EXPERIMENTAL EVALUATIONS OF
SENSWWITY TRAENING

Thesis for ”ma Degree of DH. D.
MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY

Sherwin Y. Kepes
1965

 

N\\\\\\\\\\\\\ 33 mm \\\\\\\\\\\\\M f “$33535

93 10343 3227 , 3 , .
3 12 ' Umversxt‘y

This is to certifq‘tliat’the
thesis entitled

EXPERIMENTAL EVALUATIONS OF SENSITIVITY TRAINING

presented by

Sherwin Y. Kepes

has been accepted towards fulfillment
of the requirements for

 

Ph . D . degree in Psxcho logy

mmfl

Date WW \QL < f

L!
’1
l

5

 

ABSTRACT

EXPERIMENTAL EVALUATIONS OF SENSITIVITY TRAINING

by Sherwin Y. Kepes

The present research focused on secondeperson inter-
personal sensitivity, using a relatively pure measure of the
component. Training was designed to stress practice, parti-
cipation, and knowledge of results; principles found to be
effective in most training programs. Two studies were con-
ducted. In the first study, a control and experimental
group took two pretests each assessing observational and
interpersonal accuracy. Sound-color films were used to
present the individuals to be judged. The experimental
group received eight one hour training sessions; three of
which were devoted to taking diagnostic tests of sensitivity
components. Both groups were then posttested on the same
criterion instruments.

Training effectiveness was assessed by matching
experimental and control subjects on the basis of pretest
scores and computing matched t-tests.

On the basis of the results of the first study it

was concluded that:

Sherwin Y. Kepes

1. Training resulted in a trend of increased perfor-

mance for second-person sensitivity.

2. The effects of training did not generalize to
third-person sensitivity, suggesting.that second
and third-person sensitivity have different deter-

minants.

3. Anticipated gains in observational accuracy found
for both groups suggested that familiarization with
the test situation was sufficient to allow subjects
to improve.

A second study was conducted to provide a general
cross validation,to determine the effects of one hour and
two and a half hours of training, and to assess the influence
of various types of practice materials on performance.

Subjects were pretested with one of the criterion
instruments, matched on the basis of their scores, and ran-
domly assigned to one of four groups. Each group met twice
and both times was posttested with the same criterion
instrument. The practice materials during.training for
three groups were either sound-color films, tape recordings,
or live interviews; the fourth group served as the control.
Changes in performance were assessed by t-tests.

The results of the second study indicated that:

1. One hour of training did not result.in increased

performance.

2. Differences in practice materials did not result

in differential group increases.

3. Training did not result in greater overall gains

for the experimental groups.

Sherwin Y. Kepes

Additional analyses of second-person sensitivity
were made for the experimental and control groups in both
studies. These were t-tests of the differences between
differences for subjects above and below.the-SOth percen-
tile, and an examination of pre to posttest regression
lines. It was found.that.trained subjects who initially
scored low increased their performance to a greater extent
than untrained subjects.

The combined results of both studies were discussed
and it was concluded that:

l. The main effectiveness of training was for those
subjects who score low on the pretest. It was sug-
gested that these subjects make larger errors of
stereotyping, assumed similarity, and implicit per-

sonality theories.

2. The differences in overall performance increases
found between the experimental groups in the first
and second studies were probably due to the shorter
amount of training and absence of diagnostic tests

in the second study.

3. Training was effective in enabling subjects to
practice making inferences, discuss their reasons
for specific inferences, and to determine whether
or not they were correct. The major limitation of
the training was a lack of explicit guidelines for

changing and correcting interpersonal inferences.

It was suggested that future training programs pro-
vide subjects with a clear framework for change. Construct-
ing empirically derived explicit personality theories was

offered as one technique.

EXPERIMENTAL EVALUATIONS OF SENSITIVITY TRAINING

BY

Sherwin Y. Kepes

A THESIS

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

DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY

Department of Psychology

1965

DEDICATION

To Marilyn

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The author wishes to express his sincere appre-
ciation to Dr. Henry Clay Smith for his guidance and
helpful criticism. Throughout the formulation execution
and reporting of the research, he clearly demonstrated
his high level of interpersonal sensitivity.

I would also like to thank Drs. Alfred G. Dietze,
John E. Hunter, and John H. Wakeley for their valuable

suggestions and assistance.

iii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 0

Chapter

I.

II.

III.

INTRODUCTION 0 o o o o o o o o o o o o 0 0

History . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
The DevelOpment of a Component Approach
Interpersonal Sensitivity . . . . . . .
Research on Sensitivity Training . . .
Studies without Formal Training
Programs

Studies Conducting Training Programs .
Evaluation of Training Research . . . .
Problem . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

STUDY ONE . C C 0 O O O O O O O O O O O 0

General Design . . . . . . . . . . . .
Subjects . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Criterion Instruments . . . . . . . . .
The Training Sessions . . . . . . . . .
Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Discussion and Summary . . . . . . . .

STUDY TWO 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 0

Problem . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
General Design . . . . . . . . . . . .
Subjects. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Criterion Instrument . . . . . . . . .
The Groups . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Discussion and Summary . . . . . . . .

iv

Page

iii

H

‘1me

13
15

l7

18
18
19
22
27
30

33

33
34
34
34
35
37
47

Chapter Page

IV. DISCUSSION 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 49
The Findings of the Studies . . . . . . . 49
Consistencies with Previous Findings . . 52
Limitations of the Present Research . . . 54
The Criterion Problem . . . . . . . . . . 57

V. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS . . . . . . . . . . 61
REFERENCES 0 I O O O O O O O O O O I O O O O O O O O 64
APPENDICES O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 67

Table

1.

10.

11.

12.

13.

14.

15.

16.

17.

LIST OF TABLES

Sex and class level of the subjects . . . . .
The criterion instruments . . . . . . . . . .

Test retest correlations of the criterion
instruments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Summary description of the contents of the
training sessions . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Second-person accuracy gains of training and
untrained groups . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Third-person accuracy gains of trained and
untrained groups . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Appearance and conversation accuracy gains of
trained and untrained groups . . . . . . .

Number and sex of subjects . . . . . . . . .

Test retest correlations of the criterion
instrument . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Changes in performance from pretest to
posttest l . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Second-person accuracy gains of trained and
untrained groups . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Correlations between pretest scores and gains

Second-person accuracy gains of trained and
untrained groups . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Second-person accuracy gains of students

below the 50th percentile . . . . . . . . .~

Second-person accuracy gains of students
above the 50th percentile . . . . . . . . .

Third-person accuracy gains of trained and
untrained groups . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Item difficulty and group gains . . . . . . .

Page

18

20

21

22

28

28

29

34

38

38

39

40

41

45

46

46
58

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure

Page

1. Regression lines for trained and untrained
groups in the second study . . . . . . . 43

2. Regression lines for trained and untrained
groups in the first study . . . . . . . 44

vii

Appendix

A.

B.

C.

D.

E.

LIST OF APPENDICES

The criterion instruments . . . . . . . .
Training materials in the first study . .

Additional statistical data for both
studies 0 O O O O O I O I O O O O I O 0

Training materials in the second study .

Statistical data used for the analysis of
regression lines . . . . . . . . . . .

Item analysis of "the men test" . . . . .

viii

Page

69

82

109
116

123

125

CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION

Sensitivity has been defined as, ". . . the ability
to predict what an individual will feel, say, and do about
you, himself, and others." Smith (1966) The recognized im-
portance of this ability is reflected in human-relations
training, training in clinical psychology, and education in
general. The majority of research on sensitivity has focused
on measuring the extent to which it exists in a given sample
and on an assessment of its personality correlates. Until
recently, few studies have focused directly on the question
of whether sensitivity can be increased through training.
These studies, together with research indirectly concerned
with training and with sensitivity in general have produced
conflicting results. In the last decade and a half, several
articles have appeared in the literature which have served
to clarify certain conceptual and methodological issues,
and at the same time offer possible explanations for con-
flicting research results.

Current research and theorizing reflects a component
rather than a global conceptualization of sensitivity. One

of these components is interpersonal sensitivity, which may

be defined as the ability to differentiate among individuals.
The present research will focus primarily on this component,
with the major aim of experimentally evaluating interpersonal

sensitivity training programs.

History

The development of a component approach, the nature
of these components, the specific component under investi-
gation in this study, and a discussion and evaluation of
sensitivity training programs provide a broad framework for

the following discussion.

The Development of a Component Approach

 

The general procedure for assess1ng sens1tivity is
to have a subject (judge) predict or estimate how another
person or group (Other) feels, acts, or will act. A judge,
for example, might be asked to complete a personality scale
the way he thinks a particular Other has; the Other has
completed the same scale. The judge's accuracy score, how
closely his responses agree with those of the Other, is
referred to as empathy, sensitivity, interpersonal sensi-
tivity, or predictive accuracy. The meaning of the typical
accuracy score has been questioned by several researchers.
(Bender and Hastorf, 1952; Gage, 1952; Lindgreen and Robin-
son, 1953; Giedt, 1955; Crow and Hammond, 1957; and Stel-

machers, 1964)

Gage and Cronbach note:

Writers have inadequately specified just what they
mean to measure or to what extent the variable they
study overlaps the variables in other investigations.
Thus one test of empathy finds out how accurately sub-
jects predict the ratings acquaintances will give them.
Another test of empathy requires that subjects estimate
the musical preferences of the average factory worker.
Not surprisingly, these tests correlate only .02.

(1955, p. 411)

Cronbach's discussion (1955) of processes affecting
predictive accuracy scores was the first attempt to develop
a component conceptualization of sensitivity. He proposed
that the typical accuracy score was affected by processes,
some of which were independent of an individual's ability
to judge others. He states, ". . . the usual accuracy score
is the sum of four components we shall call Elevation (E),
Differential Elevation (D E), Sterotype Accuracy (S A), and
Differential Accuracy (D A)." (1955, p. 178)

Elevation refers to the central tendency of a judge's
ratings. A high accuracy score may reflect similarity in
central tendencies between the judge and the Other, rather
than sensitivity. Differential elevation is the judge's
average spread on a response scale. Here, a high accuracy
score may reflect agreement of spread between judge and
Other, rather than sensitivity. Stereotype accuracy refers
to the judge's ability to predict a norm for a group.
According to Cronbach, it is possible for a judge to achieve

a high accuracy score because he knows the norms of a group

and not because he is particularly sensitive to the group.

Differential accuracy refers to the ability of a judge to
predict differences among Others. Cronbach also presents
a statistical technique for measuring each component by
partialing it out of the global accuracy score.

Bronfenbrenner g£_al. (1958) in a similar though
more psychological vein, also posit a component approach
to the investigation of sensitivity. They distinguish
between two major types of ability in judging others. The
first, they refer to as "Sensitivity to the generalized
other." This is related to Cronbach's stereotype accuracy;
knowledge of the norm or typical response of a group. The
second is "Interpersonal sensitivity"; here the judge dis-
criminates individual deviations from the group norm. This
is similar to Cronbach's differential accuracy.

Bronfenbrenner gt_al. feel that the conventional
accuracy score reflects both abilities, though probably
sensitivity to the generalized other most. They note that
it is possible for an individual to excell in one of these
skills but not in another, and that attempts to separately
measure the two abilities would provide a clearer understand-
ing of the nature of sensitivity and also help explain con-
flicting research findings.

They distinguish among first, second, and third-
person sensitivity. First-person sensitivity requires the
judge to predict how the Other feels toward the judge;

second-person sensitivity requires the judge to estimate

how the Other feels toward himself; and third-person sensi-
tivity requires the judge to predict how a group of indi-
viduals feel toward a specific Other.

Smith (1966) suggests a component approach similar
to the above two. His approach differs from Bronfenbrenner's
in citing more than two components, and it differs from
Cronbach's in proposing that each component be measured in-
dependently. He identifies and defines the following com-
ponents: Level; Spread; Empathy; Observation; Differentiation
between groups; and Differentiation between individuals.

Level and Spread are similar to Cronbach's Elevation
and Differential Elevation. Empathy is defined as,

". . . the tendency of the perceiver to assume that another
person's feelings, thoughts, and behavior are similar to his
own." (1966)

The component of observation is not mentioned by
Cronbach or Bronfenbrenner. Smith states, however, "Observa-
tion is obviously an important determinant of sensitivity,
for what we hear a person say and see him do has much to do
with the inferences we make about him."

Differentiation between groups is somewhat similar
to Cronbach's stereotype accuracy, and Bronfenbrenner's
sensitivity to the generalized other. It differs from both
because an attempt is made to separate it from the component

of level. He states, . . . we will focus not upon the

perceiver's judgment of a group, but upon his judgment of

the differences between groups: . . . .

Smith's conception of differentiation between indi-
viduals is similar to both Cronbach's and Bronfenbrenner's.
With respect to this component, he states:

Our level, spread, empathy, observations, and the
differentiations we make between groups exert an inde-
pendent influence on the predictions we make about a
person. What remains as a determinant of our judgment
is the influence of our differentiations between indi-
viduals.

Interpersonal Sensitivity

 

The preceding discussion has presented the general
development of a component approach to sensitivity. Investi-
gating sensitivity within this framework, requires techniques
for either measuring the components separately as Smith
(1966) suggests, or partialing them out of a global score as
Cronbach (1955) suggested.

Focusing on interpersonal sensitivity, Grossman
(1963) developed a pure measure of this component. The in-
fluences of level and spread were eliminated by requiring
the judges to make matching rather than rating judgments.

The influence of group sensitivity was reduced through a
double item analysis. Following the suggestion of Bronfen-
brenner gE_al. (1958) Grossman included different kinds of
predictions in his test. Judges were required to make

second and third-person inferences.

Grossman investigated possible relationships between

several variables and interpersonal sensitivity. Briefly
summarized, his data strongly suggested that: "Interpersonal
sensitivity is a general ability; the accurate observer has
greater sensitivity; and the open-minded judge has greater
sensitivity." (1963, p. 50) He found partial support to
-suggest that: "The intelligent judge is more sensitive;

the socially aloof judge has greater sensitivity; and second
and third-person sensitivity have different determinants."
(1963, p. 50) He did not find evidence to support the
hypotheses that female judges were superior to male judges,
and that same sex sensitivity is greater than opposite-sex

sensitivity.

Research on Sensitivity Training

 

Research on the effects of training on sensitivity
may be divided into two broad categories: Those which
equate psychological experience or amount of course work
with training, and those that interpolate training between
a pretest and an end-test. The former studies do not con-
duct formal training programs, while the latter include
training programs in the design of the research. Both types
of studies will be briefly reviewed, followed by an evalua-

tion of them.

Studies Without Formal Training Programs

 

The majority of studies in this category have failed
to demonstrate that training results in increased performance.
(Buzby, 1924; Estes, 1938; Luft, 1950; Kelly and Fiske, 1951;
Wedell and Smith, 1951; Soskin, 1957; and Kessen, 1957) A
few studies, however, report higher accuracy as being related

to training. (Polanski, 1949; and Rabin, 1951)

Studies Conducting Training Programs

 

Guilford (1929) trained 15 subjects to name facial
expressions. Subjects were pre and posttested on one set
of Rudolf pictures. Another set of pictures was used as
training material. During practice the judges were given
feedback as to the correct answers. Guilford reports the
following results: An average gain in ability of 51 per
cent, a decrease in variability, and a high negative cor-
relation between initial scores and gains. No control group
was utilized.

Jenness, (1932) in an early review of training
studies concluded that training was ineffective in increasing
accuracy of naming facial expressions. He disagreed with
Allport who contended that his obtained negative correlation
between initial scores and gains was evidence for the effects
of training. Jenness reports that he obtained a similar

negative correlation with a control group.

Giving his judges feedback during practice sessions,
Martin (1938) had judges estimate Others on five traits.

He concluded, "It appears that on the basis of brief obser-
vation and interview, appreciable improvement may be affected
in judging some of the psychological traits, as well as some
of the more objective physical features of individuals when
such judgements are regularly practiced and checked by
standardized measures." (1938, p. 690) No control group

was utilized.

Crow (1957) randomly assigned 72 senior medical
students to experimental and control groups. The experi-
mental group received training designed to increase sensi-
tivity in terms of doctor-patient relationships. Three
sets of 10 filmed interviews were presented to the judges
and they were required to estimate the self-ratings of the
patients on seven personality scales and to also estimate
where the patient actually was with respect to the scales.
Crow reports:

Contrary to what had been expected, the experimental

group which received training in interpersonal relations
did not improve more than the control group, which did
not receive such training. In fact, the trend of results
suggests the Opposite conclusion: That the training in
interpersonal relations decreased accuracy. (1957,
p. 356)

Crow also found that the variance of the experimental group

increased and he cites this negative correlation between

variance and accuracy as supporting Cronbachs hypothesis.

10

With respect to training, Crow concludes:

Since very little is known about how to train people
to make more accurate judgements about others, training
programs frequently utilize a procedure of "exposure"
and little else. The belief that placing the trainee
in a position to observe others and to make judgements
will produce desirable results is challenged by these
findings. Such experiences may lead the trainee to dif-
ferentiate among people far beyond his capacity to do so
accurately. In the absence of dependable measures of
his accuracy, the trainee lacks knowledge of his errors
and may continue inappropriate overdifferentiation long
after training has ceased. (1957, p. 358)

Testing the hypothesis of an inverse relationship
between variability of judgements and accuracy, Crow and
Farson (1961) had judges take pre and posttests consisting
of predictions of how Others would rate themselves. One
week of training in interpersonal sensitivity was inter-
polated between the tests. A control group received no
training and took the pre and posttests. The results SUP-
portedtfiuahypothesis,however, in this study, variability
decreased and accuracy increased in the experimental group.

Oskamp's (1962) research combines two designs within
one study. He had expert judges (clinical psychologists)
and inexperienced judges (undergraduates) predict from MMPI
profiles whether the patients were psychiatric or medical
cases. He found that the clinicians were slightly more
accurate. Following this, Oskamp trained the inexperienced
judges. Two different training programs were used. In the

first program subjects were given feedback about their past

performance. They then practiced with additional profiles.

11

During training the experimenter suggested ways of improving
the judges performance for the following set of profiles.

In the second program (accuracy group) subjects were
given similar feedback and were also given information on
the four best actuarial decision systems for evaluating pro-
files. Both groups were given immediate feedback on their
performance with the practice profiles. The expert and
inexperienced judges were given posttests and the "accuracy
group" was found to be more accurate, though not signifi-
cantly.

With respect to the effectiveness of the training
Oskamp concludes:

. . . the present findings indicate that training is

not difficult and that a brief period of training may
equal the results of years of clinical experience. The
training methods were not distinguished by fancy gimmicks,
rather their success seems due to their specificity and
their use of immediate feedback. (1962, p. 21)

A study conducted by Wakeley (1961) focused, in part,
on the component of interpersonal sensitivity. He developed
and tested six specific training programs to determine their
effects on accuracy in judging Others. College students saw
sound-color movies of interviews with three individuals and
completed two tests. One test (Accuracy in Judging People)
required the judges to make inferences about Others, one at
a time. The other test (Ability to Judge Differences Between

People) required judges to discriminate among three Others.

No differences in scores from pre to posttests were found

12

for the six experimental groups and one control group on
the first criterion instrument. On the other test, two
groups significantly increased in accuracy. One group was
given a "combination" program which included all the prin-
cipciples from the other programs. The other training
program that increased accuracy stressed the principle of
pooling. Judges in this program were told that one way to
make inferences about a person with whom they had little
contact was to from a pool of people whom they knew well
and who were like the unknown person. The judges were
then told that they could make inferences about the person
based on the pools they had formed.

A second study was conducted using adults as judges.
The pooling program again increased accuracy. An additional
program stressing pooling and observing others also increased
accuracy. Wakeley notes that the pooling program condoned
the use of stereotypes and he suggests that the effective-
ness of training may have been due to ". . . condoning a
normal practice and to emphasizing that the practice can be
employed systematically." (1961, p. 35) The criterion
instrument consisted of questions based on interviews with
two men and one woman; thus, the Opportunity for stereo-

typing was enhanced.

13

Evaluation of Training Research

An examination of the research on sensitivity train-
ing reveals conflicting findings. Reviewing the studies
conducted prior to 1955, Taft notes that psychologists tend
to be less capable of judging Others than physical scientists
and other non-psychologists. Taft also states:

In spite of this finding there is reason to believe that
ability to judge Others can be improved by specific
.training in judging and repeated Specific practice,
except where the person already has good ability to judge
others. (1955, p. 12)
Since Taft's review, some studies have yielded positive
results. (Crow and Farson, 1961; Wakeley, 1961; and Oskamp,
1962)

As Wakely has noted (1961) the major difficulty with
evaluating training studies is two-fold. First, many of the
studies that are conducted do not have training programs in
any formal sense. Rather, they equate years of psychological
experience or course work with training. Wakeley criticizes
this method by stating:

When training is measured in this way, what has been
measured is not clear. An individual receiving training
in psychology may study such diverse materials as sta-
tistics, principles of interviewing, the physiology of
rats and techniques of projective testing. The assump-
tion that this training combines additively and is

directly related to a criterion of interpersonal judging
accuracy is one that is difficult to support. (1961,

P- 5)

14

Secondly, the majority of studies fail to explicitly
state the content of the training programs. Training is
interpolated between a pre and posttest, and treated as an
independent variable. Wakeley notes:

In this approach training is usually measured by
stating the course title and indicating the duration of
the training. Again, what goes on in training is not
clear. The possibility exists that several, perhaps
conflicting, principles for judging are presented and
discussed. Interpretation of findings when the inde-
pendent variable has not been specified is an ambigious
undertaking. (1961, p. 5)

Certain general trends, however, do emerge from the
research. Studies concerned with observational accuracy
reveal increases in performance. (Guilford, 1929; Jenness,
1932; and Martin, 1938) These increases appear to occur
for both experimental and control groups. It suggests that
improvement in observational accuracy may be obtained inde-
pendently of training and, perhaps, is a function of familiar-
ization with the test situation.

Several researchers point out certain principles of
training which they consider to be important. These general
principles are practice, participation, and knowledge of
results. One or more of them are stressed by Martin (1938);
Luft (1950); Soskin (1954); Crow (1957); Wakeley (1961); and
Oskamp (1962).

As Oskamp (1962) has noted, there is nothing magical

about these principles. Presumably they may be effective in

increasing performance because they allow subjects to

15

explicitly focus on behavioral processes of making judgments,

which implicitly are a part of social interaction.

Problem

Considering both the methodological and conceptual
issues, and the nature of the majority of training programs,
it appears that an adequate investigation of training
effects should: Specify the component of sensitivity under
investigation; develop or utilize adequate criterion measures
of the component; explicitly state the contents of the train-
ing program; and include those principles of training found
or theorized to be effective.

As noted before, Wakeley's research (1961) revealed
significant increases in performance; measured by one of
two criterion instruments. This instrument required the in-
dividuals to differentiate among three Others, using match-
ing judgments. This was a test, then, of interpersonal
sensitivity. Items of second and third-person sensitivity
were included in the test; though the author did not dis-
tinguish between them. One of the training programs Wakeley
found to be effective instructed judges to use stereotypes
and the nature of the test was such that stereotyping was
enhanced.

To a certain extent, our research is an extension
of Wakeley's. Our focus is on interpersonal sensitivity

and the criterion instruments utilized are revised forms

16

of those in Wakeley's study. Second and third-person in-
ferences are identified and separated, and the effects of
stereotype or group sensitivity are minimized. Separating
second and third-person inferences allows for comparisons
between them. Eliminating the influences of group sensi-
tivity allows for a clearer evaluation of training.

In addition, the present research included a test
of observational accuracy so that an assessment of rela-
tionships between two components of sensitivity would be
possible.

Chapter II presents the results of the first study
which was primarily exploratory; Chapter III presents the
results of the second study which was conducted to serve as
a general cross validation; and Chapter IV draws together

and discusses the results of both studies.

CHAPTER II

STUDY ONE

The first study was exploratory and no explicit
hypotheses were formulated. We did, however, have certain
questions and expectations concerning the data:

1. The major question was whether training, uSing
a relatively pure measure of a sensitivity component and
stressing practice, participation, and knowledge of results,
would increase performance.

2. Some theoretical and empirical evidence exists
with respect to differences in second and third-person
sensitivity, and training primarily stressed practice with
second-person sensitivity. Thus, if differential group
increases were found for second-person sensitivity, similar
increases were not anticipated for third-person sensitivity.

3. It was anticipated that observational accuracy
scores would increase from pre to posttests. This was ex-
pected because it was felt that exposure to, and familiarity
with the tests would be sufficient to produce an appropriate
set to be more observant. At the same time, there seemed
to be no reason to assume that either the experimental or
the control group would manifest significant increases rela-

tive to each other.

17

18

General Design

 

Two groups were used in this study. Both groups
were pretested on two criterion instruments, the experimental
group participated in eight one-hour weekly training sessions,
and both groups were posttested with the same criterion

instruments used in the pretesting.

Subjects

Students from a psychology of personality course,
taught during the Fall quarter of 1964 at Michigan State
University served as the experimental group. The training
they received took place during scheduled class periods.
The control group consisted of students from an industrial
psychology course. Table 1 presents a breakdown of the

subjects by sex and class level.

Table l.--Sex and Class Level of the Subjects

 

 

 

Class Experimental Group Control Group

Level Male Female Total Male Female Total
Freshman 3 6 9 5 3

Sophmore 4 4

Junior 7 24 31 14 2 16
Senior 3 5 8 8
Other 1

Total 18 40 58 31 5 36

 

l9
Criterion Instruments

Two sound color motion picture films originally

developed by Cline (1955) and modified by Bruni (1963) and
Grossman (1963) served as the sensitivity tests. One film
consists of separate five minute interviews with three
.males, "the men test"; the other film is similar, but the
interviewees are females, "the women test." Each indi-
vidual in the films answers a series of questions concern-
ing his reactions to being interviewed, his personal values,
hobbies, and personality strengths and weaknesses.

Subjects are required to answer 120 questions for
each film, (see Appendix A). Items one through 60 in each
test measure the observational accuracy of the subjects;
the first 30 items pertain to appearance, the second 30 to
conversation. Items 61 through 120 require the subjects to
make inferences about the interviewees; items 61 through
90 deal with second-person inference, and the last 30 items
with third-person inference. Table 2 presents a breakdown
of the criterion instruments.

Bruni (1963) developed the items for the observa-
tional accuracy tests by having four judges View the films
a number of times and note cues of observation that differen-
tiated the interviewees. Ninety items for appearance and
90 items for conversation were pretested, and using an item

analysis the final 120 items were selected. The reported

20

odd-even reliability of the total test was .74; the men
test was .68, and the women test was .57. The odd-even
reliabilities for total appearance and conversation were

.49 and .73 respectively.

Table 2.--The criterion instruments

 

 

Number of Items Total

Men Test Women Test

 

Observation
Appearance 30 30 60
Conversation 30 30 60
Inference
Second-person 30 30 60
Third-person 30 30 60
Total 120 120 240

 

Grossman (1963) developed the 120 inference accuracy
test items by using the criterion data Cline collected from
the interviewees and friends of the interviewees. Initially
240 items were constructed and through item analysis, the
most discriminating items were chosen. Following this,
Grossman conducted another item analysis, using a test of
group sensitivity develOped by Johnson (1963). This was
done so that in the final form of the test, ". . . items
were chosen which were both highly discriminating for inter-
personal sensitivity and nondiscriminating for group sensi-

tivity." (Grossman, 1963, p. 23) It was assumed that this

21

procedure would eliminate stereotype or group sensitivity
from the test. Grossman reported that the correlation
between interpersonal and group sensitivity test scores was
not significant, (r = .12). The odd-even reliabilities for
the different parts of the test were; total test .59, total
second-person .55, total third-person .40, total men test
.50, and total women test .36.

Test-retest correlations for the control and experi-
mental groups were computed in the present study. Pearson
r's were used to compute the correlations, and they are

reported in Table 3.

Table 3.--Test retest correlations

 

 

 

Men Test Women Test Total

Appearance

Trained .45 . .58 .43

Untrained .33 (33) .46 (29) .65 (29)
Conversation

Trained .36 -30 .69

Untrained .28 (35) .45 (34) .47 (32)
Second-Person

Trained .29 .21 47

Untrained .48 (34) .50 (34) .55 (33)
Third-Person

Trained .39 .40 .52

Untrained .33 (34) .43 (36) .38 (33)

 

*Parentheses indicate the numbers on which the cor-
relations are based.

22

The general format of the test requires the judge
to answer 120 items for each film, by the matching method.
The use of matching eliminates the effects of level and
spread. In addition, as noted above, the effects of stereo-
type accuracy are greatly reduced. In summary, the criterion
instruments consist of two observational accuracy tests, and
two relatively pure measures of second and third-person

interpersonal sensitivity.

The Training Sessions*

 

Table 4 presents a brief description of the eight

training sessions.

Table 4.--Summary description of the contents of the training

 

 

 

sessions
Training
Session Contents
1 Case studies of three individuals
2 Case studies of three pairs of individuals
3 Observation of others
4 Judgment of happily married, unhappily married,
and divorced men
5 Interpersonal sensitivity inventory
6 Diagnostic test of level-spread accuracy
7 Diagnostic test of assumed similarity
8 Interviews with three female students

 

*See Appendix B for materials used in the training
sessions.

23

Training session l.--Case studies of three individuals

 

were given to the class. The subjects were required to read
the first case and then answer 15 true~false items about the
depicted individual. The correct answers were given and a
frequency distribution was put on the board showing the num-
ber of correct answers the subjects had. The second case
was read and the 15 items were answered. The subjects were
then asked to offer reasons for answering specific items the
way they did. The correct answers were read and another
frequency distribution was placed on the board. The third

case was completed in a similar manner.

Training session 2.--This session utilized two case

 

studies of twins, and one case study of two individuals.
After answering the 15 questions for the first case, and
writing reasons for their answers, the subjects discussed
their reasons for answering the way they did. Feedback on
the correct answers was given and a frequency distribution
of correct answers was placed on the board. This procedure
was followed for the second and third cases.

Training session 3.--This session consisted of

 

practice in observing Others. Three male graduate students
completed a questionnaire concerning their academic history,
interests, hobbies, values, and personality strengths and
weaknesses. The items that differentiated among the graduate
students were included in a mimeographed test given to the

class. Each graduate student was interviewed three times

24

for approximately three minutes; all three were asked the
same questions in the same order. They were instructed
before the training session to answer the questions as
they had on the questionnaire.

After the first three minute interviews were com-
pleted, the first part of the test containing 15 items
was given to the class. Their task was to match each
statement with the individual it applied to. After the
items were completed, the subjects received feedback, and
a frequency distribution was placed on the board. This
procedure was repeated two more times.

Training session 4.--The material used in this

 

session was a test of the judgment of happily married, un-
happily married, and divorced men. It consists of a num-
ber of statements which differentially apply to the three
groups. The subjects task was to match each statement with
the specific group to which it was most relevant. The sub-
jects completed the first 30 items and were asked to discuss
reasons why they answered as they did. They were then given
the correct answers, and a frequency distribution was placed
on the board. The next 30 items were then answered and the
same procedure of discussion and feedback was followed.
Training session 5.--The material used in this ses-
sion was a test developed by Grossman (1963) called the
Interpersonal Sensitivity Inventory. Grossman constructed

this test by administering 690 items from 22 personality

25

scales, and item analyzing the results for those items that
differentiate between high and low scorers on the film
tests. The test consists of 90 items which are scored true
or false by the subjects. After completing the test, the
students were given the correct answers and heard a lecture
on procedures involved in conducting an item analysis.

Each individual was given his score on the test as soon as
the tests could be scored.

Training session 6.--During this session, the sub-

 

jects took a level-spread accuracy test which was being
developed by another graduate student. After completing
the test, the topics of level and spread, as they relate
to sensitivity, were presented to the class. Subjects
received their individual scores as soon as the tests
could be scored.

Training session 7.--The student's task during this

 

session was to complete a test of level of assumed simi-
larity, being developed by another graduate student. After
the test had been completed, the concept of assumed simi-
larity, as it related to sensitivity, was discussed. Sub-
jects were given their individual scores as soon as the
tests could be scored.

Training session 8.-—Three females from the class
completed the-Cough Adjective Check List. Those adjectives
which discriminated among the females were selected as

items for the training session test. The females were

26

interviewed in class and were all asked the same questions.
The subjects' task was to match each adjective with the fe-
male who said it applied to herself. The class was split
into eight groups of eight to ten members. The first 15
items were answered by each subject, and then each group
discussed reasons why the members answered as they did.

Then each subject re-answered the 15 items, changing any
answers they wanted. The correct answers were given and
the average gain for each group from pre to post-discussion
was computed. These average gains were written on the board.

The same procedure was followed with the next 15 items.

Method of Analysis

 

Subjects from the experimental and control groups
were matched on the basis of pretest scores. Matching was
done for each test, and for each sub-part of the tests.
Comparisons were then made between and within the groups,
on increases in performance from pre to posttests. The
statistical technique utilized was matched t-tests.

Only those students who completed the two pre and
posttests were included in the analysis of the data. The
largest number of possible matches for each comparison was
36; the number of subjects in the control group. For any
given comparison it was not always possible to match every

control subject with an experimental subject. In addition,

27

since individual pretest scores vary for the subparts
of the tests, it was not generally possible to match the
same pairs of experimental and control subjects from one

comparison to another.

Results

Table 5* shows the comparisons made for second-
person accuracy. The results of the comparisons between the
experimental and control groups indicate a general trend of
greater gains for the experimental group. The comparisons
within each group from pre to posttests reveal a consistent
trend for increased performance in the experimental group.
This trend is not seen in the control group.

The results of similar comparisons made for third-
person sensitivity are reported in Table 6. The table
shows that the experimental and control groups are not dif-
ferent on the posttests. For the within group data, the
experimental group reveals significant improvement in two
of the comparisons, while one control group comparison

yields a significant increase in performance.

 

*Additional statistical data showing variances,
standard errors, standard errors of the differences, and
correlations between the experimental and control group
posttest scores will be found in Appendix C. The tables in
the appendix will be constructed and numbered so that they
correspond to the tables in the body of the paper.

28

Table 5.--Second-person accuracy gains of trained and un-
trained groups

 

 

Pretest Posttest
Criterion N Means Means Difference t p

 

Men Sub-test

Trained 34 14.7 15.7 1.0 1.67 .10
Untrained 34 14.7 14.6 -0.1 .10 .90
Difference in Gains 1.1 1.92 .10

-----_----------—---------------------------—------—-------

Women Sub-test

 

Trained 34 15.9 17.2 1.3 1.99 .05
Untrained 34 15.9 16.2 .3 .54 .60
Difference in Gains 1.0 1.58 .20

Total Test
Trained 33 30.9 32.9 2.0 2.99 .02
Untrained 33 30.9 31.0 .1 .04 .90
Difference in Gains 1.9 2.65 .02

 

Table 6.--Third-person accuracy gains of trained and un-
trained groups

 

 

Pretest Posttest
Criterion N Means Means Difference t p

 

Men Sub-test

 

Trained 34 16.2 17.6 1.4 2.57' .02
Untrained 34 16.2 17.5 1.3 3.05 .01
Difference in Gains .1 .03 .90
Women Sub-test
Trained 36 9.7 10.7 1.0 1.49 .20
Untrained 36 9.7 10.4 .7 1.22 .30
Difference in Gains .3 .31 .80
Total Test
Trained 33 26.1 29.0 2.9 3.48 .01
Untrained 33 26.1 27.4 1.3 1.51 .20
Difference in Gains 1.6 1.54 .20

 

29

Table 7 reports the results of the analysis for the
data on observational accuracy. The results consistently
reveal significant increases in performance for both the
experimental and control groups. For the differences in
gains between groups, none of the results are significant.
In five of the six comparisons, however, slightly larger

gains are found in the control group.

Table 7.--Appearance and conversation accuracy gains of
trained and untrained groups

 

 

 

Pretest Posttest
Criterion N Means Means Difference t p
Men Sub-test
Appearance
Trained 33 16.8 19.5 2.7 4.91 .001
Untrained 33 16.8 20.2 3.4 5.62 .001
Difference in Gains 7 .98 .40
Conversation
Trained 33 19.1 21.9 2.8 4.23 .001
Untrained 33 19.1 22.7 3.6 4.84 .001
Difference in Gains .8 1.19 .30
Women Sub-test
Appearance
Trained 29 17.6 19.6 2.0 3.45 .01
Untrained 29 17.6 19.9 2.3 3.97 .001
Difference in Gains .3 .39 .70
Conversation
Trained 34 20.5 22.4 1.9 2.98 .01
Untrained 34 20.5 21.8 1.3 1.68 .01
Difference in Gains .6 .64 .60
Total Test
Appearance
Trained 29 34.0 39.1 5.1 4.72 .001
Untrained 29 34.0 40.3 6.3 7.38 .001
Difference in Gains 1.2 1.07 .30
Conversation
Trained 32 37.5 44.0 6.5 10.79 .001
Untrained 32 37.5 44.4 6.9 6.48 .001
Difference in Gains .4 .37 .80

 

30

Discussion and Summary

 

The discussion of the results of this study will

follow a framework provided by the questions and expecta-
tions discussed at the beginning of the chapter.

With respect to second-person sensitivity, the re-
sults suggest a general trend of increased performance in
the experimental group, as compared to the control group.
The trend is further evidenced by the increases within the
experimental group from pre to posttests. The results are,
however, not conclusive, and the question of whether train-
ing would increase performance, may be answered in a moder-
ately affirmative manner.

The comparisons for third-person sensitivity suggest
that training failed to significantly affect performance.
This is evidenced by the finding that there was some tendency
for both trained and untrained groups to increase their per-
formance. The finding of increases for both groups is some-
what unexpected, but since training appears to have dif-
ferential effects on second and third-person sensitivity it
lends some support to previous theorizing and research which
suggests that second and third-person sensitivity have dif-
ferent determinants. (Bronfenbrenner gt_al. 1958; and
Grossman, 1963)

The results for observational accuracy support our
expectation that both the experimental and control groups

would increase their performance. Only one of the 12

31

comparisons for the groups fails to reach at least the .01
level of significance. At first glance, these results
might appear to be obvious. It should be remembered, how-
ever, that the pre and posttests were given eight weeks
apart, the tests are relatively difficult, and that little
training emphasis in the experimental group and none in
the control group was placed on observation. It appears
that observation is a greatly underdevelOped capacity.

It was also expected that increases in observational
accuracy for the groups, relative to each other, would not
occur. This was generally supported by the data. One
interesting trend that emerged was the finding that on five
of the six comparisons between the experimental and control
groups, greater, though non significant increases were
found for the control group.

The finding is of interest because it may further
suggest that the training was affecting performance. Obser-
ving Others appears to be an easier task for judges than
making inferences. This is indicated, in our study, by the
higher mean scores on the observational parts of the tests.
It was assumed that increased performance in observing
Others would be more or less a function of familiarity with
the demands of the test situation. The control group sub-
jects, given no training between tests, may have focused on
the easier task of being better observers. The subjects in

the experimental group may have also been set to observe

32

more closely, but as a function of training, may have been
slightly less concerned with what the Others wore or said,
and more concerned with how the Others felt about themselves.

In summary, the results of this study suggest that
the training program was moderately successful; that train-
ing focusing on second-person sensitivity does not generalize
to third-person sensitivity; and that observational accuracy
may be increased as a function of familiarization with the
test.

The next chapter will discuss a second study that
was conducted to evaluate the impact of a training program

designed to increase second-person interpersonal sensitivity.

CHAPTER III

STUDY TWO

Problem

Since the results on the effectiveness of training
in interpersonal sensitivity were suggestive though not
conclusive, the second study was conducted to:

1. Provide a general cross validation.

2. Determine the effects of one hour and two and a
half hours of training on performance.

3. Investigate the effects of various methods of pre-
senting information about Others.

With respect to the last point, there is some evidence to
indicate that, generally, this is not a critical variable.
(Giedt, 1955; Soskin, 1959; and Stelmachers, 1964)

An attempt was also made to focus more specifically
on second-person interpersonal sensitivity by only using
practice materials of this type during training.

Though complete data were available for 58 experi-
mental group subjects in the first study, on any given
training session up to 100 students might be present. In
this study, an attempt was made to increase the amount of
subject participation by keeping the training groups smaller

in size.

33

34

General Design

 

Four groups were used in this study. Subjects were
pretested prior to their assignments to the groups. Each
of the groups met once a week for two successive weeks. At
each meeting three groups received training and were post-
tested. The fourth group served as the control, did not

receive training, and was posttested at each meeting.

Subjects

The subjects in the study came from students en-
rolled in a psychology of personality class at Michigan
State University, during the Winter quarter of 1965. Table 8

presents a breakdown of subjects by sex.

Table 8.--Number and sex of subjects

 

 

 

Male Female Total
Film group 3 9 12
Tape group 4 5 9
Live group 7 12 19
Control group 10 15 25
Total 24 41 65

 

Criterion Instrument

 

The criterion instrument used in this study was the

men film test, discussed in Chapter 2.

35

The Groups*

 

Students were grouped on the basis of pretest scores

and randomly assigned to one of four conditions. This
grouping was done in order to insure equality of pretest
means.

Approximately 35 students were assigned to each
group and mimeographed sheets were distributed to the class,
indicating which group each student was assigned to. The
general purpose of the research was explained to the class.
They were told that participation was voluntary, but that
additional class credit would be given to those who partici-
pated.

Group 1, film group.--The subjects were given their
pretest scores and told about the general nature and purpose
of the research. The women film test was shown and the
items in the test on second-person inference were used as
practice material. The general training procedure was
similar to that followed in the first study; after answering
the items the subjects were asked to discuss how they
answered and why. After each few items were answered and
discussed, the correct answers were given to the group.

This continued for one hour and then the men film test was
shown and the subjects answered the 30 items on second-

person inference, (posttest 1).

 

*
See Appendix D for the training materials used.

36

The following week the film group met again and the

subjects were given their pre and posttest 1 scores with
their corresponding gains or losses. The women film test
was shown again and additional practice material, prepared
by the experimenter, was presented to the group. As in the
first meeting, training followed the general format of the
judges answering the items, and then discussing how and why
they answered as they did. After one and a half hours of
training, the men film test was shown and the subjects
answered the 60 items for both second and third-person sen-
sitivity, (posttest 2).

Group 2, tape group.--The same procedure was fol-

 

lowed for this group, but instead of seeing the women film
test, this group heard a tape recording of the film's sound
track.

Group 3, liveggroup.--The same procedure was followed

 

as in the film and tape groups, but subjects in this group
saw interviews with three female students enrolled in a psy-
chology of interviewing class. The experimenter interviewed
the girls one at a time, and patterned his questions after
those in the film. The three females completed the same
criterion data as had the Others who appeared in the film.
The practice material was of the same general form as the

other experimental groups.

37

Group 4, control group.--This group served as the

 

control and received no training. At the first meeting

they were given their pretest scores and took the men film
test. At the second meeting they were given their pre and
posttest scores and corresponding gains or losses. Follow-

ing this, they completed the men film test again.

Results

The data were first analyzed to determine test-
retest correlations. These were computed for the control
and experimental groups, using Pearson r's. Table 9 re-
ports these coefficients.

Changes in performance from pre to posttest l were
investigated for the groups. These are shown in Table 10.

The table indicates that the groups differ somewhat
on pretest means. It is also apparent that almost no change
occurs from pre to posttest l, for the four groups. Addi-
tional analyses do not appear to be particularly fruitful,
and thus, the remainder of the analyses will focus on

changes from pre to posttest 2.

38

Table 9.--Test retest correlations

 

 

 

Pre to Pre to
N Posttest 1 Posttest 2

Control group 25

Second-person .27 .52

Third-person .42
Film group 12

Second-person .58 .33

Third-person .43
Tape group 9

Second-person .54 .27

Third-person .62
Live group 19

Second-person .44 .32

Third-person .29
Combined 40
Trained groups

Second-person .53 .37

Third-person .40

 

Table 10.--Changes in performance from pretest to posttest 1

 

 

 

N Pretest Posttest 1 Difference
Film group 12 16.9 16.6 - .3
Tape group 9 17.4 17.0 - .4
Live group 19 14.8 15.5 .7

Control group 25 15.4 15.5 .1

 

39

Matched t-tests were computed for each group from
pre to posttest 2. The results of these comparisons are
shown in Table 11.

Table ll.--Second-person accuracy gains of trained and
untrained groups

 

 

 

 

Group N Pretest Posttest Difference t

Tape 9 17.4 17.8 .4 .31

Film 12 16.9 17.3 4 .39

Control 25 15.4 16.0 .6 1.11

Live 19 14.8 16.6 1.8 1.95*
*p = .10

As can be seen from this table, one of the four com-
parisons approaches significance. The table also illustrates
that the higher the pretest mean, the less the corresponding
increase on posttest 2.

T-tests of the differences between differences were
computed comparing the control group with each of the experi—
mental groups. (Walker and Lev, 1953, p. 158) None of the
comparisons were found to be significant, and the mean in-
crease for the control group was slightly larger than in-
creases in the film and tape groups.

As noted earlier, the groups were initially estab-
lished to insure equality of pretest means. Participation

in the study was voluntary, however, and subject participation

40

was such that differential group means and group size re-
sulted. The tape group, for example, has a significantly
higher mean than the live and control groups. These in-
equalities of pretest means present certain difficulties
in terms of the analyses. The first indication of these
difficulties is seen in Table 11. It appeared that nega-
tive correlations existed between pretest scores and gains
(posttest 2 scores). Pearson r's were computed between pre-
test scores and gains for the four groups. In addition,
the three experimental groups were combined and a correla-
tion was computed; this was also done for the experimental
and control groups in the first study. Table 12 reports

these correlations.

Table 12.--Correlations between pretest scores and gains

 

 

 

N 1:

Study 1

Experimental 36 - .65

Control 36 - .72
Study 2

Film 12 - .69

Tape 9 - .60

Live 19 - .66

Control 25 — .42
Study 2

Combined

Experimental 40 - .68

 

41

Table 12 indicates that substantial negative corre-
lations exist between pretest scores and gains. These
negative correlations, and the unequal pretest means may be
partly obscuring any training impact.

Matching subjects on the basis of pretest scores as
in the first study does not completelyaflleviate the problem,
because, for the most part, matching tends to be based on
subjects who had relatively higher pretest scores. These
subjects are less likely to show gains. In addition, the
small number of subjects in the film and tape groups, re-
stricts the number of possible matches.

Matched t-tests were computed, however, comparing
the differences between the control group and each of the
experimental groups. Table 13 reports the results of these

comparisons.

Table 13.--Second-person accuracy gains of trained and
untrained groups

 

 

Control

 

Compared With N Pretest Posttest t
Film 10
Trained 16.1 16.9
Untrained 16.1 16.4
Difference in Gains .5 .39
Tape 8
Trained 17.1 17.5
Untrained 17.1 17.9
Difference in Gains .6 .40
Live 17
Trained 15.1 16.1
Untrained 15.1 15.6

Difference in Gains .5 .64

 

42

The results shown in this table indicate that
although the differences do not approach Significance, the
trend is for slightly larger increases in performance in
the experimental groups. This slight trend suggested that
if training was effective in producing an increase in per-
formance, it was perhaps a differential effect as a function
of pretest performance.

In order to investigate this possibility, regres-
sion lines for the experimental and control groups were
plotted. They are based on the correlations between pre
and posttest scores. Figure 1 indicates the bivariate
densities for the combined experimental group and for the
control group. In each parallelogram the middle "horizontal"
line is the regression curve itself. The top "horizontal"
line is the regression curve plus 28y x’ and the bottom is
the regression curve minus 28y x’ The two vertical lines

are boundaries on x; the right being § plus 28x, the left

being E minus 28X.*

Figure 1 indicates that subjects in the experimental
group who initially score low, increase their performance
on the posttest to a greater extent than subjects in the
control group. It may also be seen that for relatively
high pretest scores the trend is reversed; though the mag-
nitude is less.

A similar analysis of the men film test data for
the experimental and control groups in study 1 was performed.
This is shown in Figure 2. An examination of Figure 2 in-

dicates a similar trend for greater increases in the

 

*See Appendix E for the data on which Figure 1 and
2 are based.

POSTTEST

43

 

Control Group

Experimental Group ——————

25'
241

23-

21.
20‘
19.

184

17‘
16*

15-

14q

 

131

12'

111

10'

 

 

 

 

A A.
7 j j I I I I r I

8 9 10 ll 12 13 14 15 l6 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
PRETEST

Eigure l.--Regression lines on second-person sensitivity for
the trained and untrained groups in Study 2.

POSTTEST

23
22

21

20

19

18

17
16

15

14

13
12
ll

44

 

Control Group

r Experimental Group -------

 

 

I‘_————__—T-—__-——_‘\

\

 

 

 

8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22
PRETEST

Figure 2.--Regression lines on second-person sensitivity for
the trained and untrained groups in Study 1.

45

experimental group at the lower end of the distribution.
While the difference between the groups is less at the
higher end, the regression lines do not cross.

One further technique for investigating possible
differential training effects is to divide pretest scores
at the 50th percentile and compute t-tests of the differ-
ences between differences. In order to compute these
tests, pretest scores were categorized below 15, above 15,
and at 15. This figure represents the 50th percentile
utilizing the data from both studies as norms.

Table 14 shows the results of the comparisons for
subjects who initially score below the 50th percentile.
Table 14 indicates that in both studies there is a tendency
for the magnitude of change to be greater in the experi-
mental groups.

Table 14.--Second-person accuracy gains of students below
the 50th percentile

 

 

 

Mean
Comparison N Gains df t p
Study 1
Trained 16 3.3
Untrained 16 1.5
Difference in Gains 1.8 30 1.77 <.10 >.05
Study 2
Trained 12 4.1
Untrained 8 1.2
Difference in Gains 2.9 18 2.16 .05

 

46

Similar t—tests were also computed for those sub-
jects who initially score above the 50th percentile. These
are shown in Table 15. Table 15 indicates that no consis-
tent or significant trends are present. Both groups in
the first study, however, show larger losses than the groups
in the second study.

Table 15.--Second-person accuracy gains of students above
the 50th percentile

 

 

 

Mean
Comparison N Gains df t p
Study 1
Trained 13 -2.00
Untrained 13 -2.54
Difference in Gains .54 24 .50 >.75
Study 2
Trained 25 - .76
Untrained 14 .14
Difference in Gains - .90 37 1.01 .30

 

Data were also available for performance on third-
person sensitivity. Table 16 shows the pretest and posttest

means for the four groups.

Table 16.--Third-person accuracy gains of trained and un-
trained groups

-

 

Group N Pretest Posttest Difference
Film 12 17.4 17.4 .0
Tape 9 18.6 18.0 -.6
Live 19 17.2 16.9 -.3

Control 25 16.9 16.6 -.3

 

47

Table 16 indicates that there were no increases in perfor-

mance, and in three of the groups there is a slight decrease.

Discussion and Summary

 

The results of the analyses for changes in perfor-
mance on second-person sensitivity indicate that, generally
speaking, the effects of training were not pronounced. The
general trends seen in the first study were not replicated
in this study. A closer examination of the data, however,
suggested that training was primarily affecting those sub-
jects in the experimental group who scored lower on the pre-
test. This was evidenced by an examination of experimental
and control group regression lines, and by a larger mean
increase in performance of experimental subjects, initially
scoring below the 50th percentile.

Negative correlations found between pretest scores
and gains would predict increases in performance for those
below the 50th percentile; they would not predict the results
of the greater magnitude of gain in the experimental groups.

The question may be raised as to whether these find-
ings may be adequately explained by a simple regression to
the mean. If this were the case, it does not appear that
differential changes in the experimental and control groups

would have been manifested.

48

The results for changes in performance on third-
person sensitivity revealed that training did not increase
performance. One experimental group had the same mean from
pre to posttest, and the other groups showed a decrease in
performance.

The results on the influence of various types of
input materials are somewhat inconclusive. On the one hand,
no significant differences in terms of increased perfor-
mance were found among the experimental groups. This might
indicate that the manner in which information about Others
is presented, during training, is not a critical variable.
On the other hand, the relative lack of overall increases
for the experimental group detracts from the validity of
this interpretation.

The next chapter will discuss the combined findings
of both studies and their consistencies and inconsistencies
with previous research. Limitations of the present studies
and implications for future research, gained from this re-

search, will also be discussed.

CHAPTER IV
DISCUSSION
The Findings of the Studies

The first study yielded relatively unambiguous
findings. Though not statistically significant-for all com-
parisons, the results suggested a trend in the direction of
increased performance on second-person sensitivity as a
function of training. It appeared that training which
stressed practice, participation, and knowledge of results
was explicitly focusing on behavior which individuals im-
plicitly engage in during the course of social interaction,
and enabled judges to increase their performance.

The results of the second study generally failed to
substantiate this conclusion. It was found, however, that
subjects in the experimental groups who initially scored
below the 50th percentile, increased their performance to
a greater extent than the subjects in the control group.
This was also found in the first study. An examination of
the regression lines for the experimental and control groups
in both studies also indicated that it was the lower scorers
in the experimental groups who improved to a greater extent.
The question may be raised as to why training seemed to

have its major impact for these individuals.

49

50

l

The fact that negative correlations were found be-
tween pretest scores and gains may partially explain the
findings. The same may be said for regression to the mean.
Neither of the two, however, would explain the differential
findings for the experimental and control groups.

A number of processes affect, or are part of an
individual's accuracy score; these may be thought of as
variables which individuals bring to the judging situation.
They would include the level and spread of the judge, his
stereotypes, level of assumed similarity, and implicit per-
sonality theories. One can assume that sensitivity is, or
in part, a reflection of correct stereotyping, apprOpriate
levels of assumed similarity, and adequate personality
theories.

As initially conceived, the purpose of training was
to give judges an opportunity to practice making inferences,
discuss reasons why they inferred the way they did, and
receive feedback as to the correctness of their predictions.
The general attempt was to enable judges to explicitly focus
on processes which implicitly are a part of everyday inter-
action. The control groups received general knowledge of
results; they were given their pretest scores, and in the
second study their gains or losses on the posttests. Subjects
in the experimental groups were given the additional Oppor-
tunity to practice making judgments, express reasons for

their judgments,-and to find out if they were correct or not.

51

General knowledge of results seems to have been suf-

ficient to motivate individuals to change. It also appeared
that practice, participation, and more specific knowledge of
results enabled lower scorers to modify incorrect stereo-
types, level Of assumed similarity, and implicit personality
theories. Subjects in the control groups, initially below
the 50th percentile, though they may have been motivated to
change, had little or no Opportunity to check the correct-
ness Of these judgmental processes.

Those who initially score above 15 may have been
less motivated to change because scores higher than this
are above the 50th percentile. Two factors, however, seem
more basic. First, the higher one scores initially, the
less is the probability that gains will be made by changing
responses. This is most true, if subjects gain little dur-
ing training and change responses in a random fashion.
Second, higher scorers may have less to learn; they make
fewer errors and possibly fewer "gross" errors. One explana-
tion, then, for the differential increases may be that lower
scorers make "gross" errors with respect to stereotyping,
assumed similarity, and implicit personality theories. It
appears conceivable that the major impact Of the training
was allowing the judges to correct relatively large errors.

While the above explanation seems plausible, it
does not resolve the problem of why the suggestive overall
trends found in the first study, were much less clearly seen

in the second study. Two major reasons appear tenable.

52

In the first study eight hours were directly or in-
directly devoted to sensitivity training; compared to two
and a half in the second study. One can only speculate as
to what the results would have been if training were con-
ducted for as long a period in the second study.

Another difference existed between the training in
the two studies which may have been important. In the
first study, three of the eight training sessions were spent
by the subjects taking diagnostic tests of components of
sensitivity. Each subject knew his level and spread rating
habits and how much similarity he assumed. He also knew
how these components were related to sensitivity. While
this interpretation must be speculative, because of the
nature of the data, it seems reasonable to assume that
these diagnostic tests added to the effectiveness of the

training in the first study.

Consistencies with Previous Findings

 

Wakeley's research (1961) is closely related to the
present studies. His findings rather clearly indicated that
increases in sensitivity occurred as a result of training.
Our results, while not contradictory, were somewhat less
clear. A number of differences exist between the studies
which make strict comparisons untenable. Wakeley did not
distinguish between second and third-person items in his

criterion as the present research did; the criterion on

53

which Wakeley found significant increases in performance

was not constructed with the idea of eliminating the in-
fluences of stereotype accuracy as ours was; and his train-
ing programs were built around specific principles of the
judging process, while our programs were more general,
stressing principles of learning.

Whether second and third-person sensitivity have
different determinants, as suggested by Bronfenbrenner
e£_§l. (1958) and Grossman (1963) is clouded in our research
by the lack of clear increased performance on second-person
sensitivity for the experimental groups. If increases for
second-person sensitivity were more pronounced and were
coupled with the experimental groups' lack of superior gains
for third-person sensitivity, our results would be more
conclusive.

It was found, however, that changes in performance
for second and third-person sensitivity were not similar.
This was more clearly seen in the first study where both
trained and untrained groups showed trends in the direction
of increases in third-person sensitivity. It may be con-
cluded then, that while no conflicting evidence was found,
no strong support may be offered.

For the effects of different methods Of presenting
information about Others, a similar conclusion appears ap-

propriate. While no differences in gains were found as a

54

function of various inputs, clearer overall results would
have added to the strength of our support for previous
research findings.

The findings for Observational accuracy are rela-
tively clear. Of 12 comparisons within the experimental
and control groups, 11 revealed increases in performance
which were significant at the .01 level or more. While
the nature Of the data precludes specifying precisely why
these increases were found, it is reaSonable to assume
that famifiarization with the test situation enabled the
subjects to develop an apprOpriate set. These results are,
in part, consistent with those of Guilford (1929) and Martin
(1938) who found increases in Observational accuracy for
their trained groups. The findings also agree, however,
with those Of Jenness (1932) who found an increase in his
control group. These previous results, together with the
present findings suggest that increases in observational
accuracy are not necessarily a function of training and can
be achieved relatively easily through exposure and familiar-

ization with the task.

Limitations of the Present Research

 

This section will discuss the samples used in the
studies, the training programs, and the criterion instru-

ment.

55

A possible limitation of the first study was the
lack of strict comparability between the experimental and
control groups. One group was drawn from a psychology of
personality class, while the other was drawn from an indus-
trial psychology course. Differences, not apparent from
our analyses, may have been present.

In the second study all subjects came from the same
population; a psychology of personality class. In this
study,tflmnh no question exists about population compara-
bility. Certain problems were created, however, by sample
differences in pretest means. Future research using larger
groups with more rigid controls to insure equality of pre-
test performance would be desirable.

A chief value of the research was the insights
gained from conducting the training sessions. These relate
both to sensitivity and to implications for future research
with training programs. Though the design of the research
precludes quantitative support, it appeared that individuals
enter training with an array of stereotypes, assumed simi-
larities, and implicit personality theories built up over a
lifetime of making inferences. This became apparent to the
researcher, during training, as subjects expressed reasons
for their answers to the practice problems. Responses such
as; "She is older and Older people are more conservative,"
"She seems to be like me and I feel this way," and "She
seems confident, and confident people are bold," would be

typical of comments expressed by judges during training.

56

During training, judges were given on Opportunity
to check the correctness of their inferences. An individual
might discover that his assumptions about trait relation-
ships were incorrect and attempt to change them. What
became evident, however, was that the training failed to
Offer explicit guidelines for change. This was, perhaps,
the major weakness of the training programs.

For training to be most effective, it would seem
advisable to develOp more explicitly structured programs.
One possibility would be to develop explicit personality
theories. Personality scales could be administered to
subjects and these scales could be factor analyzed to deter-
mine trait factors and correlated clusters. This would
then be presented to the judges during training to replace
or complement their implicit theories.

An additional factor which future research should
consider incorporating into training programs, is the use
of diagnostic tests of various sensitivity components, as
was done in the first study.

In summary, it is suggested that future research
include controls for insuring equality of pretest perfor-
mance; training programs which Offer clear guidelines for
change; and the use of diagnostic tests of sensitivity com-

ponents.

57

The Criterion Problem

The preceding discussion has suggested possible re-
visions for future research. Another area of the present
research which needs to be investigated is the criterion.
Weaknesses hithecriterion.instrument may obscure the effects
Of a sound training program, and artifacts in the instrument
may make a poor program appear worthwhile. The nature of
our data permitted an investigation of the criterion to be
made. Responses to the men film test were item analyzed,
using the data from the first study. From this item analysis
it was possible to investigate, in an exploratory manner,
variables related to the adequacy of the criterion for use
in research on training. A summary of this analysis is re-
ported in Appendix F.

An important consideration is whether the items in
the criterion are too difficult, too easy, or of intermediate
difficulty. It may be, for example, that items relatively
easy or relatively difficult would be less appropriate than
items of intermediate difficulty in assessing the value of
training.

The items for second and third-person sensitivity
were classified as easy, moderate, or difficult. Easy items
were those where 65 percent or more of the subjects in both
the experimental and control groups made correct judgments
on the pretest. For moderate items, the corresponding per-

centage was between 35 and 64; for difficult items the

58

percentage was 0 to 34. On this basis, 54 of the 60 items
were classified; 19 were classified as easy, 23 as moderate,
and 12 as difficult.* In order to investigate possible
relationships between item difficutly and changes in per-
formance, those items where there was a difference Of 10
per cent or less between.the groups, on the pretest, were
selected. Table 17 presents a breakdown of item difficulty
and the extent to which there were differential gains, or

no gains between the groups on the posttest.

Table l7.--Item difficulty and group gains

 

 

 

Item Experimental Control

Difficulty Gain Gain NO Gain Total

Easy 5 2 4 11

Moderate 5 4 3 12

Difficult 4 2 5 11
Total 14 8 12 34

 

The results shown in Table 17 suggest no clear trends with
respect to item difficulty and group gains. It may be, thenfi
that all three ranges of item difficulty should be included

in a criterion which measures the effectiveness of training.

 

*Six items could not be classified because the per-
centages in both the experimental and control groups were
not within the limits of the same difficulty level.

59

Another area of consideration concerns the degree
of difficulty that judges have in differentiating among the
three individuals in the film. The available data suggests
that the subjects had some difficulty differentiating be-
tween the first and third men in the film, (Mr. G. and
Mr. Z.), and had less difficulty with the second man,

(Mr. W). It was evidenced by the finding that on 12 of the
19 easy items, the correct answer was Mr. W. .It was also
suggested by the pattern of responses on the difficult
items. On 9 of the 12 items, a majority of the judges
selected the same incorrect alternative; for five of these
items the correct answer was Mr. G., and for three the
correct answer was Mr. Z. On seven items the incorrectly
chosen alternative reflected confusion between these two
men. That is, if Mr. G. was the correct answer, Mr. Z.
was chosen, and if Mr. Z. was the correct answer, Mr. G.
was chosen. It would seem that for training purposes,
individuals should be.more easily differentiated. This
would be especially true if the experimenter attempts to
construct explicit personality theories for the judges to
use. If judges are learning which traits are correlated,
so that the perception of one trait suggests another, then
it would seem reasonable that the individuals being judged

differ on the trait demensions.

60

Related to the above is the question of whether
judgments should be made for one individual, or among more
than one as in the present criterion. The task presented
to the subjects in our studies appears to be more difficult
than making inferences about individuals one at a time.

For example, matching an individual with his selected self-
descriptive adjective would seem to be complicated if it

was thought that two or more individuals might have selected
the same adjective.

While presenting more than one individual to the
judges might be a difficult task, the presentation of single
individuals presents the problem of dealing with the influences
Of other components such as level and spread.. It would seem
apprOpriate, then, to present more than one individual to
the judges, but at the same time, efforts should be made to
insure that clear differences exist between them.

Based on the analysis of the criterion, the following
tentative suggestions for future research seem apprOpriate:
The criterion should include all levels of item difficulty;
relatively clear differences should exist among the Others
to be judged; and judgments should be made between more than

one individual.

CHAPTER V
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

The present research focused on second-person inter-
personal sensitivity, using a relatively pure measure of the
component. Training was designed to stress practice, parti-
cipation, and knowledge of results; principles found to be
effective in most training programs.. Two studies were con-
ducted. In the first study, a control and experimental
group took two pretests each assessing observational and
interpersonal accuracy. Sound-color films were used to
present the individuals to be judged. The experimental
group received eight one hour training sessions; three Of
which were devoted to taking diagnostic tests of sensitivity
components. Both groups were then posttested on the same
criterion instruments.

Training effectiveness was assessed by matching
experimental and control subjects on the basis Of pretest
scores and computing matched t-tests.

On the basis of the results Of the first study it
was concluded that:

1. Training resulted in a trend of increased perfor-

mance for second-person sensitivity.

61

62

2. The effects of training did-not generalize to
third-person sensitivity, suggesting that second
and third-person sensitivity have different deter-

minants.

3. Anticipated gains in Observational accuracy found
for both groups suggested that familiarization with
the test situation was sufficient to allow subjects
to improve.

A second study was conducted to provide a general
cross validation,to determine the effects of one hour and
two and a half hours Of training, and tO assess the influence
of various types of practice materials on performance.

Subjects were pretested with one.Of the criterion
instruments, matched on the basis of their scores, and ran-
domly assigned to one Of four groups. Each group met twice
and both times was posttested with the same criterion
instrument. The practice materials during.training for
three groups were either sound-color films, tape recordings,
or live interviews; the fourth group served as the control.
Changes in performance were assessed by t-tests.

The results of the second study indicated that:

1. One hour of training did not result in increased

performance.

2. Differences in practice materials did not result

in differential group increases.

3. Training did not result in greater overall gains

for the experimental groups.

63

Additional analyses of second-person sensitivity
were made for the experimental and control groups in both
studies. These were t-tests of the differences between
differences for subjects above and below.the 50th percen-
tile, and an examination of pre to posttest regression
lines. It was found that trained subjects.who initially
scored low increased their performance to a greater extent
than untrained subjects.

The combined results Of both studies were discussed
and it was concluded that:

l. The main effectiveness Of training.was for those
subjects who score low on the pretest. It was sug-
gested that these subjects make larger errors of
stereotyping, assumed similarity, and implicit per-

sonality theories.

2. The differences in overall performance increases
found between the experimental groups in the first
and second studies were probably due to the shorter
amount of training and absence of diagnostic tests

in the second study.

3. Training was effective in enabling subjects to
practice making inferences, discuss their reasons
for specific inferences, and to determine whether
or not they were correct. The major limitation of
the training was a lack of explicit guidelines for

changing and correcting interpersonal inferences.

It was suggested that future training programs pro-
vide subjects with a clear framework for change. Construct-
ing empirically derived explicit personality theories was

Offered as one technique.

REFERENCES

Bronfenbrenner, U., Harding, J. and Gallway, Mary. The
measurement of skill in social perception. In:
D.C. McClelland (Ed), Talent.and Society. New York:
Van Nostrand, 1958, 29-111.

 

Bruner, J.S. and Tagiuri, R. The perception Of people. In:
G. Lindzey (Ed), Handbook Of Social Psychology,
Vol. 2. Cambridge, Mass.: Addison-Wesley, 1954,
634-654.

Bruni, E. A Film Test Accuracy in Observing People and
Its Correlates. Master's thesis, Michigan State
University, 1963.

Buzby, D.E. The interpretation of facial expresSion.
Amer. J. Psychol. 1942, 55, 602-604.

 

Cline, V.B. Ability to judge personality assesSed with a
stress interview and sound film technique. 5.
abnorm. soc. Psychol. 1955, 59, 183-187.

 

., and Richards, J. M. Accuracy of interpersonal
perception-—a general trait? J. abnorm. soc. Psychol.
1960, 52, 1-7. ’

 

 

Cronbach, L.J. Processes affecting scores on "understanding
Of others" and "assumed similarity.". Psychol. Bull,
1955, 53, 177-193.

 

Crow, W.J. The effect of training upon accuracy and vari-
ability in interpersonal perception. J. abnorm. soc.
Psychol., 1957, 51, 355-359.

 

., and Farson, R.E. The effect of sensitivity
training upon accuracy and variability in judging
others. Western Behavioral Sciences Institute
Report NO. 9, 1961. II

 

 

 

., And Hammond, K.R. The generality of accuracy
and response sets in interpersonal perception.
J. abnorm. soc. Psychol., 1957, 55, 384-394.

 

Dymond, Rosalind F. A scale for measurement of empathic
ability. J. consulthsychol., 1949, 55, 127-133.

 

64

65
Edwards, A.L. Experimental Design in Psychological Research.~
New York: Holt, Rinehart.and Winston, 1962.

Estes, S.G. Judging personality from expressive behavior.
J. abnorm. soc. Psychol. 1938, 55,.217-236.

 

Gage, N.L. Judging interests from expressive behavior.
Psychol- Monographs., 1952, 55, NO. 18. (whole no.
350). ‘

 

., and Cronbach, L.J.; Conceptual and.methodological
problems in interpersonal perception. Psychol Rev.-

., Leavitt, G.S. and Stone, G.C. The intermediary
key in the analysis of interpersonal perception.
Psychol. Bull., 1956, 55, 258-266.

 

Giedt, F.H.( Comparison of visual, content, and auditory
cues in interviewing, Journal of Consulting ng-
chology., 1955, 55, 407-416.

., Cues associated with accurate and inaccurate
interview impressions. Psychiatry, 1958, El, 405-
409.

Grossman, B. A Test of Interpersonal Sensitivity and Its
Correlates. Master's thesis, Michigan State Uni-
versity, 1963.

 

Guilford, J.P. An experiment in learning to read facial
expression. J. abnorm. soc. Psychol., 1929, 31,
191-202. ‘

 

Hastorf, A.H. and Bender, I.E. A caution regarding the
measurement of empathic ability. J. abnorm soc.

Jenness, A. The recognition of facial expression. Psy-
chol. Bull. 1932, 25, 324-350.

 

Kelley, E.L. and Fiske, D.W. The Prediction of Performance
in Clinical Psychology. Ann Arbor, Michigan:
The University of Michigan Press, 1951.

 

Kessen, W. The role of experience in judging children's
photographs. J. abnorm. soc. Psychol., 1957, 51,
375-379.

Lindgreen, H.C. and Robinson, J. An evaluation of Dymond's
test of insight and empathy. J. counsulting Psychol.,
1953, ll, 172-176.

 

66
Luft, J. Implicit hypotheses and clinical predictions. 5.,
abnorm. soc. Psychol., 1950, 55, 756-759.

Lundy, RaM. Assimilative projection in interpersonal per-
ceptions. J. abnorm. soc. Psychol., 1956, 55, 33-38.

 

Martin, H.W. Effects of practice on judging various traits
Of individuals. Psychol. Bull., 1938, 55, 690.
(Abstract).

Miles, M.B. Human relations training: processes and out-
comes. J. counseling Psychol., 1960, 1, 301-306.

Oskamp, S. The relationship of clinical experience and
training methods to several criteria of clinical
prediction. PsycholnMonographs., 1962, 76, NO. 27
whole. _—

Rolanski, N.A. How shall a life history be written.
Character and Personality. 1940-41, 5, 188-207.

Rabin, A.I. Szondi's pictures: identification of a diag-
nosis. J. abnorm. soc. Psychol., 1950, 55, 392-395.

Smith, H.C. Sensitivity to PeOple. New York: McGraw-Hill,
1966. (in press).

 

Soskin, W.F. Bias in postdiction from projective tests.
J. abnorm. soc. Psychol., 1954, 55, 69-74.

.' Influence of four types of data on diagnostic
conceptualization in psychological testing. 5.
abnorm. soc. Psychol., 1959, 55, 69-78.

Stelmachers, Z.T. and McHugh, R.B., Contributions of stereo-
typed and individualized information to predictive
accuracy.) QLCOunsulingPsychol., 1964, 55, 234-242.

Taft, R. The ability to judge people. Psychol. Bull., 1955,
55, 1-23.

Tobolski, F. P. and Kerr, W. A. Predictive value of the
empathy test in automobile salesmanship. J. applied
Psychol., 1952, 55, 310-311.

 

Wakeley, J. H. The Effects of Specific Training on Accuracy
in Junding Others. Ph.D. dissertation, Michigan State
University, 1963.

Walker, Helen M. and Lev, J. Statistical Inferences. New
York: Henry HOlt and Co., 1953.

Wendell, C. and Smith, K.V., Consistency of interview methods
in appraisal of attitudes. J. applied Psychol.,

APPENDICES

APPENDIX A

The Criterion Instruments

1. The men film test

2. The women film test

70 EB. BG/HS
February, 1963

THE JUDGMENT OF MEN

GENERAL DIRECTIONS:

This is a test of your ability to judge men. You
are going to see five-minute filmed interviews with
three men: Mr. G, Mr. W., and Mr. Z. When the film
is over you will be asked to answer questions about
what they looked like and said and also to answer
questions about how they rated themselves and what
their friends think of them. That is, the test is
divided into two parts:

Part I. Observational Accuracy
Part II. Inference Accuracy

Instructions for Part I

 

This part of the test is concerned with the appear-
ance, actions, and conversation of the three men.
The statements in the test are of the following kinds:

He had a red hat
He smiled frequently
He said he liked to play chess

Answer the questions by using spaces 1,2,3, and 4
on the separate answer sheet:

Mark "1" if you think the correct answer is
Mr. G. (the man in the first inter-
View)

Mark "2" if you think the correct answer is
Mr. W. (the man in the second inter-
view)

Mark "3" if you think the correct answer is
Mr. Z. (the man in the third inter-
view)

Mark "4" if you think the statement applies
to none of the three men.

DO all the items and try not to leave any blank.

DO NOT TURN THIS PAGE UNTIL THE FILM IS FINISHED
INSTRUCTIONS FOR PART 2 FOLLOW PART I

71

PART I

OBSERVATIONAL ACCURACY

Appearance and Actions

The first thirty statements refer to the appearance and
actions Of the men. REMEMBER to use "1" for Mr. G.,
"2" for Mr. W., "3" for Mr. 2., and “4" for statements
that refer to none of the men.

Correct
Answers

He smiled frequently.

He kept wringing his hands.

His shirt and jacket were the same color.
He left quickly.

He shook the interviewer's hand when he entered.
He wore a knit white pullover shirt.

He wore a wedding ring.

He sat far back from the table.

He gave a quick smile upon leaving.

He put his left hand to his chin.

He had a rather high forehead.

12. He did not change his facial expression.
13. His eyes appeared to be red.

14. He had a nervous stutter.

15. His elbows were on the table.

\ocoqoxmwar-J
I

l—‘
O
O

N-bWHI—‘Nwaw-bwl—‘tbw
|_-
H
O

16. He folded a piece Of paper.

17. He had a very soft voice.

18. He moved his chair forward.

19. His hands were in his lap most of the time.

20. He sat sideways to the interviewer.

21. He was wearing a shiny belt.

22. There was a birthmark on his upper lip.

23. He wore a tan sport jacket.

24. He needed to shave.

25. He covered his mouth.

26. There was a pen or pencil in his hand.

27. He had a pen clipped to his shirt.

28. His hair was parted on the right.

29. He wore a turtle-neck sweater.

30. He did not shift his body at all during the
interview.

Hub-bbNNNUNwwwob-MH

72

Conversation

 

The following statements refer to what the interviewees
said. Remember to use “1" for Mr. G, "2" for Mr. W,
"3" for Mr. Z, and "4" for none of them.

Correct
Answers
2 31. He did not want to talk about himself.
1 32. He would sometimes go to a person who lied about him.
4 33. Being in movies make him nervous.
2 34. He is not very athletic.
4 35. People don't need religion.
1 36. He has been in home movies.
2 37. He keeps his emotions in check.
4 38. He never attends church.
1 39. He likes dancing.
4 40. He likes being married.
2 41. Moral teachings are important to most peOple.
3 42. He would get "sore" if someone lied about him.
1 43. People need a basic belief.
l 44. It is good to get along with people.
2 45. He likes music.

46. He is an average person.

47. He likes to "play around."

48. He wouldn't like it if his brother took his car.
49. Religion is not a major issue to him.

50. He said that people have a big conscience.

51. Religion keeps him from things he feels like doing.
52. He never goes to parties.

53. He has few friends.

54. Only a mean or big thing makes him lose his temper.
55. He gets along well with intimate friends.

56. Religion is important to him.

57. He said that he doesn't mind being in movies.

58. It is important to have a hobby.

59. He likes summer sports.

60. He is disturbed at the way people get after parties.

WobrbwwNwaWWHWl-‘H

73
PART II
INFERENCE ACCURACY

INSTRUCTIONS:

All the men in the film filled out a series of attitude and
personality scales. Their friends rated them on a series

of traits and also gave sketches of them. The statements
below are based on the answers that the men and their friends
gave. When you answer the questions, use only spaces 1, 2,
and 3, on the IBM sheets. The numbers correspond to the
order in which the interviews appeared. That is, Mr. G is
(1), Mr. W. is (2), and Mr. Z. is (3). In other words, if
you think the answer to a particular question is:

Mr. G. mark "1"
Mr. W. mark "2"
Mr. Z. mark "3"

The correct answers are known from the attitude scales and
other tests that the interviewed men filled out. Also, the
correct answers are equally distributed among the three men.

Religious Beliefs

(1) Mr. G., (2) Mr. W., and (3) Mr. 2., filled out a rating
scale about their religious beliefs. Which one answered in
the following manner?

Correct
Answers

2 61. Agreed that "I am unable to accept the idea of
'life after death' at least not until we have
some definite evidence there is such a thing."

3 62. Agreed that "God will punish those who disobey
his commandments and reward those who Obey Him
(either in this life or a future life)."

2 63. Disagreed that "There exists an evil intelli-
gence, personnage, or spirit in the universe
often referred to as Satan or the Devil."

74

Adjective Check List

 

The three men were each given pairs Of adjectives and were
asked to choose the one which they thought was a better
description of themselves. In each of the pairs below only
one of the men checked the adjective underlined. Mark "1"
if you think it was Mr. G., "2“ if you think it was Mr. W.,
or "3" if you think it was Mr. Z.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Correct
Answers
2 64. Arrogant - apathetic
2 65. Progressive - outgoing
3 66. 55y - assertive
1 67. Steady - spunky
l 68. Tolerant - ingenious
l 69. Stable - robust
1 70. Practical - charming
3 71. Contented - quick
1 72. Warm - forceful
1 73. Moderate - artistic
2 74. Restless - unemotional
3 75. Sincere - original
1 76. Good-natured - painstaking
3 77. Kind - insightful
l 78. Changeable - tense
3 79. Loyal - clever
3 80. Considerate - sharp-witted
1 81. Foolish -"Eynica1

Personality Inventory Items

 

(1) Mr. G., (2) Mr. W., and (3) Mr. Z. were given a series
of true-false items. Which one of the three answered false
to these items?

Correct
Answers

3 82. I like to be the center Of attention.
3 83. It is easy for me to talk to strangers.
2 84. At times I think I am no good at all.

Which one of the three answered true to these items?

2 85. I easily become impatient with people.

1 86. I take a pretty easy-going and lighthearted
attitude toward life.

2 87. My hardest battles are with myself.

75

3 88. Policemen are usually honest.

3 89. I seldom have quarrels with the members of my
family.

1 90. I do not always tell the truth.

Thumbnail Sketches by Friends

 

Friends of (1) Mr. G., (2) Mr. W., and (3) Mr. Z. also gave
thumbnafldescriptions of them. Which one was described as
follows?

Correct
Answers
2 91. "Is in a state of rebillion against all religions."
2 92. "Enjoys almost all good art and music."
3 93. "Does quite poorly in speaking to groups."
2 94. "Rather fussy about what he eats and how it is
prepared.
3 95. "Is shy and reserved at parties."
3 96. "Prefers going steady with one person."
3 97. "Rather easy-going with no great ambition."
l 98. "Is fairly easy-going with his children."
1 99. "Raises voice a little but maintains control in
family arguments."
l 100. "Is about average in regards to ambition."
2 101. "Somewhat insecure and highstrung."
1 102. "Is easy to get along with."
3 103. "Is a rather quiet and humble person."
3 104. "Loyal, honest, and kind."
1 105. "Enjoys himself at parties, but is not much

noticed."
106. "Very reliable and hard working."
107. "Avoids emotional scenes with people because
they make him feel most uncomfortable."
2 108. "Tends to 'stew' about things, changes his mind
back and forth before making final decisions."

N00

Ratings by Friends

(1) Mr. G., (2) Mr. W., (3) Mr. 2., were rated by their
friends on a series Of personality traits. Which one was
rated as follows?

109. least affectionate
110. most rebellious
111. least shy

112. least friendly
113. least egotistical
114. most careful

115. least ambitious

116. least realistic

117. least confident

118. most egotistical
119. least rebellious
120. least careful

(JLJNBOBJN
Hranamcth

2/11/63 ht

76 EB. BG/HS

February, 1963

THE JUDGMENT OF WOMEN

GENERAL DIRECTIONS

This is a test of your ability to judge women. You
are going to see five-minute filmed interviews with
three women: Mrs. D., Mrs. N., and Mrs. P. When
the film is over you will be asked to answer ques-
tions about what they looked like and said and also
to answer questions about how they rated themselves
and what their friends think of them. That is, the
test is divided into two parts:

Part I. Observational Accuracy
Part II. Inference Accuracy

Instructions for Part I

 

This part of the test is concerned with the appear-
ance, actions, and conversation of the three women.

The statements in the test are of the following kinds:

She had a red hat.
She smiled frequently.
She said she liked to play tennis.

Answer the questions by using spaces 1, 2, 3, and 4
on the separate answer sheet:

Mark "1" if you think the correct answer is
Mrs. D. (the woman in the first
interview)

Mark "2" if you think the correct answer is
Mrs. N. (the woman in the second
interview)

Mark "3“ if you think the correct answer is
Mrs. P. (the woman in the third
interview)

Mark "4" if you think the statement applies
to none of the three women.

Please answer all the statements, leaving none blank.

DO NOT TURN THIS PAGE UNTIL THE FILM IS FINISHED

INSTRUCTIONS FOR PART II FOLLOW PART I

77

PART I

Appearance and Actions

 

The first sixty statements refer to the appearance and
actions of the women. REMEMBER to use “1" for Mrs. D.,
"2" for Mrs. N., "3" for Mrs. P. and "4" for statements
that refer to none Of the women.

Correct
Answers
1 1. She wore short sleeves.
4 2. She wore a necklace.
l 3. She faced the camera directly.
1 4. Her hair was messy and uncombed.
2 5. She wore a ring on her right hand.
2 6. She smiled very infrequently.
3 7. Her hands were below the table.
1 8. She clenched her fingers.
3 9. She had very thin eyebrows.
4 10. She straightened her glasses.
1 11. She leaned back in her chair.
3 12. Her hair was turned under on the ends.
1 13. She had a long thin neck.
4 14. She had to clear her throat.
2 15. She spoke slowly and softly.

16. Her coat had a button undone.

17. She looked down as she left.

18. She nervously tugged at her collar.
19. She wore shiny silver earrings.

20. Her ring had a dark colored stone.
21. Her watch had a gold strap on it.
22. She wore no lipstick.

23. She had waves in her hair.

24. She used no hand gestures at all.
25. She took something from the table as she left.
26. She gestured with both hands.

27. She carried no purse.

28. She wore no earrings.

29. She put her gloves on the table.

30. She sat sideways to the interviewer.

NhI—Iwr-wamppwwaww

78

Conversation

 

The remaining statements refer to what the interviewees said.
Remember to use "1" for Mrs. D., "2" for Mrs. N., "3" for
Mrs. P., and "4" for none of them.

 

Correct
Answers
2 31. She wished she had more patience.
4 32. She reads a great deal.
1 33. She expects people to be inconsiderate.
4 34. She has few friends.
2 35. Religion makes people better.
4 36. In her spare time she works in her home.
2 37. It is a problem for her to put up with 10

other employees.

1 38. Religion is something to cling to and depend on.

3 39. She loses her temper when she's tired and nervous.

4 40. She thinks religious persons don't lose their
temper.

3 41. Religion should be the greatest thing in the
home.

4 42. She has no time for hobbies.

3 43. She would give money for mentally disturbed
people.

1 44. She never gets finished with housework.

3 45. She thinks she is quite a hard worker.

2 46 She loses her temper Often.

3 47. She would laugh off a lie told about her.

2 48. Religion should be "over 50% Of one's life."

2 49. One of her handicaps is lack of time to do what
she wants to do.

4 50. She thinks there is good in everyone.

1 51. She tends to control her temper too much.

2 52. Her work is in the field Of religion.

3 53. Remembering names is her greatest problem.

4 54. She can't control her temper.

1 55. The inconsiderateness of people makes her lose
her temper.

1 56. A lie would make her mad.

4 57. Her greatest problem is neglecting her family.

1 58. She likes to do things that are creative.

2 59. She agreed that she is "very busy."

3 60. Religion is important in her home.

79

PART II

INFERENCE ACCURACY

INSTRUCTIONS:

All the women in the film filled out a series of attitude
and personality scales. Their friends rated them on a
series of traits and also gave sketches of them. The state-
ments below are based on the answers that the women and
their friends gave. When you answer the questions, use

only spaces 1, 2, and 3, on the IBM sheets. The numbers
correspond to the order in which the interviews appeared.
That is, Mrs. D. is (1), Mrs. N. is (2), and Mrs. P. is (3).
In other words, if you think the answer to a particular
question is:

Mrs. D. mark "1"
Mrs. N. mark "2"
Mrs. P. mark "3"

The correct answers are known from the attitude scales and
other tests that the interviewed women filled out. Also,
the correct answers are equally distributed among the
three women.

Religious Beliefs

 

(1) Mrs. D., (2) Mrs. N., (3) Mrs. P., filled out a rating
scale about their religious beliefs and values. Which one
of the three would have made the following statements?

Correct
Answers

1 l. Agreed that "While God may exist, it is quite
difficult for me to accept such a fact without
some definite proof."

1 2. Most strongly agreed that "PeOple don't neces-
sarily have to believe in God in order to lead
good lives and have a high system of ethics and
morals."

2 3. Most strongly agreed that "God will punish those
who disobey his commandments and reward those
who Obey Him (either in this life or a future
life)."

2. 4. Most strongly agreed that "When in doubt, I have
usually found it best to stop and ask God for
guidance."

80

l 5. Agreed least that "I have sometimes been very
conscious of the presence of God."
2 6. Most strongly agreed that "NO one.who has ex-

perienced God like I have could doubt his
existence."

2 7. Most strongly agreed that "I have sometimes
been very conscious of the presence of God."

Adjective Check List

(1) Mrs. D., (2) Mrs. N., (3) Mrs. P. filled out a form
which contained a number of pairs of adjectives. They
were asked to check the adjective in the pair which most
closely fit themselves. Which one checked the underlined
adjective in the following pairs?

Correct
Answers

8. Conservative - excitable

9. Talkative - boastful
10. Curious - pleasure seeking
11. Reliable - feminine

12. Interests wide - efficient
l3. Impulsive - forgetful
14. Original - quiet
15. Spontaneous - attractive
l6. Unconventional - unassuming
17. UnderstanaIng - timid
18. Fairminded’- sharp-witted
19. Unselfish - cool

20. Moderate - silent
21. Healthy - tough
22. Contented - progressive
23. Changeable - submissive
24. 5ympathetic - charming
25. Sincere - warm
26. Courageous - rational
27. Practical - wholesome
28. FrIendl — humorous
29. POised - moderate
30. Capable - obliging

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

WWNNWNWHNWNWNNHHHl—‘HNHHN

D.,

81

Thumbnail Sketches

 

(2) Mrs. N., (3) Mrs. P., were described by

their friends. Which one was described as follows?

(1) Mrs.
Correct
Answers
1 31.
1 32.
2 33.
3 34.
2 35.
1 36.
3 37.
2 38.
3 39.
3 40.
2 41.
2 42.
l 43.
1 44.
(1) Mrs.

D.,

"Emotionally possessed Of considerable mood
swings (happy or very unhappy)."

"Is very friendly tO everybody at social
gatherings and enjoys herself very much.“
"Always on time."

"Maintains quite firm and strict discipline with
her children."

"Very conscientious and responsible."

"Likes to be with people who like her when she
feels blue."

"A very generous and warm hearted person."
"Handles and budgets money extremely well."

"Is exceptionally sound and stable with regard
to her emotional and mental health."

"An exceptionally hard working and energetic
person."

"A very stable, well balanced woman."

"Weighs things quite carefully before making

a decision."

"Resents her husband's criticism and gets upset."
"Is open and warm in showing affection to people."

Ratings by Friends

 

(2) Mrs. N., (3) Mrs. P. were rated by their

friends on a series Of personality traits. Which one was
rated as follows?

Nr-FJNtOUJFWABJFW-bomtvk4H

45.
46.
47.
48.
49.
50.
51.
52.
53.
54.
55.
56.
57.
58.
59.
60.

least cooperative
least confident
most careful

least unrealistic
most stubborn
least friendly
least ambitious
most affectionate
least affectionate
most shy

least egotistical
least rebellious
least stubborn
most unrealistic
least careful
least impractical 2/20/63 ht

APPENDIX B

Training Materials for the First Study

1. The
2. The
3. The
4. The
5. The
6. The
7. The
8. The

first training session
second training session
third training session
fourth training session
fifth training session
sixth training session
seventh training session

eighth training session

83 H. C. Smith
November, 1959
TRAINING SESSION 1

 

THE CASE OF BORIS*

Boris is a strong and tall college student Of 21.
Although somewhat above average in intelligence, he has a
very poor academic record. He is popular, handsome, and
somewhat spoiled by women. His father is an alert and
Opportunistic Irish businessman who is now doing very well
with a garage on the outskirts of Chicago. His mother is
a muscular woman who weighs 175 pounds, never misses a
National League ball game, and loves to gamble. Boris was
rarely punished by his father but was repeatedly whipped
by his mother.

Boris is extremely active and almost tireless. He
seldom sleeps more than six hours, is up by 5:30 A.M. and
likes to start the day with a cold shower. Exercise is
carried on regularly and with almost perfect routine. He
has a punching bag which he carries about with him and sets
up wherever he goes. When possible, he likes a regular gym
workout for about three hours each morning and for two more
hours in the late afternoon. If he does not get his exercise,
he becomes irritable, uncomfortable, and sometimes depressed.
He is fond of stunt flying and automobile racing and had
found opportunities to take part in both.

For each of the statements below indicate whether you think
it is "true" or "false."

Boris was slow is learning to walk.

He could ride a bicycle when he was four.

He now feels that he should have been whipped

a good deal more during his childhood.

He reads much less than the average student.

He is polite and considerate.

He has many close friends.

He is generally patient with peOple.

He is bothered by insomnia.

. He likes to confide in others.

10. He sleeps nude and swims nude when he can.

11. He likes to go swimming outside in the winter.

12. He prefers to sleep on the floor without a mattress.

13. He is unusually concerned and disturbed about
sexual matters.

14. He appears unable to express feeling except in a
violent outburst.

F 15. Sheldon, the psychologist who dealt with Boris,

felt that he should have been much more firmly

disciplined as a child.

LONi-J
o o o

F
F
F

FBI-388888868 Ell-3P3
koooqoxme.

W’fl'fl'flm'fl’fl’fi'fl'fi

V-J
'11

 

*From: Sheldon, W. H. (1945) Varieties of Temperament,
N.Y.: Harper, pp. 121-146.

 

84
H. C. Smith
December, 1957

Name

 

Group

 

Directions: Read each case. For each statement put "T“ in
the space in front of the number of the statement if you
think it is true; "F" if you think it is false.

THE CASE OF AGNES NELSON

Agnes Nelson is a teacher in a small midwestern
university. She is unmarried and in her mid-fifties. A
devoted teacher, she enjoys her work and takes a personal
interest in all her students. She is blind in one eye but
covers her handicap well.

The third oldest in a family of eight, she is the
only one to have a college education. As a child, she would
hide somewhere in order to read books instead of doing house-
work. Since her parents came from northern EurOpe in 1900,
two languages were spoken in the home. Her father was an
iron miner, and the family lived in a small company house in
a small company town. Her parents were very strict with the
children. They encouraged the children to quit school and
go to work. Her sisters and brothers are now married and
live within a short distance of the family home.

Agnes is active in the university's social life with
other single women her age. She is a gracious hostess and
does everything to perfection. Her hobby is interior decora-
tion and her apartment is just like a magazine feature story
on interior decoration.

***
__1.__ Grammatical errors that family members make bother
her.
2. All of her family are proud of her accomplishments.

What other people would think is very important to
her in planning her activities.

4. Agnes readily shows her affection for her family.
Sex discussions do not embarrass her.

Agnes was very hurt when aniece married instead of
following in her footsteps.

7. Her career has always been more important than
marriage.

ll.

85

She enjoys housework.

She likes and approves Of all her sisters- and
brothers-in-law.

She has invested money in the stock market.

She has travelled over most of the United States.
She is not a good cook.

Her sisters ask her advice when buying clothes.
She tries to visit all her brothers.and sisters
whenever she is at the family home.

She favors labor unions.

11/27/57 js

86

THE CASE OF SMITH
DIRECTIONS:

The present instructor filled out the Strong Vocational
Interest Blank several years ago. Among other things, he
indicatedia liking for about half of the following items,
disliking for the other half. Answer "1" for those which
you think he expressed a liking, "2" for those for which
you think he expressed a dislike.

 

 

___ l. ___ Sales Manager
___ 2. ___ Secretary, Chamber of Commerce
___ 3. ___ Life Insurance Salesman
___ 4. ___ Continually changing activities
___ 5. ____ Auto Salesman
___ 6. ___ .Actor
___ 7. ___ Golf
___ 8. ___ Carpenter
.___ 9. ___ Algebra
___10. ___ Tennis
___11. ___ Entertaining others
'___12. ___ Living in the city
___13. ___ Certified Public Accountant
___14. ___ Sculptor
15. Picnics

11/7/58 JM

87
H. C. Smith

TRAINING SESSION 2

THE CASE OF FRED AND JOHN*

Fred, and John, identical twins, had very similar
backgrounds and personality. Their father, an unsuccessful
and alcoholic son Of a well-to-do New England manufacturer,
had gone to Cuba to make his fortune. He failed there as a
farmer, and also failed in Florida where the family had moved
when the boys were four. He eventually returned to New
England to live with the twins' grandmother. The mother Of
the twins was industrious and long-suffering. Though she
was, for the most part, responsible for rearing the children,
their father was sporadically a demanding and cruel disci-
plinarian. The twins left school after the eighth grade and
went to work in the same factory on semiskilled jobs. They
are working at identical jobs today. They have the same eye
and hair color and look very much alike. Both have type 0 and
Rh positive blood. Both are shy, dependent, passive, and
anxious.

The twins came to the attention of physicians at the
age Of 46 because John had developed a severe duodenal ulcer
while Fred remained in good health. Two psychiatrists and a
gastroenterologist interviewed both twins. They saw John for
a total of 25 hours and Fred for six. Stomach X-rays were
studied and blood pepsin levels as a reflection of gastric
secretion were determined. One psychologist administered an
intelligence test, the Rorschach Inkblot Test, and the Thematic
Apperception Test, and a second psychologist, who knew nothing
about the twins, interpreted the results.

For each of the statements below indicate the name Of the twin
to whom you think the statement applies. Use "F" for Fred and
"J“ for John.

'11

1. Had better understanding of himself and of other
people.

2. Was a warmer and more tender person.

3. Was readier to accept blame.

4. Worked harder to keep a brighter view of himself

and others.

He reacts to frustration with anxiety and anger

more easily and intensely than his brother.

Showed greater hatred of his father.

. Described his wife as a good cook and mother.

'11 "IJ'EI'EI
C—I LIE-IQ CI
U'l

”1'11
CAL:
le

 

*From: Pilot, M. L., Lenkoski, D., Spiro, H. M.,
and Schafer, R. (1957) Duodenal ulcer in one of identical
twins. Psychosomatic Medicine, May-June.

 

88

Was more resentful that their mother had not
given them more from the $100,000 she inherited
about ten years ago.

'11
q
m

F J 9. Got into more arguments.

F J 10. Was more Optimistic.

F J 11. He was more stubborn.

F J 12. He showed more competitiveness in his relation-
ships with his brother.

F J 13. While the level Of gastric secretion was much

higher than normal in both twins, his level was
higher than his brother's.

F J 14. One of his son's has a scholarship at an ivy
league university.
F J 15. Learned that his wife had been carrying on an

affair with an Older man.

THE CASE OF EARL AND FRANK*

Earl and Frank, identical twins, were born in a
Midwestern city of uneducated and unmarried parents. When
the boys were six months old, they were turned over to their
mother's sister. She kept Frank but placed Earl with a
family who had advertised their wish to board a baby. This
family soon assumed full responsibility for Earl and took
him to a city in the Northwest without consulting the aunt
of the boys. Earl's foster father was a college graduate
and a successful salesman; Frank is a streetcar conductor.
Earl graduated from college; Frank attended high school only
six months though later he attended night school. Earl was
raised in comfort; Frank was brought up with little economic
security in the neighborhood where he was born by his fond
aunt. Both twins had happy homes with only moderate disci-
pline.

They were both interviewed and tested by psychologists
in 1941 when they were 37 years Old. The boys did not see
each other after they were separated until they were 15 and
did not know they were twins until they were 23. At the time
of the study the twins were living in the same suburban com-
munity. Two psychologists made personality ratings of the
twins based on their interviews with them. Ratings were also
obtained from their wives. Both took the Binet Intelligence
Test, the Rorschach Inkblot Test, and the Strong Vocational
Interest Test.

The twins were remarkably similar in many respects:
same height, same hair, same finger prints, same good health,
same poor spelling, same ratings on many personality traits,
very similar vocational interest scores, etc. In some respects,
however, they were different- ' -

*From: Burks, Barbara S. and Roe, Anne, (1949) Studies
of Identical Twins Reared Apart, 62, NO. 5.

 

89

For each Of the statements indicate the name of the twin to
whom you think the statements applies. Use "E“ for Earl and
"F" for Frank.

E F 1. Was more energetic.

E F 2. Had an IQ of 83 while his brother had an IQ of 96.

E F 3. Was warmer in his personal relations.

E F 4. Spoke of his brother with condescension.

E F 5. Was less pompous and affected.

E F 6. Had a higher score on the minister vocational
interest scale.

E F 7. Was more interested in athletics.

E F 8. Was more "cagey," less willing to give himself
away.

E F 9 Was bothered by the gap between his aspirations
and his ability to achieve them.

E F 10. Was less stable emotionally.

E F 11. Was more self-conscious.

E F 12. Said that what he wanted most in life was a
good business with men working for him.

E F 13. Said that what he wished for most was the happi-
ness of his family.

E F 14. Was more cooperative with the psychologists.

E F 15. Was more eager to impress people.

Dr. Smith and Mr. Kepes both completed the Strong
Vocational Interest Blank. They indicated their likes and
dislikes for a number Of occupations, academic interests,
and amusements. Many of their interests were similar; some
were not. The following 30 items are a sample of those that
were not similar. For each Of these interest areas circle S
if you think Smith liked the item, and circle K if you think
Kepes liked the item. Circle each item only once.

1. S K Actor (not movie) 16. S K Ship Officer
2. S K Advertiser 17. S K Statistician
3. S K Architect 18. S K Stock broker
4. S K Astronomer 19. S K Algebra

5. S K Auctioneer 20. S K Art

6. S K Buyer of merchandise 21. S K Botony

7. S K Employment manager 22. S K Chemistry

8. S K Lanscape gardner 23. S K Geography

9. S K Lawyer (criminal) 24. S K Geology
10. S K Manufacturer 25. S K Philosophy
11. S K Orchestra conductor 26. S K Shop work
12. S K Physician 27. S K Zoology

13. S K Poet 28. S K Taking long walks
14. S K Real estate salesman 29. S K Chess

15. S K Sculptor 30. S K Bridge

90

TRAINING SESSION 3

 

Name

 

The Observation of Men

You are going to see interviews with three men:
Mr. B., Mr. G., and Mr. K. Each individual will be inter-
viewed three times. After each has been interviewed once,
you will answer a series of questions about what they said.
There are three parts to this exercise and the directions
are the same for each part.

Mark "B" if you think the correct answer is Mr. B. (The
first one interviewed).

Mark "G" if you think the correct answer is Mr. G. (The
second one interviewed).

Mark "K" if you think the correct answer is Mr. K. (The
third one interviewed).

Mark "N" if you think the statement applies to none of

the men.
PART I

1.___ He has a 4.00 honor point average.

2.___ He was born in Cambridge Mass.

3.___ He has a minor in social-psychology.

4.___ His first name is Burt.

5.___ He attended the University of California.

6.___ He has earned over 100 graduate credits.

72... He has had a fellowship.

8.___ He attended the University of Iowa.

9.____ His Masters Thesis was on sensitivity.
10.___ He hOpes to be finished with school in one year.
11.___ His Major is experimental psychology.

12.____ He has a Minor in counseling psychology.
l3.___ His Masters Thesis was on neurotic behavior.
14. He was born in Detroit.

15. His first name is Bob.

ll.

12.

13.

14.

15.

91

PART II

He finds it difficult to make friends.

He said he would like to Operate a college bar.
He began dating when he was 14.

He said his parents are upper-lower class.

His father owns a meat market.

He thought proseminar was his most difficult
graduate course.

He wants many friends, instead of a few close ones.
He is married.

He is a Republican.

He belonged to a high school fraternity.

He is interested in antique cars.

His parents are both happy about his interest in
psychology, but don't completely understand it.

His parents never really said anything either way
about his going to college.

His father is a union Official.

He said the learning section of proseminar was
the graduate course he most enjoyed.

10.
11.
12.

13.

14.

15.

92

PART III

He is not in favor of medicare.

He feels our sexual morals are declining.

As a child, his parents were not strict with him.
He has earned a B.S. and an M.A. in college.

He said his friends would describe him as con-
ceited and aloof.

Driving his sports car makes him happy.

Not being prepared for examinations makes him
anxious.

He said he has no patience with himself if he
doesn't learn quickly.

He said being understanding is one the the most
important qualities a person can have.

He does not feel that he has much self-insight.
His parents live in Grand Rapids, Michigan.
He is interested in pool.

When people are late for appointments, it
upsets him.

Religion is fairly important to him.

He said that most people are probably sincere.

10/16/64 vsk

93

TRAINING SESSION 4

 

THE JUDGEMENT OF HAPPILY MARRIED,
UNHAPPILY MARRIED, AND DIVORCED MEN AND WOMEN

GENERAL DIRECTIONS:

The following test investigates your knowledge of the dif-
ferent interests and traits of happily married, unhappily
married, and divorced men and women. The test is in two
sections; the first pertaining to men, the second to women.
The correct answers are based on a comparison of the replies
Of carefully selected groups of happily married, unhappily
married, and divorced men and women.

EXAMPLE:

The question, "Do you prefer a play tO a dance?" was asked
of the three groups of women. It was found that:

81% of the happily married women responded "yes."

58% of the unhappily married women responded "yes."

44% of the divorced women responded "yes."
Therefore, as pertains to women, the correct answer to the

statement "More apt to prefer a play to a dance" is happily
married women.

TURN THE PAGE AND READ CAREFULLY THE INSTRUCTIONS FOR PART I

INSTRUCTIONS FOR PART II FOLLOW PART I

94

THE JUDGMENT (3F HAPPILY MARRIED,
UNHAPPILY MARRIED AND DIVORCED MEN

INSTRUCTIONS:
Read each item carefully. On your separate answer sheet mark:

"1" if you think the responses of more Happily Married Men
than unhappily married or divorced men fit the statement.

"2" if you think the responses of more Unhappily Married Men
than happily married or divorced men fit the statement.

"3" if you think the responses of more Divorced Men than
happily married or unhappily married men fit the state-
ment.

 

 

 

Please complete all the itmes, try not to leave any blank.
Choose only one answer for each item.

Correct
Answers
1 1. Enjoy teaching adults.
3 2. Most likely to avoid dictatorial or bossy people.
2 3. Dislike educational movies.
3 4. More apt to like the occupation of novelist.
2 5 Views self as a radical, while actually conserva-

tive in nature.

1 6. Enjoy household pets. .

2 7. Most likely to have difficulty in making up their
minds.

1 8. Like cautious people.

3 9. Best able to compete in a game against an Opponent
of superior ability.

1 10. More apt to like religious peOple.

2 11. Care least for the occupation of teaching.

3 12. More often willing to take chances.

2 13. Least Often take the lead to enliven a dull party.

3 14. Like the occupation of stock broker.

3 15. Prefer commission to definite salary.

2 16. Care least for symphony concerts.

2 17. Prefer outside work.

1 18. Most tolerant of sick peOple.

3 19. Most often seek someone for cheer when feeling low.

1 20. Most likely to solicit funds for a cause of interest.

Nl-‘P-‘l—‘Nl-‘wwww l-‘LUNNl-‘l-‘l-‘NNUJ I—‘l—‘UONNWl—‘UJl—‘H

NWwaNNNUN

21.
22.
23.
24.
25.
26.
27.
28.
29.
30.

31.
32.
33.
34.
35.
36.
37.
38.
39.
40.

41.
42.
43.
44.
45.
46.
47.
48.
49.
50.

51.
52.
53.
54.
55.
56.
57.
58.
59.
60.

95

Place the most emphasis on quality of work.
Prefer developing plans to executing them.
More apt to like playing poker.

Most meticulous and methodical in work.
Like the occupation of criminal lawyer.
Most neurotic.

Seldom become excited.

Like fashionably dressed peOple.

Are seldom asked for advice.

Prefer to spend a night at home.

Enjoy making radio sets.

Prefer being alone during times of emotional stress.
Dislike foreigners.

Most likely to organize a club or team.

Accustomed to planning work in detail.

Most tolerant of people with physical deformities.
Most Often touchy on various subjects.

Slow in making decisions.

Most gregarious.

Prefer making plans with others.

Most often experience feelings of loneliness.
Least artistically creative.

Most likely to enjoy taking risks.

More apt to dislike socialists.

Never make wagers.

Dislike modern languages.

Seldom feel miserable.

More apt to like talkative peOple.

Like the occupation Of orchestra conductor.
More apt to be critical of others.

Frequently feel grouchy.

Prone to religious radicalism.

Rather execute plans than develop them.

More apt to like a period of isolation.
Seldom organizes teams or clubs.

More apt to make wagers.

Most likely to enjoy contests.

Most appreciative of regular hours.

Prefer traveling in company.

Often take the lead to enliven a dull party.

END OF PART I.

96

PART II.

THE JUDGMENT OF HAPPILY MARRIED,
UNHAPPILY MARRIED AND DIVORCED WOMEN

INSTRUCTIONS:

Read each item carefully. On your separate answer sheet
mark:

"1" if you think the responses of more Happily Married
Women than unhappily married or divorced women fIt
the statement.

if you think the responses Of more Unhappily Married
Women than happily married or divorced women fit the
statement.

if you think the responses of more Divorced Women
than happily married or unhappily married women fit
the statement.

Please complete all the items, try not to leave any blank.
Choose only one answer for each item.

"2"

"3"

Corr

8C1:

Answers

Us)

WNHWWNl—‘HN

kawraruw

NW1“

61.

62.
63.
64.
65.
66.
67.
68.
69.
70.

71.
72.
73.
74.
75.

76.
77.
78.

79.
80.

 

 

 

Prefer work which makes heavy demands on know-
ledge and experience.

Most neurotic.

More apt to like music.

More apt to like physiology.

Avoid technical responsibilities.

Most often make wagers.

Like the occupation of inventor.

More apt to dislike working in isolation.

More often troubled by feelings of inferiority.
More apt to like playing chess.

Apt to dislike peOple who smoke.

More often solicit funds for a cause.

More apt to like old people.

Least effective in emergencies.

Give the most weight to the tangible returns of
work.

Most conservative in social and political Opinions.
Possess the most initiative.

Proclaim to be radical but are actually conser-
vative by nature.

Prefer to work for self.

Find reading more helpful than conversation in
formulating ideas.

Correct
Answers

HI—‘WWHNHWNN WHNl-‘WLOHLDWW NNl—‘l-JUJNNNWH

l—‘WNN

Dow

81.
82.
83.
84.
85.
86.
87.
88.
89.
90.

91.
92.
93.
94.
95.
96.
97.
98.
99.
100.

101.
102.
103.
104.
105.
106.
107.
108.
109.
110.

111.
112.
113.
114.

115.
116.

117.
118.

119.
120.

97

More apt to dislike bolshevists.

Least likely to blush.

Most unmethodical.

Often have spells of dizzyness.

More apt to like psychology.

Slow in making decisions.

Systematic in caring for personal property.
Least daring and venturesome.

Most likely to be indecisive.

More bothered by peOple watching them do
their work.

Prefer commissions to definite salary.
Most self-assertive and self-reliant.
Least docile and compliant.

More apt to like clerical work.

Most willing to be different or unconventional.
Prefer taking chances to playing safe.
Most tolerant of Negroes.

Daydreams most frequently.

More apt to like bird study.

More apt to like the occupation of foreign
correspondent.

More apt to dislike peOple who are deformed.
More Often arrive late for work.

Likely to argue their way past a guard.

Apt to like Clergy and religious people.
Consider themselves as nervous.

Dislike quick tempered peOple.

Like the occupation Of interpretor.

Most ambitious.

More apt to like YMCA workers.

More apt to like teetotalers.

Least willing to work things out for themselves.
Neglect to care for personal property.
Accustomed to take the lead in activities.
More Often like amusement parks, picnics, and
excursions.

Prefer frequent changes from place to place.
More apt to express judgements regardless of
resulting criticism.

Prone to fluctuating feelings of happiness and
sadness.

Dislike spending an evening alone.

Dislike detailed work.

Least often make excuses.

END OF PART II.

98

TRAINING SESSION 5

 

HCS/BG
November, 1964

IS Personality Inventory

 

DIRECTIONS:

There are no right or wrong answers to the following state-
ments. Indicate your answers on the separate sheet. If
you think the statement is "true" or more true than false
as far as you are concerned, answer "1" opposite the number
of the question. If you think the statement is "false" or
more false than true as far as you are concerned, answer
"2" Opposite the number of the question. Please try to
answer all questions.

1. I enjoy being a leader of peOple.
2. I occasionally act contrary to custom.
3. I am sometimes influenced in minor decisions by how

I happen to be feeling at the moment.
4. The notion of divine inspiration may be mistaken.
5. It is possible that there is no such thing as divine
inspiration.
6. I think it is more important for a person to be
reverent than to be sympathetic.
7. No individual, no matter what the circumstances, is
justified in committing suicide.
8. I genuinely like everyone I get to know.
9. The thought of God gives me an absolutely complete
sense of security.
10. I have occasionally felt contempt for the Opinions of
others.
11. I would rather read an article about a famous musician
than about a famous financier.
12. The idea of divine inspiration may be a form of wish
fulfillment arising from suggestibility.
13. I would rather grow inwardly than be a success in
practical affairs.
14. I like continually changing activities.
15. I was known as a quiet child.
16. Religion should be a set of practices concerning our
relation to the supernatural.
l7. I am guided in all my conduct by firm principles.
18. I believe that the individualist is the man who is
most likely to discover the best road to a new future.
19. The idea of God is not absolutely necessary for the
development of good human beings.
20. I like tennis.

21.

22.

23.

24.
25.

26.
27.
28.
29.

30.

31.
32.

33.
34.
35.

36.
37.

38..

39.
40.

41.
42.

43.
44.
45.
46.
47.
48.

49.
50.

51.

52.'

53.
54.
55.

99

It is not absolutely necessary to believe in the exis-
tence of God in order to lead a good life.

My faith in God is absolutely complete for "though he
slay me, yet will I trust him."

I always feel even the minor interests of others as if
they were my own.

I generally talk very quietly.

I am quick to discard the old and accept the new: new
fashions, new methods, new ideas.

I get annoyed when people take up my time for no purpose.
I take pains not to incur the disapproval of others.

I always play every game very hard.

I can become so absorbed in solving a problem that I
forget everything.

I like to keep all my letters and papers neatly arranged
and filed.

I have never been seasick, plane sick, or carsick.

There may be better ways of explaining the working of
the world than to assume a God.

I like to associate with emotional peOple.

I never argue with older people whom I respect.

I like to participate in discussions about sex and sexual
activities. .

I occasionally Spend time thinking about sexual matters.
I usually enjoy spending an evening alone.

I don't particularly like reading about business trends.
Divine inspiration is certainly not the most important
source of truth.

Women should have as much right to propose dates to men
as men to women.

I like to perform laboratory experiments.

Cat meat is out of the question for the human diet under
any circumstances.

I seldom do anything for which anyone could reproach me.
I am not ticklish at all.

Some of my tastes change rather rapidly.

I rather dislike directing the activities of people.

The average person needs more caution than daring.
Before I do something I am apt to consider whether my
friends will blame me for it.

It doesn't bother me to work in noisy surroundings.

I always prefer to spend my social evenings with members
of the opposite sex rather than my own sex.

I generally prefer to keep my opinions and feelings to
myself.

People have never criticized me in what I thought was

an unfair way.

I have occasionally doubted the reality of God.

The world might benefit from having a new kind of religion.
I have sometimes corrected others not because they were
wrong, but only because they irritated me.

56.
57.
58.
59.
60.

61.
62.
63.

64.

65.
66.
67.

68.
69.

70.
71.

72.

73.
74.

75.
76.
'77.
78.
79.
80.
81.

82.
83.

84.

100

Professors should not put forth their own radical
views in the classroom.

I like advertising as an occupation.

I like the occupation of being a Secret Service Man.
Sometimes I rather enjoy doing things I'm not supposed
to do.

I would like being a sculptor, even if I were not par-
ticularly good.

I believe that everyone's intentions are good.

I have never been jealous of other people 5 success.
I would rather read "Atlantic Monthly" than "Business
Week."

Radical agitators should be allowed to speak publicly
in certain parks and streets.

I like long periods Of physical exertion.

I have occasionally eaten things that upset my stomach.
I am considered extremely "steady" by my friends rather
than "excitable."

I would rather go out with attractive persons of the
Opposite sex than do almost anything else.

Sometimes I become so emotional that I find it a little
hard to get to sleep.

I enjoy helping people with their personal problems.

I like everyone I meet, even those with different goals
and interests than mine.

It is of little importance to me whether people agree
with my ideas or not.

I would like being a Consul.

I sometimes lack self—confidence when I have to compete
against people who are at least as good as I am.

A man who works in business for his living all the week
can best spend Sunday in hearing a sermon.

I have extremely strong loyalties toward my ideals of
beauty.

I sometimes tell people frankly what I think of them.

I like Vaudeville.

The supernatural idea ought to only play a minor part
in religious thought.

I am sometimes so discouraged about my activities that
I cannot do my best.

I see life as a constant series of problems which must
be solved.

I am not particularly methodical in my daily life.

My sense of humor is probably no better than that of
most peOple.

I consider the close observance of social customs and
manners an essential aspect of life.

101

85. I am inclined to agree with the poet who said that "Beauty
is truth."

86. I have never read a book on modern art that interested me.
87. I control my emotions in practically all situations.

88. I am never aware Of my heart beating.

89. I only work for tangible and clearly-defined results.

90. I spend very little time thinking about money matters.

TRAINING SESSION 6

 

BG/HS

Alas Judgment Test January, 1965

 

This is a test of your judgment of people. It consists of
three parts:

I. Judgment of the interests of men
II. Judgment of the interests of women
III. Judgment of how students rate themselves.

The directions for each part of the test are somewhat different
so read the directions for each part carefully.

I. Judgment of Men

DIRECTIONS:

A representative group of thousands of American men were asked
to indicate whether or not they liked certain occupations,
activities, subjects, and types of people. Your task is to
decide what percentage of the men in the study said they liked
a particular item. Indicate your choice in the space provided.
For example: 1. Floorwalker (l) 10% (2) 30% (3) 50% (4)70%

(5) 90%. If you think that $93 of the men liked the occupation
of floorwalker, then mark choice (1); if you think 30% liked it,
mark choice (2); and so on. Mark only one choice for each item.
Throughout the test an answer of (1) means 10% (2) 30% (3) 50%
(4) 70% and (5) 90%.

 

 

1. Office clerk 7. Railway conductor

2. Advertiser 8. Auto salesman

3. Auctioneer 9. Buyer of merchandise
4. Sculptor lO. Bookkeeper

5. College professor ll. Bank teller

6. Secretary, Chamber of Commerce 12- Printer

102

13. President of a society or club

14. Arithmetic

15. Educational movies

16. Thrifty peOple

17. Can discriminate between more
or less important matters

18. Can carry out plans assigned
by other people

19. Usually get other people to do
what I want done

20. Energetic peOple

21. Progressive people

22. History

23. Mathematics

-24. Musical comedy

25. People who have made
fortunes in business

26. Scientific research worker

27. Golf

28. Looking at shop windows

29. Contributing to charities

30. Raising flowers and vegetables

31. Bridge

32. People who assume leadership

33. Observing birds (nature study)

34. Picnics

35. Inventor

36. Author of technical book

II. Judgment of Women
DIRECTIONS:

A large group of women were asked to indicate whether or not
they liked certain occupations, activities, subjects, and
types of people. Your task is to decide what_percentage of
women in the study liked a particular item. Indicate your
choice in the space provided, for example: 1. Dressmaker
(l) 10% (2) 30% (3) 50% (4) 70% (5) 90%. If you think that
lgi of the women liked the occupation of dressmaker, then
mark choice (1); if you think 30% liked it, mark choice (2);
and so on. Mark only one choice for each item. Throughout
the test an answer of (1) means 10% (2) 30% (3) 50% (4) 70%
(5) 90%.

 

 

 

37. Philosophy 40. Poetry
38. Museums 41. PeOple who are natural
39. Can discriminate between leaders

more or less important 42. Music

matters 43. Psychology

103

55.
56.
57.
58.
59.
60.
61.
62.
63.
64.
65.
66.
67.
68.
69.
70.
71.
72.

Physician

Foreign correspondent
Writing personal letters
Dramatics

Office manager

Radio program director
Minister

Men who drink

Bank teller
Stockbroker

Wholesaler

Dentist

Artist's model
Politician

Real estate saleswoman
Telephone Operator
Afternoon teas
Waitress

III. Judgment by Others Of Themselves

44. Energetic people

45. Cooking

46. "Reader's Digest"
magazine

47. Dancing

48. Decorating a room
with flowers

49. Educational director

50. Tennis

51. Zoology

52. Hostess

53. Psychiatrist

54. Florist

DIRECTIONS:

Each of several hundred midwestern college men rated himself

as he thought he compared with other men on a series of traits.
The average rating of all the men on each trait was determined.
Rate the average college man on each of the traits below as

 

you think he rated himself.
Mark
Mark
Mark "3" if you think he
73. Stubborn
74. Egotistical
75. Shy
76. Affectionate
77. Serious
78. Talkative
79. Imaginative
80. Aggressive
81. Cooperative
82. Friendly
83. Ambitious
84. Adaptable

"1“ if you think he rated himself in
"2" if you think he rated himself in
rated himself in

85.
86.
87.
88.
89.
90.
91.
92.
93.
94.
95.
96.

the lowest 25%.
the middle 50%.
the highest 25%.
Wide range of interests
Liberal
Adventurous
Trustful
Rebellious
Impractical
Unrealistic
Unpredictable
Socially poised
Easily upset
Timid
Irresponsible

104

TRAINING SESSION 7

 

Personal Interest Inventory

The following is a list of 96 occupations, activities, Objects,
and descriptive phrases. You are to indicate whether you like
If you like the item, mark one
(1) on the answer sheet. If you dislike it, mark two (2).
Answer each item. This is an interest inventory and there are

or dislike each of the items.

no right or wrong answers.

Manufacturer
Musical comedy
Auctioneer

Auto salesman

Art galleries
Symphony concerts
Auto racer

Auto repairman
Driving an auto
10. Arithmetic

11. Talkative people
12. Bookkeeper

13. Geometry

14. Spelling

15. Civil Service employee
16. Clergyman

17. Algebra

18. Chemistry

19. Literature

20. Physics

21. Dentist

22. Floorwalker

23. Factory worker

24. Jeweler

25. Tennis

26. Sports pages

27. Life insurance salesman
28. Photo engraver

29. Hunting

30. Golf

31. Pharmacist

32. Music teacher

33. Museum

34. Educational movies
35. Office clerk

36. Railway conductor
37. "National Geographic"
38. Geology

\DCI)\10\U1thJNI—’

39.
40.
41.
42.
43.
44.
45.
46.
47.
48.
49.
50.
51.
52.

53.
54.
55.
56.
S7.
58.
59.
60.
61.
62.
63.
64.
65.
66.
67.
68.
69.
70.
71.
72.
73.

74.

Real estate salesman
Printer

Physical training
Geography

Poet

Politician

Economics

Vaudeville
Undertaker
Watchmaker

Costume designer
Psychologist

Proof reader
Companion to

elderly person
Artist

Author of novel
Accountant

Bank teller

Magazine writer
Musician

Dentist

Telephone Operator
Buyer of merchandise
Landscape gardener
Missionary

Beauty specialist
Interior decorator
Florist

Artist's model
Lawyer, criminal
Plays

Meeting new situations
Probation Officer
Cashier

Meeting and directing
people

Adjusting difficulties of
others

75.

76.
77.
78.
79.
80.
81.
82.
83.
84.
85.

Preparing dinner

for guests

Attending lectures
Governor of a state
Factory manager
Typist

Mechanical engineer
Movies

Camping

"True Story" magazine
Teacher, grade school
Discussions of
economic affairs

105

86.

87.
88.
89.
90.
91.
92.
93.
94.
95.
96.

"Good Housekeeping"
magazine
Stenographer
Statistician
Museums

Taking responsibility
Teacher, commercial
Waitress

Cooking

Doing research work
Stock broker
Wholesaler

Knowledge of Men Test

The following test measures your knowledge of the interests

of men.

A large and representative group Of men checked

whether they liked or disliked the various occupations,

activities,

school subjects,

and objects below.

Mark one

(1) if you think the majority of men checked that they

Mark two (2)

if you think the

majority checked that they "disliked" the interest.

"liked" the interest.
97. Manufacturer
98. Musical comedy
99. Auctioneer
100. Auto salesman
101. Art galleries
102. Symphony concerts
103. Auto racer
104. Auto repairman
105. Driving an auto
106. Arithmetic
107. Talkative peOple
108. Bookkeeper
109. Geometry
110. Spelling
111. Civil Service employee
112. Clergyman
113. Algebra
114. Chemistry
115. Literature
116. Physics
117. Dentist
118. Floorwalker
119. Factory worker
120. Jeweler
121. Tennis
122. Sports pages

123.
124.
125.
126.
127.
128.
129.
130.
131.
132.
133.

The following test
of women.
whether they liked
activities,

106

Life insurance salesman 134.
Photo engraver 135.
Hunting 136.
Golf 137.
Pharmacist 138.
Music teacher 139.
Museums 140.
Educational movies 141.
Office clerk 142.
Railway conductor 143.
"National Geographic" 144.

magazine

A large and representative

school subjects,

Geology

Real estate salesman
Printer

Physical training
Geography

Poet

Politician
Economics
Vaudeville
Undertaker
Watchmaker

measures your knowledge of the interests

group of women checked

or disliked the various occupations,
and objects below.

Mark one

(1) if you think the majority of women checked that they

“liked"

the interest.

Mark two (2) if you think the majority

checked that they "disliked" the interest.

145.
146.
147.
148.

149.
150.
151.
152.
153.
154.
155.
156.
157.
158.
159.
160.
161.
162.
163.
164.
165.
166.
167.
168.
169.

170.
171.

Costume designer
Psychologist

PrOOf reader
Companion to
elderly person
Artist

Author of novel
Accountant

Bank teller
Magazine writer
Musician

Dentist

Telephone Operator
Buyer of merchandise
Landscape gardner
Missionary

Beauty specialist
Interior decorator

Florist

Artist's model
Lawyer, criminal
Plays

Meeting new situations

Probation officer

Cashier

Meeting and directing

people

Adjusting difficulties of others
Preparing dinner for guests

107

172. Attending lectures 183. Stenographer
173. Governor of a state 184. Statistician
174. Factory manager 185. Museums
175. Typist 186. Taking responsibility
176. Mechanican engineer 187. Teacher, commercial
177. Movies 188. Waitress
178. Camping 189. Cooking
179. "True Story" 190. Doing research work
magazine 191. Stock broker
180. Teacher, grade school 192. Wholesaler
181. Discussions of economic
affairs
182. "Good Housekeeping"
magazine

TRAINING SESSION 8

 

The Judgment of Female Students

Name

 

You are going to see interviews with three girls: Miss B.,
Miss D., and Miss P. These girls have described themselves by
filling out an adjective check-list. On many adjectives all
three agreed; that is, they all checked true, or they all
checked flase. On some adjectives they differed. Listed below
are those adjectives that only one of the three checked as
being true of herself. After the interviews, your task will be
to select, for each adjective, the one girl who felt that the
adjective applied to her.

DIRECTIONS:

Mark "B" if you think the correct answer is Miss B. (she will

be the first one interviewed). Mark "D" if you think the

correct answer is Miss D (She will be the second one interviewed).
Mark "P" if you think the correct answer is Miss P. (she will

be the last one interviewed.

\DmxlmU'IbWNH
O

10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
24.
25.
26.
27.
28.
29.
30.

For
the
for

adjective,

\oooqoxmbwtol-I

Hraha
torao
O O O

13.
14.

alert
clever
conservative
defensive
aloof
anxious
confident
inventive
cool
artistic
noisy
simple
unexcitable
hard-headed
shrewd

lazy
demanding
rigid
talkative
zany

silent
dependent
stern
poised
dominant
prudish
self-punishing
spendthrift
touchy
forceful

108

31.
32.
33.
34.
35.
36.
37.
38.
39.
40.
41.
42.
43.
44.
45.
46.
47.
48.
49.
50.
51.
52.
53.
54.
55.
56.
57.
58.
59.
60.

assertive
impatient
idealistic
self-confident
stubborn
cynical
irresponsible
complicated
evasive
fault-finding
confused
dissatisfied
high strung
timid

hasty

robust
self-denying
rebellious
slow

worrying

smug
unambitious
self-controlled
unconventional
unstable
preserving
inhibitied
show-Off
uninhibited
submiSSive

the following adjectives, one of the three girls checked

adjective as not being true of herself.
each of the adjectives, one girl checked false.
select the girl you think checked false.

sociable
adventurous
forgiving
bossy
demanding
energetic
tactful
tense
complicated
spunky
loyal
modest
assertive
evasive

15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
24.
25.
26.
27.

In other words,

quick
determined
patient
unaffected
reserved
jolly
spontaneous
meek

weak
dependable
argumentative
practical
frank

28.
29.
30.
31.
32.
33.
34.
35.
36.
37.
38.
39.
40.

For each

mischievous
bitter
talkative
selfish
prejudiced
peaceable
natural
careless
rational
fault-finding
responsible
foolish
arrogant

Table

Table

Table

Table

Table

Table

Table

Table

Table

5C:

6C:

7C:

10C:

11C:

13C:

14C:

15C:

16C:

APPENDIX C

Additional Statistical Data for Both Studies

Additional
of trained

Additional
of trained

Additional

data for second-person accuracy gains
and untrained groups

data for third-person accuracy gains
and untrained groups

data for appearance and conversation

accuracy gains of trained and untrained groups

Additional
pretest to

Additional
of trained

Additional
of trained

Additional

data for changes in performance from
posttest 1

data for second-person accuracy gains
and untrained groups

data for second-person accuracy gains
and untrained groups

data for second-person accuracy gains

of students below the 50th percentile

Additional

data for second-person accuracy gains

of students above the 50th percentile

Additional
of trained

data for third-person accuracy gains
and untrained groups

110

Table 5C.--Additiona1 data for second-person accuracy gains
of trained and untrained groups

 

 

 

Pretest Posttest Standard Posttest
Variance Variance Error Correlations
Men sub-test
Trained 9.5 9.0 .60 18
Untrained 10.8 5.8 .50 '
Standard error of difference .60
Women sub-test
Trained 9.3 9.8 .60 29
Untrained 9.3 10.6 .50 '
Standard error of difference .65
Total test
Trained 13.8 14.5 .66 46
Untrained 14.5 18.6 .70 °
Standard error of difference .74

 

Table 6C.--Additiona1 data for third-person accuracy gains
of trained and untrained groups

 

 

Pretest Posttest Standard Posttest
Variance Variance Error Correlations
Men sub-test
Trained 5.8 8.9 .5 l6
Untrained 5.8 4.8 .4 '
Standard error Of difference .58
Women sub-test
Trained 10.8 12.8 .6 _ 08
Untrained 10.1 8.4 .5 °
Standard error of difference .8
Total test
Trained 19.7 25.3 .8 15
Untrained 20.7 20.4 .9 °
Standard error of difference 1.1

 

111

Table 7C.--Additiona1 data for appearance and conversation
accuracy gains of trained and untrained groups

 

 

 

Pretest Posttest Standard Posttest
Variance Variance Error Correlations
Men sub-test
Appearance
Trained 8.2 10.2 .55 18
Untrained 7.6 8.3 .60 °
Standard error of difference .68
Conversation
Trained 10.5 12.3 .66 31
Untrained 10.5 8.9 .74 °
Standard error of difference .66
Women sub-test
Appearance
Trained 12.9 9.0 .58 04
Untrained 12.9 13.2 .59 ’
Standard error of difference .86
Conversation
Trained 13.1 19.7 .63 02
Untrained 13.1 14.7 .75 '

Standard error of difference .99

Total test
Appearance
Trained 14.0 32.6 1.07 39
Untrained 14.0 24.8 .84 °
Standard error of difference 1.09
Conversation
Trained 65.3 44.3 .60 27
Untrained 82.5 32.4 1.07 '

Standard error of difference 1.33

 

Table 10C.--Additional data for changes in performance from
pretest to posttest 1

 

 

 

Pretest Variance Posttest l Variance
Film group 13.0 9.7
Tape group 6.7 2.0
Live group 9.1 8.0
Control group 8.0 8.4

 

112

Table llC.--Additiona1 data for second-person accuracy gains

of trained and untrained groups

 

 

 

Pretest Posttest Standard

Variance Variance Error
Tape 13.0 7.0 1.0
Film 6.7 6.9 1.0
Control 8.0 9.3 .57
Live 9.1 6.9 .75

 

Table 13C.--Additiona1 data for second-person accuracy gains

of trained and untrained groups

 

 

 

Control Com- Pretest Posttest Posttest
pared With Variance Variance Correlations
Film
Trained 13.9 7.2 _ 12
Untrained 13.9 6.3 '
Standard error of difference 1 3
Tape
Trained 6.7 7.1 _ 27
Untrained 6.7 8.7 °
Standard error of difference 1.5
Live
Trained 9.1 7.0 44
Untrained 10.7 9.1 °
Standard error of difference .73

 

113

 

m.m m.ma H.m H.NH omcflmuuco

 

m.H
h.h H.ma o.m o.ma UOGHMHB
m mwsum
m.HH v.ma m.v m.aa OOGHMHDCD
mm.
v.0 m.mH n.v m.HH OOCHMHB
H mwsum
mocmummwflo may mo mocmfium> cmmz moccanm> cmmz GOmHHmmEOU
Houum pumpcmum ummuumom umwuumom umoumum ammumum

wafluamoumm auom
map 3OHOQ mucoosum mo mcfimm momnooom cOmuwmuoooomm mom mumo Hmcowuflooall.0va magma

114

 

o.m v.ma o.m m.na UOCHMHDCD

 

0.5
0.0 «.55 m.m H.mH emcfimue
m >osnm
a.m m.mH m.H o.mH Bmcflmupcs
H.H
m.m o.m5 m.H o.mH omcflmua
H mcsum
moconmwmao mzu mo mocmflum> com: mocmflum> com: COmflummEOU
Houum Oumpcmpm ummuumom ummuumom ummumum ummumum .

 

maflucmoumm Buom
msu m>onm mucmpsum mo mcflmm momusoom COmHomlpcoomm “Om mump HOGOHDHUO¢II.UmH mance

115

Table 16C.--Additiona1 data for third-person accuracy gains
Of trained and untrained groups

 

 

 

Group Pretest Variance Posttest Variance
Film 3.9 3.7
Tape 6.2 7.0
Live 12.7 6.0

Control 6.5 4.9

 

APPENDIX D

Training Materials for the Second Study

Material for film and tape group

Material for live group

117

MATERIAL FOR FILM AND TAPE GROUP

 

Inference Accuracy
DIRECTIONS:

All the women in the flim filled out a series of attitude
and personality scales. Their friends rated them on a
series of traits and also gave sketches of them. The
statements below are based on the answers that the men and
their friends gave. When you answer the questions, use
only spaces 1, 2, and 3, on the IBM sheets. The numbers
correspond to the order in which the interviews appeared.
That is, Mrs. D. is (1), Mrs. N. is (2), and Mrs. P. is (3).
In other words, if you think the answer to a particular
question is:

Mrs. D. mark "1"
Mrs. N. mark "2"
Mrs. P. mark "3"

The correct answers are known from the attitude scales and
other tests that the interviewed women filled out. Also,
the correct answers are equally distributed among the three
women.

Religious Beliefs

 

(1) Mrs. D., (2) Mrs. N., (3) Mrs. P., filled out a rating
scale about their religious beliefs and values. Which one
of the three would have made the following statements?

1. Agreed that "While God may exist, it is quite difficult
for me to accept such a fact without some definite proof."

2. Most strongly agreed that "People don't necessarily have
to believe in God in order to lead good lives and have a
high system of ethics and morals."

3. Most strongly agreed that "God will punish those who
disobey his commandments and reward those who obey Him
(either in this life or a future life)."

4. Most strongly agreed that "When in doubt, I have usually
found it best to stop and ask God for guidance."

5. Agreed least that "I have sometimes been very conscious
of the presence of God."

6. Most strongly agreed that "No one who has experienced
God like I have could doubt his existence."

7. Most strongly agreed that "I have sometimes been very
conscious of the presence of God."

118

Adjective Check List

(1) Mrs. D., (2) Mrs. N., (3) Mrs. P. filled out a form
which contained a number of pairs of adjectives. They
were asked to check the adjective in the pair which most
closely fit themselves. Which one checked the underlined
adjective in the following pairs?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

8. Conservative - excitable 21. Healthy - tough

9. Talkative - boastful 22. Contented - progressive
10. Curious - pleasure seeking 23. Changeable - submissive
11. Reliable - feminine 24. Sympathetic - charming
12. Interests wide - efficient 25. Sincere - warm

13. Impulsive - forgetful 26. Courageous - rational
14. OrIginal - quiet 27. Practical - wholesome
15. Spontaneous - attractive 28. Friendly - humorous
16. Unconventional - unassuming 29. Poised - moderate
17. Understanding - timid 30. Capable - obliging

 

18. Fairminded - sharp-witted
19. Unselfish - cool
20. Moderate - silent

 

 

The three women filled out a form which contained a number
of pairs of adjectives. They were asked to check the adjec-
tive in the pair which most closely fit themselves. Which
one checked the first adjective in the following pairs?

 

 

 

 

 

1. Efficient - precise 9. Honest - clever

2. Loyal - sophisticated 10. IndiVidualistic-conservative
3. Ambitious - charming ll. Affectionate - poised

4. Independent - adventurous 12. Frank - dreamy

5. Tolerant - steady 13. Tactful - enthusiastic

6. Generous - witty 14. Warm - reflective

7. Reliable - feminine 15. Loyal - clever

8. Determined - relaxed

 

They also filled out an adjective check-list. On many of
the adjectives all three agreed; that is, they all checked
true or they all checked false. On some adjectives they
differed. Listed below are those adjectives that only one
of the three checked as being true of herself. For each
adjective, which of the three checked it as being true of
herself?

119

16. artistic 26. fussy

17. emotional 27. practical

18. moderate 28. high-strung
19. Opinionated 29. unconventional
20. pleasure-seeking 30. curious

21. bossy 31. intelligent
22. complicated 32. reliable

23. enterprising 33. excitable

24. patient 34. impulsive

25. outgoing 35. indifferent

It was mentioned at the last session that the three women;
Mrs. D. (1), Mrs N. (2), and Mrs. P. (3) completed a number
of questionnaires. The items that follow were taken from
these questionnaires. Your task is the same as last time:
If you think the correct answer is Mrs. D. mark "1"; if you
think the correct answer is Mrs. N. mark "2"; and if you
think the correct answer is Mrs. P. mark "3."

The three women filled out a rating scale-showing their agree-
ment or disagreement with a series of statements about reli-
gious questions. Which person fits the following statements?

1. Less strongly agreed, but still agreed that, "There exists
an evil intelligence, personage, or spirit in the uni-
verse Often referred to as Satan or the Devil."

2. Strongly disagreed with the statement, "If there is a
'God,' it is only an impersonal creative force in the
universe."

3. Strongly agreed with the statement, "I believe that after
death we will ultimately regain our bodies and in a real
sense be resurrected."

4. Less strongly disagreed with the statement, "I am unable
to accept the idea of "life after death," at least not
until we have definite evidence there is such a thing."

5. Strongly agreed that, "God does marvelous things which
are called miracles by some."

6. Less strongly agreed that, "While I am responsible for
my own actions, I feel that God has some definite pur-
pose Or role for me to fulfill in life."

These three women were given a series of true-false items.
Who answered true to these items?

I enjoy bull sessions where everyone talks about sex.
. I seem to be about as capable and smart as most others
around.
9. I practically never blush.
10. I worry over money and business.
11. I seldom have quarrels with the members of my family.
12. I believe that a person should never taste an alcoholic drink.

7
8

120

They were also given a series of incomplete sentences to
complete with one of three alternatives. Which of the
three completed each of the following sentences in the
way underlined?

13. When I make a mistake I am embarrassed.

14. When I make a mistake I laugh it off.

15. When I'm criticized, I appreciate it.

16. I'm afraid of hurting others.

17. I'm afraid Of what peopIe might sgy.

18. When I'm criticized, I defend myself.

19. My philoSOphy of life is,I“Do unto others, as
ygu would have them do unto you.’r

20. My philOSOphy of life is, "What you do, do well."

21. I felt most dissatisfied when, I didn't do the
right thing.

22. I felt most dessatisfied when, I was not busy.

23. When they offered me help, I was somewhat em-
barrassed.

24. When they Offered me help, I thanked them but refused.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

MATERIAL FOR LIVE GROUP

 

The Judgment of Female Students

Name

 

You are going to see interviews with three girls: Miss B.,
Miss K., and Miss L. These girls have described themselves
by filling out a number of questionnaires; including an
adjective check-list. On many adjectives all three agreed;
that is, they all checked true or they all checked false.
On some adjectives they differed. Listed below are those
adjectives that only one of the three checked as being true
of herself. After the interviews, your task will be to
select, for each adjective, the one girl who felt that the
adjective applied to her.

DIRECTIONS:

Mark "1" if you think the correct answer is Miss B. (she
will be the first one interviewed). Mark "2" if you think
the correct answer is Miss. K. (she will be the second one
interviewed). Mark "3" if you think the correct answer is
Miss L. (she will be the last one interviewed).

121

agressive 21. shrewd

cold 22. unhibited
organized 23. clear-thinking
artistic 24. independent
individualistic 25. flirtatious
tolerant 26. distrustful
reckless 27. enterprising
formal 28. steady
efficient 29. mature

rigid 30. outspoken
hard-headed 31. unambitious
unassuming 32. unselfish
quiet 33. fickle
methodical 34. thorough
outgoing 35. sarcastic
trusting 36. smug

gentle 37. submissive
poised 38. cautious
contented 39. painstaking
stable 40. precise

Miss B. (1), Miss K. (2), and Miss L. (3), filled out a
rating scale showing their agreement or disagreement with
a series of statements about religious questions. Which
person fits the following statement?

1.

Strongly disagreed with the statement, "God will punish
those who disobey his commandment and reward those who
Obey Him (either in this life or in a future life)."
Strongly disagreed with the statement, "If there is a
God, it is only an impersonal creative force in the
universe."

Most strongly disagreed with the statement, "I believe
that after death we will ultimately regain our bodies
and in a real sense be resurrected."

Most strongly agreed that, "PeOple don't necessarily
need believe in God in order to live good lives and have
a high system of ethics and morals."

Strongly disagreed with the statement, "While God may
exist, it is quite difficult for me to accept such a
fact without some definite proof."

Strongly agreed that, "I am unable to accept the idea
of life after death, at least until we have definite
evidence that there is such a thing."

Strongly agreed that, "While I am responsible for my own
actions, I feel that God has some definite purpose or
role for me to fulfill in life."

122

These three girls were given a series of true-false items.
Who answered true to these items?

8. I have Often had to take orders from someone who did
not know as much as I did.
9. When someone annoys me I don't mind telling him what
I think Of him.
10. It takes a lot of argument to convince most peOple
of the truth.
11. I take a pretty easygoing and light-hearted attitude
toward life. ‘
12. I am happy most of the time.
13. I practically never blush.

They were also given a series of incomplete sentences to
complete with one of three alternatives. Which of the
three completed each of the following sentences in the
way underlined?

14. When I'm criticized, I take it.
15. The thing that gets me into hot water most is
trusting people too much.
16. When they Offered me help I thanked them but refused.
17. My philOSOphy of life is whatever you do, do well.
18. The thing that gets me into hot water most is
not being able to make up my mind.
19. I feel bad about lying.
20. Love to me is a problem.

 

APPENDIX E

Data Used for the Analysis of Regression Lines

124

Table lE.--Data for figures 1 and 2

 

 

 

Study 1 Study 2
Trained Untrained Trained Untrained

Pretest mean 14.7 14.7 16.0 15.1

Standard

Deviation 3.08 3.29 3.5 2.82
Posttest mean 15.7 14.6 16.9 16.0

Standard

Deviation 3.0 2.4 2.6 3.0
Correlation .29 .48 .37 .52
Slope .21 .35 .28 .56

Sy x 2.87 2.11 2.44 2.60

 

APPENDIX F

Item Analysis of "the men test"

126

Item analysis of the "men test"

 

 

Percent Correct

 

 

Item Pretest Posttest Gains
Experiment Control Experiment Control E - C

61 73 55 71 80 -27
62 98 95 96 95 2
63 41 55 48 37 25
64 91 77 93 85 - 6
65 70 82 78 82 8
66 56 47 63 72 -18
67 71 67 81 90 —13
68 66 72 60 57 9
69 68 85 7O 65 22
70 48 47 41 62 -32
71 50 32 61 4o 3
72 35 40 51 42 14
73 55 50 65 45 15
74 61 47 53 57 -18
75 50 45 46 37 4
76 46 37 28 15 6
77 56 45 51 27 13
78 8 5 6 7 — 4
79 28 27 50 27 22
80 41 27 30 27 -ll
81 36 32 13 20 -11
82 25 30 36 22 19
83 71 6O 70 75 -16
84 65 65 70 6O 10
85 75 80 90 9O 5
86 26 30 26 22 8
87 41 30 38 42 -15
88 41 32 50 50 - 9
89 15 7 15 7 0
90 16 17 35 22 14
91 81 95 88 95 7
92 97 82 95 95 -15
93 80 55 85 80 -20
94 76 77 71 70 2
95 55 62 71 72 6
96 73 65 7O 70 ' 8
97 7O 57 76 62 l
98 81 92 75 90 - 4
99 53 47 50 62 -18
100 56 57 71 7O 2
101 65 92 65 85 7
102 60 55 55 42 8
103 36 20 53 25 12
104 36 35 43 40 12

127

Item analysis of the "men test" - CONTINUED

 

 

Percent Correct

 

 

Item Pretest Posttest Gains
Experiment Control Experiment Control E - C
105 40 22 38 42 ~18
106 3 5 3 0 5
107 25 12 33 25 - 5
108 46 60 46 60 0
109 83 75 78 80 ~10
110 86 9O 90 87 7
111 75 87 73 87 ~ 2
112 81 65 75 65 ~ 6
113 68 50 68 57 - 7
114 l 7 11 5 12
115 13 20 8 7 8
116 68 42 65 47 ~10
117 11 10 1 12 ~12
118 90 97 98 97 8
119 48 65 61 65 13

120 5 0 13 0 8

 

 

MICHIGAN STATE UNIV. LIBRARIES
llHl WII Ill 1") "I Mlll W ll WI) 1| 1| III) II” 1|) llllHl
31293103433227