QIIE?“£~‘~+-+93T?

2 §»}\-}.C 2 Y

p.133 .2 0 1333

 

OVERDUE FINES:
25¢ per day per iteu

RETURNING LIBRARY MATERIALS:

Place in book return to remove
charge fro: circulation records

 

@1980, Edward D. Seely

BEHAVIORS OF PEER LEADERS, ADULT LEADERS, MOTHERS
AND FATHERS AS PERCEIVED BY YOUNG PEOPLE FOURTEEN
THROUGH EIGHTEEN YEARS OF AGE

By
Edward DeVoe Seely

A DISSERTATION
Submitted to
Michigan State University

in partial fulfillment of the requirements
for the degree of

DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY

Department of Secondary Education and Curriculum

1980

‘ABSTRACT

BEHAVIORS OF PEER LEADERS, ADULT LEADERS,
MOTHERS AND FATHERS AS PERCEIVED BY
YOUNG PEOPLE FOURTEEN THROUGH
EIGHTEEN YEARS OF AGE

By
Edward D. Seely

The study examined ll behaviors which high school
youth perceive as desirable and 11 as undesirable in
their leaders (based on Gamelin, 1970). The sample,
drawn widely from church, school and other groups,
including a national program for delinquent youth,
consisted of 1536 young people in the continental
United States. The subjects indicated on a Likert
scale the degree of importance (of the positive be-
haviors) and the degree of seriousness (of the nega-
tive) each had when performed by Egg; leaders and
adult leaders. The reSpondents were also asked to
indicate on the same scale the degree to which each
of these behaviors was true of the mothers and fig-
thggg. Using the mean scores obtained, rankings
were also indicated for the four sets of responses
(pggg, adult, mother, father). Subgroups from which
data were received were urban, suburban and rural

youth: "delinquent" and "average” young people: male

and female respondents: church-related and nonchurch

related subjects; each year of age: and voluntary
group members as well as members of groups on a non-
voluntary basis (such as math class). Regional data
were also analyzed from within the boundaries of the
contintntal United States.

A multivariate analysis of scale scores was con-
ducted. A scale score is the average of the ll mean
scores for a category, for example, Egg; positive.
General descriptive statistics for item frequencies
are also provided. Pearson Product Moment correla-
tions were also made on both scale and item analyses.

Several important findings were identified. The
top-ranked and highest rated desirable behavior for
both Egg; leader and adult leader is "listening."

The second and third most important behaviors in ggglt
leaders were identified by the youth as "understanding
the concerns of young people" and "communicating.”

The same two were identified for Egg; leaders in the
second and third positions only in reverse order.

The most serious undesirable behavior of both Egg;
leaders and ggult leaders is "hypocrisy.”

A bimodal distribution of the negative scales

occurred between peg; and adult leaders and mother and

 

father. The behaviors ranked most serious (negative)
for peer and adult leaders (very high mean scores on

the Likert scale) received very low mean scores,

indicating that the subjects view these behaviors as
not very true. for their mother and father. An example
is with regard to the most serious behavior of pug;
and adult leaders, ”hypocrisy," which the youth re-
ported as least true of both mother and father. MQEE’
SEE and fathers received high mean scores (all above
the median) for each of the desirable behaviors.

For pug; leaders all four of the most desired
behaviors were types of consideration. For udult
leaders the t0p three were related to consideration
and the fourth was a type of initiation of structure.
The first and third for mothgr was a type of initia-
tion of structure, the second and fourth a type of
consideration. The third for fathgr was a type of
consideration while the others were types of initia-
tion of structure. The top-ranked item for uothgr
and fgthg; was the structural ”using of firmness when
necessary." I

Few differences cocurred among the subgroups.

Only a few minor differences were noted across the

regions.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

When it became apparent that this dissertation
project would deve10p into a national study, I was
only slightly aware of the enormity and complexity
of the new dimensions it would take. In one sense,
it became a test of faith; as such the ultimate ac-
knowledgment and praise belongs to the Lord who kept
me from being overwhelmed.

Happily, most of those who contributed to the
magnitude of the task also helped greatly in its ac-
complishment and truly deserve recognition. I am
grateful to the more than 1500 young pe0ple who gave
their time, to the church and school administrators
and teachers who made provision for the survey, to
the management and staff of Youth for Christ Inter-
national who Sponsored the study and provided the
resources for gathering the data, and to the members
and fellow staff associates of Christ Church of Oak
Brook, in Oak Brook, Illinois for their continual
expressions of assurance and cheer.

Special acknowledgment is due to certain peeple

in particular whose contribution to this project

ii

exceeds anything I could have expected or desired.
The first to be mentioned must be Ted Ward, the
chairman of my committee and project director, whose
guidance and counsel has been a constant source of
professional and personal enrichment. An educator
'par excellence, he, and his family as well, have con-
tributed immeasurably to my development.

The members of my faculty committee have also
helped me greatly. Norman Bell has helped me attain
many understandings and technical skills for the con-
ducting of educational research and insights as to
how these skills may be profitably used in the field
of church education. Ben Bohnhorst has introduced me
to much of the great literature in my field of curric-
ulum and has enabled me to develOp confidence and com-
petence in my scholarship. Fred Graham's generous
gift of time and abiding care as well as his percep-
tive exploration of theological and ecclesiastical
implications of the study have been a source of
blessing to me.

As with all such projects, many others have
shared in significant ways in the shaping of its
construction. Frank Jenkins of the MSU Office of
Research Consultation went far beyond what could
reasonably be expected of him in his role as

iii

statistical consultant and computer programmer.
Roger Harris, a computer programmer and member of
Christ Church, gave much personal time in helping
with the statistical analysis of the computer out-
put. Vic Glavach, Assistant to the President of
Youth for Christ International, went well above the
call of duty in managing the many details involved
in facilitating the organizational mechanics re-
quired in order to conduct the study. Arthur
DeKruyter, Senior Pastor of Christ Church, is a
colleague and friend whose encouragement and reas-
surance have been a constant inspiration.

In any endeavor involving the rigors of a dis-
sertation, the effects on one's family are signi-
ficant. I concur with the youth who were surveyed
in the study that parents should be rated very favor-
ably. I am appreciative of the fact that not only
during the first thirty-nine years of my life but
even throughout the struggles associated with this
project these first leaders continued to help, to
listen and to support me. My wife, Carol, and daugh-
ter, Janet, have been enormously patient and under-
standing in spite of the considerable absence of
their husband and father. In addition, Carol has

helped me with editing and doing most of the typing.
iv

Moreover, her perspectives as a good educator were
especially helpful in identifying the meaning of the
findings reported in Chapter V. In all these and
many other ways as well, she has had an important
part in the completion of this dissertation and the
contribution it holds for the future. I

Edward D. Seely
March 20, 1980

TABLE OF CONTENTS

_ Page
.LIST OF TABLES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ix
LIST or FIGURES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xii

A Chapter

I.THEPROBLEM.............. 1

Need for the Present Study

Purpose of the Study

Importance of the Study
Assumptions of the Study
Definition of Terms

Research Questions

The First Pilot Study

Factors Affecting Generalizability

II. THE PRECEDENT RESEARCH . . . . . . . . . 26

Context of the Study
Content Base of the Study
Method Base of the Study

III. THE DESIGN . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53

The Plan of the Study
Internal Validity
External Validity

Instrument for the Study
Reliability
Validity

Iv. THE FINDINGS e 0 O O C I O I C O I O O I 75
Research Questions and Pertinent Data
Research Question #1

Research Question #2
Research Question #3

vi

Chapter

vii

Research Question #h
Research Question #5
Tapical Generalizations

Generalizations about Peer Leaders

Generalizations about Adult Leaders

Generalizations about the Relation-
ship of Adult Leader Behaviors to
the Mother Behaviors

Generalizations about the Relation-
ship of Adult Leader Behaviors to
the Father Behaviors

Other Generalizations

Page

v. THE CONCLUSIOIVS e e e o o e e o e e e e o e 1‘43

APPENDIX A
APPENDIX B
APPENDIX C
APPENDIX D

APPENDIX E

What the Data Mean
Conclusions Regarding Peer Leaders
Conclusions Regarding Adult Leaders
Conclusions Regarding Comparisons
and Contrasts between Pear and
Adult Leaders
Conclusions Concerning the Relation-
ship between Adult Leader Behaviors
and Mother and Father Behaviors
Meanings for Leader Selection
Conclusions for Selecting Peer
Leaders
Conclusions for Selecting Adult
Leaders
Meanings for Leader Training
Other Conclusions
Research Questions for Further Study
Additional Suggestions for Further
Research

The First Pilot Study . . . . . . . . .
The Second Pilot Study . . . . . . . .
The Instrument . . . . . . . . . . . .

Instructions for the Trainers of Data
Gatherers . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

177
200
208

212
213

viii
Chapter Page

Instructions for Data-Gatherers

Public Relations Principles for
Conducting the Survey

Group Description Sheet

APPENDIX F Pearson Product Moment Correlation
of Mother Negative and Father
Negative Scales by Item . . . . . . 216

BIBLIOGRAPHY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 217

Table

1.0
2.1

2.2

2.3

”.1

#.2
“.3

“.4 .

4.5

“.6

4.?

LIST OF TABLES

Subgroup Distributions . . . . . . . .

Per Cent of Common Variance Accounted‘
for by Four Factors . . . . . . . . .

Program Item Scores as Related to
Rating of Leaders . . . . . . . . . .

Traits Which Church Youth Like and
Dislike in Their Leaders . . . . . .

National Mean Scores and Ranking by
Item in All Four Categories . . . . .

Variable Comparison Rankings . . . . .

Youth Perceptions of Peer and Adult
Leadership Behavior--Mean Scores
and Ranking by Item of Male and
Female Subjects . . . . . . . . . . .

Youth Perceptions of Peer and Adult
Leadership Behavior-~Mean Scores
and Ranking by Item of Urban and
Voluntary Youth Guidance and
"Other” 0 O O C O D O O O O O O O O 0

Youth Perceptions of Pear and Adult
Leadership Behavior--Mean Scores and
Ranking by Item of Voluntary Subur-
ban and Rural Subjects . . . . . . .

Youth Perceptions of Leadership Behav-
ior--Distribution of All Subjects'
Responses . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Youth Perceptions of Leadership

Behavior--Distribution of Male and
Female Responses . . . . . . . . . .

ix

Page

20

34

#1

77
79

33

85

87

91

9h

Table Page

“.8 - Youth Perceptions of Leadership Behav-
ior--Distribution of Voluntary
Suburban and Rural Responses . . . . . 96

“.9 - Youth Perceptions of Mother and Father.
Leadership Behavior--Mean Scores and
Ranking by Item of Male and Female
31113386133 e e e e e e s e e e e e e e e 109

' “.10 - Youth Perceptions of Mother and Father
Leadership Behavior--Mean Scores and

Ranking by Item of Urban and Volun-

tary Youth Guidance and ”Other” . . . . 112

“.11 - Youth Perceptions of Mother and Father
Leadership Behavior—~Mean Scores and
Ranking by Item of Voluntary Subur-
ban and Rural Subjects . . . . . . . . 117

“.12 - Youth Perceptions of Leadership Behav-
ior-~Distribution of Urban and
Voluntary Youth Guidance and "Other”
Responscs O O O O O O I O O O O O O O O 123

“.13 - Groups Which Tended to Rate Behaviors
Higher O O C O O O O O O O O O O O D O 126

Al - Traits Which Church Youth Like and
Dislike in their Leaders . . . . . . . 180

A2 - Frequency (Weighted) of Selection of
the Eight PEER Leadership Competency
Factors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 182

A3 - Frequency (Weighted) of Selection of
the Eight PEER Leadership Incompe-
tency Factors . . . . . . . . . . . . . 183

A“ - Frequency (Weighted) of Selection of
the Eight ADUDT Leadership Compe-
tency Factors . . . . . . . . . . . . . 185

A5 - Frequency (Weighted) of Selection of
the Eight ADUDT Leadership Incompe-
tency Factors . . . . . . . . . . . . . 186

Table

A6 - Frequency (Weighted) of Selection of
the Sixteen Important Characteris-
tics of Mother Factors

A7 - Frequency (Weighted) of Selection of
the Sixteen Important Characteris-
tics of Father Factors

A8 - Summary of Rank-Order of Characteris-

tics

xi

Page

188

190

192

Figure
“.1 -

“.“ -

“.6 -

A1 -

LIST OF FIGURES

Youth Perceptions of Peer and Adult

Leadership Behavior--Mean Scores
and Ranking by Item of Male and
Female ReSponses . . . . . . . .

Youth Perceptions of Peer and Adult

Leadership Behavior--Mean Scores
and Ranking by Item of Urban and
Voluntary Youth Guidance and

"Other" Responses . . . . . . .

Youth Perceptions of Peer and Adult

Leadership Behavior--Mean Scores
and Ranking by Item of Voluntary
Suburban and Rural Subjects . .

National Mean Scores and Rank by
Item for Peer, Adult, Mother and
Father Behaviors . . . . . . . .

Youth Perceptions of Mother and
Father Leadership Behavior--Mean
Scores and Ranking by Item of
Male and Female Responses . . .

Youth Perceptions of Mother and
Father Leadership Behavior--Mean
Scores and Ranking by Item of
Urban and Voluntary Youth Guid-
ance and "Other" Responses . . .

Youth Perceptions of Mother and
Father Leadership Behavior-~Mean
Scores and Ranking by Item of
Voluntary Suburban and Rural
SUbJeCtSeeeeeeeeeeee

Scoring Sheet for the Ranking of
Traits O O O O O O I O O O O O O

xii

Page

82

8“

89

92

108

11“

116

178

xiii
Figure Page

A2 - Weighted Scores for Peer, Adult,
Father and Mother Characteristics
Cited by Combined Male and Female
Responses 0 O I O O O O O O O O O C O O O 19“

Bl - Cover Letter for Second Pilot Study .'. 201

B2 - Leadership Behaviors Youth Perceive
as Important - INTERVIEW INSTRUMENT . . 202

CHAPTER I
THE PROBLEM

The education of today's young people continues
to challenge theoreticians and practitioners in the
' schools and in the churches. Ideal situations have
eluded us thus far. Conversations with colleagues
in many parts of the world confirm widespread simi-
larities of experience in the difficulties attending
youth education and a concensus as to the integral
role of leadership in improving the present condi-
tions. Empirical investigation, while raising fur-
ther questions, has provided some concrete bases for

solving many of the biggest problems.

Need for the Present Study

In his landmark research on the processes of
moral judgment, Kohlberg identified three levels
through which human beings progress in their values
development. He found that in normal development
persons who have attained the capacity for reasoning
at the second, conventional level view the source of
truth as outside themselves. They impute a morality

to that external source and respond accordingly.

1

2
The motivation to make these value judgments, and all
others, is seen to be internal. Kohlberg also found
the first part of this level (Level II) to be that
form of thinking which is typically characteristic of
adolescents (Kohlberg in Beck, dt_al., 1971, pp. 36-
378 Stewart, 197“, p. 3“).

The findings of Kohlberg have fundamental and
far-reaching significance for peOple who have the
responsibility for planning and implementing programs
which involve youth. Program planners must assume
that youth participation in that which is designed for
them will be essentially voluntary. Indeed, even in
those situations where one still finds a certain
amount of forced attendance, as in some Sunday Schools,
it is not uncommon to also find a considerable amount
of absenteeism on the part of those whose participa-
tion is "required" by parents or others.

To these conditions are added an integral phenom-
enon concerning leadership. Leaders are the key fac-
tors in the dynamics and outcomes affecting groups
(Downton, 1973, p. 12: Strommen, 1971, p. 719: Perrow,
1972, p. 197: Good, Biddle and Brophy, 1975, pp. 7,

5“ ff.: Stogdill, 197“, pp. 7 ff.). As important as
are such variables as room setting, curriculum mate-

rials and socio-economic status, the leader is even

3
more critical. A configuration of variables designed
to produce the most ideal environmental setting in
which the brightest students were studying the "best”
curriculum would produce ineffective results if the
,leader were incompetent. Conversely, a good leader
can be effective in the midst of such adverse con-
. straints as a substandard environment with poor
curriculum materials and students who possess inade-

quate understanding of the subject matter.

Pur ose of the Stud
Viewing the problem more specifically, at least

four purposes were served by the present investiga-
tion. First, since leaders are such key parts of
groups, and since an adolescent's initial desire to
join and continuing desire to remain in a group de-
pends upon his or her own internal motivation, the
study sought to identify what leaders do which attract
and repel youth. Some organizations have youth groups
with a very large membership while similar organiza-
tions struggle to attract and hold merely a handful of
young people. To know what the key peOple, the lea-
ders, are doing in the former groups can be useful to

those in the latter.

a

Second, the study tried to determine whether
there is a relationship between the actions performed
by 222: and adult leaders as to which attracts and
repels youth. Because of their Level II orientation,
young people are concerned about which other people
their age are going to be part of a given group. As
all task-oriented groups have leaders, whether emer-
gent, appointed or elected (Fiedler, 1967, p. 8),
the adolescent constituency of a group has its lea-
dership also in addition to_any adult leader function-
ing at the same time. To the extent that the tag;
leaders are appointed,as occurs in some organizations,
it is useful to know which actions of their 2222 and
adult leaders youth value most and how the behaviors
of both leaders compare. Such information is espe-
cially valued, for example, by the Youth for Christ
International (YFC) organization, which funded and
staffed this study.* YFC is in the process of estab-
lishing a new approach to reaching out to young peo-
ple in which 2222 leaders will have the key role.
The present study will help YFC and other organiza-
tions who employ youth (222:) leaders in their

 

*Support from YFC consisted of (l) participation
of their staff as data-gatherers, (2) cost of duplica-
tion and mailing, and (3) cost of statistical services.

5

recruitment procedures.

Third, the study sought to determine whether a
connection exists between what youth perceive as being
true concerning their parents' actions. Psychological
and sociological research has well established a re-
lationship between the behaviors of parents and chil-
dren (e.g., Horrocks, 1969, p. 599). but this study
took this understanding a step farther and asked
whether there was a relationship between the same ape-
cific behaviors (which created positive and negative
affect) of 2222 and adult leaders compared with their
perception of their first leaders, mother and fatheg.

A fourth purpose was to demonstrate again the
usefulness of empirical research in the field of
church education, which in the writer's own denomina—
tion has been generally viewed as of questionable
value as a valid and reliable means of inquiry, pre-
ferring rather to depend on revelation and logic.
While churches in such denominations have not always
valued education as a high priority, they have valued
it. Moreover, they value even higher the obtaining of
the required number of teachers and other leaders, and
the most effective ones, with the least difficulty.
The results of this study will help them in these

6
endeavors and, at the same time, indicate the utility
of empirical investigation in the field of church
education and provide one more reason to place a

higher value on the field itself.

Importance of the Study

At least four important anticipated outcomes
can be identified in addition to the above. First,
administrators in church education are becoming aware
that it is no longer possible to select leaders and
make other educational decisions apart from consider-
ation of the felt needs and opinions of the youth for
whom the programs are designed. To ignore this
awareness will probably result in the development of
programs attended by fewer and fewer young people.

The study provides data that will help administrators
base leader selection and evaluation on important
matters of leadership performance.

Second, administrators of education programs in
the local church are concerned with the characteristics
of 222! and adult leadership of youth. These adminis-
trators as well as those of other organizations seeking
to relate to young people will find this information
useful in order to better reach their goals. Such or-

ganizations include both religious and nonreligious

, 7

groups, for example, YFC, Young Life, Inter-Varsity
Christian Fellowship, Campus Crusade for Christ
International, the Boy Scouts and Girl Scouts of
America and Campfire Girls.

Third, parents will be benefitted by knowing
how children view them with respect to the positively
and negatively perceived behaviors included in the
study. They can use this information as a self-
evaluation to determine whether this perception is
parallel with the way they_are and want to be.

Fourth, the results of this project will contri-
bute to knowledge needed in extending the theory of
leadership behavior. One specific area in which it
is extended is the relationship between tag; and
adult leaders with respect to the 22 behaviors (11
positive and 11 negative). Another contribution is
the identification of parallels drawn between the pre-
ceding and youth perceptions of what is true about

their mothegs and fathers.

Assumptions of tha_Study

Five assumptions were made in the development of

 

this research. First, though the scope of the study
in its entirety is intended primarily for the religious

education context, due to the nature of the research

8

design, the value of the study is similarly apparent
for secular organizations. Phenomenological reality
applies to both religious and nonreligious organiza-
tions. Yet due to the fact that religious organiza-
tions operate within constraints that sometimes differ
from other organizations, such as the need to plan on
V the premise that youth involvement will be largely
voluntary, religious education is the focal point of
the research. While this limitation will primarily
only affect Chapter V, it is an organizing principle
that shapes the text as a whole.

Second, the philosophical orientation of the
writer may be expressed as a commitment to the or-
ganismic-structural-develOpmental approach to educa-

tion.* Other approaches such as behaviorism and

 

*The organismic-structural-developmental (OSD)
orientation to education refers to an approach to
human learning distinct from the other major ap-
proaches, viz, behavioristic and psychoanalytical.
The "organismic" aSpect refers to the perception of
the learner as essentially healthy, intrinsically
motivated, and actively functioning in an holistic,
fully integrated, manner in which he relates trans-
actionally with his environment. The "structural"
sepect of this orientation refers to the underlying,
organized, dynamic and universal patterns which
typify human behavior, particularly thought. The
”developmental” dimension of the OSD approach refers
to the observable (content) and mental (structural)
change within the organism as he constructs new
structures as a result of transacting with the en-
vironment. In the process of this construction the

organism pragresses through a series of qualitatively

9
psychoanalysis have important contributions to make
with reapect to such leadership matters as helping
people who are struggling with pathological dis-
orders of various kinds, but for the overall founda-
tion on which to build a view of leadership, the
organismic orientation will be employed.

Third, organismic theory has given rise to gen-
eral systems theory and the attendant structural-
functional theory of leadership behavior (Downton,
1973, p. 5). It is structural-functional theory
which has supplied the framework of the current
study's observation of leaders' behaviors.

Fourth, a theological commitment affects not
only the philosophical orientation described above
but also the writer's conceptualization of the nature
of leadership bepavio: which will be reflected in the
discussion below with respect to the definition of
this term. Holding the Bible to be the unique reve-
lation of God and Jesus Christ his only Son, the
author maintains the necessity of shaping the concept
of leadership in accord with Jesus' teachings. Thus

the primary concern of leadership is the function of

 

different, structurally whole, and hierarchically in-
tegrated stages which proceed according to an invar-
iant sequence. (Stewart, 19?“, pp. “2o“7).

10
service, often lacking in secular definitions, and
even where included usually applies to the group it-
self rather than to include pe0ple outside the group
as its objects.

Fifth, it is assumed that in reporting on their
preferences for leader behaviors, young people are
describing what effectiue leader behavior is. The
discussion below in Chapter II (particularly that
which examines the precedent literature that serves
as the content base for the present study) supplies

empirical support for this assumption.

Definition of Terms

Throughout this dissertation a number of words and
terms will be used consistently with their technical
meanings given in the leadership literature. Several
will be identified here and, where necessary, others
will be defined where they occur in the text below.

LEADERSHIP BEHAVIOR The Specific acts a leader
employs in helping his followers meet their collective
and individual needs. Studies on leadership during
the last fifty years have produced many definitions of
leadership and related constructs. However, working
within the structural-functional theoretical framework

narrows the number of acceptable definitions

ll
considerably, though, in the Opinion of this writer,
none is perfect.

Nevertheless, Fiedler has develOped a definition
which is the basis of the one employed in this study.
In this conceptualization leadership behavior refers
to ”the particular acts in which a leader engages in
'the course of directing and coordinating the work of
his group members. This may involve such acts as
structuring the work relations, praising or criti-
cizing group members, and showing consideration for
their welfare and feelings“ (Fiedler, 1962, p. 36).

Fiedler's definition is as complete as any but it
lacks a specific reference to service. The concept of
service is found in the leadership literature, though
it is uncommon (Downton, 1973. p. 7). and the articu-
lation which comes closest to the conceptualization
herein is that of Downton who states that

leadership can be broadly defined as the

coordinating structure of social systems.

Through goal-setting and attainment, leader-

ship coordinates the activites of other

structures in order to increase the capa-
bilities of the system. By increasing

capabilities, leadership contributes in a

positive way to the service capacity of the

system, which enhances its ability to per-

sist. (p. 1“)

Yet it is to be noted that the service is oriented to

the group of which the leader is a part.

12

Leadership behavior should be viewed more inclu-
sively. As used in this study, leadership behavior
refers to service outside as well as within the group,
with personal concerns last of all. Theological and
pragmatic reasons apply to this viewpoint, and the
latter are occasioned by the former. With respect to
the former, Jesus said,

You know that the rulers of the Gentiles

lord it over them, and their great men ex-

ercise authority over them. It shall not

be so among you: but whoever would be

great among you must be your servant, and

whoever would be first among you must be

your slave; even as the Son of man came

not to serve, and to give his life as a

ransom for many" (Matthew 20:25-28 RSV).

The pragmatic aspect follows in the expectations
of the religious organizations described above. In
both church and parachurch groups, a high expectation
exists that leadership behaviors will be designed to
accomplish goals which pertain to both the group of
which a person is a part and to peOple outside the
group who are potential members. The accomplishment
of goals is an integral aspect of leadership behavior
and a determinant of its effectiveness: one of the
main goals of church and parachurch organizations is
reaching outside their own groups to obtain new mem-

bers (Matthew 28:19-20).

13

GROUP An interdependent set of two or more indi-
viduals interacting c00perative1y to achieve a commonly
valued goal. As a number of writers have noted, lea-
dership presupposes the existence of a group (e.g.,
Krech and Crutchfield, 1959. p. 683), even though that
group, sometimes called a "social system“ is as small
as two members (Downton, 1973, p. 5). While there are
almost as many definitions of ”group" as of "leader-
ship,” the structural-functional theory will provide
a means of selection. The conceptualization of
Fiedler (1967, p. 6) has been adapted here because of
its consistency with the theory and limitation to the
key aspects of the issue affecting this research.
That aspect of group life which is most important with
respect to the current study focuses on the concept
of goal. This awareness is one of the reasons Mitchell
prefers the term "social system:' He insists that one
of the main properties of a social system is that "the
interaction is relatively persistent: a chance meeting
of strangers on a street cannot be considered as a
social system" (p. “), but such a configuation of per-
sons could be considered a group. This latter under-
standing is not accepted within the meaning of "group”

for the purposes of this research.

l“

CHURCH EDUCATION The formal and nonformal pro-
grams in which groups within a specific local church
meet to accomplish particular learning objectives.
Not only the interrelationships within the group
affect the members but also the group's holistic
. association within the larger organizational struc-
ture. However, the primary setting is within the
confines of the local institutional body, i.e.. the
specific church.

RELIGIOUS EDUCATION The formal and nonformal
programs of learning conducted by church and para-
church organizations. It is a term which is broader
than ”church education” as it includes such organi-
zations as YFC as well.

DBLINQUENT A person who has been judged by the
due process of the community in which he or she is a
resident to be in violation of one or more of that
community's laws. The word usually appears here in'
its adjectival form. Contacts with these young people
were made through the social service branch of YFC.

The word appears in quotes because it is ne-
cessary to recognize that while these young people do
share a common characteristic (criminal behavior),
some of the other youth also share this same charac-

teristic, along with the similar mentality. It is

15

thus possible that the only noteworthy difference
between the "delinquent” youth and the other youth
who have committed a crime is that the latter were
not caught (and perhaps that evasion was not even due
-to any skill, care, or effort of their own making)!
Yet this situation also occurs in society as a whole,
‘and the inclusion of the ”delinquents" was for the
purpose of learning whether they view behaviors in
their pup; and adult leaders, and in their parents,
differently from the other youth (who are referred

to as "typical,” "average,” or ”other").

as h stio

There are five main research questions. First,
do young people view any of the 11 positive and 11
negative behaviors as more important on any kind of
consistent basis with respect to their paap leaders?
Second, do young people view any of the 11 positive
and 11 negative behaviors as more important on any
kind of consistent basis with respect to their adult
leaders? Third, what is the similarity or dissimi-
larity in responses to paap and adult leaders?
Fourth, in what ways is the ranking of the behaviors
for adult leader similar and dissimilar with the be-
haviors seen by young peOple in their own uptpapa?

16

Fifth, in what ways is the ranking of the behaviors
for adult leader similar and dissimilar with the be-

haviors seen by young peOple in their own fat 8?

Tha First Pilpt Study
In the light of these questions, a pilot study

' (hereafter referred to as the first pilot study) of
the main study herein described was done in Muskegon,
Michigan (n1 November 12, 1977. During a conference
of the Muskegon chapter of YFC, data were collected
from each of the 70 participating teen-agers. About
one-third of the young people were active and about
two-thirds were currently inactive in the organiza-
tion.

The ages of the participants varied from l“-18.
There were 11 fourteen year-olds (10 female and 1
male), 12 fifteen year-olds (11 female and 1 male),
20 sixteen year-olds (18 female and 2 male) 2“ sev-
enteen year olds (12 female and 12 male) and 3
eighteen year-olds (1 female and 2 male). The mean
age was 15.5. The median age was 16.5. The modal
age was 17.

At least four purposes were served by the first
pilot study. First, it was determined that the

general scheme of the research had potentiality for

17
a wider and more far-reaching investigation (Ap-
pendix A). Second, the pilot study identified what
needed to be done differently in a major study of
the same subject, which differences were incorporated
into the design of the main study and are discussed
. in Chapter III.

Third, as with descriptive research in general,
it was intended that the findings, in whole or in
part, would lend themselves to the generation of new
quggtiong, This subject will be discussed in Chapter V.

Fourth, the study indicated that there is rea-
son to doubt the recent thinking of some leaders of
youth organizations who maintain that young people
are currently looking for more authority figures who
are very autocratic as leaders. The findings of the
first pilot study suggested that leadership of this
sort does not appear to be what youth desire. Such
a finding is of considerable importance to churches
and youth organizations as guidance for staff selec-

tion and training and in designing programs.

Faatopa Affepting Gapepallzability
The scope of this study was limited to high

school young people, specifically those in the age
range of 1“-18. The sample of 1536 was drawn from

18
public and private schools, YFC groups, ad hoc youth
gatherings and church youth groups for those young
people termed "typical.” For comparison, surveys were
also administered to Youth Guidance groups which work
especially with young peeple who have been arrested
and referred to Youth Guidance (YG) for rehabilita-
tion. (Youth Guidance is a social service branch of
Youth for Christ International.)

YFC's work in the continental United States is

divided into nine regions. 'Groups in each region pro-

' vided respondents who completed the questionnaires.

The selection of groups was made on the basis of
availability rather than randomization, so generaliza-
tion is limited. The subject of generalizability will
be discussed in further depth in Chapter III, however,
in general it can be said here that since the "typical"
youth involved were from within normal settings, it can
be concluded that the findings will hold for young peo-
ple with similar backgrounds.

What, precisely, are those backgrounds? More
males (808) than females (689) participated in the sur-
vey. It should be noted here and in the figures below
which also appear on Table 1.0, that the numbers given
will not always add up to 1536, the total sample size,

for here with regard to the sex variable, and elsewhere

19
as well, a number (in this case 39 or 2.5%) did not
complete all the information requested on the ques-
tionnaire, e.g., sex. Hence the percentages given in
the far right column in Table 1.0 are relative, rather
than adjusted,frequencies.

Fourteen year-olds numbered 208: fifteen year-

} olds 392: sixteen year-olds “O3: seventeen year-olds
3h9: and eighteen year-olds 159. The last number is
likely due to the fact that most of the surveys were
completed in school and church groups which use grade-
. level contexts for their instructional settings, and
many seniors do not become eighteen years old until
after graduation. The survey was conducted in April
and May of 1979.

Groups with voluntary membership, such as church
youth groups and school music and sports teams, as
well as groups with a nonvoluntary membership, such as
math, science and history classes, were surveyed to
see whether any differences exist in the perception of
leader behaviors with respect to this aspect of group
membership. Groups with voluntary membership con-
tained 801 of the sample subjects, while groups with a
nonvoluntary membership (such as math classes) had 735
of the subjects.

Determining a group's membership presents

20

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

    

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Ei‘
[ _ TABLE 1 0 - S b rou Distributions
Clas- Raw Relative
ehlca- Subgroup Number Frequenc
.ILQDI (Pe e
g gale 808 52.6
V’ 68 ““.
Female 2 f 2
, l“ Year-Olds 208 l3.5
. o 15 Year-Olds 392 25.5
:0 ,_1t6 Yeap-Olds “03 26.2
12 Year-Olds 43“9 22.7
. 18 Year-Olds I 152 10.“
g a Voluntag 801 52.1
9“ Non-Volgtary ‘ 225 I “2.2 _
s
”3 Urban “96 32.3
§ Suburban 56lg 36.5
A “28 21.1 .
Church Related 179 11.7
1m 811.8. ,
,3... Youth Guidance 230 15.0
55 Other 1 o 8 .o
_
Region 1 - Pacific Northwest 12“ 8.1
Region 2 - Pacific Southwest 2“0 15.6
Region 3.- Mid-West States 1“6 9.5
g . Region “ - Northepn States 118 1,7
'3}, Region 5 - Western Guest Lakes 225 l“.6
a? Region 6 - Southepn States 2“6 16.0
, Region 2 - Bastepp_Great Lakes _9“ 6.1
Regiop 8 - Elaips Stataa 25“ 16,5
KW :38 $3?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

21

considerable difficulty. Some schools consider a
given subject as a core, and therefore required, sub-
ject while for others it is an Option the students can
choose or reject. In church youth groups, which are
normally considered voluntary as far as membership is
'concerned, some members are present due to varying de-
grees of parental pressure, the young people having no
choice but to attend. The lines of differentiation
were drawn as follows: due to compulsory attendance
laws. all school groups were considered nonvoluntary
except for music and sports groups which are not re-
quired. Although, some church groups contain young
people who are members due to parental coercion, it
was considered that they would be termed voluntary on
the basis that most of the membership is usually of
that nature. Moreover, as those who have experience
in working with church youth groups well know, when a
teennager does not want to attend he can find inge-
nious ways to absent himself.

The sample was also composed of youth from urban
and suburban as well as rural settings. Urban youth
numbered “96: suburban 561: and rural “78. These demo-
graphic designations were made by the YFC regional
offices according to how the community in which the

survey was taken views itself, rather than according to

22

distinctions in the sociological literature pertain-
ing to how large a community is before it is considered
urban rather than rural. In fact, sociologists are
aware that the mentality of a person in a city like
.Des Moines, Iowa (with a population of over 100,000
people) may be more "rural" than a person living in a
[city like Rye, New York, which has only about 10,000
people. (See Bierstedt, 1957, p. 381; Broom and
Selznick. 1963, p. 601.)

Church relationship was also investigated. This
variable, too, must be carefully considered, due to
the fact that school groups contain many peOple who
also have membership in churches. Any usefulness this
measure may have, though, will be in its indication of
the mentality existing when the survey was taken. The
people in the church groups surveyed were meeting for
a specific purpose different from that operating in
the school settings. That purpose, or those purposes
where there were more than one, was considered to be
possibly related to the perception of leader behaviors
held by the members. It was thus entered into the
study as a variable to be observed. Church related
groups contained 179 subjects, while non-church
related subjects numbered 1357.

Since YFC has a division which serves young

23
people who have been judged "delinquent" by societal
authorities and who have been referred to this Youth
Guidance division by the courts, an opportunity
existed for observance of data which would indicate
whether there may be a difference in the perception of
leader behaviors by youth convicted of some kind of
ideviancy, as contrasted with "average" youth, or the
rest of the youth papulation, containing, it must be
acknowledged, youth similar to those in Youth Guidance,
who have performed similarly, yet without being
‘caught. The Youth Guidance subjects numbered 230;
the contrasting part of the sample, the ”average,"
totalled 1305.

The nine YFC regions include territory outside
the continental United States, but the sample was
drawn only from within the continental borders. The
regions, referred to by name at YFC, were also assigned
numbers for the purpose of this study.

Region one, Pacific Northwest, includes Alaska.
Idaho,0regon and Washington. Sample subjects numbered
12“ or 8.1% of the total sample.

Region two, Pacific Southwest, includes California
and Hawaii. Sample subjects numbered 2“0 or 15.6% of
the total sample.

Region three, Midwest States, includes Texas,

2“
Colorado, Mexico and Wyoming. The number of subjects
from this region was l“6, which constituted 9.5% of
the sample.

Region four is the Northern States region which
includes Moline, Illinois: Minnesota: Wisconsin and
Iowa. The number of subjects from region four is 118
or 7.79%.

Region five, Western Great Lakes, encompasses
Indiana and all of Illinois except Molina. Region
five subjects numbered 225 or l“.6% of the sample.

Region six, Southern States, contains Florida,
Georgia, Tennessee, Mississippi and North Carolina.
This region supplied 2“6 or 16% of the sample.

Region seven, Eastern Great Lakes, covers
Michigan and Ohio. The number of subjects from this
region was 9“ or 6.1% of the total sample.

Region eight, Plains States, comprises Kansas.
Nebraska and Missouri. Subjects from this region
numbered 25“ or 16.5% of the sample.

Region nine, Eastern States, includes Pennsylvania,
New York, New Jersey, Connecticut, Massachusetts, Dela-
ware, Maryland and Washington, D.C. The subjects from
this region (88 or 3.7%) were drawn only from New York
and New Jersey. Seven of the 88 were urban YG subjects,

and rest of the sample from region nine were non-YG

25
youth from suburban Rochester, New York.

With the above identifications made, it was next
necessary to determine what is already known from
previous studies in order to begin answering the re-
search questions. This investigation is the subject

of the next chapter.

CHAPTER I I
THE PRECEDENT RESEARCH

Leadership is a complex and sophisticated concept.
The literature on leadership is vast, particularly ex-
panding since World War II. The first section of this
chapter will be limited to a brief overview to estab-
lish a frame of reference. Following will be those
precedent studies that provide the bases for the con-

' tent and method used in the study under investigation.

Context of the Study

In many cultures words meaning "chief” or "king"
are the only verbal symbols designating the differ-
entiation of the ruler from the other members of so-
ciety. It is in the countries with an Anglo-Saxon
background that one finds a concentrated study of
leadership. The word ”leader" appeared in the English
language as early as 1300, yet it isn't until 1800 that
the variation "leadership” occurs in this language
(Stogdill, 197“, p. 7). While it is true that the sub-
ject of leadership is treated in such ancient lore as
Confucius' Apalegt and Plato's Republig, the systematic

26

2?

phenomenon that caused the displacement of trait
theory from its position of prominence. As Jennings
concludes, "Fifty years of study . . . failed to pro-
duce one personality trait or set of qualities that
~can be used to discriminate leaders and nonleaders"
(1961, p. 2). Furthermore, scholars began to recog-
inize as Leavitt explains that "the search for leader
characteristics was bound to be of limited value, be-
cause leadership is so clearly an interactive, rela-
tional activity" (1973, p. 21?). Later studies
included situational variables which were seen to
significantly affect leadership behavior, followed by
the current inquiry into how people become effective
leaders.

Having the capacity for rationality and logic,
human beings, particularly the scientific sort, like
to see categorization and order. The above must not
be so construed at least in the absolute sense, for
while there exists a general progression of develOp-
ments in the field as indicated, it is not as neat as
may be inferred. For example, traits are still being
investigated, and situational variables were studied
prior to the Second World War. In fact, it was Lewin
and Lippitt's landmark study of authoritarian and demo-
cratic group environments in 1938 which was the first

28

that any major impetus developed in the field.’ One
of the main concerns at that time was the employment
of intelligence testing in a concerted effort to ob-
tain information helpful to overcome problems with
respect to officer selection and placement.

Between the world wars, research in the field
focussed mainly on personal traits and on the ways in
which people obtain leadership positions. This orienta-
tion the so-called trait theory, resulted in the iden-
tification of numerous personality characteristics that
were supposedly associated with successful leadership.
It was assumed that if one could isolate the key char-
acteristics that were possessed by all successful lea-
ders, it would then be possible to predict which people
would do the job required in a given situation. Some
of the traits claimed to be associated with leadership,
out of the many suggested, are as follows: age, size,
physical appearance (including dress), self-confidence,
sociability, energy, intelligence, education, assertive-
ness, and motivation (Berelson and Steiner, 196“, pp.
3“l-3“2: Stout and Briner, 1969, p. 700).

Gradually, however, the trait theory gave way to
other orientations which could be described as behav-
ioral theories, some of which will be discussed in fur-

ther detail below. It was not simply a bandwagon

29
study of the concept is very recent, comparatively
speaking (Fiedler and Chemers, 197“, p. 1).

Why, then. is the systematic study of leadership
predominately conducted in Western, and particularly
English-speaking, countries? Perhaps it is because
much of the money to fund such investigations has
largely come from organizations within the United
States. Fiedler and Chemers (197“, pp. 2, 3), however,
indicate that a more basic reason most likely lies in
the political and social traditions of the countries
' of the Western hermisphere, especially those function-
ing as a democracy. The authors point out that where
only aristocrats can obtain leadership, it is useless
to study selection and recruitment.

It was only with rapid industrialization

and the growth of large bureaucratic organi-

zations in business and government that

the need for new leadership was really

felt. The aristocracies of Europe were

reluctant to become involved with the un-

gentlemanly calling of trade, and the

larger and increasingly more complex

business organizations required substantial

numbers of managers to staff their depart-

ments, plants, and offices. By the end of

the nineteenth century it had become ob-

vious that the selection of managers and

military leaders could no longer be left

to chance or to the accident of birth

(Fiedler and Chemers, 197“, pp. 2. 3).

Thus the first empirical research on leadership

was published in 190“, but it wasn't until World War I

30
major research to study leadership as a two-way
transaction between leader and followers (Stogdill,
p. 365). Furthermore, Lewin, Lippitt and White's
work and categories are still being used (e.g.,
Angell and DeSau, 197“, pp. ““-“5: Pandey, 1976, pp.
“75-“89).

Lewin, Lippitt and White described the behaviors
of authoritapian leaders as determining all group pol-
icies, dictating techniques and activity steps seriatum,
dictating the particular work tasks and work companions
of each group member, rendering ”personal" praise and
criticism of the performance of each member and remain-
ing aloof from active group participation with the ex-
ception of giving demonstrations. Qappgzatlp leaders
made policies through assisting the members in group
discussion. General goals were sketched for the group,
but alternatives were also given, the selection of
which was made by the group. The choices of division
of tasks and work partners were left to the group. The
leader, who tried to be a regular member of the group,
rendered praise and criticism in as "objective” and
"fact-oriented” a manner as possible. Laissez-faipe
leaders granted complete freedom to the group to deter-
mine its policies. They only supplied resource materials
for the group's activities, they did not direct them, and

. 31
indicated they would supply information only when asked.
He did not participate in the group's work and only
made very infrequent evaluative comments on the perfor-
mance of group members, unless they were questioned.
‘(Lewin, Lippitt and White in Puch, 197“, p. 232).

This signal research has influenced studies to
the present, but it contains flaws that should be
noted. First, considerable confusion has diffused
through the literature through admirers' of Lewin,
Lippitt and White equating in their own studies the
concepts of democratic and laissez-faire leadership
behavior, thus claiming for the latter the results and
benefits of the former (Stogdill, 197“, pp. 366-367).
Later scholars have used the terms democratic and
laissez-faire interchangeably. There has also been
some inconsistency in the use of the authoritarian and
democratic constructs. Second, as Perrow points out in
his scathing critique of this aspect of leadership re-
search in what he terms the human relations school of
organizational research, the categories are too simple
a dichotomization of those who practice good human re-
lations and those who do not. A considerable number of
other variables also effect leadership, for example
”the Ohio State studies indicated that 'structural' or

'task-oriented' expertise-~planning work, eliciting

32
ideas, scheduling, etc.--was as important as good in-
terpersonal relations“ (Perrow. p. 110). Third, the
earlier studies of Lewin, Lippitt and White, while
cognizant of cultural and other influences (Lewin,
Lippitt and White in Puch, p. 256), did not account
_for them. For example, when groups have an expectancy
and/br desire for authoritarian leadership, they will
perform more effectively and be more satisfied than
under another leadership style of behavior (Stogdill,
197“, p. 367). Another significant finding is that
authoritarian leadership is related to the satisfac-
tion of members when their group is large and/or has a
major goal of task performance (Stogdill, 197“, pp.
369-370). Other dimensions have been described by
Leavitt (pp. 218-220). The Lewin, Lippitt and White
research has just been described for two reasons: its
focus on the behavioral dimension of leadership set a
trend followed by subsequent research: its particular
findings are easily recognized as having far-reaching
implications for religious education.

The Ohio State project, however, did more to
shape the content and method of the leadership research
in recent times, and this outcome was not accidental:
the framers of the ten-year project that began in l9“5
had that result in mind while designing their studies

33
(Stogdill and Coons, 1957. p. 7). The project sought
to identify and catalogue all of a leader’s behavior
which are related to his effectiveness and which were
most important. One of the principal foci was the
testing of hypotheses with reapect to the situational
aspects affecting leader behavior (Shartle in Stogdill
and Coons, 1957, p. l). The studies were structured
to answer two basic questions: "(1) fipat does an indi-
vidual do while he operates as a leader, and (2) up!
does he go about what he does?” (Hemphill and Coons
in Stogdill and Coons, 1957, p. 6).

An instrument was developed as a preliminary
questionnaire that contained 150 items (pared down from
an initial collection of 1,790 items obtained from the
researchers' personal experience, the leadership lit-
erature and the work of two advanced university classes
studying the subject). The instrument, called the Lea-
der Behavior Description Questionnaire (or LBDQ), was
subsequently revised by reducing the number of items
from 150 to 130.

After several years of study utilizing increasingly
sophisticated techniques of data analysis, four cate-
gories emerged to account for most of the variation in
respondents' descriptions of leaders' behaviors. Table

2.1 identifies the four categories, or factors, as

presented by Halpin and Winer (in Stogdill and Coons,
1957. p. “1).

Factors III and IV were discarded, being consid-
ered not important enough to significantly describe
eleader behavior. Actually, not only the percent of

common variance figures support the decision to drop
1 these two factors, but also a careful comparison of
the descriptions of and items in each of the two
eliminated categories reflects, at least in this re-
viewers' opinion (with the advantage of the more ob-
jective standpoint afforded by time), that the two
could be incorporated into the ”consideration" and
"initiating structure" categories (IV with I and III
with 11).

TABLE2.1 - Per Cent of Common Variance Accountefi for

 

 

 

b Fo . tors to dill d oons
Per Cent of
Factor Factor Common
Number. Deaignation Vap’anga
I Consideration “9.6
II Initiating Structure 33.6
III Production Emphasis 9.8
IV e si vit So a1 wa eness) .210

 

 

 

"Consideration” refers to behavior indicative of
"friendship, mutual trust, respect, and warmth in the

relationship...it does not imply laxity in the

. 35

performance of his duties." "Initiating structure"
was described as indicating the degree to which the
leader ”organizes and defines the relationship between
himself and the members . . . 3' It is the definition
,of the role which he expects each member . . . to
assume, and the @egree to whicEI

endeavors to establish well-defined patterns

of organization, channels of communication,

and ways of getting jobs done. This factor

probably represents a basic and unique func-

tion of leadership. It is possible that

other factors (including Consideration) may

represent only facilitating means for accom-

pl shing this end. (Ipid., pp. “2-“3)

Consideration and initiating structure were con-
sidered as discrete categories and not polar Opposites
on a continuum. Thus, a leader would (and, from a
personnel manager's perspective, hOpefully would) score
high on both of these factors. Furthermore, this con-
ceptualization represents an advance beyond the simple
dichotomies of the earlier leadership research which
limited the focus to studies of those leaders who prac-
tice good human relations and those whose behaviors are
inferior.

An enormous number of leadership studies followed
the Ohio State project, a large percentage of which
used the same or similar constructs as well as the LBDQ

or an equivalent. Aligned with the "consideration"

.36

rubric are such concepts as harmony, equalitarian,
group-oriented, person-oriented, Theory Y, expressive
mode, influence, permissive, and even democratic and
laissez-faire. Following the "initiation of structure"
focus are guidance, authoritarian, task-oriented, pro-
duction-oriented, Theory X, instrumental mode, control,
restrictive. and autocratic (Berelson and Steiner, pp.
3““, 3“6, Stogdill, 197“, pp. 22, 27, 37“: Downton,
1973. p. 21: Larkin, 1976, p. 815: Coughlin, 1971,

p. 15: Fiedler, 1967, p. 12). In Perrow's view, all
of these related factors are "more or less compatible
with the initiating structure and consideration dimen-
sions discovered in the Ohio State studies, but most
offered elaborations and recombinations of elabora-
tions" (1972, p. 111).

Unfortunately, reviewing the above research re-
veals a tragic inability of the studies to hold up to
the rigors of replication and methodological inspection.

Many of the correlations reported were in-

significant: the correlation between consi-

deration and performance was better than

that between initiating structure and per-

formance (the latter was sometimes nega-

tive): the research did not take into

account the situations of the groups or

the possibility of relations for consider-

ation were the o posits of those pre-

dicted . . . . Perrow, p. 112)

Thus the past decade has seen leadership research

37

take another step, a move beyond the "two-variable”
approach which characterized the field previously.
However, the more recent investigations are still
using consideration and initiation of structure as a
base but eXploring variables that can intervene with
them.

One of the most promising of these research ef-
forts in the view of Perrow and many others who have
followed him is that of Fiedler. Building upon the
work of Lewin and Lippitt and the Ohio State studies,

‘ he developed what he calls the "contingency theory” or
”contingency model," which ”postulates that the ef-
fectiveness of a group is contingent upon the relation-
ship between leadership style and the degree to which
the group situation enables the leader to exert in-
fluence" (Fiedler, 1967, p. 15).

Fiedler discovered that group climates which are
either highly favorable or highly unfavorable for the
leader are situations in which a leader oriented to-
ward the initiation of structure will be more succes-
ful. However. in climates which are in between with
respect to favorableness, a leader oriented toward a
considerate style will function more effectively. Sit-
uation favorableness refers to the extent to which the

relationships between the leader and his followers are

.33
positive. In such contexts the programming of tasks
and the leader's position is well-established. Hence,
the most effective leader is the one who provides
straightforward task direction and facilitates the
group's wbrk. Member relationships are stable and
functional and thus take care of themselves.

On the other hand, when relationships between
the leader and group members are negative, tasks are
not clear and the leader's position is questioned,
giving him what Fiedler calls "weak position power.”
In such a situation strong direction is required in
order to be effective. A focus on interpersonal re-
lationships would prove fruitless.

If, though, situational favorableness is in be-
tween, neither good nor bad, then considerate behavior
is required. Strong direction in the sense of the in-
itiation of structure, is neither necessary nor effec-
tive.

Thus, the current state of the leadership liter-
ature is characterized by a focus upon the situational
variables which intervene and with which the leader
must cope. Other recent findings, for example, indi-
cate that the size of a group, urban versus semirural
environments, expectations, self-esteem and wishes of

subordinates all influence how a leader behaves (Perrow,

j 39
1972, p. 112). Stanley found that a factor called

"incremental influence" is a possible moderator of a
leader's behavior within his group. Incremental in-
fluence refers to the leader's behavior that is over
pand above what is required by his official position,
or, more specifically, the combined amounts of expert
and referent power the leader possesses. Expert power
refers to the influence a person has due to his abil-
ity to perform his function competently. Referent
power indicates the ability of a leader to influence
others on the basis of his relationships with them
(1975, p. 3639-B). In another study Pandey reported
that a leader's style and traits as well as the method
of leader selection used in his recruitment all pro-
duce joint effects on his behavior (1978, pp. 592-
593).

The above overview of the most important develOp-
ments in the field of leadership with respect to the
theoretical position of this study, its subject matter,
and its procedures provides a framework against which
the more specific discussion of content and method can
be most fully understood. The former will be considered

first.

. “O
Qontept Baselpf the Study

Spaulding and Haley in a 1955 study found a sig-
nificantly high correlation between program success
and leadership. The study, conducted in 188 Protes-
tant churches, showed that the higher youth programs
were rated on “3 criteria, the more likely youth were
to rate their adult leaders as "effective,” as indi-
cated in Table 2.2 (1955, p. 31).

Respondents were interviewed with a questionnaire
comprising both closed and open-ended items. The
first part of the instrument contained “3 questions
concerning the effectiveness of six different aspects
of the church's program pertaining to youth. Re-
spondents were to answer each question by checking one
of five boxes on a Likert scale ranging from "very ef-
fective“ to ”very ineffective.” Through assigning pos-
itive and negative numerical values to each of the
five response categories, a "program item score" was
obtained for each subject. This score refers to the
total score of each person's questionnaire as a measure
of his opinion regarding the effectiveness of the en-
tire church program for youth. The scores are grouped
into six categories in the far left column of Table 2.2.

Among other open-ended questions, the respon-

dents were asked to indicate whether they felt adult

“1

 

 

TABLE 2. - Program Item Scores as Related to Rating of

Leaders (Spaulding and Haley; 1955, p. 31).
Program Number Youth's Rat ng of Adult Leaders

 

 

 

__§:;;e I ogeggIgg Effective Fair Ineffective

(94$) (6%) (of)

120-159 1“1 11“ 18 9
(81¢) (13$) (6’)
(67$) (2“5) (9;)

“0’79 157 79 41 37
(50$) (26$) (205)

°‘39 99 34 39 26
(3“!) (395) (27$)

Less than 0 79 18 26 35
123$) (33$) (““1)

398 163
(598$)_ 12“1) _tl8$)

 

leadership of youth in their church had been ef-
fective, and, if so, why. When these responses were
compared with those of the “3 items, a statistically
significant (.05) correlation was discovered. As seen
in Table 2.2, the higher youth programs were rated on
the “3 criteria, the more the subjects gave their
adult leaders an "effective” rating.

Noting the Spaulding and Haley findings, Gamelin
(1970) designed a research project ”with the express

purpose of discovering what personality'traits,

“2

competencies, motives, and other characteristics typ-
ify effegtive adult leaders of church youth" (p. l).
The project, sponsored by The Lilly Foundation, con-
sisted of several descriptive studies of youth and
denominational and other organizational adult leaders
of youth.

The first of these studies involved 1090 youth
from five denominations, representing a broad theolo-
gical spectrum (ranging from those considered "con-
servative" to those considered more ”liberal," but
without much representation in the "middle" of the
theological continuum). Two hundred thirty-four
United Methodist youth elected to the denomination's
100 youth work councils, 250 Mennonite youth consti-
tuting 855 of a random national sample, 2“? Evangelical
Covenant youth constituting 83% of a random national
sample, 75 EpisOOpal youth from Ohio attending a sum-
mer leadership camp and 28“ Lutheran Church-Missouri
Synod youth attending volunteer camps throughout the
U.S. formed the sample of 1090 young people whose
opinions were investigated in late 1968 and 1969.

The youth were asked to write endings for two
incomplete sentences. The first sentence was "I
especially like an adult youth leader who . . . ."

The second sentence was phrased, "I especially dislike

“3
an adult youth leader who . . . ." The youth cited an
average of two characteristics they liked in their
adult leaders and one or two they disliked. Gamelin
discovered that their responses were able to be clas-
sified into eight positive and eight negative cate-
gories. The categories were comprehensive enough to
include 98$ of the responses and discrete enough to
allow reliable sorting.

The categories were given trait names (Table 2.3)
by the researchers. The rank order in which they are
.given in Table 2.3 indicates the frequency with which
the young peOple mentioned the characteristics. It
should be noted that the column listing the disliked
characteristics is not meant to be the Opposite of the
traits indicated in the ”Likes" column. The categories
are discrete, not the polar Opposites on a continuum.

The Gamelin study of traits that youth like and
dislike in their leaders initiated a good start in the
scientific investigation of such characteristics in
youth leadership. However, serious weaknesses exist in
this study which limit the degree to which generaliza-
tion is possible. The study made an important contri-
bution, though, in identifying basic traits upon which
another (including the present) research project,

could build.

an

 

 

TABLE 2.3 - Traits Which Church Youth Like and Dislike
in Their Leaders (Gameli . l970. p! 2)

 

Rank

1

(D\l0\\l\¢'UN

Likes
Concerned and Encouraging
Receptive and Communicative
Understanding
Lively
Competent
Helpful and Involved
Mature and Secure

Open-minded and Flexible

Dislikes

Domineering
Patronizing
Unrelating
Stodgy
Immature
Disinterested
Phony
Distrustful

 

 

The limitations of the Gamelin study are several,

not the least of which is the orientation toward trait

theory.

However, as also noted above, the trait school,

while having hit upon hard times, is still receiving

some attention, and, moreover. the Gamelin traits

raised the question in the present study as to whether

some of these traits are connected with attendant be-

haviors, e.g.. "Receptive and Communicative” which

could be expressed "Communicates.”

The fact that this

question was answered in the affirmative in the second

pilot study, described in Chapter III, indicated the

value of the Gamelin study as a base.

The Gamelin research was also limited by sampling

bias due to differences in the groups studied (which,

“5
to his credit, he noted in his report, p. “), sampling
bias in the selection of the groups to be studied, and
sampling bias within the instrument. With respect to
the groups themselves, Gamelin notes that two of the
groups were representative of the total pOpulation of
youth in their respective denominations (due to random
selection), but the other three groups constituted
leadership types. Noting these differences, Gamelin
reported that the representative youth indicated
greater preference for adult leaders who are concerned
and encouraging, understanding and lively, while dis-
liking mostly those who are disinterested and dis-
trustful. Leadership types of youth on the other hand
expressed greater preference for adult leaders who are
receptive and communicative, competent, mature and se-
cure while expressing greater dislike for those who
are domineering, patronizing and stodgy.

Sampling bias stemming from the selection of the
groups which were studied centers in the fact that
there is no way to be certain that those groups are
representative of youth in the United States generally
or of any other sector outside of themselves. While
it has been recognized that they are from a broad
theological spectrum. this observation permits no con-

fident generalization to any other groups in similar

. “6
theological orientations. It has also been noted that
there is little or no representation in what may be
described as the "middle” Of this theological spectrum.
Moreover, the scientific value of this construct (a
’theological spectrum) may be questioned due to the
fact that virtually every denomination (including those
in the Gamelin study) has its own internal theological
spectrum. For example, while in some respects the
United Methodist denomination may be placed on the
"more liberal" and of the spectrum. a sizable number
of Methodists would not classify themselves as "lib-
eral" to any degree.

Sampling bias within the instrument is present
due to the type of design employed. Sentence comple-
tion items have a number of strengths (one of which,
in a study such as Gamelin's, especially for the pur-
poses of this research, is to generate information
that can be explored in greater depth with a more
rigorous design), but they also have important limi-
tations. One of the most critical limitations is the
inability to ascertain to what degree a response to an
item applies to any other persons in the sample other
than the one responding with that particular statement
and to others with similar (yary similar) responses.

In such cases one cannot be sure that if another

respondent had thought of any given completion state-
ment he or she would have used that one rather than
the one he or she gave.

Thus the Gamelin study has provided a foundation
upon which to build. It has identified eight posi-
tive and eight negative traits which church youth like
and dislike in their adult leaders. The limitations
noted were used as guidelines in designing the present
study, as well as the pilot studies, the details of
which are presented in Chapter III.

About the same time the Gamelin study was being
undertaken, Ward and Harmon of Michigan State univer-
sity were investigating the values of youth in a study
sponsored by YFC. Their purpose was to obtain

1) a clear picture of the outlook and values

of today's youth in terms of certain criti-

cal aspects Of life values to which YFC's

program particularly attempts to relate, 2)

an investigation of the probable conse-

quences of using a teen-to-teen approach

to expansion, and 3) a comparison between

the youth now related to YFC and those with
whom YFC has not yet made contact (1970,

p. l).

The outlook of the adolescents studied was spec-
ified in terms of five major aspects of life values,
namely, education, religion, patriotism, morality and
purpose. Each of the aspects was scored on the basis

of responses on a Likert scale of items relating to

“8
that aspect.

The instrument, a twenty-five item question-
naire, was designed "to identify the persons whose
influence constitutes the source or major support for
each element in the person's outlook" (p. 1). Each

youth queried was asked to indicate the degree to
which he agreed with a stated position on a given
issue. He or she was then asked to select from five
given peOple (mother, father, best friend, favorite
teacher, religious leader) the one who would most
likely agree with him on each of the twenty-five
subjects.

Ward and Harmon discovered that these five per-
sons constitute sources of a high degree of influence
upon youth, even though each is a source in a dif-
ferent area. For example, while identification with
the Opinions of peers (best friend) is predominant in
most categories, religious leaders stand out as having
a high degree of influence in matters pertaining to
religion (1970, pp. 2-3).

Since these five persons are sources of a high
degree of influence upon youth, it was decided to in-
corporate this aspect of the Ward and Harmon research
into the present study. However, in the new investi-

gation, "favorite teacher” and "religious leader"

“9
were combined in the category of "adult leader” and
"best friend“ was broadened into the redesignated
category of ”a person about my age (peer)," in the
attempt to retain the adult leader and peer emphases
'but, at the same time, to focus more specifically

, upon the aspects of leadership.

Method Base of the Study

Because of the content decisions made as indi-
cated in the preceding section of this chapter,
particularly regarding the limitations of the Gamelin
study, it was considered necessary that this study be
descriptive in nature. In order to comprehend the
factors youth most desire and least want in their
leaders, it is necessary to ask them, but in such a
way as to be able to generalize as widely as possible.

A first step toward this generalization was
taken by building upon the start Gamelin made in his
identification of the eight positive and eight nega-
tive factors. Those factors, their behavioral mani-
festations, and other behaviors exhibited by leaders,
were the subject of focus in this study. It was
determined at the outset, however, that the Gamelin
factors would be subjected to examination to see

whether they are still important to youth today.

.50
This examination took the form of the second pilot
study which will be described in Chapter III. It was
felt necessary to determine whether any changes in the
thinking of youth regarding leadership terminology have
occured since the Gamelin study. No subsequent re-
search has explored this possibility.
A The area of research concerned with the research
questions in this study is that of attitude measure-
ment. According to the taxonomy develOped by Mayhew
(in Payne, 197“, pp. 230, 232), the aspect of attitude
measurement here being focused on is youth Opinion.
The opinion being asked for is what leader behaviors
are most desirable and least desirable, and how they
are ranked in the minds of the young people.

A standard practice within behavioral science
today with regard to attitude measurement is the
utilization of the method of self-report as a means of
obtaining data. Since self-report offers the advan-
tages of ease of administration and scoring as well as
low cost (Borg and Call, 1971, p. 178) and, when used
with a form of the closed question, provides the ad-
vantage of obtaining responses on all items germane to
the research questions, it was decided to employ self-
report as the framework for obtaining the needed in-

formation (see also Scott in Lindzey and Aronson, 1968,

51
p. 211). There are dangers in using the self-report
method, and these dangers have been identified by
Borg and Call as three different types of response
sets. A discussion of these sets and how they were
controlled will be undertaken in the next chapter.

Following Scott, it was determined to use a form
of the multiple choice kind of forced choice in the
closed question format (Scott in Lindzey and Aronson,
p. 213). This form of instrumentation, as any form,
has a number of disadvantages, which will be discussed
in Chapter III, but it is considered here that the dis-
advantages are outweighed by the advantages. More-
over, the design to be discussed in the third chapter
has incorporated procedures for mitigating these dis-
advantages.

Mayhew (in Payne, pp. 232-233) has further noted
the importance of unambiguous phraseology in the in-
strument items and that a carefully worded instrument
can help achieve a high degree of reliability. In
compliance with this caution, the positive and negative
factors were worded in terms used in the common lan-
guage of contemporary youth. Of special help in this
regard were the second and third pilot studies as well
as conversations with teenagers in the l“ to 18 year-

old age range. Further discussion of the wording of

52
instrument terms and other matters pertaining to re-
liability and validity will be undertaken in the next
chapter.

With this help from the literature, the next
step was to develop the plan of approach in Order to
obtain the data needed. It is to the matter of re-
search design that Chapter III addresses itself.

CHAPTER III
THE DESIGN

The task of this research project was to an-
_swer questions concerning whether young people perceive
leadership behaviors differently on any kind of con-
sistent basis with reapect to their paar and adult
leaders. and in what ways the youth's ranking of
these behaviors for adult leader compares and con-
trasts with behaviors of their parents. The sub-
jects were questioned as to what degree the behaviors
were perceived as being true of their parents in con-
trast to the questions concerning paar and adult
leaders in which cases the youth responded as to the
degree the behaviors are considered important (in

the positive instances) and serious (in the negative

instances).

The Plan gt_the Study
Professional YFC staff peOple in the nine re-
gions covering the continental United States surveyed
groups of high school youth fourteen through eighteen

years of age. The groups were obtained from public

53

5“
and private schools, churches and YFC youth groups.

Since random selection was not possible, the
data-gatherers tried to Obtain as many youth as they
could from each region. The goal was to have at
least 50 subjects in each cell. The total number in
the sample was 1536.

The survey consisted of the subjects' complet-
ing a four-page questionnaire (APPENDIX C) which took
an average of 11 minutes. For each of 22 leader be-
haviors (11 positive and 11 negative) the subjects
were to circle a number on a scale of O - “ which
would indicate how important they perceived the be-
haviors to be for their leaders and how true the acts
were seen to be of their parents.

In this study validity and reliability were
considered crucial, the former with regard to both
the design and instrument, and the latter pertaining
especially to the instrument. With reSpect to valid-
ity, both internal and external validity were con-

sidered in the planning of the study.

Internal Validity
Concerning the internal validity of the design,
rival hypotheses pertaining to history, maturation,

testing. instrumentation, and statistical regression

55
were not operative due to the nature of the plan.
Those factors. which function either independently
or in a combination to produce varying degrees of
internal invalidity from these sources, are absent

in the design of the study.

Mortality

Mortality, however, was a concern, though to a
limited degree in a special way. The data were
obtained from intact groups and were accumulated on
a single occasion. This prOcedure resulted in a
low loss of respondents. While law requires provid-
ing students in public schools the Option of electing
not to participate in any activity being done under
the auspices of a religious organization (such as
YFC), most members of the groups surveyed completed
the questionnaire. Those who did not fill in the
questionnaire were few in number. The larger and
more applicable problem of sample selection will be
further discussed below.

Since sample selection was done on a conve-
nience basis according to the location of YFC per-
sonnel throughout the continental U.S.A.. and since,
therefore, it was necessary to obtain as many re-

pondents as possible from each of the subdivisions

56

of the population (e.g., urban, voluntary, Youth
Guidance), carefully constructed procedures were
followed in order to obtain the most subjects (see
APPENDIX E). To illustrate, data-gatherers were
‘careful to administer the questionnaire on an ordi-
nary day (rather than, for example, on a day prior
to a three-day weekend) where absenteeism was at a
minumum, and at an apprOpriate time during the day
(which was established on an appointment basis with
the school principal ahead of time), also described
in the instructions to data-gatherers in APPENDIX E.

A basic principle underlying the issue of mor-
tality gave rise to a special way in which this
source of invalidity was potentially Operative.
Some mortality did occur through certain respondents'
failing to complete certain items on the instrument.
For example, it occurred, as reported on the com-
puter printout where some respondents omitted certain
items in the category of father. Provision for
anonymity, indication of the importance of the study,
explanation that there were no right or wrong answers
and the request to complete all items, were proce-
dures used to obtain as little item mortality as
possible (see APPENDIX E). This subject will be

discussed further in the sections below which deal

57
with response sets and external validity and in

Chapter IV.

Selection Bias

More,serious was the possibility of selection
bias. This study was designed as a nationwide pro-
'ject. While it would have been ideal to be able to
use random sampling in the study in order to assure
complete representativeness and the limitation of
bias, time and money were constraints that prohib-
ited the random selection of subjects. However,
since scientifically valid and reliable results were
a high priority, the design had to be rigorous and
sound. Following Jones (1973, pp. 73'7“), it was
determined that accurate results would still be
achieved through obtaining as many young peOple as
possible in the sample from as many different parts
of the nation as could be reached.

YFC, learning of the purpose and intent of this
study, indicated that it paralleled needs they had and
offered to staff and fund the project on a national
‘basis. YFC staffing involved the use of regional and
local personnel in the data gathering process. The or-
ganization Operates throughout the United States in the

nine regions described in Chapter I. Each of the nine

. 5 8
has a regional director. YFC does not, though, have
staff pOOple in every part of the country, nor does
it have access to every area and every type of sub-
group. _

Thus, the sampling problems raised the rival hy-
pothesis of selection bias. The question appeared:
"would different groups give different answers?”
However, at second look, selection bias does not ap-
pear to be as formidable a threat to validity as at
first thought, for at least three reasons. These
three reasons, while not eliminating selection bias,
serve to control its effects. (The term, "control its
effects," is here used to refer to the indication of
the degree to which the factor is functioning. It is
not used with the unrealistic thought that there would
be some possible way to eliminate the effects of the
factor (selection bias) under the given conditions such
as are applying in this study.) First, the study was
conducted with a large number of respondents (see
Jones, pp. 73-7“: Borg and Call, p. 123). Second, the
study contained a wide variety of groupings (see Jones,
pp. 73-7“). Most different types of youth were repre-
sented, for example, urban, suburban, rural, and ”de-
linquent" and "typicalf The results obtained enabled

the viewing of a wide variety of contrasts. Third,

59
Douvan and Adelson found that "clear regional dif-
ferences exist only in highly specific activities
which depend on climate or special geographic fea-
tures. Adolescents in the South do not know winter
,sports: those in the urbanized East report active lei-
sure centered on camping or field interests less
often” than youth in the West (1966, 310-312). Thus,
these reasons provided a high degree of confidence
that existing Opinions would be obtained. This con-
clusion was supported statistically in several ways,
. for example, in that little difference across regions
was found in a multivariate analysis of regional

difference scores.

Observer Bias

Another factor which threatened the internal va-
lidity of the study was observer bias. Mitigation of
this factor was an important goal of the training
sessions for the data-gatherers and their trainers.

The trainers of the data-gatherers were them-
selves trained at a meeting during a national con-
ference held in Miami on February 25, 1979. These
pOOple constituted the members of the Research and De-
velopment Committee who were the heads of the nine

regional YFC units. The training session was

60

conducted on the basis of the forms which appear in
APPENDIX D and APPENDIX E.

The presentation began with a statement review-
ing the purpose of the research (as indicated in item
#1 of the INSTRUCTIONS FOR DATA-GATHERERS sheet which
appears in APPENDIX E) which had been previously ex-
‘plained to this committee in a meeting the preceding
fall in Elburn, Illinois on September 27, 1978. Care
was taken to avoid indicating specific expectations
which could result in the committee members developing
a bias that might influence their direction-giving to
the data-gatherers they would train and to the youth
to whom they would give the instrument (the members
were to both train others and collect data themselves).
It was indicated that this is descriptive research: the
only interest is in what la, not in what should be or
.nhy. The explanation indicated what would be learned,
specifically what the instrument was capable of showing.
COpies of the instrument were distributed.

Opportunity was provided for any changes the
committee wanted to suggest in any of the forms or
methods. Some suggestions were made but only one was
needed for implementation (the addition of a space for
YFC region on the GROUP DESCRIPTION SHEET in APPENDIX

E). The writer explained how the other suggestions

61

would conflict with established procedures of scien-
tific research. The committee appeared to appre-
ciate this involvement with the development of the
study. This procedure provided practical help, and
it was a useful public relations procedure as well,
motivating interest and participation in the study.*
1 Motivation was also stimulated by the writer's
identification of the study with needs expressed by
the committee members. YFC is engaged in a shift to-
ward more effective selection and use of paar leaders
among the youth. Thus, the probable benefits of the
study were apparent.

Other possible sources of observer bias were also
worked on, including the importance of indicating to
the respondents that their honest responses were what
was desired, that there were no "right" (or even pre-
ferred) or ”wrong" (or even undesired) answers. Other
ways of controlling observer bias were incorporated
through the development of the instrument, namely,

not structuring it so it would contain leading questions

 

*The writer learned how important motivation on
the part of the data-gatherers and their trainers is in
a wide-spread study, for even though they may be doing
such research in the employ of a sponsoring organiza-
tion, it was soon seen that money and pressure from
superiors are not adequate motivators, especially when
the workers are constrained by a heavy work load in
other areas of their job.

62

which would give the subjects clues as to a preferred
response, not permitting observers to record behaviors
they would like to see or not to see, not permitting
observers the Opportunity to draw inferences from
subjectsNresponses, and not including items that would
threaten, embarrass, or annoy reapondents (Borg and
Call, 1971, p. 105).

Also discussed at the Miami meeting were what
groups to survey (e.g., voluntary, urban, church-
related) and how many people were needed in each of
these cells (they were asked to obtain at least 50
subjects per cell). A realistic time frame was dis-
cussed in which the writer and committee members com-
mitted themselves to certain responsibilities. The
committee members agreed to select and train data-
gatherers, obtain their own data and the others' data,
and bring the data back to the YFC home office in
Illinois by April 2“.* The specific procedures that
would be used in data gathering were discussed: the

importance of each observer's functioning according to

 

4*Due to many factors, such as work load, difficulty
obtaining access to some schools, cancellation of the
April 2“ meeting and forgetfulness, the last of the
data were not returned until early June, in spite of a
system of communication through biweekly contacts made
by phone and letter from the home office. At the end,
the writer had to make a number of phone calls to one
particular region.

63

the planned methods was emphasized.

Response Sets

Before proceeding to the subject of external va-
tlidity, one more statement should be made with regard
to internal validity. As indicated in Chapter II,
'Borg and Gall (p. 178) have shown that there are dan-
gers in using the self-report method of data-gathering,
and these dangers have been identified as three dif-
ferent types of response sets in the minds of the re-
spondents. These sets threaten to give support to the
rival hypothesis which may be stated in the form of
the question, ”How do you know that the tendency of
subjects to make their choices on the basis of three
major types of response sets has not accounted for the
data you have received instead of accurate indications
of their actual opinions?"

The set for social desirability was dealt with
through anonymity. Sex and age were the only identi-
fying factors asked of the respondents in the study.
The other categories (for example, urban. suburban
rural, and ”average" or Youth Guidance) were indicated
by the data-gatherer on the GROUP DESCRIPTION SHEET.
The limitation of choices (the selection of a number

on a Likert scale for each item on the instrument) was

. 6“

also a help in mitigating the concern to present one-
self in a favorable light. As no other gain existed
to encourage faking (for example, the possibility of
a higher grade), it was considered that the set for
isocial desirability was contained within allowable
limits.
A The set for aoquiecence was reduced by the in-
structions that there are no true or hOped for re-
sponses. Thus, this set to respond "true," regardless
of an inventory item's content, is not a significant
factor in this study. ’

The set for deviance also did not produce any
significantly negative effect in this study. There
was no reason to believe that there was any general
hostility in the respondents as a whole which inclined
them to want to give answers in this mentality. Borg
and Call have advised that if a researcher "has good
reason to believe that his research sample will fake
or give atypical answers, then a self-report inventory
should not be selected” (1971, p. 178). In the absence
of such belief, and as no apparent gain was considered
likely to be present to reward such deviance, it was
concluded that the self-report method was suitable for

this study. This conclusion was supported by the data

which showed a wide diversity of responses.

65
External Validity

With regard to external validity of the design,

a reaction to measurement procedures may seriously
affect a study (Campbell and Stanely, 1963, p. 6).

A test situation can stir negative affect toward test-
ing and thus cause within the respondent his or her
negative motivations toward behavior different from
that of youth in general. To mitigate such reactive
effects, the questionnaire was designed in the form of
Likert-scaled items in which opinions (not information
recall to be graded right or wrong) were given. In
addition, the observers gave precise verbal instruc-
tions explaining that there were no "right" or "wrong"
answers being called for on this questionnaire. Since
many people like to be asked for their Opinions in non-
threatening subject areas, particularly where anonymity
is provided, the data-gathering experience was consid-
ered a positive one for the respondents, and that
awareness was a guiding principle in the design.

A greater threat to external validity was the
selection bias resulting from the fact that random
sampling was not possible in this research project.
However. for the reasons indicated in the discussion of
the effect of selection bias on the internal validity

of the design, the effect of selection on external

66

validity was not considered to be so adverse as to
impugn the study. Caution is in order regarding gen-
eralizations of the conclusions. Claims are not being
made herein pertaining to all youth in the United
States, even within the continental borders. It is
possible to draw conclusions with a reasonable degree
or confidence in regard to groups with similar char-
acteristics. This subject will be further discussed
in Chapter V. A

’s nt fo h St d
Concerning the validity and reliability of the
instrument, these matters were attended to in several
ways. Since the latter is a prerequisite of the for-
mer. care was taken, therefore, to provide for maxi-

mum reliability.

Reliability

Instrument reliability was strengthened by using
a closed question form for the instrument (Scott in
Lindzey and Aronson, pp. 210-212): establishing rapport
with the respondents in such a way that it was clear to
them that their frankness was truly desired (Cronbach
in Payne, 197“, p. 120): conducting the data collec-
tion at a time when contextual fluctuations were at a

minumum (Adkins in Payne, 197“, p. 19“): and keeping

67
items relatively homogenous and in the middle range
of difficulty (Ebel, 1972, pp. “27, 567: Ebel in
Payne, 197“, pp. 262 ff.).

The reliability of the instrument was also
strengthened by dealing with the three major causes of
unreliability in the following manner (Ebel, 1972,

A p. “09). One major factor which negatively affects
reliability is the inappropriateness of the task. It
was, therefore, a major concern in designing the in-
strument to attend to making sure that each term,

- especially with respect to the questionnaire items,
was clearly understood by the respondents. In order
to provide this clarity and to update the Gamelin re-

search, a second pilot study was undertaken.

The Saapnd Pilot Study

The second pilot was conducted to find out what
words youth across the country use in describing lea-
dership. YFC regional directors interviewed two dif-
ferent types of young peOple. They were to interview
the youth in each of three major sections of the con-
tinental United States, West, Midwest and East. In
each section one group of young peOple was to be inter-
viewed who could be described as "average." The other

was to be a Youth Guidance group. The age range of

. 68

the youth interviewed was 1“ through 18, the same as
in the main study. The youth were to be interviewed
in groups, as would be done in the main project, and
the size of the groups would range from three to ten
in number; The interviews were audio recorded,

transcribed, and assessed. The question was whether
or not the Gamelin terminology could still be used or
whether certain terms would have to be changed. The
interview instrument, instructions and cover letter
for the data-gatherers (interviewers) can be seen in
APPENDIX B.

The second pilot was helpful in the develOpment of
an instrument that would be as reliable and valid as
possible. Certain changes in wording were made to-
gether with the addition of six new items which can be
seen by comparing the instrument (APPENDIX C) with the
instrument used in the first pilot study (APPENDIX A).

With the instrument develOped through the re-
sources provided in the review of the precedent
research (Chapter II), the sources identified in this
chapter, and the confirmational insights from the se-
cond pilot study, it remained necessary to determine
whether the questionnaire was workable in a setting
similar to which it would be used in the main study.
For that determination a third pilot was utilized.

. 69
The Third Pilot Study

The third pilot study took place at Christ
Church of Oak Brook, in Oak Brook, Illinois On Feb-
ruary 20, 1979. five days prior to the Miami meeting.
The writer trained the data-gatherers in the same man-

ner he planned to have the data-gatherers trained for
the main study. He first trained the Youth Director
of the church who in turn trained the person who would
be administering the questionnaire to the youth in
their regular Tuesday evening group meeting. The
writer observed the Youth Director's training of the
data-gatherer and the data-gatherer's work with the
youth group. The time taken in training and in ad-
ministration of the questionnaire was noted. The
third pilot study confirmed that the questionnaire was
usable.

Thus, the first major factor negatively affecting
reliability, inapprOpriateness of the task, was con-
trolled. The second and third pilot studies verified
the list of behaviors which would be used on the in-
strument and which would serve to answer the research
questions. These two pilot studies also assured that
the items were worded in language the target pOpula-
tion uses and understands.

Second, reliability is also affected by human

7O

factors such as fatigue. All data were collected,
therefore, during one fifteen minute period, usually
in the morning when the subjects could be assumed to
be alert. Mornings were preferred because the youth
»were awake long enough to be mentally alert and yet

not having experienced a long period of sitting and
I listening or a period of time in the day following a
meal, for example, when they would have been less
alert.

The third factor which causes unreliability, in
adition to inapprOpriateness of task and fatigue, may
be described as inconsistency and nonobjectivity of
the observer. This factor was taken into account by
making the instrument highly structured (Mayhew, in
Payne, 197“, p. 233). The closed question form re-
stricts variable and subjective elements entering
the study via the observer.

A reliability analysis of the eight scales
(e.g., the 11 positive behaviors for padr constituted
scale 1: the 11 positive behaviors for adult constituted
scale 3) was done using the Cronbach alpha test. Con-
sidering .80 or above as good (i.e., that 805 or more
of the variation in the scales was due to the items
themselves rather than to error), all eight of the

scales were seen to be reliable. The lowest

71
coefficient was .83306 for the positive scale of

padr. The highest was .92982 for the negative scale
of adult.

. Validity
The validity of the instrument was provided for
-by utilizing the preceding procedures for producing
the highest degree of reliability possible and by
keeping the instrument items relevant to the research
questions (Ebel, 1972, p. ““8). Exercising much cau-
‘tion in phrasing the items in clear language which
was understandable to the respondents was an important
help in assuring validity.

One further matter, which also affects content
validity, needs to be discussed concerning the instru-
ment. The closed question format has both advantages
and disadvantages. While the former outweigh the lat-
ter because of the reasons cited throughout the dis-
cussion of the design of the study in this chapter,
the rationale for not shifting the weight toward the
disadvantages should also be indicated. Scott (in
Lindzey and Aronson, 1968, pp. 210-211) claims that
the disadvantages are as follows: the closed question
form (1) suggests particular answers which might be

uncritically accepted by acquiescent respondents, (2)

72

doesn't permit the researcher to find out whether the
respondents have no attitude toward the subject in
question. (3) doesn't facilitate the discovery of at-
titudes not anticipated a priori, and (“) may inhibit
observer-respondent rapport by inserting unnatural and
disinteresting factors into their relationship.

Numbers (1) and (“) have been dealt with in the
above discussion in this chapter. Items (1) and (3)
have also been taken into consideration through the
use of the Gamelin research as a base. While the
Gamelin study does not permit generalization on any of
its 16 items, it does, through the method used to ob-
tain the data it procured, permit a rather high degree
of confidence to prevail concerning the attainment of
the thinking of youth regarding these subjects. More-
over, the results of the second pilot study supplied
leadership behaviors that youth from the Eastern, Mid-
western and Western continental United States perceive
to be both attractive and repulsive. It is noteworthy
that all 16 of Gamelin's aspects of leadership
(albeit their behavioral manifestations) were sustained
and only three positive and three negative behaviors
were added that did not appear in Gamelin's original
study.

While the Gamelin research suggests that the

73
issue raised in (2) is unlikely, that study does not
preclude its possibility, nor do any of the pilot
studies undertaken with this research project in con-
junction with the main study. However. it was assumed
for the present study that the respondents do have an
Opinion with regard to this subject matter, even
though that opinion may not be conscious and articu-
lated in a cogent manner. This assumption was cor-
roborated by the completion of most of the items by
every respondent in the first pilot, by the enthusiasm
and extent of the discussions on the tapes of the se-
cond pilot, and by the completion of most of the items
on the questionnaires in the third pilot and main
studies. These reasons, then, combined with the
aforementioned advantages of the closed question form
for the instrument, led to the selection of this meth-
odology for the study.

Instrument validity is supported by the results
of a multivariate analysis of the eight scales. The
correlation of tatuar positive and negative scales,
for example, is -.“18“l7. The tendency to score high
on the positive scale and low on the negative scale
strengthens confidence in the validity of the posi-
tive and negative scale of the instrument.

The foregoing has described the design the study

7“
employed. The data procured by following this plan
will be discussed in the next chapter.

CHAPTER IV
THE FINDINGS

The study sought the answers to five questions.
This chapter reports what was discovered. The ques-
tions asked whether young people view any of the 11
positive and 11 negative behaviors as more important on
any kind of consistent basis with respect to their paar

and adult leaders.

 

Also asked was an indication of what ways the
ranking of the behaviors for adult leader were similar
and dissimilar with the behaviors seen by young peOple
in their mothers and fathers. Following the presenta-
tion of the data, a summary of topical generalizations

concludes the chapter.

Research Questions and Pertinent Data
The questions stated in Chapter I guided the analy-
sis of the data. For convenience they will be restated

at the beginning of each section.

Research Question #1
The first question asked, "Do young people view

any of the 11 positive and 11 negative behaviors as more

75

76
important on any consistent basis with reSpect to their
.pggx leaders?" The findings show that some behaviors
are, indeed, identified as having more value on certain
consistent bases.

The differences noted in that which follows are
, with respect to behaviors ranked plus or minus four or
more places. The selection of the number four is arbi-
trary, though not without logic. The rationale for
less than four places as the cut-off is that consider-
able interchangability is seen to occur among items
within one, two or three positions of each other. Four
or more indicates more contrast and it appears less fre-
quently. Further, four or more places constitutes a
spread of more than 1/3 of the 11 scale positions. The
cut-off at less than four was used consistently in all
cases.

Moreover. since the sample is large almost all of
the scores were statistically significant to at least
the .01 level. Thus the following discussion will focus
on those relationships which appear to yield the great-
est practical significance. The subject of statisti-
cal significance will be considered further in
connection with Research Question #3.

Table #.1 shows that while some behaviors are more

important than others, all are considered important

77

 

 

TABLE 9.1 - National Mean Scores and Ranking by
_I 7 '

 

 

 

Categories

Egg; Adult Moths; Fatbg;
0 3.993 c D 3.565 c I 3.189 i I 3.21? i
A 3.350 c J 3.991 c P 3.139 c 8 3.115 1
J 3.325 c A 3.968 c B 3.019 1 C 2.888 c
P 3.296 c 3 3.379 1 C 3.017 c 8 2.883 1
8 3.207 r 3.399 D 3.011 a 2.853
3 3.183 8 3.293 A 2.998 P 2.688
I 3.178 I 3.279 8 2.996 D 2.635
I 3.089 C 3.226 H 2.911 A 2.619
I 3.063 K 3.175 J 2.887 J 2.530
C 2.897 I 3.192 I 2.750 I 2.982
0 2.665 O 2.762 0 2.692 G 2.078
U 3.338 U 3.318 R 2.119 R 2.092
I 3.181 I 3.297 V 1.71? V 1.832
I 3.168 I 3.285 I 1.663 I 1.676
I 3.161 0 3.289 0 1.985 0 1.379
0 3.197 L 3.267 0 1.383 T 1.373
P 3.112 8 3.198 L 1.292 O 1.327
I 3.106 P 3.198 T 1.230 I 1.179
8 3.100 T 3.099 P 1.228 L 1.109
0 2.961 0 3.068 I 1.137 8 1.109
R 2,759 R 2.897 S 1.129 P 1.096
V 2.626 V 2.792 U .975 U 1.018

c - consideration

1 . initiation of Structure

 

Item Sym-
l 991 .Behgyior
1 A Communicates 2 I Doesn't relate to young
2 3 Displays adequate know- people
ledge and ability 3 N Doesn't show concern for
3 C Lets young peoole (me) young people (me)
take responsibility 9 0 Doesn't trust young people
9 D Listens (me)
5 E Organizes well 5 P Favors some over others
6 P Seeks to help when 6 Q Forces ideas on young
needed peeple (me)
7 0 Shares own shortcomings 7 R Gets upset when things
and problems don't go right
8 I Shows sense of humor 8 S Looks down on young
9 I Tries new ideas--open people (me)
10 J Understands (my) con- .9 T Puts own interests ahead
cerns of young people or group
11 K Uses firmness when 10 U Says one thing, but does
necessary another-~dishonest
11 V Won't change--old
1 Doesn't follow through-- fashioned

H

dishonest

78
(with respect to the positive acts) and serious
(with respect to the negative). For example, the
ninth-ranked behavior for 222; leader is “uses firm-
ness when necessary” (K). Though ranked ninth, the
‘national mean for that item is 3.063, which, on a
_scale of 0 - 9, is high.

The four top-ranked positive behaviors are
"listens” (D), "communicates” (A), "understands
concerns of young people” (J) and ”seeks to help
when needed” (F); these items are all concerned with
consideration. The last-ranked positive behavior
is "shares own shortcomings and problems” (C).

With respect to the 11 negative behaviors,
hypocrisy, "says one thing, but does another--dis-
honest” (U), is ranked first (most serious) for
Egg; leaders. The two last-ranked negative behav-
iors, mentioned here, due to their consistent reap-
pearance in these positions, are "gets upset when
things don't go right” (R) and ”won't change--old-
fashioned" (V).

Essentially the same results obtain when the
demographic variables are isolated, as can be ob-
served from the data displayed on Table 9.2, graph-
ically portraying the comparisons the research question

eXplored. Care must be taken in the contrasts made

79

 

Father

Zun.mcn.<0p.
2ma.mca.<op.

«o.cnd.<ow.
29a.zmpe
29¢.pasmpe

 

 

 

TABMAZ - V8

.__flmhg_. o__£Jmu__.

w

 

 

zua.>HH

2mm. wcn. <ow.

and. mad. <ow.

amass. cud. <or
.cnd. <ow.

029d. Rape

zma. wasswe

zmn.>pp

2mn.xcn.<ow.
zmn.mcd.<ow.
oaseu.csd.<or
«o.cna.<ow.
29¢.zmwe
2ma.wesmwe
zaa.>ww

zmn.wswn<ow.
zsa.mca.<ow.
onsen.cnd.<or
«6.:fie.<op.
:I¢.IIHe
zsa.~ellwe

 

2s¢.>ww

oasem.cwc.<or.

BKCHB‘D’JIG
KBCBHPD‘JIG
KBCBHDPAIJG
KH'BDCAJIIG
KBCBHPADIJG
KBHBCFDAJIG
KBCEHPDAJIG

 

KPDBBICHJIO
KPC‘DBJ‘HIG
CPBKDBHAJIG
KPHBADBCJIG
’KD‘BCBJHIG
K’BCDAHBJIG
KPBCDABHJIG

DJABCBPHKIG
DJAPBIBICKG
ADJBEPIKCHG
DJAEPIBCHKG
iJBAPBICKHO
DJAPBBICIKG
DJABPBICKHG

 

DJB‘PBHKICG

‘J’Ixnflaxco
D‘Jxrgnxnco
D’AJ31HK300

AJ’IBIxuuco
D‘Jylxnflxco
D‘thnlnxco

RVIOTQSPLNU
RVIQTOSNLUP
RV'TONQLPSU
RIVNOTLUPQS
“VITOQNLSPU
RVIOTQNPSLU
RV'OTQNLSPU

RIVQOLTPNSU
RVIQOTLPSNU
RVIOQNTPLSU
R'OVNLPTSQU
RV'OQTLPNSU
RVIOQPLTNSU
RVIOQLTP"SU

00.anSQTV3
"IUOSLPTQRV
LN‘UOSTQPRV
UOlLlPSQTRV
unnoebspnlqnv
uuouLQ-PTQRV
U'NOLSPTQRV

UOLPNISTQRV
UNLOISTPQRV
"'LNTsOQD-RV
DINOLTQPRSV
UNL'TOS’QRV
UL'ONPSIQRV
"LI”OP-ssqnv

I Youth Guidance
Vol. I Voluntary (membership)

YG

Sub. I Suburban
I Urban

Urb.

Nat. I national
Rur. I Rural

Behayior

bol

I

 

Item Sym-

C
1
r p d
8 O O I I
m f. a r I C
o p me a a
v. m); tm m a
60m 00 h m 8
0 0m V. t t
0 Va en nhy 9
O 09 V0 cg r
t 1t 0 )hin)9
8 «FE SGWPOOt
1 0“ 88m mn
. her MBI\t0n(1
r rapt 0d 06W
0 5.188 08"
tltgt lptdlw
.p- n.)88pu. p0
nonunereo n80
SOBOSMOCGSOXBS
epeyel\Vrp+~dOpt
O O O 80 e O U
D D D urn... G .L F
I N 0 PG R 8 T
2 3 u. 56 7 8 9
. 8
)
m av. m. n.
n at .1 ran
.KVJl‘i .m 00.0
t 1 n O MOO
919.1. a C u.
tllb h t h.)
8.1051 N .1 8V.
“.008 1 OBf—Jnm
qaen 10. hm081\
88 po 01 39 .0
Odd D. we 18.18
tangs h "b3 .0
a ane B Wonwn
C8 ur 90d0reea
iyeo Santa pant
nannyeni d8 8
“1.0 kenseedssr
mpesatakerwwee
MSIttsana 0.1m
0.1 .m it... h h?
CD L03 3 STU
AB C DE? G “1.0
1.2 3 1456 7 89”

or group
Says one thing, but does

cerns of young people

Uses firmness when

U
V

10

K

11

another--diahonest

Won't change-~old

necessary

11

fashioned

Doesn't follow through--
dishonest

L

. 80

and conclusions drawn from these data, because one
variable is being compared with part of itself when
matching a demographic variable with the national
mean. Thus, only the rankings are given in the
table; statistical analysis is not done. Most of the
mean scores closely parallel the national scores
(National, all).

Combinations of the demographic variables were
selected for statistical analysis on the basis of
two criteria: (1) combinations of factors reported in
the research of Douvan and Adelson (1966) as having
the most chance of containing important differences
and (2) sufficient data to produce meaningful statis-
tics. An example of this selection process is seen
in regard to the comparison of Youth Guidance subjects
with the other subjects. Here the logation variable
held constant had to be urban. for that sector was
where most of the Youth Guidance subjects came from.
Only 15 Youth Guidance subjects were suburbanites,
and none were rural. Thus criterion one was met by
all three location variables, but criterion two was

met only by the urban subgroup.

81

I

Male ggd Female Respogggs
Male and female subjects showed very little dif-

ference in their ranking of the Egg; behaviors. The
females tended to mark slightly higher score values
overall, as can be seen in Figure 9.1 and Table 9.3.

_ All of the top four behaviors for both male and female
are types of consideration which parallel the whole

sample.

Youth Guidance and "Other” Responsgg
Youth Guidance and other subjects did not differ

 

substantially from the total sample. However, ”other”
youth did rank ”uses firmness when necessary” (K)
fourth, while Youth Guidance ranked that behavior
eighth, and the total sample ninth (Table 9.2). It
should also be noted that "other” reapondents tended
to score the behaviors higher on both scales than did
the Youth Guidance groups, as can be seen in Figure
9.2 and Table 9.9. While this tendency is not true
for every behavior, and while the contrast observable
in the graph (Figure 9.2) is not as pronounced as for
the gender variable, the tendency is still quite

 

1.It is not certain that an age by sex biasing is
not functioning. Data were not obtained to assure that
the proportion of males and females was the same at
each age.

82

FIGURE 9.1 - Youth Perceptions of Pear and Adult
Leadership Behavior-~Mean Scores and_Ranking by
Item of Male and Female Responses

 

 

 

 

 

9.0.. I I
| I
e80 ' '
D
.615 I D : JA
.91. I FJ D ' FE 3E0
D I... L A | IC .3
300‘. I O O -| ..... u u e- a n T c c c u o a
a $60 I 8 B Q' G RV
Q It '
R
6 C R I V G v I
. «IL
0 V I .I
.90 |
' I
.20 I '
2‘00. : '
l
.80 | l
e60 I '
I I
on“ I I
I I
.2“ 1 I
I I
1.01? '
l I
.817 I I
l l
‘6“ I I '
Quifl I |
l l
e2” I I
ofi J 4 fi—p—n—r—LT—I—w
as eg. ‘ Pos. eg. 03. eg. 03. eg.
5213 Fems s Male Female
PEER ADULT
LEADER LEADER

83

 

 

TABLE 9.3 g Youth Perceptionsbof Peer an? Adult Leadership behavior--
8 n 2 n

 

 

k1 d F 1e Subjects
Peer Adult

[ale Zemalg ugle Eegalg
D 3.368 c D 3.659 c D 3.959 c D 3.709 c
A 3.231 c A 3.993 c J 3.371 c J 3.635 c
J 3.207 c J 3.971 c B 3.323 1 A 3.603 c
P 3.199 c P 3.918 c A 3.3 9 c P 3.931 c
8 3.169 I 3.297' P 3.279 H 3.913
3 3.193 E 3.279 E 3.225 E 3.396
I 3.080 B 3.293 I 3.188 I 3.389
K 3.020 H 3.210 C 3.172 C 3.300
H 2.993 K 3.118 K 3.117 H 3.261
C 2.775 C 2.992 H 3.061 K'3.297
G 2.539 G 2.826 G 2.681 G 2.879 -
U 3.172 U 3.530 U 3.152 U 3.526
I 3.031 L 3.372 M 3.120 M 3.518
L 3.025 M 3.3 8 N 3.110 0 3.508
M 3.021 0 3.3 6 0 3.105 N 3.993
O 2.989 P 3.309 S 3.053 S 3.379
8 2.960 S 3.272 P 3.010 P 3.329
P 2.960 T 3.250 T 2.970 T 3.235
O 2.897 Q 3.109 O 2.938 Q 3.230
R 2.672 R 2.851 R 2.76? R 2.9 3
V 2.563 V 2.682 V 2.692 V 2.906

c I consideration i = initiation of structure

 

Item Sym-
# bol Behavior
1 A Communicates 2 M Doesn't relate to young
2 B Displays adequate know- people
ledge and ability 3 N Doesn't show concern for
3 _ C Lets young peOple (me) young people (me)
take responsibility 9 0 Doesn't trust young people
9 D Listens (me)
5 B Organizes well 5 P Favors some over others
6 F Seeks to help when 6 Q Forces ideas on young
needed ' people (me)
7 0 Shares own shortcomings 7 R Gets upset when things
and problems don't go right
8 H Shows sense of humor 8 S Looks down on young
9 I Tries new ideas--open people (me)
10 J Understands (my) con- 9 T Puts own interests ahead
cerns of young people or group
11 K Uses firmness when 10 U Says one thing, but does
necessary another--dishonest
' 11 V Won't change--old
l L Doesn't follow through-- fashioned

dishonest

 

89
FIGURE 9.2 - Youth Perceptions of Peer and Adult Leader-

ship Behavior--Mean Scores and Ranking by Item of Urban
and Voluntary Youth Guidance and "Other" Responses

9.0.. I |
.39
.60
.90
.2..

3.0”

Q

do um'm» In U

 

 

 

 

0' Poe. Neg. Pos. ‘ Negi Pos. Neg. ‘Tos. I Neg. ‘

"Other” m "Other"

Youth
Guidance Guidance
PEER ADULT

LEADER I ‘ LEADER

 

85

 

 

‘TIELEIETE I’Youth PerceptIons ofiPeer and Adult Leadershi Behavior--fiean
Scores and Ranking;0yItem of Urban and Voluntary Youth Gu dance and"0ther”

 

 

Peer Adult
Youth Youth
”QIDEI.‘ nQIharw
D 3.919 c D 3.500 c D 3.999 c A 3.529 c
r 3.325 c A 3.978 c J 3.365 c 0 3.306 c
A 3.186 c J 3.379 c A 3.322 c J 3. 56 c
J 3.175 c K 3.300 1 s 3.27 1 B 3.909 1
8 3.099 P 3.281 P 3.271 8 3.289
I 2.988 E 3.269 I 3.1 6 P 3.26?
H 2.992 8 3.256 B 3.1 9 I 3.213
K 2.911 I 3.209 ' C 3.030 K 3.211
B 2.859 H 3.033 H 3.018 C 3.067
c 2.708 c 2.7 6 x 3.012 H 3.067
0 2.633 G 2.7 7 G 2.820 0 2.798
U 3.066 U 3.269 U 3.059 L 3.278
M 2.996 I 3.121 0 3.000 N 3.278
N 2.991 L 3.111 N 2.988 I 3.211
0 2.990 N 3.091 L 2.969 U 3.189
L 2.875 T 3.055 I 2.969 0 3.178
T 2.81 8 3.033 p 2.873 8 3.133
0 2.79 0 3.022 8 2.850 T 3.079
P 2.756 0 2.995 .0 2.833 0 2.956
R 2.681 P 2.9 3 T 2.827 P 2.800
3 2.619 a 2.7 7 a 2.768 R 2.733
V 2.280 V 2.538 V 2.615 V 2.711
c a consideration 1 I initiation of structure
Item Sym-
bol Behavior
1 A Communicates 2 M Doesn't relate to young
2 3 Displays adequate know- people
ledge and ability 3 N Doesn't show concern for
3 C Lets young people (me) young people (me)
take responsibility 9 0 Doesn't trust young people
9 D Listens (me)
5 E Organizes well 5 P Favors some over others
6 P Seeks to help when 6 Q Forces ideas on young
needed people (me)
7 G Shares own shortcomings 7 R Gets upset when things
and problems don't go right
8 H Shows sense of humor 8 8 Looks down on young
9 I Tries new ideas--0pen people (me)
10 J Understands (my) con- 9 T Puts own interests ahead
cerns of young people or group
11 K Uses firmness when 10 U Says one thing, but does
necessary another--dishonest
_ 11 V Won't change--old
1 L Doesn‘t follow through-- fashioned

dishonest

86

noticeable. The top four behaviors in the positive
scale of the Youth Guidance distribution are all types
of consideration, while three of the tap four for the
"other” respondents are types of consideration, but

the fourth, which is ranked fourth, is a type of initi-

ation of structure.

Suburban and Rural Responses

Voluntary group membership was held constant for
both suburban and rural subjects. Both showed somewhat
more variance in their choices than did the gender var-
iable but no great differences. Suburban respondents
ranked ”tries new ideas--open“ (I) fifth, two places
above the national sample, while rural youth indicated
a lower priority for this behavior by ranking it ninth.
Rural young people, however, put "displays adequate
knowledge and ability" (B) third in contrast with the
whole sample where it was sixth and with the suburban
subjects who ranked it eighth. Again, the differences
in means are small, as can be seen in Table 9.5. All
four of the tap-ranked positive behaviors in the sub-
urban distribution are types of consideration, while
three of the t0p four are of that orientation in the
rural subjects' perceptions. The latter ranked third

a structural behavior, "displays adequate knowledge

87

 

 

 

TABLE 9.5

- Youth Per

     

  

ceptions of Peer

 

and Adult_Leadership Behavior

  

 

 
 
   

Peer Adult

§gbggbgn Bgrgl u ban ggzgl

D 3.603 c D 3.370 c D 3.638 c D 3.381 c
A 3.979 b J 3.189 c J 3.553 c J 3.381 c
J 3.916 c 8 3.187 1 A 3.52 c A 3.319 c
P 3.391 c A 3.151 c P 3.927 c E 3.25? i
I 3.231 P 3.199- ‘ 5 3.919 C 3.229
E 3.228 E 3.122 I 3.902 B 3.229

H 3.218 H 3.119 E 3.292 P 3.211

8 3.191 K 3.017 H 3.272 H 3.160

K 3.100 I 2.999 C 3.238 K 3.102

C 2.970 C 2.783 K 3.166 I 3.091

C 2.878 C 2.585 C 3.003 C 2.698

U 3.352 U 3.233 N 3.398 O 3.286

N 3.280 0 3.211 M 3.390 U 3.233

L 3.238 L 3.198 U 3.362 M 3.208

O 3.229 P 3.170 0 3.399 N 3.183

M 3.218 N 3.159 S 3.289 P 3.19 .
S 3.20? M 3.137 L 3.269 L 3.085

T 3.170 5 3.122 P 3.222 8 3.051

P 3.159 T 3.085 T 3.196 Q 2.960

0 3.003 Q 2.931 Q 3.120 T 2.886

R 2.866 R 2.766 R 2.958 V 2.80?

V 2.680 V 2.751 V 2.898 R 2.739

c = consideration 1 = initiation of structure

 

Item Sym-
# bol Behavior
1 A Communicates 2 M Doesn't relate to young
2 B Displays adequate know- people
ledge and ability 3 N Doesn't show concern for
3 . C Lets young people (me) young people (me)
' take respons bility 9 0 Doesn't trust young people
9 D Listens (me)
5 E Organizes well 5 P Favors some over others
6 F Seeks to help when 6 Q Forces ideas on young
needed ' people (me)
7 G Shares own shortcomings 7 R Gets upset when things
and problems don't go right
8 H Shows sense of humor 8 S Looks down on young
9 I Tries new ideas--open people (me)
10 J Understands (my) con- 9 T Puts own interests ahead
cerns of young people or group
11 K Uses firmness when 10 U Says one thing, but does
necessary another-~dishonest
‘ 11 V Won't change--old
1 L Doesn't follow through-- fashioned

dishonest

88
and ability” (B).

Among the negative behaviors, rural youth ranked
"favors some over others (picks favorites)" (P) fourth
in contrast with the whole sample where it was sixth
and with the suburban young people who placed this be-
havior eighth. As the graph in Figure 9.3 shows, this
idiscrepancy represents no large difference. The i1-
1ustration does indicate, though, that the suburban
subjects tended to rank both positive and negative be-
haviors higher than did rural respondents. This ob-

servation is corroborated by Table 9.5.

Research Question #2

The second question asked, ”Do young people view
any of the 11 positive and 11 negative behaviors as
more important on any kind of consistent basis with
respect to their gdglt leaders?” The findings show
that some behaviors are indicated as having more value
on certain consistent bases.

Table 9.1 shows that, while some behaviors are
more important than others, all the positive ones are
”important" and the negative ones are all "serious.”
Thus, while ”shows sense of humor" (H) was ranked
tenth it was rated high (3.192). Only one positive be-

havior was rated below 3.0, the eleventh-ranked

89
FIGURE 9.3 - Youth Perceptions of Peer and Adult

Leadership Behavior-~Mean Scores and Ranking by
Item of Voluntary Suburban and Rural Subjects

“00‘
.841
. 060

v

U
C:
O
t’)
:13
O
0
U2
F3
'0‘:

U

e e

9’ 9’

g a:

. ['1']

. 3 .
< $13 $02G

, 5'

.2"
1.0..
.8.»
.6.»
.II..'
.26

O
8’

 

 

 

Sgburbag Rural Suburban Rural

PEER ADULT
LEADER LEADER

 

, J l I ~—
0 Poe. Neg. ' Poe. Wag. Foe. Tag? Pos. . Neg. '

90
”shares own shortcomings and problems" (G), but it
was rated nationally 2.762, considerably above the
median.

The top-ranked behavior on the positive scale is
"listens” (D), followed by "understands the concerns
of young pe0ple" (J) and "communicates" (A). All
4 three of these behaviors deal with types of consider-
ation. The fourth, "displays adequate knowledge and
ability” (B), is a type of initiation of structure.

The trend of rating all the behaviors high is
also found with reSpect tothe negative scale. The
top nine behaviors are all rated with mean scores
above 3.0. The bottom-ranked act, "won't change--
old fashioned” (V), is well above the middle with a
mean of 2.792. The most serious ggglt leader behav-
ior is ”says one thing, does another--dishonest” (U)
with a mean of 3.318.

Another important discovery in the data is de-
picted in Table 9.6 where the range of the positive
distribution is seen to lie from almost one standard
deviation below the mean to almost two above. How-
ever, consulting Figure 9.9 and Table 9.1 reveals that
half that range is caused by one item, "shares own
shortcomings and problems" (G). This behavior, which
is represented by the shaded part of the bar in

91

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

am n+ am ~+ om H+ am an an «I am nu!
M
236.3 x 33.3 andn 3min. “mm...” 32.0 Angiouv m
. . . - I . . I v
I
88.6 I am filmmImm... ._ _ _ salvo: _ m
9.58 T masses 4 m.
m
A
1|
0
u
8 T. 8 T. 8 T. 8 HI am. «I 8 n- 1
w .
2.9m mmwé llama 63A 62.8 838 m8 m _ M
a m d I u 11 i 1 m
Tu
can... I am _ mums _ w
. c .228... a. g a
a «aoouaosm 56 w.
some: c hp deuce» HIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIQ a
Ium can .3 unsoam I mum—mac: - '0.
t\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ m «amass é u
an; oml..m»oeq

 

 

 

 

 

 

Ego 833235.46:

 

 

scam aasmaocmen go 28.25093 2990 I

 

 

 

92

FIGURE 9.9 National Mean Scores and Rank by Item
for Peer, Adult, Mother and Father Behaviors

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

9.0.} l I
I
d ‘
.8. | I
I
.64 ' D I F
E U 1 BF -‘—fl I
.2. E JF , c I NUMOL: ' K
311(- OI’IIEI H $1) I SE ' B
3.0% - - - -Q ...... Q 'DA ......... I -
e R 1 G v ‘2; I ~--.
.61 V I ‘\" I “D
I j I I J
.90 \ ' I
' I
'2? The dotted line oon- \ .unm I
nesting the bracketed . ' R I R
2 01 I G
' I behaviors illustrates I I I
BI the bimodal distribu- . 1 |
° I tion between the adult I, V I
6 negative and mother I; M
- ” negative scales. 0- ‘1 I
u tice also the bimodal I I) |
- I distribution of adult A .OT
2 negative and {atggg PfiH. I Q
' V negative scales. N I ON
I 3 ap%
1.0+ I
I U
.8“ I I
I I
06‘} | I
I
.98. I :
'2“ I I
0 _a 4 a _ f a v 4 v I _-
Pos. Neg. Pos. Neg. Pos. Neg. Pos. Neg.
PEER ADULT MOTHER FATHER
LEADER LEADER

 

‘ 93
Table “.6, is the only one ranked consistently last
by all groups.

Male and Female Bespogggs
Female subjects rated all the behaviors higher

than did the males. Yet. apart from this observation,
- both male and female responses were similar to each
other and to the total sample. Both sexes' rating of
"shares own shortcomings and problems" (G) accounts
for approximately half the range of the distributions,
as depicted by the shaded part of the bars in Table
h.?. All of the top four items ranked by the female
respondents are types of consideration, while males
ranked one structural behavior in their top four
choices. They ranked ”displays adequate knowledge and
ability” (B) third in order of importance.

Youth Guidance and "Other" Responses

These subjects show little difference from each
other and the total sample. As seen in Table “.4 and
Figure 4.2, "other" reapondents tended to score the
behaviors higher than did the Youth Guidance subjects.
Both Youth Guidance and "other" young people selected
only one of their top four choices as a type of ini-
tiation of structure: they differed only in the choice

of the behavior selected. Youth Guidance ranked

 

 

91+

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

on T. om NI. om T mm H- mm. N. mm. m.
, k
as. 3 $8.3 2 .m 9a. m Sm; mom. Emmi m
I Lil n Jr WV
man I. 8 I é m
mama u > a} r.» I _ 0: L M
oedema u m “MUD a
3:3 I I... .o w m .. «m J m.
oofioy u oz m
oosood u <d m
S
TIL
T om m+ cm T N mm H- mm N- mm m- d
2.8.3 39m mama omnoa SEN $m.~ fined m
own. I am _ fimfl- mama L m
. I. - A
0 wEm I
1.: .33 r a o mmom _ 3
Inchm cam - I I I ma
2:: e o o é o.
Ipponw 96 c was a w
mmpmsm: .3 _ unma mmdea _ M.
souooto 33% a
3.9m.» no H s
pssoem n W can: I mmzesm §§

 

 

 

 

 

angina.
mam: mo SodasnapuwHDIIkofrmsmm QWsmLmvTod ho godpamocamm suzow I 5.: mqmdfl.
JIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIHHW

 

95

”organizes well” (E) as fourth, while the ”other"
respondents placed "displays adequate knowledge and
ability” (B) as fourth. In both distributions the

top three behaviors were types of consideration.

Subgrbgg and Rural Responses

Subjects in these categories showed the most but
not great differences both within and across groups
with respect to ggglt leaders. The suburbanites, as
seen in Table 4.5. ranked "tries new ideas--open"

(I) sixth, while rural youth ranked it tenth, a dif-
ference of more than a standard deviation. Both sub-
urban and rural youth contrasted with the national
rank of seventh.

Rural youth ranked "lets young people take re-
sponsibility for important tasks” (C) fifth in con-
trast to suburban youngsters who placed this behavior
ninth. yet the mean scores were close. The national
sample ranked this item eighth with a closely related
mean score.

Rural youth. consistent with the rest of the na-
tional sample. ranked ”shares own shortcomings and
problems" (G) last. However, as can be seen in Table
#.8. they rated this behavior considerably lower than

did suburban youth. Thus, "shares own shortcomings

 

 

96

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

om m+ .am N+ . om H+ x mm a- om N. mm m.
I m
38.3 2.22: 33mm Swd mmINJ mom. Soon; w
and. .I. am .‘ l. RIM a _H ImIIo: l m
”Mmumommmu m Hmwd a to: L m
Loom n m “H H UMIQMU we
paso< u < , . alllmudmlld w.
oofioz .I. oz u
tosses u as o
J
3
,IL
om m+ om N+ am at M mm d. om N. mm m- d
mama Rea smmé 08A Exam mmsd 3H,...” m
28.-“ am . lg? . i I m
V JIImfllamI mama _ m
Amy :mEmanoam IIII I
cum mwSano ampesnmmI nu
Ipuosm go we.
mmamsm: an do w
Ipommum swamp I
mo apnoea u _ Hmumm I mmmBOE _ m
§\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\§\\\ s

 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

3332::
IHo> no soapsnaapmdoIIsOa>msom naswaoomoq go msoapnoopom zusow I m.d mqm<a

 

 

 

 

 

 

97

and problems" (G) accounts for over half the range of
the distribution for rural reapondents, in contrast to
less than a quarter for suburban subjects, as shown in
the shaded areas. .

Suburban youth scored positive and negative be-
haviors higher than did rural youth. (See Table u.5
and Figure h.3.)

All of the top four positive behaviors ranked by
the suburban youth are types of consideration. Rural
youth ranked the structural ”organizes well" (E)
fourth instead of ”displays adequate knowledge and
ability” (B) as the total sample.

One item in the negative scale, ”gets upset when
things don't go right" (R). was ranked last by rural
youth in contrast to every other group and the national
sample. All others ranked this behavior tenth in the
ggglt category. The differences in mean scores is not

noteworthy.

Research Question #3
The third question asked. ”What is the similarity
or dissimilarity in responses to 222; and ggglt lea-
ders?” Since this and the remaining two questions
focus upon the subject of agreement and difference,

two comments are necessary to indicate the frame of

98
reference used for approaching the subject. First,
the use of four or more as an indicator of contrast
(the rationale for which has been described above on
P. 76) has been also used to analyze the data for
the purpose of answering these questions.

Second, considering the size of the sample and
the nature of the data, the question of statistical
significance is less important than the demonstration
of the ranges of data in terms of standard deviation,
and thus the data are reported in that manner. However,
as a matter of general interest, Pearson Product Moment
correlations and analysis of variance were made on se-
lected sets of data, one of which is displayed in
APPENDIX P. Beyond this, analysis of significance was
not ordered.

As seen in Table n.1, both p12; and QQHLI leaders'
positive behaviors were rated above 3.0 with the excep-
tion of only two for p22; and one for ggglt. The be-
havior, ”shares own shortcomings and problems" (G),
was consistently ranked last for both leaders. While
this behavior also received the lowest mean score of
all other positive behaviors, the scores are still all
above midpoint (2.0) for each of the leaders.

Another observation can be made with respect to

this behavior. As seen in Table 4.6, the range of the

99

ggglt leader positive distribution lies from almost
one standard deviation below the mean to almost two
above. Yet, consulting Figure 4.4 and Table 4.1 re-
veals that half of that range is caused by the one
behavior,'”shares own shortcomings and problems" (G),
which effect is illustrated in the shaded part of the
' bar in Table 4.6. The other adult behaviors are
tightly gathered in a narrow range above the mean.
In contrast, the range of the Egg; positive behaviors
is considerably broader, being more evenly distri-
buted across the mean. i

The sample subjects ranked the same three posi-
tive behaviors as most important for both leaders.
The tOp-ranked behavior in each case was the same,
"listens" (D). The second and third for 212;, ”com-
municates" (A) and "understands concerns of young

people" (J), were inverted for adult. The top three

 

were all types of consideration.

The fourth-ranked behavior for 222; leader is
"seeks to help when needed" (F), also a type of consid-
eration. However, the fourth most important behavior
in ggglt leader was indicated as "displays adequate
knowledge and ability" (B), a type of initiation of
structure.

With respect to the 11 negative behaviors, "says

100

one thing, but does another--dishonest" (U) is ranked
as the most serious for both pug; and ggult leader.
Three other negative behaviors, "forces ideas on young
people” (Q), ”gets upset when things don't go right"
(R), and ”won't change~-old-fashioned” (V), were
ranked least serious for both pug; and éQBlE leaders.
They also appeared in the same order for both leaders.

A Pearson Product Moment correlation of the eight
scales showed a high correlation between the ugulz neg-
ative and gag; negative scales. The correlation for
the two scales was .7843 which is significant to the
.001 level. A strong correlation also obtained for the
ugulu and pug; positive scales. While the correlation
for the positive scales was not as high as for the neg-
ative ones, it was still significant at the .001 level.
Consistent with Douvan and Adelson's contention that
differences between the regions are not great, these
correlations stand out in the regional analyses as well
with only one exception. A multivariate analysis of
scale scores by region showed a significant (.0003)
difference between region 7 (Eastern Great Lakes) and
region 8 (Plains States) on the ugult negative scale.
Youth in region 7 rated these behaviors much lower
(such that the mean of all 11 behaviors was 2.7545)
than did the young people in region 8. The region 8

101

respondents rated the negative behaviors as consider-
ably more serious (with a mean of 3.2748) when seen in

their adult leaders.

Male and Fgmale Responses

Male and female subjects scored the behaviors

' higher for ugulp leaders than for pup; leaders. As il-
lustrated in Figure 4.1, the females rated all behav-
iors higher than did the males. The essential
similarity of both sexes, to the responses of the total
sample, is seen in Table 4.7.~ The shaded part of the
ugulp distributions reflects the effect of both gen-
ders' low rating of ”shares own shortcomings and prob-
lems" (G). Males and females rated this behavior more
than a standard deviation below the rest of the dis-
tribution. However, the males and females in the
sample did not make such a distinction with respect to
this behavior in the pug; category. As shown in

Table 441 all of the top four behaviors for pup; and
ggulp leaders are types of consideration with one ex-
ception. Males ranked the structural behavior, ”dis-
plays adequate knowledge and ability" (B), third for
ugulp leader instead of fourth, as in the total sample.

102

Youth Guidance and ”Other” Responses

”Other" respondents tended to score the behaviors

 

higher than did Youth Guidance subjects in both leader
categories. With respect to the behavior ”uses firm-
ness when necessary" (K), ”other” young people ranked
it fourth in importance for pup; leaders but only
eighth for guulp leaders. They still consider the be-
havior very important in their ugulp leaders, however,
giving it a mean score of 3.211 (in contrast to 3.300
for the fourth-ranked pug; category). The top three
behaviors for pup; and ugulp leaders are all types of
consideration as selected by Youth Guidance and
”other” respondents. Youth Guidance also selected a
type of consideration for the fourth rank for pup;
leader but a structural behavior, "organizes well” (E),
fourth for ugulp leader. ”Other" respondents ranked
”uses firmness when necessary" (K) fourth for pup; and
"displays adequate knowledge and ability" (B) fourth
for ugulp leaders, both types of structure.

8 b b and R al a

Both suburban and rural subjects were consistent
in their view of the behavior "tries new ideas--0pen"
(I) with respect to pup; and ggulp leaders. Suburban
young people ranked this behavior fifth for pup; and

103
sixth for uuulp leaders, while rural youth ranked it
ninth for pug; and tenth for uuulp leaders. In all
cases it was considered very important, having mean
scores of more than 3.0 (except for rural pggp, 2.994).

Suburban young peOple ranked "lets young people
take responsibility for important tasks" (C) low for
both puup leaders (tenth) and uuulp leaders (ninth),
though the mean scores are high (Table 4.5). Rural
respondents, on the other hand, ranked this behavior
tenth for pug; leader but fifth for uuulp leader, also
rating the behavior high. I

Rural respondents rated "shares own shortcomings
and problems" (G) more than a standard deviation lower
than the tenth ranked behavior for uuulp leader, as can
be seen in Tables 4.5 and 4.8. The rural youth paral-
leled the suburban young people with the ranking and
rating of this behavior for pug; leader.

Suburban youth scored positive and negative be-
haviors higher for both pug: and uuulp leaders than did
rural young people. Figure 4.3 and Table 4.5 illus-
trate and document this trend.

Suburban subjects' four top-ranked behaviors are
all types of consideration. Rural respondents on the
other hand ranked "displays adequate knowledge and

ability" (B) third for peep leader and "organizes

104

well" (E) fourth for adulp leader: both of these be-

haviors are types of initiation of structure.

Research Question #4

The fourth question asked, "In what ways is the
ranking of the behaviors for uuulp leader similar and
dissimilar with the behaviors seen by young people in
their own motheps?” The reader should recall that the
ranking of the behaviors was ordered according to which
is perceived as most IMPORTANT with respect to the
uuulp leader, and to which is most TRUE of pupuup.

The top-ranked behavior on the positive scale for
mothep is "uses firmness when necessary" (K). This
behavior was only ranked ninth in the uuulp leader
category, but the mean scores are quite similar, as
noted in Table 4.1.

The top-ranked behavior, seen as most important,
in éQBlE leaders is ”listens" (D), a type of consider-
ation. The top-ranked "uses firmness when necessary"
(K), seen as most true of motheps, is a type of initia-
tion of structure. 0f the tOp four behaviors indi-
cated as being most important in uuulp leaders, the
first three are types of consideration. 0f the top
four behaviors indicated as being most true of pupugpu,
two, the first and third, are structural.

105

"Understands my concerns" (J) was ranked second in
importance for uuulp leaders, yet this behavior was
ranked ninth by sample subjects as being true of their
mothers. Again, the mean scores are important. Even
though ”understands my concerns" (J) is ranked ninth,
it has a mean score of 2.887. In fact, all 11 of the
behaviors in the positive scale for mothep have mean
scores over 2.6.

The last-ranked behavior seen as true of puppgp is
the same as that ranked least important in uuulp lea-
der, ”shares own shortcomingsand problems" (G). The
mean scores are also similar.

This last discussed behavior is also involved in

another observation concerning the adult and moths:

 

distributions. As can be seen in Table 4.6, and more
specifically in Table 4.1, if it were not for the ex-
tended range of the uuulp positive scale caused by
”shares own shortcomings and problems" (G), which is
illustrated in Table 4.6 by the shaded area, these two
distributions would have a small overlap and almost be
bimodal.

With respect to the 11 negative behaviors, "says
one thing, but does another-~dishonest” (U) is ranked
first as the most serious for uuulp (and pugp) lea-
ders. By contrast the young people surveyed indicated

' 106
a perfect negative correlation (as far as rank is con-
cerned) on this behavior. They ranked it last as being
least true of their ugppgpg and with a national mean of
under 1.0!
Figure 4.4 shows another contrast between the pos-

itive and negative scales in the adult and moths;

 

categories. The figure depicts nine of the 11 negative
behaviors for uuulp leaders as being above 3.0, thus
indicating that the respondents hold these acts to be
quite serious. At the same time the subjects rated all
11 of the negative behaviors as relatively untrue of
their mothers, only one being above 2.0. This bimodal
distribution is also illustrated in Table 4.6.

Two negative behaviors, "gets upset when things
don't go right” (R) and ”won't change--old-fashioned”
(V), were ranked least serious for ugulp leaders. Yet
these same two were ranked first and second as being
most true of ugppgp. However, here again, the mean
scores are of key import. While these two behaviors
are ranked most serious, it is noteworthy that the
highest mean is only 2.119, and the other behavior,
”won't change--old-fashioned" (V), is well under 2.0
as are the other nine behaviors.

Essentially the same results obtain when the demo-

graphic variables are examined. However, a

107

multivariate analysis of differences among the scales
yielded one significant finding. A difference, sta-
tistically significant at the .003 level, exists be-
tween region 7 (Eastern Great Lakes) and region 8
(Plains States) with respect to the difference between
pupuup and uuulp regarding the undesirable behaviors.
I Specifically, the mean difference (pupuup negative
minus uuulp negative) for region 7 was -l.47l, while
the mean difference for region 8 was -l.9634. Check-
ing the regional means for the uuulp negative scale
reveals that region 8 had a noticeably higher mean
(3.2748) than did region 7 (2.7545), while the mujhgr
negative scales were similar for both regions. This
and the finding reported on pages 100 and 101 were the
only regional differences of significance, which

tends to support Douvan and Adelson's contention con-
cerning the similarities of regions in the continental

United States.

Male and Female Responses

Males and females showed similar responses with
respect to pupuup. The tendency of females to score
the behaviors higher than males for uuulu (and puup)
leaders is not found in_pgpugp_as is seen in Figure 4.5

and corroborated in Table 4.9. Nevertheless females

108
FIGURE 4.5 - Youth Perceptions of Mother and Father

Leadership Behavior--Mean Scores and Ranking by
Item of Male and Female Responses

4.0..
.8“
.5..
.IIJ.

RICO

“D
A J

0

<

<
3
H
0
>21:
UTJ

O
F'
wragx:
gDsz
2 vs
r*Io
on A)

C
"U
C:

- 1.0..
.8.
.6.
.m,’
.2.

on

I: vat
zr'

crogprsc

 

 

 

 

O
9’
(D
an
.b———————-——-———-—-—>——-——

FOB- Neg. P08. Neg. P08. . eg. 08. eg.

Male Female Male Female
MOTHER FATHER

 

109

 

 

TABLE 4.9 - Youth Parceptions of Mother and Fatger Leadership Behavior--
: ': :1 'z b _; : _':n:l; .° ; ;

     

Mother Father

 

 

ugle Zumale Mulu Eem§1§__
P 3.161 c K 3.31? i K 3.11? i K 3.344 1
K 3.085 i P 3.128 c B 3.059 i B 3.193 1
D 3.042 c B 3.042 1 C 2.867 c H 2.953 c
A 3.027 c C 3.037 c E 2.848 1 E 2.951 1
B 3.010 D 2.981- H 2.733 C 2.918
C 3.001 A 2.978 F 2.7 5 P 2.638
E 2.953 H 2.969 A 2.686 D 2.604
J 2.872 E 2.951 D 2.669 A 2.545
H 2.871 J 2.915 I 2.553 J 2.319
I 2.771 I 2.739 J 2.547 I 2. 07
O 2.637 0 2.655 0 2.183 G 1.978
R 2.145 R 2.087 R 2.141 R 2.029
V 1.746 V 1.691 V 1.803 V 1.87?
M 1.71? M 1.387 M 1.69? M 1.657
0 1. 41 0 l. 26 T 1.48? 0 1.310
Q 1. 33 Q 1.319 0 1.449 T 1.241
T 1.332 P 1.139 Q 1.444 Q 1.183
L 1.3 a L 1.124 N 1.263 N 1.068
P 1.29 T 1.081 L 1.241 P .981
N 1.221 N 1.018 S 1.211 S .970
S 1.20? S 1.015 P 1.192 L .956
U 1.046 U . .873 U 1.135 U .878
c = consideration 1 = initiation of structure
Item Sym-
g bol Behavior
1 A Communicates 2 M Doesn't relate to young
2 B Displays adequate know- people
ledge and ability 3 N Doesn't show concern for
3 _ C Lets young people (me) young people (me)
‘ take reaponsibility 4 0 Doesn't trust young people
4 D Listens (me)
5 E Organizes well 5 P Favors some over others
6 F Seeks to help when 6 Q Forces ideas on young
needed people (me) -
7 G Shares own shortcomings 7 R Gets upset when things
and problems don't go right
8 H Shows sense of humor 8 S Looks down on young
9 I Tries new ideas-~0pen people (me)
10 J Understands (my) con- 9 T Puts own interests ahead
cerns of young people or group
11 X Uses firmness when 10 U Says one thing, but does
necessary another-~dishonest
11 V Won't change--old
l L Doesn't follow through-- fashioned

dishonest

 

 

110
did score the tOp positive behavior, "uses firmness
when necessary” (K) notably higher than did males. The
two genders differed most in the ranking of the top
four behaviors. The males' selection included three
types of'consideration while the females' contained two
types of initiation of structure, one of which, "uses
firmness when necessary” (K), was top-ranked as in the

total sample.

Youth Guidupue und "0thep" Responses
As reflected in Table 4.2, these two subgroups

differed more than any of the other demographic vari-
ables. Youth Guidance respondents ranked "shows sense
of humor” (H) third in contrast with ”other” subjects
who ranked this behavior seventh and with the national
sample where it was ranked eighth for ugpuup. The
scores of all three, however, are within one standard
deviation from the mean of the scale. By comparison,
Youth Guidance ranked this act ninth, while ”other”
subjects and the national sample ranked it tenth for
52311 leaders. The scores in this latter category are
not notably differentiated.

Youth Guidance respondents ranked ”displays ade-
quate knowledge and ability" (B) seventh for pupugp in
contrast to third for "other" young people and third

lll
nationally. The rankings were similar for uuulp
leader.

”Other” youth ranked "lets me take responsibility
for important tasks” (C) first for gupuup with a mean
of 3.057.‘ (See Table 4.10.) The national sample con-
trasts with this value by ranking the behavior fourth
with a mean of 3.017 and with Youth Guidance subjects
who ranked it eighth with a mean of 3.030. Here is
another example of the importance of checking the mean
along with the ranking. A difference of seven places
in rank appears to be quite large, and is not unimpor-
tant, but a mean difference of .027 between the first
and eighth ranked behaviors mitigates that difference.
With respect to uuulp leaders the ranking and rating
is similar for the national sample, Youth Guidance and
"other” young peOple.

Youth Guidance subjects split their top four
choices with regard to considerate and structural be-
haviors of uguugp. The first and fourth ranked be-
haviors are types of initiation of structure and the
second and third are types of consideration. The
"other” subjects' tOp four are also split evenly,
though with the top two being types of consideration.
For uuulp leaders both Youth Guidance and ”other”

respondents' top three were considerate with the

1L12

 

 

TABLE 4.10- Youth Perceptions of Mother and Father Leadership Behavior-Mean
R

 

 

tem of U ban and Volun o Guid d ”Other”
Mother Father
Youth Youth
"Otpep' Quiduugg ”Otpup'
K 3.313 1 C 3.057 c K 3.050 i K 3.125 1
P 3.181 c P 3.035 c H 2.906 c 8 2.899 1
H 3.139 c B 3.035 1 P 2.829 c C 2.872 c
a 3.122 1 x 3.034 1 B 2.829 i a 2.862 1
A 3.120 D 2.988 D 2.77? H 2.813
D 3.080 8 2.920 C 2.755 D 2.696
B 3.075 H 2.860 A 2.739 P 2.587
C 3.030 A 2.837 ' J 2.734 A 2.392
J 2.988 J 2.655 E 2.724 I 2.392
I 2.916 I 2. 32 I 2.671 J 2.387
6 2.820 G 2. 1 G 2.281 C 1.938
a 2.264 a 2.126 R 2.123 , a 2.075
I 2.025 V 1.770 I 2.080 V 1.962
0 1.982 H 1.721 V 2.014 H 1.825
V 1.939 0 1.517 N 1.914 T 1.662
N 1.866 Q 1.333 0 1.899 0 1.658
L 1.788 N 1.291 T 1.814 N 1.312
P 1.783 T 1.26? L 1.714 Q 1. 38
T 1.782 P 1.256 U 1.65? L 1.412
S 1.728 L 1.161 P 1.616 P 1.215
Q 1.646 8 1.034 Q 1.468 8 1.162
U 1.582 U .966 S 1.420 U.1.125
c = consideration i = initiation of structure
Item Sym-
# bol Behavior
1 A Communicates 2 M Doesn't relate to young
2 B Displays adequate know- people
ledge and ability 3 N Doesn't show concern for
3 C Lets young people (me) young people (me)
take responsibility 4 0 Doesn't trust young people
4 D Listens (me)
5 E Organizes well 5 P Favors some over others
6 F Seeks to help when 6 Q Forces ideas on young
needed people (me)
7 0 Shares own shortcomings 7 R Gets upset when things
and problems don't go right
8 H Shows sense of humor 8 8 Looks down on young
9 I Tries new ideas--open people (me)
10 J Understands (my) con- 9 T Puts own interests ahead
cerns of young people or group
11 K Uses firmness when 10 U Says one thing. but does
necessary another--dishonest
11 V Won't change--old
Doesn't follow through-- fashioned

H
t"

dishonest

 

113
fourth structural. The fourth-ranked behavior for
Youth Guidance subjects was "organizes well" (E).
and for "other” respondents it was "displays adequate
knowledge and_ability” (B) as did the total sample.

0n the negative scale Youth Guidance subjects

ranked "doesn't show concern for me” (N) fifth with a
mean of 1.866 for mgthggg "other" respondents ranked
it sixth with a mean of 1.291 and the national sample
ninth with a mean of 1.137. By contrast Youth Guid-
ance ranked this behavior third (2.988) for adult
leaders while "other” ranked it second (3.278) and the
national sample third (3.285). The reader should
again notice the difference in the mean scores which
are much higher in agglt leader where the reference is
to the degree of seriousness this behavior has for
this leader. The lower scores for mother refer to how
true the behavior is perceived to be of her.

Youth Guidance ranked "forces ideas on me" (Q)
tenth in contrast to fifth for ”other” and the national
sample with respect to mgthgr. The rankings and rat-
ings were similar with regard to ggglt leaders.

As seen in Figure 4.6. Youth Guidance subjects
tended to rank behaviors higher than did the "other"
respondents for ggth_§. This finding contrasts with

the prior observation for adult leader where

114
FIGURE 4.6 - Youth Perceptions of Mother and Father

Leadership Behavior--Mean Scores and Ranking by Item of
Urban and Voluntary Youth Guidance and "Other" Responses

“.00 1

08'“
.61)
.4.»

I

I

I

I

I

l

I

.21» F I

I
BQOlP---—-.— n--- ......

J

o 1’ I
.60 I
I
gun. '
.21D :
200'”. I
I

r33<

CCD’UDZ

v

. 100‘

O
L
f
.-—-——-——--------—“--“----_—-w--

 

.b-——-—-—-—’-——

 

 

 

L's—"w 4 TM
08. eg. Pos. Neg. 703.. eg. 08. eg.

Youth Youth
Guidance 892922" Guidance 192523"

MOTHER FATHER

 

. 115
(Figure 4.2) "other” youth tended to rank the be-

haviors higher than Youth Guidance young peOple.

Suburban and Rural Responses

suburban and rural subjects were similar in
their responses pertaining to EQEQQI- The latter.
however. tended to both rank and rate the desirable
behaviors higher than did the former. as can be seen
in Figure 4.7 and Table 4.11. By contrast suburban
youth scored both positive and negative behaviors
higher than did rural young people for ddulu leaders.
(See also Table 4.5 and Figure 4.3.)

Suburban subjects ranked "lets me take responsi-
bility for important tasks” (0) third for EQEEEI- The
national sample ranked this behavior fourth and rural
respondents seventh. By contrast, suburban young
people ranked this behavior ninth for 22212 leader
while the national sample ranked it eighth and the
rural youth fifth.

Rural respondents ranked two behaviors which are
types of initiation of structure first and fourth with
the second and third being types of consideration for
udthdn. Suburban subjects also split their four tap-
ranked behaviors in the same manner, the first and

fourth being types of initiation of structure, the

116
FIGURE 4.7 - Youth Perceptions of Mother and Father

Leadership Behaviors--Mean Scores and Ranking by
Item of Voluntary Suburban and Rural Subjects

“.00

1......__..”_.._.--
£9
HI

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

C)
c..
H'IJ
(3‘
3,5

:1)
:13

e
#3
83 <
(DO rap 3

Z

N
O
5’
m
“U
m - -

' 1.00

Cth-B

cm *9 1" <3
*s 60
t“
c:
’13

e60

 

.p-_------------—-------------

 

IF——----—a-

 

0,
Pos. Nag. Pos. Neg. Fos.l Neg. TostEg.
Suburbag Rural Suburban Rural
MOTHER FATHER

 

117

 

 

THEE 4.11 - Youth Perceptions of Mother and Father Leadership Behavior--
Mean Scoresfiund Ranki b Ite of 01 '

 

 

Mother - Father
Marina. _nur.s1_ Suburban. ML
K 3.191 1 K 3.222 1 K 3.291 1 B .l i
P 3.078 c P 3.200 c B 3.200 1 K 3.1;; 1
c 2.952 e D 3.109 c C 2.978 c C 2.976 c
8 2.928 1 B 3.075 1 B 2.972 1 H 2.806 c
D 2.883 3 3.040 H 2.900 3 2.734
B 2.8Z2 A 3.029 P 2.678 A 2.706
J 2.8 9 C 3.028 D 2.669 D 2.698
A 2.847 H 2.955 A 2.622 F 2.692
H 2.810 J 2.881 J 2.603 J 2.641
I 2.685 I 2.841 I 2.502 I 2.45
G 2.631 G 2.619 G 2.135 G 2.09
R 2.043 R 2.114 R 2.023 R 1.976
V 1.691 M 1.760 V 1.756 V 1.688
M 1.368 V 1.608 M 1.56? N 1.420
Q l. 51 Q 1.486 Q 1.356 0 1.268
0 1.426 0 1.434 T 1.284 T 1.218
L 1.175 T 1.161 S 1.099 S 1.04?
P 1.163 P 1.149 N 1.042 P .9 6
8 1.145 N 1.109 L .965 L .9 7
N 1.024 S .977 U .962 N .888
U .963 U .841 P .923 U ..865
c = consideration 1 = initiation of structure
Item Sym-
# bol Behavior
1 A Communicates 2 M Doesn't relate to young
2 B Displays adequate know‘ people
ledge and ability N Doesn't show concern for
3 O Lets young people (me) young people (me)
take responsibility 4 0 Doesn't trust young people
4 D Listens (me)
5 E Organizes well 5 P Favors some over others
6 F Seeks to help when 6 Q Forces ideas on young
needed people (me)
7 G Shares own shortcomings 7 R Gets upset when things
and problems don't go right
8 H Shows sense of humor 8 S Looks down on young
9 I Tries new ideas-~open people (me)
10 J Understands (my) con- 9 T Puts own interests ahead
cerns of young people or group
11 K Uses firmness when 10 U Says one thing. but does
necessary another-~dishonest
11 V Won't change--old
Doesn't follow through-- fashioned

p
t"

dishonest

 

118

second and third consideration. On the other hand
with regard to ddult leaders, all of the top four
behaviors ranked by suburban youth were considerate.
Rural young people ranked considerate behaviors for

the top three, but ranked a structural behavior fourth.

Research Question #5

The fifth question asked, "In what ways is the
ranking of the behaviors for ddult leader similar and
dissimilar with the behaviors seen by young peeple in
their own fathdpd?" Again, the reader should keep in
mind that the ranking of the behaviors was ordered
according to which is perceived as most IMPORTANT
with respect to the 29213 leader, and to which is most
TRUE of 32532;.

The top-ranked behavior on the positive scale for
fatheg is ”uses firmness when necessary" (K). This
behavior was ranked only ninth for adult leader, but,
as can be seen in Table 4.1, the mean scores are close.

The top-ranked behavior, seen as most important.
in 22211 leaders is "listens” (D), a type of consider-
ation. The tep-ranked "uses firmness when necessary"
(K). seen as most true of fathers, is a type of initia-
tion of structure. Of the top four behaviors indi-
cated as being most important in 29211 leaders, the

. 119
first three are considerate. Of the top four be-
haviors indicated as most true of fathdzs, three are
structural: only the third is a type of consideration.

”Understands my concerns" (J) was ranked second
in importance for ddul; leaders, yet this behavior
was ranked ninth by respondents as being true of their
-£££h£2§. Again, the mean scores are important. Even
though "understands my concerns" (J) is ranked ninth,
it has a mean of 2.530. In fact, all 11 of the be-
haviors in the positive scale for gdludg have mean
scores over 2.0. I

The last-ranked behavior seen as true of gggug;
is the same as that ranked least important in udulg
leader, "shares own shortcomings and problems” (G).
The mean scores, however, are divergent, being sep-
arated by more than two standard deviations. Both
£2213 leader and gulhdz_have much lower mean scores for
this behavior than do 92322; and pug; leader, which can
be seen in Table 4.6. The shaded areas of the ddul;
leader and father distributions illustrate the degree
of separation of "shares own shortcomings and prob-
lems” (G) from the other behaviors.

With respect to the 11 negative behaviors,
"says one thing, but does another--dishonest" (U) is
ranked first as the most serious for 22312 leaders,

‘ 120
having a mean score of 3.318. By contrast the young
people in the survey indicated a perfect negative
correlation (of rank) on this behavior, ranking it
last as being least true of their fathegs with a na-
tional mean of 1.018.

Figure 4.4 shows another contrast between the
I positive and negative scales in the 59212 and 222222
categories. It shows nine of the 11 negative be-
haviors for ddul; leaders as being above 3.0, thereby
indicating that the subjects consider these acts as
serious. At the same time they rated all 11 of the
negative behaviors as relatively untrue of their
$512221. only one being above 2.0. This bimodal dis-
tribution is also illustrated in Table 4.6.

Two negative behaviors, ”gets upset when things
don't go right" (R) and "won't change--old-fashioned”
(V), were ranked least serious for udult leaders. Yet
these same two were ranked first and second as being
most true of lulud; (as of udthdg). However, again
the mean scores must be noted. While these two be-
haviors are ranked most serious, it is important that
the highest mean is only 2.092, and the other behavior,
”won't change--old-fashioned" (V), is well under 2.0

as are the other nine behaviors.

121

Male and Female Responses

Male and female subjects were quite similar in
their responses with respect to lduudu. On most of the
positive and all but one of the negative behaViors,
however, the males rated the items higher than did the
-females, the former thus indicating that they see these
behaviors as more true of their fdthezs than do the
latter. The clearest example of this tendency of the
females to rate £2353; lower is shown on Table 4.? re-
garding the last-ranked behavior, ”shares own short-
comings and problems” (G), which is ranked more than
two standard deviations below the mean for males but
is more than three standard deviations below the mean,
and off the chart, for females. The shaded areas,
again, refer in each case to the degree of difference
between the mean scores of the last-ranked behavior and
the next highest in the distribution. By contrast,
females scored both positive and negative behaviors
higher for ddult leaders.

Both males and females included only one of their
four top-ranked behaviors as a type of consideration,
and both ranked it third for £21h2I- They differed
only in their choices. Males selected, as did the
total sample ”lets me take responsibility for important

122
tasks" (C), while for females it was “shows sense of
humor” (H). For ddult leader males ranked the struc-
tural "displays adequate knowledge and ability“ (B)
third; the other three of the top four behaviors are
considerate. Females, on the other hand, chose all
considerate behaviors as their four tOp-ranked leader

acts.

Yough duidduge dud 'dthez” Respdnseg

Youth Guidance and "other" subjects showed the
most but not great differences with regard to £53221-
Youth Guidance respondents ranked "seeks to help when
needed” (F) third in contrast to the national sample
who ranked it sixth and the ”other” youth who ranked
it seventh. At the same time the ”other" subjects
ranked "organizes well” (E) fourth, as did the national
sample, yet in contrast with the Youth Guidance re-
spondents who ranked it ninth.

Regarding the last-ranked item, "shares own short-
comings and problems" (G), more of a discrepancy can be
observed as is illustrated in Table 4.12. Consistent
with their trend of scoring both parents higher than
did the ”other" young peOple. Youth Guidance respon-
dents rated this behavior with a mean of 2.281 as dis-
tinct from the ”other” subjects' 1.938 for fdludn.

123

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

am m+ am ~+ om T. N am H. 8 N- am?
lawn.sv mme.n mmo.~ oa~.~ Hom.a Nam.o mma.o
«3. .u am. 4 _ .3 u mum“. _ _ dance _ J .
sense: I o: I I
sesame n as . F 0 EL
3:2 u 2 Eu
EU
am m+ om ~+ am u+ N cm H- mm N- mm m-
sam.m cam.m mom.n wme.m mmm.~ «mm.~ mso.~
3mm... am 1 fl - 6H - .mmmm - _ 1 -
.uesuo. u o f .

 

 

eosmcaso sumo» u
“my :msofipoaa cam
m adsoouaosm: 23o
moamcm: an copoem
Ium swamp .8 £525

wu§§§§§§§&&&&&

 

 

 

 

 
 

 

 

 

 

BJOIABQOH HAIIVOSN

“£0149q98 HAILISOd

 

 

 

noncommom cheapo: can eonmddsc 39:0» unmansao> and

. sent: 90 sodusnaspmanIaoa>mn m adamaocmonmo msoauneoaehrmpsow I

 

 

‘ 124

The former score is more than two standard deviations
below the mean but the latter more than three. Youth
Guidance and ”other” rankings of this and the rest of
the behaviors with regard to ddulu leader were essen-
tially similar. Both groups rated the behaviors
higher for ddult leader (consistent with the gener-
ally higher ratings for £32.11). Youth Guidance
rated ”shares own shortcomings and problems” (G)
almost two standard deviations higher than they did
for m, and "other” rated this behavior almost
three standard deviations higher than for fathgr.

Responses of Youth Guidance young people were
divided evenly among the four top-ranked behaviors for
fdther, two being types of consideration and two types
of initiation of structure. The "other" youth, how-
ever, had three of the tOp four as types of structure.
For udult leader the three top-ranked behaviors se-
lected by both Youth Guidance and "other" respondents
are all types of consideration, and the fourth choice

of both subgroups is a type of structure.

subuzbdu and Rugal Resuouses

Suburban and rural young people were very similar
in the IQEBEE category. Suburban youth did tend to
rate the behaviors higher than did rural young people

. 125
with only three exceptions in the positive scale and
one in the negative. Again, the clearest example, as
illustrated on Table 4.8, is seen with the last-
ranked behavior on the positive scale, ”shares own
ashortcomings and problems” (G), which suburban subjects
ranked almost three standard deviations below the mean,
(but which rural respondents ranked more than three
standard deviations below the mean and even off the
chart. Paralleling the generally higher scores for
ddulg given by the other subgroups, both suburban and
rural respondents rated the 52213 behaviors higher than
for Ilihlto For example, as illustrated in the shaded
part of the distributions on Table 4.8, both suburban
and rural ratings of "shares own shortcomings and
problems" (G) for ddult are over two standard devia-
tions above those given for 221222-

Suburban youth ranked only one behavior as a type
of consideration in their top four in contrast with
rural youth whose top four behaviors included two types
of initiation of structure and two types of considera-
tion for lutudx. By contrast, suburban subjects' tap
four behaviors for ddult leaders were all types of con-
sideration as were the top three of rural respondents.
The latter ranked fourth a type of initiation of struc-

ture for adult leaders.

126

A trend can be observed in the subgroups' rating
of behaviors in the four leader categories. In most
cases the subgroups who rated behaviors high for the
2222 and adult leaders tended to rate them low for

moths: and tutudg.

_ exception of the desirable behaviors for mothet and

As seen in Table 4.13, with the

both scales for fathe , the subgroup which had the
highest mean scores for the most behaviors in the

scales for 2222 and adult had the lowest for mother
and fatngt.

 

 

TABLE 4.13 - Groups Which Tended to Rate

Behaviozs Higher
PEER ADULT MOTHER FlTflgfi

 

 

 

 

SUBGROUP Female Female Male Male
SCALE Both Both Negative Both
"Other” "Other" Youth Youth
SUBGROUP Guidance Guidance
SCALE Both Both Both Both
SUBGROUP sub- Sub- Rural Sub-
urban urban urban
SCALE Both Both Both Both

 

 

It will be noted that analysis of the voluntary

and nonvoluntary as well as church-related and

127

nonchurch-related groups has not been reported. These
subpopulations are not included because statistical
analysis of these and the age variables with respect
to their scale scores showed no significant differences.
Furthermore, due to the confounding elements identified
‘in Chapter I, and the limited usefulness of the infor-
mation for religious education in the church, the de-
cision was made to limit the inspection of the findings
for these variables to an examination of the scales.
The data, however, are being kept on file should any
need arise in the future for the information they could

provide.

Tepidal Genetdlizations
The foregoing has been an identification of the

most pertinent data that were discovered in the effort
to answer the research questions. The concluding sec-
tion of this chapter will summarize the most important
findings and describe some other generalizations which
may also be drawn from the data.

The generalization of the findings from this sam-
ple to other 14 - 18 year-olds is limited. However, a
relatively high degree of confidence in the findings
derives from the rigors of the design, the size of the
sample and the situational and geographic breadth of

128

the study. But since randomization was not possible,
generalization should be tentative and to populations
with backgrounds similar to the sample. More wide-

spread generalization awaits another research project,
building upon the present base but with a design that

will permit more confident generalization.

Generalizations About Egg; Leaders
The data reveal seven particularly important
findings. Again, "ranking" refers to the order of the
behaviors based on their mean scores. ”Rating” refers
to the mean scores, per se.

1. Ligtguiug is rugged as the most impoztgut pad:
ldddet bdugvioz. This leader act was ranked
first by the national sample and by all sub-
groups. Its rating was well above 3.0 on the

Likert scale by all groups.

2. donsidetate behgviors gre tanked as more impor-

tgut thau behaviots whidh initiate stgugture.
All four of the top-ranked behaviors in the

total sample are types of consideration. The
same is true for the subgroups with only two
exceptions. ”Other” young people ranked a
structural behavior fourth, and rural youth

ranked a structural act third.

129

3. All of the desipable and undesirable behaviors
gpe pgtdd as impOptant. The behaviors re-
ceived different rankings in each of the sub-

groups, though most of the behaviors varied
within three positions of each other unless
noted otherwise above. However, the mean
scores were all rated above the halfway point
on the Likert scale which indicates a high
degree of importance for each of these be-
haviors as perceived by the respondents.

4. Hypodrisy is ranked as the most serious un-

desirable behaviop. Hypocrisy, or ”saying
one thing, but doing another-~dishonesty" (U),

traditionally a serious tgug pug of leaders in
the eyes of youth, was the top-ranked negative
act. It also received the highest rating of

the negative scale.

5. degles pated thp desipable and undesipable be-
puvlops up mope ippoptdpt than did pglds. The

former consistently rated the 22 behaviors
higher in terms of mean score than did the lat-
ter. Otherwise there was no notable dif-

ference between the genders.

6. ”Delinguent' youth rated the desirable and un-
desirable behaviops as less important than did

130
the ”average” youth. The "delinquent" youth,
though, rated none of the 22 behaviors as un-
important or even of just ”little" impor-
tance. By rating the behaviors with lower
mean scores than those given by the other
youth, they indicated that they are not as con-
cerned with most of the behaviors as the

others are.

7. dubuptgu ydutu pgted the positive and negg-

tlyg bdpguidpp up pope impoptgpt than did
zu:gl_yduth. The mean scores of the suburban

subjects were higher than those of rural re-
spondents. The higher means occurred on both
the desirable and undesirable scales for pug;

leader.

Generalizations about Adult Leaders

Eight particularly important findings with respect
to pdult leaders emerge from the data. These obtained
from analysis of the data from the total sample are
identified first, followed by observations from the
subgroups.

l. Llsteulug is pankdd as thg most impoptant adult

ldgdd: pungviop. This behavior was ranked

first with a mean score of over 3.5 on the 4.0

3.

4.

. 131
scale. All subgroups rated it over 3.3, and
all ranked it first except for "other" youth

who ranked it second (yet with a mean of

over 3.5). .
Qonsldgrgtd bphaviOIs up: punked up pope id-

0 an han st tu al behavio s. The three
top-ranked behaviors in the total sample and
in all but one of the subgroups are considerate.

Only males ranked a structural behavior third.

gharipg one's own shortcomings and problems is
thd least importdpt gdult leadep behgvlop.

This behavior was ranked least important (elev-

 

enth, of all 11 on the positive scale in the
total sample and for all subgroups. Neverthe-
less, it was rated above midpoint on the Likert
scale by the total sample and all subgroups
thus indicating its importance in the respon-
dents' perception.

fiypogrisy is pdpked as the most sepious undu-
sizable behavior. The negative behavior,
"says one thing, but does another--dishonest"
(U), was ranked first on the undesirable scale
by the total sample and half of the subgroups.
The behavior was rated above 3.0 by the whole

sample and by all subgroups.

5.

132
Thu positivd dud neggtivd behaviops are rated

pore important and more serious when seen in
udult lgaddys thgp when seep ip peep leadeps.

Only two behaviors, both on the negative scale,

received lower mean scores for adult leader

 

than for pddp leader. The same emphasis is
generally true for the subgroups.
Fe a as d e ositive d n tive be-

v i o d s ious did
udldd. Female subjects rated all 22 behaviors
higher than did male respondents. The ranking
of the behaviors, however, was quite similar

for the two genders.

”Del uent" 0 ea 1 I ated t e ositive
dud pgggtlyd bppaviOIs us less impoptgpt tugp

did tug "gvepgge” youth. Youth Guidance respon-

dents generally rated the behaviors lower in
terms of mean score than did the ”other” sub-
jects with respect to udult leaders only two
exceptions occured in the positive scale and
two in the negative. The two groups were simi-
lar in their rankings for both scales.

ban 0 a d he osi ive and no a iv

bungviops gs pope impoptant than did rupal
ydutn. Each of the 22 behaviors received a

133

higher mean score from the suburban subjects.

All 11 behaviors in the positive scale and all

but two in the negative were rated over 3.0 by

suburban youth.
Generalizations About the Relationship of Adult Leader

Behaviors to Moths; Behaviors
Nine especially important findings can be listed

with respect to the relationship between ddult leader
and pptgpp behaviors. It will be noted that the rela-
tionships are mostly in the form of dissimilarity

rather than of alikeness.

l. Llstdnipg is tanked most important in adult
leadeps but using firmness when negessapy is
yanked most tpue of mothep. Both behaviors
were rated over 3.0 for ddult leader and
pdtpdp, even though the top-ranked in each
category was ranked lower in the other.

”Uses firmness when necessary” (K) was ranked
ninth for ddult leader, and "listens" (D)
was ranked fifth for pdthdz.

2. 1112 turde top-[guns bguavidrs fop gdult
leaddp ups all donsidepate, while two of the

to thre o 0 he a e s u a1. ”Lis-
tens" (D), ranked first for adult leader, is

a type of consideration. ”Uses firmness when

134
necessary" (K), ranked first for uptudy, is
a type of initiation of structure. The other
behaviors for ddult leader were "understands
concerns of young people (J) and ”communi-
cates" (A). The others for uptpdp were the
considerate "seeks to help when needed" (F)
and the structural “displays adequate know-
ledge and ability" (B).

3. dugping ong's own shortpomings and problems is
{dated ad leudt important lp adult leadep dud

s of o . This behavior was ranked
eleventh, least, on the positive scale for both
udult leader and uptudp. The mean scores for
both are similar and both above 2.5.

4. flypoppipy id yanked as most seyious for adult
leader but least true of mothep. ”Says one
thing, but does another-~dishonest' (U) is
ranked first as the most serious of the nega-
tive behaviors for gdult leader but last, or
least true, for pdtndp. A notable difference
in mean scores is also evident. The mean for
the top-ranked "says one thing but does an-
other--dishonest" (U) for ddult leader is
3.318, while the mean score for this same be-

havior, ranked last for uothdp, is .975.

7.

 

fey gdult leadep but not vepy tpug fop mothez.

The mean scores on all of the 11 negative be-

haviors for ddult leader were above 2.7, thus
ih the "very serious" range on the Likert scale.
The mean scores for each of these behaviors
with respect to hdthdp, however, were all be-
low 2.0 except for the top-ranked, ”gets upset
when things don't go right" (R), which was
2.119. The distributions of these means were
completely bimodal.-

The two hehaviops panked least sepious for

d 1t d ked mos t u fo ot .
”Gets upset when things don't go right" (R)
and ”won't change--old-fashioned” (V), ranked
tenth and eleventh for ddult leader, were
ranked first and second respectively for hp-
thdz. The mean scores are notably higher for
these two behaviors in their ranking for gdult
leader than they are for pdthdp.

nggled gated bdth sgdles highs: than pglds f9;
Wigs
sgulg highdp fdp uothdz. Females rated every
behavior on the desirable and undesirable

scales higher than males for adult leader. By

 

136
contrast. for mother males rated all 11 be-
haviors of the negative scale higher than did
the females. The behaviors were rated quite
similarly in the mother positive scale by

both genders.

”Average" youth rated both scdles highdr thgh
”delinquent” youth for adult leaderll but "de-
linguent“ youth rdted both sgales higher for

mother. "Other" subjects' mean scores for the

 

22 behaviors were higher than those given by
Youth Guidance respondents with the exception
of two in the positive scale and two in the

negative for adult leader. 0n the other hand,

 

Youth Guidance rated all but one of the 22 be-
haviors higher than the "other" for mother.

§uhurban youhg pQOple rated both spales higher
thah rural youth for adult leader, but rurgl

youhg people rgtpd both spales higher for me-
th r. Suburban subjects rated all 22 behaviors

with higher mean scores for gdult leader than
did rural respondents. However, for hdthdr
rural sample members' mean scores were higher
on all but one of the behaviors in the positive
scale and on all but five of the behaviors in

the negative scale.

13?
Generalizations About the Relationship of Adult Leader
Behaviors to Father Behaviors
Nine findings which are particularly important
can be listed with regard to the relationship between

adult leader and father behaviors. As with the rela-

 

'tionship between adult and mother behaviors, the com-

parisons are more in the form of dissimilarity than of
similarity. However, it will also be noted that seven
of the nine observations which follow correspond to the

nine in the preceding section.

1. Listening is ranked most important in adult
ldgder but uding rirmness when nedessary is

rankgd mogt true of father. Both behaviors
were rated over 2.6 for gdult leader and t_-

thdr, even though the behavior ranked first
in each category was ranked lower in the
other. ”Uses firmness when necessary" (K)

was ranked ninth for adult leader, and "lie-

 

tens" (D) was ranked seventh for father.

2. All thred tap-ranked behaviors for adult led-
der ard gonsiderate, while two of the tap

three for father are strudtural. "Listens" (D),
ranked first for adult leader, is a type of

consideration. "Uses firmness when necessary"

(K), ranked first for father, is a type of

‘ 138
initiation of structure. The other behaviors
for ddult leader were ”understands concerns
of young people” (J) and "communicates” (A).
The others for father were the structural
”displays adequate knowledge and ability” (B)
and the considerate ”lets me take responsi-

bility for important tasks" (C).

3. Sharihg one's own shortcomihgs and problems
is ranked gs least important in adult leader
ghd least trud of father. This behavior was

ranked eleventh, last, on the scale of desir-

 

 

able behaviors for both ddult leader and rd-
th_r. The mean scores for both, however, are
separated by more than half a point on the
Likert scale, yet are both above 2.0.

4. Hypogrisy is ranked as most serious for adult
leader but least trudyof father. ”Says one
thing, but does another-~dishonest” (U) is
ranked first as the most serious of the unde-
sirable behaviors for gdult leader but last, or
least true, for tdth_r. A notable difference
in mean scores is also evident. The mean for
this behavior is 3.318 for pdult leader, while
the mean score for tdthdr is 1.018.

5. The negative behaviors are all rated as serioup

139
£9! adult leader hut not very true fur father.
The mean scores on all of the 11 negative be-

haviors for adult leader were above 2.7, thus

 

in the "very serious" range on the Likert

seale. The mean scores for each of these be-
haviors with respect to father, however. were
all below 2.0 except for the top-ranked "gets
upset when things don't go right" (R), which
was 2.092. The distributions of these scales

were completely bimodal.

6. The two bdhaviors ranked least serious for

adult leader dre ranked most true for fgther.
”Gets upset when things don't go right" (R)

and ”won't change-~old-fashioned" (V), ranked
tenth and eleventh for gdult leader, were
ranked first and second respectively for lg-
th_r. The mean scores are notably higher for
these two behaviors in their ranking for adult

leader than they are for father.

7. Females rated both sgales higher than males for

adult leader, but males rated both sgales
higher for father. Females rated every be-

havior on the positive and negative scales
higher than did males for adult leader. By

contrast, males rated six of the 11 behaviors

140

on the positive scale and all but one on the
negative scale higher than did the females.

8. "Average" youth rdted bothfigpules higher thuh
"delinguent" youth for adult_legderr put "de-
llhduent" yguth rgtdd both scules higher for
father. ”Other" subjects' mean scores for the
22 behaviors were higher than those given by
Youth Guidance respondents with the exception
of two in the desirable scale and two in the
undesirable for ddult leader. On the other
hand, Youth Guidance subjects rated all but
four of the behaviors on the desirable scale
and all of the behaviors on the undesirable
scale higher than did the "other" sample mem-
bers.

9. Suburban young people rdted poth suales higher
than rural youth tor adult leader and for fa-
thdr. Suburban subjects rated all 22 behaviors
with higher mean scores for gdult leader than
did rural respondents. In a reverse of the
trend noted above where one set of subjects
scored the behaviors higher in one category and
lower in another, the suburban subjects also
scored the behaviors on both scales higher

than did the rural reSpondents for father.

141
Suburban youth rated seven of the 11 desirable
behaviors with higher mean scores and nine of
the 11 undesirable behaviors with higher means

than did rural young people with regard to

father.

Other Generalizations
While examining the data in order to answer the
research questions, a number of findings were discov-
ered that do not apply to the questions but which are
important with regard to related issues. Three such
observations have been identified, and their presenta-
tion below concludes this chapter.

1. More data were available for:peer and adult
leaders than for udther dud father. For analy-
sis of findings the computer was programmed to
reject all cases in which a reapondent failed
to provide a reaponse to more than five items.
For pddr and gdult leaders the average number
of invalid cases reported by the computer was
28. However, for mother the number rose
sharply to 52, and for fathgr it more than
doubled to 123 out of 1536 (85).

2. helpihg when needed was seen as more true of
pother than father. ”Seeks to help when needed"

142
(F) was ranked second for mother in contrast
to sixth for father in the frequency counts
for the total sample. Furthermore, the mean
for this behavior was more than a standard
deviation higher for mother. These observa-
tions generally held as well for each of the
subgroups.

3. Regional subgroups' ranking of the 22 behav-
iors paralleled the ranking of the other duh;
groups. Confirming the conclusions of Douvan
and Adelson as well as others, young people
in the regional groups reported similarly to
the total sample. Where statistical signifi-
cance emerged it was observed to agree with
the other findings. The rare exceptions have
been noted in the text above.

The foregoing has been an identification of the
most important data obtained by the design described in
Chapter III. What do the data mean? What conclusions
can be drawn from the findings? These questions to-
gether with some implications for further research are

the focus of Chapter V.

CHAPTER V
THE CONCLUSIONS

This study sought answers to five research ques-
tions. The first and second questions asked whether
young people view some of the 11 positive and 11 nega-
tive behaviors as more important on any kind of consis-
tent basis with respect to their pddr and gdult leaders.
The third question asked what similarity or dissimi-
larity existed in responses concerning pddr and udult
leaders. The fourth and fifth questions asked what

ways the ranking of the behaviors for adult leader was

 

similar and dissimilar with the behaviors seen by young
people in their own mothers and fathers. The preceding
chapter has indicated the findings of the study with
respect to these questions. The following will indi-
cate practical implications of the findings for each

of the areas explored in the research questions and for
the selection and training of leadersu New questions
and suggestions for further research will conclude the

chapter.

143

144

What the Data Mean
While not presuming to be an exhaustive list, the
following practical applications can be seen as impli-
cations of the findings discovered in the attempt to
answer the research questions. This first section fo-
4 cusses Specifically on those implications which pertain

to peer leaders.

Conclusions Regarding Egg; Leaders
The meanings identified here pertain to what
young people perceive as a good pddr leader. At
least three implications can be listed.

1. Peer ladders should be good listendrs. It is
very important to young people that peers who
are exercising leadership over them provide
them with Opportunities to express their needs
and concerns. The close proximity of three
other types of consideration, all indicated as
most important in the study, suggests that the
pddr leader listen empathically and act in ac-
cord with the message received. A pddr leader
should spend more time in drawing out others
as to how they are doing rather than in talking
about himself/herself. The consistently last-

place ranking of "shares own shortcomings and

2.

3.

145
problems" (G) is an additional indication that
youth want the subject of conversation with
their pddr leader to be more on themselves than
on the leader or on something else.
Peer leaders should emphasize behaviors that
urdoriented to pupplelrdther than to tddh.
Behaviors that are types of consideration are
perceived as more important in pddr leaders.
Therefore, if a pddr leader wishes to be ef-
fective, he or she should act accordingly,
whereby the majority of his or her behaviors
ought to involve relating to the followers in
such ways as listening, communicating, and
seeking to help when needed as a result of un-
derstanding the concerns of young people. He
or she should be seen doing these behaviors at
each meeting of the youth group rather than
being observed spending time arranging the
chairs, lining up the peeple to bring next
week's refreshments or setting up the pro-
jector and screen.
Thd peer leader's words and deeds should matgh.
Hypocrisy is considered more serious than most
of the positive behaviors-pug; leaders perform.
To be effective the pddr leader should make

146
sure that his or her actions are consistent
with the verbal message he or she is communi-
cating. ”Practice what you preach” is essen-
tial for the pddr leader. The Biblical
teaching of the Apostle James is still true in
the application of this conclusion to church
education, "faith without works is dead"
(James 2:26). In the light of Jesus' state-
ment that ”you will know them by their fruits"
(Matt. 7:20), a.2§££ leader in a church youth
group should modela lifestyle and values con-
sistent with those commanded in the Bible and
held to be important in the church.

Conclusions Regarding ldult Leaders
The meanings identified in this section pertain to
what young people perceive as a good adult leader. At
least four implications can be listed.

1. Adult leaders should bg good listehers. It is
very important to young peeple that their adult

 

leaders take time to allow them to express
their needs and concerns. While they are mak-
ing this expression the leader should listen
attentively and not be engaged in other activ-
ities, checking his watch to make sure the

147
meeting starts on time or looking around at
other people or objects. The leader should
listen empathically and try to draw out his/
her followers as to how they are doing rather
than in talking about himself and what he
thinks concerning certain subject matters.
The consistent ranking of ”shares own short-
comings and problems” (G) last of the 11 posi—
tive behaviors is an added indicator that
youth want to talk about themselves rather
than something else when conversing with their

adult leader.

Adult legderp should emphasize behaviors thgt
gr; orightdd to people rather than to tash.

More behaviors that are types of consideration
were ranked among the highest than were types
of initiation of structure. Thus, the udult
leader who wishes to be effective should con-
sciously make the majority of his behaviors
relational in nature, such as listening, under-
standing and communicating. He should plan to
spend most of the time at each meeting of the
youth group in relating to his followers.

While it is easier for the ddult leader to do

such structural acts as room arrangement,

148
setting up displays and planning future events
with those to whom he has given certain respon-
sibilities, and to take meeting time to do such
things, he will be more successful in the eyes
of the youth if he delegates as much work as
he can to others and takes time to do most of
his structural work on other occasions. These
procedures are likely to also be perceived as
demonstrating the leader's adequate knowledge
and ability which was the structural behavior
youth in the sample indicated as most important
in their ddult leader.

3. Thu adult lgadpr ghould shard hip own short-
gopings dud problems disgriminately. While, as

noted above, young people want the leader to
listen to them more than to talk about himself,
the high rating of the behavior ”shares own
shortcomings and problems" (G) shows that youth
consider it important to know how the leader
copes with difficulties. This observation both
supports and illustrates the youth counselling
literature (e.g., Richards, 1972) which indi-
cates the desirability of youth leaders sharing
how they have caped with a problem similar to
that a client has been talking about. As

149
Richards states, however, this sharing by the
udult leader should take place after an appro-
priate amount of listening, understanding and
communicating so the young person can be sure
the adult knows what he is thinking and feeling
(p. 142). The lower mean score for this item
indicates the degree of emphasis this behavior
should receive in the leader's relationship
with his followers. It should come after, not
before. a lot of other communicating.

u. The adult ladder's words and deeds should matgh.
Hypocrisy is considered more important than
most of the positive behaviors. and more than
all of the negative behaviors, that udult lead-
ers perform. If he/she is to be effective
with his/her followers, the gdult leader should
avoid a conflict between what he/she says and
what he/she does. With regard to the latter
deeds of emission and commission need to be
remembered. If, for example, a leader tells
the youth that it is important to be loving and
caring toward everyone and then proceeds to ig-
nore some of the young people himself, he will
be violating this principle. The leader can be

seen as a hypocrite in the eyes of his/her

150
followers on the basis of what he/she doesn't
do as well as by what he/she does if these
behaviors are in conflict with what he/she
says. ”Do as I say but not as I do” repre-
sents a serious shortcoming in the eyes of many

young people.

Conclusions Regarding Comparisons and Contrasts

Between Peer and Adult Leaders

The implications of the findings identified in the

following section refer to similarities and dissimi-

larities youth make in what they view as important in

their peer and adult leaders. At least six implica-

tions can be listed.

1.

Peer and adult ladders should perform all the
poditive behaviors in order to be most effeg-
tlyd. All 11 of the positive behaviors are
considered by young people to be important.

and they want to see their pddr and ddult lead-
ers function accordingly. While the behaviors
themselves vary in degree of importance among
young people, the youth still view them all
with high regard.

222! ghd adult ldaders should make listening to

their followers thelr top priority. Young peo-
ple want their leaders to listen to their

151
concerns. Leaders who want to be successful
will therefore avoid allowing program con-
straints to take time away from talking with
their followers. The leaders should encourage
their group members to share their concerns

and demonstrate a desire to hear and to help.

3. Peer and adult leaders should spend more time
oh behaviors oriented to people than to tasks.

Young peeple prefer leaders to show more con-
sideration than concern for structure in their
behavior. The top three leader acts are per-
ceived to be listening, understanding and com-
municating, and these apply to both pddr and
udult leaders. It should be readily evident

to the youth that their leaders are spending
more time with them than with program details.

4. Adult ldaders should be hor§_doncerned with

task oriented behaviors than should peer legd-
3rd. Young people expect the ddult leader to
demonstrate adequate knowledge and ability more
than pddr leaders. This behavior was the only
structural behavior indicated as important in
the four top-ranked behaviors. Youth recognize
that structure is important, and they want it,

but they want it more in their adult leader

152
than in leaders of their own age.

5. Peer and adult leaders should avoid all the
negative behaviors in order to be post eff -
tlyd. All 11 of the negative behaviors are
considered by youth to be seriously undesir-
able. They therefore want to see little or no
evidence of these actions in their leaders.
2222 and ddult leaders who don't want to "turn
their kids off" will avoid functioning in these

undesirable manners.

6. Peer and adult leaders should be especially
pgrgful to matdh their words ghd ddeds. Of all

the negative leader behaviors, hypocrisy is
considered by youth to be the most serious in
any leader. All leaders should demonstrate in
action the prOpositions taught in the Bible if
they are claiming to teach and value these
concepts and principles.
Conclusions Concerning the Relationship Between ldult
Leader Behaviors and Muthdr and thher Behaviors
In certain ways it is possible to see to what de-

gree preferences for adult leaders are viewed by youth

 

as true of their mothdrs and fgthers. Both mothdr and
fathdr will be discussed together in this section since

the important conclusions for each are the same.

153

An ideal situation would obtain if it were pos-
sible to observe certain rankings for ddult leader as
present in mother and father. It would then facili-
tate, for example. the selection of ddult leaders. As
can be seen in the first pilot study, the same three
traits ranked highest for ddult leader are the three
ranked highest, and in the same order, for mother.
Thus, one could conclude that to recruit an ddult
leader who will be effective in working with high
school young people, he should look first to mothers.

Such is not the case with the rankings in the
data produced by this study. As seen in the generali-
zations about the relationship of desired udult leader
behaviors to perceived mother and father behaviors in
Chapter IV, the relationships with regard to ranking
are all dissimilar with the exception of the last-place
"shares own shortcomings and problems” (G). Neverthe-
less, the rankings as they are and the ratings (mean
scores) of the behaviors do lead to at least two impli-
cations.

1. Both mothers and fathers are appropriate as
adult leaders. All of the 11 desirable behav-
iors young people view as important in their
udult leaders are seen by them as true in

their pothdrs and fathers. Furthermore. all

154

ll of the undesirable behaviors, which youth
see as serious in their ddult leaders are not
generally true of their parents. Corre-
Spondingly, the two undesirable behaviors
youth see as most true of mothers and fathers
are those which are the least serious of the
undesirable behaviors performed by gdult

leaders.

2. Mothers and fathers should share thdlrgown_pr&
perienges about as mugh as is eupdcted of adult
ldadgrs. Young peOple want their ddult leaders
to share their own problems and concerns but
only to a limited extent, indicating that the
other 10 behaviors are more desired. Corre-
spondingly, they see their parents as doing
such sharing less than the other 10 and about
as frequently (indicated by similar mean
scores) as desired in their ddult leaders, with
the possible exception of father who shares his
concerns considerably less than indicated for

the others.

Mappings for Leader §elegtion

The preceding has been an identification of prac-

tical implications of the data discovered in the

. 155
attempt to answer the research questions. The focus
of the foregoing was on those areas of youth leadership
relative to the questions. In addition, the data yield

implications for leader selection as well.

Conclusions for Selecting Eddr Leaders
The following implications are of importance to
these churches and parachurch organizations, such as
YFC, which are placing an emphasis on providing cppor-
tunities for helping young peOple grow and develop
through interaction with leaders their own age. At
least four implications can be listed.
1. Look for youth who listen more to their peers
thuh talk about themselves and whut they thihk.
Since young people want their pddr leaders to
listen to them, the organization which wants
to use youth in leadership positions will want
to look for those who demonstrate such ability.
This approach does not mean that listening em-
pathically cannot be taught as a skill, but it
is reasonable to assume that this leadership
behavior will be more often utilized more ef-
fectively if a recruit can be obtained who

already has been performing in this manner.

2. look for youth who are people-oriented more

156
thah task-orientdd. Young people who are ob-
served to be more interested in talking with
their peers about how they are doing than
about which school is going to beat which
school for the football championship, about
whether the principal will resign before the
end of the year, or about their extracurricu-
lar activities, are prime considerations for
pddr leadership. Recruiters of pddr leaders
should expect a large amount of talk such as
that just listed and a similar amount of talk
about oneself, for, as Kohlberg discovered
(Chapter I), adolescents are still in a rela-
tively egocentric stage of development.
Nevertheless, some young peeple do stand apart
from others their age in the amount of time
they spend talking about such matters and in
the degree of interest they display toward
others' well-being. This study suggests they
are most likely to provide effective pddr
leadership.

3. Look for youth who perform thd desirable ghd
gvoid thg uhdesirdble behdvlors. Since all the

behaviors on each scale are rated as very im-

portant by young peeple, it is essential the

157
preposed 2§££ leader act accordingly. The
high mean scores indicate that youth take each
of the 22 behaviors seriously, and unless one
who aspires to lead his peers performs the
positive acts and avoids the negative ones he
will most likely be ineffective. Therefore,
the recruiter of pddr leaders can use the 22
behaviors as a checklist in observing young
peeple in action while seeking to determine
who demonstrates these abilities. The highest
ranked behaviors, of course, should be given
tap priority: all else being equal, the selec-
tion should be made on the basis of which youth
performs the highest ranked behaviors most fre-
quently.
Ask the girls who would be a good peer leader.
The tendency of girls to rate the behaviors
higher than the boys do indicates that the
former have stronger feelings about the behav-
iors of their pddr leaders. Their pddr
leader should have a high degree of homophily
with what the girls value if he is going to
be successful in relating to the female gender.

Thus, an informal sociometric inquiry among

158
the girls is likely to be very helpful in
identifying an effective peer leader.

Conclusions for Selecting Adult Leaders

 

The findings also yield implications for the re-
cruitment of gdult leaders, the following of which
suggestions will likely result in more effective lead-
ership. At least five implications can be identified.

1. Look for adults who listen to others more than

tglk about thdmselves and thdlr Opiniong. Ob-
serve the preportion of time potential ddult
leaders spend in listening to those with whom
they are in conversation. A recruiter should
also try to participate in such conversations
unobtrusively, that is, without any indication
of his objective, and notice if the prospective
youth leader is listening in an empathically
caring manner or in a more disinterested mind-
wandering way. Observation should also be made
as to the amount of time a potential udult
leader spends in talking with young people.
Does he search them out or at least talk with
them when in proximity to them? Is he inter-
ested in what they might have to say? These

questions provide answers that serve as

' 159
indicators of the degree to which he is likely
to listen in the manner the young people want.

and need.

2. Look for adults who dre more peeple-oriented

3.

than task-oriehtgd. The subjects of conver-
sation which potential gdult leaders engage in
are indicators that are likely to be useful in
determining whether a prospective leader will
be peOple or task-oriented. Is an gdult who
is being considered as a youth leader spending
more time trying tounderstand what a person
is saying and how he feels about what he is
saying? Or, does such a person spend more
time talking about meeting production quotas,
explaining how to balance the budget and com-
plaining about the disagreeable weather? The
importance of this implication is difficult to
overestimate. Young people are less interested
in the program an ddult leader has planned for
a given occasion than with how he treats them
when they come to the meeting.

00 fo ad ts w o fo m the abl d
gydld thg uhddgirdbld behavlors. As each of
the 11 behaviors on the desirable and each on

the undesirable scale are rated as very

‘ 160
important by young people, the proposed ddult
leader should act accordingly. Since the youth
take the 22 behaviors seriously, an ddult
leader will be effective to the degree he per-
forms the desirable and avoids the undesirable
behaviors. Thus, a recruiter can use the 22
behaviors as a checklist for determining which
prospective adults function as desired and
which do not. Furthermore, the potential ddult
leader should be rated higher on this checklist
than the potential pddr leader. Since youth
see the desirable and undesirable behaviors as
more important and more serious in their ddult
leaders than in their ppdr leaders, they are
expecting more from the former. Parents are a
good starting point, for youth see both pdthdrd
and tgthdrd as performing desirable and avoid-
ing the undesirable behaviors. Since both
parents are seen as having an emphasis on
structural behaviors, care must be taken, as
the primary emphasis in ddult leadership should
be on acts of consideration. However, parents
vary and what is true of them in the home can-

not be assumed to be the same in a youth group.

4. Ask the girls who would be a good adult leader.

161

The higher rating of the desirable and unde-
sirable behaviors for ddult leader by girls is
indicative of their stronger feelings with
reapect to how the leader should perform. The
ddult leader's behaviors should parallel the
expectations of the girls if he is going to be
effective in working with them. An informal
sociometric inquiry among the girls as to which
adults they would like for an ddult leader
often yields successful results in the experi-
ence of this writer.

5. Leah for a mother or g father if an gdult
leader is needed for disgipline probleus.

Young peOple's viewing their parents as having
a high degree of structure in their behaviors
indicates that such leaders would likely per-
form well in groups where youth sometimes be-
come unruly. While it is not at all certain
(and cannot be concluded from the data) that
all parents will perform in a youth group as
they are perceived in a parental context at
home, this writer has found that parents fre-
quently function well in such environments.
The findings in this study thus appear to have

uncovered one reason why that happens.

162

Meanings for Leader Traihing
The preceding identified practical implications

of the data for the selection of leaders. In addition,
the data obtained in the study yield implications for
helping leaders to develop their skills in relating to
' young people. At least three implications can be
listed.

1. The basig purridulum should inplude pomponents
for devlepihg pommuniggtidn skilld. In order
to accomplish the mission which is part of each
Christian's life purpose (Matt. 5:13-16;
20:19-20), leadership is performed. When young
people are being taught in the context of
church education, they are being equipped for
such leadership. Therefore, at regular inter-
vals on a formal basis, and through nonformal
programs, the curriculum for children and youth
should provide opportunities for helping the
learners develop the ability to listen empath-
ically and employ the other positive behaviors
skillfully.

2. T basi ur i l s cvld 1 de a at o

duphasis on the nedessdry link between vdlugs
judgmdht dud vdlues agtioh. One of the key

163
messages of the Bible is the necessity of link-
ing word and deed (Matt. 7:20: James 2:26).
The Hebrew word, ddhdr, and the Greek word,
ldgdd, both mean word and deed as an insepar-
able unity. The believer is to thus make his
actions parallel to his judgments, which is a
principle esteemed by youth as discovered in
this study. At specific points in the curric-
ulum the importance of this conceptualization
and areas of practical application should be

emphasized.

3. huggership should be taught as involvihg

pddpld-orientdd agtivities as well as task-
oriented aptivities. Leadership in church

education is frequently conceived as produc-
tion oriented and highly structural. Such a
concept is especially true with regard to
church teaching. Many teachers feel very un-
comfortable if they are not talking or struc-
turing learning activities. The findings of
this study, however, suggest that teachers and
other youth leaders should spend most of their
time in behaviors that are types of considera-
tion. Therefore, the leadership training pro-
gram ought to include an emphasis on the

164

importance of considerate leader acts and help

in developing those abilities.

Othdr Qohglusiohs

The foregoing has been an identification of impli-
cations of the data obtained in this study for the
'purposes of answering the research questions. The
first section listed the implications for the research
questions themselves, following which implications were
presented for the related matters of leader recruitment
. and education. The following section contains a list
of implications for other subjects which can be seen in
the findings discussed in the fourth chapter. At least

three other conclusions can be drawn from the data.
1. Egrdhts ghould hp dhgourggdd in thdir relutloh-

phips with thelr tdep-agers. Young people view
their parents in a favorable light, seeing the

desirable leader behaviors as true of their
parents and the undesirable behaviors as not
very true of them. This message is not often
heard or seen in accounts of parent-teen re-
lations communicated today in the medias in
fact, it is quite the Opposite. Parents are
portrayed as existing in perpetual conflict
with their adolescent offspring. Yet this

165
conclusion from this study was corroborated
by Gallup who stated that his polls show the
existence of similar Opinions by today's
young people toward their parents.* However,
this conclusion is perplexing to many parents
when they hear it, for they respond that they
only receive negative criticism from their
youngsters. The explanation Of this phenom-
enon may lie in Erikson's research (Erikson,
1963, pp. 216 ff.). The Harvard psychologist
has develOped a theory of human growth which
conceptualizes man as going through eight
basic stages. The stage in which 14 to 18
year-olds function is referred to as identity
formation, so-called because the human or-
ganism at this stage is forging a self-concept
in which he is trying to become a psychologi-
cal adult and to dissociate himself from child-
hood in every way possible. He, therefore, is
less likely to want to communicate to his
parents in any way that he is dependent upon
them or to suggest that the filial relationship
which existed in childhood is still intact.

 

*Conversation with Dr. George Gallup, Jr.. Oak
Brook, Illinois, November 15, 1979.

166

Thus, the adolescent avoids communicating that
he perceives his parents positively, which
would affirm them and his relationship with
them. Independence is more readily perceived
through taking an opposite position. However,
when anonymity is preserved, as in the present
study, the youth can feel safe to express his
views as they are. Hence, he can say that
hother and fdther are good and that he is
pleased with them and their behavior without
the risk they will then assume everything is
the same as it always was and try to keep

treating him as a child.

2. Thu legddr shduld egphadize ggrtgin behdviors
i i o d to a i e ula

objddtives more guigkly and effedtively. This

implication extends not only to individual
teachers but also to educational administrators
who must choose what kind Of teacher tO put
with what kind Of youth to obtain which objec-
tives. For example, recognizing Maslow's
findings concerning the necessity for a secure
environment in order for social and personal-
ity develOpment, a class with a high percentage

of ”energetic” young peOple will require

167
leader behaviors with a considerable amount of
structure in order for these social and per-
sonality needs to be met. The leader himself
should thus employ these behaviors. However,
even prior to the develOpment of this situa-
tion, the educational administrator, e.g..
the Director of Christian Education in a
church setting, should use what Fiedler calls
”organizational engineering" (1967, p. 255) to
match the leader who is strong in structural
behaviors with such a class. "It is essen-
tial," states Fiedler, ”that we realize that
poor performance in a leadership position is
likely to be as much the function of the lead-
ership situation which the organization pro-
vides as it is the function of the individual's
personality structure” (p. 260). In curric-
ulum construction this is all a part Of what
should constitute the needs assessment upon
which objectives are established (Tabs, 1962,
p. 12). In this manner the leadership behav-
iors, which are such key elements in the suc-
cess of the educational institution's
objectives (of. Chapter I), will facilitate the

attainment of those purposes instead of

3.

168
mitigating them.

Adult ldgders should not use an authoritarian

styld as their gdneral orientation. As men-
tioned in Chapter I, the Evghgeligal News-

letter (1977) reported that young people may
be ”looking more for authority figures who
forthrightly state, 'This is the way it is.'”
The article cited a return to the use of

large youth rallies similar to those used in
the middle Of this century. It indicated that
one reason for the return to this form of
youth ministry might be a desire on the part Of
young peeple for leaders who use an authori-
tarian approach. If this were the case one
would expect the ranking and rating of "forces
ideas on young people" (Q) to indicate ”not
strongly undesirable.” However, this behavior
was ranked ninth, and the mean score was 3.068,
thus being in the "very serious” range. Fur-
thermore, the top-ranked behaviors are types
of consideration rather than initiation of
structure. For these and other reasons iden-
tified in APPENDIX A, this study does not sup-
port widespread use Of an authoritarian ap-

proach to youth ministry.

169

Resegrch Questions for Further Study

The present study has been descriptive in design.
As such it is unable to draw conclusions as to cause
and effect. Since one of the purposes of descriptive
’research is to generate areas for further investiga-
‘tion, the following suggestions have grown out of the
present study. These questions are stated as they are
to indicate their measurability, but the technical
precision has been omitted, for that must await the
specific problem statement and design required by the
study which will treat them.

1. Will the adult ledder whosd initiation of
gtrudture behaviors outwdigh higlher consid-
grate hdhaviord dggomplish more objeptives
under pertain renditions thdhpthe one who
funptions mostly in a ponsiderate manner uhder

the same renditions? Generally speaking, as
indicated in this study, the emphasis on con-

sideration will likely yield the more effective
accomplishment of Objectives in relating to
high school youth. However, while the con-
siderate approach is useful as a general
framework, specific instances (such as a class

with youth who are Often unruly) seem to

170
mitigate that orientation, and empirical sup-

port would be most desirable.

gravided the Opportunity to remain anonyuous,
will young peeple give family life a positive

I

rutlhg? The high rating of desirable behaviors
for both uother and tdthdr as well as the low
rating of undesirable behaviors for each

parent indicates a generally favorable view of
these important relationships within the fam-
ily. This finding suggests that family life as
a whole in America may not be as negative an
experience in the lives of most people as is
often presented to be the case by much of the

publicity currently being produced in the media.

Will youth rate mother and father equal in

authority with respedt to depisiohs ponderning
dhildren? The high ranking and rating of be-

haviors which are types Of initiation of
structure for hdthdr indicate that young peo-
ple see her as having considerable involvement
in decision making with respect to the chil-
dren's activities. This awareness combined
with the substantial amount of the time tgthdr
is away from the family leads to the conclusion

that mothdr makes many of the decisions

171
concerning the children. While this con-
clusion is not new, one implication which
should be explored is the effect this develop-
ment has on parental leadership functions and
relationships, specifically the strong indica-
tion that ppthdr does not relate to fathdr as
second in a chain Of command with respect to
these decisions in the view of youth. Hence,
pother may be seen as not accountable to
futhdr in this area, and a democratic rather
than autocratic relationship with regard to
parental leadership may be characterizing the

American family.

Additional Suggdstions for Eurther Researdh

Due to the nature Of empirical research which re-

quires a specific focus on a particular problem,

thorough treatment of important related issues is not

possible. These areas must thus be undertaken by sub-

sequent investigations. The present study has brought

to light at least five such areas in addition to the

foregoing research questions which should be explored

by continuing research.

1. Do youth see the behaviors ranked and rated as

most importdht and serious for 29;; and adult

_ 1'72
leaders as true for thosd leadgrs? Investi-
gation of this question could involve a design
similar to the one in the presentation with
only a change of the rubrics on the instrument.
In effect the subjects would be asked to do
for their pddr and udult leaders what those in
this study were asked to do with respect to

their parents.

2. Tu whgt ddgrde do the behavior; of their pur-
dhts ddppgrd to whdt yduth vidw as most impor-

 

bdhavior? As with the first suggestion, a
possible design for such a study would involve
a change in rubric on the present instrument.
Thus, youth would be asked to indicate for each
parent which of the behaviors is most important

and serious instead of which is most true.

3. To what degree is therd a disprgpancy bdtween

how youth vldw thdir pgrentd dud how purgnts
vidw thepdelydg? The findings and conclusions

reported in this study must be considered as
indications of how youth view their parents and
not necessarily as evidence of what is in fact
true concerning their mothers and fdthers. A
possible design for Obtaining information

he

173
leading to the answer of this question would
be to survey the parents of the youth whose

Opinion would be investigated.

What gre the rdasons as to why youth IQEEOQQ

A

ldss td gugstiohs pertainihg to their fathers?

As reported above, the average number of cases

 

where respondents failed to answer at least

six items on a given scale for pddrd and

udultd was 28. For.pdthdr the number increased
sharply to 52: for fdthdr it more than doubled
to 123. This Observation seems important in
itself, for the reasons could have considerable
implications for American family life and fam-
ily education in the church. A possible way to
Obtain this information would be to identify
the most commonly reported reasons in several
pilot tests with an Open-ended question per-
taining to the rationale for not responding to
items for tgthdr, Those reasons could then

be included at the end Of such an instrument

as the one used herein in a closed item format
where respondents would indicate which of them
is most characteristic of their decision.

Would any diffdrendes be Observed by stratify-
ing the populdtion on the basis Of the

174
following variables? At least five other
demographics chould have been used as orga-
nizers for data analysis. Each of the fol-
lowing is a potential influence on the

perception of leader and parent behavior.

a. A subjegt's experidnde of strohg negativg
affept on the day Of the survey. A ques-

tion should be asked on the instrument
relative to whether the respondent had any
experience on the day of the survey which
bothered him/her to any considerable ex-
tent. Such an experience could be an
argument with his/her parent(s), a break-up
of a romance, or a failure Of a test.

b. A suhjegt'p pergeption of the datg-gatherer.
An Opportunity should be provided for the
respondent to indicate how he/she perceives
the data-gatherer. A positive affect toward
the one who is distributing and collecting
the instrument, giving the instructions,
and observing the responses could produce
different results from a respondent who has
developed a negative affect toward the one
conducting the survey (who is performing

certain leadership functions in his/her data

175
collecting).

c. Nuuber Of subjedt's siblings. Building
upon the common observation that children in
a given family view their parents' treatment

' Of them differently, it would be instructive
to see what differences exist, if any, be-
tween the Oldest and the youngest (and any
others). Therefore, a question should be
added to the instrument which asks the re-
spondent to record how many brothers and/or
sisters he/she has and his/her position
‘among them.

d. De e of latio s i . It would
still be useful for church educators to
know whether (and. if so, to what degree)
any differences exist between church related
and nonchurch related young peeple with
respect to their perception of leader be-
haviors. One way to Obtain this information
without the confounding of data due to
church subjects in the schools would be to
ask the respondents to check on the instru-
ment whether they attend any church youth
group. In conjunction with this question

could be a scale on which the subjects

‘ 176
would also check their degree of involve-
ment with such a group.
e. Subjdgt's age. The views of younger high

school youth (14 - 15 years Of age) may

‘ differ from the perceptions Of their older
peers (l6 - 18). The data for this anal-
ysis already exists from the present study
and should be used.

Of course it is to be hOped that the present study
will be replicated. In the interests of the scientific
pursuit of what is, man must continually use all avail-
able tools in the objective attempt to Obtain under-
standing Of the realities which constitute his envi-
ronment. As crucial as is the leadership of those who
comprise the future, such investigation has special

urgency.

APPENDIX A
The First Pilot Study
Muskegon, Michigan

November 12, 1977

The respondents in this study were presented with
two slips Of paper, One green-~on which in eight dif-
ferent sections were written the eight positive traits,
and the other pink--on which in eight different sec-
tions were written the eight negative traits. The
group was told to rip the eight sections of each slip
into separate cards, so each slip would represent one
(trait.

They were next each given the sheet (Figure Al)
upon which they were asked to record their rankings
Of the eight positive and eight negative traits for
each of the categories on the sheet. In sections five
and seven they were to only identify the tOp four of
all sixteen traits. In sections six and eight they
were asked to write yes or no as to whether they were
living with the parent whose traits they had ranked
in the preceding section. In these spaces they were
also asked to indicate their age and their sex. With
only a couple Of exceptions everyone provided all the
data requested.

A major concern in designing the instrument was
to make sure that each term, especially withregard
to the leadership trait cards, was clearly understood
by the age group for which the instrument was designed

(l4 - 18 years Old). The eight positive and eight
177

178

 

 

FIGURE A1 - Scoring Sheet for the Ranking of Traits

 

I. IIIIAT Is 2. NHAT CAN MAKE A 3. IIIIAT IS IIPORTANT I. WHAT CAN NANE AN

INPORTANT IIIEN PERSON (ABOUT NI WHEN AN ADULT ADULT A- POOR

A PERSON ABOUT AGE) A POOR LEADS LEADER OP

GE 5 LEADER TEENAGERS TEENAGERS

NOST NOST MOST MOST
IMPORTANT SERIOUS _ IMPORTANT SERIOUS _
LEAST _ LEAST — LEAST _ LEAST ‘—
INPORTANT SERIOUS IMPORTANT SERIOUS

 

5. WHAT IS MOST
IMPORTANT
ABOUT HY
"OTHER

7. HHAT IS MOST
IMPORTANT ABOUT
MY FATHER

 

VALUES DEVELOPMENT EDUC

ATION PROGRAM -- Michigan

 

State University

 

 

 

 

179

negative traits of the Gamelin study were reworded
(except for ”understands" and "phony") in terminology
geared to the level of high school youth. The way
the new terms were decided upon was to present a
sheet containing the eight positive and eight negative
terms from the Gamelin study to two different groups
'of Grand Rapids, Michigan teenagers. The sheet had
the definitive phraseology beside each of the eight
positive and eight negative terms which Gamelin used
in his study to indicate the meaning Of the 16 factors.
Some additional words and phrases which are part of
the contemporary language of high school youth in the
United States were also included in the definitive
section opposite each Of the 16 traits. The youth
were then asked to select one word or phrase for each
of the 16 traits, from either the original 16 terms or
from the definitive statements concerning the traits,
which best (most accurately and meaningfully) communi-
cated that concept in their understanding. The orig-
inal terms and their counterparts for this study are
listed in Table A1.

The precautions concerning the control of poten-
tial causes of invalidity and unreliability identified
above with respect to the national study were also

followed in the Muskegon pilot but for two exceptions.

180

 

 

Rank

1

TABLE Al - Traits which Church Youth Like and

Gamelih

Concerned,
Encouraging

Receptive,
Communica-
tive

Understand-
ing

Lively

Competent

Helpful,
Involved

Mature,
Secure

Open-minded,
Flexible

Dislike in their Leaders
Gamelin

Reworded

Rewarded

Respects my Domineering Forces ideas

ideas

Easy to
talk to

Understand-
ing

Sense of
humor

Able to
lead

Willing to
become
involved

Uses good
judgment

Open to new Distrustful

ideas

Patronizing

Unrelating

Immature

Disinter-

on 118

Looks down
on us

Doesn't com-
municate

Dull (not
fun to be
with)

Selfish
Doesn't
seem con-
cerned
Phony

Doesn't
trust us

 

 

First, some observer bias is present due to explanations

that had to be made in the conference setting during

which the data were collected.

External validity is thus

affected in that generalizability is limited to the ex-

tent that other youth may not have the awareness created

by these explanations.

limited due to the membership of the sample.

Second, generalizability is also

The most

181
that can be said with much confidence is that the
findings hold for all those present at the meeting dur-
ing which the data was collected.

The Researph Findings

For analysis the raw data were statistically
’weighted in order to give each item a common basis for
comparison. The weighting procedure used for each

analysis is indicated in each accompanying table.

Peer Leadership

Ability to lead is clearly the most important con-
cern youth have for their peers. ABLE TO LEAD was
ranked "most important" with WILLING TO BECOME IN-
VOLvn, UNDERSTANDING and RESPECTS MY IDEAS being placed
in the second, third and fourth ranking levels respect-
ively. There does not appear to be any significant
difference between males and females concerning peer
leadership competency items with regard to the number of
responses to a trait (in contrast, for example, to the
”trust” item in Table A3). There is, however, a notice-
able difference between females and males concerning
some traits (i.e., with regard to the ranking level
selected). Table A2 shows that girls consider it much
more important that a peer leader is WILLING TO BECOME
INVOLVED (ranking this item second) than do boys who see

182

 

 

TABLE A2 - Frequency IWeighted) of Selection of the
El ht PEER Leadershi Com etency Faptors

 

 

 

 

 

Fifi“? . 53:13 £2131

3* Respects My Ideas 255 7 81‘757‘ 336 (4)
L Easy to Talk to 216 (6) 38 (4) ‘ 304 (6)
M Understanding 264 (3) 90 (3) 354 (3)
C Sense of Humor 98 (8) 34 (8) 132 (8)
T Able to Lead 311 (1) 106 (l) 417 (l)
J Willing to Become 295 (2)4___p75 (7) 370 (2)
Involved 295 (2) 75 (7) 370 (2)

S Uses Good Judgment 223 (5)e———e94 (2) 317 (5)
H Open to New Ideas 210 (7) 80 (6) 290 (7)

Weighting procedure: Most important choice 8 8
Least important choice 8 1
Others sealed 7 - 2
Numbers in parentheses - rank
e——sunusually large discrepancies
across sex

Ratio Panel; to hdle - Blil

 

 

this item as next to last (Of those given) in importance
(ranking it seventh). With regard to the item USES GOOD
JUDGMENT, the converse is true. Males rank this item
second in importance, while females place it considerably
lower (fifth).

On the negative side, considering these items

 

*Upper case letters appeared on each trait card to
facilitate ranking the traits on the response sheet

(Figure l).

183

 

 

TABLE A3 - Frequency (Weighted)of Selection Of the
Eight PEER Leadership Indohpetengy Faptors

 

 

Page Page 5321'
G Forces Ideas on Us 299 (l) 91 3) 390 1
D Looks DoWn on Us 288 (2) 92 (2) 380 (2)
R Doesn't Communicate 238 (6) 79 (5) 317 (5)
K Dull (Not Fun to Be

With) 73 (8) 24 (8) 97 (8)
s Selfish 4 243 (5) 66 (7) 309 (6)
N Doesn't Seem Concerned 273 (4) 90 (4) 363 (3)
U Phony 278 (3)¢—-—e?8 (6) 356 (4)
W Doesn't Trust us ' 180 (7)e——e98 (l) 278 (7)

Weighting procedure: Most important choice . 8
Least important choice 8 1

Others sealed 7 - 2

Numbers in parentheses = rank

e——sunusually large discrepancies

across BOX.

Ratio Femgle to Mule = 3:1

 

relating to peer leadership incompetency, there is a no-

table difference between males and females with regard to

two of the traits. DOESN'T TRUST US is ranked first by

boys and only seventh by girls. Viewed another way, 180

isn't even twice 98 in spite Of the fact that the female

to male ratio is 3:1. This finding leads us to suspect

that not being trusted by peer leaders is much more

important to males than to females.

It is also noted that male and female responses are

184
considerably different with regard tO a peer leader's
being PHONY. Males ranked this trait in sixth place,
thus considering it not as serious as the females who
placed it third. The other traits are relatively close
together in rank. These findings are visualized in
Table 3.

In spite of the wide differences Of opinion be-
tween boys and girls with regard to peer leader's trust,
they quite clearly ranked FORCES IDEAS ON US as the most
serious trait which would result in peer leadership
incompeteney. The second, third and fourth most seri-
ous traits are LOOKS DOWN ON US, DOESN'T SEEM CONCERNED
and PHONY. One of the most striking points of compar-
ison is the considerable agreement that of all the
traits, being DULL (NOT FUN TO BE WITH) is the least

serious.

Adult Leadership

Male and female responses are remarkably similar
with regard to most adult leadership competency items.
Ranked most important was UNDERSTANDING. Almost tied
for first was EASY TO TALK TO, which missed being con-
sidered most important by only one point. The third
and fourth traits were RESPECTS MY IDEAS and WILLING TO
BECOME INVOLVED. There was also a high degree Of

185
agreement that of all the traits, SENSE OF HUMOR is

least important. These relationships can be seen in

Table A4.

 

 

TABLE A4 - Frequency (Weighted) of Selection of the
Eight ADULT Legdership Competengy Fadtors

 

2.... F22? Iii; £231
SB Respects My Ideas 292 73) 91 737 383 (3)
L Easy to Talk To 306 (l) 111 (2) 417 (2)
M Understanding 305 (2) 113 (1) 418 (1)
C Sense of Humor 126 (8) 44 (8) 170 (8)
T Able to Lead 167 (7) 74 (5) 241 (7)
J Willingdto Become 256 (4) 8O (4) 336 (4)
S Uses Good Judgment 184 (6) 64 (7) 248 (6)
H Open to New Ideas 236 (5) 71 (6) 307 (5)

Weighting procedure: Most important choice = 8
Least important choice 8 1
Others sealed 7 - 2
Numbers in parentheses = rank

Rgtio deale to Mule = 3:l

 

 

It is noteworthy that three Of the top four traits
ranked most important in peer leader competencies ap-
pear also in the tOp four for adults (see Table A2, A4,
and A8). While occurring in different orders, youth
view UNDERSTANDING, RESPECTS MY IDEAS and WILLING TO
BECOME INVOLVED as being considerably important in both
their peer and adult leaders. Similarly, of all the

 

186
traits, they consider having a SENSE 0F HUMOR as being
least important by a substantial margin.

On the negative side, as visualized in Table A5,
there is also considerable agreement of both sexes con-
cerning these traits which lead to adult leadership
incompetency. Heading the list as being viewed as
'most serious is DOESN'T TRUST US. It is of interest
to note (while probably not statistically significant)
that an adult leader's distrust is more important to
girls than to boys, whereas it was seen above (Table A3)

that boys were more concerned than girls with distrust

 

 

TABLE A5 - Frequency (Weighted) of Selection Of the

 

FadtOEs L - :Ffiégéé '“" :giEFa ' iggtal
G Forces Ideas on Us 300—72) 9772)w 397
D Looks Down on Us 287 (3) 104 (l) 391 (3)
R Doesn't Communicate 255 (4) 74 (6) 329 (4)
K Bull)(Not Fun to Be 97 (8) 31 (8) 128 (8)
N Doesn't Seem Concerned 229 (5) 85 (4) 314 (5)
U Phony 185 (7) 76 (5) 216 (6)
W Doesn't Trust Us 333 (l) 90 (3) 423 (l)

Weighting procedure: Most serious choice = 8
Least serious choice = 1
Others sealed 7 - 2
Numbers in parentheses = rank

Ratio Female to Male = 3:1

 

187
in peer leaders.

.In second, third and fourth place, respectively,
are FORCES IDEAS ON US, LOOKS DOWN ON US, and DOESN'T
COMMUNICATE. Two of these tOp four, FORCES IDEAS ON US
and LOOKS DOWN ON US are also included in the tOp four
traits Of incompetency Of peer leaders (Table A3), and
they are listed in the same order for peer leaders, with
the exception that in the peer listing they are ranked
first and second instead Of second and third as in the

adult.

Characteristics of Mother

There are very slight differences between male and
female responses with regard to mother (Table A6). The
only noticeable differences are with regard to ABLE TO
LEAD and LOOKS DOWN ON US. If these differences say
anything, it appears that boys are a little more con-
cerned with seeing leadership in mother and about being
looked down on by her than are girls.

What is most striking about the findings concern-
ing mother is the parallel between the first three traits
ranked for mother with the first three ranked for adult
leader competency. The first three traits in both cat-
egories are exactly the same, namely, UNDERSTANDING,
EASY TO TALK TO, AND RESPECTS MY IDEAS, and they appear

 

 

 

TABLE A6 - Frequency (Weighted) of Selection of the

 

Slrteen Important dharagteristids of Mother Fagtors

 

 

Parse 332:: I221
R Respects my Ideas 89 (3) 37 (3) 126 (3)
L Easy to Talk to 107 (2) 39 (2) 146 (2)
M Understanding 110 (l) 48 (l) 158 (l)
C Sense Of Humor 68 (4) l7 (4) 85 (4)
T Able to Lead 2 (12)e——-e4 (2) 6 (10)
J Willing to Become 31 (6) 8 (7) 39 (6)
Involved
8 Uses Good Jugment .49 (5) 14 (5) 63 (5)
H Open to New Ideas 24 (7) 13 (6) 37 (7)
G Forces Ideas on Us 3 (ll) 1 (ll) 4 (11)
D Looks Down on Us 0 (14)e———e4 (9) 4 (11)
R Doesn't Communicate 6 (9) 3 (10) 9 (9)
K Dull (Not Fun to Be 0 (14) O (12) O (14)
With)
E Selfish l (13) O (12) 1 (13)
N Doesn't Seem Concerned 2 (12) O (12) 2 (12)
U Phony 4 (10) O (12) 2 (12)
W Doesn't Trust Us 14 (8) 5 (8) l9 (8)

Weighting procedure: First citation = 4
Last citation
Others sealed 3 - 2
Numbers in parentheses = rank
e——eunusually large discrepancies
across sex

Ratio Female to Male = 33l

 

189
in the same order. This relationship should be watched
in the next study and even examined in more depth in

future research.

Characteristics Of Father

More variability between male and female responses
is seen with regard to important characteristics of
father (Table A7). By noting the ranking it can be seen
that there are considerable differences between boys and
girls with respect to UNDERSTANDING, ABLE TO LEAD, WILL-
ING TO BECOME INVOLVED, DULL (NOT FUN TO BE WITH), SELF-
ISH, and PHONY. Examining the point spread of the
weighted frequencies of selection, unusually large dis-
crepancies between girls and boys are also seen with
regard to SENSE OF HUMOR, FORCES IDEAS 0N US, DOESN‘T
COMMUNICATE and DOESN'T SEEM CONCERNED. For example,
while FORCES IDEAS ON US is ranked similarly (10th for
girls, 9th for boys), the ratio of reSponses is almost
1:1 instead of the 3:1 which would be expected due to
the sexual distribution of the respondents. Conversely,
SENSE OF HUMOR, while ranked about the same by both
girls and boys (first by girls and third by boys), has
a score of 93, considerably more than the 3:1 ratio
would lead one to expect to see. Boys tend to see

father as being more UNDERSTANDING than do girls.

190

 

 

TABLE A7 - Frequency (Weighted) of Selection of the

Sigtedh Important thrapteristigs of Father Faptors

 

Weighting procedure: First citation = 4

Ratio Female to Male = 3:1

Last citation = 1

Others scaled 3 - 2
Numbers in parentheses =
e——vunusually large discrepancies

BCI'OBS 88X

Female Male Total
B Resp::::0;: Ideas 482(5) lgi(%) 262(57
L Easy to Talk To 46 (6) 14 (5). 6o (6)
M Understanding 51 (4)e———e21 (l) 72 (3)
AC Sense of Humor 93 (l)e,-——el9 (3) 112 (l)
T‘Able to Lead 58 (3)e———+10 (8) 68 (4)
J irinlrfisgdto Become 32 (NH 7 (10) 39 (7)
S Uses Good Judgment _73 (2) 20 (2) 93 (2)
H Open to New Ideas 12 (10) 3 (12) 15 (12)
G Forces Ideas on Us 12 (lO)o—-———e9 (9) 21 (10)
D Looks Down on Us 9 (12) 4 (ll) l3 (13)
R Doesn't Communicate 22 (8) em-e 12 (6) 34 (8)
K Dull (Not Fun to be 2 (l4)e———elO (8) 12 (14)

With)

E Selfish 5 (UM—+11 (7) 16 (11)
N Doesn't Seem Concerned l6 (9)«————ell (7) 27 (9)
U Phony l (15)‘“--*3 (12) 4 (15)
W Doesn't Trust Us 10 (ll) 3 (12) l3 (l3)

 

191
Table A7 also shows that more reapondents used the neg-
ative in describing the fathers than the mothers.

Respondents tend to see leadership in father but
not in mothers. ABLE TO LEAD was ranked fourth for
fathers and tenth for mothers.

The first four traits seen as most important about
father were as follows: SENSE OF HUMOR, USES GOOD JUDG-
MENT, UNDERSTANDING and ABLE TO LEAD. However, it is
notable that boys placed UNDERSTANDING first in the
father category and in the mother and adult leader cate- «
gories as well. SENSE OF HUMOR, seen as least important
in peer and adult leaders, is viewed by boys and girls
as one Of the four most important traits of mother and
father, ranked fourth for mother and first (except by
boys who placed it third) for father.

Comparing the Categories

Table A8 Ofers a view of how the four main cate-
gories compare with respect to the leadership traits.
It enables the reader to Observe the major similarities
and differences on a single page. The comparisons be-
tween important characteristics Of mother and adult
leader competencies appear to be cOnsiderably useful.
The relationship exists not only with regard to the com-
peteney factors but also the incompetencies. DOESN'T

1192

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

TABLE A8 - Summary of Rank-Order of Charactersltics
Desirable With Desirable with Perceived Perceived
Reapect to has set to Characteristics Characteristics
PEER as deder ADU T as leader ,.21.MQIH§BS of FATHER
Rank Female MalengtalLFemale_Malg~Total,Femalngale Total Female Male Total
1 T T T L M M M M M G M C
2 J S J M L L L L L S S S
3 M M M B B B B B B T C M
4 B L B J J J C C C m B T
5 S B S H T H S S S B L B
6 L H L S H S J H J L R L
7 H J H T S T H J H J E,N J
8 C C C C C C. W W W R T,K R
R T,D R N G N
U R T H,G J G
G G G,D W D 8
KEY T,N §,E N,U D H,U H
,U W
B Respects My Ideas
L Easy to Talk TO E E E D,W
M Understanding
C Sense Of Humor D,K K K K
T Able to Lead
J Willing to Become Involved U U
S Uses Good Judgment
H Open to New Ideas
G Forces Ideas on Us ,
v on Us 1- 232.33.3322223
R Doesn't Communicate for this anal sis
K Dull (Not Fun to Be With) Y -
E Selfish
, Note 2. The 8 desirable and
3 2:32“ t Seem Concerned the 8 undesirable
W Doesg't Trust Us traits were ranked

(in free mixture) for
this analysis.

193
TRUST US is ranked first (at least by girls, third by
boys) for adult incompetence and first among the negative
factors by both girls and boys with respect to mother.
Figure A2 graphs the relationships even more visually.
The numerical values represented on the graph are those
identified in the "Total" column to Tables A2 - A7 in
the above discussion in this appendix.

The dotted lines on Figure A2 point out some of the
most notable differences discussed above. For example,
while UNDERSTANDING (M) is within the top three traits
considered by young people as most important for both
peer and adult leaders, the figure shows that it is not
only ranked first for adults (as Opposed to third for
peers) but also that UNDERSTANDING scored about 420 for
adults compared with slightly less than 360 for peers.

In the figure these numbers provide more information
which is not as readily evident from the tables. For
example, as consistently sure as youth are concerning
what they like (cf. the parallels between adult leader
and mothers, they are even more sure of what they don't
like (of. DOESN'T TRUST US (W), which is ranked first in

important characteristics of adult).

194

FIGURE A2 - Weighted Scores for Peer, Adult, Father and
Mother Characteristics Cited by Combined Male and Female

 

 

 

 

Responses
460
440
420 3
ML
.4 .
I+00 T. / f
\ G l/ I I CD
380 . D’ / B I
J N ,’ I
3601 M.’ U./ I;
3&0 B /AAV ‘
320 ,’ ‘ 'l J R
300? L‘ E H N
I H /I ‘\
280; w“ \
I‘ \
260; \ g
2405 ’TS
220
200
180
c
160 M (UNDERSTANDING)
L‘ EASY TO TALK TO)
140 C \x
K ‘ , .
120 B‘TRESPECTS NY IDEAS)
_ ‘\\ \ ‘ \- C
100 K C ‘ \\ S
x; “
80 s '\ .%T
60 ‘L
40
JH JR N
20 w G E
R DHK W
o _ .,....‘--_,.......-1.--....PQ_T kENU .
PEER ADULT MOTHER FATHER

LEADER LEADER

195
The Research Conclusions
What do these findings mean? The research ques-
tions asked, (1) What are the factors which young peOple
perceive as desirable and undesirable in their leaders
and. (2) of those factors are there some that are con-

sidered more important than others?

Conclusions Regarding Peer Leaders

It can be concluded, at least for the Muskegon

group, that youth expegt their peer leaders to possess

definite skills which make them ABLE TO LEAD. The having
and using of such skills is considerably more important

than the other seven traits as far as peer perception is
concerned. There is a concern that peer leaders demon-
strate skills which support their holding the position
of leadership they do. Thus, when adults select certain
young people for leadership positions in youth groups,
they should be careful to select youth with these skills
even though they may not be high on other nonessential
criteria in the opinion of the adult leader (e.g., avoid
selection on the basis of favoritism).

o so 1 0 de 1 is e1 tiv l 1 as im 0 -
tant for their peer leader to have a SENSE 0F HUMOR and
t i is ti el less as ious if he is DULL NOT
FUN TO BE WITH). These qualities were ranked last by a

196
large majority of the group in this study. This state-
ment does not mean that these qualities are unimportant,
it only means that vis-a-vis the other seven traits,

they are less important.

Conclusions Regarding Adult Leaders
‘ Both peer and adult leadeps, but especially the
lattep, must bg UNDERSTANDING. UNDERSTANDING, ranked in
the upper half of all four categories, placed third and

first, respectively, in the peer and adult categories.

It is relgtively less important for an adult leader

to hgve a SENSE OE HUMOR, and it is relatively less
serioug if he is DULL jNOT FUN TO BE WITH). These qual-

 

ities, ranked last by a majority of the group in this
study, are not, thereby, to be considered unimportant to
youth, but are to be seen as less important over against
the other seven examined.

It is essential that pp adult leadep tpust youth.
DOESN'T TRUST US was seen as the most serious trait caus-

ing adults to be poor leaders.

Yoppg people pay not be "looking pope f9: authority

figppes who forthrightly state, 'Thig is the way it is,'”
The readerwill note that the October 21, 1977 Evangeli-

gal Newslgppgp stated that there appears to be a return

to the use of large youth rallies used in the 50's and

197
60's. The article suggested that one reason might be
an underlying desire on the part of youth for leaders
who speak with a voice of authority. If this were the
case, one might suspect to find in the Gamelin traits
such characteristics as SPEAKS WITH AUTHORITY in the
listing of desirable qualities. However, such is absent.

Moreover, one might also expect to find a rela-
tively low rankingof FORCES IDEAS ON US. It may be of
considerable importance with regard to this issue that
the Opposite occurred in each category. FORCES IDEAS ON
US was ranked first (most Serious) for ppgp_leaders,
second for pgplp leaders, third for ppppgp and second for
2.21.9.1:-

Ten years ago YFC was moving toward a "Teen-to-
Teen" strategy for which the Ward and Harmon study pro-
vided information. The present study does not disconfirm
that prior approach.

Neither, however, does it indicate that large ral-
lies are wrong. The present.findings also do not indicate
that leaders should refrain from giving their Opinion of
"This is the way it is." This study does suggest, rather
strongly, however, that if youth leaders do say "This is
the way it is," they should allow youth to come to their
own conclusions with regard to "it" and not force their

position on others.

198

The thzeg tpgits post valhed by youth in theip adult
leadeps and motheps ape UNDERSTANDING, being EASY TO TALK

TO and having RESPECT fop their ideas, in that order.
This selection seems to indicate that youth prefer adults

in leadership capacities who can relate to others over
those who may have intellectual and administrative skills
but function less effectively in the interpersonal dimen-
sion. Relational rather than technical characteristics
are valued by youth in their choices concerning adult
leadership.

The high ranking of USES GOOD JUDGMENT and ABLE TO
LEAD in the father category, in place of the more har-
mony-building traits attributed to ppthpp (such as EASY
TO TALK T0 or RESPECTS MY IDEAS), may reflect what Berelson
and Steiner (196%, p. 34#) refer to as the dual demands
of leadership (the guidance function of the intellectual
leader and the harmony function of the social leader)
which are “rarely combined in the same person" (p. 3##).
The findings in the present study would seem to indicate
that the majority of the youth see the father as the in-
tellectual leader and the mother the social. In fact,
Berelson and Steiner note that they have found it to be
the case that these two reaponsibilities are divided be-
tween the ;gthgp and the mothep in families (p. 3u6).

The authors also give a clue as to one possible reason

199
for the mother categOry being more closely associated
with favorable ggptt leader traits than the £3thgp.
"When put to the choice, most group leaders give up the
instrumental (guidance) role in favor of popularity"
p. 3&6. \

The findings have generated at least two hypotheses,
the confirmation of which in a study of a different de-
sign would yield useful information. The first hypoth-
esis is as follows: ability to lead is considered by
youth to be the most important single trait for a peer
leader to possess. ABLE TO LEAD was selected by a sub-
stantial majority in the present study as the most impor-
tant peer trait.

The second hypothesis is that there is a significant
correlation between ppthgp and ggptt leader with respect
to UNDERSTANDING, EASY TO TALK TO and RESPECTS MY IDEAS.
This relationship was obtained in the data in this study.
Confirmation of this hypothesis would lend strong support
to the findings presented in this report which suggest
that youth most desire relational and understanding-

oriented traits in their adult leaders.

APPENDIX B
The Second Pilot Study

200

The design of the second pilot study was such that
two taped interviews were to be made in each of three
major sections of the continental United States. Two
were to come from the West, two from the Midwest and
two from the East. Of the two in each sector, one was
to be from a group of "average" youth and two from a
group who had had trouble with the law through con-
'viction as a result of some kind of delinquent be-
havior. The purpose of the study was to validate the
instrument for the main study which would include both
types of young peOple.

As reported in the mainitext of the study, two of
the six tapes were never made. Since both of those
tapes were from Youth Guidance groups, who work with de-
linquent young people, there is reason to believe that
the validity is lower for these groups than for the
average youth. Comments in this regard from Youth
Guidance leaders confirm this suspicion.

On the next page is a cOpy of the cover letter
which accompanied the interview instrument that was used
in the study. It was sent out over the signature of the
YFC Director of Research and DevelOpment whose (R & D)
committee members, who were heads of the regions to
which the tapes were sent, conducted the interviews.

The two pages which follow the cover letter comprise

201

 

Figure Bl - Cover Letter for Second Pilot Study

 

May 1978
Dear

Thank you very much for your willingness to participate
in the study of leadership behaviors which youth perceive as
important. With your help we'll be able to find out whether
some potentially valuable insights obtained from a small-
scale pilot study will hold up on a national level. If 80.
the implications for all of us in youth work will be far—
reaching.

In order to develop an accurate questionnaire for the
main study, we're first going to have to find out what words
youth use in describing leadership. To obtain this informa-
tion two different types of youth will be interviewed in
three major sections of the United States (west, midwest and
east .

One type of youth will be those typical of young people
usually involved in Campus Life clubs. Yet we are also in-
terested in contrasting these youth with those farther out
of the social norm, for example, those who are worked with
in Youth Guidance or similar types. We need information
pertaining to "deviant" as well as to "average" young peO«
ple. We would like to ask you to interview a group or
groups as indicated: (one group who fit the basic norm/one
group who are different from the basic social norm).

Please select a groug of young people of this type who
are in the age range of l - 18. The size of the group
should be roughly in the range of from 3 - 10 in number.

We would like you to tape the interview. Taping will
free you to follow the flow of the conversation without
having to write down all that is said, which we can do back
at the office. The introduction to the enclosed instrument
provides further details pertaining to the interviews.
Please h? sure to mark on your tape the following informa-
tion: ( your name, (2) the type of young people, (3) the
date, (U) the city and state where the interview was held.
It will be very helpful if you can return the tape to me
within the next three weeks.

Thanks very much again for all your help. I'm looking
forward to meeting you in person in a few months and to
working with you on this very promising endeavor.

Sincerely,

202

 

FIGURE BZ - Leadership Behaviors Youth
Perceive as Important
INTERVIEW.INSTRUMENT

Introdugtion

l.

2.

Before meeting the reapondents prepare the tape re-
corder.

a. It's best to use a plug-in (110 volt) cassette
recorder.

b. If you are using tape which has a leader (the
clear colored piece of tape at the beginning which
doesn't record) be sure to cue up the tape so you
are past the leader before you turn on the re-
corder. Otherwise some of your interview will be
lost.

c. If possible, use a mike which contains a remote
control on-off switch. Have the buttons on the
machine pre-set to record so that all you have to
do when you begin the interview is to move the
remote control from ”off" to ”on." Minimize the
mechanics involved with the taping as these can
be distracting to some reapondents and make them
nervous, thus reducing their productivity in the
interview.

Arrange to conduct your interview at a tips and
plape convenient for your respondents.

a. Make it at a time when other reSponsibilities
are minimal, so they aren't preoccupied with
other matters or too tired.

b. Make it at a place where interruptions are least
likely to occur and where the respondents will
feel most comfortable.

In conducting the interview, the following will be
helpful.

a. Explain to each group exactly what is being
done and for what purpose.

1) In order to obtain leaders who will do the
best job, we need to know what good leaders
are like, so we know how to choose.

2) We also need to have a better understanding
of what makes a person a poor leader, so we

203

can avoid selecting peOple who do these
things, and so the leaders we already have
can avoid doing these things.

b. Talk with the group for a few minutes about
general matters of interest to them (for exam-
ple, where they go to school, what they have
the most fun doing, vocational interests).

c. When the group appears to be at ease, turn on
the recorder as you ask the first question.

d. Avoid rushing the interview. If a pause de-
velops after a question, let them think. On
the other hand, watch your time. By the end of
the first side, when it comes time to flip the
tape over, the group should at least be throu h
question #2. (We are assuming a 0-30 or a C- O
cassette, as you choose.)

e. Probe for further meaning if necessary. If some-
one says something that is unclear to you, it
will quite likely be unclear to the rest of us
as well. Ask them to explain what they mean if
there is any doubt.

929m

1. When a person pbOpt yopp own pg; is your leader,
what do you li e?

a. What is good about such a leader?

b. What do you want this leader to do?

c. What does this leader ppt do?

d. How would you complete this sentence? ”What I
especially like in a leader my own age is . . . .”

2. When a person bo t o own is your leader,

what do you dtslIEE?

a. What makes such a person a poor leader?

b. What does this person do that he or she shouldn't
do?

c. What does this person ppt do that he or she
should do?

d. How would you complete this sentence? "What I

especially dislike in a leader my own age
1. O O O O"

3. When an pgult is your leader, what do you 113;?

20#

3. When an.§pp;t is your leader, what do you like?

a.
b.
c.
d.

What is good about such a leader?

What do you want this leader to do?

What does this leader ppt do?

How would you complete this sentence? ”What I
especially like in an adult leader is . . . ."

vh. When antpgplt is your leader, what do you gtptihp?

a.
b.

c.

d.

What makes such a person a poor leader?
:hat does this person do that he or she shouldn't
o?
What does this person ppt do that he or she
should do?
How would you complete this sentence? What I
{specially dislike in an adult leader
. O O O 0'

205
the interview instrument.

As also indicated above in the text, three new
behaviors were obtained for the positive scale and
three for the negative scale of the instrument for the
main studyzwhich were not part of Gamelin's original
work. The second pilot also provided payoff in indi-
cating which items from the instrument used in the first
(Muskegon) pilot should be reworded.

Three three new positive items obtained from this
second pilot were ”communicates," “organizes well,"
and ”shares own shortcomings and problems." Confirm-
ing the benefit of the second pilot is the awareness
that all three of these behaviors figured prominently
in the findings of the main study.

The three new negative behaviors obtained from the
second pilot were ”favors some over others (picks fa-
vorites),“ "puts own interests ahead of group (others),"
and ”gets upset when things don't go right.” Here,
again, one of the new items, the last, figured signifi-
cantly in the findings of the main study.

The second pilot was also very helpful in phrasing
the wording of the items in such a way that they ex-
pressed the thoughts in the language the young peOple
in the target pOpulation regularly use. For example,

the author questioned whether to use the word ”relate,"

206

raising the issue of whether the content of the word
was precisely enough understood by youth from the
various sectors of the country as to be useable. In
listening carefully to the tapes, it was readily ap-
parent that the young people from each region Surveyed
used the word consistently in the same manner and was,
indeed, therefore useful.

Another way in which the second pilot fulfilled an
important function with regard to the main study was in
facilitating decision-making as to which words indi-
cated behaviors even though they were not expressed in
verbal form. For example, after analyzing the tapes it
was decided to leave the word "understand" in the item
expressing that concept. The decision was based on the
belief that this word not only reflects a mental behavior,
but, moreover, is an activity that young people recog-
nize and have a concensus concerning the meaning of
which. This concern for meaning was one of the main
principles that governed the decision to use observable
behaviors for the expression of the items, the other
principles being measurability and reduction of overlap,
i.e., behavioral expression would facilitate the develOp-
ment of items that would be more mutually exclusive.

With the arrival of the Miami conference came a

207

rare opportunity to meet with all the regional R & D
leaders who would be performing a crucial role in the
data gathering and in the training of the data gatherers.
It was thus necessary to terminate the second pilot
without the two tapes from Youth Guidance and train the
trainers of the data gatherers at this meeting. The
main study was about to begin, but not before these
important and formative developments the second pilot

had already made possible.

APPENDIX C

The Instrument

208

Your Age: Male/Female

THINGS I LIKE AND DISLIKE IN PEOPLE MY AGE WHO ARE LEADERS

Please circle the number which shows how important each thing is to you.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

SAMPLE How Important Is It?

’ Little Very
Smiles when he or she gives commands 0 1 © 3 4

In the sample the person circling number 2 sees the leader's
smiling as having m but not great importance.

THINGS I LIKE How @13le Is It?

(LEADERS MY AGE) Little ery
Communicates (l l .3 3 4
Displays adequate knowledge and ability 0 l .2 3 4
Lets young people take responsibility {or important tasks 0 l .3 3 4
Listens 0 l 2 3 4
r Organizes well 0 l .2 3 4
Seeks to help when needed 0 l .2 3 4
Shares own shortcomings and problems 0 l 2 3 4
Shows sense of humor 0 1 2 3 4
Tries new ideas--open 0 l 2 3 4
Understands concerns of young people 0 l 2 3 4
Uses firmness when necessary 0 l 2 3 4
THINGS I DISLIKF. How S3193 Is It?

(LEADERS MY AGE) Little Very
Doesn't follow through--irresponsible O l 2 3 4
Doesn't relate to young pcople--doesn't see their point of view 0 l 2 3 4
Doesn't show concern {or young people 0 l 2 3 4
Doesn‘t trust young people 0 l 2 3 4
Favors some over others (picks favorites) 0 l 2 3 4
Forces ideas on young people 0 1 2 3 4
Gets upset when things don't go right 0 1 2 3 4
Looks down on young people 0 l 2 3 4
Puts own interests ahead of group 0 l 2 3 4
Says one thing. but does another--dishonest O 1 2 3 4
Won't changc--old-fashioned 0 l 2 3 4

 

209

THINGS I LIKE AND DISLIKE ABOUT ADULT LEADERS

Please circle the number which shows how important each thing is to you.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

J—
Communicates , . 0 ‘ l 2 3 4
Displays adequate knowledge and ability 0 1 2 3 4
Lets young people take responsibility for important tasks 0 l 2 3 4
Listens 0 l 2 3 4
Organizes well 0 I Z 3 4
Seeks to help when needed 0 l 2 3 4
Shares own shortcomings and problems 0 l 2 3 4
Shows sense of humor 0 I 2 3 4
Tries new ideas--open 0 l 2 3 4
Understands concerns of young people ‘ 0 l 2 3 4
Uses firmness when necessary 0 1 2 3 4

THINGS I DISLIKE How Serious Is It?

(IN ADULT LEADERS) Little Very

Doesn't follow through--irresponsible ' 0 l 2 3 4
Doesn't relate to young people--doesn't see their point of view 0 l 2 3 4
Doesn't show concern for young people 0 1 Z 3 4
Doesn't trust young people 0 l 2 3 4
Favors some over others (picks favorites) 0 l 2 3 4
Forces ideas on young people 0 l 2 3 4
Gets upset when things don't go right 0 l 2 3 4
Looks down on young people 0 l 2 3 4
Puts own interests ahead of group 0 l 2 3 4
Says one thing, but does another--dishonest 0 l 2 3 4

Won't change-~old-fashioned 0 1 2 3 4

210

Your Age: Male/Female

IMPORTANT THINGS ABOUT MY MOTHER

Please circle the number which shows how much each thing is true of your mother.

Never Sometimes Always

 

 

 

 

Communicates . 0 1 ' 2 3 4
Displays adequate knowledge and ability 0 l 2 3 4
Lets me take responsibility for important tasks 0 1 Z 3 4
Listens 0 1 2 3 4
Organizes well 0 l 2 3 4
Seeks to help when needed 0 l 2 3 4
Shares own shortcomings and problems 0 l 2 3 4
Shows sense of humor 0 l 2 3 4
Tries new ideas--open 0 1 Z 3 4
Understands my concerns 0 1 2 3 4
Uses firmness when necessary 0 1 2 3 4

Never Sometimes Always

 

 

 

 

Doesn't follow through--irresponsible . 0 l 2 3 4
Doesn't relate to me--doesn't see my point of view 0 1 Z 3 4
Doesn't show concern for me 0 1 Z 3 4
Doesn't trust me 0 1 2 3 4
Favors some over others (picks favorites) 0 l 2 3 4
Forces ideas on me 0 l 2 3 4
Gets upset when things don't go right 0 1 2 3 4
Looks down on me 0 1 2 3 4
Puts own interests ahead of others 0 l 2 3 4
Says one thing. but does another--dishonest 0 1 2 3 4

Won't change--old-fashioned 0 1 2 3 4

211

IMPORTANT THINGS ABOUT MY FATHER

Please circle the number which shows how much each thing is true of your father.

Never Sometimes Always

 

 

 

 

Communicates 0 1 . 2 3 4
Displays adequate knowledge and ability 0 l 2 3 4
Lets me take responsibility for important tasks 0 l 2 3 4
'Listens 0 l 2 3 4
Organizes well 0 l 2 3 4
Seeks to help when needed 0 l 2 3 4
Shares own shortcomings and problems 0 l 2 3 4
Shows sense of humor 0 l 2 3 4
Tries new ideas--open 0 l 2 3 4
Understands my concerns 0 l 2 3 4
Uses firmness when necessary 0 l 2 3 4

Never Sometimes Always

 

 

 

 

Doesn't follow through--irresponsible 0 l 2 3 4
Doesn't relate to me--doesn't see my point of view 0 l 2 3 4
Doesn't show concern for me 0 l 2 3 4
Doesn't trust me 0 1 Z 3 4
Favors some over others (picks favorites) 0 1 2 3 4
Forces ideas on me 0 l 2 3 4
Gets upset when things don't go right 0 1 2 3 4
Looks down on me 0 1 2 3 4
Puts own interests ahead of others ' 0 1 Z 3 4
Says one thing. but does another-dishonest 0 1 2 3 4

Won't change--old-fashioned 0 l 2 3 4

APPENDIX D

Instructions for the Trainers of Data Gatherers

i.

3.

4.

6.

7.

9.

10.

ll.

212

INSTRUCTIONS FOR THE TRAINERS OF DATA GATHERERS

At a group session meet with the data gatherers to go through each of the
following points on this sheet. Meet personally with any who couldn't attend
the group session.

Distribute the “INSTRUCTIONS FOR DATA GATHERERS" sheet. Read through
item I].

Distribute the questionnaire.

a. Let them complete the questionnaire.

b. After they've completed the questionnaire. direct their attention to
items 2-4 on the "INSTRUCTIONS FOR DATA GATHERERS" sheet.

c. Read through the rest of the items on the "INSTRUCTIONS FOR DATA
GATHERERS" sheet. Ask if there are any questions.

Demonstrate the procedures called for in items 2-4 of the "INSTRUCTIONS FOR
DATA GATHERERS" sheet.

Ask each data gathercr to do a demonstration as you just did. If the group

in your training session is too large to permit each to do a demonstration in
the time allotted. divide into groups of two so each person can have a turn.

a. Then ask one to volunteer to do a demonstration for the large group.

b. Discuss any questions.

Establish what groups of young people will be selected. See and explain the

'GROUP DESCRIPTION SHEET." We need to survey groups where the member-
ship is nonvoluntary (e.g. . biology class) and voluntary (e.g. . band. baseball):
urban. suburban and rural; and Youth Guidance groups. Try for 50 in each.

Distribute and discuss the "PUBLIC RELATIONS PRINCIPLES FOR CONDUCT-
ING THE SURVEY” sheets.

Establish a date in accord with the Miami guideline as to when each data
gatherer will have completed his or her investigations.

Follow-up with a phone call within a week after this training meeting to check
whether the following have occurred:

a. ~Ths selection of youth groups have been made.

I). The dates for data collection have been set.

Within a week after the date established in Miami. call each data gatherer
to check whether the following have been done:
a. The data has been obtained.
b. The questionnaires and "GROUP DESCRIPTION SHEETS" have been
mailed back to the UTE-Eton office.
c. If the data has not been gathered. do the following:
1) Call once a week to check on progress.
2) Recognize that there may be legitimate reasons for delay.
3) Review the importance of obtaining the data soon.
a) The validity and reliability of the study will be impaired
by delay.
b) Staff time and machine time at headquarters is geared to
receive the data at a specific time and delay will be costly.

Thank the data gatherers by phone or letter for their time and effort.

APPENDIX E

Instructions for Data Gatherers

Public Relations Principles for
Conducting the Survey

Group Description Sheet

3.
4.
5.

213

INSTRUCTIONS FOR DATA GATHERERS

Explain the following to the young people:

b.

We are studying the behaviors of leaders as viewed by high school

young people.

1) We want to know what leaders do that attract youth and what they
do that turn them off.

2) This understanding will help us select leaders who will be most
effective in their work with young people.

We are working with Michigan State University in this study which will

involve several thousand young people from all across the United States.

Distribute the questionnaire to each person. Study the following so you can
explain this information to the young people without reading it to them.
BE SURE, however. to cover each subject below.

a.

b.

Co

Ask the respondents to mark their age and the Male/Female section at the

top of the first and third pages.

Read the instruction and SAMPLE item at the top of the first page aloud.

On both sides of the FIRST page: note that responses (circled numbers)

refer to how important and how serious each statement is with respect to

leaders their own age (on the front side) and to adult leaders (on the
back side).

On both sides of the LASTpaggi responses refer to how much each state-

ment is true of their mother and father (or stepmother or stepfather).

1) If a respondent's mother or father is dead, ask him to complete the
statements on the basis of what he remembers of the parent(s) .

2) If parents are divorced or separated. complete the statements per-
taining to the parent the respondent is not residing with on the
basis of memory. If the respondent can't remember a parent. leave
the page uncompleted.

3) If a respondent has both a natural and a stepmother or stepfather,
let him choose which one to report on (either the natural or the step).

Explain to the group that each page contains 11 statements of what leaders

do that are pleasing and 11 that are displeasing. Ask them to BE SURE to

keep this difference in mind when completing the questionnaire.

 

 

 

Ask if there are any questions.

Ask them to please make a response to EACH statement.

Ask them to Work independently.

(If . however. you notice talking during the

completion of the questionnaire. don't reprimand those who are talking.)

Complete a "GROUP DESCRIPTION SHEET" for this group while they are
completing the questionnaire.

When the young people are finished, ask them to go back over their
questionnaires to be sure each statement has been answered.

l.

2.

214

PUBLIC RELATIONS PRINCIPLES FOR CONDUCTING THE SURVEY

To conduct the survey in a school:

Ce

Meet first with the principal.

1) Explain the purpose of the study. See item #1 on "INSTRUCTIONS
FOR DATA GATHERERS" sheet.

2) Mention the length of time for the survey: 15 minutes (including
introductory explanations).

3) Indicate that only one session is needed for the survey.

4) Try to obtain time in the mornin . preferably not too close to
lunch. for the survey. Also avoid the day before a holiday or
a three-day weekend.

5) Ask to meet with the teacher and that the teacher be present
during the survey. '

6) Offer to share the results of the study with the principal if he
or she desires.

Meet with the teacher.

1) Cover items 1-3 as with the principal.

2) Establish a date and time with the teacher. See above #4.
Be prompt in keeping that time.

3) Ask the teacher to be present during the survey.

Explain the following to the young people:

1) Their frankness is truly desired: there are no right or wrong
responses. We are not looking for any "hoped for" answers.

2) See the "INSTRUCTIONS FOR DATA GATHERERS" sheet.

To conduct the survey in a church:

a.

b.

C.

d.

Meet first with the pastor. or director of education if there is one.
Follow the procedures indicated above for working with the principal
of a school. Avoid unusual weekends.

Meet with the teacher or group leader. Follow the procedures
listed above for working with a school teacher.

Include the above explanations for school young people in your
explanations to a church youth group.

Try to meet with groups on Sunday. preferably in the morning.
If you are surveying a Sunday School class. try to conduct the
survey at the beginning of the class. Try to avoid weekday
afternoons and evenings after the young people have been in
school.

Number in the Group: Date of Survey:
YFC Region:

215

One form needed for each group surveyed
Fasten this cover sheet to the set of responses.

 

 

 

GROUP DESCRIPTION SHEET

Data gatherers: Please answer all questions. Feel free to use the space pro-
vided (#7) for any additional information which would identify thoughts and
feelings held by your respondents that are germane to this study. Thank you.

1.

Z.
3.

City and state in which survey was conducted

 

Organization or school name

 

Please check one of the following. (If you surveyed more than one group.
please fill out a GROUP DESCRIPTION SHEET for each group and attach
the appropriate sheet to the survey forms you return to the Wheaton YFC
office. Please take care to avoid mix-ups.)

choral group
band

baseball team. or other team:

 

classroom (Please specify the course. e.g. . biology. history. math)

 

club (Please specify. e.g.. French club. Scouts. ski club)

 

church group (Please specify. e.g. . Sunday School class. cate-
chism. youth fellowship)

 

other (Please specify)

 

Age range:

 

Circle one: Urban . Suburban. Rural
Circle one: Youth Guidance. other

Any additional information about the group. (We need everything you
can tell us!)

 

 

 

Your name

 

APPENDIX F

Pearson Product Moment Correlation
of Mother Negative and Father Negative
Scales by Item

2115

PEARSON PRODUCT MOMENT CORRELATION OF MOTHER

NEGATIVE AND FATHER NEGATIVE SCALES BY ITEM

seas.
wo=~.
Noam.
moam.
a-~.
aaa~.
amsw.
boom.
waoa.
Wham.
«saw.

amsm.
mane.
aSa .
omua.
amam.
sooa.
ween .
moon.
mmwa.
menu.
SR.

mamm.
aamn.
sown.
“can.

aea~..

aoaa.
aaaa .
mamw.
~am~.
~ao~.
aaea .

da : m oa : h o t m

anon.
mnmn.
oaon.
mend.

$2. .

aaaa.
8R .
owaa.
33a .
awmw.
San .
m o m

Nmom.
Nova.
omma.
mama.
NmbN.
owma.
opaN.
«naa.
aoaa.
:ama.
mafia.
m I m

mama a sense: canssm

aoo. no unseauaBMao one musmaanuooo aa<

aonu.
eemm.
aaoa.
swam.
aasm.
mama.
Naoa.
mew“.
oacu.
anew.
ouau.
w u a

aaou.
Rana.
aoaa.
coma.
mNaN.
eaaa.
woes.
omoa.
waaa.
acm~.
flea .
a - a

H‘ Boua .hosumm I a i m

ax sous .uunpo: : a s z

aomm.
aaaa.
Neon.
Nosa.
amam.
maoa.
oaaa.
maoa.
aaaa.
mean.
mama.
a i m

msaw.
«maa.
aooa.
mama.
emow.
aamm.
mama.
aoca.
anus.
sea~.
soma.
a-»

baom.
ommm.
anon.
«new.
cwom.
moom.
memw.
aamN.
aawm.
mama.
ONon.
N i m

Ran.
Rena.
amen.
aaaa.
Raou.
cmwu.
iaa .
saaa.
ooma .
anew.
ages.
a i m

CH
Hr'l

HNM3“\O¢\-QO\

3:.EESZESSI:

BIBLIOGRAPHY

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Adkins, Dorothy C. "Principles Underlying Performance
Testd" in David A. Payne (ed). Curriculum Evalu-
gtion. Lexington, Massachusetts: D. C. Heath
and Company, 1974.

Angell. Donald L. and DeSau, George T. "Rare Discord-
ant Verbal Roles and the Development of Group
Problem-Solving Conditions.” Spell Group Behavior,
February, 197“, Vol. 5, No. l.

Berelson, Bernard and Steiner, Gary A. Human Behavior:
An Igventory of Scientific Findiggs. New York:

Harcourt. Brace and World, Inc.. 196u.

Borg, Walter R. and Call. Meredith D. Edugational

Bgsegrgh: An Introdggtion. New York: David McKay
Company. 1971.

Campbell, Donald T. and Stanley, Julian C. Experiggntgl
ggd Qggsi-Expezimental Designs for Research.
Chéeago: Rand MeNally College Publish ng Company,
19 3-

Coughlin. Joseph W. "The Study of a Program for Train-
ing Leaders of Youth in the Formulation of Objec-
tives." Unpublished Ph. D. dissertation,
Department of Secondary Education and Curriculum,
College of Education, Michigan State University,

1971.
Douvan, Elizabeth and Adelson, Joseph. The Adolgscent

Eggezienge. New York: John Wiley and Sons. Inc..
19 .

Downton, James V., Jr. Rgbel Leadership: Commitment

ggd gaggisma in the Revolutionggy Proggss. New
York: The Free Press, 1973.

217

218

Ebel, Robert A. ”A Consultant Talks about Evaluating
a Social Studies Curriculum Improvement Project"

in David A. Payne (ed). Qprrigplpp Evpluatiop.
Lexington, Massachusetts: D. C. Heath and Company,

1974.

. Essentials of Edu ation l Mea urement.
Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall,

Inc., 1972.

 

Erikson, Erik H. Childhood and Sogiety. (2nd ed.)
New York: W. W. Norton and Company, Inc., 1963.

Evppggiipgl Newslepter. October 21, 1977, Vol. a,
No. 21.

Fiedler, Fred Edward. A Theory of Leadership Effeg-
rivgpgss. New York: McGraw-Hill, 19 7.

and Chemers, Martin M. Leads shi nd Effe -
. Glenview, Illinois: Scott,
Foresman and Company, 1979.

 

Gallup, George Jr. in a private conversation with the
author in Oak Brook, Illinois on November 15, 1979.

Gamelin, Francis C. "Descriptive Studies of Church
Youth Workers.” Unpublished research report,
Search Institute, Minneapolis, Minnesota, 1970.

Good, Thomas L., Biddle, Bruce J., and Brophy, Jere E.
T h e a ffe e . New York: Holt,
Rinehart and Winston, 1975.

Halpin, Andrew W. and Winer, B. James. "A Factorial
Study of the Leader Behavior Descriptions” in
Ralph M. Stogdill and Alvin E. Coons (eds). Leader
Behgvior: Its Dgsgription and Measurement. Colum-
bus, Ohio: The Bureau of Business Research, College
of Commerce and Administration, The Ohio State
University, 1957.

Hayes, William L. §§atistips for Ppyghologists. New
York: Holt, Rinehart and W nston, 19 3.

219

Hemphill, John K. and Coons, Alvin E. "Development of
the Leader Behavior Description Questionnaire" in
Ralph M. Stogdill and Alvin E. Coons (eds).
ngder Behavior: Its Description and Measurement.
Columbus. Ohio: The Bureau of Business Research,
College of Commerce and Administration, The Ohio
State University, 1957.

Holy Bible, The. Revised Standard Version. New York:
Thomas Nelson and Sons, 1959.

Horrocks, John E. The Ps cholo of Adoles en e:
Behavior and Development. :3rd ed.) Boston:
Houghton Mifflin Company, 1962.

Jennings, Eugene E. "The Anatomy of Leadership,"
Management of Personnel Quarterly, VoI. I, No. 1
(Autumn, 1961), p. 2.

Jones, Ralph H. Methods and Techniques of Edpcational
Researph. Danville, Illinois: The Interstate

Printers and Publishers, Inc., 1973.

Kohlberg, Lawrence. "Stages of Moral Development as a
Basis for Moral Education," in Beck, C. M.,
Crittenden, B. S., and Sullivan, E. V. Moral

Education: Interdisgiplinary Approaches. New
York: Newman Press, 1971.

Krech, David and Crutchfield, Richard S. Elements of
Psychology. New York:|Alfred A. KnOpf, 1959.

Larkin, Ralph W. "Social Exchange in the Elementary
School Classroom: The Problem of Teacher Legiti-
mation of Social Power." Sogiology of Edupation,
Fall 1975, Vol. #8, No. A.

Leavitt, Harold J. Managerial Psychology. (3rd ed.)
Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1973.

Lewin, K., Lippitt, R. and White, R. K. "Patterns of
Aggressive Behavior in Experimentally Created '80-

cial Climates'” in D. S. Pugh (ed). Organizatiop
Theory. London: Cox and Wyman Ltd., 197 .

220

Mayhew, Lewis B. "Measurement of Noncognitive Objec-
tives" in David A. Payne (ed). Curriculum Eval-
ugpion. Lexington, Massachusetts: D. C. Heath
and Company, 1979.

Pandey, Janek. "Effects of Leadership Style, Person-
ality Characteristics and Method of Leader Selec-
tion on Members' and Leaders' Behavior." EurOpean

No. .

Journal of Serial Psychology, 1976, Vol. 6,

Perrow, Charles. Complex Organizations: A Critigal Es-
s y. Glenview, Illinois: Scott, Foresman and
Company, 1972.

Richards, Lawrence 0. Youth Ministry: Its Renewal in
the Logal Church. Grand Rapids, Michigan:
Zondervan Publishing House, 1972,

Scott, William A. "Attitude Measurement" in Gardner
Lindzey and Elliot Aronson (eds). The Handbook of
Sogial Psychology. (2nd ed.) Vol. II. Reading,
Maggachusetts: Addison-Wesley Publishing Company,
19 .

Shartle, Carroll L. "Introduction" in Ralph M. Stogdill
and Alvin E. Coons (eds). Lgader Behavior: Its
Despription and Measurement. Columbus, Ohio: The
Bureau of Business Research, College of Commerce
and Administration, The Ohio State University, 1957.

Spaulding, H. and Haley, O. "A Study of Youth Work in
Protestant Churches."l An unpublished report.
Chicago: The National Council of Churches of
Christ, 1955.

Stanley, Donald Malcolm. "The Effects of Consideration
and Initiating Structure as Moderated by Incremental
Influence." Dissertation Abptrapts International B:

The Sgienpes and Engineering. Vol. 35, No. 7,
January 1975.

Stewart, John S. "Toward a Theory for Values Development
Education." Unpublished Ph. D. dissertation, De-
partment of Secondary Education and Curriculum,
College of Education, Michigan State University,

1974.

N. Stogdill, Ralph M. Handbook_ofg;gadership: A Survey of
Theory pnd Research. New York: The Free Press, 197U.

221

Stout, Robert and Briner, Conrad. "Leadership."
Robert L. Ebel (ed). Encye10pedia of:§ducational
Research. Toronto, Canada: Collier-Macmillan
Canada Lts.. 1969.

Strommen, Merton P. (ed). Research on Religious De-
velopment: A Comprehensive Hgndbook. New York:
Hawthorn Books, Inc., 1971.

Ward, Ted and Harmon, Robert. "The Facts Unfold."
Unpublished research report, Institute for Research
in Human Learning, Michigan State University, 1970.

I...rl..lllf I II.II}| .llll: Ill.