THE PSYCHOSDCIAL NATURE AND DETERMINANTS OF ATTITUOES TOWARD EDUCATION AND TOWARD PHYSICALLY DISABLED PERSONS IN JAPAN Thesis for the Degree of Ph. D. MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY WILLIAM CONRAD CESSNA. IR. 1967 IQIIIIIIITIIIIIIIIIIII IL IIIIIIIIIII THESIS 3 3 01084 2460 This is to certifg that the thesis entitled THE PSYCHOSOCIAL NATURE AND DETERMINANTS OF ATTITUDES TOWARD EDUCATION AND TOWARD PHYSICALLY DISABLED PERSONS IN JAPAN presented by William Conrad Cessna, Jr. has been accepted towards fulfillment of the requirements for Ph.D. degree mm. 1’1 L—JI’T/lyzC—L’Lb ) f/J’IA Wt professor Dme March 15, 1967 . LIBRARY “Mime“ SW ‘tjflw‘efifify I *M I teem * 7* ”Man . 3’“ My . r.- “ : Ly, avg? 3W1,- \ fi”tig ABSTRACT THE PSYCHOSOCIAL NATURE AND DETERMINANTS OF ATTITUDES TOWARD EDUCATION AND TOWARD PHYSICALLY DISABLED PERSONS IN JAPAN by William Conrad Cessna, Jr. The purpose of this study was to investigate the theoretical, methodological, and technical questions per— taining to the cross—national investigation of attitudes.1 The relationship between (a) attitudes, (b) interpersonal values, (0) personal contact with education and disabled persons, and (d) certain demographic variables were examined. The assumption was that these variables may be determinants of attitudes. The study was conducted in Tokyo, Japan in l965. A battery of five research instruments were administered: (a) Attitudes Toward Disabled Persons Scale (ATDP), (b) Education Scale (traditional and progressive), (G) Gordon Survey of Interpersonal Values (SIV), (d) Personal Questionnaire, and (e) Personal Questionnaire—Handicapped Persons. Administration time was approximately two hours. 1This study of attitudes toward education and toward disabled persons is in progress in countries in Europe, Latin America, and Asia under the direction of Dr. John E. Jordan, Michigan State University. WILLIAM CONRAD CESSNA, Jr. The sample consisted of 211 respondents from known occupational groups: (a) special education and rehabilitation personnel (SER), (b) elementary and secondary teachers (E), (c) low income,white and blue collar workers (L), and (d) business and government managers and executives (M). The theoretical orientation of the study was social— psychological with a focus on the influence of contact variables (such as frequency, enjoyment, ease of avoidance) and interpersonal values (asset and comparative) on the differential attitudes of known occupational groups. Asset values were operationalized by Benevolence; comparative values by Leadership and Recognition (SIV). Statistical analyses included descriptive statistics (frequency column count), analysis of variance (controlled for sex and group), and correlational analyses (zero—order, partial, and multiple). The study was based on five sets of hypotheses. The major hypotheses examined (a) scaling, (b) contact frequency, intensity, and attitude scores, (c) attitude and value scores, (d) change orientation and attitude scores, and (e) characteristics of the BER group. Analysis of the data revealed the following significant findings. High frequency of contact resulted in high intensity scores for the ATDP scale. High frequency of WILLIAM CONRAD CESSNA, JR. contact, if accompanied with alternative rewards, enjoyment of contact, and ease of avoidance of contact resulted in positive ATDP scores. As hypothesized, high Leadership scores resulted in high traditional attitudes toward education. Recognition scores were not differentially related to the attitude scores. Benevolence scores were not significant for the ‘nt for the sexes; \\ occupational groups but were signific females had higher scores than males. High change orientation scores were correlated with progressive attitudes toward education. The SER group had higher Benevolence scores than all groups in the sample, lower Leadership scores than the M group, and lower Recognition scores than the L group. The SER group also had lower traditional attitudes toward education scores than all groups but not higher progressive attitude scores. All groups indicated a transitional or progressive orientation to change, with no significant group differences. The SER group had more contact with mentally retarded and emotionally disturbed persons than the other groups. A major research task was the develOpment of a rationale and technique for determining cross—cultural comparability of input data. Concept equivalence was attempted by using Japanese professional rehabilitation personnel to translate WILLIAM CONRAD CESSNA, JR. and supervise the administration of the instruments. Scaling was also proposed as another approach to concept equivalence. However, scaling was not attempted because of computer programming difficulties. It was recommended that Guttman— Lingoes Multiple Scale Analysis — l (1965), which allows for multidimensional and multi—unidimensional analysis of data, be used in future studies for this purpose. The majority of the hypotheses were confirmed or the results were in the direction hypothesized. However, the confounding of certain data (e.g., low traditional attitudes toward education but not high progressive attitudes toward education for the SER) suggests that the complex nature of attitudes and their relationship to other logical constructs, such as values and personal contact, needs further extensive research. A major implication of the present research is the need for future studies of attitudes toward significant social objects to COpe with the problem of concept equivalence by constructing a comprehensive, interrelated battery of instruments capable of adequately sampling the attitude universe being considered. Facet theory, as proposed by Guttman was suggested as one possible approach to this problem. THE PSYCHOSOCIAL NATURE AND DETERMINANTS OF ATTITUDES TOWARD EDUCATION AND TOWARD PHYSICALLY DISABLED PERSONS IN JAPAN By William Conrad Cessna, Jr. A THESIS Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY Department of Counseling, Personnel Services, and Educational Psychology College of Education 1967 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I am grateful to the members of the adVisement committee for their guidance throughout my program of study at Michigan State University, and for their assistance in the completion of this research project. Dr. John E. Jordan (Chairman) has provided support and inspiration beyond that eXpected. Being associated with him in a rigorous cross cultural research effort has been a rich professional eXperience. Dr. Normal Abeles, Dr. Cole S. Brembeck, Dr. Gregory A. Miller, and Dr. Edgar A. Schuler have given helpful suggestions which are deeply appreciated. The assistance of a number of individuals and institutions in Japan has been essential in conducting the research for this dissertation. Professor Yasusada Takase, professor, Japan College of Social Work and Vice—Director of the Institute for the In—Service Training of Social Workers assumed the responsibility of coordinating the efforts of the Japanese personnel working on the project. His interest in rehabilitation research enabled him to enlist the help of other qualified personnel, including Professor Yasuo Tsujimura, Ochanomizu Women's University, and Mr. Giichi Misawa, staff psychologist, National Rehabilitation Center for the Physically Handicapped. ii Their skillful effort was a major contribution to this research project. Without their understanding and help in translating, administering, and scoring the instruments, the study would have been substantially restricted. Special appreciation is due the institutions with which Messrs Takase, Tsujimura, and Misawa are affiliated for their financial assistance in providing materials and personnel for translating, mimeographing, and scoring the instruments. The Computer Center at Michigan State University provided facilities and counsel; without such services, the extensive statistical analyses would have been greatly limited. Miss Katherine Morris assisted in preparing the raw data for card punching and Miss Susan Speer provided computer programming. A training grant from the Vocational Rehabilitation Administration, U. S. Department of Health, Education and Welfare made the research financially feasible. To my wife, Opal, my daughter, Kandi, and my son, Stephen, I acknowledge the largest debt of gratitude. Their patience, understanding, encouragement, and occasional prodding have been instrumental in the com— pletion of the study. To them I dedicate this work. iii PREFACE This study is one in a series, jointly designed by several investigators as an example of the concurrent- replicative model of cross cultural research. A common use of instrumentation, theoretical material, as well as technical, and analyses procedures was both necessary and desirable. The authors, therefore, collaborated in many respects although the data were different in each study as well as certain design, procedural, and analyses approaches. The specific studies are discussed more fully in the review of literature chapter in each of the individual investigations. iv TABLE OF CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGMENTS. . . PREFACE . . . . . LIST OF TABLES . . LIST OF FIGURES LIST OF APPENDICES Chapter I. INTRODUCTION. Nature of the Problem Statement of the Problem Definition of Terms. . Organization of the Thesis II. REVIEW OF THEORY AND RELATED RESEARCH Attitudes Toward Education . . . . Attitudes Toward Disability . . . . Attitude and Value Orientations. . Value Variation Among Groups Value Variations of Rehabilitation Groups. . . . . . . Measurement of Values Attitude Intensity and Personal Contact Empirical Research on Attitudes Toward the Physically Disabled . . . Cross- National Studies Social Contact and Informational Studies . . . Cross— Cultural Studies Types of Disability The Measurement of Attitudes. General Considerations Cross— National Research and Scale Analysis . . . Scale Analysis . Scale and Intensity Analysis in Relation to Cross— National Problem of Comparability of Responses V Page ii iv ix xiii Chapter Page III. METHODOLOGY AND PROCEDURES . . . . . . 68 Rationale for Selecting Sample from Japan 68 General Description of Japan. . . . . 69 Geography . . . . . . . . . . 69 Population . . . . . . . . . . 70 Economics . . . . . . . . . . 71 Politics . . . . . . . . . . 72 Education . . . 73 Special Education and Rehabilitation Services . . . . . . . . . 76 Research pOpulation . . . . . . . 79 Selection of Variables. . . 79 Attitudes Toward Physical Disability . 80 Attitudes Toward Education . . . 81 The Intensity Scales . . . . . . 82 Interpersonal Values . . . . . . 83 Personal Contact Variables . . . . 85 Contact with Education . . . . 86 Contact with Physically Disabled. . . 86 Preferences for Personal Relationships. 86 Religiosity. . . . . . . 87 Institutional Satisfaction. . . . . 87 Change Orientation . . . . . . . 88 Demographic Variables . . . . . . 89 Collection of Data . . . . . . . . 89 Statistical Procedures. . . . . . . 90 Descriptive. . . . . . 90 Scale and Intensity Analysis . . . . 90 Mean Differences Analysis . . . 92 Relational and/or Predictive Analysis . 9A Major Research Hypotheses . . . . 96 Hypotheses Related to Scaling. . 96 Hypotheses Related to Contact Frequency, Intensity, and Attitude Scores. . 98 Hypotheses Related to Value and Attitude Scores. . 100 Hypothesis Related to Change Orientation and Attitude Scores . . 103 Hypotheses Related to Characteristics of Those Working directly with Disabled Persons (SER) . . . . . . . 103 Limitations of the Study . . . . . 106 vi Chapter IV. ANALYSIS OF THE DATA . . . . . . Section 1: Descriptive Data. . . Differences in Mean Education, Income and Age Scores Between Interest, Male, and Female Groups Summary of Descriptive Data in Tables 3-6 . . Section 2: Hypotheses Testing, Mean Differences, and Correlational Analyses. Hypotheses Related to Scaling. . Hypotheses Related to Contact Frequency, Intensity and Attitude Scores . . Hypotheses Related to Attitude and Value Scores. . . Hypothesis Related to Change Orientation and Attitude Scores Hypotheses Related to the Character- istics of Those Working Directly With the Disabled Persons (SER) Differences Between the Various Occupational Groups on Mean Scores on the Value Sub- scales Sex Differences as Indicated by Mean Scores on the Value Sub- scales Differences Between Male and Female Mean Scores on Attitude Variables. V. DISCUSSION, RECOMMENDATIONS, AND SUMMARY Part I: Discussion of Results . . . Scale and Intensity Analysis in Relation to Attitudes. Contact Frequency in Relation to Intensity . Contact Variables in Relation to Attitudes . Value Variables in Relation to Attitudes. Change Orientation variables in Relation to Attitudes Group Differences in Relation to Values, Attitudes, Change Orientation, and Contact Variables vii Page 109 109 112 116 118 118 126 138 1A0 151 151 154 158 159 159 161 163 165 167 170 'Il ||I|.|I| Chapter Part II: Discussion of Theoretical and Methodological Issues Theoretical Issues Methodological Issues Part III: Recommendations Recommendations Related to Recommendations Related to Instrumentation . Recommendations Related to Analysis . . . 0 Sampling. Statistical Part IV: Concluding Summary REFERENCES . ADDENDUM TO REFERENCES APPENDICES viii Page 17A 175 178 183 183 183 186 189 192 208 210 Table 10. LIST OF TABLES Distribution of respondents according to sex and interest group . - - - - - Occupational composition of total sample by sex and interest group . . . Comparison of mean differences, standard deviations, F statistics, and Duncan's Multiple Means Test results in respect to three demographic variables for four occupational categories Duncan's New Multiple Range Test applied to means of education scores for four occupational categories . . Comparison of mean differences, standard deviations, and F statistics in respect to three demographic variables for males and females . . . Interpretation of education scores in terms of actual educational attainment. Means, standard deviations, and F statistic comparing high and low frequency of contact with disabled persons with intensity scores on the ATDP scale. . . . . . . . Means, standard deviations, and F statistic comparing high and low frequency of contact with education with intensity scores on the Progressive Attitude Toward Education scale Means, standard deviations, and F statistic comparing high and low frequency of contact with education with intensity scores on the Traditional Attitude Toward Education scale Zero—order correlations between amount of contact and intensity scores on the attitude scales for the occupational groups . ix Page 110 111 113 114 115 115 120 121 122 123 Table IL. 12. 13. 1A. 15. l6. 17. 18. 19. 20. Partial and multiple correlations between Attitude Toward Disabled Persons and Attitudes Toward Education (both progressive and traditional) as related to contact variables Means, standard deviations, and F statistic comparing high and low scores on Leadership value and Attitudes Toward Disabled Persons scores Means, standard deviations, and F statistic comparing high and low scores on Leadership value and Progressive Attitude Toward Education scores. . . . . . Means, standard deviations, and F statistic comparing high and low scores on Leadership value and Traditional Attitude Toward Education scores. . Means, standard deviations, and F statistic comparing high and low scores on Recognition value and scores on the Attitudes Toward Handicapped Persons Scale. Means, standard deviations, and F statistic comparing high and low scores on Recognition value and scores on the Progressive Attitude Toward Education scale. . . . . . . . Means, standard deviations, and F statistic comparing high and low scores on Recognition value and scores on the Traditional Attitude Toward Education scale. Means, standard deviations, and 3 statistic comparing high and low scores on Benevolence value and scores on the Attitudes Toward Disabled Persons scale. Means, standard deviations, and F statistic comparing high and low scores on Benevolence value and scores on the Progressive Attitude Toward Education scale. . . Means, standard deviations, and F statistic comparing high and low scores on Benevolence value and scores on the Traditional Attitude Toward Education scale. Page 125 126 127 127 128 129 129 130 131 131 Table 2L. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. Page Means, standard deviations, and E statistic for Benevolence scores, ATDP scale scores, and Progressive Attitudes Toward Education scores for males and females. . . . . . 133 Zero—order correlations between Attitude Toward Disabled persons scale (content) and the Gordon value scale, for four occupational groups . . . . . . . . . . . . . 136 Zero—order correlation between Attitude Toward Education (content) and Gordon value scale for four occupational groups. . . . 137 Partial and multiple correlations between attitudes toward handicapped persons and attitudes toward education (both progressive and traditional) as related to change orientation variables . . . . . . . . 139 Means, standard deviations, F statistic, and mean rankings for Attitude Toward Disabled Persons scores for four occupational categories. . . . . . . . . . . . 140 Means, standard deviations, F statistic, mean rankings and Duncan's Test results for . Benevolence value scores for four 27. 28. 29. 30. occupational categories . . . . . . . 142 Means, standard deviations, F statistic, mean rankings and Duncan's Test results for Leadership value scores for four occupational categories. . . . . . . . . . . . 142 Means, standard deviations, F statistic, mean rankings, and Duncan's Test results for Recognition value scores for four occupational categories. . . . . . . . . . . . 143 Means, standard deviations, F statistic, and mean rankings for Progressive Attitude Toward Education scores for four occupational categories. . . . . . . . . . . . 144 Means, standard deviations, F statistics, mean rankings, and Duncan's Test results for Traditional Attitude Toward Education scores for four occupational categories . . . . 145 xi Table 3L. 32. 33. 34. 35. 36. 37. Means, standard deviations, F statistic, mean rankings, and Duncan's Test results for six change variables for four occupational groups. . . . Means, standard deviations, F statistic, mean rankings, and Duncan's Test results related to contacts with mentally retarded and emotionally disturbed persons for four occupational groups. Comparison of mean differences, standard deviations, F statistic, and mean rankings for three value variables, and four occupational categories Comparison of mean differences, standard deviations and F statistic in respect to six value variables for males and females. Sex difference scores on various national groups on sub—scales of the Survey of Interpersonal Values (Gordon, 1963) Comparison of mean differences, standard deviations and F statistics in respect to three attitude variables for males and females. Summary of hypotheses 1 through 13 indicating confirmation or non— confirmation . Page 149 150 152 160 Figure 1. LIST OF FIGURES Basic facets used to determine component structure of attitude universe A Mapping Sentence for the facet analysis of attitudes toward education . . . A Mapping Sentence for the facet analysis of a research project on cross—cultural attitudes toward education . . . xiii Page 185 187 188 LIST OF APPENDICES A. Statistical Material 1. Means, Standard Deviations, and Number of Respondents for 63 Variables for the Total Sample, Males, and Females by Occupational Groups B. Instrumentation \Imwtme Education Scale Survey of Interpersonal Values Personal Questionnaire Handicapped Persons Scale Definitions of Physical Handicap Personal Questionnaire: Handicapped Persons Rationale and Procedures for Producing Item "Directionalit;” C. Variables, Administration Procedures, and Code Forms NOWL‘WNH Basic Variables of the Study Administration Procedures Code Book Special Instructions for Japan Data Transcription Sheet FCC I and II Variable Computer Print Out Methods of Sample Selection xiv CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION The concept of social and cultural change has been the subject of considerable research by social scientists. There is also a ”continuing strong interest" in the study of.the diffusion of innovation. Fliegel and Kivlin (1966, pp. 235—248) cite the need to develop a parsimonous ex— planation of the adOption of new ideas and practices. Executives in business, education, politics, and religion are vitally interested in the implications of change within cultures and across cultures. Since change is an essential element in every situation in which man is involved, an interest in theories of change is of practical importance to professional change agents and to private citizens interested in human progress. The task of the social scientist, as a change agent, is to engage in purposeful, planned change in relation to four dynamic systems: the individual personality, the face— to-face group, the organization, and the community (Lippitt, Watson, and Westley, 1958, p. 5). Nature of the Problem Educators have a paradoxical role; they favor inno- vation and change, yet are intent in transmitting the traditions of their particular culture. For Maritain (1965, pp. 38, 39), the aim of education involves two primary objectives: guiding the person as he "shapes him- self as a human person...while at the same time conveying to him the spiritual heritage of the nation and the civi- lization...preserving...century-old achievements of generations." Educators are also innovators and consumers of technological change (Trump, 1961), often focusing on the content of change while ignoring or over simplifying the process of change. Administrators must cope with change which is often given its primary impetus from outside the formal organi— zation and the "number of innovations is inversely proportional to the tenure of the chief administrator" (Griffiths, 1964, p. 434). However, forces within a system or organization may also tend to initiate change (Miles, 1964, pp. 645-647). Psychologists are interested in personal change (Kell and Mueller, 1966; Wrenn, 1962). The concern is not whether change will occur, but whether change shall be beneficial to the greatest possible number of people. Wrenn cites several areas where change has vast implications for increasing understanding among individuals and nations including the following: the pressure of population growth, the "Automation Revolution", changing family patterns, the creation of super cities, and the general increase of wealth. The effect of social change is seen in a lack of self— identity, or "the fulfillment of man as a human person" (Maritain, 1965, p. 42). The problem narrows to a search for meaning. How can one find meaning when the social ills of increasing industrialization evade solution? How can one find meaning when "what a man can produce" becomes more important than his intrinsic worth? The search for meaning is intensified for the handi— capped or disabled person. In societies where a person gains self-identity primarily through his occupation or profession, the loss of the ability to function vocation— ally, results in a loss of self-identity. In many countries, facilities designed to habilitate or rehabili- tate the culturally, intellectually, physically, and emotionally handicapped are meager. In many Latin American countries, special education and rehabilitation programs are yet to be adopted into the educational and social systems. However, there are innovators who recognize the current and increasing need for services for the disabled (Jordan, 1963, 1964a), and who welcome support from con- structive change agents such as universities and scholars. In Asia, some countries have only minimal services available whereas in other countries, facilities are varied, plentiful, and well equipped (Taguchi, 1965b). Increased concern with physical disability is evidenced by expanded programs sponsored by such organizations as the United Nations and the International Society for the Reha— bilitation of the Disabled (ISRD). Advances in the medical sciences, and the dissemination of information and medicines throughout the world via public health agencies have markedly reduced death rates (Davis, 1963). This wider use of preventive and remedial procedures in medical treat- ment has resulted in an increase in the number of children with physical disabilities since many of these disabled children would have died in infancy in previous generations (Meyerson, 1963). There is a great need for broader communication about attitudes and programs already developed or being developed among workers in special education and rehabilitation throughout the Americas, EurOpe, and Asia as was evidenced by the Second International Seminar on Special Education at Nyborg, Denmark (July, 1963) and the Third Pan Pacific Rehabilitation Conference (April, 1965). Communication of research results to professional colleagues is the final and most valuable step in the research endeavor. Adequate Communication involves the presentation of relevant data in suChalucid form that colleagues can understand, evaluate, mutreplicate the research (Lippitt et al., 1966, p. 273). Normative data indicates what is permissable within a given culture and which groups are most sympathetic and receptive toward the projected programs. In the United States, normative data aids in understanding the attitudes of sub- cultural groups such as the culturally disadvantaged and ethnic minorities and facilitates the provision of adequate educational, vocational, and rehabilitation programs. In Japan knowledge of the effect of geographical isolation on attitudes and cultural patterns are Vital in determining national goals in education and rehabilitation. An important guideline for conducting the present kind of research involves the development of a comprehensive cross—national and cross—cultural research program aimed at delimiting the similarities and differences in attitudes toward physical disability and toward the educational process. These findings can subsequently be integrated into a more general conceptual framework. An adequate methodological approach will consider the diverse cultures and social systems, aiming at comparability of data from one national/cultural/linguistic setting to another (UNESCO, 1964). Although the present research is guided by a pragmatic and humanistic concern over the welfare of persons with disabilities, a theoretical framework is invaluable in giving adequate substantive foundation and direction to the StUdy, resulting in a pragmatic relevance for researchers, teachers and rehabilitation personnel in various countries. Such a theoretical base should increase the power and scope of the study and provide an orienting purpose beyond the immediate pragmatic and humanistic objectives of the project (Goode and Hatt, 1952, pp. 9—16). Lippitt et al., (1958), in discussing the role of the change agent, suggests several tasks he may perform. These include diagnosis (What is the trouble? What is causing the trouble?), assessment of motivation to change, assess- ment of change agent's motivations and resources, selection of apprOpriate change objectives, choice of appropriate helping role, and establishment and maintenance of the help- ing relationship. Also potentially involved in the change agent's tasks are (a) the choice of specific techniques and modes of behavior for the change agent and (b) research, leading to a refinement of the skills and theories which were utilized (Lippitt et al., 1958, pp. 91-126). In terms of the Lippett et a1. (1958) model, the current research focuses primarily on the "diagnosis" aspect and the assessment of motivation and capacity to change. A broader research effort will integrate the findings of this study which will ultimately result in completion of the research tasks outlined by Lippitt.l 1The broader, long range research program is being de- veloped by Dr. John E. Jordan and a number of his doctoral students in the College of Education at Michigan State University. Data will be collected in several nations in Latin America, Asia, and EurOpe, and in the United States. The present research can be conceptualized as involving theoretical, methodological and technical problems. The theoretical problem to be investigated will be restricted to the prediction of certain behavioral correlates of attitude. The main focus will be on the inter—relationships among certain variables related to interpersonal values, personal contact with disabled persons, and attitudes with the assumption that both value and contact variables are in- strumental in determining attitudes (Yuker, 1965). The methodological problem to be investigated is that of developing an adequate solution to the problem of cross- national/cultural/linguistic comparability of data units (UNESCO, 1964). The technical problem to be investigated has two aspects: logistical and statistical” The logistical problem involves the development of relationships with com- petent researchers and political officials interested in giving assistance with the research, including translating questionnaires into comparable language, selecting the sample, and obtaining necessary clearances. The statistical aspect involves scoring, organizing, and processing the data systematically in a way suitable for the comparison of a variety of cultural analyses. In summary the aim of the research project is to define and limit the variables as clearly as possible and to find the best way to measure the aspects of a given change situation which 8 are judged important, without losing sight of the larger complex of variables in which , particular factors of interest are embedded (Lippitt et al., 1958, p. 266). Statement of the Problem The purpose of this study is to investigate the theo- retical, methodological, and technical questions pertaining to the cross—national investigation of attitudes toward education and toward physical disability. Using a set of instruments in an attempt to elicit attitudes to be used in cross—national comparisons, an attempt will then be made to relate these attitudes to other demographic variables such as age, sex, and income which, from a theoretical standpoint, should serve as either correlates or predictors. A final aspect of the study is to develop a set of techniques to facilitate the collection, organization, and analysis of data in subsequent studies.1 Psychological theory suggests that values are important determinants of attitudes. Concerning physically disabled persons, it has been suggested that persons who generally value others as having intrinsic worth are more likely to hold favorable attitudes toward the disabled than are those Who value others according to more absolute comparative standards. A comparison of attitudes toward education can also be made on the favorable—unfavorable continuum. There— fore, one problem to be investigated is whether such 1See footnote on page 6. value—attitude relationships can be empirically ob- tained. - Theory also suggests that the quantity and quality of interpersonal contact with a sub-group (disabled or ethnic) are determinants of attitudes. A second problem then, is to determine the amounts and kinds of eXperiences respon- dents have had with disabled persons and with educational institutions and to determine how this data is related to attitude scores. Definition of Terms The following terms are Operationally defined as they are used in the study. Attitude The sense in which this general term will be used follows the definition by Guttman (1950, p. 51). An attitude is a "delimited totality of behavior with respect to something. For example, the attitude of a person toward Negroes could be said to be the totality of acts that a person has performed with respect to Negroes." Use of this definition is consistent with the attempt to use some of Guttman's concepts for scale and intensity analysis. Attitude Component Components of attitudes have been discussed by various investigators (Katz, 1960, p. 168; Rosenberg, 1960, p. 320 ff; Guttman, 1950, Ch. 9). The two components typically considered are those of belief and intensity, although Guttman defines additional components 10 according to certain mathematical properties. In the attitude scales used, the first component of an item will be that of item content (or belief), the second that of item intensity (Guttman, 1950, Ch. 9; Suchman, 1950, Ch. 7). Attitude Content The attitude content component refers to the actual item statements within an attitude scale. Attitude Intensity, The attitude intensity component refers to the affective statements that a respondent makes regarding each content item; operationally, it consists of a separate statement for each attitude item on which the respondent may indicate how strongly he feels about the statement. Attitude Scale As used in this study, a scale is a set of items which fall into a particular relationship in respect to the ordering of respondents. A set of items can be said to form a scale if each person's responses to each item can be reproduced from the knowledge of his total score on the test within reasonable limits of error (Guttman, 1950, Ch. 3; Stouffer, 1950, Ch. 1). Demographic Variables Specificially, this refers in the present study to certain statistical data frequently used in sociological studies. These variables are age, sex, education, income, rental, occupation, number of siblings, occupational and residential mobility, and whether the respondent spent his youth in a rural or urban setting. Data on these variables were secured through responses of respondents to the personal questionnaire items. 11 Educational Progressivism A ten—item scale of progres- sive attitudes toward education developed by Kerlinger (1958). Educational Traditionalism A ten-item scale of tra- ditional attitudes toward education developed by Kerlinger (1958). These measures do not constitute scales as defined for the present study, but rather are constituted of items which appeared in factor analytic studies, and which were characterized by the terms which identify the scales. Handicap Signifies the social disadvantages placed upon a physically impaired person by virtue of the impairment. A handicap is a consequence of culturally held values and. attitudes which serve to define the physically impaired person socially. Impairment A defect in tissue or in body structure. As such it has no particular functional connotations. Institutional Satisfaction A term used to describe a set of variables on which the respondents were asked to indicate how well they felt various kinds of local insti— tutions were doing their jobs in the community. These institutions were schools, business, labor, government, health services, and churches (or religion). Interest Group Any group that, on the basis of one or more shared attitudes, makes certain claims upon other groups in the society to engage in particular forms of behavior. Associational interest groups work as collectiv— ities to exert influence (Almond, 1960). 12 Occupational Personalism A term operationally defined by questionnaire items designed to ascertain: first, about what percent of the time peOple work with others with whom they feel personally involved; second, how important it is to work with peOple with whom one is personally involved. A personalistic orientation to.1ife is sometimes considered to be a distinguishing characteristic of traditional social patterns (Loomis, 1960). Physical Disability A functional term denoting some loss of the tool function of the body. An approximate synonym is physically "incapacitated." In the English version of the scale the term "handicapped" was used since it appeared to be a more meaningful term. The technical distinction between handicap and disability is usually not a very meaning— ful or significant one to a lay person. Rehabilitation A term signifying "restoration of the disabled to the fullest physical, mental, social, and vocational usefulness possible" (Jordan, 1964b). Relational Diffusion A term Operationally defined by a questionnaire item designed to determine the extent to which personal relations on the job diffuse into a person's non-job social milieu. A personalistic diffusion between , the social milieu and occupational milieu is sometimes considered to be a distinguishing characteristic of traditional social patterns (Loomis, 1960). l3 Religiosity A term used to denote orientation to religion. Operationally, it is defined by three items: first, religious preference; second, the importance of religion; third, the extent to which the rules and regulations of the religion are followed. Special Education Following Kirk (1962, p. 29) this term characterizes educational practices "that are unique, uncommon, of unusual quality, and in particular are in addition to the organizational and instructional procedures used with the majority of children." Jordan (1964b, p. 1) has commented: "the basic aim of special education is to prevent a disability from becoming a handicap." Kala: Two value categories are used, but defined Operationally by the same set of measures. Asset values predispose a person to evaluate others according to their own unique and inherent qualities. Comparative values predispose a person to evaluate others according to some preconceived external criteria of success and achievement (Wright, 1960, pp. 128—133). Operationally these values are defined by three scales on the Survey of Interpersonal Values (Gordon, 1960). Asset values are measured by the Benevolence Scale. Comparative Values are measured by the Recognition and Leadership Scales. These three scales have adequate face validity for the measurement of the asset andcxmmarative values proposed by Wright. Other value orientations measured by the Gordon Survey of Interpersonal 14 Values are labeled Support, Conformity and Inde— pendence. Organization of the Thesis The thesis is organized as follows: In Chapter I, the need and purpose of the study, and an overview of the thesis is introduced. In Chapter II, a review of the theory, and research relevant to the study is presented. The major divisions of the review include the following: 1. A theoretical framework for attitudes toward education. 2. A theoretical framework for attitudes toward disability. 3. A theoretical framework for value orientations. 4. Research conclusions related to the relationship of values and personal contact to attitudes. 5. Research conclusions related to attitudes toward the physically disabled. 6. A theoretical framework for the measurement of attitudes. In Chapter III, the procedures and methodology used in Um study are outlined and explained. A general description of Japan and of the research population is given. The 1DStrumentation of the study and the statistical procedures 11sec in the analysis of the data are included. 15 In Chapter IV, the research results are presented in tabular and descriptive form. In Chapter V, a summary of the results, conclusions, and recommendations are presented. Some of the theoretical foundations alluded to in Chapter I will be given more detailed consideration in the following chapter on Review of Theory and Related Research. CHAPTER 11 REVIEW OF THEORY AND RELATED RESEARCH Many attempts have been made to define theory, both phiIOSOphically and scientifically. Stefflre (1965) cites several definitions of theory, all of which have twocommon elements: reality and belief. Reality is the perceptual world we try to understand and explain. Belief, as used here, is the acceptance of eXplanations which seem to fit the data in a logical manner. Theory may thus be conceptu— alized as a human convention for keeping data in order a provisional systemization of events...which enable us to see relationships — a conceptual model - a cluster of relevant assumptions systematically related to each other and a set of empirical definitions — a possible world which can be checked against the real world (Stefflre, 1965, pp. 1, 2). The theory reviewed here are partially verified assumptions which suggest interrelationships among certain variables. In this frame of reference, theory may facili- tate scientific research by defining the major orientation Of a science, by proposing a conceptual scheme for class- ifying relevant phenomena, by abstracting empirical generalizations, by predicting further relationships (facts) l6 17 and by revealing gaps in our current understanding of the data (Goode and Hatt, 1952, p. 8). In this chapter, theory and research will be presented as a "provisional systemization of events." The topics to be reviewed include attitudes toward education, attitudes toward disability, attitudes and value orientations, attitude intensity and personal contact, empirical research, measurement of attitudes, and problems of cross—cultural measurement. Attitudes Toward Education Although a vast amount of current literature is de— voted to the exploration of the relationship of education to innovation and social change, as noted in Chapter I, there has been surprisingly little theoretical discussion about the basic variables or factors underlying attitudes toward education. Comcerning the absence of empirical research, Miles (1964) makes the following observation: A very wide variety of strategies for creating and controlling educational change is being employed....The dominant focus in most contem— porary change efforts, however, tends to be on the content of the desired change, rather than on the features and consequences of change processes....We need to know, for example, why a particular innovation spreads rapidly or slowly, what the causes of resistances to change are in educational systems, and why particular strategies of phange chosen by innovators succeed or fail p. 2) l8 Kerlinger has developed a theoretical model which includes progressive and traditional dimensions of attitudes toward education. According to Kerlinger, educational attitudes can be conceptualized as two relatively independent factors or variables, representing two distinct ideologies: traditional and progressive. In this model, traditionalism apparently is not just the Opposite of progressivism in education. The opposite of progressivism is anti-progress- ivism. Traditionalism seems to have an existence of its own. Rather than conceiving traditionalism as simply the negation of progressivism, as is usually done, it might better be conceived as a positive affirmation which empha— sizes a conservative-traditional approach to educational issues and problems. Progressivism also seems to be a positive affirmation in its own right. When we say a man is an "educational progressivist" we do not mean only that he is an anti—traditionalist. While this is undoubtedly true, it is more important to suggest that progressivism is an independent stance in its own right (Kerlinger, 1958, pp. 296, 330). Kerlinger defines a restrictive-traditional factor as one emphasizing subject matter for its own sake. The hierarchial nature of impersonal, superior-inferior relation— Ships is considered important as is an emphasis on external discipline. In such a system, social beliefs are preserved through the maintenance of the status quo. In contrast, 19 the permissive-progressive factor emphasizes the problem solving approach and de—emphasizes subject matter as the primary focus of education. In this frame of reference, education is viewed as a growth experience with the child's interests and needs being given primary attention. Equality and warmth in interpersonal relationships are valued. There is an orientation toward internal rather than external discipline and social beliefs tend to be liberal, emphasizing education as an instrument of change and as learning to live (Kerlinger, 1958, p. 112). This orientation corresponds with the philosophical position of Dewey (1938). He states that, in traditional education "the subject-matter of education consists of bodies of information and of skills that have been worked out in the past; therefore, the chief business of the school is to transmit them to the new generation” (p. 17). He contends that progressive education, which is character— ized by the cultivation of individuality, learning through experience, and becoming acquainted with a changing world, is a product of discontent with traditional systems (pp. 18-20). Kerlinger's theory may be summarized in four pro— positions: 1. Individuals having the same or similar occupational or professional roles will hold similar attitudes toward a cognitive 20 object which is significantly related to the occupational or professional role. Individuals having dissimilar roles will hold dissimilar attitudes. There exists a basic dichotomy in the educational values and attitudes of people, corresponding generally to "restrictive” and "permissive,” or ”traditional" and "progressive" modes of looking at education. Individuals will differ in degree or strength of dichotomization, the degree or strength of dichotomization being a function of occupational role, extent of knowledge of the cognitive object (education), the importance of the cognitive object to the subjects, and their experience with it. The basic dichotomy will pervade all areas of education, but individuals will tend to attach differential weights to different areas, specifically to the areas of (a) teaching, subject matter, curriculum, (b) interpersonal relations, (0) normative expectations, and (d) authority, discipline (Kerlinger, 1956, p. 290). 21 Based on the implications of these observations and pro— positions, Kerlinger designed a study which investigated the educational attitudes of professors and laymen. The sample consisted of 25 subjects chosen on the basis of both their occupational roles and their known attitudes toward education. He developed the following categories for the study: ATTITUDES (l) Restrictive—traditional (dependence-heteronomy) (2) Permissive-progressive (independence—autonomy) AREAS (a) Teaching—Subject Matter—Curriculum (b) Interpersonal Relations (k) Normative—Social (conventionalism—nonconventionalism) (m) Authority—Discipline A statement expressing 1(a) might be: The true view of education is to arrange for learning in such a way that the child gradually builds up a storehouse of knowledge that he can use in the future. A statement illustrating 2(a) might be: Knowledge and subject matter are not as important as learning to solve problems involved in daily living. An illustration of l(m) might be: One of the big difficulties with today's schools is that discipline is often sacrificed to the narrow interests of the children. Mtexample of 2(m) would be: True discipline springs from interests, motivation and involvement in problem solving experiences. 22 Kerlinger summarizes the traditional-progressive concept in this way: A basic dichotomy seems to exist in educational attitudes corresponding generally to restrictive and permissive, or traditional and progressive ways of regarding education, and some individuals show the dichotomy more sharply than others de- pending on their occupational roles, their knowledge of and eXperiences with education, and the importance of education to them (Kerlinger, 1956, p. 312). This study by Kerlinger indicates that occupational roles and role eXpectations are dynamic independent vari— ables influencing attitudes. Individuals having similar roles might be eXpected, therefore, to have similar attitudes and a similar attitude structure. Smith (1963), a student of Kerlinger, hypothesized that progressivism and traditionalism are basic dimensions of educational attitudes and that they emerge and remain factorially invariant under different conditions of item sampling and subject sampling. She also postulated a relationship between attitudes toward education and general social attitudes. Individuals holding progressive educational attitudes would tend to be liberal in their social attitudes while persons having conservative social attitudes would be expected to be traditional in their educational attitudes. In two Q sorts, consisting of 140 attitude statements pertaining to all aspects of education, Smith found that progressive and traditional factors of the Q sort remained 23 invariant as hypothesized. Other factors which emerged from one of the sorts were labeled "moral values" and "interpersonal relations." On a third Q sort, liberalism and conservatism emerged as basic dimensions of social attitudes in the direction of the research hypothesis. Two additional factors, "internationalism" and "religious tenents," were indicated by the third Q sort. Block and Yuker (1965) developed the Intellectualism— Pragmatism (I-P) Scale in an attempt to measure intellectual attitudes. Though intellectualism is not operationally defined, it is contextually inferred to be an intellectual orientation resulting from academic eXposure. Their research indicates that intellectualism is associated with a progressive attitude toward education, as measured by the Kerlinger Education Scale and the I-P Scale. Contrary to expectations, I-P scores were not related to Kerlinger's Traditionalism Scale. The Intellectualism scores were also positively correlated with scores on the Attitudes Toward Disabled Persons Scales (ATDP) (Yuker et al., 1960). Students exhibiting the greatest change in their attitudes toward disabled persons, as measured by the ATDP, also scored highest on the intellectualism scale. They concluded that some types of education bring about attitude changes that are related to an increased intellectual orientation. 24 In a related study, Kramer used Rokeach's Dogmatism Scale and Kerlinger's Education Q sorts, in an effort to measure the interrelation of belief systems and the educational values of teachers. His findings indicate that in contrast to "closed-minded" teachers, "open- minded" teachers were more consistent and held permissive- progressive attitudes and that the more ”open—minded" a teacher's belief system, the greater the likelihood for an internally consistent progressive educational attitude. While the "closed—minded'teachers were less consistent than the "open-minded" teachers, they were more consistent than those who had no clear cut belief system (Kramer, 1963). In a study designed to measure liberal beliefs and con— sistency of beliefs, Lawrence (1963) used the Scale of Beliefs on Social Issues which appeared to differentiate between liberal and conservative beliefs. Kerlinger's Education Scale II was also used to measure both pro- gressive attitudes toward education and attitudinal consistency. The findings of Lawrence did not support earlier research indicating a differentiation between progressive and traditional attitudes toward education. Taylor (1963) used Kerlinger's Education Scale II to investigate the relationship between basic educational attitudes and participation in professional teacher activities, and the relationship of basic educational attitudes to the educational background of teachers. Her 25 research indicated that teachers with border-line traditional attitudes participated less in activities related to pupils than did teachers in other categories (such as traditional, progressive border—line, progressive). She concluded that 29% of the teachers had attitude scores that almost certainly indicated either traditionalism or progressivism. A study of the changes in attitudes of prospective teachers toward education and teaching in secondary schools by Anderson (1964) revealed that student teachers generally did not change their attitudes toward education and teaching. She concluded that the extent and direction of change seems to depend on the degree to which the students perceive existing school and community objectives, policies, and relationships. Several factors responsible for pro— ducing attitude change were identified, including kind of interaction with those whom student teachers came in contact, effectiveness of the school program, and attitudes formulated before student teaching began. Attitudes Toward Disability Investigators in the field of Special education and rehabilitation have noted the inadequacy of much of the special education and rehabilitation research, and have called for a greater involvement in studies with theo- retical relevance and consequently greater generality (Block, 1955; Kvaraceus, 1958; Levine, 1963; and Meyerson, ZS 1955, 1963). Feltyl (1965) noted, however, that certain research studies in physical disability have been theoretically derived, and that other research can be shown to have theoretical relevance although an explicit theory is lacking. He further noted that an analysis of these studies should suggest ways in which they can be related to broader social, social-psychological or psychological theory, leading to the formulation of new twpotheses which can be empirically tested. One conceptual frame of reference by which rehabilitation theory can be systematized is that of social change (Straus, 1966). He notes that non-disabled persons often respond to disabled persons with anxiety which may produce such prejudicial behavior as scapegoating and viewing the dis— abled as "inferior, immoral and dangerous to the 'good' society" (Straus, p. 6). The disabled person may respond to such attitudes with feelings of bitterness and depression Which may be revealed in "paranoiac kinds of behavior" (p. 6). Straus notes that there has been a change in the basic philosophy of rehabilitation programs since the initial federal programs of 1918—1920 which focused primarily on the rehabilitation of World War I veterans, enabling them x lFelty's (1965) pilot study in Costa Rica has pro— ‘dded invaluable insights to the development of the present study. 27 to become engaged in remunerative occupations. Prior to the passage of extensive rehabilitation program legislation, hearings held in 1961 and 1962 emphasized the need to make rehabilitation services available to all persons without regard for employability potential. In 1965, employability requirements were reduced, demonstrating in a practical way the "significant changes in social values and broader support in the society at large [for assuring] all citizens opportunities for at least a minimum adequacy in education, health care, and conditions of living” (Straus, p. 23). Several changes in values and attitudes have made expanded rehabilitation programs possible. Foremost among these is a shift in emphasis from manpower related concerns to an emphasis on the intrinsic mental health of the dis— abled, his family and society (a shift from comparative to asset values). Utilitarian arguments have been strength— ened however; rehabilitation services enable many persons to be removed from welfare rolls and become tax-paying contributors to society. In the future, current trends indicate that rehabilitation concepts ”will be cast in a broader social frame of reference more integrally identified With the problems of adaptation to technological change and with national goals of achieving a greater degree of health, economic security, and equality of opportunity for all"(Straus, p. 34). 28 The theoretical orientation of the present study is essentially social—psychological, and is generally consistent with that of Wright (1961), and Meyerson (1955, 1963) in the area of physical disability. Concepts central to this orientation are self, other, reference groups, role, attitude and value which are related to interpersonal interaction. The underlying assumptions of the social— psychological orientation, according to Shibutani (1961, pp. 22—2”), are as follows: (a) behavior is motivated through the give and take of interpersonal adjustment, both the person and society are products of communication, (b) personality is continually reorganized and constructed in the day-by—day interactions with others, and (c) culture consists of models of proper conduct hammered out and re— inforced by communications and by grappling with life conditions. In the present study, the concepts of attitude and value will be explored with a focus on the attitudinal implications of interpersonal contact, value organization, social norms, and role behavior, as perceived by the respondents. In this frame of reference, Levine (1961) suggests that disability is not an isolated empirical fact but a social value judgment: These values relate to society's perception of leadership, contributions toward improving society, being a good citizen, being a family head and other essential aspects for main— taining a society. These values are 29 criteria against which behavior is assessed in terms of deviation. All members of society, whether handicapped or not are evaluated primarily by these values. Where an individual cannot meet these demands, or where there are questions as to the adequacy of the individual in relation to these demands, there will be some devaluation of him on societies' part (p. 84). In more general terms, Levine suggests a relationship between social role, role perception, role value, and attitude. "Being a family head" and "being a good citizen" are two of many roles having value in maintaining society. Role fulfillment may be perceived as the fulfillment of an obligation to society, and peOple are evaluated by the way they are perceived as meeting these role obligations. levine has further suggested that groups are stereotyped according to their social contributions (Levine, 1961, p. 8”). Persons with some negative characteristic such as blindness, crippling condition, or skin color are Categorized according to whether others perceive them as being able to maintain certain valued social roles. More recently, Friedson (1966) has suggested that one of the tasks of rehabilitation agencies is to delimit "handi— cap" which is "often historically and culturally variable" (p. 71). Friedson concurs with Levine (1961) that there is a devaluation of the handicapped person who is seen as a deviant from what is considered normal or appropriate. Thus a handicap becomes a socially (not physically) un- desirable deviation from normalcy. In many cases the 3O disabled person is aware of these devaluing attitudes and the stigma attached to his condition. On the other hand, reacting to the devaluation of disabled persons, rehab— ilitation agencies and personnel are "too prone to ignore the fact that [stigma] exists socially in the community” (Friedson, 1966, p. 96). As noted in Chapter I, and by Straus (1966), a change in social attitudes results in the provision of a wider range of rehabilitation services to a greater prOportion of the handicapped pOpulation. Friedson (1966) suggests that a concept like deviance may be used as a tool to question current rehabilitation concepts and procedures, subsequently resulting in a determination of which aspects of rehabilitation, including attitudes toward the disabled, require "deliberate change" (p. 99). Attitudes and Value Orientations The values one holds may be considered as dynamic motivations. In the determination of attitudes, values are miimportant source of prejudice or negative stereotype (Allport, 1958). According to Allport, "the most important categories a man has are his own personal set of values. *b lives by and for his values...evidence and reason are (Hdinarily found to conform to them...the very act of affirming our way of life often leads us to the brink of prejudice" (p. 24). He further states that "man has a 31 propensity to prejudice. This propensity lies in his normal and natural tendency to form generalizations, con— cepts, categories, whose content represents an oversimpli- "one fication of his world of experience" (p. 26). Again, type of categorization that predisposes us to make un— warranted prejudgments is our personal values” (p. 27). Katz relates attitudes and values by ascribing a "value— expressive function" (Katz, 1960, p. 173) to attitudes in which attitudes confirm and clarify for others, and for the person himself, those things which are most important and central to his image. In discussing the relationship of attitude to value in terms of attitude change, he notes that people are much less likely to find their values uncongenial than they are to find some of their attitudes inappropriate to their values (p. 189). Since people are generally inclined to change or renounce attitudes appear— ing as inconsistent or unrelated to central values, Katz would expect a high degree of consistency between a basic value (such as equality) and a more specific attitude (such as being favorable toward providing opportunities for the disabled). Rosenberg (1956, 1960) points out an instrumental relationship between the positive and negative aspects of attitude and value. Stable positive attitudes are per— ceived as being instrumental to positive value attainment and the blocking of negative values. Conversely, stable ¥ 32 negative attitudes are perceived as being instrumental to negative value attainment and the blocking of positive values. "The individual tends to relate positive attitude objects to goal attainment and negative attitude objects to frustration of his goal orientation" (Rosenberg, 1960, p. 321). Rosenberg found moderate attitudes (rather than intense ones) to be related to less important values or, in the case of important values, the instrumental relation— ship of the attitude to the value attainment was not accurately perceived by the subject. Rosenberg's analysis resulted in a broadening of the concept of attitude to include a positive—negative affective component and a belief component. Typically, attitudes have been concerned with the affective component while beliefs have usually been considered separately. In considering prejudice, Allport (1958, pp. 12—13) states that "there must be an attitude of favor or disfavor; and it must be related to an overgeneralized (and therefore erroneous) belief." Osgood (1957, p. 190) uses a re- stricted connotation of attitude as "the evaluative dimension of the total semantic space.” The position of Rosenberg is supported by his own research (1956), and by that of Cartwright (1949), Smith (1949), and Woodruff and DiVesta (1948). Guttman (1950) also prefers this broader concept of attitude, though primarily on logical rather than experimental consideration. 33 Changes in prejudical attitudes (including affective and belief components) toward Negro mobility were studied by Carlson (1956). He found that attitudes became more favorable toward Negro movement into white neighborhoods as subjects' beliefs were changed from the view that Negroes tend to lower property values. The change was interpreted as an inconsistency between the cognitive (belief) com— ponent and the affective value component. Research involving hypnosis and post—hypnotic suggestion in respect to changing either the belief or the affective components was conducted by Rosenberg (1960, pp. 225—230). Though his conclusions were concerned primarily with attitude structure and change, they also support the pre— viously discussed research findings, that the instrumentality of a belief to a valued goal is associated with a corres— ponding and direction—related affective component. Value Variation Among Groups Values may vary among groups and societies since the type of role behavior perceived to be important may vary. Classical sociological and typological formulations of societies, as summarized by Loomis (1960) and Becker (1950), are stated in terms of social structure and value orientations. For the purposes of this study, three types of societies may be considered: traditional, transitional, and modern, each representing a point along a continuum. 34 Persons in a modern society are characterized as possessing values that are more affectively neutral, achievement and change oriented, more materialistic, instrumental and muversalistic than those held by persons in a traditional society. Latin American society can thus be described as traditional or transitional and the United States as a modern society (Williams, 1963, pp. 415—470; Parsons and White, 1961; Loomis, 1961; and Almond and Coleman, 1960). Japan may also be classified as a modern society (Norbeck, 1965). Applying these concepts to physical disability, a logical inference is that diverse value orientations are associated with variations in attitudes toward particular disability groups. It seems reasonable to conclude that disability groups will be evaluated idiosyncratically, depending upon the perception of their relative ability to meet valued role requirements. Value Variations of Rehabilitation Groups Jordan (1963, 1964) has suggested that in Latin America, those persons employed in the areas of rehabilitation and Special education differ in values from the majority of the population. In discussing these differences (see Almond and Coleman, 1960; Rogers, 1962, and Katz et al., 1963), he describes the various types of groups and associations in society, and the process of innovation diffusion. No 35 attempt will be made here to summarize the vast sociological hterature from which this data was drawn. However, Jordan (1963) has postulated that rehabilitation and special education groups in Latin America are characterized by rather modern values (p. 22) of ”democracy, constitutional- ism, humanism, the scientific process and universal suffrage” (p. 17) and more generally by "specificity, universalism, achievement, and affective neutrality” (p. 16). It has been suggested that this complex interaction of attitudes and values can be simplified by bifurcating values according to their derivation, whether they derive from com— parisons or from intrinsic assets (Dembo, Leviton, and Wright, 1956; Wright, 1960). If the evaluation is based on comparison with a standard, the person is said to be invoking comparative values....On the other hand, if the evaluation arises from the qualities inherent in the object of judgment itself, the person is said to be invoking asset values. What matters is the object of judgment in a setting that has its own intrinsic purposes and demands. The person's reaction is then based upon how appropriately the situational demands are fulfilled rather than on comparison with a predetermined standard (Wright, 1960, p. 29). Some situations, such as hiring personnel for a partic— ular type of job, require the application of comparative standards of evaluation. In other situations, the person WiUlthe asset value orientation may be able to evaluate Um disabled person for his own unique characteristics as a 36 human being. Being aware that such asset orientations may \ arouse skepticism, Wright notes that "incredulity shades ‘ into understanding when one considers that walking itself is always a remarkable achievement" (Wright, 1960, p. 29). ‘ The economic argument, that education and training are 1 cheaper than public support, has gained wide support. However, the whole concept of special education and rehab- ilitation may be considered a response to the asset values of a society (Straus, 1966). The direct antithesis of this position is exemplified in a society where educational opportunity is based on some comparative standard, either a hereditary standard or an achievement standard. The hereditary standard makes comparisons with the past whereas the achievement standard makes comparisons with present norms. An inference based on the asset—comparative value framework is that those persons working in special education and rehabilitation have higher asset values than those working in other occupations, regardless of the location of the social system on the modern-traditional continuum. Measurement of Values Various models have been developed to explain and illustrate the content of one's value structure. One of the earliest formulations was Spranger's (1928) intuitive Classification of men into six general types in an attempt to describe several distinct behavior patterns. He y 37 asserted that man can be understood best through a study of their personal values. The six basic values (they may also be called interests or motives) which Spranger used to describe types of men are: Theoretical, Economic, Aesthetic, Social, Political and Religious. An attempt was made to study the six values empirically by Allport, Vernon, and Lindzey (1951) by constructing the §§pdy of Values, a scale based directly on Spranger's Typee of Men (1928). A major criticism of Spranger's model is that it infers a "somewhat flattering view of human nature” since no attention is given to ”formless or valueless personalities nor for those who follow an eXpedient or hedonistic philosophy of life" (Allport et al., 1960, p. 3). However, both Spranger and Allport et a1. attempt to allow for the "baser” values by reducing them to economic and aesthetic values. As noted above, the scales used in the Study of Values are conceptualized as an attempt to empirically validate Spr'anger's Types of Men which are summarized below. For descriptive purposes ”ideal types" are identified. The Theoretical: Interest in discovery of truth emphasizing cognitive activity in an attempt to order and systematize knowledge. The Economic: Interest in what is useful, pragmatic. Often in conflict with other values such as religion and social. The Aesthetic: Greatest interest in form and harmony; the Opposite of the theoretical. Individuality important. 38 The Social. Love is most important, especially its altruistic or philanthropic aspects. In purest form, the Social is quite close to the Religious. The Political. Major focus on the attainment of personal power,influence and renown. The Religious: Search to understand the cosmos as a whole and man's relation to it. Mixture: Spranger and Allport et a1. indicate that these six categories are not mutually exclusive, and that a given man may be a "mixture” of more than one of these values. In agreement with Spranger and Allport et al., Gordon (1960, p. 3) asserts that "a person's motivational patterns or the values he holds" are important in personality assessment. A person's values may determine to a large degree what he does or how well he performs. His immediate decisions and his life goals are influenced, consciously or unconsciously, by his value systems. His personal satisfaction is dependent to a large extent upon the degree to which his value systems can find expression in everyday life. The presence of strong, incompatible values within the individual, or conflict between his values and those of others, may affect his efficiency and personal adjustment (Gordon, 1960, p. 3). Gordon's attempt to measure values resulted in a six scale instrument (Survey of Interpersonal Values) which was developed through the use of factor analysis. The six scales are described as follows: Support: Being treated with understanding, receiving encouragement from other people, being treated with kindness and consideration. Conformity: Doing what is socially correct, following regulations closely, doing what is accepted and proper, being a conformist. 39 Recognition: Being looked up to and admired, being considered important, attracting favorable notice, achieving recognition. Independence: Having the right to do whatever one wants to do, being free to make one's own decisions, being able to do things in one's own way. Benevolence: Doing things for other people, sharing with others, helping the unfortunate, being generous. Leadership: Being in charge of other peOple, having authority over others, being in a position of leadership or power (Gordon, 1960, p. 3). In a study designed to determine the relationship existing between the Study of Values and the Survey of Inter- personal Values, the inter—correlations indicated that the two scales "moderately overlap” in what they measure and the relationships ”appear to be quite reasonable" (Gordon, 1960, p. 7). The Theoretical is positively correlated with Leadership and Independence (.42 and .36 respectively). Other positive correlations are Economic with Recognition (.29); Social with Benevolence and Conformity (.59, .26); Aesthetic with Independence (.46); Political with Leader- ship and Recognition (.30, .17); Religious with Benevolence and Conformity (.52, .37). The Gordon Survey of Interpersonal Values will be used in the present study as a measure of asset values (Benevo— lence) and comparative values (Recognition and Leadership). This instrument will also be used as a measure of tra— ditional and progressive attitudes (see Instrumentation for Hypotheses 5a, 5b, 6a, 6b, 7a, 7b, 7c, and 10). uo Attitude Intensity and Personal Contact Rosenberg considers the intensity component of an attitude as an action predictor (1960, p. 336). Carlson (1956, p. 259) found initial intense attitudes to be much more resistant to change than more moderately held attitudes. Guttman and Foa (1951) have shown that in— tensity of attitude is related to amount of social contact with the attitude object. Research has suggested that intensity is also an important component of attitude structure in determining the "zero point” of a scale that differentiates the psychological "true” positive attitude direction from the ”true" negative attitude direction. This may not be the same as the actual scale numbers (Guttman, 1947, 1950, 1954; Guttman and Foa, 1951; Guttman and Suchman, 1947; Suchman and Guttman, 1947; Suchman, 1950; Foa, 1950, Edwards, 1957). In considering the relationship between attitude and action, Rosenberg states that what is usually done is to follow a theoretical rule of thumb to the effect that the "stronger” the attitude, the more likely it will be that the subject will take consistent action toward the attitude object. .the more extreme the attitude, the stronger must be the action- eliciting situation in which those forces are Operative...improvement in the validity of estimates of attitude intensity will increase the likelihood of successful prediction (Rosenberg, 1960, p. 336). Besides increasing predictability, attitude intensity can be used in locating the ”true” zero point of a scale 41 in which the area of content has been found to be scalable (Guttman, 1947). Locating a true zero-point appears to have the highly desirable characteristic of elimination of question bias which often minimizes the value of cross- 1ingua1 studies (Foa, 1950; Suchman and Guttman, 1947; and Guttman, 1954b). In reference to personal contact, Homans (1950, p. 112) indicates that the frequency of contaCt between groups or persons and favorableness of attitude are related, with the converse also being true. Zetterberg (1963) reviews the social contact considerations of Malawski in which the effects of frequency of social contact on liking or dis— liking are dependent on two variables: the cost of avoiding a particular contact and the availability of better alternative rewards. ”If the costs of avoiding interaction are low, and if there are available alternative sources of reward, the more frequent the interaction, the greater the mutual liking" (Zetterberg, 1963, p. 13). Allport (1958, pp. 250—268), in examining various kinds of intergroup contact, concludes that "equal status con- tact" creates more favorable attitudes when the contact is in pursuit of common goals (p. 267). The effect of a casual contact is unpredictable but it may reinforce negative stereotypes (p. 252). Status was found to be significant in studies of attitudes toward Negroes; those having contact with high status or high occupational group 42 Negroes held more favorable attitudes than those having contact primarily with lower status Negroes (pp. 254, 261- 2). Jacobson, Kumata, and Gullahorn (1960, pp. 210—213) considered research related to inter—group contact that was primarily between cultures. They suggest that contact with persons of equal status are more likely to develop friction if the basis of the status equality is uncertain in that one group does not fully accept the other group as being in miequal status position. The following is a summary of the foregoing discussion of personal contact. Frequent contact with a person or grmg>is likely to produce more favorable attitudes if: 1. the contact is between status equals in pursuit of common goals (Allport, 1958, p. 267); 2. the contact is perceived as instrumental to the realization of a desired goal value (Rosenberg, 1960, p. 521); 3. the contact is with members of a higher status group (Allport, 1958, pp. 254, 261—2); 4. the contact is among status equals and the basis of status is unquestioned (Jacobson et al., 1960, pp. 210—213); 5. the contact is volitional (Zetterberg, 1963, p. 13); and 43 6. the contact is selected over other rewards, (Zetterberg, 1963, p. 13). Empirical Research on Attitudes Toward the Physically Disabled A number of studies have considered attitudes toward specific kinds of physical impairment in various settings in the United States. These have been reviewed in general reference works such as those by Barker, Meyerson, and Comic, (1953); Wright, (196OZ and Cruickshank, (1955, 1963), some of which will be discussed in this section. Barker et a1. (1953, pp. 74—76) attempted an analysis of attitudes as eXpressed in religion, fiction, and humor, resulting in the finding that religion and fiction showed considerable variation in attitudes eXpressed. Jokes about physical disability tended to be more depreciating than jokes about other groups such as farmers or salesmen. In another study, Barker and Wright (1955) found that some people mask their unfavorable attitudes toward disability; verbalizations pertaining to physical disability tend to be favorable. Thus, jokes might provide a disguised outlet fbr unfavorable feelings which are not usually verbalized. A research program reported by Dunteman et a1. (1966) had two major aims: (a) to examine the personality and other characteristics which might discriminate among Students entering several health related professions and (b) tO identify the variables related to academic and job 44 success in each of the selected health related professions. Eight studies were conducted, one of which involved the administration of Attitudes Toward Disabled Persons (ATDP) scale in an attempt to differentiate attitudes of freshman and SOphomore female white students according to their curriculum preference: physical therapy (PT), occupational therapy (OT), medical technology (MT), and education and nursing (O for others), It was predicted that OTs, and PTs would have a more favorable attitude toward disabled persons than would MTs and Os. A simple analysis of variance indicated however, that there were no significant differences among the four groups. Since the MTs had the lowest score (more favorable) in the direction Opposite from that hypothesized, Dunteman et a1. (1966, pp. 28-29) suggest that the ATDP may be measuring the degree to which people view the disabled person as different from the normal individual. This notion, if correct, would indicate scores in the direction obtained empirically in the Dunteman et a1. study. mS-National Studies Felty (1965) and Friesen (1966)1 indicated that apparently there had been no studies that dealt directly with R lFriesen's (1966) thesis on attitudes toward physical disability and toward education in Colombia, Peru and the muted States has contributed materially to the present study on Japan. 45 the problem of cross-national attitudes in relation to dis- abled persons. However, recently completed studies by Siller (1963),Si11er and Chipman (1964), and LeCompte and LeCompte (1966) examined the attitudes of Turkish and American college students. Siller (1963) studied the attitudes of a sample (548) of junior high school, high school, and college middle class students drawn from New York city and suburbs. Three instruments were used in the study: Yuker's Attitudes Toward Disabled Persons scale, Feeling Check List, and Social Distance Scale. Factor analysis of the data indicated that femininity was most related to acceptance of the disabled. Other variables found to be related to positive attitudes toward the disabled were low rigidity, authoritarianism, and aggressiveness, and positive scores on endurance, nurturance, affiliation and change. Several clinical observations made by Siller (1963) were based on empirical data but not statistically tested. He posits that an attitude score which is atypical of the Sample in either a positive or negative direction "generally reflects a particular eXperience” (p. 15) with a handi- capped person. He also noted a difference in the attitudes of respondents, depending on the hypothesized COI'lditions under which contact with disabled persons was made. While 30% of the sample indicated feeling toward a disabled person "the same as with most people" (p. 15), 46 nine percent of the sample indicated the acceptance of such a person as a spouse. A factor analytic study of the Attitudes Toward Disabled Persons scale (Yuker, 1960) was designed by Siller and Chipman (1964) and was based on a sample of over 1100 junior high school, high school, and college students, and female adults drawn from the New York city area. Although Yuker indicated that to believe the disabled person is different from the non-disabled is synonomous with non-acceptance of the disabled, the study by Siller and Chipman indicates that a low score on the ATDP may be indicative of non—judgmental acceptance. Two factors de— rived from their study of the ATDP scale are Benevolent lnferiority and Negative Atypicality. Benevolent Inferi— ority may involve perception of the disabled as being inferior but lead to constructive, supportive action on be- half of the disabled. Attitudes of Negative Atypicality, 0b the other hand, would tend to promote such behavior as segregation and aversion. The findings of this study also indicated that amount of eXperience (contact) with the diSabled had only ”trivial correlation” with attitudes. The LeCompte and LeCompte (1966) study is based on the findings of Siller (1963) and Siller and Chipman (1964). Three scales, the Attitudes Toward Disabled Persons (ATDP), the Feeling Check List and the Social Distance Scale were administered to a sample of Turkish college students. The 47 scores were then compared with the scores of a sample of New York college students. Although the two samples are not completely comparable, the sex distribution in both samples was approximately even and other variables were similar. LeCompte and LeCompte hypothesized that, because of various religious and social influences derived from the Koran (such as enduring rather than changing ”fate"), there would be a greater indication of attitudes of inequality and non-acceptance of the disabled peOple in Turkey than in the United States. Findings reported by the authors indicate that the college major, and sex of the respondents were not significantly related to attitude scores. The E test did not reveal any significant relationship between amount of contact and ATDP scores. These findings related to sex and amount of contact agree with those of Siller and Chipman (1964). A significant relationship was found to exist between amount of contact and the Feeling Check List total Spores. Analysis of the ATDP total scores for the New York and Turkish samples showed a significant difference (.001 level) between sample means with the Turkish sample expressing more devaluating or non—accepting attitudes toWard disabled persons. §2£iel Contact and lflfigrmation Studies The Attitudes Toward Disabled Persons (ATDP) scale and ROkeach's Dogmatism Scale were administered to a sample of 48 University of Illinois and University of Indiana students. Since the University of Illinois has more extensive programs for disabled persons than does the University of Indiana, Genskow and Maglione (1965) hypothesized that greater "familiarity" with disabled persons at the University of Illinois would result in greater acceptance of the disabled. Analysis of the data resulted in scores for the ”familiar" group being significnatly more positive than those for the group less familiar with disabled persons. The greater contact with disabled persons resulted in more positive ATDP scores and lower dogmatic scores on the Dogmatism Scale. The authors state that the Illinois sample may be positively biased toward fi‘: disabled persons since passing a rigorous screening program by disabled persons is re- quired for admission. This notion correlates with Siller (1963) that an atypical attitude, either positive or negative reflects a specific experience. Another approach to the investigation of the contact Variable was taken by Meissner (1965) in a study of the relationship between a personal disability and attitudes tOward the handicapped. Using a sample of 382 high school Juniors from three Wisconsin high schools, several scales including the Attitudes Toward Physical Disability (ATDP) Were administered. The respondents' relationship to disability ranged from no disability to severe disability. Analysis of the data showed that for males, the ATDP mean 49 scores were significantly more positive for the males not having a disability. A lower mean score for the disabled may be considered a measure of the self—concept. For females, havirug a disability did not affect attitudes significantly. The least positive attitude scores were held by those adolescents who had "disabilities” which were neither obvious nor severe. For the total group, there were no significant differences between males and females. Bell (1962) compared the attitudes toward physical disabilities of rehabilitation and non-rehabilitation workers in a hospital setting. The sample included three groups: (a) 40 rehabilitation workers, (6) 30 hospital employees working in non—therapeutic roles who had a family member or a friend who was disabled, and (c) 40 hospital employees working in non—therapeutic roles who had no friends or family members who were disabled. The groups were com- parable in sex, age, marital status, and level of education. Using the Attitudes Toward Disabled Persons (ATDP) scale, Bell found that the following variables are gee related to ATDP scores: age, sex, marital status, level of education or years in a hospital setting, or, for professional re— habilitation workers, years of professional experience. There was a significant difference between groups a and b, and between b and c. The highest scores, representing a "favorable” attitude toward physical disability or "accept— ance” of the physically disabled, were obtained by those 50 who had family members or friends who were disabled. The hypothesis that rehabilitation workers would have higher scores than other hospital workers was not confirmed. Bell, on the basis of this study, suggests that rehabilitation workers, to be efficient and successful, must view the disabled person as somewhat different from the normal individual. The attitudes of educational, medical, psychological, and social work personnel working with children and the attitudes of students planning to work with children in these professions were examined by Warren and Turner (1966). The study focused on the relationship between Familiarity with an exceptionality, Preference for working with persons having an exceptionality and the amount of Educational emphasis currently being put on the various kinds of exceptionality in training in the respondents' professional field. Seven categories of exceptionality to which the subjects responded were gifted, anti-social, brain—injured. hearing handicapped, mildly retarded, moderately to severely retarded, and sight handicapped. Warren and Turner (1966) analyzed the data by ranking Of preferences and by computing rank—order correlations between Preference (P), Familiarity (F), and Educational Emphasis (E). Differences in attitudes between groups were not computed. For the total sample (N=403), the academ— ically talented (gifted) were most preferred and the 51 moderately to severly retarded were least preferred. Pre— ference for the mildly retarded fell about midway in rank. Rank order correlations (P—F, P—E, E—F) for the total sample are significant at the .01 level. The data indicates that the less a person knows about an exceptionality, the lower he ranks it, and the more familiar he is with an exception- ality the more he prefer to work within that area of U1 exceptionality. The authors suggest that social desirability l is a factor to be consid (1 :red since respondents having a family member in one of the areas of exceptionality rank that exceptionality highest in Preference. Haring, Stern, and Cruickshank (1958) found that work— shOp attempts to modify teacher attitudes (both verbal and behavioral) toward disabled children were more effective when teachers had regular contact with disabled children. For attitudes toward a subordinate group, they suggest a possible interaction between amount of information avail— able and amount of contact, provided, however, the information requires a change in beliefs. From the reaction of those teachers who had few opportunities for actual experiences with exceptional children, it appears that the threat of having to modify behavior is more anxiety-producing than the real process of change itself. ..The effort of a formal attempt to modify attitudes, whether through mass media or a workshOp, seems only to increase the anxiety and to provide a specific focus for the eXpression of rejection and the development of organized resistance. When specific exper- iences are provided, the actual problems that arise can be dealt with directly (Haring et al., 1958, pp. 130—131). 52 Roeher (1959) found that both social contact and the availability of increased factual information lead to in- creased acceptance and tolerance o1 disabled persons, confirming the research findings of Haring et a1. (1958). Cross—Cultural Studies Wright (1960, pp. 253—“56) sampled material drawn to- gether by Maisel in an extensive survey of anthrOpological records. These records revealed wide discrepancies in the treatment of disabled persons, although negative attitudes were more frequent than positive attitudes. Hanks and Hanks (1948), in a more systematic analysis of several non—occidental societies, attempted to determine relationships between structural and functional character— istics of the societies and their treatment of the physically handicapped. They concluded that the physically disabled are better protected and have more participation in societies where: (a) the level of productivity is higher in proportion to the population and its distribution more nearly equal, (b) competitive factors in individual or group achievement are minimized, and (c) the criteria of achievement are less formally absolute as in hierarchial social structures and more weighed with ”concern for individual capacity, as in democratic social structures" (Hanks and Hanks, 1948, pp. 19—20). Cultural uniformity and variability were investigated by Richardson, Goodman, Hastorf, and Dornbusch (1961) by asking children to rank pictures showing various kinds of physical disability. All samples were from the United States but included disabled and non—disabled subjects from various ethnic and social groups. They found "remark— able uniformity in the hierarchy of preferences which the children exhibited for pictures of children with and without (53 various Visible physical handi aps" (p. 246). Slight sex variations were also found. Girls tended to depreciate children having more ”social” impairments and boys seemed more concerned about "functional” impairment. The picture of a child with no visible handicap was always ranked highest. UQ Goodman (196 ) hypothesized that a person's negative value pattern, as noted by Richardson et a1. (1961), was related to the absence of contact with disabled persons. These patterns were communicated by parents to children without any eXplicit pattern or awareness; a child's ex— posure to a value and his ability to learn the value were postulated as being significant in a child acquiring a social value. To test this hypothesis, persons who were judged to come from subcultures with different value orientations in relation to visible impairments were studied. The sample included children and adults of Jewish and Italian origins. Li \. Results indicated that (a- adults showed the same pre— ference pattern as the dominant children's pattern,(b) the Jewish children gave a higher ranking to both facially disfigured and obese than others, and (c) both retarded and disturbed children gave deviant patterns. The evidence suggests that cultural values pertaining to physical dis— ability are related to cultural uniformity. People who deviate from the cultural norm in terms of value orientation might also be eXpected to dev1ate in their appraisal of the physically disabled. Several research projects in rehabilitation are currently being conducted in lsr‘ W (I) l. Because of the composition of the pOpulation, most studies in Israel involve the sampling of several cultures. Althuleh the nation was established eighteen years ago, a wide—spread cultural integration has not yet occurred. Out of a population of 2.5 million, 2.2 million are Jews with the balance being Arab and other minority groups. The Jewish population is composed of three general groups of people: the western group, the oriental group, and the lsrael group or native born adults (Chigier, 1966). Rehabilitation research is supported by the International Division of the Vocational Rehabilitation Administration (U.S.A.). There are 29 research projects currently in progress, eight of which are concerned with handicapped children or adolescents. These studies are concerned with cultural factors in the 55 rehabilitation of children and adolescents having dis- abilities related to cerebral palsy, diabetes, mental C retardation and hearing loss (Chigier, 1966; Chigier and Adler, 1966). A study by Felty (1965; of attitudes toward physical disabilit in Costa Rica was a pilot stud; for a number of . y ( f (I) cross cultural invesnigatitn , including the present study, currently underway at Michigan gtate University (See foot— note, page 6?. The occulational interest groups and the hypotheses of all studies are essentially the same. Using the Multiple Scalogran Analysis developed by Lingoes, Felty found that seven items of the twenty item Attitudes Toward Disabled Persons minimally met the Guttman scale requirements. He also found that six of the ten ”progressive attitudes toward education” items formed a scale, but that no suitable scales were formed from the ”traditional attitudes toward education” items. When the intensity scores were plotted against content scores for these scales, the predicted U— or J—shaped curves were obtained. Felty noted however, that not enough content total score categories were obtained around the ”bending points” of the curve to define with precision where the scales should be divided into favorable and unfavorable sections. The hypothesis that Leadership value would be negatively related to Attitudes Toward Disabled Persons scores was confirmed. It was also predicted that the rehabilitation 56 and special education group (SER) would have higher Attitudes Toward Disabled Persons scores than the other occupational groups. The SER group has higher scores than the ex— ecutive and labor groups, but had lower scores than the education group. (D (I) For the attitude varlaxl.., Felty found significant Males tended to be g‘ a *3 Q 1-0 (L E Q) [—1 (D U) differences between males in their orientation toward (L) U) i 1 more traditional than fema ct matter and on (D c :) 4 s)U.k./'j 1 (l. \ (.I) y ; k 1 k *3 education and placed more disci line. Conversel: females were more inclined to accept f, _ progressive, child—centered ideas. Since the education group (including 32 males, no 81 females) was also high in W progressivism and low in t iditionalism, whether these differences are primarily an occupational characteristic or genuine sex differences need further investigation. Concerning the lower income group (Laborers), a signifi— cant finding was that those reSpondents having a relatively low income and educational level had a high Independence value. Felty stated that this group consisted largely of males which may have biased the results, but he also noted that while this group was the most divergent of the sample, it was the most typical of the Costa Rican population as a whole. Using a theoretical approach and instruments similar to those used by Felty (1965), Friesen (1966) compared the attitudes of two Latin American countries (Colombia and \fl \1 Peru) with the attitudes of a United States sample. Thirteen specific hypotheses were tested; nine were confirmed or partially confirmed. The four hypotheses not confirmed will be noted below, together with some of His general findings. The two hypotheses relating to scale and intensity analysis were not con irmed. Though a confirmation would serve to indicate similar outcomes toward the attitude object psychologically, Fri sen indicates that "the com— (1) plexity of attitude measurement" accounts for these hypotheses not being confirmed .Friesen, 1966, p. 221). A third hypothesis which was no: confirmed states in essence that the more contact a person has with either education or with disabled persons, the n-4her his attitude intensity scores will be. Regardless of the content of his attitude, whether favorable or unfavorable, the intensity of feeling should be higher. The data did not show this to be true for the samples included in this particular study. Also, the statistical analysi did not Confirm the hypothesis that persons working in special education and rehabilitation (SER) will have a higher mean score in progressive attitudes toward education than persons in other occupations. Al— though this hypothesis was not confirmed, the SER group had the highest scores on the progressive education scale and the lowest on the traditional education scale, the scores being in the predicted direction. 58 A finding of general interest, consistent with Felty's study, was that males were significantly lower than females on the Benevolence value scores. Also, the SER group was found to be characterized by an asset value orientation rather than a comparative value orientation in attitude toward physical disability itself. SER respondents scored significantly higher on Benevolence (asset value orientation) than on Leadership and Recognition (comparative value orientation). As postulated, the SER group had more favor— able scores on the Attitudes Toward Disabled Persons scale than other groups in Columbia and Kansas (but not in Peru). Types of Disability Studies by Kvaraceus (l956), Force, (1956), Dickstein and Dripps, (1958), Haring et al., (1958), and Murphy, (1960) consider preferences for different disability groupings in various specific situations. Kvaraceus, Dickstein and Dripps, and Murphy studied preference for teaching par— ticular groups by means of group rankings. In general, the gifted were most prefereed while the mentally handicapped and maladjusted children were least preferred. Physically disabled children were ranked between these groups. The studies of Force (1956) and Haring et al., (1958) suggested that children with cerebral palsy are considered the most difficult with whom to interact. In the Haring et.al. (1958) study, respondents were considering the acceptability of children for regular school programs. Only 59 those children with mild hearing disorder and with leg crippling, if ambulatory by crutch or wheelchair, were con— sidered educationally acceptable, although others were functionally capable of placement (pp. 40—41). This re— striction limits the generalizability of the findings. Whiteman and Luckoff (1962) were concerned with attitude structure and personal value orientations. Because of the theoretical foundation of the research, it has relevance to a study of attitudes toward physical disability. In respect to structure, which they apparently define as a pattern organization of beliefs and evaluations, they found that correlations are higher between disability groups on a single component (or handicap, such as blindness) than they are within a single disability group on two components or handicaps. The relationship between components, even though within a given disability, is poor. Thus the correlation between items dealing with the evaluation of a physical handicap and the evaluation of physically handicapped people is .13 while the two items referring to blindness and blind people correlate .22. However, the relationship within components is appreciably better even though the responses are to different disabilities. Thus the two items referring to blindness and physical handicap and their effect on the most worthwhile experiences correlate .53 while the two items referring to the sorrowful characteristics of blind and physically handicapped people correlate .61. Similar considerations obtain when the components deal with pity towards blind peOple, or with readiness for interaction with them (Whiteman and Luckoff, pp. 154-155). 60 The Measurement of Attitudes Attitude has been defined as a ”delimited totality of behavior with reSpect to something" (Guttman, 1950, p. 51). Methods of measurement used in the present study will be presented in this section. General Considerations Responses on an attitude scale are one form of de- limited behavior, but the attitude universe may consist of many forms of behavior which are more or less inter- correlated and which form separate subuniverses. An adequate attitude abstraction from this universe should include sampling from each of the possible subuniverses, a task of doubtful empirical possibility. A statement of the conceptual problem, however, points up limitations in the range of inferences one may make from a limited sampling of behavior. There will probably be a relationship between the statements one makes about a person with a disability, and how one overtly behaves toward that persons, but the relationship cannot be assumed without empirical evidence. Green (195A, pp. 335—336) makes three other salient statements about attitudes, their underlying characteristics, and their relationship to other variables. First, there must be a consistency of responses in respect to some social object. Second, the attitude itself is an abstraction from a set of consistent, or covarying responses. "In each measurement method, covariation among responses is related L 61 to the variation of an underlying variable. The latent attitude is defined by the correlations among responses” (p. 336). Responses themselves are not attitudes; rather, the attitude is defined by the latent variable. The detection of this latent variable requires certain scale properties. Third, an attitude differs from other psycho— logical variables (with the exception of value) because it is always in terms of a referent class of social objects. The approach to attitude assessment known as scalogram analysis (Guttman, 1950, Ch. 3) is consistent with the above considerations and it is this approach which is used in respect to the attitude variables employed in this study. Cross-National Research And Scale Analysis Several authors have considered the hazards of meaning equivalence in cross—national studies (Jacobson and Schachter, 1954; Jacobson et al., l960; Klineberg, I950; Suchman, I958, l962, 1964; UNESCO, 1955, I963). A primary problem in studies of this type is how to obtain comparable input stimuli, an aspect which may be sub— divided into problems of translation, and into the availability of equivalent language terms and concepts (Jacobson et al., 1960, pp. 218—263). Concerning problems of input equivalence, Suchman (1958), in reporting method— ological findings of the Cornell Cross—Cultural Methodology Project, distinguishes between "concept” equivalence and 62 "index" equivalence. He reported that it was not possible to compare specific questions and indices across cultures. Technical problems such as language translation along with more subtle factors of the meaning of words, combined to make it extremely difficult to compare responses from different cultures with any degree of confidence that they were indeed equivalent. On the other hand, it was found that while specific indices might not be comparable, broader concepts were (Suchman, l958, p. 197). He suggested that scale analysis offered a ”particularly promising method” of determining concept equivalence. The problem of input equivalence of concepts in cross- national studies would appear to be an aspect of the general problem of question bias. Suchman (1950, Ch. 8) explores the measurement of intensity of feeling with which people hold to their attitudes or opinions as a way of surmounting differences in measurement results which are due mainly to nuances of differences in question wording (”bias"). Guttman (195A, p. 396), in referring to the application of this approach to the problem of bias by the Israel Institute of Applied Research, comments that "in Israel where we sometimes have to do the same study in twelve different languages, it is essential to have a technique which does not depend on question wording." Scale Analysis The following summary of scale analysis is not intended to be exhaustive, but merely to present a rationale and an outline of the approach used in the study. A basic 63 reference is Guttman (1950), but comprehensive discussions of other scaling methods are found in Green (195A), Edwards (1957L and Goode and Hatt (l952). Riley, Riley and Jackson (1954) present certain information on the technique not available elsewhere, and Riley (1963) and Waisanen (1960) present simplified techniques for introductory work with the method. Scale analysis is a method for determining whether a set of items can be ordered along a single dimension. If a particular attitude universe is one—dimensional, any sampling of items from it should also be one—dimensional, and should provide an ordering of respondents essentially the same as that provided by any other sampling of items from the universe. If the prediCted ordering does not occur, the universe is judged to be multi—dimensional and con— sequently not scalable. It is possible, of course, that items have been included which do not refer to the universe of content. These non—scale items might be ex— cluded; however, item exclusion must be exercised with caution (Green, 1954, p. 357). If items do suggest an underlying single dimension, it is meaningful to describe a respondent with a higher total score as possessing more of the characteristic being measured than someone with a lower total score. Most important, if scale properties are obtained, this provides evidence for the existence of a defined body of opinion in the respondent group concerning 6A the particular area of measurement involved. The fact that item scales are obtained in each of two or more countries being compared is evidence for concept equivalence, regard— less of variation in the content of the particular items in the scales from one nationality group to another. In Guttman scaling, the focus is on the ranking of respondents rather than on the ranking of items. ”We shall call a set of items of common content a scale if a person with a higher rank than another person is just as high or higher on every item than the other person” (Guttman, 1950, p. 62). The individual item responses of every respondent should be reproducible (with a minimum of 10% error) from a knowledge of his total score rank. The amount of error which is allowable in reproducing item scores from a knowledge of respondent total score rank has been some— what arbitrarily established at l0%, although Guttman has shown that if the errors are random in a given sample of 100 persons and 5 dichotomous items, the population re— producibility should not vary more than A or 5 percent from the reproducibility coefficient of the sample (1950, p. 77). Guttman has also described the quasi-scale,l which may occur when the reproducibility of a scale is lower than the required 90%, but when the errors occur in a random pattern. l _ The analysis of scales employed in the present study would appear to place them in the category of quasi— scales. 65 Stouffer (1950, p. 5) notes that "the correlation of the quasi—scale with an outside criterion is the same as the multiple correlation between responses to the individual items forming that scale and the outside criterion [which] justifies the use of sets of items from an area not scalable in the strictest sense.” The important criteria in respect to scale error would seem to be the random nature of occurrence of the errors. "The error pattern of the quasi—scale question is recognizable from the manner in which the fairly large number of errors that occur gradually decrease in number as one moves further and further away from the cutting point.l These errors...do not group to— gether like non—scale errors" (Suchman, 1950, pp. 160—161). Scale and Intensity Analysis in Relation to Cross—National Problem Of Comparability of Responses Once scaling has been established so that there is some indication of unidimensionality, there remains the question of how to divide the respondents on the basis of the favorable or unfavorable responses. Foa (1950) and Suchman (1950, pp. 214-2l5) have shown how question bias can be introduced through slight changes of question wording so 1The ”cutting point" refers to the point at which the "favorable” (or, ”yes") responses to an item, can be divided with the least amount of error from the ”unfavorable" (or, "no") responses to an item, when the respondents have been ordered on the basis of total score for all items in the scale. 66 that the response patterns of a set of questions may be altered considerably. What is needed is an objective zero , (0) point, independent of the content of the item, which will separate the favorables from the unfavorables. The method proposed is to ascertain for each item how intensely the respondent feels about the item. It has been shown experimentally (Foa, l950, I961; Guttman, 19u7, 1950; Guttman and Foa, l95l; Guttman and Suchman, l947; Suchman, l950; Suchman and Guttman, 19“?) that intensity will usually form a quasi—scale which, when plotted against the content dimension, will reveal the point of lowest intensity of response on the content scale. This point has been empirically established as a point of indifference for the item content. Attitudes become favorable on one side of the point and unfavorable on the other side of the point. It then becomes possible, for any particular group, to determine about what percent of the respondents are actually favorable, neutral, or unfavorable, as defined by an objective and invariant referent point. This concept is of great potential significance for cross—national research, since it offers an objective technique for comparing persons in different cultures, regardless of subtle meaning changes resulting from translation, providing that the item content is scalable within each of the cultures being compared. Both the point of division, and the shape of the intensity curve are 67 of interest. The shape of the curve may indicate whether people are generally apathetic about the issue being con- ' sidered or are sharply divided into opposing factions. These potential benefits of scale and intensity analysis ‘ recommended their use for the present study. ‘ While the following studies were not available for review (since they are still in process) they are related to the larger concurrent—replicative cross cultural research project on attitudes toward education and toward handicapped persons underway at Michigan State University. They are listed to make them known to the professional public. The additional studies, (with their projected completion dates) examine: attitudes of various subgroups ; Of special educators (Mader, 1967); comparison of special versus regular educators (Green, 1967); relationship between attitudes, values, contact and theological orientations (Dean, 1967); attitudes of college counselors , (Palmerton, 1967); ministers attitudes toward mental retardation (Heater, 1967); attitudes toward general disability versus blindness (Dickie, 1967); attitudes toward general disability versus deafness (Weir, 1968); and factors influencing attitudes toward integration of handicapped children in regular classes (Proctor, 1967); and attitudes of Various groups in Belgium, Denmark, England, France, The Netherlands, and Yugoslavia (Kreider, 1967) (see Addendum to References, p. 208). CHAPTER III METHODOLOGY AND PROCEDURES The purpose of this study was to investigate technical, methodological and theoretical problems relating to the cross-cultural investigation of attitudes toward education and toward physical disability. An attempt was made to employ a set of instruments to elicit attitudes toward education and toward physical disability (Appendix B—1 and ' B—u). Rationale for Selecting Sample from Japan Several factors were considered in choosing Japan for the present study, including the availability of suffi- cient rehabilitation and other types of workers, ease of access to the country, and the availability of persons with— in the country interested in giving professional and technical assistance. The selection of Japan also provided a population differing in language, culture, and values from the United States, thus providing a more rigorous test of the assumptions underlying the instruments. It also met the needs of a larger study currently being conducted by John E. Jordan, Michigan State University, which includes samples from the United States, Latin America, EurOpe, and Asia. 68 Ox \0 In Japan, there are active and extensive programs of special education and rehabilitation. Some programs are under private or local SUprFC and control while others are under national or prefectural jurisdiction. The city of (0 Tokyo provided an easily acce sible population from which the research sample could be readily selected for each of /} the specified groups. Al 0, several professional workers in I rehabilitation in Tokyo were contacted and they became vitally interested in the nature of the research and offered their assistance to the project by translating and admin— ubsequently reduced the (j) istering the instruments. They multi-page questionnaire responses to a single page of data which greatly reduced the time required for preparing the data for card punching. ’D‘ ‘1 .eneral De; L} (U ription of Japan Before describing the research sample, a brief survey of Japan will be given. This section will include a description of geography, population, economics, politics, general education, and special education and rehabilitation services. Geography Japan consists of four main islands — Hokkaido, Honshu, Shikoku, and Kyushu — and 3,000 smaller islands, which lie in the temperate zone. The total land area is approximately the size of the state of California, but due to many 70 mountains, only about l7% of the land is arable. This 2,000 mile long chain of islands extends over a long range of latitude and variations of climate bearing a close resemblance to the eastern coast of the United States. However, due to its location on the Pacific Ocean, it has higher humidity and a greater rainfall than is usually found in continental areas. Her volcanic mountains are a source of many gushing hot springs which figure so prominently in the Japanese way of life. Being separated from her nearest neighbor, Korea, by over 100 miles of water, and also being separated from China by some 500 miles of open sea, Japan has tended to be an isolated nation by nature's decree. After a period of ex— change of ideas with other nations, she became isolated by her own choice. This isolation has helped Japan, however, to become ingenious in adopting ideas from other cultures, such as the Chinese originally, and more recently the Western, and modifying them to meet her own particular needs. Population Japan has a population of over 97 million, making it the fifth most populous nation in the world, with China, India, the U.S.S.R., and the United States having larger popu— lations. For a 10 year period, beginning in 1950, the pepulation increased by 9 million. The birth rate is de— creasing, however, and the tendency is for the population 71 to become concentrated around the large metropolitan areas such as Tokyo, Osaka, Nagoya and Fukuoka. As the population of Japan approaches 100 million, Tokyo has become the world's most populous city with over 10 million residents. A modern city in the international sense, it has luxury hotels, cultural and athletic attrac- tions, express highways running through the heart of the city, a subway system, the world's only commercially operating monorail train, and a radio—television tower higher than the Paris Eifel Tower. Economics The standard of living for Japan is the highest of all Asia and is equal to those of some European countries. Japan has changed from an agrarian economy to an industrial one with current production far surpassing pre—war levels. According to 1962 government statistics (Japan), the average urban family earns about $210 a month and owns a television set, washing machine, refrigerator and other items con— sidered luxury items in many countries. A labor shortage is reported for some industries and unemployment is at its lowest level in Japanese history (Taguchi, 1965a). In 1961, the Japanese government established a 10 year income doubling program in which industrial productivity is projected to increase 5.8% annually. The actual increase in industrial productivity for 1961—63 averaged 7%, while agricultural productivity During the same period, agri 72 increased an average of 2.9%. cultural population decreased by 2.9%. Although agriculture syo"s SOdhd growth, it should be noted that the gap in producti.l-y and income between agriculture and other industrie: continues ;o widen. The agricultural p:pulatlcn in l953 12s 30 2% of the entire population (Japan Economi, Fearpooy — [904' It is estimate, tha. b\ 1970, industrial production will be three times that of 19s- le’di industries include heavy industry, chemicals, ano text-l:s. tapan is the world's largest shipbuilder, and isnoted for its production for export of cars and trucks, railway trains, cameras, radios and electronic equf rent Politics Japan adopted a new co.stitution which was put into effect on May 3, 19A7. Two fundamental principles of the constitution which continue in effect in both principle and practice are the idea of There are three branches of executive, and judicial. Th the National Diet consistinu members being elected for a the provision that the House dissolved before the end of executive powers belong to t democr acy and the desire for peace. the government: legislative, e legislative powers reside in of two houses, with the term of four or six years with of Representatives may be the four year period. The he Cabinet which includes a 73 prime minister, designated by the Diet, and ministers appointed by the prime minister and approved by the Emperor. The judicial power is invested in the Supreme Court and courts of lower rank. According to Reischauer (1952, p. 229), "the most important single reform of the occupation was the revision of the Constitution and of its supporting legislation." The Constitution defines the position of the Emperor as "the symbol of the State and of the unity of the people, deriving his position from the will of the people with whom resides sovereign power." Previous to this, during the eras of the last two emperors, the monarchy had been slowly evolving into a constitutional symbol after the British pattern, and the new constitution brought the official document into line with practice (Reischauer, 1952, p. 231). As a member of the United Nations Organization (admitted in 1956), Japan is providing leadership in several inter— national organizations. She is also providing technical and financial assistance to developing countries. Through emigration of Japanese workers, primarily to South America, industrial and agricultural skills are being made available to other nations. Education In 1868, two centuries of self-imposed isolation came to an end in Japan. In 1872 the government adopted as a 74 1 national policy, a western system of education as a means ‘ of attaining status as an equal with other nations where the industrial revolution had already been initiated. Historically, the Japanese have favored education as a means of attaining and maintaining high status position. On the basis of criteria developed by Almond and Coleman (1960), and by the Hakone Conference on Modernization of Japan which was conducted in 1960, Japan can be described as a developed, modernized nation (Hall, 1965). She is especially "modern" in education. From 1890 until the close of World War II, one of the central features of the schools was the inculcation of loyalty and morality, especially in reference to parents and the Emperor. The instrument by which this was accomplished was through Shushin (Morals) which was a mandatory course (1 hour/week for elementary and secondary schools) and whose contents were prescribed by the national government. Through Shushin, filial piety and loyalty to the Emperor were drilled into the students (Passin, 1965). Special note might be made of Japan's literacy rate which is reputed to be the highest in the world. In 1960, .5% of the population received no education, 63.9% com— pleted elementary school (6 grades), 30.1% completed secondary school, and 5.5% completed higher education. This data is based on persons of "productive age” 15—59. (Education in Japan, 1964, pp. 30—31). This noteworthy 75 achievement is made possible through the expenditure of 5.3% of the national budget for education. If only the children of compulsory school age are considered, 99.8% of all children are enrolled in school. In 1960, 23.A million persons were enrolled in educational institutions extending from kindergarten through university levels (Cramer and Browne, 1965, pp. 511n512). Since the constitution of Japan guarantees "an equal education correspondent to their ability” facilities and services are being continuously upgraded. Japan is second only to the United States in ratio of colleges and universities to pOpulation. In 1960, there were 760 thousand students enrolled in colleges and universities. The present status of education in Japan may be summarized as follows: There is no doubt that this attempt to plant democratic and liberal educational ideas in a country formerly hostile to them (by the U.S. occupation forces) is one of the most interesting and significant experiments in modern times. A generation may have to pass before the real results emerge, but at the present time there appears to be no sign of a departure from the principle expressed in the opening paragraph of the Fundamental Law of Education promulgated in 1947: ”having established the Constitution of Japan, we have shown our resolution to contribute to the peace of the world and the welfare of humanity by building a democratic and cultural State. The realization of this ideal shall rest fundamentally on the power of education" (Cramer and Browne, 1965, p. 530). 76 Special Education and Rehabilitation Services Japan has had a strong interest in providing special education for various categories of exceptional children. Her rehabilitation facilities have been described as being "very highly develOped” due to comprehensive legal provision for such services, with the primary laws dating from 1946, 1947, 1949, and 1950. This emphasis on special education and rehabilitation has resulted in a very low percentage of handicapped persons receiving rehabilitation services remaining unemployed (Taylor, 1960, pp. 33, 34). National surveys regarding the handicapped are conducted by the Ministry of Welfare every 5 years to aid in adminis— tering the various programs of rehabilitation. According to the 1960 survey findings which are the latest available, there are 950 thousand physically handicapped children and adults in Japan, or about 1% of the population. Physical handicaps are categorized as visual, auditory, vocal and speech, motor nerve, and functional disabilities of limbs. The distribution of ages of the physically handicapped is as follows: Percent gge of total Under 15 9.9% 15 — 17 2.8 18 - 19 2.2 20 — 29 9.6 30 — 39 14.2 40 - 49 16.6 50 — 59 16.4 60 — 69 15.1 Over 70 13.2 Total 100.0% 77 0f the total number of phy .~4 .1 /.7 12.7% are children, and 87.3 age). Males comprise 61% and I,“ J. population. Approx 1 —‘. it- sidered to be mu , CHE comm Among (- V“"“ COI’.:3€;--" diseases, accidents predominant * *3 defects are ‘ Accidents and I“! ‘g ' " ‘ (J 1 U of all disabled per pan has had a ’to n the handicapped with blind, services and institutions a cooperation of private agencle (state), and local governments tailed description of services 1965a). There are an estimated 580 and adults in Japan. Children served by 167 public and priva served by 40 residential insti by the prefectures with the ai needs are far greater than the time. sically handicapped persons, are adults (over 18 years of females 39% of disabled thousand persons are con— pped persons. h sical disability are industrial accidents, and ted 'itn 'ar. Disease is the 1dicats .32 8%). Congenital ailCL: handicaps (36.1%). ted Jith war account for 6.4% CHCUSaHQ). ry of providing services for ;stitution a school for the How, a wide range of available through the s and federal, prefecture . Space will not permit a de— available (See Taguchi, ,000 mentally retarded children under 18 years of age are te institutions; adults are tutions which have been built d of federal subsidy. The facilities available at this 78 Handicapped children are classified in five groups: the blind, the deaf, the mentally retarded, the orthope— dically handicapped, and the delicate child (physically weak). The Education Law of 1947 requires each of the 46 prefec— tures to establish special schools for the handicapped or to provide special classes within regular schools. In 1952, a Special Education Section was set up within the Ministry of Education. These two provisions at the national level have tended to insure similar practices in special education throughout Japan. According to Izutsu (1959), of a total of 18.5 million children of compulsory education age (6-15 years), 1.2 million or 6.4% were in need of some type of special education because of physical disability or mental retardation which made it impossible for them to attend regular schools. 0f the 1.2 million handicapped children, 3% were attending schools providing special education. Among the handicapped children, 41% of the blind, 71% of the deaf, and 2% of the mentally retarded are en— rolled in special schools or classes. Also 4% of the orthopedically handicapped, and 3% of the delicate children were taking advantage of special education facilities (Izutsu, 1959)~ Izutsu (1959), after an extensive survey of special education facilities currently available in Japan, notes both the strengths and weaknesses of these facilities. He 79 concludes that "surely the concern for the [handicapped] is directly related to the positive solution of economic and social problems arising from war and defeat....lt will take many years to overcome all of the difficulties, more so, when each problem is interwoven with the country's religion, culture, economy and social patterns. The important thing is that a noble beginning has been made. The finishing touches are sure to be made" (0. 19). Research Population The research sample1 consisted of 211 adult men and women employed in various occupations in Tokyo, Japan. Five distinct occupational groups were represented in the sample, as follows: the Special Education and xehabilitation (SER) group, the Elementary and Secondary Education Teachers (E) group, the Manager/Executive (M) group, and the Laborer (both white and blue collar) (L) group. A fifth group, government officials and executives were placed in the M group for statistical analysis. There were 113 males and 98 females in the sample. The total sample of 211 had the following distribution: SER — N = 50 E — N = 41 M - N = 84 (includes 50 government executives) L — N = 36 Selection of Variables The selection of variables (Appendix C—l) was dictated primarily by theoretical considerations already reviewed. 1See Appendix C—7 for method of selection. CD Also, well—established sociological tradition indicated the selection of certain demographic variables. 71 ‘ 'pp‘ll. :' *-r"‘~r -'r‘*"r‘r\— * '. ' r‘ lhe theoretically dictated .arlaoles were mainly those suspeCted to be in one particular relationship to the (I) criterion variable of attitudes toward education and toward h sical disability. Ether va-iatle; gene included how— 3 ever, which were intended to rovide information in respect to the ctexacteris:;cs of t rout: of respondents: (a) education personnel aid Lt: those who work with the l 3 handicap_ed. These variables are mooility, personalism, institutional satisfaction, rel gicsitv, ‘d change orientation. Tre fact that or e -f these variables were ‘cores on the criterion H) O C :3 Q. d 0 LT \l‘ N ( D 51‘ *“K (D *— m ( f l,_ l ") —) 3 ( O"; the design of the research. 5 (D Q) U) C "S (D 22‘. Q3 (1) F {p *3’ I1 I) y. ‘——¢ C) ’1 (if 5: Fl (‘f L\ C. 0) L“ I\ k N L U T) Q .1 ,3 g f 3 (1‘ The major variaclgg study are discussed in this section. ' r. r] i Attitudes Physical D owa sability mu .1. The items used in this scale were taken from the Attitudes Toward Disability Scale (Yuker, Block and Campbell, 1960). Adequate test-retest reliability scores were reported, and various construct validity measures which were collected from disabled employees of Abilities, lnc. of Alberton, New York, a light manufacturing company which employs disabled workers. Among these employees the test was found to be negatively related to age and anxiety, and . ~ A. : 81 positively related to verbal intelligence and Job satisfaction. Although the validating group has questionable generality - o ~r._ - ‘ I -—~ ‘1“, ‘— ‘~ ’v I. A C if ‘ T v .x ..L Cf H. for and the rationale +4 ' ‘ . " I A _L -'_ F . represents an attempt CO 9——1 deserves further study. available. w j Modifica dent scoring. (D the response (.1. seven to four, ‘_ Aak.’ "’3 m 1;) J k, requiring the ‘ . H: coded categori o t "'Lves response, (A- question was fications y it was intended to submit the items '\ rather than follow tn Ca y no need to retain the same numerical Fifteen of the 20 attitude items differences between disabled persons abled. reflecting an unfavorable attitude. Attitudes Education Toward Modifications similar on is not clear, H or the respondent. suggested scoring system, the test n the field and be the only instrument one for respon— ained, but reduced from instead of number from a set of m us page to indicate his were stated following each felt that these modi— Since to scale analysis there was SCOFGS. are statements of and those not dis— Agreement with those statements is interpreted as to those described above were made on the Attitudes Toward Education scale developed by 82 Kerlinger (Kerlinger, 1958, 1961; Kerlinger and Kaya, 1959). The scales were included for two reasons: first, they are short and easy to administer; second, there is a rationale for hypothesizing a relationship between progressive attitudes toward education and positive attitudes toward physical disability in Asian countries. The scales represent a factor analysis of a set of 40 items administered to 598 subjects of various backgrounds, but all apparently with above average education. The scale: have been found to hold up under cross—validation; however, there is no indication that persons of lower educational attainment have been adequately represented in the studies. An examination of the items (Appendix B—l) suggests that some of them may be overly complex and difficult for many peOple. The complete instrument consists of 20 items, of which 10 are "pro- ' and 10 are ”traditional.” As employed in this gressive,‘ study, the progressive and traditional items were analyzed independently as two separate scales. The Intensity Scales Suchman (1950) suggests that intensity of attitudes may be ascertained by asking a question about intensity immediately following a content question. One form used for an intensity question is simply: "How strongly do you feel about this?" with answer categories of ”Very strongly", "Fairly strongly”, and ”Not so strongly”. Repeating such a question after such content question yields a series of intensity answers. 83 Using the same procedure...for content answers, these are scores and each res— pondent is given an intensit s f) y core The intensity scores are then toss tabulated with the content scores _chhman, 1950, p. 219). This procedure was the one adopted to measure intensity H: O "S O. O (‘Y‘ 23‘ d {3‘ (D g) (1‘ cf ‘1 (f if Q (I) I.) (f D i ) [J I W Tvtihg to handicapped persons and to education. E-ir re- 3 e categories were used instead of the three -91 c tel b, Quchman: ”Very strongly," "Fairly strongly," ”Hot very :2rohglv," and ”Not strongly at all." Interpersonal Values In selecting the Gordon (lQét) Survey of Interpersonal Values (817), two factors were considered. First, an instrument was needed which would yield scores on items that seemed logically related to the values included in the hypotheses of this study, namely, those of "asset" orienta— H tion to others, and comparative orientation to others. Benevolence, one of the si N I) sub—scales in the instrument, is described as: "Doing things for other people, sharing with others, helping the unfortunate, being generous” (Gordon, 1960, p. 3). Among studies presented in a subsequent research brief, Benevolence was found to correlate .49 with the Nurturance score on the Edwards Personal Preference Schedule (EPPS and negatively with Achievement (—.24) and Aggression (—.28) (Gordon, 1963, p. 22). It was decided that on the basis of the description, the item content, and 84 the inter—correlations with the EPPS that the Gordon Benevolence value, would be an adequate operationalization of the "asset” value, The second value to be operationalized was that of "com— parative" orientation toward others. Three of the SIV values, Recognition, Conformity, and Leadership appear to involve rankings of others on some kind of absolute scale, either of achievement (Recognition), social acceptability (Conformity), or power (Leadership). The Gordon manual defines Recognition as: "Being looked up to and admired, being considered important, attracting favorable notice, achieving recognition" (Gordon, 1960, p. 3). Conformity is defined as: ”Doing what is socially correct, following regulations closely, doing what is accepted and proper, being a conformist" (Gordon, 1960, p. 3). Leadership is defined as: "Being in charge of other people, having authority over others, being in a position of leadership or power (Gordon, 1960, p. 3). 0n the basis of face validity, the Recognition and Leadership items were judged to be most representative of "comparative" values. A second consideration for selecting the SIV was the validity of the scale in a different cultural application than the one for which it was designed. Translations in French and Japanese yielded scores consistent with expectations for known groups (Gordon, 1963, pp. 17—21). The forced-choice format of the instrument may be less — 85 sensitive to subtle shifts in item meaning resulting from translation than a format in which each item is separately responded to as ”agree” or ”disagree," or on a Likert-type format. It is expected, however, that in the present study some estimate of validity may be obtained through con— firmation of predictions about the values of known groups used in the study (predictive validity), and from expected relationships between other scores (concurrent validity). Personal Contact Variables Two types of variables related to personal contact were represented by 15 items in the questionnaires. Four items were related to educational contact, nine to contacts with physically disabled persons, one to contact with mentally retarded persons, and one to contact with emotionally dis— turbed persons. Eacn item produced a score. Single—item scores are notoriously unstable, and no reliability data can be offered. There is some evidence of the predictive validity of some of the items in respect to expectancies that known groups should respond in certain ways. For example, it was expected that persons working in SER would report a higher frequency of contact with disabled persons than would persons not working in the field of dis— ability. This was the case in Costa Rica (Felty, 1965), and might be considered an item validation. Contact with Education These items (#0 4—7) requested respondents to indicate: 'a at much they had worked in schools or educational 39:“. “s, 3o) what percent of income was derived from such »sr., cl how LflGy felt about such work, and td? what other nurk ubePLUhltleo they could have alternatively chosen Contact with Physioa;;n_;;:;pled Tuese items (PQ—HP 1—9) requested responden, 2 “ : ,e the kind of physical disability with vhi n t.4 I 1' the Host contact or knew the most about, the ZvUe of 1:1atlgnsri they had had with physically disabled verso .o. /s )amil , friends, or others, and the approcircte /; ter of encounters they had had with phgslcal d1 cl persons. Other questions were contact with harcl;.,~ contacts, gfin fror con from working with hand: Preferences for Persona -ive apportunities, enjoyment of “d rersons, ease of avoidance of such ,acu, and percent of income derived capped persons. 1 Relationships This set of three items (P0 21—23) was de or groups dimension. as opposed to affective of respondent' vised to help identify respondents, along a traditional—modern (if A I , The predominance of affective relationships neutral relationships is -L "y" 1Throughout the dis Questionnaire; PQ—HP w 1 Handicapped Persons. sertation P0 will refer to Personal 11 refer to Personal Questionnaire— 87 supposedly one of the distinguishing characteristics of the "Gemeinshaft," or traditional, orientation (Loomis, 1960, p. 61ff). ”Members of the Gemeinshaft—like system are likely to know each other well, their relationships are functionally diffuse in that most of the facets of human personality are revealed in the prolonged and intimate associations common to such systems" (Loomis, 1960, p. 72). The SER group, then, being committed to "asset” values (by hypothesis), being more concerned with intrinsic valuation of the person rather than valuing him for his absolute achievements, should also eXpress a greater need for personal interactions generally, and a greater diffuseness of inter— personal relationships. Religiosity Three questions (P0 18, 19, 38) were oriented toward religion: religious preference, importance of religion to the respondent, and the degree of conformity to the rules and regulations of his religion. Religiosity also relates to the traditional-modern continuum, with higher scores eXpected among the lower income group, and among persons with low education. Institutional Satisfaction This set of nine questions (PQ 31A—311) was adapted from Hyman (1955, p. 400). The institutions selected (schools, business, labor, government, health services, churches) were 88 listed and an opportunity offered to indicate whether they were judged excellent, good, fair, or poor in doing their particular job. It was postulated that the SER group would be less satisfied with institutions generally than other groups. Persons with high education in relation to income might also be expected to be less satisfied than others. Change Orientation This set of six questions (PQ 39—43, 47) was adapted from Programa Interamericano de Informacion Popular in Costa Rica. The respondents were asked to react to a number of statements which purported to reflect attitudes toward change in such areas as health practices, child rearing practices, birth control, automation, political leadership, and self change. Four response alternatives were provided: strongly agree, slightly agree, slightly disagree, and strongly dis- agree. It was postulated that the SER group would have responses which suggested a greater flexibility and open— ness toward change which would, of course, challenge many existing cultural norms. 0n the other hand, the Managerial (M) or Labor (L) group1 might be expected to respond in ways which suggest resistance to change. 1 The four sample groups are identified as follows: SER — Special Education and Rehabilitation workers E — Elementary and Secondary Teachers M — Managers and executives (business and government) L — Labor, white and blue collar workers ; 89 Demographic-Variables In the Personal Questionnaire respondents were asked to indicate their placement on several variables often found to be of significance in sociological analysis. These were level of education (26, 27), occupation (37), rental pay— ments (30), age (8), sex (face sheet), marital status (12), number of children (13), number of siblings (16,17), home ownership (29), mobility (11, 12, 15), and rural—urban youth community (9). In the dissertation analysis, all of these variables will not be used because of time and space limitations but will be utilized more fully in the larger study being conducted by John E. Jordan, Michigan State University (See footnote, page 6). Collection of Data The instruments were administered in Japan under the supervision of Yasusada Takase (professor, Japan College of Social Work), Yasuo Tsujimura (professor, Ochanomizu Women's University), and Giichi Misawa (psychologist, National Rehabilitation Center of the Physically Handicapped). The instruments were administered in the following order: 1. Definitions of Disability 2. Attitudes Toward Education 3. The Survey of Interpersonal Values 4. The Personal Questionnaire 5. Attitudes Toward Handicapped Persons 6. The Personal Questionnaire — Handicapped Persons The English version of each of these questionnaires is included in Appendix B. 90 Statistical Procedures Statistical procedures to be discussed in this section .nclude descriptive statistics, scale and intensity analysis, wan differences analysis, and relational and/or pre- dctive analyses. escriptive Two Frequency Column Count Programs (Clark, 1964), esignated as FCC I and FCC II, were used. These programs ere used to compile the frequency distributions for every tem of the instruments. This proved to be a very useful tep in selecting variables for analysis and in gaining a linical "feel” for the data. cale and Intensity nalysis The general procedures of scale and intensity analysis re discussed by Suchman (1950, Chs. 4, 7). In working with Lkert—type items, two problems arise which call for >ecial techniques. First, the respondent—item matrix 1st be organized to permit the items to be dichotomized by .sual inspection and counting. Once the items are dichot- lized into 9 and 1 categories, the second problem, common . all Guttman-type scale procedures, is that of re—ordering spondents in the order of their new total scores, and en recording the items for inspection of the resulting ale pattern. 91 Various techniques have been proposed to indicate item spmmes, such as the use of specially constructed boards udmmn, 1950, Ch. 4). A technique employing only a pewriter was suggested by Waisanen (1960) and is appealing virtue of its simplicity. While the Waisanen technique 5 very helpful, the "CUT” Computer Program, developed by Werson (1964) at Michigan State University, is more flcient in terms of time and errors. The program :ermines each possible cutting point as well as the mer of errors involved in each cut. The dichotomized *ms are then scaled by the Multiple Scalogram Analysis gram in use with the CDC 3600 Computer at Michigan State versity (Lingoes, 1963; Hafterson, 1964). A procedure for combining the content and intensity les is described by Suchman (1950, Ch. 7). A matrix of "es is formed by entering the total intensity scores on vertical axis and the total content scores on the zontal axis. Respondents are tabulated in the resulting s on the basis of the two total scores received for scale, one in content and one in intensity. For each ant rank, a median intensity score is computed. The a of intensity on content is formed by these median rs. The lowest point of the curve represents the ological 0 point which divides favorable attitudes Lnifavorable attitudes (Suchman, 1950, pp. 220—223). 92 ran Differences 1alysis For convenience of computer programming, the F statistic is used for all testing of mean differences, though Lfferences between two means are usually tested by the t :atistic. The results are the same for both methods Edwards, 1960, p. 146). If an F between two means is ignificant, inspection of the size of the two means will idicate which one is larger and thus the main contributor o the differences reflected in the F. Since a significant merely shows that the variance projected in the hypothesis 5 greater than would be eXpected by chance, the specific elationship between the dependent variable and the ariable represented by the levels or groups must be nvestigated. Duncan's New Multiple Range Test (Edwards, 960, p. l36ff), as extended for unequal replications by ramer (1963), will be used to investigate the extent to . hich a particular sub—group mean contributes to the total ariance represented by the F test. Using this method, the roup means can be ranked from high to low. Subsequent to his, the ”difference" between success1ve pairs of means an be tested to ascertain which one(s) are statistically ignificant at a stated level of confidence. The UNEQl routine (Ruble, Paulson and Rafter, 1966) was sed to calculate the one—way analysis of variance statistics. he program is designed to handle unequal frequencies 93 ccurring in the various categories. In addition to the nalysis of variance tables, the frequency, sums, means, tandard deviations, sums of squares, and sums of squared eviations of the mean were included for each category. The pproximate significance probability of the F statistic is 130 included in the computer print off. This convenient igure enabled the researcher to know at a glance if the was significant without referring to a table. For xample, if the number printed out was .05, the level of onfidence, with apprOpriate degrees of freedom, would be 05 or less. However, if .00 was printed out, the level f confidence was to be considered to be .005 or less. UNEQl also contains provision for designating one or ore dependent variables as missing for an observation, but ncorporating other dependent variables listed on the nalysis of Variance table as non-missing. The observation 5 then ignored for all dependent variables with missing alues, but used in the analysis for all dependent variables ith non—missing values. The number of missing values in ach category is printed after the table giving statistics or the categories for each dependent variable. A two-way analysis of variance design for unequal Eli 'as used to analyze group—sex interaction (Ruble et al., 966). Since the samples were not equal in size or sex 'atio within groups, an ”adjusted mean" was computed on hich to base all F tests. The ”adjusted means" equalizes 94 :counts for both the variance in the size of the group les and the unequal sex distribution. The F test for group comparison is the usual one while the F test used est for differences between the adjusted means is equal two—sided 3 test while also fully accounting for the r experimental factors. This procedure for testing significance among multiple means is approximately equal uncan's New Multiple Range Test (Edwards, 1950; Kramer, , pp. 307—310) when three or less treatment means are g tested. The procedure is somewhat more liberal than .. Duncan's test when more than three means are included, :fi increasing the likelihood of Type I error. The pro— re also does not account for the non-independence g the pairs of treatment means. tion and/or ictive Analysis Partial and multiple correlation are outputs of the ral multiple regression model used in the CDC 3600 ram at Michigan State University (Ruble et al., 1966). benefit of the use of partial correlation is that a er of variables which are assumed to have some relation— to a criterion, or dependent variable, can be examined ltaneously. Often, when a series of Pearsonian product- nt {Ls are computed between a criterion and a set of ables considered to be predictors of the criterion, 95 >urious conclusions may be obtained because the predictor Lriables are themselves inter-related, rather than directly 'edictive of the criterion. In a partial correlation solution to the problem these elationships among the predictor variables are considered 1 computing the true correlation of each variable with the ‘iterion. That is, the effects of all but one variable are ald constant. The use of multiple regression analysis is recommended I Ward (1962, p. 206) because it ”not only reduces the ingers inherent in piecemeal research but also facilitates 1e investigation of broad problems never before considered éesearchable'.” The multiple correlation program yielded 1e following statistics: the beta weights of all (i.e., lose used) predictor variables, a test of significance 3r each beta weight, and the partial correlations between ach predictor and the criterion. In the CDC 3600 MDSTAT program (Ruble and Rafter, 1966), great deal of data can be utilized in one analysis. eparate analyses can be done for the total group and for my number of specified sub-groups, or partitionings, of ne data. For each specified group (such as total, male, emale) a number of statistics can be requested. Those used or each partitioning in this research program were: means nd standard deviations for each variable, and the matrix f‘simple correlations between all variables. 96 Several multiple regression analyses were done. The Lrst set of analyses used the total raw scores from the andicapped persons scale as a criterion. The second set sed the total raw scores on both the progressive and the raditional education scales. The third set used the cores from change orientation items. Since the computer rogram for multiple regression did not ”handle missing ata," persons with missing data were dropped from the nalysis of that problem. Major Research Hypotheses ypotheses Related to caling :l: Each set of attitude items employed in the study Appendix B—l,u) represents an underlying one—dimensional niverse of content, so that Guttman scale analysis will ield a scale or quasi-scale of attitude items.1 1. Attitudes Toward Disabled Persons items will yield a Guttman scale or quasi—scale 2. Traditional Attitudes Toward Education items will yield a Guttman scale or quasi-scale 3. Progressive Attitudes Toward Education items will yield a Guttman scale or quasi—scale 1For this hypothesis, and all following hypotheses in mich statistical tests of significance are included, the Watement of the hypothesis is in the research form 7ather than the null form for purposes of clarity. It, Should be understood that in the statistical analyses it w the null form, either one or two—tailed, which will 3e tested. 97 l Hypothesis Derivation: The utility of scaling for cross— ,tional research has been discussed in Chapter 2. The .813 for the assertion of the hypothesis in respect to ;ch national sample and the attitude-object-group of lysical disability, rests on the assumption that disabled :rsons represent a salient group in the particular nation > that people will hold opinions in respect to them, Lther on a favorable—unfavorable, or a different—similar antinuum. The basis for the assertion of the hypothesis 1 respect to the education items, rests on the original actor derivation of the "traditional" and "progressive" tems by Kerlinger (1958, 1961), and on pre—test scaling of hese items in Lansing, Michigan in March, 196A, in which traditional” items were found to scale independently of progressive” items among a sample of 97 students and job e—training workers. -1 Instrumentation: The attitude scales, as modified for he present study, are found in Appendix B—l,u. t2: For each attitude scale the plotting of intensity mores against content scores will yield a U—shaped or '-shaped curve. 1. For Attitudes Toward Disabled Persons items, the plotting will yield a U— or J—shaped curve 2. For Traditional Attitudes Toward Education items, the plotting will yield a U- or J—shaped curve. 98 3. ForProgressive Attitudes Toward Education itmm, the plotting will yield a U— or J— Mmped curve -2 Hygmhesis Derivation: From empirical findings re— Itedby &mhman (1950) and others that such a relationship ybe emwcted and should serve to establish a 9 point fidingthe favorably—disposed from the unfavorably— :posed respondents. Instrumentation: Following each attitude item, a arate question referring to the intensity with which a >ondent held the opinion expressed on the content state— (Appendix B-l,4). theses Related to act Frequency, Intensity, Attitude Scores The more frequent the contact with disabled persons, igher will be the scores on the intensity statement of ttitude Toward Disabled Persons (ATDP) scale, regard— >f whether attitude content is favorable or unfavorable. Hypnothesis Derivation: From considerations of erg, .Foa, and Guttman and Foa, to the effect that : frwaquency is directly related to attitude intensity, .esss (Df content directions (see Ch. 2). ristzruimentation: Contact frequency, by a direct ; :1, i..e., PQ—HP, A (Appendix B—M); ATDP intensity 99 sobuflhed through independent intensity questions whg mmh attitude content statement (Appendix B—A). Thenmre frequent the contact with education, the éwilee the scores on the intensity statements of the gerthitudes TOward Education scale, regardless of I°the attitude is traditional or progressive. hypothesis Derivation: Same as H-3a above. Instrumentation: Contact frequency, by a direct in, i.e., PQ, A (Appendix B-l); education intensity obtained as in H—Ba above (Appendix B—l). High frequency of contact with disabled persons will favorable attitudes if high frequency is concurrent ) alternative rewarding Opportunities, (b) enjoyment contact, and (c) ease of avoidance of contact. :pothesis Derivation: From considerations of Homans, 1%; and other studies in special education (see strunnentation: Attitudes toward disabled persons, tenmnit attitude instrument developed by Yuker et al., id rnodified for the purposes of the present study B-J4). Contact variable by direct questions in ’: :frequency by question A, alternatives by S9, (enjoyment by question 8, and avoidance by 5. lOO Higifrequency of contact with education will lead to 'abheattitudes if high frequency is concurrent with gtemmtive rewarding opportunities, (b) enjoyment of ontmfig and (c) ease of avoidance of contact. Ifflpothesis Derivation: Same as H—Aa above. Chmtrumentation: Attitudes toward education, by a am instrument deveIOped by Kerlinger (1959) and .ed for the purposes of the present study. Contact tle by direct questions in the PQ: frequency by on A, enjoyment by question 6, and alternatives by on 7. eses Related to 3nd Attitude Scores Persons who score high in need for power and control .hers will tend to score low in acceptance of dis— ersons . I%arsons who score high in need for power and (aver cwhers will tend to scorelow in progressive as inoward education and high in traditional n3'toward education. ;5b Hypotheses Derivation: From considerations of II ruespect to asset versus comparative valuations :s, sand of Rosenberg to the effect that the more the orrtenit of an attitude is instrumental to value lOl aintenance, the more favorable will be the evaluation of he object of the attitude. Persons with high power needs re applying a comparative yardstick in evaluations of others nd should be expected to devalue persons with disabilities s well as devalue progressive attitudes toward education ince the latter usually implies changes in the status quo. ome empirical findings of this appears in the conclusions f Whiteman and Lockoff (1962) in respect to blindness, nd Felty (1964). —5a, H-Sb Instrumentation: Need for power and control easured by Leadership (L) scale of the Gordon Survey of nterpersonal Values (Appendix B—2); attitudes toward dsabled persons, as in H-Aa, and attitudes toward education $ in H-ub. L6a: Persons who score high in need for recognition and mhievement will tend to score low in acceptance of dis— mled persons. 1-6b: Persons who score high in need for recognition and mhievement will tend to score low in progressive attitudes :oward education and high in traditional attitudes toward education. 7L6a, H—6b Hypothesis Derivation: Same as H—5 above. 102 [:;6t> Instrumentation: Need for recognition and anueni; measured by the Recognition (R) scale of the ESurHJey of Interpersonal Values (Appendix B—2); ward educaticni as :in IL—Ub. — 103 Hypothesis Related to Change Orientation and Attitude Scores i—8: Persons who score high on change orientation will score high on positive attitudes toward handicapped persons and progressive education and score low on traditional attitudes toward education. {-8 Hypothesis Derivation: Same as H—S above and extended :o connote that high scores on change orientation cepresents departure from the status quo and high relation— ship to new ideas (i.e., progressivism) and care for the landicapped (i.e., concern for individual differences). {-8 Instrumentation: Change orientation measured by luestions 39—43, and A7 in the PQ. These questions deal Iith change in health practices, child rearing, birth :ontrol, automation, political leadership, and self change. Lttitudes toward disabled persons as in H:flg and toward education as in H:flp. mpotheses Related to Characteristics )f Those Working Directly With )isabled Persons @ER) [—9: The SER group will have a lower mean attitude toward lisabled persons score than will persons in other >ccupational categories. ~'— 10“ H—9 Hypothesis Derivation: From considerations of Zetterberg (1963) to the effect that high frequency of contact is positively associated with favorableness of attitude if (a) the interaction could be easily avoided, and (b) there are other rewarding actiVities in which to become involved. The association of (a) and (b) with occupational categories rests on the assumption that a measure of choice and job alternatives were present in the selection of employment; i.e , that SER employees chose this occupation in preference to others. H-9 Instrumentation: Attitudes toward disabled persons measured as in H-Aa. 5;;9: The SER Group will have a higher mean score than will persons in other occupational categories in respect to the value of Benevolence and will have a lgwgg mean score in respect to the values of Leadership and Recognition. H—lO Hypothesis Derivation: Same as H—S above and applied specifically to the SER group rather than to those who measure high on Benevolence (asset value) and low on Leadership (comparative value). H—lO Instrumentation: Same as H—4 and H—6 for Leadership and Benevolence values, respectively. 105 Lg; The SER group will have a higher mean score in pro— SSiflle attitudes toward education than will persons in ex: occupational categories. .lb: The SER group will have a lower mean score in Lditional attitudes toward education than will persons in 1er occupational categories. lla, H-llb Hypothesis Derivation: Same as H—5 and H—6 1 applied specifically to the SER group rather than to ose who measure high on progressive attitudes and low on aditional attitudes toward education. $3: The SER group will have a higher mean score than .11 other occupational groups on the following change “ientation measures: (a) health practices, (b) child earing practices, (c) birth control practices, (d) auto- ation, (e) political leadership, and (f) self change. -l2 Hypothesis Derivation: Same as H—Sa, H—Sb, H—5c and xtended to imply that persons who score high on progressive ttitudes toward education will also score high on change mientation variables since both areas represent dis- atisfaction with the status quo and emphasize the JfliVidual and empirical solutions to current problems. L12 Instrumentation: Change orientation measured by a smdesof questions in PQ on the areas stated in H-l2 (Appendix B—3). 106 Ebl3: The SER group will have a higher mean score than fihergroups on the amount of contact with mentally retarded “ mdammionally disturbed persons. 913 Hypothesis Derivation: The SER group was chosen for nown'prolonged contact" with the physically handicapped. he mnTent hypothesis postulates a ggneralization effect ‘ n that increased contact with one area of disability nplies increased contact with other areas of disability or (ceptionality. l3 Instrumentation: Contact frequency with the physically ndicapped measured as in H—3a and contact frequency with e mentally retarded and with the emotionally disturbed asured by questions 10 and 11 in PQ—HP. ; Limitations of the Study In cross-national research, concept—equivalence must be lajor concern. Felty (l965) and Friesen (1966) dis— g sed the necessity of giving adequate attention to this ect of a study. The problem is to translate the truunents without losing the essential meaning of the ginaJ. questionnaire. Exact, i.e., literal translation is reculired if the concept or idea contained in the :iJial is preserved in the translation. For the Japan Ly, a solution was sought by having one of the three Iiesea research colleagues translate the instruments. 107 txig ‘this, the translation was reviewed by the other BJXSJJECOPS. The translators' competency to perform orw< includes the following qualifications: pro- t lise of the English language, extensive study and abrfiyad, and current professional involvement in ,litation work. iough every effort was made to obtain concept— ilence, the limitation of time and finances did not t the administration of these instruments to a pre— group before administration to the main sample. uch as this study can be considered a continuing »ratory study for the larger stldy currently being done . the supervision of Dr John E. Jordan, this limitation not be as imposing as it might seem (see footnote on 6). Under limitations of tne testing of hypotheses may be idered such conzepts as the reliability and validity he measuring instruments and the adequacy of the ding. Two approaches to reliability and validity were mmted: the analysis of reliability was restricted to seitems appearing in instruments that were analyzed for legnoperties. Reliability in this case becomes a ctiMiof the reproducibility of the scales. According mmtmmi(1950, p. 278), for a reproducibility co— ‘identto acquire stability it 18 necessary to retest on .Mgesample of respondents, even though the pre—test may m ardatively high reproduCibility coefficient. 108 1e to the nature of the study, which will be replicated Later date in a more comprehensive, in—depth study of :ed countries, the usual sampling procedures were ad. Other factors indicating the adVisability of the ”availability” approach was the pressure of time inances. The data was secured from known occupational s in Tokyo, as described in Chapter IV. Sampling places limitations on the generalizations that can stically be inferred from the data. The generalizations be limited to the Tokyo sample, but may by inference be ded to include other large metropolitan areas in Japan attitudes are presumed to be different from isolated areas but not unlike those found in the Tokyo sample. ample in this study was chosen to represent "ideal" .s and the major concern was with obtaining a large ;h representation within each group for statistical 'sis, rather than with population representation in a >nal sense. Although this would impose a severe . zation of a study purporting to be “nationally l asentative,‘ it appears fairly adequate for an Dratory study such as the present one. CHAPTER IV ANALYSIS OF THE DATA The analysis of data is presented in two major sections. tgg_l will include descriptive data on designated icteristics of the sample. Section 2 will be used pri— Ly for reporting the results of hypotheses testing. irisons will be made of mean differences of various as when respondents are compared according to (a) sex, Lnterest or occupational group, (c) contact with the Brion, and (d) related indices. Correlational relation— ; (zero—order, multiple, and partial) will be presented. Section 1: Descriptive Data )escriptive characteristics of the sample are presented liS section. The data are derived from three computer ’ams which provide a number of statistics useful for .e demographic description. The computer programs used I1requency Column Count (Clark, 1964) and MDSTAT (Ruble lafter, 1966). The two major sub-divisions of the sample, sex and )ational/interest groups, are presented in Tables 1 and Inspection of the tables reveals a major factor which s interpretation of the data difficult: the sex-linked 109 110 acter of some of the occupational groups, such as the >minance of female teachers and male managers/executives. :hose variables or hypotheses in which sex differences significant, the sex composition of the interest group 1 important factor in the analysis of the interest group arences. However, the use of two—way analysis of ane procedures enables the sex factor to be held con— ; in the analyses. 2 l.——Distribution of respondents according to sex and interest group Interest Group1 SER E L M Total 16 8 1A 75 113 e 3“ 33 22 9 98 50 Al 36 8A 211 = Spec. Educ. Rehab. E = Education = Labor M = Manager/Executive able 2 indicates that of the total M group, 50 ndents were government executives. Because of their istrative responsibilities, business and government tive level personnel were grouped together for ses of analysis. 111 3 2.——Occupationa1 composition of total sample by sex and interest group of Occupation Description Frequency of occupations by groups1 SER E M L Ma Fe Total 39, SER) Teachers, elem and sec A9 15 3A A9 School special services 1 1 l 19, Educators other than SER) Elementary teachers 19 5 1A 19 Secondary teachers 22 3 19 22 39, Professional and Tech— nical) Lawyers, public account- ants 3 2 l 3 A9, Business, Industry, and Government Executive) Government and public officials 50 A2 8 50 Manufacturing executives 3 3 3 Non-manufacturing ex- ecutives 12 12 12 Retail trades 6 6 6 Executives (non— specified) 10 10 10 -59, White Collar Workers) Clerical, office, book- keeper, etc. 29 8 21 29 Sales, wholesale and retail 1 l 1 Small shOpkeeper or dealer 5 A 1 5 -69, Blue Collar Workers) All foremen 1 1 1 als 50 Al 8A 36113 98 211 El: Spec. Educ. Rehab., E = Education, M = Managerial/ ecutive, L = Labor, Ma = Male, Fe = Female 112 erences in Mean Education, 3e, and Age Scores Between rest, Male; and Female Groups Amount of education, income, and age of respondents are ented in Tables 3 and 5 according to sex and interest p. The Duncan's New Multiple Range Test is used to yze the variance between three or more means when the F istic indicates a significant difference between means. Chapter III for a discussion of Duncan's New Multiple e Test. Table A contains the Duncan's Means analyses education scores as given in Table 3. Throughout the y, when there is a significant difference between two s, the Duncan's New Multiple Range Test is applied to means using the formu . shown in Table A. The means h are significantly different will be indicated within table (e.g. Table 3) after the caption ”Duncan's Test lts." The raw data for education and income were coded before istical analysis. The code for amount of education is n in Table 6. The code for income is contained in the Book — Special Instructions (Appendix C—A). For both ation and income, each score represents an equal range .ost cases. In all cases, the data are ordinal; a higher 'e always represents a greater amount of education ileted or a greater amount of income earned. The raw .for age was recorded with computations being made on actual ages of the respondents. 113 .E 3.——Comparison of mean differences, standard deviation, F statistics, and Duncan's Multiple Means Test results in reSpect to three demographic variables for four occupational categories Lable Occupationl N Mean Standard F Sig. Deviation of F cation SER 50 6.78 1.63 17.A8 .005 E A1 7.A9 0 95 M 2A 3.0A 2 39 L 7 5.A3 3 10 TOTAL 122 6.20 2.38 ntested Ranking of Means: E(7.A9):>SER(6.78)>»L(5.A3) >~M(3.0A) uncan's Test Results: E>M; E>L; E>P3 R>M; R>L; L:>M ome SER 50 8.36 3 5A 3 2A 02 E 39 11.61 7 27 M 8A 1A.38 16 71 L 6 7.A7 5 56 TOTAL 209 11.23 11.73 ntested Ranking of Means: M(1A.38):>E(ll.61)>>SER(8.36) >L(7.A7) luncan's Test Results: M>L; M>R; SER 50 35.68 7.10 18 96 005 E Al Al.Al 7.60 M 8A 3A.71 7 A6 L 36 28.33 10 53 TOTAL 211 35.16 8.89 Intested Ranking of Means: E(A1.A1):>SER(35.68):>M(3A.71) :>L(28.33_ )uncan's Test Results: E>M; E>L; E>R; R>Lg M>L Spec. Educ. Rehab. Labor Education 3R L Managers 3m 11A BLE A.-—Duncan's New Multiple Range Test applied to means of education scores for four occupational categories nge of Mean (p) d.f. 121 udentized ranges 2.80 2.95 3.05 r 5% test (Zp)l D [R'=(s)(zp,df=l21)]2 2.AA 2.57 2.65 an differences3 — M 17.35* — EL (p=3) 7.11* 4 — In (p=3 27.02 — ER (p=2) A.76* - EL (p=2) A.72* - KM (p=2) 6.70* ével of confidence used on all Duncan's Multiple Range ests: P 6 .05. Lken from Edwards (1960, p. 373). =the range of means (2,3, and A). =the square route of the error mean square of the analysis ' variance of Table 3 s =t/ 0.75 = 0.87 ‘an differences of columns 2, 3 and A have been trans— :med into the equivalent of t—scores for multiple means. be significant, the figure must exceed the R' value of same column. The formula given by Kramer (1856) is: _ _ 2nynz (X —XZ) ——_;—__. sz , error d.f. of A.of V. (=R' ) y ny+nZ p p e subscript R is used here to designate the SER group. 115 5.-——Comparison of mean differences, standard deviations, and F statistics in respect to three demographic variables for males and females >1e N Sex Mean Standard F Sig. Deviation of E tion 52 Male 5.15 2.78 8.91 .005 70 Female 6 99 1 65 122 Total 6 2O 2 38 e 113 _ Male I2I65 — 1A 75 — 3 60 07 96 Female 9 57 6 31 209 Total 11 23 11 73 113 Male 35IA2 8 65 21 65 98 Female 3A.86 9 19 211 Total 35 16 8 89 E 6.-—Interpretation of education scores in terms of actual educational attainment e Interpretation Range of Interval Less than A years completed 0 — 3 inclusive From A to 6 years completed A - 6 inclusive From 7 to 9 years completed 7 — 9 inclusive From 10 to 12 years completed 10 — 12 inclusive Some college or university 13 - 15 inclusive College or university degree 16 - Post-degree study _ _ _ Advanced degree _ _ _ 116 ;y (of Descriptive gi'Tables 3-6 Hie ciata presented must be interpreted cautiously, cilyr because of the interaction between sex and iticni. Not only are the occupational categories un- , but also the distribution of sex within the ories is unequal. For those variables where there is Ixificant difference related to sex, the sex composition e interest group would be an important factor in the sis of group differences. An effort will be made to 'mine which variable, sex or interest group, is more >nsible in the determination of the level of signifi— i r C In these tables, the actual significance levels of the lues are provided, rather than stating whether they are ificant at a predetermined level, such as .01 or .05. e the computer program provides this information, the al significance values are presented so the reader can his own judgment as to the importance of a particular .lue. As indicated in Table 3, the E group has a significantly ‘mr mhmational level than the M, L, and SER groups. The grmn>has a higher level of education than the M and roupsginterestingly, the L group has a higher level of catunlthan the M group. However, the L group in Japan 5 hm:include manual, unskilled laborers but primarily 117 ccflllar workers. Educators have a mean education at lostL—degree study level; Managers have a mean of 9 ; or’ less education, the lowest of the four groups. Iflanagers have a significantly higher income than Terms and SER personnel, but not higher than Educators. 3 group is older than the M, L, and SER groups. The group is older than the L group; the L group is older the M group. Since the mean age for the total sample 5 years, the average respondent was approximately 15 's old at the close of World War II when a period of .d social change began. Theoretically, this factor 11d have implications for the kinds of attitudes ressed by the respondence. Table 5 indicates a significant difference in cation between the sexes with females having a higher e1 of education than males. The male mean level of cation was some college training, but not college duation whereas the mean level for females of 6.99 in— :ates that nearly all females had done post—degree study. 3 great variance between the sexes may be occupationally :her than sex determined since over two—thirds of the tales in the sample are in the E and SER groups which velflgher educational levels than the other groups in e sample. Hm difference in income between the sexes is not mustically significant. However, of a mean score of +— J }__| CD ( fenuales) indicates an income of 957,000 yen and a of‘ 12.65 indicates an income of 1,265,000 yen. In of‘ actual purchasing power, there is a considerable :reruce between the two income levels. Age is not .fdxcantly different between the sexes with the attual liffxarence between males and females being less than year- Section 2 Hypotheses Testing, Mean Differences, and Correlational Analyses _theses Related .caling Each set of attitude items employed in the study lendix B—1,A} represents an underlying one—dimensional Jerse o content, so that Guttman scale analysis will 1d a scale or quasi—scale of attitude items. For each attitude scale the plotting of intensity £es against content scores W111 yield a U—shaped or Lhaped curve. In attempting attitude stale analysis Felty (1965) had Ly'mmrginal” success in forming attitude scales. In iesmfls (1966) study, none of the attitude items formed mflngflfl.unidimensional scales in keeping with the ttmmicriteria. Friesen (1966, p. 213) suggests that efaihne of the item to form a scale is related to two kmors,the complexity of attitudes and their multi- tmnshmal nature. He recommended the use of Lingoes' 119 .) Nhiltidimensional Scalogram Analysis—I (MSA—I) for “e Jresearch. Since the MSA—I is not yet Operational at lickxigan State University computer center, the analyses tirmg to hypotheses l and 2 were not completed. However, e ancalyses will be computed for the Japan data for the eptli study (see fQCpnCES, page 6). Iri future research efforts, it is recommended that :e ite~s be analyze; by linwoes' ( 965) Multidimensional F1 Logram Analysis—I. This program permits both multiple iimensional and multidimensitral analysis. A brief cription of the MSA—I is given below. Although computer t veloped for scalogr 1961) and for exten pioneeflr ng and por,u1or’ determination of multip scales (Lingoes, 1960, method is adapted for a data nor for directly : ling multi— dimensional interrelati nships. The present program, G—L (MBA—l), is, however ideally suited for solving the general grouping problem of systematics, on the other hand based on a minimum number of assumptions. This program can handle quantitative and/ or qualitative data, monotc ne and/or polytone items, with up to 20 categories, and permits one to test not only uni— dimensional hypothesis, but multidimensional ones as well (Lingoes, 1965). have been de— is (Schultz, G man s (19AA) cal ng method to the e unidimensional 962, 1963a), neither a yzing n- chotomous , a U (D :5 l—‘l- m ggfiheses Related to Contact cequmuw, Intensity and ttitudeiScores 33g: Thexnore frequent the contact with disabled persons, flghigmr will be the scores on the intensity statement of 120 :tthllde Toward Disabled Persons (ATDP) scale, regard— )f‘ wTiether attitude content is favorable or unfavorable. Talile 7 indicates that high frequency of contact with leCi persons produced significantly higher intensity 5 cnu the ATDP scale than did lower frequencies of LCt. In determining the level of significance, >ximately one third of the sample having the highest it of contact were compared with approximately one third he sample having the lowest amount of contact with bled persons. Hypothesis 3a was confirmed. IE 7.—-Means, standard deviations, and F statistic comparing high and low frequency of contact with disabled persons with intensity scores on the ATDP scale iable N Mean of ATDP Standard F Sig. Intensity Scale Deviation of F m frequency 70 6A.5A 7.31 25.2A .005 contact I frequency 76 57.87 8.62 contact tal 1A6 61.07 8.66 3p: The more frequent the contact with education, the .gwrWMll be the scores on the intensity statements of the mlhgerAttitude Toward Education scale, regardless of ieUmr'Hw attitude is progressive or traditional. 121 .s sliown in Tables 8 and 9, the F statistics indicate die Inean difference in scores for persons with high DW’ frwequency of contact with education are not fixcaJitly different on either the progressive or tra- naJ. scales. Contrary to the hypothesis, the mean of .OW':frequency of contact group is higher than the high Lency (of contact group on both the progressive and Ltional attitude toward education scales. H—3b was confirmed. .E 8.--Means, standard deviations, and F statistic com- paring high and low frequency of contact with education with intensity scores on the Progressive Attitude Toward Education scale iable N Mean of F Sig. Progressive Standard of Intensity Scale Deviation F m frequency 57 31.72 3.83 3.82 .06 contact N frequency A5 33.20 3.75 contact tel 102 32.37 3.85 122 Bu——Means, standard deviations, and F statistic comparing high and low frequency of contact with education with intensity scores on the Traditional Attitude Toward Education scale 1e N Mean of Standard F Sig. Traditional Deviation of Intensity Scale F requency 57 32.82 3.A3 2.88 .09 tact 'equency A5 3A.02 3.67 (tact 102 33.35 3.57 Dhe zero order correlations between amount of contact iisabled persons and intensity scores on the ATDP , and between amount of contact with education and sity scores on the progressive and traditional udes Toward Education scales are presented in Table Significant positive correlations are indicated for emale and total SER group, for the male and total M q and for the total L group on the ATDP. There were .gnificant correlations, either positive or negative, mn amount of contact with education and either pro— ;ive or negative attitudes toward education. High frequency of contact with disabled persons will tofavorable attitudes if high frequency is concurrent (a)alternative rewarding opportunities, (b) enjoyment km cmfiact, and (c) ease of avoidance of contact. 123 lO.——Zero—order correlations between amount of contact and intensity scores on the attitude scales for the occupational groups ATDPl Education Scale2 Scale Progressive Traditional r N r N r N roup 1e 110 16 —.323 16 - A31 16 nale A39* 31 —.063 3A — 106 3A tal 329* A7 —.103 50 — 165 50 pp 1e3 male .151 22 137 33 18A 33 tal 220 28 079 A1 11A Al pp 1e 36A** 66 -.l5A 2A 157 2A tal 39A** 72 —.15A 2A 157 2A pp 1e 351 11 —.383 0A 629 0A male 370 18 .685 3 A23 3 tal AlA** 29 .336 7 .3A0 7 1 Low scores on ATDP indicate positive attitudes. Correlations are between amount of contact with disabled persons and intensity scores on the ATDP. 2Correlations are between amount of contact with education and intensity scores on Kerlinger's Attitudes Toward Education Scale. 3Since the N for this group was less than 10, correlations were not computed. * P < .05 * ‘P<.01 12A 'he Inultiple correlation relating to the combined con— 'ariables and favorableness of attitudes toward zapped persons, as indicated in Table 11, is signifi— Lt the .01 level of confidence. Table 11 also indicates anjoyment of contact, when partialed out, contributes :han other contact variables in predicting attitudes 1 handicapped persons. The correlation coefficient ) indicates a low (positive) ATDP score and enjoyment itent. H-Aa was confirmed. High frequency of contact with education will lead vorable attitudes if high frequency is concurrent with lternative rewarding opportunities, and (b) enjoyment e contact, and (c) ease of avoidance of contact. For both progressive and traditional attitudes d education, Table 11 indicates that no ficant correlation exists between the combined bles and attitudes toward education, whether essive or traditional. H—Ab was not confirmed. 125 Uu-—Partial and multiple correlations between Attitude Toward Disabled Persons and Attitudes Toward Education (both progressive and traditional) as related to contact variables pped Persons Scale (dependent) N=133 of contact -.09 ce of contact —.0A nt of contact -.22** e correlation .26** sive-attitudes—toward-education ependent) N=120 3f contact .01 it of contact .11 :ives to contact —.01 a correlation .12 inal—attitudes—toward-education lependent) N=120 f contact -.05 t of contact .01 ives to contact .15 correlation .16 o < .01 >‘- w—o_ 126 ases Related to ie and Value Scores Persons who score high in need for power and control :hers will tend to score low in acceptance of ad persons. 1e data presented in Table 12 do not show a Lcant difference between high and low Leadership scores and Attitudes Toward Disabled Persons scores. asis 5a was not confirmed. L2.-—Means, standard deviations, and F statistic comparing high and low scores on_Leadership value and Attitudes Toward Disabled Persons scores _e N Mean of Standard F Sig. ATDP Deviation of E :ores on ' Ldership value 7A 51.03 A.07 1.81 .18 >res on Ldership value 71 50.06 A.60 1A5 50-55 A.35 Persons who score high in need for power and , over others will tend to score low in progressive ,es toward education and high in traditional .es toward education. e F statistic presented in Table 13 indicates there ignificant difference between persons with high and 127 scores on Leadership value in relation to progressive itudes toward education. Table 1A, however, indicates a iificant difference between high and low scores on iership value in relation to traditional attitudes ard education. H-5b was partially confirmed, i.e., Fpp iitional, but not for progressive attitude scores. LE l3.-—Means, standard deviations, and F statistic com— paring high and low scores on Leadership value and Progressive Attitudes Toward Education scores Lable N Mean of Standard F Sig. Progressive Deviation of Scale F 1 Leadership 7A 28.70 3.11 0.90 .35 llue scores Leadership 71 28.2A 2.75 llue scores 11 1A5 28.A8 2.9A .E lA.—-Means, standard deviations, and F statistic com— paring high and low scores on Leadership value and Traditional Attitudes Toward Education scores .able N Mean of Standard F Sig. Traditional Deviation of Scale F 1 Leadership 7A 27.85 3.10 8.12 .01 .lue scores Leadership 71 26.37 3.18 .lue scores 1 1A5 27.12 3.21 128 Phersons who score high in need for recognition and jenmnat will tend to score low in acceptance of Led persons . Tablxa 15 indicates that persons who scored high on iitiANi value did not score significantly lower in tance of disabled persons than those who scored lower rue scores are in the direction hypothesized. H—6a ot confirmed by the data. 15.--Means, standard deviations, and F statistic com— paring high and low scores on Regognition value and scores on the Attitudes Toward Handicapped Persons ible H Mean Standard F Sig. of Deviation of ATDP F scores on 71 51.A2 5.29 1.2A .27 cognition value scores on 68 50.56 3.67 cognition value 1 139 51.00 A.57 Persons who score high in need for recognition and levmmnm will tend to score low in progressive attitudes imieducation and high in traditional attitudes toward zation. Thecbta presented in Tables 16 and 17 indicate re was no significant differences between those who 129 Jed high scores on Recognition and those who received cores on Recognition value when compared with scores th progressive and traditional attitudes toward tion. H—6b was not confirmed. l6.——Means, standard deviations, and F statistic comparing high and low scores on Recognition value and scores on the Progressive Attitudes Toward Education scale ble N Mean of Standard F Sig Progressive Deviation of Scale F scores on 72 28.33 2 53 1.27 26 ognition value cores on 68 28.88 3.20 :ognition value 1A0 28.60 2.88 3 l7.——Means, standard deviations, and F statistic com— paring high and low scores on Recognition value and scores on the Traditional Attitudes Toward Education scale able N Mean of Standard F Sig. Traditional Deviation of Scale F scores on 72 27.A9 2.95 0.5A .A7 cognition value scores on 68 27.10 3.25 cognition value 1 1A0 27.30 3.09 130 Phersons who score high in need to help othersp to be mas, will tend to score high in acceptance of disabled pp, As :indicated in Table 18, there were no significant rences between those who scored high and those who d low on Benevolence value when compared with scores e ATDP scale. H—7a was not confirmed. 1 18.-—Means, standard deviations, and F statistic com- paring high and low scores on Benevolence value ‘ “ and scores on the ATDP scale i ible N Mean of Standard F Sig. ATDP Scale Deviation of F scores on 68 50.37 3.88 1.61 .20 nevolence value scores on 62 51.3A A.83 nevolence value 1 130 50.83 A.37 Persons who score high in need to help othersppto mnerous, will tend to score high in progressive Nudes toward education and low in traditional attitudes ard education. The data presented in Tables 19 and 20 indicate there erm significant differences between persons who scored liand persons who scored low on Benevolence value when 131 reti to both progressive and traditional attitudes 1 education, although the scores were in the direction hesized. H—7b was not confirmed. l9.-—Means, standard deviations, and F statistic comparing high and low scores on Benevolence value and scores on the Progressive Attitudes Toward Education scale Lble N Mean of Standard F Sig. Progressive Deviation of Scale F scores on 68 29.29 3.08 2.90 .09 ievolence value scores on 62 28.AA 2.62 nevolence value , 1 130 28.88 2.89 E 20.-—Means, standard deviations, and F statistic com— paring high and low scores on Benevolence value and scores on the Traditional Attitudes Toward Education scale .able N Mean of Standard F Sig. Traditional Deviation of Scale F iscores on 68 27.10 3.65 .025 .85 enevolence value scores on 62 27.19 2.6A enevolence value al 130 27.15 3.19 132 Women will score higher than men in (a) the need to thers, (b) positive attitudes toward the disabled, and @pessive attitudes toward education. he data presented in Table 21 indicate that women an have significantly higher Benevolence value scores Ht On the other hand scores for women on positive ies toward the disabled (i.e., lower scores), and for ssive attitudes toward education, though not statis— ' significant, are in the direction hypothesized. is remembered that Japanese women have a significantly level of education than men, their failure to score on progressive attitudes toward education is even aningful. Hypothesis 7c, part (a), that women a greater need to help others than do men was ed for the sample. H—7c, parts (b) and (c) were firmed. 133 2l.——Means, standard deviations, and F statistic for Benevolence value scores, ATDP scale scores, and Progressive Attitudes Toward Education scores for males and females ble Sex N Mean Standard F Sig. Deviation of g rolence Male 113 18.27 A.76 A.A9 .0A Female 98 19.56 A.02 Total 211 18.87 A.A7 Lcapped Male 113 50 65 A.AO. .09 .76 csons Female 97 50.A7 A.l6 ile Total 210 50.57 A.28 ressive Male 113 28.6A 3.10 .0A .82 titudes Female 98 28.71 2.75 ward Total 211 28.67 2.9A ucation 13A :y of‘zero-order correlations between Ides and value scores, H-5a through 7—c ?he correlational analyses of attitude and value 5 for all respondents are summarized in Tables 22, and The data in Table 22 reveal significant positive re— 1ships between Support value and attitudes toward :ap ed persons (HP attitudes) for the female and 'U L roup (low scores for Support, low or positive 09 3 on ATDP.) A ignificant negative relationship is C0 ited between Recognition value and HP attitudes for the 3 group (high scores for Recognition high or negative C) J. . . - 3 1C f—h 3 on ATDP.) A U) igni n: positive relationship wa m ([1 between Benevolence value and HP attitudes for the A group (low s (D ores for Benevolence, high or negative s for ATDP). These relationships are consistent with heoretical model of the study. LU The data in Table 2 shows a negative correlation be- Support value and progressive ppp_traditional attitudes d education for the female E group. According to the etical model, teachers should score low on Support and d therefore obtain scores indicating a positive relation— between Support and traditional attitudes and a ive relationship between Support and progressive udes. A negative relationship was found between Support and traditional attitudes toward education for the male up, in keeping with the theoretical model. 135 A negative correlation exists between Conformity value >rogressive attitudes toward education for the male, _e, and total L group. This finding is not consistent the theoretical model which postulates low scores for >rmity and low progressive attitudes. Support and >rmity values do not ppear to be adequate predictors :titudes toward education. A negative relationship between Recognition value and cessive attitudes is indicated for the female SER 3 and is consistent with the model (low scores for gnition, high for progressive attitudes). A positive elation between Recognition value and progressive :udes is indicated for the male L group, (high scores 3th Recognition and progressive attitude) and is nOt istent with model. In keeping with the model, a :ive relationship was found between Leadership value :raditional attitudes toward education for the female group (low scores in both Leadership value and itional attitudes). In summary, hypotheses 5a through 7c are not con- ed except for two sub—hypotheses (out of 12 hypotheses). There was a significant positive elation between high Leadership value scores and high es on traditional attitudes toward education and vice a. Also, female respondents had higher Benevolence e scores than did the male respondents. 136 Ho.uVass mo.Vm«. oouonEoo ooo muoB meowumHoupoo .OH coco mmoH mp3 moouw mane Mom 2 osu moowmm Hoomq u H nommcwz n E oofluwoopm u m .ngom .ooom .oomm n Mmmm mopoufluum o>Howmoc oumoflocfl mouoom mm nwflma em saw. om oNH.- am soo.- om NwN. om NHN.- em swam. Hence NN ssh. NN emu, NN smo. NN ome. MN wmo.- NN swam. mutate as sum as Hom.- so smo. “ ea imam. an eue.- so smm. was: I. u - . - . - l - - ; , - - . . - . - - - - , - - - a - - - A - - n a - + - - 7 - - a a a a am 000. am xsmm.- w as mos. em sow. I am ewe - aw smo. swoon _ onEom m _ ms Qua. fl ms .mmm,- w ms ome we saw. me eso.- _ ms moo. was: _ m __. a. i m _ 1 -7. w . . m - - - - .1. - - . . - - w - - - - - a - - - - - - - - - _ oe seu_- m ca sol “ oe mos m as smu m oe qNN. _ oe mmo. swoon Nm _wo. . mm ass ” mm ose, H mm one. m mm mmm. m Nm mac assets w m m I a... , em w H _ i i _ l _ . . .. ..I : . . .M i u A. .. . . E m 1. i 4 1 w. I i . J h M 4 u, I a. I 4 In I _ cm 0mm. om ome. fl om mes, fl cm can.. m om moo.. W om mmo. swoon _ em com. _ em ose _ em usu.. m em Nam.- “ em mmo- _ em eeo. toasts on mmz so smm _ as eml,- _ as moo - m an sma,- _ a ago. was: 2 t z t _ z u z t I z t z t mam al.,. -- t... - .. dwcmpoommé “ mocm~o>mcom m cocoosodoosw coaoflomooom m sowEuowcoc ouoodom IF doouw ,_ l. 1 -li alllli-llti» 137 pouodEOO poo oMoB mcoflomaouuoo .OH ewso mmoa mp3 dooum wasp Mom 2 one moonN Ho,uvm so hope; u A common: n z coflomoopm u .om .nmcom ,oopm .oon n mmmH mo Uta s .llilllllltli:I+IlI Il Illillllllilllilla I ll w Illilillllll . _ _ moo. wOH. Hmo mNH.. " «Om.i osm. _ mom. wso. mmo.«sowm.i moH.a omfl um omuflzv HmBOH moo. men. mmo. smo.- Hom.- «mm. “ mam. Hum.- omH. «Osq.- ooa.n www.41NNnsz mamamm HmN. «Ho. ome. 0mm.- m0m.- mmm. _ cam. room. omm.i:owo.- sec.» dam m oanmzv can: i ; -. r MM . m “ woo. woo. one "Ma. . 000.- Nmo M mmo.. omo, m moo. mmH.. m kaN.- smo. w ewuflzo Hmoow _ M , m . T mnmzwmonEow coo mmo qoo mmfl. M omo.. mqo - m oco.- oHQ. " moo, sm~.. W mom,- mmo ._ msnAzV oamz . _ _ m I m a _ i M w l m . n u u _ ,. . . . -m- ... m . L . . .- . . . _ .. - u .1 l- a . - 7 - _ - . . .. msfl wsa W New New m Mme. mo~.. _ oma poo, OHM. Oma. mewofiq.- wwmm..w Mensa, Hmooe . mmm mmm. m oofi. mofl. “ com.- qHH.. H omo.. NHH owe. mso wamme.- rxcwq .mmmnnzo masses _ n _ n . : _ Is as: w a u M n u N mm _ n _ . . m u i . _ _ _ _ 1 a m m m . I I n u . n u . hm - n u . . n . , .v .r i - y n m I . a i w a .s l u v M I .- a. (y r » emu. ems. m coo. m_l m ema.. ome. m Awe mow - m Nwo. moo, m moo,- omm. m omnflzo sauce _aamm owm _ ome. 0mm M owfi.. woo, w wmo.. comm.. W Moo wHH.. w OHH - wwa MemuAZV masses JAIN ago. _ cam mlo.. M smq.. mac 1 man- 000 . was. emm. m can awm .fl singed tnmz w m m m mmm _ r m _ 1r IIIIII. l-.....l- i .I l..| A: llllllllllllllllll a .. l.l. I‘ll-I u. III? ...v|ulm.p.l..lrIF.L...lilul.Uh- nil IIIIIW; . I!) I '13-! IS! II. .-.l+.irfiill-.;il., ill Ii! Luil m ravage ween pope mono pope woom m pone moon m pone moom WI pope woumm ullulnl iiul ullnllu I4 lllll- . l'ulllllll. l. IlrllLI l..||...l Iflt. -..lpIJ.II.-.I-..~_. (in.l.lr.lui|I-I.{II£.IIII:I. It! Eel-.lu- iuululuitlflrl.‘ . I.I!I._ Ian. lufllahllhllllli._ . _ . QHLmooemog oocoao>ocom mocopcoompca “ eoHostoomm M soMEoowcoo _ uncooom m ozoto : 1 m _ _ _ _ 138 nesis Related to e Orientation and ude Scores Persons who score high on change orientation will high on positive attitudes toward handicapped> pp; Table 2A indicates that the multiple correlation en HP attitudes and the combined change tation was not significant. When the six change bles are partialed out, none of the variables a significant differential contribution to the ple correlation. H—8a was not confirmed. Persons who score high on change orientation will score high on progressive attitudes toward tion and low on traditional attitudes toward agri. The data in Table 2A indicate there is a ficant multiple correlation between change .tation and both progressive and traditional udes toward education. Of the six change bles, health practices contributed significantly e correlation for traditional attitudes; child .ng practices contributed significantly to the elation for progressive attitudes. H—8b was .rmed. 139 'MHE 2A.——Partia1 and multiple correlations between attitudes toward handicapped persons and attitudes toward education (both pro— gressive and traditional) as related to change orientation variables '_. andicapped Person Scale (dependent) N=206 calth practices .03 111d rearing practices .01 lrth control practices —.02 Atomation .06 >litica1 leadership .05 Elf change -.03 thiple correlation .11 aditional Attitudes Toward Education (dependent) N=207 alth practices .l5* ild rearing practices .07 rth control practices .01 tomation .11 litical leadership .07 1f change —.13 Ltiple correlation .27** >gressive Attitudes Toward Education (dependent) N=207 ,lth practices .09 ‘Id rearing practices .2l** tli control practices —.07 omation .03 itxical leadership —.07 f Change —.0A tijole correlation .28** * p<.05 **’;o<;.01 1A0 jypotheses Related to the Characteristics of Persons Working Directly With Disabled Persons (the SER group) {-9: The SER group will bet: a lower mean Attitude Toward Pisabled Persons score than will persons in other 3pcupational categories. ) . ore U) The mean , szagdard deviations, ranking of means, (I) ( f variance data is presented 0 nalysis (N Fe) m 1nd a summary ?or Attit'ces Toward Disabled Persons scores. As indicated, :he F statistic was not significant. The scores on the lTDP scale were not significantly different between the ‘our occupational groups, although the results were in the lirection of the hypothesis with the SER group having the .owest mean score. High r ires on the ATDP scale refer to .egative attitudes and the lower the score, the more (ositive the attitude. This hypothesis was not confirmed. ‘ABLE 25.--Means, standard deviations, F statistics, and mean rankings for Attitudes Toward Disabled Persons scores for four occupational categories ccupatiinal N Mean Standard F Sig. ategory Score Deviation of F ER 50 A9.70 3.0A 1.2A .29 A0 51.A3 3.95 ’ 8A 50.69 5.02 36 50.56 A.1A otal 210 50.57 A.28 anking of Means: E(51.A3)3>M(50.69:>L(50.56 >SER(A9.70) SER = Spec. Educ. Rehab E = Education L = Labor W = Manager lul :gg: The SER group will have a higher mean score than illpmrsons in other occupational categories in respect to lexmlue of Benevolence, and will have a lower mean score grmfipct to the values of Leadership and Recognition. The E statistics presented in Tables 26, 27, and 28 dicate the SER group had scores significantly fTerent from other occupational groups. The Duncan's ltiple Means Test results indicate which means are gnificant from the others. For Benevolence Value able 26), the SER mean scores are significantly fferent from the mean scores of the L, M and E groups, :h the SER group having the highest Benevolence score hypothesized. For Leadership value (Table 27), the 1 group has next to the lowest score (E group is ‘er) rather than the lowest as hypothesized. The can's Test results indicate however, that only the roup has a mean score significantly higher than the group. For Recognition value, (Table 28), the SER group the lowest mean score which is significantly different n only the L group. Ir1 summary, this hypothesis is considered confirmed trme Benevolence value, and partially confirmed iLeauiership (M group) and Recognition (L group) es. 142 PABLE 26.—— Means, standard deviations, E statistic mean rankings, and Duncan's Test results for Benevolence value scores for four occupational categories )ccupational Mean Standard E Sig. Zategoryl N Score Deviation of F BER 50 21.22 3.10 6.39 .005 l 41 19.27 4.78 I 84 17.80 4.59 J 36 17.64 4.24 7ota1 211 18.87 4.47 tanking of Means: R(2l.22) >E(19.27)‘>M(l7.80):>L(l7.64) >uncan's Test Results: Rt>L3 R;>M; R:>E fig “SER = Spec. Educ. Rehab. E = Education L = Labor M = Manager ‘ABLE 27.—- Means, standard deviations, 3 statistic, mean rankings, and Duncan's Test results for Leadership value scores for four occupational categories ccupational N Mean Standard 3 Sig. ategory Score Deviation of F ER 50 10.28 4.09 2.62 .05 41 10.12 4.14 84 13.12 5.21 36 12.86 5.92 otal 211 11.82 5.07 anking of Means: M(l3.l2)t>L(l2.86)>R(lO.28):>E(lO.l2) uncan's Test Results: M:>E; ME>R; ..__— SER = Spec. Educ. Rehab. E = Education L = Labor W = Manager 143 imfil28-—Means, standard deviations, E statistic, mean rankings, and Duncan's Test results for Recognition value scores for four occupational categories cupational N Mean Standard E Sig. tegoryl Score Deviation of F 3 50 7.00 2.87 2.91 .03 41 7.32 2.65 84 7.96 2.67 36 8. 81 3 . 11 wal 211 7.75 2.84 king of Means: 11(8.81) >M(7.96)>E(7.32)I>R(7.00) can's Test Results: L:>R; L:>E [—.— R = Spec. Educ. Rehab. E = Education L = Labor = Manager £1: The SER group will have a higher mean score on Lressive attitudes toward education than will persons in Ir occupational categories. Data related to this hypothesis are presented in e 29 showing the SER score to be in the Opposite :tixnu from that predicted, with the SER group having a u° score than the L group, and a lower score than the D4 groups. However, the scores for the four groups ot,:significantly different. Friesen (1966, p. 183) tfldat the progressive attitude scores were not signif- 1y (different for the three occupational groups in chnnbian and Peruvian samples. H-lla was not con— i. 144 ABME29a—Means, standard deviations, E statistic, and mean rankings for Progressive Attitude Toward Education scores for four occupational categories upatipnal N Me an Standard _F_ Sig egnw Score Deviation of F 50 28.50 2.61 .69 .56 41 29.17 2.72 84 28.70 3.27 36 28.25 2.79 11 211 28.67 2.94 :ing of Means: E(29.l7):>M(28.70):>R(28.50)2>L(28.25) I_—— = Spec. Educ. Rehab. E = Education L = Labor Manager 3: The SER group will have a lower mean score in Etional attitudes toward education than will persons Lher occupational categories. The §_statistic and Duncan's Test results as ted in Table 30, indicate there are significant atixmqal differences in traditional attitudes 1 education. hati the lowest mean scores. Among the four groups, the SER H—llb was con- 145 ME flk-—Means, standard deviations, mean rankings, Duncan's Test results for Traditional Attitudes Toward Education scores for four occupational categories. upwflpnal N Mean Standard E Sig. egory Score Deviation of E 50 25.50 2.86 7.72 .005 41 26.90 2.91 84 27.94 3.22 36 27. 3 2.89 11 211 27.14 3.16 :ing of Means: M(27.94) >1M27.83):>E(26.90)7>R(25.50) (an's Test Results: M:>R; L:>R; E:>R IF— = Spec. Educ. Rehab. E = Education L = Labor Manager The SER group will have a higher mean score than gother occupational groups on the following change Ltation variables: (a) health practices, (b) child {jg practices, (c) birth control practices, (d) tation1(e) political leadership, and (f) self—change. 'Tablxa 31 contains the means, standard deviations, txistics, and Duncan's Test results for six ales; relating to change orientation. The data reveal lifdxcant difference between SER and the other groups Ltcxnation but in the Opposite direction from that cesijzed. The M group had the highest scores on this file. For the other change variables — health practices, 146 remflng practices, birth control practices, political rflnp and self change there were no significant mnmes in responses between groups. The questions to which the respondents reacted are llows: :1Practices: Health eXperts say adding certain :als to drinking water results in less decay in people's If you could add these chemicals to your water ittle cost to you, would you be willing to have the :als added? Rearing Practices: Some people feel that in bringing ldren, new ways and methods should be tried when— ossible. Others feel that trying out new methods gerous. What is your feeling about the following ent? ”New methods of raising children should be out whenever possible.” :Planning: Family planning on birth control has iscussed by many people What is your feeling about ied couple practicing birth control? Do you think re doing something good or bad? If you had to , would you sa; they are doing wrong, or rather iey are doing right? :ion: People have different ideas about what should 3 concerning automation and other new ways of doing How do you feel about the following statement? ition and similar new procedures should be en— ed (in government, business, and industry) since Llly it creates new JObS and raises the standard In; . n al Leadership: Running a village, city, town or fernmental organization is an important job. What feeling on the following statement? "Political should be changed regularly, even if they are good jde' angxa: Some people are more set in their ways than liow do you rate yourself? (Choices: very or y ctifficult; somewhat or very easy.] nee: the responses on the five variables are not 3arN:1y different between the four occupational 147 ups,the mean score of the total sample may be an icmflon of current Japanese thought. For Health Practices, emiscore of 2.82 indicates a response between "No" or’Waybe” (3;. For this particular sample of Tokyo -dmfis, a transitional orientation (i.e., neither iractices seems to S Ct F’ O D—j {1) F—’ I) k‘ W ’C.‘ *1 O ‘ ( H (I (11 \ 1 1.1 ‘N (D (l J J (D Q) }_ C” :T’ |:\ ) For Child Rearing Practices, a mean score of 2.91 O m (_f (D (D Q) *3 (D U) C U f} U) (D O (I) H p (L‘ ffi *— } J “4 .31 C1 ly disagree” (2) and ghtly agree” (3). Such a s-ore may indicate a sitional stage with the respondents tending to favor fiessive child rearing i‘aLLlCES. ‘x 1 H For Birth fortrrl :ra'“-;es, a mean score of 1.99 ates resprnses between ”it is always right” (1) and 3 probably all Flint” ’29. These responses may ate curlenf ora;tlce l. a country where the birth -s the -J”€ot of polar nations and lower than many 'lES or [nitomation, the mean scores for the groups from.3.04 (SER) to 3.44 Wllvuth.a total mean of‘ 3.29. lhis indicates a response between ”Agree _y :3) and ”Agree strongly” (4). Though the (Maps; are significantly different, they can all eci CMi a continuum of response between 3.00 and 'idim3ating a progressive attitude toward automation groupa L, 148 ForPOlitical Leadership, ‘— dicates a response of ”Slight smumesfbr the SER and L (if‘ r... \J a mean score of 3.00 agree." The mean 1 y ups indicate a response :wemi”Slightly disagree” (2) and ”Slightly agree" (3). ememiresponses for the E and M groups are between ighth/agree” (3; and "ltrongly agree” (4). Ppr Self Change, a mean score of 2.61 indicates a ponse betieen ”Slightly difficult to change" (2), "Somewhat easy to change” L3) The mean scores for groups ranged from 2.56 to 2.67 and may indicate a xsitional orientation to self change. That is, personal .ge may be somewhat easier to accomplish and may be ed as acnncomltant of current rapid social change in n which permits the individual to be more self— ?mining than was previously possible in a traditionally :tured society. In summary, 5, as predicted, on any of the SER group did not have higher mean the six variables- The rOLqJ was significantly different from the other 3 or1.Automation but in the Opposite direction from ,. >retkicted. (However, for all change variables, Iieefilth Practices and Self Change the total sample iruiicate a progressive orientation to life) H-l2 t ccmifirmed for any Of the change variables. 149 ABLEIN --Means, standard deviations. 3 statistic, mean rankings and Duncan's Test results tor six change variables for four occupational groups l- .———_——u———_— _ —- — |_ —-.: —_--..__— _..___—. . _- niab1e Group N Mean Standard pf Sig - ____l__-___ll______Deviat192 ______-m__.9£152_ :alth SER 50 2 68 1 13 .70 .56 'actices E 41 2 71 98 M 80 2.91 1.07 L 36 2 94 79 TOTAi. 207 2 82 1 02 nking of Means L(2 94):>MQ 91):>E(2.71)i>SER52 68) l. I n l a - ‘ n. - II n I ‘ a . I I - n 92 .60 -11 95 ild SER 50 2 aring E 41 2 88 56 actices M 80 2 91 51 L 36 2 94 47 TOTAL 207 2 91 53 nking of Means: L 2 94):>SER(2 92):>M(2 91):>E 2 88) - - r - - u - .. — w. - ER 50 1 98 59 1 O9 36 z. rth S itrol E 41 2 10 -70 ictices M 80 1 86 65 L 36 2.17 77 TOTA1 207 1 99 67 iking of Means; 1(2 17) >E 2 101:>SER(1 981Z>M11 86) - n. u I. -1 '1 :Omation SER 50 3 O4 -63 2.59 05 E 41 3 32 57 M 80 3.4g .57 1. 36 3 31 62 TOTAL 207 3 29 .61 king of Means: M(3 441i>E43 32):>1(3.31)>>SER13.04) can‘s Test RESUTLS‘ 11>R; E;>R, 1.>R '-. J v -1 n3 - I u -- itica] SER 50 .92 -75 97 -41 2 dership E 41 3.10 -66 M 84 3 06 .87 L 36 2,83 94 TOTAL 211 3 OO 82 (irug ot Means E’3 10):>M- 3 06):>SER12 921Z>I(2 831 r-. - A. 64 .56 3> 05 E SER 5O 2 ige E 41 2 63 .54 M 84 2 56 .68 1 36 2 67 .68 TOTAL 211 2 61 6.3 :irq; of Means. L(2. 671,2SER: 2 64):>E(2 63):>M(2 56) _——. -——— ——--o-. . -nc- I—J-~_ —_—.. _—_ -—— —— _——--——-a-‘-. L = £3pec. Educ. Rehab. E — Education L = Labor 150 13: Nm SER group will have a higher mean score than herocmmetional groups in the amount of contact with {malh/retarded and emotionally disturbed persons. Tafle 32 indicates that the SER group had significantly gharnman scores than did the E, M, and L groups, as Kficted, for amount of contact with mentally retarded 1 amnionally disturbed persons. The Duncan's Test LUIS indicate that the E, M and L groups did not differ ng themselves. H—l3 was confirmed. LE 32.——Means, standard deviations, E statistic, mean rankings, and Duncan's Test results related to contacts with mentally retarded and emotionally disturbed persons for four occupational groups l ,. able Group n Mean Standard E Sig. Deviation of E acts with SER 50 4.46 1.81 89.71 .005 tally E 40 1.57 1.10 arded M 84 1,65 1.06 sons L 3 1.67 1.17 210 2.31 1.64 In; of Means: SER (4.46) >L(l.671:>M(1.65):>E(1.57) 11's Test Results: R:>E; R:>M; R:>L Cts ivith SER 50 2.16 1.59 10.65 005 ionally E 39 1.26 .85 urbed 1% 84 1.42 .71 ans ll 36 l 28 .65 209 1.54 1.06 1g (of Means: SER(2.16)i>M(1.42)Z>L(l.28):>E(l.26) 1's ’Test Results: R:>E; R:>L; R:>M prec. Educ. Rehab. E = Education L = Labor anagers FL: £13 114 Efferences between the pjpusoccupational :Ogm wimean scoreg itheimlue sub-scales (1) fines value sub—scales x're considered in the testing thelwpotheses, namelv, Benevolence, Leadership and 3 cogfition. Table 33 contains a summary of the ree\m1ues not considered in the testing Of the xmheses, those of Support, Conformity, and r {1) tes that there “i (I 5 O (D :5 O (D '1 ( J (D O * \ 5).. U :1 i_J \C‘ C‘ L3 d7 ositive relationship between Support and Recognition, formity and Benevolence, and between independence Leadership. According to the theoretical model, SER group snruld have higher mean scores on formlty and Benevolence and lower mean scores on >ort, Recognition independence, and Leadership. .g the four occupational groups, there was no istically significant difference in the mean es. Eifferences as indicated by i§cores on the value sub—scales ’Tablme 34 contains a summary of the six value sub- s, zaccording to sex. There was a significant .reruoe between the mean scores for males and es :for:the three values most related to the it sstudy: Benevolence, Recognition, and Leader— As. hypothesized, males had higher mean scores 152 MBM333a_COmparison of mean differences, standard deviations, E statistic and mean rankings for three value variables, and four occupational categories .— L ndabha Group N Mean Standard E Sig. Deviation of F pportimlue SER 50 13.04 3.89 .21 .89 E 41 13.10 3.86 M 84 12.84 4.14 L 36 13.00 3.66 TOTAL 211 12.97 3.92 udmg of Means: E(13 10):>S(13.04):>L(13.00):>M(12.84) formity SER 50 17 82 2.83 1.41 24 lue E 41 18 63 2.49 M 84 18.43 3.49 L 36 17 69 3.96 TOTAL 211 18.20 3.26 :ing of Means: E<18.63):>M(18.43);>S(l7.82):>L(17.691 pendence SER 50 17.72 4.4/ .31 82 ue E 41 18.34 5.19 M 84 16.84 4.61 L 36 17.53 6.42 TOTAL 211 17.46 5.04 .ng;<5f Means: E(18.34) >S(17.721:>L(l7.53):=M(16.84) preo. Educ. Rehab. E = Education M = Manager/ tive L = Labor 153 gnifision, and Leadership and females had higher mean 5n.13enevolence value. There were no significant ncens between the sexes on mean scores related to Ties cof Support, Conformity and Independence. tna relating to Sex Differences between the mean value for'Inine separate studies are summarized in Table 35. 'ee values most related to the present study, .ence, Leadership and Recognition, show the most con- ; sex differences when several divergent cultures npared. The data in Table 35 indicates that the differences between the sexes found in the present are generally consistent with findings in other ies, and in another study on Japan. The findings on O Japanese studies may not be completely comparable different translations Of the Survey of Interpersonal ; were used. lor each of the nine studies summarized in Table 35 as had higher scores on Benevolence value, and in cases the differences were significant. The mean 5 fin°Leadership value are higher for men in all es,vdth all but the Colombian scores being signifi- ycfliferent. For the Japan—II sample, the differences sigmflicant at the .005 level or less. For Recognition 5 mahm had higher scores in each study reported. wemasignificantly higher for the Indian teacher, Mdan,and Japan-II samples. These consistent findings 154 :re :renmrkable when the assumed variations in ‘ticni, and the variations of the groups within 13 L1 is Eire considered. 1; ap ears that the values ed tn; the Benevolence and Leadership scales reflect nital sex role differences in each of the cultures 1. i the O ores for Independence, r ’31 D~..- $44.. 1' nificant differences n the sexes. However. :66 1 d the L3 ependence value, s scored higher than ma studies. score (I) ' Of females who are engaged _litation profession‘ .N=67) itional rather than sex role rmity, the present countries, with females rt, the present findings tly higher mean score, net of the studies. images between male female mean scores gtitude variables having higher scores. (:1 ontrary to the findings result "3m the high in educational and and may reflect differences. For findings are similar to those for For show the males to have a opposite from those reported As hwflcated in Table 36, there were no significant sex ermwms between the mean scores on the three attitude afles. This finding is similar to that reported by sen for Colombia and Peru where the only for attitudes toward disabled ifimnm difference was 155 s ivith Colombian females having more positive attitudes ales. HOwever, for the Japan data, the two—way is cof variance E statistic indicates a significant eruxe among the groups on progressive attitudes, g sex constant. 34.——Comparison Of mean differences, standard deviation, and E statistic in respect to six variables for males and females 118 Sex N Mean Standard E_ Sig. Deviation of g >lence Male 113 18.26 4.76 4.49 .04 3 Female 98 19.56 4.02 Total 211 18.87 4.47 dition Male 113 8.11 3.00 3.99 05 3 Female 98 7.34 2.60 Total 211 7.75 2.84 Pt Male 113 13 08 3.75 .20 66 e Female 98 12.84 4.13 Total 211 12.97 3.92 rmity Male 113 18.01 3.52 .83 37 e Female 98 18.42 2.93 Total 211 18.20 3 26 endence Male 113 16.98 4.83 2.20 14 1e Female 98 18.01 5.24 Total 211 17.46 5.04 fiship Male 113 12.98 5.30 13.54 .005 1e Female 98 10.48 4 45 Total 211 11.82 5.07 156 j35.—-Sex difference scores on various national groups on sub—scales of the Survey of Inter— personal Values (Gordon, 1963) .____k Group 34 R S C I L I, [igg School —3.1 0.0 -0.2 —3.2 0.8 , 5.7 ers F=28, N=53 ) . j ‘ *9? q ** 96* .9696 Eeneral Adults 9 . . > , F=212, N=425 ,** ** ** ** ** Eenera; Adults3 -4.8 0.3 —2.9 —1.9 3.1 5.9 > 5, F=746, N=1821 2 *% ** ** ** n Teachers ’ F=50, N=100 ** r - _ * ** Rican Sample“ —2.0 0.6 —0.6 —0.6 1.4 2.0 ) , F=l44, N=267 E _** *** bian Sample) —1.7 1.4 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.5 ) F=l32, N=219 ian Sample“ —3.3 0 l 0 6 —0.4 -0 8 3 3 ) , F=20, N=l26 ** ** Lese College -0.5 0 0 -l 4 0.5 0 1 1 4 rntS - l “ a, F=285, N=473 6 * * *** lSample — ll —l.3 0.8 0.2 -0.4 —2.0 2.5 0 3, F=98, N=2ll [gnificant at the .05 level of confidence Lgnificant at the .01 level of confidence ignificant at the .005 level of confidence or less sub-scales on the Survey of Interpersonal values are: Benevolence S 2 Support I = Independence Recognition C = Conformity L = Leadership alfrom Gordon (SRA) Research Briefs Supplement (1963) aifrom Gordon (SRA) Manual (1960) mifrom Felty (1965) wifrom Friesen (1966) sna data (1967) mahehigher than female; — = male lower than female 157 standard and F statistic in respect to three 6.——Comparisons of mean differences, V v 0 variables for deviations, attitude males and females e Sex N Mean Standard F Sig. Deviation of F 1—way 2—way l—way 2—way Sex Group Sex Group es Male 113 50.65 4.40 .09 1.24 .76 .29 Female 97 50.47 ed Total 210 50.57 s Male 113 27 33 3 38 83 7 72 .37 .005 Female 98 26 93 2.90 de Total 211 27 14 3.1t Ma e 3 28.63 3.10 04 .69 8 56 Fe a 8 28.T1 2.75 To a 3 28.67 2.94 CHAPTER V DISCUSSION, RECOMMENDATIONS, AND SUMMARY attempt will be made in this chapter to relate the s and implications of the research to the purposes study as outlined in Chapter I. These implications integrated with the theoretical model. To ish this task, the chapter is divided into four ections. Part I, the findings will be discussed in relation Hypotheses. Five categories of hypotheses will be ad. Part II, theoretical and methodological issues will issed. The adequacy of the present theoretical 1d methodological procedures will be evaluated in f future research efforts. Part III, recommendations evolving from the ion of the preceding section will be formally Recommendations will be related to sampling, entation, and statistical analysis. a final section, Part IV, will contain a con— summary with a focus on the overall results and the primary purposes of the study have been Lshed and whether the hypotheses have been confirmed. 158 159 Part I: Discussion of Results ere were thirteen hypotheses<4l sub—hypotheses) ere classified into six major categories: (a) scale ensity analysis in relation to attitudes; (b) contact cy in relation to intensity; (0) contact variables tion to attitudes; (d) value variables in relation tudes; (e) change orientation variables in relation tudes; and (f) group differences in relation to attitude, change, and contact variables. Each major y was examined by testing one or more hypotheses in mpt to make inferences about sex or occupational nces or about characteristics of the total sample. ry of the l3 hypotheses, with an indication of onfirmation or non—confirmation, are presented in 7, page 160. nd Intensity Analysis tion to Attitudes noted on pages 118 and 119, scale and intensity 8 was not attempted in the statistical analyses due lications in computer programming. Although hypotheses indicated such analysis would result in a U— or J— curve when content was plotted on the abscissa and ty on the ordinate. This analysis will be completed ter date and reported with the more comprehensive urrently underway (see footnote on page 6). 160 7.——Summary of Hypotheses 1 through 13 indicating confirmation or non—confirmation .— «— 1e dimensional scale for D _, P-Bd, T—Bd - or J—shaped curve for utensity and content cores for HP, P—Ed, T—Ed f high contact frequency, igh intensity scores for D -Ed —Bd f high contact frequency 3 accompanied with lternative rewards, nJoyment, and ease of ontact, then P, positive —Ed, high —Ed, low f Leadership high P, negative —Ed, low -Ed, high f Recognition high P, negative —Ed, low -Bd, high f Benevolence high P, positive —Ed, high —Bd, low omen higher than men on enevolence P —Ed f change orientation high P, positive —Ed, high —Ed, low Confirmed Not confirmed ><><>< ><><>< 161 lL—l3: In contrast to yther'groups, SER will 1ave scores in the iirection indicated 1P, positive X Benevolence, higher X Leadership, lower x2 Recognition, lower X3 P—Ed, higher X T—Ed, lower X All change orientation variables higher: Health practices Child rearing Birth control Automation Political leadership Self change ><><><><>< Higher contact with Mentally retarded X Emotionally disturbed X Attitudes toward disabled persons = Progressive attitudestoward education = Traditional attitudes toward education .rmed for M group which has significantly higher score ered for L group which has significantly higher score :3 Frequency lation to Intensity According to the theoretical model, contact frequency rectly related to intensity of attitudes regardless e content of the attitude. The hypothesis was con- d.for attitudes toward handicapped persons but was not Imwd for either the progressive or the traditional udmstoward education (H-3). As noted in Table 7, the Mnmhip between amount of contact with disabled persons 162 [DP :scores is highly significant for the total sample. I“, tflde scores for progressive and traditional <3ess toward education, though not significant, are .tee.from.the hypothesized direction (Tables 8, 9). ;ccuwes were examined according to sex, a significant Latian between amount of contact and ATDP intensity 3‘was indicated for the female SER and male M groups. sexamined according to occupational groups, amount of ct was significantly related to ATDP intensity scores he SER, M, and L total groups (Table 10). The data did -eveal any significant relationships between contact lency and progressive and traditional attitude scores examined according to group or sex. A possible explanation of these findings is that contact handicapped persons sharpens perception of the issues lved whereas contact with education may be a more rficial type of contact. In this way, contact with dcapped persons may increase one's awareness of the Lications of.a handicap in an affective manner whereas ceamxicontact with education may not indicate an reasmiaffective involvement. The contact with handicapped sonsnwy be more specific and concrete whereas the tactvnth education would tend to be more diffuse. This dd way well be the case in Japan where the handicapped :seChMed from the main stream of society as much as sflbleahd where a physical disability is occasionally 163 3 £1 "pity" evoker (now relatively rare with increased :atandards) by alms—seekers in public places. rue sex and occupational differences as indicated in ll) seem to support this eXplanation. When amount of ‘t and attitude toward handicapped persons scores ompaied, no significant correlation was found for group. It is known that E personnel had less contact andicapped persons and more contact with education 'able 39 Appendix A). This lack of correlation for group is more interesting when it is remembered that 1e B group is composed largely of females, and (b) that as for the total sample had slightly higher ATDP scores nales. These inferences may reasonably lead to the :ive conclusion that lack of significant correlations an amount of contact with education and educational ude intensity scores may be the function of a less tive (and more cognitive) type of contact with education is possible in the case of contact with handicapped ns. Therefore, increased intensity of response es evident in responses on the ATDP scale for those g more contact with handicapped persons. 0n the 'hand a more cognitive contact with education may be med to inhibit increased intensity scores. gct Variables nation to Attitudes Inlwpothesis 4, favorable attitudes are postulated ahwgdependent on high frequency of contact when the 164 : is associated with other rewarding Opportunities, arm: of contact, and ease of contact. The multiple ation between the combined contact variables ctors) and attitudes toward handicapped persons rion) was significant at the .01 level of significance e total sample. The partial correlations indicate njoyment of contact was a significant contributor to ltiple correlation. As noted in the preceding n, an affective rather than a cognitive factor may rative in the determination of positive attitudes . disability. 'hese findings are comparable to those found in er studies. Siller and Chipman (1964) found a; -ation between amount of contact and attitudes for a a composed primarily of high school and college 1ts. Genskow and Maglione (1965) found scores for its at two mid-west universities to be significantly Jositive on the ATDP scale when contact was more ant, and under favorable conditions. LeCompte and ate (1966), on the other hand, did not find a ficant relationship between amount of contact and scores for Turkish college students. The LeCompte and pte finding may be a function of the sample selection ege students) who may have had limited contact with disability and education. Friesen (1966) found a ficant relationship between amount of contact and ATDP 165 scmwsfbr a sample of Colombian and Peruvian respondents 00mmawcnally similar to those of the present study. 'Nm multiple and partial correlations between the ammunmicontact variables and progressive and traditional awtimkms toward education indicate a lack of significant relathwmhips. H—4b was not confirmed. These data may [ndimfie that the contact variables selected for this uuflysis do not make a differential contribution to ttitudes toward education, but that some variables, specially enjoyment of contact, do make a contribution to positive attitude toward physical disability. glue Variables ; Relation to Attitudes It has been suggested that values are instrumental in termining and maintaining attitudes (see page 75ff). the analysis of values, the major concern focused on a flnytomy of asset and comparative values (p. 83). On r‘basis of face validity and inter—correlations of the ’vey'<3f Interpersonal Values (SIV) and Edwards Personal ferwnace Schedule, Benevolence value was judged to be an quaima Operationalization of asset value, and Recognition ;Le£uiership value were judged to be an operationalization :omparative value. (Phrnee other SIV values (Conformity, Independence, and toxrt) , though not related directly to the hypotheses of ssttzdgr, were included in the analysis. According to 166 mn00n(l960), Support value is positively correlated with Mmogfltion (.40), Conformity is correlated with knewflence (.39), and Independence is correlated with .eadership ( .06). Twelve sub—hypotheses were specifically related to alues. TWO were confirmed; data for eight were in the ypothesized direction; and two were opposite from the ypothes‘ “3 direction. The sub-hypotheses which were confirmed by the data ere related to Leadership and Benevolence scores (5b, 7c). rsons having high Leadership scores al_- scored high on aditional attitudes toward education (Table 14). Women re hypothesized to have u-gher scores than men on 1evolence value, on attitudes toward disabled persons, 1 on progressive attitudes toward education. The data Lble 21) reveals a significantly higher score for .ales than for males on Benevolence value only. Friesen (56) reported a significantly higher mean score for alts respondents in Colombia and Peru on Benevolence value. In; indicated by the zero—order correlations (Tables 22 .23) , Conformity, Recognition, and Independence values Lot: appear to be satisfactory predictors of either ttuies toward disabled persons or attitudes toward atzicna. For example, the negative correlations between CleEHS toward education (both progressive and traditional) Ehlpuaort value may render the interpretation of results 167 mfibmfled. Friesen (1966) reported a similar finding fimemiboth progressive and traditional attitudes and 3amnship value for a Peruvian sample. However, Kerlinger Mimfies that Traditionalism and Progressivism are not melycmposites but are distinct in their own right. eomfiflcally then, a person may have both traditional and ogrmxflve attitudes. If this is the case, the terminology auld be changed since traditionalism and progressivism, commonly used, indicate Opposite poles on a single ltinuum. Although there is a confounding of interpretation of the ue—attitude relationship, the results suggest that dership, Recognition, and Benevolence values may be iictors of attitudes. Ten of the twelve sub—hypotheses 3 either confirmed or the scores were in the hypothesized action. This would suggest that a larger, more hetero~ ~ous, randomized sample may show these values to be (iiscriminatory than the present data indicates. ge (Irientation Variables zlat ion to Attitudes flflae rationale for this hypothesis is that the SER and >upms would score relatively higher on the change isaizion variables than other occupational groups. It jlsc> hypothesized that a high degree of change tsalxion would result in positive attitudes toward lead. persons, high scores on progressive attitudes 168 education, and low scores on traditional attitudes education. In contrast with the SER and E groups suggested that the M and L groups would have the scores,reflecting a resistance to change. High were conceived as representing a departure from the quo and a receptivity to new ideas. Correlational is and analysis of variance wereused to test this esis relating to six change variables: health ces, child rearing practices, birth control practices, tion, political leadership, and self change. The onnaire items relating to these variables are listed e 146 and in Appendix B-2. hough the multiple correlation between the combined orientation variables and attitudes toward disabled 3 is not statistically significant, a salient relation- ay be inferred from the multiple correlation of .11 24). To be significant at the .05 level, a ation coefficient of .14 is needed. When the change les are partialed out, automation and political ship are most contributory to the multiple correlation. th of these variables, the E and M groups have higher than the SER and L groups (Table 31). This would t that some kind of relationship exists between tion and political leadership change orientation les and attitudes toward disabled persons but further igation is needed to warrant a positive interpretation. 169 t is remembered that Japan has been described as a ’n" or progressive country, and that great changes have 'ed in industry and politics in the last decade, a ation between change in these areas and a positive .de toward disabled persons appears to be a reasonable Iretation of the data. in the other hand, a significant multiple correlation licated for the relationship between change orientation »les and both traditional and progressive attitudes 1 education. When the six change variables are Lled out, health practices had a significant *ential contribution to the multiple correlation re- to traditional attitudes. As might be eXpected, the :hange variable shows salient negative relationship e'multiple correlation though not quite reaching the 1 level of significance. Automation makes an un- zed positive contribution to the multiple correlation an change orientation variables and traditional 1des toward education. However, the mean scores for ition for the total sample was 3.20, indicating a cessive" orientation. Since Japan is highly industri- i (for instance, producing more ships annually than :her country), automation may not be an indicator of L attitudes but one related primarily to economic sity. The findings cited here support the hypothesis ay be considered to be indicative of current Japanese it and practice. 170 he relationship between change orientation variables ogressive attitudes toward education indicates child g practices make a highly significant differential bution to the multiple correlation. It seems able to assume that a person's acceptance of changing patterns has a direct relationship to new (i.e., pro- ve)attitudes in other areas, especially in education. t be remembered that the traditional Japanese family pyramid type with the father at the apex of status and ity, and personal interests were always sacrificed e family welfare. The three most significant nces of Japanese life have been the family system, the ous system and the educational system (SCAP, 1952) e influence of each may be assumed to be inter- d with the others. Article 24 of the new Constitution guarantees "individual dignity and essential equality sexes" in matters pertaining to marriage and the It may be inferred then, that in contemporary and perhaps throughout Japan, attitudes related to rearing are the most cogent indicators of a progressive, tatus quo orientation to life situations. Differences in Relation to bAttitude, Change Orientation, ntact Variables ypotheses 9 to 13 predict that the SER group is ent from the other occupational groups in the following 171 mmver (more positive) attitudes toward disabled ‘persons score. ligher'Benevolence value score. lower'leadership value score. Lower Recognition value score. fligher progressive attitudes toward education score. Lower traditional attitudes toward education score. Higher change orientation variable scores. Higher amount of contact with mentally retarded persons. Higher amount of contact with emotionally disturbed persons. Six of the sub—hypotheses listed above were confirmed ’tially confirmed by the study (Table 37). Those re— 1 to Benevolence value, traditional attitudes toward Ltion, contact with the mentally retarded, and contact the emotionally disturbed were confirmed while Recog— >n, and Leadership values were partially confirmed. The SER group had the lowest (most positive) scores 1e four groups on the ATDP scale (Table 25) as thesized. The scores were not statistically different, ver. Three value scores were of primary importance in the y: Benevolence, Leadership and Recognition. The SER p>had the highest Benevolence scores which were ermNJfrom the other occupational group scores at a .lysflgnificant level (.005 or less). The M group 172 tlie laighest Leadership scores which is consistent trueoretical model. However, the E group had the leadership score rather than the SER group as sizexi. The SER group mean score for Leadership is narl‘those for the L and M groupsbut it is carnzly different from only the M group mean score 27). For Recognition, the SER group attained the meaui score which was significantly different from group cwfly (Table 28). Although the scores are not Lcantly different for all groups on the three value les, the scores were in the direction of the hypo- except for one score (the E group mean score for ship was lower than the SER group mean score). It inferred that the SER group is different from the groups in relation to these variables in the iesized direction. Phe hypothesis concerning the educational scales was rmmd for traditional attitudes toward education but 0t mnfiirmed for progressive attitudes toward education es 29,30). The SER mean score on progressive attitudes meriflmn the mean score for the total sample. This -ng fin~progressive attitudes, opposite from that flwsimxh makes interpretation difficult in the light rughhzsignificant difference (.005 or less) in group smnesibr attitudes toward traditional education. A lmccmfibunding of results was noted for the zero- 173 corrwelations (Table 23). A significant negative Iistuip was indicated between Support value and both sinve agd_traditiona1 attitudes toward education. Langxa orientation variable scores were not signifi— ctifferent for the SER group as hypothesized (Table 31). xxnation mean score for the SER group was significantly arm; from the other occupational group scores but be f"é«1the hypothesized direction. However, the on automation for all groups are 3.04 or higher, an tion of a progressive orientation to change for all The mean scores for the change Variables indicate * a progressive orientation (for child rearing practices, control practices, i.tomation, and political leadership) :ransitional orientation (i.e., neither traditional rogressive for health practices and self-change). The SER group had significantly more contact with the lly retarded and emotionally disturbed than did the groups. Friesen (1966) also found the same conditions lombia and Peru. The very highly significant results at the hypothesis. hisummary, the findings of the present study, in terms Amunming the hypotheses, are as follows: Higifrequency of contact resulted in high intensity es fin*the ATDP. High frequency of contact, if mpmned with alternative rewards, enjoyment of contact, eameof avoidance of contact resulted in positive ATDP ’98. 174 nyxxothesized, high Leadership value scores resulted traditional attitudes toward education. Recognition <1res were not differentially related to the attitude IBenevolence value scores were not significant for jpational groups but were significant for the sexes; had higher scores than males. 11 change orientation scores were correlated with ive attitudes toward education. SER group had higher Benevolence value scores than 1ps in the sample, lower Leadership value scores than ‘OUp, and lower Recognition value scores than the L The SER group also had lower traditional attitudes education scores than all groups but not higher pro— 3 attitude scores. All groups indicated a transitional ressive orientation to change, with no significant ifferences. The SER group had more contact with y retarded and emotionally disturbed persons than er groups. Part II: ssion of Theoretical and Methodological Issues e theoretical basis of the study together with methods sed in the investigation were discussed at length in 'chapters. In this section, the emphasis will be on unation of the theoretical and methodological issues K185 they relate to the outcomes of the study in 175 , and.in.particular as the issues are related to the ititni or non—confirmation of the hypotheses. ical Issues a general theoretical orientation of the study was psychological with a primary focus on the relation- tween attitudes and personal contact, interpersonal change orientation, and certain demographic es (age, sex, income, education, etc.). An attempt e to establish a differential pattern of attitudes disabled persons and attitudes toward education on is of such variables. .e theoretical framework for attitudes toward education >vided by Kerlinger (1956) who postulated a dichotomy :ational attitudes having permissive-progressive strictive-traditional dimensions. Kerlinger postulated >gressive—traditional dichotomy of attitude orientation education can be generalized to other relevant les. Kerlinger emphasizes that progressivism and ionalism are not just opposite constructs but that re distinct orientations in their own right. In View confounding of the derived scores, when both the ional and progressive dimensions are significant, it reasonable to assume that the issues are more com- ed mkithe attitudes not so neatly dichotomous as ger%3research seems to indicate. It may be, however, 176 the interaction of attitudes and values produces these pected results. These results may also be interpreted response generalization. However, the need for further rical evidence appears to be indicated by these results rder to permit a confident interpretation of the pro— sive-traditional attitudes toward education as used he present study. Attitude intensity and contact are considered to have lient relationship with an increase of contact with the tude object resulting in an increase of attitude nsity (Guttman and Foa, 1951). Rosenberg (1960) in- .ted that intensity is an action predictor. Zetterberg ~3) has suggested that the location of a score on the .rable-unfavorable continuum of attitude intensity is ectly related to whether the contact was voluntary and :eived to be rewarding. For the Japan sample, intensity contact proved to be meaningful correlates of enjoyment :ontact and alternatives to contact. The framework for attitudes toward disabled persons provided by Wright et a1. (1960) and Meyerson (1963) in :h the relationship of attitudes and values are given eful attention. Wright et a1. (1960) emphasized two 1d types of values: asset and comparative. Asset values derived from an evaluation of intrinsic worth; com— 1tive values are derived on the basis of comparison with ermrmative standard of the past or present. As related ||II|Lll| PI 177 e present study, it was postulated that the SER group .perceive disabled persons from an asset value frame ference more than would the other occupational groups, their scores would be more positive toward disabled ns. This concept was extended in hypothesizing a ive relationship between positive attitudes toward led persons and progressive attitudes toward education asured by the instruments of the study. Operationally, asset and comparative values were red by the Gordon Survey of Interpersonal Values. values were measured by the Benevolence sub—scale rosity needs); comparative values were measured by eadership sub-scale (power needs), and by the aition sub—scale (achievement needs). The data in- ed a relationship between these values and positive cogressive attitudes. The summary of results (Table 37) ates that scores on the relationship between values :titudes are not consistently significant although in :ases the relationship was in the hypothesized ;ion. These results suggest that further investigation :se attitude-value interrelationships may indicate con— It significant relationships. .n orientation toward change has been postulated as indicative of positive or progressive attitudes an orientation to change represents a departure from atus quo and an acceptance of new ideas. For the 178 fl.sample, high scores on change orientation variables Uted in significantly high scores on progressive attitudes er education and low scores on traditional attitudes er education. Though not significant, a positive re- onship between high change orientation scores and positive tudes toward disabled persons was indicated. The SER ps, however, did not show a significantly higher score other groups, as hypothesized, on any of the change ables. odological Issues Several issues will be discussed in this section, in- ing scaling, instrumentation, sampling, concept valence, and statistical analysis. Recommendations, 2 applicable will be summarized in the following section. As reported in an earlier chapter, scaling procedures 1 not be completed due to computer programming Lculties. Scale and intensity analysis was suggested 1e approach to concept equivalence. It is hypothesized similar scale outcomes for different linguistic and lral groups reflect similar psychological orientations :d the attitude object (see page 6lff). In Felty's (1965) Costa Rican study, the scale analysis ted in only marginal success. Friesen (1966) reported IND meaningful unidimensional scales were formed in 'tudy of attitudes in Colombia and Peru. He cites the 179 t3? cxf attitudes and their multi—dimensional nature rensponsible for the failure of the items to scale. r1 derta will be computer processed for scaling when -11 prnogram becomes operational (see pages 118, 119) resnilts will be published in the report on a larger see page 6) . strwnnentation for the study consisted of Attitudes Ilisabled Persons, Kerlinger's Education Scale ssive and traditional sub—scales), Gordon's Survey :rpersonal Values (producing six value sub-scales), ‘al Personal Questionnaire, and a Personal Questionnaire— 1pped Persons (Specifically related to issues involving apped persons). The attitude instruments and the instrument have one feature in common: the score for f the sub—scales is determined by the summation of the given to each of the items of the scale. These ments, except the questionnaires, have been used in investigations and their reliability and validity are iered to be adequate for the purposes of the present However, in translation into another language, the ityenm.reliability of the instrument may become (pate. Two approaches to maintaining the properties lecndginal instrument will be discussed in the nmendations. Thesmmple used for the study places limits on the rmnzmfllity of the findings. Although a stratified 180 mnsample would have been more meaningful, the orauny nature of the present research indicated the :tion of 50 respondents in each of 5 occupational groups: ial education and rehabilitation personnel, educators, less managers and executives, government executives, Laborers. The total sample included respondents from group but the business and government executives were 'zed as a single group. The total sample of 211 .ndents had the following composition by groups: 50; E = 41; M = 84; L = 37. The sex distribution for otal sample was nearly equal. However, within groups, a1 sex distribution was especially noticeable for the up (males = 8, females = 33), and for the M group s = 75; females = 9). The L group was composed mainly ite collar office workers with no representation from ommonly described ”laborer” group. 3oncept equivalence has been cited as being of prime :ance in cross-1inguistic/cultural research. It is Lated that the translation into comparative concepts be preferred to exact translation, i.e., dictionary 'word for word translation. To attain concept Llence, the researcher worked with the Japanese .ators in reaching an understanding and agreement of .tix: expressions and hard to understand phrases and The use of three translators, reviewing each other's atixni, served as a precaution in assuring concept 181 uiwflence. However, pre-testing of the instruments in panvms not attempted because of the pressure of time and lakms. 0n the other hand, pre—testing may be less sandal in a highly literate nation like Japan where the 'mSLmed in the instrument would be understood by the (ndty of the pOpulation. The qualifications of the anese research assistants, being involved in special cation and rehabilitation work professionally and ng competent in the use of the English language, may be sidered another guarantee of concept equivalence. It be inferred that the whole problem of concept equivalence be minimized by using nationals familiar with the eral field of the research and by employing persons ng a good understanding of both the original language he instruments and the general educational level of the arch population. These two conditions prevailed in present study. Statistical analysis utilized the following procedures: iency column count; one-way (sex) and two—way (group) rsixs of variance; and zero-order, multiple, and partial :latififlh The frequency distributions were used to gain ruical "feel” for the data, and to determine the high OW'zscores for the dichotomized variables used in Sims of variance routine. The analysis of variance see; were adapted to correct for unequal frequencies a cmalls (missing data). This routine also provided the 182 mate level of significance in the computer print—off. relation coefficients were also provided in a readily form in the computer print—off. Part III: Recommendations e recommendations in this section are the result of lysis of the data (Chapter IV) and the discussion of ical and methodological issues (Chapter V). ndations will be presented for three aspects of the sampling, instrumentation, and statistical analysis. ndations Related ling ough the sample consisted of "known" groups, other not included in the sample might reasonably be expected 'ide new clues as to the nature of the composite .e structure for a given culture. For example, the .es of students (the new generation) and retired persons ,der generation) might profitably be compared. The les of employed women with non—employed women (i.e., :ers) should provide differential data pertaining to ‘1uence of outside work eXperience or professional ;y on attitudes. Another meaningful comparison might Ieen attitudes of professors and elementary and secon— 2achers. For these and similar categories, a difference _tude scores is suggested. 1e mean age of the Japan sample was 35.16 years. Many 5e persons were children during World War II and may 183 ijnides quite different from a sample of older It seems reasonable to assume that a future study, 6N1 for age, would indicate significant age differ- Specially in a country like Japan where rapid Ihange is assumed to have taken place beginning at 'ic identifiable point in time (e.g., at the end of rar period). enever feasible, the sex distribution within groups >e controlled. In the present study, the sex ratio total sample is relatively equal but the E and M ire unequal, with more females in the E group and Les in the M group. This condition makes a itial sex interpretation meaningless. Following 1966) who cites Guttman, a sample composed of 100 ants (50 males, 50 females) is recommended for each ithin the sample. ndations Related rumentation e change variables used in the present study make a ntial contribution to attitude scores. Six change es were included in the analyses. The addition of hange variables in the analyses such as geographic, c, and social mobility may also be assumed to bear rm relationship to attitudes. 0n the other hand, [data'which have not shown a relationship to attitudes ammnnated in an effort to shorten the time required 184 gate the questionnaires. In the present study both >er~HCD mumum cmmwnoflz sconce .m anon - HxAthmommoommx .Ad EHmonm guH3\C.C 82mg coaumusew eumBou mwesuwuumT B 9200 U83ou\:v mmOnHMDm How \\Amv ezmezoo woxxHov :H nmemuoq\\aav mumbom u0\\lmv oneommHo wonuoe Ho\\AoV mama mNHm 9H2: Ho\\on ezmHmHomm nou\\Hmv Hm>mq mcHHooHUm mo \chv HoHHnEsm m HOH>mnwn HMHUOm vn mHQmuo>mucs x 30H NH 4 m ucwEQon>wU HmcoHum: mh .0003 20mm 5.53 H xcmu 32053 53 8sz> H3350: H Al magma mo .28 0:» H8830» nmaz H V ucwEQOHw>wU Hmcoqumoo> mfl mHAwuo>wm Hx NuHHOHMN ucmEoocm>Umleom Hh oocme> HHV IIIII. m mo Axe H c Amy M mo use can CH m coflucw>oum NH HMHUOm N: N H Ho mmommsm wzu How ezmezoo H mo eooummmHo may monuso w omeaooq mum aon3 mmomDOm cmewocm> m H HanuowHHoucH z u e . meamcH Hm mmmmmmm ucmucou aoHumooq HHV Hal :3 ochuw mo eouwam N.0 Umenmuwu xHHmucwe 0o m mucoumm mm m N > a m m 30: u w scum U UOHQMmHU HHmon a 0 Echo mHOOu mchs mucoezum mm >9 omeummHQ meonuws mchonEm H e HmcoHuHemuu Hu H mHm5©H>HUCH e ewumsnemHmE >HHMH00m o muwsomwu m moonsom wQ>B mNfim uHCD uooa mo :oHuoouHQ Amy H v ADV knuHmwk Nu m emeHuommcs Ho 0 mucmeHomm mucw sum 0 m H0 H8 mumsemumnumoa n - m moHocwcm HmcoHumcuwucH m muHmuw>Hcs v2 meocwmm wum>HuQ vm oomH .m >umsunwm zoumwmom HmHoom emHHmm< mo musuHumCH meumH :MEuuso mHaoq huwmuo>HcD mucum cmwwnowz cocked .m anon uoH>mcmn HmHoon vfl ucoEQoHo>oe HmcoHua: Mn mcH>u . c ucweaon>oe choHuwuo> Nn mo H400 ucoEoocm>emanwm Hn uwooo Adv mucoumm mm 30: mm m H Eouu mHOOu ocHn: mucovSuu o HocoHuHonuu u H muucocou 0 counsom co uuouH Hmv nucoesun on ucaocowo HocoHumcumucH mm uoHocomo auo>wua fin uncacuo>om Hmcofiuc: mm mca>u£ vuo30u uoUDuHuua mmMHu HMHoow :oHummsuoo ecu Aucsosdv coHumusoo wEOUGH X00 0mm H .A coHumosow usonm an empowewua mum :oHumoon cum3ou woesuHuum omega mm coHuco>ouQ NH 0:» eum30u wo mmOAMDm 0:» now BZHBZOU ucmeucm>om HH mummamM AHV uQDOHo No 00 Ha omeummHo avenues mcHsoHQEo H mHnscH>HocH o 000 mmHHImmHm uch on .m.: o» HmmumH m> nH>mHmom5N v» mHL Ou mcHUHouoa mcHuuwm Amevhuucsoo cmHm< m» wmva3ocx Hm v new uomucoo mo ucwfiwoflco No can huwnowmeou N: uomucoo mo unsofia Ho wuduoauum 09H~> H: . wuowomu uomufimu Hoe oHAmuo>mMcs mx 3oH NH H9390: N Al .umomu 20mm cHnuH3 swag HH xcmu prmOHmm nuH3 muzmq<> x . mHAmuo>mw Hg NuHulom 0060 m> lav H Hxv mo uso ecu :H mm HmHUOm m; H M No eooummmHo on» ouHmuso Nm amaauoq oun gngz mmompom HmsuowHHoucw n mvfimcfi Hm ucoucoo GOH moo 1m. .0 H How ochum mU// vouwam N.U , mumsomumlumom mn ewcumuwu >HHmucwE wo m qumuw>acs vn Hamch HHHmuHmsna o k m humocoowmlumom n lllllllll no msflomHms xHHmHuom v0 A w Hm>mq ozHHoomUw N um coHumusew wqmmpm m xumecoumm n noon 0 H >umucmeHo n anuHmw3 mo chMHuwmmcs mucoflmaowm AUV m o z z.lllllwv. H H.1ATIIIHHH m o m m a u m H w x m m : cowumucofluo omcmzu uumuaoo ou m0>wumcuwuHm o Ho>wq UGHHOO£Um Amy asouo umwumucH ’ ch ou mcweuooum mx mHz cH ~ uHmmEHn H BZszommmd xesum ou cwcmwmwe mH uuonoum nonmmmmu 055 x 189 5 recommended by Felty (1965, pp. 199, 200, 220), the ‘factor analysis should be eXplored for future studies. commended use is indicated for detecting design flaws study, determining predictor variables for multiple sion analysis, and for providing various factor for comparative analysis of the occupational groups. analytic studies by Siller (1963) and Siller and n (1964) were found to be highly suggestive of ative hypotheses to those underlying the Attitudes Disabled Persons scale (see pp. 44-46). Factor ic studies for each of the instruments could also as a uniform validity measure for the battery of nents. Part IV: Concluding Summary 1 a general sense the present research has confirmed ’or theoretical orientation of the study. A salient >nship between attitudes (toward disabled persons rard education) and personal contact, value, change .tion and certain demographic variables has been 0 exist although the degree of consistency was not t for each group of hypotheses. e significant findings of the present study, in f supporting the hypotheses, may be summarized in lowing statements: Iiigh frequency of contact resulted in high tensity scores for attitudes toward disabled persons. 190 2. High frequency of contact with disabled persons, if mmompanied with alternative rewarding Opportunities, mfloyment of contact, and ease Of avoidance of contact resulted in positive attitudes toward disabled persons. 3. High Leadership value scores resulted in high traditional attitudes toward education. 4. High Recognition value scores were not related to the attitude scores. 5. High Benevolence value scores were not related to the attitude scores for occupation groups but were significant for the sexes. 6. Women had higher Benevolence value scores than did men. 7. High change orientation scores resulted in high progressive attitudes toward education and low traditional attitudes toward education. 8. The SER group had higher Benevolence value scores than all groups, lower Leadership value sscores than the M group, and lower Recognition ‘value scores than the L group. 9. The SER group had lower traditional attitudes tcnvard education than all groups, but not higher .prnogressive attitudes toward education. 1C). The SER group, as the other three groups, :irniicated a transitional or progressive orientation <3r1 each of the change variables. 191 I The SER group had more contact with mentally tarded and emotionally disturbed persons than 1 groups. aling was not attempted and several of the hypotheses t confirmed. However, the majority of the hypotheses sub—hypotheses were confirmed or the results were direction hypothesized suggesting that a rejection rmulation of the hypotheses is contra-indicated at age in our investigation of attitudes toward 1 persons and toward education. The complex nature :udes toward social objects and their relationship r logical constructs such as values and personal are in need Of further extensive research. najor implication of the present research findings future studies of attitudes toward social objects 3e with the problem Of concept equivalence by g a comprehensive, interrelated battery of ants that can adequately sample the attitude 3. It may be that facet theory and mapping as as formulated by Drs. Jordan and Guttman will be / advantageous in the attempt to understand, and attitudes toward significant social objects. REFERENCES 192 REFERENCES G. W. The nature of prejudice. Garden City, Y.: Doubleday Anchor Books, 1958. G., Vernon, P., and Lindzey, G. A study of .lues (Revised). Cambridge: Houghton-Mifflin, 1951. G.,and Coleman, J. S. (Eds.) The politics of the rveloping areas. Princeton: Princeton Univer. ’ess, 1960. ., Sara E. The changes in attitudes of 'ospective teachers toward education and teaching . secondary schools. Unpublished doctoral ssertation, Indiana University, 1964. r, E. G. Attitudes toward the disabled. Rehabilit. unsel. Bull., 1963, 6, 26—30. R. G. The social psychology of physical disability. Lof Soc. Issues, 1948, 4 (4), 28-38. R. G., and Wright, Beatrice A. The midwest and its ildren. Evanston, 111.: Row, Peterson, 1955. R. G., Wright, Beatrice A., Meyerson, L., and nick, M. R. Adjustment to physical handicap and lness. New York: Social Science Research Council, 53. R. Stereotypes et prejuges de couleur. ciologia, 1955, 18. R., and van den Berghe, P. Stereotypes, norms and .teracial behavior in Sao Paulo, Brazil. Amer. Soc. L: 1957: 22) 689‘694- W. G. The modern history Of Japan. New York: 'ederick A. Praeger, Inc., Publisher, 1963. H. Through values to social interpretation. ,rham, N. 0.: Duke Univer. Press, 1950. H. Attitudes of selected rehabilitation workers .d other hospital employees toward physical sability. Psychol. Reports, 1962, 10, 183-186. 193 . A. Cultural trends and the task of psychology. merican Psychologist, 1965, 3, 203—207. J. R., and Yuker, H. E. Correlates of an intellectual rientation among college students. Proceedings of me 73rd Annual Convention of the American sychological Association, 1965. N. E. A study of somatOpsychological relationships 0 cerebral palsied children. J. Except. Child., 955, 22, 347—350. E. R. Attitude change through modification of titude structure. J. Abnorm. Soc. Psychol., 1956, , 256—261. a 3 2 ght, D. Some principles of mass persuasion. Human alat., 1949, 2, 253-268. , E. Problems in special education of children in 1e multi—cultural society of Israel. Paper read at Lrst International Conference, Assn. for Spec. 1., London, July 1966, and at Third International )ciety for Rehabilitation of the Disabled, Germany, aptember, 1966. , E., and Adler, E. V.R.A. programs in Israel, ishington: Department of Health, Education, and alfare, 1966. I. Manual Of computer programs. Research Services, apartment of Communications, Michigan State liversity, 1964. L. R. Attitude change and social influence. New >rk: Basic Books, 1964. J. F., and Browne, G. S. Contemporary education. aw York: Harcourt, Brace and World, 1965. lank, W. M. (Ed.). Psychology of exceptional iildren and youth. (2nd ed.) Englewood Cliffs, *entice—Hall, 1963. l. E. Attitude Change: A Review and Bibliography ‘ Selected Research. UNESCO, NO. 19, 1964. I, .. Population. Scientific American, 1963, 209 (3), 1-71. 194 T., Leviton, G. R., and Wright, Beatrice A. djustment to misfortune——a problem of social- . sychological rehabilitation. Artificial Limbs, 1956, 3 J. EXperience and education. New York: Collier ooks, 1938. in, Joan,-and Dripps, Elaine. An analysis of attitudes f acceptance—rejection towards exceptional children. aster of Education Thesis, Boston, Univer., 1958. n, G. H., Anderson, H. E., Jr., and Barry, J. R. haracteristics of students in the health related rofessions. Gainesville: University of Florida, ehabilit. Res. Monogr. Ser., June, 1966. on in Japan. Tokyo: Ministry of Education, 1964. , A. L. Techniques of attitude scale construction. ew York: Appleton—Century-Crofts, 1957. , A. L. EXperimental design in psychological esearch. New York: Rinehart, 1960. , A. L. Statistical methods for the behavior ciences. New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston, 961. I. E. The measurement of attitudes toward disability 1 San Jose, Costa Rica. A scale approach to thegproblem f concept equivalence. Proceedings of the Ninth Inter— nerican Congress of Psychology, Miami, Florida, acember, 1964. I. E. Attitudes toward physical disability in Costa Lca and their determinants: A pilot study. Unpublished >ctoral dissertation,Michigan State University, 1965. 3r, L. A Theory of Cognitive Dissonance. Evanston, Llinois: Row Peterson, and Co., 1957. , F. C., and Kivlin, J. E. Attributes of innovations 5 factors in diffusion. The Amer. J. Sociology, 966, 72, 235—248. G. Scale and intensity analysis in opinion research. it. J. Opin. and Attitude Res. 1950, 4, 192—208. 195 G. Convergences in the analysis Of the structure f interpersonal behavior. Psychol. Rev., 1961, 3 (5), 341-353. G. A facet approach to the prediction of ammunalities. Behavioral Sci., 1963, 8 (3), 220-226. D. G. Social status of physically handicapped iildren. Except. Child , December, 1956, 23 (3). a, W. K. PhilOSOphyof education. New York: acmillan, 1965. 1, E. Disability as social deviance. In M. B. 1s2"an (Ed.), Sociology and Rehabilitation, ashington: Amer. Sociol. Assn., 1966. , E. W. Nature and determinants of attitudes toward iucation and toward physically disabled persons in alombia, Peru, and the United States. Unpublished actoral dissertation, Michigan State University, 1966. a, T. Democracy and the Japanese background. In Schneps and A. D. Cook (Eds.) The Japanese Image. iiladelphia: Oriert West, Inc., 1965. , J. K., and Maglione, F. D. Familiarity, dogmatism, 1d reported student attitudes toward the disabled. soc. Psychol., 1965, 67, 329-341. J. J., and Hatt, P. K. Methods Of social research. 2w York: McGraw—Hill, 1952. Mary E. Values, attitudes, and social concepts of :panese and American children. In Japanese character 1d culture. Tuscon: University of Arizona Press, 1962. N., Dornbusch, S. M., Richardson, S. A., and storf, A. H. Varient reactions to physical dis— ilities. Amer. Soc. Rev., June, 1963, 28, 429—435. L. V. Manual for survey of interpersonal values. icago: Science Research Associates, Inc., 1960. L. V. Research briefs on survey of interpersonal lues. Chicago: Science Research Associates, Inc., 63. 196 B. F. Attitude measurement. In G. Lindzey (Ed.), {andbook Of social psychology. Vol. 1, Theory and method. Reading, Mass.: Addison—Wesley, 1954. :hs, D. E. Administrative theory and change in Jrganization. In M. B. Miles (Ed.), Innovation in education. New York: Teachers College, Columbia Jniversity, 1964. 1, L. The Cornell technique for intensity and scale inalysis. Educ. and Psych. Meas., 1947, 7, 247—280. 1, L. The problem of attitude and opinion measurement. In S. A. Stauffer (Ed ), Measurement and prediction. Drinceton: Princeton Univer. Press, 1950. 1, L. An outline Of some new methodology for social *esearch. Publ. Opin. 0., Winter, 1954, 18 (4), ;95—404. 1, L. A structural theory for intergroup beliefs and Lction. Amer. Soc. Rev., 1959, 24, 318—338. 1, L. The structuring of sociological spaces. ‘echnical Note No. 3, Contract NO. AF 61 (052)-121, >ec., 1961, p. 14. ., L., and Foa, U. G. Social contact and an inter— ;roup attitude. Publ. Opin. 0., Spring, 1951, 43—53. , L., and Suchman, E. A. Intensity and a zero—point ’or attitude analysis. Amer. Soc. Rev., 1947, 12, 7—67. on, J. M. Multiple scalogram analysis (MSA) on the DC 3600. Michigan State University Computer Institute or Social Science Research, Technical Report 6, ebruary 10, 1964. on, J. M. The "CUT” program for Guttman scalogram nalysis. Computer Center, Michigan State University, 965. E. E. On the theory of social change. Homewood, llinois: Dorsey Press, 1962. W. Changing conceptions of modernization in Japan. n M. B. Jansen (Ed.), Changing Japanese attitudes gward modernization. Princeton: Princeton Univer. ress, 1965. 197 an, W. H. The measurement of attitudes toward the Vegro in the South. J. Soc. Psychol., 1958, 48, 305—317. J. R., and Hanks, L. M., Jr. The physically handi- 3apped in certain non-occidental societies. J. of 100. Issues, 1948, 4. , N. G., Stern, G. G., and Cruickshank, W. M. §ttitude of educators toward exceptional children. Syracuse: Syracuse Univer. Press, 1958. , G. C. The human group. New York: Harcourt, Brace 1nd World, 1950. , G. C. Social behavior: its elementary forms. New 7 .ork: Harcourt, Brace and World, 1961. H. Survey design and analysis. New York: Free ’ress of Glencoe, 1955. S. Education of handicapped children in Japan. Mimeographed Report) New York: International Society ‘Or the Welfare of Cripples, 1959. in, E., and Schachter, S. (Eds.). Cross—national 'esearch: a case study. J. Soc. Issues, 1954, X (4). In, E., Kumata, H., and Gullahorn, Jeanne E. Cross— ultural contributions to attitude research. Publ. rpin. 0., 1960, 24 (2), 205—223. J. Attitudes of adolescents toward persons with isabilities. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Olumbia University, 1965. M. B. (Ed.), Changing Japanese attitudes toward Odernization. Princeton: Princeton University ress, 1965. conomic Yearbook — 1964, Tokyo: the Oriental ,_ conomist, 1964. J. E. The Guatemala research and training center in ehabilitation and special education. Selected onvention papers——40th annual convention. Washington, . C.: The Council for Exceptional Children, NEA, 962 (a). 198 I. E. The university looks at rehabilitation: an narnational perSpective. J. Mich. Med. Soc., 1962, :620, (b). I. E. Rehabilitation and special education in Latin erica” Papers read at the Inter-American Congress Psychology, Mar del Plata, Argentina, April, 1963; i at the second International Seminar on Special ication, Nyborg, Denmark, 1963 (a). I. E. Special education in Latin America. World rizons in Special Education. Proceedings of 1963, mmer Lecture Series, College of Education, Michigan ate Univer., 1963 (b). J. E. Problems and promises of education in Latin erica. Special Education in Latin America. Phi lta Kappan, January, 1964 (a). J. E. La Rehabilitacion y Educacion Especial en la erica Latina, Revista Mexicana de Psicologia, bruary, 1964 (b). The functional approach to the study of attitudes. ,bl. Opin. 0., 1960, 24 (2), 163—204. , Levin, M. L., and Hamilton, M. Research on the .ffusion of innovation. Amer. Soc. Rev., 1963, 28 0. , and Stotland, E. A preliminary statement to a 1eory of attitude structure and change. In S. Koch Bd.), Psychology: a study of a science. Vol. 3, >rmulations of the person and the social context. ew York: McGraw—Hill, 1959, 423—475. In, and.Mudler, W. J. Impact and change: a study f counseling relationships. New York: Appleton— antury-Crofts, 1966. -L H. Some implications of social psychological theory :M1research on the handicapped. In L. H. Lofquist fli), Psychological Research and Rehabilitation, ashington, D. C., American Psychological ssociation, 1960. er,FR N. Progressiveness and traditionalism: asicfectors of educational attitudes. J. Soc. sych01., 1958, 68, 111—135. 199 ger, F. N. Factor invariance in the measurement of attitudes toward education. Educ. and Psychol. Meas. 1961, 21 (2), 273—285. a ger, F. N., and Kaya, E. The construction and factor analytic validation of scales to measure attitudes toward education. Educ. and Psychol. Meas., 1959, 19, 13-29. C. Progress report on social service in Japan. (Mimeographed report) Tokyo: Japanese National Committee Of the International Conference of Social Mork, 1964. 3. A. Educating exceptional children. Boston: ioughton, Mifflin, 1962. erg, 0. Tensions affecting international understanding. ; Jew York: Social Science Research Council, Bulletin h 32, 1950. )hn, Florence R., and Strodtbeck, F. L. Variations ‘1: Ln value orientations. Evanston: Row, Peterson, 1961. ~H:‘ American students' contacts with and attitudes :oward foreign students. Unpublished doctoral lissertation, Michigan State University, 1962. A. S. The interrelation of belief systems and educational values: a study of the educational Lttitudes of individual school teachers. Unpublished [octoral dissertation, New York University, 1963. C. Y. Extension Of multiple range tests to group 1 ,eans with unequal numbers of replications. Biometrics, 956, 12, 307-310. _— us, W. C. Acceptance—rejection and exceptionality. xcept. Child., 1956, 22 (8), 328—331. us, W. C. Juvenile delinquency. Dept. of Classroom eachers, Amer. Educ. Res. Assn. Of the National duc. Assn., 1958. e, W. A., and LeCompte, Guvey. Attitudes of American nd Turkish college students toward disabled persons. ersonnel & Guidance J., 1966, 45, 353-358. 5 J. L. A comparison Of attitudes toward handicapped hildren between three groups of teachers as expressed a a 0—sort. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, niversity Of New Mexico, 1965. 200 , D. The passing of traditional society. New York: 11ree Press Of Glencoe, 1958. , S. A. Conceptual framework for special education. gxcept. Child., 1961, 28 (2), 83-90. 5, J. C. Multiple scalogram analysis: a set :heoretical model for analyzing dichotomous items. gduc. and Psychol. Meas., 1963, 23, 501—524. 5, J. C. An IBM—7090 Program for Guttman-Lingoes lulti-dimensional Scalogram Analysis - I. Ann Arbor: Iniversity of Michigan, 1965. ;, R., Watson, Jeanne, and Westley, B. Planned change, Lew York: Harcourt, Brace and World, 1958. S. M. The value patterns of democracy. Amer. Soc. 31., 1963, 28(4). C. P. Social systems. Princeton: Van Nostrand, .960. n, J. Man's nature and the aims of his education. n W. K. Frankena (Ed ), PhilOSOphy of education, New ork: Macmillan, 1965. r, Ann L. W. Adolescent attitudes toward self and oward others. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, niversity of Wisconsin, 1965. n, L. Physical disability as a social psychological roblem. J. Soc. Issues, 1948, 4 (4), 2—10. n, L. SomatOpSychology of physical disability. In . M. Cruickshank (Ed.), Psychology of exceptional hildren and youth. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice—Hall 963. A. P. American social theory: a critique and a rOposal. New York: Harper, 1964. W. B. (Ed.) Innovation in education. New York: eachers College, Columbia University, 1964. , J. C. Understanding the Japanese mind. New York: ailosophical Library, Inc., 1954. C. Varieties of human value. Chicago: Univer. of 1icago Press, 1956i 201 Murphy, A. T. Attitudes of educators toward the visually handicapped. Sight—Saving Review, 1960, 30 (3). Norbeck, E. Changing Japan. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1965. Osgood, C. The measurement Of meaning. Urbana: Univer. of Illinois Press, 1957. Palgi, Phyllis. Attitude towards the disabled amongst immigrants from middle eastern countries (Hebrew). Public Health, 1962, 66—71. Parsons, T., and White, W. The link between character and society. In S. ” Lipset and Leo Lowenthal (Eds.), Culture and social charactep. New York: Free Press of Glencoe, 19r Passin, H. Modernization and the Japanese intellectual: some comparative observations. In J. B. Marius (Ed.), Changing Japanese attitudes toward modernizapion. Princeton: Princeton Univer. Press, 1965(5). ‘ Passin, H. Society and edu p;ion in Japan. New York: Teachers College, Columbia University, 1965(b). Payne, S. L. The art of asking questions. Princeton: Princeton Univer. Press, 1951 Reischauer, E. 0. Japan pasi and_present. Tokyo: Charles E. Tuttle, 1952. Richardson, S. A., Goodman, N., Hastorf, A. H., and Dornbusch, S. M. Cultural uniformity in reaction to physical disabilities. Amer- Soc. Rev., 1961, 26, 241—247. Riley, Matilda W. Sociological research. New York: Harcourt, Brace and World, 1963. Riley, Matilda W., Riley, J. W., and Jackson, T. Sociological studies in scale analysis. New Brunswick: Rutgers Univer. Press, 1954. Robinson, Mary E. Education for social change. Washington, D. C.: Brookins Institution, 1961. Roeher, G. A. A study of certain public attitudes toward the orthOpedically disabled. Doctoral dissertation, New York Univer., 1959. 202 Rogers, E. M. Diffusion of innovations. New York: Free Press of Glencoe, 1962. Rokeach, M. The Open and closed mind. New York: Basic Books, 1960. Rosenberg, M. J. Cognitive structure and attitudinal affect. J. of Abn. and Soc. Psych., 1956, 53, 367-372. Rosenberg, M. J. A structural theory of attitude dynamics. Publ. Opin. 0., 1960, 24 (2), 319—340. Ruble, W. L., Kiel, D. F., and Rafter, Mary E. Calculation of least squares (regression) problems on the LS routine. Stat. Series Description No. 7, Agricultural EXperiment Station, Michigan State University, 1966. Ruble, W. L., Kiel, D. F., and Rafter, Mary E. One—way analysis of variance with unequal number Of replications permitted, (UNE01 Routine). Stat. Series Description No. 13, Agricultural Experiment Station. Michigan State University, 1966. Ruble, W. L., Paulson, Sara J., Rafter, Mary E. Analysis of covariance and analysis of variance with unequal frequencies permitted in cells —- no interaction effects. (LS Routine - Temporary). Stat. Series Description No. 115, Agriculture Experiment Station, Michigan State University, May, 1966. Ruble, W. L., and Rafter, Mary E. Calculation Of basic statistics when missing data is involved, (The MDSTAT) Routine). Stat. Series Description NO. 6, Agricultural Experiment Station, Michigan State University, 1966. SCAP, Education in new Japan, Vol. 1. Tokyo: Supreme Command Allied Powers, 1952. Schneps, M., and Coox, A. D. (Eds.) The Japanese image. Philadelphia: Orient/West Inc., 1965. SChinzinger, R. Peculiarities of Japanese character. In M. Schneps and A. D. Coox (Eds.), The Japanese image. Philadelphia: Orient/West Inc., 1965. Shibutani, T. Society and personality. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice—Hall, 1961. 203 Silberman, B. S. (Ed.) Japanese character and culture. Tuscon: Univer. Of Arizona Press, 1962. Siller, J. E. Personality determinants Of reaction to physical handicap. Amer. Psychologist, 1962, 17, 338. Siller, J. E. Reactions to physical disability. Rehabilit. Counsel. Bull., 1963, 7, 12116. Siller, J., and Chipman, A. Factorial structure and correlates of the attitudes toward disabled persons scale. Educ. and Psych. Meas. 1964, 24, 831—840. Sinha, B. K. Maternal attitudes and values in respect to emotionally disturbed and physically disabled persons. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Michigan State University, 1966. Smith, M. B. Personal values as determinants Of a political attitude. J. Of Psych., 1949, 23, 477—486. Smith, M. B. Attitudes and adjustment in cross—cultural contact: recent studies Of foreign students. J. soc. Issues, 1965, 12, 1. Smith, Inez L. The invariance of educational attitudes and their relations to social attitudes: an inverse factor analytic study. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, New York Univer., 1963. Smith, R. J., and Beardsley, R. K. Japanese culture. Chicago: Aldine Pub. Co., 1962. Snow, P. G. A scalogram analysis of political development. Amer. Behav. Scientist, 1966, 9, 33-36. Sommers, Vita S. The influence of parental attitudes and social environment Of the personality development of the adolescent blind. New York: American Foundation for the Blind, 1944. Spranger, E. Lebensform (Types Of Men). (P.J.W. Pigors, translator), New York: Stechent, 1928. Stagner, R.‘ Attitudes. In W. S. Monroe (Ed.), Encyclopedia of educational research. New York: MacMillan, 1941. Stauffer, S. A. Social research to test ideas. New York Free Press of Glencoe, 1962. 204 was“: 1.:- -fi .; 3:: '1‘ . .“'.ea_.é..-:-.A:.-.': v.---;;-L:L.§'~.‘-" . 'l " 'T‘Tfi u “‘4' .,§‘-‘-- '.——r'.=- 7H5. .. : H“ 'T \A-k- a- ....._. _. Him... W @- ~-—_ . .-.... State of Israel, Vocational Rehabilitation Council. An empirical study Of disabled persons in Israel in need of vocational rehabilitation (Mimeographed Report). Tel Aviv: Author, 1965. Stefflre, B. (Ed) Theories Of counseling, New York: McGraw—Hill, 1965. Stern, G. G. Measuring noncognitive variables in research on teaching. In N. L. Gage (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching. Chicago: Rand McNally, 1963. Stouffer, S. A. An overview of the contributions to scaling and scale theory. In S. A. Stouffer et al., Measurement and prediction. Princeton: Princeton Univer. Press, 1950. Stouffer, S. A. (Ed.) Measurement and prediction. Princeton: Princeton Univer. Press, 1950. Straus, R. Social change and the rehabilitation concept. In M. B. Sussman (Ed.), Sociology and Rehabilitation. Washington: Amer. Sociological Assn., 1966. Suchman, E. A. The intensity component in attitude and opinion research. In S. A. Stouffer, et a1. Measurement and prediction. Princeton: Princeton Univer. Press, 1950. Suchman, E. A. Public Opinion research across national boundaries. Publ. Opin. 0., 1958, 22 (2) Suchman, E. A. An analysis of bias in survey research. Publ. Opin. 0., 1962, 24, 102—111. Suchman, E. A. The comparative method in social research. Rural Soc., 1964, 29 (2), 123—137. Suchman, E. A., and Guttman, L. A solution to the problem of question bias. Publ. Opin. 0., 1947, 2, 445—455. Sussman, M. B. (Ed.) Sociology and rehabilitation. Washington: Amer. Sociological Assn., 1966. Taguchi, T. (Ed.) Rehabilitation of the physically handi— capped in Japan. Tokyo: Japanese Society for Rehabilitation of the Disabled, 1965(a). Taguchi, T. (Ed.) The rehabilitation program for the dis- abled in Pacific and southeast Asian countries. Tokyo: Japanese Society for Rehabilitation of the Disabled, 1965(b). 205 Rédggfiffifip‘éfgi?RIV‘;13:;‘1 -i -_ . ”4.2.5.. w ‘nfififi .g.-:9; MI 1'. ’ do —-—-. u. -_ . -I --—~—.—— Tanaka, J., and Osgood, C. E. Cross-culture, cross-concept and cross—subject generality of affecting meaning system. J. Pers. and soc. Psychol., 1965, 2, 143—153. Taylor, E. J. (Ed.) Rehabilitation and world peace. New York: Int. Soc. for the Welfare of Cripples, 1960. Taylor, J. L. A study of the relationship between attitudes toward education and the extent to which teachers participate in certain professional activities. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Arizona State University, 1963. Trump, J. L. Guide to better schools. Chicago: Rand McNally, 1961. United Nations. Study on legislative and administrative aspects of rehabilitation Of the disabled in selected countries (Brief report). New York: Author, 1964. UNESCO. Comparative cross—national research. Int. Soc. Sci. Bull., 1955, 7 (4). UNESCO. Opinion surveys in developing countries. Int. Soc. Sci. J., 1963, 15 (l). UNESCO. Sociology of development in Latin America. Int. Soc. Sci. J., 1963, 15 (4). UNESCO. Data in comparative research. Int. Soc. Sci. J., 1964, 16(1). _— Waisanen, F. B. A notation technique for scalogram analysis. The Soc. 0., 1960, l (4), 245—252. Waisanen, F. B. Finding a place in contemporary mass society: a problem of roles. Dept. of Social Sci., Univer. College, Michigan State Univer., 1962. Ward, J. H., Jr. Multiple linear regression models. In H. Borko (Ed.), Computer applications in the behavioral sciences. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall, 1962. Warren, Sue A., and Turner, D. R. Attitudes Of professionals and students toward exceptional children. Train. Sch. Bull.,l966, 62, 136-144. Whiteman, M., and Luckoff, I. F. Public attitudes toward blindness. The new outlook for the blind, 1962, 153-158. 206 Williams, R. American society. New York: Knopf, 1963. Woodruff, A. D., and Di Vesta, F. J. The relationship between values, concepts and attitudes. Educ. and Psych. Meas., 1948, 8, 645—660. Wrenn, C. G. The counselor in a changing world. Washington, D. C.: Amer. Pers. and Guidance Assn., 1962. Wright, Beatrice A. Physical disability-—a psychological approach. New York: Harper and Brothers, 1960. Yuker, H. E., Attitudes as determinants of behavior. J. of Rehabil., 1965, 31, 15. Yuker, H. E., Block, J. R., and Campbell, D. A. A scale to measure attitudes toward disabled persons. Human Resources Study No. 5. Albertson, N. Y.: Human Resources Foundation, Division of Abilities, Inc., 1960. Zetterberg, H. L. On theory and verification in sociology. Totawa, N. J.: Bedminster Press, 1963. 207 ADDENDUM TO REFERENCES 208 Dean, J. T. An analysis of attitudes toward education, theological orientations, interpersonal values, and educational experience. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Michigan State University, 1967. Dickie, R. F. An investigation of differential attitudes toward the physically disabled, blind persons, and attitudes toward education and their determinants among various occupational groups in Kansas. Un— published doctoral dissertation, Michigan State University, 1967. Green, J. H. Attitudes Of special educators versus regular teachers toward the physically handicapped and to— ward education. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Michigan State University, 1967 (c. Sept.). Heater, W. H. Attitudes of ministers toward mental retar— dation and toward education: their nature and determinants. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Michigan State University, 1967 (c. June). Kreider, P. E. The social—psychological nature and deter- minants of attitudes toward education and toward physically disabled persons in Belgium, Denmark, England, France, The Netherlands, and Yugoslavia. Un- published doctoral dissertation, Michigan State University, 1967. Mader, J. B. Attitudes of special educators toward the phys— ically disabled and toward education. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Michigan State University, 1967. Palmerton, K. E. Attitudes of college counselors toward education and toward physically disabled persons. Un- published doctoral dissertation, Michigan State University, 1967 (c. Sept.). Proctor, Doris I. The relationships between knowledge of disabilities, kind and amount of experience, and classroom integration of exceptional children. Un- published doctoral dissertation, Michigan State University, 1967 (0. June). Sinha, B. K. Maternal attitudes and values in respect to emotionally disturbed and physically disabled persons. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Michigan State University, 1966. Weir, R. C. An investigation of differential attitudes toward the physically disabled, deaf persons, and attitudes toward education, and their determinants among various occupational groups in Kansas. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Michigan State University, 1968 (c. June). 209 APPENDICES 210 APPENDIX A Statistical Material Means, Standard Deviations, and Number Of Respondents for 63 Variables for the Total Sample, Males, and Females by Occupational Groups 00 00.H 00.0 0H 00.0 0H.0 00 00.0 00.0 00 H0 GOfiuOmmmwumm .luN 00 H0.0 00.0 0H 00.0 00.0 00 00.0 00.0 H0soov 000000 am “00 00 H0.0 00.0 0H 00.0 H0.0 00 00.0 00.0 Haeoov 0H00 00. .00 00 00.0 00.0 0H 00.0 00.0 00 00.0 00.0 A0500 0H00 em .H0 00 00.0 00.0 0H H0.0 00.0 00 00.0 00.0 HuuoaeHv 0000 .00 00 00.H 00.0 0H H0.H 00.0 00 00.H 00.0 Huasoamv 000 .EmHHmcomumm .mH 00 00.0 00.H 0H 00.0 00.H 00 H0.0 00.H 00H0HH00 wo mocmuuomEH .wH 00 0H.0 00.0 0H 0H.0 H0.0 00 00.0 00.0 0000H000 .0H 00 00.0 H0.0 0H 00.0 0H.0 00 00.0 00.0 0085 .0H 00 00.0 00.0 0H 00.0 00.H 00 0H.H 00.H 0000HH00 .0H 00 00.0 00.0 01 00.H 00.0 00 00.0 00.0 00Hcseaoo 00:00 .0H 00 00 H 00.00 00 00.0 H0.00 00 0H.0 00.00 000 .0H 00 00 H 00.0 0H 00.H 00.0 00 0H.0 0H.0 H000 0>0000000H< .0H 00 00.0 00,0 01 00.0 00.0 00 00.0 00.0 H000 000000000 .HH 00 00.0 00,0 00 00.0 00.0 00 00.0 00.0 H000 0H00 .0H 00 00.H 00.0 00 0H,H H0.0 00 00.0 00 0 0000000 WO uGSOHbAw .m 00 00,0 00.0H 00 00.0 00.0 00 00,0 00.01 0000000 00 0~owum> .w 00 0H 0 00,0H 00 H0.0 00.0 00 00.0 00.0H 0000000000 .0 00 00.0 00.H0 00 00.0 00.00 00 0H.0 00.H0 0000H0>0000 .0 00 00.0 00 00 00 00.0 00.00 00 00.0 00.00 0.000000000H 0 00 00 0 00.0 0H 00.0 00.0 00 00.0 00.0 00H00000000 ,0 00 00.0 00.00 00 00.0 00.00 00 00V0 00.01 0000000000 .0 00 00.0 00.00 0 00.0 00,00 00 00,0 00 01 0000000 ,0 00 00.0 00.0 00 00.0 00.0 00 00 0 00,0 000 .H Ii Illmlllul .Q.m c0021. IILImILlLJMWWLLILimmwz -Iizmlil.o.m I 5002 I -.|!iulllililuliliu :1 0H0500 I 0002 I I-.| I 0000w|111 0H000000 11:11 I I; I l. 7 I rl I14"! II".II l4ll|lldv| - I, U. ' llr. ‘ .ll'vulfl. I ‘4 lurid-41581444 . . I '4 III L! P. Ill . l III-4'11}! rill-I .EIJII .llrlnlrll'll.‘ Ill 5'“. "I .I .I8488‘08!Ul .usouw mmcoHomQSOoo mum 050 How mucoecoammu 0008mm paw .m.ma . «000 0 mm mHHw> c MO 0050 common ho Ht Es: cm mcoHumH>m um 0000 .0:002... 10. H H a He . m 0 p - b e . p e e mm m_1w-m>o~c1~ m 0101N~v~r FINA: 00.0 00.00 00 00.0 00.00 00 00.0 00 00 000000000100 00.0 00 00 00 00.0 00 00 00 00.0 00.00 00000 ucmucoo 1 mm 00.0 00.0 00 00.0 00.0 00 00.0 00.0 0000000 0000 1 uE¢ pumpcou 00 0 00 0 00 00.0 00 0 00 00 0 00.0 00000000 000002 .1. uE< uomuCOU 00.0 00.0 00 00 0 00.0 00 00.0 00.0 0>000000000 . 00 00.0 00 0 00 00 0 00.0 00 00.0 00-0 000000000 - 00 00 0 00 0 0 00 0 00 0 00 00 0 00 0 000000 1 00 00 0 00 0 00 0 0 00 0 00 00.0 00.0 0000 - 00 00 0 00 0 00 00.0 00.0 00 00.0 00.0 000000000 1H0 wme 1 AI. 00 0 00 0 00 00 0 00.0 00 00,0 00.0 0000000 000 00 00.0 00 0 00 00.0 00.0 00 00.0 00 0 0000 000000> 0: 00.0 00 0 00 0m 0 00.0 00 00 0 00.0 0000 0000000 0: 00 0 00 0 00 00 0 00 0 00 00 0 00 0 0000 00000000 00 0 00 0 00 00.0 00 0 00 00 0 0 0 000. 00000000000 00 0 00.0 00 00 0 00 0 00 00 0 00.0 000 000 000000 00 0 00 0 0. 00 0 00 0 00 m0 0 0 0 0000.010000 00 0 00 0 00 0 0 00.0 00 00 0 00 0 000000 0000 00 0 00 0 00 00 0 0_ 0 00 00.0 00 0 00000000 00 00.0 00 0 00 00 0 00 0 00 00 0 00 0 000 0000000 0 00 0 00 0 00 00 0 00.0 00 00 0 00 0 000 0000..00 00 0 00 0 00 00 0 00 0 00 00 0 00 0 000. 000 00 00 0 00 M 00 00 0 00 m 00 00 0 00 0 0000000 00 00.0 00 0 00 00 0 00 0 00 00 0 00 0 0000 00000 00 00.0 00 0 00 0M 0 00 0 00 00 0 00 0 00.0 00000 00 00 0 00 0 0_ 0. 0 00 0 00 0 w 00 0 00001; 000000 00 0 00 0 00 00 0 -0 0 00 00 0 0 0 00000000 .00000000 00 0 00 0 00 00,0 0_ 0 00 00.0 00 0 000000 000 00 0 00 0 00 00 0 00 0 00 0 0 00 0 00000000 000 00 0 00.0 0“ 00 _ 00 0 00 00 _ 00 0 0000 00000: 000 00 m 00.0 00 00 0 00 0 00 00 0 00 0 0000 002 000 0_ 0 00 0 00 00 0 00 0 00 00 0 00.0 0000 000 000 _0.0 00.0 00 00.0 00 0 00 00 0 00 0 00000 000 00 0 00.0 00 00 _ 00.0 00 00.0 00 0 00000000 000 00.0 00 0 00 00.0 00 0 00 00.0 00.0 >00; 000 _0.0 00 0 00 _0 0 00 0 00 00,0 00 0 00 000 000 -1I1IImww1 -1--1 mm02111-11111z.!1.wgsw11 1 3mmm2111-m1110m1w--1-11-mmma1mwmowmww1wm.mwmmm iv 3 n 1» C\ ‘o mt) . m \1 S 88 3'2 88 ') L'. r“- If‘ If‘ h . 3’3 W: i; K IV) [Ci (‘1 rr‘ rl‘ f fii'n q Trad 'L‘. Ed h‘l h 00 Rt) 3 \ Ed Frog (‘3 mm mm Mm mm mm Mm mm mm »m mm «m mm mm mm ‘ vm mam m_mE ,~m~0p >2 mw_nmmpm> me pow c., no, mm} Om; NH mo, HQ 00" w“ moj #m. Om. mq mm. mo ]\ \L mm ow ma wq. me oo oo ~+c>c$c>c>~'m \3 HOOHI“—O.—‘I\C‘\J O \‘T CMCNCNLI‘. mmum mm,¢ H©.m Noam do m mn.m wqu 00mm N r—a (\Jm (.4 \T O“ O qmmom. ~©.@ HQ _q Md Hq Hq Hq Hq .“.~<3,~ m C>©va q d d q q q~r~q q rdrd-~ungmuH< Mwfi oq‘o om m ,wmw “cue>oflcm AH Rm 0 co q Amww swag ”OH mo 0 o« p gumucou MO pCSOcEQ ‘0 mn‘fi an OH uvmwcou we zumflgm> w qy g m# o“ uwgmHmwmuy n mu q mm 0* uucb~u>ycum .@ 0” m qm.wfl Duguugmawccfl m we m mm,n cofluwcwouvm “q oq m mg mg zuweMowcou m .m m ofl mH “poaasm m .q‘o ow H me ‘H -- - g-m.w-s-Irrz ;-mmwmz-n-i¢:--au-z s--r+-|:n-usu ‘-;,:-e-wmwob;- . I --Is--1-1-1:----=-wmmmwmmmltini QSOuw Hmcowummjuuo m vs“ pow mucmwcoamMH m_mEmm mu:bccoawbp wo unpass 7cm mcowumw>aw wwmnsmpm .wcmvz.,.om mgm~4c$c>c$c>c>c>c$c> om mo qo \ P V—‘v—‘r—‘flr—‘rdr—Jr-m 0 Car om. ww. ON; 00. cm, mm, mo. mfl. mmmmmx'fm mm. H N N tummy—«momma HNNNOJMMC’NC’WN m cmmz .‘ilu' om ma mm mm mm oq Hq Hq Hq Hq HQ Hq HQ Hq flq Mg Hg #q “q Hq #q Hq Hg Hq Hq #q HQ Z Hana nova mwoo 00.0 ON O\v—4 o m l\ l\ QOOOONOv—i mm. 00 mm‘ oo‘ mm. Ow. om, mo Hm mm CHOOOOOOOO mm om om mfl mm mo ofi. r—4F-4P—‘r—4r—‘OH .D,m mmofl deem mm.m oouo wo‘H mqv N mm. we. Ho. nq. mm mo, mo, mo. cur—«monooa NN ma ma} mm, OH mm, ofl‘ mm, #m, qm, no, r—‘NNNNMMMMN AM No. mm mo mfi. omcm oo.m MNNQM wwwumumm kucmz a uE¢ uowucoo w>HumcumuHm a mm udek0mdw - mm wEoocH a mm cflmw . mm wocmwflo>m mo mmmm a mm nonucoo uE< mm ucou xumwum> mm. mm. ucoo xumeflum wmvz maficc Luo . Emammcom Low sum mwc mfiom . wwc mwcmgo w wcwccmah vwa fimpwwvn UH< Hmuop wmua Fem umEou3< ucou Luuwm umvm UHWLU spammm mwc mowuomha.comww mwcmLu cowwwamm ppwm Lufimmm p>ow umz p>ow go; Roam; mmmcwwsm >wcz Apcouv .. mam Hmm mLo msu Hmm wm um um :9 L9 L9 :0 mLu Hum now pwm “mm me “mm umm “mm “mm .om .mm oqm 0mm .Nm “Hm com umq .wq Umq .oq qu uqq .mq ”Na .Hq uoq .mm ”mm mm .«m .mm «m ,mm zmm “Hm ,om Vow .wm mm .om Ill! '1' .llxll lillllv. 'nI-II. ll I'll '."J 1 II III ll.lrlllllalllrlrr I'll- I'lrl’j’Iulluil'lr- III'. II: lli, 14".1' cmmz am manmk rm mm mm mm mm mm Hm $0. ms Om mo. mm mm- .G., m m ._V4 \3 (\J orx r- ‘1 m>mnq-AJ”\ QMOON \DCMG; .x‘j'OO mm mm .:Qmw29. msvusm.wopa Um ,mo ucmucoulmopm um .Nm wcupcw vmgw wm yaw ucvgcou UmpH vm .oo >pwmcmucm - um ”om Hmuow “cupcou h mm [mm DkZHmwG uoam . HE¢ “umucoo ”mm .i om mHDmE mm Nwoo mcnq «m Naoo No.q um 0mm “mm .mm mm owao Nmoq qm None mN.q wm Hm cofluomwmflumm .qN mm quo NH.m qw wwoo «H.m Ansoov umSHmm um‘ .mm mu wooo mmvm qw coco omen Aaaoov mfimm wm ONN mm mwoo exam qm «m.o mo.m Augmv mamm mm .HN qm «coo qN.N mm qo.o o~.N AuuoaeHv muwm “om mm NN.H w¢,q qm mN.H mq,¢ Aucsoemv 30m “Emflawcomumm .mH mN mH.H owuq qw Nwoo mmufi coflwflamm mo mudmuuanH owH mm mmom Hw.m qw mqnm mm.m mwcfianflm ONH m“ cm ”H Ha ma gm an 0H wm.¢H GEOUCH "OH qm ©H_H mo.H mm mafia mono cmuwfiflgo ”ma mm vao om.m qw mNoo Ho.N xuflasasoo susow ace m“ mm,w Ho.mm qw oq.m Hm qm mw< omH gm HN_H 00 N cm HR.H oo.m Awmv m>flumcumufi¢ .NH mm mwco mm m mm mwoo mm.m Awmv “smeaohcm OHH mm ON.H NNLN mN ONUH NNUN Awmv camu ”OH gm amgm comm qm mmum qo}m “umucou MO uGDOE< o. q“ oolfl on ofi mm moafl NN.OH #Umucoo MO >umwum> .w mm oaum om.m~ cw Hmum NH.mH QHSmumnmmq on mm gm.q mn,m_ gm omoq ow.ma mucmao>wcmm “c m“ mfluq Ho.©H qw H©.q mm,©H mocmwcmmmwcH “m m“ o~.m co m qw N©,N om.m cofiuflsmoumm q mN mo m ¢N.wH qw oq,m mq mH >ufiep0wcoo um mk mo.q ow,mfi qw qfl.q mm NH ”Hommsm “N m“ ooyo co H qw #muo HohH xmm ,H .Ia.:u|:--mlnnluz-,-|umqwul-u--lu-:mmmz---y:-3;.-m::11!;::u-«mww:-1-u-lz;immmmlluruzu--i--::--u;-luee4nsu .ujka-; - :mwmmuu-u--talu--=--.i;-:--,:--.-:; -lsflmmma-;-:u:-i;-uua--¢uuu.:-.:|snmwmmmmmw,aggn .a30gw Hmcowumasuoo z wsu uow mucmwcoammu mHmEmw wcm wHwE .HmHOu >5 mwanmwum> mo pew mucwwcommmg mo pvnEDC can mcoflumw>m© wumwcmpm dmcmw2;7,oq mamHumcumuHm a mm ucmE%0mcm 2 mm wEoocH a mm cflmw 1 mm mochHo>m mo mmmw a mm uomucoo uE< mm ucou zumHum> mm ucoo >umawum m: Ummz wchcme Lao u EmHHmcomuwm now sum mwcmso mHom a wwcwso mmcmso Hme mcficcmHm cm wH¢ Hmpmvwm ! cm wH< HmooH . wm vmmH Hem so uw60u3< nu ucou :uuHm nu ummm UHHzo Lu LuHmm: wmcmco onuomHa;conHHmm mwcmzu pom conHHmm umm >pmm :uHmmI umm u>ow umz umm u>ow uOH Hmm uoan umm mmmchsm umm >Hc: umm .om .mm "qm umm on on .om .mq ,wq omq 00¢ hmq ,qq umq ”Nq ”Hq aoq ”mm ”mm «mm Hem mm oqoq mn.mm mm Hm.m H mm mm Ho q NR.Nm mm ¢N,m mo mm mm Om w OJ No mm mmaq 00 cm mm @500 m¢_H qw qw qw qw qw qw qw No, Hm, omqjqu‘fl’ ‘ I '9 r" 5: . ll..lllul.!l III I y IA «ill! mmlmm Omnwm gm mm do mm we No ooqom Nq.H 1 5mm: mcmucw . mowm cm qmo ucmucou ‘ woum am “No mcmucm UQME Um ,Ho usmucou mauH cm ,00 >uHmcwpcm a mm ”mm HmHOH ucmucoo a mm own nusumHQ poem 3 He¢ pumucoo .mm a...-mafluwwdflmflmm mm mm mm NN mm mm Hm NN mm NN mm mm mm mm .,.II h'l'l I- 'llil'll‘lllnlu z mm.o owoo om,o Hmoo coco qH.H <3 ooh och om; Hm. «H, ~(O\O(V oq, cm. 00. mm“ Hm“ 6301C>Otn mm. C) me mm On mq om. mm 00. C>Q W3N\O(fl~d Q.m deem om,m wHum quq om.N ngq m¢.H mm m qH m mo 0 wHVN moth MmVH oo.¢ oo.m mo.q 00 HH om.HH Nw NH mq_wH oo.w Nm wH qH mH oo.N cmmz .l-l|.lllul I'llxllulilll'llllsl III. I I ¢'l. l. I‘llrll‘ll l(llu'n III] II III | -‘n l-"I'I. \V '7: I t. mHmEmm .uc...) I'l§-1.Ir‘l.u.. I’ll- Illi'l‘a II I 0' ,II .D . O a qH qH qH qH qH qH «H «H qH qH -¢‘¢~¢-d-d qH qH qH qH qH qH GH 2 mmoH Nmam om ONGH Hoom wm Hm COHuommmHumm OQN HN.H Noflm om mmuo mmum HQEOOV ngumm um_ “MN Nmoo omom om Nqno Hmom Hmsoov HHmm um ONN mmuo qH.m om wmoo mead HHEmV HHom wm ,HN owro 0N.N om mono HouN HHHomeHv muwm ooN NN.H Hm.q om 0H.H NNuq Hucsoamv noh AEmHHmHHOmem umH mquo mNAH mm omoo NmaH conHHmm mo wucmugomEH owH mm,¢ 0N,q om omum mwum mwcHHHHm JNH omuq 00 m cm omam NquN mEOUCH 00H mm,H no H om mNOH «q o» :mHuHHso umH No.H Om.N om mohH Hm.N HHHcseeOo gusow )qH HN qH qo Hm om mm oH mm wN mw< ”NH mm o Om H N mm.o mqu meH m>HHmchHH< ”NH oo o mN N N mHoH comm Awmv HcmaHoHcm DHH Hm N 00 m o mHHN comm mev chw uoH N .m 00 o N oH.m mq.m ubmucou MO uCSOE< Hm no.0 Hm oH om mm.o mm oH Hochou wo muwHHw> “w NH N HN mH om No.m ow NH chmHmwmuH ,N Nq m cm,NH om qN q qo NH mucmHo>mcmm to N@ m no CH om mg m mm NH mogumcwamucH .m mN m mo o @m HH m Hw.w coHHHcmoumm uq wq.q HN oH cm 00 m we NH NHHeHoHcou Wm om N oh NH om co m 00 NH HHoagsm .N oo\o oo.H Om aquo Ho H xmm H :u:--------s‘lgi-i--qm_W-,---;gmmmu----im:a;;--qmww-gu;:,mmmmnu-uug-ulnu-ug--uaazu:;nrv mHmz--.-.-u,- ---;.:-:i-:;HMHmHa,--5---::-:s:1--!1-;-mHmmwmmmI-nuu .uonw HmcoHuwusuuo 92H Ho“ wucwwcoammu vaEmH r Ucm .onE .HmHoH >2 mmHanHm> mo Hem chmncogrmH we ngass ccm mcoHHmH>ww UHmwcmHm .mcmv2,-,Hq mHm¢H 0H oH mH wH wH wH mm mm mm mm mm mm mm mm mm mm mm mm mm mm mm mm mm mm mm mm mm .l'l lull]- 1 I’ll" mm, mm, 00¢ 00, mwa C>C>C>C>C> do. ow Ho qm no mm C>C>C>C\IC>r—1 ow Om. _w 00, 05‘ NR wm. mo \ Rm. OC>C mo ow ¢w mm mg H OH. mo No. mm wn, OHuwcumuHm 5 mm ucmE%0mcm a mm mEoocH . mm chw - mm wocmvHo>m Ho wmmw . mm Homucoo HE< mm ucoo >umem> mm ucou szEHHm mm Ummz wchcme Luo ‘ EmHHmcomHmm LOm cum mwcwso wHom a wwcwcu vwcmgu HHmm wchcmHm Um UH< Hmpmwmu - @m ww< HmuoH . mm meH Ho» LL HmEoHsm LL Hcop LHHHm LL Hmum GHHLU Lu LHHmmI vwcmLL muHHumHm :onHva Lwcmxu DON chwHHym Hmm wpum LHHmL: Hmm Haow Hmz Hmm H>ow uoH ”mm Mafia; wma mmmcham Hmm H/wCWH 9mm cm gym me ign 2.2mwmcma .mm oqm .mm ”mm "Hm had Uwq ,nq Hod md .wq .mq .Nq ”HQ .oq Dom mm ,mm mm ”mm .‘II'III Ill . 1‘. III. I lllllli .lllkl..LnI l\.. NN ooom NN oo.N NN wqqm NN om,m NN ¢o.o mm oo,q NN mm,o mm mo,o ; [Tim .I‘ kill!!! .Q H. m Ho,om mm.wm mwnmm Om.wm wH.wm mm_a¢ oohH cmaH cum: qH ¢H qH qH qH qH «H qH ll.ll,"ll!"b.lrl l!|1.ill|’ . z Om.m Ho N qmvm nva Hm.n Hokm qoao mm H (Dam Hm Hm 0m on Hm mm mm ‘wm mm “cm ,mw cw“ Hm H om om om om cm on om mH, 0m mm mm NH, qH 00, AH. C>q Oxmnwam~d omuH mm,wm mHHHm mm mm Hm Ho omwom wqu mc,H cum: :I' It‘ll-I’IIEIJVV 1:1! "l’l‘l I',.' mammcm : woum Um ucwqcou ; wepm Um mcvucm UMHP wm HCMHCOU UGHH Um HHHmschH p mm HmuOH ucwucou 2 mm Dhsumwm uOEm J UE< HUMHCOU UQUHQUQM Hmucmz ; HE< Huchou I I!" .1" a mwaamH awuHm II.» mo .mo ”Ho .09 ”om .mm ”mm 90m 1" Mmma APPENDIX B Instrumentation B—l Education Scale No. Location Male Group Female Date EDUCATION SCALE Instructions: Given below are 20 statements of opinion about education. We all think differently about schools and education. Here you may express how you think by choosing one of the four possible answers following each statement. These answers indicate how much you agree or disagree with the statement. Please mark your answer by placing a circle around the number in front of the answer you select. You are also asked to indicate for each statement how strongly you feel about your marking of the statement. Please mark this part of your answer in the same way as before, by placing a circle around the number in front of the answer you select. l. The goals of education should be dictated by children's interests and needs as well as by the larger demands of society. 1. Strongly disagree 3. Agree 2. Disagree A. Strongly agree About how strongly do you feel about your answer? 1. Not strongly at all 3. Fairly strongly 2. Not very strongly A. Very strongly 2. No subject is more important than the personalities of the pupils. l. Strongly disagree 3. Agree 2. Disagree 4. Strongly agree About how strongly do you feel about your answer? 1. Not strongly at all 3. Fairly strongly 2. Not very strongly A. Very strongly No. Schools of today are neglecting reading, writing, and arithmetic: the three R's. l. Strongly disagree 3. Agree 2. Disagree A. Strongly agree About how strongly do you feel about your answer? 1. Not strongly at all 3. Fairly strongly 2. Not very strongly A. Very strongly The pupil-teacher relationship is the relationship between a child who needs direction, guidance, and control and a teacher who is an expert supplying direction, guidance, and control. 1. Strongly disagree 3. Agree 2. Disagree A. Strongly agree About how strongly do you feel about your answer? 1. Not strongly at all 3. Fairly strongly 2. Not very strongly A. Very strongly Teachers, like university professors, should have academic freedom——freedom to teach what they think is right and best. 1. Strongly disagree 3. Agree 2. Disagree A. Strongly agree About how strongly do you feel about your answer? 1. Not strongly at all 3. Fairly strongly 2. Not very strongly A. Very strongly No. The backbone of the school curriculum is subject matter; activities are useful mainly to facilitate the learning of subject matter. 1. Strongly disagree 3. Agree 2. Disagree A. Strongly agree About how strongly do you feel about your answer? 1. Not strongly at all 3. Fairly strongly 2. Not very strongly A. Very strongly Teachers should encourage pupils to study and criticize our own and other economic systems and practices. 1. Strongly disagree 3. Agree 2. Disagree A. Strongly agree About how strongly do you feel about your answer? 1. Not strongly at all 3. Fairly strongly 2. Not very strongly A. Very strongly The traditional moral standards of our culture should not just be accepted; they should be examined and tested in solving the present problems of students. 1. Strongly disagree 3. Agree 2. Disagree A. Strongly agree About how strongly do you feel about your answer? 1. Not strongly at all 3. Fairly strongly 2. Not very strongly A. Very strongly No. 10. ll. Learning is experimental; the child should be taught to test alternatives before accepting any of them. 1. Strongly disagree 3. Agree 2. Disagree A. Strongly agree About how strongly do you feel about your answer? 1. Not strongly at all 3. Fairly strongly 2. Not very strongly A. Very strongly The curriculum consists of subject matter to be learned and skills to be acquired. l. Strongly disagree 3. Agree- 2. Disagree A. Strongly agree About how strongly do you feel about your answer? 1. Not strongly at all 3. Fairly strongly 2. Not very strongly A. Very strongly The true view of education is so arranging learning that the child gradually builds up a storehouse of knowledge that he can use in the future. 1. Strongly disagree 3. Agree 2. Disagree A. Strongly agree About how strongly do you feel about your answer? 1. Not strongly at all 3. Fairly strongly 2. Not very strongly A. Very strongly No. l2. 13. 1A. One of the big difficulties with modern schools is that discipline is often sacrificed to the interests of children. 1. Strongly disagree 3. Agree 2. Disagree A. Strongly agree About how strongly do you feel about your answer? 1. Not strongly at all 3. Fairly strongly 2. Not very strongly A. Very strongly The curriculum should be made up of an orderly sequence of subjects that teach to all students the best of our cultural heritage. l. Strongly disagree 3. Agree 2. Disagree A. Strongly agree About how strongly do you feel about your answer? 1. Not strongly at all 3. Fairly strongly 2. Not very strongly A. Very strongly Discipline should be governed by long—range interests and well-established standards. 1. Strongly disagree 3. Agree 2. Disagree A. Strongly agree About how strongly do you feel about your answer? 1. Not strongly at all 3. Fairly strongly 2. Not very strongly A. Very strongly No. 15. l6. l7. Education and educational institutions must be sources of social ideas; education must be a social program undergoing continual reconstruction. l. Strongly disagree 3. Agree 2. Disagree A. Strongly agree About how strongly do you feel about your answer? 1. Not strongly at all 3. Fairly strongly 2. Not very strongly A. Very strongly Right from the very first grade, teachers must teach the child at his own level and not at the level of the grade he is in. l. Strongly disagree 3. Agree 2. Disagree A. Strongly agree About how strongly do you feel about your answer? 1. Not strongly at all 3. Fairly strongly 2. Not very strongly A. Very strongly Children should be allowed more freedom than they usually get in the execution of learning activities. 1. Strongly disagree 3. Agree 2. Disagree A. Strongly agree About how strongly do you feel about your answer? 1. Not strongly at all 3. Fairly strongly 2. Not very strongly A. Very strongly No. l8. 19. Children need and should have more supervision and discipline than they usually get. l. Strongly disagree 3. Agree 2. Disagree A. Strongly agree About how strongly do you feel about your answer? l. Not strongly at all 3. Fairly strongly 2. Not very strongly A. Very strongly Learning is essentially a process of increasing one's store of information about the various fields of knowledge. l. Strongly disagree 3. Agree 2 Disagree A. Strongly agree About how strongly do you feel about your answer? ., l. Not strongly at all 3. Fairly strongly A 2. Not very strongly A. Very strongly In a democracy, teachers should help students understand not only the meaning of democracy but also the meaning of the ideologies of other political systems. 1. Strongly disagree 3. Agree 2. Disagree A. Strongly agree About how strongly do you feel about your answer? l° Not strongly at all 3. Fairly strongly 2. Not very strongly A. Very strongly APPENDIX B Instrumentation B-2 Survey of Interpersonal Values Ill =‘ D— Z I“ U K “I L n. D O n: 0 2 n: 0 2 Date Grade or Occupation— Marital Status_____“i __ School or Firm SURVEY OF INTERPERSONAL VALUES By LEONARD V. GORDON DIRECTIONS In this booklet are statements representing things that people consider to be important to their way of life. These statements are grouped into sets of three. This is what you are asked to do: Examine each set. Within each set, find the one statement of the three which represents what you consider to be most important to you. Blacken the space beside that statement in the column headed M (for most). Next, examine the remaining two statements in the set. Decide which one of these statements represents what you consider to be least important to you. Blacken the space beside that statement in the column headed L (for least). For every set you will mark one statement as representing what is most important to you, one statement as representing what is least important to you, and you will leave one state- ment unmarked. Example M I. To have a hot meal at noon , ._ :::::: — To get a good night’s sleep ,, ,7 . :::::: :::::: To get plenty of fresh air ....................... _ :::::: Suppose that you have examined the three statements in the example, and although all three of the statements may represent things that are important to you, you feel that “To get plenty of fresh air” is the most important to you. You would blacken the space in the column headed M (for most) beside the statement. Notice that this has been done in the example. You would then examine the remaining two statements to decide which of these represents something that is least important to you. Suppose that “To have a hot meal at noon" is the least important to you. You would blacken the space in the column headed L (for least) next to this statement. Notice that this has been done in the example. You would leave the remaining statement unmarked. In some cases it may be difficult to decide which statement to mark. Make the best decision that you can. This is not a test; there are no right or wrong answers. Be sure to mark only one M (most) choice and only one L (least) choice in a set. Do not skip any sets. Answer every set. Turn this booklet over and begin. In A Science Research Associates, Inc. 259 East Erie Street, Chicago, Illinois 60611 A Subsidiary of IBM Copyright 1960 (9 Science Research Assocuates, Inc. Printed in U.S.A. All rights reserved. Reorder No. 7-2760 Mark your answers in column A ——> To be free to do as I choose To have others agree with me To make friends with the unfortunate To be in a position of not having to follow orders To follow rules and regulations closely _ To have people notice what I do To hold an important job or office To tr 3at everyone with extreme kindness T 0 do what is accepted and proper To have people think of me as being important To have complete personal freedom To know that people are on my side To follow social standards of conduct To have people interested in my well being To take the lead in making group decisions To be able to do pretty much as I please To be in charge of some. important project To work for the good of other people To associate with people who are well known To attend strictly to the business at hand To have a great deal of inlluence To be known by name to a great many people To do things for other people To work on my own without direction To follow a strict code of conduct To be in a position of authority To have people around who will encourage me To be friends with the friendless To have people do good turns for me To be known by people who are important To be the one who is in charge To conform strictly to the rules _ To have others show me that. they like me To b: able to live my life exactly as I wish To do my duty To have others treat me with understanding To be. the leader of the group I'm in To have people admire what I do Tr be independent in my work \— To have people act consideratcly toward me To have other people work under my direction To spend my time doing things for others It be able to lead my own life To contribute a great deal to charity To have people make favorable remarks about me \- Turn the page and 9° °"' 6789 1-9876543 APPENDIX B Instrumentation B—3 Personal Questionnaire No. Location Male Group Female Date PERSONAL QUESTIONNAIRE This questionnaire has two parts to it. The first part has to do with your contacts with schools and education, and what you know about education. You may have had considerable contact with schools and education, or you may know a great deal about education. On the other hand, you may have had little or no contact with schools or education and may have never thought much about it at all. For the purposes of this investigation, the answers of all persons are important. If you know very little or nothing about schools or education, your answers are important. If you know a great deal about them, your answers are important. The second part of the questionnairehas to do with personal information about you. Since the questionnaire is completely anonymous, you may answer all of the questions freely without any concern about being identified. It is important to the study to obtain your answer to every question. 165 No. PERSONAL QUESTIONNAIRE Please read each question carefully and do not omit any questions. Please answer by circling the correct answer (or answers) or fill in the answer as requested. 165 SECTION I: Experiences with Schools and Education Below are listed several different kinds of schools or educational divisions. In respect to these various kinds or levels of education, which one have you had the mostgprofessional or work experience with, or do you have the most knowledge about? This does not refer to your own education but to your professional work or related experiences with education. Please answer by circling the number of the group you select. Circle only one. Elementary School (Grade School) . . . . 1 Secondary School (High School) . . . . . 2 College or University . . . . . . . . . 3 Other Types (Please Specify) u I have had no such experience . . . . . 5 Which other groups, in addition to the one indicated above, have you also had some professional or work experience with? Please circle the number of each additional group with which you have had some experience. Elementary School (Grade School) . . . . 1 Secondary School (High School) . . . . . 2 College or University . . . . . . . . . 3 Other Types (Please specify) A I have had no such experience . . . . . 5 2 PQ e following questions have to do with additional kinds contacts you have had with schools or education. ease circle the number of each experience that applies you. Be sure and circle the number of every experience at applies to you. I know little or nothing about education . . . . l I have read or heard a little about schools and education . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 I have studied about schools and education through reading, movies, lectures, or observations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 A neighbor of mine works in education . . . . . A A friend of mine works in education . . . . . . 5 Some relative works in education . . . . . . . . 6 My father, mother, brother, sister, wife (husband) or child works in education in any position, ©rofessional or non—professional) . . . . . . . 7 I have worked in education, as a teacher, administrator, counselor, volunteer, etc. . . . 8 Other (Please specify) 9 on the preceding three questions you indicated at you have had no personal experience with any nd of education, please skip Questions #4 rough #7. If you indicated that you have had perience with one or more of the levels of ucation listed, please answer Questions #U rough #7. 3 PQ >utrmw much have you worked in schools or educational wings? Please circle the number of the one best Egg. ess than three months . . . . . . . . . . . . l etween three and six months . . . . . . . . . 2 etween six months and one year . . . . . . . 3 etween one and three years . . . . . . . . . u etween three and five years . . . . . . . . . 5 etween five and ten years . . . . . . . . . . 6 Ier ten years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 rer fifteen years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 ’ou have ever worked in education, about what percent 'our income was derived from such work? ss than 10% . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . l tween 10 and 25% . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 tween 25 and 50% . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 tween 50 and 75% . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 tween 75 and 100% . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 Ju have ever worked in education, how have you "ally felt about it? lefinitely have disliked it . . . .. . . . l Hive not liked it very much . . . . . . . . 2 ave liked it somewhat . .. . . . . . .. . 3 avee definitely enjoyed it . . . . . . . . . A L4 PQ yourmve ever worked in education for personal gain rexample, for money or some other gain), what artmfities did you have (or do you have) to work at fibing else instead; that is, something else that (or is) acceptable to you as a job? do not know what other jobs were available ’acceptable . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . l >other job was available . . . . . . . . . . 2 her Jobs available were not at all acceptable me . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . her jobs available were not quite acceptable me . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . her Jobs available were fully acceptable to SECTION 2: Personal Information >ld are you? (Write age in box) [:::::1 ‘ were you mainly reared or ”brought up" in your (that is, up to the age of 15 or 16)? ntry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . l ntry Town . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 y . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 y Suburb .. . . .. . . .. . . .. . . .. u have you (or the main bread winner in your family) nnployed during the past three years? ltry . . . . . . .. . . . . . .. . . . . . l Ltry Town . . . .. . . .. . . .. . . .. 2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 Suburb .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . 4 5 PQ rekmve you mainly lived during the past three years? ountry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . l ountry Town . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 ity.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 ity Suburb . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A : is your marital status? eried . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . l ,ngle 2 vorced . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 dowed . . . . . . . . . . A parated . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 many children do you have? (Please write number in se answer either A or B, whichever applies best to present situation. Please read both choices, then er only one. If you are self-supporting, about what is your total yearly income before taxes (or, if you are married, the total yearly income in the family). Include extra income from any regular sources such as dividends, insurance, etc. Please write the total in the box. If you are not self-supporting (or if you arwa married, if your family is not self— SLuoporting), what is the approximate total ynearly income before taxes of the persons wins mainly provide your support (that is, gnarents, relatives or others). Make the best estimate you can. 6 PQ ording to your answer to Question 14, about how does r income compare with that of most people in the al community where you live? uch lower . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . l ower . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 bout the same . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 Lgher . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A zch higher . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 many brothers have you? (Please write number >ox) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0 many sisters have you? (Please write number uox) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .t how does (or did) your father's income are with that of most people in the community in h he lives (or lived)? ch lower . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 wer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 out the same . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 gher . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A :h higher . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 is your religion? :holic .. . . . .. . . .. . . .. . . . . l >testant . .. . . . .. . . . .. . . . .. 2 rish . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 le ’4 .er~ (Please specify) 5 7 PQ >ut how important is your religion to you in your .ly life? I have no religion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 lot very important . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 I‘airly important . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 Very important . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 'ing an "average" work day, you probably have occasion talk and make contact with other adult persons where 1 are employed. Estimate about what percent of these 1tacts and conversations are with people you feel 'sonally close to, whom you consider to be close ,ends, or that are relatives of yours. lone . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . l I do not usually talk or make contact with >ther adult persons where I am employed . . . 2 .ess than 10% . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 Setween 10 and 30% A Setween 30 and 50% 5 ietween 50 and 70% 6 ietween 70 and 90% . . . . . . . 7 [ore than 90% . . . 8 ' important is it to you to work with people you feel 'sonally close to? ot at all important . . . . . . . . . . . . . l 'ot very important . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 ‘airly important . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 'ery important . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A 8 PQ w please consider all of the personal contacts you have th people when you are not at work. Would you estimate out what percent of your contacts apart from working gas are spent with people whom you know because of your 3; that is, those who work at the same job, trade, or afession, or in the same place that you do, or that 1 otherwise contact in the pursuit of your job. Jone . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 Less than 10% . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 3etween 10 and 30% . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 Between 30 and 50% . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . U 3etween 50 and 70% . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 Between 70 and 90% . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 Iore than 90% . . . . . . .'. . . . . . . . . . 7 ch social class do you believe you are in? vower. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . l rower Middle . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 iddle . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 pper Middle . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . u pper . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 pper Upper . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 ch social class do you believe your father is (or in? ower. .. . . .. . . .. . . .. . . .. . . . l ower Middle . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 iddle . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 Dper Middle . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A >per.. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . . 5 >per Upper . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 9 PQ tut how much education do you have? (Circle only one) : years of school or less . . . . . . . . . . . l . years of school or less . . . . . . . . . . . 2 years of school or less years of school or less . . . . . . . . . . A ome college or university 5 college or university degree . . . . . . 6 ome graduate work beyond the first degree 7 ne or more advanced degrees . . . . . . ther (Please note number of years of study or iploma obtained . . . . ut how does your education compare with that of most ple? uch less than most . . . . . . . . . . . . . . l ess than most . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 bout average . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 ore than most . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A uch more than most . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 ut how does (or did) your father's education compare h that of most people in his time? uch less than most . . . . . . . . . . . . . . l ess than most . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 bout average . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 ore than most . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A uch more than most . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 lO PQ t type of living arrangement do you have? ent a house . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . l ent an apartment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 ent a room (meals in a restaurant, etc.) . . 3 urchase room and board (rooming house, etc) A wn an apartment 5 wn a house. 6 ther (Please specify) . . 7 ase answer either A or B. Please read both before wering. If you are renting the house in which you live, about how much money per month do you pay - for rent? (Write amount in box) . . If you gwn the house in which you live (house, apartment, or other), about how much money per month do you believe you could rent the house for? (Write amount in box) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . every community each group (for example, schools, Lnessmen, labor, the local government) has a different to do for the community. In your community, would say that the schools are going an excellent, good, 1, or poor job? How about businessmen? Labor? The 11 government? The doctors and hospitals? The 7ch? (Please circle the appropriate number to Lcate how you feel each job is being done.) Please ver for each group. Elementary Schools Do not know . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 Poor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 Fair . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 Good . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A Excellent . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 itinued from Page 10. ge apply to the following sections, B through E. L Secondary Schools Do not know Poor Fair Good Excellent Universities Do not know Poor Fair . Good Excellent Businessmen Do not know Poor Fair Good Excellent Labor Do not know Poor Fair . . . . . Good Excellent ll PQ The instructions on the previous l2 PQ 1tinued from Page ll. The instructions on the previous ;e apply to the following sections, F through I. L Local Government Do not know . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 Poor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 Fair . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 Good . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A Excellent . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 National Government Do not know . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 Poor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 Fair . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 Good . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A Excellent . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 Health Services (Doctors and Hospitals) Do not know . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 Poor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 Fair . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 Good . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A Excellent . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 . Churches Do not know . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 Poor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 Fair . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 Good . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A Excellent . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 l3 PQ ’ long have you lived in your present community? .ess than 1 year . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 'rom l to 2 years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 'rom 3 to 6 years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 ‘rom 7 to 10 years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A ‘ver 10 years. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 e you changed your residency (from one community to ther) during the past two years? Please circle the rect number. es . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . l o . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 e you changed your employment during the past two rs? Please circle the correct number. es . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . l o . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 ut how many times have you changed residency mmunities) during the past 10 years? Please circle correct number. one . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 Time . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 - 3 Times . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 - 6 Times . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A - 10 Times . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 ver 10 Times . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 lA PQ )ut how many times have you changed jobs during the .t 10 years? Please circle the correct number. [one . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . l . Time . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 — 3 Times - 6 Times A - 10 Times 5 O\ ver 10 Times ase state your occupation. Briefly state the title name of your job and the nature of your work. respect to your religion, about to what extent do observe the rules and regulations of your religion? ase circle the correct number. have no religion . . . . . . . . . . . . . l eldom . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 ometimes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 sually . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A lmost always . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 lth experts say adding certain chemicals to drinking er results in less decay in people's teeth. If you ld add these chemicals to your water with little cost you, would you be willing to have the chemicals added? ase circle the correct number. robably no . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . l 3 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 1ybe . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 as . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A 15 PQ w people feel that in bringing up children, new ways 1 methods should be tried whenever possible. Others 21 that trying out new methods is dangerous. What is tr feeling about the following statement? 2w methods of raising children should be tried out snever possible." Ltrongly disagree . . . . . . . . . . . . . . l 'lightly disagree . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 lightly agree . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 trongly agree . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A ily planning on birth control has been discussed by y people. What is your feeling about a married couple cticing birth control? Do you think they are doing ething good or bad? If you had to decide, would you they are doing wrong, or rather, that they are ng right? t is always right . . . . . . . . . . . . . l t is probably all right . . . . . . . . . . 2 t is usually wrong . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 t is always wrong . . . . . . . . . . . . . A ple have different ideas about what should be done cerning automation and other new ways of doing things. do you feel about the following statement? tomation and similar new procedures should be en- raged (in government, business, and industry) since ntually it creates new jobs and raises the standard living." isagree Strongly . . . . . . . . . . . . . . l isagree Slightly . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 gree Slightly . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 gree Strongly . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A l6 PQ ining a village, city, town, or any governmental ganization is an important job. What is your feeling the following statement? alitical leaders should be changed regularly, even if 2y are doing a good job." Strongly disagree . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 Slightly disagree . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 Slightly agree . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 Strongly agree . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A 1e people believe that more local government income )uld be used for education even if doing so means .sing the amount you pay in taxes. What are your zlings on this? »trongly disagree. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . l ‘lightly disagree . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 lightly agree . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 trongly agree . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A e people believe that more federal government income uld be used for education even if doing so means sing the amount you pay in taxes. What are your lings on this? trongly disagree . . . . . . . . . . . . . . l lightly disagree . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 lightly agree . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 trongly agree . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A l7 PQ Dple have different ideas about planning for education their nation. Which one of the following do you Lieve is the best way? Answer only one. Dlanning for education should be left entirely to the parents . . . . . . . . . . . . . l iducational planning should be primarily directed by the individual city or other local governmental unit . . . . . 2 2ducational planning should be primarily directed by the national government . . . 3 e people are more set in their ways than others. How ld you rate yourself? Please circle the number of r choice. find it very difficult to change. . . . . . 1 find it slightly difficult to change. . . . 2 find it somewhat easy to change my ways . . 3 find it very easy to change my ways . . . . A ind it easier to follow rules than to do things on awn. gree strongly . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . l gree slightly . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 _sagree slightly . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 .sagree strongly . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A .ke the kind of work that lets me do things about the . way from one week to the next. Circle the number our choice. :ree strongly . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . l ree slightly . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 sagree slightly . . . . .. . . . . . . . . 3 sagree strongly . . . . . . .. . . . . . . A 18 PQ good son will try to find work that keeps him near his rents even though it means giving up a good job in other part of the country. Agree strongly . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 Agree slightly . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 Disagree slightly . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 Disagree strongly . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A should be as helpful to people we do not know as are to our friends. Disagree strongly . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . l Disagree slightly . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 Agree slightly . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 Agree strongly . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A inning only makes a person unhappy because your plans "dly ever work out anyway. \gree strongly . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . l igree slightly . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 )isagree slightly . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 )isagree strongly . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A .ch of the following requisites do you consider most >ortant to make your life more happy and satisfactory the future? Circle the single, most important choice. 'othing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . l [ore money . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 [ore friends etter job A ood health . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 ther (please specify) 6 19 P0 hat do you think you can do to make this possible? lease answer one of the two alternatives below. Nothing Please specify APPENDIX B Instrumentation B-A Handicapped Persons Scale Location Group 2 Date HANDICAPPED PERSONS SCALE lotions: Given below are 20 statements of opinion about :ally handicapped persons. We all think differently persons with physical handicaps. Here you may express >u think by choosing one of the four possible answers :ing each statement. These answers indicate how much gree or disagree with the statement. Please mark your 1 by placing a circle around the number in front of lswer you select. ~e also asked to indicate for each statement how strongly eel about your marking of the statement. Please mark )art of your answer in the same way as before, by mg a circle around the number in front of the answer elect. irents of handicapped children should be less strict 1an other parents. Strongly disagree 3. Agree Disagree A. Strongly agree >out how strongly do you feel about your answer? Not strongly at all 3. Fairly strongly Not very strongly A. Very strongly )ysically handicapped persons are just as intelligent s non-handicapped ones. Strongly disagree 3. Agree Disagree A. Strongly agree >out how strongly do you feel about your answer? Not strongly at all 3. Fairly strongly Not very strongly A. Very strongly 2 ATDP andicapped peOple are usually easier to get along with han other people. Strongly disagree 3. Agree Disagree A. Strongly agree bout how strongly do you feel about your answer? Not strongly at all 3. Fairly strongly Not very strongly A. Very strongly . é. ost physically handicapped people feel sorry for , hemselves. Strongly disagree 3. Agree é Disagree A. Strongly agree bout how strongly do you feel about your answer? Not strongly at all 3. Fairly strongly Not very strongly A. Very strongly hysically handicapped people are the same as anyone lse. Strongly disagree 3. Agree Disagree A. Strongly agree bout how strongly do you feel about your answer? Not strongly at all 3. Fairly strongly Not very strongly A. Very strongly 3 ATDP 'here shouldn't be special schools for physically .andicapped children. Strongly disagree 3. Agree Disagree A. Strongly agree .bout how strongly do you feel about your answer? Not strongly at all 3. Fairly strongly Not very strongly A. Very strongly ,t would be best for physically handicapped persons .0 live and work in special communities. Strongly disagree 3. Agree 3. Disagree A. Strongly agree .bout how strongly do you feel about your answer? Not strongly at all 3. Fairly strongly 3. Not very strongly A. Very strongly it is up to the government to take care of physically landicapped persons. Strongly disagree 3. Agree 3. Disagree A. Strongly agree Lbout how strongly do you feel about your answer? Not strongly at all 3. Fairly strongly 2. Not very strongly A. Very strongly u ATDP [ost physically handicapped people worry a great deal. Strongly disagree 3. Agree E. Disagree A. Strongly agree Lbout how strongly do you feel about your answer? Not strongly at all 3. Fairly strongly I. Not very strongly A. Very strongly ’hysically handicapped people should not be expected to leet the same standards as non—handicapped people. Strongly disagree 3. Agree 2. Disagree A. Strongly agree (bout how strongly do you feel about your answer? Not strongly at all 3. Fairly strongly 2. Not very strongly A. Very strongly >hysically handicapped people are as happy as non— landicapped ones. Strongly disagree 3. Agree 2. Disagree A. Strongly agree ibout how strongly do you feel about your answer? LA) L. Not strongly at all Fairly strongly 2. Not very strongly A. Very strongly 5 ATDP relgr physically handicapped people are no harder at; along with than those with minor handicaps. Strongly disagree 3. Agree Disagree A. Strongly agree t how strongly do you feel about your answer? Not strongly at all 3. Fairly strongly Not very strongly A. Very strongly .3 almost impossible for a handicapped person to 1 a normal life. Strongly disagree 3. Agree Disagree A. Strongly agree ut how strongly do you feel about your answer? Not strongly at all 3. Fairly strongly Not very strongly A. Very strongly .should not expect too much from physically handicapped ‘ple. Strongly disagree 3. Agree Disagree A. Strongly agree nu how strongly do you feel about your answer? Not strongly at all 3. Fairly strongly Not very strongly A. Very strongly 6 ATDP ically handicapped people tend to keep to themselves 7 of the time. Strongly disagree 3. Agree Disagree A. Strongly agree it how strongly do you feel about your answer? Not strongly at all 3. Fairly strongly Not very strongly A. Very strongly sically handicapped people are more easily upset n'non-handicapped people. Strongly disagree 3. Agree Disagree A. Strongly agree nut how strongly do you feel about your answer? Not strongly at all 3. Fairly strongly Not very strongly A. Very strongly Isically handicapped persons cannot have a normal :ial life. Strongly disagree 3. Agree Disagree A. Strongly agree out how strongly do you feel about your answer? Not strongly at all 3. Fairly strongly Not very strongly A. Very strongly 7 ATDP Most physically handicapped people feel that they are not as good as other people. 1. Strongly disagree 3. Agree 2. Disagree A. Strongly agree About how strongly do you feel about your answer? L. Not strongly at all 3. Fairly strongly 2. Not very strongly A. Very strongly You have to be careful of what you say when you are with )hysically handicapped people. Strongly disagree 3. Agree Disagree A. Strongly agree .bout how strongly do you feel about your answer? Not strongly at all 3. Fairly strongly Not very strongly A. Very strongly hysically handicapped people are often grouchy. Strongly disagree 3. Agree Disagree A. Strongly agree bout how strongly do you feel about your answer? Not strongly at all 3. Fairly strongly . Not very strongly A. Very strongly APPENDIX B Instrumentation B-5 Definitions of Physical Handicap DEFINITIONS What is meant by "physical handicap." The words "physically handicapped" will be used often in the questions and statements that follow. Where these words are used, they will include persons with any of the following handicaps: l. blind persons--those who have no useful sight at all. 2. partly blind persons——those who have some sight but have trouble reading and getting about even with glasses. 3. deaf persons——those who have no useful hearing at all. A. partly deaf persons-—those who have some hearing but have trouble understanding other persons even with a hearing aid. 5. cripples or amputees——those who have arms or legs that have been paralyzed or removed even though they may be of some use with artificial hands or legs. 6. spastic (or cerebral palsy)——those who have poor control and coordination of their leg, arm, and head movements. Movements are often jerky and speech hard to under— stand. 7. disfigured--those who have been obviously damaged about the face, such as with burns or scars, so that the face has been changed. APPENDIX B Instrumentation B—6 Personal Questionnaire: Handicapped Persons No. Location Male Group Female Date PERSONAL QUESTIONNAIRE: HP This questionnaire deals with your contacts with physically handicapped persons, and what you know about them. Perhaps you have had much contact with physically handicapped persons, or you may have studied about them. On the other hand, you may have had little or no contact with physically handicapped persons, and may have never thought much about them at all. For the purposes of this investigation, the answers of all persons are important, so even if you know very little or nothing about physically handicapped persons your answers are important. 165 No. 1 PERSONAL QUESTIONNAIRE: HP Please read each question carefully and do not omit any questions. Please answer by circling the correct answer (or answers) or fill in the answer as requested. 1. Some physically handicapping conditions are listed below. In respect to these various handicaps, which have you had the most actual experience with. Please answer by circling the number of the group you select. Circle only one. 1. blind 6. disfigured (such as severe burns or 2. partially blind scars on face) 3. deaf (and deaf—mute) 7. spastic (or cerebral palsy) A. partially deaf 8. speech disorders 5. crippled or amputated limbs none 2. Which other groups have you also had some experience with? Please circle the number of each additional group with which you have had some experience. l. blind 6. disfigured (such as severe burns or 2. partially blind scars on face) 3. deaf (and deaf-mute) 7. spastic (or cerebral palsy) A. partially deaf 8. speech disorders 5. crippled or amputated limbs none If on the preceding question you indicated that you have had no personal experience with physically handicapped persons (by circling response No. 9, please skip questions #3 through #9. If you indicated that you have had experience with one or more of the above handicapping conditions, please answer questions #3 through #9. .165 165 2 PQ—HP The following questions have to do with the kinds of experiences you have had with physically handicapped persons. Please circle the number of each experience that applies to you. If more than one experience applies, please circle a number for each experience that applies. I have read or heard a little about physically handicapped persons . I have studied about physically handicapped persons through reading,movies, lectures, or observations . . . . . . . . . . 2 A friend is physically handicapped . . . . . 3 Some relative is physically handicapped . . . A I have personally worked with physically handi- capped persons, as a teacher, counselor, volunteer, child care, etc. . . . . . . . 5 My father, mother, brother, sister, wife (husband) or child is physically handicapped. . 6 I, myself, have a physical handicap. (Briefly, please indicate the kind of handicap) Considering all of the times you have talked, worked, or in some other way had personal contact with physically handicapped persons, about how many times has it been altogether? Please circle the number of the single best answer. Less than 10 occasions . . . . . . . . 1 Between 10 and 50 occasions . . . . . . . 2 Between 50 and 100 occasions . . . . . . . 3 Between 100 and 500 occasions . . . . . . A More than 500 occasions . . . . . . . . 5 165 3 PQ-HP When you have been in contact with physically handicapped people, how easy for you, in general, would it have been to have avoided being with these handicapped persons? I could generally have avoided these personal contacts only at great cost or difficulty . . . l I could generally have avoided these personal contacts only with considerable difficulty. . . 2 I could generally have avoided these personal contacts, but with some inconvenience . . . . 3 I could generally have avoided these personal contacts without any difficulty or inconvenience A During your contact with physically handicapped persons, did you gain materially in any way through these con— tacts, such as being paid, or gaining academic credit, or some such gain? - No, I have never received money, credit, or any other material gain . . . . . Yes, I have been paid for working with handi— capped persons . . . . . . 2 Yes, I have received academic credit or other material gain . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 Yes, I have both been paid and received academic credit. . . . . . . . . . . . . . If you have never been paid for working with handicapped persons go on to the next question. If you have been paid, about what percent of your income was derived from con— tact with physically handicapped persons during the actual period when working with them? Less than 10% . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 Between 10 and 25% . . . . . . . . . . 2 Between 25 and 50%. . . . . . . . . . . 3 Between 50 and 75%. . . . . . . . . . . A More than 75% . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 165 A PQ—HP How have you generally felt about your experiences with handicapped persons? I definitely have disliked it. . . . . . . l I have not liked it very much . . . . . . 2 I have liked it somewhat . . . . . . . . 3 I have definitely enjoyed it . . . . . . . A If you have ever worked with the physically handicapped for personal gain (for example, for money or some other gain), what opportunities did you have (or do you have) to work at something else instead; that is, something else that was (or is) acceptable to you as a job? I do not know what other jobs were available or acceptable . . . . . . . . . . . 1 No other Job was available. . . . . . . . 2 Other Jobs available were not at all acceptable to me. . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 Other jobs available were not quite acceptable to me . . . . . . . . . . . . Other Jbbs available were fully acceptable to me. . . . . . . 5 No. 10. 11. 165 5 PQ—HP The following questions should be answered by all persons, regardless of whether or not they have had any per- sonal contact with persons who are physically handicapped. Have you had any experience with mentally retarded persons? Considering all of the times you have talked, worked, or in some other way had personal contact with mentally retarded persons, about how many times has it been altogether? Please circle the number of the single best answer. Less than 10 occasions . . . . . . . . . 1 Between 10 and 50 occasions . . . . . . . 2 Between 50 and 100 occasions . . . . . . . 3 Between 100 and 500 occasions. . . . . . . A More than 500 occasions. . . . . . . . . 5 Have you had any experience with emotionally ill persons? Considering all of the times you have talked, worked, or in some other way had personal contact with emotionally ill persons, about how many times has it been altogether? Please circle the number of the single best answer. Less than 10 occasions . . . . . . . . . 1 Between 10 and 50 occasions . . . . . . . 2 Between 50 and l00 occasions . . . . . . . 3 Between 100 and 500 occasions . . . . . . A More than 500 occasions. . . . . . . . . 5 APPENDIX B Instrumentation Rationale and Procedures for Producing Item "Directionality" in the Following Scales 1. Handicapped Persons Scale Hearing Handicapped Persons Scale Blind Persons Scale Deaf Persons Scale John E. Jordan John E. Felty September 30, I965 The rationale for reversing content scoring on the H—P scale items 2, 5, 6, ll, 12. a. All of the other items of the scale state either a difference between HP's and others, or a negative characteristic——therefore, agreement with these items indicates less acceptance (according to Yuker—Block). b. The 5 items mentioned above are statements of similarity between HP's and others, therefore agreement indicates more acceptance. In order to make the ”direction” of acceptance the same for all items, the scoring was reversed on these 5, so that people who disagreed with statements of similarity would get a higher score. c. After this reversal, high scores on each of the items is supposed to indicate less acceptance. d. In the dichotomization procedure (Felty, by hand) there was a final reversal of scoring on all items in order to make a high (I) score be favorable, and a low (0) score unfavorable for each item. It is, of course, not necessary to make this final step, but it is more convenient for my thinking, and a more usual procedure, to make more favorable scores higher. For Dickie and Weir, the positively-stated items are not all precise statements of similarity, but the items can be divided into those in which agreement with the item indicates unfavorable attitudes, and those in which agreement indicates favorable attitudes. This is by inspection, of course, and it is possible that empirical test could indicate that a given item was placed in the wrong category. Such an item would probably scale negatively with the others, and scoring would have to be reversed for this item in computing total scores for each subject. This question is independent of the question of whether a high total score indicates favorable or unfavorable attitudes, which is a question of item content. If you want a high total score to indicate favorable attitudes, (see l,d above), one way would be to follow Felty's procedure on the H—P scale (as outlined above and in the code book). However, if the computer dichotomization is used, it will be necessary to reverse the total scores after the dichotomized total scores have been computed for each person for scale items (this is a hand procedure based on new dichotomized totals——either machine or hand—dichotomized—-and takes place as the last two operations in the ”scale and intensity analysis" subsection of the "flow and control chart." That is, after scaling, even by computer, someone still has to figure out the new total scores for each respondent for each "scale," enter these into unused columns of the data sheet, and then have them punched into Deck 1 for further analysis.) If after dichotomization, total scores ranged from O to g9 (possible with 20 dichotomized statemEnts scored 0, I) and high scores indicate unfavorable attitudes, the scoring can be reversed by making up an equivalence table to transpose the scores; e.g., Total Scores Dichotomized Reversed "Unfavorable" ”Favorable” 2O 0 19 l 18 2 l7 3 etc. etc Another way of doing this would avoid the necessity of making two sets of reversals; i.e., instead of re— versing the similarity—type items (see above, l,b), reverse the others. This means many more items have to be reversed initially in the scoring but that no further reversal is necessary since a high score for each item would then presumedly indicate a favorable or accepting response. Although this would be more time— consuming for coder, it would save time later and is not as complicated. (Note: it will still be necessary to obtain new scale item total scores by a hand pro- cedure after dichotomization and scaling as indicated on p. For the Blind Persons Scale (Dickie) a high score (strong agreement) indicates favorable attitude for items 2, 10, 13, 1A, l7, l9. For the Hearing Handicapped Persons Scale (Weir) a high score (strong agreement) indicates favorable attitude for items 1, 7, 10, 15. If the scores are reversed for these items, a high total score will indicate unfavorable or unaccepting attitudes, and a further reversal following dichotomization would be advisable (as on pages 1 and 2). If scores are reversed for all other items, a high total score will _indicate favorable or accepting attitudes, and no further reversal will be necessary. For Sinha (Emotionally Disturbed Persons Scale — EDP) the procedures follow exactly those of Felty for the HP scale. (See pages l-lO of code book number 865). Following is a summary of the above procedures to be used by all studies: a. in initial scoring, reverse favorably stated items (usual procedure) i.e., those items mentioned specifically by number. b. submit for dichotomization and scale analysis by computer c. for scale items obtain new total scores for each respondent d. convert these total scores by inverting the order (e.g., bottom of page 2L High score now indicates favorable attitude e. enter scale scores (converted) onto data sheets in open columns f. have scale scores punched into Deck 2 at data processing g. use new scale score totals in subsequent analyses (Anova, MRA, etc.) h. since the intensity items are all clearly directional, from low to high intensity, there would be no reason for making any reversals. I See page A 1As mentioned before, a possible complication can arise with items which scale negatively with the other items in the Lingoes procedure. This would seem to indicate that the prejudgment about whether the item was "favorable" or "unfavorable" was in error, and would require a reversal of scoring for this item in obtaining a total scale score. That is, all "0's" would be scored as "l's" and vice versa (as Lingoes states it, the item has been "reflected"). John E. Jordan John E. Felty APPENDIX C Variables, Administration Procedures, and Code Forms C-l Basic Variables of the Study 565 BASIC VARIABLES - INTERNATIONAL Attitudes Toward Education 1 Traditional attitudes, Items 3, 4, 6, 10, ll, 12, l3, l4, l8, l9 - Content Raw Score total Adjusted total score (dichotomized) 2 Traditional attitudes, Items 3, 4, 6, 10, ll, 12, l3, l4, l8, l9 - Intensity Raw Score total Adjusted total score (dichotomized) 3 Progressive attitudes, Items 1, 2, 5, 7, 8, 9, 15, l6, 17, 20 - Content Raw Score total Adjusted total score (dichotomized) 4 Progressive attitudes, Items 1, 2, 5, 7, 8, 9, 15, l6, 17, 20 - lgtensity Raw Score total Adjusted total score (dichotomized) Contact with Education (Q'aire) 1 Levels of education experienced Q'aire, Item 1 (primary contact) Q'aire, Item 2 (additional contacts - no. kinds of) 2 Varieties of contact with education Q’aire, Item 3 3 Amount of contact (work) with education Q'aire, Item 4 4 Personal gain through working in education Q'aire, Item 5 (% of income) 5 Alternative opportunities available Q'aire, Item 7 (refers to other possible employment) 6 Enjoyment of contact Q'aire, Item 6 Aid to Educatiop - Financial (Q'aire) Item 44 (local) Item 45 (federal or national) D. F. G. 565 2 BASIC VARIABLES f INTERNATIONAL Education Planning (Q'aire) Item 46 Interpersonal Values - Gordon Scale 1 S scores: Support 2 C scores: Conformity 3 R scores: Recognition (comparative score) 4 I scores: Independence 5 B scores: Benevolence (asset score) 6 L scores: Leadership (Comparative score) Demographic, S.E.S., Other Control Data (All from Q'aire) 1 Education (self—amount), Item 26 2 Occupation (specific), Item 37 3 Income and rental (S. E. Class) Item 14 (income - yearly, self—family) Item 30 (rental) 4 Age: Item 8 5 Sex: Front sheet of questionnaire 6 Marital status: Item 12 7 Number of children: Item 13 8 Size of family: Item 16 (brothers — do not use) Item 17 (sisters - do not use) Items 16 and 17 (siblings) 9 Housing (type of), Item 29 10 Mobility: Residency, Items 32, 33 and 35 Card 4, Col. 25 Occupational, Items 34 and 36 11 Rural-Urban Status: Items 9, 10 and 11 12 Employment status - current: Item 37 Satisfaction with institutions (Q'aire) l Satisfaction with elementary schools Item 3l-A 2 Satisfaction with secondary schools Item 31—B 3 Satisfaction with universities Item 31-C 565 3 BASIC VARIABLES - INTERNATIONAL 4 Satisfaction with businessmen Item 31-D 5 Satisfaction with labor Item 31—E 6 Satisfaction with local government Item 3l—F 7 Satisfaction with national government Item 3l—G 8 Satisfaction with health services Item 31-H 9 Satisfaction with churches Item 31-I Self-Statements (Q'aire) Comparative income status - self: Item 15 Comparative income - father: Item 18 Comparative social class - self: Item 24 Comparative social class — father: Item 25 Comparative education — self: Item 27 Comparative education - father: Item 28 mmwar—I Religiousity Questionnaire (Q'aire) 1 Religious affiliation: Item 19 2 Perceived importance: Item 20 3 Perceived norm conformity: Item 38 Personalism Questionnaire (Q'aire) 1 Orientation toward job personalism a Statement of extent of personalism on job: Item 21 b Perceived importance of personal relations: Item 22 2 Diffusion of personal relationships Percent of job-social overlap: Item 23 3 Familialism: Item 50, (Son's work) 4 Other orientation: Altruism: Item 51 Attitudes Toward Change (Q'aire) 1 Health practices (water): Item 29 2 Child-rearing practices: Item 40 3 Birth control practices: Item 41 M. 565 4 BASIC VARIABLES - INTERNATIONAL 4 Political leadership change: Item 43 5 Automation: Item 42 6 Self Conception Item 47 (Perceived self-rigidity) Item 48 (Adherence to rules) Item 49 (Job regularity and rigidity) 7 Future orientation Item 52 (Planning - personal) Item 53 (Requisites for happiness) Item 54 (Achievement of happiness) Attitudes Toward Handicapped Persons 1 Handicapped Persons Scale, Items 1—20 — Content Raw Score total Adjusted total score (dichotomized) 2 Handicapped Persons Scale, Items 1—20 — Intensity Raw Score total Adjusted total score (dichotomized) Contact with Handicapped Persons 1 Kinds of handicapped persons experienced P.Q.-HP, Item 1 (most contact) P.Q.—HP, Item 2 (additional contacts - no. of) 2 Varieties of relationship with handicapped P.Q.—HP, Item 3 3 Frequency of contact with physically handicapped P.Q.-HP, Item 4 4 Ease of avoidance of contacts with handicapped P.Q.-HP, Item 5 5 Personal gain through working with handicapped persons P.Q.-HP, Item 6 (experienced gain) P.Q.-HP, Item 7 (% of income) 6 Alternative opportunities available P.Q.-HP, Item 9 (refers to other possible employment) 7 Enjoyment of contact with physically handicapped P.Q.-HP, Item 8 8 Frequency of contact with mentally retarded persons P.Q.-HP, Item 10 9 Frequency of contact with emotionally disabled persons P.Q.-HP, Item 11 APPENDIX C Variables, Administration Procedures, and Code Forms C—2 Administration Procedures PROCEDURES FOR ADMINISTRATION: CROSS—CULTURAL ATTITUDE STUDY 'HYI' *1 I John E.IJordan Michigan State University East Lansing, Michigan December, 1964 The specific instructions will vary in detail from nation to nation. However, the follow1ng outline is presented on the basis of my experience thus far with the questionnaires and attitude scales. 1. Arrange for a meeting room and/or place. The respond— ents should have a table (or similar surface) on which to write and ample room between respondents (in group administration) to minimize influencing each other. After introducing oneself (or being introduced), state briefly the following kind of rationale for the study: "This is an international study of attitudes toward education; part of it deals with education in gen— eral and part of it deals with the education of handicapped persons. Each part is clearly stated. Remember, in a study like this, there are no right or wrong answers to the attitude questions. We want you to anSWer how you feel about certain things. Therefore, y§_§o not want your name on the question- naire. Please answer quickly, with your first idea first, and go not spend a lot of time thinking about each item. Remember this is an international study and all the people in the other countries will be answering in the same manner. If there is no answer that exactly fits what you would like to answer, please choose the alternative nearest to your desired answer. Please answer all items. 3. If you have any questions as you proceed, please raise your hand and we will come to you and dis- cuss it individually so as not to disturb the other people. When we have all completed the questionnaires, I will be glad to discuss the study in more detail if you desire. Thank you very much for taking time to cooperate in the study.” Distribute the page of definitions. "We will now distribute to you a page of definitions of certain handicapping conditions which will be referred to in some of the questionnaires. We will all take a few minutes to read these so we will all have the same idea about the same words. You may refer to these later if you so desire. Also, we want you to put a number in the upper left hand corner of the page like this (show them what you mean). Since we do not want you to put your name on the questionnaire, you will use this num- ber. In this manner no one will know your answers. We must have your number and group (special educa- tion, teacher, business, etc.) on each question— naire so we can put all the answers of one person together at the end." Here the respondents "number off" and see that no two persons have the same number. Remember if two people in a group have the same number, the data cannot be analyzed. Distribute the attitude scales and questionnaires in the following order. In group administration be sure to pass out only one instrument at a time. Order of Administration of Instruments l. Page of definitions 2. Education Scale 3. Survey of Interpersonal Values 4. Personal Questionnaire 5. Handicapped Persons Scale 6. Personal Questionnaire: HP Distribute the Education Scale. Have the respondent fill out data on the top of scale: (1) Number, (2) Sex, (3) Location, (4) Group, and (5) Date. Either instruct the respondents to read silently the instructions or the administrator may read them to the group; this is left to each country to do in the manner they consider most appropriate. Our experience shows that if the instruc- tions are well understood on this first instrument, the other instruments are easily understood. When the respondents have completed the Education Scale, collect them and distribute the next one as indicated above in Point Number Four. Proceed in a similar manner until all five instruments have been completed. If situations arise where the instruments are left with the respondent (i.e., either in an office or to take home), try to impress on them the order in which to take them (e.g., number them 1—2-3—4-5 in the upper right hand corner) and not to look at them ahead of time. Do not leave instruments with respondents except when absolutely necessary and in such cases mark on them later to indicate they were given in this manner. Respondent identification. See discussion under Points Numbered 3 and 6 above. Remember we need a minimum of 50 persons per each of the four groups: (1) special educa— tion, (2) teacher—primary and secondary, (3) workers— blue and white collar, and (4) employers—business, com- merce, industry. We would prefer to have more so secure as many as you can conveniently locate up to 100 per group. Each of these respondents must fill out all five instru— ments, using the §§m§_resp9pgent number and group. If either the respondent number or group is omitted or dupli— cated, the data cannot be collated for data analysis! When you have secured enough completed sets of instruments for a “usual size” mailing package in your country, please mail to me rather than waiting to send all of them at one time. In this manner I can have the data scored and tabu— lated for computer processing in an orderly manner. If I receive all the data at one time, it will be difficult to hire assistants here at the university on any regular basis. Each time you mail a package of data, you should send me a letter describing it so I can keep records. APPENDIX C Variables, Administration Procedures, and Code Forms C—3 Code Book CODE BOOK CROSS CULTURAL ATTITUDES TOWARD EDUCATION: THEIR NATURE AND DETERMINANTS INTERNATIONAL STJDY* John E. Jordan College of Education Michigan State University August 25, 1965 INSTRUCTIONS FOR THE USE OF THIS CODE BOOK 1. Code 9 or 99 will always mean Not Applicable or Nothing, except as noted. 2. Code i for a one column no response, or —9 for a two column no response, or —99 for a three column no response will mean there was No Information or Respondent did not answer. 3. In each case in the following pages the column to the left con- tains the column number of the IBM card; the second column con— tains the question number from the questionnaire; the third column (item detail) contains an abbreviated form of the item; and the fourth column contains the code within each column df the IBM card with an explanation of the code. The fifth colL umn (recode) is reserved to later indicate recoding after the item count is finished; i.e., after all data is key punched, run the data through the M.S.U. computer (ACT II, FCC, and/or Single-Column Frequency Distributions) to determine the pat- terns of response alternatives to a question. This will indi— cate if regrouping, etc., need to be considered for the item. 4. Coder instructions always follow a line across the page and are clearly indicated. 5. In some cases when codes are eguat to others already used, they are not repeated each time, but reference is made to a previous czode or the immediately previous code with ”same”. 6. 'Under Code, the first number is the questionnaire question alternative and the second number is the actual code which is errtered on the data sheets (i.e., 1—4; one i is the question— na.ire question alternative and g'is the code). * fifiyis code book is specifically for the United States sample thru Caini 4. Limited modifications and/or additions are made in certain natitnas and/or states. Special instructions are appended £93 each study before scoring that sample. 865 » Column—Ques. Item Detail gpgg 1,2,3 Face Sheet Nation and UNITED Location 001 002 003 004 005 006 007 008 009 010 011 012 013 Page 1-1 Recode* STATES Mich., Mt. Pleasant Mich., Cadillac Mich., Ann Arbor Mich., Port Huron Mich., Lansing Mich., Walden Woods Mich., Flint Mich., Misc., Ka1., Mid. Kansas, Wichita Ohio, Tiffin West Virginia Kentucky Georgia LATIN AMERICA 101 102 103 104 105 106 EUROPE 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 ASIA 301 302 303' 304- AFRICA 865 Costa Rica Colombia Peru Argentina Mexico Surinam England Holland Belgium France Yugoslavia Denmark Germany Israel Japan India Formosa Kenya Rhodesia South Africa CARD 1 Page 1—2 Column-Ques. Item Detail Code Recode* 4,5 Face Sheet Group Number 01 — 99 (adminis- Check Special tration) Instructions 6,7 Face Sheet Respondent Ol — 99 Number 8 Face Sheet Sex of 1 — Masculine Respondent 2 — Feminine 9 (Code Occupational l — Code 01 — O9, Rehab., derived Recode Spec. Ed. from finterest 2 — Code 10 — 19, Education Col's group) 3 — Code 20 — 45, Profes— '22, 23, sional, Business, Medical Card 1) 4 - Code 50 — 86, White Col— lar, Blue Collar, Laborer 10 New Occupational 1 — Teacher, Educable Retarded, Redode (Type A and Type C) (Spec. Ed., 2 — Teacher, Trainable Retarded Rehab. SER)* (Type B) 3 — Teacher, Hearing 4 — Teacher, Vision 5 — Speech Correction 6 — Visiting Teacher (Also Social Worker) 7 — Diagnostician 8 — Other (Professors, Supts., Administrators, etc.) + — Non—teacher 11,12 Face Sheet Deck or Card 01 Number 13,14 Face Sheet Project LATIN AMERICA Director, 01 Felty: Costa Rica location (total — pilot study) and con— 02 Friesen: Peru and tent area Colombia (total) 03 Taylor: Costa Rica * If respondent is not an SER (country StUdY) ”educational person”, he received a i, 865 CARD 1 Page 1-3 Column-Ques. Item Detail Code Recode* 13,14 Face Sheet UNITED STATES (continued) 31 Sinha: Ohio (parents— M. R., emot. dist. and normal) 32 Dickie: Kansas (total and blind scale) 33 Weir: Kansas (total and deaf scale) 34 Mader: Michigan (spec— ial educ. - intra) 35 Jordan: Michigan — Mt. Pleasant (Spec. Ed.) ASIA 51 Cessna: Japan (total plus university stu— dents and government employees) EUROPE 71 Boric: Yugoslavia (total) 72 Fabia: France (total) 73 Hansen: Denmark (total) 74 Loring: England (total) 75 Robaye: Belgium (total) 76 Schweizer: Netherlands (total) 77 Kreider: Europe (total) 15,16 Face Sheet Day of Admin— 01 to 31 istration (Use the actual day) 17,18 Face Sheet Month of 01 - January Adminis- 02 - February tration 03 — March 865 CARD 1 Page 1-4 Column—Ques. Item Detail Code Recode* 17,18 Face Sheet 10 - October (continued) 11 - November 12 - December 19,20 Face Sheet Year of 64 — 1964 Adminis— 65 - 1965 tration 66 - 1966 70 - 1970 21 Face Sheet Type of 1 - Group Adminis— 2 — Self-administered stration 3 - Interview, individual + ~ No information 22,23 37 Q'aire Occupation (91 - 09) Rehab. & Spec. Ed. of R85p0n- 01 _ A11 administrative d t* _ en. (Spe persons, public and c1fic) . private schools or agencies 02 - Teachers, elem. and secondary academic and vocational 03 — School Special Services (Psych., soc. work, speech, etc.) 04 — University teachers, professors, researchers, specialists, etc. 05 — Medical (Doctors, Den— tists, etc.) 06 - Other professional (Psych., Soc. worker, Speech, etc., not pri— marily in public or private schools) 07 — Para-medical (Nurse, 0.T., R.T., P.T., ect.) 08 — Unskilled Help (Hospital aide, janitor, any non— prof., non—tech. role) * See page 4‘2 O9 - Other 865 Column-Ques. 22,23 37 Q'aire (continued) *See page 4—2 865 Item Detail Occupation of Respon— dent* (Spe- cific) $1212 Page 1—5 Recode* (10 — 19) Educational personnel other than Rehab. and Spec. Ed. 10 — Elementary teachers, (include elem. v.p.'s, counselors, etc.) 11 — Secondary teachers 12 — Guidance and personnel workers (psych., social work, counselor if not elementary) 13 — Other special services (Speech, spec. teacher, audiometric, etc.) 14 — Administrative (elem., sec., central office adm., including elem. principal, sec. v.p. and princ., etc., in non-teach.) 15 — University teachers, professors, researchers, specialists, etc. 16 - 19 Open (20 - 29) Medical, other than Rehab. and Spec. Ed. 20 - General practitioners 21 — Surgeons 22 — Psychiatrists or psycho- analysts 23 - Dentists 24 - All other medical spec— ialties 25 - Open 26 — Tech. and Prof.: Nurse, O.T., P.T., R.T., Audio, etc. 27 — Non—tech. and non—prof.: aide, janitor, attendant, etc. 28 — 29 Open Column-Ques. 22,23 37 Q'aire (continued) * See page 4-2 865 Item Detail Occupation of Respon- dent* (Spe- cific) Page 1—6 Code Recode* (30 - 39) Professional and Technical, not Spec. Ed. and Rehab. or Medical or Educ. 3O — Engineers (degrees): civil, electrical, mechanical, etc. 31 - Lawyers, attorneys, public accountants 32 - Ministers, clergymen 33 - Musicians 34 — Clinical psychologist 35 — Researchers, scientists, not primarily in education 36 - Social workers, etc. 37 - 39 Other (40 — 45) Business and Industry, Managers, officials, prop.'s 40 - Gov't and other bureau— cratic officials: public administrators and offi— cers, union officials, stage inspectors, public utility, telephone offic- ials, etc. 41 — Manufacturing, industrial officials, exec's, etc. 42 — Non-mfg., service, indus- try: bankers, brokers, insurance, real estate 43 - Retail trades: food, clothing, furniture, gaso- line, vehicle sales, etc. 44 — General: i.e., manager executive, etc., no other qualifications 45 — Open (46 - 49) Farm owners, operators and managers of large farms, e.gJ, heavy equipment and/or many empl. Column—Ques. 22,23 37 Q'aire (continued) *See page 4—2 865 CARD 1 Item Detail Occupation of Respon- dent* (Spe- cific) Page 1-7 Code Recode* 46 - Farm owner 47 - Farm operator (renter) 48 - Farm manager 49 — Open (50 - 59) White Collar: office, clerical, etc. 50 51 52 54 (60 Clerical and similar: tellers, bookkeepers, cashiers, secretaries, shipping clerks, attend— ants, telephone operators, library asst's, mail clerks and carriers, file clerks, etc. Sales workers: advertising, sales clerks, all mfg., wholesale, retail and other Small shopkeeper or dealer 59 Open 69) Blue Collar: crafts— men, foremen, and kindred work 60 61 62 63 64 65 Craftsmen: carpenters, bakers, electricians, plumbers, machinists, tailors, toolmakers, photographers, etc. Foremen: all construc— tion, mfg., transporta— tion and communication, and other industries Servicemen: telegraph, telephone, etc. Mechanics and repairmen Shoemakers, roofers, painters, and plasterers Merchant marine, (non—military) sailors Column-Ques. Item Detail 22,23 37 Q'aire (continued) Occupation 66 of Respon— dent* (Spe— cific) 67 68 (70 Household workers) Co_de Page 1—8 Recode* Bus and cab drivers, motormen, deliverymen, chauffeurs, truck and tractor drivers Operatives of all other mech. equipment (machine, vehicle, misc. mfg.) 69 Open 74) Serivce and Private 7O 71 72 73 74 (75 75 76 77 78 79 (80 Private household: laun— dress, housekeeper, cook Firemen and policemen, sheriffs, and baliffs Attendents, professional and personal (valet, mas— seur, misc. mfg.) Misc. attendents and services: hospital attendents, bootblacks, cooks Open 79) Military Personnel Ranking officers, all services (Navy Commander and up, Army and Marines Colonel and up) Junior Officers, Army and Air Junior Officers, Marines Non—commissioned personnel, Army and Air Non—commissioned personnel, Navy and Marines Navy and 86) Laborers * See page 4-2 865 CARD 1 Page 1-9 Column-Ques. Item Detail Code Recode* 22,23 37 Q'aire Occupation 80 - Small farm owners, renters, (continued) of Respon- and farm laborers (small dent* (Spe- farm has no heavy equipment, cific) provides minimal income and substance, employs 3 or less persons, full or part time, except for migrant help) 81 - Non-mfg., non-industrial: fishermen, hunters, lumber- men, miners, gardeners, teamsters, garage laborers, etc. 82 - Manufacturing of durable goods: wood, clay, stone (stonecutter), metal, glass plastic, machinery, of all kinds 83 — Mfg. of non-durable goods: food (bakery, beverages, etc.). tobacco, clothing, cloth, paper, printing, chemicals, rubber, leather, etc. 84 - Non-mfg. industries: rail- road, construction, trans— portation, workers, etc. 85 - 86 Open (87) No employment 87 - Persons that haven't worked, such as housewives, students or others who have never had a regular occupation * Instructions for Coder: OCCUPATIONS, COLUMNS 22-23. Coding information is derived from two sources: 1. Occupational description of groups as listed by the administrator. 2. Personal statements by the respondents in Question 37 of the questionnaire. Question 37 is the primary source of information. If vague or incomplete, score entirely from notes of administrator. * See page 4—2 865 CARD 1 Page 1-10 Column-Ques. Item Detail Code Recode* 24 37 Q'aire Current 1 - Employed or self-employed Employment 2 - Retired Status* 3 — Temporarily out of work 4 — Housewife, but formerly employed 5 - Unable to work (other than retired or housewife) but formerly employed 6 - Student or persons trained for employment but not work- ing for various reasons 25 1 thru All ques- l - 1, strongly disagree thru 20 §:g tions in 2 - 2, disagree 44 Content** handicap— 3 - 3, agree ped per- 4 — 4, strongly agree sons scale are to be scored from ggy.data. See instruc- tions below. * Instructions for Coder: EMPLOYMENT STATUS, COLUMN 24. Code from questionnaire Question 31 if person clearly states employ- ment status. If no employment stated, and no indication with certainty from the administrator, score :. ** Instructions for Coder: HANDICAPPED PERSONS SCALE SCORING, COLUMNS 25-44. NOTE: CERTAIN STEPS AND PROCEDURES ARE THE SAME FOR THE EDUCATION SCALE AS FOR THE HANDICAPPED PERSONS SCALE. THESE PROCE- DURES WILL BE WRITTEN IN CAPITAL LETTERS. The content part of the question is the first half of the question (i.e., the first score). 1. Reverse the content response numbering for the Handicapped Persons Scale (NOT the intensity response number) for items 2, 5, g, llj and 12, as follows: The number of response on data sheets. l.is changed to g and scored directly 2. (.3. :3. .2. 51. .1. 865 CARD 1 Page 1—11 Column-Ques. Item Detail Code Recode* 2. Special instructions for Ng RESPONSE. Count the number of NO RESPONSE items, if more than §_occur, do not score respondent for this scale. If there are_§ 93 less in total, and 3'gg less in sequence, the NO RESPONSE statement is to be scored either 1_or 2_by the random procedure of coin flipping. If a head is obtained, the sCOre assigned will be 1. If a tail is obtained, the score assigned will be 3, 3. TOTAL THE RAW SCORES FOR EACH RESPONDENT AND WRITE THE TOTALS ON THE TRANSCRIPTION DATA SHEET DIRECTLY BELOW THE COLUMN TOTALED.* 4. INTENSITY RAW SCORES FOR EACH STATEMENT ARE TO BE SCORED ON THE DATA SHEET EXACTLY AS THEY APPEAR ON THE QUESTIONNAIRE: i.e., IF.1 IS CIRCLED IN THE INTENSITY SECTION OF QUESTION ONE, SCORE IT AS 1_ON THE CORRESPONDING SECTION OF THE TRANSCRIPTION SHEET. 5. Dichiomization Procedures (i.e., for MSA - applied to all scales). a) Using Egg data scores (i.e., the actual number circled by the respondent) via the Hafterson QUE Program on the M.S.U. CDC 3600, determine the point gf_least error for each item on the content scales. b) Using this point (i.e., between 1_and gJ or between g_and 3_or between 3 and g) rescggg the items, via recode cards, as Q, 1 via the Hafterson MSA Program on the M.S.U. CDC 3600 to determine which items form 2 scale. Run at both .01 and .05 level. c) For Handicapped Persons ScaleA items are scored 9 above the column break, 1 below the column break. For edugation Scale scoring, the reverse is true: items are scored 1 above the column break, 9 below the column break. d) Using the same procedure in point 5_a above, determine the CUT points for the intensity component 9; each item. * By this procedure, the possible range of scores is from Q_to 80. Doubling the obtained score will approximate scores obtained by the method of Yuker, g3 g1,, (1960, p. 10) 1 HP scale, blind scale, and deaf scale. 865 CARD 1 Page 1—12 Column-Ques. Item Detail Code Recode* 5. e) Enter the MSA Program with the CUT points for the intensity component and scale as in Point No. 5-b for content. f) Adjusted total scores f9; content gpg intensity. Sum the didhfibmized content and intensity scores (i.e., Q, 1) obtained by the above procedure for each respondent on these items that scaled for both content and intensity. Maximum score will be l E Egg number pf Egg same items that scaled pp both content and intensity. 9) Zero Point. Using only the items that scaled for both con— tent and intensity, plot and determine the "zero point" for each cultural group (or other desired groupings) via the method detailed on pages 221-234 by Guttman (1950). 6. Dichotomization Procedure (alternative to no. 5 above). Attempt to program the CUT Program into the MSA so that both procedures under 5-a and b are conducted jointly. 45 1 thru Handicapped l - 1, not strongly at all thru 20 H-P Persons 2 — 2, not very strongly 64 Intensity* Scale 3 — 3, fairly strongly Intensity 4 - 4, very strongly 1. Except for NO RESPONSE, intensity scores are to be determined as noted in the preceding section regarding Content. 2. Those scales which are rejected because of an excess of NO RESPONSE items in respect to content will of course also be rejected for intensity. Intensity questions which are unscored, but which occur when the content part of the ques- tion is scored, will be scored as follows: If content score is l_or 3, score intensity 3. If content score is 2 or 3, score intensity just below the mean intensity score for that item; i.e. mean intensity of the group. * Instructions for Coder: HANDICAPPED PERSONS SCALE, INTENSITY, COLUMNS 45-64. See instructions 1 and 2 above and 3 on the next page. 865 CARD 1 Page 1-13 Column-Ques. Item Detail Code Recode* 3. Intensity questions which are unscored, and which occur when the content part of the question is also unscored, will be scored at the highest point below the respondent's own median on the other intensity questions in the questionnaire; i.e., if respondent generally scored intensity questions either 3 or_3, so that the median was in between 3 and 3, score NO RESPONSE 2, and so forth. 65 3,4,6, Education 1 - 1, strongly disagree thru 10,11 Scale Tradi— 2 - 2, disagree 74 12,13 tional, gpp— 3 - 3, agree 14,18 tent Respon- 4 - 4, strongly agree 19* §2§ ** 1. Items are to be scored on the transcription sheet as circled by the respondent. 2. Follow the procedures outlined in caps on Pages 1-10, 1-11, and 1—12 for the Handicapped Persons Scale. Be sure to score only those items indicated above as applying to the education traditional scale, content. * The traditional and the progressive scales are both in the Kerlinger education scale but the responses are scored separ— ately on the transcription sheet. ** Instructions for Coder: EDUCATION SCALE, TRADITIONAL, CONTENT, COLUMNS 65-74. See instructions 1 and 2 on page 1—13. 865 Column:Ques. 1,2,3 10 11,12 13,14 15,16 17,18 19,20 21 865 Face Face Face Face Sheet Sheet Sheet Sheet 37 Q'aire 37 Q Face Face Face Face Face Face 'aire Sheet Sheet Sheet Sheet Sheet Sheet Item Detail Nation and Location Group Number Respondent Number Sex of Respondent Occupational Recode (Interest group) Occupational Recode (Spec. Ed.- Rehab. SER) Deck or Card Number Project Director Day of Adminis- tration Month of Adminis- tration Year of Adminis« tration Type of Adminis— tration Page 2-1 Code Recode* Same as Card 1, page 1—1 01 - 99 01 — 99 Same as Card 1, page 1-2 Same as Card 1, page 1-2 Same as Card 1, page 1—2 02 Same as Card 1, pages 1-2 and 1-3 01—31 01-12 Same as Card 1, page 1-4 Same as Card 1, page 1—4 CARD 2 Page 2-2 Column—Ques. Item Detail Code Recode* 22,23 Face Sheet Occupation Same as Card 1, pages of Respond- 1-4 through 1-9 ent 24 Face Sheet Current Same as Card 1, page 1-10 Employment Status 25 3,4,6,10, Education 1 - 1, not strongly at all thru 11,12,13, Scale, Tra- 2 - 2, not very strongly 34 14,18,19 ditional, 3 — 3, fairly strongly Intensity 4 — 4, very strongly Responses* 35 l,2,5,7, Education 1 - 1, strongly disagree thru 8,9,15, Scale, 3397 2 — 2, disagree 44 16,17,20 gressive, 3 — 3, agree Content 4 - 4, strongly agree Responses** * gpgtructions for coder: EDUCATIQN SCALE, TRADITIONAL, INTENe SITY, COLUMNS 24—33. Intensity questions are scored as indica- ted in caps on pages 1—11, 1-12 and 1-13 and as noted before, Handicapped Persons Scale, pages 1-10, 1-11 and 1-12, instruc— tions 1 through 5. ** Instructions for Coder: EDUCATION SCALE, PROGRESSIVE, CONTENT, Wig;- 1. Items are to be scored exactly as circled. 2. Follow the procedures outlined in caps on pages 1—11, 1-12 and 1—13, Handicapped Persons Scale. Be sure to score only those items indicated above as belonging to the education progressive scale content. 865 CARD 2 Page 2—3 Column—gues. Item Detail Code Recode* 45 l,2,5,7, Education 1 — 1, not strongly at all thru 8,9,15, Scale, Pro— 2 — 2, not very strongly 54 16,17,20 gressive 3 — 3, fairly strongly Intensity 4 — 4, very strongly Responses* 55-56 Raw p Value scale, score Support 01 — 32 score** 57-58 Raw g Value scale, 01 — 32 score Conformity score** 59—60 Raw 3 Value scale, 01 — 32 score Recognition score** (comparative) 61-62 Raw I Value scale, 01 - 32 score Indepen— dence score** 63-64 Raw B Value scale, 01 — 32 score Benevolence score**(asset) 65—66 Raw L Value scale, 01 ~ 32 score Leadership score** (comparative) * Instructions for Coder: EDUCATION SCALE, PROGRESSIVE, INTENSITY, EQLHMNS 44—53. Same as instructions for Education Scale, Pro- gressive content, see page 2-2. ** Entries for columns 63-74 are obtained through scoring accord- ing to SRA Manual for Survey of Interpersonal Values, Science Research Associates, Inc., 259 East Erie Street, Chicago, Illi— nOiS, 1960. For scoring, coders should use the special keys adapted from the SRA English edition of the scale. Although the summed scores of the six value scales should total 90, scores 8 between 84 and 95 are "acceptable." 65 Column-Ques. 67-68 Sum of item scores, 1-20, Content 69-70 Sum of item scores, 1-20, Intensipy 71-72 Sum of item scores, 3, 4,6,10,11, 12,13,14, 18,19 73-74 Sum of item scores, 3, 4,6,10,11, Item Detail Code Adjusted Adjusted Adjusted Adjusted (Check totals based here) on item :2 to dichotomiza- tion, H.P. Scale, Con— tent* (Check totals based here) on item _:2 to dichotomiza— tion, H.P. Scale, Inten- s'ty* (Check totals based here) on item .ig to dichotomiza— tion Educa— tion Tradi- tional Scale, Content* (Check totals based here) on item :9 to dichotomiza- 12,13,l4, tion Educa— 18,l9 tion Tradi~ tional Scale, Intensity* * See Card 1, page 1-12, instruction no. adjusted total scores are obtained. 865 Page 2—4 Recode* dich. for no. to use Code will be: .99 or obtained score dich. for no. to use Code will be: QQ_or obtained score dich. for no. to use Code will be: _00 or obtained score dich. for no. to use Code will be: QQ_or obtained score 5—f, to ascertain how CARD 2 page 2-5 Column-Ques. Item Detail Code Recode* 75-76 Sum of Adjusted (Check dich. for no. to use item totals based here) Code will be: 'QQ or scores, 1, on item .12 to obtained score 2,5,7,8,9, dichotomiza- 15,16,17,20 tion Educa- tion Progres- sive Scale, Content* 77-78 Sum of Adjusted (Check dich. for no. to use item totals based here) Code will be: QQ_or scores, 1, on item :9 to obtained score 2,5,7,8,9, dichotomiza- 15,16,l7,20 tion Educa- tion Progres— sive Scale, Intensity* * See Card 1, page 1-12, instruction No. 5—f, to ascertain how adjusted total scores are obtained. 865 Column-Ques. 1,2,3 Face 4,5 Face 6,7 Face 8 Face 9 37 Q' 10 New 11,12 Face 13,14 Face 15,16 Face 17,18 Face 19,20 Face 21 Face 865 Sheet Sheet Sheet Sheet aire Sheet Sheet Sheet Sheet Sheet Sheet Item Detail Nation and Location Group Number Respondent Number Sex of Respondent Occupational Recode (Interest group) Occupational Recode (Spec. Ed.- Rehab. SER) Deck or Card Number Project Director Day of Admin- istration Month of Adminis— tration Year of Adminis- tration Type of Adminis- tration 93% Same as 01—99 01-99 Same Same Same 03 Same and 01-31 01—12 as as as as 1-3 Card Card Card Card Card Same as Card 1, Same as Card 1, Page Page page Page Page 3—1 Recode* 1-1 pages 1-2 Page Page 1-4 CARD 3 Page 3-2 Column-Ques. Item Detail Code Recode* 22,23 Face Sheet Occupation Same as Card 1, pages of Respond- 1-4 through 1-9 ent 24 Face Sheet Current Same as Card 1, page 1-10 employment status 25,26 1 Q'aire Contact Primary group 1 - 01, Elem. School (Educ.) 2 - 02, Sec. School 3 - 03, University 4 - 04, Other as specified 5 — 05, No experience 27,28 2 Q'aire Contact Secondary group 1 - 01 (Educ.) 2 - 02 3 - 03 SAME 4 - 04 5'- 05 29,30 3 Q'aire Educational 1 - 01 Know nothing about Ed Contact 2 — 02 Read little about Ed (Varieties) 3 - 03 Studied about Ed 4 — 04 Neighbor works 5 — 05 Friend works 6 — 06 Relative works 7 - 07 Family works 8 - 08 I work in Ed 9 — 09 Other (1) If any combination of alternatives 1, 2 and 3 are circled, code as 10, Impersonal Contact (2) If any combination of alternatives 4-8 are circled, code as 11, Personal Contact. (3) If alternatives are circled in both division, code as 12, Both Impersonal and Personal Contact. This requires coding alterna— tive OTHER (i.e., alternative 9) as either personal or imper- sonal contact; i.e., according to its content. 865 CARD 3 Page 3-3 Column-Ques. Item Detail Code Recode* 31 4 Q'aire Amount of 1 - 1, less than 3 months Contact 2 - 2, 3 months to 6 months (Educ.) 3 - 3, 6 months to 1 year 4 - 4, 1 year to 3 years 5 - 5, 3 years to 5 years 6 - 6, 5 years to 10 years 7 - 7, over 10 years 8 - 8, over 15 years 32 5 Q'aire Percent of l — 1, less than 10% income from 2 - 2, 10 to 25% Education 3 - 3, 25 to 50% 4 - 4, 50 to 75% 5 - 5, 75 to 100% 33 6 Q'aire Enjoyment of 1 - 2, disliked Educational 2 - 3, not much Work 3 - 4, somewhat 4 - 5, enjoyed 34 7 Q'aire Alternative 1 — 1, no information work (to 2 — 2, unavailable educ.) 3 - 3, not acceptable 4 - 4, not quite acceptable 5 - 5, acceptable 35,36 8 Q'aire Age 20 - 20 years 21 — 21 years 40 - 40 37 9 Q'aire Community in l - 1 country which reared. 2 — 2 Country town If more than 3 - 3 city one is 4 - 4 City suburb Checked try to determine in which one the respond— ent spent most of the time. If 865 CARD 3 Page 3-4 Column-Ques. Item Detail Code Recode* 37 9 Q'aire (continued) impossible, try to Choose a median (i.e. country, City, score country town) 38 10 Q'aire Employment 1 - 1, country community 2 - 2, country town (recent) 3 - 3, city 4 - 4, city suburb 39 ll Q'aire Recent Resi- l - 1, country dence 2 - 2, country town 3 — 3, city 4 - 4, city suburb 40 12 Q'aire Marital 1 - l, married Status 2 - 2, single 3 — 3, divorced 4 - 4, widowed 5 - 5, separated 41,42 13 Q'aire Number of 1 - 01 Children. 2 - 02 If blank, 3 - 03 check Ques. ° ' 13. If 10 - 10 single, score 00; if married, score -9. 43:44 14 Q'aire Yearly Income UNITED STATES (self—family) 01 - less than $1,000 (for other 02 — $1,000 to $1,999 nations see 03 - $2,000 to $2,999 Special ° Instructions) 10 — $9,000 to $9,999 865 Column-Ques. 45 15 Q'aire 46,47 16 Q'aire 48,49 17 Q'aire 51,51 None' 52 18 Q'aire 53 19 Q'aire 865 CARD 3 Page 3-5 Item Detail Code Recode* Comparative l — 1, much lower Income 2 - 2, lower (self-fam— 3 - 3, about the same ily) 4 - 4, higher 5 - 5, much higher Brothers. 1 - 01 If the 2 - 02 respondent 3 — 03 answers - - only one 10 - 10 question (17 or 18) and other is blank, assume it to be zero. Sisters Same as number of brothers Siblings - l — 01 Obtain by ' - summing 15 - 15 above Ques— tions 16 and 17, Col's 45, 46 and 47, 48 Fathers' 1 - 1, much lower Income: 2 — 2, lower Comparative 3 - 3, about the same 4 - 4, higher 5 — 5, much higher Religious 1 — 1, Roman Catholic Affiliation 2 - 2, Protestant 3 - 3, Jewish 4 - 4, None 5 — 5, Other 6 to 9, Other major religions _,.. Column-Ques. 54 55 56 57 58 59 865 20 Q'aire 21 Q'aire 22 Q'aire 23 Q'aire 24 Q'aire 25 Q'aire Item Detail Code Religion 1 - (Import- 2 — ance) 3 - 4 _ Personaliam l - (job-amount) 2 - 3 _ 4 _ 5.. 6 _ '7— 8 _ Personalism l - (job—impor- 2 — tance of) 3 - 4 _ Personalism l — (job—diffu- 2 - sion) 3 - 4 _ 5 _ 6 - 7 - Social Class 1 - Position 2 — (Self) 3 - 4 - 5 - Social Class Same Position (Father) IDWNH -~s ‘ ‘ \ \ ‘ ‘ mummnbwwt—J ‘ vwaH \\\\ \ \ Q Q \lOWU'lr-PWNH ‘ \ § UlwaI—J \‘sss Q) U) Page 3-6 Recode* No religion Not very Fairly Very none no contact less than 10% 10 to 30% 30 to 50% 50 to 70% 70 to 90% over 90% not at all not very fairly very none less than 10% 10 to 30% 30 to 50% 50 to 70% 70 to 90% over 90% lower lower middle middle upper middle upper above CARD 3 Page 3-7 Column-Ques. Item Detail Code Recode* 60 26 Q'aire Education 1 - 1, three years or less (Self- 2 - 2, six years or less amount). 3 — 3, nine years or less If more 4 - 4, twelve years or less than one is 5 - 5, some college circled, 6 - 6, degree Choose the 7 — 7, work beyond degree highest 8 — 8, advanced degree amount or determine the approp- riate an answer. 61 27 Q'aire Education 1 — 1, much less (Self-com— 2 - 2, less parative) 3 - 3, average 4 - 4, more 5 - 5, much more 62 28 Q'aire Education 1 - 1, much less (Father — 2 — 2, less comparative) 3 - 3, average 4 — 4, more 5 - 5, much more rent house rent apartment rent room purchase room and board , own apartment , own house 7 - 7, other 63 29 Q'aire Housing (type of) ‘ § 43 U) N l-’ l .b. O) N H E (DUI ll (DUI 64 30 Q'aire Housing UNITED STATES (rental- 1 — $20 or less month) (for 2 — 21 - 40 (dollars) other nations 3 — 41 - 75 see Special 4 — 76 — 125 Instructions) 5 - 126 - 200 6 7 - 201 - 300 — 300 or more 865 Column-Ques. 65 31-A 66 3l—B 67 31-C 68 31-D 69 3l—E 70 31-F 71 31-G 72 3l-H 73 31—I 865 Q'aire Q'aire Q'aire Q'aire Q'aire Q'aire Q'aire Q'aire Q'aire Item Detail Institutional Satisfaction Elementary Schools Institutional Satisfaction Secondary Schools Institutional Satisfaction Universities Institutional Satisfaction Businessmen Institutional Satisfaction Labor Institutional Satisfaction Government (local) Institutional Satisfaction Government (National) Institutional Satisfaction Health Services Institutional Satisfaction Churches c_od_e UlthNl-J I Same Same Same Same Same Same Same Same U'I-bNI—‘w do not know poor fair good excellent Page 3-8 Recode* Column—Ques. 74 32 Q'aire 75 33 Q'aire 865 Item Detail Residency (current length) Residency (Change- recent) 9&2 U'lbb-JNH I Page 3-9 Recode* less than a year one to two years three to six years seven to ten years over ten years yes no Column-Ques. 1,2,3 10 11,12 13,14 15,16 17,18 19,20 21 865 Face Face Face Face 37 Q' New Face Face Face Face Face Face Sheet Sheet Sheet Sheet aire Sheet Sheet Sheet Sheet Sheet Sheet Item Detail Nation and Location Group Number Respondent Number Sex of Respondent Occupational Recode (Interest group) Occupational Recode (Spec. Ed.- Rehab. SER) Deck or Card Number Project Director Day of Adminis- tration Month of Adminis- tration Year of Adminis- tration Type of Adminis— tration Eris Same Ol - 01 - Same Same Same 04 Same 1-3 01-31 01-12 as 99 99 as as as as Card Card Card Card Card and 1-3 Same as Card 1, Same as Card 1, Page page Page Page pages page 1-4 Page Page 4—1 Recode* CARD 4 Page 4—2 Column-Ques. Item Detail Code Recode* 22,23 Face Sheet Occupation Same as Card 1, pages of Respond— 1-4 through 1—9 ent 24 Face Sheet Current Same as Card 1, page 1—10 Employment Status 25 34 Q'aire Job change 1 — 1, yes (recent) 2 - 2, no 26 35 Q'aire Residency - , none , one time , two to three times four to six times , seven to ten times , over ten times (change fre— quency) (i. e., last ten years) mU'IDP-OUNH I mmbwmr-J 27 36 Q'aire Job (change frequency) (i.e., last ten years) , none , one time , two to three times four to six times , seven to ten times , over ten times mmpwww l mmawNI—i 28,29 37 Q'aire Occupation Same as Card 1, pages (Specific) 1—4 through 1—9 30 38 Q'aire Religiousity 1 - 1, no religion (norm con— 2 - 2, seldom formity) 3 — 3, sometimes 4 — 4, usually 5 — 5, almost always 31 39 Q'aire Change Ori- l — 1, no entation 2 - 2, probably not (Health 3 - 3, maybe Practices) 4 — 4, yes 32 40 Q'aire Change Ori- l - 1, strongly disagree entation 2 — 2, slightly disagree (Child 3 « 3, slightly agree Rearing) 4 — 4, strongly agree 865 Column-Ques. 33 41 Q'aire 34 42 Q'aire 35 43 Q'aire 36 44 Q'aire 37 45 Q'aire 38 46 Q'aire 39 47 Q'aire 4O 48 Q'aire 865 Item Detail Change Ori— entation (Birth con- trol Prac- tices) Change Ori- entation (Automation) Change Ori— entation (Political Leaders) Education (aid to — local) Education (aid to - federal) Education (planning responsi— bility) Change Ori- entation (self) Change Ori- entation (self-role adherence) ‘ ‘ h