71 ware-1:1? «7 I " ' ‘51..“ ‘ -','I1I1I'1;' ‘1'2 $1 I "I‘H‘H‘I 11 11avp,1:ia‘,; _ ‘ ‘ ,5 1111 1:112:1- , .... ,~ ‘ ~;2 1.v.wfi VMFIVwIIVU' ¢fi2§¢fiul A: 2,,I1I,,‘1112,\1 ,aq,,,.1FI,2,' 31,1 ‘22, ”‘ 'I‘,,I1,1,1,II ‘ {‘"W " ”.113211’1'51'111211,.,{."'.,1..I1',I1'.‘1;117' "12:22! "11111I1IIIIIII ‘.,..1I1I“'uo 51,2'7’11‘3" .‘ 11111111,,2 ,,,,,,§,£,.,.,11I,1 111 Iggy”, ‘1":"":'2,;‘ .1;,val,,,,2,1,2 11, “1 '11, 1,1, '125'2‘K'I'1':“"2 “221.21., '1. v‘.‘:1'".'1' {:I‘.“,.l11,‘,;111 '1‘2‘“, 1,:1,‘ 3.2., 1 ,1; ,,11'1.I,12,,, , I‘ll' 1| ' ‘ ‘b'x 1 1;!” 1 3"" gig,“ ":'",1‘"1'1"’ 11,112 ,1I1I 1,113.,” ’1‘"1I:1111 1' “1,11‘11‘1 ,‘II ' I;I\‘I2,fl,', '1‘1'1,1“‘:11 “121:: ,1), ,l,£11,I'::1,1',',l‘,l my,“ 11-11"'1‘ ..“.'1‘1‘1I. - 1“ 11,,1 ~ -I'1'I , _1 ‘ .2. 1, .1. ,'\§,1,1,,11,I”‘ ' '1: II .1 1:.1'1'1‘11311 I" 1-13 ,1,12‘12“,I"1“.1‘,,1121:'11,221;,,,,, 1,1l1,:,1,1,1, .1;~‘,1,1,:L2,:,11‘:1,3 '1 "31’“:‘1I1 ' ' ,12. .‘21122'1'12‘? 2,1'I,I,"', N124 2),,121 1,.1 I I,',- 86,2, ’12::121,121‘:,1‘,1}I‘ 3jg‘;'141,51,1,:‘LI,I, ,2, LI' W1 I U‘ 1' . I 1.1 1;,111 ' :32“ 2,2,?“ '-'w‘1 1 , f S 1, . ,S‘Ey' 1 1,1.“ 1'1, , 111,1 111,191,1,1,,1,I,l' ”111',_ 12213,,- W'4211‘H2131'I"c"$ 1:.QI,5"1212122{1‘1'22,231‘“£11924,” .;1.II- “W52: 1.25;?!“ .2212 I“‘.$i¢r..‘~.'.a~ 1,- 212‘1'“ 111M £11,?“ 15:. ”'1, 1,’.' 4‘) £127,233" I'IJ'“ 1'1'11' " if; . , .1,,_:I1:11k1,1 11: 115.2 I .1, 1 ." 3:1" I: ' :31}. 311,112,211111,..1'111g,13;311~1{15,1 " "1111:: 1121‘. '2“ I , , 1,, 11‘1I , ,1 1,21? ,2, ,52’2‘ 111,1‘121'11:1,.122,£,,'|{2{",,1\12,,11’1'1,1,l 1"11‘1, . “L'1'1212121'92‘ 9,2,2, 1"“ 1'1”"; 'I 121‘ “,5, 1’13’1‘3': \' :111'1',I,1 ‘11"121. “1131 L , 121.2,”:- 111'“ " 12".“1‘1' 1'91 “2111,15“, "fl! 2",,21, £2 1' 22'2" :21, 11,1,1,1,1‘IC11,,,12I:,J 1'1'1‘2" $217222" 1 1, 2 - ‘1. 1.1.11.1. . .1111. 12 ‘1. 1- .1 .. 1,...111. . 2'111‘1 ‘1,1'.I.'.2,,22‘11'2',I'19‘I11’2"'2 "2"‘11'11‘""" 2'1'1'12122" 255,115“; .' 1.12.1.z-1-r ,. . ‘ 1 1,._1.,.,.,11 4,2,1, ,1 I _,1,1,1,1,f1,1,,2,1,1,1,,,,l, 22,2‘621,,1,1,I121' 22,2211“ ,I,(1,,,1‘“‘1 ,,, ,1,1,..1‘1',’1,‘. ..1 . ,1,,,1.1111111./1111.(r1,13,311‘1,“,1,Wk, . 22,, H" ' "‘1:I‘:‘2’u 242:2”. 122,, ,2," .,A,52“"11 2,, “2531, 2 213.2, 3,1, ‘1, . "1" 1, 1,1“,1'11 “g“; ”12,122 13,2 1111:.“ 21‘, ”0,: .I1' 111.,,,,I.., "~{I""‘111"m 2 I2" ”12,” '1,1 11’ 122,1,2,” r'1lI‘. .111III‘I.-' 12"“ 1 .‘1‘1‘ {5,1212 f,,l|14,,|l1,1 ‘ 1‘1 '11 .1 . ‘ '2 .11‘ 1.1 111,111 -,._.1'.1.1.11, ; , 11‘ 1 “2 .Ho‘l. 1'II1H 111 . 1 1 11" 111,111,I1, 1,1,1 I ,, 1,1,1,1,-1-,I ,2, :1 22%, o2.’ 1,. ‘2"1'" 4"..21,” . 1'1';' 1 ‘121,11‘ I'I 1‘1 'I2‘22',~' 2,"1"1'\'S'1:121'.2'1'V ,122' '2‘I\f'2'112,.1'1'22222‘22122'4,””g, , 1 , 1'. .. , 1"|' 2“,"! '11 “ H1I,':1‘21III1 "1'1" 1'1’1'2' "2'2' ‘ .'.I'111,' "I'I"\II1 1,1,1111. I211” .12 “12212215,. (1 II 1,I,'I,2,_2,I,"-I 1111~ . .11... . .1 11111 222:" 12:21.. 1,,1111;111:1111:I111113121;111:1211111.. 1'1,...,,1 ”112112 " 1 1“"¢"""‘.I:3. .. ,1 1 ,1, 1“,, ‘2“2' 1' ,2. ,1.,. , , , . , . ,, 11- ,I. .2, ,1.~,‘ 1‘ 2,2,. 32.2.:ft2,;;‘12{2‘ ”£221, 222.11,,,,;11,1,11,2Ic1,,,,‘,‘1, "‘2" ‘122'”{‘2’2'1‘I"2122'1422‘1'2'22'2’1‘222‘11‘2‘"2'2’1'252'21‘1‘I ""“2252"'1“’12121'1"‘I'1‘11"I?“}I‘x" ""1. ., 1 111:1, ”I, I" , . 1 I 1:3.- '1“, "‘2" 1,2'21‘22121‘1"'1"‘2"‘I‘1I ,,'.2' "{2 121‘“ ’1'1"11112"'1'1‘:"5£2':{;’22:1( ’1"..1"1I2'1"1"}1§ fiq'21‘22""‘12" 2’2"1'-"'1°‘ ""1',"":",}L‘121' "fie-{3 I"’"" , 1‘11.-‘1 ‘.,',I.,,1 112. 1‘L1‘L12 11'1' ’,II.'2,1I 11 , 1,1, “113.11%, 1 ,211 .1.,2 II2'1_1“,1,1-11, 2,11,:2.‘ , ,2‘25’ '1 H“ .‘21 ‘1”; “ " ‘ ‘ 'I"" ""“1'2‘2‘ ""1" ‘2 {‘1 .“11.1'1"1"11'11I'G' ‘1'" """""I2I,I2""1I1“' 2"”1'1'2'22: “2.132119112223221 “32"5'1'22’23“ "2'33“ ‘121"1"2'1‘2'2""""' ,,,,,2,,1,’1 “,2,” ,2,I,:2112 422,22”, 11 ,122 '12211, ,1, ,2'121 1,2211, 3,29%, 2" w; ‘ “a"??? “$225,!“ ,1“!,‘,2,2,,,,1“11,2 522.11. 222,222; 5‘,” . “"'1I'I' ‘1 “2’I‘1.""I'I‘I‘11"2‘ """‘ 2,22 {22"‘22 2'12”” I‘fl, ‘2 11'2‘522'2121‘1 z2’15” "" 122.13,“, $1,113.14: . I ,,, 1 ,1,(K ,22, ,1 ‘2‘2'22'2I 6,12: 1112“”, l 12,24,222 251‘ ,1,,,12;‘.1'1:, 1,1,2”, “1,8,3”? ,3,” 1'22"?” “1,2,;fi; 3,,3?‘ 12'11'1'. "11.1,.,',,1,1,,, ,1, 2,, [,1 1 :1112', ',{I,'I.2{I2121’1111,12221I2'11‘11I’I'II11I.II'I1‘I'I1I21“1I1""1'4‘22‘2'1222“ l‘ , 121,1‘2“ '2'I‘2 2122,“ ILWI ,221221,“\2"’Hl,‘1 ’2"2, :1, that” 12;, 1'51“ 1"“ ~,:’1'1.1{'2"‘I{“f,,,‘22'1:1' "I'I'I"I2II 2"1‘2’11‘1‘1221!"1,'1'11'22'2122" ('2‘ ‘12‘2‘1'21‘I12222122fl’h'qr‘M'E‘LQ'W“ ‘ I. I II 1’” ' 1.. y'tfi‘é'fl’fi Q”? @J ‘1’ . , . ‘11":"I‘{I 1‘11‘2122,‘,',11"1‘1"222'1'2”,2121,,<‘II 6212'”, 2'1'IIII‘II,:'1’(,' 1'2221'12 ,,,2,¢'2',,,£'fi' Em "‘2'1' 2121222,; 1.11.,1,;1,;,,,.;,1,1..1111. 21221-13221: 1 1222221" ”K 23”,, ,,, ' "‘ 1561111‘2'... 1‘1 1 11'22”"2 12"I1. .. 1,111.11. 1.111.1I11,1,,121,1,2I:I‘I ‘ 11’ I1‘2'2',111'"""1,"I"‘2,‘2':{2'2‘1121"212121121,2"221'2222'I1 1'1", '122'I‘I'1 I"" “22221,“, ‘ a “ 1‘11“.“ ‘I1I’~"“‘1:2‘1I1*" ""“1‘I““"“ 2122121" " ‘2' """"‘ 22‘2‘22‘1' '2'221‘1'222‘22 '9'222 112‘51 ,.2,f;;I1;1: ‘,., 2, 2.1111 2"“2‘2‘ 2,, ,11,,,21,,,1£.1,I£,.,12,211,, ”2W '2 ,,,2£222;,,,1,1,21I,.2,, I1 I,1,1,§,211,,1,,,1,'11,,1'-“1,1},2 1:21;, ,2, " 1-1 22.22.11 ,,,,1,, 2|, £1," 71,2: i1,,21 '2'2,‘2"‘,222‘":"d22' ‘1£2,212,22££21,: 2,222., 5,92, 2,2,, ,221222£, 1241,21 ,2 , ,,,1,11,,£21,I,,1,1, 51",‘2‘121'1222'. 22,22,522 34 ,I"".. “1,1, ,, ,1‘ 1'1; . 1.2121" I 3:2 , 1.1.1.1111... 1’ 1‘1‘111‘21 122211212 12‘2"251.2111... 12122.22 ‘2 ‘ ‘ 1 1' 2, m‘ .,";1 :11" {,‘,1211 '111,‘1‘1 1,1,11,112' ..,.,,112121,1 11 1 1,, 1,, ,2221“ ‘2'2'12'21'22‘1" 222122—1211”, 12.21222 11111.1,“ ,2'221 21,221,111: ,11,‘ 1,, 1. ”22:12, {22%| ,,,;2{2££,, 2,, 3,2,;fi, ,, '121‘21, 1 '1, , , “‘""""'“ ""‘ “‘""“-' {'2‘ £2214 "'22’22' “"."1"1,2‘21‘1“1 1 '121‘22'2" 122, 222122," 2, 2222911223 121'2, ‘ 4221'2 ,1 - - 1213;“, . ' 31.211 1,211? I: .1, ~11": ‘ 112‘" “1111 11221,,,1.2,,.1,121I 1112 ~ 111 11 1 2122" .2111 "‘ 21"“: .2 ‘I‘“'"‘:"."{"'1If:.':s“““ ,2 2‘ 21.2"“ "‘" 1'2" "2 '3 ,1,ng2,‘1“,11,,'1"'11 ,2“ 1,1,1‘221 \ "112'122' .1 22"I22‘22,2‘ ' l . , 1'212132,1"2,112‘, 2'12 '2“'2""21222' 23221212,,21221222 22222121 2222' 51.1,, 2,,”221' ' 22L21"1,"11' ' 222,21 “ “£3, . 122212121,22£,,;,, 222,22, ,1,,, ,2‘ 311‘ 22'2"“ '22'2,‘ I III'III'1‘222 2"I' 2|"'l‘ £‘1'322'I'I121’3 ‘11'2""I‘11'122"“,,, W ‘13'111, 2,1,2, .11, ,2,.,,,I,'£222{1,11222‘ '1,IL'I1'2 2234,31,, ,2, 2,2),1351‘: 111 Q 12“,|r‘“!1,1-‘1_,‘1,:II' 3,: ” 1:213. ," I 2' 1,1111 " 1 1 ‘ I 1 I, ' " "'4'", «1112121122‘1 22111 111 .1- .11 ,,£ ““2212 22' 2 2‘ "J 1"," 1215,24933‘133‘ I '1‘ 1 ‘1‘“. 1,11. ‘3'" 1.1 . ' ‘1 (“1% {gm} 1,1 g; "22$“? “1,,2'0!" ' 'I ,9??ng $1,135“ “-2,, ‘1 «R2129 “1'2‘18‘2‘21252211'1'1<,\"“M} a .2 1 Q 112211112, «12 2‘ " .. ‘-' 1 , , 1 "22221_'122{2I-2,2222111;122 12"2 - 2*, 1‘ I “I QM“ ‘q ‘,1'\LI ' “1'1?! 221,22221’1'2'2 ,“'2"Li'22112'21‘,,"' ,2 ,121‘4W42‘E‘2‘3'1‘2‘32 “Eigughfig 2"2212‘21'2'222‘2"'1:22'222121’“ 1'_1 ' ££"‘ 124:5; £££ 111,12 1,1,2, 22 I1. “2.1,:‘2‘5122225123. 1222211221122” 2252121222 a} {1.1232, 2'12 232 1,2,, ’2 2 2,0 '2 . . , ' 212122112 "" “5‘1 1 . '1 . . 121$. ' ‘“- M“ $1ffl‘ . h x». 1.1122 .“2 2:22 ’ 1'1 1 2' q, «. . l 1,, . 122121” 11“. ' .- ,11‘, 211 ‘22 :1 .' 2222‘ " “£222; ‘ “ ‘ "'21 ‘ 3":2I‘{‘2‘ 12., .. , 111112 - 12 A.“ E L- __...—.- 1.; m _ , 3.51:3: M- __ .. 2 . 2.- 121 ‘ 21b1, ":“ . 11.1 ‘ 221‘“ 2” _, .1 ‘ ‘ j}. .1": 12'! 'II""" " , 1:11 2~ ”fl. =92k2‘%u III/IIIIIIILIIJIIIIIIIIIILIIILIIIIIIIQIIIIII LIBRARY ‘ . Michigan Stan University This is to certify that the thesis entitled THE LINKAGE BETWEEN SEXUAL AND AGGRESSIVE MOTIVATION IN ADOLESCENCE AS RELATED TO PSYCHOSOCIAL DEVELOPMENT presented by JOLIE S. BRAMS has been accepted towards fulfillment of the requirements for M— degree 1n_L P‘s—W ML Majorproessf MW? i Mi THE LINKAGE BETWEEN SEXUAL AND AGGRESSIVE MOTIVATION IN ADOLESCENCE AS RELATED TO PSYCHOSOCIAL DEVELOPMENT By Jolie S. Brams A THESIS Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF ARTS Department of Psychology 1978 ABSTRACT THE LINKAGE BETWEEN SEXUAL AND AGGRESSIVE MOTIVATION IN ADOLESCENCE AS RELATED TO PSYCHOSOCIAL DEVELOPMENT By Jolie S. Brams Previous research has demonstrated a relationship between sexual and aggressive motivation, whereby arousal of one motive re- sults in arousal of the other motive. Eriksonian theory suggests that this relationship may be specific to a particular psychosocial level, Identity vs.Role Confusion. Persons who have not success- fully resolved identity issues will have heterosexual relationships in which aggression is a salient element, and will confuse sexual and aggressive arousal. In addition, persons still resolving iden— tity issues should be more defensive. These hypotheses were tested using a procedure developed by Barclay and Haber (1965), in which subjects were exposed to either a sexual, aggressive, or control arousal and later wrote stories in response to TAT-like stimuli that depicted male-female pairs. Subjects were assessed for psycho- social development using a measure developed by Constantinople (l969). Psychosocial level did not significantly effect overt imagery, although there were strong trends, but was a major deter- minant of defensive imagery. Results were interpreted in terms of Jolie S. Brams experimental procedure, societal change, and were viewed in a para- digm developed by Clark (l953). ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Dr. Andrew Barclay deserves special thanks. His respect for me as a psychologist and an individual, and his constant support and guidance, has been invaluable in my personal and professional growth. Although he has said, in jest, that I am "becoming another Andy Barclay," he has shown me that pride in one's uniqueness and the ability to make use of individual qualities is the key to satisfac- tion in all areas of life. His faith in me has helped me gain faith in myself. My thanks to Dr. Robert Zucker who showed me the importance of doing what I care about and doing it well. I would also like to thank Dr. Joel Aronoff for the many hours he spent helping me organize my ideas on human development. Our discussions have helped me find the way to becoming a "true" Eriksonian and a competent researcher. My undergraduate assistants, Jim Abramson, Frances DeMaria, and Lisa Haberman, were dedicated, competent, and a pleasure to know as friends and colleagues. Their patience in scoring the multi- tudes of TAT stories and their sensitivity and mature understanding of the variables involved is deeply appreciated. 11' TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF TABLES INTRODUCTION . Empirical and Theoretical Investigations of a Sex- -Aggression Linkage . . Eriksonian Theory: An Alternative Explanation The Relationship Between Defensiveness and Psychosocial. Development Hypotheses METHOD . Measures . . . Inventory of Psychosocial Development (IPD) . Rassmussen' s Ego Identity Scale (EIS) . . Measurement of Sexual and Aggressive Motivation Measures of Arousal Effectiveness Procedure . RESULTS Arousal Effectiveness . Measures of Psychosocial Development . Reliabilities . . . "Replication" Results . . Use of the Independent Variable Identity Resolution (C5) . Intimacy Resolution (C6) . . . Combination of Identity and Intimacy Resolution DISCUSSION General Discussion . . Comparison to Previous Studies . Goodness of the Measures . . Relationship to Clark's Study APPENDICES REFERENCES Page iv IO 17 20 LIST OF TABLES Table l. Self-Report of Arousal 2. Mean Psychosocial Scores 3. Sexual and Aggressive Imagery Reliabilities 4. Sexual Defense Scores by Condition, Sex, and Dominance 5. Sexual Imagery Scores by Condition, Sex, and Dominance 6. Aggressive Imagery Scores by Condition, Sex, and Dominance 7. Sexual Defense Scores by Condition, Sex, and Dominance Aggressive Defense Scores by Condition, Sex, and Dominance 9. Sexual and Aggressive Imagery Scores by Stage and Condition (Identity Resolution) . . . . . . . . . . l0. Sexual and Aggressive Defense by Stage and Condition (Identity Resolution) . ll. Aggressive Scores by Condition, Dominance, and Stage (Identity Resolution) . l2. Sexual and Aggressive Imagery Scores by Stage and Condition (Intimacy Resolution) . . . . . . . . . . l3. Sexual and Aggressive Defense by Stage and Condition (Intimacy Resolution) . . . . . l4. Sexual Defense Scores by Condition, Sex, and Stage (Intimacy Resolution) . . . . l5. Difference Scores between Sexual and Aggressive Imagery by Condition, Sex, and Stage . . . . l6. Sexual and Aggressive Imagery Scores by Stage and Condition (Identity and Intimacy Resolution) . . . . l7. Sexual and Aggressive Defense by Stage and Condition (Identity and Intimacy Resolution) . l8. Sexual Defense Scores by Sex and Stage . l9. Aggressive Defense Scores by Condition, Dominance, and Stage . . . . . . . . . . . . iv Page 29 31 32 35 36 36 37 37 4O 41 41 43 44 45 46 48 49 50 SI INTRODUCTION Previous research has suggested a relationship between sexual and aggressive motivation, whereby arousal of one motive re- sults in the arousal of the other motive (Clark, I953; Barclay and Haber, I965; Barclay, I970). This research supports both psycho- logical theory (Freud, l938; I959) and popular observation (Stoller, I976; I977). In all empirical investigations of this sex-aggression linkage, college students have been the subjects. Generalizing these results would suggest that the relationship is invariant throughout development. If Erik Erikson's theory of psychological growth and maturation is considered, it is possible that the results of these studies may be related to the college subjects' specific developmental stage, rather than having validity for all stages. It is plausible that the majority of the subjects in previous studies were dealing with the issues of a particular stage of psychosocial development, Identity vs. Role Confusion, and that the connection between sexual and aggressive motivation resulted from life issues that the subjects were attempting to master, and the defensive orientation related to this stage. Empirical and Theoretical Investigations of a Sex-aggression Primate neuroanatomy suggests a physical link between sexual and aggressive motivation. MacLean (I965) found that struc- tures controlling sexual and aggressive behaviors were juxtaposed within the squirrel monkey's Iimbic system. MacLean found that stimulating one structure can result in the display of a neighbor- ing structure's functions. Electrical stimulation could produce sexual or aggressive behavior when the electrode was moved within the space of a millimeter. However, justaposition of neural struc- tures does not guarantee similarity in the functions controlled by these structures. It is possible that separate structures, uninflu- enced by one another, control sex and aggression. In addition, MacLean states that naturalistic observations of experimental monkeys further support the sexual-aggressive link- age: squirrel monkeys assume that the same penile display in courtship and aggression. A similar connection between sexual and aggressive posturing also occurs in other species. MacLean suggests that a sexual-aggressive linkage may be due to neural structures in primates. He generalizes this hypothesis to man by suggesting that the use of a loincloth was developed to ease social tension created by the display of male genitals, i.e., the display of aggressive impulses. A neurological framework is well suited to MacLean's interests, and while it may be one possible explanation of his ob- servations, he does not discuss social causes that may be equally plausible. Freud dealt with the issue of a sex-aggression linkage on an orthogenetic level. He suggested that, in prehistoric times, aggression was necessary for mating to occur, that man had to subdue his mate. From an evolutionary perspective it is possible that this, through time, could have resulted in a sexually active and aggressive population, sexual and aggressive instincts striving for the same aim and object in the mating situation, indistinguishable from one another. Here, the two instincts work together for grati- fication in this special situation. In Western society, open dis- play of aggression in a sexual encounter is forbidden, yet the link- age between the two may be present, although disguised. Freud in- dicated that in normal sexual activity, where the woman (Circa I900) was resistant to sexual encounters, both sexual and aggressive drives are gratified for the male as he attempts to force a sexual Iiason, although in a less obvious way than his ancestors. Late psychoanalytic thought has further elaborated on this problem, and has arrived at several conclusions of significance to the present research. Eidelberg (I948) noted that many people attempt to satisfy sexual and aggressive needs in one action, al- though he states that combined satisfaction of the instincts is less effective due to a weakening of aggression through the conco- mitant presence of sexuality, and the risk of social or superego censure of sexual expression when it is paired with aggression. However, dual gratification still takes place because, "the ear- liest prohibitions simultaneously inhibit the sexual instinct and destroy the narcissistic feeling of omnipotence." The individual struggles to regain feelings of power, self-worth and to satisfy sexual needs by a single action. Following this, it seems a rea- sonable hypothesis that actions to satisfy both sexual and aggres- sive drives would be more likely to occur in certain stages of a person's life when power and sexuality are threatened or in turmoil. Adolescence seems to be such a period. Freud believed adolescence to be a time of refighting the battles of childhood, of coming to grips with the unresolved concerns of the past. In particular, un- resolved anal conflicts seem especially magnified in adolescence. The adolescent is concerned with autonomy and independence, much as he was during the anal period. As in the anal period, sexuality is connected with veiled aggression. Whereas the child used erotic functions (defecation) to display independence and aggression, the adolescent uses his genital sexuality as a means to break away from parental influence and express aggression toward his heterosexual peers. Previous research on the linkage between sex and aggression has used adolescents as subjects. 0f importance to the methodology of the proposed research is Eidelberg's assertion that "there is one realm in which the two gratifications can be sought simultane- ously without disadvantage, namely, the realm of fantasy. Exper- iences that eventually induce the individual to separate the two gratifications occur only in the realm of reality. In fantasy situations, the risk to sexuality and the weakening of aggression is negligible." Clark (I952) was the first to lend empirical support to the sex-aggression linkage in Freudian theory. To investigate the effects of inhibition on the measurement of sexual motivation by the TAT, Clark measured sex and guilt in the TAT protocols of male college students who had been exposed to a sexual stimulus prior to the TAT administration. Clark designated three categories of res- ponse as being indicative of the presence of guilt: a) someone is ashamed, guilty, sorry, anxiety-ridden, morally concerned, embar- assed, etc. over sexual activity; b) someone is punished, criti— cized, ostracized for sexual activity; and c) someone punished him- self in some concrete fashion as a result of a sexual activity. From observation, it is clear that two of the three categories con- tain aggressive elements. Clark reported increases in TAT guilt following a sexual arousal. However, a portion of what Clark Ia- beled guilt cannot be separated from aggression, giving support to a sex-aggression linkage in his subjects. Whereas Clark investigated the effects of sexual arousal on the presence of aggression (guilt) in fantasy, later explorations of the linkage between sex and aggression concerned the effects of aggressive arousal, using a content analysis of TAT responses for the dependent variable (Barclay & Haber, I965). However, in order to assess the manner in which these motivations are expressed, special TAT—like stimuli were photographed. These stimuli depicted heterosexual scenes; for one half of the cards the female was dominant, for one half, the male. Subjects were male and female college students. The experimental group was aggressively aroused by insults from the professor and the experimenter. Both sexual and aggressive imagery in that TAT response were greater in the aroused group, when compared to the unaroused group, suggesting a relation- ship between sex and aggression. Males displayed more defensiveness than females in their responses. In addition, the large majority of stories told in response to female dominant stimuli had a change in the dominance relationship. In short, a relationship between sex and aggression, through aggressive arousal, was demonstrated and the nature of imagery and defensiveness was influenced by the domi- nance relationships present in the stimuli. In addition, sex dif- ferences are found in the expression of these motivations. Barclay explained these results in terms of the general norms of American middle class society. Results that seem variant with the accepted norms are attributed to the uniqueness of the role of college students in relation to the parent culture. The explan- ations for the differences are given in terms of norms for the college student culture, rather than in terms of a specific level of psychological development among the subjects. An alternative explanation for the proposed linkage between sex and aggression could be that the female subjects found the aggressive behavior of the male experimenter sexually arousing. Un- like the male subjects who were made angry and then projected sex- ual imagery in their TAT protocols, the angry male experimenter may have been directly sexually arousing to the female subjects. To rule out this explanation, Barclay (l970a) employed a female experi- menter. As in the previous study, both males and females responded with increases in sexual motivation following arousal by the hos- tile experimenter, Barclay concluded that there was indeed a link- age between sex and aggression, regardless of the sex of the experi- menter. As in the previous study, males responded sexually, not aggressively but with greater defensiveness, to female dominant stimuli. Aggression is a component of sexuality in both sexes, rather than primarily in males. The methodology of these studies creates the implicit assumption that a state of arousal exists within the subject. Schacter and Singer (I962) propose that situation cues elicit emo- tional expression when preceded by a general arousal. Hullian theory postulates that an increase of one organismic drive leads to an increase in all other drives. In relation to both of Barclay's two investigations, it is possible that the arousal condition, in- stead of eliciting anger, caused an increase in general arousal. The cues produced by the experimenter would generate a sexual res- ponse. Barclay suggests, however, that this does not explain why subjects of the same sex as the experimenter also show an increase in sexual imagery on their TAT responses. Barclay (I969) found some evidence to refute this alterna- tive hypothesis. If there is an increase in general drive caused by the arousal condition, the arousal should equally elicit other "irrelevant" motivation. A hostile experimenter aroused the sub- jects and their TAT protocols were analysed for need for affilia- tion and need for achievement, as well as sex and aggression. Only sexual motives increased after arousal. Although this lends support for a specific connection between sexual and aggressive motivation, it is possible that this resulted from time limits im- posed on the TAT responses. Subjects may have responded with sexual motives first, and did not have time to include other motives. For clarification, Barclay (l97l) administered a more complete test of the nonspecific arousal hypothesis. By using several types of arousal (sexual, anxiety, laughter, and neutral) Barclay found an increase in sexual and aggressive imagery only in the sexual arousal condition. Both males and females responded with aggression to this arousal. The results of this study support the proposed connection between these motivations in the experimental subjects. They also coincide with the results of Barclay's previous studies. Fantasy, expressed in a TAT response, is only one method with which to measure arousal. Sexual arousal can also be demon- strated through physiological measures. Barclay (I968) used uri- nary acid phosphatase (AP) as an indicator of sexual arousal in male subjects. Angered males had greater amounts of AP in their urine and also expressed more sexuality in their TAT responses than unangered males. The physiological results validate the TAT mea- sure and support a sexual-aggressive connection. However, the re- sults are not definitive. Barclay (l97l) found that subjects have some cognitive control over AP secretion. The amount of information male subjects had about the experimental procedure (which included a collection of urine samples and the viewing of a sexual film) was related to AP secretion. The greater the amount of information, the less the AP secretion, caused by a reduction in anxiety concerning the procedure. Anxiety, therefore, may be a factor controlling AP levels. For a closer examination of this possibility, Barclay (I972) replicated the’multi-arousal" experiment, using males, and measured AP secretion. He found that AP secretion is an indicator of sexual arousal even though part of the response can be traced to an element of general arousal or a link between sex and anxiety. A pairing of sex and anxiety, through experience, may be present. If emotions are viewed as consisting of two components, a general drive, and a specific, directing element, it is possible that anxiety may repre- sent the general component, as anxiety in the traditional sense is unlabeled arousal. The absence of AP change from pre- to post-arou- sal in the group viewing the anxiety film lends support to this idea. The subjects may have been anxious upon arrival to the experi- ment and their anxiety was maintained by the film. The postulate of an unconfounded, definite linkage between sexual and aggressive mo- tivation is weakened by these results. The only investigation of the relationship between sex and aggression in fantasy that did not use a college population, used prison inmates as subjects (Beit-Hallamhi, I97l). Using a special- ized TAT that consisted of pictures of either a sexual or aggressive nature, and no arousal condition, Beti-Hallamhi found a positive correlation between sexual and aggressive fantasy. In addition, subjects were more likely to respond with sexual, rather than aggressive imagery, to an aggressive picture, and were also more likely to respond with aggressive, rather than sexual imagery, to a sexual picture. Beit-Hallamhi also scored for achievement motive IO and found no correlation between that motive and sex or aggression. Therefore, his results cannot be explained according to a theory of general arousal. If there had been a general expressiveness, there would also have been an increase in the achievement motive, and this was not found. Eriksonian Theory: An Alternative Explanation Unlike Freudian theory, Eriksonian theory attributes greater flexibility to the develooing individual across a broader time-span. Although an individuals' successes or failures in mastering life issues influence future development, the person's needs, motivation, and interactions with the environment change both in form and ex- pression throughout development. The guiding principle in human development, according to Erikson, is epigenesis. Epigenesis refers to an unfolding of the personality, so that a certain aspect of the personality becomes of greatest concern, and has least resistance to change, during a spe- cific period of a person's life. Erikson labeled these periods as ”psychosocial stages" (Erikson, I950), and specified eight stages as the major periods in development. Chronologically, these stages stretch from infancy through old age. At each stage the individual is confronted with a new issue that must be resolved. Erikson be- lieves that these concerns are in the form of polarities; the indi- vidual may either master the new issues, or he may not. Whatever the result, it has influence on further personality development and from that point on, characterizes the individual. Most importantly, at each stage there are significant changes in a person's ll orientation toward himself, towards others, and toward the environ- ment. In terms of the present research question, it is plausible that the relationship between sexual and aggressive motivation may be determined by the psychosocial development of the individual. In specific, it seems a reasonable hypothesis that students in their first two years of college, who constituted the large majority of subjects in the studies reported here, are leaving adolescence and attempting a final resolution of the issues and concerns of Erik- son's Stage of Identy vs. Role Confusion, as experience and matura- tion draws them to deal with the issues of the next stage, Intimacy vs. Isolation. This is supported by several investigators, who describe the stage of Identity vs. Role Confusion as a period of identity or ego diffusion, which they found to be characteristic of college age populations (Constantinople, I969; Donovan, I970; Douvan, I966; Waterman, Geary & Waterman, I974; Marcia, I966; Stark & Traxler, I974; Orlofsky, Marcia, & Lesser, I973). It is likely that the issues of the stage of Identity vs. Role Confusion have a significant impact on the connection between sexual and aggressive motivation in the reported research, and that resolution of the issues of the period of identity diffusion will result in a weaken- ing of the relationship between these two motivations. Orlofsky, Marcia and Lesser (I973) have demonstrated that the resolution of the identity crisis is related to the successful exploration, ra- ther than avoidance, of intimacy. The hypothesis of the proposed research states that a linkage between sexual and aggressive IZ motivation is weakened when an individual resolves identity issues and begins to focus on the stage of Intimacy vs. Isolation. How can an individual who is dealing with the concerns of the stage of Identity vs. Role Confusion be described? Most gener- ally, the person is in a period of transition between childhood and adulthood. The person is now physically ready to enter adulthood, yet he has not developed the sense of identity that is needed to choose the tasks that will be approached in adulthood and to deter- mine one's position in adult society. Munley (I975) found that strong ego identity was positively related to adjusted vocational choice, defined as a vocation that was in concordance with aptitude and interest. When one's self-perceptions have consensual validity, one has achieved identity. Identity is confirmed through relationships with others. Partially due to the dictates of society, and primarily caused by the powerful sexual feelings of the adolescent, many of these rela- tionships are with members of the opposite sex. Erikson states that these relationships are, "an attempt to arrive at a definition of one's identity by projecting one's diffused ego image on another and by seeing it reflected and gradually clarified” (Erikson, I950). Dignan (I963) defines identity as, ”a complex of self-referent images which evolves through interpersonal relations and helps the individ- ual define himself within a social reality." While the individual is looking for clarification, he is also searching for stability and attempting to avoid a loss of self-esteem. Bronson (I959) characterizes individuals in the stage of Identity vs. Role Confu- sion as having, "temporal instability of self-perceptions" and l3 being uncertain about their dominant personal characteristics. Rela- tionships between people who are in this stage display pseudomutual- ity; they seem to contain the components of a genuine mutual rela- tionship (sex, togetherness) yet they exist primarily to reinforce the member's newly forming identity. According to Douvan (I966) adolescent sexuality is pseudo or defensive sexuality, whose aim is to both ward off anxiety, which arises from the conflicts of the past that ascend in the turmoil of puberty, and to resolve these childhood conflicts, achieving identity. Unfortunately, relationships are imperfect in meeting the needs of its members. It is inevitable that an individual's grow- ing, yet uncertain identity will be contradicted within the rela- tionship, creating anxiety. Anxiety in general appears to be re- lated to ego diffusion. Bronson (I959) found that a high degree of inner tension and anxiety is a component of the identity crisis. Stark and Traxler (I974) and Dignan (I963) found a negative corre- lation between ego identity and anxiety in college students. One common reaction against anxiety is to aggress toward the element of the environment that causes anxiety; in this case the anxiety of one member, caused by a weakness in identity, is externalized to the other member of the dyad. However, both the individual and society find the display of hostility in what is labeled a mutual affiliation unacceptable. As a result, it is necessary to veil the aggression. Joking and teasing within the relationship are vehicles for expression; for males, sex may also be a means of hostile expression. In short, one way in which sex I4 and aggression may be linked is through the presence of anxiety in heterosexual relationships. This anxiety is blamed on the other member, and hostile feelings arise in regard to that person. The anxiety is created by both the novelty of the affiliation and the nonconfirmation of identity within it. The heterosexual relationship is also a trial of a person's worthiness. The sense of inferiority is heightened in this stage, as the individual's worth is in constant queStion as he attempts to form an identity and plan for his position as an adult. In par- ticular, an individual questions his attractiveness as a person and as a sexual partner. The individual may use the relationship as a proving ground. There may be continual stress to compete against the partner, and sex may become, as Erikson (I950) states, a "genital combat.“ In addition, anxiety due to feelings of unworthiness may occur because the individual who has not yet resolved identity issues brings an incomplete self to the relationship, and as a re- sult is unable to meet the partner's expectations, causing hostility within the dyad. An incomplete self is formed by strongly sex-typed socialization in childhood. In general, females are programmmed to ”be." They attain a childhood identity by being; being beautiful, kind, quiet, etc. Males, in contrast, must achieve in order to create a childhood self-concept. Measured by accomplishment rather than existence, they must actively effect the environment. When people in this stage of identity formation engage in a heterosexual relationship, they both become dissatisfied and angry. The female sees herself as her father's little girl. She desires the nuturance A" l5 and emotional support that her father is adept at giving. However, her partner is unable to gratify her needs. He has not yet learned how to "be," and therefore cannot share his emotions with his part- ner which would lead to intimacy and emotional support. The male realizes that he is less competent than his mate's father, or her "ideal" father. Not only is he unable to meet her emotional needs, but he is less powerful and accomplished. This comparative incom- petence causes anxiety and hostility. The female also feels hos- tility toward her partner, as she feels ill-cared for. She has not developed the ”doing" aspect of her personaltiy that would enable her to care for herself, just as her partner lacks the emotional "being" aspect that would allow him to be more supportive. This is yet another way in which a link between sexuality and aggression develops. When an individual acquires a firm and relatively stable identity, much of the anxiety is removed from the heterosexual re- lationship. This isrmn:to say that anxiety is nonexistent; it is quite certain that the individual will have doubts concerning the goodness or stability of the relationship, or that the interactions within it will illuminate some aspects of the personality that the person would rather ignore. However, there is a shifting of the issues of primary importance to the individual. Where in the stage of Identity vs. Role Confusion there is a heightened concern with avoiding contradictions of the growing identity, and an increased vulnerability of the self-concept to external judgment (Marcia, I967; Waterman, Geary & Waterman, I970), there is less potential 16 for anxiety when the individual enters the stage of Intimacy vs. Iso- lation, in which the primary issue is the merging of the newly ac- quired identity with another. This emerging identity is balanced in the "doing" and ”being" aspects of personality, enabling each partner to equally contribute to both the emotional and active func- tions of the relationship, thereby reducing hostility. Most impor- tantly, the person is willing and able to sacrifice and compromise for the sake of the relationship as he is significantly less vulner- able to threats to the self concept, or as Erikson writes, ” . . . he is able to face the fear of ego loss." Never again will close relationships be as anxiety provoking as in the previous stage of Identity vs. Role Confusion. As a result, in heterosexual rela- tionships, as well as other types of affiliations, there will be less hostility, as anxiety is no longer a pervasive characteristic of relationships. In addition, because the individual is striving for mutuality, as well as becoming less concerned with proving his worth, there will be less competition with the partner. Coopera- tion and sharing will be a hallmark of sexual, as well as other kinds of encounters, between the partners, replacing the combative elements of the previous stage. Lastly, heterosexual experiences will become less novel, thereby reducing anxiety. Erikson states that the achievement of an identity is a prerequisite for the de— velopment of intimate relationships: True "engagement" with others is the result and the test of firm self-delineation. Where this is missing in the young individual, when seeking tentative forms of playful intimacy in friendship and competition, in social play and love . . is apt to experience a peculiar strain, as if such tentative l7 engagement might turn into an interpersonal fusion amounting to a loss of identity . . . it is only after a reasonable sense of identity has been established that real intimacy with the other sex (or with any other person) is possible I959 . The Relationship Between Defensiveness and Psychosocial DeveIOpment Defense mechanisms are, in general, ways in which individ- uals protect themselves from both internal and expernal pressures. All individuals have a defensive structure but this structure be- comes more rigid as psychological pressures increase. From the previous discussion it is apparent that an indi- vidual in the process of resolving identity issues, especially dur— ing adolescence, is experiencing internal and expernal pressure; the main task of this stage isself—discovery,tying in past iden- tities and experiences with future goals. However, this process is undermined by several factors. Most basic is the individual's internal, physiological upheaval, the advent of puberty and the final stages of maturation into adulthood. The unpredictable and unfamiliar body seems to sabotage the individuals' struggle for stability and self-understanding. External factors also threaten the adolescent who is dealing with identity issues. Heterosexual relationships, as previously discussed in detail, are threatening to the individuals' self-esteem, yet are mandatory in the adoles- cents identity formation, as it is through relationships with others that one forms a realistic self concept. Heterosexual relationships help define the adolescents role as a sexual adult. The individual l8 must protect the emerging self in interpersonal relationships. The adolescent is also pressured by the adult world to make life-long career choices which are valued by the community in which he or she lives. The fear of "choosing too soon" and never fully discovering ones' potential is a constant threat to the adolescent, yet he or she also fears that the choice may never be made. The pull between individual and group desires, stability and adventurous Self-dis— covery, isolation and exploration of the self through others, com— bined with the physiological changes of adolescence are a threat to the individuals' growing self. Here, probably more than any life- stage, the individual erects a strong defensive structure for self- protection. This high level of defensiveness is salient in hetero- sexual relationships and is related to the aggressive elements in adolescent sexuality. To discuss this relationship it is neces- sary to create a definition of defensiveness. In this context, it includes any mechanism by which a person protects the "self" from internal and/or external threat. These mechanisms may be studied in the context of classical psychoanalytic defense mechanisms, or simply as behavioral methods by which an individual avoids "pain." For an individual dealing with identity issues, defensivenss is a waythrough which a self-concept can develop with the least turmoil. In general, a too rigid and encompassing defensive structure will stifle personal growth, while a lack ofdefensivenessis anxiety pro- voking. The dilemma between comfort and growth is salient during adolescence. It is for this reason that maturation is difficult and heterosexual relationships are aggressive in nature. The adolescent l9 wants to have relationships with others, for the information they give in helping the individual form a self-concept, and the social pleasures that can be gained through interaction with others. Yet closeness brings the pain of self-doubt, the painful knowledge that one has weaknesses, and limited self-understanding. To ward off much of these painful feelings, the adolescent removes them from the self. This can be done by blaming, consciously or unconsciously, the partner for these feelings, bringing hostility into the rela- tionship. The blaming can take several forms. One way of avoiding painful feelings is through a projective type of mechanism, "These are your problems, not mine.” Another way is by "denial," ”You seem to want me to think I'm such and such a person, but I'm not." The adolescent may feel angry that the relationship is making him or her uncomfortable; he or she may distance themselves from the relationship to "punish" the partner for evoking these feelings as well as to avoid these anxiety laden issues. Defensiveness is a component of aggression in sexuality, as it is related to other aspects of adolescence. The high level of defensiveness in adoles- cent relationships, with their resultant aggressive aspects, makes them unique. Hypotheses Hypothesis I Subjects in lower levels of psychosocial development will respond with sexual imagery on a projective task when aggressively aroused, and with aggressive imagery when sexually aroused. 20 This is due to a link between sexual and aggressive mo- tivation for subjects of lower levels of psychosocial development, for reasons elaboratedirithe preceeding discussion. In brief, for these individuals, hetero- sexual relationships are situations for both sexual and aggressive interactions. Hypothesis 2 Subjects lower in psychosocial development will be more highly defensive. The rationale is elaborated in the pre- ceeding discussion. In brief, due to insecurity in their identity and the subsequent insecurity in relationships, subjects in lower levels of psychosocial development will be more defensive overall. METHOD Measures Inventory of Psychosocial Development(IPD). The measure to assess psychosocial development was construc- ted by Constantinople (I969). This measure uses a seven-point self- rating scale on items relating to the polar factors of Erikson's first six stages of psychosocial development. Each polar factor labels a subscale that is composed of five words or phrases that are rated by the subject. For example, Erikson's first stage is measured by a Basic Trust subscale and a Basic Mistrust subscale, the instrument consisting of a total of twelve subscales. The instrument was derived from a Q-sort, devised by Wessman and Ricks (I966) who used it in a clinical setting to mea- sure changes in self concept in college males. Constantinople changed the format to a rating system rather than a Q-sort to make it more facilitative for use in developmental studies employing a large N. Unfortunately, Wessman and Ricks give no data concerning the reliability of their Q-sort form of the measure. Neither were there validity estimates for subscales, although there is consider- able congruence between personality data derived from the Q-sort and other psychological measures, including clinical judgment. The psychometric status of Constantinople's measure appears to be adequate. In a six-week test-retest reliability study, median r was .70. However, for males, social desirability Zl 22 response set does have some influence on obtained scores. A signi- ficant correlation was found between scores for Erikson's fourth, fifth, and sixth stages and the Marlowe-Crowne measure of need for social approval. Constantinople points out that it may be impossi- ble to eliminate entirely the influence of social desireability from the measure, as it is correlated with personal adjustment. Clear bipolarities were found for only the first, fourth, and sixth stages, with stage 2 being the weakest. Constantinople did not find that there were differences in item applicability for males and females. Thompson (I975) tested the validity of the IPD on a popu- lation of college honor students. Like Constantinople, she found the strongest polarities to exist in stages I, 4 and 6, with stage 2 the weakest. She also found that ego identity, as measured with this instrument, to be negatively correlated with three measures of anxiety and positively correlated with six measures of self es- teem. She states that the IPD seems to be an adequate indicator of ego development as defined by Erikson. Partial indications of validity for the IPD comes from Constantinople's own study, which showed a longitudinal increase in identity over the college years; from Waterman et al. (I970) who found successful resolutioncyf the Identity Scale related to successful resolutions of prior crises; and from Munley (I975) who found that adjusted vocational choice (the choice of a vocation that coincides with actual abilities and interests) and vocational 23 maturity were related to successful resolutions across stages, as measured by the IPD. The IPD contains several items that may be difficult for certain populations to clearly understand, although they might have been comprehensible for Constantinople's and Thompson's honors and career oriented students. Because the subjects in the proposed experiment have varied levels of ability, the vocabulary used in certain items has been simplified, to help all subjects understand the meaning of all items. The revised measure is presented (see Appendix A). All entries with an asterik have been changed, the original item in parentheses below the revised item. Rassmussen's Ego Identity Scale (EIS) This scale consists of 72 statements (see Appendix B) to which the subject deems applicable to him (by responding "true”) or unlike him (by responding "false"). The items for each stage can be used to examine various derivatives of health and ill- health, as described by Erikson. For example, a derivative of stage 5 (Ego Identity vs. Ego Diffusion) is "sense of psychological well-being; being at home in one's body".' Certain items that mea- sure stage 5 reflect this particular derivative. Each stage can be divided into 3 derivatives either healthy or not healthy with 4 items reflecting each derivative. In selecting items, Rasmussen attempted to use derivatives from Erikson in a literal or concrete manner, and avoid interpreting the original text. As the criteria for satisfactory or unsatisfactory resolution of psychosocial ‘51s 24 conflicts was taken directly from Erikson, Rasmussen states that content validity is not a problem. However, to control for possible misunderstandings and ambiguities in wording, the statements Ras- mussen devised were subjected to the test of being unanimously agreed upon by two judges as accurately reflecting a stage of psycho- social development and a particular derivative. The reliability of the measure which was used on two groups of Navy recruits, was .85 in both cases. Measurement of Sexual and Aggressive Motivation Sexual and aggressive motivation was measured by fantasy responses to eight specially prepared TAT-type photographs (Barclay & Haber, I965) (see Appendix C). These cards depict four heterosexual scense and are one of two forms: female dominant (F0) or male dominant (MD). Each subject received a test booklet con- taining four pictures, one of each scene. Two of the pictures were MD, two FD. Two sets of booklets were constructed, differing only in the form of each picture. Half of each group of subjects received a different set. Paper was provided in the test booklet for writing responses. Instructions were printed on the cover sheet to the booklet, and also read aloud: "This is a test of creative imagination. In order to get the best possible response, look at each picture for ten to twenty seconds. Try to see what is taking place, then use the following page to write a story about it. Try to answer: (I) What led up to the events taking place? 2) What is happening now? ( (3) How are the people feeling? (4) How will it turn out? 25 It is important that your story contains answers to these questions. However, don't just answer the questions--write a complete, continuous story. You will have five minutes to write each story. The experimenter will let you know when it is time to go on to the next picture. It has been found that the best stories are written by people who relax, let themselves go, and write whatever comes into their heads, even though some parts of the story may not make much sense at the time. Naturally, there are no "right" or "wrong" stories so relax and have a good time. Protocols were scored for sexual and aggressive imagery and defense using Barclay's (I967) revised scoring system. Judges were blind as to which arousal generated the protocol. Measures of Arousal Effectiveness The purpose of these measures was to assess the effect of the different arousal conditions to be used. The "Own Feelings Checklist" measures the specificity of each arousal, for example, whether the sexual arousal elicited sexual feelings and only sexual feelings. This checklist also measures the level of general arousal in each condition. The "Behavioral Checklist" measures behavioral manifestations of arousal, and serves as another measure of general arousal. The control condition should be less arousing than the sex or aggression condition. I. "Own Feelings Checklist." Each subject will rate his/her reaction to the videotape. Instructions: Rate the degree to which the words below agree with your feelings during the film. 00 this by circling the correct number. I means I'not at all," 4 means "moderately" and 7 means “extremely." 26 For example, if you were moderately sad during the film, you would answer: 12 3®5 6 7 sad not at all moderately extremely Now rate your feelings using the feeling words below: affectionate, aggressive, amused, angry, anxious, apathetic, bored, delighted, disgusted, elated, embarassed, enraged, envious, fearful, guilty, hostile, hungry, indifferent, jealous, lighthearted, nauseous, nervous, resentful, sexually aroused, shameful, sleepy, tense, terrified, thirsty, tired. To determine the level of arousal, subjects' numerical rat- ings of relevant words were totaled, and divided by the number of words. The words relevant to each arousal are as follows: Sex: affectionate, sexually aroused Aggression: aggressive, angry, enraged, hostile Control: apathetic, bored, indifferent General: anxious, tense 2. "Behavioral Checklist." On a scale of I to 5, subjects rated their experience of certain behaviors during the film. In- structions were: It is also important to examine the extent to which be- havioral states are related to a person's feelings. There- fore, we are asking you to describe other reactions you may have had while watching the film. To what extent did you experience the following be- haviors? I means "not at all," 3 means "medium," and 5 means "to a great extent." The behaviors listed are: banging the table, butterflies in stomach, crying, genital sensation, hiding your eyes, hunger 27 pangs, impulse to run, increased heart rate, laughter, making a fist, fist, nausea, sweating palms, verbal exclamations (Look Out! Help! Run! 0h!) To determine the level of arousal the subjects' numerical ratings of each experience was totaled. This score will be referred to as “action potential” arousal. Procedure Subjects were recruited through introductory psychology classes, where participation in psychological experiments can be used for extra credit. No financial compensation was offered. Approximately one third the subjects were exposed to a sexual arousal, one third were exposed to an aggressive arousal, and one third were exposed to a neutral arousal. The total number of sub- jects was 239. Therefore, there were three experimental groups: sexual arousal, aggressive arousal, and control (neutral arousal). Subjects were tested in large groups. The experimenter and assistants were introduced as graduate students from the Michigan State University Department of Psychology, working under the super- vision of faculty members. The experimenter informed the subjects that there would be two activities during the hour. First, they would be rating a videotape that will be used in future research. Next, they would be taking a test on "creative imagination," followed by some "gen- eral personality tests," which allow an understanding of the pro- cess of imagination. After the introduction, subjects viewed a videotape of either sexual, aggressive, or neutral(control) content. All three 28 videotapes have been used in previous research, although with somewhat different instructions (Barclay, I969). They have been found to elicit arousal-specific feelings; feelings matched to the videotape (Barclay, I972). All three videotapes depict scenes re- lating to a psychology experiment, and are about l2 minutes in length. In the sexual film, a male and female are waiting for a psychology experiment to begin. They had their first date the evening before and are very attracted to each other. When the experimenter leaves the room, they kiss and fondle each other for the remainder of the videotape. The aggressive arousal shows two males participating in a psychodrama involving a father and son. The "son" becomes violent and abusive, and refuses to let the ”father" leave the experiment; the psychodrama becomes real-life aggression. At the end, there is a fist-fight. The control (bor- ing) videotape shows three male students building a toy building, in an experiment measuring"teamwork." There is little dialog in this videotape. After the film subjects completed the arousal measures the "Test of Creative Imagination," and the measures of psychosocial development. As stated in the directions, the experimenter timed the test, allowing five minutes a story for the "Creative Imagina- tion Test." After these measures were collected, subjects were debriefed. RESULTS Arousal Effectiveness Table l Self-Report of Arousal Condition Sex Agg Cont F P Sex Arousal (SF) 2.62 l.26 I.35 42.34 .00l a b b Aggressive Arousal l.89 3.43 l.95 40.20 .00l (AF) C d c Control Arousal 4.33 3.2l 5.l8 27.45 .00I (CF) e e f General Arousal 4.75 5.56 4.02 ll.97 .00l (G) 9 h 9 Action Potential 6.97 7.38 6.48 2.63 .074 Arousal (AC) i j i Note: Same letters indicate no difference between groups. Using MANOVA (see above Table I) it was found that subjects reported sexual, aggressive and control feelings (SF, AF, CF) differed between conditions, as measured by the "Own Feelings Check- list." Sheffe's test performed on the mean reported feelings for each condition showed that subjects reported feelings were 29 3O congruent with the arousal condition. Sexual arousal was signifi- cantly higher in the sex condition(p= .05) whereas the reported aggressive and control feelings did not differ significantly from each other in this condition. For the aggressive arousal condition, Sheffe's test showed that reported aggressive feelings were signi- ficantly higher than either sexual or control feelings. In the control condition, control feelings were significantly higher than either sexual or aggressive feelings, between which there was no significant difference. There was no significant difference in the degree of re- ported general arousal between the sexual and aggressive conditions, but general arousal was significantly higher in the aggressive con- dition when compared to the control condition. There was no main effect for condition for the subjects re- ported action potential arousal, but a strong trend was noted. Ac- tion potential arousal is strongest in the aggressive condition, with the greatest difference between the aggressive and control condition. No significant sex differences in the self report variables were found but females tended to report fewer sexual feelings than males (p = .064) when sexually aroused. No other significant main effects were found or were there any interactions. Measures of Psychosocial Development Through MANOVA, a significant sex difference was found for all but one psychosocial developmental measure, Constantinople's 3l measure of identity (C5). In all instances, females had a higher mean score; their reported psychosocial development was higher than that of the male. Table 2 Mean Psychosocial Scores M F X Identity Resolution C5 7.69 8.53 8.l0 Intimacy Resolution C6 l0.30 l3.64 l2.04 Identity and Intimacy X l2.00 l4.79 Resolution There was no significant main effect for condition; condition did not have a significant effect on the measures of psychosocial development. In addition, no significant interaction between sex and condition was present; sex differences were not effected by con- dition. Reliabilities For sexual and aggressive imagery, reliabilities were com- puted by Pearson correlation, between the two raters who scored each test booklet. All reliabilities were acceptable and some were very strong. 32 Table 3 Sexual and Aggressive Imagery Reliabilities Raters l 2 3 4 l - .82 .92 .88 .82 .85 .72 2 - - .9l - .76 3 - - - .92 .73 4 - - _ - Note: Sexual imagery reliability is reported above the aggres- sive imagery reliability. In two instances, due to scheduling problems, it was not possible to obtain com- pletely crossed reliabilities. For the same reason it was not possible for all pairs of raters to score equal numbers of booklets. Defensive imagery reliabilities were calculated in terms of percentage agreement, due to the nature of the data. Barclay's scoring system for defense contains five categories of defensive- ness, with two levels of intensity for four of the categories. The labels for types of defense in Barclay's scoring system appear to coincide with the type of defense discussed previously but pilot scoring sessions found that it was not possible to establish ade- quate inter-rater reliability, however, reliability could be esta- blished on the total defense per booklet. For example, a phrase that one rater labeled avoidance might be labeled distancing by 33 another, but they both agree that the phrase was defensive in na- ture. As the principle interest in this reasearch is amount, rather than category of defense, each booklet was scored for all five types of imagery and was then given a summed score across the categories. This was done for both sexual and aggressive defense. The most im- portant aspect of reliability for this study is congruency between raters judgment of the presence or absence of sexual and aggressive defense in a story. Reliability was computed in terms of matching type of imagery (sexual or aggressive defense) rather than category. Instances where there was a “match" but there was a difference in intensity between raters, raters were considered to have "half a match" and given a score of .5 in the following formula. When ra- ters matched on sexual or aggressive defense, a score of l was given; when there was not a match, a zero score was given. Rab = # of stories matched / # stories scored The reliability for sexual defense was .86, for aggressive defense was .82. ”Replication" Results An underlying assumption of this investigation was that the experimental manipulation, especially the aggressive arousal, would have similar overall effects as compared to Barclay's previous studies (Barclay & Haber, I965; Barclay, I969, I970). It was assumed that the majority of subjects in the previous studies could be described as individuals with poorly resolved identity and inti- macy issues. For this reason, a linkage between sexual and aggres- sive motivation was found. It was here postulated that the imagery 34 of subjects of lower levels of psychosocial development would parallel the previous findings, while the paradigm would not hold for subjects of higher psychosocial levels. Because the influence of higher level subjects would be removed, it was assumed that the sex-aggression linkage would be stronger for subjects of lower psychosocial levels than the subjects of previous studies. The overall results, not including the psychosocial dimen- sion, can be considered to represent a replication of Barclay's previous studies. In the present study, unlike Barclay's, there was no effect for condition. In fact, the sexual imagery scores were almost equivalent for all three conditions, as were the aggres- sive imagery scores (see Table 5). The only significant overall re- sults were a main effect for dominance, on sexual and aggressive imagery and sexual defense, a difference between the amounts of sexual and aggressive imagery, and a sex by condition by dominance interaction on sexual defense. Subjects displayed more sexual imagery to male dominant cards (X female dominant = 3.48, male dominant = 3.76, P = .042) and more aggressive imagery to female dominant cards (7 female dominant = 4.52, male dominant = 4.26, p = .044). Overall, there was more aggressive than sexual imagery (X agg = 8.77, X’= 7.23, p = .OOI). More sexual defense was evoked from male dominant cards (X'female dominant = .456, male dominant = .665, p = .0l5). The sex by condition by dominance interaction was significant at the .038 level for sexual defense. 35 Table 4 Sexual Defense Scores by Condition, Sex and Dominance Sex Aggression Control Male Male Dominant .66 .47 .43 Female Dominant .20 .4I .7l Female Male Dominant .64 .86 .74 Female Dominant .60 .5l .26 Regarding defensiveness, there was more overall sexual de- fense than aggressive defense (X'sexual defense = l.l2, aggressive defense = .75, p = .00l). Tables describing the overall results, sex by condition (by dominance) for sexual and aggressive imagery and sexual and aggres- sive defense are included (see Tables 5, 6, 7 and 8). 36 Table 5 Sexual Imagery Scores by Condition, Sex, and Dominance Male Female Dominant Dominant Sex Males 3.69 3.59 7.28 Females 3.62 3.69 7.31 7'30 Aggression Males 3.59 3.56 7.l5 Females 4.02 3.53 7.55 7'39 Control Males 3.48 3.33 6.8l Females 3.98 3.05 7.02 6'95 3.76 3.48 Table 6 Aggressive Imagery Scores by Condition, Sex, and Dominance Male Female Dominant Dominant Sex Males 4.2I 4.07 8.28 Females 4.32 4.72 9.03 8'79 Aggression Males 4.29 4.44 8.74 Females 4.17 4.71 8.88 8'82 Control Males 4.29 4.62 8.90 Females 4.25 4.35 8.60 8'70 4.26 4.52 37 Table 7 Sexual Defense Scores by Condition, Sex, and Dominance Male Female Dominant Dominant Sex Males .66 .2l .86 Females .54 .51 .25 1"2 Aggressive Males .47 .4I .88 Females .86 .5I .47 1‘18 Control Males .43 .7I .l4 Females .74 .26 .00 1'05 .67 .46 Table 8 Aggression Defense Scores by Condition, Sex, and Dominance Male Female Dominant Dominant Sex Males .3l .24 .55 Females .41 .52 .93 '81 Aggressive Males .32 .56 .88 Females .33 .45 .78 '82 Control Males .33 .24 .57 Females .21 .35 .55 '56 .33 .42 38 Use of the Independent Variable Subjects' comments written on the Rasmussen scale revealed that many subjects did not take the scale seriously or did not res- pond honestly. The true-false format appears to have increased social desirability biasing subjects' responses. In a forced choice situation subjects chose the more socially desirable response. In addition, the range was restricted to scores near the upper bounds of the measure which also supports the assumption of bias. Because of these problems, it was decided to excluse the Rasmussen measure from further analysis. In order to investigate the specific effects identity and intimacy have on imagery and defense, the results were analyzed using three different criteria of psychosocial development. Con- stnatin0ple's measure yields separate scores for identity resolu- tion (CS) as well as intimacy resolution (C6). Combining these scores reflects the degree to which the subject has simultaneously resolved both identity and intimacy (C56). A subject's subscale score on either identity or intimacy reflects how well he or she has resolved conflicts directly attributable to the particular scale. Although in theory, psychosocial development is assumed to be epigenetic, Constantinople's measure meets this criterion only with some flaws. For example, a subject may have a poor resolution of conflicts associated with identity, but can have relative success with intimacy. As a result of this problem, three separate analyses were performed. In each analysis two different stages were created, poor resolution and good resolution; subjects were divided on the 39 median of the particular psychosocial score or the stage. To measure the effect of combined identity and intimacy resolution, subjects were divided on the median of the combined score. Those subjects below the median of the distribution were labeled as minus, while those subjects above the median of a parti- cular stage were labeled plus subjects. Because sex of subject differentially affected scoring on psychosexual measures, with fe- males as a whole measuring as more advanced psychosocially, the medians of each sex's score distribution was used separately, rather than using the median of the combined distribution. Identity Resolution (C5) The original hypotheses were that subjects in stage C5-, or who had poorly resolved identity conflicts, would respond with sex— ual imagery to an aggressive arousal and with aggressive imagery to a sexual arousal, due to the linkage of sexual and aggressive moti- vation. The stage by condition interactions by sexual and aggres- sive imagery were nonsignificant, but there were definite trends in the hypothesized direction (see Table 9). 40 Table 9 Sexual and Aggressive Imagery Scores by Stage and Condition (Identity Resolution) Sex Aggression Control Sexual Imagery Poor Identity Resolution (C5-) 7.09 7.78 6.66 Good Identity Resolution (05+) 7.53 6.66 7.I2 Aggressive Imagery Poor Identity Resolution (C5-) 9.ll 8.9l 8.7l Good Identity Resolution (C5+) 8.44 8.66 8.68 In addition, it was hypothesized that subjects in stage C5- would respond with more overall defense, with sexual defense being greatest in response to an aggressive arousal and aggressive defense being greatest in response to a sexual arousal. Subjects would defend against "inappropriate" feelings, such as sexual arousal when the overt situation is aggressive in nature. Stage C5- subjects would be more defensive overall due to their instability in identity. The stage by condition interactions for sexual and aggressive defense were nonsignificant (see Table l0), but there was a signifi- cant stage by condition by dominance interaction for aggressive defense (p = .007). 4I Table IO Sexual and Aggressive Defense by Stage and Condition (Identity Resolution) Sex Aggression Control Poor Identity Resolution C5- Sexual Defense l.04 l.07 l.ll Aggressive Defense .89 .96 .56 Good Identity Resolution C5+ Sexual Defense l.20 I.37 l.00 Aggressive Defense .72 .60 .57 Table II Aggressive Defense Scores by Condition, Dominance, and Stage (Identity Resolution) Sex Aggres- Control X- sion Male Dominant Poor Identity Resolution 5- .57 .33 .33 .42 Good Identity Resolution 5+ .I6 .33 .I9 .22 Female Dominant Poor Identity Resolution 5- .32 .62 .22 .43 Good Identity Resolution 5+ .56 .27 .38 .42 42 Under a sexual arousal, Stage 05+, or good identity forma- tion subjects, showed little aggressive defense to male dominant cards, but were highly aggressively defensive to female dominant cards. In response to female dominant cards, subjects in Stage 05-, or subjects with poor identity formation, were highly sexually defensive when aggressively aroused, an increase over their res- ponse under a sexual arousal. Stage 05+ subjects were not defen- sive, a decrease from their defense under a sexual arousal. In the control condition to male dominant cards, Stage 05- subjects showed no difference from the response under aggressive arousal. In con- trast, they showed a large decrease in aggressive defense to female dominant cards. Stage 05+ subjects were slightly less defensive in the control condition, to male dominant cards, and slightly more defensive to male dominant cards. Intimacy Resolution (06) The original hypotheses were that subjects in Stage 06-, or who had poorly resolved intimacy issues, would respond with sexual imagery to an aggressive imagery to a sexual arousal, due to the linkage of sexual and aggressive motivation. The stage by condi- tioninteractionsikw'sexual and aggressive imagery were nonsignifi- cant, but there were definite trends in the hypothesized direction (see Table l2). Table I2 Sexual and Aggressive Imagery Scores by Stage and Condition (Intimacy Resolution) Sex Aggression Control Sexual Imagery Poor Intimacy Resolution (C6-) 7.02 7.56 6.8l Good Intimacy Resolution (06+) 7.63 7.2l 8.68 Aggressive Imagery Poor Intimacy Resolution (06-) 9.02 8.95 7.I0 Good Intimacy Resolution (06+) 8.5l 8.7l 8.73 In addition, it was hypothesized that subjects in Stage 05- would respond with more overall defense, with sexual defense being greatest in response to an aggressive arousal and aggressive de- fense being greatest in response to a sexual arousal. As identity formation and intimacy issues are related, each enhancing the other's development, Stage 06- subjects would respond similarly to 05- subjects. They would defend against I'inappropriate" feelings, such as sexual arousal when the overt situation is aggressive in nature. Stage 06- subjects would overall be more defensive due to their instability in identity. The stage by condition interactions for sexual and aggressive defense were nonsignificant, but there were other significant results (see Table I3). 44 Table I3 Sexual and Aggressive Defense by Stage and Condition (Intimacy Resolution) Sex Aggression Control Poor Intimacy Resolution 06- Sexual Defense .88 l.l4 .84 Aggressive Defense .90 .74 .55 Good Intimacy Resolution 06+ Sexual Defense l.4l l.22 l.24 Aggressive Defense .7I .90 .58 There was a main effect for stage, in a direction opposite that of the hypothesis; stage 06+ subjects were more sexually defen- sive than stage C6- subjects (06- = .96, 06+ = l.23, p== .05). In addition, there was a significant interaction between sex, stage and condition for sexual defense (p = .05). 45 Table I4 Sexual Defense Scores by Condition, Sex and Stage (Intimacy Resolution) Sex Aggres- Control 'X sion Poor Intimacy Resolution 06- Male .29 l.05 l.40 .88 Female l.ll l.2l .57 l.00 Good Intimacy Resolution 06+ Male l.40 .66 .90 l.00 Female l.42 l.5l l.40 l.45 l.l2 l.l8 l.05 Under a sexual arousal, stage 06+ males, or males with good intimacy resolution, were highly sexually defensive, while 06- males, or males with poor intimacy resolution, were not. Both 06+ and 06- females were highly defensive. Aggressively aroused stage 06- males were highly sexually defensive, much more so than when sexually aroused, while 06+ males were moderately defensive, much less than when sexually aroused. As when sexually aroused, aggressively aroused females were highly defensive. In the control condition, males in stage 06- were most defensive, compared to other condi— tions, and 06+ males were also highly defensive, although not as defensive as when sexually aroused. Stage 06+ females showed no 46 significant change from the other conditions, which 06- females were much less defensive in the control condition. There was a significant interaction between sex, condition and stage, and the difference scores between sexual and aggressive defense (p < .022). Table l5 Difference Scores between Sexual and Aggressive Imagery by Condition, Sex and Stage Condition Sex Aggression Control Poor Intimacy Resolution 06— Male -.50 .42 l.00 Female .17 .38 -.l2 Good Intimacy Resolution 06+ Male l.0l -.53 .l8 Female .50 .77 .9I Sexually aroused males in stage 06- respond with more de- fensive aggression than defensive sex. Males in stage 06+ respond with more defensive sex than defensive aggression to a sexual arousal. Females in both stages 06- and 06+ respond with more de- fensive sex than defensive aggression, although this is stronger for females in stage 06+. Aggressively aroused males in stage 06- respond with more sexual defense than aggressive defense, while 47 males in stage 06+ respond with more aggressive defense than sexual defense. Females in stage 06- and 06+ respond with more sexual than aggressive defense, although this is again stronger for stage 06+ females. In the control condition, stage 06- males respond with more sexual than aggressive defense. Stage 06+ males do the same, but to a much less extent. Stage 06- females respond to the control condition with slightly more aggressive than sexual arousal, while stage 06+ females respond with more sexual than aggressive defense. Combination of Identity and Intimacy Resolution (056) The original hypotheses were that subjects in stage 056-, or who had poor resolution of both identity and intimacy issues, would respond with sexual imagery to an aggressive arousal, and with aggressive imagery to a sexual arousal, due to the linkage of sexual and aggressive motivation. The stage by condition interac- tions for sexual and aggressive imagery were nonsignificant, but there were definite trends in the hypothesized direction (see Table I6). 48 Table I6 Sexual and Aggressive Imagery Scores by Stage and Condition (Identity and Intimacy Resolution) Sex Aggression Control Sexual Imagery Poor Identity - Intimacy (C56-) 6.90 7.55 6.86 Good Identity - Intimacy (056+) 7.66 7.I3 7.03 Aggressive Imagery Poor Identity - Intimacy (056-) 8.9l 8.92 8.59 Good Identity - Intimacy (056+) 8.68 8.66 8.80 In addition, it was hypothesized that subjects in stage 056- would respond with more overall defense, with sexual defense being greatest in response to an aggressiVe arousal and aggressive defense being greatest in response to a sexual arousal. Subjects would defend against "inappropriate feelings,” such as sexual arousal when the overt situation is aggressive in nature. Stage 056- subjects would be more defensive overall due to their insta- bility in identity. The stage by condition interactions for sexual and aggressive defense were nonsignificant, but there were other significant findings (see Table I7). 49 Table I7 Sexual and Aggressive Defense by Stage and Condition (Identity and Intimacy Resolution) Sex Aggression Control 056-* Sexual Defense .8l l.06 .97 Aggressive Defense .93 .85 .5l C56+* Sexual Defense l.40 l.37 l.ll Aggressive Defense .70 .78 .60 *056- and 056+ represent poor and good resolution, respec- tively, of both identity and intimacy issues. There was a significant main effect for stages for sexual defense: 056+ subjects were more defensive than 056- subjects (056+ = I.30, 056- = .95, p = .03). This finding is in the opposite direction of the hypothesis. In addition, there was a significant sex by stage interaction (p = .04) for sexual defense. 50 Table I8 Sexual Defense Scores by Sex and Stage 056-* 056+* 'X Males l.00 .87 .94 Females .92 l.54 l.2l .95 I.30 *056- and 056+ represent poor and good resolution, res- pectively, of both identity and intimacy issues. Using Sheffe's test it was found that stage 056+ females are significantly more sexually defensive than the other groups (p =.05). There was a significant interaction for aggressive defense, between stage, condition, and dominance (p = .05). 5T Table I9 Aggressive Defense Scores by Condition, Dominance and Stage Sex Aggression Control Male Dominant 056-* .58 .30 .3I 056+* .I9 .36 .35 Female Dominant 056-* .34 .54 .20 056+* .5l .40 .40 *056- and 056+ represent poor and good resolution, res- spectively, of both identity and intimacy issues. Sexually aroused stage 056- subjects were more aggressively defensive to male dominant cards. This was reversed, in magnitude and direction, when subjects were aggressively aroused. In the con- trol condition, 056- subjects responded to male dominant cards as if they were aggressively aroused. Stage 056+ subjects responded oppositely of the 056- sub- jects. When sexually aroused, they were only slightly aggressively defensive to male dominant cards, and much more to female dominant cards. When aggressively aroused, their aggressive defense to male dominant cards increased, while their aggressively defensive res- ponses to female dominant cards decreased. Stage 056+ responses 52 were equal in the control and aggressively aroused conditions, for responses to both male dominant and female dominant cards. DISCUSSION General Discussion The primary focus of this investigation was to determine how psychosocial development affects the relationship between sex— ual and aggressive motivation. In general, it was hypothesized that the relationship would be found in individuals who have not resolved specific developmental issues. It was assumed that previous data were reflective of only a single developmental stage rather than in— corporating subjects from several areas of the distribution. Few of the hypotheses were directly supported, but the study yielded information on two issues. First, psychosocial devel- opment affects the relationship between sex and aggression. Second, not only does the development of an individual effect this rela— tionship, but so do the changes within a society, through time. This is in line with Eriksonian theory, which proposes that an individual resolves developmental crises in a way particular to the culture, and although the basic progress of developmental epigenisis is uniform in all societies, the methods of resolution are related to the "outer world." Although the hypothesized stage by condition interaction was not found for overt imagery, the cell means illuminate infor- mative trends in the data. When sexual and aggressive imagery after a sexual arousal is considered, there are marked differences be— tween psychosocial stages. Subjects of lower levels of 53 54 psychological devel0pment respond to a sexual arousal with consid— erably less sexual imagery than subjectscd higher psychosocial levels. They also respond with more aggressive imagery. This is directly in line with the present hypotheses, which predict that lower level subjects will respond with more aggressive imagery to a sexual arousal than higher level subjects, and less sexual imagery. Comparing across conditions, subjects of lower psychosocial levels responded with less sexual imagery under sexual arousal than under aggressive arousal, while subjects of higher levels responded more "appropriately," giving more sexual imagery under a sexual arousal. The lower level subjects also responded with more aggressive imagery to a sexual arousal than an aggressive arousal, while high- er level subjects responded with more aggressive imagery to an aggressive arousal. All these findings support a sex-aggression linkage for lower level subjects only. If these relationships are valid, and support the sexual-aggression linkage, why were the stage by condition interactions nonsignificant? The answer lies in the ratio between sexual and aggressive imagery responses. When the stage by condition interactions are studied, it is seen that in all conditions the amount of aggressive imagery is greater than the amount of sexual imagery; subjects aggressive imagery responses were stronger than their sexual imagery responses. Overall, subjects responded with more aggressive imagery than sexual imagery. Under aggressive arousal, subjects of higher psychosocial levels responded with less aggressive imagery than the lower level sub- jects which is in conflict with the sexual-aggression hypothesis. 55 However, when the sexual imagery scores under aggressive arousal are compared between psychosocial levels the aggressive arousal appears to have been effective. The strength of aggressive imagery, combined with the rever- sal of hypothesized results under aggressive arousal, suggests that aggression, in general, is a more salient motive. A possible ex- ,planation is that the cues elicited by the classroom situation en- hance aggressive motivation. The classroom environment is associa- ted with competition, as well as being an arena for interactions with authority figures, i.e. instructors. Competition with fellow students breeds aggression and the college student may become enmeshed in ”power“ struggles with authority figures as the issues of dependency and control are explored in the college experience. With these points in consideration, it seems reasonable to expect aggressive motives to be enhanced in a classroom situation. In addition, although there were no significant stage differences for overt imagery, in all cases, individuals of lower psychosocial le- vels responded with more aggressive imagery than subjects of higher psychosocial levels, both within and across arousal conditions. This is congruent with psychosocial theory; subjects of lower psy- chosocial levels are concerned with issues of power and competition, "proving their worth," and the classroom cues were more salient to these subjects. However, in Barclay's studies, the overall amount of sexual and aggressive overt imagery was equivalent, and his studies were conducted in classroom situations. How can the present assumption that the overabundance of aggressive imagery was the 56 result of the classroom situation be supported? One, present day students are more concerned with success. Unlike the subjects of IO years ago, today's subjects are likely to be more concerned with success in academics, instead of "learning your own thing.“ Compe— tition is an important aspect of college today. Two, the relation- ship between the classroom setting and the experimental procedure was less clear than in previous studies. Whereas in previous stud- ies the anger arousal coincided with the classroom situation, i.e. a professor telling his class that they were incompetent, subjects in the present study were tested in a classroom but not as part of a class. Subjects confronted with ambiguity in a psychological experiment may search for cues to signal them to "appropriate" be- haviors and feelings. In the present study, these cues may have been related to the classroom setting, and elicited anger and aggression regardless of the arousal condition. Subjects of lower psychosocial levels were more atune to these cues. First of all, they may have been more insecure and tended to be more aware of cues in their environment. Second, they are more concerned with competition, and the classroom cues may have had a stronger effect. This paradigm is one explanation of the lack of a stage by condition interaction of overt imagery and the reversal of hypothesized re- sults in the aggressive arousal condition. In general, psychosocial development relates to psychologi- cal defensiveness, rather than overt imagery. As a whole, however, subjects responded differentially to dominance cues in social situ- ations. They showed more sexual imagery when males were dominant 57 and more aggressive imagery when females were dominant. It is im- portant to note that subjects were also more highly sexually defen- sive in the presence of dominant males, but were not more aggres— sively defensive to dominant females. These results seem to be a direct reflection of societal norms which specify that dominant males are appropriate or common in sexual situations. These data suggest that most people respond to a dominant male with sexual be- havior. Interestingly enough, many subjects' responses to male- dominant pictures assumed a sexual interaction between the male and female characters in the story. A typical excerpt is: "of course the boss will try to seduce his secretary. That's the way it always is.” However, the subjects did not feel comfortable dealing with the sexual implications they projected since they were highly sexually defensive. Although in recent years, sexuality is talked about fairly openly both in private and in the media, sex still causes guilt and anxiety for the adolescent sample. Subjects might label the situation as sexual because of male-female cues but were anxious and, as a result, acted defensively. Subjects were aggressive in female-dominant situations, but not defensive regard- ing their hostility. To generalize form the subjects' responses, it appears that dominant females are regarded as inappropriate still and are a target of angry'responses from men and women alike. All subjects showed an interaction between sex, condition, and dominance for sexual defense. Sexually aroused females were sexually defensive regardless of the sex of the dominant person. Males were sexually defensive only in the presence of a dominant 58 male. This is in contrast to previous studies which found that males are more sexually aroused and more sexually defensive than fe- males. Here, there is no significant difference in amount of sexual arousal between males and females, to female dominant cards, but males were less defensive. One explanation is that males were sexually aroused by the female dominant situation, but were defen- sive. However, their defensiveness was manifested in lack of imagery rather than in sexual defensiveness; they defended by responding with neutral or short stories to the female dominant cards. Under an aggressive arousal, the female response to dominant males is most sexually defensive. Females are sexually aroused by the aggres- sive elements that a dominant male elicits, but are uncomfortable with these feelings. The other groups were equivalent. Sexual defensiveness is related to psychosocial development, in a direction opposite that of the hypotheses. Subjects who were higher in psychosocial resolution were more defensive than those who had comparatively poorer resolution of psychosocial conflicts. This held true where psychosocial development was measured in terms of the joint resolution of identity and intimacy, (056) and in terms of intimacy alone (06). There are no differences in sexual defen- siveness when identity resolution is used alone as a variable. It appears that resolution of intimacy issues is related to the defensive structure of an individual. Subjects in 06+ were more sexually defensive than 06- subjects. This is especially true for females. When 056 is the independent variable, females in 056+ are significantly more sexually defensive than 056+ males and 056- males 59 and females. In the stage by sex by condition interaction for 06 it can be seen that females in 06+ are consistently and significantly more sexually defensive than the other subjects. It had been ex- pected that successful resolution of identity issues and movement into intimacy would be inversely related to level of defense. In- stead, there seems to be a direct relationship, especially for fe- males. One explanation is that identity formation for females con- sists of powerful incorporation of the attitudes and modes of socie- ty. Instead of feeling comfortable in heterosexual relationships because of having a stable identity, females, as a result of their identification with societal values, become more sexually defensive. Females learn to regard themselves as the standard-bearers of Ameri- can society, as vehicles of maintaining the status quo. They identi- fy with the moral, upright woman, who is a representation of socie- tal values. While males are freer in choosing an identity, females are pressured to conform to the image of virtue. Even if a man ac- cepts a conventional identity, this identity is much less sexually restrictive than that of the female. The hypothesized stage by condition interaction for sexual defense was nonsignificant, but, as stated before, there was a sex by stage by condition interaction when psychosocial development was measured by C6. The interaction supports the hypothesis that sub- jects who have poor psychosocial resolution will find the aggres- sive situation to be sexually arousing and defend against these sexual feelings. Stage 06— males are less sexually defensive than any other group, when confronted with a sexual situation. One 6O explanation is that they were aggressively aroused by the sexual stimuli, rather than sexually aroused. This caused a reduction in sexual defense. The aggressive feelings elicited by the sexual stimuli were inappropriate and anxiety arousing to the stage 06 males. This anxiety caused them to focus their attention on defend- ing their aggressive feelings; this can be seen in the sex, condi- tion, and stage interaction of the difference scores between sexual and aggressive defense. This is not to say that they were not sex- ually aroused by the stimuli, but that the sexual arousal elicited aggressive feelings that the subjects felt uncomfortable with, much more uncomfortable than with sexual feelings along. They attended more strongly to the aggression; they spent little energy defending against sex, as the aggression caused the subjects to be more anxious. Why were the aggressive feelings so unnerving? Possibly, individuals who have not yet successfully resolved intimacy issues are still unsure about their heterosexual relationships, and may have recently experienced real or imagined failuresvfitfiianother per- son as they attempt to form intimate relationships. Aggressive feelings are therefore threatening for two reasons. One, the sub- jects may fear that any inappropriate feelings in the context of a sexual relationship are a deathknoll to that relationship. They may feel that their growing identity may not be perfect, and feel that this is called for. Secondly, they may feel guilty over any aggres— sive feelings they may have while forming intimate relationships, and become defensive when faced with these feelings. In summary, subjects who are just beginning to explore intimacy, as based on 6l ConstantinOple's measure, still have identity issues (with their sexual-aggressive overtones) left to resolve. In fact, some of these feelings may remain to some extent even with identity resolu- tion. However, the reaction of male subjects with poorly resolved intimacy issues is unique. Aggressively aroused males in stage 06+ were less sexually defensive than any other group. It appears that males who have be— gun to resolve intimacy issues do not feel uncomfortable with the sexual feelings that they may have when angered. Unlike the stage 06- males, these individuals feel comfortable in intimate relation- ships. They are more sure of their self and their feelings, and realize that, to a certain degree, some aggression (i.e., competi- tion) is often involved in sexuality, or in relationships in gener- al. For these 06+ subjects, aggression occupies a very minor place in their sexual relationships, as compared to other subjects, al- though the measure of intimacy does not guarantee that resolution of identity precedes resolution of intimacy. The 06+ males did not feel as threatened by their sexual response to aggression, and were therefore not sexually defensive. 06+ females are highly sexually defensive when angered. As they have incorporated the societal view of sex as a male conquest, they are probably sexually aroused as well as aggressively aroused, but feel uncomfortable with these sexual feelings and defend am gainst them. The stage 06- subjects were sexually defensive when angered. The explanation is embedded in the discussion of the 06+ response. 62 In short, subjects in stage 06- do not feel comfortable with their own sexual feelings in response to aggression. They are still un- sure about their ability to form intimate relationships and have not yet come to terms with any aggression in their encounters with the opposite sex. The 05 variable is the best predictor of aggressive defense. As seen previously, using 06 as an independent variable yields in- formation on the relationship between psychosocial development and sexual defensive imagery. However, defensive aggression and de- fensive sexuality are related, just asare»identity and intimacy re- solution. It is difficult to discuss the two categories of defense separately, just as it is difficult to discuss identity issues with- 0L1t examining intimacy issues. For this reason, much of the dis- cussion of the separate interactions for sexual and aggressive de- fense overlaps. Using 05 as the independent variable yields an interaction between stage, condition, and dominance cues for aggressive de- fense. Sexually aroused subjects in stage 05- were more highly aggressively defensive to dominant males than dominant females. It is possible that the male dominant stimuli typified the type of interpersonal relationship the poor identity formation group is struggling and competing within. The dominant male situation, as the 05- subjects are very uncomfortable with any interaction which threatens their identity. 05- subjects were less defensive to situations in which females are dominant because they are not of ma- jor concern to these subjects; most of their heterosexual 63 interaction still involves dominant males. 05+ subjects responded oppositely of their 05- counterparts; they were much more aggres- sively defensive to dominant females. This is probably because as identity becomes more stable, individuals branch out into relation- ships other than relationships in which the male is dominant and these other relationships become an area of heightened sensitivity for them. Stage 05+ subjects may be doing well in identity resolu- tion, well enough to begin to explore relationships in which the female is dominant. These are new and threatening, and still have elements of rivalry and aggression that are unresolved. Angered subjects in both 05- and 05+ did not defend against aggressive feelings elicited by dominant males. It appears that aggression to a dominant male arouses little anxiety; aggressive feelings seem to be accepted where the male is dominant. However, feeling aggressive to dominant females makes 05— subjects anxious; when they are aggressively aroused, involvement in a female dominant situation causes defense. Both males and females in 05— have little experience with dominant females. The male feels threatened when encountered with a dominant female; he is too unsure of himself to assert him- self, and too uncertain to not allow the female to lower his self esteem. As a result, he becomes defensive. The female is also not stable enough in her identity to feel comfortable with being dominant. Also, for both males and females, feeling defensive over the aggression may in itself be a way of avoiding the sexual arousal potential of the female dominant situation. 64 A further question would be to ask why dominance entered in- to the interaction for defense when 05 was the independent variable and not 06. The answer lies in the nature of the 05 variable. Part of identity formation consists of assessing one's power in relation to others. Competition and "power games" are a large part of rela- tionships during identity formation.' Dominance thus has a function when identity is examined. Comparison to Previous Studies The results of the present study differs from the I969 Bar— clay study, which used an aggressive and control arousal to investi- gate sexual and aggressive motivation. Comparing the two investiga- tions gives information concerning the effect of societal as well as experimental changes on the data of sexual and aggressive motiva- tion. There are striking differences in both the imagery and de- fensiveness results. Concerning imagery, angered subjects in the I969 study res- ponded with sexual imagery, supporting the hypothesis that sexuality and anger are linked. There were no significant interactions for imagery in the present study. There are several ways in which changes in the societal ex- periences of the subjects may have influenced the imagery results, all of which operate in conjunction with each other. First of all, the intensity and amount of sex and aggression in the media has risen considerably since the late l960's. Although subjects' self- report of their feelings seemed to indicate that they were aroused 65 by the films, subjects in the present study may have been able to distance themselves from the arousal stimuli, more than l969 sub— jects. Sex and aggression in the media are still interesting to the I977 subjects, but do not cause subjects to be emotionally involved. This allowed the present subjects to be less defensive, in terms of freedom with imagery. Their distancing from the stimuli caused them to be less anxious than the I969 subjects, in regards to ex- pressing the "appropriate" imagery; sex to sex, and aggression to aggression. This may have caused the differences between the appro- priate imagery response and the "linkage" response to disappear. For example, a I977 subject who was aggressively aroused would be freer in his/her aggressive imagery response, and while there would be a sexual imagery response, it would not be very different in quantity from the aggressive response. In addition, because the responses were time-limited, I977 subjects may have spent a greater portion of their time writing stories with the appropriate imagery, which they felt freer to do. The difference in imagery results between the I969 and I977 studies may also have been caused by differences in the experimen- tal procedure. In the I969 study, the anger arousal consisted of direct insults from the experimenter, while the I977 arousal was a videotape of a fight. Subjects in the I969 study had their self- esteem directly threatened, causing them to feel both anger at the experimenter and anxiety over the situation. This, then, was a potent aggressive arousal that may have been linked to sexual feel- ings that were expressed in imagery. The lowering of self-esteem 66 may also be directly related to their experiences with the opposite sex. The aggressive videotape, however, probably elicited more anxiety than pure aggression. Although the videotape has elements that may make a person question his or her competency, and is in itself an aggressive situation, it is not as anger arousing as the I969 direct insult manipulation. For this reason, the sex-aggres- sion linkage in the I977 study may not have been as strong; sub- jects were more anxious than angry. Subjects in the two studies also responded oppositely in terms of sexual defense. Subjects in the I969 study were more sex- ually defensive to dominant females than dominant males. Subjects in the present study were more sexually defensive to male dominant than female dominant cards. The difference here probably lies in changes in cultural attitudes to dominant females. In I969, women's liberation was changing the structure of society as a whole and of individual relationships. Both males and females felt uncomfortable with this new social structure; females felt unsure and perhaps guilty over female dominance, while males were threatened by the power being granted to women. As a result, neither sex felt com- fortable with dominant females, especially when their confusion and anger were enhanced by an aggressive arousal. By the time of the present study, people were becoming more comfortable with dominant women. Although people, especially late adolescents, are still un- comfortable with dominant females, they are more at ease than the I969 subjects. As a result, they are less defensive to dominant females than the I969 subjects. Therefore, the reason that the 67 I969 subjects more sexually defensive to dominant females and the I977 subjects more sexually defensive to dominant males, involves changes in defensivenss to female dominance rather than male domi- nance. Subjects' responses to male dominance likely stayed the same, but the response to female dominance changed. The two studies also differed in sexual defensivenss in the control condition. The I969 control group consisted of the experi- menter reading directions in a neutral, boring way, instead of being insulting. The I977 control group consisted of a repetitious video- tape of three people building a toy building. Males in the I969 control group were much more sexually defensive when aggressively aroused than in the control condition. In the present study, males were more sexually defensive in the control condition. It seems that in the I969 study, males were sexually aroused when angered and quite defensive about these feelings. However, there was little sexual arousal in the control condition, and not much sexual defense. The control condition in I977 was very different, however, and seemed to elicit intense feelings. Whereas the subjects in the control con- dition had to pay attention to a rather neutral situation (a psy— chology experimenter), subjects in the I977 situation were faced with a videotape. Being media-oriented individuals they expected something "interesting" and were probably excited or agitated when they came in the room and saw the videotape machine. When the tape turned out to be boring, the subjects had three alternatives. One, they could take the tape seriously and be bored. However, two other outcomes are likely. They could have been frustrated and 68 angry; disappointed that the film was not interesting. Thus the control situation could have been a potent anger arousal. The sub- jects could also have used the time to fantasize, probably about sex. Thus the control group may have been a sexual arousal for some. The non-demand tape, unlike the "live” and demanding experimenter in I969, could have allowed the subjects to fantasize. The effect dis- cussed here may not have occurred for females because the females may have taken the control tape more "seriously" than the males; they watched intently, followed instructions, and the tape did not elicit anger or sex from them. If females do uphold the social norms, it would make sense that they would conform to the experimen— tal situation more than the males. Support for the effect of a non- demand control condition was found by Mussen and Scodel (I955). They found that sexual imagery was less when the experimenter was formal, rather than informal. The informal experimenter may not have attracted the full attention of the subjects, allowing them to fantasize about sex and thus increase their sexual response, much like the subjects' response to the non-demand videotape. The I969 study and the I977 study also differed in aggres- sive defense. In I969, interactions were found between sex and arousal, and between sex and dominance. In I977, there were no sex differences, although when either C5 or 056 were used as a variable, there was a stage by arousal by dominance interaction. The lack of sex differences in the present study is caused by male responses in the control condition. In I969, males responded with almost no aggressive defense in the control condition, but considerable 69 aggressive defense to a hostile arousal. Males in I969 displayed high aggressive imagery when angered, and little aggressive imagery in the control condition. Barclay stated that the control males had little need to be aggressively defensive because they were not aroused. In the present study the control condition caused males to be aggressive and elicited aggressive defense. The control situ- ation was an anger arousing situation for the males because, as dis- cussed previously, they became frustrated and angry with the boring videotape, yet defended against these feelings. Related to these discussions is the finding that angered females in the I969 study were less aggressively defensive than in the control condition, while the opposite holds true for the present study. Barclay stated that the I969 study reflects that females are not defensive about expressing hostility when angered by a male experimenter. There are two possible explanations for the differ- ence between the studies. One, in I969, during the height of the women's liberation movement as well as it being a time of militancy and free expresssion in general, women had powerful external pres- sures to be open in their expression of aggression. It was socially unacceptable, especially for college women, to retreat from being aggressive or strong, and for this reason women were not defensive when angered. Today, there is less pressure on women to be militant and outspoken. One can attribute this to either the relative suc- cess of the women's movement, reducing the needed militancy of the beginning stages of the movement, or to a return to the female characteristics of passivity and nonaggression. Second, as discussed 70 previously, the differences in the control condition of the studies may have effected the defensiveness of the subjects. The present study elicited little aggressive defense in the control condition. It appears that the females took the boring videotape more seriously than the males, and were not experiencing aggressive feelings in that situation. For this reason, aggressive defense in the control condi- tion was less than in the arousal condition. In I969, it was the arousal condition that elicited the least aggressive defense. Un- like the present study, subjects in the I969 study were angered by a hostile male experimenter. These females may have been openly aggressive in their stories due to the effects of the women's move- ment discussed above; the hostile male was an appropriate target for aggression. Defensiveness was not needed. For this reason, the I969 arousal group was less aggressively defensive than the control group. In the I969 study males responded with greater sexual image- ry to dominant females, as well as with greater sexual defensiveness. In the present study, there were no differences in sexual imagery, but males responded with more sexual defense to dominant males, especially when aroused sexually. It is possible that in both studies males were sexually aroused by the female dominant situa- tion and defended against these feelings. In I969 this was done through defensive imagery, in I977, by lack of imagery rather than defensive imagery. An alternative explanation would be that the males in the present study are more free in the expression of sexual motives to female dominant situations, but this is an unlikely 7I possibility when subjects' responses in the control condition are studied using the sex by dominance by condition interaction. In the control condition male dominant pictures evoke much higher sex- ual defense from females than from males. Female dominant pictures evoke much higher sexual defense from males than from females. If the control condition of the present study is indeed a situation that evokes free fantasy, as discussed previously, it appears that males fantasize about and defend against the sexual aspects of dominant females while females fantasize about and defend against sexual feelings that involve dominant males. The responses in the control condition may be an indication that males are sexually aroused by dominant women, while females are sexually aroused by dominant men as held true in I969. Males and females are probably equally uncomfortable with their sexual feelings toward situations where the other sex is dominant, but express this defensiveness differently. Males defend by lack of imagery while females defend through defensive imagery. This difference may be attributed to differences in language styles between the sexes; the more verbal females defend by elaborating their stories with defensive imagery while the males shorten a response with which they feel uncomfort— able. Goodness of the Measures As previously mentioned, the Rasmussen measure of psych- social development appears to be inadequate. The range of scores was restricted to the upper bounds of the measure, with little vari- ability between scores. Social desirability seemed to have a 72 strong impact on response. In the forced—choice situation, subjects may have Opted for the more "favorable" response. Subjects' com- ments on the scale indicated the difficulty of the true-false format in self-assessment. In contrast, the Constantinople measure appears to be a more valid and realistic assessment of psychosocial development. There was wide variability in scores, and the distribution was near nor- mal. The correlation between 05 and 06 (identity resolution and intimacy resolution) was .62. This is congruent with Erikson's formulation of development. A positive relationship exists between identity development and the successful formation of intimate rela- tionships. This relationship is not universal, because it is through attempts at intimacy and interactions with others that identity is strengthened. Subjects' comments indicated that they felt they had answered "honestly," to a large extent and that it was difficult to "lie" when using the 7 point scale. Relationship to Clark's Study In brief, Clark (I952) studied the relationship between anxiety and the expression of sex on the Thematic Apperception Test (TAT). He found that when male college students are sexually aroused by pictures of nude females they show less manifest sex in their TAT response than subjects given the TAT without being sexually aroused. The anxiety accompanying the sexual arousal inhibits the expression of sexual imagery. However, when subjects were tested at a party after drinking, sexually aroused subjects' TAT responses were more sexual than those of students who drank but were not sexually 73 aroused. Clark attributed the difference between the alcoholic and nonalcoholic groups as a function of anxiety reduction. Clark then hypothesized that, in congruence with Freudian theory, where mani— fest imagery was low, symbolic imagery would be high, and vice versa. As in Freud's discussion of dreams, symbolism is a means of expressing a motive where anxiety of guilt censors the direct ex- pression of the motive. It was found that symbolic sexuality was indeed higher in the nonalcoholic aroused group when compared with the control, and symbolic sexuality was less in the alcoholic con- dition. Subjects' whose anxiety had not been alleviated by alco- hol, or were sexually aroused and felt guilty, displayed greater symbolic sexuality. It would thus seem that to the extent anxiety is lacking, symbolism is lacking. However, a paradox exists in the intragroup breakdown of the nonalcoholic condition; subjects with high mani- fest sexual imagery scores also have high symbolic sexual imagery scores. Clark explains this by an approach-avoidance paradigm, using the concept of response—produced guilt, by which a subject who has a low avoidance gradient toward writing sexual stories may become guilty by that behavior and as a result channel some of the sexuality into symbolic form. . . . The individuals in the low manifest group (both aroused and control) through past training are highly anxious about expressing sex. For the aroused subjects this anxiety is, of course, reinforced by the stimulation of the nude slides to which they were exposed. These indi- viduals, therefore, would tend to express most of their sexuality in symbolic terms. The individuals in the high III N - a 74 manifest group through past training have acquired less anxiety over sexuality and therefore approach close enough to the goal to write stories of a primary nature which in turn cues off quite a bit of guilt resulting in symbolic expression of sexuality. Clark's interpretation may relate to the present study in the following way. Persons who are lower on psychosocial resolution will be anxious about expressing sex; they can be equated with Clark's low manifest group. Persons higher in psychosocial resolu- tion can be equated with Clark's high manifest group; they are less anxious about expressing sex. This accounts for the relationship found here between defensiveness and psychosocial development as well as the lack of overt imagery differences. These data reflect that indivdiuals who are more advanced, developmentally, are also more sexually defensive. It was previous- ly suggested that sexual arousal makes these individuals more anxious than persons with lower levels of psychosocial development because they have incorporated societal norms as a major aspect of social development. However, another explanation is possible, con- gruent with the hypothesis that these persons are less anxious over sex. In brief, like subjects in the high manifest group, subjects of higher psychosocial development are freer in sexual expression. Like the high manifest subjects, though, they become guilty when they express too much sexual imagery, and become defensive, ex- pressing this through imagery, just as the high manifest group res- ponded to their anxiety with symbolism. Persons of lower psycho- social levels, who are like the low manifest subjects, detach feel- ings from sexual expression (a defense in itself) and as a result 75 do not appear defensive on the TAT scoring system. As a result, persons who have relatively successful resolution of psychosocial conflicts will appear to be highly anxious when sexually aroused compared with other subjects. In actuality, persons who are sucess- ful in psychosocial development are more able to express overt sex- ual motives. In addition, the explanation that persons who have relatively successful resolution have incorporated societal norms still fits with the above. These people have a realistic under- standing of the amount of sexual expression that is socially per- missible; only when they reach that point do they become defensive. The model was tested, using data from the present study, MANOVA, and a correlational technique. Through MANOVA, it was found that there are no imagery differences between psychosocial levels and that subjects of higher psychosocial levels are more de- fensive. Correlation was used to test the power of the relation- ships. Relationships between manifest imagery and psychosocial development, defense and psychosocial development, and manifest imagery and defense within subjects of a psychosocial level were tested. In brief: High Psyphosocial Low Psychosocial High Manifest Low Manifest High Defense Low Defense The correlational analysis showed a weaker relationship than the MANOVA, but Clark's approach-avoidance model may yet be a useful explanation of the results of the present investigation. It 76 predicts the somewhat paradoxical finding that persons of higher psychosocial development respond to a sexual arousal with greater defensiveness than persons of lower psychosocial levels. Unlike the model, however, subjects in this study responded with no significant difference in imagery between psychosocial levels. If subjects responded with statistically equivalent manifest imagery, how can the defensivenss findings be interpreted using Clark's model? To answer this, it is again necessary to assess the impact of the media on the present subjects. Sexual expression is common- place in today's media. This may not have alleviated societal guilt over sexual feelings, but it has encouraged the open expression of sexuality. With freedom in sexual expression becoming the norm, the differences in sexual expression between groups decreases. Unlike the Clark study, where only the more "mature" subjects were able to respond with overt sexual imagery, all subjects in the present study responded with sexual imagery, although there were group differences in defense. This can be explained in terms of classical psychoanalytic defense mechanisms. Subjects lower in psychosocial development are characterized by their anxiety over heterosexual relationships, as well as their uncertainty with their own sexuality. Such strong anxiety may lead to repression being the typical psychological defense for these in- dividuals. In addition, these persons are trying to assimilate to the adult world. As a result, persons of lower psychosocial levels may respond to a sexual arousal with sexual imagery, as that is the norm. To escape from the anxiety that is linked to sex, they 77 dissociated any feelings attached to sexual expression; they use re- pression as a defense. These subjects separate feelings from be- havior, and as a result, are able to write stories high in overt sexuality, without feeling guilt or anxiety. There is little res- ponse-produced defense. In contract, subjects of higher psychosocial levels use de- fense mechanisms other than repression to deal with any anxiety in regards to sexual expression. This is probably because their sex- related anxiety is less than the other subjects. This lower anxiety level allows them to experience some anxiety, as it is not overpow- ering. They do not repress their feelings when writing sexual stories, and as a result have response-produced guilt. This guilt and anxiety caused them to respond with overt defense, making them appear to be more defensive than individuals of lower levels of psychosocial development. APPENDIX A CONSTANTINOPLE INVENTORY OF PSYCHOSOCIAL DEVELOPMENT (IPD) 78 Ia. APPENDIX A Basic Trust (accessible to new ideas) (imperturbable optimist) able to take things as they come deep, unshakable faith in himself (herself) not able to stand frustration and everything frustrates him (incapable of absorbing frustration and everything frustrates can't share things with anybody pessimistic, little hope (dim nostalgia for lost paradise) never gets what he really wants values independence more than security (values independence above security) stands on his (her) own feet quietly goes his (her) own way good judge of when to make himself (herself) heard (good judge of when to assert himself (herself)) * I. calm and untroubled (placid and untroubled) *l3. open to new ideas *25. always an optimist 37. 49. lb. Basic Mistrust * 7. (her) him (her) l9. 3l. *43. longs for lost paradise 55. 2a. Autonomy * 8. *20. free and natural (free and spontaneous) 32. 44. *56. 2b. Shame and Doubt 2. *l4. an automatic response to all situations careful about details and overorganized (meticulous and overorganized) 79 8O 26. cautious, hesitant, doubting 38. feels as if he (she) were being followed *50. always in the wrong, feeling sorry (always in the wrong, apologetic) 3a. Initiative * 3. likes adventure (adventuresome) *15. active (dynamic) 27. ambitious *39. inventive, enjoys finding new answers to new problems (inventive, delights in finding new solutions to new problems) 5l. sexually aware 3b. Guilt * 9. finds it difficult to have sexual feelings (sexually blunted) *2l. afraid of sexual failure (afraid of impotence) 33. thinks too much about the wrong things *45. a lot of talking and planning, but little action (big smoke but no fire) *57. controlled, never lets himself (herself) go (inhibited and self-restricted) 4a. Industry *IO. upright and hardworking (conscientious and hardworking) 22. interested in learning and likes to study 34. serious, has high standards *46. gets much done (accomplishes much) *47. does well in his (her) work (excels in his (her) work) 4b. Inferiority * 4. can't reach his (her) goals (can't fulfill his (her) ambitions) *I6. doesn't try as hard as he (she) is able (doesn't apply himself (herself) fully) *28. wastes his (her) time (fritters away his (her) time) 8l 40. ineffective, doesn't amount to much *52. living for pleasure, always "fooling” around (a playboy, always "hacking" around) 5a. Identity * 5. full of confidence (confidence is brimming over) l7. natural and genuine *29. at ease and well mannered (poised) 4l. knows who he (she) is and what he (she) wants out of life *53. proud of his (her) own character and values (pride in his (her) own character and values) 5b. Role Diffusion *II. a fake, pretends to be what he (she) isn't (a poseur, all facade and pretence) 23. spreads himself (herself) thin *35. attempts to seem at ease (attempts to appear at ease) 47. never knows how he (she) feels *59. afraid to get involved (afraid of commitment) 6a. Intimacy *l2. honest, not afraid to show himself (herself) (candid, not afraid to expose himself (herself)) 24. warm and friendly 36. has sympathetic concern for others 48. tactful inpersonal relations *60. comfortable in close relationships (comfortable in intimate relationships) 6b. Isolation * 6. little concern for the rest of the world (little regard for the rest of the world) *l8. overly concerned with himself (herself) (preoccupied with himself (herself)) 30. very lonely *42. cold and distant (cold and remote) *54. secretly doesn't pay attention to the opinions of others (secretly oblivious to the opinions of others) APPENDIX B RASSMUSSEN EGO IDENTITY SCALE (E18) 82 A 0 IO. ll. l2. 13. I4. APPENDIX B RASSMUSSEN EGO IDENTITY SCALE (EIS) I seem to have regrets when I have to give up my pleasures right now for goals or things I want in the future. (T F) No one seems to understand me. (T F) I have a fear of being asked questions in class because of what other people will think if I don't know the answer. (T F) Working is nothing but a necessary evil that a person must put up with to eat. (T F) It doesn't pay to worry much about decisions you have already made. (I F) People are usually honest in dealing with each other. (T F) From what others have told me, I feel I am a person who is very easy to talk to. (T F) When given a job, I try never to get so tied Up in what I am doing at the moment so as to lose sight of what comes next. T F) I work best when I know my work is going to be compared with the work of others. (T F) I have no difficulty in avoiding people who may get me in trouble. (T F) When I have to work, I usually get pretty bored no matter what the job is. (T F) It doesn't worry me if I make a mistake in front of my friends. I F The decisions I have made in the past have usually been the right ones. (T F) Although I sometimes feel very strongly about things, I never show other people how I feel. (T F) 83 l5. I6. l7. I8. I9. 20. 2T. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. 30. 3T. 32. 84 After I do something I usually worry about whether it was the right thing. (T F) I am confident that I will be successful in life when I finally decide upon a career. (T F) It's best not to let other people know too much about your family or background if you can keep from it. (T F) I really don't have any definite goals or plans for the future. T F I never enjoyed taking part in school clubs or student govern- ment activity. (T F) If I am not careful people try to take advantage of me. (T F) In general, people can be trusted. (T F) It is very seldom that I find myself wishing I had a different face or body. (T F) I would get along better in life if I were better looking. I F At my age a person must make his own decisions, even though his parents might not agree with the things he does. (T F) It's not hard to keep your mind on one thing if you really have to. T F It seems as if I just can't decide what I really want to do in life. (T F) I am always busy doing something, but I seem to accomplish less than other people even though they don't work as hard as I do. T F When I'm in a group I find it hard to stand up for my ideas if I think other people won't agree with me. (T F) I have at least one close friend with whom I can share almost all of my feelings and personal thoughts. (T F) I do not feel that my looks and actions keep me from getting ahead in life. (T F) Even when I do a good job in my work, other people don't seem to realize it or give me credit. (T F) One of the hardest things for a young person to overcome is his family background. (T F) 33. 34. 35. 36. 37. 38. 39. 40. 4I. 42. 43. 44. 45. 46. 47. 48. 49. 50. 85 The best part of my life is still ahead of me. (T F) In a group, I can usually stand up for what I think is right without being embarrassed. (T F) I seem to have the knack or ability to make other people relax and enjoy themselves at a party. (T F) I can't seem to say no when the group does something which I don't think is right. (T F) Being without close friends is worse than having enemies. (T F) I am not sure what I want to do as a life-time occupation, but I have some pretty definite plans and goals for the next few years. (T F) It is easier to make friends with people you like if they don't know too much about your background. (T F) I don't like sports or games where you always have to try and do better than the next person. (T F) A person who can be trusted is hard to find. (T F) I believe that I must make my own decisions in important mat- ters, as no one can live my life for me. (T F) In order to be comfortable or feel at ease, a person must get along with others but he doesn't really need close friends. (T F) I am proud of my family background. (T F) I cannot keep my mind on one thing. (T F) It is a good idea to have some plan as to what has to be done next, no matter how much you have to do at the moment. (T F) During the past few years I have taken little or no part in clubs, organized group activity, or sports. (T F) I have found that people I work with frequently don't appre- ciate or seem to understand my abilities. (T F) For some reason, it seems that I have never really gotten to know people I have worked with, even though I liked them. (T F) I am pretty content to be the way I am. (T F) 5T. 52. 53. 54. 55. 56. 57. 58. 59. 60. GT. 62. 63. 64. 65. 66. 67. 68. 86 I can't stand to wait for things I really want. (I F) A person is a lot happier if he doesn't get too close to others. (T F) Even though I try, it is usually pretty hard for me to keep my mind on a task or a job. (T F) One of the good parts of being a teenager is getting together with a group which makes its own rules and does things as a group. (T F) When it comes to working, I never do anything I can get out of. (T F) My way of doing things is apt to be misunderstood by others. T F A person who hasn't been a member of a well organized group or club at some time in his teens has missed a lot. (T F) When I think about my future, I feel I have missed by best chances for making good. (T F) I like to tackle a tough job as it gives me a lot of satis- faction to finish it. (T F) I am always busy but it seems that I am usually spinning my wheels and never seem to get anywhere. (T F) It is very important that your parents approve of everything you do. (T F) It doesn't bother me when my friends find out that I can't do certain things as well as other people. (T F) As a rule, I don't regret the decisions I make. (T F) I feel pretty sure that I know what I want to do in the future and I have some definite goals. (T F) I dongt have any trouble concentrating on what I am doing. T F A person can't be happy in a job where he is always competing against others. (T F) I feel like I have missed my opportunity to really be a success in life. (T F) If a person wants something worthwhile, he should be willing to wait for it. (T F) 69. 70. 7T. 72. 87 At home, I enjoyed work or spare time activities where I had to compete against others. (T F) I never make any important decisions without getting help or advice from my family. (T F) It is better to say nothing in public than to take a chance on other people hearing you make a mistake. (T F) I lose interest in things if I have to wait too long to get them. (T F) APPENDIX C PROJECTIVE STIMULI 88 y... .t e o b. I '«é'e’id‘r. , .~-'.Ar.' 3-111'5‘45‘ - 4 (My, 4, M , Jauxummif ' —“_ REFERENCES 97 References Barclay, A. M. Manual for scoringysexual and aggressive imagery, defensiveness, and distortion on the TA (2nd rev.). East Lansing, Michigan: Michigan State University (mimeo), 1967. . The effect of hostility on physiological and fantasy res- ponses. Journal of Personality, I969, 31, 651-667. The effect of female aggressiveness on aggressive and sexual fantasies. Journal of Projective Techniques, 1970, 33, 19-26. (a) Urinary acid phosphatase in sexually aroused males. Journal of Experimental Research in Personality, 1970, 4, 233-238. (b) Linking sexual and aggressive motives: Contributions of "irrelevant" arousals. Journal of Personality, I971, 33, 481-492. . Information as a defensive control of sexual arousal. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1971, 11, 244-249. Barclay, A. M.,& Little, 0. M. Urinary acid phosphatase secretion under different arousal conditions. Psychophysiology, 1972, 9, 69-77. Barclay, A. M., & Haber, R. N. The relation of aggressive to sexual motivation. Journal of Personality, I965, 33, 462-475. Bibring, E.* The development and problems of the theory of the instincts. In Stacey, C. L., & DeMartino, M. F. (Eds.), Understanding human motivation. Cleveland: Howard Allen Inc., 1963. Bronson, G. W. Identity diffusion in late adolescents. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 1959, 33, 414-417. Clark, R. A. The effects of sexual motivation on fantasy. Journal Of Experimental Psychology, 1953, 45, 391-399. Constantinople, A. An Eriksonian measure of personality develop- ment in college students. Developmental Psychology, 1969, 1, 357-374. 98 99 Dignan, M. Howard, Sister. Ego identity, identification, and adjust- ment in college women. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Fordham University, 1963. Douvan, E., & Adelson, J. The adolescent experience. New York: John Wiley & Sons, 1966. Eidelberg, L. Studies in psychoanalysis. IUP, I948. Eidelberg, L. (Ed.). Encyglgpedia of psychoanalysis. New York: The Free Press, 1968. Erikson, E. H. Childhood and society (2nd ed.). New York: Norton, 1963. Identity: Youth and crisis. New York: Norton, 1968. Freud, S. The basic writings of Sigmund Freud. New York: The Modern Library, 1938. Beyond the pleasure principle. New York: Bantam Books, 1959. MacLean, P. D. New findings relevant to the evolution of psycho- sexual functions of the brain. In Money, J. (ed.), 3g}. research: New developments. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston, 1965. Marcia, J. E. Development and validation of ego-identity status. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1966, 3, 551-558. Munley, P. H. Erik Erikson's theory of psychosocial development and vocational behavior. Journal of Counseling Psyghology, I973, 33, 314-319. Musser, Paul, and Scodel, Alvin. The effects of sexual stimulation under varying conditions on TAT sexual responsiveness. Journal of ConsultingiPsychology, 1955, 13, 90. Orlofsky, J. L., Marcia, J. E., & Lesser, I. M. Ego Identity status and the intimacy versus isolation crisis of young adult- hood. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1973, 27, 211-219. Prelinger, E., & Zimet, C. N. An ego-psycholpgical approach to character assessments. Glencoe, Illinois: Free Press, 1964. Schacter, S., & Singer, J. E. Cognitive, social and physiological determinants of emotional state. Psychological Review, 1962, 33, 379-399. IOO Simmons,D. 0. Development of an objective measure of identity achievement status. Journal of Projective Techniques and Personality Assessment, 1970, 33, 241-244. Stark, P. A., & Traxler, A. J. Empirical validation of Erikson's theory of identity crises in late adolescence. Journal of Psychology, 1974, 33, 25-33. Stoller, Robert J. Sexual Excitement. Archives of General Psychiatry, August 1976, 33, 899-909. Is Sex Neurotic? Time, January 3, 1977,.l_3(l), 76. Thompson, E. Personal communication. August 15, 1976. Waterman, A. S., Geary, P. S., & Waterman, C. K. Longitudinal study of changes in ego identity status during the freshman year at college. Developmental Psyphology, I974, 13, 387-392. Wessman, A. E., & Ricks, D. F. Mood and personality. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston, 1966. All]... I ulnlr. 11‘ MICHIGAN STATE UNIV. LIBRARIES III(Willi)(IHIIIIHHIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII 31293101911877