PERSONALITY FACTORS ASSOCEATED WITH ELEVENTH GRADE MALE AND FEMALE DISCREPANT ACHIEVEMENT Times]: for the Degree 0‘ pk. D. MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY Ronald Gail Taylor 1962 TH ESIS This is to certify that the thesis entitled Personality Factors Associated With Eleventh Grade Male and Female Diacrepant Achievement presented by Ronald Gail Taylor has been accepted towards fulfillment of the requirements for 2b.“. . degree inlducation (SYKLLLAanV :7a44velé:c/ Major professor (/ Dateq’lW/fis V7; 16] (\r 0-169 Copyright by RONALD GAIL TAYLOR 1962 PERSONALITY FACTORS ASSOCIATED WITH ELEVENTH GRADE MALE AND FEMALE DISCREPANT ACHIEVEMENT By Ronald Gail Taylor A THESIS Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY College of Education 1962 Chapter I. II. TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE or CONTENTS ................................ . LIST OF TABLES..... ............... v ............... . LIST or FIGURES................................... Acmovmancmurs.......................... ..... ABSTRACT...l,.. .............. .... ........ ......... THE PROBLEM.............. .......... ............... Purpose of the Study........................... Need for the StudyOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO0.0.0.0000... Statement of the Problem....................... Definition Of Tame.OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO0.0.0.0.... Theory.OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO smary Of TraitSOOOOOOO0.0.0.000...00...... Academic Anxiety.OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO00.00.00... Self valuBOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO Authority Relations......................... Interpersonal Relations..................... Independence-Dependence Conflict............ Act1V1ty Patterns..QOOOOOOOOOO00.00.000.000. Goa-l orientationOOOOOO.00.10.00...00.00000... Implications of Summary Traits.............. The HypotheSBSOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO0...... Statement of the Hypotheses................. organization Of the StudYOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE............ ........ . ..... Research Base for Each Trait .................. Acadmc AnietyOOOOOOOOOOO0.000000000000000 self value...CCOOOOOOOOOCCOOOOOO0.0...00"...l Authority Relationsccccccccoocccccccccccoccc Interpersonal Relationships................. Independence-Dependence Conflict............ Activity Patterns........................... Goal Orientation............................ Critical Review of Selected Studies............ Review of Literature Reporting Atypical findingSOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO SW” OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO ii Page ii iv AZ Chapter Page III. DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY. ............... . ..... .. 52 Instrumentation............................ 52 Sample Selection........................... 53 Null Hypotheses............................ 57 Item Analysis Procedures................... 58 Factor Analysis Procedures................. '60 EXthtion salutionocccocoocooococcc‘ccoccoo 61 AssmptiODSOOOOOO0.0.0....OOOOOCOOOOOOOOOOO 62 Rotation of the Factors.................... 62 serOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO000...... 63 IV. ANALYSIS OF DATA............................... 65 Item Analysis Results....................... 65 Reliability EstmtOSOOOOOOOOCOO...00.... 67 Factor Analy313 ResultsOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO... 69 Interpretation of the Factors............... 79 Hales - Results of Factor Analysis - . Rotation.OOOOOOOOOOOIOOOOO.0.0.... 80 Females - Results of Factor Analysis RoutionOOOOO000.000.000.000... 85 Comparison of Hale and Female Factors....... 89 sumry OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO00.0.00... 91 V. INTERPRETATION AND DISCUSSION OF FACTORS...... 9h Discussion of’Male Factor-Traits........... 9h Significance of the male Factors........ 97 Discussion of Female Factor-Traits......... 100 Significance of the Female Factors...... 103 Logical synth68130000000000.0.0.000...0.00. 106 VI. SUMMARI, CONCLUSIONS AND RESEARCH IMPLICATIONS 109 Recommendations............................ 113 BIBLIOGRAPHY.................................. 11h APPENDIX A.. Human Trait Inventory.................. 119 B. Tables of Item Intercorrelations of Twentyathree Male and Female Items in Factor Analysis of Human Trait Inventory scaleOOOOOOOO0.0000000000000000.0.0.... 127 iii LIST OF TABLES Table No. Page No. 1.1 Summary Personality Traits Associated With Academic Achievement....................... 10 3.1 Sample Size for Male and Female Classifi- cationOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO 56 3.2 Sample Size for Validation and Cross- Validation Classification.................. 57 A.l Summary Tabulation of the Number of Signi- ficant Items for the Human Trait Inventory.. 66 h.2 Reliability Estimates of the Factored Items and Total 8081600000000...OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO. h.3 Rounded, Uhrotated Loadings for Twenty-three Items of the Human Trait Inventory for Male OVBP- and underaChieverSeccccccocccoo-ocean 70 u.h Rounded, Unrotated Loadings for Twenty-three Items of the Human Trait Inventory for Female OVOP- and underaChieversoo.................. 71 h.5 Seven Unrotated Factors for Twenty-three Items of the Human Trait Inventory Selected on the Basis of Sums of Squares Above 1.00 for Male Over- and Underachievers.................... 72 4.6 Six Unrotated Factors for Twenty-three Items of the Human Trait Inventory Selected on the Basis of Sums of Squares Above 1.00 for Female Over- and Underachievers............. 73 L.7 Rotated Factors for Twenty-three Selected Items of the Human Trait Inventory for male Over- and Underachievers.................... 75 4.8 Rotated Factors for Twenty-three Selected Items of the Human Trait Inventory for Female Over- and Uhderachievers............. 76 4.9 Highest Factor Loadings for Twenty-three e ected Items of the Human Trait Inventory for Male Over- and Underachievers........... 77 iv Table No. 5.10 b.11 b.12 h-13 b.1h h-15 l..l6 b.17 h.l8 b.19 b.20 b.21 h-22 M23 b.2h 5.1 5.2 5.3 5-h 5.5 5.6 Highest Factor Loadings for Twenty-three Items of the Human Trait Inventory for Female Over- and Underachievers............................ Item Item Item Item Item Item Item 1:... Item Item Item Item Item Content of Factor I...................... Content Content Content Content Content Content Content Content Content Content Content Content of of of of of of of of of of of of Summary of Male Hale Factor-Trait Labels and Brief Interpretation00000.000.00.0000000000000000000 Factor Factor Factor Factor Factor Factor Factor Factor Factor Factor Factor Factor 110.0000 III.................... IV..................... V............. ..... .... VI..................... VII........0....000000. I...................... II..................... III.................... IV..................... v0.0.0. 000000 0.0....... VI.........0.000000.00. and Female Factors ........... Random Factors Generated from a Table of Random "tubers.00000.0...000.00000000000000.00 Correlations Between Random and Extracted Male Factors.00000000000.0.0000000.000.000.000000000 100 Female Factor-Trait Labels and Brief Interpretation0000000000.000000000000000000000 10‘. Random Factors Generated from a Table of Random NWbBrsOOOOO0000.0000000000000000000000 105 Correlations Between Random and Extracted Feflle FaCtors000000000..00000000000000.000000 Page No. 78 8O 81 82 83 83 8k 8k 85 86 87 87 88 88 89 98 99 106 Table No. 5.7 A.l A02 Page No. Postulated Relationship Between Extracted and Theorized Factor-Traits............... 107 Item Intercorrelations of Twenty-three.Ma1e Items Used in Factor Analysis of Human Trait Inventory Scale..................... 128 Item Intercorrelations of Twenty-three Female Items Used in Factor Analysis of Human Trait Inventory Scale............... 129 vi LI ST OF FIGURES Figure No . Page No . 3 . 1 Methodological Selection of Individuals with Stable Measured Aptitude. . . . . . . . . . . . 55 3.2 Method of Selecting Under- and Over- aChiever800.00.0000000000000000.000000000 56 vii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Thesis writing requires patience and persistence. Without the constant encouragement of the following individuals this study could not have been completed. Grateful acknowledgment is expressed: To Dr. William w; Farquhar, the writer's major advisor,efriend, and chairman of his guidance committee. To the other members of the guidance committee, Dr. Gregory A. Miller, Dr. Bill L. Kell, and Dr. Don Hamachek. To Dr. David Payne, Dr..flarion D. Thorpe, and John Patterson, for technical and statistical assistance. And to his wife, Marlene, whose encouragement and invaluable assistance provided the inspiration necessary to complete this study. viii PERSONALITY FACTORS ASSOCIATED WITH ELEVENTH GRADE MALE AND FEMALE DISCREPANT ACHIEVEMENT BY Ronald Gail Taylor AN ABSTRACT OF A THESIS Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY College of Education 1962 Approved (la/£604....“ QM :lA/‘erxvéfi/ ABSTRACT PERSONALITY FACTORS ASSOCIATED WITH ELEVENTH GRADE MALE AND FEMALE DISCREPANT ACHIEVEMENT by Ronald Gail Taylor The study was concerned with a) developing an objectively scored instrument to measure the personality characteristics of male and female discrepant achievers, and b) determining the number, nature, magnitude and structure of the personality traits resulting from factor analysis of the cross-validated items in the experimental instrument. Item discrimination was determined on samples of statistically defined under- and overachieving eleventh grade students of each sex. A review of the literature isolated seven basic summary personality traits connected with discrepant achievement: 1) Academic Anxiety, 2) Self Value, 3) Authority Relations, A) Interpersonal Relations, 5) Independence-Dependence Conflict, 6) Activity Patterns, and 7) Goal Orientation. The modal differences between under- and overachieving students was summarized into a limited theory as follows: The overachiever tends to operate at a high level of energy. He controls and directs his anxiety while conforming to academic pressures of culture. The overachiever attempts to merge with the academic standard while resisting peer pressures. ‘0 The umderachigzgg tends to operate at variable’levels of energy, tocontrol his anxiety less, and to resist social conventions. The underachiever attempts to conform to his peer group and to resist.academic pressures. A personality instrument was constructed from items which previous research had found to differentiate between under- and overachieving students. The final compilation of 9a edited items employed a four point self rating scale (never, sometimes, usually and always). It was found that 32 male and 31 female items significantly discriminated between under- and overachievers for each sex after cross-validation. Analysis of variance reliability estimates for the 23 factor analyzed items ranged from ;68 to .80 for males and from .68 to .78 for females in various samples. The construct validity estimates of the HTI with grade point average was .L2 for males and .36 for females. Factor analysis (Principal Axis Method) and rotation (Quartimax Rotation.Method) yielded seven male and six female factors. The male factors were labeled as: F1) School Attitude, F2) Compulsivity, F3) Authority Relations, F“) Excitation, F5) Self value, F6) Anxiety, and F7) Internalized Pressure. The female factors were identified as: F1) Fantasy, F2) Achieve- ment Attitude, F3) Organizational Heeds,Fh) Self Attitude, F5) Excitation, F6) Independence~Dependence Conflict. The research project, of which this study was a part, was supported by funds granted by the 0.3. Office of Education, Xi under the direction of William W. Farquhar; The project was entitled, A Comprehensive Study of the Motivational' Factorg Underlying Achievement of Elgventh Grade High School Students, Research Project No. 846 (8458). xii CHAPTER I THE PROBLEM Purpose of the Study Current research emphasis on non-intellectual factors in achievement is uncovering a positive relation between person- ality and school success. Academic achievement may well be a sensitive thermometer of the overall psychological health of adolescents. If academic achievement is to be better under- Istood, past research needs to be synthesized into a series of testable hypotheses or a cohesive theory. This study is directed toward a partial fulfillment of both of the preceding objectives. Need for the Study It has long been theorized that academic success is a combination of aptitudes, skills and personality. Much research is available relating aptitudes and skills to achievement, but personality assessment has not kept abreast of aptitude and skill assessment. The need is particularly apparent in the theoretical formulation of the field of motivation. A better definition is demanded if operationalism is to undergird' empirical investigation. Furthermore, there is a need for objectively validated descriptions of personality character- istics of high and low academically motivated students. The construction of an instrument to diagnose personality traits relating to academic achievement could be justified because it would permit better educational selection and placement. Moreover, the value of such an instrument in the improvement of curriculum, teaching methods, and counseling procedures through a better understanding of the personality character- istics further emphasizes the need for research in this area. Statement of the Problem The present investigation is concerned with: 1) developing an objectively scored instrument to measure the characteristics of male and female under- and overachieving eleventh grade high school students. Items to measure these char- acteristics were provided by inspecting the scales devised by Altus,1 Cough? McQuary and Truax.3 These scales have, in the past, measured differences between under- and overachievers. From past research the factors which differentiate 1William D. Altus, "A College Achiever and Non-Achiever Scale for the MMPI," Journal of Applied Psycholo , Vol. 32, (1948) PP. 385-97. 2H.G.Gough, "The Construction of a Personality Scale to Predict Scholastic Achievement," Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 37. (1953) pp. 361-66. 3John McQuary and William Truax, "An Under-Achievement Scale," Journal of Educational Research, Vol. 48, (Jan. 1955) pp. 393-990 differentiate between the under- and overachievers were analysed and incorporated into the personality schedule. 2) determining the number, nature, magnitude and structure of the personality traits resulting from factor analysis of the functioning items in the experimental instrument. The investigation devel- oped as part of a research project sponsored by the United States Office of Education under the direction of William w. Farquhar.1 Definition of Terms Personality may be broadly defined as the individual's total reaction to himself and others in his environment. More specifically, it is the individual's self percept, his reaction to authority figures, and his ability to socially interact. In this study the term overachiever is reserved for the student who receives grades which are higher than might be expected from predictive measures based on academic aptitude. The underachiever receives grades which are lower than might be expected. r _ 1William W. Farquhar, A Comprehensive Stud of the Mbtivational Factors Underlying Achievement of EIeventE Grade HighSéhool Students,7Research Project 0. 4 n cooperation with the 0.8. Office of Education. Theory Farquharl conceives of Human Behavior theory functions at three levels -- focusing, predicting, and integrating. At the first level (focusing) past studies are reviewed to encumber the pertinent concepts to be studied. Null, rather than directional hypotheses are used. The theory of this study appropriately functions at the focusing level because consideration was given to isolating traits related to academic motivation from past studies. Summary of Traits A review of the literature reveals certain recurrent references or allusions to seven basic summary personality traits connected with under- and overachievement: academic anxiety, self value, authority relations, inter-personal relationships, independence-dependence conflicts, activity patterns, and goal orientation.2 An expanded review of the literature, using these seven traits as topic headings, may be found in Chapter II. 1William W. Farquhar, "An Integrated Research Attack on Academic Mbtivation," (Research Frontier) Journal of Counseli Ps cholo , Vol. 9, No. l, (1962) pp. SZ-SE. 2Ronald G. Taylor, "Personality Factors Associated With Scholastic Achievement," (Paper presented at American Personnel and Guidance Convention, March 1961, Denver.) Mimeographed. Academic Anxiety - The overachiever has a high need to succeed academically which is attended with a certain amount of anxiety. Horrall1 expresses the view that the overachiever has less deep underlying anxiety than the underachiever. However, the overachiever has more control of inner tensions. At the other extreme is the overwhelming, all engulfing, ’ anxiety which impedes academic achievement. Horrall2 and Mitchell3 indicate that the underachiever has a high degree of anxiety which demoralizes personal and academic activity. Self Value - How's person approaches a challenge, e.g., academic achievement, may mirror the way a person perceives himself. Several researchers (Gowan,h Horrall,5 and Lumé) 1Bernice M. Horrall, "Academic Performance and Person- ality Adjustments of Highly Intelligent College Students," Genetic Psychology Mbnographs, Vol. 55 (Feb. 1957) pp. 3:82. 2Horrall, "Academic Performance»....." pp. 3-82. 3James V. Mitchell, "Goal Setting Behavior as a Function of Self-Acceptance, Over and Under Achievement, and Related Personality Variables," Journal of Educational Psycholo , Vol. 50, No. 3, (June 1959) pp. 95-104. “John c. Gowan, "Dynamics of the Underachievement of Gifted Students," Exceptional Children, Vol. 24 (Nov. 1957) pp. 98-101,122. 5Horrall, "Academic Performance......" pp. 3-82. 6M. Lum, "A Comparison of Under and Over-Achieving Female College Students," Journal of Educational Psychology Vol. 51, (19 0) pp. 109-114. found that the overachiever is optimistic, self-confident, and holds a relatively high opinion of himself. The underachiever, however, is self-derogatory and depressed in attitudes toward self. Authority Relations - The type of relationship that an indiv- idual has with an authority figure indicates his willingness to accept academic demands and tasks placed upon him. Several investigators observe that the overachiever attempts to create favorable impressions and is eager to please authority figures (Gerberich,1 Hollandz, Merrill and nurphyB). The underachiever dislikes his teachers and is resistant to externally imposed tasks (Dowd,4 Kirk,5 Walsh,6 Shaw and Brown,7 Shaw and Grubb,8 and.Lum9). 1J.R. Gerberich, "Factors Related to the College Achieve- ment of High-Aptitude Students Who Fail of Expectation and Lows Aptitude Students Who Exceed Expectations," Journal of Educa- tional Psypholo , Vol. 32, (April' 1941) pp. 233-53. 2John L. Holland, "The Prediction of College Grades from the California Psychological Inventory and the Scholastic Aptitude Test," Journal of Educational Psycholggy, Vol. 50 ugust 1959) NoJ'E, pp. 135-42. 3R.M; Merrill and D.T. Murphy, "Personality Factors and Academic Achievement in Cdllege, Journal:of Counseling_£_y- chology, Vol. 6 (1959). Pp. 207-215: . “Robert Dowd, Jr., "Underachieving Students of High Capacity," Journal of H or Education, Vol. 23 (June 1952) PP. 327‘300 sBarbara Kirk, "Test Versus Academic Performance in Malfunctioning Students," Journal of Consultipg Psychology, Vol. 16, (1952) pp. 213-16. Interpersonal Relations - The ability to get along with and . - be accepting of others is one of the primary goals of the home and school socialization process. Social ability is also considered to be associated with academic achievement. Gough1 indicates that the overachiever is interested in, responsive to, and accepting of the feelings of others. Gough2 and Gowan3 conclude that the underachiever is overly critical of others and exhibits anti-social behavior. 6Ann M. Welsh, "Self-Concepts of Bright Boys with Learning Difficult1989"'Contributions to Education, Bureau of Publications, T.C., Columbia University,New YorE, I955, pp. 78. 7Merville C. Shaw and Donald J. Brown, "Scholastic Under- achievement of Bright Colle e Students," Personnel and Guidance Journal, Vol. 36 (Nov. 1957 , pp. 194-99. 3Merville C. Shaw and James Grubb, "Hostility and Able High School Underachievers," Journal of Counseli Ps cholo ,, 9M. Lum, "A Comparison of Under and Over-Achieving Female Colle e Students," Journal of Educational Psycholo , Vol. 51, (1960 pp. 109-11A. 1Harrison G. Gough, "What Determines the Academic Achieve- ment of High School Students," Journal of Educational Regearch, Vol. 46, (Jan. 1953) pp. 321-31- - 2Harrison G. Gough, (Notes from a paper presented during the annual meeting of the American Psychological Association, Sept. 1955, San Francisco). 3John C. Gowan, "Dynamics of the Underachievement of Gifted Students," Exceptional Children, Vol. 2h, (Nov. 1957) pp. 98-101,122. Independence-Dependence Conflig§_- As the child matures he normally moves from a dependent to an independent relationship. On this basis it is easy to make the assumption that the more the student is to make decisions and depend upon his own judg- ment, the more academically successful he will be. The over- achiever is seen as an emotionally mature and independent individual with leadership capacities.1 Mitchell indicates that the underachiever chooses goals, occupations, and school subjects influenced by parental aspirations.2 High dependency characterizes the underachiever. Activity Patterns - Mbst individuals participate in activities which satisfy personal needs. Academic achievement is no exception. Kurtz and Swenson3 observe that the overachiever is academically inclined, happy in a classroom situation, and derives satisfaction from scholarship. The underachiever is seen by Mitchell as fulfilling his needs in other than academic areas 0 1' 1R.M. Merrill and D.T, Murphy, "Personality Factors and Academic Achievement in College, Journal of Counseling Psy- cholo , Vol. 6 (1959). pp. 207-2167 2James V. Mitchell, "Goal Setting Behavior as a Function of Self-Acceptance, Over and Under Achievement, and Related Personality Variables," Journal of Educational Psychology, Vol. 50, No. 3, (June 1959) pp. 93-lOA. 3John J. Kurtz and Esther J. Swenson, "Factors Related to Over-Achievement and Under-Achievement in School," School Review, Vol. 59, (Nov. 51) PP. h72-80. “Mitchell, "Goal Setting Behavior....." pp. 93-104. Goa; Orientation - The academic goals of an individual, in that they demand involvement in long term or short term pro- jects, determine his attitude toward achievement. Kurt: and Swanson indicate that the over-achiever has high educational and vocational goals and relates school work to future goals.1 Lum concluded that the underachiever has few stated goals and is unable to decide upon educational and vocational direction.2 The underachiever's inability to project future goals for him- self results in short range goals. Implications of Summary Traits The modal differences between under- and overachieving students can be summarised into a limited theory as follows: The overachiever tends to operate at a high level of energy. He controls and directs his anxiety while conforming to academic pressures of culture. The overachiever is attempting to merge with the academic standard while resisting peer pressures. The underachiever tends to Operate at variable levels of energy, to control his anxiety less, and to resist social conventions. The underachiever attempts to conform to his peer group and to resist academic pressures. A summary of personality traits associated with academic achievement may be found in Table 1.1. 1John J. Kurtz and Esther J. Swenson, "Factors Related to Over-Achievement and Under—Achievement in School," School Review, Vol. 59, (Nov. 51) pp. A72-80. 2M. Lum, "A Comparison of Under and Over-Achieving Female College Students," Journal of Educational Psycholo , Vol.51, (1960) pp. 109-11F 10 Table 1.1 Summary Personality Traits Associated With Academic Achievement _ _ -:— Direction Postulated Direction (High) Achiever Traits (Low) Achiever Directed Anxiety Academic Anxiety Free-floating Anxiety Positive Self Value Self Valuation Negative Self Value Acceptance of Authority Hostility toward Authority Relations Authority Positive Interpersonal Interpersonal Negative Interpersonal Relationships Relations Relationships Low Independence- Dependence- High Independence- Dependence Conflict Independence Dependence Conflict Conflict Academically Activity Socially Oriented Oriented Patterns Realistic Goal Goal Orientation Unrealistic Goal Orientation Orientation A number of hypotheses can be formulated from the research based theory discussed above. The Hypotheses In the Farquhar United State Office of Education Motivation Project, #8L6, of which this study is a part, the assumption was made that over- and underachievers exemplify extremes in moti- vation. The assumption which this study is concerned with is that over- and underachieving (high-low motivated) students will manifest unique personality traits. 11 The basic assumption is that an instrument can be devised to measure personality characteristics which will remain con- stant after cross validation. It is further assumed that psy- chologically meaningful personality traits can be translated into items which will form an objective measure of personality as it reflects itself in a statistically defined group of dis- crepant achievers. Those items with sufficient power to dis- criminate between a sample of over- and underachievers will be factor analyzed. Because of past research findings, person- ality characteristics, due to sex differences, will form the basis for an alternative hypothesis. Statement of the Hypotheses Research Hypothesis: I. Cross-validation of a scale designed to measure personality traits will produce items which discriminate between under- and overachieving (high-low motivated) students. II. Items will function differently for each sex, which in turn will yield separate personality traits. III. A factor analysis of the discrim- inating items will yield inter- pretable personality traits. 12 Organization of the Study The over-all plan of the dissertation is as follows: In Chapter II a review of the research related to this inves- tigation is presented along with a critical analysis of the studies which tend to disagree with the majority of the findings. A discussion of the general design of the study, together with consideration of instrumentation, sample sel- ection, and the analytic procedures used in the factor analysis method is presented in Chapter III. The analysis of the data is presented in Chapter IV; the interpretation and discussion of factors is examined in Chapter V. The summary and recom- mendations for further research are presented in Chapter VI. O CHAPTER II REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE . Investigations of personality characteristics related to academic achievement are reviewed beginning with Stagner's study of the relationship of personality to achievement in .1933.1 The review is divided under the sections of summary personality characteristics described in Chapter I. In the second section a critical review of studies which produced discrepant findings is made in an attempt to isolate the source of disagreement. Research Base for Each Trait Academic Anxiety May defines anxiety as a preparatory and unconsummated reaction of escape, or withdrawal, in a fear-provoking situation.2 In this study anxiety is related to a fear of academic failure and the amount of control one has over this anxiety. Directed Anxiety - Horrall3 indicates that the overachiever has less underlying anxiety, but more inner tension with 1R. Stagner, "The Relation of Personality to Academic Aptitude and Achievement," Journal of Educational Research, Vol. 26, (1933), pp. 648-60. 2R. May, The Meanin of Anxiety (New Ybrk: Ronald Press, 1950) pp. 190-ZIUT_33I:33%} 3Bernice Horrall‘ "Academic Performance and Personality Adjustments of Highly Intelligent College Students," 93222;; Psychology Monographs, Vol. 55 (Feb. 1957) pp. 3-83. 1h better outward control than the underachiever. Similar results are reported by Holland1 and Cough2 who conclude that the over- achiever, or high achiever, has more self-control than the underachiever. His anxiety does not manifest itself in a readily apparent form such as: misconduct, conflict over sex, maladjustment, and neurotic tendencies. Gowan3 found that tensions in task demands during childhood prevailed among overachievers. The result was the development of strong self control. The overachiever's longltime history is of anxiety directed toward a fear of failure. However17this anxiety is controlled and directed in the area of achievementygthus allowiggzmore of his energies and drives to be concentrated upon academic success. Free Floating Anxiety - Two investigators concluded that the underachievers tend to have a high degree of anxiety which demoralizes personal and academic activity (Mitchell" and 1John L. Holland, "The Prediction of College Grades From the California Psychological Inventory and the Scholastic Apti- tude Test," Journal of Educational Psychology, Vol. 50, No. A, (August 1959) pp. 135-h5. 2H.C. Cough, "What Determines the Academic Achievement of High School Students", Journal of Educational Research, Vol. L6, NO. 5, (Jane 1953) pp. EEI-gie 3John C. Cowan, "Dynamics of the Underachievement of Gifted Students," Exceptional Children, Vol. 24, (Nov. 1957) Pp. 98‘101, 1220 "James V. Mitchell, "Goal Setting Behavior as a Function of Self-Acceptance, Over- and UnderbAchievement, and Related Personality Variables" Journal of Educational Psychology, Vol. 50, No. 3, (June i9597pp. 93:10L. 15 Horralll). Horrall's study also revealed that the under- achiever has a high conflict over conduct and sex; a high degree of emotionality, and exhibits instability and mal- adjustment. Other investigators obtained similar results regarding the underachiever's denial of normal shortcomings and his ability to maintain a superior self-image (Middleton and Cuthriez and Kimball3). An older investigation by Gerberienh suggests that the underachiever has difficulty paying attention in class and studying.. In a study of elementary school males, walsh5 concluded that the underachiever feels restricted, 1Bernice Horrall, "Academic Performance and Personality Adjustments of Highly Intelligent College Students," Genetic Psychology Monographs, Vol. 55 (Feb. 1957) pp. 3-83. 2George Middleton, Jr. and George M. Guthrie, "Person- ality Syndromes and Academic Achievement," Journal of Educa- tional Psychology, Vol. 50, No. 2, (April 1959) pp. 66-59. 3Barbara Kimball, "Case Studies in Educational Failure During Adolescence," American Journal of Orthopoychiatry, Vol. 23 (April 1953) pp. E06415. “J.R. Gerberich, "Factors Related to the College Achieve- ment of High-Aptitude Students Who Fail of Expectation and Low-Aptitude Students Who Exceed Expectations," Journal of Educational Psychology, Vol. 32 (April l9Al) pp. 233-53. 5Ann M. Welsh,"Self_Concepts of Bright Boys with Learning Difficulties, Contributions to Education, Bureau of Puglications, T.C., Coiumbia University,—New York, 1956, pp. 7 - 16 hemmed in, and helpless. The underachiever expresses exag- gerated free-floating emotion or represses all emotion when some emotional response seems appropriate. The underachiever's fear of failure and denial of his shortcomings leads to an exaggorated anxiety which results in directingomost of his energy toward controlling_his anxiety. The underachiever has trouble concentratiggyand being_effective in the classroom. Self Value Self value is the attaching of positive or negative loadings to the feed-back characteristics one perceives as his own image. Positive Self Valgg - Several investigations indicate that the overachiever is optimistic, self-confident, adequate as a person, and holds a relatively high opinion of himself (Kurtz and Swenson,l Morgan,2 Cough,3 Cowan,h Horrall,5 1John J. Kurtz and Esther J. Swenson, "Factors Related to Over-Achievement and Under-Achievement in School," School Review, Vol. 59 (Nov. 51) pp. A72-80. 2Henry H. Mbrgan, "A Psychometric Comparison of Achieving and Non-Achieving College Students of High Ability", Journal of Consulting Poychology, Vol. 16 (1952) pp. 292-98. 3H.C.Cough, "What Determines the Academic Achievement of High School Students", Journal of Educational Research, Vol. A6 No. 5 (January 1953) pp. 321-317 “John C. Gowan, "Dynamics of the Underachievement of Gifted Students", Exceptional Children, Vol. 2A, (Nov. 1957) pp. 98-lOl,122. 5Bernice Horrall, "Academic Performance and Personality Adjustments of Highly Intelligent College Students," Genetic DQthA1A~W "A“‘~“g“k"_ V91. 55 (Fahrnnrv 10‘?) an Q=RQ- 'fi T ‘___v \. mm, fijlll yy. J VJ. 17 and Luml). A number of other investigations conclude that the overachiever has positive character integration and a personal and intellectual efficiency which is persistent and enduring (Cough,2 Cowan,3 Krug,A Merrill and Mtrphy,5 and Pierceé). An investigation by Morgan7 finds the overachieving male to have insight and realistic attitudes which make for satisfactory self value. lM.Lum, "A Comparison of Under- and Over-Achieving Female College Students," Journal of Educational Poychology, Vol. 51, (19 0) pp. 109-11A. 2H.G. Cough, "What Determines the Academic Achievement of High School Students," Journal of Educational Research, Vol. A6, No. 5 (January 1953) pp. 321-3I. 3John C. Gowan, "Dynamics of the Underachievement of Gifted Students," Exceptional Children, Vol. 2A, (Nov. 1957) pp. 98-101,122. 4R.E. Krug, "Over and Under-achievement and the(Edwa§ds PPS," Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. A3, No. 2, Apri 5R.MZ. Merrill and D.T. Murphy, "Personality Factors and Academic Achievement in College," Journal of Counseliog_ Psychology, Vol. 6 (1959) pp. 207-210. 6James V. Pierce, The Educational Motivation Patterns of Suporior Students Who Do and Do Not AEhieveVIn HiRH' School, Final Research Report 5.8. Office of Education Cooperative Project. November 1959. (Project #208 (7136). (Mimeographed) 7Henry H. Morgan, "A Psychometric Comparison of Achieving and Non-Achieving College Students of High Ability," Journal of ConsultingPsychology, Vol. 16 (1952) pp. 292-98. 3? study cje e1euentzmry1 15.1es by Wa15n+ ind'catcd that th: overashiever's '"CALtenae of self results in freedom and ste,u-,v :f emotional expression. Tao investigations present some findings that disagree with the investigations cited above (Mitche112 and Hallandg). These investigators found that the overachiever has feeiings of unhorthiness about himself and the inpr,ssion which he make: Elpo n others .39 av achiever sees himself as an efficienti_g;rais- opnt individuall. He has a positive self concept and accepts his own attitndta And behavior realis_;§§11v. O Nags“: a Self Value - A number of investigators have d15- revered that the unis achiever is self der: gs gory pug. use,pe in a titu“e s totsrd :elf. The O underachiever has feelings of 0..) inddéiuacy, a concern about health, nd a poor over~all __~ A-.--v”1r- , *Ann_M.‘W61sh, "Self Concepts of Bright Boys with Learning Diffisulties, Contributions to Education, Buxeau ;f Publicst one, T. C., Cefumbia University, NEf‘Yora 1‘956, D 0 78s ? . James V. Mitchell, "Goal Setting BEhQTLQy as a function of Self-Acceptancs, C'sz-o Under-A hievsmen‘, 21d Relrtcn Perscnality Vgriablss,‘nqurna1 2f.§ Heft: cnal Psychtltgv. Vlyue 5‘99 “(29 2.9 (J1Jle 1)“). a1 .32 J'Lwiwe ‘Jehn L. H;11an£,"The Pre~fi :ti; 3 of Cclle gs Grades From the Ceiifcrnia 35y¢hol1g1s*l Inventory and the acho-aetic A; Mi ude Tezit," gc~.aal of Edusa 799:1 _y_hology V3 , 53 NC. A, (Pugu;t 373?:"131-1, PLEASE NOTE: Light, indistinct type on this page. Filmed as received. UNIVERSITY MICROFILMS, INC . 19 adjustment (Kirk,l Kimball,2 and Horrall3). In those studies it is also concluded that the underachiever has strong in; foriority feelings and passivity which result in deliberate failure. In other investigations it is indicated that the undorachievers lack confidence in themselves and tend to withdraw, attempting to be self;sufficient(Kurtz and Swensonh and Gowan5). The literature discloses only one investigator (Holland6) who disagrees with this theory of negative self values. He indicates that the low achieving student has positive self attitudes. 1Barbara Kirk, "Test Versus Academic Performance in Mal- functioning Students," Journal of Consulting Psychology, 2Barbara Kimball, "Case Studies in Educational Failure During Adolescence," American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, Vol. 23 (April 1953) pp. LOG-IS. 3Bernice Horrall "Academic Performance and Personality ,Adjustments of Highly intelligent College Students," Genetic Psychology Mono ra hs, Vol. 55 (February 1957) pp. 3- . “John J. Kurtz and Esther J. Swenson, "Factors Related to Over-Achievement and Under-Achievement in School," School Review, Vol. 59 (November 51) pp. h72-80. 5John C. Gowan, "Dynamics of the Underachievement of Gifted Students," Exceptional Children, Vol. 2A (November 1957) pp. 98-101 , 122 0 6John L. Holland, "The Prediction of College Grades From the California Psychological Inventory and the Scholastic Aptitude Test," Journal of Educational Ps cholo , Vol. 50, No. L (August 19 pp. S-L . 20 The underachiever exhibits concern with his behavior and is worried about his physical health and mental functioning. AUnderachievers exhibit unrealistic attitudes about self and have poor over-all adgustment. Authority Relations Authority relations can be defined as those relation- ships between two or more people -- one person having a definite responsibility for others because of training, amount of know- ledge, position, or years. This responsible person then directs, controls or guides the other individual's actions and behavior to a significant extent.1 Acceptance of Authoritx - Several investigations indicate that the overachiever has a good relationship with parents (Kurt: and Swenson,2 Cough,3 Gowan,“ and Horrall5). The parents are 1Horace B. English and Ava C. English, A Comprehensive Dictionary of Psycholo ical and Psychoanalytigal‘Terms,(New'York: Longmans, Green 00., 587 pp. 55. v. 2John J. Kurtz and Esther Swenson, "Factors Related to Over-Achievement and Under-Achievement in School," School Review, Vol. 59 (Nov. 51) pp. h72-80. 3H.G. Cough, "What Determines the Academic Achievement of High School Students," Journal of Educational Research, Vol. #6, No. 5 (January l9537pp.“§21>§1. _ “John C. Gowan, "Dynamics of the Underachievement of Gifted Students," Exceptional Children, Vol. 2h (November 1957) Pp e 98.10]. , 122 e 5Bernice Horrall, "Academic Performance and Personality Adjustments of Highly Intelligent College Students," Genetic Psycholggngono ra hs, Vol. 55 (February 1957) pp. 3- . 21 interested and supportive in regard to their children's academic success and the children in turn respect their parents and. attempt to please them by doing well academically. The child conforms to the demands and conventions which are important to his parents. Additional investigations have obtained sim~ ilar results regarding the overachieving student's relationship with authority outside of the home (Gerberich,l Holland,2 and Merrill and Murphy3). The overachiever seems to like most instructors and feels that he receives fair treatment. .The overachiever attempts to create favorable impressions and is eager to please authority figures. This is done by getting work in on time, turning in extra assignments, exhibiting great interest in the course, and creating no discipline problems in the classroom. Several other investigators indicate that there may be a negative relationship between overachievers and their parents 1J.R. Gerberich, "Factors Related to the College Achieve- ment of High-Aptitude Students Who Fail of Expectation and Low-Aptitude Students Who Exceed Expectations," Journal of Educational Paychologz, Vol. 32 (April 1941) PP. 233-53. 2John L. Holland, "The Prediction of College Grades From the California Psychological Inventory and the Scholastic Aptitude Test," Journal of Educational Psychology, Vol. 50, No. b ‘kngust 195 pp. 135-h2. 3R.Ms Merrill and D.T. Murphy, "Personality Factors and Academic Achievement in College," Journal of Counseling Psy- chology, Vol. 6 (1959) pp. 207-210. 22 (Hoffman, Rosen and Lippitt,1 Drews and Tehan,2 Horrall,3 and Haggard“). The theoretical assumption being that a child un- able to obtain love, warmth, and understanding at home will compensate for these needs by substituting in their place a teacher's approval of school achievements. Host'investigators find thgt_the overachiever accept; controlslgregulations, and assignments with little or no confligt. Hostility Toward Authority_- The underachiever's hostility and aggression toward authority has been recognized by many inves- tigators to be directly influenced by his relationship with 1L.W. Hoffman, S. Rosen, and R. Lippitt, "Parental Coerciveness, Child Autonomy and Child's Role at School," Sociometry, Vol. 23 (1960) pp. 15-21. 2 ‘Elizabeth Mbnroe Drews and John E. Teahan, "Parents Attitudes and Academic Achievement," Journal of Clin cal Psychology, Vol. 13 (October 1957) pp. 3233527“""L“' 3Bernice Horrall, "Academic Performance and Personality Adjustment of Highly Intelligent College Students," Genetic Psychology Mongggaphg, Vol. 55 (February 1957) Pps 3-3§. “Ernest A. Haggard, "Socialization, Personality and Academic Achievement in Gifted Children," Schoo;_Review, Vol. 65 (December 1957) pp. 388-hlh. 23 his parents (Kurtz and Swenson,1 Kimball,2 Shaw and Brown,3 Horrall,“ Hapkins, Molleson and Sarnoff5). The parents do not express their love for the child and are somewhat indifferent or disinterested in the child's academic success. In general, there seems to be a great deal of conflict between one or both of the parents and the child. The underachiever feels that his parents have not given him the material things in life that he would like to have. In an investigation involving males only, Kimball6 concludes that the underachiever does not have much 1John J. Kurtz and Esther J. Swenson, "Factors Related to Over-Achievement and Under-Achievement in School," School Review, Vol. 59 (November 1951) PP. h72-80. zBarbara Kimball, "Case Studies in Educational Failure During Adolescence," American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, Vol. 23 (April 1953) pp.“t06-I5. 3Merville C. Shaw and Donald J. Brown, "Scholastic Underachievement of Bright College Students," Personnel and Guidance Journal, Vol. 36 (November 1957) PP. 5- 9. “Bernice Horrall, "Academic Performance and Personality Adjustments of Highly Intelligent College Students," Genetic Psychology Monographs, Vol. 55 (February 1957) PP. 3 3. SJ. Hopkins, N. Molleson, and I. Sarnoff, "Some Non- Intellectual Correlates of Success and Failure Among univer- sity Students," British Journal of Educational Psychology, Vol. 28 (February I953} pp. 25-35. 6Kimball, "Case Studies in.........pp. h06-15. 2h chance of directly expressing his aggressive and hostile feelings as he grows older -- in most cases the father is felt to be very distant, strict, and dominating. In another investigation by Hopkins, Molleson and Sarnoff1 it is con- cluded that the underachiever chooses his school subjects because of parental pressures rather than genuine interest. This conflict and hostility seems to be carried over to authority figures outside the home. This is indicated by several studies (Dowd,2 Kirk,3 welsh,“ Shaw and Brown,5 Shaw and Grubb,6 and Lum7). They conclude that the under- _ — ‘L 1J. Hopkins, N. Molleson, and I. Sarnoff, "Some Non- Intellectual Correlates of Success and Failure Among Univer- sity Students," British Journal of Educational Psychology, Vol. 28 (February 1953’ PP. 25-36. 2Robert Dowd, Jr., "underachieving Students of High Capacggy," Journal of Higher Education, Vol. 23 (June 1952) ppe 3 '30. 3Barbara Kirk, "Test Versus Academic Performance in Malfunctioning Students Journal of Consultigg Psycholggy Vol. 16, (1952) pp. 312116. ' "Ann M. Walsh, "Self Concepts of Bright Boys with Learning Difficulties, Contributions to Education, Bureau of Publications, T.C., Columbia University, New York, I§56, pp. 78. 5Mervi11e c. Shaw and Donald J. Brown, "Scholastic Underachievement of Bright College Students," Personnel and Guidance Journal, Vol. 36, (November 1957) PP. I95-99. 6Merville c. Shaw and James Grubb, "Hostility and Able High School Underachievers " Journal of Counseling Psychology Vol. 5, No. b (1958) pp. 263-66. ' WM. Lum, "A Comparison of Under- and Over-Achieving Female College Students," Journal of Educational Psychology, Vol. 51 (1960) pp. 109-11h. 25 achieving student dislikes his instructors and is resistant to such externally imposed tasks as home work. The under- achiever's dislike and hostility is a pronounced characteristic which tends to create a less favorable impression, and as a result he is less acceptable to the instructor. An investigation of elementary males by Walsh1 indicates that the underachiever acts defensively either through com- pliance, evasion, escape, blind rebellion, or negativism. The underachiever's resistance to imposed acadggic tasks is seen eggs reaction against his parents. Interpegggnal_Relationghip§ Interpersonal relationships shall be defined as those relationships occurring or existing between two or more persons-- where there is an interaction or exchange of values which may or may not cause acceptance or rejection by one of the indiv- iduals involved.2 Positive Interpersonal_Relationships - Investigations have indicated that the overachieving student seems to be aware of, and concerned with, others(Kurtz and Swenson,3 1Ann M. Walsh, "Self Concepts of Bright Boys with Learning Difficulties, Contributions to Education, Bureau of Puglications, T.C., Golumbia University, New York, 1956, pp- 7 - 2Horace B. English and Ava Chapney English, A Com re- hensive Dictionagy of Psychological and PsychoanalypicaE Terms,—(New' or : 5 , ongmans, reen and 0. pp. 73. 3John J. Kurtz and Esther J. Swenson, "Factors Related to Over-Achievement and Under-Achievement in School," School Review, Vol. 59 (November 1951) pp. L72-80. 26 Morgan,1 Gough,2 Gowan,3 Gebhart and Hoyt,“ Pierce,5 and Holland6). The overachiever is interested and responsive to the feelings of others and accepts others. The over- achiever denies feelings of ill will and animosity toward others and is free of interpersonal friction. The peer relationships are strong and supportive. An investigation by Middleton and Guthrie7 concludes that the overachiever's achievement is motivated by social acceptance. An 1Henry A. Mbrgan, "A Psychometric Comparison of Achieving and Non-Achieving College Students of High Ability," Journal of Consulting Psychology, Vol. 16 (1952) pp. 292-98. 2H.G. Gough, "What Determines the Academic Achieve- ment of High School Students," Journal of Educational Research, Vol. 46, No. 5 (January 1953) pp. 321-31. 3John C. Gowan, "Dynamics of the Underachievement of Gifted Students," Exce tional Children, Vol. 2h (November 1957) pp. 98-101,1227‘2"““"“"“' “0.0. Gebhart and D.T. Hoyt, "Personality Needs of Under- and Over-Achieving Freshmen," Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. L2 (195 ) pp. 125-28. 5James V. Pierce, The Educational Motivation Patterns of Sn erior Students Who Do and Do Not—Achieve in High Schoog. Final Research Report 0.3. Office of Education Cooperative Project. November 1959. Project # 208 (7136) (Mimeographed) 6John L. Holland, "The Prediction of College Grades From the California Psychological Inventory and the Scholastic Aptitude Test," Journal of Educational Ps - chology, Vol. 50, No. L (August 1959) PP. 135-L2. 7George Middleton, Jr. and George M. Guthrie, "Per- sonality Syndromes and Academic Achievement," Journal of Educational Psychology, Vol. 50, No. 2 (April 1959) PP. 66-69. 27 investigation of elementary males by Walsh1 found that the overachiever has a present feeling of belonging. A number of other investigators seem to be in conflict with the theory of positive interpersonal relationships (Horrall,2 Holland,3 Krug," and Merrill and Murphy5). These researchers found in their respective studies that the over- achieving student tends to be unsociable in his attitude toward peers. Another investigation by Rabinowitz6 indicated that one of the reasons for the overachieving student's excel- lence in the academic area was because of his doubt and confusion in the areas of family and peer acceptance. It —— ‘— 1Ann M. welsh, "Self Concepts of Bright Boys with Learning Difficulties," Contributions to Education, Bureau of Publications, T.C., Columbia Unive?§ity, NeW'Yfirii 1956, pp. 78. 2Bernice Horrall, "Academic Performance and Personality Adjustments of Highly Intelligent College Studnts," Genetic Psychology Menographs, Vol. 55 (February 1957) pp. 3-83. 3John L. Holland, "The.Prediction of College Grades From the California Psychological Inventory and the Scholastic Aptitude Test," Journal of Educational Psycholog , Vol. 50, No. A (August 193?) pp. 1 S-A . LR.E. Krug, "Over and Under-achievement and the Edwards PPS," Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. #3. No. 2 (April 1959) pp. 133-36. 5R.M. Merrill and D.T. Murphy, "Personality Factors and Academic Achievement in College," Journal of Counseligg Psy- chology, Vol. 6 (1959) pp. 207-210. 6Ralph Rebinowits, "Attributes of Pupils Achieving Beyond Their Level of Expectancy," Journal of Personality, Vol. 2t (March 1956) pp. 306-17. “""‘ 28 would appear though that it is not so much a factor of not getting along with peers, but more a result of spending more time in individual tasks and therefore socializing less. Most investigations indicate that the overachiever has styong-positive feelings for others and accgpts others. He denies feelings of ill wil;_toward others anQLfeelp acceptgd and supported by his peers. Negatiye Interpersonal Relationship - Two investigations conclude that the underachiever has conflict over his conduct and heterosexual adjustment (Kurtz and‘Swenson1 and Horrallz). Similar investigations support this statement and indicate that underachievers are overly critical of others and exhibit asocial behavior (Gough,3 Gowan,“ and Shaw and Brown5). 4* 1John J. Kurtz and Esther J. Swenson, "Factors Related ‘ to Over-Achievement and Under-Achievement in School," School Review, Vol. 59 (November 51) pp. 472-80. 2Bernice Horrall, "Academic Performance and Personality Adjustments of Highly Intelligent College Students," Genetic Psychology Mopographs, Vol. 55 (February 1957) Pp. 3-83. 3H.G. Gough, "What Determines the Academic Achievement of High School Students," Journal of Educational Research, Vol. 46, No. 5 (January 1953) pp. 321-31. LJohn C. Gowan, "Dynamics of the Uhderachievement of Gifted Students," Exce tional Children, Vol. 2b (November 1957) pp- 98-101.122- SMerville C. Shaw and Donald J. Brown, "Scholastic Underachievement of Bright College Students," Personnel and Guidance Journal, Vol. 36 (November 1957) pp. 195499. 29 The underachiever also tends to be withdrawn, self-sufficient, disinterested in others, and apathetic in many of his rela- tionships with his peers and adults. An investigation by Armstrong1 reports that underachieving girls are not chosen for positions of responsibility in extra-curricular activities; while the males prefer companions who are older than them- selves. The underachiever obtains lower ratings on cooperation, dependability, and judgment. In an investigation of elementary males, walsh2 indicates that the underachiever tends to feel rejected and isolated from others. Holland3 seems to agree and disagree with the theory of inadequate interpersonal relationships. He observes that the low achiever creates a less favorable impression upon peers and authority figures and yet seems to be poised, socially skillful, and flexible in his attitudes. The underachiever antagonizes hip peers by being overly critical of their behavior. He can be pictured as a student .yith many conflictp_and behavior problepp which he cannop resolve. This causes overt agggegsion and rebellion,_or an appthetic withdrawalgfrom social relationshipp. 1Marion E. Armstrong, 1g§§ Dissertation Abstracts, University of Connecticut, Vo . 5: pp. 13A -5 . 2AnnM. welsh, "Self Concepts of Bright Boys with Learning Difficulties," gentributions to Education, Bureau of Publications T.C., Columbia Ufiiversity, New York, 1955, pp. 78. 3John L. Holland, "The Prediction of College Grades From the California Psychological Inventory and the Scholastic Aptitude Test," Journal of Educational Psycholggy, Vol. 50 No. A (August 1959) Pp. 135-42. 30 lpdepenggnce-Dependence Conglict Independence is defined as the ability to take action and make decisions without the need of going to others to make the final decision.1 Dependence is defined as one per- son's reliance upon others to make the difficult decisions.2 A dependent person is one with low self-value who maintains a relationship with a stronger individual, who in a sense directs and controls this weaker person. Low Independence-Dependence Conflict - Investigations have indicated that the overachiever's interest and emotional maturity is high. He tends to be dominant in his group (Cohler,3 Morgan,“ Horrall5, and Merrill and Murphy6). lHorace B. English and Ava C. English, A Com rehensive Dictionary of ngcholo ical and Ps choanal ica arms, (New7Ybrk: Longmans, arson and 50., I958? p. 258. zEngliSh’ A cmpnhunsive OOOOOOOOOOOOOPO 1AA. 3Milton J. Cohler, "A Comparative Study of Achievers and Non-Achievers of Superior Intelligence," Summa of Doctoral Dissertations, Northwestern University, 701. 9 (October 19h0) PP. 7A-79. “Henry H. Mbrgan, "A Psychometric Comparison of Achieving and Non-Achieving College Students of High Ability," Journal of Copsultlpg Psychology, V01. 16 (1952) pp. 292-98. 5Bernice Horrall, "Academic Performance and Personality Adjustments of Highly Intelligent College Students," Genetic Psychology Moggggaphs, vol. 55 (February 1957) pp. 3-33. 6R.M. Merrill and D.T. Mhrphy, "Personality Factors and Academic Achievement in College," Journa1_p§ Counseling Ps cholo , Vol. 6 (1959) pp. 207-210. '3"““ 31 A number of investigations have concluded that the over- achiever is dependable and responsible, having a basic seriousness of interests which enables him to perform in leadership capacities (Kurtz and Swenson,1 Morgan,2 and Holland3). An investigation of elementary males by Whlshh found that the overachiever is free to make choices and initiate activities. Other investigators disagree, to some extent, with the theory that the overachiever is more independent (Holland5 and Middleton and Guthrieé). They indicate that the over- achiever's success is motivated by dependency and that he is more oriented toward achievement than toward independence. 1John J. Kurtz and Esther J. Swenson, "Factors Related to Over-Achievement and Under-Achievement in School," School Review, Vol. 59 (November*l951) pp. 472-80. 2Henry H. Morgan, "A Psychometric Comparison of Achieving and Non-Achieving College Students of High Ability," Journal of Consulting Psychology, Vol. l6~(l952) pp. 292-98. 3John L. Holland, "The Prediction of College Grades From the California PsycholOgical Inventory and the Scholastic Aptitude Test," Journal of Educational Psycholpgy, Vol. 50, No. A (August 1959) pp. l35-h2. “Ann M. Halsh, "Self Concepts of Bright Boys with Learning Difficulties," Contributions to Education, Bureau of Publi- cations, T.C., Columbia University, NE; York, 1956, p. 78. 5Holland, "The Prediction of College......pp. 135-12. 6George Middleton, Jr. and George M. Guthrie, "Person- ality Syndromes and Academic Achievement," Journal of Educa- pional Psycholo , Vol. 50, No. 2 (April 1959) pp. 66-69. 32 It is also indicated that the overachiever does well academ- ically under direction, but is not as adept in situations demanding independent judgment. Most_lnve§§lggtopp_feel that the overachiever's inde- pendence is eyigenced by his leadershipy_responsibility, and' dependaplllty. It can be concluded that because of the over- achiever's positiveypelf concgpt he would be mgge independppt end mature a; he develops toward adulthood. Some investigatoy§_repppt findings which disagree with tpe majority of the studies. They feel that the overachlever is so academically orientgd toward achievement that independent thinkigg is submerged toygbpaln_gyscholastic goal. High Independence-Dependenge Conflipp - A number of investi- gations have indicated that future goals, occupations and subjects are influenced by parental pressures and aspirations (Brown, Abeles, and Iscoe,1 Armstrong,2 Hopkins, Molleson and Sarnoff,3 ananitchellh). 1WilliamBrown, Norman Abeles, and Ira Iscoe, "Motiva- tional Difference Between High and Low Scholarship College Studints," Journal of Educational Psychology, Vol. as (April 195A pP- 2 - 3. 2Marion E. Armstrong, 1%55 Dissertation Abstracts, University of Connecticut, Vo . , pp. 3h -50. 3J. Hopkins, N} Molleson, and I. Sarnoff, "Some Non- Intellectual Correlates of Success and Failure Among University Students," British Journal of Educational Psychology, Vol. 28 “James V. Mitchell, "Goal-Setting Behavior as a Function of Self-Acceptance, Over- and Under-Achievement, and Related Personality Variables," Journal of Educational Psycholo , Vol. 50, No. 3 (June 1959) PP. 93-104. 33 The underachiever lacks a decisiveness to act and future occupations are chosen because of the influence of others. One study of males only by Kimball1 found that the under- achiever has prominent dependency needs. Contrary findings are reported by Stagner2 in that he concludes that the underachiever has a high degree of self- sufficiency. The underachiever is seen as a perpon, whoL if left alone, operates on impulse egg wish fulfillment. He is easily lpfluenced by parents regardipg future aspipations. gpppgh he overply accept§:pis parents' deplplgns, he contlnue§_to follow strogger peers and becomes involved in conflict situations. Activity Pattergg Activities may be defined as that type of behavior which fulfills certain needs of the individual. The individual will tend to continue with behavior which is satisfying3 e.g., over-achiever, academic behavior, under-achiever, social be- havior. 1Barbara Kimball, "Case Studies in Educational Failure During Adolescence," American Journal of Ortho s chiat , Vol. 23 (April 1953) Pp. "t.'0'6"5—‘——‘—"'u""fl-1 . 2 R. Sta er, "The Relation of Personality to Academic Aptitude and chievement," Journal of Educational Research, Vol. 26 (1933) Pp. 61.8-60. .____.____ 3"" ‘ 3 . Horace B. English and Ava Chapney English, A ngpre- hensive Dictiona of Pa cholo ical and Pa choanal ca Terms, (New York: 1958, Longmans, Green and Co.) pp. 9-10. 3h Academlcally Orlented - Several investigators have indicated that the overachiever derives self-satisfaction through work and has a high motivation to achieve and a need for achieve- ment (Morgan,l Gebhart and Hoyt,2 Krug,3 Mitchell,“ and Lum5). Additional studies indicate that the overachieving student spends most of his time on studies, gets assignments in promptly, has good study habits, and generally has a feeling of academic effectiveness (Gerberich,6 Dowd,7 Gough8 and 1Henry'H. Mbrgan, "A Psychometric Comparison of Achieving and Non-Achieving College Students of High Ability," Journal of Consultin Ps cholo , Vol. 16 (1952) pp. 292-98. 2G.G. Gebhart and D.T. Hoyt, "Personality Needs of Under- and Over-Achieving Freshmen," Journal of Applieg Psycholggy, Vol. A2 (195 ) pp. 125-28. 3R.E. Krug, "Over and Under-achievement and the Edwards 1 of -3 PPS," Journa A lied Ps cholo , Vol. #3. No. 2 (April 1959) Pp- 133 5. "James V. Mitchell, "Goal-Setting Behavior as a Function of Self-Acceptance, Over- and under-Achievement, and Related Personality variables," Journal of Educational Ps cholo , Vol. 50, No. 3 (June 1959) pp. 93-19h. 5M; Lum, "A Comparison of Under- and Over-Achieving Female Colle e Students," Journal of Egucatlpnal Psycholpgy, Vol. 51 (196 ) pp. 109-1lt. 6J.R. Gerberich, "Factors Related to the College Achievement of High-Aptitude Students Who Fail of Expectation and Low-Aptitude Students Who Exceed Expectations," Journal of Educational‘Psycholggy, vol. 32 (April 19h1) pp. 235363? 7Robert Dowd, Jr., "Underachieving Students of High Capacégy,s Journal of Higher Educatiop, Vol. 23 (June 1952) PP- 3 -3 . 3H.G. Gough, "What Determines the Academic Achievement of High School Students," Journal of Educational Research, Vol. L6, No. 5 (January 1953 pp. 321-31. 35 Horralll). Two other investigations conclude that the over- achiever is able to work effectively under direction, but is not as adept in situations demanding independent judgment (Holland2 and Pierce3). It is indicated that the overachiever is achievement rather than individually oriented. Kurtz and Swanson“ conclude that the overachiever is academically inclined, happy in a classroom situation, derives satisfaction from booklearning, has high educational/vocational goals, relates school work to future goals, and tends to regard education for more than its job value. The overachiever is strongly motivategitoward acadepic success. Heyppends much of his time studying, is punctual ln completing:asslggments, and derives saplpfaction from academic achievement and adult approval. It would appear that the overachiever glves up a_pgrtain amount of creatlyity and originalitypyyputtipg;sofimuch emphasis on conformlpg_to the reguirements of the instructor§_lp_order to recelyp_g "mark". lBernice Horrall, "Academic Performance and Personality Adjustments of Highly Intelligent College Students," Genetic Psychology Monographs, Vol. 55 (February 1957) pp. 3-83. 2John L. Holland, "The Prediction of College Grades From the California Psychological Inventory and the Scholastic Aptitude_Test," Journal of Educational Ps cholo Vol. 50, No. 4 (August 19 pp. 35-h . 3James V. Pierce, The Educational Motivation Patterns pf Sppppior Students Who 50 and 50 Not Achieve_ln ngh School . Final Research Report U.S. Office of Education Cooperative Pro- ject. November 1959. (Project #208 (7136) Mimeographed. “John J. Kurtz and Esther Swenson, "Factors Related to Over-Achievement and Under-Achievement in School," School Review, Vol. 59 (November 1951) pp. h72-30- 36 Socially Orlented - Various investigations indicate that the underachiever lacks motivation and interest in the academic area, but obtains self satisfaction in other areas (Terman and Oden,1 Brown, Abeles and Iscoe,2 Holland,3 and Mitchell“). One example of this is that underachievers are considered more socially skillful than the overachievers. The under- achiever is unwilling to conform to academic requirements and has strong "activity" interests as opposed to intellectual- interests. Several other investigators emphasize the under- achiever's tendency toward pleasure seeking and extraversion and the tendency to go to college for social reasons, e.g., joining a fraternity or sorority (Hopkins, Molleson, Sarnoff,5 1Lewis M. Terman and Malta Oden, "The Gifted Children Grow Up," Genetic Studies of Genius, Vol. IV,(Stanford: Stanford University Press, 19h?) Chap. 23: Factors in the Achievement of Gifted Men. 2William Brown, Norman Abeles, and Ira Iscoe, "Moti- vational Difference Between High and Low Scholarship College Students," Journal of Educational Psychology, Vol. LS )April 195h)_pp3 215-23- 3John L. Holland, "The Prediction of College Grades From the California Psychological Inventory and the Scholastic Aptitude_Test," Journal of Educational Psychology. Vol. 50, No. A. (August 1959) PP- 135-bi- hJames V. Mitchell, "Goal-Setting Behavior as a Function of Self-Acceptance, Over- and Under-Achievement, and Related Personality Variables," Journal of Educational Psychology, Vol. 50, No. 3 (June 1959) PP. 93-10A. 5J. Hopkins, N. Molleson, and I Sarnoff, "Some Non- Intellectual Correlates of Success and Failure Among University Students," British Journal of Educational Psychology, Vol. 28 (February 1958) pp.—25-36} 37 Gerberich,l Horrall,2 and Middleton and Guthrie3). The underachiever is found to have strong affiliation needs and immaturely reaches out for contact experiences. An inves- tigation by Gowanh indicates that the underachiever has unclear and indefinite academic and occupational choices. The underachiever attempts to oppplpyhlpysatisfactions from areas outside the academic situation. He is acplyp socially and interepted in immedlgpe rewards and gratification. He needs to identifyyylph a:g£9up, whether informalgor formal, from which he can gain supporpLand satisfaction. Goal Orientatipp Goal orientation may be defined as the ends which the individual holds to be important and significant. The in- dividual strives for the ends that satisfy his needs.5 lJ.R. Gerberich, "Factors Related to the College Achieve- ment of High-Aptitude Students Who Fail of Expectation and Low Aptitude Students Who Exceed Expectations," Journal of Educaplonal Psychology, Vol. 32 (April 191.1) pp. 233? . 2Bernice Horrall, "Academic Performance and Personality Adjustments of Highly Intelligent College Students," Genetic Psychology Menographs, Vol. 55 (February 1957) pp. 3-83. 3George-Middleton, Jr. and George M. Guthrie, "Person- ality Syndromes and Academic Achievement," Journal of Educa- tional Ps cholo , Vol. 50, No. 2 (April 1959) pp. 66-69. “John C. Gowan, "Dynamics of the Underachievement of Gifted Students," Exce tional Children, Vol. 2h (November 1957) Pp. 98-101,1T£'——‘—__—2 . 5Horace B. English.and Ava C. English, A Comprehepsive Dictiona of Ps cholo ical and Ppychoanalytical Terms, (New York: Longmans, Green and 90., 1953) p. 227. 38 Realistic Goal Orientation - Several investigations of over- achieving males indicate that they have a drive to organize and plan their lives. They are dependable, consistent and responsible in relationship to task demands and requests from others (Morgan,1 Gebhart and Hoyt,2 Holland,3 Krug,“ and Diener5). It is also indicated that the overachiever has a basic seriousness of purpose, is intellectually efficient, energetic, conscientious, and has an insightful and realistic attitude toward himself and others. A number of other studies conclude that the overachiever is conservative in setting goals; has persistent and effective study habits; has a capacity for sustained and diligent application; rejects the frivolous and diversionary; is orderly and planful; and has 1Henry H. Mergan, "A Psychometric Comparison of Achieving and Non-Achieving College Students of High Ability," Journal of Consulting PsycholOgy, Vol. 17 (1952) pp. 292-98. 20.6. Gebhart and D.T. Hoyt, "Personality Needs of Under- and Over-Achieving Freshmen," Journal of Applied Psychology, v61. 1.2 (195 ) pp. 125-28. "" 3John L. Holland, "The Prediction of College Grades From the California Psychological Inventory and the Scholastic Aptitude Test," Journal of Educational Psychology, Vol. 50, No. A (August.1959) pp- l35-A2. hR.E. Krug, "Over and Under-achievement and the Edwards PPSé; Journal of Applled Pnycholngy, Vol. #3. No. 2 (April 195 PP- 133-56- 5C.L. Diener, "Similarities and Differences Between Over-Achieving and Under-Achievin Students," Personnel and Guidance Journal, V01. 38, No. 5 (1960) pp. 39 -A 0. 39 a basis seriousness of purpose (Gerberich,1‘Kurtz and Swenson,2 Dowd,3 Gough,h Gowan,5 and Merrill and Murphyé). These investigations indicate that the overachiever tends to relate school work to future goals and is intellectually efficient. The overachiever plans his life around long range ggals.' He is efglplent and seriopn about his academic achievement and sees this success as_n_means of achieving his goal. He exhibits appersistence for cgnpleting_asplgned tasks. Unrealistic Gonl Orientation - A number of investigators indicate that the underachiever is highly emotional, lacks decisiveness to act, is restless, changeable and unhappy —_¥ lJ.R. Gerberich, "Factors Related to the College Achieve- ment of High-Aptitude Students Who Fail of Expectation and Low-Aptitude Students Who Exceed Expectations," Journal of , Educaplonal Psycholo , Vol. 32 (April 1941) pp. 233-63. 2John J. Kurtz and Esther Swenson, "Factors Related to Over-Achievement and Under-Achievement in School," School Review, Vol. 59 (November 1951) pp. A72-80. 3Hobert Dowd, Jr., "Underachieving Students of High Capacéty," Journal of ngher Education, Vol. 23 (June 1952) pp. 3 7-30. 4H.G. Gough, "What Determines the Academic Achievement of High School Students," Journal of EducationalResearch, Vol. L6, No. 5 (January 195 pp. -3 . 5John C. Gowan, "Dynamics of the Underachievement of Gifted Students," Exce tional Children, Vol. 2b (November 1957) pp. 98-101,1 - 6R..M.‘. Merrill and D.T. Murphy, "Personality Factors and Academic Achievement in College," Journal of Counseling Psychology, Vol. 6 (1959) pp. 207-210. ::’ LO (Brown, Abeles and Iscoe,1 Dowd,2 Kurtz and Swenson,3 Holland,“ Lum,5 Mitchell,6 and Stagner7). It is also con- cluded that the underachiever lacks motivation to complete tasks that are assigned either in school ar at home. Several of the investigations emphasize the underachiever's inability to decide upon educational and vocational goals, and the difference between measured interests and stated future vocational goals. It is indicated that many underachievers have no stated goals or else have stated goals impossible 1wi11iam Brown, Norman Abeles, and Ira Iscoe, HHoti- vational Difference Between High and Low Scholarship College Students," Journal of Educational Ps cholo , Vol. LS (April 195k) PP- 213‘55- 2Robert Dowd,Jr., "Underachieving Students of High Capacity," Journal of Higher Education, Vol. 23 (June 1952) PP- 327-30. 9“ 3John J. Kurtz and Esther J. Swenson, "Factors Related to Over-Achievement and Under-Achievement in School," School Review, Vol. 59 (November 1951) Pp- A72-80. "John L. Holland, "The Prediction of College Grades From the California Psychological Inventory and the Scholastic Aptitude Test," Journal of Educational Psycholqu, Vol. 50, No. A. (August 1 59 PP- 13 -A . 5M. Lum, "A Comparison of Under- and Over-Achieving Female College Students," Journal of Educational Psycholog , 6James V. Mitchell, "Goal-Setting Behavior as a Function of Self-Acceptance, Over- and Under-Achievement, and Related Personality Variables," Journal of Educational Psychology, Vol. 50, No. 3 (June 195 PP. 3-1 A. 7R. Stagner, "The Relation of Personality to Academic Aptitude and Achievement," Journal of Educational Research, Vol. 26 (1933) pp. 6A8-60. L1 to achieve (Kurtz and Swenson,1 Dowd,2 Armstrong,3 Gowan," Hopkins, Molleson, and Sarnoff,5.Mitchell,6 and Lum7). The underachievery_due to his conflicts, is not able to make decisions about his own_gpals. His indecisiveness about himself and his future increases his deep underlying angiety and lnsecurityy Inlngresplts in an undependable and lnmature type_p§_pehnyior which contributes to the under- achiever's lack ofgpugpose. He is not able to dpflne and evaluate himself and thlnresults.in wish fulfillment goals rather phan realistic goals. 1John J. Kurtz and Esther J. Swenson, "Factors Related to Over-Achievement and Under-Achievement in School, " School Review, Vol 59 (November 1951) pp. h72-80. 2Robert Dowd, Jr., "Underachieving Students of High Capacity," Journal of Hi lgher Education, Vol. 23 (June 1952) pp. 327-300 3Marian E. Armstrong, 1225 Dissertation Abstracts, University of Connecticut, Vol. 15, pp. 3L9-50. “John C. Gowan, "Dynamics of the Underachievement of Gifted Students, " Exceptional Children, Vol. 2h (November 1957) pp. 98-101, 122. 5J. Hopkins, N. Molleson, and I. Sarnoff, "Some Non- Intellectual Correlates of Success and Failure Among University Students," British Journal of Educational Ps cholo , Vol. 28 (February 1953) PP- 25- 39- 6James V. Mitchell, "Goal-Setting Behavior as a Function of Self-Acceptance, Over- and Under-Achievement, and Related Personality Variables, " Journal of Educational Psychology, 7M. Lum, "A Comparison of Under- and Over-Achieving Female College Students," Journal of Educational Psycholpgy Vol. 51 (1960) pp. 109-11A. h2 Critical Review of Selected Studies Some investigators report findings which disagree with the majority of the studies. A number of these studies were critically examined in an attempt to determine the reasons for disagreement. Evaluation of the research was approached by applying a set of criteria developed by Farquhar and Krumboltz.l The criteria used in the tentative evaluation of the .specified literature were as follows: 1. Definition of the Problem A. was the problem clearly defined? B. was the problem stated in the form of testable hypotheses? II. Statement of Methodology A. were all the pertinent and distinguishing characteristics of the sample adequately described, such as methods of selection, size, and other pertinent characteristics related to the statement of the problems? B. was a control group randomly selected and adequately defined? Was the population from which the control was drawn made explicit? C. were the methods and sources of data collected clearly stated and adequate to the problem? _ h...‘ 1William.W’. Farquhar and John D. Krumboltz, "A Check List for Evaluating Experimental Research in Psycholo and Education," Journal o§_Educatipnal Researgn, Vol. 52 (3959) PP- 353-354- #3 III. Analysis of the Data A. was some statistical design employed in the investigation and was it appro- priate to the problem under study and the data collected? B. Did the analysis of data result in some statement of probability? IV. The Findings A. were the findings consistent with the problem presented? B. Did the investigator generalize within the limits of the study? 1. Did he generalize within the universe sampled? 2. Did he generalize within the evidence available in his findings? 3. Did he generalize within the structure of his hypotheses or within the stated purposes of the study? In attempting to critically evaluate published research, restrictions of length are frequently imposed. Obviously, these restrictions require that certain details be omitted from the published report. Therefore, the criticism may be unjust in some cases. A concensus of research findings is not expected for the summary factors detailed in the first half of this chap- ter because of: 1) uniqueness of design, 2) sample selection,1 3) different level of study, and A) sex differences. ‘7 lWilliam Farquhar, "The Predictive Efficiency of the .Michigan State M-Scales,"(Paper presented at American Per- sonnel and Guidance Association Convention, Chicago, April 1962) Mimeographed. Ah Review’pfnthe LlpnnatugpgRepornlng_ntypical Findingn Hoffman, Rosen and Lippittl presented the theory that boys who perceive their parents as being highly coercive and report themselves as having high autonomy will be suc- cessfully assertive in the school situation. Children whose parents were both coercive and autonomy granting were expected to be successfully assertive in academic performance, social influence and friendship. This sample was composed of 211 third through sixth grade boys in three elementary schools. Only children from white, non-immigrant, intact families were included in the study. The data was collected through the use of a questionnaire, in which the items were to be rated: "quite often, sometimes, and hardly ever." The items were scored in the high autonomy direction. The mean scores obtained by that portion of the sample which scored in the top quartile on both the high coerciveness and high autonomy variables were compared with: l) the remainder of the sample, 197; 2) high coerciveness group only, A9; and 3) the high autonomy group only, AZ. The high coerciveness-high autonomy groups mean scores were significantly higher on practically all of the variables measured when compared with the other three groups. The variables were: academic performance; personal influence l L.W. Hoffman, S. Rosen, and R. Lippitt, "Parental Coerciveness, Child Autonomy and Child's Role at School," Spciometry, Vol. 23 (1960) pp. 15-21. LS attempts; use of directiveness; success of influence; group leadership; active friendliness and liking by peers. Measures of hostility and needs for self-assertion were also obtained from the questionnaire. Those boys who scored high on parental coerciveness when compared with the remainder of the sample acknowledge significantly more feelings of hostility and had higher self-assertion. Rosen, et. al., finding that hostility is a manifest characteristic of achievers, disagrees with the majority of studies investigated. The problem under study was clearly defined. Questions were presented which indicated what was investigated. No hypotheses were stated. "The sample was adequately described. A questionnaire was used and a "t" test of the difference between means was appropriate due to the unequal means of the group analyzed. The conclusions and generalizations were well within the findings, except for some generalizations regarding coercion and autonomy with girls. The study did have some limitations in that the questionnaire was used on a sample of young boys whose per- ceptions and understanding of the questions might be suspect. The method of collecting the data was not mentioned and a number of questions arise concerning this point. 1) were the questionnaires filled out individually or as a group? 2) Were the questions verbally presented or were they read by the sample of boys? A6 3) were there any non-respondents? Possible reasons for discrepancy of results when com- pared to the majority of studies could be: 1) The sample which was selected; 2) Under- and overachieving characteristics were not a concern of this study. The sample was selected from a male population of elementary school children from the third to sixth grade. Most of the other studies inves- tigated were based on high school or college populations. While the term academic achievement was selected as one of the variables studied, there was no operational definition of either under- or overachievement described in the study. The majority of past investigators were concerned with the populations at the extremes of achievement. Holland investigated the relationship between grades in college and non-intellectual factors.1 In addition, his purpose was to provide information for the development of a theory of intellectual achievement. The California Psycho- logical Inventory and the Scholastic Aptitude Test scores were analyzed separately and in combination to determine their usefulness in predicting scholastic achievement. The selected sample was obtained from 7,500 National Merit finalists, who were the survivors of a nationwide competition in which 166,000 high school seniors had participated. The 1John L. Holland, "The Prediction of College Grades From the California Psychological Inventory and the Scholastic Aptitude Test," Journal of Educational Psycholo , Vol. 50, No. A (August 1959) pp. 135-h2. #7 sample included 7h3 Merit Scholars and 578 Certificate of Merit winners. The sample was divided by sex into validation and cross validation sub-groups. The mean scores of the sam- ple were reported for the SAT verbal and mathematical sections, the CPI scales and Honor Point Ratio of freshman grades in college. College grades were intercorrelated with the CPI and SAT scores of student samples classified in three ways: 1) Zero order correlations were computed for both samples and multiple regression equations derived from the validation sample and applied to the cross validation sample. 2) Both samples were dichotomized as science or non- science majors and correlations computed. 3) Finally, correlations between grades and test variables were computed for eight colleges in which 2A or more of the students in the sample were enrolled. From these results Holland concludes that high grades (high achievers) are negatively correlated with the following CPI scales: Capacity for Status; Sociability; Social Presence; Self Acceptance; and Flexibility. High grades are positively correlated with: Sense of Well-being; Responsibility; Social- ization; Self-Control; Good Impression; Achievement via Con- formance; Achievement via Independence; Psychological- Mindedness; and Femininity scales. h8 The problem studied was clearly defined, but no hypo- thesis was generated in a manner which would lead the reader to expect certain findings. The instruments used and the analysis were clearly explained in table form. The statistical procedures were explained completely and were adequate for the study. Disagreement of Holland's findings with the other studies could be because the method of selected high and low achievement was not clearly specified. Farquhar's paper clearly indicates that the technique for selection of sample creates entirely different sample identification. Further- more, it was difficult to determine which CPI scales of the Holland study were significant for either high or low achievers. Some of the scales were significant for either the male or female sample, or for one college or another, but the scales were not consistently significant between sex or across colleges. For example, the scale, Capacity for Status, was significant at the .01 level at Harvard but was not signif- icant at any of the other seven schools. Therefore, any generalizations made regarding this scale were questionable. Further reason for disagreement with other studies might be the nature of the sample which was selected from a high ability pOpulation and therefore the deviations between the extremes would be less than between a more heterogeneous sample. A9 Merrill and Murphy investigated the relationship be- tween personality factors and academic achievement.1 Their stated purpose was to examine personality factors as measured by the Edwards Personal Preference Schedule (PPS) which dis- criminated between groups of students of low predicted achievement. The sample was selected from 300 entering freshmen at the University of Utah. One group overachieved academically and the other group performed as predicted -- failing. The samples were selected from a population of low achievers whose predicted grade point average was 1.50 or less and an overachieving group (n=49) consisting of students who had obtained a grade point average of 2.00 or above after the first term. The achieving-as-expected group (n=52) were those students who had obtained a grade point average of 1.00 or below after the first term. Using the "t" test of significance, the mean scores of the overachievers were found to be significantly different from the achieving-as-expected group on several PPS scales. The overachieving group was found to be more dominant; less autonomous; more deferent; less exhibitionistic; less affil- iative; less concerned about change and more enduring than the achieving-as-expected group. When both groups were compared with the liberal arts 1R.M- Merrill and D.T. Murphy. "Personality Factors and Academic Achievement in College," gournalfigf Counseling Psychology, Vol. 6 (1959) pp. 207-210. 50 college norms the low ability achieving-as-expected group was less achievement oriented, more deferring, more orderly, more exhibitionistic, more affiliative, less intraceptive, less dominant, more abasing, more changeful, more enduring, less heterosexual and less aggressive. The over achieving low ability group was more deferent, more orderly, less autonomous, less dominant, more abasing, less nurturant, more enduring, less heterosexual and less aggressive than the norm group. The purpose of the study is clear, but no testable hypothesis was stated. The sample was adequately described and generalizations and conclusions were appropriate to the population. The methodology and analysis were adequate for the study. Merrill and Murphy's findings suggest that the over- achiever tends to be unsociable, which disagrees with other studies. When the selected sample is carefully scrutinized it would appear that anyone in the low group achieving- passing-grades would socialize less and concentrate more on studies. The overachieving group, on the basis of high school grades and achievement tests, would be considered low achievers before they entered college. Therefore, it is likely that the entire sample would be considered low ability students of low achievement potential, some of whom have begun to put effort into scholarship with a possible alteration in behavior pattern. 51 Summary The forementioned personality characteristics are im- portant variables which might be used in attempting to under- stand individuals whose level of achievement is inconsistent with their measured academic aptitude. The review of literature emphasized seven personality traits: 1) Academic Anxiety; 2) Self valuation; 3) Authority Relations; A) Interpersonal Relations; 5) Dependence-Independence Conflict;- 6) Activity Patterns; and 7) Goal Orientation. The research evidence suggests that these traits are related to academic achievement. A reasonable method of viewing each of the seven traits would be as having two directions, one being characterized as over (high) achievers and the other as under (low) achievers. The high achiever direction is exemplified by more academically;socially acceptable patterns of behavior, while the other characterizes less desirable modes of behavior. Several studies were found which reported findings disagreeing with the majority of the other investigations. Three investigations were critically analyzed in an attempt to discover the cause for disagreement. The major discrepency appears to be traceable to differences in sample selection. A further contributing factor to discrepency was that of over-generalization from the resulting data. CHAPTER III DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY The design and methodology are discussed under four gen- eral headings: l) Instrumentation; 2) Sample selection and hypothesis; 3) Item analysis procedures; and A) Factor analysis procedures. Instrumentation A personality instrument was constructed from items which previous research had found to differentiate between under- and over- (high and low) achieving students. The scales developed by Altus,l Cough2 and McQuary and Truax3 which used items from the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory represent the primary source from which items were chosen. The compilation of items was labeled the Human Trait InventoryS (hereafter referred to as the HTI). Initially the instrument consisted of 125 items which were to be responded to by a "yes" or "no", lWilliam D. Altus, "A College Achiever and Non-Achiever Scale for the MMPI," Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 32 (l9h8) pp. 385-97. 2H.G. Gough, "The Construction of a Personality Scale to Predict Scholastic Achievement," Journal of Applied Psy- chology, Vol. 37 (1953) pp. 361-66.- 3John McQuary and William Truax, "An Under-Achievement Scaleé" ggurnal of Educational Research, Vol. #8 (January 1955) PP- 3 3- . “A copy of the Human Trait Inventory may be found in Appendix A. . 52 53 "true" or "false". However, it was decided to alter the statements so that they could be answered on a four point scale (never, sometimes, usually, and always). It was assumed that high school students would feel threatened by a demand to make a definite "black or white", "true or false" decision. As a result, some of the items became grammatically incorrect and were drOpped. A few errors were missed in the re—examination of the statements and it was necessary to drop them after the study was in progress. This resulted in a total of 9A edited items which were available for administration. The procedure for the selection of statistically defined under- and over- achievers is outlined in the following section. Sample Selection 1) Nine schools in eight Michigan cities were asked to c00perate in the study. Each school selected had ninth grade Differential Aptitude Test scores avail- able on their current tenth graders. 2) The California Tests of Mental Maturity were admin- istered to the tenth graders with the DAT scores. This second aptitude measure was obtained so that a more reliable estimate of academic aptitude could be made. 3) The DAT Verbal Reasoning and CTMM Language scores were used to obtain a stable estimate of academic aptitude after empirically examining possible DAT and CTMM sub-score combinations, e.g., in one school 5A the correlation of DAT-VR with cumulative grade point average (GPA)was +.65 and the CTMM-L with GPA was +.50. A) Regression lines were calculated for each school and sex assuming a correlation of +1.00 between DAT-VR and CTMM-L. Calculation of separate equations for each school were necessary because a pilot study indicated that one equation could not be generalized from school to school.1 Only those individual students who fell within one standard error of estimate above or below the regres- sion line were included in the study. It is important that the criterion groups be classified with little chance of making a Type II error (accepting when it should have been rejected). Thus, it was decided to run the risk of a Type I error (rejecting when it should have been accepted) resulting in the pos- sibility of losing individual students in the process. Figure 3.1 graphically represents the method used in selecting the sample. 1William W. Farquhar, A Com rehensive Stud of the JMotivational Factors Underl igggAchievement of EIeventh. Grade High School Students, Research Project No. 3361 (8h58) in c00peration with the 0.8. Office of Education. 55 (high) Q E CTMM-L (low) X = individuals selected for the study fl = individuals dropped Figure 3.1 - Methodological Selection of Individuals with Stable Measured Aptitude 5) Regression equations predicting GPA from the DAT-UR scores were calculated for each sex in each of the participating schools. Underachievers were oper- ationally defined as thoselindividuals whose GPA fell at least one standard error of estimate 2519! the regression line prediction of achievement. Over- achievers were defined as those individuals who fell one standard error of estimate gbgyg the regression line. Approximately 12% of the sample was classified in one of the extreme groups. Figure 3.2 depicts the method of selecting under- and overachievers. 56 (High) GPA X §,- (Low) ——" GB an (High) DAT-VR fl = overachievers [2) = underachievers N = normals Figure 3.2 - Method of Selecting Under- and Overachievers Using the method just described, male and female under- and overachievers from the full range of academic ability were selected. Table 3.1 describes the size of the sample for both sexes. Table 3.1 Sample Size for Male and Female Classifications Males. Females Overachievers 157 178 Underachievers 137 167 57 The criterion groups represent a statistically defined sample of eleventh grade male and female over- and under- achievers frum the nine Muchigan schools drawn from the pop- ulation of h,200 students. Within each of the nine schools the male and female samples for whom HTI results were available were divided randomly into two groups. The first group became the validation sample and the second, the cross-validation sample. The ob- tained sample size for the validation and cross-validation groups is reported in Table 3.2. Table 3.2 Sample Size for Validation- and Cross-Validation Classification Underachievers Overachievers Males Validating- 69 81 Cross Validating 68 76 Total 137 157 Females validating 85 91 Cross Validating 82 87 Total 167 178 " Null Hypotheses ‘ The research hypotheses to be properly tested must be worded'in null form. Following are the three null hypotheses to be tested in this study. Null Hypothesis I is: There is no significant difference in the frequency of choice of alternatives for under- and over- finh‘ ..... 58 Null hypothesis two is concerned with two concepts which are inter-related: 1) items selected are not affected by sex, and 2) sex does not influence extracted factors. Null Hypothesis II is: There are no personality dif- ferences between male and female under- and overachievers. Sub hypothesis A: Selection of personality inventory items by under- and overachievers is not influenced by sex. Sub hypothesis 8: Conceptually,empirically extracted _ factors will not differ significantly for males and females. Null Hypothesis III is: Factor analysis of item intercorrelations will not_ produce significant interpret- able factors. Item Analysis Procedures The HTI scores for both the validation and cross-validation samples were analyzed (using Chiésquare tests of significance) to determine which items significantly discriminated between over- and underachievers. The level of significance was set by Farquhar and associates at .20 (two tail test) for the validation of the HTI and .10 for cross-validation (one tail test).1 w lQuinn McNamar, Ps cholo ical Statistics (2nd ed.) (New York: John Wiley & Eons, I§55) p. 231. 59 A two tail test was used at validation because contradictions in the review of literature did not allow for specifying direction of item discrimination. After item direction was determined by validation, it was possible to use a one tail test for cross-validation. The less stringent level was used for validation to minimize the rejection of items when they should have been accepted. The more stringent level for the cross-validation process was used to minimize the acceptance of items when they should have been rejected. The four point response continuum of the HTI was arbi- trarily dichotomized to 1) facilitate the tabulation and calculations necessary for item analysis and 2) because studies have indicated the difference between weighted and dichotomized responses are negligible. The items were keyed in the direction of alternatives assumed to characterize the overachiever, i.e., the overachiever response became "l" and the underachiever response became "0". Frequencies for every response were obtained and entered into a 2 x 2 contingency table to determine the chi square values.1 Items which dis- criminated between under-and overachieving students at .10 level of significance were selected for the final scale --- a total of 31 female and 32 male items were identified. 1This analysis was accomplished on a high speed electronic computer (MISTIC) at Michigan State University, by having the observed frequencies for Chi-square analysis punched on computer tape and analyzed with the K6M program. 60 Due to the input limitation of MISTICI only 23 items could be factor analyzed. The 23 items which had the highest chi square values for each sex were used in the Principal Axis Factor Extraction and Quartimax Rotation method. Factor Analysis Procedures In preparation for the factor analysis it was necessary to determine the intercorrelations among the 23 items for both male and female samples. To achieve this the entire male overachiever sample (n-157) and underachiever sample (n=l37) was used to build a response matrix. As stated, each individual response was given a "l" or "0", depending upon whether or not the overachieving alternative was chosen. The procedure produced a 23 x 29h matrix (23 items and 29A individuals). A similar procedure was followed for the female sample using the total female over- and underachieving sample. (Over-achiever, n-178 and Under-achiever, n-167). A 23 x 3&5 matrix was produced. Cattell defends the use of product moment coefficient by stating, "Neither the product moment nor the principles of factor analysis assume or require a normal distribution... As Thurstone points out (126), the nature of the factors.... is remarkably immune to distorted distributions or crude coefficients.2 1This analysis was accomplished on a high speed electronic computer (MISTIC) at MSU, the K-11 program. 2Raymond B. Cattell, Factor Anal sis, (New York: Harper Brothers, 1952) pp. 328. 61 The matrix was punched on computer tape and verified. The factor generated-intercorrelation matrix was checked against the empirical intercorrelation matrix. Theoretically, it is necessary for each motored item produced by the product moment to be within 1 .19 of the empirical item results. Guilford reports that "the correlation between two tests (items) is regarded in factor theory as the sum of the cross products of their orthogonal, common factors."1 The seven male factors were verified but an error was found in the female intercorrelation matrix.) The female items were again rotated producing six interpretable traits (factors). Product moment coefficients (item intercorrelations) were obtained from the matrix which resulted in 253 intercorrelations for both the male and female sample.(The intercorrelation matrix.may be found in Appendix B). Extraction Solution The principal axis solution is selected over several available methods of factor analysing a matrix because it is mathematically precise.l All of the variance presented by a matrix of intercorrelations is extracted,2 whereas other methods leave residual variance.3 1J.P. Guilford, as chometric Methods, (New York: McGraw Hill Book 60., 16%4) pp. A78. 2Raymond B. Cattell, Factor Anal sis, (New York: Harper Brothers, 1952) pp. I2§-IA§. BCattell, Factor Analysis.......pp. 129-187. 62 . Assumptions The mathematics of the principal axis solution involves the assumption that the total variance demonstrated by the intercorrelations can be divided into independent sets.1 These independent sets of variance represent the number of factors necessary to account for a matrix of intercorrelations.2 Neither the correlations nor the population on which the correlations are obtained are required to be normally dis- tributed. Rotation of the Factors Thurstone prOpounded that simple structure is the most widely used and widely practicable criterion for finding a uniquely meaningful position.3 Cattell states that: "According,to this axiom if we have several alternative hypotheses, each fitting equally the given facts, we should decide among them by taking that which is the simplest, i.e., that which requires fewest conditions and leastubolstering by supplementary hypothesis. In terms of factor analysis, Thurstone argued, this means that any one test (in this case any one item) should have the simplest possible factor constitution.---This means in terms of 1Raymond B. Cattell, Factor Analysis, (New York: Harper Brothers, 1952) p. 3?; ZCattell, Factor Analysis. . . . . pp. 35-h5. 3Cattell, Factor Analysis.....p. 67, citing L.L. Thurstone. 63 the factor matrix that every test (item) should have some zeros in its row, i.e., that some factors should not load it, and that every factor should have some zeros in its column, i.e., that not all test (items) should be affected by it. In a factor analytic solution rotated to simple structure there is actually a double application of the simplicity or parsimony principle. First we have represented many variables by a few common factors and secondly we have distributed these factors to give the simplest explanation for that number of factors.1 A quartimax method of rotation devised by Neuhaus and Wrigley was used in order to achieve the desired orthogonal simple structure.2 While other methods of rotation have been devised, it appears that the researcher must determine which method best fits Thurstone's criteria. As far as can be ascertained the quartimax method of rotation fulfills Thurstone's criteria. Summary An experimental instrument, the Human Trait Inventory (HTI) was devised in an attempt to measure the personality factors associated with academic achievement. A sample of male and female over- and underachievers was statistically 1— 1Raymond B. Cattell, Factor Analysis, (New York: Harper Brothers, 1952) pp. 67:68. 2.1.0. Neuhaus and Charles Wrigley, "The Quartimax Method, An Analytical Approach to Orthogonal Simple Structure," British Journal of Statistical Psygholggy, Vol. 7, (l95h) PP. ‘ - 6A defined and.drawn from a population of A,200 eleventh grade high school students.‘ The sample was randomly divided by sex into validation and cross-validation groups. The basic (assumption was made that the personality characteristics of over- and underachievers would differ significantly. ‘ The chi square analysis level of significance was set at .20 (two tail test) for validation and .10 (one.tail test) for cross-validation for all items. . It was decided to extract significant factors using the principal axis solution method of factor analysis. -This method is mathematically precise and leaves no residual variance. The 23 items with the highest chi square values»; were selected for factor analysis. 6 The quartimax method of rotation was used because'it best meets the assumptions reported by Thurstone. CHAPTER IV ANALYSIS OF DATA Data pertaining to the null hypotheses described in Chapter III is presented in this chapter. Following the pre- sentation of the data an interpretation is made of the data as it relates to the hypothesis. Item Analysis Results Null Hypothesis I: There is no significant difference in the frequency of choice of alternates for under and over- achievers. Chi square analysis was used for the test of significance to measure the first null hypothesis. A summary of the item analyses for the Human Trait Inventory is presented in Table h.l. Examination of Table 4.1 indicates that 34% of the Male items (32) and 33% of the female items (31) held up after cross- validation of the final 9h items.l Inspection also revealed that 26 male items (81%) and 25 female items (83%) discrim- inated significantly atthe .05 level or better. Items to be acceptable for the final scale needed to be significant at the .10 level or better on the cross-validation sample. The above lThe discriminating items for male and female are indicated on the copy of the Human Trait Inventory found in Appendix A. 65 66 Table 4.1 Summary Tabulation of the Number of Significant Items for the Human Trait Inventory* as validation Sample Chi square level of significance Total .20 .10 .05 .Ol .20 or better Males 9 l3 8 18 A8 Females 9 10 12 22 53 Cross validation Sample Chi square level of significance*** Total Selected for Scale .10 .05 .025 .01 .10 or better .Males 6 5 7 1h 32 Females 6 6 9 10 31 *Original 125 items **9h items after corrections ***One tail test findings support the hypothesis that significant differences in item responses between over and under achieving students would be found on a measure of personality. Therefore, the null hypothesis that there are no differences between under- and overachievers is rejected. 67 Null Hypothesis II: Selection of personality inventory items by under-and overachievers is not influenced by sex. It is noted that of the 32 male discriminating items, lb or 44% are common to both sexes.1 Of the 31 female dis- criminating items, 1A or h5% are common to both sexes. All of the common items are significant discriminators in the same scoring direction. The findings indicate that about half of the items are influenced by sex. Other significantly discriminating items are impervious to sex differences. This hypothesis is further explored when the results of the factor analysis are presented. Reliability Estimates A summary of the reliability estimates for the 23 factored items and the total scale score for various groups are pre- sented in Table A.2. The estimates for the underachievers, overachievers, a combined over and under sample, a random sample of the general population, and a sample of normals for each sex were obtained by Hoyt's method of reliability for the 23 factored items.2 1Items common to both sexes are indicated on the copy of the Human Trait Inventory found in AppendixlA. 2Cyril J. Hoyt, "Test Reliability Estimated by Analysis of Variance," Psychometrika,(l9tl) Vol. 6, pp. 153-160. 68 The Spearman-Brown Prophecy Formula was used to estimate the reliability for the total scale of 32 male and 31 female items.l Reliability is prOportionately increased as the num- ber of items increases. Spearman-Brown Prophecy Formula reliabilities are also presented in Table 4.2. Table 4.2 Reliability Estimates of the Factored Items and Total Scale Reliability Estimates N Factored Items Total Scale*** Males General* 66 .80 .85 Over 157 ' .72 .78 Under 137 .68 .75 Normals** 50 .78 .83 Combined Over- under Achiever3294 .78 .83 Females General* 66 .76 .80 Over 178 .71 .76 Under 167 .70 .75 Normals** 50 .68 .73 Combined Over- Under Achievers345 .76 .80 *Random sample from total population N=4200 **Over and underachievers excluded, random sample from general population. ***Spearman-Brown Prophecy Formula 1J.F. Guilford, Fundamental Statistics in Ps cholo and Education, (New York: McCraw-HiII BooE 50., I955) pp. 452. 69 Inspection of Table h.2 indicates that the reliability estimates for each sex are of an acceptable magnitude. The combined over- and underachiever reliability estimates are of critical importance because these groups constituted the samples used in factor analysis. Based upon a random general sample of 25A males and 261 females the construct validity estimates of RTI total score against grades was .h2 for males and .36 for females. The correlations for each sex were significantly different from zero at the .01 level, indicating an acceptable level of validity for an achievement criterion. Factor Analysis Results Null Hypothesis III: Factor analysis of item inter- correlations will not produce significant interpretable factors. The principal axis method extracts, characteristically, as many factors as there are variables, or in this case, items. Therefore, 23 factors were extracted, one for each item for both sexes. The 23 unrotated factors, for each sex, with rounded loadings and the factor's sum.of squares are presented in Tables L.3 (Males) and h.b (Fe-ales). To be considered a factor, the sum of squares (Eigen' values) had to exceed 1.00. Seven male'and eight female factors satisfied the criterion. A further criterion was added demanding that each factor have.at least two items loading highest on it across rows. If the latter criterion was not met the factor was 70 .w * * a. neuoaonamama * .w a. son. mum. omn 02.. SH own. son. nHm. mow «mm. N3 can. H3 94 «so «.3 can. HNH 34 Rs. 3.3%.. $3 . mohasvm mo sum Nm mH: «N: so: mo: 00 co co: HN: nN: so om mo: co: no: 00 no as NH No mH: NN om MN HH 00 No: 0N 0H Nm Ho: so: MN no on mN mo: NH mH: No mm: 00: HN: NH: oN: nN: os NN NN mo Hm sN: mo: mN: NH: NN: mo: NN nN Ho: 0N: co: oH no so sH No: No oH: mm: mm HN MH OH «H so: Hm: no: 0H HH: sN no nH: oo ms NN mH Ho: co: oH no mo: mo: oN sm oN Ho sH: so oo oo nH: mH 00 Ho. sm Hs: Nm mo: Ho: oo: oo ON «0 co: no mo: sH oN oH NN: sN: nN: «0: cm no: co: mo: No: HH: mH NH: sN oH nH nH: nH no 0H: HN oN: ns: nm mH nH: mo HN mN no: os: mN HN om: mo: «H 00 Ho no Ho oo: Hs: oo: HH no: mo mm: on nH oo: No oH: sH mo: NN oN 0N sH HH mm co .oH: so: mN 0H om mo: mH MH «H nH mm 0H Ho: HN no: sH nH: co: nN: so: 0H no mH: HH HH oN: mH: No: oN: co OH os oN mN: cm «H sH oo sN: ss: No: oH HH 0N sH: oN so: sN: Ho: mo mo: 00 ns: NH no: Ho: 0H No: ms sH om: oH: Nm: sH nH: Ho: oo sN: oo oo 0N: nH: HH: no Ho MN HH: so: MH sN: No Ns: Hm mH 0H: mm: Ho: 00: mo: Ho: nH: Ho so no 0H oH mo oN: HH HH: oN: nN: so: oH: HN Hs om NH 0N: Nm oH: Ho: om: Ho: co: Ho om: no 0H: 0H mo: NH: «O nH: nm No mN: HH: H: NH ms HH 0H: NH No: no: NN nH: nm oH: 0N no: mH sm: HH: 0m: mo: NH: 0H: sN Ho: so: 0: ss mm 0H 0H No sH MH sH sN mo nN: mm: No: oH nH: MH Ho so 0H Ho: mN: mH: mH sH os Hm o HH so: MH so: 00 0H: Ho: nH oH Nm: HH: co: no mo: so: mH HN oo wN: no: mm mm: nm m 0N Ho: no: no: Ho: co: co: oH: no: mo MH co: No: NN mN: sN: ss oN: 0H 0H: Ns mo: mm n nH: Ho MN wH NN nH os: sH HH: co mo mN: no Ho mo: Ho no No mo nH: no 0N mN o mN: No: oH mN: co: NN: 0H: no no mo: HN Ho co mo oN: oN HH mN: mo no ms: sn ms m nH: no: oN mo: No MH HH: mo:.HH oH: sm: mo nm: mm 0H NH: nN: so: Ho nH No on os s no mm HH HN: on On no: Ho Ho: mH: nH: MH mo NN: HH so: no Hm: NN mH: 0H: sm: mm m cs 0 nH: 0N so mN: HN: sH so oo sH: nm: mo: mo: 0H mo: Ho 0N: Ho: «0: nm: on wN N no on: mN no sn: Hm NN no No: no sN: mN: mo mH: 0H: mo: HN Ho no no Hm: mm: oN H MN NN HN 0N oH mH nH 0H mH sH MH NH HH 0H m m n o m s m N H .o, unopoem Beau «veapHao one mHaaHoeo on» one .oeoeoaomHnonHauenuo mmoHcs e>HpHmoq one nosHe>v .nme>oHsoeneomo one :he>o eHmz mom nhouc0>cH uHana smear on» No mSopH oonnu:nu:e:9 mom ownvaOH sensuous: .oeonsom : m.s eHnau 71 OsO. OMO. NOn. sOm. sMn. NHn * * * * mOH NOO. HOH NHH OsH nHQ ONm. smO. OHs. Mss. ONO. semoaaacmama * * fl * OON. HNHsHO. MNH oNN oO.m menqsum mo sum mN nH: MO: OO: mo: ON sN NN NH: NO: HH NO: Ho MM: HH OO ON MO: MN: OO: Nm: OM ON MN Os ON OO OH: HH: no ON: HN: so no: nH: ON: ON: OO: mo NH: nN: OO: MN: OH: Ho mN: Ms NN nN: OH OM HH: mH: no: ON ON: nH: MN MN ON MH: No OH: so: mH: NO: OM: so ON: MM mN HN Ho MN OH OO No: Ho: OH: OO ON: OO: OM OO no OO so so: nH OM MO OH: No: Ns: sm ON MN: no: NO: OH: so OM: OH NN OO HH mM: mN: OH: NH: MH: OH: NM HO HM: «O HO OM: MM OH «O 00 no: OO Ms OO: HO sm: no: so Hs: NM MO: OH: NO: OH sH 00 no MH: HH: OH: Os OH Hs OH: 3 No no NN: ON «0 mm Ho: «M MN oN: NH Mo mo: mo: Mo sN mN Oo: HN: MM nH OO: OH HH HO: NO so so: HH ON: no: Os Oo OO OO HO: so NN nM: OH MH: MN ss: Nm OH nH: ON sN: MO: OO: NO HN: OH Om OO: NO: mM HH nH mo NO nH: no: nM: OO: NM: OH: ON mH no Oo OO: OH Oo ON: Ns HH: so Om: OH NN: ON O0 O0 OH HO Ho: ms: NO: nN sH OH sH HH: MM: HH OM HH OO: ms: mH: Oo HO MM OM: Ho: MH Mo: NO: HH so: OH: HO ss: HN NN MH HN: NH ON: OH nN: sH NO: OO: nH: OH: no: NO: nH: no: OO HH HO NO OH Os «O: OH: Om NH no: so OO: OO: OH MH so OH: ON mM mN nH: OM nN: no: nH: MH: 00 OO ON OH HH: nm HH OO «0 ns so mH: OO: OO OH no sH ss: MH: MN HH «0 ON OH: OO sH OH OO: «O: Nm OH mH: mo NO so: NN HH: OH: sH HO ON OO 00 OH: mo: Ms HO: no: NO NO: No HM Om Os O mH OH NH: NN: OH OH NH: O0 O0 O0 so OO: OO: HM ON: OH MN so OO: sH nH mm os O HN: sM: NH: NH: OH: no OH OO: ON MO OH OH: OH: OO: no: HN OH: no ON sM: nH mo: Mm n OH: NM: HO: OH: Mo NN OH HH: mH: OH: nM: 00 OH OM sH ON: so HO: OO NO: NH: NO: sm O so: nM HN: NH nH sH: ON OH OH: so MO: NN: mo: OO OO: no: OM: OM: Hs OH: Ms: MN HN m OO MO OH ss nH: ON no OH OH NO MN: OH so: OO: sH: NN: OO NO HO: nH: ON Hs Os s OH OM: nH: OO «O OO: no: ON Os: mN HO NH NO OO HH: mo Ns: OO nm: NO MH OH: nN M nH mo: sN: MH: OM: ss: OH: NH: NH: NO NO: MH OH «0: Mo: mo: OH mo: ON OO: Ho Os sM N MH: OH: HN OH: sH mo: NN: sH NO: OO: HO: NH HO: MN: mH: mo: nN: HO HH OO HO: sN ON H MN NN HN ON OH OH nH OH «H sH MH NH HH OH O O n O m s M N H .oz 80 whopodh OH .vepeOHumH eonhonuo mneHnd.e>HpHmoo one nesHo>O mom nnopco>mH pHenn mess: 0:» mo msopH oom:p:npso:a mom mwsHomoA sensuous: .ooocsom : s.s eHnsn HoepuHEo ohm mHmEHooo can one .nhebeHmomnovmo one :he>o oHeEem 72 Tabla A, e' 5 Seven Unrotated Factors for Twenty-three Items of the Human Trait Inventory Selected on the Basis of Sums of Squares Above 1.00 for Male 0ver~ and Underachievers. (Values are positive unless otherwise indicated and decimals are omitted) Item Factors Number 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Communality (hz) l 20 ~38 21 01 ~34 ~31 ~24 50 2 28 30 01 ~26 04 -37 ~14 39 3 38 -3 05 ~31 39 ~16 -17 57 4 49 3 -27 ~04 02 02 ~34 56 5 43 34 11 ~28 ~06 ~43 21 62 6 28 20 07 62 22 03 08 56 7 53 ~03 #4 ~20 ~01 42 13 71 8 57 -33 21 06 00 39 ~11 65 9 51 40 ~01 ~28 14 14 10 60 10 35 44 ~10 24 22 ~04 15 46 11 49 12 37 02 -39 ~18 ~16 60 12 30 41 ~29 ~27 ~08 21 10 48 13 51 ~42 ~1l ~04 ~13 02 ~26 54 14 48 ~02 ~47 12‘ ~02 10 ~04 48 15 56 ~25 ~29 06 ~13 20 ~13 54 16 53 17 39 ~08 ~08 15 35 62 17 39 -33 -hl -09 ~03 03 13 46 18 37 -h7 l7 07 36 ~20 15 53 19 29 14 20 05 60 ~03 ~41 68 20 54 29 ~06 19 ~31 ~08 ~13 54 21 35 -53 04 14 ~05 ~10 27 51 22 40 ~27 ~33 ~06 10 ~29 38 58 23 39 22 05 49 -08 ~18 ’04 48 Sum of Squares 4.29 2.38 1.42 1.23 1.19 1.12 1.02 dropped as being uninterpretable and an additional rotation was attempted. The male factors satisfied the two criteria after one rotation. However, after two rotations of the female factors the seventh and eighth factors were dropped as not satisfying 73 the latter criterion. The third rotation with six factors met the specifications. The final unrotated male and female factors are reported in Tables 4.5 and 4.6. Table 4.6 Six Unrotated Factors for Twenty-three Items of the Human Trait Inventory Selected on the Basis of Sums of Squares Above 1.00 for Female 0ver~ and underachievers. (Values a;; positive unless otherwise indicated and decimals are 0 tted Itgn Factors Number 1 2 3 4. 5 6 Communality.(h?) 1 28 24 ~01 ~01 11 ~69 62 2 34 49 ~02 01 20 02 4o 3 27 ~16 01 15 ~37 25 32 4 49 41 ~23 29 ~01 02 55 5 21 23 ~03 ~42 41 04 44 6 54 ~02 ~37 ~12 09 ~18 48 7 53 ~05 16 17 20 03 38 8 4O 55 O 17 ~09 06 50 9 4o 58 0 31 ~02 20 64 10 52 ~05 ~44 ~08 14 14 51 11 57 ~11 25 10 06 35 54 12 59 ~19 ~07 ~05 10 ~16 43 13 22 21 33 ~44 ~10 01 o 14 18 14 16 27 ~45 ~50 o 15 26 ~19 ~02 ~32 ~37 ~06 35 16 52 ~44 40 ~23 16 ~05 7o 17 33 ~21 35 ~09 24 ~01 3 18 49 ~18 ~41 ~11 05 04 4 19 33 ~38 ~35 01 ~31 11 48 20 54 ~42 38 ~02 03 ~09 62 21 25 33 23 ~20 ~36 ~23 45 22 43 ~25 ~17 ~01 ~23 ~07 33 23 29 3o 11 ~52 ~23 ~02 51 Sum of Squares 3.90 2.20 1.46 1.23 1.21 1.17 74 Thurstone suggests that after rotation to a simple analytical structure, the loading values be changed in accordance with the following criteria.1 1) Each item had at least one loading close to zero. 2) There were at least as many items with zero loadings as factors chosen for rotation for each factor column. 3) For every pair of factors there were several items with projections (loadings) on one factor but not on the other. 4) A large proportion of the items had negligible loadings on any pair of factors. 5) Only a small number of items have appreciable loadings on any pair of factors. The results of the final rotation for each sex is pre- sented in Tables 4.7 (Males) and 4.8 (Females). The loading pattern is further simplified by determining for each item the factor on which it has the highest loading. The procedure revealed no male item below .39 on its highest loading. Examination of the rotated female factors results in no item falling below .35 on its highest loading. The relation- ship between the item and the rotated factors are represented by the above numbers. The highest loadingsbr each factor are presented in Tables 4.9 (Hales) and 4.10 (Females). I 1Benjamin Fruchter, Introduction to Factor Anal sis, (New York: D. Van Nostrand company, 1954) p. 110, cit¥ng L.L. Thurstone. 75 Table 4.7 Rotated Factors for Twenty-three Selected Items of the Human Trait Inventory for Male Over- and Under- Achievers. (Values are positive unless indicated, decimals are omitted). Item Factors Number 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 1 01 ~15 04 ~12 13 ~66 09 2 ~06 01 ~56 01 15 ~15 ~15 3 12 ~26 ~13 ~19 65 ~06 ~09 4 03 ~35 ~41 26 ~02 ~02 ~45 5 12 02 ~74 04 08 ~14 17 6 10 ~02 06 73 08 06 07 7 83 ~09 ~09 ~01 09 ~03 ~04 8 60 ~39 20 10 20 ~16 ~10 9 39 ~14 ~53 10 03 23 ~17 10 07 ~06 ~35 53 02 22 ~00 ll 34 ~04 ~31 17 ~05 ~59 ~04 12 18 ~24 ~44 ~01 ~27 29 ~19 l3 17 ~58 05 ~06 21 ~34 ~09 14 00 ~63 ~13 22 ~04 09 ~08 15 21 ~68 02 09 02 ~11 ~10 16 67 ~00 ~32 16 ~01 ~04 21 17 03 ~64 ~05 ~10 09 07 15 18 17 ~21 06 08 62 ~08 33 19 ll 08 ~10 31 59 05 ~45 20 15 ~29 ~35 39 ~20 ~31 ~12 21 19 ~37 15 02 24 ~19 46 22 ' ~06 ~49 ~26 ~00 24 09 45 23 05 ~11 ~17 62 ~04 ~21 12 76 Table 4.8 Rotated Factors for Twenty-three-Selected Items of the Human Trait Inventory for Female 0ver~ and Underachievers. (Values are positive unless indicated, decimals are omitted) Item Factors Number 1 2 3 4 5 6 l 35 ~10 05 ~22 04 ~05 2 56 ~08 ~04 ~21 17 ~13 3 04 ~16 28 02 ~01 ~48 4 66 ~30 01 19 01 10 5 05 ~17 ~06 ~05 58 ~01 6 15 ~62 ll 09 24 ~10 7 29 ~16 47 18 04 29 8 71 ~03 03 ~07 10 03 9 79 02 05 ~05 01 ~07 10 18 ~66 07 ~02 03 06 ll 25 ~15 57 02 04 21 12 10 ~44 41 ~06 12 ~16 13 '17 11 16 ~69 22 13 14 24 10 19 45 16 07 15 ~06 ~26 18 ~35 ~05 51 16 01 ' ~06 81 03 ~07 ~21 17 ~05 00 51 12 19 43 18 04 ~66 13 ~02 05 ~04 19 ~1 ~56 18 14 ~11 08 20 ~0 ~12 77 ~21 04 ~25 21 22 08 ll 05 55 ~05 22 07 ~44 28 ~21 ~20 ~02 23 10 ~10 03 ~15 7O 05 77 Table 4.9 Highest Factor Loadings for Twenty-three Selected Items of the Human Trait Inventory for male Over~ and Underachievers Item Factors Number 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 65 73 83 60 10 53 \OQQO‘NIIPWNH I V #- 16 67 18 62 19 59 20 39 21 46 23 62 78 Table 4.10 Highest Factor Loadings for Twenty-three Selected Items of the Human Trait Inventory for Female Over- and Underachievers Item Number 1 Factors 3 \OQIQOVI-F'WNH 71 79 ~62 ~66 ~66 ~56 47 57 81 51 77 58 ~69 45 51 55 70 79 The discussion strongly supports the hypothesis that sig- nificant factors can be extracted from item intercorrelations. The extracted factors satisfied the criterion of having a sum of squares above 1.00. The final rotated factors satisfied Thurstone's criteria (supra 74) and the criteria of having at least two items loading highest on any one factor in order for it to have been retained in the rotation process. Interpretation of the Factors Extractable and interpretable factors can be identified from the significant cross-validated items. The factors V resulting from the rotation will be considered in two sections, the first for males, the second for females. Most factor analytic studies either name or number their factors. Cattell contended that factors may be numbered, leaving the naming to the reader.1 The tradition of naming factors, however, is followed for the purpose of discussion and theory reformulation. An attempt is made to confine the naming of the factors to the most obvious content of the highest loading items. 1 Raymond Cattell and Andrew R. Baggaley, "The Objective Measurement of AttituO Motivation and Development and Eval~ uation of Principles and Devices, Journal of Personality, Vol. 24.(June 1956) pp- 409-423. 80 Males ~ Results of Factor Analygis Rotation Factor One ~ Factor I, Hm-Fl* accounted for the largest proportion of the variance present in the seven unrotated factors (see the Sums of Squares Table 4.5). Hm-Fl is pre- sented in Table 4.11 along with the loadings and direction of scoring. Table 4.11 Item Content of Factor I Scoring Item Direction Number Content Loading ~ 52 Most of my school subjects are a +83 complete waste of time + 53 Most of my school subjects are +60 useful ~ 79 I have played hookey from school +67 The items loading highest on this factor appear to be involved with the student's School Attitude. Factor Two ~ Although there were more items (5) loading highest on Factor 11, Hm-Fz, it accounted for only a little more than half the variance of Hm-Fl. * Symbolically the "H" indicates the Human Trait Inventory. The "m" designates male ("f" will be used for female) and the order of the factor numbering is identified by F (one through n). 81 Table 4.12 Item Content of Factor II + Scoring Item Direction Number Content Loading + 72 I like to make the best grades ~58 possible .+ 74 I like to study ~63 + 75 I like to plan very carefully ~68 what courses I will take in school + 89 I plan my activities in advance ~64 + 122 I like to be consistent in the ~49 ' things I do Factor 11 items are concerned with planning, studying,and grades, implying Compulsivity. Due to the scoring direction of all the items this is considered to be an overachievement factor. Factor Three ~ The items loading highest on Factor III, Hm-F3 appear to be involved with the student's relationship and attitude toward authority. For this reason Hm-FB is labeled Authority Relations. The scoring direction of these items indicate that this is an underachievement factor. 82 Table 4.13 Item Content of Factor III —_— ~— Scoring Item Direction Number Content Loading ~ 16 I have been quite independent and ~56 free from family rule - 37 I have difficulty working under ~74' strict rules and regulations ~ 54 I find it difficult to find time ~53 to study assignments for the next day ~ 69 I have to be in the mood before I ~44 can study Factor Four ~ Four items loaded highest on Factor IV, Hm-Fh. Three of the items (50, 57, 124) are concerned with an aggressive, acting-out of needs. One item seems to be involved with a school situation. However, since three of the items imply an aggressive activity pattern, Hm-Fh is labeled Excitation. This is considered to be an underachievement factor because of the scoring direction of the items. 83 Table 4.14 Item Content of Factor IV Scoring Item Direction Number Content Loading ~ 50 I flirt +73 ~ 57 I have done something that is +53 considered dangerous just for the thrill of it ~ 101 I have trouble waiting for a +39 class to be over ~ 124 I would like to belong to a +62 motorcycle club Factor Five ~ The highest loading trait on Factor V, Hm-F5 denotes the student's concern with himself and his status. Sglf Value describes this factor. Table 4.15 Item Content of Factor V Scoring Item Direction Number Content Loading + 27 When I have an opinion, I stand +65 up for it + 93 I want very much to be a success +62 ~ 98 I work under a great deal of +59 tension 84 Factor Six ~ Two items loaded highest on Factor VI, Hm-Fé. They seem to be involved with the student's concern and guilt regarding past behavior and future rewards or punishment. The expression of Anxiety characterizes this factor. Table 4.16 Item Content of Factor VI Scoring Item Direction Number Content Loading + 3 I worry about my grades ~66 ~ 67 When I was a youngster I stole ~59 things Factor Seven ~ Two items loaded highest on the final male factor, Hm-F7. The items appear to denote the student's reaction to academic and Internalized Pressure. Table 4.17 _Item Content of Factor VII t Scoring Item Direction Number Content Loading ~ 29 It is difficult for me to keep ~45 interested in most of my school subjects + 105 I get disgusted with myself if I +46 don't do as well as I should 85 Females ~ Results of Factor Analysis Rotation Two of the original eight female factors were dropped as not satisfying the criterion (supra 74). The resulting six traits are reported in this section. Factor One ~ Similar to the male findings, the first female factor, Hf-Fl, accounted for the largest proportion of the variance present in the six unrotated factors (see the Sum of Squares Table 4.6). Five items loaded highest on Hf~F1. The items are concerned with the student's reaction to outside pressures. The items denote an attempt to withdraw into a dream world of the student's own making. Therefore, the logical summary of the item content is Fantasy. The scoring direction of the items imply an underachievement factor. Table 4.18 Item Content of Factor I Scoring Item Direction Number Content Loading ~ 5 Many times I become so excited I find +35 it hard to sleep ~ 9 I daydream frequently +56 ~ 29 It is difficult for me to keep +66 interested in most of my school subjects ~ 66 I have a hard time concentrating on +71 the subject during class periods ~ 68 Even when I do sit down to study I +79 find that my mind tends to wander 86 Factor Two ~ Although more items (6) loaded highest on Factor 11,. Hf-FZ, it only accounted for a little more than half of the variance of Hf-Fl, ,The item content appears to relate to the student's need for achievement. This factor is labeled Aghigye- ment Attitude. This is considered an overachievement factor because of the positive scoring direction of the items. Table 4.19 Item Content of Factor II Scoring Item Direction Number Content Loading + 53 .Most of my school subjects are ~62 useful + , 72 I like to make the best grades ~66 possible + 75 I like to plan very carefully what ~44 ‘ courses I will take in school + 93 I want very much to be a success ~66 + 105 I get disgusted with myself if I ~56 don't do as well as I should + 122 I like to be consistent in the ~44 things I do Factor Three ~ Five items loaded highest on Factor III, Hf-FB. The items denote the student's concern with structure and constancy or Qgganization Need. All the items were scored in the plus direction,suggesting that this is an overachievement factor. 87 Table 4.20 Item Content of Factor III a...— #— Scoring Item Direction Number Content Loading + 60 I like just about everything about +47 school + 74 I like to study +57 + 89 I plan my activities in advance +81 + 90 I think I would like the work of a +51 teacher + 110 I like to plan my activities in +77 advance Factor Four ~ The two items loading highest on Factor IV, Hf-Fh, indicate the way the student perceives himself, his Self Attitude. This is considered to be an underachievement factor. Table 4.21 Item Content of Factor IV Scoring Item Direction Number Content Loading ~ 80 I am said to be quick tempered ~69 ~ 82 I learn slowly +45 Factor Five ~ Factor V, Hf-FS, has three items loading highest on it. The three items appear to be concerned with the student's aggressive acting outof personal-social conflicts. Hf-F5 is labeled Excitation. The scoring direction of the items implies that this is an underachievement factor. & Table 4.22 Item Content of Factor V Scoring Item Direction Number Content Loading ~ 50 I flirt +58 ~ 118 Some subjects are so unpleasant to +55 me that I can't talk about them ~ 124 I would like to belong to a motor- +70 cycle club Factor Six_~ Two items loading highest on Factor VI, Hf-F6, denote the student's attitude toward independent action or group involvement, implying Independence-Dependence Conflict. This is considered to be an overachievement factor. Table 4.23 Item Content of Factor VI Scoring Item Direction Number Content Loading + 11 I work things out for myself rather ~48 than have a friend show me how + 84 It would be worthwhile to belong to +51 several clubs or lodges 89 Comparison of Male and Female Factors Null Hypothesis II: There are no conceptual differences . between male and female factors derived on item responses of under- and over- achievers. When comparing male and female factors it must be recog- nized that this is more of a conceptual relationship than an empirical one. Items within the compared factors are not identical nor is it certain that the items are perceived in the same way by both male and female. Inspection of Table 4.24 reveals that one male and female trait has the same label (Excitation). Table 4.24 Summary of male and Female Factors Factors Males Females I School Attitude (x) Fantasy II (o) Compulsivity FK\\\\’(0) Achievement Attitudes III (x) Authority Re;:;i;;;“‘i(o) Organizational Needs IV (x) Excitation (x) Self Attitude V Self value (x) Excitation VI Anxiety (0) Independence- Dependence Conflict VII Internalized Pressure $5 ,4% indicates relationship (x) indicates underachieving direction (0) indicates overachieving direction 90 While the Excitation factaihas both common and unique items to the sexes (see Table 4.14, males, and Table 4.22, females), underlying all Excitation items appears to be an aggressive acting-out of personal-social conflicts. Other male and female factors appear to.be related,but not with clearness of the factor labeled Excitation. Male Factor I (School Attitude) appears to be related to female Factor 11 (Achievement Attitudes). However, the male factor pertains only to the student's attitude toward school, whereas, the female factor implies not only an attitude toward the school, but also to achievement in other areas. Male Factor II (Com- pulsivity) and female Factor III (Organizational Need) have common items. male Factor II describes the student's compul- sive approach to tasks and use of time. The female Factor III, however, implies the need for structure within which she can operate. Male factor V (Self Value) and female Factor IV (Self Attitude) are both concerned with the student's "self". The male factor is involved in the student's perception of his own worth, while the female factor is concerned with the student's attitude toward her own behavior. Male Factors III (Authority Relations), VI (Anxiety) and VI (Internalized Pressure) do not appear to be related to the remaining female Factors I (Fantasy) and VI (Independence-Dependence Conflict). Examining the scoring direction of the items indicates that certain male and female factors can be classified as either over or underachiever factors. ‘One male factor (Compulsivity) and three femalezfiactors(Achievement Attitude, Organizational 91 Needs, and Independence-Dependence Conflict) can be interpreted in the overachieving direction. Two male factors (Authority Relations and Excitation) and three female factors (Fantasy, Self-Attitude and Excitation) can be interpreted in the under- achieving direction. Directional interpretation was not possible for four of the male factors because both under and overachieving items were included within the factor. Directional interpretation was possible with all of the female factors. The null hypothesis that there are no personality dif- ferences between males and females is rejected, with the realization that the results indicate that students, regardless of sex, need organizational structure, are concerned with "self", with their relationship to others, and have strong positive or negative feelings about school and achievement. It is also obvious that males and females may perceive the same items differently so that even though common items are found, different meanings may be attached to the same item. Therefore, even though each sex has an organizational need, they selected both common and uncommon items to express this need. Summary The item analysis procedures selected 32 male and 31 female items after cross-validation from the Human Trait Inven- tory. These items, 14 of which are common to both sexes, were significant discriminators between statistically defined under- and overachievers at the eleventh grade level. 92 Hoyt's method of reliability produced estimates of internal consistency ranging from .68 to .80 for males and from .68 to .76 for females for various samples. Factor analysis extraction yielded seven male and efimm female factors, which accounted for most of the variance among items. These factors were rotated to simple structure. The seven male factors satisfied the criterion, but only six of the female factors remained after three rotations. The seven male factors were characterized as 1) School Attitude; 2) Compul- sivity; 3) Authority Relations; 4) Excitation; 5) Self-Value; 6) Anxiety; and 7) Internalized Pressure. The female factors were labeled 1) Fantasy; 2) Achievement Attitudes; 3) Organ- izational Needs; 4) Self-Attitude; 5) Excitation; and 6) Independence-Dependence Conflict. It was possible to interpret all of the female factors in either the over- or underachiever direction. Only three of the male factors were classifisdin one or the other direction. The interpretation and discussion of each factor as it relates to the theory will be presented in the next chapter. CHAPTER V INTERPRETATION AND DISCUSSION OF FACTORS To have practical or theoretical usefulness, the per- sonality factors reported in the preceding chapter must be psychologically meaningful. The purpose of this chapter is to interpret and discuss the factors as they relate to the hypothesized traits discussed in Chapter I. The content of the items and how they relate to each other, as reported in Chapter IV, will form the basis for this presentation. This chapter will be divided into two sections, one for the dis- cussion and interpretation of the male factors and the other for the female factors. Conceptually, factors and traits can be viewed as anal- ogous because the factors in Chapter IV were labeled and inter- preted in the Rum of personality traits. The term "factor- trait" will be employed in order to facilitate the discussion of the relationship between extracted factors and summarized personality tgéits. Definite interpretation of each item is not. always possible because sometimes more than one implication may be relevant. Conceptual overlap between extracted factors makes possible a relationship with more than one summarized factor- trait. 93 94 Discussion of Male Factor-Traits Factor-TraitAOne ~ This factor-trait for males (see Table 4.11, supra p. 80) has three items which load highest on it. All three items refer to a particular attitude of the student toward school. Item 52 reflects an essentially negative attitude, indicating that school is a waste of time. The content of this item indicates a disregard for the authority placed in the hands of the school personnel. Item 53 reflects a positive school attitude. Item 79 suggests the attitude of escaping from the school situation and appears to agree more with item 52. Item 79 also suggests a risk-taking and disregard for rules and regulations. Thus, Factor-Trait I, labeled School Attitude, is strongly related to summary Factor-Trait VI (Activity Patterns) and associated with summary Factor—Trait III (Authority Relations). Factor-Trait Two ~ Five items loaded highest on factor-trait two (see Table 4.12, supra p. 81). The content of items 72 and 74 suggest a liking for good grades and study. These items are involved with the student's wish for security and constancy in relationship to his goals and effective use of time. Items 75 and 89 reflect planful and orderly approaches to school work and activities. The content of these items indicate a desire for structure andcnganization. The lowest loading on this factor-trait belongs to item 122. The content of this item appears to emphasize consistency but is not clearly related to organization or orderliness. This factor-trait was categorized 95 as Compulsivity which appears to relate to summary Factor~ Trait VII (Goal Orientation). Items 72, 74 and 75 suggest a possible relationship with summary Factor Trait VI (Activity Pattern). Factor-Trait Three ~ The content of the four items loading highest on Factor-Trait III (see Table 4.13, supra 82) cate- gorize the student's resistant attitude toward Authority Relations. Items 16 and 73 emphasize the demands for inde- pendence and an inability to work under the direction of authority figures. These two items suggest an active acting- out against authority. Items 54 and 69 indicate a passive resistant attitude toward tasks imposed by external authority figures in contrast to items 16 and 73. This factor-trait was labeled Authority Relations and is obviasly related to summary Factor-Trait III (Authority Relations). There also is a possible relationship between this factor-trait and summary Factor-Trait V (Independence-Dependence Conflict). Factor-Trait Four ~ Four items load highest on Factor-Trait IV (See Table 4.14, p. 83). The content of item 50 indicates the student's need to validate his masculinity and his preoccupation with short term gratification. A desire for peer acceptance is also suggested. The content of items 57 and 124 again emphasize the student's need to validate his masculinity but add the dimension of physical danger. Item 124 suggests a group need. Items 50, 57, and 124 also imply sensual grati- fication as associated with flirting, danger, and fast 96 motorcycles. The lowest loading on this factor-trait belongs to Item 101 which suggests a restlessness and an impatience with structured events. It also implies an inability to con- trol actions and behavior. This factor-trait was labeled Excitation. This factor-trait appears to be related primarily to Factor-Trait VI (Activity Patterns) and slightly related to Factor-Trait IV (Interpersonal Relationships). Factor-Trait Five ~ The three items loading highest on Factor- Trait V emphasize the concern of the student with himself (see Table 4.15, supra p. 83). Item 27 suggests a concern with the student's demand to be heard and respected for his opinions. This item also implies an overt aggressive reaction to external topics. Item 93 exhibits the student's concern with success. He wants others to see him as a success now and in the future. Item 98 can be categorized as a concern with mental and physical tension. All three items imply an underlying anxiety regarding status, success and tension. Factor-Trait V, labeled Sal;- 12122 is obviously related to summary Factor-Trait II (Self Value). There also appears to be a relationship to summary Factor-Trait I (Academic Anxiety) although the relationship is not as clearly defined. Factor-Trait Six ~ Two items load highest on Factor-Trait VI (see Table 4.16, p. 84). Item 3 emphasizes the student's worry and concern over academic achievement. Item 67 indicates the student's concern with past behavior. It implies a feeling of guilt over actions which are not accepted by society. It also 97 suggests a denial of wrong-doing versus acceptance of past action. This factor-trait labeled Anxiety is related to summary Factor-Trait I (Academic Anxiety). Factor-Trait Seven ~ The content of the two items loading highest on Factor-Trait VII (see Table 4.17, supra p. 84) indicates the student's reaction to external pressures. Item 29 implies an apathetic withdrawal from failure situations in academic areas. Item 105 suggests a reaction of self criticism when the student perceives himself as having failed. This trait was labeled Internalized Pressure and appears to be related to summary Factor-Trait I (Anxiety) although this relationship is not as clear as some of the others presented in this section. The male factor-traits and the interpretation of each are summarized in Table 5.1. Significance of the Male Factors A random factor was constructed for each of the seven rotated factors to determine if the extracted factors were chance dimensions. The first digit determined the sign (plus or minus) and the next three digits determined the loading. These random factors may be examined in Table 5.2. 98 Table 5.1 Male Factor-Trait Labels and Brief Interpretation Male Factor-Traits Interpretation I. School indicates either an acceptable or non- Attitudes acceptable attitude toward school. School experience is seen to be valuable or .worthless. II. Compulsivity describes the student's approach toward assigned school tasks, personal goals, and effective use of time. III. Authority describes the student's reaction toward Relations demands and tasks assigned to him by authority figures. IV. Excitation describes the student's activity pattern, determines which needs are most basic for the student. Immediate gratification or short term satisfactions are seen as most adequately describing this factor. V. Self Value indicates how the student perceives him- self and his behavior. VI. Anxiety describes the student's feelings about present and past behavior and its immediate effect. VII. Internalized describes the student's mode of responding Pressure to failure situations. Apathetic with- drawal or profound self disgust characterize this factor. Random Factor I was correlated with extracted Factor I using the Pearson "r" method. The same procedure was followed with the remaining six factors terminating with Factor VII. 99 Table 5.2 Random Factors Generated from a Table of Random Numbers (Decimals are omitted and the numbers are positive unless otherwise indicated). Item Factors Number 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 1 686 ~602 530 ~833 433 ~227 299 2 ~044 157 ~398 ~387 ~200 117 919 3 ~373 ~472 ~684 889 ~192 280 663 4 234 ~845 ~723 ~123 ~166 ~64? 080 5 ~423 222 ~304 ~299 ~789 ~184 212 6 005 591 162 990 ~593 616 ~606 7 684 ~952 134 008 ~935 ~607 ~908 8 ~191 436 ~723 374 ~672 197 589 9 191. 752 ~046 897 ~405 ~64? ~897 10 076 ~225 228 080 ~129 ~460 ~021 11 298 ~759 034 342 ~880 534 023 12 032 ~207 ~092 671 ~990 ~221 374 13 050 967 ~961 ~593 ~794 ~390 ~111 14 ~572 089 076 370 781 ~052 ~659 15 ~378 ~224 ~590 312 003 906 ~594 16 320 420 ~344 ~163 806 ~013 ~659 17 559 029 ~416 506 ~071 ~659 ~245 18 ~634 ~128 094 ~264 ~422 ~294 909 19 008 ~723 554 ~586 ~393 ~026 ~263 20 ~061 ~842 ~935 ~207 634 ~824 ~2oo 21 862 264 594 764 847 353 768 22 274 ~462 ~13o 191 274 068 ~049 23 ~531 ~285 ~938 ~292 183 285 ~845 Using the .05 level of significance it is observed that none of the extracted factors were greater than zero when cor- related with the random factors. These findings support the desirability of interpreting all of the factors. The male correlations are presented in Table 5.3. 100 Table 5.3 Correlations Between Random and Extracted male Factors Random Extracted Factors Factors 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 1 +.245 2 ”0139 3 +.144 4 +.023 5 ~.084 5 ~.063 7 +.l36 p f .05 ~ .404 d.f. - 21 Discussion of Female Factor-Traits Factor-Trait One ~ Five items load highest on Factor-Trait I (see Table 4.18, supra p. 85) for females. All of the items are concerned with the student's inability to concentrate on a task or goal. The lowest loading on this factor-trait be- longs to Item 5. This item suggests that thoughts and ideas interfere with sleep. It also implies that perhaps physical tenseness may be a contributing cause to the inability to sleep. Items 9, 29, 66 and 68 are involved with the student's attempt to withdraw from the school situation. This is done by daydreaming, losing interest, lack of concentration or by allowing the mind to wander. This factor-trait labeled Eggtggy appears to be related to summary Factor-Trait I (Academic Anxiety). *This relationship is due-to the student's apparent reaction to and concern with academic achievement. 101 Factor-Trait Two ~ The content of the six items loading highest on Factor-Trait II (see Table 4.19 supra p. 86) indicatesthe student's attitude regarding achievement. Items 53 and 72 indicate the positive feelings of the student toward school. Item 75 suggests student planfulness and interest in academic subjects. Item 93 implies the desire for success. Item 105 implies a reaction to perceived failure situations. Item 122 suggests the need for control and consistency in relationship to actions. This factor- trait labeled Achievement Attitude is associated with summary Factor-Trait VI (Activity Patterns) and also with summary Factor-Trait VII (Goal Orientation). Factor-Trait Three ~ The items loading highest on Factor- Trait 111 (see Table 4.20 supra p. 87) are seen as involving a need for structure, security and constancy. Item 60 implies a need for the structure of a school situation. Item 74 suggests the need for the orderliness and planfulness necessary for good study habits. This item also immlies a need for achievement. Items 89 and 110 are much alike in their meaning, but the wording is slightly different. However, the difference between the two loadings (.004) suggests that the items are functioning identically. Item 110 did not hold up after cross-validation for the male sample, suggesting that the female perceived this item differently. The content of both items categorize them as a need for planfulness and organization of activities. Item 90 implies two different thoughts: 1) the need for security found in 102 a teaching position; and 2) an occupation which provides interpersonal contact with children. This factor-trait labeled Organizational Needs appears to be related to summary Factor-Trait VII (Goal Orientation) and to a lesser extent to summary Factor-Trait VI (Activity Patterns). FactorgTrait Four ~ Two items load highest on Factor-Trait IV (see Table 4.21 supra 87). Item 80 categorizes the student's inability to control anger and aggression. This item also implies how the student perceives her own reaction to external actions. Item 82 defines the student's attitude toward academic success. This factor-trait labeled Sglf Attitude is associated with summary Factor-Trait II (Self Value). Factor-Trait Five ~ The content of two of the three items (50 and 124) (see Table 4.22 supra 88) loading highest on Factor-Trait V indicates the aggressive acting-out of the student's needs. Item 50 involves the student's acting-out of sensual or status need with the opposite sex. Item 118 implies the student's conflict and ambivalence regarding thoughts and actions. Item 124 suggests a need to act out aggressions by belonging to a group which involves the thrill and excitement of danger and speed. All three items have the underlying implication of conflict over sexual actions and r thoughts. This factor-trait labeled Excitation is associated with summary Factor-Trait VI (Activity Patterns). 103 Factor Trait Six ~ The content of the two items loading highest on Factor Trait VI are concerned with the student's reaction to independence versus dependence (see Table 4.23 supra 88). Item 11 suggests a need for independence and a dislike for relying on others. Item 84 implies two different thoughts: 1) a need for dependency provided by the group; and 2) a desire for social mobility. This factor-trait labeled Independence-Dependence Conflict is obviously related to summary Factor-Trait V (Independence-Dependence Conflict). This factor-trait can also be related to summary Factor-Trait IV (Interpersonal Relationships). The interpretation of each female trait can be found in Table 5.4. Significance of the Female Factors The female random factor was constructed identically to the procedure employed for males. Pearson's "r" was used to correlate the six extracted factors with the random factors. The random factors are presented in Table 5.5. The .05 level of significance was used. Examination of the correlations between the extracted factors‘and random factors in Table 5.6 show that none of the correlations for female factors were greater than zero ~at the .05 level of significance. These findings support the desirability of interpreting all six factors. 104 Table 5.4 Female Factor—Trait Labels and Brief Interpretation Female Factor-Traits Interpretation 1. Fantasy II. Achievement Attitude III. Organizational Need IV. Self Attitude V. Excitation VI. Independence- Dependence Conflict indicates the student's defensive reaction toward the problems of life which she is not able to cope with. describes the student's attitude toward achievement. The student's need for academic success and reaction to failure characterize this factor. indicates the student's need for structure, security and constancy. The school structure and activities are seen as fulfilling these needs. indicates how the student perceives her own behavior and actions as associated with interpersonal relation- ships and academic learning. describes the student's activity in an attempt to resolve personal and social conflict. indicates the student's conflict over independence~dependency relations. The conflict over the feminine dependency role or inde- pendence characterize this factor~ trait. 105 Table 5.5 Random Factors Generated from a Table of Random Numbers (Decimals are omitted and the numbers are positive unless otherwise indicated). Item . Factors Number 1 2 3 4 5 6 l ~729 ~73? ~4l9 ~402 ~893 482 2 924 ~369 702 ~39l ~738 313 3 ~710 604 659 603 709 079 4 937 154 567 298 374 ~166 5 ~845 ~l32 ~859 610 ~045 ~24O 6 488 ~464 894 023 692 594 7 ~139 769 ~12o ~506 522 817 8 ~038 956 776 ~243 685 ~509 9 871 607 402 485 331 868 10 ~163 ~119 537 496 435 ~615 11 ~79? ~455 146 921 ~741 082 12 ~014 ~202 649 ~455 779 ~442 13 ~369 425 ~47? 072 811 226 14 628 845 ~687 108 822 234 15 466 112 193 695 ~294 353 16 050 ~637 ~509 727 358 954 1? 859 ~736 845 ~354 513 662 18 282 ~476 551 ~393 ~623 ~561 19 780 076 ~3?9 854 236 420 20 ~600 ~463 ~401 094 354 408 21 628 702 827 ~321 273 344 22 401 158 642 ~812 ~854 978 23 055 869 115 638 ~32? ~634 106 Table 5.6 Correlations Between Random and Extracted Female Factors Random Extracted Factors Factors 1 2 3 4 5 6 1 +.237 2 +-35l 3 ~.309 4 +.028 5 +.060 6 +.063 p f .05 = .404 d.f. - 21 Logical Synthesis It should be noted that the preceding discussion labeling factor-traits and interpretating items is of a hypothetical nature. It is possible that there are other interpretations that would be of as great a value or greater depending upon the interpreter. In Chapter V the item content of the seven male and six‘ female personality factor-traits were integrated. This took the form of: l) determining the psychological meaning of each factor-trait and labeling each group of items; 2) of inter- preting each item for its unique contribution to the factor- trait; and 3) evaluating the factor-trait in relationship to the seven hypothesized factor-traits presented in Chapter I. 107 In Table 5.7 a graphic presentation of the relationship between the extracted factor-traits and the theorized factor- traits is found. Table 5.7 Postulated Relationship Between Extracted and Theorized Factor-Traits Extracted Theorized Extracted Male Factors Female School'Attitude-r—é Activity Patternské—Achievement Attitude ,8 ’ Aggression ‘ 2‘6 Goal Orientation “\\ Aggression Compulsivity ’ 4 3 Authority ‘\rganizational Needs ‘sy Relations Authority Relations 3'Interpersonal e-H—~Independence~ ‘\. Relations s-f Dependence Conflict slndependence- *’/’/’ Dependence Conflict Self value -_\ ~¢ Self Value é—-——-—-Self Attitude Anxiety 1; 3 Academic Anxiety e—Fantasy ,0 Internalized Pressure’ ,4 Strong relationship hypothesized ~~ ~~~~~~~~~ 9» Slight relationship hypothesized 108 The extractedmalc factor-traits strongly support the theorized factor-traits. Summary Factor-Traits I (Academic Anxiety) and VI (Activity Patterns) are the most strongly supported. Summary Factor-Traits IV (Interpersonal Relation- ships) and V (Independence-Dependence Conflict) received the least support. The extracted female factor-traits strongly support summary Factor-Traits VI (Activity Patterns) and VII (Goal Orientation). There appear to be no interpretable relation- ships between the female factor~traits and summary Factor-Trait III (Authority Relations). This suggests that either this factor- trait is not related to academic achievement or that there are no items which properly measure this factor-trait. When a Pearson "r" test of significance was applied to the extracted factors it was found that none of the male or female factor correlations when related to chance factors were greater than zero at the .05 level of significance. CHAPTER VI SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS AND RESEARCH IMPLICATIONS The basic problem of this investigation was to determine whether eleventh grade male and female under- and overachievers scored differently on a measure of personality characteristics. The problem was further extended to a factor analytic analysis of the obtained differences between the discrepant achievers. Seven summary factor-traits were theorized from the review of literature. Each factor-trait was viewed as bi-polar. The assumption was made that under- and overachieving students fall along a continuum from one extreme to the other on each summary factor-trait. An objective personality scale, the Human Trait Inventory (HTI) was developed from previous tests which purported to measure the differences between under- and overachieving stu- dents. The students were asked to rate themselves on a four point scale (never, sometimes, usually, and always). The in- strument was one of a battery constructed forlxe in a research project conducted at Michigan State University.1 The HTI was administered to a statistically defined sample of under- and overachieving eleventh grade students. Sexes 1William W. Farquhar, A Comprehensive Study of the Moti- vational FactorsUnderlyin%_Achievement3T_E1eventh Grade—High School Students, Research roject No. 846 (8458); supported’by thE’U.S. Office of Education, in cooperation with Michigan State University, 1959. 109 110 were analyzed separately. Using a Chi square model to determine significant items, it was found that 32 male and 31 female items held up after cross-validation at the .10 level of significance or better (one tail test). Fourteen scale items were found to be common to both sexes. Reliability.estimates ranging from .68 to.80 for males and.68 to.76 for females were obtained using Hoyt's analysis of variance technique to determine the internal consistency of the 23 items selected for Factor Analysis. The Spearman Brown Prophecy Formula yielded reliability estimates ranging from .75 to .85 for males and .73 to .80 for females for the 32 male and 31 female total scale scores. The con- struct validity of the HTI when correlated with grade point average was .42 for males and .36 for females. After determining significant items which discriminate between under- and overachievers, the subsidiary problem of factor analysis was studied. Three purposes were considered in conducting the factor analysis: 1) analysis of the items should reveal factors which would support the advisability of extracting factors from an item intercorrelational matrix; 2) factors should be interpreted supporting the theory of personality factor-traits associated with academic achievement; and 3) item loadings and content should suggest how to increase the precision of predicting academic achievement. To answer these questions, a mathematically precise factor extraction procedure (principal axis factor solution) and an analytic method of rotation (quartimax rotation method) was employed. 111 Seven male and six female factors were produced. The factors were found to account for most of the variance among the twenty-three items selected for factor analysis and rotation. The content of the male items loading highest on the seven factors suggested the following labels: 1) School Attitude; 2) Compulsivity; 3) Authority Relations; 4) Excitation; 5) Self Value; 6) Anxiety; 7) Internalized Pressure. The content of the items loading highest on each of the six female factors were categorized as follows: 1) Fantasy; 2) Achievement Attitude; 3) Organizational Needs; 4) Self Attitude; 5) Emcitation; 6) Independence-Dependence Conflict. Conceptual overlap appeared to exist between extracted factors and theorized factor-traits. The conceptual overlap was particularly apparent for the males in that the relation- ship of the seven extracted factors with the seven theorized factor-traits was hypothesized. Theorized Factor-Trait III (Authority Relations) did not overlap with any of the extracted female factors. Theorized Factor-Trait IV (Interpersonal Relations) was only slightly supported by the extracted female factors. The extracted female factors strongly overlapped the other five theorized factor-traits. The findings of this study do not imply that the above two summary factor-traits are not related to achievement. It is possible that there.were no items which could adequately measure these two summarized factor-traits. None of the male or female factors correlated significantly with chance factors at p 5 .05. On 1) 112 the basis of the findings it is concluded that: An objective measure of personality can be con- structed which will measure the differences between under- and overachieving students of either sex. 2) Male and female under- and overachieving students 3) 4) 5) 6) select both identical and different items. It is possible to empirically extract male and female factors which are related to achievement. Examination of male and female factor labels and interpretation suggest both common and unique factors. A conceptual overlap of interpretation exists between:_ male factor I (School Attitude) and female factor II (Achievement Attitude); male factor II (Compulsivity) and female factor III (Organizational Needs); male factor III (Authority Relations) and female factor VI (Independence-Dependence Conflict); male factor IV (Excitation) and female factor V (Excitation); and male factor V (Self Value) and female factor IV (Self Attitude). Male factors VI (Anxiety) and VII (Internalized Pressure) plus female factor I (Fantasy) appear to be unique to their sex. Reliability of the HTI is of an acceptable magnitude (ranging from .68 to .80 for males and from .68 to .78 for females) to be of practical usefulness. The ability of the HTI to predict grade point average is at a significant level. A conceptual relationship is found between extracted and theorized factors. 113 Recommendations 1) New theories about the relation of personality to academic achievement should be developed incorporating the findings of this study and companion studies of current motivational projects. 2) More items similar in content to the total scale 3) 4) 5) items should be constructed to increase reliability. Items of a different nature should be constructed to determine whether additional personality dimensions can be related to achievement. A normal achieving population (excluding over- and underachievers) or a random sample of the general population should be used to determine whether the same factors appear, but with moderate loadings. The study should be replicated on different socio- economic classes, racial groups, and other sub-groups. Other grouping methods such as multiple scalograms and agreement (pattern) analysis should be employed to determine the agreement of different analytic procedures in partitioning items. BIBLIOGRAPHY Altus, William D., "A College Achiever and Non-Achiever Scale for the MMPI," Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 32, (1948) pp- 385-97. Armstrong, Marian Elizabeth, 1255 Dissertation Abstracts, University of Connecticut, Vol. 5, pp. 349. . Brown, William, Abeles, Norman, and Iscoe, Ira, "Motivational Difference Between High and Low Scholarship College Students," Journal of Educational Ps cholo , Vol. 45, (1954) pp- 215-23- Cattell, Raymond 8., Factor Anal sis, (New York: Harper Brothers, 1952) pp. 2 ~ 7, 328, 39-68. , Baggaley, Andrew R., "The Objective Measurement of ’Attitude Motivation and Development and Evaluation of Principles and Devices, Journal of Personaligy, Vol. 24, (June 1956) pp. 409-423. Cohler, Milton J., "A Comparative Study of Achievers and Non- Achievers of Superior Intelligence," Summary of Doctoral Dissertations, Northwestern University, Vol. 9 (1940) pp. 74-79. Diener, C.L., "Similarities and Differences Between Over~ Achieving and Under-Achieving Students " Personnel and Guidance Journal, Vol. 38, No. 5 (1960 pp. 396-400. Dowd, Robert Jr., "Underachieving Students of High Ca acity," Journal of Higher Education, Vol. 23 (June 1952) pp. 327-30. Drews, Elizabeth Monroe, and Teahan, John E., "Parents Attitudes and Academic Achievement," Journal of Clinical Psychology, Vol. 13 (1957) pp. 328-32. """“ English, Horace B. and English, Ava Chapney, A Com rehensive Dictionar of Psycholo ical and Ps choanal ticaITerms, (New York: Iongmans, reen & Co., 1958) pp. 9-10, 54, 144. 227. 258. 273. Farquhar, William W., A Comprehensive Stud of the Motivational Factors Underl in Achievement of EIeventH Grade Hi 5 chool Students, Researc roject No. .45 ; 4 Sipported_by the U.S. Office of Education in cooperation with Michigan State University, 1959. 114 115 Farquhar, William W., "An Integrated Research Attack in Academic Motivation," (Research Frontier) Journal of Counselin Psychology, Vol. 9, No. l (1962) pp. 84-86. , and Krumboltz, John D., "A Check.List for Evaluating ’Experimental Research in Psychology and Education," Journal of Educational Research, Vol. 52 (1959) pp. 353-354. +_ , "The Predictive Efficiency of the Michigan State 'M:Scales," Paper presented at American Personnel and Guidance Association Convention, Chicago, April 1962. Fruchter, Benjamin, Introduction to Factor Anal sis, (New York: D. Van Nostrana Company. 1954) cIting I. L. Thurstone, p. 110. Gebhart, 0.0., and Hoyt, D.T., "Personality Needs of Under- and Over-Achieving Freshmen," Journal of A lied Ps - cholo , Vol. 42 1958) pp. 125-28. Gerberich, J.R., "Factors Related to the College Achievement of High-Aptitude Students Who Fail of Expectation and Low-Aptitude Students Who Exceed Expectations," Journal 2;:Educationa1 Psygholo , Vol. 32 (April 1941) pp. 233-63. Gough, H.G.,"What Determines the Academic Achievement of High School Students," Journal of Educational Research, Vol. 46 (January 1 53 PP. 3 - . (Notes from a paper presented during the annual meeting of the A.P.A., September 1955. San Francisco). Gowan, John C., "Dynamics of the Underachievement of Gifted Students," Exceptional Children, Vol. 24 (November 1957) pp 0 98-101 ’ e Guilford, J.P., Ps chometric Methods _(New York: MbGraw-Hill Book Co., 4 pp. 4 . , Fundamental Statistics in P8 cholo and Education, (New York: McGraw-HiII 500E Co., 1955] pp. 452. Haggard, Ernest A., "Socialization, Personality and Academic Achievement in Gifted Children," School Review, Vol. 65, (December 1957) pp. 388-414. Hoffman, L.W., Rosen, S., and Lippitt, R., "Parental Coerciveness, Child Auton and Child's Role at School," Sociometgy, 116 Holland, John L. "The Prediction of College Grades From the California Psychological Inventory and the Scholastic Aptitude Test," Journal of Educational Psycholo , Vol. 50 (August 1959) Pp. 135-42. Hopkins, J., Molleson, N.,and Sarnoff, 1., "Some Non-Intel- lectual Correlates of Success and Failure Among University Students," British Journal of Educational Ps cholo , Vol. 28 (Fe ruary 5 pp. 5-3 . Horrall, Bernice M., "Academic Performance and Personality Adjustments of Highly Intelligent College Students," Fe Genetic Ps cholo Mono ra hs, Vol. 55 bruary 1957) pp- 3-33- Hoyt, Cyril J., "Test Reliability Estimated by Analysis of Variance," Psychometrika, v61. 6 (1941) pp. 153~16o. Kimball, Barbara, "Case Studies in Educational Failure During Adolescence," American Journal 9f Orthops chiatr , Kirk, Barbara, "Test Versus Academic Performance in Mal- functioning Students," Journal of Consulting Psychology, Vol. 16 (1952) pp. 312-16. Krug, R.E., "Over and Underachievement and the Edwards PPS," Journal of A lied Ps cholo Vol. 43. No. 2, (April 1959) pp- 133-35. ' M Kurtz, John J., and Swenson, Esther J., "Factors Related to Over-Achievement and Under-Achievement in School," School Review, Vol. 59 (November 1951) pp. 472-80. Lum,M., "A Comparison of Under- and Over-Achieving Female College Students," Journal of Educational Ps cholo , Vol. 51 (1960) pp. 109-114. McNemar, Quinn, Ps cholo ical Statistics (2nd ed) (New York: John Willey & Sons, 1955) pp. 231. May, R., The.Meaning of Anxiety, (New York: Ronald Press, 1950) pp° ’2 : ' 39- Merrill, RJM., and Murphy, D.T., "Personality Factors and Academic Achievement in College," Journal of Counselin Psychology, Vol. 6 (1959) pp. 207~2107““""""'“"‘ Middleton, George, Jr., and Gutherie, George M., "Personality Syndromes and Academic Achievement," Journal of Educa- tional Psycholo , Vol. 50, No. 2 (ApriI 1959) pp. 65-69. 117 Mitchell, James V., "Goal-Setting Behavior as a Function of Self-Acceptance, Over- and Under-Achievement, and Related Personality Variables," Journal of Educational Psycholggy, Vol. 50, No. 3, (June 1959) PP~ 93:104. Morgan, Henry H., "A Psychometric Comparison of Achieving and ' Non-Achieving College Students of High Ability," Jgurnal of Consulting Psychology, Vol. 16 (1952) pp. 292- Neuhaus, J.O. and Wrigley, Charles, "The Quartimax Method, An Analytical Approach to Orthogonal Simple Structure," Byitish Journal of Statisticalesyghology, Vol. 7 (1954) PP0 ‘ - Pierce, James V., The Educationafi Mbtivation Patterns of Sn erior Students 0 0 an o ot c eve in Scfiool, FInal Research Report—U.Sl Office of Eaucation Cooperative Project, (November 1959) Project #208 (7136) Mdmeographed. Rabinowitz, Ralph, "Attributes of Pupils Achieving Beyond Their Level of Expectancy," Journal of Personalit , Vol. 24 (March 1956) pp. 306~I7. Shaw; Merville C., and Brown, Donald J., "Scholastic Under- achievement of Bright College Students," Personnel and Gpidgpce Journal, Vol. 36 (November 1957) pp. 195-99. , and Grubb, James, "Hostility and Able High School Ufiderachievers," Journal of Counseling Psychology, v01. 5, NO. If, (1 5 ppm 2 3- e Stagner, R., "The Relation of Personality to Academic Aptitude and Achievement," Journal of Educational Research, Vol. 26 (1933) pp. WW4 ~ . _— Taylor, Ronald G., "Personality Factors Associated With Scholastic Achievement," (Paper presented at APGA Convention, Denver, March 1961) Mimeographed. Terman, Lewis M. and Oden, Melta, "The Gifted Children Grow Up? Genetic Studies of Genius, Vol. 4, Stanford: Stanford University Press (I947T—Chapter 23: Factors in the Achievement of Gifted Men.. Walsh, Ann M., "Self Concepts of Bright Boys with Learning Difficulties," Contributions to Education, Bureau of Publécationg, T.C., Oqumbia‘UniVersity, New York, 195 p. 7 . APPENDIX A HUMAN TRAIT INVENTORY (Items marked "*" were found to be significant discriminators in cross-validation for males, those marked "#" were significant for females. Male factor analyzed items were identified by "5", female factor analyzed items " ". Scoring direction of the items was dentified by ~ for underachievers and + for overachievers). HUMAN TRAIT INVENTORY GENERAL DIRECTIONS: PLEASE READ CAREFULLY! Following is a list of statements about.YOU. Read each statement carefully! Then decide whether this statement is how’you alwayswfeel, usually feel, ggmetimes feel or never feel. Number Meanng of Number 1 This statement would never describe the way I feel. 2 This statement sometimes describes the way I feel. 3 This statement usually describes the way I feel. 4 This statement always describes the way I feel. Answer each statement - Do not leave any blank. There are no right or wrong_answers. The answers apply only to y__. The way you answer these statements will not affect your school marks in any way. Mark between the lines under the number that best describes how you feel. EXAMPLE: 1. I feel it is a good thing to be honest. 1 2 4 5 Answer Sheet 1. // 1' /7 // // (Ignore Column 5) This individual has chosen number "2" for the statement "I feel it is a good thing to be honest". This means he feels that this statement sometimes describes him. In marking your answers on the separate answer sheet, be sure that the number of the statement in the booklet is the same as the number on the answer sheet. It is best to mark your first impression, try not to change your answer. If you change an answer, erase completely your first choice and then blacken between the lines under the‘otherrcolumn. 86 sure to fill in all the information at the top of the answer sheet,'name, age, sex, date today and so on. Remember to answer the statements as theygapply to yep! PLEASE DO NOT WRITE ON THIS BOOKLET 119 7. 8. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. l6. l7. 18. 19. 20. 1. Never 2. Sometimes 3. Usually 4. Always I an inclined to take things hard. I like collecting flowers or growing house plants. I worry about my grades. Delete Many times I become so excited I find it hard to go _ to sleep. I worry about things I have said that may have injured other peOple's feelings. I take on more work than I should. I take on more than I can handle. I day dream frequently. I prefer to work with the opposite sex on school projects. I work things out for myself rather than have a friend show me how. . I work things out for myself rather than have a teacher show me how. I wake up alert and rested most mornings. I wake up tired and listless most mornings. The one to whom I was most attached and whom I most 'admired as a child was a woman. I have been quite independent and free from family rule. Delete People that break the law are caught and punished. I like to collect things such as stamps, flowers, coins, house plants, etc. Delete Be Sure You Have Given A RatingTTo Each Of The Statements On This Bagg 120 Ratings: 1. Never 2. Sometimes 3. Usually h. Always 21. Most people make friends because of what the friends might be able to do for them. 22. I enjoy cooking. 23. I am bothered for days by unimportant thoughts running through my mind. 29. I mind being made fun of. 25. I have played that I am sick to get out of doing something. 26. While in trains, buses, etc., I strike up a conversation with a stranger. +# :27. When I have an opinion, I stand up for it. 28. Quite a few people are guilty of sexual conduct which is considered to be bad. ~£529. It is difficult for me to keep interested in most of my school subjects. 30. At least one member of my family is very nervous. 31. I fear bugs such as spiders. 32. When I am in trouble I feel it is best to keep my mouth shut. -*33. I like to read about science. 3h. I have difficulty sticking up for my rights because I am so reserved. 35. At parties I sit by myself or with just one other person rather than join a crowd. 36. The way of life of those about me controls my conduct. -#:37. I have difficulty working under strict rules and regulations. 38. I have a great deal of satisfaction when I do something better than what is expected of me. gg:Sure You Have Given A Ratin To Each of The Statements On _TEI_SL - s Page 121 Ratings: 1. Never 2. Sometimes 3. Usually 1.. Always 39. LO. #1. AZ. #3. kn. £5- #6. #7. L8. #9. -#j‘_ 50. 51. - a 52, hf: 53. - I 51.. 55- I an discouraged if not successful at completing something I have seriously started to do. My parents have been strict and stern with me. I find it hard to make friendly contacts with members of the opposite sex. I enjoy reading the editorials in the newspaper. If several friends and I were in trouble, I would rather take the whole blame than give them away. I pass up something I want to do when my friends feel that it isn't worth doing. When someone tries to cut in ahead of me in a line, I become annoyed and speak to them about it. Delete I sweat very easily, even on cold days. I can read a long while without tiring my eyes. I belong to a crowd that tries to stick together through thick and thin. I flirt. I spend time with the opposite sex. Mist of my school subjects are a complete waste of t e. Most of my school subjects are useful. I find it difficult to find the time to study my assignment for the next day. I care what happens to me. gegSureZgu Have Given A Rati To Each Of The Statements On is Page 122 Ratings: 1. Never 2. Sometimes 3. Usually h. Always 56. -*57e 58. + # 59. If? 60, 61. 62. 63. 6h. 65. .£* 66. -1670 -gy 68. -1690 70. 71. ff: 72. - # 73. +1171“ I have a daydream about life which I have not told anyone. I have done something that is comidered dangerous just for the thrill of it. I like to keep people guessing.what I'm going to do next. my parents have been satisfied with their economic position. ‘ I like Just about everything about school. I have trouble getting my school assignments in on time. I feel nervous when called upon in class to recite. I have a hard time getting along with some of my teachers. The questions on school tests often confuse me because I don't know’what they are driving at. I do things that are dangerous. I have a hard time concentrating on the subject during class periods. When I was a youngster I stole things. Even when I do sit down to study I find that my mind tends to wander. I have to be in the mood before I can study I lose sleep at night because thoughts or ideas bother me. Delete I like to make the best grades possible. A college education is unimportant to me. I like to study g9 Sure You Have Giyen A Ratin To Each Of The Statements On This Page 123 Ratings: 1. Never 2. Sometimes 3. Usually A. Always +13 75. 76. 77. n. -:w. -gm. m. - i 82. 83. + f 81.. - t 85. 86. 87. 88. +£g 89. + i 90. 91. 92. +£t 93. 91.. 95. I like to plan very carefully what courses I will take in school. I like large noisy parties. Unimportant thoughts keep running through my mind and bothering me. I like to read about history. I have played hooky from school. I am said to be quick tempered. There was a time in my life when I liked to play with dolls. I learn slowly. The way I do things is misunderstood by others. It would be worthwhile to belong to several clubs or lodges. My parents object to the friends I choose. I feel worthless. I have been sent to the principal for misbehaving in class. I have trouble with my muscles twitching or jumping. plan my activities in advance. think I would like the work of a teacher. lose my temper. would rather be physically active than sit and read. want very much to be a success. watch TV.- HHHHHHH give up when I meet difficult problems. —__ gs. Sure You Have Given A Ratigg_To Each of The Statements On This age p ' 12:. I Ratings: 1. Never 2. Sometimes 3. Usually a. Always - * 96. 97. -:%. 99. 100. - 35101. -# 102. +# 103. 101. . +£1 105. 106. 107. 108 O 109. +fi* 110. 111. 112. 113. When someone hurts my feelings I want to pay them back, just for the principle of the thing. One or more times a week I suddenly feel hot all over for no apparent reason. I work under a great deal of tension. I have had many strange and unusual experiences. I enjoy social activity. I have trouble waiting for a class to be over. I would be happier if I were able to travel around the country. I would be uneasy if some of my family were in trouble with the police. I worry more about my looks than about my school work. I get disgusted with myself if I don't do as well as I should. Society owes a lot more to the business man and the manufacturer than it does to the artist and the professor. I like fiction stories more than I do factual novels. I would feel satisfied if one of my papers was read to the class in school. I enjoy watching or starting a fire. I like to plan my activities in advance. It is more fun if your activities are not planned in advance. I wish I were a child again.. A person who can't take orders without getting angry or resentful must have something wrong with him. Be Sure You Have Given A Ratin To Each Of The Statements On This age 125 Ratings: 111*. 115. 116. + # 117. -' i 1180 119. -#* 120. 121. fig 122. - * 123. -5: 121.. 125. 1. Never 2. Sometimes 3. Usually 4. Always When I am disappointed I put it out of my mind. I feel cross and grouchy without good reason. I feel I would make a good leader if given the chance. I like being with peOple in social gatherings. Some subjects are so unpleasant to me that I can't talk about them. Something about a fire fascinates me. I feel that I haven't any goals or purpose in life. I think teachers are wrong many times and won't admit it. I like to be consistent in the things I do. I like to go to the movies more than once a week. I would like to belong to a motorcycle club. If I were an artist I would like to draw still objects. 126 APPENDIX B Tables of Item Intercorrelations of Twenty-Three Male and Female Items Used in Factor Analysis of Human Trait Inventory Scale boa wuH mmm ooa 04H Hmo .... Had ooa HAM oua who Hmo ... cam 6mm «66 Hmm saw ... ooo «Honomm cum ... oNH HHOubMH ... 4mm 040 see omfl and mod n m saw a N uma mam o4m ono moo mod odd ham mom 04H 00H eee mom «no CNN mmm Ned Hmo 0mm mom mNH man how and Ham boo Ono Noonomo and mam who moo Hoouono mbo 4mo 00H omm Ned 4mm and 4mo n N M40 040 Nma QNH OHH odd oNo Fwd mod Neonmmouomm mod cam and mac moo mNN moo oom 4mo oaa OOH mm mm mm om oH ma 5H 0H ma ea ma NH dd 0H souH m N ems mHo moo «mm 54H mNN wmo oom mud How o now was new «mm omm mom «ma 4mm “so mma oso cud moo HON 04H aha moo 0H4 NON Jud mum Add new moo sum «44 now «ma 040 med Nmo omo Nod mom 4HH moo odd ONH msolmmo mMH OmN OHH one had 450 omo «so 0N0 OmN OHH mNm Ham Maw end 5mm hHH.MNo moo mod one 000 can OHOanH Ono HNH How one 400 méonhmd mOOIMHN man now HJOINSN moa boa mam ohm sod com Had bmm 4mm med 4NH 55H 0mm HNO oom omH boa N00 moo 550 moo NMH 00H sum omH 4oo 4mm 540 0¢000HH oNH NHH amenabd NOH HJN NmN mac and HNH QNOnumo coo omm OOH mud .0. mac mwo 540: 45a cmo «we «no oao new coon bma OHM: 4H0: mad use mHoI moo ooo H4H oHo FIN (“JUNO (\wO‘ Ahmauz nuo>ownomuoono mamzv avoweowomw emu: unonuo unease o>apamoo one woman» on» one oopuaao one masawooo. madam hnopno>cH wanna smear mo mamhamn< nopomm cw we»: maouH can: oomnaahpnose mo meowpmaomnoonounH Boga Ahmalz mno>ownom§o>o sassy H.< mAmownomnous= onaoO Aooumowuna shampoSpo mnoch obwpwmom one mosHm> on» one moppwso ohm mHmaHoonv AOmHuz who>oHsommo>o onEoO. onoO amouno>cH pawns amen: mo mammHmn< movemm :H to»: maouH onaom oomnouhumoxe Mo soapsHonhoououmH aouH N.< OHOOH M'Yl’iifiiiflfiujlfliflijflmlflfiiimifll'tlflfflhfillES 3177