llllllllllllllllllllglflllll \“Es‘s ”BRA” 5 5m! 31293 00991 MICHIGAN STATE UNlVEgaz‘ EAST LANSING, MlCH. This is to certify that the dissertation entitled ASPECTSOFSHROIEANDSElF-ES’I'ED’IIN DDRMCNADOIESCENI‘SFOIMIING A WILDERNESS EXPERIENCE presented by Janiece L. Pompa has been accepted towards fulfillment of the requirements for - - » ' Ph - D- degree in PSYChOIOEY / V Virprofessor fi Date {/Zé/z MSU is an Affirmative Action/Equal Opportunity Institution 0- 12771 PLACE IN RETURN BOX to remove this checkout from your record. TO AVOID FINES return on or before date due. MAY BE RECALLED with earlier due date if requested. I DATE DUE DATE DUE DATE DUE W 6/01 chlRC/DatoDuopGS-DJS ASPECTS OF SEX ROLE AND SELF-ESTEEM IN MORMON ADOLESCENTS FOLLOWING A WILDERNESS EXPERIENCE by Janiece L. Pompa A DISSERTATION Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY Department of Psychology 1983 ABSTRACT ASPECTS OF SEX ROLE AND SELF-ESTEEM IN MORMON ADOLESCENTS FOLLOWING A WILDERNESS EXPERIENCE By Janiece L. Pbmpa This study described the psychological sex role character- istics of 67 Mormon adolescents prior to a five-day wilderness ex- perience, as compared to a control group of 71 Utah high school stu- dents. In addition, the relationship of sex role and selfeesteem in these two groups, as well as changes in the Mbrmon sample fbllowing their outdoor experience, were investigated. gftests revealed that at pre-test, experimental and control fe- males scored significantly higher than experimental and control males on sub-scales of the Tennessee Self-Concept Scale (TSCS) measuring moral-ethical worth and social self-esteem. Experimental group females. also scored significantly higher than experimental group males on TSCS measures of behavioral satisfaction and global selfeesteem. With regard to psychological sex role, subjects' scores on the Bem Sex Role Inventory (BSRI) revealed that at pre-test, most Mbrmon adolescent males were classified as Masculine, while most Hermon ado- lescent females were classified as Feminine and Androgynous. In addi- Pompa tion, the number of subjects classified as cross-sex-typed was very small. A Chi-square test of independent samples revealed that the dis- tribution of experimental group subjects in sex role categories was significantly different than the distribution in Bem's standardization sample. Although MbNemar tests showed that neither male nor female exper- imental group members shifted from sex-typed to androgynous from pre- to post-test to a significant degree, multiple regression analyses revealed that mid-and high-scoring experimental females' BSRI Mascu- linity scores increased significantly from pre- to post-test, when compared to mid- and high-scoring control females. There was no sig- nificant difference in these males' BSRI Masculinity or Femininity scores, or females' Femininity scores, from pre- to post-test. Finally, it was found that the experimental group as a whole showed significantly increased TSCS global selfbesteem scores from pre to post-test. A main effect for sex role was also feund, and Scheffe post-hoe analyses revealed that Masculine and Androgynous subjects' scores considered together were significantly higher than Feminine and Undifferentiated subjects' scores at both pre- and post-test. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I would like to thank my statistical adviser, Dr. Donna Venous, for her many hours of work in reviewing this manuscript, her patience in helping me develop research and statistical skills, and her sincere interest in my career and general well-being. I am also grateful to Dr. Gary Stollak for his reassurance, support, and interesting conver- sations regarding the validity of the concepts of "masculinity" and "femininity". I appreciate the time spent by Drs. Ellen Strommen and Elaine Donelson as committee members. The help of various research 'assistants, especially Elaine Clark, in collecting and organizing the data is appreciated, and Sarah Whiteher has my undying gratitude for helping me use the Hewlett-Packard computer. Tim Goth-Owens also provided valuable assistance in the development of the research ideas. Finally, I am grateful to my parents, who believed as did Coleridge, that "a great mind must be androgynous". ii TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF TABLES. O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 0 LIST OF APPENDICES O O O O O O O O O O O O O 0 Chapter I. II. INTRODUCTION. 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O Rationale 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O O 0 LITERATURE REVIEW . . . . . . . . . . . Sex role - historical development and cross-cultural aspects . . . . . . Psychological androgyny . . . . . . . . Sex role and self-esteem . . . . . . . Sex roles in adolescence . . . . . . . Sex roles and religious affiliation . . Sex roles in the Mormon church . . . . Wilderness stress groups . . . . . . . Psychological changes among wilderness stress participants . . . . . . . smary O O O O O O O O O O O I O O O O Hypotheses and preposed data analysis . Rationale for analyses. . . . . . . . . iii Page viii 16 20 25 27 3O 32 34 35 37 38 III. IV. VI. METHOD 0 O O O . O O O O O O O O _. subj acts 0 O O O O O O O O O O O 0 Experimental treatment. . . . . . ~Instructor training . . . . . . . Measures. . . . . . . . . . . . . Tennessee Self-Concept Scale Bem Sex-Role Inventory . . . RESIII‘TS O O O O O O O O O O O O 0 Preliminary analyses. . . . . . . Pre-test comparisons of both Tests of hypotheses . . . . . . . Hypothesis Hypothesis Hypothesis Hypothesis Hypothesis Hypothesis Summary . . . . 0 O\U'|#\NN-‘ e e e e o o e 0 DISCUSSION. 0 O O O O O O O O O 0 groups. Pre-test characteristics of Mormon sample Differences between males and females . Pre-test group differences. . . . . . . Relationship of self-esteem to sex role Effects of wilderness experience. . . Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS . . . . . Limitations 0 e e o o e e o e e 0 Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . REFERENCES 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O 0 iv 40 4o 42 45 45 46 51 51 54 57 57 6O 63 67 72 75 so 81 81 82 85 9O 92 98 100 102 105 109 APPENDICES . . LIST OF TABLES TABLE 1 Means and standard deviations of BSRI and TSCS variables, experimental group, pre— and pest-test. . . . . . . . . 52 2 Means and standard deviations of BSRI and TSCS variables. 0011131301 group, pre- and Post-test e e e e e e e e e e e e 53 3 BSRI and TSCS pre-test means by treatment group and sex . 55 4 Tests of significance, BSRI and TSCS scale scores at pre-test, combined experimental and control groups .. 56 5 Chi-square test of sex-role distributions between experimental and control groups at pre-test . . . . . . 58 6 Chi-square tests of sex-role distributions between sexes at pre-test, by treatment group . . . . . . . . . 59 7 Chi-square tests of sex-role distributions between treatment groups and Bem's group at pre-test, by sex. . 62 8 Change in sex-role classifications, pre- to post- test, experimental group (sex-typed and non-sex-typed categorieS) C O O O O O O C C C C O O O O O O O C O O O U 64 9 Change in sex-role classifications, pre- to post- test, exPerimental group (sex-typed and androgynous categorieS) O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 65 10 Change in sex-role classifications, pre- to post- test. experimental group (non-androgynous and androgynous categories) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66 11 2 x 4 analysis of variance, pre-test TSCS Total Positive scores by sex x sex role, combined experimental and control groups . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69 12 Pre-test means and standard deviations, TSCS Total Positive scores, by sex role x treatment group x sex. . 7O 13 Results of post-hoe comparisons, pre-test TSCS Total Positive scores bv sex role . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71 14 Results of multiple regression analyses of pre- to vi 15 16 17 post-test BSRI scale scores, by sex/BSRI scale. . . . . Pre-test means and standard deviations, TSCS Total Positive scores. by treatment group and sex role. . . . Results of post-hoe comparisons, post-test TSCS Total Positive scores by sex role . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Breakdown of subjects falling into sex-role categories at post-test, by treatment group and sex. . . . . . . . vii 73 77 78 94 APPENDIX LIST OF APPENDICES Wilderness Trek - Course description . . . . . . . 116 Sample BSRI and TSCS Protocols of Masculine, Feminine, Androgynous, and Undifferentiated subjects. . . . . . . . . . . . . 120 viii CMHMI INTRODUCTION Rationale The 1980s have seen the resurgence of a wave of political con- servatism among the American people and their leaders. The growth of the "New Right" has been accompanied by a groundswell of religious activity among the American pOpulace, as well as the growing political influence of evangelists and heads of conservative fundamentalist religious groups. The recent defeat of the ERA, aided by the vocal opposition and financial resources of certain religious groups, in- cluding the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (Mormon), attests to the political power of this segment of American society. There is obviously a pressing need for research focused on the rela- tionship between religiosity and/or religious affiliation and person- ality as well as behavior. The present study investigates the rela- tionship between sex role and self-esteem as well as sex role sta- bility in a sample of Mormon adolescents living in central Utah. Should the influence of religious groups continue to be felt in the future, the results of this research may help to forecast 'trends in public policy and social norms. For example, it may be that the schism between liberal and conservative factions of American society with regard to cultural norms for the behavior and personal- ity traits of’men and women is growing. Furthermore, this study generated hypotheses with regard to sex role that may be applicable to other populations espousing particularly narrow sex role defi- nitions, such as Latin American, Chicano, Arab, and other cultures in foreign countries, or as subcultures of the American ”melting pot". The present study investigated some of the hypotheses about sex role that have been proposed, but not tested, by previous researchers. The sample consists of'67 white Mormon adolescents (32 male, 35 fe- male) aged 14 to 18, living in central Utah, who were administered a measure of psychological sex role (Bem Sex Role Inventory).and self- esteem (Tennessee Self;Concept Scale) befbre and after their partici— pation in an intensive five-day wilderness survival experience. The relationship between sex role and selfeesteem in these sub- jects will be considered from a social learning perspective. It is expected that as Mormons, and particularly Mermon adolescents living in Utah, fellow the dictates of the predominant culture reinforced by peer group pressure, their level of self-esteem will be high. As long as these individuals can produce the sex-typed behavior expected of them from their parents, culture, religion and peer group, they will receive approval and social reinforcement from significant others, and. their selfkesteem will remain relatively high. However, an intense wilderness experience during which the male and female adolescents receive strong social approval and encouragement for both agentic and communal behavior may alter this pattern, and those who possess both agentic and communal personality traits (the androgynous group) may score relatively higher than sex-typed adolescents on self-esteem at post-test. As mentioned above, the subjects participated in a wilderness experience in which adolescents of both sexes were required to perfbrm such traditionally "masculine" tasks such as killing a sheep and rap- pelling down a cliff, as well as "feminine" activities including cook- ing, expressing feelings verbally and supporting other group members in distress both physically and emotionally. There is little or no research on the stability of sex role in individuals who have partici- pated in training programs requiring them to perferm difficult tasks of both the instrumental and expressive type, or whether there is any difference in the degree to which males and females are affected by these types of experiences. It is assumed that sex-typed adolescents A of both sexes will become significantly more androgynous after such an experience, and in light of Heilbrun's (1968) suggestion and the re- search of Nye (1976) and Nielsen (1975), that girls may experience a significantly greater degree of change in sex role (towards androgyny) and selfeesteem (towards higher levels of self-esteem) than boys, who may experience a ceiling effect due to their higher levels of masculi- nity at pre-test. CHAPTER II LITERATURE REVIEW This study is designed to assess the statistical incidence of differing psychological sex roles reported by a sample of Mormon adolescents; the correlation between religiosity and sex role, as well as sex role and self-esteem in this sample; and whether these sex roles would be affected by an intensive wilderness experience requiring adolescents of both sexes to display agentic and communal behaviors. To help the reader understand the relevant literature in this field, a general overview of the concepts of selfbesteem, sex role, sex role socialization, and wilderness stress groups will be presented. Finally, the literature directly per- tinent to the present study covering the areas of relationship of psychological sex role to selfeesteem; effects of wilderness stress groups upon psychological characteristics of participants; and the influence of religious affiliation on the psychological sex roles of members of religious groups will be covered in greater detail. Self-theory and self-esteem The concepts of self and individual phenomenal experience developed from the notion that human behavior could not be explained simply by the study of stimulus-response contingencies, but that there exist internal psychological and cognitive processes that mediate behavior and interpersonal interaction. Accordingly, Gordon and Gergen (1968) have defined the self-concept as "the person's subjective cognitions and evaluations of himself” (p. 8), which constitute a working compromise between his/her self-ideals and perceptions of his/her imperfect behavior in daily living. More specifically, COOpersmith (1967) feels that the self or selfeconcept is "an abstraction that an individual develops about the attributes, capacities, objects, and activities which he possesses and pursues" (p. 20). Perhaps the earliest theorizing about the self was that of William James (1890), who postulated feur possible antecedents of positive feelings about the self: 1) congruence between the individual's aspirations and achievements; 2) the ability to meet societal standards of status and success; 3) the value placed on extensions of the self, including the body, psychological processes, interpersonal relationships, and material goods; and 4) feelings of social worth, or peer recognition and approval. It was shortly after this time that theoretical perspectives emerged concerning the developnent of the self-concept throughout the lifespan; Cooley (1909) hypothesized that the self-concept of the child developed through his/her interaction with significant others in the environment. He believed that the child's idea of self consisted of the idea held by the child regarding his/her appearance to another person; his/her imagination of the other's judgment of that appearance; and the child's affective reaction to that judgment, such as "pride or mortificatiOn". George Herbert Mead, another influential self theorist, elaborated on Cooley's ideas by emphasizing the importance of language in the development of the self-concept. He felt that infants initially failed to differentiate themselves from significant others in their environment. In early childhood, Mead believed, a basic awareness of the self as an actor and organism deve10ped, which he termed the "I". Later, the "me", or the under- standing and internalization of how others perceived and judged the child, evolved. Mead felt that the "me" was the social part of the child's personality, consisting of the internalization of norms, values, and roles presented by society, which are learned by the child as s/he assumes the role of the "other" in interpersonal inter- ' action. Contemporary theories of self-concept and self-esteem survive almost unchanged from these early contributions to self theory. For example, the keystone of Carl Rogers' therapeutic technique is the concept of unconditional positive regard. Rogers believes, as did Cooley and Mead, that positive self-esteem develops when the individual experiences unconditional acceptance by significant others during infancy. As the infant internalizes the positive reaction of others to him/her, the process culminates in a positive subjective evaluation of him/herself, or positive selfbregard. The child is also unable to differentiate the reactions of his/her parents towards him/her from the demands of the outside world on him/her, and thus develOps a world view and attitudes towards others which reflect the reactions of his/her parents towards him/her. Brim (1968) feels that because of this process, the child acquires a desire to conferm his/ her behavior to others' expectations, and thus becomes receptive to the acquisition of social roles, which insure approval from society. Thus, social roles constitute the basis of the self-concept through late childhood and adulthood. Park (1931) summarized by stating, ”the conceptions which men form of themselves seem to depend upon their vocations, and in general upon the role which they seek to play in the communities and social groups in which they live, as well as upon the recognition and status which society accords them in these roles" (p. 44). Of course, the individual assumes many social roles throughout the life span, including kinship (father, mother, brother); career (dentist, waitress); ethnic/cultural (Black, Chicano); religious, and even sub-cultural (delinquent, punk rocker) roles, to name a few. Undoubtedly, the behavior and personality characteristics ex- pected from the individual in his/her functioning in these roles both affects and is affected by her/his level of self-esteem. However, many researchers feel that one's sex role characteristics and behavior are relatively important in the developnent and maintenance of the individual's self-concept and self-esteem. Mussen (1969) has stated, "it is a banal truth that the individual's sex role is the most sal- ent of his many social roles. No other social role directs more of his overt behavior, emotional reactions, cognitive functioning, covert attitudes and general psychological and social adjustment" (p. 707). Likewise, Recely (1973) feels that "in our society, the maintenance of personal self-esteem requires some degree of confermity to the demands of the major sex-role stereotypes...straying too far from sex- role prescriptions is risky in terms of social acceptability, and it is difficult to preserve one's self-esteem in the face of social rejection" (p. 7). Given that sex role is an important factor in the development of self-esteem, let us now turn to a consideration of that to pic . Sex role - Historical development and cross-cultural aspects At present, it is acknowledged that sex-role differentiation is almost universal across human cultures; men and women are assigned to perfbrm different tasks and live under different social norms regulating personal conduct, social interaction, and expressed per- sonality characteristics. Cultural anthropologists and other social scientists have speculated that sex-role differentiation in primitive societies arose from genetic differences; the division of labor in hunting-gathering societies was based on man's superior strength and woman's childbearing capability. Thus, traditional sex roles, in which the woman performed domestic duties and nurtured children, gradually evolved. Barry, Bacon and Child (1957), in their study of the socialization of children in 110 cultures, have asserted that the magnitude of sex differences in socialization processes in a society is positively correlated with the degree to which that society's economy values and demands superior physical strength and motor activity in the accomplishment of necessary tasks. In addition, cultures that are characterized by large family groups high in cooper- ation also seem to be conducive to large differences in socialization between the sexes, as the isolation of a nuclear family requires that the man must be prepared to assume the woman's role in the family and vice versa. The authors concluded that most societies, like American society, pressure girls towards developing nurturance, obedience and responsibility, while boys are encouraged to be self-reliant and achieving. However, they state that "There is marked variation among ' regions of the world in typical size of sex difference in socializa- tion..." (p. 332). Although American society has progressed to an industrial state with advanced technology, no longer necessitating such a rigid divi- sion of labor between the sexes, complex political, sociological and economic forces have helped maintain the patterns of sex role social- ization that originated in less advanced societies. Scott and Tilly (1975) hypothesize that in agricultural and poor urban communities, the labor of women is required to support the family economically. However, as a society becomes more industrialized and its middle class grows, it is more likely to value women's economic contibution in domestic tasks and socialization of children. The authors feel that such socio-economic conditions foster certain cultural stereo- types of males and females, stating, "The division along sexual lines between instrumental and expressive functions was thrown into high relief, and along with it, expectations that women and men should possess contrasting personal qualities" (p. 6). Within the last thirty years, interest in and research on sex roles and differences between the sexes in the areas of socializa- tion, cognition and emotion has mushroomed. The term "psychological sex role" has been defined by Coleman (1980) as "a set of standards 10 or prescriptions which describe apprOpriate masculine and feminine behavior in a particular culture", and sex role identity is defined as "...the extent to which a person feels that his or her behavior is consistent with the standards which operate in the culture to determine male or female behavior in general" (p. 57). There is general agreement about the most salient sex-role behaviors expected of men and women in American culture: women are expected to marry and have children, rely on a male provider for sustenance, stress personal appearance, be nurturant, and ferego expressions of direct aggression, assertion, and power (Keller, 1974). Men are expected to be physically strong and achievement-oriented; provide sustenance and protection for women and children; avoid emotional intimacy with same-sex others, and show emotional control and alienation from feelings, except for anger (Pleck, 1976). In light of these universally acknowledged sex-role prescriptions, much recent psychological research has focused on identifying the personality characteristics that are thought to characterize men and women. In discussing the attributes of "mascu- linity" and "femininity" as defined by American societal norms, Parsons and Bales (1955) have observed that masculinity has been term- ed an instrumental orientation, or a cognitive and behavioral fecus on accompdishing a desired goal, while femininity has been associated with an expressive orientation, or an affective concern with the well- being of others and the harmony of the group. Similarly, Bakan (1966) suggested that masculinity corresponds to an "agentic" modality of behavior, or an individual concern for oneself and the urge for 11 mastery, while femininity corresponds to a "communal" mode of being, or a concern with the relationship of the self to others. In the 19505 and 603, efferts to devise instruments to determine which personality characteristics were considered masculine and femin- ine by American adults were fraught with difficulties. Constantinople (1973) criticized the use of unidimensional scales of’masculinity and femininity, on which personality characteristics were dichotomized as characteristic of one sex, and their opposites, as characteristic of the other sex. Thus, femininity was conceptualized as a lack of’mas- culinity and vice versa. Masculine and feminine responses were also summed algebraically to locate a person along a continuum of’masculin- ity and femininity; those who scored at the sexually "appropriate" extremes of this range (masculinity for males, femininity for females) were viewed as preperly sex-typed and therefbre well-adjusted, while those scoring in the middle were seen as ambiguous in sex-role iden- tity, and thus less well-socialized and possibly, less well-adjusted. Constantinople also noted that researchers had not provided the theoretical groundwork necessary to guide the selection of test items, andthat no distinction between important and trivial aspects of behavior was made; masculinity and femininity had been defined in terms of the empirical sex-differentiated frequency of item endorse- ment. Finally, she criticized the criteria for item selection, which often included the ability to distinguish between men and women or homosexuals and heterosexuals. No conceptual distinction was made between sex roles, sexual orientation, masculine and feminine aspects of the self, and other gender-related phenomena; test items often 12 reflected such varied phenomena as motives and attitudes, interests, leisure activities, domestic tasks, patterns of interpersonal inter- action, and personality attributes, thus confbunding behavior of various types with the measurement of personality characteristics. Angrist (1969) observed that the various types of behavior differed in the importance attached to them by the individual, and hypothesized low correlations among behaviors that were low in the hierarchy. Later research on sex-role phenomena fecused on sex-role stereo- types, or "a set of beliefs about the personal characteristics of women and men which is shared by the members of some groups” (Ashmore and DelBoca, 1979, p. 227). In order to empirically determine the content of sex-role stereotypes held by adult‘Americans, Rosenkrantz, Broverman and their associates conducted a number of studies in the late 19603 and early 708. Rosenkrantz et al (1968) asked 74 male and 80 female college students to rate the typical adult male, female and themselves on a scale of one to seven on 122 bipolar items, including traits such as aggression ("not at all aggressive" to "very aggressive") and emotional ("not at all emotional" to "very emotional") that were thought to differentiate men and women. Items defining sex-role stereotypes were defined as 75% agreement among the subjects in rating an item as either masculine or feminine. 41 items met this criterion, and it was found that men were rated higher than women on traits such as aggression, objectivity, independence, compe- tition, and ambition, while women were rated higher on passivity, dependence, emotionality, and submissiveness. Tests of social desirability indicated that more male than female traits were highly 13 valued (29 and 12, respectively). The authors concluded that "sex- role stereotypes continue to be clearly defined and held in agreement by both college men and college women...both men and women agree that a greater number of the characteristics and behaviors stereotypically associated with masculinity are socially desirable than those associated with femininity....The self-concepts of’men and women are very similar to the respective stereotypes....but women also hold negative values of their worth relative to men” (p. 293). In an analysis of this and additional data, Broverman et a1 (1972) also noted that the masculine traits fermed a cluster of related behaviors which exemplified "competence, rationality, and assertion", while the positively-valued feminine traits reflected "warmth and express- ieness", and that women incorporated more negative aspects of the feminine stereotype into their selfeconcepts, including incompetence,' irrationality and passivity. This data was consistent over approxi- mately one thousand subjects, regardless of age, sex, religion, edu- cational level, or marital status. The authors, surprised at the persistence of sex role stereotypes in the face of woman's changing role in American society, hypothesized that people resist change in sex-role stereotypes because they fear chaos in their perceptions of the world; feel personally threatened and emotionally aroused; and have difficulty resisting societal norms and structures that support and confirm sex-role stereotypes. The list of personality traits designated as more characteristic of one sex than the other, as well as the research methodology used to compile this list, formed the basis of contemporary measures of 14 psychological sex role, the best-known of which is the Ben Sex Role Inventory (BSRI). Bem (1974) compiled a list of 200 personality char- acteristics that she judged to be positive in affective valence and either masculine or feminine in nature, prior to fermulating the Masculine and Feminine scales of her instrument, as well as 200 "neutral" characteristics that formed the basis of her Social Desi- rability scale. 100 undergraduates, half’male and half female, were asked to rate how desirable each of the 600 characteristics were ”for a man” or "fer a woman" in American society; a characteristic qualified as masculine if it was judged by both males and females to be significantly more desirable for a man than fer a woman (p (.05), and feminine if judged by both males and females to be more desirable for a woman than for a man (p (.05). Neutral characteristics were defined as those judged by both males and females to be no more de- sirable for one sex than for the other (p (.20), and when males and females did not differ significantly in their social desirability ratings fer that trait (p <.2o). or the final item pool satisfying all these criteria, 20 masculine items were selected fer the Masculin- ity scale, 20 feminine items were chosen for the Femininity scale, and 20 neutral items (10 positive and 10 negative in tone) for the Social Desirability scale. According to Ben, her instrument we designed to measure "a very specific tendency to describe oneself in accordance with sex-typed standards of desirable behavior fer men and women" (p. 159), classifying a person into Masculine, Feminine, or Androgynous sex-role categories as a function of Student's t_ratio for the difference between his or her mean scores on the Masculinity 15 and Femininity scales. Kelly and Worell (1977) have summarized the assumptions upon which the BSRI is based as follows: 1) an orthogonal, two-dimensional model of masculinity-femininity, rather than a bipolar additive model as had been popular in the past; 2) a socio- cultural definition of sex roles, particularly according to the instrumental/expressive and communal/agentic distinctions espoused by Parsons and Bales (1955) and Bakan (1966), respectively; 3) a sampling of positive, socially valued but sex-typed characteristics; 4) an assumption that psychological sex role has implications for the flex- ibility and extensiveness of one's behavioral repertoire. The significance of Bem's achievement in the measurement of psy- chological sex role was threefold: first, she empirically defined personality characteristics that are believed to differentiate men and women in American society; second, she devised a multidimensional, non-bipolar schema fer the measurement of psychological sex role; it was now possible for a person's score on masculinity and femininity scales within one instrument to vary independently of each other. Third, Bem introduced the concept of psychological androgyny, or the possession of male and female characteristics by a single person and the corresponding endorsement of approximately equal numbers of‘mas- culine and feminine characteristics on a measure of psychological sex role. The introduction of androgyny as a sex-role phenomenon has pre- cipitated many empirical and theoretical articles, some of which will be summarized below. 16 Psychological androgyny Kaplan and Bean (1976) note that the word androgyny is derived from the Greek m, referring to male, and gm, referring to female, and originally meant the presence of female and male characteristics in a single organism, as in the hermaphrodite. Jung (1956), however, revised this concept to describe a primordial archetype representing the fusion of'male and female consciousness in the human psyche. According to Jung, man's consciousness is primarily masculine, but partially counterbalanced by anima (female principle). Conversely, ' the woman's consciousness is feminine, but she is possessed of animus (male soul), which she must use to nurture the man's anima, allowing him to integrate this part of himself with the rest of his personality and free his creative energy. Thus, androgyny pertained mainly to males and their striving fer psychological integration. As noted above, Bem resurrected this concept, attaching to it a different meaning. Her position, based on the research of Kagan (1964) and Kohlberg (1966), was that the highly masculine male or feminine female would be very invested in behaving in a manner consistent with his or her internal sex role standard, thus narrowing his or her behavioral options in situations where behavior tradition- ally appropriate for the other sex might be more adaptive. Thus, she hypothesized that persons scoring high in both masculinity and femin- inity on her measure would: 1) show a wider range of responses than a sex-typed person; 2) be more flexible in his/her response to situational demands, being able to assess a situation and determine the most adaptive response fer him/herself and others; and 3) be more 17 psychologically healthy than sex-typed persons. As can be seen, Bem postulated a link between the endorsement of sex—typed characteristics and sex-stereotyped behavior. She invoked both cognitive and dispositional processes for interpreting BSRI responses, feeling that consistency across situations in behavior can occur because of a "motivational disturbance" that ”causes a person to respond to dissimilar situations as if they were equiva- lent" because s/he ”is defensively motivated to maintain some sort of image” (Bem 1972, p. a). To test this hypothesis, she and her associates conducted a number of studies comparing subjects classified as androgynous and sex-typed on her instrument on independence (a masculine behavior) and nurturance (a feminine behavior). The first study utilized a standard conformity paradigm to determine whether masculine and androgynous subjects would be able to resist social pressure more successfully than feminine subjects. Subjects were asked to rate the funniness of cartoons in the presence of confederates of the experimenter who rated funny cartoons as not funny and vice versa. Both male and female subjects categorized as masculine on the BSRI agreed with the confederates on significantly fewer trials than did the feminine subjects of both sexes. To test nurturance, the subjects' responses to a kitten‘were measured under two conditions: when the kitten was the only thing in the room to play with, and when there were other objects available to play with. On this task, feminine and androgynous males played with the kitten more frequently than did masculine males. Contrary to prediction, however, feminine and androgynous females were not found to be more responsive to the 18 kitten than masculine females; in fact, feminine females played with the kitten less than did the androgynous females. In an effort to clarify this confusing finding, Bem, Martyna and Watson (1976) first left subjects alone in a room with an infant and measured the extent to which each subject interacted with the infant. Feminine and androgynous subjects of'both sexes did not differ signi- ficantly in the degree to which they interacted with the baby, and both were significantly more nurturant than.masculine subjects of both sexes. Bem concluded that feminine females may have been reluc- tant to interact with an animal, which they may have conceptualized as ”unfeminine”, but were willing to interact with a human infant, a traditionally feminine behavior. In a second study, subjects were asked to interview a confederate of the experimenter, who was \ described as a lonely transfer student. Nurturance was defined as the number of empathic responses each subject made to the confederate. Feminine and androgynous males did not differ significantly in number of nurturant responses emitted, and were significantly higher than masculine males. However, according to prediction, feminine females were significantly more nurturing than androgynous females, who were more nurturant than masculine females. Thus, it appeared that fem- inine females' nurturant responses were only observed in interactions with human beings in general (infants and adults). In another effort to measure the relationship between sex-role characteristics and sex-typed behavior, Bem and Lenney (1976) asked both sex-typed and androgynous subjects to choose between performing sex-typed and cross-sex-typed tasks, such as ironing a cloth 19 (feminine) or nailing two boards together (masculine). The subjects were paid fer performing tasks, with the sex-typed tasks paying less money than the cross-sex-typed tasks. As expected, sex-typed' subjects were significantly more stereotyped in their choices of task than were androgynous subjects, even though the sex- typed subjects received less money for performing sex-typed tasks. In addition, sex-typed subjects reported more discomfbrt at performing cross-sex-typed tasks than did androgynous subjects. In their summary of these validation studies, Bem et al concluded, "Thus, for both men and women, sex-typing does appear to restrict one's functioning in either the instrumental or the expressive domains” (p. 1022). Following the publication of the BSRI and the above-cited studies establishing its construct validity, Spence et a1 (1975) criticized Bem's use of Student's Erratic to establish sex-role categories, arguing that under this system, people who were both low on masculinity and femininity and high on these two scales were classified as androgynous, obscuring potential differences between the two groups. Spence classified subjects as either above or below the sample median on the masculinity and femininity scales of her instru- ment, the Personal Attributes Questionnaire (PAQ), deriving a feur- feld classification of psychological sex role. Subjects who scored above the mean on the Masculine scale and below the mean on the Fem- inine scale were termed Masculine; low Masculine-high Feminine subjects were termed Feminine; high Masculine-high Feminine persons were called Androgynous; and low-Masculine-low Feminine subjects were Undifferentiated. Furthermore, Spence found that on a measure 20 of social competence, Androgynous subjects scored highest and Undif- ferentiated subjects scored lowest, supporting her claim that subjects high on masculinity and femininity were fundamentally different from subjects scoring low on both scales. The publication of Spence's article marked another turning point in the history of sex role research; she established the scoring system and feurfold classification that was to become popular among those conducting research with both the FAQ and BSRI, and her research marked the beginning of correlational studies designed toestablish the relationship of‘masculinity, femininity, and androgyny to other personality characteristics; e.g., selfeesteem. Sex role and self-esteem Before the develoynent of contemporary measures of sex role such as the BSRI and FAQ, several studies of the relationship of'masculin- ity and femininity to adjustment and self-esteem had been conducted. High femininity in females had consistently been correlated with high anxiety, low self-esteem, and low social acceptance (Cosentino and Heilbrun, 1964; Gall, 1969; Gray, 1957; Sears, 1970; Webb, 1963). Early studies also showed that females in general suffered lower self; esteem than did males, even in childhood. Smith (1939) conducted a study in which 100 boys and 100 girls from 8 to 15 years of age were asked to rate their own and the opposite sex on an array of both de- sirable and undesirable traits. He feund that as children became older, boys had a progressively poorer relative opinion of the girls, and girls had a progressively better Opinion of the boys. Conversely, 21 as they grew older boys had a progressively better opinion of them-_ selves and girls had a progressively poorer opinion of themselves. Furthermore, although boys and girls thought better of their own sex than of the other, by the age of 14 girls had come to think almost as well of the boys as they thought of themselves. Accordingly, Sears (1970) noted that femininity in either sex was clearly associated with poor selfeconcept, aggression anxiety, high selfhaggression, high pro- social and low antisocial aggression. In his opinion, ”these relations are probably based on a common element of fearfulness and insecurity" (p. 278). In adolescence, although high masculinity in males had been cor- related with better psychological adjustment (Mussen, 1961), in adult- hood it was correlated with high anxiety, high neuroticism, and low self-acceptance (Harfbrd, Willis and Deabler, 1967; Mussen, 1962). It was also found that adult men high in masculinity were "aloof, tough, practical, unpretentious, and suspicious...emotionally dissatisfied, prone to guilt and anxiety..." (Harford, Willis and Deabler, 1967). Connell and Johnson (1970) studied both male and female early adoles- cents to test the hypothesis that subjects at this age who are sex- typed have higher self-esteem than subjects who are not sex-typed. Using the Gough Fe (femininity) scale (a unidimensional, bipolar measure of sex role) and the Coopersmith SelfBEsteem Inventory, Connell and Johnson found no differences in self—esteem between sex- typed and non-sex-typed females, but found that the self-esteem of sex—typed males was significantly higher than that of the non-sex— typed males; in fact, the self-esteem of the non-sex-typed males was 22 the lowest in the sample. The authors concluded that for the early adolescent, "the male role may have reward value above and beyond that of the female role regardless of whether the role is adopted by a male or female" (p. 268). Most studies of the relationship of sex role to self-esteem using contemporary sex-role instruments have been conducted with adults and have found that Androgynous or Masculine subjects show the highest mean selfzesteem scores, followed by Feminine and Undifferentiated subjects, in that order. This phenomenon has been explained as re- flective of the tendency of the androgynous individual to be more di- verse in the expression of socially-approved behavior than sex-typed individuals; the androgynous person is capable of using assertive, "masculine-typed" behavior and expressive, "feminine-typed" behavior in the apprOpriate circumstances, while sex-typed persons are restric- ted to one or the other behavioral Option. When Masculine persons score highest, this result has generally been attributed to the higher value placed on masculine personality characteristics in American society. In the first of these studies, Spence et a1 (1975) administered the PAQ and Texas Social Behavior Inventory (a measure of selfeesteem) to 248 males and 282 females enrolled in a university introductory psychology class. She feund Androgynous persons to have the highest mean selfeesteem scores on the TSBI, followed by Masculine, Feminine and Undifferentiated subjects. She also feund "highly significant" positive correlations between masculinity and self-esteem fer both sexes, and "significant" positive correlations between femininity and 23 selfbesteem, also fer both sexes. Several later replication samples, including one group of 1345 high school students, confirmed these results. O'Connor, Mann, and Bardwick (1978), in an attempt to replicate Spence's findings with older adults, administered the PAQ and TSBI to 43 men and 48 women, all upper-income, Caucasian, suburban homeowners between 40 and 50 years of age. The authors found that for both sexes, Androgynous people had the highest mean self-esteem, followed by Masculine, Feminine, and undifferentiated subjects. In addition, scores on the Masculinity scale and self-esteem scores were feund to be significantly correlated (p<.05) among men and women (r-.38 and r-.77, respectively), whereas femininity and self-esteem were significantly correlated for women only (r-.46). Bem (1977) also attempted to replicate Spence's findings by ad- ministering the TSBI and BSRI to 95 male and 74 female undergraduates. Although she feund the same trends in sex role classification and self-esteem as reported by Spence, her multiple regression analysis indicated that self-esteem in men was found to be significantly related to Masculinity scores, but not to Femininity scores. In con- trast, selfhesteem in women was found to be significantly related to both Masculinity (p<.001) and Femininity (p<.01). Jones et al (1978) conducted a comprehensive study of 1404 sub- jects and their sex role classifications as related to adjustment in the following areas: 1) specific personality characteristics such as extroversion, self-control, self-esteem, and alcoholism; 2) intellec- tual competence and creativity, 3) resistance to feelings of help- 24 lessness, and 4) experience in heterosexual relationships. It was feund that with regard to self-control, drinking problems, and extra- version, masculine males rather than androgynous males showed the highest levels of adjustment. There were no significant differences between the two groups in resistance to feelings of helplessness, selfbesteem, or experience in heterosexual relationships. For females, it was feund that androgynous females were less extroverted than masculine females, but had fewer drinking problens and were more creative. The androgynes reported more intimate relationships and fewer sexual inhibitions, but did not show greater knowledge about sexuality. ‘There were no significant differences between the two female groups on sense of control, resistance to feelings of helpless- ness, neurotic tendencies and self-esteem. Kaplan and Sedney (1980) summarized the study by stating, "when differences are found, masc- uline males and androgynous females are likely to score higher in emotional adjustment than their same-sex counterparts" (p. 42). Erdwins, Small and Gross (1980) administered the BSRI, the Ten- nessee Self-Concept Scale (TSCS) and the Manifest Anxiety Scale (MAS) to 52 male and 84 female undergraduates, mean age 21.4 years. The authors found several main effects for sex of respondent; men in gen- eral had a more positive self-image than women and significantly greater overall self-esteem, selfeacceptance, feelings of personal worth and body image. Men also demonstrated significantly less conflict in their TSCS responses, and more certainty. 0n the MAS, men obtained significantly fewer indicators of neurosis and signifi- cantly less anxiety. Regarding sex role, the authors found that 25 androgynous or masculine subjects consistently obtained the highest mean selfeesteem scores on the different scales of the TSCS, while undifferentiated subjects consistently obtained the least positive scores and the feminine group fell in between. Kelly and Wbrell (1977), in their summary of the research on self-esteem in masculine and androgynous subjects, concluded that masculine and androgynous groups did not show consistent differences on tests of self-esteem, and that high selfeesteem is primarily re- lated to the presence of masculine rather than feminine personality characteristics. As a reasonable explanation, the authors prOpose that masculine characteristics, being more highly valued by society as a whole, are also more valued by the individual and thus lead to higher selfhevaluation than would an equivalent number of feminine characteristics. Sex roles in adolescence Adolescence has traditionally been viewed as a period of up- heaval and change in the individual's self-concept, for at least four reasons: 1) the physical and hormonal changes occurring in adolescence precipitate a change in one's body image and feelings about one's self; 2) the cognitive growth that occurs during this period makes possible the fermulation of a more complex self-concept, which in- cludes the individual's potential as well as present behavior and achievement; 3) increased autonomy and opportunity for decision-making enables some growth in self-concept; 4) the transitional nature of adolescence may be associated with self-concept change. With regard 26 to the last point, Erikson (1950) has defined the task of adolescence as "the quest for identity”, or discovering and defining the self. The adolescent accomplishes this by trying out different roles offered by society and integrating the roles that are ego-syntonic with the identifications, skills, values and aspirations he or she has devel- oped and nurtured throughout childhood. Thus, the adolescent's be- havior may appear inconsistent and unstable to others in his or her environment. Be that as it may, researchers have also observed that powerful social pressures operate in adolescence to promote sex-typing, with girls expected to fit the conventional pattern of femininity and boys, masculinity. As Rodgers (1967) has observed, ”it is in the teens that the polarity of sex roles reaches its zenith" (p. 337). Douvan (1970) feels that cultural norms become salient at adolescence as the individual seeks to achieve a stable identity, and because adults see adolescence as the "last chance" to influence and social- ize the child into culturally acceptable patterns of behavior. In addition, peer group influences are especially important in adol- escence, and the values stressed and approved by the adolescent mil- ieu are athletic interests for boys and social popularity for girls (Coleman, 1961). Longitudinal data revealed that as boys progressed throughout the high school years, academic achievement became in- creasingly important, while girls progressively devalued academic achievement, but continued to value social leadership and pepularity. Douvan believes that in this way, the girl is trained to adapt to the needs of her husband when she marries, as adolescent girls are encour- 27 aged by society to remain fluid and ambiguous in selfedefinition, continuing to look to others for the social acceptance that forms the basis of their self-esteem. Rosenberg (1965) also replicated Coleman's findings in his study of self-esteem in 5024 high school juniors and seniors; he found that girls more consistently valued 'being "liked by others" than did boys; boys were more likely to value motoric activity and physical courage. As can be seen, the prescribed sex roles of'male and female adolescents in American culture closely parallel the norms espoused by the society as a whole, except that sex roles in adolescence are probably even more‘rigid and narrowly prescribed than in adulthood. As Douvan (1970) states, there are "a somewhat overly specialized, narrowly conceived set of sex-role expectations that is stringently imposed on adolescents in our culture” (p. 41). Sex roles and religious affiliation Having previously considered the relationship of sex role and self-esteem in adolescence, which may be considered a ”subculture" in American society, we now turn our attention to sex role phenomena in another faction of the larger society; religious groups. Very little research has been done in this area, possibly because of the difficulty of defining a homogeneous group of religious believers. Degree of orthodoxy, differing religious socialization practices employed by parents, demographic and many other variables intrude to make generalizations about the members of any religious group extremely difficult. Lipman-Blumen (1972) studied 1012 wives of 28 graduate students in the Boston area, aged 18-54, median age 23.4 years. She feund a "strong association" between a woman's religious affiliation and her attitude toward sex roles; women who espoused atheism, agnosticism, Judaism or Eastern religions tended to espouse contemporary sex role ideology, while Protestant and Catholic women were more likely to favor traditional sex role beliefs. This rela- tionship was much stronger for converts to a particular religion as opposed to those who maintained the religion they had been raised in as children. Tavris (1973) conducted a survey in Psychology Today, to which 890 men and 616 women responded. She feund that support for the women's liberation movement (WIM) was best predicted fer both sexes by political radicalism, religious liberalism, and the perception of sex differences as purely cultural rather than genetic. Atheists, Unitar- ians and Jews were most in favor of the WLM, followed by Protestants and Catholics. The author noted that religion was an important factor for both sexes with regard to their support for the WLM; but it was consistently stronger for men. For example, Protestant and Catholic. men were more likely than men affiliated with other religious groups to believe that WLM members are neurotic or castrating; that women are best fulfilled as wives and mothers; and to believe that women are not discriminated against. Finally, Van Fossen (1977) studied the relationship of social class, parental education and occupation, parental dominance, and religious background to the sex-role values and aspirations of young college women. 334 women responded to a 25-item Likert scale measuring 29 sex role values, as well as the Attitudes Towards Women Scale (Spence, et al, 1973). On the basis of these responses, the subjects were classified as traditional, contemporary, or intermediate with regard to the sex role values they held.~ The author feund that daughters of Catholic or Protestant fathers were more likely to be classified as traditional or intermediate in sex role values, while daughters of non-Christian fathers ("Jewish", "other", or "none”), were much.more likely to be classified contemporary. This differentiation was particularly marked on sex role items relating to male dominance and superiority; confonmity of women to "feminine" norms; and adherence to a traditional division of labor and authority within the family. This finding was not due to religious differences in parental domi- nance or social class effects. Furthermore, a stepwise multiple re- gression analysis revealed father's religion to be the most important influence on the daughter's sex role values, followed by parental dominance_and mother's employment. In discussing her results, van Fossen offered two hypotheses: 1) that the patriarchal concepts espoused by different religions in- fluence the sex-role ide010gies of their members, which is a specific example of the general idea that religious cultures instill strong values about virtually all aspects of'human life, thus influencing individual behavior and aspirations. This, of course, is a cultural theory of religious socialization, while the second hypothesis is structural in nature, suggesting that 2) religious values concerning appropriate sex roles develop out of that religion's authority patterns and sexual hierarchies. In support of this idea, Van Fossen 30 cites the research of Wallace (1975) on the religious behavior of men and women in the Catholic Church; women have traditionally performed the loweréstatus, "expressive" behaviors such as cleaning and ironing altar cloths, baking cakes, cooking fer church dinners, listening to the sermon, receiving communion, and donating money. The "instrumen- tal”, active behaviors are generally performed by men; consecrating the Eucharist, distributing communion, ordaining priests, preaching and reading scripture during Mass, and managing church funds. Van Fossen postulated that religious ideologies are more powerfully incorporated by the individual when they are further validated by social hierarchies and relationships in one's everyday life.' She concludes by stating that ”churches which are hierarchical and pa- triarchal in their own institutional structures, which stress com- pliance to authority as a facet of one's religious faith, and which also contain specific and traditional norms governing family rela- tionships, encourage the development of traditional sex-role values in the young women of their membership" (p. 571). Sex roles in the Mormon church Unfortunately, no studies exist regarding the perceptions of Mormons about cultural norms held by their religion regarding sex role. However, there is evidence that the Mormon church fits the description of the hierarchical and patriarchal church as offered by Van Fossen in the previous paragraph, and it would seem reasonable to expect that its members would be strongly sex-typed. Numerous statements by Mermon church leaders clearly support the idea that 31 men and women should assume different social roles and that women should abide by the decisions of a male head of the household, generally the husband or father (if the woman is unmarried). Warenski (1978), in her description of the Mormon patriarchal system, concludes that "men and women are assigned to the division of labor in the home and church for which each is best suited by nature. The woman is the child bearer and rearer and homemaker...and the man is the provider" (p. 88). Furthermore, Mormon doctrines and church leaders encourage the acquisition of sex-typed personality character- istics, interests and behaviors among its members; the Biblical in- junction for women to be ”submissive to their husbands", patient and cheerful as a wife and mother is stressed, as well as man's dominance, leadership, protection and emotional strength as the patriarch of his family. The difficulties inherent in measuring sex role, self-esteem, or the relationship of any other variable to religious affiliation are greatly minimized when studying a population of church-going Mormons. Religious socialization practices and religious orthodoxy are invar- iably conservative in nature, varying little from one Mormon family to the other, as the Mormon church has established norms regarding the conduct of almost every aspect of daily life. Kelly (1972) classified the Mermon church as a rapidly growing conservative de- nomination, noting that religious commitment and religious conserva- tism have increased dramatically among its members from 1910 to 1976. Christensen and Cannon (1978) feund marked increases in the religious orthodoxy of Mormon university students with respect to religious and 32 social attitudes and religious behavior. Rytting and Christensen (1980) also found striking unanimity of beliefs in the same sample; of their 34 questions concerning Mormon social attitudes, the subjects showed 98% agreement with the orthodox, church-approved view on one- third of the questions and at least 90% agreement on almost two-thirds of the total questions asked. The authors concluded that demographic and other variables paled in comparison to the variable of church membership in the determination of degree of orthodoxy in Mbrmons vs. non-Mormons; it accounted for 58% of the variance. Thus, it appears that young church-going Mormons are apt to be very orthodox in their acceptance of church doctrines and practices with regard to sex role attitudes, behaviors, and characteristics. Wilderness stress groups The positive potential of wilderness stress programs in the amelioration and primary prevention of psychological disorders has been substantiated by considerable research (Clifford and Clifford, 1967; Fletcher, 1970; Wetmore, 1969; Nye, 1975; Stimpson and Pedersen, 1970; Thorstenson, 1972; Nielsen, 1975; Risk, 1976; Nowicki and Barnes, 1975; Eastman, 1973). There is much evidence that wilderness stress programs may be especially effective with adolescent and young adult participants, who constitute the majority of the subjects re- ported in the literature. The wilderness stress experience lifts the adolescent from his/her everyday social milieu, and places him/her in a wilderness setting where s/he can test his/her own newly learned adaptive and coping skills against nature. The student learns that 33 s/he can make decisions, exert personal power and determination, and enjoy the support of the other adolescents within the small groups who are facing the same challenges. There are numerous types of "wilderness survival" or "wilderness adventure” programs, most of which have several elements in common: a wilderness setting, a written or implied philosophy emphasizing the desirability of understanding one's weaknesses and strengths and one's relationship to nature, and the use of controlled stress situations to promote positive changes in the individual and his or her social functioning. The latter is accomplished by the setting of’mentally challenging and/or physically strenuous tasks, the confrontation of fear, the completion of the "seemingly impossible" task, and the positive psychological changes generated within the individual who completes the task successfully (Noll and Wilpers, 1974). To facili- tate improved social functioning, including the development of cooper- ,ative efforts, group decision-making abilities, and interdependence, small groups are often employed as the primary social units. Programs . meeting the above criteria will hereafter be referred to as ”wilder- ness stress" programs. The presentation of conditioned aversive stimuli in intense ferms without negative consequences, or "flooding", may account for the elimination of much defensive behavior and the acquisition of coping skills in the wilderness stress situation, especially since the Oppor- tunity fer escape is minimal. Peer pressure and instructor support for the individual rappelling down a 90-fbot cliff for the first time make it difficult to avoid the task, and coping behavior, or the 34 perfbrmance of the task, is elicited. As defenses break down and challenges are met rather than avoided, the individual who conquers his/her fear and overcomes mental or physical obstacles though his/ her own determination experiences a surge of self—confidence and pos- itive feelings about him/herself. As Bernstein (1972) notes: "the ultimate positive reinforcement is mastery or control over one's environment" (p. 161). Psychological changes among wilderness stress participants Again, no research has been done on the effects of wilderness stress programs on the psychological sex roles of the participants. Heat of these studies have confirmed statistically significant in- creases in various other psychological variables such as selfeesteem and Jocus of control following a wilderness stress experience. However, two studies have investigated sex differences in selfeconcept following a wilderness stress experience (Nye 1975; Nielsen 1975). Nye used the TSCS to measure self-concept changes in 23 male and 35 female students participating in a 24-day Outward Bound course, as compared to a control group. An analysis of variance revealed that male experimental group members scored significantly higher from pre-test to post-test on nine scales of the TSCS: identity, self- satisfaction, behavior, physical self, moral-ethical self, personal self, family self, social self, and total positive score. Female experimental group members scored significantly higher from pre-test to post-test on all of the above scales except physical self. How- ‘ ever, after a three-month follow-up, female experimental group mem- 35 bars scored significantly higher than pre-test on all nine scales, while male experimental group members scored significantly higher on only six scales: identity, behavior, family self, social self, moral-ethical self and physical self. Nielson (1975) studied members of two types of wilderness stress groups: a "traditional" and a "pilot" group, the latter involving the learning of sociological and interpersonal concepts in addition to a wilderness experience. Both outdoor experiences lasted approx- imately one month. The former group included 10 males and 17 females, while the latter group included 12 males and 16 females. Nielsen feund that females in both groups showed significant changes in a positive direction on 12 scales of the TSCS, while males showed sig- nificant changes on the self-satisfaction and personal self'dimensions only. Pilot group males showed no statistically significant changes, while pilot group females showed statistically significant positive changes on all scales but selfgcriticism. Traditional group males changed significantly in a positive direction on selfesatisfaction, behavior, moral-ethical self, personal self, and social self, while traditional group females changed positively and significantly on all TSCS scales. Thus, females in both groups seemed to show greater personal growth as a result of their wilderness experience, as compared to the males. Summary Contemporary theories of self-concept and self-esteem stress the role of social reinforcement in the develOpment of the individual's 36 attitudes about the self, suggesting that selfeesteem is closely tied to socialization practices. The roles that a particular culture encourages men and women to adopt are often narrowly prescribed; in American culture, women are expected to marry and have children, be nurturing and communal towards others, and accede to males, while men are expected to provide fer their families, be aggressive and achievement-oriented, and control the expression of feelings. This is particularly true in the case of fundamentalist religions, which frequently espouse patriarchal beliefs and encourage traditional sex-role stereotyping. Studies have shown that women belonging to the more conservative religious denominations (particularly Protestants and Catholics) believed in traditional divisions of labor and authority in the family; male dominance and superiority; and the necessity for women to conferm to "feminine" ideals to a greater extent than did wemen of’more liberal religious affiliation (atheists, Jews, and others). It was hypothesized that the patriarchal concepts taught by fundamentalist religions, including Mbrmonism, influenced the sex-role attitudes and values espoused by female members, in the direction of sex-role stereotypy. Finally, studies of the effects of wilderness stress experiences revealed that participants showed large increases in selfeesteem, which suggests the possibility that the psychological sex role of participants might also change in the direction of androgyny follow- ing such experiences. 37 Hypotheses and proposed data analysis In light of the theoretical framework that was laid by the lit- erature review, it is hypothesized that: 1) At pretest, the highest proportion of Mormon male and female adolescents in the experimental group will be feund in their respec- tive sex-typed categories, with males classified as Masculine and females classified as Feminine according to Bem's difference score/ median split hybrid method employing Bem’s standardization sample medians, as applied to the scores of these subjects on the BSRI. A Chi-square test of association was used to test this hypo- thesis. ' 2) At pre-test, a significant difference will be found between the proportions of experimental group subjects and the proportions of Bem's standardization sample that fall into each of thefour sex- role classifications. A Chi-square goodness-of-fit test was used to test this hypothesis. 3) Following the wilderness experience, a significant number of males and females in the experimental group who were classified as sex-typed on the BSRI at pre-test will move into the androgynous category (using Bem's standardization sample medians), using the Mc Nemar Test for the significance of changes to test this hypothesis. 4) At pretest, sex-typed individuals of both sexes in the com- bined experimental and control group of subjects will show the high- est levels of self-esteem, and cross-sex-typed individuals of both sexes will show the lowest levels of self-esteem, as measured by the TSCS Total Pbsitive score and assessed by a 2 x 4 analysis of 38 variance (sex x sex role). 5) Male experimental group members' BSRI Femininity scores and female experimental group members' BSRI Masculinity scores will increase significantly from pre- to post-test when their pre- test scores on these scales are held constant. A multiple regres- sion analysis of covariance was used to test this hypothesis. 6) There will be a significant increase in the TSCS Total Positive score of the experimental group from pre- to post-test, after controlling for subjects' pre-test scores on this scale. A multiple regression analysis of covariance using post-test Total Positive scores as the dependent variable; pre-test Total Positive scores as the covariate; and treatment group, sex, and sex role as independent variables, was used to test this hypothesis. Rationale for analyses The chi-square test of association was used to find out whether the experimental group males' and females' sex-role distributions differed significantly from chance on the pre-test, according to Hypothesis 1. A chi-square goodness-of-fit test was used to deter- mine whether the observed frequency of the experimental group depar- ted significantly from the hypothesized frequency distribution, which in this case was Bem's standardization sample (Hypothesis 2). To test Hypothesis 3, or the pre- to post-test changes of individual exper- imental group subjects from sex-typed to androgynous categories and vice-versa, a MCNemar test was used, as it was designed to handle categorical variables in a 2 x 2 matrix. In order to clarify the 39 relationship between sex role and global selfeesteem as proposed by Hypothesis 4, an analysis of variance was used to investigate main effects as well as possible interaction effects. Finally, pre-test scores on the BSRI Femininity scale for experimental group males and on the masculinity scale for experimental group females (Hypo- thesis 5), as well as pre-test TSCS Total Positive scores (Hypothesis 6) were used as covariates in these analyses to control for the effects of pre-test level of self—esteem, thus giving a more accurate measure of treatment effect. In addition, in Hypothesis 6 the co- variate was entered first, as it logically would account for the greatest proportion of variance in post-test selfeesteem scores. Next entered was the treatment variable, which was expected to account for the next greatest proportion of variance. Because pre- vious research indicated that males and females show significant differences in level of self-esteem, the variable of sex was entered next; and finally, sex role was entered last, as the mag- nitude of its contribution to self-esteem was difficult to predict. CHAPTER III METHOD Subjects The control group consisted of students enrolled in psychology classes at a high school in central Utah. After obtaining consent from the superintendent of the school district, the principal of the high school, and the teacher of these classes, the measures were administered to 99 students (37 males, 62 females) by a person with little knowledge of the purpose of the research. Approximately 20 students in five Classes were tested on the same day. Five days later, the same person re-administered the measures to the same class- es. Due to student absences, failure of students to properly identify themselves on their test protocols, and failure to complete at least three of the five measures, usable data over both administrations was obtained fOr only 71 students (25 males, 46 females) aged 16-18. The overall attrition rate was 28.3%, 32.4% for males and 25.8% for fe- males. The experimental group consisted of adolescents 14-19 years of age residing in the Oak Hills Stake (ecclesiastical unit), Provo, Utah, of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (LDS), who had volnteered or had involuntarily been enrolled by their parents to participate in "Wilderness Trek", a five-day wilderness stress program 40 41 sponsored by the Youth Leadership Department of Brigham Young univer- sity. Approximately 10 adults, either BYU students or parents of ado- lescent Wilderness students, also participated, but the research in- volved only the adolescent population. The personality measures were administered to 100 participants (48 males, 52 females) by the experi- menter, who also worked as an instructor on this trip. The students were herded into a large gymnasium on the BYU campus, where the tests and pencils were circulated and a general announcement was made sta- ting that completion of these tests was a mandatory part of the course requirements. After the end of the wilderness experience, post-testing was achieved by dropping off a test at each subject's house, allowing him/ her five days to fill it out, then returning to collect it. The lat- ter procedure took three days to complete, as many students neglected to fill out the tests by the required date or were not at home at the scheduled pick-up time, both of which necessitated a return trip. Thus, not all post-tests were completed on the same day, but all were finished within eight days after the termination of the experience. Due to students' failure to fill out at least three of the five mea- sures or failure to return the post-test to the experimenter, usable data over both administrations was obtained on only 67 students (32 males, 35 females). The overall attrition rate was 33%, 33.3% for males and.32.7% for females. I It should be noted that the experimental group seemed enthusias- tic about participating in the wilderness experience, and appeared very reluctant to complete paper-and-pencil, school-type tests befbre 42 their adventure. In the pre-testing session, they laughed and joked noisily, collaborated on answers, wrote negative, smart-slack comments on the papers, and wasted time by talking to each other. As a result, many did not finish their tests or return them to the experimenter. After the trip, however, many of the same adolescents had become per- sonally acquainted with the experimenter and most made every effort to fill out and return the tests. - Both the experimental and control groups were approximately the same age, though the control group was slightly older, on the average. All of the subjects in the experimental group, and at least 90% of the members of the control group, were Caucasian members_of the LDS Church. The experimental group was probably slightly higher in so- cio-economic level than the control group, since the latter were chil- dren of residents of a middle-class community, while the fermer were largely children of BYU professors or professionals, residing in an upper-middle-class community. Experimental Treatment With regard to wilderness stress programs at BYU, Cloward (1978) has stated, "The Department of Youth Leadership has long been the advocate of natural experience provided from a non-contrived situation being the most effective facilitator of behavioral change. We have also held that any form of psychological manipulation through professional "coaching techniques" and grouping, confrontation groups, etc., are a less effective behavioral change model." 43 He also delineates three types of objectives that are the foundation of the Wilderness Trek program: 1) experiential objectives, the aim of which are to develop ”cognitive understanding of principles or truths involved with or associated with the subject or program goal", 2) attitudinal objectives, in which the student who has been exposed to and deve10ped an understanding of certain principles ”will set in motion changes of feeling, whether they be reversal or inten- sification of previous attitudes”, and 3) behavioral objectives, which are assumed to be a by-product of revised attitudes. ‘Once attitudes are changed by exposure to certain aspects of the wilder- ness experience, behavior will change to fit these new attitudes. These objectives may be attained through the use of the "challenge chain” concept, in which a challenge, or a projected goal with obstacles betweeen the individual and the objective, is presented to the student. Presentation of the challenge leads to anxiety, viewed as an agent for positive change. Anxiety leads to stress, or physiological or psychic tension based on uncertainty, which in turn may lead to fear. At this point, the successful completion of the challenge may lead to enhanced self-concept, while failure may lead to humiliation or loss of self-esteem. Participants in Wilderness Trek experience four main types of activities as delineated by Berube (1974): fear- and life-stress- producing tasks, outdoor survival skills, and environmental manipula- tion problems. Fear-stress, or stress occurring when the individual must face a challenge which s/he fears, is experienced by the Wilderness student when s/he must walk or crawl blindfolded for several hours through the forest, watch a sheep being killed, climb a tree and fall back- wards 15 feet into a net, hold a snake, or rappel down an 85-foOt cliff. Life-stress, or the student's awareness that his or her life or physical safety is at risk, occurs as s/he edges along a narrow trail above a roaring river in the middle of the night, or is felt through the physiological depletion occurring when s/he hikes 27 miles without sleep or fecd, and is deprived from sufficient rest and food for a week's time. Outdoor survival skills are taught on the trail by the instructors, who point out edible and poisonous berries and plants, show the students how to carve a spoon from wood and how to prepare sausage, stomach bread, mutton and the hide of the sheep, as well as various other techniques of wilderness living. Finally, the participation of the whole group in solving problems such as how to maneuver all group members over a shoulder-high rope within 15 min- utes, how to retrieve a box of oranges without stepping within a 10- foot radius of it, and other situations requiring group initiative and cooperation comprise the environmental manipulation problems or initiative tests. All of these activities are intended to help develop the participant's feelings of competence, self-sufficiency, and skill at interpersonal relationships, which can lead to increased levels of mastery and greater selfeesteem. Furthermore, formal and informal "processing" or "valuing" sessions designed to help the student internalize positive values to produce attitudihal and behavioral change are held several times during the experience. With instructors as facilitators and discussion leaders, each student is 45 encouraged to share an insight acquired during a particular activity, which is then discussed by the group. Students are asked to record these insights in a personal journal kept for that purpose. Instructor training Approximately 60 Wilderness instructors, male and female, were personally selected by the director of the program from several hundred applicants, all BYU students. Those students who, in the director's opinion, demonstrated the highest moral and ethical standards, personal religious commitment, enthusiasm, sincere desire to work with adolescents and the ability to motivate them to change in a positive way, were selected. Age, physical condition and previous outdoor experience were of relatively minor importance. The instructors selected spent the first two weeks in the classroom, learning the usual outdoor skills such as the area's flora and fauna, elementary geology, weather, how to secure and prepare food in the wilderness, first aid, and so on. However, the emphasis in instructor training was the development of enthusiasm for working with youth, and channeling this energy into effective leadership designed to facili- tate attitudinal and behavioral change in the students. Instructors were trained in the use of techniques to develop trust and rapport with their students, such a looking into a student's eyes to convey sincerity of feeling: the importance of physical contact; taking the time to privately counsel individual students about their concerns; monitoring the physical and emotional state of each student, and so on. In addition, psychological concepts such as self-esteem, motiva- 46 tion, rapport and trust were defined and discussed. Stress was introduced as a useful tool by which students would be forced to re-evaluate and re-examine_their lives and their pos- itive and negative qualities as human beings. As instructors read the mood of the group and regulated the level of stress accordingly (for example, a physically strong group could be made to hike at a faster pace), students would experience a moderate level of physical and emotional distress, which would act as a motivator for positive attitudinal and behavioral change. Thus, the role of the Wilderness instructor was to 1) be an example to his/her students in his/her own personal life, and 2) to act as a facilitator fer positive psychological change through his/ her own enthusiasm and interaction with the individual student, the creation and regulation of stress in the group, and the use of elementary psychological techniques. Measures Tennessee SelfeConcept Scale (Fitts, 1965). This scale (Fitts, 1965) is comprised of 100 selfhdescriptive statements which the sub- ject marks on a 5Lstep scale ranging from "completely true" to "com- pletely false". The statements were drawn from three other selfecon- cept measures, plus "written self-descriptions of psychiatric patients and non-patients” and are equally divided between positive and nega- tive items. Ninety of the 100 statements comprise nine scales: a total self- regard score measuring the individual's overall level of self-esteem . 47 (Total Positive), plus eight other scales measuring various aspects of the selfeconcept. These are arranged in a two-dimensional, 3 x 5 scheme with three rows and five columns. The variables in rows are labeled: 1) identity, or "what I am”; 2) self-satisfaction, or "how I accept myself”; and 3) behavior, or "how I act". Column variables are entitled: a) physical self, or the individual's view of his/her body, health, physical appearance, skills, and sexuality; b) moralethical self, or one's feeling of moral worth, being a "good” or "bad” person, relationship to God, and satisfaction with one's religion or lack of religion; c) personal self, or the individual's sense of personal worth, felt adequacy as a person, and selfeevaluation of his/her per- sonality, apart from body image and interpersonal relationships; d) family self, or one's feeling of adequacy, worth, and value as a fam- ily member, or with reference to his/her closest constellation of as- sociates; and e) social self, or the individual's sense of adequacy and worth in social interaction with others in general. The remaining 10 items comprise a selfecriticism scale, or a measure of the indivi- dual's level of defensiveness, and consists of mildly self-derogatory statements that most peOple would acknowledge as being true of them. The test manual (Fitts, 1965) states that the standardization group for this measure consisted of 626 persons ranging from 12 to 68 years of age of various racial, social, economic, intellectual, and educational levels. Fitts affirms that "the effects of such demo- graphic variables as sex, age, race, education, and intelligence on the scores of the scale are quite negligible" (p. 13). Data and ref- erences also suggest that the test discriminates between psychiatric 48 patients and non-patients, as well as between patients with different types of psychiatric disorders. Two-week test-retest reliability coefficients are reported as .92 for the total self-regard score, with rows ranging from .88 to .91 and columns from .85 to .90. However, evidence that the measure is sen- sitive to self-concept changes due to significant positive or negative life experiences has also been presented. For example, Gividen (1959) evaluated the effects of stress and failure in army paratroop trai- nees. Those who passed and failed showed significant score decreases, with the failing group showing significantly greater decreases on cer- tain scales. Ashcraft and Fitts (1964), in their study of patients who had been in therapy and those who had not, found that the therapy\ group changed significantly in the expected direction on 18 of the 22 variables studied. Bem Sex Role Inventory (Ban, 1974). This measure assesses an individual's identification with certain traits ascribed by American society to correspond to a masculine or feminine sex role. The Bem Sex Role Inventory (BSRI) contains a Masculinity scale, a Femininity scale, and a neutral scale composed of "filler" items, each of which is comprised of 20 words describing personality characteristics, for a total of 60 items. The testee indicates on a 7-point scale how well each of these masculine and feminine personality characteristics de- scribes him/herself, ranging from 1 (never or almost never true of’me) to 7 (always or almost always true of’me). During the item selection process, each item qualified as masculine if it was judged by two in- 49 dependent samples of‘undergraduates (Ns - 723 and 194) to be more de- sirable in American society for a man than for a woman (i.e., asser- tive, analytical), or qualified as feminine if judged to be more desi- rable in American society for a woman than for a man (i.e., childlike, shy, warm). According to Bem's 1977 modification of her original scoring pro- cedure, the ratings for the Masculinity and Femininity scales are sum- med and divided by 20. Each subject's average ratings for each scale, or the raw scores, are compared with median raw scores derived from Bem's standardization samples. Average medians for the two samples were 4.90 for the Femininity scale, and 4.95 for the Masculinity scale (Bem, 1981). Bem recommends the use of'median raw scores from the study sample itself for classification purposes, rather than these norms, when the sample is very large and composed of both sexes, but advises the use of these norms when the sample is composed of only one sex or is relatively small. (Since the sample used in the present study is smaller than Bem's normative sample, her norms will be used in the data analysis.) In the latter procedure, each subject's raw scores on the Mascu- linity and Femininity scales are compared to the raw accres of the normative sample. Subjects higher than the norm on the Masculinity scale and lower than the norm on the Femininity scale are classified as Masculine; those relatively high on the Feminine scale and low on the Masculine scale are termed Feminine; those high on both Masculini- ty and Femininity scales are called Androgynous; and those lower than the standardization median on both scales are termed undifferentiated. 5O Bem reports that the Masculinity and Femininity scales are empirically and logically independent, with correlations ranging from -.14 to .11 for males and females in her 1973 and 1978 samples (N.- 723 and 816, respectively). Coefficient alpha was also computed separately for fe- males and males in both these samples for the Femininity and Masculin- ity scores, as an estimate of internal consistency, and ranged from r-.78 to .87. Finally, test-retest reliability after feur weeks was estimated for 28 males and 28 females from the 1973 sample, and ranged from .76 to .94 for the Masculinity and Femininity scales. CHAPTER IV RESULTS In this section, the descriptive statistics that illustrate charcteristics of both the experimental and control groups, inclup ding their similarities and differences,are presented. The results' of the statistical analyses related to each hypothesis follow. Preliminaryfianalyses Tables 1 and 2 present the means and_standard deviations of all BSRI and TSCS sub-scales for the experimental and control groups, respectively, on the pre- and post-tests. Of the BSRI variables,. the mean Masculinity and Femininity scores of the control group showed a slight increase from pre- to post-test, while the scores of the experimental group on these two scales appeared to have decreased slightly. Seven of the TSCS sub-scale scores for the control group showed a decline and three increased from pre- to post-test; in the experimental group, eight of the scales showed a small increase and two, a slight decline. The significance of pre- to post-test changes in both groups on the Masculinity and Femininity scales of the BSRI and Total Positive scale of the TSCS are discussed later in this chapter. First, pre-test comparisons between the means of all BSRI and TSCS scales for experimental and control group subjects are presented. 51 Means and standard deviations of BSRI and TSCS W BSRI Masculinity Femininity 1595. Total Positive Identity Self-Satisfaction Behavior Physical Self Moral-Ethical Self Personal Self Family Self Social Self Self Criticism Note: N=67 52 TABLE 1 No. of 22::1335. 29st:taat tfiaala_ltsma. .Msan. suns. .Mflan..§xDa. 20 109.73 13.20 102.70 21.29 20 100.81 11.60 99.84 21.03 100 366.26 32.47 375.84 29.63 3“ 135.28 12.09 192.25. 10.70 3“ 112.65 13.31 112.1” 12.72 32 115.2” 12.53 121.93 11.99 18 57.26 8.43 70.4” 7.5” 18 59.03 9.20 71.20 8.99 18 65.99 7.18 66.80 6.63 18 65.85 8.73 68.26 8.41 18 65.66 _7.64 67.10 . 7.18 10 32.08 5.49 32.07 6.39 TABLE 2 Means and standard deviations of BSRI and TSCS MW 8581 Masculinity Femininity 1525 Total Positive Identity Self-Satisfaction Behavior . Physical Self Moral-Ethical Self Personal Self Family Self Social Self Self Criticism Note: N=71 No. of .££§:L£§L. lkuflLJuuflL $9312.1Lsma luau; ELLL. Mean..§.nx 20 102.82 18.03 108.03 18.62 20 99.75 11.90 100.90 11.90 100 370.51 28.28 368.80 .28.98 38 139.19 10.58 -137.58 11.89 38 113.18 12.70 112.86 12.21 32 118.31 9.38 118.32 10.07 18 68.99 7.25 68.86 7.21 18 70.63 9.67 69.81 '9.52 18 66.88 7.81 66.59 7.87 18 66.19 7.28 65.66 8.28 18 68.98 7.70 65.36 7.17 10 33.20 8.70 32.63 8.78 54 Pre-test comparisons of both groups. Separate trtests between the means of the experimental and control groups on the two scales of the BSRI (Masculinity and Femininity) and the ten scales of the TSCS (Identity, SelfLSatisfaction, Behavior, Physical Self, Moral-Eth- ical Self, Personal Self, Family Self, Social Self, SelfeCriticism, and Total Positive score) were performed to determine whether these two groups showed similar scores on the pre-tests. No significant dif- ferences were found between the two groups on any of these variables, suggesting that members of both groups were highly similar in reported sex-role and self-esteem characteristics at the pre-test. The scores of males and females in both groups on the pre-tests were then com- pared (see Table 3) and it was found that females in the control group scored significantly (p<.05) higher than control group males on the BSRI Femininity scale and the TSCS Moral-Ethical and Social Self scales. The same results were obtained fer members of the experimental group; however, females in this group also scored significantly higher than males on the TSCS Behavior and Total Positive scales. Thus, it appeared that the males and females in each group were highly similar to their same-sex counterparts in the other group, with females in both groups showing higher reported femininity, feelings of’moral-eth— ical worth, and social self-esteem than the males. In addition, exper- mental group females showed higher reported satisfaction with their own behavior and total self-esteem than did the experimental group males. Since preliminary analyses revealed that the experimental and control groups were relatively homogeneous on the sex-role and self- 1 . 1 1. . . ... 111.. A £‘r...v‘.f(..r.fl:‘. . .11.§1:I{1t11‘eio‘ 1!...10‘49. 111.1 {1.692010110563111 Jlrvrut 11.11.41.-.- 4\..I}.1€‘leuil 113l1l.t<5311<1‘. {it}! x 1 “I’ll"... (..\.§:11.( BSRI Masculinity Femininity 1398 Total Posi- tive Identity Self-Satis- faction Behavior Physical Self Moral-Ethi- cal Self Personal Self Pamily Self Social Self Self Criti- cism 'p<.05 55 TABLE 3 Comparisons of BSRI and TSCS pre-test maana4am2Juxaflmumflaaroun.bx_ssx Experimental arena Males 107.09 13.08 92.97. 9.59 358.18. 35.08 133.38 13.01 111.98 13.99 111.12. 13.23 67.98 8.92 68.96' 8.63 65.51 8.20 63.78 8.60 63.29' 7.18 33.01 5.02 Females lira: :LJL. .8888. 5‘24. .Msan. ‘SIDI. Esau. Elna. 102.66 107.97“ 378.65“ 138.97 113.81 119.85. 66.58 73.23. 66.50 67.99 68.73' 31.12 13.13 8.16 27.65 10.66 12.96 10.32 7.99 7.89 6.00 8.88 1.81 5.87 106.80 Control Males 11.20 93.32“ 9.90 365.86 26.86 136.07 9.82 112.75 12.91 117.08 8.90 71.23 8.29 66.57. 9.19 66.06 6.81 65.28 7.12 62.829 6.93 311036 ”.15 Females 100.87 15.11 103.28. 9.83 373.10 28.95 180.89 10.70 113.81 12.72 118.99 9.60 67.78 6.38 72.833 9.29 66.71 8.36 66.70 7.39 66.83' 7.81 32.55 8.91 56 esteem variables, the scores for the two groups were pooled and correlations were obtained using the BSRI and TSCS scale scores to ascertain whether levels of masculinity or femininity were signifi- cantly related to the different components of self-esteem. The 8 results supported Bem's (1977) contention that her Masculinity and Femininity scales are essentially orthogonal (r-.O39,p>.32). It was also found that Masculinity was significantly correlated with the following TSCS scales: Personal Self, Total Positive, Behavior, Physical Self, SelfLSatisfaction, Social Self, Identity, Family Self, and Moral-Ethical self; its correlation with the remaining scale, Self-Criticism, was not significant. The Femininity scale was signi- ficantly correlated with the TSCS scales Social Self, Behavior, Iden- tity, Moral-Ethical Self, Total Positive, Personal Self, SelfLCri- ticism, and Family Self (a negative correlation). Self;Satisfaction and Physical Self were not significantly correlated with Femininity. (For a complete list of these correlations, see Table 4.) Tests of significance between correlations of BSRI and TSCS scale scores are also presented in Table 4, and show that Masculinity was correlated at a significantly higher level than Femininity on three TSCS scales: Self-Satisfaction, Physical Self, and Personal Self. Femininity was not significantly more highly correlated than Masculinity on any of the TSCS scales. Finally, a Chi-square test for two independent samples was performed to determine whether the two groups differed at pre-test in pr0portions of subjects falling in each of Bem's four sex-role groups (Masculine, Feminine, Androgynous and Undifferentiated), as 55.. A TABLE 8 Tests of significance, BSRI and TSCS scale BSRI T3525, Masculinity“ Femininity“ 2." Total Positive .85' .25' 1.88 Identity' .38' .35' . .09 Self-Satisfaction .39. -.02 3.18. Behavior .83. .36' .69 Physical Self .39' -.08 2.98. Moral-Ethical Self .21' .30. .78 Personal Self .86' .20'- 2.32. Family Self 1 .28. .18. .92 Social Self .37' .86. .77 Self-Criticism .08 -.17' .78 ‘LTest of significance of individual correlations for BSRI and TSCS scores hSignificance between correlations, masculinity vs. femininity scales with TSCS scores *p<.05 57° defined by their scores on the BSRI and computed using the dif- ference score/median-split hybrid method. Males' and females' scores were grouped in an 8 x 2 grid, with sex x sex role as one dimension and treatment group as the other (Masculine male, Androgynous male, etc., by experimental or control group), and the observed and expec- ted frequencies were compared. As can be seen in Table 5, no signifi- cant differences between the two groups were found on this measure 2. (’3'11-09. P>~05)- Tests of Hypotheses Hypothesis 1. At pre-test, the highest proportion of Mbrmon male and female adolescents in the experimental group will be found in their respective sex-typed categories, with males classified as Masc- uline and females classified as Feminine according to Bem's difference score/median split hybrid method employing Bem's standardization sample medians as applied to the scores of these subjects on the BSRI. The results of this analysis are presented in Table 6. As can be seen, the largest proportion of male experimental group subjects fell into the Masculine category at pre-test, while the largest pro- portion of female experimental group subjects fell into the Feminine and Androgynous categories. A Chi-square test of association revealed that the distribution of subjects was not unifbrm across sex-role categories, and was significantly different from that expected by chance (73823.47. P<.OO1). The fact that the largest number of ex- perimental group males and females fell into their sex-typed cate- 58 TABLE 5 . Chi-square test of sex-role distribution We; Experimental Control Group Group W Male. Banal: Male. E21831: Masculine 17 3 9 7 Feminine 2 15 O 16 Androgynous 5 15 q 7 18 Undifferentiated 8 ' 2 9 9 Total 32 35 25 86 X71.- 11.1 p>.05 59 TABLE 6 Chi-square tests of sex-role distributions .hatwaan_saxaa_at_nra:tasi._bxitrsaiment_aronn. Experimental Control Group Group 1§2x_nolss .Malea. females. .Malas. females 1 1 I i Masculine 53.13 8.57 36.00 15.22 Feminine . 6.25 82.86 0.00 38.78 Androgynous 15.63 82.86 28.00 30.83 Undifferentiated 25.00 ' 5.71 36.00 19.57 2 1K6; 23.5 7L = 28.6 p<.001 p<.001 6O gories supported Hypothesis 1. However, the equally large number of experimental group females who fell into the Androgynous category was an unexpec ted finding . Although the experimental and control groups showed no statis- tically significant differences on all BSRI and TSCS variables at pre- test, it was decided to examine the distribution of subjects in the various sex-role classifications in the control group at pre-test. Because control group subjects were high school psychology students, rather than active Mormons who participated in a church-sponsored wilderness activity, it was expected that the BSRI scores of the members of the control group would also tend to cluster in their respective sex-typed categories, although to a lesser degree than experimental group subjects. As can be seen in Table 6, this expec- tation was confirmed; the largest proportion of control group males fell into both the Masculine and Undifferentiated groups, while com- pared to the experimental group, a lower proportion of control group females fell into the Feminine and Androgynous categories. Instead, there was a relatively higher percentage of control group females who fell into the Masculine (cross-sexed) and Undifferentiated catego- ries as compared to female experimental group subjects. Hypothesis 2. At pre-test, a significant difference will be found between the proportions of experimental group subjects and the propor- tions of Bem's standardization sample that fall into each of the feur sex-role classifications. 61 The Chi-square test of goodness of fit, using proportions derived from Bem's standardization sample scored by the hybrid method as the expected prOportions, revealed that Bem's group and the exper- imental group sex-role distributions differed significantly (70:15.19, p<.05). Table 7 presents the proportions of Bem's group and the treatment groups which fell into each of the sex-role catego- ries, and the results of the Chi-square analysis. Visual inspection of the data indicated that in the experimental group, the devia- tions from the expected values occurred primarily in the Androgy- nous and Undifferentiated categories for females, and in the Mas- culine category for males. Far more experimental group females fell into the Androgynous group than expected. In addition, more experi- mental group males fell into the Masculine category than expected. Thus, Hypothesis 2 was confirmed. A higher proportion of adolescent Mormon males and females fell into their respective sex-typed cat- egories, as compared to the college freshmen and women of Bem's sample. As befbre, it was decided to compare the control group at pre- test and Bem's group with regard to sex-role distribution, with the expectation that the control group would not differ significantly from Bem's standardization sample. This expectation was borne out, as the two sex-role distributions were not significantly different (91:7.93, p<.05), and confinns the utility of using this sample of Utah high school psychology students as a control group, as they did not differ significantly from Bem's sample of college freshmen and women in sex-role distribution. 62 TABLE 7 Chi-square tests of sex-role distributions - - . - -1- - -. “-- 11-0 _ o o ..o :11 o o - o -- flgte; The data in columns 1 and 2 are from Bem, 1977. Bem's Experimental Control Group Group Group W Males females. Malesfemeles mm x 1 S 1 1 1 Masculine 36.80 16.20 53.13 8.57 36.00 15.22 Feminine 16.00 38.20 6.25 82.86 0.00 38.78 Androgynous 20.50 29.30 15.63 82.86 28.00 30.83 Undifferentiated 26.70 20.30 25.00 5.71 36.00 19.57 1' 1 1:5.9 74:7.9 p<.05 p>.05 63 Hypothesis 3. Following the wilderness experience, males and females in the experimental group who were classified as sex-typed on the BSRI at pre-test will move into the androgynous category (using Bem's standardization sample medians) to a significant degree, using the McNemar Test for the significance of changes to test this hypothesis. For the purposes of this analysis, all subjects were divided into ”sex-typed" and "non-sex-typed" groups by treatment group: the non-sex-typed group included Androgynous, Undifferentiated, and cross-sex-typed subjects (Masculine females and Feminine males). A 2x2 matrix was then established, the categories being sex-role status (sex-typed or non-sex-typed) at pre-test and post-test, and the MCNemar test was performed to assess whether sex-typed subjects became non-sex-typed after the wilderness experience. As can be seen from Table 8, experimental group subjects"8ex-role status remained virtually unchanged from pre- to post-test (962:0, p>.05). In an effort to assess whether the experimental treatment did in fact have an effect that the initial analysis was not sensitive enough to detect, the experimental group subjects were grouped into "sex-typed" and "androgynous" categories, as well as "non-androgynous" and "androgynous" categories. Two different McNemar tests were perfbrmed on these dimensions for 1) the group as a whole; 2) males only, and 3) females only, for a total of six additional McNemar tests. The results of these analyses are presented in Tables 9 and 10. All Chi-square values from these analyses failed to reach statis- 64 TABLE 8 Change in sex-role classifications, pre- to 00‘ -" -,0: 11‘. Sex role classification, post-test Sex-typed Non-sex-typed -1- 0‘0 .00 dean“, ‘o-o . '- Sex role classification, pre-test Sex-typed Non-sex-typed 21 8 9 27 65_ TABLE 9 Change in sex-role classifications, pre- to 00‘ - “ ‘,0; 11;. - ° 0 o ‘;.- ‘0‘. -90 -90 e. do ‘ - “.0 Sex-role QJgggjfijgagjgn. pn§-;§3; Sex-role classification, Rem-Less. Sex-fined Andmaxneie Whole group Sex-typed 21 8 x": .36 Androgynous 7 18 p>.05 Males ‘ 2' Sex-typed 1O 2 Z. = .17 Androgynous 8 3 p>.05 Females. 1 Sex-typed 11 2 2’- : 0 Androgynous 3 11 p>.05 66 TABLE 10 - Change in sex-role classification, pre- to 00‘ - 2‘ ‘,0‘ 11‘. - ' o o dog—.00g0_ .0“ -90 -00 0° .0 ‘ - ‘Lo .. WM Sex-role classification, ' negates; . W Andreameue Whole group 2 Non-androgynous 33 5 X- : 2.12 Androgynous 13 18 p>.05 Males 'i Non-androgynous ~ 18 2 Z = 1.11 Androgynous 8 3 p>.05 Females . 2. Non-androgynous 15 3 “L = .125 Androgynous 5 11 p>.05 67 tical significance, suggesting that very few experimental group sub- jects, whether male or female; moved away from sex-typing or "nonan- drogyny" towards androgyny as a result of their wilderness experience; in fact, most subjects' BSRI responses before and after the experience were very similar. Thus, Hypothesis 3 was not supported. As a post-hoc analysis, the BSRI responses of the four males and three females who switched from sex-typed to androgynous following following the experimental treatment (of the 31 male and 34 female respondents) were analyzed. A pre- to post-test difference score fer each of these subjects' responses to each item was obtained, and it was found that the males showed the largest decreases on the items "masculine”, "inefficient", "individualistic", "athletic", and "self; 'sufficient”, and increases on the items "tactful", "yielding", "soft- spoken", and ”aggressive". The three females showed the largest decreases on the items "inefficient", "does not use harsh language", "eager to soothe hurt feelings", and "secretive", and increases on the items "defends own beliefs" and "dominant". Hypothesis 4. At pre-test, sex-typed individuals of both sexes in the combined experimental and control group of subjects will show the highest levels of self-esteem, and cross-sex-typed individuals of both sexes will show the lowest levels of self-esteem, as measured by the Total Positive score, and assessed by a two-way analysis of variance (sex x sex role). 68 The results of the analysis of variance (see Table 11) indica- ted significant effects for sex (F(1,121)=7.85, p<.OO1) and sex role (F(3,121)-5.87, p<.O1). Means for males and females on the Total Positive scale of the TSCS were 361.82 and 373.45, respectively, in- dicating that experimental and control females' selfeesteem was sig- nificantly higher than experimental and control males' selfeesteem at pre-test. Total Positive mean scores for Masculine, Feminine, Andro- gynous, and Undifferentiated subjects were 376.60, 363.34, 376.55, and 353.04, in that order. Scheffé post-hoe analyses of these self-esteem scores for the sex role main effect revealed that the combined means of the Masculine and Androgynous groups were significantly higher than the combined means of the Feminine and Undifferentiated groups (see Tables 12 and 13). The combined means of the Masculine and Feminine groups were not sig- nificantly different from the combined means of the Androgynous and Undifferentiated groups. (See Appendix B for sample BSRI and TSCS protocols of Masculine, Feminine, Androgynous, and Undifferentiated' subjects.) Furthenmore, the interaction effect of sex and sex role was not significant (F(3,121)=.648, p>.58), which failed to support Hypothesis 4. However, inspection of the self-esteem means of these interactions, broken down by treatment group x sex role x sex, reveals that cross-sex-typed subjects scored at opposite ends of the spectrum; Masculine experimental and control females ranked at or near the top, while Feminine experimental group males were near the bottom (no control males fell into the Feminine category). It appears that 69' TABLE 11 2 X 8 Analysis of variance, pre-test TSCS Total positive scores by sex x sex role, combined exeerimentel_ene_eentrel_areaee Source 511‘, 1.4.3. E Total 128 920.68 Main Effects 8 8625.10 5.72* Sex 1 6385.06 7.85' Sex Role 3 8788.10 5.87. Sex x Sex Role 3 523.28 .65 Explained '7 2867.18 3.55’ Error 121 808.07 *p<.01 70 TABLE 12 Pre-test means and standard deviations, TSCS Total W .QELBEQEI. Sex Role Masculine Feminine Androgynous Undifferentiated Sex role x treatment group x sexo‘ Masculine experimental females Undifferentiated experimental females Masculine control females Androgynous control females Androgynous experimental males Masculine control males Androgynous experimental females Androgynous control males Feminine experimental females Masculine experimental males Feminine control females Undifferentiated control females Undifferentiated control males Feminine experimental males Undifferentiated experimental males (Feminine control males o. Arranged in descending order of means Mean 376.60 363.38 353.08 801.68 392.88 392.28 383.81 379.56 377.35 371.83 368.36 366.07 368.62 362.90 358.53 352.81 350.19 337.62 8.2. 30.85 19.88 33.81 28.60 8.18 30.70 15.60 80.16 35.81 26.86 32.37 20.08 22.09 35.83 18.86 15.09 28.36 16.70 32.82 71 mo.v ma.vaa.ucosouuqos=+.sasomvlansoshmosoc< +.Hsonmzvvmo.m A.usoeouuuoc=+.eusomvuamsoshmoeoc<+.Hsonmzv mph“.=a.mva.ueosouuao:=+nsosawososmoeoc¢v1A.sflsom+.asonmzv AduuuquIGGGQUHqum .dduduuqadu uHdulNauIHAIHGHGQQIQHHAHudNIHdeH moms unoauosa .nsonaeumsoo oosuanoo ho auasmom mp m4m.05). Addition of the interaction term to produce the full equation resulted in a .2% increment in variance accounted for, which again was not sig- Wale Males' Femininity Males' Masculinity Females' Femininity Females' Masculinity 'p<.05 73 TABLE 18 Results of multiple regression analyses of pre- “WW Variable sneezed Covariate Trt. group Interaction Covariate Trt. group Interaction Covariate Trt. group Interaction Covariate Trt. group Interaction Multiple .8 .89668 .89731 .89930 - ..88609 .85288 .85883 .86708 .87105 .87869 .61328 .61708 .68230 R R Square 592529. Shenae .28665 .19899“ .28731 .00066 .28930 .00199 .19899 .19899“ .20870 .00571 ‘ .20651 .00180 .21817 .21817' .22189 .00372 .22533 .00388 .3760? .37607' .38078 .02981 .81255 .07669' 74 nificant (F(1,53)'.143. P>.05). Since the amount of variance accounted for by the full regression equation was significant, it appears that the co-variate was the only important factor in this respect. Thus, Hypothesis 5 was not supported for the males' Femininity scores, which did not change significantly as a result of the experimental treat- ment. Results of the multiple regression analysis for the experimental group females' Masculinity scores indicated a disordinal inter- action between the Masculinity scores of the experimental and control group females. A Johnson-Neyman test of significance revealed that when females' pre-test Masculinity scores were above 96 (mid- and high-scoring subjects), experimental females' Masculinity scores surpassed those of the control females at post-test, confirming a portion of Hypothesis 5. Below this level, control group females' post-test Masculinity scores surpassed those of experimental females. The Johnson-Neyman test also revealed that scores above 57 and below 9 on this scale were significant; since the scores ranged from 70 to 130, all results reported above were statistically significant. With regard to the multiple regression equation for this hypothesis, it appeared that the covariate alone accounted for a sizable proportion of the variance. Addition of the treatment group accounted for a sizable proportion of the variance.Addition of the variable to the equation resulted in an increment of approximately .5% in variance accounted for, which was not significant (F(1,78)=.625, p>.05). However, the addition of the interaction term accounted for an additional 3.2% of the variance, which was statistically significant 75 (F(1,78)-4.00, p<.05). To assess whether the wilderness experience might have also had a positive effect on males' Masculinity scores and/or females' Feminini- ty scores, two additional multiple regression analyses were performed. Again, in both cases the covariates accounted fer a significant pro- portion of the variance. Addition of the treatment group variable for both equations did not result in a significant increment in variance accounted for, as the F (1,54) fer males' Masculinity scores was .43 (p>.05) and for females' Femininity scores, the F (1,77) was .37 (p>.05). Likewise, the addition of the interaction term was not signi- ficant; the F (1,53) for males' Masculinity scores was .12 (p>.05) and for females' Femininity scores, the F (1,76) was .34 (p>.05). Thus, it appears that females' Masculinity scores were the only sex-role varia- bles that increased significantly from pre- to post-test. Hypothesis 6. There will be a significant increase in the TSCS Total Positive score of the experimental group from pre- to post-test, after controlling fer subjects' pre-test scores on this scale. Results of the multiple regression analysis of covariance in- dicated that the covariate alone accounted for a large proportion of the variance in self-esteem scores (R-.77678, R?-.60339). Addition of the treatment group variable to the equation resulted in an increment of approximately 3.1% of variance accounted for (R-.79659, R?-.63455), which was statistically significant (F(1,125)=10.39, p<.001). The ad- dition of the sex variable resulted in an additional .008% of variance 76 accounted fOr (R=.79664, R25.63463), which was not significant (F(1,125) -.027, p>.05). However, adding the sex role term to the equation was significant (F(1,125)-4.51, p<.05); it accounted for 1.4% of additional variance (R-.80508, Rz-.64815). The addition of the nu- merous interactions resulted in 3% of additional variance accounted for (R=.82394, Rz-.67888) and was not significant (F(1,125)-.50, p>.05). Thus, Hypothesis 6 was confirmed. Table 15 reports the means and standard deviations of TSCS Total Positive scores at post-test by treatment group and sex role, while Table 16 shows the results of the Scheffé'post-hoc analysis of the sex-role scores. The significance of the treatment effect in the multiple regression equation after the partialling out of the covariate (pre-test Total Positive scores), as well as the higher post-test mean fer experimental rather than control group subjects, indicates that the wilderness experience did have a significant positive effect on participants' self-esteem scores. Since the inter- action term was not significant, it seems that the effect of parti- cipation in the wilderness group was not limited to members of par- ticular sex or sex role groups; rather, it was a generalized effect over subtypes of the experimental group. The significant sex-role effect indicated that regardless of treatment group, the means of the members of the fOur sexerole groups on global self-esteem varied from group to group. Results of the Scheffé post-hoc analysis revealed that Masculine and Feminine sub- jects considered together showed significantly higher self-esteem than Androgynous and undifferentiated.subjects considered together. In 77 TABLE 15 Post-test means and standard deviations, TSCS Total Positive scores, by treatment group sex role, Wm Caisson Treatment Group Experimental Control Sex Role Masculine Feminine Androgynous Undifferentiated Sex role x treatment group x sex°' Masculine experimental females Androgynous experimental females Masculine control females Androgynous control females Masculine control males Masculine experimental males Feminine experimental females Androgynous control males Androgynous experimental males Feminine control females Undifferentiated experimental females Feminine experimental males Undifferentiated control females Undifferentiated control males Undifferentiated experimental males (Feminine control males a. Means arranged in descending order Mean 375.88 368.80 379.68 369.83 379.67 389.06 802.57 390.60 387.92 376.88 378.86 378.58 372.27 371.10 366.60 368.00 358.85 352.00 389.39 329.28 sini 29.63 28.98 28.73 22.58 29.56 27.19 11109” 25.69 10.71 31.77 27.71 35.02 17.01 26.95 32.05 26.90 25.86‘ 21.00 36.89 15.79 25.26 78 poo.v oe.>ova.usoeouuuo:=+.susomv1ausosamoeos< +.Hsoamzvvwa.mp A.acmeonuaosa+.caeomvnansoshwoecc¢+.Hsonmzv mo.v o.mmva.ucosouuaos=+msoshwososwoeoc -> -> (E) 4> GE) -> -> -> U'I -> -> U'l \J'IU'IU'I -4 -q 123 The statements in this test are to help you describe yourself as you see yourself. Answer them as if you were describing you to yourself. Read each item carefully; then select one of the five responses below and circle the answer that describes you best. If you feel the statement is completely false, circle 1; mostly false, circle 2; and so on. Completely Mostly Partly false , Mostly Completely false false partly true true true 1 2 3 4 5 1. I have a healthy body 1 , 2 3 4 CD 2. I am an attractive person 1 2 3 GD 5 3. I consider myself a slappy person G 2 3 4 5 4. I am a decent sort of a person 1 2 3 4 ® 5. I am an honest person 1 2 3 GD 5 6. I am a bad person (1) 2 3 4 5 _7. I am a cheerful person 1 2 3 ® 5 8. I am a calm and easygoing person 1 2 3 ® 5 9. I am a nobody (D 2 3 4 5 10. I have a family that would always help me in any kind of trouble 1 2 3 ‘4 G; 11. I am a member of a happy family 1 2 3 44 63 12. My friends have no confidence in me@ 2 3 4 5 13. I am a friendly person 1 2 :3 QD 5 14. I am popular with men 1 2 3 ® 5 15. I am not interested in what other people do 1 2 3 @ 5 16. I do not always tell the truth 1 2 6) 4 5 17. I get angry sometimes 1 2 3 4 (3 18. I like to look nice and neat all the time 1 2 3 @ 5 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. 30. 31. 32. 33. 34. 35. 36. 37. 38. 39. 124 I am full of aches and pains I am a sick person I am a religious person I am a moral failure I am a morally weak person I have a lot of selfbcontrol I am a hateful person I am losing my mind I am an important person to my friends and family I am not loved by my family I feel that my family does not trust me I am popular with women I am mad at the whole world I am hard to be friendly with Once in a while I think of things too bad to talk about Sometimes when I am not feeling well, I am cross ‘ I am neither too fat nor too thin I like my looks just the way they are I would like to change some parts of my body I am satisfied with my moral behavior I am satisfied with my relationship to God ‘99 £5) .. 99 x» \» CB11§D w: u: u: v1 \8 WWW“ 4s a- -> 4» 69 a- -> -> ~56 -> 4s @9 a- @6565 U'IU'IUlUlU'IU'IU'I U1U1 \flU‘IUlU'I .40. 41. 42. 43. 44. 45. 46. 47. 49. 50. 51. 52. 53. 54. 55. 56. 57. 58. 59. 125 I ought to go to church more I am satisfied to be just what I am I am just as nice as I should be I despise myself I am satisfied with my family relationships I understand my family as well as I should I should trust my family more I am as sociable as I want to be I try to please others, but I don't overdo it I am no good at all from a social standpoint I do not like everyone I know Once in a while, I laugh at a dirty joke I am neither too tall nor too short I don't feel as well as I should I should have more sex appeal I am as religious as I want to be I wish I could be more trustworthy I shouldn't tell so many lies I am as smart as I want to be I am not the person I would like to be N I» (:) (g A) N WWWWUW @ @363“ \n \n \n (a) (a) ‘5) \n 60. 61. 62. 63. 64. 65. 66. 67. 69. 70. 71 . 72. 74. 75. 76. 126 I wish I didn't give up as easily as I do I treat my parents as well as I should (use past tense if parents are not living) I am too sensitive to things my family say I should love my family more I am satisfied with the way I treat other people I should be more polite to others I ought to get along better with other people I gossip a little at times At times I feel like swearing I take good care of myself physically I try to be careful of my appearance I often act like I am ”all thlmlbs" I am true to my religion in my everyday life I try to change when I know I am doing things that are wrong I sometimes do very bad things I can always take care of myself in any situation I take the blame for things without getting mad I do things without thinking about them first @®@®t 78. 79. 80. 81. $0 83. 840 95. 96. 97. 127 I try to play fair with my friends. and family I take a real interest in my family I give in to my parents (use past tense if parents are not living) I try to understand the other fellow's point of view I get along well with other peOple 1 I do not forgive others easily I would rather win than lose in a game I feel good most of the time I do poorly in sports and games I am a poor sleeper I do what is right most of the time I sometimes use unfair means to get ahead I have trouble doing the things that are right I solve my problems quite easily I change my mind a lot I try to run away from my problems a I do my share of work at home (D I quarrel with my family I do not act like my family thinks I should 6) I see good points in all the peOple I meet I do not feel at ease with other people 1 1 1 1 1 (3) (E) \n \w x» xx x» \w \n \w 199 ##-># a» a- a» -> .5 .s 128 99. I find it hard to talk with strangers 1 100.0nce in a while I put off until tomorrow what I ought to do today 1 FEMININE FEMALE Please indicate how well each of the following characteristics describe you as you now see yourself. Use the 7-point scale and circle the number that best describes your feeling about the adjective. Never or almost Always or almost never true of me always true of me 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 1. Self-reliant 1 2 6) 4 5 6 7 2. Yielding 1 2 3 @ 5 6 7 3. Helpful 1 2 3 4 5 © 7 4. Defends own beliefs 1 2 3 4 5 6 ("D 5. Cheerful 1 2 3 4 5 C) 7 6. Moody 1 2 3 4 © 6 7 7. Independent 1 ® 3 4 5 6 7 8. Shy 1 2 C? 4 5 6 7 9. Conscientious 1 2 3 4 ® 6 7 10. Athletic 1 2 3 4 5 C) 7 11. Affectionate 1 2 3 4 5 6 ® 12. Theatrical 1 @ 3 4 6 7 13. Assertive 1 ® 3 4 5 6 7 14. Flatterable 1 2 3 Q1) 5 6 7 15. Happy 1 2 3 4 5 @ 7 16. Strong personality 1 2 3 4 5 6 (a 17. loyal 1 2 3 4 5 6 ® 18. Unpredictable 1 fig 3 4 5 6 7 19. Forceful 1 2 3 G1,) 5 6 7 2o. Feminine 1 2 3 4 5 6 CD 129 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. 30. 31. 32. 33. 34. 35. 36. 37. 38. 39. 40. 41. 42. Reliable Analytical Sympathetic Jealous Has leadership abilities Sensitive to needs of others Truthful Willing to take risks Understanding Secretive Makes decisions easily Compasssionate Sincere Self-sufficient Eager to soothe hurt feelings Conceited Dominant Soft-spoken Likeable Masculine Warm Solemn 130 “WWW wwmu “WWW \N K)! WWW @585 4> QE) (:) «b -> .p snag.) \J'l (:) (n (n (:> (:} cm (m cm 43- 44. 45. 46. 47. 48. 49. 50. 51. 52. 53. 54. 55. 56. 57. 58. 59. 60. Willing to take a stand Tender Friendly Aggressive Gullible Inefficient Acts as a leader Childlike Adaptable Individualistic Does not use harsh language Uhsystematic Competitive Loves children Tactful Ambitious Gentle Conventional 131 WWWWW Wk)! -> -> (:) -b -h 4:. a» @5 a. -> .p .b .p -q 63) (E) -4 (:) -q -q (E) -4 ~a ~a ~J ‘ED (:) ~J «3 ED ~J 132 The statements in this test are to help you describe yourself as you see yourself. Answer them as if you were describing you to yourself. Read each item carefully; then select one of the five responses below and circle the answer that describes you best. If you feel the statement is completely false, circle 1; mostly false, circle 2; and so on. Completely Mostly Partly false , Mostly Completely false false partly true true true 1 2 3 4 5 1. I have a healthy body 1 2 3 4 (‘9 2. I am an attractive person 1 2 3 ® 5 3. I consider myself a slappy person 1 2 ® 4 5 4. I am a decent sort of a person 1 2 3 GD 5 5. I am an honest person 1 2 3 4 Ga 6. I am a bad person 6) 2 3 4 5 7. I am a cheerful person 1 2 3 4 69 8. I am a calm and easygoing person 1 2 3 4 69 9. I am a nobody C) 2 3 4 5 10. I have a family that would always help me in any kind of trouble 1 2 3 4 C) 11. I am a member of a happy family 1 2 3 4 C) 12. my friends have no confidence in me® 2 3 4 5 13. I am a friendly person 1 2 3 4 C5) 14. I am pepular with men 1 2 ® 4 5 15. I am not interested in what other people do 6) 2 3 4 5 16. I do not always tell the truth 1 2 3 © 5 17. I get angry sometimes 1 2 3 Q 5 18. I like to look nice and neat all the time 1 2 ® 4 5 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. 30. 31. 32. 33. 34s 35. 36. 37. 38. 39. 133 I am full of aches and pains I am a sick person I am a religious person I am a moral failure I am a morally weak person I have a lot of self-control I am a hateful person I am losing my mind I am an important person to my friends and family I am not loved by my family I feel that my family does not trust me I am p0pular with women I am mad at the whole world I am hard to be friendly with Once in a while I think of things too bad to talk about Sometimes when I am not feeling well, I am cross I am neither too fat nor too thin I like my looks just the way they are I would like to change some parts of my body I am satisfied with my moral behavior I am satisfied with my relationship to God {-9 EDA 9976(3‘9‘ E9 99* 1 WWWMWWWQ \fl b-§-¥>b##¢b (:) (:} (:) .> -> .> -> (:) .p -> (9 \J'I @ 40. 41. 42. 43. 44. 45. 46. 47. 48. 490 50. 51. 52. 53. 54. 55. 56. 57. 58. 59. 134 I ought to go to church more I am satisfied to be just what I am I am just as nice as I should be I despise myself I am satisfied with my family relationships I understand my family as well as I should I should trust my family more I am as sociable as I want to be I try to please others, but I don't overdo it I am no good at all from a social standpoint I do not like everyone I know Once in a while, I laugh at a dirty joke I am neither too tall nor too short I don't feel as well as I should I should have more sex appeal I am as religious as I want to be I wish I could be more trustworthy I shouldn't tell so many lies I am as smart as I want to be I am not the person I would like to be (:3 (E) <:) GE) (g) to to @®® \» xx xx xx (:) (:) x» 5696) ® @®© (9 ##-b# 4: 60. 61. 62. 630 64. 65. 66. 67. 68. 69. 70. 71. 72. 73- 74. 75. 76. 77. 135 I wish I didn't give up as easily as I do I treat my parents as well as I should (use past tense if parents are not living) I am too sensitive to things my family say I should love my family more I am satisfied with the way I treat other people I should be more polite to others I ought to get along better with other peOple I gossip a little at times At times I feel like swearing I take good care of myself physically I try to be careful of my appearance I often act like I am "all thumbs" I am true to my religion in my everyday life I try to change when I know I am doing things that are wrong I sometimes do very bad things I can always take care of myself in any situation I take the blame for things without getting mad I do things without thinking about them first (a) x» \x \» (:) (3) \fl (5) (2) a» a- 63) (:> .s (:> \n # 4s GE) (:) C9 78. 790 80. 81. 82. 91. 92. 93. 94. 95. 96. 97. 98.' 136 I try to play fair with my friends and family 1 I take a real interest in my family 1 I give in to my parents (use past tense if parents are not living) 1 I try to understand the other fellow's point of view 1 I get along well with other peeple 1 I do not forgive others easily 1 I would rather win than lose in a game 1 I feel good most of the time 1 I do poorly in sports and games 1 I am a poor sleeper 1 I do what is right most of the time 1 I sometimes use unfair means to get ahead 1 I have trouble doing the things that are right 1 I solve my problems quite easily 1 I change my mind a lot 1 I try to run away from my problems 1 I do my share of work at home 1 I quarrel with my family 1 I do not act like my family thinks I should 1 I see good points in all the people I meet 1 I do not feel at ease with other people 1 ~99 ® ® ®®®N @ @@\~© was»: \fl mmmm 137 99. I find it hard to talk with strangers 100.0nce in a while I put off until tomorrow what I ought to do today 1 ANDROGYNOUS FEMALE Please indicate how well each of the following characteristics describe you as you now see yourself. Use the 7-point scale and circle the number that best describes your feeling about the adjective. Never or almost Always or almost never true of me always true of me 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 1. Self-reliant 1 2 3 4 5 @9 7 2. Yielding 1 2 3 @ 5 6 7 3. Helpful 1 2 3 4 ® 6 7 4. Defends own beliefs 1 2 3 4 5 6 Q) 5. Cheerful 1 2 3 4 5 (:> 7 6. Moody 1 (j) 3 4 5 7 7. Independent 1 2 3 4 (5) 6 7 8. Shy 1 ® 3 4 5 6 7 9. Conscientious 1 2 3 4 5 (:> 7 1o. Athletic 1 2 6) 4 5 6 7 11. Affectionate 1 2 3 4 5 @ 7 12. Theatrical 1 2 3 4 .® 6 7 13. Assertive 1 2 3 4 5 6 CD 14. Flatterable 1 2 3 4 (5) 6 7 15. Happy 1 2 3 4 5 6 ® 16. Strong personality 1 2 3 4 5 6 (a) 17. loyal 1 2 3 4 5 6 CD 18. Unpredictable Q 2 3 4 5 6 7 19. Forceful 1 2 3 4 5 (:3 7 2o. Feminine 1 2 3 4 5 © 7 138 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. 30. 31. 32. 33. 34. 35. 36. 37. 38. 39. 40. 41. 42. Reliable Analytical Sympathetic Jealous Has leadership abilities Sensitive to needs of others Truthful Willing to take risks Understanding Secretive Makes decisions easily Compasssionate Sincere Self-sufficient Eager to soothe hurt feelings Conceited Dominant Soft-spoken Likeable Masculine Warm Solemn ewes .. (:> .n 139 WWW“ WWWW WWWW \N K)! WWW 9613(9) @9996) -4 65> (E) (a) -4 (a) -q (:> -q -4 -n (E) 43. 44. 45. 46. 47. 48. 49. 50. 51. 52. 53. 54. 55. 56. 57. 58. 59. 60. Willing to take a stand Tender Friendly Aggressive Gullible Inefficient Acts as a leader Childlike Adaptable Individualistic Does not use harsh language Unsystematic Competitive Loves children Tactful Ambitious Gentle Conventional 140 WWWWWW WWWWWW seseese ®®989<®® I shouldn't tell so many lies I am as smart as I want to be I am not the person I would like to be (0 CD w®© W WWWWWWW 4s 69 (E; -> .9 #«b 60. 61. 62. 63. 64. 65. 66. 67. 68. 69. 70. 71. 72. 73. 74. 75. 76. 144 I wish I didn't give up as easily as I do I treat my parents as well as I should (use past tense if parents are not living) I am too sensitive to things my family say I should love my family more I am satisfied with the way I treat other peOple I should be more polite to others I ought to get along better with other people I gossip a little at times At times I feel like swearing I take good care of myself physically I try to be careful of my appearance I often act like I am "all thumbs" I am true to my religion in my everyday life I try to change when I know I am doing things that are wrong I sometimes do very bad things I can always take care of'myself in any situation I take the blame for things without getting mad I do things without thinking about them first x» x» {3) 9 9 99 99 919999 9 78. 79. 80. 81. 82. 83. 850 86. 87. 88. 89. 91. 92. 93. 94. 95. 96. 97. 98. I try to play fair with my friends 145 and family 1 I take a real interest in my family 1 I give in to my parents (use past tense if parents are not living) I try to understand the other fellow's point of view 1 I get along well with other people 1 I H I I do not forgive others easily would rather win than lose in game feel good most of the time do poorly in sports and games am a poor sleeper do what is right most of the time I sometimes use unfair means to get ahead I have trouble doing the things that are right I solve my problems quite easily I I try to run away from my problens I I I change my mind a lot do my share of work at home quarrel with my family do not act like my family thinks I should I see good points in all the people I meet I do not feel at ease with other people 9 WWWW 146 99. I find it hard to talk with strangers 1 100.0nce in a while I put off until tomorrow what I ought to do today 1 UNDIFFERENTIATED MALE Please indicate how well each of the following characteristics describe you as you now see yourself. Use the 7-point scale and circle the number that best describes your feeling about the adjective. Never or almost Always or almost never true of me always true of me 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 1. Self-reliant 1 2 3 4 6) 6 7 2. Yielding 1 2 3 @ 5 6 7 3. Helpful 1 2 3 4 ® 6 7 4. Defends own beliefs 1 2 3 @ 5 6 7 5. Cheerful 1 2 3 4 ® 6 7 6. Moody 1 2 3 4 5 © 7 7. Independent 1 2 (3? 4 5 6 7 8. Shy 1 2 3 GD 5 6 7 9. Conscientious 1 2 3 4 (5) 6 7 1o. Athletic 1 2 6) 4' 5 6 7 11. Affectionate 1 2 3 4 5 © 7 12. Theatrical 1 2 3 Q) 5 6 7 13. Assertive 1 2 3 Q) 5 6 7 14. Flatterable 1 2 3 @ 5 6 7 15. Happy 1 2 4 <5) 6 7 16. Strong personality 1 2 3 4 ® 6 7 17. loyal 1 2 3 @ 5 6 7 18. Unpredictable 1 2 3 4 (:3 6 7 19. Forceful 1 2 3 4 (9 6 7 20. Feminine (:7 2 3 4 5 6 7 .b .4 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. 30. 31. 32. 33. 34. 35. 36. 37. 38. 39. 40. 41. 42. Reliable Analytical Sympathetic Jealous Has leadership abilities Sensitive to needs of others Truthful Willing to take risks Understanding Secretive Makes decisions easily Compasssionate Sincere Self-sufficient Eager to soothe hurt feelings Conceited Dominant Soft-spoken Likeable Masculine Warm Solemn \» GE) 65) @9999999 @999 9999 9 (:> .s -4 -q -a ~J ~J -q -q 43. 44. 45. 46. 47. 48. 49. 50. 51. . 52. 53- 54. 55. 56. 57. 58. 59. 60. Willing to take a stand Tender Friendly Aggressive Gullible Inefficient Acts as a leader Childlike Adaptable Individualistic Does not use harsh language Unsystematic Competitive Loves children Tactful Ambitious Gentle Conventional @m (E) to 149 WWWW ## 4; #43-§ @ereeee \n (5) \fl (5) (:) \n \n U1 U1 «J «J -4 -q ~a ‘1 -4 -q -q -q -q -q 150 The statements in this test are to help you describe yourself as you see yourself. Answer them as if you were describing you to yourself. Read each item carefully; then select one of the five responses below and circle the answer that describes you best. If you feel the statement is completely false, circle 1; mostly false, circle 2; and so on. Completely Mostly Partly false, Mostly Completely false false partly true true true 1 2 3 4 5 1. I have a healthy body 1 2 3 ® 5 2. I am an attractive person 1 2 3 (:3 5 3. I consider myself a sloppy person 1 2 ® 4 5 4. I am a decent sort of a person 1 2 (:) 4 5 5. I am an honest person 1 2 3 a) 5 6. I am a bad person 1 2 ® 4 5 7. I am a cheerful person 1 2 3 C:) 5 8. I am a calm and easygoing person 1 2 ® 4 5 9. I am a nobody 1 2 ® 4 5 10. I have a family that would always help me in any kind of trouble 1 2 © 4 5 11. I am a member of a happy family 1 2 (3) 4 5 12. My friends have no confidence in me 1 2 (:) 4 5 13. I am a friendly person 1 2 3 r a 5 14. I am popular with men 1 2 ® 4 5 15. I am not interested in what other people do 1 2 @ 5 16. I do not always tell the truth 1 .2 CE) 5 17. I get angry sometimes 1 2 3 18. I like to look nice and neat all the time 1 2 3 seer 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. 30. 31. 32. 33. 34. 35. 36. 37. 38. 39. 151 I am full of aches and pains I am a sick person I am a religious person I am a moral failure I am a morally weak person I have a lot of self-control I am a hateful person I am losing my mind I am an important person to my friends and family I am not loved by my family I feel that my family does not trust me I am pepular with women I am mad at the whole world I am hard to be friendly with Once in a while I think of things too bad to talk about Sometimes when I am not feeling well, I am cross I am neither too fat nor too thin I like my looks just the way they are I would like to change some parts of my body I am satisfied with my moral behavior I am satisfied with my relationship to God w®©®®®®w 99W \» (:) xx a- (:) .> 999 40. 41. 42. 43. 440 45. 46. 47. 48. 49. 50. 51. 52. 53. 54. 55. 56. 57. 58. 59. 152 I ought to go to church more I am satisfied to be just what I am I am just as nice as I should be I despise myself I am satisfied with my family relationships I understand my family as well as I should I should trust my family more I am as sociable as I want to be I try to please others, but I don't overdo it I am no good at all from a social standpoint I do not like everyone I know Once in a while, I laugh at a dirty joke I am neither too tall nor too short I don't feel as well as I should I should have more sex appeal I am as religious as I want to be I wish I could be more trustworthy I shouldn't tell so many lies I am as smart as I want to be I am not the person I would like to be 99 999 999 63) xx x» 65) 63) x» a- (:> (E) -b 9 999 4:. 60. 61. 62. 63. 64. 65. 66. 67. 68. 69. 70. 71. 72. 73- 74. 75. 76. 77. 153 I wish I didn't give up as easily as I do I treat my parents as well as I should (use past tense if parents are not living) I am too sensitive to things my family say I should love my family more I am satisfied with the way I treat other peOple I should be more polite to others I ought to get along better with other people I gossip a little at times At times I feel like swearing I take good care of’myself physically I try to be careful of'my appearance I often act like I am "all thumbs" I am true to my religion in my everyday life I try to change when I know I am doing things that are wrong I sometimes do very bad things I can always take care of'myself in any situation I take the blame for things without getting mad I do things without thinking about them first at; E») w®© (58) 9® (:) .a 99 9 78. 79. 80. 81. 82. 83. 84. 85. 86. 87. 88. 89. 91. 92. 93. 94. 95. 96. 97. 154 I try to play fair with my friends and fan i1 y 1 I take a real interest in my family 1 I give in to my parents (use past tense if parents are not living) 1 I try to understand the other fellow's point of view 1 I get along well with other peOple 1 I do not forgive others easily 1 I would rather win than lose in a game 1 I feel good most of the time 1 I do poorly in sports and games 1 I am a poor sleeper 1 I do what is right most of the time 1 I sometimes use unfair means to get ahead 1 I have trouble doing the things that are right 1 I solve my problems quite easily 1 I change my mind a lot 1 I try to run away from my problems 1 I do my share of work at home 1 I quarrel with my family 1 I do not act like my family thinks I should 1 I see good points in all the people I meet 1 I do not feel at ease with other people 1 9‘”9 9 99 ww®®®® 9 9 99'9“ 99 4 5 4 5 4 5 4 5 GD 5 4 5 6) 5 4 5 (4) 5 4 5 4 5 4 5 4 5 4 5 4 5 4 5 4 5 4 5 4 5 4 5 155 99. I find it hard to talk with strangers 100.0nce in a while I put off until tomorrow what I ought to do today 1 111041an STATE UNIV. LIBRARIES 11m1111111111111|111111111111111111111111111111 31293009913223