‘‘‘‘‘ 7* VALUING OF THE MATERIAL ENVIRONMENT: A CONCEPTUAL MODEL OF OBJECT VALUE Dissedation for the Degree of Ph. D. MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY VIRGINIA T. BOYD 1976 III" unu'n " Maw U, . . This is to certify, that the thesis entitled ’ VALUING OF THE MATERIAL ENVIRONMENT: A CONCEPTUAL MODEL OF OBJECT VALUE presented by Virginia Theresa Boyd has been accepted towards fulfillment of the requirements for Ph.D. degree in Family Ecology {Mex/55402 Major professor Date March 18, 1976 0-7 639 ~ ’Faual Opp - ' I‘l“.l~f;: ‘ r; t I1; ELF-i3. 1 NIGHT LOANS ' Tfiv~-" fl 1”) .‘ "‘1 w ' e,“ .. I . W ABSTRACT VALUING OF THE MATERIAL ENVIRONMENT: A CONCEPTUAL MODEL OF OBJECT VALUE By Virginia T. Boyd The study focused on the interface between an individual and the material environment, and on one aspect of that interface in .particular:I the value that the individual assigns to objects} The study developed out of the work of value theorist Clarence I. Lewis. Iwg dimensions of extrinsic value were identified which individuals appear to use to assign value to objects and an interrelationship between the two was suggested. Based on the two dimensions, a con- _ceptual model for discrimination of object value was developed. The dimensions were: an evaluation of the object's instrumentality or its ability to function for an end beyond itself, and an evaluation of the object's inherentness or its ability to provide intrinsic satisfaction directly. The model allows the individual to assign a weight to each of the dimensions, either positive or negative which permits four categories of object value: (l) negative instrumental value and negative inherent value--an object neither functions well nor is visually appreciable, (2) negative instrumental and positive inherent value--an object does not function well, but is visually very appreciable, (3) positive instrumental and positive inherent Virginia T. Boyd value--an object is functional and appreciable, and (4) positive instrumental and negative inherent value--an object is very func- tional, but is not considered visually appreciable. The conceptual model was submitted to an empirical test to determine its validity. The procedure for determining validity con- sisted of assembling 13 photographs of objects representing the four value categories and developing a test form to record respondents' evaluations of the objects in four ways based on the conceptual model. A panel of design professionals and a sample of ll6 female students from an undergraduate introductory design class were asked to evaluate the objects using the test developed. Threethypotheses were identified to determine whether valid— ity for the conceptual model as presented in the empirical test had been established: flypothesis l: The conceptual model was capable of consis- tently discriminating four categories of object value across several groups of individuals. Hypothesis 2: The conceptual model was capable of detect- ing change in the perception of object value over time. Hypothesis 3: Individuals having high aesthetic interest (as defined by the Allport-Vernon-Lindzey Values Inventory) would evidence greater consistency with the classifications of the panel of professionals and the author than those without a high aesthetic value orienta- tion. Findings of two of the three hypotheses were supportive of the hypotheses which gave evidence for the validity of the conceptual model. In response to Hypothesis 1, consistency of responses among Virginia T. Boyd author, panel of professionals, and design class at both pretest and posttest occurred for nine out of thirteen objects. In order to respond to Hypotheses 2, data was taken at both the beginning and end of the design course hypothesizing that if the empirical model was capable of assessing dimensions of value, itmwould be able to register change in value assignations which could be expected when students were introduced to fundamental design concepts. Results supported the hypothesis for eight out of the thirteen objects and the group mean for the total score developed for the empirical test changed significantly (.OOl) towardgreaterconsistency on posttest. Analyses of interaction effect obtained from a two-way analysis of variance technique suggested that individuals used a common set of criteria for assigning value and used it in a systematic manner. This suggested that when new information was introduced (the design course) or when items were changed on the empirical test, the empiri- cal model and by implication, the conceptual model, was capable of registering the change. The third hypothesis could not be adequately responded to because the subsample of individuals within the class was not large enough to provide reliable information. 45% Results of the study showed support for the formulation of gbject yal e a¢¢9rdin9 to the model developed suggesting that there is such a logical construct held and used in a systematic and pre- dictable manner by at least the.group of individuals participating in the study. Several implications were drawn from the study. The graphic presentation of the empirical model serves as a useful discussion Virginia T. Boyd tool for value clarification and the teaching of vaer with respect to objects because it provides categories for evaluating objects which are less subjective than the more common like/dislike value categorization, but are more subjective categorizations than evalua- tion based on purely formal design criteria suCh as balance, propor- tion, and unity. From an economic perspective, the conceptual model provides a way of assessing the relationship between value and the investment of materials. It provides a system for looking at the relationships between investment of resources and degree of utility and degree of satisfaction obtained from a particular investment. VALUING OF THE MATERIAL ENVIRONMENT: A CONCEPTUAL MODEL OF OBJECT VALUE By ,..'.'_'"1. n ( 'u-‘r - b \a Virginia T. Boyd A DISSERTATION Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY Department of Family Ecology 1976 Copyright by Virginia T. Boyd 1976 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS A dissertation reflects not only the efforts of the author but also reflects the culmination of the accumulation of many inter? changes with colleagues and faculty, insights gained from intellec- tual and personal growth, and experiences offered within one's degree program. The academic tradition gives this one brief opportunity for acknowledging one's gratitude to these contributors and for these contributions. The risk is great when one assembles an interdisciplinary advisory committee. Such a committee may either provide a depth of experience and breadth of perspective for the candidate to draw upon in the process of integrating their several disciplinary approaches into something new; or the candidate may end up being pulled in as many directions as there are members of the committee. My advisory committee was described by the former. The satisfaction and confi- dence that I have in my degree is due to the fact that they each contributed something unique of themselves which they trusted me to integrate into a new kind of professional. Their standards and expectations for me were high. But they were prepared to share their knowledge, competencies, and not the least important, their time, in order to give me every possible chance of meeting those expectations. The two members who shared the uncertainties, doubts, and the work, of the dissertation deserve special thanks. Drs. Beatrice ii Paolucci and John F. A. Taylor profoundly influenced my thinking and I hope will continue to do so. They also gave me something equally valuable. Many times they displayed their personal commitment to the best standards of scholarship by showing genuine respect for each other's ideas, and by consistently seeking out and building upon the commonalities between their divergent perspectives, rather than emphasizing their academic differences. Dr. Robert Boger's foresight introduced me to an area of study which has subsequently become integral to my approach to design: the role of individual personality and the perceptual process itself on the design process.. Dr. Joanne Eicher helped me examine my basic philosophical assumptions and showed me the value of remaining flexible and con- tinually receptive to new approaches. I thank fellow graduate students Sandra Evers and Mary Andrews for many discussions and for their insights which helped clear up some of the shadows around the conceptual model and its testing. Without the specific help of several groups this disserta- tion could not have been completed and I thank them especially. They include: the panel of professionals composed of Grace Martin, Jon Vredevoogd, Betty Hass, and Harold Zellman; the Summer, l975, class of students in "Design for Living" at Michigan State Univer- sity; and the class of students in the Fall, 1975, "Fundamentals of Design" course at University of Wisconsin--Madison. Gratitude iii is also expressed to the College of Human Ecology and the MSU Graduate School for providing financial support. Perhaps the greatest thanks is expressed to my parents whose support through my years of education never lessened and survived even through the last months of writing. iv TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF TABLES LIST OF FIGURES LIST OF PLATES LIST OF APPENDICES Chapter I. II. III. IV. INTRODUCTION . Value Position Underlying the Study Definition of Object. Statement of the Problem . . . Overview of the Study with Respect to Value Research. . RELATED LITERATURE . The Concept of Value The Object . The Experience The Perceiver . . The Concept of Theory Summary. . . TOWARD A MODEL OF OBJECT VALUE . AN EMPIRICAL FORMULATION OF THE CONCEPTUAL MODEL . Statement of the Problem for Research Implementa- tion . . . . . . . . . . . Research Hypotheses . Assumptions . Development of the Empirical Test Validation of the Empirical Test A Sample of Professionals A Sample of Students . . . A Pretest- Posttest Research Design V Page vii xi xiii xiv Chapter V. PRESENTATION AND DISCUSSION OF RESULTS Descriptive Characteristics of the Sample Results of Discrimination 1 Results of Discrimination 2 Results of Discrimination 3 Results for Sample with High Aesthetic Value. Scores . Summary Analyses on the Empirical Test Summary of Results . VI. CONCLUSIONS, LIMITATIONS, AND IMPLICATIONS . Conclusions of the Study Limitations of the Study Implications for the Study APPENDICES . BIBLIOGRAPHY vi LIST OF TABLES Distribution of Value Orientations from the Allport- Vernon-Lindzey Inventory Distributions of Classifications of Four Evaluating Groups for Object: Quilt . Distributions of Classifications of Four Evaluating Groups for Object: Balcony Distributions of Classifications of Four Evaluating Groups for Object: Painting . Distributions of Classifications of Four Evaluating Groups for Object: Paper Holder . . . . Distributions of Classifications of Four Evaluating Groups for Object: Bridge 1 . . . . . . Distributions of Classifications of Four Evaluating Groups for Object: Bridge l--Second Presentation . Distributions of Classifications of Four Evaluating Groups far Object: Bridge 2 . . . . . . Distributions of Classifications of Four Evaluating Groups for Object: Spoon 1 . . . . . Distributions of Classifications of Four Evaluating Groups for Object: Spoon l--Second Presentation Distributions of Classifications of Four Evaluating Groups for Object: Spoon 2 . . . . . Distributions of Classifications of Four Evaluating Groups for Object: Mailbox l . . . . . Distributions of Classifications of Four Evaluating Groups for Object: Mailbox l--Second Presentation Distributions of Classifications of Four Evaluating Groups for Object: Mailbox 2 . . . . . vii Page 75 79 Bl 83 86 89 91 93 96 97 100 102 103 106 Table 5.20 5.21 Distributions of Classifications of Four Evaluating Groups for Object: Chair 1 . . . . Distributions of Classifications of Four Evaluating Groups for Object: Chair l--Second Presentation Distributions of Classifications of Four Evaluating Groups for Object: Chair l--Third Presentation Distributions of Classifications of Four Evaluating Groups for Object: Chair 2 . . . Distributions of Classifications of Four Evaluating Groups for Object: Chair 3 . . . . . Summary of Agreement with Hypotheses l and 2 by Object Crosstabulation of Results of Discrimination 3 by Evaluation Groups . . . . . Crosstabulation of Classification by Aesthetic Value Orientation and Test Administration: Quilt . Crosstabulation of Classification by Aesthetic Value Orientation and Test Administration: Balcony Crosstabulation of Classification by Aesthetic Value Orientation and Test Administration: Painting . Crosstabulation of Classification by Aesthetic Value Orientation and Test Administration: Paper Holder Crosstabulation of Classification by Aesthetic Value Orientation and Test Administration: Bridge l . Crosstabulation of Classification by Aesthetic Value Orientation and Test Administration: Bridge l-- Second Presentation . . . . . . . . Crosstabulation of Classification by Aesthetic Value Orientation and Test Administration: Bridge 2 . Crosstabulation of Classification by Aesthetic Value Orientation and Test Administration: Spoon 1 Crosstabulation of Classification by Aesthetic Value Orientation and Test Administration: Spoon l--Second Presentation . . . . . viii Page 109 110 111 114 116 117 118 120 120 121 121 122 122 123 123 124 Table 0-1 0-2 0-4 0-5 Crosstabulation of Classification by Aesthetic Value Orientation and Test Administration: Spoon 2 Crosstabulation of Classification by Aesthetic Value Orientation and Test Administration: Mailbox l Crosstabulation of Classification by Aesthetic Value Orientation and Test Administration: Mailbox l-- Second Presentation . Crosstabulation of Classification by Aesthetic Value Orientation and Test Administration: Mailbox 2 Crosstabulation of Classification by Aesthetic Value Orientation and Test Administration: Chair l Crosstabulation of Classification by Aesthetic Value Orientation and Test Administration: Chair l--Second Presentation . . . . . . . . . Crosstabulation of Classification by Aesthetic Value Orientation and Test Administration: Chair l--Third Presentation Crosstabulation of Classification by Aesthetic Value Orientation and Test Administration: Chair 2 Crosstabulation of Classification by Aesthetic Value Orientation and Test Administration: Chair 3 Frequency Distribution of Total Score at Pretest and Posttest . . . . . . Crosstabulation of Attitude Toward the Object and Test Administration: Quilt. . Crosstabulation of Attitude Toward the Object and Test Administration: Balcony . . . Crosstabulation of Attitude Toward the Object and Test Administration. Painting. . . . Crosstabulation of Attitude Toward the Object and Test Administration: Paper Holder . . Crosstabulation of Attitude Toward the Object and Test Administration: Bridge l . . . ix Page 126 125 125 126 126 127 127 128 128 129 183 184 185 186 187 Table D-6 D-7 0-10 D-11 D-12 0-13 0-14 D-15 D-16 D-17 D-18 Crosstabulation Administration: Crosstabulation Administration: Crosstabulation Administration: Crosstabulation Administration: Crosstabulation Administration: Crosstabulation Administration: Crosstabulation Administration: Crosstabulation Administration: Crosstabulation Administration: Crosstabulation Administration: Crosstabulation Administration: Crosstabulation Administration: Crosstabulation Administration: of Attitude Toward the Object and Test Bridge l--Second Presentation . of Attitude Toward the Object and Test Bridge 2.. . of Attitude Toward the Object and Test Spoon 1 . . of Attitude Toward the Object and Test Spoon l--Second Presentation of Attitude Toward the Object and Test Spoon 2 . . of Attitude Toward the Object and Test Mailbox l . . of Attitude Toward the Object and Test Mailbox l--Second Presentation of Attitude Toward the Object and Test Mailbox 2 . . of Attitude Toward the Object and Test Chair 1 . . . of Attitude Toward the Object and Test Chair 1--Second Presentation of Attitude Toward the Object and Test Chair l--Third Presentation of Attitude Toward the Object and Test Chair 2 of Attitude Toward the Object and Test Chair 3 . . . Page 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 l99 200 Figure 3.1 3.2 awwwww Nasal-aw LIST OF FIGURES Value Defined as Extrinsic and Intrinsic . Representation of Object as Presented by John F. A. Taylor . . . . . . . . . . . . A Continuum of Four Categories of Object Value . The Field of Instrumental and Inherent Value A Model of Object Value A Quadrant B and a Pure Utilitarian Object Pure Art Objects . Extrinsic Evaluation Continuums for Empirical Test-- Version II . . . . . . . . Combination of the Two Extrinsic Evaluation Continuums of the Empirical Test--Version II . . . . Locus of a Painting on both the Empirical Test Continuums and as Described within the Conceptual Model . . . . . Summary of Classification of Object Within Value Field: Qui1t . Summary of Classification of Object Within Value Field: Balcony . . . . . . Summary of Classification of Object Within Value Field: Painting . . . . . . . Summary of Classification of Object Within Value Field: Paper Holder . . . . . . Summary of Classification of Object Within Value Field: Bridge 1 . . . . . . . . . xi Page 33 36 39 40 41 43 47 64 65 65 79 81 83 86 89 Figure Page 5.6 Summary of Classification of Object Within Value Field: Bridge 1--Second Presentation . . . . . . 91 5.7 Summary of Classification of Object Within Value Field: Bridge 2.. . . . . . . 93 5.8 Summary of Classification of Object Within Value Field: Spoon 1 . . . . . . . . 96 5.9 Summary of Classification of Object Within Value Field: Spoon 1--Second Presentation . . . . . . 97 5.10 Summary of Classification of Object Within Value Field: Spoon 2 . . . . . . . . 100 5.11 Summary of Classification of Object Within Value Field: Mailbox l . . . . . . . . . . . . 102 5.12 Summary of Classification of Object Within Value Field: Mailbox l--Second Presentation . . . . . 103 5.13 Summary of Classification of Object Within Value Field: Mailbox 2 . . . . . . . . . . . . 106 5.14 Summary of Classification of Object Within Value Field: Chair 1 . . . . . . 109 5.15 Summary of Classification of Object Within Value Field: Chair 1--Second Presentation . . . . . . 110 5.16 Summary of Classification of Object Within Value Field: Chair 1--Third Presentation . . . . . . 111 5.17 Summary of Classification of Object Within Value Field: Chair 2 . . . . . . . . 114 5.18 Summary of Classification of Object Within Value Field: Chair 3 . . . . . . . . 116 xii Plate U1 01 U1 U1 U1 U1 U1 U1 01 01 U1 U1 01 w o o o o o o o o o o o o o o omwmmawm .—a.—o._a_a (AN—'0 LIST OF PLATES Patchwork Quilt, Feathered Star with Flying Geese Borders . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Johan Rohde: Silver Pitcher . Object 1: Quilt Object 2: Balcony . Object 3: Painting Object 4: Paper Holder Object 5: Bridge 1 Object 6: Bridge 2 Object 7: Spoon 1 Object 8: Spoon 2 Object 9: Mailbox 1 Object 10: Mailbox 2 Object 11: Chair 1 . Object 12: Chair 2 . Object 13: Chair 3 . xiii Page 28 31 78 80 82 85 88 92 95 99 101 105 107 113 115 LIST OF APPENDICES Appendix Page A. Empirical Test Version 1 . . . . . . . . . . 141 Empirical Test Version 2 . . . . . . . . . . 158 n Allport-Vernon-Lindzey Values Inventory . . . . . 169 Test Administration . . . . . . . . . . . 182 U xiv CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION Value Position Underlying the Study This study was guided by the proposition that the earth of 1976 is no longer a world of infinite possibility among unlimited resources, but is in essence a spaceship with finite dimensions requiring maximum utility from limited means. It was guided by the belief that although material resources are limited, the individual's human potential to develop personally and to better the environment remains a domain of infinite possibility. Only the utilization of material resources must be viewed with an increasingly economical perspective. The following value position was taken. With declining raw materials and an increasingly scarce supply of energy with which to process them, consumption must be reduced, the things produced be made to last longer and to give greater satisfaction during their use. However, implementing these will be exceedingly difficult. How can standards be set in these areas? What constitutes better quality? Is quality defined in a functional sense or in a sense of satisfaction achieved? Is there a consensus among people on accept- able standards? The questions are qualitative in nature and will require a qualitative evaluation of objects in order to answer them, an evaluation which is not only highly abstract, but which touches deeply held attitudes and beliefs which are difficult to deal with without evoking strong emotional responses. Answers to the questions will require determining how objects are valued. Research was also guided by the belief that the material fbrms which an individual creates out of natural resources and with which one surrounds oneself are a direct external expression of the w" individual's inner self. A society's forms are therefore a gather- ing together, an accumulation of the expressions of each of its individuals. A given form achieves relevance and meaning within a society only as it serves an active function within the lives of the individuals of that society. "For the only justification of any order, of any form, which men produce is, that men discover in it possibilities which they could not have without it."1 Definition of Object Only a particular domain of the total material environment, the domain of objects man intentionally creates from the wide.range of available materials occurring naturally within his environment. was investigated. The gbjegt_was defined broadly to include two kinds of intentionally material objects; those things created in order to extend one's abilities--those things designed to work, and those things designed to express oneself-~those objects whose value accrues with their ability to communicate in a dimension and medium 1John F. A. Taylor, "The American Artist: An Essay on the Uses of Freedom," The Centennial Review 7 (Fall 1963): 419. 3 beyond the limits of language: By defining the object with this breadth an attempt was made to recognize that all objects are naturally interrelated and in a sense are interdependent each having an individual yet integrated function in daily existence. However, contemporary life has increasingly moved in the opposite direction, toward compartmentalizing objects and dealing with the divisions independently and often competitively. The value position taken suggested that not only is it inappropriate to consider and consume the different kinds of objects independently, but that with increas- ingly more limited resources society can no longer afford the result- ing expenditure of resources which such fragmentation demands. Statement of the Problem A conceptual framework for understanding the dimensions on which value is attributed to objects was developed. It was based on the proposition that value with respect to objects is not divided intgsonly two categories of value--artistic objects and useful objects--as the area of object value is often subdivided. Rather, it was suggested that there are four classes of value with respect to objects and among the four there is one class of object value which is particularly important with the general need to reduce the number of objects while maintaining a high degree of satisfaction from those remaining. This class was termed Economy of Value objects because of their ability to be highly valued on two value dimensions simultaneously. Economy of Value objects are those objects designed not only to perform a specific task, but which are also intended to function in a manner beyond their ability to work, as objects to be appreciated, to provide pleasure through their presence alone. Architecture has been recognized as having this v dual capacity as have objects in the graphic and decorative arts. The architect creates a house which not only must work well as shelter and as a "machine for living" but it must often also visually express characteristics of its occupants as well. The inhabitants derive a certain pleasure from the visual form of their immediate material environment itself, in addition to its utilitarian function. Not as commonly included in the category of Economy of Value objects have been things such as clothing, urban environments as entities of organized space, everyday household items such as brooms, kitchen pots and pans, newspaper advertising, and the various objects for transportation. If a society is required to husband resources it is to this group of objects that it may most profitably turn, for their dugl:ngtgrg_permitsithem to satisfy not only mundane utilitarian ~needs,ebut also the need for something visually appealing and satis- fying as well. Increasing the prevalen enof dual-natured Economy of Valueflobjects would resultin an equivalent amount of satisfaction -~____.-——-r-" Vim.— egch designed to satisfy only a single need or desire rather than severalsimultaneously.~ It has been exceedingly difficult to study this group of objects as a whole because of the high degree of specialization encouraged, often through necessity, by both academic disciplines and the professions. The "pie" of object value, the total range of forms, things, and objects is broken into pieces which become the intellectual territory of the several groups. Engineers design and construct and evaluate the useful objects needed by society to carry out its tasks—-its bridges, highways, dams, communication systems--and the principal criterion for valuation is how efficiently the object does the job. Artists create, appreciate, and evaluate those objects far removed from the world of work, those things whose value accrues solely through their ability to give satisfaction, to be appreciated for the very fact that they exist. Some fields such as architecture and graphic art integrate functional and aesthetic concerns because their piece of the object pie contains objects which require not only that they perform a utilitarian function, but that the form that fuction takes must have an appreciative dimension in addition. They thus are involved with dual-natured Economy of Value objects. The form the architect creates is limited in some measure by the functions the house must serve; it must have bathrooms, a given amount of window space per interior footage, systems for energy and water. The graphic artist is restricted in the visual form his product will take by the requirements of the message, the spacing of letters and words, reada- bility at various distances and positions, the limitations of avail- able printing techniques, and usually the cost ceilings of the client.‘ Although the previous two professions are both intimately involved with the illusive ambidextrous Economy of Value object, they are each only involved with their own type of object within that larger class and when asked to cross boundaries to discuss another type of dual-natured object, they find it difficult and are reluc- tant to do so. A specialist in clothing may consider herself worlds removed from the furniture designer, perhaps feeling greater affinity with the artist even though clothing and furniture have a great deal in common. Their commonality results from the fact that they are /’ the two Economy of Value objects which physically touch the body most intimately and which are concerned with anthropomorphic and anthropometric considerations; considerations which are of little concern to the artist. Because of the preceding situation among professionals and academics in regard to objects, this study suggested that there was a current need to consider all objects as a group and to develop through an analysis of value a conceptual approach which could accommodate all kinds of objects within a single conceptual frame- work. It only began such a large undertaking by deve10ping a con- ceptual framework for viewing the wide range of objects from a single perspective, proposing a model, and attempting to determine the validity of that model for dealing with the range of objects in the environment. The source from which the conceptual framework was developed was the larger field of value theory. Primary impetus for the frame- work came from the work of value theorist Clarence I. Lewis who tentatively suggested a substructure within object value and who also suggested a need for evaluating such a framework empirically. Overview of the Study_with Respect to Value Research Because the conceptual model developed in a sense suggests a new structure for a field of inquiry, if not a new field of inquiry altogether (the study of Economy of Value objects) the dissertation must be considered exploratory in nature rather than conclusive, perhaps having raised more questions than it answered. The experimental researcher generally begins with previously identified variables which are manipulated to determine their inter- relationships which are then used to predict future behavior. The present undertaking began even further back. It first determined what was actually there to be studied, what names could be given to it, what characteristics did it have, and how could it be meaning- fully organized. Only when this basic knowledge had been assembled can variables now be developed, concepts agreed upon, and true theory building begun in the area of object value--the discoveryof the? interrelationships among concepts which explain and_predict behavior 'iitiflFésfiéEt to objects. The present product is a conceptual frame- work which will hopefully provide at least a crude instrument for facilitating increased understanding of the material environment in order to permit its more efficient and satisfying use. It must also be recognized that the content under investiga- tion, the interaction between the material reality of an object and the perception of it by a human observer, involves a complex and highly individualized integration process. Integrally involved are feelings, sensations, judgments, reasoning, motivation, characteristics of personality, and past experiences, all of which are unique to each individual and all of which are brought together at a point in time when the individual is confronted with a tangible "fact"--a material object. With such a range of factors involved in the interaction with a single object, it is impossible and unde-' sirable to expect exactly the same experience resulting from inter- action with the same object across a number of individuals. However, there appear to be several broad dimensions used by individuals to assign value to objects, dimensions which are perceived with some consistency across individuals and which are integral to the com- posite experience which results for each individual. The conceptual framework to be discussed will look in detail at characteristics Common_to all objects which determine the value assigned to that objegt. This information, in turn, can hopefully be used to obtain satisfaction from objects more effectively within a social context of increasing demand for a decreasing quantity of resources. v" CHAPTER II RELATED LITERATURE The literature and research which influenced development of the conceptual framework will be organized according to the follow- ing broad topics; the concept of value, the object, the experience, the perceiver, and the role of theory. The Concept of Value The concept of value has been studied from many perspectives over a long period of time. For the present study, two approaches were instrumental: a perspective developed within phi1050phy, and a perspective developed within the social sciences. Philosopher Ralph Barton Perry1 approached value through an understanding of interest; to be for or against something, to be inclined toward or react against, "this state, act, attitude, or disposition of favor or disfavor, to which we propose to give the name of 'interest.'" His conception of the term value implied inter- est in the sense of desire as opposed to interest in the sense of attention. Perry continues, "any object, whatever it be, acquires value when any interest, whatever it be, is taken in it; . . . . 1Ralph Barton Perry, General Theory of Value (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1926), pp. 115-116. 10 The view may otherwise be formulated in the equation: X is valuable = interest is taken in X . . . ." And with respect to the valuing of objects "It follows that any variation of interest or of its object will determine a variety of value." As the object of the value changes, or its characteristics change, the value itself assumes a different character. The interdisciplinary nature of the study required solid footing in two disciplines with respect to the definition of value. .Perry's classic definition of value from philosophy was thus paral- leled with Clyde M. Kluckhohn's classic definition from the social sciences: A value is "a conception, explicit or implicit, distinc- tive of an individual or characteristic of a group, of the desirable which influences the selection from available means and ends of action."2 Both definitions used "desire" as the integral component of valuing. Kluckhohn integrated the concept of desire directly and Perry viewed "desire" as integral to "interest." Both definitions were interpreted to mean selective behavior or preference among 3/ alternatives. For the research the two definitions were considered compatible and acceptable as the foundation on which to build a con- ceptual framework of a particular kind of value--value with respect to objects, or object value. 2Clyde M. Kluckhohn, "Values and Value Orientations in the Theory of Action," in Toward a General Theory of Action, eds: Talcott Parsons and E. A. Shils (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1951), p. 395. 11 Morris3 viewed the "value situation" as the occasion where preferential behavior occurs. He identified three dimensions of the value situation: value as operative, value conceived, and value objectified. Value considered from an operative sense "signifies the preferential behavior of a given individual in a variety of "4 It is observable behavior. The individual who con- situations. sistently selects chocolate ice cream over all others operationally values chocolate ice cream. Conceived value is something "signi- fied and liked or disliked as signified. The object or situation 5 Many Americans hold need not be present and need not even exist." a conceived value with respect to landownership because it is con- sidered to be an ideal state whether or not they are able to achieve it or to.operationalize the value. Morris' third category which was of concern to the study defined the preference situation value with respect to an object, "some objects are such that they support positive preferential behavior to them by some organisms. Others are such that contact with them leads to negative preferential behavior by some organisms." Object value was defined as the prop- erties of an object considered in relation to its ability to rein- force preferential behavior directed toward it by some organisms."6 3Charles Morris, Signification and Significance (Cambridge: MIT, 1964). p. 13. 41bid., p. 19. 51bid. 6Ibid., p. 20. 12 The Object Clarence I. Lewis suggested that object value could be sub- divided into four categories based on differing value characteristics held by objects: objects having instrumental, instrumental and inher- ent,inherent, or neutral value. The conceptual framework developed began with this continuum and will be discussed in detail in Chapter III. Most writing on object value was limited to the analysis of predominantly fine art objects including painting, sculpture, and architecture. It was thus essentially analysis of strictly aesthetic V object value. As a result, it did not provide the breadth of approach required for the present study which focused not on fine art objects exclusively, but on developing a way of discussing within the same theoretical model, those and all other objects with the environment. However the two aestheticians discussed below alluded to a need to broaden the base of objects considered appropriate for inves- tigation beyond only fine art objects. They provided a precedent for considering as aesthetic objects things other than paintings and sculpture, a position which was essential to this research. Formalist aesthetic theory approached the object through com- positional principles such as line, color, proportion, and harmony. Clive Bell7 suggested that there are certain combinations of these elements and principles which, when presented to an observer provoke 7Clive Bell, "Significant Form," in A Modern Book of Esthet- 5, ed: Melvin Radar (New York: Holt, Rinehart E Winston), pp. 228- 37. i O N 13 a particular kind of emotion: the aesthetic emotion. He suggested that only those objects having this combination, which he called “significant form" are capable of producing the desired aesthetic emotion. Although Bell discussed significant form primarily as it occurred in painting and sculpture, his original definition of an object was broader, an intention which was important to this study, "there is a particular kind of emotion provoked by every kind of visual art, by pictures, sculptures, buildings, pots, carvings, textiles, etc., is not disputed, Ithink,by anyone capable of feel- ing it."8 It would not be a violation of Bell's intent to insert for the word "art" in "every kind of visual art," the word "object," "every kind of visual gbjegt," "Significant form" would then approximate one of the two dimensions of object value proposed in the conceptual model which will be discussed in detail in the follow- ing chapter. The writings of Bell were also important to this study because of his position with regard to the perceiver (this discussion will be recognized as belonging under the Literature Review section The Perceiver but because it is brief it will be included here in order to consider Bell's work as a whole). Bell stated that to experience fully the aesthetic emotion the perceiver must bring with him: a sense of form and color and a knowledge of three-dimensional space. That bit of knowledge . . . is essential to the appre- ciation of many great works since many of the most moving forms ever created are in three dimensions.9 8Ibid., p. 228 91bid., p. 232 14 The statement implies that in order to evaluate an object most effectively, one needs a degree of critical ability acquired through visual training. This premise provided the rationale for one of the measures of the validity for the empirical test which will be dis- cussed in Chapter IV. Specifically, it provided a conceptual ration- ale for the inclusion of a panel of design professionals within the research design. Aesthetician Horatio Greenough extended Bell's concept of the appropriateness of giving critical attention to objects in addition to those of the fine arts. Greenough matured intellectually within the eclectic revival art milieu of the mid-1880's which sanctioned only those contemporary forms which followed as closely as possible historical antecedents. Within that intellectual climate Greenough thus spoke as a revolutionary when he redefined Academy art to include within the definition of art an object such as a clipper ship, describing it as a work of art saying "There is something I "10 Greenough's position could . should not be ashamed to show Phidias. be considered the philosophical foundation on which the study rests. He argued that exactly the same serious, informed, critical yet appre- ciative approach should be applied not only to the objects designated "art" but also to the common ordinary objects essential to everyday life. It is as appropriate to talk of Bell's "significant form" and Greenough's "organic significance," or the subordination of all parts 10Horatio Greenough, Form and Function (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1962), p. 226. 15 to the whole and of the whole to the overriding function of the object, in the presence of Doric columns as it is in the presence of kitchen blenders. Although the work of aesthetic theoreticians could make only limited contribution to this study because of their orientation toward only the fine arts, theoretician Dewitt H. ParkerIA did pro- ¢ vide a conceptual tool for the analysis of objects beyond those of the fine arts. Like Bell's and Greenough's principles, Parker's concepts of organic unity, principle of the theme and thematic varia- tion, balance, and the principle of hierarchy are as relevant in the artist's studio as in the industrial design laboratory. The field of experimental aesthetics carried the theoretical analyses of philosophical aesthetics regarding object value into empirical formulations in order to determine the degree to which the theories developed could be demonstrated to describe aspects of 12 v'7 reality. For example, Irvin L. Child worked on the problem of consistency of aesthetic judgment of object value across groups of individuals. He presented pairs of paintings similar in subject or style but differing in their aesthetic value according to the judg- ment of a panel of experts. Individuals were asked to identify the selection of the experts within each pair. Child did not accept the view that agreement with the experts' selections was due primarily to 1'Dewitt H. Parker, “The Problem of Esthetic Form,“ in A Modern Book of Esthetics, ed: Melvin Rader (New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1935), pp. 250-251. 12Irwin L. Child, "Enjoying Art--what Does It Mean?" £fl£.(June 1975): 70-75. 16 indoctrinated standards of taste, but rather that broad formal, in the sense of compositional, aesthetic characteristics exist which most individuals with an aesthetic inclination recognize and respond to. Child based this hypothesis on what he considered to be a paral- lel fact, that certain moral values exist cross-culturally, a cross cultural characteristic which he felt was also characteristic of aesthetic sensitivity. His results showed that individuals with developed aesthetic inclination within their own culture tended to agree with the evaluations of the sample of Western experts more often than individuals native to Western culture without formal training. Japanese potters selected the choices of Western experts more closely than American high school students agreed with the experts. Pakistani fine art students identified the Western art experts' selections more consistently than non-fine art Pakistani students. Child also looked at the relationship between personality characteristics and aesthetic sensitivity. In particular, he looked at three aspects of cognitive style: tolerance of complexity, inde- pendence of judgment, and regression in the service of the ego. The design of the empirical model used in this research was influenced by this work though with a significant modification. Child's pair comparison method was used but the forced-choice aspect was eliminated. Like most aesthetic judgment research, Child's work was restricted to the consideration of only fine art objects, and paint- ing in particular. The present study was influenced by his 17 methodology but considered a much broader range of objects within its investigation. The Experience Perhaps the most familiar classification of value is by an intrinsic and extrinsic distinction. For example, when education is acquired principally for the pleasure of increased understanding and personal satisfaction, it is valued by the individual intrinsically --for its own sake. An object, event, or experience considered good simply for its own sake, by its existence alone is said to be valued intrinsically. When education is acquired as a tool to effect social change, it is valued primarily not for itself but for the sake of something beyond itself, in this case perhaps as a tool to achieve social justice. When the object, event, or experience is valued for the sake of an end distinct from itself, as the means to obtaining a further goal, its value is said to be instrumental or extrinsic. ‘3 and because they These distinctions were made by Ralph B. Perry were integral to the conceptual framework developed, they will be discussed in detail in Chapter III. However, because the concept of intrinsic value is necessary to the presentation of the following writer, the distinction was developed briefly at this point. With reference to a work of art, the peculiar experience it evokes, the sense of satisfaction and pleasure it elicits, identifies it as intrinsically valuable according to George Santayana. The sense of beauty, the perception of pleasure objectified as the 13Ralph Barton Perry, General Theory of Value (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1926), pp. 131-134. 18 quality of a thing, the aesthetic experience itself, can be perceived and described "Beauty is a value, that is, it's not a perception of a matter of fact or of a relation: it is an emotion, an affection "14 of our volitional and appreciative nature and it "springs from the immediate and inexplicable reaction of vital impulse, and from the irrational part of our nature."15 The study was concerned strictly with objects as they were considered to be valued extrinsically which was outside of Santay- ana's concern with the intrinsically valued aesthetic experience which the objects create. For Santayana beauty is the ultimate good, the intrinsic "perfection of life."16 His approach to an aesthetic object is through conceived, or ideal value. The approach to the object of the present study was through instrumental value. However, the inclusion of Santayana's approach within the review was necessary because the reader must not lose sight of the fact that the concep- tual model developed in this study is Only an instrument for enabling an observer to identify what objects occasion or have the potential of occasioning the ideally pleasant emotion as it is conceived by Santayana. The purpose of the framework was to identify which objects are capable of acting as springboards to the experienc- ing of beauty as Santayana so compellingly expresses it, and which objects do not have that capability. The framework attempted to 14George Santayana, The Sense of Beauty (New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1896; Dover Publications, 1955), p. 31 15Ibid., p. 14. '5Ibid., p. 149. 19 identify what other objects in addition to the relatively few uni- versally reliable great works of art have the ability to produce at least in small measure the intoxication, the pure pleasure of per- ception intrinsically valuable to all sensing human beings. The focus of the framework on the extrinsic value of objects assumed that the need to do so was to provide increased access to intrinsic experience, to Santayana's sense of beauty through a more informed understanding of extrinsic value as it is found in objects. The Perceiver The field of experimental aesthetics mentioned previously in connection with Irvin Child's work has been most commonly inter- ested, not in analyzing the object as.*was Child, but in identify- " ing characteristics of the aesthetic observer. Issues such as the following have been central to experimental aesthetics analysis: the distinction between aesthetically inclined observers and non- aesthetically inclined observers, characteristics of personality influential to the perceptual process, the relationship between an observer's aesthetic abilities and other nonaesthetic aspects of personality, and the effect of aesthetic training and experience on aesthetic interest. The field of art education in particular, has focused on these issues. The present study was not concerned with characteristics of the perceiver of the object but with the object itself. However, to assess the validity of the conceptual model, a measure of each individual's personal value orientations was used in the research design. Although these areas are outside of the issues 20 of concern to this study, mention of it is made to identify where most current aesthetic research is being done. Two studies are pre- sented as characteristic of this approach. Robert Seelhorst17 looked at the relationship between human values and three aesthetic orientations: aesthetic performance, aesthetic sensitivity and sensitivity to problems. His sample of 109 college students in art education programs was selected to include a range of levels of art experience from undergraduate through graduate status. Five basic values were identified by means of factor analysis of Charles Morris' "Ways to Live" instrument designed to assess basic value orientations. A score for aesthetic performance was obtained from a panel of experts' evaluations of work done by each subject in response to a verbal motivation. A score of aesthetic sensitivity was obtained by using a subset of questions from the Beittel Instrument of Aesthetic Sensitivity. Correlations were run on the six possible combinations of the three variables on which the following conclusions were based. Value orientations identified as "enjoyment and progress in action" and "self indul- gence" were negatively significantly correlated with aesthetic per- formance at .05 level of significance. A third value orientation, "withdrawal and self-sufficiency" was positively correlated with aesthetic performance at the .01 level of significance which the researcher interpreted to mean that individuals with internalized 17Robert C. Seelhorst, "The Relationship Between Human Values, Aesthetic Performance, Aesthetic Sensitivity, and Sensitivity to Problems" (Ph.D. dissertation, Pennsylvania State University, 1960). 21 values perform better aesthetically than individuals whose general value orientation is more outgoing and socially oriented. No corre- lations reached significance for variables "aesthetic sensitivity" and "sensitivity to problems" for the sample as a whole. However, among the subsample of those with the highest level of experience, i.e., graduate students in art education, there was a significant correlation between aesthetic performance and sensitivity to prob- lems. Art judgment studies have a long tradition and several instruments have been developed. One instrument and a study which used it is presented as illustrative of the approach. In an early 18 using the Meirer-Seashore Art Judgment instrument, study by Calahan a sample of art and nonart students, and a test-retest design, Calahan obtained the following results. Aesthetic judgment was con- sistent over a period of one year with art students more consistent than nonart students. High aesthetic judgment scores were more con- sistent from test to retest than low scores. Aesthetic judgment was positively related to knowledge of compositional principles. The last finding provided a method for assessing the validity of the present empirical test through use of a pretest-posttest research design with the intervening treatment a course in design principles. Home management research has focused on objects within the near environment as one of a family's several resources which can be organized to meet needs and wants. Research in this area has 18Ellen J. Calahan, "The Consistency of Aesthetic Judgment," Psychologjgal Monographs 51 (1931): 75-87. 22 emphasized the operationalizing of values, and the role of the indi- vidual's value system within the decisionmaking process. A char- acteristic study within this area of investigation was that of Dorothy Ramsland19 which looked at consistency between husbands' and wives' value orientations and the value they assigned to items of household furnishings. The relative strengths of basic value orien- tations, identified with the Allport-Vernon-Lindzey and the Expressed Response instruments, were identified for both husbands and wives of fifty student couples. Ramsland found little consistency between the value orientations of husband and wife generally, moreover, an individual's dominant value orientation identified by the Allport- vernon-Lindzey instrument was not similarly reflected in the Expressed Response instrument. The only similarity between the present study and the Rams- land study is that individuals were asked in both to evaluate objects according to a particular set of value characteristics. Ramsland asked subjects to identify which one of the six Allport-Vernon- Lindzey value categories matched most closely the value they held for particular objects in their home. The present study asked individuals to assign value to objects according to two value dimensions--inher- ent and instrumental value. The present study included a wider range of objects in its conceptualization than did the Ramsland study. Literature in the area of management has stressed the need to look more closely at the role the material near environment plays 19Dorothy Ramsland, "Values Underlying Family Utilization of Home Furnishings" (Ph.D. dissertation, Michigan State University, 1967). 23 in daily life. Dorothy Lee stated, "Comparatively little attention has been paid by academic researchers to material resources. they are, however, parts of the whole organization to which human 20 With the material beings react and with which they are involved." resources available to a partciular social group--the family, Beatrice Paolucci stated, "the house and its furnishings are but resources to be managed for the good of the family. Recognizing this obligates the home managerix1so arrange the materials and space 2] To achieve this within the home that special values are mediated." end, a great deal more needs to be known about the kinds of value objects have for individuals. This research addressed itself to this task by identifying two dimensions commonly used to assign value to objects and suggested a possible relationship between the two. Such knowledge has direct application, for as Edward Hall stated "by broadening his conception of the forces that make and control his life, the average person can never again be caught in the grip of patterned behavior of which he has no awareness."22 A Concept of Theory Morris Weitz made the following statement regarding the role of theory with respect to the fine arts which was equally appropriate to the consideration of all objects: 2Ooorothy Lee, "The Individual in a Changing Society," Journal of Home Economics 52:2 (February 1960): 73-82. 2‘Beatrice Paolucci, "Home Management: Yesterday--Today," Penney's Home Fashions and Fabrics 8 (1962): 3. 22Edward Hall, The Silent Languege_(Garden City, New York: Doubleday, 1959), p. 212. 24 these theories are supposed to be factual reports on art. If they are, may we not ask, are they empirical and open to veri- fication or falsification? For example, what would confirm or disconfirm the theory that art is significant form or embodiment of emotion or creative synthesis of images? There does not even seem to be a hint of the kind of evidence which might be forthcoming to test these theories; and indeed one wonders if they are perhaps honorific definitions of "art," that is, proposed redefinitions in terms of some chosen con- ditions for applying the concept of art, and not true or false reports on the essential properties of art at all.23 His response to his own question could be considered a justification for the present undertaking, But what makes them--these honorific definitions--so supremely valuable is not their disguised linguistic recommendations; rather it is the debates over the reasons for changing the criteria of the concept of art which are built into the defi- nitions. In each of the great theories of art, whether correctly understood as honorific definitions or incorrectly accepted as real definitions, what is of the utmost importance are the reasons preferred in the argument for the respective theory, that is, the reasons given for the chosen or preferred criterion of excellence and evaluation. It is this perennial debate over these criterion of evaluation which makes the history of aesthetic theory the important study it is.24 The argument was even more pertinent to the study of objects in general, an area of investigation which has not had and which badly needs, the long tradition of scholarly debate which identified and clarified issues pertinent to the building of theories of art. At the present time a single theory of art has not been agreed upon, but the issues central to one have been carefully laid out and seri- ously discussed. The same process must occur in order to develop a theory which includes all objects. Weitz continued."To understand 23Morris Weitz, "The Role of Theory in Aesthetics," in Prob- lems in Aesthetics, ed: Morris Weitz, 2nd ed. (New York: MacMilIan, W), p0 1730 24 Ibid., p. 179 25 the role of aesthetic theory (read: the theory of objects) is not to conceive it as definition, logically doomed to failure, but to read it as summaries of seriously made recommendations to attend in certain ways to features of art (read: objects)."25 The primary value of the conceptual model to be presented is perhaps not as much for_the concepts it develops, but as it brings the analysis of object value into greater prominence thus submitting the area of investigation to the clarifying effects which are often the result of rigorous debate. Summar Literature and research suggested the following points rele- vant to the present study: 1. Aesthetic theory was limited in the degree to which it is concerned with analysis of only a small segment of the total objects in the environment, of only art objects. However, it provided sev- eral theories on which to build a conceptual model descriptive of a wider range of objects. And two theorists suggested the appropriate- ness of.expanding the range of objects to be considered beyond merely L, art.9biectsnalone, 2. Empirical aesthetics generally places its focus on analy- sis of the observer rather than on analysis of the object. However, its methods and experimental designs had relevance for the present study. 25Ibid., p. 180. 26 3. Research in family management and value with respect to the object has focused on the material object as it functions as a resource to be considered in the decisionmaking process. It has looked at object value from an operational rather than theoretical perspective. 4. Literature in art theory suggests that the value of the discussion which is generated from critical analysis of new theories may be as great as the value of the ideas proposed. The present research will hopefully serve as a catalyst to begin serious dis- cussion of object value. CHAPTER III TOWARD A MODEL OF OBJECT VALUE This chapter presents a conceptual model for the classifi— cation of object value. The following chapters will present the empirical test which was constructed to assess the validity of the conceptual model, and the results of the research design whiCh applied the empirical test. Any object can be evaluated by its observer from several dis- tinct perspectives. Each added dimension of evaluation gives a more complete understanding of the object as a whole through providing additional information peculiar to that analytical approach. Take, as example, the quilt illustrated in Plate 3.1. Itcan be evaluated in its role as a communicative, nonverbal symbol within the colonial American cultural milieu. Nonverbal communication occurs through the articles of material culture in the form of information or a message which is transferred from a source, in this case the quilter, to the receiver, in this case the observer or user of the quilt. Added understanding of the quilt as an object can therefore be obtained by researching the provenance of the indivdual motifs used in the overall pattern, the traditional "Feathered Star" and "Flying Geese" patterns. These symbolic allusions were commonly understood by the contemporary community and the quilt, therefore, functioned as a vehicle for transmitting this meaning among members of the social group. 27 28 v v v v v v POP»..D{O««« POWDDD{4(«{44 A IR ’2‘ 1% V V D» v v P»»»>‘4«4«« »”’A«‘““‘ v v V v v z - «“4 A A A A A A A 2 a. 2 A A IAI fl ”DP»»««4« ”DD»PN««4« A ‘ A A A «(Oiiifi A A )9)» D A ‘ «“4“ '«««4 PLATE 3.1.--Patchwork Quilt, Feathered Star with Flying Geese Borders 29 The purely formal design characteristics of the quilt can add a dimension of understanding to the quilt as a whole. Analysis would inc1ude such things as the use of particular combinations of pattern elements, the handling of color, the relationship between positive and negative spaces, the division into dominant and subore dinant areas of pattern, the organization of the whole with respect to the concepts of balance, proportion, and unity. The quilt can be evaluated as a fact which, when perceived by an observer, elicits a particular kind of response. That response may serve as an impetus to use the quilt in some manner, or it may be a purely enjoyable feeling in response to the visual image created by the quilt, or the response may be a combination of the previous two possibilities. Any one of the three kinds of evaluation could be studied with respect to most design objects. However, gn1y_the last ferm of“ Qxeluationiwillbe investigated in the_present 9159955190; The guilt, or any object, will be viewed as an aspect of a total activ- ity, of a particular kind of integrative process occurring when an individual interacts with a material object. The activity or expe- rience will be viewed as a process of valuing and an attempt will be made to identify two characteristics of objects which the individual uses to determine whether a particular object has positive value in general, and how that value might be described or classified. ijegt_ yglge in this discussion will be viewed as the complex transaction in which an artifact deliberately formed for a predetermined purpose 30 is contemplated and judged by an interpreter.1 The definition of the object remains as stated in Chapter I: an gbjegt_is defined as any intentionally created material artifact. The category includes those things termed art objects, those useful things termed tools and instruments, and those useless things termed junk and refuse. The subscriber to an object's value will be the individual attend- ing to or contemplating the object. Classic value theory as outlined by Ralph B. Perry struc- tures value with respect to objects in the following manner. Con- sider Johann Rohde's pitcher (Plate 3.2). If we attend to the pitcher and experience a sense of enjoyment and satisfaction occa- sioned by the smoothness and reflectiveness of the finish, the grace- ful character of the curving line as it moves from lip across the opening, along the handle, eventually merging with the body of the form, the sense of elegance it imparts; the sensation we feel is a purely aesthetic experience and has positive value for us. The experience, that sense of satisfaction obtained in the presence of the object, is 'This definition of the object is based upon but enlarges in its scope the following definition of art developed by John F. A. Taylor [John F. A. Taylor, Series of Lectures: "Philosophy of Aesthetics." Michigan State University (September-December, 1974)]: The process of art is a complex transaction in which an artifact deliberately formed for the purpose of expres- sion is contemplated by an interpreter who finds value in 1 . The present author believes that there is a need to approach not only art objects but many other categories of objects with the discriminating appreciative approach often reserved only for tra- ditionally defined art objects. (See discussion in Chapter II, The Object-) 31 I___, , 6'17; Johan Rohde's silver pikier PLATE 3.2.--Johan Rohde: Silver Pitcher 32 considered good simply because it occurs. The object is appreciated “ for purely visual qualities which occasion the experience that we find particularly pleasant and worthwhile. We regard the value of the experience itself to be of intrinsic value. In value theory terminology, something regarded as good in its own right or good for its own sake, is said to haveintrinsic value. Its goodness is not conditional upon any other state, it is good just by virtue of the fact that it exists. If a second pitcher is presented to the same observer, one of perhaps a more ornamental style yet visually appeal- ing in its own right, both pitchers, though presenting different visual stimuli, occasion the same kind of experience-~a positively valued experience. The resulting experience in both cases is of similar value--of intrinsic value. Objects or events occasioning this experience may, therefore, be quite different in appearance but the intrinsically valued sensation they stimulate in the observer is of the same kind. Similar intrinsic satisfaction may be occasioned by an unusually patterned fabric, a painting by Rembrandt, and a sketch on a breakfast food box. However, the intensity and quality of the experience may be quite different for different individuals in each of the three cases. The experience is valued intrinsically as good in itself. The pitcher which occasioned the experience is valued conditional on its ability to provide that intrinsic good. Its value is con- sidered extrinsic as it serves as the means by which the creation of an intrinsic good, the experience, is realized. An object valued 33 extrinsically is considered good, not for its own sake, but for the " sake of something distinct from itself. The relationship can be expressed by the following figure: VALUE /////’[X is good] EXTRINSIC INTRINSIC [X is good for the [X is good for its sake of something else] own sake] FIGURE 3.1.--Va1ue Defined as Extrinsic and Intrinsic. However, when this dichotomized approach to value is applied to a number of diverse objects, it does not seem to be sufficiently discriminating to describe the full range of value situations with respect to the wide range of existing objects. Continuing with the pitcher, intuitively one feels that there is a difference in the value attributed to the tools used to produce the pitcher and the value attributed to the pitcher as a product; and that both--the tools and pitcher--are distinct from the value of the experience gained by contemplation of the pitcher. The forge required to melt the silver, the molds required to form it, and the burnishers nec- essary to smooth its surface, are all objects and must all have some kind of extrinsic value, according to the definition. However, their extrinsic value seems to be acquired for different reasons than the extrinsic value of the pitcher. The difference rests in the fact 34 that the pitcher provides intrinsic experience directly, the observer values the pitcher for its visual effect, for the pure satisfaction which results from interacting with it. The tools, on the other hand, are not generally considered as directly gratifying in them- selves. The observer does not, upon contemplating a burnisher or forge, feel a sense of pure satisfaction from their presence alone, rather he regards them primarily for their utility, for their ability to produce other things. The burnisher and forge are valued indi- rectly as they efficiently work in order to make the pitcher or other objects which provide intrinsic experience directly. Both kinds of objects--pitchers, and forges and burnishers-- are valued extrinsically in that they are valued for something distinct from themselves. But in the case of the pitcher, the object is valued as an instrument for creating an intrinsic aesthetic experience directly. In the case of the burnisher or hammer, the object is valued as it creates intrinsic value indirectly. It is an instrument used to make the pitcher and its value accrues from its ability as a tool, not as an end in itself. The pitcher, on the other hand, is valued for its own sake, for the satisfaction which it occasions. For the purposes of discussion, any object which is valued extrinsically as the immediate occasion for satisfaction, i.eiimgfyen intrinsic value, will be described as having extrinsic inherent valbe, according to the phrasing of Clarence I. Lewis.2 Anything valued extrinsically for the sake of an intrinsic good, 2Clarence 1. Lewis, An Analysis of Knowledge and Valuation (LaSalle, 111.: Open Court Publishing Co., 1946), p. 432. 35 in this case the pitcher, is said to have inherent extrinsic value. In contrast, anything valued or considered good for the sake of another extrinsically valued good, in this case the forge and burn- isher, is said to have extrinsic instrumental value. This distinc- 3 in Figure 3.2. tion is made graphically by John F. A. Taylor If the total range of objects is considered in light of Figure 3.2, generally speaking, objects valued inherently are com- monly thought of as art objects, objects which according to Lewis provide direct gratification and gratification of a higher order. And objects valued inscrumentally are those things generally described as utilitarian, whose value is derived from their ability to produce other goods but which are not generally considered to be directly satisfying in themselves. However, anuobject may be valued simultaneously both inher: A M-..“— 4 ‘ ——~.._, W ently and instrumentally. The burnisher and forge have instrumental value. However, the pitcher has a more complex nature. It is valued instrumentally if one attends to its ability to hold and to dispense a liquid. In this light, it is regarded as a tool, a facilitator created to produce another extrinsic good, perhaps in this case, drinking. And it also serves in the creation of an intrinsic experience as a rsult of its particularly pleasing visual formal qualities. The pitcher appears to carry both kinds of extrinsic value, both instrumental and inherent. It functions as an 1 L P 1 " x \ 1 I Q.“ h- ., '\:\i\ W 3Clarence I. Lewis, op. cit., p. 435. 36 eo_>ep .< .d czoc x5 umucmmmca me mz—e> pumnno we comumucmmmcnmmii.m.m mmaumu .; mgmzoqu ..m.m mcmgmwcgsn ..m.m .coom .uoom ummcwepcw cm eo ummcmepxm cospoce we exam as» com uoom mw xg exam on“ Low uoom mm xu _ ezmemzzH seezuz=memzfi nmucmwcmaxm ovumzumwe ..m.m _ Ill, mmmpo mcwcpmsom .wxem czo wow so» uoom Mm xg _ eo exam on» cow coca mw xu onszsz _ uHmszhxm Heoom me xu m24<> mocwwemaxm Co :_esoo + _ i mpomwno mo c_eeoo 37 aesthetic object in 299 sense_and as a useful tool in another sense; r Zfibotbsfunctions occurring simultaneously in the same object,. Fortunately, Lewis suspected an inability of the model of inherent/instrumental value to describe adequately the full range of extrinsically valued objects within the environment: "There are relatively few things which are good exclusively in the sense of inherent value, and do not possess in addition some usefulness.“ For example, a Cezanne painting, though generally considered to be art, created without regard for its usefulness, may in fact be g§eg_ to decorate a room, a degree of instrumental value in addition to its dominant inherent value. Lewis' statement suggests that‘there ; M... 4’ -_ f is a degtesflintemeeving between PIESEategQries of teammate], “fix and inherent value; that they are not as mutually exclusive as they ' .m..._. -.-._.,._, _‘_’ would at first glance appear to be. His statement continues suggest- ing that there are a significant number of objects falling within this undefined region: Since there are two main types of value to be found in objects, inherent value and instrumental value and since a single objective existent may be good in either or both senses, we have three classes of good things: those which are preponderantly or exclusively useful, those possessing some degree of inherent value and also some use; and those which by being preponderantly or exclusively good in the sense of being directly gratifying, are candidates for the v/ label "aesthetic." (There is, of course, the fourth class of objects also, which neither afford direct gratification nor have any use, and are wothless altogether.)4 “Visually these four categories of object value might be represented as four degrees on a‘continuumsthat encompasses all possible objects. ~ -- --.,--k _ ”J’s-v ‘ .. 4 _ _ Clarence Lewis, 0p. cit., pp. 435-436. 38 The continuum, as represented in Figure 3.3, would extend from objects having no value, Lewis' worthless objects, to those having pure inherent value. It is the opinion of the author that the domain of object value is structured not in the form of a single continuum, but rather ggn§j§tgfigfytwo dimensions: la dimension of "inherentness"-- an ability to provide satisfaction directly, and a dimension of "instrumentality"--an ability to perform a useful task, to provide satisfaction indirectly.- And any object can be meaningfully evaluated against these two criteria. However, the central issue is not simply the determination of the strength of each value dimension for a given object, but determining the particular interaction of the two dimensions with respect to a particular object. What is really desired is not only to determine how useful an object is, and independently, how appreciable it is, but rather to determine the degree of interaction between these two dimensions for a single v/‘ _gbject, It would be informative to know whether a given object is generally considered more useful than visually pleasing as compared to another object which also has both characteristics or whether its value is predominantly based on its appreciableness rather than its usefulness. It is therefore proposed that the two dimensions be viewed as two axes perpendicular to one another (Figure 3.4). The total space within which all objects, with respect to value, are located is then divided into four sub-spaces or quadrants. A reading on 39 .m:_pcwea pucecnewm m ..m.m xuwpwua opopwp new: coeuumemmpem “dogma eo mmoczom mpnewpwe use gown: muumnno .o=_e> oooweo co moeeomooeu seem so asseeoeou <--.m.m mmzwue .mma op «cameo—n e we pm peg» mcmpmwaae xppesmm> ma uce one; m.mco “we op umcuwmmu Ppm: om m? use F—mz mxcoz sows: cog mcwpme: m ..m.m cowueuww_ueem mo mucsom me .covauuo cw .m>gwm :oumo new hp? upwuz m>eg sown: mpomnao .mcwpwgz com cowmeuuo o: co qucma Peupcegume o: mw .xpego mews“ we vamp we mumwn.e eo women m ..m.m .cowuoew ..m.m .m:_e> m>wpmmmc Lo -mmpem pumswu o: muw>oea m>wuwmoa uaogaw: .Feepamc wee mxmep mo cowwmpaeou we mmcmm we» cw mmmp muepwpwomm cows: muummno usage: one cope: muomnno m24<> hzmmmIzH w=o<> ezmmwzzH seeZLZDeAmZH m=4<> 4 oz 40 AXIS 0F INSTRUMENTAL VALUE [Degree of Instrumentality] AXIS 0F INHERENT VALUE [Degree of Inherentness] FIGURE 3.4.--The Field of Instrumental and Inherent Value. either axis is interpreted as the degree to which that character- istic is present or absent for a given object. A positive reading is interpreted as value present, and a negative reading interpreted as value absent. The four quadrants enable four different combinations of characteristics with respect to the two criteria to be distinguished. All objects located within a particular quadrant have a particular unique combination of characteristics with respect to the two dimen- sions in common. Objects placed within each of the four quadrants have either positive or negative value in varying degrees of inten- sity. They are not neutral in value. Quadrant A (Figure 3.5) contains objects which will be termed the Economy_of Disvalue Objects. They may also be described as the 41 INSTRUMENTALITY + B C Utilitarian Economy of Objects Value Objects + INHERENTNESS A 0 Economy of Aesthetic Disvalue Objects Objects FIGURE 3.5.--A Model of Object Value. litter in the environment. They are evaluated "negative" on both axes neither serving a positive useful purpose nor providing posi- tive satisfaction by their existence alone. Into this quadrant fall such things as unrepairable toasters, junked automobiles, and wrinkled candy wrappers. If they work at all they are difficult, thwarting, or frustrating to use and therefore are rated negative on the Instrumental axis. They are not merely ordinary to look at but, if not ugly, at the least are displeasing to observe, there- fore rating negative on the Inherent axis. Unfortunately, a great number of the objects in our environment fall into the Economy of Disvalue category and because they are not positively valued, they continue accumulating at an increasing rate as discarded refuse littering the environment. They required an investment in materials and labor to produde and are giving little return on that investment. They may in some ways be a handicap to daily existence as they gradu- ally accumulate without an evident purpose. 42 In contrast, objects in Quadrant B, Utilitarian Objects, are highly valuable. They are those things which are very useful. They perform a useful task and are thus located along the positive sec- tion of the Instrumental axis. They do not have positive value as providers of aesthetic experience, they are, in fact, sometimes unattractive or offensive in appearance. They, therefore, rest on the negative end of the Inherent axis. Carburetors, bulk handling milk pails, refuse bins behind commercial buildings and industrial sites all work well and efficiently. They are highly valued for this utility and there is no doubt that civilization literally could not continue without this group of objects. On either axis it is possible to suggest the relative degree of instrumentality or inherentness present with respect to an object. A heavy iron skillet is useful in thatii:distributes and retains heat well. However, it requires careful handling to keep it from rusting and food cannot be left sitting in it. In contrast, an iron skillet which has been enameled has all of the thermal advantages of the uncoated iron skillet but, in addition, it requires less care in terms of maintenance. Food can be left in it and it will not rust. As a result, the iron skillet would perhaps be located somewhere in the lower right of Quadrant B (Figure 3.6) since it is positively use- ful but with some reservations and for this observer, it is not conducive to an intrinsic aesthetic experience. The enameled skillet might be located further away from the origin on the Instrumental axis than the iron skillet since it is easier to maintain and hence has greater all around utility, and it may be ambiguously close to 43 being considered positive on the Inherentness axis depending on its form, color, and surface. The issue of ambiguity will be discussed below. The enameled skillet may seem to rest exactly on the border between Quadrants B and C (Figure 3.6), not positive on the Inherent axis in the sense of eliciting intrinsic aesthetic value but cer- tainly not negative in the sense of ugly or unpleasant to look at either. INSTRUMENTALITY + Enameled Skillet o Iron 0 - Sk'IIEt + INHERENTNESS FIGURE 3.6.--A Quadrant B and a Pure Utilitarian Object. The previous example has raised an important issue. In some respects the visual representation of the model is inadequate. The axes suggest that there is an absolute line of demarcation between any two quadrants. The format of the axes would seem to demand an either--or classification into one quadrant or the other. However, the borders or axes themselves, particularly those between Quad- rants B and C and between Quadrants C and 0, actually represent a number of objects which might be considered pure types. A location 44 directly on an axis represents objects which are one dimensional: one axis has positive value and the second axis is neutral, resting V on the point of origin as neither positive nor negative. The enameled skillet may be considered purely useful if it occasions neither positive intrinsic aesthetic satisfaction nor evokes a nega- tive feeling of unpleasantness or ugliness. It is, then, neutral with respect to inherent value and therefore rests directly on the margin between Quadrants B and C. The issue of "pure type" objects is perhaps more critical on the margin between Quadrants C and D and will be discussed in connection with Quadrant 0 objects below. Quadrant C objects are unique because they are the only objects described by positive value on both axes. In defining his four categories of object value (Figure 3.3), Lewis asserts that "in order to qualify as an object which is good on the whole a thing must usually possess some instrumentality to other good objects, in addition to its potentiality for direct gratification."5 “An object, fir). .1 therefore, has greater value or "good on the whole" if it is dual- ngtuged, fulfilling two criteria simultaneously. A Quadrant C Economy of Value object, is not only useful, having positive Instru- mental value, but its value accrues as a result of something beyond its usefulness. The function of the object has been translated into a form which is not only appropriate to the function, but seems by eminent fitness of form, to express it. The end product is not only useful, but seems visually to enhance daily existence ~/ for the user. Economy of Value objects have a characteristic of 5Ibid., p. 236. 45 perspicuous efficiency, of artful economy, of having everything essential to the function and nothing extraneous to it. These are not objects whose attraction is generated out of curiosity, shock, or startlement at their eccentricity. Their attraction has a dura- bility over time because they are highly useful and visually appre- ciable. The work egg they are visually attractive. Lewis continues the previous statement: In order to qualify as an object which is good on the whole, a thing must usually possess some instrumentality to other good objects, in addition to its potentiality for direct gratification, or else the inherent value findable in the presence of it must be of a higher order. The last phrase describes objects in Quadrant 0; objects whose value is positive on the Inherent axis providing "higher order" intrinsic aesthetic experience directly, and negative on the Instrumental axis because they are frustrating or difficult to use, or costly in terms of their usefulness. Quadrant D Aesthetic Objects are most commonly described as fine art objects. The pur- pose of their existence is to serve as a direct source for intrinsic experience. Their high value accrues from their ability to express or communicate in a visual form. Their difficulty and costliness ‘ are tolerated because their inherent value justifies their expense. Quadrant 0 objects are not meant to be casual, comfortable presences, but rather require appropriate psychological distance. As a result, objects such as great paintings and sculpture do not integrate easily into daily existence and its mundane routines. The effort they require in order to extract their potential intrinsic value 46 requires a singleness of purpose not easily arranged in the many leveled styles of everyday existence. We do not have the time, we cannot go to the museum, we cannot afford the cost and requirements of ownership even though we are aware of the value they have for us because of the sometimes unparalleled satisfaction they can often provide. The quadrant includes objects such as Michelangelo's "Pieta" and Leonardo's "Mona Lisa:" sculpture and painting deemed so valuable in terms of their Inherent value that their preservation is almost too costly. They cannot be easily moved because of the security felt necessary to protect them, and their inherent value is often unobtainable because the constant crowd of viewers which sur- rounds them which prevents them from being seen at advantage by anyone. As exhilarating as Quadrant 0 objects are, it is unrealistic to expect to maintain that level of intense intrinsic satisfaction with any one object for extended periods of time. It is at this point that it is appropriate to turn back to Quadrant C, Economy of Value objects. They have a function both useful and visual, and include a wide range of objects: from a Trecento Italian altarpiece to a contemporary leather armchair. They provide positive intrinsic value, but do not have the intensity of the art object. They are familiar and integral to our daily lives. We can live yjth_them rather than being demanded to concentrate 9n_them. Because of their familiarity, our.interest and involvement with Economy of Value objects can be sustained for longer periods of time without becoming '47 over saturated than is possible with art objects. Response to Quadrant C objects is low-keyed rather than highly intense. They r are described with comfortable aesthetic adjectives such as well done, attractive, and pleasant. In contrast, art objects are described with much more intense adjectives such as strikingly beautiful, breath-taking, monumental: terms which are not likely to describe objects which are comfortable to live with over time. The issue of "pure type" objects, those which are essentially one-dimensional with respect to value, was discussed above and is pertinent again in connection with the axis between Quadrants C and D. The value of some art objects is purely Inherent since value accrues for their ability to provide intrinsic experience which is enjoyable without great cost. They are, therefore, neither posi- tively useful nor negatively useful. As shown in Figure 3-7. they rest exactly on the axis between Quadrants C and 0 rather than within Quadrant D. A B Pure Art Objects C D FIGURE 3.7.--Pure Art Objects. 48 A great percentage of all painting and sculpture probably falls along this line. The objects are highly appreciable and they can be appreciated without cost; they are not negatively valued with respect to instrumentality. When intrinsic experience can only be achieved at some cost, at some discomfort, or under some negatively felt condition, then the inherently valued object is located within Quadrant 0, not on the axis itself. The model identifies an additional group of objects beyond objects within the four quadrants and "pure types" located directly on the axes. The last category includes those objects which have v/ neither positive nor negative value on either axis. They are not one-dimensional but in a sense are without value. In Lewis' classi- fication of object value, he referred to this group of objects as "worthless." Without either positive or negative value they corre- spond to the point of origin on the model. They are absolute zero [objects which lie outside of the valuing process. They neither serve nor thwart our purposes, they neither satisfy nor offend our sensibilities. In the natural world these objects are relatively easily identified. A blade of grass or a grain of sand is generally not referred to as having either positive or negative value. Each simply exists. It is more difficult to identify objects with neutral value in the domain of intentionally created objects because the very fact that they were considered valuable enough to be made in the first place takes them out of the category of neutral value objects to some degree. Perhaps the category includes things such 49 as wooden spools whose thread has been used up, or used corks from wine bottles. Both items, once useful, no longer have positive instrumental value nor are they particularly appreciable in an inherent sense. But the value society attaches to the material they are made of, wood or cork, respectively, makes one hesitate to dis- card them. At the present moment, they are neither useful nor visually appealing, but neither are they negatively useful nor visually undesirable. They are just present. They simply exist until we are tired of moving them and throw them out or transform them into another object which has positive value. For example, the spools may be made into beads for children's play. This category of objects is conceptually critical to the model since it defines a feature integral to the visual model: the point of origin. It is difficult to illustrate the conceptualization of the category with specific objects, which may be due to the fact that by nature these objects are rather neutral, they evoke no value response and hence are present within the environment, but are camouflaged, in a sense, to our perception. Placement of objects within the four quadrants depends on determining how a given individual most characteristically or most typically interacts with or responds to the object. The important ~ question is whether this construct for object value is a meaningful way of talking about object value: whether the construct provides a terminology and set of relationships which have meaning across a significant number of people and thus permits communication. If 50 there is some consistency across individuals in the way they evaluate a given object's usefulness and its reliability as a source of satis- faction. its instrumentality and its inherentness,then there is evidence that there is a common meaning for those terms. There is no doubt that, if taken to the extreme, a painting can be considered useful--that it can be "used" to cover a hole in the wall; or that a set of highly polished industrial ball bearings can be set apart in a museum and called "sculpture." However, a painting is generally not valued as a patch for a wall, but rather as an appreciable object. Ball bearings are typically not valued as appreciable objects, but rather are more commonly valued as highly useful instruments designed to reduce friction. If the two previous examples seem correct, then there is evidence for a common meaning ~ of the concepts of "inherent" and "instrumental" value. In summary, this chapter has presented a conceptual frame- work, identified its theoretical source, and developed the individual concepts which it employs. However, a conceptual framework appro- priate and helpful to only one individual has limited value. Only if others use it to structure the same world and the two find con- sistency in the way they use it can it be said that a path for communication has been identified. It becomes true communication because it is shared meaning, not similar terminology masking quite different underlying conceptual frameworks. There is a need to bring true communication, a sharing of meanings, into the area of object value. The following chapters will assess whether the 51 conceptual framework developed is capable of moving slightly closer toward that further goal of shared meaning with respect to the value assigned to objects. CHAPTER IV AN EMPIRICAL FORMULATION OF THE CONCEPTUAL MODEL Statement of the Problem for Research Implementation As stated above, a conceptualization of object value which had meaning and provided understanding for only one individual had a small role to play in furthering the understanding of object value generally. To determine whether the model presented in Chapter III had such a limited role or whether its formulation had a certain logic which others would find useful, an empirical model based on the conceptual model was develOped. The intent was to determine whether the evaluations of objects by the author, a panel of design professionals, and a sample of college students in an introductory design course would provide evidence that all were using the concep- tual model in a consistent manner; that all had a common understand- ing of the concepts of inherentness and instrumentality. Research Hypotheses To provide a standard with which to assess the persuasiveness of the conceptual framework as presented in the empirical model, the following hypotheses were identified and evidence proposed for each which the author felt would constitute agreement with each hypothe- sis if obtained under controlled conditions. 52 53 Hypothesis 1: The conceptual model was capable of consis- tently discriminating four categories of object value across several groups of individuals. Evidence for agreement was to be gjmiler_ela§sifigetion§_of ~§ number of objects by the author, a panel of design professionals and a class of design students at the end of an introductory design course. Evidence for agreement was to be consistent classifications _eero§§~thewthree groups when a particular object was presented alone and when it was presented simultaneously with a similar, yet not identical object functioning as a distractor. Hypothesis 2: The conceptual model was capable of detecting change in the perception of object value over time. Evidence for agreement was to be change toward greater dis- criminatory ability from administration of the test at the beginning of a design course and at the posttest administration at the end of the course. Greater consistency of response among the three groups ’«ww . (author, professionals, students) was expected at the posttest than at the first admini§tration. Hypothesis 3: Individuals having high aesthetic interest in general would be expected to evidence greater consistency with the classifications of the panel of professionals and the author than those without a high aesthetic value orienta- tion. Evidence for agreement was to be higher performance on the empirical model at both the pretest and posttest situations for individuals who scored at or above the nationally normed 54 82 percentile on the aesthetic score of the Allport-Vernon-Lindzey Values Inventory than individuals with lower aesthetic value scores. The three hypotheses provided a means for assessing the validity of the empirical test developed from the conceptual model. They provided a means for responding to the question: Given the theoretical model, what behaviors, conditions, or responses, when observed would provide evidence for the existence of the object value construct which the conceptual model proposes. To as great a degree as possible validity was interpreted in accordance with the standards developed by a joint committee whose members represented the American Psychological Association, the American Educational Research Association, and the National Council on Measurements Used in Education. The committee defined validity on three dimensions: content, criterion-related, and construct validity.1 Each of the three dimensions will be intro- duced as each becomes pertinent within the development of the empirical test. Assumptions The study was based on the following assumptions: 1. An individual's valuing behavior is not random but has some consistency over time and with respect to content. 2. An individual's predisposition toward broad interest orientations cah be identified though not necessarily measured. 1Standards fo:_Educational and Psychological Tests and Manuals (Washington, D.C.: American PsychologicET Association, 1966), section on Validity. 55 3. Valuing behavior may be changed as a result of inter- vening educational experiences. .EA“TV" 4. The aesthetic attitude assumes a positive appreciative [Tfljji approach to an object on the part of the observer. égn-ag‘ Development of the Empirical Test The Empirical Test-Version II (Appendix B) is the product of three trial runs and subsequent revisions. An initial presentation of the conceptual model itself was made to select an appropriate vocabulary with which to present the conceptual model in an empirical test which could be easily and quickly understood by individuals unfamiliar with design or value theory terms. The conceptualization of the model was presented verbally along with a graphic representa- tion to a class of 50 undergraduate and graduate students. The class was then shown slides of two objects and asked to locate each within the conceptual model. Discussion immediately after this session pro- vided the following insights which were incorporated into the first version of the empirical test (Appendix A). It was evident that the test would first have to help the subject make a distinction between evaluations of intrinsic and extrinsic value. Although they occur simultaneously with respect to a given object, only the second was of concern in the present study. Mtflnsic value response evidenced in a sense of satisfaction from anobject,1;:preference felt for it, was outsideof the scope of the present study. An evaluation of the actual intrinsic experience occasioned by an object cannot be externally evaluated or questioned by.a second individual, it is an individual's emotional response in 56 the presence of the object ranging from satisfaction to displeasure. An individual may like Victorian deSign and dislike what is termed modern functional design. For the purposes of this study, intrinsic evaluation had to be kept distinct from the extrinsic evaluation of Victorian and functional design which identified the specific dimen- sions in each which were capable of producing or not producing for a given individual, the intrinsically valued experience. Extrinsic evaluation of an object is involved with the properties of the object which are capable of creating intrinsically valued experience. Ihesfir§§-que§t19" 0f-the test §$K¢9.th9.re$pondent to first ehereeterize her immediate response to the object being presented: was it liked, disliked, or did it evoke a neutral response. The discrimination identified the iQQIXIQEEILEMIEEEIESIC response to the .QEJEEE: The second discrimination was the one of primary concern to the study and involved evaluation of extrinsic value for the same object. Discrimination II asked the respondent to locate the object in one of the four quadrants within the value field. The two ques- A tions, Discriminations I and II, therefore, separated the respon- dent's intrinsic and extrinsic evaluation of the same object. Separation of intrinsic and extrinsic judgments also solved a conceptual problem brought up by the fourth assumption of the 57 study. By definition2 en aesthetic evaluation assumes a positive.) 3339919919- attitude- 911-1319 part .ofthesevaluetor; The act of attributing positive aesthetic value to an object occurs simultane- ously with enjoyment of that object. It is meaningless to say that , aesthetic value ghoolg_be appreciated, for aesthetic value does not exist except as it is recognized by an appreciative observer. An individual who responds negatively to an object may find it diffi- cult if not impossible to make a positive aesthetic evaluation of it. In the context of the empirical test then, it was difficult to mark "I dislike it" in Discrimination I, and in Discrimination II to use the right half of the model Quadrants C and D, which rest on the positive end of the Inherent axis. To be located within these quad- rants, the object must have provided intrinsic aesthetic experience for the observer. By strict definition that intrinsic experience would have been impossible to obtain without a positive attitude, identified by the response of "I like it" in Discrimination I. How- ever, there are times when any sensitive observer will say something to the effect that “I think this object is very attractive or aesthetically pleasing though personally I don't like it." Strictly speaking, even though the observer professes not to like the object, 2George Santayana, The Sense of Beauty (New York: Scribner's Sons, 1886; Dover, 1955), p.’l3._u“There is no value apart from some appreciation of it," and Vernon Lee, The Beautiful (Cambridge: Cam- bridge Press, 1913) reprinted in Melvin—Rader, ed., A Modern Book of Aesthetics (New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston, 1935), p. 359. Lee refers to the motivation of aesthetic experience as "empathetic“-- as "feeling oneself into something." Bertram Morris, "An Analysis of the Aesthetic Experience and of the Aesthetic Judgment as Reflecting upon a General Theory of Value" (Ph.D. dissertation, Cornell Univer- sity, (1934), p. 5. "The value situation first arises when an object is appreciated or enjoyed." . 58 he has at least a minimally positive appreciative attitude toward the object. By separating Discrimination I into three possible responses, the test could distinguish between strong positive atti- tudes (I like it), and less positive attitudes (I am indifferent to it, or I dislike it). As assumption of a positive attitude as prerequisite for the determination of value did not seem as essential a condition with respect to the instrumental axis as for the aesthetic axis. There is no reason to suggest that an individual must be positively inclined toward an object generally in order to determine whether it is useful or not. An evaluation of an object's instrumentality is not dependent upon having a positive attitude toward the object generally. The first verbal presentation also identified a need to describe as precisely as possible, the value combinations within each of the four quadrants. The abstractness and unfamiliarity of the concepts of inherent value and instrumental value prevented these ideas from being internalized rapidly enough within the time constraints of experimental conditions to be used with facility when presented with an object. As a result a set of quite specific cri- teria for each axis (Appendix A, p. 1, criteria A and B) was devel- oped which, when combined in four different ways, expressed a value combination unique to each quadrant. Criterion A stated simply, "It (the object) was designed to serve a useful purpose." The three statements in Criterion B were intended to reflect the three char- acteristics of an aesthetic object as described by Lewis; its 59 designation as something intrinsically good in itself, its ability to cause a "contemplative pause" when an individual comes into con- tact with it--an arrest in reaction to its higher order value, and its reliability as an object of inherent value of many people over 3 The subject would determine what com- an extended period of time. bination of the two criteria described the object and would select the quadrant of the model which matched that combination; neither criteria A nor B, A only, both A and B, or B only. After development of the test, a selection of objects in slide medium was assembled which met the following criteria. All objects were within the Western cultural tradition and extant in Twentieth century culture. The purpose of this requirement was to use only items which were potentially familiar to contemporary expe- rience, whether in a museum, within ordinary households or as part of the outdoor public environment. In order to be able to interpret the results, an attempt was made to avoid objects which could have been interpreted as having several kinds of instrumental value. For example, clothing or housing may be "instrumental" in several senses: w” as protection for the body, as symbols for communication of messages such as power or social status, or as objects carrying sentimental associations. Forty slides of objects were assembled which satisfied the above criteria and which, according to the evaluation of the author, gave equal representation to each of the four quadrants. Selection of the slides, therefore, responded to the require- ments for content validity, the representativeness or sampling 3Lewis, op. cit., pp. 455-456. 60 adequacy of the content selected for an instrument. The selection of slides attempted to identify a group representative of the universe of content which the conceptual construct described. At this point several actions were taken to eliminate any objects which were ambiguous from a technical standpoint. Indepen- dently, two graduate students in design fields classified each and discussed their classifications with the author. Objects were eliminated where there was a disagreement between the two reviewers' perception of a given object due to such technical considerations as the readability of the slide, or the influence of the photographic style itself on the perception of the object. For example, a simple spark plug can be made to appear an imposing piece of statuary when scale, color, and lighting are manipulated under studio photographic conditions. Eight slides which appeared to be susceptible to these kinds of problems but which for other reasons were desirable to include were then presented to a graduate seminar as part of a pre- sentation on the conceptual framework. The slides continued to be ambiguous and all but one were eliminated from the empirical test. The winnowing process left 15 slides which were subsequently used. A third Discrimination was developed which focused on the relationship between the two value dimensions. A number of state- ments were selected by writers who had expressed with some success the nature of the relationship between inherent and instrumental value: the form in relation to the function of an object. Respon- *” dents were to read the statements, and when shown simultaneously two objects of similar function but with forms which differed slightly, 61 were asked whether each object illustrated the kind of object the writers were describing. The decision to present objects in pairs in this section was an attempt to increase awareness of the potential range of different solutions to the same design problem and to help intensify differences between various solutions. When two chairs which differ only slightly in their outward appearance are displayed together, the observer almost immediately perceives the point at which they differ due to their close proximity and can easily iden- tify the characteristics unique to each. If the two chairs are presented to an observer separately, their unique characteristics may be overlooked without the foil of the different solution to the same problem which brings the characteristics into prominence. Use of a comparative technique for analyzing phenomena is sometimes questioned on the grounds that although it brings character- istics into prominence, it also sets up a forced choice situation in which the perceiver is unconsciously biased toward a predetermined response. However, in this situation the individual was asked to evaluate both objects and was given the same number of alternatives with which to evaluate both objects. The subject was not forced to choose only one or the other, but could select from the full range of possible evaluations for each object. To be sure that there was no forced choice effect, a check was built into the test to determine the effect of the comparison situation on the classification response the results of which will be discussed in Chapter V. The three Discriminations in the first version of the test were ordered so that the respondent progressed toward increasingly 62 more subtle evaluations of the same object. Discrimination I made a distinction between intrinsic and extrinsic value, asking whether the object has intrinsic value for the individual. Discrimination II dealt with the four broad categories within extrinsic value asking the individual to evaluate the object by placing it in an appro- priate quadrant. Discrimination III concentrated on the discrimina- tion of the two dimensions of extrinsic value using a single state- ment which integrated the two dimensions rather than using two sep- arate criteria. The first version was tested within a controlled situation to a sample of 28 female undergraduate students enrolled in an intro- ductory design course of 35 students. Respondents were asked to describe briefly in writing why they placed each object in the quadrant that they did in order to check again for confounding fac- tors within the slides. Two objects were eliminated at this point. One was eliminated because respondents were attending to objects secondary to the object which was intended to be evaluated, and one in which the slide was too dark to be clearly visible. From the written comments of respondents and from the tabu- lated results of this first run, it became evident that the format of the two sets of criteria (A and B) forced the evaluator to view the model as four separate boxes, rather than as two intersecting dimensions each with a range extending between negative and positive poses and thus having geggee of value, not simply inherent value either present or absent and instrumental value either present or absent. 63 Perhaps a more important inadequacy of the format of the first version was that it did not allow the respondent to designate a locus directly on either axis. The conceptual model described pure art objects as those resting directly on the Inherent axis between Quadrants C and 0 having neither positive nor negative instrumental value; and pure utilitarian objects as those resting directly on the Instrumental axis having neither positive nor negative inherent value. As Discrimination II was arranged it was impossible to locate a point directly on either of the axes, an object could only be located in the area between the axes and thus the empirical test did not reflect the sensitivity of the theoretical conceptualization of the model. I The second Discrimination was redesigned to resolve the two issues raised, creating a second version of the Empirical Test (Appendix 8). Rather than presenting the model with a visual repre- sentation of the two perpendicular axes, the revised version asked the individual to respond to two statements: the object is designed to serve a useful purpose (a statement descriptive of the Instru- mental axis of the conceptual model), and secondly, the object is enjoyable just to look at for its own sake (a statement descriptive of the Inherent axis). The individual's response was not restricted to only yes or no, an either-or forced choice response, but could vary along a five point continuum from strongly negative through neutral to strongly positive responses as illustrated in Figure 4.1. 64 The object is designed to serve a useful purpose. _2 -1 0 +1 +2 I L I I I neutral The object is enjoyable just to look at for its own sake and one would not tire of it for a long time. -2 -1 0 +1 +2 I I .J 1 1 ord1nary FIGURE 4.1.--Extrinsic Evaluation Continuums for Empirical Test-- Version II. The neutral point in the center of each continuum provided a means for registering a response such as, "the statement does not seem appropriate in the case of this object," or "the object is not strongly enjoyable nor particularly unattractive, it simply exists." The two continuums which replaced the set of criteria and graphic model for Discrimination II in the first version of the test there- fore provided a range of potential response and also provided a position for objects located directly on the axis as proposed in the conceptual model. This can be observed if the two continuums are placed perpendicular to one another at the neutral points on each (Figure 4.2). Evaluating an object as neutral on one of the con- tinuums places it directly on_the axis of the second dimension when the two scales are combined. For example, if the two evaluations of a painting are 0 on the instrumental continuum meaning neither 65 Instrumental +2T +1.4 -2 -1 +1 +2 I I O I J—Inherent O -]_. -2_A FIGURE 4.2.--Combination of the Two Extrinsic Evaluation Continuums of the Empirical Test--Version II. positively nor negatively instrumental, and +2 on the inherent con- tinuum, meaning very enjoyable visually, the locus of that object when the two scores were plotted would be directly on the Inherent axis (Figure 4.3) . db FIGURE 4.3.--Locus of a Painting on both the Empirical Test Continuums and as Described within the Conceptual Model. 66 The theoretical model identified this kind of object as a pure type having high value on one dimension only, with neutral value on the second. The locus resulting from the two independent continuums and the locus resulting from the conceptual model are at the same point on the graphic representation. In the second version of the test then, the conceptual model evolved out of two independent evaluations of the object by the respondent, rather than by presenting the conceptual model directly to the individual. Discriminations I and III remained the same in the second version of the test with only minor changes in format and wording. Validation of the Empirical Test The revised Empirical Test was then used to gather the data necessary to respond to the three hypotheses posed. A Sample of Professionals In order to respond to Hypothesis 1, the test was given to 4 four professionals representing four areas of design. It was felt necessary to have a sample of individuals professionally interested in and constantly involved with the kinds of issues being raised in the study for the following reason. Aesthetic theory5 suggested 4Individuals in the sample represented the fields of interior design, industrial design, clothing, and textile design. All were currently teaching within their area of specialization, and with the exception of the specialist in clothing, all were currently profes- sionally active in their respective design areas. 5For example, see Susanne Langer, Feeling and Form (New York: Scribner's Sons, 1953), p. 406. 67 that a truly discerning evaluation of an object required not only an instinctive, intuitive response, but an informed understanding of how J” the effect was created; an analytical and critical ability which could only be acquired through continued appreciative experience with objects. Professionals in design could be assumed to have that informed appreciative approach to their particular kind of object. The rationale for inclusion of the group of professionals was to determine whether professionals with a relatively high degree of insight into these design issues, would similarly evaluate the same objects when asked to use the conceptual model. Similar responses would signify common usage of the two concepts basic to the con- ceptual model and a similar manner of applying them in a given situation. The purpose of the professional sample was not to create a "standard" of excellence or a "correct" evaluation for each object against which the author and the design students would be compared, but to determine whether their evaluation of the group of objects, an informed and appreciative evaluation would evidence any patterns as a group in common with both the author's evaluations and to those of the design students. Consistency of responses among the four professionals, the author, and the students would be considered evidence of support for Hypothesis 1. A Sample of Students Since their purpose was as a means for validating the test in several specific ways, rather than to permit the findings of the 68 study to be generalized from the samples to a larger population, both the professional and student groups were not statistically random samples. The sample of 116 undergraduate female students was taken from a population of 224, a class enrolled in an introductory design course.6 This permitted the validation of the empirical model by a group which could be expected to consider the issues being dealt with in the conceptual model with more interest and involvement in the content of the research than might be found in a sample taken from a group without a design focus. The group might be expected to have a higher incidence of respondents with the positive attitude necessary for evaluating objects. Presumably Students enrolled in a design course, either as part of a design major or interested enough to select it as an elective could be expected to have a more positive attitude toward design in general than other population subgroups. A second reason for taking the sample from a design course was because it could also be expected to contain a high number of indi- viduals with high aesthetic interest, a subgroup required for responding to Hypothesis 3. 6Student sample was taken from the Fall Semester, 1975, class of the course Environment and Design 120, Fundamentals of Design, University of Wisconsin at Madison. Because there may be a significant difference in socialization practices between male and female children, it was felt prudent to control for sex in the sample since the results of socialization patterns may be influe- ential to the way individuals attribute value to objects. The number of males in the class was not large enough to be able to compare evaluations between male-female subgroups. 69 A Pretest-Posttest Research Design To validate the empirical test and by implication the con- ceptual model, the research design called for a pretest and posttest for the following reason. Based on the third assumption for the studY» .aLy @3519" curriculum 35591115111611:3nginpebaxiouiihfl __..-a-.L _ respeetmto_objeets may change with the introduction of information _ ”r. .q-.-._ ...- and analytieel training in design principleg. The study assumed that during the interval of a design course, a change with respect to value classification of objects would occur. Therefore, if the empirical test was indeed sensitive to discriminating categories of object value, change in valuing behavior between pretest responses to the empirical test and posttest responses after the interval train- ing period should be evident. Change in value discrimination ability could also be influenced by a number of other conditions such as the effect of the test itself on sensitizing the respondents to these kinds of distinctions, increased awareness and knowledge introduced by the course content, experiences of the subjects during the thir- teen week interval between the pre- and posttests, or a general change in the subject because of the normal maturation during the interval. Whether because of the course itself or to these secondary causes, the study hypothesized that change in an individual's ability to distinguish object value would occur and that the empirical test would be capable of detecting the change. There was no reason to control for differing art or design backgrounds within the sample selected because the only concern was the fact that at whatever level 70 the individual entered some change upward in the score could be per- -ceived on the posttest taken at the end of the course. The second approach to validation,Construct validity,would be established by documenting change in a predictable direction from the pretest to the posttest situation. The validation of the test would be strengthened if change toward greater consistency occurred between the evaluations of the author, professionals, and the posttest after a thirteen week exposure to basic design concepts than occurred at the pretest before the design training. Following the posttest administration of the test, individu- als completed the Allport-Vernon-Lindzey Values Inventory (AVL) (Appendix C). The AVL inventory was used in order to respond to Hypothesis 2, to provide criterion-related or concurrent validation for the empirical test. Concurrent validity is generally understood to mean the comparison of results obtained with a new test with a known measure believed to measure similar attributes or character- istics.7 No instrument could be located which measured discrimina- tory ability with respect to object value. The AVL instrument measures aesthetic interest and was the only instrument with tested reliability and validity which measured in any way the concepts integral to the present study. The relationship suggested between the AVL instrument and the empirical test was that an individual with high aesthetic interest as defined by the AVL inventory might be expected to have greater aesthetic sensitivity, perhaps greater and 7Standards for Educational and Psychological Tests and Manuals, op. cit., p. 13. 71 perhaps more experience in making aesthetic discriminations than individuals with little aesthetic interest. Individuals who scored high on the aesthetic score of the AVL inventory would therefore be expected to have a high score on the empirical test which discrimin- ated among categories of object value, one of which was an aesthetic discrimination. Based on Edward Spranger's Types of Men8 the AVL inventory purports to measure the relative prominence of Spranger's six basic interests or motives in personality: theoretical, economic, aes- thetic, social, political, religious. Created in 1931, the inventory has been revised and renormed twice. Spearman-Brown product-moment correlation for reliability of the aesthetic value is presently .89, with mean reliability coefficient (2 transformation) for the test as a whole .90. Repeat reliability for a two-month interval is .87 for the aesthetic value. The aesthetic score estimates the degree to which the respondent shares the following outlook: The aesthetic man sees his highest value in form and harmon . Each single experience is judged from the stand- po nt of grace, symmetry, or fitness. He regards life as a procession of events; each single impression is enjoyed for its own sake. He need not be a creative artist, nor need he be effete; he is aesthetic if he but finds his chief inter- est in the artistic episodes of life. . . . The aesthetic either chooses, with Keats, to consider truth as equivalent to beauty, or agrees with Menchen, that "to make a thing charmigg is a million times more important than to make it true.“ 8Edward Spranger, Types of Men, trans. Paul J. W. Pigors from the 5th German edition of Lebensformen (Halle: Max Niemeyer Verlag, 1929). 9Gordon W. Allport, Phillip E. Vernon, and Gardner Lindzey, Manual: Study of Values (New York: Houghton Mifflin, 1970), p. 4. 72 Because of the unresolved questions concerning what personal- 10 the aesthetic AVL ity inventory instruments actually measure, score was interpreted very broadly to mean an identification not of a precisely defined aesthetic value as such, but rather of a relative predisposition toward, or interest in, aesthetic concerns as com- pared to the other five groups. Individuals were asked to complete the inventory during the class period. It was prefaced only with the statement that the purpose of the values inventory was to identify the basic interest orientations present in the class, much like demographic information such as age, sex, and level of education is requested in other kinds of research. A In summary, this chapter presented the hypotheses necessary in order to establish validity for the conceptual model presented and developed in Chapter III, and the assumptions which were necessary in order to proceed with the validation. The three stages of the devel- opment of the empirical test were discussed and the specific behaviors were identified which, if observed, would be accepted as measures of validity for the empirical test and by implication, for the conceptual model. 10Rollo Handy's discussion of the AVL instrument; Chapter 4, sec. 8. in Measurement of Values (St. Louis, Mo.: Warren Green, 1970) presents the central issues involved. CHAPTER V PRESENTATION AND DISCUSSION OF RESULTS The previous Chapter presented an empirical model appropriate for analyzing the validity of the conceptual framework developed in Chapter III. The present Chapter will present the data obtained using the empirical model and will discuss the results. The discussion of results will be presented in the following sections: descriptive characteristics of the sample, results of Discrimination l, Discrimination 2, Discrimination 3, results for high aesthetic value subsample, and summary analyses on the empirical test as a whole. Descriptive Characteristics of the Sample Sample size of both pretest and posttest groups was 116 female students enrolled in an introductory design course. The sample was described as predominently freshmen and sophomores, white, and between the ages of 18 and 20. The pretest was administered with the sample divided into five sections at the first discussion session of the course; and 13 weeks later at the end of the course, again in five groups. A brief explanation of the study and directions were read to each group in order to maintain consistency of the test sit- uations across the 10 periods. 73 74 Description of the sample with respect to basic value orien- tations according to the six value or interest categories identified in the Allport-Vernon-Lindzey values inventory is presented in Table 5.1. It had been anticipated that individuals, knowing they were involved in a research project concerning aesthetic choices, might consciously or unconsciously bias their scores on the AVL value ' inventory toward high interest in aesthetic value as compared to the five other groups. In order to correct for that situation, the cut for the upper group (High) was set in order to include only those individuals falling above the 82 percentile of all females (as normed by the AVL instrument, Appendix C, p. 12), or only those individuals with outstandingly high aesthetic scores. Comparison of the number of individuals scoring high for aesthetic value (N=ll) with the number of individuals described as high in the other five value categories, N=lO, 15, 10, 7, and 8 respectively shows that an artificial bias toward high aesthetic value because of the content of the research did not occur. Results of Discrimination 1 Although not essential to answering the three hypotheses posed for the study, an observation on the responses to Discrimina- tion 1 is indicated in relation to the fourth assumption underlying the validation of the conceptual model. Discussion in Chapter IV suggested that aesthetic evaluations cannot be made unless the atti- tude of the evaluator toward the object is positive. Appendix D .seeoeosee o>< oeo oxee oee e_e m_e=easeeee o>aaa 75 o.oo— ppp o.oop ppp o.oo~ pp— o.oo~ PFF o.oop FFP o.oo~ «FPF 4=m mech41=och>1ucoq—F< mcp seem mcowueucmwso mape> we companmcumwa11.P.m m4mono quCLomuo «ounce o>oao uonpsumue «dunno Co uc.x as» ouueumapp. ac: meet a. oz up vcpx ogu vacuumsp—w woe moat up oz o>ona acmeououm use c, uoa'cuuuo “define co ee.x we» “success... a. no» .cowuapom uuoecog a mu e—omu¢ E's—ease cu amoepo «soon «v «as» «seaweed uuonno on» go*:: coeuocau as» meson a, use» masoeeoa uuowao use cove: cowuucae ogu cu away,» a—uuomgmq on m. muoonao deem we seem mg» .e o» coup.» apuooueun on m, muuunno deem Co sLoe as» .e xupmopcau Aupmo_ezu m>_uuoguuu so so»? so we a—co w>Puooeuuo Co so», an we xpco xeo> opaomupuo: my a. so aem> opaoouwuo: m_ a, go m, up .md» Agocwuco .m>_uuaeuuec: mm we _ mw u_ .mm» aga:_uco .m>_uumcuuoca we u~ _ _ 4 _ i4 _ .4 air a _ ~+ ~+ o p- N- ~+ _+ o p- N- .oe.» acop o Lee a? so wepa no: upset «no use exam .me_u asap a go» a? we oc_u no: u_:or ago new exam :30 a». so; an soap on uman mpamxonco mp pumnao as» .m :30 mu. so» as goo. o» «man apnoxoncm m_ Humane use .m mm: on: ——e3 o» mcvuocumage m? ——e3 ou.a=.uocumaee m. acu> wage: a“ .ppmz ego: yo: ago> wage: a. .ppo: see: no: a. can .md» Pocono: moot aw «an .mb» a. new .md» Pneuaoz mace up pan .md» _ _ _ .fi _ fir . _ _ _ ~+ ~+ o p- w- ~+ p+ o p- m- .omoacan paeoma a m>emm o» vocawmev we uoonao use .~ .mmoacaa pawwm: o m>emm on umcmvmmv m, yummno och .N a. axe—a.u All b. ca peaaaeeeoe. an all as «8., An. S. axe—nee _I.. u_ o» beaaace.u=, Em All u. ax._ mi. $820 $5 8 5:32 «dosage, .52 r be; .— ~uuonao mpg» a» covuumes ouewuwes_ each m, was: .p one.m use,“ au_pm beau m¢~u .mcowuoaposo e dune cem_ganeoo zoom mo move—m coco Lou 165 2,8. 25:88 “83.. co oe.. ago «access... so: soon a. oz osoao uooeoooum as» o. ooopsoooo nuance eo oe.x as» «ouaeoaa__a a. no» .oovoapou ouueeoo o no C—ouu. e.o.ooso op boos—o maven a? was» osnowsoo noonoo us» save: oo.uoo=e ago coon. coacsumoo nuance ho u=¢x 0:» ouoeumappw no: moot a. at «sea. “caucuses as» e. coo.toaao “dunno co oe.. as» «beacons... a, no» .oopuopoa commode o no epomu, e.o—uoeo ou «mos—o 8.3» a. =5 3.8.5: uoonoo 2: 522 552.3 as» 3 8:: 5828 8 a. 382.. 95a .3 ES 2: .e 3 8:: 5822. 8 a. 382° sea co 28 2: .e xuvmovcou »a_uopgou o>_oooeuuo yo so». on no apoo osvuuocuao Co eouv on no A—co auo> o—oooupuoo m. a, so ago» o—ooou_uoo m. up so a. u. .mo» xgoo.oco .o>*uooauooo: or ww m. pr .mo> xenopooo .ospwuooouoo: m» Mn _ .4 d .4 _ q o q _ .4 ~+ p+ o _- ~- ~+ —+ o _. ~- .ue_u noop o Low a, mo we.» no: o—ooz moo ooo exam .oepu woo. o com a. mo as.» uoo opao: ooo coo exam co been «Paesaneo a, goofing use .m on: ou mo.uoeumose a. a? .ppos goo: no: ozo mu. so» am soo— ou anon o_ooxonoo m, ooonoo do» .m one «a. so» on soo— on: ppm: o» mopuoeumosu m. ppm: xuo> mxgoz a. .ppo: xeoz uo: zuo> oxcoa up one .mo>. Pocuooz mooo a? goo .mor up one .mo> - a H _ . _ H ~+ —+ o p- N- ~+ p+ .emooeoo .oeoma o o>com o» oocmwmoo ow woonoo ooh .N .omoocao puma“: o a. a..Paae A.. o. a» acetate.oe. 2: mi. o. ax.. A.. ». a..pa.o H... a. a» $oo2o at.» 3 .3339. $23.35 So» 3 use: ._ Buofioo at.» 3 ao..m aga.¢ paaoaaz wage a. a:n..ams 4., _ . a PI NI «seem o» oooaeuoo we ouonoo oz» .N «genome—oc. so all a? 03.. ail 5326.. 3235.: .59.. a. no.5 .— oo.—m «mod mmaa~¢m mzh up¢=4<>m .meopuoaposo e exo- eomvcooeoo some mo moowpm goon Lou 166 o>ozo ooz»zumoo »oowzo o>ozo vozFLumoo »uonzo »o no»: oz» o»oe»m:»»» »oz mooo »» oz eo oz»z oz» o»oo»m=»»» »oz mooo »» oz o>ozo »zoeo»o»m oz» z» ooz»eumoo o>ozo »zoso»o»o oz» z» oozpzomoo »uonzo »o no»; oz» mo»og»m=»»_ »» no» »oonzo »o no»; oz» mo»og»mo_»» »» no» .zo»»:»oo »oo»eoo o no »»om»» spo»oogo o» »moE»o .zo»»o»ou »uo»goo o no »»om»» s»o»uoeo o» »mo5»o meoom »» »oz» masoezoo »uonzo oz» zu»z: zo»»uz=» oz» meoom »» »oz» magousoo »oonzo oz» zo»z3 zo»»uz:» oz» o» oo»»»» a—»oo»goo on a» m»uonzo oeom »o Ego» oz» .e o» oo»»»» z»»uo»goo on m» o»uonzo oeom »o Ego» oz» .o »»»mo»gou »»»mo»eou o>»»uoc»»o »o so»» on no »»zo o>»»ooc»»o eo so». on we x»zo zoos o—zoou_»oo m» »» Lo zoo> o_zooo»»oz m» »» co m» »_ .mo> zgmz»oeo .o>»»ooc»»oz= m» »4 m» »» .mo» zuozmoco .o>»»uoo»»oz= m» »4 fl. 4 _ 4 4 4 4 .4 .4 ..4 ~+ »+ o »- - ~+ »+ o p- - .oep» moo» o co» »» Lo oar» »oz o_:o: ozo ozo ozom .oe_» moo» o co» »» »o oo»» »oz o_=oz ozo one ozom zzo m»» go» »o zoo» o» »m=n o»zozonzo m» »oonzo oz» .m zzo u». go» »o zoo» o» »m:n o_zo»onzo m» »uonzo oz» .m om: on: ppoe o» mz»»oc»mozm m» »_o3 o» mo»»oe»m=e» m» zeo> mxooz »_ .»»o: zoo: »oz zgo> mzeoz »» .»»oz zoo: »oz »» ooo .mo> »oz»ooz mooo »» »:z .mo» »» ozo .mo» _oz»=oz mooo »» »:z .mo» _ 4 m. A. 4 4 .4 .i4 4 .4 ~+ »+ o »- N- ~+ »+ o -i.»- - .omooe=o »=»om: o o>Lom o» oozm_moo m» »oonzo oz» .N .omoocoo »:»om: o o>Lom o» oozm»moo m» »uonzo oz» .N P. 3:3; _| 2 8 228:2, .5 4| 3 9.: “I t 9:3... _I t 3 288:2. .5 4| 3 9.: zl- ~»uonzo 35.3 5.38.. 3285..» So» 2 »oz: .» Soonzo a?» o» 8393.. 3235.» zoom 3 »oz: .» 8:...“ 23:. 2:3 :3 muxom4»<: uz» m»¢=4o e one: oom»oooeoo zuoo 5o moo»»m z»oz Lou 167 o>ozo ooavsuuoo »oonao Co to»; oz» o»os»m:—»— »oo moou »» oz oooao ooooooooo oz» :4 ooooooooo »oo4oo oo oo.. oz» ooooooo=444 »— no» .oo4»:»om »oooeoo o no opon»4 54o4uoco o» »mo5»o «noon »4 »oz» mooooooo »oonzo oz» zo4ze oo»»uoo» oz» 3 ooo»: boots. 8 o. 383.. 88 .3 Eco oz» .4. »»»mo»L:u o>4»uog»»o »o so». on mo »»oo »oo> o»zoou»»oo m» »4 co m» »»iwmo>. xuoo4zmo. .o>»»ooo»»oo: m» »4 4 4 4 4. _ ~+ »+ o 4- - .oeo» moo. o co» »4 »o oo»» »oo o»:o3 ooo ooo ozom ozo m»4 go» »o zoo» o» »mon opzozonoo m» »oonzo oz» .m om: _»o3 o» mo»»oo»moc» o» »oo» mxgos »» .»—o3 zoo: »oo »» ooo .mo> .»oo»:oz moon »» »oz .mo» o 4 4 I 4 iii4 ~+ »+ o »- - .omooL=o »ooom: o o>oom o» ooom4moo m» »uonzo oz» .~ o. 3:24. 4| 3 3 oooootoo... so 4..- .: 9.: 4| 382° 2..» 8 .3382 oozes...» .52 o. »oo... .4 8:... 224. o>oau voapsumoo »uonzo »o 9:»: 0:» ouosuuapp— »oo mooo »- oz «>050 acuiououm 0:» :» nonpsumoo »uonzo ho 9:»: oz» mouosumapp— »» no» .oo»»o—om »oo»ooo o no »»oo»» e4.»oooo o» »ooepo macaw »» nag» mscosson »uonno 0:» zu»:3 cowuucaw 0:» o» vouupv h—uuomson on m» muuonno «no» no Ego» oz» .0 z»»mo»oao o>4»ooo»»o »o so». on no Apoo auo> o4zoou»»oo a» »4 go o» »w..mo». zooo4ooo. .o>4»ooo»»oo: m4 »4 4 4 4 _ 4 ~+ »+ o 4- - .o34» ooo» o oo» »» »o o.»» »oo opooz ooo ooo ozom ozo m»» go» »o zoo» o» »mon o»zo»onoo m4 »oofizo oz» .m 0 on: »»o: o» mo4»oo»moo» m» xuo> mzcoz »» .»»o3 zoo: »oo »» ooo .mo> »oo»:om. mooo »» »am..mo> 4 4 4 4 4 ~+ »+ o »- - .omooeoo »ooomo o o>eom o» ooou4moo m4 »oonzo oz» .N o. 9:3... 4.. o. 8 22832.. .5 .I o. 9.: .1 booze or.» 8 8:89. 338...... .524 o. o2... .— 85 :3 2:56 on “23¢: .moo»»o:»o>o e ozoe.oom4oooeoo zooo »o moo»»m z»oz sou 168 2.8.. 3.8.8 »oonzo .5 2.... oz» 823...: »oo 88 ». 2. osozo »ooeo»o»m oz» o. ooz.eoooo »uonzo »o vz.z oz» mo»oz»m:——. »» no» .oo.»:.om »uomeoo o no ».om». e.o»ooso o» »uoe.o m5o0u »» »oz» also»soo »uonzo oz» 5......4 zo.»oz:» oz» o» oo»».» »»»oo»ooo on a. «»oonzo oiom »o one» oz» a».mo.oau os.»uoo»»o »o so». on no ».oo zoos o.zooo.»oo m. ». co m. ». .mo» zuoo.ozo .o>.»uoz»»oo= m. »4 4 4 .4. 4.. 4 ~+ .+ o .- - .oo.» moo. o no» ». »o oz.» »oo o.=o3 ooo ooo ozom oxo m». go» »o zoo. o» »mon opzoaonoo m. »uonzo oz» om: .»o3 o» mo.»oo»mo.» m. zzo> mxzo: ». ..»oz zoo: »oo ». ooo .mo> »oo»:oz mooo ». »oz..mo» 4 4 .o 4 .4 ~+ »+ o .- - .omooooo .:»om= o o>zom o» ooom.moo n. »uonzo oz» ». 2...... .l ». 8 228.5... 5. .I- ». e... .1 »»uonzo m.z» o» oo.»oooz o»o.oooe. Loo» m. »ozz ou..m »zo.¢ 2.3. 4.2.3.8 »848 .o 4...... oz» 3.55:. »8 88 ». s. 2.8.. 22.35 oz» z. 83.88 »oonzo .o no.4 oz» oooozooo... ». no. .oo.»o.om »oo»zoo o no ».om». e.o.uooo o» »moo»o Boom ». »oz» 2.3.3.. »oonzo oz» 52.. 5.8.5. oz» .o o» .3»... 438...: 3. o. 38...... one .o .5. oz» .4. a».mo.z:o o>.»ooo»»o .o no». on no a.oo zgo> o.zoou.»oo m. ». .o m. »»|wmo» »zoo.osc .o>.»ooo»»oo= m. »H 4 .4 4 4 4 N. .+ o .- - .oe.» ooo. o co. ». .o oo.» »oo o_:oz ooo ooo ozom .m ozo m». go» »o zoo. o» »mon o.zo»onoo m. »oonzo oz» .m on: ..o: o» mo.»oo»moz. a. zzo> mzzoz ». ...o3 zoo: »oo ». ooo .mo. .o.»ooz «ooo ». »oo .oo» 4 4 4 4 4 ~+ .+ o .- - .~ .omoozao .=.om= o o>zom o» ooom.moo o. »oonzo oz» .N ». 9:3... 4| ». 3 528:2. so .I ». e... .I .. $8.24.. o.z» o» 8:28.. 338:... .52. o. »oo: .— 85. »oo. 28% 4.... 3.5.4.4: .uoo.»o:»o>o e ozoe ooo..ooeou zooo »o moo..n z»oz so. APPENDIX C ALLPORT-VERNON-LINDZEY VALUES INVENTORY 169 9432049 TEST BOOKLET ALLPORT - VERNON - LINDZEY Study of Values THIRD EDITION HOUGHTON MIFFLIN COMPANY - BOSTON NEW YORK - ATLANTA - GENEVA, ILL. - DALLAS . PALO ALTO COPYRIGHT ©, 1960, BY GORDON W. ALLPORT, PHIlIP E. VERNON, AND GARDNER lINDZEY COPYRIGHT, l95l, BY GORDON W. AllPORT, PHllIP E. VERNON. AND GARDNER LINDZEY COPYRIGHT, 193l, IY GORDON W. AllPORT AND PHILIP E. VERNON PRINTED IN THE U.S.A. UVWXYZ-H—73 Part | DIRECTIONS: A number of controversial statements or questions with two alterna- tive answers are given below. Indicate your personal preferences by writing appropriate figures in the boxes to the right of each question. Some of the alternatives may appear equally attractive or unattractive to you. Nevertheless, please attempt to choose the alternative that is relatively more acceptable to you. For each question you have three points that you may distribute in any of the following combinations. 3 I I. If you agree with alternative (a) and dis- I & agree with (b), write 3 in the first box and O I in the second box, thus I I o 2. If you agree with (b); disagree with (a), write 3. If you have a slight preference for (a) over (b), write 4. If you have a slight preference for (b) over (a ). write -_--_-_---___-__EI ._....._.._.._.._.....E __E o'—-—------I§:I o.-- Do not write any combination of numbers except one of these four. There is no time limit, but do not linger over any one question or statement, and do not leave out any of the questions unless you find it really impossible to make a decision. .______---EI ._-_______-_____- N . The main object of scientific research should be the discovery of truth rather than its practical applications. (a) Yes; (b) No. . Taking the Bible as a whole, one should regard it from the point of view of its beautiful mythology and literary style rather than as a spiritual reve- lation. (a) Yes; (b) No. . Which of the following men do you think should be judged as contributing more to the progress of mankind? (a) Aristotle; (b) Abraham Lincoln. . Assuming that you have sufficient ability, would you prefer to be: (a) a banker; (b) a politician? . Do you think it is justifiable for great artists, such as Beethoven, Wagner and Byron to be selfish and negligent of the feelings of others? (a) Yes; (b) No. . Which of the following branches of study do you expect ultimately will prove more important for mankind? (a) mathematics; (b) theology. . Which would yOu consider the more important function of modern leaders? (a) to bring abOut the accomplishment of practical goals; (b) to en— courage followers to take a greater interest in the rights of others. . When witnessing a gorgeous ceremony (ecclesi- astical or academic, induction into office, etc.), are you more impressed: (a) by the color and pageantry of the occasion itself; (b) by the in- fluence and strength of the group? Tolol 6’1 [jg -—-—————-——--I:le - ——————-—-——————I:] "““‘“"—""“l:l c'---—-- - - - - — D o . Which of these character traits do you consider the more desirable? (a) high ideals and rever- ence; (b) unselfishness and sympathy. . If you were a university professor and had the necessary ability, would you prefer to teach: (a) poetry; (b) chemistry and physics? . If you should see the following news items with headlines of equal size in your morning paper, which would you read more attentively? (a) PBOTESTANT LEADERS 'ro CONSULT ON RECONCILIA- TION; (b) GREAT IMPROVEMENTS IN MARKET CON- DmONs. . Under circumstances similar to those of Question 11? (a) SUPREME COURT BENDERS DECISION; (b) NEw scnawrn-‘ic THEORY ANNOUNCED. . When you visit a cathedral are you more im- pressed by a pervading sense of reverence and worship than by the architectural features and stained glass? (a) Yes; (b) No. . Assuming that you have sufficient leisure time, would you prefer to use it: (a) developing your mastery of a favorite skill; (b) doing volunteer social or public service work? . At an exposition, do you chiefly like to go to the buildings where you can see: (a) new manufac- tured products; (b) scientific (e.g., chemical) apparatus? . If you had the opportunity, and if nothing of the kind existed in the community where you live, would y0u prefer to found: (a) a debating society or forum; (b) a classical orchestra? Total 20. 21. 22. 23. . The aim of the churches at the present time should be: (a) to bring out altruistic and char- itable tendencies; (b) to encourage spiritual wor- ship and a sense of communion with the highest. . If you had some time to spend in a waiting room and there were only two magazines to choose from, would you prefer: (a) SCIENTIFIC AGE; (b) ARTS AND DECORATIONS? . Would you prefer to hear a series of lectures on: (a) the comparative merits of the forms of gov- ernment in Britain and in the United States; (b) the comparative development of the great religious faiths? Which of the following would you consider the more important function of education? (a) its preparation for practical achievement and finan- cial reward; (b) its preparation for participation in community activities and aiding less fortunate persons. Are you more interested in reading accounts of the lives and works of men such as: (a) Alex- ander, Julius Caesar, and Charlemagne; (b) Aristotle, Socrates, and Kant? Are our modern industrial and scientific develop- ments signs of a greater degree of civilization than those attained by any previous society, the Greeks, for example? (a) Yes; (b) No. If you were engaged in an industrial organization (and assuming salaries to be equal), would you prefer to work: (a) as a counselor for employees; (b) in an administrative position? Total D a .___ Dan-mum---“ I: Page 6 24. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. 30. Given your choice between two books to read, are you more likely to select: (a) THE sroar or RE- LICION IN AMERICA; (b) THE STORY OF INDUSTRY IN AMERICA? Would modern society benefit more from: (a) more concern for the rights and welfare of citi- zens; (b) greater knowledge of the fundamental laws of human behavior? Suppose you were in a position to help raise standards of living, or to mould public opinion. \Vould you prefer to influence: (a) standards of living; (b) public opinion? Would you prefer to hear a series of popular lec- tures on: (a) the progress of social service work in your part of the country; (b) contemporary painters? All the evidence that has been impartially accu- mulated goes to show that the universe has evolved to its present state in accordance with natural principles, so that there is no necessity to assume a first cause, cosmic purpose, or God behind it. (a) I agree with this statement; (b) I disagree. In a paper, such as the New York Sunday Times, are you more likely to read: (a) the real estate sections and the account of the stock market; (b) the section on picture galleries and exhibi- tions? Would you consider it more important for your child to secure training in: (a) religion; (b) ath- letics? Total -__-_-____--_[j a .-_____--__--_-_--___D a ._____-_____-..__ .-__-__-_-___---_-__---___{:l “-___-.. -___________________-_.|:) ,-----_____-___-_ «D a —----—---—-——-------[:j r-—------—-------—----—-----------—---------—----------[:] a -—- -____-______E] n '"""‘““"““"""“"“"“““""D a --—----—-—————D a-—-- -__-___-_--_D a--------------_--------_-_-_E] c-_---_-------_---------------------_---__ Partll DIRECTIONS: Each of the following situations or questions is followed by four possible attitudes or answers. Arrange these answers in the order of your personal preference by writing, in the appropriate box at the right, a score of 4, 3, 2, or 1. To the statement you prefer most give 4, to the statement that is second most attractive 3, and so on. Example: If this were a question and the following statements were alternative choices you would place: I I 4 in the box if this statement appeals to you I ‘9‘ l most. 3 in the box if this statement appeals to you second best. 2 in the box if this statement appeals to you third best. l in the box if this statement represents your interest or preference least of all. .- ——---—-—-—&‘——n—-‘—-——-—-_- 1 --________-.______fl.____..___. You may think of answers which would be preferable from your point of view to any of those listed. It is necessary, however, that you make your selection from the alternatives presented, and arrange all four in order of their desirability, guessing when your preferences are not distinct. If you find it really impossible to state your preference, you may omit the question. Be sure not to assign more than one 4, one 3, etc., for each question. Page 8 . Do you think that a good government should aim chiefly at—( Remember to give your first choice 4, etc.) a. more aid for the poor, sick and old b. the development of manufacturin and trade 0. introducing highest ethical princip es into its poli- cies and diplomacy d. establishing a position of prestige and respect among nations In your opinion, can a man who works in business all the week best spend Sunday in — a. trying to educate himself by reading serious books I). trying to win at golf, or racing 0. going to an orchestral concert d. hearing a really good sermon If you could influence the educational policies of the public schools of some city, would you under- take — a. to promote the study and participation in music and fine arts I). to stimulate the study of social problems c. to provide additional laboratory facilities d. to increase the practical value of courses Do you prefer a friend (of your own sex) who —— a. is efficient, industrious and of a practical turn of mind b. is seriously interested in thinking out his attitude toward life as a whole 0. pgssesses qualities of leadership and organizing a ili d. showtsyartistic and emotional sensitivity If you lived in a small town and had more than enough income for your needs, would you pre- fer to — 0. apply it productively to assist commercial and in- dustrial development b. help to advance the activities of local religious groups 0. give it for the development of scientific research in your locality ' d. give it to The Family Welfare Society When you go to the theater, do you, as a rule, enjoy most— 0. plays that treat the lives of great men b. allet or similar imaginative performances 0. plays that have a theme of human suffering and ove d. problem plays that argue consistently for some point of view Total -----[:]a ------------Dn---------------[:l cr---|:| n.------ -______-l:],-.____ "a “"““"““""l:l n "““"'D n ——----——-----—- ----—---—-—----Eln -—-—-—-——-—--Dn "Dn.-—-—----—--------—-[:1 a'--—- -----—--—----Dtr-----—--—-Dr--—-~——------D 1------Dn -————--— - D n.-—-—----—-D a nun---—-—-----———--—————-—-[:] n .—-——-——-—-—D a —-——-—--——---- fl—f 10. . Assuming that you are a man with the necessary ability, and that the salary for each of the follow- ing occupations is the same, would you prefer to be a — a. mathematician b. sales manager 0. clergyman d. politician . If you had sufficient leisure and money, would you prefer to —— a. make a collection of fine sculptures or paintings b. establish a center for the care and training of the feeble-minded c. aim at a senatorship, or a seat in the Cabinet d. establish a business or financial enterprise of your own . At an evening discussion with intimate friends of your own sex, are you more interested when you talk about — a. the meaning of life b. developments in science 0. literature d. socialism and social amelioration Which of the following would you prefer to do during part of your next summer vacation (if your ability and other conditions would permit) ‘— a. write and publish an original biological essay or article b. stay in some secluded part of the country where you can ap reciate fine scene 0. enter a 1 tennis or other ath etic tournament d. get experience in some new line of business . Do great exploits and adventures of discovery such as Columbus's, Magellan’s, Byrd’s and Amundsen’s seem to you significant because — a. they represent conquests by man over the difficult forces of nature b. they add to our knowledge of geography, meteor- ology, oceanography, etc. 0. they weld human interests and international feel- ings throu bout the world d. they contri ute each in a small way to an ultimate understanding of the universe Total C] a -———-—-——————————-— an"--- Page 10 T2. T3. 14. 15. Should one guide one’s conduct according to, or develop one’s chief loyalties toward — one's reli ious faith ideals of eauty one's occu ational organization and associates ideals of c arity 94>9~9 To what extent do the following famous persons interest you —- a. Florence Nightingale b. Napoleon 0. Henry Ford d. Galileo In choosing a wife would you prefer a woman who — (Women answer the alternative form be- low) a. can achieve social prestige, commanding admira- tion from others b. likes to help people 0. is fundamentally spiritual in her attitudes toward life d. is gifted along artistic lines (For women) Would you prefer a ‘husband who— a. is successful in his profession, commanding ad- miration from others b. likes to help people 0. ilsiffundamentally spiritual in his attitudes toward e d. is gifted along artistic lines Viewing Leonardo da Vinci’s picture, “The Last Supper,” would you tend to think of it— a. as expressing the highest spiritual aspirations and emotions b. as one of the most priceless and irreplaceable pictures ever painted c. in relation to Leonardo’s versatility and its place in history (I. the quintessence of harmony and design Total -__-___D ,1 DD u-——-———————————————-———-———-————— -_____._[:J 1.-_____--______.{:] m.-------___--_[] a, D'“ mama --—-—————--———-—-—-------{::]a "D a ---—-—---——-El r--—--——-——-———-—- -—-—-————--———{:\a mun—”DB -—————————-——-D n .--—--—-—--———-—--—-——--“D a - SCORE SHEET FOR THE STUDY OF VALUES Duuzcrrous: 1. First make sure that every question has been answered. Note: If you have found it impossible to answer all the questions, you may give equal scores to the alternative answers under each question that has been omitted; thus, Part I. 1% for each alternative. The sum of the scores for (a) and (b) must always equal 3. Part II. 2% for each alternative. The sum of the scores for the four alternatives under each question must always equal 10. . Add the vertical columns of scores on each page and enter the total in the boxes at the bottom of the page. . Transcribe the totals from each of the foregoing pages to the columns below. For each page enter the total for each column (R, S, T, etc.) in the space that is labeled with the same letter. Note that the order in which the letters are inserted in the columns below differs for the various pages. Final Total 240 5. 6. 4. Add the totals for the six columns. Add or subtract the correction figures as indimted. Check your work by making sure that the total score for all six columns equals 240. (Use the margins for your additions, if you wish.) Plot the scores by marking points on the vertical lines in the graph on the next page. Draw lines to connect these six points. ET: the 1951 Edition these figures were: Theoretical +3, Social —3. These new correction figures have been employed in determining the norms in the 1960 manual. Average Male Profile Average Female Profile ....... INTERPRETATlON The profile can be best interpreted if the scores obtained are com- pared with the following ranges. (Detailed norms for college students and for certain occupations will be found in the Manual of Directions.) Men High and low scores. A score on one of the values may be considered definitely high or low if it falls outside the follow- ing limits. Such scores exceed the range of 50% of all male scores on that value. Theoretical 39-49 Social 32-42 Economic 37-48 Political 3847 Aesthetic 29-41 Religious 32-44 Outstandingly high and low scores. A score on one of the values may be con- sidered very distinctive if it is higher or lower than the following limits. Such scores fall outside the range of 82% of all male scores for that value. Theoretical 34-54 Social 2847 Economic 32-53 Political 34-52 Aesthetic 24—47 Religious 26-51 Women High and low scores. A score on one of the values may be considered definitely high or low if it falls outside the follow- ing limits. Such scores exceed the range of 50% of all female scores on that value. Theoretical 31-41 Social 3747 Economic 3343 Political 34-42 Aesthetic 37-48 Religious 37 -50 Outstandingly high and low scores. A score on one of the values may be con sidered very distinctive if it is higher or lower than the following limits. Such scores fall outside the range of 82% of all female scores for that value. Theoretical 26-45 Social 33-51 Economic 28-48 Political 29-46 Aesthetic 31—54 Religious 31-56 Page 12 NAME DATE . Last First Middle Initial . §EX (M or H: PROFILE OF VALUES ' SE 3 70 j: l 70 - h I: l '- Hig < 60 t 4’ 60 ‘ L 50 4 so I I: . A_‘,—-0- ......... -__ -,..'4’ S. 1 Average{ 40 j: 1' _________ 4r"’\'—_________::/’-ét>y_-—\o 1 40 1 r so I I 30 . low 20 I; j 20 i 1; :. 10 ‘Z , 10 l 1: ‘1. ' Theogretigcal Economic ' Aesthetic Social " Political Religious! APPENDIX D TEST ADMINISTRATION l82 cor _. 2: m cop a 2: 8 2: mop cop mm 2 N; p .5620 m.m P c< “.5 N N; F a m.— N 06 m 8 N.NN N w.om w eém om m.mw K u on: F m.mm m m.om m m.m v «N N om oe N 0.: _. ¢.mp c m... N ¢.N N m co m m.m F o; F N... F m< o.: _. BK N < m. . z x z x 2 R z N z a z pmoupmoa “manage ammuumoa amouoga. “mopumom ammumca ucmaumzo an, mxwpmae av Ancmtmaaaeca an av Ava mxa_ av manpmao Fatnzmz m>aewmoa .ppazo "caveatamacase< camp ecu “cameo may etazOF meanaua< mo coapmpaamammOLu--._-o mnmPNFmoa $823 "conceaflfisz Na: e5 338 2; 22.8 8352 .3 83233320-...2 ENE 185 2: N 2: m 2: NF 03 ON SF SF 2: mm 2 v.2 N oe m N.m m 52:5 5.5 F o< o.m F m6 N N.m . m o m.mm F New 0 o.mN m n.mN om o.mN RN 8 cm F m.mm F o.mN m o.m F ¢.Fm Nm mém on u 0.3 N o.F F om 0.2 N o.F F m E a ohm F E 2.. F m.mm F < N z N z N z N z N z N z ammpumoa ammuoae ammupmoe «Noumea ummgpmom amount; pcegueso A”: 92.3.5 5 3:29;??? Em C A: 9.: C memeo Fmausoz o>wpwmog 6:553 "cowumauchmEE amok .25 uumnao 9:. Ego... £5:qu mo SFumanmummoLui.m..o 59:. ooF cc 2: 3 SF FR 2: mo 2: m 2: m z 186 m.e N N.._ N N.N m _.NF _ gamete e._ _ o< a mu o.m N N.N _ e.m e m.e a o.ow m.mm m u m.NP N e.FP m «.me me e.Ne om o.ON P.P_ _ om m.Nm NN N.em mN m.m_ a, N.FN ON N.NN N m m.N N m.¢ N N.N N m.e a Na m.NF m m.ON m < N z N z N z N z N z N z ummppmom umopmga “monumom ummpmgm umoaumoa , amoumaa acecomso AN, mxmpmae NV Aucmtwetaeca am He New New, av «Napmaa _mtaamz m>apamoa .323. has. 23:32:22 an; .25 N820 2: 2&8 $332 .3 83238320-$5 59: 187 cop N co. cop _N co, Ne cop oN cop me 2 e.N _ N.e N camato _.__ ¢.N _ QN a N.N F e._ _ no m._a NF N.¢N a N.mN om N.ee Na 9 _.F_ m._¢ NN N.Ne _N m.NN m e.NN NF um N.ee N e.mm e.a e N.ON m e._ N N.N N m N.N F m< m.mm F N.NN ¢.N _ < N z N N z N z N z N z pwwpumoa ummvwgm ammuumoa ummpman— ammuumoa umwqun— #29525 New mxw_mme av Aucmtmaeaeca ea NV New mxa_ av mxapmao Natazmz m>apamoa .P $3.5 "85:52.; as: e5 8930 9: P338 8332 .6 53232329$5 ENS 188 NON N cop N. No, NN cop Fe cop NN NN_ NN z N.N _ N.N N N.N _ =_Naao o< N no N.NN _ N.NN NN N.NP N N.NN NN N.NN NN N N.NN N N.NN o, N.NN NN ..N N N.NN N NN N.NN N N.NN N N.N_ N N.N_ N N.N N N.P F N N.N _ N< N.NF _ N.NN N N.N _ < N z N z N z N z N z N z amouumoa “Noumea umopumom amouoga pmouumom ammumam ucecumao ANN NNNNNNN NV Apcmtmaeaeca EN NV New NNNN NV NNNNNNN Nagpzmz m>aaamoa .comumpcommam vacuum -iF mmcFLm .ucoFuNLpNF:NEn< “Now use womnno one ucwzoh ouzumue< No :onNanmummosuii.mio m4m

NNNNoN .N :83 "5523222 No.3 .2; Noozo 2: EozoN 33:2 .6 8323333-...NN ENS l91 NNN N NNN N NNN NN NNN NN NNN NN NNN NN z N.N N NNNNNN NN N.N N N NN N.N N N.NN NN N.NN NN N.NN NN N N.NN N N.NN NN N.NN NN N.NN NN N.NN NN NN NNN N N.NN N N.NN N N.NN N N.N N N NN N.N N N.N N N N z N z N z N z N z N z Hmmpumom Hmwpmgm Hmwpumom ummpmgn— pmmuumom ammuwgn— HCMLUmzo NNN NNNNNNN NV NNNNNNNNNNNN so NV NNN oxNN NV oxNNNNN NNNNNoz -o>NNNNoN -uF :ooam NeoNpNNNmNNNEN< pmwh use Numnno as“ cgmzoh .cowumpcommam ecouom $3.52 .6 NoNNoNNNoNNNoNN--.N-N ENE l92 NNN NN NNN NN NNN NN NNN 2 2: NN NNN NN z N.N N N.N N N.N N N.N N 52.5 N.N N N.N N N.NN N NN N.N N N.NN NN N.N N N.NN NN N.NN NN N N.N N N.NN N N.NN N N.NN N N.NN N NN N.N N N.N N N.N N N.N N N.NN N N.NN NN. N NN N.NN N N.NN NN N.NN N N.N N N N.N N N.N N N.N N N.NN N N.N N NN N.NN NN N.NN NN N.NN N N.NN N N.N N N.NN N N N z N z N z N z N z N z umopumoo NNmNoNN ammupmoo amoumga ammupmoo Nmouoaa pcmgvoao NNN NNNNNNN NV NNNNNNNNNNNN so NV NNN oNNN NV oxNFNNo Feauzwz o>NNNNoN .N :83. "5:23:22 Na; NS NooNNN 2: 22,8 33:2 .8 NoNNoNNNSNNEN-..NN-N NNNNN l93 NNN N NNN NN NNN NN NNN NN NNN NN NNN NN z N.NN N N.N N N.N N N.N N NNNNNN NN N N.N N NN N.NN .NN N.NN N N.NN NN N.NN NN N N.NN N N.NN N N.NN NN N.NN NN N.NN NN N.NN NN NN N.NN N N.NN N N.NN NN N.NN N N.N N N N.N N NN N.NN N N.N N N.N N N.N N N N z N z N z N z N z N z amouumoa NNoNoNN ammupmoa pmmumaa Nmopumoa “Newman NNNNUNNO NNN NNNNNNN NV NNNoNoNNNNNN so NV NNN oxNN NV oxNNNNN NNNNNoz o>NNNNoN .N onNNNN “NoNNNNNNNNNeoN NNoN ooo NooNNN NNN ooozoN NNNNNNNN No NoNNoNNNoNNNoNN-..N¢NNNNNNN l94 ooF m ocF NF ooF Nm ooF mm ooF co ooF cm 2 m.F F :NmNNo o< a nu N.NF FF m.FF N N.NN mN o.om on u N.NN m N.FN m N.NN om N.NN mm N.NN NF o.mm NF um N.NN m 0.0m N N.N m N.NF N o.N F N F.FF F N.N F N< m.e m < N z N z N z N z N z N z NNNNNNNN NNNNNNN NNNNNNNN NNoNoNN amoupmoo ammumga Nemaumao NNN meFNNu NV Aucoammwwucm EN NV NNN meF NV meFNNo Foauzmz N>NNNNoN .cowumucomoga accomm .3323: 30525252 amok one uumwno m5 22.6... 3332 we :owumFangmmoauiNFuo mNmE 195 NNN NN NNN NN NNN NN NNN NN NNN NN NNN NN z N.N N N.N N N.N N NNNNNN N.N N NN N N.N N NN N.N N N.NN NN N.NN NN N.NN NN N.NN NN N N.N N N.NN N N.NN NN N.NN NN N.N N N.NN N NN N.NN NN N.NN NN N.NN N N.N N N.N N N N.N N N.N N NN N.N N N.NN N N.N N N.N N N N z N z N z N z N z N z pmmuamoa uNoNoNN NNNNNNON ammuoaa umopumoa NNNNNNN Ncmguaao NNN NNNNNNN NV NNNoooNNNooN so NV NNN NNNN NV NNNNNNN NNNNNoz o>NNNNoN .N .322: "5:23:22 NNN: E... ,NooNNN 9: BozoN $352 .5 No..NNNNNN3NNo.NN:.NN-N NNNNN 196 NNN NN NNN NN NNN NN NNN NN NNN NN NNN NN z N.N N NNNNNN N.N N NN N.NN N N.NN NN N.N N N N.N N N.NN N N.NN N NN .N.N N N.N N N.NN N N.NN N N.NN NN N.NN NN N NN N.NN N N.NN N N.NN N N.NN N N.N N N N.NN N N.N N N.N N N.NN N N.N N N.N N NN N.NN NN N.NN NN N.N N N.NN N N.N N N.N N N N z N z N z N z N z N z vacuumom uNonNN amoupmoa ummymam “monumoa ammumaa pcmgnmsc NNN NNNNNNN NV NNNNNNNNNNNN so NV NNN NNNN NV NNNNNNN NNNNNoz o>NNNNoN .N .NNNNN 22:53:22 :8 NNN NooNNN NNN ENNNN 8332 No NoNNNNNNBNNEN-..NN-N NNNNN 197 ooF mm ooF NN ooF mF ooF FF ooF. mo ooF NN z m.F F :FmNNo N.N F N.NN N o< N.N F N.NN m N.NF FF N.N N a N.N F m.oF N N.N N nu F.NF N N.N F N.NN N N.NN NN F.oN em u o.oN ,N N.N N am N.NN m N.NN N o.oN N N.NN m N.F F N.N N N F.N N F.FF N o.ON m N.NN N N.N N N< N.NN NF N.NN NF F.m F N.N N N.N N < N z N z N z N z N z N z »NoNNNoN pmmpmga NNNNNNNN “Noumea umopumoa NNoNNNN ucogcmzo NNN oxNFNNu NV NNNNNNNNNNNN EN NV NNN oxNF NV meFNNN FNNNNmz N>NNNNoN .coNNNucoNoNN vcoumm its; "8:23:22 :8 EN NooNNN 2: 22.8 2.332 .No NoNNNNNNSNNoNN-..NN-N NNNNN 198 ooN NN ooN NN ooN NN coN N ooN oN ooN NN z N.N N N.N N N.N N cNNNgo N.N N N.NN N NN N.NN N N.NN NN N.N m a N.N N N.N N N.N N cu N.N N N.N N N.NN N N.NN N N.NN om N.NN mm o N.NN N N.N N N.N N UN N.NN m N.NN oN N.NN N N.N N N N.N N N.N N N.NN N N.NN N N.N N NN N.NN NN N.NN NN N.NN N N.NN N N.N N N.N N N N z N1 z N z N z N z N z »mwupmoa ammumgm Nmmupmoa waumgm ammupmoa ammumgm ucugumso NNN NNNNNNN NV NNcmNmNNNucN EN NV NNN NNNN NV meNmNN Nogpzmz m>NNNNON .comumucmmmsm NNNNH :N :25 “5523222 33 NS 3&8 9: 23,8 8352 No S:£3§8&:.2-N ENE 199 NNN NN NNN om NNN NN NNN NN NNN NN NNN NN z N.N N N.N N N.N N N.N N NNNNNN N.N N N.N N NN N.N N N N.N N No N.NN NN N.N N N.NN NN N.NN mm N N.NN N.N N N.NN NN N.NN NN N.NN NN N.NN N NN N.NN N.NN NN N.NN N N.NN N N.N N N N.N N N.N N N.N N NN N.NN N N N z N . z N z N z N z N z 3338 N33; 3338 3385 $958.. , wmmuamgma 9:233 NNN NNNNNNN NV NNNNNNNNNNNN EN NV NNN «NNN NV NNNNNNN NNNNNNz N>NNNNoN .N .325 "cowumsumpcwsg ”Em... EB #0930 mg» 9330... muaumuu< mo cot—233329.225 39: 200 NNN NN NNN NN NNN NN NN NNN NN NNN NN z .N.N N N N.N N N.N N NNNNNN N.N N N NN N.N N N N.N N N.NN N N N.N N N.N N No N.N N N.NN N N N.NN NN N.NN NN N N.NN N N.N N N.NN NN N N.NN N N.NN N NN N.NN NN N.NN NN N.NN N N N.N N N.N N N N.NN N N.NN NN N.N N N N.N N N.N N NN N.NN NN N.NN NN N.NN N N N.N N N.N N N N z N z N z N z N z N z ammuumoa NmmeNN ummuumom Nmmamga ammuumom umwumga Ncmguwzo NNN NNNNNNN NV NNNNNNNNNNNN EN NV NNN NNNN NV NNNNNNN NNNNNNN NNNNNNNN .N :25 NNNNNENNNNNENN NNNN N.NN N820 9: N.NNzoN NNNNNNNN No SNNNNBSNNEN-..NNN NNNNN BIBLIOGRAPHY 201 BIBLIOGRAPHY Anwar, Mah P., and Child, Irwin L. "Personality and Esthetic Sensi- tivity in an Islamic Culture." Journal of Social Psygholggy_ . 87 (June 1972): 21-28. w Bell, Clive. "Significant Form." In A Modern Book of Esthetics, pp. 228-237. Edited by Melvin Radér. New York: Holt. Rinehart, and Winston, 1935. Calahan, Ellen J. "The Consistency of Aesthetic Judgment." Psycho- a V logical Monographs 51 (1931): 75-87. Child, Irwin L. "Enjoying Art--Hhat Does It Mean?" [HE (June 1975): 70-75. Dewey, John. Experience and Nature. 'LaSalle, Illinois: Open Court, 1925; Dover,’1958. Glass, Gene V., and Stanley, Julian C. Statistical Methods in Educa— tion and Psychology. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall, 1970. Greenough, Horatio. Form and Function. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1962. Hall, Edward T. The Silent Language. Garden City, New York: Double- day, 1959. ‘ Handy, Rollo. The Measurement of Values. St. Louis: Warren Green, 1970. Kluckhohn, Clyde M. "Values and Value Orientations in the Theory of Action." In Toward a General Theory_of Action, pp. 388-433. Edited by Talcott Parsons and E. A. Shils. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1951. Langer. Susanne. Feeling and Form. New York: Scribner's Sons, 1953. Lee, Dorothy. "The Individual in a Changing Society." Journal of Home Economics 52:2 (February 1960): 73-82. Lewis, Clarence I.‘ An Analysis of Knowledge and Valuation. LaSalle, Illinois: Open Court Publishing Co., 1946. ~202 203 Morris, Bertram. "An Analysis of the Aesthetic Experience and of the Aesthetic Judgment as Reflecting Upon A General Theory of Value." Ph.D. dissertation, Cornell University, 1934. Morris, Charles. Signification and Significance. Cambridge: MIT, 1964. . Varieties of Human Value. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1956. Nie, Norman H.; Bent, D. H.; and Hull, C. H. Statistical Package for the Social Sciences. 2nd ed. New York: McGraw-Hall, 1975. Paolucci, Beatrice. "Home Management: Yesterday--Today." Penney's Home Fashions and Fabrics 8 (1962): 3. Parker, Dewitt H. "The Problem of Esthetic Form." In A Modern Book of Esthetics, pp. 250-265. Edited by Melvin Rader. New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston, 1935. Perry, Ralph Barton. General Theory of Value. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1926. Ramsland, Dorothy. "Values Underlying Family Utilization of Home Furnishings." Ph.D. dissertation, Michigan State University, 1967. Rescher, Nicholas. Introduction to Value Theory. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1969. Santayana, George. The SensegfrBeauty. New York: Charles Scrib- ner's Sons, 1896; Dover Publications, 1955. Seelhorst, Robert C. “The Relationship Between Human Values, Aesthetic Performance, Aesthetic Sensitivity, and Sensi- tivity to Problems." Ph.D. dissertation, Pennsylvania State University, 1960. Taylor, John F. A. Department of Philosophy, Michigan State Uni- versity, East Lansing, Michigan. Lectures: Philosophy of Art, September-December, 1973. . "The American Artist: An Essay on the Uses of Freedom." The Centennial Review 7 (Fall 1963): 415-430. Heitz, Morris. "The Role of Theory in Aesthetics." In Problems in Aesthetics, p. 173. Edited by Morris Weitz. 2nd ed. New York: MacMillan, 1970. "‘IVIIITAHOE“