and isolation: [a study g£_personality in inter-personal relations. New York: Longmans, Green and Co., 19h3. Kidd, J. W. An analysis of social rejection and social selection in a college men's residence hall. Unpublished EdD thesis, Michigan State College, East Lansing, Michigan, 1951. Kidd, J. W. An analysis of social rejection in a college men's residence hall. Sociometry, 1951, XIV, 226-23h. Kuhlen, R. G., and Bretsch, H. S. Sociometric status and personal problems of adolescents. Sociometry, 19h7, X, 122-132. Kuhlen, R. G., and Lee, Beatrice J. Personality characteristics and social acceptability in adolescence. ‘J. educ. Psychol., l9h3, 3h, 321-3h0- Lecky, R. Self-consistency; a theory of personality. New York: Island Press, 19h5. MCKinley, J. G., Hathaway, So R., and. Meehl, Po E. The MEI: VI The K scale. ‘g. consult. Psychol., l9h8, 12, 20-31. 31. 32. 33. 3h. 35. 36. 37. 380 39. W. 1112 Meier, N. R. F. Frustration; the study gf behavior without 3 ggal. New York: McGraw—Hill Book Co., 19140. Maslow, A. H. A clinically derived test for measuring psycholog- ical security-insecurity. .£°.E§§’ Psychol., 19h5, 33, 21-hl. Meehl, P. E. Using the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inven- tory in counseling. A summary of selected research results. (Mimeographed c0py of a lecture given to Minnesota VA Psych- ologists on March 10, 1950). Meehl, P. E., and Hathaway, S. R. The K factor as a suppressor variable in the MMPI. g} appl.Psychol., l9h6, 30, 525—56h. Medlin, H. C. A study of the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory in clinical practice. Amer. J, Psychiat., 19h7, 103, 758-769. Moreno, J. L. EEE.§EE££ survive? (Helen H. Jennings, collabora- tor). Rashington: Nervous and Mental Disease Pub. Co., l9h3. Newcomb, T. M. Personality and social Chang . New York: The Dryden Press, Inc., 19h3. Northway, M. L., and wigdor, B. T. Rorschach patterns related to the sociometric status of school children. Sociometry, l9h7, X, 186—199. Patrick, J. K. Studies in rational behavior and emotional excite- ment: II. The effect of emotional excitement on rational behavior of human subjects. ‘J. comp. Psychol., 193b, 18, 153-195. Pepinsky, P. N. The meaning of "validity" and "reliability" as applied to sociometric tests. Educ. Psychol. Meas., 19h9, 9, 39-1490 hl. h2. h3. ’45. h6. h7. h8. L9. 50. 51. 1h3 Powell, M. Relationships existent between adjustment traits of college freshmen women: as measured by the Bell Adjustment Inventory. J. soc. Psychol., 1950, 31, 1h5-1h9. Raimy, V. C. Self-references in counseling interviews. J. conSUIto PEYChOlo, 19148, 12, 253-263. ROgers, C. R. Client-centered therapy. New York: Houghton Mif- flin Co., 1951. Rokeach, M. Generalized.mental rigidity as a factor in ethno- centrism. Unpublished PhD thesis, Univ. Cal., Berkeley, 191.7. Rokeach, M. Generalized mental rigidity as a factor in ethno- centrism. Ii. abnorm. soc. Psychol., 19h8, h3, 259-278. Shaffer, L. F. The psychology of adjustment. New York: Houghton Mifflin, 1936. Smith, M. Some factors in friendship selections of high school students. Sociometry, 19th, VII, 303-310. Supplementary manual for the MMPI. Part II: The booklet (group) form. New York: The Psychological Corporation, 19h6. Swift, J. W. Relation of behavioral and Rorschach measures of insecurity in pre-school children. ‘J. clin. Psychol., l9h5, 1, 196-205. Thomas, W. F. Attitudes of liking and disliking persons and their determining conditions. Unpublished Master's thesis, Univ. 111., Urbana, 1936. Tuddenham, R. D. Differences in reputation among elementary school children. Unpublished PhD thesis, Univ. Cal., Berkeley, 19h2. 52. 53. 5h. 55. 56. lhh Welsh, G. S. An anxiety index and an internalization ratio for the mm. (to appear). Wiener, D. N. Subtle and obvious keys for the MMPI. J. consult. Psychol., 19MB, 12, 16h-170. Wiener, D. N. A control factor in social adjustment. g. gbgggm. soc. Psychol., 1951, h6, 3-8. Wilkinson, B. A statistical consideration in psychological re- searCho PSYChOlo Bull., 1951, 148, 156-1580 Winslow, C. N., and Frankel, M. N. A questionnaire study of the traits that adults consider to be important in the formation of friendship with members of their own sex. ‘J. soc. Psychol., 19,41, 13, 37-1490 APPENDIX A THE SOCIOMETRIC QUESTIONNAIRE No. ABE CT HALL CC *InlnIN QUESTIONNAIRE-1951 A questionnaire like this last year was returned by 9M% of Abbot men. It resulted in embarrassment of pg_gg£, It accomplished a great deal of good. Please co0perate and mack the returns 100% this year. YOU WILL REMAIN ANONYMOUS. 'YOU MAY ERASE YOUR NAME FROM THE QUES TIOLJAIRE, YOU L0 NOT SIGN IT, ONLY I KNOW’WHICH ONE IS YOURS. So feel free to be absolutely frank inryeur responses.;Thank31 11;. 41%;. .1.‘ John W _iI,i Reeld_ent _Ad _viser h—‘o‘u—— _-_C_.-— ~a—-—--—.—.-——_-_ ~—~-— Who are your best friends in Abbot Hal 1, the persons you wouli most prefer as roomates? Name tlle ten or less who are really your beg t frie ends. — OI. —_ —- .._ — — _ ~ — — _ —— un- _. ~ - _ _ u— u- c-— —— _ — 0—- —— i— h—. In. — .— I—o - —— _ on. -- 0—— .— o-uo 9—- ... --—o —- — n— — -_ -—. —— _ —— c— — .— — _ —- ~ ._- — .— he. —— _ n— I— .0- — h—n -— -— _— u—n —- u—a — In- ~ -— ~— —. -—~ n — — ~ —— -— — c-u- _ — _ -- —. _ — _ o u. —. _ —- — C-— 0—:- .-. -— -— -— —- -—- — u-u— ht! .u— _ _ >— - —. —— —_ ha. 0—- t—. _ l— — 0—- ——. _ h— _-n .— .— -— -— -—. .- -u‘ _ I— .— ~ N .— u—o _ -— 5. ~— I—- h—- —— —— —- h—n ho fi— ———‘—-~_——.-—_—._ ~_.—_-——_.—_‘_.——‘_ _-H—_ 0f al :Abhot men, who, in your opinion, wouli be the best precinct Resident Assis— tent? Name more than one if you wish. ~—~—~~~———.—_—~_—n~O—QH H—_——_~h~_-~___-~—H~~~ “—0 -——- ——-——~— .—-_. ’— -.—-_—--— _.——-~h— I-w—Hh——.-‘__-—__u—n-—o~ w Which bbot men wou_d be Leastsies' lr able as Resiient Assistant? Which Abbot men, if any, would you be most reluctant to accept as friends, as roam- mates, and why I (Remember, YOU RETURN THIS TO MR. KIT; II A SEALED ENVELOPE - fur him to be in the best position ta help fe ellows he better human beings, this kini of information is essential. §§_£p£_ will §g_tcld whe pamed him ig_ggy_b;gp£,) name____ name_.__ -- —_ 0—- H -— .— 0—.- _ —_ h. h. _ ._ c—- in. -— I—o — F— _. _ u—o .- u— -—-¢ .— I—-. h— a... —— —. v 1‘4 hy ? IV 113’? a _ .— —- — .— -—0 n— — D“ _ _ -—.¢ — _ .— —- —- _ ~ h. M — H _‘ — _ 0— — H ——- H h - h. u— _ H H .- —- _ u— —— h—n — b- -_ -- 0—. .I‘ .u-o ~ — O—o .- _ H — I-. -— .— l— a.-- .— —- ~ f‘ name n._L.'£1C ——o h.- H h u— p—. -— cu-n - bu. .- h.- -— —— —- M -— .— — u—a bu. ~ H h—n — u— h. but In- 0—- C— H O-- u— h—o "I; L y 7 1 11" ? H -_ — H b. 0—. --o -_ — 0—. ~ H ~¢ _ M u.- a— — H H b‘ in. -—- ”v H 0—- .-—~ -—- _. h. —. .— H u _ ‘— H tun-— —— w— .u— 0—- .— u.— —- _ — —. H H H _- n-q 0—. ..— .— H .U‘ D.— —-— — .— .n—o pun. H H 118.1116 name — H 0— _ -— 0—- .I- h- — O—— —. hu- _ -— -—. -— -— M ~ _ -_ _ .— _. H o-_ —. h—. D—- U—-. H h— _ .— I-Ihy? W 113’ 7 -c. — _ N 0-.- _ — —- a... -— .— Dn— I... — —-— O—. u _ ~ -—- u - n—g b.‘ *- I—- ~—. 9-.- D-- .n- b“ unnu- --. — .— — h—- h— * .- — h— .— t—u _ __ —— H t—q —— H _ _ — _ -—— h. — D.- U-a — —— n—n _ .— s—a SEAL III ENVELOPE APTRESSIT :20 MP. mg, :mAT-‘I: AT POST 0: ICE on III P301. 3171' ASSISTAIIT'S so I-I A2: 1m NIL R3: U: 1: IT UITCPEITZI' TO 1:3. KILL. - APPENDIX B ASSURANCE 0F ANOI‘JYIHTY , Room You will be identified only b the number on this questionnaire. I v‘ reveal your name to no one. So please feel free to an_ swer all questions. (Signed) John W. Kidd, Res. Adv. APPENDIX C THE SELF RATING SCALE 1. The original scale. 2. The scale with columns reversed. 3. The scale with numbers reversed. Name Self-Rating Scale This scale allows you to compare yourself on a series of personality traits with the other college students. Each trait is set up on a continuum, With a scale in between, thus: 1 2 5 L 5 studious . . . . . not studious Rate yourself on each continuum by placing an X at the point where you think you stand. For example, an X under "1" would indicate that you think of your- self as quite studious, under "2" would indicate that you think of yourself as more studious than the average, under"?" that you are about average in studiousness, under ’h" that you are not very studious, and under "5" as being not the studious type at all. Try to be as fair-minded in judging yourself as possible, without painting either "too good" or "too bad" a picture of yourself, but rather indicating the way you really think of yourself from day to day, in comparison with.the other* colle;e students. adult aggressive blundering broad-minded bull-headed confident contrary courteous dependable dirty dishonest effeminate feeble follower friendly gay genuine helpful hypocritical illpmannered insecure keep-to-myself liar likeable manly mature modest infantile yielding diplomatic intolerant flexible uncertain c00perative rude irresponsible clean trustworthy masculine muscular leader hostile sorrowful insincere uncooperative sincere polite secure prying truthful unpleasant prissy childish vain moody moral narrow-minded neat nosey offensive passive persuasive proud quiet reserved selfish smart steady-diaposition. stingy stubborn stupid thin thoughtful underweight unfriendly unhappy unselfconscious unstable virtuous weak withdrawn b even-tempered corrupt liberal messy mind-my-own-business pleasant quarrelsome imitative humble noisy loud generous dumb changeable openhanded democratic bright fat tactless overweight sociable happy self-centered reliable immoral strong mixer Name Self-Rating Scale This scale allows you to compare yourself on a series of personality traits with the other cdflege stmiente. Each trait is set up on a continuum, With a scale in between, thus: 1 2 5 L. 5 studious . . . . . not studious Rate yourself on each continumntw'placinp an X at the point where you think you stand. For example, an X under "1" would indicate that you think of your- self as quite studious, under "2" would indicate that you think of yourself as more studious than the average, under"?" that you are about average in studiousness, under 'h" that you are not very studious, and under "5" as being not the studious type at all. Try to be as fair-minded in judging yourself as possible, without painting either "too’good" or "too bad" a picture of yourself, but rather indicating the way you really think of yourself from day to day, in comparison with the other colle;o students; bright changeable childish clean cooperative corrupt democratic diplomatic dumb even-tempered fat flexible generous happy hostile humble imitative immoral infantile insincere intolerant irreSponsible leader liar liberal loud messy masculine stupid steady-disposition mature dirty contrary moral stubborn blundering smart moody thin bullheaded selfish unhappy friendly proud persuasive virtuous adult genuine broad-minded dependable follower truthful narrow-minded reserved neat effeminate 1 2 3 4 5 mindqmy-own-business . . . . nosey mixer . withdrawn muscular . feeblenziisy noisy . quiet openhanded . stingy overweight . underweight pleasant . offensive polite . ill-mannered prissy . manly prying . keep-to-myself qua rrelsome . passive rude . courteous reliable . unstable secure . insecure self-centered . unselfconscious sincere . hypocritical sociable . unfriendly sorrowful . gay 1 strong . weak tactless . thoughtful trustworthy . dishonest uncertain . confident uncooperative . helpful unpleasant . likeable vain . modest yielding . aggressive APPENDIX D THE ROKEACH MAP TECHNIQUE NA ME f‘OIfL' 'i' NO '90 U‘JT‘ IL : Orleans Avenue T ‘CJ‘ hey MAP NUMBER 1 ‘-—_- ._. - .-~-.—.-_oo—-.-s-.-o--¢ -. .5... - «.- —-~c- ——--.--~--«-- ~- — - - o.-— - -‘o‘bw ~4— v-J Memphis Avenue \Ioo-n - m‘“.* “0-. Jackson Avenue ~---- v-----o—«--wuw—~— ---— a“...- -‘--—.v.~ ....‘. Dallas Avenue nun-‘0 .uo--q-—.-—~.«..-—. ~.¢——-.-‘~- .nw-ra- - —--—u-o.-u- -c—-— ..—-—.~ g. -..-.o----- .... -- .. -. Tulsa Avenue l.‘L.P 1 Describe in your own Wsrds the shortest way te go from Dallas and New Orleans Avenues to Tulsa and Memphis avenues. DO NOT TURN THIS PnGE UNTIL TOLD TU DO SO. Nebraska Boulevard L- a MAPIMEIER 2 -”m---¢-~-_,- _ -.._ ‘o.oo.-—¢- 4-. n”- kansas Boulevard -C. Cowwnfla -¢----* “up. ~.—.~.—-—- —... .0 ~.—-.-.—- -owc.—.a *- -.-.Om I 'U H m > (D .4 g 0 Idaho Boulevard ‘3 CO C: H a O 3‘ Colorado Boulevard -’-. - ill; a P 2 Describe in your own words the shortest way to go from ' "1 Colorado and Nebraska Boulevards to uyoming and hansas Boulevards. DO NOT TURN TRIS PnGE UNTIL TOLD TU DO SO. MaP NUhBLR 3 ___A _ _— .....-. w ..-»o -—.. ' ”—- O'm— - ~— “-— -. J. o-. —.--— —~.: - 1 Indianapolis Avenue I ” V/ - i ,e” a .1/ 1 ./€:// 1 “/"j/x ’ 35/ / .’/’// Q) / If”, a / /’ i ,/ r ,a CD _ ' , -1" > “W. -.—-- -—--OO— -—.——- ~0- —.—...-..- “Mo-I.“- ”fie-woo»- _ -4 IN 3 Detroit Avenue H . “g...” _.—.--——--o. --—9—--—»—-—.——.~—~~~o o-o-«-—_’-*o—- -- --~----.- -—«M-.—o- — w—I ;> m I -H 5 i O I—J . !W_m_.-p A a -- -.p__..-____ -_.,._.,._...__.__-.-2 Cincinnati nvenue 'p- - _-. .Q.‘ ---w 0...-v—‘o...- -.. ._--.V.. —..—--—— .- .~.- --—.-- -.- H‘. "- _-"__ Pittsburgh nvenue 1‘th P 3 Describe in your own words the shortest way to go from Cincinnati and Louisville nvenues to Pittsburgh and Indianapolis nvenues. DO NOT TURN ThIS PnGE UNTIL TOLD TO DO SO. Boulevard dissouri 0' I A MAP NUMBER 4 a v #1 Minnesota Boulevard , I ,. i -. -s- a .~. -0. --.-..—..— -. .. - --- .. - , --.»*~ +.-..~.... - pu-N -—.——.-‘.— -..-—.-.-—~.--o-- . u...- .-~O—-- -.J +.... I Iowa Boulevard .01 ~on—- -. - . -fl- _..~—.. ~acr -c- _, - L‘ o-- -- w-fl---» .v .-...-.- “u. ‘ . -9. . .“u lllinois Boulevard r _ __ fl Jisconsin Boulevard 1 EL. 8 P 4 Describe in your own words the shortest way to go from Illinois and Missouri Boulevards to Wisconsin and Minnesota Boulevards. DO NOT TURN ThIS PnOE UhTIL TOLD TO DO SO. Linccln Street uh? suites 5 Denver Street A ‘7' v Cheyenne Street fi ‘1‘ Boise Street _, *4. v7 Street Wichita MAP 5 Describe in your own words the shortegp way to go from Boise and Lincoln Streets to Wichita and Denver Streets. DO NOT TURN THIS PnGE UNTIL TOLD TO DO SO. Tennessee Boulevard MnP NUMBER 6 4 w __4_- __. A Oklahoma Boulevard “ * I 1;”? w w ‘7“ Mississippi Boulevard 4L 4 *— Louisiana Boulevard fl fii v.“ _v_ Texas Boulevard Mi 3. P 6 Describe in your own words the shortest way to go from Louisiana and Tennessee Boulevards to Oklahoma and Texas Boulevards. DO NOT TURN THIS PnGE UNTIL TOLD TO DO SO. Ohio nvenue F"""" / Michigan avenue / 4* W Kentucky nvenue' Indiana —'-— “venue Pennsylvania nvenue {VI 1} a P 7 Describe in your own words the shortest way to go from Indiana and Ohio avenues to Michigan and Pennsylvania nvenues. DO NOT TURN THIS PnGE UNTIL TOLD TO DO SO APPENDIX E INSTRUCTIONS TO THE JUDGES 1. For rating of the Rorschachs. 2. For rating of the MMPI's. INSTRUCTIONS TO THE RORSCHACH JUDGES Will you please rank the 38 Rorschach protocols according to the following procedure: Select the 5 most well adjusted. Rank them from 1 to S, with rank of 1 being the most well adjusted. Select the 5 most poorly adjusted. Rank them from 3h to 38, with rank of 38 being the most poorly adjusted. Of these protocols that remain: Select the 5 most well adjusted. Rank them using numbers 6 to 10, with 6 being the most well adjusted. Select the 5 most poorly adjusted. Rank them, using numbers 29 to 33, with 33 being the most poorly adjusted. Of the 18 that remain: Rank them in order of adjustment, using numbers ll to 28 inclusive, with number 11 being the most well adjusted and 28 being the most poorly adjusted. In order that the judges will have a similar frame of reference for "adjustment" will you read over the following discussion of adjustment, and keep it in mind.as you make your ratings. Pay partic- ular attention to the last sentence: A broader meaning of the adjustment process is illustrated by the individual's relationships with his social environment. Not only must a person modify his behavior in response to his inner needs and the natural events of his surrounding, but he must also adapt to the presence and activities of his fellow men. For a person to satisfy all his motives with regard for their functioning as an interrelated system, is good adjustment. To achieve this requires unified and integrated behavior, the presence or absence of which provides what is perhaps the clearest distinc- tion between good and poor adjustment. When the interrelated motives of a person are satisfied without undue emphasis or slighting of any one motive, and when this is achieved with consideration for the adjustments of other persons, then a state of good adjustment may be said to exist. (from Shaffer, L. F. The Psychology of Adjustment, pp. h and 138). APPENDIX F REASONS FOR REJECTION 1. REASONS FOR REJECTIUN withdrawn, homosexual inclinations, dishonest, juvenile, sex fiend, unreliable, dirty, queer, insincere, low morals, odd. 2. overbearing, insulting, prejudiced, profane, hypocrite, egotisti- cal, inconsiderate, unfriendly, talkative, irreSponsible, uncOOperative, loud, immature. 3. lies, a cheat, self-centered, loud.mouthed, hypocrite, inconsiderate, persecution complex, nosy, unreasonable, odd, knowbit-all, superiority attitude. h. self-centered, superiority attitude, cynical, childish, lies, not dependable. S. boisterous, childish, inconsiderate, a drunk, smart also. 6. rowdy, loud, not studious, juvenile, superiority complex. 7. inferiority complex, introverted, too quiet, nosy. 8. leppy housekeeper, untidy, dirty, loud, nosy, lazy, uncooperative, childish, conceited. 9. noisy, inconsiderate, childish, loud, stupid. 10. sloppy, inconsiderate, poor housekeeper, unsanitary. ll. uncooPerative, conceited, must have his way, arrogant, inconsider— ate, borrower. 12. 1oud, noisy, extrovert, exhibitionist, self-centered, sloppy. l3. self-centered, sleppy. 1h. too quick, unsociable, un000perative, tactless. 15. childish, trouble maker, unfriendly. 16. inconsiderate, unc00perative. 17. childish, prissy, affected. 18. selfish, inconsiderate, noisy, egotistical. 19. dirty 20. inferiority complex, nosy, different, narrow. 21. foul language, childish, unstable, unfriendly. APPENDIX G COMPLETE RESULTS OF THE THEMATIC ANALYSIS OF THE TAT COMPLETE RESULTS OF THfl THEMATIC ANALYSIS OF THE TAT The complete check list of themes and interpretation levels for analysis of the Thematic Apperception Test may be found in "A Nermative Study of the Thematic Apperception Test" by Leonard D. Eron, published in the Psychological Monographs, Vol. 6h, number 9, 1950. In the fol- lowing list, only those themes which occurred in the stories of the groups being studied are included. Selects Rejects I. Disequilibrium A. Interpersonal 10 Parent a. Pressure 31 37 b. Succorance c. Nurturance d. Aggression from e. Aggression to f. Departure g. Concern 1. Death or illness 1 j. Death of child k. Disappointment to l. Disappointment in m. Filial obligation n. Confession 0. Bad news p. Marriage q. Collusion 2. Partner a. Pressure b. Succorance c. Nurturance e. Aggression to f. Departure from g. Concern h. Illicit sex i. Illicit sex (rape) 1. Disappointment by m. Jealousy n. Competition 0. Cuckold p. Decision q. Pursuit 8. Unrequited u. Childbirth 3. Peer b. Succorance 1 c. Nurturance e. Aggression to 7 g. Concern 1. Death or illness H \nw H U'l NWNNNNHP’NWOHH \J‘l-Q I? OMP'WNCO fol-”N H m w NHHVDHCDHWNF’ hdhdcrrdrazrra UlHt'l-‘H N wk) j. Belongingness q. Bad influence 1‘. h. Disappointed in Sibling f. Rivalry g. i. Concern Death or illness B. Intrapersonal 10 2. 30 h. S. 6. 7. 9o 10. ll. 12. 13. 1h. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 21. 23. 2h. 29. Aspiration Inadequacy Curiosity Behavior disorder Suicide Moral struggle Guilt Fear anination Occupational concern Physical illness or death Retribution Reminiscence, sad Intra-aggression Religion Loneliness Compensation Vacillation Exhaustion Sad "Hurt feelings" Grief C. Impersonal 1. 2. 3. h. S. 6. 7. Economic pressure Legal restriction Selects rmHmo HHH HHm HHUJU'IW 0 WWW b) wan-4w N Generalized restriction S Aggression to environ, ment Aggression from environ- ment war Escape II. Equilibrium (adjustment) A. l. Interpersonal Parent a. Cooperation b. Resignation C. Idealization d. Reunion e. Fulfillment f. Contentment NNl-‘UJHUI Rejects 8 l H crnatr hD-JhOF‘hJCthF‘FJthJ-Q WUUH U) Selects g. Ordinary familial activity 2. Partner a. Admiration b. CoOperation c. Contentment e. Ordinary activity 3. Peer a. COOperation b. Congeniality c. Reunion e. Exhibition f. Ordinary activity B. Intrapersonsl 1. Self esteem 2. Tranquillity 3. Reminiscence, happy h. Retirement 5. Occupational satisfac- tion 6. Resignation to lot 7; Ordinary activity C. Impersonal l. Favorable environment III. Level of interpretation A. Abstract C. Descriptive D. Unreal I. Alternate themes K. Denial of a theme N. Confused Q. Humorous H. Continuation 1 NODNl-J OW-J P4 nacr PJO\FJ P’ \flO\I-‘N Rejects 1 L’NH WHNW NH nbk‘h‘ HI—‘NNU'l-P' ' A. 9 Oct 31j ’56 :57» I )J‘ ‘. “no ‘1 I’d 'O‘ y ‘ I ' , f I ,. Mai 5 O . I 1‘ .. I" «4‘? o \A v.0 t‘. v '9. ‘ l I v' ; I 1 o ' - ) '. W I s \' ‘ . ‘\ ,- \ ‘ A k I 3 I :‘ r U.‘ - u . \ - l . J I; I ,- 1 v ' \ V , v I I j I a n) ’ ‘ I - ' ( L i. . I ', \ t I I ! '-. v I 4 _'-_ .n_-_ MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY LIBRARIES l I 01 12 3 93 3 77 4833