{a I‘ v 1?. ‘-;- .1 ‘L,’ .‘f‘ . ‘ 1‘ r - - ‘. , ~. ‘ "I; x. J. ' v1. ' "m f M ‘ (“1" ‘ ‘ "ng " 1.4 22W; A '- - .1 \‘5 h ' ‘l%fii A":' f .| f " r,‘-. ',u 211*".- ' ' ’ h" 3 I I A ‘ . ‘,' xi l:\I\p,, ”w' I . Fir", v ”I, '.‘ A - .1 I. - I 15“" . J , ‘ , 1 art“! ' ' - m .- ‘ '04- ‘ ‘. 1 "1V’fu |)"C| - . . ‘ - ‘ ‘~ ”pd Ml" :‘ ' 2M“ ‘5119 ‘ “t .~$¢3.tb‘it§:lttr ‘I . ‘ l. 'Ilj)‘l ‘ .u ‘ 'U 5!. . . . v.‘ . \" ' PM; ’ It?) '§ :13; fl: ’3’ 41' .- 7"? C J ’! V5. ., . 3‘9 1 I ,\.l";l .[gl‘lflr ‘. r" $3.34.}; figgfp 4:3 31"“.‘1 . I", .. fir . 1‘_.“l. "'1'13'121' 951’. $‘523 (341}; I ‘ . l ' 1‘ \ .‘i ..‘,-' I O .V u ! féz’ I 9 ’. , ,cm’ I f’.’ I .1}? f _ 41.3 . . V.’ A ‘- v 1 Hr - k'vr'vl‘- :‘r -. 1“.“3.‘ x 1' ‘M‘1 £1.14”: ET? ‘ : "‘L “‘y c“ 0 ~33. ~ 351:.5‘: 1.1 " n» r-A "1v ‘.. c.- a 3 L_ La.“ Jig-1:. (1.}; u- 33%;"? . ' [:31 ’I , 4- v1. .‘ i); 1‘ ._ 'l‘.l',‘ “.' t 5 {31' -'1-.‘(l'-““ 1-" 1 . .1 $ 3 . , . .‘ ‘ . ‘ L01. . .- ;~_~.~( . '14” «gm -...- faiufirj. 41-234 .- ., j..,‘:~‘/.Q.‘ $17.11.; 1 *7 D ‘ . ‘ n. f ~ - 32535 :1 1‘; 61,34 “‘3294- *é’Ifnr... ‘ _- .1.; 5:»; ‘v .1 "1C. l 41 Z“.| - ’7. . m-w’n “n‘fh ; . _ [u . . 'p. _ ' I' T 4‘ 11¢”, . _‘, . . fl ‘ |.. -5. fly I“ . ' h“ ‘3‘}.Ei: 2"" “‘1“ . 's. . YO- . .‘. ‘4 ‘ ‘ r1- . ‘ .~ . _ ;- '" 1‘ 3". I E".I‘~' ml". 1 1‘ ,_~.‘3T ’Jfiwcww': 'm‘wgamw . -. .- J LIL/ll; 75 Liana?! ‘»\ M/ i’xfl Milli/lull ‘ L/ Michigan State H! z / University This is to certify that the dissertation entitled LIFE STRESS, SOCIAL SUPPORT, AND PSYCHOLOGICAL SYMPTOMATOLOGY OF MINORITY AND MAJORITY AMERICANS presented by Elsie M. Jones Smith has been accepted towards fulfillment of the requirements for Ph.D. degreein Psychology g_ mg. L Major professor Elaine Donelson 3 Date June 9, 1986 Msu.‘....n_mmm.'._- ' r1 'nrr ‘ ' ' ' 0-12771 MSU RETURNING MATERIALS: Place in book drop to remove this checkout from w your record. FINES will 1 - be charged if book is returned after the date stamped below. APE: '1 o 995 W1 FEB 12 2000 ; . ‘33"? If” ’ ' J 6 LIP! STRESS, SOCIAL SUPPORT AND PSYCHOLOGICAL SYMP‘I‘OIATOLOGY OP MINORITY AND MAJORITY AIBRICANS By Elsie I. Jones Smith A D‘BR‘I‘A’I'ION ”milled to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY Department of Psychology 1986 434‘ X¥41 Capyright by ELSIE M. JONES SMITH 1986 ABSTRACT LIFE STRESS, SOCIAL SUPPORT AND PSYCHOLOGICAL SYMPTOMATOLOGY OF MINORITY AND MAJORITY AMERICANS By Elsie M. Jones Smith The purpose of this study was to investigate the relationship of stressful life events, social support, and cognitive functioning of Black and White college students' psychological symptomatology (depression and anxiety). Students were administered anonymously a total of 10 instruments: (1) the Life Experiences Survey to measure stressful life events; (2) the Beck Depression scale (depression) and (3) the State Anxiety Inventory (anxiety) to assess psychological symptomatologY; (4) the Inter- nal-External Locus of Control Scale and the (5) Generalized Expectancy for Success Scale to measure students' cognitive functioning (internal mediating factors); (6) the Inventory of Socially Supportive Behaviors to ascertain students' level of social support; (7) the University Alienation Scale to measure students' feelings of alienation, powerlessness, and social isolation; and (8) the Attitudes Toward Women Scale and the (9) Personal Attributes Questionnaire to assess differences in sex-role attitudes and personal attributes; and (10) the Information Inventory to gain background data on students. Questions investigated were: Do Black and White college students have significant differences in the number of stressful life events they experience? What relationship, if any, is there between the stressful life events students experience and their reported psychological symptoms (anxiety and depression)? Do individuals' social support and cognitive functioning mediate or act as buffers to the stressful life events they experience? The results indicated that race is related to life stress. Minority students reported significantly more negative stressful life events, depression, and anxiety than did majority students. In contrast, majority students reported experiencing a significantly higher number of positive life events than did minority students. The study did support partially the "buffering effect" theory of social support and life stress but not that of cognitive factors and life stress. Social support was associated with significantly lower anxiety scores. While social support scores were associated with lower depression scores, the relationship was not statistically significant. DEDICATION To My Father, Richard Jones With much love and appreciation ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Special thanks to: My co-chair, Dr. Lee N. June, Professor and Director of the Counseling Center; Dr. Bertram Karon, a Committee member in the Psychology De- partment; Mrs. Rita Canady, who typed the entire manuscript so flawlessly; Mrs. Suzy Pavick, who has assisted me graciously throughout my tenure as a student at Michigan State University; Dr. Hiram Fitzgerald, Associate Chairperson of the Psychology Department; and, especially My son Travis L. Smith, who waited so patiently for me to complete the dissertation. vi TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF TABLES LIST OF FIGURES Introduction and Review of the Literature Race as a Source of Stressor Stimuli Out—group—Ingroup Phenomena - Race and Stress Out-group Status: Social Isolation, Marginality, and Status Inconsistency Racial Roles and Stress Racial Roles as Dominants and Tokens Race as a Stressor and Psychopathology External Mediators of Stress: Racial Minorities The Differential Exposure Hypothesis Economic Resources Social Support Internal Mediators of Stress Locus of Control and Vulnerability to Stress Learned Helplessness Self-Concept Racial Differences in the Ratings of Life Events Sumary Hypotheses About Culture, Race, and Life Stress vii vii xi XV 11 18 21 22 24 26 29 29 35 36 38 4O 42 Life Stress and Sex Roles Gender as a Source of Stressor Stimuli: The Special Case of Women Gender as a Status Characteristic Stress as Gender Roles Stress and Sex-Role Stereotyping Personality Variables and Bipolar Concepts of Masculinity and Femininity Sexism and Prejudice Against Women: A Source of Gender Stressor Stimuli Sex Role Attitudes, Role Conflict, and Stress External Mediating Factors of Gender-Related Stress Life Stress and the Economic Situation Gender Difference, Vulnerability, and Social Support Gender and Internal Mediators of Life Stress Gender-Related Differences in Locus of Control Self-Concept Learned Helplessness and Depression of Women Significance of the Study Research Hypotheses METHOD Subjects Procedures, Instruments Hypotheses viii 45 46 46 47 48 49 51 55 58 58 61 65 66 68 70 72 74 77 77 78 80 90 RESULTS 92 Race and Stressful Life Events 92 Race, Depression, and Anxiety 92 Gender, Life Events, Depression, and Anxiety 96 Race, Gender, Life Events, and Anxiety 108 Race, Social Support, Depression, and Anxiety 117 Race and Internal-External Locus of Control 125 Summary of Findings for Major Hypotheses 125 Minor Hypotheses 130 Gender and Locus of Control 131 Gender and Social Support 131 Race, Gender, Internal-External Locus of Control, and Social Support 135 Race, Gender, and Expectations of Success 142 Six Independent Variables and Depression and Anxiety 146 Race, Gender, and Student Alienation 149 Gender, Race, and Personality Attributes 151 Race, Gender, and Attitudes Toward Women 156 Race, Gender, Sense of Mastery (GESS), 159 Self-Esteem (GESS), and Self—Denigration (GESS) Importance of Religion in Coping, Level of Social Support, Alienation, and Expectations of Success 164 Eleven Predictor Variables, Depression and Anxiety 169 Summary of Findings for Minor Hypotheses 173 DISCUSSION 17 8 Overview 1 7 8 ix Race, Gender, Life Stress, and Psychological Symptomatology Social Support Locus of Control Race, Gender, and Expectations of Success Predictor Variables and Student Depression and Anxiety Race, Gender, and Alienation Masculine and Feminine Attributes and Sex Role Attitudes Sense of Mastery, Self-Esteem, and Self-Denigration Importance of Religion in Coping with Stress Eleven Predictor Variables, Depression and Anxiety Implications of Study 183 191 193 196 196 197 198 199 201 . 202 203 Table 3.00 Table 3.01 Table 3.02 Table 3.03 Table 3.04 Table 3.05 Table 3.06 Table 3.07 Table 3.08 Table 3.09 Table 3.10 Table 3.1 1 Table 3.12 Table 3.13 Table 3.14 LIST OF TABLES Multivariate Tests of Significance for Life Experiences Survey Scores by Student Race Univariate F Tests for Life Experiences Survey Scores by Student Race Summary Table of Sample Means and Standard Deviations for Life Experiences Survey Scores by Student Race Multivariate Tests of Significance for Depression and Anx- iety Scores by Student Race Univariate F Tests for Depression and Anxiety Scores by Student Race Means and Standard Deviations for Depression and Anxiety Scores by Student Race Multivariate Tests for LES Scores by Gender Summary of Analysis of Variance for LES Scores by Gender Summary of Sample Means and Standard Deviations for Student LES Scores by Gender Multivariate Tests of Significance for Depression and Anxiety Scores by Student Gender Summary of One-Way ANOVA for Beck Depression and Anxiety Scores by Gender Means and Standard Deviations for Depression and Anxiety Scores by Student Gender Multivariate Tests for LES Scores by Student Race and Gender Summary of Analysis of Variance for LES Scores by Race and Gender Summary of Sample Means and Standard Deviations for LES Scores by Gender and Race xi Table 3.15 Table 3.16 Table 3.17 Table 3.18 Table 3.19 Table 3.20 Table 3.21 Table 3.22 Table 3.23 Table 3.24 Table 3.25 Table 3.26 Table 3.27 Table 3.28 Table 3.29 Table 3.30 Table 3.31 Summary of Analysis of Variance for Depression and Anxiety Scores by Race and Gender Means and Standard Deviations for Student Depression and Anxiety Scores by Race and Gender Summary of Three-Way Analysis of Variance for Depression and Anxiety Scores by Race, Gender, and Total Negative LES Score Summary Table of Sample Means for Depression and Anxiety Scores by Race, Gender, and Total Negative LES Score Summary of Analysis of Variance for Social Support Scores by Student Race Summary of Sample Means and Standard Deviations for Social Support Scores by Student Race Summary of Analysis of Variance for Social Support Scores by Student Depression and Anxiety Means and Standard Deviations for High and Low ISSB Groups by Student Depression and Anxiety Scores Analysis of Variance for Locus of Control Score by Race Means and Standard Deviations for Internal-External Locus of Control Scores by Race Analysis of Variance for I-E Scores by Gender Means and Standard Deviations of I-E Scores by Student Gender Analysis of Variance for Social Support Scores by Gender Means and Standard Deviations for Social Support Scores by Gender Summary of Sample Means and Standard Deviations for Students' I-E Scores by Their Depression and Anxiety Scores Summary of Analysis of Variance for I-E Scores by Depres— sion and Anxiety Scores Analysis of Variance for Social Support Scores by Student Race and Gender Table 3.32 Table 3.33 Table 3.34 Table 3.35 Table 3.36 Table 3.37 Table 3.38 Table 3.39 Table 3.40 Table 3.41 Table 3.42 Table 3.43 Table 3.44 Table 3.45 Table 3.46 Table 3.47 Table 3.48 Means and Standard Deviations for Social Support by Race and Gender Summary of Multiple Regression Analysis for the Predictor Variables of Gender and I-E Scores with the Social Support Criterion Summary of Analysis of Variance for Expectations of Success Scores by Student Race and Gender Means and Standard Deviations for Expectations of Success Scores by Student Race and Gender Intercorrelation Between Measures Summary of Multiple Regression Analysis for the Prediction of Depression and Anxiety Analysis of Variance for Total Alienation Score by Student Race and Gender Means and Standard Deviations for Total Alienation Scores by Student Race and Gender Summary of Analysis of Variance for Personality Attribute Score by Student Race and Gender Means and Standard Deviations for Student Personality Attributes by Race and Gender Summary of Analysis of Variance for Attitude Toward Women Score by Race and Gender Means and Standard Deviations for Attitude Toward Women Score by Race and Gender Summary of Analysis of Variance for Mastery Scores by Student Race and Gender Means and Standard Deviations for Student Mastery Scores by Race and Gender Summary of Analysis of Variance for Self-Esteem and Self- Denigration Scores by Student Race and Gender Means and Standard Deviations for Student Self-Esteem and Self-Denigration Scores by Race and Gender How Important Is Religion in Your Life? xiii Table 3.49 Table 3.50 Table 3.51 Table 3.52 Summary of Analysis of Variance for Student Social Support, Alienation, and Success Scores by Their Views on the Impor- tance of Religion in Coping Means and Standard Deviations of Student Social Support, Alienation, and Success Scores by Their Views on the Impor- tance of Religion in Coping Intercorrelation of Measures for Eleven Predictor Variables Summary of Multiple Regression Analysis for Predictor Variables and Depression and Anxiety xiv LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1 Hypotheses in Psychopathology XV Introduction and Review of the Literature Life Stress, Social Support, and Psychologic_al_ Symptomatolggy of Minority and Majority Americans Concern over the stress that individuals are experiencing has touched almost every segment of the American population. Stress has been linked to high rates of hypertension and is now known to be a direct or indirect major contributor to coronary heart disease, cancer, lung ailments, accidental injuries, cirrhosis of the liver and suicide—six of the leading causes of death in the United States. Increasingly, the message Americans are receiving is: stress is dangerous to your physical and mental health; it may even lead to your death. Over the past three decades, a great deal of research has focused on stressful life events (Dohrenwend 6c Dohrenwend, 1974, 1981; Holmes 6: Rahe, 1967; Gunderson dc Rahe, 1974; Horowitz, 1976). The life events research model (as originally conceptualized by Holmes 6: Rahe, 1967) proposed that it is possible to make predictions about an individual's probable stress and susceptibility to a. wide span of diseases—infectious, ne0plastic, autoimmune—simply by determining the magnitude of critical life changes the individual experiences within a limited' span of time. Thebasic premise was that naturally occurring life situations which threaten individual's security and produce attempts at adaptive behavior also evoke significant physiological changes which lead to a lowering of the body's resistance to disease. It was proposed that the greater the magnitude of life changes, the greater the individual's risk of acquiring an illness of a serious nature. Holmes 6: Rahe (1967) generated a hierarchical list of life events most likely to necessitate significant change in a person's ongoing adaptive patterns. These investigators noted that the events themselves did not have to be of a traumatic or negative nature to evoke stress and disease. The critical factor was the amount of change or adjustment required of the individual, and not the desirability or undesirability of a given event. Using the foundation provided by Holmes dc Rahe (1967), researchers have theorized that certain life events, such as the death of a loved one, the loss of a job, and marriage act as precipitating factors in the onset of physical symptoms and mental disorders. Moreover, the effects of life events, such as moving and financial problems are believed to be additive. Physical symptoms and psychiatric disorders result when individuals accumulate life events over a short time period (B. S. Dohren- wend, 1973). Overall, a growing number of studies on life events have reported modest but significantly positive relationships between life event levels and physical and mental health symptomatology (Grant, Gerst, 6c Yager, 1976; Myers, Lindenthal, Pepper, 6: Ostrander, 1972). In their review of the literature, Rabkin 6c Struening (1976) have reported that in typical studies "life events may account for at least 9 percent of the variance in illness" (p. 1015). Much of the early work on stressful life events was designed to specify a relationship between a recent life event and the appearance of symptomatology within individuals (Grant, Sweetwood, Yager, 6t Gerst, 1978). Recently, however, a number of researchers (Kessler, 1979a 6: b; Thoits, 1982; Liem 6c Liem, 1981) have begun to modify this unidimen- sional and linear research approach. Scholars have begun to emphasize the importance of social support, thereby expanding the model to make it multidimensional. As Kessler (1979a) has noted: A number of current social stress models share the assumptions that: "(1) exposure to stress impacts on psychological distress, and that (2) various 'resources' available to certain individuals modify the severity of these impacts" (p. 100). The majority of the research on life events and physical and mental symptomatology has been conducted on White Americans. Studies on Black Americans have been noticeably absent from the literature. There are several bodies of research that suggest both race and gender may be important variables in the study of stressful life events, cognitive variables, and social support. The major purpose of this study is to investi- gate the influence of race on the life stress process. More specifically, the relationship of stressful life events, social support, and cognitive functioning to psychological symptomatology reported by Black and White Americans within a nonpatierit or normal population setting is examined. A second, although considerably less major objective, is to study the influence of gender on the life stress process. Questions raised by this study are: Do Blacks and Whites evidence significant differences in the number of stressful life events they exper- ience? What relationship, if any, is there between the stressful life events Blacks and Whites experience and their reported psychological symptoms? To what extent do individuals' social support mediate or act as a buffer to the stressful life events they encounter? What role does gender play in the life stress process? The review of the literature is divided into two major parts. Part I presents a discussion of the literature on race and stress. Included in this section are such topics as racial differences in the scaling of stressful life events and race as a social stressor. Separate sections on the external and internal factors related to the life stress of racial minorities are presented. The second part of the literature review provides an analysis of the research on gender, using similar variables outlined for race. This section begins with a discussion on life stress and sex-roles and is followed by a section on gender as a source of stressor stimuli. Separate sections are also included on the external and internal mediating factors related to gender and life stress. Clearly, there are some similarities in the life situations of racial minorities and women in general. Yet, equally clear, there are major differences between these two dominant groups. The review of the literature, while not attempting to draw direct parallels between the major variables of race and gender, does so indirectly. This stance was taken primarily because it was felt that both variables constitute, in and of themselves, distinct research areas that have generally run parallel to each other. The two research areas stand on their individual merit, without having to make comparisons and contrasts between them. Race as a Source of Stream Stimuli According to E. B. White, the noted journalist, three issues have dominated American history: those of bread and butter, war and peace, and Black and White relationships (cited in R. H. White, 1970). The issue of race is probably one of the most sensitive in psychology and in the nation as a whole. This section discusses the rationale for viewing one's racial membership as a source of stress. Dohrenwend 6c Dohrenwend (1979) have proposed that three factors contribute to the general level of stress individuals experience. These three factors were defined as stressor stimuli, external mediating forces, and internal mediating forces. Dohrenwend 6c Dohrenwend defined stressor stimuli as those events that cause stress by disrupting or threatening disruption of an individual's activities. The external mediating forces were described as environmental factors that act upon the individuals. Factors included under this category were money, family, and level of social support. Internal mediator of stress were individuals' psychological or physical diSposition, their val es, life expectations, and general feelings. According to Dohrenwend 6c ohrenwend, the severity of any individual's stress was determined by the duration and intensity of the stressor stimuli and the mediating effects of internal and external stimuli. This section follows the model proposed by Dohrenwend 6: Dohrenwend. Stressor stimuli are conceptualized as the prejudice, discrimination, and hostility Black Americans and other racial minorities encounter from their social environment as a result of their minority status. External mediators are presented largely in terms of social support available to members of racial minority groups; and internal mediators are the cognitive factors that influence individuals' perception of life events and the coping behaviors they use. Wm Phenomena: RaceandStreas Research by Harding, Proshansky, Kutner, 6: Chen (1969) and Sherif dc Sherif (1956) provided some early theoretical perspectives con- cerning why minority status can be stressful. Harding, et. a1. (1969), have maintained that racial discrimination has the net effect of producing two types of group memberships: an inside-of-group and an outside-of- group distinction. These two types of group memberships can lead to stress for members, especially for those who are excluded from member- ship in a particular group. According to Allport (1954), out-group members may encounter three levels of rejection: (1) verbal rejection; (2) discrimination; and (3) physical attack. Racial minorities were said to encounter verbal rejection when they were the target of name calling and other forms of verbal animosity. Discrimination against racial minorities occurred when they were treated unfairly and unequally according to the law. Under the rubric of physical attack, Allport included treatment such as mob attack and lynchings. Out-grog Status: Social Isolation, Marginality, and Status Incomistency The psychological consequences of out-group status for racial minorities is revealed in the literature on isolation and psychopathology. Several studies have examined the effects of mental status within a community and the risk of mental disorder. For example, Bloom (1975), Mintz 6r Schwartz (1964), and Rabkin (1979) have examined the effects of minority status within a community and the risk of emotional disorder. Out-group status for Blacks and other minorities may result in: (1) social isolation; (2) social marginality; and (3) status inconsistency. Researchers have theorized that minority status leads to alienation, thereby creating within individuals a heightened sense of stress. Social isolation implies an impairment of one's position in a community. Re- cently, social isolation has been found a major factor in increased risk of disease (Eaton, 1963; Rabkin 6t Struening, 1976). Marginal social status has also been related to social isolation. A marginal group is usually defined as an incompletely assimilated group, one which has partially relinquished its former culture and which has not yet achieved full acceptance in the new culture within which it is living (Fairchild, 1961). A marginal group occupies a sort of social no man's land. When overt characteristics make identification easy, the stage of marginality may be occupied for decades. Recently, researchers have begun to examine marginal status in terms of ethnic density. In these instances, ethnic density was usually conceptualized as the ratio of Blacks to Whites or of Blacks to other Blacks in a community. Ethnic density has been found to be related inversely to psychiatric hospitalization rates. When ethnic or racial groups constitute a smaller proportion of their total population in a given area, diagnosed rates of mental illness increase with the ethnic minority in comparison to the majority ethnic group. For example, a study by Mintz 6c Schwartz (1964) found that Whites living in predominantly Black areas had a rate of psychosis 313% higher than Whites in predominantly White areas. A less drastic situation was also noted for Blacks. Blacks living in White areas had a 32% higher rate of psychosis than Blacks in Black areas. Analyzing ethnic group size within a community and psychiatric hospitalization in New York City, Rabkin (1979) found that the smaller the group size of Blacks, Puerto Ricans, and Whites in a community, the higher their psychiatric hospitalization rate. The relationship between ethnic density and psychiatric hospitalization rate held even when factors such as poverty, family cohesiveness, and mobility were controlled in the study. Bloom (1970) studied the 1970 hospitalization rates for Spanish- surnamed individuals in Pueblo, Colorado. He found that the hospitaliza- tion rates for these individuals were highest when they were in a minority and that the same situation existed for the non-Spanishsurnamed when they were in a minority position. The marginal theory has been criticized on the grounds that margin- ality exists especially for those who do not have strong identification with any minority ethnic or majority group. An individual's identification and ability to move in at least one culture successfully helps to mediate the negative effects of marginality. The concept of status inconsistency has also been used to describe what may occur as a result of one's out-group status. Status inconsistency occurs when an individual has two or more distinct and incompatible social statuses. Auxiliary characteristics carried over from other social contexts such as race and gender may contaminate one's other social status. For example, one's gender status may contaminate one's profes- sional status as a professional. In general, middle class Blacks are inclined to encounter more status inconsistency than Blacks from lower socio- economic backgrounds. The status of the Black professional is often ambivalent and based on the auxiliary characteristics of race and sex. Black professionals may experience what Grier dc Cobbs (1968) have terms "the penalty of success." Although allowed to be outstanding with persons of their own race, they nevertheless, feel penalized when they compete with Whites. The U.S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare (1969) has also noted that: returns on an investment in education are much lower for Blacks than for the general population and that for Blacks, educational attainment may simply mean exposure "to more severe and visible discrimination than is experienced by the dropout or the unschooled" (p. 24). Racial Roles and Stress Pettigrew (1964) has noted that one's racial status may become a source of stress when two people are forced to play certain roles. According to him, the role of the White person in American society has historically been one of the "superior," while the role that Black people have been forced to enact has often been that of the "inferior." By direct action or subtle cue, White Americans often convey the expectation that they will be treated with deference. If racist norms are to be 10 followed, the Black person must "act Black," and play the role of the inferior lest sanctions be imposed against him. John Griffin (1961), a White man who artificially darkened his skin and traveled in the South as a Black man, revealed in his book, M Like Me, the utter terror such a subordinate role could have for a White person inexperienced by its subtleties. Griffin described the "hate stare" intensely prejudiced Whites cast upon Blacks: It came from a middle-aged, heavy-set, well dressed White man. He sat a few yards away, fixing his eyes on me. Nothing can de- scribe the withering horror of this. You feel lost, sick at heart, before such unmasked hatred. . . (1961, p. 53). Although Griffin's work is over 20 years old, some forms of the roles he experienced as a Black man still clearly exist. The critically important variable of Blacks and other racial minorities is the color of their skin. At the personality level, however, the role adoption of White superior, Black inferior divides Black people from themselves and from other people. As long as racial roles are maintained, individuals find it hard to understand each other as complete human beings. Their communication is stunted; they find it difficult to perceive each other's humanity behind the facade of their roles. The problem becomes even more difficult when many Whites, who are by no means racist, confuse the role of the Black person with the people who assume the role. More research needs to be conducted on the roles people assume (the role of the inferior and that of the superior) and the relationship such roles have on their mental health. The stress that some members of 11 racial minorities feel could be caused by the roles they assume and believe they have to assume in life in order to get along. The price of assuming roles which suggest one's inferiority may lead to adjustment difficulties or psychopathology. Racial Roles as Dominants and Tokens More recently, Rosabeth Kanter (1977) has reconceptualized the notion of roles based on racial membership into the framework of domi- nants and tokens. According to her, the kind of interaction between socially and culturally different members of a group is determined by the proportion each type constitutes and that certain interactive patterns are based on these proportions. Kanter describes the numerically dominant type as the "dominants" and the others as the "tokens." The term "token" was selected for several reasons. People who are few in number are frequently treated as symbols and as representatives of their category rather than as real people. As Kanter has stated: Tokens are not merely deviants or peOple who differ from other group members along any one dimension. They are people identified by ascribed characteristics (master statuses such as sex, race, religion, ethnic group, age, etc.) or other characteristics that carry with them a set of assumptions about culture, status, and behavior highly salient for majority category members (1977, p. 986). Over-observation and visibility. The proportional rarity of tokens brings with them a certain kind of visibility not usually possible for the members of the dominant group. This characteristic may be described 12 as the visibility quality of tokens. The greater visibility of tokens has several implications for social situations. Whatever they do among mem— bers of the dominant group becomes, in a sense, a type of public perfor- mance. Even when tokens make efforts to go unnoticed they suffer from "over—observation." Anonymity is not a luxury that tokens or racial minorities can expect. Racial minorities are visible as representatives of their category, and so whatever they do takes on an added symbolic meaning. Their behavior may be viewed as predictive of what every other member of their ethnic category will do. Tokens are visible and evaluated most often not on the basis of skills relevant to the particular environment but rather on the basis of characteristics associated with the master status—ethnic identity or sex, for example. When a token does well, the dominant who is being judged comparatively suffers a loss of public face. Kanter noted two responses to the pressures brought on by the high visibility of tokens. One approach the token used was to overachieve. The purpose of this approach was to overachieve so that one would be recognized for his or her performance rather than for the token's master status. The overachievement response of the token made the anxiety levels of the dominants shoot up, and the tokens were described by the dominants as overly ambitious and unaware of their "place." The typical response was for the token to try to achieve invisibility—that is, the individual wore clothes that approximated the style of the dominants, avoided public occasions, did not Speak up at meetings, and minimized 13 his or her accomplishments. By maintaining a low profile, the tokens hoped to avoid the disapproval of the dominants, which was prone to be engendered by visible overachievement. There are numerous examples of the role that token status plays in the visibility of racial minorities. On many predominantly White cam- puses, for example, Black students may complain that often times their color makes them too visible to cut class. Their absence is noticed more quickly than that of White students. The same situation has often been said of Black people in work settings with the dominant group. One can never quite let one's hair down. One can never quite allow oneself to become truly vulnerable. Underscoring the dilemma of the Black profes— sional in the informal work group, Smith (1973, p. 27) has pointed out that the informal work group may not serve the same functions for Black professionals as it does for their White counterparts. For White workers, the colleague group provides refuge as a sanctuary to which: . . . The individual can turn to let his hair down and recount his mistakes. . . . The Black man knows from past experiences that he cannot afford to let his hair down and recount his mistakes. The results might be catastrophic. Hence, his self-confidence is seldomly reinforced by his informal work group. The low profile response occurs with painful consequences with Black and other professors from racial minority backgrounds on predomi- nantly White campuses. The low profile response may often lead to psy- chopathology in that the individual who is a member of a racial minority finds that less and less he can become or act like himself—even when 14 he has played according to the rules of the dominant group and achieved well. When an individual fears showing his true capabilities, he becomes estranged from himself. Estrangement from oneself leads to psychopathol- ogy. Polarization. Another characteristic of the dominant-token status relationship is polarization. Polarization occurs when there is a heighten- ing of the token's attributes in comparison to those of the dominants. That is, the dominants are often brought together against the tokens under the banner of commonality. As Royce (1982) has stated: Individual differences are forgotten in the fact of the perceived threat to which all are exposed by the 'different' tokens. The slogan of commonality becomes more than empty words as domi- nants exaggerate their common culture, especially those aspects that the tokens do not share (p. 197). For example, males may tend to overemphasize their "maleness" or macho qualities with women moving up the management ladder. Among majority Americans, all of a sudden one is faced with a flood of stories about one's Irish or Italian background, for example. Polarization may also take another form. For example, dominants may magnify differences between themselves and tokens by insuring that tokens are held responsible for interruptions in the flow of events. As Kanter (177, p. 977) has stated: "Dominants preface acts with apologies or questions about appropriateness directed at the token; they then invar- iably go ahead with the act, having placed the token in the position of interruptor or interloper." The net result is that the token is usually 15 made to feel uncomfortable, like an intruder. He or she very often feels compelled to acknowledge that the interaction should proceed by the rules of the dominants, otherwise it would be "unnatural." A major purpose of interruptions is that they signal to the tokens that their appropriate role is that of audience rather than as participants. Isolation. Isolation is another characteristic associated with domi- nant and token status of majority and minority Americans. In general, dominants (regardless if one is talking about dominant status in terms of race or sex) keep tokens from having access to aspects of the dominant culture they want to keep secret by performing those activities when tokens are absent. That is, in predominantly White settings, members of racial minority groups are often deprived of important information. The lack of access to information may hinder a racial minority's perfor- mance. Frequently, racial minorities may not be told of an important event or given the wrong date of time, or not allowed in certain contexts. One psychology intern described to me her experience with being locked out of information on a basic level. She told how she went to the meeting place for one of her seminars, but no one was there. Quite by accident, (meeting a fellow intern in the corridor) she found out that the meeting was to be held in another student’s office instead of their regular place. The student said to me: When the other interns filed into the student's office for the semi— nar, I began to wonder: Why did everyone else seem to know about the change of the meeting place but me? Why wasn't I informed? . As I sat there trying to figure out what had happened, the 16 inescapable conclusion was that as a Black, I was not privy to certain information. . . And the funny thing about it was that I was supposed to sit there and act as if nothing had happened—as if I were not even aware of the fact that I had been left out of the whole process. Test of loyalties. There are certain inconsistencies in the roles of tokens and dominants. In spite of the fact that tokens are viewed as being out-group members, they are still expected to demonstrate their loyalty to the dominant group. Tests of loyalty may often necessitate that a token turn against other tokens. Tokens in multiethnic situations may be subjected to such tests. For example, one Black student described his experience in a class of 12 Whites, and one other Black. According to him, this had been the first time that one of the two Black students was presenting. He was nervous—wondering how she would make out. The professor began giving a running commentary on her case presentation of the client—who also was Black. The student said to me: I couldn't believe my ears. I mean I just sat there listening to this White instructor talk about how typical it was for Black males to come from this sort of background—all stereotyped -— you know, the worst I had heard in a long time. I thought sure that this sister would say something redeeming, something in defense of her client because he did have some things going for him. But instead, she just joined him. I can just hear her now saying to the professor: 'Yep, Walter is real typical of Black culture all 17 right!‘ . . . Later, I didn't even want to listen to her half-assed explanation of how she had to get through the course and all. I just lost respect for her, and . . . maybe some for myself, too. The student's story illustrates how some racial minorities may find them- selves believing the dominant group's stereotype or may continue to perform in order to be allowed to remain on the periphery of the dominant group. The ways of forcing racial minorities to acknowledge the superior power of the dominant group often carries the seeds of self-hatred. Role entrgpment and status levelig. Role entrapment is another aspect of dominant and token relationships. It occurs when the token's status is brought into line with the status of the token's stereotype in the population at large. Thus, a person seeing a Japanese person dressed in an expensive business suit, would attempt to respond to him as if he were a stereotypical Japanese gardener. That is, the individual from the dominant group would attempt to put the Japanese person through a process called status leveling. It is difficult to avoid status leveling and role entrapment and still even harder to fight against it. As Royce (1982) has stated: It is often easier to accept the false classification than to insist on being recognized as an individual with many aspects. Fighting role entrapment elicits anger and resentment on the part of the dominant group members. No one likes having to revise categories or to relinquish beliefs, and no one appreciates being put in the awkward position of being wrong or appearing to be a bigot. Finally, 18 the dominant who is challenged in this way might easily resolve the dilemma by saying that the token is 'uppity' and 'doesn't know his/her place' (p. 200). Race as a Stressor and Psychopathology Scholars have debated the relationship between race/ethnicity and psychopathology. Generally speaking, two positions have been artic- ulated: (I) the effects of racial discrimination are such that they place Blacks at a higher risk of mental disorders; and (2) race alone cannot account for the prevalence of mental disorders. Kramer, Rosen, 6c Willis (1973) have maintained that "racist prac- tices undoubtedly are key factors—perhaps the most important ones—in producing mental disorders in Blacks and other underprivileged groups . . ." (p. 355). In a later article, Cannon 6: Locke (1977) used extensive epidemiological data to answer the question: Is one's racial membership group detrimental to one's mental health? The authors concluded that factors associated with the designated out-group status of Blacks made them more vulnerable to risk of mental disorder. In an extensive review of the literature on social and cultural influ- ences on psychopathology, King (1978) concluded that race alone could not account for the prevalence of mental illness, nor did it appear to be a primary etiological factor in accounting for differences in rates of psycho- pathology. King noted that there is strong evidence to suggest a basic unit of man across cultures, which is reflected partly in common personality types and common forms of psychological disturbance among people. 19 There has been some limited evidence that cultural differences do have an influence on people's presenting mental health problems. Sue dc Kirk (1975) conducted a four-year study of the utilization patterns of mental health services by Asian American and non-Asian American (primarily White) college students. These investigators found that Asian American students evidenced a greater inclination to express problems indirectly as somatic complaints. Likewise, among Hispanic Americans, Gomez (1972) observed that depression was a frequent way Puerto Ricans on the mainland re— sponded to stress. Torees-Matrullo (1976) has noted that Puerto Ricans with low acceptance and adjustment to the dominant White culture had a greater tendency toward higher depression, but less self-confidence and sense of self-control. Dressler 6c Bernal (1982) investigated the acculturative stress experienced by Puerto Rican migrants to Hartford, Connecticut. They defined acculturated stress as person's length of residence in a novel cultural environment while lacking the necessary psychosocial resources to support one's adaptation to that environment. Dressler and Bernal found that acculturated stress was related to poorer health status, more behavioral problems, and higher levels of ethnomedical (espiritista or folk healer) belief. Analyzing the importance of ethnic status in mental health risk factors, Eaton (1983) noted that American Blacks have a higher risk for antisocial personality disorders; Irish, Russians, and native-born Israelis have a higher risk for schizophrenia and that Native Americans had greater difficulties with alcoholism. Burback 6c Thompson (1971) found that 20 among college freshmen, Black Americans scored higher than others on total alienation, higher than Whites on powerlessness and normlessness, and higher than Puerto Ricans on social isolation. Burback 8c Thompson (1971) concluded that Black students are less in control of their lives than others. There was difficulty, however, in distinguishing racial factors from social class factors. 8. S. Dohrenwend (1973) found that major life changes, which are often related to physical and mental breakdowns occurred more frequently among the poor, a socioeconomic group which has a disproportionate number of Blacks, Hispanics, and Native Americans. Overall, this review has found that Black Americans, in particular and ethnic minorities generally, have more psychological disorders than Whites; but when class is taken into account, the differences become minimal (Warheit, Holzer, 6c Arey, 1975). Much of the research evidence on prevalence of psychological disorder among Black Americans is con— taminated by the investigators' failure to distinguish between class and race clearly. Yet, even in the studies that controlled for race and class adequately, researchers (Kessler, 1979b; Dohrenwend 6r Dohrenwend, 1969, 1980b) found that Blacks were subject to greater stressors than were Whites. These findings suggest that differential access to internal and external mediators results in stressors having a greater impact on Blacks. In summary, in the United States, race is a source of stressor stimuli for Black Americans, Hispanics, Native Americans, and Asian Americans. Researchers have emphasized that it is the out-group status that generates a large source of stress. Likewise, being a member of a numerical minority 21 has a great deal to do with the stress one encounters, regardless of one's race. This situation occurs because the kind of interaction possible between socially and culturally different members of a group is based, in part, on the proportion each type constitutes. Certain interaction patterns between dominants and tokens are inevitable, given their proportions. Factors which appear to contribute to the stress of racial minorities are their high visibility, over-observation, and lack of anonymity. Polariza- tion, or the heightening of the racial minority's attributes, in contrast to members of the majority or dominant culture is another factor that leads to feelings of stress. Role entrapment and status leveling were also presented as factors that may predispose a member of a racial minor- ity to stress. Racism is a social injury that may have psychological consequences. More research needs to be conducted on the mechanisms of racism. This section identified some of the mechanisms of racism as over- observa- tion and loss of anonymity; being evaluated on the basis of characteristics associated with the master status—ethnic identity, for example; role entrapment, and status leveling. The next section focuses on the external mediators of stress for racial minorities. External Mediators of Stress: Racial Minorities It is generally acknowledged that simple exposure to stressful life events does not have to lead to physical and psychological symptoms. While some individuals develop physical and emotional disorders after 22 exposure to stressful life conditions, others do not. Whether or not an individual succumbs to disease as a result of being exposed to stressful life events is dependent upon a number of variables. This section focuses on two external mediators of social stress: (1) social class membership, and (2) social support. Over the past few decades, the most consistent sociodemographic finding has been the inverse relationship between social class and psycho- logical symptomatology (Dohrenwend dc Dohrenwend, 19813; Baton, I983; Carr 6: Krause, 1978; Hollingshead 6c Redlich, 1958). Regardless of their race, people from lower socioeconomic backgrounds tend to have more psychiatric symptoms and psychological disorders than those from more advantaged backgrounds. The Differential Emsure Hypothesis The differential exposure hypothesis has been used to explain the higher incidence of psychological symptoms among the poor (B. S. Dohrenwend, 197 3). Basically, this hypothesis has maintained that frequent exposure to stressful life experiences causes the high rates of emotional disorder among the poor. The underlying assumption of the hypothesis is that the day-to-day experiences of people from lower socioeconomic backgrounds are more likely to involve exposure to stress-inducing events than the experiences of the middle-class. The differential exposure hypothesis has emphasized the quantitative differences in the frequency of life events that people in different classes experience. 23 There has been some support for B. S. Dohrenwend's differential exposure hypothesis. Myers, Lindenthal, 6: Pepper (1974) found that the relationship between social class and impairment could be explained appreciably by using a class distribution of life events weighted for desir- ability and life change units. Their findings suggested that although total life events demanding readjustment might be equally prevalent across class status groups, lower class people experience a higher ratio of undesirable to desirable events than people from more advanced socio- economic backgrounds. Rather than the total number of life events, it is poor people's relatively greater experience of undesirable as compared with desirable life events that predispose them to a disproportionately higher risk for psychological disorders. Kessler (1979b) found consistently that people's exposure to life events contributed to social class differences in impairment. Using data from the same research base as Myers, Lindenthal, 6: Pepper (1974), Kessler concluded that the greater distress found among non-Whites (defined as either Black or Puerto Rican) was primarily a function of their differential exposure to stress. Kessler (1979b, p. 266) stated: "The average difference in self-reported distress between Whites and non-Whites is much more a function of the many stressful experiences to which non-Whites are exposed than of any impact differential between Whites and non—Whites." He further noted that Blacks and Puerto Ricans were especially strong in being able to reduce the impact of stressful life events. "Therefore, if there are any variations in intrapsychic strengths, Whites must be disadvantaged relative to non-Whites." 24 Economic Resources Economic resources constitute another major social class mediator of stressful life events. For the most part, racial minorities have less access to economic resources (U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, 1980). Studies of racial minorities' economic status have shown that they fre- quently earn lower levels of income than the majority of Americans. According to Newman, Amidet, Carter, Day, Kruvant, 6( Russell (1978), Blacks are disproportionately "learning without earning" and have lower employment opportunities not primarily because of deficient education and skills, but because of racial discrimination. In a well-documented work, Newman, et a1. stated: . . one especially stubborn and widespread notion has persisted into the seventies and is as ill-founded for the present as it was for the past. This is the firm belief that Blacks are more likely to be unemployed because they are not "qualified" for jobs in the American economy and, in particular, not 'qualified' for those jobs resulting from changing technology . . . Today, with Black and White Americans receiving about equal years of schooling, credentialismm-fairly applied—would mean similar unemployment rates for White and Black high school graduates. . . But the requirements have never been equally applied: young White dropouts have had consistently lower unemployment rates than young Black graduates. . . What has made a difference in working or not, at high-status jobs or not . . . has been the color of the applicant's skin. It is difficult to review the evidence for 25 every age and educational group since 1940 and come to any other conclusion (p. 71 and 86). Lest one should think that the difficulty of translating educational achievement and credentials is solely a problem for Black Americans, one should examine the situation of other racial minorities. For instance, Asian Americans are often called the model minority; they are frequently thought of as being unusually successful in using education as a vehicle for upward economic and job mobility (Cheng, Brizendine, 6c Oakes, 1979). The "model minority" image has developed because Asian Americans have been able to achieve a higher level of education and greater upward mobility in comparison with other racial minority groups. Yet, Suzuki's (1977) examination of the success of Asian Americans found that even though this group is one of the most highly educated ethnic groups in the nation, education has not produced as much earning power for Asian males as it has for White males with the same educational background. Analyzing 1969 data from the U.S. Department of Labor, Suzuki found the percentage of Chinese males earning $10,000 or more was consistently below that of White males at the same educational levels (high school graduate, college graduate, and post—graduate), and below that of Black males at the postgraduate level. A more recent study (U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, 1980) found that, at first glance, Asian American groups appeared better off than other racial minorities and at times better off economically than White majority Americans. A closer analysis of the data revealed, however, that although Asian American groups have, on the average, superior education 26 and income to the majority group, these differences disappear when looking at urban areas where Asian Americans are highly concentrated. The breakdown of many racial minorities' and majority White families is related to the families' economic crisis. Urban minority families often experience despair, frustration, and hardships because of economic insecurity. Economic resources are believed to help shield people from the impact of stressful life events. They provide the instrumental support people need to cope with stressful life events. Social Support One of the most influential hypotheses in the literature on life stress has posited that social support mitigates against the effects of stressful life events. The "buffering hypothesis" maintains that individuals who experience significant life stress but who have strong social support will be protected from developing psychological symptomatology associated with stress. Caplan (1974) has identified three stress—mediating functions social support systems provide. Social support systems help people to: (1) organize their skills and resources for coping with the stressful life event; (2) share the burden of the stress; and (3) give or receive emotional and instrumental (for example, money) support. Only a very few studies have been conducted on stressful life events and the social support or coping networks of members of racial minority groups. Warheit, Vega, Shimizu, 8c Mainhardt (1982) examined the interpersonal coping networks and mental health problems among Blacks, Whites (Anglos), Mexican Americans, and Guamanians. A total of 5,175 27 respondents, 18 years and over were interviewed. Warheit et al. found that more than two-thirds of all respondents said they had family members nearby whom they could call on for help; however, fewer Black and Mexican Americans had nearby friends (75%) than Whites (9096). The investigators found that having family members nearby was, in itself, significantly related to lower levels of psychiatric symptoms. However, for Whites and Mexican Americans, the availability of geographically close friends was associated with significantly lower symptom/dysfunction scores. Warheit et a1. concluded that: (1) having close friends to call on in times of need was more significantly related to reduced symptomatology than having family members close by; (2) calling on family members did not necessarily negate or mitigate the emotional traumas associated with excessible life demands; and (3) people did not seek aid from people unless they felt quite hopeless to deal with their problems, thus the reason for the higher symptomatology scores for people who sought the aid of family members. Lin, Simeone, Ensel, 6c Kuo (1979) found that among Chinese Americans in Washington, D.C., the impact of stressor stimuli was negligible when social support (defined as community involvement) was high. The importance of the social support factor remained significant even when the investigators controlled for marital status and occupation. Very little data exists on the impact of social support as a means of helping members of racial minority groups deal effectively with life stress. Clearly, researchers need to study empirically the amount of emotional and instrumental support racial minorities receive from those 28 in their environment. It would seem that as individuals move farther and farther away from family members, the opportunity for social support is attenuated. Likewise, as more families from racial minority backgrounds adopt the nuclear family structure in place of the extended family one, sources of family support become more institutional than familial-cen- tered. The majority of the limited research on social support and racial minorities has focused on members from the lower socioeconomic class. More emphasis should be placed on studying the social support system of the middle class, especially that of minority children living in predomi- nantly White environments. It would seem that, in many respects, these groups stand at risk for psychopathology. For instance, the geographical mobility of members of the Black middle class has reduced the level of social support such members traditionally have received from the extended family. It is difficult to get social support from individuals who live 900 or 3,000 miles away. In fact, the problem of the Black middle class living in predominantly White, middle class suburbia may be that they have cut themselves off from their natural support systems. The problem may be especially severe for middle class minority children who may not have the cultural anchoring that their parents have. In fact, their ethnic identity may be very fluid and incomplete. An important question for researchers is: What are the natural support systems for the various racial minority groups? How might mental health specialists use natural support systems more effectively? 29 Internal Mediators of Stress Internal mediators of stress are personality factors that may influ- ence an individual's response to stressful life events. For example, individ- uals may have different psychological defenses, coping responses, and personal predispositions which may put them at risk for psychiatric symp- tomatology. Several internal factors have been discussed concerning their mediating effects on stress. These are: internal-external locus of control, learned helplessness, and self-concept. Locus of Control and Vulnerability to Stress Individual differences in vulnerability to stress-related psychopath- ology has developed from Rotter's (1966) social learning theory and his view that people have a generalized expectancy about the extent to which they control the rewards, punishments, and in general, the events that occur in their lives. Rotter called this generalized expectancy locus of control. Individuals were conceptualized as varying on the dimension of control from internal to external. People who are internally controlled expect to be in control of their life events to a high degree. Those who are externally controlled expect their life events will generally be con- trolled by others or by fate. In general, one hypothesis has been fairly well supported empirically: majority Americans who have an external locus of control expectancy have a greater proneness to psychopathology than those who have an internal locus of control expectancy (Lefcourt, 1976). In some instances, an internal locus of control expectancy has been highly associated with 30 competence, coping ability, and relative invulnerability to debilitating effects of stressful life events (Campbell, Converse, 6c Rodgers, 1976). Lazarus (1966, 1974) has suggested that stress is dependent on cognitive processes related to individual's perception of events and their meaning to individuals. Individual's perceptions of events may lead some to view an event as stressful, while others may not view it as such. The degree of stressfulness of any event depends on the meaning the individual gives it. One of the important qualities of control is that is suggests a person has perceived resources for coping with the life event and its consequences. Bandura has termed an individual's perceived resources for coping as a feeling of self—efficacy. According to him: "It is mainly perceived inefficacy in coping with potentially aversive events that make them fearsome. To the extent, one can prevent, terminate, or lessen the severity of aversive events, there is little reason to fear them" (Bandura, 1982,p.36L Thompson (1981) has categorized control as "behavioral control, cognitive control, information control, and retrospective control." She maintained that control is related to the meaning the individual gives to the event and that cognitive control has a significant effect on how one experiences a stressful life event. Other researchers have also stressed the importance of perceived control as an internal moderator of stress. Pearlin 6c Schooler (1978) have pointed out that mastery or control over life events is an important coping resource. Kobasa (1979) and Kobasa 6c Schooler (1979) surveyed 31 people who were in similar situations and found that while some people coped well and reported a few illnesses, others did not cope well and reported numerous illnesses. Kobasa (1979) described the healthy copers as higher in "hardiness." Hardy individuals were found to have a stronger commitment to themselves, an attitude of vigorousness toward the envi- ronment, a sense of meaningfulness, and an internal locus of control (Kobasa, 1979). Hinkle (1974) and Mechanic (1974) reported that people who experienced a high intensity or frequency of illness saw their environ- ment as demanding, frustrating and challenging to their self-esteem. Similar to Kobasa's (1979) statements about the importance of hardiness, Janis 6c Rodin (1979) have maintained that increases in per- ceived control may lead to improvements in coping with stress. Rodin 8c Langer (1977) conducted a study in which they showed that nursing home residents who were given greater control over their lives and health regimen experienced fewer physical ailments than those who were not given control but who were instead merely "taken care of" by nursing staff. Feelings of perceived control have also been found to increase an individual's commitment to difficult medical decisions, tolerance of physical pain, and rate of recovery from illness (Janis 8c Rodin, 1979). Johnson 6: Sarason (1978) reported a positive relationship between frequency of occurrence of negative life events but for only externally controlled students. The investigators concluded that internally controlled students saw themselves as having more control over negative events. The perception of control led to a lower stress level. 32 Phares, Ritchie, 6c Davis (1968) found that externals remembered more negative feedback than internals; internals manifested a greater willingness to take action to deal with the problem suggested by feedback. Anderson (1977) found that after the occurrence of a natural disaster, internally oriented business executives used more task-oriented coping behaviors than did externals. Sandler 6c Lakey (1982) studied the effects of locus of control orientation as an internal or personal disposition variable on (1) the rela- tionship between negative life events and psychological disorder; (2) perceptions of control over negative life events; and (3) the receipt and impact of social support. The sample consisted of college students. The investigators found that locus of control did not influence ratings of control over negative events but that locus of control did influence the receipt and impact of social support. The externals received a signifi- cantly greater quantity of support than did the internals, but the stress- buffering effect of support was manifested only for the internals. The authors concluded that more support is not equivalent to better support and that under conditions of stress internals obtain and use social support more effectively than do externals. Studies on Asian Americans have pointed out cultural influences on individuals' locus of control. For instance, Hsieh, Shybut, 6c Lotsof (1969) and Parsons 6c Schneider (1974) found Chinese and Japanese students to be more externally oriented than White American students. It was theorized that Asian Americans' perceptions of lack of control was due to cultural values rather than to feelings of learned helplessness. 33 A great number of studies have been conducted on the locus of control of Black Americans (Reynolds, 1976; Gurin, Gurin, Lao, 6c Beattie, 1969). A search of the literature did not reveal, however, any studies conducted on internal-external locus of control and social support or stressful life events. Most of the studies conducted were in the area of education. A general finding of the majority of these studies showed that internality was associated with higher socioeconomic background and with majority group membership. Externality was associated with non-Whites and with lower socioeconomic background. There has been some criticism of the research on locus of control and racial minorities. For example, how do researchers distinguish clearly between an individual's external sense of control and his or her valid perception of relative lack of control? Another criticism has dealt with the methodology involved in the locus of control scale. It has been argued that a person's locus of control is often situation specific rather than a generalized tendency that one uses to approach all of life's issues. Researchers have also begun to question the notion that an internal locus of control produces less pathology among minority individuals. Gurin 6c Epps (1975) have posited that an external locus of control might be more beneficial to racial minorities. According to them, an external reference point protects the minority individual from internalizing the effects of racism. The individual recognizes that there are limitations placed on him or her by the general American culture. Such limitations preclude or seriously hinder his/her efforts toward goal achievement. The externally oriented, healthy, minority individual might say: 34 I recognize that institutional racism may place restraints on my achievement of my goals. I will do all that I can to insure that I re- alize my goals, but I will not accept responsibility for failure when factors beyond my control have prevented their achievement. Conversely, racial minorities who internalize their own failures may blame themselves when other, more distant and pervasive forces are the real culprits. The Black person who says that I should be able to overcome all forces of racism may be placing an undue burden on himself or herself and setting himself/herself up for an eventual mental breakdown. The internally controlled racial minority person says: "I should have been able to achieve my goal even if I encountered strong, institutional barriers. The fault lies within me that I did not achieve my goals." Much of the life stress that minority individuals undergo because of their race is often more appropriately externalized than inter- nalized. In summary, research on locus of control and stressful life events may have to be reconceptualized for racial minorities. An external frame of reference is influenced by one's minority status and by one's cultural background. Cultures which stress the importance of group rather than individual efforts are more likely to cultivate an external frame of refer- ence within its members (for example, Asian American culture). Likewise, many racial minority groups assume an external locus of control because their minority status has, in effect, meant that they have little control over some of the events that affect their lives. Conversely, peOple who have majority status are inclined to believe (and realistically so) that 35 they have individual control over what happens to them. One's locus of control, therefore, should be based on a realistic appraisal of one's status in any given society. There is no inherent value in one approach over the other. Learned Helplm Closely related to the concept of locus of control is the concept of learned helplessness. Seligman (1975) found that subjects responded to an aversive situation based on their prior escape experience. Subjects who had been unable to escape aversive stimulation previously did not attempt to escape a new aversive situation. Seligman concluded that the subjects had learned that it was helpless in controlling the onset of negative experience. An important part of the learned helplessness paradigm is that subjects' belief that the experience was not predictable or controllable predisposed them to accept passively aversive stimulation, even if it could be terminated by the subjects' own action. The minority experience in the United States is often one of learned helplessness. Some minorities have found that they have little power to influence the direction of their lives. Feelings of learned helplessness lead to poor problem solving and the perception that the world is uncontrol- lable and unpredictable. It is the perception of being able to control one's life that is important in dealing successfully with stressful life events. As noted earlier, some studies have found that people who have an internal sense of control and who have feelings of self-efficacy have been found to respond more effectively to stress and to use their social support groups more efficiently. 36 As noted in an earlier section, being a racial minority and being poor in America society often go hand in hand. Clearly much progress has been made. Yet, equally clear, poor people do not control the lever that determines the kind and number of shocks they receive. In many respects, racial minorities are chronically traumatized by their poverty and by discrimination. Chronically traumatized people frequently undergo the experience of learned helplessness. We need to learn more about the effects of chronically traumatized people and their responses to stressful life events. What causes some people to respond to chronic trauma with learned helplessness, while others respond to it with an even greater determination to succeed? My hunch is that chronically traumatized people who are able to view their trauma as externally ori- ented, who have a high sense of collective or group identity, and who have the support of at least one encouraging, significant other (who serves as a source of emotional and instrumental support) are those who rebound and bounce back with an even greater determination to succeed than they had before they were traumatized. Self-Concept Self-concept is another internal mediator of stress. In general, researchers have theorized that Blacks have low self-concepts because they internalize the majority member's hatred for them (Kardiner 6c Ovesey, 1951). McCarthy 8c Yancoy (971) have maintained, however, that Black self-concept is, in reality, positive. The reference group that Black people use to judge their self-worth is Black rather than White. 37 An early study by Parker 6: Kleiner (1966) provides some support for McCarthy 6: Yancoy's position. In a study of reference groups and mental disorder among Black individuals, Parker dc Kleiner (1966) estab— lished that mentally ill Black individuals rated themselves further below their reference group than did those who were considered mentally healthy in the community. The authors concluded that Black individuals who were mentally ill experienced high levels of stress associated with goal- striving and that they compared themselves with reference groups consid- erably above them on given status criteria. It would appear that the type of community in which the minority person lives would be an important factor in his or her selection of a reference group. Individuals living in predominantly Black areas might, for example, choose other Blacks as their reference group for determining their self—worth. Conversely, Blacks living in predominantly White areas might use Whites as the reference group for determining their self- con- cept. Using this line of reasoning and material, one might hypothesize that: Blacks who live in predominantly White communities and who use Whites as reference groups for their self-concepts are at a greater risk for experiencing an emotional disorder than Blacks who live in predomi- nantly Black areas. Thus, it may be the middle class Black student who has internalized the values of Whites and who has chosen Whites as his self-concept reference group who is at risk for mental illness on predomi- nantly White campuses, and not the Black student who comes from the ghetto. 38 Much of the research on self-concept and racial minorities has been conflicting, especially that on Black Americans. It would appear that there might be several aspects of a person's identity. More studies are needed on the relationship of self-concept and one's ability to cope with stressful life events. Racial Differences in the Ratings of Life Events In general, there have been two dominant positions in the literature on racial differences in the ratings of life events. The first position, espoused by Rahe, Lundberg, Bennett, 6: Theorell (1971), Masuda 6c Holmes (1967), Komaroff, Masuda, 6: Holmes (1968), has stated rather emphatically that there is nearly universal agreement about the relative size of life event ratings. Rahe, et al. (1971) have asserted there exists "rather universal agreement concerning the relative significance of many commonly experienced life change events" (p. 241). This rather strong statement was made on the basis of studies with respondents from Japan (Masuda 6: Holmes, 1967) and western Europe (Harmon, Masuda, 6c Holmes, 1970). Komaroff, Masuda, 6: Holmes' (1968) study was one of the first to examine the ratings members of minority groups gave to life events. These investigators found that Black and Mexican Americans from lower socioeconomic backgrounds had an overall agreement or concordance in their ratings in comparison with White Americans. The findings of the Komaroff et al. study tended to suggest that being a member of an American racial minority group, with a poverty level designation, had little effect on the ratings of stressful life events. 39 Wyatt (1977), however, conducted a parallel study of her own on Blacks and found that there were significant racial differences in the rating of events. Her findings showed that for both Black samples, six items associated with employment and economic levels (for example, changes in health, job responsibility, and financial status) were rated as events requiring a great deal of adjustment. In comparison, Whites rated these items significantly lower in the amount of adjustment required. According to Wyatt (1977) these results showed that the economic level and the conditions of everyday living required more economic resources (coping) for Blacks than for Whites. Rosenberg 6c Dohrenwend (1975) examined the effects of experience and ethnicity on ratings of life events. Using college students as their sample of judges, the investigators found that judges of different racial backgrounds gave significantly different ratings to some events. Blacks, Hispanics, and Asians tended to judge interpersonal relationship situations, such as marriage, death of a loved one, or broken love relationship, as requiring more adjustment than some of the other events. Askenasy, Dohrenwend, 6c Dohrenwend (1977) have also challenged Rahe, Lundberg, Bennett, 6r Theorell's (1971) statement of universal agreement about the amount of adjustment many commonly experienced life events require of people. Using an expanded list of 102 life events and a sample of rating judges who were stratified by social class, race, and sex, these researchers found that race differences "in judgments about the magnitude of life events are greater than previous reports based largely on samples of convenience" (p. 432). 40 Most of the early studies that reported nearly universal agreement about the relative size of life event ratings were completed on samples of convenience and by judges who were largely from middle class back- grounds. It appears that the class factor may have submerged ethnic and cultural differences in judges' ratings. However, when researchers looked at race within social class categories, differences emerged in judges' rating according to their race and social class. Items that differen- tiated the judges wee those that focused on economic and interpersonal issues. In some studies, Blacks ranked interpersonal items such as divorce and loss of a loved one much higher in life change requirement than in other studies. More studies on racial minority group members ratings of stressful life events are needed before one can make any kind of defini- tive statement on Blacks' rating of interpersonal items. The findings on differences in Blacks' rating of economic items have been more gener- ally supported. Summfl This section of the study used Dohrenwend 6c Dohrenwend's (1974) model of viewing stress as stressor stimuli, external mediating factors, and internal mediating factors of stress. Essentially, race was presented as containing an entire host of powerful stressor stimuli. Under external mediating factors, such issues as social class, ethnic density, and social support were considered. The internal mediating factors reviewed were locus of control, learned helplessness, and self-concept. In looking at the external mediators I was essentially concerned with the question: 41 What social and economic factors are related to life stress for Black Americans? The question raised for the internal mediating factors was: What personal dispositions are related to life stress? Racial differences in the scaling of stressful life events were observed. Explanation for the differences in scaling of life events have varied. A number of variables put American Blacks, and racial minorities in general, at risk for mental disorders. Many of these variables are related to feelings of alienation and rejection. Clearly, race is not the only factor that has been associated with the life stress of ethnic minorities. Socioeconomic factors may be, perhaps, the most powerful influences, primarily because they pervade all aspects of an individual's life. Overall, the life situations of members of various racial minority groups have improved. American society has taken important steps to end prejudice based on one's racial membership. Decade by decade, each generation of a racial minority group has found that less and less of the stress they experience is due to their race. Instead, other factors, such as one's level of educational achievement and skill development are becoming more important factors than race. Put in alternate manner, even if all racial prejudice were ended tomorrow, the problems of high stress would continue for many racial minorities. 42 Hypotheses About Culture, Race, and Life Stress Throughout this review, a number of research areas have been reviewed concerning race and stressful life events. The purpose of this section is to present hypotheses about the life stress process and racial minorities. The first hypothesis is labeled the Victimization Hypothesis; it is shown in Figure 1. The diagrams presented are slight modifications of those presented by Dohrenwend 6c Dohrenwend (1981). Essentially, the Victimization Hypothesis was developed empirically from natural disasters, combat, and concentration camp studies. The major idea is that the individual has little or no control over a life event and that an accumulation of stressful life events will lead to psychopathology. A slight modification of this hypothesis is given in Figure 1B. This model posits that race is a source of stressor stimuli or stressful life events and that these stressful life events also lead to psychopathology. This hypothesis is known as the Differential Exposure Hypothesis. The underlying assumption of this hypothesis is that the day-to-day experiences of people from lower socioeconomic backgrounds are more likely to involve exposure to stress—inducing events that are the experiences of the middle class. Because of racial discrimination, members of minority groups tend to have a relatively greater experience of undesirable to desirable life events than do majority Americans. The greater experience of nega- tive stressful life events predisposes ethnic minority individuals to a disproportionately higher risk for psychological disorders. 43 The third hypothesis, in Figure 1C, is called the Vulnerability Hypothesis. The major thrust of this hypothesis is that preexisting personal dispositions and social conditions moderate the relationship between stressful life events and psychopathology or maladaptive functioning. Under the category of social conditions, one would place such factors as stressor stimuli from racial conditions, one's economic status and system of social support. For example, a person who has a preexisting history of mental illness and who also comes from a Black, lower socio- economic background that provides little emotional or instrumental social support is highly vulnerable to psychopathology. The fourth hypothesis is called the Additive Burden Hypothesis; it is shown in Figure 1D. This hypothesis differs from the vulnerability theory in that, rather than moderating the impact of stressful life events, personal dispositions and social conditions make an independent causal contribution to the development of psychopathology (Dohrenwend dc Dohrenwend, 1981). That is, the personal disposition of the individual (meaning his or her internal mediators of stress-locus of control, learned helplessness, self-concept, prior mental illness) will influence directly or independently the degree to which that person will develop psychopath- ology. The same can be said for one's social conditions. Hypothesis 5, in Figure IE, is termed the Chronic Burden Hypothe- _s_i_s_. It denies any specific role of stressful life events, but instead says that chronically adverse, stable personal dispositions and social conditions lead to psychopathology. No one particular stressful life event or set of stressful life events is important here. This hypothesis seems to 44 Figure 1 >8a02hmm 2. $325.22.. 392m .0 museum 3:235 .35.... . .. .333 5:055:33. :ofiEEtufia 9:253 539.3 §§>z gum augtmo A9070H1VdOHDASd 325 3.922% - _ measvdz .25.... 323 .o «35.3 (H.350: 2.52.. w «5.3 5 a... .93.} $5.37.): 255.:- anr .....n... .554 (£55.92 .1523 £93.. é... 3.5.23 dl .3289: 3.33.5.6; 45 describe well some of the life situations of racial minority groups who are from the lower socioeconomic class. In summary, hypotheses about culture, race, and life stress have varied throughout literature. There is no one definitive theory about any of these factors. The ensuing sections focus on the importance of gender and life stress. Several theories regarding the relationship of gender, sex roles, and life stress are reviewed. Life Strum and Sex Roles In addition to race, life stress may also be related to gender mem- bership and to sex roles (traditional or nontraditional). Males and females may both be exposed to more stress and experience stress differently because of: (1) the socialization processes they have undergone, and (2) what they believe is appropriate behavior for them, given their gender membership. This section explores the nature of male and female relationships from the perspective of gender membership and life stress. Essentially, the model presented earlier for examining race and life stress (Dohrenwend 6c Dohrenwend, 1979) is also used to analyze stress due to one's gender membership. Gender-related life stress is conceptualized in terms of: (1) stressor stimuli; (2) external mediating forces; and (3) internal mediating forces. The information presented on gender-related life stress is written primarily from the perspective of women, although consideration is also given to its impact on men. The focus on women is due to this researcher's interest in the area of the psychology of women. 46 Gender as a Source of Stressor Stimuli: The Qecial Case of Women Research has tended to show that one's gender may be a source of stressor stimuli. One's gender membership may be stressful because of the sex roles in which one finds himself/herself entrapped in or because of the restrictions placed on one because of his/her gender. The ensuing sections discuss factors that make one's gender a source of stress. Gender as a Status Characteristic Lockheed a Hall (1976) have maintained that sex is a status charac— teristic that has two states: being male or female. On the whole, the status characteristic of male has tended to be more highly valued than that of female. Likewise, people have tended to attribute more compe- tency to males than to females. Henley (1977) proposed that differences in men and women's status are reflected in their verbal and nonverbal behavior. According to her, women's politeness, smiling, emotional expres- siveness, smaller personal space, less frequent talking but greater frequency of being interrupted, are all indications of their subordinate status to men. Henley also observed that females' greater sensitivity to nonverbal cues may indicate a strong survival mechanism. According to Sherman (1976), females function from the perspective of sexual-caste prescriptions, which then become self-fulfilling prophecies. Gender—caste prescriptions encourage females to become less competent than males, and the resultant incompetence is then used to justify their inferior status. Many of the caste-like prescriptions have their bases within sex roles. 47 Stress as Gender Roles Gender roles are behaviors, expectations, and role sets society has defined as masculine or feminine. These role behaviors are expected to be embodied in the behavior of males and females. Each gender has culturally appropriate and inappropriate behavior. Gender role socialization is the actual process that helps children and adults to acquire and internalize the values, attitudes, and behaviors associated with masculinity and femininity. Angrist (1969) has proposed that both internal and external factors have an influence on one's enactment of sex roles. In general, external factors consist of situational factors within a person's environment, for example, the pressures of the prevailing sex—role attitudes of those around a person. Internal factors that influence one's enactment of sex roles include one's internal disposition or attitudes toward the appropriateness of maintaining sex-role distinctions and one's perceptions of the positive or negative consequences of responding in certain ways. Both internal and external factors determine the degree to which an individual exhibits masculine or feminine sex-role behavior. To avoid externally imposed penalties, individuals frequently yield to situational demands. As Spence & Helmreich (1978) have pointed out, men have been found to "inhibit certain kinds of emotional expression, except in limited circumstances, apparently because of a fear of negative reactions if they do not" (p. 15). Likewise, women have been found to conceal their competence, "assertiveness, and other 'masculine' characteristics or actively to feign the role of 'helpless, dependent female' in order to 48 influence others or to gain their assistance and attention" (Spence 6c Helmreich, 1978, p. 15). Stress and Sex-Role Stereotyping Sex-role stereotypes have evolved from the inculcation of gender roles. Rosenkrantz, Vogel, Bee, Broverman, 6c Broverman (1968) have maintained that "sex role stereotypes are consensual beliefs about the differing characteristics of men and women in our society" (p. 287). Ashmore 6c DelBoca (1979) have described a sex-role stereotype as some- thing cognitive, as a belief or set of beliefs about what women and men are like, especially the "psychological traits" or "personalities" of women and men that are shared by members of each group. Basow (1980) has defined sex—role stereotyping as the "rigidly held and oversimplified beliefs that males and females, by virtue of their sex, possess distinct psychological traits and characteristics. Such over- generalizations tend to be widely shared in a particular culture and rigidly held" (p. 5). All people stereotype to some degree. The propensity to categorize and to stereotype is, perhaps, the most powerful phenomenon that follows a person's acquisition of gender identity. As Kohlberg (1966) has main- tained, once children have become aware that people can be categorized on the basis of gender, they use gender to provide structure of their social environment. After children have developed gender categories, they use these categories as a framework for interpreting what they see and for predicting future behavior. 49 Personality Variables and Bipolar Concepts of Masculinity and Femininity Scholars have proposed different frameworks for distinguishing between the personality characteristics of males and females. Parson dc Bales (1955) have proposed that males and females be characterized along the dimensions of instrumentality vs. expressiveness. Witkin (1986) has suggested the field dependence vs. independence distinction. Accord- ing to this perspective, females are field dependent, while males are independent. Bakan (1966) has proposed that men and women can be distinguished along two modalities: (l) the sense of agency, and (2) the sense of communion. The sense of agency reflects an essential concern and involvement with the self and is demonstrated by self-assertion, self-protection, and self—expansion. In contrast, the sense of communion suggests a concern with others and a desire to be with one with other organisms. Bakan further associated agency with "male principles" and communion with "female principles." The Feminine Mystique. The bipolar conception of masculinity and femininity have led to the terms "feminine mystique" and "masculine mystique." Betty Friedan (1963) was one of the early antagonists of the feminine mystique. According to her, the feminine mystique espoused that women should be mothers, housewives, and consumers. Because a great deal has been written about this period in our history, more is focused on the situation of males. 50 The Masculine Mystique and Its Value System. The complex set of values and male norms that symbolize American manhood is called the masculine mystique and value system (Levinson et al., 1978). Typ— ically, these values are founded on rigid stereotypes about men, their masculinity, and concepts of femininity. The masculine mystique and value system suggests that: (1) men are superior to women, and mascu— linity is superior to femininity; (2) power, control, and dominance are used to establish one's masculinity; (3) emotions, feelings, vulnerability, and intimacy are to be shunned because they are feminine characteristics, and therefore, unmanly; and (4) career and economic successes are the essential measures of a person's masculinity. Essentially, such values devalue what people label as feminine attitudes; they also deny men the opportunity to express their feminine sides. Levinson et al. (1978) theorized that it is not until mid-life that the average man comes to terms with the co-existence of his masculine and feminine polarities. He has proposed that the integration of the masculine/feminine polarity is the major task of mid-life individuation. What triggers a man to integrate the masculine/feminine polarity is unclear. Levinson et al. (1978) have described how men in this study dealt with the gender polarity. The Masculine/Feminine polarity was of great importance to all men in our study, though the specific content and conflicts varied enormously . . . As a young man starts making his way in the adult world, he wants to live in accord with the images, motives, and values that are most central to his sense of masculinity, and he 51 tends to neglect or repress the feminine aspects of himself. Any part of the self that he regards as feminine is experienced as dangerous. A young man struggling to sustain his manliness is frightened by feelings and interests that seem womanly. One result of this anxiety is that much of the self cannot be lived out or even experienced in early adulthood (p. 230). It would appear, then, that gender polarity resolution is an important concept for men. As more and more women work and assume roles tradi- tionally assigned to men, a similar situation may be noted for them. Women may have to resolve their masculine polarities. §e_x1ism and P_rejmlice_égginst Women: A Source of Gender Stressor Stimuli Coming to grips with prejudice against women has been one of the major cultural tasks of the 20th century. The concept of gender prejudice against women is important because it cuts across racial and cultural lines. It is also probably one of the most basic prejudices. Gordon Allport (1954) defined prejudice as: . . . an antipathy based upon a faulty and inflexible generalization. It may be felt or expressed. It may be directed toward a group as a whole, or toward an individual because he is a member of that group . . . The net effect of prejudice, thus defined, is to place the object of the prejudice at some disadvantage not merited by his own misconduct. Frieze, Parsons, Johnson, Ruble, 6c Sellman (1978) have proposed that categorization is the basic mechanism underlying stereotyping of people. Stereotypes are often the end products of prejudice. They are 52 the images the prejudiced individual invokes to justify or support the antipathy held regarding members of a given group. Frequently, the same traits people believe are virtues in members of liked in-groups are viewed as vices when observed for members of disliked out-groups. People tend to regard an ambitious and assertive man with admiration and respect. Yet, these same traits in women are perceived less positively. An ambitious woman is aggressive rather than assertive, castrating instead of ambitious. Prejudice against women has led to devaluing of their work, which has, in turn, laid a foundation for their stress. Goldberg (1968) provided early empirical evidence of the devaluing of work completed by women. He manipulated experimentally the sex attributed to the authors of articles and asked subjects to rate the performance of the people. The papers written by males were rated more favorably than those written by females, regardless of the field involved. Goldberg concluded that subjects' evalua- tion of the superiority of male authored articles was based on prejudice rather than on the competence of the author. Touhey (1974) examined prejudice against women by asking subjects how they would feel about a profession if they knew the number of women projected to be in a profession was going to increase or to decrease. Subjects were given descriptions of five-high status professions—architect, college professor, lawyer, physicians, and scientist. Each profession was described on an information sheet that contained fabricated projec- tions. The findings showed that professions were rated lower in prestige when subjects anticipated an increasing proportion of women. 53 The devaluation of work simply because it is associated with women rather than with men is not just limited to the United States. Cross cultural data (Rosaldo, 1974) have shown that even though tasks described as "women's work" vary from culture to culture, the value placed on women's work is almost universally lower than that placed on work men perform. Prejudice against women is most likely to occur against those who violate their sex-role stereotype. Researchers have found bias against women who aspire to status or power equal to that of men (Denmark, 1970; Etaugh (St Rose, 1975; Mischell, 1974). Denmark (1979) found that college women evaluated outspoken female professors more negatively than they did male professors who exhibited the identical behavior. All subjects tended to rate female professors less favorably than they did male professors. In addition, prejudice is more likely to occur against aspiring women rather than against women who have already arrived or achieved some measure of success (Kaschak, 1978; Pheterson, Kieser, 6c Goldberg, 1971). The bias may be attributed partly to the competitive image of aspiring women. Formal recognition of women's achievement with award winning pictures tends to militate against the expression of bias toward those who have already achieved. , Research has also demonstrated that when women behave in a superior manner outside a stereotypical role, they may be evaluated even higher than men in comparable situations (Brichta 6c Inn, 1978). Taynor 6c Deaux (1973) found that women who behaved in an exemplary 54 manner in a civic emergency were perceived as being more deserving of a reward and as performing better and trying harder than a man. Spence 6c Helmreich (1972) found that male college students who hold traditional attitudes toward women least preferred competent women. In contrast, moderate and liberal males, and all females preferred competent women to incompetent men, regardless of the stimulus person's sex-typed interests. A later study (Kristal, Sanders, Spence, 6c Helmreich, 1975) demonstrated that male and female subjects liked best the woman who had "masculine interests" but "feminine qualities." Prejudice and gender—related stress of men. Scholars have pointed out that gender-related prejudice also operates against men (Levinson et al. 1978). In fact, prejudice against men may be greater than that against females when men are viewed as deviating significantly from their sex-role stereotype. Studies have found, for instance, that males who discuss their emotional problems openly, who express sexual concerns, and who are passive in group discussions are perceived as more in need of professional help than are females who evidence similar behavior (Frieze, Parsons, Johnson, Ruble, 6c Sellman, 1978). Likewise, Shinar (1978) found that undergraduate college students viewed men in sex-inappropriate occupations less favorably than they viewed women who chose either sex-appropriate or sex-inappropriate occupations. Levinson (1976) found evidence that male applicants who applied for jobs traditionally associated with females encountered more discrimina- tion than did females who applied for jobs traditionally associated with females. This situation was said to occur because when a male desires 55 less highly valued feminine jobs, it casts doubts on his masculinity, mental stability, or intelligence. Clearly, being the recipient of another's prejudice is stressful, regardless if one is Black or White, female or male. Despite many im- provements in opportunities for women, gender is still very much a status characteristic. Sex Role Attitudes, Role Conflicptl and Stress Sex role attitudes have been cited as factors that can impair or foster one's development of positive mental health. The basic theory behind this position is that people whose behavior is influenced by rigid sex role expectations are less capable of coping with a broad range of stressful situations. Such individuals are inclined to develop exaggerations of the stereotypes of femininity and masculinity. For example, Bem (1975) found that people who hold extremely masculine or feminine self-perceptions do poorly in situations requiring flexibility in behavior. A strict adherence to sex roles may also form the basis for role conflict. Role conflict may be defined as any situation in which incompatible or competing demands are made on an individual because of the roles they are attempting to perform. Role conflict creates problems for people because it almost invariably causes them to violate someone's expectation of them. Research on role conflict has focused on the problems of integrating family and work life for women and for men. Hall (1972) observed that working women have simultaneous role demands from work and family while men have sequential role demands. This situation leads to what Hall has labeled as role overload for working mothers. 56 Pleck (1977) has provided some support for Hall's position. According to him, the family role for women is allowed to intrude into the work role, and for men, the work role is allowed to intrude into the family role. For many men their family role does not begin until their work role has ended. That is, their family responsibilities are sequential to their work responsibilities, thereby preventing role overload. Gove has provided a sex-role theory of mental illness based upon the concept of role conflict and role overload. According to her, more women in modern Western societies are mentally ill than men, and this overall difference can be explained by the relatively higher rates of mental illness among married women. The higher rates of married women can be attributed to their social roles (Gove, 1972). Gove (1972) gathered much of her data for her theory by reviewing the results of 17 studies of mental illness that presented their findings by sex and marital status. Gove (1972), p. 34) has stated: "It is the relative high rate of mental illness in married women that account for the higher rates of mental illness among women." Gove has further stated that in comparison to married men, married women's poor mental health is indicative of the life stress of a disadvan- taged social position—one that is held in low societal esteem (housewife or homemaking) and one which is stressful when combined with work outside the home. Likewise, Aneshensel, Frerichs, 6c Clark (1981) have also argued that sex differences in distress are related to gender—specific expectations that are inherent in particular social roles and they determine the compatibility and stressfulness of multiple roles. Overall, however, 57 the support for Gove's sex-role theory of mental illness has been con- flicting. Felton, Lehmann, Brown, 6( Liberatos (1980) studied the coping function of sex-role attitudes during marital disruption. These investiga- tors used 114 couples seeking assistance for their marital problems to examine the hypothesis that nontraditional sex-role attitudes would serve as a coping resource to reduce the distress of marital disruption. Felton et al. found that nontraditional sex-role attitudes were positively corre- lated with reduced distress for both men and women, but that such sex-role attitudes interacted with the stress measures to reduce reported distress only for women. In essence, nontraditional sex-role attitudes perform a coping function for women, but not for men. In summary, sex-roles and sex-role attitudes have been noted as factors in the life stress process for men and women. It has been theorized that rigid adherence to sex roles creates more mental health problems for women than for men. In addition, the sex-roles of men have been viewed as less damaging to one's mental health than those of women. More women than men are believed to suffer from role conflict and role overload. A dearth of empirically-based studies have been conducted on the relationship of sex-role attitudes and psychological symptomatology of men and women. More research is needed to examine the relationship of sex-role attitudes to other variables—for instance, social support, self-esteem, and feelings of self—efficacy. 58 External Mediatigg Factors of GenderRelated Stress A second part of the life stress process involves social conditions and external mediating factors in the individual's environment. The hypothesis is that certain factors in an individual's environment may put him/her at more risk for psychopathology than other factors. External mediating sources of stress include the economic situation of the indivi- dual; her relative position within the power structure, and social support from the environment. Life Stress and the Economic Situation Albee (1981) has pointed out that "Women have long provided a pool of cheap labor and have tended to cluster in the lowest paying jobs" (p. 222). The economic situation of women has added to their life stress. The U.S. Bureau of the Census (1980) has reported that in 1979, full-time, year-round women workers earned a median income of $10,548, approximately 6096 of the $17,533 median income for men. In addition, during that same time period, 2596 of the women who had any income earned incomes under $1,000, whereas only 996 of the men had such in- comes. There were also disparities in the upper income range. While only 2.9% of the women earned over $20,000, almost 2596 of the men did so. The income gap between men and women appears to be widening. Whereas in 1955, women working full time earned 64% of their male counterparts' median income; in 1979, women earned 6096 of what men earned (Mieva 6c Gutek, 1981). 59 A number of reasons have been given for the low incomes of women. People have tended to rationalize the low incomes by arguing that women's incomes are not really necessary to maintain adequate standards of living. Women's incomes are viewed as going for the extras, such as the second car, the special vacation, rather than for the essentials of food, housing, medical expenses. The "need" line of reasoning has little supporting evidence. Few women today can rest assured that they will be taken care of for the rest of their lives. During the past decade, female-headed families have grown almost ten times as fast as two-parent families (Sawhill, 1976). Even in the husband-wife dyad, the wife's earnings have been found to be more essential than unessential. For instance, Bell (1974) found that among working wives, nearly 22% contributed to over 50% of the total family income. Women's income is becoming increasingly necessary for family survival. Another argument used to justify the low income of women has been that they are located in lower-paying jobs than men. In 1979, for example, approximately one-fifth of all women workers were located in clerical jobs, compared to about 596 of the men. On the other hand, about 1796 of the men workers, were in craft jobs, compared to 196 of the women workers; nearly 1196 of the men and only 496 of the women workers held jobs of a managerial or administrative capacity (U.S. Bureau of the Census, 1980). 60 Two labor markets: one maleJ the other female. Several research- ers (Piore, 1970; Schrank 6L Riley, 1976) have proposed the existence of two labor markets—a male labor market and a female labor market. Piore (1970) has suggested the existence of a primary labor force and a secondary labor force. The primary labor force is marked by stability, high wages, on-the-job training, substantial fringe benefits, and steady promotion. In contrast, the secondary labor force is distinguished by lack of these advantages and usually includes women, recent immigrants, young people, old people, and racial minorities. Schrank dc Riley (1976) have observed that the male and female labor markets are characterized by different "shapes." The shapes are related to the amount of prestige an occupation has. For instance, the male labor force involves the entire spectrum of job prestige. In general, males tend to occupy jobs that are very low in prestige, such as unskilled worker, and jobs that are high in prestige, such as corporation president. In contrast, females are likely to occupy jobs that have a narrower prestige spectrum; their jobs are usually clustered at the low end of a prestige continuum, for instance, clerical worker. According to Laws (1979), jobs were so sex-segregated in 1970 that "69 percent of the men would have to change occupational groups in order for the distribution of men and women in each of the major occupational categories to be the same as in the labor force as a whole" (p. 27). Although both the majority of men and the majority of women work in jobs dominated by members of their own sex, the relationship is stronger for men than for women. Approximately 6096 of men work 61 in jobs that are 9096 or more male. Very few men or women work in jobs or occupations that are integrated with respect to sex. Clearly, sex stratifications and segregation of occupations accounts, in large measure, for much of the sexual pay disparity. In summary, having a sufficient income to deal with the vicissitudes of life is an important external mediating factor in the life stress process. The fact that women earn less than men and that they are located in low-paying, stress-producing jobs puts them at risk for psychopathology. In many instances, women do not have the economic means to provide basic health care services for themselves and for their families. Moreover, having a capacity to generate income may help people to buy adequate external social support, for instance, psychological services. There is also a great deal of evidence to suggest that having more discretionary income will bring about greater variation in lifestyle and friendship choices. Differential access to the economic external mediators may mean that stressors have a greater impact on women than men. Gender Difference, Vulnerability, and Social Slgport. Research on gender differences, vulnerability, and the stressbuffering effects of social support has been marked by a great deal of controversy. In part, the controversy has been sparked by the theory that life stresses may be distributed differentially among social and gender groups. A further corollary is that psychological and social resources to cope with life stresses may also be distributed differentially as well. 62 The explanations for gender differences in vulnerability and stress- buffering effects of social support have varied, including the dual role and role overload hypotheses (Fox, 1980; Gove, 1972), interpersonal behav- ior and coping styles (Funabiki, Bologna, Pepping, 6c Fitzgerald, 1980), spouse support (Vanfossen, 1981), and specific combinations of family and work roles (Aneshensel, Frerichs, 6c Clark, 1981). As Bagar, Husaini, Neff, Newbrough, 6c Moore (1982) have maintained, the vulnerability issue has widened the focus of earlier research by changing concern from gender differences in stress to gender differences in responsiveness to stressors. These investigators have observed: That is, if gender differentials in vulnerability are possible, then the possibility of gender differentials in the stress-buffering proper— ties of social support and personal competence deserve consideration as well. That is, would social support and personal competence by expected to be equally salient as stress-buffers for males and females or might their stress-buffering properties vary by gender? (Bagar, et al., 1982). There have been conflicting findings regarding evidence of the differential buffering effects of social support. Pearlin dc Schooler (1978) investigated the distributions of c0ping tactics among stress individuals. They found that persons from lower class backgrounds and women tended to use inefficacious coping responses (for instance, selective ignoring, resignation) when confronted with role strains. In a prospective study, Nuckolls, Cassell, 6r Kaplan (1972) found that 91% of pregnant women, with the combination of high stressful life events scores and low psychosocial asset scores, had one or more 63 complications of pregnancy. In contrast, only 3396 of women with equally high stressful life events scores but also high psychosocial asset scores had any complications. The evidence was especially strong because neither life change score nor psychosocial asset score alone was related signifi- cantly to the complication rate. Several studies have investigated the relationship of stressful life events and social support by social class or marital status. Brown, Bhrolchain, 6: Harris (1975) studied the life experiences of working class and middle class women who were classified as psychiatrically disturbed or free from psychiatric disturbance. These investigators found that working class women experienced more events of a permanent and threatening nature, experience more on—going role strains, and were significantly less likely to have an intimate, confiding relationship with a husband or boyfriend than women from middle class backgrounds. In an effort to explain the increased morbidity among working class women as opposed to those from the middle class, Brown, Bhrolchain, 8: Harris (1975) identified four factors associated with an increased morbidity. These were: (1) loss of the mother in childhood; (2) three or more children under the age of 14 at home; (3) lack of full or part-time employment; and (4) lack of an intimate confiding relationship with a husband or boyfriend. The latter factor, that of having a confiding relationship with a male, was the most powerful mediator between severe adversity and psychiatric distress. Brown 6: Harris (1978) essentially replicated this study with a focus on depression and supported the same conclusions. 64 Using the data from the New Haven Community Survey, Thoits (1982) examined the existence of differential psychological vulnerability. She found that women, older adults, unmarried persons, those with less education, income, and occupational prestige; married women, and unmar- ried women were significantly more distressed by the experience of life events than were their sociodemographic counterparts. Thoits found little support, however, for the buffering effects of social support. She did find that degree of social support (in particular, degree of integration into a neighborhood) helped to explain the vulnerability of women in general to undesirable events and of unmarried women and low income individuals to health events. Bell, LeRoy, 6c Stephenson (1982) used data gathered from part of a major epidemiologic study in the southeastern part of the United Stated to examine the relationships among depressive symptoms, social support, stressful life events, and socioeconomic status. Their findings corroborated those of other researchers who have documented the main effects of stressful life events, social support, and socioeconomic status upon depressive symptoms. In general, Black females experienced the largest number of stressful life events and the largest mean depression scores (among Black males, White males, and White females). Black females had, however, the highest social support scores, followed by Black males, White males, and White females. Hirsch (1980) conducted an exploratory study that sought to identify natural support systems that enhance coping with major life changes. More specifically, the study examined the relationship among natural 65 support systems and three measures of mental health: symptomatology mood, and self-esteem. Two different subject groups of women who were currently undergoing major life changes were studied: 20 recent young widows, and 14 mature women (age 30 or over) who had recently returned to full-time undergraduate study. The recent young widows were viewed as a high risk for both mortality and the development of more severe depression. The returning women students were viewed as assuming relatively ambiguous roles, as they re-entered a competitive, often career—directed social institution after having already begun raising a family. Hirsch found that among support interactions, cognitive guidance was significantly related to symptomatology and mood, while socializing was significantly related to self-esteem. In addition, lower density (less integrated) support systems and multidimensional friendships were corre- lated significantly with better support and mental health. In summary, a number of studies have been conducted on the effects of social support as a buffer to life stress. The results of many of these studies have been conflicting. It is important to look at social support in terms of the appraisal process—that is, at what point does an individual decide that he needs social support to help him/her deal with a stressful life event. Gender and Internal Mediators of Life Strem Scholars have emphasized the critical role of internal resources (for instance, abilities, values, and beliefs) as mediating factors influencing an individual's response to life stress (Dohrenwend 6c Dohrenwend, 1979; 66 Kobasa, 1970; Rabkin 6c Struening, 1976). Although the data are sparse, the available evidence indicates that psychiatric symptoms among indivi- duals who have undergone life changes may not occur if their adaptive systems are in tact (Askster, 1974), or if their ego defenses are strong (Rahe, 1975). Important distinctions can be made between environmental and personal resources (Kohn, 1972). Personal resources are more indivi- dually-based. They are aspects of an individual's personality that may increase or decrease his/her potential for dealing effectively with stress. Kohn (1972) provided one of the early studies of the interactive model of life stress in his explanation of the higher rates of schizophrenia in the lower social classes. From his perspective, three components produced schizophrenia: stress, genetic vulnerability, and personal coping resources. Kohn (1972) maintained that the differential availability of environmental resources was not sufficient to explain the changing impact of stress across social classes. He used the term "orientational system" to denote an individual's overall predisposition to interpret, evaluate, and act on social reality in certain ways. The ensuing sections discuss several different types of personal resources that may have an influence of gender differences in the life stress process. The specific internal resources examined are: locus of control, self-concept, and learned helplessness. Gender—Related Differences in Locus of Control As noted earlier, Rotter's (1966) locus of control construct has been one of the most widely used constructs in the social sciences to measure a person's generalized orientation toward his environment. 67 Rotter proposed that people have either an internal sense of control, which would mean that they believe either they can control the events around them (an internal sense of control). In general, females have been found to have an external locus of control orientation. This type of generalized orientation has been associated with feelings of helplessness, with an avoidance of task—oriented behaviors, and with a preference for situations wherein luck rather than one's degree of skill, affects the outcome (Deaux, 1976; Deaux, White 6: Farris, 1975; Throop & MacDonald, 1971). The findings on sex differences and locus of control have been less conclusive when examining performance outcome (for instance, success or failure) and on the sex typing of individuals. Hoffman 6c Fidel (1979) found androgynous— and masculine-sex-typed females to be more internally-oriented than feminine-sex-typed females. The most externally- oriented women were those who were undifferentiated sex-typed. Con- versely, Jones, Chernovetz, 6c Hansson (1978) found no differences among women; however, masculine-typed men were found to be more internally- oriented than were either androgynous or feminine men. An important aspect of an internal generalized locus of control is the belief that one's behavior will lead to desirable goals and reinforce- ments. Along such lines, Brewer 6c Blum (1979) found that feminine—sex- typed, female college freshmen expressed less control over their achieve- ment in math and science than did either their male counterparts or androgynous females. The lack of control perception resulted in their low expectancy of success in math and science courses. The investigators 68 did not find a relationship between females' feelings of control over achievement and non—math courses. It was suggested that sex-typing may play a significant part in feelings of control. Husanini, Newbrough, Neff, 6: Moore (1982) studied the possible stress-buffering effects of personal competence and social support with respect to depressive symptoms. Personal competence was defined in terms of a person's sense of control over the environment. The sample consisted of married adults from the rural South. The investigators found support for both the independent and buffering effects of internal and external resources upon the life-event-symptom relationship. Life events and personal competence had consistent independent effects upon depres- sive symptomatology—both for the total married group as well as for married male and female subgroups. In summary, the more prevalent external locus of control orientation among women may be related to gender role socialization. Usually females are raised with an attribution process that attributes their success to luck and their failures to a lack of ability. This type of attribution process is consistent with a generalized external orientation toward life. Self—Concept A person's self-concept is another personal resource variable that affects the life stress process. Basically, an individual's self-concept is the way that he thinks about himself. A positive self-concept is one that indicates feelings of satisfaction with one's abilities and conduct, while a negative self-concept would indicate just the opposite. 69 Despite the fact that males are stereotyped as being more self— confident than females, the empirical verification of this belief has been weak except in achievement-related areas. The sexes manifest surprisingly few differences in self—esteem. Maccoby 6c Jacklin (1974) and Loeb 6c Horst (1978) conducted extensive literature reviews of studies that used standardized paper—and-pencil questionnaire on the self—concepts of males and females ranging from kindergarten to college age. Of the 39 studies Maccoby 6c Jacklin (1974) reviewed, females were high on nine studies, males on six, and there were no significant gender differences on the remaining 25 studies reviewed. Research on sex typing has provided some indirect indications of males' and females' self-esteem. A number of studies have found that from late adolescence on, androgynous individuals (that is, people who score highly on both masculinity and femininity) along with masculine— sex—typed individuals (both male and female), have the highest self—esteem (Hoffman 6c Fidell, 1979). In contrast, women who evidence a feminine- sex—type have significantly lower self-esteem than do those who manifest an androgynous or masculine orientation. It is noteworthy that the undif— ferentiated individual, that is, the person who is low on both masculinity and femininity has been found to have the lowest level of self-esteem. One way researchers have accounted for the lack of sex differences in self-esteem is to point out that self—esteem is multidimensional and that the sexes may have different bases for their self—evaluations. Measur- ing only the performance component of self-esteem, Stake (1979) found significant sex difference. College women showed lower selfevaluations of their abilities and performances than did college men. 70 A key issue on the research of self-esteem seems to be what indivi— duals feel is sex—appropriate behavior. For instance, Donelson (1977) has summarized research indicating that adolescents who feel successful in the area they consider sex-appropriate (sociability for girls; achievement and leadership for many boys) have high levels of self-esteem. In sum, despite the fact that feminine attributes are devalued relative to male attributes, females do not evidence consistently less positive self-concepts than do males, except in areas related to achieve- ment. A central issue seems to be what individuals view as important to their self-concept. Currently, few studies have been conducted on sex-role conformity, sex—roles salience, and self-esteem. It would seem that for those whom sex-roles are salient, sex-role conformity would be correlated to self-esteem measures and vice-versa. Learned Helples-ess and Depression of Women As noted in the section on American Blacks, the concept of learned helplessness is related to the construct of an individual's generalized locus of control. Feelings of learned helplessness predispose one to poor problem solving and to the perception that the world is uncontrollable and unpredictable—to the perception that one's fate is beyond one's control. Increasingly, researchers have begun to note a relationship between learned helplessness and depression. Albin (1976, p. 27) has noted, for example, that the roots of depression are located in the "uniquely vulner- able role into which women are socialized." Within this view, American society predisposes women in helplessness (Bem dc Bem, 1970). 71 Baucom 6c Danker—Brown (1 97 9) found that sex-typed college students were more susceptible to development of learned helplessness than were androgynous and undifferentiated college students. Baucom and Danker—Brown theorized that sex—typed persons were less flexible behaviorally than were androgynous persons and that sex-typed persons reacted more strongly to losing control and failing than did androgynous individuals. Weissman 6c Klerman (1979) have theorized that for either biologi- cally or socially-based reasons, women are particularly sensitive to life stressors related to disruption of intimate social relationships (for example, moves, divorce, separation, and diminution of family ties). The sensitivity to disruption of social ties leave women more vulnerable to depression. Scarf (1979) has provided partial support of this hypothesis. According to Scarf, the most common "trigger" of depression for women is a loss of a love bond. Scarf has noted that for men, the correlation between depression and loss of a love bond is less strong, though even for this group it still exists. Researchers have also noted other relationships among learning the female role, acquiring close bond attachments, and turning anger and rage inward. In contrast, males are more likely than females to turn angry feelings outward and to be physically aggressive (Cox, 1976). Hence, mental data reflecting an internal state of emotional disturbance are higher for females than for males, while data on more externally- oriented psychologically symptomatology (for instance, drug and alcohol abuse, behavior problems, psychopathy, and crimes—more externally 72 based indices of mental health) are correlated more highly with males than with females (Davison 6c Neale, 1978; Gove, 1979). In summary, the findings regarding the effect of sex-role stereo- types on individuals' mental health have tended to indicate that the more instrumental qualities a person has (as in the case of androgynous-oriented, sex-typed persons), the better that person is able to adjust psychologically. An individual's marital status is also important to his/her mental health. The data have indicated that more married women than married men and more single men than single women encounter mental health symp- tomatology or life stress. In addition, because of sex-role stereotypes, more women than men are likely to experience emotional problems from role strain and role conflict. Likewise, the double standard of mental health regarding men and women may explain partly why women are more likely than men to be viewed as psychologically unhealthy when they seek psychotherapeutic help. Sigpificance of the Study Most of the research on stressful life events has been conducted on majority Americans. Little research has been completed on the stress- ful life events of Black Americans or on gender differences in sex role attitudes, life stress, and social support. Research on gender differences in life stress has generally focused on role conflict and on role overload as central variables in analyzing differences in the life stress of men and women—essentially the Gove theory of mental illness among women. What research has been completed on stressful life events and Blacks 73 has focused largely on differences in their rating of stressful life events. The question raised has been: Do Blacks and Whites rate differently the amount of adjustment life events require? While this research is very important, there is a need to go beyond examining racial differences in rating the adjustment required of life events. The major purpose of this study was to examine the influence of race on the life stress process. The underlying assumption was that one's racial background affects the number of stressful life events to which one is exposed. It was suggested that Black Americans, because of their out-group status, would experience more stressful life events than would White Americans. The significance of this study is twofold. First, it seeks to expand the research on Black Americans and stressful life events by investigating the relationship of stress—mediating factors, such as social support and cognitive orientation to their reporting of psychological symptoms. A search of the literature did not show any studies that had examined these variables for both Black and White Americans in any kind of compar- ative fashion. Second, the study examines the influence of gender differ- ences in sex role attitudes and personality variables on life events and social support. Because few studies have been completed in this area for college students, data regarding this area should fill a void in the literature. RESEARCH HYPOTHBES Major Hypotheses 1. 10. There is a significant relationship between student race and the number of stressful life events (LES scores) they report. There is a significant relationship between student race and their depression and anxiety scores. There is a significant relationship between student gender and their LES scores. There is a significant relationship between students' gender and their depression and anxiety scores. There is a significant relationship between student race and gender and their LES scores. There is a significant relationship between student race and gender and their depression and anxiety scores. There is a significant relationship between students' race, gender, total negative LES score, and their depression and anxiety scores. There is a significant relationship between students' race and their social support (ISSB) scores. There is a significant relationship between students' social support (ISSB), depression, and anxiety scores. There is a significant relationship between students' race and their internal-external locus of control score. 74 75 Minor Hypotheses 1. 10. 11. There is a significant relationship between student gender and their locus of control scores. There is a significant relationship between student gender and their social support scores. There is a significant relationship between students' I—E scores and their depression and anxiety scores. There is a significant relationship between student race and gender and their social support scores. There is a significant relationship between student gender and I-E scores and their social support scores. There is a significant relationship between student race and gender and their expectations of success scores. There is a significant relationship between student race, gender, ISSB, total negative LES, success, and I—E scores and their depres— sion and anxiety scores. There are significant differences in student alienation scores by race and gender. There are significant gender and race differences in students' scores on the Personality Attributes Questionnaire. There are significant race and gender differences in student Atti- tudes toward Women (AWS) scores. There are significant race and gender differences in students' sense of mastery scores. 12. 13. 14. 76 There are significant race and gender differences in students' self-esteem and self-denigration scores. There is a significant relationship between students' views on the importance of religion in helping them cope and their level of social support, sense of alienation, and their expectations of success. There is a significant relationship among the variables of student race and gender, their scores on the ISSB, the Personality Attributes Questionnaire (F, M, MF), expectations of success, AWS, self- esteem, total negative LES, I—E scores, and their depression and anxiety scores. METHOD Subjggts The subjects were 250 students at Michigan State University. To obtain a sufficient number of Black students, the sources from which students were obtained varied and included the following: Human Re- source Pool for Psychology, undergraduate psychology classes, and fresh- men classes for minority students who were engineering majors. Subjects responded to announcements for participation in a survey research project on life stress. The majority of the students were given either course points or some form of course credit for their participation in the study. The final decision for credit was, however, left up to the individual course instructor. Student participation was voluntary, and no deception was involved. Of the original sample of 250 students, several failed to indicate their race or sex. In addition, the number of non-Black minorities was very small. There were, for example, 6 Hispanic, 8 Asian American, and 2 Native Americans. Because of the small number of non-Black racial minorities, it was decided to drop these from the sample. Although the resulting sample usually consisted of 234 students, the n varied between analyses because not all participants completed all instruments. The size of the sample varied according to the number of surveys returned by students which contained sufficient information to tabulate. In all, for most analyses, there were 45 White males, 92 White females, 36 Black males, and 56 Black females. 77 78 Students ranged in age from 18 to 31, with most between 18 to 22. Blacks were younger than White participants. The majority of the students were full-time students, with most being first or second year students. Although each class year was represented within the sample, Blacks were over-represented at the lower division level. Socio— economically speaking, the average student came from upper working and middle-class backgrounds, although there were students from relatively high income and educational brackets. The Chi Square statistic showed significant differences in parental education, employment, and income of Black and White students, with the latter group clearly in the more advantaged position in each case. For instance, 25% of the Black fathers were in the lower end of the income scale ($8-15,000) compared to 6% of the Whites. In contrast, 29% of the White fathers were in the highest income bracket (over $57,000) compared to 6.5% of the Blacks. In terms of occupation, 19.3% of Black fathers and 30.7% of White fathers had occupations listed as professional. The same pattern held with respect to education: 56.2% of all White fathers held a BA to a postgraduate degree, while only 25.7% of the Black fathers did. Procedures Participants were asked to become a part of a research project on life stress. They were contacted via announcements posted strate- gically on campus bulletins near classes attended by students in the Psychology Human Research Pool and in selected classes around the campus to get minority students. Appendices A-D contain forms and letters used in the recruitment process. 79 The vast majority of students came from the Human Research Pool and undergraduate courses in engineering that had a large number of Black students. Participants were informed that the life stress project would consist of taking 10 paper and pencil questionnaires on life stress and that there were no right or wrong answers for the questionnaires (Appendix C). Each student who volunteered for the study was given an envelope containing a set of directions and a package of 10 questionnaires. Par- ticipants were asked to take the instruments in the order in which they were placed in the envelope. The questionnaires were placed in the same order for all students: (1) Information Inventory; (2) Life Experience Survey; (3) Beck Depression Inventory; (4) Internal—External Locus of Con- trol Scale; (5) Hale-Fibel Generalized Expectancy Scale; (6) State-Trait Anxiety Scale; (7) Inventory of Socially Supportive Behaviors; (8) Univer- sity Alienation Scale; (9) Attitude Toward Women Scale; and (10) Personal Attributes Scale. About a quarter of the students took the instruments at home; although they were asked to take the instruments in the order specified, they may not have done so. Each package of tests contained a code number on the outside of the envelope containing the tests, and each instrument had the same number. Participants were asked not to place their names or any other personally identifying information on the questionnaires. Students were asked to work at a comfortable speed in responding to the questionnaires. Upon completion of the entire package of 10 questionnaires, participants 80 were asked to return them (in the envelope) to the person administering the testing session. Appendix D contains a statement of UCRIHS approv- al. Instruments A total of 10 questionnaires were used to assess students' life stress, their cognitive orientation (internal or external generalized locus of control), their sex—role attitudes, masculine-feminine personality attributes, expectations of success, and level of social support. Some of the instruments were renamed on the forms given to participants to avoid making their purposes blatantly obvious. For example, the Internal-External Locus of Control Scale was renamed the Survey of Opinions Scale, and the University Alienation Scale were re—labeled the Educational and Personal Survey Scale. The following is a list of the instruments used in the study and the independent and dependent variables they measured. Instruments Independent Variables Life Experience Survey Stressful Life Events I—E Scale Generalized Locus of Control Hale-Fibel Generalized Expectancy for Success, Mastery, Expectancy Scale Esteem, Denigration University Alienation Scale Alienation Inventory of Socially Social Support Supportive Behaviors Attitude Toward Women Scale Sex-Role Attitudes 81 Information Inventory Demographic Information (Religion) Personal Attributes Masculine-Feminine Character- Questionnaire istics Dependent Variables Beck Depression Inventory Depression Trait Form of the State- Anxiety Trait Anxiety Inventory Information Inventory. The Information Inventory (Appendix F) is an instrument constructed by the investigator to provide basic back- ground data on students. Some of this information was reported earlier under the subject section; other demographic information about student religion is reported in a later section. Life Experiences Survey. The importance of this instrument to the study was that it measures life stress. The Life Experiences Survey (LES) is a 57-item self-report instrument that asks respondents to indicate life events they have experienced during the past year (Sarason, Johnson, 6c Siegel, 1978). The scale has two sections. Section I, which is de- signed for all respondents, has a list of 47 life events and three blank spaces in which subjects can report other events they may have exper- ienced not listed on the instrument. Section II contains 10 life events designed primarily for students. Respondents indicate the time frame in which the events took place (0-6 months or 7 months to a year) and whether the event was perceived as positive or negative. Although 82 the LES assesses life stress during two different 6-month intervals, all analyses to date have involved change scores based on the total 12-month time period. The Life Experience Survey yields six types of scores: (1) a total negative change score, which is additive in nature and which sums across all events the participant indicated were negative in impact; (2) a nega- tive non-student concerns change score, which sums only those events which the participant indicated were negative in impact with respect to general life or non-student-related concerns; (3) a negative student concerns score which sums only those events that the subject said were negative in impact concerning the college he is attending; (4) a total positive score, which is additive and which sums across those events the respondent stated were positive in impact; (5) a positive student concerns score, which sums only those events the participant said were positive in impact regarding college life; and (6) a positive non-student concerns score, which sums those events the person said were positive in impact regarding non-college-related life. Although the LES scale gives both positive and negative life change scores, research has found that the negative life score is more highly correlated with stress-related dependent measures than are the positive life change scores. In this study, the total negative life change score is given the greatest emphasis as an indicator of the stressful life events one is experiencing. In some instances, data concerning the remaining five life change scores are presented primarily for comparative purposes. Test-retest reliability studies of the LES (of 3 weeks to 6 months) with 83 undergraduate students have shown reliability coefficients of .56 and .88 for the total negative score, and .19 and .53 for the total positive score (Sarason, Johnson, 6: Siegel, 1978). The total negative LES score has been significantly related to a number of stress—related dependent measures, including the Beck Depression Scale (Beck, 1972) and the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory (Spielberg, Gorsuch, 6c Lushene, 1970). Beck Depressim Inventory. The Beck Depression Inventory is used in this study as a measure of psychological symptomatology because depression is a common symptomatic experience for individuals who have encountered a great deal of life readjustment. It has been found to be influenced by life stress events (Sarason, Johnson, 6: Siegel, 1978). The Beck Depression Inventory (BDI, Appendix H) is one of the most widely used self—report depression measures in psychological research. The BDI is a 21-item report measure that assesses the various psychologi- cal, physiological, and behavioral manifestations of depression (Beck, 1972). Each item has a set of self-evaluative statements that the respon- dent rates from 0 (neutral) to 3 (maximum) severity. A major advantage the BDI has over other measures of stress is that it discriminates depres- sion from anxiety. Trait Anxiety InventorL The Trait form of the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory (Spielberger, Gorsuch, & Lushene, 1970) was used as the second measure of psychological symptomatology. Like the Beck Depression Inventory, the Trait Anxiety Inventory has been found to be influenced 84 by stressful life events (Sarason, et al., 1978) and to be sensitive to the stress—moderating effects of locus of control beliefs (Johnson 6c Sarason, 1978). One would anticipate that college students under stress might express their stress in terms of anxiety symptomatology as well as depression. The Trait Form of the Anxiety Inventory (Appendix I) is a 20-item questionnaire which assesses anxiety as a trait or as a relatively stable disposition variable. The authors define trait anxiety as a relatively enduring personality characteristics, a type of anxiety proneness. A person who is described as being high in trait anxiety is one who is prone to respond to life changes with anxiety. The Trait Form asks respondents to indicate how they feel about 20 statements. For instance, some of the statements are: "I feel pleasant; I tire quickly; I feel like crying; I wish I could be as happy as others seem to be." Test-Retest reliabilities for male and female college undergraduates over a six-month period were .73 and .77, respectively, suggesting that the trait measure is fairly stable. Validities for Trait scores were derived by correlating the scores with the Manifest Anxiety Scale and the Affect Adjective Checklist. Among college women, coefficients were .80 and .52. The reliability coefficient for the Michigan State University sample showed a Cronbach Alpha of .89, a fairly high reliability. Internal-External Locus of Control Scale. One important variable that influences the effects of life change might be the extent to which the individual perceives such change as within or outside of her control. 85 This study was designed, in part, to determine to what extent locus of control might moderate the relationship of life stress, depression, and anxiety. The InternalExternal (I-E) Locus of Control Scale is used in this study to measure an individual's generalized locus of control (Rotter, 1966). The I—E Scale (Appendix J) has grown out of Rotter's social learning theory and his belief that individuals have a generalized expectancy about the extent to which they control the rewards, punishments, and the events that happen in their lives. Rotter labeled this expectancy locus of control and said that people vary on a dimension from internal to external control. People who are internally controlled perceive events as being controllable by their own actions, while people who are externally controlled are inclined to view life events as being controlled by forces other than themselves. The I—E Scale (re-labeled the Survey of Opinions for the participants in this study) has been one of the most widely used instruments in re- search studies. Its test—retest reliability has ranged from .55 to .83. Its discriminant validity has ranged from .60 to .79. The Cronbach Alpha for the Michigan State University sample was .74. Generalized Expectancy for Success Scale. The Generalized EXpec- tancy for Success Scale (GESS, Fibel 6c Hale, 1978) is used as the second major measure of participants' cognitive views toward the world (Appen- dix K). It is used in this study because expectancy of success is often correlated with depression and anxiety. The GESS measures an individ- ual's generalized expectancy for success and her ability to attain desired 86 goals. The GESS differs from Rotter's I-E scale in that it focuses exclu- sively on expectations of success, whereas the I-E scale is a scale measur- ing one's generalized locus of control orientation. Moreover, the expectancy for success is a very important variable of student life in university settings. One might theorize that one's positive expectan- cies for success are correlated positively with one's internal sense of control and negatively with one's sense of alienation, depression, and anxiety. Although this scale is relatively new to psychology, it looks promising. Fibel 8c Hale (1978) have reported a split-half reliability of .90 for females and .91 for males. The Cronbach Alpha Reliability Coefficient for the Michigan State Sample on the GESS was very high, .91. All items on the GESS begin with the same phrase: "In the future I expect that I will . . .", which is printed at the top of each page. Re- sponses to the instrument are made in Likert format. Participants are asked to circle a number on a 5—point scale, ranging from 1, which is highly improbable to 5, which is highly probable for an event to occur. A total of 17 items are couched in the positive or success direction, while 13 are phrased in the negative or failure direction. The GESS is scored additively in the direction of success, such that a high total scale score indicates a high expectancy for success. Embedded within the GESS are three subscales, which measure self-esteem (items 38, 39, 41, 43, 44), self-mastery (37-37), and self- denigration (40, 42, 45, 46, and 47). 87 University Alienation Scale. Students' alienation at Michigan State University was measured by the University Alienation Scale (lab- eled Educational and Personal Opinion Survey for participants in the study). Burbach (1972) designed the University Alienation Scale to measure college students' sense of alienation from the university environ- ment (Appendix L). Although the scale measures three dimensions of alienation, only the total score is used in this study. Burbach (1972) has reported a .92 split-half reliability for the total scale. Suen's (1983) study of alienation of Black students on a predominantly White campus has shown that Black students felt more alienated than did their White counterparts. Inventory of Socially Supportive Behaviors. The Inventory of Socially Supportive Behaviors (ISSB, Appendix M) is a 40-item, self- report questionnaire designed to measure college students' level of social support (Barrera, Sandler, 6: Ramsey, 1981). Sandler 6c Lakey's (1982) study found a stress-buffering effect of social support for students who had an internal rather than an external locus of control. These investigators concluded that although the internals received less support than the externals, under conditions of stress the internals used social support more effectively than did the externally—oriented individuals. Two illustrative items on the 1888 scale are: "During the past four weeks, how often did other people do these activities for you, to you, or with you; Let you know that you did something well; and Provided you with a place where you could get away for a while." The response 88 format asks the person to check the frequency of receipt of each suppor- tive behavior in the past month (not at all, once or twice a week, several times a week, every day). Barrera, Sandler, 6c Ramsey (1981) have reported test-retest reliability of .88 and a Cronbach Alpha of .92 with college students. The Cronbach Alpha for the Michigan State University sample on the ISSB was .95. Attitudes toward Women Scale. The attitudes toward Women Scale was used because it was believed that sex role attitudes may have an influence on how one views or copies with stress or the amount of stress one experiences. A short, fifteen-item version of the Attitudes toward Women Scale (AWS) was used to assess students' sex role attitudes (Spence 6c Helmreich, 1972). The AWS scale (Appendix N) contains. statements describing the rights, role, and privileges women should have in American society. The instrument requires respondents to indi- cate their agreement with each statement on a four-point scale, ranging from 0 to 3, with high scores indicating a profeminist, egalitarian atti- tude, and low scores indicating a more conservative perspective. Possible total scores range from 0 to 45. The short version of the AWS has been found to have a correlation of .91 with the original 55-item -AWS in a sample of college students. Moreover, the Cronbach Alpha for the short form has been found to be .89 in a sample of students. For the Michigan State University sample, the Cronbach Alpha was only .44, which indicates a moderate reliability. 89 Construct validity for the AWS has been provided in a large number of studies. For instance, Spence 6c Helmreich (1972) found that women score higher (are more profeminist) than men and that college students score higher than their same-sex parent. Moreover, undergraduate students in an introductory psychology course scored lower than graduate students in psychology, and that further, high-scoring, profeminist stu- dents differ in their reactions to competent women. Personal Attributes destionnaire. The Personal Attributes Ques- tionnaire (PAQ, Appendix 0) was used to assess students' masculinity and femininity (Spence, Helmreich, 6t Stapp, 1974, 1975). It was believed that these characteristics would have a bearing on how one coped with depression and anxiety. The questionnaire contains 24 bipolar items that describe personal characteristics. For each characteristic, respondents are told to rate themselves on a fivepoint scale—from not at all having the characteristic to very much so having the characteristic in question. For example, on the aggressiveness characteristic, respondents have a choice of "not at all" aggressive to "very" aggressive. The PAQ is divided into three, 18-item scales, labeled Masculinity (M), Femininity (F), and Masculinity-Femininity (M-F). Each item on the scale describes a characteristic that differentiates the two gender groups. Although the Masculinity scale (for example, independence) contains items socially desirable for both genders, males are considered to have these traits in greater degree than do females. The Femininity Scale contains socially desirable characteristics females are considered 90 to have to a greater degree, for example, emotionality. Items on the Masculinity-Feminity scale contain characteristics whose social desirabil- ity varies between the gender groups, being considered desirable for one gender but not the other. For example, one may choose along the dimensions of very submissive (desirable for women) or very dominant (very desirable for males). Hypotheses Hypotheses were divided into major and minor categories. The first seven hypotheses dealt with the relationships of race (hypotheses 1 and 2), gender (hypotheses 3 and 4), and race and gender (hypotheses 5, 6, 7) with LES, and with depression and anxiety. Hypotheses 8 and 10 focused on race, social support, and locus of control, while hypotheses 9 dealt with the relationship of students' social support, depression, and anxiety scores. The minor hypotheses focused on gender and locus of control (hypo- thesis 1); gender and social support (hypothesis 2); locus of control and depression and anxiety (hypothesis 3); race, gender, and social support (hypothesis 4); gender, locus of control, and social support (hypothesis 5); and race, gender, and expectations of success (hypothesis 6). Minor hypothesis 7 used multiple regression analysis to examine the relationship of race, gender, social support, total negative life events, and locus of control to students' depression and anxiety. The following statistics are reported: (1) correlations; (2) summary descriptive data (means, standard deviations, range); (3) one—way analysis of variance (ANOVA); 91 and where appropriate, (4) multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA), and multiple regression analysis. Hypotheses 8 to 12 focused on the relationship of race and gender to students' alienation (hypothesis 8); personality attributes (hypothesis 9); sex role attitudes (hypothesis 10); sense of mastery (hypothesis 11); and self-esteem and self-denigration (hypothesis 12). Minor hypothesis 13 examined students' views on the importance of religion in terms of their social support, alienation, and expectations of success scores. Minor hypothesis 14 investigated the relationship of a series of indepen- dent variables including race, gender, social support, personality attri- butes, expectations of success, attitudes toward women, total negative life events, and locus of control to students' depression and anxiety. RESULTS Race and Stremful Life Events Major Hypothesis I predicted there would be a significant relationship between race and the number of stressful life events reported. Multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA) was performed with race as the independent variable and LES scores as the dependent variable (Table 3.00). Tests of significance found that race does have a significant influence on the six LES scores, yielding an approximate F of 37.69 (6,226 DF), P = .0001. Univariate F tests for the 6 LES scores (Table 3.01) were all significant (P < .000), with the exception of the positive, non-stu- dent concerns score (P = .21). The findings indicated a significant relation- ship between students' race and their LES scores. Black students had higher means for each of the negative LES scores and lower means for each of the positive LES scores (Table 3.02). Correlations of race and the total negative LES score indicated a significant, positive relationship R (233) = .60, and an inverse relationship with the total positive LES score (R (233) = -.26, P = .0001). Blacks tend to have higher negative scores, but lower positive LES scores. Although hypothesis 1 is tentatively accepted, it should be noted that additional analyses to be discussed indicated an interaction of race, gender, and students' LES scores. Race, Depression, and Anxiety Major Hypothesis 2 stated that there would be a significant relation- ship between student race and their anxiety and depression scores. Tests of the influence of race on students' BDI and Stai anxiety scores were 92 93 Table 3.00 Multivariate Tests of Significance for Life Experiences Survey Scores by Student Race Test Name Value Approx.F P Phillais .5001 37.69 .0001* Hotellings 1.0006 37.69 .0001* Wilks .4998 37.69 .0001* Boys .5001 37.69 .0001* *Level of Significance DF = 6,226 94 Table 3 .01 Univariate F Tests for Life Experiences Survey Scores by Student Race LES Score Hypoth. Error Error F P Total Negative 138.49 239.66 1.03 133.48 .000“ Neg. Non-Student 22.55 129.30 .55 40.29 .000“ Neg. Student Con. 50.80 305.74 1.32 38.38 .000* Total Positive 22.41 316.06 1.36 16.38 .000* Pos. Non-Student .89 129.11 .55 1.60 .206 Pos. Student Con. 13.52 291.11 1.26 10.73 .001* * = Significant (1,232 DF) 95 Table 3.02 Summary Table of Sample Means and Standard Deviations for Life Experiences Survey Scores by Student Race LES Score Race N Mean SD Obtained Range Total Negative White 138 4.65 1.05 3.0-6.0 Black 95 6.22 .96 3.0-8.0 Negative Non- Student Concerns White 138 2 . 28 .61 1 .0-4.0 Black 95 2.91 .90 2.0-5.0 Negative Student Concerns White 138 2. 35 1. 10 1 .0-4.0 Black 95 3.30 1.21 1.0-6.0 Total Positive White 138 4.21 1.13 2.0-7.0 Black 95 3.57 1.21 2.0-8.0 Positive Non- Student Concerns White 1 38 2 . 1 1 . 7 8 1 . 0-3 . 0 Black 95 1 .98 .69 1 .0-4.0 Positive Student Concerns White 138 2.07 1.22 1.0-4.0 Black 95 1.58 .96 l.0-5.0 96 all significant. Roy's statistic showed an approximate F = 36.18, P = .000 (see Table 3.03). Two one-way ANOVAS (Table 3.04) showed signifi- cant differences in students' mean depression scores [F = 70.78 (1,232 DF), P = .000] and in the anxiety scores [F = 67.09 (1,232 DF), P = .000]. Correlation analysis also indicated that race is associated positively with students depression [R (233) = .48, P = .000] and with their anxiety scores [R (233) = .47, P = .000]. Black students tend to have both higher mean depression and anxiety scores than do White students (Table 3.05). Thus, minority students encounter more negative life events than do majority students, and they also report experiencing more depression and anxiety than do their White counterparts. Pending the results of later analyses on the combined influence of race and gender on psychologi- cal symptoms, Major Hypothesis 2 is tentatively confirmed. There appears to be a significant relationship between students' race and the psychologi- cal symptoms they report. Gender, Life Eventg Depression, and Anxiety Major Hypothesis 3 stated that there would be a significant relation- ship between student gender and LES scores. In general, females had higher depression and anxiety scores than males. Table 3.06 presents a summary of multivariate tests for LES scores by gender. A Wilks statis- tic value of .4380 approximate F of 47.88 (6,224 DF) was significant at the .000 level. When analyzing only for the effect of gender, gender does have a significant relationship to students' LES scores. A series of one-way ANOVAS (Table 3.07) were performed to pinpoint the significant differences in students' LES scores. Univariate F tests 97 Table 3.03 Multivariate Tests of Significance for Depression and Anxiety Scores by Student Race Test Name Value Approx.F Hypoth.DF ErrorDF P Pillais .2393 36.18 2.0 230 .000* Hotellings .3146 36.18 2.0 230 .000* Wilks .7606 36.18 2.0 230 .000* Roys .2393 36.18 2.0 230 .000* * = Significant 98 Table 3.04 Univariate F Tests for Depression and Anxiety Scores by Student Race Variable Hypoth. Error Error F P SS SS MS Beck 1126.21 3675.52 15.91 70.78 .000* Anxiety 5676.84 19543.69 84.60 67.09 .000* * = Significant 99 Table 3 . 05 Means and Standard Deviations for Depression and Anxiety Scores by Student Race Variable Race N M SD Depression White 138 1 5 . 32 4 . 10 BlaCk 95 19.30 3.89 Total 233 17.15 4.54 Anxiety White 138 51.14 9.61 Black 95 61.18 8.56 Total 233 55.24 10.42 100 Table 3.06 Multivariate Tests for LES Scores by Gender Test Name Value Approx.F Hypoth.DF ErrorDF P Pillais .5619 47.88 6.0 224 .000* Hotellings 1.2826 47.88 6.0 224 .000* Wilks .4380 47.88 6.0 224 .000* Roys .5619 47.88 6.0 224 .000* Summary of Analysis of Variance for LES Scores by Gender 101 Table 3.07 LES Score Source SS MS DF F P Variation Total Neg. Btw. 47.81 47.81 1 33.43 .0000* Within 330.34 1.43 231 Total 378.15 232 Neg. Non- Student Btw. 5.97 5.97 1 9.46 .0023* Within 145.88 .63 231 Total 151.85 232 Neg. Student Concerns Btw. 21.55 21.55 1 14.86 .0002* Within 334.99 1.45 231 Total 356.54 232 Total Pos. Btw. 31.15 31.15 1 23.41 .0000* Within 307.32 1.33 231 Total 338.47 232 Pos. Non- Student Btw. 10.20 10.20 1 19.67 .0000* Within 119.83 .51 231 Total 130.03 232 Pos . Student Concerns Btw . Within Total 102 Table 3.07 (cont'd.) 78.77 78.77 225.86 .97 304.63 1 231 232 80.56 .0000* * = Significance Level 103 for the 6 LBS scores were all significant (P < .00). Correlation coefficients are consistent with ANOVA results. High negative scores are associated with females. In contrast, low negative and high positive LES scores are associated with males. There is, however, a significant positive relationship between female status and the positive non-student concerns LES score [R (233) = .28, P = .000]. Table 3.08 provides the means and standards deviations for LES scores by gender. Female students had significantly higher negative life event scores than males. These findings suggest that female students may experience more negative life stress than males, regardless if such stress is college-related or not. Conversely, male college students reported experiencing life stress of a more positive nature, though females have high positive changes not associated with being a student. Major Hypothesis 4 stated there would be a significant relationship between student gender and depression and anxiety. Table 3.09 presents a summary of multivariate tests of significance for depression and anxiety by gender. A Wilks statistic of .6605, approximate F of 59.09 (2,230 DF) was significant at the .000 level. Univariate F tests for both depres- sion and anxiety by gender were significant, also (P = .000, Table 3.10). Females have both higher mean depression scores (19.12 vs. 13.70) and higher anxiety scores (59.71 vs. 47.44) than do males (Table 3.11). Pearson correlation coefficients also demonstrate that gender has a moderate, positive correlation with depression (R = .58) and with anxiety scores (R = .57), with P = .000. Pending later analyses on the dual influence of race and gender on student depression and anxiety scores, Major hy- pothesis 4 was accepted, when analyzing only for the single influence 104 Table 3.08 Summary of Sample Means and Standard Deviations for Student LES Scores by Gender LES Score. Gender N M SD Total Negative Male 85 4.69 1 . 21 Female 148 5.63 1.18 Total 233 5.29 1.27 Negative Non- Student Concerns Male 85 2. 23 . 64 Female 148 2.66 .86 Total 233 2.54 . 80 Negative Student Concerns Male 85 2. 34 1 . 21 Female 148 2. 97 1 . 20 Total 233 2.74 1 .23 Total Positive Male 85 4.43 l. 16 Female 148 3.67 1. 14 Total 233 3.95 1 .20 Positive N on- Student Concerns Male 85 1 . 78 . 70 Female 148 2. 22 .72 Total 233 2.06 .74 Positive Student Concerns Male 85 2.64 1 . 26 Female 148 1.43 .78 Total 233 1.87 1.14 105 Table 3.09 Multivariate Tests of Significance for Depression and Anxiety Scores by Student Gender Test Name Value Approx.F Hypoth.DF ErrorDF P Pillais .3394 59.09 2.0 230 .000* Hotellings .5138 59.09 2.0 230 .000* Wilks .6605 59.09 2.0 230 .000* Boys .3394 59.09 2.0 230 .000* 106 Table 3.10 Summary of One-Way AN OVA for Beck Depression and Anxiety Scores by Gender Variable Source DF SS MS F P Depression Btw. 1 1587.53 114.09 .000* Within 231 3214.20 13.91 Total 232 4801.73 Anxiety Btw. 1 8127.44 109.83 .0000* Within 231 17093.09 73.99 Total 232 25220.53 * = Significance Level 107 Table 3.11 Means and Standard Deviations for Depression and Anxiety Scores by Student Gender Variable Gender N Mean SD Depression Male 85 13 . 70 4 . 25 Female 148 19.12 3.39 Total 233 17.15 4.54 Anxiety Male 85 47 . 44 9 . 52 Female 148 59.71 8.02 Total 233 55.24 10.42 108 of gender, gender does have a significant statistical relationship on student depression and anxiety scores. Race, Gender, Life Events, and Anxiety Major Hypothesis 5 predicted there would be a significant relationship between student race and Life Experiences Survey scores. Multivariate tests of significance were used to check for statistical differences in how the four racial and gender groups responded to the Life Experiences Survey. As hypothesized, the combined factors of race and gender were significant (Table 3.12). A Wilks statistic showed an approximate F = 14.69 (6,224 DF; P = .000). Major Hypothesis 5 is accepted. The combined factors of race and gender resulted in significant differences in students' reported number of stressful life events. Table 3.13 provides a summary of a series of two—way ANOVAS for each of the six LES scores. The analyses for the three negative LES scores were statistically significant, and no significant interactions were found. In contrast, the findings for all three positive LES scores showed significant interactions with each of these scores, as well as significant main effects. Inspection of Table 3.14 suggests that the interaction might be at— tributed to differences in the mean positive scores of Black and White males. For example, White males scored higher on Total Positive and Posi— tive Student Concerns than the other three groups, which had very similar means. For positive non-student concerns, however, White males were low scorers. The difference between the total positive score for White (4.84) and Black males (3.71) is 1.13; while that between White (3.74) 109 Table 3.12 Multivariate Tests for LES Scores by Student Race and Gender Test Name Value Approx.F Hypoth.F. ErrorDF P Pillais .2823 14.69 6.0 224 .000* Hotellings .3935 14.69 6.0 224 .000* Wilks .7162 14.69 6.0 224 .000* Roys .2823 14.69 6.0 224 .000* * = Significance Level 110 Table 3.13 Summary of Analysis of Variance for LES Scores by Race and Gender LES Score Source SS DF MS F P Total Negative Main 200.37 2 100.18 129.28 .0* Race 138.49 1 138.49 178.71 .0000* Gender 61.87 1 61.87 79.85 .000* 2-Way .32 1 .32 .42 .51 Explained 200.69 3 66.80 86.32 .00* Residual 177.45 .77 Total 1.63 Neg. Non- Student Main 30.55 2 15.27 28.90 .000* Race 22.55 1 22.55 42.67 .000* Gender 7.98 1 7.98 15.13 .000* 2-Way I. .25 1 .25 .48 .48 Explained 30.81 3 10.27 19.43 .000* Residual 121.04 229 .52 Total 151.86 232 .65 Neg. Student Concerns Main 78.05 2 39.02 32.26 .000* Race 50.80 1 50.80 42.00 .000* Gender 27.25 1 27.25 22.53 .000* 2—Way I. 1.52 1 1.52 1.26 .262 Explained 79.57 3 26.56 21.93 .000* Residual 276.97 229 1.2 Total Pos . Pos . Non- Student Concerns Pos . Student Concerns 111 Table 3.13 (cont'd.) Total Main Race Gender 2-Way I. Explained Residual Total Main Race Gender 2-Way I. Explained Residual Total Main Race Gender Explained Residual Total 356.54 58.09 22.41 35.68 13.51 71.61 266.86 338.48 10.63 .90 9.73 7.96 18.66 111.37 130.03 98.04 13.52 84.52 43.26 141.31 163.32 304.63 232 2 229 232 229 232 229 232 1.57 29.08 22.41 35.68 13.51 23.87 1.16 1.45 5.34 .90 9.73 7.96 6.20 .48 .56 49.02 13.52 84.52 43.26 47.10 .71 1.31 24.92 19.23 30.61 11.59 20.48 10.93 10.99 20.13 16.38 12.79 68.73 18.96 118.51 60.66 .000* .000* .000* .001* .000* .000* .000* .000* .000* .000* .000* .000“ .000* .000“ 112 Table 3.14 Summary of Sample Means and Standard Deviations for LES Scores by Gender and Race LES Score Race N M SD Total Negative W. Male 51 3.86 .66 W. Female 103 4.89 1.08 B. Male 39 5.64 1.03 B. Female 56 6.62 .67 Neg. Non- Student Concerns W. Male 51 2.03 .34 W. Female 103 2.33 i .70 B. Male 39 2.64 .77 B. Female 56 3.10 .94 Neg. Student W. Male 51 1.78 .57 W. Female 103 2.55 1.19 B. Male 39 3.0 1.43 B. Female 56 3.51 .99 Total Positive W. Male 51 4.84 1.15 W. Female 103 3.74 .99 B. Male 39 3.71 .91 B. Female 56 3.48 1.38 Positive Non- Student Concerns W. Male 51 1.60 .60 W. Female 103 2.31 .78 Positive Student Concerns 113 Table 3.14 (cont'd.) B. B. 9590.52 Male Female . Male Female Male Female 39 56 51 103 39 56 2.0 1.98 3.23 1.41 1.71 1.50 .76 .64 .12 .63 .91 .99 114 and Black (3.48) females is .26. Differences were noted in the positive non-student LES score for Black (2.00) and White males (1.60) compared to those for White (2.31) and Black (1.98) females. The largest difference (1.52) in the scores of White (3.23) and Black males (1.71) was observed in the positive student LES scores. In comparison, the difference in this score (.09) for White (1.41) and Black females (1.50) was much smaller. Major Hypothesis 6 stated that there would be a significant relation- ship between student race and gender and their depression and anxiety scores. Statistical analysis revealed that the effects of race and sex were each significant (for race, F = 139.49, P = .000; for gender, F = 225.05, P = .000) for their depression scores, and for anxiety scores (for race, F = 127.71, P = .000; for gender, F = 209.02, P = .000). There were no significant two-way interactions (Table 3.15). Given the findings, Major Hypothesis 6 was accepted. Although the interactions were non- significant, Black females scored highest and White males the lowest, with little differences between White females and Black males (Table 3.16). Black females had the highest, mean depression score (21.98); followed by White females (17.39); Black males (16.67); and White males (11.20). The same relationship held for students' anxiety scores. Black females had the highest mean anxiety score (66.04); White females next (55.87); Black males, third (54.23); and last, White males (41.70). There is a significant relationship between race and gender and stress. Black females tend to report experiencing the greatest amount of stress, fol- lowed by White females, Black males, and White males. Major Hypothesis 7 predicted that a significant relationship existed between students' race, gender, and total LES scores, and their depression 115 Table 3.15 Summary of Analysis of Variance for Depression and Anxiety Scores by Race and Gender Variables Sum of Squares DF Mean Square F P Depression Main Effects 2942.76 2 1471.38 182.25 .000 Race 1126.21 1 1126.21 139.49 .000 Sex 1816.54 1 1816.54 225.05 .000 2-Way Interactions 10.179 1 10.179 1.26 .263 Race Sex 10.179 1 10.179 1.26 .263 Explained 2952.94 3 984.310 121.92 .000 Residual 1848.80 229 8.073 Total 4801.74 232 20.697 Anxiety Main Effects 14967.77 2 7483.88 168.36 .000 Race 5676.85 1 127.71 .000 Sex 9290.92 1 209.02 .000 2-Way Interactions 73.73 1 1.65 .199 Explained 15041.51 3 5013.83 112.79 .000 Residual 10179.02 229 44.45 Total 25220.54 232 108.70 116 Table 3.16 Means and Standard Deviations for Student Depression and Anxiety Scores by Race and Gender Variable Race and Gender N Mean SD Depression W. Males 46 11.20 3.30 W. Females 92 17.39 3.17 B. Males 39 16.67 3.26 B. Females 56 21.98 2.40 Total 233 17.15 Anxiety W. Males 46 41.70 6.46 W. Females 92 55.87 7.96 B. Males 39 54.23 8.04 B. Females 56 66.04 4.72 Total 233 55.24 117 and anxiety scores. Student LES scores were divided into six groups, with scores ranging from 3 to 8. The total negative life events score was based on whether participants had a score of 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, or 8. For depression scores, a three-way ANOVA showed significant race (F = 192.76, P .000); gender (F = 310.92, P = .000); and total negative life events (F 18.63, P = .000) (see Table 3.17). For student anxiety scores, a three-way ANOVA showed significant race [F = 153.78, P = .000]; gender [251.68, P = .000]; and total negative life events [F = 10.54, P = .000] influences. Interaction effects were not tested for, given the number of empty cells and the small range separating each ascending LES category (+1). With this caution in mind, Major Hypothesis 7 was accepted. There is a significant relationship between students' race, gender, total negative interaction scores; however, this interpretation must be qualified because interaction effects were not examined. Table 3.18 provides a summary of student depression and anxiety scores by student race, gender, and categories of their total negative LES scores. Race, Social Support, Depression, and Anxiety Major Hypothesis 8 proposed that there would be a significant rela- tionship between students' race and their social support (ISSB) scores. One-way ANOVA (Table 3.19) showed that the relationship between race and social support was not statistically significant [F = 2.01 (1,196 DF), P =.52]. Major Hypothesis 8 was rejected. While there is an obtained difference in the mean social support scores of Blacks (91.82) and Whites (97.62), this difference is not statistically significant. Whites have more Summary of Three-Way Analysis of Variance for Depression 118 Table 3.17 and Anxiety Scores by Race , Gender , and Total Negative LES Score Depression Score Sum of Squares DF Mean Square F P Main Effects 3487.22 7 498.17 85.27 .000 Race 1126.21 1 192.76 .000 Sex 1816.54 1 310.92 .000 Total Negative 544.46 5 108.32 18.63 .000 Residual 1314.52 225 5.84 Explained 3487.22 7 498.17 85.27 .000 Total 4801.74 232 20.69 Anxiety Score Main Effects 16914.55 7 2416.36 65.45 .000 Race 5676.85 1 153.78 .000 Sex 9290.92 1 251.68 .000 Total Negative 1946.77 5 389.35 10.54 .000 Residual 8305.98 225 36.91 Explained 16914.55 7 2416.36 65.45 .000 Total 25220.54 232 108.70 119 Table 3.18 Summary Table of Sample Means for Depression and Anxiety Scores by Race , Gender, and Total Negative LES Score Total Negative LES Score 3 4 5 6 7 8 W. Depression 12.20 12.48 17.90 18.38 0.0 0.0 B. Depression 10.00 12.67 16.71 18.94 22.38 22.25 W. Anxiety 43.35 45.46 56.17 58.10 0.0 0.0 B. Anxiety 43.0 50.0 55.12 59.0 66.62 64.00 W. Male Depression 10.64 10.60 15.0 20.0 0.0 0.0 W. Female Depression 14.11 15.61 18.35 18.33 0.0 0.0 B. Male Depression 10.11 12.67 15.50 17.68 18.0 20.67 B. Female Depression 0.0 0.0 19.60 20.92 22.50 27.00 W. Male Anxiety 39.45 41.13 47.25 61.0 0.0 0.0 W. Female Anxiety 48.11 52.67 57.54 58.03 0.0 0.0 B. Male Anxiety 43.00 50.00 51.92 55.53 60.0 61.33 B. Female Anxiety 0.0 0.0 62.80 64.50 66.79 72.00 n = 138 Whites n = 95 Blacks 120 Table 3.19 Summary of Analysis of Variance for Social Support Scores by Student Race Source of Variance SS DF MS F P Between Groups 1621.0500 1 2.01 .52 Within Groups .1581 196 606.43 Total .1597 197 121 social support than Blacks, but not significantly so. Correlation analysis revealed that being Black is associated negatively with ISSB scores [R (198) = -.16, P = .07], although the correlation was small and not statis- tically significant at conventional criteria. Table 3.20 gives the means and standard deviations for social support scores by race. Major Hypothesis 9 said there would be a significant relationship between students' social support (ISSB), depression and anxiety scores. Procedures were taken to divide students into groups of high and low social support. The mean and the standard deviation for the ISSB score was 94.49, and the standard deviation was 27.95. The median score was 93. One standard deviation above and below the mean was used as cut-off points for the high and low social support groups. A total of 39 persons were in the high group and 35 in the low group. The mean depression score for those in the high social support group was 15.87, with a standard deviation of 4.23; the mean depression score for the low social support group was 17.88, with a standard deviation of 5.01 (Table 3.22). Likewise, the mean anxiety score for those in the high social support group was 52.48 and 57.97 for the low social support group. Correlation analysis showed that the ISSB was correlated negatively with the Beck Depression score [R (74) = -.21, P = .03], the Stai anxiety scores [R (74) = -.27, P = .01], and with student gender (R = -.32, P = .002); and with race [R (74) = —.16, P = .08]. Analysis of variance (Table 3.21) also showed social support was related significantly to students' anxiety scores (F = 5.73, P = .01; Table 3.21). An F = 3.50, P = .06 indicated nearly a significant relationship between depression and social 122 Table 3.20 Summary of Sample Means and Standard Deviations for Social Support Scores by Student Race Race N Mean Standard Deviations White 114 97.62 26.51 Black 84 91.82 30.77 Total 198 95.16 28.47 123 Table 3.21 Summary of Analysis of Variance for Social Support Scores by Student Depression and Anxiety Variable DF SS MS F P Depression Between 174.81 3.50 .06 Within 72 1535.90 21.33 Total 73 1610.71 Anxiety Between 1 554.79 5.73 .01* Within 72 6970.71 96.81 Total 73 7525.51 * = Significance Level 124 Table 3.22 Means and Standard Deviations for High and Low ISSB Groups by Student Depression and Anxiety Scores Variable N Mean Standard Deviation Depression High Social Support 39 15.87 4.23 Low Social Support 35 17.88 5.01 Total 74 16.82 4.69 Anxiety High Social Support 39 52.48 8.69 Low Social Support 35 57.97 10.98 Total 74 55.08 10.15 125 support. Those with low social support reported higher depression scores (17.88); while those with high social support scores evidenced low mean (52.48) depression scores. An F = 5.73, P = .01 indicated a significant, statistical relationship between anxiety and social support. Students with low social support reported significantly higher anxiety scores (57.97) than those with high social support scores (52.48.). Race and Internal-External Locus of Control Major Hypothesis 10 stated that there would be a significant rela- tionship between student' race and their internal—external locus of control score. An analysis of variance (see Table 3.23) found that differences observed in the means for Black and White students is significant [F = 16.76 (1,216 DF), P = .0001]. Hypothesis 10 was retained; White students have significantly higher, internally-oriented I-E scores than do Black students. The I-E score had a significant, inverse correlation with race [R (218) = -.22, P = .000], such that White students had higher I-E scores than Black students. All I-E scores were scored from the internal point of view. The mean I—E score was higher for White students (12.0) than for Black students (9.24) (Table 3.24). Summary of Findipgs for Majgr Hypotheses In general, most of the major hypotheses were confirmed. This section summarizes the major findings. 1. Race is related to life stress (Hypothesis 1). Minority students report encountering significantly more negative life change events than do majority students. In contrast, majority students reported 126 Table 3 . 23 Analysis of Variance for Locus of Control Score by Race Source DF SS MS F P Between 1 397.84 16.76 .0001* Within 216 5125.93 23.73 Total 217 5523.77 * = Significance Level 127 Table 3.24 Means and Standard Deviations for Internal-External Locus of Control Scores by Race Race N Mean Standard Deviation White 131 12.00 4.95 Black 87 9.24 4.73 Total 218 10.89 5.04 128 experiencing a significantly higher number of positive life events in two categories than did Black students. The positive, non-student score was the only life experience score which did not reach statisti- cal significance. Apparently, Black and White students report encountering a similar number of positive life events that are non- student related. These findings, however, must be interpreted in light of the results of later analyses which examined the combined influence of race and gender on students' LES scores. Interaction was observed be— tween the two factors of race and gender and students' positive LES scores, but not their negative LES scores. Inspection of the data suggests that the interaction might be attributed to differences in the mean positive scores of Black and White males, such that White males scored higher on the total positive and positive student concerns than the other three groups which had similar means. For positive non-student concerns, however, White males were low scorers. A one-way analysis of variance yielded a significant main effect for race and depression and anxiety scores (Hypothesis 2). Minority students reported experiencing a significantly higher rate of depres- sion and anxiety than did their White counterparts. Although inter- action was non-significant, Black males scored highest, and White males the lowest, with little difference between White females and Black males. When the influence of only gender was examined with respect to LES scores, female students encountered a significantly higher 129 number of college-related, negative life events than did male stu- dents (Hypothesis 3). Conversely, male college students encountered a statistically significantly higher number of positive life events than did female students. The life change adjustments that female students were required to make were, therefore, more negative than positive, whereas the opposite held true for males. Females have higher positive non-student concerns than males. Gender differences were observed in students' depression and anxiety scores (Hypothesis 4). Female students showed significantly higher rates of depression and anxiety than did their male counterparts. The interaction was non-significant, but Black females had the highest scores and White males the lowest. A statistically significant relationship was found between students' race and gender and their life event scores (Hypothesis 5). For each of the negative life event scores, there was no interaction for the main effects of race and gender. For the positive life event scores, there was interaction for each LES score category. Inspec— tion of the data suggested that the interaction might be attributed to differences in the mean positive scores of Black and White males. Both race and gender were found to have a statistically significant influence on students' depression and anxiety scores (Hypothesis 6). Although there were no significant interaction effects, gender differences were observed within each racial group with respect to students' depression and anxiety scores: Black females had the 10. 130 highest mean depression and anxiety scores, followed by White females, Black males, and White males. As one's total number of negative, stressful life events increases, so do one's levels of depression and anxiety (Hypothesis 7). A series of analysis indicated that negative life events are related signifi- cantly to students' reported levels of depression and anxiety. Race is not related significantly to the amount of social support one receives, although Whites had higher rates of social support than did Blacks (Hypothesis 8). Social support was related significantly to students' anxiety scores, but non-significantly to their depression and anxiety scores (Hypoth- esis 9). Students with high social support tended to have lower anxiety scores than those with low social support. While students with high social support tended to have low depression scores, this relationship was not statistically significant (P = .06). White students are more internally—oriented than are Black students (Hypothesis 10). Minor Hypotheses Most of the minor hypotheses analyzed the relationship of gender separately or the combined relationship of gender and race to the inde- pendent variables in the study. In addition, new variables were introduced which were predicted to be gender-related, for instance, the Personality Attributes Scale and the Attitudes toward Women Scale. A goal in this section is to compare the influence of race and gender as separate and combined stressors of minority status within American culture. 131 Gender and Locus of Control Minor Hypothesis I predicted there would be a significant relation- ship between student gender and their locus of control scores. The I-E scale was scored from an internal perspective. Analysis of variance (Table 3.25) yielded an F = 1.22 (1,216 DF), P = .26. Given this finding, Minor Hypothesis 1 was rejected. Males are not more internally-oriented than are females; both groups are just about equally distributed in their generalized locus of control orientation. The mean I-E score for males was 10.40 (5.89 SD) and for females 11.16 (4.46 SD) (Table 3.26). Correla- tion analysis found that student gender and locus of control scores [R (218) = .07, P = .12] are not related. An additional two-way analysis of variance, Race x Gender (one that was not part of the hypotheses formulated in this study) showed a significant effect for race, but there was also a significant two-way interaction [F = 5.97, P = .01]. The interaction seemed to be caused by the low, mean I-E score of Black males (7.75) and the high mean score of White males (12.53). The I-E scores of Black males were also low compared to the mean score for Black females (10.29) and for White females (11.72). The difference in the mean I-E scores of Black and White males was 4.78; compared to 1.43 for Black and White females; 2.54 for Black males and females; and .81 for White males and females. Gender and Social Support Minor Hypothesis 2 predicted there would be a significant relation- ship between student gender and their social support scores. Analysis of variance (Table 3.27) yielded an F = 5.81 (1,213 DF), P = .01. Minor 132 Table 3.25 Amlysis of Variance for I-E Scores by Gender Source DF SS MS F P Between 1 31.15 1.22 .269 Within 216 5492.62 25.42 Total 217 5523.77 133 Table 3.26 Means and Standard Deviations of I-E Scores by Student Gender Gender N Mean Standard Deviation Males 81 10.40 5.89 Females 137 11.16 4.46 Total 218 10.69 5.04 134 Table 3.27 Analysis of Variance for Social Support Scores by Gender Source SS DF MS F P Between 4540.15 1 5.81 .01 Within 165518.80 212 780.65 Total 170058.95 213 135 Hypothesis 2 was confirmed. There is a significant difference in the mean social support scores of males and females. Females tend to receive more social support than do males. The mean social scores for the total population was 95.01, with a standard deviation of 28.25; 88.87 for males (SD = 30.53); and 98.46 (SD = 26.38) for females (see Table 3.28). Correla- tion analysis showed a significant relationship between gender and social support [R (214) = -.32, P = .00]. Race, Gender, Internal-External Locm of Control, Social Support Minor Hypothesis 3 predicted the relationship between students' generalized locus of control orientation and their psychological symptoma- tology. Students were divided into two groups according to their scores above or below the mean (i: ISD) for the overall group. Analysis of variance for these variables (Table 3.30) found that the differences were statistically significant [F (1,210) = 6.16, P = .013]. Data in Table 3.29 indicate that externally-oriented students had a higher mean depression score (17.93) than did the internally-oriented students (16.37). There was a negative correlation between the I-E and both the depression [R (211) = -.22, P = .01] and the anxiety scores [R (211) = -.11, P = -.08], such that an external orientation is associated with higher mean depression and anxiety scores than an internal orientation. Likewise, students who were externally-oriented also had signifi- cantly higher mean anxiety scores (56.71) than did the internally-oriented student (53.77; F (210) = 4.30, P = .03). Given these findings, Minor Hy- pothesis 3 was retained: Generalized locus of control does have a signifi- cant influence on levels of depression and anxiety. One's generalized 136 Table 3.28 Means and Standard Deviations for Social Support Scores by Gender Gender N Mean Standard Deviation Males 77 88.87 30.53 Females 137 98.46 26.38 28.25 Total 214 95.01 137 Table 3.29 Summary of Sample Means and Standard Deviations for Students' l—E Scores by Their Depression and Anxiety Scores Locm of Control N Mean Depression Standard Deviation Internal 108 16.37 4.85 External 103 17.93 4.18 Total 211 17.13 4.59 Locus of Control N Mean Anxiety Standard Deviation Internal 108 53.77 11.10 External 103 56.71 9.35 Total 211 55.21 10.37 138 Table 3.30 Summary of Analysis of Variance for I-E Scores by Depression and Anxiety Scores Depression DF Sum of Squares Mean Squares F P Between 1 127.05 6.16 .01 Within 209 4303.95 20.59 Total 210 4431.01 Anxiety Between 1 455.90 4.30 .03 Within 209 22129.50 105.88 Total 210 22585.4021 139 locus of control does have a significant influence on his levels of depression and anxiety. Students who exhibited an external locus of control evidence greater depression and anxiety than those who manifested an internal locus of control. Minor Hypothesis 4 predicted that there would be a significant relationship between student race and gender and their social support scores. Table 3.31 presents the analysis of variance for the social support scores. The findings indicated an interaction of race and gender [F = 8.88, P = .003]; a significant gender effect [F = 6.32, P = .01]; but no race effect [F = 1.92, P = .167]. Given this finding, Minor Hypothesis 4 was rejected; however, the interaction indicates that race does have an effect, but differently for males and females. Inspection of the data suggested that the interaction might be caused by scores of Black males. The interaction indicates that race does have an effect for males. The range within the Black group was wide. Black females had, for example, the highest mean social support scores (100.94), while Black males (77.03) had the lowest mean social support score (Table 3.32). There was much less disparity in social support scores for White males (97.97) and females (97.43); their means were essentially equal. Minor Hypothesis 5 posited a significant relationship between student gender and I-E scores and their social support scores. To test this hypoth- esis, stepwise multiple regression analysis was performed, with gender and I-E scores as the predictor variables and social support as the criterion variable. Listwise deletion of missing data was used. Significant correla- tions were associated with the relationships between I-E scores and social 140 Table 3.31 Analysis of Variance for Social Support Scores by Student Race and Gender Source SS DF MS F P Main Effects 6235.261 2 3117.63 4.122 .018* Gender 4780.286 1 6.320 .013* Race 1454.976 1 1.924 .167 Gender x Race 6719.306 1 8.884 .003* Explained 12954.567 3 4318.189 5.709 .001* Residual 146726.933 194 755.324 Total 159681.500 197 810.566 * = Significance Level 141 Table 3.32 Means and Standard Deviations for Social Support by Race and Gender Race and Gender N Mean Standard Deviations White 114 97.62 26.51 Male 40 97.97 28.63 Female 74 97.43 25.49 Black 84 91.83 30.77 Male 32 77.03 26.97 Female 52 100.94 29.62 Total 198 95.16 28.47 142 support [R (199) = .36, P = .001] and between gender and social support [R (214) = -.32, P = .001]. The correlation associated with I-E scores and gender .was not significant [R (221) = .07, P = .31]. The mean ISSB or social support score was 94.77, with a standard deviation of 28.35. The multiple R for the two independent predictor variables was .34, F (2,194) = 12.96, P = .000 (Table 3.33). The two predictors accounted for approximately 11% of the variance associated with the criterion variable of social support. The contribution of the gender influence was small (2%). Multiple regression analysis provided support for Minor Hypothesis 5; therefore, this hypothesis was retained. Race, Gender, and Expectations of Success Minor Hypothesis 6 predicted there would be a significant relation- ship between student race and gender and their expectations of success scores. A two-way ANOVA (Table 3.34) showed that there were statis~ tically significant racial differences in students' expectations of success [F = (2,230) = 31.34, P = .000]; the observed gender difference was only marginally significant [F (1,227) = 3.09, P = .08]. The two-way interaction was not significant. Minor Hypothesis 6 was rejected because only one part was confirmed: There is a statistically significant relationship be- tween students' race and their expectations of success; but there is not a statistically significant relationship between student gender and expecta- tions of success. White males had the highest expectations of success scores (79.07), followed by White females (76.88); Black males (71.68); and Black females (68.89) (Table 3.35). 143 52. N2. 25 S. 2. 3. .828 25. $92 32. e8. «3: 2. 2. em. ml 09—20 m 335:5 .— m 2295 See an m 236m m «3.8 m 2.53: 888$ 8:35 tease :88 «5 5m: 8.68 ml Ea 85o no 83ers, 888.5 s: .8 as»? eon-ease «are: no 5588 2.... e38. 144 Table 3.34 Summary of Analysis of Variance for Expectations of Success Scores by Student Race and Gender Source SS DF MS F P Main Effects 3516.90 2 1758.45 17.21 .000" Race 3200.82 1 31.34 .000“ Gender 316.08 1 3.09 .080 Race x Gender 4.73 1 .04 .830 Explained 3521.64 3 1173.88 11.49 .000 Residual 23184.05 227 102.13 Total 26705.69 230 116.11 * = Significance Level 145 Table 3.35 Means and Standard Deviations for Expectations of Success Scores by Student Race and Gender Race Male Female Standard Deviations White 79.07 76.88 8.85 77.59 Black 71.68 68.89 11.75 70.02 Total 75.68 73.85 10.42 146 Six Independent Variables and Depression and Anxiety Minor Hypothesis 7 predicted there would be a significant relation- ship between student race, gender, ISSB, total negative LES, success, and I—E scores and their depression and anxiety scores. The predictor variables were student race, gender, ISSB, total negative LES, expecta- tions of success, and I—E scores. The dependent variables were students' Beck Depression and anxiety scores. Intercorrelations for the variables are presented in Table 3.36. To test this hypothesis, stepwise multiple regression analysis was performed. Listwise deletion of mission data was used. For steps one and two, the variables of race (1) and sex (2) were forcibly entered. After forcibly entering the variables of race and sex, the other variables (ISSB, total negative LES, expectations of success, and I—E scores) were entered in the regression model for their predictive efficiency. Table 3.37 presents the F Table and a summary of the multiple regression analysis. Using race and gender in a prediction equation, a multiple R of .79 and an R2 of .627 was obtained for the depression regression model, F (2,67) = 53.08, P = .0000. These two var- iables contributed significantly to the prediction of student depression; they accounted for approximately 62% of the variance in student depres- sion scores. One Step 3, the total negative LES score was entered into the regres- sion equation. Results of the regression analysis indicated that the 74% of the variance explained by student race, gender, and total negative LES score was significant in the regression mode, Multiple R = .86, F (3.66) = 59.00, P = .0000. The l-E, social support, and expectations of 147 Table 3.36 Intercorrelations Between Measures 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 1. Race 1.00 -.08 -.16 .60 -.14 -.22 .48 .47 2. Gender 1.00 -.32 .36 .01 .07 .58 .57 3. ISSB 1.00 .18 .23 .36 -.21 -.27 4. T.Neg.LES 1.00 .19 .10 .75 .71 5. Success 1.00 .27 -.37 -.38 6. I—E 1.00 -.22 -.08 7. Depression 1.00 .93 8. Anxiety 1.00 148 case. v e n e 43.55 55. 3.5. meme. 5:. :5. mm: .82 ~38. $5.5 .55. :.5 «mac. $5. $5. .8280 35.5 55. 3.» 3%. M55. 35. oowm 3355. 15.55 55. 2.5 25¢. was. 53.. ms .32 130.5 .5545 525. 5.5 «:5. 58. So. .8280 55.3 55. 5;. M53. 58. gm. oowm :Bmmoaon 093:0 m 2825 e 8 an 9 58 835m a 38$ m geese, 502 28 53832— no 55080.5 05 you mag SE: 0333: no D2555 ha.” 036,—. 149 success scores did not predict students' depression scores at the .05 level of statistical significance. Taken together, the regression data suggest that student race, gender, and total negative LES scores are good predic- tors of their scores on the Beck Depression Inventory; however, students' generalized locus of control, their social support, and expectations of success scores are not good predictors of their level of depression. The estimated shrinkage for R2 is about .06. The same procedures described in the regression model for depres- sion were also used for predicting student anxiety. The Multiple R of .80, F (2.67) = 57.24, P = .000 (Table 3.37) reflects the contributions of race and gender to student anxiety scores. The predictor set accounted for 64% of the variance in the student anxiety scores. When students' total negative LES scores were entered into the regression equation, a Multiple R of .85, F (3.66) = 56.18, P = .000 resulted. The three vari- ables accounted for 7 3% of the variance in student anxiety scores. Again, students' generalized locus of control, social support, and expectations of success were not good predictors of their levels of anxiety. None of these variables reached statistical significance. The estimated shrink- age for R2 is about .07. Race, Gender, and Student Alienation Minor Hypothesis 8 stated there would be significant differences in student alienation scores by race and gender. To test the combined influence of race and gender on total alienation scores, analysis of vari- ance was performed. Table 3.38 shows that the gender effect was not 150 Table 3.38 Analysis of Variance for Total Alienation Score by Student Race and Gender Source SS DF MS F E Main Effects 1337.00 2 668.50 4.56 .011* Race 1305.87 1 8.90 .003“ Gender 31.12 1 0.21 .645 Race x Gender 503.27 1 3.43 .065 Explained 1840.28 3 613.42 4.18 .007 Residual 32395.27 221 146.58 Total 34235.55 224 152.83 * = Significance Level 151 significant [F (1,224) = .212, P = .64]; however, the race effect was sig- nificant [F (1,224) = 8.90, P = .003]. The Race and Gender interaction was P = .06. Within Blacks, males are more alienated (73.21) than females (68.85), with both gender groups higher than the White groups. Within Whites, the reverse is true. White females (66.39) are more alienated than males (64.45) (see (Table 3.39). Gender was not correlated signifi- cantly with alienation [R (225) = -.07, P = .12]; but race did have a sig- nificant correlation with alienation [R (225) = -.24, P = .001). There are significant racial differences in the total alienation scores of Black and White students, with Black students having more feelings of alienation toward the campus community. Racial differences are more dominant for males. Gender, RaceJ and Personality Attributes Minor Hypothesis 9 stated that there are significant gender and race differences in students' scores on the Personality Attributes Ques- tionnaire. To test the influence of race and gender on students' mascu- linity and femininity as measured by PAQ, a two-way ANOVA was per- formed. The PAQ has three scores: (1) an M or Masculine score; (2) an F or Feminine score; and (3) an M-F score (a high score denotes feminin- ity). A two-way ANOVA for the Masculine variable revealed a signifi— cant race effect [F = 4.55 (1,223), P = .034] and a non-significant gender effect [F = .44 (1,223), P = .508]. The two-way interaction was non-signif- icant (see Table 3.40). Among the four racial and gender groups, White females had the lowest mean Masculinity score (27.74), while Black fe- males had the highest (29.28), followed by Black males (28.97), and White males (28.58) (see Table 3.41). 152 Table 3.39 Means and Standard Deviations for Total Alienation ScoresbyStudentRaceandGender Race and Gender N Mean Standard Deviations White 133 65.75 11.01 Male 44 64.45 11.54 Female 89 66.39 10.75 Black 92 70.65 13.63 Male 38 73.21 13.09 Female 54 68.85 13.83 153 Table 3.40 Summary of Analysis of Variance for Personality Attribute Score by Student Race and Gender Masculine Main Effects Race Gender 2-Way Interactions Race/ Gender Explained Residual Total Masculine-Feminine Main Effects Race Gender 2-Way Interactions Race/Gender Explained Residual Total 75.78 69.10 6.67 16.16 91.93 339.90 3431.83 76.12 0.93 75.18 37.72 113.84 2778.89 2892.74 220 223 220 223 37. 39 15. 15. 38. 37. 12 12. 89 .64 18 38 06 94 .63 97 .49 .55 .44 .06 .01 .01 .07 .95 .98 .00 .085 .034 .508 .303 .112 .051 .786 .015 .085 .031 154 Table 3.40 (cont'd.) Feminine Main Effects 37 Race 1 8 Gender 1 8 . 2-Way Interactions Race/Gender 14 . Explained 5 1 Residual 48 1 3 Total 4865. .44 .55 88 55 .99 .39 38 220 223 18.72 17.33 21.87 21.81 .85 .84 .86 .66 .79 .426 .358 .354 .416 .499 Table 3.41 155 Means and Standard Deviations for Student Personality Attributes by Race and Gender Variable N Race/Gender Mean Standard Deviation Masculine 135 White 28.02 3.53 45 W. Male 28.58 4.07 90 W. Female 27.74 3.22 89 Black 29.16 4.37 35 B. Male 28.97 4.91 54 B. Female 29.28 4.03 Total 224 28.47 3.92 Mas.—Fem. 135 White 26.75 3.37 45 W. Male 25.47 3.38 90 W. Female 27.40 3.19 89 Black 26.89 3.93 35 B. Male 26.77 4.60 54 B. Female 26.96 3.48 Total 224 26.80 3.60 Feminine 135 White 31 . 68 4 . 48 45 W. Male 30.98 5.23 90 W. Female 32.03 4.05 89 Black 32.26 4.48 35 B. Male 32.29 5.27 54 B. Female 32.25 4.75 Total 224 31.91 4.67 156 A two—way ANOVA showed that student race and gender did not have any statistical significant influence on Femininity scores. There was a statistically significant main effect of gender for students' mascu- line-Feminine scores [F (2,223) = 5.95, P = .01). White females have the highest Feminine scores (27.40), followed by Black females (26.96), Black males (26.77), and White males (25.47). There were no statistically sig- nificant race main effect or gender by race interaction for the MF score. Minor Hypothesis 9 was rejected. Race, Gender, and Attitudes Toward Women The Attitudes Toward Women scale was used to assess the influence of race and gender on sex role attitudes (Minor Hypothesis 10). Correla- tion analysis showed no significant correlations between student gender and their AWS scores [R (230) = -.01, P = .46], but a significant, negative relationship between race and AWS scores [R (230) = -.16, P = .008], such that Whites have higher mean AWS scores than Blacks. White stu- dents tend to have significantly more liberal attitudes toward the roles of women than do Black students. A two-way ANOVA (Table 3.42) sup- ported the correlation analysis: there was a significant race effect [F = 5.99 (1,229), P = .01]; a non-significant gender effect [F = .07 (1,229), P .77]; and a non-significant race x gender interaction effect [F = 1.96, P .16]. The descriptive data (Table 3.43) showed that Whites had higher mean AWS scores (40.21) than did Blacks (38.12). Minor Hypothesis 10 was rejected: There are significant race but not significant gender dif- ferences in students' AWS scores. Whites are more liberal in their sex- role attitudes, but gender is not related to this variable. 157 Table 3.42 Summary of Analysis of Variance for Attitude Toward Women Score by Race and Gender Source SS DF MS F P Main Effects 245.95 2 122.97 3.06 .05“ Race 242.76 1 5.99 .01* Gender 3.19 1 .07 .77 Race x Gender 79.60 1 1.96 .16 Explained 325.56 3 108.52 2.67 .04 Residual 9153.76 226 40.50 Total 9479.32 229 41.39 158 Table 3.43 Means and Standard Deviations for Attitude Toward Women Score by Race and Gender Variable N Race/Gender Mean Standard Deviation AWS 137 White 40.21 6.61 45 W. Male 41.09 7.67 92 W. Female 39.78 6.03 93 Black 38.12 5.97 38 B. Male 37.42 6.01 55 B. Female 38.60 5.94 Total 230 39.37 6.43 159 Race, Gender, Sense of Mastery (GESS), Self-Esteem (GESS), and Self-Denigration (G ESS) Hypothesis 11 stated that there would be significant race and gender differences in students' sense of mastery scores. The two-way ANOVA (Table 3.44) showed no significant gender effect [F (1,228) = 2.52, P = .113], race [F (1,228) = 1.55, P = .214], or interaction effects. Apparently, both Black and White, male and female students have similar feelings of mastery of their environment, although there is a tendency of Black males to report a slightly greater sense of mastery. Correlation analysis revealed a significant, but low correlation coefficient for gender [R (229) = —.11, P = .048] and a non-significant correlation coefficient for student race [R (229) = .08, P = .108] and sense of mastery score from the GESS. The mean mastery score (Table 3.45) for White students was slightly higher (23.03) than that for Black students (22.06) but not significantly so [F (1,228) = 2.80, P = .09]. Hypothesis 12 stated that there would be significant race and gender differences in students' self-esteem, and self-denigration scores. To test this hypothesis two, two-way ANOVAS were performed (Table 3.46). The findings showed non-significant race [F = 2.02 (1,223), P = .16], gender [F = .10 (1,223), P = .75], and interaction effect [F = 1.00 (1,223), P = .32] for self-esteem scores. Table 3.47 provides a summary of sample means and standard deviations for race, gender, and self-esteem scores. Self-esteem within White and Black, male and female groups is roughly equivalent, although the mean self-esteem score for Black males was the lowest of all four groups. Correlation coefficients for race [R (224) = .09, P = .07] and self-esteem and gender and self-esteem [R (224) = .02, P = .33] did not reach statistical significance. Summary of Analysis of Variance for Mastery Scores 160 Table 3.44 by Student Race and Gender Source SS DF MS F P Main Effects 69.712 2 34.856 2.04 .132 Race 26.562 1 1.55 .214 Gender 43.149 1 2.52 .113 Race x Gender 26.367 1 1.54 .215 Explained 96.079 3 32.02 1.87 .135 Residual 3845.33 225 17.09 Total 3941.415 228 17.28 161 Table 3.45 Means and Standard Deviations for Students' Mastery Scoresby RaceandGender Variable N Race/Gender Mean Standard Deviation Mastery 1 37 White 22 . 13 4 . 16 45 W. Male 22.33 4.42 92 W. Female 22.03 4.05 92 Black 22.83 4.13 37 B. Male 23.86 4.46 55 B. Female 22.13 3.71 Total 229 22.41 4.15 162 Table 3.46 Summary of Analysis of Variance for Self-Esteem and Self-Denigration Scores by Student Race and Gender Source SS DF MS F P Self—Esteem: Main Effects 12.997 2 6.499 1.063 .347 Race 12.361 1 12.361 2.021 .157 Gender .636 1 .104 .747 Race/Gender 6.127 1 1.002 .318 Explained 19.124 3 6.375 1.042 .375 Residual 1345.372 220 6.115 Total 1364.496 223 6.119 Self -Denigration : Main Effects 90.868 2 45.434 7.483 .001“ Race 33.086 1 33.086 5.449 .020“ Gender 57.78 1 9.510 .002 Race/Gender 131.555 1 21.666 .000* Explained 222.423 3 74.141 12.210 .000 Residual 1335.822 220 6.072 Total 1558.246 223 6.988 163 Table 3.47 Means and Standard Deviations for Student Self-Esteem and Self-Denigration Scores by Race and Gender Variable N Race/ Gender Mean Standard Deviation Self-Esteem 133 White 14.51 2.45 44 W. Male 14.64 2.17 89 W. Female 14.45 2.59 91 Black 14.03 2.48 37 B. Male 13.73 2.62 54 B. Female 14.24 2.38 Total 224 14.31 2.47 Self- Denigration 133 White 17 . 62 2 . 08 44 W. Male 17.41 1.94 89 W. Female 17.73 2.15 91 Black 18.41 3.25 37 B. Male 20.14 3.64 54 B. Female 17.22 2.32 Total 224 17.94 2.64 164 A two-way AN OVA was also used to assess the relationship between race and gender and self-denigration scores. The findings showed sig- nificant race [F = 5.45 (1,223), P = .02; gender [F = 9.51 (1,223), P = .002]; and interaction [F = 21.66 (1,223), P = .000] effects. Correlation analysis also indicated a low, but significant, negative relationship [R (224) = -.20, P = .001] between gender and self-denigration scores, with males having higher scores; and between race and self-denigration [R (224) = -.14, P = .01], with Black students having higher scores. Table 3.47 shows that Black males had the highest, mean self-denigration score (20.14), followed by White females (17.73), White males (17.41), and Black females (17.22). Differences in the mean self-denigration scores of Black and White males (2.73), and Black males and Black Females (2.92) appear to have contributed primarily to the significant interaction. The differ- ence in the mean scores of White males and females was small (.32), as was that between the mean scores for Black and White females (-.41); while that for Black males and females was much larger (2.92). It should be noted that among Blacks, males have higher self-deni- gration scores. Black males also tend to denigrate themselves more so than Whites. Among Whites, females tend to denigrate themselves more so than males. Importance of Religion in Coping, Level of Social Support, Alienation, and Expectations of Success Minor Hypothesis 13 stated that there is a significant relationship between students' views on the importance of religion in helping them cope and their level of social support, sense of alienation, and their 165 expectations of success. Students were asked (see Information Inventory): How important is religion in helping you to cope with life's problems? Of the Black students, 41% (Table 3.48) said that religion was extremely important in their lives; 30.5% very important; 21.1% somewhat important; and 7.4% not at all important. In contrast, among White students, 15.3% indicated religion was extremely important; 26.3% very important; 38.7% somewhat important; and 19.7% not at all important. A Chi Square sta- tistic revealed significant differences in their responses according to their race [X2 = 26.08, 3 DP, P = .000], and gender [X2 = 7.86, 3 DE, P = .05]. The data suggests that more Black than White students consider religion important in helping them to cope with stress. A four-way ANOVA (Table 3.49) of views on the importance of religion for social support (ISSB) scores showed that the differences in the means were statistically significant [F (3,204) = 3.09, P = .02]. One's level of social support is related significantly to one's views on the impor- tance of religion in helping one cope with stress. In general, those students who said religion was extremely important (103.8) or very important (92.97) in helping them to cope with life stress had higher social support scores than those who said religion was somewhat important (89.06); however, the mean ISSB score of students who said religion was not impor- tant at all was 99.44 (Table 3.50). The next set of statistical procedures examined the influences of the importance of religion in helping one cope with alienation. The mean alienation score for those who said religion was extremely important 166 Table 3.48 How Important is Religion in Your Life? Male Female White Black Extremely Important 29 31 21 39 Very Important 19 46 36 29 Somewhat Important 21 52 53 20 Not Important At All 15 19 27 7 TOTAL N 84 148 137 95 Chi-Square D.F. P Sex 7.85990 3 0.0490* Race 26.08791 3 0.00001* P = *Significant '5 by Their Views 167 Table 3.49 rag—mm Summary of Analysis of Variance for Student Social Support, -‘ h—.--. h- 2 l o .01 9 5 7 F 0 9 3 3 L 3 5 8 3 5 7 S 0. 4 5. 2 oo. 2 1 a 3.83 5.296 m . a 52min. . 28:83. . $832 3.. 8.59320 52.2mm 35mm .92 92m :22?qume 30;“ 3%.:sz omcz< commmqmzmzfl fihfiwocmflm £21495 gEza 5:83:35 8393832393352 53:883. 8 a .rwocfiaaflaawsgisswag. . 5.5823 3. was... a. 38.6 as... a. «288:8 .38 3 so oorogfi 238. 032. 5.3.. 5035328; 333;? aggficm ESEguéaa 838 33.8 q . . 253933 8 iii. 3 6 8.5.5.28: In: 5. >3 >333?“ 5.81—win. 03.9 114.24 26177.72 \,- ‘K -— 222 Total 167 Table 3.49 Summary of Analysis of Variance for Student Social Support, Alienation, and Success Scores by Their Views on the Importance of Religion in Coping Source of DB SS MS F P Social Support Between 3 7164.17 2388.05 3.09 .02 Within 201 126290.01 1913.48 Total 204 135826.80 Alienation Between 3 892.59 297.53 1.95 .12 Within 213 3249.79 152.25 Total 216 33322.38 Success Between 3 1157.61 385.87 3.37 .01 Within 219 25020.10 114.24 Total 222 26177.72 168 Table 3.50 Means and Standard Deviations of Student Social Support, Alienation, and Sucm Scores by Their Views on the Importance of Religion in Coping Variable N Importance of Mean Standard Deviations Religion Social Support 45 Group 1 103.80 27.46 45 Group 92.97 30.25 79 Group 89.06 28.11 36 Group 99.44 23.73 Total 205 94.97 28.16 Alienation 46 Group 64 . 23 1 1 . 43 44 Group 69.88 14.41 89 Group 68.93 11.97 38 Group 67.44 11.62 Total 217 67.87 12.42 Success 50 Group 73 . 1 0 7 . 65 45 Group 70.77 2.44 90 Group 76.21 9.43 38 Group 76.63 8.00 Total 233 74.48 10.85 169 was 64.23; very important (69.88); somewhat important (68.93); and not at all important (67.44). The differences were not significant [F (3,216) = 1.95, P = .12] (see Tables 3.49 and 3.50). That part of Minor Hypothesis 13 which stated that students' views on the importance of religion would have a significant influence on students' alienation scores was rejected. Students' expectations of success scores were also analyzed according to their views of religion. In general, students who said religion was either not at all important in helping them to cope with life stress (76.63) or was somewhat important (76.21) had higher success scores than those who indicated religion was extremely important (73.10) or very important (70.77). Analysis of variance showed that the differences observed were significant [F = 3.37 (3,222), P = .01]. That part of Minor Hypothesis 13 which said there would be significant differences in students' views on the importance of religion in helping them cope with stress and their expectations of success scores was supported by the statistical findings. To summarize, the findings for Minor Hypothesis 13, students' views on the importance of religion in helping them to cope with life stress do have a statistically significant relationship on their social support and expectations of success scores, but a non-significant relationship with respect to their alienation scores. Eleven Predictor Variables, Depression and Anxiety Minor Hypothesis 14 stated that depression and anxiety would be predicted by student race, gender, and their ISSB, F, M, MF, AWS, self- esteem, I-E, success, and total negative LES score. Intercorrelations for the variables are presented in Table 3.51. Listwise deletion of missing 170 8; bone... .2 8. 2: 2.23633 .2 :.. S. 8; mm: 25532 :38. .2 Ma.- S.- 2. 84 3.88% .3 8.- 2. 2. 2. 8; smog-tom .m 8. 2..- S... 8.- S. 84 5:83 Base. 8955... .m 2r 2.- S. E. 2..- 2. 84 mag. 2. 2. S. S. 2. 3. 8f 34 6555722892 .3 8. S. 2. 3. S. 3. Sr 8. 84 2:892 .m 3. 2. S. 2. 8. Sr .3.- S. S. 2: 235$ .4 S. gr 2. 2. 3. 8. mm. 2. 2..- 2.- 2: 2085308 .m 3. mm. on. S. 2. S.- S. 2. 3. 2. Sr 84 .2850 .N 2.. 3. 3. if 2. 2.- gr 2. 3. 8. Sr 2..- .: 83m 4 2 «a 2 3 a a s a n 4 a a s 8_€E> 833:; .3on .3 new $553: no 263203“:— Hmd 035,—. 171 data was used. The procedure used for regression analysis was as follows: For steps one and two, the variables race and gender were forcibly entered. The other predictor variables (I-E, ISSB, total negative LES, success, MF, F, M, AWS, and self-esteem) were entered into the regression model for their predictive efficiency. Table 3.52 presents a summary of the multiple regression analysis for students' total Beck depression score by the set of predictor variables. Results of the regression analysis (R = .79) indicated that 63% of the variance explained by the combination of student race and gender was significant [F = 53.08 (2.63), P = .000]. On Step 3, the total negative LES score was entered into the regression equation. Results of the regression analysis showed that 74% of the variance explained by student race, gender, and total negative LES scores was significant [F = 59.00 (3,62), P = .000]. Indications are that the higher levels of total negative LES scores are associated with higher depression scores. The I—E, ISSB, success, MF, F, M, AWS, and self—esteem scores did not predict students' depression scores at the .05 level of statistical significance. In summary, it appears that the linear combination of student race, gender, and total negative LES scores predicted student scores on the Beck Depression Inventory; however, students' generalized locus of control, their social support, and expectations of success scores were not good predictors of their level of depression. The estimated shrinkage for R2 is about .13. Similar procedures were taken with respect to students' anxiety scores. That is, race and gender were forcibly entered on the first and second step; then the rest of the predictor variables were entered into 172 Table 3.52 Summary of Multiple RWon Analysis for Predictor Variables and Depression and Anxiety Variables R Square R Square Beta T Sig.of Overall Change T F Depression Race .627 .615 .5508 7.04 .0000 53.08* Gender .627 .615 .6773 8.66 .0000 53.08“ Total Neg.LES .740 .728 .4886 5.19 .0000 59.00": Anxiety Race .645 .633 .5465 7.16 .0000 57.24* Gender .645 .633 .6953 9.11 .0000 57.24“ Total Neg.LES .731 .718 .4263 4.45 .0000 56.18* AWS .761 .745 .1798 2.76 .0075 48.56“ 173 the equation. The Multiple R of .80 [F = 57.24 (2,63), P = .0000] reflects the contributions of the race and gender variables. The 64% of the vari- ance that the variables contributed was significant to the prediction of student anxiety. On step 3, the total negative LES score was entered into the regression equation. Results of the regression analysis indicated that 73% of the variance explained by student race, gender, and total negative LES score was statistically significant [F = 56.18 (3.62), P = .0001]. On the fourth step, the variable, attitudes toward the role of women, was entered into the regression equation. Results of the regression analysis indicated that 7696 of the variance in students' anxiety scores could be predicted by the variables of student race, gender, total negative LES scores, and AWS score [F = 48.56 (4.61), P = .000]. The estimated shrinkage for R2 is about .13. The beta weights showed that student AWS scores positively related to their anxiety scores; that is, the higher or more liberal one's sex role attitudes, the higher anxiety score one tends to have. The linear combination of student race, gender, total negative LES and AWS scores predicted student levels of anxiety; however, their generalized locus of control, social support, expectations of success, self-esteem, and personality attributes of Masculinity, Femininity, and MF were not good predictors of their level of anxiety. It should be noted these findings are essentially the same as the previous one. Summary of Findings for Minor Hypotheses There were mixed results regarding the confirmation of the minor hypotheses. This section summarizes the major findings for these hypoth— eses. 174 The internal-external locus of control scores for males and females was not significantly different. However, an interaction was found when I—E scores were analyzed for the influence of race and gender. The interaction seemed to be related to the low average I-E score of Black males and the high average I-B score of White males. Female students reported receiving significantly more social support than did male students. Students' generalized locus of control (internal or external) did have a significant influence on their levels of depression and anxiety. Students who manifested an external locus of control had significantly higher depression and anxiety scores than did those who evidenced on internal locus of control. One's racial membership apart from gender did not have a statis- tically significant influence on the level of social support one re- ceived. There was, however, a significant race and gender interac- tion. Black males received low levels of social support while Black females received high levels of social support. This latter finding might be better understood when one considers that Black women also had the highest number of negative, stressful life events of the four racial and gender combinations. Both students' gender and their locus of control (I-E) scores were significant predictors of their social support scores. However, the two predictors accounted for only 11% of the variance associated with social support. 175 There were no significant gender differences in students' expecta- tions of success scores. Males and females have roughly the same expectations of success from their environment. Significant racial differences were found, however, in students' expectations of success scores. White students evidenced greater expectations of success than did Black students. Student race, gender, and total negative LES scores were good predictors of their level of depression. These variables accounted for 74% of the variance in depression scores. In contrast, students' generalized locus of control, social support, and expectations of success scores were not good predictors of their level of depression. Similar findings were noted for these predictors and student anxiety scores, with one exception. Approximately 76% of the variance in students’ anxiety scores could be predicted by the variables of student race, gender, total negative LES score and AWS score. Male and female college students did not evidence significantly different alienation scores. In contrast, Black students had signifi- cantly higher alienation scores than did White students. Within Blacks, males were more alienated than females. Within Whites, the reverse was true. Males and females had about the same level of Femininity, as meas- ured by the F scale of the PAQ. Black students showed a signifi— cantly higher level of Masculinity, as measured by the M scale. On the M-F scale, there was a gender main effect: Female students, particularly Whites, had a significantly higher level of femininity. 10. 11. 12. 13. 176 There were no significant differences in male and female students' attitudes toward the appropriate roles for women. Both groups had similar views on the roles and rights of women. White students evidenced significantly more liberal attitudes toward the roles of women than did Black students. Members of the four racial and gender groups shared similar feelings regarding their sense of mastery of their environment. No one group showed a greater sense of mastery of their world than the other. Self-esteem within White and Black, male and female groups is roughly equivalent, although the mean self-esteem score for Black males was the lowest of all four groups. The findings regarding the relationship between race and gender and self-denigration scores showed significant race and gender interaction effects. Black males had the highest mean self-denigra- tion scores, followed by White males, White females, and Black females. Differences in the mean self-denigration scores of Black and White males, and Black males and females appear to have contributed primarily to the significant interaction. Students' level of social support is related significantly to their views on the importance of religion in their lives. Those students who indicated that religion was either extremely important or very important had higher social support scores than those who said it was somewhat important; however, the mean social support score of students who said religion was not important at all did not fall into the same pattern. Students' views on the importance 14. 177 of religion had little or no influence on their alienation scores. In general, students who said religion was either not at all important in helping them to cope with life stress or was only somewhat impor- tant had higher expectations of success scores than those who said religion was extremely important or very important. The linear combination of student race, gender, and total negative LES scores predicted student scores in the Beck Depression Inventory and the Stai anxiety quite well. The variables contributed approxi- mately 74% of the variance in depressoin scores and 73% in anxiety scores. About 76% of the variance in students' anxiety scores could be predicted by four variables: student race, gender, total Negative LES score, and AWS score. DISCU$ION Overview During the past few decades, non-experimental research on the relationship between life stress and mental health has been based pri- marily on the study of life events. The basic premise has been that the normal life events, such as divorce, loss of a loved one, or a promotion, cause the individual to adjust to life's circumstances, regardless if such life circumstances are for good or for bad. It is the adjustment ratio rather than the positive or negative nature of an event that causes stress. Basically, there are two different life events literature, one ground- ed in epidemiology and the other in clinical practice. Epidemiologic surveys tend to focus on large-scale survey research or on case-control studies of ill populations and well controls. Research grounded in clinical practice is usually based on small samples of people who have been victimized by one particular type of life crisis, such as rape, job loss, or widowhood. Traditionally, clinical studies cast a wide-net approach in assessing mental health outcomes as a result of stress. The present study more resembled that of epidemiologic rather than clinical research. The focus was primarily on survey research within a non-patient or normal population. The study sought to extend previous research and theoretical conceptualizations on the relationship of minority status to life stress. Minority status, as used in this study, essentially referred to the lack of membership in the prevailing group—regardless if that prevailing group 178 179 is marked by race or gender status characteristics. In contrast, majority status is defined as membership in the prevailing social group. There are several reasons for viewing minority status as a stressor. Factors associated with minority status—low income, exclusion from mem- bership in the dominant group, racial and gender discrimination—may fos- ter alienation and social isolation, thereby creating within individuals a heightened sense of stress. Moreover, variables which contribute to the stress of racial minorities and women are their high visibility, over-obser- vation, and lack of anonymity. Polarization, or the heightening of the racial minority's or woman's attributes, in contrast to members of the majority or dominant culture is another factor that leads to feelings of stress. Role entrapment and status leveling are additional variables that may predispose members of racial minorities and women to stress. It is the out—group status itself and what it involves that generates a large source of stress for racial minorities and women. Moreover, being a member of a numerical minority has a great deal to do with the stress one encounters, regardless of one's race. This situation occurs because the kind of interaction possible between socially and culturally different members of a group is based, in part, on the proportion each kind constitutes. The numerically dominant type may be described as the "dominants" and the others as the "tokens". The term token is used because people who are few in number are frequently treated as symbols and as represen- tatives of their category rather than as real people. As Kanter has ob- observed, tokens are people identified by ascribed characteristics and 180 master statuses, (such as sex, race, religion, ethnic group, age) or other characteristics that carry with them a set of assumptions about culture, status, and behavior highly salient for majority category members (1977, 1986). Certain interaction patterns between dominants and tokens are inevitable, given their proportions. There is, then, nothing inherent in being a Black or a woman which causes stress. Race and gender are stressful primarily because of the factors associated with them rather than because of any inherent biological characteristic. The major purpose of the study was to examine the influence of race—as a specific type of minority status—on the life stress process. The underlying assumption was that one's racial background affects the number of stressful life events to which one is exposed. It was suggested that Black Americans, because of their out-group status, would experience more stressful life events than White Americans. The second objective was to examine the impact of external and internal mediating factors on life stress. Essentially, this part of the study is based on the "buffering hypothesis" of internal and external resources. The external mediating factor measured in this study is social support. The internal mediating factor assessed is cognitive functioning, as evidenced by one's feelings of expectations of success and generalized locus of control. The third objective was to examine the influence of gender differ— ences in sex role attitudes and personality attributes on life events, social support, and cognitive functioning. Gender status was viewed as having some of the same characteristics as minority status. 181 A major limitation of this study deals with the sampling procedures used. The sample was chosen from Black and White students at Michigan State University. To obtain a sufficient number of Black students, the sources from which students were obtained varied and included the following: Human Resource Pool for Psychology, undergraduate psychology classes, freshman math classes for minority students who were engineering majors. Although a concerted effort was made to obtain a sample which reflected the diverseness of Michigan State University, there is no claim that this was accomplished: the results may not generalize to the broader target Michigan State University population, much less to college students or to the United States population generally. The sample of Black students used in this study are those who knew of the study and who showed a willingness to participate in it. Another limitation of this study is the correlational nature of most of life events research. It is difficult, for example, to propose and support definitively or experimentally a direct cause and effect relationship between life events and psychological symptomatology. At best, one can examine a number of factors which purportedly increase the likelihood of psychological symptomatology. Moreover, as Kessler, Price 6: Wortman (1985) have noted: "... operational procedures must be developed to obtain data that are suffi- ciently rich to study the contextual features of life events...In particular, an effort must be made to take context into account rather than treating events in an aggregate fashion. Such an approach could be extremely useful in clarifying the process through which life events may lead to emotional disorder" (p. 536). 182 _ At present, there is little objective basis for measuring the meaning of life events, nor is there a sound enough basis for predicting the condi- tions under which a particular reaction to an event is likely to occur. Research is needed, for example, that distinguishes between the occur- rence of an event and the continued existence of an ongoing stressful situation. Likewise, studies are needed to determine the conditions under which a person will recover fairly quickly from the occurrence of negative life events, while others will show long-term distress. Increasingly, researchers are conducting studies that have a more careful analysis of the specific kinds of events that are associated with particular kinds of disorders. Although some improvements have resulted from discriminating events in terms of their desirability, controllability, predictability, seriousness, and time-clustering (Thoits, 1983), the relation- ship between life changes and emotional disorder is still modest. Depue 6: Monroe (1984) have suggested that the small correlation may be attrib- uted to the fact that a substantial percentage of the distress examined in screening scales of nonspecific psychological is chronic and not a result of acute life stress. A critical issue is, then, the measurement of a life event. The type of measurement devices currently available might account for the weak association between life event and psychological disorder. Kessler, Price, 6: Wortman (1985) have suggested that a two—pronged approach is needed to develop a more complete perspective about the features of life events. Such a two-pronged approach would involve the develop- ment of theoretical work which provides a more complete framework 183 about the features of life events that are stress-provoking and the pro- cess through which events may exert negative influences. Second, a means to study the contextual features of life events would also be in- cluded. According to Thoits (1983), features of life events which tend to be the most related to psychopathology are the uncontrollability, undesirability, magnitude, and time clustering of life events. One limitation of the present study is that it controlled only for the desirability and magnitude of life events. It did not control for time clustering and controllability of events. Uncontrollability of life events has been found to be related to the onset of depression (Thoits, 1983), one of the major dependent variables in this study. Focusing on college students, in many instances, a special and privileged population, is another limitation of the study. Future studies on life stress might find more representative samples of the American population. Race, Gender, Life Stress, and Psychological SymptomatM BES- Most of the major hypotheses were confirmed. Race is related to life stress. Minority students reported encountering signifi- cantly more negative life change events than do majority students. In contrast, majority students reported experiencing a significantly higher number of positive life events than do Black students. This finding sug- gests that while both Black and White students may find themselves adjusting to life events, the life adjustments that Black students make are decidedly more negative in nature than those experienced by White students. 184 There are, however, two major qualifications to this statement: One was that the relationship between race and the positive, non-student concern score was not statistically significant, and second, there was race x gender interaction for the positive LES scores. Apparently, Black and White students experience a similar number of positive life events that are non-college related. Differences observed in the number of negative, stressful life events might also be attributed to income and educational differences of the Black and White groups, although these factors were not controlled for in the study. As noted earlier, the Chi Square statistic showed significant differences in parental education, employment, and income of Black and White students, with the latter group clearly in the more advantaged position in each case. For instance, 25% of the Black fathers were in the lower and of the income scale ($8- -15,000) compared to 6% of the Whites. In contrast, 29% of White fathers were in the highest income bracket (over $57,000) compared to 6.5% of the Blacks. In terms of occupation 19.3% of Black fathers and 30.7% of White fathers had occupations listed as professional. The same pattern held with respect to education: 56.2% of all White fathers held a B.A. to a postgraduate degree, while only 25.7 % of the Black fathers did. Lower socioeconomic status has been related to a high number of negative, stressful life events. Black students' high representation in the lower class may be one reason for their reporting a greater number of negative, stressful life events than did Whites. Kessler (1979b) found, for example, that the greater distress found among non-Whites (defined 185 as either Black or Puerto Rican) was primarily a function of their differential exposure to stress. Kessler viewed social class as a primary contributing factor to Blacks and Whites' differential exposure to stress. Kessler (1979b, p. 266) stated: "The average difference in self-reported distress between Whites and non-Whites is much more a function of the many stressful experiences to which non-Whites are exposed than of any impact differential between Whites and non—Whites." He further noted that Blacks and Puerto Ricans were especially strong in being able to reduce the impact of stressful life events. One implication is that minority students, especially those on predominantly White campuses, may be at more psychological risk than are majority students, especially when one takes into account negative life events that are college and non-college related. If this is true, minority students may need a great deal of social support and campus-related activities to help attenuate the stress generated from negative life events. Michigan State has already established a number of support groups for minority students, including a special counseling service for students, Black Greek fraternities and sororities, and minority peer counselors in the dorms-to name just a few. A second important qualification to the suggestion that life adjustments of Black students are more negative than those of White students is that there was a significant interaction between race and gender for all three positive scores (total, non-student, student). For males, gender may not be the more important factor. For females, gender 186 producesa kind of status-leveling effect, regardless if one is Black of White. Among males, therefore, race may be the more important master status; among females, gender may be the more important master charac- teristic. The finding regarding the hypothesis on life stress and race make several contributions to the literature. It provides data to help support what many researchers have been saying all along: Minority status (con- ceptualized in this instance in terms of race and gender) is stressful. The data suggest support of the differential exposure theory of life stress for minority and majority Americans. Scholars have debated the relationship between race and psycho- pathology. As noted, two positions have dominated the research: (1) The effects of racial discrimination are such that they place Blacks at a higher risk of psychopathology; and (2) race alone cannot account for the prevalence of psychopathology. Kramer, Rosen, 6c Willis (1973) have maintained that racism, as exemplified in society, is perhaps the most important factor in producing mental disorders in Blacks and other underprivileged groups. Cannon & Locke (1977) likewise concluded that factors associated with the designated out-group status of Blacks made them more vulnerable to risk of mental disorder. The results of the present investigation lend support to theory that racial minorities' differential exposure to negative life events might predispose them to greater degrees of psychological symptomatology. The negative events findings indicate, for example, that minority students reported experiencing a significantly higher number of negative life events than did their White counterparts. Black students also reported 187 experiencing a significantly higher rate of depression and anxiety than did their White counterparts. While the finding does not indicate a direct cause and effect relationship between life events and depression and anxiety, it does support other correlational studies which have shown a relationship between negative life events and higher elevations of depression and anxiety scores. There is a need for caution in interpreting the findings regarding race, stress, and psychological symptoms. According to Kessler, Price, 6c Wortman (1985), minority status and life experiences may not in themselves be instrumental in creating mental health problems. From these investigators' perspective, minority status, "although related to experiences of prejudice and discrimination, is also related to structural resources that can help protect against the adverse mental health effect of these stresses" (Kessler, Price, 6: Wortman, 1985, p. 563). Kessler, Price, 6: Wortman noted a tradition that emphasizes the stress-buffering effect of group solidarity among members of deprived groups. Such stress-resistant forces tend to stem from two sources: (1) "the group provides cognitions that identify responsibility for their deprivation with structural conditions, thus removing any self-blame for their lack of financial achievement...(2) The group provides emotional support that can buffer the effects of life stress in a variety of ways" (p. 563). More studies need to be conducted which investigate the theoretical counterbalancing effect of group solidarity on the mental health of Black Americans. Likewise, researchers need to assess more explicitly the 188 stresses of minority status. How does one measure objectively the influ- ence of racial prejudice and out—group status? How does one objectively operationalize the stress of lack of anonymity, high visibility, and over- observation? Increasingly, diverse strands of research are beginning to converge on a common conception of the stress process. At the center of this process is the belief that exposure to stress sets off a process of adapta- tion. Essentially, the stress process unfolds over a period of time. The stress process is modified by structural factors (racial and gender status) as well as personal dispositions and vulnerabilities. Gender and Stress. Much of the extant research has tended to show "a significant interaction between sex and undesirable events in predicting distress, with women appearing more vulnerable than men to the effects of stressful events" (Kessler, Price, 6: Wortman, 1985). The present study supported, in part, Kessler's, et al., finding. The predic- tion that there would be gender differences in the number of negative life events students report experiencing was supported. The present finding suggests that female students do encounter a significantly higher number of negative life events (both college-related and non-college- related) than do male students. Conversely, male students encountered a statistically significant higher number of total positive life events than did female students. The life change adjustments that female stu- dents were required to make were, therefore, more negative than positive, whereas the opposite held true for males. However, there was interaction in the non-student related positive LES score, with White females highest and White males lowest. 189 The finding regarding gender and life events lends support to that body of research literature which suggests that gender is a status charac- teristic (Lockheed 6: Hall, 1976). Additional research is needed, however, to pinpoint accurately factors which contribute to female students' report- ing of higher negative life events in comparison to male students and generally lower positive life events. As predicted, there was a significant relationship between student race and gender and their depression and anxiety scores. Blacks report more depression than Whites, and females more than males. In both racial groups, the average depression and anxiety score was higher for females than for males. Thus, Black females had the highest mean depression and anxiety scores, followed by White females, Black males, and White males in the psychological symptomatology students reported. The findings of this study support those of Bell, LeRoy 6c Stephenson (1982). Using data gathered from part of a major epidemiologic study in the southeastern part of the United States, these investigators found that Black females experienced the largest mean number of stressful life events, the largest mean depression scores among the four racial and gender groups, and the largest social support scores (followed by Black males, White males, and White females). The findings regarding Black females' high number of negative life events and the high rates of depression and anxiety support the double jeopardy theory of Black women's experience. That is, Black women suffer from the twin effects of racial and gender discrimination. As theorists (Smith, 1981) have proposed, the double jeopardy status of Black women leads to their increased psychological risk, depression and anxiety. 190 The results on gender and life stress also support the extant re- search studies which have tended to show that females have higher rates of depression and anxiety than males. For example, Gove (1972) has maintained that in comparison to married men, married women's poor mental health is indicative of the life stress of a disadvantaged social position—one that is held in low societal esteem (housewife or homemaking) and one which is stressful when combined with work outside the home. Likewise, Aneshensel, Frerichs, 6: Clark (1981) have also argued that sex differences in distress are related to gender-specific expectations that are inherent in particular social roles. One implication of the gender and race finding is that Black women on predominantly White campuses are at risk, psychologically speaking. Gibbs (1973), for one, has supported this notion. In her work with Black students on predominantly White campuses, Gibbs has noted that Black women seem especially prone to low levels of self-esteem and depression. Both preventive education and support groups might be helpful ways of reducing the depression and anxiety levels among Black women. Much the same can be said for White women students, although the findings indicate that‘ their situation appears less critical. Another implication is that increasingly researchers must begin to look at gender differences within racial groups. In the past, the majority of the research on life stress and Black Americans has tended to treat Blacks as a monolithic group, ignoring important gender differences. Theories of life stress should be based, at least in part, on some of the major status characteris- tics that dominate one's life—race and gender. 191 The findings also indicated that as one's total number of negative, stressful life events increases, so does one's level of depression and anx- iety. This result supports Sandler 6c Lakey's (1982) research findings, which have indicated that the total number of negative life events are associated positively with increases in students' depression and anxiety scores. In general, the findings of this study have supported the theory that women are more vulnerable to the effects of stressful life events than are men. Future studies might focus on coping styles and personality factors that predispose women to have greater vulnerability to stressful life events. For example, Belle (1982) has suggested that network events appear to account for a very substantial part of the overall sex—distress relationship. Likewise, Kessler, McLeod, 6: Wethington (1984) have found that only a small component of events—consisting primarily of network crises that have the capacity to provoke distress primarily through em- pathic concern—are involved in the gender difference in vulnerability. Social Support As noted earlier, the majority of people who are exposed to stressful life experiences do not develop psychological disorders. Haan (1982) has noted, for example, that sometimes stressful life events can promote an individual's coping capacity. A major emphasis of current research on life events has focused on what researchers label as vulnerability or resistance factors to stress. Social support, which may be defined as interpersonal relationships which presumably protect people from 192 the negative effects of life stress, is viewed as a major resistance factor. In a comprehensive review of studies on social support, Kessler 6c McLeod (1984) found that emotional support and perceiving that one has access to broad-based support that could be mobilized if needed, reduced the impact of life stress on mental distress. Conversely, lack of social support may play an important role in the development and course of psychopath- ology. The current study hypothesized that social support would be related significantly to students' depression and anxiety scores. This hypothesis was not supported completely. Although social support was related signifi- cantly to students' anxiety scores, it was related non-significantly to their depression scores. Those students with high social support tended to have lower anxiety scores than those with low social support. Although students with high social support were inclined to have low depression scores (P < .06), this relationship was not statistically significant (by the usual criterion for significance). The results do support partially, the "buffering effect" theory of social support and life stress. One implication of the findings regarding the "buffering effect" of social support is that researchers may want to qualify the type of psychological symptomatology that social support may buffer. Anxiety may be easier for social support to mediate than depression. Thus far, most of the studies on social support have focused on the effects of various kinds of support. Little emphasis has been placed on the characteristics of the recipient, provider, and the setting that may determine whether effective support is provided. In addition, more emphasis should be placed on the consequences of providing support. 193 The negative effects of support provision may be substantial. Belle (1982) has found that those close to the recipient may become drained from the long-term provision of social support to an individual. Women may be at more risk in such situations because they are more likely to function as caregivers and to become emotionally involved in the problems of others. One limitation of this study was that it focused on analyzing social support from an aggregate perspective. Future research efforts might investigate if the providers of social support for members of the four racial groups studies differ, and if so, why. What cultural factors affect the provision of social support? Do Black men receive less social support than women because of cultural factors within the Black family or com- munity? What factors influence the provision of social support among Whites? Locus of Control This study hypothesized that there would be significant racial and gender differences in students' locus of control and that further, students' generalized expectancy regarding control would influence significantly the level of social support they received. The hypothesis regarding race and I-E scores was confirmed: White students are more internally-oriented than are Black students. This is consistent with a large body of research which has found that Black students tend to have a more external view of their locus of control (Gurin 6c Epps, 1975; Rey- nolds, 1976). 194 In general, females have been found to have a situation specific, external locus of control orientation. This study focused, however, on measuring a generalized rather than a situation specific locus of control. A situation specific locus of control has been associated with feelings of helplessness, with an avoidance of task—oriented behaviors, with fear of success, and with a preference for situations, whereby luck rather than one's degree of skill, affects the outcome (Deaux, 1976; Deaux, White 6: Farris, 197 5; Throop 6c MacDonald, 1971). The prediction of gender differences in students' generalized orien- tation toward control of events in their lives was not supported. The distributions of internal-external locus of control scores for males and females were just about equal. Neither group was more internally- or externally-oriented than the other. Most studies on situation-specific locus of control have found that women tend to be more externally than internally—oriented in comparison to men. One possible implication of the lack of significant gender differences in female students' locus of control orientation is that we may be witnessing the beginnings of a change in that variable for women. Another possible explanation is that there may be a measurement difference, that is, differenct aspects of locus of control are being measured. The results did indicate that students' generalized locus of control may have a significant mediating influence on the level of psycholog- ical symptomatology they report. Students who manifested an external locus of control had significantly higher depression and anxiety scores than did those who evidenced an internal locus of control. There was 195 no significant interaction of race and gender. This finding is consistent with much of the research on life stress. Lefcourt (1976) has posited, for example, that people who have an external locus of control have a greater proneness to psychopathology than those who have an internal locus of control expectancy. Moreover, an internal locus of control expectancy has been highly associated with competence, coping ability, and relative invulnerability to debilitating effects of stressful life events (Campbell, Converse, and Rodgers, 1976). According to Lazarus (1966), stress is dependent on cognitive processes related to individuals' perceptions of events and their meaning to individuals. Individuals' perceptions of events may lead some to view an event as stressful, while others may not view it as such. Likewise, Johnson 6: Sarason (1978) found that internally-controlled students saw themselves as having more control over negative events. The perception of control led to a lower stress level. Moreover, Huisani, Newbrough, Neff, 6: Moore (1982) found support for both the independent and buffer- ing effects of internal and external resources upon life-event symptom relationship. Life events and personal competence (defined as a person's sense of control over the environment) had consistent independent effects upon depressive symptomatology. In this study, both gender and locus of control scores were significant predictors of their social support scores. The two predictors, however, accounted for only 11% of the variance associated with social support. Being female and having an internal locus of control was associated with greater social support. It should be noted though that there was a significant race x gender interaction, with White females 196 and males essentially equal, while Black females had the highest and Black males the lowest social support scores. Race, Gender, and Expectations of Success Expectations for success have been found to influence behavior in a variety of achievement situations (Feather, 1966). Differential expectations for success in males and females have been well documented. Overall, studies have found generally low expectancies of females in a variety of tasks (Crandall, 1969). McHugh (1975) found, however, that gender differences in expectancies are not always clear cut. The findings regarding race and expectations of success have been less clear, while some researchers have argued that racial minorities have high expectations of success, others have maintained the opposite. It was predicted that there would be significant gender and racial differences in students' expectations of success scores. Gender difference was not statistically significant in students' expectations of success scores. Males and females have roughly the same expectations of success from their environment. Significant racial differences were found, however, in students' expectations of success scores. White students evidenced greater expectations of success than did Black students. Predictor Variables and Student Depression and Anxiety It was hypothesized that student race, gender, total negative life event score, social support, expectations of success and I-E scores would predict anxiety and depression levels. The results showed that 197 student race, gender, and total negative LES score did predict depression. The combination of student race and gender was significant and contributed to 63% of the variance in depression scores. Results of the regression analysis showed that 74% of the variance in students' depression scores were explained by the combination of student race, gender, and total negative, life event score. In contrast, students' generalized locus of control, social support, and expectations of success scores were not predic- tors of their level of depression. Similar findings were noted for these predictors and student anxiety scores: Approximately 73% of the variance in students' anxiety scores could be explained by the variables of student race, gender, and total negative LES score, and with the addition of AWS score, 76% of the variance in students' anxiety score could be explained. Race, Gender, and Alienation An important factor in the retention of Black students on predomi- nantly White campuses has been their perception of the campus environ- ment. Although some studies have found much similarity between Black and White students' perceptions of campus life, the general view has been that Black students perceive the university climate more negatively than do White students at predominantly White institutions (Burbach, 1971; Keller, Piotrowski, 6c Sherry, 1982). Reed (1978) has suggested that factors which contribute to high rates of attrition among ethnic groups include alienation and lack of academic preparation in addition to inadequate counseling for minority groups. 198 Given these research findings, this study hypothesized that there would be significant race and gender differences in the alienation scores of students. While the findings did support a race effect on alienation scores, there was not a gender effect. Male and female college students did not evidence significantly different alienation scores. In contrast, Black students had significantly higher alienation scores than did White students. This latter finding sustains the majority of the research investi- gating alienation among Black and White students on predominantly White campuses. Masculine and Feminine Attributes and Sex Role Attitudes Scholars have proposed different concepts of masculinity and femininity (Spence 6c Helmreich, 1978). Spence, Helmreich, 6c Stapp (1975) found differences between the means of males and females on the three Personal Attributes Questionnaire (PAQ) scale scores—males scoring significantly lower on the F scale and higher on the M and M-F scales than females. This study hypothesized there would be significant race and gender differences in students' scores PAQ scale scores. There was only partial support for this hypothesis. The findings showed that male and female college students have about the same level of the Masculine and Feminine attributes. Conversely, female students scored significantly higher on the M-F scale than did male students, and Black students scored signifi- cantly higher on the Masculine scale than did White students. 199 Sex roles and sex role attitudes have been noted as factors in the life process for men and women. It has been theorized that rigid adherence to sex roles creates more mental health problems for women than for men. The sex roles of men have been viewed as less damaging to one's mental health than those of women (Gove, 1972). It was hypothesized that there would be significant differences in male and female students' attitudes toward the appropriate roles for women. The data did not confirm this prediction. There were no signifi- cant differences in male and female students' attitudes toward the appro- priate roles for women. Both groups had similar views on the roles and rights of women. There were, however, significant race differences. White students evidenced significantly more liberal attitudes toward the roles of women than did Black students. This latter finding is in keeping with current research. Smith (1984) found that Black men had the most rigid sex role attitudes, followed by Black women, White men, and White women. If it is true that rigid sex role attitudes create more mental health problems for women than for men, then quite possibly one might be able to explain partially the higher depression and anxiety scores of Black females in the sample. Sense of Mastery, Self-Esteem, and Self-Denigration Previous research had suggested there would be racial and gender differences in sense of mastery of their environment, self—esteem, and self-denigration. The results of this study provided only partial support for these predictions. The findings for sense of mastery indicated no 200 significant gender, race, or interaction effects. Apparently, both Black and White, male and female students have similar feelings regarding their sense of mastery of their environment. No one group showed a greater sense of mastery of their world than the other. Moreover, self- esteem within White and Black, male and female groups is roughly equiva— lent, although the mean self-esteem score for Black males was the lowest of all four groups. The findings showed significant race, gender, and interaction effects in relationship to students' self-denigration scores. Black males had the highest, overall self-denigration score, followed by White females, White males, and Black females. Differences in the mean self-denigration scores of Black and White males and Black and White females appear to have contributed primarily to the significant interaction. One might theorize that the higher self-denigration scores of Black males might be related to their higher depression and anxiety scores. Evidence was presented indirectly that supports the theory that Black Americans develop cognitions that shield them from self—esteem assaults that can come from prejudice and lower socioeconomic status factors. The findings regarding race and self-esteem, race and sense of mastery seem to support the theory that among Blacks, the reference group for determining one's self-worth is Black. A Black reference group may, in turn, lower one's reference point for goal-striving or one's expecta- tions for success. Again, the study did provide indirect support of this perspective. Black students evidenced significantly lower expectations of success than did White students. 201 Although this study provided some basic information Black Ameri- cans' self-esteem, sense of mastery, and expectations of success, more systematic research is needed concerning how minority families foster identities and create nurturant environments. As Kessler, Price 6: Wort- man (1985) have stated: "Our ability to develop a deeper understanding of minority mental health hinges centrally on unravelling these develop- mental processes and their implications for self-attributions, supports, and coping efforts" (p. 564-565). Importance of Religion in Coping with Stress It was hypothesized that there would be significant relationships between students' views on the importance of religion in helping them cope and their level of social support, expectations of success, and sense of alienation. The data provided only partial confirmation of this predic- tion. Students' level of social support is related significantly to their views on the importance of religion in their lives. Those students who indicated that religion was either extremely important or very important had higher social support scores than those who said it was somewhat important; however, the mean social support score of students who said religion was not important at all also had high social support scores. Quite possibly, those students who said religion was extremely or very important may have received important amounts of social support from their church-related activities, although this is speculative and cannot be confirmed by the data examined. Students' views on the importance of religion had little or no influence on their alienation scores. 202 Students who said religion was either not at all important in helping them to cope with life stress or was only somewhat important had higher expectations of success scores than those who said religion was extremely important or very important. Apparently, the less religious one tends to be, the greater one's expectations of success. In this instance, expectation of success was defined as one's views of his or her ability to master a broad array of situations. This study has provided some beginning information on the importance of religion in helping one cope with life stress. Eleven Predictor Variables, Depression and Anxiety The variables of student race, gender, social support, Feminine, Masculine, and M-F attributes, attitudes toward women, self-esteem, generalized locus of control, success, and total negative LES scores were used in an effort to predict depression and anxiety. As already reported, the findings showed that the linear combination of student race, gender, and total negative LES scores predicted student scores on the Beck De- pression Inventory quite well. These variables contributed approximately 74% of the variance in depression scores. About 76% of the variance in students' anxiety scores could be predicted by four variables: student race, gender, total negative LES score, and sex role attitudes. The other variables did not predict depression and anxiety. Although only three to four variables appeared to account for most of the variance in students' depression and anxiety scores, those variables were at the very heart of this study. Basically, the study posited that the broad status characteristics of race and gender would have . 203 profound influences on the life stress of individuals. This finding was upheld through several different types of analyses. The third consistent variable, total negative life event, was also a major part of this study's theoretical formulations. The fact that these three variables accounted for over 70% of the variance in depression and anxiety scores lends support to the theory that in order to better understand life stress, one first gain insight into the contextual and background factors that affect it. The contextual and background factors that affect stress have a great deal to do with one's minority or majority status in society. The master statuses of race and gender form the backdrop against which men and women live out the moments of their lives. Implications of Study One major implication of this study is that a model of life stress which takes into account the dual influence of race and gender should be constructed. This suggestion is based on the study's findings of significant gender and racial differences for several of the variables thought either to moderate or to contribute to stress levels. For example, female students reported receiving significantly more social support than did male students. Significant race, but not gender differences were found in students' I—E scores, a cognitive variable which has been found to moderate the impact of stressful life events. Research studies need to sort out: What moderators of the stress process seem to be associated more so with racial rather than gender status, and why? Moreover, another implication is that researchers might consider focusing on untangling the effects of race and gender, and race and social 204 class. Evidence for vulnerability factors linked to one's social class position is well documented. Liem 6r Liem completed an extensive review of the literature and found that lower class people are disadvantaged in their access to supportive social relationships and that personality characteristics associated with vulnerability to stress, such as low self—esteem and fatalism are more common among lower class than middle class people. Social class factors are conceptualized, then, to have a pervasive influence on one's vulnerability to stress. Clearly, measuring the objective indices of social class (one's occupation and income) is only part of the answer. If we are to understand better the forces that motivate peOple, we will have to begin to examine more closely the subjective measures of social class—those factors which help people to identify with certain values and perspectives, regardless of their economic and job circumstances. In short, we will have to begin to assess more carefully people's reference groups. This study provides some important reasons for taking into account the influence of social class on life stress. Although, for example, Black and White students spanned the entire spectrum of socioeconomic class, more Black than White students came from lower socioeconomic and working-class backgrounds. Hence, it is unclear, at this point, to what extent the study assessed true racial as opposed to social class differences. Given the vulnerability hypothesis that Kessler, Price, 6c Wortman (1985) have proposed for individuals from lower socioeconomic backgrounds, one might proffer that the Black students in the sample experience more negative, stressful life events, and correlatively, were more vulnerable 205 to stress (hence the higher depression and anxiety scores) more so because of their lower socioeconomic background rather than their race. This interpretation is consistent with some of the findings of this study as well as those in the general stress literature. For example, individuals from lower socioeconomic backgrounds tend to evidence more restrictive or conservative views on the appropriate roles for women and men. Likewise, individuals from lower socioeconomic backgrounds have usually been found to be more alienated from mainstream American society and to evidence lower self-esteem and higher levels of self—deni- gration. To separate effects of race and socioeconomic class, covariance of the social class and race factors would have been required. This pro- cedure was not done for a number of practical reasons. For example, the importance of singling out race from socioeconomic factors was not originally conceptualized as part of this study's design. Moreover, the n's were small and the distribution of SES within the Black sample was unequal. It is recommended that future studies attempt to get a representative sample of racial minority and majority individuals from each social class designation. This procedure would allow the partialling out of socioeconomic factors. Untangling the influences of race and gender is important for a number of reasons. Significant interaction effects were found as a result of the statistical analysis of several of the hypotheses. In a number of the cases, Black males seemed to be the primary contributors to the interaction of race and gender effects. In general, the greatest differences in the means for any of the gender/race combinations occurred between 206 Black males and White males. For example, there was race by gender interaction for I-E scores. Black males had a low mean I-E score, and White males had a high mean I-E score. Likewise, the interaction between race and gender for alienation scores appeared to be caused by the high alienation scores of Black males and low alienation scores of White males. One possible interpretation of a number of the stress-related hypotheses is that the greatest differ— ences for any of the gender/race combinations occurred between Black males and White males. There are other reasons for studying gender differences in life events. For the past decade, the dominant perspective has been that women are disadvantaged relative to men because their roles expose them to more chronic stress (Gove, 1972). Perhaps future research studies might focus on the role-related stress experienced by men and by women. For example, in my work with female college students, many complained of being treated as a sex-object. As women, they viewed themselves as being in a less social advantaged position on the campus than men experienced. Even when academics were discussed, they complained of being in a more disadvantaged position than were men. Instead of focusing on sex-role attitudes, more research effort might be placed on analyzing contextual sex-role life stress, especially on college campuses. It seems plausible that while a number of college students may espouse liberal sex-role attitudes, the everyday realities and transactions that occur between the sexes may be much less liberal. 207 Moreover, additional studies need to be conducted on the hypothe- sized greater female vulnerability to stress. To what extent can women's greater vulnerability be attributed to their use of certain coping strategy and to their personality characteristics? Another area worth investigating is the relative difference in the amount of social support men and women provide. Could the greater distress of women be linked to the fact that women provide more network support than men and that this situation creates stresses and demands that can lead to psychological impairment? More research is needed to clarify further the major gender-related findings of this study, namely that females experience more negative- related stressful life events than men and that females report experiencing a higher rate of depression and anxiety than do men. Historically, race rather than socioeconomic background has been the major determinant of one's status in the United States. Increasingly, however, this situation may be changing. Researchers have begun to note, for example, the declining significance of race and the increasing impor- tance of socioeconomic background. Clearly, there are reasons for this shift in emphasis. Socioeconomic background is a more pervasive influence than race. As noted earlier, Liem 6c Liem (1978) found that people from lower socioeconomic back- grounds are disadvantaged in their access to supportive social relation- ships and that some personality characteristics associated with vulnerabil- ity to stress, such as low self—esteem, fatalism, and intellectual inflex- ibility occur more frequently among individuals from lower class rather than middle class backgrounds. 208 Then, too, the importance of race is declining as prejudice continues to decline in America. Increasingly, American Blacks have become ab- sorbed into almost every aspect of American life—from Supreme Court judge to astronaut, from Congressional members to baseball, football, basketball heroes, to classroom teachers. Surely, race has been an impor- tant aspect of Black Americans' development in this country, but it is not the only aspect of their development. Despite remnants of prejudice, Black Americans have been able to achieve a great deal in this country. In the past, a great deal of the research was devoted to documenting differences in the stress experienced by different racial, gender, or socio- economic groups. Currently researchers are beginning to consider the possibility that race, sex, and class differences in psychopathology may reflect differences in vulnerability to stress (Kessler, 1979). Future research efforts might focus on sorting out the separate effects of race, gender, and social class on life stress. How much of the stress we feel is due to our race, gender, or social class? Does separat- ing out the independent effects of these factors represent reality or a statistical abstraction of reality? Put an alternate way: Can we actually determine to what extent race, socioeconomic status, or gender might contribute to, for example, a Black women's level of stress? And if we could, what difference might it make in our everyday functioning? How might our studies and findings have an impact in making life better for all Americans—regardless of our race, gender, or socioeconomic status? Are we studying what really matters in the lives of most people, or have 209 we reconciled ourselves toward investigating that which is easily quanti- fiable and measurable but of little importance to most people's day—to-day lives? Thus, it seems that future research needs to focus on the multi- plicity of factors that impact one's life. Focusing individually on socio- economic, racial, or sexual factors will miss the complexities involved in living. Given that the lives of most people are complex, we need to use complex methods of analysis, for example, system approaches, causal methods, etc., rather than univariate approaches which look for pieces and misses the whole or the process. APPENDICES Appendix A Life Stress Study The research project is a dissertation study about life stress and how people respond to stressful life events—for example, a divorce, death of a loved one, roommate trouble, changing a major, or joining a fraternity/ sorority. The purpose of the project is to find out more about the kinds of stressful life events students at Michigan State University are experiencing and their feelings about these events. Both males and females are encouraged to participate in the study. It will be for 2 credits. The project involves taking 10 surveys which require anywhere from 35-60 minutes totally, depending on your reading speed and how quickly you choose to work. Although you are encouraged to give your most immediate response to a question, you are to work at a speed that is comfortable for you. The ten surveys are paper and pencil tests. All student responses to tests are confidential, and scores will be reported as a total group, unless you want to have your personal scores reported to you. To have your scores reported, please indicate on your manila envelope that you desire feedback. If you are interested in this project, please come to one of the designated rooms below at the times indicated. 210 1) 2) 3) 4) 5) 6) / Appendix B Research Consent Form I have freely consented to take part in a survey study being con- ducted by Elsie M. J. Smith (doctoral student) under the supervi- sion of Dr. Elaine F. Donelson, Professor in the Department of Psychology, and Dr. Lee N. June, Professor and Director of the Counseling Center. This study has been explained to me, and I understand that this study is concerned with how people respond to stressful life events. I understand the explanation that has been given and what my participation will involve. More specifically, my participation involves completing ten (1) research questionnaires that should take between 35 and 60 minutes. I understand that I am free to discontinue my participation in the study at any time without penalty. I understand that all information will be treated in strict confi- dence and that I will remain anonymous. My scores will be reported only as part of a total group. I understand that my participation in the study does not guarantee any beneficial results to me. I understand that, at my request, I can receive additional explana- tion of the study after my participation is completed. Signature 211 APPENDIX c MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY ‘ \IVD-ISII" ('0MMH1ID. ON IIMAICII l\\'Ot\'l\‘3 (“T LANNSC ° MICHIGAN ' W“ "t \IAN SUMO-(ITS IL’CNIHSD :u Almmin “nos IImLmNG w'. menu. Hay 18. 198‘! Hs. Elsie H. J. Smith Psychology Dear Ms. Smith: Subject: Proposal Entitled. “Life Stress, Social Support. Psychiatric Symptomatology of Hinority and Hajority_Americans" i am pleased to advise that i concur with your evaluation that this project is exempt from full UCRIHS review. and approval is herewith granted for conduct of the project. You are reminded that UCRIHS approval is valid for one calendar year. if you plan to continue this project beyond one year. please make provisions for obtaining appropriate UCRIHS approval prior to May l8, l985. Any changes in procedures involving human subjects must be reviewed by the UCRIHS prior to initiation of the change. UCRIHS must also be notified promptly of any problems (unexpected side effects, complaints, etc.) involving human subjects during the course of the work. Thank you for bringing this project to my attention. if i can be of any future help. please do not hesitate to let me know. Sincerely. 0' . ( . . 2rLJL1€£chL_. Henry E. Bredeck Chairman. UCRIHS HEB/jms cc: Donelson USU 'U at ”fin-aura Adi-affgld 0"."- eu’ Inuit-tion 212 TO: Dr. Henry E. Bredeck, Chairperson Human Subjects Committee FROM: Elsie M. J. Smith RE: Exempted Review DATE: May 10, 1984 I am requesting a category of exempted research approval for my proposed dissertation study. The regulation that fits my study is 46.101, (2) "Re- search involving the use of educational tests (cognitive, diagnostic, apti- tude achievement). The information taken from these sources is recorded in such a manner that subjects cannot be identified, directly or through identifiers linked to the subjects." 213 Appendix D Instructions Sleet Thank you for agreeing to participate in the research study on life stress. Your consent to complete the enclosed instruments will help us to learn a great deal more about life stress. The purpose of this sheet is to provide you with a set of overall instructions for completing the enclosed survey instruments. THERE ARE NO RIGHT OR WRONG ANSWERS. 1. Upon receiving your survey packet, please take out the Research Consent Form, sign it and return it to the person in charge of the testing situation. This sheet shows that you have agreed to participate in the study. Please do not enclose your Research Consent Form with the answer sheets for the survey instruments. We want to assure each students' anonymity. Please return your Research Consent Form separately to the person in charge of testing. Each survey contains a code number to allow us to know that the same person has completed all of the enclosed survey instru- ments. Please make sure that the same code number is marked on each IBM answer sheet. Darken in your code number on each IBM answer sheet. Do not darken in your name or student number. Each instrument contains its own set of directions for responding to the questions contained therein. Please follow the directions contained on each instrument; however, put your responses to the questions on the separate IBM answer sheets. Please answer each questionnaire in the order presented in the manila envelope. Please answer ALL questions, using the appropriate scale for each instrument. Omitting questions may invalidate your response for a given survey instrument. Please work quickly on each survey test. We are interested in your immediate or spontaneous response to each question. So don't spend too much time on any one question. The total time for taking the entire set of tests should vary between 35 and 60 minutes. Please don't rush; however, work at your own spped. In some instances, letters will be used in the directions, but numbers will be used on the answer sheet. Please make the appropriate changes. 214 7. Please complete the survey instruments and return them by We appreciate your cooperation in this study; we thank you in advance for your cooperation. 215 Appendix E Life Stress Prgject During Spring Term Break and 5—Week Summer Term—1984 491 Credits This research involves the study of life stress and psychological symptoma- tology of students at Michigan State University. My goal is to better understand college students' stressful life events, social support, sense of control, and psychological symptoms. Currently, I am seeking mature and responsible undergraduates to be trained as coders, who will score the questionnaires and enter the data via the computer. Both will require training and a serious commitment. The time involved will be 3-6 hours per week (1 to 2 credits). I am looking for people who can start early on the project, preferably by the end of the Spring 1984 term. Four 491 students are needed to participate in the project. The benefits to you are: 1. 491 credits, depending on your research interests and availability for work. 2. Learning data analysis skills ranging from scoring and coding data to the beginning stages of SPSS programming. IF YOU ARE INTERESTED AND WOULD LIKE FURTHER INFORMATION, PLEASE CONTACT: Elsie M. J. Smith 355-9564 Thank you for your assistance. 216 Appendix F INFORMATION INVENTORY DIRECTIONS: The questions below are designed to obtain some background information for respondents to our attitude surveys. Please answer the questions below: What is your sex? a. Male b. Female What is your race? a. White b. Black c. Hispanic (Mexican American, Puerto Rican) d. Asian American e. Native American What are your current living arrangements? a. Dormitory - university residence hall b. Of f-campus housing with other students c. Living with parents or other relatives off campus (1. Married, living in own housing e. A rented room orapartment With whom did you live most of the time while you were growing up (until age 18)? Both natural parents Mother and stepfather Father and stepmother Mother only Father only Grandparent(s) Foster parents Other (please specify) mmgpcm =03 What is your student status this quarter? a. Full-time b. Part-time 217 10. 11. What is your university cumulative grade point average? a. 4.0—3.5 b. 3.4—3.0 c. 2.9-2.5 d. 2.4—2.0 e. 1.9-1.5 f. 1.4-1.0 From the list below, please circle the number indicating your parents income. a. $ 8,000 - $15,000 b. $15,001 - $22,000 c. $22,001 - $29,000 d. $29,001 - $36,000 e. $36,001 - $43,000 f. $43,001 - $50,000 g. $50,002 - $57,000 h. $57,001 - over How important is it to you to get a college degree? a. Extremely important b. Very important c. Somewhat important d. Not atallimportant Are you a a. Freshman b. Sophomore c. Junior d. Senior What are your plans after college? a. Work (find a job) b. Graduate School (obtain additional education) Indicate the highest level of education completed by your father. Elementary school (K-6) Junior high school (7-9) Some high school (but did not complete the 12th grade) High school graduate Junior college degree (A.A.S.) Bachelor's degree (B.S., B.A.) Some postgraduate work but no degree Postgraduate degree (M.S., M.A., Ph.D., M.D., D.D.S., etc.) FTDPPPP'? 218 12. 13. 14. 15. p—n :5 0.- his 0 m '1’ (b the highest level of education completed by your mother. Elementary school (K-6) Junior high school (7-9) Some high school (but did not complete the 12th grade) High school graduate Junior college degree (A.A.S.) Bachelor's degree (B.S., B.A.) Some postgraduate work but no degree Postgraduate degree (M.S., M.A., Ph.D., M.D., D.D.S., etc.) sang-spongy- What is your father's occupation? White Collar Worker: a. Professional, technical b. Manager and/or administrator c. Sales worker d. Clerical and kindred workers Blue Collar Worker: a. Craftsman b. Operator c. Laborer, except farm (1. Farm laborer and farm foreman What is your mother's occupation? White Collar Worker: a. Professional, technical b. Manager and/or administrator c. Sales worker (1. Clerical and kindred workers Blue Collar Worker: a. Craftsman b. Operator c. Laborer, except farm (1. Farm laborer and farm foreman e. Housewife What is your age? a. 18-20 b. 21-22 c. 23-25 d. 26-28 e. 29-31 f. Over 31 219 16. 17. 18. 19. How important is religion in your life? a. Extremely important b. Very important c. Somewhat important d. Not at allimportant What is your religious denomination? a. Protestant (Specify) b. Catholic c. Jewish d. Other (Specify) e. None How often do you attend religious services? a. More than once a week b. Once a week c. Three times a month (1. Twice a month e. Once a month f. Two or three times a year g. Never How important is religion in helping you to cope with life problems? a. Extremely important b. Very important c. Somewhat important d. Not at all important 220 PLEASE NOTE: Copyrighted materials in this document have not been filmed at the request of the author. They are available for consultation, however. in the author’s university library. These consist of pages: The Life Experiences Survey 221-223 _Beck Inventory 224-227 Survey of Opinions 229-231 The Hales-Fibel Generalized Expectancy Scale 232-234 Expectations of Success Educational and Personal Opinion Survey 235-236 Inventory of Socially Supportive Behaviors 237-239 Attitudes Toward Women 240-241 Personal Attributes Questionnaire 242-243 University Mic rofilms lnte rnational 800 N Zeeb Rd., Ann Arbor. MI 48106 (818) 761-4700 APPENDIX G The Life Experiences Survey Listed heloe'sre a nunher or events which sonetices bring about change in the lives of those who experience then.and which necessitate social readjustnent. Please chggk those events which you have experienced in the recent east and indicate the tine period during which you have experienced each event. Be sure that all check marks are directly across iron the items they correspond to. Also. for each iten checked below, please circle the extent to which you viewed the event as having either a positive or negative impact on your life at the tine the event occurred. That is, indicate the type and extent or inpact that the event had. a rating at -3 would indicate an extracely negative inpact. A rating or 0 suggests no inpsct either positive or negative. A rating of +3 would indicate an extracely positive insect. SECTION I Creme y Please answer on this sheet. 0 Detention in j + f jor + +++++++ +r+++++ f + i + violations Changed situation erent work responsibility, nsjor change in working conditions. working --——..--— —— l hours, etc.) -3l -2 -1 0 +1 *2: +1 M106 ' 1 -3l -2 -1 014-2, +2: +3- 221 -‘ I ,, I: I E . i: 0' s- a : :flzflzfl :rflflazg °i7=°§:§:3-§:' ggzzgzgzz, ° ‘0 :Qfiizéfg ~J331-32312: 6 anall yr 9 ii; 2:25: 212 21:21 I I I l 15. Serious illness or injury or close I I I z 7 w“: -1 -::l -lL 0 +1. +21I -3. “‘2. father I -. -Ill -.L Cl 1 +11 2! z ‘31 . ”that ' l-‘l -Zl-1l0 l+1.!r2-*3l w: I l --:ll-Zl-Ilo ;¢..-*2=r3l do €1ma I i 1-:11 -2l -iLi 0 l +1.1 '2- -3-i m -:'lI-21-Itl0 +i.-r2:.*3| :. "MTG"! -I|I -ZT-1I 0 +11 +2i +3I _...______. -‘ - I-l l-l-le-Z-vB _' 11. Other (specify) % l 5:: -3: -I.I 3 l ’1' +2. +3 Lb. Sexual difficulties - l p 11'. trouble with employer (in danger . of losing job, being suspended. 1| -2 -1 0 +1 +2 +3 denoted. etc.) - '1‘? -2 ’1' g H ‘2’ +3 18. Trouble with in-laws I r- - . . i-h or change 1:: tinancial status 1-9 ajlot better of! or a lot worse off I -3 '2 '1 0 *1 *ZI *3 20. ilejor change in closeness of truly l l r or decrease :I:::::.§inc "3'4 I -:I -2 -1 o +1 +2! +3 21. Gaining a new family number (through birth. adoption. {anily 1' -2 -‘L 0 +1 ‘2 ‘3 number roving in, etc.) ‘ ‘; Z -i“ 0 , all a, 4.ng 22. Change of residence l -.ll - l k -' { 23. thrital separation tron nets . a - - {due to conflict) 4 -2I -1 0 +1 +2 3' 24. liajor change in church activities [ I I l o ‘1 ‘7' 43 I increased or decreased attendance) - - -3 ‘2 4;: ‘ +1. +2. ‘3. 23. Liarital reconcilaticn with nets l ' -3l -2 -1- O - l 2 ' 26. thor change in masher of arguents | l | l 3 . lti-th spouse (a lesson or a lot I ' I t- z 1; o I "I *2 ‘3 less ar ents) I ‘3 '- l ' - ' -~- .- 27. liar-ried sale: Change in wiie's l I g ' I ‘ I I work outside the bone (beginning ' . I g i . - work. ceasing work. changing to a I 2 I 2; ‘1‘ 0 i a! .2 -3; new job, etc.) i ' ‘3. " ~f fl . 23. Zlarried tenale: Change in husband'sl ! l ; ' l 3 l I worlt(1oss of job, beginning new i I l : 2’ -1; 0 . +1; -9 ‘3; job, reti: -ent, «ab . ' '3 ‘ f . ‘ , -:r ' 29. i-lajor change in usual type and/or - I ; I Z; .9 3 a; “g -3: anount of recreation I ‘ '3 " ' '1- ,_ - -‘ 30. Borrowing note than $10,000 (buy- I l 'l I I f 0 ; ‘13 “I -1, in; home, business_, etc.) - ‘3 ‘2 ‘8: . - ~ - 31. Borrowing less than $10,000 (buying I ; 5 i 7; J. 0 f a: -2 ‘3‘ ' C‘:. W: SQC21'_33—_$Ch°°l IO‘QL CCC-I I ' -3 --I L: '3 ' a); ¢7l -1: 37W!» ' * ‘3' ’2. '1: ‘ ~; 1 ‘ Ifil. Hale: Hire/girliriend having ; ; : 3i -2: -1; 0 E M- ‘2'. «~3i abortion I ; ‘3 -1; -1. 0 ~I. -2 -3 24. Egg: ’Qgigg abortigg___- .1-.- u... ° ' In ~ 222 -J- pool tine...— positing--- extremely ext rewly comma: slightly {- moderately 1' or change in activities e.g. parties, mvies. visiting (increased or decreased or in ving o! tastily new hone. remodeling. deterioration of hone uryor with recent experiences an inert on your lite. List and 68. 3 210! 2: 5334‘: 31. Beginning a new school experience at a higher acade-ic level ( graduate school. proleseional to a one at sane acadnic level (undergradute. 0 ‘0' f f ‘. ++t+++ i-I-t+++ prob concerning school (in danger or on: having 4. tron: twin 6. Sarason. James 3. Johnson. and Judith M. Siegel. Assessing the anact or Lite Changes: Develoonent or the Life Experiences Survey. Journal o: gogflltgg and Clinicg chhologz, 1978, Vol. 46. :lo. 5. 932-966. 223 Appendix H BECK INVENTORY Name Date On this questionnaire are groups of statements. Please read each group of statements carefully. Then pick out the one statement in each group which best describes the way you have been feeling the PAST WEEK, INCLUDING TODAY! Circle the number beside the statement you picked. If several statements in the group seem to apply equally well, circle each once. Be sure to read all the statements in each group before makigg your choice. 1. 0 I do not feel sad 1 I feel sad 2 I am sad all the time and I can't snap out of it 3 I am so sad or unhappy that I can't stand it 2. 0 I am not particularly discouraged about the future 1 I feel discouraged about the future 2 I feel I have nothing to look forward to 3 I feel that the future is hopeless and that things cannot improve 3. 0 I do not feel like a failure 1 I feel I have failed more than the average person 2 As I look back on my life, all I can see is a lot of failures 3 I feel I am a complete failure as a person 4. 0 I get as much satisfaction out of things as I used to 1 I don't enjoy things the way I used to 2 I don't get real satisfaction out of anything anymore 3 I am dissatisfied or bored with everything 5. 0 I don't feel particularly guilty 1 I feel guilty a good part of the time 2 I feel quite guilty most of the time 3 I feel guilty all of the time 224 6. 0 I don't feel I am being punished 1 I feel I may be punished 2 I expect to be punished 3 I feel I am being punished 7. 0 I don't feel disappointed in myself 1 I am disappointed in myself 2 I am disgusted with myself 3 I hate myself 8. 0 I don't feel I am any worse than anybody else 1 I am critical of myself for my weaknesses or mistakes 2 I blame myself all the time for my failure 3 I blame myself for everything bad that happens 9. 0 I don't have any thoughts of killing myself 1 I have thoughts of killing myself, but I would not carry them out 2 I would like to kill myself 3 I would kill myself if I had the choice 10. 0 I don't cry anymore than usual 1 I cry more now than I used to 2 I cry all the time now 3 I used to be able to cry, but now I can't cry even though I want to 11. 0 I am no more irritated now than I ever am 1 I get annoyed or irritated more easily than I used to 2 I feel irritated all the time now 3 I don't get irritated at all by the things that used to irritate me 12. 0 I have not lost interest in other people 1 I am less interested in other people than I used to be 2 I have lost most of my interest in other people 3 I have lost all of my interest in other people 13. 0 I make decisions about as well as I ever could 1 I put off making decisions more than I used to 2 I have greater difficulty in making decisions than before 3 I can't make decisions at all anymore 225 l4. 0 I don't feel I look any worse than I used to l I am worried that I am looking old or unattractive 2 I feel that there are permanent changes in my appearance that makes me look unattractive 3 I believe that I look ugly 15. 0 I can work about as well as before 1 It takes an extra effort to get started at doing something 2 I have to push myself very hard to do anything 3 I can't do any work at all 16. 0 I can sleep as well as usual 1 I don't sleep as well as I used to 2 I wake up 1-2 hours earlier than usual and find it hard to get back to sleep 3 I wake up several hours earlier than I used to and cannot get back to sleep 17. 0 I don't get more tired than usual 1 I get tired more easily than I used to 2 I get tired from doing almost anything 3 I am too tired to do anything 18. 0 My appetite is no worse than usual 1 My appetite is not as good as it used to be 2 My appetite is much worse now 3 I have no appetite at all anymore 19. 0 I haven't lost much weight, if any lately I I have lost more than 5 pounds 2 I have lost more than 10 pounds I am purposely trying to 3 I have lost more than 15 pounds by eating less. Yes__ N o__ 20. 0 I am no more worried about my health than usual 1 I am worried about physical problems such as aches and pains; or upset stomach; or constipation 2 I am very worried about physical problems and it's hard to think of much else 3 I am so worried about my physical problems, that I cannot think about anything else 226 21. sex I have not noticed any recent change in my interest in I am less interested in sex than I used to be I am much less interest in sex now I have lost interest in sex completely “Ni-dc Reproduction without author's express written consent is forbidden. Additional copies and/or permission to use this scale may be obtained from: CENTER FOR COGNITIVE THERAPY, Room 602, 133 South 36th Street, Philadelphia, PA 19104 227 APPENDIX I SELF-EVALUATION QUESTIONNAIRE sm roam x-z NAME DATE DIRECTIONS: A number of statements which people have used to describe themselves are given below. Read each state- ment and then blacken in the appropriate circle to the right of the statement to indicate how you generally feel. There are no right or wrong answers. Do not spend too much time on any one statement but give the answer which name to describe how you generally feel. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 28. 27. 28. 29. 30. 31. 32. 33. 34. 35. 36. 37. 38. 39. 40. I feel pleasant I tire quickly I feel like crying Iwishlcouldbeashappyasothersseemtobe Iamloeingouton thingsbeceuselcen'tmakeupmymindsoonenoughw Ifeelreeted Iam“celm,cool.andcollected” I feel that dificultiee are piling up so that I cannot overcome them .......... I worry too much over something that really doesn’t matter ................... Iamhappy Iaminclinedtotake thingshard I lack self-confidence Ifeelsecure I try to avoid facing a cn'sis or dificulty I feel blue I am content Some unimportant thought runs through my mind and bothers me .......... I take disappointments so keenly that I can’t put them out of my mind I am a steady person I get in a state of tension or turmoil as I think over my recent concerns and I'nps'rmhl '71 1963 by Char/rs I), Smelbrrgrr. Ho‘prmlm'tum at Hus (ml or mw pufflull I’lr'rul ‘u- mu- prm‘o'ss u‘lI’lllllI Irnlh'n purnusxmn n! (hr I’llhilaho" " ”rumba. I! 228 sans nearly 99 9999999 9 9999999 9999999999999999999 9999999999999999999 eeeeeeeee IAV&'IV ”OH'" 9999999999 Appendix J SURVEY OF OPINIONS This is a questionnaire to find out the way in which certain important events in our society affect different people. Each item consists of a pair of alternatives lettered a or b. Please select the one statement of each pair (and only one) which you more strongly believe to be the case as far as you're concerned. Be sure to select the one you actually believe to be more true rather than the one you think you should choose or the one you would like to be true. This is a measure of personal belief; obviously there are no right or wrong answers. Children get into trouble because their parents punish them too much. The trouble with most children nowadays is that their parents are too easy with them. Many of the unhappy things in people's lives are partly due to bad luck. People's misfortunes result from the mistakes they make. One of the major reasons why we have wars is because people don't take enough interest in politics. There will always be wars, no matter how hard people try to prevent them. In the long run people get the respect they deserve in this world. Unfortunately, an individual's worth often passes unrecog- nized no matter how hard he tries. The idea that teachers are unfair to students is nonsense. Most students don't realize the extent to which their grades are influenced by accidental happenings. Without the right breaks one cannot be an effective leader. Capable people who fail to become leaders have not taken advantage of their opportunities. No matter how hard you try some people just don't like you. People who can't get others to like them don't understand how to get along with others. 229 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 8.. b. a. Heredity plays the major role in determining one's person- ality. It is one's experiences in life which determine what they're like. I have often found that what is going to happen will happen. Trusting to fate has never turned out as well for me as making a decision to take a definite course of action. In the case of the well prepared student there is rarely if ever such a thing as an unfair test. Many times exam questions tend to be so unrelated to course work that studying is really useless. Becoming a success is a matter of hard work; luck has little or nothing to do with it. Getting a good job depends mainly on being in the right place at the right time. The average citizen can have an influence in government decisions. This world is run by the few people in power, and there is not much the little guy can do about it. When I make plans, I am almost certain that I can make them work. It is not always wise to plan too far ahead because many things turn out to be a matter of good or bad fortune any how. There are certain people who are just no good. There is some good in everybody. In my case getting what I want has little or nothing to do with luck. Many times we might just as well decide what to do by flipping a coin. Who gets to be the boss often depends on who was lucky enough to be in the right place first. Getting people to do the right thing depends upon ability, luck has little or nothing to do with it. As far as world affairs are concerned, most of us are the victims of forces we can neither understand, nor control. By taking an active part in political and social affairs the people can control world events. 230 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. Most people don't realize the extent to which their lives are controlled by accidental happenings. There really is no such thing as "luck". One should always be willing to admit mistakes. It is usually best to cover up one's mistakes. It is hard to know whether or not a person really likes you. How many friends you have depends upon how nice a person you are. In the long run the bad things that happen to us are balanced by the good ones. Most misfortunes are the result of lack of ability, ignor- ance, laziness, or all three. With enough effort we can wipe out political corruption. It is difficult for people to have much control over the things politicians do in office. Sometimes I can't understand how teachers arrive at the grades they give. There is a direct connection between how hard I study and the grades I get. A good leader expects people to decide for themselves what they should do. A good leader makes it clear to everybody what their jobs are. Many times I feel that I have little influence over the things that happen to me. It is impossible for me to believe that chance of luck plays an important role in my life. People are lonely because they don't try to be friendly. There's not much use in trying too hard to please people, if they like you, they like you. There is too much emphasis on athletics in high school. Team sports are an excellent way to build character. What happens to me is my own doing. Sometimes I feel that I don't have enough control over the direction my life is taking. Most of the time I can't understand why politicians behave the way they do. In the long run the people are responsible for bad govern- ment on a national as well as on a local level. 231 AppendixK THE HALES-FIBEL GENERALIZED EXPECTANCY SCALE EXPECTATIONS OF SUCCESS This is a questionnaire to find out how people believe they will do in certain situations. Each item consists of a 5-point scale and a belief statement regarding one's expectations about events. Please indicate the degree to which you believe the statement would apply to you person- ally by indicating the appropriate number. (1 = highly improbable, 5 = highly probable.) Give the answer that you truly believe best applies to you and not what you would like to be true or think others would like to hear. Answer the items carefully, but do not spend too much time on any one item. Be sure to find an answer for every item, even if the statement describes a situation you presently do not expect to encounter. Answer as if you were going to be in each situation. Also try to respond to each item independently when making a choice; do not be influenced by your previous choices. In the future I expect that I will: 1. find out that people don't seem to understand what I am trying to say. 2. be discouraged about my ability to gain the respect of others. 3. be a good parent. 4. be unable to accomplish by goals. 5. have a successful marital relationship. 6. deal poorly with emergency situations. 7. find my efforts to change situations .I don't like are ineffec- tive. 8. not be very good at learning new skills. 9. carry through my responsibilities successfully. 10. discover that the good in life outweighs the bad. 1 1. handle unexpected problems successfully. 12. get the promotions I deserve. 13. succeed in the projects I undertake. 232 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. 30. 31. 32. 33. 34. 35. 36. 37. not make any significant contributions to society. discover that my life is not getting much better. be listened to when I speak. discover that my plans don't work out too well. find that no matter how hard I try, things just don't turn out the way I would like. handle myself well in whatever situation I'm in. be able to solve my own problems. succeed at most things I try. be successful in my endeavors in the long run. be very successful working out my personal life. experience many failures in my life. make a good impression on people I meet for the first time. attain the career goals I have set for myself. have difficulty dealing with my superiors. have problems working with others. be a good judge of what it takes to get ahead. achieve recognition in my profession. There is really no way I can solve some of the problems I have. Sometimes I feel that I'm being pushed around in life. I have little control over the things that happen to me. I can do just about anything I really set my mind to. I often feel helpless in dealing with the problems of life. What happens to me in the future mostly depends on me. There is little I can do to change many of the important things in life. 233 38. 39. 40. 41. 42. 43. 44. 45. 46. 47. I feel that I'm a person of worth, at least on an equal with others. I feel that I have a number of good qualities. All in all, I am inclined to feel that I'm a failure. I am able to do things as well as most other people. I feel I do not have much to be proud of. I take a positive attitude toward myself. On the whole, I am satisfied with myself. I certainly feel useless at times. I wish I could have more respect for myself. At times I think I am no good at all. 234 Appendix L EDUCATIONAL AND PERSONAL OPINION SURVEY DIRECTIONS: This is a questionnaire to find out how you feel about ARK: gggm> Michigan State University and other situations. Each item consists of a 5-point scale and a belief statement regarding your feelings about situations at MSU and circumstances in general. Read each statement and decide to what extent it describes you. There are no right or wrong answers. You will probably agree with some of the statements and disagree with others. Please indicate your own personal feelings about each statement below by marking the letter that best describes your attitude or feeling. Please be very truthful and describe yourself as you really are, not as you would like to be. If you QEAGREE STRONGLY with the statement. If you DISAGREE MODERATELY with the statement. If you neither agree nor disagree with the statement. If you AGREE MODERATELY with the statement. If you AGREE STRONGLY with the statement. The size and complexity of this university make it very difficult for a student to know where to turn. It is only wishful thinking to believe that one can really influence what happens at this university. Classes at this university are so regimented that there is little room for the student. The faculty has too much control over the lives of students at this university. The bureaucracy of this university has me confused and bewildered. I feel that I am an integral part of this university community. Things have become so complicated at this university thatI really don't understand just what is going on. I seldom feel "lost" or "alone" at this university. 235 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. Students are just so many cogs in the machinery of this university. I don't have as many friends as I would like at this university. Most of the time I feel that I have an effective voice in the decisions regarding my destiny at this university. Life at this university is so chaotic that the student really doesn't know where to turn. Many students at this university are lonely and unrelated to their fellow human beings. More and more, I feel helpless in the face of what's happening at this university today. There are forces affecting me at this university that are so complex and confusing that I find it difficult to effectively make decisions. I can't seem to make much sense out of my university exper- ience. My experience at this university has been devoid of any meaningful relationships. The administration has too much control over my life at this university. This university is run by a few people in power and there is not much the student can do about it. The student has little chance of protecting his personal interests when they conflict with those of this university. In spite of the fast pace of this university, it is easy to make many close friends that you can really count on. My life is so confusing at this university that I hardly know what to expect from day to day. In this fast-changing university, with so much conflicting information available, it is difficult to think clearly about many issues. This university is just too big and impersonal to provide for the individual student. 236 Appendix M INVENTORY OF SOCIALLY SUPPORTIVE BEHAVIORS (ISSB) INSTRUCTIONS: We are interested in learning about some of the ways that you feel people have helped you or tried to make life more pleasant for you over the past four weeks. Below you will find a list of activities that other people might have done for you, to you, or with you in recent weeks. Please read each item carefully and indicate how often these activities happened to you during the past four weeks. Use the following scale to make your ratings: Not at all Once or twice About once a week Several times a week About every day PPP‘”? Make all of your ratings on the answer sheet that has been provided. If, for example, the item: 45. Gave you a ride to the doctor. happened once or twice during the past four weeks, you would make your rating like this: 45. A B C D E Please read each item carefully and select the rating that you think is the most accurate. During the past four weeks, how often did other people do these activities for you, to you, or with you: 1. 2. Looked after a family member when you were away. Was right there with you (physically) in a stressful situation. Provided you with a place where you could get away for awhile. Watched after your possessions when you were away (pets, plants, home, apartment, etc.). Told you what she/he did in a situation that was similar to yours. 237 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. 27. Did some activity with you to help you get your mind off of things. Talked with you about some interests of yours. Let you know that you did something well. Went with you to someone who could take action. Told you that you are OK just the way you are. Told you that she/he would keep the things that you talk about private—just between the two of you. Assisted you in setting a goal for yourself. Made it clear what was expected of you. Expressed esteem or respect for a competency or personal quality of yours. Gave you some information on how to do something. Suggested some action that you should take. Gave you over $25. Comforted you by showing you some physical affection. Gave you some information to help you understand a situation you were in. Provided you with some transportation. Checked back with you to seek if you followed the advice you were given. Gave you under $25. Helped you understand why you didn't do something well. Listened to you talk about your private feelings. Loaned or gave you something (a physical object other than money) that you needed. Agreed that what you wanted to do was right. Said things that made your situation clearer and easier to under- stand. 238 28. 29. 30. 31. 32. 33. 34. 35. 36. 37. 38. 39. 40. Told you how he/she felt in a situation that was similar to yours. Let you know that he/she will always be around if you need assis- tance. Expressed interest and concern in your well-being. Told you that she/he feels very close to you. Told you who you should see for assistance. Told you what to expect in a situation that was about to happen. Loaned you over $25. Taught you how to do something. Gave you feedback on how you were doing without saying it was good or bad. Joked and kidded to try to cheer you up. Provided you with a place to stay. Pitched in to help you do something that needed to get done. Loaned you under $25. 239 AppendixN ATTITUDES TOWARD WOMEN The Attitudes Toward Women Scale (AWS) DIRECTIONS: The statements listed below describe attitudes toward the roles of women in society which different people have. There are no right or wrong answers, only opinions. You are asked to express your feelings about each state- ment by indicating whether you (1) Agree strongly, (2) Agree mildly, (3) Disagree mildly, or (4) Disagree strongly. Please indicate your opinion by marking the column on the answer sheet which corresponds to the alternative which best describes your personal attitudes. (1) Agree strongly (2) Agree mildly (3) Disagree mildly (4) Disagree strongly 10. Swearing and obscenity are more repulsive in the speech of a woman than a man. Under modern economic conditions with women being active outside the home, men should share in household tasks such as washing dishes and doing the laundry. It is insulting to women to have the "obey" clause remain in the marriage service. A woman should be as free as a man to propose marriage. Women should worry less about their rights and more about becoming good wives and mothers. Women should assume their rightful place in business and all the professions along with men. A woman should not expect to go to exactly the same places or to have quite the same freedom of action as a man. It is ridiculous for a woman to run a locomotive and for a man to darn socks. The intellectual leadership of a community should be largely in the hands of men. Women should be given equal opportunity with men for appren- ticeship in the various trades. 240 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. Women earning as much as their dates should bear equally the expense when they go out together. Sons in a family should be given more encouragement to go to college than daughters. In general, the father should have greater authority than the mother in the bringing up of children. Economic and social freedom is worth far more to women than acceptance of the ideal of femininity which has been set up by men. There are many jobs in which men should be given preference over women in being hired or promoted. 241 Appendix 0 PERSONAL ATTRIBU'I‘ES QUESTIONNAIRE DIRECTIONS: The items below inquire about what kind of a person you think you are. Each item consists of a pair of char- acteristics, with the letters A-E in between. For example: Not at all Artistic A...B...C...D...E... Very Artistic Each pair describes contradictory characteristics—that is, you cannot be both at the same time, such as very artistic and not at all artistic. The letters form a scale between the two extremes. You are to choose a letter which describes where you fall on the scale. For example, if you think you have no artistic ability, you would choose A. If you think you are pretty good, you might choose D. If you are only medium, you might choose C, and so forth. 1. Not at all A...B...C...D...E... Very aggressive aggressive - 2. Not at all A...B...C...D...E... Very independent independent 3. Not at all A...B...C...D...E... Very emotional emotional 4. Very submissive A...B...C...D...E... Very dominant 5. Not at all A...B...C...D...E... Very excitable in a excitable in a major crisis major crisis 6. Very passive A...B...C...D...E... Very active 7. Not at all able to A...B...C...D...E... Able to devote self devote self com- completely to others pletely to others 8. Very rough A...B...C...D...E... Very gentle 9. Not at all help- A...B...C...D...E... Very helpful to ful to others others 242 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. Not at all competitive Very home oriented Not at all kind Indifferent to others' approval Feelings not easily hurt Not at all aware of feelings of others Can make deci- sions easily Gives up very easily Never cries Not at all self- confident Feels very inferior Not at all under— standing of others Very cold in rela- tions with others Very little need for security Goes to pieces pressure A...B...C...D...E... A...B...C...D...E... A...B...C...D...E... A...B...C...D...E... A...B...C...D...E... A...B...C...D...E... A...B...C...D...E... A...B...C...D...E... A...B...C...D...E... A...B...C...D...E... A...B...C...D...E... A...B...C...D...E... A...B...C...D...E... A...B...C...D...E... A...B...C...D...E... 243 Very competitive Very worldly Very kind Highly needful of others' approval . Feelings easily hurt Very aware of feelings of others Has difficulty making decisions Never gives up easily Cries very easily Very self—confident Feels very superior Very understanding of others Very warm in relations with others Very strong need for security Stands up well under pressure REFERENCES REFERENCES Aaskter, C. W. (1974). Psycho-social stress and health disturbances. Social Science and Medicine, 8, 77-90. Albee, G. (1981). The prevention of sexism. Professional Psychology, _1_2, (1), 20-28. Allport, D. (1954). The nature of prejudice. Cambridge, Massachusetts.: Addison-Wesley. Anderson, C. F. (1977). Locus of control, coping behaviors, and perfor- mance in a stress setting: A longitudinal study. Journal of Applied Psychology, fl, 446-451. Aneshensel, C. S., Frerichs, R. D., and Clark, V. A. (1981). Family roles and sex differences in depression. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, _2_2_, 379-393. Angrist, S. S. (1967). Role constellation as a variable in women's leisure activities. Social Forces, 45, (3), 423-431. Askenasy, A. F., Dohrenwend, B. P., dc Dohrenwend, B. S. (1977). Some effects of social class and ethnic group membership on judgements of the magnitude of stressful life events: A research note. Journal of Health and Social -1_8_, 432-439. Bakan, D. (1966). The duality of human existence. Chicago: Rand McNally. Bandura, A. (1982). Self-efficacy mechanism in human agency. American Psycholggist, §_7_, 122-147. 244 245 Bandura, A., Adams, N. E., Hardy, A., and Howells, G. (1980). Tests of the generality of self-efficacy theory. Cognitive Therapy and Research, 4, (1), 39-66. Barrera, M., Sandler, I. N., 6: Ramsay, T. B. (1981). Preliminary develop- ment of a scale of social support: Studies on college students. American Journal of Community Psycholpgy, 9, 435-447. Basow, S. A. (1980). Sex-Role Stereotypes: Traditions and Alternatives. Belmont, California: Wadsworth, Inc. Baucom, D. H., 6: Danker-Brown, P. (1979). Influence of sex roles on the development of learned helplessness. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 47, 928-936. Beck, A. T. (1972). Measuring depression: The depression inventory. In T. A. Williams, M. M. Katz 6: J. A. Shield (Eds.), Recent Advances in the psychology of depressive illnesses. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1972. Beck, J. C. 6: Worthen, K. (1972). Precipitating stress, crisis theory and hospitalization in schizophrenia and depression. Archive of General Psychiatry, 26, 123-129. Beck, A. T. (1976). Cognitive Therapy and the Emotional Disorders. New York: International Universities Press. Bell, D. (1974). Why participation rates of black and white wives differ. Journal of Human Resources, _9, 465-579. Bell, R. A., LeRoy, J. B., Stephenson, J. J. (1982). Evaluating the medi- ating effects of social support upon life events and depression symptoms. Journal of Community Psychology, _12, 325-339. 246 Belle, D. (1982). The stress of caring: Women as providers of social support. In Handbook of Stress: Theoretical and Clinical Aspects. (Ed.) L. Goldberger, S. Breznitz, pp. 496-505. New York: Free Press. Bem, S. L. (1975). Sex-role adaptability: One consequence of psycho- logical androgyny. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, _3_1_, 634-643. Bloom, B. (1975). Changing patterns of psychiatric care. New York: Human Sciences Press. Brewer, M. B., 6: Blum, M. (1979). Sex-role androgyny and patterns of causal attribution for academic achievement. Sex Roles, _5_, 783-796. Brichta, H., dc Inn, A. (1978). Is female leadership perceived as a disad- vantage? Paper presented at Midwest Psychological Association Convention, Chicago. Brown, G. W., Bhrolchain, M., 6: Harris, T. (1975). Social class and psychi- atric disturbance among women in an urban population. Sociology, 9, 225-254. Brown, G. W., 6: Harris, T. (1978). Social origins of depression: A Study of psychiatric disorders in women. New York: Free Press, 1978. Burbach, H. J. (1972). The development of a contesual measure of aliena- tion. Pacific Sociological Review, _1_5_, 225-234. Burbach, J. J., 6: Thompson, M. A. (1971). Alienation among college freshmen: A comparison of Puerto Rican, black, and white students. Journal of College Student Personnel, 12, 248-252. 247 Campbell, A., Converse, P. E., 6: Rodgers, L. (1976). The quality of American life. New York: Russell Sage Foundation. Cannon, M. 8., 6c Locke, B. Z. (1977). Being black is detrimental to one's health: Myth or reality? Phylon, 408-428. Caplan, G. (1974). Support systems and community mental health. New York: Behavioral Publications. Carr, L. G., 6: Krause, E. (1978). Social status, psychiatric symptoma— tology, and response bias. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, g, 86-91. Cheng, C. W., Brizendine, E., dc Oakes, J. (1979). What is an equal chance for minority children? The Journal of Negro EducationJ XLVIII (3), 267-287. Cohen, J., 6c Cohen, P. (1975). Applied multiple regression/correlation ana_lysis for the behavioral sciences. Hillsdale, New Jersey: Erlbaum. Cox, S. (1976). Ethnic diversity of female experience. In S. Cox (Ed.) Female psychology: The emerging self. Chicago: SRA, 2.2-215. Croog, S. H. (1970). The family as a source of stress. In S. Levine 6c N. A. Scotch (Eds.), Social Stress, pp. 19-53. Davidson, G., <5: Neale, J. M. (1978). Abnormal psycholgy (2nd. ed.). New York: Wiley. Dean, D. G. (1961). Alienation: Its meaning and measurement. American Sociolgical Review, E, 753-758. Deaux, D. (1976). The behavior of women and men. Monterey, California: Brookes/ Cole. . 248 Deaux, K., (St Farris, E. (1977). Attributing causes for one's own perfor- mance: The effects of sex, norms, and outcome. Journal of Re- search in Personality, 11, 59-72. Deaux, K., White, L. J., 6c Farris, E. (1975). Skill or luck: Field and lab studies of male and female preferences. Journal of Personali_ty and Social Psychology, _3_2_, 629-636. Denmark, F. (1979). The outspoken woman: Can she win? Paper pre- sented at the meeting of the New York Academy of Sciences. Depue, R. A., and Monroe, S. M. (1984). Life stress and human disorder: Conceptualization and measurement of the disordered group. University of Pittsburgh. Unpublished paper. Dohrenwend, B. P. (1969). Social studies and psychological disorder: An issue of substance and an issue of method. In L. Kolb, V. Ber— nard, 6: B. P. Dohrenwend (Eds.), (Urban challenges in psychiatry: The case history of a response. Boston: Little, Brown. Dohrenwend, B. S. (1973). Life events as stressors: A methodological inquiry. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, _l_4_, 167-17 5. Dohrenwend, B. S., 6: Dohrenwend, B. P. (1979). Class and race as status- related sources of stress. In S. Levine 6: N. Scotch (Eds.), _S_(3_C_i_a_l_ _S_t_1;_e_s_s_. Chicago: Aldine. Dohrenwend, B. S., 6: Dohrenwend, B. P. (1983). Life stress and psycho- pathology. In D. A. Regier 6: C. Allen (Eds.), Risk factor research in the major mental disorders. Proceedings of a Conference, April 3-4, 1980, pp. 131-144, DHHS Pub. No. (ADM) 83-1068. Rockville, Maryland: The Institute. 249 Dohrenwend, B. 8., 6c Dohrenwend, B. P. (Eds.). (1974). Stressful life events: Their nature and effects. New York: John Wiley dc Sons. Dohrenwend, B. S., 6: Dohrenwend, B. P. (Eds.). (1981). Stressful life events and their contexts. New Brunswick, New Foundland: Rutgers University Press. Dohrenwend, B. S., Krasnoff, L., Askenasy, A. R., 61 Dohrewend, B. P. (1978). Exemplification of a method for scaling life events: The PERI life events scale. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 19, 205-229. Donelson, E. (1977). Social responsiveness and separateness. In E. Donelson dc J. Gullahorn (Eds.)., Women: A psychological perspec- _t_iv_e. New York: Wiley, 1977, 140-153. Dressler, W. W., (St Berman, R. N. (1982). Acculturation and stress in a low-income Puerto Rican community. Journal of Human Stress, _3_(_)_, 32-38. Eaton, E. W. (1983). Demographic and social-ecologic risk factors for mental disorders. Risk factor research in the major mental dis- orders. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services - Pub. No. (ADM) 83-1068. Rockville, Maryland: The Institute. Etaugh, C., 6: Rose, S. (1975). Adolescent's sex bias in the evaluation of performance. Developmental Psychology, E, 663-664. Fairbanks, D. T., Hough, R. L. (1981). Cross-cultural differences in perceptions of life events. In B. S. Dohrenwend 6: B. P. Dohrenwend (Eds.), Stressful life events and their contexts, pp.63-84. Fairchild, H. P. (1961). Dictionary of sociology and related sciences. Paterson, J. H.: Littlefield, Adams 6c Co. 250 Felton, B. J., Brown, P., Lehmann, 6: S. Liberatos. (1980). The coping function of sex-role attitudes during marital disruption. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 21, 24-248. Fibel, 3., 6i Hale, W. D. (1978). The generalized expectancy for success scale. A new measure. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychol- ggy, :13, (5), 924-931. Fox. J. W. (1980). Gove's specific sex-role theory of mental illness: A research note. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, _2_1_, 260- 267. Friedan, B. (1963). The feminine mystique. New York: Dell. Frieze, I. H., Parsons, J. E., Johnson, P. B., Ruble, D. N., dc Zellman, G. L. (1978). Women and sex roles: A social psychological perspec- _t_iyg. New York: W. W. Norton and Company. Funabiki, D., Bologna, N. C., Pepping, M., dc Fitzgerald, K. (1980). Revis- iting sex differences in the expression of depression. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 197 8, fl, 157-165. Goldberg, P. (1968). Are women prejudiced against women? Transaction, _5_, 28-30. Gomez, A. (1972). Some considerations in structuring human services mrams for the Spanish-speakim population in the United States. Paper presented at New York Medical College, Metropolitan Hospi- tal Center, New York. Gove, W. (1972). The relationship between sex roles, marital status, and mental illness. Social Forces, 51, 31-44. 251‘ Gove, W. R. (1979). Sex differences in the epidemiology of mental dis- order: Evidence and explanations. In Edith S. Gombert and Violet Franks (Eds.), Gender and disordered behavior: Sex Differences in psychopathology. New York: Brunner—Mazel. Gove, W. R., 6c Geerken, M. R. (1977). The effect of children and employ- ment on the mental health of married men and women. §pgi_a_l_ m, pp, 66-67. Gove, W. R., 6c Tudor, J. F. (1973). Adult sex role and mental illness. American Journal of Sociology, _7_8_, 812-835. Grant, I., Gerst, M., 6: Yager, J. (1976). Scaling of life events by psychi- atric patients and normals. Journal of Psychosomatic Research, 211, 141-149. Grant, I., Sweetwood, H. L., Yager, J., dc Gerst, M. S. (1978). Patterns in the relationship of life events and psychiatric symptoms over time. Journal of Psychosomatic Reseapcp, 3, 183-191. Grier, W. H., 6: Cobbs, P. M. (1968). Black rage. New York: Basic Books. Griffin, J. H. (1961). Black like me. Boston, Massachusetts: Houghton, Mifflin. Gunderson, E. K. E., 6: Rahe, R. H. (Eds.). (1974). Life stress and illness. Springfield, Illinois: Thomas. Gurin, P. G., Gurin, G., Lao, R. C., 6: Beattie, M. (1969). Internal-external control in the motivational dynamics of Negro youth. Journal of Social Issues, Q, (30, 29-53. 252 Haan, N. (1982). The assessment of coping, defense, and stress. In Hand- book of Stress: Theoretical and Clinical Aspects. (Ed.) L. Gold- berger, S., Brenznitz, pp. 254-269. New York: Free Press. Hall, D. T. (1972). A model of coping with role conflict: The role be- havior of college educated women. Administrative Science Quar- terly, 17, 471-486. Hall, R. H. (1969). Occupations and the social structure. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, Inc. Harding, J., Proshansky, H., Kutner, B., 61 Chen, 1. (1969). Prejudice and ethnic relations. In G. Lindsey 6: E. Aronson (Eds.), The Hand- book of social psychology (2nd Ed.), Vol. 5., Reading Massachusetts: Addison-Wesley. Harmon, D. K., Masuda, M., dc Holmes, T. H. (1970). The Social Readjust- ment Rating Scale: A cross cultural study of Western Europeans and Americans. Journal of Psychosomatic Research, _l_4_, 391-400. Henley, N. M. (1977). Body mlitics: Powery sex, and nonverbal communi- ggtipp. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall. Hinkle, L. (1961). Ecological observations of the relation of physical illness, mental illness and the social environment. Psychosomatic Medicine, 2_3, 289-296. Hinkle, L. E., Jr. (1974). The effect of exposure to cultural change, social change and changes in interpersonal relationships on health. In B. S. Dohrenwend 6: B. P. Dohrenwend (Eds.), Stressful life events: The nature and effects, pp. 9-44. 253 Hirsch, B. J. (1980). Natural support systems and copying with major life changes. American Journal of Community Psychology, _8_, 159-172. Hoffman, D. M., 6: Fidell, L. A. (1979). Characteristics of androgynous, undifferentiated, masculine and feminine middle-class women. Sex Roles, _5_, 765-781. Hollingshead, A. B., 6c Redlich, F. C. (1958). Social class and mental illness: A communitystudy. New York: Wiley. Holmes, T. H., 6: Rahe, R. H. (1967). The social readjustment rating scale. Journal of Psychosomatic Research, _1_l_, 213-218. Horner, M. (1966). Sex differences in achievement motivation and per- formance in competitive-noncompetitive situations. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Michigan, 1968. Horowitz, M. J. (1976). Stress response syndromes. New York: Jason Aronson. Hsieh, T., Shybut, J., Lotsof, E. J. (1969). Internal versus external control and ethnic group membership: A cross-cultural comparison. Journal of Consultipg and Clinical Psychology, fl, 122-134. Husaini, B. A., Neff, J. A., Newbrough, J. R., 6: Moore, M. C. (1982). The stress-buffering role of social support and personal competence among the rural married. Journal of Community Psychology, _l_(_)_, 409-426. Jenkins, C. D. (1979). Psychological modifiers of response to stress. Journal of Human Stress (Dec.), 3-23. 254 Johnson, J. H., dc Sarason, I. G. (1978). Life stress, depression and anxiety: Internal-external control as a moderator variable. Journal of Psychosomatic Research, fl, 205-208. Jones, W. H., Chernovetz, M. E., 6: Hansson, R. O. (1978). The enigma of androgyny: Differential implications for males and females? Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, fl, 298-313. Kanter, R. M. (1977). Some effects of proportions of group life: Skewed sex ratios and responses to token women. American Journal of Sociology, §_2_, 965-990. Kardiner, A., 6: Ovesey, L. (1951). The mark of oppression. New York: Norton. Kaschak, E. (1978). Sex bias in student evaluation of college professors. Psychology of Women Quarterly, _3, 235-243. Kessler, R. C. (1979a). A strategy for studying differential vulnerability to the psychological consequences of stress. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 2_0, 100-108. Kessler, R. C. (1979b). Stress, social status, and psychological distress. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 2_0, 100-108. Kessler, R. C., McLeod, J. (1984) Social support and psychological distress in community surveys. In Social Support and Health. (Ed.) S. Cohen, L. Syme. New York: Academic In Press. Kessler, R. C., McLeod, J., 6c Wethington, E. (1984). The costs of caring: A perspective on the relationship between and psychological dis- tress. In Social Support: Theory, Research and Applications. (Ed.) I. G. Sarason, B. R. Sarason. The Hague: Martinus Nijhof. In Press. 255 Kessler, R. C., Price, R. H., dc Wortman, C. B. (1985). Annual Review of Psychology, 36, 531-572. Kluckhohn, F. R., dc Strodtbeck, F. L. (1961). Variations in value orien _ta_ti_o_n_§. Evanston, Illinois: Row, Peterson. Kobasa, S. C. (1979). Stressful life events, personality, and health: An inquiry into hardiness. Journal of Personality and Social Psy- chology, _3_7_, 1-11. Kobasa, S., Maddi, S., 6: Courington, S. (1981). Personality and consti- tution as mediators in the stress-illness relationship. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 22, 368-37 8. Kohlberg, L. A. (1966). Cognitive-developmental analysis of children's sex-role concepts and attitudes. In E. E. Maccoby (Ed.), The development of sex differences. Stanford: Stanford University Press, 56-85. Kohn, M. L. (1972). Class, family and schizophrenia. Social Forces, 5_0, 295-302. Komaroff, A. L., Masuda, M., dc Holmes, T. (1968). The Social Readjust- ment Rating Scale: A cross-cultural study of Negro, Mexican, and White Americans. Journal of Psychosomatic Research, fl, 121-128. Kramer, M., Rosen, B. M., dc Willis, E. M. (1973). Definitions and distri- butions of mental disorders in a racist society. In C. V. Willis, B. M. Kramer, 6c B. S. Brown (Eds.), Racism and mental health. Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania: University of Pittsburgh Press. Kristal, J., Sanders, D., Spence, J. T., 6c Helmreich, R. (1975). Inferences about femininity of competent women and their implications for likability. Sex Roles, 33-40. 256 Laws, J. L. (1979). The second X: Sex role and social role. New York: Elsevier. Lazarus, R. S. (1966). Psychological stress and the copipg process. New York: McGraw-Hill. Lazarus, R. S. (1974). Psychological stress and coping in adaptation and illness. International Journal of Psychiatry in Medicine, _5_, 321-333. Lefcourt, H. M. (1976). Locus of control: Current trends on theory and research. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Levinson, R. (1976). Sex discrimination in employment. Psychology Today, March, 1976, p. 21. Levinson, D. J., Darrow, C. H., Klein, E. B., Levinson, M. H. a McKee, B. (1978). The seasons of a man's life. New York: Ballatine Books. Liem, R., 6c Liem, J. H. (1978). Social class and mental illness recon- sidered: The role of economic stress and social support. Health and Social Behavior Journal, 25, 17 6-1 88. Liem, R., 6c Liem, J. H. (1981). Relations among social class, life events and mental illness: A comment on findings and methods. In B. S. Dohrenwend 6c B. P. Dohrenwend (Eds.), Stressful life events and their contexts, pp. 234-256. New Jersey: Rutgers University Press. Lin, N., Simeone, R., Ensel, W., 6: Kuo, W. (1979). Social support, stressful life events, and illness: A model and an empirical test. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 10, 108-119. 257 Lockheed, M. E., dc Hall, K. P. (1976). Conceptualizing sex as a status characteristic and applications to leadership training strategies. Journal of Social Issues, 32, Ill-124. Loeb, R. C., 6: Horst, L. (1978). Sex differences in self and teacher's reports on self-esteem in preadolescents. Sex Roles, :1, 77 9-788. Maccoby, E. E., dc Jacklin, C. M. (1974). The psychology of sex differ- ences. Stanford, California: Stanford University Press. Marcus, A. C., dc Seeman, T. E. (1981). Sex differences in reports of illness and disability: A preliminary test of the "Fixed Role Obliga- tions" hypothesis. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 22, 174-182. Maslow, A. (1954). Motivation and personality. New York: Harper dc Row. Masuda, M., dc Holmes, T. H. (1967). The Social Readjustment Rating Scale: A cross cultural study of Japanese and Americans (1967). Journal of Psychosomatic Research, _1_1_, 227-237. Mechanic, D. (1974). Social structure and personal adaptation: Some neglected dimensions. In G. V. Coelho, D. A. Hamburg, 6: J. B. Adams (Eds.), Ccming and adaptation, pp. 32-44. Mintz, N., 6: Schwartz, D. (1964). Community factors in the incidence of schizophrenia and maniac depression among Italians in greater Boston. International Journal of Social Psychiatry, 1_0_, 101-118. Mischel, H. (1974). Sex bias in the evaluation of professional achieve- ments. Journal of Educational Psychology, §_6_, (2), 157—166. Myers, 258 J. K., Lindenthal, J., dc Pepper, M. P. (1974). Social class life events, and psychiatric symptoms: A longitudinal study. In B. S. Dohren- wend 6: B. P. Dohrenwend (Eds.), Stressful life events: Their nature and effects. New York: Wiley, pp. 191-206. Myers, J., Lindenthal, J., (St Pepper, M. (1975). Life events, social inte- gration and psychiatric symptomatology. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, _1_6_, 421-429. Myers, J. K., Lindenthal, J. J., Pepper, M. P., 6c Ostrander, D. R. (1972). Life events and mental status: A longitudinal study. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 13, 398-406. Newman, D. K., Amidet, N. J., Carter, B. L., Day, D., Kruvant, W. J., 6c Russell, J. S. (1978). Protest politics and prosperity: Black Americans and white institutions 1940-1975. New York: Pantheon Books. Nieva, V. F., 6c Futek, B. A. (1981). Women and work: A psychological perspective. New York: Praeger. Nuckolls, K. B., Cassel, J., 8: Kaplan, B. H. (1972). Psychosocial assets, life crisis and the prognosis of pregnancy. American Journal of Epidemiology, 95, 431-441. Padilla, A. M., Ruiz, R. A., 6: Alvarez, R. (1975). Community mental health services for Spanish-speaking/surnamed populations. Ameri- can Psycholo ist, _3_0, 892-905. Parker, 8., dc Kleiner, R. (1986). Mental illness in the urban Negro Com- munity. New York: Free Press. Parsons, T., 6f Bales, R. B. (1955). Family, socialization and interaction process. Glencoe, Illinois: Free Press. 259 Parsons, O. A., 6: Schneider, J. M. (1974). Locus of control in university students from eastern and western societies. Journal of Consultng and Clinical Psychology, §_2_, 456—461. Pearlin, L. 1., 6c Schooler, C. (1978). The structure of coping. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, _13, 2-21. Pettigrew, T. (1964). A profile of the Negro American. Princeton, New Jersey: D. Van Nostrand C., Inc. Phares, E. J. (1973). Locus of Control: A personality determinant of behavior. Morristown, New Jersey: General Learning Press. Phares, E. J. (1976). Locus of Control in personality. Morristown, New Jersey: General Learning Press. Phares, E. J., Ritchie, D. E., 6: Davis, W. L. (1968). International control and reaction to threat. Journal of Personality and Social Psychol- ogy, _1_9_, 402-405. Pheterson, G. S., Kiesler, S. B., 6: Goldberg, P. (1969). Female prejudice against men. Unpublished manuscript, Connecticut College, 1969. Piore, M. (1970). The dual labor market. Theory and implications. Reprinted from M. J. Piore, Jobs and training, in Beerr 6c Barringer (Eds.), The state and the poor. New York: Winthrop. Pleck, J. H. (1977). The work-family role system. Social Problems, 24, 417-427. Quesada, G. M., Spears, W., (St Ramos, P. (1978). Interracial depressive epidemiology in the southwest. Journal of Health and Social Behav- _ip_r_, _1_9_, 77-85. 260 Rabkin, J. (1979). Ethnic density and psychiatric hospitalization: Hazards of minority status. American Journal of Psychiatry, 136, 1561- 1566. Rabkin, J. G., 6c Struening, E. L. (1976). Life events, stress, and illness. Science, 194, 1013—1020. Rahe, R. H. (1975). Epidemiological studies of life changes and illness. International Journal of Psychiatry in Medicine, _6_, 133-146. Rahe, R. H., Lundberg, U., Bennett, 6t Theorell, T. (1971). The Social Readjustment Rating Scale: A comparative study of Swedes and Americans. Journal of Psychosomatic Research, 15, 241-249 I Rahe, R. H., Meyer, M., Smith, M., Kjaer, G., 6: Holmes, T. H. (1964). Social stress and illness onset. Journal of Psychosomatic Research, 1964, 8, 35-44. Redfield, J., dc Stone, A. (1979). Individual viewpoints of stressful life events. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 41, (1), 147-154. Reynolds, G. H. (1976). Correlational findings, educational implications, and criticisms of locus of control research: A review. Journal of Black Studies, _6_, (3), 1221-1256. Roberts, R. E., 6: O'Keefe, S. J. (1981). Sex differences in depression reexamined. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 22, 394-400. Rosaldo, M. Z. (1974). Women, culture and society: A theoretical over— view. In M. Z. Rosaldo and L. Lamphere (Eds.), Women, culture and society. Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1974. 261 Rosenberg, E. J., 6: Dohrenwend, B. S. (1975). Effects of experience and ethnicity on ratings of life events as stressors. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 1975, 16, 127-129. Rosenkrantz, P., Vogel, S. R., Bee, H., Broverman, I. K., 6: Broverman, D. M. (1968). Sex role stereotypes and self-concepts in college students. Journal of Consulting and. Clinical Psychology, 32, 287- 295. Rotter, J. B. (1966). Generalized expectancies of internal versus external control of reinforcement. Psychological Monograph, (Whole No. 604). Royce, A. P. (1982). Ethnic identity: Stratpgies of diversity. Indiana: Indiana University Press. Sandler, I. N., 6: Barrera, J., Jr. (1980). Social support as a stress-buffer. A multi-method investigation. Poster session presented at the meeting of the American Psychological Association, Montreal, 1980. Sandler, I. N., dc Lakey, B. (1982). Locus of control as a stress moderator: The role of control perceptions and social support. American Journal of Community Psychology, _l_fl, (1), 65-79. Sarason, I. G., Johnson, J. H., dc Siegel, J. M. (1978). Assessing the impact of life changes: Development of the Life Experiences Survey. Journal of Consd’dpg and Clinical Psychology, 3p, (5), 932-946. Sawhill, I. (1976). Discrimination and poverty among women who head families. In M. Blaxall 6c B. Reagan (Eds.), Women and the _w_o_r§-_-_ pla_ce_. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 44-54. Scarf, M. (1979). The more sorrowful sex. Psychology Today, 12, (11), 44-52, 89-90. 262 Schrank, T. H., dc Riley, J. W. (1976). Women in work organizations. In J. M. Kreps (Ed.), Women and the American economy. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall. Seligman, M. (1975). Helplessness: On depression, development and M. San Francisco: Freeman. Sherif, M., (St Sherif, C. (1956). An outline of social psychology. New York: Harper ck Row. Sherman, J. (1976). Social values, femininity and the development of female competence. Journal of Social Issues, 32, 181-195. Shinar, E. H. (1975). Sexual stereotypes of occupations. Journal of Vocational Behavior, _7_, 99-111. Shinar, E. H. (1978). Person perception as a function of occupation and sex. Sex Roles, :1, 679-693. Smith, E. J. (1973). Counselirg the culturally different black youth. Columbus, Ohio: Charles E. Merrill. Smith, E. J. (1981). Mental health and service delivery systems for black women. Journal of Black Studies, 12 (2), 126-141. Smith, E. J. (1982). The black female adolescent. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 6, (3), 261-288. Smith, E. J. (1984). The sex-role stereotypes of black college students. Unpublished manuscript. Spence, J. T., 6c Helmreich, R. (1972). The Attitudes toward Women Scale: An objective instrument to measure attitudes toward the rights and roles of women in contemporary society. JSAS Catalog of Selected Documents in Psycholgy, _2_, 66. * l 263 Spence, J. T., 6c Helmreich, R. (1978). Masculinity and femininity: The psychological dimensions, correlates and antecedents. Austin: University of Texas Press. Spielberger, R. E.., Gorsuch, R. L., dc Lushene, R. E. (1970). Manual for the state-tract anxiety inventory. Palo Alto: Consulting Psychologist Press, 1970. Stake, J. E. (1970). The ability/performance dimensions of self-esteem: Implications for women's achievement behavior. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 3, 365-377. Sue, D. W. (1975). Asian-Americans: Social-psychological forces affect- ing their life styles. In J. S. Picou and R. E. Campbell (Eds.), Career theory of special groups: Theory, research, and practice. Columbus, Ohio: Charles E. Merrill, pp. 97-121. Sue, D. W., 6: Kirk, B. (1975). Asian-Americans: Use of counseling and psychiatric services on a college campus. Journal of Counseling Psychology, fl, 84-86. Suen, H. K. (1983). Alienation and attrition of black college students on a predominantly white campus. Journal of Collpge Student Personnel, _3, 117-120. Suzuki, R. (1977). Education and socialization of Asian-Americans: A revisionist analysis of the "Model Minority" thesis. Amerasia Journal, 3, 23-52. Taylor, J., 6: Deaux, K. (1973). When women are more deserving than men: Equity, attribution, and perceived sex differences. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 28, 360-367. 264 Thoits, P. A. (1982). Life stress, social support, and psychological vulner— ability: Epidemiological considerations. Journal of Community Community Psychology, _l_Q, 341—362. Thoits, P. A. (1983). Dimensions of life events that influence psychologi- cal distress: An evaluation and synthesis of the literature. In Psychological Stress: Trends in Theory and Research. (Ed.) H. B. Kaplan, pp. 33-103. New York: Academic. Thompson, S. C. (1981). "Will it hurt less if I can control it?" A complex answer to a simple question. Psychological Bulletin, 99, 89-101. Throop, W. F., 6: MacDonald, A. (1971). Internal-external locus of control: A bibliography. Psychological Reports, Monography Supplement 1, Vol. 28. Torres, Matrullo. C. (1976). Acculturation and psychopathology among Puerto Rican women in mainland United States. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 4_6_, 7 1 0-7 1 9. Touhey, J. C. (1974). Effects of additional women professionals on ratings of occupational prestige and desirability. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, _2_9, (1), 86-89. U.S. Bureau of the Census. Current Population Reports Series P-60, No. 125. (1980). Money and persons in the United States: 1979. Washington, D.C.: USGPO. U.S. Commission on Civil Rights. (1980). Success of Asian-Americans: Fact of fiction? Clearinghouse Publication, 64. U.S. Department of Health, Education and Welfare. (1969). Toward a social report. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office. 265 Vanfossen, B. E. (1981). Sex differences in the mental health effects of spouse support and equity. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 2_2, 130-143. Warheit, G., Holzer, C., 6: Arey, S. A. (1975). Race and mental illness: An epidemiologic update. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, _l_6_, 243-256. Warheit, G., Holger 111, G. E., 6c Schwab, R. (1973). An analysis of social class and racial differences in depressive symptomatology. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, fl, 291-299. Warheit, G., Vega, W., Shimizu, D., 6c Meinhardt, K. (1982). Interpersonal coping networks and mental health problems among four race-ethnic groups. Journal of Community Psychology, _l_0, 312-324. Weissman, M. M., 61 Klerman, G. L. (1979). Sex differences and the epidemiology of depression. In E. S. Gomberg at V. Franks (Eds.), Gender and disorder behavior: Sex differences in psychppathology. New York: Brunner/Mazel, 381-425. White, R. H. (1979). A conversation with Theodore H. White, Book Digest Magazine, 6, 19-27. Williams, A. W., Ware, J. E., Jr., 6c Donald, C. A. (1981). A model of mental health, life events, and social supports, applicable to general populations. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 2_2, 324-336. Willie, C. V., Kramer, B. M., 6: Brown, B. S. (1973). Racism and mental health. Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania: University of Pittsburgh Press. Witkin, H. A. (1986). Field dependence in psychological theory, research, and application. Hillsdale, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associ- ates. 266 Wyatt, G. E. (1977). A comparison of the scaling of Afro-Americans' life-change events. Journal of Human Stress, 13-18.