.4-

 

v-Q.

 

« .u‘wvdv".o .

0-4 -.“

 

.w’. .h44v--.‘-.-~na.4. .é.

 

THE IMPACT OF STRUCTURED
SMALL-GROUP EXPERIENCES ON THE
BEHAVIORAL DEVELOPMENT AND GROUP
INTERACTION OF NURSING STUDENTS

Thesis for the Degree of Ph. D.
MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY 7
I CHRISTA MIRIANI .- H ,7
v I 1972'“ ' ‘ . 7 .

a» A,
1:14,”;
”(fr
, o
,-~
.1..v.on!'

 

if! .rrv:.r
,j'. .
, I w
' ::-.',ar:;x’:r r‘ .
)h f; ,.,'.) «4'4 - H ,
~ ,ri mo "in ,
~w114,‘ -~,,-'L,'/ “3-7.
W {On-J] C +~. " '
H "W‘ 1245,41 “ " ' minim W:
'Y'W’ , «arr-II
”W: .‘Ip' I"

 

 

,1,"

, o
.F/J 4’:- “62$.
:7 .1; (1

an"
1-; ,

   

 

 

 

 
 

I"D"4RY

University

 
   
   

This is to certify that the

thesis entitled

The Impact of Structured Small-Group Experiences
on the Behavioral Development and Group
Interaction of Nursing Students

presented by
Chri eta mmm

has been accepted towards fulfillment
of the requirements for

 

Ph.D. degree in
Administntion and Higher Education

: I zjzmy/K/inng

I

W Ptofm

Date June 21, 1972

0-7639

 

 

 

 

 

 

.EH; fl\

:9’ J

  
 
   
 

 
  
   

ii" JUN-1 '- 39-: 'H q:
IIIIAII & SONS' .
~. 800K BINDERY INC. ._
SPRIIBMITJIICIIM I .
*- TI ‘ A.)

  

 

 
    

LIBRARY emoans
r. I

‘44-Q

x i—

ABSTRACT

THE IMPACT OF STRUCTURED SMALL-GROUP EXPERIENCES
ON THE BEHAVIORAL DEVELOPMENT AND GROUP
INTERACTION OF NURSING STUDENTS

By

Christa Miriani

This study was conducted to systematically
investigate the impact of structured, small-group experi-
ences on the personal behavioral development and certain
group development characteristics of selected second-year
nursing students.

Forty-six subjects, constituting two naturally
assembled collectives, participated in the small-group
behavioral development program. The participants, all
second-year students in a two-year diploma school of
nursing, resided at two separate residences. Students had
been assigned to the residential groups six months prior
to the initiation of this project.

The experimental procedure included two types of
group formation which were constructed on the basis of
scores on the filers-Briggs Type Indicator. Security

groups were formed on the basis of similarity of

Christa Miriani

behavioral preferences for the purpose of identification
and affirmation of behaviors represented in the group.
Stimulation groups were formed on the basis of compli-
mentarity and opposition of dominant behaviors for the
purpose of understanding, accepting, and acquiring the
behaviors represented in the group. Security groups met
for one and one-half hours a week for four weeks. After a
month of security group meetings, stimulation groups were
formed. These groups met for one and one-half to two
hours a week for eight weeks. Stimulation groups provided
the learning encounters which were designed to broaden each
participant's behavioral repertoire by means of new
behavioral experiences.

All subjects, treatment and control, were pretested
and posttested on the Omnibus Personality Inventory (0P1),
Form F, and the Group Dimensions Descriptions Questionnaire
(6000). The scales on these instruments constituted the
dependent variables in this research design. A correlated
t test between the pretest and posttest scores was computed
to determine if changes were significantly different from
zero at the .05 level of confidence.

Follow-up interviews and student self-report
evaluations were conducted with treatment subjects to
assess their responses to the project and their perceived
personal and group development.

The major hypotheses, that nursing students who

participate in the behavioral development program described

in this

Christa Miriani

study demonstrate favorable change in personal and

group attitudes, interests, and values are supported by

the results.

follows:

I.

Data from the experiment can be summarized as

Treatment subjects report significant favorable
change on the Practical Outlook and Altruism
scales of the OPI. Although not significant, the
Autonomy, Personal Integration, and Masculinity-
Feminity scales show large change constituting a
persistent trend in a favorable direction. The
overall treatment main effect across all OPI

dimensions is favorable.

Control subjects indicate significant change on the
Impulse Expression and Religious Orientation

scales of the CPI. However, the positive direction
of this change is questionable since the subjects
also report a decrease on the Personal Integration
and the Altruism scales, while the Autonomy scale

remains unchanged.

The treatment group reports significant favorable
change on five scales of the 6000: Flexibility,
Hedonic Tone, Intimacy, Potency, and Stratifi-
cation. The remaining two scales, Control and
Viscidity, indicate change in a favorable

direction, but not to as great a degree.

Christa Miriani

The Control Group indicates significant change on
the Intimacy scale of the 6000. Two dimensions,
Control and Stratification, indicate movement in
an unfavorable direction. The Flexibility,
Hedonic Tone, Potency, and Stratification scales
indicate little change in a favorable direction.
The positive direction of the Intimacy scale is
questionable since this change is not supported

by posttest changes on the other 6000 scales.

THE IMPACT OF STRUCTURED SMALL-GROUP EXPERIENCES
ON THE BEHAVIORAL DEVELOPMENT AND GROUP
INTERACTION OF NURSING STUDENTS

By

Christa Miriani

A THESIS

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

DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY

Department of Administration and Higher Education

1972

To my Sisters of Mercy

who nourish and celebrate

life with me

ii

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

I wish to extend my appreciation and gratitude
to the many persons who have contributed to the successful
completion of this study: to my chairman and friend, Dr.
Max Raines, for introducing me to human development as a
study and as a way of life; to my friends and committee
members, Dr. Richard Featherstone and Dr. William Sweet-
land, for their example of humane scholarship, for believ-
ing in me and letting me know it; and to those who started
it all, Dr. H. Harold Grant and Dr. Walter F. Johnson,
for their encouragement and continuing interest in my
educational and personal development.

Very special appreciation is extended to the
administrators, faculty, and students from Mercy School
of Nursing of Detroit for their cooperation, support, and
interest in this study.

Finally, I am deeply grateful to my parents,
Louis and Vera Miriani, for having had the courage to
take hold of life, to create it, and to share that power

with me.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

LIST OF TABLES
LIST OF FIGURES.

Chapter
I. INTRODUCTION.

Background and Purpose of the Study
Statement of the Problem .
Hypotheses. .

Definition of Terms. . .
Limitations of the Study .

Overview . .

II. REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE.

Introduction .

Developmental Status of the Student

Developmental Tasks of the Student

Personality Development in College
Students. . . .

Peer Group Influence .

Impact of the Small- -Group.

Summary. . .

III. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY

Description of the Sample.
Research Procedure
Experimental Treatment.
Instrumentation

Omnibus Personality Inventory.

Group Dimensions Discriptions
Questionnaire .

Myers-Br1ggs Type Indicator

iv

Page
vi

viii

Chapter
Statement of Hypotheses .
Research Design and Statistical Analysis
Summary . . . . . .
IV. ANALYSIS AND RESULTS.

Presentation of Data . .
Descriptive Data: Final Interview

Descriptive Data: Self— Report Evaluation :

Summary
V. SUMMARY, DISCUSSION, AND CONCLUSIONS

Introduction and Purpose.
Literature Review .

Design of the Study .
Results of the Study .
Discussion .

Limitations of the Study. .
Implications of the Research
Conclusion . . . .

BIBLIOGRAPHY
APPENDICES
Appendix

A. Definitions of the Fourteen Scales of the
Omnibus Personality Inventory . .

8. Definitions of the Thirteen Grou
Dimensions Descriptions Scales.

C. Student Self-Evaluation Report Form.

Page

108

dd—J—l—J—I-l-nl
w www-u-a-a-ao
oooasxusw—aoo

—l
N

I44

I50
154

Table
3-1.

3-2.

3-3.

3-4.

3-5.

3-6.

3-7.

4-].

4-2.

4-3.

LIST OF TABLES

Frequency of Ages of Nursing Students in the
Research Sample . . . .

Parental Occupational Classifications for
Students in the Research Sample.

Number and Per cent of Fathers Who Completed
Various Levels of Education . . .

Number and Per cent of Mothers Who Completed
Various Levels of Education . . .

Composition of Security Group Formation With
Treatment Subjects According to Scores on
the MBTI . .

Composition of Stimulation Group Formation
With Treatment Subjects According to
Scores on the MBTI

Frequency of MBTI Dominant Types and
Auxiliary Functions in the Research Sample

Mean Pretest and Posttest Raw Scores,
Standard Deviations, and Mean Differences
on the OPI Scales of the Treatment Group.

Mean Pretest and Posttest Raw Scores,
Standard Deviations, and Mean Differences
on the OPI Scales of the Control Group

Mean Pretest and Posttest Raw Scores and

Mean Differences on the 6000 Scales of the
Treatment Group . . . . . .

vi

Page

48

49

50

51

56

58

73

81

87

91

Table
4-4.

4-5.

4-6.

4-7.

4-3.

Mean Pretest and Posttest Raw Scores and Mean
Differences on the GDDQ Scales of the
Control Group . .

Frequency and Per cent of Responses During
the Final Interview of Treatment Subjects
Indicating the Effect of the Behavioral
Devel0pment Program in Personal Life

Number and Per cent of Student Responses
Indicating the Effectiveness of the
Behavioral Development Program in Relation
to the Professional Nursing Situation .

Number and Per cent of Student Responses
Indicating the Effectiveness of the
Behavioral Development Program in the
Residential Environment. .

Number and Per cent of Student Responses
Indicating the Effectiveness of the
Behavioral Development Program in Relation
to Personal Development. . .

Page

95

97

100

102

103

Figure
4-l.

4-2.

4-3.

4-4.

LIST OF FIGURES

Composite Profile of Pretest and Posttest
OPI Mean Standard Scores of Treatment
Group Subjects . . . .

Composite Profile of Pretest and Posttest
OPI Mean Standard Scores of Control
Group Subjects . . . .

Group Dimensions Profile of Pretest and
Posttest Stanine Scores for the
Experimental Group. . . . .

Group Dimensions Profile of Pretest and

Posttest Stanine Scores for the
Control Group

viii

Page

82

86

90

93

CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION
Background and Purpose
of the Study

The real educator is characterized by his refusal
to put limits to the possible, by his "effort to make
maturity the more it might become" (Rauschenbush, l965),
and by his unrelenting faith in the growth-thrust of the
person. Whether one speaks in the terms of Socrates or
Jesus, of Newman or Dewey, education consists in leading
out of the self, of breaking down the barriers and the
walls which prevent a person from relating to reality and
responding to it with the full totality of his powers.
The end of all knowledge and education, then, is tensed
toward the growth and development of the person.

The college touches the student at a most important
point in his development. Decades ago Alfred North White-
head asserted that " . . . the valuable intellectual
development is self-development and that it takes place
between the ages of sixteen and thirty" (1929, 13). More
recently The Hazen Foundation's Committee on the Student

in Higher Education (l968) reemphasized the position that

the college is a major influence in the personality
development of the young adult. In spite of this, insti-
tutions of higher education, of which schools of nursing
are a part, have made little progress toward incorporating
concepts or practices which would facilitate the personal
self-development of the students they serve.

It is understood that much has yet to be explored
about that period of the life cycle we call later
adolescence or young adulthood, but it must be recognized
that much is already known. The task of higher education,
therefore, is to apply as best it can the known while
persons engaged in research continue to unravel the
unknown (Chickering, l969).

Nursing education has traditionally been concerned
with the transmission of knowledge and the practice of
nursing procedures. In order to meet the future demands
of health care in the United States, nursing education must
develop nurse practitioners who can assimilate a large
body of scientific data and clothe it with humanistic
values. It is not enough to rely on the mere acquisition
of knowledge and the mastery of nursing procedures.

It seems to me that "personal nursing" is something
that machines cannot do; but it also seems to me that
nurses, in their efforts to make their practice of care
efficient, impersonal, and effortless, are actually
competing with machines, and becoming machine-like in
the process (Jourard, l964, 139).

The student nurse needs experiences which will

help her become attuned to herself and to others. Only

then will she be able to assess health conditions and
measure degrees of wellness more effectively. Many
classes in nursing education are small, permitting a ratio
of less than ten students to one faculty member. There-
fore, the environment for interaction, for faculty-student

contact and peer group influence already exists.

Statement of the Problem

Recognizing the theoretical constructs already
known about small-group interaction and peer group
influence, it would be possible to utilize the existing
structures within nursing education more effectively for
the personal development of the student by means of
planned intervention through goal-oriented small-group
experiences.

The purpose of this research, then, was (I) to
facilitate and assess the personal behavioral character-
istics and certain group development characteristics of
selected second-year nursing students who lived together
and who participated in a planned series of small-group
experiences; and (2) to assess the personal behavioral
characteristics and certain group development character-
istics of similar students, living in a separate residence,
who did not participate in the small-group experiences.

The sample study consisted of second-year
residential students from Mercy School of Nursing of

Detroit, Michigan, (MSND) a two-year diploma school of

nursing. All second-year resident students were subjeCts
in the study. A total of forty-six residential students
constituted naturally assembled collectives. Six months
prior to the initiation of this study, students were non-
randomly assigned to two nurses' residences--Ann Arbor,
Michigan, and Pontiac, Michigan. Assignment was based on
proximity to the students' family residences and resi-
dential space. There is no evidence of assignment based
upon personality characteristics, aptitude, behavioral
competencies, or any other variable which would be signifi-
cant to this research. Therefore, equivalency of indi-
vidual and group characteristics was assumed. The
treatment was randomly assigned to the students residing
at Pontiac, Michigan; the students residing at Ann Arbor,
Michigan, comprised the control group.

For the experimental subjects. small-group member-
ship was based on similarity of individual behavioral
preferences during the first four weeks of the program.
Later, group membership was based upon complementarity
and opposition of individual behavioral preferences as
measured by a self-report instrument, the Myers-Briggs
Type Indicator (MBTI) (Myers, l962).

The group process was based upon an understanding
and appreciation of a person's own basic behaviors in
relation to others as well as upon an understanding and

appreciation of behaviors opposite to one's own behavioral

competencies. The group process was goal-oriented in so
far as it was based upon the appreciation and acquisition
of specific new behaviors demonstrated by various members
of the group.

The research consisted of a planned and direct
intervention into a residential setting in order to increase
the sense of group identification (community) and to
facilitate the development of selected individual be-
haviors within the residential setting. The assessment
tools used to measure the impact of the small-group
experience on the personal develOpment of the student
consisted of the Omnibus Personality Inventory (OPI)

(Heist and Yonge, 1968), the Group Dimensions Descriptions
Questionnaire (GDDQ) (Hemphill, 1967), and a personal self-
report evaluation of the program which students completed
at the termination of the study.

Several basic assumptions underly this research:

I. The individual person is basically and ultimately

self-directive.

2. Each person is capable of unlimited development,
depending upon his own motivation and the support

of the external environment.

3. Personality development necessitates a broad
repertoire of behavior in order to respond to the

ever greater demands of reality.

4. Education should address itself to the full human
development of the student by creating an environ-
ment which is supportive of the self-actualizing

tendencies of the person.

5. Higher education, of which schools of nursing are
a part, has a major impact on the personality

development of the student.

6. Small group interaction is a helpful method of
encouraging and inducing change in ways associated

with and promoted by the nursing curriculum.

7. Peer groups in a residential setting have an impact
on the learning process and upon the effect

learning has on behavior.

Hypotheses
Research studies in college student development
and small-group interaction support the central hypothesis
that nursing students who participate in goal-oriented
small-group experiences demonstrate personal growth and
development.
The specific hypotheses to be tested in this
research are:
Hypothesis l: Students in the experimental group of
the behavioral development program
(BDPE) will demonstrate favorable
change on posttest scores of the

fourteen scales of the Omnibus Person-
ality Inventory

Hypothesis 2: Students in the control group of the
behavioral development program (BDPC)
will not demonstrate favorable change
on the postteSt scores of the fourteen
scales of the Omnibus Personality
Inventory.

Hypothesis 3: Students in the experimental group
(BDPE) will demonstrate favorable change
on posttest scores for each of the
following dimensions of the Grou
Dimensions DescriptionsQuestionnaire:
Control, FIebeiTity, Hedonic Tone,
Intimacy, Potency, Stratification, and
Viscidity.

Hypothesis 4: Students in the control group (BDPc) will
not demonstrate favorable change on
posttest scores for each of the
following dimensions of the Group
Dimensions Descriptions Quest onnaire:
Control, FTexibility, Hedonic Tone,
Intimacy, Potency, Stratification, and
Vascidity.

Definition of Terms

Security groups within the behavioral development
program consisted of subjects assigned to small-groups on
the basis of similarity of behavioral preferences as
measured by the MBTI.

Stimulation groups within the behavioral develop-
ment program consisted of subjects assigned to small-
groups on the basis of opposition and complimentarity of
behavioral prefenences as measured by the MBTI.

Personal behavioral characteristics refers to
scores on the fourteen scales of the Omnibus Personality

Inventory before and after participation in this

experimental study. The scales of the Inventory represent
a series of defined individual characteristics which are
the criterion measures for change in this study (see
Appendix A).

Group development characteristics refers to scores
on seven scales of the Group Dimensions Descriptions
Questionnaire. Subjects in this study completed the
questionnaire before and after participation in this
program. The scales on this questionnaire represent a
series of defined group characteristics which are the
criterion measure for group development in this study

(see Appendix B).

Limitations of the Study
Although every effort was made to create a
systematic experimental study, there are several limi-

tations which are inherent in research of this nature:

l. Random assignment of subjects was not possible
because of the predetermined nature of group

membership.

2. Sample size was limited by the number of second-
year nursing students (forty-six) who lived in

the nurses' residences.

3. Not all personality types according to the MBTI
were represented in the experimental group. The

majority of treatment subjects manifested the two

behaviors of sensation and feeling. Only a few
subjects demonstrated well-developed thinking and
intuitive behaviors. This restricted the range of

role models.

4. To the extent that the personality type classi-
fications affect behavior, and to the extent to
which there was an imbalance of personality types
between the groups, the presence of intervening
variables that are capable of distorting the

outcome may be presumed.

5. The limited duration of the experimental program
(four months) reduces the possibility of signifi-

cant personal and group development.

6. Although the OPI and the GDDQ are at the present
time considered adequate research tools, the
expected limitations of paper-and-pencil criterion

are inherent in this study.

Overview of the Study
It has been noted in this chapter that this study
attempted to experimentally assess specific behavioral
development and certain group development characteristics
in nursing students who participated in structured small-
group experiences which took place once a week over a
period of twelve weeks. The research resulted from a need

to identify and define new experiences in nursing education

10

which would most contribute to the behavioral growth and
development of the student, thus insuring greater depth,
understanding, and humaneness in nursing care.

Chapter II of this study is a review of the
literature relevant to this research. In Chapter III the
research design and the experimental procedure are
presented in detail. The three psychological instruments
used in the study, the Omnibus Personality_Inventory,
Myers-BriggspType Indicator, and the Group Dimensions
Descriptions Questionnaire, are also discussed. Analysis
of the data and other findings of the study are presented
in Chapter IV. A summary of the research, discussion of
the results, and implications for practice in a variety of

settings appear in the final chapter.

CHAPTER II
REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE

Introduction

Since the early days of American higher education,1
students have often been dissatisfied with the delivery of
the promises stated in the college catalogue. Periodically,
students have risen up to make known their plight, to call
attention to the neglect they feel heaped upon them; and
just as often they have fostered change in which the edu-
cational process emerged as in a new baptism, reborn from
the past and quickened with new life (Rudolph, 1966).

The protest and unrest of the l960's were just one
of those periods in which students lamented the irrelevance
of their education to the realities around them. The
consequences of the Aquarian Age are enormous, and students
"sense that the education they are receiving is not

functional for the world they will be inhabiting in ten or

 

1Throughout this study, all references to higher
education or to college students refer also to other post
high school educational institutions and students such as
diploma schools of nursing, with which this study is
immediately concerned.

11

12

twenty years" (Freedman, l967, l74). The heady intellectual
training, the ensuing competition and the academic press
associated with it has become diametrically opposed to the
education of the "gentleman," the "well-rounded indi-
vidual," and the "whole person" of the college catalogue

in the 1960's (Bolton, I967; Katz, 1968; Morris, I969).

The findings of recent research have_been
conclusive--information is transmitted to students about
as effectively by textbooks as by direct instruction.

The review of literature presented by McKeachie (l962)
emphasizes the fact that course work has little effect on
student attitudes, values, or behavior. Even the variance
of teaching methods has little effect. Hence, the belief
that students are changed by reason of the classroom
experience is less tenable than educators have thought
(Becker, 1968; Jacob, l957).

At a time when knowledge is exploding daily and
the crucial questions center around what and how much
should be taught, the educator must "control his zeal for
imparting knowledge" (Sanford, l967, 8). He must make
choices based upon what the student needs in order to
change as a person--in order to become a changing person
(112.19.).

Students are resisting the pressures and demands
of the academic world, but at the same time they are in a

“state of heightened educability for growth in values and

13

interpersonal relations" (Heath, l968, 267). The insistence
of today's students upon the satisfaction of these needs

and desires may be evidenced in the rise of communes,
love-ins, and the uninhibited sensualism of this day. The
needs that higher education fails to address itself to will
be met outside the system with all the excesses incumbent
upon "the revolt of the dependent" against exploitation

and frustration (Erickson, 1970).

Today's students feel a genuine loss of under-
standing of themselves and the world they live in. They
are not satisfied with the stereotype role behavior so
demanded by the cultural press. The threat of such a press
confuses their ability to maintain a sense of self in the
society. The fabricated image is a lie, and if nothing
else these students are committed to honesty (Francis,
1970; Sanford, 1967). They have grown up in the midst of
affluence and have seen their parents pay the price of
success. The total dedication of the self to the system,
the insistent work ethic, the alienation and loneliness
and competition are hardly the spoils of the good life.
Consequently, these students desire the freedom to become
whole persons, not bartering themselves to the slavery of
the system. They believe that the "unexamined life is
not worth living, and they mean to examine it fully,"
seeking the intellectual life in the "spirit of celebration"

(Martin, 1969, 8). They sense that

 

14

. . true learning ultimately involves unique per-
ceptions and unique integrations, and that real
expertness is more a light from within, more a matter
of personal wisdom and the making of good choices,
than the ability to reproduce facts (Moustakas, 1968,

The central question to which this research is
addressed is: How is it possible to intervene into the
educational process in order to facilitate the development
of the whole person? Allied questions relevant to this
study are: What is the developmental status of the post
high school student? What is the impact of the peer group
as a determinant of student behavior? How can small group
interaction facilitate the behavioral development of the
student?

The theoretical bases of these questions as they
apply to this study relate to the nature of college
student development, the influence of the peer group, and

the nature of small-group interaction as it affects the

behavioral development of the individual.

Developmental Status of the Student

A longing for profound transformation seems to live
in nearly every human soul. But on a day-to-day level,
many of our students seemed to have decided many years
ago that transformation was out of their reach, and to
have settled for a more restricted responsiveness to
stimuli, seeking security by finding out what the
rules of the game were, and by playing accordingly
(Katz, 1968, 8).

This very revealing statement is supported by
Sanford's report that "many students do not really expect

to change much in college. The concept of personal change

15

was totally new, but persuaded of the possibility of
growth and of their own power to direct the change, the
students set out to explore directions for personal growth
and development" (1967, 9). Unless a person has expec-
tation for change, he is unable to give serious consider-
ation to the choices that remain open before him (Axelrod,
gt_gl., 1969).

Many psychologists and researchers in the field of
college student development support the theory of late
adolescence or young adulthood as a developmental stage
of human life (Chickering, 1969; Erikson, 1950; Freedman,
1965; Heath, 1968; Katz, 1968; Lozoff, 1968; Sanford, 1967).

There are numerous descriptions of the tasks of
adolescent development as interpreted by Erikson, Sanford,
and Freedman, but each one enumerates the central issues--

. the adolescent concerns for independence from
parents, coming to terms with authority, maintaining
adequate self esteem while achieving a more or less
accurate evaluation of himself, deciding on a vocation,
attaining a perspective of society that will permit

him to see and oppose its ills without lapsing into
cynicism or total withdrawal (Sanford, 1968, 177).

The tasks are staggering. The young person is
seeking to determine who he is, what his life goals are,
how he can maintain a sense of self while giving himself
to another, what is worth living for and for what would one
die. As present challenges mount, older childhood problems

may be revived. Many students cannot handle this, and

educational institutions, for the most part, do not

16

recognize their potential power to assist in this quest
for adulthood (Katz, 1968, 4).

Partly because students cannot articulate all that
is happening to them, and partly because there is no
framework or criteria available to them by which to measure
personal success and degrees of maturity, students have
taken the only criteria education has given them, grades
and test scores, and awkwardly applied it to themselves
and others as the measure of personal success, adjustment,
and maturity. Students refer to their own grade point
average when measuring their progress toward maturity, and
they use it as a way of measuring the most profound and
personal judgments about themselves (Becker, 1968).

. grades seem to students a particularly apt and
reliable measure of character and maturity. Earning
satisfactory grades is like earning a living, a sign
of steadiness, of ability to discipline oneself and
stick to the job. Conversely, a person who cannot
"make his grades" must, like a person who cannot earn
a living, have something wrong with him; there must
be reason for his failure, and, whatever it is, it
cannot speak well of him (Ibid., 117).

Consequently, conformity to the educational process
takes the student farther outside himself, directed toward
external validation and external rewards. He is directed
toward standards and achievements outside himself; thus,
the habitual pattern of life is directed toward meeting
the expectation and approval of others rather than of
himself (Moustakas, 1968). Immeshed in such a behavior

pattern, the student "becomes confused for having given

17

up his own individuality, his own response to life .

[he has] lost touch with the actual both in himself and
in others" (lpld., 3). Validated by grades and test
scores, the criteria for personal maturation of the self
are external, not of his own choosing, but chosen for him
by others. Hence, the student loses touch with his own
inner resources and his own power for creative growth
(May, 1966).

Education which supports such a system can have no
real impact upon the person where he can be touched most
deeply; nor can the experience of such an education
support the developmental tasks encountered by the student

in late adolescence (Moustakas, 1968).

Developmental Tasks of the Student

Erikson's delineation of the stages of human
development provide a conceptual framework for the under-
standing of growth problems and crises experienced by late
adolescents in post high school years. The problems of
identity and intimacy offer challenges which the young
person needs to explore and resolve within the educational
environment (Erikson, 1950).

The task of identity vs. role confusion is the
adolescent's central developmental problem. The period
of identity formation is fraught with challenges of
learning how to behave, of discovering one's unique

potentialities, goals, and desires, of exploring life

18

styles that support them, of being attuned to one's most
authentic inner feelings and allowing personal behavior
and speech to express them (Erikson, 1950, 1953; Heath,
1968; Maslow, 1971). In contrast to the process of self-
identification which involves the establishment of status
and achievement, of role and mask, the process of identity
formation allows the person to come to terms with who he
is and what he wants. Such consciousness of “selfhood”
grows out of the myriad experiences of the past and toward
a growing certainty of the future, concretizing, in part,
his destiny (Erikson, 1959; Heath, 1968; Levin, 1968;
Moustakas, 1968).
Individuality and identity emerge from the deep levels
of the self, from the resources and talents that exist
in each of us to be formed and shaped into a particular
being in the world. It is these values which society
should recognize, encourage, and affirm. The self
cannot develop unless there is freedom, choice, and
responsibility, unless each person experiences his own
senses and becomes an active force in life, free to
choose and select, free to feel and express openly and
honestly the nature of these feelings, free to identify
with living forces, with alive persons who encourage
growth in individual identity, who value being for
itself, and who can enable the person to engage himself
and be committed to meaningful inquiry and activity
(Moustakas, 1968, 10).

Closely akin to identity formation is the dis-
covery of vocation. As a result of listening to himself
at the deepest levels and of learning who he is, the
student comes to grips with what it is he wants to do with
his life. Identity formation is almost synonymous with
the choice of a life's work, ”revealing the altar on which

one will sacrifice oneself" (Maslow, 1971, 185).

19

The second vital task of adolescent development as
identified by Erikson is the problem of intimacy vs.
isolation. The achievement of a relatively stable personal
identity is a precondition of forming adequate relation-
ships with others (Katz, 1968).

The problems of intimacy become crucial in a
residential environment where former intimacies are now
severed. The student needs to learn how to communicate
with others, how to give of himself in word and in deed.
He must face the lonely challenge of giving himself to
others in trust and of receiving them when they come in an
attitude of self-donation to him. Now he must become
convinced that he can love and that he is worthy of being
loved (Hazen, 1968).

However prolific the literature may be, however
recognized may be this problem,

American higher education has failed to recognize

explicitly that cognitive development which is not
integrated into the quest for identity and intimacy
deals only with a fraction of the human personality
and that this fraction is necessarily of secondary

importance to the young person arriving at chrono-
logical adulthood (Ibid., 45).

Personalitprevelopment in
ollege Students
The following section consists of a very brief
review of research conducted for the purpose of ascertaining

developmental changes in college students.

20

Jacob's (1957) controversial assumption that
college has little impact on student values and attitudes
has served to emphasize the need for research on student
development, the direction and magnitude of change,
possible assessment measures and research methods.
Freedman (1967) referred to the Jacob report to point out
just how acculturated higher education may have become,
and therefore, how limited may be its effectiveness. It
is more important that an individual be able to transcend
and transform the society than it is to be adjusted to
that same society (Sanford, 1962).

Differences among entering freshmen and among the
colleges they choose are so great that one cannot expect
personal change in the same direction or to the same
degree within the student population. In general, students
change in accord with the values and attitudes of the
immediate college environment (Webster, Friedman, Heist,
1962). On the other hand, the more the entering freshman
has of the characteristics under study, the greater is the
potential impact of the college experience for him
(Feldman and Newcomb, 1969). Stated another way, college
facilitates development in students who are predisposed
to grow because they are "psychologically open to new
experiences or because they are open to the influence of

others" (Ibid., 304).

21

One of the most significant and most widely
documented changes in college student development consists
in a decrease in authoritarianism. Whether one refers to
it in terms of dogmatism, ethnocentrism, rigidity, preju-
dice, or intolerance, evidence suggests that students who
are making normal progress in personal development are
able to adapt to social reality more adequately than
younger students and to a greater degree than non-students
(Flacks, 1963; Foster, gt_al., 1961; Lehmann and Dressell,
1962; Levin, 1968; Plant, 1965, 1966; Trent and Medsker,
1968; Webster, Freedman, and Heist, l962). Plant's
research with students and applicants of San Jose College
indicates that all subjects (students and applicants)
became less dogmatic and less ethnocentric. Furthermore,
the amount of change increased with the length of college
attendance (1965, 1966).

Trent and Medsker's recent study of 10,000 high
school graduates indicates significant differences between
college and non-college youth. Over four years of study,
the collegiate subjects gained in autonomy, independence,
complexity, and thinking introversion. They decreased in
authoritarianism significantly more than the non-college
subjects. While the study supports the claim that personal
growth and development are proportionate to the length of
time spent in college, the researchers have stressed that

individual readiness and predisposition are requisite to

22

any personal change. The college may provide an environ-
ment which permits the student to experience new forms of
behavior, new values and attitudes, as well as to test his
own behaviors against a broad scope of experiences.
However, it is apparent that institutions of higher
learning simply provide the environment for student growth
rather than directly seeking to influence student develop-
ment (l968).

Chickering's study of student development in
thirteen small colleges heightens the position that
developmental changes do occur in college. His study
indicates behavioral change in the following directions:
openness to impulses, personal integration and autonomy,
and freeing of interpersonal relations. Chickering laments
the present chasm between available knowledge of college
student development and current practices in higher edu-
cation. Recognizing the developmental status of the
student, colleges can encourage and foster growth and
development along the lines mentioned above (1969).

One of the underlying assumptions of human
development is that "growth is facilitated by true, free
expression of impulses in thought and in action, and by
the development of more sophisticated and complex impulses"
(Katz, 1968, 440). In his study of student development,
Katz found many students who had achieved at least partial

integration of "impulse and ego that pervaded their whole

23

personality" (121g.). Other research studies indicate that
seniors achieve more impulse expression, are more sponta-
neous, more Open and less self constrained than freshmen
who tend to be more controlled and restrained (Beach,

1967; Katz, 1968; McConnell, et_al., 1960; Sanford, 1956,
1957; Webster, Freedman, and Heist, 1962). However, an
initial predisposition to this sort of development consists
in an openness to one's deeper feelings and a willingness
to risk new and different experiences (Katz, 1968).

More broadly, the goals and values of college
students change in accord with the immediate collegiate
environment. In general, students increase in aesthetic
values and decrease in religious values in proportion to
the length of time spent in college. There are also
tendencies for increase in theoretical and social values.
The strength and intensity of economic value as a personal
motivator decreases. These factors concerning the impact
of the college experience are reported in studies based
upon the Allport-Vernon-Linzey Stugy of Values (Heath,
1968; Huntley, 1965; Stewart, 1964).

Vocationally oriented students seem to experience
less change from the college experience than do other 1
students who are not so practically oriented. Students in
career groups seem more satisfied with themselves and with
others; however, this satisfaction is bought at the expense

of not seeing or feeling other aspects of human experience.

24

Such students are keenly attuned to an external reward
system. They seem to spend little time evaluating an
intrinsic set of human values and rewards. Since these
students are preparing to take positions of responsi-
bility, practical, utilitarian concerns dominate their
thought. Consequently, career oriented students are less
influenced by the campus culture and value system than
students who are more intellectually or aesthetically
oriented (Korn, l968a; Selvin and Hagstrom, 1966).

A survey of comprehensive reviews of literature
indicates that a great deal remains to be known about the
effects of college on the student. All agree that certain
kinds of change occur as a result of the college experi-
ence, but questions regarding the amount of change,
conditions for change, and directions of change are not
conclusive in existing research studies (Feldman and
Newcomb, 1969; Freedman, 1967; Lehmann and Dressel, 1963;
Sanford, 1962). For further development in this area,
there is a need for more accurate research tools, more
careful theoretical constructs, and more appropriate

assessment measures (Bloom, 1964).

Peer Group Influence
Since research from Jacob to Feldman and Newcomb
indicates that the greatest impact on college students
comes through informal, peer group encounters, it is

important to look at the nature of peer group formation,

25

the nature of its process and influence, and the impli-
cations it presents to higher education.

Although studies in college student development
indicate change under certain conditions, research has made
little progress in studying differentiated peer group
formation and process. In general, studies have consisted
of student samples from college classes or from the larger
campus; only recently has attention been given to the
phenomenon of small peer group membership and its impact
upon the student (Newcomb, 1966).

The educational process in American culture has
capitalized upon the power of peer groups to influence
student behavior. Adolescents, like all persons, seek the
affirmation of the peer group, for status and security
depend in large measure upon one's relationship with peers
(Erikson, 1963). Peer group effects extend to all aspects
of student life: academic, social, political, aesthetic,
and emotional (LeVine, 1966). Consequently, the student
culture is the greatest educational force operating within
the college (Freedman, 1956).

College students encounter each other at a time
when the many and varied developmental tasks of adolescence
absorb a great deal of mental and emotional energy. The
resolution of these same tasks consists, in turn, upon the
support of peers for solution and adjustment. These tasks

are intensified by their urgency, and they cannot be

26

postponed for academic demands. In such a complex
situation, the residential group plays an important part
in defining patterns of adjustment and adaptation (Lozoff,
1968).

Recent studies on the nature of the student's
residential environment indicate that the peer group is a
pervasive influence on student behavior and development.
The most frequently observed determinant of behavior
modification is the peer group. The results of many
studies indicate that the peer culture has the most
significant impact in shaping student behavior (Becker,
g£_gl., 1961; Heath, 1968; Newcomb and Wilson, 1966;
Wallace, 1966). Furthermore, the peer culture within a
student residence has a greater influence upon student
growth and development than the residence itself (Alfert,
1966; Brown, 1966; Lozoff, 1968).

The formation of peer group membership seems to be
greatly determined by personality characteristics and
family background, for precollege acquaintance and simi-
larity of attitudes and values are often prime conditions
of group formation. "Birds of a feather do flock
together" and students are more likely to interact when
they share some common interest. Interaction may begin on
the bases of shared interests, but the continuity of the
interaction may lead to new and more expanding kinds of

diversified concerns (Newcomb, 1966).

27

As group members develop favorable attitudes
toward each other, they develop "sets of expectations
regarding each other's behavior" (1213,, 4). Hence,
groups hold the power to reward or punish individual
behavior by affirmation or censure (Newcomb, 1966). The
emphasis is often on conformity and on moderation in all
things. The peer culture has an effective means of keeping
group members in line (Sanford, 1967).

In many cases, the peer culture maintains its
power from the neurotic fears of some students to hurt
anyone by disagreement or nonconformity to group norms.
There are indications that many students experience strong
feelings of disagreement and difference toward peer
expectations, but they "are glossed over by a compelling
sense that they must, if possible, never be expressed

students exhibited deep resistance to admitting

negative feelings about others . . ." (Katz, 1953. 44)-
The fear of admitting negative feelings about persons or
situations is an obstacle to the personal developmental
tasks of adolescent years. Such fear prevents the student
from valuing himself, from finding out more fully what he
feels and wants, from respecting his own desires and wishes.
Apparent smoothness in relations with others is most often
bought at the price of personal devaluation and the
development of assertiveness of personality. Thus,

students can live together in close proximity without ever

28

achieving true, honest, deep relations with one another
(1218-3 Sanford, 1967). If higher education is to be a
developmental experience for the student, he must to some
extent become free from the unjust demands of the peer
group. Such freedom would allow him to develop as an
individual and would result in his becoming more autono-
mous, differentiated, and complex (Sanford, 1967).

Summarizing four decades of research on peer
groups and their influence, Feldman and Newcomb (1969)
propose the following functions of peer groups: (1) peer
groups may assist individual students through the crisis
of achieving independence from home; (2) peer groups can
offer support and facilitate academic goals of the college;
(3) such groups offer emotional support and fulfill other
needs not met by the curriculum, the classroom, or the
faculty; (4) groups provide the student with occasions
for and practice in getting along with people whose back-
ground, interests, and orientations are different from his
own; (5) through value reinforcement, groups can provide
support for not changing, challenge old values, provide
intellectual stimulation and act as a sounding board for
new experiences, help clarify new self-definitions, and
provide support for change.

Bolton (1967), Mayhew (1969), and Newcomb (1962)
suggest that the positive aspects of the peer group

environment become a consciously manipulated variable to

29

foster student development in the learning process.
Bolton's study emphasizes the fact that the informal,
peer group culture within the college does not generally
support the academic purposes which are the educational
responsibility of the collge. However, it should be
possible to "structure peer interaction in such a way as
to forward the intellectual-academic goals of the school“
(Bolton, 1967, 259).

Mayhew (1969) supports the same position that the
college should recognize the phenomenon of peer group
formation by establishing small student groups which
could foster intimacy and identification for academic and
educational purposes. Such groups can have a profound
effect upon what is learned in the collge. how it is
learned, and whether or not what is learned is integrated
into the total life style of the student.

By applying concepts of social psychology and
social learning to the nature of peer groups on the
college campus, the educational process could become much
more effective in promoting the learning process (Bandura,
1962; Gibb and Gibb, 1968).

Because personal human development takes place
essentially within small, primary group relationships, it
is important to consider in more detail the nature of the
small-group experience, its effects, and its ability to

influence individual behavior.

30

Impact of the Small-Group

Today's technological, cybernetic, post-modern
society finds man groping to establish a "selfhood," to
see himself independent of the bureaucracies and the
institutions which threaten to smother him, to find
personal meaning and internal validation in a social
structure breathed through with the stench of competition
and the loneliness it breeds. Thus, renewed interest in
the small-group experience is a "cultural attempt to meet
the isolation and alienation of contemporary life" (Rogers,
l969b, 61; Sanford, 1967).

One of the recurrent themes of youth movements is
opposition to the impersonal organization of man, the
devaluation of the meaning of human life, and a desire for
greater identification with other people (Sanford, 1968).
At the very time when higher education has reached the
pinnacle of affluence in the United States, at the very
time when it has become a national institution, on its way
to becoming available to everyone, the very foundations
upon which its success has been built are being questioned
and irreparably shaken. While higher education has
increased its professional function, it has steadily become
more socially dysfunctional. Educational goals consistently
emphasize a concern for the education of the "whole man,"
but the emphasis has been on quantitative criteria--grades

evaluations, credits (Martin, 1969). Rewards and success

31

have been inextricably associated with cognitive learning
and skill. The student's head has been cut off from his
heart in the ever-increasing race to survive and to
succeed. Academic reward systems have capitalized upon
the competitive, the individualistic American theme. All
too often the student has become an isolated, lonely
participant in the race for meritocratic goodies. Heath's
study brings to focus the great loneliness of many
students in the midst of the flurry and activity of the
campus scene (1968).

The day of isolationism in the United States has
long past. The competitive concept of the revolutionary
“survival of the fittest" is beginning to give way to
concepts of a new era, to concepts associated with the
global village and the interplanetary world, to concepts
of interdependence, cooperation, sharing, and trust.

The new student is "attempting to counter the
atmosphere of competitiveness and isolation which has
prevailed since 1950" (Freedman, 1967, 34). He is seeking
to restore the community of scholars to the campus scene.
Indeed, the student is even trying to break out of the
imprisoning concepts of the ineffable uniqueness of indi-
viduality in order to share himself with another, to be
open, to grow, to reduce the barriers and the roles which
keep people apart and alone (lplg.; Francis, 1970; Morris,

1969). Today's youth are preparing for a different human

32

and social existence. As they move toward restoring the
union between the personality and cognitive skills, they
move also toward the restoration of the sense of community
to colleges and other social institutions (Freedman, 1967).

In community, man becomes most fundamentally
himself in and through personal relationships. Community
is rooted in man's nature, for only in community can man
achieve the fullness of his personhood. Community is not
being side—by-side but being-with another, a dynamic
facing one another, a flowing from person-to-person. At
the same time each person retains his identity, autonomy,
and responsibility even though embraced in a loving and
caring relationship (Buber, 1947). The achievement of
personhood is attained by a faithful standing-with another,
an encounter which transcends mere meeting or juxtaposition;
it implies the ability to transform circumstances into
opportunities. The true foundation of personhood is not
the “I am,“ but the "We are." To-be-with is the highest
dimension of being which implies the commitment of the
person in dialogue and self donation to another (Marcel,
1963).

The student in the world today is like an atom
caught in a whirlwind, like a statistical unit or an IBM
card. He voices opinions about national policy; he lives
a timetable existence, and becomes almost identified with

his work functions or his G.P.A. When he breaks down he

33

goes to the health center or to the counseling office to

be overhauled. Within the student, however, lay an obscure
unrest which keeps hinting that this pattern of life
violates his nature. In such anonymous, alienated masses,
the student cannot grow toward personhood. He is often
“playing in the gallery," creating a role for others to
know. In this global village the person has almost
disappeared. There is a great need for communication and
dialogue, for a mutual self-donation with other persons
(Mn.

Today's students are passionately concerned about
belonging and sharing and participating. They desire to
belong, to share an intimate fellowship, and to participate
with others in face-to-face community. In a movement
toward this end they are seeking "to learn the skills of
Being" (Van Doren, 1943, 67), to integrate their emotional,
social, and personal lives with the cognitive style of
higher education. Interpersonal skills which develop the
capacity for dealing effectively with other persons are
crucial for the survival of man. This aspect of education
has been largely ignored or taken for granted (Leonard,
1968). “As the abrasion of human existence increases in
our crowded world, it can no longer be ignored" (Birnbaum,
1969, 98).

Thus, the task belongs to the educators to provide

opportunities and experiences that are conducive to

34

psychological and interpersonal development (Katz, 1968).
Persons can fail to grow because of unconscious defense
mechanisms, but too often persons fail to develop because
of a lack of challenge. Persons charged with the edu-
cation of youth "can be deliberate about introducing

young people to the major challenges of adult life“
(Sanford, 1967, 56). Learning has always consisted of the
modification of human behavior, and “normal adult behavior
develops through the stimulation of other people" (Berelson
and Steiner, 1964, 65; Mayhew, 1969).

Kemp's review of developments in the study of small-
groups emphasizes the need for educators to trust the group
experience as a significant influence in the personal
development of students (Kemp, 1964). By placing a student
in a small, meaningful, non-competitive group, he may be
freed from his usual role with its expected behavior
patterns. As a result, the primary group may become the
center in which the student may learn new patterns of
living, and from which he can move out to interact with
larger realities (Axelrod, 1967; Mayhew, 1962; Sanford,
1966).

The small-group experience can provide an environ-
ment for both security and stimulation. Left to himself,
the individual is more likely to choose an environment
which offers little threat to his defenses and established

modes of behavior (Bloom, 1964; Borel, 1964). However,

35

there must be sufficient security (minimum anxiety and
stress) for the person to risk a new behavioral response.
The median must be maintained; too little security can
throw a person back upon more primitive behavior patterns;
too much security does not offer an opportunity for growth.
By creating a little anxiety (stimulation) in a person, he
is more open to new learning (Sanford, 1966).

The student must be challenged before change can
occur, and it is the educator's task to keep challenging
the student's behavioral patterns in the interest of
growth (Sanford, 1967). An approach to student development
grows out of the belief

that people do not change unless they encounter a
situation to which they cannot adapt with the use of
devices already present. They have to innovate, to
generate some new response to meet the new situation
offered them (Sanford, 1966, 44).
Therefore, with the blend of security and stimulation which
may exist in the small-group, the student would experience
new thoughts, new feelings, and new conflicts. With the
assistance of group support and the competence of an adult,
these could become occasions for new growth and further
development (Katz, 1968).

The central growth process of the group is from
fear to trust. In early periods of latent and disguised
fear, group members camoflage their deeper feelings, they

are dependent upon role behaviors for an idealized presen-

tation of self; advice and affection is openly bartered.

36

As the group grows, fears are reduced and trust is in-
creased. In a trusting environment group members become
more personal; facades are replaced by intimacy and
openness, members become more self-directive and search-
oriented (Gibb and Gibb, 1969).

Competitive attitudes are a great barrier to
trust. In a student group, previous patterns of compe-
tition must give way to mutual cooperation and trust. This
is more easily achieved if group members are interested in
each other's welfare. Conversely, mutual interest in each
other's good is fostered by opportunities for meaningful
cooperation (Deutsch, 1962). The establishment of enduring
patterns of trust over mistrust is the first task of the
group experience (Erikson, 1959).

If small groups are meaningful occasions for the
developmental growth of the members, there is every reason
to involve students as behavioral models for one another
in the interpersonal process (Gibb and Gibb, 1968).
Theories of social learning indicate the importance of
social agents as a source of patterns of behavior in the
learning experience of the group process. "The provision
of models in actual or in symbolic form is an exceedingly
effective procedure for transmitting and for controlling
behavior" (Bandura, 1962, 265). In'a group where there
has formed a high degree of membership identification

(community), persons feel some responsibility for assisting

37

one another. In behavioral development, the more proficient
student may help another. In a helping, caring encounter
of this nature, all members of the group are free to learn
something of the social and human purposes of personal
development (Sanford, 1964). One researcher concludes
that “the most persuasive determinant of personality change
is another human being whom one respects or toward whom one
must adapt" (Heath, 1968, 224).

The purposes of the small-group process are
closely aligned with the broad educational goals which
center around the full development of the total person.
It provides the opportunity for the student to test his
own theory, his values, and his assumptions about himself
and the world. As a result of the small group experience,
it is hoped that each member has experienced himself as
growing, has seen other members growing, and has borne his
share of the responsibility to create positive growth
conditions in the environment. Through responsible
participation in the small-group, each member has an
opportunity to experiment with new modes of behavior, to
receive feedback regarding the effects of his behavior
upon himself and upon the group, and to make continual
changes in personal behavior patterns under conditions
that are supportive of creative growth. Each participant
may experience the full range of pain and joy that

accompanies taking personal responsibility for one's

38

own feelings, initiations and refusals, and sharing that

experience with others (Gibb and Gibb, 1968).
Sharing is not a mere reporting of experience; it is
a medium for opening into new relationships and, in
the process, for developing insights and letting go.
In sharing, a climate is created in which each person
within the group recognizes himself as he really is,
really notices each person in the group, and uses his
senses in being present and in creating bonds with
others.

That which we know we come to trust; as each person
shares himself in the personal, private world in which
he lives, real knowledge is enerated; a clarity of
self and others is emerging Moustakas, 1968, 56).

Research dealing with the application of small
group processes to the development and modification of
behavior in college students has been widely diverse. It
has been tentatively accepted that small group experi-
ences (a) positively affect participants' attitudes and
values (Bowers and Soar, 1960), (b) foster a positive
approach to the learning process (McKeachie, 1962), (c)
increase self-directed behavior change among participating
students (Kolb, Winter, and Berlow, 1968).

Studies involving the unstructured group process
report divergent findings. Dyer (1967) found significant
changes in self report and peer ranking of interpersonal
behavior after eight weekly meetings of one and one-half
hours each. Coleman and Glofka (1969) report similar
research with nursing students. Their study indicates a
significant increase in positive self-esteem as measured
by the Tennessee Self Concept Inventory. Alberti (1969)

studied the effects of small group interaction among

39

students and faculty. He reports significant results on
the Altruism scale of the Omnibus Personality Inventory.

Conversely, L. K. Johnson (1966) reports no effect
on personal behavior as a result of unstructured small
group experiences. LeMay (1966) found no difference in
post-treatment results between volunteers for group
counseling and the control group.

Research studies involving more structured group
process provide similarly tentative results. Curry (g£_gl.,
1968) used the Management Improvement Progrgm developed by
the Human Development Institute with small groups of
student nurses. He reports significant impact on the
human relations skill of the participants in their work
as nursing team members and as team leaders. In another
study utilizing structured, small-group interaction, Grass
(1970) reports significant changes on the Impulse Ex-
pression and the Anxiety Level scales of the Omnibus
Personality Inventory. On the other hand, after initiating
a sequence of small-group experiences, Grant and Eigenbrod
(1970) found no significant results pertaining to be-
havioral change.

Studies involving group composition (homogeneous,
complementary, heterogeneous) indicate more consistent
findings. Although homogeneity may be a necessary condition
for early group cohesion (Anderson, 1969; Pollack, 1967),

it can result in the absence of stimulation, leaving group

40

members with little challenge toward personal growth
(Shepherd, 1964). According to Pollack's research,
heterogeneous group members demonstrate more positive
change in interpersonal relations than members of homo-
geneous groups. McCary (1970) reports that members of
homogeneous groups found the group experience less
satisfying than they had expected, and they indicated
little desire to continue with the group experience. On
the other hand, complementary group members appeared to
have a greater degree of self-understanding and appeared
to have been satisfied by the group experience. This
seems to be verified by their willingness to volunteer
again for group membership. Finally, in contrast to
homogeneous groups, members of complementary and heter-
ogeneous groups reported a greater desire to continue with
the present group experience.

In general, the reported impact of the small-group
experience upon the behavioral development of the members
is decisive. Specific results of the effects of group
membership remain tentative.

There is little doubt that a small group provides the
major source of the values and attitudes people have,
and an important source of pressures to conform to
social values and attitudes. . . . The small group
serves an important mediating function between the
individual and the larger society (Newcomb, 1966;
Shephard, 1964, 1).

Furthermore, as was indicated previously in this chapter,

small-group experiences appear to have a positive impact

41

on the learning process by mediating the process of
applying knowledge, by fostering positive feelings toward
learning, by facilitating the learning of attitudes and
values, and by rewarding positive behaviors (Bowers and
Soar, 1960; McKeachie, 1962; Newcomb, 1966; Shephard,
1964; Wilson, 1966).

It is well recognized that the effects of the
small-group experience depend upon many conditions, i.e.,
the processes of the small-group, the environment within
and without the group itself, techniques designed to assist
the growth of participants, and the personality character-
istics of the members (Stock, 1964).

Change within the personal behavior of group
participants depends to a large extent upon the initial
personality of the individual (Schutz and Allen, 1966).
Miles (1960) and Whitman (1964) have identified the
characteristics of flexibility and openness as essential
prerequisites for the growth process. A most significant
catalyst for personal growth is a willingness to share
oneself with others--doubts, conflicts, uncertainties,
i.e., "to share the most vital dimensions of being as they
are emerging in oneself and in one's own relations with
others" (Moustakas, 1968, 56). Individuals who are
inclined toward a high degree of authoritarianism are
likely to respond poorly toward the unstructured environ-

ment so characteristic of most small-group experiences

42

(Levin, 1968). Therefore, it must be recognized that
personal developmental change as a result of a small-group
experience may occur only for some persons under certain
conditions. Specific variables indicating the causes of
change and the effects of the group experience are as yet
unknown. However, research studies indicate that the
application of small group methods to student development
may have considerable value. It remains for future
research to provide more adequate research tools, more
innovative strategies, and more effective measurement

techniques.

Summary

An effort has been made in this chapter to
summarize those research reports and supporting theories
which are relevant to this study. Students in higher
education today are rebelling against the depersonali-
zation, the competition, and the heady cognitive emphasis
which has characterized higher education since the 1950's.
The loneliness and competition of the collegiate experi-
ence in particular, and of American society in general
have given rise to renewed concern over the role higher
education has in the world today.

Most psychologists and research scholars support
the theory of late adolescence as a developmental stage in

human life. The primary tasks of this period are the

43

formation of personal identity and the achievement of
intimate, meaningful relations with others.

A survey of the literature indicates that some
broad conclusions may be made regarding personality change
in college students. In general, students change in
accord with the characteristics of the immediate college
environment. The college experience facilitates the
development of students already predisposed toward further
growth. Student development is proportionate to the
length of time spent in college. More specifically,
research tentatively indicates that the college experience
tends to contribute toward student growth and development
in the following ways: decrease in authoritarianism,
increase in autonomy, independence, complexity, thinking
introversion. and impulse expression. However, because of
their practical, utilitarian concerns, vocationally
oriented students are less inclined to experience change
as a result of higher education.

There is little doubt that the greatest impact on
college student development is the peer group. Peer
pressure is a primary determinant of behavioral modifi-
cation. Nevertheless, research has made little progress in
studying differentiated peer group formation and its
effects. In spite of the closeness of residence hall
living arrangements, and in spite of continual peer

interaction, many students admit to profound loneliness

44

and great fear of expressing negative feelings in the

peer group. As a result, relationships are superficial
and loneliness persists. Evidence points to the possi-
bility of structuring peer group interaction in such a way
as to forward the personal development of the student as
well as the academic and intellectual goals of the
college.

In a desire to restore community to the scholars,
interest in small-group process and its impact upon student
development has heightened in recent years. Learning has
always consisted of the modification of human behavior,
and this occurs only through interaction with other
people. Although conclusions are tentative and generalized,
research indicates that the small-group experience may offer
an effective, growth-producing, learning environment.

The curriculum of student nurses provides for the
formation of small groups within the academic and clinical
setting. Students become active members of the nursing
team, working for some time as a team member, at another
time as a team leader. Students in a diploma school of
nursing experience the same period of young adulthood
with all of its developmental tasks and concerns as other
college students. It seems evident that the small-group
structure of the nursing curriculum could be more
effectively utilized toward the personal development
of the student as well as toward the academic goals of

the institution.

45

Chapter 111 describes the design and methodology
of a structured attempt to meet these needs within a
residential setting by means of a small-group behavioral

development program.

CHAPTER III

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY

This research sought to test one method of
purposeful intervention into a residential environment
in order to encourage students' behavioral potential on
the one hand, and to identify and strengthen behavioral
competencies on the other. The strategy included the
formation of goal-oriented small-group interaction which
would offer the necessary conditions for security as well
as for stimulation or learning.

Several aspects of the research project are
discussed in this chapter, including (1) a brief description
of the student population which participated in the project,
(2) an explanation of the instrumentation, (3) a statement
of the testable hypotheses, and (4) a description of the

research design and the experimental procedure.

Description of the Sample
The population from which this research sample was
drawn consisted of the total population of second-year,

female nursing students who lived in residence at Mercy

46

47

School of Nursing of Detroit, during the l969-l970 academic
year. A total of forty-six resident students constituted
naturally assembled collectives in two residential groups.
One residence is at Pontiac, Michigan (twenty-two treatment
subjects); and the other is at Ann Arbor, Michigan (twenty-
four control subjects). Students were assigned to the
living groups in August, 1969, on the bases of proximity

to home and residential space. There is no evidence of
assignment of students based upon personality character-
istics, aptitude, behavioral competencies, or any other
variable which would be significant to this research.

The project was initiated in February, 1970.

Mercy School of Nursing of Detroit is a two-year
diploma school of nursing affiliated with St. Joseph Mercy
Hospital, Detroit, Michigan; St. Joseph Mercy Hospital,
Pontiac, Michigan; and St. Joseph Mercy Hospital, Ann
Arbor, Michigan. Enrollment consists of close to two
hundred female and male students.

All of the students in this sample lived in
Detroit or in the surrounding suburbs. As indicated in
Table 3-1, experimental subjects had a slightly higher
median age than control group subjects.

The educational background of the population
consisted of public and Catholic parochial secondary
schools, with 46 per cent of the subjects having had
attended Catholic affiliated high schools and 54 per cent

48

TABLE 3-1.--Frequency of ages of nursing students in the
research sample.

 

 

 

 

 

Agggrg" "2:23;"; °2::::‘
N % N % N %
19 7 31.8 15 62.5 22 47.8
20 9 40.8 3 12.5 12 26.0
21 3 13.6 4 16.6 7 15.2
22 1 4.5 0 0.0 1 2.1
23 2 9.0 2 8.3 4 8.6

 

of the participants having had attended public secondary
schools.

As indicated in Table 3-2, the sample population
appears relatively homogeneous in relation to parental
occupational status. Fathers' occupations consisted
predominantly of industrial supervisors, skilled and semi-
skilled workers. Similarly, the majority of mothers were
full-time homemakers. Mothers who were employed outside
the home appear to have been engaged in traditionally
female service positions.

Parental educational patterns seem consistent with
the occupational choices, with a greater percentage of
parents terminating their formal education after high

school graduation (see Tables 3-3 and 3-4).

49

Table 3-2.--Parental occupational classifications for
students in the research sample.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Treatment Control
Item Description Group Group Total

N % N % N %
Father's occupation
Businessman o 0.0a 2 3.3 2 4.5
Disabled 1 5.0 O 0.0 l 2.2
Insurance, sales 2 10.0 2 8.3 4 9.0
Professional 0 2 8.3 2 4.5
Police, Fireman 2 10.0 4 16.6 6 13.6
Supervisor, foreman 7 35.0 4 16.6 11 25.0
Skilled worker 6 30.0 6 25.0 12 27.2
Semi-skilled worker 2 10.0 4 16.6 6 13.6
Mother's occupation
Bookkeeper 2 9.1 O 0.0 2 4.3
Clerk 1 4.5 5 20.8 6 13.0
Housewife 3 59.1 3 54.1 26 56.5
Nurse 4 18.2 5 20.8 9 19.5
Secretary 1 4.5 l 4.1 2 4.3
Teacher 1 4.5 O 0.0 l 2.1

 

aPer cents are rounded to one decimal
not necessarily total 100.

place and do

50

TABLE 3- 3. --Number and per cent of fathers who completed
various levels of education.

 

 

 

 

 

EdUEggggna‘ T'§i§I§"t CEEESS‘ Total

N % N Z N %
Postgraduate Degree 0 0.0 O 0.0 O 0.0
College Degree 0 0.0 l 4.1 1 2.2
Three years college 1 5.0 2 8.3 3 6.8
Two years college 4 20.0 5 20.8 9 20.4
One year college 1 5.0 O 0.0 l 2.2
High school graduate 9 45.0 11 46.0 20 45.4
Tenth grade 1 5.0 2 8.3 3 6.8
Ninth grade 1 5.0 O 0.0 l 2.2
Eighth grade 3 15.0 3 12.5 6 13.6

 

51

TABLE 3-4.--Number and per cent of mothers who completed

various levels of education.

 

 

 

 

 

Edufgtlonal Trgagmgnt C82533] Total
N N N %
Postgraduate Degree 1 4.5 O 0.0 1 2.1
College Degree 0 0.0 O 0.0 O 0.0
Two years college 0 0.0 l 4.1 1 2.1
One year college 1 4.5 2 8.3 3 6.5
Technical education 4 18.2 6 25.0 10 21.7
High school graduate 15 68.2 12 50.0 27 58.6
Tenth grade 0 0.0 1 4.1 1 2.1
Ninth grade 1 4.5 2 8.3 3 6.5

 

 

Di

52

In all of the above respects, age, high school
background, parental occupation and education, the sample
population appears to have been relatively homogeneous,
thus supporting comparability in these factors between the

experimental and control groups.

Research Procedure

 

Mercy School of Nursing of Detroit, through the
Director and the Associate Director, was invited and
agreed to serve as the population within which the
experiment would be conducted. Meetings were held with
all faculty members from each of the three units of the
school, i.e., Detroit, Ann Arbor, Pontiac, for the purpose
of explaining the nature of the study and the procedure
to be followed in its implementation.

The total population of second-year resident
students participated in the project. The students lived
in two residences: Ann Arbor, Michigan, and Pontiac,
Michigan. The treatment was randomly assigned to the
Pontiac students. Twenty-four students from the Pontiac
residence became the experimental group and twenty-four
students from the Ann Arbor residence constituted the
control group. After five weeks of the study, two par-
ticipants in the experimental group moved out of the
residence for reasons of marriage. Thus, the final study
consists of twenty-four control subjects and twenty-two

treatment subjects.

53

In February, 1970, all experimental and control
subjects were pretested on the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator
(MBTI), the Omnibus Personality Inventory (OPI), and the
Group Dimensions Description Questionnaire (GDDQ). Each
student in the experimental group had an assessment
interview with the researcher in order to assess present
behavioral competencies and to explore directions for
future development. Control subjects had no further
contact with the researcher until the posttest.

The treatment group was first divided into small
security groups which consisted of subjects assigned to
small-groups on the basis of similarity of behavioral
preferences as measured by the Myers-Briggslype Indicator,
a self-report inventory based upon Carl Jung's theory of
personality type. Typological theory suggests that the
different dominant types--sensation, intuition, feeling,
thinking--foster different behavioral patterns. The type
which is most developed in each person is the most influ-
ential in personal behavior (Myers, 1962). The dominant
function is accompanied by an auxiliary function.

As far as possible, security groups were formed
according to similarity of dominant and auxiliary functions.
These groups met for one and one-half hours a week for
four weeks. Research and theory on behavioral development

Support the importance of homogeneity in providing a base

W

and

In
11.
h

(D

9x

Se

Pr

54

from which a person can move toward more stimulating and
learning experiences in his personal and social environ-
ment.

After a month of group meetings, security groups
were dissolved and stimulation groups were formed
according to complementarity and/or opposition of dominant
behaviors. As far as possible, each of the four behaviors
were represented as a dominant function within the group.
Stimulation groups met for one and one-half to two hours
a week for eight weeks. These groups provided the
learning encounters which were designed to broaden each
participant's behavioral repertoire by means of modeling
and experiencing new behaviors.

At the conclusion of the twelve weekly meetings,
all participants in the program, both experimental and
control subjects, were posttested on the OPI and the G000.
The interval between the pretest and posttest was a little
more than four months.

The research project was terminated by a personal
interview with each member of the experimental group in
order to reflect individual perceptions and reactions to
the program as well as to assess how each student perceived
her own progress. Two weeks after the final interview,
experimental subjects were asked to complete anonymous
self-report evaluations regarding the effectiveness of the

Program (see Appendix C).

55

Experimental Treatment

The following steps describe the treatment employed

in this study in order to facilitate personal growth and

development and group interaction.

1.

After pretesting, each student in the experimental
group was interviewed by the researcher in order
to confirm behavioral preferences as indicated by
the MBTI and to explore areas for future growth

and development.

Experimental subjects were assigned to security
groups according to similarity of behavioral
preferences as determined by the MBTI (see

Table 3-5).

a. Security groups, consisting of four to six
members, met for one and one-half hours each
week for four weeks with the experimenter

present as facilitator in each case.

b. During the time of these meetings, one-half of
the experimental subjects resided at the Ann
Arbor unit because of their nursing affili-
ation. Therefore, two security groups met in

Ann Arbor and three groups met in Pontiac.

56

TABLE 3-5.--Composition of security group formation with
treatment subjects according to scores on the

 

 

 

 

 

 

MBTI.
Group
Group Description Composition

Group I Dominant Sensing Types ESFP
ESFP

ESFP

ESFP

ESFP

Group II Dominant Sensing Types ESFP
ESFP

ISFJ

ISFJ

Group III Two Dominant Thinking Types ISTJ
and ESTJ

Two Dominant Sensing Types with ISTP

Auxiliary Thinking Function ISTJ

Group IV Dominant Feeling Types ESFJ
ISFP

ESFJ

ISFP
ESFJ*
ESFJ*

Group V One Dominant Intuitive Type INFJ
and ENFJ

Four Dominant Feeling Types with INFP

Auxiliary Intuitive Function ENFg

INF

 

*These subjects were terminated from the program
after four weeks of meetings when they moved out of the
residence for reasons of marriage.

57

c. The focus of the security groups was on the
identification, experience, and affirmation of

behaviors common to members in the group.

d. The activity of the groups centered on informal
discussion of MBTI results, sharing of personal
perceptions and responses, and determination

of areas of needed growth and development.

e. At the end of four group meetings, security
groups were terminated, and members were told
that the formation of stimulation or learning
groups would provide greater opportunity for
personal behavioral development by means of
inclusion into each group of persons demon-

strating a broad variety of behaviors.

f. At the termination of security groups, the
participants were encouraged to use their
personal freedom in choosing whether or not

to continue in the project.

Experimental subjects were then assigned to
stimulation groups which were formed on the basis

of complementarity and/or opposition of behavioral
preferences as indicated by the MBTI. These groups,
consisting of five or six members, met for one and
one-half to two hours a week for eight weeks (see

Table 3-6).

58

TABLE 3-6.--Composition of stimulation group formation with
treatment subjects according to scores on the

 

 

 

 

 

 

MBTI.
Group Type Description
Comp051tion Dominant Auxiliary
Function Function
Group I ESFJ Feeling Sensing
ISFJ Sensing Feeling
ESFP Sensing Feeling
ISTJ Sensing Thinking
INFP Feeling Intuition
Group II ESFP Sensing Feeling
ESTJ Thinking Sensing
INFP Feeling Intuition
ENFJ Feeling Intuition
ESFP Sensing Feeling
ESFP Sensing Feeling
Group III ISTP Thinking Sensing
ENFJ Feeling Intuition
ESFP Sensing Feeling
ISFJ Sensing Feeling
ISFP Feeling Sensing
Group IV ISTJ Sensing Thinking
INFJ Intuition Feeling
ESFP Sensing Feeling
ESFP Sensing Feeling
ESFJ Feeling Sensing
ISFP Feeling Sensing

 

59

The focus of these meetings was on the under-

standing and acquisition of developmental

behaviors in an environment of minimal stress

and anxiety.

Each meeting was focused on one particular

function with each behavioral function covering

two meetings.

The activity of the group centered on the

1.

awareness, understanding, and acceptance

of behaviors represented in the group;
identification, discussion, and observance
of the behavior to be learned;

explanation and modeling of the behavior

by persons with competency in it;
individual practice in the behavior by role
playing and allied activities;
identification and expression of individual
feelings and reactions relating to the
behavioral experience;

affirmative feedback by role models. group
members, and the facilitator;

discussion and identification of situations
in which the behavior could be practiced

during the following week.

60

The specific strategies for behavioral

development which were employed during the

group meetings were:

1.

To facilitate the development of sensing

behaviors, specific strategies included

a.

Self-wareness exercises involving the
senses of taste, touch, and smell
(Otto, 1966, 1968; Schutz, 1967);
Experiences in awarness of personal

physical presence (Ibid.).

To facilitate the development of intuition,

experiences included

a.

Contemplative concentration on an
object, a candle, a mirror, and the sky
(Smith, 1963);

An Oriental tea ceremony involving the
attitudes of attention, reverence,
harmony, and celebration;

Fantasizing and imagining stories
behind pictures presented by members

of the group.

To facilitate development of feeling

behaviors, strategies included:

a.

Reflection, awarness, and expression of

personal feelings which arose while

61

participating in a corporate effort to
create one design out of construction
blocks;

Group discussion and/or experiences
designed to stimulate feeling among
members, reflection and awareness of
the feeling, and finally verbal
expression of the feeling, negative as
well as positive.

Activities involving expression and
communication of feeling through touch,
sight, and one-word verbalizations;
Expression of feelings in diads and in

small groups.

Concentration on feeling behaviors took

place during the first two stimulation

group meetings in order that identification

and verbalization of feelings might be

facilitated during subsequent meetings,

thus reducing stress and anxiety.

To facilitate the development of thinking

behaviors, group activities included:

a.

Identification and modeling of
assertion as distinct from hostility
and aggression, the use of assertion

and its role in personal and

62

professional life, and the personal

cost of lack of assertiveness, i.e.,
self-depreciation and lack of self-

esteem;

b. Discussion of the dynamics of decision-
making, including personal risk,
responsibility, thrust for life, and
celebration;

c. Practice in relaxation techniques which
are designed to calm the sympathetic
nervous system, thus reducing personal
tention and anxiety;

d. Identification of situations in
personal life, in professional contacts,
and in the residencehall where

assertion might be practiced.

Each member in the small group was
encouraged to test and experience each
behavior. Therefore, each participant

had the opportunity to feel comfortable
with his own perceptions and responses and
to model his behavioral competencies for
other members of the group. This procedure
also emphasizes the acceptability and

necessity of all behaviors and of each

63

person's power to increase and broaden his

own behavioral repertoire.

Instrumentation

Omnibus Personality Inventory

The Omnibus Personality Inventory (OPI), Form F,
consists of 885 true-false personality items, most of
which were reportedly derived from the Minnesota Multiphasic

Personality Inventory and the California Psychological

 

Inventory. Consisting of fourteen scales, the OPI purposes
to deal with "the relevant aspects of the individual as a
changing, learning organism in the special social context
of academic institutions" (Heist and Yonge, 1968, 3). It
was constructed to assess certain dispositions, attitudes,
and values which are considered to be particularly relevant
in the areas of intellectual activity, social-emotional
development, and normal ego-functioning. Each scale was
constructed because of its assumed relevance to behavior
in the academic setting, "and some of these scales serve
as important variables by which to assess development and
change presumably related to college experiences" (1219.,
26).
Form F of the OPI includes fourteen scales which
are listed below and which are described in Appendix A.
Thinking Introversion (TI) Impulse Expression (IE)
Theoretical Orientation (TO) Personal Integration (PI)

64

Estheticism (Es) Anxiety Level (AL)
Complexity (Co) Altruism (Am)
Autonomy (Au) Practical Outlook (PO)

Religious Orientation (RO) Masculinity-
Social Exproversion (SE) Femininity (MF)

Response Bias (RB)

The instrument has been used extensively for
research purposes, often within the context of longitudinal
studies of personality development among college students
(Chickering, 1969; Katz & Associates, 1968; Korn, l968b;
Trent and Medsker, 1968; Webster, g£_gl., 1962). The
authors support its use for longitudinal comparisons of
scores from two administrations as a means of providing a
basis for measuring change in a number of non-intellective
characteristics over a period of time (Heist and Yonge,
1968).

Reliability coefficients of .71 to .93 (Kuder-
Richardson 21 Formula) appear sufficiently high. The
median reliability coefficient is .84. Such stability
permits the use of the instrument in studies concerning
intraindividual comparisons over time (Buros, 1965).

Most of the external validity evidence consists
of correlations with other tests. The following statement
from the Sixth Mental Measurements Yearbook (Buros, 1965)

help to summarize early validation research:

65

OPI scales are correlated with appropriate scales from
the Study oflValuesg_California dechological Inven-
tory, Myers- Briggs Type Indicator, Stern Activities
Index, andStrong Vocational Interest Blank.

1515 instrument would”be most userT’in research on
group differences involving relatively normal subjects.

Paul M. Kjeldegaard
Harvard University

This inventory has been selected because (1) it is
specifically designed to measure dimensions of student
behavior related to the goals of nursing education; (2)
is used extensively as a research tool in studies relating
to student development; (3) it purports to measure those
dimensions of personality development which were of
interest in this study.

Group Dimensions Descriptions
QuestionnaTre

The Group Dimensions Descriptions Questionnaire
(GDDQ) consists of 150 statements regarding group charac-
teristics or attributes. The respondent to this question-
naire expresses his answers for (attitudes toward, per-
ceptions of, impressions or knowledge about) a specific
group by indicating to what degree he regards each
statement as stating something that is true about the
group. The 150 statements are arranged to yield scores
on thirteen group dimensions (see Appendix B).

Scores on the thirteen group dimensions provide a
profile of an individual's orientation (perception and

attitude) toward a group. A profile based on the responses

66

of all members of a group gives a description of the group
as it appears to its members. Therefore, the instrument
may be used to assess a group member's orientation toward
the group or it may be used to obtain a description of the
group as it is perceived by its members (Hemphill, 1967).

Although the instrument yields thirteen scores
relating to various group dimensions, the particular focus
of this study is concerned with the seven dimensions
indicated in the hypotheses: Control, Flexibility, Hedonic
Tone, Intimacy, Potency, Stratification, and Viscidity.

Reliability of the group dimensions scores varies
widely with the dimension described. The scores for two
dimensions, Stability and Hedonic Tone, yield lower
reliabilities due to the fact that they are based on
responses to only five items each. Reliability for the
other eleven dimensions ranges from .66 to .92. These
estimates of reliability are from three studies, and they
appear to be adequate.

The discussion of validity raises questions
regarding group members' divergent perceptions of the same
group. When members disagree, are their percetions in-
valid? When members agree, are they more valid? The
researcher recognizes this concern; however, the following
excerpt from the Fifth Mental Measurements Yearbook helps

to clarify its use in this study:

67

For one who would like to discover how the members of
a “group"--defined broadly as any social unit regard-
less of its size, geographical distribution or internal
organization--perceive its "Autonomy," "Homogeneity,"
degree of "Intimacy," amount of "Participation,“
"Stratification," "Stability," and other interesting
characteristics, this questionnaire lies ready to be
used. . . . The investigator in pursuit of such
systematic knowledge [regarding the formation,
structure, and dynamics of groups] will welcome

these scales and the technically sound development
research described in the manual.

Jay Jackson

Myers-Brigngype Indicator

The Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI) consists of
a forced-choice, self-report inventory designed for use
with normal subjects. Based on Carl Jung's typology of
personality, the instrument aims to ascertain people's
basic behavioral preferences in regard to perception and
judgement so that the effects of the preferences may be
put to practical use (Myers, 1962).

The four dimensions of the Indicator test the

following dichotomous preferences:

 

 

 

Preference as between Affects on individual behavior
I Introversion Whether the person prefers to
direct his mental activities
or toward the external world of
people and things or toward
E Extroversion the inner world of concepts
and ideas
S Sensation Whether the individual prefers
to perceive his world in a
or factual and realistic way or
to perceive imaginative
N Intuition possibilities in an inner

world of concepts and ideas

68

 

 

 

Preference as between Affects on individual behavior
I Thinking Whether the subjects prefers
to arrive at judgments by
or impersonal, logical analysis
or by the subjective processes
F Feeling of appreciating personal and
interpersonal values
P Perception Whether the person prefers to
take a judgmental attitude or
or an understanding, perceptive
attitude toward his environ-
J Judgment ment (Buros, 1965; Myers,
1962)

Since the instrument was originally developed more
than twenty years ago, there is a considerably large body
of reliability and validity data available for the Indi-
cator, a substantial part of which is detailed in the
manual. Internal consistency reliabilities range from .75
to .85. These figures are comparable to other well-known
personality inventories, the Minnesota Multiphasic Per-
sonality Inventory, California Psychological Inventory, and
the Guilford-Zimmerman Tempdrament Survey. While the issue
of construct validity is always a complex one, Sticker and
R055 (1963) conclude that the SN and TF scales may reflect
the dimensions they represent, but the E1 and JP scales
are more tentative.

Many types of research projects have utilized this
instrument. Studies indicate a relationship between
behavioral type preferences and (1) frequency of per-
sonality change in college students, (2) choice of

religious vocations (Greenfield, 1969; Nauss, 1968), and

69

(3) behavioral development in small group interaction
(Grass, 1970).

Similarity of type preferences appear to be
positively related to roommate satisfaction (Eigenbrod,
1969) and to the length of client-counselor relationships
(Mendelsohn and Geller, 1963).

Complementarity of behavioral preferences seem to
be related to small group effectiveness (Grass, 1970;
McCary, 1970).

Although there has been much conflicting discussion
about the theoretical bases of the instrument and the
statistical significance of the continuous scores, the
debate is inconclusive. However, the resolution of this
debate is not crucial to this study.

The MBTI was selected for this study because of
its ability to distinguish behavioral types within group
settings. The formation of small-groups as implemented in
this project was dependent upon behavioral type preferences
indicated by this instrument. One reviewer supports this
position, stating that "an intriguing possibility for use
of the Indicator is within groups, such as married

couples, families, or work groups" (Buros, 1965).

Statement of Hypotheses
Research studies in college student development
and small-group interaction support the central hypothesis

that nursing students who participate in goal-oriented

70

small-group experiences demonstrate personal growth and

development.

The specific hypotheses to be tested are:

Hypothesis 1:

 

Hypothesis 2:

Hypothesis 3:

Hypothesis 4:

Students in the experimental group of
the behavioral development program
(BDPE) will demonstrate favorable change
on posttest scores of the fourteen
scales of the Omnibus Personality
Inventory.

Students in the control group of the
behavioral development program (BDPC)
will not demonstrate favorable change
on the posttest scores of the fourteen
scales of the Omnibus Personality
Inventory,

Students in the experimental group
(BDPE) will demonstrate favorable
change on posttest scores for each of
the following dimensions of the Grou
Dimensions Descriptions_Questionna1re:
Control, FTexibiTity, Hedonic Tone,
Intimacy, Potency, Stratification, and
Viscidity.

Students in the control group (BDPC)
will not demonstrate favorable change

on posttest scores for each of the
following scales of the Grou Dimensions
Descriptions Questionnaire: Control,
FTexibility, HedonTE'Tone, Intimacy,
Potency, Stratification, and Viscidity.

Research Desiggand
StatisticalTAna ysis

The research design employed in this study is a

pretest-posttest nonequivalent control group design

(Campbell and Stanley, 1963). Treatment and control

groups constituted naturally assembled collectives

determined by factors outside the scope of this study.

71

The treatment was randomly applied to the experimental

group. The design may be expressed as follows:

Experimental programs are often evaluated on the
basis of pretest-posttest changes. This is the design that
is generally used when no randomly equivalent control
group exists. However, the inclusion of even an unmatched
and/or nonequivalent control group reduced the equivocality
of interpretation over what is obtained in the one—group
pretest-posttest design (Ipld., 47; Kerlinger, 1964).

In designing this research, it was impossible to
employ random assignment of subjects to two groups because
the groups were constituted six months prior to the
implementation of this study. Students had been assigned
to one of two residences on the basis of proximity to home
and residential space. There is no evidence of assignment
of students based upon personality characteristics,
aptitude, behavioral competencies, or any other variable
which would be significant to this research.

Nevertheless, analysis of pretest scores showed
more significant differences between the two groups than
had been initially expected. The MBTI pretest scores
indicate significant differences between the sensation-

intuition and the feeling-thinking preferences, with the

72

control subjects apparently preferring the intuitive and
feeling functions to a significantly greater degree than
the treatment subjects (see Table 3-7).

The theoretical bases of typology of personality
assumes that differences in behavioral type preferences
would indicate marked differences in individual behavioral
responses, growth patterns, and in group interaction. In
view of this, it has been assumed that the treatment and
control groups were not equivalent and are, therefore, not
comparable.

Large differences between the groups were also
reflected on the following OPI pretest scale scores:
Thinking Introversion, Complexity, Social Extroversion,
Anxiety Level, and Practical Outlook.

Because the experimental treatment was based upon
the MBTI pretest scale scores, and because the OPI pretest
scores indicated wide differences between the groups, it
was determined that these significant differences on the
pretests made comparisons of change scores inappropriate.

Therefore, the analysis chosen for this study is
a test for significant changes on the various scales from
pretest to posttest. This analysis was carried out
separately for each group. Specifically, a correlation t
test between the pretest scores and posttest scores was
computed to determine if changes were significantly

different from zero.

73

TABLE 3-7.--Frequency of MBTI Dominant Types and Auxiliary
Functions in the research sample.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Treatment Control
Dominant Auxiliary Group Group
Type Function Index
N % N %
Sensing 11 50.0 2 8.3
with feeling ESFP, ISFJ 9 40.9 2 8.3
with thinking ESTP, ISTJ 2 9.1 O
Intuition l 4.5 11 45.8
with feeling ENFP, INFJ l 4.5 10 41.4
with thinking ENTP, INTJ O l 4.1
Thinking 2 9.1 1 4.1
with sensing ESTJ, ISTP 2 9.1 l 4.1
with intuition ENTJ, INTP O 0
Feeling 8 36.4 10 41.4
with sensing ESFJ, ISFP 4 18.2 4 16.6
with intuition ENFJ, INFP 4 18.2 6 25.0

 

74

Follow-up interviews and student self-report
evaluations were conducted with treatment subjects in
order to assess their responses to the project as a source

of supplementary descriptive data.

Summary

This research sought to test one method of
purposeful intervention into a residential environment in
order to facilitate students' behavioral potential on the
one hand, and to identify and strengthen behavioral
competencies on the other.

The population from which the research sample was
drawn consisted of the total population of second-year
nursing students who lived in residence at Mercy School of
Nursing of Detroit. The research subjects are all female,
and they appear relatively homogeneous in reSpect to age,
race, educational background, and parental economic status.

The experimental procedure includes two types of
group formation which were constructed on the basis of
scores on the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator. Security groups
were formed on the basis of similarity of behavioral
preferences for the purpose of identification and affir-
mation of behaviors represented in the group. Stimulation
groups were formed on the basis of complementarity and
opposition of dominant behaviors for the purpose of under-
standing, accepting, and acquiring the behaviors represented

in the group.

75

It has been hypothesized that (l) nursing students
who participate in goal-oriented small group experiences
will demonstrate personal behavioral development according
to scale scores on the Omnibus Personality Inventory and
the Group Dimensions Descriptions Questionnaire; and (2)
nursing students who do not participate in the small group
experiences will not demonstrate personal behavioral
development as indicated by scale scores on the above
instruments.

The instruments employed to test these hypotheses
are the Omnibus Personality Inventory (Form F) and the
Group Dimensions Descriptions Questionnaire which are the
pretest and posttest measures in this multivariate design.
The research design used in this study is a pretest-posttest
nonequivalent control group design. The statistical
analysis was a test for significant changes on the various
scales from pretest to posttest. This analysis was
carried out separately for each group. Specifically, a
correlated t test between the pretest scores and posttest
scores was computed to determine if changes were signifi-
cantly different from zero at the .05 level of confidence.

Follow-up interviews and student self-report
evaluations were conducted with treatment subjects to
assess their responses to the project as a source of

supplementary descriptive date.

76

A detailed analysis of the project data is
reported in Chapter IV.

CHAPTER IV

ANALYSIS AND RESULTS

Presentation of Data

 

Forty-six subjects, constituting two naturally
assembled collectives, participated in the small-group
behavioral development program. The participants, all
second-year students in a two-year diploma school of
nursing, resided at two separate residences--Ann Arbor,
Michigan, and Pontiac, Michigan. The treatment was
randomly assigned to the Pontiac group (twenty-two subjects).
Ann Arbor residents became the control group (twenty-four
subjects). The treatment subjects were divided into small
security groups1 which met for an hour and a half, once a
week for four weeks. At the end of this time, security
groups were dissolved and treatment subjects were assigned

to stimulation2 or learning groups which met for one and

 

1Security groups consisted of subjects assigned to
small groups on the basis of similarity of behavioral
preferences as measured by the MBTI.

2Stimulation groups consisted of subjects assigned
to small groups on the basis of complementarity and/or
opposition of behavioral preferences as measured by the
MBTI.

77

78

one-half to two hours a week for eight weeks. Group
assignment was based upon the results of the Myers-Brigg;
Type Indicator (MBTI) which reflect individual behavioral
preferences.

The Omnibus Personality Inventory (OPI), Form F,
and the Group Dimensions Descriptions Questionnaire (GDDQ)
had been administered to both control and treatment
subjects in the latter part of the winter term (mid-
February, 1970), prior to the initiation of the project.
A second administration of the OPI and the GDDQ took place
at the end of the behavioral development program (July,
1970). The interval between the pretest and the posttest
administration was four and one-half months. The fourteen
scales of the OPI (defined in Appendix A) and the seven
scales of the GDDQ (defined in Appendix B) are the dependent
variables in this multivariate design.

Because random assignment of subjects was impossible
in this study, every effort was made to use samples from
the same population. Similarity of the groups was examined,
utilizing all available information-~age, sex, social
class, parental occupational classifications and educational
background. However, pretest differences revealed at the
termination of the study indicated significant differences
between treatment and control group subjects on the
Sensation-Intuition, Thinking-Feeling, and Perception-
Judgment scales of the MBTI.

79

Theory of personality type suggests that differ-
ences in behavioral preferences indicate differences in
growth patterns, in personal perceptions and responses to
reality, toward one's inner and outer world. Consequently,
it has been assumed that the treatment and control groups
were not equivalent and are, therefore, not comparable.
Comparisons of relative growth and changes of the two
groups would not be valid since the two groups did not
begin at the same point.

Therefore, the analysis chosen for this design is
a test for significant changes on the various scales of
the OPI and the GDDQ which may have occurred between the
pretest and posttest administrations. This analysis was
computed separately for each group. Specifically, a
correlated t test between pretest and posttest scores was
computed to determine if changes were significantly
different from zero at the .05 level of confidence.

Descriptive data compiled from final interviews
and self-report evaluations of the effectiveness of the
program are included as a source of supplementary
descriptive data.

No attempt is made in this chapter to draw
conclusions or to make substantive inferences about these
data, since those topics are treated in some detail in

Chapter V.

 

111C
DH
1‘01
DOS

9”

del

9M

DO!

011

DO;

ché

80

Hypothesis 1: Students in the experimental group of
the behavioral development program
(BDP ) will demonstrate favorable change
on tfie posttest scores of the fourteen
scales of the Omnibus Personality Inven-

M.

A summary of pretest and posttest raw score means
and the mean differences of the treatment group are
presented in Table 4-1. A composite profile derived by
rounding off the raw scores and plotting standard score
positions on the graph, are presented for the experimental
group in Figure 4-1.

A visual study of the profile, along with a
detailed look at the raw-score means and the mean differ-
ences presented in Table 4-1, reveals that the pretest and
posttest differences within the treatment group are small
on the first six scales of the OPI. There is a slight
decrease in scores on the Thinking Introversion and
Theoretical Orientation scales, while the Estheticism,
Complexity, and Religious Orientation scales reveal a
slight increase. The Autonomy scale shows a large change,
though not to a significant degree. These scales measure
intellectual values and interests, and related non-
authoritarian attitudes. The authors of the Inventory
view these measures as relatively stable for the greater
population of students (Heist and Yonge, 1962).

The scales measuring social-emotional adjustment

characteristics indicate change in a favorable direction.

81

.cowuumswu acmpmrmcoo

 

 

m :- mucosa mmcmp 3ogm op emcee» mmcoom mmmgp .pcmowmwcawm uo: gmaozup<sa
.mucmopecou co Fw>mp mo. 8;» an mucauwwwemwm mmumupucHn
.NN u 82 "ago:
~¢.o em.m mo.~p om.m mm.Pp mmwm mmcoqmmm
«ac—.P Fm.m am.¢~ “5.8 me.m~ xppcvcwsom-»urcvp=omuz
«mm.p- eo.m mm.e_ mo.m 5N.o~ goo-use Pmu_uumem
«mo.~ om.¢ Fe.¢~ mp.¢ ~m.- 58*:L»p<
~m.o eo.¢ om.mp m~.m mo.~P pm>mg xumpx=<
«smm.P F_.o~ am.mm mm.“ m~.mm copumcmmucm chomcma
eo.o- mm.m mm.m~ N~.m oo.s~ cowmmmcnxm ampaasn
em.o mn.~ -.- m~.o ep.- :o-mco>ocpxm pmwuom
ep.o «m.m em.PF mp.e m~.FP covuaueaeeo ”so,m*_a¢
«av—.P mp.“ om.o~ ms.» m~.m~ »Eo:ou=<
pm.o P~.o oo.mp me.e mo.¢F »u_xopnsou
¢_.o Pm.¢ mp.mp e~.¢ mo.mp EmvuPumgumm
mm.o- mm.m mm.mp pm.e Pe.mp covuaucmvco Poo-aocouzh
m~.o- mm.~ P¢.o~ No.m «F.- covmco>oeuca ucpxcwgh
mwcmcouuyo co_umw>mo coo: co-uuw>oo cam: mpmum ”so
cam: usaucmum ammuumoa ucmucaum “acumen

 

.naogm acmsuomcu on» mo mmpoum Has 8:» co mmucmcu$$.c

come new .mcopumv>mc vcmucmum .mmcoum 38L ammuumoq use ammuogn ca~2-u.~-¢ u4m<h

82

 

mo

$0

.ummuumoa mg» co mocoom ucmucmum cums mpcmmmcamc

mcw_ cmxocm .ummpmca on» we museum ucaucmum came mucmmmcnmc ocvp umpom ”maoz

meoum

 

om

.muumnazm aaocm “cospmmcu
nemucmum cams Hao ummaumoa new ummumea mo upwmoeg murmonsouuu.Pue «Lam-m

 

 

 

 

 

 

. . . . . . mmvm mmcoammm
. . . . . . xuwcwawswmuzpwcppaumoz
. . . . . . soopaao poo-pong;
. . . . . . EMr:L#_.<
. . . . . . Pm>84 aumwx=<
. . . . . . :o-uacmmucfi Pacomgoa
. . . . . . :opmmocaxu mmpaaeu
. . . . . . cowmcm>ocuxm Popuom
. . . . . . copumucmwco macro-Pom
. . . . . . xsocoua<
. . . . . . hpwxmpaeou
. . . . . . Emw0wpmzumm
. . . . . . covumucmrso pmuFumeomgp
. . . . . . cowmcm>ocucH merxcpzh
ca mm

83

The Social Extroversion and Anxiety Level scales show a
slight increase in a positive direction, with the Impulse
Expression scale reporting a slight decrease of .64.
However, as indicated in Table 4-1, treatment subjects
indicate a large increase on the Personal Integration
scale, thus reporting growth toward emotional and psycho-
logical adjustment.

On the Altruism scale, a high score indicates in
large part a need to affiliate with others and to be
concerned about them. High scorers are affiliative
persons, trusting and ethical in relations with others.
Low scorers tend not to consider the feelings and welfare
of other persons. Participants in the treatment group
express significant favorable change on this measure at
the .05 level of confidence. Students who participate in
the small-group experiences report increased affiliative
tendencies.

A second scale on which there is significant
change is Practical Outlook. As indicated on Table 4-1,
the treatment group mean difference on this scale is -1.59,
indicating significant change. Therefore, it may be said
that students who participate in the behavioral develop-
ment program show less tendency toward authoritarian and
conservative attitudes.

Similarly, the Masculinity-Femininity scale

reports a large change which indicates a movement toward

84

more masculine interests and attitudes--objectivity over
subjectivity, and rationality over emotionality.

Predictably, the Response Bias scale indicates
very slight change in test-taking attitudes.

In summary, Hypothesis 1 is supported. Partici-
pants in the behavioral development program report an
increase in affiliative, trusting feelings and relation-
ships toward others (significant increase on Altruism
scale) as well as movement toward nonauthoritarian,
liberal, and less pragmatic values and attitudes (signifi-
cant decrease on the PO scale). Although not significant,
change on three scales, Autonomy, Personal Integration,
and Masculinity-Femininity, indicate a persistent trend
toward personal growth. These changes seem consistent
with previous research and theory of student development
and small-group interaction.

The intellectual disposition scales, Thinking
Introversion, Theoretical Orientation, Estheticism,
Complexity, and Religious Orientation remain in accord
with the authors' prediction of stability of these
measures over time.

Participants in the small group experience express
a slight decrease in feelings of anxiety (a higher AL
score) and in readiness to express impulses (a lower IE
score). Their tendencies toward Social Extroversion show

only slight increase.

85

Hypothesis 2: Students in the control group of the
behavioral development program (BDPC)
will not demonstrate favorable change
on the posttest scores of the fourteen
scales of the Omnibus Personality
Inventqpy.

As demonstrated in Figure 4-2, there is very
slight change in pretest and posttest scores for the first
five scales on the Inventory. The Thinking Introversion
scale shows a decrease, while the Estheticism scale
indicates a slight rise. The total main effect of these
intellectual disposition categories, however, appears to
change little, as predicted by the authors of the Inven-
tory (I_b_j_d_. ) .

On the other hand, the final scale associated with
the measurement of intellectual values and interests, the
Religious Orientation scale, shows a significant increase
in change scores from the pretest to the posttest. This
scale purports to measure liberal, independent, non-
conventional religious beliefs and attitudes. High
scorers tend to reject conventional religious beliefs,
while low scorers manifest a strong commitment to Judo-
Christian belief systems. A significant increase in this
scale seems to indicate that control subjects became more
liberal, independent, and unconventional in religious
attitudes and beliefs. However, this scale is closely
related to and associated with the Autonomy scale which,

as indicated in the mean scores presented in Table 4-2,

shows no change.

86

 

mm

*0

warp :mxocm

mmLoum

 

om

.ummuumoa on“ co mmsoum ucmucmum cums mucmmmLamc

.umopmca on» go mwcoum ocmucmum came mucommsamc mcwp uvpom "muoz

.mpomnnam qaosm Fosucou
nemncmum came Hmo pamppmoa use pmmpmca yo upwmoca mprmogsou--.wue mesa-J

 

 

 

 

 

 

mm

mmwm mucoammm
xuwcwcmswu-»upcw~=ommz
xoo_uao Fae-poms;

Emwacup<

Fm>m4 xpmvxc<
:o-pmcmmucH chomgma
cowmmmcaxm mmpsaEH
covmgo>ocpxm meuom

cowumpcmwco mzowmwpma
xsocou=<

xuwxmpneou

smwuppogumu

co_umucmveo ~88wumeomgp
cowmcm>ocuca mcvxcwgp

87

.mocmurecou to Pm>mp mo. on» an mocmuwwwcmwm mmumuwucHn

«N u Uz "apoz

 

 

AF.o m~.¢ mo.FP mp.e 84.F_ 883m amcoamam
mm.o om.m o~.- ep.¢ ~_.- soeevceeaL--p_=3.=umaz
m~.o em.m mN.eF m~.m om.m_ 588.330 Pageuuasa
mo.o- om.m mk.m~ mm.e mm.mu sm_=epp<
mm.o _m.¢ m8.oF em.¢ m~.o_ _a>as spa-xe<
m,.o- No.-P N8.Pm F~.op ms..m eoepaemauea Pacemeaa
sum.~ op.m F~.Nm Nm.~ N,.om copmmasaxm ampaaee
PN.o we.“ mm.m~ mo.~ m_.mN eoememsoeexm Paeuom
-N_.~ 4P.e 88.~F hm.m o~.FP eovoapeaeeo msoeavpam
oo.o Po.~ N8.8N No.5 mm.e~ asoeoe=<
om.o _m.8 m-.~p om.m no.8F agexa_aeoo
m~.o om.4 mw.mp o~.¢ mP.NP smeuvuagumm
mm.o- mm.o om.mF Am.8 mm.o_ coauaeeaeeo paupuaeoaee
me..- me.~ 8N.FN P¢.- co.mm corneasoeuee m=e¥e_;c
mucmgmmmwo cowumw>mo cum: cowpmw>mo cam: mpmum :3
com: ugmucmum ammupmoa ugmvcmum ammuwga

 

.azocm Focucou mg» co mmpmum qu a

:8 co “augmemmmfiu

cams new .mcopuap>mu ucaucapm .mmeoum 3mg “mmpumoq new ammumen cmmz--.m.v ugmxk

 

88

According to raw mean scores and the standard
deviations presented in Table 4-2, the social-emotional
adjustment scales indicate slight favorable change on the
Social Extroversion scale and the Anxiety Level scale,
while the Personal Integration scale shows a decrease in
the standard deviation from 10.21 to 11.02. However, the
Impulse Expression scale indicates significant increase
from pretest to posttest scores.

The control group reports a slight decrease on the
Altruism scale as well as a small increase on the Practical
Outlook, Masculinity-Femininity, and Response Bias scales.

In summary, Hypothesis 2 is partially supported.
Nursing students who do not participate in the behavioral
development program apparently indicate significant
increase in liberal, nonconservative religious attitude
and beliefs (a higher RO score) and a significant increase
in readiness to express impulses (a higher IE score).

However, these same students report an increase in
feelings of isolation, loneliness, and aggression (a lower
PIC score) and a decrease in affiliative, trusting relation-
Sflips with others (a lower Am score). Non-participants
1°hdicate no change toward liberal, independent, non-
aMthoritarian attitudes and values (stable Au score).

The intellectual disposition scales show a tendency
toward practicality as reported in the following mean
“s<=ore differences: -1.75 decrease in Thinking Introversion

3"d -.83 decrease in Theoretical Orientation.

89

Hypothesis 3: Students in the experimental group
(BDPE) will demonstrate favorable
change on posttest scores for the
following dimensions of the Group
Dimensions Descriptions guest onnaire:
Control, ex b1 ity, He on c one,
Intimacy, Potency, Stratification, and
Viscidity.

 

A summary of pretest and posttest stanine
(standard) scores of the treatment group is presented
in Figure 4-3. The composite profile is derived by
rounding off standard score means and plotting the mean
standard score positions on the graph (Hemphill, 1967).

A study of the figures presented in Table 4-3
reveals that the pretest-posttest variations within the
treatment group are significant in five of the seven
scales. The two remaining scales report change in a
favorable direction, but not to as great a degree.

Treatment group subjects report a significant
increase in group flexibility as reflected in freedom from
custom, tradition, and codes of behavior (a higher
Flexibility score). Treatment subjects also indicate a
general feeling of pleasantness and agreeableness
associated with group membership (increase in Hedonic
Tone). Intimacy of group members as reflected by inter-
personal behavior appears significantly high (increase on
Intimacy scale). Participants in the small group program
report that group membership has primary significance for

its members as expressed by the kind of personal and

 

_.1

90

a

Stanine Score

Control
Flexibility
Hedonic Tone
Intimacy
Potency

Stratificationb

 

Viscidity

Proportion in
Base Population .04 .O7 .12 .17 .20 .17 .12 .07 .04

Figure 4-3.--Group Dimensions profile of pretest and post-
test stanine scores for the experimental
group.

Note: Solid line = pretest
Broken line = posttest
aA stanine score is a standard score.

bA positive change on the Stratification scale is
indicated by a low score.

 

_
I

91

TABLE 4-3.--Mean pretest and posttest raw scores and mean
differences on the GDDQ scales of the treatment

 

 

group.

Pretest Posttest Mean

GDDQ Scale Mean Mean Difference

Control 30.5 31.5 1.00
Flexibility 26.1 33.0 6.95*
Hedonic Tone 17.4 22.2 2.85*
Intimacy 50.1 53.9 3.77*
Potency 46.7 51.7 4.95*
Stratificationa 33.7 30.3 -3.41*
Viscidity 38.3 41.3 3.00

 

Note: Nt = 22.

*Indicates significance at the .05 level of
confidence.

aA positive change on the Stratification scale is
indicated by a low score.

 

92

interpersonal needs which the group is satisfying (increase
in Potency dimension). Absence of dissension and personal
conflict among members and an increase in group unity is
indicated in an increase on the Viscidity scale. Treatment
group members report a significant decrease in stratifi-
cation among group members as reflected by the absence of
status hierarchies and shared participation in power,
privileges, obligations, and duties among the members (a
lower score on the Stratification dimension of the GDDQ).
In summary, Hypothesis 3 is supported. Nursing

students who participate in the behavioral development
program report an increase in group growth and development
as reflected by significant favorable treatment main
effects across five dimensions of the GDDQ: Flexibility,
Hedonic Tone, Intimacy, Potency, and Stratification. The
group dimensions of Viscidity and Control show an increase
in a positive direction, but not to as great a degree.

Hypothesis 4: Students in the control group (BDPc)
will not demonstrate favorable change
on posttest scores for each of the
following dimensions of the Grou
Qjmensions Descriptions Questionnaire:
ControT}F1exibility, Hedonic“T6ne,
Intimacy, Potency, Stratification, and
Viscidity.

A composite profile of pretest and posttest

stanine (standard) scores for the control group is

presented in Figure 4-4. A study of the profile indi-

cates little change in the degree of pleasantness

 

_. ...1..

93

Stanine Score

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

Control

Flexibility

Hedonic Tone

Intimacy

Potency

Stratificationb

 

Viscidity

Proportion in
Base Population .04 .O7 .12 .17 .20 .17 .12 .07 .04

Figure 4-4.--Group Dimensions profile of pretest and post-
test stanine scores for the control group.

Note: Solid line denotes pretest; broken line
denotes posttest.

aA stanine score is a standard score.

bA positive change on the Stratification scale is
indicated by a low score.

 

94

associated with group membership (Hedonic Tone). Group
members likewise report little change in the unity of
group members (Viscidity scale) and the degree of flexi—
bility within the group (Flexibility scale). On the other
hand, non-participants in small group interaction indicate
an increase in the degree of control that group members
tend to exert over one another (Control scale). Similarly,
status hierarchies and differential distribution of power
and privilege appear to have increased (increase on
Stratification scale). The power of the group to have
importance for its members and to satisfy their needs
shows slight increase. Significant pretest-posttest
change is reflected on the Intimacy dimension (see

Table 4-4). Non-treatment participants in the program
report an increase of intimacy among and between members
which is reflected in interpersonal interaction.

In summary, Hypothesis 4 is supported. Nursing
students who do not participate in the behavioral develop-
ment program indicate significant favorable change on only
one group dimension, i.e., Intimacy. Two dimensions,
Control and Stratification, report change in an unfavorable
direction. A small increase in a favorable direction is
indicated on the Potency dimension. The Flexibility,

Hedonic Tone, and Viscidity scales show such slight change

that the stanine score is not affected.

 

95

TABLE 4.4--Mean pretest and posttest raw scores and mean
differences on the GDDQ scales of the control

 

 

group.

Pretest Posttest Mean

GDDQ Scale Mean Mean Difference

Control 34.1 32.7 -l.42
Flexibility 26.9 30.0 2.75
Hedonic Tone 17.5 18.3 0.75
Intimacy 50.9 56.3 5.38*
Potency 53.3 54.7 1.42
Stratificationa 33.0 33.2 0.25
Viscidity 38.3 40.3 2.00

 

Note: Nc = 24.

*Indicates significance at .05.

aA positive change on the Stratification scale is
indicated by a low score.

 

96
Descriptive Data: The
Final Interview

At the completion of the behavioral development
program, all twenty-two treatment group subjects took part
in a follow-up interview with the experimenter. The
purpose of the interview was to provide an opportunity for
students to reflect their feelings and attitudes toward
the project as well as to compile supplementary descriptive
data regarding the effectiveness of the program.

During the interview students were asked the
open-ended question, "Do you feel that participation in
the program in any way supported or failed to support your
personal growth and development?" A summary of reSponses
appears in Table 4-5.

Eighty-six per cent of the participants indicated
an increased ability to get along with other people. This
factor appears to be closely related to other responses
reflecting increased ability to understand various
behaviors (59%) and to interact with people the student
previously disliked or avoided.

Principal self-reported gains from participation
in the project were self-acceptance (68%), increased
ability to be assertive in appropriate situations (72%),
and the recognition and acceptance of assertive behavior
in others (63%).

Many students expressed an increased understanding

of the feelings of others (59%), as well as a recognition

97

TABLE 4-5.--Frequency and per cent of responses during the
final interview of treatment subjects indi-
cating the effect of the Behavioral Develop-
ment Program in personal life.

-....‘ _- “.- -.. -._-.-._ —-. 7‘. - ---___ _ -_ .. - .. _. -- 3 4 _-__—.. .. —~‘_._

Per cent of

 

Number of Total Number

Item Description Responses of Participants
Greater ability to get along
with other people 19 86.3
Increased ability to be
assertive in appropriate
situations 16 72.7
Greater self-acceptance 15 68.1
Ability to recognize and
accept assertion in others 14 63.6
Greater facility in understanding
and accepting behavior of others 13 59.0
More sensitive understanding of
feelings in self and others 13 59.0
Ability to interact with people
previously avoided 12 54.5
More comfortable with other
people 11 50.0
Greater facility in verbalizing
problems 10 45.4
Increased ability for decision-
making 10 45.4
Increased ability to recognize
and express feelings 10 45.4
Greater self-understanding 10 45.5

More able to be self-directive
in environment of peer pressure 9 40.0

Increased self-confidence 8 36.3

98

TABLE 4-5.--Continued.

 

Per cent of

 

Number of Total Number

Item Description Responses of Participants
Greater ability to express
anger and negative feelings 8 36.3
Increased recognition and
appreciation of intuition 7 31.8
More comfortable in small
groups 6 27.7
Greater appreciation of
sensing behaviors 6 27.7
Conscious enjoyment of
little things in life 6 27.7
Ability to enjoy self more 6 27.7
Increased awareness of the
possibilities of self-
development 3 13.6
More comfortable with inter-
personal silence 1 4.5
Increased aggression and
anxiety 1 4.5
Program did not assist in
any way 1 4.5

 

99

and acceptance of their personal feelings, negative as
well as positive. Closely allied to these responses are
reports of greater ability to express feelings, including
anger and negative emotions. These responses likewise are
related to feelings of self-worth and self-acceptance.
Descriptive Data: Self-
Report Evaluations

Two weeks after the termination of the program and
the follow-up interview, all twenty-two treatment-group
subjects were asked to complete an anonymous self-report
evaluation of the behavioral development program (see
Appendix C). The evaluation consisted of three parts:
the effectiveness, or lack of effectiveness of the
behavioral development program in relation to (1) team
nursing and/or the hospital work situation, (2) the
student residential environment, and (3) personal growth
and development.

A summary of the first part, the effectiveness of
the program in relation to team nursing and/or the hospital
work experience, appears in Table 4-6. The frequency of
responses (68%) suggests that an understanding of assertion
and the ability to practice assertive behavior are assets
in the work setting. Fifty-four per cent of the students
indicate that an understanding of the various behavioral
preferences assisted them in their interaction with

professional colleagues, patients, and fellow students.

100

TABLE 4-6.--Number and per cent of student responses
indicating the effectiveness of the behavioral
development program in relation to the

professional nursing situation.

 

Per cent of

 

Number of Total Number

Item Description Responses of Participants
Ability to understand and
express assertion 15 68.1
Ability to understand and
accept behavioral differ-
ences in others 12 54.5
Increased ability to get along
better with nursing staff 10 45.4
Ability to accept position of
team leader with confidence 9 40.0
Ability to recognize and
express personal feelings 7 31.8
Ability to understand
patients better 6 27.7
Increased ability to get along
with nursing students 22.7
Increase in self-understanding 5 22.7
Ability to delegate responsi-
bility in team leading 2 9.0
Program was not effective 1 4.5

 

101

Part two of the questionnaire asks about the
effectiveness of the behavioral development program in
relation to the residence setting. A summary of responses
is presented in Table 4-7. Most frequent responses center
around greater understanding and acceptance of other
students (72%).

A summary of the third part of the questionnaire,
the effectiveness of the program in relation to personal
growth and development, is presented in Table 4-8. Over
half of the participants report an increase in self-
understanding (59%) and the ability to understand other

persons (68%).

Summary

Second-year students in a two-year diploma school
of nursing who participated in a twelve-week behavioral
development program as explained in Chapter III, completed
the Omnibus Personality Inventory and the Group Dimensions
Descriptions Questionnaire at the termination of the
program. The statistical analysis employed to test four
hypotheses of interest is a correlated t test between
pretest and posttest scores in order to determine if
changes are significantly different from zero.

Hypothesis 1: Students in the experimental group
(BDPE) will demonstrate favorable

change on posttest scores of the
fourteen scales of the OPI.

102

TABLE 4-7.--Number and per cent of student responses
indicating the effectiveness of the behavioral
development program in the residential
environment.

 

Per cent of

 

Number of Total Number

Item Description Responses of Participants
Better understanding of people
and their behaviors 16 72.7
More able to recognize and
accept assertion in others 10 45.4
More familiar with people
previously avoided 8 36.3
More able to get along with
others 7 31.8
Increase in self-confidence 5 22.7
Greater ability to recognize and
express feelings 4 18.5
Increased understanding of
personal interactions 4 18.5
More tolerant of other people 3 13.6
Better able to communicate
with others 3 13.6
Able to share self more 2 9.0

More able to see good and bad
aspects of cliques 2 9.0

Able to break loose from clique
pressures l 4.5

Personal rights are respected
more 1 4.5

Program was not effective 1 4.5

 

 

103

TABLE 4-8.--Number and per cent of student responses
indicating the effectiveness of the behavioral
development program in relation to personal
development.

 

Per cent of
Number of Total Number
Item Description Responses of Participants

 

Able to understand other persons
better 15 68.1

Greater self-understanding 13 59.0

Increased ability to recognize

and accept own feelings 9 40.9
Increased personal development 8 36.3
More able to be assertive 8 36.3
Greater self-acceptance 7 31.8
Increase in self-confidence 7 31.8
Conscious effort toward

personal development 4 18.5
Ability to be free from other's

control 4 18.4
Better relationships with others 4 18.4
Increase in personal

independence 2 9.0
Enlarged concept of self in

relation to others, i.e.,

important part of the whole 2 9.0
Increased appreciation of

little things in life 1 4.5

Program was not effective 1 4.5

 

104

Supported: A t test between pretest and posttest
scores indicates significant change in a favorable
direction on the Practical Outlook and Altruism scales.
Participants in the program also report large favorable
change on the Autonomy, Personal Integration, and
Masculinity-Femininity scales. Change in a positive
direction is indicated on the Anxiety Level and Social
Extroversion scales. The Impulse Expression scale shows
a slight decrease. The over-all main effect of the
intellectual disposition scales appears relatively stable.

Hypothesis 2: Students in the control group (BDPC)
will not demonstrate favorable change
on posttest scores of the fourteen
scales of the OPI.

Partially Supported: The first four scales which
comprise the intellectual disposition category of the OPI
appear relatively stable. Two scales, Religious Orien-
tation and Impulse Expression show significant increase.
Conversely, the Personal Integration and the Altruism
scales indicate a decrease in the favorable development of
associated behaviors, while the Autonomy scale remains
stable. The remaining scales, Social Extroversion, Anxiety
Level, Practical Outlook, Masculinity-Femininity, and
Response Bias all report a slight tendency toward change

in a favorable direction.

105

Hypothesis 3: Students in the experimental group
(BDPE) will demonstrate favorable change
on posttest scores for the following
dimensions of the GDDQ: Control,
Flexibility, Hedonic Tone, Intimacy,
Potency, Stratification, and Viscidity.

Supported: Students who participated in the
program report significant change in a favorable direction
on five of the seven scales: Flexibility, Hedonic Tone,
Intimacy, Potency, and Stratification. The remaining two
scales, Control and Viscidity, indicate change in a
favorable direction, but not to as great a degree.

Hypothesis 4: Students in the control group (BDPc) will
not demonstrate favorable change on
posttest scores for each of the
following dimensions of the GDDQ:
Control, Flexibility, Hedonic Tone,
Intimacy, Potency, Stratification, and
Viscidity.

Supported: Students who did not participate in
the behavioral development program indicate significant
favorable change on only one group dimension. 1-909
Intimacy. Two dimensions, Control and Stratification
report a change in an unfavorable direction. A slight
increase in a favorable direction is indicated on the
Potency dimension. The remaining scales, Flexibility,
Hedonic Tone, and Viscidity, show such small change that
the stanine score is not affected.

In a follow-up interview at the completion of the

project, participants supported the effectiveness of the

106

project toward their personal growth and development.
Most frequently cited effects include: (1) increased
ability to get along with other pe0p1e, (2) understanding
and appreciation of various behaviors, (3) ability to
recognize, accept, and practice assertive behavior, and A
(4) increased self-acceptance.
Two weeks after the termination of the project,

treatment group subjects completed an anonymous self-

report evaluation of the program. The evaluation consisted

 

of three areas dealing with the effectiveness of the 3
project in relation to (l) the hospital setting, (2) the
student residential environment, and (3) personal growth
and development. Most frequent responses regarding the
effectiveness of the program in relation to the hospital
setting are (a) ability to understand and to practice
assertive behavior, and (b) ability to understand and
appreciate behavioral differences, thus facilitating
interaction with colleagues, students, and patients.
Responses regarding the effectiveness of the program in
relation to the student residential environment are (a)
greater understanding and acceptance of other students,
and (b) increased interaction with students previously
disliked and avoided. Finally, program participants
indicate that the treatment main effects facilitated their

personal growth and development by (a) increasing

107

self-understanding and acceptance, and (b) by enlarging
their capacity to understand and accept the different

behaviors of other persons.

CHAPTER V
SUMMARY, DISCUSSION, AND CONCLUSIONS

Introduction and Purpose

The student in higher education today is facing a
different world. The questions of the past--What shall we
teach? What should the course cover?—-no longer form an
appropriate fit. They are relevant only in an unchanging
world, the world from which the past decades have just
evolved. In the world of today and the interplanetary
world of the not-too-far-distant tomorrow, those questions
are meaningless. In such an environment, no knowledge is
secure. The question is rather, how can education
facilitate the development of the learning man, the
person-in-process? How does a person learn to continually
adapt and change? How does a man learn to transcend and
help transform society? How does he achieve a balance
between what is known and the fluid, moving problems and
realities of the future (Rogers, l969a)?

For the most part, higher education has failed to
assist students toward the solution of these questions by

not providing a satisfactory environment for total personal

108

109

development. Pressure for grades, testing, competitive
evaluations, and the various appendages of a meritocratic
society thrust upon the college by a mushrooming technology
have directed student energies toward survival and
adjustment. Educational institutions have been pre-
occupied with what Abraham Maslow (1971) calls extrinsic
learnings--the knowledge, the skills, the facts that are
external to the personality. Having fostered such
learnings, the institution supports a system of reward
and punishment which is also external to the human person.
Consequently, the student learns to assess his personal
value in terms of his grade point average, test scores,
and other academic myths which are outside the self.

Conversely, intrinsic learning consists of
"learning to be a human being in general, and second,
learning to be tplg particular human being" (Tpid., 170).
Education which is worthy of the name consists of intrinsic
learning which influences behavior, which assists a
person to achieve his Optimal personhood by focusing on
the self-actualizing tendencies already present in his
personality. It is concerned with learning how to grow,
what to grow toward, what to choose and not to choose.

To be able to float with the stream of experi-
ences, to remain close to oneself and one's inner world,
to drop defenses, to grasp a glimpse of infinite values

where basic and ultimate values converge, this is to

110

rescue oneself from a goal-less, meaningless, existence so
common in today's culture (Maslow, 1971; Rogers, 1969a).
Such an education begins with an assumption about the 1
nature of person, with an open-ended vision of what each
person can become. It measures educational progress in
terms of change in personality—-from prejudice to broad-
mindedness, from egocentrism to altruism, from disciplined
to undisciplined thought. This education does not deny
the historical values of socialization or of the ability
to adapt to and aid in the preservation of civilization,
society, and culture. The freely response-able person

can do such things creatively and constructively (Sanford,
1967). But the response-able person will be born only in
an environment which supports the full development of his
powers and recognizes the self-actualizing and self-
directing thrust within the human person.

If one were to imagine an environment that would
be conducive to individual growth and development, it
would be an environment

. . that is accepting and forgiving; let it be one
that takes him [the student] out of himself and
involves him in group activities; let the inducements
to sociability be attractive and vivid, yet let them
be measured accurately to his own capacities; let
there be real pressure in the environment, let it make
definite demands, yet let the demands be flexible; let
there be no formal punishment nor long-lasting
ostracism; let there be a hope of friendship and hope
of praise; let the environment offer him a sense of
the skills and the varieties of behavior that lead to
greater pleasure, greater security . . . and let the
rewards for this kind of growth be immediate and

intrinsic in the activities themselves (Dennison,
1969,74).

111

The purpose of this research, then, was to
intervene into a residential environment in order to
encourage and facilitate the behavioral development and

the group interaction of nursing students.

Literature Review

Research in higher education indicates that
students do change, as a result of the college experience,
in social-emotional characteristics related to the
personality. However, such changes appear to be either
accidentally achieved or the result of socialization
processes. Personality development does not appear to be
the result of institutional intervention or of the
implementation of strategies directed toward developmental
change. Much is already known about necessary conditions
for growth and development in young adulthood, and higher
education could move toward conscious implementation of
those conditions into the educational environment for the
purpose of fostering personality development within and
among the student clientele.

Furthermore, Sanford emphasizes that it is
necessary to persuade students of the "possibility of
growth and of their power to direct the change" (1967, 9).
A profound longing for change seems to live in nearly
every human person, but many students seem to have
decided years ago that growth and development were no

longer within their reach (Freedman, 1965; Katz, 1968).

112

It is the responsibility of educators to expand the
horizons toward directions of change and then present
opportunities and strategies which would facilitate
further growth.

The small-group experience, incorporated into the
educational process can have great value and potential for
facilitating behavioral development in the life and experi-
ence of the student (Burton, 1969; Martin, 1969; Newcomb,
1967; Rogers, 1969b). Through guided, small-group inter-
action, the student may learn to respond to a broad range
of human experience. Such interaction with other persons
_and openness to self would involve a greater acceptance of
his own feelings and would build up his confidence in
handling new relationships and experiences in the future.

All of this suggests that structured, small-group
experiences, bringing together persons of complementary
personality types, can create an environment which is
supportive of the behavioral development of the partici-
pants. The small-group project implemented and tested in
this study is an attempt to consciously intervene into a
residential environment in order to create those conditions
and to apply those strategies essential to personal growth
and development--support, stimulation, complementary
relations, behavioral experiences, assessment of existing

behaviors and facilitation of behavioral expansion.

113

Design of the Study

Forty-six subjects, constituting two naturally
assembled collectives, participated in the small-group
behavioral development program. The participants, all
second-year students in a two-year diploma school of
nursing, resided at two separate residences. Students had
been assigned to the residential groups six months prior
to the initiation of this project.

The experimental procedure includes two types of
group formation which were constructed on the basis of
scores on the Myers-Brigg; Type Indicator. Security groups
were formed on the basis of similarity of behavioral
preferences for the purpose of identification and
affirmation of behaviors represented in the group.
Stimulation groups were formed on the basis of comple-
mentarity and opposition of dominant behaviors for the
purpose of understanding, accepting, and acquiring the
behaviors represented in the group. Security groups met
for one and one-half hours a week for four weeks.
Stimulation groups met for one and one-half to two hours
a week for eight weeks.

All subjects were pretested and posttested on the
Omnibus PersonalityTInventory (OPI), Form F, and the
Group Dimensions Descriptions Questionnaire (GDDQ). The
scales on these instruments constituted the dependent

variables in this research design. A correlated t test

between

114

the pretest and the posttest scores was computed

to determine if changes were significantly different from

zero at

the .05 level of confidence.

Follow-up interviews and student self-report

evaluations were conducted with treatment subjects to

assess their responses to the project as a supplementary

source of descriptive data.

follows:

Results of the Study

The data from the study can be summarized as

A correlated t test between pretest and posttest
scores of the experimental group indicates signifi-
cant change in a favorable direction on the
Practical Outlook and the Altruism scales of the
OPI. Participants in the behavioral development
program report an increase in affiliative, trusting
feelings and relationships as well as movement
toward nonauthoritarian, liberal, less ethnocentric
attitudes and values. Although not significant,
the favorable change on three scales, Autonomy,
Personal Integration, and Masculinity-Femininity,
indicates a persistent trend toward personal

growth.

 

115

Control subjects indicate significant change on
the Impulse Expression and Religious Orientation
scales of the OPI. Non-participants report
movement toward independent and unconventional
religious attitudes and values as well as an

increased tendency to express impulses.

Treatment subjects report significant change in a
favorable direction on the Flexibility, Hedonic
Tone, Intimacy, Potency, and Stratification scales
of the GDDQ. Participants in the behavioral
development program report a significant increase
in group flexibility as reflected in freedom from
custom, tradition, and codes of behavior (a higher
Flexibility score). Treatment subjects also
indicate a general feeling of pleasantness and
agreeableness associated with group membership
(increase in Hedonic Tone). Intimacy of group
members as reflected by interpersonal behavior
appears significantly higher (increase on Intimacy
scale). Participants in the small-group program
report that group membership has primary signifi-
cance for its members as expressed by the kind of
personal and interpersonal needs which the group is
satisfying (increase in Potency dimensions).
Absence of dissension and personal conflict among

members and an increase in group unity is indicated

116

in an increase on the Viscidity scale. Treatment
group members report a significant decrease in
stratification among group members as reflected in
the absence of status hierarchies and shared part-
ticipation in power, privileges, obligations, and
duties among the members (a lower score on the

Stratification dimensions of the GDDQ).

Non-participant control subjects report a signifi-
cant change in a favorable direction on the
Intimacy scale of the GDDQ. Conversely, they
report an unfavorable change in the Control
dimension which is indicated by the degree of
control that group members exert over one another
as well as an increase in status hierarchies and
differential distribution of power and privilege
as reflected by an increase on the Stratification

scale.

In a follow-up interview at the completion of the
project, participants supported the effectiveness
of the project toward their personal growth and
development. Most frequently cited effects include
(1) increased ability to get along with other
people, (2) understanding and appreciation of
various behaviors, (3) ability to interact with
persons previously avoided, and (4) ability to

recognize, accept, and practice assertive behavior.

 

117

6. Two weeks after the termination of the project,
treatment group subjects completed an anonymous
self-report evaluation of the program. The
evaluation consisted of three areas dealing with
the effectiveness of the project in relation to
(l) the hospital setting, (2) the student residence,
and (3) personal growth and development. Most
frequent responses regarding the effectiveness of
the program in relation to the hospital setting
are (a) ability to understand and to practice
assertive behavior, and (b) ability to understand
and appreciate behavioral differences thus,
facilitating interaction with colleagues, students,
and patients. Responses regarding program
effectiveness in relation to the student residence
are (a) greater understanding and acceptance of
other students, and (b) increased interaction with

students previously disliked and avoided.

Discussion
An accurate intepretation of the preceding results
demands viewing and analyzing OPI scale scores in the
context of two or more other scores in order that existing
SUP'Patterns of change may emerge (Heist and Yonge, 1962).
Both the treatment group and the control group
indicate a decrease on the Thinking Introversion and

Theoretical Orientation scales of the OPI. This change

118

seems consistent with the nursing education experience
which is primarily concerned with the practical utilization
of knowledge and theory. Furthermore, this pattern is
predictable since most diploma nursing students have
little inclination toward scholarly pursuit, nor are most
of these students seriously committed to continuing their
formal education beyond the two-year nursing program. The
other two intellectual disposition scales, Estheticism and
Complexity, indicate little change, which is in accord
with the predicted stability of these scales over time
(Tpid,, 2).

The response Bias scale for both groups falls
close to the standard mean and reports little change from
pretest to posttest. This finding may suggest that the
student self-reports as indicated on the OPI represent a
sufficiently valid presentation of the self.

Treatment group subjects report significant change
on the Altruism and Practical Outlook scales of the OPI,
thus indicating an increase in affiliative, trusting
feelings and relationships toward others as a result of
the small-group experiences (higher Altruism score).
Therefore, growth from egocentric tendencies toward
altrusitic concerns may be perceived as an outcome of the
behavioral development program.

Small-group participants also indicate significant

change toward greater tolerance of complexity and ambiguity,

 

119

toward nonauthoritarianism, and toward greater appeal for
ideas rather than facts (decrease on Practical Outlook
scale). This change is not consistent with present theory
regarding vocationally-oriented students. Selvin, Hagstrom
(1966), and Korn (l968a) report that career-oriented
students are more utilitarian, that practicality is their
credo, and that they are less influenced by the educative
experience than academically-concerned students.

Fifty per cent of the treatment subjects preferred

 

dominant sensing behaviors as reported by the MBTI. A
Another 23 per cent indicated a preference for sensing as
an auxiliary function. Therefore, the significant decrease
on the Practical Outlook scale may be attributed to growth
toward intuitive behavior. Group participants also showed
an increase on the Autonomy scale which is positively
associated with intuition.

The Personal Integration, Masculinity-Femininity,
and Autonomy scales of the OPI indicate large positive
change which appears to be a persistent trend toward
personal growth for treatment group subjects. It is
interesting to note that these three scales are positively
associated with the Thinking preference on the MBTI. Only
four of the twenty-two subjects reported preference for
thinking behavior at the time of pretesting. It may be
suggested that the trend indicated by the above scales may

be a movement toward the practice of thinking behaviors.

120

Student responses at the time of the follow-up interview
and on the self-report evaluation indicate growth toward
assertive and decision-making behaviors. Thus, treatment
subjects may have grown in directions (intuition and
thinking) complementary to their preferred functions of
sensation and feeling (78% of the participants).

Therefore, it may be stated that, for the most
part, participants in the behavioral development program
described in this study do appear to have grown in those
dimensions associated with the small group experience as
measured by the OPI.

Control subjects indicate significant change on
the Impulse Expression and the Religious Orientation
scales of the OPI. However, considered in context with
all of the scale scores, the interpretation and direction
of these changes may raise some questions. Although the
magnitude of change is a clue to how many individuals will
have change scores consistent with the mean change, it
must be remembered that certain trends may be masked.

When the pattern of change is analyzed, it may be clearly
seen that eleven of the twenty-four control subjects had
standard scores of sixty or above on the Impulse Expression
scale, seven of these students had scores above sixty-five.
In interpreting this trend, it should be remembered that
standard scores of sixty (eighty-fourth percentile) or

above are interpreted as sufficiently high for the

 

121

respective definition to apply. Persons whose scores fall
above a standard score of seventy are very appropriately
characterized by the definition (Heist and Yonge, 1962).

The Impulse Expression scale purports to assess a "general
readiness to express impulses and seek gratification in
conscious thought or in overt action. High scorers have

an active imagination, value sensual reactions and feelings;
very high scorers have frequent feelings of rebellion and

aggression" (Ibid., 5). It is interesting to note that

 

one-third (eight) of the control subjects, who report a
standard score of sixty-two or above on the Impulse
Expression scale of the OPI posttest, raised their scores
from pretest to posttest an average of eight standard
scores. Therefore, despite an overall mean increase on
this scale, eight control subjects increased their indi-
vidual scores to a sufficiently high degree as to be
tentatively interpreted as a movement toward hostility
and rebellion. High scorers not only tend to have frequent
feelings of rebellion and aggression, they may have
undifferentiated emotional responses (Tpid.).

Considered in relation to other OPI scales, the
interpretation of the significant change on the Impulse
Expression scale of the control group may become clearer.
"A high score has often been found to indicate rebellion
and hostility, rather than delightful impulsivity, when

considering this index in the light of scores on the

122

Personal Integration, Anxiety Level, and Altruism scales"
(lEiQ-: 13). On the OPI posttest scores, control subjects
indicate a slight decrease on the Personal Integration and
the Altruism scales, while the Anxiety Level scale reports
a slight increase (lower degree of anxiety). Therefore,
while control subjects report a decrease in feelings of
anxiety, they admit to more feelings of loneliness,
rejection, and aggression (decrease on Personal Integration
scale) and to fewer trusting, affiliative feelings toward
others (decrease on Altruism scale).

Furthermore, the decrease on the intellectual
disposition scales, Thinking Introversion and Theoretical
Orientation, and the indications toward mild introversion
and alientation (decrease on Personal Integration and
Altruism scales) may suggest that the feelings of
aggression and rebellion, which are possibly associated
with the high Impulse Expression score for the control
subjects, may be outwardly directed toward other persons
and toward the environment rather than inwardly directed
in self-punitive behavior.

Control subjects also report a significant posttest
change on the Religious Orientation scale of the OPI. A
significantly higher score on this scale seems to indicate
that control subjects became more liberal and less
conservative in religious beliefs. However, this scale

is closely associated with the Autonomy scale, with the

123

freedom—to-learn syndrome. Together they have value in
discerning the degree and type and quality of a students'
anchorages in the past, the degree of liberalness and
emancipation from familial and cultural heritages.
Although the Religious Orientation scale for the control
subjects reports significant changes on the posttest, the
Autonomy scale remains unchanged. Therefore, it is
possible to raise the question of whether the significant
increase on the Religious Orientation scale indicates a
true movement in the direction of liberal, nonconservative
religious belief and attitude. The unchanged Autonomy
scale, along with the decrease on the Thinking Introversion
and Theoretical Orientation scales, raises the question of
just how open to liberal, nonauthoritarian ideas and new
thoughts the control subjects actually became. It is
interesting to speculate on the possible relationship
between the changes reported on the Impulse Expression and
the Religious Orientation scales. If the aggressive
tendencies indicated by the high Impulse Expression scores
were directed toward the environmental structure so
indigenous to schools of nursing, the rebellious rejection
of that same structure (which is affiliated with Roman
Catholicism) could appear to be a rejection of the belief-
system which the structure supported.

It has already been noted that 50 per cent of the

treatment subjects preferred dominant sensing behavior and

 

124

23 per cent preferred sensing as an auxiliary function.
Conversely, 46 per cent of the control subjects report a
preference for dominant intuitive behavior while an
additional 25 per cent indicate a preference for intuitive
behavior as an auxiliary function. Thus, the two groups
have little comparability. While the treatment group
preferred a stable, predictable environment and relation-
ships, control subjects are uneasy with peaceful, well-
balanced relations. They seek variety and opportunity for
the expression of their impulsive energy (VanderHoop, 1939,
1950). The intuitive subjects would find little outlet
for their energy and restlessness in the academic environ-
ment; the residential and social environments would
probably absorb the aggressive and angry feelings
accumulated as a result of collision with the school
structure. To return to the OPI scales, Impulse Expression,
Religious Orientation, and Autonomy are positively
associated with the Intuition functions of the MBTI. For
the most part, control subjects do not appear to have
demonstrated change in a favorable direction as measured
by the OPI.

Posttest scores for the treatment group on the
Group Dimensions Discussion Questionnaire indicate signifi-
cant favorable change in five of the seven dimensions of
interest in this study, i.e., Flexibility, Hedonic Tone,

Intimacy, Potency, and Stratification. The other two

125

scales, Control and Viscidity, reported favorable change,
but not to a significant degree. That is to say, the
treatment group increased the community climate of group
living as the group became free from the confines of
custom and standard codes of behavior, free of dissension
and personal conflict among members in the group, and free
from status hierarchies with their supporting power and
privilege blocks. In its growth toward an environment
supportive of community living, the treatment group
reports a significantly high degree of pleasantness and
agreeableness associated with group membership. Members
report greater intimacy in interpersonal behavior, and
this community experience seems to have primary significance
for the members as expressed by the kind of personal and
interpersonal needs which the group is satisfying.
Therefore, it may be asserted that participants in the
behavioral development program cooperated in forming greater
dimensions of community living and sharing than had existed
among them prior to the small-group experiences.

The Control group reports significant change on
only one dimension--Intimacy--of the GDDQ. The group
reports slight favorable change on four scales, Flexibility,
Hedonic Tone, Potency, and Viscidity. However, they
indicate unfavorable change as members report a greater
degree of control, reflected in the coercive power that

members exert upon each other. They also report a greater

126

degree of status hierarchies and preferential disposition
of power and privilege among group members. Although the
direction of intimate interpersonal relations appears to
have increased, this change is not supported by the other
group dimensions scales. Consequently, it is possible
that this apparent intimacy exists on the superficial
level of calling one another by first names, having daily t
contact, borrowing and lending money, discussing personal ‘

affairs and family backgrounds. It may therefore be

 

stated that the control group did not grow toward those 5
dimensions of community living which are relative to this
study.
Considered as a whole, the results of this study
confirm previous research that small-group interaction
does have an effect upon participants. However, it may be
further stated that the community dimensions of group
living may be facilitated when persons who reside together

participate with each other in small-group experiences.

Limitations of the Study
It is important to clarify some of the limitations
which are inherent to this research on personal and group
development.
In the first place, sample size is small and
randomization of subjects was not possible. Because all
behaviors were not represented among treatment subjects,

it was not possible to have an adequate representation of

127

all behaviors in the stimulation groups. It is suggested
that replication of this study be conducted with a larger
sample utilizing random assignment of subjects representing
the full repertoire of behaviors.

The lack of equivalency of behavioral types between
control and treatment subjects constituted a major limi-
tation of this study. Since the groups were not comparable
on pretest measures, it is not possible to compare posttest
results. It is not certain what outcomes would occur if
comparability of groups had been achieved.

Another limitation in this study is the relatively
short time span covered by the small group meetings.

Twelve weeks is time enough to identify and practice
behavioral strategies, but it is not sufficient time to
encompass and practice the full range of behavioral
development and insight. A year of planned experience and
interaction would afford a broader base for behavioral
experimentation and development as well as provide a

truer test of the effects of structured small-group inter-
action on individual and group behavior.

This behavioral development program began during
the second semester of the second-year in nursing. At the
initiation of this project, students had been residing
together for six months. Expectations, judgments, and
predictions of other students' behavioral responses

constituted a difficulty in this study. Interpersonal

128

barriers and mistrust of each other had to be dealt with
before creative activity could begin. It is suggested that
this program be initiated at the beginning of a residential
experience so that it may facilitate interpersonal inter-
actions before sub-groups are formed.

The various expectancy factors that are inherent
in any research of this nature, which intensely involves
the experimenter with his subjects, constitute a recognized
limitation. The Hawthorn effect, halo effects, and
experimenter bias may intervene in the research at various
times and contribute to some degree of error. However,
these same expectancy factors may be consciously utilized
as strategies for changing and developing a broader
repertoire of behavior (Grass, 1970; Rosenthal and

Jacobson, 1968).

Implications of the Research

This study has provided a planned program for
behavioral development which can be applied in many
educative settings. The specificity of replicable
procedures and techniques provide a base from which further
research may procede and from which future intervention
into educational environments may be designed.

Although this research was primarily concerned with
the microenvironment of one residential setting, it is
challenging to speculate on the possibility of influencing

the macroenvironment to be supportive of the concepts and

 

129

strategies employed in this program. Organizational policy
and practice radically influence the environmental climate,
the tone, and the myriad aspects of group life. If these
policies and practices were to change in accord with the
conditions for community development described in this
study, the effectiveness of the program rendered herein

may be enhanced and secured. Both the macroenvironment

and the immediate group environment are powerful determiners
of growth and behavioral change (Gibb and Gibb, 1969).

By collaborating to create an environment conducive
to human growth and development, administrators and edu-
cators can convince students of the power to change, to
make “maturity the more it might become" (Raushenbush,
1965). In order to bring educational practice into
harmony with basic human needs, educational policy must
recognize the very orderly patterns of individual growth
and development in what may ordinarily appear to be
arbitrary differences among persons. The Jungian position
of individual preferences in perceiving and responding to
one's inner and outer world, implies also a unique growth
pattern for each person. Such growth can be fostered and
facilitated through the incorporation of planned inter-
personal experiences into the educational program. Through
the small-group experiences described in this study, the
student can learn more about what influences his behavior

and the behavior of others. And the more he is able to

130

bring his personal and interpersonal behavior under
conscious control, the more he will be able to increase
his freedom of choice, to expand his own repertoire of
behavior, and to understand and appreciate the diverse
behaviors of others. Unless one has, even briefly, walked
the paths of sensation and intuition, of thinking and
feeling, one cannot fully understand and value the tOtal 'tT
realm of human behavior. In a very real sense, one person

cannot understand another until and unless he has walked

 

in the other's shoes, perceiving and responding to reality ta

in diverse ways.

Conclusion

The behavioral development program described herein
employes specific strategy for personal growth and develop-
ment which can be implemented in a variety of settings.
Through participation in such a program, a student is
encouraged to develop a broad repertoire of behavior which
may assist him to meet any challenge that the environment,
human and non-human, may pose for him so that he does not
become subservient to or controlled by that same environ-
ment.

The interpersonal experience fosters within the
student a personal, vital self-appreciation of all that he
brings to the group as well as an appreciation and positive
regard for the personal contribution of others within the

group. Ultimately, each student grows to respect and

131

value his own self-directing thrust without violating the
self-direction of others. This kind of growth can take
place only in a trusting and open group environment.

This is what life and growth and fulfillment are
all about. To be "perfect" as the Father while encouraging
and facilitating the perfection of others, to lead not only
out of the self, but in a real sense, beyond it; to open
oneself in a prayerful response to the sacredness of the

real world and all of its interactions--this is education

 

ever ancient ever new. This is the education of Socrates »

and Jesus, of Newman and Dewey, of Maslow and Rogers.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

 

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Alberti, R. E. "The Impact on College Student Development
of Short-Term, Informal Faculty-Student Small Group
Interaction." Unpublished Doctoral dissertation,
Michigan State University, 1969.

Alfert, Elizabeth. "Housing Selection, Need Satisfaction,
and Dropout From College.“ Psychological Reports
XIX (1966), 183-86.

Anderson, A. R. "Group Counseling." Review of Educational
Research, XXXIX (1969), 209-26.

Axelrod, J. "An Experimental College Model." Educational
Record, XLVIII (1967), 327-37.

, Freedman, M. B., Hatch, W. R., Katz, J., and
Sanford, N. Search for Relevance: The Campus in
Crisis. San FranciSco: Jossey-Bass. T969TT

Bandura, A. "Social Learning Through Imitation." In M. R.
Jones (ed.), Nebraska §ymposium on Motivation.
Lincoln, Nebraska: University of Nebraska Press,
1962. PP. 211-69.

Beach, L. R. "Study of Personality in the Church-Related
Liberal Arts College." Journal of College Student
Personnel, VIII (1967), TOS-OB.

Becker, H. S., Greer, B., and Hughes, E. C. Making the
Grade: The Academic Side of College Eife. New
.York: WiTey, 1968.

, Greer, 8., Hughes, E. C., and Strauss, A. L.
Boys in White: Student Culture in Medical School.
Chicago: University of Chicago Press, l96T.

132

 

133

Beier, E. G., Rossi, A. M., and Garfield, R. L. "Simi-
larity Plus Dissimilarity of Personality: Basis
for Friendship?" Psychological Rgports, VIII
(1961), 3-8.

 

Berelson, B., and Steiner, G. A. Human Behavior. New York:
Harcourt, Brace, and World, 1964.

Birnbaum, Max. "Sense and Nonsense About Sensitivity
Training." Saturddy Review, LII (1969), 98.

 

Bloom, B. S. Stability and Change in Human Character-
istics. New York: Wiley, 1964.

Bolton, C. D., and Kammeyer, K. C. W. The University
Student: A Study of Student Behavior and Values.
New Haven, Conn.: CoTIege and University Press,
1967.

 

Borel, J. C. "Security as a Motivation of Human Behavior."
Archives of General Psychiatry, X (1964), 105-08.

Bowers, N. D., and Soar, R. S. Studies of Human Relations
in the Teaching-Learning_Process. Nashville, Tenn.:
Cooperative Research Program, U.S. Office of Edu-
cation, 1960.

 

Bradway, K. "Jung's Psychological Types." Journal of
AnaTytical Psychology, IX (1964), 129-35.

Brown, R. D. "Manipulation of the Environmental Press in a
College Residence Hall." Personnel and Guidance
Journal, XLVI (1968), 555-851

Buber, Martin. Between Man and Man. London: Routledge
and K. Paul, 1947.

Buros, O. K. ed. The Fifth Mental Measurements Yearbook.
Highland Park, N.J.: Gryphon Press, 1959.

. The Sixth Mental Measurements Yearbook. Highland
Parh} N.Ui: Gryphhh Press, 1965.

 

Burton, A. ed. Encounter. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass,
1969.

Campbell, 0. T., and Stanley, J. C. Experimental and
guasi-Experimental Desi ns for Research. Chicago:
and McNalTy, T963.

 

 

134

Chickering, A. W. Education and Identity. San Francisco:
Jossey-Bass,l969.

Coleman, M., and Glofka, P. "Effect of Group Therapy on
Self Concept of Senior Nursing Students." Nursing
Research, XVIII (1969), 274-75.

 

Currey, J. W., Swisher, J. D., and Kruse, L. C. "Improving
Human Relations Skills Through Programmed
Instruction." Nursing Research, XVII (1968),
455-59.

Dennis, L. E., and Kauffman, J. F. The College and the
Student. Washington, D.C.: American Council on

Educat1on, 1966.

Dennison, George. "An Environment to Grow In." Saturday
Review, LII (1969), 74-77.

Deutsch, M. "Cooperation and Trust: Some Theoretical
Notes." In M. R. Jones, ed., Nebraska Symposium on
Motivation. Lincoln, Nebraska: UniVersity o
Nebrask5:Press, 1962, pp. 275-319.

Dyer, R. D. "The Effects of Human Relations Training on
the Interpersonal Behavior of College Students."
Unpublished Doctoral dissertation, University of
Oregon, 1967.

"Editorial: NSNA--Past, Present, and Future." Nursing
Outlook, XVIII (1970), 27.

Eigenbrod, F. "The Effects of Territory and Personality
Compatibility on Identity and Security." Unpublished
Doctoral dissertation, Michigan State University,
1969.

Erikson, E. H. Childhood and Society. 2nd. ed. New York:
W. W. Norton, 1963.

. "Growth and Crisis of the 'Healthy Personality.'"
In M. J. E. Senn, ed., Symposium on the Healthy
Personality. Supplement II. New York: Josiah
Macy, Jr. oundation, 1950, pp. 91-46.

 

 

. "Identity and the Life Cycle." Psychological
Issues, I (1959), 1-171.

 

. "Reflections on the Dissent of Contemporary
Youth." In The Embattled University. Daedalus,
XCIX (1970). [51-76

 

 

135

Eurich, Alvin C., ed. Campus 1980. New York: Delacorte
Press, 1968.

Feldman, K., and Newcomb, T. M. The Impact of Colle e on
Students. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1969

Flacks, R. "Adaptations of Deviants in a College Com-
munity." Unpublished Doctoral dissertation,
University of Michigan, 1963.

Forer, B. R. "Therapeutic Relationships in Groups." In

A. Burton, ed., Encounter. San Francisco: Jossey- Ii:
Bass, 1969, pp. 27-41. T ”

Foster, J., et al. The Impact of a Value-Oriented Uni-
versity on Student Attitudes and Thinking. U.S.
Department of Health, Education, and Weliare :
Cooperative Research Project No. 729. Santa 3
Clara, Calif.: University of Santa Clara, 1961. P’

 

Francis, Roy G. Crumbling Walls. Cambridge, Mass.:
Schenkman Publishing Co., 1970.

Freedman, M. G. "Personality Growth in the College Years."
College Board Review, LVI (1965), 25-32.

. The College Experience. San Francisco: Jossey-
Bass, Inc., 1967.

 

. "The Passage Through College." The Journal of
Social Issues, XII (1956), 13-28.

 

Gibb, J. R., and Gibb, L. M. "Emergence Therapy: TORI
Process in an Emergent Group." In G. M. Gazda, ed.,
Innovations to Group Ptychotherapy. Springfield,
Ill.: Charles C} Thomas, 1968.

, and Gibb, L. M. "Role Freedom in a TORI Group.“
In A. Burton, ed., Encounter. San Francisco:
Jossey-Bass, 1969, pp. 42-57

 

Grant, W. H. “Higher Education and Student Personnel Work
in the Year 2000." dpurnal of the National
Association of Women Deans and Counselors, XXXI
TT968). 140-41.

, and Eigenbrod, F. A. "Behavioral Changes Influ-
enced by Structured Peer Group Activities." The
Journal of College Student Personnel, XI (197UTT
291-95.

 

136

Grass, P. L. "Differential Effects of Short-Term Small-
Group Interaction on the Behavioral Development of
College Freshmen According to Personality Type."
Unpublished Doctoral dissertation, Michigan State
University, 1970.

Greenfield, M. "Typologies of Persisting and Nonpersisting
Jewish Clergymen." Journal of Counseling Psy-
chology, XVI (l969),—368-72.

Heath, D. Growing Up in College. San Francisco: Jossey-
Bass, 1968.

Hefferlin, J. L. Dynamics of Academic Reform. San
Francisco: Jossey-Bass, l

 

 

Heist, P., and Yonge, G. Omnibus Personality Inventory
(Form F)--Manual. New York: The Psychological
Corporatihn, 1968.

 

Hemphill, J. K. Group Dimensions: A Manual For Their
Measurements. Columbus, Ohio: Ohio State Uni-
versity, 1967.

 

Hoop, J. H. van der. Character and the Unconscious.
London: Routle ge an . au ,

. Conscious Orientation. London: K. Paul,
Trench, Trubner and Co., Ltd., 1939.

 

Huntley, C. W. "Changes in Study of Values Scores During
the Four Years of College." Genetic Psychology
Monograph, LXXI (1965), 349-83.

Jacob, P. E. Changing Values in Collegp. New York:
Harper Brothers, T957.

Jacobi, J. The Psycholo yrof C. G. Jung. New Haven, Conn.:
Yale University ress, 6th ed., revised, 1962.

James, J. "A Preliminary Study of the Size Determinant in
Small Group Interaction." American Sociological
Review, XVI (1951), 474-77.

Johann, R. Buildin the Human. New York: Herder and
Herder, T96 .

Johnson, L. K. "The Effect of Trainer Interventions on
Change in Personal Functioning Through T-Group
Training." Unpublished Doctoral dissertation,
University of Minnesota, 1966.

 

Jourard,

Jung, C.

137

S. M. The Transparent Self. New Jersey: 0. Van
Nostrand Company, Inc., 1964.

 

G. "Forward (1939)." In J. Jacobi, The Psy-

chology of C. G. Jun . 6th ed. rev. ew Haven:
Yale UniVerEity Press, 1962.

"Patterns of Behavior and Archetypes." In G.

 

Lindzey and C. S. Hall, eds., Theories of Per-
sonality: Primary_Sources and Research. New York:
John Wiley and Sons, 1965] pp. 59-76.

 

Katz, J.

 

. Psychological Types or the depholo of Indi-
viduation. New York: Harcourt, Brace, I924.
, and Associates. No Time for Youth. Institute

for the Study of Human Problems, Stanford Uni-
versity. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1968.

 

Kemp, G.

of the Theory of Personality Development." In N.
Sanford, ed., The American College. New York:
Wiley, 1962, pp. 418-44.

G. Perspectives on the Group Process. Boston:
Houghton Mifilin,l964.

Kerlinger, Fred N. Foundations of Behavioral Research.

Kolb, D.

Korn, H.

New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston, Inc., 1964.

A., Winter, S. K., and Berlew, D. E. "Self-
Directed Change: Two Studies." Journal of Applied
Behavioral Science, IV (1968), 453:71.

A. "Differences in Student Response to the
Curriculum." In J. Katz and Associates, No Time
for Youth. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, l968a.

pp. IB7-206.

"Personality Scale Changes from the Freshman

 

Lehmann,

Year to the Senior Year." In J. Katz and Associates,
No Time for Youth. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass,
T9686. pp. 162-84.

I. J., and Dressel, P. L. Chan es in Critical
Thinking Ability, Attitudes, an *Values Associated
With College Attendance. East Lansing, Mich.:
Michigan State Univer§ity, 1963.

, and Dressel, P. L. Critical Thinking, Attitudes,

 

and Values in Higher Education. East Lansing,
Mich.: Michigan State University, 1962.

, and Sanford N. "The Curriculum in the Perspective.

 

138

LeMay, M. L. "An Experimentally Controlled Investigation
of the Effects of Group Counseling with College
Underachievers." Unpublished Doctoral dissertation,
University of Oregon, 1966.

Leonard, G. 8. Education and Ecstagy. New York: Delacorte,
1968.

Levin, M. M. "Changes in Authoritarianism." In J. Katz
and Associates, No Time for Youth. San Francisco:
Jossey-Bass, 1968, pp. 376-85.

LeVine, R. A. "American College Experience as a Social-
ization Process." In T. M. Newcomb and E. K.

Wilson, eds., Colle e Peer Grou 5. Chicago:
Aldine Press, 1966, pp. 107-32.

Lewis, H. R., and Streitfeld, H. S. Growth Games. New
York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, Inc., 1970.

Lida, T. The Person: His Development Throu hout the Life
Cycle. New York: Basic Books, Inc., 68.

Lindzey, G., and Hall, C. S. Theories of Personality;
Primary Sources and Research. New York: John
Wiley and Sons, 1965.

Lozoff, Marjorie K. "Residential Groups and Individual
Development." In J. Katz and Associates, No Time
for Youth. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, l ,
pp. 255-317.

McCary, P. W. "The Effects of Small Self-Understanding
Groups on the Self-Concept and Anxiety Level When
Group Composition Has Been Varied." Unpublished
Doctoral dissertation, Michigan State University,
1970.

McConnell, T. R., Clark, 8., Heist, P., Trow, M., and
Yonge, G. “Student Development During College
Years." Cited in T. M. Newcomb and K. A. Feldman,
The Impact of Colle e on Students. San Francisco:
Jossey-Bass, I969

McKeachie, W. J. "Procedures and Techniques of Teaching:
A Survey of Experimental Studies." In N. Sanford,

ed., The American Colle e. New York: Wiley and
Sons,’l962, pp. 312-64

Marcel, Gabriel. Homo Viator. New York: Harper Torch-
books, 1963.

 

 

139

Martin, W. B. Conformity; Standards and Chan e in Hi her
Education. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1969.

, and Heckman, D. "Understanding Maladies and

Effecting Cures." In G. K. Smith, ed., A on and

Promise: Current Issues in Higher Education. San

Chancisco: Jossey-Bass, l .

 

 

 

Maslow, A. The Farther Reaches of Human Nature. New York:
The Viking Press,’T97l.

 

May, Rollo. Psychology and the Human Dilemma. Princeton, 1
N.J.: Van Nostrand Co., 1966. rr*

Mayhew, L. B. Colleges Today and Tomorrow. San Francisco:
Jossey-Bass,_l969.

. The Smaller Liberal Arts College. New York: ,5
The Centerli6r‘AppliedResearch in Education, 1962. 93

 

 

 

Mendelsohn, G. A., and Geller, M. H. "Effects of Counselor-‘
Client Similarity on the Outcome of Counseling."
Journal of Counseling Psychology, X (1963), 71-77.

, and Kirk, B. A. “Personality Differences Between
Students Who Do and Do Not Use a Counseling
Facility." Journal of Counseling Psychology. IX
(1962), 341-46.

 

Miles, M. B. "Human Relations Training: Processes and
Outcomes." Journal of Counseling P§ychology, VII
(1960), 301-06}

Morris, S. B., Pflugrath, J. C., and Taylor, B. "Encounter
in Higher Education." In A. Burton, ed., Encounter.
San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1969, pp. 189- .

Moustakes, C. Individuality and Encounter. Howard A.
Doyle, 1968.

Mueller, K. H. Student Personnel Work in Higher Education.
Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1961.

Myers, I. B. The Myers-Bri 5 Type Indicator Manual.
Princeton, N.J.: ucationalTesting Service,
1962.

Nauss, A. H. "The Ministerial Personality" On Avoiding a
Stereoty e Trap." Journal of CounselingVPsychology,
XV (19681. 581-82.

140

Newcomb, T. M. Personality and Social Changg. New York:

Otto,

H.

Dryden Press, 1943.

. "Student Peer-Group Influence." In N. Sanford,
ed., The American College. New York: Wiley, 1962,
pp. 469-88.

. The Apguaintance Process. New York: Holt,
Rinehart, and Winston, 1961.

. "The General Nature of Peer Group Influence."
In T. M. Newcomb and E. K. Wilson, eds., Colle e 1
Peer Groups. Chicago: Aldine, 1966, pp. 2-16 i”‘

. "The Prediction of Interpersonal Attraction."
American Psychologist, XI (1956), 575-86.

3.2”“): I -

, and Wilson, E. K., eds. College Peer Groups.
Chicago: Aldine, 1966. r~

 

A., ed. Explorations in Human_Potentialities.
Springfield, 111.: Charles C. Thomas, T966.

. Guide to Developinngour Potential. New York:
ChaFles Scribnerls Sons, 1967.

, and Mann, J. Ways of Growth: Approaches to
Ex anding Awareness. New York: The Vikihg Press.

Plant, W. T. "Changes in Ethnocentrism Associated With a

Four-Year College Education." Journal of Edu-
cational Psychology, XLIX (1958), 162-65.

"Longitudinal Changes in Intolerance and
Authoritarianism for Subjects Differing in Amount
of College Education Over Four Years." Genetic
Psychology Monographs, LXXII (1965), 247-87.

, and Telford, C. W. "Changes in Personality for
Groups Completing Different Amount of College Over
Two Years." Genetic PsythologyTMonographs, LXXIV
(1966), 3-36.

Pollack, H. 8. "Change in Homogeneous and Heterogeneous

Prior, J.

Sensitivity Training Groups." Unpublished
Doctoral dissertation, University of California
at Berkley, 1967.

J. "Peer Group Influence on the College Climate
for Learning." Journal of College Student Person-
nel, V (1964), 163-67.

141

Raushenbush, E. Talk to Quaker Educators in 1965. Cited
in D. Heath, Growing Up in College. San Francisco:
Jossey-Bass, 1968.

Rogers, C. R. Client-Centered Theordpy. Boston: Houghton-
Mifflin Co., 1965.

. Freedom to Learn. Columbus, Ohio: Charles E.
Merrill Co., l969a.

. "Interpersonal Relationships: U.S.A. 2000."
Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, IV (1968),
265-80.

. On Becoming a Person. Boston: Houghton Mifflin
Company, 196T.

 

. “The Actualizing Tendency in Relation to
'Motives' and to Consciousness." In M. R. Jones,
ed., Nebraska Symposium on Motivation. Lincoln,
Nebraska: University of Nebraska,T963, pp. 1-24.

. "The Group Comes of Age." Psychology Today,
III (l969b), 27-31.

 

Rosenthal, R., and Jacobson, L. P malion in the Classroom:
Teacher Expectation and Pup ls' Intéllectual
Development. New York: Holt, Rinehart, and
Winston, T968.

Rubin, T. I. The Angry Book. Toronto, Ontario: Collier-
Macmillan Canada Ltd., 1969.

Rudolph F. "Neglect of Students as a Historical Tradition."
In L. E. Dennis and J. F. Kaufmann, eds., Tpg
Colleggtand the Student. Washington, D.C.:
AmeritanTCOuncil on Education, 1966, pp. 47-58.

Sanford, N., ed. Colle e and Character. New York: John
Wiley and Co., 1964.

. "Developmental Status of the Entering Freshman."
The American College: A Psychological and Social
Interpretation of the Hi her Learnin . New York:
John Wiley and’Sons, 196 . pp. 263-8 .

"Personality Development During the College
Years." Personnel and Guidance Journal, XXXV
(1956). 74-80.

142

Sanford, N. Self and Society: Social Change and Indi-
yidual Development. New York: Atherton Press,
966.

. "The College Student of 1980." In Alvin
Eurich, ed., Campus 1980. New York: Delacort
Press, 1968. pp. 176-99.

Where Colleges Fail: A Study of the Student as
a Person. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. 1967.

, Webster, H., and Freedman, M. "Impulse Expression I
as a Variable of Personality." Psychological gum
Monographs, LXX (1957), ll. ?

Schultz, D. P. Sensory Restriction: Effects on Behavior.
New YOrk: Academic Press, T966.

 

Schutz, W. C. Joy: Expandin Human Awareness. New York: [3
Grove Press, Inc., T967.

, and Allen, V. L. "The Effects of a T-Group
Laboratory on Interpersonal Behavior." Journal of
Applied Behavioral Science, II (1966), 265-86.

Schwab, J. J. College Curriculum and Student Protest.
Chicago: UniVersity of Chicago Press, 1969.

Selvin, H. C., and Hagstrom, W. O. "The Emperical Classifi-
cation of Formal Groups." In T. M. Newcomb and
E. K. Wilson, eds., Colle e Peer Groups. Chicago:
Aldine Press, 1966, pp. 2-89.

Shepherd, C. R. Small Groups: Some Sociological Per-
ppectives. San Francisco: Chandler Press, 1964.

Smith B. Meditation: The Inward Art. New York: J. B.
Lippincott Co., .

Stewart, L. H. "Change in Personality Test Scores During
Colle e." Journal of Counselinngsychology, XI
(1964?. 211-30.

Stock, D. “A Survey of Research on T-Groups." In L. P.
Bradford, J. R. Gibb, and K. D. Benne, eds.,
T-Group Theory and Laboratorprethod: Innovation
in Re-education. *New York} JOhn Wiley and Sons,
1964’ ppo 593-941.

Stricker, L. J., and Ross. J. "Some Correlates of a ,
Jungian Personalit Inventory." Psychological
Reports, XIV (1964 , 623-43.

143

Super, D. "Career Development as Human Development." In
M. R. Fields, ed., Encounters with Reality. New
York: The Center for Applied—Research in Edu-
cation, 1967, pp. 86-96.

Taylor, H. Students Without Teachers: The Crisis in the
University. New York: MECraw-Hill, l .

The Hazen Foundation. The Student in Higher Education.
Report of the Committee on the Stuaent in Higher
Education. New Haven, Conn.: The Hazen Foundation,
1968. .

Thoreson, C. E. "The Counselor as an Applied Behavioral
Scientist." Personnel and Guidance Journal, XLVII
(1969), 841-48.

Trent, J. W., and Medsker, L. L. Beyond High School: A

Psycho-sociological Study 0 O 0 Hi h School
Graduates. SaniFrancisco: Joséey-Bass, 1968.

Van Doren, M. Liberal Education. New York: Holt, 1943.

Wallace, W. L. Student Culture. Chicago: Aldine Press,
1966.

Webster, H., Freedman, M. G., and Heist, P. "Personality
Changes in College Students." In N. Sanford, ed.,
The American College. New York: Wiley and Sons,
1962’ pp- 811'46.

White, R. W. Lives in Pro ress: A Study of the Natural
Growth of Persona ty. New York: Holt,l952.

Whitehead, A. N. "The Aims of Education (1916)." In The
Aims of Education and Other Essays. New York:
Macmillan, 1929.

Whitman, R. M. "Psychodynamic Principles Underlying T-Group
Processes." In L. P. Bradford, J. P. Gibb, K. D.
Benne, eds., T-Grodp Theory and Laboratory Method.
New York: John Wiley and Sons, 1964, pp. 310-35.

Wilson, E. K. "The Entering Student: ATtributes and
Agents of Change." In T. M. Newcomb and E. K.

Wilson, eds., Colle e Peer Grou 5. Chicago:
Aldine Press, 1966, pp. 71-196.

 

APPENDICES

 

 

APPENDIX A

DEFINITIONS OF THE FOURTEEN OMNIBUS
PERSONALITY INVENTORY SCALES

APPENDIX A

DEFINITIONS OF THE FOURTEEN OMNIBUS
PERSONALITY INVENTORY SCALES

1. Thinking Introversion (TI)--43 items: Persons scoring

 

high on this measure are characterized by a liking for
reflective thought and academic activities. They
express interests in a broad range of ideas found in a
variety of areas, such as literature, art, and
philosophy. Their thinking is less dominated by
immediate conditions and situations, or by commonly
accepted ideas, than that of thinking extroverts (low
scorers). Most extroverts show a preference for overt
action and tend to evaluate ideas on the basis of their
practical, immediate application, or to entirely reject

or avoid dealing with ideas and abstractions.

 

Heist and Yonge, 1968, 4-5. Reproduced by
permission. Copyright (c) 1962, 1968 by the Psychological
Corporation, New York, N.Y. All rights reserved.

144

 

145

Theoretical Orientation (TO)--33 items: This scale
-measures an interest in, or orientation to, a more
restricted range of ideas than is true of TI. High
scorers indicate a preference for dealing with
theoretical concerns and problems and for using the
scientific method in thinking; many are also ex-
hibiting an interest in science and in scientific
activities. High scorers are generally logical,
analytical, and critical in their approach to

problems and situations.

Estheticism (Es)--24 items: High scorers endorse
statements indicating diverse interests in artistic
matters and activities and a high level of sensitivity
and response to esthetic stimulation. The content of
the statements in this scale extends beyond painting,
sculpture, and music, and includes interests in

literature and dramatics.

Complexity (Co)--32 items: This measure reflects an
experimental and flexible orientation rather than a
fixed way of viewing and organizing phenomena. High
scorers are tolerant of ambiguities and uncertainties;
they are fond of novel situations and ideas. Most
persons high on this dimension prefer to deal with
complexity, as opposed to simpliticy, and very high
scorers are disposed to seek out and to enjoy

diversity and ambiguity.

 

146

Autonomy (Au)--43 items: The characteristic measured
by this scale is composed of liberal, nonauthoritarian
thinking and a need for independence. High scorers
show a tendency to be independent of authority as
traditionally imposed through social institutions.
They oppose infringements on the rights of individuals
and are tolerant of viewpoints other than their own;
they tend to be realistic, intellectually and
politically liberal, and much less judgmental than

low scorers.

‘ggllgious Orientation (RO)--26 items: High scorers
are skeptical of conventional religious beliefs and
practices and tend to reject most of them, especially
those that are orthodox or fundamentalistic in nature.
Persons scoring around the mean are manifesting a
moderate view of religious beliefs and practices; low
scorers are manifesting a strong commitment to Judaic-
Christian beliefs and tend to be conservative in
general and frequently rejecting of other viewpoints.
(The direction of scoring on this scale, with religious
orientation indicated by lpy scores, was based chiefly
on the correlation between these items and the first
four scales, which measure a general intellectual

disposition.)

10.

147

Social Extroversion (SE)--4O items: This measure
reflects a preferred style of relating to people in
a social context. High scorers display a strong
interest in being with people, and they seek social
activities and gain satisfaction from them. The
social introvert (low scorer) tends to withdraw from

social contacts and responsibilities.

Impulse Expression (IE)--59 items. This scale assesses

 

a general readiness to express impulses and to seek
gratification either in conscious thought or in overt
action. High scorers have an active imagination,
value sensual reactions and feelings; very high
scorers have frequent feelings of rebellion and

aggression.

Personal Integration (PI)--55 items: The high scorer
admits to few attitudes and behaviors that character-

ize socially alienated or emotionally disturbed

persons. Low scorers often intentionally avoid others

and experience feelings of hostility and aggression
along with feelings of isolation, loneliness, and

rejection.

Anxiety Level (AL)--20 items: High scorers deny that
they have feelings or symptoms of anxiety, and do not
admit to being nervous or worried. Low scorers

describe themselves as tense and high-strung. They

 

 

 

11.

12.

13.

148

may experience some difficulty in adjusting to their
social environment, and they tend to have a poor
opinion of themselves. (Note the direction of scoring
on this scale: a pigp score indicates a 12! anxiety

level, and vice versa.)

Altruism (Am)--36 items: The high scorer is an

 

affiliative person and trusting and ethical in his
relations with others. He has a strong concern for
the feelings and welfare of people he meets. Low
scorers tend not to consider the feelings and welfare
of others and often view people from an impersonal,

distant perspective.

Practical Outlook (PO)--3O items: The high scorer on
this measure is interested in practical, applied
activities and tends to value material possessions
and concrete accomplishments. The criterion most
often used to evaluate ideas and things is one of
immediate utility. Authoritarianism, conservatism,
and non-intellectual interests are very frequent
personality components of persons scoring above the

average.

Masculinity-Femininity(MF)--56 items: This scale
assesses some of the differences in attitudes and
interests between college men and women. High

scorers (masculine) deny interests in esthetic

14.

149

matters, and they admit to few adjustment problems,
feelings of anxiety, or personal inadequacies. They
also tend to be somewhat less socially inclined than
low scorers and more interested in scientific
matters. Low scorers (feminine), besides having
stronger esthetic and social inclinations, also admit

to greater sensitivity and emotionality.

Response Bias (RB)--28 items: This measure, composed
chiefly of items seemingly unrelated to the concept,
represents an approach to assessing the student's
test-taking attitude. High scorers are responding in
a manner similar to a group of students who were
explicitly asked to make a good impression by their
responses to these items. Low scorers, on the
contrary, may be trying to make a bad impression or
are indicating a low state of well-being or feelings

of depression.

 

 

 

 

APPENDIX 8

DEFINITIONS OF THE THIRTEEN GROUP
DIMENSIONS DESCRIPTIONS SCALES

 

.*

APPENDIX B

DEFINITIONS OF THE THIRTEEN GROUP
DIMENSIONS DESCRIPTIONS SCALES

Autonomy is the degree to which a group functions
independently of other groups and occupies an inde-
pendent position in society. It is reflected by the
degree to which a group determines its own activities,
by its absence of allegiance, deference and/or

dependence relative to other groups.

Control is the degree to which a group regulated the

behavior of individuals while they are functioning as
group members. It is reflected by the modifications
which group membership imposes on complete freedom

of individual behavior and by the amount of intensity

of group-derived government.

 

Hemphill, 1967, 2-4. Reproduced by permission.

gopyright O 1956 by Ohio State University, Columbus,
h o.

All rights reserved.

*This study is particularly concerned with these

dimensions since they are specifically included in the
testable hypotheses.

150

151

3.* Flexibility is the degree to which a group's activities
are marked by informal procedures rather than by
adherence to established procedures. It is reflected
by the extent to which duties of members are free from
specification thrbugh custom, tradition, written
rules, regulations, codes of behavior, or even un-

written but clearly prescribed ways of behaving.

4.* Hedonic Tone is the degree to which group membership

is accompanied by a general feeling of pleasantness

 

or agreeableness. It is reflected by the frequency of
laughter, conviviality, pleasant anticipation of group
meetings, and by the absence of griping and com-

plaining.

5. Homogeneity is the degree to which members of a group
are similar with respect to socially relevant charac-
teristics. It is reflected by relative uniformity of
members with respect to age, sex, race, socio-

economics status, interests, attitudes, and habits.

6.* Intimacy is the degree to which members of a group
are mutually acquainted with one another and are
familiar with the most personal details of one

another's lives. It is reflected by the nature of

 

*This study is particularly concerned with these
dimensions since they are specifically included in the
testable hypotheses.

152

topics discussed by members, by modes of greeting,
forms of address, and by interactions which pre-
suppose a knowledge of the probably reaction of
others under widely differing circumstances, as well
as by the extent and type of knowledge each member

has about other members of the group.

7. Participation is the degree to which members of a
group apply time and effort to group activities. It
is reflected by the number and kinds of duties

 

members perform, by voluntary assumption of non-
assigned duties and by the amount of time spent in

group activities.

8. Permeability is the degree to which a group permits
ready access to membership. It is reflected by
absence of entrance requirements of various kinds,

and by the degree to which membership is solicited.

9. Polarization is the degree to which a group is oriented
and works toward a single goal which is clear and

specific to all members.

lO.* Potency is the degree to which a group has primary
significance for its members. It is reflected by the
kind of needs which a group is satisfying or has the

 

*This study is particularly concerned with these
dimensions since they are specifically included in the
testable hypotheses.

153

potentiality of satisfying, by the extent of re-
adjustment which would be required of members should
the group fail, and by the degree to which a group
has meaning to the members with reference to their

central values.

11. Stability is the degree to which a group persists
over a period of time with essentially the same
characteristics. It is reflected by the rate of

membership turnover, by frequency of reorganizations

 

and by constancy of group size.

12.* Stratification is the degree to which a group orders
its members into status hierarchies. It is reflected
by differential distribution of power, privileges,
obligations, and duties and by asymmetrical patterns

of differential behavior among members.

13.* Viscidity is the degree to which members of the group
function as a unit. It is reflected by absence of
dissension and personal conflict among members, by
absence of activities serving to advance only the
interests of individual group members, by the ability
of the group to resist disrupting forces, and by the
belief on the part of the members that the group does

function as a unit.

 

*This study is particularly concerned with these
dimensions since they are specifically included in the
testable hypotheses.

 

APPENDIX C

STUDENT SELF-EVALUATION REPORT FORM

 

" "h

 

APPENDIX C

STUDENT SELF-EVALUATION REPORT FORM

 

In what ways did the group interaction and formal
content of the personal development program assist you

(or fail to assist you) in the following areas:

 

1. team nursing and/or hospital experiences;

2. residence setting;

3. personal development.

Please explain and give examples.

154