AN [NVESTIGATEGN GP SOCIAL AND PSYCHOLOGICAL

Deiores Mabel Harms
‘ was ”

IHESlS

 

   
 
  

 

 

 

 

 

 

LIBRARY

Michigan State
University

 

This is to certify that the
thesis entitled

AN INVESTIGATION OF
SOCIAL AND PSYCHOLOGICAL CHARACTERISTICS
OF COUNSELOR TRAINEES

presented by

DE LORES MABEL HARMS

‘3 has been accepted towards fulfillment
of the requirements for

M— degree in W and
Personnel Services

’hnm fins

Major professor I

DmeFebruary 26, 1965

 

0-169

‘1!” A

ROOM USE ONLY

W
”€63”;

ROOM USE OI

 

ABSTRACT
AN INVESTIGATION OF
SOCIAL AND PSYCHOLOGICAL CHARACTERISTICS
OF COUNSELOR TRAINEES

by Delores Mabel Harms

Current selection practices of institutions offering
graduate courses in counseling indicate an emphasis for
selection on academic competence, yet not all counselor
trainees are equally effective as counselors.

The purpose of the study is to investigate whether
patterns exist in the personal-social history of the
counselor trainee, and whether related patterns exist in
his performance on a battery of tests. The existence of
such patterns could generate more finite hypotheses to
test the relationship of these patterns and the responses
of the counselor trainee in a practicum interview.

The general direction of the study was based on the
assumption that the life style of an individual is composed
of such factors as a structure of behavior, experiences,
social—identity, self—identity, and control. The interplay
of these factors results in adaptation and/0r change in the

life style of the individual. As a general theory then, the

Delores Mabel Harms
life style of an individual will be reflected in his response
to client leads in a counseling situation. The general
hypothesis proposed that the more personally creative
individual would tend to be more affective in the counsel-
ing relationship, while the less personally creative indi-
vidual would tend to be more cognitive in the counseling
relationship.

Thirty enrollees in the National Defense Education
Act Institute for Guidance and Counseling at Michigan State
University during the academic year September 1962 to June
1963 were used in the study.

Data were obtained from the responses of counselor
trainees to a tape-recorded structured interview and a
battery of tests purporting to measure scholastic aptitude,
teacher attitudes, certain personality variables, achieve-
ment in guidance and counseling, interests, creative thinking
abilities, value orientations, dogmatism, and self—concept.
Counselor trainee responses in a practicum interview were
used to separate the subjects for purposes of comparison.
Judges' ratings from first and last initial interviews
during a ten-week practicum period were compared to measure
the affective or cognitive response of the counselor trainee

to client leads.

Delores Mabel Harms

Gross differences in response were established at
plus or minus two between the more affective subjects and
the more cognitive subjects as compared to the total group
of subjects. This analysis was applied to both the struc-
tured interview and the test data.

Findings of the study indicate that hypotheses of
difference with respect to the more affective and more
cognitive counselor trainees were generated in the areas
of family relationships, occupationl involvement, awareness,
interests, spontaneous flexibility, and self-concept.

It appears that the education and training of counselors
must include not only the acquisition of skills and techniques,
but must also allow for the personal development of the
individual. This approach implies that those selected must
be capable not only of acquiring the appropriate skills, but

also of being personally creative.

Copyright by
DBLORES MABEL HARMS
1965

AN INVESTIGATION OF
SOCIAL AND PSYCHOLOGICAL CHARACTERISTICS

OF COUNSELOR TRAINEES

By

Delores Mabel Harms

A THESIS

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

DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY
Department of Counseling, Personnel Services, and

Educational Psychology

1965

In Memory Of

Edward Schwade

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

This study was made possible through the cooperation
of the enrollees of the National Defense Education Act
Institute for Guidance and Counseling at Michigan State
University. The writer is most grateful to these people
for their participation in the study.

Sincere appreciation is expressed to Dr. Norman
Kagan and Dr. Arthur Vener, co—directors of the study; to
Dr. Kagan for his emphasis on quality, mental discipline,
and creativity; and to Dr. Vener for his assistance and
stimulating encouragement throughout the study.

Grateful appreciation is also expressed to my good
friend, Dr. Walter F. Johnson, for his patience and under-
standing during this metamorphosis.

Finally, appreciation is extended to Dr. Byron
Van Roekel and Dr. William Faunce, members of my doctoral

committee.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ........... . ...................... iii
LIST OF TABLES ................................... Vi
Chapter
I INTRODUCTION ........................ .... 1
The Problem ........................ 2
Delimitations. ..................... 3
Assumptions ........................ 4
Theory and General Hypotheses ...... 4
Definition of Terms. ............... 9
Organization of the Study .......... 13
II EVIEW OF LITERATURE .................... 14
Social Characteristics of
Counselors ...................... l4
Personality Characteristics of
Counselors ...................... 18
Selection Procedures of Counselor
Education Programs .............. 21
Effects of Group Counseling on
Counseling Performance .......... 25
Role of the Counselor .............. 28
Summary ............................ 32
III DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY .................. 34
Population of the Study ............ 34
Collecting the Data ................ 35
Affective/Cognitive Response
Quality .................... 35

iv

 

Chapter Page

Test Data ..................... 36

Sociological Data; ............ 37

Instruments ........................ 37

Tests ......................... 37

Interview Schedule ............ 43

Procedure for Analysis of Data ..... 46
Affective/Cognitive Response

Quality .................... 46

Test Data ..................... 46

Sociological Data ............. 47

IV ANALYSIS AND PRESENTATION OF DATA ....... 48

Analysis of the Data ............... 48

Presentation of the Data ........... 50

Part One: Sociological Data.. 50

Part Two: Test Data. ......... 82
Summary of Social and Personality

Characteristics ................. 111

V IMPLICATIONS AND SUMMARY ................ 126

Social Characteristics of

Counselor Trainees .............. 126
Personality Characteristics of
Counselor Trainees .............. 136
Discussion and Finite Hypotheses... 140
Implications for Counselor
Education ....................... 153
Implications for Further Research.. 154
Summary of the Study ............... 156
BIBLIOGRAPHY ..................................... 158
APPENDIX A — Structured Interview Schedule ....... 167

LIST OF TABLES

Table Page
4.1 Areas in Which Gross Differences for
Identification Data Occurred ......... 51
4.2 Areas in Which Gross Differences for
Family Relationships Occurred ........ 58
4.3 Areas in Which Gross Differences for
Education Occurred ................... 62
4.4 Areas in Which Gross Differences for
Occupation Occurred .................. 67
4.5 Areas in Which Gross Differences for
Social Relations Occurred ............ 75
4.6 Areas in Which Gross Differences for
Income Occurred.. ................... . 77
4.7 Areas in Which Gross Differences for
Success Occurred ..................... 78
4.8 Areas in Which Gross Differences for
Status Occurred ...................... 79
4.9 Areas in Which Gross Differences for
Critical Incident Occurred ........... 79
4.10 Areas in Which Gross Differences for
Religion Occurred .................... 81
4.11 Areas in Which Gross Differences for
Scholastic Aptitude Occurred ......... 83
4.12 Areas in Which Gross Differences for
Personality Variable Occurred ........ 84

vi

Areas in Which Gross Differences

Achievement Occurred .................

Areas in Which Gross Differences

Interest Occurred ....................

Areas in Which Gross Differences

Creative Thinking Occurred ...........

Areas in Which Gross Differences

Dogmatism Occurred ...................

Areas in Which Gross Differences

Values Occurred ......................

Areas in Which Gross Differences

Self—Concept Occurred ................
Summary of Social Characteristics .......

Summary of Personality Characteristics..

vii

for

for

for

for

for

for

Page

93

95

102

105

106

108
112

121

CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION

Criteria are necessary for the selection of counselor
trainees. Selection criteria must be established which will
be closely related to the predictive of potential effective—
ness in counseling. McCully48 has stated that, ”Of all
developmental tasks of professionalization, the formulation
and promulgation of selection and training standards for
entry into the occupation is probably most crucial.”

There has been some assessment of certain personality
variables and social characteristics of the counselor and
its relation to counseling effectiveness; however, many
dimensions in this relationship are unexplored and those
which have been studied have thus far failed to provide
adequate selection criteria. An almost entirely unexplored
dimension is the broad area of social- and self-identity,
referents, type of familism, and sphere of orientation; while
another dimension lies in the area of creative thinking,

dogmatism, self-concept, and values.

The Problem

What experiences in the broad personal—social history
of the individual influence his responses to client leads?
Is this history related to performance on tests designed to
measure broad psychological patterns?

The purpose of the study is to investigate whether
patterns exist in the personal-social history of the
counselor trainee, and whether related patterns exist in
his performance on a battery of tests. The existence of
such patterns could generate more finite hypotheses to test
the relationship of these patterns and the responses of the
counselor trainee in a practicum interview.

Experiences are important in the development of per—
sonality. Analysis of the experiences of the individual is
necessary, but insufficient. It is also necessary to analyze
what and how a person perceives and also what and how he
fails to perceive. These analyses may then indicate how the
individual relates to and interacts with the world.

Adorno, et a1., studied the authoritarian personality
based on the total personality. Adorno2 states that "Per—
sonality is not, however, to be hypostatized as an ultimate
determinent. Far from being something which is given in

the beginning, which remains fixed and acts upon the sur—

3
rounding world, personality evolves under the impact of the
social environment and can never be isolated from the
social totality within which it occurs." Although per-
sonality is a product of the past, it is not a mere object
of the contemporary environment.

This study is an attempt to characterize the more
effective and the more cognitive counselor trainees on the
basis of sociological and psychological variables.

The selection of candidates for counselor training
prompts this study of the identification of social character—

istics and specific personality variables.

Delimitations

The findings of this study must be interpreted within
the scope of the study. The group studied was small in size.
The study was intended to be directional in nature and
hypothesis-generating rather than hypothesis-testing. No
attempt was made to obtain a geographically stratified
sample, or to follow-up subjects beyond the period of study
to test actual counseling effectiveness. No attempt was
made to establish the superiority of affective or cognitive
responses of counselor trainees. No attempt was made to
establish a heirarchy of order of questions or sections in

the structured interview.

Assumptions

It was assumed that personal interviews could reveal
meanings, influences, and the importance of certain concepts
in the personal history of individuals, and that the mental
creativity, dogmatism, value orientations, and self-concept
of the individual could be measured. It was also assumed
that both affective and cognitive responses to client leads
are possible in the interaction process of the interview,
and that these responses could be rated on a scale from

affective to cognitive.

Theory and General Hypotheses

This study was undertaken as an investigation of
numerous social and psychological characteristics of
counselor trainees. Although the areas investigated were
broad and general in nature, they were not selected randomly;
rather, theoretical constructs guided the determinations of
which attitudes and behaviors would be most likely to yield
tentative conclusions and more specific constructs and
hypotheses.

The general direction of this study was based on the
assumption that the life style of an individual is composed
of such factors as a structure of behavior, experiences,

social—identity, self-identity, and control. The interplay

5

of these factors results in adaptation and/or change in the

 

life style of the individual. As a general theory then,
the life style of an individual will be reflected in his
responses to client leads in a counseling situation.

The experiences of the individual may have both
historical actuality and psychological reality.21 These
experiences influence the boundaries of the structure for
behavior, and in turn are influenced by this structure. The
boundaries of the structure for behavior may vary from fluid
and open to rigid and closed. The individual may be able to
use experiences to adapt to the existing structure for
behavior. Or, the individual may change the structure for
behavior to accommodate those unadaptable experiences which
become so valuable to him that they must have a place in the
structure.

Both the experiences and the structure for behavior
are influential in the development of the social—identity and
self—identity of the individual. The value system of the
individual may or may not be closely tied to the value system
of the culture. The intensity of this bond is directly
related to the intensity of the social-identity of the
individual. The development of self—identity is directly
related to the testing of the value system of the culture

through experiences. The process of testing may result in

6
the individual accepting and retaining a value or values of
the culture in his personal value system. Should a conflict
develop in the testing process about the importance of a
value of the culture and a value of the individual, the
individual is then faced with a decision—making situation.
He may choose to reject the personal value, and retain the
cultural value, or he may choose to reject the cultural
value and retain the personal value, 2r he may choose to
reject the process of decision—making. If he chooses to make
a choice between the values, this then leads to a further
decision-making situation--the choice of the importance of
the development of a self-identity without the complete
impairment of the social-identify, gr the choice of the
importance of the maintenance of the social—identity without
the complete impairment of the self—identity.

The scope of experiences of the individual are then
controlled by his ability or inability to live with a per-
sonal value system which may or may not be consonant with
the value system of the culture. The individual will, there—
fore, exercise selective perception with respect to experi-
ences that may be admitted to awareness. The degree of
selective perception will be directly related to the degree
of ambiguity that the individual can tolerate in his life

style.

7

The individual who is able to admit to awareness the
historical actuality and the psychological reality of his
experiences would be a more personally creative individual.
The structure for behavior for this individual would be more
fluid and open, his experiential world (past and present)
would be available to his awareness, there would be both
social-identity and self-identity with an emphasis on self-
identity, and control (selective perception) that would
allow for ambiguity. This individual would admit to aware-
ness the facts of the experience and his feelings about the
experience because he would have tested his personal value
system and found that admitting both of these aspects of his
experience to awareness did not necessarily destroy either
his self—identity or his social—identity, or damage the
structure for behavior.

This individual would tend to be more affective in the
counseling relationship because he would perceive this situa-
tion of interpersonal relations as broad, fluent, and open;

a structure in which he could maintain self-identity and still
be a participant with social—identity. He would be able to
allow the client to admit to awareness both the facts and

the feelings of a situation because this would not damage

the structure for interpersonal relations.

8

The individual who is unable to admit to awareness
either the historical actuality or the psychological reality
of his experiences or both of these aspects would be a less
personally creative individual. The structure for behavior
for this individual would be more rigid and closed, portions
of his experiential world (past and present) would not be
available to his awareness, there would be both social—identity
and self—identity with an emphasis on social-identity, and
control (selective perception) would be rigorously applied
to admission of experiences to awareness and would not allow
for ambiguity. The admission of the facts of the experience
and his feelings about the experience would more often not
be admitted to awareness because any conflict between the
personal value system and the cultural value system would be
too damaging to the social-identity and to the structure for
behavior.

This individual would tend to be more cognitive in
the counseling relationship because he would perceive this
situation of interpersonal relations as more constructed
and less fluid; a structure in which he could maintain
social—identity with little or no self—identity necessary
for participation. He would be unable to allow the client

to admit to awareness both the facts and the feelings of a

9

situation because this would damage the structure for inter— ‘
personal relations.

This general theory of life style and counselor
responses becomes the hypothesis for this investigation as
it relates to the counseling process and training program.
The present investigation is not to test this hypothesis,
but to explore it further for the possibility of ascertaining
whether hypotheses could be more carefully specified. There-
fore, this study was an investigation of the broad personal-
social history of the counselor trainee and included the
areas of family relationships, education, occupation, social
relations, income, success, critical incident, and religion.
This study also included an investigation of performance on
a battery of tests including scholastic aptitude, certain
personality variables, teacher attitudes, achievement in
guidance and counseling, interests, creative thinking abili-

ties, value orientations, dogmatism, and self-concept.

Definition of Terms
Several terms in this study have special meaning.
The most frequently used terms are defined for purposes of
this study as follows:
Social-identity - what an individual identifies as
himself within a social context; within a

social experience

10
v

Referent - that person, event, or situation used
by the actor as the frame of reference in the
organization of his perceptual field

Deprivation - the degree of want experienced by a
person when he compares himself to his referent
relationship whether it be a group, person, or
abstract idea

The definitions relating to the sphere of orientation

54
are those of Robert K. Merton:

Localite — an individual whose orientation is
toward local social structures; one whose major
interest is in the local community

Cosmopolite — an individual whose orientation is
toward the larger social structure, the Great
Society; one whose major interest is in the
world, but who has a minimum of interest in the
local community

Status — position of person with respect to any
other persons or person in relation to education,
income, occupation, and ethnicity

The definition relating to the self-concept is that

of The Greater Kansas City Mental Health Foundation:51

Self—concept — what an individual identifies as

himself through experiences; how an individual

ll

sees himself if

Awareness - open to experience; living with full
presence in the present; receptive of experiences
to consciousness

The definitions relating to affect, cognition, and

authority are those of Horace B. English and.Ava Champney
19 '
English:

Affect - l. a class name for feeling, emotion,
mood, temperament; 2. practically = an emotion;
3. a class name for a particular kind of feeling
or emotion

Cognition - 1. a generic term for any process whereby
an organism becomes aware or obtains knowledge of
an object. It includes perceiving, recognizing,
conceiving, judging, reasoning

Authority — a relation between two or more persons
such that the commands, suggestions, or ideas of
one of them influences the others

Authority figure — the person who-—by virtue of his
status, role, or recognized superiority in
knowledge, strength, etc.——exerts the influence
in the authority relation

Authoritarianism — l. the method of control of

others in which one person sets the tasks,

l2
. it

prescribes procedures, and judges results

without permitting others to share in the

decision process; 2. belief in the principle

of authority in social relations; 3. belief

in authority as a source of truth; 4. a per-

sonal tendency to crave or demand obedience

subordination; or the complex of traits said

to be associated with that tendency

Affective - rating by judge of an emotional (feeling)

response by a counselor trainee from a practicum

interview tape

Cognitive - rating by judge of a content (intellectual)

response by a counselor trainee from a practicum

interview tape

The definitions relating to the creative thinking

30

tests are those of J. P. Guilford:

Creative thinking - abilities found in the group of

divergent thinking factors

Divergent thinking — the ability to think with

freedom in different directions, to discover, to
structure a situation, including fluency, flexi—

bility, and originality

The definition relating to the test of dogmatism is

65

that of Milton Rokeach:

l3
. . ’tfl‘
Dogmatism — the re31stance to change of systems of
belief
The definition relating to the test of value orienta-
o e 4
tion 18 that of Gordon Allport:
Value orientation - the belief upon which the
individual acts by preference
National Defense Education Institute — group setting

for the training of counselors sponsored by the

United States Government

Organization of the Study

Chapter I has included a rationale for the study, the
hypothesis, and definition of terms with special meanings.
Literature relating to the study will be reviewed in Chapter II.
Chapter III will present the population of the study, the
method of collecting the data, and the procedure for analysis.
The analysis and presentation of the data will be included
in Chapter IV. Chapter V contains an interpretation of the

data and implications for further study.

v

CHAPTER II
REVIEW OF LITERATURE

The purpose of this chapter is to review the litera—
ture relating to social and personality characteristics of
counselors and to selection procedures for counselor train-
ing. A review of the study in which data were collected to
determine the affective or cognitive quality of responses
of the subjects in this research study is also included.
The final section presents a description of the directive

and non-directive types of counseling.

Social Characteristics of Counselors
1 . .

Abeles reported a study of characteristics of 130
graduate student counselor trainees at the University of
Texas in 1958. Supervisors used a global rating to assess
counselor trainees on a continuum from greater to lesser
promise in future counseling proficiency. Tests used

included the Miller Analogies Test, the Minnesota Multiphasic

 

 

14

15

tr
Personality Inventory, the General Aptitude Test Battery, '

 

 

the Kuder Preference Test, and the Allport, Vernon, Lindzey

 

Study of Values. Results of the study indicated that

 

differences were found with respect to values, interests,
and characterological aspects for male counselor trainees,
but not female counselor trainees. Few test scales differ—
entiated male counselor trainees with high promise of
counseling proficiency from those of low promise of counsel—
ing proficiency. Female counselor trainees with high promise
of counseling proficiency differed significantly on test
data from those of low promise of counseling proficiency.
Abelsl characterized male counselor trainees with
high promise as placing themselves in a socially desirable
light, being sensitive, worrying, being somewhat high strung,
seeing themselves and their surroundings more objectively
and dispassionately, lacking quarrelsomeness and domineering
qualities, less concerned with being social leaders, and as
willing to accept things and people as they are. Those
counselor trainees with low promise were characterized as
presenting themselves in a socially desirable light, critical
of people, placing more importance on social leadership,
having a greater need to dominate, taking things more per—
sonally and subjectively, but giving the impression of being

very relaxed, self-confident, carefree, and somewhat impulsive.

16
it

Interest and value data characterized the counselor
trainees with high promise as interested in ”working with"
people, while counselor trainees with low promise were
characterized as being interested in "working around" people.

Erickson20 surveyed counselors in the state of
Michigan who were members of the state professional associa—
tion to discover social characteristics of counselors, and
obtain responses to a series of test cases. An attempt was
then made to determine the degree of relationship between
these social characteristics and the response typology of the
counselors.

Michigan counselors were characterized as being over
forty years of age, with five or more years of experience
as a counselor, having at least a Master of Arts degree,
mostly Protestant, and having migrated from other midwestern
states. Father's occupation was rated most frequently as
skilled, then semi-skilled, farmer, and professional. Most
fathers terminated their education after elementary school,
but some had college training. Entry into counseling was
based on a variety of reasons including an interest in teach—
ing, and the opportunity to counsel. Respondents stated that
the best way to improve their status in the community was to
participate in community organizations. Training and educa-

tion, joining professional organizations, and attending

17
“v
professional meetings were ways in which professional status ’
could be improved. Erickson concluded that the values and
orientations of a counselor will enter into his behavior
in the counseling interview. However, the hypothesis
suggesting a relationship between similarity of education
and occupation of the counselor and his reactions to case
data was not supported, nor was the hypothesis that the
counselor will tend to sublimate his own motivations and
personal biases in counseling situations. The hypothesis
that in a conflict of the individual and institutional
equilibrium the counselor will tend to support the individual
was neither proved nor disproved.
8

Brams investigated the relationship between some
personality characteristics of counselor trainees and the
effectiveness of their ability to communicate with clients
in counseling interviews. Personality characteristics were

indicated by a series of objective personality tests, includ—

ing the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory, the

 

Taylor Manifest Anxiety Scale, the Index of Adjustment and

 

 

Values, and the Berkeley Public Opinion Questionnaire.

 

Three ratings of communication effectiveness were obtained
for each counselor trainee. Brams concluded that effective

communication is positively related to the counselor trainee's

18
it

tolerance for ambiguity as measured by the Berkeley Public

 

Opinion Questionnaire. Other relationships measured were

 

inconclusive.
63

Rishel attempted to determine how students best
may be selected for initial entry into graduate programs of
counselor education. Test data, grade point average, and
effectiveness ratings were correlated. Scholastic aptitude
and selected items from personality and interest inventories
were reported as valid predictors of success in counselor
education. Rishel stated that age, work experience, and

teaching experience should be used as selectors only with

extreme caution, if at all.

Personality Characteristics of Counselors
. l4
Cottle and Lew1s attempted to construct a scale to
differentiate counselors and other workers in education and
psychology. The scale was constructed of items from the

Strong Vocational Interest Blank for Men, the Minnesota

 

 

Multiphasic Personality Inventory, and the Guilford-

 

 

Zimmerman Temperament Survey. The counselor was charac—

 

terized as being emotionally stable, objective in outlook,
friendly, and having above average success in personal
relations. Further research with this scale significantly

v cu... t‘fi.“ nu... ..

differentiated teachers and counselor trainees.

19

44 . '.
Kriedt attempted to determine the adequacy of the V

1938 Strong Vocational Interest Blank key for psychology.

 

A new key was constructed to better differentiate between
sub-groups of experimental, clinical, guidance, and industrial
psychologists. Guidance workers were differentiated from
psychologists by stronger interests in interviewing, service
to others, personnel work, and writing.
72 . .

An attempt was made by Snyder in 1955 to find per-

sonality characteristics typical of clinical psychology

students. The Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory

 

was administered to seniors and graduate students in a
course in introduction to clinical psychology. Later,
prediction ratings from psychology professors were obtained.
The attempt to construct a valid scale from the MMPI was
unsuccessful. Snyder characterized the "good students" as
being more aggressive, independent, unconventional, and
social; and less religious, neurotic, and having feelings
of inferiority. The "poor students" were found to be more
conventional, religious, having feelings of inadequacy, and
neurotic concerns.
61

In 1962 Patterson reported a study of rehabilitation

counselor trainees using a battery of tests for the purpose

of providing normative data. The battery of tests included

the Miller Analogies Test, the Minnesota Multiphasic Per-

 

 

20
‘v

sonality Inventory, the Edwards Personal Preference Schedule,

 

 

the Strong Vocational Interest Blank, and the Kerr—Speroff

 

 

Empathy Test. The rehabilitation counselor trainees were

 

found to compare favorably in scholastic ability with other
graduate students. They tended to be interested in helping,
social welfare, and/or psychology professions, and personnel
administration. The personality characteristics of these
trainees were normal and similar to college students in
general, but traits desirable in counselors were stronger in
these trainees than in students in general. They had above

average interest in people, and in understanding them.

._. .___._.— —«-—

 

Patterson found that the rehabilitation counselor trainees
tended to be confident of themselves, without undue guilt
feelings, were willing and able to listen to others, and to

_accept suggestions.

"\_._ 1.... -

Hoffman39 investigated counselor subroles using client
interviews to more thoroughly describe the larger role of
the counselor. Results indicated that subroles could be
categorized from verbatim transcriptions of interviews, but
that a standardized personality pattern for the effective
counselor was improbable because of the variety of behaviors
used by the counselor. Hoffman concluded that further

research was implied to investigate the relationship of certain

 

21
“v

personality characteristics to patterns of subroles, to
determine factors influencing the subrole pattern, and the

importance of the use of an extended repertoire of subroles.

92
In an article in 19573 C. Gilbert Wrenn stated

. ..-. -...............-.‘ _.

that no one knows what type of personality a counselor has,

or needs to have. Studies of personality characteristics
were cited. Wrenn concluded that, "...a counselor must
considerable psychological strength to handle the

have

I"

__"

egojinvolved counseling relationship, that he must be a

/

/
socially perceptive (sensitive) person, and that he must have

a firm sense of purpose and an articulate value structure."
. 5 i;
Arbuckle stated that research on the education of
the counselor points to a need for more research to determine
whether or not there are specific counselor traits that
definitely contribute in either a positive or negative way
to the total effect of the counseling process. Arbuckle

asserted that there is a need to first answer the question,

"What is a counselor?"

Selection Procedures of Counselor Education Programs
In an early study of the selection and education of
94 , .
student personnel workers, Wrenn listed two major unsolved
problems: one, the selection of those who are encouraged

to work toward certification or a graduate degree; two, the

22
balance of knowledge and practice in the graduate curricu- if
lum.

Results from a battery of tests measuring interests,
scholastic aptitude, values, and personality variables
indicated that males scored high on theoretical values and
low on aesthetic values. The subjects showed interest in
occupations related to science, human relations, and
linguistics. They were characterized as high in Restraint,
Emotional Stability, Friendliness, Objectivity, and Personal
Relations. Wrenn concluded that somehow individuals must be
found who are socially sensitive, emotionally mature, and
intellectually able. They must be motivated toward science
and service, and find satisfying the particular activities
involved.

Surveys of selection procedures during the last

86 66
decade were reported by Wellman, Santavicca, and the

79
committee of a professional association.
86 . . . .

Wellman surveyed 151 institutions to determine the
extent and nature of special admission requirements in
graduate colleges offering programs for the preparation of
college personnel workers. Academic achievement was the
most frequently reported criterion for admission. Interviews,

recommendations, and try-out experiences were listed as the

second most frequent criterion. Interest in the field,

23
’v‘
specified undergraduate preparation, teaching experience,
work experience other than teaching, and counseling aptitude
were the remaining criteria for admission. Wellman commented
on the inadequacy of instruments measuring characteristics
believed to be related to successful performance in the
field, and the lack of valid objective criteria for selection.
66

Santavicca surveyed current selection practices of
institutions offering graduate courses in counseling. Emphasis
for selection was on academic competence as judged by under—
graduate record and scholastic aptitude as measured by tests.
Consideration was then given to teaching experience, personal
adjustment, social interest, work experience, health, and
other criteria.

The Sub—Committee on Counselor Trainee Selection79
of the American Psychological Association surveyed the
practices and problems in universities training counseling
psychologists. Specific selection procedures included an
informal, unstructured interview, letters of recommendation,
grade point average, tests, and practicum. One-half of the
schools reported research was underway to evaluate selection
methods, less than one—half were satisfied that they knew the

essential traits on which to select, and over one—half were

dissatisfied with present selection methods.

24
36 t!
Hill reported that Barry and Wolf classified the

articles in the Personnel and Guidance Journal from 1952—57

 

and found fourteen of the 411 articles were concerned with
counselor selection and preparation. Two of the fourteen
articles dealt with research in counselor training. There
was no major longitudinal study of selection, training,
placement, and evaluation.
37

Hill further stated that there have been pronounce-
ments about the personal characteristics and competencies of
counselors, but few are based on research. Studies of the
character and status of counselors in training and guidance
workers in service with a view to standardization have
proved unsuccessful. This does not erase the selection
problem, but only makes it more challenging.

43

Kinzer disagreed with the specialization fostered
by Title V of the National Defense Education Act of 1958.
He did not propose criteria for selection, but emphasized
the importance of selection procedures rather than curriculum,
and placed major responsibility for such selection procedures
with counselor educators.

Arnold Buchheimer is in the process of validating an
instrument to predict counselor success based on kinescope

scenes of counseling behavior. After each scene the testee

25
. . if!"
is required to select the counselor's next best statement.
Norman Kagan, David Krathwohl, and William Farquhar
are currently validating a similar instrument in which the

testee is required to identify the client‘s feelings after

each scene.

Effects of Group Counseling on Counseling Performance

In 1964, Betz7 reported a study of the effects of two
different group counseling experiences on subsequent counsel-
ing behavior in practicum contact with counselees. Subjects
were members of the National Defense Education Act Institute
for Guidance and Counseling at Michigan State University
during the academic year 1962-1963.

The study defined counselor performance on the basis
of three dimensions, namely, response to affect/cognition,
degree of counselor lead, and variability of techniques.

Betz hypothesized that there would be differences of
rated response to affect/cognition, degree of lead, and
variability of technique for affective treatment groups and
cognitive treatment groups. Differences were based on a
pre—treatment measurement and a post-treatment measurement.

It was also hypothesized that there would be differ-
ences between groups after treatment. The affective treatment

group would respond to affect to a greater extent than the

26
cognitive treatment group after group counseling; the ir
affective treatment group would be less leading than the
cognitive treatment group after group counseling; the
affective treatment group would be more variable in
techniques than the cognitive treatment group after counsel-
ing.

Two experimental groups of counselor trainees were
selected and assigned two treatments: (1) affective group
counseling, and (2) cognitive group counseling. The groups
were equated prior to treatment on scholastic aptitude,
prior knowledge of counseling and guidance, age, and years
of teaching experience. No significant differences were
found between groups on the four variables. Betz concluded
that neither group had a pre-experimental advantage in
aptitude, achievement, age, or years of teaching experience.
The subjects were randomly assigned to counseling groups.
Three groups of five subjects were designated "affective
treatment" and three groups were designated "cognitive treat-
ment." Three experienced group counselors were each randomly
assigned an affective treatment group and a cognitive group.
Both types of treatment were assigned to participating

counselors to reduce effects of the ability level of the

counselor or his preference for a specific type of counseling.

27
Group leaders participated in planning sessions to clarify i;
role expectations of "affective" and "cognitive” group
counseling. Kagan's discussion of the modal expectations
of the group leader was established as the operational plan
for the functioning of group leaders. The leader role was
defined as ". . . concerns himself more with feelings and
elicitation of repressed and unconscious material than with
cognitive discussion." The cognitive group leader focused
on content rather than feelings expressed or implied by
the group members. The leader role, as defined, became the
single critical manipulated variable. Random selections of
counselor response from tape recordings of group counseling
sessions were judged on the basis of their being predominantly
designed to elicit content. Betz concluded that treatment
effects were established and maintained for the duration of
the group counseling experience.

Data were gathered by tape recording the initial
interview of the subject's first practicum counselee, and
the initial interview of the subject's fifth (and last)
counselee. Approximately two months elapsed between T and

1

T2. Random segments of the total interview in typescript
form were judged by two experts in the field of counseling

on the dimensions of affect/cognition, degree of lead, and

variability of techniques.

28

Betz concluded that the affective group changed in if
its response to affect between the pre- and post-measurements,
but did not change in degree of lead or variability of
technique. Betz also concluded that the cognitive group
did not change in its response to affect or in degree of
lead between the pre- and post-measurements. Judges did not
agree in the variability of techniques dimension and the
results were considered inconclusive. After group counseling
the affective group held a significant advantage over the
cognitive group in response to affect. There were no signifi—
cant differences in degree of lead. Judges did not agree
on the variability of techniques dimension and the results
were considered inconclusive.

The terms ”affective" and "cognitive" were not defined
by Betz. Reference was made to the meaning of these terms
by the use of words or phrases in parentheses following
"affective" and "cognitive.” Betz refers to ". . . an
affective (emotional emphasis) group experience” and

”. . . a cognitive (intellectual emphasis)."

Role of the Counselor
88
In 1950, E. G. Williamson classified two general

types of counseling: curative, and scientific. Non-directive

counseling was classified as one of the therapeutic or cura—

29 .
U“
tive types of counseling. Directive counseling was classified
as one of the scientific types of counseling.
Williamson describes directive scientific counseling
as ". . . a broadly conceived, life adjustment type of
teacher—student learning experience."
Williamson divides the work of the directive counselor
into six steps. ”Analysis refers to the collection from a

variety of sources data which provide for an adequate under—

standing of the student. Synthesis refers to the summarizing

 

and organizing of the data from analysis in such a manner as
to reveal the student's assets, liabilities, adjustments,
and maladjustments. A case history or cumulative record
form may be used to summarize the mass of data about the
student's life, and test scores are summarized on a profile

or psychograph. Diagnosis refers to the end result of

 

diagnosing; it is the clinician's statement, or prediction,
of the future development of the student's problem, i.e.
whether he will readjust or what will be the probable outcome
of a choice of a particular course of study. It is a state-

ment of adjustments. Counseling refers to the steps taken

 

by the student and by the counselor to bring about adjustment

and readjustment. The final step in clinical work, follow—up,

 

includes what the clinician does to assist the student with

3O
’9'
new problems, with recurrences of the original problems,
and what is done to determine the effectiveness of counseling.”

Williamson characterizes the directive scientific
type of counseling as a long-time developmental process with
the client taking full responsibility for participating in
learning about himself with the counselor performing the
secondary role of a ”teaching assistant” who aids in the
learning process of the client.

Within this theoretical framework, the responses of
the counselor would tend to be interpretive, reasoning,
intellectual; concerned with the definition of the problem
of the client, the collection and interpretation of facts.
The emphasis would be cognitive (intellectual).

64

In 1954, Carl Rogers described the change that had
taken place in his approach to therapy. His earlier thinking
had been concerned with treating, changing, or curing a per-
son. Now, Rogers is more concerned with the relationship
which, provided by the counselor, the client may use for his
own personal growth. ”The failure of any such approach
thru the intellect has forced me to recognize that change
appears to come about through experience in a relationship."

Rogers' over-all hypothesis may be stated as follows:

"If I can provide a certain type of relationship, the other

31
. . U
person Will discover within himself the capacity to use
that relationship for growth, and change and personal
development will occur.”
Rogers further states, "If I can create a relation-

ship characterized on my part:

”by a genuineness and transparency, in which I
am my real feelings;

by a warm acceptance of and prizing of the
other person as a separate individual;

by a sensitive ability to see his world and
himself as he sees them;

Then the other individual in the relationship:

will experience and understand aspects of himself
which previously he has repressed;

will find himself becoming better integrated,
more able to function effectively;

will become more similar to the person he would
like to be;

will be more self—directing and self-confident;

will become more of a person, more unique and
more self-expressive;

will be able to cope with the problems of life
more adequately and more comfortably.”

". . . It seems to me that we have here a general
hypothesis which offers exciting possibilities for the
development of creative, adaptive, autonomous persons."

The directions in therapy, Rogers states, then seem
to be the experiencing of the potential self, full experi—
encing of an affectional relationship, liking one's self, a

positive core of personality, and man becoming his organism.

32

The addition of awareness to ordinary (sensory and H
visceral) experiencing makes possible the full and undistorted
awareness of that experiencing. The client can be aware of
what he is actually experiencing, not simply what he can
permit himself to experience after a thorough screening
through a conceptual filter.

Rogers characterizes the therapeutic type of counseling
as a process in which the counselor provides a receptive
climate which the client will use to facilitate change and
personal development with emphasis on a loosening of feelings
and a change in the manner of experiencing.

Within this theoretical framework, the responses of
the counselor would tend to be acceptant, sensitive,
affectional; concerned with providing a relationship which

the client may use for growth. The emphasis would be

affective (feeling).

Summary
The study of social characteristics of counselor
trainees leads to articles dealing with the social charac—
teristics of counselors, personality characteristics of
counselors, and selection procedures of counselor education

programs.

33
Two studies attempted to characterize counselors and
counselor trainees on the basis of social characteristics)
and test data. More studies were found which attempted to
characterize counselor trainees solely on the basis of test

data.

Surveys of selection procedures indicate that academic

competence is the most important criterion.

y

CHAPTER III

DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY

Population of the Study

The research population was composed of thirty students
enrolled in the National Defense Education Act Institute for
Guidance and Counseling at Michigan State University during
the academic year September 1962 to June 1963. It is
assumed that the group was representative of the total
population of all previous full-year Institute members because
selection procedures for Institutes at Michigan State Univer—
sity are quite similar. The group may be representative of
the total population of Institute members throughout the
nation because the National Defense Education Act outlines
certain selection procedures.

The population ranged in age from 23 to 54 years of
age, consisted of 24 males, 6 females, 26 whites, 4 Negroes,
28 native—born Americans, 2 immigrants, 27 married persons
and 3 single persons. The year prior to attendance at the

Institute these enrollees were employed in ten states including

34

35
, “#1"
Alabama, Maryland, Michigan, Mississippi, New Jersey, New
York, South Dakota, washington, D. C., West Virginia, and
Wisconsin. Previous experience with graduate study ranged

from a minimum of one course to the Master of Arts degree in

an academic area other than guidance and counseling.

Collecting the Data
Affective/Cognitive Response Quality

Collection of the data to determine the affective
(feeling) or cognitive (content) quality of responses of the
counselor trainee was undertaken as part of a study by Betz.
Random units from typescripts of the initial interview of
the subject's first practicum counselee, and the initial
interview of the subject's last counselee were judged by two
experts in the field of counseling.

”Judge reliability for the affective/cognitive
dimension ranged from .73 (T2) to .59 (T1). Both correlations
could have occurred by chance only one time out of 100. The
magnitude of the correlations is consistent with other
reported judgments of the feeling/content dimension in con-
tent analysis research (Reid and Snyder, 1947; Snyder, 1945;
Robinson, 1950; Bergman, 1951; Ellsworth, 1962). The dimen-
sion was considered to be adequately judged by the raters

7
and is the best judged of the three dimensions."

36
v-

Test Data

One of the purposes of the study was to determine
whether patterns exist in the performance of the more affec—
tive counselor trainee and the more cognitive counselor
trainee on a battery of tests.

In September 1962 a series of tests were administered
as part of the regular testing program for the Institute.

These tests purported to measure scholastic aptitude, teacher

attitudes, certain personality variables, achievement in

 

 

guidance and counseling, and interests. The following tests
' 56
were included: Miller Analogies Test, Ohio State Univer-
. . 82 . . 12
Sity Psychological, Minnesota Teacher Attitude Inventory,

 

 

34
Guilford-Zimmerman Temperament Survey, Edwards Personal

 

 

l8
Preference Schedule, Minnesota Multiphasic Personality

 

 

35 . . .
Inventory, National Defense Education Act ComprehenSive,

78
and Strong Vocational Interest Test.

 

 

 

A battery of tests were also administered in March
1963 at the end of the practicum experience. These tests
purported to measure creative thinking abilities, value
orientations, dogmatism, and self—concept. The following
tests were included: Tests of Fluency, Flexibility and

50 3 65
Originality, the Study of Values, the Dogmatism Scale,

51
and the Twenty-Statements Problem (Who Am I?).

 

 

 

37
‘H‘
Sociological Data

Another purpose of the study was to determine whether
patterns exist in the personal-social history of the more
affective counselor trainee and the more cognitive counselor
trainee.

Sociological data were collected immediately following
the administration of the second section of tests in March
1963. An interview schedule of 85 structured items was used.
The schedule consisted of eight sections including identifica—
tion, family relationships, education, occupation, social
relations, success, status, critical incident, and religion.
No attempt was made to define any specific words in the
interview question to the interviewee, such as ”critical
incident,” because categories were established from the
responses of the interviewees. Interviews were conducted at
a time and place convenient to the subject during a two-week
period of time. All interviews were tape recorded, and type-

scripts prepared for purposes of analysis. Appendix A

contains a complete interview schedule.

Instruments
Tests
As part of the regular testing program for the Institute,

test scores were collected for the following tests: Miller

 

38
. 55 . . . . 82 1"
Analogies Test, Ohio State UniveISity Psychological Test,

12
Minnesota Teacher Attitude Inventory, Guilford—Zimmerman

 

 

 

 

34
Temperament Survey, Edwards Personal Preference Schedule,

 

 

. . . . 35 .
Minnesota MultiphaSic Personality Inventory, National

 

Defense Education Act Comprehensive, and Strong Vocational

 

 

Interest Test.

 

56
The Miller Analogies Test purports to measure

 

scholastic aptitude at the graduate school level. The test
consists of 100 analogy items based on many areas of knowledge:
social science, chemistry, biology, physics, methodology,
mathematics, and general information. Reliability coefficients
from .85 to .89 were obtained from seniors and graduate stu—
dents on alternate forms of the test. Coefficients from .92

to .94 were found on odd—even correlations. Validity of .40
was reported in a correlation of the grade point average of
graduate students in education and psychology.

82
The Ohio State University Psychological Test is an

 

instrument designed to evaluate scholastic aptitude. Reli-
alfijity of .93 was reported on alternate forms of the test.
\falidity was established at .68 for the Point Hour Ratio of
a full college year for college freshman.

12
The Minnesota Teacher Attitude Inventory was designed

 

to measure those attitudes of a teacher which predict how

39 ,
V
well he will get along with pupils in inter-personal relation—
ships and indirectly how well satisfied he will be with
teaching as a vocation. Reliability estimates of .82 to .89
were reported for 100 unselected teachers using the Spearman—
Brown formula. Validity was established at .59 to .60 in'a
combined rating of teacher's attitudes by pupils, principals,
and educational specialists.

34
The Guilford—Zimmerman Temperament Survey purports

 

to measure ten traits for an individual including General
Activity, Restraint, Ascendance, Sociability, Emotional
Stability, Objectivity, Friendliness, Thoughtfulness, Personal
Relations, and Masculinity. Internal validity of .20 to .50
was reported by factor analysis for all traits except General
Activity and Sociability. Reliability coefficients ranging
from .75 to .87 were obtained for male and female college
students based on odd-even correlations.

18
The Edwards Personal Preference Schedule purports to

 

measure a number of relatively independent so-called normal
personality variables including Achievement, Deference, Order,
Exhibition, Autonomy, Affiliation, Intraception, Succorance,
Dominance, Abasement, Nurturance, Change, Endurance, Hetero-
sexuality, and Aggression. The variables these statements

purport to measure have origin in a list of manifest needs

40
'9'
presented by H. A. Murray and others. Internal consistency
by split-half ranged from .60 to .87. On a test—retest
basis using University of Washington students, coefficients
of correlation ranged from .74 to .88. Correlations of .22

to .18 were reported with the Taylor Manifest Anxiety Scale.

The Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory35 pur—

 

ports to measure personality traits commonly characteristic
of disabling psychological abnormality, including hypochon-
driasis, depression, hysteria, psychopathic personality,
masculinity—femininity, paranoia, psychasthenia, schizophrenia,
and hypomania. Valid prediction of clinical cases against

a neuropsychiatric staff diagnosis was the criterion of
excellence rather than statistical measures of validity and
reliability. However, some reliability studies involving
statistical significance have been reported. Test—retest
coefficients for six of the variables ranged from .57 to .83.
A high score on a scale was reported to predict positively
the corresponding clinical diagnosis in more than 60 per cent
of new psychiatric admissions. This validity percentage was
derived from a differentiation among various kinds of clinic
cases.

The National Defense Education Act Guidance Comprehen-

 

sive test purports to measure achievement in guidance and

41
. . .. . ’v‘
counseling. Data regarding reliability and validity studies
were not yet published, nor was the test available to other

than NDEA Institutes.

8
The Strong Interest Test purports to measure one's

 

interests interpreted in terms of various occupations. It
is 22: a measure of specific or general abilities, including
intelligence. A score expresses the extent to which a
person possesses likes and dislikes which distinguish members
of that occupational group from men or women in general. Odd-
even reliability coefficients of .88 were reported for men
and .74 to .94 for women. The group was composed of seniors
at Stanford University. A biserial coefficient of correlation
of .85 for men and a slightly lower correlation for women
was reported for mean scores of members of an occupation from
people-in—general.

For purposes of this study, the following additional

tests were administered at the end of the practicum experi-

 

 

 

 

 

50
enace: Tests of Fluency, Flexibility and Originality, the
. 3 . 65
Study of Values, the Dogmatism Scale, and the Twengy—
51
Statements Problem (Who Am I?).
50

Tests of Fluency, Flexibility and Originality

 

purpmmt to measure creative thinking ability including Word

Fluency, Associational Fluency, Ideational Fluency, Expres-

42
'V

sional Fluency, Originality, and Spontaneous Flexibility.
Reliability coefficients of correlation based on alternate
(halves) forms of the tests of fluency were as follows: .75
for Word Fluency, .76 for Ideational Fluency, and .63 for
Associational Fluency. Reliability estimates for Originality
of .86 for the "obvious” score and .82 for the ”remote"
score were derived from alternate forms. Internal validity
was derived by factor analysis and ranged from .18 for the
"obvious" score to .42 for the ”remote" score. Practical
validity coefficients of .17 for the "obvious" score and .44
for the "remote" score were obtained for engineering students
at the University of Southern California using grade point
average as the criterion. The Alternate Uses test, purporting
to measure Spontaneous Flexibility, is an experimental form
and recommended for research purposes only. Reliability
estimates of the original form on adults ranged from .68 to
.81. Internal validity was obtained by factor analysis with
factor loadings of .51 to .52 for the factor of Spontaneous
Flexibility.

3
The Study of Values purports to measure the relative

 

prominence of six basic interests or motives in personality:
Theoretical, Economic, Aesthetic, Social, Political, and
Religious. Scores may be divided into high, low, outstand-

ingly high, or outstandingly low categories. Split-half

43
reliability coefficients ranged from .84 to .95 for the six
motives, with a mean reliability coefficient of .90. An
item analysis indicates a positive correlation for each
item with the total score for its value significant at the
.01 level of confidence. The mean test retest reliability
coefficient was .89 for the one—month study, and .88 for
the two—month interval.

65
The Dogmatism Scale purports to measure individual

 

differences in openness or closedness of belief systems.
The Scale also serves to measure general authoritarianism
and general tolerance. Odd—even reliability estimates on
Form E ranged from .68 to .93 on college students and
domiciled veterans.

51
The Twenty-Statements Problem (Who Am I?) purports

 

to measure the systems of attitudes which define the self

as an object of experience. Reliability of categories was
indicated by the fact that three independent judges cate—
gorized more than 97 per cent of the responses of a random
sample of 25 respondents in the same category. No respondent
was placed in different modal categories by any two of the

judges.

Interview Schedule
An interview schedule was used to collect the socio-

logical data because it offered scope, and freedom of

44
expression to the person being interviewed. One of the
purposes of the study was to investigate the existence of
patterns in the personal-social history of the counselor
trainee. The existence of such patterns could generate more
finite hypotheses to test the relationship of these patterns
and the responses of the counselor trainee in a practicum
interview. The interview schedule allowed for the assumption
that patterns could exist in the personal—social history of
the counselor trainee, without specifying the direction.
These patterns could be the basis for generalizations in
characterizing the more affective counselor trainee and the
more cognitive counselor trainee.

The interview schedule consisted of 85 structured
questions in eight sections including identification, family
relationship, education, occupation, social relations, success,
status, critical incident, and religion. Each question was

structured with respect to one 2E more of the following con—

 

cepts: rural-urban, localite-cosmopolite, status, familism,
type of involvement (social, occupational, educational,
religious), awareness, referent. The questions were con-
structed to cover the broadest possible survey of the life
history of the individual in as great depth as practical.

Some of the questions were patterned after those in the inter-

45
views conducted for the study of anti—semitism reported in
THE AUTHORITARIAN PERSONALITY.2

The interviewer requested clarification where necessary
on any structured question by the use of unstructured ques-
tions such as,"Why?," ”How?," "In what way?". These probing
questions are not part of an interview schedule, but are
generally considered a legitimate part of the technique of
interviewing.

The structured questions were selected for the inter-
view schedule on the basis of what they would reveal of what
had meaning, influence, or importance in the personal—social
history of the counselor trainee. It was not assumed that
all sections would prove equally discriminating. The questions
were arranged in an order corresponding to the life history
of the individual to put the interviewee at ease. The first
section of the interview schedule consisted of questions for
identification. Questions relating to family relationships,
education, occupation, social relations, income, success,
status, critical incident, and religion followed in that

order.

 

 

46

Procedure for Analysis of Data

Affective/Cognitive RQSponse Quality

Counselor trainee responses in the practicum inter-
view were used to separate the subjects for purposes of
comparison. The judges' ratings from first and last initial
interviews during the ten-week practicum period were compared
to measure the affective or cognitive response of the counselor
trainee to client leads. Ten subjects were rated as more
affective in response growth from first to last initial inter—
view during the ten-week practicum period, and ten subjects
were rated as more cognitive in response growth from first
to last initial interview during the ten-week practicum
period. Ten subjects showed little or no change in response
growth from first to last initial interview during the ten-

week practicum period.

Test Data
Scores for the following tests were expressed in

56
percentiles: Miller Analogies Test, Ohio State University
12

 

 

82
Psychological Test, Minnesota Teacher Attitude Inventory,

 

 

34
Guilford-Zimmerman Temperament Survey, Edwards Personal

 

 

18
Preference Schedule, National Defense Education Act Compre-

50
hensive, and Tests of Fluency, Flexibility and Originality.

 

 

 

 

47

Raw scores were utilized for the Strong Vocational Interest

 

3 65
Test,78 the Study of Values, the Dogmatism Scale, and

51
The Twenty-Statements Problem (Who Am I?).

 

 

 

The distribution of scores for each test for all
subjects in the study was divided into quartiles. Quartile
one (Q1) included all scores falling at or below the twenty-
fourth percentile. Quartile three (Q3) included all scores
falling at or above the seventy-fifth percentile. Scores
falling between the twenty-fifth and the seventy-fourth

percentile represented the interquartile range.

Sociological Data

Responses of the subjects to the structured interview
questions were used in establishing categories for tabulation
of responses. The responses of all subjects on each question
were grouped according to similarity of response as expressed
by the words used by the subjects. Resulting category head-
ings represented the words used by the subjects in their
responses. Responses which could not be categorized were
placed in a miscellaneous category. Responses of the more
affective and the more cognitive subjects were then tabulated

for comparison.

 

U

CHAPTER IV

ANALYSIS AND PRESENTATION OF DATA

Chapter IV contains the analysis and presentation of
the data. The presentation is divided into three parts:
(1) sociological data related to identification, family
relationships, education, occupation, social relations,
success, status, critical incident, and religion; (2) test
scores; (3) a summary of sociological concepts and social
characteristics,and a summary of psychological variables and

personality characteristics.

Analysis of the Data
The mean number of responses of the total group of
subjects in any category for any question in the structured
interview schedule or in any quartile for any tests was
designated "expected response frequency.” The number of
responses of the more affective subjects and the number of
responses of the more cognitive subjects in any category for

any question in the structured interview or in any quartile

48

 

 

49 ‘
it

for any test was designated "observed response frequency."
The difference between the expected frequency and the
observed frequency was designated as the ”gross difference."
This gross difference was the difference in the number of
responses of the more affective subjects and the number of
responses of the more cognitive subjects from the total
group of subjects. The criterion for this gross difference
was established at a difference of plus gr minus two (+2 SE
-2) between the expected frequency and the observed fre-
quency. A difference of two was chosen for the study because
of the small sample size and the directional nature of the
research. A gross difference of plus or minus two indicates
that 20 per cent of the observed subjects differed in
responses from the total group of subjects, and could indicate
direction for further research. A gross difference was con-
sidered to exist if the number of responses of the more
affective subjects or the number of responses of the more
cognitive subjects was two more 25 two less than the number
of expected responses. Gross-differences were considered
not to exist when the number of responses of the more
affective subjects or the more cognitive subjects was identical
with the number of responses of the total group of subjects.

Gross differences were considered not to exist when the

difference in the number of responses was plus or minus one.

50 M
i)‘
This indicates that 10 per cent of the observed subjects
differed in responses from the total group of subjects, and
was considered not sufficiently large to suggest direction
for further research.
The analysis was applied to the sociological data
and the test data. The resulting gross differences were
used to describe the social and personality characteristics
of the more affective and the more cognitive counselor
trainees. These groups were then characterized with
respect to both sociological and psychological variables.

An attempt was made to suggest relationships between these

sociological and psychological variables.

Presentation of the Data
Part One: Sociological Data

Identification data are grouped according to the
subject, his father, his mother, and siblings. Table 4.1
presents the expected and observed frequencies and gross
differences for the more affective and the more cognitive
subjects.

Gross differences were found in the identification
data for the more affective subjects. Two less than the
expected number were born in communities of less than 10,000

population. Of those married, two subjects more than the

 

 

 

 

51

Table 4.1

Areas in Which Gross Differences for

Identification Data Occurred

 

L

.

 

Response
Structured Interview Question* Frequency**
n = 10 Aff Cog Gross
Obs Exp Obs Difference***
l. Sex-female 3 (2) l +l-l NGD
2. Size of community of birth—
1ess than 10,000 pop 3 (5) 6 —2+1 -GD
5. Number of children-
none 3 (1) 0 +2-1 +GD
l or 2 0 (3) 6 —3+3 -GD+GD
3 or more 6 (5) 4 +1—l NGD
6. a Size of community of
father's birth-
less than 10,000 pop 5 (7) 7 -2 0 -GD
more than 10,000 pop 4 (2) 1 +2—1 +GD
don't know 1 (1) 2 0+1 NGD
b. Generation in America:
father-
immigrant or first 3 (4) 6 -1+2 +GD
second or more 6 (5) 4 +l—l NGD
c. Nationality: father-
Anglo-Saxon 3 (2) l +1—l NGD
Negro 2 (1) 1 +1 0 NGD
Irish 3 (2) 2 +1 0 NGD
Northern European 2 (3) 5 —1+2 +GD
Southern European 0 (l) 1 —l 0 NGD
8. Father's education-terminated
after:
college 1 (l) 3 0+2 +GD
high school 4 (3) 2 +l-l NGD
elementary school 5 (5) 5 O 0 NGD
9. Father's occupation-
professional, proprietary,
business 1 (3) 4 —2+1 —GD
white collar 4 (2) l +1—1 +GD
manual, service and misc.,
land owners 5 (5) 5 0 0 NGD

 

52

Table 4.1 (continued)

 

 

 

 

Response
Structured Interview Question* Frequency**
n = 10 Aff Cog Gross
Obs Exp Obs Difference***
10. b. Reason subject thought
father liked work-
work had meaning
in itself 1 (2) 4 —1+2 +GD
work enhanced indi-
vidual, or parent
described work to
child 6****(4) l +2-3 +GD—GD
11. Father's income-
under $5,000 1 (2) 3 —1+1 NGD
$5,000-$9,999 4 (5) 4 -1-1 NGD
over $10,000 0 (2) 3 —2+1 -GD
don't know 5 (2) 0 +3—2 +GD—GD
12. Source of father's income—
profit and fees 1 (3) 3 —2 0 -GD
salary or commission 7 (4) l +3—3 +GD-GD
wages 0 (1) 3 -l+2 +GD
combination of these 2 (2) 3 0+1 NGD
13. Generation in America: mother—
immigrant or first 3 (4) 4 -1 0 NGD
second or more 7 (5) 5 +2 0 +GD
14. Size of community of child—
hood: mother-
1ess than 10,000 pop 8 (7) 7 +1 0 NGD
more than 10,000 pop 1 (3) 3 —2 0 -GD
15. Mother's education—terminated
after:
college 2 (2) 2 0 0 NGD
high school 5 (4) 3 +1-1 NGD
elementary school 2 (4) 5 —2+1 -GD
16. Mother's occupation-
professional, proprietary,
business 2 (2) 1 0-1 NGD
white collar 4 (2) l +2—l +GD
manual, service and misc.,
land owners 1 (2) 3 -l+l NGD

it

53
U
Table 4.1 (continued)

 

Response
Structured Interview Question* Frequency**
n = 10 Aff Cog Gross
Obs Exp Obs Difference***

 

17. Number of siblings—

none or one 3 (2) 2 +1 0 NGD
two or three 3 (5) 6 —2+1 -GD
four or five 2 (1) O +l-l NGD
six or more 2 (2) 2 0 0 NGD
18. Sibling's education-terminated
after:
college 17 (13) 5 +4—8 +GD-GD
high school 9 (15) 18 -6+3 —GD+GD
elementary school 0 (l) O —l-1 NGD

 

*Numbers correspond to numbered questions in structured
interview schedule--see Appendix A.
**Response frequency of the more affective counselor—trainees.
Re8ponse frequency of the total sample.
Response frequency of the more cognitive counselor-trainees.
***+GD Gross difference of at least plus two between total
sample (expected) response frequency and sample (observed)
response frequency.
-GD Gross difference of at least minus two between total
sample (expected) response frequency and sample (observed)
response frequency.
NGD Identical responses between total sample (expected)
response frequency and sample (observed) response
frequency, 25 gross difference of not more than plus or
minus one between total sample (expected) response
frequency and sample (observed) response frequency.
****Less than ten responses, indicating remaining responses in
miscellaneous response category.

54 M
‘1‘

the expected number had no children; three less (none) had
families with one or two children.

Identification data concerned with the father of
the more affective subjects showed gross differences. The
father of two less than the expected number of subjects was
born in a community of less than 10,000 population. The
father of two less than the expected number of affectives
was a professional, proprietor, 0r businessman; the father
of two more than the expected number was a white collar
worker. Two more than the expected number of affectives
perceived their father as liking his work because it enhanced
him as an individual, or because the father described his
work to the subject. Two less than the expected number
(none) of fathers of affectives earned over $10,000. Three
more than expected did not know the amount of the income of
the father. Two less than the expected number of affective
subjects stated that their father's source of income was
profits and fees; three more than expected stated the source
of income was salary or commission.

Gross differences were found in identification data
with respect to the mother of the more affective subjects.
The mother of two more than the expected number of affectives

was a second generation American or more. Two less than the

expected number spent their childhood in communities of more

 

55
U
than 10,000 population. The mother of two less than the
expected number of affectives terminated her education after
elementary school. The mother of two more than the expected
number of affective subjects were white collar workers.

Gross differences were found for the more affective
subjects with respect to siblings. Two less than the
expected number of subjects had two to three siblings. The
siblings of four more than the expected number of affectives
terminated their education after college; six less than the
expected number terminated their education after high school.

No gross differences were found for the affective
group for the data relating to sex, father's generation in
America, nationality of the father, and education of the
father.

A gross difference was found in the identification
data for the subjects in the more cognitive group. Three
subjects more than the expected number had families with one
or two children.

Gross differences were found in the identification
data for the father of the more cognitive group of subjects.
The father of two more than the expected number of cognitive
subjects was an immigrant or first generation American; two

more than the expected number were of northern European

56
extraction. Two more than the expected number of cognitives
perceived their father as liking his work because it had
meaning in itself; three less than the expected number
because their father perceived work as enhancing the individual,
or because he described his work to the subject. Two less
than the expected number of cognitives did not know their
father's income. The income of the father of three less
than the expected number of cognitive subjects was salary
or commission; the income of two more than the expected
number was from wages.

A gross difference was found for the more cognitive
subjects with respect to the education of the siblings. The
siblings of eight less than the expected number of cognitives
terminated their education after college; three more than the
expected number terminated their education after high school.

No gross differences were found for the more cognitive
group of subjects for data relating to the subject with
respect to sex, size of community of birth, or number of
siblings. No gross differences were found for the size of
the community of birth for the father, or father's occupation.
No gross differences were found in the identification data
for the mother of the cognitive subjects.

No gross differences were found for either group of

subjects for identification data relating to age, race, size

57
of community of childhood for subject or father, marital
status, father's birthplace, how the father liked his
work, or mother's birthplace and size of the community.

The second section on family relationships showed
gross differences for both groups of subjects. These data
are presented in Table 4.2.

Three more affective subjects than the expected
number shared two kind of activities with their family when
they were growing up, before they went to college; two less
than the expected number shared three kind of activities.
Two more affectives than the expected number stated that
their father valued family, home, and children, or these
things and some other thing. Three more affectives than the
expected number stated that their mother valued these same
things—~family, home, and children. Two less than the
expected number stated that their mother valued truth and
honesty, or these things and something else. Two more
affective subjects than the expected number said there was
little or no disagreement between their parents; two less
than the expected number said there was some disagreement.
Two more than the expected number of affectives were dis-
ciplined by their mother; none of these subjects were dis-
ciplined by the father. Two more than the expected number of

affective group were disciplined by the taking away of privileges

 

58

Table 4.2

Areas in Which Gross Differences for Family
Relationships Occurred

 

 

Response
Structured Interview Question Frequency
n = 10 Aff Cog Gross
Obs Exp Obs Difference
20. Number of activities shared
with family-
none or one 2 (3) 3 -1 0 NGD
two 7 (40 3 +3-1 +GD
three 0 (2) 4 -2+2 -GD+GD
21. Parent closest to-
mother 5 (4) 3 +l—l NGD
father 2 (3) 5 -l+2 +GD
both equally 2 (2) 1 0-1 NGD
22. a. Father's values-
family, home, and
children, or these
and some other value 5 (3) l +2-2 +GD-GD
work virtues or educa—
tion 0 (l) 2 —1+1 NGD
truth and honesty, or
these and some other
value 4 (4) 6 0+2 +GD
b. Mother's values—
family, home, and
children, or these
and some other value 8 (5) 2 +3—3 +GD-GD
education 0 (l) 1 -l 0 NGD
truth and honesty, or
these and some other
value 1 (3) 4 -2+1 -GD
miscellaneous combina—
tions 1 (2) 2 -l O NGD
24. a. Degree of disagreement
between parents—
none or little 6 (4) 5 +2+l +GD
some 2 (4) 3 -2-1 -GD

 

59

Table 4.2 (continued)

 

 

Response
Structured Interview Question Frequency
n = 10 Aff Cog Gross
Obs Exp Obs Difference
24. b. Reason—
finances 2 (1) 2 +l-l NGD
decisions about children 2 (2) 2 0 0 NGD
father's activities 3 (2) O +l—2 -GD
other 1 (l) 2 0+1 NGD
26. How parent influenced-
inspiration 0 (1) 4 -1+3 +GD
encouraged 3 (2) 0 =l—2 -GD
with parent more 2 (3) 2 -l-1 NGD
no differentiation 2 (2) 2 O 0 NGD
27. Who disciplined—
mother 4 (2) 2 +2 0 +GD
father 0 (2) 3 —2+1 -GD
both 6 (6) 5 0-1 NGD
28. How disciplined—
physical 2 (3) 3 -l 0 NGD
took away privileges or
disapproval 3 (l) 1 +2 0 +GD
physical and verbal 0 (2) 5 -2+3 -GD+GD
physical and took away
privileges 3 (2) l +1—1 NGD
physical and disapproval 2 (l) 0 +1-l NGD

 

 

60
or by disapproval; none of the subjects were disciplined by
a combination of physical and verbal methods.

No gross differences were found for the more affective
group for the data relating to which parents they were
closest to, the reason for disagreement between the parents,
or how the parent influenced the subject to become the kind
of person he is.

Two more than the expected number of more cognitive
subjects shared three kind of activities with their family
when they were growing up, before they went to college. Two
more than the expected number of cognitive subjects were
closest to their father. Two less than the expected number
of cognitives stated that their father valued family, home,
and children, or these things and something else; two more
than the expected number stated their father valued truth and
honesty, or these virtues and something else. Three less
than the expected number of cognitives reported that their
mother valued family, home, and children, or these things
and something else. Two less (none) than the number of
expected cognitives stated their parents disagreed about the
father's activities. Three more than the expected number of
subjects in the cognitive group stated that the parents who
had more to do with their becoming the kind of person they

are inspired them; two less than the expected number said

 

61
this parent encouraged them. Three more than the expected
number of cognitives were disciplined by the use of both
physical and verbal means.

No gross differences were found for the more cognitives
for data relating to the degree of disagreement between the
parents, or who disciplined them.

No gross differences were found for either group of
subjects for the degree of happiness of the family and the
way in which the family was happy, the sibling the subject
was closest to and why, the reason the subject was close to
a parent, who made the decisions in the family, the parent
who had more to do with the subject becoming the kind of person
he is, and the reason for discipline.

Data relating to the educational involvement of the
subjects are presented in Table 4.3. Gross differences were
found for both the more affectives and the more cognitives.

Three less than the expected number of more affective
subjects attended high schools with less than 500 enrollment;
three more than the expected number attended high schools
with more than 500 enrollment. Two less than the expected
number of these subjects attended a high school located in
a community of less than 10,000 population; two more than the

expected number attended a high school located in a community

 

 

62

Table 4.3

Areas in Which Gross Differences for

Education Occurred

 

 

 

Response
Structured Interview Question Frequency
n = 10 Aff Cog Gross
Obs Exp Obs Difference
30. a. High school enrollment-
under 500 3 (6) 7 —3+1 —GD
over 500 7 (4) 3 +3-l +GD
b. Size of community-
less than 10,000 pop 4 (6) 9 -2+3 —GD+GD
more than 10,000 pop 6 (4) l +2—3 +GD-GD
31. High school clique membership
yes 6 (5) 5 +1 0 NGD
no 1 (3) 5 -2+2 -GD+GD
no clique ‘ 3 (2) 0 +1-2 -GD
34. Undergraduate training-
in Michigan 3 (5) 6 -2+1 -GD
outside Midhigan 7 (5) 4 +2-l +GD
Undergraduate enrollment-
less than 1,000 2 (3) 2 +1-1 NGD
1,000-9,999 5 (3) 4 +2+l +GD
10,000-19,999 0 (l) 0 —l-l NGD
20,000+ l (2) 2 -1 0 NGD
Degree received—
B.S. 6 (7) 9 -l+2 +GD
B.A. 4 (3) l +1—2 -GD
Undergraduate major—
science or math 1 (l) 2 0+1 NGD
English or social science,
or these and some other
area 4 (2) 3 +2+l +GD
industrial arts or physical
education 0 (l) 3 —l+2 +GD
education, or this and some
other area 5 (4) 2 +l-2 —GD
Graduate training—
yes 7 (9) 9 —2 0 -GD
no 3 (l) 1 +2 0 +GD

63

Table 4.3 (continued)

 

Response
Structured Interview Question Frequency
n = 10 Aff Cog Gross

Obs Exp Obs Difference

 

34. Those who had graduate training-

 

degree 4 (3) 2 +1-l NGD
non-degree 3 (6) 7 —3+1 -GD
Place of training—
in Michigan 3 (5) 6 —2+1 -GD
outside Michigan 4 (3) 3 +1 0 NGD
35. How finances supplied—

subject worked 4 (3) 4 +l+l NGD
G.I. Bill, and something

else 4 (4) 5 0+1 NGD
scholarship 2 (l) O +1—l NGD

36. Number of least difficult
college courses—
three or all 5 (3) 2 +2-l +GD

one or two 5 (7) 8 —2+1 —GD
38. Who influenced educational
development-
immediate family 5 (3) l +2-2 +GD-GD
educators 2 (4) 4 -2 0 -GD
self or situation 0 (l) 3 -1+2 +GD
combination 2 (1) 2 +l+l NGD

 

64

of more than 10,000 population. Two less than the expected
number of affectives did not belong to a high school clique.
Two less than the expected number of affectives received
their undergraduate training in the state of Michigan; two
more than the expected number received their undergraduate
training outside of Michigan. Two more than the expected
number of this group of affectives attended a college with
an enrollment of 1,000—9,999. Two more than the expected

number of affectives majored in English or social science, or

 

these areas and something else. Two less than the expected
number of affectives had previous graduate training. Of those
who had previous graduate training, three less than the
expected number were of non-degree status, and two less than
the expected number received their training in the state of
Michigan. Two more than the expected number of affectives
found three or more college courses least difficult (easy);
two less than the expected number found one or two college
courses least difficult. Two more than the expected number
of affectives indicated that their immediate family was most
influential in their educational development; two less than
the expected number indicated that educators were most
influential in their educational development.

Gross differences were found for the more cognitive

subjects in data relating to their educational development.

65
Three more than the expected number of cognitives attended
a high school located in a community of less than 10,000
population; three less attended a high school located in a
community of more than 10,000 population. Two more than the
expected number of cognitives did not belong to a high school
clique; two less (none) of the cognitives stated there were
no cliques in their high school. A Bachelor of Science degree

was earned by two more than the expected number of cognitives;

 

two less than the expected number earned a Bachelor of Arts
degree. Two more than the expected number of this group
majored in industrial arts or physical education; two less
majored in education, or education and some other area. Two
less than the expected number of cognitives stated that their
immediate family was most influential in their education
development; two more than the expected number stated that
they (self) or the situation was most influential in their
educational development.

No gross differences were found for this more cognitive
group in the data relating to high school enrollment size,
place and size of school of undergraduate training, and extent
and place of graduate training.

No gross differences were found for either group of
subjects for intimate high school friends, least and most

difficult or liked most and disliked high school subjects,

66
size of the community in which the undergraduate college
was located, amount of finances supplied, most difficult or
liked most and disliked college courses, and the reason for
the influence of the person in their educational development.

Gross differences for both the more affective and the
more cognitive groups relating to occupational involvement
are shown in Table 4.4.

Two more than the expected number of more affective
subjects stated that they based their decision to return or
not return to their former position on future job connections.
Two more than the expected number of affectives stated they
were members of the "gang" at work because they got along.
Two less than the expected number of affectives were very
greatly or considerably bothered if they did not find ready
acceptance into a group in which they were interested. Two
less than the expected number of this group stated that to a
great extent their occupation gave them a feeling of self-
fulfillment; two more than the expected number said it gave
considerable, some, or little self-fulfillment. Two more
than the expected number of affective subjects based this
answer on the fact that they were helping students, enjoyed
what they were doing, or it gave satisfaction. Two less than
the expected number of affectives stated it was very important

or meant a great deal to be in a position from which promotions

67

Table 4.4

Areas in Which Gross Differences for
Occupation Occurred

 

Response
Structured Interview Question Frequency
n = 10 Aff Cog Gross
Obs Exp Obs Difference

 

39. Return to former position-

yes 4 (5) 7 —1+2 +GD
no 2 (3) 2 -1—1 NGD
don't know 3 (2) 1 +l—l NGD
Reason—
direct or peripheral job
connections 5 (4) 7 —1+3 +GD
future job connections 4 (2) 0 +2—2 +GD—GD
negative 0 (l) 2 -1+1 NGD
42. Reason for ”gang" membership
in place of work—
1eader l (1) 0 0—1 NGD
professionally or socially
accepted 3 (4) 6 -1+2 +GD
got along 4 (2) l +2—1 +GD
not socially accepted 1 (l) l O 0 NGD
44. If not accepted, how much does
it bother-
very greatly or consid—
erably 2 (4) 6 —2+2 —GD+GD
some or not much 6 (5) 3 +1—2 —GD
45. a. Self—fulfillment—
great extent 1 (3) 3 -2 0 —GD
considerable, some, or
little 9 (7) 7 +2 0 +GD
b. Reason-
helping students, enjoy
what you are doing,
satisfaction 8 (6) 6 +2 0 +GD
invest in others 1 (2) 2 —l 0 NGD
negative 1 (1) l O O NGD

47. a. Meaning of position with
promotion—
very important, or means
a great deal 4 (6) 8 —2+2 —GD+GD

68

Table 4.4 (continued)

 

 

Response
Structured Interview Question Frequency
n = 10 Aff Cog Gross
Obs Exp Obs Difference
47. a. relatively minor con-
cern, not important
or of no importance 5 (3) l +2—2 +GD—GD
don't know 1 (1) 1 O O NGD
b. Reason—
accomplish something,
something to strive
for 0 (l) 3 —1+2 +GD
not interested 4 (3) l +1—2 -GD
48. Importance of job with a future—
most important aspect 5 (4) 3 +1—1 NGD
fairly important, not too
important 3 (6) 6 —3 0 —GD
49. Previous occupation experience-
teacher; teacher—counselor;
teacher and teacher—
counselor 4 (5) 4 -l-1 NGD
teacher-administrator;
teacher-counselor—
administrator 4 (l) 2 +3—1 +GD
teacher-other; administra—
tor—other 2 (3) 4 —l+l NGD
50. Work cuts down on time for
other things-
no time, little time 7 (5) 3 +2—2 +GD—GD
some time 2 (4) 6 —2+2 —GD+GD
much time, all I want 1 (1) l 0 O NGD
51. Work comes before family, in
practice-
very often or quite often 2 (3) 5 —1+2 +GD
seldom, almost never, or
never 4 (5) 4 —1-1 NGD
don't know 2 (l) O +1—1 NGD
52. Does it bother to place work
before family—
extremely, considerably 4 (2) 2 +2 0 +GD
somewhat, limited degree,
or never 4 (6) 7 -2+1 —GD
no response 2 (1) 1 +1 0 NGD

69

Table 4.4 (continued)

 

 

Response
Frequency
Aff Cog
Obs Obs

Structured Interview Question
n = 10 Gross

Exp Difference

53. How much does it bother you
when such a situation arises—
Very much, considerably
somewhat, not much, or
never
54. Importance of chance to be
creative-
absolute necessity,
a great deal
some importance,
importance
don't know
55. Came to be interested in
counseling-
relations with students,
teaching experiences,
concern for people
counseling opportunity,
academic courses, per-
sonal education experi-
ence
miscellaneous combinations

me ans

little

56. Decision to become counselor—
relations With students,

teaching experiences
academic courses,
opportunity, personal
education experiences
miscellaneous combinations
59. Best describes effective
counselor—
main interest in others,
feeling for others
self-description traits
feeling for others, and
some other trait

(\)

counseling

(4)
(6)

(5)

(4)
(1)

(4)

(3)
(2)

(2)

(6)
(2)

(2)
(1)

(4)

H

m

we.

ON

0+2

—4+2

+5-3
0+1

—l+2

+l-l

0+3

+GD

-GD

NGD

-GD
NGD

—GD+GD

+GD—GD
NGD

+GD

+GD—GD
NGD

NGD
NGD

+GD

70

Table 4.4 (continued)

 

 

Response
Structured Interview Question Frequency
n = 10 Aff Cog Gross
Obs Exp Obs Difference
60. Ultimate professional
objective—
specific job 8 (6) 7 +2+1 +GD
do the best I can, help
others 2 (3) 3 -l O NGD
61. Who influenced life career
choices—
immediate family 7 (5) 4 +2—1 +GD
educators, employers 2 (l) 1 +l—l NGD
self, situation, other 1 (3) 4 —2+1 —GD

 

71
were made; two more stated it was of a relatively minor con-
cern, not important, or was of no importance. Three less
than the expected number of these affectives reported that
it was fairly important, or not too important to have a job
which offered a future. Three more than the expected number
of affective subjects had previous occupational experience
which included teaching and administration or teaching,
counseling, and administration. Two more than the expected
number of affectives stated that their work left no time or
little time for other things; two less of the affectives stated
their work left some time for other things. Two more of the
affective group said it bothered them extremely or considerably
to have to place their work before their family; two less of
these subjects stated it bothered them somewhat, to a limited
degree, or never. The importance of having work which gave
them a chance to be creative was of some importance or little
importance to two less than the expected number of affective
subjects. Four less (none) of the affectives came to be
interested in counseling because of relations with students,
teaching experiences, or their concern for people; five more
than the expected number came to be interested because of the
opportunity to counsel, academic courses, and personal educa-
tional experiences. Two more than the expected number of

these subjects decided to become a counselor because of the

72
opportunity to counsel, academic courses, and personal educa-
tional experiences. Two more than the expected number of
affectives stated a specific job as their ultimate professional
objective. Two more than the expected number of this group
of subjects said their immediate family was most influential
in the development of their life career choices; two less
than the expected number stated the self, situation, or
others Were most influential in this development.

Gross differences in occupational involvement were
found for the more cognitive group with respect to the
following data. Two more than the expected number of cogni-
tive subjects were returning to their former position after
the Institute. Three more than the expected number of these
cognitives based their decision to return or not return on
direct or peripheral job connections; two less than the
expected number based their decision on future job connections.
Two more than the expected number of cognitives said they
were members of ”the gang” at work because they were profes—
sionally or socially accepted. Two more than the expected
number of this group of subjects were very greatly or con—
siderably bothered if they did not find ready acceptance into
a group in which they were interested; two less than the

expected number were bothered some or not much by this situa-

73
tion. To be in a position from which promotions were made
was very important or meant a great deal to two more than
the expected number of cognitive subjects; it was of a
relatively minor concern, not important compared to other
things, or of no importance to two less than the expected
number of cognitives. The importance was based on the fact
that it meant you had accomplished something, or it gave
something to strive for by two more than the expected number
of cognitive subjects. Two less than the expected number of
this group were not interested. Two less than the expected
number of cognitives stated that their work left no time or
little time for other things; two more than the expected
number said there was some time for other things. Two more
than the expected number of cognitives were bothered very
much or considerably when a situation arose and they had to
place their work before their family; two less than the
expected number said it bothered them somewhat, not too much,
or never. Two more than the expected number of cognitive
came to be interested in counseling because of their relations
with students, teaching experiences, or their concern for
people; three less than the expected number became interested
because of counseling opportunities, academic courses, or

personal education experiences. Two more than the expected

74
number of cognitives stated they decided to become a
counselor because of their relations with students, teaching
experiences; two less than the expected number of this group
decided to become a counselor because of counseling oppor-
tunities, academic courses, or personal education experi—
ences. Three more than the expected number of cognitive
subjects stated that a feeling for others, or this and some
other trait best described an effective counselor.

No gross differences were found for the more affective
group for data relating to the importance of a job with a
future, previous occupational experience, in practice that
work comes before the family, how much this bothers the sub-
ject, the importance of a chance to be creative, and the
person who was most influential in the development of the
subject's life career choices.

No gross differences were found for either group of
subjects for the data relating to occupation prior to the
Institute, whether the job gave a feeling of accomplishment
and in what way, how the people the subject worked with felt
about his becoming a counselor and why, whether he was con—
sidered to be one of ”the gang” at the place where he worked,
whether he wanted to be one of the gang and why, whether per-
sons were usually promoted from his position, the reason for

the importance of a job with a future, the way work cut down

75
on the time for other things, the reason for the importance
of a chance to be creative, job expectations, job aspira-
tions, and the way in which the person or persons influenced
the subject's life career choices.
Data relating to the fifth section, social relations,
are presented in Table 4.5. Gross differences were found for

both groups of subjects.

Table 4.5

Areas in Which Gross Differences for
Social Relations Occurred

 

Response
Structured Interview Question Frequency
n = 10 ‘ Aff Cog Gross
Obs Exp Obs Difference

 

62. Professional organization
membership-
education, subject areas,

and other 0 (1) 2 -l+l NGD
education and subject area 6 (4) 2 +2-2 +GD—GD
education only 2 (3) 5 —1+2 +GD
subject area or other only 2 (l) 0 +1—l NGD

64. Number of sparetime activities-

none or one 4 (3) 2 +l—1 NGD
two 2 (3) 5 -1+2 +GD
three or four 4 (4) 3 0-1 NGD

 

Two more than the expected number of more affective
subjects were members of education and subject area profes-

sional organizations.

76

No gross difference was found for this group for the
number of spare-time activities.

Two less than the expected number of more cognitive
subjects were members of education and subject area profes—
sional organizations; two more than the expected number were
members only of educational organizations. Two kind of
spare-time activities were engaged in by two more than the
expected number of cognitive subjects.

No gross differences were found for either the more
affectives or the more cognitives for data relating to
official positions in professional organizations, membership
in other organizations or official positions, close friends,
or acquaintances.

The data for section six on income are presented in
Table 4.6. No gross differences were found for any of the
data with respect to the more cognitive subjects.

Two more than the expected number of more affective
subjects stated money is really of considerable importance;
two less than the expected number of subjects stated money
was really important to a certain extent, of little importance,
or not important at all.

No gross differences were found for either group of

subjects for the data relating to the amount of total income,

77

Table 4.6

Areas in Which Gross Differences
for Income Occurred

 

Response
Structured Interview Question Frequency
n = 10 Aff Cog Gross
Obs Exp Obs Difference

 

69.

Importance of money- .
considerable importance 5 (3) 2 +2—1 +GD
important to a certain

extent, little impor-
tance, or not important
at all 5 (7) 6 —2—1 -GD

 

source of income, what the subject missed most that his last
income did not permit, the reason for the importance of
money, or the most important thing money can give a person.

Table 4.7 presents the data with respect to section
seven on success. No gross differences were found for any
of the data for the more cognitive subjects.

Two more than the expected number of more affective
subjects stated that success was of some importance, had
its place, or was of little importance in their life. Two
more than the expected number based the importance of success
on the fact that it gave a feeling of accomplishment.

No gross difference was found for either group for

the main thing success has to offer a person.

78

Table 4.7

Areas in Which Gross Differences
for Success Occurred

 

 

Response
Structured Interview Question Frequency
n = 10 Aff Cog Gross
Obs Exp Obs Difference

71. a. Importance of success-
most important thing 3 (4) 5 -l+l NGD
some importance, has
its place, little

importance 6 (4) 3 +2—1 +GD
miscellaneous combina-
tions 1 (2) 2 —1 0 NGD

b. Reason-
feeling of accomplish-

ment 4 (2) 2 +2 0 +GD
family provider 1 (2) 3 -l+l NGD
have to succeed, or

don't want to fail 5 (5) 4 0-1 NGD

 

Data for the question on status, section eight, are
presented in Table 4.8. No gross difference was found for
this data for the more cognitive group of subjects.

Two less than the expected number of more affective
subjects stated their reason for having a higher status than
their parents was sociologically based.

No gross difference was found for either group of
subjects for the data relating to Whether or not their status

was higher than that of their parents.

79

Table 4.8

Areas in Which Gross Differences
for Status Occurred

 

 

Response
Structured Interview Question Frequency
n = 10 Aff Cog Gross
Obs Exp Obs Difference

 

73. Way status is higher than

parents-
sociologically 3 (5) 6 —2+1 -GD
social status, power,or
style of life 2 (2) 1 0-1 NGD

 

Data relating to the ninth section on critical incident
are presented in Table 4.9. Gross differences were found for

both groups of subjects.

Table 4.9

Areas in Which Gross Differences for
Critical Incident Occurred

 

 

Response
Structured Interview Question Frequency
n = 10 ‘ Aff Cog GroSs
Obs Exp Obs Difference

 

74. Was there one most critical
incident in life—

yes 9 (8) 5 +l—3 —GD

no 1 (2) 5 -1+3 +GD
75. Degree of influence—

major factor 7 (4) 3 +3—l +GD

considerable, some or little 2 (3) 2 —l—1 NGD

 

80

Three less than the expected number of more cognitives
stated that there had been a critical incident in their life;
three more than the expected number stated there had not been
a critical incident in their life. There was no gross differ-
ence on this question for the more affective subjects. No
gross difference was found for either group of subjects for
the nature of the critical incident.

Three more than the expected number of more affectives
stated that if there had been a critical incident in their
life, it was of major influence. There was no gross differ—
ence on this question for the more cognitive subjects.

Data on religion, section ten, are presented in
Table 4.10. Gross differences appear for both the more
affective and the more cognitive groups.

Two less than the expected number of more affective
subjects had no early religious training; two more than the
expected number of affectives conceived of God as a definite
Being or described What He does; two less (none) than the
expected number conceived of God as an idea.

No gross difference was found for the more affectives
for the data relating to what they thought about the Bible,
or about immortality.

Two more than the expected number of more cognitives

received their early religious training in the church; three

 

 

 

81

Table 4.10

Areas in Which Gross Differences
for Religion Occurred

 

 

 

Response
Structured Interview Question Frequency
n = 10 Aff Cog Gross
Obs Exp Obs Difference
77. Early religious training—
none 0 (2) 2 -2 0 —GD
church 4 (3) 5 +l+2 +GD
combination of church,
home, or school 6 (6) 3 0-3 -GD
78. Conception of God-
definite Being, or described
What He does 7 (5) 2 +2-3 +GD—GD
idea 0 (2) 2 -2 0 -GD
indefinite or no idea 2 (2) 4 0+2 +GD
miscellaneous combinations 0 (l) 2 —1+1 NGD
79. a. Conception of Bible-
literal interpretation 4 (3) 2 +l—l NGD
human interpretation,
its uses, or technical
descriptions 4 (4) 6 0+2 +GD
negative reactions 1 (l) 0 0-1 NGD
miscellaneous combina-
tions 1 (2) 2 —1 0 NGD
b. Conception of immortality-
1itera1 acceptance 5 (5) 3 0-2 -GD
human interpretation or
uses 1 (1) l O O NGD
unsure 2 (3) 4 —1+1 NGD
negative reactions 1 (l) 2 0+1 NGD

 

82
less than the expected number received this training from
a combination of church, home, or school. Three less than
the expected number of cognitives conceived of God as a
definite Being, or described what He does; two more than
the expected number of cognitives were indefinite or had
no idea of God. Two more than the expected number of
cognitives gave a human interpretation, described the uses,
or gave technical descriptions of the Bible. Two less than
the expected number of cognitives gave a literal acceptance
to the concept of immortality.

No gross differences were found for either group of
subjects for church membership, denomination, monthly
services attended, whether a conflict exists between science
and religion, how religious the parents were, the religious
differences from the parents or from the spouse, parental
religious differences, whether the subject ever questioned

his religious beliefs, and which ones the subject questioned.

Part Two: Test Data
The tests are grouped with respect to scholastic
aptitude, personality variables, achievement, interest,
creative thinking ability, dogmatism, values, and self-concept.
Table 4.11 presents the expected and observed fre-

quencies and differences relating to scholastic aptitude for

 

83

Table 4.11

Areas in Which Gross Differences for
Scholastic Aptitude Occurred

 

Response
Test Frequency
n = 10 Aff Cog Gross
' Obs Exp Obs Difference

Ohio State University Psychological

Total 75-99%ile 6 (5) 4 +1—1 NGD
25-74 4 (5) 6 —1+1 NGD
0-24 0 (O) 0
Miller Analogies Test
75-99%i1e 3 (2) 2 +1 0 NGD
25—74 4 (3) 1 +1—2 -GD
0-24 3 (5) 7 —2+2 -GD+GD

 

the more affective and the more cognitive subjects.
No gross differences were found for either group of
subjects for the Ohio State University Psychological Test.

On the Miller Analogies Test, two less than the expected

 

number of cognitive subjects scored between the twenty-fifth
and seventy-fourth percentiles; two more than the expected
number of this group scored below the twenty-fourth percentile.
Two less than the expected number of affective subjects scored
below the twenty—fourth percentile.

The test data relating to specific personality vari-

ables are presented in Table 4.12. Data for the Minnesota

 

Multiphasic Personality Inventory are not included because

Areas in Which Gross Differences for

84

Table 4.12

Personality Variable Occurred

 

 

Response
Test Frequency
n = 10 Aff Cog Gross
Obs Exp Obs Difference
Minnesota Teacher Attitude
Inventory
75-99%ile 4 (3) 2 +1-1 NGD
25-74 5 (6) 7 -l+1 NGD
0—24 1 (1) l O O NGD
Guilford—Zimmerman Temperament
Survey
General Activity 75-99%ile 4 (4) 4 O O NGD
25-74 4 (3) 3 +1 0 NGD
0-24 2 (3) 3 -l O NGD
Restraint 75—99%ile 3 (2) 1 +1—l NGD
25-74 6 (7) 8 -l+1 NGD
0-24 2 (l) 1 +1 0 NGD
Ascendance 75-99%ile 4 (3) 2 +l—1 NGD
25—74 4 (5) 5 -l 0 NGD
0-24 2 (2) 3 0+1 NGD
Sociability 75—99%ile 4 (4) 2 0-2 -GD
25-74 6 (5) 6 +1+l NGD
0-24 0 (l) 2 -1+1 NGD
Emotional Stability 75-99%i1e 5 (4) 2 +1-2 —GD
25—74 4 (5) 7 -l+2 +GD
0-24 1 (l) 1 0 O NGD
Objectivity 75—99%ile 5 (5) 4 0-1 NGD
25-74 4 (5) 6 -l+l NGD
0—24 1 (l) 0 0-1 NGD
Friendliness 75-99%ile 2 (4) 5 —2+1 -GD
25-74 6 (5) 4 +1-1 NGD
0-24 2 (l) 1 +1 0 NGD
Thoughtfulness 75—99%i1e 5 (4) 4 +1+l NGD
25—74 4 (4) 3 0—1 NGD
0—24 1 (2) 2 -1 O NGD

85

Table 4.12 (continued)

 

 

Response
Test Frequency
n = 10 Aff Cog Gross
Obs Exp Obs Difference
Personal Relations 75-99%i1e 3 (4) 4 -l O NGD
25—74 5 (4) 6 +1+2 +GD
0-24 2 (l) 0 +1-1 NGD
Masculinity 75—99%ile l (l) l O O NGD
25-74 9 (6) 6 +3+1 +GD
0—24 0 (3) 2 —3-1 -GD
Edwards Personal Preference
Schedule
Achievement 75-99%i1e 6 (3) 4 +3+1 +GD
25—74 2 (4) 5 —2+1 —GD
0—24 2 (3) 1 —1—2 -GD
Deference 75-99%ile 7 (4) 5 +3+1 +GD
25-74 3 (6) 4 -3—2 -GD-GD
0—24 0 (1) 1 -l O NGD
Order 75-99%ile 5 (4) 4 +1 0 NGD
25-74 4 (5) 6 —1+1 NGD
0-24 1 (l) 0 0—1 NGD
Exhibition 75—99%ile 3 (2) 3 +l+l NGD
25-74 5 (5) 3 0-2 -GD
0-24 2 (3) 4 -l+l NGD
Autonomy 75—99%i1e 1 (l) 2 0+1 NGD
25-74 8 (5) 4 +3—l +GD
0-24 1 (3) 4 —2+1 -GD
Affiliation 75-99%ile l (3) 2 -2—1 -GD
25—74 5 (5) 7 0+2 +GD
0—24 4 (2) 1 +2-1 +GD
Intraception 75—99%i1e 5 (4) 2 +l-2 -GD
25-74 5 (5) 7 0+2 +GD
0-24 0 (1) l —1 O NGD
Succorance 75-99%ile O (2) 2 —2 0 —GD
25-74 5 (4) 4 +1 0 NGD
0-24 5 (4) 4 +1 0 NGD
Dominance 75-99%i1e 3 (2) 2 +1 0 NGD
25—74 4 (5) 5 —1 0 NGD
0—24 3 (3) 3 O O NGD

 

86

Table 4.12 (continued)

 

 

 

 

Response
Test Frequency
n = 10 Aff Cog Gross
Obs Exp Obs Difference
Abasement 75—99%ile 2 (3) 6 -l+3 +GD
25-74 5 (5) 2 0-3 -GD
0-24 3 (2) 2 +1 0 NGD
Nurturance 75—99%i1e 2 (3) 3 —2 O NGD
25-74 6 (5) 6 +1+1 NGD
0-24 2 (l) 1 +1 0 NGD
Change 75—99%ile 5 (3) 3 +2 0 +GD
25—74 3 (6) 6 -3 0 —GD
0-24 2 (1) 1 +1 0 NGD
Endurance 75-99%i1e 5 (4) 2 +l-2 -GD
25-74 3 (5) 6 —2+1 ~GD
0-24 2 (1) 2 +1+1 NGD
Heterosexuality 75-99%i1e l (1) 0 0—1 NGD
25-74 5 (5) 5 0 0 NGD
0—24 4 (4) 5 0+1 NGD
Aggression 75—99%ile 3 (2) O +1-2 -GD
25-74 3 (5) 7 -2+2 —GD+GD
0—24 4 (4) 3 0~1 NGD

 

 

87
it was used for research purposes at the beginning of the
Institute.
No gross differences were found for either group of

subjects for the Minnesota Teacher Attitude Inventory.

 

Gross differences for both the more affectives and

the more cognitives were found on the Guilford—Zimmerman

 

Temperament Survey for the traits of "Sociability,"

 

"Emotional Stability," "Friendliness,” and "Masculinity."

"Sociability" is described as having many friends and
acquaintances, entering into conversations, liking social
activities, seeking social contact, and seeking limelight.

Two less than the expected number of cognitive subjects
scored above the seventy-fifth percentile.

On "Emotional Stability” (evenness of moods, interests,
energy, etc., optimism, cheerfulness, composure, feeling in
good health), two less than the expected number of cognitives
scored above the seventy—fifth percentile; two more than the
expected number of these subjects scored between the twenty-
fifth and seventy-fourth percentiles.

On ”Personal Relations" (tolerance of people), two
more than the expected number of cognitive subjects scored
between the twenty-fifth and seventy-fourth percentiles.

Two less than the expected number of affective subjects

scored above the seventy—fidh percentile on "Friendliness"

 

 

88
(tolerator of hostile action, acceptance of domination, respect
for others).

On "Masculinity" (interest in masculine activities and
vocations, not easily disgusted, hardboiled, resistant to
fear, inhibition of emotional expressions, little interest in
clothes and styles), three more than the expected number of
affectives scored between the twenty—fifth and seventy—fourth
percentiles; three less than the expected number of this
group scored below the twenty—fourth percentile.

No gross differences were found for either group of
subjects for the traits of "General Activity" (rapid pace of
activities, energy, vitality), ”Restraint" (serious—mindedness,
self-control, deliberate), "Ascendance" (self—defense, leader-
ship habits, speaking With individuals), “Objectivity" (being
"thick-skinned"), and "Thoughtfulness" (reflectiveness,
observing of behavior in others, interested in thinking,
philosophically inclined).

Gross differences were found on the Edwards Personal

 

Preference Schedule for both groups of subjects. Gross differ-

 

ences for the affective group were found for the needs of
"Achievement,” "Deference," "Autonomy,” "Affiliation,” "Suc-
corance," "Change," "Endurance," and ”Aggression."

18
"Achievement" is described in the Edwards' Manual as

89
to do one's best, to be successful, to accomplish tasks
requiring skill and effort, to solve problems. Three more
than the expected number of affectives scored above the
seventy-fifth percentile; two less than the expected number
scored between the twenty-fifth and seventy-fourth percentiles.

On ”Deference" (to get suggestions from others, to find
out what others think, to conform to custom and avoid the
unconventional), three more than the expected number of affec-
tives scored above the seventy-fifth percentile; three less
than the expected number scored between the twenty—fifth and
seventy-fourth percentiles.

On "Autonomy" (to be independent of others in making
decisions, to do things that are unconventinal, to avoid
situations where one is expected to conform, to avoid
responsibilities and obligations), three more than the expected
number of affective subjects scored between the twenty-fifth
and seventy-fourth percentiles; two less than the expected
number scored below the twenty-fourth percentile.

On "Affiliation" (to participate in friendly groups,
to make as many friends as possible, to share things with
friends rather than alone, to form strong attachments), two
less than the expected number of affectives scored above the
seventy—fifth percentile; two more than the expected number

of this group scored below the twenty-fourth percentile.

90

Two less than the expected number of affectives scored
above the seventy—fifth percentile on ”Succorance” (to have
others provide help when in trouble, to have others be
sympathetic and understanding about personal problems, to
be helped by others when depressed.

On ”Change” (to do new and different things, to experi-
ment and try new things, to try new and different jobs, to
move about the country and live in different places), two
more than the expected number of affective subjects_scored
above the seventy-fifth percentile; three less than the
expected number of this group scored between the twenty-fifth
and seventy—fourth percentiles.

On ”Endurance" (to keep at a job until it is finished,
to keep at a puzzle or problem until it is solved, to work
at a single job before taking others, to stick at a problem
even though it may seem as if no progress is being made), two
less than the expected number of affectives scored between the
twenty—fifth and seventy-fourth percentiles.

Two less than the expected number of affectives scored
between the twenty-fifty and seventy-fourth percentiles on
”Aggression" (to attack contrary points of view, to tell
others what one thinks of them, to get revenge for insults).

Gross differences were found for the more cognitive

group of subjects for the needs of "Achievement,“ "Deference,"

91
"Exhibition," "Affiliation,” "Intraception,” "Abasement,"
”Endurance,” and "Aggression."

Two less than the expected number of cognitive sub—
jects scored below the twenty-fourth percentile for "Achieve-
ment.”

Two less than the expected number of cognitives scored
between the twenty—fourth and seventy—fifth percentiles on
"Deference."

On ”Exhibition" (to say witty and clever things, to
talk about personal adventures and experiences, to be the
center of attention), two less than the expected number of
cognitives scored between the twenty—fourth and seventy—fifth
percentiles.

Two more than the expected number of cognitive subjects
scored between the twenty-fifth and seventy-fourth percentiles
on "Affiliation.”

On ”Intraception” (to analyze one's motives and feelings,
to observe others, to understand how others feel about prob-
1ems, to put one's self in another's place, to judge people
by why they do things rather than by what they do, to analyze
the behavior of others, to analyze the motives of others, to
analyze how others will act), two less than the expected

number of cognitives scored above the seventy—fifth percentile;

92
two more than the expected number in this group scored
between the twenty-fifth and seventy—fourth percentiles.

On "Abasement" (to feel guilty when one does some—
thing wrong, to accept blame when things do not go right, to
feel the need for punishment for wrong doing, to feel better
when giving in and avoiding a fight than when having one's
own way, to feel depressed by inability to handle situations,
to feel timid in the presence of superiors, to feel inferior
to others in most respects), three more than the expected
number of cognitives scored above the seventy-fifth percentile;
three less than the expected number scored between the twenty-
fifth and seventy—fourth percentiles.

Two less than the expected number of cognitives scored
above the seventy-fifth percentile on "Endurance."

Two less than the expected number of cognitive subjects
scored above the seventy—fifth percentile, and two more than
the expected number of this group scored between the twenty-
fifth and seventy—fourth percentiles on ”Aggression."

No gross differences were found for the manifest needs
of "Order,” ”Dominance," "Nurturance,” and "Heterosexuality."

Test data on achievement in guidance and counseling

are presented in Table 4.13 for the National Defense Education

 

Act Comprehensive. No gross difference was found on any of

 

the six subtests for the more affective group of subjects.

93

Table 4.13

Areas in Which Gross Differences for Achievement Occurred

 

 

Response
Test Frequency
= 10 Aff Cog Gross
Obs Exp Obs Difference
National Defense Education Act
Comprehensive
Test 1 75—99%ile 1 (2) 4 —l+3 +GD
25—74 9 (8) 6 +l-2 —GD
0-24 0 (0) 0
Test 2 75—99%ile O (O) 0
25—74 10 (10) 10 0 O NGD
0-24 0 (O) 0
Test 3 75—99%ile 0 (O) 0
25-74 10 (10) 10 0 0 NGD
0-24 0 (0) 0
Test 4 75-99%ile l (0) 0 +1 0 NGD
25—74 9 (10) 10 —l 0 NGD
0-24 0 (0) 0
Test 5 75-99%ile O (O) 0
25-74 10 (10) 10 O 0 NGD
0-24 0 (0) 0
Test 6 75—99%ile 2 (l) 1 +1 0 NGD
25-74 8 (9) 9 -l 0 NGD
0-24 0 (0) 0

 

 

94
Gross differences were found for the more cognitive
group of subjects only on Test 1. Three more than the
expected number of cognitives scored above the seventy-fifth
percentile; two less than the expected number of this group
scored between the twenty—fifth and seventy-fourth percentiles.

Test data relating to the Strong Interest Test are

 

presented in Table 4.14. Scores were divided into primary
and secondary interests.

Gross differences in primary interests for the more
affective group of subjects were found in Groups IV, V, and
VIII.

In Group IV, three more than the expected number of
affective subjects indicated primary interests similar to
carpenters; three more than the expected number indicated
interests similar to mathematics or physical science teachers;
and two more than the expected number in this group indicated
interests similar to vocational agriculture teachers.

In Group V, two more than the expected number of
affectives indicated primary interests similar to public
administrators; five more than the expected number indicated
interests similar to social science high school teachers; two
less than the expected number indicated interests similar to
social workers; and two less than the expected number of

affectives indicated primary interests similar to ministers.

95

Table 4

.14

Areas in Which Gross Differences for Interest Occurred

 

 

Response
Test Frequency
n = 10 Aff Cog Gross
Obs Exp Obs Difference
Strong Vocational Interest Test
Primary
Group I Artist 0 (O) 0
Psychologist l (2) l -l-l NGD
Architect 0 (1) 1 -l O NGD
Physician l (2) 1 -1-1 NGD
Osteopath 2 (3) 4 -l+1 NGD
Dentist 0 (0) 1 0+1 NGD
Veterinarian 1 (1) l O O NGD
Group II Mathematician O (0) O
Physicist O (O) 0
Engineer 0 (O) 1 0+1 NGD
Chemist O (O) 1 0+1 NGD
Group III Production Manager 1 (O) 0 +1 0 NGD
Group IV Farmer 2 (l) 2 +1+1 NGD
Aviator 2 (l) 2 +1+1 NGD
Carpenter 3 (0) 0 +3 0 +GD
Printer 1 (1) 1 0 O NGD
Math, phys sci
teacher 5 (2) l +3—1 +GD
Ind arts teacher 1 (l) 2 0+1 NGD
Voc agr teacher 4 (2) l +2—l +GD
Policeman l (l) l 0 0 NGD
Forest service
man 1 (l) 0 0-1 NGD
Group V YMCA phys director 2 (2) 2 0 O NGD
Personnel director 4 (4) 3 0—1 NGD
Public adminis-
trator 7 (5) 4 +2-1 +GD
YMCA Secretary 1 (2) 0 -l-2 -GD
Soc sci hs teacherl2 (7) 2 +5-5 +GD-GD
City school supt l (1) 0 0—1 NGD
Social worker 2 (4) 2 —2-2 -GD-GD
Minister 0 (2) 0 —2-2 —GD—GD

96

Table 4.14 (continued)

 

 

 

 

Response
Test Frequency
n = 10 Aff Cog Gross
Obs Exp Obs Difference
Group VI Musician (per—
former) 2 (3) 2 -l—l NGD
Group VII CPA O (O) 0
Group VIII Senior CPA 2 (l) 0 +l—1 NGD
Accountant 1 (l) 0 0—1 NGD
Office man 7 (3) 0 +4—3 +GD-GD
Purchasing agent 0 (0) 0 ~
Banker l (O) 0 +1 0 NGD
Mortician 2 (2) 2 0 0 NGD
Pharmacist l (0) 0 +1 0 NGD
Group IX Sales manager 2 (l) 1 +1 0 NGD
Real estate sales—
man 2 (2) 4 0+2 +GD
Life insurance
salesman 2 (2) 3 0+1 NGD
Group X Advertising man 2 (l) O +1-l NGD
Lawyer 2 (l) O +l-l NGD
Author—journalist O (O) 0
Group XI President — mfg
concern 0 (0) 0
Secondary
Group I Artist . l (1) l 0 O NGD
Psychologist 2 (2) 3 0+1 NGD
Architect 1 (2) 2 -1 0 NGD
Physician 2 (4) 6 —2+2 —GD+GD
Osteopath 6 (5) 3 +l—2 —GD
Dentist l (4) 4 -3 0 -GD
Veterinarian 0 (2) 2 -2 0 -GD
Group II Mathematician 0 (1) 3 —1+2 +GD
Physicist 0 (1) 2 —l+l NGD
Engineer 0 (l) l -l 0 NGD
Chemist 0 (2) 2 —2 0 -GD
Group III Production manager 4 (5) 6 —1+1 NGD
Group IV Farmer 5 (4) 4 +1 0 NGD
Aviator 5 (4) 4 +1 0 NGD
Carpenter 1 (2) 3 —1+1 NGD

97

Table 4.14 (continued)

 

 

Response
Test Frequency
n = 10 Aff Cog Gross
Obs Exp Obs Difference
Printer 8 (7) 7 +1 0 NGD
Math, phys sci
teacher 5 (6) 7 -1+1 NGD
Ind arts teacher 6 (l) 1 +5 0 +GD
Voc agr teacher 6 (5) 6 +1+1 NGD
Policeman 7 (6) 7 +1+1 NGD
Forest service
man 1 (3) 5 -2+2 -GD+GD
Group V YMCA phys director 6 (6) 6 O O NGD
Personnel director 6 (5) 4 +1-1 NGD
Public adminis—
trator 2 (4) 4 -2 0 -GD
YMCA secretary 9 (6) 6 +3 0 +GD
Soc sci hs teacher 0 (2) 4 -2+2 -GD+GD
City school supt 8 (6) 5 +2—l +GD
Social worker 7 (5) 6 +2+1 +GD
Minister 6 (3) l +3+2 +GD+GD
Group VI Musician (per—
former) 6 (5) 7 +l+2 +GD
Group VII CPA 5 (4) 2 +1-2 -GD
Group VIII Senior CPA 7 (7) 9 0+2 +GD
Accountant 7 (4) 2 +3-2 +GD-GD
Office man 2 (4) 7 -2+3 —GD+GD
Purchasing agent 4 (4) 4 0 O NGD
Banker 7 (6) 6 +1 0 NGD
Mortician 6 (4) 5 +2+l +GD
Pharmacist 5 (6) 7 —1+1 NGD
Group IX Sales manager 3 (3) 5 0+2 +GD
Real estate sales-
man 6 (5) 3 +l-2 -GD
Life insurance
salesman 6 (5) 4 +1—1 NGD
Group X Advertising man 3 (4) 7 —l+3 +GD
Lawyer 3 (6) 8 -3+2 -GD+GD
Author-journalist 5 (6) 6 —1 0 NGD
Group XI President — mfg
concern 5 (4) 4 +1 0 NGD

 

98

In Group VIII, four more than the expected number of
affective subjects indicated primary interests similar to
office men.

No gross differences of primary interests for the more
affective subjects were found for Groups I, II, III, VI, VII,
X, and XI.

Gross differences in primary interests were found for
the more cognitive subjects in Groups V, VIII, and IX.

In Group V, two less than the expected number of cog—
nitive subjects indicated primary interests similar to YMCA
secretaries; five less than the expected number of subjects
indicated interests similar to social science high school
teachers; two less than the expected number indicated inter-
ests similar to social workers; and two less than the expected
number of cognitives indicated primary interests similar to
ministers.

In Group VIII, three less than the expected number of
cognitives indicated primary interests similar to office men.

In Group IX, two more than the expected number of
cognitive subjects indicated primary interests similar to
real estate salesmen.

No gross differences in primary interests were found
for the more cognitive subjects for Groups I, II, III, IV,

VI, VII, x, and XI.

99

Gross differences of secondary interests were found
for the more affectives for Groups I, II, IV, V, VIII, and X.

In Group 1, two less than the expected number of
affective subjects indicated secondary interests similar to
physicians or veterinarians; three less than the expected
number in this group indicated interests similar to dentists.

In Group II, two less than the expected number of
affectives indicated secondary interests similar to chemists.

In Group IV, five more than the expected number of
affective subjects indicated secondary interests similar to
industrial arts teachers; two less than the expected number
in this group indicated interests similar to forest service
men.

In Group V, two less than the expected number of
affectives indicated secondary interests similar to public
administrators and social science high school teachers; two
more than the expected number of affectives indicated inter-
ests similar to city school superintendents and social work—
ers; three more than the expected number of affective subjects
indicated secondary interests similar to YMCA secretaries and
ministers.

In Group VIII, three more than the expected number of

affectives indicated a secondary interest similar to accountants;

100
two more than the expected number of these subjects indicated
interests similar to morticians; two less than the expected
number of affective subjects indicated secondary interests
similar to office men.

In Group X, three less than the expected number of
affectives indicated secondary interests similar to lawyers.

No gross differences of secondary interests were found
for the more affective group of subjects in Groups III, VI,
and XI.

Gross differences for secondary interests were found
for the more cognitive subjects in Groups I, II, IV, V, VI,
VII, VIII, IX, and X.

In Group 1, two more than the expected number of cog—
nitive subjects indicated secondary interests similar to
physicians; two less than the expected number of cognitives
indicated interests similar to osteopaths.

In Group II, two more than the expected number of
cognitive subjects indicated secondary interests similar to
mathematicians.

Two more than the expected number of cognitives
indicated secondary interests similar to forest service men
in Group IV.

In Group V, two more than the expected number of cog-

nitives indicated secondary interests similar to social science

101
high school teachers and ministers.

Two more than the expected number of cognitive sub-
jects indicated secondary interests similar to musicians
(performers), Group VI.

Two less than the expected number of cognitive sub-
jects indicated secondary interests similar to CPA's,

Group VII.

In Group VIII, two more than the expected number of
cognitives indicated secondary interests similar to senior
CPA's; two less than the expected number indicated interests
similar to accountants; and three more than the expected
number indicated secondary interests similar to office men.

In Group IX, two more than the expected number of
cognitives indicated secondary interests similar to sales
managers; two less subjects in this group indicated interests
similar to real estate salesmen.

In Group X, three more than the expected number of
cognitives indicated secondary interests similar to advertis-
ing men; two more than the expected number of this group of
subjects indicated secondary interests similar to lawyers.

No gross differences in secondary interests were found
for the more cognitive group of subjects for Groups III and XI.

Table 4.15 presents the test data relating to the

Tests of Fluency, Flexibility and Originality.

 

Areas in Which Gross Differences for

102

Table 4.15

Creative Thinking Occurred

 

 

 

Response
Test Frequency
n = 10 Aff Cog Gross
Obs Exp Obs Difference
Tests of Fluency, Flexibility and
Originality
Word Fluency 75-99%ile 4 (3) 3 +1 0 NGD
25-74 5 (5) 3 0-2 -GD
0—24 1 (2) 4 —l+2 +GD
Associational
Fluency 75—99%ile 8 (6) 6 +2 0 +GD
25-74 1 (3) 3 -2 0 -GD
0—24 1 (0) l +1+1 NGD
Ideational Fluency 75-99%ile 9 (9) 9 O O NGD
25-74 1 (1) 1' 0 0 NGD
0—24 0 (O) 0
Expressional
Fluency 75-99%ile 7 (8) 7 —l—l NGD
25-74 3 (2) 3 +1+1 NGD
0-24 0 (0) 0
Alternate Uses 75-99%i1e 6 (4) 2 +2—2 +GD—GD
25-74 1 (3) 5 -2+2 -GD+GD
0-24 3 (3) 3 0 O NGD
Consequences:
ideational
fluency 75-99%i1e 8 (6) 8 +2+2 +GD+GD
25-74 2 (3) 1 -1—2 —GD
0—24 0 (O) 1 0+1 NGD
originality 75-99%ile 1' (1) 0 0-1 NGD
25-74 3 (3) 2 0-1 NGD
0-24 6 (7) 8 -1+1 NGD

 

103

Gross differences were found for the more affective
group on Associational Fluency, Alternate Uses, and on Conse—
quences for the factor of ideational fluency.

On Associational Fluency (the ability to produce
rapidly words from a restricted area of meaning), two more
than the expected number of affective subjects scored above
the seventy-fifth percentile; two less than the expected
number of this group scored between the twenty-fifth and
seventy—fourth percentiles.

On Alternate Uses (the ability to produce a variety of
class ideas in connection with an object or other unit of
thought), two more than the expected number of affective sub-
jects scored above the seventy-fifth percentile; two less than
the expected number in this group scored between the twenty-
fifth and seventy—fourth percentiles.

On Consequences for the factor of ideational fluency
(the ability to call up many ideas in a situation in which
there is little restriction and quality does not count), two
more than the expected number of affectives scored above the
seventy—fifth percentile.

No gross differences were found for the more affective
subjects for the tests of Word Fluency, Ideational Fluency,
Expressional Fluency, and for the factor of originality on

the Consequences test.

104

Gross differences for the more cognitives were found
for the tests of Word Fluency, Alternate Uses, and for the
factor of ideational fluency on the Consequences test.

On Word Fluency (the ability to produce rapidly words
fulfilling specified symbolic [letter] properties), two less
than the expected number of cognitives scored between the
twenty—fifth and seventy-fourth percentiles; two more than
the expected number of this group scored below the twenty-
fourth percentile.

Two less than the expected number of cognitive scored
above the seventy—fifth percentile, and two more scored
between the twenty-fifth and seventy-fourth percentiles on
Alternate Uses.

Two more than the expected number of cognitives
scored above the seventy—fifth percentile, and two less scored
between the twenty-fifth and seventy—fourth percentiles on
the factor of ideational fluency on the Consequences test.

No gross differences were found for the more cognitive
group on the tests of Associational Fluency, Ideational
Fluency, Expressional Fluency, and for the factor of origin—
ality on the Consequences test.

Table 4.16 presents the test data relating to The

Dogmatism Scale.

 

 

 

 

 

105

Table 4.16

Areas in Which Gross Differences for Dogmatism Occurred

 

 

Response
Test ' Frequency
n = 10 Aff Cog Gross
Obs Exp Obs Difference

The Dogmatism Scale

Range: +19 to —73 -4 +19 +16 Aff: 1 l std dev
Median: —16 to to to

Mean: —24.4 -49 -73 ~73 Cog: t 2 std dev
s: 22.9

 

The more affective group of subjects scored within
plus or minus one standard deviation from the mean. The
more cognitive subjects scored within plus or minus two
standard deviations from the mean.

Test data relating to The Study of Values are presented

 

in Table 4.17. Scores were divided into outstandingly high,
outstandingly low, high, and low categories.

A gross difference was found for the more affective
group in the high category. Two less than the expected number
of affectives scored high on the Religious motive (seeing high
value in unity)

No gross difference was found in any of the motives
for this group in the outstandingly high, outstandingly low,

or low categories.

Areas in Which Gross Differences for Values Occurred

106

Table 4.17

 

 

 

 

Response
Test Frequency
n = 10 Aff Cog Gross
_ Obs Exp Obs Difference
The Study of Values
Outstandingly
high Theoretical 1 (l) 1 O O NGD

Economic 0 (O) O
Aesthetic 2 (1) 0 +1—1 NGD
Social 1 (2) O —l-2 —GD
Political O (0) 0
Religious 1 (2) l -l-l NGD

Outstandingly

low Theoretical 0 (0) 0

Economic l (2) 0 —l-2 —GD
Aesthetic O (O) 1 0+1 NGD
Social 0 (O) 1 0+1 NGD
Political l (l) l 0 O NGD
Religious 1 (l) 1 0 O NGD

High Theoretical O (l) 2 -1+1 NGD
Economic 2 (1) 1 +1 0 NGD
Aesthetic l (l) 1 0 0 NGD
Social 4 (3) 4 +1+1 NGD
Political O (l) 2 '—l+1 NGD
Religious 0 (2) 3 —2+1 -GD

Low Theoretical l (2) 2 —l 0 NGD
Economic O (1) 2 —l+1 NGD
Aesthetic 2 (2) 1 0-1 NGD
Social 0 (O) 1 0+1 NGD
Political 2 (2) 1 0—1 NGD
Religious 2 (1) 0 +1-1 NGD

 

107

A gross difference was found in the outstandingly high
category for the more cognitive group of subjects. Two less
than the expected number of cognitives scored outstandingly
high on the "Social” motive (1233 of people; the altruistic
or philanthropic aspect of live; the social man prizes other
persons as ends).

Two less than the expected number of cognitive subjects
scored outstandingly low on the ”Economic" motive (interested
in what is useful; thoroughly "practical" and conforming Well
to the prevailing stereotype of the average American business-
man).

No gross differences were found for the more cognitive
subjects for high or low categories.

Test data relating to The Twenty—Statements Problem

 

(Who Am I?) are presented in Table 4.18. The criterion for

 

gross difference was established at 20 per cent of the
expected frequency to more adequately reflect the increase
in the number of possible responses. This was considered
comparable to a gross difference of plus or minus two between
the expected frequency and the observed frequency. The test
was administered once in September 1962, and again in March
1963.

Gross differences were found for Categories A and C

of the test for administration one (September 1962) for the

108

Table 4.18

Areas in Which Gross Differences for Self—Concept Occurred

 

 

Response
Test Frequency
n = 10 Aff Cog Gross
Obs Exp Obs Difference

 

The Twenty-Statements Problem

(Who Am I?)
September 1962 Category A 10 (8) 6 +2-2 +GD—GD
Category B 49 (59) 63 -10+4 NGD
,Category C 18 ‘ (15) 18 +3+3 +GD+GD
'Category D 19 (16) 13 +3-3 NGD
Incomplete
Response 4 (l) 0 +3-1 +GD-GD
March 1963 Category A 5 (4) 5 +1+1 +GD+GD
Category B 75 (81) 80 -6-1 NGD
Category C 15 (9) 8 +6—l +GD
Category D 5 (5) 7 0+2 +GD
Incomplete
Response 0 (1) 0 -1-1 NGD

 

more affective group of subjects.

Two more than the expected number of responses of the
affective subjects identified the self in Category A (identifi—
cation of the self by physical attributes and other objective
information; no other person necessary for validation of the
self, e.g. “Mary Smith: 'I have blue eyes.’ 'I live in Kansas
City.'")

Three more than the expected number of responses of

the affectives identified the self in Category C (abstract

109
statements that transcend specific social situations; action
responses that do not pin the respondent down to specific
behaviors but leave him free to behave in various ways in
various situations While maintaining his style, e.g. "I am
a good father;" "I believe in God;” ”I am a friendly person.")

Three more than the expected number of responses of
the more affectives did not complete the identification of
the self.

No gross difference was found for the more affective
subjects for Categories B and D.

On this first administration of the test, gross
differences were found for the more cognitive subjects for
Categories A and C. Two less than the expected number of
responses of the cognitives identified the self in Category A;
three more identified the self in Category C.

No gross difference was found for the more cognitive
subjects for Categories B, D, and the Incomplete Response
Category.

On the second administration of the test, gross
differences were found for the more affective subjects for
Categories A, C, and the Incomplete Response Category.

One less than the expected number of responses of the
more affectives identified the self in Category A; six more

identified the self in Category C.

 

110

No gross differences were found for the more affective
subjects for Categories B, D, and the Category of Incomplete
Response.

A gross difference was found on the second administra-
tion of the test for the more cognitive subjects for Cate—
gories A and D. One more than the expected number of responses
of the more cognitive subjects identified the self in Cate—
gory A; two more than the expected number of the more cogni-
tives identified the self in Category D (statements which
do not lead to a socially meaningful differentiation of the
self; so vague they lead to no reliable expectations about
behavior; statements which deny the question, ”Who Am I?"
e.g. ”I am a thinking individual;” "I am a human being;”

"I am a child of God.”)

No gross differences were found for the more cognitive
subjects for Categories B, C, and the Incomplete Response
Category.

The number of responses in Category A decreased from
the first administration to the second administration of the
test for both the more affective and the more cognitive sub-
jects.

The number of responses in Category B increased from

the first administration to the second administration of the

 

 

111
test for both the more affective and the more cognitive
subjects.

The number of responses in Category C decreased from
the first administration to the second administration of the
test for both the more affective and the more cognitive sub—
jects.

The number of responses in Category D decreased from
the first administration to the second administration of the
test for both the more affective and the more cognitive sub—

jects.

Summary of Social and Personality Characteristics

Each of the questions in the structured interview
schedule was coded according to one or more of the following
concepts: rural—urban, localite—cosmopolite, status, familism,
type of involvement (social, occupational, educational,
religious), awareness, referent.

A summary of these concepts and the social character—
istics is presented in Table 4.19.

Gross differences appear for both the more affective
and the more cognitive subjects with respect to the rural-
urban, localite-cosmopolite, status, familism, social,
occupational and educational involvement, religion and referent

concepts. Although gross differences appear for both groups

2
l
l

manna Honum>

pad HMUflmkfim I mafiamwomflm
hpwocon one SPSHP "Hoseow

I HoHfiEHmmfip ”modam> Hoecwuom
downy I mmeHoo 09 unflom

muommn Umnonm wwfipfl>fipoo Saflfiom
I 039 H0 0C0 I SHHEmM

m.eomhnom an COHUHHQU H0 HobESZ

ommaaoo

I nonpow mo Ho>oa HoCOfieoosom
momm3

I unseen Mo oEooce mo condom
Hoosom goes I

mmsflabflm Mo Ho>oH HoCOHpoonom
Spflcsafioo Honsu
Ce pmpoooa Hoonom nae:

I HMOOH "mafieewm HoCOHemospm

Ho>onmdomfio Ho
momoafi>fium >636 x009 muonpofi
SQ pmHonfiCHEUm I mafiaafiomflm
nmupaeno poo oEo: .Safieow
I mmaflaflm Homoeo> anaconda

039 I wmoaaoo 09 mcfiom
onommn pouonm mowefl>fleoo SHHEME
ococ I SHHEMH

n.900hflnw an coupdflso m0 HmQESZ

HoHHoo opfln3
I mpconom m0 Ho>oH Hoc0fiemmdooo
coewmflaaoo H0 kuoamm
I nonpow no oBOOCfi M0 mousom
mmoHHoo
I mmCHHQfim mo Ho>oH HoCOMHoonom
SeHCSEEOO Genus CH
nopoooa Hoosom goes I sop
Iflfiomoamoo ”onepeom HMCOHeoonom

Seacoasoo
Conn: I mooamcenfln w.um£eom

ameaeeoe

meflaomoEmooImeHHmooq

soQHSIHoHum

 

o>flpficmoo

o>eeoonn<

monouomwfin mmouo

woeemfiumpoouoco Hmfioom mo Sumessm

GH.W OHQMH

emoocoo

 

SHCO
mCOflPoNflcomuo coweoosno I mflnm
IHoDSoE soapoNficomuo HoCOfimmomoum

pouaoovm
Saamwoom pad SHHoCOHmmwmoum I
Qflnwuonawe :mcmm: Hmcowemmoooo
Hogans
o won I mnvflao Hooaom Smfl:

113

COHPMHHQmCH

I mocosfimcfi Hoecouom no make
Hoseom 0e emomoao

I QOfiPmOfiHflecoUH enoumm
Hammee mo
one Ce mcficooa no: xH03

I Heaven 09 xH03 Mo maficooz

mafiammcsoo
u0\pcm .COHemupchflfipo
.mcesoooe I moocmflnomxm UoHHo>

Ammo momudoo
onoE no omnne I momunoo mmoHHoO

mCOflPoNHnoono mono

pothSm Use coeeoonpo I QHSm
IquEoE coeeonwsomno HMQOmeowonm

mcoao #00 09 SHHHHDM c0 momma
I QHQmHoQEmE :mcom: HoCOHeomdooO

Hospe>flnc« neoconco
MH03 I neceow Op xH03 mo maficooz

sofiem>fiHmmU
pcmEo>Ho>cm Homoeeomoooo

mcficuoma no mmom

coeeo>fiumop
ecoEo>H0>CH Hofloom

 

m>weflcmoo

o>eeoonn<

monoumwwfim mmouo

emoocou

 

 

AUoSCHpcoov oa.w manna

 

Aaweow meoepoafifl
I mowoso HoQOHPomsooo CH oOCOSHMCH

 

oHQoom

How cuoocoo .moocoflquXo moonwflummxo coneoonpo Hocomuom

mcflfioooe .mpcoUSPm £9H3 .momndoo oesopooo .SPHCDeHommo

mCOfiPmHoH I Hoaomcsoo oEooon mafiaomcsoo I Hoaomcsoo oEoooQ
0e coemfiown use Ce emouoch 0e cowwfiomp 0cm CM pmoHoPCH

flow Oflwfioomm
I o>fleoohno HoCOfimmomonm oeoEfieHD

manage

woman How oafip emoa Honeo How oEflp 0: Ho oHpeHH
now I mowew>flpoo osfleouomw ewoa now I mofiefi>eeom mEHponodw

Home Hanna 6 names Ho cuoocoo

M“ ecopuomEfi Suo> I coeeoEOHQ Hosea zao>wemHoH I coeeoa
11 £Pw3 COflPMmom m0 monopnomEH Iona nee3 coepflmom mo mocoeuomSH

soapoowmfieom

H0 .enoESOhcm .mecopnem

mafimfion co powon moanouwowm
Icoo I now some eaoaaeenennInHow

mCOHeooccoo Dom

Honmnmfluom no pooHHU CH mcoflpooccoo now ownedw ca

oopmonopcfi I poem "coeeopnmfiuo nonwonoeCH I ouoesm "c0fieepcoflu0
m>eefismoo m>fipowwm< efloocoo

oocoHoHMHQ mmouo

 

 

Aooszancoov oa.+ manna

emom ow popcofluo I COMeomoooO
Hoceom ow Pmomoao

I COfiPoOflMfieconfi panned
ecoamoao>oo HoCOHe
Imusoo an HofiecmsHMCfi

emoe I coeeoueflm H0 Meow

nouoso an UmflHQQSw

I mcwCHoHe mSOflmHHmH Sanom
mSOfiemeowa accessowp H0
.moms wee .EOflvoewHQprCfi

amass I manfim H0 paoocou
none 0: H0

onecenooca I one no enoocoo

115

COHeooopw amoewasm

ounesm oe popcmfluo I COfieomsooO
Ammo momnsoo

mmwaaoo I mCflCHmoH mo owom
psmemoam>mp

Hocoepoonoo Ce Hoflpsm
ISHMCH emofi I SHHEmw meoflmeBH

mocmoamcfl
Hohoe mo I ecoUHUCfi Hoowefino

mcoc boa H030“
I msacwoue mSOHmfiHoH Sanom

mafiom m I 000 M0 eroCoo

economom

mwocouo3<

coaoaeom

 

H0 memo HoflHPmDUCfi I Howe: mocofiom Hofioom no £mfiamcm I Home:
Euwpmfi I wmoaaoo Mo wNflm
00m Ho>0 I Hoonow been no mNHm ecoEo>H0>cfi HmCOHeoonpm
o>fipflcmou o>weoowm< pmoocou

monouowwflo mmouo

 

 

AUoSCHpcoov 0H.m mHDoH

116

 

maaom o I 000

 

PamESmflamfioooo
coneoHflQmCfi mo mcfifioow o mo>wm we
I monoSHmCfi Hoeconom m0 omkH omdooon mocoeuomfifi 650m I mmooonm
mosey
Iuogfifl manmumofiwcoo no I Socoz
muoneo
How mcwaomm I Hoaomcsoo mononawcfl
o>weoomwm m0 nonpmfluomwm Honda no I ecooflOCM Hoveefluo
monopmoooo
no women I mCOflpoHoH Hofloow HHwa :0 women I mGOflPoHoH Hofloom
o>fieficmoo m>fleowmw< emoonoo

oocoHommHQ mmouO

 

 

Aposceecoov OH.W oHQoH

117
of subjects for these concepts, they differ in kind. Gross
differences appear for the more affective subjects for the
concepts of ease of learning and awareness, but not for the
more cognitive subjects.

Gross differences appear in the rural—urban and
localite-cosmopolite concepts for both the more affective
and the more cognitive groups of subjects in educational
setting. A gross difference in father's birthplace occurs
for the more affective subjects, but not for the more cog-
nitive subjects.

Gross differences in the concept of status appear for
both the more affective and the more cognitive group of
subjects in the occupational level of siblings and the source
of income of the father. A gross difference appears only for
the more affective subjects for the occupational level of the
parents. A gross difference appears only for the more cog—
nitive subjects for the educational level of the father.

Gross differences in the concept of familism appear
for both groups of subjects with respect to the number of
children in the subject's family, family activities, parental
values, discipline, and the meaning of work to the father.

A gross difference appears only for the more cognitive subjects

in the type of parental influence and parent identification.

118

Gross differences in the concept of social involve-
ment and deprivation appear for both the more affective and
the more cognitive group of subjects for membership in the
occupational "gang" and membership in professional organiza-
tions. A gross difference appears only for the more cog—
nitive subjects for clique membership in high school.

A gross difference appears in the concept of ease of
learning only for the more affective subjects with respect
to college courses.

Gross differences in occupational involvement and
deprivation occur for both groups of subjects for the reason
for returning or not returning to the former position (future;
past), for the importance of a position with promotion, and
in the interest in and decision to become a counselor. A
gross difference appears only for the more affective subjects
for varied occupational experiences, the degree of self—
fulfillment, the ultimate professional objective, and the
influence in occupational choice. A gross difference appears
only for the more cognitive subjects for sparetime activities.

Gross differences appear in educational involvement
for both groups of subjects in the size of high school
attended, and undergraduate major. A gross difference appears
only for the more affective subjects for the size of college

attended. A gross difference appears only for the more

119
cognitive subjects for the undergraduate degree received.

Gross differences in the concept of religion appear
for both the more affective and the more cognitive subjects
with respect to the concept of God and early religious
training. A gross difference appears only for the more
cognitive subjects in the concept of the Bible.

A gross difference appears only for the more affective
subjects for the concepts of awareness and deprivation in
the occurrence of a critical incident and its influence.

Gross differences in the concept of referent appear
for both groups of subjects with respect to occupation and
social relations. Gross differences appear only for the
more affective subjects with respect to the immediate family,
ease of learning, critical incident, money, success, and God.
Gross differences appear only for the more cognitive group
of subjects for self or situation, parent identification,
description of effective counselor, and type of parental
influence.

Gross differences appear for both the more affective
and the more cognitive subjects with respect to the variables
of personality traits, manifest needs, interests, creative
thinking abilities, dogmatism, values, and self—concept.
Although gross differences appear for both groups of subjects

for these variables, they differ in kind. A gross difference

120
appears for the more cognitive subjects for the variable
of scholastic aptitude, but not for the more affective sub-
jects.

A summary of the personality characteristics of the
more affective and the more cognitive subjects is presented
in Table 4.20.

A gross difference appears only for the more cognitive
subjects for the scholastic aptitude variable.

Gross differences appear in the personality trait
variable for both groups of subjects. Gross differences
appear for the more affective subjects for the personality
trait of Masculinity. Gross differences appear only for
the more cognitive subjects for the personality traits of
Emotional Stability and Personal Relations.

Gross differences appear for both groups of subjects
for the variable of manifest needs with respect to Affiliation.
Gross differences appear only for the more affective subjects
for the manifest needs of Achievement, Deference, Change and
Autonomy. Gross differences appear only for the more cog—
nitive subjects for the manifest needs of Abasement, Intra-
ception, and Aggression.

Gross differences appear for both the more affective
and the more cognitive subjects for the variable of interests.

The more affective subjects have primary interests similar to

 

 

121

mmsoum N CH mCOHe msoum H CH wCOHP

Iomsooo m CH omone Op HoHHEHw Iomsooo N CH owonp ow HoHHEHm
mpmmHoHCH SHH3 Ho3om mmdonm memoHoPCH £9H3 Ho3mw momsonm
H CH COHemmsooo H CH omone m CH mCOHpmmsooo m CH omone

on HoHHEHm memoHoPCH £9H3 0H0: ow HmHHEHm mewouoch neH3 oHoz

coennnaemn< 26a

COHmmonm< oeonopoz
cowpmoooHPCH oeonopoz
COHPoHHHHH< meonopoz >80coes< mpoumpoz

mocono soar
moconmwofl 30H:

ecoEoon¢ SGHI ecoeo>oH£o< noH:

wCOHpoHom Hocomuom oeouopoz
SPHHHDoem HMCOHHOEm oeouopoz SPHCHHsomoz oeouopoz

oHHecooqu
censomIzeco3p 30Hmn ouoz

AHMEHHE
mewmuoecH

momma pmochoz

meHoHe AeHHocomnmm

opnermm UHPonosow

 

0>HPHC000

0>HeooHH¢
mocoHoHHHQ mmonO

wOHemHHoeooHono SPHHocomHmm Mo SHMESSW

ON.¢ OHQoH

mannnnm>

 

122

mmoCUwUCHE omeHo mmocmeCHE pomOHo weouoboe

 

ana one wmocpprHE ammo EOHE paw mmocpoUCHE somo wpouoboz EmHemEmoQ
AocouHm UHOB How opopHpam 30H
aeHHHonon moo
Ionoecomm How opaner oeouopoz
APHHHQonHm
msoocopcomm How oUSPHer SGHE
SoconHm
HoCOHeoHoomm< How oUSPHPQm SOHE
hocmsHm Socoon
HoCOHPooUH How mUSPHer anm HoCOHeoonH How onnerdm SUHE SPHHHQo
ocaxcerp o>Hpeono
wmnoum m CH mCOHp wmnoum 6 CH mCOHP
Immsooo m CH mwonp on HoHHEHw Iomsooo m CH moose 0e HoHHEHm
mpwouoecH £9H3 Ho3ow mmmsouo memoHoPCH SHH3 Ho3ow momsoum
m CH mCOHpomoooo HH CH moose m CH mCOHeomsooo 5 CH omone
ow HoHHEHm memoHoPCH £9H3 GHQ: 09 HoHHEHm mponoHCH neH3 0H0: endpcooom
o>eeecooo o>epoonn< oenmeun>

monouowwHQ mmOHO

 

Aooocnpcoov om.+ manna

 

 

123

 

exwpaoo HSHUCHcomE

SHHmHoom CH HHow AMHechH

ow oHno Ho3ow Pun amopsor
Innnem anonmsna an oonnnncooe

wosHo> HoHoom an COHpo>Hpoa
30H: SHOCHUCoPmeso £9H3 Hm3om
mmsHo>
UHEOCOUw SQ cowpo>Heoa
30H SHOCHpcoemeno spH3 H0303

H0H>o£mn m0 oHSPm poo mopsn
Ieunem Hooemana an omennpcooe

mmsHo> mSOHmHHoH
an COHHM>HPOE ann SPH3 Hm3mm

emoocoonHow

mosHo>

 

o>HPHcmoO
monoHoHHHQ

o>eeoonn<
mmouO

oHnnHHo>

 

 

ApoSCHecoov ON.W oHQMH

 

 

124
those engaged in seven occupations in three groups, and
secondary interests similar to those engaged in seven
occupations in three groups. The more cognitive subjects
have primary interests similar to those engaged in one
occupation in one group, and secondary interests emilar to
those engaged in eleven occupations in eight groups.

Gross differences appear in the variable of creative
thinking abilities for both groups of subjects with respect
to high aptitude for Ideational Fluency. Gross differences
appear only for the more affective subjects for high aptitude
in Spontaneous Flexibility and Associational Fluency. Gross
differences appear only for the more cognitive subjects for
moderate aptitude in Spontaneous Flexibility and low aptitude
for Word Fluency.

Gross differences appear for both the more affective
and the more cognitive subjects with respect to the dogmatism
variable. The more affective subjects appear to be moderately
open minded and moderately closed minded. The more cognitive

subjects appear to be highly open minded and highly closed

minded.

Gross differences appear in the variable of values for
both groups of subjects. Fewer of the more affective subjects
are highly motivated by religious values. Fewer of the more

cognitive subjects have an outstandingly low motivation by

 

 

 

 

125
economic values, and an outstandingly high motivation by
social values.

Gross differences appear in the self-concept variable
for both the more affective and the more cognitive group of
subjects. The more affective subject identified the self by
physical attributes and by style of behavior. The more
cognitive subjects identified the self by physical attributes,

but fewer identified the self in a socially meaningful context.

 

 

CHAPTER V

IMPLICATIONS AND SUMMARY

Chapter V is organized in three sections. The first
section includes a description of the social characteristics
of the more affective and the more cognitive subjects,
followed by a description of the personality characteristics
of these subjects.

The second section of the chapter is a discussion of
the general theory and presentation of more finite hypotheses.

The final section presents implications for counselor

education, further research, and a summary of the study.

Social Characteristics of Counselor Trainees

The sociological data revealed both similarities and
gross differences in various areas. Items of similarity
appeared in each area of the structured interview schedule
for both the more affective and the more cognitive groups of
subjects. Gross differences appeared in all areas for the
more affective subjects. Gross differences appeared for the

more cognitive subjects in all areas except income, success,

126

 

127
and status. A characterization of the more affective counselor
trainee Would resemble certain aspects of the total group of
counselor trainees for each area, and yet reveal certain
differences in each area. (A characterization of the more
cognitive counselor trainee would resemble certain aspects
of the total group of counselor trainees for each area, and
yet reveal certain differences in selected areas.

Both the more affective and the more cognitive subjects
were similar to the total group of subjects in the area of
identification with respect to age, sex, race, marital status,
the birthplace of the father and the mother, the size of the
community where the mother was born, and the size of the com-
munity where the subject or the father spent his childhood.
The more affective subjects were also similar to the total
group of subjects with respect to the ethnicity and educa—
tional level of the father. The more cognitive subjects were
also similar to the total group of subjects with respect to
the size of the community where the father was born and his
level of occupation. Complete similarity was indicated
between the c0gnitive subjects and the total group of subjects
with respect to the identification data about the mother.

Differences in identification data reveal the more
affective subjects as married, but with no children. The

fathers of these subjects were born in urban communities, were

 

128
white collar workers and salaried, liked their work because
it enhanced them as individuals, and a few earned more than
$10,000 a year. The mothers of these subjects had some high
school education, and were also white collar workers. The
mother's ancestors had been in America several generations.
The siblings of the more affective subjects were college
educated. The more cognitive subjects were married, with
small families. The fathers of these subjects were immigrants
or first generation Americans of northern European ethnicity.
The fathers of these subjects liked their work because it had
meaning in and of itself. Their income was from wages. The
siblings of the more cognitive subjects were high school
educated.

Both the more affective and the more cognitive subjects
were similar to the total group of subjects in the area of
family relationships with respect to the happiness of the
family, close sibling relations and the reason for close
parental relations, decision—making, the reasons for discipline,
and the parent who had more to do with the subject becoming
the kind of person he is. The more affective subjects were
also similar to the total group of subjects with respect to
close parental relations, the influence of the parent, or the
reason for disagreement between the parents. The more cognitive

subjects were also similar to the total group of subjects with

129
respect to the degree of disagreement between the parents,
or who disciplined them.

Differences in family relationships reveal the more
affective subjects as sharing two kinds of activities with
the family. The subjects perceived both parents as valuing
home, family, and children, with little or no disagreement
between the parents. Discipline in the form of taking away
privileges or disapproval was administered by the mother,
but not the father. The more cognitive subjects shared
three kinds of activities with the family. They were closest
to their father who valued truth and honesty. A few mothers
valued home, family, and children. The parents did not
disagree about father's activities. Both physical and verbal
means were used for discipline. Inspiration by the influen—
tial parent was the reason given by these cognitive subjects
for becoming the kind of person they are.

Both the more affective and the more cognitive subjects
were similar to the total group of subjects in the area of
education with respect to high school friendships, ease of
learning in high school, size of community where undergraduate
school was located, the amount of financial assistance, and
the reason for the influence of the person in their educational
development. The more cognitive subjects were also similar

to the total group of subjects with respect to size of high

 

130
school, the place and size of undergraduate school, and the
extent and place of graduate school.

Differences in education data reveal the more affective
subjects as having attended large high schools in urban com—
munities, and belonging to a high school clique. They attended
a medium—sized college outside of the state of Michigan and
more majored in English or social science. They found a
majority of college courses easy. Previous graduate work
was done outside of the state of Michigan, with a degree as
the objective. The more affective subjects stated their
immediate family was most influential in their educational
development. The more cognitive subjects attended small high
schools in rural communities, and did not belong to a high
school clique. They earned a Bachelor of Science degree,
and more majored in industrial arts or physical education.
They themselves, or the situation, was most influential in
their educational development.

Both the more affective and the more cognitive subjects
were similar to the total group of subjects in the area of
occupation with respect to the occupation prior to the Insti—
tute, the feeling of accomplishment and the occupation, the
attitudes of co—workers, "gang" membership, promotion, the
reason for the importance of a job with a future, the effect

of occupation on outside activities, the importance of a

 

 

 

131
chance to be creative, job expectations and aspirations,
and the way in which the person or persons influenced the
subject's life career choices. The more affective subjects
were also similar to the total group of subjects with respect
to the importance of a job with a future, previous occupa-
tional experience, the effects of choice between job and
family, the importance of a chance to be creative, and the
person most influential in the development of life career
choices.

Differences in occupation data reveal the more
affective subject as having had experiences including teach-
ing, counseling, and administration, and an interest in
future job connections. There was some self-fulfillment from
their former job due to enjoyment, satisfaction, or helping
students. Membership in ”the gang" at work was based on their
ability to get along, but they were not greatly bothered if
they did not find ready acceptance into a group in which they
were interested. A position with promotion was of minor con-
cern to these affective subjects. Work left no time for
other things, and they were extremely bothered when they had
to place their work before their family. Personal education
experiences, the opportunity to counsel, and academic courses
were some of the reasons these subjects became interested in

and decided to become counselors. A specific job was their

 

132
ultimate professional objective. The immediate family was
most influential in the development of their life career
choices. The more cognitive subjects were returning to
their former position because of direct or peripheral job
connections. Membership in "the gang" at work was due to
professional and social acceptance, and they were greatly
bothered if they were not readily accepted into a group in
which they were interested. It was very important to them
to be in a position from which promotions were made, because
they meant they had accomplished something or it gave them
something to strive for. There was time for other things,
and they were greatly bothered if they had to place their
work before their family. Their relations with students,
teaching experiences, or their concern for people were some
of the reasons these subjects became interested in and
decided to become counselors. They stated that a feeling
for others best describes an effective counselor.

Both the more affective and the more cognitive subjects
were similar to the total group of subjects in the area of
social relations with respect to official positions in profes-
sional organizations, membership or official positions in
other organizations, close friends, or acquaintances. The
more affective subjects were also similar to the total group

of subjects with respect to the number of sparetime activities.

 

133

Differences in social relations data reveal the more
affective subjects as members of both education and subject
area professional organizations. The more cognitive subjects
were members only of education organizations, with time for
other activities.

Both the more affective and the more cognitive subjects
were similar to the total group of subjects in the area of
income with respect to amount and source of income, what the
subject missed most that his last income did not permit, the
reason for the importance of money, or the most important
thing money can give a person. The more cognitive subjects
were also similar to the total group of subjects with respect
to the importance of money.

Differences in income data reveal the more affective
subjects as stating that money was of considerable importance
to them. The more cognitive subjects cannot be characterized
with respect to income because there were no gross differences.

Both the more affective and the more cognitive subjects
were similar to the total group of subjects in the area of
success with respect to the main thing success has to offer a
person. The more cognitive subjects were also similar to the
total group of subjects with respect to the importance of

success and its reason for importance.

 

 

 

134

Differences in success data reveal the more affective
subjects as stating that success was of some importance.

The more cognitive subjects cannot be characterized with
respect to success because there were no gross differences.

Both the more affective and the more cognitive subjects
were similar to the total group of subjects in the area of
status with respect to whether or not their status was
higher than their parents. The more cognitive subjects were
also similar to the total group in the way in which they
viewed their status as compared to their parents.

Differences in status data reveal the more affective
subjects as viewing their status as higher than that of their
parents because of education, income, occupation, or ethnicity.
The more cognitive subjects cannot be characterized with
respect to status because there were no gross differences.

Both the more affective and the more cognitive subjects
were similar to the total group of subjects in the area of
critical incident with respect to the nature of the critical
incident. The more affective subjects were also similar to
the total group of subjects with respect to the occurrence of
a critical incident in their life. The more cognitive subjects
were also similar to the total group of subjects with respect

to the degree of influence of a critical incident.

135

Differences in critical incident data reveal the more
affective subjects as stating the occurrence of a critical
incident in their life had been of major influence. Differ-
ences in critical incident data reveal the more cognitive
subjects as stating there had been no one critical incident
in their life.

Both the more affective and the more cognitive subjects
were similar to the total group of subjects in the area of
religion with respect to church membership, denomination,
monthly attendance, the existence of a conflict between
science and religion, how religious the parents were, the
religious differences from the parents or from the spouse,
parental religious differences, the questioning of religious
beliefs and the beliefs involved. The more affective subjects
were also similar to the total group of subjects with respect
to the concept of the Bible or immortality.

Differences in the religion data reveal the more
affective subjects as conceiving of God as a Being; none of
these subjects conceived of God as an idea. Differences in
religion data reveal the more cognitive subjects as receiving
their early religious training from the church. They were
indefinite or had no concept of God, and gave the Bible a

human interpretation.

 

136

Personality Characteristics of Counselor Trainees

The test data revealed both similarities and gross
differences in various areas. Items of similarity appeared
in each area of the test battery for both the more affective
and the more cognitive groups of subjects. Gross differences
appeared in all areas for the more cognitive subjects. Gross
differences appeared for the more affective subjects in all
areas except scholastic aptitude and achievement in guidance
and counseling. A characterization of the more affective
counselor trainee would resemble certain aspects of the total
group of counselor trainees for each test area, and yet reveal
certain differences in selected areas. A characterization of
the more cognitive counselor trainee would resemble certain
aspects of the total group of counselor trainees for each
area, and yet reveal certain differences in each area.

Both the more affective and the more cognitive subjects
were similar to the total group of subjects on a test of
teacher attitudes. Neither of these groups can be character—
ized as different from the total group of subjects with
respect to teacher attitudes.

Both the more affective and the more cognitive subjects
were similar to the total group of subjects on a test of per-
sonality traits with respect to energy, self—control, self-

defense, being "thick-skinned," and interested in thinking.

137

Differences in test data relating to personality
traits reveal the more affective subjects as displaying a
moderate inhibition of emotional expressions. The more cog-
nitive subjects may be characterized as exhibiting moderate
evenness of moods, and a moderate tolerance for people.

Both the more affective and the more cognitive subjects
were similar to the total group of subjects on a test of
manifest needs with respect to having things organized, to
being a leader in groups to which one belongs, to helping
friends when they are in trouble, and to engaging in social
activities with the opposite sex.

Differences in test data relating to manifest needs
reveal the more affective subjects as manifesting a high
need to be successful, to find out what others think, and
to do new and different things. They manifest a moderate
need to be independent of others in making decisions, and a
low need to participate in friendly groups. The more cog-
nitive subjects manifest a high need to feel guilty when one
does something wrong. They manifest a moderate need for
participation in friendly groups, for analyzing one's motives
and feelings, and for attacking contrary points of View.

Both the more affective and the more cognitive subjects
were similar to the total group of subjects on a test of

interests with respect to the biological science, engineering

138
and physical science, production manager, musician (performer),
CPA, verbal or linguistic, or president of a manufacturing
concern groups.

Differences in test data relating to interests reveal
the more affective subjects as indicating primary interests
similar to persons engaged in occupations in the technical
and/or skilled trades, social service or welfare, and busi-
ness detail groups. The more cognitive subjects indicate
primary interests similar to persons engaged in occupations
in the sales and business contact group.

Both the more affective and the more cognitive subjects
were similar to the total group of subjects on a battery of
mental creativity tests with respect to calling up many ideas
where quality does not count, thinking rapidly of appropriate,
connected wording, and producing remotely associated,clever
or uncommon responses.

Differences in the test data reveal the more affective
subjects as having a high aptitude to produce rapidly words
from a restricted area of meaning, being able to produce a
variety of class ideas, and calling up many ideas where
quality does not count. The more cognitive subjects may be
characterized as having a high aptitude to call up many ideas
where quality does not count, having a moderate aptitude to

produce a variety of class ideas, and a low aptitude for

 

 

 

139
producing rapidly words fulfilling specified symbols (letter)
properties.

The more affective subjects are both moderately open
minded and moderately closed minded. The more cognitive
subjects are both highly open minded and highly closed minded.

Both the more affective and the more cognitive subjects
were similar to the total group of subjects with respect to
values in the low category.

Differences in test data relating to values reveal the
more affective subjects as not being ”highly” motivated by
religious values. Differences reveal the more cognitive
subjects as not having "outstandingly high" social motives,
nor "outstandingly low" economic motives.

Both the more affective and the more cognitive subjects
were similar to the total group of subjects on a test of
self-concept with respect to identification of the self by
statuses that are socially defined and can be socially validated.

Differences in the test data relating to self—concept
reveal the more affective subjects as identifying the self by
physical attributes and other objective information, and by
action responses or style of behavior. The more cognitive
subjects identify the self by physical attributes and other
objective information, but are unable to identify themselves

in a socially meaningful context.

140

Discussion and Finite Hypotheses

The general theory stated that the life style of an
individual will be reflected in his responses to client
leads in a counseling situation. It was proposed that the
life style of an individual was composed of such factors as
a structure for behavior, experiences, social-identity, self-
identity, and control. The interplay of these factors will
result in adaptation and/or change of the life style.

The general hypothesis proposed that the more person-
ally creative individual would tend to be more affective in
the counseling relationship, while the less perSonally
creative individual would tend to be more cognitive in the
counseling relationship.

The more affective counselor trainee would have a
structure for behavior that would be fluid and open, con-
taining many diverse elements and relationships; yet these
diversities would appear to function in some kind of harmony.
This structure for behavior would allow for adaptability of
experiences, or would be changeable to accommodate the in—
clusion of certain experiences that would be unadaptable to
the existing structure. The data appear to support this
portion of the general hypothesis with respect to the per—
ception of family relationships, high school peer relation—

ships, and membership in the occupational "gang." A less

 

141
authoritarian pattern of family relationships would indicate
less prescription of role relationship both within and without
the family. This may be the reason for the existence of
membership in a high school clique, and could represent the
testing ground not only for skill in interpersonal relations
but also for the development of individual values. This in
turn is supported by the statements of the more affective
counselor trainees with respect to membership in the occupa—
tional ”gang” based on their ability to get along. The
occurrence of a critical incident of major importance supports
the fluidity and openness of the structure, as does their
orientation to future job connections and diverse occupa—
tional experiences. These affectives appear to experience
less deprivation because lack of group acceptance does not
bother them. The existence of a diversity of elements in the
structure for behavior appears to be supported in the data
by a high degree of spontaneous flexibility, interests
similar to several persons engaged in varying occupations,
and identification of the self based on action responses that
are predictive of the behavior rather than the context for
the behavior. The diversity of elements also appears in the
high manifest need for new and different things, for success,
and for finding out what others think. Some degree of con—

flict appears because the more affective subjects also manifest

142
a moderate need to be independent of others in making
decisions.

In contrast to this characterization, the more cognitive
counselor trainee would have a structure for behavior that
would be more rigid and closed, with little or no diversity
of elements and relationships. The structure would tend to
be more clearly defined for the more cognitive counselor
trainee. The data appear to support this portion of the
general hypothesis. The more cognitive subjects perceived
their family relationships as more authoritarian with no
characterization of the mother and a close identification to
the father, no membership in a high school clique, and
membership in the occupational ”gang" based on professional
and social acceptance. These subjects were oriented to the
past with respect to their occupational outlook because of
direct or peripheral connections. A return to the former
setting would provide a tested structure for behavior. These
subjects felt extreme social deprivation if they were not
accepted into a group in which they were interested. The
fact that there was no one critical incident in the life of
the more cognitive subjects supports the proposition that the
structure would be more rigid and closed. Awareness of any
such incident might impair the functioning of the structure.

The test data indicate support for this general hypothesis

 

 

143
because the more cognitive subjects express interests similar
to those engaged in only one occupation, they have a moderate
degree of spontaneous flexibility, and a high manifest need
to feel guilty. The dogmatism scale indicates some conflict,
however, because these subjects are both highly open and
highly closed minded.

The experiences of the individual influence the
boundaries of the structure for behavior, and in turn are
influenced by this structure. It would appear that the more
affective counselor trainee would have more of his experi—
ential world available for awareness, there would be a vari—
ety of experiences, and the retention or rejection of a value
tested by experience would be based on its importance to the
individual. The data for the more affective subjects would
indicate support for this part of the general hypothesis
because there are a variety of educational and occupational
experiences, and the diversity of the experiences within the
structure for behavior appears to indicate adaptability and/or
change. The concept of God as a Being may be indicative of
the importance or unimportance of a value. Church membership
and participation are important assets in some respect of our
culture and as such are necessary. It is possible that these
more affective subjects have changed their concept of God,

but feel it is not so important that they must also change

 

 

 

144
the structure for behavior. Data with respect to the more
cognitive subjects tend to support this portion of the
general hypothesis by indicating fewer variety of experi—
ences, and less diversity. There are no gross differences
with which to characterize the mother of the more cognitive
subjects. It is possible that these subjects are unable to
perceive the mother in any but a stereotyped way. A conflict
appears with respect to the concept of God. The more cog—
nitive subjects have no idea or are indefinite about a con-
cept of God even though their early religious training was
supplied by the church. It may be that these cognitives
have changed their View of God, but are unable to accept
another position with respect to this concept because this
would damage the structure for behavior too severely.

The theory further states that both the structure for
behavior and the experiences are influential in the develop—
ment of the social—identity and self—identity of the individual.
The relationship of the value system of the individual and
the value system of the culture are closely related to the
intensity of social—identity. Should these two value
systems be highly similar, then there would be an emphasis
on social-identity. Should they be somewhat dissimilar, then
there would be an emphasis on self—identify, but only if the

individual felt that the value was so important that the

 

 

 

 

145
structure for behavior must be changed for the value to be
accepted. Any conflict in this decision-making process would
be dependent upon the degree of importance of the development
of the self—identity and the maintenance of the social—
identity. The data indicate that the more affective subjects
had some social-identity based on membership in various
groups, both occupational and peer groups, and that the
immediate family was influential in the choices they made
in the areas of educational development and occupation.
There appears to be more emphasis on self-identity, and the
test data support this portion of the general hypothesis
because these subjects manifest a low need to participate in
friendly groups, and they are not bothered very much if they
do not find ready acceptance into a group in which they are
interested. The data seem to indicate that the more cognitive
subjects had more social-identity based on acceptance, as in
occupational groups and professional organizations. They
are extremely bothered when they do not find ready acceptance
in a group in which they are interested, indicating a high
degree of deprivation. Promotion is important to these sub—
jects because it gives them a feeling of accomplishment, and
they are oriented to the past with respect to their former
occupation indicating a ready—made social-identity which

would appear to be comfortable to them. The test data

 

146

support this portion of the general hypothesis because these
subjects manifest a moderate need for participating in
friendly groups, and attacking contrary points of View, and
a high need to feel guilty when one does something wrong.
The data appear to support the general hypothesis that
the more affective subjects have more self-identity. These
subjects base their membership in the occupational "gang" on
their ability to get along; they are oriented to the future
with respect to occupation; they appear to be occupationally
involved with no sparetime for other things, and the job
gave them some self-fulfillment. This appears to indicate
some investment of the self in the occupation. These affec—
tives identify the self not only by physical attributes but
by action responses. These action responses lead to predic-
tions about how they will behave, but not the context of the
behavior. The data indicate that the more cognitive subjects
have little self—identity. They do not appear to be very
occupationally involved because they state that there is
time for other things, and the test data indicate that these
subjects have only a moderate need to analyze one's feelings
and motives. The more cognitive subjects appear to have
experienced more conflict in the area of self-identity
because they state that they themselves or the situation

were most influential in their life career choices, and yet

 

 

 

 

147

they do not appear to have invested much of themselves in
their occupational choice. There appears to be some con-
flict in the identification of the self through test data.
These more cognitive subjects identify the self by physical
attributes, but are unable to identify the self in a socially
meaningful context. These latter statements do not lead to
reliable predictions about behavior.

The final portion of the theory stated that an
individual will exercise selective perception with respect
to experiences that may be admitted to awareness. The degree
of selective perception will be directly related to the
degree of ambiguity that the individual can tolerate in his
life style. The more affective subjects appear to exercise
less selective perception of experiences, and are able to
tolerate more ambiguity in their life style. They are more
cosmopolitan in orientation. The data appear to support this
general hypothesis of selective perception because of the
variety of educational and occupational experiences, the
major influence of a critical incident, and the fact that
these affectives stated that money, success, and status are
of some importance but not the most important thing in their
life. There appears to be some conflict in this area for
these affectives are only moderately open and closed minded,

and express a high manifest need to find out what others

 

 

 

148
think. Yet they have a high degree of spontaneous flexi—
bility, many interests, and identify the self by action
responses which are predictive of behavior but not the con-
text of the behavior. The degree of dogmatism could indicate
an adherence to social-identity as might the manifest need
to find out what others think. The latter test data do not
appear to be compatible with the former test data. The more
cognitive subjects appear to exercise more selective per—
ception of experiences, and are unable to tolerate much
ambiguity in their life style. They are more local in
their orientation. The data appear to support this general
hypothesis of selective perception because of few diverse
educational and occupational experiences, the absence of a
critical incident in their life, and the lack of difference
from the total group with respect to the values of money,
success, and status. The question arises whether these
values were kept out of the personal value system, or
whether they were admitted because they were a part of the
cultural value system and therefore were important to the
cognitives. There appears to be a conflict also in this
area because these more cognitive subjects are highly open
and closed minded, and identify the self by physical attributes
but are unable to identify the self in a socially meaningful

context. Yet they manifest a moderate need for participation

 

 

 

149
in friendly groups, for analyzing one's motives and feelings,
and for attacking contrary points of View, and they have
few interests. The degree of dogmatism could indicate a
high degree of selective perception based on social—identity,
and a low degree of selective perception based on self—
identity which for these subjects appears to be in conflict.
This apparent conflict between self—identity and social—
identity is also indicated by the inability of these subjects
to identify the self in a socially meaningful context.

In conclusion, the more affective subjects may be
characterized as complex individuals. They appear to be
more cosmopolitan, more inner-directed, to have involved
more of the self in the occupation, to have experienced less
deprivation, perceived their family relationships as less
authoritarian, are more spontaneously flexible, have many
interests, and identify the self by physical attributes and
style of behavior.

The more cognitive subjects may be characterized as
less complex individuals. They appear to be more local in
orientation, more other—directed, to have involved less of
the self in the occupation, to have experienced more depriva—
tion, perceived their family relationships as more authori—
tarian, are less spontaneously flexible, have few interests,
and identify the self by physical attributes but are unable

to identify the self in a socially meaningful context.

 

 

 

149
in friendly groups, for analyzing one's motives and feelings,
and for attacking contrary points of View, and they have
few interests. The degree of dogmatism could indicate a
high degree of selective perception based on social-identity,
and a low degree of selective perception based on self-
identity which for these subjects appears to be in conflict.
This apparent conflict between self-identity and social-
identity is also indicated by the inability of these subjects

to identify the self in a socially meaningful context.

 

In conclusion, the more affective subjects may be
characterized as complex individuals. They appear to be
more cosmopolitan, more inner-directed, to have involved ;
more of the self in the occupation, to have experienced less
deprivation, perceived their family relationships as less
authoritarian, are more spontaneously flexible, have many
interests, and identify the self by physical attributes and
style of behavior.

The more cognitive subjects may be characterized as
less complex individuals. They appear to be more local in
orientation, more other-directed, to have involved less of
the self in the occupation, to have experienced more depriva—
tion, perceived their family relationships as more authori—
tarian, are less spontaneously flexible, have few interests,
and identify the self by physical attributes but are unable

to identify the self in a socially meaningful context.

 

 

150
It is therefore concluded that the following hypotheses
of difference are generated by this study:

1. The more affective counselor trainee will
perceive his family relationships as less
authoritarian; the more cognitive counselor
trainee will perceive his family relation—
ships as more authoritarian.

2. The more affective counselor trainee will
be more occupationally involved; the more
cognitive counselor trainee will be less
occupationally involved.

3. The more affective counselor trainee will
be more aware and open to experience; the
more cognitive counselor trainee will be
less aware and open to experience.

 

4. The more affective counselor trainee will i
have many interests interpreted in terms of
various occupations; the more cognitive
counselor trainee will have few interests
interpreted in terms of various occupations.

5. The more affective counselor trainee will be
more spontaneously flexible; the more cog—
nitive counselor trainee will be less spon-
taneously flexible.

6. The more affective counselor trainee will
define the self by physical attributes and
action responses; the more cognitive counselor
trainee will define the self by physical
attributes, but be unable to define the self
in a socially meaningful manner.
In the studies dealing with the social characteristics
of counselors, the data in this study appear to support the
. . 20 . .
data in the study by Erickson With respect to entry into ,

counseling. The opportunity to counsel was one of the

reasons given by the more affective counselor trainee, and

 

 

 

151

supports the data by Erickson.

The data in this study appear to support the data in

63

the study by Rishel with respect to interests. Rishel
indicated that certain items from interest inventories
were valid predictors of success in counselor education.
The data in this study indicate some support for a difference
in the pattern of interests for the more affective and the
more cognitive subjects studied.

There appears to be no relationship between the data
in this study and the data in the studies by Abeles1 and

8
Brams.

In the studies dealing with personality characteristics
of counselors, the data in this study in part appear to sup-
port the data in the study by Patterson.61 He found that
rehabilitation counselors were willing to accept suggestions,
and the data in this study indicate that the more affective
counselor trainee may be described in this manner. The data
also indicate support but with insufficient evidence that
the more affective counselor trainee is willing and able to
listen to others. The data do not support the finding by
Patterson that the rehabilitation counselor tended to be
without undue guilt feelings. The data in this study suggest

that the more cognitive counselor trainee has a high mani-

fest need for feelings of guilt.

 

 

 

 

152
92

In an article in 1957, Wrenn concluded that a
counselor must have psychological strength to handle ego—
involved relationships, be socially perceptive, have a firm
sense of purpose, and have an articulate value structure.
The data in this study do not support the results reported
by Wrenn in 1952 with respect to values, and support only
in part the areas of interests and personality traits. The
data in this study indicate interests for the more affective
counselor trainee similar to those engaged in occupations in
the area of human relations. The data do not support the
results with respect to interests in the areas of science
and linguistics. The data in this study support the char-
acterization of high Emotional Stability for the more
affective counselor trainee and of high Personal Relations
for the more cognitive counselor trainee, but with insuf—
ficient evidence. There is no support for the characteriza—
tion of high Restraint, Friendliness, and Objectivity.

14

Cottle and Lewis characterized the counselor as
being emotionally stable, objective in outlook, friendly,
and having above average success in personal relations. The
data in this study for the more affective counselor trainee
do not support the data in the study by Cottle and Lewis.

The data give some support, but with insufficient evidence,

 

 

 

153
for the characterization of the more cognitive counselor
trainee with respect to Emotional Stability and Personal

Relations.

Implications for Counselor Education
86 66

The surveys by wellman and Santavicca of current
selection practices of institutions offering graduate courses
in counseling indicate an emphasis for selection on academic
competence. Yet counselor educators are aware that not all
who complete training are equally effective as counselor.

This study would indicate that differences exist with
respect to social and personality characteristics between
those who are able to respond more affectively to client
leads, and those who are able to respond more cognitively to
client leads. Certainly academic competence should not be
discarded as a selection criterion, but perhaps other dis-
tinguishing characteristics could be taken into consideration
in the final selection process with more precision than they
are now being utilized.

Wrenn93 has indicated that science is giving us an
increasingly complete description of our world, but it does
not give us the meaning of man's place in that world. The
sense of nearness to the rest of the world is a relatively

new and very powerful influence for social change, and

 

 

 

154

emphasizes the close interpersonal relations which seem to
be necessary for effective functioning in that "small world."

It becomes apparent that counselor educators are faced
with the dilemma of education and/or training; of personal
and academic creativity and/or the acquisition of skills; of
academic freedom and/or indoctrination. The education and
training of counselors must, of necessity, include not only
the acquisition of skills and techniques, but must also

allow for the personal development of the individual. This

 

approach implies that those selected must be capable not
only of acquiring the appropriate skills, but also of being

personally creative.

Implications for Further Research

This research indicates the need for further study in
the following areas:

1. There is a need to investigate the affective or
cognitive responses of the counselor trainee in the practicum
interview by attempting to categorize the words used with
respect to affectivity (feeling) or cognition (content).

2. There is a need to investigate the relationship
of any such categorization of counselor trainee responses
with judge's ratings on an affective-cognitive continuum.

3. There is a need to refine the categories used in

counting the responses of the counselor trainee to the questions

 

 

 

155
in the structured interview. This refinement would not
necessarily be accomplished by adding more subjects.

4. After categories have been refined, there is a
need to establish criteria for judging counselor trainee
responses to these structured interview questions.

5. There is a need to develop in depth the areas of
the structured interview in which gross differences occurred
to indicate all possible relationships.

6. There is a need to further investigate the areas

of the structured interview in which gross differences did

 

not occur to ascertain whether these areas might yield gross I
differences. I
7. There is a need to study the interrelations of
the gross differences within each of the areas of social
characteristics.
8. There is a need to study the interrelations that
might exist between the areas of social characteristics.
9. There is a need to develop case studies from the
sample population to characterize individual affective or
cognitive counselor trainees.
10. The study needs to be replicated in other geo—

graphic areas of the United States.

 

 

 

156

Summary of the Study

The study was designed to investigate the patterns
existing in the personal—social history of counselor trainees
and the patterns existing in the test performance of such
counselor trainees in order to generate finite hypotheses
about the relationship of these patterns and the responses
of the counselor trainee to client leads in a practicum
interview.

Thirty students enrolled in an NDEA Guidance and
Counseling Institute at Michigan State University were tested
and interviewed. The response growth of twenty of these sub-
jects was determined by judge's ratings from another study.

A description was developed of the more affective and
the more cognitive subjects. The structured interview
responses about the personal—social history of the more
affective and the more cognitive subjects was interpreted
with respect to specific sociological concepts. The test
performance of the more affective and the more cognitive coun—
selor trainees was interpreted on the basis of what the test
purported to measure.

Hypotheses were developed from the data relating to
family relationships, occupational involvement, awareness,
interests, flexibility of thinking ability, and identification

of the self.

 

 

 

 

 

157

It was proposed that the more affective counselor
trainee was more complex in characterization, and the more
cognitive counselor trainee was less complex in characteri-
zation.

Implications for further study indicated a need to
investigate counselor trainee responses by attempting to
categorize the words used, and then investigate the relation—
ship of these categories and judge's ratings of the responses.
The categories used in judging the responses of the counselor
trainee to structured interview questions need refinement so
that criteria might be established for judging these responses.
Areas showing gross differences need development in depth.
Further study is needed of areas not yielding gross differ-
ences. Interrelations within and between the areas of
social characteristics need further study. Case studies of
individual affective and cognitive counselor trainees need
to be developed from the data. The study needs to be repli-

cated in other geographic areas of the United States.

 

 

 

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Abeles, Norman. ”A Study of the Characteristics of
Counselor Trainees." Unpublished Ph.D. disserta—
tion, University of Texas, 1958.

Adorno, T. W., Else Frankel—Brunswik, Daniel J.
Levinson, and R. Nevitt Sanford. The Authoritarian
Personality. New York: Harper & Brothers, 1950.

 

Allport, Gordon W., Philip E. Vernon, and Gardner
Lindzey. Manual Study of Values. Boston: Houghton
Mifflin Co., 1960.

 

 

Allport, Gordon W. Pattern and Growth in Personality.
New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1961. ?

 

Arbuckle, Dugald S. ”The Education of the School
Counselor," Journal of Counseling Psychology, V
(1958), 58—62.

 

Barron, Frank. ”Originality in Relation to Personality
and Intellect," Journal of Personality, XXV
(September, 1956—December, 1957), 730—42.

 

Betz, Robert Leo. ”A Study of the Effects of Two Types
of Group Counseling on the Counseling Performance
of Counselor Candidates.” Unpublished Ph.D. disserta—
tion, Michigan State University, 1963.

Brams, Jerome M. ”Counselor Characteristics and
Effective Communication in Counseling," Journal of
Counseling Psychology, VIII (1961), 25—30.

 

Burnett, Collins W. "Selection and Training of School
and College Personnel Workers,” Review of Educational
Research, XXIV (April, 1954), 121—33.

 

158

 

 

 

 

 

10.

ll.

12.

l3.

14.

15.

l6.

l7.

l8.

19.

20.

159

Callis, Robert, Paul C. Polmantier, and Edward C. Roeber.
”Five Years of Research on Counseling,” Journal of
Counseling Psychology, IV (1957), 119—23.

 

Christensen, P. E., P. R. Merrifield, and J. P. Guilford.
Manual Consequences. Beverly Hills, California:
Sheridan Supply Company, undated. (Mimeographed.)

 

Cook, Walter W., Carroll H. Leeds, and Robert Callis.
Manual Minnesota Teacher Attitude Inventory. New
York: The Psychological Corporation, undated.

 

Cottle, William C. "Personal Characteristics of
Counselor: I.,” Personnel and Guidance Journal,
XXXI (1953), 445—50.

 

Cottle, W. C. and W. W. Lewis, Jr. ”Personality Charac—
teristics of Counselors: II. Male Counselor Responses

to the MMPI and GZTS,” Journal of Counseling Psychology,

 

I (1954), 27—30.

Cottle, W. C., W. W. Lewis, Jr., and M. M. Penney. "Per—
sonal Characteristics of Counselor: III. An Experi—
mental Scale,“ Journal of Counseling Psychology, I
(1954), 74—77.

 

Dash, Robert A. ”Selection and Training of School
Counselors in New South Wales," Personnel and
Guidance Journal, XXXII (1954), 350—52.

 

Dressel, Paul L. "Research in Counseling: A Symposium,”
Personnel and Guidance Journal, XXXI (February, 1953),
284-87.

Edwards, Allen L. Manual Edwards Personal Preference
Schedule. New York: The Psychological Corporation,
1959.

 

English, Horace B., and Ava Champney English. A Compre—
hensive Dictionary of Psychological and Psycho—

 

analytical Terms. New York: Longmans, Green and Co.,
1958.
Erickson, Allan C. ”An Investigation of the Relationship

of Social Characteristics to Responses from Selected
Michigan High School Counselors." Unpublished Ph.D.
dissertation, Michigan State College, 1954.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

21.

22.

23.

24.

25.

27.

28.

29.

30.

31.

32.

160

Erikson, Erik H. Insight and Responsibility. New York:
W. W. Norton & Company, Inc., 1964.

 

Frick, J. W., J. P. Guilford, P. R. Christensen, and
P. R. Merrifield. "A Factor—Analytic Study of
Flexibility in Thinking,” Educational and Psycho—
logical Measurement, XIX (1959), 469—95.

 

 

Fromm, Erich. ”The Creative Attitude," Chapter 4 of
Creativity and Its Cultivation. Edited by Harold H.
Anderson. New York: Harper & Bros., 1959.

 

Geschwender, James Arthur. ”Status Consistency, Cog—
nitive Dissonance, and Social Change.” Unpublished
Ph.D. dissertation, Michigan State University, 1962.

Goffman, Erving. The Presentation of Self in Everyday
Life. Garden City, New York: Doubleday & Co., Inc.,
1959.

 

 

Guilford, J. P. ”Basic Conceptual Problems in the
Psychology of Thinking,” Annals of the New York
Academy of Sciences, LXXXXI (December, 1960), 6—21.

 

 

”Creative Abilities in the Arts,“ Psycho—
logical Review, LX (1957), 110—18.

”Creativity,” The American Psychologist, V
(August, 1950), 444-54.

 

"Some Recent Findings on Thinking Abilities
and Their Implications,” Journal of Communication,
III (1953), 49—58.

 

"Three Faces of Intellect,” The American

——' Psychologist, XIV (1959), 469—79.

Guilford, J. P., Benjamin Fruchter, and H. Paul Kelley.
”Development and Applications of Tests of Intellectual
and Special Aptitudes,” Review of Educational Research,
XXIX (1950), 26-41.

 

Guilford, J. P., R. C. Wilson, P. R. Christensen, and
D. J. Lewis. A Factor Analytic Study of Creative
Thinking. I. Hypotheses and Description of Tests.
Reports from the Psychological Laboratory. The
University of Southern California, IV, 1951.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

33.

34.

35.

36.

37.

38.

39.

40.

41.

42.

43.

44.

161

Guilford, J. P., R. C. Wilson, and P. R. Christensen. A
Factor Analytic Study of Creative Thinking. II.
Administration of Tests and Analysis of Results.
Reports from the Psychological Laboratory. The
University of Southern California, VIII, 1952.

 

 

Guilford, J. P. and Wayne S. Zimmerman. The Guilford-
Zimmerman Temperament Survey: Manual. Beverly Hills,
California: Sheridan Supply Company, 1955.

 

Hathaway, S.R. and J. C. McKinley. Manual Minnesota
Multiphasic Personality Inventory. New York: The
Psychological Corporation, 1951.

 

 

Hill, George E. ”The Selection of School Counselors,"
Personnel and Guidance Journal, XL (January, 1961),
355—59.

Hill, George E., and Donald A. Green. "The Selection,
Preparation, and Professionalization of Guidance and
Personnel Workers,” Review of Educational Research,

 

XXX (April, 1960), 115-19.

Hobbs, Nicholas. ”The Complete Counselor," Personnel and
Guidance Journal, XXXVII (May, 1958), 594—602.

Hoffman, A.Edward. ”An Analysis of Counselor Sub—Roles,”
Journal of Counseling Psychology, VI (1959), 61-67.

 

Kamm, Robert B. ”A. C. P. A. Professional Standards
Committee Studies Graduate Student Selection and
Admission,” Personnel and Guidance Journal, XXXII
(1954), 362—66.

 

Kemp, C. Gratton. ”Influence of Dogmatism on the Train—
ing of Counselors,” Journal of Counseling Psychology,
IX (1962), 155—57.

 

Kettner, Norman W., J. P. Guilford, and Paul R. Christen—
sen. "A Factor—Analytic Investigation of the Factor
Called General Reasoning,” Educational and Psychological

 

Measurement, XVI (1956), 438—53.

Kinzer, John R. ”The Educated Counselor,” Journal of
Counseling Psychology, VIII (1961), 14—16.

 

Kriedt, Philip H. ”Vocational Interests of Psychologists,"
Journal of Applied Psychology, XXXIII (1949), 482-88.

 

 

 

 

 

45.

46.

47.

48.

49.

50.

51.

52.

53.

54.

55.

56.

57.

58.

162

Lenski, Gerhard. ”Social Participation and Status
Crystallization,” American Sociological Review, XXI
(1956), 458—65.

 

Lenski, Gerhard E. ”Status Crystallization: A Non-
Vertical Dimension of Social Status,” American
Sociological Review, XIX (1954), 405—413.

 

MacKinnon, Donald W. ”What Makes a Person Creative,"
Saturday Review, (February 10, 1962), 15-17+.

McCully, C. Harold. ”The School Counselor: Strategy
for Professionalization,” Personnel and Guidance
Journal, XL (April, 1962), 681—89.

 

McKellar, Peter. Imagination and Thinking, A Psycho—
logical Analysis. New York: Basic Books, Inc., 1957.

 

 

Manual for the Christensen-Guilford Fluency
Tests. Beverly Hills, California: Sheridan Supply
Company, 1959. (Mimeographed.)

 

 

Manual The Twenty—Statements Problem. Kansas
City, Missouri: Department of Research, The Greater
Kansas City Mental Health Foundation, 1959. (Dittoed.)

 

Maslow, Abraham H. "Creativity in Self—Actualizing People,"

Chapter 7 of Creativity and Its Cultivation. Edited
Harold H. Anderson. New York: Harper & Bros., 1959.

 

Mead, George H. Mind, Self and Society. Chicago: The
University of Chicago Press, 1934.

 

Merton, Robert K. Social Theory and Social Structure.
Glencoe, Illinois: The Free Press, 1957.

 

Merton, Robert K., Leonard Broom, and Leonard S. Cottrell,
Jr. (ed.). Sociology Today, Problems and Prospects.
New York: Basic Books, Inc., 1959.

 

Miller, W. S. Manual Miller Analogies Test. New York:
The Psychological Corporation, 1961.

 

Mooney, Ross L. ”Groundwork for Creative Research," The
American Psychologist, IX (1954), 1-6.

 

Murphy, Gardner. "Creativeness," The Menninger Quarterly,
XI (June, 1957), 1-6.

 

 

 

 

 

59.

60.

61.

62.

63.

64.

65.

66.

67.

68.

69.

70.

163

”New Vistas in Personality Research," Personnel
and Guidance Journal, XL (October, 1961), 114-22.

 

”The Cultural Context of Guidance," Personnel
and Guidance Journal, XXXIV (September, 1955), 4—9.

 

Patterson, C. H. ”Test Characteristics of Rehabilitation
Counselor Trainees,” Journal of Rehabilitation,
XXVIII (September—October, 1962), 15—16.

 

Professional Training, Licensing and Certification Com-
mittee. ”Counselor Preparation Recommendations for
Minimum Standards,” Personnel and Guidance Journal,
XXXVII (October, 1959), 162-66.

 

Rishel, Darrell Fred. ”The Development and Validation
of Instruments and Techniques for the Selective
Admission of Applicants for Graduate Studies in
Counselor Education.” Unpublished Ph. D. disserta—
tion, Pennsylvania State University, 1961.

Rogers, Carl R. 0n Becoming a Person. Boston: Houghton
Mifflin Co., 1961.

 

Rokeach, Milton. The Open and Closed Mind. New York:
Basic Books, Inc., 1960.

 

Santavicca, G. Gene. ”Supervised Experience and Selection."
Personnel and Guidance Journal, XXXVIII (1959), 195—97.

 

Schachtel, Ernest G. Metamorphosis. New York: Basic
Books, Inc., 1959.

Selltiz, Claire, Marie Jahoda, Morton Deutsch, and
Stuart W. Cook. Research Methods in Social Relations
(rev.). New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1964.

 

Shibutani, Tamotsu. ”Reference Groups as Perspectives,”
American Journal of Sociology, LX (1960), 562—69.

 

Shoben, E. J., Jr. "Research in Counseling: A Symposium,"
Personnel and Guidance Journal, XXXI (February, 1953),
287—91.

 

 

 

 

71.

72.

73.

74.

75.

76.

77.

78.

79.

80.

81.

82.

164

Sinnott, Edmund W. ”The Creativeness of Life,”
Chapter 2 of Creativity and Its Cultivation. Edited

 

by Harold H. Anderson.

1959.

New York:

Harper & Bros.,

Snyder, William U. “The Personality of Clinical Stud—

ents,” Journal of Counseling Psychology,

 

47—52.

Spranger, Eduard. Types of Men. Germany:

Krober and Nictschwann,

Springbett, B. M., J. G.

Dark,

1928.

and J. Clake.

II (1955),

Karras,

”An

Approach to the Measurement of Creative Thinking,”
Canadian Journal of Psychology, XI (1957), 9—20.

 

Stein, Morris I. and Bernard Meer.

”Perceptual

Organization in a Study of Creativity," Journal of
Psychology, XXXVII—XXXVIII (1954), 39—43.

Stouffer, Samuel A. ”An Analysis of Conflicting Social
Norms,“ American Sociological Review, XIV, 707-17.

 

Stoughton, Robert W. ”The Preparation of Counselors
and Personnel Workers,” Review of Educational
Research, XXVII (April, 1957), 174-77.

 

Strong, E. K. Manual for Vocational Interest Blank for

 

Men. Stanford University Press, 1959.

Sub—Committee on Counselor Trainee Selection. ”An

Analysis of Practices in Counselor Trainee Selection,"

Journal of Counseling Psychology, I (1954), 174—79.

 

Tannenbaum, Robert, Irving R. Weschler, and
Leadership and Organization. New York:

 

Book Company, Inc.,

Tooker, Ellis D. ”Counselor Role:

1961.

Fred Massarick.

McGraw—Hill

Counselor Training,”

Personnel and Guidance Journal, XXXVI (December,

 

1957), 263—67.

Toops, Herbert A. Manual of Directions The Ohio State

 

University Psychological Test. Chicago:

 

Research Associates,

1941.

Science

 

 

 

 

 

83.

84.

85.

86.

87.

88.

89.

90.

91.

92.

165

Turner, Ralph H. ”Role—Taking, Role Standpoint, and
Reference—Group Behavior,” American Journal of
Sociology, LXI (1961), 316—28.

 

Tyler, Leona E. The National Defense Counselor and
Guidance Training Institutes Program. A Report of
the First 50 Institutes. United States Department
of Health, Education, and Welfare, Office of Educa-
tion, Bulletin No. 31, 1960.

 

 

 

Wellington, John A. ”Concepts of Counselor Training,"
Counselor Education and Supervision, (Spring, 1961),
29—33.

Wellman, Frank E. ”Selection of Students for Prepara-

tion in College Personnel Work,” Personnel and
Guidance Journal, XXXIV (1955), 24—27.

Whorf, Benjamin Lee. Language, Thought and Reality.
Edited by John B. Carroll. New York: The
Technology Press of Massachusetts Institute of
Technology and John Wiley and Sons, Inc., 1956.

 

Williamson, E. G. Counseling Adolescents. New York:
McGraw—Hill Book Company, Inc., 1950.

 

Wilson, R. C., P. R. Christensen, P. R. Merrifield, and
J. P. Guilford. Manual Alternate Uses. Beverly
Hills, California: Sheridan Supply Company, 1960.
(Mimeographed.)

 

Wilson, R. C., J. P. Guilford, and P. R. Christensen.
”The Measurement of Individual Differences in
Originality,” The Psychological Bulletin, L (1953),
362—70.

 

Wilson, Robert C., J. P. Guilford, Paul R. Christensen,
and Donald J. Lewis. ”A Factor-Analytic Study of
Creative Thinking Abilities,” Psychometricka,

XVIV (December, 1954), 297—311.

Wrenn, C. Gilbert. ”Status and Role of the School
Counselor,“ Personnel and Guidance Journal, XXXVI
(November, 1957), 175—83.

 

 

 

 

 

 

93.

94.

166

. The Counselor in a Changing World. Washington,

 

D. C.: American Personnel and Guidance Association,

”The Selection and Education of Student Per—
sonnel Workers," Personnel and Guidance Journal,
XXXI (1952), 9-14.

 

 

 

 

 

APPENDIX A

Structured Interview Schedule

167

 

 

 

168

STRUCTURED INTERVIEW SCHEDULE
Identification

1. How old were you on your last birthday? Sex: M F
Race: W N

2. Where were you born? (city, state) Size of community

3. Which one of the following describes the place where you
spent most of your childhood? Farm Open country, but
not a farm Village under 2,500 Town 2,500-10,000
City of 10,000-100,000 (or in nearby suburbs) City of
over 100,000 (or in nearby suburbs)

4. Are you at present: Single Married Divorced
Separated Widowed

 

5. How many children do you have? What are their ages? a

6. Where was your father born? (city, state, country)
Size of community (If foreign born,) How old was
he when he came to this country? (If born in the
United States,) What generation is he in America?

7. Which one of the following describes the place where he
spent most of his childhood? Farm Open country, but
not a farm Village under 2,500 Town 2,500-10,000
City of 10,000—100,000 (or in nearby suburbs) City
of over 100,000 (or in nearby suburbs)

8. How far did he go in school?

1
a. Completed one or more years of graduate work at 1
college or university
b. Graduated from 4—year college, university, or
professional school
c. Attended college for two or more years, or equivalent
higher education
d. Graduated from high school, or equivalent secondary
education
e. Attended high school, compEted at least one year
but did not graduate
f. Third to eighth grade (older persons), shifting to
eighth grade (young adults)
9. Below third grade (older persons), shifting to below
eighth grade (young adults)

 

 

 

*10.

11.

12.

13.

14.

15.

169

What is your father's occupation? (If retired,) What
was his occupation the major part of his life?

How has your father liked his work? Very much
Pretty well Indifferent Disliked some parts of it
Hated it

What was the approximate highest income he ever made?

From what source did he derive the major portion of
his income?

a. Savings and investments, inherited——50% or more
of the income
b. Savings and investments, gained by the earner——

not retirement pensions
c. Profits and fees——including higher executives who
share in profits

d. Salary or commission——including retirement earned
thereby

e. Private aid or assistance——may be supplemented by
part—time work

f. Public relief and non—respectable income, according

to reputation

Where was your mother born? (city, state, country)
Size of community (If foreign born,) How old was
she when she came to this country? (If born in the
United States,) What generation is she in America?

Which one of the following describes the place where
she spent most of her childhood? Farm Open country,
but not a farm Village under 2,500 Town 2,500—
10,000 City of 10,000—100,000 (or in nearby suburbs)
City of over 100,000 (or in nearby suburbs)

How far did she go in school?

a. Completed one or more years of graduate work at
college or university

b. Graduated from 4—year college, university,
professional school

c. Attended college for two or more years, or equivalent
higher education

d. Graduated from high school, or equivalent secondary
education

e. Attended high school, completed atleast one year
but did not graduate

 

 

 

 

 

 

16.

17.

18.

170

f. Third to eighth grade (older persons,) shifting to
eighth grade (young adults)

9. Below third grade (older persons), shifting to
below eighth (young adults)

Did your mother ever work? Before or after marriage?
What was her occupation?

How many brothers and sisters did you have? Younger?
Older?

How far did they go in school?

a. Completed one or more years of graduate work at
college or university
b. Graduated from 4—year college, university,

professional school

c. Attended college for two or more years, or equivalent
higher education

d. Graduated from high school, or equivalent secondary
education

e. Attended high school, completed at least one year
but did not graduate

f. Third to eighth grade (older persons), shifting to
eighth grade (young adults)

9. Below third grade (older persons), shifting to
below eighth grade (young adults)

Family Relationships

 

*19.

20.

21.

22.

23.

What brothers or sisters were you closest to? (in
relation to spacing in family) oldest, youngest, in
between, what?

When you were growing up, before you went to college,
what kind of activities did your family do together?

Which parent were you closest to?
What did your father value? your mother?
How happy would you say your family was when you were

growing up? Very happy Somewhat happy Some
tension Quite a bit of tension Completely unhappy

 

171

24. What was the degree of disagreement between your
parents? None Very little Some A lot
Never agreed (if they disagreed) About what things
did they disagree most?

*25. Who made the decisions usually in your family? Father
Mother Other: specify

*26. Which parent do you think had more to do with your
becoming the kind of person you are?

*27. Who disciplined the children in your family? Father
Mother Other: specify

*28. How were you disciplined?

*29. What were you disciplined for mainly?

Education

30. What was the enrollment of your high school at the

31.

*32.

*33.

34.

time you attended?

Which one of the following describes the place where

the school was located? Open country, but not a farm
Village under 2,500 Town 2,500—10,000 City of
10,000—100,000 (or in nearby suburbs) City of over

100,000 (or in nearby suburbs)

In high school, did you belong to a clique? Did you
have one intimate friend with whom you shared personal
things? (In either case, if no) Did this bother you?

What were your least difficult subjects in high school?
Most difficult?

Were those the subjects you liked the most? the least?

Where did you do your undergraduate training? (college
or university, city, state) Size of enrollment at
time of attendance

Which one of the following describes the place where
the (college, university) was located? Open country
Village under 2,500 Town 2,500—10,000 City of

10,000—100,000 (or in nearby suburbs) City of over

100,000 (or in nearby suburbs)

 

 

 

35.

*36.

*37.

38.

Occupation

39.

40.

41.

42.

43.

44.

45.

46.

172

Majors Minors Degree When received Veteran
Reason for attendance

What proportion of the money did you supply for your
education? 0 1/4 1/3 1/2 2/3 All of it

What were your least difficult courses in college?
Most difficult?

Were those the subjects you liked the most? the least?

As a student, what influenced you most in your educa-
tional development?

What was your occupation before entering the Institute?
Are you on leave of absence? Do you plan to return?
Why? Why not?

Did (occupation) give you a feeling of accomplishment? 3
Very much To a considerable extent To some extent
Little or none None at all

How do the people you worked with feel about you
becoming a counselor? Wholeheartedly approve
Approve to some degree Indifferent Disapprove
to some extent Completely disapprove

Were you considered to be one of the gang by the persons
in your (place of work)? Very much For the most part
To some extent Hardly at all Never

How much do you want to be one of the gang? Very much
Quite a bit Somewhat Little or none I don't

If you don't find ready acceptance into a group in
which you are interested, how much does it bother you?
Very greatly Considerably Some Not much

Not at all

To what extent did (occupation) give you a feeling of
self—fulfillment? Great extent _ Considerable extent
Some extent Very little None at all

Are the people who get promoted in your (place of Work)
likely to be selected from among the people in your

 

 

 

 

 

47.

48.

49.

50.

51.

52.

53.

54.

*55.

*56.

57.

173

kind of position? Almost entirely Often Sometimes
Seldom Never

How much does it mean to you to be in the kind of
position from which promotions are usually made? Very
important Means a great deal Relatively minor
concern Not important compared to other things

Of no importance

How important is it to you to have a job which offers
a future? Most important aspect Fairly important
Not too important Other things more important

No importance at all

What jobs have you held prior to your last job?
Where was this job located? Dates of employment

To what extent does your work cut down on the time
available for other things? No time for other
things Very little time Some time Much time
All the time I want

Would you say that, in practice, your Work comes before
your family? Very often Quite often Seldom
Almost never Never

Does it bother you to have to place your work before
your family? Yes, extremely Considerably
Somewhat To a limited degree Never

How much does it bother you when such a situation
arises? Very much Considerably Somewhat Not
too much Never

How important is it to you to have work which gives you

a chance to be creative? Absolute necessity Means

a great deal Some importance Little or no importance
Not important at all

How did you come to be interested in counseling?

What made you decide to become a counselor?

What kind of job do you expect to have five years from
now?

 

 

 

 

 

 

58.

59.

60.

61.

174

What kind of job would you like to have five years
from now?

What do you feel best describes an effective counselor?
What is your ultimate professional objective?

In your life career choices, what was most influential
in your development?

Social Relations

 

62. To what professional organizations do you belong?
What official positions do you hold?
63. To what other organizations do you belong? What
official positions do you hold?
64. What activities do you engage in in your spare time?
*65. Do you have any close friends? (If yes,) What activities
do you enjoy doing with them? What draws you to this
person? (If no,) Do you have any acquaintances?
(If yes,) What activities do you enjoy doing with them?
What draws you to this person?
Income
66. What was the approximate annual income you derived
from your last job?
67. From what source did you derive the major portion of

your income?

a. Savings and investments, inherited——50% or more of
the income

b. Savings and investments, gained by the earner——not
retirement pensions

c. Profits and fees—-including higher executives who
share in profits

d. Salary or commission——including retirement earned
thereby '
e. Private aid or assistance—-may be supplemented by

part-time work
f. Public relief and non-respectable income, according
to reputation

 

 

 

175

*68. What did you miss most that your last income didn't permit?

*69. How important is money really? Most important thing in
life Of considerable importance Important to a
certain extent Of little importance Not important
at all

*70. What is the most important thing money can give a person?

Success

71. How important is success in your life? Most important
thing Somewhat important It has its place Of
little importance Not important at all

72. What is the main thing success has to offer a person?

Status

73. Do you feel that your status is higher than that of

your parents? In what ways?

Critical Incident

 

74.

75.

What was the one most critical incident in your life?

To what degree has it influenced your life? Major
factor Considerable importance Some importance
Little importance Not a factor at all

Religion

 

76.

77.

*78.

79.

*80.

Are you a church member? Denomination How many
church services do you attend in a month?

What kind of early religious training did you get?

What is your conception of God?

What do you think about the Bible? about immortality?

Do you believe there is a conflict between science and
religion? (If no,) Do you then believe in a rationalized
system of belief, or do you believe that science deals

with the physical and religion with the spiritual, or
do you reject science, or some other belief?

 

 

 

81.

*82.

*83.

*84.

176

How religious would you say your parents were? Very

religious Considerably religious Somewhat
religious Very little religious Not religious
at all

In what ways do you differ from your parents in
religion? Husband (wife)?

In what ways do your parents differ in religious matters?
Have you ever questioned your religious beliefs?

(If yes,) What were the beliefs you questioned? How
did you resolve this situation?

Interview Reaction

 

85.

What are your reactions to these interview questions?

*Authoritarian Personality study.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

"IT'EIMIIMIIIIIII ‘