EARLY STRESS AND LATER PERSONALITY STRUCTURE Thais far the Doom of M. A. MECHiGAN STATE UNW‘ERSWY Ellie” H. Rosenberg I961 LIBRARY Midligan State University L OVERDUE FINES: 25¢ per day per item RETURNING LIBRARY MATERIALS: Place in book return to remove charge from circulation records rdzxfifiu‘ L EARLY STRESS AND LATER PERSONALITY STRUCTURE By ELLIOTT H. ROSENBERG A THESIS Submitted to the College of Science and Arts of Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF ARTS Department of Psychology 1961 DEDICATION To Iriet and Edor, without whose cooperation this thesis could not have been completed. And to Masha for undertaking much of the responsibility of ensuring this cooperation. ii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The author wishes to express his gratitude to Dr. A. I. Rabin, who, in his capacity as chairman of this thesis committee, showed patience and understanding in a sometimes trying situation. Gratitude is also here expressed to Rav-Seren Eliezer Karni, through whose good offices the original material on which this thesis is. based was made available. iii ABSTRACT EARLY STRESS AND LATER PERSONALITY STRUCTURE by Elliott H. Rosenberg This study was undertaken in order to explore possible per- sonality differences flowing from early childhood experiences. One group, consisting of forty subjects, comprised Jewish children born in Europe during the years. 1938—1941 and who had consequently lived their early years under conditions of considerable environ- mental stress. Stress was defined in terms of gross pressures such as threat to the security of the family from outside sources, many changes of family location, shortages of food, and, in general, a state of a highly unstable relationship between family and environ- ment. The forty subjects in the second group were born in Israel during the years 1938—1940 to Jewish parents and had lived, in childhood, under “normal” conditions. The two groups are well equated on intelligence and age, and all subjects had undergone at least six months of basic training in the Israeli Defence Force, from among whose files the subjects have been selected. iv Elliott H. Rosenberg The comparison of the two groups was based on their re- sponses to a series. of forty-two incomplete sentences. Two systems. of analysis were used. The first analysis of responses to each of the forty-two sen- tence stems was based on a dichotomy set up for each sentence, based on the content of all the responses to that stem. At the 5 per cent level of probability nine sentences showed significant dif- ferences between the two groups. It was considered that some evidence, if tentative, existed for a statement that more of the early stress group have feelings of in- security in their present social relationships than do members of the nonearly stress group. More of them, although tending to see threat as originating within themselves, are also inclined to blame others for their plight than are members of the nonearly stress group. The second method of analysis used was an examination of nine categories each including clusters of several sentences. This was done in an attempt to arrive at a more global evaluation of the data.3 Significant differences, at the 5 per cent level or better, were found between the two groups by one judge. A second judge found no categories that discriminated between the groups at this level of significance. Elliott H. Rosenberg Thus, although there is again a suggestion that more members of the early stress group tend to feel a lack of social “comfortable- ness” and to be extrapunitive as compared to the nonearly stress group, there is little of a conclusive nature in the results. ll _/ Approved “(7+ W Date % 57/. /{/M vi TABLE OF CONTENTS Page I. INTRODUCTION ........................... 1 A. The Effect of Early Stress on Later Personality Development: Some Theoretical VieWpoints .................... 1 B. The Effect of Early Stress on Later Personality Development: Some Empirical Investigations ................... 3 C. Purpose and Rationale of the Study . .......... 6 II. SUBJECTS AND PROCEDURE ................. 8 A. Selection of Subjects ..................... 8 B. Background Factors ...................... 9 C. Comparison of the Two Groups .............. 12 D. The Incomplete Sentence Method as a Measure of Personality Differences .......... 16 E. Administration of the Incomplete Sentences ............................. 18 F. Method of Analysis and Scorer Reliability ............................. 18 1. Individual sentence analysis ............... 18 2. Analysis by clusters .................... 20 . RESULTS AND DISCUSSION ................. A. Individual Sentence Analysis ................ 1. Results . OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO 2. Discussion ........................... B. Analysis by Clusters ..................... 1. Results . 2. Discussion ........................... SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS ................ . REFERENCE S viii Page 23 23 23 28 34 34 37 39 42 LIST OF TABLES Table , Page 1. Place and Year of Birth of the Two Groups ............................ 13 2. Place of Birth of Parents of Group 2 .......... 14 3. Intelligence and Age of the Two Groups ........ 15 4. Interjudge Agreement on Analysis by Clusters ............................ 22 5. Results of Individual Sentence Analysis ........ . ..................... 23 6. Age on Arrival and Length of Time in Israel of Group 1 . ..................... 31 7. Analysis of Sentences by Clusters ............ 35 LIST OF FIGURES Figure Page 1. Responses of Subjects to Nine Sentence Stems Where Group Differences Were Statistically Significant . . . . . . ...................... 29 Appendix LIST OF APPENDIXE S List of Sentence Stems .............. An Example of a Sheet of Responses . . . . .................... List of the Nine Categories Used in Analysis by Clusters and the Sentence Stems. Included in Each Category ......................... An Example of the Individual Cards Used in Analysis by Clusters ......................... Examples of Responses Made within the Dichotomies of the Individual Sentence Analysis ........... 50 52 53 I. INTRODUCTION A. The Effect of Early Stress on Later Personality Development: Some Theoretical Viewpoints Fenichel (1945), writing within the Freudian framework, de- scribes the developmental process as a gradual adaptation of the organism to inner and outer stresses. Although a continuous affair, any excessive stress or conflict at a particular stage of ontogenetic development results in the semi “sealing-off” of this stage by the erection of walls of defense. In the event of later stress with which the organism feels unable to cope, there will occur a re- gression to these earlier stages with their more adequate defensive structures. Broadly within the Freudian philosophy, but no longer repre- sentative of it, Horney (1946), From (1949), and Sullivan (1953) discard the immutability of early ontogenesis while retaining a gen- eral causative relationship between early experience and later be- havior. Early experiences may have a distorting but not neces- sarily a decisive influence on adult behavior, and an important as- pect of this behavior is an interaction between the individual and his present environment. Adler (1939) places high emphasis on the effect of early ex- periences on later personality structure. The style of life peculiar to the individual is. a function of both past experiences and inherited characteristics, and those events occurring early are the more de- cisive. Jung (1939) places less emphasis on the past. In his view, man is both attracted by future expectations as well as formed by past experiences, and these together determine present personality structure. Learning theorists, when they have turned their attention to the human developmental process, place high importance on the early influences affecting later personality. Miller (1951), for example, lays particular stress on the past ordering of events and their ef- fect on present behavior. Childhood training and early experiences are critical determinants of adult behavior via the principles of re- ward, punishment, and generalization. There is an essential contin- uity (vi_d_e Freud) of past and present. To Lewin (1936) it is only the presently acting force that can motivate change or propel the organism directionally. Behavior is to be understood within a noncontinuous framework. Ongoing activity may be influenced by past traces, but these are then presently op- erative. Psychological forces are contemporaneously functional. Rogers (1958) and Allport (1955) are, in this limited respect, in close agreement with the Lewinian view. Allport, via the principle of functional autonomy, argues that present action may be divorced from motivation originally prompting the behavior. Reference to past motivation as an explanation of present behavior may supply only irrelevant answers. To Rogers a reference to the past says nothing of the organism’s perception of his immediate phenomenal world. Answers, in terms of an understanding of the person, would, for him, have to be trans- lated in terms of their meaningfulness to the experiencing organism. It is not the purpose, here, to make any exhaustive examina- tion of all theoretical stands on this issue. It is intended only to make the point that there exist wide discrepancies among personality theorists as to the importance or nonimportance of early environ- mental influences on later personality structure. B. The Effect of Early Stress on Later Personality Development: Some Empirical Investigations Bowlby (1953) summarized much research in this area. He equates maternal deprivation—rejection of the infant by the mother, or absence of the mother from the infant—with emotional depriva- tion, and regards such stress as a critical force in personality development. Bowlby measures the results of deprivation against the yardstick of the adequacy of social relationships. Goldfarb (1945), Spitz (1945, 1946, 1955, 1957), and Bowlby, although achieving no perfect congruence of research findings, have on the whole highlighted the affectionless character as a product of the deprived experience. Descriptively summarized, this is a per- son who is unable to make deep relationships, who has little real feeling for others, inaccessible to emotional contact because of an apparent emotional vacuum, and who is deceitful and evasive. Freud and Burlingham (1944, 1944), writing of children sepa- rated from their parents because of the exigencies of war and placed in institutions, stress the faulty development of moral values in these children. Only “if these relationships [with adult super- visors] are deep and lasting [will] the residential child take the usual course of development, form a normal super~ego and become an independent moral and social being” (p. 126). The emphasis in all of these studies lies heavily on a def- inition of stress as deprivation by parental action or lack of action. The context created by the data of this study, however, is such that we are concerned with broader environmental stress. Drawing their data from the animal level, Ader (1950) and Lindzey, Likken, and Winston (1960) are able to rigorously define deprivation, but extension of their conclusions to human subjects re- mains difficult. Thompson (1960), in a review of the literature on experimental studies of environmental deprivation, states that there “is a remark- able degree of agreement as to the validity of the general proposi- tion that the early part of development is crucial in shaping later behavior. It is also true, however, that the secondary implied prop- osition that later experience is much less important is not yet con- clusively proved. Although some of the evidence is positive, some is strongly negative” (p. 311). Thompson draws no distinction, however, between parental and a general social definition of deprivation, and so it is difficult to know precisely what elements are covered by his “general prop- osition.” With the recent publication of the Stirling County Study, an attempt has been made to relate specifics of the sociocultural process to personality structure. In Volume One, Leighton (1959) states that one of the variables to be investigated in the study (among, of course, many others) are the effects of dif- ferential childhood experiences on later personality structure. He writes that “such occurrences [defective experiences] in early childhood may be, and perhaps usually are, the initial steps in progressive, cumulative development of psychiatric disorder which does not appear as overt symptoms until the adult years” (p. 166). In Volume Two, societies in various stages of disorganiza- tion and disintegration are intensively studied and the effect on personality development reported upon. The range of behavior among individuals stemming from stable and unstable communities, however, shows much overlapping, and Hughes, Tremblay, Rapoport, and Leighton (1960) can only state tendencies with few definitive conclusions. C. Purpose and Rationale of the Study The purpose of the study is in the nature of an exploratory investigation of the gross personality differences between two groups. One group lived under stressful conditions during the first years of life. The other group lived under conditions of relative stability. Both stem from the same ethnic origins. Personality differences are evaluated in terms of responses to a series of incomplete sen- tences. Since the purpose of the study is an exploratory inves- tigation, no hypotheses are stated, and there is no attempt to justify, negate, or even to supplement any specific theoretical approach. II. SUBJECTS AND PROCEDURE A. Selection of Subjects The Officer Selection Centre of the Israeli Defence Forces tests and recommends on all applicants for officership. As part of the selection procedure, applicants must routinely complete a series of incomplete sentences, a personal autobiography, and a question- naire eliciting specific details of their individual history. In this study only the first source and fragments of the sec- ond source were utilized. All the material, in the original form, was made available by the Officer Selection Centre. All Israeli youth (unless excused for very specific reasons) are drafted to the army in their eighteenth year. After serving in the army for at least six months they may apply and/ or be recom- mended for officership. Files were removed of all applicants born in Europe during the years 1939—1941, and from these, forty were randomly selected. All files of those born in Israel during these years were also re- moved, and again, forty files were randomly selected. All subjects were tested during the period March to September, 1958. B. Background Factors The following description of the background of the two groups is derived from excerpts culled from the autobiographies of individ- uals in each group. While some effort has been made to select sec— tions representative of each group, no statistical treatments have been applied. It is felt that a montage will provide a more meaning- ful description than a tabular analysis. (a) Israeli-born (nonearly stress) group. File No. 4. I was born in the year 1940 in the village of Beer-Yaacov. At that time the English were in the land and I lived with my group near the camp of the soldiers for 8 years. At that time I went through the Kindergarten and after that spent 3 years at prepa- ratory school. In my childhood I had all the children’s diseases and I never had any serious illnesses, so that I dispensed with these while still in my youth. I was a member of the group of children in the village and this group had that maturity suitable to each member of it and appropriate to his age. We were like one family. When there fell on us the War of Liberation (in 1948), we were advised to leave the village and to move to Rishon 1e Zion. . . . File No. 58. I was born during the last days of the Second World War, on Mount Carmel, in Haifa. My early childhood passed without special incidents, and my time was divided between my parents’ home, my friends, kindergarten and the woods and fields. of Mount Carmel. Between these four factors that went into the development of my self-concept during my childhood days the home of my parents occupied the most honoured place. I was an only child and therefore received a large share of love 10 without being spoiled. I was six years old when I first went to school. This was the Riali School in Haifa. This educa- tional fact influenced me greatly, because the tendency at this school was toward a strict regime. Although the order and the discipline pained me not a little, it also developed in me a sense of order and discipline, that remained permanently with me to this day. At the age of ten I entered the Scout Move- ment. . . . File No. 39. (b) I was born 20 years ago on the 3.3.39 on the Kibbutz Afikim which is in the Jordan Valley. My parents were among the veterans of the place and I was the eldest (first born) son of the family. During these two decades nothing has occurred which is, at all likely to have injured the foundations that were laid. My childhood (to the extent that I remember it) was sat- isfying. I laughed and cried like every child of my age and certainly, very often, was wild and made my parents and “house mothers” (mitaplot) angry. I began to like sport at a very young age and started to participate in it. Because there are many springs and water reservoirs in the Jordan Valley I commenced to swim at 4 years of age. At 6 years I competed with my kindergarten teacher and came out of the competition with honour. In the lower grades I learned with much enthusi- asm and even prepared my lessons willingly. In the course of time I discovered a preference for the humanities which I es- pecially liked. . . . European-born (early stress) group. File No. 20. I was born in Lwow in Poland on the 15.12.39. My father was an officer in the Polish Army and was killed in the Second World War and my mother also was killed in that war. At a young age I was passed to the keeping of a Christian family without children in the town of Lublin. In this family I passed the time of the Second World War. I was registered as a child of this Christian family and therefore remained alive when the Germans conquered Poland. At the age of 6 years I was taken by a representative of Youth Aliya (Zionist youth 11 organization) and was moved, together with a large number of other Jewish children, to a children’s camp in Dornstadt in Germany. The journey to the camp was secret and was done mostly in the night, in cars and by train. . . . File No. 51. I was born in Poland in 1939. At the outbreak of war we went to Russia because of the terrible conditions in Poland. Our family consisted then of six souls. There were four children— three males and a sister. After the war we returned to Poland and because father was not able to support us we were placed in an institution. After a year in the institution in Poland we moved, together with the others in the institution, to Germany. In Germany we were transferred to a larger institution and after a year and a half, there remained half the institution (the rest had gone on to Israel). They moved us to France and there we were placed in a religious institution and from there we started to go to Israel one by one. First my sister—the eldest—in 1948. After a year my eldest brother (in 1949) and after that I, the youngest (in 1950), and after me another brother who was older than me. When I arrived in Israel I found my parents already there (they came from Poland in 1949) and so they removed me from the institution and took me home. I live in Machane Israel. . . . File N o. 68. The story of my life starts from 2.2.39, the day I was born. When I came into the air of the wOrld my parents were very happy (according to them) because I was the first-born son. About my first days, of course, I cannot tell from memory but must rely on what was told me after I grew up. Therefore will tell about them shortly. When I was six months old the Second World War broke out and my parents decided to flee to Russia. On the way, at one of the stations my father got off the train to buy milk for me. He was informed that the train would be held up at that station for many hours and he therefore went to the town to look for milk. The information about the delay of the train had been wrong and minutes after my father had left the station the train continued on its way. So began the separation of my father and my mother, a separa- tion that continued for a year. During this year my mother 12 despaired, because she remained without money, as my father had kept all the money. She had to sell all the property we had taken with us that we should not starve. On the other hand, my father, in his rush after us, spent all the money and so the family was left with nothing at all. For six years the family remained in Russia and during these six years I grew up without the supervision of parents, as both of them had to work: my father in the irrigation of trees and my mother in the potatoe fields. With the end of the war they allowed us to return to Poland—those who wanted to. My age at this time was six and a half and the age of my brother (born in Russia) was four and a half. . . . It is apparent that degree and scope of stress varied widely between individuals in the European-born group. C. Comparison of the Two Groups Table 1 summarizes the information as to country of origin and year of birth of subjects. Members of the European-born group—now designated group l—stem from most of the countries of Europe, with a high proportion from central Europe. Table 2 indi- cates that the parents. of the Israeli-born group——now designated group 2——come, in differing proportions, from essentially the same range of countries. Table 3 indicates that, with regard to the variables of intel- ligence and age, the two groups are well matched. Estimates of intelligence—in stannine ratings—were based mainly on scores achieved on a series of progressive matrices. There is evidence 13 TABLE 1 PLACE AND YEAR OF BIRTH OF THE TWO GROUPS (N = 80) Year of Birth Place of Birth Totals 1938 1939 1940 1941 Group 1 Bulgaria ......... 4 2 6 France .......... 1 1 Poland .......... 1 7 3 11 Rumania ......... 6 3 6 1 16 Russia .......... 1 3 1 5 Yugoslavia ........ 1 1 Group 2 Israel ........... 2 15 23 40 Totals ........... 11 30 37 2 80 14 TABLE 2 PLACE OF BIRTH OF PARENTS OF GROUP 2 (N = 40) Place of Birth Mother Father Totals Canada ............... 1 1 Czechoslovakia .......... 1 1 Germany .............. 4 5 9 Hungary .............. 1 1 Iraq ................. 1 1 2 Israel ................ 8 6 14 Poland ............... 18 14 32 Rumania .............. 2 3 5 Russia ............... 2 3 5 Syria ................ 1 1 2 Yemen ................ 3 4 7 Unknown .............. 1 1 Totals ................ 40 40 80 15 TABLE 3 INTELLIGENCE AND AGE OF THE TWO GROUPS (N = 80) Stannine Age Group N (intelhgence) (years) M. S.D. M. S.D. 1. European ..... 40 6.3 1.02 19.77 .86 2. Israeli ...... 40 6.6 1.14 19.47 .59 that results of intelligence testing on such matrices mrehtively free of bias from cultural and language variables (Raven, 1951; Burke, 1958). Further, that estimates of intelligence based on such matrices are sufficiently reliable and valid for our purposes. of equating the two groups, is attested by Sperazzo and Wilkins (1958). The subjects in the Israeli-born group are slightly younger with somewhat less variability of age and have a slightly greater facility of abstract reasoning. Since instructions were given in Hebrew, this fact alone could account for their slight superiority in this area. There are no statistically significant differences be- tween the groups with respect to either variable. 16 Both groups have passed through basic training, and all sub- jects have applied or have been recommended for officership. Both groups are above the Israeli Army average in intelligence, and are physically healthy. Similarities of age makes it reasonable to as- sume that all the individuals have spent a similar amount of time in the army. D. The Incomplete Sentence Method as. a Measure of Personality Differences. No newcomer to the psychologists’ armentarium of clinical techniques, the sentence-completion test is perhaps best described as a semiprojective test. Rotter (1951), in giving a brief historical survey of the method, is able to amass an imposing amount of re- search utilizing the technique. He summarizes: It seems well adapted to an analysis of problem areas and use- ful for giving the clinician a set or orientation toward a subject so that he may structure his first interview in advance. A reasonable degree of objectivity in scoring has been obtained and it has served in some instances as an adequate screening device. One investigator feels that the test is most useful for determining unconscious trends. For the most part, however, its value for diagnostic purposes or for analysis of basic per- sonality structure is less emphasized than its usefulness in pro- viding information regarding the content of the subject’s thought and feelings [p. 309]. Sacks and Levy (1950), in giving a rather comprehensive re- view of the literature regarding this technique, stress the flexibility 17 of functions to which it may be put. They feel that it is, however, perhaps better used as a descriptive than a diagnostic tool. That is, its value in providing descriptive accounts of personality ten- dencies is more in evidence than its value in evaluating personality diagnostically or even dynamically. As with many projective techniques, it is. difficult to make a definitive statement as to its test reliability or validity. These seem to vary with the nature of the study, the background and experience of the user, and, to some extent, with the construction of the par- ticular test used. The test has been used in this study essentially as a descrip- tive tool. No attempt has been made to enter into diagnostic complex- ities or to evaluate personality dynamics. on the basis of individual responses. Analysis has rested heavily on the specific content—4hat is, manifest content—of the responses. Agreement between judges is to some extent a measure of the reliability of these content cate- gories. The cluster analysis used in the second part of the study fol- lows the procedure recommended by Sacks and Levy (1950). As to detailed organization, however, the method is based on that used by Rabin (1957), using the Rorschach test, in attempting to achieve some sort of global evaluation of his data. 18 E. Administration of the Incomplete Sentences Incomplete sentences are administered to all candidates at the time of first reporting to the Officer Selection Centre. The series is given to batches of approximately twenty-five persons by a tester who reads aloud the sentence stems at a fixed rate. The stems also appear on printed booklets. where they are completed in writing. Responses were translated by the investigator from the original sentence completions in Hebrew to English. The present research, then, is based on the English translations, and it is these from which the judges worked. A list of the forty-two sentence stems is given in Appendix A. F. Method of Analysis and Scorer Reliability 1. Individual sentence analysis Responses of each subject to a particular sentence stem were gathered together. The responses of the two groups were kept separate. Thus, the responses of the forty members of, say, group 1 to sentence stem number three were all typed together on one page, while the forty responses of group two to this same stem 19 were kept together on another separate page. An example of such a page is provided in Appendix B. Each sheet contained the group number, sentence number and stem, subject number, and response. On the basis. of an inspection of the content of all the re- sponses to a stem, a dichotomy was. set up. This was done sepa- rately for each stem. Thus every response to the stem, “When they blame me . . . ,” was placed in a dichotomy either under the self- accepting class or the self-rejecting class. The investigator acted as one of two judges; the other judge was an advanced graduate student in psychology. On separate sheets of paper each judge in- dependently then assigned completed responses. to one of the two classes of the dichotomies in a forced-choice manner. There were no intermediate categories. Where an individual made no response it was ignored. This was. designed to avoid possible ambiguities whereby a “no response” could possibly, at different times, be placed in an inconsistent manner. A chi-square was calculated for each of the forty-two dichotomies so set up, to test for differences between the two groups. All computations were based on a formula incorporating a correction for continuity as recommended by Siegel (1956). 20 A percentage agreement of the agreed-on ratings to the total ratings made by each of the two judges was. calculated for each sentence. Percentage agreements ranged from 62 per cent to 91 per cent. Percentage agreement of the same to the total ratings over all forty-two sentences was 83 per cent. In every case where a significantdifference at the 5 per cent level was found by the present investigator, the second judge found that sen- tence to be similarly significant. The second judge found more significant differences between the two groups than the present investigator at the 10 per cent level. Because of the close agree- ment between judges, only those chi-squares based on the ratings of this investigator are included in this thesis. To the knowledge of this investigator, there is no satisfactory solution to the problem of determining the number of results required for significance when those results are from the same subjects. Jones and Fiske (1953), in an exhaustive review of this. problem, feel that—at the moment at least—whe re data of combined results are correlated, there is no satisfactory way to test the significance of those results. 2. Analysis by. clusters In this part of the study nine categories, suggested by the nature of the sentence stems and considered of broad theoretical 21 relevance or, perhaps better, relevance in the field of personality, were set up. Sentences appropriate to each category were selected by this investigator. In both the choosing of the categories and the selection of the sentences placed in each category, the investigator worked in close consultation with Dr. Rabin. The sentence stems. placed in each of the nine categories are given in Appendix C. Responses of each subject to all the sentence stems placed within each category were typed on one side of 3- by 5-inch cards. On the other side of the card appeared the category number, group number, and the number of the subject giving those particular re- sponses. An example of the cards is given in Appendix D. On the basis of an examination of each category, a dichotomy was set up by this investigator. This was done separately for each category. Again, a forced-choice technique was used, and all cards had to be sorted into one of the two divisions. Judges could ask questions with reference to the categories before sorting, but after the cards. of each category had been presented to him, no further questions were permitted. The investigator did not act as a judge. Judges sorted the cards of one category at a time, and so cards were presented in batches of eighty (responses to stems within that category made by all the subjects of both experimental groups) and were thoroughly shuffled by the investigator before 22 presentation. Cards were handed to the judges with the sentence- response side up, and the judges were instructed not to turn them over. Sentence stems were typed on similar cards and these the judges could keep beside them for reference. Two advanced graduate students in psychology acted as judges. Sortings were on different days with one judge not present when the other sorted. Chi-squares were calculated on the ratings of both judges independently. Percentage agreements between judges were calculated as before, but here on each category. They are given in Table 4. TABLE 4 INTERJUDGE AGREEMENT ON ANALYSIS BY CLUSTERS Percentage of Category Judge Agreementa 80 73 86 87 83 76 85 73 80 OQQQUIfiWNI—l aPercentage agreement of judges over all sentences was 82 per cent. III. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION A. Individual Sentence Analysis 1. Results Table 5 summarizes the results of the analysis of the forty- two individual sentences. TABLE 5 RESULT-S OF INDIVIDUAL SENTENCE ANALYSISa Sen- Group b tence Dichotomy -—————— x3 p. No. 1 2 1. Success oriented ......... 24 23 Avoidance .............. 16 17 n.s. 2. Copes with the threat ...... 20 17 Unable to cope ........... 19 23 n.s. 3. Depressed feelings ........ 31 30 Positive actions .......... 5 8 n. s. 4. Positive acceptance and end successful ......... 16 17 Negative acceptance and end doubtful ........... 16 15 n.s. aGroup 1 = European-born; Group 2 = Israeli-born. bA two-tailed test of significance was used. 23 24 TABLE 5 (Continued) Sen- Group tence Dichotomy X2 p. No. 1 2 5. Self-accepting ........... 34 29 Self-rejecting ........... 5 11 n.s. 6. Self-accepting ........... 34 33 Self -re jecting ........... 3 4 n. s 7. Lies in the past .......... 30 29 Has not yet happened ...... 7 9 n.s. 8. Copes with threat ......... 21 19 Escapes from threat or evasive response ....... 17 21 n.s 9. Intrapunitive ............ 3 10 Extrapunitive ............ 37 26 4.09 .05 10. Self-accepting ........... 18 20 Self-rejecting ........... 19 18 n.s 11. Controlled .............. 17 10 Gives vent .............. 21 28 n.s 12. Active action ............ 15 20 Passive reaction ......... 25 18 n. s. 13. People act against him ..... 13 11 Other responses .......... 25 26 n.s 14. Attempts to overcome ...... 7 1 Submits and other responses . 27 34 3.47 .10 15. Handles the threat ........ 10 9 Fearful, evasiVe, or neutral .............. 27 29 n.s.. 25 TABLE 5 (Continued) Sen- Group tence Dichotomy x2 p. No. 1 2 16. Feels others are against him ................. 16 8 Other responses .......... 22 32 4.47 .05 17. Undertakes positive action . . . 5 16 Negative action or does nothing .............. 33 22 6.58 .02 18. Internal and subjective reasons ............... 33 25 Objective or situational conditions ............ 3 9 2.72 .10 19. Ambivalent .............. 16 5 Accepting, nonambivalent . . . . 24 35 6.46 .02 20. Blames himself ........... 3 3 Blames conditions ......... 35 36 n.s 21. Faces up to threat ........ 24 18 Does not face up, or evasive response ....... 15 21 n.s 22. Causes lie within himself 9 16 Other or thing referrent causes .............. 28 22 n.s 23. If I die or am injured ...... 8 0 Other responses .......... 29 39 5.72 .02 24. Accomplish or succeed ..... 13 11 Other responses .......... 25 29 n.s 25. Self-referrent ........... 24 23 Other or thing referrent . . . . 14 17 n.s. 26 TABLE 5 (Continued) Sen- Group tence Dichotomy X2 p. No. 1 2 26. Realistic or coping responses ............ 8 15 Avoidant, evasive, neutral, unrealistic, or submissive . 32 25 n.s. 27. Negative (avoidant, tense) 28 24 Positive (approach, relax- ational) .............. 11 15 n.s. 28. Refers to people or himself . . 17 13 Refers to conditions or a situation ............. 16 23 n.s. 29. Are friendly, appreciative . . . 28 18 Are unfriendly, tiresome . . . . 11 21 4.27 .05 30. Feels is a positive quality . 34 27 Feels is a negative quality . . 6 12 n.s 31. Positive, foresees success 21 21 Negative, foresees failure . 16 14 n.s 32. Feels depressed, deserted . . . 19 26 Feels uncomfortable but copes ............... 21 14 n.s. 33. Self-referrent, own actions and feelings ........... 26 14 Other referrent and situ- ational .............. 11 24 7.05 .01 34. Feels accepted and secure 18 38 Doubtful of acceptance and insecure ............. 22 2 21.49 .001 27 TABLE 5 (Continued) Sen- Group tence Dichotomy x2 p. No. 1 2 35. Self-referrent, blames him- self ................ 31 36 Other-referrent, or situation . 7 2 n.s. 36. Sees as promising ........ 29 25 Sees as threatening ....... 6 14 n.s. 37. Feels accepted and relaxed . . 26 34 Unsure of acceptance, tense ............... 14 5 4.16 .05 38. Subjective things, inside himself .............. 18 18 Objective, outside of him- self ................ 22 20 n.s. 39. Require affective qualities . . . 23 23 Require nonaffectuve or objective qualities ...... 17 17 n.s. 40. Realistic handling of threat ............... 17 20 Unrealistic or avoids threat ............... 22 19 n.s. 41. Self-acceptant ........... 22 28 Self-rejectant or descrip- tive . ..... . ......... 17 12 n.s 42. Fear of death, failure, and the dark ............. 13 8 Other responses. .......... 25 31 n.s. 28 In order to further clarify the meaning of each dichotomy, an example of the responses made within each one is provided in Ap- pendix E. 2. Discussion Figure 1 is a graphic representation of the two groups com- pared only on sentences significantly different on at least a 5 per cent level. Both dimensions of each dichotomized sentence are in- cluded so as to make for a more accurate comparison. The early stress group contains more members who feel pre- vented from the attainment of desires because of others (sentence 9) than do the nonearly stress group. While a majority of both groups blame the outside world for such nonattainment, only three members of the non-Israeli—born group (as against ten of the Israeli-born group) are intrapunitive. A significantly larger number of the early stress group feel people are against them, but here again there is a lack of any ab- solute majority (sentence 16). There would appear to be some re- luctance, in both groups, to critically examine the self. A majority of those who had endured early stress are doubt- ful of their acceptance by the group and feel insecure in the group (sentence 34). Only two of the forty responses given by the nonearly 29 Responses of subjects to nine sentence stems where Figure 1. (Scale: Icant f One square horizontally represents one subject. ally Signi 10 group differences were stati Upper bars represent group 1 responses; lower bars, group 2.) ooaoaaom 30 stress group show a comparable level of social insecurity. Sen- tence 37 provides results in the same direction. Any attempt to explain these results, however, must take cog- nizance of a possible confounding of variables. Those in the early stress group are also relative newcomers to the country, and so may feel more socially insecure for this reason only. In an attempt to explore further this line of reasoning, an analysis was made of age on arrival and years in Israel of the early stress group. The results of the analysis are shown in Table 6. It must be remem- bered, in examining this table, that at least 50 per cent of the pop- ulation in Israel at the time of gathering the present data had ar- rived in the country after 1948 (the year of the founding of the state). Thus a mean of ten years spent in Israel would argue against a social “marginality” as. would a mean age of 9.7 years on arrival. Both age on arrival and length of time in the country would seem to suggest that satisfactory social adjustments. to the new group could have been established. On this basis, then, it is suggested that the tendency for greater numbers of the early stress. group to feel a lack of security in their social relationships may be dynamically related to a view of others as hostile toward them. These attitudes may, in turn, be closer related to early childhood experiences than to the fact of 31 TABLE 6 AGE ON ARRIVAL AND LENGTH OF TIME IN ISRAEL OF GROUP 1 Mean Age Time Spent N on Arrival (1'38) in Israel ( 8;: ) (years) y (years) y s 40 9.7 1.48 10 1.38 newness in their present homeland. The data do not allow, within the context of the present analysis, confirmation of these sugges- tions, and they must, therefore, remain speculative. It is particularly interesting, within this framework, to note that sentence 29 (I feel that people . . . ) stands out as apparently inconsistent. A majority of the early stress group feel that people are friendly and appreciative, while most of the Israeli-born group consider people tiresome. It may be that the former cannot easily afford themselves the luxury of seeing others as potentially hostile toward them. There is support for an explanation along these lines in that more of the early stress group are threatened by the deser- tion of friends (sentence 17) and more of them are fearful of their own actions and emotions. (sentence 33) than are members of the nonearly stress group. They apparently tend to see the threat as 32 originating within themselves and at the same time to be peculiarly sensitive to disturbances. and disruptions in their relationships with others in their immediate surroundings. That the nature of the internal threat is related to hostility finds some support in the results of sentences 19 and 23. More of the early stress group are ambivalent toward home (sentence 19) and are concerned with the idea of death and personal injury (sentence 23) than are Israeli-born. There would be little disagreement among psychologists that a concern with these concepts is related to feel- ings of hostility. Not one of the nonearly stress group gives as re- sponse to sentence 23 a reference to death or injury, while eight of the early stress group give such responses. That all interpretations must remain highly speculative, how- ever, is heavily emphasized by the fact that of forty-two sentences analyzed, only nine show significant differences between the groups at the 5 per cent level of confidence, or better. As stated previously, the selection of the two groups was of such a nature as to equate them on a variety of dimensions. It may be that in selecting members of the early stress group from officer candidates there has. occurred a “weeding-out” of those most ad- versely affected by their experiences. Thus the study may be 33 artificially weighted against the finding of significant differences be- tween the two groups. Artificialities of selection notwithstanding, however, the paucity of significant differences demands some comment. It will be recalled from the discussion in Chapter I that the emphasis in past investigations has been heavy in considering the nature of parental deprivation. Definitions of stress in early years. included the process of the subtraction of affection (sometimes via direct absence of the parents) by significant figures in the immedi- ate environment, from the child. There is nothing in our data which enables us to say that in all or in many cases there occurred among the early stress group such a subtraction of affection. It may be that where the nuclear family is kept intact or where parental af- fection remains an operative force in the life of the child, the ef- fects of gross environmental pressures may have no lasting influ- ence on personality development. The present study, however, can neither support nor reject such a suggestion, as it is unable to specify the precise nature of parental interaction with all subjects in their early years. 34 B. Analysis by Clusters 1 . Results In order to examine the data in a more global manner, the sentences were grouped under nine categories as previously de- scribed. The results are shown in Table 7. Category 5, perhaps, requires some clarification. By social “comfort” is meant the feelings the individual associates with and in his social contacts; that is, the extent to which he feels comfort- able in his interpersonal relationships. Discomfort, in this cate- gory, was scored as negative. Categories 3 (need achievement), 5 (interpersonal attitudes and social “comfort”), and 9 (handling of blame and frustration) are felt by one judge to be areas in which there are significant differ- ences between the two groups. The fact that these same areas are scored in a consistently like manner by the other judge, although in this instance they do not achieve significant levels of difference, and the fact of high interjudge scoring agreement, might indicate some real divergencies between the two groups in these areas. There would seem to be agreement among the judges that there is little difference between the groups when they are compared on the other dimensions. 35 TABLE 7 ANALYSIS or SENTENCES BY CLUSTERSa Judge 1 Judge 2 Category Dichotomy Group Group __._..____._.._ p.b p.b 1 2 1 2 . Reaction to threat: Able to cope . . . 20 20 15 19 Unable to cope . . . 20 20 n.s 25 21 n.s . Feeling to- ward past and home: Positive 14 18 15 18 Ambi- valent . . 26 22 n.s. 25 22 n.s. . Need achieve- ment: High ..... 18 12 26 10 Low ..... 22 28 n.s 14 30 .001 . Expectancy-— view of the future: Sees as promis- ing . . . . 17 14 15 15 Sees as threat- ening 23 26 n.s 25 25 n.s. 3’Group 1 = European-born; Group 2 = Israeli—born. b A two-tailed test of significance was used. TABLE 7 (Continued) 36 Judge 1 Judge 2 Category Dichotomy Group Group p. p. 1 2 1 2 . Interper- sonal atti- tudes and social ‘ ‘comfort’ ’: Positive 22 31 21 31 Negative 18 9 .10 19 9 .05 . Self-concept; view of the self: Accepting 17 14 14 19 Rejecting . . 23 26 n.s. 26 21 n.s . Personal anxiety: Low anxi- ety . . . . 24 23 22 19 High anxi- ety . . . . 16 17 n.s. 18 21 n.s. . Sources of fear: Specific fears . . 16 19 17 17 Generalized fears 24 21 n.s. 23 23 n.s. . Handling of blame and frus- tration: Intrapuni- tive 13 21 15 27 Extrapuni- tive 27 19 n.s. 25 13 .02 37 2. Discussion Faced again with a paucity of conclusive results, we shall attempt the interpretation of tendencies. The tentative suggestion, made previously, as to the greater prevalence of feelings of hostility among members of the early stress group would seem to gain some support from this cluster analysis. This group has a greater need to achieve (and there- fore, probably to compete), but as a group are also less willing to blame themselves and to accept a personal responsibility in the handling of frustration. It would appear that they are more driven to compete than the Israeli-born group but are less willing to ac- cept a personal blame in the event of failure. Again, as in the sentence analysis, the early stress group apparently feels less comfortable in social situations and are thus less able to rely on close interpersonal contacts. There is some implication, here, of a need to maintain distance which in turn may have a reference to the nature of their trust in their fellow men. This having been said, it must be noted that the nature of the evidence is suggestive only in the broadest sense. What has been noted above is noted with caution, a caution made mandatory by the inconclusive nature of the results of this analysis. It be- comes obvious that, on the basis of this investigation at least, it III"! lull]: I. 11' II“! III [I i :5: l' a." 1" III II. III. !.!1Ian. .IIIII 1'i}. ll"! 38 is impossible to create out of the results any type of individual amalgam——any type, as it were, of an early stress personality structure. There is much overlapping, on all dimensions, between the two groups. Many subjects of both groups behave in like man- ner. Categories where one could be reasonably confident of se- curing significant differences are significantly without any differ- ences. Of nine categories, one judge found three, and the other, no significant differences between the two groups. Statements made earlier in this thesis as to the possible im- portance of the inclusion of an affectionate quality from parental fig- ures in any definition of early stress are also applicable here. Where this quality is not provenly lacking among subjects it may well be that the potential of the organism for recovery from early stress is greater than is thought by many personality theorists. IV. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS This study was undertaken in order to explore possible per- sonality differences flowing from early childhood experiences. One group, consisting of forty subjects, comprised Jewish children born in Europe during the years 1938—1941 and who had consequently lived their early years under conditions of considerable environ- mental stress. Stress was defined in terms of gross pressures such as threat to the security of the family from outside sources, many changes of family location, shortages of food, and, in general, a state of a highly unstable relationship between family and environ- ment. The forty subjects in the second group were born in Israel during the years 1938—1940 to Jewish parents and had lived, in childhood, under “normal” conditions. The two groups are well equated on intelligence and age, and all subjects had undergone at least six months of basic training in the Israeli Defence Force, from among whose files the subjects have been selected. The comparison of the two groups was based on their re- sponses to a series of forty-two incomplete sentences. Two sys- tems of analysis were used. 39 40 The first analysis of responses to each of the forty-two sentence stems was based on a dichotomy set up for each sentence, based on the content of all the responses to that stem. At the 5 per cent level of probability nine sentences showed significant dif- ferences between the two groups. It was considered that some evidence, if tentative, existed for a statement that more of the early stress group have feelings. of insecurity in their present social relationships than do members of the nonearly stress group. More of them, although tending to see threat as originating within themselves, are also inclined to blame others for their plight than are members of the nonearly stress group. The second method of analysis used was an examination of nine categories each including clusters of several sentences. This. was done in an attempt to arrive at a more global evaluation of the data.3 Significant differences at the 5 per cent level or better were found between the two groups by one judge. A second judge found no categories that discriminated between the groups at this level of significance. Thus, although there is again a suggestion that more members of the early stress group tend to feel a lack of social “comfortableness” and to be extrapunitive as compared 41 to the nonearly stress group, there is little of a conclusive nature in the results. Two comments are worthy of note here—and they are not mutually exclusive. The nature of the sample—the fact that both groups are officer applicants and are so well equated—could con- ceivably have hidden some real differences between the groups. On the other hand, it may be that when stress involves only en- vironmental pressures and affection from significant figures in the environment is not diminished, the consequences for later person- ality growth may be of a superficial nature, if it is at all of im- portance. The present study allows neither confirmation nor rejection of these comments. 10. 11. 12. V. REFERENCE S . Ader, R. The effects of early experience on subsequent emo- tionality and resistance to stress. Psychol. Monogr., 1959, 73, No. 2. . Adler, A. Social Interest. New York: Putnam, 1939. . Allport, G. W. Becoming: Basic Considerations for a Psychology of Personality. New Haven: Yale Univ. Press, 1955? Bowlby, J. Child Care and the Growth of Love. London: Penguin Books, 1953. . Burke, H. R. Raven’s Progressive Matrices: A review and crit- ical evaluation. J. genet. Psychol., 1958, 93, 199-228. Fenichel, O. The Psychoanalytic Theory of ,Neuroses. New York: Norton, 1945. Freud, Anna, and Burlingham, Dorothy. War and Children. New York: Internat. Univ. Press, 1944. . Freud, Anna, and Burlingham, Dorothy. Infants without Families. New York: Internat. Univ. Press, 1944. . Fromm, E. Man for Himself. London: Routledge, 1949. Goldfarb, W. Psychological privation in infancy and subsequent adjustment. Am. J. Orthopsychiat., 1945, 15, 247—55. Horney, Karen. Our Inner Conflicts. London: Kegan Paul, 1946. Hughes, C. C., Tremblay, M., Rapoport, R. N., and Leighton, A. H. People of Cove and Woodlot. Vol. 11. The Stirling County Study. New York: Basic Books, 1960. 42 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 43 Jones, L. V., and Fiske, D. W. Models for testing the signifi- cance of combined results. Psychol. Bull., 1953, 50, 375—82. Jung, C. G. The Integration of Personality. New York: Farrar and Rinehart, 1939. Leighton, A. H. My Name is Legion. Vol. 1. The Stirling County Study. New York: Basic Books, 1959. Lewin, K. Principles of Topological Psychology. New York: McGraw, 1936. Lindzey, G., Likken, D. T., and Winston, H. D. Infantile trauma, genetic factors, and adult temperament. J. abnorm. soc. Psychol., 1960, 61, 7—14. Miller, N. E. Comments on theoretical models: Illustrated by the development of a theory of conflict behaviour. J. Pers., 1951, 20, 82—100. Rabin, A. I. Personality maturity of Kibbutz (Israeli collective settlement) and non-Kibbutz children as reflected in Ror- schach. J. proj. Tech., 1957, 21, 148—53. Raven, J. C. Guide To Using Progressive Matrices (1947), Sets A, Ab, B. London: Lewis, 1951. Rogers, C. A process conception of psychotherapy. Amer. Psy- chologist, 1958, 13, 142-49. Rotter, J. B. Word Association and Sentence Completion Methods. In H. H. Anderson and G. L. Anderson (eds.), An Introduc- tion to Projective Techniques. New York: Prentice Hall, 1951. Pp. 279—311. Sacks, J. M., and Levy, S. The Sentence Completion Test. In L. E. Abt and L. Bellak (eds.), ProjectiveJPsychology. New York: A. A. Knopf, Inc., 1950. Pp. 357—402. Siegel, S. Nonparametric Statistics for _t_he Behavioural Sci- ences. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1956. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. 30. 31. 44 Sperazzo, G. , and Wilkins, W. L. Further normative data on the Progressive Matrices. J. consult. Psychol., 1958, 22, 35— 37. Spitz, R. A. Hospitalism: An enquiry into the genesis of psy- chiatric conditions in early childhood. Psychoanal. Study Child, 1945, 1, 53—74. I Spitz, R. A. Anaclitic depression. Psychoanal. Study Child, 1946, 2, 113—17. 7 Spitz, R. A. The Mother and Child Relationship. In K. Soddy (ed.), Mental Health and Infant Development. London: W.H.O. pub., 1955. T Spitz, R. A. No and Yes: On the Genesis of Human Communi- cation. New York: Internat. Univ. Press, 1957. Sullivan, H. S. The Interpersonal Theory of Psychiatry. New York: Norton, 1953. Thompson, W. R. Early environmental influences on behavioural development. Am. J. Orthopsychiat., 1960, 30, 306—14. APPE NDDCE S 45 NNNHHHHHHHHHH P???9°5‘9’9‘?.“E°2“P 5°9°fl9°995°i°fi APPENDIX A LIST OF SENTENCE STEMS I hope After he failed When I was left alone I felt When the difficult and responsible duty was explained to him They say of me When I work according to my own convictions The biggest disappointment in my life When my opinion is not accepted I could do what I wanted if only When they blame me When I am very irritated When the child is lost I don’t feel comfortable when What is most difficult for me When his father reprimanded him I can’t stand it when people When his friends deserted him Fear comes from At home I was very sad when When danger approaches I can’t act when 46 23. 24. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. 30. 31. 32. 33. 34. 35. 36. 37. 38. 39. 40. 41. 47 I don’t care If I only could I hate it when Because of the conditions Among strangers What interferes with me most I feel that people Pity If I only dared The feeling of loneliness I fear My position in the group He thought that his failure came from When I think of the future In the group as a rule If only I had gotten over (prevailed) In order to succeed When his suggestion was overlooked In my childhood Fear of 15. 12. 36. 39. 41. 69. 66. 63. 67. 55. 54. 53. 52. 45. 44. 43. 40. 38. 37. 35. APPENDIX B AN EXAMPLE OF A SHEET OF RESPONSES When his father reprimanded him . . . (Group 2) he was insulted and left the place he was humiliated he was frightened the boy was confused he repented the mother . . . he got excited the son corrected himself about his mistakes thought that he was going to faint swore at him shut up and was insulted he begged him the child shut up the child began to cry he was compelled to turn to his mother he began to cry began with weeping pretended to run to the side of his mother pretended to cry stood dreaming 48 34. 33. 3.2. 31. 30. 27. 26. 25. 24. 10. 13. 14. 15.. 16. 22. 23. 65. 58. 49 grimaced and sat aside the son did not take it he came to me and requested that I help him listened to his voice burst into tears cried began to cry he burst into tears he cried awfully did not pay attention he fled from his house he was insulted went out to find friends. he repented the child was hurt cried pretended to run from him was ashamed did not answer a thing APPENDIX C LIST OF THE NINE CATEGORIES USED IN ANALYSIS BY CLUSTERS AND THE SENTENCE STEMS INCLUDED IN EACH CATEGORY Cate- gory N 0. Category Sentence Number and Stem Reaction to threat Feeling toward past and home Need achievement Expectancy——view of the future Interpersonal atti- tudes and social “comfort” 10. 17. 21. 40. 15. 19. 41. 14. 38. 39. 24. 31. 36. 27. 29. 30. 34. 37. . After he failed . When my opinion is not accepted When they blame me When his friends deserted him When danger approaches When his suggestion was over- looked When his father reprimanded him At home In my childhood What is most difficult for me If only I had gotten over (prevailed) In order to succeed . I hope If I only could If I only dared When I think of the future Among strangers I feel that people Pity My position in the group In the group as a rule 5O 51 APPENDIX C (Continued) Cate- gory Category Sentence Number and Stem No. 6. Self-concept—view of 4. When the difficult and respon- the self sible duty was explained to him 5. They say of me 6. When I work according to my own convictions 9. I could do what I wanted if only . When I was left alone I felt . The biggest disappointment in my life 11. When I am very irritated 12. When the child is lost 32. The feeling of loneliness 7. Personal anxiety «It» 8. Sources of fear 18. Fear comes from 33. I fear 42. Fear of 9. Handling of blame 13. I don’t feel comfortable when and frustration 16. I can’t stand it when people 20. I was very sad when 22. I can’t act when 25. I hate it when 26. Because of the conditions 28. What interferes with me most 35. He thought that his failure came from APPENDIX D AN EXAMPLE OF THE INDIVIDUAL CARDS USED IN ANALYSIS BY CLUSTERS Response side of card. Cards were presented for sorting with this side face up, and judges were instructed not to turn cards over. 21. (no response) 37. that my brother will be sick 47. that my father and my brother Information for scoring was on the reverse side of the card; in this case, category 8, group 2, individual number 66. C.8 2. 66 52 APPENDIX E EXAMPLES OF RESPONSES MADE WITHIN THE DICHOTOMIES OF THE INDIVIDUAL SENTENCE ANALYSIS Sen- tence Dichotomy Example No. 1. Success oriented to be an officer Avoidance to go home 2. Copes with threat he tried again Unable to cope I was very sad 3. Depressed feelings an awful feeling Positive action how much I need a girl friend 4. Positive acceptance and end successful he went and succeeded Negative acceptance and _ end doubtful he wangled out of it 5. Self-accepting that I am cool-headed Self-rejecting that I amya coward 6. Self-accepting I succeed better Self-rejecting I am liable to make a mistake 7. Lies in the past was in my childhood Has not yet happened is that I will be thrown out of the course 53 54 APPENDIX E (Continued) Sen- tence Dichotomy Example No. 8. Copes with threat I try to persuade Escapes from threat or evasive response then I have failed 9. Intrapunitive I had been capable of it Extrapunitive they permitted me 10. Self-accepting I defended myself Self-rejecting I burst into tears 11. Controlled I restrain myself Gives vent I am liable to strike blows 12. Active action I went to look for him Passive reaction he began to cry 13. People act against him they pick on me Other responses I am sick 14. Attempts to overcome I try to obtain Submits and other re- sponses I don’t do 15. Handles the threat tried to explain himself Fearful or evasive or neutral response he started to cry 16. Feels others are against him insult me Other responses fight between themselves 17. Undertakes positive action chose a different group Negative action or does nothing remained alone and forlorn 55 APPENDIX E (Continued) Sen- tence Dichotomy Example No. 18. Internal and subjective reasons from lack of self-confidence Objective or situational ’ conditions being unaccustomed to parties 19. Ambivalent there was not the hoped-for comrade Accepting, nonambivalent warm and good 20. Blames. himself I failed Blames conditions the journey to America was cancelled 21. Faces up to threat need to act immediately Does not face up or evasive response he looks for refuge 22. Causes lie within himself I am sick Other or thing referrent causes many opponents rise against me 23. If I die or am injured to die for the homeland Other responses that somebody preaches me a sermon 24. Accomplish or succeed I would accomplish that Other responses I would'go to Haifa 25. Self-referrent I fail in an exam Other or thing referrent they give an order without caring 56 APPENDIX E (Continued) Sen- tence Dichotomy Example No. 26. Realistic or coping re- ' sponses I attack more Avoidant, evasive, unre- alistic or submissive he requested transfer from his unit 27. Negative (avoidant, tense) responses I am very confused Positive (approach, relax- ational) responses I am comfortable 28. Refers to people to to himself are the pains in my back Refers to conditions or a situation is the noise 29. Are friendly, appreciative are friendly to me Are unfriendly, tiresome do stupid things 30. Feels is a positive quality is a good quality Feels is a negative quality root of all evil 31. Positive—foresees success I would certainly succeed Negative—foresees failure I would have failed 32. Feels depressed and de- serted is the enemy of the person Feels uncomfortable but copes educates sometimes 33. Self-referrent—his own actions and feelings Other referrent—and situational that I will not succeed being late for the parade 57 APPENDIX E (Continued) Sen- tence Dichotomy Example No. 34. Feels accepted and secure is enduring (permanent) Doubtful of acceptance and insecure is not very stable 35. Self-referrent, blames him- self from lack of confidence Other-referrent or blames situation from objective factors 36. Sees as promising I smile Sees. as threatening I see it declining 37. Feels accepted and relaxed I am well received Feels unsure of acceptance and tense I try to be accepted 38. Subjective things over my shyness Objective things over the obstacles 39. Require affective qualities need a little desire Require nonaffective or objective qualities need the School Finishing Certificate 40. Realistic handling of threat submitted a second sug- gestion Unrealistic or avoids threat shut up and did not add a word 41. Self-acceptant I had much energy and strength Self—rejectant or descriptive I was Very depressed 42. Fear of death, failure, and the dark Other responses death made him flee obstacles will pass meta? if." 1” ELL] Uht LHLY mar" “"10- ? fro—L.” ~' . “d q-v "A ‘. live-“7‘35? "i: a A“ IIIIIIIIIIIIIIQIIILIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII ES 08741