~.. ‘ ‘ . ._,_.,,V._,_,.--,% ENDIVIDUAL IDENTITY: THE COR‘RELATES 0F PERCEWING ONESELF As UNEQUE on, ANONYMOUS . Thesis fér the Degree of ‘Ph. D. MiCHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY. MARTHA KENT‘ 1 973 LIBfi-AR y C“ Mlchigan Sm to .5 U - . .~ nlverSIty ! (M 7 Wm" This is to certify that the thesis entitled INDIVIDUAL IDENTITY: THE CORRELATES OF PERCEIVING ONESELF AS UNIQUE OR ANONYMOUS presented by Martha Kent has been accepted towards fulfillment of the requirements for V ll ‘ 9; degree iDJBDAKLCAASC‘Cdta LMCM Qqhq‘wum ajor professor DateAJIoKMALBTLEJ 3 . K ”N... "'2' amoma av V “ nu mm a sour m 1:, 800K amnm ma , .l momma: |i ‘4 u . S’Illfllflflf “mum- 4h SOVm'A; - 1‘ .$ t.) watt-1:31 7 nt: f'r -; Rattles. 1-1.:1‘. 5. \ . _ ‘ aontzmog 1- ‘ .39. “" 1“? ‘3. 9 .' l L “-'7_ :27"? - A » .‘ . ' .. ~ . . ' . ‘ II this 8“,)\“7 WW" : may _t_“-‘ a ‘1 ‘r: '-"'.".‘ .' r, v, v ‘ ‘ on were .‘>ki!3"...“..\2£1‘0 tv- .':"‘.!?.S‘.l“‘f' a: germ... . x expremT-ftno 9: nuiqxxnnuaa y,“ gnaw-:31“, t {yaw-g, .‘- - g «tr-1' enchant!» natriwuw , Gaupetl fine (con— 91th 51:! use 1135;, “11-15 women with int-J. Warsaw Ihtamntu (m. m a ., ‘ ‘ "“—".' .‘i ‘k‘t' -: . 1 ‘4 -*- catamaran; “Nerd “an”. W951. 3;“ "WV big}. .I\ 1%1‘. ABSTRACT INDIVIDUAL IDENTITY: THE CORRELATES OF PERCEIVING ONESELF AS UNIQUE OR ANONYMOUS By Martha Kent The purpdse of this study was: (1) To test the hypothesis that individuals perceive themselves as unique or anonymous. Uniqueness was defined as the extent to which individuals acknowledge exclusive, as opposed to inclusive, class member- ship. (2) To determine what characteristics this uniqueness- anonymity dimension has, if it exists. Several psychological theories propose constructs for the extent to which individuals differentiate themselves from their environment: field-dependence -independence, Eros-Logos atten- tion styles, autocentric-allocentric ego styles, internal- external control. These have focused on a general tendency to differentiate the self from its environmental context. The concern in this study was differentiation from other individuals. Scales were constructed to measure a general and several particular expressions of uniqueness and anonymity: Uniqueness (acknowledgment of exclusive attributes), Competition (con- cern with winning and excelling), Pleasing (concern with other's approval), Physiological Determinism (PD, belief in the biological determination of one's actions). Several Martha Kent existing measures suggesting uniqueness or anonymity of self were included: Status, Independence, Internal-External Locus of Control (I-E), Altruism; as were eight biographical variables: sex of subject, grade point average (GPA), participation in primary and presidential campaigns, participation in sports and competitive activities, concerns with clothing and grooming. It was predicted that (l) Uniqueness would be positively correlated with Competition and negatively with Pleasing and PD. (2) Status, Independence, I-E would be positively correlated with Uniqueness and Competition, and negatively with Pleasing and PD; that Altruism would be positively correlated with Pleasing and PD, and negatively with the scales expressive of exclusivity. (3) GPA, participation in campaigns, sports and competitive activities be positively correlated with Unique- ness and scales measuring exclusivity; that money spent on wardrobe and time spent on grooming be positively correlated with Pleasing and PD. (4) Males would score higher on Unique- ness and scales measuring exclusivity than females. Statistical and rational criteria were used to generate a pool of items. These, the biographical variables and the 'four scales were administered to 180 male and 252 female subjects. Using the ORDER program of PACKAGE, a reordered correlation matrix was obtained and cluster analyzed. The criteria for grouping items into clusters were: homogeneity of content, internal and external consistency. This yielded thirty clusters which constituted themselves into seven superclusters: Uniqueness, Competition, Pleasing, Physiological Martha Kent Determinism and three minor clusters on the Desire for Leader- ship, Desire for Distinction, Deviance. The following results of the correlations among the major clusters (Uniqueness, Competition, Pleasing, PD) them- selves and the remaining variables were obtained: (1) The correlations among the major clusters were low but in the predicted directions. (2) The correlations of these clusters with the four scales (Status, Independence, Altruism, I-E) were of substantial magnitude and in the predicted directions, with the exception of Altruism. (3) The correlations of the biographical variables with all clusters and scales were low, and largely in opposite directions than predicted. Sex did not relate to any of the measures, except for Altruism. The following sex differences were obtained for the bio- graphical variables: females scored higher on participation in sports, competitive activities, money spent on wardrobe 4 and time spent on grooming. Partial correlations between the major individual identity clusters reduced the low zero-order correlations between them to zero. The uniqueness-anonymity hypothesis received its strongest support from its relations with Status and Inde- pendence. Multiple correlation coefficients showed uniqueness to be best predicted from the combined effect of Independence, Status and Deviance. This study defined a uniqueness-anonymity dimension which individuals used to characterize themselves. These findings were consistent with various discreteness hypotheses postulated Jugs? _ Martha Kent by field-dependence -independence, Eros-Logos attention styles, autocentric-allocentric ego styles, I-E. However, the absence of sex differences in any of these scales and clusters questions the pervasive sex differences in the differentiation of self claimed by the theories named above. Approved by: Date: INDIVIDUAL IDENTITY: TH CORRELATES OF PERCEIVING ONESEI-F AS - . UNIQUE 0R ANONYMOUS By - Martha Kent 1 I A 1.313 .. ' _ . Submitted to ‘: -' ‘ Michigan State University .4 in partial fulfillment of the requirement for the degree of ‘ DOCTOR or PHILOSOPHY Department of Psychology . -‘ A " 1?” Identity worries me, and‘memory, and eternity. Gertrude Stein ii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Gratitude and appreciation are due to my mother who taught me how to read, to Dr. Lucy Ferguson and Dr. John Hunter for their careful and considerate supervision of this study and to the members of the thesis committee, Dr. Robert Zucker, Dr. Dozier Thornton and Dr. Andrew Barclay, for many helpful suggestions and a rewarding learning experience. iii TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTIONOCOC..OOOIOOIOOIOOOCIOOOOOOOIIOOOOOOCOCUOOOOOOOI Field-Dependence-Field-Independence...................5 Logos-Eros Attention Styles.-loo-eno-one-eoooooooooool6 Allocentric and Autocentric Ego Boundaries...........28 Internal-External Locus of Control...................35 HypotheseSOOOCOOOOOOCOIOOCOOOOIOOOOOOOOOOOIOCIOOOIIOO41 WTHODOOCOOOOOOODOOOIIO00....OOIOIOIOOIIIOCOOOIOOOIOOOOOOO47 Generating Items for the Individual Identity ConstmctSOOOOOOOOIO..0...OIOIO...OIIOOOOOOOOODOCOOOO47 Subjects, Data Collection, and Data Processing.......50 Criteria for Developing Clusters.....................51 RESULTSOICCOOOCOO00.00.000.000.I00...00......000030000000053 Thematic Content of Individual Identity Clusters.....55 Correlation Matrices of Individual Identity Clusters.66 Thematic Content and Correlations of Status, Independence, Altruism,I-E...........................78 Relationships Among Clusters and Scales..............87 Relationships Among Clusters, Scales and Biographical variables..."0.0.0...0..OIOOOIOOO0.00.00.0I000000...89 DISCUSSIONOOOCOIOOCI00.......0...OOIOIOOOOOIIIOOOCO0......93 Implications and Conclusions.........................100 BIBLIOGRAPIIY...OOOOOIOOOOIOCOOOO...0..0.0.0.00000000000000107 ”PENDICES...C0.0IIOCOOCOOOOOOOOOCOC...I...’......I.O.....112 iv Table 1: Table 2: Table 3: Table 4: Table 5: Table 6: Table 7: Table 8: Table 9: Table 10: Table 11: Table 12: LIST OF TABLES Predicted Relationships between Individual Identity ClusterSICIOOO.ICC...IDCODCIOIDDOOOOOOCO44 Cluster UNIQUENESS Correlation Matrix............68 Cluster DESIRE FOR LEADERSHIP Correlation MatriXOIQOOOIOOO0..I...IOOOOIOOIOOOOOI,IOOOOIOOOI69 Cluster DEVIANCE Correlation Matrix..............70 Cluster PLEASING Correlation Matrix..............7l Cluster DESIRE FOR DISTINCTION Correlation MatriXOIOOIO....0................I...72 Cluster COMPETITION Correlation Matrix...........73 Cluster PHYSIOLOGICAL DETERMINISM Correlation MatriXOOOCOOCOOOO'COIOIOCOICOOC......74 STATUS Scale Correlation Matrix..................83 INDEPENDENCE Scale Correlation Matrix...........84 ALTRUISM Scale Correlation Matrix...............85 INTERNAL-EXTERNAL LOCUS OF CONTROL Scale Correlation Matrix........................86 INTRODUCTION I dare to believe that I am made different from all others that exist (Confessions). In these lines Jean Jacques Rousseau proclaims his complete personal exclusivity. He claims to be constituted in a manner which is not duplicated by any other human, thus setting himself up as a category, or class, whose membership extends only to himself and to no one else. The author of this boldly proclaimed individuality makes a completely antithetic claim for women whom he relegates to total anonymity in the following passage: Her (woman's) dignity consists in being unknown to the world; her glory is in the esteem of husb d; her pleasure in the happiness of her family ( ‘1e). For himself Rousseau claims nothing less than complete individuation. At the same time he maintains that another group of individuals, women in this case, are regarded for being unknown and for the esteem of their families. These are contradictions in term. One cannot venerate that which is "unknown" and which, for all practical purposes, does not exist. Nor can one venerate a person for himself if all one admires and loves about him are qualities which emanate _ from others (i.e. the family's esteem and happiness). According to Rousseau then, the dignity for which women_ 1 2 are regarded is unknown and has no properties of its own. It is a state of anonymity. This same uniqueness-anonymity dimension is found explicitly stated in the counsel Lord Chesterfield gives his son: Women are much more like each other than men; they have in truth but two passions, vanity and love; these are their universal characteristics (The letters of the Earl of Chesterfield to his son, vol. II, p. 5). Contemporary examples giving eloquent expression to this dimension are not lacking. Paul Goodman, for example, has this to say in what is undoubtedly his most influential work: I say the 'young men and boys' because the problems I want to discuss in this book belong primarily, in our society to boys: how to be useful and make something of oneself. A girl does not have to; she is not expected to make something of herself. Her career does not have to be self-justifying, for she will have children, which is absolutely self-justifying like any other natural or creative act. With this background, it is less important, for instance, what job an average young woman works at till she is married Growing Up Absurd, p. 13)- Goodman is counseling youths to seek differentiation, to “make something" of themselves, by seeking individuation through the achievements of a career. Girls, by contrast, are destined for marriage and childbearing. They are destined (to do and become what millions of other women are presently engaged in doing and being, and what millions of other women have done and been for all of past human history. They do not have to worry about becoming anything at all, since they (already "are". Reik states this dichotomy of "being," a totally nondescriptive attribute of any object in the universe, and ”being somebody," which distinguishes between men and .__.___ women even-more tersely: The situation in present day America is as follows: since the First World War women, much more than before, want to 'be somebody' or 'do something.‘ But what do they mean by that? We always thought that women made their influence felt and importance felt at home and in society merely by being there, and need not 'do something.‘ The women who live as admirable patterns in the memory of mankind are not those who accomplish admirable things in different fields of activity, but those who are the best wives and mothers and those who by their beauty, charm and personality stimulated the best minds of their times (Sex in Man and Woman, p. 51). The above examples are instances that demonstrate the belief that women are, or should be, anonymous and that men should seek distinction and differentiation from others. These instances postulate a dimension of individuality-anonymity along which persons are defined. The particular authors cited here see themselves and other males at one extreme, that of individuality, and reserve anonymity for women. It will be the purpose of this thesis: (1) To test the hypothesis that individuals perceive them- (selves and/or others as relatively unique or anonymous. Uniqueness, in this study, is defined as follows: x is believed by y to be unique if and only if y believes that there is some property f which x and only x has. (It is, of course, possible that y=x, in which case x will believe himself to be unique). Anonymity is defined as follows: x is believed by y to be anonymous if and only if y believes that each property of x is also a preperty of every other entity. Stated more simply in set theoretic terms, uniqueness is the extent to which individuals will perceive themselves 4 and/or others as a set whose membership extends only to the individual himself. He is the single member of a single- member set. Anonymity would consist of perceiving yourself and/or others as a member of an infinitely inclusive set. These definitions characterize the perfect case. Relative degrees of exclusivity or inclusivity of class membership would constitute relative expressions of uniqueness and anonymity. (2) To examine what characteristics a uniqueness-anonymity dimension has, if it exists. What other traits and behaviors' are related to it and what the nature of these relationships are. Several psychological theories propose constructs for the extent to which individuals separate themselves from their environment. For lack of a unifying label for them, they will simply be termed "differentiation theories". In general, these theories prOpose that cognitive and perceptual performance on various tasks is evidence for the presence or absence of personal differentiation from the individual's environmental context. For example, performance on the rod and frame test is interpreted as evidence for field-dependence-independence in a broader than merely perceptual sense. It should be pointed out that differentiation is interpreted as the indi- vidual's differentiation from his environmental context in general. This has included differentiation from other persons. The measures for this broadly conceived tendency have been rather indirect and based on complicated assumptions. This 5 study is interested in personal differentiation from a particular aspect of this general context, notably differenti- ation from other people. The goal is to measure this as literally as possible. The following of the most prominent differentiation theories and related studies will be reviewed in this section: field-dependence -independence, Eros-Logos attention styles, autocentric-allocentric ego styles, internal-external locus of control. Since their formulations, research on any one of the subjects has proliferated enormously. For example, locus of control alone has generated 339 studies within the three-year span 1966-1969 (Lefcourt, 1972). A comprehensive review of the literature is physically beyond the scope of this study. Instead, the major works of the authors of the respective theories and studies they considered essential in demonstrating them will be considered briefly. Field-Dependence-Field-Independence Undoubtedly the soundest body of research supporting any of these differentiation theories is Witkin's work on field-dependence -independence. Witkin defines differentiation as: a...clear separation of what is identified as belonging to the self and what is identified as external to the self. The self is experienced as having definite limits or boundaries. Segregation of the self helps make possible greater determination of functioning from within, as opposed to a more or less enforced reliance on external nurturance and support for maintenance, typical of the relatively undifferentiated state (1962, p. 10). r" -‘ 6 A high degree of differentiation or articulation of experience was labeled ”field independence" and a low level of differ- entiation was termed "field dependence". Witkin and his associates devised three tests which require the person to separate an item from the field or context of which it was a part, or to "break up" a field or configuration. Persons with field-independent ways of perceiving were thought to experience their surroundings "analytically". Objects within a context were experienced as discrete from that context. Persons with more field dependent ways of perceiving experienced their surroundings in a global fashion by con- forming to the influence of the prevailing field or context. Witkin devised the following three tests for field- dependence ~independence: (l) The tilting-room-ti1ting-chair test evaluates a person's perception of the position of his body and of the whole surrounding field in relation to the upright. The apparatus consists of a boxlike room that can be tilted to left or right. Inside the room is a chair for the subject which also can be tilted to left or right independently of the room. The subject is seated in the tilted room and asked to bring his body to a position that he perceives as upright. If he tilts his body far in the direction of the tilted room in order to make himself straight, he is judging his position in terms of his apparent relation to the field. If he brings himself close to the true upright, he is resisting the influence of the field and showing marked awareness of bodily,sensations. (2) The rod-and-frame test (RFT) consists of a luminous square frame and a luminous rod, each moving independently of the other. These are presented in tilted position in a darkened room to the subject. With the frame remaining tilted, the subject is required to adjust the rod to a position he perceives as upright. For successful performance of this task the subject must "extract" the rod from the tilted frame through reference to body position. An actual large tilt of the rod when it is reported to be straight indicates adherence to the visual field, while a small tilt indicates independence of the field and reliance on cues from the body. (3) The embedded-figure test (EFT) also requires the subject to separate an item from the field in which it is incorporated. The subject‘s task is to find a particular simple figure within a larger complex figure. The simple figure is "hidden” by being incorporated into the pattern of the larger figure. The standard test uses a series of twenty-four complex figures, in which a simple figure is to be located. The 1 subject's score is the mean amount of time taken to find the simple figures within the complex ones. Witkin proposed that the three tasks measured a general mode of perceiving which, in turn, was associated with many personality characteristics. To experience the body, or perceive the rod or imbedded figure in a discrete way was a specific manifestation of a more general capacity to "keep things apart." People who were able to bring the body 8 close to the upright, or to determine rod position indepen- dently of the tilted frame in the rod-and-frame test, could- also detect a simple geometric figure within a complexly organized design. These relationships suggested some commu- nality between the person's experience of his body and of neutral objects outside of himself. Inability to differentiate body, rod, or figure from their contexts, suggest a general xtendency to lose oneself. This relatively global, unarticu- lated way of experiencing is manifested not only in these tests but also in the quality of the person's awareness of the social world around him. Accordingly, Witkin believed that there was a dynamic connection between sense of body and sense of self in which the fusion of body and field in ex- perience would be reflected in a self which was limited in segregation and inner structure. He and others have tested this hypothesis and have found that people with a relatively field-dependent way of perceiving have a less developed sense of their identity and of their separateness from others than do more field-independent perceivers. A self which is only limitedly segregated from the field was characteristic of people who experienced the body or any object as "fused" with its surroundings. For the past two decades Witkin and his associates and many other researchers have related field-dependence -inde- pendence to a great many other characteristics of perception, attitudes and behaviors, such as its relationships to dis- tracting contexts, flexibility of closure, perceptual constancy, 9 perception of reversible figures, susceptibility to illusions, color-form-distance perception, intellectual activities as set-breaking, body concept, sense of separate identity, etc. ' Only the last one, sense of separate identity, will be con- sidered since it is directly related to the construct of individual identity and uniqueness proposed in this study. Witkin defines "sense of separate identity" in general terms as "the outcome of a person's development of awareness of his own needs, feelings, and attributes and his identifi- cation of these as distinct from the needs, feelings, and attributes of others " (p. 134). It implies experience of the self as segregated and a self that is structured. Such a self has an internal frame of reference which guides definition of the self and of the world at large. The lack of an inner frame of reference forces definition of the self to be determined from without. This has the effect of greatly limiting the ability to function independently of external forces. Witkin considers three modes in which a sense of separate self becomes manifest: the need for guidance, susceptibility to outside influence, stability of self-view. A person with a well developed sense of separate identity should be able to function with little need for guidance from others. A person with a poor sense of separate identity should show a greater reliance on guidance from others. Furthermore, a person with a developed sense of separate identity should maintain his own direction in spite of opposing judgments and attitudes. The person lacking a developed sense of separate identity 10 ‘ should rely on and be swayed by the judgments and values of others. Finally a well developed sense of separate identity should be associated with a stable view of oneself in various social contexts, while a poorly developed sense of separate identity should be associated with reliance on the social context for self-definition and, therefore, with an unstable self view. A. Need for Guidance A rich variety of studies and approaches have considered these relationships. Witkin and his associates (1962) have contributed to some of these. In one of theSe studies Witkin studied children's behavior while taking the TAT. It was thought that under conditions which defined the task in very general terms and left the role of the experimenter ambiguous, children with Opposite field approaches would react in different ways. Since children with global field approaches would be less able to define their roles in such a situation, they would seek guidance from the experimenter on how to proceed. They would lack confidence in themselves to execute the task and would be 'anxious. By contrast, children with an analytical field approach would define their own roles, seek little guidance, and would proceed with confidence and less anxiety. The data consisted of the remarks subjects made during the test'and notes taken by the examiner during the test. Thirty- eight TAT records of ten-year-old boys were scored for the following criteria: (1) Reliance on experimenter for task definition. TAT's were 11 'scored for the extent to which children were unsure of how to react to the situation and looked to the examiner for support and direction. (2) The child's attitude toward his competence. Stories were scored for the extent children were self-deprecating and assumed blame for difficulties, and the extent to which children were positive about their story-telling abilities, and blamed the cards or the experimenter for their difficulties. (3) Quality of the child's feeling during the test session. This criterion considered the extent to which children en- joyed the test or seemed anxious and tense and found the task trying and unpleasant. (4) Evidence of an "I". This category consisted of the presence of the impression of "a story teller behind the scenes, going about his task of developing and organizing a sequence of ideas" (p. 138). The story teller in action emerged from comments on the problems and alternative solutions in develop- ing the story, from standing aside and evaluating aspects of the story. The results showed that the TAT ratings related signifi- cantly to perceptual index scores (r a .70, p <,.01). This con- firmed Witkin's hypothesis that children with a global field approach lacked confidence in their ability, sought guidance from the examiner, and were anxious. A different approach to the readiness to follow the guidance of an authority figure consisted of relating per- formance on a routinized task to analytic field approach. 12 Witkin thought that a narrowly defined, mechanical and mono- tonous task which would produce satiation easily would yield different results in perseverance in subjects representing different field orientations. Subjects with a global field approach should persist at the task longer than subjects with an analytical approach. A letter-cancellation test was administered to 29 ten-year-olds. A correlation of .26 was obtained between field-dependence and improvement scores of’ the cancellation task. Another indication for the relationship of field de- pendence and reliance on guidance of authority consisted in the relationship of field independence and incidental learning. Witkin thought that field dependent subjects would limit learning to those aspects of the situation to which they were directed by the examiner, while children with an analytical approach would attend to and learn about peripheral aspects of the task. In a test for incidental learning and field approach he found that subjects with a global field approach showed little incidental learning. B. Dependence A second group of studies related field—dependence -independence to expressions of dependent attitudes as measured by rating scales. Gordon (1953) found that field- dependent persons tended to view themselves and to be viewed by others as socially dependent. To measure social depen- -dence Gordon constructed a modified Thurstone-type scale. Representing the dependent extreme of the scale were items 13. as: "I consider myself completely at the mercy and direction of others in the group." Other items stressed modifiers as _'infantile,' "whiny," "submissive." The independent extreme was represented by items like: "The group usually accepts anything I express," "I take responsibility to draw others into the conversation." Other items stressed "self-assertion," "daring," "adventure," "individualism," "strength." The results showed that self ratings of dependence were sig- nificantly related to measures of field dependence on the RFT. Moreover, subjects who were field dependent on the RFT were also judged by others to be dependent. Bell (1955) also found measures of dependent attitudes to be related to perceptual performance. Using the concept of inner-directed and other-directed proposed by Riesman (1950), she developed a scale of four clusters of attitudes. One pole of each cluster reflected inner-directedness while the other represented other-directedness. One cluster measured hard-headed practical orientation (inner-directed- . ness) as opposed to a global unrealistic interest in warmth and sincerity (other-directedness). A second cluster measured work orientation expressed in concerns with efficiency, control, competence, and excelling versus the need fer friendship, popularity, intimacy, cooperation. A third cluster was concerned with the self-inner preferences, striving toward achievement, personal recognition, independence versus needs for security, social approval, conformity. The final cluster measured concerns with ideas and principles 14 rather than people as Opposed to items measuring a concern for people. Bell administered this scale and the three perceptual tasks developed by Witkin (EFT, RAT, BAT or body adjustment task) to a group of college students. Bell pre- dicted that field-dependent subjects would score higher on other-directedness and field independent subjects would {score higher on inner-directedness. The results confirmed these relations. A group of related studies have used the F-scale to relate authoritarianism to field approach (Rudin and Stagner, 1958; Linton, 1955: Bieri, 1960). Most of these studies found significant relations between authoritarianism and field dependence. This is to be expected since the authoritarian syndrome includes adherence to external values and respect for authority and is, therefore, similar to Witkin's concept of "reliance on others for guidance and support." C. Susceptibility to Influence Another manner in which Witkin thought a sense of separate identity should become manifest is in the independent main? tenance of attitudes. This should reflect an inner frame of’ reference and, hence, a sense of separate self which does not rely on attitudes and judgments cf others. To determine the relationship between susceptibility to influence and field approach, Linton (1955) administered a battery of tests to college males: the BAT, RAT, EFT, syllogism test, an auto- kinetic test which measured the extent to which subjects' judgments of the amount and direction of movement of a 15 stationary point of light conformed with the judgments of a planted confederate. Subject's behavior in the test situation was rated for the following categories of responses: coping, resisting confederate, acknowledging prestige of con- federate, reporting influence of confederate. Finally, an ‘ attitude change task was included. The subject's attitudes on several issues were measured before and after reading articles on these issues which were supposedly written by authorities. The syllogism test consisted of subject solving a set of syllogisms. In some, the logical conclusion con- flicted with his existing attitudes. In others it did not. A measure of impairment in function as a result of con- flict was developed. A factor analysis yielded four factors. The tests with high loadings on one of these factors support the hypothesis that a global field approach is related to conforming behavior. The factors which appeared on this loading were: 1. The autokinetic situation-change of judgment to conform with confederate 2. EFT 3. BAT 4. Impairment of syllogistic reasoning 5. Autokinetic situation-lack of resistance to confederate 6. Autokinetic situation-lack of coping 7. RAT. ‘ Mednick and Shaffer (in Witkin, p. 151) used Rechtschaffen and Mednick's "autokinetic word" technique to determine the 16 ' relationship between susceptibility to influence and field approach. Subject was shown a stationary point of light in a completely darkened room and was told that the light would move to write messages. He was asked to report the words he recognized. Field-dependent subjects, with field-dependence being measured by performance on the EFT, reported seeing more words than field-independent subjects (r = .30, p < .05). Rosner (1957) studied the relationship of susceptibility to influence on individual judgment. On the basis of per- formance in an Asch-type group pressure situation, Rosner selected twenty conforming and twenty non-conforming subjects and had them take the EFT. As predicted, conforming subjects were more field dependent as measured by the EFT but not by the RFT. , ' Logos-Eros Attention Styles Another set of constructs which postulate different states of differentiation are the "masculine" and "feminine" principles termed "Logos" and "Eros." Jung (1963) and Wicks (1948) initially proposed these metaphors to designate different and mutually exclusive styles of relating to the world which were thought to be characteristic of males and females. Wicks characterizes male mental functioning, or "Logos," as follows: The pattern of a man's conscious life is, as we have already said, determine y s ego, his conscious personality. It is a man's first business to find his goal, his chosen work, to concentrate upon it in order to make his place in the world of men. In finding his goal, he relates himself to the essential masculine 17 rinciple, the Logos. Logos means literally "word" €"In the beginning was the word"), i.e., that which creates by understanding, by defining, by differentiation. By finding the word, the name, for something one separates it from other things, gives it independent existence, makes possible a logical relation between it and other things. The Logos principle is, therefore, that which gives form, that which brings order out of the chaotic elements of life. It is to the working out of the chosen form that masculine energy is bent. The youth may at first be con- cerned with his physical masculinity with strength, with virility. Later his conscious energy is directed into a chosen channel, into his profession or his work, into a definite pattern (p. 89). Feminine mode of relatedness, or "Eros" is defined as: The central principle of life which woman serves is Eros, the principle of relatedness and receptivity; the principle of love, not simply in its instinctual biological aspect but in its deeper meaning. It is this principle which leads woman to understand and nurture all potentials of life, both personal and impersonal. This principle also gives to woman a deep instinctual contact with what may be called earth wisdom, an intuitive per- ception of truths relating to human experience, truths which seem to rise to her consciousness without the process of logical thought. This wisdom is like the matrix - the mother lode containing the precious ore. It is through her connection with Eros that woman finds her own center as woman....(p. 103). These analogical elaborations of stereotypic metaphors are adopted by Silverman (1970) to characterize a variety of studies which have demonstrated sex differences in attention styles. Logos, the masculine attention style, is characterized by 1. 2. 3 4. Silverman as: Midrange sensory threshold Augmentation of the experienced intensity of strong stimulation Responsiveness to discrete segments of configurations rather than to configurations as wholes Hypoawareness of subtle differences between elements in a configuration 18 '5. Analytic restructuring; responsiveness to stimulus patterns 6. Inhibition of responsiveness to irrelevant stimulus attributes in problem solving situations. Eros, the prototypic feminine attention style, is characterized 1. Low sensory thresholds and hypersensitivity to stimulation in general N 0 Reduction of experienced intensity of strong stimulation 3. Responsiveness to whole configurations rather than to parts of configurations 4. Hyperawareness of subtle differences between elements in a configuration 5. Non-analytic, non-restructuring responsiveness to stimulus patterns 6. Responsiveness to irrelevant attributes of problem solving situations Silverman cites many sensory-autonomic studies of infants as evidence for Eros-Logos attention styles. Studies on the ‘ readiness to register and experience sensory input as sensory threshold, habituation and discrimination, excitability, eye movement, of Bell and Costello (1964), Lipsitt and Levy (1959), and others, indicate sex differences on physiological activation, stimulus sensitivity, responsiveness to patterned stimuli which maintain the Logos-Eros distinction. Males showed less sensi- tivity to stimulation than females and lower arousal. Males also responded more to simple figures, whereas females tended to prefer complex stimuli which were less amenable to critical analysis. Bell (1960) reanalyzed data collected by Shirley (1933) of infants' reactions during anthropometric examinations and 19 found that females received higher irritability ratings. In a later study, Weller and Bell (1965) studied skin conductance in infants, two to five days of age, and found that females were higher in skin conductance than males. Bell and Costello (1964) also reported three studies of tactile sensitivity on three different samples of neonates. Two studies measured reactivity to air pressure on the abdomen and reactivity to the removal of a covering blanket. The female group showed greater sensitivity to these stimuli than did the male group. Lipsitt and Levy (1959) reported two studies in which they found sex differences to electrotactual stimulation in one tov four day old infants. In the first study, male and female infants were tested within twenty four hours after birth and. then at twenty four hour intervals for the next three con- secutive days. Stimulation was modified from a low subthreshold value to the point when a "discrete extension of the large toe" occurred. The results again showed that female infants obtained lower response thresholds than male infants. In the second study each of the four tests conducted during the four consecutive days was performed on different groups of infants. The same results were found for the groups tested on day one, two and three. Female infants evidenced lower thresholds than male inp fants. Escalona and Heider (1959) have reported some interesting -relationships between sensory thresholds in infancy and later psychological adjustment. One of their findings concerned the relationship between general sensory threshold level in infants one to eight months old and the degree of imagination _. in}. 20 which they manifested several years later. They found that infants who exhibited higher sensory thresholds early in life showed a lower tendency for free fantasy behavior at kinder- garten age. The play of these children was concerned with non- imaginative concrete playthings. None of the high-sensory- threshold infants demonstrated high imaginativeness in later childhood. Low sensory threshold infants, by contrast, mani- fested obvious interest in imaginary playthings, companions, and fantasy situations. The sex difference in the relationship of sensory threshold and imagination, with lower sensory thresholds and increased imagination holding for females, is ‘also confirmed by studies on fantasy which have found that females engage in more fantasy than males. Among older children and adults a greater tendency to daydreaming and to a rich fantasy life is found in females (Kleinman and Higgins, 1966; Terman and Miles, 1936). Various studies have also suggested that a relationship exists between sensitivity to stimulation, a rich fantasy life, and a tendency to seek diverse stimulation. Normal adults who evidence a heightened sensitivity to sensory stimulation, and who possess a rich fantasy life, also evidence a tendency to» seek out more diverse sensory and perceptual stimulation. Their responses suggest a readiness to encounter stimulation without fixed anticipation, an "openness to experience" (Fitzgerald, , 1966). Kagan and Lewis (1965) tested six month old male and female infants with a battery of stimulus patterns. Included 21 was a sound pattern, low in complexity, which consisted of an intermittent tone, and another sound pattern which was high, in complexity and consisted of jazz music. The measure of attention consisted of cardiac deceleration subsequent to the presentation of the sound stimuli. Antecedent studies on cardiac deceleration by Lacey et al. (1963), Kagan and Rosman (1964), and Lewis et a1. (1966) have demonstrated cardiac deceleration in adults, children, and infants during attention to auditory and visual stimuli. Kagan and Lewis found that in females, greater cardiac deceleration occurred to Jazz music. For males, greater cardiac deceleration occurred with the intermittent tone. The same infants were retested at thirteen months but with different auditory stimuli. Four paragraphs were prepared which contained either high or low meaning and were read in a normal speaking inflection or no inflection at all. The high meaning paragraph contained words which might be most familiar to a year-old child while the low meaning paragraph contained nonsense words matched structurally to the high meaning paragraphs. Males showed greatest cardiac deceleration to the high-meaning low-inflection paragraph which was followed by high-meaning high-inflection, low- meaning low-inflection and low-meaning high-inflection. For females the order in magnitude of cardiac deceleration occurred to: High-meaning high-inflection, low-meaning high-inflection, lowhmeaning low-inflection and, finally, high-meaning low- inflection. The low complexity condition is, thus, most ”preferred" by males while the high complexity condition is 22 highly "preferred" by females. These sex differences have held up for college age males and females. Taylor and Eisenman (1968) found that in responses to stimulus patterns of varying novelty and complexity male subjects showed a preference for less complex stimulus patterns than female subjects. ‘ Silverman interprets these studies as: Hale infants attend more to stimulus configurations which are more redundant and amenable to differentiation and compartmentalization; they attend less to stimulus configurations which are most complex and least amenable to differentiation and compartmentalization. On the other hand, females evidence relatively equal attentiveness to stimuli which are highest and lowest in amenability to differentiation. Whereas males are predisposed to discrimination and organization, females are predisposed to apprehending a total stimulus pattern as it occurs (p. 80). It should be mentioned at this point that it is entirely un- known what sort of information the infant actually processes from these stimuli. It cannot be ascertained whether the male child does, indeed, "differentiate and compartmentalize" or whether the female child beholds a global, effusive state of mushiness. These are, at best, analogical conjectures based on the assumption that the child will perceive those features ‘of the stimuli which have been structured and defined in this a pgiggi manner. Moreover, there is nothing which prevents the interpretation that, since female children attend to more complicated stimuli, they learn to "make sense" out of com- plexity and develop perceptual styles that are much more complicated rather than nondiscriminating and "global". 23 With the aid of several studies Silverman next makes the leap from sensitivity to stimulus configuration to sensitivity to social stimuli and Eros-Logos attention styles. Lewis, Kagan, and Kalafat (1966) found longer visual fixation for female infants to pictures of faces than to a checkerboard, a bull's eye, or a bottle. Male infants showed no significant differences in fixation responses to the different stimuli. (The feature which actually distinguishes among these three stimuli is that the human face is complex, whereas the bull's eye, checkerboard and bottle are simple and "abstract". The "social” attribute of the face is confounded with complexity). Silverman also cites the facial recognition study of Witryol and Kaess (1957) in which females were superior in memory for names and faces as evidence for the superior social skill of females. This result and interpretation is also confounded by the superior verbal skills of females. Reactions to stimulus intensity, eXpressed in the form of stimulus intensity reduction or augmentation, constitute further support for Eros-Logos attention styles. Silverman, Petrie and others have found interesting-characterological differences associated with hypersensitive and non—hypersensitive indi- viduals when these are subjected to changes in stimulation. Individuals who attenuate the experienced intensity of strong stimulation became called "reducers". They evidenced greater tolerance for pain in laboratory experiments, such as hypo- sensitivity to high intensity stimulation. On the other hand, they are hypersensitive to low intensity input, they have a P'“ 24 -lower sensory threshold and are hyper-reactive to marginal stimuli (Silverman, 1967). "Augmenters" tend to be character- ized by an automatic tendency to amplify sensory input; they, therefore, show poor tolerance_for pain stimulation. Augmenters respond well to confinement and isolation while reducers do not. In several studies females evidenced a stronger reduction response tendency than males (Buchsbaum and Silverman, 1968; Compton, 1967). Reduction is conceptualized as a protective response disposition which is observed to occur in hyper- sensitive organisms in the presence of strong stimulation. Stimulus intensity reduction is further related to receptivity to inner stimuli by female subjects. Walters et a1. (1962, 1964) found that, following a period of sensory deprivation, females verbalized their experiences in subjective and introspective terms. The comments of males consisted of retrospective accounts of bodily sensations and comments about the external surroundings. Greater female emotionality has been measured or inferred in a great variety of studies, ranging from high scores on . neuroticism and anxiety questionnaires, admission of more abnormal behavior, daydreaming, to different responses to Rorschach Inkblots. Bieri, et a1. (1958), for example, found that college women produced Rorschach responses which contained more human movement responses than those of men. Interpretations of these Rorschach findings are consistent with the Eros-Logos distinction proposed by Silverman, They suggest a freer, more open experiencing of the subjective, intuitive and nonrational. 25 Silverman adds to the "entertaining" suggestive descrip- tions of female behavior yet another term, "yielding". Females exhibit more "yielding" behavior in responses to internal and external stimulation. According to Silverman, examples of "yielding" are; perception of relatedness among elements in an array, responsiveness to background cues, persuasibility, conformity and suggestibility. It might be recalled that several of these constructs and identical studies (e.g. Crutch- field, 1955; Jackson, 1958; etc.) were also used by Witkin to postulate his construct of a lack of a sense of separate identity. Silverman, in turn, also cites the work of Witkin as evidence for the Logos-Eros response style. Consistent with the sex differences in the studies discussed so far, females tended to be influenced by context stimuli in problem solving, cognitive and perceptual judgment situations. Witkin's work showed consistent sex differences, with female responses being characterized as field-dependent and male responses as field-independent. The influence of context showed up in such studies as those by Guetzkow (1951) and Barratt (1955). Female subjects performed more poorly than males on problem-’ solving tasks which required overcoming a context. This ~ consisted of either breaking a preestablished set or by restructuring relevant aspects of the problem. On tests of space visualization, as those of Barrett (1955) which required 'perceptual restructuring for successful performance of the task, the performance of female subjects was poorer than that of male subjects. Silverman describes the performance of female 26 subjects in these experiments as a tendency on the part of females to "yield to the prevailing structure of a stimulus field" (p. 84). Eros-Logos response styles are not only sex dependent but are modified by such personality variables as anxiety, masculinity-femininity, ego strength. In female subjects high anxiety tends to be associated with Logos response styles rather than with the prototypic Eros response tendency. In a study by Iscoe and Garden (1961) the Embedded Figure Test and the Children Manifest Anxiety scale were administered to sixth grade boys and girls. For girls anxiety scale scores were highly correlated with EFT scores. For boys high anxiety was associated (however, nonsignificantly) with poor per- formance on EFT. Studies on response tendency and masculinity-femininity have, in general, found that scores deviating in the direction of the opposite sex on M-F questionnaires, were associated with tendencies to perceive and solve problems in ways which were characteristic of the opposite sex. Milton (1.957) administered three M-F measures (the Terman Miles M—F scale, MMPI M-F, Behavior Inventory M-F) and a problem solving test to a group of college students. His results showed that males were better than females on the problem-solving test. In addition, performance on the problem task correlated with- scores on the masculinity-femininity measures. Both male and female subjects who scored low on femininity did better on the problem-solving task than male and female subjects 27 who scored high in femininity. vaught (1965) investigated the relationship between masculinity-femininity and field-dependence. He administered the Rod-And-Frame Test to a large group of college age males and females and found that, consistent with antecedent research, males performed better on the RFT than females. When he sub- classified his subjects into high-feminine high-masculine groups as measured by performance on the Gough femininity scale, he found that both males and females who were high in femininity performed poorly on the RFT. Vaught also administer- ed the Barron Ego Strength scale to the same subjects. This scale is considered to be a measure of adaptability and personal resourcefulness, of general capacity for personal integration, and of feelings of personal adequacy and vitality. The results showed that for male subjects, high ego strength scores were associated with better performance on RFT. The results for females turned out to be more complicated. An interesting sex difference occurred when all three tests were compared. Male subjects who scored high on ego strength and low on femininity showed the best performance on RFT. For females, best RFT performance was associated with high ego strength and low and intermediate scores on femininity. High ego strength and high femininity was associated with poorest RFT performance for females. Silverman interprets these results as demonstrations of an ”Eros" tendency in female attention styles: 28 The Eros trait of "yielding" to a dominant stimulus configuration and of not being selectively inattentive to background cues, two characteristics of the poor RFT performers, are exemplified in the high-ego strength high-femininity female group. On the other hand, a "counteracting," Logos response to the stimulus cone figuration is most clearly evident in the superior performance of the high-ego strength low-femininity male group (p. 88). This elucidates little. It merely reiterates the problem, in this case the sex differences obtained in the various studies, by relabeling it the"Eros-Logos attention styles". Silver- man's review skillfully draws various studies and theoretical approaches together but the very terms he uses to do so are objectionable. They perpetuate the tendency to perceive women only in terms of their sexual functions (i.e. "Yielding," "Eros") and males as rational minds. Silverman's descriptive categories perpetuate Western stereotypes of males and females. is such they are another live bit of evidence, provided by the discipline itself, for one of the hypotheses to be tested in this study, that the activities of females are perceived as biologically determined. Allocentric and Autocentric Ego Boundaries The least systematic and rigorous expression of differen- tiation to be considered here is the construct of allocentric and autocentric ego boundaries. Gurman (1970) conceptualizes the sense of separation of the ego from its social-environ- mental context in terms which are essentially adopted from Schachtel. In Metamorphosis (1959) Schachtel prOposes that the senses mediate two modes of relatedness between perceiver 29 and the world around him. There are essentially two different ways of communication between subject and world. These are the autocentric and allocentric modes of relatedness. The auto- centric mode is subject-centered and contains no or little perceptual objectification. It consists of how and what the person feels. Sensory experiences of the autocentric mode are dominated by pleasurable or unpleasurable feelings. The allocentric mode is characterized by objectification, by a relatedness which is concerned with the qualities of the object, with what the object is like, rather than subjective feelings of pleasure-unpleasure. The single most important attribute which distinguishes between allocentric and autocentric relatedness is "objecti- fication". Objectification is the degree to which the object is perceived as existing independently of the perceiver and the degree to which it is apprehended in detail. Objectification is predominantly the result of one sensory function -sight. Ontogenetically and phylogenetically it is a late phenomenon. It appears fully only in man in whom it develops only gradually in the course of infancy and childhood. The neonate does not distinguish between himself and the outside world. In most of the protozoa, proper sense organs can hardly be found. Life at its beginning, ontogenetically and phylogenetically,= does not have an object world. It senses states of well-being and ill-being, internal nervous excitations. Although these states are caused by agents in the environment, they do not refer to the environment as it is experienced by the organism. 30 These sensations evoke reactions in the organism but they do not lead to the perception of objects or to the perception of an undifferentiated environment. As an example of lack of differentiation, Schachtel cites the nature of relatedness in the earthworm: (In) the world of the earthworm...there is only the change of light and dark, the experience of more or less hard obstructions, of humid and dry, of warm and cold, and of some scents. But no objects exist in this world and the worm never encounters the unending variety of plant and animal forms (p. 86). According to Schachtel, man fares considerably better than the earthworm. Only he has full-fledged perception of objects as things, as entities existing independently of him. Through visual perception man beholds a world of objects which are independent of him and among which he moves as another dis- crete object. These objects exist independent of any biological needs, drives or moods which may be impinging on the subject. 7 Objectification is limited almost exclusively to visual perception. The experience of seeing consists largely of seeing independently existing objects. This is not the case with other sensory experiences. Taste, smell, proprioception, convey states of well-being or ill-being to the organism. They convey in- formation about himself to himself rather than information about his environment. In the experience of pure_taste (dis- regarding tactile sensations from objects being tasted) as sour, sweet, bitter, no object is perceived. All that the subject experiences are these qualities. But what this object is, its structure and characteristic attributes, cannot be discerned 31 from tasting it. Hence, no objectification takes place. Olfaction is also totally lacking in objectification. The experience of smell contains no clue about the source of this sensation. The ability to distinguish between smells (e.g. tobacco, oranges, etc.) is not due to the objects them- selves, but to the antecedent visual and tactive experiences with these objects which are associated with a particular smell. The smell of an orange does not indicate whether this scent emanates from an actual orange or from a perfume. The subject's sensory experience here, again, consists of feelings of unpleasantness or pleasantness. It is an experience in which the subject experiences himself rather than the object. Other differences between autocentric and allocentric per- ception concern the more physical quality of autocentric as compared with the more intellectual and spiritual quality of allocentric perception. Allocentric senses have only a loose and hardly noticeable connection with feelings of pleasure or displeasure, comfort and discomfort. In the autocentric senses this is the primary mode of perceiving. Because of this pre- valent feeling component, autocentric sensory experiences have a much greater impact on and control of behavior. This connection between feeling and autocentric sensation is reflected linguistically in such instances where the ex- pression for "to feel" will also be used for "to smell" as is the case foerrench, English and German. Because autocentric sensations are feeling-bound, they are more directly and come pellingly controlled by the environment. 32 The point of this lengthy review of Schachtel's con- structs is to illustrate the excesses which can be committed in the use of interpretive labels. In this case it serves to illuminate the use Gutman will make of them. The term ”auto- centric," the nondiscrete sensory experiences characteristic of earthworms, lower forms of life and human infants, is used to characterize women's "diffuse ego boundaries." There is little in Gutman's constructs which warrants this extreme comparison. Second, Gutman, like Silverman, reduceswomen to their anatomies. Autocentric sensations are, it will be re- called, under the direction of the individual's body which experiences pleasure or displeasure and acts accordingly. Now to Gutman's study. Schachtel's two sensory modes of relatedness are adopted by Gutman to characterize the manner in which the ego relates to the outside world. The autocentric ego style is one in which "the order of events is seen as. related to the self" while the allocentric ego style is one in which "the order of events is seen as having a direction and logic of its own" (p. 77). Gutman reports on three groups which, he claims, represent autocentric ego styles: Women, American Indians, Hippies. Starting with women, he noteS‘ that most cultures have historically considered women as irrational - they leap to conclusions, make decisions on emotional rather than rational grounds, and ignore "ruling necessities." This tendency persisted in TAT stories which were obtained from males and females. The responses of women were more unpredictable and personalizing. Men approached 33 the experimental task as an intellectual exercise which was expressed in an awareness that their responses were only possible interpretations of the pictures and reflections of their imaginations. Women tended not to maintain such a distance between story and story teller. They responded to the cards as if they were actual events, rather than possible interpretations: a situation which was read into the card was subsequently experienced as a real event, existing inde- pendent of themselves. This "unbounded" extension of the self is seen in such examples as stories ending with "I hope things turn out well for them" or "A boy like that should get what he deserves". The female approaches lacked delay, objectivity, and boundary. The boundary between self and others, between objects and emotions relating to these objects were tenuous and permeable. The world which women create in TAT stories is thus "a metaphor e an extension of the affective reaction' aroused in them..." (p. 79). Males with such ego styles would be considered regressive and pathological. Gutman is surprised that women "thrive within this rather boundaryless modefi Both males and females whose ego styles are atypical for their sex score high on neuroticism, anxiety, and depression. The high morale for low boundaried women Gutman attributes to success- ful adaptation to an environment which is essentially auto- centric. The world of the american housewife resembles very much that of the preliterate_American Indian who also shares diffuse ego boundaries. They share physical isolation, lack of contact with alternative ways of living; the family and 34 the larger society are extensions of the individual, of his concerns and beliefs. The domestic environment reflects the wishes and tastes of the homemaker. Moreover, children are a literal extension of the mother. (This is a rather stereotypic perception of the domestic scene. It interprets the home as ”the woman's place”. Moreover, children are at least as much extensions of fathers whose "family name” and, hence, whose individuality they perpetuate and lend permanence to.) Gutman reports on another group of subjects who demons - strated diffuse ego boundaries to TAT stories, male Navaho and Maya Indians. They exhibited the same tendency to personalize the world, to confuse their imagined stories with actual reality, and to confound attributes of self with those of reality. Their ego boundaries and the environment in which they live are re- flections of each other. Their lives are expressions of this fusion of self and environment. Their dwellings are outcrOppings of surrounding stone, clay, and thatch. They define themselves by clan and tribe names shared with others who are much like themselves. Causality is not an impersonal process but the result of the individual's thoughts and actions. A third eXpression of diffuse ego boundaries was found by Gutman in contemporary alienated youth. Dress and personal adornment are important means of abolishing boundaries as social, class, or ethnic distinctions. Through a "collage of garments" they can incorporate all the options of life rejected by the established middle class. Other expressions of the fusion of boundaries are seen by Gutman in their entertainment, j 35 use of drugs and social communal organization. Gutman's essay is based on little more substantial than his subjective impressions. At no point does he define the categories used in scoring the TAT's for "diffuse ego bounda- ries,” the number of scorers, interscorer reliability, manner of collecting TAT's, and other questions fundamental to the validity of the study. Such extreme comparisons which reduce human beings to the level of sub-human entities (which the designation of autocentric would do) cannot be accepted on faith. Internal-External Locus of Control The final body of theorizing and research to be reviewed here as an eXpression of differentiation of self and environ- ment concerns the construct internal-external locus of control. It seems particularly appropriate to end this literature review with I-E. There are many substantial studies that have demon- strated a consistent positive relationship between I-E and field-dependence -independence which, in turn, were shown to be positively correlated with Logos-Eros attention styles. These constructs are thus empirically and theoretically related, all sharing some conception of separation of self from an environmental context. Their definitions contain qualities which widely overlap with each other. The association of I-E and field-dependence -independence has been particularly investigated by Lefcourt and several associates. Lefcourt and Telegdi (1971) used an I-E measure 36 and the Rod and Frame Test to predict scores on measures reflecting cognitive activity. These consisted of Mednick's RemOte Associates Test, Barron's Human Movement Threshold Inkblot Test, and a sentence completion task. Subjects characterized by internal control and field-independence, surpassed the other subjects on each of the measures. Inter- estingly, the second best performance scores were obtained _ by external and field-dependent subjects. Poorest performance scores were obtained by the incongruous groups, subjects characterized by an internal locus of control and field- dependence and by those subjects characterized as external and field-independent. Neither I-E nor field-dependence ~independence alone produced a significant main effect. Significant results were obtained only in the combination of both. In another study on the joint effect of locus of control _and field-dependence -independence Lefcourt, Gronnerud and MacDonald (1971) predicted that internal field-independent subjects would be most adept at recognizing untoward occurrens ces during an eXperiment. The task consisted of a word associ- ation test which contained a gradually increasing number of sexual double entendres. The results showed that internals exhibited an excessive time delay earlier in the list than externals. This was interpreted by Lefcourt et al. as an earlier development of awareness. By contrast, external field-dependent subjects were the last to show an increase in the length of response time. Moreover, internal field- 37 independent subjects were also the first to make a sex response to the double entendres. However, the last of the subjects to respond with sex words were not the externals but the internal field-dependent subjects. Videotaped facial expressions of this group also indicated that its members showed more signs of puzzlement throughout the test. Internal field-independent subjects were thus found to be more cogni- tively alert and responsive than other subjects. They per- ceived the nature of the word list earlier, responded earlier ‘with more appropriate responses, and emitted facial expressions of ”knowing" what was taking place in the task sooner than other subjects. A variety of other studies have investigated cognitive differences between internal and external control orientations. Davis and Phares (1967) formulated a task in which subjects were asked to attempt to influence another subject's attitude toward the Viet Nam war. Subjects were given the impression that the experimenter had in his possession files of data about the peeple to be influenced. The dependent measure consisted of the number of questions that subjects asked about the individuals to be influenced. It was hypothesized that internals would seek more information than externals in order to be better prepared for the task. In addition, Davis and Phares also informed the subjects about the likelihood of their success. One group of subjects received skill directions, another luck directions, and the third group was given no 38 information about the likelihood of the‘success of their persuasion attempts. No differences in information seeking between internal and external subjects were found in the luck condition. In the two remaining conditions, skill instructions and no instructions, internals requested significantly more information than externals about the individuals they were to influence. Internals thus will engage in more preliminary data gathering than externals. This should increase the probability of success if the task had actually been administered. In a subsequent study Phares (1968) actually compared subjects characterized by internal and external locus of control for the extent to which they used information for decision making. He found that internals were, indeed, more effective in using information than were externals. In another study by Lefcourt, Lewis and Silverman (1968) internals and externals were found to differ in sheer attentive- ness alone. This difference, however, dependet on whether subjects perceived the task as skill or chance determined. Less inattentiveness was shown by internals who perceived the task as skill determined. This was measured by greater self- reported thought which was task relevant. This tendency was less true for internals who believed the task to be chance directed. Perceived controlability of the task produced no marked differences among external subjects. Another manner in which these differences were measured consisted of the time taken to make their responses. Greater time was taken when the task was perceived as skill determined. The converse 39 seemed to hold for externals who took more time when the task was perceived as task determined. Locus of control relates similarly to a variety of _ variables which have also been considered in conjunction with field-dependence and -independence and Eros-Logos attention styles. For lack of space, only one such variables will be considered. The variable is conformity and its variations, such as obedience, resistance to influence, etc. Early studies were concerned with the common sense hypothesis that locus of control would be strongly related to resistance to coercion. A study by Crowne and Liverant (1963) feund that subjects characterized by an external locus of control reported less confidence in their own judgments in an Asch-type task. They wagered less money than internals on the correctness of their judgments when making independent rather than conforming judgments. Many studies have considered the relationship of I-E to conformity and resistance to influence as measured by a large diverSity of instruments and techniques. Gore (1963), for example, showed that internals and externals responded differently toan examiner who attempted to influence subjects through smiling, intonation, etc. while administering the TAT. Externals produced longer TAT Stories whenever the examiner indirectly suggested that longer stories were desired. When the examiner made no suggestions, no difference in story lengths between internals and externals was obtained. Another set of studies employed a verbal conditioning paradigm to study the relationship of locus of control and 4O resistance to influence. Strickland (1970) found that I-E was related to subjects' denial of having been influenced by verbal reinforcement, with subjects characterized by .internal locus ofcontrol denying such influence more often than externals. When subjects' awareness of reinforcement contingencies was taken into account it was found that aware internals exhibited less conditioning than unaware internals, and less conditioning than either aware or unaware externals. Aware internals thus exhibited least conditioning. In yet another version of resistance to influence and I-E, Jackson, Ackerman, Frank, and Fionda (1968) investigated resistance to temptation and I-E. They used a story completion task in which the hero eXperiences social pressure to violate a social norm. The stories presented the hero in two situations: (1) he was at the point of making a decision to violate or uphold the social norm, (2) he had given in to the pressure and now had to face the consequences of breaking the norm, The results found a positive relationship between degree of internal locus of control and resistance to pressure. High ' internal subjects produced completed stories in which the hero resisted pressure to violate the social norm. In the story situation in which the transgression had already occurred, internals preduced stories in which the hero acknowledged his guilt. Externals did not acknowledge their guilt. These four theories and supporting studies represent theoretical and empirical support for the presence of individual differences in a broad tendency of differentiation 41 of the individual self from its environmental context. This context tends to be defined in the broadest possible terms. Results obtained in a narrowly defined laboratory task are generalized to characterize an individual's general manner of relating to the world around him. Hypotheses This study aims to focus on a particular aspect of the context from.which differentiation occurs, notably other people. The object is to determine the extent to which people do or do not differentiate themselves from others in several attitude measures. ' The following hypotheses are to be tested in this study: 1. There is an.uniqueness-anonymity dimension along which individuals define themselves. It was thought that an individual's general attitude about his uniqueness or (individuality could be measured by his agreement or disagree- ment with statements which reiterate the idea “I have property 'f" and no one else has property "f"". Such statements single_ the individual out from all others and, in effect, make him a class of his own, thereby demonstrating his uniqueness. A high incidence of agreement with such statements is an indi- cation of the individual's self-attributed uniqueness. 2. Synonymous expressions of exclusivity, in particular competition, should correlate positively with uniqueness. It was thought that uniqueness would be demonstrated through particular expressions of it. Such eXpressions were thought 42 to consist of concerns with achievement and competition. The advice Paul Goodman gave to American youths might be recalled again. He urged them to "make something of themselves" or, through career achievements, to become discrete from the rest of humanity which merely "is". Since there were existing questionnaire measures for achievement motivation, no such questionnaire was constructed. Concern with competition as an expression of uniqueness can be seen in such popular expressions as the close association of competition and great- ness found in the characterizations of many prominent men as "great competitors," in the admiration of competitive activi- ties and the people who excel in them, the football-hockey- baseball folk-heroes, in the positive values associated with being a "winner". Striving to win and to be best is a quest for exclusivity and, hence, for uniqueness. 3. Particular instances of the converse of unnpuaclass member- ship, or anonymity, should be negatively related to uniqueness and competition. Unsystematic observations suggest that activities defined as ”pleasing” and arguments concerning physiological determinism were expressions of anonymity. For example, the value of and quest for achievements which are a means of gaining distinction and uniqueness, are found unattractive in women whose function in life, according to Rousseau, ought to be concern for the needs of others. The following passage chides three prominent American women (Catharine Beecher, Margaret Fuller, and Carey Thomas) for having made themselves unlovely through their exceptional 43 achievements: ...They are all more readily venerated than loved. Men and other women often found them oppressive, and their aspirations made for friction...In Concord and Boston, Margaret Fuller played the bristling role of an ugly and learned woman...Carey Thomas cut her life to suit the angular pattern of her ambition; certain that marriage conflicted with her plans, she made of the pretty, bumptious girl of her youth a huge and formidable presence (B. M. Cross, p. 45).~ The point is, these women "cut a pattern” which suited their individual goals and lives rather than conform to the cultural mold which did not allow distinction from others through achievements. High agreement with statements expressing concern with ”pleasing" and conformity indicate a desire to "fit in” and be like others and, hence, indicate the extent to which an individual is anonymous. 4. Physiological determinism as an expression of anonymity should correlate positively with pleasing. Attitudes asserting ‘ the physiological origin and determination of all human concerns, that attribute a man's fate to heredity rather than social circumstances, were considered expressions of anonymity for two reasons: (1) Heredity arguments reduce the individual to just another member of his species. His state, whatever it may be, is due to a quality which he shares with every other member of his species.(2) Justifications based on physiological deter- minism are ubiquitous in explanations of the misfortunes of nearly every Western minority, dating back to Aristotle who defined slaves as "by nature" inferior (Politica, pp. 559-‘ 561). More than any other group, women are particularly identified with their physiological constitution. A host of 44 commentary bears witness to this tendency: Dr. R. S. Banay, psychologist; WOmen are restless and dissatisfied because they cannot or will not accept their physical destiny. Dr. A. Mandy, psychiatrist, Johns Hepkins University; Frigidity, as we see it today, is an outgrowth of woman's running away from her biological destiny, which is to be wife, mother, and homemaker. Dr. R. Centers, psychologist, UCLA One thing is certain. If mankind is to survive, woman cannot completely escape the feminine role imposed by her biological destiny (In Reeves, p. 6). A high incidence of agreement with statements asserting the importance of heredity and physiological constitution as the major force controlling an individual's destiny are, thus, expressions of anonymity and should be negatively related to uniqueness. The table below summarizes the predicted relationships between uniqueness, competition, pleasing and physiological determinism: Table 1: Predicted Relationships between Individual ' Identity Constructs ' Uniqueness Competition Pleasing Phys. Det. Uniqueness 1.00 + - - Competition + 1.00 O O Pleasing ' - o 1.00 + Phys. D813. . - 0 + 1.00 45 5. It was also predicted that the above variables would have correspondingly positive and negative relationships with actual instances of behavior. The following biographical variables were included to measure the extent of these relationships: (1) Sex It was predicted that males would score higher on uniqueness and competition than females who would score higher on pleasing and physiological determinism than would males. '(2) Grade point average (3) Participation in the Michigan presidential primary campaign of 1972 . . (4) Participation in the presidential campaign of 1972 (5) Participation in competitive sports I (6) Participation in other competitive activities It was predicted that grade point average, participation in campaigns and participation in competitive activities would be positively correlated with uniqueness and competition. (7) Time spent on grooming '(8) Money spent on clothing It was predicted that concerns with appearance expressed in the ambunt of tune spent on grooming and money spent on clothing would be positively correlated with pleasing and with physiological determinism. 6. For validation purposes and to determine how uniqueness, competition,pleasing and physiological determinism would relate to existing scales measuring related expressions of 46 exclusivity and anonymity, a scale measuring interest in status and a second scale measuring feelings of independence were chosen. It was hypothesized that these would correlate positively with uniqueness and competition. A measure of altruism.was included. It was hypothesized that, being an expression of anonymity, it would correlate positively with pleasing. Finally a measure of internal-external locus of control was added to determine the relationship of belief in physiological determinism with external control. It was hypothesized that belief in physiological determinism would correlate positively with belief in external control. METHOD Generatina Items for the Individual Identity Constructs 9* The first step in the study consisted of generating a pool of items for the four individual identity constructs: uniqueness, competition, pleasing and physiological deter- minism. Items were written for uniqueness which reiterate the form and content of the statement "I have property "f" and no one else has property "f”". See Appendix A for the original set of twenty items written to eXpress the uniqueness construct. Another group of items was written for competition which acknowledged the significance of participation in comp petitive activities and of excelling and "winning" (e.g. "My goal is to become the best in whatever I do"). A third set of items was written for a pleasing scale which stressed the individual's desire to avoid arousing the displeasure of others (e.g. "There are many things I would do, if I were certain peeple would not disapprove of them") and to be agree- able ("To win the approval of people, I try to do what would please them"). Finally, items were written for the physio- logical determinism construct which expressed the importance of heredity as the major force controlling an individual's destiny, such as "My physiology determines who I will become”. 47 48 The pool of items was distributed to a total of twelve peeple, six professors of psychology at Michigan State Uni-‘ versity and six graduate students of psychology also at Michigan State University. They were familiar with the theoretical speculations, hypotheses and assumptions which led to the formulation of the four constructs. They were asked to read the items, make any stylistic and content modifications they deemed necessary and to add any new items which occurred to them. Those modifications on which most agreement was obtained and those which seemed intuitively reasonable were adopted. The final pool of eighty items was administered to 61 male and 83 female subjects enrolled in beginning psychology courses at Michigan State University in Spring, 1972. They received class credit for their participation. Subjects were asked to indicate on a multiple choice answer sheet their agreement or disagreement with the items on a five pointscale. The items representing the four constructs were interspersed and presented to subjects in a questionnaire booklet. A preliminary refinement of theitem pool consisted in forming a correlation matrix of all the items and deleting any itum 1f.it did not correlate with any of the items in the g’priori grouping of which it was a member (e.g. uniqueness, competition, etc) sud if it did not correlate with any of the other items in the remaining groupings. At this initial stage of analysis the items of the uniqueness grouping separated into three clusters. These clusters were retained and _ . 49 subsequently expanded. A second effort to generate items had to be made to expand the three 5 to 7 item clusters obtained from the uniqueness items. From the indications oftheir content these three groups of items were called "Uniqueness," Socially- Dubious Expressions of Uniqueness" and "Desire to be Unique." Appendix B lists the items in each grouping and the revised lists of items for the remaining constructs. The groupings expressing pleasing and competition were, in part, drastically reduced (pleasing lost only a few items while only four items of the competition group correlated with each other). New items were written for these constructs. The remaining items of the physiological determinism grouping correlated well internally and were left unaugmented. These items formed the new pool of 149 items. The items were interspersed with questions of four scales measuring . concerns with status, independence, altruism and internal- external control which were included at this point of the experiment. These scales are also listed in Appendix B. In addition, seven questions were prepared which asked subjects, for related biographical information, such as their partici- pation in competitive activities or the amount of time spent on grooming each day. These are listed in Appendix B. All items, except the biographical items which appeared at the end of the questionnaire, were scaled using a five point Likert scale (1 a strongly disagree, 5 - strongly agree). This set of items was administered to a second, larger 50 sample. Based on this new set of responses, intercorrelations among the items were computed and subsequently subjected to a detailed cluster analysis. This analysis constituted the main evidence for the individual identity hypotheses prOposed earlier. The correlation matrix was based on 208 items: 149 new items, sex of subject, seven biographical variables and four scales published by other authors: (1) Uniqueness - 47 items (2) Socially Dubious Expressions of Uniqueness - 20 items (3) Desire to be Unique - 21 items (4) Competition - 22 items (5) Pleasing - 24 items (6) Physiological Determinism - 15 items (7) Status from W. Scott's Personal Value Scales (1965) - 16 items (8) Independence from L. wrightsman's Philosophies of Human . Nature Scales (1964) - 14 items ’ (9) Altruism from L. Wrightsman's PhiloSOphies of Human Nature Scales (1964) - 11 items (10) Personal Control subscale of Gurin's Internal-External Control Scale (1969) -.10 items. Where necessary, items of these scales were rephrased to the first person singular. Subjects, Data Collection and Data Processing The data were collected during the summer, fall and winter of 1972-1973. On all occasions data were collected from both males and females. Two procedures were used: 51 (1) subjects were recruited during regular class meetings of several first and second year psychology courses. They were asked to take the questionnaire home, complete it, and return 'it at a later class meeting for research credit. (2) subjects were recruited by posting the date and place of the admini- stration of the questionnaire. Subjects could volunteer for 'these scheduled questionnaires for research credit. The directions were identical to the directions used in the first administration of the questionnaire (see Appendix A). Subjects were again asked to answer every single question and to indicate their answers on a multiple choice answer sheet. . i The following criteria were used for eliminating data: (1) Questionnaires in which more than 5% or 10 items were left unanswered were excluded from analysis (2) Scoring sheets which indicated that they were filled in arbitrarily ’- e.g. l, 2, 3. 4,.5.74. 3, 2, l,...etc., alternate rows of numbers filled in, etc. In other questionnaries missing data were. filled in with the means for the particular unanswered items. Data of 432 subjects remained. Of these 180 were males and 252 females. ~ A 4 Criteria for Developipg Clusters. The criteria used to group items into clusters were: (1) Items' correlations within the clusters (internal con- sistency). (2) Similarity of correlations of items across clusters (external consistency or parallelism). (3) Similarity of stated content of items. 52 High internal consistency of clusters is indicated by the level of correlations within the cluster, by whether the interitem correlations form a flat Spearman matrix or whether they constitute a systematically decreasing gradient. High I internal consistency does not insure that items measure the same variable. The respective items must also correlate in a "parallel" fashion with other variables. Finally, items in a cluster must share a "similar" verbal content. This last criterion is least definable formally. The judgment of the investigator was used to decide on the extent to which items shared ideational content. RESULTS Using the ORDER program contained in PACKAGE (Hunter and Cohen, 1969) a reordered correlation matrix was obtained of items representing the constructs Of Uniqueness, Deviance, Desire for Distinction, Competition, Pleasing, Physiological Determinism. This matrix was inspected for cluster formations using the criteria defined earlier. Seven clusters and thirty subclusters were identified. The clusters and subclusters are listed below. The number Of items in each is indicated in parentheses: UNIQUENESS (18) GENERAL UNIQUENESS (s) UNIQUE ABILITIES (3) UNIQUE INTERESTS (3) PERSONAL CREATIVITY (2) PERSONAL IMPORTANCE (l) UNIQUE ACTIVITIES (l) DESIRE FOR LEADERSHIP (9) LEADERSHIP IN GROUPS (3) LEADERSHIP IN CLASS (2) ENJOYMENT OF LEADERSHIP IN CLASS (2) I AM A LEADER (2) DEVIANCE (7) CONSPICUOUS (l) 53 54 ATTEMPT TO BE DIFFERENT '(3) DEVIANCE , (3) PLEASING (23) DISAPPROVAL IS UPSETTING (5) COMPLIANCE OUT OF FEAR OF DISAPPROVAL (7) DESIRE FOR APPROVAL (4) NONCONPORMITY (3) DIFFERENTIATION (4) DESIRE FOR DISTINCTION (11) PHANTASIES ON DISTINCTION (2) NEED FOR DISTINCTION (3) NEED FOR RECOGNITION (3) NEED FOR CONTROL (3) COMPETITION (17) IMPROVED PERFORMANCE THROUGH COMPETITION (s) LOSING HURTS (3) DISTINCTION THROUGH COMPETITION (5) ‘DESIRE FOR EXCELLENCE (l) PHYSIOLOGICAL DETERMINISM (11) PHYSIOLOGY ISDESTINY (5) SEX IS DESTINY ( (2) ABILITIES ARE INHERITED . (2) BODILY CONSTITUTION IS DESTINY (2) The subsequent cluster analysis proceeds from (1) a description of the thematic content of the clusters and . subclusters (2) a list of tables exhibiting the correlations of items within clusters, of the respective items and all other subclusters, of the respective subclusters and all other subclusters (3) a discussion of the relationships among 55 the newly created clusters (4) a discussion of the relations ships between the newly created clusters, the four existing scales, the seven biographical variables and sex. Information about item.means and standard deviations is given in.Appendix C. The means and reliabilities of clusters and subclusters are also given in Appendix C. Thematic Content of Individual Identit . CIusters Uniqueness The content Of the items in this cluster acknowledge unique class membership in statements which reiterate the idea "I have property "f" and no one else has property ”f"". Most of the items do not specify the nature of this distingui- shing property. At most, they refer to a broad area (such as general ability, interests, creativity) which distinguish the individual, but these, too, are not further identified. General Uniqueness. This subcluster expresses a general state of being unique. Its statements claim that the individual has some qualities which are characteristic only of him and which distinguish him from others. The qualities are not specified. . 19. I am a unique individual. I have attributes that . mark my unique identity. 23. I am uniquely different from other people. (-) 29. When I compare myself to other peOple, I find that there is nothing, or very little, which distinguishes me from them. 4. I don't perceive myself as an "average" person, as resembling most people in thought, manner and dress. 56 ‘30. When I compare myself to other peOple, I find that I am different from most peOple. 24. There is no person just exactly like me in the entire world. 37. I know of no one else who is quite like me. 22. I have an outlook toward people which is entirely ‘ my own and which demonstrates my individuality. (Note: Minus signs before item.numbers will be used to indicate . that the items are negatively scored in relation to the other items of the group). Unique Abilities. The statements in this subcluster assert that the individual has abilities which are unique to him. These abilities are not identified. 20. I have abilities and skills that are unique only ~ to me.‘ ' 21. There are things I can do which no one else can do. 33. I have one (or more) exceptional abilities. Unique Interests. One item of this cluster is a direct statement of unique interests. The other items specify the interests more concretely as hobbies or ambitions. 34. I have unique hobbies. 31. I have unique interests. 44. My ambitions make me different from most people. Personal Creativity. The two items of this subcluster attribute creativity and originality to the individual. 27. I am good at creative thinking. 41. I often have original ideas. Desire for Leadership The general themeof this cluster concerns the desire for leadership. This is eXpressed directly as a desire to be a leader and more indirectly in the participation in situations in which the individual has principally a directing function and in the enjoyment of directing activities. The situations' 57 in.which the individual participates and seeks leadership are identified in general terms as "groups" and, more speci- fically, as the ”class". The theme of this cluster relates to uniqueness in the sense that it is a particular eXpression of unique class membership. Leadership requires an "outside” perspective which assesses the activities of others and points these in a certain direction. Leadership in Groups. The content of this subcluster stresses participation in groups for the sake Of leadership and enjoyment of leadership. 10. I only participate in groups in which I can be a leader. 7 13. I enjoy group activities if I can demonstrate to . others that I am different from them (by becoming the leader, for example) rather than similar to them. 11. I enjoy group activities for the attention and recognition I receive from other people. Leadership in Class. This subcluster shows the individual initiating and directing classroom activities. 14. I often speak up in class. 16. I often initiate and direct classroom activities. Enjoypent Of Leadership in Class. This subcluster stresses the individual's enjoyment of his directing influence and impact on the class. 15. I enjoy the attention and recognition I receive when I Speak up in class. . 17. I enjoy a class only if I can contribute to it significantly. I am a Leader. The items of this subcluster assert that the individual is a leader through his "taking charge" and his desire for leadership. 58 9. In groups I often take charge and direct the activities Of the group. 25. I would rather be a leader than a follower. Deviance The theme Of this cluster is concerned with being different from others in socially suspect ways. The degree of deviance ranges from being merely conspicuous to being unorthodox and strange. The ideational content of this theme is related to the uniqueness construct. Although most of the items do not claim unique class membership for the individual, they do stress that he is different, albeit in some socially dubious manner, from others. Conspicuous. This one-item cluster is a forthright statement of being conspicuous. 61. I am conspicuous in a crowd. Attempt to be Different. In this subcluster the indi- vidual admits to seeking and having engaged in activities to demonstrate his difference from others. On the whole, implied negative value judgments on these efforts are low. 70. I search for even unorthodox ways to show that I am different. 67. I have done some far out things just to be different. 62. I try to gain recognition even through means which some peOple don't accept. Deviant. The statements of this subcluster declare that the individual is different. Moreover, they all contain an adverse value judgment of this difference. Rather than being esteemed for being different, the individual is considered to be peculiar. 59 63. I differ from people in ways which many people would criticize. 65.-Some people might consider me strange. 66. Some people might consider my outlook as weird. Pleasing Pleasing is concerned with conformity in order to maintain personal worth through the approval of others. An implied component Of pleasing may be gregariousness, the . enjoyment of others' company. The major theme of this cluster is concerned with the desire for approval and the effects of disapproval. In particular, it is concerned with the desire .for approval, the emotionally adverse effects of disapproval and criticism, and with compliance to avoid disapproval. Desire for approval is expressed directly in statements which assert that approval is sought by the individual. Concern with pleasing, however, is expressed indirectly by most of the items. These assert that disapproval is emotionally upsetting and that disapproval results in compliance. Disapppoval is Upsetting. The items Of this subcluster reiterate the idea that disapproval and criticism is emotio- nally distressing and personally devaluing. 206. Criticism of my appearance upsets me. 212. I get tense and anxious when I think other peOple are disapproving of me. 223. I take criticism personally. '224. I feel humiliated and hurt when people criticize my position. (-) 209. I don't condemn myself if other people disapprove of me. Compliance out of Fear of Disapproval. Disapproval and criticism directly modifies behavior. It is suggested that 60 the Cause of conforming behavior is lowered self worth generated by disapproval. Actions are, therefore, undertaken only after the views and positions of others have been con- sidered. 207. Criticism of my actions causes me to change them. 208. Criticism Of my ideas causes me to give them up. 210. There are many things I would do, if I were certain people would not disapprove Of them. 211. I don't say much at social gatherings because I'm afraid people will criticize me and laugh at me. 216. I try to see what others think before I take a Stand. 217. Before I do something, I consider how people will react to it. 213. I try not to disagree with anyone. Desire for Approval. The items state the importance of gaining approval. 201. My major concern is that peOple like me. 202. To win the approval Of peOple I try to do what would please them. 203. My goal in life is to be desirable. 54. In order to get along, I tend to be what people expect me to be. Item 54 fits thematically better into cluster NONCONPORMITY below. A future refinement Of this study should consider thiS-grouping. Nonconformi y. This cluster is negatively correlated witthhe above pleasing clusters. Its items are assertions of nonconformity. It is intuitively reasonable that the relationship Of this cluster be negative to the other pleasing clusters. Nonconformity represents a challenging attitude. An individual concerned with the acceptance and approval of others cannot afford to be challenging. 61 18. I am a nonconformist. (~) 45. I tend to be a crowd follower. ' 5. I do not follow the crowd in many of my thoughts and actions. . (This cluster is reversed in scoring when it is made a part of PLEASING). Differentiation. This cluster is also negatively corre- lated with the pleasing clusters. It states that the individual (does not mind being different from others. The items state both the feet that the individual is different from others and his attitude about this difference. He does not mind it. The negative relationship of this cluster to the other pleasing clusters is due to reasons given for cluster NON- CONFORMITY. A person concerned with acceptance cannot afford the challenging attitude suggested in the acceptance of personal difference from others. (-) 52. I feel uneasy when I stand out from others. 55. I like the feeling of security that comes from knowing that I'm.not too different from others. 57. It does not bother me that peOple don't like the fact that I am different from them. 59. I donit mind being noticeably different from others. - (This subcluster is reversed in scoring when it is made a part of PLEASING). Desire for Distinction The items of this cluster express the desire for dis— tinction, or to"be somebody”. This is expressed in phanta- sies about distinction, wishes for distinction and striving for distinction. 62 Phantasies on Distinction. This subcluster asserts that the individual has phantasies about being a great and famous person. 7 101. my secret ambition is to become a great individual. 107. I have phantasies in which I am a famous personality. Need for Distinction. The items of this subcluster are concerned with the significance an individual attaches to becoming an important person. 103. It is very important that I make something of ’ myself and be somebody. 104. I could not tolerate being a nobody. 120. My goal in life is to become an important person. Need for Recognition. This subcluster asserts the individual's desire that his possible or actual distinction be acknowledged through the recognition of others. 102. If I were a great person, I would enjoy most of all people's recognition and being in the spot- 109. Life is most worth while if one has distinction ‘and recognition. 119. I wish people would recognize my creative abilities. Need for Control. This subcluster states the individual's desire to control others. 115. In groups I wish I could take charge and control the activities of the group. 116. I wish I had the personality of a leader. 117. I desire to influence and control other peOple. Thematically this cluster is more consistent with the DESIRE FOR LEADERSHIP supercluster. A future refinement of this study should consider this grouping. 65 Competition I The general theme of this cluster is that competition improves performance and results in distinction for the individual. The areas in which performance is improved are specified only in one case - graded courses. Otherwise, they refer in general terms to "abilities," "work," "skills”. The kind of distinction obtainable through competition is not particularly clarified either. It is "winning” and being the best. Winning does not necessarily apply solely to sports, since it is a metaphor used to designate any success. Several items suggest that competition contains an element of self- worth. Successful competition enhances self-worth while losing diminishes it. Distinction through Competition. Distinction can be had through competition. The kind of distinction is not specified but is referred to as "winning" and being best. 151. For me, winning the game is at least as important as playing the game. ’ 156. I am impelled to show that I am better than others in competitive situations. 157. The greatest merit of competition is that it allows the best person to show that he is best. 166. To gain the recognition of other people I aim for superior performance in competitive situations. 168. Winning demonstrates to others that I am exceptional. Improved Performance through Competitigg. This cluster asserts that competition improves performance. The areas of improvement are stated in general terms as "abilities,“ "work”. 64 .162. The quality of my own work declines without the . pressure of competition. 163. I work harder in graded courses than in pass- fail courses. ‘ 164. The quality of my work improves under the pressure of competition. ‘ 170. I work harder in competitive situations. 171. Competition pressures me to develop my abilities. 172. Winning pressures me into doing even better next. time o ‘ > 155. Competition compels me to test and demonstrate my skills against those of others. 165. I am a competitor. Losing Hurts. The theme here is that losing is emotionally upsetting-and personally devaluing. It is this cluster, in particular, which suggests the involvment of self-worth in competition. 158. I'm not a good loser. 159. I feel humiliated whenever I lose. 160. Losing pressures me into doing better next time. Desire for Excellence..This one-item cluster asserts ‘ the individual's desire for excellence. 152. my goal is to become the best in.whatever I do. Physiological Determinism The theme of this cluster asserts that an individual's physiological makeup determines who he is. More particularly, it-determines what he can do, his abilities and emotional disposition. The particular aspects of physiology which have this influence are stated in general terms or identified as. sex, heredity, body build. The particular things which are physiologically determined are also stated generally or identified as actions, emotional predispositions, abilities, intelligence. 65 Pnysiology is Destiny. The physiological constitution of an individual determines what he does. 251. The actions of people are biologically determined. 252. my physiological constitution determines what I do. 254. If I am a failure in some area, it is because of some innate physiological deficiency. 255. If I am successful in some area, it is due to an innate physiological proficiency. ‘ 257. my physiology determines who I will become. Sex is Destiny. An individual's gender determines his emotional predisposition and his abilities. 259. Active or passive emotional dispositions are determined by the sex of the individual. 264. The different abilities of males and females are due to inherent biological differences between them. Abilities Are Inherited. Abilities and intelligence are inherited rather than learned. 260. Physiological differences are more important in causing differences in intelligence than are cultural factors. 261. Heredity plays the major role in determining the kind of person an individual will become. Bodily Constitution is Destiny. Bodily constitution determines people's actions and emotional predispositions. 262. BOdy build (height,.weight) is important in determining emotional disposition. 256. People act differently because they are made differently. 7 Residual Cluster Twenty items were placed into the residual cluster. These are listed in Appendix D. 66 The items for Status, Independence, Altruism, Internal- External Locus of Control were not included in the above cluster analysis because of the cumbersome size and numbers of items and clusters. They are briefly analyzed subsequent to the consideration of the individual identity clusters. Correlation Matrices of vIndIvIdEEI Identity Clusters The correlation matrix of all items and clusters is contained in its entirety in Appendix E. The following tables represent correlations of items within clusters, of items and all thirty subclusters. These are corrected for unreliability, except for single item clusters which could not readily be corrected for attenuation. The diagonal entries of the item correlation matrices give the communalities. These represent the specific reliabilities of items in the clusters to which they belong. A list of cluster labels preceeds the tables for ready identification of clusters. ' List of Cluster Labels I Unigueness ' 501. General Uniqueness (19, 25, 29, 4, 50, 24, 57, 22) 502. Unique Abilities (20, 21, 55 505. Unique Interests 54 51, 44 504. Personal Creativity $27 .41) ‘ 505. Personal Importance 28 506. Unique Activities (58) Desire for Leadershin 507. Leadership in Groups (10, 15, 11) 508. Leadership in Class (14, 16 509. Enjoyment of Leadership in Class (15, 17) 510. I am a Leader (9, 25) 67 Deviance 511. Conspicuous (61) 512. Attempt to be Different (70, 67, 62) 515. Deviant (65, 65, 66) Pleasing 514. Disapproval is Upsetting (206, 212, 225, 224, 209) 515. Compliance out of Fear of Disapproval (207, 208, 210, 211, 216, 217, 213) 516. Desire for Approval (201 202, 203, 54) 517. Nonconformity (18, 45. 5 518. Differentiation (52. 55. 57. 59) Desire for Distinction 519. Phantasies on Distinction (101, 107 520. Need for Distinction 2105, 104, 120 521. Need for Recognition 102, 109, 119 522. Need for Control (115, 116, 117) Connetition 525. Improved Performance through Competition (162, 165, 164, 170, 171, 172, 155, 165) 524. Losing Hurts (158, 159, 160) 525. Digtinction through Competition (151, 156, 157, 16 168 526. Desire for Excellence (152) Physiological Determinism 527. Physiology is Destiny (251, 252, 254, 255, 257) 528. Sex is Destiny (259, 264) 529. Abilities are Inherited (260, 261) 550. Bodily Constitution is Destiny (262, 256). Table 2: __l§__12___9 15 1 22 21 27 8 14 15 -5 .-18 -2 1 15 -3 11 6 17 3 -14 9 ~19 -28 -19 -58 -29 -11 -4 -13 -10 3 -8 -1o 7 -23 -23 -17 -58 68 Cluster UNIQUENESS Correlation Matrix M“— _.... 51 28 56 26 58 59 40 51 20 16 17 12 25 19 19 16 __1fi__ 8 17 11 15 11 -0 4 0 Vl6__15__18 5 9 18 22 12 13 11 24 -12 -15 -7 -45 -28 15 3 1 -6 -6 -3 -1 2 -13 -15 ~18 -29 0 14 -0 25 -5 -15 -12 ~34 -25 15 11 4 16 16 11 7 -8 -3 -10 -10 5 2 8 -2 -12 -19 -24 -17 5 5 15 3 9 -7 -2 4 -14 -5 -1 4 —-————. A- 9 0 15 6 15 29 22 20 21 38 27 21 51 5 52 14 17 9 4 20 21 22 21 18 22 25 21 17 22 13 16 29 17 29 46 55 17 55 62 19 20 27 16 28 33 5O 55 52 18 17 18 13 14 25 13 9 19 21 16 18 21 18 17 40 48 37 55 67 80 37 44 47 19 17 52 21 16 18 21._18___ 7 23 20 11 11 17 5 29 52 11 5 8 0 10 9 5 18 18 6 7 10 6 -5 -2 1 2 -0 5 9 -0 -7 -10 -11 -0 -3 -6 21 24 13 22 13 11 26 52 21 51 19 22 15 15 10 -15 -10 -9 -21 lZ__21__11__ZZ_.19__19 7 -1 4 6 14 4 2 12 17 24 —6 -14 -5 -23 -12 6 12 7 12 6 14 21 51 -5 -15 -11 -32 -29 17 4 8 15 5 11 10 1 -12 -8 0 4 8 25 24 18 9 15 7 -12 -11 -5 -20 -16 52 15 27 4 -5 -6 O‘O\&# H0\ 28 -11 2 58 501 502 505 504 505 506 79 68 47 39 70 51 48 45 23 37 39 31 58 51 28 39 48 36 40 52 26 31 40 35 37 48 67 44 37 80 47 36 33 4o 37 49 67 53 51 74 41 28 36 26 33 29 28 30 33 40 32 36 .30__3fi__33 1§__19_190 100 67 75 59 40 50 67 100 75 46 52 55 75 75 100 45 56 55 59 46 45 100 24 16 4O 52 56 24 100 19 __30_. 35.43-16.19100- 12 28 5 19 5. 9 25 52 24 51 15 14 14 44 21 55 5 ' 8 52 19 8 26 27 18 15 18 26 15 9 14 8 28 51 22 4 51 52 15 42 15 9 40 -12 -11 -6 -16 -21 -12 -27 -5 -20 -22 -19 -14 -17 0 -7 1 -19 -5 -52 -25 -46 -25 -28 -11 -36 -17 ~26 -24 -30 -15 20 29 16 57 10 12 19 27 11 14 7 5 17 41 19 41 9 5 8 8 7 2 11 16 15 9 4 -2 6 -0 4 13 -4 -7 3 5 21 6 14 1 -0 15 20 5 5 6 -2 —25 5 -14 11 -11 5 -23 5 -5 s -7 -7 -12 9 4 -1 -7 1 -9 17 17 15 2 -9 10 15 11 14 16 15 17 25' 501 502 505 504 505 506 A 507 509 510 511 512 515 514 515 516 517 518 519 520 521 522 525 524 525 526 527 528 529 550 69 Table 5: Cluster DESIRE FOR LEADERSHIP Correlation matrix 10 13 11 14 16 15 17 9 25 507 508 509 510 31 33 25 12 14 16 18' 14 8 55 18 31 17 33 35 27 15 22 23 23 24 26 59 26 42 39 25 27 23 9 12 28 12 18 12 47 15 37 23 12 15 9 52 48 31 29 36 23 22 71 54 45 14 22 12 48 52 29 26 39 14 30 71 50 40 16 23 28 31 29 33 28 18 9 42 43 55 21 18 23 12 29 26 28 33 13 12 33 39 55 19 14 24 18 36 39 18 13 45 41 36 54 29 66 8 26 12 23 14 9 1g 41 45 29 26 19 66 ~7 16 10 22 13 12 3 20 23 12 25 14 ‘32“ 12 20 13 19 27 26 23 16 10 28 32 44 19 ~4 12 ~0 16 17 12 11 9 2 5 24 21 8 5 3 22 16 28 17 19 28 5 19 31 33 26 2 5 ~3 11 11 4 -1 18 18 3 ,15 3 27 , 2 13 ~0 9 11 4 4 11 12 9 149 8 18 55* 59 47 22 30 42* 33 36 29 100 37 68 49 18 26 15 71 71 43 39 54 26 37 100 74 60 31 42 37 54 50 55 55 29 19 68 74.100 37 17 39 2 45 40 21 19 66 66 49 ,59 31,1og__ ‘14—‘20“‘g‘“16“19“13 127* 6* 4 ~26 25 23 7 35 37 34 5 22 28 24 5 13 66 19 47 14 0 12 12 1 14 5 2 5 7 15_ 10 6 9 13 12 27 ~21 ~14 5 5 ~19 ~8 32 ~25 9 ~21 13 0 21 ~31 ~18 ~5 ~1 ~14 ~19 21 ~35~ ~6 ~25 18 21 35 ~22 ~4 12 7 0 ~9 46 -18 17 ~6 17 2 18 ~29 ~11 o ~9 ~23 ~23 23 ~29 ~8 ~35 10‘ ~4 18 ~23 ~20 ~0 ~2 ~25 ~26 15 ~30 ~2 ~39 10 33 41 5 10 30 18 21 26 32 11 44 36 7 30 -56 8 8 37 26 16 21 45 -12 57 29 33 39 59 -6 11 42 30 30 28 82 4 65 44 28 42 39 5 8 27 22 23 42 68 9 45 49 6 26 26 5 7 12 19 17 22 36 9 28 30- 17 24 27 ~1 9 20 15 9 21 41 6 31 22 29 4o 41 5 12 26 30 17 25 ‘68 12 50 32 ~4 9 13 3 12 9 9 3 5 11 10 16 6 36 16 15 ~5 17 10 18 ~3 ~12 42 8 25 ~11 18 ~2 12 ~10 7 5 17 7 ~1 18 ~2 20 4 20 6 5 ~3 8 6 8 ~0 ~6 19 4 12 ~5 15 3 14 ~35 5 15 11 ~7 -5 20 ~21 23 ~10 70 Table 4: Cluster DEVIANCE Correlation Matrix 61 70 67 62 65 65 66 511 512 515 61 100 19 20 19 18 15 14 100 56 25 70 19 40 59 25 15 15 19 19 64 25 67 20 59 56 21 24 17 19 20 60 51 62 19 25 21 15 14 10 15 19 57 19 65 ; 18 15 24 14 22 54 55 18 55 46 65 15 15 17. 10 54 58 58 15 26 76 66 14 19 19 15 55 58 55 14 52 74 501 15 5 10 ~2 55 155416 15 8 ’52 502 18 18 16 12 12 8 9 18 28 15 505 26 13 20 16 55 26 25 26 514 42 504 15' 19 20 ~4 9 11 6 15 22 15 505 , 9 4 8 ~6 12 ~1 7 9 4 9 506 . 14 15 26 9 25 28 26 14 51 40‘ 507 26 55 55‘ 57 12 8 8 26 66 15 508 25 10 15 8 12 7 2 25 19 10 509 25 22 24 29 7 5 2 25 47 6 510 7 9 8 5 9 1 7 7 l4 9 511 100 19 20 19 18 15 14 100 56 25 512 56. 64 60 57‘ 55 26 52 56 100 46 515 25 25 51 19 46 76 74 25 46 100 514 ' -5 4 9 4 ~8 ~7 -9 '5 11 ~12 515 ~0 l9 2 4 ~17 ~11 ~6 ~0 16 ~17 516 7 21 7 11 ~19 ~10 ~6 7 24 ~18 517 ~14 15 -8 ~o ~42 ~25 ~21 ~14 4 ~45 518 ~12 ~8 ~6 -4 ~28 ~23 ~15 ~12 ~11 ~54 519 14 17 17 22 10 ~4 6 14 55 7 520 9 17 14 30 2 ~12 ~14 9 38 ~12 521 21 56 25 -31 ~1 ~13 ~4 21 57 -9 522 . 17 24 20 16 9 11 7 17 58 14 525 4 8 12 14 4 ~5 ~8 4 21 ~4 1524 15 17 11 18 12 19 18 15 29 25 525 18 29 14 19 3 ~4 ~1 18 39 -1 526 6 8 5 2 -2 ~9 -9 6 8 ~10 527' 12 22 11 11 l ~4 ~5 12 28 ~4 528 5 7 ~4 7 ~13 ~21 ~25 5 6 ~30 529 ' 5 13 9 5 ~0 ~12 ~o 5 l7 ~6 530 13 11 26 16 12 ~9 ~1 13 33 1 Table 28 ._18__1 68 47 51 25 2: .Z___9__1i__1_._15__1 70 45 59 51 48 5 51 683 Cluster UNIQUENESS Correlation Matrix ...Zd_. 28 56 26 55 8 21 2 59 45 57 58 59 40 51 57 56 22 20 20 16 17 12 19 28 20 17 25 19 19 16 21 __}§__12__.9__14__16__15_.1§__ZLW. 15 11 ~5 U 5 9 7 22 ~O 21 27 8 14 15 ~3 ~17 -4 ~27 .~18 ~2 15 11 6 17 3 ~14 9 ~19 ~28 ~19 ~38 ~29 ~11 -4 ~13 ~1o 3 ~8 ~1o 7 ~23 ~23 ~17 ~38 ~15 17 13 11 11 18 22 13 14 11 ~o 24 25 ~12 -5 ~15 -12 ~34 ~25 ~7 ~45 ~28 1s 3 15 1 11 ~6 4 ~6 16 ~3 l6 ~1 11 2 7 ~13 ~8 ~15 ~3 ~18 ~10 ~29 ~10 4 0 12 5 2 8 ~2 ~12 ~19 ~24 ~17 5 5 15 5 9 ~7 ~2 4 ~14 -5 -1 4 9 0 15 6 15 29 21 28 56 16 10 12 55 29 5O 55 100 19 ___ _. __19_109- 41 26 28 4O 5O 52 55 56 55 16 68 68 24 16 21 17 16 100 191.19.1LZ_1191199- 6 7 12 6 14 21 51 -5 ~13 ~11 ~52 ~29 17 4 8 15 5 11 10 1 ~12 -8' 8 19 19 5 9 25 24 18 9 15 7 ~12 ~11 -5 ~20 ~16 52 15 27 18 15 14 21 5 8 17 27 18 9 15 10 -9 ~18 6 ~14 ~17 19 \ 5 29 9 4 9 ~21 ~19 ~19 ~28 -30 10 7 9 2 ~2 ~7 1 6 ~11 -7 -7 2 14 51 40 ~12 -14 -5 ~11 ~15 12 5 5 11 6 5 -0 -2 5 -7 1 T9 75 59 46 40 52 52 44 19 18 8 28 15 ~11 ~5 59 71501_35__}1___ _. 100 67 75 39 40 3o 67 100 73 46 32 35 73 100 45 36 33 56 58 501 502 505 504 505 506 lé__19_190 45 100 24 16 56 24 100 19 24 21 26 31 33 26 13 22 13 ~16 ~22 1 ~25 ~24 37 14 41 7 4 ~4 .50_ 55.-)5._15_19__190- 1' 28 5 l9 5. 15 3. 27 9 4 9 ~21 ~19 ~19 ~28 -50 9 69 Table 3: Cluster DESIRE FOR LEADERSHIP Correlation Matrix 10 15 11 14 16 15 17 9 25 507 508 509 510 10 51 55 25 12 14 16 18‘ 14 8 55 18 51 17 15 55 55 27 15 22 25 25 24 26 59 26 42 59 11 25 27 25 9 12 28 12 18 12 47 15 57 25 14 12 15 9 52 48 51 29 56 25 22 71 54 45 16 14 22 12 48 52 29 26 59 14 50 71 50 40 15 16 25 28 51 29 55 28 18 9 42 45 55 21 17 18 25 12 29 26 28 55 15 12 55 59 55 19 ‘9 14 24 18 56 59 18 15 45 41' 56 54 29 66 25" 8 26 12 25 14 9 12 41 45 29 26 19 66 501. ~7 16 10 22 15 12 5 20 25 12 25 14 52 502 12 20 15 19 27 26 25 16 10 28 52 44 19 505 ‘ -4 12 ~0 16 17 12 11 9 2 5 24 21 8 504 5 ' 5 22 16 28 17 19 28 5 19 51 55 426 505 2 5 '5 11 11 4 -1 18 18 5 .15 5 27 506 2 15 ~0 9 11 4 4 11 12 9 14 8 18 ‘ 507 53 59 47 22 3o 42 33 36 29 100 37 68 49 508 18 26 15 71 71 43 39 54 26 37 100 74 60 509 31 42 37 54 50 55 55 29 19 68 74.100 37 510 17 39 23 45 4o 21 19 66 66 49 6o 37 100 4 26* 25 23 7 512 35 37 34 5 22 28 24 5 13 66 19 47 14 513 o 12 12 1 14 5 2 5 7 15 10 6 9 514A 13 12 27 ~21 ~14 5 5 ~19 ~8 32 ~25 9 ~21 515 13 o 21 ~31 ~18 ~5 ~1 ~14 ~19 21 ~35 ~6 ~25 516 18 21 35 ~22 -4 12 7 o ~9 . 46 ~18 17‘ ~6 517 17 2 18 ~29 ~11 o ~9 ~23 ~23 23 ~29 ~8 ~35 518 10 ~4 18 ~23 ~20 ~o ~2 ~25 ~26 15 ~30 ~2 ~39 519 10 33 41 5 1o 30 18 ‘21 26 52 11 44 36 520 7 3o <36 8 8 37 26 16 21 45 12 57 29 521 33 39 59 ~6 11 42 3o 30 28 82 4 65 44 522 28 42 39 5 8 27 22 23 42 68 9 45 49 523 6 26 26 5 7 12 19 17 22 36 9 28 30' 524 17 24 27 ~1 9 20 15 9 21 41 6 31 22 525 29 4o 41 5 12 26 3o 17 25 ‘68 12 so 32w 526 ~4 9 13 3 12 9 9 3 5 11 1o_ 16 6 527 36 16 15 ~5 17 1o 18 ~3 ~12 42 8 25 ~11 528 » 18 .~2 12 ~10 7 5 17 7 ~1 18 ~2 20 4 529 20 6 5 ~3 8 6 8 ~o ~6 19 4 12 ~5 530 15 3 14 ~35 5 15 11 ~7 -5 20 ~21 23 ~10 Table 4: Cluster DEVIANCE Correlation Matrix 7O 66 511 512 515 14 19 19 15 55 100 19 20 19 18 15 14 18 26 15 9 14 26 25 25 7 100 56 25 56 64 60 57 55 26 52 28 51 22 51 25 25 51 19 46 76 74 15 8 52 15 42 15 9 40‘ 15 10 6 9 25 46 100 17 14 25- 20 11 14 ~4 26 12 -5 -0 7 -14 -12 14 9 21 17 4 15 18 6 12 5 5 15 ~12 ~17 ~18 ~45 ~34 7 ~12 -9 14 ~4 25 ~1 ~10 ~4 ~30 ~6 1 71 Table 5: Cluster PLEASING Correlation Matrix 206 212 225 224 209 207 208 210 211 216 217 21} 201 202 20} 54 18 45 5 52 55 57 59 514 515 516 517 518 28 37 29 35 25 24 1o 24 19 27 22 15 36 32 29 22 12 12 18 29 27 22 1o 5} 41 54 26 41 . 37 41 31 4o 38 32 16 36 33 33 33 3 32 34 23 31 13 23 17 42 34 37 29 64 54 55 34 60 29 31 33 45 29 2o 13 21 17< 28 24 15 2o 17 2o 21 12 8 o 27 18 19 16 59 41 35 18 33 35 4o 45 4 3o 29 19 24 19 29 27 19 22 28 15 22 13 25 14 27 23 23 r) 67 49 39 33 39 25 38 29 3o 25 24 19 19 26 22 18 7 19 25 24 28 9 12 12 22 15 26 27 50 39 43 21 38 24 32 2o 29 24 31 25 3o 21 29 29 24 29 32 17 29 27 26 15 26 29 24 27 44 56 4o 43 44 1o 16 13 19 19 25 18 22 25 21 13 2o 16 19 7 26 13 9 19 21 20 16 22 27 42 31 25 33 24 36 21 24 18 3o 22 24 24 26 26 13 2o 23 15 27 13 12 17 23 19 22 17 42 49 39 26 34 19 33 17 19 26 21 25 24 21 32 11 21 18 2o 10 14 5 24 7 35 25 22 27 39 45 28 22 45 2 33 28 29 22 29 21 26 32 39 39 28 2o 28 1o 27 15 25 16 22 22 15 21 4d 63 3 35 34 22 33 24 27 18 29 13 26 11 39 2o 16 16 29 12 20 21 22 9 19 20 13 12 42 45 35 33 27 15 3 15 19 7 24 20 13 21 28 16 17 19 26 8 19 22 19 13 15 20 12 24 20 41 33 34 30 36 32 20 22 19 29 16 2o 18 20 16 19 31 32 3o 29 17 24 22 25 28 23 19 44 4o 55 4o 39 32 34 17 29 25 32 19 23 2o 28 29 26 32 47 26 48 2o 28 23 25 27 32 32 47 52 69 46 49 29 23 20 15 2. 17 7 15 1o 10 12 8 3o 26 16 16 1o 11 15 13 27 11 16 39 23 4o 22 28 22 31 21 22 28 29 26 27 14 27 2o 19 29 48 16 33 16 17 26 22 25 27 29 4 48 57 37 44 2 13 12 13 9 27 13 13 5 15 21 22 17 20 1o 16 24 3o 23 18 23 19 23 20 34 28 48 35 12 23 8 25 12 26 9 12 24 25 22 19 24 28 11 17 3o 37 3o 25 27 16 23 28 4o 37 61 38 18 17 8 4 12 15 19 17 7 16 9 15 22 25 15 26 25 50 25 22 2} 29 5O 4 28 40 49 44 29 42 27 27 22 26 21 25 55 22 19 15 25 25 15 2 18 25 22 42 55 55 42 50 47 58 41 65 27 54 18 25 15 29 20 19 25 22 20 20 28 27 27 25 25 27 2) 55 22 25 5 40 46 48 46 47 22 59 19 25 26 24 16 22 22 15 15 12 25 52 11 2' 19 16 29 55 25 52 45 44 56 42 40 56 ‘ ' 27 22 17 27 21 12 24 19 52 16 29 25 25 $0 42 52 45 49 57 44 44 48 71 -1 -12 6 ~15 —15 ~16 -27 -7 -18 -14 -4 -b -7 -15 O -15 -27 -31 ~26 -16 -27 -15 -29 -12 -27 -17 -52,-56 1 ~5 ~3 ~8 ~15 ~4 ~3 4 ~11 ~4 3 ~1 ~8 ~9 13 4 ~11 ~21 ~5 ~12 -4 ~8 ~17 ~11 ~5 0 ~23 ~17 4 ~13 9 ~10 —8 ~12 ~3 ~1o -10 ~16 ~9 ~9 ~7 ~9 12 ~12 ~31 ~26 ~17 ~15 ~15 ~12 ~22 -6 ~20 ~7 ~46 ~26 6 ~19 ~2 ~12 ~20 ~11 ~8 ~o ~22 ~15 ~12 ~6 8 ~2 3 -8 ~8 ~21 ~10 ~28 -6 ~15 ~16 ~16 ~22 1 ~25 ~24 ~10 ~15 ~6 ~12 ~16 ~6 ~17 ~4 ~14 ~15 ~6 ~1 ~8 ~9 ~8 ~16 ~14 ~18 ~13 ~18 ~18 ~18 ~17 ~21 ~19 ~19 ~28 ~30 ~4 ~11 ~10 ~16 6 ~5 ~9 ~2 ~8 ~12 ~7 ~5 ~4 ~3 1 ~6 ~8 ~4 -7 ~16 ~12 ~2 ~7 ~12 ~14 ~5 ~11 ~15 2‘ 24 15 18 12 5 15 24 o 14 9 6 25 27 24 26 5 4 26 2 o 12 20 32 21 46 23 15 ~17 ~14 ~7 ~25 -U ~21 ~9 ~11 ~29 —20 ~14 ~15 ~1o ~16 -0 ~14 ~12 ~27 ~7 ~36 ~13 ~8 ~15 ~25 ~35 ~18 ~29 ~30 14 4 o 5 2 -7 2 8 ~21 ~2 ~3 1 13 2 12 10 ~3 ~20 10 ~14 3 ~1 8 9 ~6 17 ~8 ~2 ~10 ~8 ~15 ~13 ~14 ~10 ~11 3 ~31 ~16 ~10 ~12 ~1 ~1 3 ~15 ~8 ~29 ~21 ~35 ~20 ~16 ~24 ~21 ~25 ~6 ~35 ~39 -} -7 1 -7 1 5 2 -0 -4 -1 -1 1 O 1 14 1 -11 -10 -2 -10 -9 -4 -6 -5 -0 7 ~14 -12 10 3 6 6 2 5 12 15 5 11 5 5 20 4 18 11 -14 10 10 -7 -0 -15 -7 11 16 24 4 ~11 .r?}__:i 2 ‘10 .1 :21_~-9.172_ r2..757.'4 ‘15-:1}_:12---5.:10 716.:16_719 ‘30_:?5-:10-f?5 "12“:17_71”.:§5-:}4-- 55 64 58 67 50 44 27 42 59 40 42 20 44 d7 59 45 20 2d 24 50 40 44 5’ 100 77 78 45 72 41 54 41 49 59 56 42 49 45 65 45 41 40 52 25 48 54 40 23 47 46 56 44 77 100 74 64 7} 54 55 55 59 45 4 51 59 93 59 55 55 55 69 40 57 28 57 40 58 48 42 44 73 74 100 66 72 26 54 18 55 71 45 25 26 22 55 55 54 40 46 22 57 48 61 49 41 46 40 48 45 64 66 100 ' 41 60 55 59 58 44 5} 54 .45 34 27 30 59 49 28 44 55 50 44 65 47 56 71 72 75 72 75 100 21 3o 22 17 13 5 1o 2 12 16 12 12 28 1o 34 6 7 2 5 6 2 ~1 12 3' 29 36 1o 53 27 21 24 15 23 7 20 2 25 27 11 27 6 56 7 18 2 10 9 19 '4 7 42 54 35 19 1} 49 57 29 52 16 51 11 51 14 52 18 20 45 25 50 14 28 18 27 24 29 15 15 56 46 60 46 54 20 28 10 22 15 14 11 22 6 16 10 5 22 10 14 6 10 15 21 7 9 17 14 55 26 24 29 20 20 12 11 14 6 8 '5 10 1 5 1 0 11 8 21 6 4 3 2 5 4 1 -0 21 6 21 6 4 25 27 57 51 22 14 16 25 21 25 9 8 17 21 71 2} 1 7 15 15 11 16 16 49 55 37 15 25 19 18 14 21 7 13 14 22 5 20 9 15 25 16 52 24 15 7 2] 7 7 1 9 2! 28 46 30 10 '3 -6 -2 -4 -2 -6 -9 '5 -2 1 0 4 1 ~10 15 -1 5 -14 5 ~15 -2 -6 -1 -6 -4 2 -5 '9 1o 9 15 15 17 14 19 13 13 19 -4 8 21 11 18 22 4 14 24 13 14 9 2 23 24 32 26 25 11 '5 8 12 10 19 24 15 6 20 1 17 5 9 9 17 18 10 16 14 22 O 19 16 50 18 28 2} 4 15 10 16 8 20 20 17 15 13 7 9 2 6 6 6 8 25 5 17 29 8 15 18 31 9 24 29 42 3) 54 59 51 26 14 27 22 24 25 1} 19 18 16 18 19 14 -1 18 28 5 19 61 44 52 20 29 101 107 105 104 120 102 109 119 115 116 117 501 502 505 504 505 506 507 508 509 510 511 512 515 514 ‘ 515 516 517 518 519 520 521 522 525 524 525 526 52 528 529 550 17 "’15.. 9 Table.6: Cluster DESIRE FOR DISTINCTION '72 Correlation Matrix 101 107 105 104 120 102 109 119 115 116 117 31 26 26 31 29 15 15 6 47 34 24 15 3o. 17 29 21 15 22 11 13 17 18 15 14 4 22 17 7 4 8 5 21 54 6 51 15 16 22 8 7 15 22 29 15 47 15 6 54 55 56 54 56 22 17 54 17 20 18 17 54 27 26 35 16 12 51 16 11 24 15 17 27 15 14 55 7'12"715_'—5~':2 15 14 15 5 10 4 2 2 18 9 -2 4 -0 5 4 7 27 40 5 11 5 26 55 56 9 19 20 -5 7 10 14 18 51 -1 8 ~14 -5 -1 17 20 14 17 25 15 0 10 2o 25 26 25 1o 21 17 14 27 6 3 23 1 13_ 24 50 15 17 18 27 17 26 34 56 26 25 25 21 21 18 18 25 12 26 28 2O 14 25 -5 14 17 8 1 11 1 4 42 47 2 10 25 59 27 25 15 8 26 20 -8 -9 22 26 19 25 28 28 51 17 14 _15_ 53“53 41 ”20 77“ 37 44 55 55 59 59 -24__JQ.. 20 5 26 17 55 26 25 5 17 8 2 8 4 2 24 19 76 46 43 44 4o 74 28 18 45 26 26 60 28 17 26 2 4 26 8 5 18 19 -4 15 20 15 57 42 54 51 45 .25__24n_49__55‘_41 24 21 40 22 29 25 25 46 46 14 10 28 17 28 19 22 29 24 28 29 15 11 21 22 15 16 16 15 12 11 17 51 24 27 21 18 12 18 25 26 19 25 50 25 55 55 50 55 56 22 55 55 ”'16"_10"'-2"_'4“ 20 5 -1 16 -1 2 52 9 1 1 4 -2 1 5 7 25 41 50 -7 15 -5 28 30 10 9 59 21 7 5 4 55 15 25 4 1 14 50 20 25 22 16 20 26 12 15 16 15 19 20 9 161 47-7347—22 36 31 35 42 47 49 45__59 59D. l7 17 21 29 2/ 25 55 25 5 5 1 7 9 7 17 -5 7 5 12 18 50 -5 12 519 520 521 522 55 55 55 55 41 76 20 46 77 45 57 42 44 54 47 56 54 51 22 55 52 58 "207.197 29 27 16 11 37 14 1o 7 12 5 52 45 11 12 44 57 36 29 14 9 35 38 7 ~12 35 42 29 34 36 35 10 19 8 13 ”100"83" 85 100 24 52 59 39 44 4o 74 51 45 42 47 49 51 41 19 41 9 5 82 4 65 44 21 57 -9 56 46 60 46 54 -92- 96 92 96 100 .951_ 60 85 100 24 50 25 24 49 55 41 45 59 59 56 '17‘""5" 8 8 7 2 11 68 9 45 49 17 58 14 55 26 24 29 20 ”$1. 60 85 56 57 59 8 12 -1 22 5 73 Table 7: Cluster COMPETITION Correlation Matrix 162 163 164 170 171 172 155 165 158 159 160 151 156 157 166 168 152 523 524 525 526 162 19 16 46 32 37 13 23 29 20 14 25 11 3o 19 3o 17 10 43 37 39 10 163 16 11 33 33 25 12 11 23 6 16 13 16 24 9 26 13 7 33 23 32 7 164 46 33 66 67 58 38 46 52 22 21 44 17 42 16 42 25 22 82 57 53 22 170 32 33 67 65 62 42 49 53 17 19 4o 22 41 9 4o 26 26 81 49 51 26 171 37 25 58 62 65 46 52 56 19 22 43 19 42 17 42 3o 27 80 55 56 27 172 13 12 38 42 46 23 29 37 15 2o 39 14 38 21 33 34 25 48 48 52 25 155 23 11 46 49 52 29 36 53 18 15 34 2o 43 11 38 21 19 6o 43 49 19 165 29 23 52 53 56 37 53 50 23 15 36 3o 52 17 48 3o 32 71 48 65 32 158 20 6 22 17 19 15 18 23 39 36 22 3o 22 11 22 17 8 28 63 38 8 159 14 16 21 19 22 2o 15 15 36 32 19 25 27 14 3o 31 14 29 56 47 14 160 25 13 44 4o 43 39 34 36 22 19 14 25 29 14 27 29 25 55 36 46 25 151 11 16 17 22 19 14 20 30 3o 25 25 16 25 20 22 25 18 3o 52 4o 18 156 30 24 42 41 42 38 43 52 22 27 29 25 41 22 48 37 24 62 50 64 24 157 19 9 16 9 17 21 11 17 11 14 14 20 22 16 23 25 18 24 25 39 18 166 30 26 42 4o 42 33 38 48 22 3o 27 22 48 23 43 41 27 60 52 66 27 168 17 13 25 26 3o 34 21 3o 17 31 29 25 37 25 41 38 21 39 50 61 21 152 102226 27__25‘_g9 32 8 14__25__18_ 18 _27 '21 100 _34__31 49_1qo - 501 ”‘22"16— 14 10 12 8 9‘518“:I'”J3 7 -6 '16 —11*5 "8‘“13 16 - 5 13 502 8 -o 3 5 12 17 10 1o -9 7 8 -4 17 14 17 15 2o 13 4 21 20 503 -1 -o 9 3 5 13 11 5 -o o 20 -9 13 1 2 8 5 9 13 6 5 504 2 5 6 2 -2 -2 2 7 -9 2 o 4 13 5 12 4 5 4 -4 14 5 505 -7 -1 -3 -1 -5 -4 7 7 -3 -7 -o -6 6 -2 4 1 '6 -2 -7 1 6 506 9 1 7 3 3 -4 3 8 7 -1 -1 -5 11 -12 1 4 -2 6 3 -o -2 507 19 22 19 20 26 28 14 32 16 33 15 3o 34 3o 45 46 11 36 41 68 11 508 2 -6 -o 4 6 9 11 18 -o 2 8 -2 13 1 1o 9 10 9 6 12 10 509 19 3 1o 12 24 28 24 19 1o 18 20 15 32 22 35 32 16 28 31 50 16 510 8 9 23 20 23 16 21 29 9 15 11 10 27 1 29 2o 6 3o 22 _32 6 511 8 4 -1 -3 o 2 4 4 7 16 -1 6 1o 11 14 7 6 4 15 18 6 512 25 -3 12 12 16 5 19 12 5 28 11 15 22 19 2 27 8 21 29 39 8 513 3 -5 2 -5 -1 -7 -5 -1 19 14 5 o 5 -12 -1 5 -1o -4 25 -1 -10 514 10 21 14 18 15 17 11 o 24 44 7 11 22 1 21 19 -6 21 49 27 -6 515 12 1o 4 -o 8 5 -3 -7 11 39 4 10 16 15 24 11 -4 6 35 28 -4 516 16 16 16 13 16 1o 6 11 13 35 9 21 33 19 29 16 2 21 37 44 2 517 3 17 9 4 -1 o -4 1 -o 27 -4 23 1o 23 11 14 -5 6 15 3o -5 518 12 11 3 3 4 5 -1o -8 12 23 1 7 7 7 5 2 -9 4 23 1o -9 519 8 15 15 11 6 23 25 18 9 39 14 28 37 5 43 42 27 24 4o 57 27 520 18 24 29 33 4o 41 35 36 9 41 34 22 46 27 42 47‘ 43 52 55 68 43 521 14 28 22‘ 28 32 36 25 28 8 46 23 50 3o 50 19 43 50 85 19 522 -19__21..24. 19..)0 22..13 H23__2Q__AL_121 28 22-19- 39 _4Q.__§._16 52..§9 8 523 43 33 82 81 80 48 60 71 28 29 55 3o 62 24 6o 39 34 100 72 80 34 524 37 23 57 49 55 48 43 48 63 56 36 52 so 25 52 50 31 72 100 85 31 525 39 32 53 51 56 52 49 65 38 47 46 4o 64 39 66 61 40 8o 85 100 40 526 1Q___1__22__26 27 25 19 32 8 14 25__18 24 18_*21__21_199 _34 31 40199 527 19 13 6 11 7 8 3 15 -2 21 15 22 22 19 9 15 11 37 528 5 19 4 7 19 12 15 -1 11 18 -2 19 10 3o 15 17 7 16 17 34 7 529 1 17 --7 2 8 18 6 3 -2 9 -3 16 1o 15 9 14 3 1o 2 24 3 530 ,1 7 6 12 24 27 21 5 -1 17 18 15 13 7 17 22‘ 1o 20 22 28 10 251 252 254 '255 ’ 257 259 264 260 261 262 256 501 502 503 504 505 506 507 508 509 510 511 512 ' 513 514 515 516 517 518 519 520 521 522 523 524 525 526 527 528 529 530 Table 8: 74 Correlation matrix Cluster PHYSIOLOGICAL DETERMINISM 251 252 254 255 257 259 264 260 261 262 256 527 528 529 230 16 23 26 24 23 25 16 22 29 9 15 -4 16 1 14 -4 4 24 15 22 1 10 16 -3 3 8 14 3 14 17 26 29 32 47 25 17 14 15 1o 23 32 29 16 -1 l 16 13 24 34 47 46 39 29 25 22 24 14 10 -13 9 -10 8 -8 4 26 4 23 -8 8 23 -4 17 18 19 17 15 l6. 14 22 '8 23 41 25 39 33 21 20 27 19 3o 15 -15 -1 -4 9 -13 -1 25 -4 11 -3 5 17 -2 18 13 10 14 25 20 3O 34 19 29 16 10 24 19 22 23 28 32 21 14 -11 9 21 6 14 3O 23 22 9 21 16 419 -16 -1- 15 - 12 40 57 37 26 28 48 37 56 56 28 25 ~11 4 12 5 28 6 -4 -30 23 16 24 30 32 18 26 28 25 23 23 9 19 19 38 46 -1 16 ll 17 37 34 437% 15 57 57 26 28 32 23 48 17 4O 7- 56 31 53 63 100 67 62 62 100 34 48 17 33 63 53 53 32 48 36 36 -9 17 17 13 2 -9 20 -21 23 -10 7O 94 73_190 75 Unigueness Table 2 presents the item correlation matrix of the 18 items comprising six subclusters which have been grouped into the comprehensive cluster UNIQUENESS, the correlations of the respective items with the subclusters and the corre- lations between the respective cluster sums, corrected for attenuation. The interitem correlations within each Subcluster form flat matrices (except for clusters 505 and 506 which contain one item each and for which internal and external consistency is not applicable). The items correlate quite consistently across the subclusters. Deviations are only moderate in the correlations of subclusters 501-504 with other subclusters. Cluster 505 and 506 are not really comp parable since correction for attenuation was not practically possible for single item clusters. Cluster 504 correlates somewhat moderately with the other clusters. Desire for Leadership Table 5 exhibits the item correlation matrix of the nine items comprising four subclusters which have been grouped into DESIRE FOR LEADERSHIP, the correlations of the respective items with the subclusters and the correlations between the respective cluster sums, corrected for attenuation. Inter- nally the correlation matrices of each of the subclusters is flat. The items correlate quite consistently with other sub- clusters. Deviations from parallelism are evident in the correlations of clusters 507 and 510 with other subclusters. Cluster 507 and 508 correlate inconsistently across other 76 subclusters, as do clusters 509 and 510. The.correlations between the respective subclusters is low, .37. These factors suggest that the subclusters do not quite tap the same variable. For these reasons LEADERSHIP is a weak supercluster.' Deviance . Table 4 presents the correlation matrix of seven items distributed over three clusters, their correlations with _other clusters and their cluster sum correlations, corrected for attenuation. Internally the subclusters form very nice strong—weak gradients (except for cluster 511 which contains only one item). The strong weak gradient is maintained in the external parallelism of item-cluster correlations. However, parallelism deteriorates sharply in the correlations of sub- clusters 512 and 513 with the other subclusters. Moreover, clusters 512 and 513 correlate only .46 with each other. However, these clusters do relate rather similarly to unique- ness. For this reason and because of the undesirability of three-item scales, these clusters were grouped together. Pleasing . ~Table 5 presents the intercorrelations of the 23 items, comprising five subclusters, which have been grouped into the comprehensive cluster PLEASING. The correlations between the subclusters, corrected for attenuation. The interitem corre- lations of the subclusters form flat matrices. They correlate quite consistently with other subclusters. Parallelism appears weaker in the cluster correlations which exhibit some tendency to split 517 and 518 from 514, 515, 516. 77 Desire for Distinction Table 6 presents the correlations of the eleven items, constituting four subclusters, which have been grouped into the DESIRE FOR DISTINCTION cluster. Also presented are the correlations of the items with other clusters and the corre- lations of the respective cluster sums, corrected for attenu- ation. The interitem correlation matrix for each subcluster is remarkably flat and the correlations of these items with other subclusters are rather consistent. However, the cluster correlations show cluster 522 to be the weaker cluster. Competition Table 7 exhibits the correlation matrix of 17 items, com- prising four subclusters, which have been grouped into COM? PETITION. Also presented are the correlations of these items with the subclusters and the correlations between the re- spective cluster sums, corrected for attenuation. The inter- item correlation matrices of all its subclusters (except for 526 which contains only one item) are reasonably flat. The items in each grouping correlate fairly consistently with other clusters. The cluster correlations suggest that cluster 525 is somewhat stronger than the other subclusters of COMPETITION. Physiological Determinism . Table 8 presents the correlations of eleven items, com- prising four subclusters, their correlations with all other subclusters and the correlations between the respective subclusters, corrected for attenuation. The interitem 78 correlation matrices of all its subclusters are reasonably flat. The items in each grouping correlate quite consistently with other clusters. The cluster correlations suggest cluster 530 to be slightly stronger than the other subclusters of PHYSIOLOGICAL DETERMINISM. Thematic Content and Correlations of a us, n epen ence.f ru sm, - Status Position of Control (506). The items in thisecluster assert that the individual is in a position to control and effect other peOple. 303. I am in a position to direct and mold others' lives. 305. I am in a position to command respect from others. 307. I' m looked up to by others. ' 308. I have the ability to lead others. E-) 312. I have little effect on other people's actions. ' 313. I am not able to exert any influence on things around me. 301. I am respected by people who are themselves worthwhile. I Am Inferior (201). The items are a straightforward admission by the individual that he is inferior. -) 309. I' m not able to do anything better than other peOple. i-i 311. I am in a subordinate position. 315. I' m content with my inferior position. 316. I don't take pride in my achievements. I Have Respect (50 2. The items in this cluster assert that the individual is respected. 302. I receive recognition for my achievements. 306. I have all the respect that I am entitled to. (-) 310. I'm not recognized for my true worth. 79 Personal Effort to Get Respect (503). In these items the individual makes some efforts to get respect. , 304. I make sure that I am respected. (-) 314. I don't develop contacts which could improve my position. Table 9 (at the end of this section which contains all the relevant tables) presents the interitem correlation matrix, correlations between items and clusters, and between clusters. Cluster $06 is quite flat and, except for some deviations in item 303, it is also quite parallel. The same holds for _ cluster 509 whose items correlate consistently internally and externally. Cluster 507, however, does not form a Spearman- matrix. Items 311 and 315 do not correlate at a consistent magnitude across the other items. There are a few deviations from parallelism. Because of the internal inconsistency' and because items 311 and 315 correlated so poorly with the major good cluster of 506, these items were deleted. Cluster 508 does not seem to be particularly consistent internally either. Its parallelism is poor, particularly for items 306 and 310. Moreover, these particular items correlate zero with the items of cluster 506 and the remaining items of 507. (Indeed, their correlations with cluster 506 was .07 and .12 respectively. For these reasons items 306 and 310 were rejected. That this scale needed these modifications is markedly evident in the low to zero correlations between the_ clusters. 80 Independence . I Stick to El Position (510). The items of this cluster assert that the individual adheres to his position in his beliefs and actions. 351. I have the courage of my conviCtions. 552. I make my own decisions, uninfluenced by public opinion. 354. I stick to my opinion if I think I'm right, even if others disagree. 357. I speak out for what I believe in. (-) 358. I change my opinion under an onslaught of criticism, even though I don't change the way I feel. (-) 359. I don't make a move until I find out what other people think. (-) 360. My success does not depend on how hard I work, ‘ but on how well I fit in with the crowd. (-) 361. I cheat on a test when everybody else does, even though I have a set of ethical standards. Independence througp Achievement (511). In these items the individual maintains his independence through achievement. 353. I get ahead through achievement rather than popularity with others. 355. I don't believe in cheating and avoid it even if I see many others doing it. , 356. I am respected by society for my novel ideas. Table 10 exhibits the interitem correlation matrix of independence, correlations between items and clusters and correlations between clusters. Cluster 510 is markedly not consistent internally. Items 362, 365 and 364 correlate (poorly across other items. These items are also distinctly non-parallel. For these reasons they were deleted from the scale. Cluster 511, on the other hand, is nicely flat and quite parallel. Altruism (5122 - The positive items of this scale state that peOple are 81 altruistic. Several items state this belief in general terms 5 while others state particular instances of altruism. The) negative itemsstate that people are generally not altruistic. (r) (-) (-) (d) 401. 402. 403. 404. 405. 406. 407. 408. 409. 410. 411. Most peOple try to apply the Golden Rule even in today's complex society. ' Most people do not hesitate to go out of their way to help someone in trouble. Most people will act as "Good Samaritans” if given the Opportunity. "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you is a motto most peOple follow. The typical person is sincerely concerned about the problems of others. Most people with a fallout shelter would let their neighbors stay in it during a nuclear attack. Mast people would stop and help a person whose car is disabled. It's only a rare person who would risk his own life and limb to help someone else. . Pe0ple pretend to care more about one another than they really do. Most people inwardly dislike putting themselves out to help other peOple. People are usually out for their own good. _ Table 11 exhibits the interitem correlation matrix of altruism and the correlations between items and clusters. On the whole, the scale is internally consistent, although item.406 shows some deviations. External parallelism seems to be quite good. Item 407 correlates somewhat stronger across clusters than do the remaining other items. These deviations are tolerable and no items are deleted. Internal-External Locus of Control (513) The positive items of this scale assert that the indi- vidual has control over his life while the negative items assert the contrary. (-) 451. I find that what is going to happen will happen. 452. Trusting to fate does not work well for me. I have to make a decision to take a definite course of action. 82 453. What happens to me is my own doing. (-) 454. I don't have enough control over the direction my life is taking. 455. When I make plans, I also make them work. (-) 456. I don't plan ahead because things turn out to be a matter of good or bad fortune anyhow. 457. {orkme getting what I want has little to do with uc . é-) 458. I decide what to do by "flipping a coin". 459. I have little influence over the things that happen to me. 460. Chance or luck don't play an important role in my life. Table 12 exhibits the interitem correlation matrix for internal locus of control and the correlations between items and clusters. Except for items 451 and 453 the correlation matrix is quite flat and parallelism is reasonably good. Items 451 and 453 correlated inconsistently across other items and clusters and were deleted. Sex of subject is labeled 514. The correlations between sex of subject and the above scales are included in Tables 9-12. €33 Table 9: STATUS Scale Correlation Matrix 303 305 307 308 312 313 301 309 311 315 316 302 306 310 304 314 506 507 508 509 03 31 31 35 28 33 12 19 -1 2 l 6 8' 3 -7 -2 11 56 5 3 9 305 31 22 27 28 13 14 23 3 8 4 10 14 2 3 21 13 47 15 13 36 307 35 27 39 34 34 19 22 18 9 8 18 22 8 14 18 17 63 32 30 37 308 28 28 34 28 16 25 20 15 8 20 18 16 -8 l 15 17 53 36 6 34 312 33 13 34 16 21 25 12 19 14 7 13 12 9 16 11 20 46 32 25 33 313 12 14 19 25 25 13 14 ‘26 22 10 19 19 2 15 15 18 36 46 24 35 301 19 23 22 20 12 14 13 17 13 12 23 21 7 —0 13 14 36 39 19 28 309 -1 3 18 15 19 26 17 21 12 28 23 1o 4 -1 1 7 29 46 9 9 311 2 8 9 8 14 22 13 12 7 4 21 8 8 10 -5 11 23 26 18 7 315 1 4 8 20 7 10 12 20 4 13 22 5 -5 -4 11 9 18 35 -3 21 316 6 10 18 18 13 19 23 23 21 22 35 7 2 -3 7 16 32 6o 4 25 302 8 14 22 16 12 19 21 10 8 5 7 12 17 19 4 10 33 18 33 15 306 3 2 8 —8 9 2 7 4 8 -5 2 17 3o 33 -1o -11 7 5 55 -22 310 -7 3 14 1 16 15 -o -1 10 -4 -3 19 33 34 6 -3 12 1 59 5 304 -2 21 18 15 11 15 13 1 -5 11 7 4 ~10 6 25 19 27 9 1 47 3 14 _1 1 -1- .1 31.1 7, -- 17__20__1'3__1 4.... 7.- -1 1_.__Q_1_6_-1 0_:l.1_;}_19_? 51 -32__2.6_.:. 3.4 7.. 506 56 47 63 53 46 36 36 29 23 18 32 33 7 12 27 32 100 61 36 63 507 . 5 15 32 36 32 46 39 46 26 35 6o 18 5 1 9 26 61 100 17 36 508 3 13 30 6 25 24 19 9 18 «3 4 33 55 59 1 —3 36 17 100 -2 509 9 36 37 34 33 35 28 9 7 21 25 15 -22 3 47 47 “63._}6__e2_loo__ 510 “I3"23 ’22“39“‘18'“36‘”25‘”24‘"17‘“207‘11*‘“9‘” 6"14“”8“’13’ 52 43 20 23 511 4 27 20 30 12 41 14 31 26 25 20 9 o 14 12 16 44 61 16 29 512 -6 13 8 -3 8 —0 3 -7 19 -15 5 11 7 22 16 7 7 1 27 25 513 8 17 14 31 14 33 25 22 10 25 19 13 14 22 13 14 42 .46 33 29 514 11 -0 -8 4 -3 -6 0 2 -U -3 -12 -2 9 -17 -30 -9 -0 —7 -7 ~42 84 Table 10: INDEPENDENCE Scale Correlation Matrix 351 352 354 357‘ 358 359 360 361 362 363 364 353 355 356 510 511 351 27 22 34 19 13 22 31 19 16 18 16 3o 20 8 52 39 352] 22 16 21 15 13 20 26 13 11 12 16 19 14 8 4o 28 354 34 21 20 24 3 27 31 21 3 9 15 26 33 18 45 51 357 19 15 24 23 28 31 27 13 17 16 7 23 20 18 48 40 358 -13 13 3 28 17 17 17 13 18 50 3 8 18 10 42 24 359 22 20 27 31 17 26 32 33 14 2 11 26 36 28 51 60 360 31 26 31 27 17 32 31 34 13 13 1 29 25 23 56 51 361 19 13 21 13 13 33 34 15 9 1 10 14 42 28 39 56 362 16 11 3 17 18 14 13 9 10 26 9 12 6 2 31 13 363 18 12 9 16 50 2 13 1 26 12 -1 14 15 -3 34 17 364 16 16 15 7 3 11 1 10 9 -1 4 3 1o 8 353 30 19' 26 23 8 26 29 14 12 14 3 13 24 15 45 34 355 20 14 33 20 18 36 25 42 15 10 24 44 34 52 68 we __8 {LJ8_NLJQ_flLJB 2s -3 8 15_M.351w 48. 506 36 15 33 12 3 30 34 27 7 35 25 27 15 52 44 507 41 -2 23 28 9 27 29 25 2 9 25 35 33 43 61 508 13 -1 9 13 18 8 7 -2 17 7 1o 10 5 2o 16 509 ._33 9 17 1 213 6 16__23 3 -12 21 27 9__”8__23 29_, 510 52 4o 45 48 42 51 56 39 31 34 20 45 52 32 100 85 511 __39 28__51 40 24 60__51__56 13 17 141_34 68__48H_§5 190_. ‘512 2 -4 -7 -4 7 -7 -2 -2 -4 -0 6 3 9 7 -3 13 513 41 18 36 34 27 19 41 13 17 32 4 27 21 16 61 42 514 3 11 4 6 -7 1 4 -o 11 -3 2 -11 -o -4 7 ~10 NQONO‘ 401 402 403 404 405‘ 406 407 408 409 410 411~ 506 507 509 N 510 511 '512 513 514 85 Table 11: ALmRUISM Scale >401 402 403 404 405 406 15 16 16 18 35 3o 25 10 28 24 18 7 15 2 -12 '4 21 -4 6 , 42 5 27 35 38 38 41 22 32 25 33 23 18 5 9 l7 9 2 17 62 9 . ~14 ~16 —13 38 3O 25 25 41 48 41 16 31 33 3O 27 26 5 6 14 24 -O 12 64 6 14 10 22 13 16 7 20 17 7 12 7 2 . 8 l 21 -8 7 27 9 Correlation Matrix 407 408 409 410 411 512 * 20 28 32 23 31 20 32 38 27 20 7 32 -1 -17 l4 l9 -3 4 56 -4 .12 18 -6 -20 -22 ~13 -12 10 14 ‘7 15 23 18 19 17 27 26 12 7 20 32 29 28 35 36 17 22 22 19 -7 13 -5 14 20 l 4 ' 8 -6 7 -2 41 43 3 -3 -6 ~11 39 42 62 57 644' 27 56 54 51 41 43 7 1 27 25 -3 13 100 8 r26 86 Table 12: INTERNAL-EXTERNAL LOCUS OF CONTROL Scale Correlation Matrix 451 452 453 454 455 456 457 458 459 460 513 451 7 12 -1 11 3 12 15 11 20 18 26 452 12 23 14 16 24 27 3O 13 16 22 48 453 -1 14 6 ’13 18 12 -18 3 12 8 25 454 11 16 13 15 11 24 11 -12 3O 13 39 455 3 24 18 11 11 22 19 7 11 11 34 456 12 27 12 24 22 30 27 28 21 19 55 457 15 30 18 11 19 27 32 15 12 49 56 458 11 13 3 12 7 28 15 11 l6 19 33 459 20 16 12 30 11 21 12 16 18 15 42 460 18 22 8 13 11 19 49 19 15 23 48 506 -4 23 5 26 28 27 18 15 26 8 42 507 4 7 5 22 7 25 23 19 54 20 46 508 ‘2 16 6 28 2 14 10 21 18 18 33 509 o 15 6 27 45 14 12 -1 7 ~10 29 510 9 31 10 3o 36 37 28 28 17 24 61 511 5 13 -1 27 1o 30 15 23 33 15 42 512 1 -1 17 11 12 -3 -1 -5 12 -12 8 513 26 48 25 39 34 55 56 33 42 48 100 514 15 .1 -11 -7 -2 -o -2 3 -o 1 -1 87 Relationshi s Amo Clusters and gcales Table 13 presents the correlations among the new com- prehensive individual identity clusters and status, inde- pendence, altruism and internal locus of control. Table 13: Correlation matrix of Individual Identity Clusters and Status, Independence, Altruism, Internal Control, Corrected for Attenuation Uniq Comp Pleas P.D. Dev Lead Dis Stat Ind Alt I-E Unique.- 100 13 -30 ~10 4O 34 23 53 62. -2 39 Compet. 13 100 23 24 18 42 6O 34 0 0 l3 7 Pleas. ~30 23 100 35 -12 -7 42 ~28 -73 8 -3O Deviance 40 18 -12 10 100 40 28 1 1 -12 ~30 Leader. 34 ‘42 -7 18 40 100 59 50 16 -6 ll Distinct. 23 6O 42 29 28 59 100 37 -5 2 10 Status 53 25 ,-23 -5 1 50 25 100 49 ll 51 Indepen. 62 l -73 -39 l 16 -6 49 100 l 60 Altru. -2' 2 8 3 -12 -6 -4 11 l 100 4 I-E .39 10 -30 -32 +30 11 4 51 60 4 100 N-432 A correlation of .10 is significant at the .05 level Only moderate correlations were obtained between the major 7 individual identity clusters. Unidueness and pleasing correlated -.30 whereas uniqueness correlated poorly with competition (r- .13) and with physiOlogical determinism (r = -.10). 'Competition, pleasing and physiological determinism corre- lated moderately positive: Competition correlated .23 with, pleasing and .24 with physiological determinism. Pleasing .correlated.35 with physiological determinism. 88 Several somewhat larger correlations were obtained in the relations of the remaining individual identity clusters. Deviance, desire for leadership and desire for distinction correlated moderately to quite well with each other. Deviance correlated .40 with leadership and .28 with distinction. Leadership correlated .59 with distinction. They correlate quite differently with uniqueness, competition, pleasing and physiOlogical determinism. Desire for distinction correlates ‘with all four clusters - uniqueness (r a .23), competition (r - .60), pleasing (r a .42) and physiological determinism (r - .29). Desire for leadership correlates moderately well. with uniqueness (r - .34) andeith competition (r . .42) .while deviance shows a good correlation only with unique- ness (r . .40). A number of substantial positive correlations were obtained between status, independence and internal locus of control and the individual identity clusters. Status correlated .53 with uniqueness, .25 with competition, .50 with desire for leader- ship, .25 with desire for distinction. Status also correlated negatively with pleasing (r a -.28). Independence correlated highly with uniqueness (r - .62). It correlated highly negative with pleasing (r a -.73) and with physiological determinism (r . -.39). Internal locus of control correlated .39 with uniqueness. It correlated negative with pleasing (r - -.30), with physio- logical determinism (r -‘-.32) and with deviance (r s -.30). No correlations of any magnitude were obtained between 89 altruism and any cluster or scale. Status, independence and internal locus of control correlated quite highly with each other. Status correlated .49 with independence and .51 with internal locus of control. »Independence correlated .60 with internal locus of control. These correlations suggest that these scales do measure variables that are somewhat similar. Relationshi s amo Clusters, ScEIes and Bio a EgcaI Variafiles Table 14 presents the correlations between the individual identity clusters and status, independence, altruism, internal locus of control with the biographical variables considered in this study. 9O 00H MMI mMI OOH ¢NI sh MHI OI NNI m s N mI HI H . m NI HH H v HHI mH H e NH ON 8H 8H. mN mI m 5H mI b m mH m e .monaoH nan» oHanHsb was» no Hoon conoom mona #8:» mopmoacqa swam chapmmmn a oHHn3 memHHmb puny do monaoH sump HoAmHn conoom mona on» page mopdoacna swam obwpamon a .Mom oHpmHHmb one Hom8 Hopes mo. 688.86 88888888888 ea 0H. no denudaeaaee a ¢NI en OOH NI MH b m N 0... “I #H M. HH 8 m... m m HH NI *Nom .punmaesoona MHI 0' N- OOH Nm N NH OHI OI. bl OHI bl m- mHI NHI H- b NHI OHI .<.maoo NNI 8 ml H m N HI m MH b m N NM N NH OHI 00H m MH m m OOH mm N MH mm 00H OI m N OI OCH 0. m HI m mI mI mI mH NHI NI NI m mI on mI nH mI HI 0 o wHI HHI MNI mH mHI mI mHI mI NI m n ONI HH m m eI ONI 0H 8 m a- e muV NH anomm .monm .EHHm moumnw moHnanm> Hmownmmnmon onp Ava: Honpnoo Ho maooq Hdnnovaa .amasth< .oonocnomoan .mspmvm was unopmsHo apapaeaH HaseaeaedH me waned: aeapmaeaaeo ”4H sands Nme I 2 New oponunms maHaooua .4 eeaeaeeaseo manomm .o Heapnocamonm .mamo humaanm moownw .o HasnoPdH amastha mspwpm monounommcdH noapo:8pman manmnouson consabon .ean .eamasm wnHmMon uoHpHpomaoo muonosdHnD 91 A number of correlations, consistently of low magnitude, were obtained for several biographical variables. Many of these 'were in opposite directions from those predicted. Grade point average correlated -.20 with physiological determinism and .18 with desire for leadership. Participation in the 1972 4 Michigan presidential primary campaign correlated -.16 with devianceand -.23 with desire for leadership. Participation in sports correlated -.20 with competition, -.18 with deviance and -.18 with desire for leadership. Participation in com- petitive activities also correlated negatively with deviance (r - -.17) and desire for leadership (r a -.l9). Amount of ‘money spent on the spring wardrobe of 1972 correlated posi- tively with competition (r-= .18), with physiological deter- minism (r a .17), with desire for distinction (r a .20), and ’ with status (r = .18). No sex differences for any of the major individual identity clusters - uniqueness, competition, pleas- ing, physiological determinism were obtained. For the other clusters two low correlations suggested that males scored higher on desire for leadership and deviance than females. A low correlation between sex and altruism (r a -.26) suggested that males scored lower on altruism than females. Two bio- graphical variables did not correlate with any of the clusters and scales: participation in the 1972 presidential campaign and time spent on grooming. ' I ‘ Several very interesting sex differences appear among the biographical variables. Females scored higher on participation in sports, on time spent on grooming and money spent on wardrobe. 92 The correlations between the related biographical variables are of little interest themselves. For example, participation in the primary and the presidential campaigns correlated .55. This is unilluminating of the uniqueness-anonymity dimension under investigation in this study. DISCUSSION The results of this study support the major hypotheses that the dimension of uniqueness-anonymity, as defined in this study, would be used by individuals to attribute unique- ness or anonymity to themselves. Several supporting hypotheses were confirmed by the results while others were not. The discussion shall proceed from the least supported to the most supported hypotheses. 1. It was hypothesized that altruism which seemed intuitively to eXpress selflessness and, hence, anonymity would be posi- tively correlated with pleasing and negatively with unique- ness. Unfortunately, altruism did not correlate with any of the clusters or scales. This was possibly due to the over- sight of the eXperimenter in not converting the items of this scale, which were stated in the impersonal third person plural, to the first person singular. This procedure had been followed with the items of all the other scales. It has been commonly found that items stated in the third person plural will correlate quite differently from items which maintain the same content but are stated in the first person singular. 93 94 2. The greatest disappointment of the study was that none of the individual identity clusters correlated in any substantial manner with the biographical variables. The correlations which were obtained were very low in magnitude and tended in the Opposite direction than predicted. (a) It was predicted that grade point average would be positively correlated with uniqueness and measures of exclusivity and negatively with measures of anonymity. This relationship held for a couple of obtained correlations. GPA tended to correlate in the pre- dicted direction with physiological determinism (r = -.20) and with desire for leadership (r = .18). It was predicted that participation in the Michigan presidential primary campaign, participation in sports and in other competitive activities would be positively correlated with uniqueness and measures of exclusivity. The obtained correlations tended in the opposite direction. Participation in the primary campaign correlated negatively with deviance (r = -.l6) and with desire for leadership (r = -.23). Participation in sports correlated -.18 with deviance and with desire for leadership. These correlations suggest that, contrary to popular ideology which attributes exceptional status to sports and desire for leadership to politicking, partici- pation in campaigning and in sports seem to be conventional behaviors characteristic of conventional individuals. The same is suggested by participation in competitive activities which correlated -.17 with deviance and -.19 with desire for leadership. These relationships are slight and, at most, 95 suggest that these activities are not particularly expressive of uniqueness but that they may be more closely associated with anonymity. (c) It was predicted that money Spent on one's wardrobe would be negatively correlatedwith uniqueness and positively with measures of anonymity. Again, the corre- lations tended in the Opposite directions than predicted in two out of three instances. It correlated positively with .competition (r = .18), with physiological determinism (r = .17) and with desire for distinction (r a .20). (d) Predicted sex differences in the individual identity clusters turned out most disappointing. No sex differences were obtained for the major individual identity clusters of uniqueness, competition, pleasing and physiological determinism. Males did tend to score higher on deviance (r = .25) and on desire for leader- ship (r = .17). These clusters are of peripheral rather than central importance to the uniqueness-anonymity dimension. (e) The remaining two biographical variables, participation in the presidential campaign and time spent on grooming, did not correlate with any of the clusters. (f) The biographical variables did not correlate in any better fashion with the scales of status, independence, altruism, I-E. Only two low correlations were obtained of which only one was in the pre- dicted direction. Money spent on wardrobe, which was inter- preted as an attempt at pleasing and, thus, as an expression of anonymity, correlated positively with status (r = .18). Only one low correlation was obtained which indicated a sex difference for one scale. Males scored lower on altruism 96 . than did females. This relationship is difficult to interpret since altruism did not correlate with any other variable and since it differed in its formal aspects fromother scales. One other sex difference merits attention. Interesting sex differences appeared in several biographical variables. Females scored higher on three of the seven biographical variables than did males: participation in sports (r = .22), time spent on grooming (r = .24) and money spent on wardrobe (r . .33). If participation in sports is a conventional activity,then these relationships are consistent among each other and women can be seen as being more concerned with pleasing activities than males. It can also be argued that grooming and expenditure on wardrobe are competitive activi- ties for women and that women who score high onthese and on sports (interpreted as conventional behavior) do both, compete and please or, if Sports is considered expressive of exclusivity, they are competitive. The argument is difficult toresolve at this point. 3.-It was predicted that uniqueness would be positively corre- lated with competition. The obtained correlation was .13. When status is partialled from the correlation between uniqueness and combined competition-distinction, the correlation is re- duced to -.04. The correlation becomes zero. 4. It was predicted that uniqueness would correlate positively with pleasing. A correlation of -.30 was obtained. However, when independence was partialled, this correlation, too, dropped to zero. Uniqueness is negatively correlated with 97 pleasing only to the extent that pleasing is negatively correlated with independence. 5. Physiological determinism was predicted to correlate negatively with uniqueness. A correlation of -.10 was obtained, suggesting that these two variables are actually not particularly related. The remaining three individual identity clusters, about which no‘g priori hypotheses were formulated, were deviance, desire for leadership and desire for distinction. The desire for distinction correlated positively with all of these scales. However, it correlated with uniqueness only .23, whereas it correlated .60 with competition. Desire for leadership correlated positively with uniqueness and competition. When status is partialled from the correlation, the correlation between leadership and uniqueness draps from .34 to .10. Deviance correlated only with uniqueness. When partialled from other variables, deviance has some sur- prising effects. When partialled from the correlation between I-E and uniqueness, it raises the correlation sub- stantially from .39 to .58. When partialled from the corre- lation between desire for leaderShip and uniqueness, it lowers the correlation from .34 to .22. 6. It was predicted that status, independence, I-E would correlate positively with uniqueness. These relationships actually constitute the major support for the individual identity hypothesis. Uniqueness correlated highest with. independence (r a .62). It correlated substantially positive 98 with status (r a .53). This correlation, however, is lowered to .32 when independence is partialled. Uniqueness corre- lated .39 with Internal locus of control. This correlation is lowered to .05 when independence is partialled. ‘The highest correlation was obtained between pleasing and independence, (r = -.73), suggesting that these variables measure a dimenSion of conformity-nonconformity. Pleasing correlated moderately negative with status (r a -.28). However, when independence was partialled from this corre- lation, the relationship between these two variables was lowered to zero. Pleasing also correlated moderately negative with I-E (r = -.30). When independence is partialled, the correlation becomes +.25. This is most surprising. I-E turns out to be expressive of conformity. These relationships can be causally clarified through multiple correlations. The strength of relationships are determined by the extent to which a single criterion variable can be predicted from two or more predictor variables. The criterion variable is uniqueness and the predictor variables are independence, status, deviance. The highest zero-order correlations were obtained between uniqueness and these variables. The question to be answered concerns the extent to which the predictor variables account for the amount of variance in the criterion. The zero-order correlation coefficient between uniqueness and independence was .62. The multiple correlation coefficient of uniqueness with independence and deviance is .73, of uniqueness with independence, 99 status and deviance is .78. Thus uniqueness is best pre- dicted from the combined effect of independence, deviance and status. The relationship between pleasing, independence, and combined competition-distinction can be similarly clarified. Pleasing correlates -.73 with independence and .31 with competition-distinction. The multiple correlation coeffi- cient between pleasing as the criterion variable and inde- pendence and competition-distinction as the predictor variable is .80. The major variables from which pleasing can be pre- dicted.are independence and competition-distinction. These relationships can be represented schematically as follows: - Distinc- tion 100 UniqueneSs correlates with independence and status. It correlates with the other variables only to the extent that these correlate with independence and status. Pleasing correlates with independence, competition-distinction and I—E. It correlates with other variables only to theextent that these correlate with independence, competition-distinction and I‘Eo Implications and Conclusions This study originated with the hypothesis that indi- viduals would ascribe uniqueness or anonymity to themselves and that related eXpreSSions of exclusivity and non-exclusivity would reflect the dichotomous poles of this dimension. It was particularly thought that competition and pleasing were such dichotomies. A good deal of antecedent research has suggested that, indeed, "competitive" and "pleasing" activities were antithetic activities and that the former was more characteristic of males than of females while the latter was more characteristic of 4 females than of males. Bardwick and Douvan, for example, summarize a variety of developmental research which suggests that male children are characterized by: Independence, aggression, competitiveness, leadership, task orientation, outward orientation, assertiveness, innovation, self-discipline, stoicism, activity, objectivity, analytic—mindedness, courage, unsenti- mentality, rationality, confidence, and emotional control (p. 147). while female children are characterized by: lOl Dependence, passivity, fragility, low pain tolerance, non-aggression, noncompetitiveness, inner orientation, interpersonal orientation, empathy, sensitivity, nurturance, subjectivity, intuitiveness, yielding- ness, receptivity, inability to take risk, emotional liability, supportiveness (p. 147). To account for the discrepancies between the findings of this study and antecedent research, it is proposed that activities like competition and pleasing are dichotomous under some conditions but not under others. One such con- dition may be when subjects are asked to perform in stereo- typic ways. With regard to the sex differences concerning pleasing and competition, it is suspected that the research. tradition has reported, attended to and elaborated sex differences whenever these were found but that it has not invested the same interest and effort on instances in which no sex differences were found. To illustrate the former point, let's consider the following study by McKee and Sherriffs (1957). In this study undergraduate male and female students were asked to assign descriptive adjectives which were thought to be character- istic of males and females. Both groups of subjects assigned the following positive adjectives to males: easy going industrious sharp witted - dominant informal calm broad minded self-confident frank steady wide interests independent humorous realistic ambitious forceful witty stable individualistic dynamic thorough logical courageous rugged deliberate clear thinking aggressive adventurous daring The following adjectives were assigned to females by both male and female subjects: 102 s0phisticated gentle sentimental poised affectionate lovable well-mannered kind dreamy tactful warm sensitive pleasant understanding artistiC' sociable sympathetic religious modest . soft-hearted The McKee and Sherriffs study, like similar studies on stereo- -typing, have structured the task in a way which requires .subjects to set up two categories of adjectives. Subjects are asked to respond to a category of people with labels which have pOpularly been associated with one or the other category. Under such conditions pleasing and competitive activities will be treated as antinomies. In the present study subjects were asked to agree or disagree with statements which characterize the subject hime self, since these statements were written in the first person singular. Far from being perfectly negatively correlated, competition and pleasing are positively correlated. The majority of the subjects do not fall into one or the other category. Subjects ascribed (or did not, as the case may be) both competition and pleasing to themselves. They agreed that they engaged (or did not) in both activities rather than in one or the other exclusively. The implication is that when characterizing comprehensive groups and when the characteristics are to be assigned to antinomies, subjects dichotomize the concepts of competition and pleasing. When asked to apply these to themselves, as is the case in the present study, subjects claim both constructs as characteristic (or un- characteristic) of themselves. 103 The largely poor relationships between the biographical . variables and the various clusters and scales could be attributed to the possibility that the behaviors considered in this study actually have different meanings from those assumed here. Rather than representing exclusivity, behaviors like participation in sports and political campaigns stress cooperation and contribution to a common group goal instead of some individual exceptional goal. Activities like attending to one's appearance and clothing are not merely concerned with pleasing but are highly competitive as well. 'That these behaviors have different meanings from those assumed is supported by the correlations between them and the various scales and clusters. Participation in sports and the presidential primary election correlated negatively with deviance and desire for leadership, while money spent on wardrobe correlated positively with competition and distince tion. The lack of sex differences for the attitudinal measures used in this study and the biographical variables are singu- larly interesting in the challenge they pose to antecedent research and common intuitive expectations. The research reviewed earlier on field-dependence ~independence (Witkin et a1., 1962), Eros-Logos attention styles (Silverman 1970), allocentric-autocentric ego styles (Gutman, 1969) and locus of control have all provided seemingly substantial support for the prevalence of a sex difference. Research in these areas has persistently and forcefully claimed that males were 104 more differentiated than females. This study does essentially . not support such claims or findings. Males did tend to score higher on deviance and desire for leadership, but the corre- lations were low. Moreover, these were the weakest clusters of this study. No sex differences were obtained for the large and sound clusters of competition, uniqueness, pleasing or for the scales of status, independence, I-E. Several reasons may ascount for this. (1) Witkin's field-dependence -independence and the research summarized by Silverman measure spatial abilities which may have little or nothing in common with the way an individual deliberately defines himself in relation to others (as he is asked to do in the uniqueness cluster, for example). Julia Sherman (1967) in her review of field-dependence ~independence suggests just that. The tasks used to determine field-dependence -inde- pendence are consistently positively correlated with perfor- mance on various spatial tasks. Researchers have claimed a generality for these constructs which, according to Sherman, they simply do not have. The remaining two areas which were thought to be concerned with differentiation were Gutman's study and I-E. Gutman's work is too poor to be considered a serious demonstration of anything. The measure of I-E used in this study_turned out to be correlated with gregariousness rather than exclusivity. (2) Contemporary women may actually have different characteristics from women a decade ago. The sex differences which were obtained for the biographical ‘ variables suggest that this sample of women engaged in both 105 competitive and pleasing type of activities. This finding cannot be attributed to the unrepresentative character of the sample either. The data were collected at various times extending over a period of about one year. Subjects were re- cruited from a variety of undergraduate psychology classes. The student body at Michigan State University seems quite representative of the middle class of the state of Michigan: 50% of the undergraduates are females, the school is, or is aiming to be, somewhat proportionately integrated, its students are drawn not only from the metropolitan area of Detroit but also from small towns and rural areas. It might be suggested that a group of housewives would have been more representative of females. This would not be an improvement either since housewives no longer are representative of most women. In 1969 the Department of Labor reported that only 49.9% of all women over age 16 were engaged primarily in house keeping (1969 Handbook on Women Workers, p. 11) while 40% of all women had full-time year-round jobs (p. 56). The present 'sample is probably not representative of lower socio-economic status groups whose members are still largely excluded from attending universities and who, therefore, would not have been represented in the sample of subjects of this study. The results obtained in the present study did find substantial evidence for the existence of an explicit unique- ness-anonymity dimension. This is demonstrated in the large positive correlations between uniqueness and independence and status. This study defined a uniqueness—anonymity 106 dimension which individuals used to characterize themselves. It supports the existence of this dimension which was postulated implicitly by such antecedent research as Witkin's field-dependence ~independence or Silverman's construct of Eros-Logos attention styles. BIBLIOGRAPHY Aristotle. Politica, Richard McKeon (Ed. ). New York: Random House, Bardwick, J. M. and Douvan, E. Ambivalence: The socialization of women. In V. Gornick and B. M. Moran (Eds.), Woman in Sexist Society. New York: Basic Books, 1971, pp. IZ:-IS o Barratt, E. S. The space visualization factors related to temperament traits. g, Psychol., 1963, 54, 115. Bell, E. G. Inner-directed and other-directed attitudes. Doctoral Dissertation, Yale University, 1955. Reviewed in Witkin et 81., 1962. Bell, R. Q. Relations between behavior manifestations in the human neonate. Child Develpm., 1960, 21, 463. - Bell, R. Q. and Costello, N. S. Three tests for sex differen- ces in tactile sensitivity in the newborn. Biol. Neon., 1964, 7, 335. 'Bieri, J. Parental identification, acceptance of authority and within sex differences in cognitive behavior. g, abnorm. soc. Psychol., 1960, 62, 76. Bieri, J., Bradburn, W. M., and Galinsky, M. D. Sex differen- ces in perceptual behavior. g. Pers., 1958, 26, l. Buchsbaum, M., and Silverman, J. Stimulus intensity control and the cortical evoked response. Psychosomatic Med., 1968, 30, 12. The letters of the Earl of Chesterfield to his son. C. Strachey (Ed. ), vol. II. N ew_YOEk: Putnam, 1925. Compton, N. H. Perceptual characteristics of delinquent girls. Perceptual mot. Skills, 1967, 24, 596. Cross, B. M. The educated woman in America. New York: Teachers College Press, COlumbia University, 1965. 107 108 (332cnmne,‘D. 'P., and Liverant, S. Conformity under varying con- ditions of personal commitment. J. abnorm. soc. Psychol., 1963, 66, 547- 555. (3Iutchfie1d, R. S. Conformity and character. Amer. Psycholo- gist,1955. 10,191. Ilavis, W. L. and Phares, E. J. Parental antecedents of internal-external control as a determinant of information- seeking in social influence situation. J. Pers., 1967, .22: 547-561. Ebcalona, S. K., and Heider, G. M. Prediction and outcome. .New York: Basic Books, 1959. fitzgerald, E. T. .Measurement of Openness to experience: A study of regression in the service of the ego. J. pers. soc. Pszchol ., 1966, 4, 655. Goodman, P. Growing.gp absurd. New York: Random House, 1956. Gore, P. M} Individual differences in the prediction of subject compliance to experimenter bias. Dissertation Abstracts, 1965, £5, 390. Gordon, B. An eXperimental study of dependence-independence in a social and laboratory setting. Doctoral Dissertation, University of Southern California, 1953. Reviewed in Witkin et a1., 1962. Guetzkow, J. An analysis of the Operation of set in problem- solving behavior. J. gen. Psychol., 1951, 52, 219. Gurin, P., Gurin, G., Lao, R. C., and Beattie, M. Internal external control in the motivational dynamics of Negro youth. 1. soc. Issues, 1969. Gutman, D. Female ego styles and generational conflict. In J. M. Bardwick, E. Douvan, M. S. Horner, D. Gutman (Eds. ), Feminine personality and conflict. Belmont, 0a.: Brooks-CoIe, I970, 77. 1269 Handbook on Women Workers, Women' 8 Bureau Bulletin 294, United States Department of Labor, 1969. Hunter, J. E. and Cohen, S. H. PACKAGE: a system of computer routines for the analysis of correlational data. Ed. Psych. Meas., 1969, _2, 697. Iscoe, I., and Garden, J. A. Field dependence, manifest anxiety and sociometric status in children. J. consult. Psychol., 1961, _2, 184. lD9 Jolmson, R. c., Ackerman, J. M., Frank, H. and Fionda, A. J. Resistance to temptation and guilt following yielding and pzychotherapy. J. consult. clinical Psychol., 1968, 32.19. {I‘llng, C. G. The collected works of C. G. Jung. Vol. 14. Bollingen _Series XX. New York': Pantheon Books, 1963. Kagan, J., and Lewis, M. Studies of attention in the human infant. Mérrill-Palmer Quarterly, 1965, ll, 95. ‘ liagan, J., and Rosman, B. Cardiac and respiratory attention and analytic attitude. J} exp. child Psychol., 1964, l, 50. Kleinman, R. A. and Higgins, J. Sex of respondent and Ror- schach M'production..£. 2r 1. tech. and pars. assess., 1966, fig, 439. Lacey, J. I., Kagan, J., Beatrice, G., and Press, H. A. The visceral level. Situational determinants and behavioral correlates of autonomic response patterns. In P. H. Knapp (Ed. ), EXpressions of the emotions in man. New York: International Universities Press, 1963__I6l. Lefcourt, H". M. Recent develo ments in the study of locus of control. In B. A. Maher Ed6 ), Pro ress in ex erimental personality research. Vol.6. New or .I_ademic Press, 9 o Lefcourt, H. M., Gronnerud, P., and McDonald, P. Cognitive activity and hypothesis formation during a double entendre word association test as a function of locus of control and field dependence. Unpublished manuscript. gniversity of Waterloo, 1971. Reviewed in Lefcourt, 972 Lefcourt, H. M., Lewis, L., and Lilverman, I. W. Internal versus external control of reinforcement and attention in a decision making task. i, Pers., 1968, 26, 663. Lefcourt, H. M., and Telegdi, M. Perceived locus of control ‘ and field dependence as predictors of cognitive activity. J. consult. clinical Psychol., 1971, 37, 53. Lewis, M., Kagan, J., Campbell, H., and Kalafat, J. The cardiac response as a correlate of attention in infants. Child development, 1966, 21, 63. Lewis, M., Kagan, J., and Kalafat, J. Patterns of fixation in the young infant. Child development. 1966 , _l, 331. llO Ii5:rrton, H. B. Dependence on external influence: correlates in perception, attitudes, and judgment. g. abnorm. soc. Psychol. 1955, l, 502. :Eajqpsitt, L. P., and Levy, N. Electrotactual threshold in the human neonate. Child development, 1959. O, 547. Ifililton, G. A. The effects of sex-role identification upon problem sovling skill. J. abnorm. soc. Psychol., 1957, §_5_, 208. lPhares, E. J., Differential utilization of information as a function of internal-external control. g, Pers., 1968, 6. 649. Reeves, N. Womankind. New York: Aldine-Atherton, 1971. Reik, T. Sex in man and woman. New York: Noonday Press, Farrar, Straus and Cudah , 1960. Riesman, D, The lonely crowd. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1950. Rosner, S. Consistency in response to group pressure. 1. abnorm. soc. Psychol., 1957, 22, 145. Rousseau, J. J. Emile, ou g3 l'education. New York: French and Europeafijiblications, 1962. Rousseau, J. J. Confessions. New York: French and European Publications, . Rudin, S. A. and Stagner, R. Figure-ground phenomena in the perception of physical and social stimuli. g, Psychol., 1958, 4 , 213. . Schachtel, E. Metamorphosis. New York: Basic Books, 1959. Scott, W. Personal value scales. In his Values and organizations: a stud of fraternities and sororities. Ch1cago: Rand cNaIIy,-I965. Sherman, J. A. Problem of sex differences in space perception and aspects of intellectual functioning. Psychol. Review, 1967, 13, 290-299. Sherriffs, A. C. and McKee, J. P. Beliefs about men and women, Qualitative aspects of beliefs about men and women. J. Pers., 1957, g2, 251-264. 111 Shirley, M. M. The first two years, a study of twenty-five babies. Vol. III. Personality manifestations. Minneapolis: University of MinnesOta Press,—1933. Silverman, J. Attention styles and the study of sex differences. In D. I. Mostofsky (Ed.), Attention: Contemporary theor and analysis. New York: AppletonJCentury:Crofts, 1 , 1. Silverman, J. Variations in cognitive control and psycho- physioligical defense in the schiZOphrenias. Psychosomatic Med., 1967, 29, 225. Strickland, B. R. Individual differences in verbal con- ditioning, extinction and awareness. J. Pers., 1970, 22;. 364. Taylor, R. E.. and Eisenman, R. Birth order and sex differen- ces in complexity-simplicity, color-form preference and personality. 1. Proj. Tech. and Pers. Assess., 1968, 2.383. """' """"‘— “"— Terman, L. M., and Miles, 0. 0. Sex and personality. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1936. ' Vaught, G. M. The relationship of role identification and ego strength to sex differences in the rod-and-frame test. J.Pers., 1965, 2;, 271. Walters, C. Surley, J. T., and Parsons, O. A. Differences in male and female responses to underwater sensory deprivation: An eXploratory study. g. Nerv. Ment. 2;§., 1962, 125, 302. Walters, C., Parsons, O. A. Shurley, J. T. Male-female differences in underwater sensory isolation. Brit. J. Psychiat., 1964, 192, 290. Weller, G. M. and Bell, R. Q. Basal skin conductance and neonatal state. Child Developm., 1965, 26, 647. Wicks, F. G. The inner world of man. New York: Holt, 1948. Witkin, H. A., Dyk, R. B. Paterson, H. F., Goodenough, D. R. and Karp, S. A. Ps cholo ical differentiation: Studies “2§ development. New York: W1Iey, 1962. Witryol, S. L. and Kaess, W. A. Sex differences in social memory tasks. g. abnorm. soc. Psychol., 1957, 25, 343. Wrightsman, L. Measurement of philoSOphies of human nature. Psychol. Reports, 1965, 14, 743. APPENDIX A Original Pool of Items Uniqueness 1. I am different from other people. 2. I feel at ease even when I stand out from others. 3. My goal is to become an exceptional individual. 4. I would like to be an innovator. 5. I am interested in the biographies of famous individuals. 6. I prefer to stress how I differ from others than how I am similar to them. 7. Not every person can be a unique individual. 8. I feel best when I am like other persons and fit in twith them. 9. I would rather be a leader than a follower. 10. I prefer to work independently. 11. I don't mind being alone with myself. 12. I can become anything I set my mind to. 13. I alone am responsible for how my life turns out. 14. I am good at creative thinking. 15. It is not enough for me to be just average. 16. It is better to have high aspirations than modest ones. 17. Once I have determined what my goal is, I am not easily dissuaded from pursuing it. 18. High goals and ambitions are for dreamers. 19. If I were a great person, I would enjoy most peOple's 112 113 recognition and being in the spotlight. 20. I trust my own judgment even though many peeple don't trust it. ‘ 114 Competition 1. Nice guys finish last. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. Competition does deve10p a person's character. Winning a game is at least as important as playing a game. The mark of an outstanding individual are his outstanding achievements. Competition brings out the best in people. My goal is to become the best in whatever I do. I could not accept flunking out of school. Competition is the key to success. It is very important that I make something of myself and be somebody. I compare my achievements with those of others. The best person does win the game. I am disappointed if I do not compare favorably with others. ’ ‘ It is said that the meek shall inherit the earth. It is important doing best at my work even if it means personal discomfort. I don't accept failure. I believe that "if at first you don‘t succeed, try and try again". I don't admire a person who finds his niche in life and pursues it. I could not telerate being a nobody. Most peOple live lives of quiet desperation. One man's gain is achieved through another man's loss. Success is the measure by which persons should be judged. 115 Pleasing 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 9. 10., ll. 12. l3. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. ‘ 20. How I appear to others is important to me. One of my major concerns is that peOple like me. Criticism of my appearance upsets me. I would like to be the most popular person on campus. I would rather be attractive than intelligent. It is better to be a good person than to be a great person. A person who has no friends is unhappy. Getting along with other people is more desirable than being an unsociable genius. To win the approval of people, I try to do what would please them.v Independence can offend other persons. Criticism of my ideas causes me to give them up. Criticism of my actions causes me to change them. I'm afraid to have high aspirations because people will laugh at me. My goal in life is to be desirable. I do almost anything to please the people who are important to me. There are many things I would do, if I were certain people would not disapprove of them. I try not to diSagree with anyone. I seldom criticize the ideas of others. Virtue is the measure by which peOple should be judged. I seldom contradict my professors. 116 'ngsiological Determinism l. The actions of most people are biologically determined. 2. my physiologiCal constitution determines what I do. 3. 4. 5. When I am 111, my mind is entirely filled with physical discomfort. When I am ill, I accommodate my activities to my ill health. The choices and decisions of my mind have little effect on my body. My body runs its own course independent of my mind. If I am a failure in some area, it is because of some innate physiological deficiency. If I am a success in some area, it is due to an innate physiOIOgical proficiency. 9. People act differently because they are made differently. 10. 11. 12. l3. 14. 15. l6. 17. 18. 19. 20. My physiology determines who I will become. _ When I am 111, I am entirely prevented from doing my work. Active or passive emotional dispositions are determined .by male or female sex organs. PhysiolOgical differences are at least as important in causing differences in intelligence as are cultural 'factors. When I feel unhappy, this is due to some hormone imbalance. You are what you eat. Heredity plays the major role in determining the kind of person an individual will become. Body build (height, weight) is important in determining emotional dispositions. Talent is inherited rather than learned. An individual cannot rise above the intelligence of his parents. The mind is a product of chemical interactions of nerve 'cells. 117 Instructions used in the Administration of the Original and Revised Item Pools This is a study Of opinions and attitudes people have about themselves and events and issues that concern them. We have tried to cover may different points Of view. You may find yourself agreeing strongly with some of the state- ments, disagreeing just as strongly with others and perhaps uncertain about some. Whether you agree or disagree with any statement, you can be sure that many other people feel the same as you do. What we want to know is ygpp personal Opinion on all Of the subsequent statements. Answer quickly. Although you might feel that your answers would be somewhat different if you stopped to think about each item, your first impulse is likely to be a fairly accurate "average" of the way you feel. This does, however, require that you pgag‘ggghbipgg. Mark yppp Opinion on the answer sheet according to how much you agree or disagree with any statement on the following pages. Mark (1) if you "strongly disagree" with a statement, mark (2) if you disagree, (3) if you are undecided, (4) if you agree, and (5) if you "strongly agree". Please respond 32.23231 statement. A reminder of what each number means appears at the top of each page. Be sure that the number of statements on the following pages agree with the number on your answer sheet when you are marking your Opinion. (-) APPENDIX B Revised and Expanded Pool of Items Uniqueness 1. 2. 3. 4. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. There is nothing which distinguishes me from other peOple. I am not like everyone else. Many Of my actions are directed at demonstrating that I am not like everyone else. I don't perceive myself as an "average" person, as resemb- ling most peOple in thought, manner and dress. I do not follow the crowd in many of my thoughts and actions. I avoid peOple who always follow the usual social con- ventions (in manner, thoughts and actions). I don't want to be what everyone else wants to be. I don't desire what everyone else desires. In groups I often take charge and direct the activities of the group. I only participate in groups in which I can be a leader. I enjoy group activities for the attention and recogni- tion I receive from other peOple. I don't care to be in a group in which I have to submerge my identity and become like everyone in the group. I enjoy group activities if I can demonstrate to others that I am different from them (by becoming the leader, for example) rather than similar to them. I Often Speak up in class. I enjoy the attention and recognition I receive when I speak up in class. 118 (-) l6. l7._ 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. 30. 31. 32. 33. 34. 35. 36. 37. 38. 119 I Often initiate and direct classroom activities. I enjoy a class only if I can contribute to it significantly. I am a nonconformist. I am a unique individual. I have attributes that mark my unique identity. I have abilities and skills that are unique only to me. There are things I can do which no one else can do. I have an outlook toward the world and toward people which is entirely my own and which demonstrates my individuality. I am uniquely different from other people. There is no person just exactly like me in the entire world. I would rather be a leader than a follower. I prefer to work independently. I am good at creative thinking. I am an important person. When I compare myself to other people, I find that there igegething, or very little, which distinguishes me from When I compare myself to other people, I find that I am different from most peOple. I have unique interests. I belong to an exclusive club or organization. I have one (or more) exceptional abilities. I have unique hobbies. I consider the way I dress to be unique. The clubs and organizations I belong to are exclusive. I know of no one else who is quite like me. I have tried things which none Of my friends have tried. (-) (-) (-) 120 39. I have done some far out things just to be different. 40. I try to dress differently from my friends. 41. I often have original ideas. 42. At parties I am the life of the party. 43. What I buy is not influenced by TV commercials. 44. my ambitions make me different from most people. 45. I tend to be a crowd follower. 46. I have a large group of friends. 47. Most Of my time is spent with friends and acquaintances. Noteleegatively scored items are indicated by a minus sign before the item number. (-) (-) (-) (-) (-) 121 Socially Dubious Expression Of Uniquenesp 51. 52. 53. 54. 55. 56. 57. 58. 59. 60. 61. 62. 63. 64. 65. 66. 67. 68. 69. 70. I feel upset when I am with people-who are different fromjme. I feel uneasy when I stand out from others. I'm a member Of the silent majority. In Order to get along I tend to be what peOple eXpect me to be. I like the feeling of security that comes from knowing that I'm not too different from others. I don't care how I am different from other people, as long as I am different from them. It does not bother me that people don't like the fact that I am different from them. I don't pay attention tO people who criticize me for being an individualist. I don't mind being noticeably different from others. I can be easily spotted in a group of peOple. I am conspicuous in a crowd. I try to gain recognition even through means which some peop1e_don't accept. I differ from people in ways which many people would criticize. I don't dO what peOple expect me to do. Some peOple might consider me strange. Some peOple might consider my outlook as weird. I have done some far out things just to be different. People consider me a loud-mannered person. In many situations I don't "fit in" well with others. I search for even unorthodox ways to show that I am different. 122' Desire to be Unique 101. 102. 103. 104. 105. 106. 107. 108. 109. 110. 111. 112. 113. 114. 115. 116. _ 117. 118. 119. 120. 121. My secret ambition is to become a great individual. If I were a great person, I would enjoy most of all people's recognition and being in the spotlight. It is very important that I make something of myself and be somebody. I could not tolerate being a nobody. I wish I had some exceptional abilities. I desire to be like no one else in the world. I have phantasies in which I am a famous personality. I hope to become an independent person. Life is most worth while if one has distinction and recognition. I aspire to be an individualist. I wish I had more independent ideas. I wish I could break away from the crowd. In groups I wish I could take charge and control the activities Of the group. I am disappointed with group activities because the majority of the time I have to be a silent participant. I wish I could speak up in class more Often. wish I had the personality of a leader. desire to influence and control other people. desire to be more than just an "average" person. 94 #1 #4 id wish people would recognize my creative abilities. My goal in life is to become an improtant person. The possibility that I'm like every one else is depressing. 123 Competition 151. 152'. 153. 154. 155. 156. 157. 158. 159. 160. 161. 162. 163. 164. 165. 166. 167. 168. 169. For me, winning the game is at least as important as playing the game. My goal is to become the best in whatever I do. It is important to do the best at my work even if it means personal discomfort. Competition pressures people into developing their abilities. Competition compels me to test and demonstrate my skills against those Of others. I am impelled to show that I am better than others in competitive situations. The greatest merit of competition is that it allows the best person to show that he is best. I'm not a "good" loser. I feel humiliated whenever I lose. Losing pressures me into doing better next time. I'm a winner more often than a loser. The quality Of my own work declines withOut the pressures Of competition. I work harder in graded courses than in pass-fail courses. - The quality of my work improves under the pressure Of competition. I am a competitor. TO gain the recognition of other people I aim for superior performance in competitive situations. I don't accept failure. I believe that "if at first you don't succeed, try and try again". . Winning demonstrates to others that I am exceptional. Losing demonstrates to everyone that there is nothing special about me. 124 170. I work harder in competitive situations. 171. Competition pressures me to develop my abilities. 172. Winning pressures me into doing even better next time. (-) 125 Pleasipg 201. My major concern is that people like me. 202. To win the approval of peOple I try to do what would please them. 203. My goal in life is to be desirable. 204. People like me. 205. People like me because I know how to please them. 206. Criticism of my appearance upsets me. 207. Criticism of my actions causes me to change them. 208. Criticism of my ideas causes me tO give them up. 209. I don't condemn myself if other peOple disapprove of me. ~ 210. There are many things I would do, if I were certain peOple would not disapprove Of them. 211. I don't say much at social gatherings because I'm afraid peOple will criticize me and laugh at me. 212. I get tense and anxious when I think other people are disapproving of me. 213. I try not to disagree with anyone. 214. I seldom contradict my professors. 215. I seldOm criticize the ideas of others. 216. I try to see what others think before I take a stand. 217. Before I do something, I consider how people will react to it.) ‘ 218. PeOple who criticize me don't like me very much. 219. I like people who don't criticize me. 220. I listen to the Opinions of peOple who like me. 221. I don't criticize peOple who like me. 126 222. I don't criticize my friends. 223. I take criticism personally. 224. I feel humiliated and hurt when peOple criticize my position. 127 Physiological Determinism 251. 252. 253. 254. 255. 256. 257. 258. 259. 260. 261. 262. 263. 264. 265. The actions of people are biologically determined. My physiological constitution determines what I do. When I am ill, I cannot concentrate on anything but my physical discomfort. If I am a failure in some area, it is because of some innate physiological deficiency. - If I am successful in some area, it is due to an innate physiological proficiency. People act differently because they are made differently. My physiology determines who I will become. When I am ill, I am entirely prevented from doing my work. Active or passive emotional dispositions are determined by the sex of the individual. Physiological differences are more important in causing differences in intelligence than are cultural factors. Heredity plays the major role in determining the kind Of person an individual will become. Body build (height, weight) is important in determining emotional diSpositions. Talent is inherited rather than learned. The different abilities Of males and females are due to inherent biological differences between them. Worries about my health prevent me from doing as well as I could. 128 Status ‘ Subscale from w. Scott, personal value scales, Values and or anizations:'g stud of fraternities and sororities. Chicago: Rand McNaIIy, 1965. ‘The items have been reworded to the first person singular. 301. 302. 303. 304. 305. 306. 307. 308. 309. 310. 311. 312. 313. 314. 315. 316. I am respected by people who are themselves worthwhile. I receive recognition for my achievements. I am in a position to direct and mold others' lives. I make sure that I am respected. I am in a position to command respect from others. I have all the respect that I am entitled to. I'm looked up to by others. I have the ability to lead others. I'm not able to do anything better than other peOple. I'm not recognized for my true worth. I am in a subordinate position. I have little effect on other people's actions. I am not able to exert any influence on things around me. I don't develop contacts which could improve my position. I'm content with my inferior position. I don't take pride in my achievements. The scale has actually ten direct and ten reverse scored items. Four items were Obviously inconsistent in thematic content and were left out. These were: £3 Doing what one is told Being dignified in bearing and manner Associating with worthless people~ Acting beneath one's dignity. 129 Independence Subscale from L. Wrightsman, Measurement of philosophies of human nature. Psychological Reports. 1964, 14. 743-751. The items have been reworded to the first person singular. 351. 352. 353. 354. ~355. 356. 357. 358. 359. 360. 361 o 362. 363. 364. I have the courage of my convictions. I make my own decisions, uninfluenced by public Opinion. I get ahead through achievement rather than popularity with others. I stick to my Opinion if I think I'm right, even if others disagree. I don't believe in cheating and avoid it even if I see many others doing it. I am respected by society for my novel ideas. I speak out for what I believe in. I change my opinion under an onslaught of criticism, even though I don't change the way I feel. I don't make a move until I find out what other peOple think. My success does not depend on how hard I work, but on how well I fit in with the crowd. I cheat on a test when everybody else does, even though I have a set of ethical standards. I don't go against the crowd. I rely on someone else to make my important decisions for me. I rarely express my Opinion in a group when I see the others disagreeing with me. 130 Altruism Subscale from L. Wrightsman, Measurement of philosophies of 401. 402. 403. 404. 405. 406. 407. 408. 409. 410. 411. human nature. Psycholpgical Reports. 1964, g5, 743-751. Most peOple try to apply the Golden Rule even in today's complex society. Most people do not hesitate to go out Of their way to help someone in trouble. Most peOple will act as "Good Samaritans" if given the Opportunity. "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you" is a motto most people follow. The typical person is sincerely concerned about the problems of others. Most people with a fallout shelter would let their neighbors stay in it during a nuclear attack. Most people would stop and help a person whose car is disabled. It's only a rare person who would risk his own life and limb to help someone else. People pretend to care more about one another than they really do. Most peOple inwardly dislike putting themselves out to help other people. People are usually out for their own good. The following items appeared Obviously inconsistent in content and were deleted: (-) The average person is conceited It's pathetic to see an unselfish person in today's world because so many peOple take advantage of him. (- ) Most peOple exaggerate their troubles in order to get sympathy. (-) (-) (-) (-) (-) 131 Internal-External Control Subscale from P. Gurin, G. Gurin, R. Lao, M. Beattie, Internal-external control in the motivational dynamics of Negro youth, Journal pf Social Issues, 1969. Factor II: Personal Control It consistes of five forced choice items. These have been. converted into Likert items and stated in the first person singular. 451. 452. 453. 454. 455. 456. 457. 458. 459. 460. I find that what is going to happen will happen. Trusting to fate does not work well for me. I have to make a decision to take a definite course of action. What happens to me is my own doing. I don't have enough control over the direction my life is taking. When I make plans, I also make them work. I don't plan ahead because things turn out to be a matter of good or bad fortune anyhow. For me getting what I want has little to do with luck. I decide what to do by "flipping a coin." I have little influence over the things that happen to me. Chance or luck doesn't play an important role in my life. 132 Biographical Variables 1. 2. 3. 4. 7. Record on the answer sheet whether you are male or female. What is your Grade Point Average? Choose your answer from the following possibilities. 1 l. 00 - 2. 00 2 2.00 - 2.50 3 2050 " 3000 4 3.00 - 3.50 5 3050 "' 4000 Did you participate in campaigning for a presidential candidate in the Michigan primary election? $13 Yes 2 NO DO you plan to campaign for a presidential candidate this fall? (I) Yes 2 NO Have you participated in any competitive sports during the past month? 13 Yes 2 NO Are there any other competitive activities other than sports in which you have participated during the past month? 21; Yes 2 No How much time do you spend on grooming each day? (For example, getting dressed, combing hair, putting on makeup, baths, etc.). 1 half an hour 2 1 hour‘ 3 2 hours 4 3 hours 5 4 hours. How much money have you spent on your spring wardrobe? Less than $50 $50 - $100 $100 - $200 $200 a $300 .9300 and more. U14>WNH APPENDIX C APPENDIX C Item Means and Standard Deviations, Cluster Means and Coefficient Alphas 133 Cluster Item Item Item Cluster Cluster Mean Standard Mean Coeff. Deviation Alpha Uni ueness 2.359 83 GeneraI Uniqueness 2.451 74 19 2.914 0.928 23 2.449 0.980 30 2.525 0.910 4 2.456 1.096 29 1.101 0.826 24 3.052 0.968 37 2.579 0.969 22 2.535 1.042 Unique Abilities 2.130 61 20 2.125 1.168 21 1.914 1.099 33 2.352 1.028 Unique Interests 2.174 60 ‘ 34 1.884 1.016 31 2.403 1.000 44 2.236 1.036 Personal Creativity 2.450 62 27 2.340 1.044 41 2.560 0.848 Personal Importance 2.718 100 28 2.718 0.954 Unique Activities 2.310 100 38 2.310 1.059 Desire for Leadership 1.738 72 Leadership in Groups 1.370 54 10 0.720 0.774 13 1.697 0.922 11 1.692 1.059 134 Cluster Item Item Item Mean Standard Deviation Leadership in Class 14 1.951 1.227 16 1.405 0.948 Enjoyment of Leadership in Class 15 1.910 0.985 17 1.606 1.107 I am a Leader 9 2.120 1.128, 25 2.542 0.994 Deviance Conspicuous 61 1.449 0.837 Attempt to be Different 70 1.127 0.825 67 1.718 1.049 62 1.403 0.930 Deviant 63 1.961 0.960 65 2.440 1.032 66 2.208 1.092 Pleasin Disapproval is upsetting 206 2.183 1.127 212 1.949 1.064 223 1.979 1.057 _ 224 1.475 0.918 209 2.630 0.936 Compliance out of Fear of Disapproval 207‘ 1.995 1.025 208 1.083 0.857 210 1.632 1.003 211 1.106 0.939 216 1.544 0.994 217 2.067 1.015 A 213 1.227 0.822 Desire for Approval 201 1.870 1.092 202 1.903 1.132 203 2.102 1.073 54 1.539 1.051 Cluster Cluster Mean 1.678 1.758 2.331 1.758 1.449 1.416 2.203 1.857 2.043 1.522 1.854 Coeff. Alpha 65 44 59 66 100 54 68 87 72 68 63 135 Cluster Item Item Item Cluster Cluster Mean Standard Mean Coeff. Deviation Alpha Nonconformity 1.995 54 18 2.032 1.022 45 1.333 0.900 5 2.620 0.964 Differentiation 2.111 69 52 1.773 1.080 55 1.819 1.016 57 2.373 0.961 59 2.479 0.890 Desire for Distinction 2.049 77 PHanIa31es on DlsflncIion 2.062 41 101 2.412 1.141 107 1.711 1.250 Need for Distinction 2.413 55 103 2.852, 1.098 104 2.451 1.144 120 1.935 1.076 Need for Recognition ‘ 1.928 44 102 1.745 1.157 109 1.975 1.053 119 2.063 0.927 Need for Control 1.800 60 , 113 1.889 0.926 116 1.995 0.962 117 1.516 0.981 Com etition 2.108 87 Improved Performance through Competition 2.291 83 162 1.581 1.053 163 2.315 1.079 164 2.215 1.079 1170 2.560 0.998 171 2.419 1.031 172 2.153 1.047 155 2.634 1.050 165 2.449 1.098 Losing Hurts 1.894 51 158 1.634 1.063 159 1.461 0.983 160 2.586 0.970 Distinction through Competition 1.826 67 151 2.021 1.175 156 2.116 1.095 157 1.391 1.094 166 2.081 1.028 168 1.521 0.905 136 Cluster Item Item Item Cluster Cluster Mean Standard Mean Coeff. Deviation Alpha Desire for Excellence 2.704 100 152 2.704 1.106 Physiological Determinism 1.339 74 Dhysiology is Destiny 1.187 69 251 0.995 1.025 252 1.563 1.000 254 1.019 0.918 255 1.194 0.974 257 1.162 0.870 Sex is Destiny 1.228 46 259 0.993 1.003 264 1.463 1.113 Abilities are Inherited 1.228 43 260 1.153 0.965 261 1.303 0.990 . Bodily Constitution is Destiny 1.944 19 262 1.741 1.209 256 2.146 1.170 APPENDIX D APPENDIX D Residual Cluster 7. I don't want to be what everyone else wants to be. 8. I don't desire what everyone else desires. 12. I don't care to be in a group in which I have to submerge my identity and become like everyone in the group. 218. People who criticize me don't like me very much. 219. I like people who don't criticize me. 221. I don't criticize people who like me. 222. I don't criticize my friends. 53. I'm a member of the silent majority. 68. People consider me a loud-mannered person. 69. In many situations I don't fit in well with others. 118. I desire to be more than just an "average" person. 215. I seldom criticize the ideas of others. 60. I can be easily Spotted in a group of people. 205. People like me because I know how to please them. 154. Competition pressures peOple into developing_theirA abilities. '167. I don't accept failure. I believe that "If at first you don't succeed, try and try again." 253. When I am ill, I cannot concentrate on anything but my physical discomfort. 258. When I am ill, I am entirely prevented from doing my work. 265. Worries about my health prevent me from doing as well as I could. . 137 APPENDIX E Correlation Matrix of Individual Identity Clusters 138 Uniqueness 501. 502. 503. 504 O 505. 506. 139 List of Cluster Labels General Uniqueness (19, 23, 29, 4, 30, 24, 37, 22) Unique Abilities £20, 21, 33 Unique Interests 34. 31, 44 Personal Creativity 27 41) Personal Importance 28) Unique Activities (38) Desire for Leadership 507. 508. 509. 510. Deviance 511. 512. 513. Pleasing 514. 515. 516. 517. 518. Leadership in Groups (10, 13, 11) Leadership in Class (14, 16) Enjoyment of Leadership in Class (15, 17) I am a Leader (9, 25) Conspicuous (61) Attempt to be Different (7o, 67, 62) Deviant (63, 65, 66) Disapproval is Upsetting (206, 212, 223, 224, 209) Compliance out of Fear of Disapproval (207, 208, 210, 211, 216, 217, 213) Desire for Approval (201 202, 203, 54) Nonconformity (18, 45. 5) Differentiation (52, 55. 57, 59) Desire for Distinction 519. 520. 521. 522. .Need for Recognition Phantasies on Distinction (101, 107 Need for Distinction 2103, 104, 120 ' 102, 109, 119 Need for Control (115, 116, 117). Competition 523. 524. 525. 526. Improved Performance through Competition (162, 163, 164, 170, 171, 172, 155, 165) Losing Hurts (158, 159. 160) Distinction through Competition (151, 156, 157, 166, 168) Desire for Excellence (152) 140 Ph siolo ical Determinism 527. Physiology is Destiny (251, 252, 254, 255, 257) 528. Sex is Destiny (259, 264) 529. Abilities are Inherited (260,261) 530. Bodily Constitution is Destiny (262,256) 141 N. o N._ OH. HH. O H o- OH. O N. H- NH- OH. N- N. oH. O. N- OH. O N H NH- O. NN- ON. ON. HH. VH. mm H. m. OH- oH- oNh m- OH- NO- ON- OH N. o oH- NH- OH. NH- nH- O. m- «H. O- N- O o- N- N- cH- HN- H. OH. Nm 0 m v. nH- vnu H. a H. H- on N. on. N.- nH- H... H- ..H- >- an ...- H «a x... «7. 0H.- ..H- H...- NHn «H. ...H- H H. NH OH. OH. NN. OH- NH. OH. ON. 4 O. n .- OH- NH- OH. OH- OH. OH- OH. OH. HH- a. O. H- ON. HN. ON- HH. NH- O. OH- N HH- N- O- O. m N- OH. HH O. c O- OH. N- O. ON- OH. NH. O. N- O- N- O. O. ON- ON. OH- HH- OH. OH H NH H OH. O. N e O. OH. OH O OH O. OH. N. O. N- O. N. O- n O m. H- OH. OH- N- O. .H. N. «m N NH «H N N O OH O O. OH OH O H o- e H n O NH O O OH O O- o- H O OH- H s HON H. m H H. O H H N. OH. oH OH OH O. O- O o- O. n. H. N- O- N. e O- OH- .H- O- .H-.H- N. NON o «H O n- O O OH H- NH- ON HH N v. n. a N OH. H a HH. n- H O. N- NH- O m- N. 1N. H HON .- NH H HH- 0. N H- o- mH- N H o n. H- n- v. o. n- O- v- N- N o O u- N- v. NH-.N NH. nHN O m H. n- N. O- N OH- OH- OH N. O. N. o- o- OH. N H. O. H N N m H- H o- O- N. H H- NHN H oH H. O- oHn N. O NH- NH- OH H O NH- OH. NH. O- H- O. HH- O- O. m N- O- n- O. OH. N. .N. N. OHN O o w. NH. .N- O- NH. oH- «N- N N. o O- .H- OH- OH- HH- O. H- HH- O- o- O. O. O- HH- O. NH- HH- ON- HHN a “H o- H- a e a m. HH- vN o o N- v- o- m 0. NH- O H- n m n m- c. o- n- HH- H. n OHN O NH N NH. N- e N- N. HH- o O OH O- NH. O- H. N. O. N O- O O O. OH- NH. «H. O. OO- HH- OH- HON n. w w OH. no N. on HHI 0H. ca v0 N n. o- N- N- on on an u- v- .I v mm. A. c- v”. m.3 H- m- an O o. H O. OH” O N. O. N. n O N o OH. HH- oH- .- N. O. OH. OH. O. N. O. O - H- O. OH. .H- N. .NON n N N- o- H“ o O vH- HN- mH o 0 OH- NH. N- .- 4. NH- m- HH- H m- H HH- H- m- HH- n.- o- N- «NN c m H o- uHr H- u H. o. OH N e oH- o- H- N- N o c m- H N r N N m n- n. H N ONN n m N. n. n. N- o 0. HH- so N 2 HH- H- OH. HH- 0. OH- N- OH. N- N H e- v- OH- N. oH-lm- a- NHN O N a- N- HH- N a H- mH- N m CH v- H- N N a- v m o m N- 0 NH- N n- e- O. .N- N HON s. N. e. N a O- m N m- o v H 0N N n O »H .H n o N N H OH n HH «H N .N o no NH NH OH H H O O O O O N H- ON H. O o OH OH NH O o N- H HH N NH OH O .H o HO OH NH OH N o o H NH O N NH H ON NH N O OO OH OH O O a HH NN HH NN ON OH HH NH HO HN NN NH O O OH OH O O NH OH eN O o- N. O- OH O OH N OH O N. e e- O O- O. H. O NO OH NO ON o N OH NH OH e ON .ON NH ON O OH O. NH NH N O O HH N HH N N H HH- O NH NO OH O. NH N O OH O OH H OH OH ON OH O NH OH N N O O HH H e N H o- O O. H N N ON NH Ora e . o NH OH oH OH O ON «H OH O O a oH NH NH OH o OH O o O 4H OH O N N H O N . ne-iHe NH O oH no N. O. O NH OH 4 v o N. N- OH N O OH OH OH NH O NH AH NH ON N m m He he HH pH on OH OH ON OH HH OH OH ON H O OH NH O O O OH N H «H OH ”NH OH O OH OH NH NH H OO ON ON ON NH N OH O H- NH OH o H. mH O OH OH O- O. O- N N e .H. O NH NH m OH O OH ON OH ON HO ON ON OH . 4 HH OH N O O NH NH OH O c O n O O .N NH . OH .H OH NH .H NO ON ON NO O. NH Na .H H HH OH ON O HH NH NN OH HH N O H N O N .H OH OH O H oH ON on NN H Ne Nm o OH NH a HH O OH 3 a HH HN o v o n O HH OH OH .NH NH OH ON mH m H oH H NN H O NO NN ON O. O- OH OH N H- N. O N NH N o N- N o v. HH NH HH ON mH ON ON ea ON ON NN OH NN HO OO OH O o e. O OH O N HH NH OH HH H O NH O .H OH OH NH ON mH o v“ mH oH eH NH no N Hn N N N H v- n. O- H NH N n. m- H. n- n. N. .m N- NH ON mH mH NH HH o e HH O .- .H N OOH OH NH OH .H NN H NN NH NH HN a. HH oH OH O .NH OH .mn o . O oH oH H. . HH HH O. O N OH OOH H NH HN ON OH ON OH OH HN OH NH OH ON NH HN ON ON OH NH N . OH .H HH OH o OH O N NH oH O. O. NH NN ON ON oH O OH OH NH OH O _OH .HH «N H. .H mH m e ON OH OH ON OH OH .- H OH NH O. o. s OH ON HN mm «H OH O NH H OH OH .OH mN NN NH N .H O H O N O O N O N- OH HN NH O .H NN ON NH OH NH OH NN NN ON ON NH .NH HN O. NH N NH N- n H- o HH 0 H- OH N- NN ON NN OH NN OO On NN NO ON On HN ON N N NN .HO ON H N N NH. N- OH OH o NH HH N. O O- NH OH ON ON ON OH O. ON OO ON oH HH NH OH HN NN NN HN .O O m OH OH NH O NH NN HN v N H NN ON ON HN NH NN ON NH NN ON OH HH OH O. OH OH HN NO HO u HH N N o NH NH mH o .N HH OH NH OH H nN OH NO MO NN Nc O NH NH HN .H HN O .NO HN HN HH NH OH O o OH oH HH O NH NH N H oH O OH H ON ON ON an Os ON NN mN Ha ON NH .NO NN ON N N O OH O O. O N O N OH O- HN HN OH OH oH OO OH OH NH ON OH NH NN NN . 4. .HO NO NN HH N o OH OH «- N N m o HH O- OH OH OH O NN HN 7H HH OOH NN NH NN OO NN ON ON “NH OO NO N m N .H N O- e H O N- O H- OH OH NH NH NN OH NH OH HN ma N O» ON HN NH .ON .HH ON . ON N w. «H NH HH N O N HH N O O. OH OH OH NH ON ON OH OH OH HO NN NN HN ON NN OH ”NO ON HO HH o OH O OH N .O O OH O NH O. OH ON O OH ON NN HN OH HN ON O ON NH NN H ON HO ON 4 HH- N. O NH OH O O N OH O. O N- O NH OH OH NH NN NN OH o NH OH ON ON ON ON ON .HN N NN O O O O NH O. a o OH OH O O NH ON OH «H OH on NN .HN NO on HO me OH NH Om ON .NO NO ON NH N O OH OH O NH .H NH O. OH N- OH ON ON ON HN ON HN NO HN NN OO O. ON ON ON NN .HH oe OH Nu ON HO ON O NH OH OH OH HH OH OH O» oN He NN cc H» on On HN ON NN NO ON OO O ON .HN NH HOrcNHHN m?» 7H NHHHayaryou xHaNHc oanOCH n2< arNHNHHNNONUNNHzH NONNON 142 NH OH .H ON HN OH OH OH H H. OH OH OH OH OH NO NH O H OH OH ON HN O O NH OH HH- N ON HO O. m. NH. ON. nm. N. O. oN- ON- NH O. OH OH. NO. NH. OH. ON. NH. H. ON. a. n. O. OH. NH- mN. NO- ON- OH- vu. mHm O. OH «H. ON- ONO O- O HH. ON- OH N NH HH- ON. OH- ON- NO. ON. ON. HN- HH- OH- N. HH. N- «O. OO- OH- NN- N - NHH N ON N O- O N NH O- NN- H. HN OH O- OH- O H. HH. H- O O- O. O O O- OH- H- O. OH- N. «- HHH N mH O. OH. OH» H- O. OH. HO. Ho O OH OH. OH. OH. HH. OH. OH. O. OH. o- N H oH- NH. mH- mH. ON- HH. NH. mHm - OH» H H OH- HO- NO NH OH NH- HN- O. NH- O. O. H. OH. N- n. o O- N- O. NH- OH-.H- O- OHH H N O OH H NH .NH O OO O OH N OO ON mH OH OH N O ON O ON ON O .OH OH OHH H ON ON NN H OH NO HO HO O OH OH HN .NH OH OH OH OH O OH N O- HH OH- H OH NHH O NH OH OH OH O ON H OH O O O OH NH OH OH O OH O O O OH OH O .N O HHH OO OH HN O. HO On Op NHO OH NN NH OH o . N H NN O m HH OH NH NN OH N. .HH NN OHH ON O OH Om Om NO NO HO. O O HN ON ,NH O HN OH NO ON O O O HH HH H .H HN OOH «O O Ow HN HN mm 0O OH. H OH oH an N OH ON HO NH HH HH 9 o H «H HH .OH NN mnm OO OO O. OO NO NO HO HO. N O OH O O O H- N ON ON N O O- O N O. HH OH NHm OH NH OH NH H. O O HH O O- O. N OOH OH NH OH OH NN NH NN NH OH HN OH OH OH OH O ”NH OH HOH O m N OH OH H- O HH HH O. m N OH OOH OH NH HN ON NH ON OH OH HN OH OH OH ON NH ON ON OOH ON OH OH O ON OH NH OO OH NO O H OH ON OO OO OH OH OO OO NO NH OH NH NH OH ON ON ONN OO .OH OH NH ON N O HH NH NH OH O- NH O- OO OO OO ON OO ON NO O. NO O. NO HO O. OO OO NH .H. OO OOH OH mH OH OH OH ON ON NN OH OH OO NH OO NO OO OO ON HO NO OO OH NO HO ON HO ON HO ON HO NO NOm OH w OH ON ON a vH n NN OH H N- ”O ac on 0N «O OO No on O ov Ow NH HO HO HO O. ”N on H-n n oH H. on. n H N n O N. N. H n O H OH N >- m. n N H HH. O H O OH H .N m ONm O. N. H o- O. O O .O NH- H o- H O- O. o O N O. O O. NH H OH O NH N OH- O. .N N HON OH OH O N N. H N H O- O- o O N O N H H O N O- O N- H O- O. O- HH- ON- H O- NON H m u H O N O O O. H O. O O H. O N- O H H H. H O N H- O- N- OH- OH- H. H- HON H N m N. O. N H O O H O OH O. N. H H. O. N. N N- O O O O- O O- ,O- H. O O- OON O N O. H- O H N O O. O O- O H O- O O- N- H- O O- O- N- H- N- O- O- OH- HH- N- H- .ON O. m o O H. OH O O O. O N- OH O. N- N. N N. O- O. N- OH N O. O- O- O- O- NH- O. H. NON O OH m N. N. O O O O. OH NH OH H- OH. OH N O. O- H. O. O. H N- H O- O- N- HH- HH- O. NON N ON O HH. O NH O HH H- O O ON O O. .OH H O. O- N. O- O N O. O. O. O- O- HH- N. O. HON H OH H O. O- H H. H O- HH O NO O N- N- O- N. O- OH. OH. O N O- O- N- N- N- O. N- HH- .HN o n 0 HH. N. N O mH «- o O NH N. v- _v O. OH- O. N. m- m- n- H N- o- N- NH. m.- HH- H- NON OH m OH O- N OH NH OH N O HH HN O O- O OH N- O N- O HH OH O H- O- O O- OH- H O- HHN O O O H O O O NH O OH O O- N. O H H H O .O HH HH OH OH O O N N N .O H NHH N OH N H OH OH ON O O ON OO OH O H O N OH H O. OH O H N OH H O O H. H. H OOH OH NH OH HN NH HN OH OH O ON ON OH H O HH H O O- O NH O OH O H- O H H- H H O HOH O OH OH H. O OH H O O. OH H ON NH. N. O O O H- O H OH OH N O- OH- N O- NH- N- m-. NHH HH OH OH ON OH OH OH OH O ON HN O HH O NH O O O N OH N O OH O O OH N H HO H HOH O OH a HH H O O H O. OH OH NN n. o. v H N. HH- .- H. O- c. n N- O H- «- HH- O- O- HOH O H m- OH O OH OH N H O OH N H. O- O O. OH OH OH O H O O H H OH O- O .H. H HHH . ON OH OH H OH OH N O. ON OH OH H- N. O. O O O- N H O O- H- H O- N N- OH- N- O OOH O m N O O O O H N. O O O N O. O NH. N O. O O. O. H- H. O N. O O N. N. H- OOH O m N ON OH O OH OH OH NO ON N O N OH H. H O N OH O O OH O N OH O O .N H HHH NH O O OH OH HH HH O O OH HH O- O N HH N- c .O O OH O O O H- O O N- O O OH OOH H N. N NH O OH OH H O HH ON OH O. O- O- H O O HH O OH OH OH H N HH O- N. OH O NNH O O O OH OH NH O H O NO NH O O O. O N. O H O NH O O OH O O HH H- N N OH HNH O H O. NH O N N O N NH OH O O H- O O- H N N OH O H- H O OH OH OH. O .H- OH HNH N m H. OH NH H n H H- HH OH H N O- O H. H O N O H O- O O OH HH O- H .O OH .HH O H. O OH H- O H. O. O. OH OH H H H. o O H. O O. H H N- O O OH O N- m H H- OHH OH OH O O OH OH O O O- OH OH O O N. N H- N- H O. N H O H N H. N O- OH- O. H- NHH HH HN «N ON 0. OH ON n o no ON HN OH H H O NH O a N N o n v N N N- O. H m NHH OH NH O OH O N O O. O. OH ON OH N N- a H n O O. N. o- H OH O H n m- H. H. H HHH O. HH H ON ON OH NH OH H OH NO OH O O N O O O- O. H O H O H. N- N O- O. ”H. N OHH m. NN N O O OH OH H- O. OH O O H H ON ON HH O HH O OH OH .OH O O .N H N. H OH NHH O HH O OH OH ON ON O O HO ON OH O HH H H O OH HH OH O oN HN N N O H N. O HH NOH .NH NH OH OH NO N OH O H. N. NH ON H H OH O O- H- N- N O HH O H- H N H- O. .H N NHH HH OH OH OH NH NH OH OH N. NO ON OH O O OH NH N N N HH O O OH H. O- H O- .H-NH OH ONH O N N nH HH OH ON O HH OH OH O H N- O- N O NH O. OH O H N H. N OH O OH “O NH .OH O O O- N H O OH O O OH o O- O. O O- O H- O O OH N OH OH O- H N O- O. O OH OOH NH NH N OH OH O OH. O O OO ON O H O O OH o H O- O N. HH N N O O m m. O NH NOH O m m OH N OH OH O N OH OH N o N OH OH NH o N NH o OH mH N O HH HH N. .H H HOH O. '0 ”I 3“. Vflfl 0 0 0| ”a! H N OH 80 NH. NHI 0. MA! ”H. NO ON0 00 n- '0 00 ON. ONO «0 ONO nu! uNI mm H. NH. O. HH. O. O- O O. H. OH N- o N. OH- NH- O- OH- O. O O. N. O- H O- OH- NH- O- H. .N- H. NH 'nl3.‘fi'4d.00n “(V Iv v‘ '1 N'OIC IOI\')IDI “POW r< Q'HN'V‘O “H '- 1° 21 30 20 2 4a g) 22 21 26 30 22 19 1b 3/ ‘4 2/ 20 6 8 '6 11 5 8 5 7 .1 9 ‘6 ‘9 ‘9 96 ’7 ‘2 b 30 39 24 7 $3 28 b 17 9 9 D 10 O 5 7 4 b '6 14 “vi? 00 1“. " 'Q 1 '13 J 3 .5. a 523 521 2 2 '1 N ”'0. fl 29 ‘1 13 15 2 (9 '4 '0 '2 v9. |\l V \")I-~c-O| N 7' '4 v. ~nnn'vC H H O '12 -J 7 '4 O I ‘D 10 v! 18 17 b 1 10 D -5 16 2 6 3 2 56 lb 11 '11 5 A ‘ -5 -J 3 -?'-?3 1 1 2 1 16 8 ’t b ‘12 O D 4 7 143 ’1» 0 n-M-hufvro'u ’3.an «.avn-rouv >onIa-0m-n'vland-a-an. L NflNNDoflv-Q n. I H00 0 HIV (UK 7 '1 “ "oi n N HF. Nrtfl 7‘ . ”VQQV 0 '0 r! w 144 C" 0")‘0’3OKOD‘QHAHdOMCO'ONflnnJJO NN fl '30-40');>oo I 0 II 0‘ H \l vulva-cu: N‘N'4'\"l3 H~OlDlOICIfVDv1 clonalvooun‘w I\- IN H unm-r-u-o NmanonvO-nofi nonuma .oHrgcafilnHv .HN-IN;-deilm; anl:w- NnnlN N NN a NN NN w o Ilm NN v v m m NN NN N N- N N )q Nu NN nu on MN no oN 0N Nm aN NN NN NN NN NN NN N N oN 0N NN N NN N. N. n. N. nN AN NN 0N Np NN N NN NN NN nN NN NN NN oN .N a. «N u" NN Na N- .- 0 Nn an NN n nN NN no N NN NN NN 0N CN NN AN NN um on mN NN NN vm NN «N N N. N. N mm N. NN m NN NN NN NN AN AN oN NN an «N NN 0N NN NN NN N. oN m- m- N an )N NN NN mN on NN 0N mN NN NN 0N N oN N NN NN mN NN «N N NN NN N N. 9N 0N NN NN on Nn cm NN NN oN .N NN NN NN .N .N 0 ON NN «N N NN NN n N «N NN NN 0N NN on 'N oN ON ON NN NN NN nN n «N nN NN o N NN mN NN NN N ,N NN NN NN 0N NN oN mm oN a. NN 3N oN NN .N NN ON on NN NN NN NN NN m NN oN NN NN N mN NN cN ON ON «N 90 o N NN DN NN N NN «N mN ON NN NN ON a N» uN NN NN mN mm 0 on cN Nv Nn 0N NN oN ON «N oN N» on mN NN VN Nn N N. NN NN NN 0N NN No VN NN N 00 N N )N ON ON NN nN 0N NN oN NN NN NN on o NN NN .N “N NN NN N 0N NN oN n 0N 9N NN oN oN NN NN 0N N N oN AN N N N N. N NN 4N NN .N o NN No on NN 3N oN oN om >n NN 0N nN om nN NN «N mm NN N N n NN. nN NN VN 0N «N NN NN 0N oN ON ON on N» NN mN NN oN NN oN NN NN NN N v n NN NN NN an N «N m N ON ON NN NN NN Nn NN .N NN NN oN oN NN m» oN N N NN NN NN ON 0 NN NN NN NN N NN ON NN ON ON .N .N NN an NN NN NN on .N n - N N NN oN oN NN ON 0 n. 0N N NN 0N oN «N NN NN NN NN mN oN oN NN NN “N N N .N. m w NN «N NN UN mN ON NN oN NN n 3N VN NN 3N NN an mN Nn vN oN UN NN NN N.- N NN n n . NN ON NN NN NN NN N N «v NN NN N NN NN 0N mN «N «N NN on UN NN mN N n .N N n . NN NN NN NN vN NN a. NN N nN NN NN NN NN NN .N NN NN N» v. NW “N mu m u .N. N NN. 0N N“ MN NN o N N» N. UN NN UN NN "N 0N NN NN NN N oN q mm NN oN N N .N u 3N, NN NN an N. N NN NN NN NN vm NN o m an an on 0N Nn mu Nu N Nv Nu N N. .N. m NN rmN NN NN .N N NN N. NN on NN on NN NN NN NN .N NN «N AN N uN NN NN ON- «N FNN m N. NN. a. ON. 0. o- m- NN. v. N- N o. N- N. N. a. N N. NN. N- m- N- N 0N- m; mm NN MN m. ON. 0. ON. NN. «N. N. NN-... n- N. o- NN. N. N. n. N. N. NN. n c. a- o. «N. m; mm VNN UN 0 NN. NN. NN- 0N. NN. DN- NN- NN- «- NN- NN- NN- .- o- N. N- a. NN- N a- o N- mN- mu 9N .NN NN NN N-. v. N n- N N NN- 0 ON 0. oN N- N . N N N N N N o N m NN N“ «N mN m o. n. N- N- o N- N'- N N N. N .- o N o N n N- m n c m o NN N, "N NN a :- NN. m o- m vN m NN mu 0 «N AN 0 MN ~ cN «N v N- m o m N on mN .mN nm N o. v. u- NN. N- 0N- NN- N .N N o N N. N- .- N. N n N N. N N. n- «N NN .NN NN mN N. NN. NN. 0N- mN. NN. N. NN- N N. n- NN. n. .- NN. N. NN- NN- n- o- N- m. N- N N N m N «N. n. NN. ow- NN- NN- n. m- N o n o- N. NN- «N- n - n- mu- NN. NN- m- NN- n N .N n mN N c. N n- n 0N- N. N n N m N N- N. n. . v N. v o N- N. N n N .N nN ON a a N NN- m NN- m N ON N ON N. N o NN. N N. o. N- .o N o o o v .N ON A o. o. o. NN- n NN- N. v. n N. N. o. NN- NN. oN. N. N. NN. n. .N. N- N. NN. N m _N N w NN- n. NN- .N. NN- NN- ON. ON. .- nN- NN- N. NN- NN- .N. NN- NN- NN- N- NN- u- NN- NN- m N “N N mN N «N n NN NN v NN 0N 3N oN NN N mN «N N .N o N m mN N «N NN u m N NN .N N N- N- N- o N- o. m «N «N N N N. N N. N n v- m c N N m v N .NN oN N N u N- N 0N n v mN . 0N N o a. > a a mN N N o u m NN N N ,N NN o N. u. NN. oN- N. v. m. o- N n. c. n. N. NN- o. N. o- m- o NN. NN- NN- w- o m “N N N NN. NN. NN. oN. NN. NN- «N. N. N- a. N. N. o. NN. «N. m. NN- 0. ON. NN. o- mN- ON. N N NNN o. NN. NN. NN- N- NN- n. NN. N. N- N n o n. a. NN. NN. n. o- N- NN. N. N- NN- N m. N N N- om >. a. N. NN. NN. oN- a. o. N o. N .- ON. 3. nN- m N- N- ,oN- 0. ~- NN- N n n .m n- w. oN. uN. mN. .N- «N. NN. on. N. n o- 4N. n. N oN. NN. «- - o- ,v- n. N o- n- oN «N Na N o NN- a. o- a. N- N. N- a. . n. N o. NN. o- o- NN. m. o. N. NN. a ”N. u VN mN .NN n N N. N N- N- m. NN- .N. n. NN N. a o. o. NN. N. N N o. n- N. u N- c N N. NN NN mN 9N. m. NN. NN. N. NN. o. o. n N. NN. «- N x. N. N- o- o. «N. N. N. NN. N o m pm N m o. N. N o- N NN- N. N o o. n. o- N a- o- N n .- NN- N N N. n N N .N ON «N n. n. N v- N. NN- «- N nN N- N N N n o. N o N- c- m- N N N- N N .N m nN .- N N N m. m. N. n. a q a- o n N. n. o o. c N- N o N o N N NN N- w o- .- NN. o- NN. «- o. N. N. n. n. o . N. o. «- m. NN. NN. o. N. N .- NN. oN NN NN N a NN. NN. n. N- oN. «N. o. NN. .- oN. NN. .- N o. a. N. NN. m. ON. N. N .. N n N .NN «- NN NN. NN. NN. N- NN. UN. NN- oN. N -N. n N- a. n- NN. «- .N- c- N. m. m NN. n- NN NN .NN n NN oN. 0- nu. a . nw. Nu- mn- N- n n. n. v- on cNo n. on v- .N. o- «N. m- .m- «- «N a. .NN a- N. NN. u- u . NN- NN- mN- NN- 0. ON. .N- N- NN. N. N. NN. NN. on- NN. NN. NN. o. NN- 0-. N n .NN m- o N. N. NN. .- NN- NN- n.- m- o o. m- N N >- oN. N. NN. .. NN. «- o . m. N. o m .NN N. NN NN. NN. NN. NN. NN. N. .N- N. v N. N NN. N. N. 9N. N oN. a. o. N. N .. N o o .NN v \- C d. «on an am no mm m nv on vm now Now «oN flaw «an oNN «HN cam new mom cam vNN nmm NNN cow "‘hnv0Vfl'nK ”Q4Hr0-4'CMV4 ”Ndfl‘ VN'N VA WV) ) n '30-. NF h N ”0K nNn 0'!an HNN 0 0 U‘ n 5;, t N O i 145 OO NN O N NN ON ON O «N ON NN O ON ON O NN NN «N ON NN ON ON ON N NN .N N NNO NO ON ON «N NN N ON «N ON ON O« ON ON «O «N NO NN NO ON NO ON NO O« «- ON- O. NO NNO mm «. ON O ON N ON N on o NN NN NN ON N ON N nN mN «N NN NN we «N. NN-.N On ONm «O N. N O O N N O «O ON ON NN NN ON NN ON ON m ON NN NN On NN O «. NN NN NNO O ow N« no «« ON ON «« ON O« OO OO NN «O N« «O NO «« ON N ON ON N«# mN. ON-.NN. «- ONO ON O O« O« N« O« N O« NO NN OO O« «O OO NO NN ON N N« NN O ON «N ON _NN- ON-.N«. O- NNm NN «O N« O« OO O« NO ON NO O« OO OO OO NO OO ON NO NO O« O« ON ON mm «O OO- O.-.NN- N ONO ON «N OO O« N« ON O« «r O« ON NO O« .N« N« «O N« N. N« Om OO O« N« «O N« _O- NN- NN- «. ONO ON NN «« O« N «N ON ON O« OO NO «« ON N« O« OO NO NN .« Om NO NO «O OO wO. N. N. « «Nm m N. ON. ON. ON- ON. N- ON- ON- O- NN. ON. ON- «- O- N. N- O. NN- N ON- N O- ON- « ON N« ON ONO NN NN ONr O- «- ON ON «N. NN ON « ON O O NN O NN NN O N O O O ON NO ON NO NO NNO N O «- O- ON- N- ON. NN. N «N N O N N- N. «- O. N O N N- N N- n- «N ON NN N NNO «N ON ON. ON. ON. NN. ON. O- ON. O N- N. NN- ON. ON. NO. O NN. ON. «N. ON- ON. O. ON- N N N O ONO O NN NN N. O «N. ON O . n. ON NN N ON N n. N- NO. O N N- N a u « «N N n N ON NOm O O O O. ON. ON- N. NN. N- «N. O- ON- ON- ON. «N. ON- ON. NN. O- NN- O. ON- N- «N- NN- N N NNN O NON N «O NO NN O N ON « m ON «N NN ON 0 O «N O «N ON O NO ON ON «N ON c O .NN NO NOm O. O O «- NN. ON. N. «. O. O- N O- «- N- N- «N. O- N. O- O- O ON- ON- NN- «- ON ON NNN O OOO O n N ON. ON. ON- ON. N. N- ON. O. O. O- N- O- ON. «N. «- NN. O- ON- N. O- ON- ON- N N- NON O. NOO N NN NN NN. O- ON. ON- NN. O. O. O N. O O- NN- NN- NN. O- N- NN- ON- NN- N- ON- O O NN N «- «OO O n ON NN. ON. ON. NN. ON. N.- NN. NN O. N- O- O. ON. ON- ON- O- NN. O- ON- O ON- « ON ON NO ON OOO ON m ON O. «- «N- m. NN. NN. « ON O- O- N- O «- NN- « n- «- ON. m- n. m. N O m NNN NN NOm «N M ON ON. NN. ON- ON- NO- NN- ON. O NN. N- O- «- N- ON- N- NN- ON- ON- ON. O NN- N- ON O“ NO «- Nan NH O. O- «. ON. N O O- O...- m m- « N- o ..- n N N O. «. n..- m- ..N- «- NN- m.- m ON N.- “rm O m ON N O O N « O N « N O O « O N N N « ON ON «N N ON N- O. N « OON O m N N «N O O- O O O N NN O O «N «N O NN O «N NN ON ON NN NN O N. .N O NON NN m N « ON O O ON O O O ON « O ON «N ON NN ON «N ON ON « O « O O. N. O NON O n O. « ON ON N NN O N N- «- N- N N- o N N O m N. N O N N n- N. -N N OON « « O N ON O O O «N O O N O NN « NN N O N ON ON O O N N «N. N. .N- « «ON N m N- N. O ON ON n N ON O O N . N O- NN O NN ON O O m N O. m «N. NN- N- « NON « m n O O o o NN ON ON ON N m « O. ON O m «N NN ON ON ON O N N. «- ”N N NON « O «N O «N N NN N O ON O O NN NN N. O O O ON O ON ON ON N O O- O. N O NON N. N O ON O O «N NN N- ON O m ON O N ON ON O O O NN nN NN O NN n O N. O «ON O O ON N ON O ON O N ON O « ON N- O- O N N N ON N « N N « O- O. .N- « NON N. O ON N O N O N O- ON N NN « N «- ON N O O N « O O N N- O- «- N N NON ON m ON O. N. «N. n «N- n N- ON ON- N « O N N. O. O. O- N. «- N- O- n- O- O. ”N. N NON NN NN ON O O N. NN « N O «N « O N N N N- ON O O « ON NN NN O O N. .N NN NON ON NN ON N O « NN N O ON ON ON ON NN ON ON N NN O ON O NN N N NN N. N- N O NON O n N O. « O NN O ON ON «N « ON N N. «N N O NN « N N N N- N- m- «N-.N- «N NON NN NN NN N N N NN N. O ON ON ON NN N O O « ON O ON O O NN ON ON O N . O NON N NN NN O N « ON O NN NN NN N NN « N O O O « O O N N O N N- N. .N O NON NN O. ON N N O- N. O- N. O N O. O O. O- O N N O. « N. N « N O N O ”N NN NON ON NN ON «N «N «N ON NN O ON ON NN ON ON NN «N NN ON ON ON NO ON ON ON ON NN NN _N ON NON O N N O N N O O. O. NN O N n O- O- O N ON NN N ON ON ON «N O ON N. NN N NON ON u NN O. «. N- N n. « N N O N O O- N- O- N. O. N- ON. N. N N- NN m- N. N « NON ON m ON - O. O O. O. N N. O. O N O N. O- N. O O O. N- O. ON O « ON O. «. N. ON NON ON N NN N O N N. N. O O ON N- O N. O. N N O O O O NN ON O NN N. O. .N O NNN NN « NN N O « O. O. O O ON O O N N O O O «. O N NN O NN ON O. O. .m NN NNN ON N «N O « N N-. O O N NN N O N. O N N. « NN- O O NN NN ON ON O- N. .N. O NNN O N NN O « O N ON N O ON O N N. O N N- N N. O N O O O ON N « N. N «ON ON O O O O N N «N O N O NN O n « O « m N. O ON «N ON N ON ON. O. O « . NON .quuthiluvln N N ON NN N. O. O O ON N N N N N ON NN O N O O NN « « N N ON NON O. NN NH NN N N ON « N « ON O ON N. O O « O O N O NN NN ON O O O N N NNN NN mN NW ON N O O ON O N O O NN O «N «N « NN O NN «N ON NN ON NN N N .NN N ONN ON NN O. O N N NN O O « N « NN N O ON N ON O O O NN O «N N O N HN. « ONN ON NN ON ON NN ON ON O O N NN ON ON O O NN N «N O ON O ON «N ON ON m N .N N NNN NN NN ON N ON O ON N O O ON O «N O ON ON O NN O ON ON ON NN NN NN N- NN- N ON NON ON ON «N O ON O NN NN NN O NN ON ON ON N ON N «N O NN N NN «N N NN «- O. .«- ON NON «N mO N« N ON O NN ON «N N ON O ON O ON NN N NN O ON n NN NN ON ON N- O. .N ON ONN _ON O ON O. O O O O. « N NN O NN O NN «N O. m N. O ON ON O ON NN ON- N. ,N ON «ON NO ON ON O. ON O N- N. ON N NN N ON O ON ON N ON N ON « O «N NN ON NN. NN-ON- NN NON NN NO ON N O- O « O N O N O O N O O O NN N N O ON NN NN O O N “N NN NON 146 r!" N. v-OCD'O “N I HOHOQODA' V" DO'A‘O'\'NVIWI° “N'OIN'DIOIV )‘90 Nh' '1 Q r. v.-OUNDDOd IV I“ ‘8 CV a”. v a o. n“. n n. e ~. o a. n N ~ 9. c. n”- a. nu. v- «H. n" m. .0" a“ “mm mm ma a. v" of u o” na 0“ on m~ m~ ~N. “a ed o~ an on vn n NV a. a. “m" 0H ”mm ow x.“ m mw o o o o m a n. a," 3 3 w m o a“ on m“ c an m..- n. m “mm NN «a o.” cu on 2 o o n NH « u~ o a." cm on cu w.— m nu n mm- 3.. ma. n mwm v“ a“ .N. v" v - a” «a d~ o .- ’a a" a” on .fi 5“ n ma 0 a" m- e. a H“ “Na N. an: n cu... n «a mu a... a v a « ~o as on o. N. v- w: an nu on on um. m «Nm 3 x mm A n” «N No ow AN 0“ o aw n - vn n« s aw 14. u nu as on .n no. mwm «a on ma u a mm «x «N ha a o n~ an «m on ca - ”a an u an m” a“ ”mu mu w~m v n N n v o «N n «a a a n a on na 0 0 cu m“ ~H cm on n. .o «n n~m . 3:7 25) .9 9 1 10 1) .1 7 1 5 '1 - 13 -4 I '1 .3 Nv-IIIDW‘NHvino-IKINNH'mV’IHONN‘IICITKN‘O'flNIflnvmVN I I I H I I on N I I 10‘ 123 132 199 119 113 116 £17 1‘2 163 164 170 171 172 155 165 155 159 100 151 1‘6 157 166 169 152 251 252 254 147 hOOHNdOQd’IV-LVOQHSI DD'IVDNNAOWKNVNKOAOOOJ'Duflo'nkoooNfl-OO'DJ') III I IIIII HHIH.qv-II lo .0 I. .qnco-on HI v-IHHH I ‘OIIOH'OIOI\‘)03 n‘VItcHo: DIOIOVL‘Irtfl‘-4-)c\': H-OI’N\-OICIOII\'DI\WM3 a nIOI$|DI)OH-\Jl~-’H)H’hflcs's‘K'Oth'D VI IIIII IIII HI (V IH H H N II vdrIrI v-I luv-I vI H r! vIoI I '\'~ )IOIOINOO I I I I I 'I I A N”) N N com 0:” «Mn H n o-nu-o-o n n .4 n ”wanna *3 \I x-no-n-n H o-o-n )NerN VIOHA D n )- IIIII (\ '1. I II v: I H v4.4“ r1" '4 HIHH wrc ~90 V\)~\rI‘0I\fl\QDDVVN~DOQ ”\NHOAOVV‘IO'Nfl‘I\lfithOOw-dh')ANODODNV'D HI I I I I I I I H I I I H IOI I ‘1 I I I '0'. I I OI r! N r! IIr4 I I I QVOflfl'HflNOlV()@'VHHl)NV. O.VD=3Q.\H¢’OHN‘OOVvioflnDV'n'vI‘xzanO‘an‘o") I I I “vi I Iv¢ I (V01 '0‘!" Iv-I v. I I I "I H VII '4'. NVNI‘K"mnnHrInJ‘vIrIJ‘ONVSWVINOOHACDWNNO‘O'ION'TN-OU‘flNv-IDVvIOJ\UI'OQ‘°nNO-I') V‘f‘r" II 7‘ vi IIIIIIII III I vI-I I4 HIIIIV I I I n“°.'))'l\3\'nn¢.nflu“Cid-It‘”DOO‘O”OIDO‘\J\\OoInnHv-1°COUDHNHNOV"°\'QI~HOQQ'J I I H fiI H “HIV IVrIf‘Iv-I H H HVIIV HI HI (‘1' IDHv‘Ill‘lnnr-IODIDNP’IHWU‘H'finO'OVD‘Ov-INH'N'OHHNKVNNmOONanv-IOOHOU‘VIN'00401“ I H 7"" I fl VIN") HHNHNNPIVI I IF‘H VI II V" fiHHHrIRv—I '4 I.“ ONMONO'H'HDn'NNO")onmmmnv-IFIVWVIDV‘U‘HNNNN'NOM'NNOV'I’IOOHW'U‘QH I "II '0“ I Iv'N II H IHrI HIHI I VI VII r0 V‘H N I I I I NVOOQIDNIDNCDIO'ONOHOIRWOOLO “\COOHKOVMOCAHO‘OOF’IO'OQI‘NCD J‘OHNNI‘NIRN H r! H H (In van-tHnucvo «H H H fiIIfir‘ Ir‘ 0 OQOCNNNNNOh'NnWN OIIIOI N II .4 '1 o -2 3 -4 -s -1 I 1 2 1 4 -6 -5 2 5 I 1 9 a 1 1 o 3 4 6 2 ‘4 -1 7 9 7 7 o 5 4 u 1 flmHHBOanuHcoovINn3nNnovcv-IHOHNOHOHVNHVonnonoDONmHnNOv-IHHO IH rIo-IrII II H HH HI H I I II I IIII H NN'nHOVONAfl‘OoNHn-tvvrsooun'ccoo.nOHHflnn'DNOC-anH‘OONDDAOHOVV'N‘) I I I I H I IIIHHNI HH HHN HHNNN NHNNNNNHHRJN'I NHHHHHH uoxnnnvbeeswannmaoNuanvnnmwao oovnn-oua-o-nonc-fl':nmnoorsvcz‘mw I IIII H I I HHH HNHH 'HH I H HII H I ODDKOAQDQVOHHHNDNQN0901306?DDVVrNAHHNvIOHDHONnDN")vH'flHn'OhI" H H H IH NNHHH HN IHI IHIIIII H I IIIIH I Nocancnnonv'xdhnva moannnvomccvn: V‘OCflu-ILVVIVIH‘ONONJIW‘VNOOO‘1‘CF. I I IH IHH HHHH HHIIIH HIII II II II IHN I ~¢H\Htoon‘HonHv-¢tooh)flv-DJ~VN¢AONO‘3NDONOI-OOHH-OHn-IoflnVVVOxfl—I IIH HHH H I IHNH HH H I IHH HH II IH I N I NOH‘O"QONQHVNAAQCNN‘OAUINnnDODrI'D'ODAV-IOHMOQDOOHN-‘V‘flDnhnovOVd-M In H H I I HN Hvfl H IINv—I' I rI II I" OODVflvHaOVNHn'nHfi-ooox‘vcN\1~\nnnc'sN—InnaHo—IAOIVVMNthnx‘unnoMNvaHfl cIH HI 'I I I H90 VII IIIHHvIv-I H I I r‘ I H I I oanOvuvahOoIo-ID'OBHQmHHlnL'xNo-thhuvHntOOOhormethNoOmNONnVOv-IN IHH I I HHI HHI I I I v-I H IH 15 1 1 I I94 I IrIv VI crab-mmHnmhoammnrxonmononooowom o~0¢Vfl0nhnv-IfONNNv‘INOO‘O‘LWNv-IONJ‘O' nI II I rIrI HH HH.: H u H IIHH I VINNNVHztckvoavaIHoHomcmm-OmvHHHNOQtnccaHv-Inmromvn‘omoomflthNN-Iht\ II .--. Hams. NH NN rirI {\r‘v-I . II-I .4 H H H ‘C ‘5 3 6 5 4 3 Z 5 3 U‘ vIL‘INhnour)‘: \‘ (KOO? (\J\NH:rr\v-I‘DH~OVvItL‘vavamwNLNOOOB'DNH I I HHH v-I oOvIv‘rlv-IH .4 .IH 'I H “No! Q L - - 1 a g - fl .5 mmrucnoHnamauvhvnonrxnenonn-nmmm.cmq"hummer-arrowhnahomkvmemo—Innkrm'n I I I I HIV“ IIVIIII'JN II I V'I r! '4 (\ H I! H v1 HfimnvvnoHOrIanv-IHOOCIO‘vIvOthOCINNmOIIIJU‘VIDQ'OC‘OQV’NNC‘OOMHNC‘OOOFICJ‘O fiHI'I v4 r\N’\' HIva'v-I Nv-IrI (\‘Nfi H H H“ v-‘HHF‘ .\' H'onNNI‘r‘NHOfiVIInr-omomvmomnhoomdon I'I I‘I '4 II I NrI VI v1 '4 I! rI '4 H N I\ H v4 “I I 14 - 9 8 'VAINNMnINWKflfififiim’I'JNmIHWNV 7‘ “I“ o. .4 0‘ n «rI o. “I V: I\' (\I 3 I c 1 (\I 1 WHO-I. 1 fink-Initimgfisfiméniixihin-unciéhnxnlcwn'n‘ésié o‘r.‘unnIvbfiInn-antw\lnn:nIIIAIn-nmm«Not-IA- h'J-nN '4. I II-4 '4 r4“ flufUIrfI\'tIdrIddo4I\ I INN'I(\I VI r. OI“ "I N dd.“ O. 0“, h“\C‘onNnNm‘on(J‘UIAP‘F'INLnOCFmVI'fIIOIIISNN'OOO'J‘CINWmCIOONU‘OVNnflnf\~'m0nou\v‘l!\ II II I 'I I I IIfiH I.» I‘I II rI v-I I cIN-I v4 '4 I I 'IH OI V'I I I II vnvrxnnn—crnvHvKHmMQWHvnanrxntn-or3r\cvnunnnrum-vnrx«r.nunoswanIn-im-n'nnnnvxm.o nmnmtumnnmvNanHHHHHHu N KOOO()O()wINNCafir‘III-Ov-IrdvICJK)O'J‘flv mmvmo NNN(UNNNNNNNNFJNN H .'_—i| 148 HH m O OO OH OH OH ON HN HO ON ON OH ON OH NH ON HO OH O OO HO HO HO HH .HO ON NNO NO OH OH OO HO OH O OO O» OO O ON ON OH NO ON NO ON OH HO OO HO NO O. HO OH OO HNH OH NH H HO NO HN OO NN OO HO O OO HO HO OO OH ON ON OH HO HO HO OH OO N. .HO OO ONH H mH OH NO nO m Hr ON OH on 0 9H nN ON a HH mH OH x O NH OO HN Ow HH HO OH HHn NH OH N m H H H H ON NH o- OH. O O H H HH NH O OH O OH OH OH .OH H HHm OH OH OH HH HN OH ON O. Hm O. H O. O H- O O H H HH OH OH OH HH HH .HN O HHO HH OH OH OH OH HO HN O OH OH HH O OH OH OH OH OH OH H OH NH ON H OH .HN OH HHm OH OH HH OH OH OH OH O OO HH H- O. O O O- O OH NH OH ON OH NN H OH .HN OH HHO OH OH OH HN H NN HH H OO ON O H HH OH OH OH HN OH OH ON ON OO ON NH .HN ON OHH n. O O H. NH- H O H OH OH H. O. H- H. H. N O- H H OH H O O- H. .H- H. HHO ON OH O HN ON OH NN OH HH OH O NH OH O OH NH NH O HN HN ON OH HO O OH ,HH OH NHH m O O H OH HH OH O H. OH H O O N O O- H. O o HN O H H O OH OH H HHH m. H O ON ON H HN H HH OH O ON HN OH ON ON ON O o ON HN OH O ON HN HN OH OHO ON O OH NH OH NN N- OH ON OH OH OH ON ON OH NH H H OH HO OH ON ON OH ON .OH HO HOH O H OH O OH H OH N. O N O- OH HH O O O O- O. N O m- HH H- H N .H HH HON mm u «H mv mu on vr on on an 0H an vH ow u cw oH NN oH HO an Hu Mm nu mu m. H Hum N H O N- O H H- HH O. H- H- H O O H. O O H H O OH H H H O H O H OOH m- N O. O H v N- o o- o- .H- O- H H O- n. H. n. H- H- H N- O H HH H H N- Hum O O. OH O O NH O OH O O N O- H N O- N- N O O N N H O NO O H. OH N OOH OH. OH H O o N H OH O. ON O O. n HH OH O O O O- H- OH N H- OH OH H. H OH HOm H. H N. OH ON nH HH OH HH O- O H O- OH OH HH NH O H O- O OH H- H ON ON OH .OH OH NOH OH. NH. OH O. OH o O HH. OH O- H O. O- OH O O NH OH OH OH N- O O N- OH OH N. H OH HHO u. -u H .O O- H 1O.- .O. o o m- NH H OH v- O... c O- a H- on mm 1... o. n- .m- m m m-.- “Hm. Awl- H O OH H O O H O N H O O- N O O NH H O. H H- N. O- H OH OH H .OH O OHN OH H O O O . O N O O O O H H NH OH O H O N N H O H- H H H OH O NON OH OH OH O OH O HH HH NH H HH O O O OH O H O HH O N OH OH H OH NH .HH H. HON HN OH NH O- H H O O- O HH- H- O- O- H- O H H- HH. O O- O O H N- NH NH O H- HON ON OH OH o OH OH NH O H O NH O O- HH H OH O O NH H H O H- OH O OH ”NH O OON HN HH ON O- O H NN H OH O- O O . H- H O O H. N- O H H- H H- OH OH NH H N HON OH ON ON O OH HH OH OH OH H NH N HH O OH H H O H HH O O O H OH HN HH HH HNN OH HO ON O OH OH OH NH OH OH- OH H H O O H H H O O H O H O OH HH OH H HON ON NO ON H O OH OH O H N- O O- N- O- N O. O- N O OH H N O O H NH ”NH O- OmN HO ON ON O n o OH N HH O. O N. O. O n H- N- H m r H. m H H- OH NH .OH H- NON ON O OH O OH OH O OH HH O O O o O O H n O OH OH O O- H- H O OH HH O- HON IO H O OO HN HO OH OH OH ON OH O NO OH ON HN ON NN H OH OH H H H OH OH .ON HH NOH “H O OH HN uO HO ON Hr mN ON HO HH OO HN OO ON ON mN HH HH mm OH OH OH ON ON HO OH OOH HH O OH HN HO HO OH OO NH HN OH NN OO OH OO NO OO NO ON OH ON OH HN OH OH OH HO OH OOH OH o o OH ON ON OH NO OH OH OH HH HH HH HN NH O OH O OH OH O OH m OH OH .HN OH HmH oH O NH ON Hm n. mm HO mm on Hm mm vn 0v on NO Ho ~v vm on on NH Hm nH on am Hm an an OH H HO OH ON NN ON O. H ON ON OH OO ON OH OH NN HH OH HH ON OH OH OH OH ON ”ON O HOH H N n ON ON HN H on an «H OH N on OO >O OO HO OO HH an HN HH OH O OH O .HN NH OOH NH O O OH HO OH OH HO ON OH NH OH OH OH ON NN NH HN OH OH OH OH OH OH HN ON .OH OH HOH N O O O o HH NN HH NO OH NN OH OO ON H OH H HH NN o O OH NH H H H- OH NH O. OOH HH H N O NH OH HO HH O OH O OH ON OH OH HO OH OH NO ON ON HN O HH O. OH ON ON OH H-H n H O o OH HN HH HH O. OH OH OH OH OH OO ON NO NO OO HH HO HH O O O OH H. OHN OH HOH OH O N O ON OH OH HH OH H OO ON OH HO ON ON OO NO OH NH H OH HH H OH ON NH HO OH NHH H H O H HN OH NO HH NO OH HO NO OH on NO OO HO NO Hm ON HO mN uH HH o HH OH OH OH HHH H H O O ON ON OO O HO NN OO OH HH OO OO NO NO HO HO HO NO OH OH OH H HH OH OH .HH OHH O O N O .NN ON NO OH NO HH O. H NN NO OO OO OH HO OO OH O HH NH HH H OH HH .HN NH OOH H H O OH H OH OH O OH H OH OH O ON HH NH ON HO OH HH OH OH OH OH H HH H_ 4OH OH HOH HH O OH OHO OH HH OH H OH H HO OH ON ON OH OH HO NO OO OH OH HH O H O- HH H HH O NOH O m H O rHH HO .N OH Op OO N OH OH ON H. OH OH OH HH OH Hr NH O. OH NO HO OH H. OH HHH u w W O. H .H OH O OH OH H OH NH n O HH OH OH NH OH a OH OH H» HO ON NH HO HH HHH O n m H- O OH HN OH Ho OH OH ON O OH O o OH OH OH OH O OH OH HO ON ON OH ON HH HHH o O O H O NH OH H OH OH O OH O O. O OH O a H H O. NN OH HO OH OH HN .NH NH HHH OH H o OH ON OH HH OH OH OH HN H- OH OH ON HH HH OH HH HH ON ON ON .H HN OH ,OH ON OOH HN NH OH OH ON OH H O. ON O ON OH ON HH NH OH HH HH OH O OH NH OH HH OH OH ..H HH NOH mH NH HH ON HO OO HN HO NN ON NH NH ON ON OO. OH ON ON OH OH H N ON NO OH OH HN H ONH m O. HH OH OH OH OH O OH OH O- OH OH OH OH HH NH OH O OH HH HH NH ON HH HH NN .OH H H. ON HH OH O NH H HH ON O ON OH OH NN OH O OH O OH OH OH H HN OH .OH OH HOH O o H HH HN O OH NH O. NN H O O O O- N- O O H HH HH NN HN HH OH .HO O HOH 149 m Ha n. n a” fl" 0 o N- N OH .. o my on 0v on “a a n" m" o” H- n «N o ~v av nn cc 0 m" G“ on n- m. a o a- «n m. om Kn an on c" a" N- a“ a. a” e um mo \n =< o m mm mu Ha ~- m o x o a m o q no N m" co on n~ n ~n n” m aw ow on VN uv co on «c cc 0. an no a. no on m a- a" «n ~m mm om ~n oo no av n. Kn n“ > v a" en 00 cm mc on an n~ AK 90 Na n“ «- n. 3 ms NV on I F‘ hommommmo «(V6 - on a «a mw «m cm N“ am nu v” on «N 150 IV I‘ H 0 fl tV r9 .4 ‘4 v- NIH-(\VIJ‘M NrflNFlNHIVLiU '- 74"" on-nnrnrnmmiu O'Q'LIHOI.") mom-human.“ vathN'U‘VVJ'P: mmmm-nuunm-n D‘s-4H NOONNO‘IA-fl-V ”(OI—CU" on onovm Nnntnn '4U‘N AlfiKm—JJ‘I‘I’\I\; . " 53 b ‘2 -16 ~38 '9 >24 5253526 527 S?6 52? 3 153 NO'“flOflH(\IWU\OI\Cv—IVJU\NNNVWK-flMOHOWCOM|h~I v40~¢nn . VI I r( vdv‘ u-O c1 r‘H Hvi v0 -4 -13 -5 13 -4 '3 2 2 5 -13 flDWLIV (Jit‘l NUWQJG“ (‘NCVO “I"? DWU\HI~II\F1H C O 3 z 1 P 2 J ( E 25 lb 12 Q '1 ‘2 *3 34 39 51 b 4 ’7 92 nkntc‘thF.f\—G(u'\MClfifllfl r.anommmnmanmnmmnmnv munchc‘onmmrxmwnoommvn‘rxn I I '4 I... V‘QCV. N(\II‘II‘. (V 'I(\ v‘ nnnm I I (‘vaH'OTQ")?\.\I“NN‘TV\Ian\v-IL‘\NVB", r'(\lrI I " I '.‘ :\ .-1 1y .‘ '0 c1H.’\ l (J‘t"’IN'-JNHV".VIn “-001.“th 0'¢")(7‘VCC c'v'Iv'Iv‘uIIv‘o'I-‘Jr‘fl II" ‘IQ4VIHrO-OoltII 36 5 5 7 21 1 8 2 4 4 V I .04 I“. PIt’IzJ VCA-‘I" - - O a $ O~WWTV'~'I tnU‘CC‘HPIQvIrIf’T 'I I vmmnvmnunudmwxdu'nnm “.OVC-I I -4 9 13 3 2 9 ? 3 5 5 5 3 2 2 .) 3 3 5 2 2 -5 9 3 .— 0 0' 'I U naandn-nM-flvnvnm O" I A: canon-n.am-«noéur..nu\.4rur\n vnnonr. 0n'00h15m-flv—lmm-r dis unfit-Amid '4 V. “'tIHvI‘IUIu4Q4(\-N~)nwVIVINNN .GNNN 'I'IM 27 2 'IU'IO'\ OrIOIC‘0N‘."IV°C‘NnhV "IIflI VIIVII I va‘.‘ nnntn oor..or\l¢\'rnr)C)oc.q-aH.oo«fi cam NCJNNNNNN(‘JPJ(\I'VNNN '0 vmannr1.onv\m.or\lmvn'nInnnn .4 Q mm 3‘ 3 44 ‘1 3 5 13 1 o 5 5 17 9 5 rd rI v4 '4 23 2 33 2‘ 3 2 23 21 F": 26 S? 191 13 '11 '13 19 2° 13 2 13 -4 COOL“ Kn. 00“ HvIvI 3 5 53 (9 r1 N vI 2!! I! mm In '0 n V. 13 f; 17 -7 19 163 154 2!. m LI\ (0'0an I IH 74 “will‘HN . V ['4 MOVING VG ('JlfiHv-Im '4' Ir..- QIf‘onu‘ vfi '4 “0‘va “'9" 0‘ Nun-Evin -n\' 0V9 'flncnno V“ V OU\ Nifl IA mm '\ n(‘\ O m (h 7". 0"1'4 -2 56 163 r. 13 7 10 5 u~m vI IQ J'I (I 'I 154 4 3 45 2 s 1 .57 H‘S'VCIH fl't) _alfihzl-o'o n' In! 9‘ " OvIF'IvIoI ‘..'\‘l vi | In". -Jnlv OInJ‘Ir-u“ Hr‘NN‘U 7' l.'\ N “3 ‘2 a: J\ K ‘0 VI PI 25‘ a: 2 (\I 23 2?. m (\n v. 'I P} (I W: 1 ‘1'") -ONM r‘, (‘1 Fl (\;r\lh H '0‘ 13 ‘I (3 '3 53 11 ‘2 8 !3 ‘1 507 A. C) OI F') no") F} H r! "’ "\th QU‘O 04 (\I a) 0‘ Q I (‘J nnm 03m A If} 04"" ‘Vlno N I. N fiv-Jfil '49. 04 mm Ll" "\vlnfl o‘firlrI mmmm 26 -5 5 51; 39 O- a) .‘V «‘1 U\ «\1 uh 155 “'(D Id .‘h I v4 '0. \‘, ‘ (\ c-nv-VI ON'MNNOF‘N NHNHMHNGO r4 «fl 0 n. “a «n ”ma v9 ox a" .mm Nm can mfl no u .m N “mm u;fi me x «n a“ mNm no mud 0 sq a” Kmn n o 0““ n. an «mm on an a» and mm mm“ a“ «a an .mm and vmm o" mfl .r hm Nu «mm