COGNITEVE STYLES AND CLIENT - THERAP!ST
RELAT!ONSH!P EFFECTIVENESS WITH HEROIN
AND NON - HEROIN USERS

Dissertation for the Degree of Ph. D.
MICHIGAN STARE UNIVERSITY
THOMAS F. UPDME, Jr.

1974

 

"we? ‘
7." 7) 11 .
g L LJ Pk 4’). ‘\
’1 1‘ .‘l-..’ l‘
a th4(i1i{:1r1 3!.“ /,
i
I,

University

' .raleg rfi’fln‘o‘” I. “O J .5

This is to certify that the
thesis entitled
COGNITIVE STYLES AND CLIENT-THERAPIST
RELATIONSHIP EFFECTIVENESS WITH
HEROIN AND NON-HEROIN USERS

presented by
Thomas F. Updike, Jr.

has been accepted towards fulfillment
of the requirements for

Ph.D.

f degee in Counseling, Personnel
l. Services & Educational
Psycholoqy

 

Date Feb. 20, 1974

0-7639

 

ABSTRACT

COGNITIVE STYLES AND CLIENT-THERAPIST
RELATIONSHIP EFFECTIVENESS WITH
HEROIN AND NON-HEROIN USERS

BY

Thomas F. Updike, Jr.

Statement of the Problem

 

With the increased incidence of drug abuse in the
United States, it is increasingly desirable to more clearly
understand the individual we are attempting to motivate for
treatment. This study was an attempt to understand the
drug user from the point of view of his cognitive style
and secondly to examine the therapeutic relationship as
one factor which might contribute to motivating a client
to remain in a program.

This particular study consisted of two parts. The
first was an experimental study which matched the client,
according to his cognitive style, as closely as possible
with a therapists cognitive style. The quality of the re-
sulting relationship and the change in behavior of the
client were examined. The notion was that the greater the
similarity between client and therapist with respect to

their cognitive styles, the better the resulting

Thomas F. Updike, Jr.

relationship and thus the greater the probability of in-
creasing the client's motivation for treatment.

The second portion of the study was a comparative
study which examined the cognitive styles (which is com-
posed of three factors; symbols, cultural determinants of
the meaning of symbols and modalities of inference) of
heroin users and non-heroin users. This facet of the study
provided insights into the manner in which a drug user ac-

quires knowledge and derives meaning from life.

Methodology

 

The Experimental
Study

 

The sample for the experimental study were male in-
mates incarcerated at the Ingham County Jail, Mason, Michi-
gan who were found to have drug related problems. The
sample had the following characteristics:

1. incarcerated male inmates

2. no psychosis present

3. heroin users

4. drug abuse of more than three months but less
than three years

5. limited exposure to previous therapy programs.
Sixty incarcerated inmates with drug problems who
volunteered to participate were randomly assigned to one
of two treatment groups. One was the experimental treatment

group where the client was matched, according to cognitive

Thomas F. Updike, Jr.

styles, as closely as possible with a therapist. The second
was the treatment control group where clients were randomly
assigned to a therapist. Both groups, each containing
thirty clients, received six hours of therapy, followed by
the post-test measures.

Therapy for both the treatment and control groups
was provided by three therapists. Each therapist had his
Master's degree and a minimum of one year experience; each
joined the Drug Abuse Treatment Program at approximately the
same time; all were males; and each had similar philOSOphi-
cal approaches to treatment, however, their cognitive styles
were different.

The post-test measures were the Fiedler 75 Item
Relationship Instrument which was used to measure the
quality of the therapy relationship and the Behavior Rating
Forms which were deve10ped by the researcher to report act-

ual observed behaviors of the client.

The Comparative

Study

 

The sample for the comparative study was composed
of drug abusing persons from the tri-county area of Lansing,
Michigan, who had presented themselves for treatment in a
community based program. Thirty heroin abusers were ran-
domly selected from the total case load of the community
program and given the cognitive style instrument. Another

group of thirty non-heroin drug users were randomly selected

Thomas F. Updike, Jr.

and given the cognitive style instrument. The sample had
the following characteristics:

1. non-incarcerated males from the Lansing, Michi-
gan, area

2. no psychosis present

3. drug abuse of more than three months but less
than three years.

Analysis of the content of the cognitive styles of
both groups was done. Similarities and differences between

heroin and non-heroin users were evaluated.

Results and Implications

The Experimental
Study

 

The results indicated that clients who were matched
according to their cognitive style had a significantly better
quality relationship with their therapist than the non-
matched control group. Behaviors of the client which were
observed by the teachers and turnkeys were significantly
better for the experimental group than for the control
group. These data appear to support the notion that the
therapy relationship is important and the client appears
to respond more rapidly to treatment where a good therapy
relationship exists.

The implications of this work suggest that it may
be feasible to attempt to match, as closely as possible,
client and counselor in order to effect more rapid progress

in treatment. Further, through providing counselors who

Thomas F. Updike, Jr.

are similar in cognitive style to the prospective client,
there appears to be a greater probability of a more effec-
tive relationship.

It must be noted, however, that these data have
demonstrated the efficacy of matching clients and counselors
for the short run, but the data does not project the long

run results of such matching techniques.

The Comparative

Study

 

From the comparative study it was found that the
cognitive styles of the heroin and non-heroin drug users do
differ, that the heroin user has fewer major elements in
his cognitive style map and that the heroin group has fewer
ways of deriving meaning and acquiring knowledge from life
than the non-heroin group. The cognitive style of heroin
users was found to be highly similar on several elements,
likewise the non-heroin users had a number of common ele-
ments which suggests intra-group similarities.

As an example of the differences between the two
groups, the heroin group was found to derive meaning through
the cognitive style element (I) Individual. This suggests
he derives meaning from independence in making his own de-
cisions. He possesses innate knowledge that his way is
best in addition to an ability and willingness to direct
his own behavior. The heroin user does not derive meaning

from his friends or peer group, i.e., the cognitive style

Thomas F. Updike, Jr.

element (A) Associates. This means that in the process of
making a decision, the heroin user relies on himself, not
his peer group, to arrive at what he perceives as an appro-
priate behavior for a given situation.

The non-heroin group differs significantly from the
heroin group in that the non-heroin abuser does not derive
meaning from the element (I) Individual. Instead the ele-
ment (A) Associates does provide him with a source of mean-
ing. Thus, in the decision making process, he relies on in-
put from the peer group in arriving at what he perceives as
apprOpriate behavioral response.

Perhaps the heroin user is attracted to the "sub-
culture" more out of a necessity to obtain the drug than
to derive psychological support. The non-heroin user ap-
parently derives more than just the drug from the "sub-cul-
ture" but apparently also derives psychological support
from the group.

These data suggest there are differences in the
cognitive styles of the two groups, thus, consideration
must be given to providing differential treatment programs.

Finally, the cognitive style map should be viewed
as a devise which can provide the counselor with a window,
through which he can look into the life space of his client.
The instrument indicates where an individual is now in
terms of his personal and unique method of deriving mean-

ing and knowledge from life. The major elements in the

Thomas F. Updike, Jr.

client's map represent those things which have been meaning-
ful to him. This is but one tool which may contribute to
increased understanding and communications with the client.
In order to change attitude-behaviors, we must
first be able to communicate in meaningful ways with the
individual we are seeking to have an impact on. If we
understand the client's cognitive style and are sensitive
to him as a unique human being, then perhaps we can estab-
lish an effective communications system which will further
enhance the therapy relationship.
Hopefully, the result will be the client's attitude-
behavior change, his resocialization and his ultimate re-

integration into society as a productive citizen.

COGNITIVE STYLES AND CLIENT-THERAPIST
RELATIONSHIP EFFECTIVENESS WITH

HEROIN AND NON-HEROIN USERS

BY

'm
MFG
Thomas F. Updike, Jr.

A DISSERTATION

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

DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY

Department of Counseling, Personnel Services
and Educational Psychology

1974

Copyright by
THOMAS F. UPDIKE, JR.

1974

DEDICATION

To Jeanne, Eric and Ian

ii

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

There are many persons to whom I am deeply grateful
to who have assisted me in the conceptualization of this
research project. I am especially grateful to Dr. Richard
Johnson, Chairman of my advisory committee, for his encour-
agement and assistance and especially for allowing me to
experience what it means to do "my own research."

I am extremely grateful to Dr. John E. Jordan who
constantly provided inSpiration and encouragement to me
during this project. His insights into social psychology
research have had a profound impact on me and my profes-
sional career.

I am indebted to Dr. Andrew Porter who helped make
statistics a meaningful tool for me. I am also grateful to
Geoffery Yager who served as statistical consultant and
prepared the data for computer analysis.

I am grateful to Dr. Ron Richards who introduced
me to systematic program evaluation. Also, Dr. Ron Jordan
and others in the Office of Medical Education, Research
and Development for sharing ideas for developing evaluation

methodologies for drug programs.

iii

All my committee members which include Dr. Richard
Johnson, Dr. John Jordan, Dr. Andrew Porter and Dr. Ron
Richards, assisted me in understanding the difference be-
tween data which are interesting and data which are mean-
ingful.

I owe particular thanks and gratitude to Dr. Joseph
E. Hill who devoted so much of his time in training me in
the theory of cognitive style and who so willingly shared
with me the fruits of over sixteen years of toil in the
deveIOpment of this theory.

I owe so much to Dr. Virginia Svga who shared the
cognitive style instruments with me and who provided guid-
ance in the interpretation. A special thanks goes to the
many persons whose thesis contributed to the body of
knowledge regarding cognitive styles. Particular thanks
to Dr. Laurence Wasser for the clear concise way he was
able to explain cognitive style theory in his paper.

I wish to thank Sheriff Kenneth L. Preadmore with-
out whose help the drug program would not have materialized
and this prject would not have been possible. Thanks is
also extended to the teachers and turnkeys at the Ingham
County Jail for their c00peration.

I am indebted to Jerry Gallagher, Bill Nicholson,
Keith Johnson, Dave Riddle, and Jim Kaple who helped collect

the data.

iv

A particular word of thanks to John B. Aycock for
helping to develop the grant which made the drug program
possible. He continually encouraged me in this work and
provided insights into the entire notion of cognitive
style. He helped me develop as a therapist and researcher
for which I am profoundly grateful.

My deepest appreciation and love goes to my parents,
Mr. and Mrs. Thomas F. Updike, Sr., for their steadfast
confidence and support given me during my student days.
Their love for Jeanne and me has been ever present and a
source of comfort for us. My greatest thanks goes to my
family who have endured so much while this project was
developed. My wife Jeanne was steadfast in her love and
encouragement during all my days as a student. She con-
tinuously supported me and reassured me as we worked toward

the doctorate.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

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

LIST OF FIGURES . . . . . . . . . . .

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

I. RATIONALE . . . . . . . . . . .

Introduction . . . . . . . .

Purpose of the Study . . . . . .

Theory, Supportive Research and Justifi-

cation of the Project . . . . . .

Justification of the Project . . .

Relationship Research . . . . . .

The Theory of Cognitive Style . . . .

An Overview . . . . .

Comprehensive Study of Hill's Cognitive

Style Theory . . . . . . . .
A Conceptual Framework of Education .
Cognitive Style as an Educational

Science . . . . .
Symbologosics--the Educational Science

of Symbols . . . . . . . .
The Theoretical Symbol . . . . .
The Qualitative Symbol . . . . .
Sensory Stimuli . . . . . . . .
Programmatic Effects . . . . . .
Codes . . . . . . . . . . .

Review . . . . . . . .

Determantics--The Educational Science of

Cultural Determinants of the Meanings

of Symbols . . . . . . . . .
The Family Determinant . . . . . .
The Associates Determinant . . . . .
The Individuality Determinant . . . .
Review . . . . . .

Inferensics--The Educational Science
of Modalities of Inference . . .

vi

Page

ix

xii

xiii

PAH

0000.50.90»)

Hi4

26
26

27

30
3O
34
35
39
39
44

46
47
48
41
50

50

Chapter

II.

III.

Inductive Processes . . . . . .
Magnitude . . . . . . . . .
Difference . . . . . . . . .
Relationship . . . . . . . .
Appraisal . . . . . . . . .

Deductive Processes . . . . . .
Review . . . . . . . .
Principles for Determining Major and
Minor Orientations . . . . .

Cognitive Style . . . . . . . .

METHODOLOGY . . . . . . . . . .

Overview . . . . . . . . . .

Population . . . . . . . . .
Sample . . . . . . . . . . .
Therapists . . . . . . . . .

Selection . . . . . . . . .
Subject Assignment . . . . . . .
Materials . . . . . . . . . .

Pre-Experimental . . . . . . .

Experimental Materials . . . . .

Measures . . . . . . .
The Fiedler' s (1950,1953) 75-item

Q- Sort . . . . . . .

Behavior Rating Form . . . . .

Hill Cognitive Style . . . . .
Treatment Procedures . . . . . .
Pre-Experimental . . . . . . .
Experimental . . . . . . . .
Post Experiment . . . . . . .
Control Group . . . . . . . .
Comparison Group . . . . . . .

Hypothesis . . . . . . . .
Experimental Design . . . . . .
Analysis of Data . . . . . . .

RESULTS . . . . . . . . . . .

Treatment Effects . . . . . . .
Block Effect . . . . . . . . .
Counselor Effect . . . . . . .
Interaction Effect . . . . . . .
Comparative Study . . . . . . .
Hoyt's Reliability of Behavior Rating

Scales . . . . . . . . . .
Status of Research Hypothesis . . .

vii

Page

51
53
54
55
55
57
57

59
62

67

67
69
69
76
76
77
79
79
8O
80

80
81
82
82
82
83
85
85
85
86
88
90

91

91
100
101
101
101

105
133

Chapter Page

IV. DISCUSSION . . . . . . . . . . . 134
Overview . . . . . . . . . . . 134
Conclusions and Implications . . . . 135

Relationship Study . . . . . . . 135

Limitations . . . . . . . . . 140

Comparative Study . . . . . . . 142

Limitations . . . . . . . . . 172

Summary . . . . . . . . . . . 173
APPENDICES . . . . . . . . . . . . . 176
REFERENCES . . . . . . . . . . . . . 217

viii

10.

11.

12.

13.

LIST OF TABLES

Demographic Data--Jail Population Type of
Drug . . . . . . . . . . . .

Demographic Data--Jail Population . . .
Demographic Data—-Jail Population Age .

Demographic Data--Street Population--Type,
Amount and Time on Drugs . . . . .

Demographic Data--Street Population Age .

Mean Scores on Relationship Measure for
Experimental and Control Groups . .

Mean Scores on Turnkey Behavior Rating Scale

for Experimental and Control Groups by
Blocks . . . . . . . . . . . .

Mean Scores on Teacher's Behavior Rating
Scale for Experimental and Control Group
by Blocks . . . . . . . . . . .

Mean Score on Relationship Measure for Ex-
perimental and Control Groups by Counselor

Mean Score on Teacher's Behavior Rating
Scale for Experimental and Control Group
by Counselor . . . . . . . . .

Mean Score on Truckey's Behavior Rating
Scale for Experimental and Control Groups
by Counselors . . . . . . . .

Formulas Necessary for Calculating Degrees
of Freedom, Quasi F, and F Statistics--3
way ANOVA . . . . . . . . . . .

Summary of the Relationship Scale Analysis
of Variance Table . . . .

ix

Page

70

7O

71

74

75

92

92

93

94

94

94

95

96

Table

14.

15.

16.

17.

18.

19.

20.

21.

22.
23.
24.
25.
26.
27.
28.
29.

30.

Page
Summary of the Teacher's Behavior Rating
Scale Analysis of Variance Table . . . . 97
Summary of the Turnkey's Behavior Rating
Scale Analysis of Variance Table . . . . 98
Behavior-Relationship Outcome (Raw Score)
from High Quality Match to Low Quality
Match . . . . . . . . . . . . . 102
Frequency and Percentage of Major and Minor
by Element . . . . . . . . . . . 104
Hoyt's Analysis of Variance Estimate of
Internal Consistency Reliability for
Teacher's Behavior Ratings . . . . . . 106
Hoyt's Analysis of Variance Estimate of
Internal Consistency Reliability for
Turnkey's Behavior Ratings . . . . . . 106
Chi Square Comparisons Between Addiction
Levels (in Street Population)on Cognitive
Style Elements: Theoretical Auditory
Linguistic - T(AL). . . . . . . . . 107
Chi Square Compariosn Between Addiction
Levels (in Street Population) on Cogni-
tive Style Elements: Theoretical
Auditory Quantitative T(AQ) . . . . . 108
Theoretical Visual Linguistic — T(VL) . . 109
Theoretical Visual Quantitative T(VQ) . . 110
Qualitative Auditory - Q(A) . . . . . 111
Qualitative Olfactory - Q(O) . . . . . 112
Qualitative Survey - Q(S) . . . . . . 113
Qualitative Tacticle - Q(T) . . . . . 114
Qualitative Visual - Q(V) . . . . . . 115
Qualitative PrOprioceptive — Q(P) . . . 116
Qualitative Code Empathetic - Q(CEM) . . 117

Table Page

31. Qualitative Code Estuetic - Q(CES) . . . 118
32. Qualitative Code Ethic - Q(CET) . . . . 119
33. Qualitative Code Histrionic - Q(CH) . . . 120
34. Qualitative Code Kinesica - Q(CK) . . . . 121
35. Qualitative Code Kinestantics - Q(CKH) . . 122
36. Qualitative Code Proximics - Q(CP) . . . 123
37. Qualitative Code Synnoetics - Q(CS) . . . 124
38. Qualitative Code Trousactional — Q(CT) . . 125
39. Associates - A . . . . . . . . . . 126
40. Family - F . . . . . . . . . . . 127
41. Individuality - I . . . . . . . . . 128
42. Difference - D . . . . . . . . . . 129
43. Appraisal - L . . . . . . . . . . 130
44. Magnitude - M . . . . . . . . . . 131
45. Relationships — R . . . . . . . . . 132

xi

Figure

1.

LIST OF FIGURES

Page
Research Design--Subject and Block
Assignments . . . . . . . . . . . 78
Pictorial Representation of Experimental
Design . . . . . . . . . . . . 89

xii

Appendix

A.

B.

C.

LIST OF APPENDICES

Set Theory Form . . . . .

Cognitive Style Instrument

Cognitive Style Mapping Tally Sheet

Cognitive Style Score Sheet .
Cognitive Style Map . . . .

Fiedler's 75 Item Relationship
Instrument . . . . . . .

Behavioral Rating Form Turnkey

Behavior Rating Form--Teachers

xiii

Page
177
181
203
205

207

209
213

215

CHAPTER I

RATIONALE

Introduction

 

The counseling relationship is stressed in much of
counseling theory. A variety of variables has been examined
which may contribute to the formations of such a relation—
ship. The importance of this counseling relationship with
regard to therapy outcome has been emphasized. Counselor
and client have been equated, matched, and assumed to be
similar on numerous factors thought to relate to the process
and outcome of counseling. One concept which has not been
examined is that of cognitive style as defined by Hill (1967).

The present experiment examined cognitive style
matching and its effectiveness toward enhansing the therapy
relationship and therapy outcome. Through this experiment
it was hoped that a method could be derived which would
stimulate the progress of therapy with persons who are drug
abusers.

The experiment also sought to study the relationship

between the cognitive styles of heroin vs. non heroin users.

Purpose of the Study

 

The purpose of this study was twofold: (1) to deter-

mine what differences exist between cognitive styles of hard

1

drug users (physiologically addicted) vs. soft drug users
(non-physiologically addicted), (2) to determine whether
the formation of a quality therapeutic relationship will
be enhanced by matching clients and counselors who have
similar cognitive styles.

The therapeutic relationship is seen by many re-
searchers as an essential ingredient required to expedite
counseling outcome. This becomes particularly crucial in
certain counseling settings where time is a limiting factor.
In these settings (e.g., county jails, college counseling
centers, vocational rehabilitation offices) it may be
important to move the client as rapidly as possible to
some desired counseling outcome. In order to do this,

a counseling relationship must be promptly established.

As an illustration consider the short term jail
sentences received by the drug abusers sent to county jails.
It is imperative that the therapist, as expeditiously as
possible, establish a therapeutic relationship with the
client, and thus increase the probability of positive
therapy outcome prior to the inmate's release back into
the community.

The major question in this study was: would it be
possible to use Hill's Cognitive Style Map for matching
therapists and clients and thereby enhance the therapy

relationship and the probability of positive therapy outcome?

By matching clients and counselors and by employing
short intensive therapy, an individual may be moved more
rapidly to deal effectively and realistically with his
drug problem while incarcerated and after release, to

continue in a treatment program.

Theory, Supportive Research and Justification
of the Project

 

Justification of the Project

Because of the large number of immates cycling
through the Ingham County Jail with drug related problems,
it has become imperative to offer these individuals some
type of treatment that will have a direct effect upon their
recidivism rate, employment, family, and drug abusing
behavior. The primary difficulty in providing treatment
is the relatively short period of incarceration received
by inmates at the Ingham County Jail (the average stay is
approximately 4 months). It is, therefore necessary to
exert as much influence on the inmate as possible if his
behavior is to be modified. As a result of a recent
Federal Grant providing services at the Ingham County
Jail, and because of the comprehensive nature of the drug
treatment program for the Lansing, Michigan Community, it
seems that all the elements are present which may assist
the inmate in his ultimate objective of a well adjusted

and drug free life. We therefore seek methods which will

enable the inmates to receive maximum benefit from the drug
program.

According to the research reviewed below, the more
rapidly a quality therapeutic relationship can be estab-
lished between client and counselor, the greater the proba-
bility of producing a positive therapy outcome. Thus it
seems logical that the more rapidly a therapeutic relation-
ship is established, the more rapidly the inmate will begin
to deal seriously with his drug related problem. Once
motivated for treatment the inmate would be more likely
to participate in the aftercare program upon his release
from jail. Otherwise during the short incarceration period,
if the therapist cannot establish a relationship rapidly,
probably the inmate will be released before therapy has an
impact on him. The result would be an individual who has
a greater probability of returning to jail or failing in

the aftercare program.

RelationshipyResearch

 

Much has been written regarding the importance of
the relationship between the client and his therapist. As
Snyder, (1961) notes with regard to relationship, "The
importance of the relationship is constantly mentioned
in the literature, although different authors mean quite
different things by the same term" (page 271). The terms
relationship, interaction, transaction, transference-

countertransference appear to describe segments of the

constellation of dynamics between counselor and client.
However this constellation of dynamics is defined, (i.e.,
relationship, interaction, transaction, and transference)
it is important to therapy outcome. Snyder, (1961); Grinker,
(1961); Jackson, (1961); Libo, (1957), (1959); Wolberg, (1954);
Rodgers, (1961); Murry, (1963); Shoben, (1963); Wolpe, (1968);
Lazarus, (1961); Rachman, (1959); Goldstein, et. a1., (1966)
all basically agree that the key to the influence of psycho-
therapy on the patient is the relationship with the therapist.
As Bordin, 1959 states:

. . . whenever psychotherapy is accepted as a signifi-

cant enterprise, this statement is so widely subscribed

to as to become trite. Virtually all efforts to

theorize about psychotherapy are intended to describe

and explained what attributes of the interactions

between the therapist and the patient will account

for whatever behavior change results (p. 235).

Goldstein et a1., 1961 states that:

. . . with regard to outcome investigations of rela-

tionships . . . a number of studies have examined the

widely . . . held belief that the 'favorable' or

'good quality' therapist-patient relationship is

essential for a positive therapeutic outcome . . .

research evidence is generally unequivocal in its

demonstration of a positive influence of the therapy

relationship upon treatment outcome (pp. 75 & 77).
Studies by Bown, (1954); Parloff, (1961); Hunt, Ewing, LaForge,
and Gilbert, (1959); all indicate that the better the patient-
psychotherapist relationship, the greater the symptomatic
relief experienced by the patient. Other individuals study-

ing therapist-patient relationship include, Gendlin, Jenny and

Shlien, (1960); Holden and Uborasky, (1952); Sapolsky, (1965);

Truax, 0961);and VanDerVeen, 0961). Research evidence here
is generally unequivocal in it's demonstration of positive
influence of the therapy relationship on treatment outcome.
Strupp (1962) speaks of the same issue:

. . . from the beginning of any psychotherapy, the
therapist must succeed in sparking strivings in the
patient-sometimes called 'the will to recovery,‘
'motivation for therapy,‘ the striving for 'self—
realization,‘ and the like which enable him to
cooperate with the therapist and to oppose the
neurotic forces within himself. Undoubtedly, no
single combination of attributes will yield the
answer. Much would depend, one suspects, on the
patient's capacity to identify with the therapist as
a 'good parent.‘ As yet, we know little about the
dynamics of this process in patients or in children,
but it may well turn out to be the fulcrum upon which
effective therapy turns (p. 583).

He further stated that:

. . . every neurotic patient is unconsciously committed
to maintain the status quo, and psychotherapy, par-
ticularly if aimed at confronting the patient with

his inner conflicts, proceeds against the obstacle of
powerful unconscious resistances. Therefore, unless
there is a strong conscious desire to be helped and

to collaborate with the therapist, the odds against

a favorable outcome may be insuperable (p. 6).

Goldstein et a1. (1966) states the following:

. . . psychotherapeutic efficiency may be markedly
enhanced by increasing the degree of therapist
influence over the patient. Manipulation of a major
component of the therapy relationship, that is,
patient attraction to the therapist, is offered as
the primary means for increasing the level of
therapist influence . . . by heightening the
favorableness of patient attraction toward his
therapist, to that degree does the patient become
more receptive to therapist influence attempts

(p. 81).

Specific research studies are now presented which
represent a composite and recapitulation of relationship

investigations.

Bown (1954) in one of the earliest studies of
therapist-patient relationship and its relevance to posi-
tive therapy outcome focused on the relationship developed
in twenty sessions of nondirective therapy with six patients.
During the treatment process, Q-sort rations of the quality
of the relationship were obtained from each patient-
therapist pair. For therapy characterized as successful,
in terms of independent outcome measures, Bown reported
that "the quality of the actual relationship as perceived
by both therapist and client was substantially different
from the quality of the relationship in unsuccessful
therapy" (p. 43). It was also reported that the client's
perception of the relationship more accurately distinguished
between the successful and unsuccessful cases than did those
of the therapist. Also the greater the agreement between
therapist and patient regarding the nature of their rela-
tionship, the greater the degree of rated improvement.

Generalization of the above findings is difficult
because of the small sample size and the rudimentary nature
of Bown's measures. However, the research did stimulate
additional studies which provided additional supporting
evidence of Bown's notions.

Parloff's (1961) research operationally defined
relationship in terms of Fiedler's (1950, 1953) 75-item
Q-sort deck for the ideal therapeutic relationship. The

study sought to determine whether an association exists

between the therapeutic relationship and outcome of treatment
in a group therapy setting. Three criteria of improvement
were used: Comfort, Effectiveness, and Objectivity. These
criteria were measured by a total of fourteen scales.
Additionally, a study was made of the therapist-patient
relationship established with patients who terminated

therapy prematurely.

Twenty-one patients participated in the experiment.

The Fiedler sortings were done by observers who sat in on
the meetings of the three participating groups for each of
the subjects as pairs with his therapist. The sortings
were correlated against the Fiedlerideal therapeutic rela-
tionship standard. The better the correlation with the
standard, the better the relationship between therapist
and client was assured to be.

The other scales measuring comfort, effectiveness

and objectivity were administered to each patient, to

other members of each patients group, and to the research
staff before and after the twenty session course. The
results indicate a significant degree of association between
the quality of the therapeutic relationships and certain of
the change criteria. Parloff (1961) notes:

The data indicate that the better the patient-
psychotherapist relationship, the greater the
symptomatic relief experienced by the patient,
the more likely it was that fellow group members would
describe the patient as having become more dominant

(leader), and the greater the increase in objectivity
attributed to the patient by the research staff (p. 35).

He also noted that:

Premature termination of therapy by a patient
appears to be related to his perception of the
'goodness' of the relationship he has established
with his therapist relative to the general level of
patient-therapist relationship within his group.
Individuals having the poorer relationships in a
group tended to drop out of therapy. . . . Patients
who established better relationships with this
therapist tended to show greater improvement than
those whose relationships with the same therapist
were not as good (p. 37).

Fiedler (1950, 1953), in a variety of studies,
examined the therapeutic relationship ratings by therapist
of different schools and with different degrees of training
and reputed skill. The therapists included masters degree
psychologists, doctoral psychologists, social workers,
nurses, and medical doctors ranging in experience from
one year to twenty—six years. The schools of psychotherapy
represented included psychoanalytic, Washington School,
Chicago, Nondirective, Adlerious, and Eclectic.

The studies indicated that "theoretical allegiance
to one system of psychotherapy does not change the thera-
pists' goal with respect to the relationship which he
strives to create with his patient" (p. 244).

Quinn (1950) and Heine (1950) support Fiedler's
and Parloff's findings. Quinn's research suggests that the
therapist, not the patient, is the one who plays the major
role in determining the nature of their consequent rela-
tionship. Heine requested patients treated by therapist

of differing orientation to describe any changes they

10

experienced as a result of therapy and the aspects of the
treatment which they attributed the changes to. The
result indicated that patients of therapist from different
schools describe factors leading to their change in terms
of different treatment methods and also in terms of the
same treatment relationship.

Other research dealing with the psychotherapeutic
relationship has examined another variable--interpersonal
attraction, interpersonal influence. The major contention
of many writers is that psychotherapeutic efficiency may
be enhanced by increasing the degree of therapist influence
over the patient. Manipulation of a major component of
the therapy relationship, that is, patient attraction to
the therapist is offered as a means of increasing therapist
influence.

Libo (1957, 1959) studied relationship in terms of
interpersonal attraction. Utilizing Libo's Picture
Impressions Test, a projective test consisting of four
cards illustrating therapy like situations, client's were
requested to respond in a manner analogous to TAT adminis-
tration. The test was administered to a series of patients
immediately following their initial psychiatherapy interview.
The resulting score is expressed in terms of attraction to
the therapist and the therapy process as judged from the
protocols. As hypothetically the attraction-relationship

score predicted whether or not a patient would return for

11

his second interview. The more attracted a patient was
the more likely he was to return.

Helber and Goldstein's (1961) in replicating Libo's
work provided additional supportive data of the notion
that interpersonal attraction (as a measure of relationship)
does contribute to clients "willingness" to continue
therapy (i.e., through increased interpersonal attraction
interpersonal influence appears to increase).

Wogon (1970) did a study of the effect of therapist-
patient personality variables on therapeutic outcome. The
study included eighty-two subjects (male and female) on the
psychiatric ward of a medical tending hospital. Each
patient was seen by one of twelve psychiatric residents.
Both therapists and patients were given the MMPI. These
results were used to derive personality measures. Factor
scores for each therapist and patient were computed for
each of the factor scales (anxiety, depression, withdrawal,
subtlety, suppressed anger and somatization), and a matrix
of scores generated. In addition to the therapist's and
patient's scores, the matrix included the cross-product
for each therapist-patient pair on each of the factor
scales. The cross-products were used as indexes of
therapist-patient similarity. Outcome measures were the
Patient Rating Scale and the Therapist Rating Scale. These
scales asked for ratings of the degree to which each felt

he could communicate with the other and the degree of

12

liking for the other. Therapy outcomes were found to be
positively related to therapist's level of anxiety and
negatively related to therapist's level of repressiveness.
The findings suggest that patients both liked their
therapist and showed more progress in therapy if the
therapist was able to acknowledge some forms of unpleasant
experience in himself (anxiety) and tended not to deny
symptoms in himself (repression). Therapist who denied
symptoms was found to be less effective in terms of out-
come behaviors demonstrated by the patient.

Bock (1951), Burdich and Burnes (1958), Goldstein
et a1. (1966) through their various experimental research
support the notion that interpersonal attraction increases
receptivity to interpersonal influence. McClelland (1965)
in his therapy of motive acquisition suggests:

1. The more reasons an individual has . . . to
believe that he can, will, or should develop a
motive, the more . . . attempts designed to
develop that motive are likely to succeed.

2. The more an individual perceives that developing
a motive is consistent with the demands of reality
(and reason), the more . . . attempts designed to
develop that motive are likely to succeed (PP-324'325lo

Thus it seems reasonable to speculate that an individual

can be encouraged toward motive acquisition more readily

if the therapist is successful in his interpersonal influence
of the patient.

Another study by Strong and Schmidt (1970) suggests

that unconscious motivations on the part of the counselor

13

do affect counseling outcome. In the study which attempted

to examine trustworthiness and influence in counseling, the
researchers found a positive effect on the relationship.

Most interesting, however, was that counselors who were
playing the "role" of untrustworthy were never the less

seen by the patients as being "somewhat" helpful in the
therapy situation. This was not the intention of the
researcher, however, because of methodological weakness, the
above was observed (comments by Strong & Schmidt, pp. 202-203).

The points of the above two research studies are
two fold: (1) Patient client similarity can be measured
on several different variables; (2) unconscious motivations
on the part of the therapist is often expressed in therapy.
More will be said of this later.

In the study by Kunce and Anderson (1970) it was
hypothesized that in a free-choice situation a counselor
would tend to have clients referred to him on the basis
of subtle similarities between his personality character-
istics and those of the clients. The MMPI was utilized
in the study with a sample of sixty-three. Evidence was
found to support the hypothesis.

In summary thus far, it appears that therapist—
patient similarity measured through a variety of variables,
does positively effect therapy relationship and outcome.
Further it seems evident from the above studies that

relationship does indeed appear to be a most central and

l4

powerful psychotherapeutic variables. It is also evident
from reviewing the literature (Tyler, 1961; Goldstein, 33
31;, 1966) that the counselor's own feelings are believed
to be important in this transaction. Tyler states that a
counselor "should be an accepting person who finds it easy
to be interested in diverse kinds of individuals and to wish
them well." This is not a blanket attitude that covers all
with equal warmth. Inevitably he will like some clients
better than others. Because the counselor is a sensitive
human being, he will react on an immediate unconscious level
to subtle indications of hostility toward the client. Tyler
further suggests that in such a situation the client should
be referred immediately to another counselor. Other writers
such as Freud, Ellis, Rogers, Horney, Kelly, and Adler,
indicate that only certain types of clients are amenable to
their particular therapy, therefore, clients should be care-
fully selected prior to extended treatment. As noted earlier
Fiedler pointed out that "all psychotherapists have as their
effective core, the interpersonal relationship rather than
specific methods of treatment and that the relationship is
created by the therapist who must convey feelings to the
client rather than concentrate on method." Relationship then
appears to be as important as the method in terms of therapy
outcome.

Before considering the therapy of cognitive style,
an additional comment is required regarding the concept of

cognitive dissonance.

15

Goldstein, et a1. (1966) comment:
The notion that A's interpersonal attraction toward
B increases A's receptivity to influence by B is . . .
a significant point of convergence among four major
contempory cognitive theories (p. 85).
The specific theories were the "balance" theories of Osgood
and Tannenboum (1955), Festinger (1957), Heider (1958),
and Newcomb (1943, 1956). Osgood, et al. report that
"attitude change for a given object of judgment in the
direction of the assertion is an approximately linear function
of the favorableness of the original attitude toward the
other object of judgment with which it is associated" (p. 54).
Relationship has been described by Festinger in terms of
cognitive dissonance reduction; Heider in terms of change
toward balance states; and Newcomb viewed the attraction
influence alignment as a "strain toward symmetry."

The implied common theoretical thread is that for
A to be attracted to B while remaining nonreceptive to B's
attempts to influence results in imbalance, asymmetry, or
cognitive dissonance more readily than had A accepted B's
efforts to influence.

Bock (1951) and Burdich and Burnes (1958) supplied
experimental research evidence supporting the above lmation.
These theories suggest that interpersonal attraction and
interpersonal influence might be diminished as a result of
"imbalance," "asymmetry," or "cognitive dissonance" between
therapist and client. Festinger's (1957) cognitive dissonance

theory speaks about conditions that arouse dissonance in an

16

-individual and the various ways in which dissonance reduction
takes place. The focus of the theory is on cognitive ele-
ments and the relationship between them. Cognitive elements
are items of information, knowledge, opinion, as belief

about one-self, one's behavior or one's environment. Two
cognitives are said to be consonant if they are mutually
consistent, that is, if one follows from, implies, or is
compatible with the other. Dissonance is said to exist

when two cognitive elements, occurring together, are
mutually inconsistent.

The existence of dissonance, being psychologically
uncomfortable, will motivate the person to attempt reduction
of the dissonance and achieve consonance. When dissonance
is present, in addition to trying to reduce it, the person
will actively avoid situations and information which would
likely increase the dissonance. Dissonance then is the
existence of nonfitting relations among cognitious and is
a motivating factor.

The notion is presented that if the therapy relation-
ship is less than favorable, for whatever reason, cognitive
dissonance might be the result. Hill (1967), Blanzy (1970)
DeLoach (1970) have demonstrated that when students are
taught employing methods centered around the students
cognitive style, as defined by Hill (1967), the student's
performance in class is improved. It has also been reported

that students with teachers of similar cognitive style tend

17

to perform in school more successfully than those students
with dissimilar cognitive styles. It has been suggested,
DeLoach (1969, 1970) that cognitive style disparity is

an antecedent of cognitive dissonance.

The literature seems to support the following
notions: that it is imperative a good working relationship
be established between the client and the therapist regard-
less of the method of psychotherapy itself; that it is not
possible for the counselor to get along equally well with
all prospective clients and he must be able to recognize
his limitations; that in order for therapy to be truly
effective the therapist-client relationship must be positive;
and finally that positive therapy outcome is enhanced when
there is a good quality counselor-client relationship; the
dynamics between therapist and client are important in
forming a therapeutic relationship; interpersonal attraction
is related to interpersonal influence;‘if the relationship
is not harmonious then imbalance, asymmetry or cognitive
dissonance is said to occur; therapist effectiveness is
reduced by a poor relationship and motive acquisition and
positive observed behavior is enhanced through a positive
therapeutic relationship.

This study introduces the notion that through
cognitive style matching, the formation of a therapy rela-

tionship might be enhanced, and that counselors can be

18

matched with clients with whom they will be effective.
Through matching clients and counselors utilizing cognitive
style mapping, it is postulated that patient interpersonal
attractions to the therapist will be enhanced thus increasing
interpersonal influence resulting in accelerated motive

acquisition and positive observed behavior.
The Theory of Cognitive Style

An Overview

 

This section consists of two parts: the first is
a overview of cognitive style, the second is for those
readers who might be interested in an indepth analysis of

the therapeutical and mathematical deviations of Hill's

Cognitive Style concept.

Joseph Hill (1968) has developed a cognitive style in-
strument which identified the client's methods of receiving
meaning from his own existence. Hill has defined the
educational process as a seeking of knowledge and meaning.
This can further be expanded to include the concept of
counseling in that counseling is essentially a means of
enhancing the client's ability to seek meaning from his
own life. Hill has further demonstrated that it is possible
to match the cognitive style of the teacher and student and
thereby enhance the student's probability of success in

school. A mis-matched student/teacher results in a higher

19

probability of the student either being dissatisfied or
failing in school.

This research attempts to match cognitive styles
of the counselor with that of the client in hopes of
enhancing a quality therapeutic relationship thereby
increasing the probability of a positive therapy outcome.
Before discussing this aspect of the research further,
the theory of cognitive style itself must be examined.

The construct of cognitive style, according to
Hill, has been developed as one of the educational sciences
and is therefore, different from those defined and described
in the field of psychology. Hill employed a modified form
of Guttman's meta theory of facets as a model. The concept
of cognitive style is expressed as, what mathematicians
call, a Cartesian product of sets. In this context,
cognitive style can be considered somewhat related to
Guilford's dimensions of intelligence (Guilford, 1967)-

Guilford's model is a Cartesian product of three
sets that represent intellect, content and "things," whereas
Hill's Cartesian product is designed to represent cognitive
style composed of the following four sets:

1. Symbols and meanings

2. Cultured determinants of the meanings of symbols

3. Modalities of inference

4. Neurological, electrical chemical and biochemical

aspects of memory storage and learning

20

As Hill pointed out, because of the highly speculative
nature of the fourth set, his present Cartesian product
representing cognitive style is limited to the first three
sets.

Cognitive style, then, is a vehicle which can be
employed in diagnosing individuals and prescribing activities
that provide the highest probability of accomplishing
successfully the educational or behavioral task confronting
him. It is important to note that an analysis of the
student as well as the substance of the educational or
counseling task requires a similar analysis. According
to Hill, the counselor or teacher should be skilled in
the use of information pertaining to symbols and meanings,
perceptions, differential patterns, biochemistry of memory,
cognitive styles, and systematic analysis and decision
making so he can adequately evaluate, prescribe and then
make adjustments to correct inefficiencies in the individual
sub-systems.

The cognitive style map is composed of three factors:
Symbols; Cultural Determinants of the Meanings of Symbols;
Modalities of Inference. Fragale, Svagr, Zussman (1971)
have summarized the conceptual framework as follows:

I. SYMBOLS
Man is a creature that searches for meaning through the
use of symbols. These symbols are theoretical (words,

numbers, and graphic symbols) or qualitative (sensory

21

and code data). It is impossible to communicate with

peOple without using one or both of these forms of

symbols. The theoretical symbol forms a means for

communicating experiences or generalizing about the

past, present, and future and may be either auditory

(spoken) or visual (written). In turn, each of these

types can be identified as linguistic or quantitative.

These forms are:

l. The Theoretical Auditory Linguistic-T(AL)-the sound
of a word or graphic symbol.

2. The Theoretical Auditory Quantitative-T(AQ)-the
sound of a number or a mathematical symbol.

3. The Theoretical Visual Linguistic-T(VL)-the written
word or graphic symbol.

4. The Theoretical Visual Quantitative-T(VQ)-the written
number or mathematical symbol.

~ The qualitative symbols derive their meanings from:

(1) sensory stimuli, (2) humanly constructed formalisms

(codes or games), and (3) the programmatic effects of

phenomena which convey an impression of a definite

series of images, events, or operations. Identified

qualitative symbols are:

l. The Qualitative Auditory-Q(A)-symbol is the per-
ception of meaning from non-verbal sounds.

2. The Qualitative Olfactory-Q(O)—symbol is the obtain-

ing of meaning from odors, smells, or aromas, etc.

22

The Qualitative Savory-Q(S)-symbol is the mediation
of meaning through taste.

The Qualitative Tactile-Q(T)-symbol is the gaining
of meaning through the sense of touch.

The Qualitative Visual-Q(V)-symbol is the ability
to derive meaning from what one sees.

The Qualitative Proprioceptive-Q(P)-symbol is the
ability to combine or coordinate imputs from
muscular functions into a specific response or
operation which is monitored by sensory imput,
e.g., as in running to and catching a baseball

or typing from written material.

Organizing the qualitative symbolic codes in like manner:

1.

Qualitative Code Empathetic-Q(CEM)—is the ability
to put yourself in another's place, e.g., to know
how it feels when someone hits his thumb with a
hammer.

Qualitative Code Esthetic-Q(CES)—is the ability to
enjoy the beauty of an object or an idea.
Qualitative Code Ethic-Q(CET)-is commitment to
specific values or duties.

Qualitative Code Histrionic-Q(CH)-is the ability

to deliberately stage behavior to produce a desired

effect.

II.

23

5. Qualitative Code Kinesics-Q(CK)-is the ability
to communicate through bodily movements or
peripheral vascular reactions.

6. Qualitative Code Kinesthetics-Q(CKH)-willingness
and interest in acquiring motor skill abilities.

7. Qualitative Code Proximics-Q(CP)-is the ability

'to judge the appropriate physical and social
distance between oneself and another as defined
by the other person, e.g., being able to recognize
if you may put your arm around that girl or call
the boss by his first name.

8. Qualitative Code Synnoetics-Q(CS)-is knowledge of
one's abilities, i.e., being able to establish
realistic goals for oneself.

9. Qualitative Code Transactional-Q(CT)—is the ability
to establish with others a positive communication
system which influences their actions or goals,
e.g., to convince someone that your way is best.

CULTURAL DETERMINANTS OF THE MEANINGS OF SYMBOLS

The meaning brought to man by symbols is influenced

by the person's culture and experiences. A person

interprets the theoretical and qualitative symbols

as an individual in a role that has specific expecta-

tions. These expectations are imposed by societal

norms, peers or associates, or the family and exert

III.

24

an influence over the person throughout his life.

What the person perceives as the meaning of symbols

is greatly determined by:

1. his associates -A- or peers-this is represented
by the various groups with whom the person has
the greatest contact and changes throughout life.

2. his family -F- this is either immediate or
extended or surrogate changing throughout life.

3. his individuality -I- this is the person's innate
knowledge that his is the best way along with his
ability and willingness to direct his behavior
accordingly.

MODALITIES OF INFERENCE

The meanings of symbols are influenced also by the

modes of inference or reasoning that the individual

has a tendency to employ in an effort to formulate
hypothesis. There are two classifications of modes
of inference. First, are the inductive processes
which yields probability conclusions. Second is the
deductive process which yields a logically necessary
conclusion derived from the given information. There
are four inductive inference processes, which are
classified as:

l. Magnitude -M- is categorical thinking, i.e., using

rules, definitions, and/or classifications.

25

2. Differences -D- is the emphasis of one—to-one
contrasts of selected characteristics or traits.

3. Relationships -R- is the comparison of two or
more selected characteristics or traits through
similarities.

4. Appraisal -L- is the process involving the appli-
cation of Magnitudes, Differences and Relationships
in reaching a probability conclusion.

Circle K -(K)- is the deductive inferential process.

This inferential process is utilized most frequently

in logical proofs, e.g., in mathematics and in

symbolic logic.

Hill, et a1. (1967, 1968, 1969, 1970, 1971) have
demonstrated a significant improvement in outcome performance
when a student has been assigned educational tasks according
to his cognitive style as compared with the regular educa-
tional methods. When student and teacher are matched,
according to cognitive style, the teacher is more efficient
and the student learns readily. Cognitive style matching
has therefore been demonstrated to be an effective method
of improving "teaching." This work seeks to test this same
notion as applied to the field of Counseling.

If, as the research indicated, the therapeutic
relationship is important, then it appears logical to

match therapist-client cognitive style as a means of

26

enhancing this relationship and thereby speeding therapy
outcome.

Comprehensive Study of Hill's Cognitive
Style Theory

 

 

The following represents a synthesis of Hill's work
including forty doctoral dissertations dealing with the
concept of cognitive style (Wasser, 1971; Hill, et a1.,

1967, 1968, 1970).

A Conceptual Framework of Education

"If education is to be regarded as a relatively
rigorous applied field of information, similar to those
of medicine, engineering, and pharmacy, its conceptual
framework must reflect a scientific orientation " (Hill,
1968, p. 1). Various kinds of factoral descriptions, con-
cepts, generalizations, laws and theories could comprise a
scientific conceptual framework for education. It is,
therefore, necessary to recognize that the conceptual
framework which will probably best serve the purposes of
education will be composed of a set of disciplines
which one might call the educational sciences. Presuming
this notion is assumed, then the framework can be mapped
in terms of the sciences considered to be fundamental to
the educative process.

Hill has identified seven strata to construct a

conceptual framework unique to the applied field of

27

education. These strata are: (a) symbols and their
meanings, (b) cultural determinants of the meaning of
symbols, (c) modalities of inference, (d) neurological,
electrochemical, and biochemical aspects of memory functions,
(e) cognitive styles of individuals, (f) teaching, adminis-
trative, and counseling style, and (g) systemic analysis

and decision making.

Cognitive Style as an Educational Science

History has demonstrated psychologists interests in
studying the consistency and predictability of personality.
Allport suggests the concept of "style," which essentially
he defined as the consistency and pattern of expressive
behaviors that individuals manifest in performing various
types of activities. In the context of Allport's descrip-
tive definition of style, the term is highly similar to its
common use in such expressions as: an individual's way
(style) of living, a style of speaking, a style of writing,
or a style of dress. This orientation permits the use of
the term "style" to denote an entire pattern of responses,
a way of life, and also a class of events.

Traditionally approached investigations of cogni-
tive behavior have dealt mainly with concept formation.
Studies of this nature have been limited to considerations
such as: what are concepts?, how are they obtained?, or

how are they learned? Essentially these investigations

28

have studies various ramifications of what could be termed
"concept learning." These types of studies however, have
not re-examined cognitive functions in the context of
personality.

During the past 15 years Hill and others have
studied the concept of cognitive style in the context of
cognition as a facet of personality. Witkin has advanced
the notion that the phenomena described as cognitive style
is a type of personality structure expressed in the inter-
action between perceptual (cognitive) response systems and
antecedent conditions in the life history of the person.
In this context then, Hill was interested in such
phenomenon as the quality of mother-child relationships
as antecedents to certain types of cognitive styles.
According to Hill:

certain contemporary studies of cognition have been
designed to consider the phenomena as a particular
individual's mode of response to a given set of
stimuli (variables). Other modern efforts have
sought antecedents, or correlates, between cognitive
style and: (1) such personality variables as:
dependency, anxiety, and passivity; (2) such
cognitive variables as: intelligence, problem
solving, and reasoning; and (3) such psychological
processes as: learning and preception (Hill,
1968, p. 2).
Essentially contemporary studies of cognitive style involve
the investigation of cognitive procesSes in the context of
personality and defined social variables. Investigators such

as Hill and other psychologists (e.g., Broverman, Gardner,

Kagan, Moss, Sigel, and Witkin) recognize that cognitive

29

behaviors form a fundamental part of the socio-personal
matrix, and that the employment of certain classes of
behavior called "cognitive" have consistent qualities
which justify their being defined as stylistic.

An important and central point of cognitive style
theory is that individuals are unique in that they search
for meaning in many remarkable and diverse ways. Each
person possesses his own "style" for making sense out of
his world and discovering answers to the question. "What's
happening and why?"

The educational science of cognitive style considers
individual modes of meaning-seeking behavior in a manner
that allows the social scientist (i.e. educator, psycholo-
gist, social worker, rehab counselor) to communicate
accurately and precisely, without misappropriate labels and
concepts, about each individual (client, student) unique

search for meaning.

The educational science of cognitive style is
comprised of four sets of distinct but highly correlated
sciences: (l) symbologosics--the educational science of
symbols and their meanings; (2) determanitics--the educational
science of cultural determinants of the meaning of symbols;

(3) inferensics--the educational science of modalities of

inference; and (4) the educational science of biochemical

and electrophysiological aspects of memory. However,

30

since the body of information pertaining to the fourth set
is highly speculative at this stage of its development,
cognitive style is at present defined by the first three

sets.

Symbologosics--the Educational Science of Symbols

A distinguishing characteristic of human activity
is the creation, translation and transformation of symbols
to the end of producing meaning. As fundamental elements
of intellectual activity, symbols are requisite to man's
search for and realization of meaning. Man is capable of
acquiring and mediating meaning through the creation and

utilization of two types of symbols: (1) theoretical

 

symbols (e.g., words and numbers) and (2) qualitative

 

symbols (e.g., sense data).

The Theoretical Symbol

 

The theoretical symbol can best be characterized
as an arbitrarily selected reference which signifies an
object. The most familiar forms of these symbols are
words and numbers.

Definition: the Theoretical symbol is that symbol

 

which represents to the "awareness" or nervous system of
the individual something different from that which the
symbol itself is.

Theoretical symbols include percepts, private
interpretations of sensations, and concepts, shared and
agreed upon interpretations of sensations which are

capable of being generalized. Thus, words and numbers

31

are the most common forms of theoretical symbols. This
definition conforms to the usual or standard definition
of a symbol as being representative of something other
than what it itself is.

Theoretical symbols comprise a class which can be
divided into two sub-classes: (1) visual symbols and (2)
auditory symbols. Each of these categories consists of
linguistic and quantitative elements. In this context,
linguistic refers to words and quantitative indicates

numbers.

The theoretical visual linguistic symbol.--Theort-

 

ical visual linguistic symbols are written or printed
words, such as the expressions on this page, which bring
to the "awareness" of the reader imageries different from
the printed arrangement of the letters and words involved.
That is, configurations of these letters stand for some-
thing other than randomly assigned marks on paper. They
help stimulate sensations and imageries in the nervous
system of the reader which convey meanings that can be
both interpreted individually (percepts) and generalized

(concepts).

The theoretical auditory linguistic symbol.--

 

Theoretical auditory linguistic symbols are sounds of
words which bring to the "awareness" of the listener
imageries different from the arrangement of the sounds

involved. Configurations of sounds help stimulate

32

sensations and imageries in the nervous system of the
listener which transmit meanings that can be generalized
(concepts) in addition to being interpreted individually
(percepts).

Since the sound of the letters "b," "o," and "y"
for example, do not bring to the individual's "awareness"
an imagery that differs from the sound of the letter
themselves, they are not a theoretical auditory linguistic
symbol. If, however, we rearrange the letters "0," "y,"
"b" to form the word "boy" (representing a concept), then
their sounds would comprise a theoretical auditory
linguistic symbol since the sound would bring to an
individual's nervous system an image (percept) different
from the sounds of the letters themselves.

The theoretical visual quantitative symbol.--The

 

theoretical visual quantitative symbol is the written or
printed number which can be interpreted individually and
generalized. In the theoretical visual symbolic form
it may be difficult to determine whether the printed or
written expression of a number, e.g., "five," is con-
sidered to be a number [quantitative] or a word [linguis-
tic] by the individual involved.

Under these circumstances, should the printed
numeral "5" (representing a concept) bring to the nervous

system of the individual an imagery (percept), e.g., a

33

picture (qualitative visual symbol) of five persons, dif-
ferent from the printed expression of the numberal itself,
then "5" would be an example of a theoretical visual

quantitative symbol.

The theoretical auditory quantitative symbol.--
The theoretical auditory quantitative symbol is the sound
of a number which produces percepts and concepts by
presenting to the nervous system of the individual some-
thing different from that which it itself is. For example,
the sound of the number "three" (representing a concept)
brings to the "awareness" of the individual an imagery
(percept), e.g., a qualitative visual picture of three
grapes, different from the sound itself. (Although in
theoretical auditory symbolic form it is not easy to specify
whether the sound "three" should be considered as a number
[quantitative] or a word [linguistic] by the individual
involved, in the interest of clarity, the theoretical
auditory quantitative symbol is arbitrarily defined and
said to exist).

In its complex form, this symbol is the set of
sounds selected by the individual's nervous system from
a series of algebraic (in its generic sense) terms forming
some type of mathematical expression to form a set of
images different from the sounds of the terms themselves.

For example, in considering the following problem,

34

presented orally: "What is the value of X if 2X + 6 = 12?"
both the auditory linguistic and the auditory quantitative
theoretical symbols involved bring to the individual's
"awareness" a set of images which are possibly a picture
(qualitative visual symbol) or an image of the problem
different from the sounds of the question formed by the

words and numbers comprising it.

The Qualitative Symbol

 

Meaning is usually associated with the theory of
signs and symbolic logic. In this context, meaning is
defined in terms of the lexical and grammatical aspects
of linguistics and the formal and functional analyses
of logic. This approach limits meaning to the realm of
the theoretical symbol.

Meaning in the context of the educational sciences
is associated not only with the realm of the theoretical
symbol but with that of the qualitative symbol as well.
This association is based on the assumption that man is
capable of mediating each of these two related but different
types of symbols into meaning.

Definition: the Qualitative symbol is that symbol

 

which presents and then represents to the "awareness" of
the individual that which the symbol itself is to that
individual.

These symbols, for example, are employed by infants

in the process of acquiring and mediating meaning before

35

they have attained any theoretical symbolic capabilities.
Babies, for instance, can "feel" (qualitative tactile)

cold temperatures before they have the ability to say,

"I am cold" (theoretical auditory linguistic symbol). In
addition, children begin at an early age to acquire quali-
tative symbolic code systems, e.g., esthetics, ethics,
kinesthetics, which, with modifications, they tend to retain
throughout their lives. Under circumstances such as theSe,
qualitative symbols derive their meanings from three
sources: (1) sensory stimuli, (2) humanly constructed
formalisms such as codes or "games" and (3) programmatic
effects of objects or phenomena which convey an impression

of a definite series of images, scenes, events or operations.

Sensory Stimuli

Since qualitative symbols are those symbols that
present and then represent to the nervous system of the
individual that which they (the symbols) themselves are
to that individual, they are associated with the five
perceptive senses of man: (1) visual, (2) auditory,
(3) tactile, (4) savory and (5) olfactory. Qualitative
sensory symbols, consequently, become forms of immediately
attained individualized meanings or perceptions.

l. The qualitative visual symbol presents and
then represents to the individual visual entities, such

as size, shape and color, whose meanings are attained

36

immediately but which cannot be generalized. (Contrast
this to theoretical linguistic symbols, i.e., the spoken

or written word, which can be both interpreted individually
and generalized.) For example, the shade of red of a
particular object presents to the "awareness" of the
individual, and then represents to that person, that which
it (the shade of red) itself is to him. In order for two
or more individuals to approximately share knowledge of
that shade of red exhibited by the object at a given time,
it is necessary that these persons observe the object at
that point of time. In addition, the quality of "redness"
cannot be "known" by someone who has never seen this symbol.
The sense stimuli residual remaining in the "awareness" of
the individual as the result of his observation of the
shade of red is, in essence, the "stored" qualitative
symbol.

2. The qualitative auditory symbol presents and

 

then represents to the individual perceived sounds, such

as music, hammering and drilling, whose immediately attained
meanings cannot be generalized. A strain of music, for
instance, produced by an instrument presents and then
represents to the nervous system of the individual that
which it (the strain of music) itself is to him. This
symbol can be only approximately shared by persons who

hear it at the same point of time. It cannot be shared

with a person who has never heard the symbol (the strain

37

of music). The sense stimuli residual "recorded" in the
individual's "awareness" as a result of his hearing the
music is the "stored" qualitative symbol.

3. The qualitative tactile symbol presents and
then represents to the individual various tactile sensations,
such as skin sensitivity to temperature changes or the
ability to determine the composition of various objects
by touch, whose meanings are attained immediately but which
cannot be generalized. The feel of a particular swatch of
valvet, for example, presents and then represents to the
"awareness" of the individual touching it that which it
(the feel) itself is to that person. Knowledge of this
symbol cannot be attained by an individual who has never
felt this piece of velvet. The residual of the sense
stimuli "registered" in the nervous system of the person
as the result of his feeling the velvet is, in substance,
the "stored" qualitative symbol.

4. The qualitative savory symbol presents and then

 

represents to the individual perceived tastes, such as the
flavor of wine, whose immediately attained meanings cannot
be generalized. For instance, the taste of a particular
type of dessert presents and then represents to the nervous
system of the individual that which it (the taste) itself

is to that individual. This symbol cannot be shared with
someone who has never tasted the dessert. The sense stimuli

residual remaining in the nervous system of the person as

38

the result of his tasting that particular type of dessert
is essentially the "stored" qualitative symbol.

5. The qualitative olfactory symbol presents and
then represents to the individual a variety of olfactory
sensations, such as the scent of flowers, whose meanings
are attained immediately but which cannot be generalized.
The aroma of frying bacon and coffee in the morning at a
camp site, for example, presents and then represents to the
"awareness" of the individual that which it (the aroma)
itself is to him. Knowledge of this scent cannot be appre-
hended by a person who has never experienced the aroma
presented and represented by this symbol. The olfactory
sense stimuli residual "recorded" in the nervous system
of the individual as the result of his smelling the aroma
in question is the "stored" qualitative symbol.

The qualitative symbol is composed of the sense
stimuli residual associated with the object of the symbol
that remains or is "stored" in the nervous system (brain,
spinal cord, sub-system of nerves) of the individual. In
essence, qualitative sensory symbols are "what they are"
to each perceiving individual--figurative, as opposed to
literal, expressions that convey and express meaning
through the senses of sight, hearing, touch, smell and

taste.

39

Programmatic Effects

The ability to synthesize stimuli produced within
the body into a manifest intelligent behavior is termed
"proprioceptive." This ability is exhibited in the per-
formance of many tasks (e.g., typing, which may require
the synthesis of an individual's qualitative visual and
tactile skills with his qualitative kinesthetic capabili-
ties). Other complex activities, such as heading a neuro—
surgical team, orchestra-conducting, playing a musical
instrument while reading music or any other seeming
"automatic" activity, may require the synthesis of addi—
tional qualitative intellectual competencies. Such func-
tional Operations and events are programmatic and, in
effect, are sources of meaning for qualitative symbols.
Under these circumstances, qualitative proprioceptive,
the qualitative symbol which is the device for transmitting
and expressing meanings associated with programmatic effects,
becomes, as does each qualitative sensory symbol, a form

of individualized meaning.

Codes

 

Qualitative symbolic codes derive their meanings
from humanly constructed formalisms, such as "games." As
symbols, they are vehicles by which meanings are expressed
in mosaic or figurative patterns which tend to produce

immediate insights into the "worlds" or realms under

40

consideration. Whereas generalization is the concern of
theoretical symbolic languages, qualitative symbolic codes
are oriented toward forms of subcultural individualism,
i.e., they comprise unified patterns of subjective meanings
as distinguished from the individualized meanings inherent
in qualitative sensory and proprioceptive symbols.

To clarify the nature of the nine qualitative
symbolic codes, they are defined as follows:

1. Qualitative code empathetic--the ability of an
individual to identify with, or have a vicarious experience
of, another person's (or persons') feelings, ideas or
volitions. This ability, for example, is demonstrated by
the "empathizer" executing gestures, gesticulations and
bodily movements supplemented by facial expressions that
are sympathetic with the moods and/or bodily movements of
the other person.

2. Qualitative code esthetic--the ability of a
person to View with enjoyment the "beauty" and "pureness"
of a resulting product, situation or idea. For instance,
students who appreciate paintings, geometrical theorems,
music, historical analogies and scientific generalizations
exhibit this capability.

3. Qualitative code ethic--a commitment to a set

 

of values, a group of moral principles, obligations and/or
duties. This ability would be exemplified by a student

who feels it necessary and thus is determined to complete

41

all of his homework assignments or a bank robber who insists
on finishing the job while under fire.

4. Qualitative code histrionic--artificial behavior,
staged conduct or a deliberate exhibition of emotion or
temperament to produce some particular effect in, or evoke
responses from, other persons. Actors and actresses are
especially noted for their possession of this type of
ability. Not to be outdone, of course, are teachers and
trial lawyers.

5. Qualitative code kinesics--the ability of an

 

individual to communicate by means of nonlinguistic functions
and motions of the body, such as blushes, shrugs, gesticu-
lations and gestures. Perhaps, up to 93% of human communi-
cation is comprised of "body language." Revealing moments
occur, for instance, when a person smiling and speaking

with a gentle voice, keeps his fists tightly clenched.

6. Qualitative code kinesthetics--comprised of

 

motor skill abilities and bodily reactions, such as threshold
of awareness (limen) of different weights, athletic per-
formances, ballet and finger dexterity. Excellent typists,
dancers and athletes are examples of groups of people who
enjoy this capability.

7. Qualitative code proxemics-—the ability of a

 

person to judge and effect "critical" physical and social
distances (e.g., closeness, estrangement) between himself

and others in the act of communicating, such as a culturally

42

determined "permissible" physical or social distance people
maintain between them during conversations. This ability
is shown by the individual who knows when not to slap you
on the back or the girl who is aware of how close or how
far she should stand from a male acquaintance.

8. Qualitative code synnoetics--the possession of

 

personal knowledge of oneself in all qualitative and theo-
retical symbolic forms which constitute the totality of
the individual in relation to his environment. The person
who knows himself well enough so that he is able to select
realistic goals is an example of an individual who ranks
high in this capability.

9. Qualitative code transactional--the ability of

 

an individual to maintain a positive communicative inter-
action which significantly influences the goals of persons
involved in that interaction. This ability was exemplified
by such political leaders as Roosevelt and Hitler and is
frequently exhibited by informal group leaders.

Where theoretical symbols are used in ordinary
languages to communicate ideas in a connected, consecutive
manner, according to the principles of common logic, the
qualitative symbols are used to convey feelings, commitments,
values and to provide particular types of insights into the

domain of "self." The main function of the qualitative

symbol is figurative expression, not literal statement.

43

Theoretical symbolic languages are oriented toward gener-
alization, qualitative symbolic codes toward subcultural
individualism.

Theoretical symbolic languages present meanings in
linear sequential patterns. Qualitative symbolic codes
transmit meanings in the form of mosaic patterns which
tend to produce direct or immediate insight. Meaning is
derived from ordinary (theoretical symbolic) languages at
the termination of a presentation either implicitly or
explicitly, while the figurative (mosaic) expressions of
qualitative symbols in either sensory, code or programmatic
form present meaning in an immediate sense.

Qualitative symbolic codes have a unique logic,
involving distinctive patterns (mosaics), characteristic
orders and relationships. As forms of meaning they are
not random, disconnected entities, but neither does their
organization tend to follow the necessary sequential patterns
of theoretical symbolic rationality. In this context,
qualitative symbols are sometimes mistakenly thought of
as irrational expressions of experience such as emotions.
Actually, qualitative symbols are employed extensively by
man to solve problems and interpret the various worlds
that comprise a variety of human situations. Under these
circumstances, the essential distinction between ordinary
languages and qualitative symbolic codes is not found in

their applications, but in differences between the classes

44

of symbols in which they are expressed, i.e., between the
theoretical symbols used in ordinary languages and the
qualitative symbolic forms comprising the codes. Expres-
sions composed of qualitative symbols are more apprOpriate
than theoretical symbolic statements when the purposes of
communication are best served by direct presentation of forms
instead of sequential elements that ultimately yield con-
clusions.

Qualitative symbols, whether they be in sensory,
code or programmatic form, are individual (and sometimes
subcultural) objectifications of subjective states of meaning.
In this context, qualitative codes are unified patterns of
subjective meanings, while the qualitative symbols associated
with the five senses and programmatic effects become forms

of individualized meanings.

Review
For purposes of review and clarification, the major
classifications identified in the discussion of symbologosics
are restated below in outline form with the addition of
abbreviations for each element. Capital letters express
major orientations, small letters minor orientations--the

determination of which is explianed later in this chapter.

45

l. Symbologosics (S)

A. Theoretical symbols (T)

Theoretical Visual linguistic (Tvl’ tvl)

Theoretical auditory linguistic (Tal’ tal)
Theoretical Visual quantitative (T , t )
vq vq

Theoretical auditory quantitative (Ta t )

q’ as

B. Qualitative symbols (Q)

1.

Sensory stimuli

a. Visual (Qv’ qv)
b. Auditory (Qa, qa)
c. Tactile (Qt’ qt)

d. Savory (Qs' qs)

e. Olfactory (Q0, qo)

Programmatic effects

a. Proprioceptive (Qp. qp)

Codes

a. Empathetic (Q )

cem' qcem

b. Esthetic (chs’ qces)

c. Ethic (Q )

cet' qcet

d. Histrionic (Qch’ qch)

e. Kine51cs (Qck’ qck)

f. K1nesthet1cs (Qckh’ qckh)

p I qcp)

h. Synnoetics (QCS, qcs)

g. Proxemics (QC

1. Transactional (Oct, qct)

46

Determantics--The Educational Science of
Cultural Determinants of the Meaning of

Symbols

Man derives meaning for symbols not as a totally
unique person, but as an individual cast in a social role
which has definitions and expectations imposed upon it by
societal norms, other individuals and groups with which
the individual interacts. Therefore, an individual's
symbolic mediations are influenced greatly by his own
roles in various groups, roles of other group members
and the interactions of these roles. It is in this context
that the groups of family and associates, together with a
person's individuality, are considered to be the main
cultural influences at work on the individual throughout
his life. Consequently, those groups which exert the main
influence on him determine, in great part, his perceptions
of life.

Each determinant is, in effect, a synthesis of
selected aspects of the concepts: "cultural perceptions,"
"norms" and "roles." These syntheses can be used to define
major and minor classifications to describe the influence
of the determinants on the theoretical and qualitative
symbolic mediations of the individual. Although each of

these determinants influences the individual's interpretations

47

of theoretical and qualitative symbolic information per-
taining to a given educational task, the relative strength
of its influence tends to vary with the age of the person
and the level and conditions of the task. Since these
determinants seem to be almost omnipresent in a person's
theoretical and qualitative symbolic mediations and influ-
ence greatly the meanings he ascribes to them, the determi-
nants are fundamental considerations of any effort to

educate.

The Family Determinant

 

It is reasonable to assume that the meanings of
symbols for the individual during the early stages of his
life are affected greatly by the group of persons he con-
siders to be his family. Between the ages of four and
seven the child is developing a set of code systems, and
in the process is also beginning to develop what Parsons
terms his "individuality." However, the main influence on
the meaning of the symbols being acquired by him during
this stage of his life is usually the family. Thus, most
children participating in pre-school projects or nursery
school programs, and those enrolled in early elementary
school education (grades K-3) will be influenced mainly
by the family and individuality cultural determinants.

The family determinant in the early stages of a

person's life is mainly composed of those societal norms

48

and role expectations which the family as a group tends

to support and prOpagate. Since the individual is a
member of a family, his symbolic mediations tend to have
some influence on the norms and roles that family members
in primary roles (e.g., father, mother) expect him to
accept and internalize. In this manner, the individuality
of a person begins to take form and develop to a greater

or lesser degree.

The Associates Determinant

 

Although the meaning of symbols for a young child
is usually affected considerably by his family, the rapidity
with which he frequently learns from other children indi-
cates that the effect of the associates determinant is at
work early in the life of the individual. As the individual
grows older and his sphere of acquaintances (associates)
expands, the influence of the associates determinant tends
to increase. The conflict resulting from the difference
between the norms and role expectations held for him by
his associates and those which his family wish to have
him accept and internalize influences the development of
his individuality.

The associates determinant begins to "show" its
influence on most elementary school-age children, especially
during the time they are in grades four to six. This

influence tends to increase for most persons until they

49

attain the age of 17 to 19. After that point, but depend-
ing greatly upon the situation (e.g., joining a fraternity
or a gang), the influence tends to decline in favor of

the individuality or the family determinant (for example,
when an individual marries and starts a "new" family).

If a person, however, becomes a member of a profession,

a labor union or a strong social organization that empha-
sizes brotherhood, the opportunity for the associates
determinant to become a major influence exists, and his

symbolic mediations may be affected accordingly.

The Individuality Determinant

 

The individuality determinant is composed of the
physiological, neurological, biochemical and electrochemical
"structures" of an individual's body, modified, in part, by
the societal norms and role expectations, brought to bear
upon his "awareness" (nervous system) by his family,
associates and physical environment. The individuality
of a person begins to develop at the earliest stages of
life and continues a form of developmental change through-
out his lifetime.

This determinant manifests itself in the form of
the willingness of the person, based upon his individuality,
to bring his own influence (definition) to his symbolic
mediations. The so-called "self-taught" person will usually

reflect a high degree of individuality in solving problems

50

or explaining phenomena. This particular type (self-
taught) individual might mispronounce certain words
(although he knows the meaning of them) and will tend to
use them in an unusual sense (although the definitions of
the words might be interpreted in the sense in which he
has employed them). Persons found in leadership roles
usually reflect either a major or minor individuality

influence on their symbolic mediations.

Review
To review the discussion of the main points consid-

ered in determantics, they are summarized in the outline
below. It must be noted that the family, associates and
individuality determinants are not exclusive in the sense
that an individual can possess only one of them. (Major
determinants are written with capital letters, minor
determinants with small letters.

II. Determantics (E)
A. Family (F, f)
B. Associates (A, a)
C. Individuality (I, i)

Inferensics--The Educational Science
of Modalitiés of Inference

 

 

One quality distinguishing man from other animal
species is the uniqueness of the inference processes em-
ployed by him in his search for meaning. The educational
science of modalities of inference, inferensics, deals with
the diverse methods of mediating into meaning theoretical

and qualitative symbols whose meanings are influenced by

51

family, associates and/or individuality determinants. Since,
generally speaking, there are two principal methods of sym-
bolic mediation, deductive and inductive, inferensics con-
sists of both deductive and inductive inference processes.

Inference is of a dual nature: First, it is the
process used to derive a conclusion and, second, it is the
conclusion which is derived from the data.

A modality of inference can be classified as either
an inductive or deductive process, depending upon the manner
in which the conclusion it produces is derived. An inductive
logical process yields a probability conclusion. A deductive
logical process produces a conclusion which is a logical nec-
essary consequence resulting from that particular chain of
reasoning. The inductive process produces an experienced-
based probability conclusion of the type that man continu-
ously makes. From previous experience, for example, we might
conclude that it is safe to cross the street because the
nearest moving vehicle is over one block away, or that
tomorrow will be a day possess of bounteous, beautiful
weather signaled by the bright-red sunset today. Perhaps an
individual has an appearance highly similar to that of an-
other person whom we consider to be honest, hence we might
conclude that that individual is probably honest, also. Or a
man is tall and appears to be muscular. From past experience,

we might conclude that he, too, is probably strong.

Inductive Processes

 

The advancing of an hypothesis is the first step of

an inductive inference process. Considered in this light,

52

the hypothesis plays an unusual role in the process of
inquiry or deriving a conclusion. It is an antecedant to
the extent that it provides direction for and imposes limits
upon the process, and it is a consequence of the inquiry in
that it terminates the procedures by being accepted or
rejected.

Using the process of statistical inference as a
model to construct a body of information composed of factual
descriptions, concepts, generalizations and principles which
refers to the inductive modalities of inference of an
individual, the following six-step process is considered
to be the generalized form of these types of modalities:

l. Advancing the hypothesis for testing;

2. Determining the acceptable amount of risk for
making either (a) the error of rejecting a true
hypothesis or (b) accepting a false hypothesis;

3. Calling upon a universe of samples of experience
that seem to pertain to the "world" referred to
in the advanced hypothesis;

4. Defining the critical regions of the universes
of experience being employed by establishing
limits beyond which, if the information yielded
by the observations comprising the samples
occurs, the hypothesis must be rejected;

5. Calculating the values of the variables involved
from the information provided by the observations

comprising the samples being employed;

53

6. Making the decision to accept or reject the

hypothesis.

Following the prescriptions of the model of sta-
tistical inference, it is assumed that man can advance only
three different types of hypotheses and is limited to four
inductive inference processes for drawing probability
conclusions. The three hypotheses are classified as:

(1) magnitude, (2) difference, and (3) relationship. The
four inference processes are: (l) magnitude, (2) difference,

(3) relationship, and (4) appraisal, or evaluation.

Magnitude

 

The inference process called "magnitude" deals with
deriving a probability conclusion to accept or reject the
advanced hypothesis which is one dealing with magnitudes
consisting of norms, categorical classifications and atti-
tudes accepted as true by the individual. Magnitude
inferential patterns, for example, are exemplified by
teachers who grade solely on test scores and dutifully
fail those students who fail to meet their standards, by
corporation presidents who constantly demand that their
employees always follow the company chain of command and
by those persons who insist on following the letter of the
law. A magnitude modality of inference is neither good
nor bad. Basically, it consists of the valuing, forming

and advancing of hypotheses composed of norms, attitudes

54

and categories considered true by the individual in the
process of producing probability conclusions. For instance,
the statement, "Schools are better today than ever," implies
a value of the present-day educational system which is
worthy of use as a norm or standard of past and contempo—
rary society. The magnitude inference process, then, is
concerned with deriving a probability conclusion to reject
or accept the advanced magnitude hypothesis, such as that
stated above. Magnitude inferential patterns are prominent
in rule-oriented enterprises, such as games, mathematics

and the devising of line and staff organization Charts.

Difference

 

Inferences of difference, for instance, are exhibited
by teachers who compare students on a one-to-one basis. For
example, "Bill received an A in English while Phil got a
C," or "Bill does more homework than Mark." Difference
inductive inference processes consider hypotheses of dif—
ference such as linear or mosaic one-to-one comparisons of
selected characteristics, measurements or traits of the
phenomena in question. For example, the hypothesis of
difference concerning the differentiation of the physical
appearance of one individual from another can be carried
out by means of comparing: (1) eye color, (2) hair color,
(3) height, (4) weight, (5) length of arms and any other
physical feature which can be considered on a one-to-one

basis--a linear differential comparison.

55

Relationship

 

The relationship inference process tests a hypothesis
consisting of a relationship of at least two, and usually
more than two, characteristics, measurements or traits of
the phenomena under consideration. Characteristic of this
pattern is the statement: "Bill is a hard worker, speaks
well and is a class leader; that's why he gets high marks
and scholarship awards." An hypothesis of relationship is
one which employs comparison by analogy in multivariate
terms. It may be hypothesized, for instance, that height
and weight are generally directly related and therefore
people who are "tall" will tend to have larger skeletal
frames, in various dimensions, than will those of "medium"

height. Thus, we are considering correlations of variables.

Appraisal

 

The inferences of magnitude, difference and rela-
tionship are effected by submitting hypotheses of magnitude,
difference and relationship, respectively, to test by the
six-step inference process. The inference of appraisal is
produced by assessing the results of the other three
inference processes in terms of determining the degree
to which a priori objectives of the entity under consider-
ation have been attained. For example, a person may
evaluate, or appraise, a particular brand of automobile

tire by considering: (1) information concerning the degree

56

to which it showed wear for, say, 25,000 miles (measured

in terms of a magnitude inference); (2) its demonstration

of superiority when compared with a competing tire, i.e.,
linear differential comparison of various features of the
respective tires (determined by an inference of difference);
and (3) its performance capabilities in relationship to the
type of driving, the type of automobile, loads to be carried
and other similar types of characteristics (judged by a
relationship inference).

Consequently, appraisal inferential processes are
unique in that they are comprised of magnitude, difference
and relationship hypotheses in deriving probability con-
clusions of evaluation concerning the phenomena under
investigation. An appraisal inferential oriented teacher,
for instance, might appraise a student's performance by
contemplating: (l) the pupil's achievement on standardized
tests (assessed by an inference of magnitude); (2) the
student when compared on specific behaviors with each
student in his class (measured in terms of a difference
inference); and (3) the pupil's performance in relation to
type of work assigned, his home environment and physical
health (determined by an inference of relationship). The
inference of appraisal would be effected by evaluating the
results of the other three inference processes in terms of

judging or grading the student.

57

Deductive Processes

 

In addition to the four inductive inference processes,
individuals must also employ certain deductive inferential
processes when dealing with information in selected aspects
of the natural sciences, the life sciences and in almost
all realms of mathematics and symbolic logic. Although the
use of these types of inference processes is necessary when
a person is confronted with solving certain kinds of edu-
cational tasks, such as proving a geometrical theorem, the
assumption is generally accepted that these processes are
required, and/or employed, relatively infrequently in every-
day living situations. Less emphasis has been placed,
therefore, upon the study of deductive inference processes
than upon those efforts designed to yield information about

inductive inference processes.

Review
The major categories comprising cymbologosics are
outlined below with their designated abbreviations.
(Capital letters indicate major modalities of inference,
small letters represent minor inference modalities.
III. Inferensics (H)
A. Inductive processes

1. Magnitude (M, m)

2. Difference (D, d)

3. Relationship (R, r)

4. Appraisal (L)

B. Deductive processes (GO)

I.

II.

58

SUMMARY CHART OF COGNITIVE STYLE MAP ELEMENTS

Symbologosics (S)

A.

Theoretical Symbols (T)

1. Theoretical Visual Linguistic (Tvl, tvl)

2. Theoretical Auditory Linguistic (Tal' tal)
3. Theoretical Visual Quantitative (Tvq' t
4

. Theoretical Auditory Quantitative (Taq'

Qualitative Symbols (Q)

l. Senory Stimuli
a. Visual (Qv' qv)
b. Auditory (Qa, qa)
c. Tactile (Qt' qt)
d. Savory (QS, qS)
e. Olfactors (QO, qO)
2. Programmatic Effects

a. Propriocaptive (Qp, q )

P
3. Codes
a. Empathetic (chm' qcem)
b. Esthetic (chs' qces)
c. Ethic (cht' qcet)
d. Histrionic (Qch' qch)
e. Kinesics (Qck' qck)
f. Kinesthetics (Qckh’ qckh)
g. Proxemics (Qcp' qcp)
h. Synnoetics (QCS, qcs)
i. Transactional (Qct’ qct)

Determantics (E)

A.

B.

C.

Family (F, f)
Associates (A, a)

Individuality (I, i)

vq

59

SUMMARY CHART OF COGNITIVE STYLE (continued)

III. Inferensics (H)
A. Inductive Processes

. Magnitude (M, m)
. Difference (D, d)
. Relationship (R, r)

wal-J

. Appraisal (L)

B. Deductive Processes (QQ)

Principles for Determining Major and
Minor Orientations

 

 

Major and minor orientations are relative classi-
fications estimated by means of a systematic procedure for
determining an individual's capabilities in the realm of
each of the twenty-seven cognitive style elements.

With the understanding that the basic purpose of
determining major and minor orientations of the individual
is to reflect his relative strengths in skills, knowledge
and aptitudes in the cognitive style domains at a given
level of development, the following principles are
employed:

Principle I. If the percentile rank of an individ-

 

ual's score in a given theoretical or qualitative symbolic
domain occurs in the array of values ranging from the
fiftieth through the ninety-ninth percentile (inclusively)
of a population of these scores, then the individual is
accorded a major orientation in that domain, written as a

capital letter (T or Q).

60

Principle II. If the percentile rank of a person's

 

score in a particular theoretical or qualitative symbolic
domain occurs in the array of values ranging from the
twenty-fifth through the forty-ninth percentile (inclu-
sively) of a population of these scores, then the individual
is assigned a minor orientation in that domain, expressed

as a small letter (t or q).

Principle III. If the percentile rank of an

 

individual's score in a given theoretical or qualitative
symbolic domain occurs in the array of values ranging from
the zero percentile through the twenty-fourth percentile
of a population of these scores, then the person is
accorded neither a major nor a minor orientation in that
domain.

Principle IV. If the percentile rank of a person's

 

score in a particular cultural determinant occurs in the
array of values ranging from the fiftieth through the
ninety-ninth percentile (inclusively) of a population of
these scores, then the individual is assigned a major
determinant, expressed as a capital letter (F, A or I).

Principle V. If the percentile rank of an individ-

 

ual's score in a given cultural determinant occurs in the
array of values ranging from the twenty-fifth through the
forty-ninth percentile (inclusively) of a population of
these scores, then the individual is accorded a positive

minor determinant, written as a small letter (f(+), a( or

+)

i

(+) '

61

Principle VI. If the percentile rank of an individ-

 

ual's score in a particular cultural determinant occurs in
the array of values ranging from the zero percentile through
the twenty-fourth percentile of a population of these
scores, then the person is assigned neither a major nor a
minor determinant.

Principle VII. If the percentile rank of an individ-

 

ual's score in a given modality of inference occurs in the
array of values ranging from the fiftieth through the
ninety-ninth percentile (inclusively) of a population of
these scores, then the person is accorded a major inferential
mode, written as a capital letter (M, D or R).

Principle VIII. If the percentile rank of a person's

 

score in a particular modality of inference occurs in the
array of values ranging from the twenty-fifth through the
forty-ninth percentile (inclusively) of a population of
these scores, then the individual is assigned a minor
inferential mode, expressed as a small letter (m, d or r).

Principle IX. If the percentile rank of an individ-

 

ual's score in a given modality of inference occurs in the
array of values ranging from the zero through the twenty-
fourth percentile of a population of these scores, then

the person is accorded neither a major nor a minor inferen-
tial mode.

Principle X. Since the inference of appraisal is,

 

by definition, composed of the following three major elements:

(1) magnitude, (2) difference, and (3) relationship, if the

62

percentile ranks of a person's score in all three inference
processes occur in the array of values ranging from the
fiftieth through the ninety-ninth percentile (inclusively)
of a population of these scores, then the individual is
assigned a major appraisal inferential mode, written as a
capital letter (L).

Principle XI. If the percentile rank of an individ-

 

ual's score in a particular deductive inference process
occurs in the array of values ranging from the fiftieth
through the ninety-ninth percentile (inclusively) of a
population of these scores, then the person is accorded a
major deductive mode, written as K .

Thus on the basis of the test scores and through
applying the above principles, one is able to determine
whenever an individual has a major or minor orientation

for each of the twenty-seven cognitive style elements.

Cognitive Style

 

The educational science of cognitive style is some-
what different from those defined and described in the
discipline of psychology. Employing a modified form of

Guttman's methatheory of facets as a model,* cognitive style

 

*The term "facet" was formally proposed by Louis
Guttman in, "An Outline of Some New Methodology for Social
Research," Public Opinion Quarterly, 18 (Winter, 1954-55),
pp. 393-404. Itgis interesting to note that although this
concept had been employed extensively throughout the social
and behavioral sciences, as well as in mathematics, it had
not been standardized prior to Guttman's proposal.

 

63

is expressed as, what mathematicians call, a Cartesian

product of sets. In this context, cognitive style can be
considered somewhat related to Guilford's "dimensions of
intellect."

Where Guilford's model is a Cartesian product of
three sets representing products, contents and operations,
the educational science of cognitive style is defined as
a Cartesian product, G, comprised of three sets, S, E and H:
G - S x E x H, where S indicates the set of elements

defining symbologosics, E represents the set of determantics

 

and H denotes the set of elements comprising inferensics.*
Therefore, G is defined as the universal set of all possible
three-element profiles over the Cartesian product of sets

S, E and H. In functional notation form, this universal

set is expressed as G = O (S, E, H), where O (phi) indicates
a function in the form of a Cartesian product. In set

theory form, the expression becomes:

 

*A Cartesian product is a particular type of space
or set whose elements may be combined into profiles defined
over that space. The "x" sign does not denote any algebraic
or numerical operations but indicates that elements from
each of the three sets, S, E and H, must be combined to
determine the exact reference points of each three-element
profile in space. Thus, a Cartesian product is a display
of elements which, when combined, comprises an individual's
various cognitive style profiles. Refer to Appendix
for a discussion of Set Theory Form for the three Sets S,

E and H.

64
§.
(TX-0y), (TX—qy)r
(tx—qy)’ (Qy'tx);
E.
I, A, F:
(I-a(z))r (A-i(2))' (F-i(z))l

(I-f(z)), (A-f(z)), (F-a(z)).
E .
5(M-d), (D-m), (R-m). (:).(
((M-r), (D-r), (R-d). (

Set S consists of a maximum number of 240 elements,
15 are included in set E, and set H is composed of 11
elements. Since G - S x E x H, the universal set G, the
Cartesian product of sets 8, E and H, includes: 240 x 15 x
11 = 39,600 different possible cognitive style profiles. A
person, however, could at best attain only a maximum number
of: 60 x 4 x 7 = 1,680 three-element profiles or modes of
searching for meaning. The explanation for this limitation
lies in the fact that should an individual possess various
"style" elements, he cannot by definition hold others.
For example, if a person is characterized by a major theo-
retical visual linguistic (Tvl) orientation, he cannot at
the same time be identified by a minor theoretical visual

linguistic (tvl) capability, for the minor symbol is sub-

sumed in the major element. Conversely, should an individual

65

possess a minor orientation, he could not at the same moment
command a major capability.

The cognitive style of an individual is defined as
a set 9, i.e., a Cartesian product composed of sub-sets of
elements drawn from sets S, E and H of G. Therefore, g = H
(s, e, h), or g - {§} x {g} x {h}, where s, e and h
represent sub-sets of elements drawn from those comprising
universal sets S, E and H, respectively.

The cognitive style of an individual is a relative
concept, and depends not only upon the age, educational
level and cultural background of the person involved, but
upon the level and conditions (e.g., symbolic, determantic,
infernsic) of the educational or behavioral task to be
accomplished. When "style" and task are both considered,
we realize that there is no one standard method for achiev-
ing our educational or behavioral goals. In this context,
the derivation of an appropriate "style" for an individual
demands that the diagnostician analyze the client as well
as the substance of the behavioral task to be considered.
Under these circumstances, cognitive style provides a
means of analyzing, interpreting and evaluating behavioral
endeavors in a manner relatively different from those
usually employed.

The educational science of cognitive style, there-
fore, is not a fixed or static entity. It is not rockbound
and sterile, devoid of concepts and possessed of empty

statements. Rather it is a value-free, dynamic, neutral

66

science reflecting the ever-changing status of human growth
and development. Although individuals' cognitive styles
are constantly changing (a person is not stuck with a life
"style"), they can be employed for diagnostic purposes.
This procedure leads to the formulation of strategies for
the matching and augmentation of "styles" to increase the
probability of a client's successful performance in the
myriad of educational and behavioral tasks he faces daily.
Cognitive style not only expresses the idiosyncratic

nature of our clients as persons engaged in meaning-seeking
behavior but allows us, social scientistics, to communicate

this uniqueness precisely and accurately.

CHAPTER II

METHODOLOGY

Overview

Sixty incarcerated inmates who were found to have
drug related problems were invited to participate in the
Drug Abuse Treatment Program. For the purposes of this
experiment the clients were seen for six hours of therapy
followed by the post-test measures. Inmates who volunteered
to participate were randomly assigned to one of two treat-
ment groups. One was the experimental group where the
client was matched, according to cognitive styles, as
closely as possible with a therapist. The second was the
treatment control group where clients were randomly assigned
to therapists. Both groups received six hours of therapy.

Cognitive style therapy was developed by Hill who
utilized it in matching students and teachers. The researcher
expanded this concept to include matching of clients and
therapists to facilitate the therapeutic relationship and
behavior outcome.

Therapy for both the treatment and control groups
was provided by three therapists. Each therapist had his

masters degree and a minimum of one year experience; each

67

..‘lllll]l]ll‘lll{(‘l‘|. \[Ell.[l_l.lf[[iv!l}[l{(ll'.

68

joined the Drug Abuse Treatment Program at approximately
the same time; all were male; and each had similar philo-
sophical approaches to treatment. However, their cognitive
styles were different.

The Fiedler 75 item Relationship instrument was
used to measure the quality of the therapy relationship.

A behavior Rating Form was developed by the researcher
which sought to report actual observable behaviors.

Following treatment, the Behavior Rating Form was
administered to two teachers and two turnkeys all of whom
had daily contact with the client. Note Tables 16 and 17
for interrate reliability between teachers; turnkeys; and
teachers-turnkeys. The client was not aware of these
measures. He was asked, however, to complete the Fiedler
75-item Relationship instrument which provided a dependent
measure of therapy relationship quality.

Analysis of variance was performed to test for
group main effect.

The second portion of this study examined cognitive
style differences between hard drug users (physically
addictive) and soft drug users (non-physically addictive).
Sixty persons who sought treatment for their drug problem
were invited to participate in the study. Thirty were sought
from a drug program which serves primarily "soft-drug" users,
thirty additional were sought from another program which

primarily serves hard drug users. Only persons who

.411! )IIVIIIEEII". IE.

EJIAIELIIIv f".lv

69

habitually used drugs were used in the study. All were
given the Hill Cognitive Style instrument.

A comparative study was done between these two
groups regarding differences in cognitive styles. Demo-
graphic variables of age, sex, amount, type and length of

time using a particular class of drugs were reported.

Population

 

The population for the experimental study were
inmates incarcerated at Ingham County Jail, Mason, Michigan.
Generalization will be made toward this population, however
specific demographic data and sampling procedure will be
carefully delineated, allowing the reader to judge how it
compares with some population to which he might wish to
generalize (Cornfield, Tukey's argument).

Regarding the comparative study, the population
were drug abusing persons from the tri-county area of
Lansing, Michigan, who presented themselves for treatment.
Again generalization is directed toward this population

and Cornfield, Tukey's argument is once again employed.

Sample

The sample for the experimental study have the
following characteristics:

1. Incarcerated male inmates at Ingham County Jail.

2. No psychosis present.

3. Heroin or barbiturate addicted (physically

addicted).

7O

4. Drug Abuse of more than 3 months but less
than 3 years.

5. Limited exposure to previous therapy programs.
(Note: 99% of the drug abusing inmates fall

into the above category.)

TABLE l.—-Demographic Data--Jail Population Type of Drug-

 

Cumulative Cumulative

 

Drug Frequency Percent Number Percent
Heroin 47 78.33 47 78.33
Combination

Hard Drugs 4 6.67 51 85.00
Hard and Soft

Drugs 5 8.33 56 93.33
Heroin and

Cocaine l 1.67 57 95.00
Heroin and

Grass 3 5.00 60 100.00

 

TABLE 2.--Demographic Data-~Jail Population.

 

Cumulative Cumulative

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Frequency Percent No. Cases Percent
Length of
Time on Drugs
6 mo.- 1 5 8.33 5 8.33
l - 2 years 44 73.33 49 81.67
2 - 3 years 11 18.33 60 100.00
Amount of
Money Required
to Support
Drug Habit*
$25-50/day 45 75.00 45 75.00
$50—100/day 15 25.00 60 100.00

 

*Data based on client's self report.

71

TABLE 3.--Demographic Data--Jail Population Age.

 

 

 

Cumulative Cumulative
Age Frequency Percent No. Cases ' Percent
19 13 21.67 13 21.67
20 8 13.33 21 35.00
21 6 10.00 27 45.00
22 7 11.67 34 56.67
23 5 8.33 39 65.00
24 5 8.33 44 73.33
25 2 3.33 46 76.67
36 3 5.00 49 81.67
27 3 5.00 52 86.67
28 3 5.00 55 91.67
29 2 3.33 57 95.00
30 l 1.67 58 96.67
33 1 1.67 59 98.33
34 l 1.67 60 100.00
Mean = 22.83 Standard deviation = 3.72

A sample of 60 subjects was obtained employing the

following procedure:

1. All inmates at the Ingham County Jail were
screened to determine evidence of drug abuse.
This was accomplished through the following
means.

A. Identifying inmates that have been arrested
on drug related charges.

B. Inmates who have been brought in previously
on drug related charges.

C. Clients who have been identified by the
physician as having drug related problems.

D. Clients who indicated they have drug related
problems, and who sought treatment although

they were not arrested for drug offenses.

made in

The

the

72

E. Clients referred to the drug rehabilitation
programthrough other professionals on the
jail rehabilitation staff.

F. Physical observation of this client:

1. Withdrawal symptoms
2. Tracks
3. Overt behavior changes

All clients from the above group were further

screened by the professional staff of the Drug

Abuse Treatment Program where the following

data was obtained:

A. Is there an indication of psychosis? If so
these persons were not included in this study.

B. Type of drug and level of addiction, in—
cluding the extent and amount of drug use.

From the pool of clients who met the above

criteria, 60 clients were randomly selected.

The pool consisted of 120 clients during a

two month period.

determination of the amount of drug use was

following manner:

Client's self report.

Observed physiological symptoms and extent of

withdrawal, evidence of tracks or flashbacks.

Report from the attending physician.

Interview by the professional drug rehabili-

tation staff.

73

5. Reports of known pushers who have had the

inmate as "clientele."

6. Previous records.

Clients for this study were invited to participate
in the drug program and each demonstrated the basic chara-
cteristics as listed above.

A second sample of sixty was drawn from two addi-
tional treatment programs which were based in the com—
munity. The criteria of acceptance was as follows:

1. Drug Abuse of more than three months but

less than three years.

2. Clearly on either physically or non-physically

addictive drugs--not a compensation.

3. Screened by staffs of the respective programs

regarding the type and extent of drug use.

Thirty of the above sixty were randomly selected
from a crisis center program which deals primarily with
persons on non-physically addictive drugs. The other
thirty were randomly drawn from a methadone program which
serves only persons who are addicted to heroin.

Of the total persons coming into the two programs,
thirty from each were randomly selected and invited to
participate. This method was followed until thirty persons

from each program had been received.

i 15“... i

 

 

 

74

 

 

00.000 00 00.0 N 00000 0 I 0
00.00 00 00.00 0 00000 N I 0
00.00 00 00.00 00 new» 0 - .05 0 .s00
00.00 00 00.00 00 000005 0 - 0 ..
00.00 0 00.00 0 000005 0 - 0
00.000 00 00.0 0 0003\000 - 000
00.00 00 00.00 0 0003\000 . 000 000s..

o o . x ,. CP<
00 00 00 00 00 00 0003\000 . 000
00.00 0 00.00 0 0003\000 . 0
00.000 00 00.00 00 0000 00000000500
00.00 00 0.0 0 mnnwn .:.0
00.00 .-0 00.00 .0 0 100 :.
00.00 0 00.00 0 am;
00.00 0 00.00 0 00000

Amanuo uwomv muomu CH0002ucoz

00.000 00 00.00 0 00000 0 - 00000 0
00.00 00 00.00 00 00000 0 . 0000 0
00.00 00 00.00 00 new» 0 . .05 0 0200
00.00 0 00.00 0 mrncoe 0 u 0

0 0 0 0 000005 0 - 0
00.000 00 00.0 0 0005 no 0000
00.00 00 00.00 0 000\0000 - 000 .20000
00.00 00 00.00 00 smex000 . 000 s . .
00.00 0 00.00 0 000\000 . 0
00.000 0 00.00 0 000: 000 0000
oo.om am mm.m0 v pumm co0ums0nECU mmwb
00.00 00 00.00 00 000000

muons cfiouwm
unmoumm quEDZ unwound mocmscwum
m>fiUMHDESU O>flfiwHDEDU

 

.mmsuo co mEHB 0cm DCSOE< .mmzellcofluchdom Dmmuumllmumo 00nmmnm06wont.v m0m<e

75

TABLE 5.--Demographic Data--Street Population Age.

 

Cumulative Cumulative
Age Frequency Percent Number Percent

 

Heroin Group (Mean 21.2)

 

 

 

l6 1 3.33 l 3.33
17 3 10.00 4 13.33
18 3 10.00 7 23.33
19 6 20.00 13 43.33
20 0 0 13 43.33
21 3 10.00 16 53.33
22 4 13.33 20 66.66
23 2 6.67 22 73.33
24 3 10.00 25 83.33
25 2 6.67 27 90.00
26 1 3.33 28 93.33
27 1 3.33 29 96.67
28 0 0 29 96.67
29 l 3.33 30 100.00
Non-Heroin Group (Mean 21.5)

16 0 0 0 0

17 l 3.33 1 3.33
18 3 10.00 4 13.33
19 5 16.67 9 30.00
20 3 10.00 12 40.00
21 5 16.67 17 56.67
22 3 10.00 20 66.67
23 4 13.33 24 80.00
24 1 3.33 25 83.33
25 0 0 25 83.33
26 3 10.00 28 93.33
27 l 3.33 29 96.67
28 1 3.33 30 100.00
29 0 0 30 100.00

 

76

Therapists

 

Selection

 

Three therapists were available who were on the
staff of the Drug Abuse Treatment Program. Each therapist
has a master degree in Counseling, two were doctoral candi—
dates having completed eighty per cent of their work, all
three had had a minimum of one year experience dealing with
drug or drug related problems. The age range was twenty-
eight to thirty-six.

The therapists were told that because of funding
requirements, the program director was establishing methods
and procedures of program evaluation. They were invited to
participate in developing this evaluation package. It was
viewed as a constructive measure designed to facilitate a
more productive drug program. The therapist accepted and
contributed to the evaluation package. The researcher
informed the staff that a portion of the evaluation package
which he was designing, would be used as data for his
thesis. The staff was assured the data would not reflect
their "personal worth" as a therapist but instead was
designed to evaluate methods of facilitating therapy out-
come for the client.

The therapists saw the research as an important
part of their professional responsibility to ask such
questions as, what is being done in the drug program?,

and how can they be more effective?

77

The staff was satisfied that the evaluation pre-
sented no threat to them. They were instructed to operate
normally, providing therapy as they felt most comfortable
doing. The researcher did not inform staff regarding
clients who were in the research study and they were not
aware of the type of instruments used to measure outcome
differences.

It should be noted that on the basis of cognitive
styles, the therapist exhibited enough differences to

facilitate matching.

Subject Assignment

 

Before any client was assigned a treatment group,
he was administered the Hill Cognitive Style Instrument.
The sample at Ingham County Jail, after meeting criteria
cited above, was randomly assigned one of two treatment
groups. The second was the control treatment group where
clients were randomly assigned a therapist. The first was
the experimental treatment group where clients were assigned
to therapists according to similarity of cognitive style
matches. This was accomplished as follows; from a pool of
clients randomly assigned to treatment group one, a client
was selected who had the highest similarity (match) with
counselor one; then a client was selected who had the highest
match with counselor two and next a client was selected who

had the highest match with counselor three. Each block was

78

filled in this fashion. It must be noted that counselor X
may have had a "high" match for client Y although client Y
had a better match with counselor Z, however, client Y
would have to be assigned to counselor X because, as

illustrated below, one cell must be filled before going

 

 

 

 

 

 

to another. Sl + 82 + 83 + S4 + SS"'S3O'
C1 C2 C3
_7 B1 51 S2 53
T1 B2 S4 55 S6
B10 S28 S29 S30
T2

Figure 1.--Research Design--Subject and Block Assignments.

Cell S1 must be filled from the available pool with

the client who matches best with C S is filled with the

l' 2
Client who matches best with C2 although the assigned client
may have a better match with C3 he must be assigned C2 as
the client is the best possible match of all other available
matches for C2. Each cell must be filled in that order.

The sample drawn from the community drug program,
having met the above cited criteria, were placed in one of
two groups depending on type of drug use. Group one was for

persons physically addicted to heroin; group two was for

persons on non-physically addictive drugs. The Hill Cognitive

79

Style Instrument was administers to both groups. (See

appendix for Instruments.)

Materials

 

Various phases of this study required particular

materials which were developed by the researcher.

Pre-Experimental

 

Prior to the experimental, the following operations

were performed:

1.

The involved therapist was given the Hill Cogni-
tive Style Instrument. (See Appendix A.) The
findings were not revealed to the therapist.
Administrative congents were received from the
Community Mental Health Board of Directors,
Ingham County Sheriff's Department and the
Director of the Drug Abuse Treatment Program-
Ingham County Jail.

Cards were prepared for recording demographic
data (see Appendix A), the Fiedler 75-item Rela-
tionship instrument was prepared (Appendix E), and
the Behavior Rating form was developed (Appendix
F and G).

Approval was received from Dr. Hill to use his
instrument and quote his work.

Charts were prepared to identify clients,

counselors and appropriately assigned groups.

80

Experimental Materials

The experimental materials consisted primarily of
the Hill Cognitive Style Instrument which was administered
to each subject. On the basis of these results, cognitive
style matches were experimentally preformed between client
and therapist for those in the experimental group. Those
subjects in the control group were not manipulated employing
the Cognitive Style Map. Regarding the comparative groups,
the Hill Instrument was given to determine what differences
exist between cognitive styles of different drug users. No

experimental manipulation was attempted with this group.

Measures
Two measurements were used to compare treatment
outcomes. The first was Fiedler's (1950, 1953) 75-item
Q-sort. It sought to answer the question: What is the
quality of the therapeutic relationship? The second was
the Behavior Rating Scale developed by the researcher. It
sought to answer the question: What actual behaviors of

the client were observed.

The Fiedler's (1950, 1953) 75-item Q-sort

The sort consists of 25 items aimed at the therapist's
ability to communicate with and understand the patient, 25
items describing the "emotional distance" between therapist
and patient, and 25 items dealing with the area of "status"

as reflected in the therapist's behavior toward the patient.

81

The sortings are correlated against the Fiedler ideal
therapeutic relationship standard. The higher the corre-
lation with the standard, the "better" the relationship
between the patient and therapist.

This instrument has been used extensively in rela-
tionship research since 1950 (Goldstein, et a1., 1966).
Fiedler's original work in 1950, 1957 provides the basic
Reliability data for the instrument. Parloff (1961) as
others before him, provided support to the validity of the
concept "therapeutic relationship" as defined by Fiedler.
(Refer to Chapter I for a review of the Parloff [1961]
study.)

The test was administered by the researcher and
his assistant following six hours of therapy. The client
was given a score sheet where each Q-sort statement was
placed into one of 7 categories ranging from most alike
to most unalike my therapist (Appendix E).

Behavior Rating Form

The Behavior Rating Form was developed by the
researcher after conversations with the educational, reha-
bilitation and drug staff at Ingham County Jail. The
behaviors represent to the above involved persons, sig-
nificant points in the total Rehabilitation effort. The

form examines the client's motivation through observations

82

of actual behavior, his goal setting ability, task comple-
tion competency, the client's ability to close the "say-do"
gap, general behavior, and the client's ability to assume
responsibility for his own actions.

After the instrument was designed, the staff
reviewed the instrument and agreed that it asked questions

important to their program.

Hill Cognitive Spyle

 

The Cognitive Style instrument (Appendix 11) was
administered to clients in the form of a booklet prior to
the eXperiment. Clients were asked to respond to each
statement by underlining either Rarely, Sometimes or Usually.
For each of the 27 elements of the Cognitive Style Map, a
score was derived which was used to determine either a
major, minor or negligible orientation. A score of 9-15
is considered negligible; 16-26 is minor and 27—40 is a
major orientation.

Therapists and clients were matched according to
the percentage of similarity between their cognitive style

elements.

Treatment Procedures

 

Pre-Experimental

 

The following operations were performed prior to

conducting the experiment.

83

Secure administrative consents from Community
Mental Health and Ingham County Sheriff's
Department for conducting the research.

Arrange with Dr. Hill to receive his instru—
ments and methods and permission to utilize his
computer for the maps.

Arrange to get the Fiedler 75-item Q-sort deck.
Prepare statistical cards to record screening
information.

Prepare charts for identifying clients, counse-
lors and appropriate groups.

Give Hill instrument to counselors; a. results

were not reported to the counselor.

Expprimental

 

The following operations were standard operating

procedures for the experiment.

1.

Clients were screened employing the above guide
lines.

All clients interviewed who were found to have
drug problems were invited to participate in
the overall drug program.

Clients were not informed that they were in
research groups.

a. Several clients asked if "research" was

being conducted, and were told

84

that the entire drug program is under
constant evaluation to determine how effec-
tive the program is in meeting inmates needs.
He was told this is standard procedure for
any program receiving Federal monies. It
should be noted that with drug abusing
person, they seem to dislike and distruct
"research." Experience in the program prior
to the experiment found the questions of
research raised frequently. The clients
stated they did not want to be "guinea pigs."
The clients were supplied with the above
answers and no problems were encountered
during the experiment.

Demographic data using the statistical cards

were gathered on all clients.

Each client was given the Hill instrument.

Clients were assigned treatment groups according

to procedures listed under sampling methods

found previously.

Clients received three one hour therapy sessions

per week for two weeks.

The therapist did not see the client's cognitive

style map and he was not aware which clients

were in the experimental or control groups.

(ll . II 1.51 [I

9.

85

Therapist reported to the researcher when the

client had been seen six times.

Post Experiment

 

l.

Fiedler's 75-item Q—sort was given employing

methods described above.

a. The therapist did not see or administer
the instrument.

b. The instrument was administered by the

researcher or his assistant-

Behavior Rating Scale was administered by the
researcher or his assistant to two teachers and
two turnkeys who had had an Opportunity to
observe the clients behavior. Neither teacher
nor turnkey were aware which client was in the
research grOUp. The client was not aware the

measure was being taken.

Control Group

 

The control group received exactly the same pro-

cedures as listed above. The only difference was that

they were not matched according to cognitive styles with

their therapist.

Comparison Group

 

The sample of 30 non-physically addicted and 30

heroin addicted persons received only the Hill instrument.

86

A comparison was made regarding differences in cognitive

styles. Results are reported in Chapter III and IV.

Hypothesis

 

From reviewing the literature the following state-
ments can be made:

Proposition I: Relationship appears to be a most

central and powerful variable to therapy outcome.

Proposition II: All psychotherapists have as their

effective core the interpersonal relationship rather

than the specific methods of treatments.

Proposition III: Therapists will not be able to work

equally well with all clients.

Proposition IV: Counseling is essentially seeking

of knowledge and meaning for the client.

Proposition V: Each individual has his own cognitive

style or his own way of seeking meaning.

PrOposition VI: When students/clients and teachers/

counselors are matched according to cognitive style,

there is substantial improvement in the student's

performance.

The questions then presented for this research are:

1. What is the cognitive style of drug users?

2. What similar factors in the cognitive style map
exists for persons abusing physically addictive

drugs?

87

What similar factors in the cognitive style map
exists for persons abusing non-physically
addictive drugs?

What are the similarities and differences of
cognitive style between the physically addictive
drug user and the non-physically addictive drug
user?

Will the quality of the therapeutic relationship
between therapist and client be improved by
matching cognitive styles as closely as possible?
Will the outcome of therapy be improved if
client and therapist are matched according to
cognitive styles?

Will there be a difference in the quality of

the therapeutic relationship between therapists
and clients who are matched as closely as
possible on cognitive styles and those who are
randomly assigned a therapist.

Will there be a difference in the quality of

the therapeutic relationship between high
quality and low quality cognitive style matches?
Will there be a difference in therapy outcome
between high quality matched clients and
therapist, low quality matched clients and
therapists and a random group of clients and

therapists not matched?

88

The expected answers to the above questions are

presented in the following five hypotheses tested in this

research:

H1:

T

There will be differences in cognitive styles, as
defined by Hill, between individuals abusing
physically addictive drugs (heroin, barbiturates)
and those individuals using non-physically addic-
tive drugs (marijuana).

Following therapy, counselors and clients with
high quality similar cognitive style matches, as
defined by Hill, will have a better quality rela-
tionship as measured by Fiedler's 75—item Q-sort
deck than clients and counselors with low quality
cognitive style matches.

Following therapy, counselors and clients with
high quality similar cognitive style matches, as
defined by Hill, will have a better quality rela-
tionship as measured by Fiedler's 75-item Q-sort
deck than the control group.

Following therapy, counselors and clients with
high quality similar cognitive style matches, as
defined by Hill, will have a better therapy out-
come than clients and counselors with low quality
cognitive style matches.

Following therapy, counselors and clients with
high quality similar cognitive style matches, as
defined by Hill, will have a better therapy out-
come than clients and counselors in the control
group.

Experimental Design

 

his experiment used the "post-test only control

group" design described by Campbell and Stanley (1969).

Figure

R

C

S

B

provides a pictorial representation.

= Random assignment

1 Treatment group matched cognitive styles

2 Control group--no match

1' C2, C3 = Therapist
l — 860 = Subjects
- B = Blocks

1 20

89

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

C1 C2 C3
Bl 81 S2 83
T 32 s4 55 s6
1
B10 S28 S29 S30
R
B11 S31 S32 S33
B12 S34 S35 S36
T
2
B20 S58 559 S60

 

Figure 2--Pictorial Representation of Experimental Design.

90

Analysis of Data

 

Demographic data was collected and displayed de—
scribing each group on the following:

1. Age

2. Sex

3. Type of durg used

4. Amount of drug used

5. Length of time on the drug

6. Prior drug treatment

Relationship study--A three-way analysis of variance
was the major statistical method used for this study.
Table 12 presents the required formulas.

Comparison study--A Chi-square analysis was used
to indicate differences, by element, between cognitive

styles of herion abusers and soft drug users.

CHAPTER III

RESULTS

Treatment Effects

 

The differential effect of the two treatment pro-
cedures on the three measures can be observed in terms of
the resultant means in Tables 6, 7, and 8. Tables 6, 7,
and 8 display separately the mean scores on the three
dependent variables for Experimental and Control groups
by blocks; Tables 9, 10, and 11 display the mean scores
for each dependent variable by counselors. Tables 12, 13,
14, and 15 present a summary of each dependent variable
with the resultant Quasi F and F tests.

Tables 20-45 report the comparative data between
persons physically addicted and persons using non-physically
addictive drugs. A separate section of this chapter will
report this data.

In the experimental study, the means indicate that
treatment one (Experimental group) did better than treat-
ment two (Control group) on all outcome measures. Tables
13, 14, and 15 present the analysis; Table 12 presents
information used to determine the Quasi F test, F tests,

and degrees of freedom.

91

..I‘ [I ‘llll. ‘1' '.I. ill! I .

92

100. M 00

 

 

mxoon n oamtam .pc50m mmocmumMMAp unmoflmecmflma
@5000 Houucou N NE
acoum Hmucmaflummxm u 09 mm.m u we paw 0% cmmz Hamuw>o
amm.m mm.m No.m mm.m mm.m mo.m mv.m oo.m mm.m mv.m mh.m NE
«mn.m nm.m nv.m mw.m mm.m ma.m mm.m om.m hh.m mm.m 00.0 09
new: pamnw 00m 0m 0m 0m 0m mm 0m 0m mm 0m

 

Houucoo pcm Hmucmsflummxm How mamom mcflumm Hoe>mcom

.mRUOHm an mmsouo
wmxcuce co mmnoom cmmzll.n m0m¢9

 

 

 

100. M as
mxoon n oamuam .pcsow mmocmnmmwflp DEMOHMHcmHme
@5000 Honucou N NE

msoum HmECGEAHmmxm n HE oa.v u we can HE new: Hamum>o

«wo.m no.m mm.m mo.v no.w oa.m mw.m hm.m m>.m mn.m mm.v NB
«mw.v mo.w >~.v n¢.v hm.v mv.v on.w mm.v om.v m0.m mm.m as

new: venue 00m 0m 0m 0m 0m mm 0m 0m mm 0m
.mxooam an

mmsouo Houucou paw Hmucmefiummxm How whamwmz mflnmcowumawm co mmnoom :mmzln.0 mqmde

93

A00. M E

 

 

mxooam u oamlam .cc50m mmocmanMHp unm00m0cmflms
dsoum Houucou N NE
@5000 HmucmEHHmmxm n 0% mm.m n we can 09 ans: 00m0m>o
«vm.m ov.m mm.m mo.w om.m nm.~ oo.m om.m m0.m mm.m mo.w me
400.v m0.m mm.m 00.0 00.0 m0.v >0.v m0.v 0m.m ov.v mm.v 09
new: ocmuo 00m 0m 0m 0m 0m mm 0m mm mm 0m

 

.mxoon %Q @5000

Houucoo can HmucmEHmmxm How mamom mafiumm Hofl>mnmm m.um£omme so mmuoom cmmzll.m m0m<e

94

TABLE 9.--Mean Score on Relationship Measure
for Experimental and Control Groups
by Counselor.

 

 

 

C1 C2 C3
Tl 4.98 4.32 4.65
T2 3.90 3.56 3.55
Grand 4.44* 3.94* 4.10*
C , C , C = Counselors T = Experimental
1 2 3 l
T = Control
*No significant differences found.
(p < .01)

TABLE lO.--Mean Score on Teacher's Behavior
Rating Scale for Experimental and
Control Group by Counselor.

 

C C C

 

 

1 2 3
T1 4.24 3.95 4.15
T2 3.62 3.47 3.52
Grand 3.93* 3.71* 3.84*
C ,C , C = Counselors T = Experimental
1 2 3 l
T = Control
*No significant differences found.
(p < .01)

TABLE ll.--Mean Score on Truckey's Behavior
Rating Scale for Experimental and
Control Groups by Counselors.

 

 

 

C1 C2 C3
Tl 3.80 3.63 3.92
T2 3.42 3.27 3.47
Grand 3.61* 3.45* 3.69*
C , C , C = Counselors T = Experimental
1 2 3 l _
T — Control

*No significant differences found.
(p < .01)

95

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

\LTAA l Bum“.
.10., I L
a:
em: o
.0! u .0
m:
0.000,. n 8.. wE ” 0.1 a...
Bus 9.00002 + em:
.0. .02, .0600. .0. om
m, 0..
A0IUWW0IDV.+ bwfimnv enumt + 00: BO: + snow. so
mi 000 00 we 0 m- m m-
. n 0088065000 000
0.00m: + gammzv
m o .0600- .00 o Tom o
O O O + O
N + Nt+ N N N Ev
00:13:18 St”: 9081 Hum; Bum Hum
tiles + Isl N- . 0.. No 00
m0 my; 01 my:
9.0m 0 u AMODMHOEDCV mp
A . my: Ewe .0. 0.6010 .00.V sums .0; .000, .0.
.. ..r + C
m m + m .+ m0 + N Nr N Ame
Amzvm mwoucom

m 0mmco 00w
Eocmmum mo mmmummo

m can .m HmMSO .Eocwmum wo

 

.¢>oz< >83 mnumoflumfiumum
mmoumwo maeumHsonu 00m Nummmmomz mchEMOMII.NH mumme

96

TABLE 13.--Summary of the Relationship Scale Analysis of
Variance Table.

 

 

ifdggigrzgm df Mean Square F* (df)
Grand Mean 103833.600 1 103833.600
Treatment (T) 1440.600 1 1440.600 @ 21.408** 1:15
B (T) 898.467 18 49.915 @ 3.54 (A) 18:36
Counselor (C) 260.800 2 130.400 7.23 (B) 2;2
CXT 36.400 2 18.200 1.06 (C) 2;36
CB (T) 634.133 36 17.615
TOTAL 3270.40 59 55.431

 

*Because the 3d-dependent variables are seen as repeated tests,
a has been portitioned such that a = .01.

. . . . >
**QuaSi-F Significant when F - 8.68.

= F significant when F 3 2.55.

l
\O
\O
O
O
O

F significant when F >

I
U"!
N
O

= F significant when F >

«some»
ll

Significant F.

97

TABLE l4.--Summary of the Teacher's Behavior Rating Scale
Analysis of Variance Table.

 

Reduced Sum

 

of Squares df Mean Square F* (df)
Grand Mean 87669.037 1 87669.037
Treatment (T) 495.937 1 495.938 @ 12.515** 1:11
B (T) 661.108 18 36.728 @ 3.42A 18:36
Counselor (C) 47.775 2 23.888 6.34B 2:2
CXT 7.525 2 3.763 3.27C 2:36
CB (T) 388.367 36 10.788
TOTAL 1600.713 59 27.131

 

*Because the three dependent variables are seen as repeated
tests, a has been portitioned such that a = .01.

u 0 ' ' >
**QuaSi F Significant when F - 9.65.

A = F significant when F 3 2.55.
B = F significant when F 3 2.55

C = F significant when F 3 99.00
@ = Significant F.

98

TABLE 15.--Summary of the Turnkey's Behavior Rating Scale
Analysis of Variance Table.

 

 

Eidggigrizm df Mean Square F* (df)
Grand Mean 77041.667 1 77041.667
Treatment (T) 236.017 1 236.017 @ 11.266** 1:19
B (T) 376.650 18 20.925 1.99A 18:36
Counselor (C) 60.558 2 30.279 2.88B 2:2
CXT 1.908 2 0.954 0.09C 2:36
CB (T) 377.200 36 10.478
TOTAL 1052.333 59 17.836

 

*Because the three dependent variables are seen as repeated
tests, a has been partitioned such that a = .01.

**Quasi F significant when F 3 8.18.

A = F significant when F 3 2.55.
B = F significant when F 3 99.00.
C = F significant when F 3 5.29.
@ = Significant F.

99

Because the three dependent variables are seen as
repeated tests, the alpha level has been partitioned such
that a = .01. A Quasi F was necessary to determine signi—
ficance of treatment main effects. Significance was found
when the Quasi F was equal to or exceded 8.68 for the
Analysis of Variance dealing with the Fiedler relationship
measures; 8.18 for the Turnkey's Behavior Rating Scale; and
9.65 for the Teacher's Behavior Rating Scale.

Therefore, the experimental group did better than
the control group on all measures for treatment main effects.
Specifically, this implied the rejection of the following
null hypothesis:

H03: Following therapy, counselors and clients
with high quality similar cognitive style
matches, as defined by Hill, will not have
a better quality relationship as measured
by Fiedler's 75-item instrument than the
control group.

H05: Following therapy, counselors and clients
with high quality similar cognitive style
matches, as defined by Hill, will not have
a better therapy outcome than clients and
counselors in the control group.

The following alternate hypothesis results:

HA3: Following therapy, counselors and clients
with high quality similar cognitive style
matches, as defined by Hill, will have a
better quality relationship as measured
by Fielder's 75-item instrument than the
control group.

HA5: Following therapy, counselors and clients
with high quality similar cognitive style
matches, as defined by Hill, will have a
better therapy outcome than clients and
counselors in the control group.

100

Block Effect

 

The F test statistic for determining block (row) ef-
fect is significant at or beyond a value of 2.55 for each of
the three dependent variables. On two of the measures (the
Relationship and Teacher Instruments), the tests showed
significant differences between experimental and control
groups. The blocks represent a decreasing similarity of
cognitive style match between counselor and clients.

It must be noted that utilizing the Turnkey Behavior
Rating Scale, the test failed to reject the null hypothesis.
The two remaining dependent variables, however, did reject
the null hypothesis.

Specifically, this implied the rejection of the
following null hypothesis:

H02: Following therapy, counselors and clients

With high quality Similar cognitive style

matches, as defined by Hill, will not have
a better quality relationship as measured

by Fiedler's 75-item instrument than

clients and counselors with low quality
cognitive style matches.

H 4: Following therapy: counselors and clients
with high quality similar cognitive style
matches, as defined by Hill, will not have
a better therapy outcome than clients and
counselors with low quality cognitive
style matches.

The following alternate hypothesis results:

HA2: Following therapy, counselors and clients
with high quality similar cognitive style
matches, as defined by Hill, will have a
better quality relationship as measured
by Fiedler's 75-item instrument than clients
and counselors with low quality cognitive
style matches.

101

Following therapy, counselors and clients
with high quality similar cognitive style
matches, as defined by Hill, will have a
better therapy outcome than clients and
counselors with low quality cognitive style
matches.

A4:

Counselor Effect

 

An F test was done to determine counselor effect
on the treatment groups. In order to be significant, the
F statistic must equal or exceed 99.00 at an a level of .01.
The F statistic on the three dependent variables were found
to be less than 99. Although not in the original hypothesis
to be tested, the above suggests that the treatment main
effects and block effects were not due to counselor differ—

ence .

Interaction Effect

 

An F test was done to determine interaction effect
between counselor and treatment. In order to be significant,
the F statistic must equal or exceed 5.29 at an a level of
.01. On examining each of the dependent variables, the F
test failed to reject the null hypothesis that there was no
interaction effect.

It would appear from the above that the differences
found were not related to either counselor or interaction

of counselor and treatment effect (see Table 16)-

Comparative Study

 

The chi square comparisons between non-physically

addictive drug users and physically addictive drug users

TABLE l6.-Behavior-Relationship Outcome (Raw Score) from High Quality Match to Low Quality Match.

 

Behavior Group

Behavior

Relation-
Ship

%
Match

Counselor

Number

Behavior Behavior Group

Relation—
ship

Counselor

Number

II

II

Match

 

3.8 3.6 3.9
3.6

4.4

4.1

1
l

5.8 4.9 4.7 4.4 4.5
5.6

5.2
5.2

93

3.7

4.1

(‘1

4.0 4.2

4.6 4.1

93

3.9
4.2

3.9
4.0

4.3
3.9

4.9 4.6 4.1

92

3.7

4.0

4.4 4.8 4.2

90

(V

3.9
3.4
3.6

3.9
4.0

3.6

3.9
3.9

4.2

3.6
3.7

4.0 4.2

3.7

4.2

O\

89
88

3.3

4.1

7.0

4.1 3.9
4.3

4.2
4.1

L0

3.9

3.6

4.2

88

3.7

3.9 4.0

3.2
3.2

3.8

3.8 4.0

4.1
4.1
4.0

87

3.4

3.6

3.4
3.1
4.0

3.6
3.6
3.8

3.7
3.6
3.9
4.1
4.1

3.9

85

3.0
3.0
3.7

3.2
3.1

3.9
4.1

84

3.6
3.3

3.8
3.9
3.4

4.1

82

102

3.8
3.2

3.9

3.9

4.4 4.1

4.8

82

3.0

3.1

3.0

2
2

4.2
3.8 4.2
3.6
3.9

4.0

4.5

4.2
4.0 4.3
4.0

81

4.3

81

3.0
3.0

3.0

3.2

3.9
3.9

3.4
3.4

3.9

3.8

81

3.8
3.9

P!

"O

(V)

4.6

4.6

80
80

3.0

(‘4

('3

L!)

.(‘J

P4

'if'

r4

If)

C\

(\J

l

(‘1

("I

2.9
3.1

3.9
2.8
3.1
3.0
2.8
2.9
2.9
3.2

('1

P1

(‘1

3.0
3.0
3.2

P"

4.

(‘1

3.2 3.2
3.4

3.8
3.9

3.1
3.1

3.7
3.9 4.0 4.0

78
78
77

(‘3

1

4.2

3.0
2.8
3.2

3.0 3.1

3.8

3.6

4.0 4.1
3.9
4.3

4.3

3.2

3.7
4.0

4.2

3.1

3.0
2.8
2.9

2

4.0 4.0

4.1

76
75
75

(‘J

3.3

3.1

3.7 3.9 3.7
4.0

3.9 4.1

2.6

(‘J

1

3.7

4.5

3.9

4.0 4.3 3.8

4.3

 

103

are presented in Tables 20-45. It Should be pointed out
that although the group is defined as "users of physically
addictive drugs" the population was herion users.

A summary chart is presented which illustrates each
cognitive style element, Significance and the direction (see
Table 17).

It was found that the heroin and non—heroin differed
on the following elements: theoretical visual linguistic;
theoretical Visual quantitative; qualitative auditory;
qualitative olfactory; qualitative tactile; qualitative
proprioceptive; qualitative code empathic; qualitative code
kinesics; qualitative code synnoetics; associates; indivi—
duality; differences; magnitude and relationships. Qualita-
tive code esthetics and qualitative code proximics are
Significant when the data were pooled according to Tables
31 and 36. In considering differences it is important to
determine whether the element in question is a major one or
not. The data as analyzed looked at three areas: major,
minor and negligible. It was more important to determine
whether the element was either major or minor, therefore,
by considering the categories minor and negiligible as one,
the data demonstrated Significant differences between
physically addictive drug abusers and non-physically addic-
tive drug abusers on the elements qualitative code esthetics
and qualitative code promimics. This is discussed in

Chapter IV.

104

.8. M m

.mumsvm ago so mmocmu000fi© acmofl0flcmflm mmumoHUCHt

 

 

00.05 0v mm.mm «a 00 0H 0v NH 50.05 mm mm.mm 5 M .5m
50.0w 0N mm.mm .mm 00 0H 0v NH 50.0w 0 mm.M5 mm «m .0m
mm.mm mm 50.0w mm 50.0w Va mm.mm 0H 50.05 mm mm.mm 5 42 .mm
50.0m mm mm.m0 mm mm.mm 0H 50.00 0N 50.0w 0 mm.M5 mm A .00
50.0m mm mm.m0 mm 50.00 0m mm.mm 0H 50.0m Ha mm.m0 0H 40 .mm
mm.m m 50.Hm mm 0 0 00.00H 0m mm.mm 0H 50.00 0m «H .mm
mm.mm mm 50.H¢ mm 50.0w 0H mm.mm 0H 50.0m Ha mm.m0 0H m .Hm
00.00H 00 0 0 00.00H 0m 0 0 mm.mm 5 50.05 mm «a .om
00.00 0m 00.00 vm mm.m0 0H 50.0m Ha mm.mm 0H 50.00 «a A9000 .ma
50.Hm Hm mm.mv mm 00.0w NH 00.00 0H 0 0 00.00H 0m «Amova .ma
vm.m0 av 50.Hm 0H 50.05 mm mm.mm 5 mm.mm 0H 50.0w 0H tAmUVO .5H
50.0w 0m mm.mm mm mm.mv ma 50.00 5H mm.mm 0H 50.00 0m AmMUVO .0H
00.05 0v 00.00 ma 00.00 vm 00.0w 0 50.0m 0 mm.M5 mm «AMUVO .ma
mm.m5 vv 50.0w 0H mm.m0 mm 50.0H m 00.00 0m 00.0w 0 A0000 .vH
50.Hv mm mm.mm mm 00.0m 0 00.05 am 50.0w 0 mm.m5 mm ABMUVO .ma
00.0w vm 00.00 0m 50.0w 0 mm.m5 mm 50.0 m mm.m0 mm «Ammuva .NH
00.0w 5m 00.00 mm 50.0m Ha mm.m0 0H mm.m a 50.00 mm «Azmuva .HH
50.00 0v mm.mm 0m 00.00 «N .00.0m 0 50.0H m mm.mm mm «Amvo .oa
mm.ma Ha 50.H0 av 00.0m 0 00.05 am 50.0H m mm.m0 mm A>VO .0
mm.wa Ha 50.Hm 0v 00.00 0 00.00 vm mm.m H 5Q.0m 0m «A900 .0
mm.ma Ha 50.Hm mv 50.0 m mm.mm mm 00.0H m 00.00 5m Amva .5
mm.m0 mm 50.0m mm 00.05 am 00.0m 0 mm.ma v 50.00 0m «A000 .0
00.0w 5m 00.00 mm 50.0m Ha mm.m0 0H mm.m a 50.00 mm «A000 .m
mm.mm om 50.0H 0H 00.00 5m 00.0H m 50.00 5H mm.m¢ ma tAa>VB .v
00.mm am 00.00 mm mm.mm 0H 50.0w 0H 00.0w 0 00.00 «m «AA>VB .m
vm.m5 5v 50.Hm ma mm.mm mm 50.0H m vm.m5 mm 50.0w 0 A0009 .m
50.H0 5m mm.mm mm mm.mv ma 50.00 5H 50.0w va mm.mm 0H Aqmve .H
w m w .m w .m w .m w m w .m
Mona: Hoflmz Hoses H0502 ROCHE H0502
:Houwm afloumm afloummucoz
Hflmn ummuum ucmEmHm

 

.ucmfimam ma MOSHE 0cm Honmz mo wmmucmoumm 0cm mocmsvmumll.5a mqm<a

105

It must be noted that 27 separate chi square analy-
sis were done. Independency between the 27 elements is not
assured. Sixteen of the 27 elements were found to be sig-
nificantly different. We may conclude differences do exist
on the cognitive styles between the two groups.

AS a result of the chi square analysis the follow-
ing null hypothesis is rejected:

H01: There will be no differences in cognitive styles,
as defined by Hill, between individuals abusing
physically addictive drugs and those individuals
using non-physically addictive drugs.

and the alternate hypothesis is accepted:

H There will be differences in cognitive style,

as defined by Hill, between individuals abusing
physically addictive drugs and those individuals
using non-physically addictive drugs.

Al:

Hoyt's Reliability of Behavior
Rating Scales

 

 

Tables 18 and 19 present Hoyt's ANOVA estimate of
internal consistancy reliability. The reliability was found
to be 0.92 with both instruments.

It should be pointed out that because of the close
proximity of the teachers in their working situation and be-
cause of frequent staff meetings where clients were discussed,
independence of observation cannot be assured. They were not
aware which clients were in the treatment groups. There ap-
peared to be lower group mean for the Turnkey's group (3.52)
compared to the group mean for teachers (3.82). Refer to

Table 18 and 19 for summary of group means.

106

TABLE 18.--Hoyt's* Analysis of Variance Estimate of In-
ternal Consistency Reliability for Teacher's
Behavior Ratings.

 

Reduced Sum

 

of Squares df Mean Square
Grand Mean 175338.075 1 175338.075
Subject 3201.425 59 54.261
Raters 0.075 1 0.075
SXR 253.425 59 4.295
Total 3454.925 119 29.033

 

Grand Mean 3.82

Hoyt's ANOVA estimate of internal consistency reliability

= MSSubject _MSSXK = 0 92
MS Subject °

 

*Hoyt, C. Test reliability obtained by Analysis of Vari-
ance. Psychometrika, 1941, 6, 153-160.

TABLE 19.--Hoyt's Analysis of Variance Estimate of Inter-
nal Consistency Reliability for Turnkey's Be-
havior Ratings.

 

Reduced Sum

 

of Squares df Mean Square
Grand Mean 154083.333 1 154083.333
Subject 2104.667 59 35.672
Raters 0.133 1 0.133
SXR 153.867 59 2.608
Total 2258.667 119 18.980

 

Grand Mean = 3.58

Hoyt's ANOVA estimate of internal consistency reliability

= MSSubject -MSSXK

MS Subject

 

= 0.92

*Hoyt, C. Test reliability obtained by Analysis of Vari-
ance. Psychometrika, 1941, 6, 153-160.

1437

 

 

Mn “7 n: nxq.waa 1am.nmL:ncm u .m H m: .w. -4 ) r4.).m 4r
0 am. am. cofi00fl>oo
pumUCTum
00.H mm.a nv.q cmox
0m. 56.H 00H 00H 00M c300
utuoumm
N0.H Mm.mw mm nnOuoc
ULrHHGr7NH~
m w am neurcmmxd wanufism
n~16 ..3.w 1
a (so mud . ; in.»
6 mm.nm 6:.nw - .
A - 1 , urmtnyi team an.,, an
0mmrfl. it .Dwut1)uvi
U ”01 4.33:5
meund 4 >,. . :
H0. 0. . , . : c4 mummu maoumm
5 a a 50 00 mm mu ucmmumm . - .
Icoz mo oomucoouom cfloumzlcoz
0 00.0H 00.0H xocmsvmum
macep
I m Caoumm and
9:.00H ma we N am c300 omU 0 35 080
C . . >8 .
m ucoosmm £3 a L
mmocu 033 Tmoce
mo mwmuumoumm
0>0 6mm
mmouoa a a L
5m. 5w.H mm.m 00.00 53.:m 32:,00 CA mummm :aoumm
dart n. )
A 00 vzmucmommm mom: afloumm
4 NH 5H 5ozwswoum
coflumfl>wo
cmmz manaoflammz uocflz Mona:
UumUcmum . .

 

.AA<VB I UHuMHsmch >noufl054
maxum T>Hufic000 co coflumasmom ummuum :Hv mHm>wq cofluoflpvé cmm3uom

HMOHuOHOTLB ”mucwEmHm
MCOmHummEOU mumsqm «no

II.ON mamdfi

108

 

 

.Ho. v m .pcsom mocmummwflv MCMUHMHcmflm 02
N u Eoommum mo mmmummo
000. u 008000 aro
mm. am. an. 00.0 >60 600
00.0 00.H 00.0 00.0 :60:
00.000 00.000 00.00H 00.000 00.0 0300 son
00.00H 00.0 00.00 50.HN 00.0 nnouod eon
em. 00.H 00.00 00.0 00.00 00.00 00.0 0006:0000
H6000
00.00 00.00 00.00 em.a0 00.0 dzoa Boa anono
00.00H 50.0 50.00 00.00 00.0 mnouod Boa eaonmm
mm. 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.0 adamsvmnm unoz
m 30m
00.00 00.00 00.00 00.00 00.0 c300 eon macaw
00.000 00.0H 00.00 00.0H 00.0 mnouod eon aaoumm
mm. 00.H 00.00 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.0 mormsvmnm .
H 36m
cowUMH>TQ wanflm
cnmvcmum cams Hmuoa (Hammz MOSHE Hoflmz

 

.Aodva m>aumuaudmso

muouflcsm HMOHumHomze

”mucmfimam mamum m>auwcmoo co

Acoflumasmom ummuum :00 mam>mn coauoavwm cwm3umm GOmHHmmEOU mmmsvm H£U|:.HN mqm¢e

A00. A 00 .pcsom TOGMOHchmflm
H u Eowmmum mo mmmumoo

550.5 I 008900 00o

 

109

 

00. 00. 00.0 >00 000
50.0 00.0 00.0 0062
00.000 00.000 00.000 00.0 0360 Boa
00.000 50.00 00.00 00.0 mnono0 sue
me. 50.0 00.00 00.00 00.00 00.0 socdsvdna
08005
00.00 50.50 00.00 00.0 :300 Boa dsono
00.000 00.00 00.00 00.0 nnouoa Boa daonmr
00. 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.00 00.0 moemswmnm Icoz
0 300
00.00 05.05 00.00 00.0 dzoo eon
00.000 00.00 50.00 00.0 mnono0 Goa dsouo
00. 00.0 00.00 00.00 00.00 00.0 5060:0000 aaonmm
H 300
coflu00>mn n
UHMUCMflw C002 HMfiOB MOSHE H0. ME

 

.AA>VB I oaumwsmcflq HMSMH> HMOHumHomaaII.NN mqmde

110

 

 

100. M 00 .00000 000000000000
N u Eowmmum mo mwmnmma
000.00 0 000500 0:0
00.0 00. 00. 00.0 >00 0pm
00.0 Nv.H 00.0 00.0 cam:
00.000 00.000 00.000 00.000 00.0 c300 900
00.000 50.0 50.00 50.0N 00.0 mmouofi Hum
00. 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.00 00.00 00.0 mocmswmum
00009
00.00 00.0 00.00 00.00 00.0 0300 sum 00000
00.000 00.0 50.00 00.00 00.0 mmouo¢ Bum :00000
00. 50.0 00.0m 00.0 00.50 oo.mH 00.0 xocmsvmum Icoz
N 30m
00.00 00.000 00.50 05.00 00.0 c300 90m @9000
00.00H 00.00 50.05 00.00 00.0 mmouod 900 C00000
00. mo.N 00.00 00.0 00.0N 00.0 00.0 hocmswmum .
a 30m
coHuMH>ma manflm
cumvcmum cams Hmuoa Iflammz 00:02 00mm:

 

.AO>VB m>0umufiucmso H05m0> HMUHuwHOTQBII.mN mqmde

111

 

 

A00. 00 .00000 00000000000 00000000000
0 N 8000000 00 0000000
500.00 0 000000 000
00. 00. 00.0 >00 000
00.0 00.0 00.0 0002
00.000 00.000 00.000 00.0 0300 000
00.000 00.00 00.00 00.0 000000 000
00. 00.0 00.00 00.00 00.00 00.0 000000000
00000
00.00 00.0 00.00 00.0 0300 000 00000
00.000 00.0 50.00 00.0 mmouo< Bum 000000
00. 00.0 00.00 00.0 00.00 00.0 000000000 I002
0 300
00.00 50.00 00.00 00.0 0300 000
00.000 50.00 00.00 00.0 000000 000 00000
50. 50.0 00.00 00.00 00.00 00.0 000000000 000000
0 300
000000300 n
00000000 :00: 00009 Hoc0z 00.02

 

.0000 I 0000005< 03000000090II.VN mqm<e

112

 

 

000. A 00 .00000 00000000000 00000000000
m n 8000000 00 0000000
vmm.ma u 00000m 000
00.0 mm. 00. 00.0 >00 00m
oo.0 00.0 00.0 oo.o 000:
00.000 oo.000 00.000 00.000 00.0 0300 900
oo.000 00.0 00.00 mm.mm oo.o 000000 900
mm. mv.0 00.00 00.0 oo.vm oo.mm oo.o 000050000
00009
oq.om 00.0 00.00 mm.vn 00.0 00300 900 0:000
00.000 00.0 mm.m0 00.0m oo.o 000000 900 :00000
mm. m0.0 oo.om 00.0 00.0 oo.m~ oo.o 000000000 I002
m 300
oo.om 00.000 mm.mm 00.mm 00.0 0300 000 05000
00.000 mm.m 00.00 oo.om 00.0 000000 000 000000
mm. mn.0 oo.om 00.0 oo.om oo.m oo.o 000050000 .
0 300
000000>0o 00000
0000:00m 0002 00009 IHHm0z 00:02 00002

 

.0000 I 000000000 03000000000uu.0~ 00000

113

Aao. A mv

.wcsom

mmocmHmMMHU unmoflwflcmflm oz

Eowmmum mo mmmummo

 

 

man. u mumswm Hnu
mm. om. oo.o >mo cum
om.a mq.a 00.0 cmmz
oo.ooa oo.ooa 00.00H oo.o czoo sum
00.00H mm.m no.am oo.o mmouoa Bum
mm. mo.a oo.oo oo.m oo.mm 00.0 xocmswmum
Hmpoa
oo.om oo.oo mo.mv oo.o axon Bum msouo
00.00H oo.oa oo.om oo.o mmouo< Bum afloumm
Hm. OH.H oo.om oo.m oo.- oo.o mocmswwnm uaoz
m 30m
oo.om oo.o¢ Hm.om 00.0 czoo Bum msouw
00.00H no.m mm.mm oo.o mmouo« Bum aaonmm
mm. no.H oo.om oo.~ oo.m~ oo.o mocmswmum .
H 30m
GOHuMH>mQ a m n
Unawamum m 2 Hmuoa Hocflz Ho.m2

 

.Amvo u mm>nsm m>HumuHHmsoun.m~ mqm<a

[tfl {- .l‘l‘l I if! [ill (Ill ‘Iifl I. ) , ...I\'I‘ lu‘ll‘llillll‘l‘ I III. ‘: lll..l 1 I III. ll :-

114

 

 

Aao. A mv .GQDOM mmocmummmav unmoHMHcmHm
H u Eowmmum mo mmmummo
mwo.¢ u mumswm qu
mm. om. oo.o >mo cum
¢H.H mm.H oo.o cmmz
oo.ooa oo.ooa oo.ooa oo.o CBOQ Bum
oo.ooa hm.HH oo.mm oo.o mmouofi Bum
mm. NH.H oo.om 00.5 oo.mm oo.o mocmsvmum
Hmuoe
oo.om mm.¢a ~>.¢m oo.o :3oa Bum msouo
00.00H mm.m nm.mm oo.o mmouom Bum afloumm
ma. mo.a oo.om oo.a oo.mm oo.o wocmsvmnm ucoz
m 30m
oo.om H5.mm mm.m¢ oo.o c300 Bum msoum
oo.ooa oo.om oo.om oo.o mmonod Bum caoumm
av. om.H oo.om 00.0 oo.vm 00.0 wocmswmum .
a 30m
coflpmfl>ma cam m 0 Hon n
wumvcwpm z a u 9 H2 Ho.m2

 

.ABVO I macauome m>flumuflam50Iu.nm mamaa

Aao. v my .mmocwummmHU ucmoHMHcmHm 02
a u Eowmmum mo mmmnmmo

Hm¢.a n mumsvm Hnu

115

 

 

om. om. oo.o >mo gum
mm.a qm.H 00.0 cmmz
oo.ooa oo.ooa 00.00H oo.o caoo Bum
oo.ooa mm.m~ hm.mn 00.0 mmouom Bum
mv. mm.H 00.00 oo.¢a oo.ov oo.o mocmsvmum
Hmuoa
oo.om Hp.mm mm.qm oo.o c3oo Bum msouo
oo.ooa no.wa mm.mm oo.o mmouo< Bum afloumm
mm. 5H.H oo.om oo.m oo.mm oo.o wocmsvmum ucoz
m 30m
oo.om mm.vm mm.mv oo.o c3oo Bum msouu
oo.ooH oo.om 00.05 oo.o mmouo¢ Bum caoumm
5v. om.H oo.om oo.m oo.am oo.o mocmswmum .
a 30m
coaumw>ma saw a n
@Hmccmum 2 Hmuoa no as Ho.mz

 

.A>vo . Hmsmfl> w>fiumuflamsouu.m~ mummy

 

116

 

Aao. my .mcsOw mmogmummmaw ucmoHMHcmHm
Eocwmum mo mmmummo
Hmv.¢~ u mumsvm ago
00.0 ow. ov. oo.o >mo cum
oo.a ma.a Hm.a oo.o cam:
oo.ooa oo.ooa oo.ooa 00.00H oo.o GSOQ 90m
oo.ooa oo.m mm.mv hm.am oo.o mmono< Bum
om. mm.a oo.oo oo.m oo.wm oo.Hm oo.o mocmswmnm
Hmpos
oo.om oo.o m~.ma mm.om 00.0 :300 Bum msouo
oo.ooa oo.o nm.ma mm.mm oo.o mm0H04 Bum afloumm
mm. pH.H oo.om oo.o oo.m oo.mm oo.o mocmsvmum Icoz
m 30m
oo.om oo.ooa nn.om mm.ma oo.o czon Bum msouw
oo.ooa oo.oa 00.05 oo.om oo.o mmono< Bum caoumm
mm. om.H oo.om oo.m oo.a~ oo.o oo.o mocmnvmum .
a 30m
cofluMfl>mo manflm
cumccmum cmwz Hmuoa Iflamoz HOCHS Henmz

 

.Amvo I m>Hummoowumoum w>flumuHHMDOII.mN mqmda

117

 

 

Ado. A mv .UCSOM mmocmHmMMHc unmoHMflcmHm
Eovmwum mo mmmumwa
nav.oa u mumswm Hsu
mm. mv. oo.o >mo cum
mo.H om.a oo.o :mmz
oo.ooa oo.ooa oo.ooH oo.o c300 Bum
oo.ooa oo.om oo.om oo.o mmouofl Bum
ov. om.a oo.om oo.ma oo.mv oo.o mocmswmum
Hmuoa
oo.om mm.m Nw.om oo.o c300 Bum msonw
oo.ooa mm.m mm.mm oo.o mmonofi Bum afloumm
ma. mo.H oo.om oo.H oo.mm oo.o mocmsvmum Icoz
N 30m
oo.om nm.am mm.mm oo.o CSOQ Bum msouw
oo.ooa hm.mm mm.mw oo.o mmouom Bum caoumm
mv. nm.a oo.om oo.HH oo.ma oo.o wocmsvmum .
a 30m
coauMH>wo cam: Hmuoa Hocaz Honmz
Unmocmum . .

 

.AZmovo u uaumnquEm mcoo m>flumuflamsouu.om mam¢e

118

 

 

“do. A m0 .Umaoom manflmflamm: cam HOCHE cm£3 UGDOM mocmofimwcmflm
Eowmmnm mo mmmumma
mm¢.¢ u mumswm ago
00.0 vv. on. 00.0 >ma Gum
00.H NN.H 0m.a 00.0 cme
00.00H 00.00H 00.00H 00.00H 00.0 :300 Bum
00.00H no.a 00.mH mm.m0 00.0 mmouod Bum
m¢. mH.H 00.00 oo.a oo.m oo.om 00.0 mocmswmum
Hmuoe
00.0m 00.0 NN.~N 00.0m 00.0 HH309 Bum msono
00.00H 00.0 50.0 mm.mm 00.0 mmouofi Bum afloumm
mm. 00.H 00.0m 00.0 00.~ 00.0w 00.0 wocmswmum Icoz
m 30m
00.0w 00.00H 00.50 00.00 00.0 :3oa Bum msonw
00.00H mm.m mm.m~ mm.mn 00.0 mmonofi Bum caoumm
mm. 0m.a 00.0m 00.H 00.5 00.~m 00.0 wocmswmum .
H 30m
coauMH>mQ wanflm
Unmocmum cmmz Hmuoa Iflammz HOGHZ Hommz

 

.Ammovo n ofiumsumm

mcou m>HuMUflHMDOII.Hm wands

 

119

 

Aao. v m0 .mmocmummwflw unmoHMHcmHm oz
H u Eowmmum mo mmmummo
«mo. u mumswm ago
am. am. 00.0 >m0 Uum
>¢.H Hm.H 00.0 cmmz
00.00H 00.00H 00.00H 00.0 c300 Bum
00.00H mm.mm no.an 00.0 mmouom Bum
mv. mm.H 00.00 oo.na oo.m¢ 00.0 muamswmnm
Hmuoe
oo.om 00.nv ma.am oo.o c300 sum macaw
00.00H 50.0m mm.mn 00.0 mmono< Bum afloumm
m0. >~.H 00.0m 00.0 00.~m 00.0 mocmskum scoz
N 30m
00.0m vm.mm 00.0v 00.0 c300 Bum msouw
00.00H 00.0m 00.0w 00.0 mmouo¢ Bum caoumm
“0. 0m.H 00.0m 00.0 00.Hm 00.0 mocmswwum .
a 30m
coauMH>mo cmm n
cuwccmum Z Hmuoa HOGHZ uo.mz

 

.ABmUVO I Danum 0600 m>flumuflHMDOII.Nm mqm<9

120

 

 

HHO. v my .mmucmumMMHU UCMUHMHcmHm oz
m u Eocwmum mo mmmumma
vmv. u wumsum Hnu
00. H0. mm. 00.0 >ma Uum
mm.H 00.H mm.H 00.0 cmmz
00.00H 00.00H 00.00H 00.00H 00.0 c300 sum
00.00H 00.0 50.05 mm.mH 00.0 mmouud sum
50. 50.H 00.00 00.m 00.00 00.HH 00.0 mucmswmum
Hmuoe
oo.om mm.mm oo.om mm.¢m 00.0 c300 sum msouu
00.00H mm.m 50.05 00.0w 00.0 mmouum Bum aflonmm
0s. mm.H oo.om oo.H oo.mm 00.0 00.0 mucmnwmmm Icoz
m 30m
00.00 50.00 00.00 00.00 00.0 c300 Bum msouu
00.00H 50.0 50.05 50.0H 00.0 mmouud Bum caoumm
00. 00.H 00.0m 00.m 00.mm 00.0 00.0 mucmsvmum .
H 30m
GOHuMH>wQ mHQHm
unmvcmum cams Hmuoe IHHmmz ROCHE Hunmz

 

. AmUvO I. UHCOHHUWHE QUOU m>HUMHrHHMSOIIoMM man—”QR.

121

 

 

HHo. A m0 .chom mucmummmsv unmUHMHcmHm
Eocmmnm mo mmmummo
Hov.5H n mumsum snu
00.0 00. N0. 00.0 >mo cum
00.H 0N.H m5.H 00.0 cams
00.00H 00.00H 00.00H 00.00H 00.0 GSOQ Bum
00.00H 50.H 50.Hm 50.00 00.0 mmouofl Bum
mm. mm.H 00.00 00.H 00.Hm 00.0N 00.0 mucwswmum
Hmuoe
oo.om 00.0 Hm.mm 5m.ms 00.0 axon sum msouu
00.00H 00.0 50.0N mm.05 00.0 mmouod Bum afloumm
ms. 5N.H oo.om oo.o 00.0 oo.mm 00.0 mucmsuwum Icoz
N 30m
00.00 00.00H 0H.¢5 mv.HN 00.0 G309 Bum macaw
00.00H mm.m 50.05 00.0N 00.0 mmouum Bum :aonmm
0v. mm.H 00.0m 00.H 00.mN 00.0 00.0 wucmskum .
H 30m
GOHuMH>wQ anHm
oumccmum cams Hmuoa IHHmmz HOGHE Mamas

 

.Axuvo I musmwch mcou m>HumuHHmsonu.¢m mqm0s

122

 

 

AHO. vsmv .wcsom mocmuHMHcmHm oz
Eocwmuh mo mmmnmwo
mms.H u mumsum Hnu
00.0 H0. H0. 00.0 >ua cum
00.H 0¢.H vm.H 00.0 cmmz
00.00H 00.00H 00.00H 00.00H 00.0 c300 Bum
00.00H 50.H 50.0m 50.H0 00.0 mmouom Bum
mm. 00.H 00.00 00.H 00.NN 00.5m 00.0 wocmsvmum
Hmuoe
00.00 00.0 00.00 00.00 00.0 c300 Bum msouw
00.00H 00.0 mm.mm 50.00 00.0 mmouud Bum csoumm
00. mm.H 00.0m 00.0 00.0H 00.0N 00.0 mucmswmnh Icoz
N 30m
00.00 00.00H 00.00 00.00 00.0 2300 Hum msouu
00.00H mm.m 00.00 50.00 00.0 mmouua Bum caoumm
50. 5v.H 00.0m 00.H 00.NH 00.5H 00.0 mocwsvmum .
H 30m
:oHums>ma mHnHm
vumccmum :mmz Hmuoa IHHmmz Hons: Hohmz

 

.Hmmqu I mosucmummcwm $000 m>Hum¢HHmsall.mm mqmde

123

.00Hoom mHQHmHHmm: 0cm HOGHE 0H 0:500 mucmusmscmsm

 

 

N n Eo0mmum mo mmmsmmo
Hmm.v u mumswm snu
00.0 cm. ms. 00.0 >mm cum
oo.H mv.H 50.H oo.o cams
00.00H oo.OOH 00.00H 00.00H oo.o c300 sum
00.00H 50.H mm.m0 oo.mm 00.0 mmouua sum
Hm. 50.H 00.00 oo.H oo.mm oo.Hm 00.0 mocmswmum
Hmuos
oo.om 00.0 HH.~¢ no.00 00.0 c300 sum msomu
00.00H oo.o mm.mm 50.0¢ oo.o mmouum sum :Hommm
Hm. mm.H oo.om 00.0 00.0H oo.¢H oo.o mucmuummm Icoz
m 30m
oo.om 00.00H mm.5m mm.mm oo.o axon sum msouu
oo.OOH mm.m mm.m5 mm.mm oo.o mmouud sum amoumm
ms. om.H oo.om oo.H oo.mm 00.5 oo.o mocmsvmum .
H 30m
cospmH>mQ mHnHm
0Hm0cmum 0002 Hmuoa IHHmmz Hons: Honmz

 

.Hmovo I mOHEHxOHm 0000 0>HumuHHMDOII.0m mqmde

124

 

 

“Ho. A m0 .ucsom mmocmmmMMHu ucmoHMHcmHm
H u Eo000um mo m00um0o
ooo.mH n mumswm Hnu
oo.o m0. 00.0 >00 cum
oo.H m0.H 00.0 cmmz
00.00H 00.00H 00.00H oo.o c300 sum
00.00H oo.o~ 00.00 00.0 mmouum sum
ov. om.H 00.00 oo.~H oo.ms 00.0 mocmsvmmm
Hmuos
oo.om oo.o om.m0 oo.o c300 sum msonu
oo.OOH oo.o oo.o0H oo.o mmouum sum :Houmm
oo.o oo.H oo.om 00.0 oo.om 00.0 mucmsvmum Icoz
m 30m
oo.om 00.00H om.5m 00.0 2300 sum msouu
00.00H oo.ov 00.00 oo.o mmouum sum cHoumm
om. o¢.H oo.om oo.NH oo.mH 00.0 muamswmum .
H 30m
00H00H>0Q 000 n
UHMUCMUm 2 HMUOH. Hogflz .HO . m2

 

.Amovo

I 00Hu0occmm 0000 0>HumuHHmsOII.5m mqmda

 

125

 

HHO. v m0 .00000 m0ucu0me0 0:00HMHcmHm oz
E0000um mo m00um00
05¢.H u mumswm Hnu
00.0 H0. H0. 00.0 >00 0pm
00.H 50.H 00.H 00.0 000:
00.00H 00.00H 00.00H 00.00H 00.0 0300 B00
00.00H 50.H 50.00 50.H0 00.0 mmouum 80m
mm. 00.H 00.00 00.H 00.0m 00.0N 00.0 >000000Hm
H0008
00.00 00.0 00.50 oo.0m oo.o c300 sum msouu
00.00H 00.0 mm.mm 50.00 00.0 mmouud 90m :Hon0m
H0. m0.H 00.0m 00.0 00.0H 00.0H 00.0 muc0sv0um Icoz
N 30m
00.00 00.00H 00.Nm 00.00 00.0 0300 B00 msomw
00.00H mm.m 00.00 50.0m 00.0 mmouufi Bum cHou0m
mm. 50.H oo.om 00.H oo.mH oo.HH 00.0 mucmswmnm .
H 30m
00H00H>00 0H0Hm
0H00c0um C002 H0009 IHHm0z HOGHS H0002

 

.HBUVO I H000Huo0mnoua 0000 0>Hu0UHH000II.0m mqmda

126

 

 

HHO. A m0 .00000 000000000H0 0C00H0HcmHm
N u Eo0000m 00 0000000
mNH.0m u 000000 H00
00.0 N0. 00.0 00.0 >00 00m
00.H NN.H 00.N 00.0 000:
00.00H 00.00H 00.00H 00.00H 00.0 0300 900
00.00H mm.0 mm.mm mm.0m 00.0 000000 900
N0. 05.H 00.00 00.0 00.Nm 00.0N 00.0 >000000um
H0009
oo.om oo.o mm.HN 00.00H oo.o axon sum msonu
00.00H 00.0 mm.mN 50.05 00.0 00000< B00 0H000m
mv. 0N.H 00.0m 00.0 00.5 00.0N 00.0 >000000Hm Icoz
N 30m
00.00 00.00H mH.05 00.0 00.0 0300 B00 @0000
00.00H 50.0H mm.mm 00.0 00.0 000000 900 qaou0m
0m. 5H.N 00.0m 00.0 00.0N 00.0 00.0 >000000um .
H 30m
00H00H>00 0H0Hm
00000000 0002 H0008 IHHm0z HOGHE Hofl02

 

.0 I 0000H00000II.mm mqm¢a

127

 

 

AHo. v m0 .mmoa0000000 0cmo000cmHm oz
8000000 00 0000000
500.0 N 000000 H00
00.0 H0. H0. 00.0 >00 000
00.H 00.H 00.H 00.0 000:
00.00H 00.00H 00.00H 00.00H 00.0 0300 900
00.00H mm.0 mm.mm mm.0m 00.0 000000 900
m0. om.H oo.00 oo.m oo.om oo.mm 00.0 wucmswmum
H0009
00.00 00.0 00.00 0N.vm 00.0 0300 900 00000
00.00H 00.0 50.0m mm.m0 00.0 000004 900 0H0000
mv. 5m.H 00.0m 00.0 00.HH 00.0H 00.0 000000000 I002
N 300
00.00 00.00H 00.00 H5.mv 00.0 0300 900 00000
00.00H 50.0H 00.0m mm.mm 00.0 000000 900 0Ho000
05. m0.H oo.om oo.m oo.m 00.0H 00.0 muamsvmum .
H 300
00H00H>00 0H0H0
00000000 0002 H0009 IHH00z 000H2 0on0:

 

.0 I 0H0000II.0¢ 0000s

128

 

 

HH0. 00 .00000 00000000000 00000000000
8000000 00 0000000
ooo.~H n 000900 Hnu
00.0 m0. oo.o >00 000
00.N 00.H 00.0 :00:
00.00H 00.00H 00.00H 00.0 c300 sum
00.00H 50.0H mm.mm oo.o mmo0u< sum
mm. 0H.H oo.00 oo.OH oo.om oo.o 00:0:0000
Hmuos
oo.om 00.00H 00.00 00.0 czoo sum mso0u
00.00H mm.mm 50.00 00.0 mmo0u0 sum 2000mm
m0. mm.H oo.om oo.OH oo.om 00.0 00:050000 Icoz
m 300
oo.om 00.0 00.00 00.0 asoo sum 0:000
00.00H 00.0 00.00H 00.0 mmo0u< sum cao0mm
00.0 00.H oo.om oo.o oo.om oo.o 000050000 .
H 300
000000>00 000 0 0 0 0
00000000 2 H 0 9 00 HS 00.02

 

I >00H000H>000HII.H0 00009

129

A00. A 00

.000000 000000H000 000 00008 00 00000 00000000000 00000000000

8000000 00 0000000

000.0 u 000000 000

 

 

00.0 00. 00. oo.o >00 000
00.0 0m.0 00.0 00.0 0002
oo.ooa 00.000 oo.oo0 oo.o 0300 000
oo.oo0 00.0 00.00 mm.00 00.0 000000 sum
00. mm.0 00.00 00.0 00.00 oo.mm oo.o 000000000
0000s
00.00 00.0 00.00 00.00 00.0 0300 sum m0000
oo.ooa 00.0 00.00 mm.mm oo.o 000000 sum 000000
00. 0m.a oo.om 00.0 00.00 00.00 oo.o 000000000 I002
m 300
00.00 00.000 00.00 00.00 00.0 0300 sum m0000
oo.oo0 mm.m mm.m0 mm.mm 00.0 000000 sum 000000
mm. 00.0 oo.om 00.0 00.00 00.00 oo.o 000000000 .
0 300
000000>00 00000
000000um 0002 H0009 :0H00z 00002 00n02

 

.D I 008000MMHQII.N¢ mam¢8

130

 

 

A00. v 00 .00000 00000000000 00000000000 oz
0 n 8000000 00 0000000
000. u 000000 000
00. 00. 00.0 >00 000
00.0 «0.0 00.0 0002
00.000 00.000 00.000 00.0 0300 sum
00.000 00.00 00.00 00.0 000000 sum
00. 00.0 00.00 00.00 00.00 00.0 000000000
0000s
00.00 00.00 00.00 00.0 0300 sum 0:000
00.000 00.00 00.00 00.0 000000 sum 000000
00. 00.0 oo.om 00.0 00.NN 00.0 000000000 1002
m 300
00.00 00.00 «0.00 00.0 0300 sum m0000
00.000 00.00 00.00 00.0 000000 sum 000000
00. 00.0 00.00 00.00 00.00 00.0 000000000 .
0 300
000000>00
00000000 0002 00000 00002 00002

 

000000m00un.mv 0000s

131

 

 

200. A 0V .00000 00000000000 00000000000
N n 8000000 00 0000000
000.0 u 000000 00u
00.0 00. 00. 00.0 >00 000
00.0 00.0 om.0 00.0 0002
00.000 00.000 00.000 00.000 00.0 0300 900
oo.oo0 00.0 00.00 mm.mm 00.0 000000 000
mm. mm.0 00.00 00.0 oo.0m oo.mm oo.o 000000000
00009
00.00 00.0 00.00 00.00 00.0 0300 sum 00000
00.000 00.0 00.00 mm.mm 00.0 000000 900 000000
m0. 00.0 oo.om oo.o oo.mm 00.5 00.0 K000000000 I002
m 300
oo.om 00.000 00.0m nm.mm 00.0 0300 900 00000
00.000 mm.m oo.m0 mm.mm 00.0 000000 900 000000
hm. om.0 oo.om 00.0 oo.m0 00.00 oo.o 000000000 .
0 300
000000>00 000
00000000 0002 00008 I0000z 00002 00002

 

.3

000000002I|.00 00009

132

Aao.

A

mv .UCSOm mmocmumMMfln pamoHMHcmHm

H

Eonmmum mo mmmumwa

hmh.m u mumswm Hno

 

 

5v. mv. oo.o >mo wum
Hm.H mm.a oo.o cam:
oo.ooa oo.ooa 00.00H oo.o c309 Bum
oo.ooa mm.mv no.mm oo.o mmouom 80m
om. mw.a oo.om oo.mm oo.vm oo.o moamswmnm
Hmuoe
oo.om nm.om H>.vm 00.0 :300 Bum msouw
00.00H hm.m~ mm.m> oo.o mmouofi Bum cHoumm
nm.a oo.om oo.m 00.NN oo.o mucmsvmum Icoz
m 30m
oo.om m~.mm mm.mm oo.o c30o Bum msouw
oo.ooa oo.om oo.o¢ oo.o mmouofl Bum :Honmm
om. om.a oo.om oo.mH oo.~H oo.o mocmsvmum .
H 30%
cofiumw>ma cam m o H CH n
cumccmum 2 a p B o .2 Mo.mz

 

.m I mmflanOHumemll.mv mqmde

133

Status of Research Hypotheses

 

As a result of the analysis, the null hypotheses

were rejected thus supporting the following alternative

hypothesis:

H

Al:

A2:

A3:

A4:

A5:

There will be differences in cognitive styles,
as defined by Hill, between individuals
abusing physically addictive drugs and those
individuals using non-physically addictive
drugs.

Following therapy, counselors and clients
with high quality similar cognitive style
matches, as defined by Hill, will have a
better quality relationship as measured by
Fiedler's 75-item instrument than clients
and counselors with low quality cognitive
style matches.

Following therapy, counselors and clients
with high quality similar cognitive style
matches, as defined by Hill, will have a
better quality relationship as measured by
Fiedler's 75-item instrument than the
control group.

Following therapy, counselors and clients
with high quality similar cognitive style
matches, as defined by Hill, will have a
better therapy outcome than clients and
counselors with low quality cognitive style
matches.

Following therapy, counselors and clients
with high quality similar cognitive style
matches, as defined by Hill, will have a
better therapy outcome than clients and
counselors in the control group.

CHAPTER IV

DISCUSSION

Overview

This experiment examined several major questions:
(1) Are there differences in cognitive styles between
"hard" and "soft" drug users? (2) Is the quality of the
therapeutic relationship enhanced by matching, as closely
as possible, client and counselor according to their cog-
nitive styles?

To seek these answers, two separate samples of
sixty clients each were selected. The first sample was
selected from an incarcerated population residing at the
Ingham County, Michigan jail. This sample comprised the
experimental group used in the matching-relationship
portion of the research. The second sample, being selected
from individuals residing in the tri-county area of Lansing,
Michigan who presented themselves voluntarily for treatment,
comprised the comparative group which was used to respond

to the first question above.

134

135

Conclusions and Implications

 

Relationship Study

 

Sixty inmates who were found to have drug related
problems were invited to participate in the Drug Treatment
Program. Thirty of the individuals were randomly assigned
to the experimental treatment group; the remaining thirty
being assigned to the treatment group. Clients in the
Experimental group were assigned counselors according to
the similarity of cognitive styles. Six hours of coun-
seling was provided, followed by the post-test measures.

Clients in the control group were randomly assigned
to one of three counselors. Likewise they received six
hours of counseling followed by the post-test measures.

As a result of the above experiment (refer to
Chapter III for the data), one may conclude that the
quality of the therapeutic relationship between therapist
and client does improve when their cognitive styles are
matched as closely as possible. Further, Table 16 suggests
the higher the quality of match between client and therapist,
the better the outcome. When one defines counseling as
essentially a means of enhansing a client's ability to
derive meaning and knowledge from life, which is also Hill's
definition of a teacher, then these results are not surpris-

ing. Hill and his associates have repeatedly demonstrated

136

the desirability of matching teacher and student as a means
of improving student performance as well as teacher effec-
tiveness. These data suggest the same is true for the
client-counselor. This research, as well as others like
Zussman (1971) and Hoogasian (1971), has again demonstrated
the deasibility of cognitive style matching.

Additional implications are that therapy outcome
does seem to improve as a result of matching clients and
counselors. From the review of the literature in Chapter
I, it was found that a number of variables can be used to
match client and counselor with a resulting improvement in
the therapy relationship. Cognitive style matching appears
to be yet another variable which can be employed to improve
the therapy relationship. In addition to improved therapy
relationship, the behavior of the client was seen to improve
which is supportive of the findings of researchers like
Wegan (1970), Strong and Schmidt (1970), Edwards and Edgerly
(1970) and Heller and Goldstein (1961). Thus a higher qual-
ity match will result in a more favorable therapeutic rela-
tionship as well as improved behavior outcome than lower
quality matches.

Another interesting aspect of this research is in
relation to Fessinger's theory of Cognitive Dissonance.
Fessinger (1957) states that the existence of dissonance,

being psychologically uncomfortable, will motivate the

137

person to try to reduce the dissonance and achieve conso-
nance. Perhaps the dynamics which are occurring in the
Therapist-client relationship are those of an active attempt
by both parties to reduce dissonance. There is a greater
probability of dissonance resolution if the cognitive styles
of the two parties are similar. The notion is presented
that as a result of dissimilar cognitive styles, a dissonant
situation is created resulting in increased distance between
client and counselor. Because this dissonance is psycho-
logically uncomfortable, both seek ways of ameliorating the
situation. The relationship is therefore more difficult to
establish, trust more difficult to built, and the results
are poorer outcomes in terms of observed client behavior.
Conversely, where the styles of cognition (Fessinger defines
cognition as any knowledge, opinion or belief about environ-
ment, about oneself, or about one's behavior) are similar in
that both parties perceive reality from a similar point or
loci of points of view, dissonance is minimized. As a re-
sult anxiety centered around the counseling situation is
more easily controlled; resulting in consonance, improved
therapy relationship, and improved behavior outcome for the
client. This suggests that a client who has been matched
with his counselor may be motived to remain in the relation-
ship as dissonance is minimized in the interaction between
the two individuals. Dissonance may also motivate the client

to leave a treatment program.

138

Because of the ambivalent state of many drug users,
one may encounter a set of circumstances which may create a
"positive" dissonance, thus directing the client toward
treatment. Conversely another set of Opposing circumstances
may set up a "counter-dissonance" situation which outweighs
the clients "positive dissonance" motivation for entering
the program, thus he leaves. If the client is met in the
program with a counselor who reduces the dissonance in the
relationship, he may be able to exert sufficient influence
on the client to reinforce the "positive dissonance" which
motivated the client to seek treatment. At the same time
the counselor would be dealing with the "counter dissonance"
which may otherwise motivate the client to leave treatment.
The balance of the scales may be swung in favor of the
client remaining in the program if matching were done. Ad-
ditional investigation is required to further develop these
notions.

In conclusion it appears the prOpositions listed in
Chapter II are supported by this research. Briefly
stated they are: that relationship appears to be a most
central and powerful variable to therapy outcome; that all
psychotherapists have as their effective core the inter-
personal relationship rather than the specific methods of
treatment; that therapists will not be able to work equally

well with all clients; that counseling is essentially

139

seeking of knowledge and meaning for the client; that each
individual has his own cognitive style or his own way of
seeking meaning; that when students/clients and teachers/
counselors are matched according to cognitive style, there
is substantial improvement in the student's performance.

One can further state that following therapy, coun-
selors and clients with high quality similar cognitive
style matches do have a better quality relationship than
clients and counselors with low quality cognitive style
matches; that following therapy, counselors and clients
with high quality similar cognitive style matches do have
a better quality relationship than a control group; that
following therapy, counselors and clients with high quality
similar cognitive style matches do have a better therapy
outcome than clients and counselors with low quality cog-
nitive style matches; and that following therapy, counselors
and clients with high quality similar cognitive style
matches do have a better therapy outcome than clients and
counselors in the control group.

This portion of the research suggests that if one
desires to deve10p a more effective treatment delivery
system for drug abusers, serious consideration should be
given to the notion of matching clients and counselors
both as a means of improving outcome, but also as a method

of holding clients in treatment programs.

140

As the data later in this chapter indicate, there
are a number of elements on the cognitive style map which
suggests similarity between different types of drug abusers.
There appears to be a marked similarity between heroin
users cognitive styles. As a result, drug program directors
could utilize this similarity by providing prOperly trained
ex-addict counselors at the entry point of a program. Pre-
sumably the ex-addict's cognitive style is already similar
to the prospective client, thus one would expect the rela-
tionship to develop rapidly. "Positive dissonance" could
be reinforced hOpefully resulting in a better "holding"
power for the program and a greater probability of chang-

ing the client's behavior.

Limitations

 

Because a jail population was used for the experi-
ment, several cautions must be presented. As a result of
incarceration, the client's observable behavioral reposi-
tory is somewhat limited. When designing the Behavior Rat-
ing Instrument, it was apparent the teachers and turnkeys
were suggesting those limited behaviors required for an indi-
vidual to make a satisfactory adjustment to the jail. As
the client's selection of behavior was limited, it is natural
to center counseling around those limited behaviors which

represent "appropriate" adjustment by the client to a jail

141

setting. For example, the counselor was not able to deal
with specific drug taking behavior as this behavior is con-
trolled (by the jail environment) regardless of the therapy
employed. The desired behaviors, then, were such things as
reporting to class on time, doing homework, interested in
counseling, behaving in class, lack of fighting in the cell.
Should an individual fight or cause disturbance, he could
receive solitary confinement, therefore, he was less likely
to fight.

The position taken in this paper is that because of
the limited behavioral Opportunities and because of the con-
trols placed on the client, most of the counseling was
centered around those very specific behaviors required in
the jail. Where there was a good match between client and
counselor, the client appeared more willing to do those
things required of him by the counselor. Through this
positive relationship, perhaps the client gained self-
confidence through his interaction with the counselor and
was therefore willing to try new behaviors i.e., going to
school. It should be noted that factors and/or conditions
which exist on the outside would preclude the clients from
attempting certain new behaviors, however, these conditions
are controlled in the jail resulting in a less hostile en-

vironment for the client to attempt new behaviors.

142

It is not known whether this positive relationship
and resulting behavior will continue over time when the
client is released from jail. It is possible the positive
behavior resulted from the client's desire to do "anything"
rather than remain confined to his cell. Also some clients
may feel that participation in the program may result in
reduced sentence or probation.

Although the above are factors which are difficult
to control, this experiment has demonstrated the possibility
of matching counselor and client cognitive styles with the
resulting improvement in the therapy relationship and improve-

ment of appropriate behaviors.

Comparative Study

 

A sample of sixty persons were randomly selected from
persons volunteering for drug treatment in a local drug
treatment program. Thirty were heroin users and thirty were
non-heroin users. (Reader is referred to Chapter II for a
more complete description.) The cognitive style instrument
was administered to both groups.

The results indicated differences between the two
groups on various elements. The following is a discussion
of each element on the cognitive style map in relation to the
two groups.

Regarding the element Theoretical Auditory Linguis-

tic T(AL), in the non-heroin street pOpulation it was found

143

that 53.33% of the population were considered "Major" in
this element; 46.67% were considered "Minor" or "negligible."
For the heroin-street sample, 56.67% were major and 43.33%
minor. The heroin-jail sample, 38.33% major and 61.67% mi—
nor. Chi square analysis suggest no difference between the
street heroin-nonheroin samples for this element. It is in-
teresting to note a slightly higher percentage of the jail
heroin sample falling into the minor catagory. Overall an-
alysis of the full street sample and the jail sample did

not find differences on this element. These data suggest
that approximately half of the drug abusers derive meaning
from the sound of a word or graphic symbol; the remaining do
not utilize T(AL) as their primary source of deriving mean-
ing and knowledge.

Theoretical Auditory Quantitative (T(AQ) was found
to be minor in all groups of drug abusers tested both from
the jail and street sample. The non-heroin street sample
16.67% major and 83.33% minor; the heroin jail sample con-
tained 21.67% major and 78.34% minor for the element T(AQ).
This implies that drug abusers, either heroin or non-heroin
do not derive, as a major emphasis, meaning or knowledge
from the sound of a number or a mathematical symbol. It
should be noted that this finding was constant across all
groups. The Chi square analysis failed to reject the null

hypothesis for this element.

144

Theoretical Visual Linguistic T(VL) was found to be
significantly different between the heroin versus non-heroin
street population. Eighty percent of the non-heroin street
sample were major while twenty percent were minor for this
element. The street heroin group contained 46.67% majors
and 53.33% minors for T(VL). This suggests that for a gen-
eral street population the majority of "soft" drug users
rely on the written word or graphic symbol as a major modal-
ity for deriving meaning. This is not surprising in View
of the fact that most "soft" drug abusers in this sample
were college students or "higher class" educationally speak-
ing, These persons learned‘that in order to be successful
in school it is necessary to read from books in order to
derive meaning. Our educational system tells us that in
order to be successful in school, one must be able to de-
rive meaning (learn) from textbooks. The general educational
socioeconomic level of the heroin sample suggests an indi-
vidual who has not been as successful in school. There-
fore this person has not deve10ped T(VL) as a way of deriv-
ing knowledge. For this individual the educational system
has not responded to his needs nor has he responded to the
needs of the educational system.

The heroin jail sample, however, was found to be
65% majors and 35% minors for this element. It is interest-

ing to note the emphasis in the jail program is education

145

through classes in adult basis education, general educational
development exam preparation, high school completion, or
college preparatory. Further, there is more small group and/
or individual emphasis. Perhaps as a result of this positive
emphasis and experience in education, the clients are "learn-
ing" how to derive meaning utilizing reading or skills re-
quired in T(VL). This may account for why the jail heroin
group contains a larger number of "major" than the street
Heroin group. Since cognitive styles can change, perhaps
this is what these data reflect. Possibly this can be seen
as a positive reflection of the program. However, this must
be confirmed in later research.

These data found a significant difference between
non-heroin and heroin street samples. These data also found
differences between the heroin-jail and heroin-street pOpu-
lations. The above suggests possible reasons for these
differences.

Theoretical Visual Quantitative T(VQ) element re-
sults found 43.33% of the non-heroin street sample being
majors and 56.67% were minors. The heroin-street sample,
however, found only 10% majors and 90.00% minors for the
T(VQ) element. The Chi square analysis found significant
differences between these two groups. The heroin jail
population was found to be similar to the heroin street

population in that 16.67% were majors and 83.33% were

146

minors. These data suggest that the heroin user (both jail
and street) do not derive meaning and knowledge through the
written number or mathematical symbol. Approximately half
the street non-heroin user, however, does seem to derive
meaning through T(VQ). The heroin user definitely tends to
be minor for this element.

An overall review of the theoretical elements finds
the heroin user minor in both the Theoretical Quantitative
elements, and the non-heroin street sample minor in only one
i.e., T(AQ). Neither the written nor the sound of numbers
or mathematical symbols provide meaning for the heroin user.
Also for the street heroin sample, apparently they do not
utilize T(VL) which would assist their success in school.
This implies that from a treatment point-of-view, the pro-
gram should not expect to deal with the heroin user in ab-
stract numerical terms. They should not be expected to
immediately succeed in a typical class room situation. In-
stead the system should be adjusted such that the client is
given an Opportunity to develop these other elements as pro—
ductive ways of deriving meaning and knowledge.

This data suggest that by utilizing the strong ele-
ments i.e., Auditory Linquistic, the client will possibly be
better able to respond. For example, straight drug educa-
tion i.e., reading books, pamphlets may not be a productive

way Of "getting-to-the-clients." Because his strength rest

147

in his ability to derive meaning through hearing the Spoken
word rather than reading, auditory methods should be em-
ployed as tools which may have an impact on the client. As
expressed in the vernacular, you will be coming out Of the
same "bag" as the client. One would be communicating by
utilizing a modality which is meaningful to that client.
This could justify rap sessions Often seen as a part of
drug programs.

The non-heroin addict seems to derive meaning from
the written word, therefore, this can be seen as an addi—
tional tool for the counselor to work with in attempting to
assist the client in his search for meaning and knowledge in
life.

Future research will have to determine whether the
elements which are not major in an individual's cognitive
style represents a possible direction Of emphasis for treat-
ment. For example, will the client's behavior improve if
the number of major elements of his cognitive style can be
expanded such that the client has increased avenues to
travel in his search for meaning?

The next series of elements in the cognitive style
map are the qualitative symbols which derive their meanings
from: (1) sensory stimuli; (2) humanly constructed formal-
isms (codes Or games); and (3) the programmatic effects of
phenomena which convey an impression of a definite series

Of images, events, or Operations.

148

The first sensory qualitative symbol is Qualitative
Auditory [Q(A)]. The non-heroin street sample contained
96.67% majors and 3.33% minors on this element. The heroin-
street sample contained 63.33% major and 36.67% minor. The
Chi square analysis found significant differences between
these two samples. The jail heroin sample was similar to
the street heroin group in that 55.00% were major and 45.00%
were minors. The results suggest that non-heroin drug
abusers perceive meaning from non-verbal sounds, i.e., music.

Although the majority of heroin abusers derive mean-
ing from Q(A), a substantial number do not use this element.
Future research will have to determine why fewer heroin
users as a group seem to utilize this element when compared
tO non-heroin users.

The Qualitative Olfactory [Q(O)] symbol for the non-
heroin street sample contained 86.67% major, l3.33% minor;
the heroin street sample was 30.00% major, and 70.00% minor;
the heroin jail sample contained 36.67% major and 63.33%
minor for this element. The Chi square analysis found sig-
nificant differences between the heroin and non-heroin
groups. The majority of the non-heroin users were majors
while the majority of the heroin users were minor. These
data suggest that the non-heroin drug abuser derives mean-
ing from odors, smells or aromas, however, the heroin user
does not seem to derive as much meaning through the olfac-

tories. Future research will have to determine whether

149

this is related to a physiological difference as a result of
damage done to the (nares) from inhaling heroin. Since
there is the absence of a major in Q(O), this reiterates

the position that a large number of drug abusers have a
deficit of sensory awareness.

The Qualitative Savory [Q(S)] symbol for the non-
heroin street sample was found to contain 90% major and
10% minor; the heroin-street sample contained 93.33% major
and 6.67% minor; the heroin jail sample being 81.67% major
and 18.33% minor. The Chi square analysis found no signifi-
cant differences between these groups. These data suggest
that both groups derive meaning through tasts.

The Qualitative Tactile [Q(T)] symbol for the non-
heroin street sample contained 96.67% major and 3.33% minor;
the heroin sample contained 80.00% major and 20.00% minor;
the heroin jail sample contained 81.67% major and 18.33%
minor for this element. The Chi square analysis found
significant differences between the non-heroin and heroin
samples. The non-heroin sample tended to utilize Q(T) more
frequently as a major than did the heroin users. These
data suggest the non-heroin user gains meaning through the
sense of touch. It is interesting to note that from ob-
servations made during the past years, a large number of
"soft" drug users seem to employ drugs for reasons such as

religious feelings, mind expanding, expansion of visual,

150

Olfactory and tactile sensory expansion, whereas heroin

users do not seem to want these kinds of experiences. For
example Often a person on "soft" drugs may "groove" on be-
ing touched or rubbed during the drug experience whereas

the heroin user during his high does not appear to be seek-
ing that type of experience. The "soft" user seeks contact
with others while the heroin user tends to be alone in his
experience. These are generalizations and observations which
must be researched later.

The Qualitative Visual [Q(V)] symbol for the non-
heroin street sample contained 83.33% major and 16.67% minor;
the heroin sample was 70.00% major, 30% minor and for the
jail heroin sample 81.67% major and 18.33% minor for this
element. The Chi square analysis did not find significant
differences between these groups. All groups were majors in
this element suggesting drug users possesses the ability to
derive meaning from what he sees, ie.e. strapes.

The last element in this series of sensory stimuli
is Qualitative Proprioceptive [Q(P)]. The Chi square an-
alysis found significant differences between the heroin and
non-heroin drug abuser. The non-heroin street sample con-
tained 83.33% majors and 16.67% minors; the street heroin
sample contained 20.00% majors and 80.00% minors; the
heroin jail sample was 33.33% major and 66.67% minors.

These data suggest the non-heroin drug abuser derives major

151

meaning through Q(P) whereas the heroin group does not.

The non-heroin abuser seems to have the ability to combine
or coordinate input from muscular functions into a specific
response or Operation which is monitored by sensory imput,
e.g., as in running to and catching a baseball or typing
from written material. Apparently the heroin user does not
have the ability to sense or predict consequences in the
way soft drug users can. From clinical observations, it
appears the heroin user has fewer ways to derive knowledge
and meaning from life. The "soft" drug user, as a group,
appear tO have a larger number of major elements in their
cognitive styles.

All of the above data suggest the non-heroin abuser
does in fact have a larger (repository) of material of cog-
nitive style elements which he can draw upon in his seeking
of meaning.

The following series of elements are those dealing
with codes or games. The first qualitative symbolic code is
Qualitative Code Empathetic [Q(CEP)]. The non-heroin street
sample contained 96.67% majors and 3.33% minors; the heroin
sample contained 63.33% majors and 36.67% minors; the jail
heroin sample contained 55.00% majors and 45.00% minors.
The Chi square analysis reveals significant differences
between the heroin and non-heroin drug abusers. The non-

heroin abuser seems to have the ability to put himself into

152

another's place, i.e., he is sensitive to other’s feelings.
A significant number of heroin users do not have the ability
to place himself in another's position. These data do not
suggest why these differences should exist, however, from
experience it appears the heroin user is more of an indi-
vidual (this is confirmed later in this paper) whereas the
"soft" drug user is more interested in peer group rela-
tions. It is postulated that as a result, the heroin user
is not as concerned for others as the non-heroin. Again
this must be researched separately.

The implications of the above suggest to workers in
drug programs that when working with heroin users, one may
not expect "empathic" type of therapy to be as meaningful
as it would perhaps to non-heroin drug abusers. One may
question whether the "Rogerian" type of treatment would be
as effective with heroin users. It must be noted that some
heroin users do have majors in this element. Perhaps this
is suggesting a "weakness" in the heroin user, therefore,
therapy should be centered around develOping his ability to
relate to significant others. As previously stated, heroin
users have difficulty in communicating with significant
(Others. These data seem to support this notion.

Qualitative Code Esthetic [Q(CES)] element found
93.33% of the street non-heroin population falling in the
major category; 6.67% were in the minor catagory. The

heroin users sample consisted of 73.33% major and 26.67%

153

in the minor category. The jail population heroin user was
found to contain 60% in the major area and 40% in the minor
area. These data were not found to suggest significant dif—
ferences between the heroin and non-heroin groups if one
considered the elements to contain three levels, (i.e., major,
minor and negligible) however, when one considers that minor
and negligible are essentially the same group and combine

the two, significance is found. Thus in the chi square
analysis minor and negligible scores were pooled resulting

in significant differences between groups.

All groups tended to be major, however, the non-
heroin group had a larger percentage of persons in the major
category than either the street heroin or jail heroin popu-
lation. Thus heroin users do derive meaning through the
ability to enjoy the beauty of an Object or an idea. The
non-heroin user group contained a larger percent of indi-
viduals who do derive meaning through Q[CES]. This is ex-
pected as a significant number of the soft users use LSD or
other hallucinogens. They want the psychodelic experience
whereas heroin users are not after this type of experience.

Originally this writer expected the non-heroin group
to be major for this element and the heroin group to be
minor. Thus the data was surprising in that a larger per-
centage of heroin users do derive meaning from esthetic

things. In retrospect, when considering heroin users this

154

writer has worked with, the majority enjoyed flashy, color-
ful clothing, posters and decorations for their rooms.

As for counseling, these data suggest the heroin
user has considerable strength in the area of esthetics
than some persons may have originally considered. As a
result, the counselor could focus on this strength area in
terms Of assisting the client in "turning on to life" in
non-drug terms. Through increased emphasis on improving
the client's environment so it is more attractive, visually
as well as physically, this possibly could aid in the over-
all rehabilitation of the heroin user. Q(CES) also is the
ability to enjoy an idea. This should be remembered by
the counselor in working with the heroin user. He can
respond to "temporal" as well as physical stimuli.

NO significant differences were found between the
heroin and non-heroin groups on the Qualitative Code Ethic
[Q(CET)]. 73.33% of the non-heroin group were major; 26.67%
were minor; 70% of the heroin group were major; 70% of the
heroin group were major and 30% were minor. For the jail
heroin populations the figures were 58.33% major and 41.67%
minor.

' An interesting point to consider regarding this ele-
ment is one may have predicted that because drug users oper-
ate outside of the law, they may not be committed to a set

ethics or principles. These data suggest that the majority

155

Of drug users (heroin and non-heroin groups) are committed
to specific values or duties. The question remains, how-
ever, are they committed to values and duties as interpreted
by the "middle class society" or do the drug abusers have a
different set Of values and duties that they are committed
to. With regard to rehabilitation, the notions that drug
abusers are committed to specific values and duties suggests
the client may have strengths which before may have been as-
sumed to be missing from his behavioral repository.

NO significant differences were found between the
groups on Qualitative Code Histrionic [Q(CH)] which is the
ability to deliberately stage behavior to produce a desired
effect. In the non-heroin group 20.00% were major; 80.00%
minor; the heroin group were 16.67% major, 83.33% minor;
the heroin jail population were 26.67% major and 73.33%
minor.

The majority of all groups tested were found to be
minor in this area. This suggests drug users do not derive
meaning from the ability to deliberately stage behavior to
produce the desired result. These results are quite sur-
prising when one considers how much manipulative behavior
is Observed in a drug treatment program.

Significant differences were found in Qualitative
Code Kinesics between the two groups. The non—heroin group

tended to be major in this area (73.33%) while the heroin

156

group tended to be minor (80.00%). The heroin jail popula-
tion were also minor (75%).

These data suggest that soft drug users derive mean—
ing from the ability to communicate through bodily movements.
This would be in keeping with this pOpulation's apparent in-
terest in acid rock. One would expect the heroin group to
derive meaning in this same fashion, however, the data sug-
gest otherwise. Perhaps one reason for these differences
center around the drug of choice. The non-heroin group
tended to be individuals on "uppers" while heroin is a
"downer." It is possible as a result of the "down" or seda-
tive effect of the heroin, this group presently do not de-
rive meaning through this method. These data raise the
question as tO whether the heroin user has always been the
way he is (from a cognitive style point of View) or has his
style changed as a result of the drug? Also did his cogni-
tive style suggest his drug of choice?

NO significant differences were found for the ele-
ment Qualitative Code Kinestheitcs Q(CKH). All groups were
major with the non-heroin group at 66.67%; the heroin group
at 56.67% and the jail group at 53.33%. These data suggest
drug abusers tend to derive meaning through the willingness
and interest in acquiring motor skill abilities.

Regarding the rehabilitation of the client, these

data suggest the client has an interest in develOping motor

157

skills which may be taught as a meaningful Option to drug
behavior. Possibly the client can "turn on" to sports and
athletic events instead of drugs. Further, these data sug-
gest the importance of an apprOpriate recreational component
in a complete treatment program.

Significant differences were found between the non-
heroin and heroin group for the element Qualitative Code
Prosimics [Q(CP)]. This was true when the minor and negli-
gible categories were pooled. As previously discussed, the
major research question is whether the element is major or
not.

46.67% of the non-heroin street group were major;
53.33% were minor; 23.33% of the street heroin group were
major; 76.67% were minor; 31.67% of the jail heroin group
were major and 68.34% minor.

These data suggest that approximately half the non-
heroin users derive meaning in the ability to judge appro-
priate physical and social distance between oneself and
another as defined by the other person, e.g., being able to
recognize if you may put your arm around that girl or call
the boss by his first name. The heroin group data suggest
that 76.67% are not able to measure appropriate social dis-
tance. From observations of the two populations these data
might be expected. The soft drug users tend to be more

"socially skilled" and more accustomed to judging a wider

158

variety of social situations. This does not suggest the
heroin users are not able to measure social distance, in-
stead the magnitude or variety of social situations may be
more limited. The data seem to support other clinical ob-
servations including the notion that heroin users have an
inability to form meaningful interpersonal relationships or
to communicate effectively. Therapy should be centered
around increasing the client's social articulation regarding
his relationships and communicating formations.

Significant differences were found between the groups
for the element Qualitative Code Synnoetics [Q(CS)]. Both
groups of drug abusers were major for this element, however,
100% Of the non-heroin users were major while only 60% Of the
heroin group were majors, and 51.67% of jail heroin popula-
tion were minor. These data are surprising when one consid-
ers that qualitative code synnoetics represents one's knowl-
edge Of one's abilities, i.e., being able to establish
realistic goals for oneself. Clinical observations suggest
drug clients generally are not able to establish realistic
goals, however, these data suggest otherwise. It is inter-
esting that 100% Of the non-heroin (soft drug users) were
major in this element. Soft drug users perhaps "feel" or
"believe" their drug taking behaviors are realistic goals
for them. Again the data do not speak to the issue of "ap-

propriate" goals, only realistic goals for that individual.

159

What may be realistic goals for one group (i.e., taking
drugs) may not be considered realistic for another pOpula-
tion. The other interesting point is perhaps that soft-
drug users "plan" to take drugs and establish "drugs" and
the effects thereof as a goal for themselves whereas the
heroin group "evolve" into drugs not as much as a matter
Of choice as it is chance. These opinions must be further
researched.

Another consideration is that drug clients in fact
are able to establish goals for themselves, thus in treat-
ment one must utilize this element as a strength.

The element Qualitative Code Transactional [Q(CT)]
was not found to differ significantly between the test groups.
46.67% Of the non-heroin group were majors; 53.33% minors;
the heroin group contained 36.67% majors; 63.33% minors; the
heroin jail group contained 40.00% majors and 60.00% minors.
Q(CT) is the ability to establish with others a positive
communication system which influences their actions or goals.

It is interesting to note that the data for Q(CT)
and Q(CP) are very similar. This suggests that emphasis
should be placed on assisting the clients in increasing
their ability to judge the apprOpriate physical and social
distance between oneself and another (i.e., Q(CP) as well as
increasing the clients ability to establish a positive commu-

nication system with others.

160

The next three cognitive style elements are the
Cultural Determinants of the meanings of symbols.

Significant differences were found between the test
groups on the element Associates (-A-). 76.67 percent of
the non-heroin group are majors, while 23.33 percent were
minors for this category. 100 percent of the heroin (both
street and jail groups) were minor.

The implication of these data is that soft drug
users tend to derive meaning from his relationship and in-
teraction with his peers while the heroin group does not
receive meaning in this manner. Clinical observations tend
to support this notion. Most drug abusers are social in
nature, enjoying group dynamics while the heroin users do
not appear to be as group oriented. Further, the heroin
user appears to require the group as a means of securing his
drugs but not necessarily as a means of psychological sup-
port. On the other hand, the soft drug abuser appears to
enjoy the group as a means of psychological support.

It was extremely significant that in all samples of
heroin abusers tested, none derived meaning through their
peer group whereas over three quarters of the soft drug
users did derive meaning from the associate peer relation-
ship.

As a result of these data one must pose the follow-
ing questions: Is it appropriate for drug treatment and re-

habilitation programs to utilize the group therapy technique

161

as its primary mode for providing services for heroin abusers?
DO these data suggest that because the heroin abuser previ—
ously has not derived meaning from his associate or peer
group that this is a point Of weakness within the individual
client and therefore, considerable effort should be placed
in group therapy centered around the idea of resocialization,
increasing intercommunication skills, and assisting the
client in develOping apprOpriate social interaction skills?
These data appear to be in conflict with the widely held con-
cept that all heroin abusers are essentially group oriented
and as a result of this orientation, fall into heroin abuse
because Of this group dependency. These data raise serious
questions with that hypothesis and suggest that considerable
research is required to evaluate this Opinion. With regard
to the soft drug abuser, the data suggest that although
group therapy may be meaningful to these individuals, per-
haps emphasis should be placed on the decision-making process
so that the individual is able to make his own decision
based upon input from the group, but not a decision which is
dictated by the group.

There were no significant differences found in the
Family (F) element between the two groups. The non heroin
(soft drug user) group consisted of 63.33 percent in the
major category and 36.67 percent in the minor category. For

the street heroin population, 53.33 percent were in the major

162

category and 46.67 percent were in the minor category. The
heroin jail population consisted of 41.67 percent in the
major category and 58.33 percent in the minor category.

These data suggest that the non-heroin abuser de-
rives meaning from his family relationship. Additionally,
the heroin abuser, both the street population and jail
population, are approximately split in the category suggest-
ing that a large number of heroin abusers do in fact derive
considerable meaning from their family or surrogate family
relationship.

Regarding the implications for rehabilitation, these
data suggest tht drug users generally do derive meaning from
family relationships and experiences, thus the family should
be involved in the entire rehabilitation dynamic if we are
to be truly successful in resocializing and reintegrating
the client back into the community.

It appears that this is a strength within drug abus-
ers which perhaps has not been used in the past as extensively
as it should have been. As there were no sufficient differ-
ences between groups, these assumptions appear to hold for
the majority of drug abusers. Thus, in designing a truly
comprehensive treatment and rehabilitation program, it is
necessary to involve the family in the overall treatment
process. This could include family counseling with the

client.

163

For the element Individual—I-, significant differen-
ces were found between the groups. 66.67 percent of the non-
heroin street group were in the major category while 33.33
percent were minor. The street heroin population contained
100 percent in the major category. The jail population of
heroin abusers contained 91.67 percent in the major category
and 8.33 percent in the minor category. These data suggest
that the majority of all drug abusers are major in the indi-
vidual category, but interestingly enough, a much larger
percentage of heroin abusers are major.

Heroin abusers derive meaning from individual inter-
action with others but not group interaction. This suggests
that the person has innate knowledge that his way is best,
along with an ability and willingness to direct his own be-
havior accordingly. It further indicates independence in
decision making. Thus it appears that the heroin abuser has
an ability and a willingness to direct his behavior either
toward or away from drug abuse. It is interesting to note,
from a clinical point of view, that the majority of indi-
viduals in programs will verbalize the fact that they regret
having used heroin, but when challenged they admit they en-
joy using heroin and if at all possible, they would like to
continue doing so. One third of the non-heroin group did
not derive meaning from the cognitive style element Indi—

vidual.

164

There are several implications for treatment. First,
a number of persons assume heroin abusers do not possess
sufficient internal strength to direct their own behavior.
Many assume the heroin user abuses drugs to "go along with
the group." These data refute the notion and further suggest
the individual has substantial internal strength which can
be utilized in directing his behavior in another direction.
In treatment, more emphasis should be placed on individual
"behavior contracts" with the client instead of all group
contracts. One should not assume that group experience alone
be sufficient and that individual work be nonproductive for
heroin users.

On the cognitive style element Difference-D-, sig-
nificant differences were found if the negligible and minor
categories are combined. Again, the important issue is
whether or not the individual is major in an area. As a
result Of pooling these categories, it was found that 63.33
percent of the non-heroin street users were major, 36.67
percent were minor; the street heroin population contained
33.33 percent major and 66.67 percent minor. When comparing
the jail population to the non-heroin street population,
there are no significant differences in that 63.33 percent
of the heroin jail population were major in this category,
and 36.67 percent were minor. These data do not suggest
reasons for this apparent difference between the jail pOpu-

lation and street population.

165

For persons with a major -D-, this indicates that in
his reasoning process the client places emphasis on a one-
to-One contrast of selected characteristics or traits. Thus
in the decision making process, the data suggests the non-
heroin abuser, in order to formulate hypothesis, makes a
differential one-to—One comparison before he makes a decision
regarding a situation. Apparently the street heroin user
does not utilize -D- in this fashion, however, the jail
heroin user does.

Another way of understanding this element is that a
major -D- person has a tendency to think in terms of Oppo-
sites. For example racial extremists would likely show a
-D- exclusive of a major -R- (relationship). An integration-
ist would be more likely to have a major R as he tends to
look for similarities rather than differences in peOple.
Thus, the element -D- must be examined in light of element
-R-. It is interesting to speculate that a person with -D-
would form stereotypic attitudes.

The counseling approach for major -D- should be
highly pragmatic straight forward. Abstract philoSOphical
approaches would seem unreal and not useful to the client.

NO significant differences between the groups were
found on the element appraisal -L-. It was found that 73.33%
Of the non-heroin abusers were in the major category, and
26.67% were in the minor category. The street heroin pOpu-

lation contained 66.67% majors and 33.33% minors. The

166

heroin jail pOpulation contained 63.33% majors and 36.67%
minors.

The majority of drug abusing individuals use appraisal
as a means of formulating hypothesis in the decision making
process. Appraisal is the process involving the application
of Magnitudes, Difference and Relationships in reaching a
probability conclusion. These data are surprising in that
one would not expect drug abusers to be appraisers. From
clinical experience, a large number of drug abusers appear
to make a decision on the basis of a snap judgment. Per-
haps these data suggest that the client has the potential
for appraisal, but from clinical experience he does not
necessarily use it. This suggests a deficiency in the de-
cision making process. The counselor would have to examine
the dynamics of the client's past decision making behaviors
and determine which factors influenced the decision. By
utilizing the client's appraisal ability, the counselor can
evaluate other Options which were Open to the client in the
past but were not taken. In this way the client can learn
to use his appraisal abilities.

Significant differences were found between the groups
on the cognitive style element magnitude -M—. 23.33% of the
non-heroin street group were majors, 76.67% were minors. The
jail heroin pOpulation consisted of 46.67% major and 53.33%

minors.

167

The majority of non heroin soft drug abusers do not
derive meaning through categorical thinking, i.e., using
rules, definitions, and/or classifications in formulating
hypothesis. Approximately half of the heroin abusers, both
street and jail groups, do use categorical thinking. These
differences are not surprising in that the majority of soft
drug users appear to be alienated by rules, definitions,
laws and civic requirements for acceptable behavior. They
select behaviors not on the basis of what a rule might say,
but instead on what they feel is appropriate. Interestingly
enough, half of the heroin population do use rules in this
process. This could reflect the notion that a large number
of heroin abusers come from cultures which stress the use of
rules. These rules were dictated by the "middle class" for
the "lower class." thus for survival, the culture has
learned it must obey the rules established by others. Mag-
nitude as a major represents an elementary method of decision
making and requires considerable structure in a person's
life. Also the individual uses external instead of internal
forces to make a decision.

The heroin abuser requires more structure in his
life than the non-heroin abuser according to the data. As
for treatment, this suggests that a highly structured treat-
ment program will be more meaningful to the clients who are

abusing heroin, but at the same time there is the danger of

168

reinforcing the client's categorical thinking and perhaps,
stimulating dependency on the program. From clinical ex-
perience, an alarming number of clients within the thera-
peutic community have learned a highly structured way of
life where rules and regulations are well known and as a
result, the client has a great deal of difficulty in making
the transition from the therapeutic community to the commu-
nity at large. If we are to reintegrate the client into the
larger community, therapeutic communities, as well as other
treatment modalities, must first provide apprOpriate struc-
ture in order for the client to deal with his drug abusing
behavior, but as the client progresses through treatment, it
is necessary to begin a full range of services which will
wean the client from the therapeutic structured protected
environment to the broader community to which the client must
eventually return. It is interesting that the majority of
the therapeutic communities deal with heroin abusers while
most non-heroin abusers seek treatment from rap houses and
outpatient facilities. This is in keeping with the soft
drug users dislike for structure.

Significant differences were found in the Relation-
ship -R- category in that 73.33% of non-heroin abusers were
majors, while 26.67% were minors. The heroin street popula-
tion contained 40% majors and 60% minors. The jail pOpula-

tion consisted of 53.33% majors and 46.67% minors.

169

The non-heroin soft drug user derives meaning by a
comparison of two or more selected characteristics or traits
through similarities. In other words, in the decision mak-
ing process the client will look for likeness in things, com-
pare characteristics and examine relationships between these
characteristics before a decision is made. Such a client
would reSpond well to a counselor who uses examples and
similes to enhance explanations. Approximately half the
heroin users derive meaning from -R-.

NO significant differences were found between the
groups on the last element in the cognitive style map,
circle K -(K)-. 23.33% of the non-heroin abusers were
major in this category, 73.67% were minor. For the street
population 43.33% were major, 56.67% were minor. The jail
population contained 23.33% majors and 76.66% minors. Thus
the majority of drug abusers, either heroin or soft, do not
derive meaning from the deductive inferential process.

This inferential process is utilized most frequently in
logical proofs, e.g., in mathematics and in symbolic logic.

With regard to treatment, the majority of the clients
will not utilize deductive reasoning in arriving at a de-
cision, but instead utilize inductive reasoning as found
either in magnitude, difference, relationships, or the ap-
praisal categories. In therapy a deductive presentation on
the ill effects of drug abuse will not be particularly mean-

ingful to the client. The counselor can not deal with the

170

"universe" drug abuse and then reduce this down to the in-
dividual. In other words, from given premises centered
around a "universal" truth, one can not expect the drug
user to reduce this to a necessary conclusion. Instead, if
the counselor deals with particulars, the client is more
likely to generalize to a broader universe of behaviors.
The comparative study found that non-heroin abusers
do differ from heroin abusers on a number of cognitive style
elements and that these differences suggest specific types
of activities which should occur in a comprehensive treat-
ment program. Further, there needs to be a clear delinea-
tion between the types of services provided in treatment
programs. The concept is that by clearly defining the
treatment process, and by knowing the cognitive styles of
the client, it is possible to perscribe the treatment expe-
rience most likely meaningful to the client. This is similar
to what Hill has been able to do in the field of education.
For example, the heroin abuser requires substantial
group resocialization, improved interpersonal relationship
and communication skills, whereas, the soft drug user re-
quires emphasis on increasing individual internal strength.
If our rehabilitation goal is the resocialization
and behavioral reorganization of the client, the treatment
programs must be sensitive to the fact that each person is

a unique individual with his own way of deriving meaning

171

from life. The cognitive style map provides us with insights
required in order to see the uniqueness of the client. Also
it helps to understand the client in terms of how, in the
past, he has derived meaning and how in the future he might

be expected to derive meaning from life.

TABLE 46.--Summary Composit Cognitive Style Map of Heroin
and Non—Heroin Drug Users.

 

Non-Heroin Soft

 

 

Element Heroin User
Drug User

T(AL) Major

T(AQ) Minor

T(VL)* Major

T(VQ)* Minor

Q(A)* Major Major

Q(O)* Major Minor

Q(S) Major Major

Q(T)* Major Major

Q(V) Major Major

Q(P)* Major Minor

Q(CEM)* Major Minor

Q(CES)* Major Major

Q(CET) Major Major

Q(CH) Minor Minor

Q(CK)* Major Minor

Q(CKH) Major

Q(CP)* Minor

Q(CS)* Major

Q(CT) Major

A* Major Minor

F Major

1* Major

13*

L Major Major

M* Major

R* Major

X

*Indicates significant differences. (P 3 .01)

Blocks which are blank indicate element was not clearly
either major or minor.

172

Table 46 represents a summary composit of the cogni-
tive style maps of the heroin and non-heroin drug user. For
those blocks which are blank, this indicates the potential
Of either a major or minor. Where a major or minor is indi-
cated, this was where the element was very clearly one or

the other.

Limitations

 

As was previously stated, the population has been
clearly defined and generalizations from these data would
be appropriate to the described pOpulation. It is the
reader's reSponsibility to determine whether or not the
population, as described here, is similar to the population
to which he wishes to generalize.

The information in this research should provide in-
dicators to program planners regarding areas to be consid-
ered in developing a comprehensive human services delivery
system. It is important that these data be seen as prelimi-
nary and that additional confirmation work is required. It
should km: pointed out, however, this study has been success—
fully duplicated in Virginia.

The following considerations are presented. To
fully understand a client it is necessary to examine his in-
dividual cognitive style map and to examine the elements in
relationship to each other. Caution must be taken not to

stereotype all drug users in a category, instead this work

173

must be viewed as defining parameters in which the majority
of drug" abusers deem to go, but within these parameters there
is much room for individuality.

A client's cognitive style can change as he progresses
through therapy. Presently, it is not known exactly what ef-
fect treatment has on cognitive style or exactly what effect
COgnitive style has on treatment. We do not know whether it
is "good" or "bad" for a person to be a major or minor in an
element. For example, if a person is a minor in Associates,
does this mean we should not place him in a group experience
as he does not derive meaning from the group, or does it
mean we should place him in a group so he can "learn" to de-
rive meaning from peers? Does the minor represent a
"strength" or a "weakness?" HOpefully this research will
stimulate additional studies designed to resolve some of
these issues.

Caution is advised regarding the possibility of
random differences being reported as significant differ-

ences when large numbers of chi squares are performed.

Summary

From the experimental study it was learned that the
higher the quality of match between client and counselor,
the better the therapeutic relationship. Outcome behaviors
also improved.

From the comparative study it was found that the

cognitive styles of heroin and non—heroin drug users do

174

differ, that the heroin user has fewer major elements in

his cognitive map and that the heroin group has fewer ways
of deriving meaning and knowledge from life than the non-
heroin drug user. The cognitive style of heroin users was
found to be highly similar on several elements, likewise the
soft drug users had a number of common elements which sug-
gests intra-group similarities and inter-group differences.

As a result of the study the following recommenda-
tions are made. Clients and counselors should be matched
as closely as possible to facilitate the therapeutic rela-
tionship. Because of intra group similarities of heroin
users, qualified trained ex-addicts already have highly
similar cognitive styles to the clients, thus the rela-
tionship should form quickly, hOpefully resulting in better
holding power of the program.

Further, because the cognitive styles of the heroin
user is different from the soft drug user, consideration
must be given to providing differential treatment programs.

It was found the drug abusing client enters the
therapy relationship with a considerable number of strengths
which the counselor can use as building blocks in the rehabili-
tation process.

Finally, the cognitive style map should be viewed as
a devise which can provide the counselor with a window,
through which he can look into the life of his client. The
instrument indicates where an individual is now in terms of

his personal development and growth. The major elements in

175

the client's map represent those things which, in the past,
have been meaningful to him. It serves as an indicator of
activities which may be meaningful in the future. This is
but one tool which may contribute to increased understand-
ing and communications with the client.

In order to change attitude-behaviors, (Jordan,
g£_§l., 1972) we must first be able to communicate in mean-
ingful ways with the individual we are seeking to have and
impact on. If we understand the client's cognitive style
and are sensitive to him as a unique human being, then per-
haps we can establish an effective communications system
which will further enchance the relationship.

Hopefully the result will be the client's attitude-
behavior change, his resocialization and his ultimate rein-

tegration into society as a productive citizen.

APPENDICES

176

APPENDIX A

Set Theory Form

177

SET THEORY FORM

Symbologosics can be considered as a set, "S,"
comprised of 240 possible binomial combinations involving
major and minor theoretical and qualitative symbolic orien-

tations. Expressed in the form of set notation, we have:

‘Tx‘Qy" (TX-qy>.

(tx‘qy): (Qy-tx)°

where "T" denotes a major theoretical symbolic orientation
of an individual; "Q: indicates a major qualitative symbolic
orientation; "t" a minor theoretical symbolic orientation;
"a" a minor qualitative symbolic orientation; the subscript
"x" is a place-holder for one of the following notations:
"al"-auditory linguistic, "aq"-auditory quantitative, "v1"-
visual linguistic and "vq"-visual quantitative; and the sub-
script "y" holds a place for one of the fifteen following
qualitative notations: "v"-visual, "a"-auditory, "t"-tac-
tile, "s"-savory, "o"-olfactory, "p"-prOprioceptive, "cem"-
code empathetic, "ces"-code esthetic, "cet"-code ethic,
"ch"-code histrionic, "ck"-code kinesics, "ckh"-code kin-
esthetics, "cp"-code proxemics, "cs"-code synnoetics and

"ct"-code transactional. Since there are 60 combinations of

178

179

the form (Tx-Qy), 60 Of the type (TX-qy), 60 of the group
(Qy-tx) and 60 of the "double minor" category (TX-qy); "S"
is a finite set consisting of 2 x 60 = 240 elements.
Determantics is a set, "E," composed of fifteen
elements, twelve of which are binomial combinations and
three Of which are of monomial form. Stating the set of
cultural determinants of the meaning of symbols in set

theory form, we consider the following:

I! A! F!

(I-a (A-i (F-i

(I-f (A-f (F

(2)” <2)" “(2)"

where "I" indicates a major individuality determinant of
the meaning of symbols, "A" denotes a major associates
determinant, F a major family determinant, "i" a minor in-
dividuality determinant, "a" a minor associates determinant,
"f" a minor family determinant and the subscript "2" holds
a place for either a positive sign (+) or a negative sign
(-), depending upon the type of influence the minor deter-
minant involved tends to exert on the individual when he
is in the process of determining meanings of symbols (e.g.,
words, sentences, pictures, stories, tastes).

The inferensics set, "H," consists of five monomial
and six binomial elements. Expressed in set notation, the

eleven elements appear as follows:

180

s M, D, R, L,
(M‘d) I (D‘m) I (R-m) I ®I
H =
( (M-r) I (1)-'1.) I (R-d) o S

hwere "K" indicates a deductive inference process, "M" de-
notes a major magnitude modality of inference, "D" repre-
sents a major difference inferential mode, "R" indicates a
major modality Of relationship, L represents the major in—
ference of appraisal, "M" denotes a minor magnitude infer-
ence of appraisal, "m" denotes a minor magnitude inferential
mode, "d" indicates a minor modality of difference and "r"

represents a minor relationship mode of inference.

APPENDIX B

Cognitive Style Instrument

181

25H 1.
16C 2.
25D 3.
16B 4.
15E 5.
27C 6.
1C 7.
18B 8.

6B 9.
15C 10.

182

In evaluating the performance of others, I find it
important to determine the standards which were
set for him.

A. Rarely B.Sometimes C.Usually
Learning to swing a bat the right way is important.

A.Rarely B.Sometimes C.Usually

I prefer working in situations where standards and
rules are stated explicitly.

A.Rarely B.Sometimes C.Usually
I am well-coordinated.
A.Rarely B.Sometimes C.Usually

Walking with a spring in your step gives the
impression that you are happy.

A.Rarely B.Sometimes C.Usually

I find the reasoning patterns required in statistics
rewarding to use.

A.Rarely B.Sometimes C.Usually

I understand the daily news better if I hear it on
the radio rather than reading about it in the
newspaper.

A.Rarely B.Sometimes C.Usually

I know my capabilities.

A.Rare1y B.Sometimes C.Usually

I believe that the customary smell of a store
influences its sales volume.

A.Rare1y B.Sometimes C.Usually
I shrug my shoulders when saying "I don't know.

A.Rarely B.Sometimes C.Usually

10B

20E

20F

27E

27G

26C

11G

21B

21F

26F

16E

11.

12.

13.

14.

15.

16.

17.

18.

19.

20.

21.

183

My partners tell me I am a good dancer.
A.Rarely B.Sometimes C.Usually

Before taking a new job, I discuss it with my
friends.

A.Rarely B.Sometimes C.Usually

I make personal decisions after discussing them
with my friends.

A.Rarely B.Sometimes C.Usually

I find it easier to win an argument when I state
premise (Blank is true) and give a conclusion to
the premise which is unescapable: (Therefore
Blank must be true).

A.Rarely B.Sometimes C.Usually

I understand geometric theorems.

A.Rarely B.Sometimes C.Usually

I tend to see all parts of the world as being
interconnected.

A.Rarely B.Sometimes C.Usually

I can tolerate the inability to concentrate which
characterizes those who are newly "in love."

A.Rarely B.Sometimes C.Usually
The family that prays together stays together.
A.Rarely B.Sometimes C.Usually

I understand events better after I have discussed
them with my family.

A.Rarely B.Sometimes C.Usually
I try to understand why people break rules.
A.Rarely B.Sometimes C.Usually

To become a good typist, I would practice correct
finger movements.

A.Rarely B.Sometimes C.Usually

16F

17B

17B

17G

21H

22F

22D

1H

2G

3B

11H

22.

22.

23.

24.

25.

26.

27.

28.

29.

30.

31.

184
When I play golf or other sports I take several
practice swings before I start to play.
A.Rarely B.Sometimes C.Usually

I prefer to ask favors of close friends and
associates rather than from work supervisors.

A.Rarely B.Sometimes C.Usually

If I attempted to kiss someone, I would not be
slapped.

A.Rarely B.Sometimes C.Usually

If I bump against another person in a store, I
apologize.

A.Rarely B.Sometimes C.Usually

I make it a point not to let my work interfere
with family plans.

A.Rarely B.Sometimes C.Usually

I have little need for others to help me make
decisions.

A.Rarely B.Sometimes C.Usually

When given a problem to solve, I can come to the
best solution by myself.

A.Rarely B.Sometimes C.Usually

I prefer to be in lecture type classes.

A.Rarely B.Sometimes C.Usually

I discuss the "sale" prices before I go shopping.
A.Rarely B.Sometimes C.Usually

My written explanations are better than my spoken
ones.

A.Rarely B.Sometimes C.Usually

I laugh with the person who laughs when he stubs
his toe because I know it hurts.

A.Rarely B.Sometimes C.Usually

24C

13A

13C

13E

13H

14A

19H

7D

18H

19B

14F

32.

33.

34.

35.

36.

37.

38.

39.

40.

41.

42.

185

I don't understand how people can appreciate a
problem until they know as much about it as
possible.

A.Rarely B.Sometimes C.Usually
The values of our society are just.

A.Rarely B.Sometimes C.Usually

I would give up monetary gain to avoid a compromise
of principles.

A.Rare1y B.Sometimes C.Usually

I do not permit personal affairs to interfere with
completing an assignment.

A.Rarely B.Sometimes C.Usually

I would stop for a S.T.O.P. sign at 3:00 a.m. even
if there were no other person in sight.

A.Rare1y B.Sometimes C.Usually
I can imitate someone else before a group.
A.Rarely B.Sometimes C.Usually

Sales people always find the merchandise that I'm
asking for.

A.Rarely B.Sometimes C.Usually

Blindfolded, I can Taste the difference between
chicken and beef.

A.Rarely B.Sometimes C.Usually
I know my anxiety threshold.
A.Rarely B.Sometimes C.Usually

In group discussions, I am the catalyst for
reaching decisions.

A.Rarely B.Sometimes C.Usually

I can act hurt and depressed in order to acquire
favors.

A.Rarely B.Sometimes C.Usually

23C

14C

18F

5G

8A

88

9A

6G

14B

10D

2A

43.

44.

45.

46.

47.

48.

49.

50.

51.

52.

53.

186

In my choice of clothing, I usually wear contrasting
colors.

A.Rarely B.Sometimes C.Usually

I can give the impression that I am happy and
comfortable even though I am angry and uncomfortable.

A.Rarely B.Sometimes C.Usually

I know what my physical responses will be to a
particular task.

A.Rarely B.Sometimes C.Usually

Random sounds interfere with my ability to con-
centrate.

A.Rare1y B.Sometimes C.Usually

I can feel the difference between wool worsted and
double knit.

A.Rarely B.Sometimes C.Usually
I can get dressed in the dark.
A.Rarely B.Sometimes C.Usually

I prefer to read articles which are accompanied
by pictures or drawings.

A.Rarely B.Sometimes C.Usually
Paint smell in a room is disturbing to me.
A.Rarely B.Sometimes C.Usually
I am a good actor.

A.Rarely B.Sometimes C.Usually

I can write legibly while another person dictates
to me.

A.Rarely B.Sometimes C.Usually

I find it easy to add spoken or dictated numbers
mentally.

A.Rarely B.Sometimes C.Usually

7E

17F

10G

15G

8D

23A

20G

10H

ZB

9B

17H

54.

55.

56.

57.

58.

59.

60.

61.

62.

63.

64.

187

I return to a restaurant because the food there
tasted good.

A.Rare1y B.Sometimes C.Usually

I feel uncomfortable when children call me by my
first name.

A.Rarely B.Sometimes C.Usually
I can pitch horseshoes or lawn darts quite well.
A.Rarely B.Sometimes C.Usually

I interpret a person's mood by the way they sit
or pose.

A.Rarely B.Sometimes C.Usually

I prefer furniture that "feels" good when I run
my hand over the upholstery.

A.Rarely B.Sometimes C.Usually

I understand a topic better if I examine it to
learn how it differs from other topics.

A.Rarely B.Sometimes C.Usually
I value my friends' political opinions.

A.Rarely B.Sometimes C.Usually

I am considered to be a "good" amateur athelete.
A.Rarely B.Sometimes C.Usually

I quote statistics to others in order to prove my
point in an argument.

A.Rarely B.Sometimes C.Usually
I choose clothes for the way they look.
A.Rare1y B.Sometimes C.Usually

I do not pat strangers on the back if I have an
occasion to congratulate them.

A.Rarely B.Sometimes C.Usually

9D

11F

9E

27H

10A

20H

9F

2C

9C

19A

11B

65.

66.

67.

68.

69.

70.

71.

72.

73.

74.

75.

188
I understand a lecturer better if I can see him
while he talks.
A.Rare1y B.Sometimes C.Usually

When someone is frightened, I can be patient and
calm rather than get angry.

A.Rarely B.Sometimes C.Usually

A story is easier to understand in a movie than
in a book.

A.Rarely B.Sometimes C.Usually
I avoid probability statements in solving problems.
A.Rarely B.Sometimes C.Usually

I can run and catch a ball that has been struck
or thrown.

A.Rarely B.Sometimes C.Usually

I would join a particular religious group because
my friends belong to it.

A.Rarely B.Sometimes C.Usually

I "think" in pictures and graphic models instead
of words and phrases.

A.Rarely B.Sometimes C.Usually

Oral mathematics tests are easier than written
mathematics tests.

A.Rarely B.Sometimes C.Usually
I enjoy art exhibits.

A.Rarely B.Sometimes C.Usually
Children find me easy to get along with.
A.Rarely B.Sometimes C.Usually
I understand the emotions of others.

A.Rarely B.Sometimes C.Usually

25B

22G

9G

2D

16A

11B

25C

22E

9H

2E

16H

76.

77.

78.

79.

80.

81.

82.

83.

84.

85.

86.

189

I have no sympathy for people who break the law.
A.Rarely B.Sometimes C.Usually
My "best" decisions are made alone.

A.Rarely B.Sometimes C.Usually

When I tune a radio, I pay close attention to the
numbers on the dial.

A.Rarely B.Sometimes C.Usually
When taking classes in mathematics, I find it easy
to "talk in formulas" with my classmates and
teacher.

A.Rarely B.Sometimes C.Usually

I can repair Objects with small parts without
watching my hands.

A.Rarely B.Sometimes C.Usually
I am able to offer criticism without offending.
A.Rarely B.Sometimes C.Usually
Life is simple if you go by the rules.

A.Rarely B.Sometimes C.Usually

I regard my personal goals as more important than
the goals of others.

A.Rarely B.Sometimes C.Usually

I feel better acquainted with someone after seeing
pictures of him rather than reading about him.

A.Rarely B.Sometimes C.Usually

It is easy for me to remember the numbers and
formulas I hear during a conversation.

A.Rarely B.Sometimes C.Usually

I have practiced handwriting skills until I write
legibly.

A.Rarely B.Sometimes C.Usually

15H

25G

21E

5A

2F

17C

11A

26D

21G

87.

88.

89.

90.

91.

92.

93.

94.

96.

97.

190

Eye movements are important supplements to my
conversations.

A.Rarely B.Sometimes C.Usually

I don't find sufficient reason to change my mind
on a subject once I identify the rule which applies.

A.Rarely B.Sometimes C.Usually

I find it important to consult my family in planning
vacations. -

A.Rare1y B.Sometimes C.Usually

I can tell if something is wrong with an engine
by listening to it.

A.Rarely B.Sometimes C.Usually

I can remember a telephone number once I hear it.
A.Rarely B.Sometimes C.Usually

I am seldom "brushed off."

A.Rarely B.Sometimes C.Usually
My friends tell me that I am understanding.
A.Rare1y B.Sometimes C.Usually
When looking at something constructed by someone
else (e.g., a painting, a building, a piece of
furniture) I like to figure out why the person
created it as he did.

A.Rarely B.Sometimes C.Usually

I consult with my immediate family before making
important decisions.

A.Rarely B.Sometimes C.Usually

The tone or inflection of a speaker's voice gives
additional meaning to what he says.

A.Rarely B.Sometimes C.Usually}

1E

17D

11D

27A

22A

5D

1F

19F

15F

23B

22B

98.

99.

100.

101.

102.

103.

104.

105.

106.

107.

108.

191

I prefer verbal directions rather than trying to
follow a map.

A.Rarely B.Sometimes C.Usually

Unless spoken to first, I do not speak to a
supervisor.

A.Rarely B.Sometimes C.Usually

I avoid saying things which hurt the feelings of
others.

A.Rarely B.Sometimes C.Usually

I enjoy games or puzzles in which the solution
is deduced from information contained in the rules.

A.Rarely B.Sometimes C.Usually
I make my own political choices.
A.Rarely B.Sometimes C.Usually

I can identify musical notes well enough to
recognize a "tune" the next time I hear it.

A.Rarely B.Sometimes C.Usually

After I write a letter, I ask someone to read it
to me so that I know that it sounds right.

A.Rarely B.Sometimes C.Usually
Peers involve me in resolving problems.
A.Rarely B.Sometimes C.Usually

When I shake hands with someone, the handshake
tells me something about them.

A.Rarely B.Sometimes C.Usually

I "play the devil's advocate" with people to force
them to look at other points of view.

A.Rarely B.Sometimes C.Usually
Religion is a purely personal thing.

A.Rarely B.Sometimes C.Usually

5E

4H

19G

14D

23F

22C

5F

4G

19C

14B

109.

110.

111.

112.

113.

114.

115.

116.

117.

118.

192

I am able to tell which groups of instruments
are playing at various times during a concert.

A.Rarely B.Sometimes C.Usually

If I were buying a car, I would ask the salesman
to write out the engine specifications.

A.Rarely B.Sometimes C.Usually

At parties, I am able to verbally stop arguements
involving others before they go too far.

A.Rarely B.Sometimes C.Usually
I am able to "play a role" if I agree to.
A.Rarely B.Sometimes C.Usually
Holidays are different from other days of the year.
A.Rarely B.Sometimes C.Usually

I would rather do things my way even if they don't
conform to the expectations of my family or
friends.

A.Rarely B.Sometimes C.Usually

I can tell the difference between two closely
related sounds.

A.Rarely B.Sometimes C.Usually

When I go shopping, I read the prices of my
purchases and add them in my head.

A.Rarely B.Sometimes C.Usually

I am able to presuade people in disagreement to
strive for agreement.

A.Rarely B.Sometimes C.Usually

I can act "cultured" when the situation demands
such formalized behavior.

A.Rarely B.Sometimes C.Usually

23G

20C

5H

2H

19D

15A

10C

23H

21A

6A

1D

119.

120.

121.

122.

123.

124.

125.

126.

127.

128.

129.

193

I choose music to fit my mood.
A.Rare1y B.Sometimes C.Usually

When shopping for clothes, I like to have a
friend along to help me make choices.

A.Rarely B.Sometimes C.Usually

I tune the radio by sound not by looking at the
dial.

A.Rarely B.Sometimes C.Usually

If I were buying a car, I would discuss the
engine specifications with the salesman.

A.Rarely B.Sometimes C.Usually

I can convince others to do the things that I
would like them to do.

A.Rarely B.Sometimes C.Usually
I blush.
A.Rarely B.Sometimes C.Usually

When I type, I keep my eyes on the copy.
A.Rarely B.Sometimes C.Usually

Characteristics for successful people are not
the same as those for unsuccessful people.

A.Rarely B.Sometimes C.Usually

Before voting in an election, I review choices
With my family.

A.Rarely B.Sometimes C.Usually
I can tell "what's for dinner" by the smell.
A.Rarely B.Sometimes C.Usually

I prefer to communicate with friends and colleagues
by telephone rather than writing notes to them.

A.Rarely B.Sometimes C.Usually

19E

15B

24A

20D

GB

1A

18A

15D

24H

21C

6C

130.

131.

132.

133.

134.

135.

136.

137.

138.

139 O

140.

194

I am able to put peOple at ease in tense situations.
A.Rarely B.Sometimes C.Usually

I use facial expressions in showing emotion.
A.Rarely B.Sometimes C.Usually

I often have to make a decision before I know
enough about the situation.

A.Rarely B.Sometimes C.Usually
I like to share ideas with friends and associates.
A.Rarely B.Sometimes C.Usually

I can distinguish fresh bread from stale bread by
the smell.

A.Rarely B.Sometimes C.Usually

I can make more sense out of what a person means
when they speak to me rather than when they
write to me.

A.Rarely B.Sometimes C.Usually

I can predict my prospects for success in most
situations.

A.Rarely B.Sometimes C.Usually
I "talk with my hands."
A.Rarely B.Sometimes C.Usually

There are as many facets to a problem as there
are on a well cut diamond.

A.Rare1y B.Sometimes C.Usually

I enjoy outdoor activities more if my family is
with me.

A.Rare1y B.Sometimes C.Usually

I can distinguish between several varieties of
flowers by smelling them.

A.Rare1y B.Sometimes C.Usually

1B

18C

13F

24D

21D

6D

3A

18D

13G

20A

7F

141.

141.

142.

143.

144.

145.

146.

147.

148.

149.

150.

195
I do better on a test if it is about information
I heard in a lecture.
A.Rarely B.Sometimes C.Usually
I set goals consistent with my needs and abilities.
A.Rarely B.Sometimes C.Usually
I believe that a promise should be kept.
A.Rarely B.Sometimes C.Usually

Information should be analyzed in a number of ways
before a conclusion is reached.

A.Rarely B.Sometimes C.Usually

I talk with my family before doing anything that
might effect them.

A.Rarely B.Sometimes C.Usually

The aromas in a room determine for me whether it
is pleasant or unpleasant.

A.Rarely B.Sometimes C.Usually

After I dictate a letter, I have to read it to
be certain it is correct.

A.Rarely B.Sometimes C.Usually
I can tell if I will be able to get my work done.
A.Rarely B.Sometimes C.Usually

The quality of one's work does not vary when the
supervisor is away.

A.Rare1y B.Sometimes C.Usually

I learn a subject better when I can discuss it
with other students.

A.Rarely B.Sometimes C.Usually

In selecting a beverage, my choice is based on
taste appeal.

A.Rarely B.Sometimes C.Usually

3D

18B

12F

24F

20B

7G

4E

18G

13B

24G

22H

151.

152.

153.

154.

155.

156.

157.

158.

159.

160.

161.

196

I score high on achievement tests which emphasize
reading comprehension.

A.Rarely B.Sometimes C.Usually

I can anticipate accurately how well I will do in
a new situation.

A.Rare1y B.Sometimes C.Usually
I enjoy the beauty of the stars.

A.Rarely B.Sometimes C.Usually
A person can never know enough about life.
A.Rarely B.Sometimes C.Usually

I enjoy activity more when my friends participate
in it with me.

A.Rarely B.Sometimes C.Usually

-I enjoy trying new foods in order to find new

tastes that are pleasing to me.
A.Rarely B.Sometimes C.Usually

I use a written budget in order to manage money
for which I am responsible.

A.Rarely B.Sometimes C.Usually
I can program myself to handle boring tasks.
A.Rarely B.Sometimes C.Usually
I live according to moral values.

A.Rarely B.Sometimes C.Usually

The more I know about a problem, the more I want
to know about it.

A.Rarely B.Sometimes C.Usually

When given a job to do, I prefer to work on it
myself.

A.Rarely B.Sometimes C.Usually

8C

1G

16G

12A

23D

8B

4C

16D

12G

26G

8F

162.

163.

164.

165.

166.

167.

168.

169.

170.

171.

172.

197

I use my fingers to determine the quality of the
finish on wood.

A.Rarely B.Sometimes C.Usually
People say I speak better than I write.
A.Rarely B.Sometimes C.Usually

I enjoy acquiring good motor skills so that I
can compete successfully in sports.

A.Rarely B.Sometimes C.Usually

I enjoy the beauty of people dancing.

A.Rarely B.Sometimes C.Usually

In evaluating the performances of others, I find
it helpful to determine how this performance
differed from another performance.

A.Rarely B.Sometimes C.Usually

I Pick up and feel vegetables and fruits in the
store before buying them.

A.Rarely B.Sometimes C.Usually
I keep good written records in my check book.
A.Rare1y B.Sometimes C.Usually

I enjoy practicing dance steps until I can do
them perfectly.

A.Rarely B.Sometimes C.Usually

Poetry is beautiful because of its concepts as
well as its words and structure.

A.Rarely B.Sometimes C.Usually
There's always a reason for a person's behavior.
A.Rarely B.Sometimes C.Usually

I decids that my hair needs washing by the way
it feels.

A.Rarely B.Sometimes C.Usually

198

4D 173. When I am in a group Of peOple trying to solve
a written problem involving numbers, I am among
the first to reach the solution.
A.Rarely B.Sometimes C.Usually

17A 174. I would wait to be introduced to a "big name"
rather than introduce myself.

A.Rarely B.Sometimes C.Usually
12H 175. Utility and efficiency are important, but they

should not be emphasized to the exclusion of

beauty.

A.Rarely B.Sometimes C.Usually

26H 176. Problem-sloving involves related variables.

A.Rarely B.Sometimes C.Usually
26B 177. I like to figure out how parts of a whole fit

together.

A.Rarely B.Sometimes C.Usually

12E 178. I would go out of my way to see beautiful scenery.
A.Rarely B.Sometimes C.Usually

4B 179. I score high on written mathematics tests.
A.Rarely B.Sometimes C.Usually

BB 180. I prefer to write with a pen that "feels" good
to my fingers.

A.Rarely B.Sometimes C.Usually

25E 181. In play as well as work and life in general, I
find it essential to "play by the rules."

A.Rarely B.Sometimes C.Usually

12D 182. I enjoy listening to good music for quality of
its sound.

A.Rarely B.Sometimes C.Usually

12D

4F

8G

3G

12B

23B

3H

10E

11C

12C

182.

183.

184.

185.

186.

187.

188.

189.

190.

191.

199
I enjoy listening to good music for quality of
its sound.
A.Rarely B.Sometimes C.Usually
I find it necessary to write down a telephone
number as soon as I hear it or I cannot remember
it.
A.Rarely B.Sometimes C.Usually

I can distinguish a nickel from a dime in my
pocket without looking at it.

A.Rarely B.Sometimes C.Usually

I prefer to read directions rather than have
someone read them to me.

A.Rarely B.Sometimes C.Usually
I require beauty in my surroundings.
A.Rarely B.Sometimes C.Usually

I use jokes or humorous remarks to change the
focus in different situations.

A.Rarely B.Sometimes C.Usually

I understand more easily by reading than by
hearing.

A.Rarely B.Sometimes C.Usually

When I drive a car, I look ahead and in other
directions outside of the car.

A.Rarely B.Sometimes C.Usually

I understand how a person feels when being
punished.

A.Rarely B.Sometimes C.Usually
I enjoy concerts.

A.Rarely B.Sometimes C.Usually

200

26A 192. I would find it interesting to discover how
people behave by evaluating things which make
people tick (e.g. physiological, sociological,
and psychological).
A.Rarely B.Sometimes C.Usually

6H 193. When there are gas fumes in the car or the house,
I notice them.

A.Rarely B.Sometimes C.Usually

3E 194. I have no difficulty in following a map. (I
prefer maps to verbal directions.)

A.Rarely B.Sometimes C.Usually

14G 195. I shout and act tough in order to frighten others
when I am frightened myself.

A.Rarely B.Sometimes C.Usually

5C 196. I can recognize who is on the phone just by
listening for a few moments.

A.Rarely B.Sometimes C.Usually

27D 197. I find the type of reasoning demanded by the
rules of mathematics suits my style of thinking.

A.Rarely B.Sometimes C.Usually
7A 198. I can tell whether milk is sour by tasting it.
A.Rarely B.Sometimes C.Usually
27B 199. I find reasoning like this statement helps me to
clarify my thoughts: "All men are mortal;
Socrates is a man; Socrates is mortal."

A.Rarely B.Sometimes C.Usually

10F 200. When I tune a musical instrument, I use the
piano or another instrument for the correct pitch.

A.Rarely B.Sometimes C.Usually

7B 201. When cooking, I use various spices until the dish
tastes "right."

A.Rarely B.Sometimes C.Usually

14H

6F

4A

25F

25A

26B

3C

7H

24B

13D

7C

202.

203.

204.

205.

206.

207.

208.

209.

210.

211.

212.

201
I can act attentive and interested even though
bored when listening to a teacher or supervisor.
A.Rarely B.Sometimes C.Usually

The "smell" is an important part of the pleasure
connected with a new car.

A.Rarely B.Sometimes C.Usually

I solve written mathematical problems rapidly.

A.Rarely B.Sometimes C.Usually

When shopping for clothes, if I find the article
I had in mind, I buy it without further comparison.

A.Rarely B.Sometimes C.Usually
I work best in a structured situation.
A.Rarely B.Sometimes C.Usually

I have no difficulty in understanding how to put
puzzles together.

A.Rarely B.Sometimes C.Usually

I prefer classes which rely heavily on testbooks.
A.Rarely B.Sometimes C.Usually

My "suffering" in the dentist's chair is alleviated
if he does not use unpleasant tasting materials

in my mouth.

A.Rarely B.Sometimes C.Usually

When I attack a problem, I approach it from as
many angles as possible.

A.Rarely B.Sometimes C.Usually

I would give up an immediate goal rather than
sacrifice a principle.

A.Rarely B.Sometimes C.Usually

The taste of food is more important than its
appearance.

A.Rarely B.Sometimes C.Usually

202

 

3F 213. I prefer to read a paper myself rather than have
someone read it aloud to me.
A.Rarely B.Sometimes C.Usually
27F 214. Knowledge flows logically form given premises.
A.Rarely B.Sometimes C.Usually
24E 215. I take longer than others in coming to a conclusion
because I want to know more about an issue than
others do.
A.Rarely B.Sometimes C.Usually
Age:
Sex: M F

 

 

Type of Drug Use: Grass

 

LSD
Speed
Barbs
Heroin
Other

 

 

 

 

 

Length of Time used:
(check one) 1-3 months

Amount:

3—6 months

6 mo.--l year

1 year to 2 years ___
2 years to 3 years
More

 

0-$25 per day
$25-$50 per day
More

1 to 3 joints per week

4 to 6 joints per week

7 to 10 joints per week
10 to 20 joints per week
More

 

APPENDIX C

Cognitive Style Mapping

Tally Sheet

203

204

COGNITIVE STYLE MAPPING

TALLY SHEET

 

 

 

 

 

NAME DATE
PLACE
NOS ITEMS RARELY SOMETIMES USUALLY
1 T(AL)
2 T(AQ)
3 T(VL)
4 T(VQ)
5 Q(A)
6 Q(O)
7 Q(S)
8 Q(T)
9 Q(V)
10 Q(P)
11 Q(CEM)
12 Q(CES)
13 Q(CET)
14 Q(CH)
15 Q(CK)
l6 Q(CKH)
17 Q(CP)
18 Q(CS)
19 Q(CT)
20 A
21 F
22 I
23 D
24 L
25 M
26 R
27 (K)

 

 

 

 

OAKLAND COMMUNITY COLLEGE, Diagnostic Center, Sept.,

1971

APPENDIX D

Cognitive Style Score Sheet

205

2()6

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

.u I .mexn,t- - .;._ _IH. ; o
x em
.1 mm m
2 mm A
4 am a
o mm
H mm s
E MN m
an. :N U
:73...) :1, ..
”my; ., .t.
A My; J r“.

r _ .MLU .
A...m..JV 1. «Ta
TWUOO Ina U

lemoco Am a

Amuovo ms m

4- o

Azuovo .2

Aaeo OH
C50 m 3
Amvo n I
AOVO Q U.”
A
“did m.
Ao>ve q .
T D
A172: 9. r a
Aomie m a
m
77.; .H. H
.Omz mosz monaz ameoe II n m x II II n m x II. n a xll
mfiuh .mOz
mu oom Sqq<sma mqueuzcm waummm
oneaooq .oz .Omm .Oom
mean urmz

APPENDIX E

Cognitive Style Map

207

208

 

0420165)

LLH

VXA

 

 

 

 

. No.46

vi H.

 

 

ZO_._.<UOJ

x19: .73: .83 A .1 as A \

"mwcmEEOU

COVOJ
AmOVO
EUVO
2.2qu
QUVO
AIUVO
MHMUVO
meO V

 

u
07

AEMUVO
EVO
AZO
COO
Ava
AOVO
A30

 

 

.OZ .Umm .UOm
m§<z

APPENDIX F

Fiedler’s 75 Item Relationship

Instrument

209

3-142.

4-111.
5-144.
6-123.
7-83.
8-43.

9-32.
10-14.

11-710

12-145.

13-45.

14-4.

15-91.

16-125.

17-105.
18-3.

19-33.
20-75.

21-103.

22-85.
23-64.

210

The therapist's comments are always right in line
with what I am trying to convey (get across).

The therapist maintains a friendly, neutral attitude
throughout.

The therapist acts in a very superior manner
toward me.

The therapist seems hesitant about asking questions.
The therapist tries to put me in "my place."

The therapist treats me as an equal.

The therapist is pleased with me.

The therapist is never in any doubt about what I
mean.

The therapist is well able to understand my feelings.

The therapist finds it difficult to think along my
lines.

The therapist is interested but emotionally un-
involved.

The therapist gives the impression of feeling very
much above me in society and intellectual status.

The therapist's tone of voice conveys the complete
ability to share my feelings.

The therapist's own needs (hang-ups) completely
interfere (get in the way) with his understanding
of me.

The therapist tends to be too close, is sticky.
The therapist treats me like a friend.
The therapist always apologizes when making a remark.

The therapist somehow seems to miss what I mean
time and again.

The therapist really tries to understand my feelings.

The therapist Shows little positive or negative
emotion in his reactions toward me.

The therapist treats me with much deference (regard
for my wishes).

The therapist is sympathetic with me.

The therapist acts like he feels somewhat tense
and on edge.

24-121.
25-42.

26-104.
27-13.

28-132.
29-74.

30-21.

31-81.
32-141.
33-131.

34-54.
35-93.
36-24.
37-23.
38-92.
39-12.
40-35.

41-1.

42-63.
43-134.
44-143.

45-124.

46-68.
47-25.

211

The therapist sees me as a co—worker on a common
problem.

The therapist is able to participate (get involved)
completely in my communication (rap).

The therapist curries (tries to gain) favor with me.

The therapist is unable to understand me on any
level but purely intellectual.

The therapist tends to look down on me.

The therapist accepts all of my statements in a
noncommittal manner.

The therapist reacts with some understanding of my
feelings.

The therapist seems to like me.
The therapist talks down to me as if I were a child.

The therapist acts toward me in a somewhat protec-
tive manner.

The therapist is punitive.
The therapist greatly encourages and reassures me.

The therapist's own reactions are neither par-
ticularly favorable or unfavorable in allowing
me to communicate (rap) freely.

The therapist's own ability to understand my
feelings is neither particularly good or bad.

The therapist showers me with affection and
sympathy.

The therapist often misses the point I am trying
to get across.

The therapist usually catches my feelings.

The therapist shows no comprehension (understanding)
of the feelings I am trying to communicate (rap
about).

The therapist occasionally makes me angry.
The therapist treats me like his pupil.

The therapist acts very condescending (gives in-
lowers himself) to me.

The therapist acts neither superior nor submissive
towards me. ‘

The therapist tends to make me feel small.

The therapist usually maintains rapport (harmony)
with me.

48-44.

49-55.
50-61.
51-112.
52-84.

53-5.
54-95.
55-65.

56-122.
57-51.

58-11.

59-102.
60-115.
61-94.
62-52.
63-31.

64-72.

65-82.
66-135.
67-1.

68-53.
69-101.
70-22.

71-62.

72-34.
73-15.

74-114.

75-113.

212

The therapist's remarks fit in just right with my
mood and content.

The therapist is very unpleasant to me.
The therapist is somewhat cool toward me.
The therapist readily accedes (agrees) to my wishes.

The therapist is trying to establish an emotionally
close relationship with me.

The therapist reacts in terms of his own problems.
The therapist is deeply moved by me.

The therapist seems to be a little afraid of me.
The therapist gives and takes in most situations.

The therapist acts like he feels disgusted because
of me.

The therapist often flounders around before getting
what I mean.

The therapist tries to sell himself.

The therapist tries to please me.

The therapist expresses great liking for me.
The therapist is hostile toward me.

The therapist is usually able to get what I am
trying to communicate (rap about).

The therapist's feelings do not seem to be swayed
by my remarks.

The therapist is pleasant to me.
The therapist directs and guides me.

The therapist cannot maintain rapport (harmony)
with me.

The therapist is rejecting toward me.
The therapist treats me like an honored guest.

The therapist is able to keep up with my com-
munication (rap) much of the time.

The therapist at times draws emotionally away
from me.

The therapist always follows my line of thought.

The therapist's comments tend to direct my trend
of thought.

The therapist assumes an apologetic tone of voice
when commenting.

The therapist lets me determine the course (what
we will rap about) of the session.

APPENDIX G

Behavioral Rating Form Turnkey

213

214

 

m m v m N H .OCHE
ch as mcmeE OHQDOHD mm: oz .HH

O m e m N H .umHH HHmO
xOHm map so pom OD Op mxmm mm .

.OmHm mco>Hm>m mmEmHQ mm .

o
m
.HHMm Tap DOOQO MCHMHQEOO m: .m
.co>m:m cowHO mH m: .h

o

.mpsme OucH mumm m: .

\DKDKOKDKD
mmmmm
VWQ‘Q‘Q‘
mmmmm
NNNNN
r—lt—ir—ir—ir-I

.mmumECH nguo
Os“ LDHB HHOB mcon mumm mm .m

o m w m m H .EHOO\EOOHmmmHO
map CH mEmHQOHm momsmo mm .v

 

o m w m m H .Emumonm .bmnwm
can cH UmpmmumucH mammm mm .m

o m w m m H .mmmHO MOM HHOO
ch mo poo OQHEOO ODTH mH mm .m

o m s m N H .AchEoonm .mmzuoao
cmmHOv wocmummmmm CH poms mH mm .H

mmEHu
p.cmmoo m>83H¢ mHHmst ImEOm EOOHmm Hm>mz
m m w m . m H

 

 

Auwmcommmh OHMHHQOHQQO OQH OHOHHUV .HOH>OQOQ
mcHOHmmOH OHQHmmOQ mm mHummcos mm mCOHpmmsw mcHBOHHOm wnw Hmzmcm mmmmHm

meszB EmOh DZHB<m H¢m0H>¢mmm

APPENDIX H

Behavior Rating Form--Teachers

215

216

 

(IIIILni-i II-.I-I.rrl|! (Ill; II.II'|’\.III\ ’1‘

s I I
VHS-1.. k” . .. ._ {1.57 ...
.
4 .J c 4.4. I 1.1... hr 0 1
. 1.. I 7.). .f... I}. 1;. A,
.- s > a
1 ,. a 4 o a l. 1.. .1 1.1.. .3 .44‘. . .4 o A...
. . + . 4‘. I. ,-:_E. u ._ 21.-.7 L: .

x u r _ . . u .

KL
H
l

(‘ ~J
r——1
u

1
.74
L4
/ \
L. 4
5‘
M
:J
I.)
2)
'f)
C.
o
q
—-(

4
x L! O.) A 3.. 1
o . q , 4 1H TOOOH:-co
l . .
.. e , x )J . T (u o I
__ .. I .8 \Lfr .v HIV rhfiuorrr. C .y. ’ OJ;
. . . .
\- 1 O I 24 ‘4 .4 . J
o a. M , 1 m; _ A w.... LHJH
.
. , . r _ 4- .. 45. a . ,.
. v. . I. J. u o. . HH . . l—
1 u z -. b 4
J n H. o .4 I ,4- .I HF. U :1 . _ __l
_. I . .
I L
.
I. 4 . v . W;
_ t I .4 . . 1
.2 - .
I I . a. . .1,- .(.m . .L. .1
x) .. . I o 1 .. J 4 x.) . 1v 4- ) ./ao}1 I I 4
I. n1 4 1. Th- -H u. H} 1...: U r! ,r. , .L 3.4: . H

14 -. v V I2. .I A .

.Momuo :DHB HHHJ wsoHa mu.

LO: LO Esau manO wzu
ca ,mu.aH Hun; IBMU-THJ .mvutgvn
H , -f

 

.4 u . n .x I... .\ .. .
Iu.L . V vchicxw n1u:.t O: .w
x a 3 Id :4. l .11. J 2.1. ~ 4 I. 4 \I 4 . I \ C
c m m n . .,r3 5;. ... u. -F-H-Lc3 .Yraoj ,;1 m
H 7 H 1 1 A n.. nlndailj AMI . 4 1 J.
1 l 1.... I. . 1 K r f.
.4 .4 .\. V.) J 1 a 1 .
,-_ -. J-x ::. ;L L..- pH . .w
o r w 4 - «\JWHH ».I,..Im- \ .H.\» H) I J ) ..4v .1
\ L HI b. r . . r (\p. a s x . I p.» w:\
.mdo... J1... 4., (IN-j. 4.4 u I . . .11
I r-I. r.._1»r . . (A c r P r
v 4
In??? VI... u

V

D.:mTOQ m>d5Hd hHHzfim:
@ m

I

5 A
(f)

E

O
,_'4

I)

f.

L4

2

.S-

v m m H

 

 

Anvmcommou ODOHMLOHLAO OED OHOHHQV .HOH>OLOQ
mcHchmgn OHLHmmCQ mo >Humwcoz mm mcoHumwsw mcHBOHHOm mzu Mw3mcn mmmva

mmAJUduE .UCL UZHde ZCH>GZQQ

REFERENCES

217

REFERENCES

Abrams, A., Gagnon, J. H., Levin, J. J. Psychosocial
aspects of addiction. American Journal of Public
Health., November, 1968, 58, 2142—2155.

 

Adam, K. S. and Lohrenzed, J. G. Drug abuse, self abuse,
and the abuse of authority. Journal of the Canadian
Psychiatric Association, 1970, 15, 79-81.

 

 

Armore, Sidney J. Introduction to Statistical Analysis and
Inference for Psychology and Education. New York:
John Wiley and Sons, Inc., 1966.

 

Bock, K. W. Influence through social communications.
Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 1951,
46, 9-23.

Barber, Bernard. Drugs and Society. New York: Russell
Sage Foundation, 1967.

 

Berg, I. Measures before and after therapy. Journal of
Clinical Psychology, 1952, 1, 46-50.

 

 

Berger, F. M. and Porterfield, J. Drug Abuse and Society.
In Drugs and Youth, Proceedings of the RAPCUS
Symposium on Drug Abuse, Whittenborn (ed.), Spring-
field, Charles C. Thomas, 1969, 39.

 

Birdwhistle, Raymond L. Introduction to Kinesics. Louis-
ville: University of Lousiville Press, 1952.

 

Blanzy, James. Cognitive style as an input to Mathematics
curriculum systems and exploratory studies in the
educational sciences. Unpublished doctoral disser-
tation, Wayne State University, 1971.

Block, J. and Thomas H. Is satisfaction with self a
measure of adjustment? Journal of Abnormal and
Social Psychology, 1955, 51, 254-259.

 

 

Blosser, Charles R. A pilot study to explore the relation-
ships between cognitive style, need achievement, and
academic achievement motivation. Unpublished doc-
toral dissertation, Wayne State University, 1971.

218

219

Blum, Richard et. al. Drugs I: Society and Drugs. San
Francisco: Jossey—Bass Publication, 1969.

Bordin, E. S. Inside the therapeutic hour. In Research
in Psychotherapy: E. A. Rubiustein and M. B. Par-
loff (eds.), Washington: American Psychological
Association, 1959, 235-246.

Bown, O. H. An investigation of therapeutic relationships
in client-centered psychotherapy. Unpublished
doctoral dissertation, University of Chicago, 1954.

Brock, T. C. Cognitive restructuring and attitude change.
Journal Of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 1962,
64, 264-271.

Brock, T. C. and Blackwood, J. E. Dissonance reduction,
social comparisons, and modification of others'
Opinions. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology,
1963, 65, 319-324.

Buckman, John. Psychology of drug abuse. Medical College
of Virginia Quarterly 1 (3), 98-102, 1971.

Burdick, H. A. and Burnes, A. J. A test of "strain toward
symmetry" theories. Journal of Abnormal and Social
Psychology, 1958, 57, 367-370.

 

 

Campbell, D. T. and Stanley, J. C. Experimental and Quasi-
Experimental Designes for Research. Chicago: Rand
McNally and Company, 1969.

 

Carson, R. C. and Heine, R. W. Similarity and success in
therapeutic dyads. Journal of Consulting Psychology,
1962, 26, 38-43.

Champlin, Nathaniel L. Controls in qualitative thought.
Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Columbia Uni-
versity, 1952.

Chein, I. et. al. The Road to H. New York: Basic Books,
1964.

 

Cohen, Sidney. The Beyond Within: The LSD Story. New
York Antheneum, 1964.

 

Cohen, Sidney. The Drug Dilemma. New York: McGraw-Hill,
1968.

 

220

Cotter, Jude Thaddeus. The affects of educational science
of cultural determinants of the meanings of symbols
on curricular choice. Unpublished doctoral disser-
tation, Wayne State University, 1970.

Cox, D. R. Planning of Experiments. New York: John Wiley
and Sons, Inc., 1966.

 

DeLoach, Joseph F. Cognitive Styles and Cognitive Dissonance.
Bloomfield Hills, Michigan: Oakland Community Col-
lege Press, 1970.

 

DeLoach, Joseph E. An analysis of cognitive style diSparity
as an antecedent of coqnitive dissonance in instruc-
tional evaluation: an exploratory study in the edu-
cational sciences. Unpublished doctoral disserta-
tion, Wayne State University, 1969.

Dehnke, Ronald E. An exploration of the possible isomorphism
of cognitive style and successful teaching of second-
ary school english. Unpublished doctoral disserta—
tion, Wayne State University, 1966.

Dewey, John. In On Experience, Nature, and Freedom, Richard
J. Bernstein, (ed.), "Qualitative thought," 1960,
New York: Boffs—Merrill Company, Inc.

 

Dinkmeyer, D. DevelOpmental Group Counseling. Chicago:
De Paul University Press, 1968.

 

Dworkin, Leo. A systems theory approach toward the re-
conceptualization of curriculum. Unpublished doctoral
dissertation, Michigan State University, 1969.

Ebin, David (ed.). The Drug Experience. New York: Grove
Press, 1965.

 

Edwards, B. C. and Edgerly, J. W. Effects of counselor-
client cognitive congruence on counseling outcome
in brief counseling. Journal of Counseling Psy-
chology, 1970, 17, 4, 313-318.

 

Festinger, Leon. A Theory of Cognitive Dissonance. Stan-

 

ford, California: Stanford University Press, 1957.
Festinger, L. and Carlsmith, J. M. Cognitive consequences
of forced compliance. Journal of Abnormal and

 

Social Psychology, 1959, 58, 203-210.

 

221

Festinger, L., Schachter, S., and Back, K. Social Pressures
in Informal Groups. New York: Harper, 1950.

 

 

Fiedler, F. E. Factors Operative in shaping the concept of
the ideal therapeutic relationship. Paper presented
at the Midwest Psychological Association, Chicago,
April, 1949.

Fiedler, F. E. In Psychotherapy Theory and Research. 0. H.
Mowrer (ed.). "Quantitative studies on the role of
therapists' feelings toward their patients." New York:
Ronald Press, 1953, 296-315.

 

Fiedler, Fred E. The concept of an ideal therapeutic rela-
tionship. Journal of Consulting Psychology, 1950,
p. 14, 239-245.

 

Flanagan, John C. General considerations in the selection
of test items and a short method of estimating the
product-moment from the data at the tails of the
distribution. Journal of Educational Psychology,
December, 1939, 32.

 

Fragale, Marvin. A pilot study of cognitive styles of
selected faculty members and students in a commu-
nity college setting. Unpublished doctoral disser-
tation, Wayne State University, 1969.

Fragale, Marvin J. Pretty—Much Alike but Somewhat Differ-
ent. Bloomfield Hills, Michigan: Oakland Commu-
nity College Press, 1971.

 

Fragale, Marvin, Svagr, Virginia, Zussman, Steven. Person-
alizing Human Interactions Utilizing Cognitive Style
Mapping. Detroit: GMS Associates, Inc., 1971.

 

Frank, J. D., Gliedman, L. H., Imber, S. D., Nash, E. H.,
and Stone, A. R. Why patients leave psychotherapy.
Archives of Neurology and Psychiatry, 1957, 77,
283-299.

 

Freud, Anna. Adolescence. Psychoanalytic Study of Children,
1958, 30, 255.

 

 

Freud, Anna. The Ego and The Mechanisms of Defense. New
York: International Universities Press, 1966,
149-150.

Gardner, G. G. The psychotherapeutic relationship. Psy-
chological Bulletin, 1964, 61, 426-437.

 

 

222

Gendlin, E. T., Jenny, R. H., and Shlien, J. Counselor
ratings of process and outcome in client-centered
therapy. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 1960,
16, 210—213.

 

Goldstein, A. P., Heller, K.,Sechrest,lu B. Psychotherapy
and The Psychology of Behavior Change. New York:
John Wiley and Sons, 1966.

 

 

Greyson, Mark E. A comparison Of counseling using the
cognitive style map of the educational sciences
and the traditional approach. Unpublished doctoral
dissertation, University of Michigan, 1971.

Grinker, R. R. In Contemporary Psychotherapies, M. I. Stein
(ed.). "A transactional model for psychotherapy,"
New York: Free Press, 1961, 190—213.

 

Guilford, J. F. The Nature of Human Intelligence. New
York: McGraw-Hill, 1967.

 

Guttman, Lewis. An outline of some new methodology for
social research. Public Opinion Quarterly, Winter,
1954-55, 18.

 

Hall, Edward T. The Silent Language. Garden City, N. J.:
Doubleday and Company, 1959.

 

Hays, William L. Statistics. New York: Holt, Rinehard
and Winston, 1963.

 

Heider, J. The Psychology of Interpersonal Relations.
New York: Wiley, 1958.

 

Heine, R. W. An investigation of the relationship between
changes and reSponsible factors as seen by clients
following treatment by psychotherapists of the
psychoanalytic, adlerion, and non—directive schools.
Unpublished doctoral dissertation.

Heller, K., and Goldstein, A. P. Client dependency and
therapist expectancy as relationship maintaining
variables in psychotherapy. Journal of Consult-
ing Psychology, 1961, 25, 371-375.

 

 

Hill, Joseph E. Appendis A, A synOpsiS of the educational
sciences. Unpublished paper, Wayne State Univer-
sity, 1967.

223

Hill, Joseph E. Cognitive Style as An Educational Science.
Bloomfield Hills, Michigan: Oakland Community
College Press, 1968.

 

Hill, J. E. Natural, Life, Behavioral and Social Sciences.
Bloomfield Hills, Michigan: Oakland Community
College Press, 1971.

 

Hill, Joseph E. Selected Aspects of Measurement and 'Map-
ping'. Bloomfield Hills, Michigan: Oakland Commu-
nity College Press, 1968.

 

 

Hill, Joseph E. Symbols and Their Meanings. Bloomfield
Hills, Michigan: Oakland Community College Press,
1969.

 

Hill, Joseph E. The educational sciences. Unpublished
paper, Wayne State University, 1968.

Hill, J. E., and Kerber, August. Models, Methods, and
Analytical Procedures in Educational Research.
Detroit: Wayne State University Press, 1967.

 

 

Holt, R. R. and Luborsky, L. Research in the selection of
psychiatrists. Bullentin-Menninger Clinic, 1952,
16, 125-135.

 

Homans, George C. The Human Group. New York: Harcourt,
Brace and Company, Inc., 1950.

 

Hoogasian, Vaughn. An Examination of Cognitive Style
Profiles as Indicators of Performance Associated
with a Selected Discipline. Bloomfield Hills,
Michigan: Oakland Community College Press, 1971.

 

 

 

Hoyt, C. Test reliability obtained by analysis of variance.
Psychometrika, 1941, 6, 153-160.

 

Hunt, J. McV., Ewing, T. N., LaForge, R., and Gilbert,
W. M. An integrated approach to research on thera-
peutic counseling with samples of results. Journal
Of Conseling Psychology, 1959, 6, 46-54.

 

Jackson, D. D. In Contemporary Psychotherapies, M. I. Stein
(ed.). New York: Free Press, 1961, 256-271.

 

Jordan, J. E., Kaple, J., Maclean, C., and Nicholson, W.
A facet theory model for studying attitudes toward
addiction dependency: some cross-culture findings.
Abstracts. 2nd International Symposium on Drug
Abuse, Jerusalem, May 28-31, 1972.

 

224

Kelly, G. A. The Psychology of Personal Constructs. New
York: Norton, 1955.

 

Korzybski, Alfred. Science and Sanity: An Introduction to
Non-Aristotelian Systems and General Semantics. 3rd
ed. Lakeville, Connecticut: The International Non-
Aristotelian Library Publishing Company, 1949.

 

 

Kunce, Joseph and Anderson, Wayne. Counselor-client Simi-
larity and referral bias. Journal of Counseling
Psychology, 1970, 2, 17, 102—106.

 

 

Lazarus, A. Group therapy of phobic disorders by systematic
desensitization. Journal of Abnormal and Social
Psychology: 1961, 63, 504-510.

 

 

Libo, L. Picture Impressions: A Projective Technique for
Investigating the Patient-Therapist Relationship.
Baltimore: University of Maryland Medical School,
1959.

Libo, L. The projective expression of patient-therapist
attraction. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 1957,
13, 33-36.

 

Lichtenstein, E. Personality similarity and therapeutic
success: a failure to replicate. Journal of Con-
sulting Psychology, 1966, 30, 282.

 

 

Liebert, Robert S. Drug use: symptom, disease, or adoles-
cent experimentation--the task of therapy. Journal
of American College Health Association, 1967, 16,
25-29.

 

Lindesmith, A. R. The Addict and The Law. Bloomington,
Indiana: Indiana University Press, 1965.

 

Loevinger, J. and Ossorio, A. Evaluation of therapy by
self-report: a paradox. Journal of Abnormal and
social Psychology, 1959, 58, 392-394.

 

 

Lorr, M., McNair, D. M., Michaus, W. W. and Raskin, A.
Frequency of treatment and change in psychotherapy.
Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 1962,
64, 281-292.

 

Maslow, A. H. Synanon and Eupsychia. Journal of Human—
istic Psychology, 1967, Z (1), 28-35.

 

 

Mason, Percy. Clinical and psychological observations on
narcotic drug addiction. Israel Medical Journal,
1960, 19 (1-2), 19—26.

 

225

Masserman, Jules H. Part IV: drugs and addiction. Current
Psychiatric Therapies, 1967, 1, 118-156.

McAdam, Glenn F. Personalizing instruction through the edu-
cational sciences of cognitive style and teaching
style. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Wayne
State University, 1971.

McClelland, D. C. Toward a theory of motive acquisition.
American Psychologist, May, 1965, 321-333.

 

Mendelsohn, G. A. and Geller, M. H. Effects of counselor-
client Similarity on the outcome of counseling.
Journal of Counseling Psychology, 1963, 10, 71-75.

Miller, J. G. Objective methods of evaluating process and
outcome in psychotherapy. American Journal of Psy-
chiatry, 1951, 108, 258—263.

 

Murray, E. J. Learning theory and psychotherapy: biotrOpic
versus sacrotrOpic approaches. Journal of Counsel-
ing Psychology.

 

 

Newcomb, T. M. Personality and Social Change: Attitude
Formation in a Student Community. New York: Dry-
den, 1943.

 

 

Newcomb, T. M. The prediction of interpersonal attraction.
American Psychologist, 1956, 11, 575-586.

 

Newcomb, Theodore, Turner, Ralph, and Converse, Philip.
Social Psychology. New York: Holt, Rinehart and
Winston, Inc., 1965.

 

Nishioka, Richard T. An evaluation of a systems analysis
Operation in a community college. Unpublished
doctoral dissertation, Wayne State University, 1970.

Ort, Barbara. An examination of relationships between the
measurable cognitive characteristics of a French I
teacher and the student's success in that course.
Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Michigan State
University, 1971.

Osgood, C. E., Suci, G. J., and Tannenbaum, P. H. The
Measurement of Meaning. Urbana: University of
Illinois Press, 1957.

 

Parloff, M. B. An Analysis of Therapeutic Relationships
in a Group Therapy Setting. Case Western Reserve
University, 1953.

 

 

226

Parloff, Morris B. Therapist-patient relationships and
outcome of psychotherapy. Journal of Consulting
Psychology, 1961, 25, 1, 29—38.

 

 

Patterson, C. H. The place of values in counseling and
psychotherapy. Journal of Conseling Psychology,
1958, 5, 216-223.

 

Quinn, R. D. Psychotherapists expressions as an index to
the quality Of early therapeutic relationships
established by representatives of the non-directive,
adlerian and psychoanalytic schools. Unpublished
doctoral dissertation, University of Chicago, 1950.

Rackman, S. The treatment of anxiety and phobic reactions
by systematic desensitization psychotherapy.
Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 1959,
58, 259-263.

 

Rankin, Stuart C. A theory of an isomorphism-model-hypothe-
sis method of thought. Unpublished doctoral disser-
tation, Wayne State University, 1964.

RapOport, Anatol. What is semantics? The American Scien-
tist, 49 (1), January, 1952.

Rasof, Elvin L. Approach to Optimal decision-making in
selected areas of education. Unpublished doctoral
dissertation, Wayne State University, 1965.

Robinson, Richard L. A descriptive study of specific
achievements and aptitudes of the 'high risk' stu-
dents in Oakland University's higher opportunities
program in education. Unpublished doctoral disser-
tation, Wayne State University, 1971.

Rogers, C. R. In Contemporary Psychotherapies, M. I. Stein

 

(ed.), "The characteristics of a helping relation-
ship." New York: Free Press, 1961, 92-115.
Sabatu, Gerald. Some trends in the treatment and epidemiol-

ogy of drug addiction: psychotherapy and synanon.
Psychotherapy: Therapy, Research and Practice, 1967,
4 (2), 92-96.

 

Salowich, LeRoy. Some biochemical products associated with
memory in the cognitive style Of an individual:
an exploratory study in the educational sciences.
Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Wayne State Uni-
versity, 1971.

227

Sapolsky, A. Relationship between patient-doctor compata-
bility, mutual perception, and outcome of treatment.
Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 1965, 70, 70-76.

Schroeder, A. V. Cognitive Styles: 'The Key to Student
Placement'. Bloomfield Hills, Michigan: Oakland
Community College Press, 1971.

 

 

Schroeder, Arlen V. A study of the relationship between
student and teacher cognitive styles and student-
derived teacher evaluations. Unpublished doctoral
dissertation, Wayne State University, 1970.

Sharoff, R. L. Character problems and their relationship
to drug abuse. American Journal of Psychoanalysis,
1969, 29, 186-193.

 

Shoben, E. J., Jr. The therapeutic Object: men or machines?
Journal of Consulting Psychology, 1963, 10, 264-268.

 

Shuert, Keith L. A study to determine whether a selected
type of cognitive style predisposes one to do well
in mathematics. Unpublished doctoral dissertation,
Wayne State University, 1970.

Snyder, W. U. The Psychotherapy Relationship. New York:
MacMillan, 1961.

 

Spitler, Gail. An investigation of various cognitive styles
and the implications for mathematics education.
Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Wayne State Uni—
versity, 1970.

Strong, S. R. Counseling: an interpersonal influence proc-
ess. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 1968, 15,
215-224.

 

Strong, Stanley R. and Schmidt, L. D. Trustworthiness and
influence in counseling. Journal of Counseling
Psyghology, 1970, 17, 3, 197—204.

 

 

Strupp, H. H. In Experimental Foundations Of Clinical Psy-
chology, A. J. Bachrach (ed.). "Patient-doctor
relationships," 1962, 576-615.

 

Summers, Irvin B. Exploratory study: comparison of cogni-
tive styles to employee evaluation and empooyee
satisfaction. Unpublished doctoral dissertation,
Wayne State University, 1971.

 

228

Svagr, Virginia, Fragale, Marvin, Zussman, Steven. Teacher's
Rating Scale. Detroit: G.M.S. Associates, Inc.,
1971.

 

 

Tannenbaum, P. H. and Osgood, C. E. The principle of con-
gruity in the prediction of attitude change. Psy-
chology Review, 1955, 62, 42-55.

 

Taylor, J. W. Relationship of success and length in psy-
chotherapy. Journal of Consulting Psychology, 1956,
20, 332.

 

Truax, C. B. Effective ingredients in psychotherapy. Jour-
nal of Counseling Psychology, 1961, 10, 256-263.

Truax, C. B. The process of group psychotherapy. Psychology
Monographs, 1961, 75, Whole NO. 511.

 

Truckey, George Russel. A study directed toward develOpment
of a procedure for analyzing and improving communi-
cation processes within school districts.- Unpublished
doctoral dissertation, Wayne State University, 1963.

Tuma, A. H. and Gustad, J. W. The effects of client and
counselor personality characteristics on client
learning in counseling. Journal of Counseling Psy-
chology, 1957, p, 136-141.

 

Tyler, L. E. The Work of the Counselor.- New York: Apple-
ton-Century-Crafts, Inc., 1961.

Van der Veen, F. Effects of the therapist and the patient
on each other's therapeutic behavior. Journal of
Consulting Psychology, 1965, 29, 19-26.

 

 

Van der Veen, F. The perception by clients and by judges
of the conditions Offered by the therapist in the
therapy relationship. University of Wisconsin Psyé
chiatric Institute Bulletin, 1961, NO. 10, 1.

 

Warner, James L. An analysis of the cognitive styles of
community college freshmen enrolled in a life
science course. Unpublished doctoral dissertation,
Wayne State University, 1970.

Warner, J. L. An Analysis of The Cognitive Styles of _
Students Utilizing Different Modes Of_Instruction.
Bloomfield Hills, Michigan: Oakland Community '
College Press, 1971.

 

 

 

 

III!

229

Wasser, Laurence. Are Marks Larks? Bloomfield Hills,
Michigan: Oakland Community College Press, 1971.

 

Wasser, Laurence. The Educational Science Of Cognitive
Style. Detroit: Oakland Community College Press,
1971.

 

Wasser, Laurence. An investigation into cognitive style as
a facet of teacher's systems Of student appraisal.
Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of
Michigan, 1969.

Waters, Thomas F. A report Of an internal evaluation sys-
tem for an experimental educational institution in
an urban area. Unpublished doctoral dissertation,
Wayne State University, 1970.

Wagan, Michael. Effect of therapist-patient personality
variables on therapeutic Outcome. Journal of Con-
sulting and Clinical PSYChOlOgYI 1970, 32 (3), 356-
361.

 

 

Wolber, L. R. The Technique of Psychotherapy. New York:
Grune and Stratton, 1954.

 

Wolpe, J. Psychotherapy By Reciprocal Inhibition. London:
Oxford University, 1958.

 

Wyett, J. L. A pilot study to analyze cognitive style and
teaching style with reference to selected strata of
the defined educational sciences. Unpublished
doctoral dissertation, Wayne State University, 1967.

Yasaitis, V. D. The Underachievement Syndrome. Bloomfield
Hills, Michigan: Oakland Community College Press,
1971.

 

Zussman, Steven. Cognitive Style and Administrative Style.
Bloomfield Hills, Michigan: Oakland Community
College Press, 1971.

 

Zussman, Steven. A pilot study exploration of cognitive
style and administrative style as defined in the
educational sciences. Unpublished doctoral disser-
tation, Wayne State University, 1968.