1': .—A,.-,:.;;‘A~:"" '4 ~ _. -.§-¢.L— .: I , f 1" .11. .11’1’11‘11’ 11 254% Aug... -— .«331-7":1: .._§=‘::~; ,. ;:. ;. ,‘._- -w‘ ' . -A‘A‘.“ - If: . .‘_..-1~A_‘~.r.:'<‘ “‘1. ‘ ~ m .‘“ _ -1 333?;tf“ ~94? » '- I " t- . ‘1 . ”“455” gm; 5:714:21 L4 ' “ kw ‘ "1%‘17‘1 : a.»- 53—?- M. 4“ :4. 1,—1‘ 1.! ‘ . . . . 1 4 I It.» “ I u 3‘1... . " ‘1 L'. h ‘ .. -'.,' 1‘ ' , .1 '1 1!!!!1‘.‘ .1‘1 11 ‘1‘” I 111"!LL1 51L . . ! '. 3111!!!!” 1%.):- !!L 11:31 1!” .. 1“ 52%? ~— 7% !l i!!! I.“ . 1!.!‘!;!1!!" ‘1 ’! ,1! %:fin,:fi ,:::- ah (-1‘5X‘m :éZ/“Jac “11.33% , erg“: "‘5‘“ g! tug—{£3 -—,_—L- - :21 1-32; ,- “m Laura .1. P. w “5?: 27—123. 4‘5"— . 2"";“ .- : 3.2%: ; €332“ _ "41 : U": “4 ._";-"1»1.5:“ . ‘1 - ~. ' 1“” ufl‘§«}€ .111 ,. _ ' 1 - 1.111....1911 1W3 '4 99%“ “‘11. . .1111. . ~ 14.“! fidl!1§!‘!19“f“:“!“1q‘ 11“ ;._ “h! 1‘ 1L “ ' “ 1 YW- . 31"}. 31%! '. :1- &' git. quiz!" I‘M “if"; xi“ 1%“ fitfi'fix‘x 1! 11 LILL 1. iii?!” .“ E“; ‘11‘ h‘ I' ' 1“ J ‘ ('1‘?!) .11 “‘1 51‘s“; “1!! “‘33; 11’ . 79” L T; “'1‘” 1'1 g‘ ”his. 113.‘ "1‘1! ““1!" 1‘ a}!!! L}; '= g“ 1111', -' 'v._- . I F '64- R. «a; gig- . . . V )0 r- i W ‘ii"-'"T'7:f1; .* . -etate v, s .\ _.__ __.,,__I" This is to certify that the dissertation entitled COMPARISON OF MINORITY AND NONMINORITY STUDENTS' ATTITUDES TOWARD COUNSELING-CENTER SERVICES AND PERCEIVED PROBLEM AREAS presented by Joycelyn Landrum has been accepted towards fulfillment of the requirements for Ph.D. degree in PSYChOI OQV MALAL/pfiw Major professor Date Februa ry 1984 MS U is an Affirmative Action/Equal Opportunity Institution 012771 )VIESI_J RETURNING MATERIALS: Place in book drop to LIBRAklgs remove this checkout from w your record. FINES will be charged if book is returned after the date stamped beiow. DO L407 cmcums m USE ON“ COMPARISON OF MINORITY AND NONMINORITY STUDENTS' ATTITUDES TOWARD COUNSELING-CENTER SERVICES AND PERCEIVED PROBLEM AREAS By ' Joycelyn Landrum A DISSERTATION Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY Department of Psychology 1984 COMPARISON OF MINORITY AND NONMINORITY STUDENTS' ATTITUDES TOWARD COUNSELING-CENTER SERVICES AND PERCEIVED PROBLEM AREAS By Joycelyn Landrum Some research has found that culturally or racially different students have different service-utilization patterns, perceived problems, negative attitudes toward counseling and psychotherapy, and tend to prefer counselors of the same race or ethnicity. The present study involved five groups of students attending Michigan State Uni- versity who volunteered to complete a questionnaire assessing atti- tudes toward these variables. The five groups included Black, Asian- American, Hispanic, Native-American, and White students. Results revealed that: (1) Asian—American students held significantly more unfavorable counseling attitudes than White students; (2) both Hispanic and Black students expressed stronger preferences for a similar counselor that White students; (3) Black students perceived themselves as experiencing a significantly greater degree of problems than White students; (4) the groups did not differ significantly on counseling stigma, or difficulty in presenting issues; (5) the father's socioeconomic status related to difficulty in presenting issues in counseling for the Hispanic students only; (6) greater knowledge of the services offered by the counseling—center and MECCA Joycelyn Landrum resulted in higher utilization rates; and (7) preferences for a counselor who is more similar appeared related to the nature of the problem. The more that racism, cultural, or lifestyle conflicts were perceived to be problems, the more students preferred a racially or culturally similar counselor. DEDICATION To the SUPREME CREATOR, I give all praise and thanks for the inspiration, wisdom, and knowledge that made this work possible. To MAAT and THOTH, for their initial directives. To my family, relatives, and friends, especially my mother, Mary E. Landrum, for the support, encouragement, and financial back- ing needed to make this work a reality. Also to my Aunt Lois who did not live to see me complete my degrees and to my grandmother, Oletha M. Duvalle. For my extended family: Lasana (C.J.X.), Paul X., Oyabisi, Marcy, Helen, Fareedah, Ashanti, Aisha, Imani, Kathy, and Andre“ who provided me with love and support and dealt with my "negative cognitions" in helpful and constructive ways. To my ”sisters," Naeemah and Joy, who provided the much needed balance necessary to organize and put this work together. For the oppressed pe0ples of America, in hopes that this work might provide some understanding and insight into the struggle for self-determination and liberation. UHURU! ii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I wish to thank the members of my committee, Dr. Charles Hanley, Dr. Dozier Thornton, Dr. Bertram Karon, and Dr. Judy Tant for their guidance, direction, and support in the preparation of this research project. Thanks are also expressed to the staff members of the counseling center, Dr. Lee June, Dr. Bonita Pope, Ms. Carmen Gear, and especially Phyliss and Laura who assisted me in the data collection. I would also like to thank the staff members of the Counseling and Consulta- tion Service at the Ohio State University for computer time and access to their word processor. TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF TABLES . LIST OF APPENDICES INTRODUCTION World View Racial and Ethnic Identity Majority- Minority Group Dynamics Psychological Oppression Prejudice and Discrimination Racism Service Utilization Counselor Preferences . Racial Similarity Additional Similarity Factors Summary . . . Hypotheses METHOD Subjects Questionnaire . Background Information . Attitudes Toward Counselors and the CounselingCenter: Perceived Problem Areas Character Description University Service Utilization Procedure . . . . . . RESULTS Questionnaire Analysis Counseling Attitudes Effects of Race and Socioeconomic Indicators Perceived Problems Service Utilization . Character Description Correctional Analyses . iv Page vi viii Page DISCUSSION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59 General Findings and Comparison with the Research Literature . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59 Counseling Attitudes . . . . . 60 Socioeconomic Effects on Counseling Attitudes . . . 62 Perceived Problems . . . . . . . . . . . . 63 Service Utilization . . . . . . . . . . . 63 Methodological Considerations . . . . . . . . . 65 APPENDICES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68 REFERENCES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 144 Table LIST OF TABLES Selected Demographic Characteristics of Subjects Counseling Attitudes Scale and Subscale Descriptions Product Moment Correlations Between Fathers' Socioeconomic Status and Scale Scores Perceived Problem Scale Description . Rank Order Usage of University Services Additional Demographic Characteristics . Scale and Subscale Mean Difference Comparisons Counseling Attitudes Item Responses . Service Utilization Item Responses Perceived Problems Item Responses Character Description Response Percentage and Chi- Square Analysis by Form Group . . Post Hoc Race or Ethnic Comparisons of Significant Counseling Attitudes Means . . . . . . Post Hoc Race Comparisons of Significant Perceived Problems . . . . . . . . . . Character Description, Frequencies, Chi-Square for Counseling Form Group by Race and Ethnicity Character Description, Frequencies, Chi-Square Analysis for Academic Advisor Form by Race . . . . . Selected Correlations Between Counseling- -Center, Utilization, MECCA Knowledge, Counseling Attitudes and Perceived Problems vi Page 45 47 49 49 51 7O 78 8O 89 92 96 99 101 104 107 110 Table Page E.2. Selected Correlations Between Perceived Problems, Service Utilization Patterns, and Counseling Attitudes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 112 E.3 Selected Correlations Between Perceived Problems, Service Utilization Patterns, and Counseling Attitudes for Asian-American Students . . . . . . 114 E.4. Selected Correlations Between Perceived Problems, Service Utilization Patterns, and Counseling Attitudes for Hispanic Students . . . . . . . . . . . 115 E.5. Selection Correlations Between Perceived Problems, Service Utilization Patterns, and Counseling Attitudes for Native-American Students . . . . . . . . . 116 E.6. Selected Correlations Between Perceived Problems, Service Utilization Patterns, and Counseling Attitudes for White Students . . . . . . . . . . . . 116 6.1. Subscale Item Designations . . . . . . . . . 123 LIST OF APPENDICES Appendix A. Additional Demographic Characteristics and Analyses B. Questionnaire Responses Item Analyses . C. Race or Ethnic Post Hoc Race Mean Comparisons D. Racial and Ethnic Differences for Each Group on Character Description Forms . . . . E. Correlational Analyses . F. Counseling Center Recommendations G. Subscale Item Designations H. Instruments Consent Form Interview Letters and Forms viii Page 69 79 98 103 109 117 122 124 138 140 INTRODUCTION This study examines the attitudes of Hispanic, Asian-American, Native American, Black, and White students toward counselors and counseling-center services, as well as any racial or ethnic differ- ences in service utilization and in perceptions of problem areas. In this paper the term minority will be used interchangeably to discuss the racial and ethnic minority groups presented above. Research literature (Leavitt, Carey, & Swartz, 1971; Mackey, 1972; Davis & Swartz, 1972) indicates that minority students under- utilize university counseling-center services. Furthermore, it indi- cates that this underutilization may be due to lack of knowledge about the services (Syner, Hill, & Derksen, 1972; June, 1980), negative attitudes toward receiving and seeking psychological services (Fisher & Turner, 1970; June, 1980), as well as perceived difficulties in the client-counselor relationship due to dissimilarities in age, sex, religion, socioeconomic status, racial (H‘ ethnic background, and counseling style or treatment approach (Jones & Seagull, 1977; Sue & Sue, 1977; Harrison, 1975; Wolkin, Worwaki, & Williams, 1973; Lorion, 1974, 1978; Smith, 1974; Berman, 1979). Different approaches have been utilized to alleviate these prob- lems. The Michigan State University Counseling Center has attempted to address these problems by providing a counseling service specifically for minority students known as the Multi-Ethnic Counseling Center Alliance (MECCA). MECCA's services include outreach, consultation, and public relations with minority students, as well as providing the regular direct services offered by the main counseling center. By providing a separate facility, MECCA is established as a place that can specifically address the concerns of minority students. In addition, Michigan State, as well as other counseling centers, such as at Ohio State University and St. Louis University, is making efforts to empha- size outreach and consultation programs for racially and culturally different students. The attitudes of racial minorities toward counselors and counseling- center services appear to be related to societal influences. Various factors, such as world view, language, values, racial or ethnic iden- tity, minority-majority group dynamics, psychological oppression, prejudice, discrimination, and racism may all influence the service utilization patterns of minority students. In order to understand the problem, it is useful to examine a few of the societal forces that may lead racial minorities to hesitate to utilize pyschological services. World View Different cultural systems socialize individuals into different fields of experience or world views. Sue (1981) suggested that ethnic identity, attitudina? EHld belief similarity, as well as counseling styles, may all be associated with one's world view. A world view may be defined as how individuals perceive their relationship to the world (i.e., nature, other people, animals, institutions, objects, the cosmos, their creator). World views are attitudes, values, opinions, and concepts that ultimately affect how we think, make decisions, and define or cate- gorize events and behaviors. In many respects, one's world view is a reflection of the culture in which one has been socialized. Because individuals have had different experiences and circumstances which influence their world views, they attribute different meanings to messages. In addition, the responses individuals make to messages from others are a product of their world views. This factor has impor- tant implications in counseling and psychotherapy, job interviewing, classroom performance, and academic effectiveness. World views modify the way information is processed. Individuals arrive at perceptions of the environment and themselves through a set of learned cognitive structures. These cognitive structures are learned by an individual through the socialization process of the society. These organized cognitive structures are termed schemas (Tesser, 1978). Schemas provide a framework for simplifying complex information. Schematic structures influence what information is attended to or recalled from memory, not only influencing which stimuli reach one's conscious awareness, but also the judgmental and evaluative aspects of one's perceptions. Korten (1972) suggested that "to under- stand other pe0ple, we must come to understand the cognitive struc- tures which shape their perceptions and hence determine their behavior" (p. 124). Another important aspect of world view involves values. Values are culturally derived notions of what is right and wrong, good and bad, beautiful and ugly, true and false, positive and negative (Porter & Samovar, 1972). Values provide a set of standards with which to judge the behaviors and beliefs of others. The values of a culture are important in that they define what is preferable by the social system. Values are passed on to individuals through the socializa- tion process. "Values are acquired so early in the socialization process, in the family, in the school, in the community, that for most people, they are largely unconscious assumptions, governing actions much more than they are governed by consciously professed creeds" (Marden & Meyer, 1968, p. 20). It appears that one's socioeconomic class level also influences individual world views. The socioeconomic class of an individual pro- vides a background of experiences related to the amount of income and the living conditions in which that individual was raised. Racial or ethnic minorities are disproportionately represented in the lower classes in spite of some attempts to rectify the situation. The fact that many Blacks, Hispanics, and Native-Americans come from predomi— nately lower-class backgrounds may often compound various cultural variables with class variables. The world view associated with a lower socioeconomic status has been described by Lewis (1966). Lewis indicated that the circumstances of poverty are characterized by low wages, unemployment or underemploy- ment, little or no property ownership, no savings and lack of food reserves. It involves fear of not being able to meet one's basic needs of hunger and shelter, having to borrow money at exorbitant interest rates leading to greater debt, inability to get credit, as well as feelings of helplessness and dependency. Given this information, it is apparent that the social class in which one was raised ultimately would affect the way the world is perceived. Considering the overwhelming number of obstacles related to poverty, a world view characterized by feelings of powerlessness, external control, and distrust of the bureaucracy would seemingly be the result. One's world view is ultimately reflected in communication patterns. In addition to facilitating interpersonal interactions, communication processes influence one's movement through cultural systems within a society. Communication processes are facilitated through language usage, as well as suCh nonverbal means as gestures, inflections, tone of voice, eye contact, and one's personal space usage. Both verbal and nonverbal symbols convey meanings through references to other things. Racial and Ethnic Identity The concept of ethnicity involves ancestral, cultural, or relig- ious identifications with a portion of the world's population. Eth- nicity revolves around shared similarities in language, symbolic meanings, norms, customs, values, beliefs, traditions, and technology. An ethnic group consists of individuals who perceive themselves to be alike by virture of their shared racial, cultural, ancestral, or religious heritages. It is oftentimes useful to make a distinction between race and ethnic group. Race is defined by one's anatomical characteristics, while an ethnic group is defined by similarities in behaviors, cul- tures, and language characteristics. A race may include several ethnic groups. Race has significance as long as people are categorized according to physical traits and individuals act on these categories. The salience of race and ethnicity increases when racial and ethnic groups are in conflict. When this happens, the members of a group often band together against outsiders. Not all persons in a racial or ethnic group share all of the traits of their particular group. Factors such as assimilation, acculturation, level of identification, language, and socioeconomic class interact in differing degrees to influence individuals. Feather (1979) outlined three main criteria that gauge the degree of assimilation into the dominant society: (1) acculturation (i.e., learned roles, norms, and customs); (2) personal adjustments (i.e., low rates of mental illness, crime, and suicide); (3) institutional dispersion (i.e., degree of assimilation and matriculation into insti- tutions). These three criteria indicate the degree of socialization and assimilation of minority group members into the dominant cultural systems. The more acculturated individuals are, the more likely they will be better adjusted to that system and the more likely that they will be able to advance through the institutional structures. It appears, then, that the degree and kind of assimilation and acculturation adds a special complexity to the issue of racial or ethnic identification. The issue for racial minorities is primarily one of acculturation. Acculturation is one of the sustaining processes whereby minorities are incorporated into the dominant culture (Marden & Meyer, 1968). In this sense, the term refers to a change from one's primary cultural or subcultural belief system to that of the majority group's cultural belief system. The acculturation process takes place on two levels--external and internal. External acculturation is primarily behavioral, in which the everyday language, dress, and social roles of the dominant culture are accepted, while attitudes and behaviors remain similar to those of the minority group. In this way, the individual is leading a double life, where pub- licly there is conformity with the society's standards, but privately the individual continues to conform with the attitudes and behaviors of the minority subculture. On the other hand, internal acculturation occurs when the cultural attitudes, belief systems, and values of the dominant culture have been internalized. Complete acculturation would involve a situation where the individual conforms both behaviorally and attitudinally with the dominant society's standards. Due to the ethnocentric nature of most societies, there is always pressure for acculturation. This is particularly true in light of the fact that some degree of common reality and beliefs are essential for any economic or social advancement within the society. Through the acculturation process, individuals are provided with a common reality, which provides the society with a means of predicting and controlling their behaviors. The degree of acculturation is influenced by how successful the society's institutions are able to socialize individuals to the domi- nant group's value system and world view. For minorities, the degree of socialization will initially depend on how acculturated the parents and other significant family members are. What the family considers to be desirable and important will determine what is passed on to the children. This also influences how the children will eventually define themselves racially. The most highly developed models used for examining racial and ethnic identity have dealt primarily with Blacks (Cross, 1971; Jackson, 1975; Parham & Helms, 1981), Asian Americans (Sue & Sue, 1971) and the culturally different (Atkinson, Morten, & Sue, 1979). As far as Blacks are concerned, Cross (1971) suggested several stages of racial identity that individuals may progress through. The first stage is a pre- encounter stage which is identified by attitudes and a world view dominated by a Euro-American frame of reference, as well as thoughts, actions, and behaviors, that devalue blackness. The encounter stage involves a situation where the old frame of reference is challenged and the person is forced to look at alternative interpretations of their identity. The immersion-emersion stage involves the development of a sense of "Black Pride" with the involvement level with Blacks being high, however, the degree of internalization of positive attitudes about one's blackness is minimal. In this stage there appears to be much denigrating of Whites and glorifying of Blacks. In the internali- zation stage, the individual achieves a feeling of inner security with blackness. This stage also incorporates ideological flexibility as well as a decline in global anti-White feelings. This suggestion was supported and followed up by Atkinson, Morten, and Sue (1979) who proposed the minority identity development model. This model consists of five stages similar to Cross's (1971) model for Blacks. The first stage was designated as conformity. In this stage there appears to be a preference for the dominant cultures values over one's own. It may also involve feelings of racial self- hatred. Stage two is the dissonance stage that is characterized by cultural confusion and conflict. Stage two involves a process of questioning and challenging the accepted values and beliefs of the dominant culture. Stage three is the resistance and immersion stage which involves active rejection of the dominant society and culture along with a complete endorsement of one's own cultural views. In addition, this stage usually includes desires to combat oppression and racism as a primary motivational factor, as well as attempts to get in touch with one's history, culture, and traditions. Distrust and hatred of the dominant society tends to be strong while the reference group is one's own culture. Stage four, termed introspec- tion, is characterized by conflict caused by the rigid constraints of the resistance, immersion stage. In this stage an absolute rejection of the dominant culture's values become questioned. Stage five is the awareness stage which involves a sense of self-fulfillment, actualization, and consciousness with regard to one's cultural iden- tity. In addition, there appears to be greater individual control and flexibility regarding the degree to which other cultural values 10 are objectively examined and accepted or rejected on the basis of their usefulness to the individual. In this stage there is also a desire to eliminate all forms of oppression as an important motiva- tional factor. The levels of racial identity are important to consider because they influence the extent and degree to which an individual utilizes a particular group as a frame of reference or support system in times of distress. Caplan (1974) characterized social support systems as consisting of enduring interpersonal ties to a group of people who can be relied upon to provide feedback, and who share similar stand— ards and values. It appears that one important function of social support is to provide consensual validation of one's perceptions of the physical and social reality. Support systems provide predicta- bility and security through interaction with similar others. It seems feasible that the combination of predictability and similarity makes a support system a potential insulator against stressful conditions. Researchers have suggested that the condition of low social support is in itself a source of stress (Myers, Lindenthal, & Pepper, 1975). It is apparent that the key word in support systems is similarity. This is in keeping with the idea that when people are dissimilar to us, there is a distinct possibility that they will differ from us in some respect and they will disagree with our world view. In addition, dissimilar others may not understand or even possibly misinterpret one's motives, beliefs, and behaviors. The issue of the importance of support systems and the potential for conflict with dissimilar others may cause racial or ethnic minority 11 group members to want to close ranks and not relate with those who may be different from them. This may be particularly true of those individuals in stage three of Atkinson et al.'s (1979) model. Majority—Minority Group Dynamics The majority group in a society is the one whose physical traits, customs, and world view are considered to be the standard against which all people in the society are compared and judged. As a result, the majority group's culture and physical traits are established as superior, and other groups with different cultures or physical traits are discriminated against. A minority group is the one which has different physical or cultural traits from the majority group and the different traits are considered to be inferior according to the standards of the society. Marden and Meyer (1968) suggested that a minority status is an imposed one and is valid only as long as the majority group maintains the power and has the ability and opportunity to sustain it. There are two conditions necessary to the establishment of domi— nance by the majority group. The first is a differentiation between the groups that makes each group identifiable to the others and the second condition consists of an unequal power situation (Marden & Meyer, 1968). For racial or ethnic minority group members, their different physical and cultural traits make them identifiable and in addition, their economic stratification mostly within the lower class levels results in an unequal power situation. There is much potential for conflict in majority—minority group relations because the minority group's share of the power, authority, 12 opportunities and resources are unjustifiably limited. A conflict arises between the majority and minority groups not only from unequal treatment, but also because of the basic group differences that are exaggerated by discriminatory practices When considering the unequal distribution of power, several fac- tors must be taken into consideration. Power involves the ability to control or directly or indirectly influence the conditions under which one lives. To have power is to have access to the resources which can be employed to reduce one's feelings of helplessness or to increase one's sense of control. Rothman (1978) described the resource bases of social power as: (1) economic (i.e., property, money, credit, wages); (2) occupational (i.e., jobs, promotions); (3) informational (i.e., knowledge, specific and general information); and (4) coercive (i.e., physical force). Rothman (1978) further suggested that the degree to which minority group members are dependent on the majority group is related to the availability of substitute commodities. What has been established in America is a system of institutional- ized inequality. Rothman (1978) suggested that the term “inequality“ implies the uneven distribution of a resource. Structural inequality refers to situations in which resources are allocated on the basis of group membership or position in the social organization of a society. As a result of the inequality and opportunity restrictions, individuals or groups may not be able to advance within the society. Minorities living in a discriminatory system may feel especially powerless to control the circumstances in their social environment and as a result, experience a form of "learned helplessness." Seligman 13 (1974, 1975) suggested that when individuals are exposed to uncon- trollable aversive outcomes, they learn that responding and reinforce- ment are independent. These individuals then show inappropriate generalization from those uncontrollable experiences to new situa- tions which are controllable. Therefore, it appears that learned helplessness and perceived control may have special implications for racial or ethnic minorities. Sue (1978) suggested that in its extreme form, oppression may result in a form of learned helplessness. When individuals learn helplessness behavior as a result of systemic discrimination, unemployment, poor housing, and little economic or political control, they may exhibit passivity and apathy (low motivation), they may fail to learn which events may be controlled (cognitive disruption), and they may show anxiety, anger, and depres- sion (emotional disturbance). On the other hand, instead of learning helplessness behavior, racial or ethnic minorities may respond to the injustices in American society by becoming suspicious, distrustful, or paranoid. Given the historical precedents, racial or ethnic minorities in America have good reasons for not trusting White Americans and the system. This lack of trust often leads to guardedness, an inability to establish rapport in relationships, and lack of self-disclosure or intimacy with Whites or those who work for the system. Apparently, the world view of racial or ethnic minorities in America includes eui oppression factor which is related to the racism and discrimination. Racial or ethnic minorities have to live in an 14 environment that they may perceive to be hostile, where the future is uncertain and ambiguous, and where long-range planning is of little value, while survival on a day-to-day basis is of greater importance. Although other lower-class citizens experience oppressive conditions, there is added oppression if the individual is ethnically different as well as poor. The past and continuing discrimination and oppression against racial or ethnic minorities is a basis for minority distrust of the majority society. In this situation the established institutions and their agents are perceived as potential enemies unless proven other- wise. In addition, the social system is against them unless personal experiences have taught them otherwise. To advance within American societal structures, racial or ethnic minorities are forced to change certain personality characateristics or other traditional customs which form the basis of their identity as individuals and as members of their groups. This becomes an issue only when it is considered that other groups in this society (particu- larly Whites) do not have to relinquish their own traditions and cultural identities which give each group its own sense of purpose, destiny, and direction based on their common heritage or ancestry. It becomes crucial when the characteristics to be changed are those that provide links and ties to one's orginal cultural heritage. This is crucial because identification with one's group and awareness and acceptance of the group's history and heritage provide a stable foundation for identity development and consensual validation through social support. As a result, cultural conflicts may present a problem 15 for one's identity develOpment, basically because one's culture is the basic source of the values, beliefs, knowledge, and customs upon which one's identity is founded. This may cause conflicts not only from the perspective of the increased potential for an identity crisis, but also because such change may require accepting values, norms, and beliefs that may be antagonistic to the individual's cultural heritage. In addition, this situation also involves a restriction of choice, because individuals are not free to grow in the shape, form, and fashion that would include aspects of their heritage, that do not conform to White American standards. The standards set for performance in American society are con- sidered to be commonly agreed to norms. The main problem is that the norm and standard setters did not consider ethnically different mem- bers of the society. Furthermore, what American society assumes to be appr0priate and important for an individual's optimum personality development may not necessarily be in the best interests of those members of the society with different world views. More specifically, the American criteria for success is not necessarily commonly agreed to by all the groups in the society and these criteria are many times not equally relevant or responsive to the needs and priorities of different ethnic or racial groups. It appears that a multi-ethnic society should consider the interests of all groups within the society, when the norms are established. 16 Psychological Oppression To be psychologically oppressed is to have a different world view other than the one you hold imposed upon you. A situation has been created in American society where racial or ethnic minorities have had to abandon their own world views in order to advance or even survive. This imposition of an alien world view appears to be stimu- lated by racism, prejudice, discrimination, and cultural or religious intolerance. As a result, it appears that the situation facing racial or ethnic minorities, involves systemic psychological oppression. Oppression refers not only to the economic, social, and political disenfranchisement, but to spiritual, mental, and moral disenfranchise- ment as well (Cone, 1970). To be oppressed is to have to consciously or unconsciously deal with the potential threat of nonacceptance and devaluation. The potential threat may be to one's way-of-being in the world, to one's achievement and progress, or to one's self-identity and natural development. Psychological oppression can be manifested in any minority group that is discriminated against by the majority. Women may be oppressed by sexism, Jews by religious intolerance, racial minorities by racism, ethnic minorities by cultural intolerance, low- income pe0ple by their socioeconomic status. In the case of racial or ethnic minorities, it appears that psychological oppression is a reaction to a conscious or unconscious awareness of the potential threat of discrimination and prejudice that may be experienced in the environment. Reactions to pyschological oppression may vary from over- conformity and compliance, self-hatred, and self-destructive behaviors, 17 system-beating behaviors (i.e., illegal activities, other activities that would result in the downfall of the system or its agencies), or self-determining and psychological liberating efforts. Conformity with one's assigned status and identification with the oppressor is positively sanctioned. The oppressive system must continuously rein- force its imposed defintions (i.e., minority status) for the pepple it oppresses. In addition, because a cultural system is an important mechanism for the continuation of the history, heritage, and solidar- ity of a people, it is necessary that the oppressor destroy the history, heritage, and traditions of the people it proposes to oppress. Prejudice and Discrimination The world view of racial or ethnic minorities appears to include an oppression factor that is influenced by prejudice and discrimination. It might be helpful here to explore these constructs in order to gain a better understanding of their impact on racial or ethnic minorities service utilization. Perceived prejudice and discrimination may act as psychological oppression factors that individuals must deal with in their interactions in the larger society. American society con- tinues to operate in ways that tend to perpetuate the historical injustices inflected (n1 racial or ethnic minorities, so as a result the inequitable situation is maintained and reinforced. A self- justifying ideology is used to rationalize the situation and to restore psychological equity. For example, this self-justifying ideology would result in a distorted and unreal assessment of non-White 18 individuals by those who prejudge others on the basis of such faulty assumptions such as White supremacy. Maintaining prejudical attitudes appers to be one way of restor- ing psychological equity to relationships. Prejudice is a negative attitude toward a person or group based upon a social comparison process in which the individual's own group is taken as the positive point of reference (Jones, 1972). The cognitive dimensions of prejudice have been traditionally placed under the label of stereotypes. Stereotypes are schemata in which attributes are assigned to individuals or groups. Stereotypes function to reinforce the beliefs and misconceptions of individuals. They also furnish the basis for the development and maintenance of group solidarity. Stereotypes provide motives for the actions of prejudices or closed-minded individuals and at the same time, they designate the accessible and socially approved targets for the release of hostility and aggression. Stereotyping has been discussed in terms of a structural framework for processing information and in this way, they have the properties ofa schema (Hamilton, 1979). Due to this finding, it is clear that stereotypes and prejudices interfere with communication processes by predisposing individuals to behave in cer- tain ways and generalize attributes based on preconcieved notions. The behavioral manifestation of prejudice is discrimination. Dis- crimination may involve an overt or covert situation where the opportu- nities and choices of the victimized group are limited and restricted. While the overt practices are apparent, covert discriminatory practices 19 involve subtle restrictions or behaviors that may be woven into the fabric of the society. Like prejudicial attitudes, discriminatory acts are typically justified or rationalized by the development of ideologies which define the victim as inherently inferior, different or abnormal and deserv— ing of unjust treatment. Nash (1962, cited in Rothman, 1978) suggested that a discriminatory ideology serves five functions: (1) it provides a moral rational for systematic deprivations; (2) it allows the domi- nant group to reconcile their values and behaviors; (3) it discourages the subordinate group from challenging the system; (4) it serves to rally adherents in support of a just cause; and (5) it defends the existing division of labor. Considering these points, it would seem unrealistic that a discriminatory system would make attempts to become less discriminatory particularly if the changes would involve a loss of power for the dominant group who are benefiting by maintaining the status quo. Begin Racial prejudice begins with a perception of color or physical appearance differences between two groups (Jones, 1972). This per— ception is followed by a comparison and an evaluation. Racism is defined as any activity by individuals, institutions, or cultures that treats people unjustly because of color and rational- izes that treatment by attributing to them undesirable biological, psychological, social, or cultural characteristics (Terry, 1975). Racism involves the belief that race is the primary determinant of 20 human traits and capacities and that certain racial characteristics determine the superiority of one racial group over another. Jones (1972) suggested that western society has practiced a form of cultural racism by imposing its standards, beliefs, and ways of behaving on minority groups. Cultural racism can generally be defined as the individual and institutional expression of the superiority of one race's cultural heritage over that of another (Jones, 1972). Jones further states that cultural racism is the appropriate term describing the act of requiring cultural minorities to measure up to White Ameri- can's standards in order to be able to participate and advance in the 1;: economic mainstream of the society. As a result, cultural racism is found in the historical information presented within the educational system. ”It is a matter of cultural racism when the achievements of a race of people are fully ignored" (Jones, 1972, p. 6). The negative distortions of different cultures, the suppression of information regarding different cultural heritages, in addition to the positive distortion of Euro-American culture has limited the objective of nonbiased educational growth for all Americans. It is apparent that institutional, individual, and cultural racism have created psychological barriers for minorities that may interfere with the utilization of various systemic services. Racial or ethnic minorities are placed in an approach-avoidance conflict between becoming acculturated or maintaining their cultural traditions. For Blacks, this may involve relinquishing such African values and traditions such as the importance of collective work and responsibility, extended family system, and the development of a lifestyle that is more 21 in harmony with nature. Although there is nothing inherently wrong with acculturation, the pressure that results from the intolerance of other lifestyles and deviations from American society appears to be extremely ethnocentric in its intolerance of different lifestyles, cultural traditions, and different ways of being in the world. As a result, cultural conflicts may be manifestations of cultural racism. Service Utilization Differing world views, degrees of racial or ethnic identification, majority-minority group dynamics, psychological oppression, prejudice, discrimination, racism, communication, and social class variables may be factors that work together in different combinations to influence the utilization of counseling center services by racial or ethnic minority group members, who may be more likely than Whites to experi- ence a considerable amount of anxiety regarding their ethnic, racial, or cultural differences, and this anxiety will probably influence the source and kind of help sought for personal problems. Since racial or ethnic minority students may have preconceived ideas regarding what the counseling process is like and how the inter— action will go, some racial or ethnic minorities may fear that they will be pressured in counseling to reject their own value system. Sue and Sue (1972) suggested the minority patient may feel that the White therapist is an agent who will attempt to adjust them to a “sick society." Research by Fischer and Turner (1970) indicated that certain attitudinal differences may influence whether or not individuals will 22 seek psychological help. Although, Snyder et al. (1972) reported that stigma was of little concern to students, an unpublished paper by June (1980) revealed that Black students may be afraid to use counsel- ing center services due to perceptions that the services are for severely disturbed or ”crazy people." In addition, other researchers (Parish &Knappes, 1979; Phillips, 1963) also found that seeking psy- chological help may be perceived very negatively by both nonminority students and “laymen " An extensive amount of research has been compiled, regarding the attitudes and characteristics of students who do or do not use uni- versity counseling center services (Berdie & Stein, 1966; Grande, 1968; Russel, 1970; Rossman & Kirk, 1975; Sue & Kirk, 1975). In Synder, Hill, and Derksen's (1972) study, students were favorable to the concept of counseling, but they also reported having little or no information regarding the counseling center and the counseling process. Lack of awareness of counseling center services was also true for the Black students attending Michigan State University (June, 1980). When user and nonuser populations were compared, investigators found that nonusers believed their problems were not appropriate or important enough (Rust & Davie, 1961) or felt that it was better to solve one's own problems (Hoover, 1967). In addition, Dreman and Doley (1976) report that nonusers perceived users of counseling services to be suffering significantly more than themselves from psychological and interpresonal difficulties. Among racial or ethnic minority group members, there are added concerns which may or may not influence service utilization patterns. 23 Dawkins, Terry, and Dawkins (1980) surveyed sixty Black inner city residents of Chicago and found that users of an outpatient neighbor- hood clinic were more dependent, unmotivated, and socially withdrawn than the nonusers who showed more tendency toward social deviancy and racial pride. This finding reflects the possibility that Blacks who use psychological services may be those who were mot severely disturbed or who had given up trying to deal with problems. On the other hand, the nonusers were actively combating their problems by fighting the oppressive system in addition to exhibiting racial pride and self—determination. The question remains whether or not having a sense of racial pride would decrease the need for services and decrease trust in a service provided primarily by Whites. Another issue involves ease of access to services. Davis and Swartz (1972) believed it important to take services to the students in their own milieu. Apparently, this approach is more successful in reaching racial and ethnic minority students and, in addition, pro- vides staff visibility and contacts with the agency. The whole issue of service utilization involves not just who uses services, and why they do or do not, but also how long services are utilized. Early termination by minority and low-income clients has been a concern addressed by several researchers (Yamamoto, James, & Palley, 1968; Lorion, 1974; Acosta, 1980). Research by Sue et al. (1974), Sue and McKinney (1975), Sue, Allen, & Conaway (1975) found that Asian-Americans, Blacks, Chicanos, and Native—Americans terminated counseling after only one contact at a rate of approximately 50%, compared to a 30% rate for White clients. These investigators suggest 24 that inappropriateness of the interpersonal interactions accounts for the premature termination. A study by Acosta (1980)compared Blacks, Mexican-Americans, and Whites on reasons for terminating therapy. The findings revealed that the highest ranked reason in all three ethnic groups involved negative attitudes toward therapists and the perception that therapy was of no benefit. This finding supports the results of other studies showing that the behaviors, attitudes, and treatment approaches of some therapists may be a very important variable in explaining the high termination rates of low-income and minority clients (Yamamoto, James, Bloombaum, & Hattem, 1967; Garfield, 1971; Thomas & Sillen, 1972; Balkeland & Lundwall, 1975; Sue, 1977; Acosta, 1977; Kline, Acosta, Austin, & Johnson, 1977). The second highest ranked reason for termination of therapy in Acosta's (1980) study involved the treatment approach. In the study, the primary therapeutic modality used was a psychodynamic orientation. This finding raises questions regarding the kinds of therapeutic interventions that may or may not be helpful at a given time for a given client. For minorities the concern with "survival” and making it on a day-to-day basis may result in treatment preferences for immediate problem-solving, behavioral, or short-term interventions (Lorion, 1974). Furthermore, long-term psychoanalytic approaches focusing on family dynamics may be seen as intrusive and inappropriate by minority clients. However, there is evidence that intensive psychotherapeutic 25 approaches (particularly if presented from a cross—cultural perspec- tive) may be as helpful to minority clients as well as nonminorities (Griffith & Jones, 1979; Jones, 1974, 1978; and Lorion, 1978). Most importantly, it appears that the issue involves assessing with what kind of client, at what time, and under what conditions a given therapeutic modality might influence whether or not a client continues in therapy or terminates. Counselor Preferences Sue (1981) noted several factors that may override racial dif— ferences and contribute to successful therapy. These factors involve the presenting problem, the amount of counselor experience, the therapist's counseling style, the degree of ethnic or racial conscious— ness, as well as such characteristics of the counselor as world view, expertness, and trustworthiness. 0n the other hand, White counselors may be perceived as agents of the dominant society, and minority clients might project their negative experiences of oppression and discrimination onto counselors (Vontress, 1971; Russell, 1970). Gamboa (1971) found that White students were more willing to see a counselor for personal problems than Black students were, regardless of the race of the counselor. Using the Minority Identity Development model, Sue (1981) indicated that individuals at the conformity stage will probably prefer a White counselor. In theory, individuals at the dissonance stage should prefer counselors who are familiar with majority and minority cultures. Those in the resistance and immersion stage might 26 view Whites with distrust and hostility and prefer someone from the same minority group. Individuals at the introspection stage would probably prefer a counselor from their own culture or racial group, but in general would be most receptive to counselors who share a similar world view. Finally, those in the awareness stage should prefer a counselor with similar world views, and attitudinal and belief similarity, rather than racial or ethnic similarity. As far as Blacks are concerned, Parham and Helms (1981) sug- gested that while Black pe0ple's attitudes regarding their own race may determine their preferences for a counselor, their attitudes toward Whites should also influence their preferences. In their study, racial attitudes accounted for a statistically significant percentage of the variance involving preferences for the counselor's race. Simi- larly, Jackson and Kirschner (1973) examined the relationship between a Black person's racial self-designation and the degree of preference for a counselor of the same race. They found that college students who referred to themselves as Black or Afro—American preferred a counselor of African descent significantly more than those who called themselves Negro. Furthermore, Parham and Helms (1981) found that pre-encounter attitudes were most strongly associated with a pref- erence for White counselors and a nonacceptance of Black counselors. They suggested that an effective counselor in such a situation would be someone who would sense the underlying identity conflict and help the client move toward greater understanding. For those individuals with encounter attitudes, Parham and Helms (1981) believed that an effective counselor would help clients understand and work through the 27 traumatic racial realization experience. Those counselors working with individuals in the immersion-emersion stage need to recognize and facilitate the expression of those attitudes and possibly foster the growth process. Counselors working with individuals in the internalization stage need to be aware that these individuals may accept counselors of another race, but may not prefer a counselor of another race. Parham and Helms (1981) indicated that as Blacks become more comfortable with their racial identity, race of the counselor becomes less crucial while, perhaps, other characteristics of the counselor (i.e., experience, credibility, trustworthiness) would become more important. Racial Similiarity Research that investigated the effects of racial similarity on counSeling relationships have reported conflicting results. When con- sidering the findings, one must keep in mind that the studies are primarily simulated or one session studies, which limits their generali- zation. In addition, racial self-designation was not controlled for in most of the studies, while race was categorized by skin color. This last variable is important because racial identity and race con- sciousness tend to influence preferences for counselors. In addition, there may also be social desirability effects produced by an inter- viewer's race. Sattler (1970) suggested the amount and direction that subjects are influenced by the interviewer's race depends on such factors as: (1) the task content; (2) the instructions; (3) rein— forcement conditions; (4) geographical location of the study, 28 (5) individual difference variables (i.e., age, race, family back- ground, socioeconomic level and attitudes); (6) and the race, atti— tudes, residence, and socioeconomic level of the research team. Most of the literature regarding counselor preference involves Black clients with White counselors. More research in this area is needed for each of the racial minority groups. The basic premise under- lying racial similarity studies is that people who share similar backgrounds, values, experiences, problems, and world views are more likely to feel comfortable with and understand each other. The impact of race on client-counselor relations has been studied by many researchers. Some researchers have reported that Black clients prefer Black counselors (Sattler, 1970; Gilsdorf, 1978; Banks, Berenson, & Carkhuff, 1967; Stranges & Riccio, 1970; Barnes, 1970; Gardner, 1970; Thompson & Cimbolic, 1978; Proctor & Rosen, 1981; Harrison, 1975) while other researchers found race not to be an important vari- able in counselor preference (Backner, 1970; Cimbolic, 1972). Simi- larly, several investigators have found racial similarity to be a factor in increasing counseling effectiveness (Williams & Kirkland, 1970; Bryson, 1972; Bryson & Cody, 1973; Fuller & Kern, 1978; Gardner, 1970; Kadushin, 1972; Jones & Seagull, 1977; Fry, Kr0pf, & Coe, 1980; Taylor, 1970; & Atkinson, Mariyama, & Matsui, 1978). Other researchers have not corroborated these findings (Bryson 8 Cody, 1973; Proctor & Rosen, 1981; Ewing, 1974). Although a White individual can never become Black, Asian-American, Chicano, or Native-American, familiarity with these groups and their 29 cultural heritages will help to increase interpersonal understanding. The counselor should have some understanding of what the client's environmental milieu and experiences are like if the counselor is going to be helpful. Specific findings of several studies bear on this issue. Phillips (1960) concluded that White counselors could not penetrate racial barriers and as a result could not counsel Blacks effectively. Gardner (1970) suggested that Black college students perceive that Black counselors would be able to function better with Black students than with White students. The Banks, Berenson, and Carkhuff(l967) study reported that "two-thirds of the counselees would not return to see a White counselor for a second session“ (p. 72). However, these findings must be qualified by the fact that Banks et al. (1967) failed to specify whether their subjects were chosen ran- domly, their age and grade levels, socioeconomic class levels, the geographical area of the country, or whether they were urban, rural, or suburban dwellers. These variables are important because they are known to influence subject responses. Thompson and Cimbolic (1978) found that Black clients perferred Black counselors, and the the likelihood of taking a problem to the counseling center increased as counselor preferences increased. Furthermore, they suggested that for Black clients taking a problem to the counseling center was significantly more likely if the counselor to be seen was Black rather than White. While in Proctor and Rosen's (1981) study, one-half of both Black and White clients indicated they had no counselor preference, the clients who did express 3O preferences preferred counselor of their own race. However, this study involved a small sample size and a White interviewer. Bryson and Cody (1973) found that the race of a counselor related to the level of understanding in the counseling process. They also found that Black counselors understood Black clients better and White counselors understood White clients better. However, the White counselors received overall higher rating scores on the understanding criterion scale from both White and Black students. Some investiga- tors reported results which indicate that White counselors are proba- bly less effective when counseling hostile Black clients (Fuller & Kern, 1978). Fuller and Kern further indicated that Black counselors are not affected in any adverse way by encounters with hostile Black or White clients. However, it seems that the impact of hostility toward a counselor of any race may ultimately be determined by individual differences between counselors, such as personality factors and training. One of the few studies that compared Mexican-American and White clients' perceptions of counselor capability was carried out by Acosta and Sheehan (1976). These researchers found that both Mexican- and White-Americans attributed more skill, understanding, trust- worthiness, and attractiveness to the White—American professional and to the Mexican-American nonprofessional. The Mexican-American professional was seen less favorably by both groups. This finding may be partially explained by perceptions of acculturation effects possibly exhibited by the Mexican-American professional. As a result, the Mexican—Americans trusted one of their own group less when 31 labeled as an expert than when labeled a nonexpert. This may reflect the general lack of trust in anyone who has made it through the "hos- tile" system and is labeled an expert. Related to the similarity variable, Acosta and Sheehan (1976) found that the Mexican-American saw themselves as more similar to the nonprofessional, leading to more positive attributions of skill, understanding, trustworthiness, and attractiveness. Banks (1972) reported that racially similar client-counselor pair- ings resulted in greater client self-exploration and a greater degree of reported rapport. Grantham (1973) found that Black college students preferred Black counselors to a significantly greater degree than White counselors. In a study by Gilsdorf (1978), Mexican-American community college students had a significantly higher mean preference for a counselor of similar ethnicity than did Black or White students. Furthermore, Gilsdorf (1978) reported that Mexican-American students wanted to speak to counselor of the same ethnic group regardless of the presenting problem, while Black and White students showed a stronger preference for a counselor who was racially similar when they had a personal problem rather than an administrative one. In one of the best methodological studies of race effects on the client-counselor relationship, Jones (1978) found no differences in outcome for racially matched clients and counselors. However, there were clear differences in the process of therapy. When the client was Black, the therapist's race had an impact on the content of therapy. For Black clients, some issues raised were focused on race-related concerns, while this was not the case for White clients, with either 32 race therapist. Jones concluded that the client's race was salient in the views of the therapist's. Jones's study was good because the clients were matched in age and education, it was not a simulated study, and it involved the first ten therapy hours rather than one interview. However, only a psychodynamic orientation was used, the sample size was small, the therapists had extensive experience in counseling minorities, and there were no male clients. Similarly, Bryson (1972) failed to discover significant client-race relationship differences. In this study, White counselors were rated as more under- standing than Black counselors for both Black and White clients. Cimbolic (1972) reported that the subject's ratings of the counselors on effectiveness, likeability, and skill level did not relate to race. Although Cimbolic's study was an improvement on that of Banks et al. (1967), there were still some problems with social desirability, lack of control for racial identity, counseling orientation, and small sample size. One study revealed that racial similarity does not necessarily guarantee that a counseling relationship will be effective. Consider- ing Black counselors and Black clients, Kadushin (1972) believed that barriers to self-disclosure and openness may be as great between Black counselors and Black clients as between White counselors and Black clients. Kadushin attributed this finding to the possibility that Black counselors may be seen as agents of the system as much as are White counselors. 33 Additional Similarity Factors Similarity in age, sex, and socioeconomic class affect counseling relationships. In a study on age and sex characteristics, Boulware and Holmes (1970) found that in most situations, male and female college students preferred to talk with older male therapists, rather than with females or younger males. Smith (1974) reported significant differences in student preferences for a counselors' socioeconomic background, similarity being preferred for dealing with a moral, ethical, or religious problem. Furthermore, students seeking help preferred a counselor's age, religious belief, and sex to be similar to their own. Smith also found that it was important that the counselor's sex be the same when the client dealt with a sex problem. Other studies have also examined socioeconomic class effects. A person's social class figures importantly into whether or not treatment will be offered (Jones, 1974). Jones further indicated that while mental health professionals tend to reject patients of the lower classes for psychotherapy, the rejection is mutual for the clients. In the literature, there is a general assumption that social class differences present communication barriers which do not allow good interpersonal processes to take place. This is especially impor- tant to consider in light of the importance of communication processes in therapeutic interventions. Carkhuff and Pierce (1967) found that patients who were most similar to their counselor in terms of race and social class, tended to explore themselves more than patients who were dissimilar to the counselors. Similarly, Wolkon, Moriwaki, and Williams (1973) found that lower and middle-class Black female 34 college student manifested lower self-disclosure scores than did middle-class White females. In addition, Wolkon et al. (1973) found that both social class and race were related to attitudes toward psychotherapy. Abramovitz and Dokecki (1977) concluded that social class, rather than race or sex, was most highly associated with counselor bias. Wakefield and Snell (1975) reported that counselors who perceive their clients as having low socioeconomic status were more likely to perceive those persons as having lower potential for growth in therapy. Sue (1981) suggested that "people from a lower socioeconomic class may view counseling orientations toward reflection of feelings, concern with insight and attempts to discover the underlying intrapsychic problems as inappropriate” (p. 36). Furthermore, it appears that many lower—class clients expect to receive some form of concrete, tangible advice or treatment. When these expectations are not met early, terminations are the result. Summary The research literature indicates that racial and cultural minor- ity students tend to underutilize counseling center services. It also indicates that underutilization may be due to lack of knowledge about the services, negative attitudes toward counselors and counseling practices, as well as perceived incompatibility in the client-counselor relationship due to differences in age, sex, religion, socioeconomic status, and racial or ethnic background. The literature further indi- cates that racial or ethnic minority students attending White 35 institutions may have additional adaptation concerns that seem to reflect conflicts between their traditional cultural world view and the American cultural belief and value systems. Given the many different factors such as world view, racial or ethnic identification, majority-minority group dynamics, socioeconomic influences, and communication conflicts, it seems apparent that many forces may impede or enhance counseling relationships. In addition, these forces may influence whether or not a racially or ethnically different individual would seek psychological help. An understanding of these factors is vital to an awareness of the plight of racial or cultural minorities in American society. Given the literature review on service utilization, it appears that both the negative and positive results in many cases are deter- mined by attitudinal factors on the part of the clients. These atti- tudes may keep clients from approaching and inquiring into the resources that are available to help them cope with their personal-social, academic, and career concerns. The primary focus of this research is on examining the attitudinal differences between racial and ethnic minority and majority students regarding counseling-center and other service utilization, as well as their attitudes regarding the counseling process, counselor preferences and the problem areas they have experienced. Hypotheses were developed to assess the students' responses to various issues presented in the literature. Although the literature reveals conflicting findings, particularly in the area of counselor 36 preferences and attitudes toward counseling, differences between groups are expected to appear in attitudes toward counselors and services, counselor preferences, counseling stigma, service utiliza— tion and perceived problems. Exploratory analyses were made to determine the extent to which any other variables related to minority students' attitudes toward counselors or counseling. Hypothesis Hypothesis Hypothesis Hypothesis Hypothesis Hypotheses Black, Hispanic, Asian-American, and Native American students will express attitudes toward counselors and counseling services different from those of the White students. Black, Hispanic, Asian-American, and Native- American students will express more counsel- ing stigma than White students. Black, Hispanic, Asian-American, and Native- American students will express more of a preference for a similar counselor than will White students. Black, Hispanic, Asian-American, and Native- American students will report different service-utilization patterns than White students. Black, Hispanic, Asian-American, and Native- American students will perceive themselves as experiencing more frequent and more intense problems than White students. Hypothesis 6: Hypothesis 7: 37 Black, Hispanic, Asian-American, and Native- American students will express more difficulty in presenting issues than White students. The socioeconomic status of the students will correlate with their attitudes toward counsel- ing center services. METHOD This study assessed attitudes between Black, Asian-American, Hispanic, Native-American, and White students regarding counseling center services and counselors. In addition, it was proposed that these groups would differ in their service utilization patterns, and in the kinds of general problems that they perceive themself as experiencing. Subjects The sample of 224 Michigan State University, undergraduate stu- dent volunteers included 67 Blacks, 7 Asian—Americans, 17 Hispanics, 28 Native-Americans, and 105 Whites. The subjects were recruited by telephone and/or by letter. The sample characteristics are presented in Table 1 and Appendix A, Table A-1. More than half of the sample were freshman and sophomores. All subjects received $2 upon comple— tion of the survey. In addition, those who were enrolled in Intro- ductory Psychology classes received points toward course grades, if they requested them. Questionnaire The questionnaire was developed to address specific issues that had been reported in the literature. A survey of the more standardized instruments in this area revealed that all of the issues the author 38 39 wanted to address were not included, as a result, a new questionnaire was developed. The instrument covered background information, atti- tudes toward counselors, and the counseling center, perceived problem areas, univerity service utilized, and included a phenomenological character description. Background Information Personal and family background information was obtained using open-ended and multiple-choice items. There were several specific questions regarding previous use of the MSU counseling center services, awareness of services offered through MECCA, and the kinds of programs desired (See Appendix H, page 135). Attitudes Toward Counselors and the Counseling Center This 53-item Likert-type instrument was constructed after a review of the existing research literature and from personal counseling experiences, to assess counselor preferences and attitudes toward counseling center use. Utilizing the total sample, a varimax factor analysis procedure was used to delineate the items in the subscales. In a varimax rotated factor matrix, when there is more than one factor, the dependent variable is measuring more than one theoretical dimension or subscale. With this method the factors are forced to be orthogonal. If a variable loads on more than one factor, it measures more than one theoretical dimension. In this data analysis, all 53 items were included and the items were included on the factor where they had the highest factor loading. When the factor loadings 40 for an item were numerically close on more than one factor, item analyses were performed to delete items that lowered the subscales' (factors) reliability. These items tended to have the lowest item— total correlation. Four major areas were covered: (1) counselor preference. (2) stigma, (3) service awareness, and (4) issues pre- sentation. Five response categories rated from 1 to 5 (i.e., strongly agree, agree, don't agree or disagree, disagree, strongly disagree) were pro- vided for each item. The total scale, subscales, and items were scored based on the ratings to provide a mean response that corre- sponded to one of the five response categories. 0n the total scale, the higher the total scale score, the more unfavorable the counseling attitudes. Similarly, the higher the counselor preference score, the stronger the preference for a similar counselor. The higher the issues presentation score, the more difficulty in presenting various issues in counseling. The higher the counseling stigma score, the greater the counseling stigma. The lower the service awareness score, the greater awareness of the counseling center services and how to use them. The scoring on the following items were reverse coded: l,2,3,4,8,9,13,14,15,16,17,18,19,22,31,21 (see Appendix H, page 129). Perceived Problem Areas This 39—item Likert-type scale was constructed to assess the importance of specific problems. The following five-response cate- gories were provided for each item: not a problem (never affects me), 41 slight problem (rarely affects me), some problem (sometimes affects me), substantial problem (usually affects me), crucial problem (always affects me). The items were rated from 1 to 5 (see Appendix H, page 124). Character Description This 20-item adjective checklist was adapted from Asch's (1946) Impression Formation character description research. Twenty adjec- tives were chosen from Cough and Heilbrun's (1964) Adjective Check— list measure. Subjects were asked to check the adjectives that they felt were most characteristic of the individual in the stimulus description. Two separate character descriptions were given to two groups within each racial or ethnic group. The character descriptions are identical except one description reports a student seeking help from the counseling center and the other indicates the student seeking help from the academic advisor. Each item checked was scored as 1, Black items were scored as 0 (see Appendix H, page 124). University Service Utilization This 25-item measure was designed to assess the utilization of specific campus resources, and was included as a control to determine whether counseling center utilization patterns differed from other service use. The items checked "yes" were scored as 1 and the items checked "no" or Black items were scored as 2 (see Appendix H, page 124). _,fi 42 Procedure The volunteers were recruited by phone and letter. Their names were randomly selected from the student directory and a list of minority students currently enrolled at Michigan State University during the winter quarter, 1982. Two different letters and phone interview requests for volunteers were used: one for minority stu- dents (Form A) and one for White students (Form B) (see Appendix J). Different letters were used because it was thought that minority stu- dents might respond more favorably if they felt the study were sup- ported by an agency representing minority student concerns (MECCA). ,, A more general letter was sent to the White students. The letters and phone interviews explained whom the research was for, how a student's name was chosen, the purpose of the study, confidentiality, payment arrangements, and requested the student's participation. The volunteers made individual appointments to come to one of the Counseling Center branch offices to complete the questionnaire. A receptionist or interviewer administered a participant consent form prior to administration of the questionnaires. Subjects were told that the purpose of the study was to assess general attitudes toward the counseling center and counseling practices. Subjects were again assured of the confidentiality of the results and reminded that identifying information such as name or student identification numbers was not rquired on the instrument. The participants were asked to fill out all the information and answer the questions as honestly as possible. Subjects were informed that they would receive a summary of 43 the results of the study, when it was completed, by contacting the researcher through the Department of Psychology at Michigan State University. RESULTS Mean age, sex, university class, and socioeconomic status in all five groups of subjects are presented in Table 1. The ratio of males to females was similar for each group except for the Asian-Americans, who had proportionately more females than males. Most of the students in each group were freshmen. Hollingshead's social class indicators (based on the fathers' educational and occupational levels) were cal- culated for each group. The largest percentage of the Asian-American students (57.1%) were in the upper-middle class, while the largest percentage of Black (35.8%), Hispanic (70.6%), Native-American (42.9%), and Whites (51.4%) were in the middle class. As far as counseling center utilization (reported in Appendix A, Table A-1) were concerned, 46.3% of the Black students reported using the counseling center, as compared to 42.9% of the Asian-American students, 35.3% of the Hispanic students, 21.4% of the Native-American students, and 26.9% of the White students. Awareness of the services offered by the Multi-Ethnic Counseling Center Alliance (MECCA) was reported by 71.2% of the Black students, but by only 42.9% of the Asian-American students, 41.2% of the Hispanics, 25.0% of the Native- Americans, and 15.4% of the Whites (see Appendix A, Table A—l). 44 Table 1. Selected Demographic Characteristics of Subjects Group Characteristic Blacks Asians Hispanics i;§:i§an Whites (N=67) (N=77) (N = 17) (N = 28) (N=105) Sex Male 29 (43.3) 1 (14.3) 10 (58.8) 13 (46.4) 49 (46.7) Female 38 (56.7) 6 (85.7) 7 (41.2) 15 (53.6) 56 (53.5) University Class Freshman 23 (34.3) 3 (42.9) 6 (35.3) 14 (50.0) 55 (52. 4) Sophomore 22 (32.8) 1 (14.3) 4 (23.5) 8 (28.6) 30 (28. 6) Junior 16 (23.9) 1 (14.3) 3 (17.6) 3 (10.7) 1(10. 5) Senior 6 ( 9.0) 2 (28.6) 4 (23.5) 3 (10.7). 9 ( 8.6) Socioeconomic Status Lower 9 (13.4) 0 2 (11.8) 2 (7.1) 3 (3.9) Working 3 (4.5) 1 (14.3) 1 (5.9) 3 (10.7) 13 (12.8) Middle 24 (35.8) 2 (28.6) 12 (70.6) 12 (42.9) 54 (51.4) Upper Middle 20 (29.9) 4 (57.1) 1 (5.9) 11 (39.3) 32 (30.5) Upper 1 (1.5) 0 0 0 2 (1.9) Mean Age N 19.39 20.0 19.38 19.75 19.8 46 Questionnaire Analysis Counseling Attitudes The Counseling Attitudes measure has four subscales: Counselor Preference, Counseling Stigma, Service Awareness, and Issues Presenta- tion. Presented in Table 2 are the means, standard deviations, and alpha coefficients for each group on the 53-item Counseling Attitudes scale, the 16-item Counselor Preference subscale, the 16-item Counsel- ing Stigma subscale, the 7-item Issues Presentation subscale, and the 15-item Service Awareness subscale. T-tests between the group means revealed one significant differ- ence on the total measure, two on the counselor preference subscale, and one on the service awareness subscale (see Table A.2). Overall, the findings provide partial support for Hypothesis 1 in that only the Asian-American students expressed significantly more unfavorable counseling attitudes than White students. Hypothesis 2 was rejected since significant differences were found between any groups on the perception of counseling stigma. Partial support was found for Hypothesis 3 in that both Hispanics and Black students expressed significantly stronger preferences for a similar counselor than White students. Hypothesis 6 was also rejected. The groups did not differ significantly on difficulty in presenting issues. When the 53 indi- vidual items were considered (see Appendix B, Table B.1), 15 items revealed significant differences. Post Hoc mean comparison analyses were made to determine which groups the significant item differences were based on (see Appendix C, Table C.1). 47 Table 2. Counseling Attitudes Scale and Subscale Descriptions Groups Measure Asian . . . Native . ?;:g;§ Americans .?&span;§s Americans VNLIOS) (N = 7) (N = 28) Counseling Attitudes M 139.34 141.42 141.70 140.75 139.51 SD 13.03 10.51 8.51 11.10 12.32 Alpha .68 .51 .38 .63 .72 Counselor Preference M 49.41 47.14 49.41 46.53 46.83 SD 6.06 4.81 3.92 6.22 5.04 Alpha .54 .41 .02 .63 .44 Counseling Stigma M 39.25 39.14 39.64 40.42 40.16 SD 6.59 9.82 6.69 6.18 7.17 Alpha .73 .87 .74 .67 .78 Issues Presentation M 21.08 19.42 19.58 19.71 19.60 SD 4.42 4.35 4.21 3.54 3.53 Alpha .64 .53 .71 .55 .52 Service Awareness M 35.92 40.14 38.17 39.60 38.46 SD 5.27 4.52 6.28 3.64 4.77 Alpha .61 .28 .72 .O4 .56 48 Effects of Race and Socioeconomic Indicators Presented in Table 3 are the correlational analyses of Counseling attitudes scale and subscales with socioeconomic status indicators. The results indicate that father's socioeconomic status was signifi- cantly related to the issues presentation subscale attitudes for the Hispanic students. This correlation suggests that the higher the father's socioeconomic status, the less difficulty the Hispanic stu- dents tended to have in presenting issues in counseling. These analy- ses indicate that socioeconomic status related significantly only to the difficulties in presenting issues subscale for the Hispanic students only. Perceived Problems Presented in Table 4 are the means, standard deviations, and alpha coefficients for each group on the Perceived Problem 5 scale. T-Tests (see Appendix A, Table A.2) between the group means revealed one significant difference between the groups: Blacks reported a greater degree of problems than the Whites (see Appendix A, Table A.2). In Appendix B, Table B.3 are the group mean responses for the items on the perceived problems scale. Note that none of the means for any group on the items were higher than 4.40 (indicating a sub- stantial problem). Service Utilization Presented as percentages in Appendix B, Table B.2 are the utilization responses for various services and offices offered by 49 Table 3. Product Moment Correlations Between Fathers' Socioeconomic Status and Scale Scoresa Group scale Blacks As'a"’ His anics Native Whites Americans p Americans Counseling -.009 -.02 -.02 -.36 -.O9 Attitudes (.93) (.95) (.42) (.06) (.32) Counselor .03 -.05 -.23 -.29 -.01 Preference (.79) (.91) (.37) (.12) (.90) Counseling .02 .08 .38 -.29 -.02 Stigma (.82) (.85) (.12) (.13) (.81) Issues -.05 -.38 -.58 —.08 -.09 Presentation (.68) (.40) (.01)* (.64) (.34) Service .04 .60 -.43 -.30 -.10 Awareness (.70) (.14) (.08) (.11) (.29) aSignificance levels are in parentheses *p < .05. Table 4. Perceived Problem Scale Description Group Measure Asian— . . Native . Blacks Americans H1span1cs Americans Whites (N-67) (N = 77) (N . 17) (N = 28) (N—105) Perceived Problems M 92.91 94.14 89.76 81.78 79.60 SD 16.96 28.24 20.83 20.51 ' 17.69 Alpha .94 .93 .91 .89 .89 50 Michigan State University. Only those items on which groups dif- fered significantly will be reported here. The Black students report using the Office of Minority Programs, the Minority Aide Program, the Office of Supportive Services, the Financial Aid Office, the Pan- Hellenic Council, the Placement Office, and the Office of Black Affairs more than any other group. The Hispanic students report using CHISPA (Chicano and Hispanic Students for Progressive Action), and MECCA more than any other group. More Native-American students indicate using NAISO (Native American Indian Student Organization) than any other group. A ranking of the services utilized for each group provides additional information (see Table 5). Although they indicated career selection to be a problem in Table B.1, the Asian-American students did not use the Career Resources Center as a resource for career selection problems. Significant usage differences were indicated between the groups for the following services: Office of Minority Programs, Academic Advisory Staff, Minority Aides, Office of Supportive Services, Finan- cial Aide Office, Office of Black Affairs, CHISPA, NAISO, Pan-Hellenic Council, MECCA, and Placement Office. Overall the minority groups differed in percentage usage from Whites when it came to programming addressed to minority students and the educationally and financially disadvantaged in particular. On the other hand, many of the services were used by minority and White students alike (i.e., library). As a result, it appears that Hypothe- sis 4 receives partial support. 51 moccaommm mcwccmmn muwwwo pcmsmumpm mcomw>v< owEmumu< mmow>cmm supmmz mwuw< xuwcocwz mmuw< xpwcocwz mowmwo pcmswom_a m mowmwo “cosmompa mmoczommm mmow>cmm mmow>cmm mcwccmmp mmow>cmm scram: m>wpcoaasm m>wpcoagam m mmocsomwm ocwccmmn m¢og=0mmm cmocmu . cmm mangoes; a“? mmow>cmm wwapm came: omH_ucoaa:m PFmI mocmv_mmm m mue< Famocmcwd cwpcmu mv?< meocmcwd atomw>u< oesmumo< mmow>cmm cppam: mcwccomg mo_>cmm mLOmw>v< owsmnmoq a ALOmw>v< mwmpm wwmpm mmoczomom mcwccmmn oaswumu< F_m1 mozmuwmwm FFm: mucmvwmma Lomw>n< owEmumo< mmvw< prcocwz m wmmpm wwmwm P_mz mocmuwmmm mcw< Pym: mocmummmm mvw< _mwucmcva muw< Favocmcwd mmow>cmm gupmwz Favucmcwa N xcmcnwo Acmcawn Acmcan acmcnwp Acmcnwp H cmowcms< cmowcms< wages: 1m>wumz owcmam_: -cmwm< xom_m xcmm azoco mmow>cmm xpvmcm>wcs we momma cmuco xcmm .m w_nmh 52 acmcnwp chowvmazooo m00L30mmm megwu «H aaacco meapaap mmnw< zuwcocwz cmpcmo Gaw_mmc:ou ma mmoczommm cmucmu cmm NH gmpcmo mc+meczoo _uu< pcwnzum wpa< mutate ataaata maaacc< pcmnzpm mmwpw>wpo< “cmvzpm Pacowpmasooo xum—m mo mowwwo OH mcvmww< cmpcmu mowmwo “cosmompa xomrm we muwwwo mcwccmoo mmuw>cmm —woc:oo mow>cmm m>wpcoaazm uwcmFszicma mmoc30mmm mcwccmmp m cwm mmuczomma msmcmoca quco:wz cmucmu mamcmoca cmmcmo we muwmwo mmoczommm cmmcmu appcocwz mo muwwwo w :mowcme< cmowcme< mauve: -a>waaz aacaama: -eawm< xaa_m xcmm azocw .umscwucou .m ornmh 53 :mEmnano cam mcwcmpmwp zgmcnwp Pacovpmgzouo Lem newcmpmen omHcpo< Seaezpm ma mwppcz cmowcwe< -a>wpaz ewcmamw: cmwmmwm« xompm xcmm azoco vmzcwucouii.m m4m

wpmz Nowcmamw: -cmwm< mxomHm NUHHNHLNHQNLNNN aHgaNLNoeaN HNcoHHHNN<--.H.< NHNHpaomxw cmgpo Am.mv e HH.NV N o o Hm.vv m NHmcoNNwaoNa cmNNmH use mmmcwmzn emNHN Ezwcoe .mcmmmcwz Ho.HNV Na HN.NHV N HN.NHV N HN.NHN H HN.NNV NN NHNNNHNNNNNNN NocHe NNN NNNNHNNN pcmccwamucw HHNEN .m>HchpNH:NEu< HH.NHN NH HN.NNV HH HN.NNV N HN.NNN N AN.NHV NH Naaczo NNNNHNNN NHHHHH NNN Ncmwowcgowp .mmHmm .PNUHNmFQ HN.HN N HN.NV H HN.NN H HN.NHV H HN.NN N NNHHHNN NN.HV N o HN.NN H N N NNHHHNN-HENN new Ncoumcmao mcwgomz NN.NNN NN NH.NNN N HN.HNN N HN.NNN N AN.NNV NH NNHHHNNNN NcoHmeaooo N.Nm;poz NNH NN NH N NN NNwumz NUHCNQNHI -cNNN< mxomHm nwscwpcouii.a.< m4mwp:omxm stmN: NH NH.NV N HN.NHN H HN.HHV N NHNNNHNNNNNNN NNNNNH NNN NchHNNN omNNN Ezwume .mcwmmcmz NN HN.HNV N N NN.NHV NH NHNNNHNNNNNNN NNNHE NNN NNNNHNNN HcmvcmamncH HNNEN .m>wumcumwcwau< NH HN.NV H NN.NHN H HN.NHN N acaczo NNNNHNNN NHHHHH NNN NcmNoHcgomu .NmHNm .Hmowgmpu N N HN.NNN HH HN.NNN N HN.NNN NH NNHHHNN N N AN.NV H NN.NHV H NN.NV N NNHHHNN-HENN ucN Ngopmcmgo mewzomz H H N N HN.HN H NNHHHNNNN :oHHNmmouo N.NNSHNN AmOH n zv mflwwpwwflv mcmwrumflv Ano n zv mop mFLm UMLM mmuwzz iw>NHmm ioNHN« NonHm .H . N no emacwpcouii.fl.< MAmq-c>c>c>c>c>c>c>c>—4papacacth l\ O VCDOOHNOu—TOOOOOOc—l HNMQ'LO . NNQENU co congaz NNHNNNmnEmz HmcoNpmNNNcho pcmuzpm cm>ogaa< NNNNNH mocmcu NUHN opcmza Newco NNNzN: chox NNNNNN zwz mmxmp ncmHNNNz NNcNoNNHNo owgo xao> zmz NNCN>H>NccmN Ncmwcoz NNNHNNHZ NNoNHHHH NNNHNN News: mpmpm No acucaou . NNN n ZN HmoH u zv mcmoNcme< mmpwcz 1m>HHNz NNH u zv NoNcNNNNI NN n zv Ncmowcme< TCNHN< NNN u ZN mxum—m Nowpmwcmpomcmno vmzcwucouii.fl.< m4mHN N H N N N NNHNNNNNN N N H N N NNHNNNz NNH NN NH N NN NHNNHN szmpm HNHHNNE H H N N H Nee; ego NN N N N NN NNNHHENNN N o o o H mac; N.NCmNNN N H N H N HNNEHNNNN N N N H N NNNENN NNN HNH NN NH N NN NNNENN NN wucmEm HELL< c .p>.pi_ o H o o o N H o o o H m N o o o m N mN o o H m H mzaamu Nwo NNNENZ mchmenEmz choHHNNHCNmNo pcmvzpm co>ocg< NN u zv HN u zv HNNH " ZN NMNNHNNE HNH . ZN HNN u ZN . < NcmoHNwE< NoNHNHNwHoNNNLQ NNHH53 1m>Npmz moHcmaNNI -CNHN< NonNm umzcwpcouii.H.< mHmHwoma mcwmm NHucmNNNQ Hgoaazm HNNocwcwu HNN u zv Ncmuwcwa< -N>HHNz HNH u zv NuHcmamN: HN n zv Ncmowcms< icmwm< HNN u zv mxum—m NoHHNHNwHNNLNNU umzcwucoosi.H.< m4m

HHNz NewcmamHz -cNHN< NonHm umzcwpcouii.H.< m4m

Noe N_zn .Nmmmgucwcmq NNH :H vaoHocw mew NmeHcNonN HmNoz .coHpcazooo new Hm>wH HmcoHHNosz N.chpoe co uwmmmo NcoHHNoHNHNNN—o HmomHv uwmzmmcHNHoI co uwmmn czocxmocmw 77 N mm NHNmm N.NQUNZ No wmcszocx o o o o N om o o o o N om H o o o 0 ON 0 o o o H NH H o o o N oH N H N o o o o o o o H m m H o o H N m H H o m m m o H N N N N m m H N H mcowmmmm ”*0 (63:52 gmpcwo chHmNcsou HN . e E - 7N NcmoHNmE< mquNNNmHoNcho -NNHNN NNNNHN vmzcvpcouii.H.< mHmoNNNN NHaoz mpcmNNN N: .m NmNo. NNm.N ow.N HN.N NN.N HN.N om.N .NEHH nose ooH NNNNH Nmpcmo mcmeoczoo Nuwmco>HcN NNH HN Nmmooga mcmemcaou NNN .N Nooo. mmo.m om.N NN.N NN.N oo.m NN.N .Nmpcmo mcHHchzoo NHHNNN>H23 NNH HN Nonmczoo N NNN op H:NEH:HONNN :N new 0» HHNUNNNHN N.HH .m NNH. NNN.H NN.N oo.N NN.N NN.N NN.N .Hcchm>:oo NH cwpcmo NNHHNchoo NHHNNN>HNN NSN .N Nmoo. NmH.N NN.N No.m NN.N NN.N NN.N .Nmpcmo NNHHNchou NHHNNN>HcN NNH HN NHm; mcHHHNm :H um>Ho>cH NH HNgz zocx H .H .mHm oHHNN N HmoH u zv wawHHmnw HNH u zv Ncmemmuw HNN u zv Nmaszz Nmpng m>HHNz NochNNH: ichm< monHm ENHH mmmcoammm ENHH NNNNHHNH< mcHmeczouii.H.m NHm—om op ammo N.NH .HH Nmm. moH. mo.N No.N NN.H oo.N NH.N .LoHomcooo N mom op poo; H zocx Nos» NH NNNNo No: H xcHNH pcmHE oHNooN .oH NNN. Nmm. NN.N NN.N NN.N oo.N HH.N .om oNooz NHoNnoNo H .Noucoo mcHHomcooo NNH oH om H oopmommom op omoHo E_H ocooEoN NH .m mHN. Ham. oN.N NN.N oN.N NN.N NN.N .NCNoocoo .NHcooopm NHHNocHE No mcHocNHNNooco Ngo> oNN Nopcwo mcHHomcsoo ocp HN NNo—omczoo NNN .m . HNNH u 2v HNN u zv HNH u zv HN u ZN HNN u 2N NNNENZ mNm oHHNN N NNHch NCNwwmwmm NoHcNNNHI Nchmwwm« NonHm ENHH om35wpcouii.H.m m4mNoN op mcwopmz :H N>HuooNNo NHN NNoHomcoou .ON Nomo. mHN.N NN.H oH.N 0N.H NH.N ON.H . .HcoEcoNH>co omoHHoo NNH oH NNNNNooN NNHHNNNNN NH NENHooNN NNNNN; Nucoospm NNN; oHooNN Lopcmo chHomczoo NNN .NH NNN. mMN.H mo.H aw.H mw.H HN.H Nm.H .HcmEcoNH>co NmoHHoo NNH op NHHNoHEooNoN NNNHNNNNN NH NEoHooNN oHocN; NHNNNHNN NHNN oHsosN Nopcmo NNHHNNcooo NNN .NH ONN. Nmm. NN.N mm.m NN.N NN.N NN.N .NNoHNH; NNHH oHogz NHNNNHN NHNNH 3ocx op NNH oNooNN NNoHomcoou .NH Nam. moo. Nm.m mw.m ON.m HN.m mo.m .NNNNNH NN>H>HNN ANN op ANN NHHz oocgoocoo NENHooNN NHNHNNEEN co NHco NHNNpcoocoo oHooNN NcoHomcoou .NH HNH. NNw.H mH.N HN.N Nm.N HN.N Hm.N .NHcmoo woos NNNNHo NNNon NNNHNNNN NHNLH Nmogaxo op NpcoHHo NHNNH omNgoooco oHoogm NNoHNNcoou .NH . HNN n zv HN u zv . No a: .mwm Owme L AmOH l Zv WCMUwLmE< fiNH H Zv mCMUvLmE< ANW I 2v D Z mopng N>HHNz NoHcNoNNI -NNHN< NonHm ENHH NNNCNucouii.H.m mHmNNNENNH No poo Ngoz op ocoH .NONNNH NcNE oxHH .NNHHNNoHNNHo HNcoNpoEN .ON OHO. OOH.m NN.N NO.m NN.N NH.N NO.N .ocooNOonN owcguo No NNHoNN HNNNNNNHN N sogm No—omcooo N NNH; NENHooNN HNHoNN pooNN NNNH op HHooNNNHo mo oHooz HH .NN NNN. mam. HN.N NN.N OO.N NH.N NO.N .xcHNH oHooz NHNoNN meow 9N5: No NNONoNo Nopcoo ONHHomcooo NNH oH ONHoO NNNNNN HNNN oHooz H .NN OmH. HON.H OO.N NN.N NN.N OO.N NN.N .NHo; HNoNOoHocozma No Now: NHHHH— o>NN oHooz ocN NNNNNNNNEHN No NHoHHNcoo HNNNNE No>o HNO cNo LNNUNLNNU Ocogpm N cpNz comgmo < .NN How. OHN. ON.N OO.N ON.N Nm.N ON.N .NNNN HNoHOoHoNoNNN xoom NNNNN; HNNH ocoseoooc oHooz H .EoHooNo NHHNNN HNHNNE N poooN ooH>oN com NoxNN NNNHNN oooO N NH .NN NNH. mmm.H mN.m HN.m mm.m OO.m Nm.m .ocaoNOono NNNNN HNHooN HNNNNNNHN N NHHz NoHomczoo N :Ncp HNNNHN N oH HONNNNN NNoE on oHooz ocooNOono NNNHo HNNooN oENN NNH No Nopomcooo < .HN . HNNH u zv HNN 1 2O HNH 1 2O HN u zO HNN u 2O NNNNNZ me oNHNN N NNHH53 NNNMWHMMM NochomH: NONWWMWM« NonNm ENHH owocwHOOOii.H.m MHmo 3ocx op po: pmoo NNoNooLN NH pH .ON mwm. NNN. NN.N ON.N ON.N NN.N HN.N .NHNconNoNoLN oopNoooN NHNOH; cppz NENHooNo HNcomNoN poooN NNNp op pHooHNNNN mo oHooz pH .NN NONO. Omm.N NO.N HN.N NN.N NH.N NN.N .>._._.Ewm mvmzumEEw w.m:O $0 mvwmpzo Dmmmzomwv ma #0: Upzozm was». mePnOLQ CwvamU wLm meSH .NN . HNNH u 2O HNN u zO HNH u 2O HN u zv HNN u zv NNNENZ Opm oHpNN N prpsz Nchwmmwm NoHcNoNH: NNNwwuwwm NonNm sopH vmzcwpcouii.H.m mHmNN NNNNN .mm ONO. NNH. Om.m ON.N mm.m NN.N HN.N .Ocppomcooo HNoHOoNogoNNN o>Nz op chz pNOHE H .oEHp NNopNN oEoN p< .Nm ONO. NNH.N NN.N ON.N NO.N NN.N NN.N .ocoogmono opczpo No HNHoNN pNNNNNNNo N No NoHomcooo N spwz NENHooEN HNcoHpoEN pzooN xHNp op szoHNNHo No oHooz pH .mm HmOH u zO wawwwoaw HNH u zv NNMWNHNHW HNN n zv EonEoz .NHN N.NpNN N . NNHHNz N>HHNZ . . -NNHNN NNNNHN ENHH omacmpEOOii.H.m u4m

NN poc NNN mEoHnoNN N2 .NN NNH. NNN.H ON.N HN.N NN.H NN.N HO.N .NEopooNN NNN>NN Nppz NHNooN NoN NNN NNoH>NoN Lopcoo ONHHomczoo NpHNNN>HNN ozN .HN *mooo. mmN.m Ow.m mm.m HN.m NN.N NH.m .ooopmgooco No oHooz EoHooNN NE poc co Nogposz oocooHNcN oHooz pNNp ocoocO -ono opcgpo No HNHoNN NNHonpNNo Npogp chp ENNpNE oocopoNEoo No Ho>oH N.EoHoNcooo N NN pH .ON NOm. omm. wo.m NO.N ON.N NN.m Om.N .xom opHNooNo ogp No NoHNNcooo N sppz NNENNoNN HNoon pNooN NNNp op pHooHNNHo No oHooz pH .Nm NNN.N NNN.N EN NNN.N EN .252 .Opm oNpNN N mopwzz o>HpNz mochamN: -NNHN< NNUNNN EopH Omzcwpcouii.H.m mpmppNz NNHNNNNH: -NNHNN NNNNHN ENpH OmzcprOOii.H.m mHmNN NEN HN.HN.NN.NH.NH.NH.NH.NH.NH.NH.N.N.N.N.N.H NENpH .HNNO NNNNN NHNNNNHN HNN. v NNN NN. v Np m H HNNNON u N HHOHoN op NE ONHNHN; NH chpNoNEH pNoE on oHsoz pNNp ocooNOonN oNccpo No HNHoNN ENNNNHN po: .HN>NH NooopoNEoo N.NoHNNcaoo ocp NN pH .mm *NOO. NNH.N MN.N ON.N ON.N OO.N No.m .NooLO owccpo Lo HNHUNE NENN ocp No No—omcooo N prz NENNNoEN poooN NHNp oHooo H psz NE op chpNoNEN NP pH .Nm . HNNH u 2O HNN u zv HNH 1 2O HN 1 2O HNN u zv NNNENZ NNN NNNNN N NNNHNN NNNWWHMWN NNNNNNNNI mcmwwwwm« NNNNHN ENHH Uwzcwpcouii.H.m mpmHpo< HNNNNHN .HH NNHNN. NNN.NN N HN.HNO NH HN.NO H N HH.NO N HNNHpNNHNNNNN HNNNNHN NNHNNH NNNHENEN NpNNzO NNHNz .NH NNHNN. NNN HN N N HN.NNO N N HH.NO N Hcoppo< N>HNNNNOoNN Loy Npooozpm ochNNN: ocN ocNoHNOV NNmHIO .N NNHNN. NNN.HN HN.HO N N HN.HHO N N HN.NNO NN NNHNNNN NNNHN to NNHNNN .N NNHNN. NNN.HN HN.NNO NN HN.NNO HN HN.NNO NH HN.NNO N HN.NNO NN NNHNNN NHN HNHNNNNHN .N NNHNN. HNN.HN HN.NO N HN.NHO N HN.NNO N HN.NNO N HN.NNO NN NooH>NNm N>HpcoNNNm No NNHNNO .O NHN. HNN.N HN.NNO HN HH.HHO N HN.NNO N HN.NNO N HN.NHO NH NochO OchNNoH oop>gom .m NNHNN. NNN.NN HN.NO N HN.NNO N HN.NNO N N HN.NNO HN NNNHN NHHNNNHZ .N NNN. NNN.N HN.NNO NN HN.NNO NH HN.NNO NH HN.HNO N HN.HNO NN HNNNH>N< NNN: .NNNH>NN NNNN ..N.NO NNNHN HHNN NNNNNHNNN .N NHHN. NNN.NH HN.NNO NN HN.NNO NH HN.NNO N HH.NNO N HN.NNO NN NNNpm NNoNN>o< oHEooNoN .N NNHNN. HNN.NN HN.NO N HN.NNO N HN.HNN N N HN.NNO NN NENEOoNN Stoop: No ooIoHO .H HNN u 2O HN 1 2O .OHm x HmOH u zv cNoHEoEN HNH u zO NNNNHNNEN HNN u zv oHoNHNN> N NNHHNN N>HHNZ NNHNNNNNI -NNHNN NENNHN Nmomcoqmom EmpH :oHpNNNHHpO oop>gmmii.N.m NpmLNN NHHNNN .NH NNN. NNN.N HN.NO N N N N HN.NO N .NH NNN. NNN.N HN.NHO NH HH.HHO N N N HN.NNO NH HNOONZ :sz Nogpov NochO OcHHomcooO .mH NNHNN. NNN NH HN.NHO HH HH.HHO N HN.HNO N N HN.HNO NN HNNNNHHHN NNHNNN NNHHNNNNNN NHNNpN-HpHNzO NooNz .NH NHNN. NNN N HN.NO N N HN.NHO N N HH.NHO N 22500 0.20?me CNN .2 NHN. NNN.N HN.NNO NNH HN.NNN NN HN.NNO NN HN.NNHO N HN.NNO HN NNNNNHN .NH NN u 2O HN n zO . HNNH n ZN H HNH u HNN u ZN Opm Nx moppgz chwmmwu NoHcNoNH: NNNWWMWM« NonHm NHNNHNN> omOENpEOOii.N.m m4m Omzcwpcouii.m.m mpmoN NpHE NcoNpNHNN .N mwO. NNO.N mw.H NH.N NH.N HN.H HN.N Ngommmmogo nppz mcoHpN—NN .m mmm. NNN. NO.N ON.H Nm.H HN.N mO.N NONm: ALNNNHH .N OOm. NOO.H NN.N OH.N ON.N HN.N NH.N NEHp OENNNNNONO .O NONO. ONm.N mN.N NN.N ON.N HN.N OO.N :oHpNNNNNNo Hoosom NON; opNooooNcH .m NON. mmO. NO.N OO.N NO.N OO.N NN.N NpHNNN NNNHN .N HOO. NNN.N ON.N NO.N HH.N HN.H OO.N NNONNH NoHHoN NgopHENoO .m HNO. NNO.N NN.N NH.N NO.N NN.N NN.N NpoHHNcoo opNEooN .N OOO. NNN. ON.N NN.N NO.N NH.m NO.N NNoHpHocoo ONH>HN :H :oncoN .H NcNoHEoEN NNNoHNNE< mocNoNNNNONm oNpNN N Nopst N>HpNz NoHcNNNHI -ENHNN NonNm oHoNNEN> Nomcogmom EopH NENHooEN om>NoonN-i.m.m NHN< .NN NNN. NNN.H NH.N NH.N NN.N NN.N HN.N NoNpHHHoNN NogENo No NNocoLNEN .HN NHNN. NNN.N NN.H NN.H NN.H NN.N NN.N pNNNp NHNNHNNHNHNNN .NN NNNN. NNN.N NN.H NN.H NN.H NN.N NN.N NHHNN NHNNNNNHNHNNN .NH NNN. NNN. NN.H NN.N NN.H NN.N NN.N NmeH>HpoN NNNooN ocN ONNpNO .OH NNN. NNN.H NN.H NH.N NN.H NN.H NN.H NNNNHNN NNHxNz .NH HNN. NNN. NN.H NN.H NN.H NN.H NN.H NENHNNNN NHHNNN HNHNNz .NH NNN. NNN. NN.H NN.H NN.H NN.N NN.H NENHNNNN NHHNNN HNNHNNNN .NH NNN. NHN. NN.N NN.N NN.N NN.N NN.N NNNNE pNNNNN Np NHHHHNNNH .NH NNHNNN. NHN.N NN.N NN.N NN.N HN.N NN.N NNNNN pNNHNprNNNH .NH NNNN. NNN.N NN.N NN.N NN.N NN.N NN.N cowpum Em meLNu . NH oocNoHNHcOHm oHpNN N Noppgz Nchwwwfiu NochNNHI NNNWWMWM« NonNm NHNNHEN> umzcwpcouii.m.m m4m

No mchpou .mm mON. OOO. NN.H NN.H NH.N NO.N NO.N NNoNNoNoN NooON coNpNENoNoH ONHEHNONN .Nm NNN. ONO. NH.N NO.N HN.N ON.N NN.N NpoHHNcoo onpNoNHH .Hm OmN. OOO. HN.H OO.N ON.N NN.N OH.N NENHOoNo :oHpNoHcoEEoO .Om HHH. NON.H ON.H NN.H NN.H ON.H OO.N NNoNNmNoEN an pcoEpNoNp HNOONNO .NN ONO. NNO. ON.H NN.H NN.N ON.N OO.N NEoHooNN mcoHpNHoN NHNEoNioHNz .ON ONm. mOO.H NN.H ON.H ON.H ON.H HO.N NEoNooNN NcoHpNNmN HNoxom .NN NNHOO. NOO.N NN.H NN.H ON.H NN.H HO.N HNNoNO NENNV NpoHNNcoo HNHoNELoch .ON NNHOOO. NOH.N NN.H ON.H NN.H NO.H OH.N HNNNoNO pcogowwwov NpoHHNcoO HNHoNNNoch .ON NNHOO. NNN.N NN.H NN.H HN.N NN.H ON.N NENpNNN pEoNNNN No NpHHNoNHHN>< .NN NNHOOO. NHN.N ON.N NO.N OO.N NN.N NO.N NochNHNNN HNHocNNHN .mN oocNoNNHNONm oHpNN N Nopng :Nwwummm NoHcNoNN: :Nwwmwm« NonHm oHoNHEN> cmchpOOOii.m.m NHO vmacwpcounu.m.m m¢m

w None- 8 > H B > NA 8 > A CA3 None None CA4 A < N None 8 < w H N None 8 > NA CA36 B > NA None CA37 B < H B < H w < H CA4O B < w None H < NA H < A B < A B < NA A > w CA43 B > A B > H B > H B > NA 8 > NA N > H B > N w > NA A > H A > NA CA45 NA w B > W NA < B CA52 B > w B > N B > A B > A B > NA H > A H > N H > NA CA53 B < NA None NOTE: w = Whites A = Asian-Americans B = Blacks H = Hispanics CA = Counseling Attitude NA = Native Americans Number with CA indicates item number. 101 TABLE C.2.-—Post Hoc Race Comparisons of Significant Perceived Problems Variable Duncan Test Scheffé Test 12 13 19 20 22 23 24 25 26 34 37 38 Inadequate High School Preparation Career Selection Insufficient Funds Racial/Ethnic Unity Racial/Ethnic Trust Availability of Minority Faculty Financial Assistance Availability of Support Systems Interracial Conflicts Intraracial Conflicts Racism Cultural Conflicts Concern for Minority Issues 2 >03003>03 ZWW Z - ZE>3>>UD 2 O :3 (D CD‘_ AAV AAAAAV A W: IWZI AA AAAAAA (33:sz 3>J>Z IWUUUDICD ('13) 0303: B > N None B > N B > w None EZZ>3>3> AAA/\AA None None B > N NA < 8 None N < 8 NA < 8 None IDES AAA 0:33:00 TABLE C.2.--Continued 102 Variable Duncan Test Scheffé Test 139 Paper Organization and Writing Style NA NA I>I3> AAAA None Whites Asian-Americans Hispanics Blacks Native Americans APPENDIX D RACIAL AND ETHNIC DIFFERENCES FOR EACH GROUP ON CHARACTER DESCRIPTION FORMS 103 NNN. NO.N AN.NNV NH NN.NNV N Am.NNV m o AN.ONV m Fataeeeowem 8N8. mm.N Am.va 4N AN.m¢v o Ao.va N AO.O¢V N AN.¢NV N epeee0mmem eNN. mm.N NN.NNV ON Am.wmv m Am.va m AO.ONV H Am.NNV N ovum2_emm mom. mm.N Am.¢NV MN Am.omv e NO.NNV N Ao.omv m A0.NNV N mewppweo emN. NN.m NN.NNV mN NN.NNV m o o AoN.mv a _ee_peeca mNo. em.m AN.NNV NH o NN.NNV m Ao.oev N NN.NNV NH 2e2_:eea Now. NN.N NO.NNV m NN.NNV m Am.NNV N Ao.oev N A0.NNV N bemeeeaeeeN mNN. ON.m Am.omv NH AN.mev o NO.NNV N Ao.oov m AN.ONV m manomeeH «me. NN.N NO.NNV N A¢.mNV N NN.NNV N AO.ONV N Am.oNv m em2_ooN moo. NN.eN NN.NNV me Ao.oofiv NH Am.NmV m Ao.oofiv m AN.mmV 8N _eeowooeN qu. NN.N AN.va NN AN.©QV o “N.va m No.04v N NO.NNV m Neeeeeemo mmo. 4N.N AN.NV N NN.NV N o AO.ONV N AN. NNV m NNeLu 44Nooo. NN.NN Am.emv om Am.ooNv NH Am.NmV N Ao.ooNv N Am. va NH nemzeeeu mNN. Ne.N A©.mmv NN A¢.mfiv N Am.NNV N Ao.oqv N Am. NNV m me2e2e_aeou 4omo. mo.oN NN.NNV m o NN.NNV m 0 Ne. NV N Newxe_ep-eem_o New. oe.N Am.mv m NN.NV N o 0 Am. 8V N m>wecemm< Noe. 4N.N NN.NNV m AN.omv 4 Am.NNv N 0 AN. ONV o apnepaee< - ANN u zv - AN u zv - .23....22. .51 Even,“ egg $42k egg 5% see; xpPupccpm vcm mung >5 gnocw Eco; cmpcmu mc__mm::oo 20$ mcmscm Fcu .mmrucmzcmcm .corpaFLummo gmgumgmsu--. H. o mgmoz o NN.NNN N o N NN.NNV N Nmeoz N o N N o NNNNN NN.NNN N NN.NNN N NN.NNN N N NN.NNN N Ntozemtaoo smpnoNN ucmugoaaN umoz NN.NN N o NN.NNN N o NN.NN N oz NN.NNV NN NN.NNNN NN NN.NNV N NN.NNNN N NN.NNN NN NNN Nmucmo mcw_mmc:ou NNN. NN.N NN.NNN NN NN.NNN N NN.NNN N NN.NNN N NN. NNN NNN: NNNNN. NN NN NN.NNN NN NN.NNN NN NN.NNN N NN.NNNN N NN. NNNN NNNNNNNNNN NNN. NN.N NN.NNN NN NN.NNN N NN.NNV N NN.NNN e NN. NNNN NNNNNNCN NNN. NN.N NN.NNN NN NN.NNN N N o NN. NNN N NCNNNNNN NNN. NN.N NN.NN N N N N NN. NNN N NNNNNN NNN. NN.N NN.NN N N5 NV N NN.NNN N NN.NNN N N5 NV N NNNNNN NNN. NN.N NN.NNN NN NN. NNN N NN.NNN N NN.NNN e NN. NNN NN NeNNNNN-NNNN NNN. NN.N NN.NNN N NN. NNN N NN.NNN N NN.NNN N NN. NNN N NNNNNNNNNN-NNNN NNNN. NN.NN NN.NNN N NN. NNN N NN.NNN N N NN. NNN N NNNNNeoNNNN - NNN u zv . NN u ZN - mucNonNcmNm Nx Nm0wmwwflp N:WWWHmmM wwwwmmmqp Ncmwmuww« NNmeNdm NNNNNNN> nmzcwpcouuu.fi.o mNm NNNst -m>NNNz NQNCNQNN: -cNNN< NNQNNN vmscwpcouuu.fi.o mNmNNNNNNN NNN. NN.N N5 NN N NN.NNN N NN.NNN N N NN.NNN N NNNNNNNNN - NNN n ZN - NN u ZN - N NN.NN NNN.NN NN.NN NNN.NN NNN.N Nona Na ENNN NNNN>v< NNENNNN< NNN NNNNNNN< NNNNNN-NNN .NNNNNNNNNNN.NNNNNNNNNNQ NNNNNNNNN--.N.N NNNNz NN NN N N NN.NNN N N NN. NN N NNNNN N N N N NN. NV N NNNNz NNN. NN.NN NN.NNN NN N N NN.NNN N NN. NNN NN NNNNNNNNNN ENNNONN pcmpNoNsN NNN: N NN.NNN N NN.NNN N N NN. NNN oz NNNNNN. NN.NN NN.NNNN NN NN.NNN NN NN.NNN N NN.NNNN N NN. NNNN NNN .Nom w>n< o wEmUmu< NNN. NN.N NN.NNN NN NN.NNN N NN.NNN N NN.NNN N NN.NNN NN NNNN NNN. NN.N NN.NNV NN NN.NNN NN NN.NNN N NN.NNNN N NN.NNN NN NNNNNNNNNN NNN. NN.N NN.NNN NN NN.NNN NN NN.NNN N NN.NNNN N NN.NNN NN NNNNNNNN NNN. NN.N NN.NNy NN NN.NN N NN.NNN N NN.NNN N NN.NNV N NNNNNNNN NNN. NN.N N NN.NN N NN.NNN N N N NNNNNN NNN. NN.N NN.NN N NN.NNN N N N NN.NN N NNNNNN NNN. NNN. NN.NNN NN NN.NNN N NN.NNN N NN.NNN N NN.NNN NN NNNNNNN-NNNN NNNNNNNNNNNN mx NmoMmMan Nwwmwmwmw NMMmNqup Ncwmwmwmw NNmeNaM NNNNNNNN> Umzcwpcooun.m.o MNmNNNNNN NNN NNNNNNNN< NNN—wmczoo .mmNmNzocx Nmm .NENNnoNN Nm>NwoNNN cmmzpmm NcoNNNNNNNou NNNNNNNm--.~.m NNNNmm Ngmneac empwv <0 u NNNNNNNN< mcwpmmcaou NNmnEN: Emqu NN u NewpnoNN vm>wmonN NmNoz mmmmspcmgmq 2N nwmopocm NNN NNN>NN mucmuNw_cmNm NwNoz NNNN.N NN.- NNN.N NN.- NNNN NNNN NNN NNN.N NN. NNN.N NN.- NNN.N NN.- NNNN NNNN NNNN NNNN NNNN.N NN.- NNN.N NN. NNNN NNNN NNNN NNN.N NN.- NNN.N NN. NNNN.N NN. NNN.N NN. NNNN NNNN NNNN NNNN NNNN NNNN.N NN. NNN.N NN. NNNN NNNN NNNN NNN.N NN. NNNN NNNN Uw::wpcooin.m.m mNm