H‘MWI‘HI X l 3255: "WWWWW"WWI A CGMPAR§SDN 8F TWO CEEL'WRAL {ERO’LEPS THROUGH 1{HE‘LESEi'F THE MANN INVENTORY Thesis far the fiegyee 3% Ed. D. i‘ééCHiGi‘afi SRETE EEWERSETY MRQN SifiKOFF 1959 tnssus 0-169 Date This is to certify that the thesis entitled A COMPARISON OF TWO CULTURAL GROUPS THROUGH THE USE OF THE MANN INVENTORY presented by Aaron Sinkoff has been accepted towards fulfillment of the requirements for Ed .1) degree in Education Novemb ABSTRACT A COMPARISON OF TWO CULTURAL GROUPS THROUGH THE USE OF THE MANN INVENTORY By Aaron Sinkoff The Mann Inventory was used in an attempt to measure and to classify the personal adjustment of nine hundred teen—agers. Two hundred twenty-five were White Female parochial high school pupils (Group 1); two hundred twenty- five were Black Female inner city public high school students (Group 2); two hundred twenty-five were White Male parochial high school pupils (Group 3); two hundred twenty—five were Black Male inner city public high school students (Group A). The parochial student was chosen because he represents a somewhat homogeneous white middle class population which could be used for comparison with the black inner city student population. The Mann Inventory was administered to these groups in three parochial high schools, two inner city high schools, and sixteen after school driver education classes conducted at two driving ranges sponsored by the Detroit Public Schools. An attempt was made to have the facilities and environment as similar as possible. n... V. . ..3 V . a; a: yPu Aaron Sinkoff Answers to the following questions were sought. Do the Black Female and Male view themselves, their peer group and society in general in a similar fashion as their counter- part, the White Female and Male high school pupils? What are their personal adjustment similarities? In what ways are they different? Is one group better adjusted than the other? Do they respond in a like manner to test items? The t test of significance was employed to determine the difference, if any, between the overall personal adjust- ment of the four groups. Analysis revealed that there was a highly significant difference at the .01 level between White and Black Females, White and Black Males, and White Females and Males in their overall personal adjustment scores. However, there was no significant difference in this category between Black Females and Males. White and Blacx Males as well as Black Females and Males showed a highly significant difference at the .01 level in their under controlled category scores. There was no statistical difference in this category between White and Black Females as well as White Females and Males. Black Females and Males showed a highly significant difference at the .01 level in their over controlled category scores. White and Black Females as well as White Females and Males showed a statistical difference at the .05 level for this category. There was no significant difference between White and Black Males. sly W I A;., 5.: Ad Aaron Sinkoff The preceding indicates that there appear to be real differences between the personal adjustment of inner city and parochial high school students. Eight of the twelve comparisons were significant. The second phase of this study involved an item anal— ysis. Do black inner city and white parochial high school students respond similarly to the items in the Mann Inventory? Analysis revealed that there was no statistical significance for thirty—two items, a significant difference at the .05 level for nine items and a significant difference at the .01 level for nineteen items when the responses of the White and Black Females were compared. There was no statistical signi— ficance for forty-six items, a significant difference at the .05 level for four items and a significant difference at the .01 level for ten items when the responses of White and Black Males were compared. White and Black Females had twice as many different responses, twenty-eight to fourteen, as White and Black Males to the sixty items in the Mann Inventory. The third objective of this study was to identify those individuals who were having personal adjustment problems. One standard deviation above the mean, when compared with their own peer group, was used as the criterion for classifi— cation into the various personal adjustment categories, average, under controlled, over controlled, or both under and over controlled. Aaron Sinkoff Further educational experimentation in driver educa- tion is needed to determine how these individuals and groups may best be helped in their personal adjustment. A COMPARISON OF TWO CULTURAL GROUPS THROUGH THE USE OF THE MANN INVENTORY By Aaron Sinkoff A THESIS Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF EDUCATION Department of Education 1969 \C 6‘ ‘\ l 3 \— t. L; 3] ‘. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS No work of this kind is ever completed without the help of many people. Appreciation for suggestions on and direction of the dissertation is gratefully extended to my doctoral committee: Professor Gordon Sheehe, Dr. Charles A. Blackman and Dr. James Coster. Dr. William A. Mann served as the major advisor for the research. He guided the writer through every phase of the doctoral project with understanding and patience. His inspiration provided the. supportive base which led to the fulfillment of a dream. Recognition is extended to Dr. Morton Levitt for his guidance during the writer's formative undergraduate years. A special graditude is expressed to the late Dr. Lloyd Cook for his unique influence upon the writer's educational career. The writer offers thanks and appreciation for the continued support and encouragement given by his wife, Mollie, and their three children which enabled him to carry this project through to completion. ii L—ul TABLE OF CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGMENTS. . . . . . . . LIST OF TABLES LIST OF APPENDIX Chapter I. II. III. IV. STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM The Problem. Specific Problems. Definition of Terms Delimitations . . . . . Basic Assumptions. . . . . . . Possible Applications . . . . . Need for the Study . . . . . . Hypotheses . . . . . . . . REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE Development of the Mann Inventory Related Literature Personality Testing Methods Used in Developing Inventories. Summary METHODOLOGY The Test Instrument Sample Selection Procedure of Analysis PRESENTATION OF FINDINGS Overall Personal Adjustment Category Under Controlled Category Over Controlled Category iii Page ii. vi NO\O\U'1U1.I='UUI—‘ 23 214 25 27 29 31 Chapter _ Page V. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35 Discussion . . . . . . . . . . 37 White and Black Females . . . . . . . . 37 White and Black Males. . . . . . . . 38 Similarities and Differences . . . . . . A0 White Females and Males . . . . . . . . Al Black Females and Males . . . . . . A2 Implications for Driver Education. . . . . A2 Recommendations for Future Research . . . . U3 BIBLIOGRAPHY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . U5 APPENDIX . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ug iv LIST OF TABLES Table Page I. Statistical Comparison of the Personal Adjustment for all Groups . . . . . . . . . . . . 33 II. Cut-Off Scores in Every Personal Adjustment Category for Each of the Four Groups Based Upon One Standard Deviation Above the Mean . . . . 36 LIST OF APPENDIX Appendix Page A. The Mann Inventory and Response Sheet. . . . “9 vi CHAPTER I STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM The Problem Recent research has identified personal adjustment as one of the significant factors in safe driving. Kenel reported that the relationship between the adjustment of the individual and his driving record was of the same direc— tion and magnitude.1 Uhlaner and Drucker identified six areas of human characteristics out of twenty-two which pro— vided the needed differentiation between drivers. One of these areas was personality and attitudinal factors. Ojemann pointed to the increasing evidence that personal 3 adjustment is related to safe behavior. Jacobson stressed lFrancis Carl Kenel. "The Effectiveness of the Mann Inventory in Classifying Young Drivers into behavioral Categories and its Relationship to Subsequent Driver Per- formance." (Unpublished Doctor's dissertation, Michigan State University, 1967), p. 72. 2J. E. Uhlaner and A. J. Drucker. "Selection Tests—- Dubious Aid in Driver Licensing." Presentation to the Annual Meeting of the Highway Research Board, Washington, D.C., January, 196A, p. 2. 3Ralph H. Ojemann. "Tests and Evaluation Methods Used.in Driver and Safety Education." Washington, D.C.: .National Commission of Safety Education Association, 1959. the personal adjustment of students as the principal role of counselors in driver education. The problem is to attempt to increase our knowledge about the personal adjustment of teen-age drivers. The Mann Inventory was selected because this instrument attempts to identify and to measure the personal adjustment of teen— agers. There are four scales which rate total adjustment, over controlled, under controlled, and both under and over controlled. The terms are defined later in this chapter. The Mann Inventory has been found to have validity and reliability in identifying and measuring personal 5 adjustment. The writer proposes to use the M. I. to com- pare this personal adjustment rating to one segment of the driving population, the inner city black high school student with the parochial white high school pupil. Do the Black Female and Male View themselves, their peer group and society in general in a similar fashion as their counterpart, the White Female and Male parochial high school pupil? What are their personal adjustment similarities? In what ways are the four groups different? Is one group better adjusted than the others? Do they respond in a like manner to test items? The answers to the preceding questions have many rami- :flications for the field of Traffic Safety and Driver Educa- uThomas J. Jacobson, "The Role of Counselors in Driver Egiuzation," Traffic Safety, Vol. V. No. 3, May, 1969, pp. 1 -190 5Kenel, op. cit., p. 74. «\u ... . .. . r w. r. . a . r. S n : . . T]. r». A. Q A. . a... Q» Q» cation. For example, if students with similar personal adjustment problems can be identified, then educational methodology can be developed to attempt to improve the adjustment of these individuals. The assumption being that an improvement in personal adjustment will transfer into safer operation of a motor vehicle. The writer acknowledges that the inner city sample is biased to the extent that since many inner city pupils never enter high school, this selected Black Female and Male population represents the more academically successful students. The parochial student was chosen because he represents a somewhat homogeneous white middle class popula— tion which could be used for comparison with the preceding. Specific Problems This study proposes to investigate the following aspects of personal adjustment. 1. To compare the personal adjustment of four groups, the Black Female and Male inner city and White Female and Male parochial high school students, as measured by the Mann Inventory. Each sex will be compared separately. 2. To compare the responses to each item in the Mann Inventory by the Black Female and Male inner city and the White Female and Male parochial high school students. Each sex will be compared separately. 3. To compare the scores on each of the personal adjustment categories as measured by the Mann Inventory. n . tort . SEX F». fl.» n; :C a .C nC ... O. .fih VJ if V .7a pv ‘. tfie E + C 0; ac O . MN ~ ‘ a Q» ha S d n: ..n u Comparisons will be made according to racial, school and sex classifications. A. To identify the individuals in each of the four groups whose personal adjustment may be classified as aver- age, over controlled, under controlled or both. Definition of Terms For the purpose of this study the following terms are defined: 1. Inner City: Those students who live in low quality housing and attend public high schools which have a black population over ninety per cent. 2. Parochial: Those students who live in middle class neighborhoods and attend white non public high schools in the City of Detroit. 3. Average: Behavior characterized by well adjusted interaction with persons and consistent with the norms of the society in which the individual lives with the absence of tendencies toward extremes in personality. A. Under Controlled: Behavior characterized by forceful, outgoing action or vigorous efforts to assert one- self over others, with little consideration of the results. 5. Over Controlled: Behavior characterized by with— drawal from communication with other persons with efforts to have everything under control so that they cannot be \ criticized by others. 6. Both Over and Under Controlled: Behavior char— acterized by asserting oneself over others and at other times, withdrawing from communication with other persons. Delimitations .This study was limited in the following manner. 1. All participants were students in the driver education course offered by the Detroit Public Schools. 2. The ages of the pupils were limited to fifteen, sixteen, seventeen, and eighteen years. 3. The public school students were limited to those enrolled in selected inner city high schools. A. The non public school pupils were limited to those enrolled in selected parochial high schools. 5. Personality adjustment was limited to the areas included in the Mann Inventory. Basic Assumptions The investigation of the problem was based upon the following assumptions. 1. The Mann Inventory has reliability and validity for identifying and measuring selected aspects of personal adjustment. 2. Students will express their feelings and respond to items in a paper and pencil test so as to reflect their true personal adjustment. 3. There is a need to know more about the personal adjustment of Black Female and Male inner city students n .q. Y) 6.» oel. +b 1: «» FL. VTG an- i V :0 "n A Mg. .a..- - and White Female and Male parochial high school students in order to be more effective in the educational process. Possible Applications Some possible uses of the results of this investiga- tion may be: I. To identify individuals with personal adjustment problems. 2. To identify groups with personal adjustment prob— lems. 3. To develop a basis for changing methodology to meet the needs of students better. A. To make administrative decisions based upon personal adjustment information about students. 5. To understand, better, any personality difference between the two cultural groups. Need for the Study There are two compelling reasons for this study. First, since the changing of behavior is one objective in education, it is imperative to have information upon which to base a program or curriculum. This requires some tentative answers to the following behavioral characteristic questions. How do Black Female and Male inner city students view themselves, their peer group and society in general? Is their personal adjustment similar or different from those in another social cilass? Do they respond to inventory items in a manner siJnilar to a middle class student? Do inner city students VV ..5\ y- rrb 1.. L. qli Q» a a c a. n. ad a a no ad mt. Y. v. o . 4v Id n. .au 4. . . r. «I. .L :. :. w” a: E a o .2 3. .3 C 3 w .. .«u .«U »G e 4 u no . at .1" _ . «D A: 95? -4. V Th‘v have more or less personal adjustment problems than those found in a middle class parochial pupil group? Are there more or less inner city pupils in the over or under con- trolled groups than parochial students? Second, there is the need to identify who and how many have personal adjustment problems. After this is deter— mined, the next step is to measure, if possible, in which ’direction and to what magnitude the personal adjustment' differs from his own group. It is hoped that answers to the preceding questions and problems will form the basis upon which an effective educational program to improve personal adjustment can be developed. Hypotheses The writer plans to administer the Mann Inventory to four hundred fifty inner city and four hundred fifty paro- chial high school students. Their responses to the items will be tabulated according to group and sex. Three null hypotheses will be statistically tested. Those are: I. There are no significant differences in the per- sonal adjustment between inner city and parochial students as measured by the total scores tabulated on the Mann Inventory. 2. There are no significant differences in the per- enonal adjustment between inner city and parochial high the ‘ I‘ .... . C . L n... 5 school students as measured by their sub classification scores tabulated on the Mann Inventory. 3. There is no significant difference in the pattern of responses by inner city and parochial students to each of the items in the Mann Inventory. The following chapters will review the literature relative to this investigation, state the methodology employed, report the findings, and offer conclusions and recommendations. CHAPTER II REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE Part I: Development of the Mann Inventory Dr. William A. Mann taught a course, "Personality Factors in Traffic Safety," to graduate students in the field of Traffic Safety and Driver Education at Michigan State University. A class project was initiated which re— sulted in the development of the Mann Inventory. Originally one hundred items were selected on the basis of face validity by Dr. Mann and the members of the class. These items were the result of an analysis of the feelings expressed by one hundredeichigan high school students toward the police, school, cars, family, peers, personal expectations, desires, habits, and society. Personal interviews and intensive case studies were made on each of these one hundred students who had been identified by driver education teachers as the worst drivers in their respective schools. The next step was to conduct a pilot study to deter- mine which questions from the list of one hundred items were statistically significant. Twenty driver education teachers were asked to administer the M. I. and to evaluate the results. This group of teachers established the criteria for identifying three behavioral categories: (1) very aggressive, (2) very reserved, (3) average. 9 10 "The criteria for evaluation were as follows: 1. Very Aggressive: Any student who, in the opinion of the driver education instructor through per- sonal observation in the classroom and/or during practice driving instruction, displays behavior that is exceedingly aggressive, is a show-off, is extremely egotistical or tempermental. 2. Very Reserved: Any student who, in the opinion of the driver education instructor through personal observation in the classroom and/or during prac- tice driving instruction, displays behavior that is exceedingly cautious and timid. 3. Average: All students who do not fall into either of the other classifications."l A51 composed the sample population. Eighty were classified as very aggressive, eighty—six as very reserved, and 285 as average. Chi square analysis was utilized to determine the significance of each item according to the three behavioral categories. Eighteen items appeared to differentiate between the three categories. Four were at the .10 level; eight were at the .05 level; one was at the .02 level; one was at the .001 level; and four were at the .01 level of significance. Almost all the students gave similar responses to thirty-seven items so they were deleted. Further mathematical analysis revealed that eighty— five per cent of the average population deviated from the average response pattern by seven to nineteen points. An adjustment scale was developed based upon these average responses. 1John G. Schaff, "Personal Attitude Survey," (unpub- lished Master's dissertation, Michigan State University, 1957). The result of sequently forty—two 11 remaining sixty-three items were refined as a the pilot study and became the instrument sub- employed. Another administration was made to violators who were enrolled in three county driver safety school classes in Ingham County. These stu- dents had been convicted of at least two moving violations and/or were involved in collisions within the preceding twelve months. Fifteen persons were classified as very reserved, age. Two twenty-one as very aggressive, and four as aver- violators responded to significant items in such a manner that there was a deviation of forty—six points each. In addition, these two violators scored four and five of the six lie items in the M. I. incorrectly. Kenel used the Mann Inventory in his dissertation.2 He determined that the M. I. showed reliability correlation values of .697 to .986.3 These values indicated a high to very high reliability. He also found that a significant relationship existed between observed behavior and an individual's response to the items in the M. I. Sixty of the sixty-three items showed significant differences varying from .001 to .10. The three items which did not differentiate behavioral char- acteristics were eliminated from the present study. 2 Kenel, pp. cit. 3Ibid., p. 72. 12 Another finding was that there appeared to be a difference in response to items in the Mann Inventory on the basis of sex. Forty-seven items were differentiated for males and thirty-seven for females. Three research studies involving the use of the Mann Inventory are being conducted by doctoral candidates at the Highway Traffic Safety Center of Michigan State University. Their findings and conclusions should be reported in the immediate future. Part II: Related Literature This section is divided into two parts. The first illustrates briefly the recognition that personal adjust- ment is of paramount importance to safe driving. The second reviews some of the problems in attempting to use tests dealing with factors of personality. Personal adjustment has been identified as a signifi- cant factor related safe driving behavior. The following are brief excerpts from many investigations which indicate possible contributions of further study in the concept of personal adjustment. There is increasing evidence that personal adjust- ment, as measured by emotional maturity scales or by certain personality inventories, is related to safe behavior. . . . . .Further, it appears that the degree of adjust— ment of the traffic offender is likely to be reflected in his accident and/or violation experience, i.e., “Ojemann, 92. cit., p. Al. a: u a 2. Q» Bab. Q9 niv fl. C 13 the better his adjustment, the better his driving record, the poorer his adjustment, the poorer his driving record.5 . .In some cases the personal characterisitics or the physiological condition of the driver were important in the production of driving errors, especially those involving insight and judgment. .Maladjustment seems to be closely related to accidents. . .Irresponsible and maladjusted indi— viduals have a significantly higher incident of accidents, especially repeated ones, than respons— ible and normally adjusted individuals. .Such analyses strongly suggest that in the area of accident research and prevention, para- mount attention must be focused upon the personal characteristics of the driver. . .Personality characteristics appear to be more significant and discriminating than, beyond necessary minimal levels, either motor skill or mechanical knowledge.8 The preceding clearly acknowledges the potential impor- tance of personal characteristics in the safe operation of a motor vehicle. Historically, researchers in traffic safety focused first upon performance skills and capacities.9 5E. D. Heath, "The Relationship Between Driving Records, Selected Personality Characteristics, and Biographical Data of Traffic Offenders." (Unpublished Doctor's Thesis, New York University, 1958). 6Ross A. McFarland and Alfred L. Moseley, Human Factors in Highway Transport Safety. Boston: Harvard School of Public Health, 1953, pp. 251—252. 7Morris S. Schulzinger, The Accident Syndrome. Spring- field, Ill.: Charles C. Thomas Publishers, 1956, p. 1A. 8Robert V. Rainey, "Study of the Human Factor in Motor Vehicle Accidents." Second Annual Conference, American Driver and Safety Education Association, Boulder, Colorado, June 22- 2A, 1958, pp. 115-123. 9Ibid., p. 115. 1“ Today there is an increased awareness of the role of atti— tudes and personality development. This view is expressed succinctly by Tillman in stating that, "A man drives as he lives."10 The obvious implication is to identify how a person "lives." The Mann Inventory is this type of instrument which attempts to measure the individual's feelings toward himself, others and established social mores. For example, one investigator used the Mann Inventory as well as other psychological tests to better understand the feelings of the subjects under study.11 It should be noted here that there is a wealth of information in the field of personality and its problems but that there appears to be a limited number of books and art— icles pertaining specifically to the personal adjustment of either inner city or parochial students as delineated in this study. Personality Testing Personality theory has shifted its basis from the scientifically intended but methodologically weak approaches of unaided clinical and general behavioral observation which prevailed roughly from 1880 to 1930, to a new foundation of exact measurement and experiment which began to be effective 10William A. Tillman and G. E. Hobbs, "Accident-Prone Automobile Driver: A Study of Psychiatric and Social Back- ground." American Journal of Psychiatry, 19A9, pp. 321-331. llArt Opfer, "Help from Home." Traffic Safety, January, 1969, pp. 22—2A. ‘ 15 around 1920-30.12 The invention of the first objective personality tests began with Dr. Raymond B. Cattell's early 13 How— post-doctoral researches on temperament in 1932—33. ever, there was a period following this of more than two decades when tests such as Rorschach, TAT, Szondi, and others were popular and dominated the field. Dr. Cattell consid— . ered these instruments as sterile, gadget—centered, etc., which attempted to squeeze a nonexistent amount of person- ality reference out of some arbitrary and narrow response situation.lLl Other notable scholars in agreement with Dr. Cattell's viewpoint were Thurstone, Burt, Cronbach, 15 McDougall, McNemar, Guilford, and Terman. These men advocated and employed a multivariate approach which aimed at determining the real personality and motivation structures. Their efforts produced constructive results so that measure- ment practices are presently orientated to a personality— structural-concept—centered philosophy. Some examples of this type of test are the Objective—Analytic (O-A) Person— ality Test Battery (Cattell, 1955 and 1963), for adults and children, the Objective Analytic (O-A) Anxiety Battery 12Raymond B. Cattell and Frank W. Warburton, Objective Personality and Motivation Tests, Chicago: University of Illinois Press, 1967, p. 7. 13Ibid., p. ix. lulbid., p. ix. lSIbid., p. ix. l6 (Cattell and Scheier, 1960), and the Institute for Personality and Ability Testing (IPAT) Psychological State Battery (Cattell and Nesselroade, 1961).16 Dr. Cattell believes that many of the present person— ality tests are in the experimental stage and suggests that professional psychologists invent items and modify material to suit their own needs and to produce original ideas in test design.l7 An important concept is that personality theory does not have to lean upon and borrow from clinical observations and ideas but should be derived independently from experi— mental-statistical work.18 For example, the physical scien- ces use a manipulative bivariate experiment. This is not practical for the social sciences. So Dr. Cattell advocates building a theory based upon observed behavior in the natural environment without any manipulation and to extract by superior statistics, relations of dependence which cannot be extracted by forcible manipulation.19 He suggests that behavior can be observed and recorded in three ways. One is by ratings made by observers on the frequency and intensity with which specific kinds of behavior occur in the people they observe. Another is by questionnaires ¥ 16Ibid., p. x. l7Ibid., p. x. Ibid., p. 2. lglbid., p. 7. 17 which are answered by the person himself. The third is the objective test where a situation is arranged without the person really knowing what aspect of his behavior is being scored. The Mann Inventory makes use of the second type. There are three personality tests which are in general use by researchers in Driver Education and Traffic Safety.20 These are the Guilford—zimmerman Temperament Survey, the F Allport-Vernon-Lidnsey Study of Values (Levey Modification) ' and the California Mental Health Analysis. The first attempts to measure the total personality of the student through the use of ten scales which are general activity, : restraint, ascendency, social interest, emotional stability, objectivity, friendliness, thoughtfulness, personal relations and masculinity.i The second attempts to measure the relative prominance of six basic interests in personality which are the theoretical, the economic, the esthetic, the social, the political and the religious. The third attemts to assess mental health. There are two scales, liabilities and assets, which are subdivided into five specific types each. The liability scales include behavioral immaturity, emotional instability, feelings of inadequacy, physical defects and nervous manifestations. The asset scales are close personal relationships, interpersonal skills, social participation, 20Robert V. Rainey, John J. Conger and Charles R. Walsmith, "Personality Characteristics as a Selective Factor in Driver Education," Highway Research Board, Bulletin 285, Washington, D.C.: 1961, pp. 23—28. 18 satisfying work and recreation and adequate outlooks and goals. Methods Used in Developing Inventories There are three methods being used currently to con- struct and develop objective personality inventories. The first is named the factor analytic approach. Examples of their use are found in Cattell and Guilford's work.21’22 Essentially one starts with a great number of items. These are administered to large numbers of subjects. Their responses to all possible pairs of items are correlated. By rotation of the resulting intercorrelation matrix, the simple structure may be identified. The items with a high loading on a single factor are placed together and similarly for those with a low loading. Then the content of items with a similar loading are analysed to identify what they have in common. Thus a scale is initiated for measuring a single personality variable. The second is named the criterion group approach. Exanmles of their use are found in the development of the IWinnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory and the Mann lhiventory. The approach is to have two contrasting groups of‘:subjects available such as those identified as mentally 21R. B. Cattell, The Sixteen Personality Factor gflfiastionnaire, Champaign, 111.: Institute for Personality arui Ability Testing, 1950. 22J. P. Guilford, An Inventory of Factors STDCR, Bexmarly Hills, Calif.: Sheridan Supply Co., 19A3. ,- pm": a». fir" ‘57.“? if m»: . Iranian-5.. 19 ill and those not so labeled. The inventory is administered and an item analysis of their responses is made. Tests of significance are employed to determine which items indicate a statistically significant difference in response between the two criterion groups. There are several limitations and cautions to be observed. First, a scale developed in this manner can never be better than the criterion group which provided the basis for item selection. Second, as the number of variables on which the two groups are matched is increased, there is a corresponding decrease in the number of cases that meet the requirements for membership in the criterion groups. Third, no matter how rigorously the criterion groups are defined, they can be made comparable in only one respect.23 The third is named the construct approach. This is similiar to the criterion group approach with two exceptions. First, the test constructionist identifies a personality variable which is of interest to him, such as, the exhibi— tionist. Items are developed which appear to be relevant to the construction of the instrument. When a sufficient Inumber of items are available, the responses of an unselected Egroup to the items are analysed. Correlation and factor analytic techniques are employed to select homogeneous items 23B. M. Bass and I. A. Berg, (Eds.) Objective Approaches tn) Personality, New York and London: Van Nostrand, 1959, pp. 101—116. visual " I: m’.;t\"~‘o"fa‘ n'. .9”! In! ‘J: 20 for inclusion in the scale. This is in contrast to the criterion group approach in that the construct groups are established on the basis of their behavior with respect to the items rather than in terms of an external criterion. Second, two different investigators' concept of 'exhibition' may not be the same and result in two different scales.2u Further research to reconcile differences in construct validity represented by two scales has been 5 ’3 suggested.‘ Summary Dr. Semeonoff has classified approaches to personality assessment into five groups.26 The first is a systema— tization of ad hoc personality based upon everyday observa- tion. Little in the way of specifically psychological techniques is involved. The second group may be termed 'operationa1.' They describe applications of principles set out or implied in the preceding group. The approach may be termed 'global' in contrast to the 'dimensional' of the fourth group. The second group is primarily concerned with the total man in action. 2“Allen L. Edwards, "Social Desirability and Personality Test Construction," Personality Assessment, Boris Semeonoff, (Ed.), Penguin Books Inc., Baltimore, Md., 1966, p. 391. 25L. J. Cronbach and P. E. Meehl, "Construct Validity in Psychological Tests," Psypholoical Bulletin, 1955, 52: 281—302. 26Boris Semeonoff, (Ed.) Personality Assessment, Penguin Books Inc., Baltimore, Md., 1966, pp. 9-12. 21 The third group represents the projective technique which is delineated as "a procedure for discovering a per— son's characteristic modes of behavior (his attitudes, motivations, or dynamic traits) by observing his behavior in response to a situation that does not elicit or compel a particular response, i.e. to a relatively unstructed, ambig— uous, or vague situation."27 This is similiar to the first group's approach except for procedure. It should be noted that there is a current controversy about the scientific status of the procedures which form the basis of projective techniques. The fourth group is termed the dimensional approach to personality study. Interest centers on the placement of individuals on continual measuring definable traits. Con- clusions have been reached on the basis of factor analysis. The fifth group refers to dimensional studies in personality. These are usually based on questionnaires, inventories, and similiar devices. Their validity is depend— enit upon the subjects understanding of the question and thir vwillingness to cooperate. Concepts proposed by two leading psychologists should betzioted here. First, a test measures itself. Any validity is I!) ‘.W¢.~I’- It!) ‘ 30 The t test of significance showed a score less than 1.966 with AA8 df which indicates no significant difference between the two groups. Therefore the null hypothesis as applied to White and Black Females is not rejected. The second comparison was between Groups 3 and A. White Male Black Male 2X3 = 1,619 zxu = 1,692 f 2x? = 12,716 zxfi = 13,882 i R3 = 6.56 XA = 7.52 E Median = 6.60 Median = 6.9A 2 8.0. = 2.25 S.D. = 2.28 The t test of significance showed a difference at the .01 level, which is highly significant. Therefore the null hypothesis as applied to White Females and Males is not rejected. The fourth comparison was between Groups 2 and A. Black Female Black Male 2x2 = 1,975 2x“ = 1,692 2x5 = 10,511 2x3 = 13,882 X2 = 6.56 X“ = 7.52 Median = 5.97 Median = 6.9A S.D. = 1.62 S.D. = 2.28 The t test of significance showed a difference at the .01 level which is highly significant. Therefore the null hypothesis as applied to Black Females and Males is rejected. 31 Over Controlled Category The first comparison was between Groups 1 and 2. White Female Black Female 2x1 = 1,AA1 2X2 = 1,535 zxi = 9,989 2x; = 11,3u6 X1 = 6.A0 X2 = 6.82 Median = 5.60 Median = 6.35 S.D. = 1.8A S.D. = 1.87 The t test of significance showed a difference at the .05 level which is significant. Therefore the null hypothesis as applied to White and Black Females is rejected. The second comparison was between Groups 3 and A. White Male Black Male 2X3 = 1,3A5 2x“ = 1,372 zxg = 8,885 zxfi = 9,188 x3 = 5.98 x“ = 6.10 Median = 5.50 Median = 5.58 S.D. = 2.03 S.D. = 1.97 The t test of significance showed a score less than 1.966 with AA8 df which indicates no significant difference 'between the two groups. Therefore the null hypothesis as applied to White and Black Males is not rejected. The third comparison was between Groups 1 and 3. ‘s‘ V Q ' this 2'": l V.WJ~..-D .' IM-h'l . . _ A.u 32 White Female White Male 2x1 = 1,AA1 2x3 = 1,3u5 2x2 = 8,885 2x2 = 9,188 1 3 X1 = 6.A0 X3 = 5.98 Median = 5.60 Median = 5.50 The t test of significance showed a difference at the .01 level which is significant. Therefore the null hypo- thesis as applied to White Females and Males is rejected. The fourth comparison was between Groups 2 and A. Black Female Black Male 2X2 ‘ 1,535 XX” = 1,372 zxg = 11,3u6 2x3 = 9,188 X2 = 6.82 X“ = 6.10 Median = 6.35 Median = 5.58 S.D. = 1.87 S.D. = 1.97 The t test of significance showed a difference at the .01 level which is highly significant. Therefore the null hypothesis as applied to Black Females and Males is rejected. The following table summarizes the previously reported findings. The third hypothesis stated: There is no significant difference between the pattern .Of responses in inner city and parochial high school students to each of the items in the Mann Inventory. I .4“..\4‘ .. -r 33 TABLE I.-—Statistica1 Comparison of the Personal Adjustment For All Groups Groups Personal Adjustment Categories Under Over Overall Controlled Controlled 1 vs 2 White Female vs Black Female .01 ——— .05 3 vs A White Male vs Black Male .01 .01 --— 1 vs 3 White Female vs White Male .01 ——- .05 2 vs A Black Female vs Black Male -—- .Ol .01 The third hypothesis stated: There is no significant difference between the pattern of responses by inner city and parochial high school students to each of the items in the Mann Inventory. The first comparison was between Groups 1 and 2 (White Female and Black Female). Chi square analysis was used with the following results. There was a significant difference at the .05 level for nine items. Therefore the null hypothesis as applied to these nine items between Groups 1 and 2, White and Black Females, is rejected. Items: 11,16,19,39,A2,51,52,5A,57 There was a highly significant difference at the .01 level ftm'nineteen items. Therefore the null hypothesis as appljjai to these nineteen items between Groups 1 and 2, va . '. 3A White and Black Females, is rejected. Items: 1,3,5,8,12,13,17,20,2A,25,28,35,37,AA,A8,55, 58,59,62 Analysis reveals that twenty—eight of the sixty items or almost one-half showed a significant difference in the pattern of responses between White and Black Females. The second comparison was between Groups 3 and A (White E Male and Black Male). E There was a significant difference at the .05 level for four items. Therefore the null hypothesis as applied to these four items between Groups 3 and A, White and Black é Males, is rejected. Items: 12,21,AA,A8 There was a highly significant difference at the .01 level for ten items. Therefore the null hypothesis as applied to these ten items between Groups 3 and A, White and Black Males, is rejected. Items: 1,3,13,17,20,25,26,28,38,59 Analysis reveals that fourteen of the sixty items or almost twenty-five per cent showed a significant difference in the pattern of responses between White and Black Males. CHAPTER V SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS The purpose of this study was to provide information about the personal adjustment of Black Female and Male F inner city and White Female and Male parochial high school -- Li'- students as individuals and as groups. Many comparisons were made. These included the overall personal adjustment IL- as measured by the Mann Inventory of four groups. Group 1: White Female Parochial High School Students " 2: Black " Public ” " " " 3: White Male Parochial ” " " " A: Black " Public ” " " Other comparisons made between the groups were the sub categories, under controlled and over controlled, as measured by the Mann Inventory. Another comparison made between the groups was their response patterns to the items in the M. 1. One objective of this investigation was to identify those individuals who appeared to need help in their personal adjustment as measured by the M. I. The Mann Inventory was .also used to determine how far in a statistical sense the ixndividual differed in his personal adjustment from his own peen? group. As a basis for comparison between the four 35 groups, 36 cut off scores, one standard deviation above the mean, are presented in the following table. TABLE II.—-Cut—Off Scores in Every Personal Adjustment Category for Each of the Four Groups Based Upon One Standard Deviation Above the Mean Group Personal Adjustment Categories ‘ Over Under 01era11 Controlled Controlled 1 White Female R1 23.68 = 6.A0 = 6.AA S.D. 8.87 = 1.8A = 1.9A Cut- Off 32.55 8.2A 8.38 2 Black Female X2 33.07 = 6.82 = 6.56 S.D. 10.A0 = 1.87 = 1.62 Cut— - off A3.A7 8.69 8.18 3 White Male K3 27.11 = 5.98 = 6.56 S.D. 6.80 = 2.03 = 2.25 Cut- Off 33.91 8.01 8.81 A Black Male 2, 33.09 = 6.10 = 7.52 S.D. 8.63 = 1.97 = 2.28 Cut- Off Al.72 8.07 9.80 The preceding table is presented to give the reader the ruecessary information to make comparisons between the four groups in the following discussion. 37 Discussion Groups 1 and 2 (White and Black Females) A highly significant difference at the .01 level was found in comparing the overall personal adjustment scores between White and Black Females. This appears to indicate that members of these two groups donot view themselves, their peer groups and society in general in a similar fashion. White Females, as measured by the Mann Inventory, indicated I u ‘- .0“ “Rh at! 1.“ fl! ' a. I ‘ a better personal adjustment. The average White Female had 5 an overall personal adjustment score of 23.68 compared to 33.07 compiled by Black Females. The White Female had a cut—off score ten points below that of the Black Female. The sub scale scores on the under controlled category indicated no significant difference. So in this classifica— tion the White and Black Females were not considered as different. The sub scale scores on the over controlled category indicated a significant difference at the .05 level with the Black Females being more over controlled. The Black Females had a score of 6.82 in the over controlled category compared with 6.A0 compiled by White Females. The difference in their cut-off scores was .A5 with the Black Females scor- ing higher. The item analysis comparison indicated the following similarities and differences. There was no statistical difference for thirty-two items. However, twenty—eight items 38 or approximately one-half showed a significant difference. Nine items or roughly ten per cent were significant at the .05 level and nineteen items or approximately thirty-five per cent at the .01 level. These results confirm the previous finding that there is a significant statistical difference between the personal adjustment of White and Black Females. They didnot respond to approximately one— half of the items in the Mann Inventory in a similar fashion. The nine items significant at the .05 level are identified with over-careful drivers, slow drivers, accidents, manners, courtesy, freedom, following directions and peer status. The nineteen items significant at the .01 level are identified with group participation, police, community, personal satis- factions, beliefs, self-control, popularity, and social responsibility. The importance of the preceding is that the Mann Inventory has identified those who appear to need help with their personal adjustment and in which category they fall. Groups 3 and A (White and Black Males) A highly significant difference at the .01 level was found in comparing the overall personal adjustment scores lsetween White and Black Males. This appears to indicate that nmnnbers of these two groups donot view themselves, their peen? groups and society in general in a similar fashion. MHrite Males, as measured by the Mann Inventory, indicated a tnetter personal adjustment. Their cut-off score was 39 approximately eight points below that of the Black Males. The average White Males had an overall personal adjustment score of 27.11 compared with 33.09 compiled by the Black Males. The sub scale scores on the over controlled category indicated no significant difference. So in this category the groups were not considered as different. The sub scale scores on the under controlled category indicated a highly significant difference at the .01 level _ - ~.. ______,_, r'.‘ yflun‘u $9-“! . . .. . , . with the Black Males showing less control. The White Males had a score in this category of 6.56 compared with 7.52 com— piled by Black Males. The cut-off scores were 9.80 for Black Males compared with 8.81 for White Males. Since the inner city area is known as a rough and tough place in which to live, this finding is not surprising. Teachers have reported that schools located in the inner city require more pupil supervision because the behavior of the children is difficult to control. The item analysis comparison indicated the following sindlarities and differences. There was no statistical differ- enice for forty—six items. Fourteen items or approximately orma—fourth showed a significant difference. Four items were :xigniiicant at the .05 level and ten items at the .01 level. Thee four items are identified with night activities, police, gneer' acceptance and taking chances. The ten items are identi— fiexi with school, police, car usage, driver education, patience, ‘perwnonal feelings, and traffic violations. A0 The importance of the preceding is that the Mann Inventory has identified those who appear to need help with their personal adjustment and in which category they fall. Similarities and Differences White and Black Females had differences in their responses to twenty—eight of the sixty items in the Mann Inventory as compared with fourteen items for White and Black Males. It seems that the males responded more similarly to the items than the females in their respective groups. At the .01 level eight identical items were signifi— cantly different for both White and Black Females and for White and Black Males. These were items l,3,l3,17,20,25, 28 and 59. Their topics concern school, police, car usage, driver education, patience, and personal freedom. Three items, l2,AA,A8, significantly different at the .05 level for White and Black Males were significantly differ- ent at the .01 level for White and Black Females. Their topics concern night hours, peer acceptance and taking chances. It is interesting to note that none of the nine items signifi— cantly different at the .05 level for White and Black Females inere listed as such for White and Black Males. There appear tn: be more differences than similarities in the responses to tune sixty items in the Mann Inventory on the basis of sex. The writer realizes that interpretation of the preceding firuiings is tenuous. One can only speculate about possible exmfilanations. Interpreting the data one must recognize the Al great difference in the white middle class environment and that of the central city colored area would be expected to produce considerably different effects in young people. One such possibility is that the black family structure which is usually matriarch in character has influenced the personal adjustment, as delineated above, of both the males and females. The frequent absence of a male model could account for some of the differences. A second explanation may be in the influence of the moral values stressed by the church with respect to personal adjustment. The effect of the church in having students attend a Catholic school can only be conjec— tured since other influences play a role. Another thought is that society has determined upon the basis of sex, regard- less of race, the role in personal adjustment to be followed. However, the importance of the findings is that the Mann Inventory has identified which topics appear to be viewed differently by the various group classifications. The following discussion is to identify similarities and differences in the personal adjustment between females and males of the same cultural groups. Groups 1 and 3 (White Females and Males) Analysis revealed that there was a highly significant difference at the .01 level in their overall personal adjust— ment scores with the females showing a better adjustment. ‘The White Female had a score of 23.68 compared with 27.11 for the White Male. There was no significant difference in A2 their scores on the under controlled category. A difference at the .05 level was found in the over cont;olled category. The White Female had a score of 6.A0 compared with 5.98 for the White Male. As expected, the females appear to be more controlled than the males in their personal adjustment. Groups 2 and A (Black Females and Males) Analysis revealed that there was no significant differ- ence in their overall personal adjustment. The Black Females had a score of 33.07 compared with 33.09 for the Black Males. However, there was a highly significant difference at the .01 level in both their over controlled and under controlled categories. The Black Males scored higher in the under controlled category and lower in the over controlled category than the comparable Black Females. In the under controlled category, the Black Female had a score of 6.56 compared with 7.52 for the Black Male. In the over controlled category, the Black Female had a score of 6.82 compared with 6.10 for the Black Male. This would seem to indicate that the males are more aggressive and less inhibited than their female counterparts. Implications for Driver Education Since the Mann Inventory can be used to identify and to classify the personal adjustment of teen-agers, educational planning is the next logical step. One suggestion is to administer the inventory to all incoming driver education students. They would be classified as average, under “3 controlled, or over controlled in their personal adjustment. Students needing help would be assigned to special driver education classes where they would have the opportunity to discuss and to explore their similar problems in personal adjustment. The objective would be the improvement of each individual's self—image and self—understanding. Additional time beyond that assigned to the regular driver education course would probably be necessary. Two guides for the "ms—TFT-‘r '? ’T! 7. preceding are suggested by Mann1 and Myrick. Recommendations for Future Research This research has delineated the relationships between the categories of personal adjustment as measured by the Mann Inventory for four groups. During the course of this investigation it became apparent that there were many aspects of personal adjustment in need of study. It is recommended that future research in this area devote attention to: A. Determine whether students who have been identified as having personal adjustment problems can be helped in a special driver education course. B. Compare the driving records of individuals having emotional problems as compared with the average group as 1William A. Mann, "Let's Talk it Over," Analogy, Charter Issue, 1966, pp. A- -9; "Using Group Dynamics for Better Driver Education, " Highway Traffic Safety Center, Michigan State University (Mimeographed) 1968. 2Richard Myrick, Lawrence Schlesinger and Barbara Marx, A _Manual for Instructors Conducting Discussions on Driver Attitudes, The George Washington University, November, 1962. AA measured by the Mann Inventory for each category by race and sex. Determine if there are significant differences in their violation and accident records which can be attri- buted to their personal adjustment. C. Determine if the Mann Inventory can be used to predict future violation and accident records. D. Develop a basis for changing teaching methodology based upon the student's personal adjustment. BIBLIOGRAPHY A5 - -- w ,. 1,_"’_:.""T'_ _ e BIBLIOGRAPHY Allstate Insurance Companies. A Teenage Pattern. Skokie, Illinois: The Companies, May, 1960. Bass, B. M. and Berg, I. A. (Eds.). Objective Approaches to Personality. New York and London: Van Nostrand, Cattell, Raymond B. and Warburton, Frank W. Objective Personality and Motivation Tests. Chicago: University of Illinois Press, 1967. Cattell, Raymond B. The Sixteen Personality Factor Question- naire. Champaign, 111.: Institute for Personality and Ability Testing, 1950. Cronbach, L. J. and Meehl, P. E. "Construct Validity in Psychological Tests." Psychological Bulletin, 1955. 52:281-302. Edwards, Allen L. "Social Desireability and Personality Test Construction." Personality Assessment. Boris Seggonoff, (Ed.). Penguin Books Inc., Baltimore, Md., l9 . . Statistical Methods for the Behavior Sciences. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1961. Guilford, J. P. An Inventory of Factors STDCR. Beverly Hills, Calif.: Sheridan Supply Co., 19A3. Heath, E. D. ”The Relationship Between Driving Records, Selected Personality Characterisitcs, and Biographical Data of Traffic Offenders." (Unpublished Doctor's Thesis, New York University, 1958). .Iacobson, Thomas J. "The Role of Counselors in Driver Education." Traffic Safety. Vol. V. No. 3, May, 1969. .Kenel, Francis Carl. "The Effectiveness of the Mann Inventory in Classifying Young Drivers into Behavioral Categories and its Relationship to Subsequent Driver Performance." (Unpublished Doctor's Thesis, Michigan State University, 1967). A6 A7 Malfetti, James L. "Need and Scope of Research in Safety Education." Presented at Workshop on Research in Safety Education, National Educational Association, Washington, D. C.: June 19, 1961. Mann, William A. "Let's Talk it Over,” Analogy. Charter Issue, Allstate Insurance Company, 19 . "Using Group Dynamics for Better Driver Education." Highway Traffic Safety Center, Michigan State University. (Mimeographed) 1968. McFarland, Ross A. and Moseley, Alfred L. Human Factors in Highway Transport Safety. Boston: Harvard School of Public Health, 195A. Michigan State Police. Michigan Traffic Accident Facts. East Lansing: The Department, 1969. Myrick, Richard; Schlesinger, Lawrence and Marx, Barbara. A Manual for Instructors Conducting Discussions on Driver Attitudes. The George Washington University, November, 1962. Ojemann, Ralph H. Tests and Evaluation Methods Used in Driver and Safety Education. Washington, D. C.: National Commission on Safety Education, 1959. Opfer, Art. '"Help from Home," Traffic Safety. Vol. 69, No. 1, Jan., 1969. Phenix, Phillip H. Education and the Common Good: A Moral Philosophy of the Curriculum. New York: Harper and Brothers, 1961. Rainey, Robert V. "Study of the Human Factor in Motor Vehicle Accidents." Second Annual Conference. American Driver and Safety Education Association. Boulder, Colorado. June 22-2A, 1958. ___ , Conger, John J. and Walsmith, Charles R. "Personality Characteristics as a Selective Factor in Driver Education." Highway Research Board, Bulletin 285, Washington, D. C.: 1961, pp. 23-28. Schaff, John G. "Personal Attitude Survey." Unpublished Master's dissertation, Michigan State University, 1957. [Schulzinger, Morris S. The Accident Syndrome. Springfield, 111.: Charles C. Thomas Publishers, 1956. EMemeonoff, Boris. (ed.) Personality Assessment. Penguin Books Inc., Baltimore, Md. 1966. A8 Thelen, Herbert Arnold. Education and the Human Quest. New York: Harper and Brothers, 1960. Tillman, William and Hobbs, G. E. "Accident—Prone Automobile Driver: A Study of Psychiatric and Social Background." American Journal of Psychiatry, 19A9. Tyler, Ralph W. Basic Principles of Curriculum and Instruc- tion. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1950. Uhlaner, J. E. and Drucker, A. J. "Selection Tests-—Dubious Aid in Driver Licensing." Presentation to the Annual Meeting of the Highway Research Board, Washington, D. C. Jan., 196A. Vernon, P. E. Personality Assessment. Methen, London: John Wiley, New York, 196A. APPENDIX “9 APPENDIX A THE MANN INVENTORY Name School Sex Counselor's Name The following statements reflect your attitude and feelings about yourself and your relations to others. There are no right or wrong answers. Circle the answer that reflects your feelings the best. A. always B. usually C. sometimes D. rarely E. never 1. I (like) (liked) to take part in organized extra—curric- ular activities in school. A B C D E 2. Young people are much better drivers than middle-aged people. A B C D E 3. Policemen are sincere in enforcing the laws. A B C D E A. My parents (are) (were) reasonable in their relations with me. A B C D E 5. My community is a happy place to live. A B C D E 6. I put off until tomorrow things I should do today. A B C D E 7. I like to daydream. A B C D E 8. I feel full of pep when I get behind the wheel. A B C D E 9. I (live) (lived) in a home that (is) (was) happy. A B C D E 10. If I see a police officer, I am more careful.A B C D E 11. Over-careful drivers cause more accidents than the socalled reckless ones. A B C D E 12. I enjoy being out late at night and sleeping mornings. A B C D E 50 fl A'7‘Mmuh 1.1.551 I.’ ' name-A. Li'mi) w‘. E 51 A. always B. usually C. sometimes D. rarely E. never 13. I get a feeling of real power when driving a car. A B C D E 1A. Courses in school (any grade level) are set up to meet the needs and interests of the student. A B C D E 15. I am concerned about the way my clothes look.A B C D E 16. Slow drivers should be kept off the highways.A B C D E 17. All new drivers should be required to take a course in driver education. A B C D E 18. Unsafe drivers should be deprived of the right to drive. A B C D E 19. Accidents don't just happen; they are caused.A B C D E 20. I like to get everything out of a car that it has in it. . I A B C D E 21. The chief work of most policemen should be traffic control. A B C D E 22. My parents (exert) (exerted) too much control over me. A B C D E 23. The people in my community want all traffic laws enforced. A B C D E 2A. I have been tempted to cheat on a test. A B C D E 25. I get impatient in heavy traffic. A B C D E 26. There are times when it seems like everyone is against me. A B C D E 27. Old, defective cars should be kept off the road. A B C D E 28. Drivers should be given more freedom in obeying traffic signs. A B C D E 29. People should rive when they are angry. A B C D E 30. Passing on hills and curves is exceedingly dangerous. A B C D E 31. It is necessary to stop at "stop" signs if no other cars are in Sight. A B C D E 52 A. always B. usually C. sometimes D. rarely E. never 32. I like to put extras on my car to attract attention. A B C D E 33. I am good at talking myself out of trouble. A B C D E 3A. Strong discipline in practice make a better team. A B C D E 35. I (am) (was) popular with most of the students in my class. A B C D E 36. Police officers are rougher on teen—agers than on adults. A B C D E 37. Teachers want to help students with their problems. A B C D E 38. My (father) (principal driver in family) gets traffic tickets for moving violations. A B C D E 39. I have as good table manners at home as when I eat out. A B C D E A0. I have been wrong in an argument but wouldn't admit it to my opponent. A B C D E A1. Society should have the right to question the way I drive. A B C D E A2. I like to razz a team when it is losing. A B C D E A3. I am proud of my reputation in the community.A B C D E AA. I am considered a friendly person. A B C D E A5. I like most of my work. A B C D E A6. Our family (spends) (spent) a great deal of time together. A B C D E 1V7. Attitudes toward driving are more important than ability to handle a car. A B C D E A8. I like to take chances when I'm driving. A B C D E A9. Traffic laws are set up to promote safety. A B C D E 50. Courtesy toward other drivers is important. A B C D E 51. I like a great deal of freedom. A B C D E ym—mew 2 4 . ' . _ 53 A. always B. usually C. sometimes D. rarely E. never 52. I don't mind being told what to do. A B C D E 53. My grades in school (are) (were) a good indication of my ability. A B C D E 5A. I become concerned about what other people think of me. A B C D E 55. I find that older people tend to be bossy. A B C D E 56. I feel somewhat nervous when I drive a car. A B C D E 57. I think courtesy towards others is a good reflection of a person's character. A B C D E 58. I get more fun out of driving a car than in any other activity. A B C D E 59. The police are only tryping to do the job for which they were hired. A B C D E p 60. My folks (insist) (insisted) that I spend most week day evenings at home. A B C D E 61. I am considered a relaible person. A B C D E 62. I like to help a person who is in trouble. A B C D E 63. I am more courteous than the average driver. A B C D E Write how you feel about the test. NIH-CHIGAN STATE [-TNIVICRSI'I‘Y 7 S I UC‘E NT NO. SEX M If 'A‘. T:— v> ‘JC ‘— -.._ C I:': C.:. .J .1 .L. ”T1 1*; ._ x..._ STUD E NT flNU M B E R -35.- L}- --?__ ___‘5__ "-7.- -_§-_ _--6__ --?_- ---5._ "Si- --_7._ __E'L- --§__ _--7-- -13-- "9-- _-§'-_ __'§_- v -_--_ 5 :::‘: 5 ::::: V _---.. (J {_D \ZJ‘I [X .L\ )3 4') C77 F\ZI f3 F‘Q 7‘ »" c: O " fl 9 _ U \.‘ C A CD I IS‘J I54 I ::::: I ::::: I ::::: I ::::: I::::: l :::-: I ::::: I ::::: i ::::: I ::::: I ::::: I ::::: I ::::: l ::::: I::;:: I 1 1 ..... J ..... 1 _-_.... .1- ..... 5 ::::: 5 :::': I 191‘ _________ _ 2‘ -9 ..... '_- --?._ --.3-_ ".4.- --2 ..... '-- _-?__ --.3-_ "‘3-- --Cl- ---'-_ --?__ ---3-_ __-_- "9 ..... '_- --?-_ --_3-- “-9- _-9-_ _-_'_ -_?-- --?__ vi- 5 1 222:: 2 ::::: 3 ::::: 4 ::::: 5 ::::: 4) (.0 (_n (_,n 0'7 r\) (D C!) (H l O) O) h