AN OBJECTWE STUDY OF PERSONALITY
CHANGES OF COLLEGE STUDENTS

Tinesas {or ”m Dogma of M. A.
MICHIGAN STATE UNWERSITY

Lawrence H. Levey

1961

 

ABSTRACT

AN OBJECTIVE STUDY OF PERSONALITY CHANGES
OF COLLEGE STUDENTS

by Lawrence H. Levey

The present investigation concerned personality changes of
college students based entirely upon objective personality test data.
Previous research in this area has emphasized attitude formation and
change, although a current interest in other areas of personality was
noted.

The Edwards Personal Preference Schedule (EPPS), the Iowa
Picture Interpretation Test (IPIT), and six MMPI—type scales were
administered to a sample of 83 Michigan State University students in
1955 and in 1959. The results suggest that seniors, as opposed to
freshmen, are more independent of others for guidance and emotional
types of support. They are more sophisticated and selfwconfident,
have greater achievement motivation, and seem to be less rigid in
their functioning. They also appear to manifest fewer directly hostile
tendencies. Males and females evidence few differences on the vari-
ables investigated; and much similarity was noted between the person-
ality score shifts of the older and younger male sub-groups, suggesting
that the changes were college-influenced and not solely a function of
chronological age. In general, the findings were felt to be quite
congruent with those of the recent Vassar College study.

Information was also reported concerning the stability of the
various measures employed. The coefficients for the total group of
SS tended to be rather low (average test-retest 3; = .45) but with one

exception were all significant at the 5% level.

Abstract Lawrence H. Levey

The design of the investigation was appraised with respect to the
influence of validity of the measures, the use of volunteer subjects,
representativeness of the sample, differences in test-retest environ-
mental circumstances, and number of subjects. Specific recommenda-

tions for future studies of the problem were also offered.

.- , _ 4 ' ,
ApproveQHJ/é . [/4 (Lg/q
/ Major Pf‘ofW/r

Date}//{z;4 717/ 2 /

 

AN OBJECTIVE STUDY OF PERSONALITY CHANGES
OF COLLEGE STUDENTS

BY

Lawrence H. Levey

A THESIS

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

MASTER OF ARTS

Department of Psychology

1961

/(,r 7’ f? 7'?!

I
.‘, .‘V I J
.v" \' I“
Q. . L' ‘. ‘r~"'-
.. . .1: ‘.

I.“

I

ACKNOWLEDGMENT

Grateful acknowledgment is made to my committee chairman,
Dr. John R. Hurley. His active interest in the research, his sug-
gestions, and his support and friendship were major factors in the

completion of this thesis.

I would also like to thank Dr. Joseph Reyher and Dr. Gerald
F. King for their assistance and for their willingness to serve on

my Committee .

\‘r \‘l >" s" ~lr \" “I \‘f \lr \‘t \‘r \'o
a“ ’I‘ |\ t" a'\ 'l‘ /'\ t|~ r|~ Ii~ r|~ i"

ii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page
INTRODUCTION ......................... 1
METHOD ............................. 7
RESULTS . . . . . . . . .................... 13
DISCUSSION ........................ . . . 22
SUMMARY ............................ 42
REFERENCES .......................... 44
APPENDIX ............................ 47

iii

LIST OF TA BLES

TABLE Page
1. Number of Subjects Completing Either the EPPS, B1,
or IPIT ........... O O O O ........... 11
2. Number of Subjects Completing Each Pair of Tests . . 12
3. Test and Retest Mean Scores and Standard Deviations
of the Twenty-Five Personality Variables ....... 15
4. Test and Retest Mean Scores and Standard Deviations
of the Twenty-Five Personality Variables for Veterans
and Non-Veterans . . . . . ....... . . . ...... 16
5. Mean Differences and 1:_ Values Between Test and
Retest on the Twenty-Five Personality Variables . . . l7
6. Number of Subjects Whose 1959 Test Scores Either
Increased or Decreased in Terms of Their 1955 Scores
on Each of the Twenty-Five Personality Variables . . 18
7. Number of Veterans and Non-Veterans Showing Changes
in Test Scores From 1955 to 1959 on Twenty-Five
Variables ..... O O I I O I O O O O O O O O O O O O O 19
8. Number of Significant Variable Changes According to
Stati-Stical TeSt O ..... O O O O O I O O O O O O O O O 20
9.- Pearsonian Stability Coefficients Between Test and
Retest Scores for Twenty-Five Variables . . . . . . . 21
10. Variables on Which One or More Groups Showed
Significant Changes After Four Years . . . . . . . . . 23

iv

INTRODUCTION

That colleges are expected to produce a variety of changes in
their students is a matter generally taken for granted; however, as
Sanford points out:

Agreement about the aims of liberal education is not
complete, and statements are likely to be somewhat vague--
like statements about the goals of psychotherapy. It seems
clear, however, that liberal education has accepted the task of
familiarizing the student with his cultural heritage and of ex-
ercising his intellect and, in addition, is concerned with the
develOpment of the individual as a whole person. The kinds of
intellectual, moral, social, and emotional characteristics
which the liberal college usually seeks to develop or foster,
and those which it seeks to reduce or to eliminate, are much
like those which concern the psychologist when he thinks about
maturity or health or the optimum functioning of the individual.

It appeared, then, that the study of personality develOp-
ment after the ages of 17 or 18 might yield information that
would ultimately prove useful to the college educator. It ap-
peared also that this study would be interesting and challenging
in its own right, for the area in question is one to which psycholo-
gists have given little attention.

In what ways do peOple change after the age of 17? Are
these changes in the underlying personality structure itself or
merely in behavior? If there are changes in personality, in

1

What. areas and at what levels do these occur? Above all, what
are the determinants and the processes of change? (1956,p. 4)

Previous research into the effects of a college experience on stu-
dents has been concerned with three main areas: (a) changes in skills
and information; (b) changes in mental ability; and (c) changes in values
and attitudes, which has received the bulk of the attention. However,
there has been a recent trend toward the investigation of other aSpects
of personality functioning and development. Although most studies have

been concerned with "relatively molecular types of activities, " to use

Freedman’s term (1961, p. 21), such as the relation between personality
and academic performance, current interest seems to be directed
toward a more "molar" approach to the investigation of personality
change and development of college students.

One reason for the relative lack of previous psychological re-
search into personality change during late adolescence or young adult-
hood has perhaps stemmed from theories stressing the prime importance
of infantile experiences as determinants of personality, and that later
changes are "an expression of diSpositions that have been established
earlier. . . ." (Sanford, 1956, p. 61). However, there has been a
growing influence of theories such as Erikson‘s (1953) which emphasize
the importance of experiences beyond the infantile stage upon personality
deveIOpment.

A comprehensive summary of past studies into the effects of a
college experience upon personality is included in a forthcoming book

edited by Sanford entitled The American College: a Psychological and

 

Social Interpretation of the Higher Learning. After reviewing the rele-

 

vant research and findings, Webster, _e_t all. (1961, Ch. 24), suggest
that our understanding of personality changes of college students is
still quite limited, both in terms of the types and determinants of
change and also in terms of the principles of development that apply

for college students .

The Vas sar Study:

 

The one major exception to the dearth of research in this area
is the investigation known as the Vassar study. Although it has been
described elsewhere (Freedman, 1961; Sanford, 1956; Webster (it 511' ,
1961, Ch. 24), its relevance to the present investigation warrants
brief treatment here. Through a comprehensive program of tests and

retests, of student and alumnae interviews, and of sociological studies,

the investigators attempted to assay, define, and measure the types of
personality changes wrought by a college experience. The research
was carried out at Vassar College, a privately supported, "traditional"
girls' school, which commonly attracts students from an upperu-middle-
or upper-class background.

The specific areas of personality investigated in the study were
as follows: (a) intellectual functioning and achievement; (b) authori—
tarianism and its opposites; (c) femininity and masculinity; and (d) psycho-
logical and physical well-being. Highly substantial NS and a variety of
test batteries, including personality inventories were employed in the
study.

In general, the results indicated that very definite personality
changes do occur. Seniors differed from freshmen in such areas as
maturity, impulse expression, flexibility of functioning, critical
attitudes, self-confidence, and sex role. Specific findings of the Vassar
study will be reported in a later section where they will be compared

with those of the present investigation.

Statement of Problem:

 

The relative lack of information regarding personality changes
in college students stimulated the present study. The Vassar study,
in Spite of its comprehensiveness, has pointed up several Specific
questions. First, how applicable are its findings for a r_n_a_le_ population?
Males and females frequently perform quite differently on various
personality measures (Carlson, 1960). Does college exert a differential
effect on the personality development of the two sexes as determined
by such tests? Secondly, is the Vassar study, in addition to its all-
female sample, further restricted in terms of the socio—economic status
and geographic background of its subjects? Are Vassar students

typical of the average college student? And thirdly, does an investigation

of personality changes of students require the intensive and varied
approaches utilized by the Vassar study, or can such information be

obtained through the sole use of objective types of measurements ?

Description of the Present Study:

 

The present study is a further attempt to investigate personality
changes of college students and to suggest answers to the questions
raised above. Although the findings of the Vassar study might have
been used for making predictions regarding the types and directions
of personality change, the limitations of the present design, to be dis-
cussed below, made it desirable to view the latter less as a Specific
check upon the findings of the former and more as an independent in—
vestigation.

The present study involved the testing of freshmen and their
subsequent retesting as seniors on three personality indices: the
Edwards Personal Preference Schedule (EPPS), the Iowa Picture
Interpretation Test (IPIT), and a set of six scales from the Minnesota
.‘x-‘lultiphasic Inventory (MMPI) but referred to here as the "Biographical
Inventory” (BI). These devices were selected because

each represented a very different approach to personality
measurement. This . . . point may be illustrated by noting
ll‘...L the MMPI scales restrict the S to true-false responses,
the ipsative EPPS requires that S -c_hoose between two statements
supposedly equated for social desirability, and the IPIT requires
that _S_ arrange in rank order a series of four reSponses offered
in conjunction with TAT pictures (Hurley, 1959, p. 1).

It should be noted that the original testing of the subjects was
carried out as part of the design of another study (Hurley, 1959).
The present study evolved when it became known four years later that

many of the §S previously tested were still on campus.

Available for each S, then, were two sets of test scores with a
four year interval between testings. Personality changes were inferred
through statistical analyses of the scores. Because of some of the
limitations in the design (e. g. , extremely small Ne) and the absence
of Specific predictions or hypotheses, it was decided to set the standard
for statistical significance at the .10 level, rather than at the more
rigorous and conventional .05 level. In this way, various trends,
consistencies, and inconsistencies were made easier to identify;
however, the greater opportunity for significant findings to occur by
chance was also recognized.

The areas of personality investigated in the present study were
not so broadly categorized as they were in the Vassar study, but in—
stead consisted of the twenty-five variables purportedly measured by
the tests themselves; and any changes will be reported in terms of the
definitions of these variables. However, an attempt will be made to
organize the changes into categories that for a more meaningful dis-
cussion and that lend themselves to comparison with the Vassar find-

ings. The variables are listed, by test, and defined in the Appendix.

T e st Stability:

 

The two sets of scores by the same individuals on the same
measures over a four year period allowed for an investigation into the
reliability or stability of the measures themselves. There are few,
if any, articles in the literature reporting on the reliability of tests,
especially those measuring personality variables, over such an ex-
tended period of time with presumably "normal" subjects.
Consequently, these data will be compared with available data obtained

over shorter test-retest intervals.

Summary of the Problem:

 

The matter of personality change during the college years has
received relatively little attention. Except for the Vassar study, the

emphasis has been on attitude, rather than personality, change and

 

develOpment. Although the study conducted as Vassar was both extensive
and comprehensive, it nevertheless raised numerous questions regard-
ing its design and the generalization of its findings to other populations.
The present research, a longitudinal study of college freshmen and»
seniors on three different objective personality measures, is an attempt
to provide further information as to the types of changes that occur in
college and to help clarify the issues left unsettled by the Vassar study.
Secondary to its interest in personality change, the present study is

also able to offer information relating to the stability of the various

measures employed.

METHOD

Personality Measures:

 

Edwards Personal Preference Schedule (EPPS): "The PPS was designed

 

primarily as an instrument for research and counseling purposes, to
provide quick and convenient measures of a number of relatively inde-
pendent normal personality variables" (Edwards, 1959, p. 5). These
variables or "needs" were derived from the work of H. A. Murray
(1938). Specifically, the test

. consists of 210 forced choice items. Each pair of items
is matched approximately for mean social desirability . . . to
minimize the effect of social desirability on item choice. .
Since the items are paired, the total raw score on the test will
be the same for all persons. Thus, the PPS reflects only the
relative strength of competing needs and attitudes rather than
the absolute strength of any need. Hence this test clearly has
the advantages as well as the disadvantages of an ipsative
scale (Merrill and Heathers, 1956, p. 310)

 

Biographical Inventory (BI): The "Biographical Inventory” refers to
the set of six MMPI scales administered to the subjects. Although

the MMPI was intended to serve as a clinical tool, attempting to "as say
those traits that are commonly characteristic of disabling psychological
abnormality" (Hathaway and McKinley, 1951, p. 5), there has been a
recent emphasis on using it with non-hospitalized populations for
research and counseling purposes (Drake and Oetting, 1959; Hurley,
1959).

Both in terms of scales and test directions, the "Biographical
Inventory” represents a modification of the standard MMPI. Three of
the six scales employed in the present study, 1:, l_{_, and lid, are taken
directly from the MMPI as devised by Hathaway and McKinley (1951).
Although restricted to items contained in the original MMPI, the re-

maining three scales, MA, MR, and MH, were devised by other

7

authors (Taylor, 1953; Wesley, 1953; Moldowsky, 1953). The BI,
unlike the MMPI, calls for either a "true“ or "false" response from
the S, who has an added choice of "?" on the standard MMPI. The
six scales included in the B1 are composed of 218 items, with some
items appearing in more than one scale. The items which appear
under each scale, along with a notation as to which reSponse (true or
false) contributes to the particular scale score are shown in the

Appendix.

Iowa Picture Interpretation Test (IPIT): Like the EPPS, the IPIT,

 

a variation of the Thematic Apperception Test, has its origins in the
work of H. A. Murray (1938). Originally developed by Hurley (1955),
the test has undergone some revision, with Form RK (Johnston, 1957)
having been used in the present study. Specifically, the IPIT is an
attempt

. to integrate the objective and quantitative advantages of
traditional paper and pencil personality measures with the so-
called “depth" of projective techniques (Hurley, 1955, p. 372).

Form RK of the IPIT consists of slide reproductions of 24 TAT
cards. When each slide has been projected onto a screen, subjects
are required to rank four alternative choices which represent the
following response classes: Achievement Imagery, Insecurity,
Blandness, and Hostility. A c0py of the alternatives, labelled as to
the class they represent appears in the Appendix.

Note should be taken of the IPIT's somewhat unique scoring
system. As it requires the ranking of four statements, there is an
inverse relationship between the test score and the preference for the
particular class of response. Unlike the scoring for the other two
measures, a "higher" retest score, for example, implies a lesser
preference for the relevant type of response. To avoid the confusion

that might arise over the difference in scoring, the IPIT data will be

discussed in a manner similar to that of the EPPS and BI; i. e. , a
"higher" retest score or a "lower" retest score always implies a
greater or lesser preference respectively. In the tables listing the
mean scores, or-mean differences, however, the inverse relationship

for the IPIT still applies.

Selection of Subjects:

 

All subjects were originally part of a group of 795 entering fresh-
men tested by Hurley in 1955 in an investigation of the relationship
between personality characteristics and scholastic success” . The SS
were divided into three groups, with each group completing a different
pair of the three personality tests described above. These tests were
administered as part of the general college aptitude testing program,

i. e. , on a non-volunteer basis.

The present study, which is unrelated to Hurley's except in the
employment of the same _S_s, was initiated in 1959 when it was ascertained
that approximately 300 of the students who had been tested in 1955 were
still on campus. By means of a letter and/or telephone call, each one
of these remaining Ss was reminded of his 1955 participation and was
asked to assist in the “second phase” of the research. They were also
advised that all volunteers would subsequently be invited to discussion
groups where both the general findings and their own individual test
scores would be reviewed. Approximately 30% of the students contacted

(83 out of 300) appeared for the retest sessions.

De 5 cription of Sample:

 

The 83 subjects making up the sample were all Michigan State
University (MSU) undergraduates, 61 males and 22 females. The mean

age for the males at the time of retesting was 23. 54, with a standard

10

. deviation of 2. 54; for the females, the mean age and standard deviation
were 21. 82 and 1. 30, respectively. As Hurley has pointed out, the
greater age heterogeneity of the males "was probably a reflection of a
high incidence of Korean War veterans" (1959, p. 3). Because of the
possibility that personality scores might be influenced by the age
variable, it was decided to process the data for the ”typical" students
(non-veterans, or younger males) and the veterans separately, as well

1 The absence of 24 year olds in the sample at‘the time of

as together.
retesting made this a convenient separation point between veteran and
non-veteran students. The mean age for the 38 males under 24 years
was 21.74 (which compares with the female mean age of 21.82); and
for the 23 males over 24 years of age, the mean age was 26. 52.
Because of the relatively small number of female _S_s and their greater
age homogeneity, no such dichotomy was employed. The subjects
represented a fairly wide range of majors, with education, business,
agriculture, and the natural and social sciences as the most frequently
noted.

With three exceptions, all §S had been enrolled in MSU since
1955 with only minor or brief absences. The exceptions involved three
males who had been absent for two or more years. The scores for
these particular _S_s were included in the total group computations;
however, they were excluded from the veteran-non-veteran analyses,

in order to help reduce the number of possible factors to be considered

in the discussion of the results.

Experimental Design:

 

As already indicated, the present study was essentially a test-

retest design. _S_s were originally tested in 1955 as part of the freshmen

 

1Although these older students are here referred to as "veterans, "
it is not known specifically if each one had actually had military service.
The terms "veteran“ and ”non-veteran" are retained, however, for the
sake of convenience.

ll

orientation program; and four years later, they were tested again on
a volunteer basis. Approximately ten retest sessions were held,
each lasting two hours with about 9 §S in attendance at each one. In
addition to completing the same two tests they had taken in 1955, all
§S filled out a questionnaire asking for such information as age,
number of years in college, names of psychology courses taken, etc.
After all tests had been scored and checked for errors by the writer,
each S's results were recorded on index cards. From these cards,
the IBM office at MSU transferred the information onto IBM cards for
processing by MISTIC, the MSU computer, under Program K5-M,
which computes correlations, means, and standard deviations. From
this information, the necessary statistical tests were performed by
the writer on a hand calculator.

Because each__S_ had been given two of the three personality
measures employed in the study, the actual number of _S_s completing
each test was less than the total number of §S involved. Table 1 Shows
the number of _S_s, by sex, who completed either the EPPS, the BI, or
the IPIT. Table 2 lists the number of male and female _S_s who com-
pleted the various w of tests (i. e. , either the EPPS and BI, the BI
and IPIT, or the EPPS and IPIT).

Table 1. Number of Subjects Completing Either the EPPS, B1 or IPIT

 

 

EPPS BI IPIT
Males 35 41 44
Females ll 15 18

 

Totals 46 56 62

 

12

Table 2. Number of Subjects Completing Each Pair of Tests

 

 

EPPS and BI EPPS and IPIT BI and IPIT

 

 

Males 45 19 25
Females 4 7 11
Totals 49 26 36

 

Statistical Treatment of the Data:

 

The test-retest scores of the 83 §_S were then analyzed to ob-
tain information on the two matters under investigation: the first,
ihanges in personality as reflected by test score differences over
the four year period; the second, the stability of the various measures
themselves.

Investigation into the matter of personality change was handled
by means of two different statistical analyses. In the first, the
significance of the difference between the 1955 and the 1959 mean scores
on each of the twenty-five variables was determined. The statistical
test used in this analysis was the _t_ test, corrected for correlated
means, as reported by Walker and Lev (1953, p. 154). The second
analysis was concerned with the number of subjects whose 1959 scores
either increased or decreased in terms of their 1955 scores. On the
basis of chance (the null hypothesis), it is expected that approximately
as many _S_s will Show an increase as will Show a decrease on a given
variable. The statistical test used to determine the significance of
this prOportion of _S_s changing in either direction is the Sign test, a
non~parametric test reported in Edwards (1954, p. 208), and which is

a variant of the chi square test.

 

Test stability was determined by correlating SS 1955 scores
with their 1959 scores. Computation of these Pearsonian correlations

was accomplished by MISTIC.

RESULTS

Mean Score Changes:

 

Table 3 lists the mean scores and standard deviations for all
male SS, all females, and for the combined sexes on each of the three
tests for both 1955 and 1959. Table 4 presents the same information
for the male veterans and non-veterans. In each table, Iwhere the mean
score in 1959 differs significantly (p. < .10) from the corresponding
mean score in 1955 (t_ test), it is so indicated. All mean differences

and t_ values are listed in Table 5.

Changes in Direction of Scores:

 

Table 6 shows the number of SS, by sex, whose 1959 scores
either decreased or increased in terms of their 1955 scores. This
information for the veterans and non-veterans is contained in Table 7.
Statistical significance of the proportions (p. < .10) is also indicated

on each table (Sign test).

Statistical Agreement of Significant Findings:

 

 

Note that statistical significance as obtained by one analysis is
not always supported by a similar finding from the other analysis.
Table 8 lists the number of variables, by group, which showed significant
changes, according to the statistical test employed. Also shown is the
number of changes on which there is statistical agreement by Seth
analyses.

Except for the female data, there appears to be a reasonable

amount of agreement between the two statistical tests on the number of

13

14

Significant results. The greater inconsistency of findings for the

females can be partially attributed to their small NS.

Te st Stability:

 

Table 9 lists the test-retest reliability coefficients (or stability
coefficients) over the four year interval on the twenty-five variables
for all 53, females, males, non-veterans, and veterans. Significance

of these Pearsonian correlations is indicated (p. < .10).

15

xao.u..av
3o . v .3

U

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

.AOH . V .3 undemmwsmflm ma madman ponflnopcfi 025 04.3 Goobfion, coconofifip 03H.“
meg: omd woéeomwfio HmAZ 2.6 hiohnaoéh hmd vmfi owéeocefio 3.4
wmd 90.x mfmm owmdo wm.m Neg: medvommém om.w TVS moémommdo m .m
mwfi. mmd wcéoowofim emé. 00.x. owdofiomdm wwé. Add wfiéoofivém H .N
Nod 0N6 owdmnwoém mod mo§ mmém omdm 2..» 3.5 wodmnemfim 3» .H
me M Z 2 Z 3 N Z HHQH
emé 2 .m om .wZ oooAN mm .m have mm.wfio om.mm awé NH ..m Neda fiwodm M22 .0
mph mic Nw.:. NH.NZ new .26 2.5 oo.o~ Nw.m Hmd mm.NH coda 32 .m
5.0.5 «Nd mNJL Sada Nwéu mod emdfl moJL omé. mmé. oméA wmfi: <2 .e
N56 Hm.m om.mH welma meow mo;q 3a.“: owed wN.m :6.N Nada m>.mH pnm .m
Nbé Ho.“q Main: ow.m~ mmé mm.m ow§H 3a.“; wbé woe max: NNKZ M ..N
coin. wad cod 0 0N6 No; 2.4 mm.m 0 Sim mo.~ : .N N¢.N o mwd A .IHII
om Z mg n Z 1v n Z in
ao.m ae.e om.~s s¢.- ww.e we.m ms.ss mm.os e2.m e2.e os.~s so.ms was .ms
o¢.m No.m emcfio wN.mH ofim pod maima 00;: med 33m owdfiuemémfi Hog 3:
1v.m mud omJL end; mm...‘ 2.6 QUNZ mm.m._ Sud 0mg"V owJL FMAZ ps0 .mZ
em .v mes.“ oodfim N0.~Z «.N :v mm.m M: .omorm: .NZ 5.4. vo .m 21: Po :3 wflo .NZ
cosv omé. weéa N>.mH ov.m SUM mmég NwJL How ové mmdamhméa us: .:
vmé Eugv v¢.:o 31*; No.“‘ wo.m ZZNH oo.m~ the age mo.: uoNJL and .oZ
med maé vNKH wmg: wfim Mme moi: >N.mZ mim 2.6 mmdfifioodfi Son .9
ss.¢ No.¢ om.w u sH.oH aw.m mH.e sm.e .mms.fiw. mm.e em.¢ Ha.w .see.o 05m .w
Hm.m 00% meg: 00...: emé mod. Nw§Z NNKZ calm mmé 2‘4: hmél «GM .N.
00.“. bad. nmJL om.mH mim end. 00...: mag: N06 3‘4. :4; mm.¢~ “we .0
qmé >58 metal vm.mH 23m v~.¢ 2.4L NNA: 31¢ oo.m 3.4L modfi use .m
33m 33m wwéfi owed vim 31m NNJL Nwda wwé Hw.m vméé m~.m~ 53 3v
«or oozv mm.: 5 .: 33¢ o¢.¢ NNAZ moodg wmé mko 00.: ~38: Uuo .m
No...” EHN mo.:...n$®..NH Hmé 2.3m NNJH an..mZ :..m Tm..m >>.: oodg mop .N
page. Ame om.£.rmco.: Hogs. N04. 2.: £222 Noe f .e cog: pox: com .H
ovuZ 3 uZ mng . . mnmnwnm
0mm; mmofi mommL mmofi mama: mmg ommfi mmmL 0mm; mmmfi 0mm; mm: ognmmum>
Om warez Qm mcmoz Om. mcmoz was $08
pecan—500 moZeEcum mofimz

momfldwkmxr swuflmGOmhvnH O>whu>ucm~38 OS”— .«0 mfiofiumfzmwfl Uhdpadum USN mULOUw Ede; unmanned paw amok.

.M maflmrfi

Qt

>

\f

.. .c...

, cf

.01!)

I [K

l6

Aso.v x00

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

30¢ .3
.AoH . v.3 05800303 mg 9235 mocfipmpcd 026. 0:0 Cook/009 oodonommwp 2:.”
00.3 00.0 00.0n 6 00.00 00.0 00.0 00.0n .m 00.00 E .0
00.0 00.0 00.H0 0 00.00 o0.n 00.n 00.00 6 00.00 m .0
00.0 00.0 n0.00 o 00.n0 00.n 00.0 0n.o0 6 00.00 H .0
00.0 00.0 00.00 a n0.n0 00.0 00.0 no.00 00.00 F. .H
00 Z n0 Z HHnHH
00.0 00.0 00.: 00.0Z H00 00.0 00.0Z n. 0040 ~22 .0
00.0 H0.n 00.0H n. 00.0H 00.0 00.0 0H.0H 0n.0Z $04 .0
00.0 n0.n no.0Z 00.0H 00.n 00.n 0H.0H 00.0H <2 .0
00.0 00.0 no.0Z 00.0H 0n.0 00.0 0Z.0H 00.0H pnm .0
070 00.0 no.2 m n0.0H Z00 0H0 00.0H 00.0H M .0
00A 0H.0 00.0 00.0 004 2.0 0n; 6 00.0 4 .HI
0H Z 00 n Z Hm
00.0 «w.m 0m.ms mo.es mm.m nw.m 00.2H o0.ss was .ms
00.0 0H.0 0n.0H 00.0H 0n.0 00.0 00.0H o 0H.0Z no: .0H
00.0 00 .0 00.0H 00.0H 0H .0 00.0 00.0H 00.0H 0:0 .0a
wn.m mo.e 20.00 0 00.m~ mw.0 00.m os.0H mn.sH are .00
00.0 H0.0 0a.: 00.0H nn.0 00.0 00.0Z 00.0H use .:
00.0 00.0 no.3 n Zn.0Z 00.0 00.0 00.0Z 00.0H .mnm .0H
00.0 0n.0 00.: 00.0H 00.0 00.0 00.0H 00.: 500 .0
00.0 0n.0 00.0 Zn.0 n0.0 Ho.0 00.0 00.3 odm .0
00.0 00.0 Zn.0Z Zn.0H 00.0 00.0 00.0H 00.0H 05 .n
00.0 00.0 00.: 00.0Z 00.0 00.0 00.0H 00.0Z he .0
00.0 00.0 00.0Z 0.00 00.0 H0.0 0Z.0H 00.00 use .0
0H .0 00.0 00.00 00.0H 00.0 00.0 on.0Z 00.0H 3x0 .0
00.0 00.0 0n.0H 00.: 00.0 0.0 00.2 00.0H who .0
00.0 00.0 00.: n0.0Z 00.0 00.0 0700 on.0H Hop .0
00.0 00.0 00.0Z 0. 0n.0Z n0.0 on.0 0n.m; 00.0Z nod .H
0H n Z 00 .nZ mmmm
32 $2 $2 $2 $2 $2 $2 $2 033...;
Om memo: Om mcmowz 0cm umoB
washouo> weapons/602
mcwnoamcrssoz pad 98.803» 302 .50
mofiwim> 32mc0mnonm o>whn>0co38 on» 00 mcoflegefl pnwpcmum ppm. mouoom 9002 $300 one. Eng. .0 030.0

l7

8. v .00 mmo.v do. 2:. v.9.

2030050 soon. mm: I0- .HOH swam ms» .qoflmusmmonm 00 @000 uohm

.28... 32.: $3 .8003 m 3:86.: .1:

cud

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

02.... Bis .34 3...... USA 35 mom; 0...... 03.5 om.m m .0.
02.6 5.0- uewa 3.0- 03.0 30- umm.m $.0- uoes 3.0- m .m
smog ES .8... 2.4. owns. 00.0 some 3... 03.0 E... H .N
some 8.0- 0.04 3.0- 05.0 050- E; 34...- 080 3d. 2. .2
2”: Sue we”: in: 0...”: En:
2.4 $4- 030 $.N- eons 3.0- .005 5;..- noes £0- 02 .0
gems. 3;..- $4 2.; 2.. cm. - S. S. - 3.. mm. - 52 .m
mm; 2.? mm. 84- Z; 24- 3. so;- eog S;- <2 .0.
$4 3.2- 1... f. - 0m. 00. - mm. 3. so; .3. - E .m
was 00.2 0.... mm. N: 3. 0.... 3.. 0: E. m.~
ow. mm. - ”.35 mad- oaoe 2;.- ooos. 3.? “.34. $4- AMI
Sue mmnc 0...”: 2n: :7... 5
$4 $4- 3. om: 3. 2. - 2.. 2.2 ow. nm. - was .2
mm. m: “.23 on... owed and S; m: ”and 25 so: .3
0.... 2.. S; 2.4- S. 2.. - S. 2. 2.. 3.. - e8 .2
”.31... SIN 3; mos- won; 84 03.0 8.... 00. 3.. was .2
am; 24- :.. 2..- emg 2.. - 3.. nm. - in; 3.7 ha .:
0:..N $.0- 0mg 34- 03.... 3;..- 34 mod- “.50 00.? Be .2
3. 00. $4 34 mm; on. 5. 2.7 new; $4 82.. .m.
$4 an;- mm; 34- 03.0 E;- mmms 3.....- nmmd 34- as... .w
8.. 84 No.2 34 2.2 so. mm. mm. o: no; as .s
S... om: $4 3.4- 34 2..- em; NM:- mog 00.- mm .0
2.. 2.. 2.. 24 em; 2.. 2.. 3.4 me. E. 5.... .m
mm. .2..- 00. mm: on. 2..- em. 3.. on. S.- 58 4.
S: 2.; «o. mo. 2. f. macs NM:- om. E. e8 .m
mm. 2..- .S. $.- nsos :4- «8.0 3.? mm; $.- E. .N
03$ Sin 3. S: 2.; 2.; some 85 2.2 ya. an... 4
in: 81. 3...... 2...... 2...... mnEm
.- m -. m . m. ... m a m
00> .0v>-.COZ CQEAEOD 02088-0 mod-mg

 

 

mQEdEd> 330500.500 v>flhn>0coBB 0:0 co 000.qu use 00.0.0 :00?qu ”9.35.02 m- psm mooseunmfié can;

. 0 “:an

2o...o.v.2mo...vn2 ..2v-22m
.moaommumu 025 was Swanson >Smdwm 63.98 0.295 ucdumnoo Umadmfimu mouoow omen?» mm~

#0032222. .m >9. 3222 mmmcommvn “Gd->392 mo 202.222.2222 23 222 02220.22: 22m mgmumucw ouoom 203w“; <2 .

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

18

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

2. J 22 . 22 J.- 22, 22 m .2.
.22 2.! 22. 22. m . 2 2. o. 2 m .m
22. a 22 222 . mm o 2. 2 .N
22.2 22-. 2o 2 2. 22.. .2
.22
2.... 2 22 2. n2 2 222 .o
om 2 2» 22 22 2222 .m
22 22. 2» 2 2 <2 .2.
2 2 222 22.2 22 2.n2 .22
22. 22. w 22 22 v2 .2
22. 22 22 22 u 222 -2 ..2|
. 2m
22 22 2. 2 22 22 mm... .2
2 om 2. p 2 m 2. 222 .2
2 2 .2 m 2 2.2 2.8 .2
2 22 m m 2 m 2. 220 .2
2.2 2 22. 2.2 22.2 22 22 .3: .22
222 .2 22.2 22 2m 2.2 A2 22 and .2
22 22. .2 m 222 m 22 802. .2.
22. m 22 22 2.2 2 2 2.... .w
2 2 m m 2 2 .2 .2.
22 22 m m 22 22 . 2... :2
22 22 2m 2m 2 2 222 .m
22 22. 2m 2m 2 2 2.8 .2.
2 2.2 m m 2.2 2 2.8 .m
2.... m 2 22. 2m 22 2... 22 22. .N
22 m 22.. 2m 2m 2 22 .23... .2
mmmm
mm2v$2 A22.22.22 22.322 22322 222.22 2232.2 22.2282
@02223800 wmfimamh 223.32 flaw amok.

 

 

Ill-I. i’l'

.2 22332222.? >2_..22mcom2.-.mnm ELM-isoks-fi 2.3 «0 20mm do mououm mmmL
.2223. m0 2.82.2.9 2.22 vmmdmuomQ no vow-2.6.202: 2052mm mouoom ammu- mmofi vmo£3 muumflndw mo none-2222 .o 2:an

19

Table 7. Number of Veterans and Non-Veterans Showing Changes in
Test Scores From 1955 to 1959 on Twenty-Five Variables“ ’-

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Test and Non-Veterans Veterans
Variable 1959>1955 1959<1955 1959>1955 1959<1955
EPPS
‘1. ach 10.5 9.5 9.5 4.5
2. def 9.5 10.5 4 10
3. 0rd 11 9 9 5
4. exh 9 11 7 7
5. aut 11.5 8.5 8 6
6. aff 7.5 12.5 8 6
7. int 10.5 9.5 8.5 5.5
8. suc 6 14 7 7
9. dom 15 b 5 7.5 6.5
10. aba 7 13 4 10
11. nur 6.5 13.5 4.5 9.5
12. Chg 10 10 12.5 c 1.5
13. end 6 14 7 7
14. het 14 6 9 5
15. agg 7 13 4.5 9.5
B1
TL 2.5 c 22.5 6 9
2. K 13 12 9.5 5.5
3. Pd 12 13 4.5 10.5
4. MA 10.5 14.5 7.5 7.5
5. MH 16 9 2 C 13
6. MR 8.5 16.5 5 10
IPIT
1 A1 13.5 13.5 11.5 a 3.5
2.. I 5.5 c 21.5 2.5 b 12.5
3. B 19.5 b 7.5 13.5 c 1.5
4. H 10.5 16.5 3 b 12.

 

 

1A higher score indicates an increase in the number of relevant re3ponses
made by a subject.

2S5 whose scores remained constant were divided equally between the

two categories.

ap. <.10
C:p. <.05
p, <.01

20

Table 8. Number of Significant Variable Changes, According to Group
and Type of Statistical Test"~

 

Number of

Number of

Number of Change 8

 

Group Changes Changes Agreed on by
(t test) (Sign test) Both Tests

Males 11 11 9

Females 10 2 2

All §S 12 11 11

Veterans 9 6 6

Non-Veterans 6 4 3

 

*p. < .10

Table 9.

Pearsonian Stability Coefficients Between Test and Retest
Scores for Twenty-Five Variablesl

 

Pre s ent Study

 

 

 

Test and Combined Non-

Variable .Sexes Females Males Veterans Veterans
EPPS N246 =11 N=35 N=ZO N=14
1.. ach .456 .556 .42b .30 .64b
2. def .21 .45 .10 .10 .12
3. 0rd .34b .79C .23 .27 .19
4. exh .436 .64b .39b .45b .30
5. aut .27b .16 .31a .21 .46a
6. aff .536 .51a .596 .556 .60b
7. int .33b .20 .32a .13 .56b
8. suc .656 .746 .586 .626 .52b
9. dom .456 .57a .38b .22 .69C

:0. aba .32b .43 .30a .576 .05
11. nur .536 .34 .566 .44b .726
12. Chg .56C .73C .536 .52b .726
13. end .54C .47 .576 .656 .37
14. het .26b .24 .38b .36 .48a
15. agg .62C .71C .60C .60C .56b
_1_3_1__ N=56 N=15 N=4l N=25 N215
1. L .55C .36 .57C .576 .696
2. K .556 .26 .61C .59C .686
3. Pd .41C .58b 30a .35a .23
4. MA .616 .776 .516 .526 .56b
5. MH 586 .004 .666 .746 .68b
6. MR 37C .39 .38b .16 .62b
IPIT N=62 N=18 N=44 N=27 N=15
1. AI .28b .446 .16 -.003 .4961
2. I .446 .47b .426 .34a .58b
3. B .51C .626 .39C .22 .54b
4. H .366 .43a .24 —.02 .55b

 

1Four year interval between test and retest.

ap. <.10
p.~< .05
Cp. < .01

DISC USSION

Prior to any discussion of personality changes in college students,
some attention should be given to the factors relating to or influencing
the general findings. Preceding an evaluation of these findings, then,
will be sections dealing with (a) statistical aspects of the results;

(b) differences between male and female 83; and (c) differences between
veterans and non-veterans. These will be followed by a review of the
significant results and comparisons with other findings. The secondary

concern of the study, test stability, will be dealt with last.

Personality Score Changes

Statistical ASpects: For ease of presentation, Table _1_(_)_ is a relisting of

 

those variables on which at least one of the groups of 83 showed a signifi-
cant Change after four years as determined by the t and/or Sign test.
Prior to any interpretation, it should be noted that in terms of the number

of significant results, their consistency among the various groups, and

 

the 1.31.3.8 of changes themselves, these statistically significant findings
do not appear attributable to more random or chance occurrences.
Regarding the number of findings, Table 8 should prove helpful in an
evaluation. Looking only at the male and female results, of the 50 t_ tests
performed, 21 (or 42%) were significant at or beyond the . 10 level.

On the basis of chance alone, only five significant findings would have
been expected. On the s_ig_ritest, 13 (or 26%) of the analyses were sig-
nificant, with five having been expected to arise by chance. The fact that
the female data produced only two significant results, which does not
differ from chance expectations, is noteworthy. But the total number

of significant findings, for the two sexes, eSpecially on the more

22

23

Table 10. Variables on Which One or More Groups Showed Significant
Changes After Four Yearsl, Z

 

 

 

 

Test and Non~

Variable All Ss Females Males Veterans Veterans
EPPS

1. ach I I I
2. def D D D

3. 0rd D

8. suc D D D

9. dom I I

10. aba D D

11. nur D

12. Chg I I I I
14. bet I I I

B1

1. L D D D D

2. K I
5. MH D
6. MR D D D D

IPIT

1. A1 I I I
2. I D D D D D
3. B I I I I I
4. H D D D D D

 

1Analyses by means of t and sign test (p. < . 10).
2"1“ refers to an increase in the relevant response.
“D" refers to a decrease in the relevant reSponse.

24

sensitive t test, appears to be in excess of that expected by chance

alone.

Sex Differences: In terms of both type and direction of change, the two

 

sexes displayed considerable agreement. Of the 25 variables, males
andfemales changed in the same direction, in terms of mean scores, on
19 of them. Further, of the 11 variables on which _t_ was significant

for the males, the females changed in the same direction on 10; in 6 of
these 10 cases, the female findings also attained the significance level.
On only six variables did the two sexes change in Opposite directions over
the four years, and. only on two of these did either sex show a significant
change. These two variables were EPPS #3, Order, on which females
decreased a significant extent while males tended to increase; and EPPS

#9, Dominance, on which males increased significantly, with females

 

tending to score lower.

The high degree of similarity in personality score shifts of males
and females would seem to justify combining the data of the two sexes in
order to get a more general picture. Because of the numerical
superiority of the males, however, the combined results are largely a

reflection of the male findings.

Veteran-li-JQ‘n-Veteran Differences: In general, there seems to have been

 

little difference between the two male sub-groups, both in terms of their
personality characteristics at the beginning of their college experience
and in the manner in which these characteristics were later modified.
This conclusion is borne out by two findings. First, comparisons of the
mean scores of the veterans and non-veterans for both 1955 and 1959 on
the 25 variables revealed significant differences on only four (two at

each year): EPPS #6, Affiliation; #15, Aggression; BI #1, L; and #5,

 

Manifest Hostility. Secondly, inspection of the mean scores shows that

 

25

both groups tended to shift their 1959 scores in the same direction; only
on two of the 25 variables did they change in opposite directions: EPPS #1,
Achievement; #6, Affiliation; #12, Change; #13, Endurance; and B1 #5,

 

 

 

Manifest Hostility. On only this last variable, however, was there

 

evidence that the two groups, after four years, differed significantly both
in mean score differences and in the direction these scores had followed
in relation to the original scores. Here the veterans' scores decreased
while the non-veterans' scores increased. On two other variableswhere

the two groups changed in different directions, EPPS Achievement and

 

Change, the veterans evidenced significant increases in 1959 while the
non-veterans tended toward lowered scores. No apparent explanation for
these differences seems to exist, and perhaps they are chance findings.
However, it should be noted that the veterans' significant rise in mean

scores on EPPS Achievement and Change was duplicated by the females,

 

suggesting that these results are attributable to factors other than chance.
Aside from these veteran-non-veterans differences, the data
indicate that changes among the male _S_s tended to be relatively homo-
geneous, regardless of age. Differences in the contribution of these
male sub—groups to the total picture will be subsequently mentioned when

warranted.

Review of Significant Findings:

 

As Table 10 indicates, scores on 17 of the 25 personality vari-
ables resulted in significant changes over the four year period for at
least one of the groups of _S_S. The combined group of _S_s evidenced changes
on 12 variables; females, on 10; males, on 13; non-veterans, on 7; and
veterans, on 8. In terms of the tests themselves, 9 of the 15 EPPS
variables showed significant changes for at least one group, with signifi-

cance being attained by two or more of the sub-groups on seven of these.

26

On the BI, four of the six variables changed significantly with four
groups reaching the significance level on two of these variables. All
four of the IPIT variables showed marked changes, with all five groups
changing significantly on three of these.

Rather than list and discuss each significant result individually,
it would seem more heuristic to group the various changes into specific
areas of personality, especially into those areas which loom important
during the second decade of life. The Committee on the College Student
of the Group for the Advancement of Psychiatry (1955) offers a framework
of four topics with which personality development is concerned at this
stage of life. These topics are (a) dependence—independence; (b) love and
hostility; (c) sexuality; and ((1) needs for security, adequacy, and

prestige.

(a) Dependence-Independence: The results of the present study seem to

 

support quite strongly the interpretation that seniors, as compared to
freshmen, are characterized by a greater self-reliance and that they
depend less on others for leadership, sympathy, praise, etc. The lowered

scores on EPPS Deference (to depend on others for suggestions, decisions,

 

etc.) and on EPPS Succorance (to depend on others for emotional types

 

of support) clearly point in this direction. Although these findings are
true for both males and females, the trend toward greater independence
appears more pronounced for the former, who, as seniors, also scored

significantly higher on EPPS Dominance (to lead, influence, supervise.

 

others) and lower on EPPS Nurturance (to help, sympathize with, support

 

others). Females showed little or no change on these two particular

variables .

(b) Love and Hostility: On the IPIT,- seniors show a significantly lowered

 

preference for hostile or aggressive themes. An explanation for this

result may lie in the finding by Hurley of significant negative correlations

27

between hostility measures and grade point average after one year,
suggesting that

. . . a higher reliance upon culturally disapproved adaptation
techniques, as represented by overt hostile or maladjustive
scores . . . interferes with a good academic performance

(1959, p. 5).
The subjects in the present study, as seniors, evidently achieved a
certain amount of academic success. Perhaps this success was facilitated
by a growing ability to channel aggressive feelings into more socially
acceptable techniques, thus explaining the lowered Hostility score.
Additional evidence that seniors are "less hostile" than freshmen

lies in the lowered EPPS Aggression and BI Manifest Hostility mean

 

 

scores for the total group, although these decreases were statistically
insignificant. Also, the various sub-groups were not entirely consistent
in their performance regarding the latter variable, as the younger
males tended toward higher MH scores in 1959.

The positive value of some of the implied ”socially acceptable
techniques" is suggested by the higher scores on the EPPS and IPIT
achievement variables, both of which had been previously found to
correlate positively with grade point average at or beyond the . 10 level
(Hurley, 1959). Further support for the inverse relationship between
Hostility and Achievement Imagery scores lies in the highly significant

correlation of —. 64 between the two variables (Hurley, 1955).

(c) Sexuality: Although all groups of _S_s evidenced an increase on EPPS
Heterosexuality (to have an interest in the opposite sex), this trend was
much more pronounced with the younger males, whose 1955 mean score
was less than that of both females and veterans. For several reasons,
these results do not appear too surprising. Females supposedly mature
earlier than males, so that female freshmen might be expected to have

a greater concern in heterosexual matters than their male counterparts.

28

Also, the younger males, who are still in their adolescence, might be
expected to show less of an interest in this area than the older males.
Although the increased heterosexual awareness in the younger males is
probably related to maturational deveIOpments, the substantially higher
1959 mean score of the younger males over the 1955 mean score of the
older males (when the two groups were approximately at the same age)
suggests that college tends to stimulate sexual awareness in younger
males to a greater extent than a non-college environment. This inter-
pretation is supported by the normative data showing the college sample
scores significantly higher than the general adult sample on the Hetero-

sexuality variable (Edwards, 1959).

(<5) Security, Adequacy, Prestige: Of the four areas under discussion,

 

the evidence seems the most pronounced regarding trends toward in-
creased security, adequacy, and prestige. The lowered senior means

on EPPS Abasement (to take the blame; to feel inferior, inadequate),

 

on IPIT Insecurity, and on B1 Manifest Rigidity all suggest. an improved

 

 

self-concept and a more flexible functioning. A gain in SOphistication is

also indicated by the lowered BI Lie score. Similarly, the increased

 

means on the achievement variables, and for the males, on EPPS

Dominance (to lead, influence, supervise others), and for the females

 

and older males, on EPPS Change (to do new and different things),
further support the assumption of greater self—confidence and maturity
of the seniors. Less direct support for these trends may be inferred

from the highly significant increase on IPIT Blandness, which implies a

 

more objective manner of viewing the world.

Summary of Freshmen-Senior Changes:

 

That the two groups differ on objective measures of personality

seems obvious. There has been the recognition that personality can be

29

modified during the college years. As the Group for the Advancement
of Psychiatry comments: the student

. . . must give up the familiar and reassuring, make choices
and decisions, learn new patterns of conduct and thinking,
break off old and establish new relationships, and above all,
develop a valid concept of himself and sound goals for the
future. . . . Although certain patterns of personality have
already been determined, the entering college student is still
capable of much change (1955, p. 2).

The findings of the present study suggest a substantially more
mature functioning on the part of college seniors. In contrast to freshmen,
they are characterized by personality test scores suggesting a much-
improved self-concept, greater selfwreliance, and increased self-
confidence. Seniors appear more flexible in their functioning, more
motivated to attain certain goals, and more willing to enter into new
experiences. Also, they possess a greater interest in the opposite sex
and seemingly have channeled their aggressive feelings into more

acceptable modes of expression.

Comparison with the Vassar Findings:

 

The dissimilarity of measures employed by the present study and
the Vassar study, with two minor exceptions, makes Specific comparisons
difficult. However, the trends suggested by the results of the two
investigations seem quite compatible. The similarity of results can be
seen by the Vassar finding that seniors, as Opposed to freshmen, have
increased confidence and are less dependent on their families. Further,
they are characterized by a greater "flexibility" in that they Show less
of a need to conform to established customs and are ”uncompulsive"
(Webster it a}. , 1961). This lessening of compulsive tendencies was
echoed by both sexes in the present study, but especially by the females,

who, in addition to a significantly lowered mean retest score on B1

3O

Rigidity, also decreased on EPPS Order (to organize, arrange, make
plans, etc.).

Vassar seniors are also "more aware of their sexual and aggressive
needs" (Freedman, 1961, p. 22). Although the MSU data support the
findings of increased sexual awareness, the data regarding aggression
are less clear and may even be somewhat contradictory. In the present
study, mean score on the three hostility indices tended, in general, to
show a decrease on the retest. In addition, it has already been suggested
that MSU seniors, both male and female, tend to channel their aggression
into more socially acceptable modes of expression (e. g. , increased
achievement motivation). Hostility needs, per se, then, do not appear
to be as important a concern with MSU seniors as they seem to be with
8:11iors at Vassar. On the other hand, the slight increases on mean
scores for the younger males (on B1 M111) and for the females (on EPPS

Aggression) suggest that this interpretation be viewed quite cautiously.

 

The Vassar study also found that seniors ”are more unstable, more
disturbed, . . . than are freshmen" (Sanford, 1956, p. 42). Among the
evidence leading to this finding were the increased scores of seniors on

the MMPI clinical scales, including the PsychOpathic Deviate scale (PE).

 

In the present study, male seniors tended to score lower on this scale,
while females showed a slight tendency to score higher. On the other
scale used in both studies, the 5 scale, Vassar students and most of the
MSU sample displayed relatively little change over the four years,
although the veterans evidenced a significant increase. It is intriguing to
speculate as to whether MSU seniors would have scored higher on the
MMPI clinical scales as did the Vassar seniors. The _P_c_l and _I§ results
suggest that they may not have, although for females there seems to

be more of a question. Sanford explains the increased scores of Vassar

seniors by stating that:

31

. . . Seniors are more unstable because there is more to be
stabilized, less certain of their identities because more
possibilities are open to them. Processes making for
differentiation and complexity have run somewhat ahead of
processes making for equilibrium (1956, p. 42).

Perhaps a sex difference exists here. Female graduates are often torn
between marriage and career. Males generally do not have to make
such a choice; role expectations for them are less variable, so that
conceivably there may be less of an inner conflict within the males.
Related to this area seems to be the Vassar finding that seniors
are "less feminine" in terms of feminine interests and role behavior
(i.e., conventionality and passivity) (Sanford, 1956, p. 42). Looking
only at the data of the MSU females, the significant decrease in senior

mean scores on EPPS Order and BI Manifest Rigidity and the increase

 

on EPPS Achievement and Change would seem to support this Vassar

 

finding. The relative lack of change in mean scores on such variables

as EPPS Dominance and Aggression (although on this latter variable

 

 

there was a slight increase) suggest that the trend toward masculinity
may be more pronounced with Vassar females, who, as seniors, scored
higher than as freshmen on similar scales relating to these variables.
MSU seniors have been characterized here as being more mature
than freshmen. A lessening of dependency needs, a more flexible
functioning, and a more objective way of perceiving the environment
all suggested this increased maturity. Vassar seniors, too, are
described as being more mature, but for reasons more complex than
could be offered by the present study. ‘ As Sanford comments:

In stating that the seniors are more mature we mean that
they have gained both in expression of impulse and in mechan-
isms of control. . . . [Seniors can admit problems but still
show] evidence of increased differentiation, discrimination,
and mastery (1956, p. 41).

32

Summary:

On those topics where comparisons are possible, there seems to
be a reasonable amount of agreement in the findings of the Vassar
study and the present study. Some differences were noted, of course,
but in general the similarities between the findings of the two studies
suggest that at least on those variables included in this investigation,
college produces similar changes in both males and females. The com-
parable findings also suggest that the personality changes discussed
may be characteristic of college students in general and may not be
highly limited with regard to Specific school or geographic factors.

In addition, the present data imply that differences in chronological
age of students may not be a critical factor with regard to these person-
ality changes. Further, the present study seems to have demonstrated
that objective measures of personality are able to offer considerable
information relating to personality changes over a lengthy period of

time.
Stability of the Measures

Prior to an evaluation of the stability coefficients presented in
Table 8, some attention will be accorded other stability findings as
they apply to the present study. On the EPPS, the manual reports
coefficients, based on a one week interval between test and retest,
ranging from . 74 to . 88 (Edwards, 1959). Reliability studies dealing
with the MMPI usually have employed psychiatric patients (Rosen, 1952).
Based on intervals from one to twenty-one weeks, _r_s for the clinical
scales ranged from . 55 to .88. A study by Mills (1954), using college
students and employing an interval of a year and a half, found corre-
lations of . 37 to . 59 for women and of . 27 to .61 for men on the MMPI

clinical scales. On the IPIT, Johnston (1957) reports coefficients of

33

.60 (_A_I_), .58 (I), .69 (B), and .73 (1_-_I_) for 109 male and female college
students over a one month interval. In each case, coefficients for
male _S_s were appreciably higher than those for females. An 3 of .47
for AL scores of 275 _S_s after a two month interval was also reported.
However, as Johnston points out:

. it has been previously noted that the rank-ordering pro-
cedure used on the IPIT results in an interdependence among
the four scales which . . . presumably modifies the interpre-
tation of the coefficients of . . . stability (1957, p. 284).

Similarly, Stoltz has criticized the use of the product—moment correlation
coefficient on such ipsative measures as the EPPS. ”To the author's
knowledge, no method has yet been developed to satisfactorily correct
correlation coefficients derived from data such as that presented by
Edwards” (1958, p. 241).

As might be expected, the correlations obtained in the present
study tend to be substantially smaller than those reported for a shorter
interval of time, especially for the EPPS variables. With one exception

(EPPS Deference), all correlations for the combined sexes are significant

 

at or beyond the 5% level, with 18 significant beyond 1%. For the males
alone, all but four correlations are significant at or beyond the 10%
level. The extremely small female NS may have contributed to the fact
that only half of the correlations for this sex are significant.

As might also be expected, the correlations associated with those
variables on which _S_s changed significantly tended to be somewhat lower
than for those for which there were lesser changes. For the data for the
combined sexes, the mean correlation for the former set of variables
was . 41; and for the variables showing little change, the mean _1; was . 48.
There were, however, striking exceptions to this trend. For example,

the correlation for EPPS Succorance, .65, and for BI I_.1, . 55, were

 

among the highest found, although SS changed significantly on both these
variables. A fairly large _r_ can arise, of course, if _S_s manifest a

systematic change.

34

Commenting on the use of tests in the investigation of personality
change in college students, Webster .et a1. , state:

It would be impractical to attempt to understand changes
that occur in college students without relying heavily upon
mental tests, including personality tests. Data. obtained by
other methods are less economical, less objective, less reliable,
and less valid. But even the more precise tests order subjects
imperfectly, and this seriously limits the usefulness of the test-
retest difference scores which must be used to estimating the
true change. . . . It is impossible to measure change by means
of test-retest difference scores unless the tests used have
high reliability; otherwise the difference scores contain such a
high proportion of random error that they are meaningless.

An exact solution to the problem of comparing individuals or

 

groups on amounts of change will probably have. to await the
development of new kinds of scales . . .(1961, Ch. 24).

But as Rosen points out:

. . . There has been some question as to whether a high degree
of reliability is desirable in personality tests. According to
this latter argument, the sensitivity of a personality scale to
changes in an individual, say, through psychotherapy, is much
more important than reliability. In intelligence and achievement
testing, on the other hand, the ideal test is one which gives con—
sistent results, regardless of extraneous factors. . . . A score
for an individual on any scale at a given time should be within

a reasonable distance of his "true" score. On the other hand,
the scale should have the capacity for reflecting modifications in
personality with the advent of radical change in environmental
status . . . (1953, p. 217).

The exact relation between the relatively low correlations and the
findings regarding personality changes in the present study seems un-
clear. Do these is, as Webster might suggest, reflect unstable measures;
or, as Rosen would argue, are they a reflection of real personality change
on the part of the subjects? If the former interpretation is valid, then
the change findings must be viewed with extreme caution. However, the
nature of the findings themselves and their agreement with the Vassar
study would seem to support the latter interpretation. Perhaps, as has

been suggested, ". . . the validity of these . . . measures has been

35

sufficient to partially compensate for moderate reliability” (Hurley,
1955, p. 375). Until new scales are developed, the matter of test
reliability over extended periods of time may have to be viewed differently

than is done now.

Limitations of the Present Study

The results of any study, and the interpretations of these results,
are of course dependent upon the soundness of the experimental design.

The design utilized in the present study raises certain problems.

Validity of the Measures: In general, the scales employed in the

 

present study are relatively new developments. A recent reviewer of
the EPPS feels that the test is still in the ”experimental" stage

(Barron, 1959). A like criticism could also be levelled against the
newly developed IPIT and modified MMPI scales used in the study.

The validity of all the measures has yet to be determined. Although

all three tests, in some cases, purportedly measured the same or
similar variables (e. g. , achievement, hostility), a previous investi—
gation found that the EPPS and IPIT indices of achievement motivation
were essentially unrelated to each other (3 = .15, N r. 237), yet both
correlated positively with the grade point average at or beyond the . 10
level. Similarly, fairly low correlations were found between the three
hostility or aggression indices (mean 3 of approximately . 22), yet all
related to GPA in much the same way (Hurley, 1959). In spite of the
similarity in definitions of these variables, rather different things
appear to be measured by the tests. In the present study, both achieve-
ment indices resulted in significant increases for the combined group

of _S_s; on the hostility scales, all mean scores for the total group changed

in the same direction after four years, but only the IPIT data achieved

36

significance. DeSpite the appearance of consistent trends, the lack of

a substantial relationship between the achievement variables and between
the hostility variables argues for some caution in interpreting the
results.

There are but few other articles in the literature dealing with
validity studies on the three measures. The EPPS has received the
most attention, but even here the evidence is minimal and incomplete.
Bernardin and Jessor report that their "research serves to contribute

to the construct validity of the Autonomy and Deference scales of the

 

PPS . . . “ (1957, p. 14 ). And Zuckerman (1958) suggests that within
the area of dependency and rebelliousness, the Edwards seems to be a
valid indicator.

The I__._ (IE) scale, one of the two scales of the B1 to show con-
sistent and significant changes, is felt to be an indicator of defensiveness
and naivete (Drake and Oetting, 1959). The other scale, R (Rigidity),
according to Wesley, "is related to perseveration of response in a card
sorting task of concept formation" (1953, p. 134).

Except for the relationships between the IPIT _AI and _H indices
and grade point average, this personality test has received little
attention so far. A factor analysis of the IPIT, however, is currently
in process. 1

Some indirect support for the validity of those variables showing
significant changes over the four years can perhaps be assumed by the
general agreement between this study and the Vassar investigation.

But in the absence of scientifically proven definitions, a fair degree of
caution is a requisite in the interpretation of the results.

One other possibly limiting factor concerning the variables

themselves is their interrelationships, esPecially with regard to the

 

1Personal communication from John Hurley.

37

IPIT. On this test, Johnston (1957) and the present study found fairly

substantial positive relationships between Achievement Imagery and

 

Blandness and between Insecurity and Hostility. ~ The negative relation-

 

ship between Aland 11 has already been mentioned. These relationships
tend to minimize the finding that all four of the IPIT variables evidenced
significant change after four years; without these relationships, such a
finding would seemingly point to extreme sensitivity on the part of the
IPIT to detect personality changes.

Regarding the EPPS, the present data, in general, appears to
support the assumption that the low intercorrelations “indicate that the
variables being measured by the EPPS are relatively independent"

(Edwards, 1959, p. 20).

Use of Volunteer Subjects: Unlike the 1955 test sessions, the 1959

 

sessions were composed strictly of volunteer Es Per sonality differences
between volunteers and non- volunteers have been studied by a number of
investigators (Himelstein, 19.56; Maslow and Sakoda, 1952; Rosen, 1951;
Siegman, 1956). The findings tend to be somewhat contradictory, even
when the same scales are employed (Maslow and Sakoda, 1952; Siegman,
1956). In a more elaborate design than that normally used in such studies,
Martin and Marcuse found that

. personality differences existed between volunteers and
non-volunteers associated with different types of volunteer
situations. Generalizations made from biased samples can be
misleading (1958, p. 479).

On comparisons of volunteers and non-volunteers for personality

 

experiments, however, they found no significant differences.

The present study afforded some check on possible differences
between those §S who volunteered in 1959 and the remainder of the 1955
students who were also tested as freshmen. Comparing the 1955

mean scores and variances of the two groups indicated few differences

38

(no mean differences and only two significantly dissimilar variances
were found). However, the group of 1955 _S_s who did 29-: participate
in 1959 cannot be considered as a "pure" non-volunteer sample, as

it included subjects who might have agreed to participate in the retest

phase, had they been on campus at the time.

Representativeness of the Sample:

 

The relative lack of differences between those students tested
in 1959 and those tested in 1955 suggests that the present sample may
be representative of MSU students, especially as the 1955 sample
was composed of a fairly substantial N (approximately 270 _S_s on each
«of the three tests) (Hurley, 1959). Although it may be true that the
students used in the present study were representative of the entering
class of 1955, this assumption may not hold for other classes. In evalu-
ating the Vassar study, Freedman comments:

It is also evident that the tenor of the times at. which
students are in college has an appreciable effect upon the
changes that take place. Thus, substantial differences are
found among alumnae of different decades which do not seem
to be attributable to chronological age (1961, p. 22).

Comparisons of both the 1955 and 1959 mean EPPS scores of male
E‘s from the present study with the published college male norms
(Edwards, 1959) revealed differences significant beyond the 5% level
on seven of the fifteen variables. Unfortunately, normative data
were not available for either the IPIT or B1 scales. These EPPS
results, however, suggest that the MSU sample may not be representative
of the general college population and caution against ready generalization
of the present findings to other populations. On the other hand, Webster
it al. , (1961) found that students at various colleges changed in the same
direction on retests of personality measures, even though substantial

mean score differences existed between the schools.

39

Differences in Test and Retest Conditions: In 1955, SS were exposed

 

to a more or less impersonal group experience, which, to many
freshmen, may have been quite confusing, frightening, and anxiety-
producing, features possibly reflected in their test scores. In 1959,
the situation was much more personal and relaxed. In addition, the
retest _S_s had been promised information regarding their results, so
that the degree of ego—involvement during the two testings may have
differed considerably. The effect of the first few days of college on
MMPI scores has been investigated by Stone and West (1956), who
suggest that abnormally high or low scores are often a reflection of the
Specific test situation; however, the finding more relevant to the
present study was that SS who score in the normal range do not show
significant differences on a retest (five month interval).

Despite the seemingly relaxed retest conditions, the 1959 _Ss
may have been subjected to a temporarily disrupting force in the form
of impending graduation. Freedman (1956) has pointed out the

unsettled situation of the college senior.

Number of Subjects: The relatively small number of _S_s, especially

 

females, also suggests that the results of the study be viewed with
some caution. However, the general agreement between the findings
of the present study and those of the Vassar investigation, plus the
similarity, when it might have been anticipated, of the male and female
data, and the difference, too, where it might also have been expected,
all indicate that the small samples may not have been as crippling a
weakness as might have been predicted. Replications, though, should

certainly employ a considerably larger female N.

40

Suggestions for Further Research

Despite the limitations, the present study seems to have demon-
strated that rather meaningful findings can be obtained from a more or
less molecular type of investigation. Further, studies such as this
can help to answer questions raised by a Vassar-type approach. In the
present study, no attempt was made to relate the types of changes
with specific college experiences, nor can it be stated with any great
certainty that these changes arise solely from a college, rather than
maturational or other experimential influences. Investigation of
personality development and changes is obviously more difficult because
of their lack of availability. Such information seems necessary, however,
if the role of the college in shaping personality is to be evaluated.

The Vassar study investigated college alumni; perhaps testing of high
school alumni could also be developed.

Within the college itself there are a number of factors which seem
related to personality changes in students. Among these which a study
similar to the present one might investigate are (a) types of peer group
relations; (b) psychotherapy or counseling; (c) and choice of major
(Webster, 1961).

The Vassar study suggested that personality changes in college
students "are not linear from year to year but tend to take place quite
early” (Freedman, 1961, p. 22). Testing of students at various stages
of their college career would seem invaluable in clarifying this matter.
A longitudinal design (i. e. , retesting the same SS at different times)
seems more desirable than a cross-sectional approach. However,
similar mean score differences between seniors and freshmen were
found at Vassar College in some studies employing both longitudinal

and cross-sectional samples (Webster _et 31' , 1961).

41

Regarding the choice of instruments, those used in the present
study appear quite promising. The EPPS seems especially useful
because of the wide range of variables it purports to measure. However,
much clarification is needed regarding the relative independence of
those scales supposedly measuring the same or similar personality
variables. The factor analysis of the IPIT is a step in this direction.
In addition, it has already been suggested that more of the clinical
scales of the MMPI be included in any replication. Further, some of
the scales employed in the Vassar study, such as those described by
Webster e]: E!" (1961, pp. 31-33), and measuring such characteristics
of social maturity, impulse expression, repression and suppression,
etc. , would appear to be of extreme value, especially if a_d_ir__e_gt
comparison with the Vassar findings is desired.

In conclusion, a quotation from Webster it a;1. , seems appro-
priate:

It is obvious that not enough is known about these
[personality] changes or about how they are interrelated within
the personality. But [it has been suggested] that research of
this nature can produce much that is of scientific interest.

At the same time there is every indication that continued
research will increase our understanding of the educational
process, to the advantage of higher education generally
(1961, p. 52).

SUMMARY

The present investigation concerned personality changes of
college students based entirely upon objective personality test data.
Previous research in this area had emphasized attitude formation
and change, although a current interest in other areas of personality
was noted.

The Edwards Personal Preference Schedule (EPPS), the Iowa
Picture Interpretation Test (IPIT), and six MMPI-type scales were
administered to a sample of 83 Michigan State University students
in 1955 and in 1959. The results suggest that seniors, as opposed to
freshmen, are more independent of others for guidance and emotional
types of support. They are more sophisticated and self-confident,
have greater achievement motivation, and seem to be less rigid in
their functioning. They also appearto manifest fewer directly hostile
tendencies. Males and females evidence few differences on the variables
investigated; and much similarity was noted between the personality
score shifts of the older and younger male sub-groups, suggesting
that the changes were college-influenced and not solely a function of
chronological age. In general, the findings were felt to be quite con-
gruent with those of the recent Vassar College study.

Information was also reported concerning the stability of the
various measures employed. The. coefficients for the total group of _Ss
tended to be rather low (average test-retest}; = .45) but with one

exception were all significant at the 5% level.

42

43

The design of the investigation was appraised with respect to
the influence of validity of the measures, the use of volunteer sub-
jects, representativeness of the sample, differences in testmretest
environmental circumstances, and number of subjects. Specific

recommendations for future studies of the problem were also offered.

REFERENCES

Anastasi, Anne. Psychological Testing. New York: Macmillan Co.,
1955.

 

Barron, F. Edwards Personal Preference Schedule. In O. K. Buros '
(Ed.), The Fifth Mental Measurements Yearbook. Highland Park,
N. J.: Gryphon Press, 1959, pp. 114-117.

 

Bernardin, A. C. and Jessor, R. A construct validation of the
Edwards Personal Preference Schedule with reSpect to
Dependency. J. Consult. Psychol., 1957, 21, 634-67.

 

Carlson, E. and Carlson, R. Male and female subjects in personality
research. J. Abnorm. Soc. Psychol, 1960, 61, 482-483.

 

Drake, L. E. and Oetting, E. R. An MMPI Codebook for Counselors.
Minneapolis: U. of Minn. Press, 1959.

 

Edwards, A. L. Statistical Methods for the Behavioral Sciences.
New York: Rinehart, 1954.

 

Edwards, A. L. Edwards Personal Preference Schedule: Manual.
(2nd ed.) New York: Psychological Corp. , 1959.

 

Erickson, C. W. and Davids, Anthony. ”The meaning and clinical
validity of the Taylor Anxiety Scale and the Hysteric-
Psychaethenia Scale for the MMPI. J. Abnorm. Soc. Psychol.,
153, 80, 135-137.

 

Erickson, E. H. "Growth and crises of the “Healthy Personality."
In Kluckhorn and Murray (Eds. ), Personality in Nature, Society,
and Culture, (2nd ed. rev. New York: Knopf, 1956, pp. 185ff.

 

 

Freedman, M. B. The passage through college. In N. Sanford (Ed.),
Personality deve10pment during the college years. J. Soc. Issues,

 

1956, Vol. XII, No. 4, 13-28.

Freedman, M. B. Influence of college experience on personality
deve10pment. Psychol. Reports, 1961, _8_, No. 1, 21-22.

 

44

45

Group for the Advancement of Psychiatry: Committee on the College
Student, Consideration on Personality Deve10pment in College
Students. GAP Report, 1955, No. 32.

 

Hathaway, S. R. and McKinley, J. C. Minnesota Multiphasic Personality
Inventory: Manual. New York: Psychol. Corp., 1951.

 

Himelstein, P. Taylor Scale characteristics of volunteers and non-
volunteers for psychological experiments. J. Abnorm. Soc. Psychol. ,
1956, _S_2, 138-139.

Hurley, J. R. The Iowa Picture Interpretation Test: A multiple
choice variation of the TAT. J. Consult. Psychol. , 1955, _l_9,
372-376.

 

Hurley, J. R. Relationships among objective personality indices, first
year grades in college, and intelligence. Paper read at American
Psycho. Assoc., Cincinnati, 1959.

Johnston, R. A. A methodological analysis of several revised forms
of the Iowa Picture Interpretation Test. J. Pers. , 1957, _Z__5_,
283-293.

Martin, R. M. and Marcuse, F. L. Characteristics of volunteers and
non-volunteers in psychological experimentation. J'. Consult.
Psychol., 1958, _2_2_, 475—479.

 

Maslow, A. H. and Sakoda, J. M. Volunteer error in the Kinsey
study. J. Abnorm. Soc. Psychol., 1952, 41, 259-262.

 

Merrill, R. M. and Heathers, L. B. The relation of the MMPI to the
'Edwards Personal Preference Schedule on a college counseling
center sample. J. Consult. Psychol., 1956, _2_9_, 310-314.

 

Mills, W. W. MMPI profile patterns and scale stability throughout
four years of college attendance. Diss. Ab. , 1954, _11,
1259 (Abstract).

Moldowsky, P. A study of personality variables in patients with skin
disorders. Diss. Ab., 1953, _l_3_, 1260-1261 (Abstract).

Murray, H. A. (and collaborators). Explorations in Personality.
New York: Oxford, 1938.

46

Rosen, A. Reliability of MMPI scales. Amer. Psychologist, 1952,
7, 341.

 

Rosen, A. Test-retest stability of MMPI scales for a psychiatric
population. J. Consult. Psychol., 1953, l_7_, 217-221.

 

Rosen, E. Differences between volunteers and non-volunteers for
psychological studies. J. Appl. Psychol., 1951, ‘3_5_, 185-193.

 

Sanford, N. (Ed.) Personality development during the college years.
J. Soc. Issues, 1956, Vol. XII, No. 4.

 

Siegman, A. ReSponses to a personality questionnaire by volunteers
and non-volunteers to a Kinsey interview. J. Abnorm. Soc.
Psychol., 1956, 2, 280-281.

 

Stoltz, R. E. Note on the intercorrelations of EPPS variables.
Psy_chol. Rep., 1958, _4, 239-241.

 

Stone, D. and West, L. First day orientation testing with the MMPI
cnntrasted with a retest. J. Ed. Res., 1956, 4_9_, 621-624.

 

Taylor, Janet A. A personality scale of manifest anxiety. J. Abnorm.
Soc. Psychol., 1953, 48, 285-290.

 

 

Walker, Helen M. and Lev, J. Statistical Inference. New York:
Henry Holt, 1953.

 

Webster, H. Some quantitative results. In N. Sanford (Ed.),
Personality development during the college years. J. Soc. Issues,
V61. x11, No. 4, 29—41.

 

Webster, H. Freedman, M. , and Heist, P. Personality changes in
college students. In N. Sanford (Ed.), The American college;
a psychological and social interpretation of the higher learning.
New York: John Wiley, 1961, Ch. 24, in press.

 

 

Wesley, Elizabeth. Perseveration behavior in a concept formation
task. J. Abnorm. Soc. Psychol., 1953, g, 129-134.

 

Zuckerman, M. The validity of the EPPS in the measurement of depend-
ency-rebelliousness. J. Clin. Psychol., 1958, 11, 379-382.

 

APPENDIX

47

APPENDIX I

NAMES AND DEFINITIONS OF THE TWENTY—FIVE
' PERSONALITY VARIABLES

Edwards Personal Preference Schedule:

 

1. ach Achievement: To do one's best, to be successful, to
accomplish tasks requiring skill and effort, to be a recognized authority,
to accomplish something of great significance, to do a difficult job well,
to solve difficult problems and puzzles, to be able to do things better
than others, to write a great novel or play.

2. def Deference: To get suggestions from others, to find out what
others think, to follow instructions and do what is expected, to praise
others, to tell others that they have done a good job to accept the leader-
ship Of others, to read about great men, to conform to custom and avoid
the unconventional, to let others make decisions.

3. ord Order: To have written work neat and organized, to make
plans before starting on a difficult task, to have things organized, to keep
things neat and orderly, to make advance plans when taking a trip, to
organize details of work, to keep letters and files according to some
system, to have meals organized and a definite time for eating, to have
things arranged so that they run smoothly without change.

4. exh Exhibition: TO say witty and clever things, to tell amusing
jokes and stories, to talk about personal adventures and experiences, to
have others notice and comment upon one's appearance, to say things
just to see what effect it will have on others, to talk about personal
achievements, to be the center of attention, to use words that others do
not know the meaning of, to ask questions others cannot answer.

5. aut Autonomy: To be able to come and go as desired, to say
what one thinks about things, to be independent of others in making
decisions, to feel free to do what one wants, to do things that are uncon-
ventional, to avoid Situations where one is expected to Conform, to do
things without regard to what others may think, to criticize those in
positions of authority, to avoid responsibilities and obligations.

6. aff Affiliation: To be loyal to friends, to participate in friendly
groups, to do things for friends, to form new friendships, to make as
many friends as possible, to share things with friends, to do things
with friends rather than alone, to form strong attachments, to write
letters to friends.

48

49

7. int Intraception: To analyze one's motives and feelings, to
Observe others, to understand how others feel about problems, to put
one's self in another's place, to judge people by why they do things
rather than by what they do, to analyze the behavior of others, to
analyze the motives of others, to predict how others will act.

8. suc Succorance: To have others provide help when in trouble,
to seek encouragement from others, to have others be kindly, to have
others be sympathetic and understanding about personal problems, to
receive a great deal of affection from others, to have others do favors
cheerfully, to be helped by others when depressed, to have others
feel sorry when one is sick, to have a fuss made over one when hurt.

9. dom Dominance: To argue for one's point of view, to be a
leader in groups to which one belongs, to be regarded by others as a
leader, to be elected or appointed chairman of committees, to make
group decisions, to settle arguments and diSputes between others, to
persuade and influence others to do what one wants, to supervise and
direct the actions of others, to tell others how to do their jobs.

10. aba Abasement: To feel guilty when one does something wrong,
to accept blame when things do not go right, to feel that personal pain
and misery suffered does more good than harm, to feel the need for
punishment for wrong doing, to feel better when giving in and avoiding
a fight than when having one's own way, to feel the need for confession
Of errors, to feel depressed by inability to handle situations, to feel
timid in the presence of superiors, to feel inferior to others in most
respects.

ll. nur Nurturance: To help friends when they are in trouble,
to assist others less fortunate, to treat others with kindness and sympathy,
to forgive others, to do small favors for others, to be generous with others,
to sympathize with others who are hurt or sick, to Show a great deal of
affection toward others, to have others confide in one about personal
problems.

12. chg Change: To do new and different things, to travel, to
meet new people, to experience novelty and change in daily routine, to
experiment and try new things, to eat in new and different places, to
try new and different jobs, to move about the country and live in different
places, to participate in new fads and fashions.

13. end Endurance: To keep at a job until it is finished, to complete
any job undertaken, to work hard at a task, to keep at a puzzle or problem
until it is solved, to work at a single job before taking on others, to stay

50

up late working in order to get a job done, to put in long hours of work
without distraction, to stick at a problem even though it may seem as if
no progress is being made, to avoid being interrupted while at work.

14. het Heterosexuality: To go out with members Of the opposite
sex, to engage in social activities with the opposite sex, to be in love
with someone of the opposite sex, to kiss those of the opposite sex, to be
regarded as physically attractive by those of the opposite sex, to partici-
pate in discussions about sex, to read books and plays involving sex, to
listen to or to tell jokes involving sex, to become sexually excited.

15. agg Aggression: To attack contrary points of view, to tell
others what one thinks about them, to criticize others publicly, to make
fun Of others, to tell others off when disagreeing with them, to get
revenge for insults, to become angry, to blame others when things go
wrong, to read newspaper accounts of violence.

(Edwards 1959, p. 11)

Iowa Picture Interpretation Test: (Hurley, 1955, pp. 372—373)

 

1. Achievement Imagery (Ag): A person high in Al is one who by word
or action habitually indicates a desire to compete successfully with a
standard of excellence. He indicates by word or act that successful
competition with certain groups or individuals, or high accomplishment
in terms of social standards, would be accompanied by feelings of
success; he attempts, or verbalizes an interest in attempting, some

 

unique accomplishment that would imply personal success; or he indicates
by word or action some long-term involvement of a sort that would imply
anticipation of successful competition or goal achievement.

2. Insecurity (_I): An insecure individual is one who by word or action
indicates that he has failed or anticipates failure to attain a desired goal,
named or implied. He verbalizes actual or anticipated personal experi-
ences, feelings, or fears of deprivation or threat of deprivation of

some positively valued goal, especially of a social nature, e. g. , affection,
esteem, security, etc. Individuals who reSpond to failure or anticipation
of failure by aggressive acts or statements are specifically excluded

from this category.

3. Blandness (g): A bland individual is one who habitually depersonalizes
situations or events. He acts or Speaks in a manner implying lack of
personal involvement. His self-references and references to others are
guarded or noncommittal with respect to the expression of feelings,
moods, or motives.

 

51

4. Hostility (H): A hostile person is one who habitually verbalizes
feelings of annoyance, anger, or resentment. He acts, or verbalizes
intentions or desires to act, in a punitive, threatening, or injurious
manner toward others.

Biographical Inventory:

 

1. Lie Scale (ii): This scale, along with the K scale, is an example of
the "validity" Scales of the MMPI, designed tO—represent "checks on care-
lessness, misunderstanding, malingering, and the Operation of Special
response sets and test—taking attitudes" (Anastasi, 1955, p. 550).

As Drake and Oetting define it,

The L score is based on answers to a group of items that
tend to place the test subject in a good social and moral light.
High scores on this scale are not common among college subjects
probably because the items are rather naive and concern attitudes
that are not felt to be particularly socially rewarding in the college
culture (1959, p. 31).

2. 1_(_ Scale:

The K scale was designed to improve the predictive validity
of some of the original scales and is used as a correction of five
Of them. . . . K has been considered at. times as a rather subtle
indicator Of defensiveness, and its theoretical basis as a correction
scale would support this conclusion to a certain extent. The evi-
dence for this has been rather Sketchy, however, and a high K score
may have a considerably different meaning. In the college group,
at least, a slight elevation Of K is very common and may even be
a relatively good sign of general adjustment (Drake and Oetting,
1959, p. 32).

3. Psychopathic Deviate Scale (Pd): This scale

 

. was originally derived from the responses of a group judged
tO be psychOpathic deviates. Such persons were Often young,
had a history Of delinquency, and appeared to be uncontrolled by
the ordinary mores of society. They also tended to have a fairly
high level of intelligence and presented a superficially appealing
personality. . . . There is, however, some indirect support of

52

the tendency for this scale to indicate an antagonism to authority
when it appears in a male college student‘s profile.

Low codings . . . suggest a need for reassurance in coun-
seling, possibly as a result of concern regarding the attitudes of
other peOple. If this interpretation is correct, a low coding .
would seem to be indicative of conformity with the mores of the
social group (Drake and Oetting, 1959, p. 21).

4. Manifest Anxiety Scale (MA): This is a modification of the scale
devised by Taylor (1953). As Ericksen and Davids state

 

. . . it has been suggested that the Taylor scale is not so much

a measure of anxiety as it is a measure of the way the Ss respond
to, or handle, their anxiety. . . . From a clinical orientation,
the presence of overt or manifest anxiety not only indicates that
an S is anxious, but it also suggests the use of certain kinds of
def-gnses. For example, intellectualizing or rationalizing de—
fenses are considered to be associated with more overt anxiety
indicators than are the avoidance defenses of the hysteric (

p. 135).

5. Manifest Hostility (MH): Although no formal definition of this scale
could be found, it would seem to measure of the presence of overt
feelings of hostility, annoyance, or resentment.

 

6. Manifest Rigidity (MR): This is a scale devised by Wesley who
defined Rigidity as follows:

 

A tendency to persist in reSponses that may previously
have been suitable in some situations or other but that no
longer appear adequate to achieve current goals or to solve
current problems (1953, p. 129).

.,_-. -_
.LA .51.

WINE-CHOICE PIGTUB TEST
FOR)! 5 1954

Each of the pictures you will see is indicated in thin booklet by a number.
Underneath each number there are four descriptions for that particular picture. You
are to rank the four descriptions according to 293; idea of what the picture expresses

Each description can be ranked from 1 to l! on the basic of how well my, think
it fits the picture. that is. tells what is happening. Read all four descriptions
and decide which one you would m; m give. This one would get a rank of l.
Then decide upon the one that «one next most likely. Rank 1t 2. And so on. , The
description that you would be least likely to give diould be ranked 2.

Here 18 an example:

A. She is listening to her favorite radio program.

3. She is annoyed because she has to work ‘while her friends

0. gohemfgéls that she cannot go to the party because no one
ever asks her to dance.

D. She is looking forward to her opening night as the star
of a great Show.

(If B is most like your own interpretation. you would rank 11; 1. Look at the
separate answer sheet. Under the space marked M13 you would write a 1 after the
letter B. You would then write down the ranks for descriptions A. C. and D.

thh picture will be shown for 933 minute. You must rank each description.
Even if you have difficulty deciding what the rank should be. make the best decision
you can. Remember. there are no right or wrong answers. Don't spend too much time
trying to decide. Indicate your first impressions.

Now take the answer sheet. Fill in your name and other information at the top.

Now turn the page. Judge the statements for Card 1 and then rank them on the sep-

arate answer sheet. Do not mark this booklet.

S. B.
:2) cs
x’x ”-

“ 2. A.
‘7) B-
3: 0.
BS. D.
”S. 3. A.
TY: B.

\~\ 0.

'8 D.
(.3 u. A.

A B-

A: c-

E D.

He is dreaming of the day when he 5. A.

will become a great musician.

He is afraid that he will never be
able to play the violin well.

His violin is on the table and he
is waiting for his music lesson.
He is angry at his mother because
she makes him practice while he'd
rather be outside playing.

She feels only scorn for these
people and their way of life.

She is looking for a nice quite
place where she can read and get
a little relaxation.

She is rather sad because she
doesn't fit in at school or on the
farm.

Her only ambition is to complete
her education.

He very much wants to stay with her
but is afraid of other people's
contempt.

He is determined to fight for what
he thinks is right and will win in
the end.

He is disgusted with her and is
trying to get away as quickly as

he can.

He is a patient being helped to his
bed.

They are waiting for the taxi to
take him to the station.

He has told her that he resents her
prying into his affairs.

He is telling her that he must
leave home because Opportunities
are greater in the big city.

He is telling her that he has lost
his Job and has little Imps of
finding another.

7.

A.

The boy is determined to live up to
the ideals and standards of this
older man whom he greatly admires.
The older man is telling about his
childhood experiences.

The father is telling his son that
if he does not stop his wild ways.
he will disown him.

The boy is distressed because he
feels that he has let his father
down.

The little girl has been left in
the care of a governess and feels
that she is less loved by her
parents than other children.

The little girl is resentful be-
cause her mother insists won
drilling her over her homework.
The little girl is listening to a
story about Florence Nightingale
and is thinking of the time when
she might achieve so much.

The little girl listens while her
mother reads her stories.

He is remembering a part of the
movie he has Just seen.

He is dreaming of becoming a skilled
and famous surgeon.

He realises that the operation is
doomed to failure and he turns

Ems

He hates his cruel step-father and
hopes he will not survive the
operation.

He is thinking of ways of getting
back at his father who won't let
him leave the cabin.

He is wondering why he is so unp-
popular and no one comes over to
play with him.

He is enjoying the warmth of the
sunshine.

He wishes he could grow up to be
like Abe Lincoln who was also born
in a log cabin.

(«\Y

:3

\3'

H

 

Things have not worked out for him 13. A.
and he is wondering if life is

"013th 1131113. 30
He is watching the plane passing 0.
overhead.

He is wondering how he can revenge
himself on those who have wronged D.
him.

He is thinking of great accomplish-
ments.

He is demonstrating the way to

climb a rope. 3.
He is watching his hated rival and

hopes he will fall.

He is in a rope climbing contest 0.
and is exerting every effort to

win.

Although he has tried his best. he D.

sees that the race is lost.

15. A.
She despises this man who is forcing
his attentions upon her. 28.
He admires her for the success she
has achieved in her career. 0.

She is sorry that she did not do

more to make their marriage a happy

one.

They are considering whether to buy D.
this attractive table.

16. A.
He has resolved to do his best to
live up to her expectations. 3.
He has failed her in spite of her
high hopes.
They are at a party dancing to a C.
Viennese waltz.
Despite his pretense and show of D.
affection. he secretly despises her.

She is furious because the elevator \-\
is out of order and she must walk.

She is on her way to catch a train. ‘7)
Although she is still looking for -.-—
work in the big city. she has no ‘L
real hope of success.

Viewing the magnificence of the (a:
structure. she is inspired to

work larder toward her career.

She cannot succeed and is going X:
to commit suicide.

She is waiting to go on stage in A:
what will be her greatest

theatrical triumph.

She is trying to hide her laughter \3:
after playing a mean practical

JOch

She is wiping a cinder out of her P)

eye.

She is Just coming home from a q
walk. ”
This maid is planning revenge on H-

her arrogant employers .

She is eager for everything to be

in perfect order because her

husband's boss is coming for

dinner.

She worries that her home is so I
shabby that it will make a poor
impression.

She is rushing to tell her sister of:
they have won the contest.

She has told her sister that she

must hurry if she wants to meet (7,
her friends.

She feels only scorn for her sister '9.
and her wild ways.

She feels inferior to her sister I
who is everything that she had

hOPQd to be.

.L 17. A.
\—\ 3.
(Y: c.
{3 D-
g 18. A.
A: B.
X G.
H D.
\\ 19. A.
I 3.
CS 0.
A: D-
: 20. A.
{S B.
H 0'
(Ni? D.

He feels that there is no use
trying and will Join this band of
hobos.

He despises these men for their
irresponsible behavior.

Watching the laborers. he dreams
of the success that will put him
far above such a life.

The men are resting after lunch.

The girl is watching the men and
waiting for her husband to finish
work.

Seeing her old waterfront neighbor-
hood. she realizes how great her
success has been.

She wishes that she had more self-
confidence but fears that she will
never amount to much.

She is furious at having been kept
waiting so long.

He hates the people who have led
him to this kind of life.

He realizes now that he will never
escape from the life he has been
leading.

He is tired and is leaving the
party to get some sleep.

He is determined to start anew and
make something of himself.

She is explaining her despair of
overcoming the limitations of her
handicap.

They are enacting a scene in a play.

She has finally turned in fury on

the woman who has so humiliated her.

She is telling the other woman that
despite her handicap she knows she
will succeed.

21.

22.

23.

24.

A.

He is thinking of how quiet the
big city can become in the early
mrning.

He is waiting in the dark to get
back at his tormentors.

He is sure that he will someday be
one of the successful people
living in this fashionable neigh-
borhood.

He feels that he will never be
able to make the grade in the big
city.

He is being awakened from a brief
rest to resume work on his
invention.

The man is in despair because he
can do nothing to help.

He is waking up the other person
from his sleep since it is days
break.

His menacing gesture reveals his
deep bitterness toward the
sleeping man.

The old lady is envious and resent-
ful of the younger woman.

They are reminiscing about their
years of happiness and success.
together.

The old lady wishes that she had
been able to help the younger
woman when she needed it.

They are watching the people pass
on the street.

He has Just successfully completed
an extremely difficult and danger-
ous emergency operation.

He has failed to save her life
althoxgh he has tried his best.

He is rubbing the sleep out of his
eyes in an effort to keep awake.

He is rejecting this woman because
of his disgust for her and all that
she stands for.

‘XX.

"If.
73
H

A

Wm 10 L m
(A. ms. a, x. 1.. Pd. and n Scales. 1956 Revision)

Do _nqjg write or mark on this booklet in any way. Your answers to the state--
ments in this inventory are to be recorded cpl: on the m; Answer Sheet.

-int your name. the date. the date of your birth. age. sex. etc.. in the
blanks provided on the Answer Sheet. Use only the gpecia; m provided for this
test; this pencil must be used because the Answer Sheet will be checked by machine.
If your special pencil runs out of lead. get another pencil from the haminer. Do
”not use any other type of pencil. After you have completed this information. finish
reading these instructions.

The statements in this booklet represent experiences. ways of doing things. or
beliefs or preferences that are true of some peOple but are not true of others. You
are to read each statement and decide whether or not it is true with respect to your-
self. If it is flu; or 9:18.142 £1333. blacken the answer space in column 1 on the
Answer Sheet in the row numbered the same as the statement you are answering. If
the statement is got usgally. 31333,, or is 3193 pm; at all. blacken the space in colum
g in the numbered row. You must answer the statement as carefully and honestly as
you can. There are 32 correct or wrong answers. We are interested in the way my
work and in the things m believe.

Remember: Mark the answer space in column 2 if the statement is trug or mm
1533;: mark the answer space in column 2 if the statement is falgg or 92915;! 151.39,.
.‘Be sure the space you blacken is in the row numbered the same as“ the item you are
answering. Use only the first two columns. the ones labeled 2; and I. Mark each
item as .you come to it: be sure to mark 93;, and only one. answer space for each item.
Here is an example:

r r
I would like to be an artist. ! I I I

If m would like to be an artist. that is. if the statement is true as far as you
are concerned. you would mark the answer space under 2. If the statement is false.
you would mark the space under 2.

If you have any questions. please ask them now.

PLEASBDONO‘EHARKCUTEISBOGIIM

'gfi 115.

F 116.

117.
{4; ) 118.
119.
J’QilZO.
;;121.
9:. ,1. 122.
sf? 123'
.._. 12’4.

._.
H -,
. . .

125.

126.

g} 1270
128 .

al "‘1 1290
j 130.

tiff.) 131‘

11h..At times I feel like swearing.

If I let people see the way I feel.
I'd be considered a hard person to
get along with.

It makes me nervous to have to wait.
At times I am all full of energy.

I like a great deal of variety in
my work.

Criticism or scolding hurts me
terribly.

At times I am so restless that I
cannot sit in a chair for very long.

I have been quite independent and
free from family rule.

I've met a lot of children who
would benefit from a good spanking.

I am a methodical person in whatever
I do.

Sometimes I become so excited that
I find it hard to get to sleep.

There is very little love and com-
panionship in my family as compared
to other homes.

Once in a while I laugh at a dirty
Joke.

People generally demand respect for
their own rights but are unwilling
to respect the rights of others.

I have often felt that I faced so
many difficulties I could not over-
come them.

My parents have often objected to the

kind of people I went around with.

I am usually able to keep at a Job
longer than most people.

I often think "I wish I were a
child again."

132. At times I have been worried beyond a, .

133 .

134.

135 .
136 .

137 .
138 .

139 .

11:0.

141 .

10:2 .

1‘13 .

1111+ .
145 .

1’46 .

147 .
1118 .

149.

Page 5

t
V, 1")

r son about something that really " ""
di not matter.

My relatives are nearly all in [514’ if?)
sympathy with me.

I frequently revise my opinions of M n‘ (r, ,
people in a downward direction. "

I do not always tell the truth. L J

I do not have as many fears as my ['1 n" {F}
friends.

5" .1 . ’ .l

I have been disappointed in love.

{1‘3
x I

I think it is usually wise to do ”3;.
things in a conventional way.

It is generally a mistake to maintain, a; ~
a friendship with the same person
over a long period of time.

I have been afraid of things or peo- _
ple that I knew could not hurt me. ""

w“ a

‘3 it;

My way of doing things is apt to be ,Q'gr‘,’
misunderstood by others.

Often I can't understand why I have It” 1' ‘
been so cross and grouchy.

I always finish tasks I start. even _. .
if they are not very important. 1‘ x (1",?

I certainly feel useless at times./=-:'-7‘:T,’; A (4,;
Sometimes without any reason or even
when things are going wrong I feel
excitedly happy. "on top of the
world."

’I" ‘Q 1"}
r1] :1 3’" /\

When you come right down to it, there M .3
are only a few people whom you are ‘ ‘
likely to find companionable.

1 ’ ~ ~
< ire":

I find it hard to keep my mind on a f1 "5"? -' I
task or Job.

I gossip a little at times.

I am sure I am being talked about. 51'1”)

1.
0 (F) 2.

[a 3.

9(7) 4.
(E) 50
or) 6-

“((070

my a.

m 9-

“CEDIOs
€65,110

W 12.

WI) 13 .

my 14 .
w (v.15.

use.

Mr) 17.

I am often sick to my stomach.
I do not tire quickly.

Some people are so bossy that I feel
like doing the opposite of what they
request even though I know they are

right.

I am often the last one to give up
trying to do a thing.

My daily life is full of things
that keep me interested.

I am about as nervous as other
people.

I think a great many people exagger-

ate their misfortunes in order to
gain sympathy and help 'of others.

I feel tint I have often been
punished without cause.

At times I have very much wanted to
leave home.

I have very few headaches.

There is usually only one best way
to solve most problems.

I would rather win than lose in a
game.

I have never been in trouble because
of my sex behavior.

I work under a great deal of strain.
I tend to be on my guard with

people who .are somewhat .‘more
friendly than I expected.

I prefer work that requires a great
deal of attention to detail.

No one seems to understand me.

19.

20.

21.

22.
23 .

21}.

25.

26.

27.

28.

29.

30.

31.

32.

33.

34.

Page 2
I cannot keep my mind on one thing. ”9(7)

I Inve had very peculiar and strange PJ (F)
experiences.

I am sure I get a raw deal out of ””60, ”(6
life.

During one period when I was a PJ (‘1’)

youngster I engaged in petty
thievery.

I worry over money and businessJ'flfU’ k”)

I often become so wrapped up in
something I am doing that I find it
difficult to turn my attention to
other matters.

Him

I do not like everyone I know. ‘0‘)

I have diarrhea ("the runs") once a ”403
month or more.

I frequently notice my hand shakes My“)
when I try to do something.

I've noticed that I let a lot of
unimportant things irritate me. Mfi’ffj

I prefer doing one thing at a time

to keeping several projects going. ”((TJ

I have not lived the right kind of Paw/(1’ J
life.

I blush as often as others. A4176")
I think nearly anyone would tell a K09
lie to keep out of tro ble.

It takes me a long time to get over ”#03
being angry.

I have nightmares every few nights. 1‘4 F7 (“U

I worry quite a bit over possible ”67(7)
troubles.

M71335.

.09 36°

f0) 37'
M”-

£0) 1&0.
«U “10

WU 142.
(f) “3'

@3wa
mm
' ‘53.

#70946-

fLr) 1:7.
.(F) I+8.
”(U 1&9.
Fla/50.

WU) 51.

I dislike to change my-plans in the
midst of an undertaking.

Once in a while I put off until
tomorrow what I ought to do today.

I am easily downed in an argument.
I practically never blush.

In my daydreams. I often get the
better of someone else.

I never miss going to church.
I have used alcohol excessively.

I am often afraid that I am going
to blush.

I am against giving money to
beggars.

I Inve had quite a few quarrels with
members of my family.

My parents and family find more
fault with me than they should.

My hands and feet are usually warm
enough.

I would like a position which re-
quires frequent changes from one
kind of task to another.

I like to know some important
peOple because it makes me feel
important.

I have reason for feeling jealous
of one or more members of my
family.

I sweat very easily even on cool
days.

I am often tempted to go out of
my way to win a point with someone
who has opposed me.

I usually maintain my own opinions
even though many other people may
have a different point of view.

These days I find it hard not to
€111? up hope of amounting to some-
ng.

55.

56.
57.

59.

60.

61.

62.
63.

65.
66.

67.

69.

70.
71 .

72.

Page 3

When embarrassed I often break out M I? (T)
in a sweat which is very annoying.

I find it hard to make talk when I PJCF), HF)
meet new people.

Families are frequently a nuisance. M/“TJ
I do not mind being made fun of. 7:! k)

I do not often notice my heart pound-
ing and I am seldom short of breath. M0 6")

I find it easy to stick to a certain
schedule, once I have started on it.

LU‘)

Ill/WU

1w table manners are not quite as
good at home as when I am out in

company.

I do many things which I regret
afterwards .(I regret things more
or more often than others seem td.

PJ(rJ

I feel hungry almost all the time. H19 (U

I feel mildly resentful much of the [1.6/03
time.

I believe women ought to have as much
sexual freedom as men. M'WF)
My hardest battles are with myself. 2] (U

Often my bowels don't move for several 5419(1)
days at a time.

K09

I am irritated a great deal more than
people are aware of .

People often disappoint me.
Mm

Much of the time I feel as if I have gm)
done something wrong or evil.

I have a great deal of stomach trouble. HJVQ‘j

I do not enjoy having to adapt myself M I (T
to new and unusual situations. )

If I could get into a movie without

paying and be sure I was not seen I Lug)
would probably do it.

fly family does not like the work I A
have chosen (or the work I intend to Fez/(7‘)

choose for my life work).

rlz

9(7) 71!. At times I lose sleep over worry.

(0 75. Something exasperates me almost every
day.

3(1) 76. I prefer to stop and think before I
not even on trifling matters.

L0 77. Someone has it in for me.

(0 78. My sleep is restless and disturbed.

.0 79. It makes me impatient to have
people ask my advice or otherwise
interrupt me when I am working on
something important.

'69 80. It annoys me to be called lazy.

(T) 81. In school I was sometimes sent to
the principal for cutting up.

((0 82. I often dream about things I don't
like to tell other people.

”083. I would not like the kind of work

which involves a large number of
different activities.

(F) 8’4. I do not read every editorial in the
newspaper every day.

[(0 85. My sex life is satisfactory.
“086. I am easily embarrassed.

“.087. I would rate myself as ’an impulsive
individual.

((1) 88- I try to follow a program 'of life
based on duty.

((rj 89. I know who is responsible for most
of my troubles.

7(fj90. My feelings are hurt easier than most
people.

5)” 91. It takes a lot of argument to con-
vince most people of the truth.

W?) 92. I often find myself worrying about
k) SOEEthinc.

W!) 93. I believe my home life is as pleasant
as that of most people I know.

Page 1+

91+. I have kept a careful diary over aM R (r )
period of years.

95. I find it hard to set aside a task K66)
that I have undertaken. even for a
short time.

96.. I wish I could be as happy as othersJWh), F5!

97. My conduct is largely controlled by 7.10:)
the customs of those about me.

98. I deeply dislike one or more persons [WI/(T)
whom I see almost every day.

99. My interests tend to change quickly.Mfl(F)

100. I am usually calm and not easily M40!)
upset.

101. I am neither gaining nor losing PJ (1‘)
weight.

102. Sometimes when I am not feeling well L0!)

I am cross.

103. Politics are nothing but self- M307
interest and graft.

10“. I cry easily. ”0(1’)
105. I liked school. 72! (F)
106. I usually find that my own way of
attacking a problem is best. even
though it doesn't always seem to
work in the beginning. MP“)
10?. It makes me uncomfortable to put on p109, 47‘)
a stunt at a party even when others
are doing the same sort of thing.

108. I feel anxious about something or MINT)
someone almost all of the time.

109. I wish I were not so shy. PJQQ

110. Most people are honest entirely [4 HQ)
through fear of being caught.

111. I dislike having to learn new ways ”((72)
of doing things.

112. I am luppy most of the time. 144/709, PO!
113. I like to talk about sex. Pol“)

I N...

NU 116.
1W. At times I am all full of energy.

Pip) 118.
"(6) 119.
”my 120.

709 121.

“(07122.

W 123-

9(7) 124.

W) 127°

”(7) 128 .

[(7] 129.

[RU 130.

'F) 11“. At times I feel like swearing.

If I let people see the way I feel.
I'd be considered a hard person to
get along with.

It makes me nervous to have to wait.

I like a great deal of variety in
my work.

Criticism or scolding hurts me
terribly.

At times I am so restless that I
cannot sit in a chair for very long.

I have been quite independent and
free from family rule.

I've met a lot of children who
would benefit from a good spanking.

I am a methodical person in whatever
I do.

Sometimes I become so excited that
I find it hard to get to sleep.

There is very little love and com-
panionship in my family as compared
to other homes.

Once in a while I laugh at a dirty
Joke.

People generally demand respect for
their own rights but are unwilling
to respect the rights of others.

I have often felt that I faced so
many difficulties I could not over-
come them.

My parents have often objected to the

kind of people I went around with.

I am usually able to keep at a Job
longer than most people.

I often think "I wish I were a
child again."

Page 5

132. Atptimes I Inve been worried beyond My”)

133 .

131*.

135 .
136 .

137 .
138 .

139 .

111-0.

11+1 .

142 .

1u3 .

1141+ .
145 .

146.

11*? .
1’48 .

1‘0.

re son about something that really
di not matter.

My relatives are nearly all in P10)
sympathy with me.

I frequently revise my opinions of

people in a downward direction. MHU)

I do not always tell the truth. [a (F)

I do not have as many fears as my ”#09
friends.

I Inve been disappointed in love. ‘pJ (T)

I think it is usually wise to do M! (1)
things in a conventional way.

It is generally a mistake to maintain ,1” (r J
a friendship with the same person
over a long period of time.

I have been afraid of things or peo-
ple that I knew could not hurt me.

MINT)

My way of doing things is apt to be @(r)
misunderstood by others.

Often I can't understand why I have K05)
been so cross and grouchy.

I always finish tasks I start. even
if they are not very important. M24673
I certainly feel useless at times. N90141:)

Sometimes without any reason or even m
when things are going wrong I feel P
excitedly happy. "on top of the dog)
world."

When you come right down to it. there
are only a few people whom you are
likely to find companionable.

MH(7T)

L (F)

I find it hard to keep my mind on a 113(7). ’71
task or Job.

I gossip a little at times.

I am sure I am being talked about. PJO‘)

1:;-

._;2.1

.J’i
t.

mum-

w (0151-
m (r152-
WU 153 .

Ké‘) 15“-

“7(1) 155 .

4569156.
yo.) 157.
w (T1158 -
{(0 159.

Mela-

mmmz.

III/(7)163.
w 0115“-
! u, @650

(F) 166.

3739167.

People who go about their work
methodically are almost always the
most successful.

I often feel like a powder keg
ready to explode.

I am more self-conscious than most
people.

I am always disgusted with the law
when a criminal is freed through
the arguments of a smart lawyer.

At times I feel like smashing
things.

When I have undertaken a task, I
find it difficult to set it aside.
even for a short time.

I am the kind of person who takes
things hard.

I have very few fears compared to
my friends.

No one cares much what happens to
3'0“-

Once in a while I think of things
too bad to talk about.

I am a very nervous person.

Sometimes I feel as if I must injure
either myself or someone else.

I often find myself thinking of the
same tune or phrase for days at a
time.

I am often said to be hot-headed.
Life is often a strain for me.

If people had not had it in for me
I would have been much more suc-

cessful.

At periods my mind seems to work
more slowly than usual.

I have a work and study schedule
which I follow carefully.

168.

169.

170.

171 .
172 .

173.

17“.

175 .

176 .

177.

178 .

179 s

180.
181 .

182 .

183 .

181+.

Page6

Attimes I think I am no good at MPH}
all.

Most people will use somewhat unfair ”Haj,
means to gain profit or an advantage [((g)
rather than to lose.

Sometimes at elections I vote for [,(p)
men about whom I know very little.

I am not at all confident of myself. M117)

I usually check more than once to

be sure that I have looked a door.

put out the light. or something of ”((1)
the sort.

I easily become impatient with MINT.)
people.

At times I feel that I am going to [vi/10')
crack up.

I have often met people who were
supposed to be experts who were no
better than I.

[(0-9

I have never done anything dangerous M R (7)
for the thrill of it.

I don't like to face a difficulty or H
make an important decision. M C’)
Izhave often found people Jealous of
my good ideas Just because they had
not thought of them first.

M M?)

It is always a good thing to be frank MKCI’)
I am very confident of myself. ”1105)

What others think of me does not PJ(F), KIF)
bother me.

I think a great many people exagger-
ate their misfortunes to get the
sympathy and help of others.

MHCTJ

I have a habit of collecting various MK”)
kinds of objects.

There seems to be a lump in my throat ”#0)
much of the time.

y 5"!
' V.‘

Q‘

q

in ’8

I

(F) 185. I have never felt better in my life
than I do now.

QK’JBG. I like to let people know where I
stand on things.
M“)

w 187. Several times a week I feel as if
something dreadful is about to
happen.

WV) 188. I have done a good many things on
the spur of the moment.

7;); “9.89. When in a group of people I have

trouble thinking of the right
things to talk about.

'pfl) 190. Almost every day something happens
to frighten me.

wffi 191. Some of my family have habits that
bother and annoy me very much.

WI) 192. I believe that promptness is a very

important personality characteristic.

’0‘] 193. I get mad easily and get over it
soon.

'9 (7)1915. I am afraid of finding myself in a
closet or small closed space.

#09195. I do not try to cover up my poor
opinion or pity of a person so that
he won't know how I feel.

WP) 196. My interests change very. quickly.

9(0197. I have often been frightened in
the middle of the night.

W) 193. I have periods in which I feel
unusually cheerful without any
special reason.

”(19199. I commonly wonder what hidden reason

another person may have for doing
something nice for me.

I am troubled by discomfort in the
pit of my stomach every few days
or oftener.

It is the slow

eroo.

‘Wm.

steady worker who usu-
ally accomplishes the most in the enl.

202.

203 .
2011.
205 .

206.

207.

208.

209.

210.

211.

212 .
213.

214.

215.

216.

217.

218 .

Page 7

At times my thoughts have raced PJC"), [(0')
ahead faster than I could speak them.

I am easily awakened by noise. 5417(7)

I like to poke fun at people. M H (I)
I am always careful about my manner M16!)
of dress.

I am worried about sex matters. M17 (7)

There are certain people I dislike

so much that I am inwardly pleased M ”(‘0
when they are catching it for some-

thing they've done.

I usually dislike to set aside a
task that I have undertaken until it
is finished.

M I96)
I get anxious and upset when I have
to make a short trip away from home. M n (T)

I am inclined to go from one activity
to another without continuing with ”(09
any one for too long a time.

It is safer to trust nobody. M flfr)
MAN?)

I prefer to do things according to
a routine which I plan myself.

I feel uneasy indoors.

Mm

Horses that don't pull ought to be H ,.
beaten or kicked. M (J
The future is too uncertain for a

person to make serious plans. M B (T)
I always put on and take off my
clothes in the same order. MK 0’)
Sometimes I enjoy hurting persons I ’1 H03
love.

I am often afraid of the dark. [717(7)

MICHIGQN STQTE UNIV. LIBRRRIES

||||| III II IIHIIII ll

31293100176993