LIBERAL WOMEN'S ESTIMATES OF THE AVERAGE
WOMAN IN RELATEON TO OWN SELF - ESTEEM

Dissertation for the Degree at Ph. D.
MECHSGAN STATE ummsm
ADELHEiD c. BUSS ’
1974

This is to certify that the

thesis entitled

LIBERAL WOMEN'S ESTIMATES OF THE AVERAGE WOMAN
IN RELATION TO OWN SELF-ESTEEM

presented by

Adelheid C. Buss

has been accepted towards fulfillment
of the requirements for

 

 

Ph 0 Do deg-6e in Psychology

 

Major professor

Date August 7, 1974

0-7639

ABSTRACT u-

LIBERAL WOMEN'S ESTIMATES OF THE AVERAGE WOMAN
IN RELATION TO OWN SELF-ESTEEM

By
Adelheid C. Buss

The main goal of this study was to examine "liberal" ("self-
oriented" on the IVF) women's self-esteem in relation to their own
views of what is an appropriate role for women and to their estimates
of the average woman's role on this issue. It intended to determine
whether the adoption of an extremely "liberal" role position is
related to increase in self-esteem. Perceived ideological distance
between women's own and other women's positions was also explored in
relation to self—esteem, as well as adjustment indices and degree of
"liberal” orientation.

Underlying the purpose was the concern that, in conjunction
with rapid changes in respect to women's role, extreme ideological
positions may be adopted partially for reasons of their social desir-
ability, though psychological and behavioral incongruence would
remain, and gains in self-esteem may not be made. It was also con-
sidered that an increased sense of distance between oneself and the
average woman might be associated with additional stress and lower

self-esteem.

Adelheid C. Buss

The main purpose was to discover possible relationships that
might suggest options to be chosen, or pitfalls to be avoided, in
order that the highest level of functioning be reached.

The focus was confined to the self-esteem of those women,
whose own position is on the "liberal" end of the continuum, from
moderately "liberal" to extremely "liberal."

The particular "liberal" position, as used here, refers to
"self-orientation," in contrast to "other-orientation," which repre-
sents the traditional end of the continuum (Fahd, l955).

The Inventory of Feminine Values (IVF) and the Tennessee
Self-Concept Scale (TSCS) were administered to l20 female subjects
between the ages of 25 and 40, who were all married, had children,
and were currently employed. Their educational level was beyond a
Bachelor degree, but less than a Ph.D. or its equivalent. Subjects
were selected from student lists available from the MSU registrar's
office, mostly those enrolled in the education department. Other
professional women were also included, many of whom were teachers in
the public school system in the Lansing and Detroit areas. Six proto-
cols were excluded because of an "other-oriented” self-rating.

The IVF was rated with three different sets: (l) self-rating,
(2) estimate of the average woman's rating, and (3) rating according
to what the subject considered to be the "healthy, well-integrated"
woman's responses (SD ratings). Twenty additional $5 from the same
sample pool gave SD ratings only. IVF and a number of discrepancy
measures were correlated with TSCS self-esteem measures (Total P and

its subscales), adjustment indices (Total C, Net C, N, GM, Psy) and

Adelheid C. Buss

social desirability measures contained in that scale (SC, DP). The
relationship between a number of biographical variables (Age, Number
of Children, Educational Level, Aspiration Level, Own Income and Family
Income) with TSCS, IVF, and Discrepancy measures was also examined by
means of correlations and partial correlations.

Predictions were based on self-theory, social judgment and
cognitive dissonance theories. Results are summarized as follows:

l. Degree of “self-orientation" (as measured by the IVF)
is unrelated to self-esteem (as measured by the TSCS).

2. Assumed ideological distance between women's own and
other women's role position is unrelated to degree of
self—esteem (as measured by the TSCS).

3. With increasing own "self-orientation,” the average
woman tends to be viewed as being increasingly "other-
oriented.”

4. A strong positive relationship exists between self-ratings
on woman's role and the position considered to be socially
desirable.

5. Self-esteem (as measured by the TSCS) is unrelated to
the degree of discrepancy between one's own asserted
position on woman's role and the position considered
to be socially desirable by other women.

6. Degree of Self-Criticism and Positive Defensiveness (as
measured on the TSCS) is unrelated to perceived ideologi-
cal distance between one's own position on woman's role
and that of the average woman.

7. Conflict in self-descriptions (Total C on the TSCS) has
a weak positive relationship with degree of discrepancy
between one's view of one's own position on woman's role
and one's view of the average woman's role position.

8. Increasing Denial Conflict (Net C on the TSCS) is asso-
ciated with increasing degree of discrepancy between
one's view of one's own position on woman's role and
one's view of the average woman's role position.

9. Variability in self-description, Neuroticism and General
Maladjustment (as measured by the TCS) are unrelated to
degree of discrepancy between one's view of one's own

Adelheid C. Buss
position on woman's role, and one's view of the average
woman's role position.

l0. Psychoticism (as measured by the TSCS) is negatively
related to degree of discrepancy between one's view of
one's own position on woman's role and one's view of
the average woman's role position.

Additional findings showed this sample of "self-oriented,“
well-educated women to be somewhat above average in over—all self-
esteem, especially in degree of Self-Satisfaction. However, their
self-concept in respect to Physical Self was exceptionately low.
Maladjustment indices, except Psychoticism and Conflict were slightly
worse than national norms.

Degree of ”self-orientation" was negatively related to Age,
but Number of Children accounted for this relationship. Women with
more children were less ”self-oriented." Women with lower Own
Incomes, that is, parttime employed, gave the most favorable responses
on the TSCS, whereas Educational Level and academic Aspiration had
no relationship.

Mean "self-orientation" ratings were much higher than reported
by earlier studies, though ratings of the Average Woman were lower.

Suggestions for future research included exploration of (1)
possible broad negative connotations attached to the concept of the
"average woman" by some subjects, (2) differences in women's inter-
pretation of the supposedly "active-passive" dimension related to
woman's role, (3) the origins and internal dynamics of these differ-
ences. The polarity between "other-orientation" as passive and "self-

orientation" as active was questioned. The importance of further

exploration of different life styles and work patterns was stressed.

LIBERAL WOMEN'S ESTIMATES OF THE AVERAGE WOMAN
IN RELATION TO OWN SELF-ESTEEM

By

Adelheid CI‘Buss

A DISSERTATION

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

DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY
Department of Psychology

1974

ACKNOWLEDMENTS

To Dr. Bertram Karon, Chairman of my dissertation committee,
I express my deepest gratitude. Not only was his assistance and sup-
port immeasurably encouraging, but the opportunity he offered for
complete independence in the choice of my research area became an
inspiring experience.

Thanks also is due to Drs. Norman Abeles, Elaine Donelson,
and Gail Zellman, whose suggestions significantly added to the
dimensions considered in this study.

I am also indebted to the MSU Woman's Resource Center, espec-
ially Mila Price, whose help was invaluable in the search for sub-
jects.

My sincerest regards go out to the many women who participated
in this research. The overwhelmingly positive reception, and the
degree of helpfulness that was offered, will be impossible to forget.

Undergirding all my endeavors is my family's support and con-
fidence in me. I cannot thank them enough.

To Keith Krieger I give my warmest thanks for believing that
I would do whatever was necessary to finish this task, for providing
pleasant diversion for me and others by establishing an international

folk dance group in East Lansing,and for delaying his vacation.

11

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

LIST OF TABLES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . v

LIST OF FIGURES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . vii
Chapter

I. INTRODUCTION l

Purpose l

Underlying Concerns l

Scope 2

Main Questions 3

Definitions . . 4

Self-Orientation . 4

Other-Orientation 5

Historical Context . 5

The Current Context 7

Theoretical Background l4

Other Relevant Research 23

II. METHODOLOGY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26

Inventory of Feminine Values . . . . . . . . 26

Tennessee Self—Concept Scale . . . . . . . . 27

Total P Score . . . . . . . . . . . 27

Row 1 P Score (Identity) . . . . . . . 28

Row 2 P Score (Self— Satisfaction) . . . . . . 28

Row 3 P Score (Behavior) . . . . . . . . . 28

Column A (Physical Self) . . . . . . . . . 28

Column 8 (Moral-Ethical Self) . . . . . . . 28

Column C (Personal Self) . . . . . . . . . 28

Column D (Family Self) . . . . . . . . . . 28

Column E (Social Self) . . . . . . . . . . 29

Hypotheses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30

Main Hypotheses . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31

Secondary Hypotheses . . . . . . . . . . . 33

Subjects . . . . . . . . . . . 35

Method of Subject Selection . . . . . . . . . 36

Method of Approach to Subjects . . . . . . . . 38

iii

Chapter i Page

Method of Data Collection . . . . . . . . 39
Description of the Sample . . . . . . . . 41
Design and Statistical Methods . . . . . . . 46
III. RESULTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48
Group and Normative Comparisons . . 57
Additional Findings Regarding Biographical Vari-
ables . . . . 60
Additional Findings Related to Discrepancy
Measures . . . . . 64
Additional Findings Related to the IVF . . . . 66
IV. DISCUSSION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68
Self— Orientation and Self- Esteem . . . . . 68
The Discrepancy Phenomenon and Self- Esteem . . . 70
"Self— Orientation," Own Social Desirability, and
Average Woman Ratings . . . 7l
Self- Esteem and Social Desirability Ratings .of
Others . . , 74
Self- Criticism, Positive Defensiveness, and the
Discrepancy Phenomenon . . . 76
Adjustment Indices and the Discrepancy Phenomenon 76
Normative Comparisons . . . . . . . . . . 83
Biographical Variables . . . . . . . . . 85
IVF Variables . . . . . . . . 89
Implications for Future Research . . . . . . 9l
V. SUMMARY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 93
APPENDIX
A. Pilot Study . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 98
8. Cover Letter to Participants . . . . . . . . lO9
C. Measuring Instruments . . . . . . . . . . lll

D. Results from Different Biographical Groups . . . l25
E. Additional Results Related to the TSCS and the IVF . l28
REFERENCES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . lSO

iv

TABLE

lO.

ll.

l2.

l3.

l4.

LIST or TABLES

Means and Ranges for Age and Number of Children for
Subjects in Samples l and 2

Educational Levels of Subjects from Samples 1 and 2
Aspiration Levels of Subjects from Sample 1 and 2 .
Own Income Levels of Subjects from Samples 1 and 2
Family Income Levels of Subjects from Sample l and 2 .
Type of Work Reported by Subjects in Sample l and 2
Correlations of Biographical Variables with Total P
(TSCS), "Self—Orientation" (IVF), Discrepancy1 Scores,
and Estimates of the Average Woman . . . . . . .
Correlations and Partial Correlations for Biographical
Variables vs. "Self-Orientation” and Social Desir-
ability Ratings

Correlations Between "Self-Orientation" and Social
Desirability, Including Partial Correlations, Holding

Biographical Variables Constant .

Correlations Between Biographical Variables and Dis-
crepancy2 . . . . . .

Correlations Between Self-Criticism (SC) and Defen-
sive Positive (DP) vs. Discrepancy1 and Biographical
Variables . . . . . . . . . . .

Correlations Between Discrepancy1 Scores and Mal-
adjustment measures . . . . .

Correlations Between Biographical Variables vs.
Maladjustment Nbasures and Discrepancy]

Means and Ranges of Discrepancy1 Scores for HD, MD,
and LD Groups . . . . . . . . . . . .

Page

42
43
43
44
44
45

SO

52

52

54

55

56

56

58

Table Page

l5. Intercorrelations Between Age and Family Income with
"Self- Orientation" and SD, Including Partial Corre-
lations, Holding Self— Ratings, SD, and Number of
Children Constant . . . . . . . . . . 52

16. Correlations Between Discrepancy Measures and Several
Main Variables . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65

l7. Means and Ranges for "Self-Orientation," Estimates of
the Average Woman, SD Ratings, and Discrepancy Scores
for Sample , and for all 55 with Specified Biographi-
cal CharacIeristics, Oncluding “Other—Oriented" Ss). . 67

18. Demographic Characteristics of Pilot Subjects . . . lOO

l9. Pilot Study TSCS Means for Women with Low "Self— Orien-
tation,” and High "Self- Orientation" . . . l06

20. Pilot Study TSCS Means for Groups with Different
Degrees of Discrepancies Between IVF Self—Ratings and
IVF Estimates of Average Women's Role Position: Low
Discrepancy (LD), High Discrepancy (HO), and Medium
Discrepancy (MD) Groups . . . . . . . . . . l07

2l. Pilot Study IVF Means for "Self-Orientation," Estimates
of the Average Woman's Orientation, and Discrepancy
Scores for LD, HD, and MD Groups . . . . . . . . l08

22. IVF, Discrepancy and Total P Scores for Women with
Different Biographical Characteristics . . . . . . l26

23. IVF and Discrepancy Scores Obtained from Volunteers
at a Shopping Centel in Flint, Michigan . . . . . 127

24. TSCS Means for High, Medium, and l.ow Discrepancy
Groups, as Well as the Total Sample l . . . . . l29

25. Correlational Matrix Between TSCS Subscales Contribu-
tingto Total P vs. Biographical Variables, IVF
and Discrepancy Measures . . . . . . l30

26. IVF Item Means (l = Agree, 5 = Disagree), and Percent-
ages of Agree and Disagree Responses for HD, LD, and
MD Groups, As Well As Sample (Total) Sample (SD
Only). and Sample3 (”Other- Oliented" Women, N = l6,
IVF Mean = -6.75) . . . . . . . . . . . l34

vi

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure Page
l. TSCS Means for Sample] . 59
2. Pilot Study TSCS Means for High and Low "Self— Orienta-

tion" Subjects . . . . . . . . . l04

3. Pilot Study TSCS Means for HD, MD, and LD Subjects . l05

4. Scatter Diagram Showing the Relation Between Discrep-
ancyI Scores and Self-Ratings by Subjects in Sample] . l3l

5. Scatter Diagram Showing the Relation Between Esti-
mates of the Average Woman and Self— Ratings by Sub-
jects in Sample] . . . . . . 132

6. Scatter Diagram Showing the Relation Between Own SD
Ratings and Self-Ratings by Subjects in Sample1 . . l33

vii

CHAPTER I .”

INTRODUCTION

Purpose

This study investigates "liberal" (that is, “self—oriented,"
as explained below) women's self-esteem in relation to their own
view of what is an appropriate role for women and to their estimates
of the average woman's view on this issue. It intends to determine
whether the adoption of extremely “liberal" role positions is related
to increase in self-esteem. Perceived ideological distance between
women's own and other women's positions is also explored in relation
to self-esteem, as well as adjustment indices and degree of "liberal"

orientation.

Underlying Concerns

 

Underlying the purpose are several main concerns.

The current movement to improve the status of women puts par-
ticular emphasis on achievement striving and independence in women
(Ginzberg, 1966; Peterson, l964; Roe, T960, l966; Rossi, l965). How-
ever, affectional and nurturance related values may be deemphasized
and underrated. Moreover, some women may adopt extreme ideological
positions as over-corrections for felt inadequacies, but internal
psychological states and behavior remain incongruent, and gains in

self-esteem may not be made.

In addition, the adoption of an extreme ideology would increase
a sense of distance between oneself and other women. Such distance
is likely to represent additional stress, especially for those women
who see other women as having values highly discrepant from their own.
Acceptance by other women may decrease. These problems are different
from the currently popularly accepted ideology, that emphasis on
achievement striving and independence will necessarily lead to maxi-
mum gains in total personality functioning and self-esteem.

The main purpose is to discover possible relationships that
might suggest options to be chosen, or pitfalls to be avoided, in

order that the highest level of functioning be reached.

Scope

The focus is confined to the self-esteem of those women whose
own positions is on the liberal end of the continuum, from moderately
liberal to extremely liberal.

The particular "liberal" position, as used here, refers to
”self-orientation" in contrast to ”other-orientation," which represents
the traditional end of the continuum (Fand, l955). "Self-orientation"
implies self-fulfillment by directly realizing one's own potentiali-
ties, while "other-orientation" implies indirect self-realization
by fostering the fulfillment of the man and children in their lives.
Whereas the positions occur on a continuum, one can arbitrarily di-
vide this at the midpoint with resultant apparant dichotomies. The

scope of this study includes only the ”self-oriented” range, from

extremely "self-oriented" to the zero (neutral) point on the Inven-

tory of Feminine Values (Fand, l955).

Main Questions

 

l. One question seeks to discover whether self-esteem is
related to degree of reported "self-orientation." The prediction is
that no relationship exists.

2. Another question examines the relationship between self-
esteem and degree of assumed discrepancy between one's own reported
role position and one's view of the average woman's position. It is
predicted that increased discrepancies are negatively related to
self-esteem.

3. A third question deals with the possibility that increas-
ing degrees of reported ”self-orientation” are associated with in-
creased estimates of the average woman's role position as being ex—
tremely "other-oriented.” It is predicted that such a relationship
exists.

4. Finally, is one's own concept of what is socially de-
sirable related to self-descriptions in respect to women's role?
The prediction is that these are positively related. However, it is
predicted that degree of discrepancies between one's own reported
position and the socially desirable position, as judged by other
women, is negatively related to self-esteem.

5. The existance of conflicts within the self—concept, de-
fensive orientations, and other adjustment indices (from the Ten-

nessee Self-Concept Scale) will be considered in relation to degree

of assumed discrepancies between one's view of one's own, and one's

view of other women's role positions.

Definitions

 

The particular type of "liberalism" considered in this study
is measured by the Fand Inventory of Feminine Values, which defines
a continuum from "self-orientation" (liberal) to "other—orientation"
(traditional). The range is arbitrarily divided at the mid-point

with a resultant apparent dichotomy.

Self-Orientation

 

A “self-oriented” person (as used here) is defined by the
Fand Inventory as having embraced the achievement orientation of our
culture and is striving to fulfill herself directly by realizing her
own potentialities. Operationally, a "self-oriented" woman emphasizes
success rather than affectional ties. She desires to be independent
from the help of others, and her decisions do not include the opin—
ions and feelings of others. She readily asserts herself verbally
as a group leader, and tends to argue with those giving orders. She
carries equal weight in the family as her husband, both in decision
making and responsibility. Her supportive value to him is minimized
in her eyes. Her children are raised with considerations that go
beyond good behavior training, and working is not considered an in-
terference with motherhood. The extremely "self-oriented" woman ex-
presses doubts that the gain in marriage and motherhood is worth the
sacrifices, and she does not consider her ambitions to be secondary

to the family.

Other-Orientation

 

An "other-oriented" woman is defined by the Inventory as a
person who conceives of herself as the counterpart, the "other" of
the man and children in her life and realizes herself indirectly by
fostering their fulfillment. She has little interest in work or
personal recognition and prefers affectional ties. Interest in out-
side activities is considered negligible, and she defers to others
in her opinions and beliefs, as well as decisions. What others think
of her is more important than her own development. Listening pre—
dominates over talking and orders are accepted without argument. Her
goals in child-raising is for good behavior. While in the marriage
her opinion carries less weight, her reSponsibility for its success
is greater. Her encouragement to her husband is considered as being
her greatest benefit to him. She expresses no doubts that the gain
in marriage and motherhood is greater than the sacrifices and her own

wishes are viewed as without conflict with what is expected from her.

Historical Context

 

The historical position of women continues to make impact to-
day. Women in the past were expected to be useful to men and to
focus their identities around them for their benefit (Rousseau, T792).
The parallel psychological role consisted of inhibition of aggressive-
ness, nurturance to others, and the negation of intellectual qualities
(Kagan, l962).

Freudian theory, which became widely accepted, added to the

persistence of the traditional role, as his descriptions of women's

psychological dynamics, being based on his observations of that time,
placed her in a secondary role, which she was assumed to be unable to
escape. Anatomy was assumed to be destiny.

Not all writers adopted this theory in respect to women. Many
psychologists and even psycho-analysts (i.e., Horney, Fromm, Adler,
and Clara Thompson) were beginning to lean more and more toward so-
ciology and emphasized the importance of cultural factors in shaping
individual personalities. These writers, Clara Thompson in particular,
were of the opinion that sexual differences in personality, intelli-
gence, ability, and status were neither innate nor physiologically
determined, but rather were the result of cultural stereotypes, cul-
tural pressures, and social conditioning. If women felt inferior to,
and envied men, what they envied was their culturally imposed ad—
vantages and position of superiority (Thompson, 1949).

In support of a cultural, as opposed to biological, viewpoint,
were findings of sociologists and anthropologists which revealed ex-
treme variations in the sex-role behaviors expected of men and women
in societies having cultural traditions different from modern western
societies (Albert, 1963; Farber and Wilson, 1963: Mead, M. 1935).

The implications are obvious. If each sex is capable of con-
siderably wider range of behaviors and expression than is tradition-
ally permitted, inappropriate restrictions on the female sex need to
be removed, so as to maximize her fullest potential.

A number of reality factors have affected important changes
for women. The Industrial Revolution reduced home-making responsi-

bilities, and her labor was increasingly needed outside the home

(Ginzberg, 1966). Furthermore, since the measurement of intelligence
became possible by the work of Binet in 1900, normative studies have
established that intellectual levels of the sexes are essentially
similar (Wechsler, 1966). Thirdly, awareness of the dangers of over-
population led to the acceptance of birth-control, and more women use
options in relation to child-bearing. Thus, women have more time
available to be used, according to their own inclination, but with

few historical precedents to rely on.

The Current Context

 

The rapid changes have created problems for women, while new
attitudes clash with the old, and present society is not as ready to
offer equal opportunities, as is often claimed. Women find them-
selves pulled in opposite directions, being encouraged to succeed, but
not to succeed too much. Internal conflicts also continue, while
their self—concepts have not yet incorporated aggressive competitive
activities and they lack models after which to pattern themselves
(Horner, 1972).

The current woman's movement has provided a powerful thrust
toward encouraging women to broaden their self-concepts. Women's
organizations have been formed, where women can now gain support from
each other, and consciousness raising groups have become established,
where women can help each other to remove blind-folds and give sup-
port toward new endeavors. Much emphasis is laid on personal achieve-
ment and independence, which is the area most neglected in the past

(Ginzberg, 1966; Peterson, 1964; Rossi, 1965).

Efforts are also being made to identify and confront barriers
in society which continue to infringe on women's rights, or which
stereotype and dehumanize them. Often, matters that appear subtle
at first, become quite obvious under closer scrutiny. Psychological
theories, psychoanalysis in particular, have been examined and found
to contain biases against women (Anthony, 1970; Miller, 1970). Therapy
has been identified as a process where women are frequently subjected
to further acculturation to negative stereotypes (Brovermen, Brover-
man, Clarkson, Rosenkvantz, and Vogel, 1970; Rush, 1972). Public
media and television programs often are found to embody objectionable
female stereotypes (Rock, 1973). Men's interactions with women
abound in reminders of the same stereotypes, and in fact, many women
themselves continue to support these stereotypes (Broverman, Brover-
man, Clarkson, Rosenkrantz, and Vogel, 1972; Goldberg, 1968; McKee
and Sheriff, 1959). Thus history, society, men, and even women, all
provide barriers to the fullest humanization of women. A united ef-
fort and great persistence will be required to reverse these condi-
tions.

However, while achievement and independence strivings are
being emphasized, affective values, which have been women's particu-
lar domain in the past, may become underemphasized. Throughout the
current literature, a widespread tendency exists to equate mental
health, self-fulfillment, and self-actualization for women with
intellectual pursuits, professional endeavors, and other activities
occurring outside the home. In addition, those personality char-

acteristics, previously used to describe the ”healthy” adult man,

are becoming viewed as the ideal for the adult woman, and a new role
is being prescribed for her: the role of independent, self-assertive,
achievement oriented woman whose place is no longer in the home, but
in professional pursuits as well (Ohlbaum, 1971). Thus we seem to

be plunging ahead quite rapidly, but without full understanding of
many possible consequences.

Occasional voices are heard from within the movement which
question the wisdom of a one-sided emphasis. Bardwick (1973) and
Ohlbaum (1971) have placed the current movement in the context of
current society's changes, viewing it mainly as reflecting a search
for meaning. Bardwick (1973) warned against simplistic solutions and
a uni-dimensional frame of reference. She urged that, considering
the complexity of the problems, we ought not to decide too quickly
on the exact route and goals. She pointed out an inherent danger
in outlining the route prematurely, as Unamany ramifications cannot
be immediately foreseen, and complete success might be aborted (Bard-
wick, 1973; Ohlbaum, 1971).

What does matter is that women retain a core of self through
all roles and to be confident enough to approach tasks with openness.
This shouldirmfltukethe awareness of the particular contributions that
women can offer and the important values that they have held, which
they need to retain (Bardwick, 1973; Carlson, 1972).

When this is not recognized, some women, for reason of its
social desirability, may attempt to adopt the uni—dimensional frame
of reference, though finding the application difficult. It might be

overlooked that many "feminine" qualities (though stereotypically

10

perceived in the past), have been valued as much as favorable mascu-
line qualities (Broverman, et al. 1972; McKee and Sheriff, 1959;
Rosenkranz, Vogel, Bee, and Broverman, 1968). An imbalance had in-
deed occurred because there had been fewer characteristics that were
highly valued. Yet to devaluate these qualities would do further
injustice to women.

That careful discriminations have not always been made, was
shown by Broverman, et a1. (1972) who found that women have tended
to incorporate the negative feminine stereotypes (relative incompe-
tence, irrationality, passivity, etc.) as well as the positive
(warmth and expressiveness) into their self-concepts. It is possible
that the reverse might also occur, and the positive be rejected with
the negative, though at considerable cost to the personality.

Inordinate efforts may be exerted to overcorrect for presumed
undesirable qualities, or an individual may vascillate between ex-
tremes in search for a workable solution. Even what may have seemed
obvious before, may now become occluded. Adequate solutions may
escape, while many old and tested interpersonal values are not being
integrated. While the emphasis is on social and public acceptance,
the age-old wisdom--that one's best qualities (men's or women's) often
do not enjoy public recognition--may lose flavor and credibility.
Gains in personality functioning would be slow, while internal con-
flict may increase.

In addition, misconceptions may develop in respect to other

women with different ideological emphases and different behavior

ll

patterns. Ohlbaum (1971) suggested that, not only might we be
creating a new stereotype, but this could result in a similar intol-
erance it": individual differences. Eventually we may hold in low
esteem those, who do, in fact, creatively fulfill themselves through
homemaking functions.

Some relevant observations have been made by members within
the movement itself. One pilot subject interviewed for this study,
expressed the concern that so long as women are not equally free to
work or not to work, to be family centered or not to be, women still
are not free.

Similar criticisms were reported as a result of a membership
survey of a NOW (National Organization for Women) group in Detroit,
where some members felt that work status was given too much emphasis
(to be published).

So far, little direct research seems to be available that ex-
plores differences between those women who do operate with an active
sense of self-fulfillment, as well as freedom, in the context of
traditional functions, with those who find only drudgery there, or
who conceive the role as mainly a passive one. Yet a host of studies
confirm that many women continue to value commitment to a family-
orientation (Empey, 1959; Hewer and Neubeck, 1964; Matthews and
Tiedeman, 1964; Riordan, 1966; Taylor, 1964).

More specific examinations of women's internal meanings might
elucidate questions regarding the presumed passivity versus activity

inherent in different roles. In fact, the development of a

12

conceptually well-integrated model, which describes both passive and
active strivings within a variety of roles might be most useful as
a guide to women who seek a suitable balance (Carlson, 1972).

Instead, a limited conceptual bias toward woman's role ap-
pears to have strongly influenced the methodologies and results of
many psychological investigations (Lewis, 1965; Ohlbaum, 1971). The
current literature, which is intended to advance women's self-con-
cept, often contains a double message. Much research is being done
in relation to achievement, and it usually follows the former stereo-
types. In most instances, dichotomies are artificially made along
the lines of career versus home-making and interpretations made in
the light of such stereotypes. Considerable investment seems to
exist in the research in respect to questions about working or not
working, achieving or not achieving, and whether this would occur in
feminine or masculine fields. Major sources of satisfactions are
dichotomized in the same fashion, whether they were expected from
career or from family living.

To consider women's role in the light of those questions con-
tinues to restrict considerations about women to external roles, those
most visible in society today. This would tend to reduce the envision-
ment of women in a more totally human way, and as going beyond stereo-
types.

The Inventory of Feminine Values (Fand, 1955), used in this
study, in fact, seems to be based on stereotypic assumptions. The
continuum is artifically dichotomized and the independent success-

orientation is considered ”self-oriented" and described as active,

13

while the home-centered, affection-oriented range is considered
“other-oriented" and described as passive. The "self-oriented" range
is described as reflecting direct fulfillment of one's own potentiali-
ties, while the "other-oriented" range supposedly reflects a living
of oneself ''through" the accomplishment of others. Potentiality

thus is equated with exertion toward independence, accomplishment,

and success, though it is admitted that self—realization could come
either "directly" or "indirectly" (Fand, 1955). That active, and
intrinsically self—fulfilling components, reside in either orientation
seems to be overlooked.

Yet affection, nurturance and even responsive behavior (as
compared to reactive behavior), needs to be actively internally gen-
erated (Fenichel, 1945). In fact, the value often attached to these
behaviors may reside in the active ingredients as much, or more so,
than the passive. That passive components are likewise represented
in "self-orientation," is obvious, as a success-orientation depends
quite heavily on the valuation from others (Borrow, 1966).

It must be kept in mind, therefore, that the IVF does not
clarify internal active and passive dynamics, but mainly assesses
current ideological preferences in respect to behaviors. This has
not always been made clear. Yet current research approaches and their
interpretation tend to color public opinion, as well as to be colored
by it.

Some women may then react by accentuating an ideological

“self-orientation” due to (l) the social desirability attached to

14

certain behaviors, (2) a false application of active and passive
connotations to these roles, and (3) the increased social desirability
of being considered "active," which is also changing for women.* When
such polarization occurs to an extreme degree, it may be at the cost
of suppressing other inclinations merely because of their association
with the traditional role, and because of falsely applied passive
connotations to that traditional role.

Moreover, similarly false active-passive connotations may af-
fect one's interpretation of the behavior of others, and would further
influence one's estimate of their ideological positions. As a result,
such discrepancies may appear very great. A communication gap may
occur with other women and even emotional distancing follow (Shaw
and Costanzo, 1970). This, in turn, would represent an additional,
though perhaps unnecessary, stress situation, because mutual esteem
is being reduced. Nor would self—esteem be expected to benefit from
such a situation.

The basic concerns of this study deal with the question whether
or not degree of ”self—orientation” is associated with increase in
self-esteem. It is predicted that there may be no differences. How-
ever, it is presumed that a high degree of estimated ideological dis-

tance would be associated with relatively lower self-esteem.

Theoretical Background

 

Self-theories view the self-concept as the frame of reference

 

throughvdficflithe individual interacts with his world, and which

 

*A subtle example might be that the IVF originally assigned
positive values to "other—orientation“ and negative value to "self-
orientation." The signs are now used in reverse.

15

influences his behavior as well as his attitudes toward others. Indi-
viduals who are "fully functioning persons” (Rogers, 1961) tend to
have a favorable self-concept, which is associated with a high level
of self-actualization (Maslow, 1954), personality integration (See—
man, 1959), and interpersonal competence (Fitts, 1970). They tend to
rely on their own value system and are able to function with a sense
of self-direction. The congruence of experience with the concept of
self has also been emphasized (Rogers, 1961). That is, the sensory
experiences and feelings of a fully functioning person match external
events and are consistent with his self-concept.

The source of self-esteem originates from the esteem from
others (Maslow, 1954) and can be earned by measuring up to the de-
mands and expectations of others (Fitts, et.al., 1971). Self-esteem also
emanates from the self whenever the Behavioral Self engages in self-
actualizing behavior (Fitts, 1971).

The way a person feels about himself further affects his ex-
pectations from others (Fitts, et al., 1971). If a person likes and
values himself, he tends to assume that others perceive him in the same
light. If he dislikes himself, he expects similar reactions from
others (Clark, 1968; Fitts, 1972C). One's own self-concept, in turn,
influences the way one is perceived by others (Duncan, 1966; Seeman,
1966). At the same time, individuals with high self-esteem also tend
to maintain an internal locus of control, that is, they recognize
that reinforcement can be obtained by their own behavior (Lamb, 1968).
Thus a flow occurs from external sources to internal experiences, which

in turn affect interpersonal expectancies.

16

Such a feedback relationship requires a balance between ex-
ternal and internal reinforcement. The optimal proportions would
vary between individuals and partially depend (”1 available external
resources. The conflict between dependence and independence is one
of mankind's dilemmas, and seems to be especially difficult to re-
solve. Everyone needs to depend on others to some degree and to have
others meet needs for him. There is an equally strong need to be
free and independent, and to be able to meet one's own needs (Maslow,
1954). While each person seeks his own optimal balance, it is easy
to err in either direction (Fitts, 1970).

The degree of complexity that such a balance implies is il-
lustrated by self-concept correlates with the Fundamental Interper-
soanl Relations Orientation-Behavior (FIRO-B) test, devised by Schutz
(1966). The FIRO-B test assesses three major interpersonal variables
(Inclusion, Control, and Affection) on two different dimensions (the
amount each behavior is expressed toward others, and the amount wanted
from others). Total amounts of expressed and wanted behavior are
also measured, as well as the differences between the two.

Correlations of the three FIRO-B variables with the Tennessee
Self-concept Scale (TSCS) are linear in some instances, curvilinear
in others, and these relationships vary according to level of self-
concept examined. Results show that the Expression of Inclusive and
Expression of Affective behavior are important factors in self-
esteem, and Seeking Inclusion and Seeking Affection are similarly re-

lated to self-esteem. A greater amount expressed than wanted of either

l7

Inclusion or Affection seems to be an especially favorable balance.
However, zero scores in Seeking Affection were considered suspect
and possibly reveal the exact opposite (inordinate desire for af-
fection), which is being denied (Schutz, 1966).

The Control variable (taking charge and directing others) is
at least equally important, and Expressing Control has high positive
correlation with self-esteem, but Wanting Control from others is
negatively related.

Thus it seems quite clear that sheer passivity, which requires
and seeks direction from others, does not contribute to self-esteem,
but that other seeking behavior often does.

Further complicating findings have been reported in respect
to deference behavior. Self—esteem was positively related to defer-
ence in an artificially produced obligation situation. The interpre-
tation was offered that a person with a good opinion of himself can
afford to defer to someone else (Weinstein, et a1. 1967). However,
such deference behavior was offered to friends, more so than to
strangers, and the balance of control and affection may have been an
important factor.

Cognitive functioning represents still another variable in
an effectively integrated self—concept. Though degree of intellectual
endowment has not been found to have a systematic relationship with
the TSCS (Fitts, 1972a), a high degree of personality integration (PI)
is associated with effective use of such endowment. Cognition also

interrelates with interpersonal perceptions, and high PI subjects

18

have greater degree of cognitive complexity in their perceptions of
others (Thomas and Seeman, 1971).

The nature of social perception, however, seems to be more im-
portant than its accuracy. Assumed similarity between oneself and
others has been shown to have a positive correlation with self-esteem
(Fitts, 1954). Individuals with high self-regard tend to assume
others to be relatively like themselves and to have similarly favor-
able self—concepts. Those with low self—regard, on the other hand,
tend to assume they are very different from others.

Even common stereotypes, such as ratings of the supposed
self-esteem of the ”generalized other," usually correlate signifi-
cantly with self-concept measures (Fitts, 1954; Fitts and Bell, 1969).
However, the same relationship does not hold when negative stereo-

types ("neurotic,' alcoholic”) are being considered. In that case,
individuals with positive self-concepts tend to describe negatively
valued roles as much lower than they describe their own. 0n the other
hand, those with low self-esteem may be even more negative toward an
unfavorable stereotype, or they may perceive it as more positive

than they view themselves (Fitts and Bell, unpublished).

Evidence based on this line of thinking has not always been
conclusive, however. For example, Claye's (1958) investigation of
seventh, ninth, and twelfth graders' attitudes toward Negroes in
Arkansas, showedru>significant correlation with self-esteem. The

question was raised whether the highly charged emotional climate in

that environment at that time represented a valid situation. Possibly

19

a turmoiled environment may confound results instead of accentuating
them.

Social Judgment Theory(Sherif and Hovland, 1961) deals spe-

 

cifically with attitudes involved in making judgments about social
events, though the basic experiments often begin with psychophySical
stimuli.

The basic proposition is that man structures situations that
are important to him. This structure includes both internal and ex-
ternal factors, which constitute the “frame of reference." However,
the central patterning is the major determinant. Such patterning in-
cludes degree of stimulus ambiguity, intensity of motive state and
the distance of the stimuli from the ”anchors,” or the major reference
points. The greater the stimulus ambiguity and the more intense the
motive state, the greater will be the influence of internal factors.
External factors have more influence in the judgment of structured
stimuli and under less involving conditions.

Although the total frame of reference determines behavior,
social judgment theory holds that certain reference points within the
total frame of reference are more influential than other parts. These
references points serve as anchors in the discrimination and cate-
gorization tasks, which involve comparisons between alternatives.
These anchors often are one's own internal frame of reference, par-
ticularly when objective standards are lacking, and the effects of
these anchors depends on the range of the person's experience, degree
of ego involvement, his latitude of acceptance and rejection, and an

assimilation and contrast effect.

20

In situations when the anchors are stimuli which lie outside
the stimulus range being judged, their effects depend on the remote-
ness of the anchor. If the anchor is only slightly removed from the
series being judged, items tend to be classified even closer to the
anchor than is actually the case (assimilation). An item appearing
distant from the anchor tends to be viewed as being even more distant
(contrast). The effect is that discrepant positions tend to be classi-
fied as even more divergent and many items tend to be classed into
one category. Emotionally involving conditions tend to accentuate
these effects (Shaw and Costanzo, 1970).

The theory further holds that an individual's frame of refer-
ence represents his value orientation, even under instructions to dis-
regard his own feelings. Individuals have different latitudes of
acceptance and rejection of discrepant positions, and intensive in-
volvement with a certain position also tends to lower the threshold
of rejection. The range of items rejected then becomes greater than
the range of acceptable items (Hovland and Sherif, 1952; Sherif and
Hovland, 1961).

Thus, when a communication falls within the latitude of ac-
ceptance, it will be judged as ”fair," ”unbiased," and ”probably
true," and will be assimilated. 0n the other hand, if the communica-
tion diverges from one's own value orientation beyond the latitude
of acceptance, it is judged as ”unfair," ”biased," and “probably
false," and the contrast effect will occur (Shaw and Costanzo,

1970).

21

When a person judges others on the basis of their similarity
to him, his own characteristics represent the standard of judgment
(Tagiuri, 1969). Others who are most similar to oneself often are
considered to be even more similar than is actually the case (assimi-
lation), and those least similar to oneself tend to be viewed as being
still more different (contrast).

Cognitive complexity tends to be associated with more accurate
perceptions of others (Bieri, 1955). When differences are subtle,
cognitively complex people are more able to detect and integrate
differences into a coherent impression.

Cognitive simplicity, resulting in assimilative projection,
tends to reflect incomplete differentiation of the boundaries between
self and the external world (Bieri, l955). Individuals using assimila-
tive projection appear to be made anxious about social deviance. On
the other hand, individuals who underestimate similarity between
themselves and others seem to handle their anxiety about conformity
by the use of reaction formations (Donelson, 1973).

Neither extreme tend to be accurate in their assumptions, and
each extreme can represent pitfalls. However, assumptions of similar-
ity can be well used, especially in situations when little informa-
tion about others is available. People are more likely to associate
with those who are assumed to be similar to themselves, and their un-
derstanding of the behavior of others can be increased by such as-
sociation (Donelson, 1973).

Cognitive Dissonance Theory (Festinger, 1957, 1964) represents

 

another conceptualization within which attitudes may be explained.

22

Cognitive dissonance refers to the need to defend one's self-percep-
tions after a choice has been made or a position taken. Presumably,
such dissonance can be reduced either by enhancing the chosen alterna-
tive or by depreciating the unchosen alternative.

Deutsch, et ail. (1962), however, have demonstrated that post-
decisional dissonance occurs only when an individual perceives his
choice to be inconsistent with the conception of some aspect of him-
self that he is trying to maintain. It is also influenced by the
degree of responsibility a person takes for his choice, the degree to
which he feels he cannot retract the consequences, and the degree of
inconsistency that choice has with his self-conceptions. The stronger
a person's self-conception is, the less likely he will experience
'Self-dissonancef' That is, the less doubt an individual has about his
self-conception, the less ambivalent he is about it, the less he will
experience “self-dissonance” when he perceives self-discrepant be-
havior. For example, an individual confident of being a good student,
will experience less'Self—dissonance“as a result of a poor performance
on one test, then someone with less confidence that he is a good
student.

Deutsch's. et a1. (1962) conceptualization of ”self-dissonance"
seems to differa at least superficially, from that of Edlow and
Kiesler (1966) and Eagly (1967) who have found high self-esteem people
to experience more dissonance with (false) negative information and
to have a greater need to protect themselves against such information

than low self-esteem people. Thus, although Deutsch's et a1. (1962)

23

formulations seem convincing to me, given the other findings, it would
not be surprising, if we find the opposite to hold. ‘

According to Deutsch et al., (1962), post-decisional disso-
nance is minimized when (l) the individual's self-evaluation is se-
cure, (2) the fallibility of a decision can be recognized and ack—
nowledged, (3) the decision or behavior conforms with the individual's
self-evaluation, (4) challenge from others is not anticipated in
respect to his decision, and (5) little personal responsibility is

taken for the decision or behavior.

Other Relevant Research

 

Fand (1955), who originated the Inventory of Feminine Values
(IVF), devised it with the assumption that women who consider them-
selves adequate individuals, would show a flexible concept of the
feminine role by combining both nurturing and achieving elements.
On the other hand, she assumed that women whose self-concept is
"warped," is likely to be rigid in her interpretations of the femi-
nine role. They may find "solutions" either by losing their individu-
ality by identifying with the man in their lives or live through
him, or rebel against any form of dependency and adopt the male values
of achievement. Extreme positions on either end of the continuum
were assumed to be rigid and compulsive.

Fand's study dealt with undergraduate subjects and used a
phenomenological approach, but without objective test data. One of
her findings was that subjects on the extreme ends of the continuum

tended to rate their family life as less than happy, while the medium

24

group came from "happy" families. Autobiographical sketches suggested
that extremely "self-oriented" girls prided themselves in not needing
others, and seemed fearful that they had little to offer besides their
capabilities. The moderately "self—oriented" ones seemed to have

less "tunnel vision," and used less rigid patterns of relating to
people, and were freer from "nagging doubts."

Ohlbaum (1971) also used the IVF with professional and non-
professional women. The professional were divided into two groups,
one representing "Highly Educated Professional Women" (HEP), and
the other "Miscellaneous Professional Women" (MP). The first group
consisted of individuals with Ph.D., M.D., or LLB.degrees. The
second group consisted of women, who worked in professional capacities,
but without any of the above degrees. Their average education was
4.8 years beyond high school. The Spiegel Personality Inventory and
Security-Insecurity Inventory were used besides the Inventory of
Feminine Values.

Her main findings were that a sense of well-being is related
to high achievement, but that the highest achievers were not extreme
in their self-ratings on woman's role. While they did not claim a
highly "self-oriented" position, as measured on the IVF, they presented
themselves on personality measures as comfortably independent, self-
reliant, and satisfied with their accomplishments.

The MP women, on the other hand, described themselves as need-
ing and still striving for independence, achievement and self-fulfill-

ment. They also expressed a considerable degree of insecurity and

25

conflict in the areas of self-fulfillment, and were less "contented"
and expressed more tension even than the non-professional women.
Ohlbaum's observations were that they continued to give the impression
of being highly influenced by conventional attitudes, and that their
extreme "self-orientation” on the IVF represented a struggle for
emancipation and identity. Thus, extreme "self-orientation" on the
IVF may represent conceptual overcorrection in a struggle for that
emancipation, rather than a resolution.

Ohlbaum considered reasons for the differences between the two
groups and suggested that the HEP's may have been motivated originally
by a greater sense of enthusiasm and commitment to a particular field,
rather than preoccupation with self-fulfillment per se. In any case,
it appears that those women, who actually do carry out their role
emancipation, demonstrating it by achievement. tend to integrate both

"other-orientation" and "self-orientation" into their value system.

CHAPTER II
METHODOLOGY

Inventory of Feminine Values (IVE)

The Inventory of Feminine Values is a research instrument con-
structed to assess sex role perceptions of women. It was first de-
signed by Alexandria Botwink Fand in 1955 with the basic hypothesis
that women's role could be characterized as varying on a continuum.

On the one end would be the ”other-oriented" woman who sees her own
satisfaction as secondary to those of husband and children, and where
family responsibilities take precedence over fulfillment of her own
potentials. The other end of the continuum is called "self-orienta-

tion, where the importance of one's own satisfactions are recognized
and the wish exists that one's own abilities and talents be realized
directly.

Thirty-four statements compose the total instrument, seventeen
of which represent an "other-oriented” or passive, and seventeen a
"self-oriented” or active value. The strength of agreement or dis-
agreement is indicated on a five-point scale, ranging from "completely
agree" to "completely disagree" with a mid-point of "no opinion."
The sets are presented in pairs and scoring done on each set of

seventeen. The score of the Inventory represents the differences in

the degree of agreement to each of these two separate sets of statements.

26

27

A score of zero is obtained by a balanced position, where partial
agreement is offered to each of the opposing sets. The strongest
possible "self-oriented" position would be reflected by a score of
+68, and the strongest "other-oriented" position a score of -68. The
Inventory's manual reports self-perceptions to be normally distributed
with a slight tendency toward "self-orientation."

As described earlier, scores are arranged on a continuum, but
are arbitrarily dichotomized at the midpoint. Positive values are
arbitrarily attached to one range, and negative values to the other.

(When originally constructed, the signs were used in reverse.)

Tennessee Self-Concept Scale (TSCS)

 

The nature of the TSCS is especially well suited to this study.
It not only measures overall level of self-esteem, but also contains
subscales which reveal some of the patterns by which an individual

operates.

Total P Score

 

This represents the most important single score and reflects
the overall level of self-esteem. Persons with high scores tend to
like themselves, feel that they are persons of worth, have confidence
in themselves, and act accordingly. Persons with low scores are
doubtful about their own worth, see themselves as undesirable, often
feel anxious, depressed and unhappy, and have little faith and con-
fidence in themselves. Extremely high scores are deviant as well,

and may have been inflated by defensive distortion.

28

Row 1 P Score (Identity)

 

This score includes the items by which a person describes

his basic identity, what he is as he sees himself.

Row 2 P Score (Self-
Satisfaction)

 

 

This score comes from those items where the individual de—
scribes how he feels about the self he perceives. It reflects self-

satisfaction and self-acceptance.

Row 3 P Score (Behavior)

 

This score measures the individual's perception of his own

behavior or the way he functions.

Column A (Physical Self)

 

Here the individual presents his view of the body, physical

appearance, state of health, skills, and sexuality.

Column 8 (Moral-Ethical Self)

 

Here feeling of being "good" or “bad” are described, as well

as satisfaction with one's religion or lack of it.

Column C (Personal Self)

 

This score reflects feelings of adequacy and evaluation of

his personality apart from his body or his relationship to others.

Column 0 (Family Self),

 

One's feelings of adequacy and value as a family member is
reflected by this score. It refers to self-perceptions in relation

to those closest to him.

29

Column E (Social Self)

 

This score reflects relationships with people in general.

A number of subscales offer clues regarding the individual's re-
sponse sets. The self-criticism (SC) score measures deliberate ef-
fort to present a favorable picture, but can also detect excessively
self-critical attitudes. The Defensive Positive (DP) score represents
a more subtle social desirability measure. High DP scores represent
excessively positive self-descriptions, stemming from defensive dis-
tortion. A significantly low DP score, on the other hand, suggests
a deficiency in the usual defenses for maintaining self-esteem.

Measures of Variability (V) and Distribution (0) are also in-
cluded. The V score provides a simple measure of inconsistency from
one area of self-perception to another. While very high scores sug-
gest a lack of integration of compartmentalized areas, extremely low
scores may reflect rigidity. The 0 scores measure the degree of
certainty about the way one sees himself. High scores indicate that
the individual is very definite about what he says, while low scores
occur with people who are being defensive and guarded.

The measure of Conflict is a purely operational one. Net
Conflict is a score that measures the extent to which an individual's
responses to positively—worded (P) items differ from, or conflict
with, his responses to negatively-worded (N) items in the same area
of self-perception. Acquiescence conflict occurs when the P scores

are greater than the N scores. It means, according to Fitts (1965),

30

that the subject is over-affirming his positive attributes, as com-
pared to denying his negative ones. Denial conflict is the opposite
and means that a subject is over-denying his negative attributes in
relation to the way he affirms his positive characteristics. He con-
centrates on eliminating the negative.

The Total Conflict score ignores the directional trend, but
sums the conflict regardless of signs. High scores indicate confusion,
contradiction, and general conflict in self-perception. Very low
scores suggest an artificial, defensive stereotype rather than a true
self-image.

Additioanl Empirical Scales also reflect tendencies toward
maladjustment. The General Maladjustment (GM) Scale is composed of
24 itmes which differentiate psychiatric patients from non-patients,
but do not differentiate one patient group from another. It serves
as a general index of adjustment-maladjustment without clues to the
nature of the pathology.

The Psychosis (Psy) Scale differentiates psychotic patients
from other groups, while the Neurosis (N) Scale reflects similarity
to neurotic patients. The Personality Integration (PI) Scale con-

sists of 25 items that differentiate PI groups from other groups.

Hypotheses

 

The hypotheses are designed to partially sort out which of
a number of "self-oriented" positions on women's role are related to
the self-concept and to what degree. Is high degree of "self orien-

tation" important? Are smaller discrepancies between one's own role

31

position and the estimated position of other women related to better
self-esteem than otherwise? Are smaller discrepancies between one's
own role position and the socially desirable position, as judged by
others, related to better self-esteem?

Additional secondary hypotheses deal with internal dynamics,

which may elucidate the overall results.

Maingflypotheses

 

The first hypothesis is concerned with the degree of ”self-

orientation, within a group of “self-oriented” to neutral-oriented
women. (Traditional "other-oriented" women are not included in this
study.)

Hypothesis 1: Degree of "self-orientation" (as measured

by the IVF) is unrelated to degree of self-
esteem (as measured by the TSCS).

 

No differences are expected, even though some studies have
shown moderately “self-oriented" Ss to have the highest level of
functioning. But in Ohlbaum's (1971) study, it was the educational
differences that represented the main effects, which were measured
by different instruments. Fand's study used more subjective criteria
in evaluating functioning and was carried out in 1955. At this time,
however, extremely "self-oriented" 55 are more likely to be reinforced
by some reference group, whose support and regard would enhance self-
esteem. Moreover, the feeling of commitment to women's concerns,
often currently implied by such a position, would have positive ef-

fects.

32

However, it is considered likely that the degree of "self-
orientation" asserted may reflect social desirability as much as
actual behavior (see Hypothesis 4). It is also assumed that many in-
dividuals arrive at different types of internal balance with similar
results.

Hypothesis 2: Self-esteem (as measured by the TSCS) will

be negatively related to degree of discrep-
ancy between one's view of one's own position

on women's role (as measured by the IVF) and
estimates of the average woman's position.

 

Research regarding assumed similarity between oneself and
others concurs with such a prediction (Fitts, 1954; Fitts and Bell,
1969; Richards, Mates and Whitten, 1967).

Social judgment theory concepts would also suggest that highly
discrepant positions are less valued, while one's own frame of ref-
erence serves as a standard of judgment. In turn, according to
Deutsch's an: al. (1962) concept of self-dissonance, an individual
with relatively weaker self-conceptualization would be more likely to
accentuate his own decisions or value by describing the alternatives
as less valued than his own.

Hypothesis 3: Degree of women's "self-orientation" (as

measured by the IVF) is negatively related
to their estimates of the average woman's
role preference. The greater the degree
of "self—orientation," the more "other-

oriented" will be the estimate of the aver-
age women's position.

 

Such a prediction would be consistent with the contrast
effect described in social judgment theory (Shaw and Costanzo, 1970).

Hypothesis 4: The position asserted in respect to woman's
role (as measured by the IVF) is positively
related to the desirability the individual
attaches to that position.

 

33

According to social judgment theory, in the absence of ob-

jective criteria, one's internal frame of reference serves as one's

standard of judgment (Shaw and Costanzo, 1970). It is assumed,

therefore, that one's own frame of reference will appear most desir-

able to the person making that judgment.

The prediction also has support from previous studies, which

have found consistently high correlations between own positions on

the IVF and Ideal Woman ratings by the same person (Fand, 1955;

Steinman, 1963).

Hypothesis 5:

 

Self-esteem (as measured by the TSCS) will
be negatively related to the degree of
discrepancy between one's view of one's
own position on woman's role (as measured
by the IVF) and the socially desirable
position as judged by other women.

Individuals who deviate from positions considered socially

desirable in Unepopulation are often perceived negatively and mis-

treated (Dcnelson, 1973). Negative feedback from others tends to

put a strain on one's own self—esteem.

Hypothesis 6:

 

Hypothesis 7:

 

Secondary Hypotheses

 

Degree of Self-Criticism (as measured by the
TSCS) is positively related to high degrees
of discrepancies between self-ratings and
estimates of the average woman's role po-
sitions (as measured by the IVF).

Degree of Positive Defensiveness (as measured
by the TSCS) is negatively related to degree
of discrepancies between self-ratings and
estimates of the average woman's role posi-
tion (as measured by the IVF).

Both the SC and DP measures serve as social desirability

corrections for the TSCS. The predictions are partially derived from

34

the pilot study, which suggested that high discrepancy and high "self-
orientation“ subjects tend to be lower than average on the social de-
sirability factors on the TSCS, while the comparison groups were
higher than average, especially on the DP scale.

Any differences on these scales, if these should occur, will
require careful consideration in the interpretation of the Total P
scores. Extremely low SC scores or high DP scores would invalidate
the Total P scores.

Both scores may also be relevant to the evaluation of personal-
ity integration, conflict, or maladjustment. While Personality In-
tegration Ss tend to be slightly more self-critical than the average
person, they also tend to have slightly higher DP scores. 0n the
other hand, Ss classed as unstable personalities, have been found to
be even more self-critical and much lower on the DP scale. This would
be consistent with Deutsch's et a1. (1962) conceptualization that
greater "self-dissonance” would be related to the degree of responsi-
bility a person takes for his decision or behavior.

Hypothesis 8: Conflict and maladjustment, other than psy-
chosis (Conflict, V. and N scores, as
measured by the TSCS) are positively re-
lated to degree of discrepancies between
self-ratings and estimates of the average

woman in respect to role positions (as
measured by the IVF).

 

This prediction was demonstrated by the pilot study (See
Appendix A). Further support is offered by the theory that individuals
with less consistent self—conceptualizations would be more likely to
experience "self-dissonance,“ which tends to be associated with in-

creased polarization between alternatives.

35

Psy scores, on the other hand, are expected to correlate
negatively, as was observed in the pilot study. "Self-orientation"
is a culturally consistent, realistic manner of dealing with conflict,
which a psychotic individual would not be able to utilize, but a

neurotic individual could.

Subjects

Both the IVF (Steinman, 1966), and the TSCS (Fitts, 1965)
manuals report little or no systematic relationship with demographic
variables, except for TSCS differences in subjects under 20 or over
60 years of age. Therefore, control for these variables was consid-
ered less than crucial. However, considering that trends may change
and differentially affect responses from various subgroups, varia-
bility was reduced by selecting subjects who are similar in respect
to marital and employment status, presence of children, as well as
educational and socioeconomic levels.

Since the design required data from women that give both
moderately and extremely "self—oriented“ responses to the IVF, sub-
jects with above average educational backgrounds were selected, as
these were expected to have had greatest exposure to the current
liberalizing trends. It was also presumed that variability in aspira-
tion level would be reduced in an already highly educated population.
Therefore, the sample included only women who have obtained Bachelor
degrees and completed some graduate courses, but none with degrees

beyond the MA.

36

The age range between 25 and 40 was chosen with the expectation
that age variability would have fewer significant effects on the main
variables examined in this study. Only married women with children
were selected, considering that this would be the most common group
within the specified age range.

Finally, only employed women were included, who were working

either fulltime or parttime.

Method of Subject Selection

 

The majority of subjects were selected from two sources, both
drawn from information available at the Michigan State University reg-
istrar's office. The MSU student directory contains a list of all
students currently enrolled at MSU, including information regarding
their marital status, educational level, and major of study. Telephone
numbers and addresses are also listed, unless withheld by the student.
A similar list had been furnished to the Women's Resource Center at
the Student Services Building, but this list included only women,
aged 30 and over.

It became apparant that the majority of women in graduate
school were enrolled in the department of education on a parttime
basis, were taking evening courses, and many were employed, either
fulltime or parttime. Women enrolled in this field were approached
first, arranging appointment times convenient to them, in conjunction
with their class schedules. In addition to convenience, it was con-

sidered that variability in subjects' characteristics would be further

37

minimized, if most, or even all, subjects were drawn from the same
general field of professional interest.

The list of women, aged 30 and over, however, became exhausted,
partly because of unlisted telephone numbers, partly due to the limit-
ing specifications, and also due to the extremely busy schedules im-
plied by work, school, and family demands. Only very few individuals,
however, seemed frankly disinterested in participating.

Since the general student directory proved to be relatively
inefficient in selecting those with the required qualifications, other
methods of selection were also used. Additional subjects were drawn
from lists furnished by individuals, who had either participated or
were offering assistance in providing names of women with the rele-
vant specifications. In order to avoid biasing the data, only sev—
eral individuals were approached from any of these lists.

Still another method of selection occurred, as some subjects
requested appointments during their free time, or after work hours
at their place of work, usually a public school. On a number of oc-
casions, these individuals solicited other women at work to partici-
pate. However, even an exhaustive search for suitable subjects
rarely resulted in a total of more than one or two additional sub-
jects who qualified. An exhaustive search in these instances seemed
desirable , in so far that it reduced the biasing effect of voluntary
self-selection. Subjects from East Lansing, Lansing, Okemos, Haslett,
Grand Ledge, Howell, Trenton and Flint schools were included in this

manner.

38

Finally, women with different educational majors and in dif-
ferent professional fields from the above lists were also approached.
The additional group of twenty subjects, which was needed to
provide separate social desirability ratings were selected in a simi-
lar manner. Efforts were made to match the general characteristics
of both samples.

The nature of the design required one further method of selec-
tion, namely that protocols for the individual's own orientation, on
woman's role, fit into the "self-oriented" range. This requirement,
of course, did not apply to those rating Form C, the Social Desir-
ability rating. Only six such protocols were eliminated, which would

otherwise have been included in the sample of 120.

Method of Approach to Subjects

 

Initial contact was made by telephone, at which time the ex-
perimenter identified herself as a student collecting data for her
dissertation and requesting 45 minutes of the individual's time to
complete several questionnaires. The subject was told how her name
had been obtained, and it was explained that an appointment would be
necessary, as the questionnaires were not to be handled by mail,
though an interview per se was not required. If the subject appeared
willing, several options were suggested in respect to time and place
of appointment, and the subject was invited to make other suggestions.
The area of research was identified as being related to woman's role
and self-concepts. In most instances the subject was told that she

would receive $3 as a token for her time. Occasionally this information

39

was omitted, either in error, or because it appeared irrelevant, or
even inappropriate. After an appointment was arranged, the call was
completed.

This approach was later modified in order to include additional
screening of subjects' characteristics. The experimenter explained
that certain characteristics were specified only for reasons of ob-
taining similarity in the sample, and stated the qualifications es-
pecially sought for. Occasionally subjects, who disqualified themselves,
immediately offered names of individuals who had the sought-after char-
acteristics.

Screening efforts were minimized in a work setting, where
some women spontaneously offered to participate. In order to avoid
any embarrassment in revealing age or emphasizing marital or graduate
status in the presence of co-workers, data were obtained and later
screened, using the biographical questionnaires included in the data

packets.

Method of Data Collection

 

Though the original plan was to collect data in groups, this
was less feasible than arranging individual appointments. Many sub-
jects, who participated, did so only when appointments could be fitted
into their own schedules. In many instances, however, it was possible
to make overlapping appointments.

Most of the appointments on campus were made in the education
building, some in the library. In the education building, the meeting

place consisted of a quiet lounge-study area. A name tag identified

40

the experimenter, and the subject identified herself on arrival. She
was then given a data packet and individual instructions.

An introductory letter (See Appendix 8) described the general
nature of the study, but explained that the specific focus could not
be revealed at that time. The subject was invited to leave her name
and address on a separate sheet of paper so that a summary of results
could be sent to her later. It was also explained that the informa-
tion was anonymous, as the packets had code numbers and the individual's
name was not recorded on any answer sheets.

The packets further included a biographical information sheet,
Form A and B of the Inventory of Feminine Values, and the Tennessee
Self-Concept Scale (See Appendix C). Form A on the IVF is the stand-
ard form for rating of own position on woman's role. Form 8 contains
the same questions in scrambled order and was given with the instruc-
tions to answer the questions as the subject believed the average
woman would. It also gave the opportunity to record any special frame
of reference used in rating this form.

The TSCS was to be completed after these two forms. The
subjects were also told that one more questionnaire will be given
after these have been completed. She then chose a convenient place
in the study area. When the first part was completed, the packet
was returned in exchange for Form C of the IVF, which contained the
instructions to rate the same questions as the healthy, well-integrated
woman would. A check for $3 was given at this time, which, however, a
number of people returned. Most subjects gave their names and addresses

before leaving, requesting summaries of results.

41

The same procedure was followed in different settings. In
the school setting, testing was done either in the teacher's own
study area or in the lounge. Other professionals were met in their
own offices. Finally a number of appointments were made in the indi-
vidual's home.

Interruptions occurred in all settings, except those made on
campus. However, these did not interfere with the subjects' comple-
tion of the questionnaires. When children were present in the home,
the experimenter entertained them in order to free the subject for
her task. Husbands were not present. Spontaneous remarks were common,
but the content of the questionnaires was not discussed until com-

pleted.

Description of the Sample

 

The subjects who completed the total protocol (Samplel)
consisted of 120 women from the Lansing, and Detroit area of Michigan.
The additional group of women, who provided social desirability
ratings only (Samplez) was drawn from the same sample pool.

The biographical questionnaires requested information re-
garding age, marital and employment status, number of children, type
of employment, educational level attained and aspired to, and a rough
estimate of own and family income. The biographical data are summar-
ized in Tables 1 to 6.

Any data obtained from women other than married, those with-
out children, those not employed, or whose age and educational level

were outside the specified range were not included in the sample.

42

TABLE l.--Means and ranges for Age and Number of Children for Sub-
jects in Samples 1 and 2.

 

-_—-——-—-—n—‘———_—_‘-
-..-_..—_._.__-_.

 

 

 

Demograph1c Sample 1 Sample 2

Var1ab1es Range Mean Range Mean
Age 25-40 33.6 25-40 33.5
Number of Children 1—6 2.2 1-6 2.3

 

However, their data was also scored and analyzed in separate subgroups.
The results are listed in Appendix 0.

Educational levels were somewhat difficult to identify with
complete certainty. The biographical questionnaires had listed number
of years of education beyond college, which were to be identified, ex-
pecting an MA degree to represent one year beyond college, except for
rare MA degrees, which require two years. Many subjects assumed the
years to refer to time span, though they usually inquired about this,
and corrections were made by them. Since many subjects were taking
only one or two courses at once, reference to time would have re-
sulted in a different classification. Judgment was required in some
instances to determine level of education. In most such instances,
aspiration levels assisted in making this judgment, as these were
usually stated in terms of degrees. Subjects, who indicated gradua-
tion as MA's in June, were classed into the middle category. Those
giving evidence of 100 or more credits beyond their BA, were placed

in the top third category.

43

TABLE 2.--Educational Levels of Subjects from Samples 1 and 2.

 

._ ..___._.--——-___———-

 

 

 

 

Educational Sample 1 Sample 2

Levels Number Percentage Number Percentage

Some graduate

work beyond

Bachelor degree 63 52.5 13 65

MA completed

or almost

completed 45 37.5 5 25

Approximately

two years of

graduate work 12 10 2 10
N=120 N=20

 

_..._ .. ._-. -Nh- _... ..._.-.__. .s . ._.... ~._ a...__~_. -_;_~’__—_H_._ .‘hm

 

‘- - --..__. --- __ v.___. -V. - ._ _ _ -. - s... 5

Sample 1

 

 

 

Aspiration

Levels Number Percentage Number Percentage
No further

education 11 9.17 3 15
MA 68 56.67 9 45
Education

Specialist 13 10.83 0 O
ED.D., Ph.D.

or LL.D. 28 23.33 5 25
Continuous

courses 0 O 2 10
Not stated 0 O l 5

N=120 N-20

 

44

TABLE 4.—-Own Income Levels of Subjects from Samples 1 and 2.

.-__——_-_—-.... -__A-__.4_——.—._‘.-.____—‘..--

 

 

 

 

Own Income Sample 1 Sample 2

Levels Number Percentage Number Percentage

$ 0 - 5,000 34 28.3 4 20

$5,000 - 10,000 26 21.7 5 25

$10,000 - 20,000 59 49.2 10 50

$20,000 up 1 .8 l 5
N=120 N=20

 

TABLE 5.--Family Income Levels of Subjects from Sample 1 and 2.

 

 

 

Family Income Sample 1 Sample 2

Levels Number Percentage Number Percentage
S 0 - 5,000 O 0 O 0
$5,000 - 10,000 3 2.5 l 5
$10,000 - 20,000 46 38.3 6 30
$20,000 up 70 58.3 13 65

Not stated 1 .8 0 0

N=120 N=20

 

45

TABLE 6.--Type of Work Reported by Subjects in Sample 1 and 2.

._- .__..._._ _....,_ “.— ._.._- - . -.— -

Number of 55 Number of Ss

Type Of Work in Sample 1 in Sample 2

 

Teaching

03
\l

15
Librarian

Teacher coordinator
Teacher consultant
Counsellor

Reading consultant
School nurse
Instructor of nursing
Social worker
Secretary

dubbdwwmdm

Director of church music
Music 1
Occupational therapist 1

Rehabilitation 2

Graduate Assistant 6 1
Research 2

Personnel evaluation 1

Speech and Language Pathologist 1
Management consultant ‘
Administrator

Own business

Interviewer

Public Affairs specialist

_.1._o._a__aN_—a

Factory management

Director of student center,
Public school 1

Advertisment layout, newspaper 1
Not stated 6 l
N=120 N=20

 

46

Aspiration level ranged between no further plans, to Educa-
tional Specialist, and Ph.D. degrees. In fact, the graduate level
represented in this sample probably increased variability in these
aspirations. Current enrollment in itself might represent a signal
of the existence of such variability, especially as the highest levels
would be in closer reach.

Own Income also varied considerably, sometimes as a function
of the subjects' graduate status, but more often due to a parttime
versus fulltime work pattern. The questionnaires do not completely
reflect these considerations, which were verbally expressed by the
subjects. Family Income was also lower in a number of instances, due
to the husband's graduate status. Thus the income levels reported
do not reflect income potential or socioeconomic level so much as

differences in work patterns.

_Desjgn and Statistical Methods

 

The data were from 120 subjects who fit the selection cri-
teria. The TSCS was computer scored by National Scanning Laboratories
in Columbus, Ohio. IVF protocols were handscored by the experimenter,
and recorded by an assistant to establish scoring accuracy. Discrep-
ancy scores were calculated by subtraction, disregarding directional
differences. DiscrepancyI scores represented the differences between
self-ratings and Average Woman ratings. Discrepancy2 scores refer to
the deviation between self-ratings from the mean of social desirabil-

ity (SD) ratings from samplez.

47

Two additional IVF discrepancy measures appeared to be of
interest, though these were not included in the predictions. Dis-
crepancy3 refers to the differences between self-ratings and own 50
ratings, whereas Discrepancy4 measures differences between estimates
of the average woman's position and own SD ratings.

The product moment coefficient was calculated to test each
of the predictions. Variability in biographical backgounds was
identified and their correlation with the variables of interest ex-
amined. Partial correlations were calculated in those instances
where the main variables had mutual relationships with the biographi-
cal data.

In addition, the total sample] was divided into upper, middle,
and lower thirds according to size of discrepancy] scores, and the
TSCS scores of the three groups were compared using analysis of vari-
ance. Though the design originally provided for plotted profiles
to be drawn for each of the three groups, this was not done, since
no differences between the groups had emerged. Instead, the profile
for the total sample was drawn, in order to visually compare with

national norms.

CHAPTER III

RESULTS

Results will be presented in terms of their confirmation or
lack of confirmation of specific predictions of Chapter II. After
data pertaining to the predictions have been presented, other findings
will be summarized. Appendix 0 contains additional tables which may
be useful to the reader in considering trends in different samples.
Means for specific items which compose the IVF are presented in Ap-
pendix E, Table 26.

Hypothesis 1: Degree of “self-orientation" (as measured

by the IVF) is unrelated to degree of self-
esteem (as measured by the TSCS).

The data support this prediction, as the correlation between
Total P on the TSCS and “self-orientation" scores on the IVF did not
reach any acceptable level of statistical significance (r = .114).
The product moment coefficient would need to reach a size of .150 for
a predicted correlation to be significant at the 5 percent level of
confidence.

The correlations of biographical variables with these main
variables are presented in Table 7. No single biographical variable
had asignificantrelationship with both of the main variables of in-
terest in this prediction. Therefore, they would not affect our

finding (or lack of it).

48

49

Thus, according to these data, it appears that degree of
one's "self—orientation" has little relationship with degree of one's
self-esteem.

Hypothesis 2: Self-esteem (as measured by the TSCS) is
negatively related to degree of discrepancy
between one's view of one's own position on
woman's role (as measured by the IVF) and
estimates of the average woman's position.

This prediction was not supported by the data, as the product
moment coefficient between "self-orientation“ and Total Positive
(Total P) was only .067.

As can be seen in Table 7, only Aspiration Level proved to
have any statistically significant relationship with Discrepancy1
scores and the only biographical variable related to Total P was Own
Income. Again, as none of these variables correlates significantly
with both Discrepancy1 and Total P, these could not account for the
lack of relationship.

It would then be consistent with these data to assume that
one's self-esteem has little or no relationship with discrepancies
between one's own position on woman's role and one's estimate of the
average woman's position.

Hypothesis 3: Degree of women's ”self—orientation" (as

measured by the IVF) is negatively related

to their estimates of the average woman's
role position. The greater the degree of
“self-orientation,” the more "other—oriented"

are estimates of the average woman's role
position.

 

50

TABLE 7.--Correlations of Biographical Variables with Total P (TSCS),
"Self-orientation" (IVF), Discrepancy1 Scores, and Estimates
of the Average Woman.

 

 

-_.__.. . _._.4.—.._...._...-- —_._-

Biographical Self-

 

 

Variables Orientation Total P Discrepancy] 3:32:99
Age -.183* .064 .101 .009
Number of children -.246** .059 -.157 .065
Education .089 -.153 .010 .045
Aspiration level .227* -.O64 .196* -.1778
Own income —.138 -.182* -.129 .093
Family income -.227* -.153 -.l41 .027
*p §_.05

** < .01

ap 3 .06

The data confirm this prediction, as the product moment co-
efficient between the two main variables was significant well beyond
the .01 level of confidence (r = -.33l). Only a coefficient of .232
would be required to reach that level of significance.

In considering any effects of biographical variables on these
results, it is again apparent from Table 7 that none of these variables
have significant relationships with both main variables in question,
and therefore cannot account for the relationship between the two.
However, the possibility exists that Aspiration Level is contributing
to the size of this relationship. Subjects with higher Aspiration

Levels not only express a higher degree of "self-orientation," but

51

also give lower average woman ratings, though the latter tendency
failed to reach statistical significance. A partial correlation,
holding Aspiration Level constant, did reduce the correlation between
the main variables of interest somewhat. However, that relationship
remained highly significant (r = -.303).
Hypothesis 4: The position asserted in respect to woman's
role (as measured by the IVF) is positively

related to the desirability the individual
attaches to that position.

 

This prediction is strongly supported by the data, with the
product moment coefficient between "self-orientation" scores and
Social Desirability (50) scores reaching .651 (p < .001). As "self-
orientation” and SD scores were found to have mutual relationships
with Age, Number of Children, and Family Income (Table 8), partial
correlations were computed, holding these biographical variables
constant (Table 9). Additional correlations with biographical vari-
ables were computed, with "self—orientation" and SD alternatingly
being partialled out (Table 8).

As cantxeseen from Table 8 and 9 on the following page, the
size of the relationship between $0 and "self-orientation“ was mini-
mally affected by the partial correlations. On the other hand, any
significant relationships between the main variables in question and
Age, Number of Children, and Family Income disappeared as a result
of this computation. Only the degree of the relationship between
Aspiration Level and "self-orientation" was strengthened, which would

be of interest separate from the hypothesis tested. Further focus

52

TABLE 8.--Corre1ations and Partial Correlations for Biographical varia-
bles vs. "Self-Orientation" and Social Desirability Rat-

 

 

 

ings.
. . Self— SD
3;gg;gp2;cal Oiizntation Orientation SD (Self-Orientation
(SD constant) Constant)
Age -.183* -.068 -.204* -.113
Number of
Children -.246* -.110 -.253** -.l27
Education .089 -.111
Aspiration
Level .227* .260** .046
Own Income -.l38 .060 -.212*
Family Income -.227* -.153 -.258** -.150

 

* p.: .05
**p < .001

TABLE 9.--Correlation Between "Self-Orientation" and Social Desir-
ability, Including Partial Correlations, Holding Biographi-
cal Variables Constant.

 

 

 

.. “7.”...- -_.___‘ ...___

"Self-Orientation” and

Partialled-Out Variables Soc1al Des1reab1l1ty

 

Self-Orientation .651
Age held constant .638

Number of Children
held constant .624

Family Income
held constant .680

All three variables
held constant .613

 

53

will be given to these partial correlations in later sections. In
considering Hypothesis 4, the data reflect women's tendency to de-
scribe their own role positions in very similar terms as the position
they consider to be socially desirable.

Hypothesis 5: Self-esteem (as measured by the TSCS) will
be negatively related to the degree of
discrepancy between one's view of one's
own position on woman's role (as measured
by the IVF) and the socially desirable
position, as judged by other women (Dis-
crepancyz).

 

No support for this prediction was evident from the data,
as the correlation between Total P and Discrepancy2 was very low (r =
.049). Also no significant relationship emerged between any bio-
graphical variables and Discrepancyz, as can be seen in Table 10.
Once more, therefore, differences in biographical background could
not account for the lack of a relationship between the main variables
of interest, none being correlated with both.

Since Total P and Discrepancy2 were, in fact, unrelated, it
appears that women's self-esteem may be little affected by discrep-
ancies between their own role positions and those considered to be
socially desirable by other women.

Hypothesis 6: Degree of Self-Criticism (as measured by the

TSCS) is positively related to degrees of
discrepancies between self-ratings and esti-

mates of the average woman's role position
(as measured by the IVF).

 

Hypothesis 7: Degree of Positive Defensiveness (as measured
on the IVF) is negatively related to degree
of discrepancies between self-ratings and
estimates of the average woman's role position
(as measured on the IVF).

 

54

TABLE lO.--Correlations Between Biographical Variables and Discrep-

 

 

ancyz.

Biographical Variables Discrepancy2
Age - .040 .
Number of Children .004
Education .059
Aspiration Level .073

Own Income -.109
Family Income -.O4l

 

Neither of these predictions were supported by the data.

Nor

did any biographical variables have significant relationships with

either Self-Criticism (SC) or Defensive Positive (DP) responses.

The

product moment coefficients remained low in all instances (Table 11).

Thus it appears that, contrary to results from the pilot study, women

who perceive greater similarity between their own position and the

average woman's position on woman's role, are no less self-critical,

nor more defensive in their self-descriptions than are those, who per-

ceive the differences between themselves and other women to be quite

great.

Hypothesis 8:

 

Conflict and Maladjustment other than psy-
chosis (Conflict, V, and N scores, as meas-
ured by the TSCS) are positively related

to degree of discrepancies between self-
ratings and estimates of the average woman
in respect to role positions (as measured
by the IVF).

55

TABLE ll.--Correlations Between Self-Criticism (SC) and Defensive
Positive (DP) vs. Discrepancy1 and Biographical Variables.

 

 

Correlated Variables SC DP

Discrepancy1 .033 -.O64
Age .075 .015
Number of Children .122 .036
Education -.O32 -.lO6
Aspiration Level .009 -.O38
Own Income -.113 -.O7O
Family Income -.O42 .095

 

Results lend very little support to the above predictions.
As is evident from Table 12, the relationship between Total Conflict
(Total C) and Discrepancy1 (discrepancy between self-ratings and
average woman ratings) fell short of the .05 level of statistical
significance, but was close to it (p = .06), suggesting a weak re-
lationship. The relationship between Net Conflict (Net C) and Dis-
crepancy1 is a stronger one. However, unless Net C is extremely low,
it does not represent a maladjustment measure (Fitts, 1965). No
significant relationships emerge between Discrepancy1 and Total
Variability (V), General Maladjustment (GM) or Neuroticism (N). Fi-
nally, the correlation between Discrepancy1 and Psychoticism (Psy)
scores was in the expected negative direction (r = -.l6l, p §_.05,

one-tailed).

56

TABLE 12.--Correlations Between Discrepancy1 Scores and Maladjustment
Measures.

-

 

Maladjustment Measures Discrepancy1
Total Conflict .146*a
Net Conflict -.217*
Total Variability .045
General Maladjustment -.020
Neuroticism .071
Psychoticism -.l61*

 

*p 5_.OS. one-tailed.

*ap = .06, one—tailed

TABLE l3.--Correlations Between Biographical Variables vs. Maladjust-
ment Measures and Discrepancy].

 

Bio-

 

 

graphical Total C Net C T053] GM N Psy Discrepancy1
Variables

Age .005 -.037 -.087 .093 .039 -.027 -.101
Number of

Children - 154 -.O48 -.082 .059 .012 -.057 -.157
Education .178*a .063 .079 -.o14 -.042 .151 .010
Aspiration

Level .043 .005 .077 .005 -.016 .036 .196*
Own Income .109 .053 .053 -.083 -.O46 .327** -.129
Family

Income -.131 .185* .074 .063 .136 .151 -.l4l
*

.05, two-tailed
.Ol, two-tailed
.06, two-tailed

**
*a

IIIAlA

P
P
P

57

Inspection of Table 13 again ascertains that biographical
variables do not account for the relationships between the variables
under examination. Though Aspiration Level has a significant posi-
tive relationship with Discrepancy], as had been noted earlier, no
significant relationship with any of the maladjustment measures
emerged. Own Income, which does have a sizeable positive relation-
ship with Psy scores, however, has no significant relationship with
Discrepancy].

According to these data then, women with high discrepancies
between their own positions on woman's role and their estimates of
the average woman's role positions, show only some trends toward
greater Total Conflict. They do show some Denial Conflict (Net C),
that is, they tend to over-affirm their negative attributes in re—
lation to the way they affirm their positive characteristics (Fitts,
1965). However, no greater General Maladjustment (GM), Neuroticism
(N), or Variability (V) is shown by their expressed self-concepts.
Instead, such discrepancies tend to be related to giving fewer re-

sponses typical of psychotics (Psy).

Group and Normative Comparisons

 

Even though few correlations between Discrepancy1 and the
predicted variables on the TSCS emerged, the total sample was divided
into High Discrepancy (HO), Medium Discrepancy (MD), and Low Discrep-
ancy (LD) groups in order‘txi observe <differences in the overall pro-
files of the TSCS and to compare these with national norms. Discrep—

ancy means and ranges for each group are presented in Table 14.

58

TABLE l4.--Means and Ranges of Discrepancy] scores for HD, MD, and

 

 

 

LO groups.
. Discrepancy Discrepancy
D1screpancy Groups Mean Range
High Discrepancy (HD) 50.7 41-82
Medium Discrepancy (MD) 32.5 25-41
Low Discrepancy (LD) 12.3 0-24
TOTAL Sample1 31.8 0-82

 

TSCS differences between the groups were then tested by
means of analysis of variance. However, not a single variable emerged
that significantly differentiated between the groups. TSCS scores
for each group are presented in Appendix E.

Since the groups did not differ on the TSCS, separate pro-
file patterns were not drawn. Instead, the total sample means were
plotted in order to visually compare these with national norms (Fig-
ure 1).

From this profile it is apparent that the mean for Total
Positive (Total P) scores was somewhat above the national norms, as
were most of the subscores that contribute to Total P. Only the
mean for Identity (Row 1) and Physical Self (Col. A) fell below the
national mean, Identity at the 42nd percentile, but Physical Self
as low as the 28th percentile. The highest peak reached, was that

of Self-Satisfaction (Row 2, 75th percentile).

59

.FmPaEmm com mcmmz mump--.p wcsmwm

a o A. Q. 0 g ‘8

: o . a. : 2 3 u o.
C c- . s 3 o~ 3 ad

 

_ s .. .0. U a ‘
. E H l on >ma 10 . O . . tutou... 1 .
. _ s .0! 439 lo: .4JOU
11111. L. . f . . 11. . . . . athluulut .
aua‘f .(viixu (0.»)..pr6 >>_£G(.I¢> J—BC 1. 5).».ICQ
.r L
fl . )
............ ..............a. 1. . _ . -2 .
tenffiln ruin! .0! Sol) .
08 63:0 6 833:6
2:; 3:0: _ m o ._ m »

.UC-l/ '4‘

EH; xvi. 0:1... 1(_.V

60

Means for Variability (V) and Total Conflict (Total C) were
below the average for the general population. Total V, in fact, was
quite low, the mean being at the 22nd percentile of the national norms,
but not low enough to warrant interpretations regarding rigidity
(Fitts, 1965). The mean for Total C was at the 42nd percentile. GM
and N, however, were slightly higher than the national mean, but did
not reach beyond the 60th percentile.

Thus, this sample consisting of rather highly “self-oriented,"
working women with families seemed to be somewhat higher in self-
esteem, as compared to normative populations. Their Self-Satisfaction
(Row 2), and self—concepts in respect to Moral—Ethical Self (Col. 8),
Personal Self (Col C), and Social Self (Col E) is especially high.

But they fell below average on Identity Self (Row 1) and Physical
Self (C01 A). They were somewhat more consistent in their self-
descriptions than the general population, but their General Maladjust-

ment was mildly higher.

Additional Findings Regarding

-~ .‘__.._. “--‘~.—-

Biographical Variables

 

 

The following section includes a closer focus on the rela-
tionship between biographical variables and several main variables
in question. A number of these relationships have already been re-
ported, but additional partial correlations clarify the results still
further. Significant relationships between biographical variables
and subscales contributing to Total Positive (Total P) will also be

presented.

61

As was evident in Table 8, ”self-orientation“ had a signifi—
cant relationship with Age, Number of Children, Aspiration Level,
and Family Income, but not with Education and Own Income. However,
all of the significant relationships, except Aspiration Level, dis-
appeared when SD was held constant. Thus it is clear that the rela-
tionship between ”self-orientation” and different biographical char-
acteristics is often mediated by a social desirability factor.

However, the mutual relationship that "self-orientation" and
SD ratings have with a certain biographical characteristic may also
be mediated by a second biographical variable. For example, it ap-
pears that Number of Children represents the key to the negative re-
lationship that both "self—orientation” and SD have with Age. That
is, as the number of children increases (with increasing age), a
woman's "self-orientation” decreases, and she considers this to be
desirable. Thus, the relationship between "self—orientation" and
Age disappeared, not only when 50 was held constant, but also when
Number of Children was held constant (Table 15). Likewise, the rela-
tionship between SD and Age disappeared, not only when "self-orienta-
tion" was held constant, but also when Number of Children was par- -
tialled out. It appears, therefore, that the mutual relationship
between "self-orientation," SD, and Age (at least in this age range),
is actually a function of the number of children a woman has.

In the case of different Family Income Levels, a more compli-
cated pattern exists, the 50 ratings being mediated by Number of

Children, but self-ratings not (Table 15). The negative relationship

62

VI

 

 

~O. arr

mo. w a ..

~m_.- om_.- «kmmm.- «m_m.- Qm_.- xNNN.1 meoocH
3.2.8

8f- m:.- 58.- $0.- $0.- .32.- 2%
Aucmumcou Aucmpmcou Apcmpmcoo :mcv_?;uv Aucmumcou omv cowpmucmwco mmFmecm>
coco—mzuv om w_mmv om om cowpmucmwco-w_mm cowpmucme01mem -w_mm Fmowcamcmowm

I 1111. I 1 III . .I .111. liIl t. l . .. .1 I 311111 IIEIIIIVAIY

.pcmumcou :mcu__;u mo congaz use .om .mmcwpmm1m_mm m:_u_o: .m:o_um_mccou Fmvucma
mcwc:_ocH .om use :co_pmpcm_co-e_mm= now; mEoocH >Fw5md ncm mm< cmmzumm mcowmemccoocmch11.m_ m4m<H

63

between Family Income and "self-orientation" remains significant when
Number of Children was partialled out, but the relationship between

SD ratings and Family Income disappeared. However, when 50 was held
constant, any relationship between Family Income and "self-orientation"
also vanished. Thus, either a more general 50 factor, unrelated to
family size, seems to affect women's self—ratings in higher income
brackets, or the effects of family size are affecting these women only
indirectly via the SD factor, e.g., women with more children may tend
to view lower “self-orientation” to be more desirable. Their actual
orientation is associated with that, rather than the number of children
they have.

Similar to Family Income, Own Income also had a negative re-
lationship with SD ratings (Table 8). As higher Own Income, in this
sample, generally indicted fulltime employment, this finding would
suggest that parttinmeworkers seem to attach more desirability to
higher "self-orientation.“ Thus the parttime workers show more
"liberal” strivings on IVF measures as compared to the fulltime work-
ers, though their expressed ”self—orientation” is not significantly
different.

Own Income also correlated negatively with Total P on the
TSCS, especially on Self-Satisfaction, Physical Self, and Moral—
Ethical Self (See Appendix E, Table 25) and it had a positive rela-
tionship with Psychoticism scores (Table 13). Parttime workers, then,
appear to experience still higher self-esteem, and their responses

have less similarity with psychotic populations.

64

In the case of Education Level, a weak positive relationship
existed with Total Conflict (r = .178, p = .06), and a weak negative
relationship with PI (Personality Integration, r = .171). This sug-
gests that the more highly educated women tended to express more con-
flict in their self—descriptions and they gave fewer responses that
typically differentiate Personality Integration subjects (Fitts, 1965).
The same trend existed in relation to Psy scores, but this was not
significant.

Agditional Findings Related
to Discrepancy Measures

 

 

Additional correlations with discrepancy measures are pre-
sented in Table 16. Two new measures are included here, which were
of interest to the experimenter. Discrepancy3 refers to discrepancy
between self-ratings and own SD ratings. A weak negative relationship
emerged between Discrepancy3 and self-ratings, which reflects a trend
for subjects with higher “self-orientation" to rate themselves more
similar to what they consider to be socially desirable. A scatter
diagram in Appendix E illustrates this trend. Women with low self-
ratings on the IVF (0 to +10) most often gave SD ratings which were
higher than their own, often far higher. However, subjects, whose
self-ratings were +30 or more, usually gave S0 ratings similar to
self-ratings. The middle group was more variable, which probably ac-
counts for a less than statistical significant correlation.

Discrepancy4 refers to discrepancy between estimates of the

average woman and Own SD ratings. A significant negative relationship

65

emerged between this Discrepancy4 and Psy (Psychoticism) scores, and
this relationship was somewhat stronger even than the hypothesized
negative relationship between Discrepancy1 and Psy scores. It appears,
therefore, that the estimate of the average woman as holding a position
distant from the position considered to be desirable, has an especially
favorable implication for one's own protection against Psychoticism,
e.g., one sees oneself as not so bad off by comparison. However, no
relationship emerged with Total Positive.

Examination of Table 16 further reveals a positive relation-
ship between Discrepancy2 (Discrepancy between self-ratings and SD
ratings by other women) and Total Conflict. Thus, even though Hypothe-
sis5 was not confirmed, that is, Discrepancy2 was unrelated to degree
of self-esteem, this Discrepancy2 was associated with greater conflict

in self—descriptions.

TABLE l6.--Correlations Between Discrepancy Measures and Several Main
Variables.

_ .. .-—._._.._-_. -.__-..

 

Discrepancy Self: so Total c Total P Psy

 

Measures Orientation
Discrepancy] .715*** .496*** .146 .067 -.161*C
Discrepancy2 -.494*** .333*** .181* .049 -.027
Discrepancy; -.l60 .168 .059 .056 .070

_ *
Discrepancy: .589*** .741*** .126 .037 .188

 

aDiscrepancy3 refers to discrepancy between self-ratings and Own 50
ratings.

Discrepancy4 refers to discrepancy between estimates of the Average
Woman and own SD ratings.

*p-: .05, two-tailed **p < .01
*Cp_: .05 one-tailed ***p < .001

66

Additional Findings
Related to the IVF

 

 

Additional computations in relation to the IVF give a picture
of the total sample's position on woman's role, their estimates of
the average woman, and the social desirability the subjects attached
to these positions. As can be seen in Table 17, the mean for "self-
orientation” was quite high for sample1 (+18.66), whereas the average
woman was assumed to be considerably "other-oriented” (-11.39). The
socially desirable position, on the average, was considered to be
even higher than the group's own "self—orientation" (+21.15). These
scores were only slightly modified when the six "other—oriented" pro-
tocols (excluded from sample]) where included in the calculations.
The SD ratings from sample2, however, were somewhat lower (+15.4) than
either sample1 or the total group within the specified biographical
characteristics, who had given self-ratings first.

The distribution of scores for each of these variables was
satisfactory for correlational purposes, as can be noted from the

scatter diagram in Appendix E.

67

TABLE l7.--Means and Ranges for "Self-Orientation," Estimates of the
Average Woman, SD Ratings, and Discrepancy Scores for
Sample , and for 611 55 with Specified Biographical Char-
acteri tics (Including ”Other-Oriented" Ss).

_ ___. -fib-—-s

-Fh--- ._. -s

All S5 with spe-

 

 

 

cified biographi- 5812;06;$ntEd Samplez
IVF Scores cal Characteristics y
Means Ranges Means Ranges Means Range
Self-
Orientation +17.40 ~17 to +43 +18.66 O to +43
Average
Woman -10.38 -48 to +30 -1l.39 -48 to +18
Social
Desirability +20.62 - 8 to +48 +21.15 - 8 to +48 +15.4 ~14 to +33
Discrepancy1 31.58 0 to 82 32.27 0 to 82

 

CHAPTER IV

DISCUSSION

The discussion will first be organized around the hypotheses,
which will be related to previous theories and research. Considera-
tions of additional findings and implications for future research
will follow.

Self-Orientation and Self-Esteem
(Hypothesis 1)

 

 

The prediction that self-esteem is unrelated to degree of
”self-orientation“ was confirmed, which lends support to the assump-
tion that different ideologies or different types of internal balance
may be adopted with similar results, and that this includes the
stance taken toward woman's role. However, a negative correlation
between ”self-orientation" and Psychoticism scores (r = -.264), sug-
gest that a high degree of ”self-orientation" is associated with
giving fewer responses on the TSCS, which are typical of psychotics.
Since no additional correlations with TSCS subscales emerged (see
Appendix E), it appears that self-concept patterns for different de-
grees of ”self-orientation“ are similar in most respects.

The prediction that no differences would emerge in self-
esteem was based on the assumption that IVF responses reflect cog-
nition, rather than internal dynamics. Concurrently, it was

68

69

considered that degree of "self-orientation" may represent verbal
adoption of a position considered to be socially desirable by that
person, without necessarily reflecting actual behavior. As the re-
lationship between self-ratings and SD ratings was, in fact, quite
high (see Hypothesis 4), the above assumption may be a plausible ex-
planation for the lack of self-esteem differences. The findings,
of course, do not preclude the possibility that differences in in-
ternal dynamics exist, which were not measured by these instruments.
In any case, highly ”self-oriented” positions, whether remaining
mainly on the cognitive level or not, have a favorable relationship
with realistic functioning, as shown by Psychoticism (Psy) scores.
The present results appear to contradict Fand's findings
in 1955, which suggested that extreme "self-orientation" (as well as
extreme "other-orientation”) of college women may be associated with
less desirable personality patterns and less self-esteem. The dif-
ferent results may be based on methodological differences, as well as
the changing social climate in respect to woman's role. Today (as
compared to 1955), the adoption of an extremely liberal position
would represent an entirely different psychological pattern, espe-
cially as the social desirability of that position is drastically
changing. In fact, the method of analysis used by Fand (1955),
which was a subjective one, would have been subject to bias in the
direction of what may have been considered socially desirable at

that time.

70

The Discrepancy Phenomenon and
Self-Esteem (Hypothesis 2)

 

 

Results show that, contrary to prediction, self—esteem was
unrelated to assumed ideological distance between women's own and
estimates of other women's positions. These results are different
from those of other studies based on self-theory, where assumed simi-
larity between oneself and others has been shown to have a positive
correlation with self-esteem (Fitts, 1954; Fitts and Bell, 1969). In-
stead, the results concur with Claye's (1958), who found no correla-
tion between the self-esteem of 7th, 9th, and 12th graders in Little
Rock, Arkansaw, and their attitudes toward Negroes. However, simi-
larquestions that were raised in reference to that study may apply
here. Claye (1958) considered that the highly charged emotional
climate in Little Rock at that time may have confounded the results
rather than accentuating them. The current rapid changes in relation
to woman's role, which also tend to involve intense emotions, may
have had similar effects.

Another explanation would be that this study differed metho-
dologically, in so far as the similarity considered now, dealt with
estimates of others' ideology, rather than estimates of self-esteem,
as those did. According to self-theory, the predictions would not
be expected to hold unless negative evaluation of others occurs. How-
ever, negative value judgments do seem to be attached to these esti-
mates, as is suggested by a negative correlation between own SD rat-
ings and estimates of the average woman (r = -.218). According to

self-theory, then, the predicted negative relationship between

71

estimates of the average woman and self-esteem would be expected to
hold, which it did not.

Other studies within the framework of self-theory, however,
suggest how the results of this study may have been confounded. Fitts
and Bell (Unpublished) found that in the case of negative stereotypes
("alcoholic," "neurotic“), individuals with positive self-concepts
tend to describe those roles as much lower than they described their
own. Thus, if the ”average woman" holds broad negative connotations
for some individuals, but not for others, self-esteem differences
logically would not appear, if those holding the broader negative
connotations estimate the ”average woman" in the undesirable direc-
tion and those with a more positive concept of the "average woman"
estimate her as more similar to their own position. According to
self-theory, both tendencies would be associated with relatively high
self—esteem.

Since the mean for the total sample's self-esteem scores, in
fact, were somewhat above average, the above explanation might be an
appropriate one. Unfortunately, however, it cannot be conclusively
established from these data, whether results were confounded in this
manner. Additional measures would be needed, perhaps using the seman-
tic differential method, in order to arrive at a conclusive interpre-
tation.

”Self-Orientation," Own Social Desirability,

and Average Woman Ratings
(Hypotheses 3 and 4)

 

 

 

Predictions in Hypothesis 3 and 4, which were derived from

social judgment theory, were both confirmed. As expected, with

72

increased "self-orientation,‘ estimates of the average woman's posi-
tion were increasingly ”other-oriented." Moreover, a high correlation
existed between self-ratings and own 50 scores, the results being simi-
lar to previous findings (Fand, 1955; Steinman, 1963). Viewed in com-
bination, these results show that, with increased own "self-orienta-
tion," the average woman is viewed as being increasingly distant from
the position one considers desirable (r = .589). Moreover, there was
a trend for the social desirability ratings of the most highly "self-
oriented” women to be especially similar to their own self-ratings
(negative correlation between ”self-orientation" and Discrepancy3 =
-.l60, see Table 16). This trend is illustrated by the scatter dia-
gram in Appendix E, which shows rather marked differences in SD rat-
ing patterns for women on the extreme ends of the "self-orientation”
continuum.

These phenomena concur with social judgment theory, and illus-
trate the contrast effects and differences in the latitudes and
threshholds of rejection which that theory describes. According to
this theory, discrepant positions tend to be classified as even more
divergent than is actually the case, especially by those having a
strong commitment to a certain position. One's own position tends
to represent a chosen value orientation, and thus discrepant positions,
which are more readily rejected, are less valued. Furthermore, in-
tensive involvement with a certain position tends to lower the thresh-
hold of rejection of discrepant positions (Shaw and Costanzo, 1970).

Each of these principles seem to be supported by the findings

of this study, where the most "self-oriented" would represent the most

73

highly committed to the liberal position, and these tend to view the
average woman as being most highly "other-oriented." The high degree
of congruency between self-ratings and own SD ratings of the extremely
”self-oriented“ women, would be compatible with a low theshhold of
rejection for discrepant positions.

The above results are not incompatible with cognitive disso-
nance theory, which holds that post-decisional dissonance is often
handled by enhancing the chosen alternative and depreciating the
unchosen alternative. That is, according to this theory, when a
position has been chosen over against another position, an individual
may experience the need to defend this position, due to continued
competition between alternatives, which creates cognitive dissonance.
Such dissonance is typically handled by accentuating the value of
one's own position and devaluating the alternative, thus emphasizing
the discrepancy of values attached to these positions. In the case
of positions taken on woman's role, accentuation of one's own posi-
tion may take the form of adopting an extreme stand in one direction,
to define that stand as the desirable one, and to describe the aver-
age woman as representing the opposite pole.

As stated earlier, there was a trend for women on the extreme
liberal end of the ”self-orientation” continuum to rate the socially
desirable position to be similarly high, whereas those more moderately
"self-oriented” seemed to have less investment in such congruency.
Concurrently, the correlation between degree of ”self-orientation”

and Discrepancy4 (discrepancy between own SD and estimate of the

74

average woman) was especially high (r = .589). Most likely, such
assumed discrepancy would be effective in reducing post-decisional
dissonance.

Thus the results are consistent with both social judgment
and cognitive dissonance theories. Whereas the phenomena described
by social judgment theory are clearly apparent, the possible exist-
ance of cognitive dissonance can only be inferred. If the inference
is correct, cognitive dissonance theory may conceivably provide a
partial explanation for the occurrance of contrast effect and the
lowered threshold of rejection described by social judgment theory.
The question, whether results are consistent with Deutsch's et a1.
(1962) interpretation of cognitive dissonance theory, will be dealt
with later, in the light of overall results.

Self—Esteem and Deviation from Social
Desirability_Ratings of Others

(Hypothesis 5)

The prediction that self-esteem is negatively related to

 

holding a position different from what is considered desirable by
other women was not confimed. Contrary to expectations, holding a
deviating position seems to have little effect on self-esteem.

It had been assumed that negative feedback from others would
tend to put a strain on one's self-esteem. However, if one considers
that the "average woman” may represent a negative referent for some
women, as discussed earlier, it will be apparent that the strain of

asserting a different position from her would not be great.

75

Moreover, considering that the social desirability ratings
of other women in this study was quite high into the "self-oriented“
range (+15.4), neither the extremely "self-oriented" women, nor the
barely "self-oriented," were very distant from these SD ratings. One
might wonder whether results would have been different, if social
desirability ratings of other women had been in the "other-oriented"
range. However, since degree of "self-orientation" was unrelated to
self-esteem, the degree of deviation would not have had any relation-
ship either.

Considering the actual results, it may be more realistic to
wonder what the effects of such deviation are on the "other-oriented"
women, whose position would be furthest removed from these SD ratings.
Some hint of that is available from analysis of the ”other-oriented"
protocols that were also obtained. The mean Total P scores of the 6
individuals with similar biographical backgrounds, giving ”other-
oriented” responses (mean IVF scores = -7.67), was identical to the
main sample's. Moreover, these "other-oriented" women assume the
average woman to be ”self-oriented” (mean for average woman = +8.17),

and they consider that to be desirable (mean 50 ratings - +9.83).

Thus the average woman represents a positive referent to them. In
spite of these differences in IVF patterns, self-esteem scores were
the same.

The above findings suggest that, though women's role is a
subject of vital importance, self-esteem seems to be controlled by

other sources than women's own ideologies in this respect, their

76

assumptions about the most appropriate position, their degree of devia-
tion from that position, or from the position considered to be desir-
able by other women. However, an existing positive relationship
between Discrepancy2 and Total Conflict (Table 16) does suggest that
some adverse effects may exist.

Self-Criticism, Positive Defensiveness, and

the Discrepancy Phenomenon
(Hypothesis 6 and Z)

 

 

Questions relevant to self-criticism and defensive positions
were considered in Hypotheses 6 and 7. The prediction that women,
who perceive greater ideological distance to exist between themselves
and the average woman, would be more self-critical and have higher
DP scores on the TSCS, was not confirmed. These predictions had been
suggested by the pilot study, and it seemed important to include these
measures as social desirability corrections for Total Positive scores
on the TSCS. Since no relationship emerged between $0 and DP scores
and any IVF or discrepancy measures, the overall findings can be
accepted with confidence.

Adjustment Indices and the Discrepangy
Phenomenon—(Hypothesis 8)

 

 

Findings lend very little support to the prediction that
degree of assumed ideological distance between self-ratings and
estimates of the average woman have a positive relationship with
a number of maladjustment indices on the TSCS. However, a weak

positive relationship between Total Conflict and Discrepancy1 scores

77

suggested that women with such assumed ideological distance tend to
be somewhat more inconsistent in their self-descriptions. Their
responses also include more Denial Conflict, as shown by a negative
relationship between Net Conflict and Discrepancy1 scores. Net C
measures the extent to which an individual's responses to positively-
worded items differ from, or conflict with, his responses to nega-
tively-worded items in the same area of self-perceptions. Denial
conflict means (according to Fitts, 1965) that the subject is over-
affirming his negative attributes in relation to the way he affirms
his positive characteristics. He concentrates on eliminating the
negative. Thus a negative correlation between Discrepancy1 and Net

C scores means that women who perceive a greater ideological distance
between themselves and the average woman, describe themselves more

by the negative qualities which they do not have, than by their posi-
tive qualities. However, unless this tendency is extreme, it is not
incompatible with good psychological adjustment. Personality Inte—
gration (PI) subjects, in fact, tend to demonstrate some denial con—
flict (Fitts, 1965). In this study all three groups (HO, MD, and LD)
had negative Net C scores, but these increased in the negative
direction as discrepancy scores increased.

Finally, the prediction of a negative correlation between
Discrepancy1 and Psychoticism (Psy) scores was confirmed. Since Psy
scores differentiate between psychotics and other groups (Fitts, 1965),
it supports the expectation derived from the pilot study that highly

”self-oriented” subjects are less likely to give responses typical to

78

psychotic populations. It was also assumed that high ”self-orienta-
tion" is a culturally consistent, realistic manner of dealing with
conflict, which would be reflected by low Psy scores. The results
substantiated that assumption, not only for ”self-orientation," but
also for the discrepancy phenomenon.

The usefulness of a downward comparison with the average
woman in maintaining one's own psychological balance seems further
supported by a still stronger correlatin between Discrepancy4 (dis-
crepancy between own SD scores and estimates of the average woman),
though it had no relationship with Discrepancy3 (own SD and "self-
orientation"), as is shown in Table 16. In other words, self-
comparison with one's own ideal position has no relationship to
Psychoticism, whereas perceived discrepancy between the average
woman and one's own position has favorable implications for one's own
functioning. However, it seems to be most favorable to one's function-
ing, if the average woman is perceived as being quite distant from
what one considers to be desirable.

Thus Hypothesis 8 was partially supported, though none of
the differences were significant on an analysis of variance between
HO, MD, and LO groups. (Discrepancy3 and Discrepancy4 were not
tested by analysis of variance.)

At this point Deutsch's et a1. (1962) interpretation of cog-
nitive dissonance will be considered in the light of the above
results. A number of implications may also be derived from this

theory.

79

At first glance, it appears that Deutsch's et a1. (1962)
interpretation of cognitive dissonance was not confirmed. According
to Deutsch, an individual with relatively weaker self-conceptualiza-
tions would be more likely to experience cognitive dissonance and
therefore also to accentuate his own decisions, or values, by enhanc-
ing one's own and devaluating the alternative position. It had been
predicted accordingly, that women who assume greater ideological
distance to exist between themselves and other women, would have
relatively lower self—esteem. This prediction was not confirmed
(Hypothesis 2).

Some support does exist from Hypothesis 8. The negative
relationship between Total C (inconsistencies in self-perceptions)
and Discrepancy1 scores, would concur with the theory that individuals
with weaker self-conceptualizations would be more likely to expe-
rience cognitive dissonance, and therefore to increase polarization
between competing alternatives. But the relationship between Total C
and Discrepancy1 is only a weak one, and it cannot alone confirm that
theory.

It must be remembered, however, that the above hypotheses
were only indirectly derived from Deutsch's theoretical framework.
Therefore, the nature<yfthe predictions were such that results might
support these postulates, but they can hardly disprove them. What
the findings do suggest is that generalizations from Deutsch's postu-
lates to overall self-esteem and personality functioning is inappro-

priate. Nevertheless the theory could be useful in making

8O

interpretations of the discrepancy phenomenon and in considerations
of relevant implications.

Let me review Deutsch's et a1. (1962) conceptualization of
the cognitive dissonance process. He maintained that cognitive dis-
sonance, when it occurs, always involves "self-dissonance," that is,
the need to defend one's self-perceptions after a position had been
taken. He also postulated that post-decisional dissonance occurs
only when an individual perceives his choice to be inconsistent with
some conception of himself that he is trying to maintain. However,
the stronger the self-perceptions, the less likely the individual
will experience ”self-dissonance.” That is, the less doubts a person
has about his self-conceptions (the less ambivalent about it), the
less the dissonance he will experience, when he sees self-discrepant
behavior.

Application of the above framework would require that it be
established whether cognitive dissonance has occurred. If so, one
would assume that some uncertainty exists pertaining to one's posi-
tion on woman's role, as well as self-perceptions regarding it, though
self-esteem may not be at stake.

That the existence of cognitive dissonance may be inferred
from the results of this study (though not proven), has already been
discussed. Assuming that the inference is correct, it then appears
likely that those women who assert an extremely "self-oriented" posi-
tion, but who estimate the average woman to be extremely "other-

oriented,” may be experiencing some doubts, or some ambivalence, about

81

their own position. Conceivably their tendencies to be "other-
oriented” are quite great, and the competing alternative increases
dissonance. They may have had earlier close, but ambivalent, ties
with "other-oriented” women, whom they now do not wish to emulate,
though self-differentiation may not yet be complete. Therefore, when
noting some self-inconsistencies with the chosen "self-oriented"
position, they may defensively define that position in even more
extreme terms, thereby increasing their self-differentiation. Simul-
taneously, the traditionalism of other women may be accentuated in
memory.

Others, who do not demonstrate the high discrepancy phenome-
non, may be more secure in their "self-oriented" self-perceptions,
competing alternatives may not appear as threatening to them, and
thus, they may not be as prone to over-react, when observing behavioral
discrepancies in themselves. However, the possibility that these
women may be less defensive and less self-critical in this area, should
not be generalized to assumptions about over-all personality function-
ing, as shown by the lack of correlation between Defensive Positive
and Self-Criticism scores on the TSCS.

The reader may rightfully wonder if there is any reason for
further concern, since results show that the discrepancy phenomenon
is not associated with any less self-esteem, but may represent a suc-
cessful psychological protective device.

There would be several main concerns. One is that excessive

defensive operations rarely represent 'the most successful route in

82

reaching one's maximum potential. Secondly, a concern remains for
the woman, who in fact is average, who may be viewed by other women
as a negative referent to an unnecessary degree. Her maximum poten-
tial and sense of well-being may also be more readily attained when
appropriate status is offered to her by women as well as by men.
Finally, the current cause for the improvement in the status of women
would undoubtedly receive maximal benefit under conditions of mutual
dialogue between women of differing value orientations, cooperation,
and respect for differences, without derogation of these differences.

Therefore, let us consider Deutsch's et a1. (1962) suggest-
ions as to how ”self-dissonance" can be reduced without the use of
defensive Operations, or at the cost of one's view of the average
woman. He postulated that post-decisional dissonance would be mini-
mized, not only when (l) the individual's self—evaluation is secure,
(2) when the decision conforms with the individual's self-evaluation,
and (3) little responsibility is taken for the decision or behavior,
but also when (4) the fallibility of a decision can be recognized or
acknowledged, and (5) challenge from others in not anticipated in
respect to his decision.

The latter two points seem to be relevant to conditions of
public pressure. Recognition of one's own fallibility (or the ack-
nowledgment that a certain decision was not entirely suitable for
oneself), would be more difficult when a person feels obligated to
maintain the former position in order to retain esteem in the eyes

of others. When such pressure is felt, one's freedom to retract or

83

change the position is reduced, cognitive dissonance increased, and
the defensive cycle would continue.

Finally, defensive positions of either the liberal or the
traditional position, may be increased, if continually challenged.
Ideally, pressure in either direction should be minimal. Awareness
of the possibility that a high degree of self-esteem can exist, no
matter which position is adopted, should eventually contribute to

the reduction of such pressure.

Normative Comparisons

 

TSCS results show that this sample of subjects is somewhat
above average in self-esteem, as compared to normative populations.
Moreover, their sense of Self-Satisfaction is especially high (72nd
percentile) and their self-descriptions are considerably more con-
sistent than the average (Variability scores are at the 22nd percen-
tile). Their self—esteem in relation to Moral-Ethical, Personal,
Family, and Social Self were also quite high (between 60th and 70th
percentiles). In other words, they seem to have a high sense of
being "good“ people, they have a strong sense of adequacy in evalua-
ting their personalities, and their relationships with people,
including those close to them, are perceived as being quite good.

A sense of self—acceptance is pervasive.

In contrast, Identity scores are slightly below the norms.

These scores come from items by which a person describes his "basic

identity," what he is as he sees himself (Fitts, 1965). Thus it seems

84

that neither high educational level, nor "self-orientation" per se,
are determining factors in the development of a highly positive sense
of what one really is.

A striking finding, which also existed with HD subjects on
the pilot study, was a low concept of Physical Self, that is, their
view of the body, physical appearance, state of health, skills and
sexuality. Physical Self was not correlated with any IVF or discrep—
ancy scores, but it did have a negative relationship with Own Income.
Perhaps a parttime work status adds to a sense of physical well-being,
but the explanation deserves further exploration.

Additional indices suggest that the sample, as a whole, may
have a slightly greater tendency toward Neuroticism and General
Maladjustment (N, GM) but Psychoticism scores were exactly equal to
the national norms. However, internal conflict and inconsistencies
are less than average and the sample's SC (Self-Criticism) and DP
(Defensive Positive) scores are in the favorable direction. That is,
they are somewhat more self-critical than most, and they have ade-
quate, but not excessive, defenses.

Whether these differences from the national mean are statis-
tically signficant for this sample size is uncertain. However, it
appears that these well-educated, "self-oriented" women, though as
a whole not better ”adjusted” than the average woman, seem to have
somewhat above avenage over-all self-esteem. A sense of self-

satisfaction contributes most highly to this self-esteem.

85

Biographical Variables

 

One interesting finding was that negative correlations
between age and ”self—orientation," as well as between age and SD
scores, could be accounted for by the number of children a woman had.
Therefore, increased age per se, (at least between the ages of 25 and
40), does not seem to be associated with differences in views on
woman's role (as measured by the IVF). Neither did it seem to matter
at what age these women were exposed to the currently rapidly chang-
ing conditions in respect to women's role. But lower "self-orienta-
tion“ appears to be due to having more children, which may make high
degrees of ”self-orientation” less feasible. It is, of course, possi-
ble that their attitude toward woman's role influenced the number of
children they chose to have, but it cannot be determined in this study,
which factor influenced the other.

Somewhat different patterns seem to exist with women in
different Family Income brackets. Women with higher Family Incomes
had lower ”self-orientation" scores, even after Number of Children
was partialled out, though the Number of Children controlled differ-
ences in their SD scores. Any relationship with "self-orientation,"
however, disappeared when S0 was also held constant. Thus it appears
that the degree of "self—orientation” of those women with higher
Family Incomes is only indirectly linked to Number of Children, and
may be mediated by other SD.factors besides family size, e.g., women
in higher income twackets, who have more children, consider lower
”self-orientation”to be more desirable, but the reasons for this are

not clear.

86

Moreover, since differences in Own Income in this study
generally reflected parttime versus fulltime work, and since Own
Income contributes to Family Income, it appears that the fulltime
workers are among those most subject to these social desirability
concerns.

In contrast to Family Income, Own Income was not significantly
correlated with “self-orientation," but it did have a significantly
relationship with SD. As stated earlier, since Own Income in this
study generally reflected parttime versus fulltime employment, it
appears that the parttime workers consider highly "liberal" positions
to be desirable, to a greater degree than the fulltime workers do.

The explanation is not certain. It is possible that their high SD
ratings may represent an effort to convey the degree of liberalism,
which fulltime work is commonly assumed to represent. The fulltime
workers, in turn, may believe they should be more like the moderates.
Or their more moderate SD ratings may convey their acceptance of some-
what more traditional positions, regardless of their own work patterns.

The relationship between Aspiration Level, "self-orientation,"
and SD ratings may contain a similar phenomenon, though the overall
pattern of theserelationshipsare still different. Aspiration Level
had a positive relationship with "self-orientation," but very little
relationship with SD. It appears, then, that, as women's academic
strivings increase, degree of ”self-orientation" also increased,
though this does not affect their judgments about what they consider

to be socially desirable. Instead, their own "self-orientation" is

87

influenced somewhat by the social desirability factor, which has the
effect of keeping their position more moderate than would otherwise

be the case. The S0 factor apparantly has a moderating relationship
with degree of "self—orientation" in many situations.

In contrast to IVF variables, few biographical variables,
except Own Income, had any' relationship) with the TSCS. Own Income
however, had a number of significant correlations with Total Posi-
tive and its subscales. In each instance, those with lower income,
that is, those working parttime, gave the more favorable responses.
Total P, Self-Satisfaction, Physical Self, and Moral-Ethical Self,
each had significant negative correlations with Own Income, and
similar trends existed with Identity, Family and Behavioral Self.
Moreover, a high positive relationship existed between Own Income and
Psy scores (r = .327). Thus, in this sample, the parttime, as com-
pared to fulltime, workers have distinctly higher self—esteem, and
their responses have less in common with psychotic populations.

A possible explanation for these findings might be that the
parttime workers have reached a level of financial and personal flexi-
bility that enabled them to successfully accommodate a variety of
demands as well as personal inclinations. Their self-satisfaction
and sense of identity may have been increased by the comfortable
knowledge of making a contribution to family income, as well as by
expression of skills outside the home, but without having to ex-
clude other interests and activities. Conceivably they feel that

they have the best of both worlds, and not too much of any one thing.

88

It could also be that the parttime workers, due to a strong
sense of identity and self-esteem, are resisting pressures toward
higher earnings or to conform to the work ethic. That women from
higher Family Income brackets may be more subject to social desir-
ability pressures was considered earlier. In any case, it is evident
that the women, who are working parttime, are using a work pattern,
which is different from the male's, and that this pattern may be even
more ideal. They may exemplify, as Hoffman (1972) suggested, that
a ”richer life may be available (to women) because they do not single-
mindedly pursue academic or professional goals" (p. 150).

The findings further showed that Total P had no relationship
with Education and Aspiration Level. Education did correlate possi-
tively with Total Conflict, which suggests that with increased edu-
cation, women become somewhat more inconsistent in their self-
descriptions. Such inconsistencies may be due to unresolved diffi-
culties in dealing with the role of an highly educated women in this
society. A negative relationship with PI (Personality Integration)
scores may have the same meaning.

IVF scores also were not related to Education, but they did
correlate with Aspiration Level in the commonly expected direction
(higher "self-orientation," greater discrepancy scores).

These results differ from Ohlbaum's (1971) findings, though
some parallels may exist. In this study, educational level was
correlated with more conflict and lower Personality Integration,

whereas Ohlbaum's highly educated women reported an exceptionately

89

high sense of well—being and less frustration. The differences in
these results may be due to the different levels of education com-
pared, and may reflect the fact that relative degree of education is
less important than having achieved the highest level, with the particu-
lar benefits implied by that level. Nevertheless, Total Conflict in
this study was still below the norms.

In Ohlbaum's (1971) study, higher education was related to
lower "self-orientation,“ whereas no such relationship emerged now.
A parallel, however, may exist in that the highest "self—oriented"
scores in both studies had come from those who are still "striving."
Ohlbaum's conclusion in reference to the Miscellaneous Professional
woman, with the higher ”self-orientation" scores, was that they were
still struggling for emancipation and identity. In this study, the
more highly "self-oriented“ were still striving academically.

Considering results from Ohlbaum's and this study combined,
the implication seems to be that achievement of the highest educational
level would have beneficial results for one's sense of well-being,
though the intermediary stages may incur more conflict. An active
sense of upward striving also seems to be combined with high degree
of “self-orientation," though such striving may not be related to

differences in self-esteem.

IVF Variables

 

Present results are an indication of the rapidly changing
conditions affecting women's role. The IVF mean for all women tested

who met the specified biographical criteria (including the

9O

"other-oriented” protocols) was +17.40. The mean for the "self-
oriented" sample selected was, of course, still higher (+18.66). The
fact that own Social Desirability scores were higher yet (+21.15),

is interesting, especially as the mean for SO ratings of sample2
(other women from the same sample pool) was somewhat lower (+15.4).
The differences may be due to the fact that women in sample1 rated
themselves first, which women in sample2 were not required to do.
Having given themselves rather high ratings, but wishing to reflect

a relative striving toward still greater "self-orientation," it

would have been necessary for these subjects to raise their SD rat-
ings in order to depict that striving. 0n the other hand, subjects

in sample2 may have been able to respond more directly to the task of
giving an objective judgment, without reference to themselves.
Nevertheless, their SO mean was also high.

The above results are very much different from those reported
only a few years ago. Fand (1955) found IVF means for college women
to be -1.58 for self-ratings, —.61 for Ideal Self, and -9.81 for
estimates of the Average Woman. Steinman (1966) reported IVF means
for a cross-sectional sample of 1094 women to be mildly "self-
oriented” (M = +3.05), and own Ideal slightly "other-oriented" (M =
-.7). The higher educational levels represented in this study, may
have had some effect, though Steinman (1966) reported no such differ-
ences. However, public school teachers, which represent the largest
majority in this sample are not known to be exceptionately liberal,
as compared to women in different professions. Moreover, self-selec-

tion was reduced by the experimenter's active search for suitable

91

subjects, and the sample hardly represents only those most committed
to the current woman's movement. Thus the differences between find-
ings in this study as compared to earlier ones, show that quite a
dramatic change has occurred in women's positions.

In contrast, estimates of the average woman have changed
little, but are even lower than those reported by Fand (1955). It
is obvious, then, that current women's assumptions are in error and

it might be helpful if these were revised more realistically.

Implications for Future Research

 

Several implications for future research have been mentioned
earlier. One of these was in reference to possible broad negative
connotations that the "average woman" may hold for some women. Further
research might untangle the question whether differences in self-
esteem would emerge in relation to assumed ideological distance
between oneself and the average woman, when subjects' more general
evaluation of the average woman is held constant. The method of
semantic differential might be useful for that purpose. Possibly
Fitts'(l954) method could be employed, which involves rating the TSCS
for the average woman as well as for oneself.

Different connotations to behavior considered "active" and
”passive” might likewise be explored, as well as the social desir-
ability attached to these concepts. It is possible that different
connotations attached to these concepts are affecting one's decisions

in respect to woman's role adopted. Therefore, the recognition of

92

these differences might be important. As a result of further research,
the polarity of "other-orientation" as being passive and "self—orien-
tation“ as being active, might also come into question.

In addition, the origin of different connotation attached to

the “average woman,‘ as well as the "active-passive" dimension would
be worth exploring further. Results might elucidate the question
whether different internal dynamics are attached to choices made in
relation to woman's role, and if so, what these differences are.

The markedly lower self-concepts in respect to Physical Self,
observed with subjects in this study, warrants explanation. Is a
poorer Physical self—concept typical of more highly educated women,
"self-oriented” women, or even women in general? If so, why? Or is
fulltime versus parttime work the most relevant factor? If so, why?
How could this relationship be modified?

Finally, further exploration of benefits residing in differ-
ent life styles, as well as different work patterns, may be of crucial
importance. It may be well worthwhile to heed Bardwick's (1973) warn-
ing against simplistic solutions and a uni-dimensional frame of refer-

ence, and not to prematurely outline the exact route that women ought

to take.

CHAPTER V

SUMMARY

The main goal of this study was to examine "liberal" (”self-
oriented" on the IVF) women's self-esteem in relation to their own
views of what is an appropriate role for women and to their estimates
of the average woman's role on this issue. It intended to determine
whether the adoption of an extremely "liberal" role position is
related to increase in self-esteem. Perceived ideological distance
between women's own and other women's positions was also explored in
relation to self-esteem, as well as adjustmentindicesand degree of
"liberal” orientation.

Underlying the purpose was the concern that,in conjunction
with rapid changes in respect to women's role, extreme ideological
positions may be adopted partially for reasons of their social desir-
ability, though psychological and behavioral incongruence would
remain, and gains in self-esteem may not be made. It was also con-
sidered that an increased sense of distance between oneself and the
average woman might be associated with additional stress and lower
self-esteem.

The main purpose was to discover possible relationships that
might suggest options to be chosen, or pitfalls to be avoided, in
order that the highest level of functioning be reached.

93

94

The focus was confined to the self-esteem of those women,
whose own position is on the "liberal" end of the continuum, from
moderately "liberal” to extremely "liberal."

The particular "liberal" position, as used here, refers to

"self-orientation,’ in contrast to "other-orientation," which repre—
sents the traditional end of the continuum (Fand, 1955).

The Inventory of Feminine Values (IVF) and the Tennessee
Self-Concept Scale (TSCS) were administered to 120 female subjects
between the ages of 25 and 40, who were all married, had children,
and were currently employed. Their educational level was beyond a
Bachelor degree, but less than a Ph.D. or its equivalent. Subjects
were selected from student lists available from the MSU registrar's
office, mostly those enrolled in the education department. Other
professional women were also included, many of whom were teachers in
the public school system in the Lansing and Detroit areas. Six proto-
cols were excluded because of an "other-oriented" self-rating.

The IVF was rated with three different sets: (1) self-rating,
(2) estimate of the average woman's rating, and (3) rating according
to what the subject considered to be the "healthy, well-integrated"
woman's responses (SD ratings). Twenty additional $5 from the same
sample pool gave 50 ratings only. IVF and a number of discrepancy
measures were correlated with TSCS self-esteem measures (Total P and
its subscales), adjustment indices (Total C, Net C, N, GM, Psy) and
social desirability measures contained in that scale (SC, DP). The
relationship between a number of biographical variables (Age, NUmber

of Children, Educational Level, Aspiration Level, Own Income and Family

95

Income) with TSCS, IVF, and discrepancy measures was also examined by

means of correlations and partial correlations.

Predictions were based on self-theory, social judgment and

cognitive dissonance theories. Results are summarized as follows:

1.

Degree of "self-orientation" (as measured by the IVF)
is unrelated to self-esteem (as measured by the TSCS).

Assumed ideological distance between women's own and
other women's role position is unrelated to degree of
self-esteem (as measured by the TSCS).

With increasing own "self-orientation," the average
woman tends to be viewed as being increasingly "other-
oriented."

A strong positive relationship exists between self-ratings
on woman's role and the position considered to be socially
desirable.

Self-esteem (as measured by the TSCS) is unrelated to
the degree of discrepancy between one's own asserted
position on woman's role and the position considered
to be socially desirable by other women.

Degree of Self-Criticism and Positive Defensiveness (as
measured on the TSCS) is unrelated to perceived ideologi-
cal distance between one's own position on woman's role
and that of the average woman.

Conflict in self-descriptions (Total C on the TSCS) has

a weak positive relationship with degree of discrepancy

between one's view of one's own position on woman's role
and one's view of the average woman's role position.

Increasirw; Denial Conflict (Net C on the TSCS) is asso-
ciated with increasing degree of discrepancy between
one's view of one's own position on woman's role and
one's view of the average woman's role position.

Variability in self-description, Neuroticism and General
Maladjustment (as measured by the TCS) are unrelated to
degree of discrepancy between one's view of one's own
position on woman's role, and one's view of the average
woman's role position.

96

10. Psychoticism (as measured by the TSCS) is negatively
related to degree of discrepancy between one's view of
one's own position on woman's role and one's view of
the average woman's role position.

Additional findings showed this sample of "self-oriented,"
well-educated women to be somewhat above average in over-all self-
esteem, especially in degree of Self-Satisfaction. However, their
self-concept in respect to Physical Self was exceptionately low.
Maladjustment indices, except Psychoticism and Conflict were slightly
worse than national norms.

Degree of “self-orientation” was negatively related to Age,
but Number of Children accounted for this relationship. Women with
more children were less "self-oriented." Women with lower Own
Incomes, that is, parttime employed, gave the most favorable responses
on the TSCS, whereas Educational Level and academic Aspiration had
no relationship.

Mean "self-orientation” ratings were much higher than reported
by earlier studies, though ratings of the Average Woman were lower.

Suggestions for future research included exploration of (1)
possible broad negative connotations attached to the concept of the
"average woman“ by some subjects, (2) differences in women's inter-
pretation of the supposedly "active-passive" dimension related to
woman's role, (3) the origins and internal dynamics of these differ-
ences. The polarity between "other-orientation” as passive and "self-

orientation” as active was questioned. The importance of further

exploration of different life styles and work patterns was stressed.

APPENDICES

97

APPENDIX A

PILOT STUDY

98

PILOT STUDY

Two small pilot studies were conducted in order to pretest
several predictions. Comparisons by groups are presented in graphic
form and in tables 19-21.

Subjects were chosen from a number of subgroups. Six of these
were from a list of women's liberation members in Flint. Five sub-
jects were randomly chosen from the Owen Hall graduate residence.
Three subjects are residents in Grand Blanc, a middle to upper-
middle class residential suburban environment. Seven others were
resident women in Flint, and six were women attending ”rap" group
sessions connected with the Women's Resource Center at Michigan
State University.

Other demographic material is shown in Table 18 on the
following page.

Demographic data, as a whole, are quite similar in respect
to age, marital status and the presence of children. Considering
that the inventories are not reportedly related to age, a three year
difference in adult women does not seem very great. Nevertheless,
the High Discrepancy (HO) group (high discrepancies between self-
ratings and estimates of the average woman) was somewhat younger.

It has also achieved somewhat higher educational level, and a larger

number of this group are currently students.

99

100

TABLE 18.--Demographic Characteristics of Pilot Subjects.

Average Marital Presence of

 

Group Age Status Children Educat1on Employment
Low M ----- 5 College Working ------ 3
Discrep- 31 S ----- 2 6 2-4 yrs.—-7 Not working--4
ancy Div.--l Graduate Student ------ 2
? ----- l student—--l
? --------- 1
High M ----- 5 Graduate Working ------ 2
Discrep- 28 S ----- 4 5 student---8 Not working--2
ancy ? --------- 1 Student ------ 5

 

Only Form A and B of the IVF were presented with the TSCS.
That is, SO ratings were not obtained. The forms were presented to
the subjects in their homes and were completed without the experiment-
er's supervision.

Results are only tentative but reflect the expected trends.
Twelve Ss with "self-orientation” scores ranging between -9 and +20
twere compared with eleven 55 whose ”self-orientation" scores ranged
between +30 and +48. The Total P scores were identical. Thus it
lappears that degree of “self-orientation" may not be related to self-
esteem.

On the other hand, High Discrepancy (HO) Ss as a group had
liower Total P scores than Low Discrepancy (LD) 55. This was true for
bcrth subsamples, as well as the total group. In order to determine
\vhether a different trend exists for those women in the middle range,

tflne 55 were divided into three groups of nine each. In this case,

101

the differences in the self-concept scores were accentuated, while

the middle group fell between the extremes. The mean for the LD sub-
jects reached the Blst percentile of population norms, the mean of

the HD group was at about the 62nd percentile, and the Medium group
at the 65th. Differences were even more accentuated when only the
upper five and lower five subjects were compared. It is noteworthy
that all three groups remained above the mean for the general popula-
tion. Conceivably this was related to the types of subjects selected,
many of whom were community leaders.

This role inventory scores for all of the Ss fell almost
exclusively in the direction of "self-orientation." The women, who
rated themselves moderately "self-oriented" (mean = +13.6), rated
the average woman as mildly ”self-oriented”(mean = +2.1). Those
women who considered themselves extremely "self-oriented" (mean =
+35.6), considered the average woman as similarly extreme in "other—
orientation” (mean = -30.2), whereas those women who were somewhat
less extreme in ”self-orientation" (mean = +24.3) viewed the average
woman as moderately “other-oriented” (mean = -14).

Further examination of subscales of the total self-concept
was made for the Discrepancy groups. The L0 subjects remained above
the 50th percentile on all of the 8 subscores that enter into the
Total P scores. HD 55, on the other hand, fell below average on
Behavioral Self and Physical Self, the latter reaching the 28th per-
centile only. IdentitySelf for H0 S5 was just equal to the general

population mean, whereas LD 55 reached the 77th percentile. Both

102

groups were most similar on aspects related to Self-SatiSfaction,
Family Self, and Social Self, though the LO group remained somewhat
higher.

Examination of other subscales suggests that HD Ss tend to
maintain a high degree or Self-Criticism, while LD Ss were somewhat
below average on this score.

Differences in Conflict Scores also existed. The HD group's
Total conflict score was at about the 62nd percentile, while the LD
group was only at the 30th percentile. Net conflict scores showed
the HO group to present a denial conflict, while the LD group was
close to zero (neither denial nor acquiescence conflict). Denial
conflict is referred to as a habit of describing one's characteristics
in terms of what one is not, rather than what one is. This differ-
ence appeared greatly accentuated in the first pilot study, where
the HO group's denial conflict was at the 2nd percentile and the LO
group showed some degree of an acquiescent conflict.

In respect to variability and distribution of scores, the
patterns between the groups are quite similar, with the HD's showing
slightly greater variability, though both groups remain below the
norm.

The Empirical Scales show some interesting differences, as
each group shows certain strengths and weaknesses. The L0 group
reached the 80th percentile on the Defensive Position (DP) scale, a
more subtle measure of a defensive over-affirmation of self, while

the HD group ranged around the 40th percentile.

103

On the Psychoticism (Psy) Scale, HD 55 are quite low (18th
percentile), but the LD Ss are slightly above average. Thus it seems
that the HD women in this sample have little in common with psychotic
populations. Their General Maladjustment (GM) scores are also
slightly better than the LD group's. With the Neuroticism (N) scale,
however, this pattern changes. Here the LD group is below average
and the HD group reaches the 73rd percentile. Thus HD Ss seem less
defensive, less ”maladjusted” (as the term is used by Fitts, cf. p. 30),
are better protected against psychosis, but have considerably greater
neurotic tendencies. Among the maladjustment scores, this (N) is the
only one, where a mean of either group reached above the 55th per-
centile of the normative population. The L0 group is slightly superior
on personality integration indices, but both groups are near average.
The same general patterns emerged on both subsamples of this pilot
study.

So far, only the two extreme groups have been described on‘
the subscales, without reference to the middle group. On the sub-
scales of the self-concept scores the middle group remained generally
between the two extremes, hovering closer to the HD group. The middle
group was the least variable of the three, and the distribution pattern
showed less use of the extremes of agree or disagree responses. The
Empirical scores showed no particularly outstanding pattern, but

hovered around the midpoint.

104

.meoohesm seoeceeeowco-c_om. 266 6:8 Law: co» memo: mum» sesem eo_ea--.m menace

AN_ 1 zv eowpeeeewco-crom 264 .1 -.1 -.1

AN_ 1 zv eoeeepeoeco-c_om ewe:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

2 2 2 z I = 2 a. 2 1 o. 2 2 ¢ 5 2 3 r 2 ~. 0. 2 o t 2 o 2 838
Oh.!4
. c o . . 1 : 2 3 2 o. a:
2 o 2 2 2 1 3 1 o. 1 a 2 a. n t : . _ e . . u e 6
. fl1 2 . _ 1 c - L c c s _
1 _ _ _ .6. T
I . _ o. _ .v i: . 1
I . 2 o. .. 10. I
I 2. f 2 3. . o T
12.1. a A r. T i: . .3 T. I
11 L 1. a W
a: 6. . . _ . I
1. . u - v1
1 f0 . . o a . w v
1A 10.. u 1 o H. F1 . o v
o . GI.
1A 0 I YIC
I To: . . . I
l . . . l
04 1.1 F . . ..
I _i . .
18.
m ..lo.. .
1H .
u f is
, a
I no. ,.
1 r n. _
1L
Is, v v
v T1:
1 .o 3.
1% vfl v
1.
1A 7
.1. IL 13
10111110
.1. . 7.13 H
.I _ . f1:
1;. T o
1111 1 1».
it v i u
_ 2 #3
.I _ .
VP 1A}. vl Ow v '0 PF
11 4 o .11.
w. .H ..
I. _ H
11:11 ..
.. 8 _I I .
w'ljv v1 :
141 .. .1
.1: a. Tfiv .
-l 1 2 T3
in S v S fii _. .
. an _. .
1H 2 y. a . H
.5 .-1111
A . .-
~ : r 3 13 PC It
. v v (c . . .
. o. H
v 9 1.. L o~ #3 19 o1 .
'1'. I
. a v o
co . ,1 +1 1? . .
r v .
o . H
v v— n
l :- x71? 1. 11 .
v. c.
1. u f x _ .
. . H
1x. f: .3 .11121
n o , . .. r .i . . H
, . , _ u
11 P H _ H . _ .
_ 7
1 L 1 1 . 1. o u 1 m c . ~ . . 4 .
, .3. .C. a
«CC: .1 2 OR rt :0 t0 — ~ n c m _ i 7 m. v.32; . . . a n :2 .3 23.1.
for on x: . - 113406 ‘0! u .5; .-
> 11 . p 11» P . . t b . v .. Ufrldtv'a‘ . .L 9 v e u; u
:3de IBIS... (Silt->90 >»3.0<.3<> n.1,, .a a; . rte . . .3 .13.
__. -
_ M
.) a To. v1. . I .I-1

 

 

 

ll. . spiral

0.71... I 1......

:1... L00 ((1-... ‘i .1011.

.0 .x. cl. .. O
‘1..lu~§- 98 511.1.»

:wIm 3:9:

£03m .Qoscou =mm $9826..

.meoohesm as 6:8 .oz .9: coc meeoz mume Aesem eoAAa--.m acumen

A

3

O

A

m
A

m

zv mm zuceqmsumwo Ezwumz
u zv mm Aoceqmcomwo saw: 1.1 1.1

zv mm aoceamcoon 364

105

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

      

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

2 a. 0.. o A. in O O~ ‘8
a. z .. c. 3 = . o. 3 it'd
also:
1B # Fl 3!
. . 3. . I
1 .3 . v 16. I
. | . . - Ti
3 2 i. 33. To. a. . i1
.131I4. .1 .11.! +2. 1+ 1 1x
u. fie. a. I _. T T 3
- A o.
L
15 It. . 8 _
1| .p
L
1.
1.
1. 1.1111... 161. .
U 1. 3 a 3 +9?
U a
81+1
.1
l
I.
1H n
L
1..

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

'.I.. olOt‘lv'. {34"(5.
.I .p'! ...t
.l-O‘Cucin 011.011..

Sim 3:02

fi. .2.
4 .- V . It . 3 12 $1, .
. a .. .
8 01‘ 41H fl Y 8 1 a} 1 . Ar 1 .1 1+1 .4 o. o T 1 O 4 o .1 c 5:. r 10 11¢. .TP 1 111
T1 r. u 11 r r 1 v «.0 _.
W 3 . 3 . rho. . a. 1r
. F .
[V H A . 3.
. _ . . .. u o o a < a ~ . . . a.
«(Ova .1 z 0% >t.10 8 ~ n V . 7 . quOUw 1. . . . c 4.... .3. is:
8. ‘3' 4A 1 r '1') aDJ ‘0‘ b K,F . I
. 1-1. A . - 1. 1: .4 . . . . . 3:23.36 1 . . A. A . 1 . . z .
. 0...de fluvialu ln...)9.|»n.o p»...6<.t4; w-tOva 3.57;... . T1..le
A
.
a) [ .0 cl .. O
. ’u. ~.nl'1.’
~.r€..u.a .0 . .c. C... . . lie .0

0.0om .aoocov 26m $3.89:

106

TABLE 19.-—Pi1ot Study TSCS Means for Women with Low "Se1f-0rienta-
tion” and High "Se1f—Orientation.

 

-#-A_-_m~.hmm .A .1 A ._. .1.— ”“ »~

Low Se1f-0rientation

High Se1f-0rientation

 

TSCS (N =12) (N =11)
Se1f—Criticism 35 38.8
Conf1ict

Net - 6.9 - 9.1

Tota1 27.5 29.1
Tota1 P 363 362
Row

1. Identity 131.8 128.3

2. Se1f—Acceptance 113 118

3. Behaviora1 117.8 116.3
Co1umn

A Physica1 72.3 69.2

B Mora1 76.9 75.2

C Persona1 69.5 72

D Fami1y 73.2 74.2

E Socia1 72.8 74.2

 

107

TABLE 20.--Pi1ot Study TSCS Means for Groups with Different Degrees
of Discrepancies Between IVF Se1f—Ratings and IVF Estimates
of Average Women's Ro1e Positions: Low Discrepancy (LD),
High Discrepancy (HD), and Medium Discrepancy (MD) Groups.

 

- ..__.A - _— a -.---._ - _ . _ _._—_ ._—..
._._. _A- - - - _ ____.__._.

TSCS

- .. -_—__A_—. .—._._

 

LD HD MD

Scales (N = 9) (N = 9) (N = 9)
Se1f—Criticism 33.6 41.1 35.8
Conf1ict

Net - 0.8 - 13.9 - 10.3

Tota1 26.2 32.3 27.9
Tota1 P 375.9 356.4 358.6
Row

1. Identity 136.1 127 128.9

2. Se1f-Satisfaction 118.6 116.6 113.4

3. Behaviora1 121.2 112.9 116.2
Co1umn

A Physica1 74.6 67.2 71.0

B Mora1-Ethica1 79.6 76.2 73.8

C Persona1 72.0 68.8 70.3

D Fami1y 75.9 74.0 71.9

E Socia1 74.8 73.6 71.
Variabi1ity

Tota1 38.4 42.1 34.7

Co1umn Tota1 23.3 23.8 21.6

Row Tota1 15.0 18.3 13
Distribution

D 130.1 124.0 112.7

5 20.4 17.8 16.1

4 24.8 25.6 28.1

3 15.4 17.2 19.4

2 16.4 18.1 20.8

1 21.8 21.4 18.0
Defensive Positive 65.2 50.7 57.7
Genera1 Ma1adjustment* 97.7 100 99.7
Psychoticism 47 39.3 44.9
Neuroticism* 89.1 79.7 84
Persona1ity Integration 12.1 11.7 12.4

 

*These are inverted sca1es, and need to be interpreted according1y.

108

TABLE 21.--Pi10t Study IVF Means for "SeTf-Orientation," Estimates
of the Average Woman's Orientation, and Discrepancy Scores
for L0, HD, and MD groups.

._._.._-__A _A--_._'A._..—-AAA _ ,-.«__,_.___,
_-._.-_ -_-‘.- - ...A. _A4 A. _A- ‘_.__. .—

Estimates of the
Se1f-0rientation Average Woman's
Orientation

Discrepancy
Scores

Discrepancy
Groups

 

Low
Discrepancy
(LD) +13.6 + 2.1 11.5

High
Discrepancy
(HD) +35.6 -30.2 65.4

Medium

Discrepancy
(MD) +24.3 -14 38.3

 

APPENDIX B

COVER LETTER TO PARTICIPANTS

109

700 South Foster Avenue
Lansing, Michigan 48912
Phone: 489-7104

Dear Participant in this research study,

I am a student at Michigan State University and am working
on my dissertation for my Ph.D in psycho1ogy. I am interested in
the area of women's roTe and woqu Tike your he1p to c1arify some
aspects re1ated to how women fee1 about themseTves.

I cannot exp1ain fu11y at this time, but wi11 be g1ad to
send you a summary of resu1ts Tater. If you wish to hear from me,
p1ease 1eave your name and address on a separate sheet of paper.

Your answer sheets have code numbers and the persona1 in-
formation, as we11 as your answers, w111 be confidentia1.

Your he1p is great1y appreciated.

If you wish to contact me at any time, fee1 free to do so.
Sincere1y yours,
7404K C. Sad—4a.

Heidi C. Buss

110

APPENDIX C

MEASURING INSTRUMENTS

111

INVENTORY 0F FEMININE VALUES (IVF)

Psychometric Data

 

The IVF has been quite widely used for research purposes in
the past fifteen years. Fand (1955) originally used a college sample.
Ann Steinman (1963) later expanded its use, and it has since been
copyrighted by Maferr Foundation (Male—Female Fami1y Role Research
Foundation).

Several forms are available for research and have been used
to identify role-concepts in reference to the respondents' position
for their "Own Self," ”Ideal Woman," and "Man's Ideal Woman.“ The
content of each form is identical, except items are scrambled in dif-
ferent orders.

Split-half reliability of the IVF, using the Spearman-Brown
correction is .81. The items were presented to seven judges for
categorization as passive or active items and only those were used
where total agreement existed.

Some noramtive data exists, though the samples were not
selected by random methods, but were used because of availability.
Fifteen American samp1es totaling 1094 women represent undergraduates
from public and private colleges, physicians, lawyers, artists,
musicians, nurses, businesswomen, house wives and negro professional
women. Non-college samples all had high school education. The age

ranges were from late teens to the seventies, a majority being under

112

113

40. Thus the norms represent a reasonable cross-section of the better
educated population in the United States, though younger groups have
the largest representation.

The Inventory manual reports self-perceptions to be normally
distributed in the population, with a slight tendency toward self-

orientation (Steinman, 1966).

114
FR - FORM A

Please read the instructions at the top of each page carefully. You
are asked to indicate your opinion on each item by writing a number

from 1
scale:

to 5 in the space to the left of the item, using the following

STRONGLY AGREE = 1 AGREE = 2 NO OPINION = 3 DISAGREE = 4 STRONGLY

DISAGREE = 5

PLEASE RESPOND TO THESE STATEMENTS WITH YOUR TRUE OPINION
KEEP IN MIND THE WAY YOU REALLY ARE.

 

. An ambitious and responsible husband does not like his wife

to work.

. I usually pay no attention to other people's feelings.
. A woman who works cannot possibly be as good a mother as the

one who stays home.

. I would like to do something that everybody knows is important.
. I try to do what I think people want me to do.
. A woman has a conflict in what she has to do as a woman and

what she wishes to do for herself.

. A woman should get married even if the man does not measure up

to all her hopes.

. I sometimes feel that I must do everything myself, that I can

accept nothing from others.

. The needs of a family come before a woman's personal ambitions.
. I am not sure that the joys of motherhood make up for the

sacrifices.

. I like listening to people better than talking.

. I argue with people who try to give me orders.

. Marriage and children should come first in a woman's life.
. when I am with a group of people, I usually become the leader.
. I worry about what people think of me.

. I express my ideas strongly.

. Single women need personal success, but all a married woman

needs is her husband's success.

. I would not get married if I had to give up what I really

believe in order to get along with another person.

. It is up to the woman to make a marriage work.
. A working mother can get along as well with her children as

can a mother who stays at home.

. The greatest help a wife can give her husband is to encourage

his progress.

. It is unfair that women have to give up more than men in order

to have a good marriage.

. I can put myself in the background and work hard for a person

I admire.

. A wife's opinion should be as important as the husband's opinion.
. My main interest is to raise normal, well-behaved children.
. How I develop as a person is more important to me than what

others think of me.

27.
28.
___29.
____ . A woman should have interests outside the home.

31.
32.

33.
_____34.

115

If we disagree, I would give in to my husband more often than
I would expect him to give in to me.

The greatest satisfactions in life come from what you do your-
self.

I would like to marry a man to whom I could really look up.

I am sure that what a woman gains from marriage makes up for
sacrifices.

Modern mothers should bring up their boys and girls to believe
in absolute equal rights and freedoms for both sexes.

A woman's place is in the home.

I would rather be famous, admired and popular throughout the
nation than have the constant affection of just one man.

(c) Copyright, Maferr Foundation,
Inc., 1968

Used by permission.

116

FR - FORM 8

Please read the instructions at the top of each page carefully. You
are asked to indicate your opinion on each item by writing a number
from 1 to 5 in the space to the left of the item, using the following
scale:

STRONGLY AGREE = 1 AGREE = 2 NO OPINION = 3 DISAGREE = 4 STRONGLY
DISAGREE = 5

THINK OF THE AVERAGE WOMAN AND RESPOND TO EACH STATEMENT OF
THIS FORM AS YOU BELIEVE SHE_NOULD.

 

35. I worry about what people think of me.
36. A wife's opinion should be as important as the husband's opinion.
37. A woman's place is in the home.
38. I am not sure that the joys of motherhood make up for the
sacrifices.
39. The greatest help a wife can give her husband is to encourage
his progress.
___40. A woman should have interests outside the home.
___41. My main interest is to raise normal, well-behaved children.
___42. I argue with people who try to give me orders.
___43. Single women need personal success, but all a married woman
needs is her husband's success.
44. It is unfair that women have to give up more than men in order
to have a good marriage.
___45. I can put myself in the background and work hard for a person
I admire.
___46. I would like to do something that everybody knows is important.
___47. It is up to the woman to make a marriage work.
___48. A woman has a conflict in what she has to do as a woman and
what she wishes to do for herself.
49. I try to do what I think people want me to do.
___50. I sometimes feel that I must do everything myself, that I can
accept nothing from others.
___51. A woman should get married even if the man does not measure up
to all her hopes.
“__52. I express my ideas strongly.

53. The needs of a family come before a woman's personal ambitions.
54. When I am with a group of people, I usually become the leader.
55. I like listening to people better than talking.

56. Modern mothers should bring up their boys and girls to believe
in absolute equal rights and freedoms for both sexes.
57. If we disagree, I would give in to my husband more often than
I would expect him to give in to me.
___58. The greatest satisfactions in life come from what you do yourself.
___59. Marriage and children should come first in a woman's life.

__60.
61.

:62

63.
64.
65.
66.
67.
68.

117

I usually pay no attention to other people's feelings.

I would like to marry a man to whom I could really look up.

A working mother can get along as well with her children as
can a mother who stays at home.

I am sure that what a woman gains from a marriage makes up

for sacrifices.

I would rather be famous, admired and popular throughout the
nation than have the constant affection of just one man.

A woman who works cannot possibly be as good a mother as the
one who stays home.

How I develop as a person is more important to me than what
others think of me.

An ambitious and responsible husband does not want his wife to
work.

I would not get married if I had to give up what I really believe
in order to get along with another person.

Did you have a specific woman in mind when you answered this?

Yes No

_—

 

If so, how related to you?

 

(c) copyright, Mafenr Foundation,
Inc., 1966

Used by permission.

118

FORM C

Please read the instructions at the top of each page carefully. You
are asked to indicate your opinion on each item by writing a number
from 1 to 5 in the space to the left of the item, using the following
scale:

STRONGLY AGREE = 1 AGREE = 2 N0 OPINION = 3 DISAGREE = 4 STRONGLY
DISAGREE = 5

RESPOND TO EACH STATEMENT ON THIS FORM AS YOU THINK A HEALTHY,
WELL-INTEGRATED WOMAN WOULD.

 

___69. I express my ideas strongly.
___]O. I try to do what I think people want me to do.
___71. I sometimes feel that I must do everything myself, that I can
accept nothing from others.
72. I can put myself in the background and work hard for a person
I admire.
73. The greatest satisfaction in life come from what you do your-
self.
74. Single women need personal success, but all a married woman
needs is her husband's success.
75. It is unfair that women have to give up more than men in order
to have a good marriage.
76. The greatest help a wife can give her husband is to encourage
his progress.
77. How I develOp as a person is more important to me than what
others think of me.
78. My main interest is to raise normal, well-behaved children.
___79. I am not sure that the joys of motherhood make up for the
sacrifices.
80. If we disagree, I would give in to my husband more often than
I would expect him to give in to me.
___81. A woman should have interests outside the home.
___82. A woman who works cannot possibly be as good a mother as the
one who stays home.
83. When I am with a group of people, I usually become the leader.
84. I would like to marry a man to whom I could really look up.
___85. Modern mothers should bring up their boys and girls to believe
in absolute equal rights and freedom for both sexes.
86. A woman's place is in the home.
___87. A working mother can get along as well with her children as
can a mother who stays at home.
___88. It is up to the woman to make a marriage work.
___89. I would rather be famous, admired and popular throughout the
nation than have the constant affection of just one man.
___90. An ambitious husband does not like his wife to work.
___91. I usually pay no attention to other people's feelings.

92.

93.
:::: . The needs of a family come before a woman's personal ambition.
95.

99.
100.

_101

:102.

119

I am sure that what a woman gains from a marriage makes up
for sacrifices.
I argue with people who try to give me orders.

I would not get married if I had to give up what I really
believe in order to get along with another person.

____ . I like listening to people better than talking.
97.
__~98.

I would like to do something everybody knows is important.
A woman should get married even if the man does not measure
up to all her hopes.

A woman has a conflict in what she has to do as a woman and
what she wishes to do for herself.

Marriage euui children should come first in a woman‘s life.
A wife's opinion should be as important as the husband's opinion.
I worry about what people think of me.

(c) Copyright, Maferr Foundation,
Inc., 1966

Used by permission.

120

TENNESSEE SELF—CONCEPT SCALE

Psychometric Data

 

The normative sample consisted of 626 subjects, aged 12 to 68,
including an approximately equal number of both sexes, both Negro and
white subjects, and representatives of all social, economic, intelli-
gence, and educational levels from sixth grade to Ph.D. degree. New
norms have not been published, since samples from other populations
do not differ significantly.

Most demographic variables have not been found to have major
effects. However, the elderly and those under 20 have been found to
differ from the norms.

Reliability coefficients fall mainly in the .80 to .90 range,
though some are as low as .67.

Intercorrelations between the major dimensions utilized are
relatively low. On the other hand, the various Positive Scores show
sizeable correlations with each other as well as the Empirical Scales
in the expected direction.

Validity has been demonstrated by the measure's ability to dis-
criminate between groups, not only Personality Integration groups,
but between patient groups, their types and severities. Different
profile patterns have also been found to occur for different behavioral
groups, such as juvenile offenders, unwed mothers, successful para-
trooper trainees, alcoholics, etc. The nature of the TSCS correla-
tions with other measures, such as the MMPI,are in the expected direc-

tion. Finally, personality changes under extended stress conditions

121

and psychotherapy have been traced by this measure, whereas more
temporary conditions, such as tranquillizing drugs had had no such

effects.

122

INSTRUCTIONS: On the separate answer sheet, fill in your name, sen, op. fade and today's date. Thur Oh h
opropriate letter or number according to the sample below. Be sure your merits are heavy and completely fill the
graces.

 

SAMPLE: sex

Male 0
Female 0

 

 

 

The statements in this inventory are to help you describe yourself as you see yourself. Please respond to them as if you
were describing yourself tgyourself. Do not omit any iteml Read each statetnent carefully; then select one of the five
responses listed below. Erase completely any answer you wish to change and mark your new answer.

Completely Mostly Partly false Mostly Completely
false false and true true
RESPONSES Partly true
C M M C
F F PF - P? T T
1 2 3 4 5

Man you are ready to start, find the box on your answer meet marked Time Started and record the time. When you
have finished. record the time finished in the box on your answer sheet marked Time Finished. Erase any stray marlrs
on your answer sheet.

TENNESSEE SELF CONCEPT SCALE

I. I have a healthy body ......................................................................................................................................... I
2. lam an attractive person .................................................................................................................................. 2
3. I consider myself a sloppy person ...................................................................................................................... 3
4. lam a decent sort olperson ............................................................................................................................ 4
S. lam an honest person ..................... . .................................................................................................................. S
6. I am a bad person ............................................................................................................................................... 6'
7. lam :1 cheerful person ....................................................................................................................................... 7
8. lam :1 calm and us) going person. .................................................................................................................... 8
9. lam a nobody ............................................................................................................................................... 9
10. l have a {amih 11:... would always help me in any kind of trouble ...................................................................... 10
II. I am a member ot .1 happy family ..................................................................................................................... I I
12. My friends have no confidence in me ................................................................................................................. l2
l3. lam :1 friendly pt‘fmtl ....................................................................................................................................... 13
I4. lam popular with men ................................................................................................................................ I4
15. I am not interested in what other people do ...................................................................................................... 15
16. I do not alwa) '1 tel' the truth .......................................................................................................................... 16
I7. I get angry \‘Ul‘llt‘lllllt‘\ . ..................................................................................................................................... I7
18. I like to look nice and neat all the time... . ........................................................................................................ 18.
I9. I am full of aches and pains ................................................................................................................................ 19
20. lam a Sick person. . ........................................................................................................................................ 20
2|. lam a religious person ................................................................................................................................... 21
22. lamamuralfi.lure...., . . ................................................................................................................. 22
2 . lam a morally weak person ............................................................................................................................. 23
24. I have a lot ofsell-control ................................................................................................................................. 24
25. I am a liatel'ul person .......................................................................................................................................... 25
26. I am losmg my mind ....... . ................................................................................................................................. 26
27. I am an ImptlllJlll person to my friends and family ........................................................................................... 27
28. I am not loved by 111) family ............................................................................................................................. 28
29. I feel that my family doesn't trust me ......................... : ...................................................................................... 29
30. lam popular with women ................................................................................................................................ 30
3|. I am mad at 1he whole world ............................................................................................................................. 31
32. I am hard to be friendly WllIl ............................................................................................................................ 32
33. Once in a while I think of things too bad to talk about ...................................................................................... 33
34. Sometimes. when I am not feeling well. I am cross ............................................................................................. 34
35. I am neither too fat nor too thin ........................................................................................................................ 35
36. I like my looksjusi the way they are ............................... .................................................................................. 3 6
37. I would like to change some parts of my body .......................... : ........................................................................ 37
38. I am satistied with my moral hehawor ................................................................................................................ 38
39. I am satisfied with my relationship to God ......................................................................................................... 39
40. I ought to go to church more ............................................................................................................................. 40

Copyright 1971). “llll‘dm II. I itts
Used by permission. .2

42.
43.
44.
45.
40.
~17.
48.
«W.
St).
51.

so

5*.
<4.
<5.
511.

Ml

‘NI

”1.

i)‘

1",

114'

11s

‘Ni.
97.
98.

t)i)
11111

123

I am satisfied to be just what lam .................... ...... ..............
I am lust as nice as I should he ...........................
I despise myselt“ ...... ........ ................... .....................
am satisfied WllIl 111s family relationships ......... ........ . ..... ......
understand my taniily as well as I should ............. ........... .
should trust my family more ............................... . ................. ................. ..... ..... ......... ..................
am as sociable as I want to he ...............................................
I try to please others. but Idon‘i overdo it ..................... .................... ....................... ............
I am no good at all from a social standpoint... ........ ................................. .
I do not like everyone 1 know .......................... .. ...... . ................... . ........ . ......... . ..... .................. .....
Once 111 a while. I laugh at a dirty joke.............. ..... ............. . ....... ......... ..........
lam neither too tall nor too short ................. ...................
ldon't feel as well as I should .................... . ..................
I should have more sex appeal
lam as religious as I want 111 he

eeeeeeeeeeeeeee o-eeeeeeoueeeeeeeeoeaeeeeaeeeeeeoeeleOle-oeeeeaoeeeeeoeeee-eoeaoeaoeeolu

eveeee aaaaaa eeleeee eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee eeeeaeeee eeeeeeeeeeeee

e eeeeeeeeeeeeeee e eeeeeeee eauaoe eeeeeeeeee .aoo eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee

e-neeeoaeeoeo eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee

eeeo eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee a... eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee aeeeeoeeeoeeee
eeeeee eaeeeeaeeee-oeeeessa-eoaaeeeaeeeeeeoeeeeeeeeeaeeeraeeeeeeeeeeeeeeoeeeeeee
eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee Decor..-neoQo-Iaeaaoeee-eooeeeeee-a-
...................... eeeee-eooleaeoeoaeblue-eeaeeale-nee.eeeeooeueeel-obeeooolee-CID...-eeeae-elleeeeaeeeeeaonllooeeoe

eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee ouoee-u-eaaeeeo-eeeeeeeeeeeeeee-...aene-euee-a-nn

1 wish I could he more ”unworthy

shouldn‘t tell so many lies

.................................................................. eaeeaoeoeeeeeaaeanueeeeeup.e-eee-.eeee-eneeeeeee-eeeanee-eeue

.1111 as smart .is I want to be

.111111111 the person I would like to he ...............................................................................................................
\\l‘-Il I didn't give up .is easily as I do
tieat his parents .1\ well .is 1 should (Use past tense if parents are not living) ...................................................
.1111 too \etmlwe 111 things my family say .................. . ............................................. . ...... ...............................
should lose ins 1;iinil_s more ............................................................................ .......... . ................................
ani \Jllslls‘il with the stay I treat other people ............... . ............................................. ............. . ........
should he more polite to others ............................................................................................................ . ........

ought to get along better with other people .................................................................... . ......... ........... . .....

gossip .1 little at times .................................................................................................................................
\t limes I leel like ssseariitg ...............................................................................................................................
1 take good c.11e111 iiissell physically .................................................................................................................
I try to lie careliil about my appearance .................................................................................. .......................
lotteri act like|.1111".1|ll|11111111s" ............................................................................................. . ................ .....

1.1111 true 111 111\ ft‘llllltlll 111 1111 everyday life ................................................................... . ........................... . ......
I try 111 \Il.lllllc‘\\llt‘llI111111“ I'm doing things that are wrong ............................................................................

--

.................................. -1...1...vu.-eeeeee--..........---.-.e..~a....o.-.eee...--......--oaeee-eee.e.--

\11111L'lllllt‘s 1111 sets 11.1dtliiiigs..
1.111 .II\\'.I\ s take caie 111 ms sell. 111 any situation ................................................. . ................... . ..........................
take the blame for things without getting mad ................................................................................................
do things without thinking about them first ....................................................................................................
try to pl.l\ 1.1111111111111 triends and family ............ . ....................................................................... . ....... . .........
lake .1 real interest 111111s'l.111111_\' ......................................................................................................................
ent-1111111111 parents tl'se past tense if parents are not living) ..................................... . .......................
It} to understand the other 1ell1iss‘s point of View ...........................................................................................
get along: well 1111111 other people ........................................................................................................... . .......
do 1111' loigise others easils . ...... . ..... . ........................................................................................ .. ..... . ........
“1111111 1.itlier \s 111 than lose 111 .1 game ...................................................................................... . ..............
lt‘t‘l L‘mld ttlosl ill IIIL' lllllc‘ . ........ . ............................................................................................. .....
do pooil) 111 sports and patties . .. ................................................................................................ . .....

.1111 'a poor slteptr , . .................................................................................................................
do “11 at is 1111111 11111sl HI the 111th .................................................................................................................. ..
sometimes use iiiitair means 111 get ahead ......... . ........................................................ .......... . ..........
liase trouble doiiii: the things that are right ....................................................................................................
solse lll) piohlenisquite C;l\lI\ ............. . .................................................................................... ..................
thanpe my mind .i 1111 .................... . ..... . ............................................................................ .....................
11} 11111111 ants 1111111 111\' problems ..............................................................................................................
do 111\ share 111 work at home ................................................................................. . ................ . .....................
quarrel WllIl 1113 1a11111_\' ...................................................................................................................................
do not act like my family thinks I should ........................................ ' .......................... . ............
see good points 111 .111 the people 1 meet ............................ . .......................................... . ...................................

I do not leel .11 ease ss llIl other people ................... .............. . ...................... . .....................................
1 11nd 11 hard to talk 111111 strangers ..... . .................................. . ..................................... . .................... ...........

41
42
43

45

47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55

S7
58
59

61
62
63
(14
65
(16
(17
()8
()9
70
7 I
72
73
74
75
7(1
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
()0
91
92
93
94
95
9(1
97
98
99

Once 111.1 1111111: I put 11111111111 tomorrow what I ought to do today ................................. . ................................. 100

124

BIOGRAPHICAL QUESTIONNAIRE

Code Number

 

Age:
Marital Status: Single, Married, Separated, Divorced, Other
Children: Yes, No, How many?
Working? Yes, No
What kind of work?
Education: High School, College 1, 2, 3, 4 yrs. Mgrg_than college,
1, 2, 3, 4 yrs.

What plans do you have for future education?
Income Level: (Your own)

Up to $5,000, $5,000-10,000, $10,000-20,000, $20,000 up
Family Income Level: (Combined Income)

Up to $5,000, $5,000-10,000. $10,000-201000, $20,000 up.

APPENDIX D

RESULTS FROM DIFFERENT
BIOGRAPHICAL GROUPS

125

126

TABLE 22.--IVF, Discrepancy , and Total P Scores for Women with Differ—
ent Biogrpahical Characteristics.

Self- Number of

. _ Other- Average Discrep-
Groups grgfinta Oriented Woman SD ancy1 Total P

Protocols

 

Working
no children +14.4 3 -14.9 +20.8 29.3 351.2

N = 20

Not Working +14.2 3 -13.1 +20.2 27.3 364.0
N = 18

1-2 Yrs. of
College +16.3 -ll.3 27.5

 

 

 

Over 40
Range 41-55

Working + 9.11 3 - 3.3 +15.3 12.4
N = 19
Not Working +23.5 - 5 +34.5 28.5
N = 2

3 Yrs. +18 -29 +27 47
College

N = l

Divorced +27 -26 +10.5 53
N = 2

Total Over
40 +12.2 - 6.37 +16.96 18.5 364.9

 

Single +14.5 1 -10 +16 24.5 349
N = 2

Qiyorced +29.4 -24.4 +29.2 53.8 384 (DP
N = 5 80th per-
centile)

 

Age 2131 + 6 -2o.5 +17 26.5
N = 2

 

Age 25-40 +17.4O 6 -lO.38 +21.15 27.78 357-82
Married

Children

working

Bachelor +

N = 126

 

127

TABLE 23.--IVF and Discrepancy} Scores Obtained from Volunteers at a
1

Shopping Center in

cal Characteristics).

___A———~.V --.——. __”.——

Biographical

 

_-___._-_ ._..

int, Michigan (Arranged by Biographi-

 

 

 

 

Characteristics Self-Orientation Average Woman

17-18 +17.0 —20.6
N = 7

19-24 +lO.8 -12.62
N = 13

25—29 +20.2 - 9.25
N = 9

30-40 +18.2 -lO.9
N = 10

40-50 + 9 -21
N = 2

50 and Over + 8.25 -21.5
N = 4

Working +15.9 -l3.4
N = 27

Not Working +15.0 -10.08
N = 13

Married +20.3 -14.5
N = 14

Single +14.6 -16.7
N = 15

Bachelor

Degree +20.5 - 7.5
N = 10

1-2 Years

College +13.67 -l4.8
N = 8

+12.9 -ll.3

High School
N = 6

 

APPENDIX E

ADDITIONAL RESULTS RELATED TO THE
TSCS AND THE IVF

128

129

TABLE 24.--TSCS Means for High, Medium, and Low Discrepancy Groups,
As Well As Total Sample].

.-—A- -.-.~ -_ , _. - _. .- .A.____ —.

_ __...__...__. .-___ ”A... .. A-.. - - ._ .—

 

TSCS Scales LD MD HD $393191
SC 37.88 36.87 37.57 37.44
T/F 1.10 1.06 1.01 1.05
Net C -l.15 —2.87 -7.45 -4.22
Total C 27.52 28.45 29.05 28.34
Total P 355.27 355.90 362.30 357.82
Row 1 (Identity) 125.02 124.52 126.27 125.27
Row 2 (Self-Satisfaction) 115.05 114.42 117.72 115.73
Row 3 (Behavioral Self) 115.20 116.95 118.30 116.82
C01 A (Physical Self) 68.25 66.42 69.10 67.92
Col 8 (Moral-Ethical Self) 74.15 74.97 75.85 74.99
C01 C (Personal Self) 68.07 68.40 69.57 68.68
Col 0 (Family Self) 73.32 74.25 74.22 73.93
Col E (Social Self) 71.47 71.85 73.55 72.29
Total V 39.82 41.60 39.32 40.25
Col Total V 22.30 22.32 22.37 22.33
Row Total V 17.52 19.27 16.95 17.92
Dist. 0 114.30 114.92 120.72 116.65
Dist. 5 16.12 16.57 17.80 16.83
Dist. 4 28.07 25.70 25.02 26.27
Dist. 3 19.12 20.55 18.82 19.50
Dist. 2 19.37 18.27 16.60 18.08
Dist. 1 17.30 18.90 21.75 19.32
DP 56.72 55.95 54.8 56.05
GM (Inverted scale) 97.92 97.85 100.05 98.61
Psy 47.80 46.77 45.57 46.68
PD (Inverted scale) 79.10 79.70 80.40 79.73
N (Inverted scale) 82.60 82.25 84.17 83.01

PI 12.97 12.02 11.87 12.29

 

130

006:0000600o

 

000. 000.- 000. 000. 000. 000. 000. 000.-

000. 000. 000.- 000. 000.- 000. 000. 000.- 000000000000
000. 000.- _00.- 000.- 000.- 000.- 000.- 000.- 000000000000
000. 000. 000. 000. 000. 000. 000. 000. 000000020000
000. 000. 000. 000. 000. 000.- 000. 000.- 000000 00
000.- 000.- 000.- 000.- 000. 000. 000.- 000.- 000000 00003
mm00m><
000. 000. 000. 000. 000. 000. 000. 000. 00000000000
-0000
000. 000. 000. 000.- 000.- 000. 000. 000. 000000
000000
000.- 00..- 000.- ..000.- .000.- 000.- -00_.- 000.- 000000 020
000. 000.- 000.- .00_.- 000.- 000.- 000.- 000.- 00>00
cowu00000<
000. 0.000.- 000.- -.000.- 000.- .00.- 000.- 000.- 00_000000

000. 000. 000. 000. 000.- 000. 000. 000.- 0000__00
yo 000502
000. 000. 000. 000. 000.- 000. 000. 000. 000

0000 0000 0000
0_00 0000 0_00 0000000 0_00 _0200 -00000000
000uom >00E00 00:00000 -0000: 00000000 ->0;mm -00mm xu0ucmuH 00000000)
. . .Ii . . - um000mggou
0 .000 0 .000 0 .000 0 .000 <

N 30m

.mmgzmmmz 00:00m0000o 0:0 .0>H .00000000>

fimUWLQMLmme .m> 0Q Pouch op mcquDwLucou mmpmumnzm mum-r cmmzfiwm xwL-«mz Pacowuo—mgLouil.mN “:qu

80 ‘

7O

60

0'!
O

.5
o

Discrepancy]

30

20

10

 

 

131
O
4) .
o
J) O
o o
O O
O O O
O
00.
at u .
O
O O O
O O O
I .0
.0 C
o
o o 00 0
4; O O O
O O C O
o
p O
O
. .0 O O
O O I
d» O
o o 0
O. N
O o 0 o O
o .00
O
Q
. .0 0
Jr
0
O O
O. O
0 o
o o
O O
O O C
O C
‘ O O
O O
O
O.
O C
O O C
L - g - . 0 .
+10 +20 ‘ +30 +40 +50

Self-Orientation

Figure 4.--Scatter Diagram Showing the Relation Between Discrepancy1
Scores and Self-Ratings by Subjects from Sample].

+30

+20

+10

Average Women

-20

-50

132

 

 

l
3
O
' o
C
' o
i O
o O O . C 0..
o
2
O
O
I. . O 0
1L 7+5 % ‘r 5 %
g. +10 . +20 +30 +40 +50
1. . O
1 ' 0
1 C. O O C
. o o. ‘
l .0 0... g C O
1 O
1 O 0
' . o O
' o o a
O.
O-
1 O O O
r . . o o .
.9 g . v . O C
O
. o o . o O
: g 000
- . o.
i 0 00. 000 O o
o O O
- . o.
‘ O O
O O
i O
f .
O
l C
i o
.5
Self-Orientation

Figure 5.--Scatter Diagram Showing the Relation Between Estimates of

the Average Woman and Self-Ratings by Subjects in Sample].

133

 

 

*5” l
O
O
0
+40 1 . .
O ... .0
0 o
0 . o . O
O
O O
O . .
+30 .10 O .0 . . o.
0.. Q .
o .0 O
o o o o o
0. u o
O O O
O O O o. O
O o. 0
+20 it . O . O o
o o
o . o. .0 O:-
:9 . Q 0. CO 00
I O . on . Q .
'5 u '
g +10 *' . 0.0 .
X} .
O O O
75 o o o
8 90
U) 0 i ‘r :—¥fi *0 . +0 =§ 4
i ' ’ +10 +20 +30 +40 +50
1
1 .
-101
l
-204
-30 -

Self-Orientation

Figure 6.--Scatter Diagram Showing the Relation Between Own SD Ratings
and Self—Ratings by Subjects in Sample].

 

 

 

 

134

 

 

0.00 0 0 0.0 0000000
0.00 0 0 0000000
0.00 o 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 o 0 0.0 a:
0.000 0 0.00 0.00 0.000 c 0.0 00
0.00 o 0.0 0.00 0.00 0 0 0.0 0 or
0.00 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0 0.0 000500
.050; 00000 003 0:0 00“ 00 000005 0 0000 00 00 00000000 000000 00003 on; 00503 < .m
0.00 0.0 0000000
0.00 0000500
0.00 0.00 0.0 0 0.00 0.0 02
0.00 0.00 0.0 m 0.00 0.0 00
0.00 0.00 0.0 0 0.00 0.0 0 or
0.00 0.00 0.0 0 0.00 0.0 000000
.00000000 0.000000 00000 op 0000:0000 o: 000 0000000 H .0
0.00 0.0 0000000
0.00 0 0 0 0 0000000
0.00 o 0 o 0 0.00 0.00 0 0 0.00 0.0 0.0 as
0.00 0 0 0 0 0.00 0.00 0 m 0.00 0.0 0.0 00
0.00 0 0 m 0 0.0 0.00 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.0 0 0:
0.00 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.0 0.00 0.0 0.0 000000
.0003 00 0003 000 0000 Ho: 0000 0000000 00000000000 0:0 000000050 :< .0

00000000 00000 00000000 000m< 00000000 000m<
0000000 0000000 :00: 0000000 0000000 :00: 0000000 0000000 :00: 000000

 

 

 

000000 00 00503 0mm00>< 000000-0000

1 71111.11... 11.1.1. .1111.
1111 I. 1111.71 1 . . l 1117:1111, I- U ‘1’

.000.0- - 000: 0>0 .00 n z .0000: 0000:0000-0000000
0000500 000 .00000 000 0000500 .0000000 0000500 0< 0003 0< .000000 a: 0:0 .00 .0: 000
000000000 00000000 000 000m< we 00000000000 0:0 .000000000 0 0 .000m< u _0 0:00: 5000 0>H-.00 00m<0

 

 

 

 

 

0.00 0.00 0.0 0000000

0.00 0.00 0.0 0000000
0.00 0.00 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.0 00
0.00 0.00 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.0 00
0.00 0.00 _.0 0.00 0.00 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.0 0 00
0.00 0.00 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.0 000000

 

.0000000 000 00 00 000003 000 0003 000 00503 0 00 00 00 000 000 0003 00 00000000 0 000 00503 < .0

 

 

 

135

 

 

 

 

 

0.00 0.00 0.0 0000000
0.00 0.00 0.0 0000000
0.00 0.00 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.0 02
0.00 0.00 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.0 00
0.00 0.00 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.0 .0 0:
0.00 0.00 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.0 000500
.00 00 05 0003 000000 00000 0 0003 00 00 000 H .0
0.00 0.00 0.0 0000000
0.00 0.00 0.0 0000000
0.0 0.00 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.0 02
0.00 0.00 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.0 00
0.00 0.00 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.0 00
0.00 0.00 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.0 0000500
.000000050 00 03000 0000000>0 0000 000000500 00 00 0000 00003 H .0

00000000 0000< 00000000 0000< 00000000 00000
0000000 0000000 000: 0000000 0000000 000: 0000000 0000000 0002 000000

000000 00 00503 00000>< 000000-0000

 

 

 

Iltl'lx'l. '. It'llil'l llv‘lll‘lll'la'lllli‘l“
-I'Eilllill ..l. -1. I'll "l.|l‘l.‘|'.

.000000counu.00 m00<0

136

0 0.000 0.0 00.0000

 

 

 

 

 

 

0.00 0.00 0.0 0000000
0.00 0.00 0.N 0.0 m.m0 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.N 02
0.00 0.00 m.m 0.00 m.m0 m.m 0.00 0.00 0.N 00
0.00 0.00 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.0 0 0:
0.00 0.00 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.0 000000
0:05.550 FmCOmLmQ 0.0.9003 m 9.5me @050 03.200000 0 $0 mumm: 0,: .m
00.00 0.00 0.0 0000000
0.00 0.00 0.0 0000000
0.00 m.m_ 0.0 m.m0 0.0m 0.0 m.m0 m.mm 0.0 0:
0.00 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.0 0.00 0.0m 0.0 00
m.m0 o.om 0.0 0.00 0.0N 0.0 o.m0 0.00 N.m 0 a:
0.00 0.00 0.0 N.00 0.0N 0.0 «.00 0.0N 0.0 000000
.000000 5000 0000000 000000 000 H 0000 .000000 00000000>0 00 00:5 0 0000 0000 005000500 0 .m
0.00 00.0 00.0 00.0000
0.00 0.0 0.0 0000000
m.m0 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.N 0.00 m.m 0.0 oz
m.mm m.m_ 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.0 0.00 0.0 0.0 00
0.00 o 0.0 0.00 0.00 m.m 0.00 o 0.0 a:
0.00 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.0 0.00 0.0 0.0 0000000
.me05 .00; :00 00 a: 003.0me 00: 0020 :9: 0:0 0: cm>m “00.70.09: umm “030:0 :mEoz < .0

00000000 00000 00000000 00000 00000000 00000
0000000 0000000 0002 0000000 0000000 0002 0000000 0000000 0002 0:000

 

 

 

000 00 00 00002 00000>0 000000-0000

[1" 'I- .Al'l V ulll .I I I I I . 0 1.. ll

0.00 0.0. 0.0 00.0000

 

 

 

137

 

 

 

 

 

 

0.00 0.00 0.0 00.0000
0.00 0.00 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.0 02
0.00 0.00 m.m 0.00 0.00 0.N 0.00 0.00 0.N 00
0.00 0.00 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.0 0.0m 0.00 0.0 . a:
0.00 0.00 0.0 0..0 0.00 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.0 0.0000
.000000 05 0>00 00 000 003 000000 00.3 00000 H .m_
0..0 0.00 0.0 00.0000
0.00 0.00 0.0 N0.0000
0.00 0.00 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.0 00
0.00 0.00 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.0 00
0.00 0.00 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.0 0.00 0.00 ..0 . 0:
0.00 0.00 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.0 0.0000
.00.0.00 0000 000000 0.0000 00 0000.. 00 00.. . ...
0.00 0.0 0.0 00.0000
0.00 0.00 0.0 00.0000
0.00 0.00 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.0 00
0.00 0.00 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.0 0.00 0.0. 0.0 00
0.0. 0.00 0.0 0.00 0.0. 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.0 . 00
0.00 0..0 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.0 0..0 0.00 0.0 0.0000
000.000.70.000 0:0 00» a: 00000.: “000000.009: 000 0000.0 0.00 00.: @030 .00: Em H .0_
00000000 00000 00000000 00000 00000000 00000
uchLma uchLma com: 0:90.000 0:00.090 :00: ..0chng pcmugma com: Q3000
000000 am 00503 00000>0 0.000-0000

 

o
.lrl 1|, I 'I'x‘ln' I. it- - III I 1.1:

.003000couun.om M0000

0.0. 0.00 0.0 00.0000

 

 

 

 

138

 

 

0.00 0.00 0.0 00.0000
0.00 0.00 m.m 0.0 0.00 0.0 0.00 0.00 N.N 0:
0.00 0.00 m.m m.m 0.00 ..N 0.00 0.00 0.0 00
0.00 0.0m m.m o 0.00 0.. 0.0m 0.00 0.m . o:
0.00 0.00 0.m 0.0 0.00 0.0 m.mm 0.00 0.N 0.0000
.00 00 00.00 0.0000 0003 00000 00003 . .0.
0.00 0.0. 0.0 00.0000
0.00 0.00 0.0 00.0000
0.0. 0.0m 0.0 0.00 0.0 0.m m.mm m.m0 w.m a:
0.0m 0.00 0.0 0.00 0.0. 0.m 0.00 0.00 m.m 00
0.0. 0.00 0.0 0.00 m.m 0.0 m.m. 0.00 0.0 . 0:
0.0. 0..0 0.0 0.00 0.0 0.m m.mm m.m0 0.N 0.0500
.00000. 000 050000 x..0:0: . .0.0000 $0 00000 0 00.3 Em . 0003 .0.
0.00 0.00 0.0 00.0000
0.00 0.0. 0.0 00.0000
0.00 0.0 m.m 0.0. 0.00 ..m 0.00 m.m. w.m 02
0.00 0.00 0.m 0.0m 0.00 0.0 0.00 0.0. 0.m 00
0.00 0.0 m 0 0.0 0 m0 0.. 0.00 o 0.0 . 0:
0.00 0.0. 0 m 0.0. 0.00 m.m 0.00 0.0 0.m 0.0000
.00.. 0.00003 0 0. 000.0 0000 0.0000 0000..00 000 000.000: .m.

000000.0 00000 000000.0 00000 000000.0 00000
0000000 0000000 0002 0000000 0000000 0002 0000000 0000000 :00: 00000

 

 

 

00.000 00 00003 00000>0 00.000-0.0m

 

 

.-.I.|'! -llll ..ll' k|ll|1iz 1111-11 '11 l- "ull‘iulal'l‘IIPrl l I III I II |’ .ll. .- -
.‘l i- 'II l l llll.-"'t0 I IIIIJI .. l -41.-||| Il'l.!- '3 .1... v It'll. ' -Ill ‘ nl 'l'lll.‘ L l I 1 I A - .I

.00::.u:ou-u.om 00000

m

N.Hm H.mo m.N NmHQemm
o.oH o.mm m.H mHQEmm
o.oH m.Nm m._ o.mm o.mq m.~ o.mH o.mm H.H oz
o.oH o.mm m.H m.NH m.Ho m.N m.NH m.mm o.~ OH
o.m 0.0m N.H m.~o m.m~ m.m o.oH 0.0m o.H H a:
m.m m.mm m.H H.0m m.m¢ m.~ m.NH m.mm m.H mHQemm

 

.c0mLma gmgpocm
szz mcon umm ou Lmvgo :H m>mHHmn xHHmmL H was; a: m>Hm ou cm; H HH umHLLmE “mm po: szoz H .mH

 

o.ooH m.¢ mmHaEmm
o.ooH o H.¢ mHaEmm
o.mm o q.¢ m.m¢ m.Hm o.m m.Hm m.N H.¢ oz
o.mm o m.¢ o.mH o.mH w.m o.mm m.m ©.¢ DH
o.mm m.N m.q m.NN m.Nm m.N o.ooH o m.¢ H a:
o.mm m. m.¢ H.©¢ m.mm H.m m.mm H.H N.¢ mHasmm

 

.mmmuuzm m.ncmnm3; gm: mH mumm: :mEoz umHLLmE m HHm pan .mmmuosm HmCOmLma umm: cmsoz mHmcwm .NH

 

139

 

 

m.mo N.Hm N.m mmHQEmm
H.H NmHaEmm
m.m m.mm N.H 0.0m m.Nm N.m m.NH m.~N m.m Dz
m.m o.mm N.H m.mm o.mq m.m 0 mm o.m© m.m QH
o o.mm o.H 0.0m m.N m.m m.m 0.0m o.m H a:
N.H N.¢m m.H m.om 5.0m N.m o mH m.m~ N.N mHaEmm
.mecogum mwmuH >5 mmmLaxm H .oH

mmgmmmHo mmLmq mmgmmmHo mmgm< mmxmmmHo mmgm<
ucmugma ucmugma com: pcmugma pcmugma :mmz pcmugma ucmugma com: asogo

 

 

 

mcHHmm om coEoz mmmgm>< mchmm-HHmm

-‘l l ‘l I Ill-llllll|ll.||l||[.h Q l‘.’ ’y ‘. 'I' 1“, ' I‘l..0|.’|

 

 

 

Ifnll I! I) I ‘1! ‘ ‘. I I ; a . ...! .III II: "l'.'.li .I|||'.|||'|u.. 'Pl .I‘.ll nli‘lll‘ ‘l’tlil‘l .-l'lil I'lil l I n l llif- ‘l - I..- I I I 0 vi}. ..-..iill‘ ‘t‘

.Umzcwucou-u.om m4m<p

140

m

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

H.wH o.mH ~.N NmHQEMW
0.00 o.mm m.m mHaEmm
m.~m m.Hq m.m o.m m.Hw o.m m.mm m.mm m.m oz
o.mm m.Hm o.m m.NH 0.0m H.N m.mm m.mm ©.N DH
m.Ho o.om H.m o o.ooH H.H o.mm 0.0m m.m H o:
o.m¢ H.H¢ H.m m.m N.mm m.H H.0m H.wq w.m quEmm
.mmmgmoga mH; mmmgzoucm ou mH vcmnmsc gm; m>Hm cmu mHHz m aHm; ummummgm mcH .HN
H.mH o.mH H.N mmHQ5mm
o.m o.mm m.H mHaEmm
m.m o.mm m.H o.mH m.mm m.m m.m m.Hm ¢.H oz
o.m o.mm o.H m.mm m.Hm H.N m.H 0.0m m.H OH
o m.Hm m.H 0.0m o.m o.q m.m m.Hm N.H H o:
m.N m.mm m.H m.mo m.mN ¢.m N.¢ o.mm q.H mHa2mm
.mEo: Hm mxmpm 0:3 gmzpoe m coo mm :mLuHch gm; cHHz HHmz mm mcon Hmm :mu gmgpoe mcHxLoz < .om
N.Hm m.m_ o.q mmHQEmm
o.mm o.oH N.q mHQEmm
o.mm o.m o.q m.NH m.mH q.m m.mm o.m m.m oz
o.mm o.mH o.q m.m¢ o.oq o.m o.mm o.m q.q a;
o.mm m.m ¢.q o.m o.mm m.H o.ooH o 0.? H a:
m.mw m.H H.¢ o.om N.m© ¢.N m.mm m.m m.q mHQemm
.xLoz mmmHLLmE m mxme ou cmEoz mzp OH a: mH pH .mH
mmgmmmHo mmgm< mwgmmmHo mmgm< mmgmmmHo mmgm<
ucmugma ucmugmq com: pcmugma Hcmugma com: pcmugma “smugma com: asogo
:mEoz mmmgm>< mcHumm-HHmm

mcHHam om

 

 

.Umchucou-u.om mHm<H

m.H mmHaEmm

 

 

 

 

141

N.o N.NN N
0.0m o H mHaEmm
m.Hm m H o.mN o.oH o o.ooH N.H oz
m.Hm m H o.ON m.NH o.m o.mm H.H OH
m.Hm N.H o.mm m.NH o m.Hm N.H H OI
m.Hm m H m.mm H.Ho N.H N.Nm m.H mHQ5mm
.coHcHQo m.Ucmnm:; 93 mm ucmpLOQEH mm ma UHDOcm cowcwao 99:3 < .qm
o.mN o.mH N.N mmHaEmm
o.oH mHa2mm
0.00 o.m m.NN m.NN N.Nm N.N oz
m.NH m.HH 0.00 m.Nm m.N© m.N DH
m.NH o o.ooH o.mm 0.0m N.N H a:
N.Nm m.N N.om H.0m N.NH N.N mHaEmm
.mLHEvm H cowgma m Lo» ugm; xgoz use ucsogmxumn mcu :H HHmmHE Ham :mu H .mm
H.N© N.N N.N MmHQEmm
0.0m mHaEmm
m.NN 0.0m m.No o N o.oH m.H© H.N oz
m.Nm m.HH m.Ho m.N m.HN 0.0m H.N o4
o.mN 0.0m o.oq H.m o.m m.HN H.H H DI
N.NH m.Nm H.0m H N N.HH N.No N.N oHQEmm

.mmmHLLmE voom m w>mg oH Lmugo :H cme cmgH mLoE a: w>Hm o» m>mg :mEoz ngp LHowcz mH HH .Nm

 

mmgmmmHo mmgmq mmgmmmHo mmgmq mmgmmmHo mmgm<
acmugma Hcmugma cam: pcmugma ucmugma com: Hcmugma ucmugma cam: asogo

 

 

 

NCHHmN om

cceoz mmmgm>< mcHHmm-HHmm

 

'il I2I| I ’1'. 0V.|14'II“ I

.vmscHHCOUIn.©N mHm<H

142

o.mm o.om
0.0m o.oH
m.mm 0.0m
o.mm m.H

N.mH m.NH

N.Hm
o.m
m.m m.m 0.0m o.m o.mo
m.m o.o¢ 0.0m m.m m.no
o.¢ m.m o.mm m.H m.mm
m.m H.0H m.mm m.m m.mm

0.0m

o.mN
m.NN
m.~

m.mH

N.N meQemm

NmHQEmm
N.m oz
m.m OH
H.d H DI
©.m quEmm

 

.mE ou :H m>Hm 0H EH; uumaxw szoz H cmzH :mHHo mLoE vcmnng HE OH :H m>Hm uHsoz H

.mwgmmmHv m3 HH .HN

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

m.Hm N.Hm N.N MmHQEmm
o.oH o.mm m.H mHaEmm
m.H m.Nm m.H m.No m.ON q.m m.H m.mm o.N oz
m.m m.Hm H.H m.Nm o.m¢ m.N o.oH m.Nm o.N OH
m.m m.Nm m.H o.ow m.H m.m m.NH m.Hm H.H H o:
N.q m.oH H.H m.mm m.qm m.m o.oH N.¢m m.H wHaEmm
.05 Ho xcHgH mmeuo Hog; gasp me ow HcmHLanH mLoE mH comgma m mm Qon>mu H 30: .mm
N.Hm N.No N.N mmHQEmm
o.mo o.om o.m mHaEmm
o.mm 0.0m N.m m.N 0.0m H.H m.H¢ m.mm H.m oz
m.m¢ 0.0m m.m o.mH o.ow H.N m.Nm m.No o.N QH
o.oH m.HH o.m o o.ooH o.H m.mo o.mH o.m H a:
w.mm m.Nm N.m m.m H.0m m.H m.H¢ H.0m H.m mHaEmm
.cmLuHng um>mgmn-HHmz .Hmago: mmHmL 0H NH HmmLmHCH :HNE x: .mm

mmgmmmHo mmgmq mmgmmmHo magmq mmgmmmHo mmgmq
“cougma “smugma com: Hcmugma pcmugma :mmz Hcmugma Hcmugma com: asogo

mcHHmm om

:mEoz mmmgm>< mcH

III‘II Vl-i.,ll‘v'.l l r I

ummanmm

.Umchpcoonu.om MHm<H

143

H mmHaEmm

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

o o.ooH o. N
o o.ooH m.H mHaEmm
o.m o.mm m.H o m.Nm o.N o m.Hm m.H oz
m.m m.Hm e.H o m.Hm m.H o o.ooH ~.H a;
o o.Hm m.H o.oH m.Nm H.N o m.Hm H.H H o:
m.~ H.om ¢.H m.m w.om m.H o m.mm ~.H mHaEmm
.mEo; mg“ mchuzo mummgmucH m>mc uHaosm :meoz < .om
N.N H.Nm H.N mquemm
c.mH o.oN H.N «Hasmm
m.NN o.mm o.~ o m.om m.H o.m o.mo H.N oz
o.o~ o.oo ¢.N m.H m.~m H.N o.mH o.mm ¢.N o4
o.om m.H¢ m.~ m.~ m.Hm c.H m.Hm o.oe m.m H a:
N.¢N N.¢m o.N m.m 0.0m m.H N.mH m.mm m.~ mHaEmm
.a: xooH HHHmmL uHaou H soc; op ems m Hggms op mxHH quoz H .mN
H.NH N.Nm N.N mmHQ5mm
o.om o.mH m.m mHaEmm
o.mH m.Ho H.N m.N¢ o.m¢ m.N o.oH m.Hm m.H oz
o.mH m.NH H.N o.mH o.oH m.N 0.0m m.Hm m.N DH
o.mH 0.0m m.H m.Hm m.HH m.m m.NH m.NH o.m H a:
o.mH m.mH H.N H.Hq N.¢q m.~ m.HH m.NH N.N mHaEmm
.HHmmLaox ow :0» Has: EogH meou mHHH :H mcoHuumHmHHmm Hmmpmmgm mcH .mm
mmgmmeo mmgm< mwgmmmHo mmgm< mmgmmmHo mmgm<
acmugma uchLma com: ucmugma ucmugma :mmz ucmugma pcmugmm cam: azogu
mcHumm om case: mmmgm>< mcHHmmIHHmm

 

.umacHHcou--.mN NHNHH

144

mmHaEwm

 

 

H.N» o.mN ©.m N
o.mN o.m N.H qusmm
o.om o N.¢ m.NN m.Ho m.N m.HN m.N H.H oz
o.mm N.N H.H 0.00 o.mH m.m 0.0m o m.¢ 04
o.mm o m.¢ o.oH o.ow N.N m.Nm m.N ©.H H a:
m.mm N. H.H N.om N.Hm N.N N.om H.H m.¢ «HQEmm

.mso; mgu cH mH muqu m.cmeoz < .mm

N.Hm 0.0m N.N mmHQsmm
o.mm 0.00 m.N mHQ5mm
m.NH m.NN N.H 0.0m o.mm H.N m.N m.HN H.H oz
o.mH m.HH m.H m.HN m.Nm H.N o.mH m.NH o.N ON
m.N m.Nm H.H m.No m.NN H.N o.m o.mN H.H H a:
o.oH N.HN H.H H.NH H.0m H.N m.H H.HN N.H quEmm

.mmxmm :Hon L0H mEoummLH

 

 

 

 

 

 

ucm mpzmHL Hmzcm mHJHOWDN :H m>mHHmn ow mHLHm new mxon LHmcp a: mcHLn UHsocm mgmzuoE cgmuoz .Nm
N.N m.HN N.H mmHQEHm
0.0m o.mm o.N mHaEmm
0.0m o.mm m.m o.mH m.HH m.m o.oq 0.0m o.m oz
o.mm m.Hq m.N o.om o.mo q.m 0.0m m.mm o.N oN
o.mm m.Hm q.m m.m o.mm m.H m.Hm m.mm m.m H or
H.0q m.mm N.m m.NH N.mH N.N m.mq m.mm o.m mHaEmm
.mmuHHHLumm L0H a: mmxma mmmHLLmE EOLH mchm can: m Hog; “exp mgzm Em H .Hm

mmmemHo mmgmq mmgmmmHo mmgm< mmgmmmHo mmgmq
pcmugwm Hcmugma com: Hcmugma Hcmugwa com: Hcmugma Hcmugma cam: a30Lo

mcHHmm om cmeoz mmmgm><

NCHHQN-HHmm

 

 

 

 

 

 

.UmchucouII.mm mHm<H

 

145

m.HN N.N N.H mmHQEmm

o.om o.m o.H NmHQEmm
N.NQ m.NH o.m m.HN H.NH N.N o.mH H.H o.q oz
m.NH N.N N.N m.HH o.mH H.N 0.0m o.m m.q DH
o.HH o.ON N.N o.ooH o m.H m.Nm o.mH H.N a:
N.oo N.NH N.N N.NN N.N o.H N.NH N.N N.N mHQENm

 

.cmE mco umsn mo :oHuumHHm
HcmHmcou mzu m>mz cmnu coHHm: mgu usogmzogcp LNquoa new nmLHEUm .msoEmH mp gmgpmg quoz H .qm

 

 

 

 

mmgmmmHo mmgm< mmgmmmHo mmgm< mmgmmmHo mmgm<
Hamugma Hcmugma com: Hcmugma ucmugma cam: Hcmugma Hcmugma com: Q30Lo
mcHumm om :mEoz mmmgm>< mcHHomIHHmm

 

‘1
'I

I’ I III, i’l’ 'l'ul'l "Ill'l’ulll

 

.vmschcouIn.om mHm<H

146

Observations Regarding Respgnses to
IVF Items_anb1e 26)

 

Though Sampie3 in Tab1e 26 are not "average women," but "other-
oriented" women (IVF means = -6.75), their responses ot items may be
compared with predictions made by HD and LD women on the same items.
Differences in degree of stereotyping of the Average Woman by HD and
LD subjects can a1so be observed.

Sex-roie stereotyping has often been described as existing,
when 75 percent or more of the subjects consider an item to typify
a certain sex group. Using this criterion, HD women in Sample.l stereo-
type the average woman on 22 items, LD women on 8 items. However, HD
subjects often stereotyped the average woman in the traditional direc-
tion even on those items, which "other-oriented” (traditional) women
in fact answered in the 1ibera1 direction. LD subjects' stereotypes,
on the other hand, agreed in every instance with seif-descriptions
of ”other-oriented" women.

For exampie, 75 percent of LD women assumed the average woman
to disagree with item 17 (Singie women need persona1 success, but a1]
a married woman needs is her husband's success). In fact, 100 percent
of the "other-oriented” women disagreed with that statement. Again,
80 percent of the LD women predicted the average woman to agree with
item 25 (My main interest is to raise norma1, we11-behaved chi1dren),
and this prediction concurred with "other-oriented" women's responses.

HD subjects, however, often stereotyped the average women as

taking a position which is not even adopted by traditionai women.

147

Their stereotypes were gross1y incorrect on the fo11owing items (1,
3, 6, 7, 13, 19, 20, 26, 27, 33). For examp1e, 95 percent of HD
women assumed the average woman to agree with item 19 (It is up to the
woman to make a marriage work) and 80 percent assumed she wou1d agree
with item 33 (A woman's p1ace is in the home). But on1y 12 percent
of traditiona1 women agreed with item 19 and 25 percent with item 33.

In some instances, however, ”other-oriented” women express
their traditiona1ism with even more overwhe1ming agreement than pre-
dicted by either the HD or L0 subjects. For instance, 87 percent of
Samp1e3 disagreed with item 10 (I am not sure that the joys of mother-
hood make up for the sacrifices), whereas on1y 77 percent of HD women
and 57 percent of LD women predicted such disagreement.

The areas where HD women most often predict the Average Woman's
reSponses incorrect1y may be grouped as fo11ows:

1. The marriage re1ationship, unse1ectiveness in choice of
marita1 partners, and unequa1 status as being acceptab1e (items 1, 7,
18, 19, 24, and 27).

2. The area of work and persona1 success, and its possib1e
interference with chi1d-rearing (items 3, 13, 17, 20, 28).

3. Woman's ro1e as being the home (item 33).

On the other hand, HD women tend to predict correct1y in the
fo11owing areas:

1. Average women's re1ative 1ack of interest in pub1ic acc1aim
for success (items 4, 34).

2. Average women's interest in p1easing others (items 5, 15).

148

3. Average women's wi11ingness to accept he1p from others
(item 8).

4. Average women's views on the priority of fami1y needs and
the wife's va1ue as a he1per to her husband (items 9, 21).

5. Average women's certainty that the benefits residing in
parenthood and in the marriage re1ationship make up for sacrifices
(item 10, 31).

6. Average women's re1ative1y Iower interest in assertive
1eadership behavior (items 11, 12, 14, 15, 16).

7. Average women's abi1ity to work in beha1f of an admired

person, and their desire to 100k up to their husband (items 23, 29).

REFERENCES

149

REFERENCES

Albert, E. M. The roles of women: Questions of values. In S. M.
Farber & H. L. Wilson (Eds.), The potential of women. New
York: McGraw—Hill, 1963, pp. 105-115.

 

Anthony, N. Open letter to psychiatrists. The Radical Therapist,
1970, 1 (3), 8.

 

Bardwick, J. Lessons for liberals from radica1 women's liberation.

Paper presented at a conference on women in Flint, Spring,
1973.

Bieri, J. Cognitive complexity-simiplicity and predictive behavior.
Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 1955, 513 263-268.

Borrow, H. Development of occupational motives and roles. In L. W.
Hoffman & M. L. Hoffman (Eds.), Review of child development
research. New York: Russell Sage Foundation, 1966, pp. 373-
423.

 

Broverman, I. K., Broverman, D. M., Clarkson, F. E., Rosenkrantz, P. S.,
& Vogel, S. R. Sex-role stereotypes and clinical judgments
of the mental health. Journal of Consulting and Clinical

Psychology, 1970, 34, 1-7.

Broverman, I. K., Vogel, S. R., Broverman, D. M., Clarkson, F. E.,
& Rosenkrantz, P. S. Sex-role stereotypes: A current
appraisal. Journal of Social Issues, 1972, 2§_(2), 59-78.

 

Carlson, R. Understanding women's implications for personality and
research. Journal of Social Issues, 1972, 28 (2), 17-33.

 

Clark, T. R. Self-concept and expectancy for social reinforcement
in male homosexuals. Unpublished Master's Thesis, Wayne State
University, 1968. Cited by W. H. Fitts, The self concept and
behavior: Overview and supplement. Dede Wallace Center,
Monograph VII, June, 1972.

Claye, C. M. A study of the relationship between self-concepts and
attitudes toward the Negro among secondary school pupils in
three schools in Arkansaw. (Doctoral Dissertation, University
of Arkansaw) Ann Arbor, Mich.: University Microfilms, 1958,
No. 58—2751.

150

151

Deutsch, M., Krauss, R. M., 8 Rosenau, N. Dissonance or defensive-
ness? Journal of Personality, 1962, 39, 16-28.

 

Donelson, E. Personality, a scientific approach. New York: Appleton-
Century-Crofts, Meredity Corporation, 1973.

 

Duncan, C. A reputation test of personality integration. Journal of
Personality and Social ngchology, 1966, 3, 516-524.

 

 

Eagly, A. H. Involvement as a determinant of response to favorable
and unfavorable information. Journal of Personality and Social

 

Psychology, Monograph, 1967, Z, Part 2, 15 pages.

 

Edlow, D. W. 8 Kiesler, C. A. Ease of denial and defensive projection.
Journal of Experimental and Social Psychology, 1966, 3, 56-69.

 

Empey, L. T. Role expectations of young women regarding marriage and
a career. Marriage and Family Living, 1959, 39, 152—155.

 

Fand, A. 8. Sex role and self concept. (Doctoral Dissertation,
Cornell University) Ann Arbor, Mich.: University Microfilms,
1955, No. 11, 901.

Farber, S. M. 8 Wilson, H. L. (Eds.), The potential of women. New
York: McGraw-Hill, 1963.

 

Fenichel, O. Iheypsychoanalytic theory of neurosis. New York: W. W.
Norton 8 Company, Inc., 1945.

 

Festinger, L. AEIFRQIYEQI cognitive dissonance. Stanford: Stanford
University Press, 1957.

 

Festinger, L. Conflict, decision and dissonance. Stanford: Stanford

University Press, 1964.

 

Fitts, W. H. The role of the self concept in social perception.
(Doctoral Dissertation, Vanderbilt Unitersity) Ann Arbor,
Mich.: University Microfilms, 1954. No. 11, 133.

Fitts, W. H. Manual for the Tennessee Self Concept Scale. Nashville,

Tenn.:1 Counselor Recordings and Tests, 1965.

 

 

Fitts, W. H. Interpersonal competence: The wheel model. Dede Wallace
Center Monograph 11, Nashville, Tenn.: Counselor Recordings
and Tests, 1970.

 

 

Fitts, W. H. The self concept andgperformance. Dede Wallace Center,

Monograph V, Nashville, Tenn.: Counselor Recordings and Tests,
19726.

 

152

Fitts, W. H. Correlates of the self concept, Dede Wallace Center
Monograph VI, Nashville, Tenn.: Counselor Recordings and
Tests, 1972b.

 

Fitts, W. H. The Self concept and behavior: Overview and supplement.
Dede Wallace Center Monograph VII, Nashville, Tenn.: Counselor
Recordings and Tests, 1972c.

 

Fitts, W. H., Adams, J. L., Radford, G., Richard, W. C., Thomas, B. K.,
Thomas, M. M., 8 Thompson, W. The self conceptyand self-
actualization. Dede Wallace Center Monograph III, Nashville,
Tenn.: Counselor Recordings and Tests, 1971.

 

 

Fitts, W. H. 8 Bell, G. An evaluation of group counseling for nursing
students. Nashville Mental Health Center Research Bulletin,
No. 4, 1969. Cited by W. H. Fitts, The self concept and
behavior: Overview and supplement. Dede Wallace Center
Monograph VII, Nashville, Tenn.: Counselor Recordings and
Tests, 1972.

 

 

Ginzberg, E. Life styles of educated women. New York: Columbia
University Press, 1966.

 

Goldberg, P. Are women prejudiced against women? Transaction, 1968,
April, 28-30.

 

Hewer, V. 8 Neubeck, G. Attitudes of college students towards employ-
ment among married women. Personel and Guidance Journal,
1864 9 fl. 587’592 .

 

Hoffman, L. W. Early childhood experiences and women's achievement
motives. Journal of Social Issues, 1972, 33_(2), 129-155.

 

Horner, M. Toward an understanding of achievement-re1ated conflicts
in women. Journal of Social Issues, 1972, 33, 157-175.

 

Hovland, C. I., 8 Sherif, M. Judgmental phenomena and scales of
attitude measurement item displacement in Thurstone scales.
Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 1952, 41, 822-832.

 

Kagan, J. 8 Moss, H. A. Birth to maturity: A study in psychological
development. New York: Wiley, 1962.

 

 

Lamb, K. W. Self concept and dogmatism as variables in the prediction
of internal-external reward expectancies. Unpublished Master's
thesis, Butler University, 1968. Cited by W. H. Fitts, Ihg_
self concept and behavior: Overview and Supplement. Dede
Wallace Center Monograph VII, Nashville, Tenn.: Counselor
Recordings and Tests, 1972.

 

153

Lewis, E. C. Counselor and girls. Journal of Counseling Psychology,
1965, 13, 159—166.

 

Maslow, A. H. Motivation and personality, New York: Harper 8 Row,
1954.

 

Matthews, E. 8 Tiedeman, D. V. Attitudes toward career and marriage
and development of life style in young women. Journal of
Counselipg Psychology, 1964, 11, 375-384.

 

 

McKee, J. P. 8 Sherriffs, A. C. Men's and women's beliefs, ideals,
and self-concepts. American Journal of Sociology, 1959, 34,
356—363.

 

Mead, M. Sex and temperament in three primitive societies (1935).
New York: Dell Publishing Company, 1963 (3rd ed.).

 

Miller, M. B. Meaningful interpersonal relationships and mental health
correlates. Proceedings, 78th Annual Convention, American
Psychological Association, 1970, 23, 347-348.

 

 

Ohlbaum, J. S. Self-concept, va1ue characteristics and self-actuali-
zation of professional and non-professional women. (Doctoral
Dissertation, United States International University) Ann
Arbor, Mich.: University Microfilms, 1971, No. 71-14, 181.

Peterson, E. Working women. In R. J. Lifton (Ed.), The woman in
America. Daedalus Library, Vol. 3. Boston: Houghton Mifflin,
1964.

 

Richard W. C., Mates, C. G., 8 Whitten, L. Personality traits and
attitudes or adolescent girls with behavior disorders.
Unpublished manuscript, George Peabody College, 1967. Cited
by W. H. Fitts, The Self Concept and behavior: Overview and
supplement. Dede Wallace Center Monograph VII, Nashville,
Tenn.: Counselor Recordings and Tests, 1972.

 

 

Riordan, R. J. Feminine sex role concepts among high school counselors
and students. (Doctoral Dissertation, Michigan State Univers-
ity), 1966.

Rock, G. TV: Same time, same station, same sexism. M3, 1973, 3_(6),
24-28.

Roe, A. What to look for in a career. In L. Muller and D. Muller
(Eds.), New horizons for college women. Washington: Public
Affairs Press, 1960. PP. 66—78.

 

154

Roe, A. Women in science. Personel and Guidance Journal, 1966, 44,
784-787.

 

Rogers, C. R. On becoming a_person. Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1961.

 

Rosenkrantz, P., Vogel, 5., Bee, H., 8 Broverman, I. Sex-role stereo-
types and self-concepts in college students. Journal of
Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 1968, 33, 287-295.

 

Rossi, A. A. Barriers to career choice of engineering, medicine, or
science among American women. In J. A. Mattfeld 8 G. Van
Aken (Eds.), Women and the scientific professions. Cambridge,
Mass.: The M.I.T. Press, 1965. pp. 51-127.

 

Rousseau, J. J. Emile. (1792, trans. W. H. Payne). New York: Apple-
ton 8 Company, 1896.

 

Rush, F. Who's afraid of Margaret Ribble? Rough Times, 1972, 3 (1),
6-8.

 

Schutz, W. C. The interpersonal underworld. Palo Alto, Calif.:
Science and Behavior Books, 1966.

 

Seeman, J. Toward a concept of personality integration. American
ngchologist, 1959, 14, 633-637.

 

Seeman, J. Personality integration in college women. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 1966, 4, 91-93.

 

Shaw, M. E., 8 Costanzo, P. R. Theories of social psychology, Mc-Graw-
Hill, 1970.

 

Sherif, M. 8 Hovland, C. 1. Social judgment: Assimilation and con-
trast effects in communication and attitude change, New
Haven: Yale University Press, 1961.

 

 

Steinman, A. A study of the concept of the feminine role of 51 middle
class American families. Genetic Psychology Monographs,
1963, Q], 265-276.

 

Steinman, A. Manual for interpretation of the Inventory of Feminine
Values. New York: Maferr Foundation, 1966.

 

Tagiuri, R. Person perception. In G. Lindzey 8 E. Aronson (Eds.),
The handbook of social psychology, Vol. 3. Reading, Mass.:
Addison—Wesley, 1969, pp. 395-450.

 

Taylor, P. H. Role and role conflicts in a group of middle-class
wives and mothers. Sociological Review, 1964, 13, 317-327.

 

155

Thomas, M., 8 Seeman, J. Criterion measures for therapy outcome:
A study in personality integration. Psychotherapy: Theory,
Research, and Practice, 1971, 3_(1), 26-30.

 

Thompson, C. The role of woman in this culture. In P. Mullahy (Ed.),
A study of interpersonal relations. New York: Grove Press,
1949.

 

Wechsler, D. The measurement and appraisal of adult intelligence.
Newsletter, National Vocational Guidance Association, 1966, 3,
5-6.

 

Weinstein, E. A., DeVaughan, W. L., 8 Wiley, M. G. Obligation and
the flow of deference in exchange. Sociometry, 1969, 33
(1)91‘12.