._ “'}°“'-‘.!9“.".’“5.".‘;' . :.v~‘-uo¢. ‘61.. .o4 “'I.V.".\ . , l OPINIONS ON cwmma AND APPEARANCE As RELATED ______ 10 (31101113 AND :NON (skew MEMBERSHIP ‘ or TWELFTH GRADE 61an Ih'esi$;¥fo1"—tfié iIDe‘gma: of M A.~ ' "’ MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY Suzanne H Hendricks 1965 a ------ ........... “.fHEsm ' Michigan State University W‘ llljjlllIlllllzllfllllelllLlllclfll‘ljllllflll“@le L I: L 15 R A R Y] ROOM USE ONLY ' ABSTRACT OPINIONS ON CLOTHING AND APPEARANCE AS RELATED TO GROUP.AND NON-GROUP MEMBERSHIP OF TWELFTH GRADE GIRlS by Suzanne H. Hendricks As a portion of a longitudinal study, the purpose of this research was to investigate the relationship between group cohesion and the opinions of twelfth grade girls on clothing, appearance and group acceptance. The respondents in the Study included the entire population of twelfth grade girls in the high school in a Michigan community. The social acceptance categories, including isolates, mutual pair and reciprocal friendship structure members, were established using a near-sociometric question seeking best friend choices. The social class ranking of each respondent was obtained using warner's Index of Status Characteristics. The data were obtained using two instruments, a background ques- tionnaire and an interview schedule. The background questionnaire sought personal information about the girland her family. The interview schedule was used to obtain the opinions of the girls on general acceptance, cloth- ing and appearance. A portion of the schedule included an interviewer rating of the respondent‘s appearance. Descriptive analysis was used to compare the clothing behavior opinions of the reciprocal friendship categories. The analysis was formulated in terms of Stone's framework of program and review. Review Suzanne H. Hendricks includes responses made about the wearer of clothes by others and pro- gram includes responses made about the wearer of clothes by the wearer. The analysis considered the program and review of both one's self and one's group. In terms of review the majority of the girls agreed that clothing influenced the popularity of a girl; the group in which membership was perceived was "about average” in dress when compared to others in school; their friends were dressed right; and the manner in which a best friend dressed wasrun:used by others in judging them. The members of the dif— ferent reciprocal friendship categories expressed different opinions on many aspects of the review questions. In terms of program the majority of the girls agreed that their clothes were"about average" when compared to the clothes of other girls in school; a change in some aspect of self was desired; some clothes gave more self confidence than others; and appearance, including hair, clothes and complexion, was satisfactory. The members of the different reciprocal friendship categories expressed different opinions on many aspects of the program questions. At least 67 percent of the population agreed on only 11 responses. However, the questions on which agreement was shown were the more basic questions such as the opinion that clothing influenced a girl's popular- ity. The girls failed to agree on the underlying values and opinions, such as why clothing influenced popularity. The working hypothesis which guided this study was: Members of the same reciprocal friendship structure have similar opinions regarding Suzanne H. Hendricks clothing, appearance and group acceptance which contribute to group cohesion and their opinions differ from those of non-group members or members of other groups. Because of its complexity this hypothesis was restated and separated into four parts. The reciprocal friendship structures expressed similar opinions 38 percent of the possible times, giving 38 percent support for Hypothesis A: Members of individual reciprocal friendship structure have similar opinions regarding clothing, appearance and group acceptance. Using the Spearman rho correlation coefficient it was found that there was a significant relationship between the degree of group cohesion and the number of agreements within a reciprocal friendship structure. Thus there was support for Hypothesis B: The extent to which members of individual reciprocal friendship structures have similar opinions regarding clothing, appearance and group acceptance is positively related to the cohesion of the group. Twenty-one percent of the within group agreements differed from the agreements of other groups giving 21 percent support for Hypothesis C: The similar opinions of members of individual reciprocal friendship structures regarding clothing, appearance and group acceptance differ from the opinions of members of other reciprocal friendship structures. Finally, the average number of agreements for each RFS was 16. The isolates had at least 67 percent agreement on only nine responses and the mutual pair members on only eight responses. Thus there was approximately #7 percent support for Hypothesis D. The similar opinions of members of individual reciprocal friendship structures regarding clothing, appearance and group acceptance differ from the opinions of non-groupfmembers. OPINIONS ON CLOTHING AND APPEARANCE AS RELATED TO GROUP AND NON-GROUP MEMBERSHIP OF NELFTH GRADE GIRLS By Suzanne H. Hendricks A 'HIESIS Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MAS TER OF ARTS Department of Textiles, Clothing and Related Arts 1965 ACKNOWLEDQENTS Grateful acknowledgment is extended to the following individuals whose assistance made this research possible: Miss Eleanor Kelley for her understanding, patience, guidance and invaluable assistance in the organization, data collection and completion of this research.' Dr. Joanne Eicher, the initiator of the project, for her an- couragement and extensive suggestions for the project. The writer's committee, Dr. Elinor Nugent, Dr..Allan Beagle and Dr. Mary Gephart, department chairman, for their helpful suggestions, criticisms and assistance in the completion of the thesis. Mr. Lee Kinney, principal, Mr. Jack Down, counselor, and the teachers and senior girls at East Lansing High School whose cooperation and assistance made the collection of data for this project and the larger study possible. ‘Mrs. Kay Bettinghaus and Mrs. Madelyn Vener for their assistance in interviewing the respondents. The writer’s family, particularly her husband, Lew Hendricks, whose encouragement, understanding, and technical assistance made it possible to complete this study. Finally, Michigan State University Experiment Station is grate- fully acknowledged for its financial support. ii TABLE OF CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGMENTS. . . . . . . . . . . . LIST OF TABLES . . . . . . . LIST OF FIGURES. . . . . . . . Chapter I. INTRODUCTION. Statement of the Problem. . . Review of Literature. . . . . Summary . . . . . . . . . . . Focus of the Study. . . . . . II. METHODOLOGY . . . . . . . . III. IV. The Community Setting . . . . Development of the Instruments Collection of the Data. . . . Description of the Sample . . Definition of Terms . . . . . Analysis of the Data. . . . . DESCRIPTION OF RESPONDENIS. . . Social Class. . . . . . . . . 0 Components of warner's Index of Characteristics . . . . . . Other Desériptive Measures. . Summary . . . . . . . . . . . ANALYSIS OF RESPONSES TO REVIEW summa ry C I O O O O O O O O O 0 ANALYSIS OF RESPONSES TO PROGRAM. Summary . . . . . . . . . . . iii Page ii xi 13 14 16 16 17 18 20 22 24 26 27 28 31 4O 43 66 68 89 Chapter VI. APPRAISAIS OF POPULARITY AND DRESS. Comparison of Those Selected as Most Popular and Grade Point Average . . . . . . . . . . . . Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . VII. SUMMARY AND DISCUSSION OF FINDINGS, RESTATEMENT HmMSIS I O O O I O O O O O O O I I O Q C 0 Summary and Discussion.of Findings. . . . . . Restatement of Hypothesis . . . . . . . . . . VIII. IMPLICATIONS AND REOCMMENDATIONS. . . . . . . . Implications. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Recommendations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Contributions of the Study. . . . . . . . . . BBLIOGRAPHY I I O I O I O O O I O Q I O O O 0 O I O 0 APPENDIX A C I I O O O O O I O O O O C O O O APPmDIX B O O O I O 0 O O O O C O O O O O O O O O 0 iv Page 92 99 99 101 101 107 113 113 115 117 119 124 128 Table 10. LIST OF TABLES Page Social Class Distribution of ISO Weighted Ratings by Reciprocal Friendship Categories of Twelfth Grade Girls at East Lansing High School . . . . . . . . . . 23 Number and Percentage Distribution of Twelfth Grade Girls According to Social Class and Reciprocal Friend- ship Categories. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 Percentage Distribution of Twelfth Grade Girls Accord- ing to Individual ISC Indices and Reciprocal Friend- ship Categories . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29 Percentage of Reciprocal Friendship Category Members Having Mother as the Main Source of Financial Sup- port and/or Other Sources of Support. . . . . . . . . 31 Percentage Distribution of Occupational Ratings of Secondary Financial Sources of TWelfth Grade Girls According to Reciprocal Friendship Categories . . . . 32 Percentage Distribution of Twelfth Grade Girls Accord- ing to the Educational Level of Main Financial Con— tributgrs and Reciprocal Friendship Categories. . . . 33 Percentage Distribution of Twelfth Grade Girls Accord— ing to Number of Siblings and Reciprocal Friendship categories. Q 9 O O C C C O I O O O C Q 0 O O I I O 0 3“ Percentage Distribution of Twelfth Grade Girls Accord- ing to Location of Elementary School and Reciprocal Friendship Categories . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35 Percentage Distribution of Twelfth Grade Girls Accord- ing to Number of Club Memberships and Reciprocal Friendship Categories . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35 Percentage Distribution of TWelfth Grade Girls Accord- ing to Grade Point.Average and Reciprocal Friendship categories. 0 C C C O O C O I O Q C O I O C O O O O Q 37 Table 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. Page Percentage Distribution of Twelfth Grade Girls Accord- ing to Religious Preference and Reciprocal Friend- Ship categories. a o o e o o o a o o o o e o o a a o o o a 38 Percentage Distribution of TWelfth Grade Girls Accord- ing to Ratings of.Appearance by Interviewer and Recipro- cal Friendship Categories. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .39 Percentage Distribution of Reasons for Below Average Appear- ance Ratings within Reciprocal Friendship Categories . . .40 Percentage Distribution by Reciprocal Friendship Categories of the Six Most Frequently Mentioned Factors Suggested as Important for Acceptance by the Popular Girls. . . . .u7 Percentage Distribution by Reciprocal Friendship Categories of the Six Most Frequently Mentioned Characteristics Used in Judging a New Girl in East Lansing. . . . . . . .50 Percentage Distribution by Reciprocal Friendship Categories of the Six Most Frequently Mentioned Characteristics Used in Choosing a Friend. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .51 Percentage Distribution by Reciprocal Friendship Categories of the Six Most Frequently Mentioned Characteristics of the Most Popular Girl in the Twelfth Grade . . . . . . . .52 Percentage Distribution by Reciprocal Friendship Categories of Responses to the Question,"Does the Clothing of the Popular Girls in the Twelfth Grade Differ from the Cloth- ing of the Other Girls?" and the Six Most Frequently Mentioned Differences. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .53 Percentage Distribution by Reciprocal Friendship Categories of Responses to the Question,"Do You Think Clothing In- fluences a Girl‘s Popularity at East Lansing High School?" and the Six Most Frequently Mentioned Influential Reasons.55 Percentage Distribution by Reciprocal Friendship Categories of the Six Most Frequently Mentioned Characteristics of the Best Dressed Girl. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .56 Percentage Distribution by Reciprocal FriendshipICategories of the Evaluation of the Dress of the Membership Group in Comparison to the Dress of Other Groups. . . . . . . . . .57 Percentage Distribution by Reciprocal Friendship Categories of Opinions Concerning the Dress of Best Friends as a Factor in the Group Evaluation of the Respondent and Reasons for Giving Stated Opinions . . . . . . . . . . . .58 vi Table 23. 24. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. 30. 31. 32. 33. 34. Percentage Distribution by Reciprocal Friendship Categories of Opinions about the Presence of Girls Who Did Not Dress Right and the Six Most FrequentlyMentioned Reasons Why Their Clothes Were Not Right. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Percentage Distribution by Reciprocal Friendship Categories of Descriptions of the Clothes of the Girls Who Did Not DreSSRightoooeoeeoeo0000000..a... Percentage Distribution by Reciprocal Friendship Categories of Descriptions of Other Characteristics of the Girls Who Did Not Dress Right 0 C O O O O C Q C I O O C O O O C O 0 Percentage Distribution by Reciprocal Friendship Categories of Responses Concerning the Friends of the Girls Who Did Not Dress Right 0 O O O O O I O O O O O O O O O O C O O 0 Percentage Distribution by Reciprocal Friendship Categories of Responses Concerning the Perception of Association with Friends Who Dress Incorrectly and Evaluation by the Respondents of the.Dress.of Friends . . . . . . . . . . . Percentage Distribution by Reciprocal Friendship Categories of Factors Mentioned as Important for Popularity in.Memr berShip Group C O O O O C Q 0 O I O O I C C O O O O O O 0 Percentage Distribution by Reciprocal Friendship Categories of Evaluation of Dress in Comparison to Others in School. Percentage Distribution by Reciprocal Friendship Categories of Individuals Whose Approval of Clothing was Important and Reasons Given for Valuing the Opinions of the In- dividuals. . . . . . . . . .1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . Percentage Distribution by Reciprocal Friendship Categories of Responses to the Questions, "Does Ybur Mother Make Suggestions about the Clothes You wear to School?" and "If Yes, Do You Follow Her Suggestions?" . . . . . . . . Percentage Distribution by Reciprocal Friendship Categories of Responses Concerning Desire to Change.Any.Aspect of Self and.Aspects for Which Change was Desired. . . . . . Percentage Distribution by Reciprocal Friendship Categories of Responses to the Question, "Do Ybu Think You WOuld Make a Different Impression on Others If You Could Make These Changes?" and Reasons Given for Affirmative Opinions. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Percentage Distribution by Reciprocal Friendship Categories of Responses to the Question, "Do Ybu Think it would be Easier to Make Friends if You Made These Changes?" and Reasons Given for Affirmative Opinions. . . . . . . . . . vii Page 74 76 77 Table 35. 36. 37. 38. 39. 40. 41. 42. 43. 45. 46. Page Percentage Distribution by Reciprocal Friendship Categories of Responses to the Question, "Do Some Clothes Give You More Self Confidence than Others?" and the Characteristics of Clothes Which Gave Self Confidence. . . . . . . . . . . 78 Percentage Distribution by Reciprocal Friendship Categories of Responses to the Questions, "Have You Ever Come to School Dressed Differently from the Other Girls?" and "How Did You Feel?". . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 79 Percentage Distribution by Reciprocal Friendship Categories of Responses Indicating Satisfaction or Dissatisfaction with Appearance and Factors Contributing to Dissatis- faction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..30 Percentage Distribution by Reciprocal Friendship Categories of Responses Indicating Satisfaction or Dissatisfaction with Clothing and Factors Contributing to Dissatis- faction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81 Percentage Distribution by Reciprocal Friendship Categories of Responses Indicating Satisfaction or Dissatisfaction . with Complexion and Factors Contributing to Dissatis— faction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32 Percentage Distribution by Reciprocal Friendship Categories of Responses Indicating Satisfaction or Dissatisfaction with Hair and Factors Contributing to Dissatisfaction. . . 83 Percentage Distribution by Reciprocal Friendship Categories of Responses to the Sweat Shirt Story. . . . . . . . . . . 35 Percentage Distribution by Reciprocal Friendship Categories of Responses Concerning Enjoyment of wearing Clothes Not Liked by Fr 1811ng I C O O O O O O I O O I O C I O O O O I 86 Percentage Distribution by Reciprocal Friendship Categories of Responses Concerning Whether One Was Ill at Ease at School because of Clothing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 87 Percentage Distribution by Reciprocal Friendship Categories of Frequency of Receiving Compliments on Dress at School . 88 Percentage Distribution by Reciprocal Friendship Categories of Responses Concerning Embarrassment about School Cloth- ing and Factors Contributing to Embarrassment. . . . . ... 89 Association of Girls Chosen as "Most Popular" Within Recip— rocal Friendship Categories and RFS Breakdowns . . . . . . 9S viii Table Page 47. Association of Girls Chosen as "Best Dressed" Within Reciprocal Friendship Categories and RFS Breakdowns. . . 96 48. Association of Girls Chosen as "Not Dressed Right" Within Reciprocal Friendship Categories and RFS Breakdowns. . . 98 49. Correlation Between Reciprocal Friendship Structure Co- hesion and Agreement on Opinions Concerning Clothing, Appearance and Group Acceptance as Measured by Spearman Rho O C C O O O C I O O O O O O O O C I C O I O O O O 0 0 ix LIST OF FIGURES Figure Page A. - Reciprocal Friendships. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 B. Breakdown of Larger Reciprocal Friendship Structures. . 46 C. Reciprocal Friendships and Indicators of Cohesion in Terms Of Review 0 O 0 O I O O O O O O C O C Q I I O O “8 D. Reciprocal Friendships and Indicators of Cohesion in Terms of Program. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70 E. Reciprocal Friendships and Appraisal of Popularity and Dre SS 0 o o e o a o o o a o o o o o O 0 O I O . O 0 I O 93 CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION Statement of the Problem Social science researchers generally agree on the desirability of longitudinal studies.122 Although limited in use, longitudinal study is a recommended procedure for observing patterns of change or stability in many behavioral aspects.3 The purpose of this study is to investigate the relationship between group cohesion and the opinions of twelfth grade girls on clothing and appearance. The study parallels a previous study about clothing and ap- pearance as a factor in group cohesion’4 and is a facet of a longitudinal study dealing with the relationship between clothing and adolescent be- havior.5 The researcher seeks to continue the investigation of clothing and appearance as factors in the group cohesion of adolescent girls.6 1Carter V. Good and Douglas E. Scates, Methods of Research (New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts, Inc., 1954). p. 804. 2Marie Jahoda, Morton Deutsch and Stuart W. Cook, Research Methods in Social Relations (New York: The Dryden Press, 1951), p. 343. 3Good and Scates, p. 804. ”Madelyn‘Williams, "Opinions on Clothing, Appearance and Social Acceptance as Factors in Group Cohesion of Ninth Grade Girls," (unpublished Master's thesis, Michigan State university, 1962). SJoanne B. Eicher and Eleanor A. Kelley, "Adolescent Girls View- points from.Ninth through TWelfth Grade Concerning Dress, Social Accept- ance and Related Factors," (Research in process for Michigan State University Agricultural Experiment Station). 6Williams, p. 132. Review of Literature The review of literature will contain selections concerned with adolescent peer culture and its value system, particularly in terms of clothing and appearance; group cohesion; sociometric studies; and longi- tudinal studies. Every culture assigns certain prescribed behavior and privileges to members of particular age-sex categories.1 However, though adoles— cence is a particular age category in our society, no explicit function or behavior has been prescribed for it.2 Adolescence is a twilight zone between childhood and adulthood.3 Our complex society requires extensive educational preparation, but fails to outline functions or expeCted be- havior for the adolescent. Consequently, adolescents are unable to assume an adult work role. They are forced to spend much of their time with others of their age group apart frounthe adult world.LI Much of the development taking place during adolescence involves continued socialization and a search for self identity.5 Continued 1Ralph Linton, "Age and Sex Categories," American Sociological Review, Vol. 8, No. 5 (October, 1942), p. 590. 2Ibid., p. 601. 3Richard Dewey and W. J. Humber, The Development of Human Be- havior (New York: The Macmillan Company, 1951), . 297. “David Gottlieb and John Reeves, Adolescent Behavior in Urban Areas (East Lansing, Michigan: Bureau of Research and Publications, Michigan State University, College of Education and Cooperative Ex- tension, 1962). PP. III-1 — III-4. 5Irene M. Josselyn, "The Older Adolescent, ” Values and Ideals of American Youth, ed. Eli Ginsberg (New York: Columbia University Press, 1961), p. 31. 3 interaction and developmental needs produces the characteristics of a distinct sub-culture in adolescent peer group.1 Within the sub-cultural framework the adolescent learns the role he can play most effectively within his peer group and therefore, establishes a self identity.2 Coleman's study of adolescents demonstrated the existence of dis- tinct value systems within the adolescent peer culture.3 A peer culture especially demands conformity; Hurlock stated that the adolescent's "be- havior conforms to the pattern set by the group and approved by the group."4 The clique and crowd dominate behavior trends. "The clique is a small, exclusive, non—kin, informal, face-to—face social group. There are no rules butthere is a common set of values."5 Crowds are essentially as- sociations of cliques, although a clique need not be associated with a crOWH.6 Hollingshead suggested that the clique imparts a social status to members, boosts their egos and is highly valued. Thus the clique has a dominating influence in the adolescent's life.7 1Gottlieb and Reeves, p. III-4. 2Josselyn, pp. 31-32. 3James S. Coleman, The Adolescent Society (New York: Free Press, 1961), pp. 27—34. “Elizabeth Hurlock,.Adolescent Development (New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, Inc., 1955), p. 110. 51bid., p. 129. 6Dexter C. Dunphy, "The Social Structure of Urban.Adolescent Peer Groups," Sociometgy, Vol. 26, No. 2 (June, 1963), p. 233. ZAugust B. Hollingshead, Elmtown's Youth (New York: John.Wiley and Sons, Inc., 1949), p. 206. 4 Several researchers studied the extent to which group membership influences the life of an individual. Festinger and his associates noted that the power of a group to influence members is a function of the grati- fications the group makes available. These include: friendship, companion- ship, social status, prestige and the approval of others.1 A group which is highly attractive for individual members is considered highly cohesive, because the forces acting on the individual to remain part of the group are strong. In order to accomplish its goals and maintain itself, a cohesive group will exert extensive pressure on members to maintain group standards.2 Several methods for measuring group cohesiveness include: deter- mining the number of friendship ties existing among members of a group; determining the number of choices made within the group divided by the number made outside the group; and determining the degree to which members share the same norms and standards of behavior and belief.3 Festinger, Schachter and Back studied group cohesion in two univer- sity housing projects. They found if a group was concerned about a specific value or behavior, the more cohesive the group, as measured by the number of friendship ties within the group, the greater the possibility that mem- bers would conform to the group standard.‘l A study of the productivity 1L. Festinger, S. Schachter and K. Back, Social Pressures in In- formal Groups: A Study of a Housing Project (New York: Harpers, 1950), p. 3. 2Dorwin Cartwright and Alvin Zander, GroupiDynamics: Research and Theory, 2nd ed. (Evanston, Illinois: Row Peterson and Co., 1960), p0 1690 31bid., pp. 70-71. “Festinger, Schachter and Back, p. 91. 5 of college students demonstrated that, even after the removal of direct pressure, members of highly cohesive groups would continue to show greater conformity to the perceived group standard than would less cohesive groups.1 In an experimental situation set up by Back to test whether pressure toward uniformity was related to the cohesiveness of the group, findings showed greater effort to reach agreement in highly cohesive groups, and discussion more effective in producing agreement in these groups.2 Discussion abounds on the influence of adolescent peer groups and group cohesion but, limited research exists in the area of adolescent. group cohesion. Some suggest the more cohesive a group, the more mem- bers will conform in areas important to the group. The relationship between coHesiveness and conformity should hold true for adolescent groups as well. Adolescent girls are strongly interested in clothing and appearance. Clothing assumes increased importance to the older adolescent for such reasons as increasing interest in the opposite sex. Flugel suggested, "All are alike agreed that their (clothes) ultimate purpose. . . . is to add to the sexual attractiveness of their wearers, and to stimulate the sexual interest of admirers of the opposite sex and the envy of rivals of the same sex."3 Silverman studied 373 girls ranging in age from 12-18. Her results indicated that: 1L. Berkowitz, "Group Standards, Cohesiveness and Productivity," Human Relations, Vol. 7 (195E), p. 518. 2K.‘W. Back, "Influence Through Social Communication," Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, V01. 46 (1959), p. 22. 33- C. Flugel, The ngchology of Clothes (London: The Hogarth Press, 1950), p. 26. i 6 Older girls tended to be more affected in their social relation- ships by their clothing and to attach more importance to appearance as a factor in social situations than younger girls.1 wax suggested that the continual preoccupation of the late adolescent with experimentation with her appearance, as ememplified by an eager trial of each new style of dress and grooming, is the resuitrof the search for a self image with which she can be comfortable.2 According to Stone, "Appearance is at least as important for the es- tablishment and maintenance of the self as is discourse."3 Appearance in- cludes such items as stance, facial expression, body size and shape, gestures, grooming, diothing, "reputation” and "image."4 Appearance plays a role in social transactions by helping to establish participant identification. Responses made to individuals in social interactions are largely governed by the observer's perception of other's appearance.5 "The meaning of ap- pearance therefore, is the establishment of identity, value, mood and at— titude for the one who appears by the coincident programs and reviews awakened by his appearance."6 Stone defined program as "responses made about the wearer by the wearer,VWAndreview as."resp0nses made about the wearer of clothes by others."7 Program.and review responses ISylvia S. Silverman, "Clothing and Appearance," The Adolescent, ed. Jerome M; Seidman (New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, Inc., 1960), p. 526. 2Murray‘Wax, "Themes in Cosmetics and Grooming,9 American Journal of Sociology, Vol. 62 (1957), p. 591. 3Gregory P. Stone, "Appearance and the Self," Human Behavior and Social Processes: An Interactionist.Approach, ed. Arnold M. Rose (New York: Houghton.Mifflin Co., 1961), p. 87. 41239:, p. 86. 5_1_1_>_1_g., p. 93. élRlS-v p. 91. 73333., p. 92. 7 become important for the establishment of self identity to the extent that "when programs and reviews tend to coincide, the self of the one who appears (the one whose clothing has elicited such responses) is validated or established; when such responses tend toward disparity, the self of the one who appears is challenged, and conduct may be expected to move in the direction of some redefinition of the challenged self."1 ,/” Several studies have demonstrated the importance of clothing and appearance to the social acceptance of adolescents. When the population of this study were in ninth grade, a study at that time showed the upper and lower class group members and isolates rated appearance as a standard of social acceptance. The data revealed that the girls mentioned as most popular were also usually mentioned as best dressed.2 Gordon em- phasized the importance of clothing for acceptance and membership in a particular clique of a high school. "Clique behavior centering around prestige seeking was rigidly conforming. Closely related were the patterns of dress, dating and moral behavior which.were crucial to social position."3 In the words of one student: How you dress has a lot to do with what "crowd" you belong to. If you belong to the most popular crowd in this school you are expected to dress pretty much way above average.’4 11bid. 2Arlene Bjorngaard,”The Relationship of Social Class and Social Ac- ceptance to Clothing and Appearance of 8 Selected Group of Ninth Grade Girls" (unpublished Master's thesis, Michigan State University, 1962), p. 146. 3C. Wayne Gordon, The Social System of the High School (Glencoe, Illinois: The Free Press, 1957), p. 133. “Ibid., p. 115. 8 Hurlock pointed out that the older adolescent's interest in appearance in- creases as she realizes the role it plays in social adjustment.1 Cannon, Staples and Carlson found a significant relationship between social ac- ceptance and appearance for girls in grades 7-12. The popular girls in all grades excelled or conformed closely to the norms for personal ap— pearance.2 Bonney, investigating factors which distinguish popular and unpopular children, emphasized the importance of conformity in many as- pects of behavior, including dress, grooming, cleanliness and manners, in establishing social acceptance.3 Social class position is closely related to clothing, appearance, and social acceptance. Hollingshead found that ". . . the specific be- havior traits exhibited by adolescents tend to be along the lines approved by their clique mates, who also tend to be members of the same class.“4 Smith indicated that the friendship patterns of high school students tended to follow the economic and occupational structuring of the com— munity.5 Kahl, in discussing adolescent social structure, observed that most students are members of cliques which are essentially homogeneous in terms of prestige-class composition.6 Coleman noted that the importance 1Elizabeth Hurlock, Developmental ngchology (New York: McGraw- Hill Book Company, Inc., 1959), p. 279. 2Kenneth L. Cannon, Ruth Staples and Irene Carlson, "Personal Ap~ pearance as a Factor in Social Acceptance," Journal of Home Economics, Vol. 44 (1952), p. 712. 3M. E. Bonney, "Popular and Unpopular Children: A Sociometric StUdY." Sociometry Monographs. V01. 9 (New York: Beacon House, 1947), p. 29. “Hollingshead, p. 446. SMapheus Smith,"Some Factors in Friendship Selections of High School Students," Sociometry, Vol. 7 (1944), p. 308. 6JosephA. Kahl, The American Class Structure (New York: Rinehart and Company, Inc., 1957), p. 131. lit.£rc"r.[[1.I .III..III“I.I(III1([I‘.A 1: III i1. . 1" 1.111(1! (III, [IL ,I‘I‘E III!I..I.(I,1II\:II1 9 of clothes for getting into the right crowd was related to the family status of these individuals.1 All of the cited studies demonstrate the importance of clothing and appearance for the adolescent girl, both as a means of developing a self identity and as an aid in establishing group acceptance. Apparently, any group, including the adolescent peer group or clique, will exert influence on members in areas defined as important by the group. The ex- tent to which members of a group conform to defined standards is dependent on the group's cohesiveness. Thus, one would expect that the general consensus of clique members' opinions on clothing, appearance and group acceptance would be influenced by the cohesiveness of that group. Williams stated that opinions on clothing and appearance are a factor in the group cohesion of ninth grade girls. The data supported the idea that members of the same group have opinions on clothing, appearance and group accept- ance which are similar and which differ from those of non-group members or members of other groups.2 The use of sociometry has effectively aided the study of group structure and its effect on the behavior and opinions of individuals in the group. Selltiz and associates observed that "sociometric data can provide information about an individual's position in the group, the social subgroupings within the group, the relationships among the sub- groups, the group's cohesiveness, etc."3 Moreno, who has largely devel— ' oped Sociometry, suggested that this technique delves into the organi- zations of groups and discovers the positions and interrelationships of 1Coleman, p. 37. 2Williams, p. 132. 3Claire Selltiz, Marie Jahoda, M. Deutsch and S. W. Cook, Research Methods in Social Relations (New York: Henry Holt and Company, Inc., 1960), p. 270. l. l -I .I .{I (II. I (I ,{I I41! .....I.\[ .JRI I1 (I. (I. all. I 10 members of groups.1 Used successfully in a variety of situations, socio- metric techniques effectively contributed to the study of the structure of groups in camps, schools, dormitories and factories. The basic technique of sociometry, the sociometric test, can help discover the acceptability of individuals within the group, and, or to discern the structure of the group.2 A true sociometric test Should meet certain criteria. For example, subjects taking a sociometric test should be aware of the limits of the group, should be allowed unlimited choices in terms of specified criteria and should be allowed to make these choices privately. Finally, the questions should be understood by the group, and the results should be used to change the structure of the group.3 Tests not meeting all these criteria are called near-sociometric tests.“ Although the near-sociometric test is not fully accepted by the strict sociometrist, it can be a valuable method of studying human interaction.5 An effective technique for studying relations within a group, sociometry has its limitations. These limitations include: the sub- jectivity of the material, which records only what people say; the limitations of the responses the individual may make; the eliciting of 1J. L. Moreno, Who Shall Survive (Beacon, New York: Beacon House, Inc., 1953), p. 51. 2Mary L. Ndrthway,.A Primer of Sociometry (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1952), p. l. 3Gardner Lindsey and E. F. Borgotta, "Sociometric Measure," Hand- book of Social Psychology, Vol. 1, ed. Gardner Lindsey (Reading, MasSachusetts: Addison Wesley Publishing Co., 1959), p. 407. 41bid., p. 408. 5Charles P. Loomis and Harold B. Pepinsky, "Sociometry, 1937-1947: Theory and Methods," Sociometry, Vol. 11 (August, 1948), P. 266. III 1II II III I f 1 (I‘. .ll 1’ 11 conscious opinions, which may not be the actual feelings of the individual; the often overgeneralized material.1 Once sociometric data are obtained, there are several methods of analysis available, including index, statistical, matrix, and graphic analysis. Index analysis, by means of a formula, assigns an index to each individual based on the count of total incoming and outgoing choice- rejection responses. Statistical analysis seeks to determine if the choice-rejection pattern changes, which result between two administrations of a sociometric test, occur by chance or as a result of group forces. Matrix analysis uses anrix N table depicting the pattern of choices and rejections. The columns may be interchanged to discover leadership and clique patterns. A graphic analysis shows individuals as points with lines drawn between to indicate the patterns of relationships.2 One of the most effective means of showing the relationship patterns within groups is a type of graphic analysis called a sociogram. Using the socio- gram the total pattern of group interrelationships can be depicted on a single easily read chart.3 Individuals are represented by circles or squares with some type of lines drawn to show the pattern of choices and/ or rejections within the group. Groups with a large number of mutual choices are usually considered highly cohesive.‘I 1Michael S. Olimtead, The Small Group (New York: Random House, 1959), p. 98. ' 20. H. Proctor and C. P. Loomis, "Analysis of Sociometric Data," Research Methods in Social Relations, Part II, eds. Marie Jahoda, et. al. (New York: Dryden Press, 1951), pp. 563-586. 3Loomis and Pepinsky, p. 267. “Paul A. Hare, Handbook of Small Group Research (New York: Free Press, 1962), p. 17. 12 ' Social scientists suggest consideration of the validity and reliability of their instruments. According to Pepinsky, neither validity nor reliability in their traditional context are applicable to sociometric data.1 Other authors have added supporttop'epinsky's statement. For example, Byrd found that, if the choice criterion had a reality value for the individuals participating, the difference between professed and actual choices was not significantly different from those which could be accounted for by natural behavioral changes 2 Mouton reported that "while the reports included are of over time. uneven quality, the consistency of the findings that have been reported by different investigators can be taken as evidence that the sociometric choice provides a valuable method of measuring personal and group characteristics."3 Several authors interested in research in the social sciences emphasize the need for repeated measures in research. ‘McCormick and Francis stressed the need to check and recheck research findings before possible expectance to develop an extensive body of knowledge in the area." A longitudinal study, one in which individhals are studied over a period of time, is one method of obtaining more depth and accumulating more extensive knowledge in a particular research area. The desirabil- ity of longitudinal studies is generally accepted, though limited in practice.5 1Pauline M. Pepinsky, "The Meaning of Validity and Reliability," Educational and Psychological Measurements, Vol. 9 (Spring, 1949), p. 41. 2Eugene Byrd, "A Study of Validity and Constancy of Choices in a Sociometric Test," Sociometry, Vol. 14 (1951), p. 181. 33- S. MOUtOH. et. al., "The Validity of Sociometric Responses," Sociometry, Vol. 18 (1955), p. 203. “Thomas McCormick and Ray Francis, Methods of Research in the Be- havioral Sciences (New York: Harper and Bros., 1958), p. 12. 5Jahoda, et. al., p. 343. 13 Hallworth completed a longitudinal investigation of the sociometric relationships existing between boys and girls ranging in age from eleven to sixteen years. Sociometric data were collected and analyzed on four occasions. Varied procedures determined the subjects' value systems.1 Results showed a pattern in the development of group structure and an association between value systems and group membership. Hallworth em- phasized the need for further similar studies to establish whether his findings apply to other groups.2 Brookover discussed a longitudinal study of the choice-rejection patterns of a group of high school students in which data were first obtained when the students were ninth graders and again when they were twelfth graders.3 He concluded that there was decidedly more evidence of change than stability in the group's structure.“ Summary The existence of an adolescent peer culture incorporating a unique value system has been stressed by several authors. Snell face-to-face groups, often referred to as cliques, exist within this culture. The cliquaaexert influence:on the values and attitudes of individual members. Studies have pointed out the importance placed by adolescents on con- formity to peer group and,or clique established patterns. 1H. J. Hallworth, "Sociometric Relationships Among Grammar School Boys and Girls Between the Ages of Eleven and Sixteen Years," Sociometry, Vol. 16 (1953), pp. 41-42. 21bid.. pp. 69-70. mflilbur B. Brookover and David Gottlieb, A Sociology of Education (New York: American Book Company, 1964), p. 282. ”Ibid., p. 283. 1Q The manner in which a group exerts influence on members has been extensively studied. Results from the studies indicate that if a group is highly attractive for members, that is, cohesive, the members will likely conform to group standards of values or behavior. The influence of the group will be strongest in areas which are of particular group concern. Research has shown the relationship of clothing and appearance to the social acceptance of adolescents. Clothing and appearance are important because they aid in the establishment of self identity and the attraction of the opposite sex. The relationship between the cohesion of adolescent groups and opinions on clothing and appearance provides an area for continuing ex- tensive study. Focus of the Study As a portion of a longitudinal project, this study seeks to ac- cumulate more information in the area by investigating the relationship between group cohesion and the opinions of twelfth grade girls on clothing, appearance and social acceptance. The following assumptions, objectives and hypothesis will be used as guides in the research: Assumptions: 11. Adolescent behavior is influenced by peer groups. 2. Social acceptance can be measured by use of a sociometric technique. 3. The interview schedule used will be applicable to both ninth and twelfth grade age groups. 15 Objectives: 1. To determine if reciprocal friendship structure members, mutual pair members and isolates have different opinions and appraisals of clothing, appearance and group accept- ance. 2. To determine if members of the individual reciprocal friendship structures have similar opinions and appraisals of clothing, appearance and group acceptance which con- tribute to group cohesion. Hypothesis: 1. Members of the same reciprocal friendship structure have similar opinions regardingclothing, appearance and group acceptance which contribute to group cohesion and their opinions differ from those of nonagroup members, or members of other groups. 0‘ CHAPTER II METHODOLOGY As a portion of a longitudinal study, this research incorporated the techniques of a previous phase1 with slight modifications. Method- ological considerations in the following section include: (1) the com- munity setting, (2) development of instruments, (3) collection of data, (4) description of the sample, (5) definition of terms and (6) method of analysis. The Community Setting The community of East Lansing, from which the group study was obtained, is atypical in several respects. Michigan State University is located in the community; therefore, several character aspects of the population, such as education, age, mobility, occupation. and income, differ from the average for the rest of the state. According to the 1960 census,2 persons 25 years of age and over in East Lansing have a median of 15.8 years of schooling as compared to 10.8 years for the entire state. Residents of the community have a median age of 22.2 years while the state median age is 28.3 years. Fifty and seven-tenths percent of the population of this community initially occupied their 1Williams, pp. 21—38. 2United States Bureau of Census. Michigan General Population Characteristics, 1960 (washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1960), pp. 24-46, 24-61, 24-179, 24—181, 2h—191, 24—206. 16 17 present homes after 1958. The population is predominately composed of white collar workers, 71.9 percent. Only seven percent hold positions in manufacturing industries. The median income of East Lansing is $7,152 as compared with $6,256 for the State of Michigan. While only 12.2 per- cent have incomes less than $3,000, 31.7 percent have incomes over $10,000. The only high school located in East Lansing is a co-educational public school. The 1965 enrollment totals indicated that it served 1271 pupils. The incorporation, several years ago, of Towar Gardens, a dwelling area for working class families with low incomes, provided the school with pupils from socio-economic extremes. This was the incentive for the initial choice of East Lansing High School for data collection. Development of the Instruments Background Questionnaire A background questionnaire,1 used to obtain sociometric data and general background information about the students, was developed and used by Wass as Part I of a two-part questionnaire delving into relation- ships between clothing and role behavior.2 The information obtained using the Wass questionnaire consisted of personal information about the girl and her family and included her best friend choices. 1See Appendix A for background questionnaire. 2Betty wass,"Clothing as Related to Role Behavior of Ninth Grade Girls," (unpublished Master's thesis, Department of Textiles, Clothing and Related Arts, ‘Michigan State University, 1962), p.28. 18 Interview Schedule 1 developed by Bjorngaard (studying the An interview schedule relationship of social class and social acceptance to Clothing and ap- pearance)2 was modified according to recommendations of the previous researchers. The interview schedule sought opinions about clothing, appearance and social acceptance. The interview also contained a rating sheet on which the appearance of each interviewee was rated by the adult interviewer. Pretest The original interview schedule was pretested by four girls in the ninth grade in Okemos, Michigan. As a result of suggestions made by the original researchers, the instruments were further modified before ad— mdnistration in the present study.3 A pretest of the modified inter- view schedule was secured by administering it to a tenth grade girl from Mason, Michigan. Collection of the Data Administration of the questionnaire The 'questionnaire was administered to 120 twelfth grade girls in their homerooms during homeroom period at the beginning of spring semester, 1965. Arrangements were made to administer the instrument to 18 absentees at a later date. This gave a total of 138 respondents, the entire pop- ulation of twelfth grade girls at East Lansing High School. The girls 18cc Appendix B for the interview schedule. 2Bjorngaard, pp. 35-37. 3Coleman found in his longitudinal investigation of adolescent society that the same questions could be used effectively on a total high school population, p. 168. 19 were told that their responses to the questionnaire were confidential. To fulfill this pledge, the girls have been assigned a number and in the analysis of data their identity remains anonymous. Administration of the interview Four trained persons interviewed 137 of the 138 twelfth grade girls at East Lansing High School. One girl who completed the background ques— tionnaire refused to be interviewed. Each interview lasted from 25 to. 70 minutes, the length of a single class period. At the completion of each interview the interviewer rated the appearance of the girl accord- ing to a check sheet in the interview schedule.1 Social class ratings The social class ranking of each girl was obtained by using'Warner's Index of Status Characteristics, with modifications suggested by the author.2 Using three of the original four components of warner's Index of Status Characteristics, an ISO score was computed for each girl’s family.3 The three indices included father's occupation, house type and dwelling area. Source of income, ordinarily the fourth index, was excluded because it was the opinion of the researchers that the girls would not know this information.’4 East Lansing is an educational community; therefore, some modifi— cation was made of Warner's Revised Scale for Rating Occupations, 1See interview schedule, AppendixB . 2Martindale has indicated the adequacy of Warners scale for small cities such as East Lansing. Don Martindale, American Society (Princeton, New Jersey: D. van Nostrand Company, Inc., 1960), p. 397. 3180 refers to Warner's Index of Status Characteristics. “The warner method of determining source of income is quite complex and includes factors such as inherited or earned wealth and salary or hourly wages. W} Lloyd Warner,‘Marcia Meeker and Kenneth Eells, Social Class in America (Chicago: Science Research Associates, Inc., 1949), pp. 139-142. (I?! l- u "(f‘ [,1’1' II . ‘I I‘ll]! I'll : . a {It I ll.‘ I‘ll III I ’1‘ nl‘l'l‘l‘f't‘ 'l Ill! l'll'wlll". I'll 20 especially in terms of academic rating. Werner has suggested that modifications might be necessary in some cases.1 The ratings were made after checking the questionnaire responses, the school records and the city directory. Ratings for the residential areas of the community were obtained by a sociologist, an economist, a real estate agent and a member of the research team. The houses were rated on warner's seven point scale by two or more individuals.2 The final composite ISC score was obtained by weighting each area rating. The occupation rating was multiplied times five, dwelling area times three, house type times four, and the resulting scores totaled for each individual.3 Description of the Sample Responses to the sociometric questions were coded to construct a matrix chart.l4 From the matrix chart a sociogram, Figure A, was developed. Each girl is represented on the sociogram by a circle con- taining her code number. Reciprocated choices are represented by lines connecting two circles. 11bid., p. 185. 21bid. 3Bjorngaard, p. 28. 4Sociometric questions appeared on p. 2 of the questionnaire and p. 4 of the interview schedule. See Appendices A and B. fl ‘ Q Q RFS 414 RPS 412 RPS 407 «88» H 181 '8) H 1 \ / RPS 411 l.‘ I‘ til ,I I‘ll, ‘I‘ .II .I' It? 22 The sociogram shows three distinct categories of social acceptance; reciprocal friendship structures, mutual pairs and isolates. The term reciprocal friendship structure, abbreviated RFS, is used in lieu of the term clique. Some of the structures are too complex to be classified within the accepted definition of a clique.1 The 138 girls in the twelfth grade made choices resultingin-ten reciprocal friendship structures consisting of from three 1:028 member-s. Of the total population of twelfth grade girls, 102 were RFS members, 16 belonged to mutual pairs and 20 were isolates. In addition to the sociometric status of each girl, the social class rating of each girl and the identifying number of each structure are recorded on the sociogram.2 Table 1 shows the distribution of the twelfth grade girls accord- ing to social acceptance and social class categories. Social class rank- ing was determined by the total ISC weighted ratings. The girls were assigned to each social class grouping according to the following break- down of the ratings: 12-37, upper social class, 38-61, middle social class, and 62-84, lower social class. Double lines are used on Table l to separate the three categories. Definition of Terms The following terms, which are used to describe the individual girls in terms of their reciprocated choices, were devised by the previous researchers. While similar terms contained in the literature were used as a base, the subsequent categories are unique to the present research. 1Supra, p. 3 for an accepted definition of clique. 2See legend on Figure A. 23 How Hanan: m so>Hw was mum comm .muowopoo some cw mHun mo nonaszo .coHumowuwucooH .ousuospum awnmocowum Hmooumwoom ou mnomou mmmn .ommu mason one some wCHHHoBo .cowumdsooo so comma weapon HmAUOm m .mowumwuouomumno espoum mo woocH m.uo:um3 OH muomou UmHm mmH N : sN m a m m NH mN m 0H oN mHmsoH m H H H em . ON mmpHo H H me . Ne HmHoom H H so . No ppaoH N H H He - em mmmHo m H H H mm - Hm HmHoom o: H s m H H N H m a H m N om - mm mHeeHz mH s N H H N m Hm - em m: m mH N H N m s 0H s 3 mm . mN mmpHo N H H eN - MN HmHoom mH H H H H a m UN NN . mH page: NH N H e m NH - NH z NNe HN: NH: :H: NH: HHs so: No: No: Ho: pHmm ppmH mwchmm mmmHo Hasoe mmm mmm mmm mam mmm mam mmm mmm mmm pmmm Hmspsz -omH eppeprs HmHoom omH w M Hoocom ewwm wcwmcma pmmm um mHun oomuw cemHosu mo mmHHowmumo moemuemoom HmHoom me mwcwumu counmwos omH mo :oHuanHumHo mmmHo HmHoom .H mHQmH 24 "ISOLATE: An individual who had no reciprocated choices. There are four types of isolates."1 Isolatel: pure isokte; makes no choices and receives none. Isolatez: ignored isolate; makes choices but receives none. Isolate3: self isolate; makes no choices but receives some. Isolateu: confused isolate; the choices made and received do not match. RECIPROCAL FRIENDSHIP STRUCTURE: A sociometric diagram of individuals whose choices of friends were returned. This study includes the following types: Mutual Pair: A reciprocated choice of two members, hence a dyad. Triangle: Three individuals whose choice of each other forms a cohesive unit. Chain: An open series of mutual choices. Wheel: Two chains which have a central common member. Complex Structure: Consists of a cluster of dyadic relationships. ACCURATE PERCEIVER: An individual who had all choices reciprocated, or who neither chose nor was chosen.2 Analysis of Data In order to compare the clothing behavior opinions of reciprocal friendship structure members, mutual pair members and isolates, the inter- view responses were coded and punched on IBM cards. The results of 1Williams , pp. 33-34. 2Ibid.. PP. 39*35.... 25 cross tabulations were transferred to sociograms which were used as work sheets. Descriptive analysis was used, because data were obtained from the entire population. It is recognized that correlation statistics are useable with a population; however, their usage was limited by the size and ordering of the group within the desired framework for analysis. The items in the interviews were classified and analyzed in terms of Stone's framework of program and review.1 Questions 5, 10, 14, 15, 16, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28 and 29 of the interview schedulez were determined to be program items. Questions 1, 2, 3, 6, 8, 9, ll, 12, 17, 18 and 19 of the schedule3 were interpreted as review items. Data con- tained in the questions concerning the girls who were named as best dressed, most popular and not dressed right were also analyzed. The following chapters report the analysis of data within the above framework. Chapter 111 includes a description of the respondents from.the stendpoint of group and non-group membership. Chapters IV and V will discuss the responses of group and non-group members to questions about clothing behavior in terms of’review and program. Chapter VI will discuss responses received in questions designed to elicit the names of girls considered best dressed, most popular and not dressed right. Chapter VII will include a summary and discussion of findings and a re— statement of the hypotheses. Chapter VIII will conclude with implications and recommendations. 1Supra, p. 6 for the definitions of program and review. 2See Append ix B. 3See Append ix B . CHAPTER III DESCRIPTION OF RESPONDENTS Chapter III will describe aspects of the respondents background. The following factors will be compared within the reciprocal friendship categories: individual social class indices (house type, dwelling area and occupation of the main source of financial support); additional family support; number of siblings; location of elementary school; club memberships; grade point average; honor roll membership; church af- filiation; and an interviewer rating of the appearance of the respondent. Both numbers and percentages have been included in Table 2, p. 27 to alert the reader to the relative size of each reciprocal friendship category. Unless the differential numerical base of each category is considered the percentages presented in the subsequent discussion and tables will appear distorted. Distortion is especially crucial in the case of isolates and mutual pair members, in which the N's are 20 and 16 respectively. Thus, five percent of the isolates is one person and six percent of the mutual pairs is one person. Nevertheless, percentages rather than numbers were chosen for presentation, because all reciprocal friendship category totals could be based on 100 percent, whereas numerical totals would fluctuate with each category. The percentages cited in dis— cussing a Specific background factor may not equal 100 percent, because in some instances a portion of the total is not distributed in a meaning- ful pattern. However, the total percentage is cited in the table ac- companying the discussion of each factor. 26 27 Social Class Three specific indices comprised the social class rating used in this study. The three indices will be included in the discussion of the social class of the respondents. Scrutiny of the individual indices allows one to acquire a more complete picture of the background of the girls. Table 2 depicts the total social class composition of each of the recip— rocal friendship categories. These were obtained through the use of ratings based on an Index of Status Characteristics developed by Lloyd Warner. Table 2. Number and percentage distribution of twelfth grade girls ac- cording to social class and reciprocal friendship categories Social Class Categories of Twelfth Grade Girls Reciprocal Friendship Categories Lower Middle Upper Totals % (No.) %, (No.) % (No.) % (No.) Isolates 20 (l) 20 (9) ll (10) 14 (20) ‘Mutual Pair Members -- -- l3 (6) ll (10) 12 (16) RFS Members 80 (4) 67 (29) 78 (69) 74 (102) Totals 100 (5) 100 (44) 100 (89) 100 (138) Sixty-five percent of the girls were rated as upper social class, while 31 percent were middle social class and four percent werelower social class. The majority of girls in all social classes were RFS mem- bers. A number of RFS's were relatively homogeneous in social class com- position. RFS 401 was predominantly lower social class and RFS 421 was 28 entirely middle social class. The composition of RFS's 407, 409, 412, 414, 417 and 427 ranged from 67 to 83 percent upper social class.1 Components of Warner's Index of Status Characteristicsz33 This researcher will compare each of the three components of the Index of Status Characteristics and the categories of reciprocal friend— ship. Almest 72 percent of the girls were from families in which the primary financial support was derived from occupations rated as profes- sional or semiprofessional, ranks 1 and 2 on the occupational scale. In terms of reciprocal friendship categories, this includes: 65 percent of the isolates, 81 percent of the mutual pair members and 72 percent of the RFS members. The family occupational ratings were in rank 3 for 16 percent of the RFS members, 13 percent of the mutual pairs and 20 percent of the isolates. Table 3 shows the remaining occupational rat- ings spread the scale from 4 to 7. The RFS's, except RFS 401, were composed predominantly of respond- ents from families whose main.financial support was derived from occupa- tions rated in ranks l and 2. More than 70 percent of RFS's 412 and 427 were from families rated in rank 1 and 75 percent of RFS 421 were from families rated in rank 2. Family occupation ratings for RFS 401 members ranged from 3 to 6. 1Figure A, Supra, p. 21. 2Each ISC component is rated on a scale from 1 to 7, with 1 being high and 7 being low. See Warner, pp. 140-141, 149-150, 153-154 for a complete description of each component. 3Bjorngaard gives the modifications made in the ratings of educational occupations for this study, p. 161. 9 2 AmmHv 03 N N w HN 3: w mHAmmHv 2: I HH oN mm +N 3 HH Amev 03 H N N N 0H N m: mHHHo HH< ANoHV 03 N N o NN N3 0 oN aNoHvooH I m NH Nm MN NH 0 NoHvooH H ,N m N mH MN m: neon—so: mmm AoHv ooH I I 0 NH om mH o HoHvooH I I mH Hm Hm oH I AoHv ooH I I I 0 MH om Hm cheese: HHem Hoops: AONV 00H m I oN mH m: mH I HONvooH I m mm mm 0N m I AoNv ooH I m I oH 0N mN o: mouoHOmH sz e e N N g N N e sz N N N N e e N N sz N e e N e N N & mHmHOH N o m a m N H mHmuoe N o m d m N H mHmpoH N o m a m N H moHHowoumo HHemeepHpm wsHumm mon< wcHHHoso wewpmm ommH omsom weHumm HmeoHummsooo Hmoouawoom meHo pesto eHHsze pom mpUHecH omH steH>HepH moHHowouoo aHnmocoHHm HmoouaHooH one mooHocH omH HmsoH>HocH ou wcHopooom mHuHm oomuw numHoBH mo :oHustHHmHo owmucoomom .m oHan 30 An analysis of the ratings of house type showed that 33 percent of the girls lived in houses rated in rank 4, 23 percent in rank 3, 20 per- cent in rank 5. and 15 percent in rank 2. The remaining nine percent were distributed equally between ranks 1 and 6. There were no houses rated as 7 (see Table 3). Forty-three percent of the houses were rated above 4, the mid- point of the scale, while 24 percent were rated below 4. The houses of the majority of isolates were rated lower than the houses of either mutual pair or RFS members. A predominance of RFS members lived in houses rated in rank 1 and 2. Members of two RFS's lived in similarly rated houses; 75 percent of RFS 412 in houses rated as 5; and two-thirds of RFS 414 in houses rated as 3. The dwelling area scores were comparatively higher than the individ- ual house scores for all reciprocal friendship categories, indicating that the families of the girls lived in neighborhoods rated higher than the individual houses. Forty-four percent of the girls lived in areas rated as 3, 21 percent in areas rated as 4 and 15 percent in areas rated as 1. More RFS members lived in neighborhoods rated as l or 2, while more isolates lived in areas-rated below 4, as shown in Table 3. Seventy- five percent of the members of RFS 412 and 67 percent of those in RFS 414 lived in areas given a 3 rating, while 75 percent of RFS 421 lived in areas given a 4 rating. Isolates had lower ratings than RFS members on all of the social class indices. Thus some relationship appears between social status and membership in a group at East Lansing High School. 31 Other Descriptive Measures The mother was the main source of financial support for nine per- cent of the girls, while mothers contributed extra support to an additional 30 percent. Persons other than the mother or father contributed some sup— port to four percent of the families as shown in Table 4. Table 4. Percentage of reciprocal friendship category members8 having mother as the main source of financial support and/or other sources of support Reciprocal Mother Other Financial Suppgrt Friendship Main Categories Support Father Mother Other Totals % % % % % Isolates 20 10 30 5 45 Mutual Pair Members 6 - 25 - 25 RFS Members 7 5 30 4 39 All Girls 9 5 30 4 39 aSome of the respondents did not indicate additional sources of financial support and are not included in the table. Mothers were the main source of financial support for a larger proportion of the isolates. Forty-five percent of the isolates, 39 per- cent of the RFS members and 25 percent of the mutual pair members named an additional person as contributing to their financial support. The occupational ratings of the secondary financial supporters were predominantly lower than the ratings of the main financial sources. Al— though 72 percent of the individuals contributing the main financial sup- port for the respondents had occupations rated in ranks l and 2, 69 per- cent of the secondary sources had occupations rated in rank 3. None of 32 the secondary financial sources were in occupations rated in rank 1. This information is summarized in Table 5. Table 5. Percentage distribution of occupational ratings of secondary financial sources of twelfth grade girls according to recipro- cal friendship categories Occupation Ratings of Secondary Financial Sources of Twelfth Grade Girls Reciprocal Friendship 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Totals Categories % % % % % % % % Isolates — 5 25 10 - - 5 45 Mutual Pair Members - - 25 - - - - 25 RFS Members - 6 25 4 l - 2 388 All Girls - 5 25 4 1 - 2 37a aOccupation was not given by one individual. Seventy-five percent of the group, essentially the same proportion of members in each of the reciprocal friendship categories, obtained their main financial support from college graduates. All structures except RFS 401 had at least two-thirds of the financial supporters in this category. The highest educational level for the financial supporters of RFS 401 was "some college." The distribution within the reciprocal friendship categories is shown in Table 6. 33 Table 6. Percentage distribution of twelfth grade girls according to the educational level of main financial contributors and reciprocal ‘ friendship categories Educational Level of Main Financial Contributors Grade High Some School Some School College Reciprocal Grade Grad- High Grad- Some Grad- Friendship School uate School uate College uate Totals Categories % % % % % % % (N) Isolates - - 5 10 10 75 100 (20) Mutual Pair Members - 6 - 6 6 82 100 (16) RFS Members - 2 2 10 12 74 100 (102) All Girls - 2 2 9 ll 76 100 (138) The complete distribution of siblings by reciprocal friendship cate- gories is shown in Table 7. The families of the respondents contained an average of 3.32 children. A greater percentage of isolates, 15 percent, were only children. Table 7. 34 Percentage distribution of twelfth grade girls according to number of siblings and reciprocal friendship categories Number of Siblings of Twelfth Grade Girls Reciprocal Friendship 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Totals Categories % % % % % % % % % (N) Isolates 15 25 35 10 10 5 - - 100 (20) Mutual Pair Members 6 13 31 31 13 - 6 — 100 (16) RFS Members 6 29 26 26 8 4 - 1 100 (102) All Girls 7 26 28 24 9 4 l l 100 (138) Seventy-one percent of the population attended elementary school in East Lansing. Table 8 shows, however, that within the specific recipro- cal friendship categories 44 percent of the mutual pair members, 31 per— cent of the RFS members and ten percent of the isolates attended elemen- tary school away from East Lansing. All of the members of RFS's 401 and 427, and at least two-thirds of RFS's 407, 409, 414 and 417 attended elementary school in East Lansing. Only RFS 412 contained a majority of members, 75 percent, who had attended elementary school outside East Lansing. 35 Table 8. Percentage distribution of twelfth grade girls according to location of elementary school and reciprocal friendship categories Location of Elementary School of Twelfth Grade Girls Reciprocal Friendship East Lansing Elsewhere Totals Categories % % % (N) Isolates 90 10 100 (20) MMtual Pair Members 56 44 100 (16) RFS Members 70 30 100 (102) All Girls 71 29 100 (138) An analysis of the number of club memberships revealed that 83 per- cent of the girls belonged to at least two clubs and 40 percent belonged to four or more. All of the reciprocal friendship categories had quite similar patterns of distributions of club membership; although proportion- ately more isolates, 15 percent, belonged to only one club. Table 9 shows the distribution of club memberships. Only RFS's 409 and 414 members showed any agreement in the number of club memberships, as 80 percent of RFS 409 and 67 percent of RFS 414 belonged to four clubs. 36 Table 9. Percentage distribution of twelfth grade girls according to number of club memberships and reciprocal friendship categories Number of Club Memberships of TWelfth Grade Girls Reciprocal Friendship 0 l 2 3 4 Totals Categories % % % % % % (N) Isolates 5 15 15 25 40 100 (20) Mutual Pair Members 6 6 25 13 50 100 (16) RFS Members 6 ll 23 22 39 100 (102) All Girls 6 ll 22 21 40 100 (138) Table 10 summarizes the grade point averages of the respondents. The grade point averages were based on a numerical value of 4 for each A, 3 for each B, 2 for each C and l for each D. None of the girls had F averages. Forty-three percent of the respondents had C averages, 36 percent B averages, 17 percent A averages and three percent D averages. A larger proportion of RFS members, 47 percent, had C averages, while only 11 percent had A averages. 37 Table 10. Percentage distribution of twelfth grade girls according to grade point average and reciprocal friendship categories Grade Point Average of Twelfth Grade Girls Reciprocal Friendship Aa B C D F Totals Categories % % % % % % (N) Isolates 35 25 35 S - 100 (20) Mutual Pair Members 31 38 25 - - 94b(16) RFS Members 11 38 47 4 — 100 (102) All Girls 17 36 43 3 — 99b(138) 9A=3.6 - 4.0, B=2.9 - 3.5, c=2.0 - 2.8, 0:1.0 - 1.9, F=0.0 - 0.9. DA grade point average was not available for one girl who had recently entered the class. The girls with an average of 3.5 or above were on the Honor Roll; 25 girls were honor roll students, including 35 percent of the isolates, 31 percent of the mutual pair members and 13 percent of the RFS members. Members of some of the specific RFS's had similar grade point averages. While 75 percent of RFS 421 members had D averages, 80 per- cent of RFS 401 had C averages and 80 percent of RFS 409, as well as 67 percent of RFS 414 had B averages. The respondents in this study were predominantly Protestant; 76 percent indicated affiliation with Protestant denominations, 14 percent with the Roman Catholic faith and two percent with the Jewish faith. According to Table 11, proportionately more mutual pair members were Roman Catholic. The majority of the members of all the RFS's were Protestant. 38 Table 11. Percentage distribution of twelfth grade girls according to religious preference and reciprocal friendship categories Religious Preference of TWelfth Grade Girls Reciprocal Roman Friendship Protestant Catholic Jewish None Totals Categories % % % % % (N) Isolates 75 10 5 10 100 (20) Mutual Pair Members 50 25 - 25 100 (16) RFS Members . 80 13 2 5 100 (102) All Girls 76 14 2 8 100 (138) The appearance of each respondent was rated by the interviewer at the completion of the interview; All aspects of the appearance of the girl were checked on a rating sheet shown in Appendix B. A numerical score was given to each aspect with the lowest score indicating above average appearance. Total numerical ratings were completed for each of the girls. Girls receiving the lowest possible score, 14, were con- sidered above average in appearance. The girls receiving scores from 15 to 18 were considered average, while those with scores above 19 were considered below average in appearance. Seventy percent of the girls were rated average in appearance, eight percent were rated above average and 21 percent were rated below average. Proportionately more mutual pair members, 19 percent, were rated above average; while proportionately more.RFS members, 23 percent were rated below average in appearance as shown in Table 12. At least 67 percent of the members of RFS's 402, 407, 409, 412, 417 and 427 39 received average appearance ratings. Seventy-five percent of RFS 401, the predominately lower social class group, were rated below average in appearance. Table 12. Percentage distribution of twelfth grade girls according to ratings of appearance by interviewer and reciprocal friend- ship categories Rating by Interviewer of Twelfth Grade Reciprocal Girls Friendship Above Average Average Below.Average Totals Categories %, % % % (N) Isolates 5 80 15 100 (20) Mutual Pairi v Members 19 62 19 100 (16) RFS Members 7 69 23 998(102) All Girls 8 70 21 993(138) 8This rating was not available for one girl. The interviewers noted a collective total of 51 appearance in— adequacies for the 29 girls who were rated below average. Sixty percent of the isolates, 40 percent of the mutual pair members and 41 percent of the RFS members who were given below average ratings were given these because of clothing inadequacies. A large proportion of the RFS mem- bers, 32 percent, were given below average ratings because of makeup deficiencies. The below average ratings of RFS 401 members, the pre- dominantly lower social class group, were given because of their cloth- ing. The complete breakdown for reciprocal friendship categories is shown in Table 13. 40 Table 13. Percentage distribution of reasons for below average appear- ance ratings within reciprocal friendship categories Reasons for Below Average Appearance Ratings of Twelfth Grade Girls Reciprocal Friendship Clothing Hair Makeup Figure Complexion Totals Categories % % % % % % Isolates 60 20 -- 20 - 100 Mutual Pair Members 40 40 20 -- - 100 RFS Members 41 22 32 3 3 100 All Girls 43 24 27 4 2 100 m The majority of the population of this study were members of the upper and middle social classes. Lower social class members predominated in only one RFS. However, there were only five lower social class mem- bers. in the population. One RFS was entirely composed of middle social class members, while six of the remaining eight RFS's were at least two- thirds upper social class members. Nearly 72 percent of the respondents were supported by individuals with professional or semiprofessional occupations, ranks l and 2 of the occupational ratings. With one exception, each RFS was composed pre- dominantly of members receiving financial support from persons whose occupations were given a 1 or 2 rating. Analysis of individual house ratings revealed that 43 percent of the respondents lived in houses rated above 4, the midipoint of the scale, and 24 percent lived in houses rated below the mid—point. The 41 houses of the majority of the isolates were rated lower than either RFS or mutual pair members. Of the total group, only two RFS's exhibited similarity in house ratings. Dwelling area scores were higher than inr dividual dwelling scores, suggesting that the families of the respondents lived in areas rated higher than the individual houses. Relatively more RFS members lived in neighborhoods rated as l or 2 and more isolates lived in neighborhoods rated below 4. Only nine percent of the respondents listed their mothers as the main source of support, while another 30 percent said that their mothers contributed additional support to the family. A higher percentage of isolates than other reciprocal friendship categories indicated the mother as the main financial contributor. The secondary sources of financial support were employed in occupations rated predominantly lower than the main sources. Seventy-five percent of the girls obtained their main financial support from college graduates. Only one RFS group consisted of at least two-thirds of the members not supported by college graduates. The families of the respondents contained an average of 3.32 children. Comparatively more isolates were only children. Seventy-one percent of the girls attended elementary school in East Lansing, but the isolate category contained the lowest percentage of girls attending elemen- tary school away from East Lansing. The majority of the members of only one RFS had attended elementary school outside East Lansing. While over 80 percent of the girls belonged to at least two clubs, 40 percent belonged to four or more. The distribution of the number of club memberships was similar for all reciprocal friendship categories 42 with one exception; proportionately more isolates belonged to only one club. At least 67 percent of tWo RFS's belonged to four clubs. An analysis of the grade point averages of the girls revealed that 43 percent had C averages, 36 percent B averages, 17 percent A averages and four percent D averages. Thus, 53 percent of the population had A or B averages, while only four percent had D averages and there were no F averages. RFS members had a higher percentage of C averages and a lower percentage of A averages. Thirty-five percent of the isolates, 31 percent of the mutual pair members and 13 percent of the RFS members were honor roll students. The majority of the respondents in this study, 76 percent, were affiliated with Protestant denominations. Of the reciprocal friendship categories, relatively more mutual pair members were Roman Catholic. The summary of the appearance ratings in Table 12 shows that the interviewers rated 70 percent of the girls as average in appearance, eight percent above average and 21 percent below average. More mutual pair members were given above average ratings, while more RFS members were given below average ratings on appearance. The interviewers cited clothing and makeup as the main reasons for giving below average ratings. Seventy-five percent of the members of the predominantly lower social class RFS were given below average ratings based on clothing inadequacies. The following chapter will include a discussion of the analysis of responses to review questions on clothing, appearance and social acceptance. CHAPTER IV ANALYSIS OF RESPONSES TO REVIEW Chapter IV and Chapter V will include a discussion of the analysis of responses of reciprocal friendship category members to questions on general acceptance, clothing and appearance. The focus of the analysis was Stone‘s framework of program and review. Review includes the "re- sponses made about the wearer of clothes by others" and program.inc1udes ”responses made about the wearer by the wearer."1 Chapter IV will examine responses to review, because these questions appeared first in the interview schedule.2 The researcher's opinion was that the girls would respond more willingly to questions about others before questions about themselves. This chapter will discuss review of ether individual class members and other groups within the class. The initial questions in the interview schedule dealt with general acceptance and did not mention clothing and appearance. This approach was chosen to determine if the girls would spontaneously refer to cloth- ing factors. The remaining questions referred specifically to clothing and appearance as factors in group acceptance. The analysis discussion of the questions will include only the six most frequently mentioned factors. The factors will be ranked in proportion to the number of times 1Stone, p. 92. 28cc Appendix B for the interview schedule. 43 44 mentioned by all respondents to give a measure of the relative importance the respondents placed on each factor. In all cases in which the number of "other" responses ranked in the top six factors the "other" category will be included in the table, but will not be discussed. A close check of the"other" responses showed a random pattern of responses. It was utilized as a residual category and is included on the tables to indicate the number of random responses given. Because the population contained a larger proportion of RFS mem- bers than mutual pair members or isolates, the total percentage for each response was heavily weighted in favor of the RFS members. Appendices C and D include a tabular breakdown of responses for each reciprocal friendship category as well as for the specific RFS's. The responses of the individual RFS's will be discussed only when at least 67 percent agreement is present for a particular response.1 Sixty-seven percent agreement was chosen as the minimum indicator of group agreement, in order to consider the varying number of members within the individual RFS's. The figure included two of three members of the smallest RFS's and more than a majority of the members of the larger RFS's. Two distinctions will be made in the discussion; RFS's with 67 percent or more agreement, but less than 100 percent; and those with 100 percent agreement. Generally scanning the responses the researchers decided that perhaps cohesive segments of the larger RFS's had opinions which differed 1One of the girls in RFS 401 refused to respond to the interview schedule. Because it contained only five members, the remaining four girls were considered as the complete RFS when figuring percentages. 45 from other cohesive segments of the same RFS. Therefore, the three large RFS's were additionally analyzed by segments. The criteria employed to split the large groups consisted of location of pivots, i.e., individuals with four or more reciprocated choices,and the un- reciprocated choices made by members of the segment. The breaks were made where single ties connected the segments containing a number of internal ties. The unreciprocated choices were scrutinized to deter- mdne in which segment to place the person who was a connector, i.e., one with a single tie to each segment. Figure B depicts the segmented breakdown of the three large RFS's. The individual segments will be referred to as RFS's 402A, 402B, 4020, 407A, 4073, 417A, 417B and 417C as shown in Figure B. Responses of the individual segments will be included in the discussion only when there is at least 67 percentl agreement within the segment to a response not accepted by the total RFS. In the discussion of specific review questions, reference will be made only to responses frequently mentioned by the girls; however, a total breakdown of the six highest responses will be included in the table accompanying the discussion of each question. The totals included in each table may be more than 100 percent, because the open ended structure of the questions allowed the girls to give multiple responses. The reader may use the totals to discern a relative measure of the number of responses of each individual. General Acceptance The girls stated that the most important thing a new girl should do if she wanted to get in with the popular girls was to "be friendly, talk to them." This was considered the most important factor by the UNA? mhx fi M0>un00ug Gun-1.504 Home: 323.5 42.3 GOO Dzmwud oNov mmm (XXI .J.OO.I J. («flu/K lye/K #33le 3. Ilene». / . x . . I, 2(1) fix, .hWUJ ”no. . “New mNHeL s_ . h/ .4 y L. evoNeIIM_sfl. WHOMW ... H .eououosuum flfl\ I1 ##1\ Qaneocouwm HsOOumHoom \. .hpz _ nomueH cw some excuse .I.-. . I)\ _ I .ono.!z.b¢o I nwfy we coHueuoH eoueowoaa x . moo :5 iv J me VIII. «.2. .KU? . .fl. .. - . (“x .80.. w . r.I..I {vii/fly D n . lul-.I..I\ IVIL¢ ,oon . . .m. .. 0.0 1.1.. 090 I 00“ .I. I 000.} 3. .N. v. G .7 ill\e .AHHV .1fll///wHMMV\.\WduK. _ . .eousuosuum QHzeocoHum Henchmwoox summed mo saboxeoum Heucoamow m ousmwm 47 members of all reciprocal friendship categories. Other factors mentioned in order of importance were "c1othes,""be herself, be sincere," "partici- pate in activities," "be nice, be honest" and "looks, appearance." The three reciprocal friendship categories agreed that "clothes" and ”being Oneself" were second and third in importance. In addition, the isolates stated that "being nice" was also important and mutual pair members em— phasized "participation in activities." Table 14 shows the complete distribution of the six highest responses to this question. Seventy-five percent of the members of RFS 421 and 78 percent of RFS 417C agreed it was important to "be friendly, talk to them." Eighty-six percent of RFS 427 stated that "clothes" were important if a new girl wanted to get in with the popular girls. Figure C summarizes the number of agreements for each RFS on all review questions. Table 14. Percentage distribution by reciprocal friendship categories of the six most frequently mentioned factors suggested as important for acceptance by the popular girls Reciprocal Friendship Categoriesa Factors Mentioned as Im- portant for Acceptance Mutual Pair RFS All by the Popular Girls Isolates Members Members Girls % % % % Be friendly, talk to than. 35 44 42 41 Clothes 35 25 29 30 Be herself, sincere 30 25 20 22 Participate in activities 15 13 21 19 Be nice, honest 20 -— 21 18 Looks, appearance -- 6 13 10 Totals 135 113 146 140 8Appendix C includes a tabular breakdown of the top six responses for each of the reciprocal friendship categories and indicates agree- ments to a response within the RFS's if 67 percent or more agree. win 01‘ th mum em ease ecu-HOIH sees now-HOIH ®®@ uo>Hoouom oueusoo< .. , . . . .|l I; _ . I, ® 2.0 . 6 Q a 9 t H I -l ‘ , u If; \I ”In NoueHOaH sameness 0:0 1) nI< I 4V“ one i I '7 co assess... a :H 0.33 on 2.34 max 30 boo alt .ucoouom OOH can» anH w A: oHoon uozoq .1! d g . a was .euonaofl 9.5.3 No . .; Hull/H, . H. St and 1 II I! 0.3... no unsung no I m . ... (a \L ' bIm HouaHoaH \ .. - .r moo, who . a ( A\ «It eoueHoaH cocoa-on 0:0 :0 macho 1N . l1 ‘ moo aka :a uaafloowme acouuom ooH I < -i_oo.I // \, A) . . 1 \H . M. \IU\ II III. 20 7..\ I ...<\ / ‘ ‘ 30,113,“; \mook IN . ,\\f \/ xx, // .i r v 44.. .1 . / film , ./ N , use was \7 \ YITHA n -. a 0" J H .3 TL. aw 1 use use Hoe mam I r , \ .uceaoouma as) ones.» 53:! :0 cocoon-on no woman: on» ouaquaH eavesd— nIm clo. Heosool wd ewJo a. calm... m OI< 30.33. mo canon. aw noHeosou no enoueuaoau one anus-vceHuh HaooumHuom 0 933m 49 The girls were asked, "What characteristics are used in judging a new girl in East Lansing?” The characteristics mentioned followed a pattern similar to the response of one girl, who said, "Dress is con— sidered first, before they get to know her, personality later and then general attitudes and beliefs." The response most frequently given was "looks, appearance," followed by "personality," "clothes," "the way she acts" and ”friendliness." RFS members said "looks, appearance" were more important, while isolates placed greater emphasis on "the way she acts” and mutual pair members emphasized "clothes." "Personality" was ranked second by RFS members and "looks, appearance." ranked second for both isolates and mutual pairs as shown in Table 15. All of RFS 401 and at least 67 percent of the members of RFS's 414, 417B, 417C, 421 and 427 suggested that "looks, appearance" were used to judge a new girl in East Lansing. One hundred percent of RFS 402 as well as 67 percent or more of RFS's 401, 407B, 411 and 417 agreed that "personal- ity" was used in making a judgment. While at least 67 percent of the members of RFS's 417A and 427 agreed on the importance of "clothes," two thirds of RFS 402B mentioned "the way she acts." 50 Table 15. Percentage distribution by reciprocal friendship categories of the six most frequently mentioned characteristics used in judging a new girl in East Lansing Reciprocal Friendship Categories Characteristics Mentioned as Used in Judging a New Mutual Pair RFS All Girl in East Lansing Isolates ‘Members Members Girls % % % % Looks, appearance 45 38 58 54 Personality 20 31 52 45 Clothes 35 44 41 41 Way she acts 55 25 27 31 Friendliness 20 38 23 24 Neatness lO 6 14 12 Other 35 50 24 28 Totals 220 232 239 235 When the girls were asked about the characteristics they used in choosing a friend, the most frequent response was, "She should have the same interests I do." Having the "same interests" was most important to all reciprocal friendship categories. Additional characteristics mentioned by RFS members in order of importance were "personality," "way she thinks,” "friendliness,“ “way she acts " and "loyalty." Isolates agreed that the same characteristics were important, but mentioned the "way she thinks" more frequently than "personality." Mutual pair members noted that having the "same interests," "friendli- ness" and the "way she acts" were equally important characteristics to heed when choosing a friend. Although"looks, appearance" and "clothes" were repeatedly mentioned as characteristics used to judge a new girl, the respondents did not include them.in the factors they would consider when choosing a friend. (see Table 16), Two~thirds of RFS's 402B, 402C, 51 407B. and 414 agreed that having the "same interests" was a characteristic to be used in choosing a friend. All three girls in segment RFS 402B concluded that "personality" was important in choosing a friend. Table 16. Percentage distribution by reciprocal friendship categories of the six most frequently mentioned characteristics used in choosing a friend Reciprocal Friendship Categories Characteristics Mentioned Mutual Pair RFS All as Used in Choosing a Friend Isolates Members Members Girls % % % % Same interests 55 31 47 46 Personality 25 13 37 33 Way she thinks 30 19 24 24 Friendliness 25 31 l3 17 Way she acts 20 31 11 14 Loyalty 15 19 ll 13 Totals 170 144 143 147 "She's friendly to everyone, not just her own group and she's in school activities,“ was a typical statement used to describe the most popular girl in the senior class. Forty—one percent of the girls said a descriptive attribute was "friendly," whereas 34 percent mentioned that "being nice to everyone" and "interested in school" were character- istics. RFS members and isolates placed more emphasis on "friendly" followed by ”interested in school" and "nice to everyone." Mutual pairs mentioned "nice to everyone" more often than "friendly” or "interested in school" as characteristics of the most popular girl. The other traits mentioned by the group were "cute, 'looks " "dressed well," 52 "clothes." and ”good personality" as shown in Table 17. At least 67 percent of RFS's 412 and 414 indicated “friendly" was a characteristic of the most popular girl. Two-thirds of RFS's 402B and 414, as well as 100 percent of RFS 421 mentioned the characteristic "nice to everyone." Sixty-seven percent of RFS 402B suggested that "cute" was an applicable term, while 75 percent of RFS 401 and two-thirds of RFS 414 mentioned a "good personality." Table 17. Percentage distribution by reciprocal friendship categories of the six most frequently mentioned characteristics of the most popular girl in the twelfth grade Reciprocal Friendship Categories Characteristics of the Most Popular Girl in Mutual Pair RFS All the Twelfth Grade Isolates Members Members Girls % % % % Friendly 45 38 4O 41 Nice to everyone 25 44 34 34 Interested in school 25 25 37 34 Cute, looks 10 18 30 26 Dressed well, clothes 20 25 25 25 Good personality 15 19 22 20 Totals 140 169 188 180 Clothing and Appearance Fifty-three percent of the population said the clothing of the popular girls did not differ from the clothing of the others; however, the majority of mutual pair members stated that there was a difference. “More clothes," "better quality clothes," "more fashionable clothes " and "neat and well cared for clothes" were mentioned as differences in 53 the clothing of the popular girls. The difference most frequently sug- gested by the reciprocal friendship categories was ”amount of clothing." Table 18 shows the distribution of the six highest responses. At least 67 percent of RFS's 402B and 427 agreed that the clothing of the popular girls did differ from the clothing of others. On the other hand, at least 67 percent of the members of RFS's 401, 402A, 407A, 411, 414, 417B. and 421 stated that there was no difference in the clothing of the popular girls. Table 18. Percentage distribution by reciprocal friendship categories of responses to the question "Does the clothing of the pop- ular girls in the twelfth grade differ from the clothing of the other girls?” and the six most frequently mentioned differences Reciprocal Friendship Categories Mutual Pair RFS All Responses to Isolates Members Members Girls Question % % % % Yes, sometimes 30 68 43 44 No 65 19 56 53 I don't know 5 13 —- 2 Totals 100 100 99a 99a Differences More clothing 20 25 12 14 Better quality clothing 15 13 9 10 More fashionable clothing‘lO 19 9 10 Neatness and care of clothing 5 13 ll 10 More expensive clothing -- 13 9 8 Money 10 -- 9 8 Other 5 31 12 13 Totals 65 114 61 73 8One girl refused to participate. 54 Typical of the responses made by the girls, when asked if the clothing of the popular girls was different and if clothing influenced the popularity of a girl, was the response: "No, the majority of people in East Lansing are really good dressers. But if its real extravagantly 'out,‘ extreme, then this would have a negative effect on popularity." Although the majority of the respondents said that the clothing of the popular girls did not differ from the clothing of the other girls, they did state that clothing influenced the popularity of a girl at East Lansing, an opinion held by the majority of members of all reciprocal friendship categories. "First impression counts" was most frequently mentioned as an explanation for the influence clothing had on the popularity of a girl. While RFS members indicated the importance of "first impressions," isolates said that being "neat and clean was all that mattered," and mutual pair members said it was "important to dress right." (see Table 19), All of the members of RFS's 409 and 414, as well as two-thirds of the members of RFS‘s 402B, 402C, 407A, 417, 421 and 427, agreed that clothing influenced popularity. On the other hand, at least 67 percent of RFS's 401 and 407B indicated they did not think clothing influenced popularity. 55 Table 19. Percentage distribution by reciprocal friendship categories of responses to the question, “Do you think clothing in- fluences a girl's popularity at East Lansing High School?" and the six most frequently mentioned influential reasons Reciprocal Friendship Categories Responses to Mutual Pair RFS All Question Isolates Members Members Girls % % % % Yes, sometimes 75 82 75 76 No 15 13 24 21 I don‘t know 10 6 -- 2 Totals 100 100 99a 99a Influential Reasons First impression counts 10 6 16' 14 Wealth, money 15 6 15 14 Neat and clean all that matters 20 6 13 13 Important to dress right 5 13 ll 10 Neatness and cleanliness 15 —— 9 9 Easier to be popular 10 13 7 8 Other 20 38 25 26 Totals 95 82 96 94 aOne girl refused to participate. When asked the characteristics of the best dressed girl, many of the respondents said, "There are so many who dress well that it's hard to say." Nevertheless, 34 percent of the respondents suggested that the best dressed girl had "clean and neat clothes." Less frequently mentioned characteristics were "clothes suited to the individual,” "many clothes," "clothes of the latest fashion " and "personality," as shown in Table 20. 56 At least 67 percent of RFS's 407A, 414 and all of RFS 409 cited "clean and neat clothes” as a characteristic of the best dressed girl. Two- thirds of the members of RFS 402B mentioned "personality" as a char- acteristic. Table 20. Percentage distribution by reciprocal friendship categories of the six most frequently mentioned characteristics of the best dressed girl 1 *- __—‘ 1 ReciprocalrFriendship‘Categories Characteristics of the Mutual Pair RFS All Best Dressed Girl Isolates Members Members Girls % % % % Clean and neat clothes 34 31 35 34 No one best dressed girl 30 38 18 22 Clothes suited to the individual 15 6 20 17 Many clothes 15 6 18 16 Clothes of latest fashion 10 19 13 13 Personality 5 6 12 10 Totals 109 106 116 112 The majority of the girls stated that the dress of the group in which membership was perceived was "about average" when compared to other groups in school. Typical comments were: "the same," "average," "we all dress about the same." A similar opinion was expressed by proportionately more isolates, 85 percent, than RFS members, 65 percent, or mutual pair members, 56 percent. Thirty-one percent of the mutual pair members, 29 percent of the RFS members and five percent of the isolates expressed an opinion that the perceived membership group was better dressed than others. All of RFS 414 and at least 67 percent of 57 RFS's 401, 402, 409, 411, 412, 417C and 427 said that their membership group was average in dress. A distribution of the six highest responses is shown in Table 21. Table 21. Percentage distribution by reciprocal friendship categories of the evaluation of the dress of the membership group in comparison to the dress of other groups Reciprocal Friendship Categories Evaluation of the Mutual Pair RFS All Dress of the Group Isolates Members Members Girls % % % % Better dressed 5 31 29 26 About average 85 56 65 67 Not as well dressed 5 -— 5 4 I don't know 5 13 -- 2 Totals 100 100 99a 99a 8One girl refused to participate. Ninety percent of the girls named a best friend, including all of the mutual pair members, 91 percent of the RFS members and 75 per- cent of the isolates. The majority of members in all reciprocal friend- ship categories expressed an opinion that the manner in which best friends dressed was not a reflection on them. Relatively more RFS members said that others did judge them on the dress of a best friend. The most frequently mentioned reason was "reputation by association" as shown in Table 22. 58 Table 22. Percentage distribution by reciprocal friendship categories of opinions concerning the dress of best friends as a factor in the group evaluation of the respondent and reasons for giving stated opinions Reciprocal Friendship Categories Do you have a Mutual Pair RFS All best friend? Isolates Members Members Girls % % % % Yes 75 100 91 90 No 25 -— 8 9 Totals 100 100 99a 99a Do you think the manner in which your best friend dresses is a reflection on you? Yes, sometimes 5 19 28 24 No 80 63 68 68 I don't know -- 18 -- 2 Totals 85 100 96 94b Why? Reputation by association 5 -- 21 16 I don't care that much -- 6 2 2 I don't know -- 6 1 1 They like you, not your friends -— 6 —- 1 Other 5 13 7 7 Totals 10 31 "531 27 8One girl refused to participate. bAlthough some girls indicated that they did not have a particular best friend, they did respond to this question in terms of their general friendS. 59 All of the members of RFS's 401, 411, 421, 427, and more than 80 percent of the remaining RFS's had a best friend. One hundred percent of RFS's 414 and 421, and at least 67 percent of RFS's 402, 407B, 409, 417 and 427 agreed: "The manner in which my best friend dresses is not a reflection on me." Seventy-five percent of the members of RFS 401 stated, however, that the dress of a best friend was considered by others in judging them. Sixty-one percent of the girls acknowledged that some girls in the senior class were not dressed right. Forty-four percent of the mutual pair members, 35 percent of the isolates. and 33 percenttbf the RFS members said everyone was dressed right (see Table 23). While "poor combinations" was the reason most frequently given as an explanation for incorrect dress, many suggested, as one girl did, "It's nothing she should be blamed for, it's mostly her environment." "Poor combinations" was the reason given most often by RFS and mutual pair members, but isolates placed more emphasis on "lack of cleanliness and care." At least 67 percent of RFS's 402A, 4020, 407, 409, 411, 417C, 421, and 427 agreed that there were girls who did not dress right. On the other hand, all of RFS's 401 and 402B said everyone was dressed right. Even though members of RFS 401, the predominantly lower social class RFS, stated that everyone was dressed right, they were named many times as "not dressed right." 60 Table 23. Percentage distribution by reciprocal friendship categories of opinions about the presence of girls who did not dress right and the six most frequently mentioned reasons why their clothes were not right Reciprocal Friendship Categories Presence of Girls Who Mutual Pair RFS A11 Did Not Dress Right Isolates Members Members Girls % % % % Yes 65 50 63 61 No 35 44 33 35 I don't know -- 6 3 3 Totals 100 100 99a 99a Reasons Poor combinations 5 19 24 20 Dress best they can for money 10 13 17 15 Lack of cleanliness and care 20 -- 17 15 Poor fit 5 6 17 14 Inappropriateness for occasion 10 -- u a Unfashionable 5 -- 4 u Other #0 25 23 26 Totals 95 63 106 98 8One girl refused to respond. The most frequent description of the clothes of the girls who did not dress right included "poor combinations" such as plaids and stripes, pink and yellow, slipon sweater and cotton skirts. Other descriptive phrases included "lack of cleanliness and care," "poor fit," "lack of neatness," "inappropriateness for the occasion,” and "lack of fashion," Mere emphasis was given to "poor combinations" 61 by isolates and RFS members, while mutual pairs emphasized "poor fit" more than "poor combinations." Although mutual pairs failed to mention "lack of cleanliness and care," it was the second most frequent response bf both isolates and RFS members (see Table 24). Table 24. Percentage distribution by reciprocal friendship categories of descriptions of the clothes of the girls who did not dress right Reciprocal Friendship Categories Description of the Clothes Mutual Pair RFS All of the Girls Who Did Not Isolates Members Members Girls Dress Right % % % % Poor combinations 35 25 32 31 Lack of cleanliness and care 30 -- 25 22 Poor fit 15 31 21 21 Lack neatness 30 6 15 16 Inappropriateness for occasion 10 6 12 11 Unfashionable -- -- 9 7 Other 20 6 22 20 Totals 140 7“ 136 128 Appearance factors such as ”messy hair" and "unkempt appearance" were most frequently mentioned by all the girls when asked to describe additional characteristics of the girls who did not dress right. The isolates mentioned characteristics such as "wild" and "come from poor families" more often than appearance factors. Table 25 shows the dis- tribution of the six highest responses. 62 Table 25. Percentage distribution by reciprocal friendship categories of descriptions of other characteristics of the girls who did not dress right Reciprocal Friendship Categories De scr ipt ions of Other Characteristics of the Mutual Pair RFS All Girls Who Did Not Isolates Members Members Girls Dress Right % % % % Messy hair 10 25 24 22 Unkempt appearance 10 13 19 17 Wild 25 6 13 14 Poor families 20 -- 14 13 Don't care about appearance 5 -- 8 7 Poor grades or school attitude 5 -- 8 7 Other 25 25 31 30 Totals 100 69 117 110 The respondents who had indicated that there were girls who were not dressed right were askedjj the girls had umny friends. The most frequent response was, "Yes, in their own group," When asked if their friends were dressed right many girls said, "They all dress the same." A comparison of Tables 24 and 26 shows that the characteristics used to describe the girls who were run:dressed right and the friends of the "not dressed right" girls tend to coincide. More than 67 percent of the girls in RFS’sl4OZA, 409, 417C and 421 agreed that the girls who did not dress right had friends. In addition, two-thirds of RFS 4170 said that the friends were not dressed right. 63 Table 26. Percentage distribution by reciprocal friendship categories of responses concerning the friends of the girls who did not dress right Reciprocal Friendship Categories, Do they have Mutual Pair RFS All many friends? Isolates Members Members Girls % % % % Yes, sometimes 55 38 49 48 No -- 6 12 10 I don't know 10 19 2 5 Totals 65 63 63 63 Are their friends dressed right? Yes -- l3 4 4 No 45 19 4O 38 Sometimes 10 6 5 6 I don't know 10 13 3 5 Totals 65 51 52 53 If no, what‘s wrong with the way they dress? Poor combinations 20 19 28 26 Lack of cleanliness and care 25 -- 23 20 Poor fit 15 19 18 17 Lack of neatness 25 -- 13 13 Inappropriateness‘flor occasion 10 6 9 9 Dress best they can for money 5 6 5 6 Other 15 -- 7 7 Totals 115 50 103 98 64 When asked, "Do you have friends that are not dressed right?" 83 percent of the girls said no. The remaining 14 percent indicated the following inadequacies in the clothing of friends: "poor fit," "poor combinations," "lack of cleanliness and care," and ”don‘t care." Table 27 contains a breakdown of the six highest responses by reciprocal friendship categories. All of the members of RFS's 401, 411, 412, 414, 427, and at least 67 percent of the remaining RFS's, except 421, agreed, "I don't have any friends who are not dressed right." 65 Table 27. Percentage distribution by reciprocal friendship categories of responses concerning the perception of association with friends who d‘ressainoorrec‘tly and evaluation by the respondents of the dress of friends Reciprocal Friendship Categories Perception of Association with Friends Who Dress Mutual Pair RFS A11 Incorrectly Isolates I Members Members Girls % % % % Yes, sometimes 15 19 15 15 No 95 81 83 83 I don't know -- -- l 1 Totals 100 100 99a 99a Evaluation of Incorrect Dress of Friends Poor fit 5 4 4 Poor combinations - - 4 3 Lack of cleanliness and care 5 - 2 2 Don't care 5 - 2 2 Lack of neatness 5 — l 1 Don't like their taste - 6 l 1 Other 5 6 4 4 Totals 25 18 18 17 8One girl refused to participate. 66 m This chapter includes a discussion of the analysis of all the questions pertaining to review. The importance of clothing and appearance becomes apparent when considering questions which were not designed to elicit exact appearance responses. "Clothing” was mentioned second in frequency when the girls were asked to describe the things a new girl should do to get in with the popular girls. "Looks, appearance" and "clothes" were often mentioned as characteristics used in judging a new girl. The respondents failed to indicate, however, that any con- sideration was given to the clothing or appearance of a girl when choos- ing a friend. And, only a small percentage of the girls suggested that "cute looks" and "dressed well" were characteristics of the meat popular girl. The majority of mutual pair members disagreed with the rest of the group by voicing that the clothing of the popular girls did differ from the clothing of the other girls. Most frequently mentioned was a differencein the amount of clothing. The majority of girls in all reciprocal friendship categories agreed that clothing influenced the popularity of a girl at East Lansing High School. Members of the partic- ular reciprocal friendship categories did not agree, however, on the most important reason for clothing influencing popularity. RFS members placed more emphasis on the importance of "first impressions," isolates said "being neat and clean was all that mattered," while mutual pair ueubers stressed the importance of ”dressing right." 67 The best dressed girl in the senior class was most often described as having "clean and neat clothes" and "clothes suited to the individual." Proportionately more isolates, 85 percent, than RFS members, 65 percent, or mutual pair members, 56 percent, stated that their membership group was average in dress when compared to other groups. A greater percentage of mutual pairs expressed the opinion that their group was better dressed than others. Only a small percentage of girls in any of the reciprocal friend- ship categories stated that the manner in which a best friend dressed was a reflection on them. The largest percentage was 28 percent of the RFS members . The majority of girls in all reciprocal friendship categories agreed some girls in the twelfth grade were not dressed right. Of the reciprocal friendship categories, mutual pair members more often said everyone was dressed right. "Poor combinations," was the most frequently mentioned clothing description, while "messy hair" and "unkempt appearance" were the most frequent general descriptions. Isolates and RFS members agreed that the "not dressed right" girls had friends "within their own group." When asked, "Do you have any friends who are not dressed right?" 83 percent of the girls said no. Chapters V and VI will include a discussion of other aspects of the responses of the girls to the inverview schedule, followed by a com— plete discussion of the findings, including possible contributing fac- tors, in Chapters VII and VIII. CHAPTER V ANALYSIS OF RESPONSES TO PROGRAM Chapter V will further discuss analysis of the responses to ques— tions on general acceptance, clothing and appearance. The concept of program,or self appraisa1,determined the framing of the questions. The program of both the individual and the perceived membership group re~ ceived consideration. Continuing the discussion pattern described for review,lonly the responses which were frequently mentioned by the girls will be referred to in the discussion of specific program questions. .A total breakdown of the responses will be included, however, in the table accompanying the discussion of each question. General Acceptance No reference was made to clothing or appearance when the girls were asked, "What are some important things that one should do in order to be popular in the group you go around with?" "Proper actions to others" was the factor most frequently mentioned by the girls. Isolates, in comparison, put more emphasis on ”friendliness," while approximately 25 percent of all the categories felt it was important to "be nice, be yourself." Table 28 shows that the other factors mentioned as important if one wanted to be popular in the group to which the individual belonged ISUBra , PC as. 68 69 were "participate in activities," ”have a good personality" and ”have a sense of humor." All of the members of RFS 402B agreed that it was important to "be nice, be yourself," while more than 67 percent of RFS 401 said "proper actions to others” were important. Table 28. Percentage distribution by reciprocal friendship categories of factors mentioned as important for popularity in membership group Reciprocal Friendship Categoriesa Factors Mentioned as Important to be Popular Mutual Pair RFS All With the Group Isolates Members Members Girls % % % % Proper actions to others 30 31 35 34 Be nice, be yourself 25? 25 23 23 Be friendly 40 6 20 21 Participate in activities 15 19 21 20 Good personality 15 13 11 12 Have a sense of humor 10 -- 12 10 Totals 135 94 122 120 8Appendix D includes a tabular breakdown of the top six responses for each of the reciprocal friendship categories and indicate agreements to a response within the RFS's if 67 percent or more agree. Clothing and Appbanance 'When asked, "How'do your clothes compare with those of other girls in school?" 77 percent of the girls said, "the same, average." More mutual pair members, 25 percent, said they were "better dressed" than the others in school (see Table 29). All of the members of RFS's 401, 409, 414, 421, and more than two-thirds of RFS's 402, 407, 411, 417 and 427 said they were "average" in dress when compared to others in school. See Figure D, which summarizes the number of agreements on program.questions for each RFS. 3 4 Indicators of Cohesion in Terms of Program Reciprocal Friendships and Figure D indicate the number of responses on which there was agreement. Numbers A—lOO percent agreement in 8-67 percent or more of group group on one response but less than 100 percent, were in agreement on one response. members. Isolates 71 Table 29. Percentage distribution by reciprocal friendship categories of evaluation of dress in comparison to others in school w Reciprocal Friendship Categories Evaluation of Dress 'Mutual Pair RFS All Isola tes Members Members Girls % % % % Better dressed 15 ,25 l6 17 About average 75 56 80 76 Not as well dressed 5 6 3 3 I don't know 5 13 -- 2 Totals 100 100 99a 99a 8One girl refused to respond. Although many of the girls initially indicated that self approval of clothing was most desirable, Table 30 shows that importance was also placed on the approval of parents, boy friends. or girl friends. The .approval of mother, father or both parents was considered by 37 percent of the girls, the approval of a boy friend by 35 percent and the approval of girl friends by 27 percent of the girls. While isolates mentioned parents most often, mutual pair members placed equal emphasis on the ap- proval of parents and self. RFS members said that the approval of a boy friend meant the most. At least two-thirds of the members of RFS's 4020, 4073 and 421 indicated that approval of clothing by a boy friend meant the most, while at least 67 percent of RFS's 401 and 402B were more interested in the approval of a girl friend. 72 Table 30. Percentage distribution by reciprocal friendship categories of individuals whose approval of clothing was important and reasons given for valuing the opinions of the individuals Reciprocal Friendship Categories Mutual Pair RFS A11 Individuals Isolates Members Members Girls % % % % Mother, father, parents 45 44 34 37 Boy friend 15 31 39 35 Girl friend 20 25 28 27 Self 35 44 23 27 Siblings or other relatives 5 6 7 7 No one 5 6 2 3 Totals 125 156 133 136 Reasons Given Satisfy self 35 44 22 26 Good taste, respect opinions 20 25 25 25 Tell you what you look best h325 25 16 18 Makes me feel good -- 6 ll 9 Spend most of time with friends 5 -— 10 8 Only one I want to please 5 —- 6 5 Totals 90 100 90 91 Self satisfaction was the reason most frequently given for valuing self approval of clothes. The reasons given for valuing the approval of another individual included "good taste, respect opinions," "tell you what you look best in," “makes me feel good" and "spend most of time with friends.” RFS members placed more emphasis on ”good taste," while isolates and mutual pair members said, "They tell you what you look best in." Two-thirds of the members of RFS 414 mentioned "good taste" and "tell you what you look best in" as reasons for valuing the opinion of the individual named. 73 Mothers made suggestions about school clothes at least some of the time to the majority of the girls. Some clothing suggestions were made by mothers to a larger percentage, 60 percent, of the isolates than RFS or mutual pair members. Almost all the girls whose mothers made suggestions about school clothes said the suggestions would be followed, "If I agree with her," or "Sometimes." Only four percent of all the girls said the suggestions would not be followed. Table 31 contains a breakdown of the six highest responses. Within the specific RFS's, all the members of RFS 414 agreed that clothing suggestions were made by mothers, while 78 percent of RFS 402C said suggestions about clothes for school were not made by mothers. Table 31. Percentage distribution by reciprocal friendship categories of responses to the questions,"Does your mother make sug- gestions about the clothes you wear to school?" and"If yes, do you follow her suggestions?" Reciprocal Friendship Categories Mutual Pair RFS All Reaponses to Question Isolates ‘Members iMembers Girls % % % % Yes, sometimes 60 57 52 54 No 40 38 47 45 Totals 100 95a 99a 99a Responses to Question Yes, sometimes 55 50 48 48 No S 6 4 4 I don't know -- -- 1 1 Totals 60 56 53 53 8Two girls did not participate. 74 Seventy percent of the girls answered "yes" when asked, "Is there anything about yourself you would like to change?" Proportionately more isolates, 85 percent, than RFS or mutual pair members indicated a desire to make a change. The responses included in Table 32 show that the aspect the girls most frequently wished to change was "figure." Other aspects which the girls wished to change were “get better grades," "be more friendly,“ "more social ease," "less critical of others," and "hair," While at least 67 percent of RFS's 402, 407, 412, 414, 417, 421 and 427 agreed on the desire to make a change, only RFS 414 had 67 percent agree- ment on a desired aspect for change, "figure." Table 32. Percentage distribution by reciprocal friendship categories of responses concerning desire to change any aspect of self and aspects for which change was desired Reciprocal FriendshipiCatggories Desire to Change Mutual Pair RFS A11 Self Aspect Isolates Members Members Girls % % % % Yes 85 50 71 70 No 15 31 28 27 I don't know -- 13 -- 1 No comment —- 6 —- 1 Totals 100 100 99a 99a Aspects to be Changed Figure 10 6 29 24 Get better grades 10 6 12 11 More friendly 15 6 8 9 Social ease, grace 5 13 5 6 Less critical of others 10 6 5 6 Hair -- 6 7 6 Clothes 30 13 27 26 Totals 80 56 93 88 8One girl refused to respond. 75 While 42 percent of the girls expressed the opinion that the desired changes would aid in making a different impression on others, diverse reasons were given when asked, "Why do you feel this way?" "I‘d look better,” and "It would be easier to be accepted," were the reasons most frequently given by RFS members. Isolates said, ”I would be friendlier," and mutual pair members indicated, "My personality would be changed.” Table 33 shows other factors which were mentioned. All of RFS 417B and more than 75 percent of RFS's 402 and 421 said that making the changes would create a different impression on others. 76 Table 33. Percentage distribution by reciprocal friendship categories of responses to the question, “Do you think that you would make a different impression on others if you could make these changes?" and reasons given for affirmative opinions Reciprocal Friendship Categories Responses to Mutual Pair RFS All Question Isolates Members Members Girls % % % % Yes, sometimes 55 19 42 42 No 30 38 26 28 I don't know -- -- l 1 Totals 85 57 69 71 Reasons Given Look better 5 -- 9 7 Easier to be accepted 5 —- 7 6 Friendlier 10 —- 3 4 Make better first impression -— —- 5 4 Personality changed 5 6 1 2 Noticed more -- 6 1 1 Other 35 6 24 23 Totals 60 18 50 47 A larger percentage of the girls who desired to make a change in self, 40 percent, said "no” when asked if the changes would make it easier to make friends. The reason given most frequently by the 24 percent who said "yes” was, "It would be easier to be accepted.” Other reasons shown on Table 34 were, "I would be friendlier,” or ”more at ease." Sixty-seven percent of the members of RFS 402B agreed that the changes would not make it easier to make friends. 77 Table 34. Percentage distribution by reciprocal friendship categories of responses to the question, "Do you think it would be easier to make friends if you made these changes?" and reasons given for affirmative opinions Reciprocal Friendship Categories Responses to Mutual Pair RFS A11 Question Isolates Members Members Girls % % % % Yes, sometimes 30 19 24 24 No 45 38 39 40 I don't know -- -- 2 1 Totals 75 57 65 65 Reasons Given Easier to be accepted 15 6 12 12 Friendlier 10 —— 3 4 More at ease 5 -- 2 2 Personality would be changed 5 -- l 1 Judged on looks -- -- 2 1 Other 5 7 6 Totals 40 12 27 26 Eighty-four percent of the girls, essentially the same percentage of each of the reciprocal friendship categories, indicated that some clothes gave more self confidence than others. All of the members of RFS's 402, 409,1;12 and um, and more than two-thirds of all the re- maining RFS's, except RFS 401, answered ”yes” to the question, "Do some clothes give you more self confidence than others?” RFS 401 is the predominantly lower social class RFS. Isolates and RFS members most frequently mentioned clothes with "particular design features," 78 while mutual pair members said that ”proper fit” gave them more self confidence. Other responses which were given are included in Table 35. Two-thirds of RFS 414 mentioned that clothes with ”particular design features” gave more self confidence. The remaining RFS's had no con- sensus concerning the characteristics of clothing which gave more self confidence. Table 35. Percentage distribution by reciprocal friendship categories of responses to the question, ”Do some clothes give you more self confidence than others?" and the characteristics of clothes which gave self confidence Reciprocal Friendship Categories Responses to Mutual Pair RFS A11 Question Isolates Members Members Girls % % % % Yes 80 81 85 84 No 20 19 14 15 Totals 100 100 99a 99a Characteristics of Clothes Design features 25 13 29 27 Proper fit 10 31 12 14 Those I like 10 6 15 13 Things that look nice 10 26 11 13 Fashionable clothes -— l9 13 12 Separates or casual clothes 5 6 14 12 Totals 60 101 94 91 8One girl refused to participate. Approximately 39 percent of the girls in each of the reciprocal friendship categories said they had come to school dressed differently from the other girls. The majority of the 39 percent indicated that 79 being dressed differently had little effect on them (see Table 36). One hundred percent of RFS 412 and 67 percent of RFS 414 had come to school dressed differently from others. All of RFS's 402B, 409 and 411, and more than 67 percent of RFS's 401, 417A and 427 had not come to school dressed differently from others. Yet, Figure E, p.93 shows that RFS 401 members were often named as ”not dressed right." Table 36. Percentage distribution by reciprocal friendship categories of responses to the questions,”Have you ever come to school dressed differently from the other girls?" and "How did you feel?" Reciprocal Friendship Catggories Responses to Mutual Pair RFS All Question Isolates Members Manbers Girls % % % % Yes, sometimes 40 38 38 39 No 60 56 60 59 I don't know -- 6 l 1 Totals 100 100 998 99a Responses to Question Didn't bother me 10 19 14 14 Felt fine -- 6 10 8 Felt conspicuous 5 -- 3 3 Felt different -- 6 3 3 Felt out of place —- -- 2 1 Felt a little funny —- -- 2 l Totals 15 31 34 3O 8One girl refused to participate. All of the mutual pair members and more than 84 percent of the RFS members and isolates indicated satisfaction with appearance. Seven 80 percent of the girls mentioned dissatisfaction with "hair," four percent with "figure," three percent with “clothes," and two percent with "com- plexion" (see Table 37). All members of RFS's 411, 414 and 427, and more than 75 percent of RFS's 401, 402A, 402C, 407, 409, 417 and 421 indicated satisfaction with appearance. 0n the other hand, 67 percent of RFS 402B were dissatisfied with appearance. Table 37. Percentage distribution by reciprocal friendship categories of responses indicating satisfaction or dissatisfaction with appearance and factors contributing to dissatisfaction Reciprocal Friendship Categories Satisfied with Mutual Pair RFS A11 Appearance Isolates Members Members Girls % % % % Yes, sometimes 90 100 86 88 No 10 -- 13 11 Totals 100 100 99a 99a Factors Contributing to Dissatisfaction Hair 5 -- 9 7 Figure - -- 5 4 Clothes 5 -- 3 3 Complexion 5 -- 2 2 Totals 15 -- l9 l6 aOne girl refused to participate. 81 While a large majority of girls in all reciprocal friendship categories expressed satisfaction with the clothing they owned, the few who were dissatisfied most often mentioned "insufficient clothing" as the reason for being dissatisfied. Table 38 includes the rest of the reasons cited by the girls, All of RFS's 409, 411 and 421, and more than 75 percent of the remaining RFS's except RFS 412, were satisfied with their clothing. Less than 67 percent of RFS 412 expressed satisfaction. Table 38. Percentage distribution by reciprocal friendship categories of responses indicating satisfaction or dissatisfaction with clothing and factors contributing to dissatisfaction Reciprocal Friendship Categories Satisfied with Mutual Pair RFS All Clothing Isolates Members Members Girls % % % % Yes 95 88 86 88 No -- 12 10 9 Sometimes 5 -- 3 2 Totals 100 100 99a 99a Factors Contributing to Dissatisfaction Not enough clothes 1- 6 12 9 Fit of clothes - -- l l Fashionability of clothes -- —— l 1 Other 5 6 ~- 1 Totals 5 12 14 12 8One girl refused to participate. 82 The majority of the girls in all reciprocal friendship categories, particularly the mutual pair members, expressed satisfaction with com- plexions. The typical responses of the girls expressing dissatisfaction were, "It breaks out a lot," or "I have a problem with blemishes." Several of the girls also mentioned "oily skin." Table 39 shows the distribution of other complexion problems mentioned by a few of the girls. At least 67 percent of RFS's 401, 402A, 402C, 407A, 412, 414, 417, 421 and 427 expressed satisfaction with complexions. On the other hand, two-thirds of the members of RFS 402B were dissatisfied because of blemishes. Table 39. Percentage distribution by reciprocal friendship categories of responses indicating satisfaction or dissatisfaction with complexion and factors contributing to dissatisfaction Reciprocal Friendship Categories Satisfied with Mutual Pair RFS All Complexion Isolates Members Members Girls % % % % Yes 50 81 67 66 No 45 _ 19 30 31 Sometimes 5 —- 2 2 Totals 100 100 99a 99a Factors Causing Dissatisfaction Blemishes 40 6 27 27 Oily 5 6 6 6 Freckles -— -— 3 2 Make up 5 -- -— 1 Color -— -- l 1 Other -- -— 2 1 Totals 50 12 39 38 BOne girl refused to participate. 83 Sixty-four percent of the girls were satisfied with hair. Isolates and RFS members, 35 percent, expressed more dissatisfaction than mutual pair members, 19 percent. Typical comments were, "It's so hard to manage," "I just can't do a thing with it." or "I just didn't have a chance to fix it." Being "hard to manage" was the problem most frequently mentioned, as shown in Table 40. While at least 67 percent of RFS's 402A, 4020, 409, 411, 414, 417C, and 427 were satisfied with their hair, two-thirds or more of RFS‘s,402B and 412 were dissatisfied. The members of RFS 402B said, "It‘s hard to manage." RFS 412 members had no concensus about why they were dissatisfied with their hair. Table 40. Percentage distribution by reciprocal friendship categories of responses indicating satisfaction or dissatisfaction with hair and factors contributing to dissatisfaction Reciprocal Friendship Categories Mutual Pair RFS All Satisfied with Hair Isolates Members Members Girls % % % % Yes 65 75 62 64 No 35 19 35 33 Sometimes -— 6 2 2 Totals 100 100 998 998 Factors Causing Dissatisfaction Hard to manage 15 6 17 15 Did not fix it 10 6 6 7 Too curly 5 6 4 4 Too straight 5 -— 4 4 After swimming -- 6 3 3 Color -— —— 2 1 Other 5 13 8 8 Totals 40 37 44 42 8One girl refused to participate. 84 The girls were asked the following questions: ”You may recall that East Lansing High School used to have a 'dress-up' day. If you still had such a day and you heard that everyone on 'dress—up' day was going to wear a sweat shirt to school and at the last minute they changed their minds but you were not notified and wore one to school, what would you do when you saw them dressed differently? How would you feel?"Many of the girls initially said, "I wouldn't do it," or "I'd bring it and put it in my locker if the others didn't go through with it." However, the girls then went on to say, "But if I had done it, I‘d make a joke of it," or ”I'd go home and change right away." The majority of mutual pair members said they would "make a joke of it," while isolates indicated that they would "make a joke of it" or"go home and change immediately," and RFS members mentioned that they would "go home and change immediately” or that there was "nothinglficould do." The six highest alternatives mentioned by the girls are included in Table 41. Two-thirds of the mem- bers of RFS's 402B and 414 said, "I'd go home and change immediately." When asked how they would feel, proportionately more RFS members and mutual pair members said, ”It wouldn't make any difference," while more isolates said, "I'd be embarrassed." Other possible reactions mentioned were "anger," ”feel out of place" or "would think it was funny." 85 Table 41. Percentage distribution by reciprocal friendship categories of responses to the sweat shirt story Reciprocal Friendship_Categories What would you do when Mutual Pair RFS All you saw them dressed Isolates Members Members Girls differently? % % % % Make a joke of it 30 56 21 27 Go home and change immediately 30 6 27 26 Nothing I could do 20 31 24 24 Go home and change at noon 10 -- 16 13 Continue to wear it -- 19 4 5 WOuldn't bother me -- -— 4 4 Totals 90 112 96 99 How would you feel? WOuldn't make any difference 15 38 17 19 Embarrassed 25 13 15 16 Angry -- 6 17 13 Out of place 15 19 12 13 Think it was funny 10 13 13 12 Feel bad that no one called —- 6 9 7 Other 30 31 31 31 Totals 95 126 114 111 When asked, "Do you enjoy wearing your clothes if your friends don't like them ” a few of the girls said, "I've never had that happen, I don't know." Thirty-eight percent of the girls said "sometimes" and 36 percent said "seldom." A greater percentage of the mutual pairs than members of other reciprocal friendship categories said "sometimes." Table 42 shows that while ten percent of the girls "never" enjoyed wearing clothes if friends didn't like them, 11 percent "often" or 86 "almost always" enjoyed wearing such clothes. More than 67 percent of the members of RFS's 401, 417B and 421 "sometimes” enjoyed wearing clothes not liked by friends. Two-thirds of RFS's 402B, 4078 and 412 ”seldom" enjoyed wearing such clothes. Table 42. Percentage distribution by reciprocal friendship categories of responses concerning enjoyment of wearing clothes not liked by friends Reciprocal Friendship Categories Mutua 1 Pa ir RFS A 1 1 Responses Isolates Members Members Girls % % % % Almost always 5 l3 6 7 Often 10 6 3 4 Sometimes 30 44 38 38 Seldom 30 25 39 36 Never 10 6 11 10 Other 10 6 3 4 Totals 100 100 99a 99a 8One girl refused to participate. The majority of the girls were ”never" ill at ease at school because of clothing. Proportionately more isolates had been ill at ease "sometimes." Table 43 shows the distribution of the responses. All of the members of RFS 409 and more than 67 percent of RFS's 401, 407, 411, 412 and 4170 were "never" ill at ease because of clothing. On the other hand, two-thirds of RFS‘s 402B and 4173 were "seldom" ill at ease because of clothing. 87 Table 43. Percentage distribution by reciprocal friendship categories of responses concerning whether one was ill at ease at school because of clothing W Reciprocal Friendship Categories Responses Mutual Pair RFS A11 Isolates Members Members Girls % % ' % % Sometimes 20 12 8 10 Seldom 25 38 32 32 Never 55 50 59 57 Totals 100 100 998 99a 8One girl refused to participate. The school dress of the majority of girls in all reciprocal friend- ship categories was “sometimes” complimented by others. A greater per- centage of RFS members, 43 percent, were ”often" or "almost always" com- plimented by others (see Table 44). All of the members of RFS's 401, 402A, and at least 67 percent of RFS's 402C, 414 and 421 "sometimes” received compliments. 88 Table 44. Percentage distribution by reciprocal friendship categories of frequency of receiving compliments on dress at school Reciprocal Friendship Categgries Frequency of Receiving Mutual Pair RFS All Compliments on Dress Isolates Members Members Girls % % % % Almost always -- -- 2 1 Often 35 19 41 38 Sometimes 65 81 56 60 Totals 100 100 99a 99a 8One girl refused to participate. Approximately 62 percent of the girls in all reciprocal friend- ship categories had "never" been embarrassed about school clothes. On the other hand, 31 percent of the girls mentioned having been embarrassed "sometimes." The main cause of embarrassment cited was ”failure to take care of clothes." Other sources of embarrassment mentioned are included in Table 45. All of the girls in RFS's 402B and 409 and at least 67 percent of those in RFS's 411, 412, 414 and 417 had "never" been em- barrassed about school clothing. 89 Table 45. Percentage distribution by reciprocal friendship categories of responses concerning embarrassment with school clothing and factors contributing to embarrassment Reciprocal Friendship Catggories Embarrassed About Mutual Pair RFS A11 Clothes Isolates Members 'Members Girls % % % % Sometimes 30 31 31 30 Seldom 10 6 6 7 Never 60 63 62 62 Totals 100 100 993 998 Factors Contributing to Embarrassment Didn't take care of them 15 6 11 ll Fit - S —_ 6 5 Fashionability 10 —- 4 4 Combinations ‘ -- -- 5 4 Totals 30 6 26 24 8One girl refused to participate. Summary This chapter discusses the analysis of questions pertaining to program. Clothing and appearance were not mentioned as factors important to achieve popularity within the membership group. The majority of the girls said they were "average" in dress when compared to others in school. The respondents mentioned ”parents" or "boy friend" most fre- quently when asked whose approval of clothing was important. Isolates placed more emphasis on the approval of "parents." Mothers made 90 suggestions about school clothes for the majority of the girls. Most of the girls also indicatedtbat the suggestions were followed at least part of the time. Seventy percent of the girls expressed a desire to change some aspect of self, "figure" was most frequently mentioned. Forty-two per- cent of the girls said the changes would aid in making a different im- pression on others. The reason most frequently given by RFS members was, "I'd look better." Only 24 percent of the respondents expressed an opinion that it would be easier ‘tovmake friends if the desired changes weremedeq Eighty-four percent of the respondents indicated that some clothes gave more self confidence than others. Mutual pair members emphasized "proper fit” while isolates and RFS members said clothes with "particular design features" gave more self confidence. The majority of the girls had not come to school dressed differently from the others and most of the girls who had dressed differently said it affected them very little. Satisfaction with all aspects of appearance, including clothes, hair and complexion, was expressed by the majority of respondents in all reciprocalfriendship categories. Thirty-eight percent of the girls "sometimes" and 36 percent "seldom” enjoyed wearing clothes if friends did not like them. A greater percentage of the mutual pair members would "sometimes" wear such clothes. The majority of the girls had "never” been ill at ease at school because of clothing; however, a greater per- centage of isolates mentioned feeling ill at ease "sometimes." The majority of the respondents "sometimes" received compliments on dress at school. RFS members received compliments "often" or ”almost always” 91 to a greater extent than members of the other two categories. Sixty-two percent of the girls had "never" been embarrassed about school clothes. When confronted with the sweatshirt story, the majority of mutual pair members indicated, "I'd make a joke of it," while isolates most frequently said, "I'd make a joke of it," or "I'd go home and change immediately." RFS members also mentioned, "I‘d go home and change immediately," as well as "There's nothing I could do." When asked how they would feel, more RFS and mutual pair members suggested ”no different," while isolates more frequently said "embarrassed." More discussion of the findings, as well as a discussion of pos- sible contributory factors, will be included in Chapters VII and VIII, following a discussion of popularity and dress in Chapter VI. CHAPTER VI APPRAISALS OF POPULARITY AND DRESS During the interview the respondents were asked to name the twelfth grade girls they considered to be the ”most popular,” "best dressed2 and "not dressed right." A discussion of the response analy- sis follows in terms of reciprocal friendship categories. The grade point average of the girls selected as ”most popular" is also discussed. The sociogram, Figure E, presents a complete picture of the "best dressed," "most popular" and "not dressed right" choices received by each girl. RFS 407 members received 50 percent of all selections made in response to the "most popular" girl in the twelfth grade. Thirty—three percent of the remaining choices were made to members of two mutual pairs. Only two of the RFS's chose members within their own group. RFS 407 members named girls within the membership group eight times, while RFS 402 members named members of their own group twice. Program and review coincided for members of RES 407.1 One of the girls in RFS 407 indicated an awareness of membership in the popular group. When asked what a new girl should do to get in with the popular girls the 1Stone defines program as self appraisal and review as appraisals by others. Since RFS 407 members received 50 percent of all the "most popular" choices and made 50 percent of their ”most popular" choices into their own RFS, the self appraisals coincided with the appraisals of others. 92 E 3.» f. 3 z 3 E 5 Figure : Appraisal of Popularity RPS 427 9 ‘9‘ P - mentioned “Most Popular“ BD - mentioned "Best Dressed" BD—S ' Appraigalg HDR - mentioned "Not Dressed Right” \_ / a a e Isolates "'2' O tut-d u g 5 I: o3 : 3 u H OH U-u-C GD 0 32- CU -d i -a u ta 0 Numbers ‘6’ . .3..\.. a‘s,s 4'! G M I H s i I . *g o“ o“ «f U u H I fl« .. O O». O I n I H H H H In I 0.4.4 5 I I I flu'Ofl 2 ma 2 Middle Upper RPS 411 Accurate Perceiver GOG Lower «I» «.1 Q .. ”K x é '61 ‘8' e e e 94 response was, "It depends on her personality, if she has the same interests 53 do.” Table 46 shows the complete breakdown of the "most popular" choices. A number of the respondents made multiple selections for the "most popular" girls and the "best dressed" girls. Many said,"I don't think there is any one best dressed girl " or "There are so many of the girls who dress well." Nearly 40 percent of the choices made as "best dressed" were to members of RFS 407, while 24 percent were to members of one mutual pair. The two girls in this mutual pair were accurate perceivers; however, with one exception, they received all the unrecipro- cated choices which RFS 407 members made outside their own group. Mem- bers of RFS 402 and RFS 417 each received eight percent of the "best dressed" choices. Even though some within group choices were made, program and review of "best dressed" choices did not coincide for any of the RFS's. Table 47 gives a complete breakdown of the "best dressed" choices. An examination of the "best dressed" choices by individual respond- ents showed that,119, a member of the mutual pair to which RFS 407's unreciprocated choices were directed, received 23 votes. Her best friend, 042, was chosen 15 times. Within RFS 407, number 039 was chosen "best dressed" 21 times. Her best friends were also chosen several times: number 205 received nine votes and numbers 017 and 122 received five votes each. An isolate, number 043, was selected as "best dressed" 15 times. Though named as "best dressed" 15 times and “most popular" eight times. 043 neither chose nor was chosen as a best friend. "I have many friends, but I can't say any one of them is my 'best girl friend,'" was the 95 Table 46. Association of girls chosen as "most popular" within reciprocal friendship categories and RFS breakdowns Number of Girls Chosen as "Most Popular" in the Recipro— cal Friendship Categories and Specific RFS's CD . (D Rec1procal u 3 0 O m ‘0 Friendship .3 .—1 N N 8 H N 3 :1 S R .8 <3 <3 <3 r4 .4 Categories ’2 Q1 :1 :r :r 3 3 3 3 :r :1- :- [—1 Isolates 1 3 4 1 9 Mutual Pair Members 1 4 2 10 18 All Girls 11 48 6 71 2 4 143 Specific RFS's RFS 401 2 2 5 9 RFS 402 2 7 2a 15 1 27 RFS 407 6 8a 2 l6 RFS 409 1 1 2 u RFS 411 6 5 11 RFS 412 1 1 1 1 4 RFS 414 2 1 3 RFS 417 3 9 16 1 29 RFS 421 2 3 5 RFS 427 1 5 2 8 = sfiotals 9 41 u 57 2 3 116 aTnA;nn+nn nkae’nfia I»e‘l-kq°fi ‘1‘“...- 96 Table 47. Association of girls chosen as "best dressed“ within reciprocal friendship categories and RFS breakdowns -’ 4 Number of Girls Chosen as "Best Dressed" in the Recipro- cal Friendship Categories and Specific RFS's U) Reciprocal 3 m Friendship g E Categories 0 H N N 0‘ H N :1- <\ a R .8 33 S 3 3 3 3 S 3 S S :r :r a Isolates 3 7 l 6 l7 Mutual Pair Members 1 4 3 7 1 1 17 Specific RFS's RFS 401 1 1 4 6 RFS 402 l 1 5a 12 3 l 23 RFS 407 11 11 2a 1 15 RFS 409 2 l 3 RFS 411 3 5 1a 1 10 RFS 412 2 2 RFS 414 l l 2 RFS 417 6 4 l4 2 5a 1 32 RFS 421 l 2 2 5 RFS 427 2 3 2 4 1a 12 Subtotals 13 27 8 44 l 2 12 3 110 aIndicates choices within their own structure. 97 explanation given for her lack of choices. In addition to 043, choices as "best dressed" and "most popular" coincided for many of the girls, as shown on Figure E. When the respondents were asked to name the girls who were "not dressed right" the majority, 75 percent, stated that there were no girls who were "not dressed right," or that the names of the girls were unknown. Typical responses to this question were: "I couldn't say what's right or wrong," "There were some, but they're gone," "I've seen them around, but I don't know their names." Of the girls who were named as "not dressed right" 35 percent vere isolates and 27 percent were members of RFS 401, the only pre- dominantly lower social class RFS. Within RFS 401, number 108 was named "not dressed right" seven times, while her best friend, number 106, was named twice. Number 105, a lower social class isolate, was named six times. The three girls represent 60 percent of the entire group of lower social class members. A middle social class isolate, number 146, was named as "not dressed right" three times. Table 48 includes the remaining scattered choices. Some of the scattered choices were to girls who were also named as "most popular" and"best dressed." The types of responses given by the girls seemed to indicate two kinds of "not dressed right." Some were really poorly dressed, but with others it was a question of taste. Some of the comments also seemed to indicate a "sour grapes" attitude. For example, one girl stated, in naming an often named "best dressed" girl as "not dressed right," "She has no taste at all." Stronger comments were made, but it is the opinion of the re- searchers that to include them.would pinpoint specific individuals. 98 Table 48. Association of girls chosen as "not dressed right" within reciprocal friendship categories and RFS breakdowns Number of Girls Chosen as "Not Dressed Right" in the Reciprocal Friendship Categories and Specific RFS’s m e m Rec1proca1 u w . . W Friendship .3 N 7:: . H I\ Ch H (\l N l\ Ca tegor ies co o. o o 0 <3 .—. .—¢ 55 H K: m 3 H z .3 -¢ .3 .3 .3 .3 .3 -e .3 .3 Es Isolates l 1 Mutua 1 Pa ir Members 3 l 2 6 Specific RFS's RFS 401 RFS 402 2 1 3. RFS 407 1 1 2 I 1 s RFS 409 RFS 411 1 1 RFS 412 RFS 414 2 2 RFS 417 3 u 18 8 RFS 421 1 3 1 2a 7 RFS 427 1 3 u ===a==.======..=a================================================== Subtotals 9 2 10 3 3 3 30 aIndicates choices within their own structure. 99 Comparison of Those Selected as Most Popular and Grade Point Averages An analysis of the 25 twelfth grade girls who were on the Honor Roll showed that none were members of RFS 407, the group whose members received approximately 50 percent (71 out of 143) of the "most popular” choices. This fact tends to support findings by both Coleman1 and 2 that good grades are not a factor in determining popularity Williams in some school systems. Further analysis showed, however, that number 091, the girl most frequently chosen as "most popular," was an honor roll member. Thirty-two percent of the girls who were honor roll stu- dents were chosen as "most popular" at least one time. In fact, a total of 54 of the 143 popularity choices made were to honor roll stu- dents. Thus, in this group of senior girls there is some relationship between good grades and popularity. When asked to give the character- istics of the "most popular" girl, many of the girls supported this relationship by suggesting that one of her characteristics was achieving good grades. Summary Members of RFS 407 were chosen most often as both "most popular" \ and "best dressed" by all the reciprocal friendship categories. Members of two mutual pairs received a large percentage of the choices for "most popular." Members of one of the two mutual pairs also were chosen often as "best dressed." looleman, pp. us-u9. 2Wi11iams, p. 119. 100 Although 75 percent of the respondents stated that the twelfth grade did not contain girls who were "not dressed right," or that the names of the girls who were "not dressed right" were unknown, a total of 22 girls were named 39 times. Thirty-five percent of the "not dressed right" choices were to isolates. Twenty-seven percent were to members of RFS 401, the only predominantly lower social class RFS. Program and review coincided one time, in the "most popular" choices made and received by RFS 407, which seemingly emerged as the most popular group. .A comparison of grade point averages and "most popular" choices indicated that 37 percent of the popularity choices were to honor roll students, but none of the members of RFS 407 were on the Honor Roll. Chapter VII will include more discussion of the findings pre- sented in Chapters IV, V and VI. CHAPTER VII SUMMARYUAND DISCUSSION OF FINDINGS, RESTATEMENT OF HYPOTHESIS Summary and Discussion of Findings As a portion of a longitudinal study, the purpose of this re- search was to investigate the relationship between group cohesion and the opinions of twelfth grade girls on clothing, appearance and group acceptance. The respondents in the study included the entire popula— tion of twelfth grade girls, members of the class of 1965 at East Lansing High School. The East Lansing community is atypical in several respects: the extensive education, high income and high geographic mobility of the residents. The community was chosen for the larger research project, because the school district included a lower social class residential area, thereby giving social class extremes. The data were obtained using two instruments, 8 background questionnaire and an interview schedule. The background questionnaire sought personal information about the girl and her family, as well as the best friend choices. The information obtained was used to construct a sociogram showing the reciprocal friendships existing within the twelfth grade and to determine the social class rating of each of the respondents. The interview schedule sought the opinions of the girls on general acceptance, clothing and appearance. A portion of the schedule included an interviewer rating of each respondent's appearance. 101 102 As a facet of a longitudinal project, the present study paralleled the work of Williams,1 who investigated the girls of the class of 1965 as ninth graders. Using slightly modified instruments, the writer has investigated the same class of girls as twelfth graders. The working hypothesis used in the original study2 continued to guide the present research.3 An analysis of the sociometric question revealed that 20 of the twelfth grade girls were isolates, 16 were mutual pair members and the remaining 102 were members of ten RFS's. All of the RFS's, with the ex- ception of one predominantly lower social class group, were predominantly upper or middle social class. The majority of all girls, including 90 percent of the isolates, had attended elementary school in East Lansing. Only one RFS had a majority of members who had attended elementary school outside East Lansing. The majority of all the respondents were Protestant, but relatively more mutual pair members were Roman Catholic. An analysis of grade point averages showed that mutual pair members and isolates tended to have higher averages, including a greater percentage of honor roll members, than did RFS's. The majority of the girls in all reciprocal friendship categories were given an "average" appearance rating. However, proportionately more mutual pair members were rated "above average" and more RFS members were rated "below average." Seventy-five percent of the predominantly lower social class RFS were rated "below average" in appearance. 1Williams, Chapters 1 and 11, pp. 1-38. 21bid., p. 132. 3Supra, p.1i5for a statement of the hypothesis. 103 The analysis of responses to the interview schedule was formulated in terms of Stone's framework of program and review.1 The responses to each of the clothing questions were compared in terms of percentages within the reciprocal friendship categories. The majority of girls in all recip- rocal friendship categories agreed on the following aspects of review: 1e 5. Clothing influenced the popularity of a girl at East Lansing High School, 69 percent.2 The group in which membership was perceived was "about average" in dress when compared to other groups in school, 67 percent. The manner in which a best friend dressed was not used by others in judging them, 68 percent. There were girls in the twelfth grade who did not dress right, 62 percent. Their own friends were dressed right, 83 percent. Proportionately more RFS members than other categories agreed: 1e "Looks, appearance” and "personality" were characteristics used in judging a new girl in East Lansing High School, 58 percent, 52 percent. "Personality" was a characteristic used in choosing a friend, 37 percent. Clothing did not influence the popularity of a girl at East Lansing High School, 24 percent. "Poor combinations" was the reason the clothes of some girls were not right, 24 percent. 1Supra, p. 43 for a definition of Stone's terms. 2The percentage of girls agreeing on the particular response is included with each statement. 104 The "not dressed right" girls did not have many friends, 12 percent. The manner in which a best friend dressed was a reflection on them; "reputation by association" was the reason stated, 28 percent, 21 percent. Proportionately more mutual pair members indicated: 1. "Being nice to everyone" was a characteristic of the most popular girl in the twelfth grade, 44 percent. The group in which membership was perceived was "better dressed" than the other groups‘in school, 31 percent. The clothing of the popular girls in the twelfth grade differed from the clothing of the other girls, especially in terms of having "more clothing," 68 percent, 25 percent. All the girls in the twelfth grade were dressed right, 44 percent. The analysis of review questions showed that proportionately more isolates suggested: 1. "The way she acts" was a characteristic used in judging a new girl in East Lansing, 55 percent. "Having the same interests" was a characteristic used in choosing a friend, 55 percent. The clothing of the popular girls in the twelfth grade did not differ from the clothing of the other twelfth grade girls, 65 percent. "Lack of neatness" described the clothes of the girls who were not dressed right, 30 percent. The friends of the girls who were not dressed right also did not dress right, 45 percent. 105 The majority of girls in all reciprocal friendship categories ex~ pressed the following opinions on questions related to program: 1. Their clothes were "about average" when compared to the clothes of the other girls in school, 77 percent.1 A change in some aspect of self was desired, 70 percent. Some clothes gave more self confidence than others, 84 per- cent. Appearance, including hair, clothes and complexion, was satisfactory, 64-88 percent. Clothing had "never" made them ill at ease at school, 57 percent. Others "sometimes" complimented their dress at school, 60 percent. Clothes had”never" caused embarrassment at school, 62 per— cent. Proportionately more RFS members indicated: 1. The approval of clothing by a boy friend was most desired, 39 percent. Mothers did not make suggestions about school clothing, 47 percent. The aspect of appearance in which change was most frequently desired was "figure," 29 percent. Others "often" or "almost always" complimented them on dress at school, 43 percent. 1The percentage of girls agreeing on the particular response is included with each question. 106 Relatively more mutual pair members suggested the following program opinions: 1. Their clothing was "better than average" when compared to the clothes of others in the school, 25 percent. Self approval of clothing was important in order to satisfy self, 44 percent. Making the desired changes would not make a different im- pression on others, 38 percent. "Proper fit" was the reason some clothes gave more self confidence than others, 31 percent. If a sweatshirt was worn on "dress-up" dayand others did not wear one, they would "make a joke of it" or "could not do anything” and "it wouldn't make any difference," 56 percent, 31 percent, 38 percent. Isolates more often expressed the following opinions: 1. It Was important to be "friendly" in order to be popular in the group in which membership was perceived, 40 percent. The suggestions on clothing made by mothers were followed, 55 percent. Making the desired changes in self would make a different impression on others, 55 percent. It would not be easier to make friends if the changes were made, 45 percent. Complexion was considered unsatisfactory due to "blemishes," 40 percent. Clothes had "sometimes" made them ill at ease at school, 20 percent. 107 The individuals chosen most often as "most popular" and "best dressed" were members of RFS 407 and two mutual pairs. Program.and review coincided one time, in the "most popular" choices made and re— ceived by RFS 407. Although 75 percent of the girls said there were no girls who were "not dressed right" or that the names of the girls were not known, a total of 22 girls were named 39 times as "not dressed right." Thirty-five percent of the "not dressed right" choices were to isolates and 27 percent were to members of the predominantly lower social class RFS. Restatement of Hypothesis The working hypothesis which guided this study was: Members of the same reciprocal friendship structure have similar opinions regard- ing clothing, appearance and group acceptance which contribute to group cohesion, and their opinions differ from those of non-group members, or members of other groups. In the process of seeking to accept or re- ject the hypothesis, it was decided that it is unlikely that one can determine the pattern of causation in terms of cohesion, that is, whether the similar opinions contributed to group cohesion or the co- hesion of the group contributed to the possession of similar opinions. The hypothesis was also complex, containing several parts. For these reasons, the former hypothesis will be restated and separated into four statements. 108 The first segment of the hypothesis is: A. Members of individual reciprocal friendship structures have similar opinions regarding clothing, appggrance and group acceptance. In order to determine whether to accept or reject Hypothesis A, the aspects of program and review were considered separately by the fol- lowing method. The average number of times an RFS might have agreed was obtained from the tables1 which contain the responses to review questions. The tables contain percentages and the total percentages. The percentages allow a relative measure of the average number of in- dividual responses given by each girl. For example, on Table 15, p. 50 the total percentage of all girls was 235 percent. Thus, the girls gave an average of 2.35 responses. On Table 16, p. 51 the percentage was 150 percent. Thus, the girls gave an average of 1.5 responses. Using this method, the average number of responses on each of the review questions was determined and then totaled. It was found that the girls gave an average of 22 responses to 11 questions on review. The number of responses made by members of an RFS constitutes the number of possible agreements. For example, if the girls of an RFS gave only three responses to a question, they could agree only three times. Since the average number of responses to the review questions for each RFS was 22, the average pos- sible agreements for each RFS was 22. There were 18 RFS's or segments of RFS's which, multiplied by the average of 22 possible agreements, gave a total of 396 possible agreements for all RFS's or segments of RFS's. If at least sixty-seven percent of the members of an RFS gave the same response 1Supra, Chapter IV, pp. 43-67. 109 to a particular question, it was considered that the members of the RFS showed agreement. The individual RFS's showed 100 percent agreement on 31 responses to review questions and at least 67 percent agreement on 103 responses. Thus the RFS's agreed on a total of 134 responses out of a possible 396 times agreement could be shown. This represents ap- proximately 35 percent of the total agreements possible for review questions. Using the method outlined above, it was found that each RFS could have agreed an average of 21 times on 15 program questions. This allowed a total of 378 possible agreements for all RFS's and segments of larger RFS's. One hundred percent agreement was found on 41 program responses and at least 67 percent agreement was found on 118 responses. The 159 agreements represented 41 percent of the 378 possible agreements. The RFS's and segments of RFS's expressed similar opinions 38 percent of the 774 possible times for both review and program questions, which means there is only 38 percent support of the hypothesis: Members of individual reciprocal friendship structures have similar opinions regarding cloth- ing, appearance and group acceptance. The second segment of the hypothesis is: B. The extent to which members of individual reciprocal friend- ship structures have similar opinions regarding clothing, appearance and group acceptance is_positive1y related to the cohesion of thepgroup. An index of cohesion was obtained for each RFS, or segment of an RFS, by dividing the number of choices made within the RFS by the number of possible reciprocated choices for the group, i.e., the number of 110 choices which would have been made had every member of the group chosen every other member. The formula used for measuring cohesion was C = X 1 where C indicates cohesion, X equals number of choices made (N-1)N within the group, and N equals number of group members. Table 49 includes the RFS's ranked by degree of cohesiveness and by the number of times each group had at least 67 percent agreement on a particular response. RFS 402B, the most cohesive group, also had the highest num- ber of agreements. Yet RFS 414 which ranked second in number of agree- ments ranked fourth in terms of cohesion, and RFS 421 ranked fourth in number of agreements and second in terms of cohesion. While some groups ranked the same on both cohesion and number of agreements, others had differential ranks on the two factors. The Spearman rank correlation coefficient2 was used to determine the relationship between degree of cohesion and number of agreements for all RFS's and segments of RFS's. The correlation was found to be significant at the .01 level, thus hypothesis B is supported. 1N — 1 accounts for the fact that a person cannot choose himself. N represents the total number of individuals in the group and -1 repre- sents the person himself. Thus N - 1 represents the number of choices an individual can make. 2 2The formula used was rs = 2 X2+ZY ‘Zdz as suggested by X Y Siegel for use when ties occur. Sidney Siegel, Nonparametric Statistics for the Behavioral Sciences (New York; McGraw-Hill Book Company, Inc., 1956), ”p. 207. 111 Table 49. Correlation between reciprocal friendship structure cohesion and agreement on opinions concerning clothing, appearance and group acceptance as measured by Spearman rho Reciprocal Friendship Cohesion Agreements Structures Score Rank order No. Rank order RFS 402B 100 1.0 32 1.0 RFS 421 75 2.0 20 4.0 RFS 409 70 3.0 16 8.0 RFS 414 66 4.0 28 2.0 RFS 411 65 5.0 14 10.5 RFS 412 60 6.0 12 15.0 RFS 401 50 8.5 21 3.0 RFS 4026 50 8.5 18 5.5 RFS 407B 50 8.5 14 10.5 RFS 417B 50 8.5 15 9.0 RFS 427 47 11.0 17 7.0 RFS 417C 44 12.0 18 5.5 RFS 417A 31 13.0 13 12.5 RFS 407A 29 14.0 12 15.0 RFS 402A 20 15.0 12 15.0 RFS 407 18 16.0 9 17.5 RFS 417 13 17.0 13 12.5 RFS 402 12 18.0 9 17.5 N = 18 rs = .578 P ‘<.01 The third segment of the hypothesis is: C. The similar opinions of members of individual reciprocal friendship structures regarding clothing, appearance and group acceptance differ from the opinions of members of other reciprocal friendship structures. If the opinion expressed by the members of an RFS was an opinion expressed by not more than two other RFS's, it was considered as an opinion which differed from the opinions of members of other reciprocal 112 friendship structures. RFS responses differed from those expressed by other RFS's in only 61 cases. Thus, 21 percent of the 293 agreements differed from the opinions of other RFS's. While the amount is relatively small, there is 21 percent support for the hypothesis: The similar opinions of members of individual reciprocal friendship structures regard— ing clothing, appearance and group acceptance differ from the opinions of membpps of other recippocal friendship structures. The final segment of the hypothesis is: D. The similar opinions of members of individual reciprocal friendship structures regprding clothing, appearance and group acceptance differ from the gpinions of non-group members. One could consider non-group members of a given RFS as including all members of the population who are not members of the specific RFS, i.e., mutual pairs, isolates and members of other RFS's. However, the term has been used in this hypothesis to include only isolates and mutual pair members. The average number of agreements for each RFS was 16. The isolates had at least 67 percent agreement on only nine responses and the mutual pair members on only eight responses to both program and review questions. Thus there is approximately 47 percent support for the hypothesis: The similar opinions of members of individual reciprocal friendship structures regarding clothing, appearance and_group acceptance differ from the opinions of non-group members. CHAPTER VIII IMPLICATIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Implications The results of this study seem to offer limited support for three of the hypotheses being considered, and they also tend to contradict the popular conception of adolescent conformity in attitudes, values and behavior. At least 67 percent of the population agreed on only eleven responses. However, the questions on which agreement was shown were the more basic questions. For example, the girls agreed that cloth- ing influenced the popularity of a girl at East Lansing High School. The girls failed to agree, however, on the underlying values and opinions such as the reasons why clothing influenced popularity. Although the Coleman study of adolescents in nine high schools found conformity, the conformity varied from school to school. In a university school, one which more closely resembled East Lansing, the importance of good looks for membership in the leading crowd declined sharply over four years.1 Perhaps the underlying values governing clothing and appearance decline in importance for adolescents in a university type of setting. In addition to the exposure to the atmosphere of a university community, many of the East Lansing students have traveled extensively, both in the states and abroad. This could provide a wider range of experience on which the girls may have based their evaluations. 1Coleman, p. 56. 113 114 Findings in the area of adolescent conformity tend to vary in other studies. For example, Russell, in studying the dress conformity of adolescent girls, found a slight tendency for girls to conform less to peer dictates in clothing as they became older. Twelfth grade girls showed the least tendency to conform in all situations.1 Elkin and Westley have suggested that for the upper middle class adolescent, a distinct adolescent culture does not exist. The study was comtfleted on a small, atypical sample consisting of 20 adolescents, 20 parents and 20 life histories obtained in an upper middle class suburban community near Montreal; however, the characteristics of the community do somewhat resemble the atypical characteristics of East Lansing. Elkin and Westley suggested that adolescents in peer groups are not compulsively independent, but internalize and express family values.2 In the present study an additional analysis of the individual RFS's, which showed the most extensive agreement in responses, was completed in order to determine if there were factors present in the groups which differed from other groups. The four RFS's, or segments of larger RFS's, showing the greatest agreement were RFS's 4023, 414, 401 and 421. The most obvious similarity between the groups was size; each contained no more than four members who had participated in the study. It appears that a small group is more likely to express similar 1Sallye Sue Russell, "Conformity in Dress as Expressed by Certain Clothing Attitudes of a Selected Group of Adolescent Girls," (unpublished Master's thesis, University of Tennessee, 1963). P. 43. 2Frederick Elkin and William Westley, "The Myth of Adolescent Culture," American Sociological Review, Vol. 20 (1955), p. 684. 115 opinions, and perhaps be more cohesive. The individual groups were also similar in social class composition. Although only one was completely homogeneous in social class composition, the others were relatively homogeneous. It is important to note that the middle social class mem— bers of the predominantly lower social class RFS, RFS 401, were in the lower portion of the middle class ratings and the middle social class member of the predominantly upper social class RFS, RES 414, was borderline toward upper social class. These particular groups also had a similar level of, academic achievement. The four RFS's and segments of RFS's included three of the four RFS's which had similar grade point average. In addition, the members of RFS 402B all had C averages. Other factors which were checked, but which did not reveal any similarities, were the number of reciprocated choices within the group and location of houses within the same neighborhood. There are a number of other variables which exist within this particular group of twelfth grade girls which could be checked as pos- sfl5le factors influencing the opinions expressed by the girls. These include geographic mobility, age, social class, academic achievement, affiliation of parents with town or university and the existence of reference groups outside the school situation. Recommendations Data collections for the four year longitudinal project of which this study is a portion have been completed. In working with this portion, the following ideas for drawing together certain aspects of the data have emerged: l) 2) 3) 4) 5) 6) 116 additional analysis of the current data from the standpoint of comparing the clothing responses with the other variables such as social class and town and university affiliation. comparison of the responses given by the girls as ninth and twelfth graders from both the social class and social accept- ance perspectives. case studies of the girls named as "most popular," "best dressed" and "not dressed right" utilizing the data obtained in the entire longitudinal study. depth study of RFS 407, which emerged as the "leading crowd" in the ninth and twelfth grade studies. comparisons of the opinions of the isolates with those of the RFS members in the following manner: a) unchosen isolates with chosen isolates. b) unchosen isolates with RFS members. c) chosen isolates with the RFS into which they were chosen. d) isolates who chose with the RFS into which they chose. analysis of the opinions of mutual pairs as individual recip- rocated dyads rather than a total category as included in this study. In addition to analysis on the current data, similar longitudinal studies could be conducted in school situations with populations which have more diverse social class and educational backgrounds. 117 Contributions of the Study "As human beings within a society develop social selves, dress and adornment are intimately 1inked to their interacting with one another. These personal accouterments assist the individual in presenting his image and expressing himself."1 Wax suggests that the continual pre- occupation of the late adolescent in experimentation with her appear- ance is a result of a search for a self image with which she can be comfortable.2 This study may contribute to the knowledge of the relation- ship of clothing and appearance to adolescent behavior in peer groups if parents and educators gain further insights and information about the value systems and friendships of teenage girls. 1'Mary Ellen Roach and Joanne Bubolz Eicher, Dress, Adornment, and the Social Order (New York: John Wiley and Sons, Inc., 1965), p. 42. 2Wax, p. 591. 118 "We have two types of groups here. In one, dress is important more from the standpoint of being neat and clean. You must also have a nice personality, interest in school and be willing to go along with the crowd, as long as it doesn't hinder your own ideas. In the other type. group you should be a good dresser, neat, something like a show- piece and really built. You must not have your own opinions, or be a leader as others would resent it; you must be a willow. This group looks for what they can gain." An East Lansing High School Senior BIBLIOGRAPHY BIBLIOGRAPHY Back, K. W. "Influence Through Social Communication," Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, XLVI (1959), 9-23. Berkowitz, L. "Group Standards, Cohesiveness and Productivity," Human Relations, VII (1954), 509-519. Bjorngaard, Arlene. "The Relationship of Social Class and Social Acceptance to Clothing and Appearance of a Selected Group of Ninth Grade Girls," Unpublished Master's thesis, Michigan State University, 1962. Bonney, M. E. "Popular and Unpopular Children: A Sociometric Study," Sociometry Monographs, 1x. New York: Beacon.House, 1947. Brookover, Wilbur B. and Gottlieb, David. A Sociology of Education. New Yorkt.American Book Company, 1964. Byrd, Eugene. "A Study of Validity and Constancy of Choices in a Sociometric Test," Sociometry, XIV (1951), 175-181. Cannon, Kenneth L., Staples, Ruth and Carlson, Irene. "Personal Appearance as a Factor in Social Acceptance," Journal of Home Economics, XLIV (1952), 710—713. Cartwright, Dorwin and Zander, Alvin. Group Qynamics: Research and Theory, 2nd ed. Evanston, Ill.: Row Peterson and Co., 1960. Coleman, James S. The Adolescent Society. New York: Free Press, 1961. Dewey, Richard and Humber, W. J. The Development of Human Behavior. New York: The Macmillan Company, 1951. Dunphy, Dexter C. "The Social Structure of Urban Adolescent Peer Groups,” Sociometry, XXVI, No. 2 (June, 1963), 230-246. Eicher, Joanne B. and Kelley, Eleanor A.. "Adolescent Girls' View- points from Ninth through Twelfth Grade Concerning Dress, Social Acceptance and Related Factors." Unpublished research in process for Michigan State University Agricultural Experiment Station. Elkin, Frederick and westley, WilliamwA. "The Myth of Adolescent Culture," American Sociological Review, XX (1955), 680-684. 120 121 Festinger, L., Schacter, S. and Back, K. Social Pressures in Informal Groups: A Study of a Housing Project. New York: Harper, 1950. Flugel, J. C. The Psychology of Clothes. London: The Hogarth Press, 1950. Ginsberg, Eli. Values and Ideals of American YOuth. New York: Columbia University Press, 1961. Good, Carter V. and Scates",IDouglas E. Methods of Research. New York: Appleton—Century—Crofts, Inc., 1954. Gordon, C. Wayne. The Social System of the High School. Glencoe, Ill.: The Free Press, 1957. Gottlieb, David and Reeves, John. Adolescent Behavior in Urban Areas. East Lansing, Michigan: Bureau of Research and Publications, Michigan State University, College of Education and Extension, 1962. Hallworth, H. J. "Sociometric Relationships Among Grammar School Boys and Girls Between the Ages of Eleven and Sixteen Years," Socio- metry, XVI (1953), 39-70. Hare, Paul A. Handbook of Small Group Research. New York: Free Press, 1962. Hollingshead, August B. Elmtown‘s Youth. New York: John Wiley and Sons, Inc., 1949. Hurlock, Elizabeth B. Adolescent Development. New York: McGraw- Hill Book Co., Inc., 1955. Hurlock, Elizabeth B. Developmental Psychology. New York: McGraw- Hill Book Co., Inc., 1959. Jahoda, Marie, Deutsch, Morton and Cook, Stuart W. Research Methods in Social Relations. New York: The Dryden Press, 1951. Josselyn, Irene M. "The Older Adolescent," Values and Ideals of American Youth. Eli Ginsberg, editor. New York: Columbia Univer- sity Press, 1961. Kahl, Joseph A. The American Class Structure. New York: Rinehart and Company, Inc., 1957. Lindzey, Gardner and Borgatta, E. F. "Sociometric Measure," Handbook of Social Psychology, 1. Gardner Lindzey, editor, Reading, Mass.: Addison 7We$1ey Publishing Co“, 1959. Linton, Ralph. "Age and Sex Categories," American Sociological Review, VIII (1942), 589-603. 122 Loomis, Charles P. and Pepinsky, Harold B. "Sociometry, 1937-1947: Theorytand Methods," Sociometry, XI (August, 1948), 262-287. Martindale, Donald. American Society. Princeton, New Jersey: D. Van Nostrand Company, Inc., 1960. McCormick, Thomas and Francis, Ray. Methods of Research in the Be- havioral Sciences. New York: Harper and Bros., 1958. Moreno, J. L. Who Shall Survive. Beacon, New York: Beacon House, Inc., 1953. Mouton, J. S., et. al. "The Validity of Sociometric Responses," Sociometry, XVIII (1955), 181—205. Northway, Mary L. .A Primer of Sociometry. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1952. Olmstead, Michael S. The Small Group. New York: Random House, 1959. Pepinsky, Pauline M. "The Meaning of Validity and Reliability," Educational and Psychological Measurements, IX (Spring, 1949), 39-49. Proctor, Charles H. and Loomis, Charles P. "Analysis of Sociometric Data," Research Methods in Social Relations, Part 11. Marie Jahoda, et. al., editors. New YOrk: Dryden Press, 1951. Roach, Mary Ellen and Eicher, Joanne Bubolz. Dress, Adornment,and the Social Order. New York: John.Wiley and Sons, Inc., 1965. Russell, Sallye Sue. "Conformity in Dress as Expressed by Certain Clothing Attitudes of a Selected Group of Adolescent Girls,” Unpublished Master's thesis, University of Tennessee, 1963. Selltiz, Claire, Jahoda, Marie, Deutsch, Morton and Cook, Stuart W. Research Methods in Social Relations. New York: Henry Holt and Company, Inc., 1960. Silverman, Sylvia 8. "Clothing and Appearance," The Adolescent. Jerome M. Seidman, editor. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, Inc., 1960. Smith, Mapheus. "Some Factors in Friendship Selections of High School Students," Sociometry, VII (1944), 303-313. Stone, Gregory P. "Appearance and the Self," Human Behavior and Social Processes: An Interactionist Approach. Arnold M. Rose, editor. New York: Houghton.Mifflin Company, 1961. United States Bureau of the Census. Michigan General Population Characteristics. 1960. 123 Warner, Lloyd W., Meeker, Marcia and Eells, Kenneth. Social Class in America. Chicago: Science Research Associates, Inc., 1949. Wass, Betty. "Clothing as Related to Role Behavior of Ninth Grade . Girls," Unpublished Master's thesis, Michigan State University, 1962 e Wax, Murray. "Themes in Cosmetics and Grooming,".American Journal of Sociology, LXII (1957), 588-593. Williams, Madelyn. "Opinions on Clothing, Appearance and Group Accept- ance as Factors in Group Cohesion of Ninth Grade Girls," Unpublished Master‘s thesis, Michigan State University, 1963. APPENDIX A WHAT THIS IS ALL ABOUT You may recall that Michigan State University has been doing a study of the opinions of young people in Michigan. Since we are still working on the study, we would like to see what has happened to the people in your grade. Therefore, we would like you to fill out again the part about yourself and your class. You can help us best by answering the following questions as clearly and carefully as you can. If there is something you do not understand, ask questions. You will be helped as much as possible. This information is confidential. No one you know, including your teachers, will ever see what you have written. 1. Your name , , last first middle 2. Address 3. When were you born? . . ‘Menth Day Year 4. What is the name and location of the last grade school you attended? 125 126 5. How many clubs or organizations in school and outside of school do you belong to? In school Outside None None One One Two Two Three Three Four or more Four or more 6. Please list the clubs and organizations you belong to: 7. The people with whom we share secrets and spend most of our time are usually referred to as our "best friends." write the names of your two "best girl friends" in the 12th grade in the East Lansing High School. (If you only have one person you consider a "best friend," write her name only, and if you have no one, leave the space blank). 1. 2. If you have more than two "best girl friends" in the 12th grade, write their names in the space below. If your ”best girl friends" are in another grade, write their names in the space below. Name Grade If your "best girl friends'are in another school, write their names in the space below. Name Name of School Grade 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 127 What church do you go to? How many living brothers and sisters do you have? (Circle the correct number on each line, and 0 if none.) Brothers 0 l 2 3 4 or more Sisters 0 1 2 3 4 or more Who contributes pppp to the financial support of your family? Your father Your mother Some other person (Explain who this person is. For example, "my brother," "my uncle." How far did this person mentioned above go in school? No schooling Some grade school Graduated from grade school Some high school Graduated from high school Some college Graduated from college Don't know Other (Explain) What does this person do for a living? (write in the complete name or title of his or her job, not the company he or she works for.) Describe as accurately as possible what this person makes or does on the job. (For example: he supervises the work of 15 office clerks; he sells from door to door; he operates a farm of 160 acres, etc.) Does any other person contribute to the financial support of your family? Yes No If yes, explain who (mother, father, brother, etc.) What does this person do? APPENDIX B CONFIDENTIAL INTERVIEWa What this is all about The youth of a community are in many respects the most important element of our society. There is a great deal written and said about this age group, but much of it is not based on facts. You may recall that Michigan State University has been doing a study which is intended to supply important information about the opinions of young people. Since we are still working on this study we need your cooperation once more. You can help best by answering the questions as clearly and carefully as possible. I would like your honest reaction to what adolescents think. YOu may think about the question and take your time in answering it. There are no right or wrong answers. we want to know what your opinions are. Different people will have different opinions. This information is confidential. Your name will never be used and no one you know will know what you have said. 8Appendix B reduced to one—third of original interview schedule which allowed adequate space for recording responses. 129 130 Now I would like to begin by asking you some questions about what would happen if a new girl came into your grade at school. 1. 10. 11. 12. 13. If a new girl came to East Lansing High School, describe the most important things she should do if she wanted to get in with the popular girls. What characteristics are used in judging a new girl in East Lansing? What characteristics do you use in choosing a friend? Do you think it is difficult to make friends in East Lansing High School? No If yes, why do you think it is difficult? Yes What are some important things that one should do in order to be popular in your group? What are the characteristics of the most popular girl in the twelfth grade? Who is the most popular girl in the twelfth grade? Does the clothing of the popular girls in the twelfth grade differ from the clothing of the other girls? No If yes, how does their clothing differ? Yes Do you think clothing influences a girl's popularity at East Lansing High School? No Why or why not? Yes How do your clothes compare with those of other girls in school? How does your group of friends compare in dress with other groups at school? What are the characteristics of the best dressed girl in the twelfth grade? Who do you think is the best dressed girl in the twelfth grade? 14a. 14b. 14c. 15. 16. 17a. 17b. 18a. 18b. 18c. 18d. 131 Is there anything about yourself you would like to change? No If yes, what is the main thing you would change? Yes Anything else? Do you think you would make a different impression on others if you could make these changes? No If yes, why do you think this change will cause you to Yes make a different impression? If yes, do you think it would be easier to make friends if you made these changes? No If yes, why do you feel this way? Yes Most people like to have others approve of their clothing. Whose approval of your clothing means the most to you? Why? Do some clothes give you more self-confidence than others? No If yes, which ones? Yes Why? Do you have a best friend? No If yes, what is your best friend’s name? Yes Do you think that the manner in which your best friend dresses is a reflection on you? By that I mean, do others judge you by the way your best friend dresses? No If yes, why do you think this way? Yes Are there any girls in the twelfth grade who do not dress right? No If yes, why do you think their clothes are not right? Yes How would you describe the clothes of these girls who do not dress right? Besides not dressing right, please describe any other characteristics of these girls. WOuld you please tell me who they are? Do they have many friends? No If yes, are their friends dressed right? Yes No If no, what's wrong with the way they dress? Yes 19. 20. 21. 22. 22a. 23. 24. 25. 132 Do you have any friends that are not dressed right? No If yes, what's wrong with the way they dress? Yes Have you ever come to school dressed differently from the other girls? No If yes, how did you feel when you were dressed Yes differently from the other girls? You may recall that E. Lansing High School used to have "dress- up"day. If you still had such a day and you heard that everyone on "dress-up" day was going to wear a sweat shirt to school and at the last minute they changed their minds but you were not notified and wore one to school, what would you do when you saw them dressed differently? How would you feel? Are you usually satisfied with your general appearance? Yes If no, why not? ' No Are you usually satisfied with your clothes? Yes If no, why not? No Are you usually satisfied with your hair? Yes If no, why not? No Are you usually satisifed with your complexion? Yes If no, why not? No Does your mother make suggestions about the clothes you wear to school? No If yes, do you follow her suggestions? Yes I would like you to answer the next four questions with one of these responses. (Give interviewee card with responses). 26. Do you enjoy wearing your clothes if your friends don't like them ? Almost always Often Sometimes Seldom Never 27. 28. 29. Do you feel ill at Almost always Often Sometimes Seldom Never 133 ease at school because of your clothing? Do others compliment you on the way you dress at school? Almost always Often Sometimes Seldom Never Have you felt embarrassed about the clothes you wear to school? Almost aIWays Often Sometimes Seldom Never If you have felt embarrassed about your clothes, why? :4 "1111111 111111 111 1711 T