A STUDY OF THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN RISKJAKING TENDENCIES AND HIGH SCHOOL VARSITY FOOTBALL PLAYERS" ' “axis for EM 009m of M. A. _ MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY CyriI Anthany Pick 1963 wvvvv vvwvv W' THESIS OVERDUE FINES: \ . ¢ per day per Item RETURNING LIBR ARY MATERIALS: Place in Do ok return to remove charge from circulation records A 8M? 0? THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEH RISK-TAKING WINES up man SCEOL VARSITY FOOTBALL PLAYERS BY Cyril Anthony Pick All ABSTRACT Ol‘ A rmsxs Submitted to lichigen Stete Univereity in pertiel fulfillment o! the requirement. for the degree 01 METER 0? ms Department of Beeltho Phyeicel Education. and Recreetion 1963 ABSTRACT A STUDY Ol‘ THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN RISK-TAKING TENDEMIES AND HIGH SCHOOL VARSITY FOOTBALL PLAYERS by Cyril Anthony Pick e P e The perpoee of thie etudy‘wee to deter-fine whether or net rieh-teking tendenciee ere e pert e: the pereonelity of peed tootbell pleyere. flier-teking tendenciee were identified in e previoue etudy by the uee of en “Earlier Life Experience Inventory.“ which ie e paper end pencil teet. Knowing thie e coech cen.deternine which of hie cendidetee have the de- eired peychologicel patterns to be e good football player. W A etretitied eanple (not e tendon eemple) of ten cleee A high echoele in the [lint end Leneing eree were need. the top twenty-two tootbell pleyere or theee ten echoole were eeked. elong‘with their coechee. to perticipete in the etudy. An 'lerlier Life prerien e Inventory"wee edldnietered to the tootbell pleyere. end two coechee tree eech echool were eeked to rate each one of their boye Cyril Anthony Pick on a rating ecale which I provided for them. The reeulte were placed in rank order from highest to loweet. beeed on the ecore taken from the rating blank. After thie ranking. the group wae split into three groups-- Group I wee the top 27 per cent. Group III. the bottom 27 per cent end Group II wee made up of the remaining 46 per cent of the total group. Groupe I and III were then correlated ueing the Flanigan Product Homent method for computing coefficient of correlation. Each item in the inventory wee correlated in Groups I and III. Group II wae inepected and dropped from the study. anglueigg An examination of the reeponeee which correlated at .28 or higher. euggeet that good football playere maintain a pereonality pattern of eelf-contidence. phyeical and eocial adequacy. and eelf-expreeeion. A lock at the childhood behavior or high riakere and good football playere reveals that at an early age they learned ekille which gave out etatue and advantage among peers: driving a car. driving it frequently. and driving at high ratee of epeed. They were afforded other experiences which gave them a sense of adequacy such as taking overnight tripe Cyril Anthony Pick away trcnIhome. They were aleo taught to feel eecure in their own.reeourcee ee a result of part- and tull-time jobe. At a precocioue age they identified themeelvee with the maeculine role which included drinking and driving a car. High riekere and good football playere gave expreeeione to their aggreeeive drivee by frequently fighting and taking daree euch ae disobeying their parente. However. high riekere and good football playere pre— eent a picture of phyeical adequacy and enjoyment through physical activity. Although they claim more participation in almoet every active eport. the difference occure in rough eporte like football. wrestling. and outdoor eporte (hunting and ewimming). High riekere and good football playere are generally eeeociated with greater social aggreeeiveneee. On both the elementary and high echool levele. they were in the nucleue of ectivitiee. In echool. other etudente expected thee to have the ideae about what to do and how to do it. They were the once who were eelected for major officee and ae captaine for athletic teams. They aleo felt eel:- contident when aeked about friends. Generally they indicated that they had many cloee friends and very few'enemiee. Good football pleyere. ae well as high riekere always enjoyed Cyril Anthony Pick competition. considered winning important. practiced. and tried to improve skills when they suffered losses in competition. rinally. good football players and high riskers trequently engaged in such dangerous activity as racing hot rode and taking part in games of chance. I must admit in this type of study. the usual limitations or an inventory are present. It is believed. however. that the type of items in the inventory minimises the error of recall. note that a greater significance would probably be reached if a less homogeneous sample would be used. Ybu may further conclude that there is a definite pattern followed by a good football player and can be identi- fied by an 'Early Life Experience Inventory." It is the sincere belief of the author that this test should be validated so it can be used as a prognostic instrument. A STUDY OF THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN RISK-TQKING TENDENCIBS AND HIGH SCHOOL VARSITY FOOTBALL PLAYERS BY Cyril Anthony Pick A THESIS Submitted to Itch 19311 State Univerlity in partial tulfillmnnt of the rcquiramentl for the degrec of MESTER OF ARTS Dopartnunt of abalth. Physical Education. and Recreation 1963 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The author wishes to acknowledge his adviser. Dr. John Friadrich. for his professional guidance and valuable suggestions in the development of this study. My thanks are also extended to the subjects who participatsd so willingly in this study. Much appreciation is given to tho author's wife. Sally. for her help and encouragement in the preparation in the study. c. A. P. ii DEDICATION This thasis is raspscttully and lovingly dodicatad to my wits. Sally. and daughtsr. nary. iii TABLE OF CONTENTS Chapter Page I. INTRODWTIOH e 0 e e e e o e e e e e e e 0 e o 1 Statement of the Problem Hood for the Study Limitations of the Study Definition of farms Synopsis of Literature #UWNH II. REVIEWOFTHBLITERAWRB........... 00 Rating Players through Objective Analysis — Studying Personality Traits of Athletes Summary of Literature mum III. llETmDOLOGYOPRESEAICH............ 10 Introduction 10 Selection of Subjects lO lethod Used in Collecting Data 10 lbthod of Analyzing the Data 13 Statistics 13 IV. ANALYSIS AND PRESENTATION OF DATA . . . . . . . 18 Introduction 18 Presentation of Data 19 Analysis of Data 19 Self-Confidence 20 Physical and Social Adequacy 21 Masculinity and Dara-Taking 23 Competitive Spirit 24 General Discussion 24 V. SW. COMUSIONS. AND RECOMMENDATIONS . . . 26 Summary 26 Conclusions 27 Recommendations 29 ”aroma O O O O O O O I O O O O O O C O O O O O O 31 iv LIST OF TABLES Table . Page 1. Item analysis data for items receiving a .28 coefficient o: correlation or highct................... 14 2. Personality traits and the items of the “Earlier Life Experience Inventory“ that revealed these traits . . . . . . . . . 19 3. Items and their respective correlations for the trait of self-confidence . . . . . . . . 21 4. Items and their respective correlations for the trait or physical and social adequacy . . 22 5. Items and their respective correlations for the trait of masculinity and dare-taking . . 23 6. Items and their respective correlations for the trait of competitive spirit . . . . . . . 24 LIST 0! APPENDICES Appendix Page A. RATESHEBT................. 34 B. EARLY LIFE EXPERIEECB IMH‘I'ORY . . . . . . . 36 C. COACHBS' SCORE DISTRIBUTION AND THEIR 'mmmY Q a C v e e e e e e e e e e a e 59 D. ”TE BERT Q C O O O I O O I I O 0 e s O O O 60 vi CHAPTER I IRTRODUCTION TO THE PROBLEM For many years it has been the opinion of many coaches that you must be a teacher of fundamentals and have your team in top physical condition to be a success. This is indeed desirable. In recent years. however. there has been much emphasis placed on the mental condition of the athlete as well as the physical condition. Due to the success of such famous coaches as Frank Leahy of Notre Dame and Duffy Daugherty of Michigan State University. this movement has gained great acclaim from many coaches. The efforts of these coaches. however. have been concerned with proven football players and not with the boys who have yet to prove themselves. There has not been any experimental evidence presented of someone attempting to predict the possible success of a football player with an objective instrument. W M'mfli of the Problem The purpose of this study is to determine if there is any relationship between the coaches‘ judgment of a FJ football player and how the player scored on an ”Earlier Life Experience Inventory.“ ggedpgor the gtudy For many years the mental condition of an athlete has played an important part in the winning or losing of a football game. Very frequently a game is won by the difference in the mental condition of the participanta. with the consoli- dation movement in the schools of today comes an equalization of equipment and coaching staffs. placing a greater emphasis on the mental condition of the athlete. Any time-saving devices the coach can develop which will enhance preparation of his team for competitition will add to his efficiency as a coach. Up to the present time. no psychological test has been administered to football players in attempting to determine their mental state. Each year high school coaches are faced with the same problem of not knowing which of hileoys has the mental state or desire to "hit.“ If these coaches could predict this desire to “hit" with a paper and pencil test. the Job of coaching would become much more enjoyable and the playing of the game more fun for athletes. The job of the physical education teacher and the intramural director could very conceivably become more enjoyable with this type of information about each of hi- Itudentl. the paper and pencil test could be used in Iportn such as basketball. soccer. and ice hockey becaUl. of the very nature or these sports. Limitations 9: the Stggy 3. 4. The limitations of the study are as follows: Any time a subjective judgment is used as the criteria for a study. it is difficult to obtain desirable levels of reliability and validity. Although a pilot study was done to obtain a reliable rating sheet. it is possible for some statements to mean different things to different people. A stratified sample was used: not a random sample. Ten different testing centers were used in the study. gggigitiog 2! Terms 1. 2. Riqg-taking Tendencies: The number of phyoicnl- contact situation. in which an individual‘will place himself. knowing that the polsibility of injury in present. Mental_Cond;tion: The day to day or week to week feelings of the athlats. 3. Rating Blah}: The blank used by the coachaa to rate the football players who participated in the study. 4. ‘£!g§£;_§§3£gj The attitude an individual has toward the guns of football. The literature reports vary tau atudias done with risk'tdking tendencies. but the studies that have been done are related. and do support the idea that athletes differ psychologically.l The literature also supports the idea that these traits can be identified with paper and pencil “.tIsz 13. G. Booth. Jr.. ”Personality Traits of Athletes as lhasurod by IHPI.' Regearch Quarterly. May. 1958. p. 27. 21bid.. p. 27. CHAPTER 11 REVIEW 0? LITERATURE gating Players through Ohjective Analysig For some time it has been the desire of high school football coaches to be able to rate their players objectively. There have been many attempts to rate them subjectively as to physical potential. but few have succeeded in rating them objectively. In this study. the psychological test of risk~ taking tendencies was used to determine whether or not football players possess this particular trait. Literature reports very little on physical risk~taking tendencies. but many studies have been done on risk-taking tendencies pertaining to insurance and business. This. however. is not the type of risk being tested in this study. t a i s At 1 to E. G. Booth. Jr.3 studied the personality traits of seventy-eight athletes with the MMPI. In his findings he found that twenty-two items of MMPI correlated with the absolute competitive rating of MMPI in competitive 3Ibid. personality (r - -.67) and competitive spirit (r - -.65). The correlations are in the negative. because a high score on the twunty-two items and the low score on the absolute competitive rating indicate good competitive spirit. In conclusion Booth states that evidence has been presented which indicates that some items of the MM?! discriminate between athletes rated as poor and good competitors. 3. Paul Torrance and Robert c. Ziller4 studied risk~taking tendencies through knowledge of relevant earlier-life experiences. Their study reveals a personality picture for high riskers of self-confidence. masculinity. physically and socially adequate. competitive. self- expressive individual. “The Life Experience Inventory.‘ which was made up by a group of psychologists specifically for this study. was used and revealed these findings con- cerning the personality picture for high risk-taking athletes. Katona5 studied the psychology of decision making. Bis findings revealed that individuals made decisions in relationship to their earlier behavior--that individuals 4R. Paul Torrance and Robert c. Ziller..§i§§_ggg gig; ggpggiegpg Crew. Research Laboratory. Research Air force Center. Randolph Air Force Base. Texas. lebruary. 1957. “search Report Harman-5743. 5George Katona. t [1mg 2; tholggical Economics. p. 61. would act in risk-taking situations in relation to specific past experience. J. Burtonherriman6 conducted a study on personality traits and motor ability. A secondary purpose or the study ‘was to compare the differences between personality scores of subjects who scored in the upper 25 per cent in motor ability and the personality score or subjects who scored in the lower 25 per cent in motor ability. -He found that motor ability is related to personality traits--that the upper motor ability group scored significantly higher than the lower motor ability groups on measures of poise- ascendancy. sell-assurance. and on the measures of intellectual and interest modes. Arthur '1‘. .‘Iersild7 states from early childhood into adult years. motor achievement stands for a combination of leny factors. Among the more obvious are strength and speed. sise. anatomical build. Among the more elusive sectors are interest. se1£.contidenoe. a tendency to be tearful. willingness to take a chance. and salt-consciousness. h 6 J. Burton Merriman. 80 rte . 31. Pt. I: 163-173. Key. 1960. 71mm: 2. Jersild. W (new Jerseys Prentice-Hall. Inc.. 1954). P. 164. 8 Phillip J. Roscha studied a group of thirty-three wrestlers with Booth's Competitive Behavior Scale. Booth's study is explained earlier in this chapter in which his scale was devised. Their results were analyzed by the Spearman's Rand-Difference Correlation.flsthod. They found that Booth's scale did not predict satisfactorily the competitive behavior of these subjects as judged by their coaches. Shannon9 studied the comparison of athletes and .non-athletes in relationship to personality traits. The traits selected for this exclusively were cooperation. self-control. leadership. reliability. agreeability. and sociability. Teachers. coaches. and principals were asked to rate subjects. Shannon found that the athlete had two traits which pointed favorably to him. They were leadership and sociability. All but one of the six point toward the athlete. He also found that the sum of the scores of the six point in favor of the athlete. This was true regardless of whether ratings of the coaches. the principals. or the teachers are being considered or an average of the Judgment of all‘was taken. 8Roach. 22:..213'0 p. 123. 9 J. R. Shannon. School Review. 48:127-130. rebruary. 1940. figgmagy of the Literature Although risk—taking tendencies were not measured in any of the above studies. it is evident in the studies that attempts have been made to measure personality traits. Shannon's study mentions that athletes do differ in their personality from non~athletas. and that personality traits are directly related to motor ability. This was confirmed by Herriman in his study. Jersild stated that motor performance is related to the willingness to take a chance. Torrance and Ziller studied riak~taking tendencies through an “Early Life Exgerience Inventory“ and found definite patterns for high riskere. Generally speaking we can make the assumption that identification traits of athletes can be measured with paper and pencil tests. CHAPTER III METHODOLOGY OF RESEARCH Iatrodggtion The purpose of this study was to determine the relationship between a subjective judgment of a football player's ability by his coach to an “Earlier Life Experience Inventory.“ which predicts risk-taking tendencies of an individual. Selection 0; Subjects A stratified sample was used: not a random sample of Class A High Schools in the state of Michigan in the study. The subjects were the top twenty-two football players from each of the ten Class A High Schools in the Lansing and Flint areas. These boys represent the best 220 football players that participated in the Lansing and Flint areas during the 1962 football season. Us C ec 1 Due to the lack of time and nearneas of the schools need in the study. personal visits were mmde rather than letters by nail. This method also insured that every coach 10 ll \Ieuld fully understand the method to be used in the collecting ot‘dsta and the season for doing the study. A.visit was made by the author to each school to caplein.the study and the use of the rating blank. On a date agreed upon by the coach and principal the author returned to the school to administer the "Earlier Life Experience Inventory" to the football players of that school. Each coach was given the rating blank which they were to complete on each one of the ball players. He was instructed at this time to ask the help of two additional coaches on his stat! to help rate each of the players from his team. This method was used to give as much objectivity to the rating blank as possible. A self~addreased stamped envelope was provided for the return of the blanks. The rating blank was the result of a pilot study completed by the author. This pilot study was done for the sole purpose of establishing a rating blank for use in this study. A random sample of fifty High School football coaches in the state of Mfichigan was used in the pilot study. They'were chosen randomly from the Michigan High School football Coaches Directory. They were asked to comment on the blank used in the pilot study as to its suitability for rating their football team. Forty-eight 12 returned the blank with comments. The comments were then studied by the author and two other football coaches. Alter caretul study of the comments the rating blank was tonlulsted (see Appendix A). After all tests had been administered and the rating blanks returned. a score was assigned to each answer sheet. This was obtained from the rating blank the coach filled out for each of his players who participated in the testing. This score was obtained by adding the coaches score he gave on each item of the rating blank. Each item of the rating had a possible score of one to five. rive indicated excellent and one indicated poor (see Appendix D). The responses from the test were then transferred to IBM cards along w th each boy's score. A total was then obtained of each score category so the total sample could be split into three groups. Group I included the top 27 per cent of the sample which numbered sixty-two. Group III consisted of the bottom 27 per cent which numbered sixty-two. Group II was the remaining 46 per cent which numbered ninety—six. 13 Method o§~hnalyzing the Data An item analysis was done to the responses and a coefficient of correlation was obtained by the use of the Flanigan Method. All items that received a correlation of .28 or greater were analyzed. This correlation of .28 was set as a minimum because this score is necessary to have significance at the .05 level of confidence. These items can be found in Table 1. Statistics An item analysis was made to compare the responses of the "Earlier Life Experience Inventory“ of the top 27 per cent of the sample to the bottom 27 per cent of the sample. TLese percentage groups were obtained from the score of the coaches rating blanks (see Appendix C). Tne coefficients of correlation received on each item was computed by the use of the Flanigan eroduct Moment Coefficient Tables. 14 Table l. Ito. mlyeil data for item- receiving a .28 coefficient of correlation or higher. 22:; ~— -€E===============. It. Upper 27% Bottom 27% C0::::: 122:025 10-3 22 8 .29 12—5 28 10 .32 14-3 22 8 .29 27-1 22 7 .31 29~l 4 O .323 33-3 12 2 .36 43—4 14 2 .39 44-3 ' 26 10 .28 52-1 62 52 .30 52~4 50 30 .29 52-9 34 14 .33 52-13 55 40 .28 52-12 38 18 .31 52-13 4 O .325 53-15 6 0 .40 54-14 13 3 ' .30 56-16 28 1o .33 58-5 6 ' o .40 59-1 52 34 .28 64-4 4 o .325 67-4 22 7 .31 67-5 40 18 .34 68-1 14 3 .31 69-5 40 ' 17 .36 'The coetticient of correlations were computed by the Iianigan Method. 15 0‘“ “:4 .41 .__.v _A_‘ A‘é w Coefficient Of Item Upper 27% Bottom ZTX correlation 71~1 20 3 .42 72-1 16 4 .30 72-2 38 17 .33 73-4 22 6 .32 74~8 36 10 28 75*2 18 4 .35 77-1 16 3 .36 77—3 4 0 .325 78~3 22 6 .32 79-4 32 13 .30 79‘s 20 6 .28 81-3 36 16 .31 82*1 16 1 .51 83~1 62 25 .735 84-5 8 .34 85-5 12 .29 86~1 30 .415 86—12 28 11 .29 87-1 34 15 .20 87-2 6 0 .40 87-5 42 17 .38 87-6 40 7 .36 87-11 46 21 .37 88-7 38 16 .35 88—8 36 14 .33 90-1 24 6 .35 90-3 42 17 .38 90-6 52 22 .49 16 Table 1 . "29.135181159- ‘_ M u v -—-- ‘— w ‘7— Coefticient o! W Item Upper 2*“ B°tt°“ 27” correlation 90-15 60 42 I '59 91-5 46 go .56 91-6 44 19 .39 91-7 44 23 '37 93-3 12 3 ‘29 93-6 20 5 '28 94-2 14 2 ‘39 94-7 . 6 l ’30 95_5 g .30 97-2 4 0 .325 97-5 14 3 ’32 S _5 4 Q .325 100-1 38 13 '29 101-5 36 11 -‘° 103-1 50 21 '44 103*3 4 0 .325 105-3 18 5 '39 106-3 22 4 '40 107-2 24 3 '32 110-6 28 8 ‘38 111-1 26 8 '34 112-2 24 8 '32 113-2 20 4 '32 114-1 10 1 '40 114-2 12 2 '35 116-1 12 3 .29 117-5 28 9 .35 120-3 32 13 '30 17 Table l.~-§9ntinged. 11 ;r w 7 .232: f . Coefficient of Item U999? 27% Bottom 27%’ correlation 122-1 44 21 '35 123-1 48 17 '49 127-3 24 5 '35 128-7 8 0 .43 CHAPTER IV ANALYSIS AND PRESENTATION OF DATA mm It 18 the belief of the author that a coach can Iona- what determine the psychological makeup of the individual vying for poaitiona on the football team through the India of a paper and pencil teat. the purpoaa of thia atudy‘waa tordataraina if we can identify people who will take ridka or are willing to take a chance. The but am in thil Itudy wan an “Earlier Lit. ‘Expariance Inventory' to identify riak-taking tondanoiea of athletea. Thia particular teat waa uaed becauae of ita very nature and of ita purpose for the aana raaaona by the united Stat-a Air force. 2 The Air force validated the teat for identifying people who would take riaka. and found it to have a correlation of (r - -.85) with acorea on a acale that predicted riak. 3180. an odd-even reliability of .98 correlated by the Speanman-Brown Formula waa obtained. On the baaia of having played football and having been a coach of football. the author feela that riak ia a part of a football player. 18 19 W The results of the test showed personality traits. These traits were evident in the profiles of nearly all of the top 27 per cent of the sample. Table 2 shows these personality traits and the items of the test that revealed these traits. Table 2. Personality traits and the items of the “Earlier Life Experience Inventory" that revealed these traits. Irait Ital lalf-confidence . 81-90 117-123 Physical and social adequacy 64-19 113-113 lascul inity and dare-taking 27-59 91-101 Competitive spirit 52-58 110-116 p e .05 The traits of Table 2 were established through an analysis of the test items. Each item was reviewed and than it was determined what trait the item*was attempting to identify. W Instead of analysing each item of Table l the items were grouped into areas established by the author. fable 2 shows the areas that were established for the analysis. 20 These areas were established by reviewing each iteelof the "Earlier Life Experience Inventory.“ The “Earlier Life Experience Inventory" as reported in this chapter was validated with a scale that predicted risk. The sample used in the validating of the “Earlier Life Experience Inventory." showed a very similar profile as the top 27 per cent of the sample in this study. Wane: the self-confidence was evident in the iteae shown in Table l. The good football player. according to the results of the test. seems to feel he has many friends and has never felt that people disliked him. In addition to this. he feels he has had the approval of all his friends and parents. Along'with having many friends. he seemed to be part of the neighborhood gang and many tines was one of the leaders. By accepting advice froe»older'people. be displayed a feeling of confidence. Many of the players were afforded the opportunity to acquire self-confidence by going on overnight trips without parental supervision. they were also taught to feel secure in their own resources as a result of part- and full-tine jobs. 21 Table 3. Items and their respective correlations for the trait of self-confidence. Item Coefficient of correlation’ 14"”: e29 ' 81", . 031 82-1 .51 83-1 .735 84-5 .34 85-5 .29 86-1 .415 86-12 .29 87-1 [.28 87-2 .40 87-5 .38 87-6 .36 87-11 .37 88-7 .35 88-8 .35 90-1 .38 90-5 .49 90-6 .50 90-15 .35 117-5 .35 122-1 .49 p I .05 *The above correlations were computed by the Flanigan Method. Ph s cal oci Ade ac In a great number of items in the analysis. physical and social adequacy were shown. Table 4 shows these items along with the correlation and significance. The great desire to compete in games that required physical stamina and participation in outdoor sports such as hunting and 22 fishing displayed the trait of being physically adequate. The boys expressed traits of being socially adequate by being very active in school and home activity. On many occasions they proved to be the individuals elected to important offices in their school. They were asked for advice from fellow classmates in school and often selected or appointed as captains for varsity squade. Table 4. Items and their respective correlations for the trait of physical and social adequacy. 1““. Coefficient of correlation" 10-3 .29 12-5 .32 64“ e325 67-4 .31 68"1 e 31 69‘s 0 35 71-1 .42 72-1 .30 72-2 .33 74-8 .28 75-2 .35 77-1 .36 77-3 .325 78-3 .32 79-5 .28 112-2 .32 113-2 .32 p e .05 “The above correlations were computed by the l'lanigan usthod . ' 23 1135271113. zip; and age-Tm "any of the top 27 per cent of the sample expressed this trait by indulging in smdking and drinking at an early age. Table 5 shows the number and their correlation. Driving at high rates 02 speed and fighting were noted more fre- quently than in the bottom 27 per cent of the sample. Oftentimes. they were punished for bad conduct at home and at school for their aggressiveness. Dare-taking was evidenced by frequent disobeying of parents' requests and taking part in games of chance. Racing of hot rods were also a part or their everyday activity. table 5. Items and their respective correlations for the trait of masculinity and dare-taking. A Item Coefficient of correlation. 27-1 .31 33-3 .325 43-3 .36 44—3 .39 53-15 .40 54-14 ' .30 59-1 .28 91-5 .56 91-7 .37 101-5 .40 p I .05 *lhe above correlations were computed by the Ilanigan Method. 24 Steeesassemtamurit The competitive spirit of the top 27 per cent of the sample was shown by their desire to compete in competitive type games. They were depressed when they were defeated in these games. Winning'was of maximum consequence to them. Table 6 shows the items and their correlation that displayed competitive spirit. Table 6. Items and their respective correlations for the trait of competitive spirit. Item Coefficient of correlation. 52-1 .30 52-4 .29 52—9 ' .33 52-10 .28 52-12 .31 52-13 .325 56-6 .32 58-5 .40 110-6 .38 111‘]. e34 114-1 .40 116-1 .29 P ‘ e05 'The above correlations were computed by the Ilanigan Method. ' Ge er 1 cu s After careful examination of the items of the test and their respective correlation it may be concluded that 25 football players maintain a personality pattern of the following characteristics: self-confidence. physical and social adequacy. maaculinity and dare-taking. and competitive spirit. We can assume from the above paragraph that certain traits of an individual can be identified. If these traits coincide with the above—mentioned we may conclude that the individual could very conceivably be a successful football player. As a result of the findings in this study little immediate value can be seen for the field of physical education. Although with intense effort a physical education teacher could very likely gain a real insight of certain individuals with such a prognostic instrument. Of course. these assumptions are being made with the idea that a validation of the results would have a reasonable correlation. CHAPTER V SMEY: CONCLUSIONS. AND RECOMMENDATIONS W The purpose of this study was to add additional information to the amount that has been accumulated in the area of psychological appraisal of athletes. Some studies have already been done appraising competitive spirit of athletes by the media of psychological paper and pencil tests. Others have shown that athletes do differ in their personality from non-athletee and that personality traits are directly related to motor ability. Generally speaking. we can make the assumption that identification traits of athletee can be measured and we can also assume they are directly related to performance. However. this study was concerned only with the relationship between risk-taking tendencies of high school football players and their ability to play the game. A etratified sample. but not a random sample was need. The top twenty-two football players who participated in the 1962-63 season from each of the ten Class a lichigan .ligh schools in the flint and Lanainq area were chosen for 26 27 the study. these boys were chosen because they were con- sidered to be proven football players by their coaches. The coaches of each of the ten teams also participated in the study. The football players were given an “Early Life Experience Inventory.‘ Their coaches from each school were asked to rate their boys as to their football ability. The responses from the "Early Life Experience Inventory' were then correlated with the coaches' rating by the tlanigan Method. The items that had a coefficient correlation ' of .28 or higher were analyzed. It was necessary to use a coefficient of correlation of .28 to attain the .05 level of confidence. It seemed that the top 27 per cent of the sample were characteristic of a selfvconfident. physically and socially adequate. competitive. masculine individual. an the contrary. the profile of the bottoe 27 per cent showed very little of these characteristics. W An examination of the responses which correlated at .28 or higher suggest that good football players maintain a personality pattern of self-confidence. physical and social adequacy. and self—expression. A lock at the childhood behavior of good football players reveals that at an early age they learned akills which gave out statue and advantage 28 among peers: driving a car. driving it frequently. and driving at high rates of speed. They were afforded other experiences which gave them a sense of adequacy such as taking overnight trips away from home. They were also taught to feel secure in their own resources as a result of part- and full-time jobs. At a precocious age they identified themselves with the masculine role which included drinking and driving a car. Good football players gave expressions to their aggressive drives by frequently fighting and taking dares such as disobeying their parents. However. good football players present a picture of physical adequacy and enjoyment through physical activity. Although they claim more participation in almost every active sport. the difference occurs in rough sports like football. wrestling. and outdoor sports (hunting and swimming). Good football players are generally associated with greater social aggressiveness. On both the elementary and high school levels they were in the nucleus of activities. In school. other students expected them to have the ideas about what to do and how to do it. They were the ones who were selected for major offices and as captains for athletic 29 teams. They also felt self~confident when asked about friends. Generally they indicated that they had many close friends and very few enemies. Good football players. as well as people who will take risks always enjoyed compe~ tition. considered winning important. practiced. and tried to improve skills when they suffered losses in competition. finally. good football players and high riskers frequently engaged in such dangerous activity as racing hot rods and taking part in games of chance. I must admit in this type of study. the usual limitations of an inventory are present. It is believed. however. that the type of items in the inventory minimises the error of recall. nets that a greater significance would probably be reached if a less homogeneous sample would be used. You may further conclude that there is a definite pattern followed by a good football player and can be identi- fied by an 'Early Life Experience Inventory.” It is the sincere belief of the author that this test should be validated so it can be used as a prognostic instrument. W The following should be given considerable thought if a study of this type is to be attempted or if a followbup 30 of this study is made. 1. The items which received a coefficient of correlation of .28 or better at the .05 level of confidence should be analyzed to determine if they are asking what they seem to be aeking. A similar study could be done with a .01 level of confidence used an the basis for the item analysis. The items chosen for the analysis should now be validated and used to predict the outcome of a group of football players. A very interesting study could be done by combining rink-taking tendencies. a boy's motivation and aggressive drives to predict success as a football player. This same study should be repeated with s larger group. BIBLIOGRAPHY BIBLIOGRAPHY' Booth. 3. 6. Jr. “Personality Traits of Athletes es Measured by MMPI.” Regegrcg Quarterly. Hay. 1958. p. 57e Jersild. Arthur I. P 01 . new Jersey: Prentice- mlls Inc- a 1954- Katone. Goerge. Merriman. J. Burton. Research Quarterly. Part 1:163-173. May. 1960. . Roach. Phillip J. In conjunction with Booth'a study. Shannon. J. R. gonggl ggview. 48:127-130. February. 1940. Torrance. E. Paul and Robert C. Ziller. ‘5;§g_ggg;gigg gngrience Crew. Research Laboratory. Research Air Force Center. Randolph Air Force Base. Texas. tebruary. 1957. Research Report AFPTRC-TN~57~23. 32 APPENDICES APPENDIX A Sample 3 SPEED A boy runs loo—yard dash in 10.5 seconds (lineman). 66 SS 33 The desire for physical contact . . (Go—go-go attitude and second errort) W The desire for constant improvement through long. grinding hours of practice . . . . . . . . . . . . . (The tremendous urge to compete) concmgnrm The ability to take constructive criticism: not alibi for the sustakes he lakes . . . . . . . . . .3G 85 C 3 Does he put football and the things inmolved (such as conditioning) in front of everything . . . . . . . . EPSRE the ability to concentrate on the work to be done at the moment (an end catching the bell) . . . . . . Response to events and situations 15.61ng Itasculsr coordination: quickness, ability to fire out . . . . . . . 34 Seal; 1 - Lowest Rate 5 ~ Highest Rate 1 2 3 4 5 [”1 [11“1 1 2 3 4 5 CTIITi LFIJFI TMJATTJI [111T {Tlljj (“LLIil 3S SPEED Ability to move fast . . . . . . ATTITUDE On and of! the field (cooperative. cheerful. sullen) . . . . . . . . .gymrLLIcgngg What kind of student? Can he learn quickly? . . . . . . . . . or: SEASON 5933!;ggsg Is he fit all year round? . ch1g 1 ~ Lowest Rate 5 - Highest Rate 1 2 3 4 5 L? 1 I 1 I :1 [FIILT Cy Pick Michigan stete University APPENDIX B 81“.le LIFE EXPERIENCE INVENTORY What is your age? (1) Less than 15 (2) 15 to 16 (3) 17 to 18 (4) 19 to 20 How much education did you complete? (1) 8th grade or less (2) Some high school but was not graduated (3) High school graduation What was the regular work of your father? (It the incole of your fandly came chiefly from someone other than your father. show the regular kind of work of that person.) (1) Professional--such as accountant. architect. artist. musician. author. engineer. teacher. professor. physician. dentist. lawyer. etc. (2) 8e31pro£essional~~such as draftsman. engineering aide. dental technician. medical technician. etc. (3) Proprietor. manager. or Official--such as store owner. wholesale dealer. manufacturer. Earn owner. contractor. conpany official. banker. government official or inspector. etc. (4) Salea-such as salesman of life insurance. real estate. and various kinds of products and services (not in store). ' (5) Clerical-osuch as work in a store or office. ticket agent. sales clerk. sales person. bodkkeeper. stenographer. etc . 36 (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (11) 37 Protective-~police. firemen. soldier (enlisted nan). sailor (e.l.). airman. marine (e.n.). etc. Skilled Worker or Forenan--such as mason. carpenter. electrician. unchanic. tailor. conductor. baker. barber. foreman in factory. fern. or mine. etc. Semi-skilled Workerb-such as apprentice. factory operator. chauffeur. delivery man. attendant. etc. unskilled Worker-~such as laborer in factory. fans. mine. or construction: fisherman: longshorenan: elevator operator: etc. Pilot--military or commercial. Officer--Army. Navy. marines. Air Force (non-pilot). Coast Guard. 4. During most of your childhood. in what type of house did you live? (1) (2) (3) (4) A private. one or two~family house which we owned. A private. one or two~fwmily house which we rented. An apartment in a residential apartment house. An apartment over a place of business or store. 5. How far do you believe your father (or stepfather or foster father) went in school? (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) Grade school (8th grade or less). Some high school . Graduated from high school. Some training after high school but not college. Some college. Graduated from college. Advanced training after college graduation. 6. Selecting from the same choices as in Question 5. state how far you think your mother (or stepmother or foster nether) went in school. 7. How old were you when you learned to drive a car? (1) (2) 12 years old or less. 13 or 14. 10. ll. 12. 13. 38 (3) 15 or 16. (4) 17 or 18. (5) 19 or older. (6) I have not yet learned to drive a car. How old were you when you started to drive a car frequently? (1) 14 or younger. (2) 15 or 16. (3) 17 or 18. (4) 19 or 20. (S) 21 or over. HOW old were you when you got your first car? (1) 16 or younger. (2) 17 or 18. (3) 19 or 20. (4) 21 or over. (5) I do not yet own a car. How frequently have you violated traffic regulations? (1) Often. (4) Seldom. (2) Fairly often. (5) never. (3) Occasionally. (6) I do not drive. How frequently have you been given a traffic ticket? (1) Often. (4) Seldom (2) fairly often. (5) Never. (3) Occasionally. (6) I do not drive. What is the tasteet you have ever driven an autondbile? (1) 10 mph. (4) 100 mph. (2) 80 mph. (5) Over lOO mph. (3) 90 aph. (6) Less than 70 mph. How did you usually get money to go on dates while you were in high school? (1) I did not date in high school. (2) I had a big enough allowance. (3) I got it by asking for a special allowance. (4) I had to plan and budget carefully. (5) I had to work and save. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 39 How old were you‘when you had your first regular paid job. part-tin. or full-time? (l) 12 years or less. (2) 13 to 15. (3) 16 to 18. (4) 19 or more. How old were you when you started your first bank account? (Do not include childhood savings account started by parents.) (1) 12 years or less. (2) 13 or 14. (3) 15 or 16. (4) 17 or 18. (5) 19 or older. (6) I have not yet had an account in Iy name. A3 a boy. hOW‘wera your finances taken cara of? (1) An allowance. (2) My family giving me what I needed when I asked for it: I had no allowance. ‘ (3) Generally getting along without cash. (4) Earning my own money for some of the things I wantsd. (5) Earning my Own money. How frequently have you borrowud honey? (1) very often. (4) Seldom. (2) Fairly often. (5) lover. (3) Occasionally. How old were you.vhan you took your first overnight trip away from homa without your family? (1) 10 or loss. (4) 19 to 21. (2) 11 to 15. (5) 22 or over. (3) 16 to 18. (6) flavor. When you were a boy. how frequently did you taka ovsrnight trips away from homo without your family? (1) Very ottsn. (4) Only once or twics. (2) fairly often. (5) never. (3) Once in a while. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 24. 25. 26. 27. 28. 40 As a boy. how actively did you participate in family conversations? (1) I took little part in family conversation. (2) I talked about the same as anyone else. (3) I probably did more than my share of talking at home. As a boy. how frequently did you have a feeling of wanting to leave home? (1) Very often. (2) fairly often. (3) Once in a while. (4) never. Before age 17. how'many times did you run away from home or leave home in anger or protest? (1) 10 or more times. (4) Twice. (2) 5 to 9 times. (5) Once. (3) 3 to 4 times. (6) Never. How old were you when you started choosing all. or almost all. of your own clothes? (1) 12 or younger. (4) 19 to 21. (2) 13 to 15. (5) 22 or older. (3) 16 to 18. (6) Not yet. 31. At what age did you first do the things listed below in items 24 - 31. (Answer each item separately. using the key below.) (1) 12 or younger. (4) 17 to 18. (2) 13 to 14. (5) 19 to 20. (3) 15 to 16. (6) 21 or over. (7) Not yet. Going out on dates. Hacking. Dancing. Sucking. Drinking beer. 29. 30. 31. 32. 41 Drinking wiskey. Hitchhiking. (leave blank) Which of the following things do you remember doing as a child? (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (a) (9) (10) (11) (12) (13) (14) (15) Having nightmares. Eating only certain foods. Being timid away from home. Fighting. Crying. Doing cruel things. Snitching things. Playing hockey. Biting fingernails. Having temper tantrums. Having allergies (sensitivity to certain foods or substances in animals. flowers. grain. etc.). Lying. Stuttering. Having asthma. Bullying other kids. 33. As a boy. how frequently did you skip school? 34. 35. (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) Often. Fairly often. Occasionally. Seldom. Never. In high school. how frequently did you cheat on examinations? (1) (2) (3) (4) (s) Often. Fairly often. Occasionally. Seldom. Never. Which of the following things do you remember doing before age 15? (1) Walking alone in the woods. 36. 37. 38. (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (a) (9) (10) (11) (12) (13) 42 Being afraid of snakes. Being afraid of water. Being afraid of the dark. Being afraid of high places. Playing'with snakes. Being interested in sex. Being picked up by police. Reading a great deal. Teasing other kids. Slodking reefers. Leading the gang. Winning a prize in scholarship. When you were a boy. how much aoving did your falily do? (1) (2’ (3) (4) (5) (5) Always lived in the sass house except for trips. visits. etc. Lived in the sane town and neighborhood but loved more than once. Lived in the same town but changed neighborhoods at least once. loved fro. one town to another at least once. but always in the sane part of the country. loved from one town to another in various parts of the country. Did not live together as I lived in an orphanage. oerith foster parents. grand parents. other relatives. etc. Bow difficult for you were these loved vhich involved changes free one neighborhood or town to another? (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) Difficult and disagreeable. Sc-swhat difficult and disagreeable. Easily enough lIdO. fun. Did not oaks any such novas. Bow difficult for you were changes from one school or college to another? (1) (a) (3) (4) Difficult and disagreeable. Souewhat difficult and disagreeable. Basil y enough nade . run. 39. 40. 41. 42. 43. 4‘. 43 How old were you when you firet telt that you could cone and go no you planned without having to account too cloeely to your pnrente? (1) 12 or younger. (4) 17 to 18. (2) 13 to 14. (5) 19 to 20. (3) 15 to 16. (6) 21 to 22. (7) 23 or over. Where did you grow up? (1) On I turn. (2) In'l rural area but not on a term. (3) In a community of leee than l0.000 people. (4)'In e euburb of a city. (3) In e city. no a boy. how (requently did you take a dare? (l) Alncet elveyl. (a) Ueually. (3) Sometime. and sometimes not. (4) nlnoet never. (5) lever. A: a boy. how frequently did you get into lights with other boys? (1) lever. (4) fairly frequently. (2) Once or twice. (5) very frequently (3) Beverel tinge. Ae e boy. hon frequently did you dieobey your parente? (l) lever. (4) Prequontly. (2) Rarely. (5) Vbry frequently. (3) Occeeionelly. In gran-or echool. how frequently were you punished for bad conduct in echool? (1) Once or twice a week. (4) Once or twice a year. (2) Alnoet every wcek. (5) Rarely. (1) nlnoet every month. (6) Ibvcr. 45. 46. 47. 48. 48. 49. SO. 51. 52. 44 How many times have you found yourself in serious situations in.which you Just did not knOW‘Uhlt to do? (1) Hone. (4) 6 to a. (2) 2 to 3. (s) 9 to 10. (3) 3 to 5.. (6) Over 10. As s boy. how well did you satisfy your parents' expectations of you? (1) Always. (4) Seldom. (2) Usually. (5) lever. (3) Fairly often. How many tines have you run into a vory serious or difficult situation in.vhich you had to put out with evorything you had? (1) None. (4) 6 to a. (2) l to 2. (5) 9 to lo. (3) 3 to 5. (6) Ovor 10. How much did you enjoy the kinds of sports listed in items 48~517 (l) vary much (3) vary little. (2) Sons. (4) IOt at all. Rough sports like football. boxing. wrestling. hockey. Sports like baseball. basketball (which involvo no physical contact.) Individual sports like track. tennis. gylnsstics. woight lifting. Outdoor sports like hunting. fishing. etc. When you wore a boy. in*which of the following sports did you engage fairly often. (Answor as anny as apply.) l. Football. 8. Boxing. 2. Softball. 9. ‘Wrastling. 3. Baseball. 10. Basketball. 4. Swim-ing. 11. Soccer. 5. Diving. 12. Track. 6. Roller Skating. 13. Skiing. 7. Gymnastics. 14. Sailing. 15. annting. 53. 54. 55. 56. 45 When you were a boy. in which of the following activities did you engage fairly often? 1. Checkers. 9. Poker. 2. Chess. 10. Bridge. 3e Kathi... lle P°°1s 4. Dominoes. 12 . mmblety Peg. 5. Lotto. 13. Driving a motorcycle. 6. Monopoly 14. Driving an automobile. 7. Anagrams. rapidly around corners. B. Parchesi. 15. Racing a ”hot rod.” At the present time. in which of the following activities do you engage fairly often? (Answer as many as apply.) 1. Golf. 9. Poker. 2. Tennis. 10. Auto racing. 3e SOItb‘lle 11s “3Ck JaCke 4. Hunting. l2. Roulette. 5. swimming. 13. Dice or craps. 6. Diving. ' 14. Drinking parties. 7. Chess. 15. Pool. 8. Bridge. As a boy. what was your usual reaction toward competition? (Answer as many as apply.) (1) I always enjoyed competition very much. (2) I neither liked nor disliked competition. (3) I disliked competing with others. but competed nevertheless. (4) I tried to avoid competing with others whenever possible. (5) I saw no point in competing with others. (6) I thought winning was very important. (7) I preferred to compete against my own record rather than against others. How did you usually react to losses in competition? (1) I practiced and tried to improve my skills. (2) I just tried harder next time. (3) I talked with other people about how to improve. or tried to get more information in some way. (4) I tried to think of a better strategy or method of attack. 57. 58. 59. 60. 46 (S) I played against someone less skilled than the person to whom I had lost. (6) I usually felt pretty low. (7) I don’t remember having any particular reaction of any kind. Which of the following things have you had to plan for carefully and which you have succeeded in your goal? (Anawer as many as apply.) (1) Being elected to office. (2) Being invited to join a fraternity or club. (3) Obtaining an introduction to someone I wanted to meet. (4) Succeeding in a school subject that was difficult for me. (5) Getting ahead of someone with mom I was competing. (6) Making a favorable impression upon someone. (7) Dating a particular girl. (8) To get into the kind of job I am in. Which of the following teams or clube did you try to make but failed during your high school career? (1) football. (e) Drematics. (2) Basketball. (7) Debating. (3) Baseball. (8) Choir. (4) Tennis. , (9) Band. (5) Track. How many courses did you fail in high school? (1) None. (5) four. (2) One. (6) Five. (3) Two. (7) Six or more. (4) Three. When you were taking subjects in school that you disliked. how hard did you work? (1) I worked just as hard as if I liked it. (2) I worked just enough to get by. (3) I tried to get out of it. (4) I tried to develop an interest in it. (5) I sometimes failed the subject. 61. 62. 63. 64. 65. 66. 47 When you unexpectedly have “time on your hands."whst do you usually do? (Mark as many as apply.) (1) Sit down and relax. (2) Find some absorbing task to do. (3) Find any kind of work to do. (4) Seek come kind of entertainment. (5) Find somebody to talk with. When‘you were a boy. how many friends and acquaintances of other races and nationalities did you have? (1) none. (3) 4 to 6. (2) l to 3. (4) 7 or more. While in high school. how old were most of your closest friends in relation to your age? (1) About my on age. , (2) A few years older than I. (3) a few years younger than I. (4) varied greatly. (5) Spend most of my time with adults. How frequently has the thought entered your mind that other people dislike you or something about you? (1) very often. (2) Pretty regularly. (3) Once in a while. (4) lever. In grade school. how many friends did you usually have? (1) no friends or regular play mates. (2) A few acquaintances but no close friends. (3) One or two good friends. but that is all. (4) Several close friends. (5) lany good friends. Did your parents approve of your grade schoel friends? (1) I played with only those of whom they did approve. (2) I playod*with some even though my parents disapproved of my doing so. (3) In parents didn't ever express approval or disapproval of my grade school friends. 67. 68. 69. 70. 71. 48 (4) My parents approved of my playing with whomever I chose. (5) fly parents seemed to disapprove of whomever I chose as friends. In high school. how many friends did you usually have? (1) No friends to speak of. (2) A few acquaintances but no close friends. (3) One or two true friends but that is all. (4) Several close friends. (5) Many good friends. Do your parents approve of your high school friends? (1) I associated closely only with those of whom they did approve. ’ (2) I associated with some even though my parents disapproved of my high school friends. (3) My parents didn't ever express approval or disapproval . of them. (4) My parents approved of my associating with whomever I chose. (5) my parents seemed to disapprove of whomever I chose as friends. At the present time. how many friends do you have? (1) no friends to speak of. (2) A few acquaintances but no close friends. (3) One or two good friends. but that is all. (4) Several close friends. (5) Many good friends. In grade school. how much a part of your group did you feel? (1) Right in the middle of things. (2) Pretty much a part of the group. (3) Kind of on the fringe of the crowd. (4) Left out of things. pretty much on my own. In high school. how much a part of your group did you generally feel? (1) Right in the middle of things. (2) Pretty much a part of the group. (3) Kind of on the fringe of the crowd. (4) Left out of things. pretty much on my own. 72. 73. 74. 75. 76. 77. 49 At the present time. how much a part of your group do you generally feel? (Answer from question 71) When you dated one girl fairly regularly. did you date other girls at the same tine? (l) Regularly. (4) Rarely. (2) Most of the ties. (5) never. (3) Occasionally. (6) Does not apply. Of which of the following organisations have you been an active number at ease tins? (1) Boy Scouts. (6) Church Youth Group. (2) 4-H Club. (7) ma (3) Future formers of (a) Neighborhood gang. America (9) Hobby club. (4) Airplane nodal club. (10) main organisations. (5) Debating club. ' Do you help other students with their studies? (1) Other students ask as for help‘with their studies. (2) Other students expect us to have ideas about what to do and how to do it. (3) Ibsehers ask as to explain things to other students. (4) I sought opportunities to help other students understand things. (5) I rarely helped others with their studies. Do you help new students get acquainted? (l) I was usually one of those who helped neV'students get acquainted. (2) Other students seesed to find sue easy to get acquainted‘with. (3) I wasn't such aware of. or‘was little concerned‘with new students. Which of the following types of teens did you (or are you now) captain? (l) Vhrsity football. (2) Vhrsity baseball. (3) Vhrsity basketball. 78. 79. BO. 81. 50 (4) Class or intramural football. (5) Class or intramural baseball. (6) Class or intraniral basketball. (7) Bandlot league baseball. (8) Softball. (9) Hockey. (10) Boxing. (ll) Track. (12) 'i'ennis. (14) Golf. (l5) soccer. Bow nany organisations did you (or are you has) holding office in? ‘1) We (2) One or two minor offices. (3) One or two major offices. (4) Several sinor offices. (5) Several major offices. How often do people tell you their troubles? (l) fiver. - (2) considerably less than they do others. (3) Somewhat less than they do others. (4) About the sans as they do others. '(5) Bonswhat tore than they do others. (6) Considerably more than they do others. When you are with a groupof friends deciding what to do for the evening. what do you usually do? (1) lake a suggestion and try to get the others to .mpt its (2) lake a suggestion and let it go at that. (3) Wait for others to make suggestions nd express your opinion about their suggestions. (4) Say nothing and go along with the others. (5) Leave the group. if I do not like the decision.- How often do you accept advice and aid from your friends? (1) Very'frequently. (4) Barely.- (1) fairly frequently. (5) never. (3) Occasionally. 82. 83. 84. 85. 86. 51 How often do you accept advice and aid from older people? (1) Very frequently. (4) Rarely. (2) Fairly frequently. (5) never. (3) Occasionally. During your boyhood. did you live with your parents? (1) I always lived with ny father and Bother except for trips. etc. (2) I lived with one of my parents: the other was frequently absent. (3) I lived with one of my parents: the other lived away from us or was dead. (4) I visited or was visited by my parents but lived with relatives or elsewhere. (5) I rarely or never saw my parents as they were dead or unknown. Mark as many of the following as apply: (1) lly father is deceased. (2) my father lives and I see him from time to tise. (3) m father is living but we have not kept in touch. (4) My mother is deceased. (5) My mother is living and I see her from time to tine. (6) fly sother is living but we have not kept in touch. (7) lly fanily now includes my father and stepmother or foster nether. (8) lly family now includes my mother and stepfather or foster father. ' How many brothers and sisters do you have? (Hark two.) (1) lo brothers. (6) lo sisters. (2) One brother. (7) One sister. (3) Two brothers. (8) Two sisters. (4) Three brothers. (9) 'fhree sisters. (5) More than three (10) More than three brothers . sisters . When you were a boy. where did you spend your suaner vacations? (mark all which apply.) (1) At home. ‘2, M: CWe (3) At day camp. . 87. 52 (4) At my family's summer camp or home. (5)‘with other relatives in the country. (6) with friends in the country. (1) At work. (8) With relatives or friends in another town. (9) Taking occasional short trips. (10) On a long trip. (ll) On day trips with Iy fanily. (12) On day trips for swimning. picnicking. etc. with my own crowd. In which of the following activities have you and your family. or members of the group with which you lived. engaged fairly often? (Mark as many as apply.) (1) Played games together. (2) Read aloud. (3) Gone to movies together. (4) Gone for walks together. (5) Gone on picnics and outings. (6) Gone ewi—ing. fishing. boating. skiing. skating. etc. together. (7) Sung together. (8) Gone to ball games and other athletic events together. (9) Gone for rides together. (10) Shopped together. (11) Gone to church together. (12) Gone to museums. exhibits. concerts. plays. etc. together. (13) Done housework together. (14) Worked on hobbies together. (15) Worked in the garden or yard. In which of the following activities have you and your family. or members of the group with which you lived. engaged fairly often? (hrk as many as apply.) (1) lads such things as toys. play equipment. gifts. IWWO together. (3) Listened to mic together. (3) Entertained each other's friends. (4) Attended social gatherings. (s) Talked about our day's activities together. (s) Gene on trips together. (7) Gone on vacations together. (8) Engaged in sports together. (9) Included neighbors and friends in our good tines. both-mine and theirs. 89. 90. 91. 92. 53 Why did you do most of the things you checked in items 87 and 88? (l) Largely because my family wanted me to. (2) Because I enjoyed doing them with my family. When you lived with your folks. which of the following things did you do around the house? (1) minor repairs such as wiring. carpentry. (2) Hblping with cleaning. (3) Scrubbing floors. (4) Gardening. (5) Putting on screens and stern windows. (6) Sweeping sidewalks and shoveling snow. (7) Stable. barn. and chicken coop cleaning. (8) Chopping wood. (9) Plowing. harrowing. etc. (10) (11) (12) (13) (14) (15) Cultivating. Harvesting. picking. etc. feeding and caring for fanm