HtGHLY OOMPETENT GIRLS
AND DEUNQUENT GIRLS:
A CGMPARATIV‘E STUDY OF VALUE‘NEEDS
AND SELF-CONCEPT PROHLES

Dissertation for the Degree of Ph. D.
MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY
HARRIETT K. LiGHT
1 9 7 6

we

- 46.1.

 

‘ nanny
IL MLJMWJ‘ ‘ I

, -. ‘..K
.x "t." “(~" ‘.
. ,’Q‘-i-
. .1»;
J
~ ( ,\.
\\ '.
« \ u
5‘ '
. l ’
O t ~ ‘
‘

     

-- v w anififi, u

u {fins-Laggtns ‘

 
 
   

Wag "1

 

We” ‘

    

nomm
5 10.429 5

 

ABSTRACT

HIGHLY COMPETENT GIRLS AND DELINQUENT GIRLS:
A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF VALUE-NEEDS AND
SELF-CONCEPT PROFILES
BY

Harriett K. Light

The overall objective of this study was to deter-
mine the relationship between the self-concept and value-
needs enhancement of adolescent girls and their social
competency.

Four groups of adolescent girls between the ages
of 14 and 16 years from two urban areas of a midwestern
state served as the subjects. These groups included:

1. Twenty high school girls identified as highly
socially competent.

2. Twenty girls randomly selected from the same
high schools as were the highly competent girls.

3. Twenty girls referred to the courts, excluding
delinquents whose disposition was to an institution.

4. Twenty institutionalized delinquents.

The self-concepts of the subjects were measured
through the use of six categories of the Tennessee Self-

Concept Scale. These categories were Physical-Self,

Harriett K. Light

Moral-Ethical-Self, Personal-Self, Social-Self, Family-
Self, and the Total Positive Score. Value-needs pro-
files were measured by the Values Inventory of Behavioral
Responses, an instrument consisting of the following
eight categories: Affection, Power, Skill, Respect,
Enlightenment, Wealth, Rectitude and Well-being.

The data were analyzed by multivariate analysis
of variance with univariate analysis of variance and
Helmert contrasts as post hoc procedures.

Based upon the results of the study, the following
conclusions were made:

1. Highly competent, randomly selected, court-
referred and institutionalized delinquent adolescent
females differ significantly in their self-concepts, as
measured by the Tennessee Self-Concept Scale, and in their
value-needs profiles, as measured by the Values Inventory
of Behavioral Responses.

2. Specifically, the highly competent group
differs from the average of the mean scores of the ran-
domly selected, the court-referred and the institution-
alized delinquents in the following categories of the
TSCS: Total Positive Score (P < .0002), Moral-Ethical-
Self (P < .0003), Personal—Self (P < .0008), and Family-
Self (P < .0008); and in the following categories of the

VIBR: Enlightenment (P < .0009) and Skill (P < .0005).

Harriett K. Light

3. While there were no other significant dif-
ferences noted in the study, an important trend was that
the institutionalized delinquents did score consistently
lower on the TSCS, except in the Physical-Self category,
and that the randomly selected and court-referred subjects
had very similar scores.

4. Similarities were noted between the mean
group scores of all four groups in the Affection, Power
and Respect categories of the VIBR, while the randomly
selected, court-referred and institutionalized delinquents

had similar scores in all categories of the VIBR.

HIGHLY COMPETENT GIRLS AND DELINQUENT GIRLS:
A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF VALUE-NEEDS AND

SELF-CONCEPT PROFILES

BY

Harriett K. Light

A DISSERTATION

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

DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY

Department of Family Ecology

1976

To:

Karen,

DEDICATION

Bob, Paul,

ii

and Steve

with love.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

At the completion of this study, gratitude is
now extended to:

The Bush Foundation, St. Paul, Minnesota, for
awarding me a Bush Leadership Fellowship without which
the pursuit of this doctoral program would have been
severely curtailed. Special thanks to D. Donald Peddie,
Program Director, for his technical assistance and advice;

Dr. Reis Hall, former Chief Research Analyst,
Federal Bureau of Prisons, for his guidance and encourage-
ment during the study and for his knowledgeable instruc-
tion in the areas of delinquency prevention and correction;

The Law Enforcement Council of the State wherein
the study was conducted, for its invaluable aid in the
planning, facilitation and implementation of the study's
goals and procedures;

Bob Wilson, Michigan State University Office of
Research Consultation, for his expert counsel in the
statistical analysis of the study data;

The judges and probation officers, the school

administrators and guidance counselors and the staff at

iii

the institutions for delinquent girls, for their kind
assistance in the administration of the research instru-
ments;

The girls themselves, who participated in the
study, for their willing—-and often poignant--self—
revelations which formed the very matrix of this project;

My Doctoral Committee:

Dr. Robert Boger, Chairperson, who gave so freely
of his time--while on sabbatical leave-~both tolerating
my impatience and guiding my efforts in the completion
of this dissertation. His unique insight into graduate
student dilemmas made him a valuable and sensitive
counselor;

Dr. Beatrice Paolucci, who stimulates all who
come in contact with her to look beyond the microcosm of
academia to the macrocosm of the larger society and the
world in seeking new knowledge and understanding of human
problems. It is she who taught me to see the family's
decisions as crucial to the betterment of all of society;

Dr. Margaret Bubolz, who so willingly shares
her extensive grasp of family research and theory--both
inside and outside the classroom. Her eagerness to
discuss divergent ideas with her students, along with
her respect for their individuality and personal opinions,

exemplifies her reverence for human dignity;

iv

Dr. Ralph Lewis, who, because of his unique com-
bination of research expertise, theoretical understanding
of crime and delinquency and sensitivity to the problems
of those unfortunate enough to find themselves in trouble
with the law, has been an invaluable source of information
and advice. The many hours he spent with me discussing
the complex issues of delinquency are greatly appreciated;

Donald Duquette, J.D., who provided innovative
approaches to the age-old legal problems related to
parent-child relationships. His willingness to share
his many experiences relevant to this area made an
immeasurable contribution to the perspectives revealed
in this study.

The pursuit and attainment of the academic and
professional goal symbolized in the completion of this
dissertation are all the more meaningful because of the
participation of my family. My deepest appreciation,
then, to:

My husband, for providing me a challenge to
succeed as a "dual career" woman, for not requesting my
adherence to a Parsonian expressive role in our marriage;

My children--Karen, Bob, Paul, Steve--who gave
me encouragement and support as no academician could,
whose humor and sensitivity sustained me many times in an

often frustrating adjustment to the role of doctoral

student. In the end it is they who have made the most
priceless contribution to this endeavor: They taught me

to see the world through the eyes of youth.

vi

Chapter

I.

II.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . .

Statement of the Problem . . . .
Statement of Objectives. . .
The Conceptual Framework . .
Conceptual Definitions . . .
Assumptions. . . . . . .

REVIEW OF LITERATURE . . . . . . . .
Values, Self-Concept, and Behavior . . .

Values and Behavioral Choices . .
Adolescent Value Formation . . .
A Definition of the Self-Concept .
Self- -Concept Theory . . . .
Development of the Self- -Concept .
Components of the Self- -Concept. . .
Male-Female Differences in Self-Concept.
Summary . . . . . . . . . . .

Theoretical Explanations for Juvenile
Delinquency . . . . . . . . . .

A Definition of Juvenile Delinquency. .
Juvenile Delinquency: A Historical
Perspective . . . . . . . . .
Delinquent Behavior as a Continuum . .
Juvenile Delinquency: A Psycholoqical
Explanation . . . . . . . . .
Juvenile Delinquency: The Sociological
Viewpoint . . . . . . . . . .
Delinquency as a Result of Circum-
stances . . . . . . . . . .
Juvenile Delinquency as a Result of
Social Disorganization and Anomie . .
Summary . . . . . . . . . . .

Female Juvenile Delinquency . . . . .

The Konopka Theory. . . . . . .
Society and Delinquent Girls . . .

vii

Page

\lO‘bJUJH H

\D

11
12
l3
14
16
18
20
21
21

23
24

27
3O
32

33
36

4O

4O
43

Chapter

III.

IV.

V.

The Contemporary Situation . . .
Statistics on Male and Female
Delinquency . . . . . . .
The Family and Female Delinquency.
The Self—Concept and Female Delin-
quency . . . . . . . . .
Summary . . . . . . . . .

Conclusion . . . . . . . . .
METHODOLOGY . . . . . . . . .
The Sample . . . . . . . . .

Description of the Subjects. . .
Selection Procedure for Subjects .
Rationale for Selection of Subjects
Sampling Procedure. . . . . .
Research Design. . . . . . .

Instrumentation . . . . . . .

Rationale for Selection of Research
Instruments . . . . . . .

Instrument Description: TSCS . .

Instrument Description: VIBR . .

Administration of Research Instruments

The Null Hypotheses . . . . . .
Operational Definitions. .
Data Reduction and Analysis . . .

Data Reduction Procedures . . .
Analysis of the Data . . . . .

RESULTS OF DATA ANALYSIS . . . . .

Results of the Tennessee Self—Concept
scale 0 O O O O O O O O 0

Values Inventory of Behavioral Responses

Summary of the Results . . . . .
DISCUSSION OF THE RESULTS. . . . .

Introduction . . . . . . . .
The Tennessee Self—Concept Scale. .
The Values Inventory of Behavioral
Responses. . . . . . . . .
Summary . . . . . . . . . .

Page
45

47
49

52
53

54
55
55

55
55
59
60
61

62

62
64
65
65

66
69
71

71
72

77
77
91
104
106

106
106

115
125

Chapter Page

VI. CONCLUSIONS, IMPLICATIONS, AND SUGGESTIONS

FOR FUTURE RESEARCH . . . . . . . . 128
Study Conclusions . . . . . . . . 128
Study Inferences . . . . . . . . . 129
Limitations of the Study . . . . . . 134
Suggestions for Further Research. . . . 136
APPENDICES
APPENDIX
A. DIRECTIONS FOR SELECTING HIGHLY COMPETENT
GIRIJS I I I I I I I I I I I I I 138
B. DIRECTIONS FOR SELECTING RANDOM CONTROL
GROUP I I I I I I I I I I I I Q 146
C I TSCS I I I I I I I I I I I I I I l 4 9
D I VIBRI I I I I I I I I I I I I I 157
E. DIRECTIONS AND EXPLANATION GIVEN TO SUB-
JECTS I I I I I I I I I I I I I 168
REFERENCES I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 169

ix

10.

11.

12.

13.

LIST OF TABLES

Theories of Delinquency . . . . . . .
Design Matrix . . . . . . . . . .
Design Matrix . . . . . . . . . .

Results of Multivariate Analysis of Variance
Test of Differences Between Groups on the
TSCS I I I I I I I I I I I I I

Results of Univariate Post Hoc Analysis of
Variance Test of Differences in Specific
Categories of the TSCS. . . . . . .

Group Mean Scores and Standard Deviations
for Specific Categories of the TSCS . .

Results of Multivariate Helmert Contrasts
Between Groups on the TSCS . . . . .

Results of Univariate Post Hoc Analysis of
Significant Multivariate Helmert Contrasts
for Five Categories of the TSCS. . . .

Univariate Analysis of Variance Test of Dif-
ferences Between Groups on the Total
Positive Score . . . . . . . . .

Total Positive Group Mean Scores 1... . .

Results of Univariate Post Hoc Helmert Con-
trast of Differences Between Groups on
Total Positive Score . . . . . . .

Results of Multivariate Analysis of Variance
Test of Differences Between Groups on the
VIBR. I I I I I I I I I I I I

Results of Univariate Post Hoc Analysis of
Variance Test of Differences in Specific
Categories of the VIBR. . . . . . .

Page

37

63

63

79

80

82

85

86

88

89

92

93

95

Table Page

14. Group Mean Scores and Standard Deviations
for Specific Categories of the VIBR . . . 97

15. Results of Multivariate Helmert Contrasts
Between Groups on the VIBR . . . . . . 100

16. Univariate Post Hoc Analysis of Significant

Multivariate Helmert Contrasts for Eight
Value-Needs Categories of the VIBR . . . lOl

xi

LIST OF FIGURES
Figure Page

1. Hypothetical formulation of behavior con-
tinuum . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25

2. Continuum of social competency. . . . . . 60

3. Statistical procedures and corresponding

tables in Chapter IV . . . . . . . . 76
4. Group mean scores in Tennessee Self—Concept

Scale categories. . . . . . . . . . 84
5. Group mean scores in Total Positive Score . . 90

6. Group mean scores in Values Inventory of
Behavioral Responses categories. . . . . 99

7. Relationship between Self-Concept and
Behavior . . . . . . . . . . . . 116

xii

CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION

Statement of the Problem

 

The number of females arrested for serious crimes
increased 52% during the five-year period from 1968 to
1973; the number of males arrested during the same period
increased only 8%. Equally notable are the arrests of
adolescent females under 18 years of age which increased
35%, while arrests for young males under 18 rose just 10%
during the same time span (Uniform Crime Reports, 1974).
Such statistics attest to the seriousness of criminal
and delinquent behavior among women in America and, accord—
ingly, the rise in behavior considered inappropriate by
society.

This study investigated the relationship of self-
concept and value-needs to the social competency of
adolescent girls. Social competency is here defined as
the ability of an individual to achieve in those areas
that society has designated as important, such as edu-
cation, leadership, interpersonal relationships and
conformity to established rules and laws. Delinquency

is defined as nonconformity to society's established

“

rules and laws of a degree severe enough, according to the
judgment of a court, to require institutionalization in
a correctional facility.1
While there are many dimensions to the etiology
of delinquency, there appears to be a number of factors
of an external environmental nature that, if present as
a group, are highly related to the increase in female
delinquency. These factors include the increasingly tech-
nological orientation of a society that is rapidly becoming
equated with an inability to provide worthwhile jobs for
youth (Phillips, 1972), changes in the family that result
in less interaction between parent and child (Bronfen-
brenner, 1973), and the cultural alterations in the
position of women in society (Simon, 1975; Konopka, 1965).
However, the internal factors having to do with individual
psychology, such as the adolescent's self-concept and the
extent to which he/she is able to experience enhancement
of value-needs, are being ever more widely viewed as the
deciding factors in whether or not the individual engages
in delinquent behavior (Lasswell, 1948; Rogers, 1951;
Matza, 1964; Reckless, 1961).
The primary focus of this study was to describe

and compare the self-concept and value-needs enhancement

of adolescent girls varying in social competency.

 

1Additional terms relevant to this research are
defined later in this chapter.

 

Statement of Objectives

The overall objective of this study was to deter-
mine the relationship between the self-concept and value-
needs enhancement of adolescent girls and their degree of
social competency. The specific objectives of this study
were as follows:

1. To determine and compare the self—concepts,
as measured by the Tennessee Self-Concept Scale, of four
groups of adolescent girls varying in social competency:
highly competent high school girls, randomly selected
high school girls, court referred and institutionalized
delinquent girls.

2. To determine and compare the value—needs pro—
files, as measured by the Values Inventory of Behavioral

Responses, of the four groups of adolescent girls.

The Conceptual Framework

 

Values are things of the mind that have to do with
the vision people have of "the good life" (Rescher, 1969).
As such, they are related to basic human needs. Values,
then, serve as guides for an individual's behavior, cri-
teria for the decisions he/she makes and determinants of
the goals toward which he/she strives (Raths, Harmin, &
Simon, 1966). Fulfillment of one's value-needs depends
upon one's neurolegacy and the richness of the environment.

Certain values have been identified as common to

all individuals (Lasswell, 1948), values which are not a

set of norms but a framework of open-ended, continuum
categories in which an individual experiences varying
degrees of enhancement or deprivation. These categories
are affection, power, skill, respect, enlightenment,
wealth, rectitude, and well—being. It has been theorized
that behavioral choices and decisions of the individual
are made according to his/her current status in any or all
of the value categories (Lasswell, 1948). Consequently,
if an individual feels deprived in a value category, it
is logical to assume that his/her behavior will be dif-
ferent than the behavior of an individual who perceives
personal needs to be met (Seiders & Sanford, 1971).
Values, however, are not the only motivators for
human behavior. The role of the self-concept must also
be considered. The self-concept is comprised of the views
each person holds of himself/herself in relation to what
society expects; it is the frame of reference through
which the individual views the world (Fitts, 1971).
Basically phenomenological, the self—concept is built
upon the general principle that the human being reacts to
the phenomenal world in terms of the way he/she perceives
that world. According to Fitts (1971), the most salient
feature of that world is the person's self, the self as
perceived by him/her. In order to understand completely
an individual's behavior, it is necessary to be able to

perceive that individual's phenomenal world as he/she

does (Rogers, 1951). This, however, is impossible; hence,
the understanding of the individual's self—concept and

the degree to which he/she is able to fulfill value-needs
must be a close approximation. Such knowledge assists in
comprehending how the organism responds and also how he/
she interprets his/her responses to the impinging environ—
ment (Fitts, 1971).

Moreover, such knowledge adds another dimension,
the organism, to the theories of learning and behavior
that have been based upon a simple S-R response. Awareness
of the impact of the self-concept and knowledge of the
individual's value-needs enhancement leads one to the
recognition that the organism is an intervening variable
between stimulus and response, one which mediates and
influences the kind of responses which stimuli will elicit
(Fitts, 1971).

An understanding of the self—concept, along with
a knowledge of the effects of value-needs, provides
access to an important variable in delinquent behavior.

A strong, favorable self-concept tends to isolate the
child from adopting and engaging in delinquent behavior
and ensures his/her avoidance of social situations that
might lead to delinquency. Likewise, a self-concept in
which one is viewed as unworthy would function in the
opposite manner and tend to guide one into delinquent

behavior (Matza, 1964; Reckless, 1973; Jensen, 1973).

An understanding of human behavior, then, requires
an ecological model. Such an approach allows for a
holistic study of the individual's interaction with his/
her near and far environments, thus requiring an under-
standing of the many factors, and their relationships,

that influence the human organism's development.

(Auerswald, 1968)

Conceptual Definitions

 

The following conceptual definitions were utilized
in this study:

1. Self-concept. The views each person holds of

 

himself/herself in relation to what society expects, the
frame of reference through which the individual views the
world (Fitts, 1971).

2. Values. Things of the mind that have to do
with the vision people have of "the good life" for them-
selves and their fellows (Rescher, 1969).

3. Social Competence. The ability of an indi-

 

vidual to achieve in those areas that society has desig-
nated as important, i.e., education, leadership, inter-
personal relationships, conformity to established rules
and laws.

4. Delinquency. Nonconformity to society's

 

established rules and laws of a degree severe enough,
according to the judgment of a court, to require insti-

tutionalization in a correctional facility.

5. Value-needs. Values that are closely related

 

to the basic needs of the human organism (Lasswell, 1948).

6. Continuum of Social Competence. A method of

 

viewing socially approved behavior as a continuous whole
but varying in degrees and ranging from highly competent
high school girls, randomly selected high school girls,

and court—referred girls to institutionalized delinquent

girls.

Assumptions

 

The assumptions upon which this study was based are
as follows:

1. The prevention and correction of a social
problem is not possible without first having a phenomeno—
logical understanding of the individuals involved in that
problem.

2. The child is born into a given culture with
criteria and standards of worth already defined and
established. The child is subject to a set of built—in
rewards and punishments for exhibiting or failing to
exhibit a certain type of behavior (Sawrey & Telford,
1968).

3. The individual self-concept is comprised of
the views each person holds of the self in relation to
what society expects of him/her. It is the frame of
reference through which the individual views the world

(Fitts, 1971).

4. An individual's self-concept is an important
determiner of behavior. One is more likely to act
according to what one thinks one can do, than according
to what one is physically or mentally capable of doing
(Rogers, 1951; Fitts, 1971).

5. The self-concept of adolescent girls can be

measured by the Tennessee Self-Concept Scale.

6. Values are things of the mind that have to do
with the vision people have of the "good life" for them-
selves and their fellows (Rescher, 1969). They are
related to basic human needs (Lasswell, 1948).

7. There are eight value-need categories that
are basic to all individuals: affection, respect, skill,
enlightenment, power, wealth, well-being, and rectitude.
Behavioral choices and decisions of the individual are
made according to his/her status in any or all of the
eight categories (Lasswell, 1948).

8. The status of adolescent girls in the eight
value-needs categories can be measured by the Values
Inventory of Behavioral Responses.

9. The social competence of adolescent girls can
be viewed within the framework of a continuum ranging
from highly competent high school girls to institution-

alized delinquents.

CHAPTER II
REVIEW OF LITERATURE

Values, Self-Concept, and Behavior

 

Values are defined by Rescher (1969) as "things
of the mind that have to do with the vision people have
of the good life." Kluckhohn (1952) views values as a
conception of the desirable which influences the selection
from available modes, means and ends of action. Values,
then, are related to basic human needs and, as such, serve
as guides for human behavior, criteria for the decisions
one makes and determinants of the goals toward which one
strives (Raths, Harmin, Simon, 1966). Enhancement of
human value-needs depends upon one's neurolegacy and the
richness of one's environment, and the value profiles
that emerge throughout one's development portray the
uniqueness of the individual's environment as well as an

indication of his/her potential (Rucker, 1970).

Values and Behavioral Choices

 

The family is basic to the formation of an indi-
vidual's values. It plays the role of former and trans-

former. Because values exist in a societal context, and

10

not in a vacuum, the family serves as the initial facili-
tator of value formation in the life of the child.

The concepts of assimilation and accommodation,
as explained by Piaget, are also basic to value formation.
A child utilizes and incorporates experiences from his/her
environment (assimilation), and experiences, in turn,
affect and change the child's perception of his/her world
and become an integral part of his/her being (accommo-
dation). The child's nervous system is responsible for
the processing and interpretation of this information
(Phillips, 1969). Therefore, it is possible to have the
same experience affect different children in different
ways.

Lasswell (1948) has categorized values that he
believes are common to all individuals. These categories
are not a set of norms; rather they are a framework of
open—ended, continuum categories in which individual
experiences represent varying degrees of enhancement or
deprivation. The categories are: (l) affection,

(2) respect, (3) skill, (4) enlightenment, (5) power,

(6) wealth, (7) well-being, and (8) rectitude. Behavioral
choices and decisions of the individual are made according
to his/her current status in any or all of the eight
categories. Consequently, if the human being feels
deprived in a particular values category, it is logical

to assume his/her behavior will be different than that

11

of an individual who perceives personal needs to be met
in that same category (Seiders & Sanford, 1971).

Rokeach (1973) has made a distinction between two
types of values. Instrumental values refer to desirable
modes of conduct and terminal values concern desirable end-
states of existence. The instrumental values may, in
fact, be the means to achieving terminal values. It
appears that Lasswell's value categories might be con-

sidered terminal values.

Adolescent Value Formation

 

Many factors influence the degree of importance
placed on personal qualities by adolescents. Deitz (1972)
investigated the influence of social class, sex, and
delinquency-nondelinquency on adolescent values. Subjects
were asked to write down as many personal qualities as
they could think of that they regarded as important for
people to have. Where delinquents value traits under-
lying the making of a favorable social impression, non—
delinquents value traits concerned with social responsi-
bility. In addition, males focused slightly more upon
physical attractiveness and females upon traits necessary
for functioning in interpersonal relationships, while
middle—class adolescents were distinguished from lower-
class adolescents in their preference for the possession
of intelligence and ambition. Although it may be argued

that this study ascertained personal preferences rather

12

than values, its results are important to consider in
light of the definition of values previously given as
"things of the mind that have to do with the vision
people have of the good life" in that understanding what
the individual perceives as important will assist in a
comprehension of his/her behavior and thinking.

A Definition of the Self-
Concept '

 

The self-concept is concisely defined by Fitts
(1972) as the view each person holds of himself/herself.
Coopersmith (1967) contends further that the self-concept
is an abstraction that an individual develops about the
attributes, capacities, objects, and activities which he/
she possesses. Sawrey and Telford (1968) state that the
self-concept refers to the individual's conception of the
kind of a person he/she is. And Kagan (1971) believes
that the child's self-concept consists of his/her evalu-
ation of the degree to which his/her attributes match
those that the culture has designated as desirable,
attributes in the Western culture which include virtue,
honesty, strength, attractiveness, intelligence, wealth,
and power. Despite their varying interpretations, all
of these definitions have a commonality: The self-concept
is the individual's personal interpretation of his/her
world and how he/she measures up in relation to the

expectations of his/her culture.

13

Self-Concept Theory

 

The self-concept has been a topic of concern for
behavioral scientists for some time and is increasingly
becoming a central construct for the understanding of
people and their behavior (Fitts, 1971). A theoretical
school, the self-theory, has evolved and is evidenced in
the work of Rogers (1951).

Self-theory is basically phenomenological and is
built upon the general principle that the human reacts to
his/her phenomenal world in terms of the way he/she per-
ceives that world. According to Fitts (1971), the most
salient feature of each person's phenomenal world is his/
her own self--the self as perceived by him/her. This is
the perceived self or the individual's self-concept.

Self-theory contends that human behavior is always
meaningful and that understanding an individual's behavior
would be possible if his/her phenomenal world could be
perceived as he/she perceives it. Because such a per-
ception is impossible, the closest approximation to this
understanding is a comprehension of the individual's self-
concept, an important concept in the study of behavior
because, as one of the most prominent aspects of the
individual's phenomenal world, it tends to be the most
stable feature. In fact, Monge (1973) examined the con—
notative structure of the self-concept by factor analysis

of a semantic differential instrument and found it to be

14

essentially constant through adolescence, though it was
more constant for boys than for girls.

The individual's environment is constantly chang-
ing, then, but the self-concept is relatively fixed and
stable. According to self-theory, the self-concept is the
frame of reference through which the individual interacts
with his/her world, and, hence, is an important influence
in human behavior. Indeed, given knowledge of an indi-
vidual's self-concept, it is possible to advance an under-
standing and prediction of his/her behavior.

According to Sawrey and Telford (1968), an indi-
vidual's self-concept eventually becomes a more important
determiner of behavior than physical potential or social
competence. A person, then, is more likely to act accord—
ing to what he/she thinks he/she is and believes he/she
can do than according to what he/she actually is or is
physically capable of doing. If an individual believes
the self to be dependent, inadequate, and inferior, this
belief will dictate his/her actions and, to some degree,

his/her probabilities of success.

Development of the Self—Concept

 

The child is born into a given culture with cri-
teria and standards of worth already defined and estab-
lished. And the child is subject to a set of built-in

rewards for being or failing to be a certain type of

15

person and for doing or not doing certain things (Sawrey &
Telford, 1968). The human organism comes to evaluate the
self in terms of these social reinforcements. Gecas, et
a1. (1973), in a study of 219 families consisting of
father, mother, college-age child, and high school-age
child, explored two kinds of relationships which have

been found to affect the development of self—concept:
mirroring and modeling. Findings were that the child's
self-concept was more closely related to his/her parents'
perceptions of him/her (mirroring) than to his/her
parents' self-conceptions (modeling). Moreover, while
there was a slight tendency for mirror correlations to

be stronger for cross-sex parent-child relationships, both
boys and girls tended to model father more than mother,

a tendency which Gecas suggests is a function of the
father being perceived as a more powerful figure than

the mother.

As the child matures, he/she gains a larger frame
of reference for self-evaluation when he/she observes how
others are treated in comparison to himself/herself. The
child eventually comes to perceive of himself/herself in
much the same way that he/she thinks others perceive him/
her. If other people display respect, approval, and love
toward him/her, he/she comes to view the self in a
favorable light. If others' views are derogatory or

hateful, however, he/she develops a low or negative

16

self-concept. Thus, the individual has no other measure
of his/her own value than the recognition he/she receives
or has received from others (Sawrey & Telford, 1968).
Bledsoe (1973), in his study of 50 male and 50
female ninth graders, discovered that the parents per-
ceived their adolescents more favorably than the adoles—
cents perceived themselves. Gray (1974) found similar
results in his study of high school seniors who rated
themselves on 100 positive and negative traits as
describing or not describing themselves. The parents
and peers of the subjects were then asked to rate each
trait as they felt the subject would rate himself/herself.
The parents and peers gave ratings which correlated sig-
nificantly with those of the subjects, results which tend
to indicate a relationship between how adolescents per-
ceive themselves and how their parents and peers perceive

them.

Components of the Self-Concept

 

A central component of the self-concept is one's
identity (Erikson, 1968). And identity formation arises
from the selection and rejection of childhood identifi-
cations and their absorption into a new configuration for
the child. The society in which the child lives plays a
crucial role in this identity formation process by acting
as a mediator of behavior and self-conception. For

example, society may recognize the child as arousing

17

displeasure or discomfort and suggest that he/she change.
And, frequently, the ways in which it is suggested by
society that he/she change are not ways that to the child
add up to anything that is coherent in view of the concept
he/she has of himself/herself. Yet, society views such
change as simply a matter of will and resistance to change
as a matter of inferiority, heredity, or just a lack of
desire to change. Hence, society often does not acknowl-
edge the impact of the long and intricate childhood history
that has played an important role in making the adolescent
what he/she is, thus restricting the youth's further
choice of identity alteration.

The final identity, as fixed at the end of adoles-
cence, is comprised of all significant identifications of
the past and is influenced by the many and varied experi-
ences that the individual has had throughout his/her life,
but it also alters all these experiences in order to make
a unique and coherent whole. On the other hand, identity
confusion may exist for the adolescent who fails to estab-
lish his/her identity, a confusion which usually manifests
itself when the adolescent is faced with experiences that
demand his/her decisions or occupational choice, compe-

tition or interpersonal intimacy.

18

Male-Female Differences

in Self-Concept

 

 

The process of identity formulation has been
theorized to be more difficult for girls in American
society than for boys (Cavan, 1975). This is because of
the traditional and current lack of Opportunities in
American society for females to achieve self-esteem
through personal achievement due to their designation
to the role of wife and mother, or to "other oriented"
sources of esteem. Howard (1960) found such indications
of identity conflicts in the 69 adolescent girls she
studied; and these conflicts were the cause of some con—
scious anxiety experienced by the subjects.

Despite findings like Howard's, the bulk of
research pertaining to sex differences in the self-concept
indicate inconsistent results. Bardwick (1971) concluded
that women have lower self-esteem than men. Several
other studies may serve to explain Bardwick's conclusion.
These studies have shown that both men and women, and
high school boys and girls, devalue work labeled as done
by women in comparison to the same work labeled as nor-
mally done by men (Mischel, 1974). And both men and
women have been found to depict embarrassing things
happening to successful women and good things happening
to successful men in academic settings (Monahan, 1974).

Indeed, according to Maccoby and Jacklin (1974), it is

19

possible for women who know they belong to a sex that
is devalued in these ways to have a poor opinion of
themselves.

Several studies have reported that males in late
adolescence have greater confidence in task performance
than do females (Leventhal & Lane, 1970; Jacobson, et
al., 1970; Feather, 1968). However, while no studies
could be found indicating females to have greater confi-
dence in task performance, two were found that indicated
no differences. Battle (1966), in a study to ascertain
adolescents' confidence in reaching minimal goals of
school performance in math, found no differences between
males and females in their expressed confidence. And
Feather (1967), who studied adolescents' estimate of
their success on tasks described as involving luck or
skill, also found no difference between estimates given
by males and females.

In view of such inconsistent results in the
research findings pertaining to difference in the self—
concepts of males and females, it is impossible to draw
any definite conclusions. However, it is obvious that
although no differences may exist in the findings of
some studies, no studies could be found which indicated
that females had a stronger self-concept in any aspect,
Whereas studies were found which indicated that males

Imad stronger or more positive self-concepts than females.

20

Summary

The self-concept, values, and behavior are intri-
cately interwoven. The self-concept is formed within the
context of the family and society; value formation also
takes place within the family and the society. Both are
influenced by a multitude of experiences over the lifetime
of the child and are basically grounded upon the indi-
vidual's neurolegacy.

Values are defined as concepts having to do with
the vision pe0ple have of the good life. There are eight
universal values related to basic human needs as identified
by Lasswell (1968). The self-concept, on the other hand,
is defined as the way in which an individual perceives
himself/herself in relation to what society deems impor-
tant. Given these two definitions, then, we can thus say
that values serve as a mechanism or tool against which the
self-concept is judged. As an example: Affection has
been deemed a universal value by Lasswell. An individual
feeling of being unloved by others, or not liked by family
or peers, will contribute to a negative self-concept. A
person so affected is thus using the value-need of
affection as a yardstick by which to judge himself/her-
self.

The self—concept and values serve as guides to
the individual's behavior (Fitts, 1971; Rescher, 1969;

‘Kagan, 1971). It is therefore important to understand

21

adolescents' perceptions of themselves in order to meet
their needs and assist them in developing a strong, posi-
tive self-concept since a negative self-concept usually
contributes to behavior that is not in accordance with,
or does not support the universal value-needs of indi-
viduals in the larger society.

Theoretical Explanations for
Juvenile Delinquency

 

 

A Definition of Juvenile
DeIInquency

 

 

According to Cavan (1975), juvenile delinquency
refers to the failure of children and youth to meet cer-
tain obligations expected of them by the society in which
they live. Moreover, legal definitions have as their
base this general reference. In fact, juvenile court
laws define a "Delinquent Act" as "an act that if com-
mitted by an adult would be called a crime" (National
Advisory Commission on Criminal Justice Standards and
Goals, 1973, p. 248).

In addition, the Uniform Juvenile Court Act (1968)
defines a delinquent act as: "An act, other than a minor
traffic offense, designated as a crime under the law."
This Act, in turn, has created a special category, that
of the Unruly Child, for that child "who is habitually
or regularly truant from school, or habitually disobeys
reasonable orders of his parent, guardian, or other cus-

todian and is out of control, or has run away from home,

22

and is in need of treatment or rehabilitation." This
child can, however, be adjudicated delinquent if he/she
repeatedly commits offenses listed under the unruly cate-
gory.

Whatever the classification or definition of
delinquency, all have their base in the offenses specified
in the juvenile delinquency law of the state. When
deviation from this law is detected and the child is
either brought in by police or otherwise referred to the
juvenile court, this deviancy constitutes delinquency of
an official type (Cavan, 1975).

These definitions seem cold and are, of course,
legalistic, but there is a completely humane aspect that
must be considered. That is this: before an adolescent
can meet these definitions, he/she must be caught; his/her
‘behavior must be noticed by someone and brought to the
attention of the legal personnel, which means he/she must
be judged, in some manner, by the Court. Thus, those who
are adjudicated delinquents, may represent a wide variety
of personalities; what they have in common, however, is
that they have come into conflict with society. Still,
they are adolescents, and, as such, they share a great
many things in common with other adolescents. As Konopka
(1966) states, they are part of the human race with its
common traits and problems. The "good" and the "bad" lie

side by side in all of us.

23

Juvenile Delinquency: A
Hiétorical Perspective

 

 

The end of the nineteenth century brought the
reforms of the child savers who saw as their mission the
saving of children from the physical and moral dangers
of an increasingly industrialized and urban society. The
child savers, then, is a term used to characterize a
group of social reformers who were concerned for the
innocence, purity and salvation of children (Platt, 1969).
The child saving organizations in Illinois, for example,
culminated their 30-year effort at reform with the passage
of the juvenile court act in 1899--an act to regulate the
treatment and control of dependent, neglected, and delin-
quent children. These child savers thus brought attention
to the plight and misbehavior of the youth, but in so
doing created new categories for the misbehavior of youth
which had previously gone unnoticed, and, perhaps were
not serious enough to warrant legal attention.

According to Platt (1969), there were three themes
in the juvenile court movement that reflected the conserv-
atism and middle-class bias of the child savers: (l)
Delinquents were depicted as needing firm control and
restraint, an indication of the authoritarianism in the
child-saving movement. (2) Children could be removed
relatively easily from homes that failed to fulfill their
"proper function" in spite of claims by the child savers

that affirmed the value of the home and family as basic

24

to American society. Indeed, they set unattainably high
standards to which almost any parent could be accused of
not measuring up. (3) Dependent and delinquent were
overlapping and confused definitions. An example of
this confusion can be seen in the child savers' belief
that all children were dependent. If, thus, dependent
children could be treated as delinquent, there were many
unwarranted "delinquents." In effect, the independence
and autonomy of adolescence were punished (Platt, 1969).

Delinquent Behavior
as a Continuum

 

 

Cavan (1975) believes delinquent behavior exists
on a Behavior Continuum which elicits a variety of public
responses ranging from outraged condemnation through mild
disapproval to strong approval (Figure l). The central
stage, D, represents the average or expected behavior of
children, the behavior that conforms most nearly to the
expectations of society. If there is some deviation, it
does not threaten or attack the values of society. The
expectation, then, is not for perfection but for overall
conformity. Examples of class D behavior would be an
occasional truancy, mischief on Halloween, or coming home
later than the hour set by one's parents.

Groups C and E represent variation from the D
class whereby children and youth strain the limits of

tolerance too far and are merely put up with. Adult

25

disapproval is evident in this category. Group C youth
are criticized for going too far or for straining every-
one's patience, while group E youth are accused of being
too concerned with winning approval and, generally, being

too good or too conscientious.

    
   

r-—--—--—-——-—-

 

L__-_-__-_-____

l
I
I
l

 

D E F G

>
ID
('3

A--Contra-culture--Delinquent; B--Extreme under-conformity;
C--Minor under-conformity; D--Norma1 conformity; E--Minor
over-conformity; F--Extreme over-conformity; G--Contra-
culture--extreme goodness.

Figure l. Hypothetical formulation of behavior continuum

The child in group D views himself as a misbehaving
nondelinquent. The young people in group B are not
regarded as confirmed delinquents, but they are viewed by
the public with disapproval. They are frequently dis-
honest, deceitful and destructive, and are often beyond
the control of their parents thus necessitating referral
to juvenile court. Moreover, these children are particu-

larly vulnerable as they are frequently ostracized by

26

groups D and C and lean toward the confirmed delinquent
who may still resist them as companions. Finally, the
youth in area F are overly conforming, and while they are
not publicly penalized, they may be avoided by the group D
youth.

Cavan argues that groups B and F are the ones
wherein children tend to stabilize their self-concepts as
"average," "delinquent," or "better than other people."
Further, she views the overconformer of group G as "Too
good to be true," and feels that this child should be
drawn back to the D area, lest he/she become socially
ostracized and voluntarily withdraw into some isolated
group. The group A child, on the other hand, is located
by Cavan within the legal definition of delinquent and is
usually committed to a correctional school. This child's
self-concept is that of delinquent, whereas group B
children have a confused self-concept, and groups D and
A, a marginal one.

The concept of the continuum proposed by Cavan
appears to put great emphasis on the average individual,
with conformity as the desired behavior. Interesting to
note is that it can be argued that, viewed from the frame—
work of this continuum, the child who deviates from the
normal conformity of group D in either direction--
delinquent or extreme goodness--is in trouble and should

be helped to return to the normality of conformity. It

27

can be further argued, then, that rather than view both
deviations as undesirable, deviation toward the right
would be desirable in that it represents a child con-
tributing to society through worthwhile achievements.
Hence, basic to this idea is the assumption that to be
in the G category, or at the extreme opposite end, as is
delinquency, would enable an individual to be socially
competent and contribute in a worthwhile manner to
society.

Juvenile Delinquency: A Psy-
chologiCal Explanation

 

 

A great deal of the psychological explanation of
delinquent behavior is grounded in psychoanalytic theory.
As such, there are three general personality patterns
that are thought to lead to delinquent behavior (Ferdinand,
1966). The first pattern is exhibited by those whose
early sexual behavior was so extremely punished by their
caretakers that it is firmly repressed in their unconscious.
As they approach adolescence and physical maturity, then,
their sexual needs mount to irrepressible proportions.
However, any direct satisfaction of these needs is not
possible due to the early severe repressions. Thus, they
find alternative methods by which to relieve sexually
based desires, ranging from pyromania to window-peeping.
Frequently, these children grow up in highly conventional

families in which the parents hold very strict views

28

regarding sexual behavior and, thus, are extremely rigid
with their children in regard to sexual matters.

The second cause of delinquency, based on psycho-
analytic theory, originates in the youngster's unconscious
motives and involves him/her in serious difficulty as he/
she attempts to express them. This child has been labeled
unsocialized aggressive (Hewitt, et al., 1947) and has
grown up with intense hostility causing him/her to
express hatred in a destructive manner.

Levy (1943) describes a similar pattern, but his
has its origin in completely different circumstances and
involves the child who has been overprotected by one
parent, usually the mother. Indeed, it is usually the
mother, rather than the father, who is extremely affec-
tionate and protective toward the child. (Perhaps this
is due to society's designated roles for males and
females rather than innate reasons.) But the family
atmosphere is not consistent with this behavior in that
it is usually one of hostility and strained relations.
Thus, the indulged child sees inconsistencies and/or
contradictions and is caught between affection and hos-
tility. He/she develops an attitude of defiance and
alienation and never learns self-control. When faced
with frustration, he/she flies into a rage.

The concept of impaired ego-functioning, as

described by Redl (1957), is yet another difficulty

29

leading to delinquency. The child suffering such impair-
ment feels inferior and experiences great self-doubt.
Moreover, this child typically comes from a family where
there is great stress and inconsistency. He/she usually
is resentful toward adults and is isolated from his/her
peers.

Erik Erikson's developmental concept of ego-
identity is descriptive of such impaired ego-functioning.
Erikson explains that the human being has an image of the
kind of person he/she is in several categories, such as
attractiveness, worthiness, and these images comprise
the self-concept, a concept which is developed through
close relationships and is inevitably influenced by the
individual's immediate environment (Cavan, 1975).

Cavan (1975) believes that Erikson's concept of
ego-identity is formed by the blending of the youth's
interests with the values of his/her groups, and, further,
that ego-identity is the core of the individual's self-
concept, with his/her attitudes and ideals being built
around it. In fact, ego-identity is based on the child's
personal qualities that coincide with the values of his/
her immediate peers and win their approval; it provides
a framework for organizing his/her world. Yet, many
adolescents find it very difficult to blend their personal
feelings with group values, and, according to Erikson, the

result is ego-diffusion which manifests itself by a lack

30

of self-confidence and well-defined purpose. Such
alienated youth experience indecision and confusion
regarding their place in society (Erikson, 1968), which
can be compared to that resulting from impaired ego-
functioning.

It is important to note in summary here that psy-
choanalytic theory cannot completely explain delinquent
behavior. Indeed, it excludes the influence on behavior
of the broader social processes while explaining patterns
of behavior by reference to only family relationships and
the child's early years. Yet, such processes can hardly
be excluded in view of the tremendous societal influence
on contemporary families.

Juvenile Delinquency: The
Sociological Viewpoint

 

 

Sutherland (1974) suggests that delinquency is a
learned pattern of behavior. An explanation of this
behavior comes from viewing the neighborhood or community
instead of the individual's personality. Delinquency,
then, is learned by the child when his/her peers confront
him/her with the ways of delinquency and he/she adopts
those ways instead of conventional ways.

Reckless (1973) agrees with the sociological
viewpoint, but views the roles of the family as basic to
the question of whether or not the adolescent will adopt

delinquent or conventional patterns of behavior. He uses

31

the self-concept as the reference point here, citing the
strong, favorable self-concept as being formed in young
people from supportive, cohesive families. Such a self-
concept in turn isolates the child from adopting and
engaging in delinquent behavior. In fact, the avoidance
of social situations that might lead to delinquency is
common in the adolescent with a strong, favorable, and
positive self-concept. Likewise, a self-concept by which
one views oneself as unworthy would function in the oppo—
site manner and tend to guide adolescents into delinquent
behavior. Jensen (1973) qualifies Reckless' assertion by
stating that a favorable self-concept will insulate the
adolescent from delinquency only when the child is sup-
ported by significant others who disapprove of delinquent
behavior.

A vieWpoint that approaches the issue from another
dimension is that of Lemert (1972). He argues that many
adolescents indulge in various forms of deviance and that,
if delinquent behavior is the first step in producing a
negative delinquent self-concept, many more adolescents
than do should regard themselves as delinquent. Signifi—
cant here is his suggestion that it is the act of labeling
a child delinquent which often precipitates a negative
self-concept and, consequently, more deviant behavior.

In other words, when a child is accused of certain

deviant acts and labeled delinquent by significant

32

others, he/she becomes more aggressive and alienated.
Thus, labeling a child delinquent may, in fact, simply
re-affirm his/her feelings of unworthiness and reinforce
an already negative self-concept.

The labeling of any child can have devastating
effects. Indeed, a self—fulfilling prophecy can operate
with a child who has behavioral problems just as it can
with children who have learning problems. The importance
of the self-concept is crucial to the behavior of the
child. Nevertheless, a pragmatic view of Lemert's theory
causes one to become cognizant of the fact that many
adolescents do provoke significant adults and peers
beyond endurance. In these cases, it becomes necessary
to take legal steps, and, thus, "label” the child in
order to protect society, and sometimes the child, from
further deviant behavior.

Delinquengy as a Result
of Circumstances

 

 

The theory that delinquent behavior stems from
circumstances in the child's environment that seem to
guide him/her toward delinquency is shared by several
contemporary criminologists (Cohen, 1966; Strodtbeck,
1964; Matza, 1964). In this view, the child drifts into
delinquency because of a combination of several factors
interacting to produce delinquency. Some of these

factors might be a negative self-concept, the discovery

33

of rationalizations for deviant behavior, and a desire to
make a significant impact on one's environment. Another
important factor would be the child growing up in an
environment where delinquency and poverty exist.
Strodtbeck and Short (1964) developed the concept
of aleatory risks in which they suggest that a convergence
of circumstances, not a rational decision, makes delinquent
behavior the most convenient solution for the juvenile.
Thus, because some children gravitate to inherently high
risk situations, i.e., possession of guns and/or member-
ship in a delinquent gang, they become deeply involved in
delinquent behavior without ever consciously setting out
to do so.
Juvenile Delinquency as a

ResuIt of Social Disorga:
nization and'Anomie

 

 

 

Social disorganization is defined as existing when
the rules of society are designed so as to deny social
rewards to those who conform to the normative structure
and ordinarily would be rewarded for their conformity
but are not because of their socio-economic class, race
and/or place of residence (Cavan, 1975). Anomie is
described as "a breakdown in cultural structure occurring
when there is disjunction between the cultural norms and
goals and the socially structured capacities of members
of the group to act in accord with them" (Merton, 1957,

p. 162). As such, the concepts of social disorganization

34

and anomie have played a central role in the explanation
of delinquent behavior; cultural values may help to pro-
duce behavior which is at odds with the mandates of the
values themselves (Merton, 1957). Thus, according to
Merton (1957):
The social structure strains the cultural values,
making actions in accord with them readily possible
for those occupying certain statuses within the
society and difficult or impossible for others. The
social structure acts as a barrier or as an open
door to the acting out of cultural mandates. When
the cultural and the social structure are malinte-
grated, the first calling for behavior and attitudes
which the second precludes, there is a strain
toward the breakdown of the norms, toward normless-
ness. It does not follow, of course, that this is
the sole process making for the social condition
of anomIe. (pp. 162-63)
Merton further discusses anomie by speaking of the dis-
tinction between "simple" and "acute" anomie. Simple
anomie refers to the state of confusion in a group or
society which is subject to conflict between value-systems,
resulting in some degree of uneasiness and a sense of
separation from the group; acute anomie to the deterior-
ation and, at the extreme, the disintegration of value-
systems, which results in marked anxieties.

Moreover, Merton argues that class strata are
not only differentially subject to anomie but are dif-
ferentially subject to one or another type of response
to it. In other words, neither tendencies toward deviant
behavior nor tendencies toward re-equilibration of a

system of social interaction can develop at random.

Deviant behavior, then, is patterned.

35

Once an individual has experienced failure in
achieving desired cultural goals, Merton suggests several

patterns of reaction: innovation involves developing sub-

 

stitute means to desired cultural goals; retreatism

 

causes the individual to reject the means of society;

rebellion constitutes a substitution of different means

 

and goals for those proposed by society. When, in fact,
the institutional system is regarded as the barrier to
the satisfaction of legitimized goals, the stage is set
for rebellion as an adaptive response. The individual,
then, searches for alternative means to achieve his/her
goals. In the process, he/she may reject the normative
means of society. Therefore, according to Merton, the
delinquent has been prevented from achieving culturally
approved goals because of socio-economic class and/or
racial factors, in spite of the fact that he/she has
attempted to adhere to the ascribed societal means. And
his/her deviant behavior is, in fact, an alternative way
of achieving the goals denied him/her because of contra-
dictions in the organization of society.

Cloward and Ohlin (1960) extended Merton's thesis
by suggesting that one of the basic conditions fostering
delinquency in America is the inaccessibility of legitimate
opportunities in comparison with illegitimate opportunities
for adolescents. For instance, membership in delinquent

gangs may be accessible to some juveniles whereas totally

36

unavailable to others; residence in neighborhoods where
individuals are well known may deter juveniles from theft
and other offenses in that neighborhood as opposed to
living in an area where there is little personal inter-
action. Cloward and Ohlin's theory, then, tends to
explain much of the delinquency in working class and

lower class neighborhoods.

Summary

Several theories of delinquency are summarized in
Table 1. An evaluation of these explanations for delin-
quent behavior points out several factors that are impor-
tant to consider:

1. In view of the complexity of the human
organism, no single theory can provide a complete expla-
nation of the causes of delinquency. Instead, it is
necessary to consider each theory as making significant
contributions to explaining these causes.

2. Rather than dividing behavior into categories
of delinquent or nondelinquent, it is necessary to view
behavior on a continuum ranging from delinquent through
highly socially competent.

3. The self-concept appears to play a vital role
in the explanation of delinquent behavior.

4. Deviance may result when the child searches
for alternative methods of reaching goals that have been

denied him/her by social disorganization. In addition,

37

mono ugmfibop

mgflumoom can mosHm> Hmcoflugm>
Igoo mgfinmfi:UGHHwH ma umsmpw
on Hmsoa>flogfl mgflmsmo was»
.ummmmp Ho gofluommmu ugmumgoo

magmHmCSO mum>flum

mmmooum mafiamnmq

mcofluOAU
umuugoo HMHOOm ~00fi©5mmum

mmfiuwgsunommo
wumfifluflmma Hmsqm mmflgmp
pun» gofiumNfigmmHo Hmfloom

\l L

muouomm Hmmsmu unmoamwgmfim

mmogmumfisouwo mmuo>pm
ou gowuommu Hm50fl>fl©qfi gm

ummuoum mo scammmumxm

an no mogwsqgflamo was mfiwho
mgflmsmo man» mmmHo mafixuo3
osu go moonom Emwamuflmmo Dos»
mgofluflpcoo mcw>fla pmmmmummn

Howbmnmn deacon
teams can umoogOOIMHmm ugwsq
Inflamc m mmumuflmwomum soa£3
ugmnngHmp pafino m mgwamnmq

mamoq mmwnu m>wazom

on magmawm>m momma gnu

can mamom pmgflmmp kaamnsu
:Hso gmm3umn hogmmmuomww d

mpgmommHO©m

Mom mmflufigsuuommo meme
(Hufimmaaw suw3 cemflnwgfioo ca
mmfiufignunommo mumfiwufimoa

mo huflawnflmmmoomga was

mmsmo owmomoum

Aemmav muumz ue>mo

Amhma .gw>mov
ugw093mfl> umfixumz

Avmmav
uHmEmA .2 qw3pm

Ammmfie
26:00 .m unmade

loomav chase esoflg
was UHMBOHU unwnowm

“manomna

 

hogwsgcaama mo mmfluoons

H magma

38

m:0+umsuflm can
mugo>m mo pom msofiomgooqs ad

monwpgmum
mnouowomupgoo “mafia >H«Emm
omHHAMImmwuum .ugmumflmgoogH

mawfimm may mafiumefium
Ilmmsoum mogmuwmmn :Hmunmo

mmflufignuuommo mo Hmfigmp

can Hoppfl>fiogfl mo gofluoommu
.muwAOOm mo gofiumuagmmuo
may ca mCOADUHpMHugoo

I r-

muouomm Hmmsmu unmoflmagowm

.H0fi>mnmn ugmsq

[swamp mo xmfin swan m wanna
umsu mgoaumsuam ou mumua>mum
mugmsqgflawolmum .gOHDDHOm
unmagw>goo pace on» Scamsq
tqfiHmU mmxmfi scan? mmogmumfiso
luau mo mogmmum>goo m ..m.w
.mxmwu mnoummam mo ummogoo

mufluofiummcfl mo mmcwflwmm ppm

undOGIMHmm cw pmvmwMAng
mgwg0auogsm 0mm pmuflmmEH

obwuommmm:fl can haunozgs
mm comm ma mawm on» £OH£3 ca
wgo i.e.fl .ummogoolmamm 304

How>mnwn ucwfi>o© w>ao>gw has
noasz .mHmom Hmn\mws o>mfinom
op magma mbaumqumuam mmnmfia
Inmumm Hm50w>wpca gnu was“
“mamoq mmonu m>mwnom madman
:flouo manomm mammmnz magma
omnmfianmumw gnu on mumsow

op omen» m>m£ mun» nmsonu gm>m
mamsow>woqfl 080m omagmp who
mumAUOm mo mamom Honsgano one

1'11le L

mmsmo pmmomonm

Avwmav
unonm .A mmEmo
can xomnueoupm emnm

Anmmav ngwcHB ofl>mo
.Hemm unfinm

Aammav
mmmaxomm Hmuamz

Ahmmav
nouns: .M phenom

umfluomne

 

pmagfipgoollfl manna

39

 

mmflufigSEEoo :H
mmooum mocmummou ugmsquamp
Monmom umnu mommoooum Hafioom

muouomm Hmmsmo unmoamagmwm

.Hofl>mnmn mo cumuumm
pmgumoa m mH AgOADMAUOmmm
nghamummmfle mo mamfloagumv

.3ma mo mgOGDMH0w> ou
manmuo>mmgs mgoflufigflmwp Hw>o
3nd mo gowuwaofl> on manmuo>wm
m:0fiuflqwmmo mo mmwoxo Gd

mmgmo pmmOQOHm

emncfluaoocua magma

Avbmfiv
camanmsusm .m .m

umfiuomae

40

a convergence of circumstances acts to guide the child
into delinquency when, in fact, he/she may never inten-

tionally choose to engage in delinquent behavior.

Female Juvenile Delinquency

 

The Konopka Theory

 

Konopka (1966) proposes a theory, though not com-
plete, for explaining female delinquency. She feels that
the girl's delinquency cannot be explained exclusively on
the basis of her personality, nor on the basis of her
physical and psychological characteristics, nor on the
basis of sociological-cultural circumstances, although
all these forces must be considered as significant.
Instead, she presents her theory, which she says is an
emerging theory, in the form of key concepts which are of
particular significance in contemporary America and con-
tribute to juvenile delinquency:

The unique, dramatic biological onset of puberty
in the girl.

The complex identification process.

The changing cultural position of women.

The faceless adult authority and the resultin
loneliness. (p. 119) ‘

Konopka feels that the onset of menstruation can
be a very frightening experience for a girl who does not
understand what is happening to her and who receives no
support from the significant adults in her life. Because

it is so closely related to childbearing, the consequence

of the sex act is always present, consciously or

41

unconsciously. Sex, then, has a more pervasive meaning
for the girl than for the boy. She cannot separate
pregnancy, nor the fear of pregnancy, from the sex act.
Sex can thus become an outlet for frustration, a weapon--
a means by which she may be "wanted" for the first time
in her life. Yet despite the cunning that goes along with
the use of this "weapon," Konopka, in her years of exper-
ience with young girls, found an alarming number who
reached adolescence knowing very little about sex and

the body. In fact, many of them learned how pregnancy
occurs from the father of their baby.

Konopka also views the identification process as
being more difficult for the female because she must,
after passing through a period of intense love for the
father, return to the mother for feminine identification.
Yet this focus is frequently met with a great deal of
resistance in that the daughter may object to the assump-
tion of the feminine role associated with the mother and
prescribed by society. This may explain the frequent and
often intense conflict between mothers and daughters in
early adolescence. Moreover, if the father is absent or
rejecting, or if the mother is very weak or very dominat-
ing, identification can be very difficult or even impos-
sible. This part of the Konopka theory is very much

grounded in the psychoanalytic theory.

42

The changing cultural position of women is having
an impact on adolescent girls' behavior because it involves
the basic values in relation to the worth of human beings
and the structure of the family. Some specific aspects
of this change that have the greatest impact on girls'
behavior are:

1. No tradition of vocational training for women;

2. Stereotyped and low-paying employment for
women, causing the adolescent girl to frequently see
marriage as a way out of bad working conditions;

3. Thwarted ambition, related to societal atti-
tudes and economics, that prevents girls from entering
many vocations;

4. Few socially approved outlets for aggressive
drives that are a normal part of the adolescent desire
for adventure;

5. Increased awareness and resentment of the
double standard that exists in American society for men
and women.

Konopka sees the preceding points as applying to
all adolescents. However, the impact of the faceless
adult authority and the resulting loneliness applies only
to those girls who have come in conflict with society.
For these girls, authority is encountered as an enemy
force to be avoided. Friendship becomes unknown. Lone-

liness may then force a girl into unstable romantic

43

relationships and toward an overwhelming desire to belong,
thus leading her into a more intense conflict (Konopka,
1966).

The attitude of society is especially harsh toward
the delinquent girl. It is one of moral indignation.
While "boys will be boys," the sexual acting out of girls,
and most of the delinquent girls do act out sexually, is
looked upon by the adult society with great disdain. In
fact, many adults themselves have unresolved sexual con-
flicts and transfer them to the girls (Cavan, 1975;
Konopka, 1966). Such hypocrisy concerning male-female
equality in our society arouses deep resentment in
adolescent girls (Cavan, 1975; Simon, 1975; Konopka,
1966). It would seem, then, that there is a definite
need for honest and straightforward sex education aimed

at erasing the double standard.

Society and Delinquent Girls

 

The general consensus of writers in the field of
female delinquency is that it has been neglected. Ward,
Jackson, and Ward (1968) state that the knowledge of
female criminality, its causes and its character, is at
least 30 years or more behind the knowledge of male
criminality. Simon (1975) claims that female criminality
has been almost completely ignored by criminologists,

lawyers, penologists, and social scientists, while

44

Cavan (1975) asserts that aside from statistical reports
few studies have been made of delinquent girls.

Reasons for this dearth of studies can be traced
to several factors: there are more male delinquents than
there are female delinquents; male delinquent acts
usually involve destruction or theft of someone's
property; girls' offenses primarily tend to harm them-
selves and are generally not victim crimes. Yet, it
would seem that although female delinquency is usually
not harmful to others per se, its effects are generally
just as far reaching and as potent as those of male delin-
quency in that if females carry their problems into mar-
riage, the rearing of their children may be adversely
affected. Likewise, if a girl has-a child out of wed-
lock, this may contribute to society's problems.

Simon believes that the Freudian view of women
held by society has influenced society's perspective on
women in crime and has, in fact, contributed substantially
to the role of females in crime and the differential
treatment of females in the court system. (The Freudian
view of women is that women are biologically inferior
and experience penis envy. The difference between the
adjusted woman and the unadjusted woman, then, is that
the adjusted woman compensates for the lack of a penis
through the sex act and through motherhood, while the

unadjusted woman attempts to compensate for the lack of

45

a penis by pursuing education, a career, or leading an
independent life.) Simon (1975) cites several writers
in the area of female delinquency who have perpetuated
the Freudian View, among them the Gluecks (1934), who
advocated voluntary sterilization as an advisable pre-
ventive treatment because women in delinquency need,
they felt, just as much protection and salvation as
children (p. 318). And Klein (1974) discusses Caesar
Lombrozo, one of the early criminologists, who felt that
the female moral sense is deficient and that women have
an undeveloped intelligence, thus preventing them from
any real leadership in crime (p. 10).

Pollack (1950) questions the previous theories of
women in crime and believes that women are actually com-
mitting many more criminal acts. Yet, because of
society's view of women as passive, unintelligent
creatures, such acts are going undetected. His view is
basically shared by Reckless and Kay (1967) when they
state that law enforcement personnel and the courts are
much less willing to treat women as they treat men
because of society's view of women as dependent and in
need of protection. These researchers are espousing

what has been labeled the paternalism theory.

The Contemporary Situation

 

An attitude of paternalism toward females has

been identified in trial court judges by several

46

researchers (Simon, 1975; Nagel & Weitzman, 1971). Such
paternalism has several consequences, according to these
researchers and summarized by Simon: women are less
likely to remain in custody during the pretrial period
than are men; once tried, they are less likely to be
convicted; if convicted, they are likely to receive
milder sentences. Other consequences are that they are
less likely to have an attorney, a preliminary hearing,
or a jury trial. Simon (1975) uses data collected by
Silverstein in a National survey to support her con-
clusions.

A study by Kratcoski (1974) of the court records
of 845 youths referred to the juvenile court in an urban
county of a midwestern state found a significant trend in
differential treatment of males and females by the juvenile
court when the dispositions of the cases were compared.
Although a much larger proportion of boys than girls com-
mitted delinquent acts (69% to 44%), a higher proportion
of the girls were placed in the juvenile court detention
center. In fact, 31% of the females in the sample were
held in detention, compared with 24% of the males.

These results may appear to be inconsistent with
the study of differential treatment cited by Simon. How-
ever, the explanation of the inconsistency, as given by
the juvenile court personnel and police officers, is con-

sistent with the paternalistic idea. According to

47

Kratcoski, they view the juvenile court as predominantly
a protective and service agency rather than a punishment
agency, and claim that it is often necessary to hold a
girl in detention for her own safety and well being. For
instance, girls picked up as runaways are held if the
parents cannot be reached immediately. Or, if a girl is
running from a brutal or sexually aggressive parent, she
may need the protection of detention in a center if a
foster home is not readily available. The juvenile court,
then, may be responding to what it perceives as the
"special" needs of adolescent girls. Hence, the pater-
nalism.

Statistics on Male and
Female Delinquency

 

 

Statistics on male and female delinquency vary
slightly. The federal 1970 juvenile court statistics, for
example, indicate a 3 to 1 ratio of boy to girl delin-
quency cases, while Wise (1967) reports a 1.7 to 1 ratio,
and Cavan (1975) a 3 to 1 ratio of boys and girls. Per-
haps of greater significance are the trends reported by
the 1970 Juvenile Court Statistics. The number of
delinquency cases involving girls disposed of by
juvenile courts in 1970 was 228,500--more than double
the number of cases disposed of in 1963 (104,500). And
the percentage of cases involving girls also rose from

19% in the years 1958 through 1964 to 24% in 1970.

48

The literature shows some dissension regarding the
differences in the types of offenses committed by boys
and girls. Perhaps, however, the apparent contradictions
are merely an indication of changing female delinquency
patterns. Indeed, Cavan (1975) states that the delinquency
of girls is of a different kind from the delinquency of
boys, the latter involving overt and aggressive acts in
the form of burglary, larceny, and vandalism. Girls, on
the other hand, exhibit very low rates for these types
of offenses and much higher rates for runaway, truancy,
and incorrigibility. Cavan cites, as an example of this
distinction, the statistics of the Illinois Juvenile
Institutions in 1972 that give the number and percentage
of adolescents committed to the Illinois Juvenile Insti-
tutions in 1972. These statistics show that 60.8% of the
girls committed were committed for incorrigibility and
general delinquency, whereas only 18.6% of the boys were
committed for the same offenses. Moreover, only 17.6%
of the girls, compared with 41.3% of the boys, were com-
mitted for violent theft, personal violence, and property
damage.

A study by Wise (1967) revealed that patterns of
involvement by females in delinquency closely paralleled
those of males, while Gibbons and Griswold found in their
study of juvenile court records in the state of Washington

between 1953 and 1955 that female delinquency revolved

49

around sex delinquency, while male delinquency revolved
around property offenses. Finally, the 1971 Uniform
Crime Report statistics show that the number of violent
crimes by females under 18 increased 22% from 1970 to
1971, showing a female trend toward crimes generally
committed by males.

The Family and Female
DeIinquency

 

 

The impact of the family upon the young girl can-
not be denied. Thus, although much of the literature
relating the family to delinquency has the psychoanalytic
theory as its base, the family must be viewed in the con-
text of the society at large.

An excellent study of the impact of parental
pathology on delinquency has been done by Andry (1971).
Although he studied only boys, his study is of interest,
nevertheless, because his findings parallel those of
similar studies done with females. He concluded from
his study of 22 delinquent and nondelinquent males and
their parents that delinquent boys from nonbroken homes
tend to perceive greater defects in their fathers' roles
than in their mothers' roles, whereas nondelinquents
tend to perceive the roles of both parents as being
adequate. Thus, he concludes that the prime differen-
tiating factor between delinquent and nondelinquent males

is the delinquents' perception of their fathers' roles as

50

being negative. Andry then theorizes that the concept of
maternal deprivation ought to be enlarged to include the
concept of paternal deprivation.

Duncan (1971) studied parental attitudes and
interactions in female delinquency. Her subjects were
the parents of 40 delinquent females and of 20 nondelin-
quent females. She concluded that parents of the delin-
quents often had personal adjustment problems and were
inconsistent in their feelings toward their children.

The parents of the nondelinquents, however, had generally
accepting and consistent feelings toward their children,
were basically equalitarian and displayed little conflict
in their roles.

Friedman (1969, p. 120) summarizes some of the
family dynamics that are considered contributory to
female sexual delinquency as:

primary emotional deprivation and an unfulfilled
need for closeness and tenderness in the girl;
longing for a missing father;
excessive strictness by the father;
overstimulation or seduction;
over-permissiveness and inconsistent parental
controls;
hostility and accusations by the parents;
confusion from incest threat;
a flight from incest threat;
and a tendency to fulfill a parent's prediction
for delinquent behavior.
Moreover, Warkentin (1969) views marriage as the corner-
stone of the family system. Thus, a malfunctioning

marriage contributes greatly to an atmosphere that

fosters maladaptive behavior in the children of that

51

marriage. And Cavan (1975) qualifies this view when she
claims that a bad home situation can have a more devastat-
ing effect on a girl, since a boy can more easily escape
and find companionship and a status within his peer group.
A girl, however, tends to tolerate the home as long as
she can and then escapes by running away. She subse-
quently becomes vulnerable to sexual exploitation by
older men and boys.

Bronfenbrenner (1973) expresses a concern over
the decrease in the spheres of interaction between parents
and children in the 25-year period that he has studied
American families. He further reports that he and his
colleagues, Condry and Simon, have completed a study show—
ing that, at every age and grade level, children today show
a greater dependency on their peers than they did a decade
ago. And that dependency and susceptibility to group
influence is higher among children from homes in which one
or both parents are frequently absent. Yet, since peer-
oriented youngsters describe their parents as less affec-
tionate and less firm in discipline, attachment to age-
mates appears to be influenced more by a lack of attention
and concern at home than by any positive attraction of
the peer group itself. In fact, Bronfenbrenner reports
that these children have a relatively negative view of

themselves and their friends. His study found them

52

pessimistic about the future and less able to assume

responsibility and leadership (1973).

The Self-Concept and
Female Delinquency

 

 

The familial characteristics that have been
studied and concluded to be related to female delinquency
have much in common with the factors previously discussed
as contributing to a negative or low self-concept. Con-
versely, these characteristics are quite opposite of those
identified as necessary for positive self-concept develop-
ment and for enhancement in the value-need categories as
defined by Lasswell (1968).

William H. Fitts, Ph.D., of the Nashville Mental
Health Center, has done perhaps more work in the relation-
ship of the self-concept and delinquency than any other
person. He has developed the Tennessee Self-Concept
Scale that has been used extensively with adolescent
delinquents. He states that, using a purely empirical
approach, there is mounting evidence that the delinquent
can be differentiated from the nondelinquent on the basis
of the self-concept (1971). Though not without exception,
these studies usually find the direction of the difference
to be in favor of the nondelinquent, i.e., his/her self-
concept is much higher or more positive. In fact,

Epstein (1962) reports that the delinquent female's

53

self-concept is more negativistic than is that of the
nondelinquent female. Motoori (1963) found similar
results.

A more theoretical approach is exemplified by
Reckless and his associates (1956, 1957) who studied the
question of why one youngster becomes delinquent while
another in the same neighborhood or in the same family
does not. Many of the sociological factors are the same,
yet the outcome is different. To account for this, Reck-
less theorizes that the nondelinquent is insulated
against delinquency by a favorable self-concept, while
the unfavorable self-concept of the delinquent provides
no such insulation and acts to compel him/her toward

delinquent behavior.

Summary

Basically, there are two theories concerning
causes of juvenile delinquency: sociological and psy-
chological. Neither can explain delinquency in and of
itself. However, both, together with a biological-
maturational theory, can contribute a great deal toward
a satisfactory explanation.

Behavior must be viewed on a continuum because
much behavior overlaps and delinquents are not a totally
separate and different group of adolescents. They have
the same needs, though sometimes more intense and

expressed in different ways, as do nondelinquents.

54

Konopka (1966) eloquently summarizes the role of
the self-concept in the lives of delinquent girls by
explaining that self-esteem is the ingredient which gives
dignity to human existence and that it grows out of human
interaction, out of being appreciated for what one is.

She maintains that the delinquent adolescent girl exper-
iences an increasingly low self-concept as she receives
fewer and fewer bits of praise and indications of her
worthiness. And, as her feelings of being unappreciated
go down, so do her feelings of self-respect and worthiness

as an individual.

Conclusion

 

The preceding review of literature on adolescence,
juvenile delinquency (in particular, female juvenile
delinquency), and the influence of values and self-concept
on delinquent behavior suggests several areas in need of
still further research. Two of the most crucial areas
are highlighted by the following two questions, questions
whose answers can shed further light on the complex issue
of female juvenile delinquency:

1. What is the relationship of the self-concept
and value-needs enhancement to social competency of
adolescent girls?

2. Is there a difference in the self-concept and
value-needs enhancement of adolescent girls varying in

social competency?

CHAPTER III

METHODOLOGY

The Sample

 

Description of the

Subjects

Four groups of adolescent girls between the ages

 

of 14 and 16 years from two urban areas of a midwestern
state served as the subjects for this study. These groups
included:

1. Twenty high school girls identified as
highly socially competent.

2. Twenty girls randomly selected from the same
high schools as were the highly competent girls.

3. Twenty girls referred to the courts, exclud-
ing delinquents whose disposition was to an institution.

4. Twenty institutionalized delinquents.

Selection Procedure for

Subjects
Members of Group I, the highly competent high

 

school girls, were drawn from two public schools serving
families from a variety of socio-economic strata in

cities with a population of 50,000. The Guidance

55

56

Departments of these schools maintain complete student
records as well as having very close contact with the
students. The staff of the Departments, therefore, were
considered qualified to select the subjects based on the
following procedures.

The subjects were selected on the basis of their

actual educational achievements (not their potential for

 

such achievements as measured by an I.Q. score). In order
to qualify for this group, then, the female subject had
to be one of the 20 girls who ranked highest scholasti-
cally in the ninth grade 9r one of the 20 girls who
ranked highest scholastically in the tenth grade. The
40 chosen subjects were then further ranked within their
grade level groups (through detailed point systems
described in Appendix A) on their scholastic performance
and on their performance in leadership (as measured by
the number of offices held or other forms of leadership
roles assumed), in interpersonal relationships (as
measured by the absence of rule infractions or problem
behavior in the school and/or community), and in partici—
pation (as measured by the number of worthwhile-~to
school, self, community--groups and endeavors partici-
pated in).

Such a ranking procedure, through the assignment
of points, led to the ultimate selection of the 10 most

highly competent girls in each grade level (ninth and

57

tenth), a total number of 20 which made up the membership
of Group I for this study. It was thus assumed that,
having met the criteria for scholarship, leadership,
interpersonal relationships, and participation, these

20 girls did in fact excel in social competency as
defined in this study.

Five alternate names for each grade level were
also selected. A description of the utilization of these
names can be found in Appendix A, along with the several
forms used in the entire selection procedure for Group I.

The subjects for Group II, 20 randomly selected
girls, were drawn from the same high schools as were
Group I subjects. The selection procedure for this
second group was not as complex as that for the highly
competent girls, though it was just as precise and care-
fully detailed. After being separated from male students'
names on class lists, female student names only were
assigned consecutive numbers. Random numbers, chosen
from prepared tables, were used to select 10 subjects
from the ninth grade and 10 subjects from the tenth
grade. (Specific random number selection can be found
in Appendix B.) The 20 girls so randomly selected made
up Group II for which no criteria in regard to social
competence was established. Thus, it was assumed that
this group might possibly include some highly competent

girls, some girls who may have been referred to the

58

courts, and some girls who could be considered "just
average"--a membership make-up which would justify the
description of "average high school females" for the
entire group.

Group III, the court-referred girls (which also
numbered 20), was assumed to have not conformed to the
established rules and laws of society; if these girls had
conformed, they would not be in court. Nevertheless,
their nonconformity had not reached a severity requiring
institutionalization. Though with no assurance--via
measurement generated data--it was logical to assume
that because of their nonconformity to rules and laws,
these girls had not attained a high level of achievement
in education, leadership, nor interpersonal relationships
as defined in this study.

The subjects in Group III were selected based on
their personal agreement to participate in the study.
All girls appearing before the courts in two cities with
populations of 50,000 (the same cities from which the
highly competent and randomly selected girls were chosen)
during August and September 1975 were asked to partici-
pate; the first 20 to accept the invitation became
Group III subjects.

Group IV, the institutionalized delinquent sub-
jects (numbering 20), was made up of female adolescents

who had, in fact, committed an act, or acts, that caused

59

them to be institutionalized based on the judgment of

a court.1 Thus, it was assumed that, according to the
definition of social competency adopted for this study,
these subjects were less competent in that their non-
conformity reached a degree of severity requiring insti-
tutionalization.

The girls making up Group IV were selected based
on their personal choice to participate in the study.
All girls institutionalized during August and September
1975 were asked to participate; the first 20 to accept

the invitation became Group IV subjects.

Rationale for Selection of

Subjects

Criteria for selection of the four groups of sub-

 

jects for this study were based on two primary defi-
nitions: that of social competency (the ability of an
individual to achieve in those areas designated by society
as important, such as education, leadership, interpersonal
relationships and conformity to established rules and
laws) and that of delinquency (nonconformity severe

enough to require institutionalization--refer to footnote

1, this page). Furthermore, a continuum of social

 

1A more stringent definition of delinquency,
i.e., committing an act that if committed by an adult
would be considered a crime, would in fact apply to the
majority of subjects in this group. However, a minority
of subjects were institutionalized because of their
repeated acts of unruliness or unmanageability.

60

competency was used as a base for designating the four

groups of subjects (Figure 2).

 

Institutionalized Court“ Randomly Highly
Delinquents Referred Selected Competent
Group

Figure 2. Continuum of social competency

Finally, the number 20 designating the membership
size of each of the four groups was an arbitrary number.
The time period chosen for gathering the data for this
study was primarily a function of time constraints estab-
lished by the funding source and the preferences of the

cooperating agencies.

SamplianProcedure

 

The highly competent and randomly selected sub-
jects were drawn from two public high schools located in
cities with a population of 50,000. The particular
schools were selected because they served families from
a variety of socio-economic strata. The Guidance Depart-
ments of these schools maintained complete student records
as well as having very close contact with the students.
The staff of the Departments, therefore, were considered
qualified to select the subjects for these two groups
using specifically defined criteria (see Appendices A

and B).

61

The court-referred group included all girls who
had been referred to the courts of the selected urban
areas during the months of August and September,

1975, except those who were adjudicated delinquent and
whose disposition was to an institution. These referrals
included the following court action categories:

1. Deferred action

2. Adjustment at intake

3. Informal adjustment

4. Formal action
Offenses in this group ranged from status offenses (an
offense only because the child is not of adult age) to
shoplifting and drunken driving.

The group of institutionalized adjudicated delin-
quents was comprised of girls incarcerated in the state's
correctional facilities for delinquents during the time
period of August and September, 1975.

The time period chosen for gathering the data for
this study was primarily a function of time constraints
established by the funding source and the preferences of

the cooperating agencies.

Research Design

 

The dependent variables in this study were the
self-concepts, as determined by the TSCS, and the degree
of value-needs enhancement, as determined by the VIBR, of

adolescent girls. The independent variable involved social

62

competency and contained four levels: highly competent
high school girls, randomly selected high school girls,
court-referred and institutionalized delinquent girls.

The l x 4 design matrix is shown in Tables 2 and 3.

Instrumentation

 

Rationale for Selection of
Research Instruments

 

 

A basic factor in the selection of instruments for
this study was consistency between the study's operational
definitions of self-concept and value-needs and the con-
struct validity of the research instruments chosen since
any inconsistency could undermine the conclusions of the
study. Such caution necessitated the examination of many
research instruments for possible use in the study; most
were discarded because they could not meet the criterion
of consistency.

A second major consideration was that the subjects
be able to read and understand the statements posed.

This was important because of the assumed differences in
reading levels due to the variability in competency of

the subjects. Another consideration was the applicability
of the research instruments to adolescents. It was
important that all instruments be meaningful to adolescents
as well as having norms established for them. Both of

the instruments selected satisfied these considerations.

63

Table 2

Design Matrix

 

Social Competency

 

 

 

 

 

 

Highly Court- .
Competent Random Referred Delinquent
VIRR 20 20 20 20
Table 3
Design Matrix

Social Competency
Highly Court' .
Competent Random Referred Delinquent

 

64

Instrument Description: TSCS

 

The self—concepts of the subjects were measured
through use of the Tennessee Self-Concept Scale (TSCS),
an instrument consisting of 100 self-descriptive items
which the subject uses to portray his/her own picture of
self (see Appendix C). The scale is self-administering
and can be used with subjects 12 years of age or older
reading at a sixth grade level. On each item of the
TSCS, the individual has a choice of five responses,
ranging from "completely false" or "1" to "completely
true" or "5." The scores computed represent the number
of times the subject uses each response category and
reflect the manner in which the subject handles self-
description.

The subject's overall self-concept is indicated
by a total positive score. The following sub-scores are
also given: physical-self, moral-ethical-self, personal-
self, family-self, and social-self. These scores are
plotted as a profile of the subject's self—concept.

The norms of the TSCS were developed using a
broad sample of people from various geographical
locations, with age ranges from 12 to 68 years, males
and females, mixed races and all levels of socio-economic
strata. The test-retest reliability coefficient of the

TSCS is reported as .83 (Fitts, 1965).

65

Instrument Description: VIBR

 

The Values Inventory of Behavioral Responses
(VIBR) was used to determine the value profiles of the
subjects. This instrument, based on Lasswell's (1948)
eight categories of value-needs (affection, power, skill,
respect, enlightenment, wealth, rectitude and well-being),
consists of 48 problem situations to which the individual
responds by indicating a choice of four possible responses
to each problem (Appendix D). The VIBR thus yields a
score that shows the subject's status in each value
category.

The norms for the VIBR were established with 500
young persons of mixed racial backgrounds. The instrument
has undergone constant revision and development through
the continuous collection of data from throughout the
nation (Seiders & Sanford, 1971).

Administration of Research
Instruments

 

 

The highly competent and random comparison sub-
jects were tested as a group on the same day, the research
instruments being administered by a guidance counselor
and a university professor. The directions and expla-
nations given to these subjects were the same as those
given to the other groups of subjects and are included

in Appendix E.

66

The court personnel administered the measurement
to the court referral group on an individual basis in
order to maximize confidentiality and the protection of
the privacy of these subjects. The researcher was thus
prevented from seeing the subjects. Instruments were
administered at the time that each subject came to the
court for her hearing.

Finally, the institutionalized subjects were
administered the research instruments by a staff member
during their incarceration in the correctional facility.
Again, it was not possible for the researcher to see the
subjects. Administration was done on a small group basis
or individual basis based on the unique nature of the

institutional situation.

The Null Hypotheses

 

The overall conceptual null hypothesis of this

study was as follows:

Overall Conceptual Null Hypothesis:

 

There is no difference in the self-concept, level
of self-esteem, or the value-needs enhancement of
adolescent girls varying in social competency.

The general and specific operational null hypotheses

of this study were:

67

General Null Hypothesis:

 

1.

Four groups of adolescent girls varying in social
competence (highly competent, randomly selected,
court-referred, institutionalized delinquent)
will not differ in their self-concepts as
measured by the Tennessee Self-Concept Scale
(TSCS).

Specific Null Hypotheses:

 

1.1

1.3

1.4

Four groups of adolescent girls varying in social
competence (highly competent, randomly selected,
court-referred, institutionalized delinquent) will
not differ in the physical-self category of the
TSCS.

Four groups of adolescent girls varying in social
competence (highly competent, randomly selected,
court-referral, institutionalized delinquent) will
not differ in the moral-ethical-self category of
the TSCS.

Four groups of adolescent girls varying in social
competence (highly competent, randomly selected,
court-referred, institutionalized delinquent) will
not differ in the personal-self category of the
TSCS.

Four groups of adolescent girls varying in social
competence (highly competent, randomly selected,
court-referred, institutionalized delinquent) will
not differ in the family-self category of the
TSCS.

Four groups of adolescent girls varying in social
competence (highly competent, randomly selected,
court-referred, institutionalized delinquent)
will not differ in the social-self category of
the TSCS.

Four groups of adolescent girls varying in social
competence (highly competent, randomly selected,
court-referred, institutionalized delinquent) will
not vary in their overall level of self-esteem

as measured by the Tennessee Self-Concept Scale
(TSCS).

68

General Null Hypothesis:

 

2.

Four groups of adolescent girls varying in social
competence (highly competent, randomly selected,
court-referred, institutionalized delinquent) will
not differ in their value-needs profile as measured
by the Values Inventory of Behavioral Responses
(VIBR).

Specific Null Hypotheses:

 

2.1

2.4

2.6

2.7

Four groups of adolescent girls varying in social
competence (highly competent, randomly selected,
court-referred, institutionalized delinquent) will
not differ in the affection category of the VIBR.

Four groups of adolescent girls varying in social
competence (highly competent, randomly selected,
court-referred, institutionalized delinquent) will
not differ in the power category of the VIBR.

Four groups of adolescent girls varying in social
competence (highly competent, randomly selected,
court-referred, institutionalized delinquent) will
not differ in the skill category of the VIBR.

Four groups of adolescent girls varying in social
competence (highly competent, randomly selected,
court-referred, institutionalized delinquent) will
not differ in the respect category of the VIBR.

Four groups of adolescent girls varying in social
competence (highly competent, randomly selected,
court-referred, institutionalized delinquent) will
not differ in the enlightenment category of the
VIBR.

Four groups of adolescent girls varying in social
competency (highly competent, randomly selected,
court-referred, institutionalized delinquent) will
not differ in the wealth category of the VIBR.

Four groups of adolescent girls varying in social
competence (highly competent, randomly selected,
court-referred, institutionalized delinquent) will
not differ in the rectitude category of the VIBR.

Four groups of adolescent girls varying in social
competence (highly competent, randomly selected,
court-referred, institutionalized delinquent) will
not differ in the well-being category of the VIBR.

69

Operational Definitions

 

The following operational definitions were used
in this study:

1. Highly Competent—-Girls ranking in the top 12%

 

of their high school class academically, participating in
worthwhile groups and endeavors, and excelling in both
leadership ability and interpersonal relationships, as
determined by their school counselors.

2. Randomly Selected High School Students--Sub-

 

jects selected by use of a random table of numbers from
the same high school as the highly competent subjects.

3. Court—Referred--Adolescent girls referred to

 

the court, regardless of the reason for referral.

4. Institutionalized Delinquent-~A child whose

 

nonconformity to established rules and laws has caused
her commitment to a correctional facility for delinquents,
based on the judgment of a court.

5. Delinquencye-Nonconformity to'established

 

rules and laws of a degree severe enough, according to
the judgment of a court, to require institutionalization
in a correctional facility.

6. Tennessee Self-Concept Scale--An instrument

 

used to measure the self-concept based on the following
categories:

a. Physical-self--The individual's view of his/her
body, state of health, physical appearance, skills, and

sexuality.

70

b. Moral-ethical-self--The individual's view of
his/her moral worth and relationship to God; the indi-
vidual's feelings of being a "good" or a "bad" person and
his/her satisfaction with religion or lack of religion.

c. Personal-self--The individual's sense of per-
sonal worth, his/her feelings of adequacy as a person,
and his/her perception of personality apart from the body
or relationship to others.

d. Social-self--The individual's sense of ade-
quacy and worth in social interaction with other people.

e. Family-self--The individual's sense of ade—
quacy, worth, and value as a family member (Fitts, 1965).

7. Values Inventory of Behavioral Responses--An

 

instrument utilized for determining an individual's value-
needs profile based on the following categories:

a. Affection--Love and friendship for persons
in individual and group relationships.

b. Power--The extent to which a person partici-
pates in decision-making within his/her society.

c. Skill--Development of potential talents.

d. Respect--The degree of discrimination against,
or recognition given to, human beings based on personal
merit.

e. Enlightenment--Possession of knowledge neces-

sary for responsible decision-making.

71

f. Wealth--The individual's degree of access to
desired goods and services available within society.

9. Rectitude--The degree of an individual's moral
practices and self-responsibility.

h. Well-being--The degree of mental and physical
acceptability of one's self and status in the value

categories.

Data Reduction and Analysis

 

Data Reduction Procedures

 

The Values Inventory of Behavioral Responses
instruments were hand scored using the Prototype Scoring
Key (Appendix D) and instructions for scoring provided
by the publishers of the instrument. The individual
scores were coded on computer coding forms and keypunched
on computer cards which were subsequently verified
mechanically.

The publisher of the Tennessee Self-Concept Scale,
Counselor Recordings and Tests, Nashville, Tennessee,
computer scored the TSCS instruments. Data provided by
this company included individual subjects' scores, group
means, and standard deviations for each of the five cate-
gories and the Total Positive Score concept. These indi-
vidual scores were then coded on computer coding forms and
keypunched on computer cards which were then verified

mechanically.

72

The TSCS produced a Total Positive Score, which
is considered a general measure of self-esteem, and
scores in five separate categories of self-concept. The

VIBR produced scores in eight value-needs categories.

Analysis of the Data

 

The basic research question of this study was:

Do adolescent girls varying in social competency differ
in their self-concepts as measured by the TSCS and in
their value-needs profiles as measured by the VIBR? The
statistical procedures needed to test the null hypotheses
generated by this research question had to identify dif-
ferences between groups in specific categories of the
research instruments.

General null Hypothesis 1 was divided into two
approaches: general self-esteem and five specific cate-
gories of self-concept. The first part, general self-
esteem, was explored with univariate analysis of variance.
When omnibus differences among groups of subjects were
found, Helmert contrasts were used to explore the specific
differences among groups. The second part, investigating
specific categories of self-concept, was analyzed by
multivariate analysis of variance. Two types of post
hoc analyses were employed when the multivariate null
hypothesis was rejected: univariate analysis of variance
was utilized to explore which measures were most sensitive

to the multivariate differences between groups, and

73

Helmert contrasts were used to analyze which groups in
particular differed from each other. This was followed
by additional univariate analysis of variance to locate
the categories of self-concept most sensitive to the
group differences.

General null Hypothesis 2 was tested using multi-
variate analysis of variance. On rejection of this null
hypothesis, two separate post hoc procedures were used:
univariate analysis of variance was utilized to determine
which of the eight categories of value-needs was sensitive
to the differences reflected in the significant multi-
variate test between the four groups of subjects, and
Helmert contrasts were employed to determine which of the
groups were most dissimilar. Upon finding groups unlike
one another, univariate analysis of variance was used to
determine which categories of value-needs most clearly
reflected that difference.

The decision regarding which statistical pro-
cedures to utilize was based on the researcher's desire

to obtain the most efficient explanation of the results

 

of the entire study. Therefore, the number and type of

comparisons implemented were restricted. Consequently,

Helmert contrasts, a method of complex planned contrasts
(as opposed to pair comparisons), were determined to be

especially suited to analysis of these data because

they compared each group of subjects to the average of

74

the remainder of the groups and are more powerful than,

for example, doing an omnibus F test followed by post hoc
procedures designed to test the same hypotheses. Thus,
each hypothesis was tested by contrasting the mean scores
of Group 1 with the average of the mean scores of Groups 2,
3, and 4; Group 2 was compared to the average of Groups 3
and 4; Group 3 was compared to Group 4. A specific
characteristic of Helmert contrasts is that comparisons

are orthogonal, thus yielding the desired efficient
explanation of the entire study by restricting the number

(J-l) and type of contrasts implemented while yielding

 

 

nonredundant and nonoverlapping information. The use
of orthogonal planned complex contrasts is discussed
by McSweeney (1976).

An overall theoretical alpha level of .05 was
established for this study. However, according to Hays
(1963), when using orthogonal planned comparisons and an
established overall alpha, that alpha should be divided
by the number of comparisons being made in order to
avoid generating an overall alpha greater than that
which has been designated. Therefore, this study's
overall alpha of .05 was divided by the number of
hypotheses and, then, by the number of variables

(analogous to the number of comparisons).

75

All data analyses were implemented on the Control
Data Corporation 6500 computer at the MSU Computer
Laboratory.

The statistical procedures labeled with the cor-
responding number of the table in which the results are
shown in Chapter IV, and the partitioning of the alpha

level are illustrated in Figure 3.

76

.>H nmummsu
CH moans» unaccommwnuoo can monopmooum Hmoaumwumum .m musmwm

28m 2...... I... - a...
82...... 3.2.2.. .. race... 8...... - .3...

33m .088 .3 .385... - 3m.
38... 8...... 982...... £358.. 3. . «0.8..

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

".8353. .. 83......
a .
F . .l. . o
. . an.
amnes.. aura
92...... 5...... 5...... 3.2.5:
5.2.3.. 2358.. 238...... 3 an)...
.. 8.. .8. .55.... . I. .8. 3.5....
_ .2 . as...
be... r 1....
3...... e... 38 .o 3n. 5 8......
258° 5.88 £3.28 38.2.8 568: II. is
5...... . .. 8.. .8. 33.3.... 2. 3..
.3 .3 3.... .. :3
£338 .3; 3.3.3 3..
c. 2.82 SEQ 5 SI! .35
_ .z 2... _ a 2....
3.338 .8; 3.68m r: 3.888 3.... 3:83 a
a c. 888...... .o c. 2.82 985 c. 883...... 3 .8—
8: .8. 82.3.... a! .8. 83.25....
— .2 2.... _ a. 2.... x .3.—
..s .. files 1.88... file... .-
5... c. 2.2.... 3...... 3.. ... 3.5... 8m. 5 :85
Salon 888...... $238 8.5.; 5.88 8822.3 3
.o .8. 32.3.3... .. 3...... ......>..... .8. 33.92....
L .N. 2.... .. 2.... _ a .3:
fl 1
n . m . .
.91.... .. HAS... 1. W12... a
3.838 .3... o 32 a... o. 9.2 3.8.3 mom: a 32
— 8.88-...9 no.3:

 

~

 

3. . u
Etgu-..om 53.2 - 2.32 073:
eggs... 13388

 

 

 

CHAPTER IV

RESULTS OF DATA ANALYSES

This chapter is presented in three sections:
results of the Tennessee Self-Concept Scale (TSCS),
results of the Values Inventory of Behavioral Responses
(VIBR) and a summary of the results. The following group
designations are used throughout this chapter:

Group 1 - Twenty highly competent high school girls

Group 2 - Twenty randomly selected high school

girls
Group 3 — Twenty court-referred girls
Group 4 - Twenty institutionalized delinquent

girls

Results of the Tennessee Self—
Concept Scale

 

 

The five categories of the TSCS utilized for this
study were:

Physical-Self--The individual's View of his/her

 

body, state of health, physical appearance, skills, and

sexuality.

77

78

Moral-Ethical-Self--The individual's description

 

of the self from a moral-ethical frame of reference--
moral worth, relationship to God, feelings of being a
"good" or "bad" person, and satisfaction with one's
religion or lack of it.

Personal—Self--The individual's sense of personal

 

worth, his/her feeling of adequacy as a person and his/her
evaluation of personality apart from the body or relation-
ship to others.

Family-Self--The individual's feelings of adequacy,

 

worth and value as a family member.

Social-Self--The person's sense of adequacy and

 

worth in social interaction with other people in general.
The Total Positive Score reflects the individual's
overall level of self-esteem. As such, it is considered
to be the most important single score in the TSCS (Fitts,
1965).
General null Hypothesis 1 was as follows:
Four groups of adolescent girls varying in social
competence (highly competent, randomly selected,
court-referred, institutionalized delinquent) will
not differ in their self-concepts as measured by
the TSCS.
Table 4 reports the results of multivariate

analysis of variance used to test this hypothesis with

an alpha level of .0167.

79

Table 4
Results of Multivariate Analysis of Variance Test

of Differences Between Groups on the TSCS

 

 

N = 80 Total, 20/Group a = .0167
Degrees of Degrees of F
Freedom Freedom . . .
Hypothesis Error Ratio Probability
15 199.16 2.08 .0123a

 

a I O O O
Implies Significance

General null Hypothesis 1 was rejected. Thus, it
was determined that the four groups of subjects differed
significantly in their self-concepts as measured by the
TSCS.

In order to explore which of the five categories
of the TSCS was most sensitive to the multivariate dif-
ferences between groups of subjects, a univariate post
hoc analysis of variance test was implemented. The
results of this test are shown in Table 5. Alpha level
for this test was set at .0033.

Significant differences were found to exist
between the four groups of subjects in the Moral-Ethical-
Self (P < .0006), Personal-Self (P < .0029), and Family-
Self (P < .0029) categories of the TSCS. Thus, the

following specific null hypotheses were rejected:

80

mocmoHMflcmwm mmflHmEHm

 

 

ommo. mmom.m on m Hmoa.mm mmmm.mam mamm
(Hmfloom
mmmoo. vmmo.m mm m momv.~m ooo.anv maom
Imaflfimm
mmmoo. avoa.m on m HmmH.mm mmaa.omv mamm
IHMCOmHmm
mmooo. Hmmm.m mm m mvnm.>m mmam.mvv mamm
Iamowsumuamnoz
oaoo. mmwm.m on m omom.am oomm.mma mawm
[Havammsm
h a a m on o m Houum mammnuommm uouum mammnuommm whomm m
u.w.anm m flu m Eoommum Eocmmum mumsvm mumsqm oa Howmu
m H A m mo mmmummo mo mmmnmma com: com: .m. m
mmoo. n o moonw\om .Hmuoe om n z

 

mume may mo mmfluommumo UHMHommm a“ mwocmuwMMHQ mo
umma GOGMflHm> mo mammamcd Dom pmom mDMHHm>wcb mo mpadmmm

m magma

81

Hypothesis 1.2

 

Four groups of adolescent girls varying in social
competence (highly competent, randomly selected,
court-referred, institutionalized delinquent) will
not differ in the Moral-Ethical-Self Category of the
TSCS.

Hypothesis 1.3

 

Four groups of adolescent girls varying in social
competence (highly competent, randomly selected,
court-referred, institutionalized delinquent) will
not differ in the Personal-Self category of the TSCS.

Hypothesis 1.4

 

Four groups of adolescent girls varying in social
competence (highly competent, randomly selected,
court-referred, institutionalized delinquent) will
not differ in the Family-Self category of the TSCS.
The following specific null hypotheses were not

rejected:

Hypothesis l.l

 

Four groups of adolescent girls varying in social
competence (highly competent, randomly selected,
court-referred, institutionalized delinquent) will
not differ in the Physical—Self category of the TSCS.

Hypothesis 1.5

 

Four groups of adolescent girls varying in social
competence (highly competent, randomly selected,
court-referred, institutionalized delinquent) will
not differ in the Social-Self category of the TSCS.
The Groups' mean scores and standard deviations

for each category of the TSCS are given in Table 6. The

established mean score for each category is also given.

£32

 

 

on.m oo.Hm m~.m n.nm >4.oa om.mm mm.n mm.mm v~.m w.mo om .qcfiaoo
.flumcH q
Hm.m mm.vo mn.oa m.am mm.HH om.am vv.n mm.mm HH.m m.vw om pmuummwm
uuusoo m
wo.m mm.~o m~.HH m.~o mm.h mm.mm mo.oa ov.~m n~.w m.am om pouowamm
%HEOUcmm m
Hm.m on.mm vv.m v.mw Hm.m om.nm mm.o mm.nm Ho.m m.mo om .mEou
mass“: A
va.mo mm.on mm.vo mm.on mn.ab muoom Euoz
nmnmfiflnmumm
. mamm . mamm . mamm . Hmownum wamm
>00 >mo >wo >ma .>ma
. IHmfiUOm . I>HHEML . IHwCOmem . IHQHOZ . lHflOflm~n£m Z QSOHO
ucmum cam: ocmum cam: ocmum cow: ocmum cam: ocmum cam:

womb msu m0

mwfluommumu ofiMfiommm How mc0wumw>mo pumoamum can mmuoom :mmz msouo

m magma

83

The Highly Competent Group scored consistently
higher than any of the other groups in all categories,
while the Institutionalized Delinquent Group scored
consistently lowest in all categories, except Physical-
Self. In that category, the Institutionalized Delinquents
scored 1.7 points above the Randomly Selected Group which
was the group that scored the lowest. The Randomly
Selected Subjects and the Court-Referred Subjects appear
to have scores that are quite interchangeable.

All four groups scored below the established norm
in all categories, except Personal-Self where the Highly
Competent Group scored higher than the norm. The standard
deviations were lowest in the Highly Competent Group and
highest in the Randomly Selected and Court-Referred
Groups.

The Groups' mean scores are graphically depicted
in Figure 4, where the differences just described are
clearly evident.

In order to determine which groups differed sig-
nificantly from one another in their scores on the TSCS,
multivariate Helmert contrasts were implemented. The
results are shown in Table 7. Alpha level was set at
.0056.

Group 1 differed significantly from the average
of Groups 2, 3, and 4. However, Group 2 was not signifi—
cantly different from the average of Groups 3 and 4, nor

was Group 3 significantly different than Group 4.

84

.mwfiuommumo
wamom ammocootmamm mommmccme cH mmuoom some macaw .v musmflm

.

qum “Bum “Sum nan-mm “Bum
458%. >325... 44209.9. 4491.5-.3102 44055.:

 

an

9'

23:03.3 3303:3335 ll .~¢
3:83. :30 u--- .9.

3823 3535: ll . kc
20.09.30 2:21 9|. .mv

. .0
.9»
.mn
inn
.mn
. .0
.mm
.mm
0.3:!!! 4.0

‘o‘o‘o ‘o'o'o'o-o'o‘

,o'o'o'o'o“o‘o [mo

 

X,
\
‘\“

O.

 

._h
ink

 

 

 

85

Table 7
Results of Multivariate Helmert Contrasts Between

Groups on the TSCS

 

 

N = 20/Group a = .0056
De rees of De rees of
Groups greedom greedom F Level of
Contrasted Hypothesis Error Ratio Probability
G1-(G2+G3+G4)/3 5 72 3.7672 .0044a
G2-(GB+G4)/2 5 72 2.0255 .0852
G3-G4 5 72 .8210 .5388

 

a O I O .
Implies Significance

Univariate post hoc analysis of variance of the
significant multivariate Helmert contrasts was the pro-
cedure implemented at this point in order to determine
the significant differences between groups in specific
categories of the TSCS. The results are given in Table 8.
Alpha level was set at .0011.

Group 1 was significantly different from the
average of Groups 2, 3, and 4 in the Moral-Ethical-Self
(P < .0003), Personal-Self (P < .0008) and Family-Self
(P < .0008) categories. There were no significant dif-
ferences between Group 2 and the average of Groups 3 and
4, nor between Groups 3 and 4 in any of the categories.

The Total Positive Score, a measure of the

general level of self-esteem, was found to differ

86

vwmo. Nwmm. mm H mmH.mm mmm.o~ MHDMIHMGOmHmm

wmno. momm.m on H v>~.hm ooe.mH~ mflmm
[Hananpmuamuoz

Noam. mom.H on H ~o~.Hm mmm.mh mammuamofimsnm

 

v cam m mmsouw mo mmmno>m on» nuH3 pmummnucoo m moouo

oboe. mmvm.h on H mHOH.om mHm.mm¢ MHmmIHMHOOm
mmooo. hwhm.NH on H mmmv.mm wmo.VVHH MmeleHfimm
mmooo. NH¢N.NH mm H HmmH.mm vom.mBOH HHmmIHchmHmm
amooo. hth.mH _ mm H vhm.hm hmm.0NOH MHmm

[Hanacumuamnoz

meo. mom.m mm H NON.Hm wHo.oom MHmmleowmmnm

 

v pom .m .m mmsouo mo mmmum>m may £HH3 pmummuucoo H moonw

 

Houum mHmmnuommm Houum mHmonuomhm

prMHQMmmum oHumm Eocmmum Eoommnm mumsgm magnum ”Homwwmu
m H A m mo mmmnmmn mo mmmummm com: com: .MH m
HHoo. n a msonw\om .Hmuoe om n z

 

moms mag mo mmHHoqmumu m>Hm How mummupcou
uHmEHmm mDMHHm>HuHDz unmoHMHmmHm mo mHmmHmad 00m pmom mHMHHw>ch mo muHSmmm

m magma

87

mocmoHMHcmHm meHQEHm

 

mmmH. sms~.~ ms H H0H.mo mm~.mHH HHmmuHmHoom
mHmH. mmHm.H on H mmv.~m OOH.mmH HHmmumHHEMm
Home. mvmm.~ on H mmH.mm ooo.om~ HHmmuHm:Omumm
HHmN. memm.H ms H Hum.em ooo.om HHmm

-HmOHsumuHmuoz

meow. Hwhm. mu H NON.Hm oom.mH MHmmIHMOHmwnm

 

v mmouw £pH3 Uwummuucoo m msouw
HHmm. Hooo. mm H MHOH.mm moo. MHmmIHMHUOm

momm. momo.H on H mmv.mm mmm.OOH MHmmlmHHEmm

 

A.ucoov v paw m mmsouw mo mmmnm>m wnu SHHB Umummuucoo N msouo

Houum mHmmnuommm Houum mHmmcpomhm
muHMHQMmmnm oHumm Eocwmum Eommoum mumsqm mumsqm ”nomwwmu
m H H m mo mmmnomo mo mmmuqma cmmz com: HMH m
HHoo. n a msonc\om .Hmuoe cm H z

 

UmscHuGOULLm mHnma

88

significantly among the four groups of subjects (Table 9).

Alpha level was set at .0167.

Table 9
Univariate Analysis of Variance Test of Differences

Between Groups on the Total Positive Score

 

 

N = 80 total, 20/group a = .0167
Mean Mean Degrees of Degrees of F Level of
Square Square Freedom Freedom Ratio Proba-
Hypothesis Error Hypothesis Error bility
7659.61 1171.56 3 76 6.538 .0006a

 

a I D I O
Implies Significance

Specific null Hypothesis 1.6 was therefore
rejected:

Four groups of adolescent girls varying in social
competence (highly competent, randomly selected,
court-referred, institutionalized delinquent) will
not differ in their level of self-esteem as measured
by the TSCS.

The mean Total Positive Score of each group of
subjects is shown in Table 10. The established norm
score is listed first on this table.

AS shown in this table, the Highly Competent
Group's mean score was 29.40 points higher (342.00) than
the Court-Referred Group's mean score (312.60), while the

Court-Referred Subjects' mean score was 2.9 points higher

than the mean score of the Randomly Selected Group. The

89

Institutionalized Delinquents' mean score was 14.35 points
below that of the Randomly Selected Group and 17.25 points

below that of the Court-Referred Group.

Table 10

Total Positive Group Mean Scores

 

N = 20/Group

Group Total Positive Mean Standard Deviation

 

Norm 345.57

G1 342.00 22.20
G2 309.70 35.34
G3 312.60 42.22
G4 295.35 34.06

 

The norm established for the Total Positive Score
is 345.57; thus, the mean score of the Highly Competent
Subjects was 3.57 points below the norm, the Randomly
Selected Group was 35.87 points below the norm, the Court-
Referred Group was 32.97 points below the norm and the
Institutionalized Delinquents' mean score was 50.22 points
below the established norm.

Figure 5 illustrates the differences between
Groups on their Total Positive Scores. It is obvious
that Group I scored higher than Groups 2, 3, and 4, but
the scores of Groups 2, 3, and 4 were very Similar.

When it was determined that a difference between

the groups of subjects did exist on the Total Positive

90

«coaaczoo
uo~__oco:2:mc_
¢ anomo

outflow
.taoo
m anomo

.mHoom w>HuHmom Hmuoe SH mmuoom ammE msouw

3.022....
36023.

N anomo

2.23800
>22...
_ anomo

 

00.0mm

w.N_m

h .mon

Nvm

_l

 

0mm
0mm
OmN
0mm
00m
mom
0. m
m . m
Own
own
on»
mmn

O¢m

hm.m¢m|

.m mHDmHm

88m .502
85:83

 

 

 

 

91

Score, Helmert contrasts were used to explore the dif-
ferences among groups. Alpha was set at .0056. The
results are shown in Table 11.

These results indicate that Group 1 differed
Significantly from the average of Groups 2, 3, and 4.
There were no Significant differences between Group 2
and the average of Groups 3 and 4, nor between Groups 3
and 4 in their Total Positive Scores.

Values Inventory of Behavioral
Responses

 

 

The results of this section are based on the mean
scores of the four groups of subjects in eight categories
of the VIBR. The eight categories and their definitions
are:

Affection--The degree of an individual's love and

 

friendship for persons in individual and group relation-
ships, i.e., one's affinity with another, one's identity
with and loyalty for another person or institution.

Enlightenment--The possession of knowledge

 

necessary for responsible decision-making.
Power--The extent to which a person participates
in decision-making within his/her society.

Rectitude--The degree of an individual's moral

 

practices and self-responsibility.
Respect-—The degree of discrimination against, or

recognition given to human beings based on personal merit.

92

l

mommOHMHcmHm mmHHmEHm

 

mmHH. mmm.m we H mam.HSHH mmm.mhmm kumo
mmvm. omhm. on H mvm.HnHH moo.hmv N\va+movumw
mmooo. Ho>.mH on H mvm.H>HH vom.mwmmH m\Hv0+mo+moquo
muHHHnmnoum oHumm Houum mHmwnuommm Hounm mHmwnuommm mummuucou
.o. m>mq .m Eoommum Eocmwum mumsom mumsow p mmzonw
m H mo mmwummo mo mmmumma com: com:
mmoo. n a QSOHC\ON n z

 

muoom m>HuHmom Hmuoa co mmsouw cmenmm

mmocmHmMMHo mo ammuucoo uHmEHmm oom umom mHMHHm>HSD mo mpHsmmm

HH mHQMB

93

Ski11—-The development of potential talents such
as motor, cognitive, social, communication, and aesthetic
abilities.

Wealth--The accumulation of desired goods and
services available within society, and the individual's
degree of access to these goods and services.

Well-Being--The degree of mental and physical

 

acceptability of one's self and one's status in the value
categories.
General null Hypothesis 2 was stated as follows:
Four groups of adolescent girls varying in social
competence (highly competent, randomly selected,
court-referred, institutionalized delinquent) will
not differ in their value-needs profiles as measured
by the Values Inventory of Behavioral Responses
(VIBR) .
This hypothesis was tested using multivariate

analysis of variance with an alpha level of .0167. The

results of this test are Shown in Table 12.

Table 12
Results of Multivariate Analysis of Variance Test of

Differences Between Groups on the VIBR

 

 

N = 80 Total, 20/qroup a = .0167
59:223.? 53:223.? F of
Hypothesis Error Ratio Probability

24 200.72 2.15 .0023a

 

a o o c o
Implies Significance

94

General null Hypothesis 2 was rejected. There-
fore, it was determined that the four groups of subjects
differed significantly in their value—needs profiles as
measured by the VIBR.

In order to explore which of the eight categories
of the VIBR was most sensitive to the multivariate dif-
ferences between groups, a univariate post hoc analysis of
variance was conducted. The results of this post hoc pro-
cedure are Shown in Table 13. Alpha was set at .0021.

Significant differences were found to exist
between the four groups of subjects in the value-needs
categories of Enlightenment (P < .0009) and Skill
(P < .0005). Therefore, the following Specific null

hypotheses were rejected:

Hypothesis 2.5

 

Four groups of adolescent girls varying in social
competence (highly competent, randomly selected,
court-referred, institutionalized delinquent) will
not differ in the Enlightenment category of the VIBR.

Hypothesis 2.3

 

Four groups of adolescent girls varying in social
competence (highly competent, randomly selected,
court-referred, institutionalized delinquent) will
not differ in the Skill category of the VIBR.

The following specific null hypotheses were not

rejected:

95

mocmonchHm mmHHQEHm

 

«NOH. mmmH.m on m momm.m mmsv.mH manmuHHmz
mass. mHem.N mm m Nvmm.m bmHm.mH guHmmz
mmooo. mm¢o.w on m HmHo.e mmmm.mv HHme
amps. mnmm. on m mmmv.m oom~.H pummmmm
«HmH. Hmom.H mu m SHBS.HH mNHm.mH mwsuHuomm
mmmm. HHHN. on m 0666.5 anm.H . 00306
688. mHmH.m on m Hmmm.a OOOH.mN sumacmuanHcm
NmnH. Hmmm.H on m mmnm.6 oomm.s coHHommma
Emma. fig... .Hmmw .wamma
mo Hm>mq m mo mmmummo mo mmouqmo com: com:
Hmoo. u 6 msouc\om .Hmuoe ow n z

 

mmH> may mo mmHHommumo UHMHommm SH mwocwumMMHo mo

umme mocmHHm> mo mHmkacd 00m umom muwHHm>HcD mo mpHSmmm

MH mHQMB

96

Hypothesis 2.1

 

Four groups of adolescent girls varying in social
competence (highly competent, randomly selected,
court-referred, institutionalized delinquent) will
not differ in the Affection category of the VIBR.

Hypothesis 2.2

 

Four groups of adolescent girls varying in social
competence (highly competent, randomly selected,
court-referred, institutionalized delinquent) will
not differ in the Power category of the VIBR.

Hypothesis 2.4

 

Four groups of adolescent girls varying in social
competence will not differ in the ReSpect category
of the VIBR.

Hypothesis 2.6

 

Four groups of adolescent girls varying in social
competence will not differ in the Wealth category
of the VIBR.

Hypothesis 2.7

 

Four groups of adolescent girls varying in social
competence will not differ in the Rectitude category
of the VIBR.

Hypothesis 2.8

 

Four groups of adolescent girls varying in social
competence will not differ in the Well-Being
category of the VIBR.
The mean scores and standard deviations of each
group in the VIBR categories are shown in Table 14.

Group I scored higher than Groups 2, 3, and 4 in the

categories Enlightenment, Rectitude, Skill, Wealth, and

 

 

mo.m om.mH Nm.m OH.wH mv.N mm.wH Ob.N mH.mH vo.v mv.wH mm.N mm.MH Hm.N mm.hH mh.H ov.mH .UCHHwo
.umcH v
mo.m Oh.mH mH.N ov.mH mN.m mm.®H Nm.H mv.mH Nhom mm.hH hm.N ow.vH mv.N ov.hH mH.N om.mH .wwm
-uusoo m
mw.m mv.va ho.m 0H.mH mm.H mv.wH MN.N mo.mH o.v Chord HH.M ov.vH vm.H mN.mH mm.N Ob.mH .Hmm
Soccmm m
mb.H om.mH ow.N om.hH h.N mm.¢H Hm.N mm.hH mw.N mm.mH mm.H mH.VH vv.H OH.ON Nw.H om.mH QMOU
S an H
mm mm mw mm an mm mw aw mw aw mw NW mw mm mm mm m
AD. ID. AD. PD. AD. T}? A? 8“ AD. 3D. AD. M9 AD. ID. AD. JD. 0
.U TU ou TU 0U T...“ on d 0“ .4“ 9“ a“ 0U I.“ ou an n
p _ p 3. p I p a p T? p I p b p D d
a q o u. I O D o 3 o I u. o o
8 1. o H...
T. o
u
(D
macho comm om n z

 

mmH> mnu mo mmHHoqmumu onHoQO How mcoHuMH>mo UHMGCmum new mmuoom cam: msouu

vH mHan

98

Well-Being. Group 3 scored highest in Power and Respect
while Group 4 scored highest in the category of Affection.
Group 2 had the lowest mean scores of all groups in four
of the categories (Affection, Skill, Wealth, and Well-
Being); Group 4 was lowest in two categories (Power and
Rectitude); and Group 3 had the lowest mean score in one
category (Enlightenment). Group 1 scored lowest in the
category of Respect. The greatest Similarity of mean
scores was between Groups 2, 3, and 4 while Group 1
generated the most disparate scores.

Figure 6 illustrates the Groups' mean scores in
the eight VIBR categories. It clearly depicts the Slight
variance between the mean scores of Groups 2, 3, and 4 in
the categories of Enlightenment and Skill and the simi-
larity between all groups in the Power, Affection, and
Respect categories.

Figure 6 also indicates the range from very high
to very low as ascertained by the VIBR norms. It will be
noted that all group means were within the average or
high areas; however, they did range from the bottom of
the average range (Power, Well-Being category) to the
upper portion of the high area (Enlightenment, Skill
category).

In order to determine which groups differed sig-

nificantly from one another on their scores of the VIBR,

99

.mmHHommumo
mwmcommmm HmuoH>mnmm mo muoucm>cH mmus> CH mmHoom coma msouw .m musmHm

 

 

 

 

 

 

02mm moo... hzms.
4.63 1.553 4.5m bomdmwm 1.5%. «950d -zmhzon-‘w 2038...“?

q q H a q q a d w A
i a
A
1Q HI
232:8 62:65:25... 6 o
outflow. :53 1-..! a M
633.20. 3602.61 III. 0. 1
.coanoo >23: 1.-.! . __ m

.m.

.m.
.3 V
.m. M.
w
o. 9
.t 3

1m.
.m. m
9
.. om H
1 _N M
.3 w
.1 mm m
9
.. gm H

 

100

multivariate Helmert contrasts were implemented. Alpha
level was set at .0056. These results are shown in

Table 15.

Table 15
Results of Multivariate Helmert Contrasts

Between Groups on the VIBR

 

 

N = 20/group a = .0056
Groups 1383:2230? ”83:223.? F. Levelpfi
Contrasted Hypothesis Error Ratio Probability
G1-(G2+G3+G4)/3 8 69 4.3841 .0003a
G2-(G3+G4)/2 8 69 1.9886 .0608
G3-G4 8 69 .4807 .8659

 

a . . . .
Implies Significance

AS indicated in Table 15, Group 1 differed sig-
nificantly from the average of Groups 2, 3, and 4 on their
VIBR scores. There were no significant differences between
Group 2 and the average of Groups 3 and 4, nor between
Groups 3 and 4.

The final statistical procedure, Univariate Post
Hoc Analysis of significant Multivariate Helmert contrasts,
was conducted to determine the Significant differences
between the groups of subjects in particular categories
of the VIBR. The results are Shown in Table 16. Alpha

level was set at .0007 for this test.

101

6560. 56H.H 65 H H666.0 666.6 u:mEcmuanHcm

vomo. th.v ms H mmhm.v mmm.oN cowpowmm<

 

6 can m mmdouo mo mmmnm>m ans Umummuucoo N msouw

0006. 666H.0 65 H 6606.6 6566.60 6chmuHHmz
6Hm0. 6H66.0 65 H «060.0 56H6.60 zuHmmz
6H060. 5656.6H 65 H HmH6.5 56H6.60H HHme
N606. 656m. 65 H 6660.6 56H6.m 6066666
6066. 5066.5 65 H 5H55.HH 6060.00 6600Huomm
H6H0. 6066. 65 H 6606.5 56H0. 06306
6H066. 6H06.6H 65 H H006.6 5666.55 HamscmuamHHcm
0666. 0H6H. 65 H 6656.0 56H6. aoHuommm¢

 

v can .m .m mmsouo mo mommm>m LHHB Umummnunoo H msouw

'9’

MUHHHanoum 0H m Eopmwnm Eoomonm Hounm mHmmnuommm
mo .u m m0 m0 mumsqm muwsqm muommpmo
Hm>mH m mmmummo mmmummn 2602 cam:
5666. u 6 msouo\6m .Hmuoa 66 n z

 

mmH> may mo mmHHommumu mpmszwDHm> uanm How mpmmuucoo

uHmEHmm mHMHHm>HuHDZ “CMUHchqu mo mHmmHMQ< 00m umom mpwHum>HaD

mH GHQMB

102

bmmm. ome. mm H mmmv.m ooom. Hommmmm

665H. 6HH6.H 65 H 5H55.HH 0666.66 006060006
6666. 6666. 65 H_ 6666.5 6666.6 60306
6666. 6666. 65 H H666.6 6666.6 0606600606H66
6656. 6666. 65 H 6656.6 660H. 606000666

 

6 moonw nqu pmummuucoo m @5060

 

 

666H. 6566.6 65 H 6666.6 606.6H mchmuHHmz
oomH. meH.N on H Nvmm.m mmm.hH anmmz
mHmn. mmHH. 66 H HmHo.h mmmm. HHme
mnmm. mHmH. on H mmmv.m mmmm. Hommmmm
Noam. mmmm. on H thh.HH mmm.m opsuHHomm
6mmm. Nnmo. 66 H 066m.n mmom. um3om
v cam m mmsouw mo mmmnm>m zuH3 Uwumwuncoo N mdouw
>UHHHnmnonm Neocmmum HEOpmmHm Houum mHmmauomhm
oHumm -
no mo mo muwsqm wumsqm muomwumu
Hm>mH m mmmnmma mmmnmmo cmmz cmmz
hooo. n a QDOHO\ON .HMHOB cm H z

 

wmquuaoocu6H 0Hnma

103

mocmoHMHcmHm meHmEHm

 

66H6. 6HH6. 65 H 6666.6 6006. 06H06-HH03
6665. 066H. 65 H 6666.6 6666. 66H003
6H65. 666H. 65 H H6H0.5 0606. HHme

 

6 @5060 nuHB pmummupcoo m msouw

 

wuHHHanonm 06 m NEOUmmHm HEopmmHm Houum mHmwnuommm
mo .w m m0 m0 mumsqm mumsqm mnommumo
Hm>mH mmmnmma mmmuqmo £002 £002
booo. n o msouw\oN 6Hmuoa om n z

 

omscHucootth mHnma

104

As can be seen from this table, Group 1 differed
significantly from the average of Groups 2, 3, and 4 in
the value-needs categories of Enlightenment (P < .0001)
and Skill (P < .0001). There were no Significant dif-
ferences between Group 2 and the average of Groups 3 and
4, nor between Groups 3 and 4 in any of the value-needs

categories of the VIBR.

Summary of the Results

 

The results of the data analysis can be summarized
as follows:

Generally:

 

Four groups of adolescent girls varying in social
competence differed significantly in their self-concepts
as measured by the Tennessee Self-Concept Scale.

Specifically:

 

The mean scores of the highly competent group of
subjects were significantly different than the average of
the randomly selected, court-referred and institutionalized
delinquent subjects' mean scores in the following cate-
gories of the TSCS: Moral—Ethical-Self (P < .0003),
Personal-Self (P < .0008), Family-Self (P < .0008), and
Total Positive Score (P < .0002).

There were no significant differences between the

mean scores of the randomly selected group and the

105

average of the mean scores of the court-referred and
institutionalized delinquent subjects in any category
of the TSCS.

There were no significant differences between the
mean scores of the court-referred subjects and the insti-
tutionalized delinquents in any category of the TSCS.

General:

Four groups of adolescent girls varying in social
competence differed significantly in their value-needs
profiles as measured by the Values Inventory of Behavioral
Responses (VIBR).

Specific:

The mean scores of the highly competent subjects
differed significantly from the average of the mean scores
of the randomly selected, court-referred, and institution-
alized delinquents in the following categories of the
VIBR: Enlightenment (P < .0001) and Skilled (P < .0001).

There were no significant differences between the
mean scores of the randomly selected group and the average
of the court-referred and institutionalized delinquents
in any of the categories of the VIBR.

There were no significant differences between the
court-referred subjects and the institutionalized delin-
quents in any of the categories of the VIBR.

The overall conceptual null hypothesis of the
study was rejected by inference when the above stated

significant differences were ascertained.

CHAPTER V

DISCUSSION OF THE RESULTS

Introduction

 

This study was designed to determine whether four
groups of adolescent girls varying in social competency
differ significantly in their self-concepts, aS measured
by the Tennessee Self-Concept Scale (TSCS), and in their
Value-Needs profiles, as measured by the Values Inventory
of Behavioral Responses (VIBR). The results of the study
are based upon the subjects' scores in five specific
categories of the TSCS and its Total Positive Score
(which provides a general measure of their self-esteem)
and upon the subjects' scores in eight value-needs cate-
gories of the VIBR. This chapter will present a dis-
cussion of the results of both the TSCS and the VIBR. No
attempt will be made to interpret level of scores; rather
the discussion will focus on differences between the

groups.

The Tennessee Self-Concept Scale

 

Analysis of the data on the TSCS revealed several

phenomena worthy of discussion:

106

107

l. The highly competent subjects scored con-
sistently higher than the other three groups in all Six
categories of the TSCS, with the differences attaining
Significance on four of the measures and approaching Sig-
nificance in the other two measures, yet they scored
below the mean scores of the standardization group in
all categories but one.

2. The institutionalized delinquents scored
consistently lower in all categories of the VIBR, except
the Physical-Self category, than did the other three
groups, yet these lower scores were not significantly
different than those of the court-referred or average
of randomly selected and court-referred groups.

3. The randomly selected and court-referred groups
attained scores that were, in fact, interchangeable in all
categories, and their Total Positive Scores ranged within
2.9 points of each other. Following is a separate dis-
cussion of each of the above three findings.

The highly competent high school subjects scored
consistently higher than the other three groups on all
variables of the TSCS. Moreover, their scores were very
consistent across all categories, a consistency which
could indicate, as suggested by Cavan (1975), that the
highly competent individual tends to have a fairly well
crystalized self-concept which is not as easily influenced
as the self-concept of the individual who is not highly

competent and is thus not as subject to change.

108

The consistently high scores of this group could,
in fact, be expected: because they had been identified
as excelling in areas society deems important, they would
also excel in their perception of themselves. One might,
however, ask whether their generally high level of self-
esteem would enable them to become highly competent, or
whether, because they are highly competent, they are able
to maintain a higher level of self-esteem. While this
study was not designed to explain what factors make one
highly competent, several writers argue that the family
is of crucial importance (Terman, 1951). Clearly, the
mean score of this group was much higher than the mean
scores of the other three groups in the Family-Self
category which would indicate that, to a greater degree,
the highly competent females perceived themselves as
adequate, worthy and valued family members. Perhaps,
then, the family is the pivot point around which all
other factors and perceptions of self revolve.

The Total Positive Score was significantly higher
for the highly competent group than was the TPS of the
other groups. Because this score reflects the overall
level of self-esteem, it is designated by the TSCS as the
most important score on the instrument. Persons with
high scores tend to like themselves, to feel that they are
persons of value and worth, and they act accordingly. It

could be expected, then, that these highly competent girls

109

would, in fact, act accordingly and, thus, be further
rewarded by society for their conforming behavior, which
in turn might function to enhance their self-esteem to

a greater degree.

Perhaps the fact that the standardization group
included males (one-half of the group) might serve as at
least a partial explanation for why this all female sample
scored below the mean scores of the mixed group in all
categories, except that of the Personal-Self. Indeed,
Bardwick (1971) concluded that women have lower self-
concepts than men, and several other studies (Mischel,
1974; Monahan, 1974) support Bardwick's conclusion. In
fact, no studies were found which indicated that females
had stronger self-concepts in any aspect, whereas studies
were discovered which indicated that males had stronger
or more positive self-concepts than females.

The institutionalized delinquents scored consis-
tently lowest of all four groups, except in the category
of Physical-Self where the scores of Groups 2, 3 and 4
ranged within three points of each other, a difference
that could be attributed to measurement error. There
were no Significant differences when Group 2 was con-
trasted to the average scores of Groups 3 and 4, nor
when Group 3 was contrasted with Group 4. This may be
due to the possibility that the research instrument

was not sensitive enough to detect differences in these

110

group members' self-concepts, that sampling procedures
were inadequate or that there are, in fact, no significant
differences between these groups on these measures of the
self-concept. Nevertheless, Figure 4 (p. 84) quite clearly
illustrates the apparent trends-~that the delinquents
scored lower than the other groups and that their scores
on the Moral-Ethical, Personal and Family-Self scales
were almost identical (56.85, 56.20, 57.7). These results
may, as with the highly competent group and in corrobor-
ation with Cavan (1975), indicate that, indeed, the self-
concepts of these two groups are more firmly established
and are consistently high or low across all categories.
While this study did not set out to determine
causes of delinquency nor causes of low self-concepts,
one is led to hypothesize why the institutionalized
delinquents consistently scored the lowest. Several
writers argue that a low self-concept is a primary
causative factor in delinquency (Redl, 1957; Reckless,
1961; Wineman, 1957). However, other researchers main-
tain that while a low self-concept iS a crucial factor,
it is even more important to consider the cause of that
low self-concept. Lemert (1964), for example, suggests
that the labeling of a child as delinquent precipitates a
delinquent self-concept and anti-social behavior. And
perhaps, when one critically studies the mean scores of

the four groups in this study, it is possible to

111

theorize that, once a child enters the court system
after being "caught" at a nonconforming act and receiving
a 1abel--whether simply that of having gone to court or
that of being a delinquent-~hiS/her self-concept could
subsequently drop to the point depicted on Figure 4.

Still other writers (Merton, 1957; Cloward &
Ohlin, 1960; Cohen, 1955) state that the unavailability
of equal opportunities to achieve socially approved goals
‘(the good life) contributes to delinquency; these same
factors might be recognized as contributing to a low self-
concept. Clearly, the highly competent group members have
been identified by significant adults in their society as
having achieved in areas important to the larger society;
they can then reap the prizes and rewards of achievement,
i.e., praise, recognition and more opportunities for
achievement, which in turn reinforce their already high
self-concepts. The opposite would then be true for the
delinquents: once they misbehave and their nonconforming
acts increase, causing them to receive a label, their
opportunities are reduced by society, a reduction which
in turn furthers the deterioration of their already low
self—concepts.

There were no significant differences in self-
concept as determined by group mean scores among the
randomly selected, court-referred and institutionalized

delinquents. However, while the institutionalized

112

delinquents scored lower almost consistently, the same

was not true of the randomly selected and court-referred
groups. In fact, the scores of these latter two groups
appear to be literally interchangeable when one surveys
the entire picture. Even their Total Positive Scores or
general measures of self-esteem exhibit only a 2.9 point
difference. This result is of particular importance
because it depicts the randomly selected--the average--
adolescent girl and the girl who is sent to court for some

nonconforming behavior as having very similar self-concepts.

Are, in fact, the majority of adolescent girls
(excluding the highly competent) more alike than not
alike, at least before they are institutionalized? Do
they all perhaps engage in escapades and the independence
claiming antics of adolescence, but the court-referred
subjects just happen to get "caught" and the institution-
alized "caught" once too many times? Or do some of these
girls have more opportunities for nonconforming behavior
(Merton, 1957)? Are their families less watchful of them,
do they have fewer adults supervising them, are there
fewer rules to provide a safe framework within which they
can operate? Are some wiser (random group) in figuring
out how not to get caught? Do Groups 3 and 4 have fewer
socially approved ways of venting their frustrations, a
limitation which then guides them into nonconforming

behavior and, eventually, into the courts and

113

institutions (Cloward & Ohlin, 1960)? Or do these girls
differ only in their overt behavior, while underneath,
in psychological nakedness, their self-concepts, their
views of themselves, are similar? The court-referred
group had a lower score on the Moral-Ethical-Self-~feelings
of being a good or bad person-—than did the randomly
selected group. This may be a function of their having
been in court; would their feelings of worth in this
category Sink even lower--1ike those of the institution-
alized group--if, indeed, they, too, were institutionalized?
Perhaps there is no "typical" delinquent girl;
rather it may be more accurate to speak of a "typical"
adolescent girl, of variations in adolescent girls' abili-
ties to adjust to the expectations and conformity patterns
of society. Still, intuitively, it is assumed that delin-
quent girls are "different" from "nondelinquent" girls.
Thus, it becomes important to consider the gradations of
delinquency. Can we classify a child who enters an
institution for the first time as having the same self-
esteem as one who has been institutionalized for a period
of time or who is a recidivist? If delinquent girls were
administered the TSCS when they left institutions after
their incarceration, their scores might be significantly
different. In fact, Balester (1956) and Lefeber (1965)
found first offenders and recidivists to have significantly

different scores (recidivists, lower) on the Total Positive

114

Scores, Moral-Ethical Scale and Social-Self Scale, while
mean scores on the Physical-Self, Personal-Self and
Family-Self showed the same trend but failed to achieve
Significance. Perhaps, then, habitual delinquents do
have more negative self-concept scores than first
offenders. If so, when did the differences develop?

Are they attributable to their experiences in the insti-
tution? Does the experience of having been in court
and/or institutionalized over time tend to lower one's
self-concept?

It may be valid to speculate that, in the begin-
ning, before the system has a chance to operate, all girls
(except the highly competent) are pretty much alike. It
may be a function of labeling, i.e., being in court,
institutionalized, that produces lower self-concepts.
Indeed, one may theorize that if a highly competent
adolescent were to be referred to the courts and subse-
quently institutionalized, her scores might be more like
those of the institutionalized than those of the highly
competent group.

This study has yielded descriptive data concerning
the scores of four groups of adolescent girls. However,
an unanswered, yet significant question is: Do highly
competent girls have a higher self-concept and level of
self-esteem because they are highly competent, or are

they highly competent because of their good self-concept?

115

Are institutionalized delinquents institutionalized
because they have low self-concepts, or do they have
low self-concepts because they are institutionalized?
If, indeed, as this study suggests, court-referred and
randomly selected girls generally view themselves in a
very similar manner, then what factors might act to
enhance or depreciate their self-concepts? The following
circular diagram (Figure 7) may serve to clarify the
findings of this study, incorporate the theoretical
explanations of conforming or nonconforming behavior
and illustrate possible implications.

The Values Inventory of Behavioral
Responses

 

 

The highly competent subjects did not maintain
the same consistently higher scores on the VIBR as they
did on the TSCS nor did the institutionalized delinquents
score consistently lowest of the four groups. It is
important, therefore, to understand the differences in
purpose of the two research instruments: whereas the
TSCS describes how the individual views himself/herself,
the VIBR is composed of categories of value-needs that
are theorized to be common to all individuals. These
categories are not a set of norms; rather they are a
framework of open-ended, continuum categories in which
individual experiences represent varying degrees of

enhancement or deprivation.

116

HIGH SELF-CONCEPT

Labeled Selection oi
Society as Socially Approved Peers.
Competent Subsequent "good" behavior
Legitimate
6632.116 °°°°"°"m”
Provided as
Rewards
LOW.— SELF-CONCEPI oAVERAGE
GROUP 1
Labeled as \ Selection at rs
Misbehavinq, mm“ 3m on Oasis or
Possibly Deviant. 7 WM -
Delinquent , Fewer Opportunities Detection
and
‘ Fuer Rewards
lncreesd
Achievements -- I
lncreesll I
Decreased Opportunities Avelldlllty at
to Achieve __ SocietalOmortunltles I WM
Increased Non-Conlorm Opprtunlties
andlor Deviant Behavior Basal on Iehlvior
GROUPS 2 - 3

COMPARATIVELY LOW SELF-CONCEPT

Law“ A
Delinquent --

institutionalized Drill toward
Delinquent Peers
and High Risk
Situations
Dec reased Opportunities
to Achieve --
increased Non -Conlormity
and,“ Dawn Rh”
GROUP 4

Figure 7. Relationship between Self—Concept and Behavior.

117

In three categories, Affection, Power and
Respect, there was less than a one point variation in
the scores of the four groups. This may indicate that
being highly competent does not automatically assure
that one's individual value-needs are correspondingly
enhanced.

The two Significant differences that did occur in
the VIBR can be described as relating to areas that are
out of the hands--the control of--the adolescent, i.e.,
the possession of knowledge necessary for responsible
decision-making and the development of potential talents
such as motor, cognitive, social, communication and aes-
thetic abilities. These two categories are Enlightenment
and Skill. Both imply the involvement of significant
others (someone must teach in order for the individual
to have knowledge--and provide opportunities for the
development of potential talents). Thus, in agreement
with Lasswell (1948), it would seem that the home, as a
teaching center, and/or the school and/or society, has
not provided the same opportunities for all groups of
girls--or if the opportunities were provided, for some
reason (biological, genetic, etc.) the same potential
was not exercised by all girls. Yet the areas of
Enlightenment and Skill are crucial to the individual's

future success, for it iS through responsible

118

decision-making and the development of talents that a
productive and rewarding life in adulthood can be
attained in our society.

Rucker (1970) argues that the value profiles that
emerge throughout one's development portray the unique-

ness of the individual's environment as well as an indi—

 

cation of his/her potential. And Lasswell (1948) states

that individual experiences represent varying degrees of

 

enhancement or deprivation. Furthermore, Lasswell (1970)
contends that the behavioral choices and decisions of the
individual are made according to his/her current status
in any or all of the eight value-needs categories. Con-
sider, then, the treatise of Merton (1957), the basic
premise being that the social structure makes it readily
possible for those occupying certain statuses within the
society to attain in accordance with desired cultural
goals, while it is virtually impossible, or at least
extremely difficult for other individuals, occupying
other statuses, to attain desired goals.

Consider also the definitions of Enlightenment,
the possession of knowledge necessary for responsible
decision-making, and of Skill, the development of
potential talents such as motor, cognitive, social,
communication and aesthetic abilities. It appears
logical to infer, then, that the very tools by which

cultural goals, i.e., achievement, education,

119

participation in society's affairs, can be reached are
more readily available to the highly competent adolescent,

while the "average,' the court-referred and the insti-
tutionalized delinquent adolescents experience less
enhancement in these crucial areas--areas which are
vitally necessary if one is to attain in accordance
with desired cultural goals. If, as Rucker suggests,
value profiles serve to indicate an individual's potential
and, as Lasswell states, serve to guide his/her behavior,
then one would tend to agree with Merton's thesis that
deviant behavior does not develop at random; rather, it
is patterned. The issue, then, involves not $2132 values
adolescent girls hold, but rather the means, i.e., the
necessary skills, which are available to the different
groups of subjects for achieving their goals. And the
possession or nonpossession of these Skills may in fact
be a function of the structure of society.

If, finally, these two areas of Enlightenment and
Skill, among others, appear necessary components of being
highly competent as opposed to average, court-referred
or delinquent, then it would seem to make good sense for
prevention and/or rehabilitation programs to focus on
the development of responsible decision-making processes
and of motor, cognitive, social and communication skills.
In addition, the home as a teaching center must not be

overlooked by family interventionists. Practitioners and

120

researchers alike must not only acknowledge the extensive
role played by the family as a primary socializing agent,
but must actively seek to support and assist the family

in this role. If one assumes that all parents desire what
is best for their children, it may be a matter of offering
parent education appropriate for Specific situations or of
actively seeking to remove pressures, i.e., economic or
personal, in order that the family may more effectively
perform its socializing role.

The areas in which commonalities in VIBR scores
were found merit consideration (Affection, Power and
Respect). Apparently, all the subjects in this study
identified with and felt loyalty or affinity towards
another person or institution. However, subjects may not
have been reporting the same type of relationship, i.e.,
the subjects in Groups 3 and 4 may have been referring to
the type of relationship Konopka (1966) speaks of--fleet-
ing, sometimes intense--whereas the highly competent sub-
jects may have been referring to a more stable, enduring
relationship. It is, in fact, possible that the delin-
quents were describing fantasized relationships.

The VIBR defines "Power" as the extent to which
an individual participates in decision-making within
his/her society. While still within the average range,
however relatively low, all groups scored within one

point of each other in this category. Apparently, then,

121

all the subjects perceived themselves as having little
participation in decision-making within their society.
This may be understandable within an institution, but it
is hardly expected that the highly competent, who sup-
posedly have the ability to make responsible decisions,
Should refer to this same lack of participation. One
might speculate that it is situations such as this that
cause the percentage of highly competent females in adult-
hood to be proportionally lower compared with the per-
centage of highly competent high school females (Kirk,
1974). It may be possible that a sexist factor is oper-
ating here-—do male adolescents who possess the knowledge
necessary for responsible decision-making (Enlightenment
category) also report a low level of participation in
decision-making in their society? If so, then perhaps
the cry for greater participation by youth in decision-
making Situations is warranted. If not, then it would

be well to consider programs aimed at increasing the par-
ticipation level of female adolescents in decision-making.
It is indeed important to note, however, that all groups
ranked essentially the same in this category.

On the other hand, one might argue that the lack
of perceived power is a universal adolescent syndrome.
Several theorists (Rice, 1975; Garrison & Garrison, 1975)
suggest insecurity and dependency-independency ambiguity

as characteristic traits of adolescents. Such traits

122

could logically produce a perception of relatively small
degrees of power in one's life. However, it is crucial
to consider two factors in this analysis: (1) the adult
world is not the focus of the VIBR; rather the instrument
was constructed for use by adolescents and younger chil-
dren and the standardization group of subjects for this
instrument consisted of adolescents and younger children;
(2) instrument items relating to power (see Appendix D)
specifically deal with Situations peculiar to adolescent

life, i.e., "In my class . . . , "when it is time to
elect officers . . ." Therefore, when the explanation of
adolescence, per se, is used to explain the relatively
low scores attained by all four groups of subjects in

the category of Power, one must be cognizant of the fact
that Power, as defined in the VIBR, is not measured by
asking the adolescent if he/she perceives decision-making
opportunities within the adplp society in general, but
rather specifically within his/her 23p society, i.e.,
school, peer group.

The highly competent group attained the highest
mean scores in the categories of Wealth and Well-Being;
the scores of the other three groups indicated relatively
little variance among them. This outcome is not surprising
considering the definitions of Wealth, . . . individual's

degree of access to desired goods and services available

within society, and of Well-Being, . . . the degree of

123

acceptability of one's self and one's status in the value
categories. Once again, Merton's treatise concerning the
inequality of opportunities within society to achieve
desired goals is brought to the fore. While the dif-
ferences in scores of the random, court-referred and
institutionalized groups were not statistically Signifi-
cant, they are important to consider in view of the need
to better understand the adolescent girl in trouble--is
it her "fault" or iS it the "fault" of a society that
indeed provides means for some of its members to achieve
desired goals while denying accessibility to those means
for other individuals?

The institutionalized delinquents scored lowest
of all four groups in the Rectitude category. It could
be argued that, given the definition of Rectitude (the
degree of an individual's moral practices and self-
responsibility), this is an expected result since many
members of society tend to perceive the behavior patterns
of institutionalized delinquents as indicative of their
inability to adhere to morally acceptable norms. This
perception would probably encompass the court—referred
subjects as well who would be expected to score rela—
tively lower in the Rectitude category than those who
have not found their way to court, and certainly much

lower than the highly competent group.

124

But this was not the case. Figure 6 (p. 99)
indicates that, with the exception of the institutionalized
delinquents, all the subjects scored within a very close
range of each other. A question thus seems to be in order:
What effect does institutionalization have on one's per-
ception of one's moral practices? Does it contribute to
the feeling of being morally "bad"? Or do subjects possess
this perception of their moral practices before they enter
the institution? (It is important to note here that score
differences were not statistically Significant and that,
in fact, all scores in the Rectitude category were within
the average range. This discussion is based only on com-
parisons among the four groups of subjects.)

According to the results of this study, all sub—
jects, regardless of their social competence, ranked
essentially the same in the category of "Respect"--they
seemingly exercise about the same degree of discrimination
against, or recognition toward, human beings based on
personal merit. Perhaps the overriding factor here is
the concern of all contemporary adolescents, in general,
for justice--nondiscrimination.

In conclusion, as one surveys the mean group
scores (Figure 6, p. 99), the closeness, the sameness of
the Scores among the randomly selected, the court-referred
and the institutionalized delinquents is obvious. The

premise that values serve as guides for an individual's

125

behavior, as criteria for the decisions he/she makes and
as determinants of the goals toward which he/she strives,
raises some issues relevant to this study. Can we expect
essentially the same behavior, etc. from these three
groups of individuals? If this is so, then what factors
operate to enable society to bring some to court, send
some to institutions and leave some alone in their own
communities and even label some as highly competent?
Indeed, as Konopka says--the delinquent adolescent female
is one of us--she is more alike than unlike, with the same

needs.

Summary

Highly competent female subjects scored signifi—
cantly higher in four of the TSCS and two of the eight
VIBR categories, while there were no significant dif-
ferences between the mean scores of randomly selected
subjects and the average of the mean scores of the court-
referred and institutionalized delinquents, nor were there
any significant differences between the court-referred and
the institutionalized delinquents). While a definite
trend was noted on the TSCS (institutionalized delinquents
scored lower), such a trend was not nearly as noticeable
with regards to the VIBR scores. Thus, we can assume that
the highly competent subjects do indeed possess a more
positive view of themselves and, consequently, a more

positive self-concept. On the other hand, they are

126

Similar to the other three groups in their value-needs
profiles, with the exception of the Enlightenment and
Skills categories, as they attained almost identical
scores in the Affection, Power and Respect categories.

Of great importance to professionals working with
adolescent girls and their parents iS the finding of the
similarity between the court-referred and randomly
selected groups on literally all measures of the TSCS.
Such a finding Should caution one against assuming that
great differences exist between those girls who go to
court and those who do not. Instead, it is perhaps the
process of labeling and the expectations of society which
tend, over time, to produce increasingly negative self-
concepts in young girls in trouble. Indeed, the rela-
tively lower self-concepts of the institutionalized sub-
jects might cause one to question whether, in fact, a
low self-concept is a function of being institutionalized,
or whether a low self-concept causes the behavior that
requires institutionalization.

Finally, the similarities between the four groups
of girls in sgmg of the VIBR categories Should not be
taken lightly. Most revealing is the discovery that,
whether highly competent or institutionalized as delin—
quents, these girls scored almost identically in Affection,
Power and Respect, a clear indication that girls in insti-

tutions must not be assumed to be so "different" that

127

they constitute a special group with totally different
needs and values. However, the significantly higher mean
scores of the highly competent girls in the categories of
Enlightenment and Skill may be equally revealing, for it
is possible that the "possession of knowledge necessary
for responsible decision—making" (Enlightenment) and the
"development of one‘s potential talents such as motor,
cognitive, social, communication and aesthetic abilities"
(Skill) may, in fact, constitute determining elements in

the degree of social competence an adolescent girl attains.

CHAPTER VI

CONCLUSIONS, IMPLICATIONS, AND SUGGESTIONS

FOR FUTURE RESEARCH

Study Conclusions

 

Based upon the results of the study, the following
conclusions were made:

1. Highly competent, randomly selected, court-
referred and institutionalized delinquent adolescent
females differ Significantly in their self-concepts, as
measured by the Tennessee Self-Concept Scale, and in their
value-needs profiles, as measured by the Values Inventory
of Behavioral Responses.

2. Specifically, the highly competent group
differs from the average of the mean scores of the ran-
domly selected, the court-referred and the institution-
alized delinquents in the following categories of the
TSCS: Total Positive Score (P < .0002), Moral-Ethical-
Self (P < .0003), Personal-Self (P < .0008), and Family-
Self (P < .0008); and in the following categories of the
VIBR: Enlightenment (P < .0009) and Skill (P < .0005).

3. While there were no other significant dif-

ferences noted in the study, an important trend was that

128

129

the institutionalized delinquents did score lower almost
consistently on the TSCS and that the randomly selected

and court-referred subjects had very Similar scores.

4. Similarities were noted between the mean group
scores of all four groups in the Affection, Power and
Respect categories of the VIBR, while the randomly
selected, court-referred and institutionalized delinquents

had similar scores in all categories of the VIBR.

Study Inferences

 

Based on the foregoing conclusions, the following
inferences can be made: While differences do indeed exist
between girls who vary in social competency, it is crucial
that we not lose sight of the fact that Similarities exist
also. Therefore, the adolescent girl who comes before
the court or who is institutionalized cannot be treated
as a totally different type of individual. Extreme
caution should be exercised in the labeling of any child
because of the unwarranted damage that may result to
his/her self-concept; nor Should opportunities for
individual development be denied on the basis of mis-
behavior, for such a denial may, in fact, only serve to
force the adolescent female into increasingly deviant
behavior. It would appear that a crucial turning point
in a girl's life may be when She comes before the court,

for, according to the results of this study, she is still

130

more like than unlike her peers in her value needs and

self-concept, despite her being brought to the court's

attention. Every attempt should thus be made to avoid

'labels at this time and to, instead, enhance her self-

concept and develop her motor, cognitive, and decision-
making skills through intervention programs.

In addition, considering the highly Significant
differences in categories relating directly to the indi—
vidual's learning skills (Enlightenment and Skill) between
the highly competent and the other groups, it does appear
that the home as a primary learning environment in an
individual's life must be considered crucial (White,
Kagan); for it is within the home that the very basic
cognitive skills are formed. Then, hopefully, if the
individual brings these basic skills to society's insti-
tutions of learning, opportunities will be provided for
the enhancement of learning potential, though unfortu-
nately, as Merton (1957), Cloward and Ohlin (1960) have
discussed, social organization (i.e., prejudice)
sometimes works to deny equally legitimate oppOrtunitieS
to all individuals.

Therefore, based on the results of this study,
recommendations are made for two general groups of prac-
titioners: (1) those who work with families and children
before the child enters the court system and (2) those who

work with the child once She has entered the court system.

131

The following recommendations are made for prac-
titioners working with the child and her family before her
entrance into the court system:

1. The family is acknowledged as exerting a
powerful influence upon the child's self-concept and his/
her learning abilities. AS such, every effort should be
made to support and assist the family in creating a posi—
tive learning environment, one in which the parents are

helped to understand the crucial role they play in the

 

child's life. Yet the practitioner must be sensitive to
pressures, i.e., economic, personal, that Operate

to influence the parenting functions and work in a
cooperative effort with appropriate agencies to alleviate
such pressures.

2. Practitioners in the field of early child-
hood care and education should be made aware of, and act
to implement, the tremendous influence they have on the
lives of the children with whom they come in contact.

The home cannot be solely responsible for the child's
coqnitive and emotional development if, indeed, that
child is in the care of nursery school or day care per-
sonnel for a portion of each day. Such personnel should
be aware of methods of enrichment, emotional as well as
cognitive, to be employed in dealing with the young child
and most certainly should not view their role as merely

custodial in nature.

132

3. It would be beneficial for teachers to have
as a part of their required college curriculum courses
dealing with Human Development and the Family in order
that they may fully appreciate the interaction of the
family with its environment as well as the crucial
environmental influences upon the lives of children.

In addition, every effort should be made to encourage

the awareness by potential teachers of the important sup-
portive role they have the potential to perform in the
life of the child simply because they have contact with
the child for a great deal of his/her day. In fact, for
some children, the teacher may be the gply source of
support in their life.

The following recommendations are made for those
who work with the child once she has entered the court
system, for correctional and court personnel and programs
dealing with adolescent girls, which, if followed, would
aid in breaking the cycle of low self-concept--deviant
behavior as portrayed in Figure 7, p. 116.

l. In-service training programs should be
designed to create an understanding of human development
and an appreciation of the complex interaction between
the family and its environment; these would then serve
to facilitate more effective treatment of the adolescent

girl who enters the juvenile justice system.

133

2. Efforts to assist the adolescent girl should
be instituted when she first comes before the court,
rather than waiting until she is institutionalized, for
it is at this time that probabilities for successful out-
comes appear most likely.

3. Every effort Should be made to avoid labeling
a girl in such a way that would portray the idea that she
is "bad" or delinquent as this may only serve to reinforce
her image of herself as "different, bad, or not as good as
others"; such labeling may also give her a basis for such
feelings of inferiority which may then serve to push her
further down the path of nonconforming behavior.

4. Rehabilitation efforts should have as their
goal the raising of the girl's self—esteem and the
strengthening of her self-concept. This could be facili-
tated by instituting programs oriented towards assuring
successful outcomes for the girl, i.e., job training,
academic work-~programs that would provide opportunities
for succeeding by initially limiting chances or risks of
failing and then increasing in difficulty as the girl
became able to handle such risks. Recognition Should of
course be freely offered when the risks are met and over-
come.

5. Programs for delinquent girls Should have
as their goal the increasing of a girl's Skills--Skills

related to cognitive, communication, motor and physical

134

tasks. Development of such skills promotes her chances
for successfully competing in the larger society and pro-
vides her with the ability to make responsible decisions,
thus enabling her to share in the rewards society offers
for those who are able to achieve what society deems
important.

6. In order to augment the girl's feelings of
worth as a family member, every effort should be made to
include the parents and other family members in programs
oriented towards improving communication and understanding

between the girl and her family.

Limitations of the Study

 

The following limitations of this study are
acknowledged:

1. Sampling--In order to maintain very definite
distinctions between the groups of subjects, every effort
should be made to decrease variability within the groups.
Therefore, it is suggested that greater control over the
selection of the subjects in each group be maintained.
While matching of human subjects presents definite advan-
tages, it would have eliminated too many subjects in this
study. The very stringent court regulations regarding
privacy of clients limited the researcher in the selection
process: all subjects were females, aged 14-16, who were
in court during a specified time; no further controls were

possible. In all cases, the researcher was totally

135

dependent upon the administrators of the high schools,
courts and institutions in choosing subjects that fit
the established criteria; She could not administer the
research instruments nor select the subjects herself.

2. Research Instrument-~An ever-present question
that haunts researchers is whether or not the research
instrument is measuring what it proposes to measure. That
question can be asked of the TSCS and the VIBR. While the
tests have limited standardization, they are undergoing a
continuing process of analysis and critical evaluation.
Thus, it is acknowledged that measurement error exists in
this study as well. In addition, a unique situation
occurred here: the research instrument had to make sense
to both highly competent and institutionalized delinquents;
it had to be easily read and understood, yet not so simple
as to "turn off" the highly competent. It can only be
assumed that all subjects could understand the instruments
and, if not, that they requested and received assistance
from the person administering the tests.

3. It is acknowledged that extraneous variables,
i.e., I.Q. and socio—economic status, may have influenced
the results of this study. Attempts were made to control
these factors by building them into the design of the
study as independent variables. However, the researcher

was prevented from obtaining these data by the high

136

schools, the courts and the institutions on the basis

of invasion of the subject's privacy.

Suggestions for Further Research

 

The results of this study suggest that while dif-
ferences do exist between adolescent girls varying in
social competency, similarities exist also; both dif-
ferences and Similarities must be considered when planning
and implementing programs for these adolescent girls.

More important than this conclusion, however--when con-
sidered in light of the theoretical causes of delinquency--
are the research questions this study has raised:

1. Why does the highly competent group consistently
score higher in all categories of the Tennessee Self-Concept
Scale, but exhibit similar scores to the other three groups
in the Affection, Power and Respect value-needs categories
of the Values Inventory of Behavioral Responses?

2. If, indeed, the randomly selected and court-
referred girls have such Similar scores on the TSCS and
the VIBR, where do the differences lie? What causes some
to be referred to court and others not? What effect does
being in court have on the adolescent girl?

3. Does the institutionalized delinquent girl's
relatively low self-concept indirectly precipitate her
institutionalization, or is her lowered self-concept a

direct result of institutionalization?

137

4. Would a Similar study with male subjects have
the same results, or are the results of this study spe-
cific to females?

5. What effects would an enriched home learning
program have on a child's self-concept of value-needs
enhancement?

The above questions demand further research in
order that we may better understand the complexity of
factors that serve to influence the competency level of
adolescent girls. However, potential researchers in this
area should be cognizant of the concern for protection of
the subject's privacy rights and autonomy. And, because
of this concern, it is necessary to lay a substantial
amount of groundwork to establish rapport between the
researcher, the subjects, and the administrators. In
addition, once approval is obtained to conduct the
research, the researcher must be fully prepared to carry

out the ethical obligations he/she has assumed.

APPENDICES

APPENDIX A

DIRECTIONS FOR SELECTING HIGHLY

COMPETENT GIRLS

APPENDIX A

DIRECTIONS FOR SELECTING HIGHLY
COMPETENT GIRLS

List on the attached Form I the 25 girls who rank highest
scholastically (highest grades) in the ninth grade and the
25 gir 5 who rank highest scholastically in the tenth
grade. Give the top two girls a rating of 10 in the
"scholarship" column, next two highest 9, next two 8, next
two highest 7, etc. Girls ranking 19-25 will receive only
1 (one) point in the "scholarship" column.

Rate these girls on a scale from 1-10, with 10 being highest
and 1 lowest, on leadership, character, and participation.

Definitions:
A. Leadership - as measured by the number of offices
held or other forms of leadership roles assumed.

 

B. Interpersonal Relationships - as measured by the
absence of rule infractions or problem behavior
in the school and/or community.

 

C. Participation - as measured by the number of
worthwhile (to school, self, community) groups
and endeavors the student participated in.

 

Add the total number of points each girl has received and
record in the "total points" column. It is possible for a
girl to receive 40 points (highest) or 4 points (lowest).

Record the names of the 15 girls from each grade who have
the highest total number of points on the Highly Competent
Girls — Ninth Grade and the Highly Competent Girls - Tenth
Grade, Forms II.

 

 

 

Record the names of the 5 girls who rank just below the top
15 in the Alternates Space for the appropriate grade on
Form II.

 

Check the names of the girls you have selected with the

list of randomly selected girls (attached). If the name

of girl you have selected appears on the random list cross
her name off the random list and fill that slot with a name
of a random alternate (on the bottom of the random selection
list). Do not remove her name from the highly competent

138

139

list. However, if more than one highly competent name is
also on the random list, remove the second name from the
highly competent list and fill that slot with a highly
competent alternate. If a third name Should appear on both
lists, that name would be removed from the random list and
the slot filled with a random alternate. In other words,
one name should appear only once on either of the lists.
But removing of the names should be done alternately
between the random and highly competent lists, always
making a replacement from the alternate section of the
appropriate list.

*This scholastic ranking Should be based on the eighth
grade performance of the September, 1975 ninth grade girls
and on the ninth grade performance of the September, 1975
tenth grade girls.

140

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

>L L bi t

 

mucHom Hmuoe coHummHoHunmm HMSMMHMMWMMSH mHanwUmoH mHanwHonom

.mZOHBUHMHQ

ozHedm mHmmmfiqomom Q26 onBOMHmm HdHeHzH mom Hw cm modm OB mmmmm .pmosoH on» mcHoQ H
can whoom HmmzmHn may mchn 0H £HH3 munHom OH on H mo onum 0 mchn Huouomumno .coHumm
IHoHpumm cmHsmHopmoH .mHanMHoaomv MHHmpHHo mcH3oHHom may no ucooaum some much ommon

ofimz

 

00060 60662 H 6606

141

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

mucHom Hmuoe

onummHOHunmm

HMSOmHom
HMSOmMmmuoucH

 

momma sucHz.:H.EMom

mHanopmmH

mHanmHosom

osz

142

Form II

Highly Competent Girls
Ninth Grade

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Alternates

 

 

 

 

 

 

143

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

chHHMHom

mucHom Hmuoa :oHummHoHuumm HMSOmHmmHougH

mHanmpmoH mHanmHogom oemz

.monBOmmHo

ozH666 6Hmmm<Homom 626 onaomHmm HHHaHzH mom H6 .6 6066 06 66666 .ummon 060 06606

H can whoom Hmmana map mchn OH nuH3 mucHom OH on H mo mHmom m qums Humpomumno .coHu
immHoHHHmm .mHanmpme .mHanmHonomv MHkuHHo mcH3oHHom on» so Hampsum comm opmn ommmHm

.ooeuc.mucme.,H.8606

144

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

mucHom Hmuoe

coHpmmHOHuHmm

mSOHumHom
HmcomuomnwucH

 

00060 60606 H 6606

mHanopmoH

mHsmHMHonom

ofimz

11.
12.
13.
14.

15.

145

Form II

Highly7Competent Girls
Tenth Grade

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Alternates

 

 

 

 

 

 

APPENDIX B

DIRECTIONS FOR SELECTING RANDOM CONTROL GROUP

APPENDIX B

DIRECTIONS FOR SELECTING RANDOM CONTROL GROUP

The following pages contain lists of numbers that
have been selected from a table of random numbers.
There is one list for the ninth grade girls and one
list for the tenth grade girls.

Each girl in the ninth grade should be assigned a
number. IT IS NECESSARY TO SEPARATE THE BOYS FROM
THE GIRLS FOR THIS NUMBERING. Number consecutively.

After each girl has been assigned a number, match the
Control Group-Ninth Grade list of numbers with those
you have assigned.

Fill in the girl's name behind the corresponding
number.

Complete the Control Group Subjects-Tenth Grade in the
same manner.

146

147

*
Control Group Subjects
Ninth Grade*

If a student cannot participate, please use a replacement
from the alternate list, beginning with number 1.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

N94. Name Hg; Name
1. l 1 11. 021
2. 201 12. 114
3. 011 13. 020
4. 132 14. 001
5. 022 15. 172 v_
6. 012 Alternates
7. 122 1. 024
8. 144 2. 011
9. 022 3. 116
10. 013 4. 112
5. 131
6?**123
7?**130
8f**111

 

*Random numbers from Rand Corporation tables in
Dixon, Wilfid J. and Massey, Frank J. Introduction to
Statistical Analysis, New York, McGraw-Hill Book’Co., 1969.
pages 5521561.

 

 

**Method of number selection for ninth grade:
First digit of the fifth, tenth and fifteenth column of
every fifth row, excluding numbers over 201.

***
First digit of the fourth, eighth and twelfth
columns of every second row, excluding numbers over 201.

148

Control Group Subjects
Tenth Grade** *

 

If a student cannot participate, please use a replacement
from the alternate list, beginning with number 1.

N2;
1. 172
2. 183
3. 030
4. 093
5. 114
6. 163
7. 144
8. 122
9. 094

10. 140

11. 167

12. 194

13. 062

14. 195

15. 152

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Name N2;_ Alternates
l. 097
2. 181
3. 117
4. 182
5. 129
6. 180
7. 119
8. 135

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

****

Method of random numbers selection for tenth

grade, the first three digits of every seventh column of
every fifth row, excluding numbers over 201.

APPENDIX C

TSCS

APPENDIX C
TSCS

DIRECTIONS: Fill in your name and other information on the
separate answer sheet.

The statements in this inventory are to help
you describe yourself as you see yourself.
Please answer them as if you were describing
yourself to yourself. Read each item carefully;
then select one of the five responses below and
fill in the answer Space on the separate answer
sheet.

 

Don't Skip any items. Answer each one. Use a
soft lead pencil. Pens won't work. If you
change an answer, you must erase the old answer
completely and enter the new one.

 

Completely Mostly Partly False Mostly Completely
False False and True True
Partly True

RESPONSES

C M PF-PT M C

F F 3 T T

1 2 4 5

TENNESSEE SELF CONCEPT SCALE
1. I have a healthy body . . . . . . . . . . l
2. I am an attractive person. . . . . . . . . 2
3. I consider myself a sloppy person . . . . . . 3
4. I am a decent sort of person. . . . . . . . 4
5. I am an honest person . . . . . . . . . . 5
6. I am a bad person . . . . . . . . . . . 6
7. I am a cheerful person. . . . . . . . . . 7
8. I am a calm and easy going person . . . . . . 8
9. I am a nobody. . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
10. I have a family that would alway help me in any

kind of trouble . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
11. I am a member of a happy family. . . . . . . ll
12. My friends have no confidence in me . . . . . 12
13. I am a friendly person. . . . . . . . . . 13
14. I am popular with men . . . . . . . . . . 14
15. I am not interested in what other people do. . . 15
16. I do not always tell the truth . . . . . . . 16

149

17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
24.
25.
26.
27.

28.
29.
30.
31.
32.
33.

34.

35.
36.
37.
38.
39.
40.
41.
42.
43.
44.
45.
46.
47.
48.
49.
50.
51.
52.
53.
54.
55.
56.
57.
58.
59.
60.
61.

62.
63.
64.
65.

150

get angry sometimes . . .

I . . . .
I like to look nice and neat all the time .
I am full of aches and pains. . . . . .
I am a sick person . . . . . . . . .
I am a religious person . . . . . . .
I am a moral failure . . . . . . . .
I am a morally weak person . . . . . .
I have a lot of self-control. . . . . .
I am a hateful person . . . . . . .
I am losing my mind. . . . . . . .
I am an important person to my friends and

family . . . . . . . . . . . . .
I am not loved by my family . . . . . .
I feel that my family doesn't trust me . .
I am popular with women . . . . . . .
I am mad at the whole world . . . . . .
I am hard to be friendly with . . . . .

Once in a while I think of things too bad to
talk about I O O O O O I O O O I 0
Sometimes when I am not feeling well, I am
cross 0 O O I O O O O O D O 0
am neither too fat nor too thin . . . .
like my looks just the way they are. . .
would like to change some parts of my body
am satisfied with my moral behavior. .
am satisfied with my relationship to God
ought to go to church more. . . . .
am satisfied to be just what I am . .
am just as nice as I should be . . .
despise myself . . . . .
am satisfied with my family relationships
understand my family as well as I should
should trust my family more . . . .
am as sociable as I want to be . . . .

do not like everyone I know . . . . .
nce in a while, I laugh at a dirty joke.
am neither too tall nor too Short . .
don't feel as well as I should .
Should have more sex appeal . .
am as religious as I want to be .
wish I could be more trustworthy.
shouldn't tell so many lies . .
am as smart as I want to be . .
am not the person I would like to be
wish I didn't give up as easily as I do

HHHHHHHHHHOHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH

tense if parents are not living) . . . .
I am too sensitive to things my family say .
I should love my family more. . . . . .

I am satisfied with the way I treat other people

I should be more polite to others . . . .

try to please others, but I don't overdo it
am no goOd at all from a social standeint'

treat my parents as well as I should (Use pa t

O
O
S

17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26

27
28
29
3O
31
32

33

34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60

61
62
63
64
65

66.
67.
68.
69.
70.
71.
72.
73.

74.
75.
76.
77.
78.
79.
80.

81.

82.
'83.
84.
85.
86.
87.
88.
89.
90.
91.
92.
93.
94.
95.
96.
97.
98.
99.
100.

151

I ought to get along better with other people
I gossip a little at times . . . . . .
At times I feel like swearing . . . .

I take good care of myself physically. . .

I try to be careful about my appearance . .

I often act like I am "all thumbs". . . .

I am true to my religion in my everyday life

I try to change when I know I'm doing things

that are wrong . . . . . . . . . . . .
I sometimes do very bad things . . . . . . .
I can always take care of myself in any situation.
I take the blame for things without getting mad .
I do things without thinking about them first . .
I try to play fair with my friends and family . .
I take a real interest in my family . . . . .
I give in to my parents. (Use past tense if
parents are not living) . . . . . . . .
I try to understand the other fellow' S point of
view . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
I get along well with other people. . . . . .
I do not forgive others easily . . . . . . .
I would rather win than lose in a game . . . .
I feel good most of the time. . . . . . . .
I do poorly in sports and games. . . . . . .
I am a poor sleeper. . . . . . . . . . .
I do what is right most of the time . . . . .
I sometimes use unfair means to get ahead . . .
I have trouble doing the things that are right. .
I solve my problems quite easily . . . . . .
I change my mind a lot . . . . . . . . .
I try to run away from my problems. . . . . .
I do my share of work at home . . . . . . .
I quarrel with my family . . . . . . .
I do not act like my family thinks I should. . .
I see good points in all the people I meet . . .
I do not feel at ease with other people . . . .
I find it hard to talk with strangers. . . . .

Once in a while I put off until tomorrow what

66
67
68
69
7O
71
72

73
74
75
76
77
78
79

80

81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99

I ought to do today. . . . . . . . . . .100

152

 

 

 

oogdndmmmd
66106000 H660600 06 00 66p H.6H

 

 

HomomHm Moon w 80 H.wH 08H» on# no pmofl.0oom Hmoh H.4H m 30m
606606» HH0= 00 H 0HHH 000 00060 H.5H 6HH0060666
mmsdm 0:0 096090 gH hHuoom 00 H.mH uHoth no 0600 0000 0x0» H.MH
mud away
606 060 0006 06006 60 0666 6.6
Hammad New 0608 0>0a cHsonm H.NH phonm
6609.65 009 you HHdp oop honpwon ad H.m N now
60 00602 0500 0mgwno oa 0xHH uHsoz H.HH can
0Hsonm H 00 HH03 no How“ p.600 H.0H 00» you new 00» uwanmu nu H.h
acmuom 0>Hpodupp0 go so H.m
agnumm x060 0 Ed H.w mmaHp
000609 SQQOHm a wHoth Hmungoo H.m HHu pm 006g HOOH on 0mHH H.N H 30m

mgHmm 060 monod no HHgm n0 H.:

 

 

6006 6606006 0 0600 H.H

 

 

m>HH<omH

r-e

m>HBHmom

6 606H00
6H06 H00606n6

—--..-—

-—

 

 

153

 

 

mach?
000 0000 000000 0300 a.H

 

 

 

pnwwh mad hoax H nus: vwnmno op hp» H.mm
page qufisg on» wnwov oapfioup m>mn H.mm mfiwp mnp m 30:
mwcfinp can hhm> 0c mwawp0a00 H.mm mo pmoa pnmwn ma pan? on H.Nm
dawns mmwa hmohhmbm he
pmm 0p 0:008 gamma: mm: moeameOm H.:m a“ newmaamu as on mdhp aw H.Hm
000 00 000000000
navy ha paw: oowvmwpwm ”0 H.5m
on op
mafia mama om damp p.ndddonm H.om ands H mm mdonmeh mm n0 H.mm m Rom
whoa nohsno o» om Op unmso H.mm uofi>wnwn
hzwnoupmzhp whoa mp fiasco H 30w: H.wm Hunoa ha npw:_00fimmwpwm aw H.mm
acmumm Mam: haaduoa a an H.4N nomumm ummnon n0 n0 H.HN
comhmm can 0 am H.mm nemumm «dewmwamh 0 H0 H.0m H :om
mudawwm Hauoa w 80 H.Nm comnmm no anew unmomv 0 n0 H.mH

 

 

 

Mamm

0 000a00
H00000m-a000x

—.—. -- .—__... “a... -" --

 

 

154

L

 

93.393 bu 89C 5.25 55 09 b5 Him

000 530% 0005?

00500 00H 053 000 0H3 H4“
. Diana

0330 050303 bu 9500 H.0m

 

 

 

amufln 55 m 30m
00000 0030an 0.00an: 09030 00 Han 0030030 .80 0H .300
90.3 cad: bu mwuano H.mm lb: Ho 0500 33» £353 ado H6:
cu H on
00 H2000 00 0: 030 0.030 H 00? H0: 09000 H 0.0 030 00 000.. 00 H6:
Mama? 00.3006 HQ: on. o» and: H 0.0 9.35» no 80 H..3 m 30m
09 an H was:
on 83H .3503 H 000.30“ 05 pom fin H6: 9046 on. on 60.30.33 9.0 H6:
8989
.038 as 9503 ad Hm: mnwow ammo and Edna d an H.mm
3090s .0 80 Ht; Hahpmoo mama .Ho #0.? 95A Hém H 30%

39...qu H530: .0 a.» H6:

 

“00.39 .393vo d an H. Hm

 

 

We H5482

gHBHmom

o EH00
HHmm Hanomhmm

 

 

155

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

000000 00
0H #0000900 HO0H 0 «~09 H.mm
0.90:0 H 008A
000000 0H0a00 00 0000 000 000 00 H.00 00 0000.00 00000 00 00 H.00 m 000
0000000 00 00 00 0>00 H.Hp 000000 000 0000000
0H0000 00 000: 0000000 H.00 00 0002 0000 0000 00 000 H.Hm_
0.30:0 H 00 .303
00 03080..“ bu 00000000005 H.mm
0.8.0 3.0.00.0 b0 26H 30.900 53 0.3000 H 00
whoa 00:03.0 b0 0000.3. 0.9000 H.mm :03 m0 0000.009 an 000.3 H.mm m 30m _
0.000 03000000030
0H0a00 00 000000 00 000000000 000 00 H.00 0H0000 an 0000 000000000 00 H.00
Hg.“ 1
0.05.0.» 0 no 000.808 0 000 HR.
3.00000 0:0 000005 bu
0a 0» 080an pafioma..." 00 H0 H.0m _ H Rom
00000 0.00000 000000 00 0000 H000 H.00 0000000 00 0
08 00 000000.008 on 020: 00000000 badm 00000 .30 00 08 9.03 0.003.? n
000000 00 00 00000 000 00 H.00 0000: 0000 000000 0 0000 H.00 r”
H

 

€80.82

EHBHmOm

a 000000
0000 000000

156

_
_

 

 

f--

fi. ———--

1.- I777“

 

>5.-

.000w00000 0903 000» 09 000: 00 0:00 H.om

000000 000000 m>0w000 no: 00 H.mm
009009
00:00 0903.0000 an 0000 000 00 H.mw

manomm

00:90 £003 000: macaw «mm H.~w
0006 H manomm

000 000 00 00000000000 000 0.00
300> mo 0000a 0.000000

00000 00» 000000000: on 00» H.mm

 

W

m 0

 

mamomm 00:00
0000 000000 00000 000 00 00000 0.00
pafion0qdpm
000000 0 8000 000 pa 000m on ad H.mw
000000 00 00000“ 0003 09 005000 H.mm

00 o000>o p.000 H
059 .000590 omdmam on 000 H.0m
mamomm 00000 90000 H
000.000 0000.000000000 00 0.00
09 on
and: H 00 mHadwoow 00 a0 H.m~

. N 30m

 

0000 00000000 00 00 0000 00 0.00

00 mHmoon
00:00 was: 00 0wpmmhmpnw no: 80 H.bw
00003 mHogz 000 pm 003 Ed H.mw

 

00a 0000.0000909.a0 H.m~
0080: £003 Haasmom aw H.0r
000009 50000000 0 80 H.m~

 

 

 

W>HB¢omz

m>HBHmom

m GHSHOU
MHom Hawuom

APPENDIX D

VIBR

APPENDIX D

VIBR

INSTRUCTIONS FOR ADMINISTRATION

\

The Values Inventory of Behavioral Responses is designed
to register children‘s value choices. The inventory is
designed primarily for use with grades four, five, and six.
It consists of a variety of familiar situations for which
four alternative choices are provided. In all, there are
192 possible choices, twenty-four of which refer to each
of the eight value categories as outlined by Lasswell's
framework of values.

 

GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS

1. Read aloud to the class the paragraphs appearing on
the front cover of the booklet. Stress the point that
this is not a test. There are no "right" or "wrong"
answers. Each student is to make the choice that best
fits him. Try to alleviate any fears that the children
may have concerning grades, report cards, secrecy, etc.
Fears, founded or unfounded, are likely to bias the
choices.

2. This inventory is not a timed reading test. To
ensure that reading ability does not become a factor,
it is strongly recommended that the teacher read each
situation and its four choices to the class. Allow
enough time for all children to make a decision and to
mark their response before going on to the next situ-
ation. This procedure should be followed for all
forty-eight items.

3. This inventory should be completed in one sitting
if possible (approximately one hour)--or about one
minute per question. Discourage any discussion during
the time the inventory is being administered.

157

158

INSTRUCTIONS FOR SCORING

The scoring key is designed so that the teacher can easily
determine the value status of each child by placing the
appropriate category key over the marked response of the
student (so that choices can be seen through the spaces
provided).

1. The prototype of the scoring key that follows is
divided into eight sections, each representing one
of the individual categories.

2. Each category contains six items that are indi-
cated under the column entitled "Item”; e.g., the
category "Well-Being" contains items one through six,
the category "Respect" seven through twelve, and so
forth.

3. The column to the far right of each category under
the title "points" contains numbers that represent the
number of points to be given to the alternative chosen
by the student.

4. The number beside the choice selected by the stu-
dent should be entered in the space provided under the
column entitled "Subscore."

5. When the subscores for each item within a category
have been determined and entered in the subscore space,
the subscores are to be totaled and entered in the
"Category Total" space found at the bottom of each
category column.

6. These category total scores can then be plotted
on a Value Profile Sheet.

159

VIBR SCORING KEY

ITEM a b c d iTEM a b c d ITEM a b c
1. 4 3 2 1 — 19. 1 2 3 4 — 37. 3 1 2
2. 1 4 3 2 -- 20. 3 4 2 1 - 38. 1 4 3
3. 2 4 3 1 - 21. 4 3 2 1 — 39. 4 2 1
4. 4 2 1 3 - 22. 4 1 3 2 - 40. 1 4 3
5. 4 2 3 1 - 23. 4 1 3 2 — 41. 4 1 3
6. 4 1 2 3 - 24. 2 3 1 4 - 42. 2 3 4
Total Total Total
Well-Being — Affection — — Wealth
7, 4 3 1 2 _. 25. 3 2 4 1 - 43. 3 1 2
8. 2 4 3 1 - 26. 4 2 3 1 - 44. 3 2 4
9. 3 2 1 4 _ 27. 4 2 3 1 - 45. 1 4 2
10. 3 4 1 2 - 28. 4 3 2 1 — 46. 3 1 2
11. 1 3 2 4 — 29. 4 3 2 1 — 47. 2 3 1
12. 2 3 1 4 — 30. 2 4 3 1 — 48. 4 3 1
Total Total Total
Respect -— Skill -—- -— Enlightenment

13. 4 3 1 2 — 31. 4 3 2 1 -

14, 2 1 4 3 .. 32. 3 4 1 2 — 1 = Most Negative

15, 1 4 3 2 .— 33. 4 1 3 2 - 2 = Negative

3 = Positive

16. 4 2 3 1 - 34. 4 1 2 3 - 4 2 Most Positive

17. 3 4 2 1 - 35. 4 3 2 1 —

18. 1 2 3 4 - 36. 3 1 2 4 -

Total _ Total 9

Rectitude Power — '—

© , 1973 by

VIBR-2

160

VALUES INVENTORY
OF BEHAVIORAL RESPONSES

On the next few pages you will be reading some interesting problems that
most of us have to face pretty often. Please read these problems and the
four choices that go with each problem. Think about the problem and the
choices carefully, then mark the number of the choice that you honestly
feel fits you.

This is not a test. There are no right or wrong an?i. Your name will

not be on any of these papers. Do not be air d to very honest and to
select the choice most like you. The ans ou choose will have nothing
to do with either your grades or your ards. We only want to know
how young men and women your so out some things.

   
 
 
 

Contemporary Design, P. O. Box 262,
Campbell. Ca 95008

161

If I make a foolish mistake

a. I can laugh at myself

b. I get upset for a few minutes

c. I will stay embarrassed for a while
d. I will remember it for a long time

In choosing sides

a. I am usually one of the last chosen

b. I am usually one of the first chosen

c. Most peo want me with their group

d. Most pe e don't want me with their group
Q

I am happfzst when

a. My work is easy
b. I have completed a difficult job well
c. I have finished all my work
d. I don't have work to do £3?
~

When I go to bed 49
as?

a. I usually fall asleep quickly

b. I usually stay awake a long time

c. Sometimes I hardly sleep at all

d. I read until I get sleepy

It is hard for me to go to sleep

a. The night before Christmas

b. After being in trouble $3?
c. When my school work is too hard dfi
d. Most of the time 4?

9
I usually

a. Feel I am as good as most people

b. Feel I am not as good as most people

c. Feel I am as good at a few things as most peOple
d. Feel I am better than most people

When I see the flag and hear a band

a. I get shivery all over

b. I stand at attention

c. I have to talk extra loud

d. I wish the parade would start

10.

11.

12.

13.

14.

If my cousin said their school is better than mine,

162

I would tell them

a.
b.
c.
d.

If I misbehave and the principal calls my parents

They are wrong

They are entitled to their own opinion

They should not say things like that
They had better take that back

I knzgfiI have let my parents down

I

parents

When someone does a job well

a.
b.
C.
d.

When friends need help they

a.
b.
c.
d.

If

a.
b.
c.
d.

am very happy for her
think she probably had help

HHHH

0
Never ask me for advice 90,4"
Often ask me for advice

Never follow my advice
Usually follow my advice

someone says "Sir" to her father it is because

She was trained to say "Sir"

nk, "My father is not afraid of the principal."

I a shamed to face my parents
IiéLlieve the principal was right to call my

admit that she did a good job

feel I could have done it better

.9
33’

One should be polite to elders
She wants to impress other people

She respects her father

I pick up my things

a.
b.
c.
d.

Without being reminded

After being reminded

Unless someone else used them
If my mother makes me

I help with chores at home

a.
b.
c.
d.

Only when I am asked
Because I have to
Because I should
When I think about it

Q
,3»

49
(as

15.

16.

17.

18.

19.

20.

21.

163

If a window was broken accidentally I would probably

a. Run

b. Tell the owner

c. Tell my parents so they could tell the owner
d. Tell my best friend

I usually tell the truth

a. All the time

b. Only if it doesn't hurt me

c. Only if it doesn't hurt someone else
d. If m caught

8'
If I‘$%re a page in a library book I would
9

a. Mend it and return it

b. Tell the librarian so she could mend it
0. Return it and say nothing

d. Blame it on somebody else

Usually I

b. Will copy if my friends le e
c. Will not copy very often 0"
d. Will not copy éf’
When I know someone who has no friends

a. Will copy if the teacher is got there

a. I won't associate with them as I have friends of
my own

b. I won't associate with them if my friends
dislike them

c. I invite them to join us

d. I ask them if I can join them ~§$

‘8
I usually 4?
ég

a. Want everyone to like me

b. Want to like everyone

c. Like only those who like me

d. Don't care who likes me

I usually like to be

a. With lots of people

b. With a few close friends
c. With one special friend
d. By myself

22.

23.

24.

25.

26.

27.

28.

164

If someone feels sad

a. Most people try to help

b. Most people mind their own business
c. Most people would ask them why

d. Most people feel sad too

If someone I know gets into trouble I

a. Offer to help

b. Pretend I don't know them
c. Like them anyway

d. Let t em alone

Most peééie I know
47

a. Tfiank only of themselves

b. Are sometimes nice to others
c. Are often mean to others

d. Are considerate to others

I start projects at home that§$
S,

a. I can't always finish d?

b. I need help to finish :3?

c. I can usually finish

d. Are too hard for me even with help

I usually write

a. Quickly and neatly

b. Quickly but it is hard to read

c. Slowly but neatly

d. Slowly but it is hard to read .9

In reading Social Studies I usually r2§d
Q

a. Fast and understand the story 6

b. Fast but don't know all the answers

c. Slowly but can answer most of the questions
d. Slowly but need help to answer the questions

When I read out loud to a class

a. I am one of the best readers

b. I read better than most classmates

c. I read as well as most classmates

d. Most of my classmates read better than I

29.

30.

31.

32.

33.

34.

35.

For

a.
b.
C.
d.

In

a.
b.
c.
d.

165

me most new games are

Easy to learn quickly

Learned well only after much practice
Learned quickly but usually not very well
Difficult even if I try hard

math I am

Fast but I make many errors
Fast and don't miss many
Slow but get most right
Slowégnd miss a lot

I hqgfie a good idea I

Make other people see it my way
Tell everyone

Tell someone to tell others
Don't say anything

I think my suggestion is $§tter than another I

Say so to everyone é?
Convince others why I

d9
am right

Ask others about it
Get others to help me

When I get to make a decision I

a.
b.
c.
d.

When I need to get someone to help mec§ith a job

a.
b.
C.
d.

In

Have to think about it
Do it without thinking much about it

Get others to help me

Ask others about it ‘éfi
5.

I

$0

can get help easily

It is easier to do it myself

I
I

my

HHHH

often cannot get anyone to help
cannot get help as easily as others can

class

would like to be president
would like to be a monitor
don't want any job

will help when asked

36.

37.

38.

39.

40.

41.

42.

166

When it is time to elect officers I

a. Often make nominations

b. Can't decide who would be best
c. Usually don't take part

d. Get someone to nominate me

My allowance

a. Is about like other people my age

b. Is not as much as other people my age
c. Is more than other people my age

d. Gets me gost of the things I want

Every youE§§person should

a. GetQan allowance

b. Earn her allowance

c. Help whether or not she gets an allowance
d. Not get an allowance

Things I want I

a. Work and save for 駧
b. Ask my parents for C?
c. Usually do not get 42

d. Get if I wait until Chrisémas

When I get to buy something I usually

a. Spend more than I should
b. Keep within my allowance
c. Ask my parents how much to spend
d. Never buy the best I can afford

If I need extra money to buy something I

.1
a. Usually hunt for a job to do Q駧
b. Ask my parents for it
c. Try to sell something I no longerégant
d. Try to borrow on next week's allowance

I work for my allowance

a. More than most people my age
b. Less than most people my age
c. About as much as everyone else
d. If I have to

43.

44.

45.

46.

47.

48.

167

The things I learn in school

a. Will be good for me when I am grown
b. Help me to get good grades

0. Are useful sometimes

d. Help me at home

When I am grown

a. I know what I want to be

b. I don't now what I want to be

c. There many things I would like to be
d. I wil%, hink about it later

. 9 .
I W111 63 to college if

a. My parents expect me to

b. I want to

c. My grades are good enough

d. What I want to be requires it

e.

Learning multiplication tables 6§§
€>

a. Helped me with division $1

b. Was not really necessary
c. Was required by my teacher
d. Was worth the effort

School is important

a. If you plan to go to college as
b. If you plan to get a job ‘§§
c. For some people 4?
d. For everyone é$

Most people can learn things

a. If they study hard

b. If they want to

c. If the teacher helps them
d. By just being in class

APPENDIX E

DIRECTIONS AND EXPLANATION GIVEN TO SUBJECTS

APPENDIX E

DIRECTIONS AND EXPLANATION GIVEN TO SUBJECTS

This is a study to find out how girls your age
feel about a lot of things. We want to find this out
because we think that girls your age should be able to
tell us how you feel about these things. Then adults
who work with girls can do a better job because they
will know how you feel and think.

This is not a test--there are no right and wrong
answers. Just your feelings are all that matters. We
don't want to know your name and no one will know how
you answered the questions. If you can't understand
some of the sentences, be sure to ask the person that

gave you these papers.

168

REFERENCES

REFERENCES

Books

Andry, R. G. Delinquency and parental pathology.
London: Staples Press, 1971.

Bakken, D. Adolescence in America: From idea to social
fact. In Robert E. Grinder (Ed.), Studies in
Adolescence (3rd ed.). New York: Macmillan
Publishing Co., 1975.

 

 

Bardwick, J. M. Psychology of women. New York: Harper
& Row, 1971.

 

Cavan, R. S., & Ferdinand, T. N. Juvenile delinquency
(3rd ed.). New York: Lippincott Company, 1975.

 

Cloward, R. A., & Ohlin, L. E. Delinquency and oppor—
tunity. New York: Free Press of Glencoe,
1960.

Cohen, A. K. Delinquent boys. New York: Free Press
of Glencoe, 1955.

Cohen, F. J. Youth and crime. New York: International
UniverSitIes Press, Inc., 1957.

 

Cohen, A. K. Deviance and control. New Jersey: Prentice-
Hall, Inc.,fl966.

 

Coopersmith, S. The antecedents of self-esteem. San
Francisco: W. H. Freeman & Co., 1967.

 

Erikson, E. H. Childhood and society. New York: W. W.
Norton & Company, 1963.

 

Erikson, E. H. Identity, youth, and crisis. New York:
W. W. Norton & Company, Inc., 1965f

 

Ferdinand, T. N. Typologies of delinquency. New York:
Random House, 1966.

 

Fernald, M. R., Stevens, M. H., & Hayes, A. D. A study
of women delinquents in New York state. New
Jersey: Patterson Smith, 1968.

 

169

170

Gray, A. The psychology of fear and stress. London:
Weidenfeld & Nicolson,*l971.

 

Giallombardo, R. Society of women: A study of a women's
prison. New York: John WIIey & Sons, Inc., 1966.

 

Gleuck, S. & Gleuck, E. Five hundred delinquent women.
New York: Alfred A. Knopf, Inc., 1934.

 

Gleuck, S. & Gleuck, E. Of delinquengy and crime.
Springfield, 111.: Charles C. Thomas,’1974.

 

Grinder, R. E., ed. Studies in adolescence. New York:
MacMillan Publishing Co.,11975.

 

Hall, G. S. Adolescence (2 vols.). New York: Appleton,
1916.

 

Hays, W. L. Statistics for psychologists. New York:
Holt, Rinehart & Winston, 1963.

 

Hewitt, L. E., & Jenkins, R. L. Fundamental patterns of
maladjustment. Springfield, 111.: State
Printers, 1947.

 

 

Jensen, A. R. Genetics and education. New York:
Harper and Row, Publishers,‘1972.

 

Jurjevich, R.-R.M. No water in my cup. New York: Libra
Publishers, Inc., 1968.

 

Kagan, J. Personality development. New York: Harcourt
Brace Jovanovi, Inc., 1971.

 

Kagan, J. A conception of early adolescence. Readings in
Human Development. Sluice Dock, Guilford, Conn.:
The Dushkin PubliShing Group, Inc., 1974.

 

 

,.

Kenniston, K. Youth: A new stage of life. Readings in
Human Development. Sluice Dock, Guilford, Conn.:
The Dushkin Publishing Group, Inc., 1974.

 

 

KonOpka, G. Young girls, a portrait of adolescence.
PrentiEe-Hall, Inc., 1975.

 

Konopka, G. The adolescent girl in conflict. New Jersey:
Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1966.

 

Lasswell, H. D. Power and personality. New York: W. W.
Norton & Co., Inc., 1948.

 

Lemert, E. M. Social action and legal change. Chicago,
111.: Aldifie Publishing Co., 1970.

 

171

Levy, D. Maternal overprotection. New York: Columbia
University Press, 1943.

Maccoby, E. E. & Jacklin, C. The psychology of sex dif-
ferences. Stanford, Calif}:‘ Stanford'University
Press, 1974.

 

Matza, D. Delinquengy and drift. New York: John Wiley
& Sons, Inc., 1964.

 

Matza, D. Becoming deviant. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.:
Prentice-Hall, 1969}

 

Mead, M. Culture and commitment: A study of the gener-
ation gap. Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday and
Company, 1970.

 

Merton, R. K. Social theory and social structure. New
York: The Free Press, 1957.

Phillips, J. L. The origins of intellect: Piaget's
theory. San Francisco: W. H. Freeman & Co.,
1969.

Platt, A. M. The child savers. Chicago: University of
Chicago Press, 1969.

 

Pollack, 0., & Friedman, A. S. Family_dynamics and female
sexual delinquents. Palo Alto, Calif.: Science
and Behavior Books, Inc., 1969.

 

 

Pollack, O. The criminality of women. Philadelphia:
University of Pennsylvania Press, 1950.

 

Raths, L., Harmin, M., & Simon, S. Values and teaching.
Columbus, Ohio: Charles Merrill Books, Inc.,
1966.

 

Reckless, W. C. The crime problem. New York: The Free
Press, 1961.

 

Redl, F., & Wineman, D. The aggressive child. Glencoe,
Ill.: Free Press, 1957.

 

Rescher, N. Introduction to value theory. New Jersey:
Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1969.

 

Rice, P. F. The adolescent. Boston: Allyn and Bacon,
Inc., 1975.

 

Rogers, C. R. Client-centered therapy. Boston:
Houghton Mifflin, 1951.

 

172

Rokeach, M. The nature of human values. New York: The
Free Press, 1973.

 

Sawrey, J. M., & Telford, C. W. Psychology of adjustment.
Boston: Allyn and Bacon, Inc., 1968.

 

Short, J. F., & Strodtbeck, F. L. Group process and gang
delinquency. Chicago: University of Chicago
Press, 1965.

 

 

Stinchcombe, A. L. Rebellion in a high school. Chicago:
Quadrangle Books, 1964.

 

Sutherland, E. H., & Cressey, D. R. Criminology (9th ed.).
Philadelphia: Lippincott Co., 1974.

 

Periodicals

 

Auerswald, E. Interdisciplinary versus ecological ap-
proach. Familnyroceggd 1968, 1(2), 202-215.

Bledsoe, J. C., & Wiggins, R. G. Congruence of
adolescents' self-concepts and parents' per-
ceptions of adolescents' self-concepts. Journal
of Psychology, 1973, 33(1), 131—136.

 

Bronfenbrenner, U. The roots of alienation. Journal of
National Ass'n. of Women Deans, Administrators
and Counselors, 1973, 32(1), 3-17.

 

 

 

Campbell, P. B. Feminine intellectual decline during
adolescence. American Educational Research,
April 1974.

 

Deitz, G. E. The influence of social class, sex, and
delinquency-nondelinquency on adolescent values.
Journal of Genetic Psychology. 1972, 121(1),
119-126.

 

Duncan, P. Parental attitudes and interactions in delin-
quency. Child Development, 1971, 42, 1751-1765.

 

Feather, N. T. Change in confidence following success
and failure as a predictor of subsequent per-
formance. Journal of Personality & Social Psye
chology, 1968, 9, 38-46.

 

Freud, S. An outline of psychoanalysis, 1940 in
Quarterly Focus. University of Minn.: Center
for Youth Development and Research, Spring, 1975.

 

173

Gibbons, D. G., & Griswold, M. J. Sex differences among
juvenile court referrals. Sociology and Social
Research, 1957, 33, 107-110.

 

Gray, D. F., & Gaier, E. L. The congruency of adolescent
self-perceptions with those of parents and best
friends. Adolescence, 1974, 3(34), 299-303.

 

Hindelang, M. J. Moral evaluations of illegal behaviors.
Social Problems, 1974, 33(3), 370-385.

 

Jacobsen, L. I., Berger, S. E., & Milham, J. Individual
differences in cheating during a temptation period
when confronting failure. Journal of Personality
and Social Psychologxr 1970, 33, 48-56.

 

 

Jensen, G. F. Inner containment and delinquency.
Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, 1973,
91’ 464-470.

Jenstrom, L. L. Programming for young parents. Sharing,
Dept. of HEW, Winter, 1975.

Klein, D. The etiology of female crime: A review of
the literature. Issues in Criminology, 1973, 3,
3‘29.

Kratcoski, P. C. Differential treatment of delinquent
boys and girls in juvenile court. Child Welfare,
1974, 33(1), 16-22.

 

Lemert, E. M. The concept of secondary deviation.
In Edwin M. Lemert (Ed.), Human Deviancey_Socia1
Problems, and Social Cogtrol (2nd ed.). New
Jersey: Prentice-Hall Inc., 1972.

 

Leventhal, G. S., & Lane, D. W. Sex, age, and equity
behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psy-
ChOlogz' 1970' ii, 312-3160

Monge, R. H. Developmental trends in factors of
adolescent self-concept. Developmental Psye
chology, 1973, 3(3), 382-393.

 

Monahan, L., Kuhn, D., & Shaver, P. Intrapsychic versus
cultural explanations of the "fear-success"
motive. Journal of Personality and Social Psy-
chology, 1974, 33, 60-64.

Nagel, S. S., & Weitzman, L. J. Women as litigants. The
Hastings Law Journal, 1971, 33, 171-198.

 

174

Phillips, L., & Votey, H. L. Crime, youth, and the labor
market. Journal of Political Economy, 1972, 502-
503.

Rucker, R. W. A value oriented framework for education
and the behavioral science. The Journal of Value
Inquiry, 1970, 3(4), 270-280.

 

Strodtbeck, F. L., & Short, N. F. Aleatory risks versus
short-run hedonism in explanation of gang action.
Social Problems, 1964, 33, 127-140.

 

Documents

 

Corrections. Washington, D.C.: National Advisory Com—
mission on Criminal Justice Standards and Goods,
1973.

 

Crime in the United States. Uniform Crime Reports.
Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice,
1973.

 

Uniform juvenile court act. National Conference of Com-
missioners on Uniform State Laws, 1155 East Six-
tieth Street, Chicago, 111. 60637.

 

McSweeney, M. Notes, exercises and diagnostic measures
for education 9693. Unpublished, Michigan State
University, 1976.

 

 

Monographs

 

Fitts, W. H. Manual for the Tennessee self concept scale.

Nashville, Tenn.: Counselor Recordings and Tests,
1965.

Fitts, W. H. The self-concept and delinquency. Nash-
ville, Tenn.: Counselor Recordings and Tests,
1969.

 

Fitts, W. H. The self-concept and delinquency. Nash-
ville, Tenn.: Dede Wallace Mental Health Center,
1971.

 

Fitts, W. H. The self-concept and behavior. Nashville,
Tenn.: Counselor Recordings and Tests, 1972.

 

Reckless, W. C., & Kay, B. A. The female offenders.
Washington, D.C.: President's Commission on Law
Enforcement and Administration of Justice, 1967.

 

175

Seiders, N. D., & Sanford, E. W. Values inventory of
behavioral responses magual. Campbell, Calif.:
Contemporary Design, 1971.

Simon, R. J. The contemporary woman and crime. Rock-
” ville, Md.: National Institute of Mental Health,
1975.

Ward, D., Jackson, M., & Ward, R. E. Crime and violence
by women. Crimes of violence (Vol. 13),
Appendix 17. President's Commission on Law
Enforcement and Administration of Justice, 1968.

 

Research Instruments

 

Fitts, W. H. Tennessee self concept scale. Box 6184.
Acklen Station. Nashville, Tenn.: Counselor
Recordings and Tests, Copyright 1964.

 

Seiders, N. D., & Sanford, E. W. Values inventory of
behavioral responses. PO Box 262. Campbell,
Calif.: Contemporary Design, Copyright 1973.

 

"illllllllillili