I“ Ib‘
”A
‘, Q N ‘n
a: r u
I. 1.
fl» . .
nJ :-
.n ‘

 

 

a‘pn~4v
- O t4- I

.3
J

.1

yak!
‘1.

V...

=U

.d n V. .fl I. g n

11¢ Av — c Q»
n». J a a

n V. Ni

Fit hi. at

,AH . t

. alt nfl‘

I i 5 §

 

ABSTRACT

A STUDY OF THE SOCIAL POSITION, REPUTATION
AND ADJUSTMENT OF THE MENTAL RETARDATE
IN AN INSTITUTIONALIZED
DELINQUENT POPULATION

by Paul John Spata, Jr.

The main purpose of the study was to investigate the
social status and adjustment of the institutionalized
delinquent who is also mentally retarded, in order to
determine the suitability of this milieu for his resociali—
zation. Other interests involved a systematic study of
the social valuing system of a delinquent pOpulation, and
an application of the theory of anomie to explain the
behavior of the delinquent retardate.

The study group consisted of 365 institutionalized
male delinquents, among whom 39 mental retardates, with
I.Q.'s ranging from 63 to 79, were identified.

A sociometric technique was employed to gather the
data, utilizing the Lewis Sociometric Scale. This scale
provides an object measure of reputation, locates the
individual within the social ordering of the group, and
offers a means of evaluating the individual on three key

personality variables--acceptability, aggressiveness, and

withdrawal.

. . . ‘ . . ‘ v . F. .r . .: re. u .. a. A . Q.» kw. AM». 4%
e e e a o a r C ...n a. .. .. A“ .2 a. n . N.
T .Q «Q C V. nu .. . .G .L... St ~ l C m a LC N a. «G.
e .Q e Q»
pr: r u a»
a.» 4 a k... S - o - .
«\U A v a» «i. a /~ «(J 1..
d J .. a .. k.
S» .n u t v
6 v .9.“ A v
.\V I U‘
AIV -&.t v- vi
«in a .-

 

 

.th
y.‘._

a“

Paul John Spata, Jr.

A research design was develOped which consisted of

two parts:

1.

A systematic pairing of the research variables of
intelligence, social position, and adjustment
factors in all possible combinations to test for
independence.

A combination of the personality variables into
reputation components in a facetized design to
determine the social valuing models for both
delinquents and the institutional staff. These
components were tested against the research

variables of intelligence and social position.

Seven major hypotheses were developed which were

tested indirectly by testing the two to three subhypotheses

of which each major hypothesis consisted. These major

hypotheses were:

1.

A positive relationship exists between intelli—
gence and social position.

There is a positive association tetween reciprocal
choice and similarity in intelligence.

There is an association between intelligence and
behavioral adjustment.

There is an association tetween social position
and adjustment mode whicn'varies with the adjust-

ment factor and the rater role.

Paul John Spata, Jr.

5. There is an association between social position
and reputation in the institution which is
differentially perceived in accordance with
rater role.

6. There is a positive association between reputation
and intelligence.

7. A positive association exists between low intelli-
gence and anomie in the delinquent social structure
of the institution.

The main postulation, that social position would vary
directly with intelligence, was formulated from the over-
whelming evidence in the literature. It was also a thesis
that the retardate would be seen as malaggressive by staff
but not by peers, and that he would be perceived as anomic
by both staff and peers. It was reasoned that the reputation
hierarchy established by those assigned high and low social
position by friendship choice, would determine the delinquent
and staff valuing systems. These two systems were predicted
to differ mainly in the high value postulated to be placed
on malaggression by delinquents.

Tests of the hypotheses were accomplished by means of
two statistics, the chi square and the phi coefficient.

These nonparametric tests were employed because the nature
of the group could not meet the assumption of a normally

distributed pOpulation.

Paul John Spata, Jr.

The major findings may be summarized as follows:

1.

Social position is independent of intelligence

in an institutionalized delinquent population.
The personality characteristics of acceptability
and withdrawal are independent of intelligence,
but malaggression is inversely associated with
intelligence.

Social acceptability is directly associated with
social position as measured by both types of
rater. Withdrawal is inversely associated with
social position as measured by peers and directly
associated with it as measured by staff. Social
position appears to be uninfluenced by aggression
in either staff or peer ratings.

While both retardates and nonretardates tend to
reciprocate in friendship choices to a greater
degree within their own respective intelligence
groups, they do not appear to do so to a signifi-
cant degree.

There is a direct and highly significant associa-
tion between social position and reputation.
Staff and delinquents value reputations differen-
tially and the predict;d hierarchies of reputations

were found tenable.

Paul John Spata, Jr.

Reputation is independent of intelligence.

Retarded delinquents are no more anomic, alienated,
isolated or rejected than their intellectually

more well endowed compeers; but delinquents as a
group tend to perceive their members as more

anomic than eunomic.

“L:
\ v
n4 P
.. i .1
Fwd
Z»

A STUDY OF THE SOCIAL POSITION, REPUTATION
AND ADJUSTMENT OF THE MENTAL RETARDATE
IN AN INSTITUTIONALIZED

DELINQUENT POPULATION

By

Paul John Spata, Jr.

A THESIS

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

DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY

Department of Elementary and Special Education

1965

PREFACE

”It is not to die, or even to die of
hunger, that makes a man wretched; many
men have died;. . . .But it is to live
miserable we know not why;. . . .to be
heart worn, weary, yet isolated, unre-

lated."

.Thomas Carlyle

Past and Present (in
book III The Modern
Worker, Chapter XIII
Democracy. New York:
Harper Bros., 18A3).

ii

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The investigator would like to express his apprecia—
tion to his project director, Dr. John E. Jordan, and to
the other members of his committee, Drs. G. Marian Kinget,
Fred Vescolani and W. Vernon Hicks for their helpfulness
and support in aiding this study through to completion.
Acknowledgment is also made to Dr. James Crowner for
helping to initiate the project.

For stimulating and encouraging the original ideas,
and for collaborating on the initial phases of the study,
the researcher is greatly indebted to Dr. Bobbie Palk.

More than any other individual, the investigator
owes deepest gratitude to his colleague, Mr. John Felty,
for providing crucial breakthroughs in theory, design, and
data treatment methodology, and without whose consultation
this study might never have been completed.

Appreciation is also eXpressed to Dr. Willard G.
Warrington for statistical advice and to Mr. John Johnson
for his assistance in the final stages.

The patience of Mrs. Lura Pearl Carr, who undertook
the typing of the manuscript, and her willingness to endure
the long hours and frustrations of numerous rewrites were

also much appreciated.

iii

The investigator will not attempt to describe semanti—
cally, that which can only be expressed affectively, con-
cerning his feelings for the support given him by his many
friends and family. Far beyond the computational and proof
reading tasks undertaken by his wife, Elizabeth, the
decision to embark on doctoral studies would never have
been made without her encouragement, nor could have been
feasible without her willingness to assume, by herself,
almost the entire parental responsibility for a large
family. In this regard, fond appreciation is also extended
to the researcher's children, who managed so well during
this almost fatherless period, especially to daughter
Patricia, whose voluntary assumption of the many and
varied household tasks made it possible for her mother to
return: to teaching to provide the necessary financial
support.

Finally,the contribution of his sister Antoinette, to
improve the family habitability arrangements, did much to
relieve the concerns of the investigator during this period

and free him to pursue his studies.

iv

PREFACE
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

LIST OF TABLES.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS . . . . . . . . . .
LIST OF APPENDICES . . . . . . . . .
Chapter

I. THE PROBLEM.

II.

Purposes of the Study

Background

Importance of the Study.

Summary . . . . . . . . .
Definitions of Terms. . . . . . . .

Limitations of the Study
REVIEW OF RELATED RESEARCH.
Orientation of the Review

General Findings in Social Adjustment
Specific Findings in Social Adjustment.

Research Related to Intelligence in
Social Position and Adjustment .

Summary of Research on Intelligence. .

Research Related to Personality Char—
acteristics in Social Position and
Adjustment . .

Summary of Research on Personality in
Social Position and Adjustment . .

Research Related to Social Setting and
Adjustment

Summary of Research on Social Setting
and Adjustment.

Research Related to Staff Perceptions
and Attitudes in Leadership

Page
ii

iii
ix

xii

xiii

15
l9
19
26
28
32
33

Page

Summary of Research on Staff Atti—

tudes and Perceptions in

Leadership . . . 38
Summary of the Literature on Intelli—

gence and Personality in Social

Position and Adjustment. . . 39
Questions Not Answered by the Research

on Social Adjustment. . . . . 41
Research and Discussion Related to the

Retardate as a Social Deviant. . . A2

Research and Discussion Related to the
Delinquent as a Social Deviant . . 48
Research and Discussion Related to the
Theoretical Foundation and Develop-
ment of the Study. . . . 50
Anomie and Its Relevance as a Theore—
tical Foundation for This Study . . 52
Summary of Theory <1f Anomie as Related

to This Study . . 58
Theory Utilization in Hypotheses Devel-
Opment . . 59
Summary of Relationship Between Theory
and Hypotheses. . . . . . . 62
Summary of Related Research . . . . 64
III. METHODOLOGY AND DESIGN . . . . . . . . 65
Introduction . . . . . . . . 65
Hypotheses to be Tested. . . . . . . 65
The Research Setting. . . . . . . . 70
The POpulation. . . . . . . . . . 71
General Procedures . . . . . . . . 71
Instrumentation . . . . . . . . . 72
Design of the Study . . . . . . . . 7A
Rationale for the Design . . . . . 7A
Study Design . . . . . . . . . 76
Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . 81
IV. ANALYSIS OF THE DATA. . . . . . . . . 82
Introduction . . . . . . . . . ‘82
Statistical Rationale . . . . . 82
Statistics Employed and Procedures
Utilized. . . . . . . . . . 83
Subjects. . . . . . . . . . 85
Format of the Analysis . . . . . . . 87

vi

V.

VI.

Intelligence and Social Position.
Results of Testing Hypothesis (1)
Intelligence and Reciprocal Choice
Results of Testing Hypothesis (2)
Intelligence and Behavioral Adjustment.
Results of Testing Hypothesis (3)
Social Position and Adjustment Mode.
Results of Testing Hypothesis (4)
Social Position and Reputation
Results of Testing Hypothesis (5)
Reputation and Intelligence
Results of Testing Hypothesis (6)
Intelligence and Anomie.
Results of Testing Hypothesis (7)
Summary of the Analysis.
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS.

Summary of the Study.
Conclusions. .

Intelligence and Social Position.
Intelligence and Reciprocal Choice

Intelligence and Behavioral Adjustment.

Adjustment and Social Position
Reputation and Social Position
Reputation and Intelligence
Intelligence and Anomie.

General Study Conclusions
IMPLICATIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS. . .

Implications of the study
Recommendations .

vii

Page

88
93
93

97
102
102
107
107
113
113
115
116
117
118
120

120
121

121
122
122
123
12“
125
125

l26
127

127
135

Problems for Further Study
Summary of the Investigation

BIBLIOGRAPHY.

APPENDICES

viii

Page

137
1140

IA“
158

Table
l.

10.

ll.

12.

LIST OF TABLES
Page
A typology of modes of individual adaptation . 55

Retardate variables of possible influence on
Social position, reputation and adjust—
ment . . . . . . . . . . . . . 86

Analysis of social position as measured by
peers in relation to intelligence . . . 89

Analysis of social position as measured by
peers in relation to level of retardation. 90

Analysis of social position as measured by
peers in relation to intelligence and
equated for reputation . . . . . . . 91

Percentages of potential reciprocal social
choices made between and within intelli-
gence groups . . . . . . . . . . 94

Analysis of total reciprocal social choices
by cottage as measured by peers in rela-
tion to intelligence. . . . . . . . 95

Analysis of the facet of aggression as
measured by staff in relation to intelli—
gence. . . . . . . . . . . . . 98

Analysis of the facet of aggression as
measured by peers in relation to intelli-
gence. . . . . . . . . . . . . 99

Analysis of the facet of withdrawal as
measured by peers in relation to intelli—
gence. . . . . . . . . . . . . 100

Analysis of the facet of withdrawal as
measured by staff in relation to intelli—
gence. . . . . . . . . . . . . 100

Analysis of the facet of acceptance as
measured by peers in relation to intelli-
gence. . . . . . . . . . . . . 101

ix

Table

13.

IA.

15.

16.

17.

18.

19.

20.

21.

22.

23.

2A.

25.

Analysis of the
measured by
gence.

Analysis of the
measured by
position.

Analysis of the
measured by
position.

Analysis of the
measured by
position.

Analysis of the
measured by
position.

Analysis of the
measured by
position.

Analysis of the
measured by
position.

facet
staff

facet
peers

facet
staff

facet
peers

facet
staff

facet
peers

facet
staff

of
in

of
in

of

in

of
in

of
in

of

in

of
in

acceptance as
relation to intelli—

acceptance as
relation to social

acceptance as
relation to social

aggression as
relation to social

aggression as
relation to social

withdrawal as
relation to social

withdrawal as
relation to social

Analysis of reputation as measured by staff
in relation to social position

Analysis of reputation as measured by staff
in relation to the entire range of social

position.

Analysis of reputation as measured by peers
in relation to social position

Relationship of reputation to social position
throughout the ranges as measured by

peers.

Analysis of reputation as measured by peers
in relation to the entire range of social

position.

Analysis of reputation as measured by staff
in relation to intelligence

Page

102

10A

10A

105

105

106

106

109

110

111

112

112

114

Table
26.

27.

28.

29.

30.

31.

32.

Analysis of reputation as measured by peers
in relation to intelligence . .

Analysis of the highest and lowest reputation
categories as measured by peers in rela—
tion to intelligence. . . . . .

Analysis of the highest and lowest reputation
categories as measured by staff in rela—
tion to intelligence.

Analysis of anomie as measured by peers in
relation to intelligence . . . . .

Analysis of anomie by highest and lowest repu-
tations and social position quartiles as
measured by peers in relation to intelli-
gence. . . .

Total possible reciprocal social choices by
cottage

Reputation and social position by IQ category
as measured by peers. . . . .

xi

Page

114

115

116

117

118

169

170

" i

Figure

LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS

Variables of Reputation Components.

Hypothesized Relation of Social Position to
Reputation in a Normal POpulation.

Hypothesized Relation of Social Position to
Reputation in a Delinquent Population as
Ranked by Delinquents. . . . . .

Hypothesized Relation of Social Position to
Reputation in a Delinquent Population as
Ranked by Staff and Peers

Comparison of Hypothesized and Observed

Orderings of Reputations in a Delinquent
POpulation . . . . . . . .

xii

Page
77

78

79

80

171

CHAPTER I
THE PROBLEM

Purposes of the Study
The purposes of this study are: (1) to ascertain the
social position of the educable mental retardate in an
institution serving male delinquents; (2) to determine the
nature of his behavioral adaptation; (3) to study the social
valuing system of the delinquent pOpulation of the institu—
tion.
The motivations for this investigation are threefold:
1. To determine whether an institution for delinquents
is an appropriate rehabilitative setting for a youth
who is also retarded.
2. To obtain knowledge of the adjustment and sociometric
Status of the mentally retarded delinquent to assist
in individualizing treatment prescriptions for future
wards with this particular combination of dysfunctions.
3. To determine what implications exist in these approaches
for the educational and rehabilitative programming for

all institutionalized delinquents.

Egpkground
The treatment of delinquency, even under conditions
of high rehabilitative potential, Optimal facilities and

1

competent staff is still a complex task in social engineering,
involving the reorientation of norms and values to conform

to society's eXpectations of its members. But when additional
handicaps, such as mental retardation, are presented, the
problem is considerably more complicated.

Most, if not all, state institutions for delinquents
are faced with this problem of mentally retarded inmates.
Delinquents are usually committed to these institutions on
the assumption that, although socially damaged, they are
physically and mentally capable of profiting from the train-
ing school experience. For institutions serving the
mentally deficient, as well as those housing delinquents,
the law is generally written to provide for the nonacceptance
of those who cannot qualify on the basis of criteria estab-
lished for this purpose. But because of the various and
well documented limitations of psychometry, the whole
problem of discrepancies between intellectual measurements
and functioning levels, and the shortcomings of our judicial
System, public institutions find themselves with substantial
numbers of charges ill equipped for the milieu in which
their rehabilitation is supposedly to take place (Westwell,
1951). The result is a significantprpulation in our
institutions representing a "grey area" of responsibility
between the state governmental agency responsible for mental

health and the agency responsible for social welfare.

L4

Both types of training schools are currently faced
with the situation of c0ping with the special problems
which the retarded—delinquent youth presents, apparently
because no clear guide lines exist for courts to assist
them in making a determination of institution suitability,
or at least discriminating between mental and social
deviancy as to the primary problem in each individual
case. Knowledge of the nature of the retardate's adjust—
ment in a training school for delinquents could help
determine the advisability of his placement in this rehab—
ilitative environment. An analysis of this adaptation
in terms of social structure, hierarchy, and relationships
could materially assist in both resolving the placement
dilemma and providing clues to future approaches in this
youth's socialization and education. Concomitantly, much
could be learned about the informal organization and social
Structure of a delinquent society which could be of value
in improving programs for institutionalized delinquents.
It is to these ends that the present study will attempt

to make a contribution.

Importance of the Study

Although the mere fact that the delinquentvretardate
exists could be considered sufficient justification for
this investigation, more pragmatic evidence can be presented

on several bases:

l. The changing roles and functions of state institutions
and the social implications of institutional place-
ment have been recently identified as areas in which
research has been lacking (Gardner & Nisonger, 1962).
This is easily confirmed by a comparison of the number
of studies involving the placement and adjustment of
mentally retarded children in regular and special
classes in the public school with those studies
involving institutional placement. In a careful
review of the literature published since 1950, a
total of 29 studies were found which were done with
public school retardates while in the same period
only three investigations of retardate adjustment in
institutions, and about as many studies of institu—
tionalized delinquents in this regard,1 were uncovered.

2. The impact of automation has made it more important
than ever that we consider ways in which to increase
our understanding of the delinquent-retardate in
order to help him to a better community and economic
adjustment. Aside from the fact that this boy's
present involvement in crime and delinquency is a
considerably drain on public funds,thepprob1em is no—
where near the magnitude it portends to become in the

future. The simple fact is that the social problems

 

1These studies are cited and discussed in the Review
of Related Research, Chapter II.

of the delinquent—retardate in the community affect
him economically and, when he cannot support himself,
he and his progeny will become dependent upon public
support, either through welfare or incarceration.
Rogers (l963) calls this the "social price" we pay
for automation and points out that it is the lower
level job—-the one most likely to be filled by a
retardate—-which is most vulnerable to elimination

by a machine, while at the same time his intellectual
limitations prevent this person from competing for
the new technological positions which automation
creates.

While some studies (Baller, 1936; Bobroff, 1956;
Charles, 1953; Dinger, 1961; Kennedy, 1948; Porter
and Milazzo, 1958) show that the retardates adjust
quite well in the community, several (Channing,

1932; Collman and Newlyn, 1956; O'Connor, 1954;
Peckham, 1951) suggest that they do not and that the
main reason for failure of retardates to successfully
adjust on the job is not low intelligence, but rather
social dysfunctioning—-antisocial conduct, social
instability, temperament, and lack of social sophisti—
cation. Added to this is the emphasis of other
researchers (Bolduc, 1959; Dexter, 1958; Foale, 1956)
on the social restrictions and demands placed on the

retardate in our culture, which are so unrealistic

that he is unable to c0pe with them, and which pre—
dispose him to——if not actually predetermine-«his
social deviancy. Indeed, Merton (1957) suggests,

and Dexter and Erikson (in Becker, 1964) concur,

that all deviants find themselves alienated as a result
of society's circularity in reasoning, leading to a
"self-fulfilling prophecy" which first creates the
"facts" concerning the deviancy, and later uses these
facts to confirm its imposition of negative sanctions
against these individuals (Erikson, 196A, p. 17).
Studies of the nature of the retardate's adjustment,
and of the relationship between this adjustment and
his social position, are important to effective
treatment planning toward his eventual release.

A. In comparison to other times and other cultures, the
unique position of today's youth as an alienate is of
particular concern to our consideration of the retardate.
Kvaraceus (l963), echoing some of his earlier remarks
(1959) states: "[All] youth's importance and function
have diminished to the point where youth now represents,
in many parts of the world, a surplus commodity on a

glutted market." (p. 87).
If this is the position of the typical youth, what

must the situation be for those who cannot run as fast
as the rest in the race for social, economic and even

psychological survival? If today's normal youth is

"stigmatized, infantilized, down graded, disengaged
.shut out. . . .disenfranchized. . . .[and]
shunted. . . .from the mainstream of social, civic,
and economic life—activity of family and community,"
(p. 87) how much more so must the youth, beset by
behavioral and cognitively handicapping conditions,
also suffer status deprivation? If the modern
juvenile is "shelved for deferred purposes" (p. 87)
and denied even apprenticeship for eventual adulthood,
how intolerable must be the existence of the youngster
who is not even allowed to mutually share in the aim—
lessness and misery of his peer group, banished even
from the street corner society, faceless even in his
own neighborhood? This study will attempt to deter-
mine to what degree the above description of estrange—
ment is representative of the social position among
his peers of the delinquent who is also retarded.
The importance of an investigation of this social
position is specifically pointed out by several writers
(Charles, 1953; Johnson, 1950; Palk, 1962) all of whom
agree that there is far too much Opinion and not
enough scientific investigation in what little has
been written on the subject of the retarded child in
society. Becker (1963), makes the same claim for
deviant behavior in general, and according to Bowman
(1957), the mentally defective delinquent is the one

who has been ignored most of all by research.

6. Finally, the multidisciplined approach to delinquency
treatment has suffered for lack of an organizing and
coordinating theory by which the behavior of groups,
as well as individuals, can be better understood and
treated. The application of a theory in this investi—
gation to explain and confirm the nature of a delinquent
social structure can be of considerable usefulness to

the field.

Summary
It appears clear then, that on both theoretical and

pragmatic grounds, this investigation has relevance and
importance to the general fields of delinquency and mental
retardation, and to those whose particular concern is

institutional treatment programs.

Definitions of Terms

deustment This term refers to the characteristic

ode. behavior of the individual, his personality
"signature," or to the general direction
of his actualizing activities. It will be
categorized in a manner similar to Karen
Horney's paradigm: accepted behavior
(moving toward); maladjusted, aggressive
behavior (moving against); and withdrawing

behavior (moving away). The term "adaptive

mode" will refer to these same categories.

Anomie:

Delinquent:

"Aggressive" behavior will be synonomous

with "malaggressive" or "acting out" behavior.
"Withdrawing" behavior will be variously
referred to as "self—estranging" or "self—
isolating." Assignment to a category will

be determined by the relative frequency with
which individuals are selected for these
categories by the responses to the questions
in the instrument.

While originally in the Greek it referred to
a state of lawlessness, this term will
include the concepts of "alienation: and
"maladjustment," and will be measured by a
combination of both the individual's social
position and his reputation component. It

is a sociological construct that attempts

to describe the degree to which an individual
is outeofvstep with his society. In this
study an anomic individual will define one
whose social functioning is not effective.
This concept is discussed more fully in the
section devoted to theory deveIOpment and
discussion.

An individual between the ages of 12 and

17, so adjudicated by the court, and committed

to an institution whose main purpose it is to

Delinquent-
Retardate:

Eunomie:

Mental
Retardate:

10

treat norm-violating behavior. This includes
the whole study pOpulation, hereafter called
"ward," "inmate," "client," etc.

An individual who meets the criteria listed
in both the retardate and delinquent defin-
itions. This individual is a member Of the
subset of retardates in the delinquent set
which will be hereafter identified by the
terms "research group," "retardates,"
defectives," "mentally deficient pOpulation"
and similar terms.

A sociological construct which attempts to
describe the degree to which an individual
(or group) is in tune with the society in
which he (or it) functions. It is the
Opposite of anomie and represents a stable,
homeostatic adjustment to a formerly anomic
situation.

An individual who scores between 60—79 on

an individually administered intelligence
test (Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Chil—
dren, Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale, or
Wechsler—Bellevue I and II) such that the
difference between the verbal and performance
scores does not exceed 20 points and neither

scale scores exceeds the upper confidence

Reputation:

Social

Interaction:

Social
Isolate:

11

bound of 89.1 Those retardates who score
above IQ 7A will be referred to as "high
retardates" and those who score at IQ 7“
below will be known as "low retardates."

This is only for the purpose Of extracting

an upper and a lower group and not to define
behavioral level.

The social assets and liabilities of an
individual constituting a behavioral descrip—
tion. In this study, reputation will be
defined in terms of the degrees to which

one is perceived as acceptable, malaggressive
and withdrawn.

A relation between persons such that "the
behavior Of either one is stimulus to the
behavior Of the other." (English and English,
1958, p. 270). In this study the term "inter—
personal relationships" will be used inter—
changeably with "social interaction."

An individual whose relative frequency Of
choice as friend is low in comparison to
others. It will not necessarily define

one whose adjustment mode is "withdrawing"

unless he also has low social choice scores.

 

1See Appendix A, NO. 1.

12

Social This term will be variously called "social

Position:
status," social choice position," and "sociov
metric position" and will refer to the
individual's popularity as measured by the
relative frequency of choice as "friend" on
the sociometric instrument.

Sociometry: The term will be defined according to
Bronfenbrenner (19A5, p. 364) as "a method
for discovering, describing, and evaluating
social status, structure, and deveIOpment
through measurement of the extent of accep-

tance or Of rejection between individuals

and groups."

Limitations of the Study

 

This research was conducted at one institution and
involved not only all the residents but, at the time, the
entire population of mental retardates then assigned to
a state institution for male delinquents in Michigan. In
this sense, our experimental group represents a universe
bUt, because Of such variables as criteria for commitment,
(which may be subject to considerable variance among the
States) no attempt will be made to generalize to other
States and training schools from the data gathered in this
study.

Also, the experimental group contained so few subjects

in the low end Of the retardation range that sharp categorical

l3

distinctions between intelligence groups were not possible
and intelligence effects tended to be blurred.

Furthermore, because Of the difficulty in measuring
parameters in this type of research it was decided to
deal conservatively with the analysis by means of non—
parametic techniques and avoid an elaborate defense, based
at best on a weak foundation of assumptions, for the use
of more sophisticated analytic statistical techniques.
As a result, the findings, no matter how favorable, have
definite inferential limitations, while at the same time
eliciting greater confidence than those obtained by more
advanced techniques whose assumptions would be questionable

and whose results would therefore be suspect.

CHAPTER II

REVIEW OF RELATED RESEARCH

Orientation of the Review

 

A systematic investigation of the literature un—
covered some findings, both general and specific, of
importance to this study. The review was made from several
orientations assumed to be relevant to the research;
namely, intelligence, personality, social setting, leader-

ship, social deviancy, and the concept of anomie.

General Findings in Social Adjustment

 

The vast majority of studies of the social position
of the retardate in an educational milieu are concerned,
With his adjustment in the public schools rather than in
institutions. None was found which dealt specifically
With the efficacy of institutions serving delinquents as
compared with those for retardates for the type youth in
Which this study is interested. In all, only three were
discovered, in a search going back thirty years, which
involved institutions at all, in each case the comparison
being with public schools (Capobianco and Cole, 1960;
Channing, 1932; Reynolds and Stunkard, 1960). In fact,
it is difficult to find any literature with the retarded
dEILHquent as a special concern in a controlled experiment,

IA

15

the closest being four which focused on the defective
delinquent (Bowman, 1957; Foale, 1956; Weber, 1953; Westwell,
1951) as the subject of speculation and judgment.

The research on retardate social position and adjust-
ment has, for the most part, been done in the area of later
community adjustment, rather than in the institution, and
almost no attempt has been made to predict the former from
a measurement of the latter.

In summary, it would appear that the retarded delin—
quent, as a specific research concern, has been conspicuously
overlooked by behavioral and social scientists (Bowman,
1957), and that the available research must be utilized more

inferentially in deveIOping hypotheses for this study.

Specific Findings in Social Adjustment

Research Related to Intelligence in Social Position
and Adjustment.--In the early part of this century, even
reputable and highly esteemed investigators such as Fernald,
Goddard, Lombroso, and Tredgold concluded that mental
retardation was a prime causal factor in crime and delin-
quence (Wallin, 1955)° Today we know that, while social
ills have a multicausal source, mental deficiency, in and
0f itself, contributes very little to the problem1 (Tizard
and O'Connor, 1956).

‘1

1See Appendix A, No. 2.

16

Intelligence, nevertheless, is an important factor in
social and occupational adjustment (and in self—discipline
and control) which cannot be ignored in the assessment of
variables which bear on malbehavior of any kind.

Some early studies, which investigated the factors in
the social positions of normal children, found Mental Age
to be the controlling variable (Almack, 1922; Furfey, 1927;
Hsia, 1928). A tendency toward intragroup reciprocity of
choice was evidenced in Almack's study while Hsia found
Intelligence Quotient and reading ability also to be corre—
lated with social position. In a recent study, however,
Capobianco and Cole (1960), found that Ma seems to be a little
significance in the choice influencing social behavior of
mental retardates, IQ proving to be far superior as a prognos—
ticator of play behavior in their experiment. The results
Of this latter study appear puzzling, not only because it
runs counter to earlier studies of the influence of MA but
because of the Opposing directionalities of effect between
two such closely related variables as MA and IQ. Capobianco
and Cole's study, however, is typical of many recent
investigations which tend to confirm a positive relationship
between IQ and social choice and position (Baldwin, 1958;
Barbe, 1954; Brown, 1954; Grace and Booth, 1958; Grann, 1956;
Grossman and Wrighter, 1948; Hays, 1951; Jennings, 1950;
Johnson, 1950, 1961, 1962; Johnson and Kirk, 1950; Jordan, A.,

1959, 1960; Thurstone, 1959; Turner, 1958). Grace and Booth

17

found pOpularity and degree of giftedness to be positively
correlated. Barbe included nonretardates in his study and
found IQ significantly related to their acceptance and
choice.

Johnson, a most active investigator in this area,
has done several studies of regular and special classes
which establish IQ as a variable closely associated with
social position. In a very carefully controlled study (1950),
he found that the peer acceptance of the retardates was
lower than for intellectually normal children, that the
degree Of social isolation varied inversely with IQ, and
that the degree of active rejection varied directly with
IQ. His review of the literature also suggests that a
correlation appears to exist between the intelligence of
mutual friends.l Johnson concluded that the social expecta-
tions for mentally retarded children in the regular grades
are beyond their abilities and that under this "discrimina—
tive strain, [their] integration is broken down resulting
in the various forms of bizarre and disintegrated activities

and behaviorisms" (p. 87).2

fi

1But not, however, for unreciprocated pairs (p) 63).

2For a more detailed description and explanation of
this deviant behavior, and the social forces which precipi—
tate it, see H. S. Becker, Outsiders. Studies in the SociO«
lesv_or Deviance (Glencoe, 111.: The Free Press, 1963),
179 pp., Robert Merton, Social Theory and Social Structure
(Glencoe, 111.: The Free Press [2nd ed. Rev.I, 1957), 645 pp.;
and H. S. Becker, ed., The Other Side: Perspectives on
Qifluylge (New York: The Free Press of Glencoe, 1964), 297 pp°

q

u-q

 

nY‘

61‘s 6‘
1

n .“‘

91d:

.. 1;.I‘I3'EB .

ya “

DO 11

.a . a4:

vnuu c...
h v

9
‘fl:
Iodv
v-
I.
.

Q 4.;

v\ V"‘
re“

”H"!
-nmlul

.t

V
p
§v00

.3
m .
~.~.

~15

.‘v

f4 . 1 e .
1".-1’J ,

I.

Yr hid
“ a..-.'

R'- ‘
iflp‘
‘uv

r2

H

\

G
on»

‘1
\‘v

8.7.8.

. 5
c v

w.
.fi‘
‘6

ance ‘f‘:

:ff‘ane
"UU

18

Turner Obtained significant t-ratios for the differences
Of the means Of intelligence and social quotient between
the high and low social status mentally retarded groups in
Special classes. One third of Turner's research subjects,
however, were later found to have intelligence beyond the
maximum permissible for special placement (p. 81), which
would tend to invalidate the findings Of this study.
Grossman and Wrighter established SOClal position along a
Selection—rejection continuum and found the more intelligent
Obtained the higher scores. These high status children
(sixth grade nonretarded pupils) also had better reading
ability, enjoyed higher socio—economic status and, signifi—
cantly, manifested a better personality adjustment than
the low status children.

Sutherland gt_al; (1954), concluded from a socio—
metric analysis Of institutionalized defectives that social
acceptance was significantly related to IQ but not to CA,
length of residence, or attitude toward the institution.
Hays (1951) studied a group of institutionalized mentally
deficient fourteen-year—Old girls and found social choice
to be significantly correlated with both MA and IQ, while
Jennings (1950), also working with adolescent girls at the
New York State Training School, determined that neither
MA nor IQ accounts for choice status, the important factor

being how personality characteristics interact collectively

(p. 142).

19

Weber (1953), in a plea for maintaining perspective,
warns that the IQ as the sole criterion for social defi—
ciency is inadequate because the fact remains that some
peOple with IQ's around 70 function competently in social
situations.

Summary of the Research on Intelligence in
Social Position and Adjustment

 

 

With the few exceptions noted above, the main body of
research appears to be in close agreement that:

1. There is a positive relationship between intelligence
and social position.

2. Reciprocity in social choice appears to be related
to intelligence.

There is less agreement, however, concerning the
relative contributions of MA and IQ to this status. That
more studies show IQ to be related to social position may
be merely an artifact of the greater number of studies
done with this variable.

Bgsearch Related to Personality Characteristics
1n_Socia1 Position and Adjustment.

 

 

The results Of investigations into the personality
Components which affect social choice with retardates are
generally congruent with the studies of more typical chil—
dren. Looking first at the latter, Bonney (1943), Dahlke
(1953), Dunnington (1957), Grossman and Wrighter (1948),
and Loughlin (1954), all substantiate the importance of
Personality characteristics in the peer status of children

in the regular grades.

20

Bonney found that strong, positive, personality traits
were more influential than negative virtues (moral and
religious) in the determination of popularity of fourth
graders. Dahlke confirmed the primacy Of sex status in the
elementary school child's evaluative system and substantiated
prior studies which show personality adjustment to be more
important than socioeconomic class irlsocial choice.

Dunnington, studying pre—school children, determined
that low status children were maladaptively more aggressive
than high status children while the latter rated higher on
the more nOrmal, positive-type aggression. Similarly,
Grossman and Wrighter established that there was less
personality deviancy among the highest scorers in a selection“
rejection test than among the lowest scorers, and that these
selectees were also more intelligent and came from economi—
cally more privileged homes. Loughlin adds further support
to the importance of personality, concluding that among the
variables Of class membership, mental ability, academic
achievement, and personality characteristics, the latter
Was the most significantly related to peer status.

Alexander and Alexander (1952), however, arrived at
a counter conclusion in their study of fourth grade children.
USng the Thematic Apperception Test to determine the
personality characteristics of those enjoying the greatest
Pepularity, their findings indicate that choice is not made

on thebasis of desirable characteristics but as an outlet

21

for the aggressive and directive needs of the choosers.
This interesting conclusion suggests that childrens' choices
may be suspect as a criterion on which to base adjustment
evaluations, an inference which Gronlund (1959) refutes.

As previously reported in the research on the
intelligence variable, above, Jennings (1950) found that
it was the interactions of personality characteristics
among institutionalized adolescent girls, rather than the
individual characteristics separately, which determined

1

choice status, while CA and IQ contributed little. Another

finding, significant toifluapresent study, was that length
of residence had little effect on the social position accorded
an individual in this environment.

Turning now to the intellectually subnormal, Johnson
(1950), Jordan, A. (1959), Miller (1956), and Moreno (1952),
in addition to many others, concluded from their studies
that mental retardates are not well adjusted among their
more intellectually well endowed peers. Several writers have
tried to shed some light on the possible reasons for this

maladjustment of retardates in studies done under varying

k

1A possible explanation for Jennings' counter finding con-

cerning the influence of IQ on popularity, may lie in the
setting in which the experiment was conducted. Institution-
alized delinquents, especially adolescent girls, may well

Order intelligence to the lower end of a priority list Of
Criteria for popularity, valuing a whole complex Of inter-
related personality characteristics much higher, due to the

more intimate contact and closer confines attendant to in-
stitutional living, and to the inherently more complicated
nature Of their personality makeups as compared with boys.

22

conditions; in the regular grades, in institutions, out in
the community, with children, and with adults. Most
researchers have obtained results which indicate that the
educable retardate is rejected and isolated, neither because
Of tendencies to actively withdraw, nor because Of
passivity in social interactions, but because Of socially
unacceptable behavior. The retardates in the upper IQ
group in Johnson's (1950) study demonstrated more social
interaction than those in the lower IQ group, but Of an
aggressive and maladaptive nature. Teasing, fighting,
roughness, and meanness were at the top Of a list of

reasons for rejection Of these children (p. 80), and

Johnson saw the sources of their unacceptability as
inability to conform to group standards, fighting, showing—
off, anc cheating. It should be kept in mind, however, that
this was a typical public school situation, involving chil-
dren who generally conformed to the social norms and
internalized the social goals which prevailed in the
community. That aggressive behavior will not always be
rejected has been shown by POpe (1953) who found this charac-
teristic valued among low socioeconomic groups. Boys in

his study who successfully demonstrated aggression were
rewarded with pOpularity. This has been partially confirmed
by Trent (1957) and, as we shall see later in the section

On theoretical considerations, supported by theories of
lower class behavior in the writings of Becker, Cloward,

Merton, Riesman, and Trippe.

'— .

While
date to make
unidimensic
wcr‘. within

sccial rath

 

While studies show various factors causing the retar-
date to make a good community adjustment, there is near
unidimensionality found in the reasons for failure. In
work.within their cognitive capacity, retardates fail for
social rather than intellectual reasons. Baller (1936)
found considerably more trouble with the law among retar—
dates, although considering the economic period, they did
well in holding jobs. Charles (1953) did a follow-up
study on the same group and found an even better employment
percentage than did Baller,l but still twice as great a
rate Of involvement with the police as did the rest of the
population. Peterson and Smith (1960) are in agreement
with the finding Of retardate proneness for conflicts with
the law. Cassidy and Phelps (1955) list temperamental
instability and low frustration tolerance among the reasonS‘
for job failures among retardates, and the results of
numerous other studies of community adjustment of retar—
dates are essentially congruent with these findings in
regard to the personality variables involved (Collmann and
Newlyn, 1956; Kolstoe, 1961; O'Connor, 1954; Peckham, 1951;
Phelps, 1956; and Reynolds and Stunkard, 1960).

Tizard and O'Connor (1956) prOpose that no more mentally
retarded are criminals than would be expected in this environ-

ment, The inference here is that studies which compare

 

 

lAlthough perhaps not as great a differential as
aPparent if one were to equate this factor for the economic
VaPiation between the two periods involved in the studies.

24

retarded with intellectual normals from the population-at-
large on social adjustment, are biased against the retarded
because the retardate population comes mainly from the
lowest socioeconomic class, which has a higher rate of
conflict with the law to begin with. Thus, only studies
of community adjustment which control for the important
variable of social class could be considered valid.
Bobroff (1956) and Dinger (1961) showed fine work adjust—
ments by retardates but neither investigated community
adjustment exclusive of the job.

Some researchers have focused on the personality
needs and deficiencies of the retardate. Cromwell (1961)
points out that repetitive failures may result in reduced
motivation and responsiveness and an increase in avoidance
behavior. This study supports Bijou's (1952) conclusion
that the retarded child has learned the futility of even
working up to capacity. This thwarted Opportunity for
eXpression is emphasized by Walker (1950) while others
(Davis, 1951; D011, 1952; Itoga and Tanaka, 1956) stress
the need for security, love, sense of self-worth, accep-
tance, and feeling of belonging. Bolduc (1959, p. 2),
influenced by Foale (1956), summarizes the difficulties
Of the retardate in the modern world as resulting from a
lack Of capacity to (l) acquire norms Of behavior which
apply broadly in social situations, (2) generalize and

discriminate in behavioral situations, (3) apprehend the

25

character of his expressions, (4) reason analogically, (5)
conceptualize, and (6) abstract. Lucito (1959) found it
characteristic Of the retarded to be more otheredirected
and other—dependent than normal children in Obtaining goal
satisfaction.

Some studies tend to associate pOpularity with an
absence of neurosis (McCandless et_al, 1956; Thorpe, 1955).
Trent (1957) found a significant negative correlation
between anxiety and popularity among institutionalized
delinquent boys and no relationship between social choice
and CA,IUQ,Or length of stay.1 Trent's study revealed
that delinquents in the institution are rewarded for
aggressiveness by friendship from some compeers but at the
same time are punished by others for this quality by
rejection. The experiment did not indicate, however, which
personality types did the rewarding and which the punishing
of these aggressives. One possible explanation is that
the less aggressive members aligned themselves in a depen~
dency relationship with those who were more aggressive but
did not internalize this quality as a social norm,2 while
the more autonomous residents rejected those who attempted

to impose their aggression on them or to intimidate them.

_¥

 

1See Appendix A, NO. 3.

2See Appendix A, NO. 4.

26

In a study of competitive behavior in mental defectives,
Albee and Pascal (1951) found no relationship between
success in this area and pOpularity, or between success
and strength or size. The sample size was very small,
however, and the success criterion, involving competition
for candy rewards, could be criticized as an artificial one,
or parochial, at best. A larger sample, combined with the
substitution Of athletic prowess as the success measure,
might have derived results which could have been at consider-
vable variance to those Obtained. The assumption for this
conjecture is that the success—goal must have social value,
and not merely material or utilitarian value, before a
relationship between it and social position can be estab—
lished-—a consideration seemingly ignored by the authors
of this study.
Summary_of the Research on Personality in
Sgcial Position and Adjustment
The literature on personality characteristics Of

retardates and delinquents appears to establish that:
1. Personality characteristics are a significant factor

in social position. Where retardates fail to adjust

in the community, the reason is generally personality

maladaption rather than intellectual deficiency.
2- Personality deviation from social eXpectations is

negatively related to social position.

10.

27

Mental retardates tend to be maladjusted in two ways:

a. Aggressive, as a result of immature judgement and
lack Of controls.

b. Withdrawn, due to repeated failures in social
situations.

If withdrawn, retardates tend to seek out more autono—

mous compeers to satisfy dependency needs while with-

drawn delinquents appear to establish symbiotic relation-

ships with aggressive peers.

In a delinquent society, social pressure exists to

alter values to include aggressiveness as a social

asset.

Aggressive retardates tend to be more pOpular in insti—

tutional settings but rejected among normal children

in the regular grades.

Among institutionalized delinquents, anxiety is

negatively related to pOpularity.

Among both defectives and delinquents of both sexes,

length of residency, as compared with personality

characteristics, has a negligible effect on social

position.

Aggression among delinquents can simultaneously be

rewarded with pOpularity and punished with rejection.

Insufficient research exists on which to base judgments

concerning the adjustment Of mental retardates in

institutions for delinquents, or for the defective-

delinquent in any setting.

28

Research Related to Social Setting
and Adjustment

 

As pointed out earlier, research with the retarded
delinquent has been hampered by the absence Of comparative
studies Of adjustment in varied institutional settings.

It is possible, however, to draw some inferences related
to our concern for the Optimal placement of this youth from
the available literature.

There are a few studies which compare institutions
and day school classes, some which evaluate the institution
in terms of later community adjustment, and others which
focus on variables within the institution itself. There
are, in addition, studies Of normal children which bear on
the placement problem for the atypical. The majority,
however, compare regular and day school classes in the
public schools. When these are regarded as comparisons
of heterogeneous versus homogeneous placement-—precisely
our problem in the.institutionalizing of the delinquent—
retardate--the relatedness of this research to our needs
is seen more clearly.

While the evidence is overwhelming that the mental
retardatesinregular day classes achieve, academically, at
a Significantly higher rate than in special classes or in
institutions, there is much less agreement regarding social
adJustment, those in special classes apparently enjoying
some advantage over the others in this respect (Johnson,

1950). Blatt (1958), Cassidy and Stanton (1959), Elenbogen

29

(1957), and Thurstone (1959) all found that the hetero—
geneously grouped retardates were evidently academically
stimulated by their environment but experienced a poorer
social adjustment than those in special classes. Porter
and Milazzo (1958) demonstrated that Special class
’"graduates" made a better community adjustment than their
regular class compeers, although the small size of the
sample in their study precludes any broad generalizations
from this finding.

Johnson (l962,13.68) summarizes the research in this
area and suggests that slightly better social adjustment
of the special class children may reflect the lack of
academic pressure to achieve at the norms for the grade
level, or be due to the nature of the preparation which
Special teachers undergo, emphasizing, as it does, the
mental hygiene aspects of the classroom. Thurstone (1959)
concurs and further infers that the type of teacher person—
ality selected for these classes may spell the difference
in social adjustment. Martin (1941) concluded that the
mental. retardate :in a heterogeneous group is generally
an unhappy child and one who often develOps antisocial
behavior as a result of being thrust into a social and
educational milieu with which he cannot COpe.

Various factors influence social position. Jennings
(1950) found social choice to change with the nature of

the activity for which chosen. Kinney (1953) studied normal

30

children and found that social acceptability varied
inversely with the size Of the group. Johnson and Kirk
(1950) replicated Johnson's original study, but in a
progressive school system with a small pupil—teacher ratio,
and still found the retardate to be a social isolate in the
regular grades, a finding which somewhat weakens Kinney's
results as supplied to retardates.l

Johnson (1950) and Jordan and DeCharms (1959) both
found the regular class retardate to be more rejected and
have more fear Of failure than those in special classes,
which would lead us to believe that such children might
display avoidance and self—isolating type behavior. While
several studies (Ainsworth, 1959; Johnson, 1961; Jordan,
1960; Kennedy, 1948; Mullen and Itkin, 1961; Wilson, 1960)
Show no significant differences between special classes
and regular classes in social adjustment, only Lapp (1957)
found retardates in heterogeneous classes to be as well
accepted as other children. In light of all the evidence
then——none of which shows heterogeneously grouped children
to be better adjusted--exception must be taken to Johnson's
conclusion that only a slight advantage in social adjustment
is enjoyed by the special classes grouping children homo-

geneously. A conclusion which definitely favored special

g

1These studies, though contradictory, make us aware

Of the necessity to consider the factor of class size
differences when analyzing studies which compare regular
and Special classes.

31

classes on the factor of social adjustment would appear
more tenable from an overall evaluation Of the research.

Studies Of institutionalized children reveal several
interesting points. Channing (1932) found institutionalized
retardates to make a somewhat less favorable community
adjustment than day school "graduates," while Capobianco
and Cole (1960) found no differences in social behavior
between the institutionalized and non—institutionalized.
Stevenson and Knights (1962) tested female retardates
immediately after returning to the institution, and again
three months later, and found that their response to social
reinforcement declined, suggesting that the institution
might have a depressing effect on motivation. Caditz (1959),
in comparing delinquents and nondelinquents with the MMPI
found, among other things, that the Pd scale was unaffected
by the training school experience.

Bowman (1957) points out that we have thus far
failed to integrate defective delinquents into either
penology or psychiatry and that administrators Of training
schools for both delinquents and retardates tend to reject
this type child because they are not geared to his needs-—
neither by facilities, staff, nor program. He decries the
trend toward placement of this youth in custodial type
institutions and the lack of interdisciplinary cooperation

Which creates this situation, and prOposes that mental health

32

agencies build the necessary facilities for this child,

rather than turn him over to institutions for delinquents.
Johnson (1950) sums up the situation in a statement

which accurately reflects the available evidence in the

literature:

The small number of studies inadequately dealing
with this problem has left us unable to formulate
any definite policies concerning prOper placement
of mentally handicapped children (p. 63).

Summary of the Research on Social
Setting and Adjustment

In the absence of more definitive and more closely
related research, it is difficult to reduce the studies

to postulates concerning the effects of placement in an

institution for delinquents, as a factor in itself, on

the social adjustment of the youth who is also retarded.

These general statements, however, appear to be viable:

1. No conclusive evidence presently exists to accurately
determine the placement of retarded children in general,
and particularly delinquent ones, which will result in
optimal conditions for social adjustment.

2. Retardates appear to make a better personal-social
adjustment in homogeneously grouped social settings
than in heterogeneously grouped ones.

3. Institutions, in general, may have a socially debili-
tating effect on children and evidence is not strong

that they perform more than a custodial function with

Children.

33

Research Related to Staff Perceptions
and Attitudes in Leadership

 

 

Knowledge of the attitudes and perceptions of staff
members who are in direct contact with institutionalized
children is essential to the study of the institution as
a social system and to an analysis of the nature of the
child's adaptations in this system.

There has been a prodigious effort by researchers
in the area of personality and attitude measurement of
those working with children, most of it directed to the
nature of the relationship between teacher personality
or attitudes, and teacher effectiveness (Getzels and
Jackson, 1963). Our concern is withtflmapossible existence
Of a differential attitude toward, or perception of, the
Student by staff, and the part that the intelligence of
the student plays in its influence on this variance.
Evidence, for instance, that teachers show bias in their
relationships with (and evaluations of) children based on
the child's intelligence, would be considered as a factor
legislating against such a grouping method.

It is not sufficient to proceed only this far with
the problem, however, since students' feelings about staff
perceptions of them are also of significance. In fact,
Some feel that the total interactions must be considered--
student—student, staff—student, student-staff, and student—

others (staff and students combined)——before the student's

34

adjustment can be accurately assessed (Spector, 1953).l
Itoga and Tanaka (1956) studied the social adjustment of a
Japanese pOpulation with IQ's under 70 and concluded,
similarly, that the degree of social adjustment is deter—
mined by the interrelationship of many factors, "acceptance
by others" included prominently among them.2
Teachers evidently tend to evaluate student behavior
in terms of conformity and decorum rather than mental
health (Stern, 1963), and several studies have obtained
results which were in close agreement in this respect
on the kinds of behavior teachers rated as minor and
serious (Hunter, 1957; Slobetz, 1950; Stauffer, 1956).
Myers (1961) conducted an investigation which showed
teachers to be, at best, mediocre judges of social position.
Significantly, this study was with mentally retarded
Children and the analysis further revealed that neither

the teacher's nor the student's sex made a significant

difference in the accuracy of judgment. Bonney (1947)

1Also see Jennings (1950).

2One example of an exploration of this complex inter-
action involved an experiment which used a type of bipolar
Semantic differential scale (Davidson and Lang, 1960).
The investigators confirmed their hypothesis that childrens'
perceptions of teachers' feelings correlate positively
With childrens' self-perceptions. They also concluded
that favorable perception of teachers' feelings was
associated with desirable classroom behavior. In other
Words, the student's interpretation of the way a teacher
feels about him influences both the way he feels about
himself and his behavior in class.

35

is another who found teachers to be inaccurate in this
respect. The teachers in this study consistently over-
rated students in pOpularity who were active in school
affairs, high achievers, and who generally conformed to
teacher's expectations. Similarly, they underrated those
whose academic work was poor and who were lacking in
obedience. It is therefore surprising, with this evidence,
that any research reveals teachers to be even fairly
accurate in judging the sociometric status of their
pupils. Gronlund (1959), however, reports that while
measures of dispersion show a large variance in teachers'
abilities to judge student popularity, some teachers can
do this quite accurately.

Kvaraceus (1956) reported an experiment with
graduate students enrolled in a course in the education of
exceptional children which revealed their (the graduates)
attitudes toward various categories of deviates. The
resultsshowed they least preferred to teach delinquents,
followed closely by the mentally retarded as a non—pre—
ference category. We could logically infer then, were
these results to hold true in general, that the delinquent—
retardate would have a greater probability of exposure to
teachers with rejecting attitudes than would any other
Combination of exceptionalities, and certainly more than
the gifted, who were chosen the most preferred deviate

Category to teach.

36

The effect of the type of staff leadership and the
personalities of the leaders on student behavior is of some
interest to this study, and research in social climate
reveals some vectors for consideration. The earliest
major work in the manipulation of the social climate vari—
able by leaders was done by Lippitt (19AO) who organized
children into clubs which were exposed successively to
democratic, autocratic, and laissez—faire types of leader-
ship. Among the conclusions of this study was the observa—
tion that different styles of leadership create different
social climates, the democratic leadership eliciting the
most effective interactions among the members of the
groups. This result is in line with the findings of
Thurstone (1959) and Washburne and Heil (1960), who also
found that teacher personality affected the social growth
of children. Similarly, Tizard (1953), studying sheltered
workshops in Great Britain, found that the climate set by
Supervision influenced the performance and behavior of
retardates, and observed a differential reaction to a
Single supervisory type, based on the retardate's personality
Characteristics. This would support the centrality of the
tOtal interactions in the problem of analyzing social
adjustment, suggested by Itoga and Tanaka (1956) and Spector
(1953). Palk (1962) was also interested in teacher behavior
in Classroom climate for its possible influence on the

behavior of retardates in special classes and their subsequent

37

learning, but found little effect of this variable on the
students involved. He suggests, however, that the contra-
vening results of his study may have been due in part to
the adaptive changes in both teacher and pupil over the
relatively long period of the experiment, in contrast to
the more rigidly defined climates established and adhered
to in the leadership studies. Palk used the Lewis Socio-
metric Scale in measuring pupil behavior and employed
productvmoment correlations to determine relationships
among the measures of this behavior. His results are
interesting and relevant to this study in that both
extremes of social structure in the classroom--permissive-
ness and pupil autonomy on the one hand, and authoritarian-
ism and teacher-direction on the other—-resulted in the
greatest degree of social isolation. He reasoned that the
brighter students dominated the permissive classes too
much while the authoritarian teachers were too concerned
With control activities and the middle IQ child's academic
achievement, both of which resulted in social isolation
for the retardate. Johnson (1962) reached much the same
Conclusion concerning the teacher's influences on the

retardate in the regular class.1

1For a study which points up the need for teachers of
the retarded to have competencies in develOping social growth
as well as academic achievement see R. Mackie, H. Williams
and L. Dunn, Teachers of Children Who Are Mentally Retarded
(U.S. Office of Education Bulletin, 1957, No. 3), 97 pp.
While offering little empirical data to support its claims,

38

Summary of the Research on Staff Attitudes
and Perceptions in Leadership

 

The foregoing studies of social climate set by staff,

and of the interactions of staffs' perceptions and atti—

tudes with those of the students, would indicate that:

1.

Social adjustment of students is influenced by the
interrelationship of many factors in a complex social
network involving the perceptions and attitudes of
staff, other students, and themselves in all possible
combinations. Prominent among the factors is staff
attitudes.

Social class expectations and traditional concepts of
behavior and decorum tend to bias the attitudes of
teachers with regard to behaviorally and intellectually
deviant children.

Teachers, at best, show wide variance in accurately
assessing the social positions of students and, in
most cases, would probably be poor judges of retarded
student status, mainly as a result of the biasing
factor mentioned in number 2, above.

The attitudes of teachers toward children appears to
affect both the ways in which children regard them-
selves and the ways in which they behave in the class-
room. As a result, teacher attitudes apparently

influence childrens' social growth.

 

this study lists the prevention of social isolation, and the
development of socially acceptable behavior, among the impor—
tant teacher competencies for work with the retarded.

39

The sex of the staff evaluator and student evaluated
is apparently of little significance in the ability of
staff to accurately predict the social position of

retardates.

Summary of the Literature on Intelligence and
Personality in Social Position and Adjustment

 

Research in the social adjustment of both normal

and exceptional children was reviewed from several stand—

points considered to be relevant—-intelligence, personality,

social setting, and staff leadership. Conclusions from

these studies which are significant to this investigation

indicate that:

1.

There appears to be a positive relationship between
intelligence and social position.

Reciprocity in social choice is apparently related to
intelligence so that those of like intelligence tend

to choose each other as friends. Conversely, where
social choice involves pairs which are intellectually
dissimilar, there appears to be a lack of recipro-
city.

Personality characteristics seem to be of more signifi—
cance than intellectual deficiency to retardate adjust—
ment; and deviations from social expectations are
regarded negatively.

Mental retardates as a group are not well adjusted in
society and tend to manifest maladjustment by either

malaggression or social withdrawal.

U0

In a significant proportion of a delinquent society
aggression is evidently viewed as a positive value

and to some extent this appears to be true in a
retardate social system, also. Among children in the
regular grades, however, this behavior leads to social
rejection.

Length of residency (seniority) appears to be a negli-
gible factor in social position with institutionalized
delinquents.

While institutions, in general, may actually retard the
social growth of the children they are intended to
assist, those which provide for homogeneous intellec—
tual groupings may effect a better social adjustment
than those which do not.

The more closely a social situation is identified with
academic achievement ( and the more the latter is
accorded social value), the more poorly the retardate
will function in social interaction.

Staff attitudes and perceptions seem to occupy an
important position in a complex social matrix
influencing adjustment which includes other students
(both separately and in combination with staff) as
well as the individual's own self-attitudes. Chil-
drens' self-perceptions appear to be heavily influenced

by adult attitudes toward them.

Al

10. Teachers are seemingly poor judges of childrens'

social position, especially those who are behaviorally

and intellectually exceptional. They apparently
are biased by unrealistic social class expectations,

(adult norms) and traditional concepts of social

conduct. The sex of evaluator and evaluated, however,

seems to be a negligible factor.

11. Teachers tend to View the behavioral adaptations of
delinquents and retardates less favorably than more
typical children and.underrate their social positions.

12. Withdrawn retardates tend to seek friendships among

more autonomous peers.

Questions Not Answered by the Research
on Social Adjustment

There are several questions suggested by the litera—
ture on social adjustment for which no answers have been

Offered. Most of the research has been done in public

Eschools, a good portion of it with intellectually typical

Clhildren, and with groups which hold the norms and values

f7or the prevailing culture. Would these same results have

EDeen obtained in institutional settings and do they apply

equally as well to delinquents and retardates as to typical

clflildren? Does the social structure of the institution

differ markedly from that of the community or public school?
Ar1dis the retardate accepted in a society of delinquents

anybetter than he is in the community-at-large?

42

In order to answer these questions through this
investigation, it is first necessary to consider a whole
new social system——the deviant society of the delinquency
training school——to examine and analyze it, and to view
the retardate within this framework in order to assess his
social adjustment.

VResearch and Discussion Related to the Retardate
as a Social Deviant

 

 

The central interest in this investigation lies in
the social status of the retardate among his delinquent
peers, and we have already seen evidence which tends to
establish him as a deviant member of this subculture.
Becker (1963), in his study of deviance, says:

.social groups create deviance by making rules
whose infraction constitutes deviance, and by applying
those rules to particular people and labeling them as
Outsiders.” (p. 9). He continues:

Social rules are the creation of specific social
groups. Modern societies are not simple organizations
in which everyone agrees on what the rules are and

how they are to be applied in specific situations.
They are, instead, highly differentiated along

social class lines, ethnic lines, occupational

lines, and cultural lines. . . .Insofar as the

rules of various groups conflict and contradict one

another, there will be disagreement about the kind
of behavior that is prOper in any given situation.

(13- 15)
Deviance is seen, then, ". . . .not [as] a quality

Of the act a person commits but rather a consequence of

the application by others of rules and sanctions to an

43

'offender.' The deviant is one to whom that label has
successfully been applied; deviant behavior is behavior
that people so label. . . ." (p. 9).
Thus, in an already deviant social system (the delin—
quent population of the institution), the mental retardate
may be treated as an outsider, not only by the delinquent
members themselves, but perhaps even, (and more importantly)
rby the staff. In this way the mental deviate may find
himself ordered to the low end of the social acceptance-
rejection continuum. The fact that an individual, who

does not rate high socially with the other delinquent
members of the institution population, may actually be
making a better "adjustment," (in terms of the society

of the community for whose membership he is being rehabili—
.tated), than those who are accepted because they identify
.Closely with.delinquent norms and values, is only indirectly
Of interest and significance to this study's concerns. To
demonstrate a negative relationship with a negative value
System, as evidence of the existence of a positive relation-
EShip with a positive value, is spurious, because it neither
exhausts the alternatives nor presents support for the
appropriateness of the supposedly therapeutic setting as

Mae facilitating favorable behavioral change. It is
eXtremely doubtful, for example, that the youth himself
Views this alienation as a badge of success and a mark

of progress. All that it may do, as far as his peer relation-

Ships are concerned, is to further convince him of his

uu

worthlessness and add to his already negative self—
attitudes—-hardly the outcomes expected of a treatment
program. vathe staff also perceive him in this same
socially alienated role, it could only result in serious
doubts concerning the ability of this type institution

to re—educate this youth for a productive place in society.
The simple fact is that no treatment setting can be
justified which creates a climate of isolation, a feeling
of not belonging, a sense of inadequacy, or an atmosphere
of rejection, regardless of how efficiently it culls the
person from a negative social system. The important
question here is not £39m what is he separated, but with
what is he identified? The answer, if he is shown to be
a true alienate, is "nothing"; at least nothing positive
and rehabilitative.

Dexter (1958) pursues this subject of deviancy
Specifically in relation to the retardate and points out
that, while in most societies, those who cannot learn the
"meanings" given by the society to certain valued symbols,
events, or things are considered as deviant, in our
society this failure is viewed as even more of a social
.IDroblem because we require a demonstration of the skill
CDf coordinating meanings—-reading, writing and computing--
as a prerequisite for induction into the adult world,
"although such formal skills are not necessarily related

to the capacity for effective survival or economic

“5

contribution.” (p.920). Dexter suggests that this failure
to learn the "correct" meanings is often the only reason
for many retardates to be denied their rightful social
status and that this status has little relationship to
their ability to perform successfully in the work world.

He states:

The indirect consequences of the high valuation placed
upon such skill manifest themselves in discrimination
and prejudices against the 'stupid'. . . If this
hypothesis is in fact valid, a substantial prOportion
of the cost and trouble resulting from the presence

of mental defect in our society is a consequence,

not of the biological or psychological characteristics
of mental defectives, but of their socially prescribed

or acquired roles and statutes [sic] . . . The technique
of learning has become a value in and of itself.
(p. 921—22).

This social labeling, often done at an early age,
ignores the delayed maturation which may occur later,
ignores the errors in the instrument used to measure the
intelligence, and is too often based on ”the type of
intelligence and clerical aptitude which enables peOple to
do well at school” (p. 923), rather than on the ability
to be economically successful.

It is little wonder then that mental retardates
become social problems as they discover the extent of
their devaluation in society. Sociologically, we treat
'Hrembers of a null class," or as Dexter puts it, "people
ka>lack or appear to lack some particular characteristic,
as though they have positive characteristics in common"
wbile all they may mutually share is the socially pre-

SCribed deviant status role. (p. 962).

A6

In a later article (in Becker, 196“), Dexter amplifies
this thesis. He postulates that intellectuality (or its
corollary, stupidity) as a value in our society ( a negative
one in the case of stupidity) is taken as a given and its
consequences viewed "as self-evident facts of nature"

(p. 38). His polemic presents ”stupidity" as an artifact
of the historical, political and ethical forces which have
shaped our present society (i.e., the French Revolution,
Jacksonian democracy and the Protestant Ethic) and cites
other societies as evidence that the retardate can
function adequately in a social system organized differ-
ently from ours. Analogically, he shows how another human
attribute (grace of movement) could just as easily have
given rise to a wholly different currency for valuing
peOple, complete with its own unique educational curri-
culum, technology, psychometrics (the child would
naturally have to have a GQ or "grace quotient") and
social institutions. In this hypothetical system the
ordering of retardates and intellectually gifted could
easily be reversed. Thus, mental retardates in our
Society are the victims of the historical quirks which
égave the society its present structure, norms, and
\falues. That retardates are discriminated against can

be easily demonstrated by our literature, from nursery
rhymes and fairy tales to English classics and modern

humor (Wolfenstein, 1959). In fact, Dexter observes

47

(p. Al) that our attitudes toward retardates have changed

from merely simple derision to genuine apprehension as we

have learned to associate sex crimes with "morons."
Paradoxically, our egalitarian philosophy, committed

to providing Opportunity for all to succeed has, by its

insistence one one's obligation to take advantage of this

Opportunity (the Protestant Ethic), doomed the retardate

to devaluation and alienation. The public school is the

main instrument utilized in this social surgery. We are

even reluctant to admit, if not downright resentful of

the notion, that retardates can be successful (pp. 43—44).

We justify our attitude by means of a communications

system based on so highly abstract a symbolization that

it forces conferrenceCM‘high status on the more intelligent.

This is done despite the existence of a differential in the

utilitarianism of this commodity of intellect at the various

levels of economic production (p. AM). In other words

the discrimination exists as a result of a social label

rather than because of any particular relevance of the

individual's intelligence to his ability to perform the

Social and economic functions required of him (p. 40).

Were this contemptuousness unperceived by retardates, as

a result of some social insensitivity related to their

COgnitive handicap, the problem would not be so acute; but,

unfortunately, there is no evidence to support such a

48

correlation. The mental retardate must therefore be
assumed to suffer psychological deprivation and trauma

(p. 42).

Research and Discussion Related to the
Delinquent as a Social Deviant

 

 

Trippe (1959, 1960), in a very illuminating discussion
of deviant behavior, points out that the delinquent, unlike
the physically disabled, continues to pursue the success—
goals of society even though the socially prescribed means
of attainment are inaccessible. This socially induced
abandonment of commitment to, or conduced deviation from,
the "approved" means of goal attainmentijswhat determines
the delinquent's social deviancy, both in direction and
degree. This is typical of one adaption to lower class
subcultural existence, another being to abandon both the
goals and the behavioral norms and become a public
liability.1 Lower middle class people, on the other
hand, Trippe feels are more likely to rigidly conform to
the social mores but relinquish, to some degree at least,
the cultural goals. Thus their deviancy is less likely
to be in a delinquent direction. While all three social
patterns are probably attempts at maintaining psychological

integration, they actually lead to social disorganization.

 

1For an unusually lucid and perceptive reflection on
the estrangement and encapsulation of lower class urban
society, see Samuel Tenenbaum, "The Teacher, The Middle Class
The Lower Class," Phi Delta Kappan, 45 (Nov. 1963), p. 82—86.
In this article the author discusses his growing awareness

 

49

It would appear from Trippe's analysis and the pre-
vious discussion of Foale's and Bolduc's View, that social
pressure is the important dimension in the delinquent's
and the retardate's behavioral deviancy. Trippe summarizes:

Contemporary American culture seems to hold promise
of success for all, but specific groups in our society
do not enjoy equal Opportunity to attain recognition
and rewardl. . . . For those segments of our society
which are denied access to goal attainment, high
rates of nonconforming behavior are observed, not
because members of these groups are biologically
different, but because they are responding normally
to unique social situations. (p. 171).
If Trippe's assumptions are correct, it should be valid
to generalize that the limited goal realization Opportun-
ities of the subculture from which both the delinquent
and the retardate tend to be spawned, create a saliency
toward two types of COping with the social structure—-

personal (leading to disorganization through frustration

and, eventually, to neurotic behavior), or social

 

of the reason for the lower class child becoming the
school's problem child. He claims that they are alien to
the school because they cannot meet the school's and
teachers' expectations. Even the bright lower class
Child, he feels, is isolated from the school faculty and
classmates. Relevant to this study, it poses the question
that if this is the situation for the intellectually able
lower class child, what must the dull one eXperience?
Regardless of the relative rates of delinquency increase
between rural and urban areas in recent years, when we
Speak of delinquents we are speaking, demographically, of
the urban lower class child.

lOur assumption being that the mentally retarded
constitute one of these groups.

50

(leading to disorganization through delinquent and anomic
behavior)-—unless some other social force (family, church
or school) intervenes to legislate socially conforming
behavior. This approach sets the stage for the theoretical
reference point from which this research problem will be
explored.

Were our interest to be with the first alternative-—
personal disorganization-—self concept would offer a logical,
”parsimonious and very fruitful theoretical model on which
to base a study of the delinquent retardate. Our main
concern, however, is with the apprOpriateness of the thera-
peutic setting, with the retardate's adaptive mode in this
environment, and with the nature of the social system
itself. Our theoretical approach will, as a consequence,
be to predict the structure of the social system of the
institution and to further predict the retardate's
adaptations to this system.

Research and Discussion Related to the Theoretical
Foundation and DevelOpment of the Study

 

 

Introduction

 

Many psychologists, sociologists, and social-
psychologists have analyzed the COping behaviors of
individuals and groups in ways which are relevant to our
study. The personality theory of Karen Horney for instance,
which classifies behavior as moving toward, away from, and

against, offers a model for categorizing the research

51

subjects and comparing the experimental group with the con—
trols to determine the presence of a behavioral differential.
But it does little to reveal the structure of the social
system Operating within the institution. Seeman (1959)
offers a paradigm of alienation in which he lists five
components: normlessness, meaninglessness, powerlessness,
isolation, and self—estrangement. This model would provide
a means for sharp discrimination of the nature of the
alienation in the individual's personality, but essentially
concerns man's feelings of helplessness in attaining his
perceived social role (Clark, 1957), and does not adequately
fulfill our need for more specific placement in the social
system, nor tell us precisely how he interacts with others.
Likewise, Festinger's theory of cognitive dissonance,
which seeks to explain behavior as activity which attempts
to bring about consonance between the systems of self-
'knowledge and knowledge of society, presents a possible
theoretical entry into our investigation of the delinquent-
retardate's social position. But this theory, and the
‘models of other balance theorists (Newcomb, 1961; Osgood,
1957; McClelland, 1961) all have the same drawback in
satisfying our purposes. They are mainly psychologically
oriented and lead us too deeply into the individual's
personality makeup and away from our study of the group.
These balance theories are mentioned, not with the

thought of effecting a rapprochement, but to present them

52

as convergencies (Waisanen, 1963) on another theory-—
'anomie--which has been develOped into a sociological model
by Robert Merton (1957).

Anomie and Its Relevance as A Theoretical
Foundation for This Study

 

 

Originally from the Greek "anomia," meaning "lawless—
ness," anomie has come into more pOpular usage in the
post World War II literature to describe the aimlessness,
purposelessness, and normlessness--thus, "anemic" behavioral
style--of a segment of today's youth, particularly in the
lower class. It was first developed as a theory by
Emile Durkheim1 at the turn of the centuryanuipsychologi-
cally formulated as a concept by MacIver (1950) and Riesman
(1961). Although defined in terms of normlessness, it has
historically included another concept, the progressive
disintegration of interpersonal relationships and mutual
supports which is of paramount importance to this study.
Mainly as a result of this latter concept, Merton sees
anomie as "bridging social and psychological dynamics"
(Witmer and Kotinsky, 1956, p. A0), a linkage which
allows us to couple the objectivity of a sociometric
approach with psychologically laden material involving

personal and group interactions and behavior.

 

lDurkheim was less interested in the sources of
anomie than he was in its consequences and develOped this‘
theory in his now classic study of Suicide, (The Free
Press, Glencoe, Ill.) 1951.

53

As originally conceived and develOped, this concept
"referred to a property of the social and cultural structure,
not to a prOperty of individuals confronting that structure"
(Merton, p. 61). Later the concept was extended to the
individuals themselves (p. 161). Riesmanl (p. 242) uses
the term as "virtually synonymous with maladjusted" but
without the "negative connotations,” and it is more in this
sense than any other that it will be used in this study to
describe those whose adaptive mode is variously characterized
by nonconformity. These are the nonadjusted——though not
necessarily maladjusted-—in society.

Merton offers a means by which the role behavior
which we have been discussing may be analyzed. Some in-
sight into Merton's paradigm has already been offered by
Trippe2 (1959) who undoubtedly was influenced by Merton.
Merton stresses the importance of recognizing that social
and cultural structures vary independently3 (Witmer and
Kotinsky, p. 29) although, it may be added, not mutually

exclusively. He says, (and Trippe agrees):

 

1See Appendix A, No. 5.

2We have already seen that Trippe describes deviant
behavior in terms of norm non-conformity as a result of the
inequalities of Opportunity which exist in our society for
goal realization (p. 171). This is a keystone construct
in Merton's theory.

3Merton defines the cultural structure as "that
organized set of normative values which is common to members
of a designated group," and the social structure as ”that
organized set of social relationships in which members of
the group are variously implicated or involved” (Witmer and
Kotinsky, p. 28).

54

Some unknown but substantial prOportion of deviant
behavior does not represent impulses of individuals
breaking through social controls, but, on the con—
trary, represents socially induced deviations—«devia—
tions which the culture and the social organization
conjoin to produce. In other words, social and
cultural structures exert a definite pressure upon
certain persons to engage in nonconforming rather
than conforming conduct. (Witmer and Kotinsky, p. 29)

Merton (1957) feels that, more than any other society
our nation has enjoined its members, regardless of social
origins or class position, to pursue the value of success.
The fact that equal Opportunity is not available to all
’members of the society to realize this value creates an
imbalance which leads to deviant behavior by those with
the least access to the success goals. Thisprocess ends,
eventually, in anomic behavior as a result of the malin-
tegration of cultural emphases with social organization.
(Witmer and Kotinsky, p. 30). Said another way, we can
expect an anomic adaptation when contradictions exist
between cultural norms and patterned social situations
(Witmer and Kotinsky, p. 45).

In Merton's View, the "strain toward anomie” prevails
throughout our social structure, albeit unevenly (p. 157).
His typology of adaptive modality lists five categories,
covering all the possible combinations of acceptance or

rejection of both the cultural goals and the institution—

alized means of goal pursuit and achievement:

55

TABLE 1.--A Typology of Modes of Individual Adaptation.l

 

 

 

Modes of Institutionalized
Adaptation Culture Goals Means

I. Conformity + +

II. Innovation + -
III. Ritualism — +

IV. Retreatism - —

V. Rebellion i i
+ = acceptance i = rejection of prevailing values

and substitution of new values

rejection

The above portrayal reveals how patterns of "dysfunction
[can occur] between culturally induced high aspirations and
socially structured obstacles to [their] realization"
(p. 174) to create a saliency toward deviant behavior and
anomie. This is what Merton calls his "central hypothesis"
(p. 134) to explain aberrant behavior.

In the first modal type-—conformity——there is accept-
ance of both the culturally prescribed goals and the moral
mandates for their attainment, which is representative

of the stable elements of our society.2 The delinquent,

 

lMerton (1957), p. 140.

2It should be pointed out that Merton in defining
these adaptive types is making no value judgments regarding
their relative worth but only discriminating between elements
which create homeostatic conditions and those which create
imbalances in society.

56

by definition a norm violator, is excluded from this
category. The innovator in society, however, is the
individual "who has assimilated the cultural emphasis upon
the goal without equally internalizing the institutional norms
_geverning ways and means for its attainment," (p. 141).
This type includes, if not defines, the delinquent, whom

we know to be less concerned with how ends are achieved,
than with achieving them. The delinquent—ratardate, on the
other hand, depending upon his level of intellectual
competence, may or may not, fit this definition. As a
proposition--the more mentally defective, the less the
capacity exists for the cognitive processes resulting in
innovating activity—-would appear to be viable.

The ritualist, having abandoned the quest for status
and success, (or at least modified the goal), while com-
pulsively continuing to conform to the socially sanctioned.
rules, would hardly describe the delinquent, nor lower class,
people in general. This adaptation is more typical of
lower middle class behavior. It may, however, be represen-
tative of a significant portion of the mentally retarded,
especially at lower functioning levels, and may be related
to their prOpensity for perseverant-type behavior.

Retreatism, according to Merton, represents an

"escape" from society's requirements which:

57

Arises from continued failure to near the goal by
legitimate measures1 and from an inability to use
the illegitimate route because of internalized
prohibitions, this process occurring while the
supreme value of the success—goal has not yet been
renounced. The conflict is resolved by abandoning
both precipitating elements, the goals and the
means. The escape is complete, the conflict is
eliminated, and the individual is asocialized.

(p. 153-54)

The rebellion adaptation is described by Merton as a
transitional phase in an attempt to "institutionalize new
goals and new procedures to be shared by other members of
the society," (p. 140). This effort to change the existing
structure by rejecting both the goals and norms of society
and instituting new ones, describes the institutionalized
delinquent's social system. Once accomplished--as in the
delinquent subculture of the training school--the situation

within can no longer be considered anomic but, rather, to

 

1Although the individual is assumed to have assimilated
both the cultural values and the social norms.

2Cloward (1959, pp. 210-11) presents a construct of
considerable importance here. He notes that Merton assumes
that "internalized prohibitions" in the engagement in
illicit activity would be a necessary factor conducing
toward retreatism, otherwise innovation would be the logical
result. Cloward suggests that retreatist activity can result
"even in the absence of internalized prohibitions," as in
the case of individuals who "fail in the use of both legiti-
mate and illegitimate.means" and thus, through a process of
"double failure," become defeated and leave the field.
This may come very close to the actual position of a signi-
ficant portion of the delinquent-retardates, who may
have experienced unsuccessful attempts at innovation, and
this construct may offer a means of both prediction and
explanation of the retardate's adjustment in the institution.

58

1 In other words, how—

use Merton's term, becomes "eunomic."
ever deviant the delinquent may be in society, however
'unstable an element he may become in the structure of our
social chemistry, within the confines of the institution

he may well be a healthy, stable, and productive member

’who conforms to delinquent norms and values and contributes
his share to the attainment of the deviant ends of the
system. It is important to establish this social order,
reintegrated around its own set of norms, because it allows
us to observe the retardate in this system, to determine
whether he represents a stable or an anomic element, and

to establish the specific mode of adjustment which charact—
erizes his interactions in this subsociety.

Summary of Theory of Anomie as Related
to This Study

 

 

By way of summarizing the theory of anomie we have
seen that Durkheim initiated the concept as a means of
describing howtlmaoverly ambitious and aspiring eventually
experienced a breakdown in their regulatory social
apparatus. Merton extended Durkheim's theory and syste-
matized it by identifying the types of malintegrated
societies which aspire (but are denied access) to cultural
goals, and by pointing out "differentials in access to

success—goals by legitimate means, showing how the social

 

lWitmer and Kotinsky (1956, p. 67).

59

structure exerts a strain upon the cultural structure,
leading in turn to anomie or normlessness." (Cloward, p. 189-
90).

Cloward introduced a third concept variable to the
theory in the form of illegitimate means of achieving
society's ends. In this system, as in the greater society,
nonconformance brings retribution by way of social isolation
and anomie. The retardate could find himself a social
isolate in this society of deviants, either because he
identified with the values of the larger society, or because
he failed to assimilate and place high value on the delinquent
norms, or simply because he could not discriminate between

the two.1

Theory Utilization in Hypotheses Development

 

Merton's paradigm of anomie is presented here for its
clarity in providing a grasp of the dimensions of adjustment
from a sociological vieWpoint and not as a model on which
to base the design of this study. We will see in the next
chapter that our purposes will be better satisfied by a

facetized design which will facilitate an analysis of the

 

1We are all aware of examples of this latter situation
in the form of the unfortunates who are either used as tools
by their more intelligent peers or who "go along” with the
gang in an attempt to "belong" without much real commitment
or display of innovating behavior. Such individuals are
often only on the fringe of the gang, rejected for the most
part, for real membership. Only with ideas of exploitation
as objects with which to "have fun," or to perform tasks
which the other gang members find unpleasant, are these per-
sons sought out and utilized. More often they are only
tolerated.

60

social system of the training school by means of the social
statuses and reputations of its residents. The focus will,
of course, be mainly on the retardate, although the non-
retardate will also be located and classified. HOpefully,

it is expected that some light will be shed on possible
differences between the valuing systems of a delinquent
subculture and society in general, so that treatment pro—
grams can be more effectively directed towards rehabilitative
objectives.

In order to utilize Merton's theory for these purposes,
it must be understood that the institutional society,
although made up, as it is, of members who qualify as
anomics by reason of their having rejected our social norms,
is, as we have seen before, by no means an anomic situation,
but rather eunomic. This understanding should clarify that
the measure of the retardate's possible adjustment deviancy
will be from the standpoint of his relative assimilation
into the delinquent social structure of his compeers and
not that of society in general. Redl (Witmer & Kotinsky,

p. 60) for instance, claims that the delinquent gang rejects
as members those whose behavior is dysfunctional for the
group, and includes in this category neurotics and schizoid
character types who are too behaviorally unpredictable for
trustworthy membership. This experiment will research the

position of the mental retardate in this regard.

61

The assumption will be that those delinquents whom the
group, as a whole, identifies as ”accepted" individuals will
also be pOpular and therefore evaluated as "eunomic"
whereas, those who are seen as "withdrawn" will not be
popular and will qualify as "anomie." The members labeled
"aggressive” will serve to predict and confirm the existence
of differentials in the valuing process of the delinquent
social system by measurement of their degree of popularity
in the group. The retardate pOpulation will be examined as
a subgroup of this system.

Seeman's (1959) appraisal of the meaning of alienation
permits at least two points of contiguity between that.con-
cept and Merton's theory of anomie. In discussing the
normlessness component in alienation he defines Merton's
anomie individual as one who holds the belief that "socially
unapproved behaviors are required to achieve given goals."
(p. 788). This can be tested with the retardate by
observing the adaptive types With whom he prefers to
interact. Also, in clarifying the dimension of isolation
in the alienation concept, Seeman likens the alienated
individual in this sense to one who assigns low reward
value to goals or beliefs that are typically highly valued
in the given society. This can be tested with the retardate
in two ways:

a. Quantitatively in the number of his interactive

selections as compared with those of nonretardates.

b. Qualitatively by the prOportions of members of
low and high social position and reputation whom
he selects as friends (and, reciprocately, by
those who choose him).

As may already have been deduced, the hypotheses
which will be formulated as a result of the broad directions
given above will be tested by means of the individual's
"role set"1 as well as by means of his own reSponses.

Staff attitudes will also be analyzed, mainly to
determine the presence of any differential which may Operate
between staff and nonretardates in the ways in which they
perceive the social position, adjustment and interactive
behavior of the retarded group.

Summary of Relationship Between
Theory and Hypotheses

 

The way in which anomie will be utilized, then, is
to assist in the formulation of hypotheses which will both
confirm the theoretically predicted social structure in an
institution for delinquents and determine the pattern of

the retardate's functioning or dysfunctioning in this

 

lMerton defines "role set" as "the set of persons with
whom an individual is in sustained interaction in this role"
(Witmer and Kotinsky, P. 47-8), and further, as "the complex
relationships of individuals in any one role to those in-
volved in a series of connected roles." (p. 50). It includes
all significant reference groupsenkiindividuals, and requires
definitions of these roles as well as that of the individual
being observed.

63

system. We will want to know if, in fact, the delinquents
achieve homeostasis in their social interactions once
within the institution or whether they continueto be as
socially disintegrated as they were in the community. It
will be important, also, to determine what personality
characteristics and reputations are socially sanctioned by
the members of this society and whether these values are
those held in common with the staff, (representing society-
at—large).

As for the retardate, our construct would lead us to
predict him to manifest retreatist behavior, or at least
to have failed as an innovator, and to be perceived as
withdrawn by the peer group. But, we will keep in mind
that his behavior in a delinquent subsociety may be quite
different from that in the public school classroom.
Accordingly, we will be interested in how he compares with
the nonretardate in all three facets of reputation which
we are measuring, but especially that of aggression. We
will want to know if he holds the same values as the rest
of the members (conformist), or whether he differs in this
respect (ritualist or retreatist). This can be evaluated
by analyzing the data on "aggression," which will be assumed
to be a value of the delinquent subculture. The social
position of the retardate will, of course, be a central
interest of ours and if it is demonstrated that he holds

both low social position (rejection) and low reputation, it

64

will be considered an indication that he is an alienated
member of the institutional social system who is denied
access to the success-goals of the delinquent subculture.
If true, it will confirm our prediction that the retardate
is an anomic individual in an otherwise homeostatic social
structure for whom the institution represents a source

of trauma rather than treatment.

Summary of Related Research

This chapter reviewed the literature on social adjust-
ment as related to intelligence, personality, social setting,
and leadership. The research concerning deviancy, especially
that related to the retardate and the delinquent, was
studied and the concept of anomie as it related to this
study was investigated and discussed. Constructs were
formulated out of which hypotheses to be tested will be

developed.

‘ Cl

X‘-

A
r

4..

will be

1
01”..

J
L

a s.-.

a 1 t .
”a a
“U. ‘11.
DJ at
IL. I .

 

 

V“
guilt V

a;

a:

p
Mk“

\y.

Chapter III

METHODOLOGY AND DESIGN

Introduction

 

This chapter will state the hypotheses to be tested
and will outline the general methods and procedures which
will be utilized to test them. The research setting, study
population and instrumentation will be described and the
relationship of the latter to the field of sociometric
testing will be briefly discussed. A rationale for the
study design will be presented and the methodology for the

design and analysis will be detailed.

Hypotheses to be Tested

 

Seven major hypotheses have been formulated and are
stated below in the research form:
Hl There is a positive relationship between intelligence
and social position.
Sub a) operationalized: The retardate will receive pro-

portionately fewer social choice ratings than
the nonretardate.

 

confirmation: Phi (rg) coefficient analysis with
intelligence categories dichotomized into retar—
date and nonretardate prOportions and social
choice ratings dichotomized at the median.

 

65

66

Sub b) operationalized: Among retardates, the lower the
IQ, the lower will be the social position.

 

 

confirmation: Phi (r¢) coefficient analysis with
retardate IQ dichotomized into low and high
and social position dichotomized into low and
high.

Sub c) operationalized: Retardates will receive proportion-
ately fewer social choice ratings than non—
retardates of the same reputation (as assigned
-by peers).

 

confirmation: Phi (r ) coefficient analysis with
frequency of choice dichotomized at the median
and intelligence categories dichotomized into
retardate and nonretardate prOportions. This
will be done for each reputation category in
which there are retardates.

 

H2 'There is a positive association between reciprocal
choice and similarity in intelligence.1

Sub .a) operationalized: Retardates as a group will tend to
be reciprocated in friendship choices by other
retardates prOportionately more often than by
nonretardates as a group.

 

confirmation: Comparison of percentages of potential
reciprocal social choices made between and within
intelligence groups.

 

Sub t>) operationalized: Nonretardates as a group will
tend to be reciprocated by other nonretardates
prOportionately more often than by retardates
as a group.

 

confirmation: Comparison of percentages of potential
reciprocal social choices made between and within
intelligence groups.

 

Sub 0) Operationalized: PrOportionately more retardates
will receive scores below the median in total
reciprocal social choices than will nonretardates.

 

\

foll lIna sense, if H5 is true, then H will logically
laEiOVJ, given the distribution of IQ in the institution pOpu-
and :Y1- However, if H2 is not true, H1 might still be true

53 therefore worthy of investigation.

67

confirmation: Chi square (X2) test with intelligence
categories dichotomized into retardate and non- ‘
retardate prOportions and reciprocal choice scores
dichotomized at the median.

 

H3 There is an association between intelligence and be-

havioral adjustment in the institution.

Sub a) operationalized: PrOportionately more retardates
than nonretardates will receive ratings above
the median on the factor of aggression as
measured by staff.

 

confirmation: Chi square (X2) test with intelli~
gence dichotomized into retardate and nonretar—
date prOportions and aggression dichotomized at
the median for staff ratings.

 

Sub ‘b) Operationalized: PrOportionately more retardates
than nonretardates will receive ratings below
the median on the factor of aggression as
measured by peers.

confirmation: Chi square (X2) test with intelli-
gence dichotomized into retardate and nonretar-
date prOportions and aggression dichotomized at
the median for peer ratings.

 

Sub <3) operationalized: PrOportionately more retardates
than nonretardates will receive ratings above
the medians in withdrawal as measured by both
the staff and peer ratings.

 

confirmation: Chi square (X2) test with intelli-
gence dichotomized into retardate and nonretar—
date prOportions and withdrawal dichotomized at
the medians for both the staff and peer ratings.

 

Sub d) operationalized: Proportionately more retardates
than nonretardates will receive ratings below
the medians in acceptance as measured by both
the staff and peer ratings.

 

confirmation: Chi square (X2) test with intelli—
gence dichotomized into retardate and non-
retardate prOportions and acceptance dichoto—
mized at the medians for both the staff and
peer ratings.

 

68

H24 There is an association between social position and

adjustment mode which varies with the adjustment factor

and the rater role.

Sub 6:1)

Sub b >
Sub <3)
H

operationalized: Acceptance will be directly

 

associated with social position as measured by
both staff and peers so that those rated high
in the one will be rated high in the other and
vice versa.

confirmation: Chi square (X2) test with acceptance

 

scores dichotomized at the median and social
position scores by quartiles for peers and
dichotomized at the median for staff.

operationalized: Aggression will be directly
associated with social position as measured by
peers and inversely associated as measured by
staff.

 

confirmation: Chi square (X2) test with aggression
scores dichotomized at the median and social
position scores by quartiles for peers and dicho—
tomized at the median for staff.

 

operationalized: Withdrawal will be inversely
associated with social position as measured by
both staff and peers so that those rated high
in the one will be rated low in the other and
vice versa.

 

confirmation: Chi square (X2) test with withdrawal
scores dichotomized at the median and social
position scores by quartiles for peers and
dichotomized at the median for staff.

 

5 Tfnere is an association between social position and

reputation in the institution which is differentially

pexrceived in accordance with rater role.

Sub a)

operationalized: The components of reputation will
be ordered by staff so that those in the lowest
social position will tend to be assigned to the
low acceptance—high aggression-high withdrawal
category, and those in the highest social posi-
tion to the high acceptance—low aggression-low
withdrawal category.

 

69

confirmation: Chi square (X2) test with social
position dichotomized into the lowest and highest
quartiles and reputation dichotomized into the
lowest and highest categories in the model prev
dicted for staff ratings.

 

Sub> b) operationalized: The components of reputation will
be ordered by peers so that those in the lowest
social position will tend to be assigned to the
low acceptance-low aggression—high withdrawal
category and those in the highest social position
to the high acceptance-high aggression-low with—
drawal category.

 

confirmation: Chi square (X2) test with social
position dichotomized into the lowest and highest
quartiles and reputation dichotomized into the
lowest and highest categories in the model pre-
dicted for peer ratings.

 

H6 'There is a positive association between reputation and
intelligence in the institution.

Sub a) Operationalized: PrOportionately more nonretar-
dates than retardates will be assigned above
the median reputation category and proportione
ately more retardates than nonretardates will
be assigned below the median reputation category
as rated by staff.

 

confirmation: Chi square (X2) test with reputation
dichotomized into low and high and intelligence
dichotomized into retardate and nonretardate.

 

SUb t>) operationalized: PrOportionately more nonretar—
dates than retardates will be assigned above
the median reputation category and proportion-
ately more retardates than nonretardates will
be assigned below the median reputation category
as rated by peers.

confirmation: Chi square (X2) test with reputation
dichotomized into low and high and intelligence
dichotomized into retardate and nonretardate.

 

H7 TIaere is a positive association between low intelli—

éyence and anomie in the delinquent social structure of

tile institution.

70

Sub a) operationalized: Proportionately more retardates
than nonretardates will receive a combination
of social position and reputation scores below
the median.

 

confirmation: Chi square (X2) test with intelli-
gence dichotomized into retardate and nonretar—.
date proportionstnfiianomie dichotomized into
low and high. Cells will consist of the prOpor-
tions of each intelligence category having social
position and reputation scores both of which
fall either below or above their respective
medians.

 

Sub b) qperationalized: Proportionately more nonretar-
dates than retardates will receive a combination
of social position and reputation scores above
the median.

 

 

confirmation: Same as H7 (a)

Research Setting

The study will be conducted at the Lansing, Michigan
Boys Training School, an institution for some four hundred
boys between the ages of twelve and seventeen, adjudicated
delinquent and committed for an indefinite period. The
facility, administered under the auspices of the Michigan
Social Welfare Department, consists of groups of brick
buildings representing the domiciling, educational, voca-
tional, recreational, and administrative units of the
school. These are located on a plot in a residential area
in the center of the city. There are from twenty-five to
thirty—five boys domiciled to a living unit and the assign-
-ments are made roughly on the basis of age and physical

develOpment.

71

Population

 

The study pOpulation will consist of all the boys
committed to and in residence at the training school who
are available to complete the questionnaire at the time it
is given. Of the approximately four hundred wards, it can
be eXpected that about fifty will meet the criteria for
inclusion in the eXperimental group. This is a higher
incidence of retardation than would be found in a normally
distributed pOpulation but is not excessive for a

delinquent group.l

General Procedures

 

The Lewis Sociometric Scale (see Appendix B) will be
administered to all cottages in which there are members
of the research group. The questions will be read to each
group to avoid introduction of reading competency bias and
the cottage manager in charge of the group will respond to
the same questions with the exception of question No. 10,

which will be eliminated for staff members.2

 

1See Appendix A, No. 6.

2While children are shown to be good judges of social
positions of peers, studies of adults, with few exceptions
(Gronlund, 1959), report they are much less reliable in
rating children's social positions accurately (Bonney,
1947; Hunter, 1957; Myers, 1961; Slobetz, 1950; Stern,
1963; Stouffer, 1956). Evidently adult perceptions of
children's popularity are influenced considerably by their
own expectations for children's social behavior.

72

Instrumentation

 

The measurement of adjustment comes within the pur—
view of what are known as Reputation Tests.l Bredemeyer
(1954, p. 144) points out that the concept of reputation
can serve as a link between the social structure and the
culture of the group. "Interrelationships between 1
position measures and reputation measures. . . .may provide [A
important clues to the content of a group's culture." L
(p. 127). This is precisely an objective of this study-— '—
to correlate sociometric position with reputation as a
means of determining what values are commonly held by a
"pure" delinquent subculture, the institution. Reputation
tests fall into two general categories: those which measure
the individual as subject ("which person are you most
nearly like?")and those which measure the individual as
object ("which members of the group are like this?"). The
object approach is particularly suitable for our needs
because it allows for the determination of "actual or
sanctioned norms. . . .the operating norms" (p. 130).
"The object approach," Bredemeyer points out, "is more
likely to get at Operating norms [because] it minimizes
the distortion created by the pressure to express 'prOper'
attitudes," (p. 130). This determination involves observing
the traits which are attributed to each individual and

then correlating this reputation with his sociometric

 

lSee Riley et a1. (1954), Chap. 6 for a discussion of
these tests.

73
status. The assumption is that high status is conferred on
those traits which hold positive group sanction and low
status is assigned to those who display negatively sanctioned
qualities. The indirectness with which this is accomplished
should secure more confidence in the obtained data than
that elicited from a respondent's statement of what he
thinks he, himself, should feel concerning approval or L
disapproval of a trait. [I

The Lewis Sociometric Scale (1950) was selected for

this study for several reasons:

1. It provides an "object" measure of reputation
(adjustment).

2. It conveniently and parsimoniously determines
adjustment categories of interest to this investi-
gation (acceptance, aggression, withdrawal).

3. It locates the individual in the group (social
position).

4. It is a validated instrument with established
reliability.

5. The validation was done on a group somewhat
similar to the present study group.

6. It is easily administered.

The instrument has the further attribute of providing

a combination of three indices for each trait which it
measures, offering Opportunity for multiple confirmation of
a perceived characteristic in an individual as object. It

was originally devised as a screening test for identifying

74

socio-emotional maladjusted school children. It was vali—
dated on a group of elementary school children and its
test-retest reliability was reported as .98 for social
acceptability, .82 for aggressive maladjustment and .72
for social isolation. Intercorrelation of test items
show all three adjustment categories to be independent 1
measures of behavioral style. Its construct validation, 1
high reliability and demonstrated independence of L
adjustment pattern measures are considered to make it a
highly acceptable instrument for this particular study.
The test is reproduced in Appendix B.
Sociometric tests in general, while not free of
measurement problems,1 have been found to be valid
predictors of social status and reputation. Ausubel and
Schiff (1952) report high correlations at all grade levels
between measures of actual and predicted sociometric status
(p. 125) and children's perceptions were found to be quite

reliable.2

Design of the Study

 

Rationale for the Design

 

We have defined "reputation" for the purposes of

this study as consisting of three types of adjustment:

 

1See Appendix A, No. 7.

2They also found that age affects predictability such
that:
a) ability of students to predict increases with age
b) ability of teachers to predict decreases as age
of pupils increases.

75

acceptance by others, withdrawal from others, or mal-
aggression toward others. The relative importance that
peOple assign to a particular reputation as determined by
friendship choices, should be an indicator of peOple's
valuing systems. Therefore, since friendship choices
determine social position, the valuing systems of groups
can be determined by analyzing the patterns of reputation
types associated both with those to whom they assign high
social position and those from whom they withhold high
social position by non—choice.

That people in different roles have different value
systems is borne out by the sociometric research relating
to teacher and peer attitudes towards retardates discussed
in Chapter 11. Also established by many studies cited in
the literature, (such as Johnson's, 1950) is the fact that
values will vary according to the characteristics of the
person being rated. Again, retardates were found to be
assigned to low social position because of behavioral
characteristics which were not in keeping with social norms.
What we are postulating at this point, then, is that
the structure of the elements of reputation will vary
according to the role of the rater and the characteristics
of the social object being rated.

In society in general, high social position of adol-

escents is ascribed to those who are non-malaggressive

(low in aggression), normally gregarious (low in withdrawal),

4' Y.- “arr—dfip

76

and well accepted (high in acceptance). This is documented
in Chapter II. The lowest social position is assigned

to those who are highly malaggressive, highly withdrawn,
and low in acceptance. If this holds true, we should be
able to make predictions about the value system of the
delinquent society in general in regard to possible devia-
tions from social norms (represented in this study by
staff ratings on the assumption that the staff generally
conforms to social norms and values). Further, we should
also be able to predict the social position of the
retardates in this system and to determine whether the
position, if different from nonretardates, is a result of
the lower intellectual competency per se (eg: if retar-
dates are found to hold low social position, that this
position would bear no relation to reputation) or due to
the social characteristics associated with lower intellec-
tual functioning (which in this study are being predicted

as reputation for withdrawal and/or aggressiveness).

Study Design

 

This approach lends itself to a facetized experi—

mental design1 in which the variables of reputation type

 

1For a detailed explanation of facet theory and its
application to sociological research, see Louis Guttman,
"A Structural Theory for Intergroup Beliefs and Action,"
American Sociological Review (June, 1959), 24:318—328.

 

1.... -._....__..- ‘1."—

77

can be arranged into components of reputation, each with

dichotomized elements as follows:

Figure l.-—Variables of reputation components.

 

Reputation Facets

Acceptance (a) Aggression (b) Withdrawal (c)

-_I

 

low (a1) high (bl) high (cl)
Reputation
Elements

w" | ‘5’“

high (a2) low (b2) low (02)

 

For each facet we have two elements, a high and a
low. These elements combine into components of reputation
such that each component has one element of each facet
and the various combinations of elements can be exhausted.
The way society typically views those of low social
position is represented by the reputation component:

a b c

l l l
withdrawal (In an institution, this is often the moody,

= low acceptance, high aggression, high

Suspicious, defensive type who interacts aggressively).
Those of high social position are associated with

the component:
b c

a222
Withdrawal (In an institution this is the boy who is

= high acceptance, low aggression, low

chosen often for activities, is outgoing, friendly and

78

works OOOperatively.) Not only are these polar social
status types determined by this model but it is further
postulated that the ordering along the whole continuum of
social position can be predicted by a logical patterning

of elements into reputation components, which, for a normal
pOpulation, would be arranged in the following value
ranking:

Figure 2.—-Hypothesized relation of social position to
reputation in a normal pOpulation.

L

 

Social Position Reputation Componenta
1. Low . . . . . . . . . . a1 bl c1
2. Low—medium. . . . . . . . al bl c2
a1 b2 °1
u
a2 b1 0i
3. Medium—high . . . . . . . al b2 c2
a2 bl c2
*
a2 b2 cl
4. High. . . . . . . . . . a2 b2 c2

aIn the division of each facet into its elements,
all of the subscripts 1 have been assigned so that they
represent the least socially acceptable in the group and
subscripts 2 the most socially acceptable. Therefore it
is possible, by varying the subscripts within each component,
to rank the components from a low social position extreme
(with all subscripts 1) to a high social position extreme
(all subscripts 2).

*These components exist theoretically but not
practically, due to the nature of the questions asked, and
Will be eliminated from further consideration.

79

Since we are making the assumption that the staff represent
society in general, we should be able to predict that the
staff will order the residents according to the arrange-
ment in Figure 2, and that this ordering illustrates the
relative value of reputations in society.

With respect to the delinquent peer group, we hold
that a different value system will prevail, such that the
elements of aggression will be reversed and the following
rank order of reputation components, as determined by

social position scores, will be assigned:

Figure 3.-—Hypothesized relation of social position to
reputation in a delinquent population as ranked by

 

 

delinquents.
Social Position Reputation Component
1. Low. . . . . . . . . . al b2 cl
2. Low~medium . . . . . . . al b2 c2
a1 b1 Ci
3
a2 b2 ci
3. Medium-high . . . . . . . al b1 02
a2 b2 °2
i
a2 bl °i
4. High . . . . . . . . . a2 b1 02

 

”These components exist theoretically but not
practically, due to the nature of the questions asked, and
will be eliminated from further consideration.

I‘d.”~ u m-fl:-_ _"—

80

In summary, the difference between the values of a

delinquent social system and the society of the adult world

can be represented by the social statuses given to behavior

types as follows:

Figure 4.——Hypothesized relation of social position to
reputation in a delinquent population as ranked by staff

and peers.

 

rfirfi—r-T" ‘-

 

Social Staff Ranking Delinquent Ranking

Position Behavior Behavior

Low **nonaccepted-aggres— nonaccepted-nonag-
sive—noninteractor gressive-noninter-

actor

Middle nonaccepted-aggres nonaccepted—nonag—
sive-interactor gressive-interactor
nonaccepted—nonag- **nonaccepted—ag-
gressive—noninter— gressive-noninter—
actor actor
nonaccepted—nonag- nonaccepted—aggres—
gressive—interactor sive-interactor
accepted—aggressive- accepted—nonaggres-
interactor sive—interactor

High accepted—nonaggres— accepted-aggressive-

sive-interactor

interactor

 

**This apparent semantic contradiction is recognized
by psychologists and institutional workers, among others,
as a recognizable type with the characteristics of general
social isolation, accompanied by intense underlying hosti—
lity which is overtly manifested when unable to COpe with

social situations.

The above facetization will be utilized to exhaust

all the combinations of reputation components in testing

81

triern against the other research variable—-social position,

811d. the independent variable-—intelligence.

A second part of the design will involve the pairing
cof‘ all the individual personality factors in all possible
connbinations with social position and intelligence.

Finally, social position and reputation will be

ccynfioined into measures of anomie and tested for associa—

tiJDfl with intelligence.

Sunnnary

 

A statement of the hypotheses to be tested was pre—
seerrted.in this chapter in research and operationalized
fc>runs, and the method of confirmation stated in each case.
Tile» research setting, study population, and instrumenta—

tixsri were described and discussed, and the study design

W618 justified and detailed.

CHAPTER 1V

ANALYSIS OF THE DATA

Introduction

 

This chapter will present a description of the a

statistical conditions under which the analysis was made,

 

F- .1

the results of the analysis, and an interpretation of

the results.

Statistical Rationale

The measurement of the social interactions and
personality factors of any group of human beings presents
too complex a task for the researcher ever to feel confident
concerning his knowledge of the parameters involved. The
nature of the particular group in this experiment was such,»
however, as to leave little doubt that the data should be
treated nonparametrically, since the social and psycho-
logical trauma attending their common delinquent back—
grounds would, most surely, bias the distribution of the
group's social and personality characteristics. Accordingly,
it was decided that nonparametric techniques offered the
more conservative, and therefore, preferred approach, no
matter how much information had to be sacrificed which might
have been obtainable from the data by more SOphisticated

statistical methods.

83

Statistics Employed and Procedures Utilized

The statistics chosen to be employed were the
chi square (X2) and the phi coefficient (o). Chi square
appeared adequate to test all but one of the hypotheses
which were generally concerned with determining the
dependence of personality characteristic and social
status observations of a pOpulation on the variable of
intelligence, for the following reasons:

a. the chi square distribution is based on the

assumption that the observed frequency will

be equal to the expected or theoretical
frequency (in which case X4 = O).

b. X2 is a measure of association whose test of

significance provides a test of the null hypo—
thesis that two variables under study are
independent.

The single exception was in the first hypothesis
which dealt with intelligence and social position. For
this test we chose the phi coefficient (o), a statistic
related to the chi square and often applied where two
variables, obviously not discontinuous, are studied as
though they were (Ferguson, 1959). Because both
intelligence and social position are continuous variables
which, for convenience in observing deviations from hypo—
thetical expectations are treated as discrete, and because
we represented the two categories of each variable by two
point—values, the resultant model was amenable to test by
a four—fold point correlation, the phi coefficient (r ),

~~— ¢
. . . /x2
bearing the relationship to cni square, r¢ = k M“ .

84

Where the eXpected frequencies were small, and in all
cases where there was only one degree of freedom, Yates'
correction for continuity: 2
2 = N([AD-BC[—N/2)

(A+B)(C+D)(A+C)(B+D)—

was applied as a conservative move to guard against type I

error1 by bring the observed and expected values closer

1r——»

together and decreasing the value of X2.

In testing the hypotheses, the median was used to

- i Ao‘m

determine the upper and lower categories, rather than the
mean, essentially for two reasons:

1. Each cottage group reported only on its own members
and an overall institutional mean would have been
misleading.

2. The relatively large number of subjects who received
no score on one or more of the measurements would
have depressed the mean beyond usefulness.

The statistical procedures employed in the analysis
were in accordance with the contingency table program
utilized with the C.D.C.#36OO computer at Michigan State
University.2

It was arbitrarily decided that data testing results

would be considered significant whenever the probability

of a Type I error did not exceed .05, or, in other words,

 

1Type I error is the error of rejecting the null
hypothesis when, in fact, it should be accepted.

5

 

 

F. M. Sim and M. J Beech, Analysis of Contingency
Tables (Act II) for the C.D.C. 3600, MSU CISSR Technical
Report No. 4 (January 27, 1964).

85

whenever there was no greater than .05 probability of the
results occurring by chance when the null hypothesis was

true.

Subjects
A total of 365 subjects were available for the study 1

‘7

in 13 cottage groups. Of this number 326 were nonretarded

and 39 retarded.l The retardates were further categorized

H gr- ('1 nus-a.d-
I

into "high" and "low" groups by dichotomizing as near the
IQ median as possible. Because of the skewed IQ distri—
bution it was realized that this dichotomy did not serve
to identify intelligence groups with radically different
behavioral characteristics and performance levels, but
only "upper" and "lower" retardate groupsvdJXUJ1whiCh only
the grossest of the effects of low intelligence could be
expected to be manifested. The retardate IQ's ranged from
63-79 with a mean of (x) of 74.34 and standard deviation
(8) of 3.85. There were 15 white, 2 Mexican and 22 Negroes
in the experimental group and their ages ranged from 13 to
17 with a mean (2) of 15.58. The mean continuous stay in
the institution at the time of the test was 5.00 months
and the range was from 1—13 months. These data are tabu-

lated in Table 2.

 

1This is close to the percentage predicted in foot-
note No. 6, Appendix A and supports the incidence research
of Lichtenstein and Brown (in Metfessel and Lovell, 1942),
Glueck and Glueck (1934), Kvaraceus (1945), and others.

86

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

mm.m m
oo.m mm.mH nm.om m
am m H : mH Hm mm m mH mH m m mm mH mw.m mq<eoe
mm.: MH.mH .w
mH : o m m m mH : z s o 0 HH 0 mHmpOppsm
H H o H H o m o o H H o H H molmo
H o o o o H H o o o H o o H mmuwm
m o o o H m H m H H H o m o Ha-mm pozos
w m o H z o m m m m m o s : :sums
mm.m mm.mH M
Hm H H m N mH om m m mH m m HH m mHMpOposm
NH O o m m w HH H z m m H m z swims
Logo:
m H H o a m m H a o o H z m msnws
cant: Hmhsm +mH mHsm mum :tH oz mow +5H mHth :HtMH .xmz z 3 Ho>oq moose
. - I, L , oH
pcoecoaH>cm mHmsoochcoo COHp pmH>H mm< .do OHccum
m50H>opm wouHumCH CH mnpcoz :UHoom :HmHomm

 

.pCoepmsfiom ocm
coHpmpsooa .COHpHmOQ HmHoom co cocooHecH oHnHmmoo mo mOHpmHgm>

mmeQMpmmtt.m mqm<9

87

Examination of Table 2 shows that the within—groups
difference in mean age was negligible, and since the mean
age of the total institution pOpulation was 15.20 at the
time of admission, it can be assumed that the variable of
age should have had little between-groups effect either.

The retardates were fairly evenly divided racially
so that this factor should not have influenced results to
any appreciable extent and the distribution was in about
theffiflmeproportion as that of the institution as a whole.

In terms of length—of—stay at the time of the
experiment, there was an approximate difference between
the retardate and institutional means of .5 months, the
retardates being the less senior group. This is not con—

sidered significant.

Format of the Analysis

The general approach in meeting the objectives of
the study was to set up certain broad hypotheses based on
our main concerns, and to give them directionality obtained
from the literature, even thoughthere'may have existed
doubts as to the representativeness of this evidence in the

experimental situation. It was felt that, in the absence

 

of empirical evidence to the contrary, the literature should
provide the reference points from which the study could

then depart. From these broad directions, specific opera-
tional statements were evolved which, when tested, would

offer evidence in support or refutation of the main

88

hypotheses, and thus give probability statements concerning
our study questions. In such a format, data which tests
in favor of the null hypothesis becomes as valuable as

that which verifies the research notion.

Intelligence and Social Position

 

The literature is clear that a positive relationship
exists between intelligence and social position. The
research, however, comes largely from studies of the
public schools where academic achievement receives positive
social sanction and a student can often attain social
prestige through the single criterion factor of high
academic standing. This may not at all be the case in
an institution where academic remediation receives more
stress than overall academic achievement, and especially
among delinquents who are known to devalue academic
knowledge.

Nevertheless, starting with the prOposition that a
positive relationship exists between intelligence and
social position, three subhypotheses were developed. If
true, it was reasoned that, not only would retardates
fare poorer in social choice but, the more retarded, the
greater would be the social rejection. Also, recognizing

that one's reputation could affect social choice, a

 

re ~«

89

hypothesis was develOped to eliminate the influence of
this variable so that intelligence effects could be

observed without masking from this intervening variable.

Hypothesis (1a): The retardate will receive prOpor—
tionately fewer social choice ratings than the
nonretardate.

 

The results of thetest of the hypothesis, as
reported in Table 3, indicate that the null of no differ—
ence in the social choice ratings between retardates and

nonretardates is tenable.

TABLE 3.-—Ana1ysis of social position as measured by peers
in relation to intelligence.

 

Intelligence Category

 

 

 

Social
Choice Nonretardate Retardate Total
High 167 15 182
Low 150 24 174
TOTAL 317 39 356

X2 = 2 2700 p > 10

(ldf) o , o o
r¢(ldf) .025.

Hypothesis (lb): Among retardates, the lower the
IQ the lower will be the social position.

 

 

ll. ll» Ill-Ir l. L‘. :"iv

90

TABLE 4.-—Ana1ysis of social position as measured by peers
in relation to level of retardation.

 

Retardate Category

 

 

 

Social
Position High Low Total
High 12 3 15
Low 11 13 ‘ 24
TOTAL 23 16 39

x2 = 3 1535 p > 05

(ldf) o , o o
P¢(ldf) .28

The evidence presented in Table 4 supports the null
of no difference in social choice ratings on the basis
of intelligence between high and low retardates. There
was, however, a tendency toward social rejection of the
more severely retarded while making no discriminations
among the less retarded.

Hypothesis (lc): Retardates will receive propor—
tionately fewer social choice ratings than non—
retardates of the same reputation. (See Table 5
on page 91.)

The null hypothesis, that the observed frequency of

high and low social ratings among retardates and nonretar-
dates in any reputation category would equal the expected

frequency, was verified and the independence of intelli-

gence and social choice established.

91

mm m om H<BOB

 

OH.A Hm. mm:©.H mm m mm emMm .m
om : om A<BOB
om.. MH. amas. MN m NH emMm .:
m: m o: H<Boe
w W a an ..
am m em Hoooe
om.A mo. memo. mm m mm ome .m
mm 0 mm H<Boe
a .1 Mi an .H
.Q AmoHvea Amchmx Hmpoe mpMUAMuom ouMOAMpmacoz MMWWMW coupomommo
Hoops om

 

mLOwOpmo mocowHHHoucH

 

.COHpmpSQOQ pom umpmsvm new mocow
[HHHoch on COHpmHoL CH whood an oopsmmoe mm COHprOO HmHoom mo mHmaHmc<uu.m mqm<e

CO mmpOCpOOM mmm

.ms new we
.QOHumnmchcoo Eon“ ooumcHEHHo coon mm: showcase mHan

momma

 

92

 

 

zAOwOpmo mocmeHHOch

mm m om H<BOB

wH m mH Qme .m*

on m mm .H<BOB

: o z 304

mm N am ome .5;

mm m on H<BOB

OH H m 3oH

mm m Hm Eme .w
AMUHVop AMOHV x Hmuoe opMOLMpom mumOLMpoacoz OOHogo showcase

HmHoom COHpMuzdom

 

Umscdpcooll.m mqmde

93

Results of Testinngypothesis (1)

It would appear from the above results that, regard-
less of how we viewed intelligence and social position in
the institution (whether between retardates and nonretar-
dates, or between upper and lower groups of retardates)
there was no significant relationship between these two
variables. Even when equated on the intervening variable
of reputation, social choice appeared to be independent
of intelligence. There is an inference from the data,
however, that the more severely retarded are rejected
socially while no discrimination seems to be made among

the less retarded.

Intelligence and Reciprocal Choice

Previous research gives a strong indication of a
positive correlation between the factors of intelligence
and reciprocation in friendship choices. In other words,
those of like intelligence appear to choose each other as
friends in preference to those dissimilar in intellect.
Whether or not this is true in delinquency treatment
institutions was the question here. If either group tended
to cross intellectual lines, it was reasoned that the
retardates, due to dependency needs, would be the group
to do so.

Hypothesis (2a): Retardates as a group will tend to

be reciprocated in friendship choices by other

retardates prOportionately more often than by
nonretardates as a group.

 

94

Hypothesis (2b): Nonretardates as a group will tend
to be reciprocated by other nonretardates prOpor-
tionately more often than by retardates as a
group.

 

Analysis of these two hypotheses can be made simul-
taneously but it is not enough to know merely how many
reciprocal choices between and within groups had actually
been made. What also must be determined here is the total
potential for each group to choose, and be chosen, within
and between intelligence groups. Since the choices were
made by cottage groups, this had to be determined for
each cottage and then the sums of these totals obtained.
Then, by dividing the total reciprocal social choices
actually made between and within groups, by the total
potential reciprocal choices which were available to be

1

made, it became possible to determine whether or not

significant differences were present.

TABLE 6.-—Percentages of potential reciprocal social
choices made between and within intelligence groups.

 

 

 

Choosers
Chosen Nonretardates Retardates
Nonretardates .2863 .2948
Retardates .2566 .3085

 

 

1See Appendix C, Table 31.

95

Since there was no apparent means for determining
eXpectations here, no chi square was attempted.

The raw results indicate that no relationship
apparently exists between intelligence and recipro-
cation in friendship choice.

Hypothesis (2c): Proportionately more retardates
will receive scores below the median in total
reciprocal social choices than will nonretar-
dates.

Because there were differences in the numbers of
persons in cottages, and therefore differences in the
potential reciprocity available to the various groups,
analysis was done by individual cottage median score in
total reciprocal choices, and overall summations were
made on the basis of the numbers of retardates and
nonretardates who fell above and below their reSpective
cottage medians.

TABLE 7.——Analysis of total reciprocal social choices by
cottage as measured by peers in relation to intelligence.

 

Total Recip— Intelligence

 

 

 

rocal Social
Choices Nonretardate Retardate Total
High 156 17 173
Low 149 18 167
TOTAL 305 35 *340
Median score = 5 X2(1df) = .0122, p.>.90

Modal score = 5
Overall range = 2-6

 

*21 nonretardates and 4 retardates were not avail-
able for reciprocal social choice testing.

96

The findings reveal an almost exact split of both
intelligence groups to support the null hypothesis of no
difference between the observed and expected frequencies
of reciprocal social choices between the two groups.
Reciprocal choice is independent of the variable of

intelligence.

Results of Testing Hypothesis (2)

The results indicate that there was no association
between the intelligences of the groups and their recip—
rocal friendship selections, and thus, the null hypotheses
were supported. In each case the choosing group selected
from its own members a slightly greater percentage of
friends than from the other group but not to a significant
degree. As can be seen in Table 6, the greatest social
affinity was within the retardate group itself, followed
by retardates for nonretardates, nonretardates within
their own group, and lastly, nonretardates for retardates.
All in all, it would appear that retardates are "friend—
lier," or else more dependent, than nonretardates, especially
when it comes to making friendship selections from a group
dissimilar in intelligence. The findings in analysis of
total reciprocal social choice scores reveal that this

variable is independent of intelligence.

97

Intelligence and Behavioral Adjustment

There is reason to believe, from the literature, that
there is a positive correlation between intelligence and
behavioral adjustment. Even those studies which indicate
that the retardate makes an adequate work adjustment, find
these persons to have a higher rate of involvement in
difficulties with the law enforcement agencies of the
community than do intellectually normal persons.1

The situation in the social system of the institution
for delinquents, however, is different than that of the
Community-at-large (although perhaps not for the
neighborhoods from which they come), since the delinquent
subculture is presumed to value aggressive behavior and
to give status to those who are proficient in making it
utilitarian. An assumption was made here that staff
members, not identifying retardates as individuals with
limited capacities to understand and follow directions,
(and therefore misinterpreting their poor responses as
hostile, or nonconforming, responses), would tend to label
this behavior as aggressive. Their peers, however, being

generally higher, intellectually, would tend to dominate

 

1Although some of the strength of the evidence is
reduced when the fact is considered that most of the com-
munity's retardates are found in low socioeconomic neighe
borhoods where the rate of police contact is generally
higher anyway than in more economically privileged neigh—
borhoods.

98

them and assume leadership roles, thereby tending to con-
sign them to follower positions. These peers, therefore,
would tend to see them as less aggressive. Because of
their impaired functioning, and especially because of
their presumed lesser ability to communicate, it was
reasoned that both staff and peers would tend to see the
retardate as more withdrawn than his more intellectually
well endowed compeers, and less acceptable in social
activities.

Hypothesis (3a): Proportionately more retardates

than nonretardates will receive ratings above

the median on the facet of aggression as
measured by staff. ‘

 

TABLHE 8.--Analysis of the facet of aggression as measured
by staff in relation to intelligence.

 

Intelligence Category

 

 

Aggression Nonretardates Retardates Total
High 149 21 170
LOW 157 13 170
TOTAL 306 34 340

 

Median score = 0
Overall range = 0-3 (max. possible)
Retardate range = 0-3

2

x (ldf) = 1.6013, p.>.2O

99

The results show that staff measures of aggression
are independent of intelligence and the null hypothesis
is supported. The direction of the data, however, was in

line with the research hypothesis.

Hypothesis (3b): PrOportionately more retardates
than nonretardates will receive ratings below
the median on the facet of aggression as measured
by peers.

 

TABLE 9.--Analysis of the facet of aggression as measured
by peers in relation to intelligence.

 

Intelligence Category

 

 

Aggression Nonretardate Retardate - Total
High 156 26 182
Low 170 13 183
TOTAL 326 39 365

 

Median score = 9
Overall range = 0—73
Retardate range = 0-

2 _
X (ldf) — ”.2080, po<.05

40

The results indicate that peer measures of aggression
are dependent on intelligence but the research hypothesis
is not tenable because the data was in the direction

Opposite to that of the research hypothesis.

Hypothesis (3c): PrOportionately more retardates
than nonretardates will receive ratings above
the medians in withdrawal as measured by both
the individual staff and peer ratings.

 

100

TABLE 10.--Analysis of the facet of withdrawal as measured

by peers in relation to intelligence.

 

Intelligence Category

 

 

Withdrawal Nonretardates Retardates Total
High 160 22 182
Low 166 17 183
TOTAL 326 39 365

 

Median score = 5
Overall range = 0—74
Retardate range = 0-

2

26

, X (ldf) = .4842, p.>.3O

TABLE

ll.--Ana1ysis of the facet of withdrawal as measured
by staff in relation to intelligence.

 

Intelligence Category

 

Withdrawal Nonretardate Retardate Total

 

High 154 16 170
Low 152 18 _ 170.
TOTAL 306 34 340

 

Median score = 0
Overall range = 0-3 (max. possible)
Retardate range = 0-3

2 _
X (ldf) - .0327, p.>.80

101

In both tests of hypothesis (3c), the facet of with-
drawal was found to be independent of intelligence and

although slightly inclined toward the research hypothesis,

tnuis could be due to chance. The null of independence

is verified.

Hypothesis (3d): PrOportionately more retardates
than nonretardates will receive ratings below
the median in acceptance as measured by both
the individual staff and peer ratings.

TABLE l2.-——Analysis of the facet of acceptance as measured
by peers in relation to intelligence.

Intelligence Category

 

 

Acceptance Nonretardates Retardates Total
High 164 18 182
Low 162 21 183
TOTAL 326 39 365

 

Median score = 10
Overall range = 0-68
Retardate range = 0-47

2 . _
x (ldf) - .1029, p.>.70

102

TABLE l3.——Analysis of the facet of acceptance as measured
by staff in relation to intelligence.

 

Intelligence Category

 

 

Acceptance Nonretardates Retardates Total
High 155 15 ”170
Low 151 19 170
TOTAL 306 34 340

 

Median score = 0
Overall range = 0-3 (max. possible)
Retardate range = 0—3

2

x (1df) = .2941, p.>.50

Results of Testing_Hypothesis (3)

 

The results of the analysis of aggression as measured
by staff inclines toward the research hypothesis but not
at the level of significance, while that of peers shows
to be similar to that of staff and significant at the .05
level, but the directionality was Opposite to that stated
for this hypothesis. This tells us that the retardates
are seen by their peers to be a more aggressive group.
Neither the staff nor peer ratings show any association
between intelligence and withdrawal tendencies nor between

intelligence and social acceptability.

Social Position and Adjustment Mode

 

There are many studies in Chapter II to show that

personality factors affect social choice. Some reveal

103

personality traits to be the variable most significantly
related to social status. Low status children have been
shown to be more malaggressive than high status children
and personality deviancy, (such as self—isolation), has
been demonstrated to be inversely related to social position.
In this next analysis, the personality characteristics

of acceptance, malaggression, and withdrawal will be
tested against social position.

Our review of the research impels us to assume that
acceptance scores will affect the social position scores
directly for both staff and peer evaluations, while with—
drawal scores will affect social position inversely.
Aggression scores, however, will be perceived differently
by the two rating groups. Peers will view it favorably
and assign those individuals with high aggression to high
social position, while staff will view it as a negative
characteristic and assign low status to those perceived

as manifesting aggression.

Hypothesis (4a): Acceptance will be directly
associated with social position as measured by
both staff and peers so that those rated high
in the one will be rated high in the other
and vice versa.

 

The analysis shows acceptance to be directly asso—
Ciated with social position as measured by both staff and
peers. There was less than a .001 probability that the
null was correct in the staff data and less than a .001
pPObability of the null hypothesis being correct in the

peer data. The research hypothesis is therefore accepted.

104

TABLE l4.——Analysis of the facet of acceptance as measured
by peers in relation to social position.

 

Social Quartile

 

 

 

Acceptance lst 2nd 3rd 4th Total
High 85 51 27 19 182
Low 6 40 65 72 183
TOTAL 91 91 92 91 365

2

X (Bdf) = 118-77553 p.<.001

TABLE 15.-—Analysis of the facet of acceptance as measured
by staff in relation to social position.

 

Social Position

 

 

 

Acceptance High Low Total
High 118 67 185
Low 64 116 180
TOTAL 182 183 365

x2 = 2796 09 < 001
(ldf) . , p. .

Hypothesis (4b): Aggression will be directly
associated with social position as measured
by peers and inversely associated as measured
by staff.

 

105

CDABLE l6.--Analysis of the facet of aggression as measured
by peers in relation to social position.

 

Social Quartile

 

 

 

Agggression lst 2nd 3rd 4th Total
High 44 51 48 39 182
Low 47 40 44 52 183
TOTAL 91 91 92 91 365

X2 3 4694 p > 30
(3df) o 3 o o

CPIXBLE l7.—-Analysis of the facet of aggression as measured
by staff in relation to social position.

 

Social Position

 

 

 

Aggression High Low Total
High - 97 81 178
Low 85 102 187
TOTAL 182 183 365

2

x (ldf) = 2.6301, p.>.lO

The variables of aggression and social position are
r’evealed to be independent in both staff and peer evalua-
‘ticnis. 'The null hypothesis is considered tenable.

JHypothesis (4c): Withdrawal will be inversely
associated with social position as measured by
both staff and peers so that those rated high
in the one will be rated low in the other and
vice versa.

 

106

(TABLE 18.——Analysis of the facet of withdrawal as measured
by peers in relation to social position.

 

Social Quartile

 

 

 

tvithdrawal 1st 2nd 3rd 4th Total
High 19 46 59 58 182
Low 72 45 33 33 183
TOTAL 91 91 ’ 92 91 365
x2 45.9184, p.<.OOl

(3df)

ELABLE l9.—-Analysis of the facet of withdrawal as measured
by staff in relation to social position.

 

Social Position

 

 

 

tViJ:hdrawal High Low Total
Iiigh 99 92 191
Igow 83 91 174
TOTAL 182 183 365
2

x (ldf) = 3.3404, p.>.05

There was no association between withdrawal and
SCDCiJil position demonstrated in the staff data. The peer
eValuation shows a measure of inverse association between
withcflrawal and social position significant at the .001

lmsvel. The research hypothesis is partially verified.

107

Results of Testing Hypothesis (4)

 

Acceptance appears to be highly associated with social
position. Both staff and peers show the same tendencies,
the peer data being especially significant in that they
reveal a consistent increase in the high acceptance
category as the social position increases and an equally
consistent increase in the low acceptance category as the

social position decreases, quartile by quartile.

["“mT”TT_—'

Aggression appears to have little effect on social
position in either staff or peer evaluations.

In withdrawal, the peer evaluations show a signifi-
cant inverse association with social position while the
staff data show a slight tendency to favor the more with-
drawn with higher social position, although not to a

significant degree.

Social Position and Reputationl

 

We have previously defined reputation as a combination
of personality characteristics, as Opposed to adjustment
mode which describes the person's behavior in relation to
a specific overriding personality factor in an individual's
makeup. Analysis of reputation in relation to social
position is intended to determine mainly whether or not a

differential actually exists between the people—valuing

 

1See Appendix C for Table 32 showing overall frequency
relationship of Reputation, Social Position and Intelligence

108

system of the community-at-large (as represented by staff
'ratings) and that of the delinquent subculture. A further
determination is whether or not this difference is in
accordance with the predicted models for each group.

Since delinquents are known to place high value on

_...—

aggression, it is reasonable to assume that they will accord
higher social status to members of their group whom they
feel possess this characteristic to a marked degree, and
lower status to those whom they see as bereft of this
personality ingredient. Likewise, since the law abiding
members of society generally abhor malaggression, they
should assign this quality to those in low social position
much more frequently than they do to those in high social
status. This valuing difference, if it exists at all,
should be most apparent in a comparison between the highest
and lowest reputation categories and between the highest

and lowest social position quartiles. The rationale behind
this assumption is that in both the community's and the
delinquent's social systems, people who are found to be
both highly acceptable and outgoing (i.e. not aloof or with—
drawn) are given higher social position. It is only on

the factor of aggression that the two systems are Opposi-
tional. At first glance, one may wonder why, since
aggression is the only variable assumed to be perceived
differentially between the two social systems, this factor

is not examined individually. A more careful analysis of

109

the problem, however, reveals that this would not produce

meaningful results since social position is not the pro-
cjuct of a single personality criterion but of all one's

goersonality variables-~of which we have selected three of

'the most influential and combined them into a "reputation.
Hypothesis (5a): The components of reputation will L

be ordered by staff so that those in the lowest _~

social position will tend to be assigned to the ,

low acceptance—high aggression—high withdrawal ;

category, and those in the highest social position g

L“.

to the high acceptance-low aggression-low with-
drawal category.

TUTBLE 20.——*Analysis of reputation as measured by staff in
relation to social position.

Reputation Category

 

 

 

Social Position Highest ' Lowest Total
Upper Quartile 18 10 7 28
Lower Quartile 3 3 6
TOTAL 21 13 34
X2 = 0067 p > 95
(ldf) ' ’ ° '

*The reputation hierarchy here is in the model pre-
diCVteed for a normal population (see Figures 2 and 4,

pp- '78 and 80).

Since the highest and lowest reputation categories
"SITE looth represented more strongly in the upper social
posiltzlon quartile than in the lower one, the null of
indleperldence between the variables of reputation and

Socialposition would have to be considered tenable.

110

However, when we look at the data for all social position

quartiles, a different picture emerges:

'PABLE 21.-—*Analysis of Reputation as Measured by staff in
relation to the entire range of social position. '

 

 

 

 

Reputation Social Quartile
category lst 2nd 3rd 4th Total
Lowest 10 3 6 3 22
TOTAL 28 18 15 6 67
X2 = 3 “562 p > 05
(3dr) ‘ ’ ° -

*The reputation hierarchy here is intflnemodel pre-
dicated for a normal pOpulation (see Figures 2 and 4,

pp. 78-80.

Now we see a general pattern to the data such that,

as ssocial position increases, the frequency count in the

higfilest reputation category increases. For a perfect

Corurelation there should also have been a corresponding
deCINease in the lowest reputation category but, while this
dhi zqot occur to the same degree, nevertheless, a nearly

Sigmuihficant association between the two variables was

9513 ab lished.

Hypothesis (5b): The components of reputation will
be ordered by peers so that those in the lowest
social position will tend to be assigned to the
low acceptance-low aggression-high withdrawal
category and those in the highest social position
to the high acceptance-high aggression-low
withdrawal category.

111

TABLE 22.—-*Analysis of reputation as measured by peers
in relation to social position.

 

Reputation Category

 

 

 

Social Position Highest Lowest Total
Upper Quartile 38 3 41
Lower Quartile 2 23 25 .
TOTAL 40 26 66 j-
l
x2 43 1677 p < 001 La
(ldf) ' ’ ° ‘

“The reputation hierarchy here is in the model pre-
dicted for delinquents (see Figures 3 and 4, pp. 79 and 80-

The results show a very significant association
between peer measures of reputation and the social positions
of the individuals to whom they assign them. The research
hypothesis is strongly supported with less than a probability
of .001 that this result would occur by chance when the null
is true.

If our assumptions concerning the value system of
the delinquent are valid, this same relationship should
exist throughout the whole range of social positions and
reputations. An examination of Table 23 reveals almost
precisely the predicted pattern, as the frequencies in the
extreme reputation categories can be seen to vary directly
with the change in social position (with one slight excep-

tion), while the middle categories remain fairly constant.

112

This same consistency of association is present within
each quartile (again with one exception) so that the
frequence varies directly in the top two social quartiles

and inversely in the bottom quartiles.

TABLE 23.--Relationship of reputation to social position

 

 

 

throughout the ranges as measured by peers. L

Social Quartile I

Reputation Category lst 2nd 3rd 4th 7

r
Highest 38 3O 8 2

Average of the middle

categories 9 7 10 12
Lowest 3 18 24 23

 

Testing just the highest and lowest reputations
through all four quartiles for independence we find the

following:

TABLE 24.-—*Ana1ysis of reputation as measured by peers
in relation to the entire range of social position.

 

Social Quartile

 

 

Reputation

Category lst 2nd 3rd 4th Total
Highest 38 3O 8 2 78
Lowest 3 18 24 23 68
TOTAL 41 48 32 25 146

 

x2 = 57.4940, p.<.001

 

i’The reputation hierarchy here is in the model pre-
dicted for delinquents (see Figure 3 and 4, pp. 79 and 80).

113

Thus we see a probability of less than one chance in
one thousand that these two variables could be independent

and the research hypothesis is accepted.

Results of Testinngypothesis (5)

 

The results of this analysis offer strong support
that a differential does, indeed, exist between staff and

peers in the reputations on which they place social value

.4... Wuh- v .‘F
.
II
-' h

and that the orderings of these reputations follow the 7.

general patterns predicted for them.

Reputation and Intelligence

 

We have seen previously that there appears to be a
close and positive correlation between the hierarchy of
personality variable combinations to which a group sub—
scribes, and the degree to which they place social value
on people. Further, these hierarchies apparently vary
with the social statuses and roles of the membership
which constitute the group doing the evaluating. We
have also had previous evidence in this experiment that
there is no significant relationship between intelligence
and social position in the study group when equated for
reputation.

But to what extent is reputation influenced by
intelligence irrespective of social position? In other
words, is intelligence also part of the total input which

peOple consider when assigning other peOple a reputation

114

label? Also, is this factor utilized differently by
delinquents than by others? Hypothesis (6) is designed

to treat these questions.

Hypothesis (6a and b): Proportionately more non-
retardates than retardates will be assigned
above the median reputation category and prov
portionately more retardates than nonretardates L
L

 

will be placed below the median reputation
category as rated by both staff and peer
groups separately.

TABLE 25.--Ana1ysis of reputation as measured by staff *<
in relation to intelligence.

 

Intelligence Category

 

 

 

Reputation Nonretarded Retarded Total
High 63 12 75
Low 102 14 116
TOTAL 165 26 191

2

X (ldf) = .9583, p.>.80

TABLE 26.—-Ana1ysis of reputation as measured by peers in
relation to intelligence.

 

Intelligence Category

 

 

 

Reputation Nonretarded Retarded Total
High 132 14 146
Low 136 17 153
TOTAL 268 31 299

2

X (ldf) .0585, p.>.80

115

Both the tests showed reputation to be quite indepen—

dent of intelligence. The null hypotheses are supported.

Results of Testing Hypothesis (6)

There appears to be no discrimination between intell—
igence groups by either staff or peers in assigning subjects
to high and low reputation categories. The peer data shows
an almost even split in cell frequencies, for almost a com-
plete absence of relationship, while the staff showed an
inclination toward loading of nonretardates in the low repu—
tation components cell, while not discriminating among the
retardates.

Even when only the lowest and highest reputation
categories are considered (in order to bring out any
association possibly screened out by the middle categories),

the data for peers remains essentially split as, seen below:

TABLE 27.--Analysis of the highest and lowest reputation
categories as measured by peers in relation to intelligence.

 

Intelligence Category

 

 

 

Reputation
Category Nonretarded Retarded Total
Highest 7O 8 78
Lowest 62 6 68
TOTAL 132 14 146
x2 0316 p > 80
(ldf) ' ’ ' '

Similarly, the staff data shows little tendency toward

influence on reputation by the intelligence variable.

 

116

TABLE 28.-—Analysis of the highest and lowest reputation
categories as measured by staff in relation to intelligence.

 

Intelligence Category

 

 

 

Reputation
Category Nonretarded Retarded Total
Highest 52 6 58
Lowest 28 2 30
TOTAL 80 8 88
x2 0316 p > 80
(ldf) ' ’ ° '

Intelligence and Anomie

 

The last pages of Chapter II outline our concerns
with anomie from the standpoints of both the delinquent in
general and the delinquent-retardate in particular, and
suggests possible approaches to investigating these
interests. Our primary interest lies in the retardate
and his relative alienation from, or integration with,
the peer social system, but we are also concerned with
his nonretarded compeers.

We have already postulated that the delinquent
achieves homeostasis in his delinquent subculture within
the institution after having experienced alienation in the
community. The question then becomes, "Is the retardate
also assimilated into this eunomic institutional social
order, or is he rejected by his fellow delinquents as

intellectually unworthy of membership?" By selecting

”F

“a. n M:
' .
I

117

those whose social position and reputation scores were
both above their medians and comparing them with those
whose scores were both below their medians, for their
proportions of retardates and nonretardates, it should
be possible to determine an answer to this question

(at least in accordance with our definition of anomie).

Hypothesis (7a and b): Proportionately more retar—
dates than nonretardates will receive a combina-
tion of social position and reputation scores
below the median and conversely, prOportionately t!
more nonretardates than retardates will receive
a combination of social position and reputation
scores above the median.

 

 

TABLE 29.--Analysis of anomie as measured by peers in
relation to intelligence.

 

Intelligence Category

 

 

 

Anomie Nonretarded Retarded Total
Low 99 8 107
High 112 14 126
TOTAL 211 22 233

X2 = 5194 p > 30
(ldf) ' ’ ° '

Results of Testing Hypothesis (7)

The evidence above appears to support the null of
no difference among intelligence groups in the degree to
which they are alienated from the main group. A slight

lean toward the more highly anomic in both groups, however,

118

is noted. Even at the extremes of reputation and social
position this appears to be true, although an interesting

reversal in directionality takes place, as seen below:

TABLE 30.—-Ana1ysis of anomie by highest and lowest
reputations and social position quartiles as measured
by peers in relation to intelligence. 1

 

Intelligence Category ;

 

 

 

Anomie Nonretarded Retarded Total ;
7-3
Lowest 33 5 38
Highest 21 2 23
TOTAL 54 7 61
x2 = 0133 p > 90
(ldf) ' ’ ' '

This table shows that in a comparison of the extremes
of social position and reputation we find more of each
intelligence group in the best integrated category and the

null still is found to be tenable.

Summary of the Analysis

 

In this chapter an attempt was made to describe the
plan for examining the data and each hypothesis was first
discussed in its various ramifications and then tested by
means of the tests of the subhypotheses. Results were

obtained in all cases and interpretations of the results

119

to the extent necessary were made. In some cases supple—
mentary data was presented and analyzed as the main analysis

required.

CHAPTER V

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

Summary of the Study

 

The purposes of the study were stated to be:

1. To ascertain the social position of the educable
mental retardate in the delinquency treatment
facility

2. To investigate his behavioral adjustment, and

3. To study the nature of the social valuing system
of a delinquent society, especially as it differs
from that of the community—at—large.

In addition, anomie as a theory to explain delin—
quent—retardate deviant behavior was to be operationalized
and tested.

A sociometric instrument and design were employed to
gather and test the data derived from the responses of a
pOpulation of institutionalized delinquents of both normal
and inferior intelligence, along with a small sample of
staff responses. Seven groups of hypotheses were developed
and the main hypotheses were tested indirectly by means
of the subhypotheses.

The design of the study consisted mainly of two parts:

a. A pairing of the research variables in all
possible combinations to test for independence.

120

121

b. A combining of the personality variables into
reputation components and exhausting all the
alternatives in a facetized design to test
against the othernmflxlresearch variables of
intelligence and social position.

This design resulted in a seven section analysis
involving intelligence and social position, intelligence
‘and. reciprocal choice, social position and adjustment,
adjustment and intelligence, reputation and social posi—
tion, reputation and intelligence, and intelligence and

anomie. It is felt that all of the objectives of the

study have been met in this analysis.

Conclusions

 

Before presenting the conclusions, a word of caution
concerning inferences from the data should be made. Since
X2 is mainly a measure of independence between nominal
variables, it cannot be assumed that rejection of the null
of independence establishes a cause—and-effect relation—
ship. At best we can only state whether or not there
appears to be some measure of association, and unless we
transform the results into a correlation by some means

such as r we can say little concerning relationships.

$5
1. Intelligence and Social Position

Unlike the preponderance of studies involving these
variables, intelligence appeared to exert little, if any,
influence on the social position of the delinquents in the

institution. Even when the eXperiment was controlled for

certain personality variables (i.e., reputation) no

122

significant relationship was established. There was an
indication that the more severely retarded were viewed
differentially and rejected but this was not at the level

of significance.

Conclusion: There is no relationship between intelligence

 

 

 

and social position and the research hypothesis

is therefore rejected.

 

2. Intelligence and Reciprocal Choice

There was no significant evidence that intelligence
was a factor in the reciprocal friendships established
between residents. The retardates, however, appeared to
be "friendlier," choosing friends both from within their
own ranks and from the nonretardate group to a prOportion—
ately greater degree than did their more intellectually
well endowed peers. In fact, they selected friends from
their Opposite numbers in a greater percentage of the
potential cases than the nonretardates did of their own

nonretarded membership.

Conclusion: The hypothesized positive association between

 

 

 

reciprocal choice and similarigy in intelli—

 

gence was not verified.

 

3. Intelligence and Behavioral Adjustment
No evidence was presented to show an association
between intelligence (at any of the three levels) and social

acceptability by either staff or peer evaluations.

123

In aggression, although the directionality was as
predicted, the staff data did not show a significant
association of this variable with intelligence. The peer
data, however, showed a definite inverse association between
aggression and intelligence, significant at the .05 level
and opposite to the research hypothesis.

The data on withdrawal for both staff and peers shows

this variable to be independent of intelligence.

Conclusion: The hypothesis of an association between
intelligence and adjustment is supported in
part and rejected in the main. There appears
to be an inverse association of aggression

with intelligence.

4. Adjustment and Social Position

A very significant positive association between
acceptance and social position by both staff and peer
reSponses was established. The data for both staff and
peers was significant at the .001 level.

There was no support for the research hypothesis of
association between social position and aggression. A
slight tendency for the social position to vary directly
with the degree of aggression was noted.

The peer data showed the social position to vary
inversely with the degree of withdrawal and to be signifi—

cant at the .001 level. Curiously, the staff favored the

124

more withdrawn with higher social position, but not signie
ficantly so.

Of the three personality facets, acceptability was
the most significantly associated with social position and
may be considered the social position predictor in reputa—
tion. Withdrawal is also an important facet in peer evalua—
tions of social position and in inverse association.
Surprisingly, aggression was not found to be an important

influence in either staff or peer evaluations.

Conclusion: The hypothesis of association between behavioral
adjustment and social position was partially
verified. The predicted associations between
acceptance and social position, and withdrawal
and social position, were supported (accepr
tance by both rating groups and withdrawal by
peers only). The hypothesis concerning

aggression was rejected.

 

5. Reputation and Social Position

A very significant association. between reputation
and social position was apparent in the peer data and one
almost at the level of significance was found in the
staff data. The hypothesized peer social valuing model
was almost exactly reproduced by the actual evaluations.
A difference between the people—valuing models for staff

and peers was established.

125

Conclusion: The hypothesis of association between social

ppsition and rpputation and the predicted

 

differential between staff and peer valuing

eystems were supported.

 

6. Reputation and Intelligence

No significant influence of intelligence on reputation
was found in either staff or peer data. Even when the
eXperiment was extended out to the extremes of reputation
components to increase sensitivity to intelligence effects,

the data failed to produce significant results.

Conclusion: The research hypothesis of a direct associa—

 

 

tion between reputation and intelligence was

rejected.

 

7. Intelligence and Anomie

There was no significant difference between intelli—
gence groups in their proneness toward an anomic relation—
ship in the subculture. The data showed only slight
evidence of inclination toward the hypothesis in that a
greater prOportion of retardates than nonretardates fell
below the median but this could be due to chance. It is
noteworthy that a greater prOportion of both groups fell
into the highly anomic category. It is only in a compari-
son of the extremes of reputation and social position that
the frequency balance turns in favor of the integrated

delinquents, but even here it favored both intelligence

126

groups and supported the null of independence between

these two variables.

Conclusion: The research hypothesis that the retardate

 

would be more anomic was not found tenable.

 

General Study Conclusions

 

1.

Intelligence is apparently not a factor in the study
group's determination of the social positions of their
peers and the retardates did not suffer status loss

by reason of their intellectual impairment.

Intelligence was a factor in the behavioral adjustment
of the institutionalized delinquents in this study
only in that the retardates appeared to be more mal—
aggressive.

Social acceptability was the predictor variable in
determining social position of this group of institu—
tionalized delinquents and aggressiveness appeared to
have little influence on social status.

A differential appeared to exist between these insti-
tutionalized delinquents and the staff who supervised
them in the hierarchy of reputations in their respec«
tive social value systems. Staff placed highest value

on those who were perceived to be accepted-nonaggressive—
interactors while the delinquents valued the accepted—
aggressive—interactors above all others. At the bottom
of the social ladder, in this group of institution-
alized delinquents, was the nonaccepted-nonaggressive—
noninteractor.

This study neither supported nor refuted the assumption
that the delinquent social system is eunomic even
though a somewhat greater prOportion were shown to be
alienates.

The retardate in this study was apparently no more
anomic than his nonretarded compeers.

The retardate in this experiment definitely was not
an isolate.

CHAPTER VI

IMPLICATIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Implications of the Study

 

Introduction

As suggested in the preceding chapter, with a
statistic such as chi square, the outcomes of application
of this test must be treated conservatively. Drawing
inferences from data obtained by assigning groups with
similar characteristics to categories, and then comparing
the categories, leaves considerable latitude for Spurious
associations to attain the "respectability" of cause-and-
effect relationships from "scientific" methodology. For
instance, it is entirely possible that, because of the
relatively small group, all of the high retardates in
this experiment may have been brown eyed and all of the
low retardates blue eyed, but it would be capricious on
our part to impute causality to this observation with any
personality differential existing between these two groups.

It is for this reason that the eXperiment attempted
to exhaust all the possible combinations of variables
involved, in order to gather maximum evidence concerning
social position and adjustment as they are influenced by
intelligence.

.127

128

As a result, it is with the confidence borne of
conservative treatment and restraint that the following
implications are discussed, keeping mindful of our earlier
imposed limitation that the nature of our data and
methodology do not allow for generalization to the universe

of training schools for delinquents.

Intelligence and Social Position

The inference from the study is very clear regarding
the influence of intelligence on social position. Delin-
quents in the training school under study simply did not
discriminate in friendship selections on the basis of the
intellectual capacities of their compeers. The implica—
tions of this finding, should future replications offer
confirmation, could have a profound effect on the
policies governing transfer of residents between training
schools serving delinquents and those serving the men-
tally retarded. What is implied is that no social
sanctions are invoked in the training school against in—
mates as a result of their lower intellectual functioning.
What discriminations do show up appear to be associated
with the social malaggression attending the intellectual
retardation, as a function of low impulse control, rather
than from the intellectual difference per se. Since
social labeling was not found to exist, the study indicates
that, to the extent that this institution is represen—

tative of most, training schools for resocialization of

129

delinquents are a suitable medium for rehabilitation of
retarded delinquents, provided they plan for and meet their
special social and academic needs. In fact, by comparison
with studies done in the heterogeneously grouped classrooms
of the public school, the training school offers a parti-
cularly well suited milieu for the retardates need to

find social acceptance and social success. Another factor
in the institution's favor is the relatively greater
Opportunities afforded its members to accrue social prestige
through activities associated more with performance than
nvith cognition.

The potential danger included in the finding of no
dtlfferences in the social positions of the normal and
Peetarded subjects in the study, lies in the possibility
tflat the existence of members with special academic needs
(i..e. the retardates) among the institutional pOpulation
18: simply not recognized (in much the same way that
IN12>1ic schools appear to ignore their social needs), and
Tflléat these unique needs will therefore not be provided
fear. Perhaps, the public school and the institution can
leéalui from each other in creating an atmosphere conducive
tO tooth social and academic gains to insure the retardate

Opp<DIiunity to function Optimally in the community.

Intelligence and Reciprocal Choice

Perhaps the most significant implication to be

derixred.from.this area of the study is the realization

130

that retardates may have something to offer society as
well as needs to be met.

While no significant results were obtained to
establish that retardates differed materially in recip—
rocal social relationships, as a group they tended to
seek friends among all members of the pOpulation to a
greater degree than did the control group. Perhaps
this is due to a lack of social SOphistication but, if so,
this quality should be reinforced and supported by our
educational institutions to make mutual trust and con—
:fidence in our fellow men an integral social characteristic
c>f our society. That the retardates possessed this
cauality to a greater degree, is evidence, perhaps, that

riot all the desirable personality factors in human beings

adre positively correlated with intelligence. The

h<3nesty, authenticity, generosity, selflessness, and true

lOve of living things, often observed among mentally

PEEtarded and deficient children, (although not measured

1?: this study) ought to be preserved or inculcated in all

0L1]? children as they grow to maturity.

IIltelligence and Behavioral Adjustment
Of the three measures of adjustment--acceptabi1ity,

alggr‘ession and withdrawal—-it was only in aggression that

a Significant difference was obtained. That the retardate

tenCis to be more malaggressive appears to be undeniable,

131

but it should be emphasized that this in no way imputes a
relationship between low intelligence per se and this
undesirable facet of personality. Rather, it is more
likely the product of social conditioning and frustration,
attending the retardation as a result of persistent
failure to compete successfully in the intellectual

"track meet" which characterizes the daily school routines
of all children in our society. This confirmation of
studies done in the public schools may be an indicator
that institutions are as prone as other educational
systems to placing unrealistic expectations for behavioral
conformity on retardates. The fact that he tended to
choose more friends than did the nonretardate is evidence
that the retardate is not antisocial.

The retardate, then, is not dominated by his peers,
as it was postulated he would be, and does not withdraw
and alienate himself from the group; nor was he found to
be any more or less acceptable to the members of his
society than were the subjects with normal intellect.

This finding implies that we must continue to seek
ways to provide the stimulation of intellectually hetero-
geneous interactions among our children while reducing the
competitive aspects of these relationships. The retardate

might, under these conditions, have less need to act out

132

hostilely and could utilize his demonstrated ability to be

an acceptable outgoing member of his social group.

Adjustment and Social Position

The results indicated a very strong positive associa—
tion between acceptance and social position, a somewhat
less intense negative association between the tendency to
withdraw and social position, and no significant associa—
tion (although:unmrpositive tendencies existed) between
aggression and social position. The implications of these
findings are of considerable importance.

First of all, it confirms the writings of Mertonl
concerning the normalcy of the delinquent value system,
as well as the hypotheses of this study concerning the
delinquent's viewing of acceptability and withdrawal.
Secondly, it refutes the literature in general, and the
hypothesis in this study in particular, concerning the
delinquent's attitude toward aggressiveness. Social
acceptability and social isolation are as prime factors
in the delinquents' people—valuing system as they are in
society in general, and aggressiveness appears to be much
less important than is commonly assumed. The tendency
for the staff to associate withdrawal positively with

social position supports the well-documented observation

 

1See page 55.

133

of teachers that they tend to equate self—isolation with
conformity and reward it with social approval, when it
should be treated with as much concern as malaggression
and hyperactivity. It also confirms the many researchers1
who found children to be more reliable than adults in
judging peer social position.

The main implication of this section, however, lies
in the finding that delinquents, while slightly inclined
to value aggression in their friends, generally demonstrate
the same culturally induced attitudes toward peer person-
ality factors taken individually, as do typical children.
This indicates that treatment programs for delinquents
need not deviate markedly from the social adjustment
approaches used with typical children in effecting their
resocialization. Identification figures for delinquents
to use as models, for instance, can be the same historical
and contemporary heroes as are held up to typical children
as mirror images for maturity (save, perhaps, for the
addition of outstanding members of the minority groups so

heavily represented among delinquents).

Reputation and Social Position
The strongest evidence produced in this study was
in the finding that the predicted hierarchies of reputa-

tions by both peers and staff were confirmed by the data.

 

1See page 71.

134

Social position was associated with reputation to a marked
degree and a definite differential between staff and peers
in reputation orderings was noted. While the delinquents
gave social approval to the acceptable—aggressive-inter—
actor, the staff sanctioned the acceptable-nonaggressive—
interactor. It would appear that the delinquents are

more reality oriented than staff in selecting as their
social ideal, the reputation component best suited for

the violent world in which the delinquent must exist.

Reputation and Intelligence

Since the retardate was seen to differ from the
control group in displaying a greater degree of aggression,
and since the aggressive, outgoing delinquent enjoyed the
greatest peer social approval of all the various reputa-
tions, it is not surprising that the retardate was found
to be associated as often with high reputations as were
his mentally better endowed compeers. Equipped in this
way, the retardate should be able to function as well as
the others in this subculture. Perhaps all that is needed
is for treatment programs for this type youngster to
emphasize impulse control in order to keep aggression

within manageable limits.

Intelligence and Anomie
The retardate was found to be no more anomic than

the nonretardates in the study. This implies that, unlike

135

hi.s alienated position in society, the retardate achieves
knonueostasis within the institutional social system. The
faxzt that the delinquents tended to consign more of their
nuenfloers to the anomic category than to a socially integrated
st:aJ:us merely indicates the general reliability of their
appraisals. Added support is seen in the finding that
bcrtrl intelligence groups appeared in approximate pro—
portions among the most and least anomic.

It would appear, then, that in the inmate social
Sydsizem, value is placed not on where one lives, nor on
WhCD one's parents are, nor on what clothing one wears
(strice all wear essentially the same) nor on how intelli-
Serltz one is (since this can be a negative value in the
ihEStitution under subtle staff pressure to conform to
Patzrler rigid behavioral eXpectations), but on what one
Car; do. Thus, the borderline defective who can physi—
callyassert himself, either legitimately through athle-
tiCES or illegitimately through fighting, can win the sub-

Serxrience, and often the friendship, of his peers.

Rieol'nmendations

l. The study shows the mentally retarded boy able to
compete on even terms for social position in
the training school for delinquents. This out—

come, coupled with the intellectual challenge

136

and stimulation of heterogeneous groupings, would
dictate a recommendation that delinquent retar—
dates continue to be placed in these facilities.
It is recommended that staff develOpment pro—
grams in residential treatment centers for
delinquents emphasize the need to create an
institutional atmosphere in which student leader—
ship can accede from desirable social qualities
rather than from such undesirable personality
manifestations as malaggression and hostile
acting out. This leadership in the informal
system of the inmates must be recognized and
rewarded by the formal system of the staff.

More efficient means of individualization of
treatment should be developed through prescrip-
tion programming to insure structured Oppor—
tunity for goal achievement by socially pre-
scribed means. This should reduce movement
toward an anomic behavioral style in the comm—
unity and produce a more socially conforming
adaptive mode.

Treatment programming for delinquents should
take cognizance of the difference between their
social valuing and that of greater society.
Staff members should be chosen with the greatest

care to present identification figures in the

137

form of young, vigorous males who epitomize
acceptable social values, but who have the con-
temporary social awareness and aggressiveness
to gain the respect, admiration, and loyalty
of their charges. Liaison between a nearby
community and the treatment center must be
established so that program activities can
reach out and involve social interactions with
community institutions (i.e., church, school,
YMCA, etc.) which can provide appropriate peer
models. With saturation from these sources
and the saliency created by an accepting and
empathic staff, a shift in delinquent social
valuing toward congruence with the values of

the community should be attained.

EEIZELlfiems for Further Study

 

1.

Gain further evidence concerning the relative
anomia of delinquents in the following way:
Operationalize Merton's paradigm of anomie in
a sociometric instrument which will identify
each of the five types of social adaptation
he defines, and establish the social position
of each type in both a training school and a
public school setting for comparison purposes.
Study the effects of institutional size and

the nature of its program on delinquency

138

treatment as follows: Identify, by sociometric
means, malaggressive and COOperative members

in the following types of institutions: a large,
custody-oriented training school for delinquent
boys; a large, residential institution for
delinquent boys which utilizes an activity pro—
gram as the treatment agent; a large, residential
institution for disturbed children with a
coeducational program; a small residential
facility featuring an intensive, individualized,
social casework approach; a small psychiatrically
oriented residential institution. Determine

the differences which may exist among these
institutions in the relative social statuses

of the two types of membership, as measured by
both staff and peers.

Investigate the influences of leadership type
and school climate on changes in delinquent
social values by the following means: Within
one institution for delinquents, randomly assign
a sample of new arrivals to domiciling units
organized and administered along‘one of two
lines,either“autocratic or democratic. Socio-
metrically identify "hostile" and "friendly"
members within both groups and establish their

relative social standings in the groups at two

139

chronological stages: one month and six months
after entering the program. Compare the two
groups at both periods of time for changes

in attitude toward peers.

Further study the relationship between low
intelligence and certain personality character-
istics and social position as follows: Make a
detailed analysis, utilizing available casework
materials and staff evaluations, to assess and
classifytnnypersonality variables of a selected
sample of institutionalized delinquents who

score below 70 on an intelligence test. Establish
their social positions in an intellectually
heterogeneous group by sociometric means. Factor
analyze the resulting data for differential
influence of intellectual impairment and
personality variables on social position.
Investigate the effects on social position of

the nature of the program activities by the
following means: Do a replication of the present
study, utilizing only those delinquents who

score either above 100 or below 75 on an
intelligence test. Equate for length of time

in residence. Redesign the sociometric instru—
ment to provide for social rejections as well as
social choices by both staff and peers. Gather

the data in two contrasting environments within

140

the institution; academic (classroom) and social

(cottage). Compare the results from these two

areas .

6. Make further investigation into the facet of
aggression in its relation to the social

position of delinquents in a delinquent social

system.

Shinunary of the Investigation

This investigation was primarily concerned with the
Social status of the mental retardate in an institution
fWDr‘ delinquents. He was found to be as pOpular a member
<3f‘ 11he institutional social system, to enjoy as high a
IVEIDLAtation, and to be as relatively free of anomia
(vvidohin the institution) as was his more intellectually
tafpical cottage mate. He exhibited a significantly
gPeater malagression, but was still as acceptable, and
ric’ hnore withdrawing, than was the nonretardate.

Assuming that it could meet his other needs, the
InaiiJfi :implication of these findings was that the
institution was a socially suitable milieu for the

r3
etarded delinquent's treatment.

In the secondary order of inquiries,acceptability and
She gariousness (low withdrawal) were established as of
t
r163 ESame importance to a delinquent's social position as

tin
635’ appear to be among more typical children, while

141

aggression was found not to be a significant factor in
delinquent pOpularity. In the valuing of reputations,
however, delinquents demonstrated their preference
for a different ordering than did the staff who super-
vised them and gave highest status to the acceptable
and aggressive interactor.

It is our belief that the study revealed some
evidence that the delinquent may see his compeers as
estranged and alienated and that, while his attitude
toward clusters of personality traits in other peOple is
apparently different from the staff who supervised him,
his reactions to these personality characteristics taken
individually is quite typical and conforming. Other
than the differential in reputation valuing, there was
little in the investigation to indicate innovation
Style of behavior in the Merton sense. The retardate also
failed to live up to expectations, showing none of the
retreatist or ritualistic life style that had been pre—
diCited for him. In the confines of the institution at
least, the retarded delinquent is quite conforming and
integrated socially.

Ways must be sought to assist this youth to the
Same social integration level in the community that he
has secured within the residential institution. To put

the problem in Trippe's (1960) words:

142

Social cooperation with value attached to individual
pursuits, performance in line with ability, freedom
from anxiety, and social as well as economic security
for all, are goals which need to be actively sought.

While delinquency and mental retardation are shown

13y incidence figures to be associated with our lowest
sc>cioeconomic class more than with any other, the social
Lorwablems which they create beset the whole of society and
irrvolve us all in their solutions. We must insure that
61s our present socioeconomic class system is altered by

true "War on Poverty" to produce the "Great Society," we

dCD not give rise to emu intellectual caste.

143

"There is a destiny that makes us brothers:
None goes his way alone,

All that we send into the lives of others
Comes back into our own."

Edwin Markham

BIBLIOGRAPHY

11414

Lo

1:1.‘

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Ainsworth, S. H. An exploratory study of educational,
social and emotional factors in the education of
mentally_retarded children in georgia public schools.
Athens: University of Georgia, 1959.

Albee, G. W., and Pascal, G. R. "A study of competi—
tive behavior in mental defectives," American Journal

of Mental Deficiency, 1951, 55:567—581.

firm

Alexander, T. and Alexander, M. "A study of person— .
ality and social status," Child Development, Sept- I"

ember, 1952, 23:207-213.

Almack, J. C. "The influence of intelligence on the
Selection of associates," School and Society,
November A, 1922, 16:529~530.

Ausubel, D. P., and Schiff, H. M. "A preliminary
study of developmental trends in socioempathy:
accuracy of perception of own and others' socio—
metric status," Child Development, 1952, 23:111—128.

Baldwin, W. K. "The social position of mentally
handicapped children in the regular classes in the
public schoolg' Excep. Child, 1958, 25:106-108, 112.

Baller, W. R. "A study of the present social status
of a group of adults who, when they were in the
elementary schools, were classified as mentally
deficient," Genet. Psychol. Monog., 1936, 18:165—

2AA.
Barbe, W. B. ”Peer relationships of children of

different intelligence levels," School and Society,
August 21, 1954, 80:60—62.

Becker, H. S. Outsiders, studies in the sociology
of deviance. New York: The Free Press of Glencoe,

1963.

 

. The other side: _perspectives on deviance.
New York: The Free Press of Glencoe, 1964.

Bijou, S. W. "The special problem of motivation in
the academic learning of the retarded child,"
Excep. Child. 1952, 19:103—1OA, 120.

145

.122.

i113.

J.L4-

J—ES-

1.65.

1L6

Blatt, B. "The physical personality and academic
status of children who are mentally retarded attending
special classes as compared with children who are
mentally retarded attending regular classes,"
American Journal of Mental Deficiency, March, 1958,

62:810—818.

Bobroff, A. "Economic adjustment of l2l adults
formerly students in classes for the mental retar-
dates,” American Journal of Mental Deficiency,

1956, 50:525-535-

Bolduc, T. E. "Social value-need patterns in mental
retardates." Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation,

Pennsylvania State, 1959.

Bonney, M. E. "Personality traits of socially success-
ful and socially unsuccessful children," Journal
of Educational Psychology, November, 19A3, 35:359-472.

"Sociometric study of agreement between
teacher Judgments and student choices: in regard
to the numbers of friends possessed by high school
students,” Sociometry, 19A7, 10:133-146.

Bowman, P. "The defective delinquent," American
Journal of Psychiatry, 1957, 114:1“7—151.

Bredemeyer, H. C. Toby, Marcia L., and Riley,
Matilda W., Chapter VI, "Reputation," in Riley,
Matilda W., Riley, J. W. Jr., and Toby J. Sociolo-
gical Studies in Scale Analysis. New Brunswick,
N. J.: Rutgers University Press, 1954.

Bronfenbrenner, U. "A constant frame of reference
for sociometric research: Part II, eXperiment
and inference," Sociometry, 19UA, 7:AOw75.

"The measurement of sociometric status:
structure and development,” Sociom. Monogr. New
York: Beacon House, 19A5, No. 6.

Brown, D. "Factors affecting social acceptance of
high school students," The School Review, 195A,

62:151-155.

Caditz, Sylvan B. "Effect of a training school
experience on the personality of delinquent boys,"
Journal of Consult. Psychol., December, 1959,

23:501-509.

‘-‘T*“”’““Wll'

2;3.

234.

255.

236.

237.

258.

1359.

332?,

313 o

141'

Capobianco, R. J., and Cole, Dorothy A. "Social
behavior of mentally retarded children," American
Journal of Mental Deficiency, 1960, 6A:638—65I.

Cassidy, Viola M., and Phelps, H. R. Postschool
Adiustment of Slow Learning Childrean_A Study of
Persons Previously Enrolled in Special Classes in
Ohio. Columbus: Bureau of Special and Adult
Education, Ohio State University, 1955.

 

Cassidy, Viola, and Stanton, Jeannette E. An Investi—
gation of Factors involved in the Educational Place-
ment of Mentally Retarded Children. Columbus:

Ohio State University, 1959.

Channing, Alice. Employment of Mentally Deficient
prs and Girls. Children's Bureau Pub. No. 210.
Washington D. C.: U. S. Dept. of Health, Education
and Welfare, 1932.

 

Charles, D.C. "Ability ard accomplishment of persons
earlier Judged mentally deficient," Genet. Psychol.

Monogr., 1953, 47:3—71.

Clark, A. D. B. "A symposium: the social adjustment
of the mentally deficient.--I. recent english
research," American Journal of Mental Deficienpyj

 

1957, 621295-299.

Cloward, R. A. "Illegitimate means, anomie, and
deviant behavior,” American Sociol. Rev., April,
1959, 24:164-176.

”Social control and anomie: A study of a
prison community." Unpublished Doctoral Disser-
tation, Columbia University, 1959.

Collmann, R. D., and Newlyn, D. ”Employment success
of educationally subnormal ex—pupils in England,”
American Journal of Mental Deficiency, 1956, 60:

733-753-

. "Employment success of mentally dull and
intellectually normal ex-pupils in England,"
American Journal of Mental Deficiency, 1957, 61:
A8H449O.

Cromwell, R. L. "Selected aspects of personality
development in mentally retarded children,"
Excep. Child., 1961, 28:44-51.

1A8

j314. Dahlke, H. O. ”Determinants of sociometric relations
among children in the elementary school,” Sociometry,

1953, 15:327-338-

j355. Davidson, Helen H., and Lang, G. ”Children's
perception of their teachers' feelings toward them
related to self-perception, school achievement,

and behaVior," Journal of Exp. Educ., 1960,

 

 

29:107-l18.
:363. Davis, P. "Emotiona‘ roblems of the retarded
child," Training School Bulletin, 1951, 98:50v56.
L3'7. EeXter, L. A. ”A social theory of mental

deficiency," American Journal of Mental Deficiency,
March, 1958, 62:920-928.

 

 

3353. . ”On the politics and sociology of stupidity
in our society,” in Becker, H. S. The Other
Side: Perspectives on Devianpe. New York: The
Free Press of Glencoe, 196K.

3359.. Dinger, J. C. "Post—school adjustment of former
educable retarded pupils," Excep. Child., March,

1961, 72353-360-

. Doll, E. ”Understanding and acceptance,"
Excep. Child., 1952, 19:105—106.

Dunnington, Margaret. "Behavioral differences of
sociometric status groups in a nursery,” Child

Development, 1957, 28:103—111.

24'23 . Durkheim, E. Suicide. Glencoe, Illinois
The Free Press, 1951.

14 33.. Elenbogen, M. L. ”A comparative study of some aspects
of academic and social adjustment of two groups of

mentally retarded children in special classes and
in regular grades,” Dissertation Abstract, 1957,

17:2496.

1* L4 - English, H. B., and English, Ava C. A Comprehensive
Dictionary of Psychological and Psychoanalytic
Terms. New York: Longmans, Green, 1958.

- Erikson, Kai T. "Notes on the sociology of deviance,"
in Becker, H. S. The Other Side: Perspectives
on Deviance. New York: The Free Press of Glencoe,

196A.

 

 

 

 

146.

147.

1483.

L19.

5(3.

511.

552.

553.

£514

149

Foale, Martha. "The special difficulties of the high
grade mental defective adolescent," American Journal

 

of Mental Deficiency, 1956, 60:867—877.

 

Furfey, P. H. "Some factors influencing the selection
of boys' chums,” Journal of Applied Psychol.,
March, 1927, 11:A7—51.

 

Gardner, W. 1., and Nisonger, H. W. "A manual on

program develOpment in mental retardation," American

Journal of Mental Deficiency, Vol. 66, Supplement
No. A. Willimantic, Conn.: American Association
on Mental Deficiency, 1962.

 

Getzels, J. W., and Jackson, P. W. "The teacher's
personality and characteristics," in Gage, N. L.
(ed.) Handbook of Research on Teaching. Chicago:
Rand McNally and Co., 1963.

Glueck, S. and Eleanor. One Thousand Juvenile
Delinquents: Their Treatment by Court and Clinic.
Cambridge, Mass. Harvard Press, 193A.

 

 

Golding, W. Lord of the Flies. New York: G. P.
Putnam's Sons, 1959.

 

Grace, H. A. and Booth, Nancy Lou. "Is the gifted
child a social isolate?" Peabody J. Educ., 1958,
35:195-196.

 

Grann, L. R. "The relationship between academic
achievement of pupils and the social structure of
the classroom," Rural Sociol., March, 1956, 21:
179—180. If

 

Gronlund, N. E. "The accuracy of teachers' Judgments
concerning the sociometric status of sixth-grade
pupils," Sociometry Monogr., 1951, No. 25.

 

. "Relationship between the sociometric status

of pupils and teachers' preferences for or against

having them in class," Sociometry, 1953, 16:
142-150.

 

"The relative ability of homeroom teachers

and special subJect teachers to Judge the social

acceptability of pre-adolescent pupils," Journal
of Educ. Res., 1955, 48:381-391.

q”"“" "“ ”‘7’”

d

4'.

:l i

 

537.

538.

539.

EEO.

651.

632.

63.

E54

65

150

"The general ability to Judge sociometric
status: elementary student teachers' sociometric
perceptions of classmates and pupils," Journal of

 

 

Educ. Psychol., 1956, 47:1U7v157.

 

. Sopiometry in the classroom. New York:
Harper, 1959.

 

Grossman, B., and Wrighter, J. "The relationship
between selectionereJection, intelligence, social
status, and personality amongst sixth grade

children," Spciometry, December, 1958, 11:346-355.

 

Guertin, W. H., Rabin, A. 1., Frank, G. H., and
Ladd, C. E. "Research with the Wechsler Intelli-
gence Scale for adults: 1955-60," Psychological
Bplletin, January, 1962, 59:1—26.

 

Guttman, I. "A structural theory for intergroup

beliefs and action," American Sociological Review,

June, 1959, 24:318—328.

Hays, W. "Mental level and friend selection among

institutionalized defective girls," American Journal

 

of Mental Deficiency, July, 1951, 56:198-203.

 

Hsia, Jui—Ching. A Study of Sociability of
Elementary School Children. New York: Teachers
College, Columbia University, 1928.

 

 

Hunter, E. C. "Changes in teachers' attitudes
toward children's behavior over the last thirty
years," Ment. Hyg. N. Y;) 1957, 41:3—11.

 

Itoga,I<.and Tanaka, M. "A study of the prognosis
of social adJustment of the feeble minded,"
Japanese Journal of Educ. Psychol., 1956, 3:204-
213, in Psychol. Abs., 1958, 32:4313.

 

Jennings, H. H. Leadership and isolation. New York:

 

Longmans, Green and Co., 1950.

Johnson, G. O. "A study of the social position of

mentally handicapped children in the regular grades,"
American Journal of Mental Deficiency, July, 1950,

55:60-89.

‘1 ‘ ,' "5:3,

151

638. . A Comparative Study of the Personal and
Social Adjustment of Mentally Handicapped Children
Placed in Special Classes With Mentally Handicapped
Children Who Remain in Regular Classes. Syracuse:
Syracuse University Research Institute, Office of
Research in Special Education and Rehabilitation,

 

1961.

69% . "Special education for the mentally handiv
capped-—a paradox," Excep. Child., October, 1962,
29:62—69. .

'70. . and Kirk S. "Are mentally handicapped

children segregated in the regular gradeS?" Excep.
Child., December, 1950, 17:65-68, 87-88.

'71. Jordan, A. M. "Social traits of mentally
handicapped children," in Thurstone, T. G. Ag
Evaluation of Educating Mentally Handicapped
Children in Special Classes and in Regular Classes.
Chapel Hill: School of Education, University of
North Carolina, 1959.

 

'722. . "Peer acceptance of mentally handicapped,"
Research Relating to Mentally Retarded Children,
No. 1, Washington, D. C.: U. S. Department of

Health, Education and Welfare, 1960.

'733. Jordan, T. E., and DeCharms, R. "The achievement
motive in normal and mentally retarded children,"
American Journal of Mental Deficiency, 1959, 6A:
H67-1166.

714. Kennedy, Ruby J. The Social AdJustment ovaorons in
a Connecticut City. Hartford (Mansfield-Southbury):
Social Service Department, 19A8.

 

753. Kinney, Elva Elma. "Study of peer group social
acceptability at the fifth grade level in a public
school," Journal of Ed. Res., September, 1953,
47:57-64.

755. Kolstoe, O. P. "An examination of some character-
istics which discriminate between employed and
not-employed mentally retarded males," American
Journal of Mental Deficiency, November, 19 l,
66:A72-H82.

T7 . Kvaraceus, W. 0. Juvenile Delinquency and the
School. Yonkers—on-Hudson, N. Y.: World Book Co.,

1955.

 

7E1

79.

82%

534.

E35.

E36.

__Em

Delta Kappan, November, 1963, 45:87—90.

1
\l'
I

”Acceptance, reje ectic n and exceptionality,
Child., 1956, 22: as 331.

 

(Il
rr1 .

"Some cultural aspects of delinquency,"

Federal Probation; Jarcn, 1959, 23:8—12.

"Alienated youth here and abroad," Phi

—-—-—

 

lapp, Esther R. "A study of the social adJustment
of slow—learning children who were assigned part~
time to regular classes," American Journal of
Mental Deficienpy, September, 1957, 62:254-262.

13 of Sixth and Seventh

Laughlin, F. The Peer
Teachers College,

Grade Children. New
Columbia University,

HKIUJ
\00

Lewis, W. W. Jr. "The construct validation of a
reputation test. Unpublished Doctoral Disserta—
tion, Geo. Peabody Collzge for Teachers, 1959.

Lichtenstein, M., and Brown, A. W. "Intelligence
and achievement of children in a delinquency area,"
Journal of Juv. Res., 1938, 22:1-25.

Lippitt, R. "An experimental study of the effect
of democratic and authoritarian group atmospheres.
Studies in topological and vector psychology,"
University of Iowa Stud. Child Welf., 1940, 16:43—

195.

Littell, W. M. "The Wechsler Intelligence

Scale for children: review of a decade of research,"

Ppychol. Bulletin, 1960, 57:132—156.

Lucito, L. J. "A comparison of the independence—
conformity behaVior of intellectually bright and
dull children," Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation,
University of Illinois, 1959.

MacIver, R. M. The Ramparts We Guard. New York:
The Macmillan Co., 1950.

Mackie, R., Williams, H., and Dunn, L. Tgachers
of Children Who Are Mentally Retarded. U. S.
Office of Education Bulletin, No. 3, 1957.

Martin, Frances. "Personality development and social
adJustment of mentally retarded children," American
Journal of Mental Deficiency, September, 1941,

46294-101.

 

153

91. McCandless, B. R., Castaneda, A., and Palermo, D. S.
"Anxiety in children and social status," Child

Develop., 1956, 27:385-391.

92. McClelland, D. C. The AchievingySociety. Princeton:
D. VanNostrand, 1961.

 

93. Merton, R. Social Theory and Social Structure.
2nd ed. revised. Glencoe Illinois: The Free
Press, 1957.

 

94. Metfessel, M. and Lovell, Constance. "Recent "
literature on individual correlates of crime,
Psychol. Bulletin, March, 1942, 39:133—164.

 

95. Miller, R. V. "Social status and socioempathic
differences among mentally superior, mentally
typical and mentally retarded children," Excep.
Child., December, 1956, 23:114-119.

£96. Moreno, J. L. Who Shall Survive: A New Approach
to the Problem of Human Relationships. (revised).
New York: Beacon House, 1952.

 

 

$97. Mullen, Frances A., and Itkin, W. Achievement and
Adjustment of Educable Mentally Handicapped Children

 

 

in Special Classes and in Regular Grades. Chicago:

Chicago Board of Education and Department of Public
Instruction of the State of Illinois, 1961.

 

$98. Myers, R. K. "Teachers' Judgment of social success
and sociometric scores," American Journal of
Mental Deficiency, 1961, 65:462—466.

 

 

959. Newcomb, T. M. The Acquaintance Process. New York:
Holt, 1961.

 

10C). Newman, J. R. and Loos, F. M. "Differences between

verbal and performance IQ's with mentally

defective children on the Wechsler Intelligence
Scales for children," Journal of Consult. Psychol.,
1955, 19:16.

 

1011.. O'Conner, N. "Defectives working in the community,”
American Journal of Mental Deficiency, 1954,
59:173—180.

 

102 . Osgood, c. E., Suci, G. J. and Tannenbaum, P. H.
The Measurement of Meaning. Urbana: University

of Illinois, 1957.

 

1133.

.1C34.

].C)5.

]_C)6.

J.C)7.

ILC)8.

11359,

141C).

J-J.J_.

1-1.22.

113.

llq.

154

Palk, B. E. "Relationship between classroom climate
and pupil behavior with educable retardates,"
Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, Geo. Peabody
College for Teachers, 1962. F

Peckham, R. A. "Problems in Job adjustment of the
mentally retarded," American Journal of Mental

Deficiency, 1951, 56:448v453.

Peterson, L. and Smith, L. L. "The post-school
adJustment of educable mentally retarded adults in
comparison with that of adults of normal intelliw
gence," ExcepJ Child., 1960, 26:4044408.

 

Phelps, H. R. "Post—school adJustment of mentally
retarded children in selected Ohio cities,"
Excep. Child., November, 1956, 23:58:62, 91.

 

POpe, B. "Prestige values in contrasting socio-
economic groups of children," Psychiat., 1953,
16:381-385.

Porter, R. B., and Milazzo, T. C. "A comparison
of mentally retarded adults," Excpp. Child.,
1958, 24:410—412.

Reynolds, M. C., and Stunkard, C. L. A Comparative
Study of Day Class vs. Institutionalized
Educable Retardates. Minneapolis: University
of Minn., 1960,

Riesman, D. The Lonely Crowd. 2nd ed. revised.
New Haven: Yale University Press, 1961.

Riley, Matilda w., Riley, J. w. Jr., and Toby, J.
Sociological Studies in Scale Analysis. New
Brunswick, N. J.: Rutgers University Press, 1954.

Rogers, V. M. "What teachers should know about
automation," N.E.A. Journal, October, 1963, 52:50—

52,69.

Rotman, D. B. "Alcoholism and crime," Federal
Probation. September, 1947, 11:31—33.

 

Seashore, H. G., Wesman, A., and Doppelt, J. "The
standardization of the Wechsler Intelligence
Scale for children," Journal of Consult. Psychol.,

1950, 14:99-110.

‘Th‘l'ad‘? : n._- ,

_.JI

115.

116.

117.

118.

119.

120.

121.

122.

123.

124.

125;

126.

155

"Differences between verbal and perfor-

mance IQ's on the Wechsler Intelligence Scale

for children," Journal of Consulty Psychol.,
1951, 15:62—67.

Seeman, M. "On the meaning of alienation," Americap
Sociological Review, 1959, 24:783-791.

 

Shulman, H. "Intelligence and delinquency,"
Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, March-
April, 1951, 41:763—781.

Sim, F. M., and Beech, M. J. Analysis of Contin-
gency Table (Act II) for the C.D.C. 3600. MSU
CISSR Technical Report No. 4, January 27, 1964.

 

 

Sloan, W., and Schneider, B. "A study of the
Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children with
mental defectives," American Journal of Mental

Deficiency, 1951, 55:573-575-

 

Slobetz, F. "Elementary teachers' reactions to
school situations,” Journal of Educ. Res., 1950,
44:81-90.

 

Spector, S. I. "Climate and social acceptability,"
Journal of Educ. Sociol., 1953, 27:108—114.

 

Stacey, C. L., and Levin, Janice. "Correlation
analysis of scores of subnormal subJects on the
Stanford-Binet and Wechsler Intelligence Scale
for children," American Journal of Mental
Deficiency, 1951, 55:590-597.

 

Stern, G. G. Chapter IX, "Measuring noncognitive
variables in research on teaching," in Gage, N. L.
Handbook of Research in Teachipg. Chicago:

Rand McNally and Co., 1963.

Stevenson, H. W., and Knights, R. M. "The effective—
ness of social reinforcement after brief and
extended institutionalization," American Journal
of Mental Deficienpy, January, 1962, 667589-594.

Stauffer, G. A. W. "The attitudes of secondary
school teachers towards certain behavior problems
of children," Sch. Rev., 1956, 64:358-362.

Sutherland, J. S., et al. "A sociometric study of
institutionalized mental defectives," American
Journal of Mental Deficiency, October, 1954,
59:266-271.

 

.1227.

238.

1.4

lIBCD.

113:1.

lJ3;3.

r...)
\H
O\

 

Tenenbaum, S. "The teacher, the middle class, the
lower class," Phi Delta Kappan, November, 1963,
45:82—86.

Thorpe, J. G. "An investigation into some correlates

of sociometric status within school classes,"
Sociometry, 1955, 18:49—61.

Thurstone, Thelma G. An Evaluation of Educating
Mentally Handicapped Children in Special Classes
and in Regular Grades. Chapel Hill: University
of North Carolina, 1959.

Tizard, J. "The effects of different types of
supervision on the behaviour of mental defectives
in a sheltered workshOpJ'American Journal of

Mental Deficiency, July, 1953, 58:143-161.

__ and O'Conner, N. The Social Problem of
Mental Deficiency, New York: Pergamon Press,

1956.

Trent, R. D. "The relationship of anxiety to
pOpularity and reJection among institutionalized
delinquent boys," Child Development, 1957,

28:379—384.

Trippe, M. "The social psychology of exceptional
children: Part II in terms of factors in
society," Excep. Child., November, 1959, 26:137—

140, December, 1959, 26:171-175, 188, January,
1960, 26:243-247.

 

 

Turner, Mildred W. "A comparison of the social
status of mentally retarded children enrolled in
special classes." Unpublished doctoral disser—

tation, Indiana UniverSity, 1958.

Waisanew, F. B. "Some theoretical convergencies
in the social psychology of alienation," Eighth
InterAmerican Congress of Psychology, Mar del
Plata, Argentina, April, 1963.

Walker, G. H. "Social and emotional problems of
the mentally retarded child," American Journal of

Mental Deficiency, 1950, 55:132-138.

Wallin, J. E. Wallace. The Education of Mentally
Handicapped Children. New York: Harper Bros.,

1955.

1:38L

1:3SL

1_L#O.

llJZI.

1.L$22.

1.L4:3,

3-L114.

Washburne, C., and Hell,

I. M.
q
V

istics of teachers all: t c

Sc'r Ray., 1960, 68:420 428.
Weber, Hilda.

Brit. Journal of Delinq., 1953,

 

Wechsler, D.
Adult Intelligencs;
Wilkins Co., 1958.

Baltimore:

A. E.
Journal of

Westwell,
American
283-289.

Wilson, Mamie L. T. A Camp
Speech Responses

"What character—
hildren's growth?"

"The borderline defective delinquent.”

3:173—184.

The Measurement and Appraisal of

Williams and

"The defective delinquent,"
Mspgal Deficiency, 1951, 56:

arative Studyycf the
and Social Ages of Two Selected

 

 

 

 

 

Groups of Educable Mental Retardates. Grambling:
Grambling College of Louisiana, 1960.

Witmer, L., and Kotinsky, R. (ed.) New Perspectives
for Research on Juvenile Delinquency. Children's
Bureau Pub. No. 356. Washington, D. C.: U. S.

of Health, Education and Welfare, 1956.

Dept.

Wolfenstein, M. Children's
Apalysis. New York:
1954.

Humor, A Psychological
The Free Press of Glencoe,

 

APPENDIX A

 

LENGTHY FOOTNOTES

158

Both the WISC and WAIS were designed so that PIQ—

VIQ = O. Investigations have revealed, however, that
differences within a certain range can be eXpected as

a result of measurement errors and test insensitivities.
In the WAIS, for example, it has been determined that

a difference in excess of 25 points would have to be
obtained before reaching the level of statistical
significance (Guertin et a1., 1962). The general
assumption underlying full scale scores is that the

"g" factor in intelligence (See Wechsler, 1958, p.12)
operates equally throughout the subtests to provide

an homogeneity of variance. When deviations greater
than those determined as nonsignificant for a parti—
cular test occur, the assumption of equality of means
among subtest scores can no longer obtain. When this

is the case, it is reasonable to assume that the
instrument is differentially measuring the individual's
intellectual functioning. The source of this differ—
ential is of interest to us. Also, an analysis of how
this differential Operates is very germane to this
definition, especially as it would affect the verbal

and performance scale scores of those who are actually
retarded. Errors of measurement introduced by the
examiner, of course, are one cause of these differences.
Variables within the individual himself, such as mental
and emotional health, at the time of testing, are another.
A particularly significant source of difference lies

in the test's insensitivity tcrvariables affecting whole
groups of people. There is considerable evidence, for
instance, (Newman & Loos, 1955; Sloan & Schneider, 1951;
Stacey and Levin, 1951) that the type of mental defective
likely to be found in an institution for delinquents
(i.e., familial undifferentiated types) obtains
significantly higher Performance scores than Verbal on
the WISC, although Seashore's (1951) study controvenes
this finding. Similarly, Seashore et a1. (1950) found
that children whose parents had higher occupational
statuses obtained higher Verbal than Performance scores.
Littell (1960) cites studies which show test insensiti—
vity to southern Negro children, bilingual children,

and children of differing socioeconomic status to the
extent that the suitability of the WISC for those
pOpulations was questioned (p. 146-7). All these vari-
ables contribute to an expected mean difference between
VIQ and PIQ of something other than zero. In the WISC,
for instance, this expected difference has been determined
to be 8.07 points (Newman & Loos, 1955). Our main con—
cern, however, is not what is normal but what is deviant,
since we are interested only in insuring that our
research group will, in fact, contain those actually

159

 

 

160

retarded and not pseudoretardates whose social com-
petency could bias the data. The question then becomes
a two—fold one; how great a difference is needed before
we become suspicious of the full scale score as a
valid measure and, if directional, in which direction
does the differential operate, as a depressant or as

an elevator? We have already seen that a difference

of over 8.00 IQ points can be expected on the WISC
scale scores and that a difference as great as 25.00
points is still nonsignificant on the WAIS. While no
overall limit has been established for the maJor tests
to determine deviancy, 20 points is generally accepted
by diagnosticians as the maximum range of the confidence
interval. As for directionality, we should not be
misled by studies which show children in highly verbal
environments and those who have attained high degrees
of test sophistication to have elevated IQ scores.
Remembering that our population will consist largely

of low socioeconomic and culturally deprived children,
(perhaps some fairly recent southern Negro emigres,

or children of parents who have migrated north, a few
bilingual children of Mexican—American parentage, with
the chance of an Indian boy or two), there is little
question in which direction the differentials operate.
If we can have confidence in test results with these
children at all, it is only by recognizing that the
full scale score may be depressed by these social and
cultural influences; and that the protocols must be
analyzed for more valid indicators of true intellectual
potential. Generally, it is the performance scale
score which is the truer measure for these children,
but for the purposes of this study, we will accept,

as the upper confidence limit for full scale IQ 79

(the highest score obtainable to be eligible for in-
clusion in the research group) a score of 89 for either
scale score. Within this range, we can reasonably
assume that we are controlling for type I error and
that we have included only those who are actually
retarded, excluding those who could possibly qualify

as pseudoretardates.

While it is a fact that a larger proportion of delin—
quents than nondelinquents are intellectually subnormal,
the figure is not significant when compared with the
number of those of normal intelligence or above from
the same social class and environment. Most male
retardate-delinquents are delinquent, not because of
criminal tendencies, but because of weakness in the
control and executive functions of the personality
(i.e., ego-superego), gullibility and poor environment.
IFor much the same reasons--lack of Judgment, control,

51::
1

‘!fi_

m-mm-u-nuj
:’ .O,
5.

J

F
t

161

and protection-- some mentally retarded females become
sex offenders. Actually, no more retarded become
criminals than would be eXpected from this milieu, and
inconsistencies in the results of studies of community
adJustment of retardates are largely due to the varia
tion in the economic periods in which the studies wele
conducted and to differences in sampling methods
(Tizard and O'Connor, 1956). Thus, the relationship
of mental retardation to crime lies not in the condition
of the defect itself but in the factors associated
with its—lack of foresight, insight, Judgment and
inhibition. (Sutherland's theory of differential
association in crime [1947] supports the environmental
link between delinquency anl retardation, as a result
of the retardate's high persuasibility and low social
status). By the same token, the typical delinquent

is not a retardate but tends to fall within the dull—
normal range of intelligence, again largely due to
cultural deprivation factors rather than innate intel-
lectual differences between delinquents and nondelin—

quents.

The lack of correlation between the temporal factor

and social standing, found also by Jennings (1950), is

a phenomenon of an institutionalized delinquent society
which lends support to those researchers who see the
delinquent as possessing a unique valuing system

solidly rooted in the present. The literature documents
this firm anchoring in the present through such
evidences of delinquent character as proneness to

denial of past and resistance to consideration of

future consequences of acts. This is not at all un—
eXpected when one considers the inculcated values of
the subculture from which most delinquents come. This

culture tends to regard deferred rewards with suspicion
and embraces an ”enJoy now, pay later" philosophy to
compensate for its lack of normal access to the
success-goals of our society. It is hardly surprising,
then, that there is little deference to seniority
unless it can be backed up ty a more immediately
"marketable" quality, such as physical superiority or
ability to dominate. In one sense this makes for a
‘Very realistic criterion for valuing people, based not
<3n the abstract "who you are" but rather on the con—
<;rete "what you can do." What is ignored, of course,
(and which eventually leads to the disintegration of a
Esocial system value-oriented in this way) is that
VVith the demotion of abstract qualities and character—
idstics which are not immediately demonstrable, "liquid—
‘aJSing," or gratifying, go such vital "frozen assets"
51$ .judgment and maturity. The result is often a more

 

 

162

primitive social system, typical of ”high risk"
neighborhoods and institutions for delinquents. In
this system then, to value aggression is to conform

to the norm. For a stylized, fictional version of the
type of valuing by youngsters leading to social
disintegration and the primitive behavior to which we
refer, see William Golding, Lord of the Flies (New
York: G. P. Putnam's Sons, 1959), 192 pp.

See Alexander and Alexander (1952) for a similar
finding. This study suggests that a symbiotic
relationship may exist in which the dependent person
receives protection and goal satisfaction while the
other reciprocates as a result of his need for an

outlet for his aggression. If this is true, then the
assumption in the previous footnote, concerning an
actual value change in delinquents, as a result of their
more primitive social structure, becomes less tenable.
Both studies suggest sociometrically testable hypotheses.
First, it must be established that the aggressive and
withdrawing delinquents do, in fact, mutually recipro-
cate in social choice. Then, the sociometric results
would either confirm the actual value change by
demonstrating that the dependent delinquents label

as "conforming" those aggressives whom they select as
friends, or, on the other hand, confirm Trent's findings
by evaluating the aggressives realistically but never-
theless choosing them as friends. Other alternatives,
of course, are that both personality types will reJect
each other or that the dependent delinquents will

seek out aggressives as friends, but be unreciprocated.

Riesman classifies nonconformists as of two types--
anomic or autonomous. The latter, in his definition,
are capable of conformity "but are free to choose
whether to conform or not," (p. 242), while the
former lack this facility. The mentally retarded
delinquent, lacking the social and intellectual strength
to be autonomous, neatly fits Riesman's definition of
the anomic individual. Pushed by social pressure into
norm violating behavior, often not completely aware that
his means of goal achievement are not socially sanc—
tioned (and sometimes ambivalent concerning the continued
IDursuit of the but dimly perceived success-goals of
(our culture) and without a cognitively derived commit-
Inent to delinquent norms and values, this youth is not
Cuily anomic in relation to the prevailing culture but
IDOssibly alienated as well from the delinquent sub-
Ctllture. Where this pattern of delinquent peer relae
tfllonships does not obtain, it may be because the retar-

<3£ite has developed a physically aggressive style of

 

 

F’
on
(A;

social interaction which his peers recognize, respect
and fear, and not because he is accepted by them, nor
because in him they perceive socially desirable person—
ality traits with which they want to identify. The
only other adJustment alternative available to him is
to voluntarily reduce his social sphere-~to simply
leave the field——and, by withdrawing, thus avoid
further frustration and rejection. These are premises
concerning the adaptive modes of the retardate, central
to this study, and will be later formalized into

hypotheses and tested.

Studies by psychologists, criminologists and demo-
graphers do not agree on the incidence of mental
deficiency among delinquents (Metfessel & Lovell,
1942; Shulman, 1951). Changes in tests, methods of
testing, screening and even attitudes towards mental
deficiency as a factor in crime, have resulted in pro—
gressive lowering of incidence figures. Our recogni—
tion of the influence of such factors as social status
and economic difference between delinquent and non—
delinquent populations allows us to see more clearly
the actual lack of relationship between intelligence
and crime. By the same token, because of the much
higher prevalence of low socioeconomic status youths
in high delinquent-risk populations, we find the
incidence of retardation in these areas (IQ's under
70) to be approximately 10% (Lichtenstein & Brown in
Metfessel & Lovell, 1942, p. 143). Although Rotman
(1947) found only 2-5% of delinquents qualified as
mentally retarded, most studies of institutionalized
Juvenile and adult offenders show higher percentages,
ranging from 10.2 to 47.3% (Charles, 1953), the differ—
ences attributable to high loadings on such factors

as race, bilinguality, etc., in the group used to
obtain the figures. Most studies now show about 13%
retardation for those children referred to Juvenile
courts or committed to training schools (Glueck &
Glueck, 1934; Kvaraceus, 1945; and others). For a
more complete analysis of the relationship between
intelligence and delinquency, see Shulman (1951).

Bredemeyer (1954) in discussing reputation tests points
out that some individuals tend to be more conspicuous
than others and for this reason alone can be expected
to receive more selections than those who posses the
criterion characteristic to an equal degree but who
are more obscure. The dimensions of conspicuousness
are called "vividness" (being perceived as possessing
many attributes irrespective of the number of others
Who observe this) and "visibility" (being perceived by

““63““ 7 ‘99“ 2:: ‘ . g
‘ ' '-

164

many others to possess a particular one or several
characteristics) (p. 139). It becomes readily apparent
that a highly vivid individual can be rewarded with
selection for a certain attribute simply because of
the general "halo effect" of his all—around "good—at—
everything” reputation and not as a result of his
possessing this characteristic to a greater degree
than others more obscure. Moreover, vividness and
visibility can increase selection for a particular
attribute even when they are embodied for negative
qualities which make an individual conspicuous. Some
investigators control for this factor by limiting
their scrutiny to those of like conspicuousness.

This study, however, is concerned with the whole con-
tinuum of conspicuousness, the obscure and colorless
individuals as well as those more vivid and visible
and, while keeping mindful of these influences, will
not take special cognizance of them in the design.

APPENDIX B

LEWIS SOCIOMETRIC SCALE AND INSTRUCTIONS

FOR ADMINISTR TION
Lewis Sociometric Scale (Modified)

Instructions for Administering the Lewis
Sociometric Scale

165

L

 

VINE-
.

IO.

LEWIS SOCIOMETRIC SCALE (MODIFIED)

Which boys are good at starting games and getting
things going, the ones who think of interesting things
to do?

Which boys quarrel and argue a lot?

 

Which are the boys who are too shy to make friends F,
easily? b

‘ E m
Which boys are good at games; they play them better 5
than most boys? Q
Which boys are bossy; they always try to run things E”-
their own way? 6

Which boys are bashful and don't like to recite in
class?

Which boys are the ones everybody likes; they have
lots of friends?

Which boys get mad the easiest; they lose their tempers?

Which are the boys who stay out of games; they don't
play much with the other boys?

Who are your best friends?

INSTRUCTIONS FOR ADMINISTERING THE
LEWIS SOCIOMETRIC SCALE

Print your last name and then your first name and your
number in the spaces provided at the tOp of the page.

I am going to ask you questions, the answers to which
are peOple in this group. Instead of using names,
however, use the number which each boy has around his
neck.

For each question that I ask, there is a line for the
answers. The first question will be answered on the
line numbered "1," and so on. You will notice that
each line is broken into 11 small parts. Each of
these spaces is for a number but you do not have to
fill them all in for each question. Use only as many
as you need to answer the question completely. Your
answer, therefore, may be several numbers, one number,
or a zero, if you cannot honestly think of anyone who
fits the description in thg group.

16

10.

167

Do not leave any numbers out because you think that

by mentioning their numbers you may cause your friends
to get into trouble. Your answers can neither hurt

you nor anyone else, but the answers of all the
hundreds of boys who take the test can help us to
build a better program at BTS which will help all the
boys. It is important, therefore, that you answer
each question completely, leaving no numbers out which
you feel should be listed. Do not put down numbers,
however, Just to put something on paper. Use "0" in
this case.

There are no right answers or wrong answers, only your
own Opinions.

If you are new to the group today, write this at the

tOp of your paper and place a zero on each of ten lines.
You will not take the test. If you have been in the
group only a week or so, answer only those questions

to which you are sure you know the answers.

Some of the questions will sound a great deal like
other questions. Do not let this bother you and if
you find that you are using the same number to answer
several of the question, this is all right.

Do not discuss your answers with anyone else after
the test, and do not look at anyone else's paper during
the test.

Do not point at anyone or otherwise indicate whose
number you are putting down. If you cannot see a
number, ask me to have all the boys put their numbers
where they can be seen.

If I start a question before you have finished the
previous one, raise your hand and I will stop and wait
for you.

 

APPENDIX C

MISCELLANEOUS TABLES

Table 31.--Total possible reciprocal social choices
by cottage.

Table 32.--Reputation and social position by intelli—
gence category as measured by peers.

Figure S.——Comparison of hypothesized and observed
orderings of reputations in a delinquent population.

168

TABLE 31.--Tota1 possible reciprocal social choices by
cottage.

 

Total Reciprocal Choice Potential

 

By Own IQ Group

 

 

Cottage

Group Nonretardate Retardate By Other IQ GPOUP

l 380 20 100

2 462 6 66

930 6 93

4 812 2 58

5 930 6 93

6 756 12 I24

7 380 12 8O

8 992 2 64

9 552 O 24

10 306 6 54

11 506 2 46

12 650 O 26

13 506 20 115

TOTALS 8162 94 943

 

169

170

TABLE 32.--Reputation and social position by intelligence
category as measured by peers.

 

.3... ._ .

**Beputation Categories
Social *IQ
Quartile Category Low Medium-Low Medium—High High Totals

 

 

 

1 2 2 O 29 33 67
l 2 l O O O 1 '4 6
3 O D O O l l 2
1 17 3 10 7 5 28 70
2 2 l O 2 O O 2 5
3 O O O O O O O
Subtotals 21 ” 12 8 36 68 150
1 22 ll 15 10 1 7 66
3 2 l O O O O 1 2
3 l 1 2 2 O O 6
1 21 18 15 8 l 2 65
4 2 l 2 3 1 O O 7
3 l O 1 1 O O 3
Subtotals 47 32 36 22 2 10 149
TOTALS 68 37 48 3O 38 78 299
* l = Normal IQ **Minus Eliminated Cate—
2 = High Retardate gories (a2b2cl) and (a2blcl)
3 = Low Retardate
Subjects in Eliminated Subjects Used
Categories
Normal IQ 58 Normal IQ 268
High Retardate 3 High Retardate 20
Low Retardate _: Low Retardate 11

TOTAL 66 TOTAL 299

171

FIGURE 5.—-Comparison of hypotnesized and observed orderings
of reputations in a delinquent pOpulation.

 

Reputation Hierarchies

 

 

Order Predicted Observed
1. a2blc2 a2blC2
“a2b1°1
2. a2b2c2 a2b2c2
*a2blcl
*a2b2cl
3. alblc2 alblc2
*a2b2cl
4. alblcl alb2c2
5. alb2c2 alblcl
6 alb2cl a1b2cl

 

*These reputations were eliminated from
consideration as impractical in the development of
the study design (See pp. 78-79).