HYPNOTIC STKMULATtON OF

THE EFFECTS OF POST
AND LOW- MOTWATORS

HOSTlLITY UPON MALE HlGH-

Thesis for the Degree of Ph‘ D.
lCHlGAN STATE UNNERSH'Y
William F. Moore
1963

M

 

‘rl—‘lESlS

This is to certify that the

thesis entitled

THE EFFECTS OF POSTHYPNOTIC STIMULATION
OF HOSTILITY UPON MALE HIGH— AND LOW—
MOTIVATORS

presented bg

William F. Moore

has been accepted towards fulfillment
of the requirements for

Ph.D. Education

degree in

/2 '7 I
/ 4%)” 5. (Ma/[m
/ Major professor
4
DMe February 13, 1963

0-169

L I B R A R Y
Michigan State
University

 

 

lVlESI_J RETURNING MATERIALS:

PIace in book drop to
LIBRARIES remove this Checkout from
your record. FINES wiII
be charged if book is
returned after the date
stamped beIow.

 

 

 

 

 

 

N‘_

gm ‘ .

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

ABSTRACT

THE EFFECTS OF POSTHYPNOTIC STIMULATION OF HOSTILITY
UPON MALE HIGH- AND LOW— MOTIVATORS

by William F. Moore

A procedure for the investigation of hostility was
described which utilized hypnotically induced conflict and
verbal productions in an interview situation. Based on a
theory of academic motivation, Specific predictions were made
regarding the effects such conflict would have on the inten-
sity of verbally expressed hostility. Theoretically, hostility
is present in both high motivators and low motivators but in

varying intensities and directions. The high motivator is

' and has learned

characterized as having more ”self control,’
effective defense mechanisms and control against anxiety which
enable him to handle hostility by repressing it. The low
motivator has not learned similar effective controls and
ventilates his hostility in more overt forms of expression.
The study consisted of an experimental group comprised
of high motivators and low motivators and a control group of
Ss who simulated hypnosis. All §§ were treated under a con—
trol condition which consisted of an interview session in a

normal ”waking” state and an experimental condition immediately

following a hypnotically induced paramnesia. Clause-units

 

 

 

William F. Moore

were derived from the verbal productions and independently
scored for hostility. The composite hostility scores for
each group across each condition were compared.

The hypothesis was supported that low motivators do
verbalize more hostility upon posthypnotic stimulation than
do high motivators. Furthermore, the hypnotically induced
paramnesia was shown to be genuine, and the criteria for
hypnotically inducing psychosomatic reactions and psycho-
pathology was met.

The present study is consistent with current motivation
theories in regard to the intensity of hostility expressed
by high- and low- motivators, and lends support to the theory
of repression as a defense against anxiety—producing situ—

ations.

 

 

 

Copyright by
WILLIAM F. MOORE
1963

-zP.

 

 

 

 

THE EFFECTS OF POSTHYPNOTIC STIMULATION OF HOSTILITY

UPON MALE HIGH- AND LOW—MOTIVATORsi 7

By

William Ff Moore

A THESIS

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

DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY

Guidance and Personnel Services

College of Education

1963

 

 

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

To the school administrators, parents of the subjects,
and to the individuals who served as subjects for this pro-
ject, I wish to express my sincerest appreciation for their
assistance. Special thanks are due to Miss Margaret Smith
for her many hours of assistance in statistics, and to Dr.
Rahe Corlis who offered invaluable suggestions.

To the members of my doctoral committee I am deeply
indebted. They are:

Dr. John E. Jordan (Co-Chairman)
Dr. Joseph Reyher (Co—Chairman)
Dr. William W. Farquhar

Dr. Gwen Norrell

Each member has given unselfishly of himself, his time
and his knowledge whereby all share in my deep gratitude and
appreciation. Their individual contributions have been a
source of constant encouragement and constructive guidance
‘throughout my program of study.

Also, I wish to thank Dr. Leon Saul and Dr. Edith
ESheppard of the University of Pennsylvania, and to Dr.
Eitanley Kaplan of the Department of Psychiatry, University

OI? Cincinnati, for providing the manuals used in this study.

ii

 

 

 

Lastly, to my wife Reatha and to my children Jerry and

Diane, who have shared with me the hardships as well as the
satisfactions of accomplishment, I thankfully dedicate this

work.

 

 

 

 

William F. Moore

Candidate for the degree of
Doctor of Philosophy

Final Examination: February 13, 1963, College of Education

Thesis: The Effects of Posthypnotic Stimulation of Hostility
Upon Male High- and Low— Motivators

Outline of Studies: Major subject: Counseling Psychology
Minor subject: Counseling and Guidance

Biographical Items:

Born: June 28, 1929, Columbus, Ohio

Undergraduate Studies: Owosso College, 1947—1951, Th.B.
Degree, June, l95l; Taylor University, 1951—1952,
A.B. Degree, June, 1952; Capital University, 1952-
1953, A.B. Degree, June, 1953.

Graduate Studies: Ohio University, l953—l95A, M.A.
Degree, August, 195A; Michigan State University,
1959—1963, Ph.D. Degree, March, 1963.

Experience:

Probation Officer, Franklin County, Ohio, 1953—1955;
Assistant Supervisor, Department of Mental Hygiene
and Correction, State of Ohio, Columbus, Ohio,

1955-1959;
Chaplain, U. S. Navy, 1956-1959;
Psychologist Intern, Psychiatric Institute and Hospital,

Columbus, Ohio, 1962-—

Professional Memberships:

American Psychological Association

Psi Chi
Phi Delta Kappa

iv

 

 

   

INTRODUCTION
Hypothesis I

METHOD

 

 

 

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Experimental Procedure.

Paramnesia.

Conflict Inducing Instructions
Description of Control Group.
Dream Hostility Count .
Michigan State M-Scale.

Materials
Subjects
Results.

Analysis of the Results

DISCUSSION
SUMMARY
REFERENCES
APPENDICES
Appendix I
Appendix II
Appendix III
Appendix IV
Appendix V

Appendix VI
Appendix VII

Theory . . . . .
Review of the Literature

Pre-Experimental Preparations.

Hypnosis Induction Procedure
Hypnotically-Induced Conflict
Situation . . . .
Scoring Instructions.
Michigan State M-Scale

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

LIST OF TABLES

Table Page
1. Summary of Analysis of Variance Data for
Hostility Scores for High- and Low-
Motivators Under Two Conditions . . . . 22
2. Newman-Keuls Significance Test for All
Cell Means . . . . . . . . . . . 23

 

vi

 

 

 

INTRODUCTION

Academic achievement in school has been hypothesized
to be more than mental ability. Research points to a com-
bination of factors as aptitudes and skill, personality
traits, and environmental conditions. Investigators have
developed an interest in the personality composition of the
student in an attempt to find ways of assisting him in
achieving his fullest potentiality. The problem has partic-
ular significance when the high proportion in school popula—
tions of low motivated students alone is considered.

McClelland, §t_al3 (I953), characterized students with
a high need for achievement motivation by a concern with
(l) long—term involvement, (2) unique accomplishment, and
(3) competition with a standard of excellence. Farquhar
(1962) extended McClelland‘s formulations into polar dimen—
sions by postulating the opposite end of the n-Achievement
continuum by characterizing the student with low need for
academic achievement by a concern with (l) short-term
involvement, (2) ordinary or common accomplishment, and (3)
Prnerging or competition with a minimal standard of excellence.
Dchlelland's concern was with one facet of personality and
cnae facet of motivation; that is, general achievement

UKDtivation (n-Achievement). On the other hand, Farquhar

 

2

was interested in two facets of achievement motivation;

that is, high and low need for academic motivation (Thorpe,
unpublished paper). Refer to Appendix I for the theoretical
formulations for this study.

In the present study, the term high motivator is used
to designate the student who scored at the upper extreme on
the Michigan State M—Scale and who fulfilled the require—
ments for Factor III entitled ”Authority Relations" in
Taylor's ”Personality Factors Associated with Eleventh Grade
Male and Female Discrepant Achievement” (unpublished Doctoral
Dissertation). The low motivator is the term applied to the
student who scored at the lower extreme on the Michigan
State M-Scale and who fulfilled the same requirements for
Factor III but in the opposite direction from the high
motivator.

Over achiever is the student who receives grades which
are higher than might be expected from predictive measures
based on academic aptitude. The E2923 achiever receives
grades which are lower than might be expected.

The terms high motivator and low motivator will be
used as synonyms for over achiever and under achiever in
the present study.

A number of studies (Taylor, 1962; Farquhar, W. W.,
Payne, D. A., Chubb, W. H., and Thorpe, M.D.; and Shaw,
1958) have uncovered evidence of a defused, generalized
Iiostility in the low motivator and a few have found similar

Euggressiveness in the high motivator but with varying

 

 

 

 

 

intensities and control of direction, establishing (1) that

hostility actually exists in the extremely discrepantly
motivated student, and (2) the nature of the type and
direction of whatever hostility is there would offer new

and fundamental insight for both classroom practice and
therapy. The H. M. tend to operate at a high level of
energy. They control and direct their anxiety while con-
forming to academic pressures of culture. The H. M. is
attempting to merge with the academic standard while
resisting peer pressures. Conversely, the L. M. tends to
operate at variable levels of energy, to control his anxiety
less, and to resist social conventions. The low motivator
attempts to conform to his peer group and to resist academic
pressures (Taylor, 1962). See Appendix II for a more com-
plete review of the literature.

An investigation of the intensity and direction of
hostility in H.M.'s and L.M.'s necessitates being able to
manipulate hostility which is crucial to testing the ques—
tion of its presence in these two groups. Reyher (1958,
1960, 1961) has devised a procedure for manipulating
hostility in the following manner. ‘Under deep hypnosis the
subjects were given a hallucinatory experience that generated
intense feelings of hostility toward a given individual. A
conflict was created by the posthypnoticsuggestion that
(zonscious awareness of anything related to these eXperiences
vvould produce over-whelming feelings of hate and an urge to

tfear up some important papers nearby, which belonged to the

 

A

offending person. The author demonstrated that posthyp—
notically stimulated hostility often produced pathogenic
psychodynamics and psychopathology. Reyher noted that most
SE experienced symptoms some of which were considered quite
severe. He states that the hypnotic induction of a para-
mnesia which is associated with feelings of hostility and

a destructive urge can become a source of severe anxiety
and/or symptoms.

According to Rehyer (l962) the Eli defenses and con—/
trols against hostility whicn are learned early in life are
activated by the posthypnotic intensification of hostility.
The intense hate would be threatening to the Eli security
under the circumstances of the waking state, therefore, its
activation by a posthypnotic signal creates the conditions
of conflict, anxiety, and psychopathology (Reyher, 1962).
On the basis of the foregoing, individuals who have not
previously learned effective defenses and/or controls against
hostility can be expected to react to a hypnotically induced
process in a manner which can be contrasted to the reactions
of individuals who have learned effective controls and
defenses against hostility. In this study, the H. M. is
viewed as the S who has learned these defensive mechanisms
and can be compared to the L. M. who has been unsuccessful
in learning similar effective controls and defenses.

The specific hypothesis regarding the difference in

expressed hostility between these two groups of SE is as

follows:

 

Hypothesis I: Low motivators will verbalize more

hostility upon posthypnotic stimulation that will high

motivators.

 

METHOD

Experimental Procedure

 

See Appendix III for the pre—experimental prepara-
tions and Appendix IV for the hypnosis induction procedure.
Each S was given two 30-minute long tape recorded inter—
view sessions with a co-experimenter during which time he
could talk about any dramatic or personal experience he
has had or was having, or about anything else he desired to
talk about. Prior to one of these interviews, which were
counter—balanced across Ss, a hypnotically induced para—
mnesia was used to generate affect and/or impulses that
would be likely to have hostility—producing properties in
the posthypnotic period, when activated by appropriate

stimuli (Reyher, 1958).

Paramnesia

This experience involved the S_taking an important
examination in his most difficult subject. The results of
this examination could determine whether he passed or
failed the course. While attempting to study on the night
preceding the examination, he found that the harder he tried
to study the more other things, such as noises from children
playing nearby and the radio, came in to interfere and

'bother him. He tried to think over what he had just read

6

 

7
but found that he could not remember much of it. The time
was late in the evening and he was getting tired, but he
knew the only thing he could do was to cram. He received
very little sleep during the night and the following day
everything went wrong; there was not a clean shirt to wear
to school, no time remaining to study, and other classes
before the examination only helped to confuse him. Finally,
the time came for the examination. Some of the students
were trying to cram in a little more, while others were
making wisecracks about the examination. The competition
for grades was stiff and he became more unsure of his
ability to pass this one. The teacher had a reputation of

”sour grape” and enjoyed giving failing grades.

being a
There had been an unspoken understanding between S and his
teacher; neither one liked the other. As he watched the
teacher write the questions on the chalkboard, S realized
that the teacher had picked out the small, insignificant
details which he had not emphasized in class and which S
had not studied. This meant that after all of §L§ work, he
had pulled a dirty trick like this. Other students were
writing furiously; S could only scribble a confused, jumbled
Iness. Anxiety and pressure was building up more and more.
After the teacher had finished writing, he started walking
around the room stopping to look at one student's paper and
'then another. S could feel him coming up behind him and he
stopped at his side. S looked up and there was that stupid,

ilgly smile. He knew S was having a rough time and now he was

 

 

8

making fun of him. As the teacher went on up the aisle,
S had to hold onto the desk to keep from jumping on his
back and letting him have it. S finished the examination
in a hurry, knowing there was no use in trying anymore.
He slammed the papers down on the teacher's desk and left
the room cursing him under his breath. Refer to Appendix
V for the complete text of the hypnotically-induced con—
flict situation.

Conflict Inducing Instructions

 

Under deep hypnosis S was given a paramnesia which
generated intense feelings of hostility toward the central
person in the paramnesia. The posthypnotic conflict was
created by the following instructions:

Now listen carefully. After I awaken you, you will
not be able to remember anything about this session.
Sometime soon, after I awaken you, you will be inter—
viewed by Mr. who is doing a survey. As you
talk with him you will notice that in some ways he
reminds you more and more of this teacher
whom you hate. As you talke with RIB, this feeling
of similarity will increase until you are absolutely
certain that he is the same kind of person as the

teacher. In fact, you will find that all
the old feelings about your teacher will come boiling
up until you come to the brink of doing something

about them. These feelings will become almost over-
whelming and they will continue until the end of the
interview.

One of the important factors about this procedure,
as pointed out by Reyher (1963), is that the SS were given
an amnesia only for the paramnesia and not for the related
affect and impulse which were activated in the posthypnotic

period by the co—experimenter. The amnesia for the

 

 

 

 

 

9
paramnesia was maintained until the end of the research.
At the end of the experimental interview session, g was
rehypnotized and told that the experience which the exper—
imenter had recounted to him was only a dream; consequently,
it would fade away and it would have no significance to him

after being awakened.

Description of Control Group

 

Six good hypnotic E3 were randomly selected to stim-

ulate hypnosis. This control group were given the same

 

treatment as the experimental §§; however, prior to the
induction of the paramnesia they were awakened by a co-
experimenter and told to fake hypnosis. This group served
the purpose of controlling for the possibility that the
nature of the instructions wereinstrumental in producing
an increase in psychopathology.

The use of the control group is based on an implica—
tion involved in the use of hypnosis in research which has
been pointed out by a number of previous investigators
(Crne, lQEQ; Weitzenhoffer, l960; Feyher, 1962). These
authors have presented evidence which raises the question
of hypnotic §s responding in a manner complementary to the
investigator. Orne (1999) suggests that some of the §§
must be asked by a co—experimenter, unknown to ghe experi—
Inenter, to fake hypnosis in order to determine the demand
characteristics of the research. in his paradigm for

hypnotically inducing psychopathology, Reyher {1962) has

 

10
made this a condition for meeting the requirements of the

paradigm.

Dream Hostility Count

 

For the present study, an adaptation of Saul and

Sheppard's Dream Hostility Count (D.H.C.) (Kaplan, et al.,

 

1961) was used to obtain a hostility score for each E.

The rationale for this results from a number of consider-
ations: (l) the scoring procedure developed by Saul and
Sheppard (1956) and modified by Kaplan, et al. (1961)
provides discrete scoring categories for a §;s verbal
production. Eacn clause—unit was independently scored on
the basis of its content. Scoring is along a 6-point scale,
according to the degree of hostility in the action, feeling,
or scene described. Thus, in general, a maximum of 6 is
assigned if the clause refers to death, human; 5 to des—
truction, nonhuman; 4 to injury, human; 3 to damage, non—
human; 2 to annoyance, human; and l to impairment, nonhuman.
The final score for a verbal sample on the D. H. C.
represents the sum of all the individual unit scores for

the particular samplegt2) the D. H. C. scale provides for
measuring the intensity of hostility expressed via a §L§
verbalization; and (3) the method provides a direct measure-
ment of a §;§_hostility; that is, obtaining the strength of
the hostility in an individual by observing the intensity

and frequency with which he thinks and talks about hostility

as measured by verbal productions.

 

 

ll

MiChigau State M—Scale

 

 

 

Using a bi—polar theory as a basis, Farquhar (unpub—
lished paper) constructed an objective inventory suitable
for measuring an individual’s need for academic achievement.

The Michigan State N—Scale consists of four sub—
scales totaling 259 forced—choice items (see Appendix VII
for the complete M—Scale), and was utilized to differenti-
ate the extremely discrepant H. M.'s from the L. M.'s in
the present study. The four subscales are (l) Generalized
Situation Choice Inventory, (2) Word Eating List, (3) Human
Trait Inventory, and (4) Preferred Job Characteristic Scale.
The full scale takes approximately 60 minutes to administer

and the protocals are machine scored.

Materials
The typescript of the second, fourth, and sixth
5—minute segments of each interview for all §E were broken

down into their component clauses consisting essentially

inci

*3

Ias according to Saul

S

of a subject and predicate. Sco
and Sheppard s D. H. C. (lji3). The indepehdent clause-
units were independently scored on the basis of their con—
tent by two individuals trained in scoring methods.
Although three 5-minute segments were theoretically derived
from each 30—minute interview, the sum of the scores for
the total number of clause-units was the score for the S.
The scoring instructions are given in Appendix VI. The

rationale for using three segments of the interview was

 

 

12

based on the fact that the intensity of hostility could
conceivably vary over time. S could be mildly hostile
during the initial minutes of the interview session but as
the posthypnotic stimilus became more effective the hostility
could increase in intensity. Or, the greatest amount of
hostility could be expressed during the first few minutes
of the interview session and then dissipate over time.

The experimental environment was the same for all §§
in the study. Induction of hypnosis and the paramnesia by

the experimenter was conducted in a small room arranged so

i U)

that privacy was insured and distractions were minimal.
was seated facing a wall, and E was seated to the side and

a little behind S in an attempt to further minimize dis—
tractions. A similar environmental setting was utilized

in the interview sessions, althougl S and the co—experimenter

were facing each other during the interview.

Subjects

The Michigan State h—Scale was administered to 520
eleventh grade male high school students. This population
was comprised of the enti‘e male classes from eleven hichigan
high schools. The protocals were machine scored and tabulated

b“ rank order with the to seven 36? cent (32 students)
3 .

n. . . u

arbitrarily being designated as high motivators and the

, , . . . w . ;_ l I
bottom seven per cent (32 stidents) being oeSignaoed as low
Inotivators.” The students at each extreme of the ochtinuum

who met Factor 3——entitled "Authority Relations'(Taylor,

 

 

l3
1962)——in opposite directions, comprised the prospective
§§. Factor 3 was used to help differentiate the H. M.
from the L. M. ”Authority Relations" are defined (English
and English, lQEB) as those relatiinsnips between two or
more people—-one person having a definite responsibility
for others because of tra ‘ning, amount of knowledge, posi-
tion, or years. This responsible person then directs,
controls, or guides the other irdividual’s actions and
behavior to a significant extent. The items which consti—
tute Factor 3 are as follows:

Item 16: ”I have been quite independent and free
from family rule.“

Item 37: ”I have difficulty working under strict
rules and regulations."

Item 54: ”I fird it difficult to find time to study
assigrflmerts fc r the next day.

Item 69: ”I have to be in the mood before I can

study.”

The H. M. answered all four of the above items on the
Michigan State M—Scale in the opposite direction from the
manner in which the L. M. a:lswered the same item ms. All of
the 51 students meeting Taylor s criteria volunteered for
research involving hypnosis.

The hypnotic criterion utilized for including an E
in the study is his ability to experience a total hypnotic
amnesia. Amne la, in this study, is co nSi idered the minimal
criterion of depth of hypnosis for the hypnotically induced
conflict. Nineteen H. M.’s and 19 L. M.'s meeting this

criterion were used in the present sample. Three of these

 

 

14
EE from each group were selected randomly to "fake” hypnosis.
The procedure for instructing ”faking” §E as controls is
similar to the method utilized in a previous experiment
(Reyher, 1960). This control group was utilized to serve
the purpose of controlling for the possibility that the
nature of the instructions was instrumental in producing an
increase in psychopathology; that is, to determine the
demand characteristics of the research. At a specified
point in the proceedin

gs the experimenter left the room and

K“

a co—experimenter entered and instructed the 0, unknown to

 

the experimenter, to either (I) awaxen from the hypnotic

trance and continue the experiment by ”faking" hypnosis;

or, (2) continue ”sleeping.” A difficulty encountered with

this method is that one § apparently spontaneously returned

to the hypnotic state when the senior experimenter returned

to the room and continued with the experimental instructions.
The controlled variables for all EE included sex,

race, grade in high school, experimental environment, and

experimental procedure. The ages ranged from l6 years, 3

months to 18 years.

 

Results
Analysis of the results. Current studies are begin—
ning to show cultural differences in motivation. Therefore,

the findings in the present study may be regarded as
applicable only to this group; that is, to the male, white

population from which the sample was drawn. The Spearman

 

16
under each condition will illustrate the nature and mean—

ingfulness of the verbal content.

1. Subject A, age 17, High motivator, Control condition:

We had a conference (golf) meet up at Ithica, Michigan.
I‘m still mad at myself cause it was such an easy course
and I was so sure I couldn’t lose it. First par 4 hole, I
didn‘t even hit a good drive and I was to the right of the

green.

2. Subject A, Experimental condition:

 

One night my feet hurt and I couldn‘t even move. You
had to lift me just to get me around. I thought I was an
emergency case so they hustled me to the hospital and there
wasn’t one doctor in the whole hospital. While I was there
a woman came in and you could tell she was in great pain.
She told me she had great chest pains. I never had a right
day yet. I am the world's most unluckiest person.

3. Subject B, age 16 years, 6 months, High motivator,
Control Condition;

 

The only trouble is when I‘m outside and running I
breath clearly and my chest is clear. I‘m O.K. when I‘m
doing the sport and after I get done I slow down and fill
up . . . ache . . . eyes start watering . . . sneezing.
We played the second team. They scored 4 runs . . . they
were gonna have us by one run, then they got us down 1, 2,
3 in the next minute. It was all over. They were clear

plays; the umpire couldn't have missed them. We been going

 

17
there for about l0 years now, We havenit won a tournament
yet. We just went over to play; we didn’t figure much on

winning.

4. Subject B, Experimental condition;

 

I've got a sinus condition and when I get out and run
in the cool air I get all stuffed up and can t breath, sick
. . . Most of the kids run around in separate little groups

of their own. I don t seem to get any enjoyment out of it.

“fit: _

Most of the popular ones stay together and the rest of the

 

people just go their own way; same backgrounds, same enjoy- I
ments. I think some of the teachers they have in the junior

class aren't helping too much. We could learn but they

didn’t seem to teach so we could learn. And, then, there's

teachers that are all for our class; always trying to help us.

5. Subject C, age 16 years, 10 months, high motivator,
Control condition:

 

 

One time we took my aunt looking for huckleberries,

and she said ”Isn t that a bottle?” And, there it was on

a dirt road. I hopped out of the car because I wanted to
find one first. And, I found this purple one. Boy, I
proudly showed it around. My aunt called us over and she
found the most perfect one youid ever want to see. I sort
of felt like leaving her there but we had to take her with
us. Everytime I go over to her house and see that bottle
sitting on her window, it just makes me envious but I don't

let it show.

 

18

6. Subject C, Experimental condition:

 

I feel like this teacher I dislike in particular
although he was quite a good teacher. Sometimes his teact-
ing was different than I would if I was teaching. He lets
kids cheat a lot. And, I thought this wasn’t right. I
never cheated in his class; I don‘t mean to brag but I
didn't. I didn't feel this was right; I didn't say anything
cause I didn't want a flunky's grade. My life . . . been
quite a dull life. it‘s been an average life; I can’t say
that I regret it. When I talk, I like to talk about Cuba,

Berlin; and, I also like to talk about chemistry and teaching.

7. Subject D, age 17, Low motivator, Control condition;

 

My sister s the one that bitches. Maybe its my im—
agination but someday Iid like to smack her. She tells my
mother and my dad. And, my dad jumps down my neck and that‘s

when I don‘t like it.

8. Subject D, a

xperimertal cogg‘tion:

That teacher we had;she was a real tag. I felt like
getting up and hitting her with a chair or something. I
felt like getting up and hitting her so tad it wasn't funny.
Could have killed her right there. The best thing to do is
keep your mouth shut. If I had had a gun I‘d get even with
her but I'd have to go to jail. My dad does the same thing

sometimes. Said I did something I didn’t do. dripping that

I drive too fast.

 

, ll

 

19

9. Subject E, age 17, Low motivator, Control cordition:

 

I get up in front of the class and I just can‘t talk;
I don't know why. Everybody’s looking at you and they're

q
>

all thinking well he‘s goo y or something, he's standing
the wrong way, or doing something he’s not supposed to be
doing. So many different things that they can find fault

with, you know.

10. Subject 3, Experimental condition:

 

I’d like to be a top-notch syudert and I don‘t know

why I can‘t. One day right after another, sit in school

and do stuff; just don‘t seem to accomplish anything. Lots
of kids say its the teacher's fault; go back on the teacher;
say the teacher don‘t like me, she gets on my nerves I

guess . . . She 5 (mother) always saying that when you get
out in life and find out itis harder and all that. I know
all that; I know it’s gonna be harder than heck, but I still
want to get out and not be at home . . . My mother, if she
tells me to do it, I gless I think I have to do it. I do

it and I don’t feel good atout it.

ll. Subiect F are l» vears Q moaths, low motivator.
v, ,7 ., ) J , _
c t

J
Control ornd i ‘ ion:

 

I always had the bad habit of fouling (basketball) out.
Last year, I was all over the guys. I don’t know why; just
keep slapping at them all the time . . . Everybody can‘t be

number one player but you lose interest in it if you‘re not

in there with them working. I had a problem when I was in

 

20

my freshman year; I had a bad habit of smoking and I
couldn't break it. It was just the bunch I was running
with. I was with the crowd and we was always smoking and
everything . . . The coach told him (a friend) he wasn‘t
going to dress unless he ran something because all he was
trying to do was be an individualist. I don’t think very

much of the coach after he did that.

12. Subject F, Experimental condition:

 

I was on the first team (football). He (coach) was
telling me what I'm supposed to do and I‘m all tensed up.
I didn't even get in the game. I got mad at the coach; I
didn't want to talk to him or anything . . . I think we’ll

have a rotten season . . . Gonna be hurting.

From the foregoing examples, it appears that the H.
M. tend to be intrapunitive and direct their hostility
inwardly, while the L. M. tends to be extrapunitive and
direct their hostility outwardly. This finding is in agree—
: ment with current literature wnich Characterized the H. M.
as operating at a high level of energy, while controlling
and directing his anxiety in the process of conforming to
academic pressures of culture. On the other hand, the L.
M. is characterized as operating at variable levels of/
energy and controls his anxiety less effectively. He resists
social conventions and attempts to conform to his peer group

while resisting academic pressures. A number of implications

 

21
Created by this differential behavior will be discussed in
greater detail under ”Discussion."

A Two-Factor Analysis of Variance with repeated
measures on one factor (Edwards, 1960; Winer, 1962) was
applied to the composite hostility scores for the experi—
mental §§, The assumptions for this analysis of variance;
namely, the homogeneity of variance, was tested by the
Harley’s Fmax test. Both the homogeneity of variance
within groups across conditions, as well as the homogeneity

of variance of Es within a given group and condition, were

 

found to be significant at the .05 level. Technically
speaking, since the assumptions of the analysis of variance
have not been met, the procedure should end at this point
or a nonparametric statistical model should be utilized.
However, in view of the Norton study (Lindquist, 1956) in
which the analysis of variance was found to be a very
robust statistic even when the assumption of homogeneity
of variance is not met but with equal His ithin groups,
the results of the analysis are presented. Furthermore,
a conservative test for degrees of freedom suggested by
Greenhouse and Geisser (1950) was used to enter the tabu-
lated F distribution.

The obtained F~values for the H. H.7s and the L. M.‘s
under both conditions are reported in Table 1.

On the basis of previous research (Taylor, 1962;
Farquhar, Payne, Chubb, Thorp, and Shaw, 1958), both H. M.’s

and L. M.’s were characterized by a defused, generalized

22
hostility. Relevant to these investigations, it is shown
in the present study that the H. M. and the L. M. do not
differ significantly in the intensity of hostility expressed
when averaged across the two conditions. On the other
hand, the analysis shows there is a significant difference
at the .01 level between the control condition and the

experimental condition.

TABLE 1

SUMMARY OF ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE DATA FOR HOSTILITY
SCORES FOR HIGH- AND LOW-MOTIVATORS UNDER
TWO CONDITIONS

 

 

 

 

Source Sum of Squares df F p
Between Groups 1,A15.7 l 3.76 n.s.
Between Conditions 3,122.1 l 28.56 <:.Ol
Interaction A89.5 1 4.48 ‘<.O5
Between Subjects 11,284.95 30
Residual ' 3,279.15 30

Total 19,591.40

 

The appropriate statistic for testing Hypothesis I
.is the interaction effect between groups. An inspection
(If the interaction between Ss and conditions reveals there

.153 a significant interaction at the .05 level between Ss

 

tvj_thin the two groups and the two conditions. This finding
lxeeads to the conclusion that one of the conditions had a
dj;ITferential effect depending on the group to which it was

allfillied; that is, the joint effect of the combination of

 

 

23

fkactors, over and above the effects of the factors sepa-

zreately, accounted for the significance of this finding.
Having shown a significant interaction, it becomes
xieacessary to determine which combination of factors are
exignificant. The Newman-Keuls Significance Test (Winer,
1£962) is a statistical test which sequentially tests all
goossible combinations of factors while retaining both the F
ealpha level and the "protection level" at a constant level. i
The analysis shows that the mean scores for the L. M.

Ullder the experimental condition do differ significantly

 

fd?0m the mean scores for the H. M. under the same condition
at: the .05 level. This finding supports Hypothesis I which
puredicted that L. M.'s would verbalize more hostility upon

pm>sthypnotic stimulation than would H. M.'s.

TABLE 2

NEWMAN-KEULS SIGNIFICANT TEST FOR ALL CELL MEANS

Source Means D p

 

 

Ek313ween L. M. Experimental Condition) 25.3 23 A 0
and H. M. Control Condition) 1.9 ° ' 5

EN313ween L. M. (Experimental Condition) 25.3 1 O
and L. M. (Control Condition) 5.8 9'5 ' 5

Ekeirween L. M. Experimental Condition) 25.3 15 0 05
and H. M. Experimental Condition 10.3 ' '

:Bertween H. M. Experimental Condition) 10.3 8.4 n.s.
and H. M. Control Condition) 1.9

ZBEFtween H. M. Experimental Condition) 10.3 4 5 n s
and L. M. Control Condition) 5.8 ' ° '

ZBeirween L. M. Control Condition 5.6 3 9 n s
and H. M. Control Condition 1.9 ' ' '

 

 

"K. W‘—

."'.

 

 

 

Although of secondary importance to the study, it is

 

iiqteresting to notice that the mean scores for the L. M.
taxider the control condition do not differ significantly
ffirom the mean scores for the H. M. under the same condition.
Flowever, when the L. M. under the experimental condition is
c:ontrasted with the L. M. under the control condition, there
j_s a significant difference at the .05 level in the intensity !
c>f hostility verbally expressed. When the H. M. is compared I4
tinder the same two conditions, the analysis shows a nonsig-

riificant difference. From these findings, it can be shown

 

tliat the mean hostility scores for the L. M.'s, averaged
aacross conditions, do differ significantly from the H. M.‘s.
Ffiinally, when the H. M. under the experimental condition is
cxompared with the L. M. under the control condition, the

rnesan scores do not differ significantly.

 

DISCUSSION

One of the primary purposes of the study was to
iravestigate the differences in intensity of hostility
vwarbally expressed by H. M.‘s when contrasted with L. M.3s
Tfide feasibility of the techniques utilizing the verbal
pnroductions of SE, and the use of hypnotically induced
puaramnesia, has been demonstrated by previous investigators.
ITie present study combined the two established independent
Ineathods of investigating hostility into a single process in
ari attempt to clarify hostility as a personality trait
(Briaracteristic of the H. M. and the L. M.

The theoretical considerations forming the basis for
the study (McClelland, 1953, 1956; Farquhar, 1962), included
a. ciifferential development for H. M.’s and L. M.‘s. For

<3><Emnple, H. M.'s are described as individuals who are
.111\/olved in the attainment of a long—term goal, and in
axzczomplishing other than run—of-the‘mill daily tasks. They
aJrea engaged in competitive activity where competing with a
Sileuidard of excellence is the primary concern. On the other
Tiarufl, L. M.’s are characterized as being at the opposite
extnreme in their need for academic achievement.

In addition to the differences mentioned above, there

are aalso other basic personality differences found in the

25

 

 

-—~—_.,

"C's”-..

.. it?" '

 

 

 

tVJO groups, one of which is the expression of hostility.

[ilfithough previous investigators (Taylor, 1962; Farquhar,
Payne, Chubb, and Thorpe; and Shaw, 1958) have shown evi-

cieance of a defused and generalized hostility in both the

Ei. M. and the L. M., the intensity of the hostility and

‘tIle control of its direction of eXpression appears to vary

'beatween the groups. The hypothesis investigated in the

pnresent study predicted that L. M.‘s would verbalize more
knastility upon posthypnotic stimulation than would H. M.’s.

Ifiie results, which supported the hypothesis, demonstrate

triat although the two groups do not differ significantly

iri the intensity of hostility expressed under a control

ccxndition, they do react differentially when the hostility

ixs posthypnotically stimulated. From this result,

hue

it can

concluded that both groups possess hostility but the
Inuariner in which it is expressed depends upon the type of

ESixtuation the particular SIis in.

These findings are in essential agreement with current

1.15terature pertaining to differences between H. M.'s and

14. M.'s. Taylor s review of the literature (unpublished

PNEIDer) characterizes the L. M. as having much underlying

Eigggression, strong feelings of inferiority, defensive about
his abilities and anxious to maintain a belief in his own
Sutxeriority, possesses a negative attitude toward education,

ilaclcs confidence in himself, hostility is a pronounced

chainacteristic, engages in asocial behavior, has weak ego

 

 

27

czcnitrol, and maintains an apathetic withdrawal. The H. M.
13c>ssesses adequate self control, he tends toward stronger
:iritellectual and social interest, is academically inclined,
rials high educational and vocational goals, maintains a
sseanse of academic effectiveness, and is capable of sustained
axad.diligent application to achieve a goal.

The H. M. has less underlying anxiety but more inner

'téension when contrasted with the L. M., according to
licxrrall (1957). Concommitantly, the H. M. has more self
ccontrol; therefore, his anxiety does not manifest itself
iri as directly an overt manner as does the L. M. The
aIiXiety observed in the H. M. appears to be directed toward
a fear of failure, and this fear is controlled and directed
‘tcyward achievement. If the satisfactions he gains from
zaczademic achievement and adult approval is thwarted, he
‘teerids to turn his hostility inwardly. For example, if the
Pi- M. fails an examination in school, he often rationalizes
‘tlfiiat he failed because he was not sufficiently prepared.
Trldca L. M., on the other hand, tends to deny his shortcomings
81113 his fear of failure, and often will ventilate his
tuasstility toward the teacher and/or the test. The L. M.
Ertizempts to derive his satisfaction in areas other than the
Eicaademic environment. He more readily identifies with a
E§PCNip which is supportive and maintains an active interest
111 iJmnediate rewards and gratification.

Orne (1959) has pointed out that hypnotic §E tend to

be Emirticularly cooperative participants and that much of

 

 

 

 

 

, ...§£.....Vfi......flnfitgtfiwfl

 

28
their hypnotic behavior is the result of their conception
of the role of the hypnotic subject as well as cues provided
by the hypnotist and the situation. In other words, the
extent to which compliance can take place depends upon the
demand characteristics in the experimental situation. In
the present study, an effort was made to determine the
demand characteristics of the research, and the effective-
ness of the experimental instructions, by the use of a
”faking” control group. The use of a hypnotically induced
process to produce psychosomatic reactions and psychopath-
ology has been demonstrated (Reyher, 1958, 1961a, 1961b).
If the induced process has no intrinsic capacity for spon-
taneously producing alterations in behavior, such as repres-
sion and psychosomatic reactions, then the induced processes
have no real clinical significance and the imposed experi-
mental reactions are simply hypnotic suggestions to be
carried out (Reyher, 1962).

On the basis of Orne‘s formulations, if there were
strong demand characteristics present in the experimental
Situation, there should have been no differential results in
hostility expressed by the H. M. and the L. M. groups WhiCh
was not the case.

Reyher (1960) noted that although the status of the

conflict may be an important factor in determining the

general characteristics of the symptoms, the uniqueness of

the individual's neurophysiology would determine the specific

form of the neurophysiological reactions, and the uniqueness

 

 

 

 

. r. .... fiigiihmw-.. ’wa _

(.2... r. I:

3

{Agassi .

.awr’wm .T- ., my); Wif.

 

 

 

 

(31‘ the personality would determine the nature of his con-

:sc:ious states. From Reyher s formulations it would appear
13r1at the H. M. would be the greater repressor when compared
vviqth the L. M. and, concommitantly, more H. M.'s would
Irerport somatic symptoms. An investigation of the data
sldows that six H. M.’s did report symptoms as compared to
fkour L. M.‘s who reported symptoms, which is consistent
vrith.previous research in this area.

In terms Of.§L§ adjustment and current personality
tiieory, such findings tend to point to a need for reevalu-
afi:ing present-day ”accepted” approaches for dealing with
tiaese two groups of individuals. The H. M. characteris-
t:ix3a11y accepts controls, regulations, and assignments.
liee is highly motivated toward academic success, and com—
Ioullsively devotes much time and effort to studying, punc-
‘tlaeality, and gaining his satisfactions from academic
84311ievement and adult approval. In addition, he attempts

‘CCD create a favorable impression on authority figures and
113 eager to please them. It would appear than an underlying
adsssumption regarding the H. M. is that repression of his
E1C>Stility allows for more psychological adjustment. However,
111 the H. M.'s attempt to conform to the demands of his
EBitniation, it may be that the hostility he experiences has
110 coutlet for expression and, consequently, it is turned
inwardly.

Although Speculative, the L. M. may be struggling to

saftnguard his mental health and individuality even though

 

 

 

 

 

30
rue seemingly defeats his purpose by overtly expressing his
Iic>stility and engaging in less favorable behavior. While
‘blie results of the study must be interpreted cautiously,
'tlue findings do raise the question that perhaps investiga-
‘t<3rs in this area have been operating under a misconception
Isegarding the L. M.‘s; that is, the L. M. may be as capable
618 the H. M. in controlling his hostility, especially in a
ruonthreatening situation. Under a condition which stimulates
riostility, the L. M. manages and directs his hostility in a

fl

nianner different from the H. M. the significance of a study

 

cxf hostility between these two groups may not revolve around
tide intensity of hostility expressed but may focus on the
d:irection of its expression and the manner in which it is
e1<pressed.

Reyher (1960) investigated the degree of posthypnotic
I?€{pression and type of reaction and found that the degree
C>f‘ repression appeared to fluctuate over the course of the
<E><perimental session. He also observed that the type of
I“esaction appeared to vary with changes in the degree of
lreypression. When repression first begins to break down,
TLIie first symptoms seem to be specific or circumscribed in
Ilainire, but as repression progressively weakens, there
Eipuoears to be more generalized nonspecific reactions and
11igflier drive level. It is possible that highly stressful
Stertes as the emotional reactions stemming from the threat
Of Iiostile impulses may produce different patterns of auto—

nOmic responses in the individual. Although sparce and

 

 

31

inconclusive data was obtained in the present study to

demonstrate how the continuum of repression is character—
ized by a progression of symptoms along its extent, from
the somatic reactions on a partially awareness level to
the subjective reactions on a fully awareness level, a few
samples will acquaint the reader with the nature of the

l
somatic complaints and the psychological complaints. i

Somatic Reactions

 

1. Subject 1, age 17, High motivator: Complained

 

of tachycardia, quivering in stomach.

2. Subject 11, age 16, High motivator: Tachycardia,

 

stomach muscles tightened, hands perspiring.

3. Subject III, age 17, High motivator: Tachy—

 

cardia, body muscles tense.

4. Subject 1V, age 17, Low motivator: Rapid

 

breathing, nausea.

5. Subject V, age 17, Low motivator: Nausea.

 

6. Subject V1, age 16, Low motivator: Rigidity in

 

 

left side of body.

Psychological Reactions

 

1. Subject V11, age 17, High motivator: Became very
quiet and withdrawn; refused to talk with interviewer.
2. Subject V111, age 17, High motivator: Felt

uneasy and tense.

3. Subject IX, age 16, High motivator: Had feelings

 

 

Of being angry but could not relate direction of his

 

 

 

J.

Eyewfifikwp 7,

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

hostility. Later stated he did not feel like talking to

the interviewer.

4. Subject X, age 17, Low motivator: §_stated

 

”That was iti”; namely, that he had experienced exactly this
same type of experience.

5. Subject XI, age 17, Low motivator: Conflict was

 

very realistic. .§ states that a surgically removed section
of his foot, which has healed, hurt very badly during the
paramnesia, and during the interview.

6. Subject XII, age 17, Low motivator: 'S became

 

intensely hostile and aggressive, and threatened the inter-
viewer by his behavior.

In considering the findings of the study and implica-
tions regarding the education, management, and treatment of
H. M.‘s and L. M.'s, it may be convenient to explore the
difficulty of characterizing the H. M. and the L. M. as
being the same type of individual. They do not seem to be
the same and must be dealt with differentially. Because
the H. M. is cooperative and conforming, because he does
strive to achieve academically and creates minimal difficulty,
and because he does passively control his hostility he pre-
sents a favorable impression on the peOple in his environ-
ment and is amenable to change and instruction. Although
he seemingly does contribute more to society than the L. M.,
it is questionable whether society is assisting him in his
development and maturation or whether society is encouraging

and rewarding the formation of a maladjusted personality.

 

 

 

33

Shaw and Brown (1957) state that low motivation is not

a surface phonomenon easily modified but rather is related
to the basic personality structure of the individual. Payne
(1961) found that the literature supports certain relation-
ships and behaviors related to the L. M. and academic
achievement. Among the more salient of these are the
following: (1) a low frequency of discipline in which the
individual is expected to accept the consequences of his
behavior, (2) a high frequency of parental and authority
behavior which is perceived by the individual as rejecting
or ignoring, and (3) a somewhat cold and emotionless atmos-
phere which engenders feelings of doubt and confusion in
areas of understanding and acceptance. His hostility is a
pronounced characteristic which tends to create a less
favorable impression resulting in the student being less
acceptable to his parents, teachers, and others who attempt
to deal with him.

From the foregoing, it would seem apparent that be—
fore modifications in behavior and/or significant personal—
ity changes in these individuals can be expected, it may be
necessary for the authority figures to change their view-
point of and approach to these groups. The present study
has shown that both H. M.'s and L. M.‘s can verbally eXpress
their hostility, and inspection of the data suggest that the
H. M. tends to direct his hostility inwardly while the L. M.
directs his hostility outwardly. It is possible that the

L.IW. is psychologically healthier than the H. M. because he

 

 

 

:5“ .

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

34

can and does ventilate his hostility. If he can be assisted
in discovering new channels for redirecting the hostile
energy which be expends, it is likely that the socially
desirable changes in his personality will be facilitated.
Likewise, if the H. M. can be assisted in ventilating a
portion of his hostility, it is likely that later psycho-

pathology could be avoided.

 

 

   

SUMMARY

A procedure for the investigation of hostility was
described which utilized a hypnotically induced process
to produce psychopathology and psychosomatic reactions, E
and the verbal productions of Ss, in an attempt to clarify .

hostility as a personality trait characteristic of the

 

H. M. and the L. M. r
The specific hypothesis of the study was derived
from Farquhar's extension of McClelland's n-achievement
theory. According to this theory, a student with a high
need for achievement motivation is concerned with (1) long—
term involvement, (2) unique accomplishment, and (3) com—
petition with a standard of excellence. At the other
extreme of the continuum, the student with a low need for
academic achievement is concerned with (l) short-term in—
volvement, (2)0rdinary or minimal accomplishment, and (3)
merging or competition with a minimal standard of excel-
lence. Both the H. M. and the L. M. are characterized as
possessing varying intensities and directions of hostility.
The H. M. tends to control hostility and to direct it
inwardly, while the L. M. tends to express overt hostility

without the social or peer restrictions found in the first

group,

 

,t'i.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The purpose of the study was to investigate the
effects of posthypnotic stimulation of hostility upon
male H. M.'s and L. M.‘s. The male high school student
who scored at the extremes on a measure of academic moti-
vation was arbitrarily termed "high motivator" or ”low
motivator" depending upon his score. The sample consisted
of 16 H. M.'s and 16 L. M.'s which served as the experi-
mental groups. The "faking" control group consisted of
3 H. M.'s and 3 L. M. s, and were given the same experi—
mental instructions as the experimental group but who were
simulating hypnosis. This control group served the purpose
of controlling for the possibility that the nature of the
instructions and experimental situation was instrumental
in producing an increase in psychopathology; that is, to
determine the demand characteristics of the research.

Each S_was given two 30-minute long tape recorded
interviews during which time §_could talk about any dramatic
or personal experience he has had or was having. One inter—
view was in a normal ”waking” state, and the other interview
immediately followed a hypnotically induced paramnesia. The
procedure for inducing a paramnesia followed Reyher's (1962)
paradigm for hypnotically inducing psychopathology. The
typescript of the second, fourth, and sixth five—minute
Segments of each interview for all §§ were broken down into
their component clauses consisting essentially of a subject

émni predicate. Each clause—unit was then scored along a

 

 

 

6—point scale (Saul and Sheppard, 1956), on the basis of
its content, by two independent judges.

The inter—judge correlation, using a Spearman Rank—
Order Coefficient, between scores was .999. Since the
correlation was so high, the mean score was used for the
statistical comparisons. To test the demand characteristics
of the research, a procedure for hypnotically inducing a
process for producing psychosomatic reactions and psycho—
pathology (Reyher, 1958) was applied to the experimental
§E and the control group of ”faking" SE, It was found that
a significantly greater number of experimental Ss reported
psychosomatic reactions as contrasted to the control SE.
Since the hypnotically induced paramnesia appeared to be
genuine, obtained differences on the dependent variable
also are likely to be valid reactions to the induced con—
flict.

A number of examples were given to illustrate the
nature and meaningfulness of the verbal content expressed
by the §§ in the interview sessions. From these examples,
it appeared that the H. M. is intrapunitive and directs his
hostility inwardly upon himself, while the L. M. is extra—
punitive and directs his hostility outwardly onto others.
Such a finding is consistent with current literature pera
taining to these two groups of students.

A Two—Factor Analysis of Variance with repeated meas—
ures on one factor (Edwards, 1960; Winer, l9o2) was utilized

to test the hypothesis of this study which predicted that

 

 

[pl
_ a . . . . . . . at r. . . .. P. ..
. _. a: .C _. y. r.” as L. .. .J . 5 :9 . wl L. A. no r.
. 3 2.. v. ..H .,. _ a. . , - . .
r. a 2. r c .. .. u 1 . . . .. .. . a... .C . .. :c 2.» f o a u
A.\v w. h ~ * ~ ~ ~\~ « ‘pu “A . . » «Md r a n~a N: K
,- g 4 n” {5.

 

 

 

 

 

 

.‘5’8.

‘7'. r-v-v'_ _

 

 

 

38

L. M.'s would verbalize more hostility upon posthypnotic
stimulation than would H. M.'s. The interaction effect
between Ss and conditions revealed that there was a sig—
nificant difference in the intensity of the hostility

being expressed by these two groups. The Newman-Keuls
Significance Test (Winer, 1962) was then utilized to deter—
mine which combination of factors was significant. The
analysis indicated that the mean scores for the L. M. under
the experimental condition did differ significantly from
the mean scores for the H. M. under the same condition.
This finding supports the hypothesis being tested in this
study.

From the results of the study and a review of the
literature, it has been shown that both the H. M. and the
L. M. can be characterized as possessing hostility of a
diffused and generalized nature. Consistent with previous
research (Reyher, 1960), it was also noted that the H. M.
tends to be a greater repressor than the L. M. and, con-
commitantly, more H. M.'s reported somatic symptoms.
Although not consistent with previous investigations which
found that L. M.'s report more psychological reactions than
do H. M.'s, an equal number Of.§§ within each group reported
some type of a subjective complaint.

In terms of a §;§_adjustment and current personality
theory, such findings point to a need for reappraising
"accepmed" concepts regarding the H. M. and the L. M.

Althougjithe H. M. does appear to be contributing more to

 

 

p;

_:
r:

‘xy

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

39

society, it is questionable whether he is being assisted in
his psychic development, or whether he is being encouraged
and rewarded for the formation of psychopathology in his
personality. Future research in this area may also be able
to substantiate the speculation that the L. M. is as capable
as the H. M. in controlling his hostility in non—threatening
situations but that under a condition which stimulated
hostility there is a differential difference in the intensity
of hostility expressed and the manner in which it is directed.
The significance of a study of hostility between these two
groups may focus on the direction of its expression and the
manner in which it is expressed, rather than on differences

in intensities.

 

 

 

 

 

v0.-

 

 

 

 

REFERENCES

Dowd, Robert Jr. Underachieving students of high capacity.
J. higher Education, 1952, 23, 327—330.

 

Drews, E. M. and Teahan, J. E. Parents attitudes and
academic achievement. J. clinical Psychol., 1957,

13, 328-332.

Duncan, C. P. and Wishner, J. Psychology of motivation.
New York: Lippincott, 1961.

Edwards, Allen L. Experimental design in psychological
research. New York: Rinehart & Co., 1960.

 

English, H. B. and English, A. D. A comprehensive diction—
ary of psychological and psychoanalytical terms.
New York: Longmans Green Co., 1958.

Farquhar, William W. Research frontier: An integrated
research attack on academic motivation. J. counsel.
Psychol., 1962, 9, 84-86.

. The development of the Michigan State M-Scales.
Unpublished Paper, Michigan State University.

 

 

A cross-cultural study of the motivational
factors influenging academic achievement. Unpublished
Paper, Michigan State University.

 

jFarquhar, William W., Payne, D. A., Chubb, W. H., and
Thorpe, M.D. Summary of characteristics of over- and
under—achievers. Unpublished Paper, Michigan State
University.

 

Gerberich, J. H. Factors related to the college achievement
of high-aptitude students who fail of expectation and
low-aptitude students who exceed expectation. J. Educ.
Psychol., 19Al, 32, 233—263.

(Eough, H. G. What determines the academic achievement of
high school students. J. Educ. Research, 1953, 46,

321-331.

Guthrie, J. A. Academic achievement motivation viewed in a
self economy context. Unpublished Paper, American
Personnel and Guidance Association Convention, 1961.

40

 

«M «w

 

 

 

 

 

 

41

Haggard, E. A. Socialization, personality and academic
achievement in gifted children. School Review, 1957,

65, 388—414.

 

Hoffman, L. W., Rosen, S., and Lippitt, R. Parental coer-
civeness, child autonomy and child's role at school.
Sociometry, 1960, 23, 15-21.

 

Holland, J. L. The prediction of college grades from the
California Psychological Inventory and the Scholastic
Aptitude Test. J. Educ. Psychol., 1959, 50, 135-142.

 

Horrall, Bernice. Academic performance and personality
adjustment of highly intelligent college students.
Genetic Psych. Monographs, 1957, 55, 3-83.

 

Joseph, Michael P. The use of depth interviewing to explore
the motivational factors underlying achievement of
eleventh grade boys. Unpublished Paper, Michigan
State University, 1961.

 

 

Kaplan, S. M., Gottschalk, L. A. Magliocco, E. B.,
Rohovit, D. D., and Ross, W. D. Hostility in verbal
productions and hypnotic dreams of hypertensive
patients. Psychosom. Medicine, 1961, 23, 311-322.

 

Kimball, Barbara. Case studies in educational failure
during adolescence. Amer. J. 0rthopsychia., 1953,
23, 406-415.

 

Kirk, Barbara. Test versus academic performance in mal—
functioning students. J. consult. Psychol., 1952,

16, 312—316.

 

Kurtz, J. J. and Swenson, E. Factors related to over-
achievement and under-achievement in school. School
Review, 1951, 59, 472—480.

Lindquist, E. F. Educational measurement. Washington,
D. 0.: American Council on Education, 1951.

 

chClelland, D. G. Studies in motivation. New York:
Appleton-Crofts, 1956.

 

IWcClelland, D. G., Atkinson, J. W., Clark, R. A., and
Lowell, E. L. The achievement motive. New York:
Appleton-Crofts, 1953.

 

IWerrill, R. M. and Murphy, D. T. Personality factors and
academic achievement in college. J. counsel. Psychol.,
1959, 6, 207—210.

 

 

" )

«I!

 

{/1

 

 

 

42

Payne, D. A. The relationship between student perceptions
of parental influence and academic achievement.
Unpublished paper, Michigan State University, 1961.

 

Orne, M. The nature of hypnosis: Artifact and essence.
J. abnorm. soc. Psychol., 1959, 58, 277-299.

Reyher, Joseph. A paradigm for determining the clinical
relevance of hypnotically induced psychopathology.
Psychol. Bull., 1962, 59, 344—352.

 

Hypnotically induced conflict in relation to
subception, repression, antisocial behavior and
psychosomatic reactions. Unpublished Doctoral Dis-
sertation, University of Illinois, 1958.

 

 

Posthypnotic stimulation of hypnotically induced
conflict in relation to antisocial behavior. J. Soc.
Ther., 1961, 7.

 

Posthypnotic stimulation of hypnotically induced
conflict in relation to psychosomatic reactions and
psychopathology. Psychosom. Medicine, 1961, 23, 384-
391.

Saul, Leon and Sheppard, Edith. An attempt to quantify
emotional forces using manifest dreams; a preliminary
study. Unpublished paper. American Psychoanalytic
Association Midwinter Meeting, 1953.

 

 

 

Senders, Virginia L. Measurement and statistics. New York:
Oxford Univ. Press, 1958.

 

Shaw, M. C. Hostility and able high school underachievers.
J. counsel. Psychol., 1958, 5, 263-267.

 

Shaw, M. C. and Brown, D. J. Scholastic underachievement of
bright college students. Person. & guid. J., 1957,

36, 195-199.

'Taylor, Ronald G. Personality factors associated with
eleventh grade male and female discrepant achievement.
Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, Michigan State
University, 1962.

 

. Summary personality characteristics of over (and
high)- and under (and low)- achievers. Unpublished
paper, Michigan State University.

 

 

flfluxrpe, Marion D. Factors accounting for item intercorrela—
tion in an inventory of academic motivation. Unpub-
lished paper, Michigan State University.

 

 

 

43

Walsh, A. M. Self concepts of bright boys with learning
difficulties. Contributions to Educ., New York:
Columbia Univ., 1956.

Weitzenhoffer, A. M. Hypnotism: An objective study in
suggestibility. New York: John Wiley, 1953.

Winer, B. J. Statistical principles in experimental
designs. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1962.

Wiseman, Richard J. and Reyher, Joseph. A procedure

utilizing dreams for deepening the hypnotic trance.
Amer. J. clin. Hypnosis, 1962, 5.

 

 

APPENDICES

All

‘v v-

 

 

 

H‘

(Iv

I
(I)

(In

I
(I)

(I)

g-

f

;- -' ‘
.1.

"‘
O
.. N .

x‘ D-
IQ~1
’8'- ‘
-g. .'
3

h-r‘
~....

-...

,.

\-
M“

l 7".

 

\. ‘
...‘
\.

 

H‘

 

 

 

 

APPENDIX I

THEORY

According to McClelland (1955), all of man's motives
are learned. He defines a motive as an aroused anticipatory
goal state; that is, a strong affective association, charac-
terized by an anticipatory goal reaction and based on past
association of certain cues with pleasure or pain. He dif-
ferentiates between two kinds of motives: (1) n-Achievement
is when the person‘s primary goal is to enjoy the glories of
success; and, (2) f-Failure when a person's primary goal is
to avoid the misery and disgrace of failure. Certain situ-
ations produce pleasure or pain with such regularity either
through biological or cultural arrangements that the prob-
ability of certain ”common" motives developing in all people
is high. These motives may be inferred (a) indirectly based
on knowledge of past cue—affective arousal associations
implying a direct knowledge of the individual studied, or by
extrapolation from the experience of other individuals; or,
(b) directly based on imaginal goal states; that is, obtain—
ing the strength of the achievement motive in an individual
by observing the frequency with which he thinks about achieve—
ment as measured through imaginative productions. McClelland
concludes that whatever the variations in the strength or

kind cd'n-Achievement associations, the fact remains that

45

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

46

some associations of this sort are laid down in all individ—
uals in all cultures, at all times, simply because with very
few exceptions every person is faced at one time or another
with achievement problems.

A number of studies demonstrate the value of measuring
motivational strength indirectly by content analysis of
imaginative stories. The basic assumption is that this
method of assessing an individual's motivation is superior
in predicting behavior than merely asking an individual to
describe his own motives.

DeCharms, et_§1.(in McClelland, 1955), state that
individuals who verbalize their achievement desires may
have developed such conscious needs in response to adult
pressures for becoming successful. These subjects may have
been taught to value achievement; therefore, they should be
Inore responsive to authoritative Opinions as to what consti-
tutes ”correctness" or success, and in general, should be
somewhat more conformist than subjects who tend to be individ—
ualistic and unwilling to be pressured into conformity. The
authors conclude that a consciously high desire for achieve-
Inent tends to be associated with conformity, a high valuation
on expert authority, and a low valuation on unsuccessful
.people. A high need for achievement tends to be associated
xvith.internalized standards of excellence which lead to
superior performance of various sorts in task situations.

McClelland,_et.a1. (1953), has postulated that achieve-

ment Imqtivation (n-Achievement) can be revealed through

 

 

 

u—v—zr"

 

 

(”I

 

 

 

 

 

1+7

Achievement Imagery. Such imagery is present when an exam—

inee's responses demonstrate content concerned with (1) long—
term involvement, (2) unique accomplishment, and (c) competi—
tion with a standard of excellence (in Thorpe, Unpublished
paper).

In using depth interviewing to explore the motivational
factors underlying achievement of eleventh grade boys, Joseph
(Unpublished paper) defined the above three elements of
Achievement Imagery as follows:

Long-termed Involvement

 

Client is involved in the attainment of a long—term
goal. Being a success in life, becoming a mechinest,
doctor, etc. are all examples of such career involve-
ment. He has also planned the rest of his high school
courses with an eye to further education. When a long—
term assignment is given he plans ahead towards its
completion. If client does not have a Specific career
in mind, at least he knows what he doesn’t want to be.

Unique Accomplishment

 

Client is involved in, or has been involved in,
accomplishing other than run-of—the—mill daily task
which marks him a personal success. Inventions, artis—
tic creations, and other extraordinary accomplishments
fulfill this criterion. He has had leads in plays; had
held class office; has won prizes for his school projects
or in sports. Has won a National Merit citation, or has
been offered some academic scholarship.

Competing With Standards

 

Client is engaged in, or has engaged in, some competi—
tive activity (other than pure cases of aggression) where
winning or doing as well as or better than others is
actually stated as the primary concern. He wants to have
positions of leadership in and out of school because they
give him prestige.

Farquhar (1962) extended McClelland's formulations into

a birqaolar theory by postulating the opposite end of the n—

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

.11-

 

Ag.“ ..
~ . . v a . ..
a ,.. . FLV 1‘ ‘ . ‘ ‘ ~
. . 3;. Y. L» 5:. ., _
«kw 0. * «1» xxx .1. . ... a .r.g
a. .1 a. . .. 3 r-..

 

 

A8

Achievement continuum for which three additional dimensions
were hypothesized: (1) short-term involvement, (2) ordinary
or common accomplishment, and (3) merging or competition with
a minimal standard of excellence. These dimensions were
stated as characterizing the individual with low motivation
or a low need for academic achievement while McClelland's
dimensions were characteristic of the person with a high
need for academic achievement. Thorpe (Unpublished paper)
points out that McClelland‘s concern was with only one facet
of personality and one facet of motivation; that is, general
achievement motivation (n-Achievement). 0n the other hand,
Farquhar was interested with two facets of achievement
motivation; that is, high and low need for academic achieve-
ment.

Using a bi-polar theory as a basis, Farquhar (Unpub-
lished paper) constructed an objective inventory suitable
:for measuring an individual's need for academic achievement
(see Appendix VII). The Michigan State M—Scales consists
of four subscales totaling 259 forced-choice items. The full
scale takes approximately 60 minutes to administer and the
prxytocals are machine scored. The interpretation for each
of the subscales is taken from the preliminary form of the
IWanual for Interpretation of the Michigan State M-Scale
(unpublished paper).

1. Generalized Situation Choice Inventory

Items on this scale were constructed to describe the

Inotivational situation. Students are required to make
a frmced choice between two types of situations, one

 

 

 

n—v W - -—-._.;r

 

 

 

 

49

which depicts a high and one which depicts a low academic
motivation situation. A high score on this scale indi—
cates an individual who has a high need for academic
achievement and would generally like the kind of task

and activities that schools would value as part of the
academic program. A low score indicates individuals

who choose activities disassociated from the school's
program which did not necessarily pay off in their aca—
demic study.

2. Word Rating List

 

This scale was designed to measure the academic self-
concept of the student. Students are asked to rate
themselves on series of descriptive phrases and words
gleaned from literature describing high and low motivated
and achieving students. These ratings are made as the
student thinks their teachers would make them on the
student. A high score on this scale indicates an individ-
ual with academic self—concept oriented towards the school
environment. He sees himself as a person who fits the
academic role. An individual who scores low on this has
a fairly clear-cut picture that he is not academic.
Furthermore, he sees himself outside of the academic role
and its many ramifications.

3. Human Trait Inventory

 

Items from past personality tests have been found to
differentiate between high and low achieving and motivated
students in revised form constitute this scale. An attempt
has been made here to differentiate the personality
structure of high-low motivated students. Individuals
who score high on this scale tend to have personalities
more similar to highly motivated students and those
scoring low tend to have personalities similar to low
motivated students. The highly motivated student is
characterized by a certain amount of compulsivity, posi—
tive attitude, controlled anxiety, and low fantasy life.
The low motivated student tends to lack the above charac-
teristics or to have them in their opposite form.

4. Preferred Job Characteristics Scale

 

Items from this scale were designed to differentiate
between the job aspirations of high—low motivated students.
Students who scored high on the scale tend to want jobs
where their individuality is recognized, where their
talents and skills are used, and where Opportunities exist
for change and advancement. Students who score low on
this scale tend to prefer jobs where entry is easy, re-
quirements are low, time restrictions are absent, and
'where one is ”discovered” rather than worked into a position.

 

 

50

Current literature indicates that personality is an

important motivational variable leading to the conclusion
that the personality characteristics of students who achieve
well in school manifest anxiety about achieving well, con-
cern about the planning and organization of their activities,
and have an optimistic self—confidence (Farquhar, unpublished
paper).

In reviewing the literature dealing with under— and
over—achievement, Taylor (unpublished Doctoral Dissertation)
found recurrent references to seven of these traits: academic
anxiety, self value, authority relations, interpersonal rela-
tionships, independence—dependence conflicts, activity
patterns, and goal orientation. "Authority relations," which
is of interest in this study, are defined as those relation—
ships between two or more people——one person having a
definite responsibility for others because of training, amount
of knowledge, position, or years. This responsible person
then directs, controls, or guides the other individual's
actions and behavior to a significant extent (English and
English, 1958).

Taylor concludes that the model differences between
under— and over-achievers can be summarized into a limited
theory as follows: The over achiever tends to operate at a
high level of energy. He controls and directs his anxiety
while conforming to academic pressures of culture. The over
achiever is attempting to merge with the academic standard

Whilxe resisting peer pressures. The under—achiever tends to

 

 

Q r_-,-——r...-.

“x:£,_~n.,~q‘4cq-r

v J

9‘

r:

r».

 

 

 

51

operate at variable levels of energy, to control his anxiety
less, and to resist social conventions. The under achiever
attempts to conform to his peer group and to resist academic

pressures.

Definition of Terms

 

In the present study, the term high motivator is used

 

to designate the student who scored at the upper extreme on
the Michigan State M-Scale and who fulfilled the require-
ments for Factor III entitled "Authority Relations" in
Taylor's "Personality factors associated with eleventh grade
male and female discrepant achievement” (unpublished Doctoral

Dissertation). The low motivator is the term applied to the

 

student who scored at the lower extreme on the Michigan State
M-Scale and who fulfilled the same requirements for Factor
III but in the opposite direction from the high motivator.

Over achiever is the student who receives grades which

 

are higher than might be expected from predictive measures

based on academic aptitude. The under achiever receives

 

grades which are lower than might be expected.

The terms high motivator and low motivator will be used
as synonyms for over achiever and under achiever in the
present study.

The theoretical constructs forming the basis for the
use of hypnosis in the study are as follows. According to
Reyher (1962), the type of instrumental hypnotic research as

utilized in this study remains relatively inconsequential

 

 

4H“ ‘ PA J.,.

a?

 

3.»
Lo
T:

 

 

H... I
. , a C.» a .
. q. » .r . . .
.. r L _. .2 .
a; .p.. .-. .... 2.. r. v“
rL. . . v; pf rL. .i. .. ...-...
.~ .. A a rk \ru. .~‘
. . v . rn

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

52

and isolated despite its ability to command interest. One

of the primary reasons for this state of affairs, he main-
tains, is the lack of criteria for determining the relevance
of hypnotically induced behavior to clinical or natural
behavior.

Reyher postulates that phenotypic identity does not
necessarily imply genotypic identity; that is, the fact that
behavior similar to anxiety can be produced by hypnosis does
not mean that the mechanisms of hypnosis are the same or
similar to the processes underlying clinical anxiety. In
1953, Weitzenhoffer stressed the point that hypnotically
induced phenomena resembling psychodynamic manifestations
are apt to lack affective tone. He recognized the impor-
tance of inducing an appropriate genotype by his assertion
that affective tone is most apt to be absent when the sug—
gestions are aimed at directly bringing about the overt
manifestations rather than creating the type of factors
normally responsible for these.

In Reyher's (1962) paradigm for hypnotically inducing
psychopathology, the hypnotically induced process defines
the genotype, and the behavioral outcome defines the pheno-
type. The genotype is operationally defined by the state—
ments in the hypnotic suggestions, while the phenotype is
operationally defined by a description of the person's overt
behavior. The requirements of the paradigm consists of four
principles or criteria: (1) the induced process must in no

way' include cues as to how the experimenter expects the

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

53

subject to respond, (2) the induced process must produce

other processes and behavior; that is, it must be response-
producing; (3) some of these responses must satisfy the
defining criteria for inclusion in some classification of
psychopathology; and (4) some of the subjects must be asked
by a co—experimenter to fake hypnosis in order to determine

the "demand" characteristics of the research.

~—~

 

 

 

 

.l _
'FJ ’ cm ‘. I.
E , mm
h—«v FEW LAW
. A n

 

 

 

 

_
..
W.

“9‘7

IA

 

 

APPENDIX II

REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE

Taylor (unpublished paper) and Farquhar, et al. (un-
published paper) have made an exhaustive review of the
general and personality characteristics of high motivators
and of low motivators. In addition to surveying the traits
of these two groups of students, it will be beneficial to
review the findings of other investigators in this area of
interest. Following this, a review of the literature re—
lating the investigation of hostility utilizing hypnosis
will be made.

To gain a better understanding of the high— and low-
motivator, reference to Taylor for a summary description of
these two groups is made. In regard to anxiety, he states
the over achiever (or high motivator) has a long history of
anxiety which appears to be directed toward a fear of failure
but this fear is controlled and directed toward achievement,
especially academic success. On the other hand, the under
achiever (or low motivator) denies his shortcomings and his
fear of failure resulting in anxiety which necessitates a
great expenditure of energy to control. One consequence is
he has difficulty concentrating or being effective in the

academic environment.

54

 

 

 

 

. . Ly \ a. .(k. g . L

.. .. .. . “c. do a... .. . r: h. 2-. :8.

. .. r: u. . Ly or“ w L. t: ~ . rfid H... A.» C... $9 \r.‘ .r ..
w c. w c. u... s. o f: ..C . . w .. ~... 3: 2.“ r c. h. rt. : I

 

 

 

 

 

 

55

The high motivator views himself as an efficient and

a persistent person with a positive self regard. In con-
trast, the low motivator exhibits a negative self regard
and is overly concerned about his physical and mental
functioning.

Quoting from Hoffman,_gt_al.(1960), Drews and Teahan
(1957), Horrall (1957), and Haggard (1957), Taylor concludes
that most investigators find that the over achiever accepts
controls, regulations, and assignments with little or no
conflict. However, the under achievers' resistance to im—
posed academic tasks is seen as a reaction against his
parents. While the over achiever is characterized as being
highly motivated toward academic success and compulsively
devotes much time and effort to studying, punctuality, and
gaining his satisfaction from academic achievement and adult
approval, the under achiever attempts to derive his satis-
faction in areas other than the academic environment. He
more readily identifies with a group which is supportive and
maintains an active interest in immediate rewards and
gratification.

Following McClelland's theorizing (1953), the over
achiever is involved in long—termed planning, and displays
perserverance in attending his academic goals of achievement.
At the opposite end of the continuum, the under achiever is
preoccupied with anxiety and insecurity to the extent he is

indecisive regarding his goals. As a result, he is portrayed

 

 

ll ‘ u ‘ ‘ AF; .. :. L» .r n
‘K V . .m. .. H L. “L. a _ a. . r L ~ m V: ‘ N; ‘ Aw .v
..- cc A. 4L .0“ so ...Ju .n. .1. no. :2, 2‘
Co W... 2. . r .. r .. a v «Q A .. C.» . l 5... A 4/ .ria
A: .3 c L . r: a: s . flxv .. w J . K I a 4:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

56

as an immature and undependable individual without a purpose

in life. His goals, then, become fantasized wish fulfill-
ment rather than realistically based.

A number of writers state that both the high- and low-
motivator possesses a certain amount of anxiety but in
varying intensities. For example, the over achiever has
less underlying anxiety but more inner tension than the low
achiever, according to Horrall (1957). Holland (1959) and
Gough (1953) both state the high motivator has more self
control; therefore, his anxiety does not manifest itself
in as directly an overt manner as does the low motivator.

Referring again to Taylor's Factor III-~Authority
Relations-—and its significance to a study of hostility,
several studies (Horrall, 1957; Gough, 1953; Kurtz and
Swenson, 1951) indicate the over achiever has a good rela—
tionship with his parents in which the latter are interested
and supportive in regard to their children's academic success
and the children in turn respect their parents and attempt
to please them by doing well academically. The same type of
cooperative reaction is also exhibited by the over achiever
toward authority figures outside the home. According to
Gerberich (1941), Merrill and Murphy (1959), and Holland
(1959), the over achiever attempts to create a favorable
impression on these persons and is eager to please them.

These, and other writers (Kimball, 1953; Shaw and Brown,
1957), stress the fact that the hostility and aggression

whicfli the under achiever displays toward authority is largely

 

 

 

wwr T -_-_- _

...— \

 

 

 

 

.— .
I
. I
7/
‘
‘ , -
‘—

   

57
influenced by his relationship with his parents. They do

not express their love for the child and are somewhat indif-
ferent or disinterested in the child's academic success.

The under achiever feels that his parents have not given

him the material things in life that he would like to have.
Studies by Dowd (1952), Kirk (1952), and Walsh (1956) indi—
cate that the conflict and hostility between child and parent
is also carried over to authority figures outside the home;

that is, to his school teacher to whom he reacts by exer-

 

cising resistance to externally imposed tasks. The under
achiever's dislike and hostility is a pronounced charac-
teristic which tends to create a less favorable impression
resulting in the student being less acceptable to his
teachers.

Payne found that the literature supports certain
parent—child relationships and behaviors related to academic
achievement. Among the more salient of these are the
following. In reference to the over achiever or high moti—
vator: (l) a high degree of achievement pressure developing
in the growing child a competitive spirit; a need for achieve—
ment, and (2) a high degree of authoritarianism in the parents.
In regard to the low achiever or low motivator: (1) a low
frequency of discipline; the child is expected to accept the
consequences of his behavior, (2) a high frequency of parental
behavior which is perceived by the child as rejecting or
ignoring, and (3) a somewhat cold and emotionless atmosphere

Mfilich engenders feelings of doubt and confusion in areas of

Lincierstanding and acceptance.

 

C\

A:
r...

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

58

Guthrie (1961) viewed academic motivation in a self

economy context and observed that some students seem to
operate in general at a low level of ambition and achieve-
ment according to the commonly accepted norms of the area
in which they are engaged. Others seem generally to operate
at a high level. He postulates that the total perceptual
point of view of the two extremes is different. For example,
while the high level operant or over achiever perceives
alternatives as competing rewards, the low operant or under
achiever will count the cost. Guthrie concludes that the
profit relative to academic achievement depends on the amount
of reward perceived to accrue to the academic activity com—
pared with the amount of reward perceived to accrue to com—
peting alternative activities. If the balance is in favor
of the academic activity the other rewards will be foregone.
If the balance is in favor of the competing alternatives,
the academic activity will be foregone. Over achievers, then,
«chose the academic activity and forego the alternative activ—
ities more frequently than under achievers. On the other
hand, under achievers perceive a greater number of competing
alternatives to achievement activity as rewarding than over
achievers.

In their investigation of underachievement among bright
college students, Shaw and Brown (1957) found that hostility
was characteristic of underachieving students when contrasted
with achieving students. These authors state that under-

achievement is not a surface phenomenon easily modified but

 

A.

 

 

 

 

 

 

,fif-‘M '7' our.“ 4-H?’

.n

”w

 

 

59

rather is related to the basic personality structure of the

individual. Kirk (1952) suggests that the under achiever
satisfies an unconscious hostility motive which is often
directed toward the family member who demands success of
him. Shaw's (1958) investigation of hostility in able high
school under achievers found that hostility is a more pro—
nounced characteristic of under achievers than of over
achievers.

In general, Taylor's review of the literature charac-
terizes the high school under achiever as having much under-
lying aggression, strong feelings of inferiority, defensive
about abilities and anxious to maintain a belief in their
own superiority, possess a negative attitude toward educa-
tion, lack confidence in themselves, hostility is a
pronounced characteristic, asocial behavior, weak ego control,
and maintain an apathetic withdrawal. The over achiever has
been characterized as possessing adequate self control, tends
toward stronger intellectual and social interest, they are
academically inclined, have high educational and vocational
goals, maintain a sense of academic effectiveness, and are
capable of sustained and diligent application to achieve a
goal.

In an attempt to quantify emotional forces using mani—
fest dreams, Saul and Sheppard (1953) compared hypertensive
subjects with nonhypertensive subjects. The authors observed
that the hypertensives exhibited more frequent and intense

hostility often associated with anxiety, a lower degree of

 

 

I5--.

 

 

 

 

 

 

6O

regressive passive receptive dependent trends, and a higher
degree of muscular and work activity. It is noted that a
number of these same characteristics have been used to de-
scribe the over achiever (or high motivator). It was with
their investigation of hypertensive subjects that Saul and
Sheppard formulated their Dream Hostility Count (D.H.C.)
which attempts to evaluate two aspects of hostility. The
aspects of hostility measured are: (l) the intensity of

its expression, and (2) the relationship that this bears to
the ego; that is, the degree to which the dreamer is able to
participate in and/or accept hostile impulses. They defined
hostility as anything which causes or represents disorgani—
zation of mind, matter, or concept, including relationships
between people and the relationship of the self to the self.

In a similar study of hypertension, Kaplan, 23 El-
(1961) used verbal productions and hypnotic dreams to find
that essential hypertension accompanies inhibited, and only
partially expressed, hostile aggressive impulses.

Reyher (1958) has employed the use of hypnosis to in—
duce conflict in subjects in an attempt to study subception,
repression, antisocial behavior, and psychosomatic reactions.
He found that a deeply hypnotized subject can remember a
hypnotically induced experience as real events. When a
hypnotically induced hostility was combined with a destruc—
tive urge, in the absence of any suggestions regarding con—
trol or expression, the author noted that subjects experienced

psychosomatic reactions and psychopathology. The hypnotic

 

 

 

 

 

(J

"\\

’(1

.‘

r. .
-.A.‘ k
‘.

rC‘Wr
‘.\"A‘
,.
5"»-
..M\A
Sans
. V4
1‘
.6”;

Y‘yy'- ~
p; "l
‘ \.
‘.

 

 

 

61

induction of a paramnesia which is associated with feelings
of hostility and a destructive urge can become a source of
severe anxiety and/or symptoms. Under these conditions, the
induced experience appears to become a ”living reality"
causing the subject to react and behave in a manner deter—
mined by his personality structure.

In his study of psychosomatic reactions and psycho-
pathology produced by the hypnotically induced process,
Reyher (1960) notes that the "status" of the conflictual
impulse and/or idea may be an important factor governing a
variety of posthypnotic reactions. He found this to be true
with regard to a wide range of somatic reactions which were
produced and which included such symptoms as tachycardia,
flushing, sweating, gastritis, tremors, and sleepiness. Even
though the status of the conflict may be an important factor
in determining the general characteristics of the symptoms,
the author points out that the uniqueness of the individual's
neurophsiology would determine the Specific form of the
neurophysiological reactions, and the uniqueness of the'
personality would determine the nature of his conscious states.
Personal eXperience and learned reactions would determine
which cognitive and emotional processes will have anxiety-
producing properties, the intensity of which may determine
the degree of repression. If the subject has reacted to in—
tense hostile and destructive impulses with anxiety and
repression in childhood, then it is likely that he will react

in the same way in adulthood when these emotions and impulses

 

 

 

 

62

become intense. Although the intensity of the anxiety-
producing processes may be one of the most important factors
in the activation of both repression and symptoms, other
factors such as degree of age regression and the presence of
other concurrent emotions, such as guilt, may enhance further
the reactions and contribute new facets to the symptomatology.
The definition of hostility used in Reyher‘s study and
adopted as an operational definition for the present study
states that hostility is the induction of a pseudo-experience
which generates intense feelings of hostility and a destruc-
tive act towards the central figure in the experience. The
subject is instructed that if he permits anything associated
with the experience or certain stimuli to enter his conscious
mind, after he is awakened he will be overwhelmed by feelings

of hostility (Reyher, 1958).

 

 

.“' _..fia 3‘”?

I»
.

rg— . . . .
.,—v a . v. a . f—v I: , ll.
_: .._ r: w‘ ... C~ .Au L. _.
T... ,s. . Vb‘ in. ‘54 1 Ali» .l -
E E Q. 3 fl. .. . 3. .:
Nxb N\\ Ann. t.» ‘ . A. L
v; .V . \ru
.r.L Cc

 

 

 

 

W)": )l‘"

 

7.

v
.-

 

 

APPENDIX III

PRE-EXPERIMENTAL PREPARATIONS

The Michigan State M-Scale was administered to 520
eleventh grade male high school students. This population
was comprised of the entire male classes from eleven Michi-
gan high schools including Corunna, Durand, Eaton Rapids,
Elsie, Grand Ledge, Holt, Laningsburg, Okemos, Ovid, Perry,
and St. Johns. Society's acceptance of the use of hypnosis
for experimentation with adolescents was not known; there-
fore, it was necessary to employ elaborate preparations
prior to initiating the data gathering procedure. One of
the primary reasons for using a male population was based
on the assumption that parents would be more permissive for
a son to participate in such a study than they would be for
a daughter.

The proposed study was discussed thoroughly with the
Superintendent and/or Principal of approximately fourteen
schools during which both the administration of the M—Scale
and the use of hypnosis was explained. Three of the schools
refused to participate for ”political” reasons, such as fear
of community repercussions, too much time involved, and too
busy of a school schedule to allow for further interruptions.

The first phase in the preparations for the study

entailed the administration of the M-Scale to the eleventh
63

 

 

6A

grade male students. The school administrator was assured
he would receive a copy of the results of this test so that
he could observe the rank of each of his students when con-
trasted with the total population. Each school official
was also advised that a list of prOSpective subjects would
be submitted for his approval before a student was contacted.
The purpose for this action was an attempt to eliminate
potential "problems” known to the school administrator. It
is interesting to notice that of the 193 names submitted to
the eleven administrators, only four names were deleted.

The second phase of the preparations, as explained to the
school administrators, was the use of hypnosis. It was
pointed out this technique was being used in an effort to
help the subject to relax under the assumption that he would
be able to express himself more freely. A significant
finding was the willingness of the eleven high school admin-
istrators to cooperate in this study. Specific reasons for
this cooperation, other than their ability to perceive the
value of such a study and a generalized acceptance of
hypnosis not heretofore known, are unknown at the present
time.

Upon receipt of the lists of approved students, each
student was visited in his school for the purpose of con-
ferring with him regarding the study. At that time, the
following explanation was given:

You have met the first requirements for being

considered a subject for research being conducted in
an effort to understand how students begin learning.

 

 

 

 

.3 'fi
3""- ‘

‘.

 

 

 

65

On the basis of the scores you received on the Michigan
State M—Scale, you have been designated a ”high motivator"
or a "low motivator.” However, since knowledge of your
specific classification might in some way bias the

results of the study, this information will remain unknown
to you and me until after the data has been collected.

At that time, I will inform you by letter of your standing.

The second phase of the study involves each student
coming to Michigan State University for one day. During
this time, you will be given two tape recorded interviews
of 30 minutes duration each, in which you can talk about
any dramatic or personal experience you have had or are
having, or anything else you desire to talk about. Prior
to one of these interviews, I will hypnotize you in an
effort to help you relax and, consequently, feel freer
in talking with the Interviewer. You will not purposely
be embarrassed and whatever you_talkedabout will be con—
fidential within the University, or if the material is
used it will be without any identification as to who
the person is.

The hypnotic induction procedures were sparsely explained
in an attempt to avoid creating undue anxiety prior to initi-
ating the experimental conditions. The students were also
informed they would be reimbursed for travel expenses and
that luncheon would be provided; however, it was necessary
that they arrange for their own transportation. Following
this brief explanation, the students were requested to indi-
cate their willingness or refusal to participate. It was
emphasized that no pressure to participate or to refuse to
participate was desired, and that their final selection would
likewise depend upon the written approval of their parents.

A number of the students place? telephone calls to their

parents for approval prior to making a commitment; however,
all of the 59 students contacted expressed their desire to
participate. At that time a tentative appointment was made

for each student whereby he knew in advance the date and time

J ‘_, .—

 

Lav

w“

J

 

 

 

 

H‘

(T ‘

 

 

 

 

 

 

66

he was scheduled to report to Michigan State University for
the interviews and hypnosis.

The next and seemingly most difficult hurdle to over-
come was considered to be that of gaining the sanction of
the students' parents. At least one parent of each student,
and in many instances the entire family, was visited during
which time the parent(s) were given the same explanation as
that given the administrators and students. If they were
accepting of the explanation of the study and desired that
their son be included, they were requested to sign a simple
consent form which stated:

As you recall, when you volunteered to be a subject

in research which involves the use of hypnosis, it
was our wish that your parents approve. Please seek
their consent by having one of them sign in the Space
provided below. We can not include you without this
consent.

Four of the 59 families contacted would not give per-
mission for their son to participate; two of these because
they ”did not believe in hypnosis” or were fearful of its
use, one refused on the basis of religious conviction, and
in the last situation a marital difficulty was encountered
in which neither parent would take the initiative to give
their consent. This result, which is considered significant
in itself, can be attributed in part to the fact the parents
were personally contacted during which time they were afforded
an opportunity to ask questions concerning the study and the

use of hypnosis. Correspondence via letters was deemed

inadvisable and inappropriate.

 

 

 

 

 

.mv ‘. .—

in" -". J‘ -

 

.. ’_,__,

 

 

 

 

 

67

One of the interesting sidelights of the contact with
parents was the incident of a student's mother calling the
family physician to ask for his opinion regarding the safety
of using hypnosis with her son. While conferring with her,
the writer was in his office discussing the possible use of
his son as a subject. The outcome was entirely satisfactory.
Although the large majority of parents had questions con—
cerning the study, and especially hypnosis, all families
contacted were receptive to the entire study, with the ex—
ception of the four previously mentioned cases. The variables
controlled for in the study were sex, grade in high school,
race, research environment, and experimental procedures.

Age differences are within a range of 16 years, 3 months to
18 years.

In an attempt to reduce or avoid public criticism, the
following additional precautionary measures were taken. The
major news media in each locality, as well as selected pro-
fessional persons such as physicians, attorneys, ministers,
and school teachers, were contacted for the purpose of pro-
viding each with the details and extent of this study where—
by they would be in a better position to answer the questions
of critics. Any person who has engaged in extensive research
and has been victim to the reprimands of public opinion, has
a knowledge that the investigation need not be of a sensitive
.tnature to arouse some fractions of society. In this case,
tihe complete study was accomplished without serious incident,

(flue in large measure to the precautions taken.

 

7"

._'-<7' w>.‘i‘mm_ I '. ’ ' fl .- I -

 

 

”W {3" I. Hi! ‘“ "' ".r'

 

 

c
In
—~
A;
\
\
Jvl‘
._ '
v.
~—
- v
k
'7

 

 

 

68

Approximately one week prior to the date of appoint—
ment, a post card reminder was mailed to each student
stating the place, date, and time of his appointment. Al-
though this was effective for its purpose, four students
failed to meet the appointment and were eliminated from con-
sideration as subjects. The reasons offered by these
students included: a change of mind, inability to find
tranSportation, and employment commitments.

Permission to use the facilities of the University
was obtained from the Chairman, Department of Counseling
and Guidance, College of Education. Upon the recommendation
of a number of staff members in the University, a graduate
student completing a doctoral program in Counseling and
Guidance and eXperienced in counseling techniques, was
employed to serve as the Interviewer during the study.
Typing of the recorded interviews was done by a student-

employee on a part—time basis.

 

.w.

‘

 

 

"--.'I"-

u“-

‘35

 

a...
wk.

 

 

APPENDIX IV

HYPNOSIS INDUCTION PROCEDURE

Hypnosis was attempted with 53 students to determine
their susceptibility to hypnosis and their ability to reach
the criterion depth of posthypnotic amnesia. Thirty—eight
of this group were capable of reaching the desired depth of
hypnosis using a technique devised by Wiseman and Reyher
(1962). The induction procedure involved having the S
seated in a comfortable position. A combination of three
induction processes was used in a manner which provided for
an uninterrupted transition from one method to another
depending upon Sis resistance to hypnosis. A time limit
of 60 minutes for inducing hypnosis applied to all SE.

That is, if the S was unable to reach the criterion depth
of hypnosis within the time limit, he was eliminated from
participating in the study.

The §_was asked to look down at his hands held on
his lap in a manner which enabled him to see both hands at
the same time (Hand Levitation Method). Next, he was asked
to look at a spot of light being reflected from a thumb
tack placed on the wall in front of him approximately two
feet above his horizontal plane of sight (Eye Fixation
IWethod). While looking at the spot of light, the S was told

lae was going to be assisted in relaxing every muscle in his

69

 

 

70
body, beginning with the muscles in his feet and working

up to his facial muscles (Muscle Relaxation Method), At

any time during this process, his eyelids would become
extremely heavy and they would close by themselves and

stay closed as he slipped deeper and deeper into a very
comfortable and peaceful sleep-like state. If the Muscle
Relaxation method was ineffectual, it was possible to
proceed with the Eye Fixation method. Where necessary,

the Hand Levitation method--considered by some as one of

the more strenous and difficult induction methods for the
S'to achieve-—was used as a final attempt to induce hypnosis.
The induction process involved the following steps or levels:
(1) Eye catalepsy.

(

2)
(3) Dream or image-like pictures of the S's last full meal.
4)

(

Arm catalepsy.

Counting to 10:

 

 

a Without sound or lip movement.
b Without sound but with lip movement.
0 With sound and with lip movement.

(5) Hyperesthesia involving putting the hand in imaginary
hot water and feeling a warm sensation on the hand.

(6) Wiseman and Reyher's (1962) dream sequence technique
for deepening the hypnotic trance.

(7) Anesthesia involving the hypnotic anesthetizing of the
right hand and arm, and lancing an imaginary boil on the
fore-finger of the right hand.

(8) Awakening instructions whereby the S was fully awake on
the count of 5.

(9) Rapid-induction instructions. This technique avoids
the time consuming induction procedure in subsequent
hypnotic sessions. The S was instructed that at any
time during the experimefit the E wanted to re-hypnotize
him, all E need do is to ask §_to close his eyes as he

 

 

 

 

.JA

 

 

C16)

 

71

counted to 10 and that on the count of lO,_§ will be
just as relaxed and in just as deep a sleep-like state——
or a deeper state-—than he is in now.

Post-hypnotic amnesia suggested.
Awakening process initiated.

Intensive questioning of the 8 regarding his ability to
recall what had taken place daring the session. As
previously indicated, 38 out of the 56 students, or

8 per cent, were capable of meeting the hypnosis
criterion of post-hypnotic amnesia. The amnesia level
of hypnosis is considered by some as a moderate level,
and it was considered to be the minimum level necessary
for the present study. The students unable to meet
this criteria were dismissed from the remaining part of
the study. The remaining 38 students continued in the
following manner.

Rapid-induction instructions initiated. The S_was
instructed to raise his right hand when the previous
depth of hypnosis, or a deeper level, was reached.

Wiseman and Reyher's dream sequence technique was
repeated to insure a sufficient depth of hypnosis.

Rapport transferred to a co—experimenter who came into
the room after E had left. At this time, the co-experi—
meter talked briefly with each S. The method of
selecting the control ”faking” SS was randomly done by
the co—experimenter. After the—control §§_were awakened,
the instructions to them for faking hypnosis were
essentially as follows:

Every scientific investigation such as the study
being conducted here involves using control Ss
for the purpose of comparing the results they—-
obtain with the results of the experimental SS
under the same conditions. Thus far, you have
responded in an acceptable manner which is the
same as or similar to all of the other SE;
Neither E nor the Interviewer will know that you
are awakE. During the remaining time you are
with either of these persons, or with anyone else
during the time you are here today, I want you to
fake hypnosis; that is, act as if you were still
hypnotized or how you think a hypnotized person
would act.

Conflict induced. The test of the conflict situation
is reported in Appendix V. A person experienced in
hypnosis can frequently detect when aIS is faking

 

(17)

(20)

 

 

 

 

72

hypnosis by their reflex actions and certain other forms
of behavior. To guard against this possibility, E pur—
posely turned away from each S as he read the conflict
to the S, ‘—

Awakening process initiated. The S was asked how he

was feeling and if he was fully awake. When it was
determined the S was fully awake and feeling satisfactory,
he was taken to—the Interviewer for the interview session.
After completing the 30-minute interview, the S was
returned to E as soon as possible for removal 5f the
paramnesia..—

Rapid-induction instructions initiated. The §_was again
asked to raise his hand when the previous depth of
hypnosis, or a deeper level, was reached.

Conflict removed and instructions given for total recall.
The instructions for removing the hypnotically induced
conflict are stated in Appendix V, immediately following
the text of the conflict situation. This precautionary
measure was considered a critical step in the process.

If the intensified conflict had not been successfully
removed from the S‘s mental repertoire, it is conceivable
he could have left—the University and reacted in a
hostile and aggressive manner toward his high school
teacher. It is well to point out, however, that no
attempt was made to completely alleviate or eradicate

the hostility for the teacher which was originally
present in the S. The purpose for removing the conflict
was just that; that is, to reassure the §_that the in—
duced conflict situation was fabricated and to return

the hostility being experienced by the §_to its pre—
hypnotic level. No objective measurement was available;
therefore, it was necessary to rely on the S's subjective
reports and the E's judgment that the hostiIIty conflict
had been removed. A crude indice that the conflict had
been removed was the fact that no reports of hostility or
violence were received from the SS, the teachers or school
administrators. In addition to PEmOVing the conflict,
each S was instructed that when awakened, he would be
able to recall every detail of what had taken place and
that there would be no gaps in his memory of these details.

 

Awakening process initiated.

(:21) Discussion with S to obtain information regarding his

reactions, feelihgs, and memory of the hypnosis proce-
dure, conflict situation, S's somatic and subjective
reactions, and any other tapIc the S desired to dis-
cuss. Approximately 30 minutes was—devoted to this last
step. This period of time provided an opportunity for S
to give his subjective report concerning the conflict

 

73

and his feelings of hostility toward the high school
teacher and the Interviewer. It also aided E to make
an evaluation regarding the safety of permitting S to
leave the experimental environment. In addition,“the
S could ask and receive an answer to any question he
might have regarding the study or his participation
in the study. Without exception, the Ss expressed
their fascination with the experience 5? hypnosis and
a willingness to return for subsequent participation.

 

 

APPENDIX V

HYPNOTICALDY—INDUCED CONFLICT SITUATION

The following is the text of the conflict situation
which was hypnotically induced in the high- and low—
motivators. Much of the material has been taken directly
from Erickson's ”The Method Employed to Formulate a Complex
Story for the Induction of an Experimental Neurosis in a
Hypnotic Subject,” J. Genetic Psychol., 19AM, 31, 67—84; and
from Reyher's "A Paradigm for Determining the Clinical Relev—
ance of Hypnotically Induced Psychopathology," Psycho. Bull.,
1962, 59, 344—352.

 

 

 

Now, as you continue to sleep, I am going to recall to
your mind an event which occurred last year. As I recount
this event to you, will will recall fully and completely
everything that happened. You have had good reason to for-
get this occurrence, but as I recall it, you will remember
each and every detail fully, even though I may not relate
each detail as it exactly happened.

Now bear this in mind, that while I repeat the event
to you, you will recall fully and completely everything just
as it happened. And more than that, you will re—experience
the various conflicting emotions which you had at the time
and you will feel exactly as you did while this occurrence
Twas taking place.

Last year, you were preparing for an important examin—

esition in which is one of your most difficult sub-

 

jeects. You can recall studying for this exam. It was evening

tnssfore the exam. It seems that the harder you tried to study,

74

 

 

 

 

 

75

the more other things came in to interfere and to bother
you. You could hear the radio playing in another room; and
the more you tried to avoid listening to it, the louder it
seemed. There were also noises coming in from the outside.
You could hear some children screaming and playing, there
was the noise of the cars passing on the street, a door
slammed somewhere in the house. These noises seemed to get
louder and louder. It became more and more difficult to
read the text book and your notes as these noises became
louder. You found yourself listening to the noises more
than reading the material. You tried to think over what you
had just read but found that you could not remember much of
it. You had to read each sentence over and over again. The
exercises just didn't make sense and you continue to read
them repeatedly.

It was getting late and you were very, very tired. It
became more difficult to hold your eyes open. Yet, you knew
that to fail this exam would mean a poor grade or even to
fail the course. You feel anxious and tense. You had Spent
a long time studying and there was very little that you could
remember. Even though you were very tired and sleepy, you
knew the only thing you could do was to cram. Now you began
gramming. It was difficult to read the material, to think.
:It was difficult to retain what you had read.

You had been studying a very long time now. It was very
:late in the night. In fact, it was only a couple of hours

1><efore you had to get ready for school. As you laid down to

 

76

rest, everything that you studied became confused and mixed
up. It was difficult to get to sleep and these thing you
tried to study turned over and over in your mind. The next
morning your head felt full of confused and mixed-up
thoughts. You felt extremely tired and sleepy. You also
felt more anxious and tense than you did the night before
because now the time for the exam was getting nearer. You
went into the bathroom and stood before the washbasin. You
turned on the cold water and splashed it on your face. You
continued to get ready for school but it was difficult doing
so. It seemed everything went wrong. There was not a clean
shirt to wear and your trousers were messed. Breakfast
didnt' suit you and you dreaded the thoughts of attending
classes. The tension was building up more now. You could
feel yourself getting more anxious and tense. To make
matters worse, the exam wasn’t scheduled until later that
day. You dreaded the thoughts of attending the classes be—
fore the exam because they would just help to confuse you and
make you more tense. You now had no time left to study; and
as the exam time drew nearer, the pressure built up and up.

Now the time came for you to go to the class.
You can recall walking down the hallway. You reached the
door to the classroom, opened it, walked in, and took your
seat.

Some of the other students were making wisecracks about
the exam and others were trying to cram in a little more.

You could feel the tension in the class. The competiton for

 

 

77

grades was stiff and you became more unsure of your own
ability to pass this exam. The things that you studied the
night before kept coming into your mind but they were dis—
organized and confused. You recall vividly that the in—
structor warned the class the period before the exam that
the final grade would largely be based on this exam, and
that it would be a tough one to pass. He has a reputation
of being a "sour grape" and gets enjoyment out of giving
failing grades. He enjoys seeing to it that students flunk,
unless you are one of his pets. And you know that you're
not. In fact, there has been an unspoken understanding
between the two of you; he doesn‘t like you and you don't
like him. Everytime he would come into the classroom you
would feel sick to your stomach. You don‘t like him, and
you liked him even less the day of the exam. He now entered
the classroom with that stupid and sarcastic smile on his
face. He then went to the blackboard and started to write
the questions on the board. As you continued to watch him
write, you realized that he had picked out the small, insig—
nificant details which he hadn’t even emphasized in class and
which you hadn’t studied. This meant that after all of your
hard work, he had pulled a dirty trick like this. That dirty
so-and—so. You had felt like telling him off before, but
now it was all you could do to keep from getting up out of
your seat, and going up to the blackboard and telling him

exactly what a stupid, dirty rat he really was.

 

 

78

You looked around the class and you could see some of
the other students had started to write furiously. Your
mind was now a blank. All that came out was a confused,
jumbled mess. Someone in the room let out a groan. Anxiety
and pressure was building up more and more. You started to
write but you sensed what came out was not correct. You
looked down at the paper and all you could see was scribbling.
The way the questions were written just did not make sense.
Where in the devil did he get such stupid questions? But,
knowing him you knew that only an ignorant dope like him
could come up with something like this. You looked up at
the blackboard now and all you could see were those impossible
questions. Now you looked over at the teacher and the thought
passed through your mind that he is lucky to have lived this
long. Boy, how you hated that guy. That dirty, stinking
rat. Even thinking about him made you almost get sick. You
were not sure of yourself before the exam but now you know
it was hopeless to try. Darn that guy! He didn’t realize
how much time and effort you had put into the course. Why
should he care;he didn't have to take it. It didn't matter
to him whether you flunked out or passed. In fact, he wanted
to see you flunk.

You can recall when he finished writing on the black—
board. He started to walk around the room, stopping to look
at one student's paper and then another. You could feel him
coming up behind you. Now he was beside you and he stopped.

This wasn‘t the first time something like this had happened,

 

 

 

79

but now you were fed up with him and the whole mess. You

looked up at his face and there was that stupid, ugly smile.
He knew you were having a rough time, and now he was making
fun of you. This was the last time. Darn him: This was

one guy you really hated. AS he went on up the aisle you

had to hold onto the desk to keep from jumping on his back
and letting him have it. You could feel your muscles strain-
ing. Your face flushed and the hate for that ignorant rat
was almost more than you could hold in, but you knew you had
to withhold it.

You finished the exam in a hurry, knowing there was no
use in trying anymore. You got up from your desk and as you
left the classroom you slammed the test papers down on the
teacher's desk. Going out of the room, you passed the rat
and cursed him under your breath as you walked down the hall—
way and out of the school building.

Now listen carefully. After I awaken you, you will
not be able to remember anything about this session. Some—
time soon, after I awaken you, you will be interviewed by Mr.

who is doing a survey. As you talk with him you

 

will notice that in some ways he reminds you more and more

of this teacher whom you hate. As you talk with

 

him, this feeling of similarity will increase until you are
absolutely certain that he is the same kind of person as the
___ teacher. In fact, you will find that all the old

feelings about your teacher will come boiling up until you

Come to the brink of doing something about them. These

 

 

 

 

8O

feelings will become almost overwhelming and they will con—
tinue until the end of the interview.

Before I awaken you, there is one more thing that I
must tell you. You will not be able to recall anything about
the hypnotic session after I awaken you. And, when I inform
you that we have come to that point in the experiment at
which I must hypnotize you again, you will want to be hypno-
tized. If you understand these instructions, let me know by

nodding your head.

Resolving the Conflict After the Experiment is Completed
Sometime after I awaken you, I am going to mention the
name of this building. Shortly after this you will recall
the experience which I previously recalled to you and you
will have an urge to tell me all about it, and you will find
that you can tell me about it. However, before I awaken you,
I want you to know that the feelings and experiences you had
about the testing situation were manufactured, and these re—
actions will not occur again to the interviewer or to anyone

else.

 

   

tu'v

 

 

 

."\
~'~.A.
I
n .
-__ U .
, .--,‘
----J-_

 

‘ My .
..3
.rr
- .-.
‘ ‘~_A.
“a o .
"V
'4 .x
v.. .
It? 1 at,“
“~_.
w,
i—r‘gl
K.
A-
‘rw
'1
.r
4
v
r.—
F‘ ,_
L
--
o‘ ‘.- .
‘~‘-
..
. N
.. c
‘K.
~‘
..‘-
u, r

 

 

 

APPENDIX VI

SCORING INSTRUCTIONS*

Preliminary Hostility Scale

 

The purpose of these instructions is to describe a
method of quantifying hostility as expressed in the manifest
dream. You are asked first to break up each dream, following
Freud, into its conceptual elements, which are to be scored
individually and then totaled to obtain the overall hostility
rating. A "conceptual element" is here taken to mean a sort
of natural unit of either action, feeling or scene. A guide
to identifying this unit is the independent clauses through
which the dream is reported.

Sometimes the dream will consist of only one such ele—
ment expressed in one sentence; i.e., ”He killed his mother."
”A corpse lay in the room." More often, however, there will
be many sentences, each containing two or more units of this
kind; i.e., ”He searched for a brick/and then threw it at
his mother/ as he wished to do away with her.” In isolating
the elements, it is sometimes necessary to supply missing

words or grammatical links; i.e., ”He was angrier/ and (he

 

*Leon Saul and Edith Sheppard, ”An Attempt to Quantify
Emotional Forces Using Manifest Dreams,” Journal of American
Psychoanalytic Association, A, 486, 1956, pp. A90-49l.

 

 

8l

 

 

 

 

82

was) more murderous when they were near." Likewise, "After

1

picking up the brick, he threw it at his mother,’ really
means: "He picked up the brick;/he then threw it at his
mother." A sentence reading "He was angry, resentful, and
hostile" means, ”He was angry/ (he was) resentful/ and (he
was) hostile." It thus contains three elements and is ac—
cordingly scored three times.

On the other hand, a sentence like, "He said that he
was feeling very hostile” cannot be broken into two distinct
elements because the verb ”said" is transitive and requires
the clause ”that he was feeling very hostile” as its object.
It is, therefore, scored only once. However, if a parenthet-
ical clause is nonrestrictive, i.e., if it can stand alone
and does not distort the meaning of the rest of the sentence
when taken away, it can be treated as independent. Thus,
"Peter, who incidentally hates women, is now preparing to
murder his mother” means; ”Peter hates women;/he is now
preparing to murder his mother.” If a sentence is ungram—
matical, convert it into proper form and treat it as you

would any other.

 

 

.Cmssc cans socpo
mpoomno outfissmcfl so omeHcm so

psosEoomsp psoam>ssom “cmEsm :02 H

.sos>mcmp

opossmosmgmss .osSsts soocmmoccm

.owsoz popmsossopoo so hnpmzm .pssc «spadesmssp socHE hp pmoscp
"CospmSQHm Cs wcosz wcsgmeom psomEoomsp so psosEoomsQ ”:mEsm m

 

.cmEs: cwcp
socpo mpoompo omescwcH so omescm

so szmcH pcoam>ssvm "Chasm :02 m
.pCopsoow nsopoop «coflpmmssmpsgmoc .poppos «mmoamaoc posoGCos .pCmE
“mmocsas so ooco©s>o qossm Izopcmnm «mmosHHs npcoosoom .pzmss

.Esopm "Cospwzpsm CH spamso>p< hp pmoscp msSmCs so ssSwsH ”CmEsm :

 

 

3o .cmEss cogs sogpo
RV mpoompo omescmCH so omeHCw so
Cospozspmop pCon>ssom "cmESE Coz m
.mpomeo npooan .mosoop
some “stocsm "Spoop so oesops>m .oocoaos>
.ocmoao> qpoofls qo>m3 ampsp napscmmcH op o>ssp «Cospmasuse
.ocwosssss .oxmso cpsmm sosss agompow HmEscm qosmsswz ammocflfifl
«mamas so camsp Kpoop .smo pmms .mcsczosp .see as us: .wCHXHspm
.mappmp no>mo .mcHsocpoEm qoonH .wcscmsm nweapoocm .wcspnmpm
cmsc. "GospmSpHm wcsamoo cpmom hp pwosgp gumbo so cpmoa ”swarm @
mCprom cospo< osoom

 

 

oaoom soasscnom

 

 

 

APPENDIX VII

‘1'!!! MIGIGAN STATE M-SGALES‘k
(Down 3)

 

developed by

William W. Farquhar. Project Director

David A. Payne . Research Coordinator
Marion D. Thorpe, Research Assistant
Ronald G. Taylor
Roger C. Thweatt

 

*These scales were developed under the auspices of the 0.8. Office of
Education, Department of Health. Education and Welfare, Research
Project #846.

Copyright applied for, May, 1961.

8A

 

 

 

 

 

 

The questi
mnbered i

This is a
The resul

The inv e1
care full

Answer a
my wil'

 

”a?“

I.

THE cragggtlztn SiggATIOHAL CHOICE INVENTORX

The questions on this inventory refer to the spaces on your answer sheet
numbered from 1 through 80.

This is a survey of your choices. There are no right or wrong answers.
The results will in no way affect your grades in school.

The inventory is made up of pairs of statements. Read each pair
carefully. Choose the one you would most prefer or like to do.

Answer all questions as honestly and frankly as you can. Only in this
way will the results be meaningful. Remember this inventory is about

ygu_ and you alone. This is not a survey of what you can doI but of
what ygu would like to do. ‘

Do Not Write On This Booklet. You will be given an answer sheet and
a special pencil to mark your answers with. Mark between the two
small lines under the one of your choice. If you prefer "a", mark
"1"; if you prefer "b", mark under "2".

 

 

 

 

    
 

EXAMPLE:
r Qfiooklet I Agtswer §heet
Which would you prefer to do? 1. l 2 3 4 5
I // l/ l/ l/

l. a)Gotosparty,or W

b) Read a book

 

 

 

P

This person marked under the masher "l" on the answer sheet which means
that he would prefer to go to a party to reading a book. Ignore
columns "3", "4", and "5".

If you have any questions, raise your hand. If not, turn to the next
page and answer all the questions. Do Not Skip Any Questions! Work
as rapidly as you can and do not spend too much time on any one item.

This is not a survey of what you can do but of what
you would prefer to do.

Remember the guegtions in this igventory refer to ghe
gggces on your answer sheet numbered from 1 thro_l_:gl_1 80.

PLEASE DO NOT WRITE ON THIS 30mm

 

-2-

I would prefer to:

l. 1) Avoid failing in school, or
2) Do well in school

2. 1) Be quick, but often incorrect, or
2) Be slow, but often correct

3. 1) Work hard for what I get, or
2) Just get what I want

4. 1) Make something I have planned myself, or
2) Make something planned by somebody else

5. l) Accomplish a task slowly, but in an orderly manner, or
2) Accomplish a task in a hurry, but less carefully

I would prefer to:

6. 1) Receive a grade on the basis of how well I did on the
teacher's test, or
2) Get a grade on the basis of how hard I tried

7. 1) Work hard to be smart, or
2) Take it easy and become rich

8. 1) Be thought of as being a studious person, or
2) Be thought of as being a carefree person

9. 1) Have the best teachers in the state in my school, or
2) Have a large recreation center in my school

10. 1) Buy a car, or
2) Continue my education

I would prefer to:

11. 1) Be well prepared for a job after graduation from high
school, or
2) Be well prepared to continue learning

12. 1) Pass a usual classroom examination, or
2) Pass a college entrance examination

13. 1) Have the teacher give everyone the same grade at the
beginning of the term and know I had passed, or
2)-Take chances on getting a higher or lower grade at the
end of the course

 

 

 

 

 

 

I scald pr

 

14.

15.

lwould p ,

16.

17.

18.

19.

20.

1 meld

21!

22

 

 

 

I would prefer to:

14.

15.

1)

Develop a|g§g product which may or may not be good, or

2) Make a product as good as the best one available

1)
2)

Receive money for my good grades, or
Be allowed to take any course I wanted because of good
grades

I would prefer to:

16.

17.

18.

19.

20.

1)
2)

1)
2)
1)
2)
1)
2)

1)
2)

Be successful in finishing a job, or
Finish a job

Play a game against experts and lose but learn how to play
better, or
Play a game against inexperienced players and win

Get excellent grades because I have a great deal of ability,
or
Get average grades because I have average ability

Be graded at the end of a course with the possibility of
making an “A", or

Get a "C" at the beginning of a course along with everyone
else

Make quick decisions and sometimes be right and sometimes

wrong, or
Deliberate over decisions and usually be right

I would prefer to:

21.

22.

23.

24.

25.

1)
2)

1)
2)

1)
2)

1)
2)

1)
2)

Be known to my parents as an intelligent person, or
Be known to my parents as a practical person

Be a person of leisure, or
Be a person of action

Be allowed to take extra courses before or after school, or
Just take courses offered during the school day

Complete a job which I recognize as difficult, or
Complete a job which other's recognize as difficult

Receive money for good grades, or
Have my picture in the paper for good grades

 

 

 

I would

26.
27 .
28.
29 .
30 .
I WOuld

31.

32.

q

3.

35,

I would

36,

370

 

pre

1)
2)
1)
2)

1)
2)

1)
2)

NH

 

 

I would prefer to:

26. 1) Receive grades which are like everyone elses', or
2) Receive grades that please my parents

27. 1) Do as well as most of my classmates, or
2) Do better than.most of my classmates

28. 1) Be considered as being strong but not very smart, or
2) Be considered as being weak but smart

29. 1) Have someone show me the solution to a problem, or
2) Take a long time to figure out a problem for myself

30. 1) Be known as a person with much ability, or
2) Be known as a person with adequate ability

I would prefer to:

31. 1) Work at many less importang jobs which I know I could finish, or
2) Work at one very important job which may never be entirely
finished in my life-time

32. 1) Be paid for how well I did a job, or
2) Be paid the same amount no matter how I did the job

33. 1) Wbrk rapidly just "skimming" along, or
2) Work slowly with great thoroughness

34. 1) Do a less recognized but complete job, or
2) Do a recognized but incomplete job

35. 1) Have a bgtgg; job than my father has, or
2) Have a job like my father has

I would prefer to:

36. 1) Have a great deal of money, or
2) Be an expert in my favorite school subject

37. 1) Have average ability and be liked by many people, or
2) Have superior ability but not be liked by as many people

38. 1) Have everybody in the class get a "C" at the beginning of
the course, or
2) Be graded at the end of the course with the possibility of
getting a higher or lower mark

 

 

 

 

 

I would pr‘

41. 1
2

42.

43.

39.

40.

 

-5-

1) Receive a grade on the basis of how much my teacher thinks
I have learned, or
2) Take a course from an instructor who only gives "C"'s

1) Be an able person, or
2) Be wealthy

I would prefer to:

41.

42.

43.

44.

4S.

1) Be paid for the amount of work I did, or
2) Be paid by the hour

1) work hard in everything I do, or
2) Work at things as they come along

1) Have a hard job which pays well, or
2) Have an easier job which pays less

1) Study my assignments during study hall, or
2) wait to study until the mood strikes‘me

1) Be known for what I could do, or
2) Be known for what I.gg

I would prefer to:

46.

47.

48.

49.

50.

1) Think of an idea that nobody has ever thought of, or
2) Set a world's speed record

1) Perform.well in class, or
2) watch television

1) Learn by defeating an inexperienced player, or
2) Learn by defeating an expert

1) Save enough money to buy something with cash, or
2) Buy something on credit and pay for it as I use it

1) Do what I think is right, or
2) Do what others think is right

I would prefer to:

51.

52.

1) Be known as a person who is able to do many things, or
2) Be known as an expert

l) work overtime to make more money, or
2) Get more schooling to make more money

nfi
a.

. “fi. 3" '11-? ‘37:: Ffiwg' “1".“

 

 

 

 

53.

54.
55.

I WU’Ld

56.
57.
58.
59.
60.

1 Would

61.
62.
63.
64.
65

6E

 

 

53.

S4.

55.

-6-

l) Inherit a great deal of money, or
2) Earn a great deal of money

1) Wait ten years and receive fame throughout the nation, or
2) Receive fame in.my community overnight

1) Whit until I had finished college and make a better salary, or
2) Get a job right after high school and make a good salary

I would prefer to:

56.

57.

58.

59.

60.

1) Plan my life in advance, or
2) Live my life from day to day

1) Have decisions made for me, or
2) Make my own decisions

1) Accomplish a difficult task well, or
2) Accomplish a difficult task fast

1) Study to go to college, or
2) Study to get out of high school

1) Live a life of leisure, or
2) Live a life of many new experiences

I would prefer to:

61.

62.

63.

64.

65

1) Enjoy myself at a museum, or
2) Enjoy myself at a night-club

1) Have a great deal of influence over people, or
2) Have a great deal of ambition

1) Play a "tie" game with an expert, or
2) Win a game from an inexperienced player

1) Carry out the plans of others, or
2) Create something of my own

1) Be known as being a "good guy" or a "good gal", or
2) Be known as a person who "does things well"

I would prefer to:

66.

67.

1) Be very happy, or
2) Have lots of money

1) Be known as a person who knows his own mind, or
2) Be known as a person who gets help in making decisions

 

"5" . r,‘ ’78 ..._-

3 {"51 _‘~"-._ m. we; ‘1. ‘2', ' if .y a '7'~..-:"— F. .-

   

 

68. 1'

2.

F

69. 1

70. 1

2

Iwould pr

71. 1

2

72. 3
73.
74.
75,
Iwoum
76,
77,
78
79
8

 

 

68.

69.

70.

v”-

-7-

1) Do something like everyone else, or
2) Do something outstanding

1) Have an instructor who gave me an "A" and not care whether
I learned anything or not, or

2) Have an instructor who gave me a "C" but made sure I
learned something

1) Put together a new object, or
2) DevelOp new ideas

I would prefer to:

71.

72.

73.

74.

75.

1) Be demanding on myself to do good work, or
2) Be demanding on my friends so that they will do good work

1) Accept what someone else says even though I don't agree, or
2) Argue for what I believe to be right

1) Study for an exam.one night and know that I would receive
an "A", or

2) Go to a party on this night and take a chance on a lower
grade

I) Date the smartest girl or boy in class, or
2) Date the girl or boy who is the most fun

1) Do something that I have done before, or
2) Do something that I never have done before

I would prefer to:

76.

77.

78.

79.

80.

1) Work hard enough to be outstanding, or
2) Work hard enough to pass my courses

1) Discover a gold mine, or
2) Discover a nemeedicine

1) Have one of my children win a beauty contest, or
2) Have one of my children win a college scholarship

1) Be the smartest person in the world, or
2) Be the happiest person in the world

1) Learn by defeating an experienced player, or
2) Learn by losing to an expert

 

 

 

 

 

numt

am
you
the
edm
res:
in

cas
may

II.

PREFERRED JOB CHARACTERISTICS SCALE

The questions on this scale refer to the spaces on your answer sheet
numbered from.81 through 128.

Directions: What kind of a job do you prefer? In the following items
you will find two job characteristics paired. From.each pair choose
the gag characteristic you value most for your future job, after your
education. If you prefer characteristic "a", mark in the column for
response "1" on the special answer sheet. If you prefer "b", then mark
in the "2" column. (Ignore columns "3", "4", and "5".) Be sure to
mark only one choice for each pair. Do not omit any items. In some
cases, it will be hard to make a choice between the items because you
may want to choose both items or neither. But remember, you.must make
a choice.

 

 

 

  
  
 
 
 
 

 

 

EXAMPLE:
Booklet II Answer Sheet
I prefer: 1. l 2 3 4 5
H ll // // ll
1. a) A job which is exciting \‘**v-~J
b) A job where there are Ignore
no lay-offs
__..— HWV

 

This person marked under the number "1" which means that he prefers job
characteristic "a".

This is a survey to find out your job preferences. There are no right
9!: wrong answer! a

If you have any questions, raise your hand and ask.the examiner. Be
sure to fill in the spaces at the tap of the answer sheet.

Remember, if you prefer characteristic "a", mark.in the "1" column, if
you prefer "b", mark in the "2" column.

The Questions in this scale refeg to spaces on your answer
sheet numbers 81 through 128.

If there are no questions, turn the page and begin!

PLEASE DO NOT WRITE ON THIS BOOKLET

 

 

'm_£r . C

-73 —~

5

.‘T ‘--V"!R‘Wm

 

 

 

I prefer:

81.

82.

83.

84.

85.

I prefer:

86.

87.

88.

89.

90.

I prefer:

91.

92.

93.

94.

95.

 

l) A job where my opinion is valued
2) A job with short working hours

1) A job where
2) A job which

1) A job which
2) A job where

l) A job which
2) A job where

1) A job which
2) A job where

I solve problems no one else can
permits me to take days off when I want

does not require a college education
I could decide how the work is to be done

pays well and requires little effort
I could express my ideas, talents, and skills

requires little thinking
I could continue to learn the rest of my life

1) A job which absorbs my interests

2) A job where

l) A job where
2) A job where

I make few if any decisions

I could become known for outstanding accomplishments
I could not be fired

1) A job which has high work standards

2) A.job which

1) A job where
2) A job which

1) A job which
2) A job where

l) A job where
2) A job which

1) A job where
2) A job where

permits ms to take days off when I want

I solve problems no one else can
does not require a college education

pays well and requires little effort
I could decide how the work is to be done

I could express my ideas, talents, and skills
requires little thinking

I could continue to learn the rest of my life
I make few if any decisions

1) A job with short working hours

2) A job which absorbs my interests

1) A job where my opinion is valued

2) A job where

l) A job which

I could not be fired

does not require a college education

2).A job which has high work standards

 

I prefer:
96. l) A job
2) A job
97. l) A job
2) A job'
98. l) A job
2) A job
2) A job

100. l) A job
2) A job

I prefer:

2) A job

102. l) A job
2) A job

103. l) A job
2) A job

104.. l) A job
2) A job

105. 1)'A' job
2) A job

I prefer:

106. DA job
2) A job

107. l) A job
2) A job

108. l) A job
2) A job

2) A job

no. 1) A job

-10-

which requires little thinking
where I could decide how the work is to be done

with short working hours
where I could continue to learn the rest of my life

which does not tie me down
which absorbs my interests

where my opinion is valued
which permits me to take days off when I want

where I could become known for outstanding accomplishnents
which does not require a college education

which pays well and requires little effort
which has high work standards

where I could decide how the work is to be done
where I make few if any decisions

with short working hours
where I could express my ideas, talents, and skills

which does not tie me down
where I could continue to learn the rest of my life

where I could not be fired
which absorbs my interests

which does not require a college education
where my opinion is valued

where I make few if any decisions
were I solve problems no one else can

where I could not be fired
where I could continue to learn the rest of my life

which permits me to take days off when I want
which absorbs my interests

where I could become known for outstanding accomplishments

2)‘ A job which requires little thinking

 

I prefer:

111.

112.

113.

114.

115.

I prefer:

116.

117.

118.

119.

120.

I prefer:

121.

122.

123.

124.

125.

1) A job
2) A job

1) A job
2) A job

1) A job
2) A job

1) A job
2) A job

1) A job
2) A job

1) A job
2) A job

1) A job
2)Ajob

l) A job
2) A job

1) A job
2) A job

1) A job
2) A job

1) A job
2) A job

1) A job
2) A job

1) A job
2) A job

1) A job
2) A job

1) A job
2) A job

-11-

which has high work standards
where I make few if any decisions

with short working hours
where I solve problems

where I could not be fired

where i could express my ideas, talents, and skills

which does not require a college education
which absorbs my interests

which requires little thinking
where my opinion is valued

where I make few if any decisions
where I could become known for outstanding accomplishments

with short working hours
which has high work standards

which does not tie me down
where I solve problems no one else can

where I could not be fired
where I could decide how the work is to be done

where I could express my ideas, talents, and skills
which permits me to take days off when I want

which does not require a college education
where I could continue to learn the rest of my life

where my opinion is valued
where I make few if any decisions

with short working hours
where I could become known for outstanding accomplishments

which does not tie me down
which has high work standards

which does not require a college education
where I could express my ideas, talents, and skills

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

.._. MwademoEuflwfisfimmfifirg . ,.

 

 

 

 

 

 

~12-
I prefer:

126. l) A job where I could continue to learn the rest of my life
2) A job which pays well and requires little effort

127. l) A job which absorbs my interest
2) A job which requires little thinking

128. l) A job which requires little thinking
2) A job where I solve problems no one else can

 

 

 

      

U. .. . ......... marfiwmybfirtwu _... ......WP. _

11%.) v

    

III.
WORD RATING LIST
The questions in this rating list refer to the spaces on your answer
sheet numbered 129 through 211.
Following is a list of words teachers may use to describe students. You
are to rate yourself on each word as you think your'geachers would rate

you.

Be sure to describe yourself as your teachers would, opt as you would
describe yourself.

Read each word carefully, then decide which of the following ratings
would be chosen by your teachers to describe you.

335393 Eumber .Meaning of Number
1 This word would 3333; describe me
2 This word sometimgp describes me
3 This word £93113; describes me
4 This word gl_w_a.yp describes me

After you decide how your teacher might rate you, mark the special answer
sheet. Use the pencil provided and make heavy marks. Ignore column "5".

EXAMPLE:

Booklet III Answer Sheet

\1.Happy1234 l12345(Ignore

\Vx // ”I l/ // // column 5)

This individual has chosen the rating number "2" for the word "happy".
This means that he feels that his teachers think that the word "happy"
sometimeg describes him.

 

 

If you have any Questions, raise your hand. If not, turn to the next
page and begin rating all of the words. Do Not Skip Any Word . Work

as rapidly as you can and do not spend too much time on any one word.
Remember, you are not to use column "5".

The Questions in this rating list refer to the spaces on your
answer shegt numbered 129 through 211.

PLEASE I'D NOT WRITE ON THIS BOOKLET

 

 

Tull-

 

, :3?

L. I sinki.‘ H‘ v

VI -r 3 n b.

‘ 2r». Hahn.
:vn EM.O,V

.a.)
‘ has... I”

1.9..- .

....

apfisfs

 

 

’5’ N5 9 x? ~53
‘égéfigfié;§’;§§$ lefigiogigsiéés
Teachers feel that I am: N S U A Teachers feel that I am: N S U A
129. patient 1 2 3 4 149. different 1 2 3 4
130. talented 1 2 3 4 150. discontented 1 2 3 4
131. dull 1 2 3 4 151. flighty l 2 3 4
132. inefficient l 2 3 4 152. responsible 1 2 3 4
133. practical 1 2 3 4 153. original 1 2 3 4
Teachers feel that I am: N S U A Teachers feel that I am: N S U A
134. confident 1 2 3 4 154. consistent 1 2 3 4
135. average 1 2 3 4 155. intelligent 1 2 3 4
136. logical 1 2 3 4 156. distractable 1 2 3 4
137. unsuccessful l 2 3 4 157. in-the-know 1 2 3 4
138. smart 1 2 3 4 158. childish l 2 3 4
Teachers feel that I am: N S U A Teachers feel that I am: N S U A
139. successful 1 2 3 4 159. rebellious 1 2 3 4
140. "blah" 1 2 3 4 160. nervous l 2 3 4
141. careful I 2 3 4 161. systematic 1 2 3 4
142. thorough 1 2 3 4 162. daring 1 2 3 4
143. orderly 1 2 3 4 163. cold 1 2 3 4
Teachers feel that I am: N S U A Teachers feel that I am: N S U A
144. purposeful 1 2 3 4 164. below average 1 2 3 4
145. uninterested 1 2 3 4 165. reckless l 2 3 4
146. a procrastinator 1 2 3 4 166. dependable 1 2 3 4
147. unreliable l 2 3 4 167. a person who 1 2 3 4
postpones
148. studious 1 2 3 4 168. a goof off 1 2 3 4

 

 

hm: v

   

 

It- I‘-

 

..m..,c. Am ‘.a‘.e.mvflfi§r .. lair“. o m ”we .

1,

L17

Lye; .. no»
a fritters?

par}

‘. if {u

x). a. 73%.... 1 .7
. _& $8. .
c ‘ f 1.3: r: ‘w E

 

N mfifia

0"”

Jaw: .
. if :
v

4f. n

 

169.
170.
171.
172.

173.

174.
175.
176.
177.
178.

179.
180.
181.
182.

183.

184.
185.
186.
187.
188.

Teachers feel that I am:

exacting

lazy

stubborn
perfectionistic

accepting

Teachers feel that I am:

carefree
competitive
unreasonable
a "wheel"

a "grind"

Teachers feel that I am:

fool-hearty
intellectual
retiring
alert

above average

Teachers feel that I am:

productive
a "brain"
persuadable
a thinker

ambitious

U)

s- c~ s~ a- s~ b, s- a» s~ s~ s~ w'

9b 45 4‘ b > 41‘ J> PL‘ D >

$0

Teachers feel that I am:
189. contented 1
190. outsider l
191. a person who 1

delays
192. indecisive 1
193. irresponsible 1

Teachers feel that I am: N

194. concerned 1
195. an achiever 1
196. a planner 1
197. competent l
198. inconsistent 1

Teachers feel that I am: N

199.
200.
201.
202.

203.

teachable 1
reasonable 1
impatient 1
friendly 1
fault-finding 1

Teachers feel that I am: N

204.
205.
206.
207.

208.

dominant 1
inaccurate 1
passive 1
efficient 1
easily distracted l

 

N S U ,A

##1-‘4-‘9

waw

4-‘4‘ #5 «P k 3’ J-‘J> -“ {>9 3’ 9 45“.? «P >

 

 

'r—L
. 7

t:

 

 

 

T
.-

.saJ .- ,.r‘ ”of... . «,r‘ Ian-A. ...O r
1...... or? wwwhnflabweEek},icicles/r : t

 

u_ , 304:4... ‘

P117

 

 

 

 

 

Teachers feel that I am:
209. reliable
210. serious

211. pushed

 

 

 

IV.

gym TBA IT mvgmoar

 

The questions in this inventory refer to the spaces on your answer sheet
numbered 212 through 259.

GENERAL DIRECTIONS: PLEASE READ CAREFULLY!

Following is a list of statements about YOU. Read each statement
carefully! Then decide whether this statement is how you glyayg feel,
usually feel, sometimes feel or ppygp feel.

amass.
1 This statement would‘pgygp describe the way I feel
2 This statement sometimes describes the way I feel
3 This statement usually describes the way I feel
4 This statement'plypys describes the way I feel

Answer each statement-~Do not leave any blank.

There are no right or wrong answers. The answers apply only to vou. The way
you answer these statements will not affect your school marks in any way.
Mark between the lines under the number that best describes how you feel.

 

 

 
       

 

EXAMPLE:
Booklet IV Answer Sheet
\.
1. I feel it is always a good 1 2 3 4 5 (Ignore
thing to be honest. // I? // // // column 5)

 

This individual has chosen number "2" for the statement "I feel it is
always a good thing to be honest." This means he feels that this state-
ment sometimes describes him.

‘In marking your answers on the separate answer sheet, be sure that the
number of the statement in the booklet is the same as the number on the
answer sheet. It is best to mark your first impression, try not to
change your answer. If you change an answer, erase completely your first
choice and then blacken between the lines under the other column.

The uestions in this inventor refer to a sea on our answer
sheet numbered 212 through 259.

 

Remember to answer the statements as they apply to you!
PLEASE DO NOT WRITE -ON THIS BOOKLET

 

 

 

Ratings:

212.
213.

214.

215.

216.

217.

218.

219.

220.

221.

222.

223.

224.

225.

226.

227.

228.

-13-

1. Never 2. Sometime 3. Usually

I like collecting flowers or growing house plants
I worry about my grades

Many times I become so excited I find it hard to
go to sleep

1 day dream frequently

I work things out for myself rather than have a
friend show me how

I have been quite independent and free from

family rule

I have played that I am sick to get out of doing
something

When I have an opinion, I stand up for it

It is difficult for me to keep interested in most
of my school subjects

I have difficulty working under strict rules and
regulations
I flirt

Most of my school subjects are a complete waste
of time

‘Mest of my school subjects are useful

I find it difficult to find the time to study my
assignment for the next day

I have done something that is considered
dangerous just for the thrill of it
I like just about everything about school

I have a hard time concentrating on the subject
during class periods

 

 

 

 

I‘ll-ll" I

 

229.

230.

231.

232.
233.
234.

235.

236.

237.

238.

239.

240.

241.

242.
243.
244.
245.
246.

247.

248.

-19-

When I was a youngster, I stole things

Even when I do sit down to study, I find that my
mind tends to wander

I have to be in the mood before I can study

I like to make the best grades possible
I like to study

I like to plan very carefully what courses I will
take in school

I have played hooky from school

I am said to be quick tempered

There was a time in my life when I liked to play
with dolls

I learn slowly

It would be worthwhile to belong to several clubs
or lodges

‘My parents object to the friends I choose

I have been sent to the principal for misbehaving
in class

I have trouble with.my muscles twitching or jumping
I p1an.my activities in advance

I think I would like the work of a teacher

I want very‘much to be a success

One of more times a week I suddenly feel hot all
over for no apparent reason

I work under a great deal of tension

1 have trouble waiting for a class to be over

##5##

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

._ . i ‘ \wlefua‘pdnggfigs

 

 

249.

250.

251.

252.
253.
254.

255.

256.

257.

258.

259.

-20-

I would be uneasy if some of my family were in
trouble with the police

I get disgusted with myself if I don't do as well
as I should

I like to p1an.my activities in advance

I wish I were a child again
I feel cross and grouohy without good reason
I like being with people in social gatherings

Some subjects are so unpleasant to me that I
can't talk about them

I feel that I haven't any goals or purpose in
life

I like to be consistent in the things I do

I like to go to the movies more than once a week

I would like to belong to a motorcycle club

 

 

 

...
w

 

?
r

r

1

lfiflfifl

 

 

 

 

 

 

   

 

 

..Unb
f»
.. .
PL
Q
_0 .
...
v,
7
A
,.
m.
...
v-
-4}-
Ins...-
}
i a...
'11.
.1...»
I a
‘ l
...
.... R
\V .
.ovhb
“v.
u
r
v
2
_
_
.1... Jo; “ii! 5 -. . 1 . \-. w \ ‘ \\ ‘\ .. ‘ ‘ .‘
... a A... I V . .. . ... _. s. . A . o w .x -x .x \ \
...»... "a. an? s,.t. 1.. 4, 14 f..¢.I.~5. FHAWF. 0.... t . (I. . .T a I . .... u
a . _ . , ._ . .. . .u . . he. ..
....NJ .| um...r T. l. .1 1 1.1 ... _’VQ-. I .11...)., .u: ...n .. a .4. .5 r. In}.
.. ..., L . .. . .....- .17 r r...“ ......w... .... ,. . ......dfiwfim. hay/73.4... . ...... .. .3-..» .. . _ .. . , .
A . u ...) . t . ;.\ v.0 fan‘s...“ ...». ... 5L... ..i... . ...P-r ... .estavs.a._...:.!vni . ...“...15. . . .
. Ju . . T +1 . . n... .. ..I Ev}... ..i. I . w o. .\. x. \. w ‘ .

MICHIGAN STQTE UNIV. LIBRRRIES
HWWIWWWIWWWWWIHIIIWIWHI
31293103945758