OVERDUE FINES:

25¢ per day per item
. l
. J flmfi“ ‘ , RETURNING LIBRARY MATERIALS:
as. m ‘- —-———

~-. , ' 1 Place in book return to remove
"PM”, 4 charge from circulation records

 

 

 

 

A FACET THEORY ANALYSIS OF ATTITUDES TOWARD

HANDICAPPED INDIVIDUALS IN SAUDI ARABIA
BY

Hamad A. Al-Marsouqi

A DISSERTATION

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

DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY

Department of Student Teaching and
Professional Development

1980

ABSTRACT

A FACET THEORY ANALYSIS OF ATTITUDES TOWARD
HANDICAPPED INDIVIDUALS IN SAUDI ARABIA

BY
Hamad A. Al-Marsouqi

In recent years, intensive effort has been devoted
to identifying the attitudes of people toward groups, con—
cepts and institutions. A significant part of this research
examines attitudes toward the handicapped. The attitudes of
the public toward the handicapped, usually determine the
kinds of programs the society provides for care, management,
and rehabilitation of the handicapped. The aims of the
present study were multiple. The first aim was to assess
and examine the attitudes currently held toward the blind,
the deaf, and the mentally retarded by two segments of the
Saudi Arabian people: (a) students enrolled at the College
of Education in Mecca City, and (b) teacher educators at the
same college. A second, theoretical aim of the study was
to examine the relationship of certain variables to the
handicapped: sex, education, and contact. A third, practical

aim was to determine, through attitude assessment, if

Hamad A. Al-Marsouqi

educators were likely to support the development of a train-

ing program for teachers of the handicapped.

Methodology

 

The instrument used to measure attitudes toward
the handicapped in Saudi Arabia was the Attitude Behavior

Scale, the Deaf, the Blind, and the Mentally Retarded

 

(ABS-DEM). This instrument was deve10ped from intensive
research by Jordan and his associates in 1968, and slightly
modified by Afooz (1978). The ABS, built on Guttman's

Facet theory, measures two reSponse levels, the hypothetical
and the stereotypic. Scales were translated into Arabic and
administered to a group of 173 students and 13 teacher edu-

cators.

Results

The data suggests that the sample tended to hold
positive attitudes toward handicapped persons. It appears
that respondents thought that other pe0p1e (society, at
large) hold positive attitudes toward the deaf and the
blind, but not toward the mentally retarded. Both education
and frequent contact with the handicapped were associated
with more favorable attitudes toward these particular groups.

Several limitations of this study and recommenda-

tions for further research are suggested.

Dedicated

to my wife
Lolwah Al—Henti
and my daughters
Najla and Saher.

What else can I say?

ii

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

I am indebted primarily to Dr. B. Bradley West for
his assistance, encouragement, support and guidance. Dr.
West, as a chairman of my committee and major advisor, did
everything possible to enable me to achieve my educational
objectives. His continuous support and patience helped me
to overcome frustrations and difficulties. My appreciation
for Dr. West goes so deep, that language does not permit its
true expression.

I would also like to express my appreciation to the
other members of my committee, Dr. Marvin Grandstaff, Dr.
James B. Mckee, and Dr. Roger Niemeyer, for their support
and suggestions.

Also, I would like to thank Dr. Ghamdi Mohammed and
his associates in the Educational Research Center of the
College of Education in Mecca, Saudi Arabia for their
assistance in the collection of data for this study.

Finally, I would like to thank my wife Lolwah Al-
Henti and children Najla and Saher for their continuous

support and patiente.

iii

LIST OF

CHAPTER

I.

II.

III.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

TABLES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . .
Statement of the Problem . . . . . .
Aim of the Study . . . . . . . . . .
Variables . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Research Questions . . . . . . . . .

Research Population . . . . . . . .
Instrumentation (Methodology . . .

Research Hypotheses . . . . . . . .
Research Limitations . . . . . . . .
Organization of the Study . . . . .
THE SETTING O O O O O O O O O O 0 0

Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . .
General Introduction to Saudi Arabia
Educational System in Saudi Arabia .

Introduction . . . . . . . . . .
Historical Background . . . . .
Philosophical Base . . . . . . .
Governance and Control . . . . .

The Religious Schools . . . . .
Higher Education . . . . . . . .

Secondary and Elementary Education

Teacher Education . . . . . . .
Special Education . . . . . . .

Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . .
ATTITUDE: NATURE AND MEASUREMENT . .
The Nature of Attitude . . . . . .

Attitude Measurement . . . . . . . .
Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . .

iv

Page

vi

g..-

\oxoqoxmwc-wm

10

10
10
19

19
20
20
25
26
27
29
3O
35

39
4O
4O

43
52

(CHAPTER
IV. REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE . . . . .

Attitudes Toward the Mentally Retarded .
Attitudes Toward the Blind . . . . . . .
Attitudes Toward the Deaf . .
Cross-Disability Research . .
Cross-Cultural Research . . .
Modification of Attitudes . . . . . .

Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

V. RESULTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Research Instrument . . . . . . . . .
Standardization of ABS . . . . . . . .
Translation to Arabic . .
Sampling Procedures . . .
Selection of Sample . . .
Research Hypotheses . .

Analysis Procedure
Scoring Procedures
Findings . . . . .
Summary of Results

VI. SUMMARY, DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Research Questions . . . . . . .
Review of Related Literature . .
Sample and Methodology . . . . .
Findings . . . . . . . . . . . .
Discussion . . . .
Conclusions. . . . . . . . . . . .
Recommendations .

APPENDIX C O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O

BIBLIOGRAPHY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Page

53

54
62
68
75
79
93
101

104

104
109
110
111
111
111
116
116
117
129

130

130
131
132
132
133
142
143

146

202

LIST OF TABLES

Table Page

1. Analysis of Expenditures for Major Development
Programs, 1975-1980 (Billions of Dollars) . . l6

2. Elementary Stage: Schools, Classes, Pupils,
Teachers and Administrators 1969/70 - 1974/75. 21

3. Intermediate Stage: Schools, Classes, Pupils,
Teachers and Administrators 1969/70 - 1974/75. 22

4. Secondary Stage: Schools, Classes, Pupils,
Teachers and Administrators 1969/70 - 1974/75. 23

5. Higher Education: Faculties, Students, Teachers
and Administrators. . . . . . . . . . 24

6. Number of Teachers, Students, and Employees in
Saudi Arabia in the Year 1978-79 . . . . . 31

7. Technical Education in Saudi Arabia 1978-1979 . 32

8. Guttman Facets to Determine Structure of an
Attitude Universe . . . . . . . . . . 47

9. Guttman Facet Profiles of Attitude Levels. . . 47

10. Jordan Facets Used to Determine Joint Struction
of an Attitude Universe . . . . . . . . 48

11. Joint Level, Profile Composition and Labels for
Six Types of Attitude Struction . . . . . 49

12. Variables List. . . . . . . . . . . . 105
13. Distribution of Respondents According to ABS-

Deaf Scores for the Stereotypical and

Hypothetical Levels . . . . . . . . . 112
14. Distribution of Respondents According to ABS-

Blind Scores for the Stereotypical and
Hypothetical Levels . . . . . . . . . 113

vi

Table Page

15. Distribution of Respondents According to ABS—
Mentally Retarded Scores for the Stereotypical
and Hypothetical Levels . . . . . . . . 114

16. Mean ABS Scores of Students, Male and Female,
Experienced and Non-experiences . . . . . 118

17. T-Test Values and Significance Levels of the
Independent Variable, Education (teachers
versus students) . . . . . . . . . . 120

18. Means of the Scores of Teachers and Male
Students for the Three Dependent Variables. . 121

19. T-Test Values and Levels of Significance of
the Independent Variable, Sex (female versus
male) I O I O O O I O O O O O O O 122

20. Mean Scores of Male and Female Students for the
Three Dependent Variables . . . . . . . 123

21. T-Test Values and Levels of Significance of the
Independent Variable, Contact (experience
versus nonexperience of reSpondents). . . . 124

22. Mean Scores of ReSpondents with Previous Experi-
ence with the Handicapped Versus Respondents
Who Have Not Had Previous Experience for the
Three Dependent Variables . . . . . . . 125

23. T-Test Values and Levels of Significance of the
Three Dependent Variables (deaf, blind, and
mentally retarded) . . . . . . . . . . 126

24. Mean Scores of the Three Dependent Variables
(deaf, blind, and mentally retarded). . . . 127

25. T-Test Values and Levels of Significance of the
Two Levels, Stereotypic and Hypothetical . . 128

26. Mean Scores on ABS for Stereotypic and Hypo-

thetical Levels for All Three Independent
variables 9 o o o o o o o o o o o o 128

vii

CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION

In recent years, intensive effort has been devoted
to identifying the attitude of people toward groups, con-
cepts and institutions. While such research contributes
to our knowledge of human behavior, studies on attitude are
also required by civil services to assist them in organiz-
ing their activities to reflect the desires and interests
of the public. Bedwill (1977) asserts that attitudes have
major impact on decisions made in all areas of life: for
individuals and for society, in the economy, and in the
legislature.

A significant part of the research in this area is
being done in studies of attitudes toward the handicapped
individual, i.e., the blind, the deaf, and the mentally
retarded. But, Afrooz (1978) indicates that the study of
attitudes toward the handicapped constitutes only 5 percent
of the studies of attitudes in general. Perhaps this is
due to the fact that the struggle for the rights of the
handicapped individual intensified only recently. Jordan
(1978) predicts that the 19805 will be the era of a civil
rights movement for the handicapped.

l

A number of researchers demonstrate the effect of
attitudes on the acceptance of handicapped persons in
certain social and educational settings (Barker gt al.,,
1953; Force, 1956; Miller, 1956). Furthermore, these atti-
tudes, Harrelson (1970) asserts, will determine the kinds
of programs the society provides for care, management, and
rehabilitation of the handicapped.

In order to meet their future needs, we need to
identify the attitudes of people who may have direct or
indirect contact with the handicapped. This study is an

attempt to do that.

Statement of the Problem

 

Teacher education in Saudi Arabia has greatly
improved along with the country's economic development.
But, training programs for special education teachers are
not particularly popular. In most cases, Saudi teachers
trained to work in regular schools are asked to take posi-
tions in schools for the handicapped; or, foreign-born and
trained, Arabic-speaking personnel are brought in to teach
the handicapped in special schools.

While Saudi Arabia has no comprehensive teacher—
training program for the blind, deaf, or mentally retarded,
it surely does have the need. The number of schools for
the handicapped is increasing. In 1979, a total of 1,839
students were enrolled in thirty-one schools for the blind,

sixteen schools for the deaf and the dumb, and fifteen

3

schools for the mentally retarded. There were 870 teachers
working in these schools.

It is, therefore, appropriate to inquire why Saudi
Arabia (a country that appears to now have the economic
and human resources to administer and support such programs)
has not established a special education teacher training
program to meet the needs of handicapped students. The
lack of such services may be attributed to this attitude,
expressed by some teacher educators in Saudi Arabia two
years ago, if we establish a special education teacher
training program, it will attract few, if any, student
teachers; most student teachers will hold negative atti-
tudes toward the handicapped. Such an opinion expresses
an attitude, and constitutes a value judgment.

If Saudi Arabia is to make progress in providing
needed special education training programs for teachers of
the handicapped, it must be determined whether or not the
above-cited attitude accurately represents the current
attitudes of the rest of the profession. Thus, the purpose
of this study is to investigate attitudes concerning the
handicapped currently held by student teachers and teacher

educators.

Aim of the Study

 

The first aim of the study is to assess and examine
the attitudes currently held toward the blind, the deaf

and the mentally retarded of two segments of the Saudi

 

.Note: A student teacher is defined as a student en-
rolled in College of Education at Mecca, and not the course
called "Student Teaching" per se.

Arabian people: (1) students enrolled at the College of
Education in Mecca City, and (2) teacher educators at the
same college.

A second aim of this study is also of theoretical
interest: to examine certain variables as they relate to
the handicapped person, i.e., to what degree does contact
with the handicapped influence positiveness or negativeness
of attitude toward a handicapped person. Another aim is
of practical interest: to determine, through attitude
assessment, if it is timely to find support for the devel—
opment of a training program for teachers of the handi-
capped. If this study reveals widely—held positive atti-
tudes toward the handicapped, it would follow that develop-
ment of special education teacher training programs is
timely and would be well received. On the other hand, if
negative attitudes are discovered, then it would be more
effective to recommend development of an attitude modifica-
tion program to encourage future acceptance of such a

teacher training program.

Variables

 

The independent variables in this study are sex,
education and contact. The dependent variables are the
attitude objects: the blind, the deaf, and the mentally

retarded.

Research Questions

 

This study is designed to investigate and examine
questions regarding the attitudes of designated segments
of the Saudi population toward handicapped persons (the
blind, the deaf and the mentally retarded).

The research questions are as follows:

1. To what degree does the amount of contact with
handicapped persons influence attitudes toward
such groups?

2. To what degree does education influence the atti-
tude of an individual toward a handicapped person?

3. Do sex differences affect the degree of positive-
ness or negativeness of the attitude held toward
the handicapped?

4. Is there a difference in perception of one kind
of disability, i.e., mental retardation, than of
another, i.e., blindness?

5. Is there a difference between what the subject
believes are other people's attitudes and what
the subject states are his or her attitudes toward

the handicapped?

Research Population

 

The research population consists of samples of two
groups who are likely to affect future educational policy
on the training of Saudi Arabian teachers for special

education:

1. students enrolled in teacher training programs at
the College of Education in Mecca,
2. teacher educators at the same college.

The justification for selecting these groups is
that they represent a sample of the Saudi population who
will influence future attempts to establish teacher train-
ing programs for special education: student teachers will
be trained to teach the handicapped and teacher educators
will initiate, implement and administer special-education

programs within the College of Education.

Instrumentation (Methodology)

 

The instrument used to measure attitudes toward
the blind, the deaf and the mentally retarded is the
Attitude Behavior Scale (the ABS-DEM). This instrument
was produced as a result of intensive research done by
Jordan and his associates in 1968. Afrooz (1978) slightly
modified the demographic section of the ABS-DEM to fit
his own subjects. This author, in turn, modified the
ABS-DBM to suit the limit of his investigation and the
characteristics of the subjects studied. The original
twenty items of the ABS-DEM are, however, retained.
Modifications of the ABS—DBM include the addition of items
in the Demographic Section, and excluded the other two sec-
tions: the Efficiency Scale and Orientation to Change.
Finally, this investigator also developed operational

definitions of the blind, the deaf, and the mentally

retarded for inclusion in the ABS-DEM since such defini-
tions were needed. The ABS-DBM was translated into Arabic
for the first time by the investigator for use in the
study.

The basic scale consists of 20 statements for each
disability group: the blind, the deaf and the mentally
retarded. For each disability group there are two levels.
The stereotypical level examines what the respondent thinks
other people believe about the handicapped. The hypothet—
ical level looks at what the respondent himself believes
about the handicapped. Thus, each subject responds to the
scale six times.

The first fifteen items of the three forms of the
ABS-DEM are the identical except for the name of the dis-
ability, the common item; the other items on each form are

specific for each disability group.l

Research Hypotheses

 

In this study several hypotheses are tested.

H1. Students and teacher educators will maintain a
positive score on ABS—DEM on both stereotypical and
hypothetical levels.

H2. Amount of education will be positively related to
favorable attitudes toward the deaf, the blind, and

the mentally retarded.

 

1For more detail about the ABS-DBM see Chapter V
and the Appendix.

H3.

H4.

H5.

H6.

Female students will show more positive attitudes
than will male students toward the deaf, the blind
and the mentally retarded.

Frequent contact with deaf, blind, and retarded
persons will be associated with favorable attitudes
toward these groups.

There will be more favorable attitudes toward the
deaf and blind than toward the mentally retarded
on both stereotypical and hypothetical levels of
the Attitude Behavior Scales.

There will be no significant differencies between
person's scores on the hypothetical level and on

the stereotypical level at the ABS.

Research Limitations

 

Several limitations of this study should be noted:
The study sample was selected to serve the purposes
of this investigation; however, a greater number
of subjects is required for wider generalization.
It was not possible to randomly select the sample
due to an internal difficulty within the College

of Education.

Organization of the Study

This chapter is the introduction. Chapter II deals

with the national setting of the study, examining the Saudi

Arabian people, culture and educational system. Chapter III

deals with the subject of attitude, its nature and measure-
ment. Chapter IV reviews related research. Chapter V pre-
sents the data. Chapter VI presents the findings, the

summary, the conclusions and the recommendations.

CHAPTER II

THE SETTING

Introduction
The research focus of this study is the attitudes
currently held by a designated segment of the Saudi Arabian
people toward handicapped individuals. In order to enhance
the American reader's understanding of the study, a brief
orientation to Saudi Arabia's people, culture and educa-
tional system is appropriate. This overview will also

examine the rationale and the need for this study.

General Introduction to Saudi Arabia

The Arabian peninsula has an area of about one
million square miles of which Saudi Arabia occupies about
80 percent. Saudi Arabia is bordered by Jordan, Iraq and
Kuwait to the north, the Red Sea and the Yemen Republic to
the west, Oman and the Peoples Democratic Republic of Yemen
to the south, and the United Arab Emirates and the Arabian
Gulf to the east. The land is mainly desert and only 1
percent is cultivated. There are no permanent rivers (only
the Wadis fills with torrents of floodwater during the
occasional rains) (Ghamdi, 1977); the country is character-

istically dry (Lacker, 1978).
10

11

The Arabian Peninsula has a particularily inhos-
pitable climate. It is hot in summer with an average
temperature of 85°F, and cold in winter with an average
temperature of 15°F; in spring and during the first part
of summer winds are very harsh (Owens, 1962).

Although nearly all Saudi Arabia is hot and dry,
there are great variations in climate. Winters
are generally balmy but nights can be quite cold
in the mountains and interior (Hobdey, 1978).

Saudi Arabian people are mostly Semitic, descend-
ents of the Eastern Mediterranean strain (Rustum, 1976).
They have similar physical features and speak the Arabic
language. The predominant religion is Islam which has
influenced the shaping of a common culture and values
(Ghamdi, 1977).

Saudi Arabia has long been the holy place for
Muslims; it is here that Mecca and Medina, the holy cities
for Muslims, are located. Islam, which came into being in
611 A.D. in Mecca, was a reactionary religion to the pagan-
ism of Arabia. According to Phillby,

Islam led Arabia at one point in the history of civil-
ization to play a remarkable, if not outstanding part,
in the political, intellectual and economic life of
the civilized world (Phillby, 1930).

Lackner asserted that

Islam, unlike Christianity, has a highly developed
legal and social code of behavior. At the purely
religious level, the devout Muslim is required to
observe the five pillars of the faith which are:
repetition of the testimony of faith, almsgiving,
five daily prayers, the great fast (Ramadan) and the

pilgrimage to Mecca and Medina. But equally important
to the Muslim is the Shari'a Law which prescribes

12

in great detail exactly how the Muslim is to conduct
his life within the community, as orthodox Islam is
very much a religion of the community, not of individ-
ual (Lackner, 1978).

In 634 A.D., when Muhammad died, Islam was the
religion of most of the Arabian Peninsula. By the eighth
century, the center of Islam had moved from Mecca and
Medina to Damascus and Baghdad. Thereafter, most of the
Arabian peninsula remained a back water of little political
interest (Lackner, 1978). The people of the peninsula
became isolated, returning to some of the values of pre-
Islamic life.

In 1924, King Abdalaziz bin Saud unified four
regions in the Arabian peninsula, Najd, Alhijaz, Assir and
Al-Hassa. In 1932, he renamed the country Saudi Arabia
(Ghamdi, 1977).

In the days before oil, Saudi Arabia was predomi-
nantly agricultural. Although only 1 percent of the land
is arable, it was sufficient to support the relatively
small population of two million. About three decades ago,
before the discovery of oil, Saudi Arabia was an isolated
country-~educationally, politically, economically and
sociologically.

Her people used to depend for their livelihood on
primitive agriculture and animal husbandry and
small scale fishing and trade which grew out of
the pilgrimages of Muslims to Mecca (Ghamdi, 1977).

In 1939, the first commercial shipment by Aramco

of Saudi Arabia oil took place (Hobdey, 1978). Since then,

13

the exportation of oil has increased, and with increased
exportation came an astronomical increase in revenues.
The money from oil has started a dramatic new era
of economic and technological change in Saudi Arabia. A
vast effort to modernize the country is underway, especially
in the areas of communication and transportation. Air-
ports, hospitals and highways are being built.
Oil revenues are also radically changing the Saudi

Arabian way of life. Such drastic change has had an
intense sociological and political impact on the nation.
As a result of the great influx of wealth, the tendency
toward class distinctions has increased. The royal family
tops the class scale, followed by tribal sheiks, top
Ulema,l and a few members of the wealthy merchant families
(Rustum, 1976).

A new middle class is emerging rapidly in Saudi Arabia.

This group of managers, administrators, technicians,

clerks, lawyers, scientists, army officers, and others

in government and business occupy a middle level in

prestige and socio-economic power (Rugh, 1975).
The lower class consists of nomadic and semi-nomadic

herdsmen, unskilled and semi-skilled workers in government

and private employment (Rustum, 1976).

 

1The Ulema are the learned men who interpret and

explain the legal and religious requirements of Islam to
their local communities. Their role tends to be more
judicial than theological (Lackner, 1978).

14

The formation of the classes mentioned above has
resulted in a potential for class tension because of con-
flicts of interest among classes.

The Saudi government recognizes inter-class con-
flicts and hopes to ease the tensions and to control
changes. The tools for control are massive modernization
programs. These programs aim to provide social services
(medical care, education, social security) and to raise the
standard of living. The Saudi government has adopted a
Five Year Plan whose goals are to maintain traditional
values while modernizing Saudi Arabia technologically.

A close look at the Five Year Plan (1975—1980)
reveals this dual focus: in an official document released
by the Saudi government in 1974, the developmental goals
are stated as follows:

1. Maintain the religious and moral values of Islam.

2. Assure the defense and internal security of the
kingdom.

3. Maintain a high rate of economic growth by devel-
oping economic resources, maximizing earnings from
oil over the long term, and conserving depletable
resources.

4. Reduce economic dependence on the export of crude
oil.

5. Develop human resources by education, training, and

raising standards of health.

15

6. Increase the well-being of all groups within the

society and foster social stability under circum-

 

stances of rapid social change.

7. Develop the physical intra-structure to support
achievement of the above goals.

The Five Year Plan (1975-1980) provides for an
expenditure of some 144 billion dollars (see Table l). The
idea behind the plan is to encourage new industrial com-
plexes, including petro-chemical plants, cement factories,
an aluminum plant, and a steel mill along with various
social and welfare programs, medical centers, schools and
universities. An all-out effort is being made to upgrade
the skills, education, and living standards of the Saudi
people.

From an examination of the developmental goals of
the Five Year Plan one can conclude the following:

1 The Saudi government assumes that by carrying out
the Five Year Plan, the country will become
involved in the modernization process.

2. The Saudi government assumes that by introducing
the massive program outlined in Table 1 they will
be in better position to ease the political con-
flict and to maintain stability in the country.
In the view of this writer, the above assumptions

may not be an accurate estimation of the sociological and

political impact of the Five Year Plan.

16

Table 1.--Ana1ysis of Expenditures for Major Development
Programs, 1975-1980 (Billions of Dollars).

 

 

Program Amount

Water and Desalinization 9.8
Agriculture 1.4
Electricity 1.8
Manufacturing and Minerals 13.0
Education 21.4
Health 5.0
Social programs and Youth welfare 4.2
Roads, ports, and railroads 6.1
Civil aviation and Saudia Airline 4.3
Tele-communications and Postal services 1.2
Municipalities 15.4
Housing 4.1
Holy cities and the pilgrimage 1.4
Other developments 2.7
Defense 15.7
General administration 11.0
Funds 18.3

Total Plan 143.6

 

Source: Central Planning Organization Development
Plan, 1975-1980, p. 602.

17

David Long stated that

In Saudi Arabia, a traditional, conservative Islamic

society has suddenly been confronted with the full

force of twentieth century western technology and

thought (Long, 1976).
Political tension has not been relieved by the introduction
of the Five Year Plan. On the contrary, it has widened the
gap between two rival groups: the conservatives, who feel
Saudi Arabia should maintain traditional values, and the
liberals, who think Saudi Arabia should modernize its
thought as well as its land.

The application of the Five Year Plan has not led
to a fully modernized society as the Saudi government had
anticipated. Instead, it has created some confusion and
uncertainty about the direction of change. While it is not
suitable in this introduction to critically examine the
full impact of the Five Year Plan on the Saudi society,
it is relevant to examine briefly the term "modernization"
as it applies to the Saudi society.

M. J. Levey, Jr. stated:

The greater the nation of inanimate or animate sources
of power and the greater the multiplication of efforts
as the effect of application of tools, the greater is
the degree of modernization (Sinai, 1977).
It is clear that Levey believes that the extent of modern-
ization is measured by the degree of control one can exer-
cise over one's environment. But, modernization involves

more. Sinai says that there are two basic preconditions

for modernization:

 

 

18

one is the formation of an ideology forceful enough

to effect a re-evaluation in the traditional scale of
values and habits, and powerful enough to shape,
conduct, act, and create a new type of character.

The other is the formation of an elite of sufficient
strength and cohesiveness which is committed to change,
enterprise and development and which has the capacity
to rule (Sinai, 1977).

Such pre-conditions are hardly observable in Saudi Arabia.
Modernization is also considered a multi-dimensional pro-
cess where the social, economic and political factors are
primary. Shaker stated that
it is not just the expansion of education, or community
development or economic planning nor just the widening
base of power in society. Modernization is rather the
interrelation between those aspects. In other words,
to borrow Horowitz conception of development, the prob-
lem of modernization is not exclusively one of tech-
nological or natural resources, or exclusively one of
sociological or human resources, but rather the inter-
relation and interpretation of the two (Shaker, 1972).
Shaker further concluded that Saudi Arabian society
is a transitional society:
transitional societies are defined in the literature
as societies that are neither predominantly tradi-
tional nor predominantly modern, where they are assumed
by behavioral scientists to undergo an inevitable
evolution from tradition to "modernity" (Shaker, 1972).
In summary, while there has been an intensive effort
to transform Saudi Arabian society from a technically and
socially traditional society to a modern one, this goal has
not been reached. Therefore, Saudi society should be
classified as transitional, one which is passing through
critical stages in its development and exhibiting confusion

and uncertainty about the direction of its growth. The

great influx of wealth and the introduction of massive

19

programs conflicting with the attempt to maintain tradi-
tional values contribute to these uncertainties. This
situation demands an intensive effort from social scien—
tists in Saudi Arabia to assess and analyze the socio-
logical and political impact of the transitional period.
The first step in such an endeavor is to study people's
attitudes in order to gauge the direction of social change
in Saudi Arabia. This thesis is an attempt to examine the
attitudes of a designated segment of the Saudi society.
While not designed to test the political or sociological
implications of the Five Year Plan, this study does use a
method for evaluating attitudes that is scientific and

systematic.

Educational System in Saudi Arabia

 

Introduction

 

The most critical problem facing Saudi society
during this transitional period is the shortage of manpower
and well trained professionals. Hobday said,

Saudi Arabia has one of the best equipped medical

centers in the world but not yet enough doctors to

serve the population. They are.building schools at

a tremendous rate, but must rely mostly on foreign

teachers and professors to educate the population.

. . . It will be foreigners who will have to build

the roads, schools, houses, and ports (Hobday, 1978).
To meet the challenge, Saudi Arabia has stressed education,
since that is the only way to train students to function in

the types of vocations needed by the nation.

20

Historical Background

A modern educational system in Saudi Arabia was
started in 1926 when a directorate of education was estab-
lished. But, only a few students were enrolled at the
schools available at that time. By 1948, 182 primary
schools enrolled 21,407 students; by 1952, 301 schools
enrolled 39,920 pupils (Ministry of Education in Saudi
Arabia, 1979).

The establishment of the Ministry of Education in
December of 1953 was a giant step forward in the develop—
ment of the educational system of Saudi Arabia. In 1954
the nation had 52,839 students, 2,288 teachers and 460
schools. By 1975 there were 772,600 students: 618,600 were
in elementary school, 104,000 were in intermediate school,
and 28,000 were in secondary schools. In addition, at this
time, 5,000 students attended technical and vocational
training schools, and 19,000 were university students.

National expenditures for education increased from
14.6 million dollars in 1954 to almost 7 billion dollars in
1975. In 1954, there were 2,288 teachers which increased

to 42,000 in 1975.

Philosgphical Base
The philosophical foundation of education in Saudi
Arabia centers around Islamic beliefs. The system's objec-

tive is to maintain the religious and moral values of

211

.o«bnu¢ ausom no savages or» a“ cowuuoaum no mofiunauauw .oousom

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

m~0n hvnw Ham Hebcu ~hvhu mews movvno «mango vonmnw omhafl NmmON comm moov Hahn vows mh\vho~
aahw coma amp mwwmw Hmood chum vnhhhm omwomn ovvhmd vomwm anhmd nmoh vav mama Hmhd Vb\nhmn
hoe~ omma ham «whoa waved QOmm NNHHNm ammovn vaVNH OMHNN mwOmH hovw aNov wwmm nwmu nh\mhmu
vaN owed mac mocha amend ovmv hoomhc mvo-m vommma hhmmu HHHQH movm wove nwdn Ho~H Nh\Hhm~
meme mama can wNmmH meowa Homm hmhhmv Gunman thNMH mmvha mahmu oahv mman HHGN vvoH Hh\OBmH
vmma wvvn mhm vowed vanH Ommm mmdhom venhhm wormed award Hmowu Onmv nuom mmmm vmm Oh\momu
Huuoa when unuwu Huuoa n>om muuwo Huuoa m>on uduwu Hoaoa can! odolwh Hauoa and: oumflvh Hum»
nuoozom nonmnao mdunsm muonouoa muoonuuuwcfiaflt deacon

 

.mh\v>ma I oh\moma uuoumuumuc«Efl< can uuozooma .uuwmsm .uomuuao .naoonom «macaw hunucofiwamll.n wanna

22

.awncut «namm mo scumbag 0:» :H cOAumospm mo mofiumwumum "wousom

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

hem onm FHH vwov amen onau momwma mnnmm «vmmm mach Avon Hhhd NHmH Mama Hnn mh\vhau

com one am mmmn moon Hmm ommmna thmw mhvmw Ahab more coma mama been mhw wh\nhma

rmm Nov mm hm~m ommu Hno Hmbma nnwmh wnmon mowm h-v mmoa vmmd Gena new nh\thH

«av mac mo mmou vowm mov Hoomm mnHOh wvmmn mode humn owe omNH nNHH mna Nh\HhaH

mmn mom hm Noam FNON mmm mammw nowom mvmm mnnm damn ovn QHHH omoH co Hh\0had

mmm Onm NN vnom nmmn Aha ohmoo Hthm monm omen thm 00H NVHH quad no Oh\awmu

Huuoa uaom mango aouoa whom nauflu Haves whom «Hugo Hmuoa can: oHnEEh Hones can: Ondfldh user
uuoonom monumau nHunam anaconda nuouauun«:dafld Hoonom

 

.mhxehma n Oh\momu mucumuum«c«afi¢ can muosomma .maumpm .mounmao .naoonom «umuum ouoapoeuouCHul.n GHQMB

213

.oabgu: «asum no souocwx us» ca coauooaou uo noauafiuaum .oousom

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Nos own 0N coma owed mow anmav nnnnm woNOH «nan mama ave «mm Adv fled mh\ohau
00H Hvd mu MOOH Goa mom wmdnn Vbhon Ndvo ome omna va Hmv can Hod wh\nhad
NmH can we mmm «on man whhmn Forum aoov hnna hVHH omn hon nvm cm nh\NhaH
Hen mam me man Han vo Nnonw anON ahan com ham bud «an vom ma N>\Hhud
no .8 b one now mm 353 m cm: 33 amp 9.3 H a new mm m a storm."
ms an 0 Own mam me mQNmH mound nova «Hm Gav en 50H run 3 Ohxooon
Houoa uaon 3.30 150,—. goo 3 as «econ. «>8 nu .30 H.509 and: ouu'h uauou. can: can! an or
unconom avocado 9398 3050.39 Rwandan-«call Hog—om

 

.mb\chmd I Oh\a@od auDu¢uUudcfilfi£ can QHOSOQUB sadnnam .OOOIGHU .umOOfiom “ooaum mhuucooomlt.v Oahu?

24

.mflnmufi flcomm mo Eocmcwm on» Ca sewumospm mo mowumfiumum “mousom

 

 

 

 

 

mm mmoma HmeH mmmm thH omva mew mmma vmna ema mh\¢hma
om Nmmva mmmma mvma «med «mNH oma momH mmea an wh\m>ma
om hmmaa «coca mmma HNHH mmoa mm vmm mum Hm MN\thH
ma Hhvm comm 5mm mum mom am can mmo em ~n\ahma
ma Naem down Ham 5mm wa mv I I I Hh\o>ma
ma Nemm momm emw mum omm ha I I I ch\mmma
mommaaoo Hmuoa whom mauww Hmuos was: mHmEmm Hmuoe mam: mHmEmm Ham»
ummmdz mucmcsum muwcomme muoumuumwcwEUd Hoocom

 

.muoumuumwcflEUd can muwnomme .mucmpsum .mwwuasomm "cowumunpm nonwflmII.m magma

25

Islam (Wasia, 1970). Religious education is an essential
element in the curriculum.

Such emphasis results in a strong orientation toward
classical studies and a strong tendency toward the use of
memorization as a teaching method. The aim is knowledge.

If the student masters the subject matter, then the student
meets the criteria for certification. Thus, the stress on
cognitive education is the most important factor to be con-
sidered about Saudi education. Saudi educators are con-
cerned about evaluation of the "product," not the "process,"
of their educational system; educators place no importance
on student participation, or student attitudes toward

school.

Governance and Control

 

There are five different authorities which direct
and supervise education in Saudi Arabia: the Ministry of
Education, the Ministry of Higher Education, the religious
establishment, the Ministry of Defense, and the Ministry
of the Interior. All of these come together and are repre-
sented in the Supreme Educational Councils. The Supreme
Educational Councils are a coordinating body that has the
authority to set up policies and approve curriculum for
every school. All of the aforementioned groups promulgate
their own policies and programs, but they have to first be

approved by the Supreme Educational Councils.

26

The Religious Schools

 

The religious leaders in Saudi Arabia hold a very
strong position and control two types of educational pro-
grams.

The first, the General Directorates for theological
institutes, is a school system mainly concerned with
religious and Arabic studies starting at the seventh grade
and extending to the college level (Ghamdi, 1977). These
religious schools carry out two tasks: (1) they prepare
judges who will run the Judicial System in Saudi Arabia
according to Islamic laws and (2) they prepare teachers who
will teach Islamic studies, the Arabic language and litera-
ture. Thus, public schools are definitely influenced by
the religious beliefs.

The second area under the control of the religious
leaders is female education. The Directorate General of
Girls Schools, established in 1961, is totally controlled
by the religious authorities.

The issue of educating women in Saudi Arabia was
very controversial in the 19505 and created a national
debate. Religious leaders, who have unlimited power in the
decision-making process in Saudi Arabia, rejected the
idea of educating women. The reason for their stand was
a fear that Saudi women would follow Western ways. The
government, on the other hand, wanted to open the way for
women to be educated. A compromise was reached: schools

for girls were opened, but the religious authorities

27

firmly controlled and supervised these schools. In this
way, conservatives hoped that liberals would not be able
to exert undue influence.

The Directorate General of the Girls Schools and
the Ministry of Education cooperate in technical matters
(Wasia, 1970). However, the Directorate General controls
the education of women from elementary through higher
education and has set forth these objectives for the edu-
cation of women:

a. To give girls a clear understanding of their
responsibilities toward their children, their home
and society.

b. To satisfy the need in Saudi Arabia for a group
of women who are capable of maintaining a balance
between the changing patterns of today and the
traditions of yesterday.

c. To ensure a supply of highly trained women for
service in education and in other areas.

d. To provide all girls with means to obtain higher

education (Wasia, 1970).

Higher Education

 

While the Ministry of Higher Education was estab-
lished in 1974 to oversee colleges and universities, its
role tends to be that of a consultative body. This
ministry does not have firm control over colleges and

universities, unlike the Ministry of Education which

28

exercises great control over all the other Saudi schools'
policies.

In Saudi Arabia there are six major universities,
each with a different function.

The University of Riyadh, located in the capital
city of Saudi Arabia, was created on November 6, 1957,
with one college, The College of Arts. By 1979 it also
had the following faculties: Science, Commerce, Pharmacy,
Engineering, Education and Medicine.

King Abdulaziz University was founded in 1967.
Located in Jeddah on the west coast, it has Colleges of
Economics, Administration, Arts and Human Science. In
1971, the two oldest Saudi colleges joined the University:
The College of Islamic Law, founded in 1947, and the College
of Education, founded in 1952. In 1979 King Abdulaziz
University further expanded by adding Colleges of Engineering,
Science and Medicine.

The University of Petroleum and Minerals is the
only institution of higher learning in Saudi Arabia that
follows the American system of higher education. Founded
in September of 1963 in the eastern province of Dehran, it
offers programs in three general areas: science, engineer-
ing and applied engineering (Ghamdi, 1977). The language
of instruction is English.

In 1961 the Islamic University of Medina was

established to prepare students to propagate the teachings

29

of Islam around the world. Most of the students come from
other countries in the Islamic world.

The University of Al-Eman Mohamed Ibn Saudi also
emphasizes Islamic studies. It was established in 1975
in Riyadh City out of a consolidation of the College of
Islamic Law and the College of Arabic Language. Its major
function is to train judges in Shari'a Law and to train
teachers in Islamic studies and Arabic language (Ghamdi,
1977).

The University of King Faisel, founded in 1975 in
the eastern province of Damman, is also in the process of
growth. At present, it has three colleges: Agriculture,
Architecture and Medicine (Ghamdi, 1977).

In addition to these universities, there are a
number of colleges including the College of Education (for
girls), founded in Riyadh in 1970, and founded in Jeddah
in 1974.

Secondary and Elementary
Education

 

 

The Ministry of Education is the oldest and the
most important authority in the educational system in Saudi
Arabia. It controls all education for males in kinder-
gartens and elementary schools, and controls the majority
of intermediate and secondary schools for males, i.e., all
with the exception of the religious schools. The Ministry
also gives advice to other educational authorities regarding

technical matters. It directs various programs:

30

1. General education, including elementary, inter-
mediate and secondary schools for boys.

2. Technical education. At the secondary level
there are three kinds of technical programs each
with its own schools and functions: industrial,
commercial, and agricultural. There are also two
higher institutes for technical and commercial
programs, to train those students who are not con-
tinuing their higher education and need skills to

meet the demands of the job market (see Table 7).

Teacher Education

 

One of the most pressing problems facing education
in Saudi Arabia today is the shortage of native teachers
and the inadequate training institutions for the education
of teachers.

In 1975 Hobday estimated that 95 percent of the
Saudi population between the ages of six and eleven were
in school (Hobday, 1978). While student enrollment grew
from about 50,000 in 1954 to about 700,000 in 1975, the
number of trained Saudi teachers did not keep pace. Hobday
indicates of the 42,000 teachers in Saudi schools during
1975, 17,000 were foreigners (Hobday, 1978).

Officials in the Saudi Arabian Ministry of Educa-
tion reported that most of these foreigners were not

trained as teachers and generally graduated from colleges

31

.muma Hmowumflumum .coflumoupm mo huumwcwz

"mousom

 

 

 

msm.HH «mm.o Nas.mm oma.mms mmo.~m Ham.s Hmuoe ocmuo

omm ems sma.~ oms.cm mmm.a hem mumcaoowm

asm.a Hma.~ msv.m mso.ma msm.m mmm mumfiomsumucH

Haq.m ssm.m oom.m~ Hmm.vms sma.s~ mm¢.m sumuamemam

coflumuu Amhom. cowumoopm

mhmuoan ImHCHEmXN mhmgvmwfi mUGwUH—um mmmMMHU MHOO£Om MO 0&8
.mnmaaosma

Hmmw 0:» ca mwnmné flpsmm ca mommoHQEm can .muampsum .mumcomma mo HmnEszII.m magma

32

.mumo Hmowumwumum .GOHumoscm mo muumwcwz "mousom

 

 

Hmcmflm

m m mm hvm 5H m HMHUHOEEOU

umnmflm

5 NH mm baa NH m Hmowcnoma

wumpcoomm

mm mm mm mom NH H amusuasowum¢
hum 2000

mm Hm mmm mam.m «ma va Hmaowmasow
xnm coom

sea mmfl one mvH.H mm m HmHHMmsocw

muwuonmq Imwwwmmw mumcomma mucmpsum mommmHU mHoonom cwwummmmm

 

.mhmalmhmd mwnmu<

“656m as coflumoscm Hmoflcnomsuu.s manna

33

other than a college of education, i.e., they are not
certified teachers. Since they are not familiar with

the Saudi culture and values, foreign teachers find it
very difficult and, in most cases, unpleasant to teach in
Saudi Arabia, because they do not participate in the
decision making process in the school Operation.

Clearly, there is a need to train native teachers
and the Ministry of Education has intensified its program
to solve this problem. Success, though, has been limited.
While teaching positions are plentiful in Saudi Arabia,
unfortunately, teaching does not have very high social
status. Therefore, many students tend to study medicine,
engineering or business.

The history of teacher education in Saudi Arabia
can lead one to conclude that educational programs are
developed on a trial and error basis. In 1954, when the
Ministry of Education was established, its first task was
to train teachers for elementary schools. It opened thirty
teacher training institutes. The only requirement for
admission was completion of the primary school courses
(Wasia, 1970). The students spent three years at the
institute, involved in courses on academic subjects and on
professional preparation for teaching which included

psychology and methodology. After three years at the

34

institute, students received a teaching degree. Wasia
said,
We were dissatisfied with the low level of training
offered to teachers in primary schools but had to
accept that this was an expedient dictated by need
(Wasia, 1970).

Within ten years, by 1964, these institutes were
unpopular. The Ministry of Education, therefore, decided
to upgrade the institutes by changing the content of the
curriculum. It required applicants to complete at least
the intermediate school course. For elementary teachers
trained in the old system, the Ministry offered the oppor-
tunity to be re-trained in the new system. They could
attend complementary courses, each lasting about two
years.

Besides the academic institutes, there are also
three year institutes to train physical education and

technical teachers. These institutes train teachers for

elementary schools only (teachers for secondary schools

are required to have college degrees). Recently, the
Ministry of Education started to require the elementary

teachers take some higher education.

In 1975 the Ministry established a network of com-
munity colleges which provide two year programs for the
training of elementary school teachers. Applicants must
have a high school diploma or its equivalent. Presently,
there are eight of these colleges which are gradually

taking the place of the teacher training institutes.

35

The first institute for higher education established
in Saudi Arabia was the Teachers College, founded in 1952
at Mecca which started with one single academic discipline,
the Arabic language (College of Ed. Pub., 1976). In 1956,
there were fifty-six students enrolled and the number
decreased to eight in 1957. In 1960, the Teachers College
was closed.

In the next year, the Ministry of Education
reopened the Teachers College, subsequently reorganizing
it into the College of Education with five major disciplines:
English, Arabic, science-math, education and psychology-
social studies. The college offers a four year program in
which students focus on one discipline while taking pro-
fessional development courses such as psychology, methods
of teaching and philosophy of education. In 1970, the
college affiliated with King Abdulaziz University; its pro-
grams have been expanded and upgraded. At present, the
college offers eleven major academic disciplines to an

enrollment of almost four thousand students.

Special Education

In 1958, the Ministry of Education first attempted
to educate the handicapped, offering an evening course
for the blind on the Braille system (Wasia, 1970). One
hundred students enrolled in the course, most of whom were
daytime students at the Religious Institute in Riyadh.

However, the results of this attempt were promising, and

36

in 1960 the program was expanded into a day school called
the Institute of Light. By 1962, three institutes for the
blind in three different cities had been established
(Wasia, 1970). At present, there are thirty-one different
facilities with 652 students enrolled. sc'

The Ministry of Education does not limit its
services only to the blind: training is also offered to
the deaf and the mentally retarded.

In 1965, the first institute for the deaf in the
City of Riyadh was established, admitting children who were
wholly or partially deaf. At present there are sixteen
schools with 807 students enrolled.

In 1968, an institute for retarded children was
founded in Riyadh City in which one hundred students
enrolled. Now there are fifteen schools for retarded
children with 380 students enrolled.

It is a truism that a handicapped individual has
difficulty adjusting to life which can cause some psycho-
logical problems. The Ministry of Education felt that edu-
cation for the handicapped individual could engender a
positive self-concept and provide possible career choices
making the handicapped individual feel like a functioning
member in society.

Two basic types of courses are offered to the
handicapped: academic and vocational. The academic section
offers a curriculum similar to that of the public schools

so that students in this section spend the same time

37

studying the same things as do normal children with only a
few slight modifications to fit specific requirements of
the handicapped. In particular, teaching methods and aids
are changed. Students in the handicapped academic program
spend six years at the elementary level, three years at

the intermediate level, and three years at the secondary
school. At the secondary school students receive a diploma
equal to that of a public school (Ministry of Ed. Pub.,
1977).

The vocational program is intended for the handi-
capped individuals who are older or who have difficulty
adjusting to the academic program. In this section, the
student can receive a diploma equal to that given in normal
vocational schools.

Deaf students between the ages of four and six go
through a preparatory program in which they are assisted
in development of their general abilities, and are examined
to determine the degree of their deafness.

Many free services are offered to the handicapped:
medical care, financial aid and psychological care. Every
school has a social worker who establishes a close rela-
tionship with students and their families. In most cases
psychologists are available to help with special adjustment
problems. Financial help in the form of small monthly
grants enable students to be independent from their fam-
ilies. There are full boarding facilities available, free

of charge, to the handicapped. These boarding houses are

38

operated by the schools for the handicapped for those need-
ing close care or supervision.

This writer spent three months, between December
1979 and March 1980, performing research in Saudi Arabia.
During this period, the writer interviewed pe0p1e connected
with Special education in Saudi Arabia, and visited many
schools. These recent research activities highlighted the
most difficult problem in the education of the handicapped in
Saudi Arabia: the shortage of native teachers qualified to
work with the handicapped. In 1979, there were 870 teachers
who were working with the handicapped--a1most 50 percent
were native Saudis. Very few of these teachers had train-
ing in special education. The native teachers had two
kinds of teacher training: in teacher institutes for ele-
mentary school teachers and in colleges of education.
The Ministry of Education offers courses to elementary
teachers with no special training aimed at familiarizing
them with the problems of the handicapped. However, these
courses cannot be considered training; they are merely an
orientation. No courses on education for the handicapped
are offered to secondary teachers, although graduates of
colleges of education also do not receive any special
training. There are a few foreign teachers who are trained
to work in the special education field.

It seems obvious that the first need is to estab-
lish special education teacher training programs. This

is crucial if programs for the handicapped are to be

39

upgraded. In addition an examination of people's attitudes
toward the handicapped is needed in order to apprOpriately
recruit committed professionals in this special field of

education.

Conclusion

 

From the data presented thus far, it seems fair to
conclude that the most important problem facing a special
education in Saudi Arabia is the lack of native teachers,
trained to carry out this complex task efficiently. To
educate such teachers, special education teacher training
programs should be established. One crucial aspect of
establishment of such a program is to investigate student
teacher and teacher educator attitudes toward handicapped

individuals.

CHAPTER III

ATTITUDE: NATURE AND MEASUREMENT

The Nature of Attitude

 

The concept of attitude, as with some other social
science concepts, generates controversy in the literature.
This controversy centers around the operational definition
of attitude.

In his literature review, Jordan (1968) concludes
that attitude research centers around two basic views:
one sees attitude as a "pre-disposition to behavior," and
the second sees attitude as "behavior" (Jordan, 1968).

The concept of attitude as a "pre-disposition of
behavior" began during the nineteenth century when the
British philosopher Spencer defined attitude in the follow-
ing statement:

Arriving at correct judgments on disputed questions
much depends on the attitude of mind we preserve while
listening to, or taking part, in the controversy; and
for the preservation of a right attitude (Alport, 1954).

It seems clear that attitude in Spencer's definition is
considered to be an inner process and a mental state; in

this light, attitude could be viewed as a tendency to act,

but not as action, itself.

40

41

The first comprehensive study of attitude was con-
ducted by the American social psychologist Allport (Allport,
1934). Allport defines attitude as follows:

An attitude is a mental or neutral state of readi-
ness, organized through experience exerting a direc-
tive or dynamic influence upon the individuals
response to all objects and situations with which it
is related (Allport, 1954).

McGuire examined Allport's definition and concluded
that any definition of attitude must involve many dimen-
sions. In three phase analysis of attitude, McGuire postu-
lates that an attitude is a combination of three dimensions.
The first is cognitive or informational: how does an indi-
vidual perceive the particular object of the attitude
(McGuire, 1969)? On the other hand, Scott defined the
cognitive dimension of attitude as the number of ideas a
person has about the object. The second dimension is affec-
tive or emotional: does the individual like or dislike the
attitude object? The third dimension is conative: is there
a tendency to act in a certain situation? The following
example illustrates McGuire's definition of attitude:

Mike learns that marijuana affects the brain and can do
damage (this is cognitive information about marijuana);
so, he does not like it (this is his affective reaction);

finally, Mike does not smoke marijuana (this is the conative

reaction).

42

McGuire asserts that his approach to attitude is
similar to Allport's. Allport's definition of attitude
also consists of three parts:

1. a mental state of readiness to respond,
2. organized through experience,
3. exerting a directive or dynamic influence on
behavior.
These elements of Allport's definition appear to encompass
the same three dimensions of attitude postulated by McGuire
(McGuire, 1969).

The idea of using three components to define a
human condition is not unique to McGuire or Allport. It
originated in the ideas of Plato, the Greek philosopher.

He claimed that the human mind consists of three centers:
the abdomen is the seat of emotions, the breast is the seat
of striving and action, and the head is the seat of reason
and thought (Brodwin, 1973). James Sully simplifies
Plato's notion, describing the mental state in three dimen-
sions: feeling, knowing, and willing (Sully, 1892). This
view is almost identical to the McGuire analysis of atti-
tude.

Brodwin hypothesizes that McGuire's three divisions
(cognitive, affective, conative) were influenced by exis-
tential thought asserting that man can take three stances
to human life: knowing, feeling, and acting.

Guttman defines attitude as "a delimited totality

of behavior with respect to something" (Jordan, 1975).

43

Jordan suggests that Guttman's definition of attitude fits
within the positivistic definition developed by McGuire
(Jordan, 1969).

In conclusion, the two basic views of attitude that
permeate the literature are (1) as a pre—disposition to
behavior, and (2) as a behavior. Considering attitude
as a behavior is attractive to many social scientists since

this definition facilitates measuring an attitude object.

Attitude Measurement

 

The validity and reliability of data on an attitude
object depend to a large degree on the validity and reli-
ability of the instrument used to gather such data. Show
and Wright, in their comprehensive study of attitude
measurement, conclude that while the research done on atti-
tude has been intensive, much effort has been wasted due
to the lack of a suitable measuring instrument (Show and
Wright, 1967).

Three basic approaches to measurement of attitude
have been developed: the Thurston Method, the Likert
Method and the Guttman Method. A brief examination of each

follows.

The Thurston Method
In 1928, Thurston developed a process of construct-

ing an attitude measurement scale.

44

a. One begins by developing a large number of
statements which express different degrees of positive and
negative feelings toward some institution, concept or group.

b. These statements are handed to several judges
who are experts on the subject. The judges rate and
arrange the statements into a continuum of affective
intensity, from negative to positive. Each judge rates
and arranges these statements independently.

c. The researcher reviews the judge's ratings,
eliminating any items that were assigned different values
by the judges. Only those items on which the judges showed
relatively high agreement are retained.

d. Fifteen to twenty-five statements are selected
with respect to a median rating on the attitude continuum.
These statements are arranged in random order on the ques-
tionnaire. Respondents mark the statements with which they
agree (Jordan, 1975). The statements are assigned values
ranging from 0 (for extremely negative) to 5.5 (for neutral)
to 11.0 (for most positive). A subject's score is based
on the median score of the values of all the statements
marked (Jordan, 1975).

Jordan suggests the Thurston type scale is quickly
administered and easily scored; but it is somewhat laborious

and time consuming to construct (Jordan, 1975).

45

The Likert Method

 

Developed by Likert in 1932, this process also
starts with the development of a number of statements which
express different degrees of positive and negative feeling
toward some institution, concept or group. Item selection
for the attitude scale is based on the responses to the
items of a representative sample (Afrooz, 1978). Each item
is rated by subjects on a 5-point attitude scale ranging
from "strongly disapprove" to "strongly approve." A sub-
ject's total score is the sum of all the item scores

(Gottlieb, 1973).

 

 

Ratings for Ratings for

Favorable Unfavorable

Statement Statement
Strongly Agree (SA) 5 1
Agree (S) 4 2
Undecided (U) 3 3
Disagree (D) 2 4
Strongly Disagree (DS) 1 5

Each item's validity is determined according to its
correlation to the total score on the preliminary edition.
The items that have low (e.g., i 30) inter-item correlation
are rejected as either unreliable, or as measuring some
extraneous attitude factor. Those items having high (e.g.,
90+) inter-item correlation are also excluded as they
probably reflect duplication (Jordan, 1975). As a result,
the shorter, revised attitude scale is much more homogeneous

than the preliminary edition (Harrelson, 1969).

46

Edwards and Kenney compared the Thurston and Likert
methods, concluding that

The factors which invalidate "self-reports" were
present in both, i.e., response sets influence the
score in the Likert tests which tended to lower the
validity, whereas in the Thurston, because the direc-
tions required one to check the several statements with
which he most agreed, there was no influencing effect
due to the response set. The Thurston test was not as
diagnostic as the Likert which required a response to
every item, thus enabling an item analysis to obtain a
picture of the reaction to specific questions (Edwards
and Kenney, 1946).

The Guttman Method

 

Guttman's Facet Theory led to development of the
ABS (Attitude-Behavior Scale) by Jordan and his associates
(1968). A brief analysis of Guttman's approach is important
to illustrate the basic theoretical ground of ABS, the scale
used in this study.

Guttman defines an attitude as a "delimited totality
of behavior with respect to something." Thus, according to
Guttman, the appropriate task of a social scientist is to
discover the structure underlying the totality of behavior.
Guttman proposes a three facet, four level system to provide
a basic framework for such a study of attitude (see Tables
8 and 9).

Jordan expands Guttman's work to improve the
empirical correlation among levels. He adds two levels and
two facets (see Tables 16, 11, and 12).

Harnelson states that

The ABS was guided by a facet design which makes
it possible to construct items by a systematic a

47

Table 8.--Guttman Facets to Determine Structure of an
Attitude Universe.

 

 

(A) (B) (C)
I
Subject's Behavior Referent Referent S
Intergroup
a1 Belief b1 Subject's group cl Comparative
a2 Overt action b2 Subject's himself c2 Interactive

 

TableSL.--Guttman Facet Profiles of Attitude Levels.a

 

 

Subuniverse Profile
1 Stereotype al b1 cl
2 Norm a1 b1 c2
3 Hypothetical interaction a1 b2 c2
4 Personal interaction a2 b2 c2

 

aBased on facets of Table 1.

Source: J. E. Jordan, Facet theory and the study of behavior,
in S. Shye (Ed.), Theory_Construction and Data Analy-
sis in the Behavioral Sciences (San Francisco:

Jossey Bass Publishers, 1978).

48

.Amhma .mumsmwansm mmmm acumen
"oomwocmnm cum. mwocmwom HMH0H>ms0m 0:» ca mwmxaqu mumo can composuumcoo
Nnomaa .Apmv mmsm .m :H .How>mnwn mo hpnum map can anomnu Hooch .cmcuon .m .h “mouaom

.wamsomcmuasawm mumomm m>flm Ham mmonom Azoa mum ma umwuomnsm. swan on 30H Eoum mumomM
m>flm on» no mumm pmumcuo may mm pmcfimmp waamc0wumu0mo ma cofluosuum unwocm

 

 

Anow>mnmn
A>E\mcHE. I unm>ov
HmcoHumquO mm cofluomumucH Np mamm mo mocmwummxm NA AHV waom mm
Hmoauwnuomwm Hm cemflummeou Hp mumcuo Ho mwflamm an Hmcuo Hm
Hofl>mcmm u0w>mcmm uoH>mnwm
m.uouo¢ accumumucH Hound ucuuummm ucmuwmmm

mo cameoa m.nouo¢
AB 3. 8. Am. 2:

 

0.0mHGPflGD OUSHflHU4 CM MO COfiHUQHUm UCHOD @GHETUTD Cu. COMO MUOUMW GMfiYHOh.II-CH THQMH.

49

.Amnma .mumnmnansm mmmm Summon
"oomflocmum cum. mmocmwom Hmuow>mnmm may cw mfimwamcd mama can coauosuumcoo
Nuomna .Apm. mmcm .m CH .H0fi>mamn mo mosum on» can mucosa umomm .cmpHOH .m .h "mousom

.ma manna mama

 

 

 

cofluom accomumm mm Np m0 m9 mm m newuod .m
mcwammm chomumm Ho NU NU mm «M w mcflammm .m
coauom Hmowumnuomwn Hmcomumm H0 N0 N0 an mm m omhm .v
cowumsam>m Hmuoa HMCOmHmm Hm mo H0 H9 mm N ammo: .m
Enos Hmumaoom Hm mp Ho an am A Euoz .m
mmwuomumum Hmumwoom Hm Hp Ho an an o omumum .H

EH09 mucmEmHm Hm>mq

MCAOH wwwwwmmmm monouum mama
m>wuawuommn . mo Hmnssz mamomnsm

.cowuosuum

mooufluué mo momma xflm MOM mamnmq 0cm cofluwmomEoo mammoum .Hw>mq “GHOhII.HH wanna

50

priori design instead of by the method of intuition or
by the use of judges (1969).

Guttman's Facet Theory (1959) specifies that the

attitude universe represented by the item content can be

substructured into components. These components system-

atically are related according to the number of identical

conceptual elements they hold in common.

Homersma and Jordan (1973) conclude that there are

four classes of variables which seem to be important deter-

minants of attitudes:

1.

Econ-demographic factors such as age, sex and
income;

Contact factors such as amount, nature, willingness,
voluntariness and enjoyment of the contact;
Socio-psychological factors such as one's value
orientation;

The knowledge factor, i.e., the amount of factual
information one has about the attitude object.

The ABS was developed to include all four classes

of variables. Jordan states he attempted to select items

for the ABS according to three principles:

1.

Ego involvement: cognitive-affective. Is the
attitude object in situation Y dealt with cogni-
tively or affectively?

Social distance: Distant-close. Is the attitude
object in situation Y distant or close to one's

self? What amount of contact is there?

51

3. Relevance: Low-high. Is situation Y relevant to

the subject? Is it important?

Thus, item selection for ABS is guided by what Guttman calls
Facet Theory. This theory provides a semantic map (see
Tables 11, 12, 13, 14 and 15) and a rationale from which

to select items.

Item analysis of ABS is conducted via unidimensional

methods. Jordan explains,

The object of a unidimensional method is to test
directly whether a collection of items can be scaled
on one attitude continuum. The criterion of scala-
bility is that if an individual endorses a more extreme
item he should also endorse all less extreme items.

The scaling criterion is applied to the scores obtained
from a try out group of respondents (1973).
Jordan further states,

By knowing the extreme statement that a person
endorses, his other responses can be predicted. In
attitude scale construction, if a set of items can be
found which will fit this pattern, it is convincing
evidence of unidimensional scalability (1975).

Kim, Jordan and Horn (1973) conclude that ABS has

proven to be a powerful tool for
1. Defining research problems.
2. Finding relationships within and among variables.
3. Dealing with problems of relevancy, equivalency

and comparability.

4. Assisting in the analysis and interpretation of
empirical data.

Such advantages, however, are not true of the other

methods, i.e., Thurston and Likert. A number of ABS-type

scales exist centered around attitude objects such as the

52

mentally retarded, the blind, the deaf, the crippled, drug

users, racial-ethnic differences and educational change.1

Summary

A history of research on attitude reveals that two
basic views permeate the literature. The first sees atti-
tudes as "pre-disposition to behavior," and consider atti-
tudes a mental state, an inner process or a tendency to
act. This definition makes it.difficult, if not impossible,
to conduct scientific research on attitude objects because
inner states cannot be measured or observed. The second
view sees attitude as "behavior." Guttman used this defi-
nition to develop his facet theory which offers a three
facet and four level system to provide a basic framework
for a scientific study of attitude. An ABS developed by
Jordan and his associates using Guttman Facet Theory makes
it possible to construct items by a systematic, a priori
design rather than through intuition (Likert method) or by

the use of judges (Thurston method).

 

1For further details about ABS, see Chapter V in
which description and analysis of items is examined.

CHAPTER IV

REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE

The literature reviewed for this study is presented
according to the following variables: contact, stereotype,
social acceptance, knowledge, and peer acceptance. Repre-
sentative studies were selected according to these criteria:

1. data on various segments of the population, includ-
ing attitudes of teachers, students, and other
groups.

2. documentation of findings on experimental and
survey research from an historical perspective

from the early fifties to the late seventies.

Since this study is concerned with attitudes toward
the blind, the deaf and the mentally retarded, research
on each disability group is examined in separate sections.
Cross-disability research is covered in a fourth section,
examining attitudes toward one disability in comparison
with others.

The present study was conducted in a cultural
setting that is very different from that of the 0.8.

Since no single study exists on the attitudes of the Saudi

people toward the handicapped, this review includes a

53

54

cross-cultural section focusing on how other cultures per-
ceive the handicapped.

Investigations of attitudes in the 0.8. toward the
handicapped seem to suggest some mildly negative perceptions
of the handicapped (Cruickshank, 1975). Americans appear
to approach the handicapped as they do minority groups,
exhibiting hostility based on stereotyped expectations
(Siegel, 1966). This conclusion led to a shift in research
emphasis away from attempts merely to identify attitudes
toward the handicapped, and toward studies on how to modify
attitudes toward the disabled. Since 1975 little work has
been done on attitude identification compared with the
previous period. Thus, this review includes a section on

the more recent research into modification of attitudes.

Attitudes Toward the Mentally Retarded

 

A comparison of several studies on attitudes toward
mentally retarded persons reveals results which are mixed
and contradictory. This appears true of all the other
groups of studies reviewed here--a phenomenon which will
be examined more closely at the end of this chapter.

One of the most comprehensive investigations in
the literature was conducted by Smith and Hurst (1961) who
made a detailed examination of the relationship between
motor ability and peer acceptance in a group of educable
mentally retarded students in a day school. Focusing on

the nature of peer perceptions, the researchers attempted

55
to discover whether the stereotype was connected with
mental ability or with motor ability of the retarded stu-
dents. They found that there was a significant relation—
ship between motor ability and peer acceptance.

Clark (1964a) confirmed the Smith and Hurst (1961)
conclusion. Assessing normal students' attitudes toward
the mentally retarded, Clark also tried to find out whether
their attitudes were linked with intellectual ability or
motor ability. Data obtained from interviews of a large
sample of normal fifth grade boys and girls were subjected
to content analysis. Two significant conclusions were
reported: first, the students had negative attitudes
toward the mentally retarded, and second, these attitudes
were attributable to appearance and athletic ability, not
intellectual ability.

In another study, Clark (1964b) showed photographs
of retarded children in an adjacent class to normal chil-
dren. The children were unable to identify the individuals
in the photographs. Then, he asked the normal children
directly about the special class. Only 10 percent of the
children's remarks about the other class were derogatory;
90 percent described the special class members in terms
connoting deviancy; but only 5 percent correCtly described
the class's members as mentally retarded.

Jaffe (1966) did intensive research into stereo-
types of retarded people. He employed the following

semantic differential scales:

f.

56

the evaluative factor

activity, potency and suggestibility factor
Adjective Checklist

the social distance scale

a vocabulary test

demographic data.

Of the forty high school seniors who participated

in Jaffe's study, half were asked to respond about a

retarded person; the rest were asked to respond about a

nonretarded person and about the label "mentally retarded."

Several findings were reported by Jaffe:

1.

There were no significant differences on instru-
ments measuring the evaluative factor, suggestible
factor, and the adjective checklist. The subjects'
responses to both retarded and nonretarded were
almost the same. However, the subjects' responses
on the evaluative factor for the retarded person
were significantly more favorable than for the label
"mentally retarded."

There was a significant difference on the vocabulary
test, results between those who had and those who
had not had contact with retarded people. Jaffe
concluded that contact may be related to cognitive
or descriptive attitudes as opposed to attitudes
based on feelings.

Jaffe's conclusions led Hearte (1967) to examine

the issue of contact, specifically, the intensity of

57

attitude as a result of contact with mentally retarded
people. Testing 405 clergymen of various denominations
(Jewish, Catholic, Methodist), he found that clergymen with
more frequent contact with mentally retarded persons tended
to feel more strongly about their attitudes toward the
mentally retarded, regardless whether the attitudes were
favorable or unfavorable. This conclusion seems to con-
tradict that of Jaffe (1966) who suggested that contact
seemed to be related to a more cognitive than emotional
dimension of attitude.

Cohen (1963) designed scale to measure attitudes
toward hiring the retarded which tested three variables:
amount of contact, amount of knowledge, and amount of
education. Using 177 employers in the immediate area of
a training and research center on retardation, Cohen found
a significant negative relationship between attitudes and
reported educational level. The contact variable was not
significant. Cohen concluded that employer attitudes were
relatively independent of knowledge.

Several studies contradict Cohen's findings.
Hartlage (1965) found no relationship between the educa-
tional level of 120 employers and their receptivity toward
hiring the retarded. Phelps (1965) constructed fifty-four
items to measure the relationship between level of education
and attitude toward the retarded. Among the 132 service

employers participants, he found a positive relationship

58

between educational level and attitude toward the mentally
retarded.

Polansky (1961) administered a mental deficiency
misconception scale to psychiatric technicians in a state
hospital for the retarded and found that technicians believed
to greater extent than laymen that the "feeble-minded are
readily recognizable." Female technicians had fewer mis-
conceptions than males and seemed to be more "tender-
hearted." Polansky suggests that beliefs and emotional
bias influenced the responses of psychiatric technicians
more than factual knowledge.

Efron (1967) investigated the degree of influence
on attitudes toward the retarded resulting from contact
with this disability group. He had 235 persons (teachers
and students from both special education and general edu-
cation) respond to a seventy item Likert Format question-
naire. The results revealed that special education teachers
and students showed more positive attitudes toward the
mentally retarded than general education staff. The author
suggests that personal contact is the most important vari-
able in changing attitudes.

Babow (1969) found that subjects who exhibited a
generally favorable orientation toward mental retardation
scored low on a test for authoritarianism.

Renz (1969) attempted to discover how normal
adolescents perceive and describe educable mentally retarded

adolescents measured on the same continuum used for normal

59

adolescents. Findings of this study indicate that subjects
did not reject educable mentally retarded students with any
greater frequency than their normal grade mates.

Anders (1968) compared parental authoritative—
permissive attitudes toward the mentally retarded among
Anglo-Saxon Protestants, Negro Protestant and French Catho-
lics in Louisiana. The author did not find significant
differences among the three ethnic groups; but he did find
other demographic variables--education and income--to be
important.

Conine (1969) investigated the attitudes of regular
elementary teachers toward mentally retarded students and
found that these teachers neither accepted nor rejected
mentally retarded students. Mays (1974) expanded Conine's
sample to include special educators, examining the atti-
tudes of both regular and special educators toward mentally
retarded students. Special education teachers, more experi-
enced with the handicapped students than regular educators,
demonstrated more positive attitudes toward the mentally
retarded. The author suggests that actual contact may lead
to favorable attitudes toward the retarded.

White (1974) continued this line of research by
attempting to discover whether related education or actual
contact was more important in determining teacher attitudes
toward the retarded. Results indicated that persons with
related education had a greater mean level of acceptance of

the retarded than persons with experience but no education.

60

Persons with both related education and experience had a
greater mean level of acceptance of the retarded than both
of the former groups. No significant difference in attitude
was measured after a student teaching practicum with the
mentally retarded, but a significantly positive increase

in level of acceptance was measured after a twelve-week
work experience with the retarded. The author concludes
that positive attitudes toward the retarded are a function
of both related education and experience.

Willey and McCandless (1973) investigated how normal
children view other children of the same age who are edu-
cably mentally retarded. Using 341 white children attend-
ing public school fifth grade classes, the authors adminis-
tered forty-six adjectives, verbs and noun phrases such
as "like" or "not like." The researchers found negative
attitudes among normal children toward the mentally
retarded; however, the authors concluded that the negative-
ness of these children's attitudes was not associated with
the retarded people's academic problems, but, rather, with
their personal and social impression.

Somewhat contradictory results were obtained by
Gortlieb, Cohen, and Goldstein (1974) who investigated the
attitudes of elementary school children toward the
retarded. Testing children at schools which had educable
mentally retarded students and at schools which did not,
the authors found that attitudes toward educable mentally

retarded students were most favorable when the raters had

61

little school contact with retarded children. They also
reveal that no significant differences were found between
adjustment and attitude toward the retarded.

Bruininks and Rynders (1974) conducted a survey to
assess the social acceptance of retarded children enrolled
in regular classrooms while receiving supportive assist—
ance in resource learning centers. Looking at both
suburban and urban inner-city schools, the authors found
that retarded urban school children achieved significantly
higher peer ratings than nonretarded children; suburban
retarded children achieved significantly lower ratings than
nonretarded children. However, there was no significant
difference in the level of acceptance of retarded compared
with nonretarded samples in both settings when all the
samples were combined.

Payne and Murray (1974) examined the attitudes of
elementary school principals toward the integration of the
mentally handicapped into regular educational settings.

Of the sixty-three principals, twenty-eight were located in
urban areas and thirty-five were in suburban areas. Results
revealed that integration of the handicapped was acceptable
to 40 percent of the urban principals and to 71 percent of
the suburban principals. This difference was significant

at the .01 level.

Sheare (1974) studied experimental and control
groups of nonretarded ninth grade adolescents. The

experimental nonretarded children were integrated with

62

educable mentally retarded adolescents from the school's
special classes in nonacademic classes, clubs, social and
athletic activities; the control group was not integrated.
Results of an acceptance scale reveal that the experimental
groups consistently gave more positive ratings to educable
mentally retarded adolescents than the control groups.

Gottlieb and Corman (1975) studied public attitudes
toward mentally retarded children in a survey of 430 adults.
They found that persons with no previous contact tended to
favor segregation of retarded children in the community.

Foley (1979) conducted a study to examine the
effect of labeling and teacher behavior on children's atti-
tudes toward the mentally retarded. Coming from a rural
school having an integrated special education program,
seventy-eight fourth grade subjects viewed one of two video-
tapes depicting a child demonstrating various kinds of
academic and social behavior. After, the subjects filled
out a peer acceptance questionnaire about the child on the
videotape. It was found that the "mentally retarded" label
led to significantly higher peer-acceptance rating than

did the "normal," or "learning disabled" label.

Attitudes Toward the Blind
There are only a few studies of attitudes toward
blind people. One of the most important was conducted by
Sommers (1944) investigating the impact of parental atti-

tude on behavior of blind children. Five forms of

63

adjustment mechanism were utilized by the blind children.
Sommers concludes that these behavior patterns are a result
of parental attitudes and are similar to them:

The meaning the handicap held for the child himself

seemed to depend largely on his social experience,

especially in his early childhood. It was clearly
evident from the data at hand that the blind individ-
uals tended to make a wholesome personal and social

adjustment whenever their early life afforded them a

reasonable amount of economic, physical and emotional

security, whenever they were fully accepted by the
members of their family, and the parents were able

to face their handicap in an objective way.

The work of Imamura (1965) seems to confirm
Sommers' results. This researcher addressed the question
of parental attitudes toward blind children, and the
degree of influence of their attitudes on the children's
behavior. Imamura asked these questions:

1. Is the behavior of blind children different from
that of sighted children of the same age?

2. Do the mothers of blind and sighted children
treat their children differently?

3. What are the relationships, if any, between the
behavior of blind children and that of their
mothers?

Twenty-two children participated, including ten
who were blind and twelve who had normal vision. Using
the systematic behavior observation method, the researcher
recorded the concrete actions performed by children and

mothers in their natural home environment. This data led

to the following conclusions:

64

1. The characteristic which most clearly distinguished
between the behavior of blind children and of
sighted children was "succorance."

2. There was no significant difference between the
two groups of mothers regarding the treatment of
their children.

3. A number of significant relationships were found
between the blind children's behavior and their
mothers' behavior which may be classified as
follows: The blind children tended to relate to
their mother's dominance with submission to their
aggression. The sighted children tended to relate
to their mother's dominance with succorance to
their aggression.

Imamura also concludes that a mother's compliant
behavior serves as a more certain predictor of her child's
self-reliance than whether or not the child is blind.
Mothers' attitudes toward their blind children have an
important influence on the children's self-concept and
social adjustment.

Meighan (1971) took this issue farther when he
attempted to examine the formation of self-concept in
the visually handicapped. Since self-concept emerges from
the interpersonal relationships of the individual, Meighan
insisted that it results from the reflect appraisals of
significant others, i.e., self-concept is an outcome of

the attitudes of other people toward an individual.

65

Meighan reports three important findings:

1. There were significant differences between the self-
concepts of visually handicapped and the self-
concepts of other people.

2. Generally, the blind hold negative self-concepts.

3. There was no significant correlation between self-
concept and academic achievement of the blind.

Cowen (1958), conducting one of the most compre-
hensive studies to appear in the literature, investigated
attitudes of sighted people toward blind peOple. A series
of items dealing with attitudes toward blindness were
carefully constructed and submitted to a group of workers
with the blind. Based on the workers' judgments of whether
each item reflected a positive or negative attitude toward
blindness, Cowen retained only those items which evoked
100 percent agreement. Using the fifty-six items which
received 100 percent agreement, the author had 101 subjects
respond on a four point scale ranging from "strongly agree"
to "strongly disagree." Several interesting results emerged:

1. There were no significant differences in attitudes
to blindness as a function of previous contact with
blind people.

2. Male respondents tended to verbalize more negative
attitudes toward the blind than females. Cowen
notes that this seemed to be a generalized response
characteristic which cut through all attitude scales

used in his study.

66

3. There were significant correlations between
negative attitudes to blindness and anti-minority,
anti-Negro feeling among respondents.

Batman (1962) seems to contradict some of Cowen's
results. Examining sighted children's perceptions of
various abilities of blind children and some factors which
influence these perceptions, she found a number of inter-
esting relationships.

1. Amount of contact was associated with more positive
attitudes toward the blind. Those having contact
with the blind were more positive and the positive-
ness of appraisal increased with the number of blind
children known.

2. The appraisal of urban children was more positive
than that of rural children.

3. Positiveness of appraisal was associated with the
sighted children's level of educational attainment.
The author suggests several implications:

Support was found for the contention that personal

knowledge about blindness [acquaintance with a recog-

nizably select group of blind children; those attend-
ing public schools] does broaden sighted children's
ideas of the capabilities of the blind. . . . The
fact that the children who had had no experience with
the blind expressed greater certainty and unanimity

in their evaluations indicates that increased knowl-

edge may decrease the tendency to make absolute

judgments and generalizations.

Work by Whiteman and Lukoff (1962) seem to support

Batman and contradict Cowen regarding contact variables.

Their assessment of attitudes toward the blind indicates

67

that contact appears to be related to more positive atti-
tudes and to the degree of espousal of community integra-
tion of the blind. Another variable investigated was value
orientation. The authors conclude that those who describe
themselves as distant from others, or those who identify
strongly with power express these same orientations in
negative evaluations of blindness.

Bell (1962) studied the attitudes of professional
rehabilitation workers toward the physically handicapped.
He found that those workers with disabled relatives were
significantly more accepting of the physically handi-
capped than those without close personal contact.

Dickie (1967) conducted intensive research into
the attitudes of people in selected occupations toward the
blind. The 391 adult male and female participants con-
sisted of teachers at regular schools, teachers at special
education schools, blue collar workers, and managerial per—
sonnel. Six research instruments were employed to examine
several research questions. Dickie reports the following
results:

1. There was a significant correlational relationship
between the combined contact variables and favor-
able attitudes toward handicapped and blind persons.

2. There were no significant relationships between
value orientations and attitudes toward the blind.

3. The female sample showed significantly more positive

attitudes toward the blind than did the male sample.

68

In his study of attitudes toward blindness and blind
people, Monbeck (1973) indicates that

Although the number of blind beggars is too often
small, it is the image of the beggar that is most
commonly called to mind by the words "blindman."

It is not surprising that the blind beggar is so
conspicuous, for it is his business to be noticed
and to be instantly recognized as useless, unable to
work and worthy only of pity. The ordinary, average
blind person on his way to work or out shopping is
only rarely noticed and almost never remembered.

While the studies reviewed in this section offer
contradictory results, their general orientation suggests
some important findings. Parental attitudes appear to
influence the formation of self-concept of the blind. Con-
tact with blind persons seems to influence more positive

attitudes toward this disability. These findings will be

more closely examined later in this chapter.

Attitudes Toward the Deaf

 

As with research on attitudes toward the mentally
retarded, the literature on attitudes toward the deaf
reveals conflicting and even contradictory results.

One of the earliest studies on attitudes toward
deaf people was conducted by Strong (1931). In spite of
its descriptive nature, this study has some interesting
conclusions. Strong suggests that American people do not
hold negative attitudes toward the deaf: he found that 59
percent of the subjects studied were indifferent. While

25 percent expressed dislike of deaf people, 16 percent

69

said they liked the deaf. These results have been chal-
lenged by several investigators, i.e., Cowen.
' Baker (1953) and his associates point out that
while there are not many studies of stereotypes of the
deaf, jokes and stories about them attest that such stereo-
types are widespread. Bender (1970) decries the general
ignorance about deaf peOple citing the persistance of
terms such as "deaf-mutes" and "deaf and dumb" in most
languages and countries.
Elser (1959) studied the level of acceptance of

hearing handicapped students by their normal classmates.
To assess the attitudes of normal subjects toward the deaf,
Elser developed different categories of investigation:

1. friendship patterns

2. social status

3. self-perception
The authors found that the level of acceptance of the hear-
ing handicapped as friends was below average in the group.
Results indicated the social status or reputations of the
hearing handicapped were below the average of the class.
the deaf subjects felt that other students viewed them
less than the average.

Horowitz and Rees (1962) studied different group

attitudes toward the deaf by testing 226 normal subjects
ranging from children in the first grade to college students.

While the research subjects labeled all peOple with any

70

hearing loss as deaf, the group generally had positive per-
ceptions of the hearing handicapped. They indicated a
general impression that hearing aids guarantee normal
hearing, a factor which might reduce the intensity of nega-
tive attitudes toward this type of disability. However,
surprisingly, children more consistently realized that a
hearing aid did not guarantee normal hearing.

One of the most intensive and comprehensive studies
to appear in the literature on attitudes toward the deaf
was designed to include three phases by Cowen, Rockway,
Grove, and Stevenson (1967).

In Phase I, a fifty item scale was developed based
on statements the investigators found in the literature
which indicated either a positive or negative attitude to
deafness. The items were submitted to a group of psychology
student judges who were asked to indicate whether each item
reflected a positive or a negative attitude, whether it did
not relate to attitudes on deafness. A 4-point Likert type
framework was used which elicited strong or mild agree-
ment, or strong or mild disagreement. Twenty-five items
were then selected for the final test and this scale was
then given to a second sample of 160 psychology students
for the purpose of cross validation.

In Phase 2, Cowen gt a1. attempted to determine
the relationship between negative (anti-deafness) scores
on their scale and a series of other attitude and personality

measures. The investigators used abbreviated versions of

71

authoritarianism, anti-minority, and anti-Negro scales and
hypothesized that the disabled have an underprivileged status
similar to that of racial and religious minorities. Thus,
they anticipated similarly negative attitudes would

result from tests of the nonhandicapped majority.

The authors used the Locus of Evaluation Scale
for the Phase 3 goal of testing the hypothesis that the
individual who "externalize responsibility" is more
likely to have negative attitudes toward deafness than the
person who accepts the responsibility for failure.

Cowen §£.El- obtained results from the preliminary
use of their deafness scale which demonstrated reasonable
face validity and internal consistency. In the second
phase, they established interrelationships between anti-
deafness and authoritarian, anti-Negro and anti-minority
attitudes. However, results from their test of the hypoth-
esis that negative attitudes to deafness "were predictive
of some outside behavior apart from responses to other
attitude scales" were postulated to need further exami-
nation.

Poulos (1970) examined the relationships of certain
variables to deafness, assessing the attitudes of five
designated groups. Teachers of the deaf, regular school
teachers, mothers of deaf children, prospective employers,
and mothers of normal children were tested on the Attitude
Behavior Scale-Deafness (ABS-DF) originally developed by

Jordan (1963). The ABS-DF consists of six levels which

72

each correspond to a certain level of the hypothesized
attitude universe:

1. societal stereotype

2. societal norm

3. personal moral interaction

4. personal hypothetical behavior

5. personal feelings

6. actual personal action.

Poulos found support for his hypothesis that con-
tact is significantly related to the positiveness of atti-
tudes toward the deaf. However, he also found that
increased knowledge about deafness may be a weak predictor
of positive attitudes toward the deaf.

Kennedy and Bruininks (1974) constructed research
instruments to test peer status and self-perceived peer
status of first and second grade hearing impaired and
normal children enrolled in regular classrooms. The
respondents in this study were fifteen hearing impaired
children and 227 normal children. Three different socio-
metric tests were administered to all the subjects. Each
pupil received a list of his classmates' names. Play was
selected as the criterion for peer choice. First, the
children completed the peer acceptance scale; then, in a
second booklet with the names typed in reverse order, they
assessed their self-perception of their own peer status.
Results indicated that hearing impaired children enrolled

in regular classrooms appeared to have gained a degree of

73

social acceptance inconsistent with the below average levels
reported in earlier studies (Elser, 1959). These researchers
found no significant differences in level of peer status
between the hearing handicapped and the normal groups.

Emerton and Rothman (1978) investigated attitudes
toward deafness held by normal students on an integrated
deaf-hearing campus. Several research questions were
addressed in this particular study:

1. What is the general valance (positive or negative)
of attitudes toward deaf people held by normal
freshmen and transfer students prior to arrival on
campus?

2. What is the nature of the change (if any) in these
attitudes after six months attendance at the deaf-
hearing college?

3. Do attitudes vary with the deaf/hearing composition
of the residence hall population?

4. Are there background, knowledge or involvement
variables associated with the student attitudes
which suggest leads for future investigations?

5. What are the most positive and the most negative
attitudes expressed by the students?

One hundred normal students admitted to the
Rochester Institute of Technology participated in the
study's two phases. First, before coming to the campus,
students responded to a 25-item list of stereotypes about

deaf people. The second phase, conducted after six months

~74

of campus residency, included three parts: (1) a series of
questions to discover the kinds of information, contact,
and experience the subject had with respect to deaf people;
(2) a 25-item attitude scale containing sixteen items on
the same stereotypes listed in the questionnaire completed
before arrival on campus, and nine items which reflected
campus stereotypes of deaf students; (3) an optional open-
ended interview designed to allow free expression of feel-
ings and opinions. The general valance of attitudes held
by incoming normal-hearing students appeared positive;
however, no significant differences were found after six
months.

Holton (1978) designed a study to examine "proxemic
behavior," spatial and distancing behavior of deaf adults.
Proxemic behavior, according to Holton, defines an individ-
ual's use and perception of his social and personal space.
Specifically, this author explored the proxemic behavior
of deaf and normal individuals in homogeneous and hetero-
geneous dyads. The proxemic behavior of normal subjects
did not alter significantly in interactions with the deaf.
Similarly, deaf subjects did not alter their behavior in
interactions with normal people. Finally, Holton found
that normal and deaf people do not differ significantly

in their overall proxemic behavior.

75

Cross-Disability Research

Generally, cross-disability research involves a
comparative study of specific variables or treatments across
two or more discrete handicaps. The review presented in
this section will deal only with cross-disability research
into attitudes toward the handicapped.

One of the earliest of such studies to appear in
the literature was conducted by Murphy, Dickstein, and
Dripps (1960) who investigated the attitudes of several
groups of youth toward deaf children and compared these
attitudes with those held toward other types of disabil—
ities. The authors used a scale consisting of eight
categories: the deaf, the visually handicapped, the mentally
retarded, the emotionally disturbed, the physically handi-
capped, the gifted, the speech disordered, and the delin-
quent. The college freshmen respondents, who were study—
ing to become teachers, gave low preference to teaching the
deaf--with the exception of one group, respondents studying
to become speech therapists. The within-group rank differ-
ence correlation between attitude categories by all groups

responding revealed this trend: tg_g small degree, the more

 

an individual feels he knows about a handicap, the more
inclined he is to desire to work with individuals having
such a handicap. This conclusion is confirmed by many
studies cited in this chapter and clearly suggests that
knowledge, by itself, does not necessarily lead to positive

attitudes toward a specific disability.

76

One year later, in an extension of the work started
with his associates, Murphy (196 ) asked educators to rank
categories of disabled persons according to their prefer-
ence for teaching, i.e., the kind of handicapped students
these educators would prefer to teach, and, by implication,
the kind of handicap best understood. The majority of the
respondents placed the visually handicapped on the rejec-
tion end of the continuum, saying that they knew very
little about the blind in comparison to other types of
disability.

Nikoloff (1962) assessed elementary and secondary
school principals' attitudes toward different kinds of
disabilities (blindness, deafness, stuttering, and physical
handicaps requiring crutches or artificial limbs). Using
a questionnaire to discover which of the five categories
would be accepted as either student teachers or as full-
time teachers in their school, this researcher found that
principals most often rejected blindness. Deafness was
rejected at almost the same level.

Jones gt a1. (1966) concerned with the social distance
of exceptional children, these researchers had 186 high school
students complete a paired comparisons questionnaire composed
of twelve exceptionalities and seven interpersonal dimensions.
The degree of acceptance of certain exceptionalities was
sometimes associated with an interpersonal situation. The

severely mentally retarded were placed in the unfavorable

77

end of the acceptance continuum and the gifted were placed
at the favorable end. Disabilities of a mild nature, such
as hardness of hearing, partial sight, were most often
placed near the favorable end.

Warren and Turner (1966) reported rank order data
on disabilities which suggest different conclusions than
those of Jones gt 21' Here, results indicated that the
most visibly handicapped, i.e., the blind, are least
socially acceptable.

Shears and Jenseman (1969), attempting to compare
the acceptability of differently disabled persons in cer-
tain social situations, used ninety-four subjects including
undergraduate students, graduate students, and psychiatric
technicians. Respondents ranked ten disabilities with
respect to (a) their desirability in a friend and (b) their
desirability as a self-affliction. In addition, the sub-
jects filled out a social distance questionnaire involving
the following levels:

would marry

would have as a friend

would work with

would live in same neighborhood

would speak to

would live in same country.

As the level of intimacy increased, the percentage
of subjects willing to accept persons with this handicap

gradually decreased. At the level of "would marry," there

78

was an extreme drop. Three distinct levels of acceptability
were abstracted from the data:
Most acceptable: amputee, wheel chair patient, and

blind person;

Next acceptable: persons who are deaf, stutter severely,
and persons who have a harelip;

Least acceptable: mentally ill and mentally retarded
persons.

The results suggest six dimensions which probably
combine and interact in the formation of stereotypes of
disabled persons: visibility of the disability, communi-
cation, social stigma associated with the disability,
reversibility of prognosis, degree of disability, and
difficulty the disability imposes on daily living.

Afrooz (1978) conducted an intensive study of atti-
tudes of Iranian regular school teachers toward the deaf,
the blind, and the mentally retarded. This author also
examined the relationships of certain variables to these
expressed attitudes. A great number of interesting con-
clusions emerged which will be fully explored in the cross-
cultural section of this review; only the findings which
are related to cross-disability research will be reported
here. The Iranian sample expressed more positive attitudes
toward the deaf and the blind than toward the mentally
retarded.

While some of the results of cross-disability

research seem contradictory and mixed, one consistent

79

conclusion suggests that the mentally retarded occupy the
unfavorable end of the attitude continuum, especially in

social situations where interpersonal relations involved.

Cross-Cultural Research

 

In a report published by the American Psychological
Association, Kelly gt 31. (1960) saw "great value" in com-
paring attitudes and beliefs regarding disabilities through
cross-cultural studies of adaptations to disabilities.
However, it is important to note that cross-cultural data
is more complex and difficult to obtain. The cross-
cultural methodological problems, as stated by Jordan (1968),
are relevancy, equivalency, and comparability. A brief

examination of each follows.

Relevancy

 

In a study of attitudes toward the blind, the
researcher must examine the relevance of concepts of
"blindness" in all the research countries involved in

the study.

Equivalency

 

The problem of meaning equivalence is being studied
extensively. Various authors have considered the hazards
of meaning equivalence in cross-cultural studies (Jacob-
son, 1954; Klineberg, 1950; Suchman, 1964; UNESCO, 1963).

Primary is the problem of obtaining comparable input stimuli;

80

this may be subdivided into problems of translation and the

availability of equivalent terms and concepts.

Comparability

 

Once the problems of relevance and equivalence are
resolved, data units are likely to be comparable. A
UNESCO (1964) publication and Teune (1967) deal extensively
with comparability of data units and offer persuasive evi-
dence that comparability can be attained.

Thus, in spite of the complexity of cross-cultural
studies, it appears possible to obtain reliable data.

This section will deal with two types of cultural
research: cross-cultural analyses and studies of a cultural
setting other than the United States.

One of the earliest studies of attitudes toward
the handicapped was by Jane and Kanks (1948) who described
the social status accorded the physically handicapped in
various foreign cultures: India, and several tribes which
live in North America, i.e., Trabraind Islanders. Looking
at the different cultural settings of the physically handi-
capped, the authors examined several categories: economic
liability, tolerant civilization, limited participation.

Analysis suggested that cultural variation with
regard to the physically handicapped could be best under-
stood by looking at the types of values which influence
the society's social structure. For instance, the

physically handicapped in India appeared to be considered

81

a liability; such people may be denied protection because
they constitute a threat to the family. Searching for the
cultural conditions which could lead to such a situation

in India, the researchers identified aspects of the Indian
value system which could cause rejection of the physically
handicapped: the Hindu concepts of dhama and contamination.
Briefly, the theological doctrine of dhama justifies exist-
ing personal social status as the inevitable result of past
behavior. So, a physical handicap is seen as a result of
past behavior--the handicapped person's fault for which

he is responsible. Another contributing factor explaining
the rejection of the handicapped in India is the intensity
of the class structure.

The authors suggest an hypothesis for further
research: protection of and social participation for the
physically handicapped increases in societies where

l. the level of productivity is higher in proportion
to the population, and distribution is more

nearly equal;

2. competitive factors in individual or group achieve-
ment are minimized;

3. the criteria for achievement are less formally
absolute, as in hierarchical social structures,

and more weighted with concern for individual

capacity, as in democratic social structures.

82

They conclude that authoritarian cultures are more
often characterized by negative attitudes toward disabled
individuals than are egalitarian ones.

It is important to note that Jane and Kanks' study
was descriptive and speculative. While the authors did
conduct systematic, personal observations, they did not
design an instrument of measurement. However, their con-
clusions led to further investigation.

Wright (1960) refers to anthropological surveys
by Maisel dealing with primitive or nonaccidental attitudes
toward disabled persons. Wide discrepancies in the treat-
ment of disabled persons were found, but, in the main, there
was a preponderance of negative attitudes.

Until there is more abundant anthropological research
on the attitudes of different cultural groups toward
physique and physical deviation, we can only hazard the
guess that though the variation in attitudes is greater
than we imagine, out of all the diversity will emerge
psychological law that will contribute to our under-
standing of the fundamental characteristics of atti-
tudes toward physique.

Two groups of researchers, Richardson (1961) and
Goodman (1963) investigated uniformity and cultural vari-
ability of preference rankings of pictures of different
kinds of physical deviations. Drawn from the United States,
the samples showed people'who were physically handicapped,
nonhandicapped, and from various ethnic groups and social
classes.

Richardson gt al. found "remarkable uniformity in

the hierarchy of preferences which the children exhibited

83

for children pictured with and without various visible
physical handicaps."

The Goodman study concerned itself with the acqui-
sition of "value patterns" generally acquired in the
absence of direct contact with disabled persons, hypothesiz-
ing that the implicit character of these patterns was com-
municated from parents to children without explicit rules
or awareness. The groups studied were judged to come from
subcultures which have different value organizations
regarding visible impairments. The results suggest that
cultural values in respect to disability are related to
cultural uniformity, particularly in respect to physical
appearance, in general. People who deviate from the cul-
tural norm in terms of value orientation might be expected
to deviate also in their appraisal of the physically dis-
abled.

Jordan (1968) conducted one of the most compre-
hensive studies to appear in the literature. This work led
to the formulation of the Guttman and Jordan Facet theory
and to the development of the scale used in this thesis.
For these reasons, the review of Jordan's study will be
extensive. Jordan headed up a research team whose goal was
to investigate attitudes toward the physically disabled in
eleven nations. The project was completed in five years.
In close consultation with Guttman, Jordan developed the

theoretical and conceptual levels for attitude measurement;

84

then, he devised the attitude behavior scale to test the

theoretical and conceptual roots.

Research Objectives

 

The research objectives of the Jordan study were:

1. To test the hypothesized relationship between
certain dependent criterion variables (attitudes
toward disabled persons) and certain types of
independent predictor variables (value, contact,
change orientation, institutional satisfaction,
religiosity, and demographic factors). The inde-
pendent variables were looked at as correlates or
determinants.

2. To compare attitudes of four groups in each of
eleven nations. Analysis was made of the groups
within, between, and across nations.

3. To examine and compare attitude content and struc-
ture (component composition and level) in each of
the groups within, between, and across nations.
Were there invariants either between groups within

nations or between groups across nations?

Research Sample

 

There were 2,493 respondents from eleven nations:
the United States, Costa Rica, Colombia, Peru, England,
Holland, France, Yugoslavia, Denmark, Japan, Belgium.

Subjects were drawn from four basic groups:

85

1. special education and rehabilitation personnel
2. education personnel
3. managers/executives

4. laborers (blue and white collar).

Instrument

 

The measure used to identify attitudes toward

physical disability was the Attitudes Toward Disabled

 

 

Persons, a scale consisting of twenty items. Fifteen of
the twenty items are statements of differences between dis-
abled and nondisabled persons; agreement with these state-
ments is interpreted exhibiting an unfavorable attitude.

The other five items were "reversed" in the scoring process;
thus, a higher score on these items would exhibit a nega-
tive attitude. Additional data were collected: measures

of value, contact, and orientation to change.

Hypotheses

 

The seventeen hypotheses of the study were divided
into nine groups:
1. Relating attitudes and values
2. Relating attitudes and values and sex
3. Relating attitudes and contact
4. Relating attitudes and change orientation
5. Relating attitudes and institutional satisfaction
6. Relating attitudes and religiosity

7. Relating attitudes and group membership

8.

9.

Results

86

Relating attitudes and modernization level

Relating attitudes and multidimensionality.

Several issues were fully explored in Jordan's

research and are summarized as follows.

1.

Relating attitudes and values.

The data for this set of hypotheses are not
clear. However, they suggest a trend toward con-
firmation of the hypothesis in lesser developed
nations. Conversely, this suggests that value
orientations in groups become more homogeneous in
the more developed nations.

Relating attitudes, values, and sex.

The data indicate some relationship between sex
and attitudes toward the disabled, both within and
across nations; but, the relationship is neither
strong nor consistent from nation to nation.
Relating attitude and contact.

The researchers found that when contact was
associated with enjoyment, it led to positive
attitudes.

Relating attitudes and change orientation.

The data supported the hypothesis that those

who score high on change orientation will be more

positive toward the disabled.

87

5. Relating attitudes and religiosity.

It was found that as national per capita income
increased, the stated importance of religion sig-
nificantly increases--but, adherence does not.
Apparently, businessmen feel that religion is
important, but labor groups do not. Persons who
were religiously oriented tended to hold negative
attitudes toward the disabled.

In summary, the data collected in this project are
rich in analysis potential; comparatively little has been
used by Jordan.

Jordan and Friesen (1968) tested some other hypoth-
eses than those advanced in the previous study. This time
only three nations were involved, Colombia, Peru, and the
United States and only rehabilitation personnel were used
as subjects. The authors tested the hypotheses that
"persons who generally value others as having intrinsic
worth are likely to hold more favorable attitudes toward
the disabled than are those who value others according to
more absolute comparative standards." The hypothesis
required that values and attitudes be compared across cul-
tures. The three national samples differed at the .05
level on "asset orientation." The analysis of data on
sex differences revealed interesting results: when males
and females were compared within nations, no differences
occurred, but combined female scores were significantly

higher than combined male scores. Generally the data

88

supported the hypothesis that the disabled are viewed more
positively in modern than in traditional societies.

Felty (1965), in his study in Costa Rica, hypoth-
esized that persons who score high in need for power and
control over others will tend to score low in acceptance
of disabled persons. Data collected appear to confirm the
negative relationship between comparative values and accep-
tance of the disabled. A positive relationship between
asset values and acceptance of the disabled was not, how-
ever, apparently supported. In general Felty's data seem
to suggest that leadership value is negatively related to
attitudes toward disabled persons. He furnished evidence
that persons who score high in need for power and control
over others tend to score low in acceptance of disabled
persons. Felty also found significant differences between
males and females.

Friesen (1966) assessed attitudes toward disabled
persons in Colombia and Peru, also testing some of the
variables reported by Felty (1965). He found significant
relationships between the combined contact variables
(enjoyment of, and avoidance of) and favorable attitudes
toward handicapped persons.

Females had significantly higher mean scores than
males on the value scale. Men were found to be less accept-
ing of handicapped persons. Friesen likewise found a sig-

nificant relationship between attitudes toward handicapped

89

persons and change orientation items: the more change ori-
ented, the more positive the attitude.

Cessna (1967) investigated the attitudes of the
Japanese toward physically disabled persons. He used 211
respondents from these occupational groups: special educa—
tion, education, executive labor. Administering five
research instruments, he found that high frequency of con-
tact with disabled persons led to favorable attitudes.
There was no significant difference between women and men
in Japan.

Harrelson (1970) measured attitudes toward mental
retardation across the six levels or subscales of the
Attitude Behavior Scale--Mental Retardation (ABS-MR). He
tested selected groups in the Federal Republic of Germany
(West Germany):

(1) 47 parents of moderately retarded children

(2) 148 special education teachers of the mildly
retarded

(3) 74 regular elementary school teachers

(4) 84 management executives

(5) 71 parents of normal children.

Harelson reported several interesting findings:

1. Knowledge was not a significant influence on the
intensity or the direction of attitudes, both

positive and negative;

90

2. Amount and enjoyment of contact were positively
related to attitudes toward the retarded for the
total sample;

3. Age was positively related to attitudes toward
the mentally retarded;

4. There were no significant differences between males
and females.

Kreider (1967) studied the relationship between
attitudes, interpersonal values, personal contact, change
orientation, and certain demographic variables. He hypoth-
esized that both value and contact served as determinants of
attitudes. Conducted in six European countries (Belgium,
Denmark, England, France, the Netherlands, and Yugoslavia),
the study consisted of a battery of five research instru-
ments:

(1) the Attitude Toward Disabled Persons Scale

(2) the Education Scales

(3) the Survey of Interpersonal Values

(4) the Personal Questionnaire (general)

(5) the Personal Questionnaire (hypothetical).
Respondents were selected from these occupational

groupings: special education and rehabilitation, education,
manager-executives, and labor.

Several findings were reported. There was a sig-
nificant relationship between contact frequency and inten-
sity of attitude toward physically disabled persons. The

findings lend some support to the theoretical position

91

stressing the volitional nature of contact as related to
attitudes. Enjoyment of contact and the ease of avoidance
of contact were frequently related to favorable attitudes.
Women scored significantly higher than men on attitudes
toward disabled persons. Evidence suggests that high
scores on change orientation represent a departure from the

status quo, openness to new ideas, and a concern for the

 

disabled. The multiple correlation of the combined change
orientation variables supports this theoretical position.
Gottlieb (1974) compared the attitudes of intel—
lectually average Norwegian and American school children
toward students in special classes for the mentally retarded.
Implicitly assuming that attitudes expressed by school
children adequately reflect the attitudes of the public
at large, he administered a battery of six attitudinal ques-
tionnaires to 285 Norwegian and 231 American school children
between the ages of ten and fourteen years. The results
indicated significant differences--American children
expressed more favorable attitudes than the Norwegian.
Afrooz (1978) examined the relationship of certain
variables to attitudes toward the deaf, the blind and the
mentally retarded in Iran. Afrooz utilized three
attitude-behavior scales based on Facet theory to measure
attitudes toward these three groups. These attitude scales
are revised versions of instruments previously developed by
Jordan (1968). Attitude was measured at two of the levels

specified by Facet theory: the stereotypical and the

92

hypothetical. Variables tested were age, sex, education,

contact, religiosity, and orientation to change. Three

hundred and thirteen Iranian regular school teachers par-

ticipated in the study. Afrooz reported several interesting

findings:

1.

Attitudes measured at the hypothetical level were
more favorable toward the handicapped than those
measured at the stereotypical level. Individuals
tend to see themselves as holding more favorable
attitudes than they attributed to others.

All of the hypotheses involving the relationships
of predictor variables to ABS scores were sup-
ported. On the basis of small, but significant,
correlations or significant differences in means,
it was found that older age, higher level of educa-
tion, female sex, greater contact with the handi-
capped, and regular participation in religious
Observances are all associated with favorable
attitudes toward the handicapped.

Attitudes toward the deaf and the blind tend to be
more favorable than attitudes toward the mentally
retarded.

The correlations between attitudes expressed toward
different disability groups were found to be higher
than the correlations between attitudes at the
hypothetical and stereotypical levels toward a

single disability group. So, for instance, if one

93

knows a respondent's hypothetical attitude toward
the deaf, one is better able to predict his atti—
tude toward the blind than to predict his stereo-
typical attitude toward the deaf.

5. The portions of the attitude scale based on common
items were found to be more highly correlated
between disability group than were the portions
based on items specific to a particular disability

area.

Modification of Attitudes

 

As stated previously, the study of attitudes toward
the disabled person has shifted from attitude identification
to attitude modification. Becoming clear in the 19705, this
shift in emphasis may be attributed to a general agreement
among researchers that the public holds somewhat negative
attitudes toward the handicapped (Jordan, 1968; Afrooz,
1978). Thus, researchers felt the next step was to dis-
cover those tools which are best for use in the task of
attitude modification. It appears, however, that identifi-
cation and modification are related. Afrooz suggests that
identification and modification of attitudes related to
handicapped persons should be of increasing concern to
educators and researchers interested in improving the
status of exceptional children within a country (1978).

Another contributing factor to the shift from

identification to modification, was the emergence of the

94

mainstreaming movement. Rothschild (1978) states that the
decade of the 705 witnessed the promulgation of laws and
the issuance of judicial decrees that established the
educational rights of the handicapped.

Breton (1974) defines mainstreaming as "moving
handicapped children from their segregated status in spe-
cial education classes and integrating them with 'normal'
children in the regular classroom." Mainstreaming is
generally the responsibility of regular classroom teachers
who must guide acceptance and implementation. MacMillan,
Jones, and Meyers (1976) confirm this, stating that the
impetus for mainstreaming came from courts, legislatures,
special education procedures, but it has been left up to
the classroom teachers to work out the details. Thus, most
of the research in modification of attitudes toward dis-
abled persons is concerned with teachers and student
teachers.

Rothschild (1978) suggests that teacher negativism
is reflective of society's feelings, biases, and miscon-
ceptions about the handicapped. Also important is the
readiness of the regular classroom teacher for integration
of the disabled in the classroom. Dunn (1966) suggests
that regular classroom teachers have neither the skills
nor the knowledge necessary to meet the needs of individual
children. Heath (1974) confirms that observation.

One of the most difficult problems facing research-

ers of attitude modification is the lack of solid knowledge

95

of what to modify and of the causes of negativeness toward
the disabled. These are research questions. In order to
establish a scientific research model, two conditions must
be met. First, a theoretical framework must provide opera-
tional definitions of attitude and related concepts, and
identify variables which influence negative and positive
attitudes. Second, systematic research must verify and
validate these concepts and variables. A review of current
literature reveals researchers have not reached this stage,
probably because of the contradictory findings of attitude
identification research about the disabled. Nevertheless,
there have been attempts to bridge this gap.

One of the first attempts was reported by Festinger
(1950) who tried to sort out the theoretical grounds for
modification of attitudes, in general. Proposing that
modification comes about as a result of societal pressure
for uniformity, he describes two specific forms of pressure.
The first occurs among people who have no firm anchorage
in physical reality (regarding attitudes, opinions, or
beliefs, in this case). They seek out the opinions of
members of some reference group. The second form of pres-
sure towards uniformity occurs when uniformity is necessary
to move a group toward some desired goal.

Kelman (1961) looked at attitude modification in
terms of social influence. He postulated three distinct
processes that result in attitude changes. The first,

compliance, involves the acceptance of influence by others

 

96

in order to achieve favorable reactions from them. Usually
done in order to obtain reinforcement or to avoid punish-
ment, compliance typically occurs only in overt manifesta-
tions, and is actually a more temporary social influence

than an attitude change. Identification, the second pro-

 

cess, involves the adoption of a behavior derived from
others in order to imitate or agree with values and opin-
ions held by the group. This process is not associated with

reward and punishment. The third process, internalization,

 

is the acceptance of influence because the induced behavior
is congruent with the person's value system. Thus, the
behavior becomes intrinsically rewarding and independent

of external sources.

Festinger and Kelman attempted to explain the pro-
cess of attitude modification; they did not spell out
strategies. Collins (1970) does suggest strategies to
modify attitudes: problem solving games, consistency games,
and identity games. The modifier takes the role of a com-
municator. First, the attitude object to be modified is
presented in terms of a problem to be solved (the cognitive
aspect). Second, consistency is developed so that the
problem and the solution becomes associated with the
individual's value system. This identity links the atti-
tude change with a personal belief.

The research on attitude modification seems to empha-
size the provision of direct information concerning the

attitude object (Triendis, 1971). Using this concept as

97

a theoretical basis for investigation, investigators
attempted to modify teacher attitudes through the pro-
vision of inservice training programs (Curis, 1974).

Curis (1974) studied the effects of related edu-
cation and experience on vocational educators' attitudes
toward the educationally disadvantaged. Participating in
two summer training institutes, the subjects also received
appropriate instructional materials, occupational informa-
tion and individual visits by project staff. The teachers
were pretested at the beginning of the project, and post-
tested both at the end of the project and one year later.
The investigator found that teacher attitudes toward edu-
cationally disadvantaged youth became more positive as the
teachers had direct successful experiences teaching them.

Euse (1975) investigated the efficacy of covert
positive reinforcement on modifying attitudes toward the
physically handicapped. Twenty students majoring in rehab-
ilitation were matched according to pretest scores on atti-
tude questionnaires, and randomly assigned to experimental
or control groups. The post and follow-up test scores of
the experimental group were significantly higher than
those of control group. The author concludes that covert
positive reinforcement is effective in positive modifica-
tion of attitudes toward the physically handicapped.

Lazar (1976) investigated the impact of knowledge
on the alteration or modification of student attitudes

toward the handicapped by designing an introductory special

98

education course to be taught in three different univer-
sities. No significant mean change in attitudes toward the
handicapped was measured for subjects at two out of the
three schools. Herr, Algozzine, and Eaves (1976) examined
the impact of experience and actual contact on modification
of attitudes. An intensive camp experience with emotionally
disturbed children was used to attempt to modify biases of
undergraduates about certain behaviors. The experimental
group of special education majors participated in a week-
long camping experience during which they counseled ninety-
two emotionally disturbed children. A control group was
also selected from students enrolled in special education
courses. The subjects were pretested and posttested to
determine their perceptions of disturbing child behaviors.
Certain behaviors were significantly less disturbing to
experimental subjects than to control subjects at the end
of the experiment, suggesting that slight modifications
indeed were obtained.

Another method uses video tapes to present infor-
mation and to evolve emotional involvement about attitudes
toward the disabled. Fumford (1962) demonstrated the power
of using video tape for modification of attitude when he
used closed circuit television to teach elementary school
methods. Results indicate that televised instruction was
as effective as conventional instruction in promoting
changes in teacher attitude as measured by the Minnesota

Teacher Attitude Inventory.

99

Shae and Gillung (1975) offered a college course
in special education to regular teachers who made up the
experimental group; they selected a control group made up
of teachers who did not enroll in the course; the results
of pretests and posttests of both groups indicated an
improvement in teacher attitudes toward the handicapped.

Murray (1975) examined the attitudes of 120
psychology students toward physically disabled individuals.
Each student observed one of six video tapes of someone
being interviewed for a job. The interviewers were either
normal, mildly disabled, or severely disabled. After
viewing the tapes, students held more positive attitudes
toward physically disabled than toward the normal individ-
uals. The author suggests that a sympathy effect operated
to cause the results.

Mitchell (1976), commenting upon the rapid influ-
ence of media on attitudes, suggested that television's
characteristics "make it possible to provide contact and
information about exceptional persons and thus destroy
misconception and stereotypes." The effectiveness of video
tape presentations versus live observations on modifying
attitudes toward the disabled was investigated by Donaldson
and Martinson (1977). Both methods had significant influ-
ence on attitude changes toward the disabled.

Daily (1979) used video tapes of handicapped chil-
dren to determine if attitudes toward the handicapped

students participating in an introductory special education

100

course (the experimental group) differed significantly from
attitudes of students participating in the course without
the video tapes (the control group). He also tried to
measure whether treatment was differentially effective in
modifying attitudes toward the handicapped. The experi-
mental group showed significantly more pbsitive attitudes
toward the handicapped on the Attitude Toward Disabled
Persons Scale. And, treatment was found to be differen—
tially effective in modifying attitudes toward the handi-
capped.

Several other studies have used different tools for
modification of attitudes toward the disabled. Meers (1977)
developed a workshop intervention strategy to effect change
in vocational education teacher attitudes toward special
needs populations. Conducting a pilot testing of the work-
shop program with 200 teachers, he obtained pre- and post-
test measures of the teachers' attitudes. Meers found that
the workshop intervention strategy was effective in pro-
ducing positive attitudinal change.

Rothschild (1979) tested the effectiveness of in-
service courses in improving the attitudes of regular
teachers toward handicapped children. Two distinct curric-
ula were developed in order to measure possible differential
effects on the attitudes of classroom teachers: one involved
a humanistic or affective approach to special education,
and the second involved a cognitive or ability training

approach to special education. The author concluded that

101

"although significantly better teacher attitudes were
demonstrated for the affective than the cognitive group,
conclusions must be drawn cautiously. The study did
demonstrate that certain types of attitudes can indeed be
improved in a relatively small amount of time.“

In summary, many different techniques have been
used to modify attitudes toward disabled persons. Courses,
workshops, and video tapes are the most effective means
being used, suggesting that emphasis of methodology should

be on knowledge and experience variables.

Conclusion

 

The literature reviewed in this chapter appears to
support inconclusive or contradictory findings. Gardner
(1975) suggests that the problem is methodological. The
defects, according to Gardner, fall into three classifi-
cations:

1. scale which lack any discernible underlying theor-
etical construct;
2. scales in which various theoretical constructs

are confounded together, i.e., scales which

attempt to reduce multi-dimensional attributes

to single scores.

3. experimental treatments in which there is little
discernible relationship between the experimental
treatment applied and the scale used to measure

outcomes.

102

Felty (1965) noted that some research on physical
disability has been theoretically derived. Other studies
have theoretical relevance, but lack explicit theory. It
seems, however, that some of the investigators arrange
variables on the basis of empirical results rather than
for conceptual reasons.

Thus, three factors contribute to the contradictory
nature of findings recorded in the literature: methodology,
the lack of theory, and a posteriori method, i.e., the
arrangement of variables based on empirical results. Facet
theory and ABS, the tools utilized in this study, resolve
these deficiencies.

Foa (1965) states that Facet theory provides a sys-
tematic definitional System of variables in terms of their
component structure and content. The theory also provides
a procedure for accepting variables on a theoretical basis
rather than on a posteriori one. One of the disadvantages
of a posteriori method is that the researcher is never sure
of including the relevant or necessary variables.

Several investigators (Hammersma, Paige, and
Jordan, 1973; Adiscastro and Zunigs, 1974; Jordan, 1968,
1972; Kim and Horn, 1973) indicate that four classes of
variables seem to be important determinants of origins,
correlates, and predictors of attitudes:

(l) econ-demographic factors such as age, sex, and

income;

103

(2) contact factors such as amount, nature, and enjoy—

(3)

(4)

ment of the contact;

socio-psychological factors such as one's value
orientation;

the knowledge factor, i.e., the amount of factual
information one has about the attitude object.

The scholarly literature on attitudes toward the

disabled suggests that the following theoretical model

should be operationalized and validated further:

1.

certain aspects of attitude toward the disabled
are object specific;

certain aspects of attitude toward the disabled
are situation specific;

certain aspects of attitude toward the disabled
are culture specific;

knowledge, alone, about the attitude object does
not generally lead to attitude positiveness;
attitude positiveness is related to a value-
affective contact base rather than a cognitive-

knowledge one.

CHAPTER V

RESULTS

This study was devised to assess attitudes toward
handicapped persons (blind, deaf, and mentally retarded)
of students and teacher educators in Saudi Arabia.

The design investigated certain background vari-
ables of the respondents including amount of education (stu-
dents versus teachers), amount of contact with the handi-
capped, and sex. Devised to consider relationships among
the variables contained in Table 12, the study's independent
variables are education (students versus teachers), sex
(male versus female), and contact. The dependent variables
are the attitude objects, the type of disability, i.e., the

blind, the deaf, and the mentally retarded.

Research Instrument

 

The research instrument used in this study was the
Attitude Behavior Scale, Toward the Deaf, The Blind, and
the Mentally Retarded (ABS-DBM), originally developed by
Jordan and his associates (1968) and then adapted by Afrooz
(1978). The basic scale contains twenty items. In this

study, each disability group is represented in forty items:

104

105

Table 12.--Variables List.

 

 

Score Number of
Variable Range Questions
Attitude l. Stereotype 20-80 20 items
Behavior 2. Hypothetical 20-80 20 items
Independent 1. Sex 1-2 1 item
Variable 2. Education 1-2 1 item
3. Contact 9-36 9 items
Dependent 1. Deaf 40-160 40 items
Variables 2. Blind 40-160 40 item
3. Mentally 40—160 40 items

Retarded

 

106

twenty items deal with the stereotype level (for example,
other people generally believe the following things about
the visually impaired compared to those who are not visu-
ally impaired), and twenty items deal with the hypothetical
level (for example, with respect to visually impaired per-
sons, would you expect that . . . .). Thus, subjects
responded twice to the same twenty items on attitudes

toward each disability--the only difference being that they
followed different instructions for the stereotype and hypo-
thetical levels.

Since the three disability groups are each repre-
sented by forty items, the instrument contains 120 of these
items. The first fifteen items of each section are the
same--merely referring to each respective disability group.
The last five items of each section are specific to each
type of disability.

The instrument also contains twelve items dealing
with variables such as the respondent's sex, education, and
contact. Thus, the complete instrument has a total of 132
items.

The fifteen items which are constant for all three
disability groups are as follows. The specific disability,
shown in parentheses, changes in each section.

1. (Deaf) persons have less energy and vitality than
others.
2. It is almost impossible for (deaf) persons to lead

a normal life.

1
1
1
1

1

1

ability

Deaf

 

3.

4.

0.
1.
2.

3.

4.

5.

1.

(Deaf) persons
(Deaf) persons
as others.
(Deaf) persons
(Deaf) persons
(Deaf) persons
spouses.

(Deaf) persons
children.
(Deaf) persons
(Deaf) persons
(Deaf) persons
(Deaf) persons
(Deaf) persons

be financially

107

have ability to do school work.

generally have as much initiative

can maintain a good marriage.
should not have children.

are likely to be faithful to their

are able to take care of their

are likely to obey the law.

make plans for the future.

are so by luck or fate.

like to be with other people.

are likely to have the ability to

self-sufficient.

Rules for (deaf) persons should be less strict.

Education for (deaf) persons is as important as

for others.

The other five

statements Specific for each dis-

area are as follows.

Deaf persons can usually learn to use speech to

communicate with others.

Deaf persons are usually comfortable with people

having normal hearing.

108

Deaf persons can usually be mainstreamed in
regular schools by providing special materials.
Deaf persOns can usually benefit from a hearing
aid.

Deaf persons are usually able to go on to higher

education.

Visually impaired persons can participate in social
activities with sighted persons.

Visually impaired persons can usually learn to per-
form daily living tasks.

Visually impaired persons can usually be main-
streamed in regular schools by providing special
materials.

Mobility training usually will enable visually
impaired persons to travel independently.

Physical education and sports should be part of

the educational curriculum of visually impaired

persons.

Mentally Retarded

1.

The intelligence level of most mentally retarded
persons can be increased through education.
Mentally retarded persons can learn almost any-
thing, but at a slower rate.

Mentally retarded persons can usually complete

elementary school.

109

4. Mentally retarded persons can learn personal
hygiene and good health habits.
5. Most mentally retarded persons can learn the social

skills needed to get along with other people.

The last twelve items deal with the independent
variables of this study, education, sex, and experience.
Item 122 assesses the amount of education, freshmen stu-
dents versus teacher educators. Item 123 deals with sex,
female students versus male students. The last nine items

deal with experience.

Standardization of ABS
Jordan and his associates (1968) attempted to
standardize ABS-MR, administering it to three groups:

A. Eighty-eight MSU graduate students (46 female, 42
male) enrolled in a course on medical information
for rehabilitation counselors and special education
teachers. This group was specializing in the area
of disabled or handicapped conditions.

B. Six hundred and thirty-three regular education stu-
dents (426 female, 207 male) in the sophomore
class. This group was comprised of all sophomore
level education students registered at MSU in
Winter, 1968.

C. Five hundred and twenty-three elementary school
teachers (381 female, 142 male) in Belize (British

Honduras).

110

Jordan's report (1970) of the findings of the above
study indicated that all three groups yielded the simplex
approximation pattern: .97 for the graduate students, .94
for the regular education students, and .85 for the Belize
teachers (Afrooz, 1978).

Poulus (1970) developed and tested the Attitude-

Behavior Scale-~Deaf. His data revealed a simplex approxi-

 

mation ranging from .83 to .93. Williams (1970), using
the ABS: FW/WN Scale, obtained scores ranging from .73 to
.90.

To assess standard reliability, Hoyt's method (1969)
was used. Reliability coefficients for the ABS-MR and the
ABS-BW ranged between .70 and .95 (Jordan, 1971; Morin,

1969; Afrooz, 1978).

Translation to Arabic

The investigator translated the ABS-DEM to the
Arabic language for the first time. The ABS had been
previously translated to several other languages (French,
Spanish, Persian, German); in most cases, it proved to be
a powerful research tool in different cultural settings
(Jordan, 1968; Harrelson, 1970; Afrooz, 1978).

Afrooz (1978) recommended that a.definition of
mental retardation should be considered since his sample
(Iranians) was not sure about that concept. Accordingly,
this investigator developed three definitions for each

type of disability involved in the study (see Appendix).

111

SamplinggProcedures

 

The sample for the entire study on attitudes toward
the disabled in Saudi Arabia is contained in Tables 13, 14:
and 15.

The universe, or population for the present inves-
tigation was teacher educators and students enrolled at

the College of Education in Mecca.

Selection of Sample

 

Only native teacher educators holding professional
degrees in education were selected. Native instructors
holding degrees in science from outside the College of
Education were excluded since the investigator did not
consider them qualified because they were trained as scien-
tists, not as professional teacher educators.

All teacher educators who participated in this
study were male. The second group sampled was male and
female students in their first year who were registered in
an introductory psychology course. All those who enrolled
in that course, male and female, participated. All ques-
tionnaires were distributed to the students in the class
at the same time; all of the questionnaires distributed

have been retained.

Research Hypotheses

 

It has been stated in Chapter I that the main aim
of this study is to assess the attitudes of designated seg-

ments of the Saudi population toward the deaf, the blind,

112

 

wad ma an NOH mma ma an Noa HmuOB

mm v OH v o o o o omIHb
mm m an 5H m o N b Ohlam
mm H mm om mm m do we omIHm
ma 0 H NH No v NN mm omIHv
m o o m va o w m ovIHm
o o o o o o o m onloN

 

OHMETMH 0AM: QHMEQK OHM:

Hmuoa mumaooma mucmosum mucmosum Hmuoa mumsomms mucmooum mucmosum muoom

 

mosufluué
moonIHmOHumcuomam wmonIHm0fim>uomumum

 

.mam>mq HMOfluocuommm ocm Hoowmmuoououm
may MOM wouoom wmonmm¢ on mcflouooom mucmocommmm mo cofluoowuumfloII.mH canoe

113

 

 

me MH Hh NOH omH MH Hm NOH Hmuoa
m v v H o o o o omIHh
Ne m «M mm HH o m m oanw
55 N mm mv Hm m mm mm omIHm
mm H H on we v ON «v omIHe
o o o o co 0 5H mm olem
o o o o o o H m onlom
mHmem mHoz mHoEmm mHmz

Hmuoa muwnomma mucmosum mucmooum Hobos anaconda mucmooum mucmooum muoom
moauHuue

 

ccHHmIIHmoHumnuodsm ocHHmIIHmonsuomumum

 

.me>mH HMOHumnuomam com HmOHmauomumum
wow you mmuoom ocHHmImmd Ou mcHouooo< mucwocommwm mo coHusaHnumHoII.vH mHoma

114

 

 

 

mmH MH an NOH mmH me an NOH Hmuoe
N m o o o o o o omIHa
HH m N m H H o o osIHm
mm m cm mm a o H m omIHm
mm m mm as no m mH om omIHe
mm o o mm mm a ow as oqIHm
v o o H mm m NH am omuom
meEom OHM: mHmEmh mHmz
Houoa muwnomma mucmosum mucmosum Hmuoa muwnomma mucmosum mucmosum wuoom
mnsuwuua

owoumumm aHHmucozIIHMOHumcuomwm omoumumm >HHoucmleHo0Hm>uomumum

 

.mHm>mH HMOHuwnuom>m com HOOHmwuomnmum on» How

mouoom Umoumumm >HHmucszmm< ou OCHouooo< mucmocomwmm mo coHusoHuumHaII.mH wHoma

115

and the mentally retarded. The major hypothesis regarding

this assessment of attitudes is stated in H1.

H1.

Students and teacher educators will maintain a
positive score on ABS-DEM on both stereotypical
and hypothetical levels.

The direction Of this hypothesis is consistent with

cultural perceptions Of the Saudi population. Saudi society

believes in the precepts of Islam which shape the members'

attitudes. Afrooz (1978) indicates

In Islamic teaching caring about others and helping
all fellow men, regardless of differences in color,
race, language, social class, physical or mental
impairment, etc., are considered the vital and essen-
tial duties of Muslims. Such a religious command is
so important that it is said 'whoever wakes up in the
morning without the intention of helping his fellow-
man is not Muslim.‘

Beside the major hypothesis, five additional hypoth-

eses were tested. The predictions made in these five hypoth-

eses are based on the earlier research of Jordan (1968) and

Afrooz (1978).

H2.

H3.

H4.

Amount Of education will be positively related to
favorable attitudes toward the deaf, the blind, and
the mentally retarded.

Female students will show more positive attitudes
than will male students toward the deaf, the blind,
and the mentally retarded.

Frequent contact with deaf, blind, and retarded
persons will be associated with favorable attitudes

toward these groups.

116

H5. There will be more favorable attitudes toward the
deaf and blind than toward the mentally retarded
on both stereotypical and hypothetical levels Of
the Attitude Behavior Scales.

H6. There will be no significant differences between
persons' scores on the hypothetical level and on
the stereotypical level Of the ABS. This hypoth-
esis is stated in null form due to the investi-

gator's uncertainty about its direction.

Analysis Procedure

 

Harrelson (1970) recommended that Analysis Of Vari-
ance should be used for the analysis of data utilizing ABS.
However, an attempt to use repeated measures (multi-variant
analysis) led to the discovery Of an interactive effect
which made it difficult to test for all the hypotheses in
that mode Of statistical analysis. Thus Harrelson's
recommendation (1970) was taken into consideration and a
one-way analysis of variance using match peer F test with

two levels was employed.

Scoringiprocedures

 

The response to ABS-DEM was ordered from the least
negative to the most positive score: 1 and 2 indicate nega-
tive responses, and 3 and 4 indicate positive responses.
However, the computer calculated the mean of a given group

on the same basis; thus a score higher than 2 is considered

117

positive, and a score of 2.00 or less is considered nega-

tive.

Findings
H1. The average score of both students and teachers
will be higher than 2 for both levels, hypothetical
and stereotypical.

To test this hypothesis, a one-way Analysis of Vari-
ance, using T tests with two levels, was conducted. A sum-
mary of the results, contained in Table 16, reveals the
following findings:

Teachers and students (male and female), whether
having had previous contact or not, all had average scores
higher than 2.

With regard to the deaf and the blind on both
hypothetical and stereotypical levels, all groups indicated
a positive attitude.

These groups agreed that people in Saudi Arabia
held somewhat negative attitudes toward the mentally
retarded while they themselves did not. Therefore, at the
hypothetical level, the sample scored on the positive con-
‘tinuum indicating that they have positive attitudes toward
the mentally retarded. In general, the hypothesis was sup-
ported since the total sample held positive attitudes toward

the handicapped.

118

 

 

cams owumnuomhm pmcumumm maamucmz u 2::

com: owmauomumum Umcumumm aaamucmz u Sm:

cams oflumnuommm ocean u 2mm

cam: oddsuomumum ccflHm u 2mm

cmwz OHHmnuommm mama u Ema

com: owmwuomuoum mama u Ema
mmqm.m mmmh.a oooh.~ ooom.~ wmoh.~ mavm.~ cmocoflummchoz
mmmv.~ mmvm.a mamm.~ mmav.~ ammo.m mmwm.m cmocmwumdxm
hmm¢.~ momh.a mmoa.m ecmv.~ vaH.m mflvm.~ mHmEmmllmucwpsum
mmm~.~ mmmm.a maah.m ohm~.~ vamh.m mhhe.~ mamzllmucmcsum
memo.m vmwm.a Hmhm.m mmmo.~ mmmm.m anhm.~ mumcomme

2:: am: 22m 2mm 2mm 2mm museum

 

.pmocwwnmaxw

Icoz 0cm cwocmflnmmxm .mHmEmm 0cm mam: .muchSpm mo monoom mmfi cmwzla.ma magma

119

H2. Amount of education will be positively related to
favorable attitudes toward the deaf, the blind,

and the mentally retarded.

A match peer T-test was constructed to test the
significance level between male students and teacher educa-
tors (male) at a = .05. Table 17 and 18 show the average
scores and levels of significance. The data reveal the
following findings:

Teacher educators scored significantly higher than
students on ABS-DEM for all attitude objects (the deaf, the
blind, and the mentally retarded) at the hypothetical level;
at the stereotype level, teacher educators also scored
significantly higher regarding the deaf and the blind, but
not regarding the mentally retarded. For the latter,
teacher educators scored higher (see Table 18) than stu-
dents, but the difference was not statistically significant.
However, the great difference in sample size (13 educators
versus 102 male students) suggests that with more teacher
educators a significant difference might have been found.
Therefore, with some reservation, it may be concluded that

this hypothesis was supported.

H3. Female students will show more positive attitudes
than male students toward the deaf, the blind, and
the mentally retarded.

To test the difference between male student scores

and female student scores on ABS-DBM a one-way analysis of

120

unmonmncofim uoz.

 

o. Ho.ov o. wN.mH o. Hm.om Hmuwumnuomhm
«ommn. Ha. mmoo. mm.m mnmv. mm. HMUflmhuowumum

mucmosum mamum> mumnomme

 

 

 

 

a up umouuu a up umwunu a up ummuuu
msouw
pmonmuwm adamucmz pcwam moon
mo. u a .Amucmcsum msmuw> mumnommu. coflumoaom

.manmwum> ucmccwmwccH on» NO mam>mq mocmowMHcmHm 0cm mmsHm> umma|a||.na magma

121

Table 18.--Means of the Scores of Teachers and Male Stu-
dents for the Three Dependent Variables.

 

 

. Mentally
Group Level Deaf Blind Retarded
Stereotypic 2.5731 2.6538 1.8654
Teachers
Hypothetical 3.3962 3.2731 3.0808
Stereotypic 2.4775 2.2676 1.8226
Students
Hypothetical 2.7294 2.7118 2.2588

 

variance was employed. Table 19 contains the t-test values
and the significant results for male and female students.
Table 20 summarizes the mean scores obtained by both groups.
An examination of these findings indicates that
the hypothesis was generally supported. As it has been
stated elsewhere, the level of significance is equal to
.05. A comparison of the scores of both groups indicates
that, at the hypothetical level, women score significantly
higher across all attitude objects. However, this differ-
ence is not merely significant--it is also meaningful.
On the stereotypical level, the scores reveal
some interesting results: women scored higher on both the
blind and the deaf stereotype than males; but, regarding
the mentally retarded, the results are reversed. Males
scored slightly higher at the stereotype level, although

the difference was not significant.

122

ucmowmacmfim uoz«

 

wooo. hm.NH o. mH.mv o. Hm.mm Hmowumnuomhm
«ommm. mhhm. vao. mm.v mth. mo.H Havamhuowumum

mamsom mamum> mam:

 

a no ummu-» a mo ummuuu a mu ummuuu

 

 

macaw
omuumumm aaamucmz ccHHm mama

 

. mo. u 6 .AonE msmuw> mHmEmm.
xmm .oHQMHum> ucoocmdmocH may mo mocmoflmacmflm mo mam>oq cam mmsHm> ummalsnn.ma wanna

123

Table 20.--Mean Scores of Male and Female Students for the
Three Dependent Variables.

 

 

Group Level Deaf Blind gzggiéég
Stereotypic 2.4775 2.2676 1.8225
Male
Hypothetical 2.7294 2.7118 2.2588
Stereotypic 2.5414 2.4204 1.7908
Female
Hypothetical 3.1641 3.1092 2.4627

 

H4. Frequent contact with deaf, blind or retarded
persons will be associated with favorable atti-
tudes toward these groups.

In order to test for significant differences between
those who had previous experience with the handicapped and
those who did not, a one-way analysis of variables was
used. Table 21 contains the t-test results and shows the
levels of significance at a = .05. Table 22 summarizes
the mean scores for both groups.

The data tend to support the hypothesis whenever
the results are consistent with previous results for other
hypotheses. This suggests that, while there is a signifi-
cant and meaningful difference between those who had
previous contact and those who did not, contact is associ-
ated with favorable attitude; but, both groups believed
that the public held somewhat negative attitudes toward the

mentally retarded. Thus, persons having previous contact

124

acmofimwcmfim uoz«

 

mmoo. H¢.m o. ma.oa o. mn.a~ Hmowumnu0dam
«omho. o~.m meoo. ov.m mooo. N.¢H Hmowmhuowumum
mocmwummxmcoz

mamum> mocofiuomxm

 

 

 

 

a mo ammunu a we ummunu a mu ummpuu
msouo
nmoumumm maamucmz ccfiam mama
mo. n d .Amucmncommmu mo wocmflummchoc m5mum> mocmflummxmv uomucou

.mHQmHHm> ucmccmdmch man no mochMMHcmwm mo mam>mq 0cm monam> ummBnBII.HN magma

125

Table 22---Mean Scores of Respondents with Previous Experi-
ence with the Handicapped Versus Respondents
Who Have Not Had Previous Experience for the
Three Dependent Variables.

 

 

. Mentally
Group Level Deaf Blind Retarded
Stereotypic 2.5735 2.4123 1.8459
Experienced
Hypothetical 3.0321 2.9813 2.4526
Non- Stereotypic 2.3413 2.2000 1.7298
experienced Hypothetical 2.7096 2.7000 2.2433

 

scored higher than persons who did not on ABS-MS; but, such

differences were not statistically significant.

H5. There will be more favorable attitudes toward the
deaf and the blind than toward the mentally retarded
on both stereotypical and hypothetical levels of the
Attitude Behavior Scales.

A one-way analysis of variance using a t-test with
two levels was employed to test for significant differences
on ABS scores for the deaf, the blind, and the mentally
retarded. Table 23 contains the results significant at
the .05 level which reveal a significant difference between
ABS deaf scores and mentally retarded scores.

The results also indicate that there were signifi-
cant differences between the ABS blind scores and the

mentally retarded scores.

126

Table 23.--T-Test Values and Levels of Significance of the
Three Dependent Variables (deaf, blind, and
mentally retarded). a = .05

 

 

 

Variables t-test df Signigicant
MSM versus DSM -22.86 185 .000
MHM versus DHM -18.24 185 .000
MSM versus BSM -l4.12 185 .000
MHM versus BHM -15.71 185 .000
MSM versus NMS -20.3 185 .000
MHM versus NMH -18.16 185 .000

MSM = Mentally Retarded Stereotypic Mean

DSM = Deaf Stereotypic Mean

DHM = Deaf Hypothetic Mean

BSM = Blind Stereotypic Mean

BHM = Blind Hypothetic Mean

NMS = Deaf and Blind Stereotypic Mean

NMH = Deaf and Blind Hypothetic Mean

127

Table 24 summarizes the means for the three depend-
ent variables (the deaf, the blind, and the mentally
retarded) which reveal that both deaf and blind scores
were higher than scores on the mentally retarded. Both
Tables 23 and 24 reveal meaningful differences in the atti-
tudes toward the three disability groups. It appears that
the mentally retarded in the Saudi culture may be perceived
less favorably than the other disability types--a conclusion
that fully supports this hypothesis.

Table 24.--Mean Scores of the Three Dependent Variables
(deaf, blind, and mentally retarded).

 

 

. Mentally

Level Deaf Blind Retarded
Stereotypical 2.5086 2.3530 1.8134
Hypothetical 2.9419 2.9027 2.3941

 

H6. There will be no significant difference between
respondent scores on the hypothetical level and
respondent scores on the stereotypical level of
the ABS-DEM.

The t-test values significant at the .05 level
shown in Table 25 indicate that the null hypothesis was
rejected. Results reveal that there was a significant
difference between the attitudes of respondents to ABS-DBM

in this study across all three attitude objects.

128,

Table 25.-—T-Test Values and Levels of Significance of the
Two Levels, Stereotypic and Hypothetical.

 

 

 

Means for Levels t-test df Signiiicant
DS versus DH -l3.65 185 .000
BS versus BH -20.11 185 .000
MS versus MB -18.25 185 .000
D = deaf
B = blind
M = mentally retarded
S = stereotype
H = hypothetical

Table 26.--Mean Scores on ABS for Stereotypic and Hypo-
thetical Levels for All Three Independent

 

 

Variables.
Variables Means Significant a
Deaf, stereotypic 2.5086 .000
Deaf, hypothetical 2.9419 .000
Blind, stereotypic 2.3530 .000
Blind, hypothetical 2.9027 .000
Mentally Retarded, stereotypic 1.8134 .000

Mentally Retarded, hypothetical 2.3941 .000

 

129

Summary of Results

 

The data reveals the following meaningful results:
The sample tended to hold positive attitudes

toward handicapped persons.

It appears that the sample thought that other
people (society at large) hold positive attitudes
toward the deaf and the blind, but not toward the
mentally retarded. The data suggest that others
hold somewhat negative attitudes.

Education is associated with positiveness of atti-
tude toward the handicapped.

Contact with the handicapped is associated with more
favorable attitudes toward the handicapped.

Women held more positive attitudes than men toward
the handicapped.

Respondents felt that they hold more positive atti-

tudes than others do toward the handicapped.

CHAPTER VI

SUMMARY, DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS

The first aim of the study was to assess and examine
the current attitudes toward the blind, the deaf, and the
mentally retarded held by two segments of Saudi Arabians:

(1) students enrolled at the College of Education in Mecca
City, and (2) teacher educators at the same college.

The second aim of this study, of theoretical inter-
est, was to examine certain variables as they relate to
attitudes toward the handicapped: contact and education.
Another aim, of practical interest, was to determine,
through attitude assessment, if it is timely to develop a

training program for teachers of the handicapped.

Research Questions

 

The research questions were:

1. To what degree is amount of contact with handicapped
persons associated with positiveness of attitude
toward such groups?

2. To what degree is education related to positiveness

of attitude toward the handicapped?

130

131

3. Are sex differences associated with the degree of
positiveness of attitude toward the handicapped?

4. Is there a difference in attitude toward one kind
of disability than toward another?

5. Is there a difference between a subject's perception
of other people's attitudes and the subject's per-
ceptions of his or her own attitudes toward the

handicapped?

Review of Related Literature

Most research on attitudes toward disabled persons
tends to focus on how different variables are associated
with attitude. Variables studied are education, sex, age,
knowledge, experience, and religion. Findings reported in
the literature seem mixed and contradictory across all vari-
ables and types of disabilities. Several explanations or
justifications are advanced. Gardner (1975) suggests that
the problem is methodological, i.e., scales used lack any
discernible underlying theoretical construct. Felty (1965)
suggests that some of the investigators arrange variables
according to empirical results rather than for conceptual
reasons. Gultman-Jordan facet analysis design (1969) seems
to avoid these deficiencies and indicates that facet theory
provides a systematic definitional system for variables in
terms of their component structure and content. The theory
also provides a procedure for accepting variables on a

theoretical basis rather than on an a posteriori one.

132

Sample and Methodology

 

The instrument used in this study was the Attitude
Behavior Scale--Deaf, Blind, and Mentally Retarded (ABS-
DBM). ABS-DEM was originally developed by Jordan and his
associates (1968), and was later adapted by Afrooz (1978).

The sample used in this study consists of two
groups: male and female students enrolled in an introductory
course in psychology at the College of Education in Mecca,
Saudi Arabia, and the teacher-educators at the same insti-
tution. The total sample was 186, 13 teachers and 173 stu-
dents (102 male and 71 female). All the teacher-educators

were male.

Findings

The major findings of the study were as follows:

1. Attitudes toward the handicapped are positive.
Mean scores for the three disability groups were
higher than 2 for all hypothetical levels. Mean
scores on the stereotypical level for both blind and
deaf were higher than 2 and in the positive con-
tinuum. The stereotypic mean for mentally retarded
was less than 2 indicating that, while the total
sample held positive attitudes toward the mentally
retarded, respondents think that other people do
not share that attitude. Thus, the data supports

the conclusion that the total sample held a positive

133

attitude toward all three types of disability
involved in the study.

2. Teacher educators scored significantly higher than
students on both levels, stereotypic and hypo-
thetical, for the three dependent variables.

3. 'Female students scored significantly higher than
male students on all dependent variables for the
hypothetical level, and on blind and deaf for the
stereotypical level. However, female stereotypic
scores on mentally retarded were slightly less--
the difference was not statistically significant.

4. Those who had previous contact with the handi-
capped scored significantly higher on the ABS-DEM
across all levels except the stereotypic for
mentally retarded for which there was no signifi-
cant difference.

5. Attitudes toward the deaf and blind were signifi-
cantly more positive than attitudes toward the
mentally retarded.

6. There was a significant difference between scores
for the hypothetical level and stereotypic level.
The data indicates significantly higher scores on

the hypothetical level.

Discussion

 

In this section, the discussion will focus on the

contribution the data offers to our theoretical perspectives

134

on examining attitudes toward the handicapped. An exami-
nation of the data reveals several major findings of this
study.

The Afrooz (1978) study reported different findings
than those who used the same scale and followed the facet
design in other cultural settings. Afrooz was the first to
use Gutman-Jordan theoretical and measurement procedures
in the Middle East. This study tends to follow his in that
it finds the same patterns and deviates from those of the
other investigators (Harrelson, 1970; Poulou, 1970;
Gottlieb, 1973). This difference can be attributed to the
fact that the Iranian people share some common beliefs with
the Saudi Arabia people--both nations believe in Islam.
Both nations emerged during the seventh century under one
government. Both the Arabic and Iranian cultures are part
of what has been called the Islamic culture, a combination
of elements from both.

The major findings of the study about the direction
of attitudes toward the handicapped tend to support those
of Afrooz more than the other scholars (Jordan, 1968). Data
obtained by Afrooz (1978) and by the present study reveal
clearly positive attitudes toward the disabled.

While other research on attitudes toward the handi-
capped obtained different results, most studies were con-
cerned only with comparing two different groups to see which
one held a more positive attitude than the other. These

studies did not establish criteria to assess the direction

135

of attitudes, toward a positive or a negative continuum.
Some investigations found positive attitudes when testing
special populations, groups working with the handicapped in
one way or another.

In general, studies conducted in Western cultures
tend to reveal less positive attitudes toward the handi-
capped, at least in comparison to the findings of Afrooz
and this study. As discussed previously in this study,
investigations of attitudes toward the handicapped in the
U.S. seem to suggest mildly negative perceptions (Cuicks-
Hank, 1975). Americans appear to approach the handicapped
as they do minority groups, exhibiting hostility based on
stereotyped expectations (Siegel, 1966). Jordan (1968) con-
firms this conclusion, but observes that the disabled are
viewed more positively in modern than in traditional soci-
eties.

The fact that Afrooz's study and this research sug-
gest that people in the Middle East hold more positive atti-
tudew than people in the West indicates a need for further
investigation. This researcher will advance some hypoth-
eses which will require further experimental investigation.

This writer disagrees with the Jordan and Frieson
(1968) perspective of "modern" versus "traditional" soci-
eties. While the terms "modern" and "traditional" are
relevant within the Western cultural framework, they may
not be apprOpriate in other cultures. There is no absolute

cultural norm which one can use to classify or categorize

136

different societies. Jordan and Frieson did not establish
criteria for their judgments; they did not define what they
meant by "modern" and "traditional” societies.

This investigator supports Jane and Kanks (1948)
who suggest that cultural variation with regard to the
physically handicapped can be best understood by looking
at the types of values which influence a society's social
structure. In that context, an explanation can be found
for the differences in attitudes toward the disabled between
the West and the Middle East. In the West, especially in
the United States, most peOple are influenced by the values
of advanced capitalism. The major value in a capitalist
society is competition: the value of individual lies in his
capacity to work and produce. In some instances, the
individual is considered as a commodity in the job market;
the individual is valued according to the level of his
qualifications and the price he can obtain for his skills.
In such a social and economic context the handicapped have
difficulty fitting in.

Another trend revealed by the data obtained in this
study supports Afrooz and contradicts others: the more
positive attitude of women toward the disabled. Jordan
(1968) stated that

The data indicate some relationship between sex and

attitudes toward the disabled but relationship is
neither strong nor consistent.

137

Harrelson (1970), Morin (1970), Poulos (1970), and Gottlieb
(1973) found that men demonstrate more favorable attitudes
toward the handicapped than women. Afrooz (1978) and this
study show the reverse; both found that women demonstrate
more favorable attitudes than men. And, this relationship
between sex and attitude toward the handicapped is strong
and consistent.

Afrooz (1978) tries to explain this difference by
stating that

One reason for the results of the present study may
be found in the cultural and social upbringing of
Iranian women. They are more sympathetic and com-
passionate towards handicapped people while men, on
the other hand, tend to be more realistic.

I agree with Afrooz that women in Arabic culture
share the same perspective of Iranian women and are more
sympathetic and compassionate than men. This characteristic
of Middle Eastern women's personality can be observed easily
as a common value or judgment among people of this particu-
lar culture. Nevertheless, I find it difficult to accept
and to understand what Afrooz means when he says Middle
Eastern men tend to be more "realistic." Does he mean to
suggest that those who have a positive attitude toward the
disabled are less realistic? This conclusion contradicts
Afrooz's basic orientation in his study. While I believe
that women are different from men biologically and psycho-

logically, I do not mean to imply that either sex is

inferior or that one sex should have a privileged position.

138

However, to conclude that women are more sympathetic than
men does not explain the difference that exists between
women in the West and women in the Middle East with regard
to their respective attitudes toward the handicapped.

More investigation is needed of the roles of women and
their associated societal values. Here, we can only postu-
late.

This writer suggests that the status of women in
the Middle East may explain the difference in attitude.

The role of women in the Middle East is secondary to men
who dominate society; women are not free to move and do not
have the same rights as men. Thus, it seems fair to hypoth-
esize that to be a woman in the Middle East is similar to
being handicapped. The results obtained by Afrooz and by
this study could, therefore, be explained as follows: if
Middle Eastern women feel disabled and totally dependent on
men for protection, they probably have more insight into

the experience of being handicapped and, consequently, more
sympathy.

The data and conclusions reported by Afrooz and by
this study suggest that certain aspects of attitude toward
the disabled are cultural specific; the values inherent in
a social structure may shape the content or direction of
attitudes. However, other data obtained in this study
reveal that some aspects or determinants of attitude are

culturally invarient. Several findings were consistent

139

with previous research conducted in different cultural
settings.

Education tends to be related with more positive
attitudes toward the handicapped; contact or experience
with the handicapped also appears to have a positive corre-
lation with attitude. These findings confirm those in
previous studies (Jordan, 1968; Harrelson, 1970; Morin,
1970; Poulos, 1970; Gottlieb, 1973; Afrooz, 1978).

More important, the results obtained in this study
are consistent with others which used the same scale, the
ABS. Respondents to the ABS score significantly higher on
the hypothetical level than the stereotypical level, sug-
gesting that people tend to believe they hold more positive
attitudes than others. This phenomenon requires further
investigation. It is beyond the capacity of this study to
offer an explanation of this occurrence. Speculation may
suggest some promising research questions.

Psychiatry emphasizes the use of subconscious justi-
fication by individuals involved in interaction with others.
Could this figure in the explanation of why human beings
tend to believe they are more tolerant than others? Such
an hypothesis must be approached with care examining in
detail the psychological framework to accumulate data with
which to interpret the phenomena.

The data reveals another interesting trend: a
group's mean scores on the hypothetical level tend to be

reflected on the stereotypic level. This trend occurs

140

consistently across attitudes objects with only one excep-
tion: while the scores of women on the mentally retarded
are significantly higher than those of males at the hypo-
thetical level, they score less than males on the stereo-
typic level (albeit the differences are not significant).
In general, the consistent direction of scores on both
levels for all groups across all attitude objects indicates
the accuracy of the ABS and offers additional proof that
ABS is a powerful tool for measuring attitudes.

Data indicates that attitudes toward the deaf were
slightly more positive than toward the blind. This finding
was surprising, contradicting the investigator's guess that
attitudes toward the blind were more positive than toward
the deaf. While the data does not yield a significant dif-
ference, Tables 11 and 12 show that the score on ABS-D is
higher than the score on ABS-B for all the three groups
participating in the study.

The investigator's hypothesis was grounded on the
respected position Saudi Arabian blind people hold in the
judicial establishment. Many judges are, in fact, blind.
The most important religious leaders in the country are also
blind. One, therefore, wonders why the deaf are perceived
more positively?

While the data do not provide an answer to the
question, some cultural explanation may. First, these
blind judges and religious leaders come from a different

region (Najd) than the sample of this study. The religious

141

establishment is dominated by the Wahhabi sect which live
in Najd in central Arabia. Second, the central Arabians
have a higher percentage of blind people due to a disease
which was common in the region; this is not true in Mecca
where the sample for this study was drawn.

The findings of this study and others (Jordan, 1968;
Afrooz, 1978) indicates that frequent contact with the
handicapped leads to more positive attitudes. Therefore,
one might hypothesize that people in Mecca have more
exposure to the deaf than to the blind; if this study had
been conducted in central Arabia (Najd), it might have led
to reversed results.

The data reveals that attitudes toward the mentally
retarded are less positive than those toward the deaf or the
blind. This result was consistent across all three groups
which held slightly positive attitudes toward the mentally
retarded. The three groups (male and female students, and
teacher educators) all believed that others hold negative
attitudes toward the mentally retarded.

Afrooz (1978) advanced this argument to explain
why the mentally retarded were perceived less positively
in his study.

Sympathy toward the blind and the deaf individual may
be explained by the fact that blindness and deafness
are more visible, and more understandable, than mental
retardation. Another reason could be the misconcep-

tions or the insufficient knowledge of mental retard-
ation held by the public.

142

A third reason can be added to Afrooz's observations.
The Arab culture highly regards the ability to clearly
articulate. The deaf and the blind seem to be able to fit
themselves in with this cultural pattern; on the other hand,
the mentally retarded have difficulty with such a cultural
framework. Both the deaf and the blind seem to be able to
establish successful careers, while the mentally retarded,
historically, live on welfare.

Negative attitudes might be modified by efforts to
help the mentally retarded maximize realization of their
potential through good vocational programs which enabled
them to support themselves. In addition, an extensive
effort should be made to educate the public about the nature
of retardation, emphasizing the variety of things mentally
retarded people are able to do. If the public are provided
with accurate information about the mentally retarded, and
if the mentally retarded are provided with a wide range
of options to grow vocationally and emotionally, it is my
hypothesis that current negative attitudes will soften or

shift.

Conclusions

 

The aim of this study was to investigate and assess
currently held attitudes toward the handicapped in Saudi
Arabia. The investigator suspected that since Saudi
Arabia has no education teacher preparation programs

because of some of the teacher educators' opinions (see

143

Chapter I), students would hold negative attitudes toward
the handicapped. The study proved otherwise. The data
reveal that students and teacher educators have, indeed,
positive attitudes toward the handicapped.

Another significant conclusion of this study is
that those who have previous contact with the handicapped
tend to hold more positive attitudes than those who have
not. If contact, as has been proven so far, leads to
more positive attitude, then it is right to expose the
handicapped so that others have an Opportunity to correct
any emotional biases against the handicapped.

On the basis of the conclusions, it can be
suggested that negative attitudes toward the handicapped
is not a primary reason for not establishing a special

education teacher training program.

Recommendations

 

The ABS-DEM seems to be an adequate instrument for
measuring attitudes toward the handicapped. However, some
recommendations for future researchers who use this
instrument are as follows:

1. An examination of the basic twenty items of the ABS

(see Appendix) reveals that items range in moderate

intensity. There are no extreme items in either

direction (positive or negative). Developing

144

extreme items will help discrimination and build

a clear-cut picture of the direction of attitudes.
The ABS is very long (132 items) and time consuming
to work with. Breaking down the scale to three
basic parts (forty items each) which deal with one
particular disability would permit administration
over three different occasions (using the same
sample, of course).

Before the findings of this study can be considered

generalizable across cultures, several of the hypotheses

should be replicated within the Saudi Arabia itself due

to the limitation of the sampling procedure. Since the

sample of this study consisted of teacher educators and

students enrolled at the College of Education in Mecca,

there was no opportunity to draw a random sample. A more

inclusive sample should be drawn from the general popu-

lation in order to replicate and confirm the generalizability

of the findings.

Since this is the first systematic attempt to inves-

tigate attitudes in Saudi Arabia, this study lays down the

groundwork for future research. The findings suggest several

areas for further inquiry:

1.

An assessment of self-attitudes to discover how the
handicapped see themselves in comparison with others.
An assessment of parental attitudes to reveal how

parents of the handicapped value their children.

145

3. A study of possible relationships between age and
positive or negative attitudes toward the handi-
capped.

4. A study of teacher evaluations of the handicapped.
What are their feelings about the presence of the
handicapped within their regular classrooms?

As far as the cross-cultural studies are concerned,
the investigator recommends a study of attitudes toward the
handicapped in two or three countries in the Middle East.
This is necessary in order to obtain enough data to estab-
lish whether or not the findings of Afrooz (1978) and this
study form a consistent composite of attitudes toward the
handicapped in the Middle East and to establish whether or
not Middle Eastern attitudes are, indeed, different than

those of the West.

APPENDIX

APPENDIX

Praise to be Allah, the Beneficent, the Merciful

King Abdulziz University
College of Education
Psychology Department

Mecca

Attitude Behavior Scale

Visually Impaired--Mentally Retarded--Deaf Persons

BY

Johen E. Jordan
Ali Afrooz

Translated by

Hamad Al-MarSO‘Dqi

1980

146

147

Dear Brothers and Sisters,

The enclosed questionnaire measures the attitudes
toward handicapped persons, i.e., the deaf and the mentally
retarded. The purpose of distributing this questionnaire
is a scientific one for getting a Ph.D. degree from Michigan
State University in the U.S.A.

Your cooperation is highly appreciated, especially
when you answer this questionnaire. Please try to be as
accurate as possible, since such careful responding to the

items will be very helpful and would facilitate the analy-
sis. .

- While I thank you for your c00peration I would
like to turn your attention to the following points:

1. Please do not write your name on the booklet.

2. This questionnaire is somewhat long which may take
some of your time; however the nature of this
research required that length.

3. The questionnaire consists of three parts--every
part has two sections--and then a demographic

section which deals with background information
about you.

I hope that you enjoy reading this booklet and at
the same time have the desire to respond to it.

Thank you very much.

Sincerely yours,

Hamud A. Al-Marsouqi

148

Definition of Terms

The Blind - the person who does not see, has no

 

sight whatsoever.

The Deaf - the person who does not hear at all or
hears with great difficulty.

The Mentally Retarded - has less than 70 I.Q. score,
the slow learner. In our culture is the "Ablah," he is
different than the insane, Usually the mentally retarded

goes to the Institute of Hope in Saudi Arabia.

 

149

ATTITUDE BEHAVIOR SCALE

Visually Impaired . . Mentally Retarded . . Deaf Persons

DIRECTIONS

This booklet contains statements of how people feel
about certain things. There are two sections in each part
of the questionnaire concerning VISUALLY IMPAIRED, MENTALLY
RETARDED, and DEAF PERSONS. In section one you are asked
to indicate for each of the given statements how other people
believe visually impaired persons compare to those who are
not visually impaired, how mentally retarded persons compare
to those who are not retarded, and how deaf persons compare
to those who are not deaf. In section two you are asked
to indicate how you personally compare visually impaired,
mentally retarded, and deaf persons to those who are not
retarded, visually impaired, and deaf. Here is a sample
statement.

 

SAMPLE

l. Deaf persons are likely to be physically stronger
than others.

. all people believe

. most people believe

. some people believe«—

. very few people believe

waI-J

If all people believe that deaf persons are physically
stronger than others you should circle the number 1 as shown
above or if you are using an IBM answer sheet make a heavy
dark line on the answer sheet between the two lines after
the number as follows:

 

 

l o 1 . === 2 . === 3 . === 4 . ===

150

ABS-I-DF

Direction: Section I

In the statements that follow you are to circle

the number that indicates how other people compare deaf
persons to those who are not deaf. It is important to
answer all questions, even though you are not sure of the
answer to some of them.

 

Other people generally believe the following things about
the deaf persons as compared to those who are not deaf.

1.

Deaf persons have less energy and vitality than others.

It

all people believe

most people believe
some people believe
very few people believe

is almost impossible for deaf persons to lead a

normal life.

DWNH
o o o 0

all people believe
most people believe
some people believe
very few people believe

Deaf persons have ability to do school work.

1. very few people believe

2. some people believe

3. most people believe

4. all people believe

Deaf persons generally have as much initiative as
others.

1. very few people believe

2. some people believe

3. most peOple believe

4.

all people believe

Deaf persons can maintain a good marriage.

1.
2.
3.
4.

very few people believe
some people believe
most people believe

all people believe

151

ABS-I-DF

Other people generally believe the following things about
the deaf persons as compared to those who are not deaf.

 

6. Deaf persons should not have children.

1. all people believe
2. most people believe
3. some people believe
4. very few people believe

7. Deaf persons are likely to be faithful to their spouses.

1. very few people believe
2. some people believe

3. most people believe

4. all peOple believe

8. Deaf persons are able to take care of their children.

1. very few people believe
2. some peOple believe
3. most people believe
4. all people believe

9. Deaf persons are likely to obey the law.

. very few people believe
some people believe

. most people believe

. all people believe

ubUNl-J

10. Deaf persons make plans for future.

1. very few people believe
2. some people believe

3. most people believe

4. all people believe

11. Deaf persons are so by luck or fate.

1. all people believe
2. most people believe
3. some people believe
4. very few people believe

12. Deaf persons like to be with other people.

1. very few people believe
2. some people believe
3. most people believe
4. all people believe

152

A_B§_:1_i:2£

Other people generally believe the following things about

 

the deaf persons as compared to those who are not deaf.

13.

14.

15.

16.

17.

18.

Deaf persons are likely to have the ability to be
financially self-sufficient.

1. very few people believe
2. some people believe

3. most people believe

4. all people believe

Rules for deaf persons should be less strict.

very few people believe
some people believe
most people believe

all people believe

bWNI—J

Education for deaf persons is as important as for
others.

1. very few people believe
2. some people believe

3. most people believe

4. all people believe

Deaf persons can usually learn to use speech in com-
munication with others.

1. very few people believe
2. some people believe

3. most people believe

4. all people believe

Deaf persons are usually comfortable with hearing
people.

1. very few people believe
2. some people believe
3. most people believe
4. all people believe

Deaf persons can usually be mainstreamed in regular
school by providing special materials.

1. very few people believe
2. some people believe

3. most people believe

4. all people believe

153

ABS-I-DF

Other people generally believe the following things about
the deaf persons as compared to those who are not deaf.

l9. Deaf persons can usually benefit from a hearing aid.

1. very few people believe
2. some people believe

3. most people believe

4. all people believe

20. Deaf persons are usually able to continue higher edu-
cation.

1. very few peOple believe
2. some people believe

3. most people believe

4. all people believe

Direction:

154

ABS-IV-DF

 

Section II

This section contains the same statements about the

deaf persons as they were stated in section one, but here
you are asked to circle the number that indicates for each
of these statements how YOU PERSONALLY compare deaf persons
to those who are not deaf.

 

It is important to answer all questions even though

you are not sure of the answer to some of them.

In respect to deaf persons would you expect that:

 

21. Deaf persons have less energy and vitality than others.

1. strongly

2. agree

3. disagree

4. strongly
22. It is almost

normal life.

1. strongly

2. agree

3. disagree

4. strongly

23. Deaf persons

1. strongly

2. disagree

3. agree

4. strongly
24. Deaf persons

others.

1. strongly

2. disagree

3. agree

4. strongly

25. Deaf persons

1.
2.
3.
4.

strongly
disagree
agree

strongly

agree

disagree

impossible for deaf persons to lead a

agree

disagree
have ability to do school work.

disagree

agree

generally have as much initiative as

disagree

agree
can maintain a good marriage.

disagree

agree

155

ABS-IV-DF

 

In respect to deaf persons would you expect that:

26. Deaf persons

1. strongly
2. agree

3. disagree
4. strongly

27. Deaf persons

spouses.
1. strongly
2. disagree
3. agree

4. strongly

28. Deaf persons

. strongly
disagree
. agree

. strongly

waH

29. Deaf persons

1. strongly
2. disagree
3. agree

4. strongly

30. Deaf persons

1. strongly
2. disagree
3. agree

4. strongly

31. Deaf persons

1. strongly
2. agree

3. disagree
4. strongly

32. Deaf persons

1. strongly
2. disagree
3. agree

4. strongly

 

should not have children.

agree

disagree

are likely to be faithful to their

disagree

agree
are able to take care of their children.

disagree

agree
are likely to obey the law.

disagree -*

agree
make plans for future.

disagree

agree
are so by luck or fate.

agree

disagree
like to be with other people.

disagree

agree

156

ABS-IV-DF

 

In respect to deaf persons would you expect that:

33.

34.

35.

36.

37.

38.

 

Deaf persons are likely to have the ability to be
financially self-sufficient.

1. strongly disagree
2. disagree

3. agree

4.

strongly agree
Rules for deaf persons should be less strict.

. strongly disagree
disagree

. agree

. strongly agree

udeNl-J

Education for deaf persons is as important as for
others.

1. strongly disagree
2. disagree

3. agree

4

. strongly agree
Deaf persons can usually learn to use speech.

1. strongly disagree
2. disagree

3. agree

4. strongly agree

Deaf persons are usually comfortable with hearing
people.

1. strongly disagree
2. disagree

3. agree

4. strongly agree

Deaf persons can usually be mainstreamed in regular
school by providing special materials.

1. strongly disagree
2. disagree

3. agree

4. strongly agree

157

ABS-IV-DF

 

In respect to deaf persons would you expect that:

39.

40.

Deaf persons

1. strongly
2. disagree
3. agree

4. strongly

Deaf persons

education.
1. strongly
2. disagree
3. agree
4. strongly

 

can usually benefit from hearing aid.

disagree

agree

are usually able to continue higher

disagree

agree

158

ABS-I-VIP

 

Direction: Section I

In the statements that follow you are to circle the
number that indicates how other people compare visually
impaired persons to those who are not visually impaired.

 

It is important to answer all questions, even though
you are not sure of the answer to some of them.

Other people generally believe the following things about
the visually impaired persons as compared to those who are
not visually impaired:

 

41. Visually impaired persons have less energy and vital-
ity than others.

1. all people believe
2. most people believe
3. some people believe
4. very few people believe

42. It is almost impossible for visually impaired persons
to lead a normal life.

1. all people believe

2. most people believe

3. some people believe

4. very few people believe

43. Visually impaired persons have ability to do school

1. very few people believe
2. some people believe
3. most people believe
4. all people believe

44. Visually impaired persons have as much initiative as
others.

1. very few people believe
2. some people believe

3. most people believe

4. all peOple believe

45. Visually impaired persons can maintain a good marriage.

very few people believe
some people believe
most people believe

all people believe

anNi-J
o o o o

159

ABS-I-VIP

 

Other people generally believe the following things about
the visually impaired persons as compared to those who are
not visually impaired:

46.

47.

48.

49.

50.

51.

Visually impaired persons should not have children.

1. all people believe
2. most people believe
3. some people believe
4. very few people believe

Visually impaired persons are likely to be faithful
to their spouses.

1. very few people believe
2. some people believe

3. most people believe

4. all people believe

Visually impaired persons are able to take care of
their children.

1. very few people believe
2. some pe0ple believe

3. most people believe

4. all people believe

Visually impaired persons are likely to obey the law.

1. very few people believe
2. some peOple believe
3. most people believe
4. all people believe,

Visually impaired persons make plans for the future.

1. very few people believe
2. some people believe

3. most people believe

4. all people believe

Visually impaired persons are so by luck or fate.

1. all people believe

2. most people believe

3. some peOple believe

4. very few people believe

160

ABS-I‘VIP

 

Other people generally believe the following things about

 

the visually impaired persons as compared to those who are
not visually impaired:

52.

53.

54.

55.

56.

57.

Visually impaired persons like to be with other people.

1. very few people believe
2. some people believe

3. most people believe

4. all people believe

Visually impaired persons are likely to have the
ability to be financially self-sufficient.

1. very few people believe
2. some people believe
3. most people believe
4. all people believe

Rules for visually impaired persons should be less
strict.

1. very few people believe

2. some people believe

3. most people believe

4. all people believe

Education for visually impaired persons is as important
as for others.

very few people believe
some people believe
most people believe

all people believe

bWNI-J
o I o o

Visually impaired persons can participate in social
activities with sighted persons.

1. very few people believe
2. some peeple believe
3. most people believe
4. all people believe

Visually impaired persons can usually learn to take
care of their daily living tasks.

very few people believe
some people believe
most people believe
all people believe

bLAJNI-J
o o o o

161

ABS-I-VIP

 

Othergpeople generally believe the following things about
the visually impaired as compared to those who are not
visually impaired:

58. Visually impaired persons can usually be mainstreamed
in regular school by providing special materials.

very few people believe
some people believe
most people believe

all people believe

waH
O O

59. Mobility training usually will enable visually impaired
persons to travel independently.

. very few people believe
some people believe
most people believe

all people believe

DUMP-J
O O O

60. Physical education and sports should be part of educa-
tional curriculum of visually impaired persons.

very few people believe
some people believe
most people believe

all people believe

thNH

162

ABS-IV-VIP

 

Direction: Section II

This section contains the same statements about
visually impaired persons as they were stated in section
one, but here you are asked to circle the number that indi-
cates for each of these statements how YOU PERSONALLY com-
pare visually impaired persons to those who are not visually
impaired.

 

It is important to answer all questions even though
you are not sure of the answer to some of them.

In respect to visually impaired persons would you expect
that:

 

61. Visually impaired persons have less energy and
vitality than others.

strongly agree
agree

disagree

strongly disagree

DWNH
O I O

62. It is almost impossible for visually impaired persons
to lead a normal life.

1. strongly agree

2. agree

3. disagree

4. strongly disagree

63. Visually impaired persons have ability to do school
work.

1. strongly disagree
2. disagree

3. agree

4. strongly agree

64. Visually impaired persons have as much initiative as
others.

1. strongly disagree
2. disagree

3. agree

4. strongly agree

163

ABS-IV-VIP

 

In respect to visually impaired persons would you expect
that:

65. Visually impaired persons can maintain a good marriage.

1. strongly disagree
2. disagree

3. agree

4. strongly agree

66. Visually impaired persons should not have children.

1. strongly agree

2. agree

3. disagree

4. strongly disagree

67. Visually impaired persons are likely to be faithful
to their spouses.

1. strongly disagree
2. disagree

3. agree

4. strongly agree

68. Visually impaired persons are able to take care of
their children. .1

1. strongly disagree
2. disagree

3. agree

4. strongly agree

69. Visually impaired persons are likely to obey the law.

1. strongly disagree
2. disagree

3. agree

4. strongly agree

70. Visually impaired persons make plans for the future.

1. strongly disagree
2. disagree

3. agree

4. strongly agree

164

ABS-IV-VIP

 

In respect to visually impaired persons would you expect
that:

 

71. Visually impaired persons are so by luck or fate.

1. strongly agree

2. agree

3. disagree

4. strongly disagree

72. Visually impaired persons like to be with other people.

1. strongly disagree

2. disagree

3. agree

4. strongly agree

73. Visually impaired persons are likely to have ability
to be financially self-sufficient.

1. strongly disagree
2. disagree

3. agree

4. strongly agree

74. Rules for visually impaired persons should be less
strict.

1. strongly disagree
2. disagree

3. agree

4. strongly agree

75. Education for visually impaired persons is as important
as for others.

1. strongly disagree
2. disagree

3. agree

4. strongly agree

76. Visually impaired persons can participate in social
activities with sighted persons.

1. strongly disagree
2. disagree

3. agree

4. strongly agree

165

ABS-IV-VIP

 

In respect to visually impaired persons would you expect
that:

 

77. Visually impaired persons can usually learn to take
care of their daily living tasks.

1. strongly disagree
2. disagree

3. agree

4. strongly agree

78. Visually impaired persons can usually be mainstreamed
in regular school by providing special materials.

1. strongly disagree
2. disagree

3. agree

4. strongly agree

79. Mobility training usually will enable visually impaired
persons to travel independently.

1. strongly disagree
2. disagree

3. agree

4. strongly agree

80. Physical education and sports should be part of educa-
tional curriculum of visually impaired persons.

1. strongly disagree
2. disagree

3. agree

4. strongly agree

Direction:

166

ABS-I-MR

Section I

In the statements that follow you are to circle the

number that indicates how othergpegple compare mentally
retarded persons to those who are not mentally retarded.
It is important to answer all questions, even though you
are not sure of the answers to some of them.

 

Other people.generally believe the following things about

 

the mentally retarded persons as compared to those who are
not mentally retarded:

81. Mentally retarded persons have less energy and vital-
ity than others.

all people believe

people believe
people believe
few people believe

is almost impossible for mentally retarded persons
lead a normal life.

all people believe

people believe
people believe
few people believe

83. Mentally retarded persons have ability to do school

all people believe

1.

2. most

3. some

4. very
82. It

to

l.

2. most

3. some

4. very

work.

1.

2. most

3. some

4. very
84. Mentally

others.

1. very

2. some

3. most

4.

people believe
people believe
few people believe

retarded persons have as much initiative as
few people believe

people believe
people believe

all people believe

85. Mentally retarded persons can maintain a good marriage.

1.

2.
3.
4.

very few people believe

some
most

people believe
people believe

all people believe

167

ABS-I-MR

Other people generally believe the following things about
the mentally retarded persons as compared to those who are
not mentally retarded:

 

86. Mentally retarded persons should not have children.

1. all people believe
2. most people believe
3. some people believe
4. very few people believe

87. Mentally retarded persons are likely to be faithful
to their spouses.

. very few people believe
some people believe
most people believe

all people believe

ubWNH

88. Mentally retarded persons are able to take care of
their children.

1. very few people believe
2. some people believe
3. most people believe
4. all people believe

89. Mentally retarded persons are likely to obey the law.

1. very few people believe
2. some people believe
3. most people believe
4. all people believe

90. Mentally retarded persons make plans for the future.

1. very few people believe
2. some people believe

3. most peeple believe

4. all people believe

91. Mentally retarded persons are so by luck or fate.

1. all people believe
2. most people believe
3. some people believe
4. very few people believe

168

ABS-I-MR

Other people generally believe the following things about
the mentally retarded persons as compared to those who are
not retarded:

92.

93.

94.

95.

96.

97.

Mentally retarded people like to be with other people.

. very few people believe
. some people believe

. most people believe

. all people believe

Mentally retarded persons are likely to have the
ability to be financially self-sufficient.

. very few people believe
. some people believe

. most people believe

. all people believe

Rules for mentally retarded persons should be less
strict. ‘

1. very few people believe
2. some people believe

3. most people believe

4. all people believe

Education for mentally retarded persons is as important
as for others.

1. very few people believe
2. some people believe
3. most people believe
4. all people believe

The intelligence level of most mentally retarded
persons can be increased through education.

1. very few people believe
2. some people believe

3. most people believe

4. all people believe

Mentally retarded persons can learn almost anything
but at a slower rate.

1. very few people believe
2. some people believe
3. most people believe
4. all people believe

169

ABS-I-MR

Other people generally believe the following things about
the mentally retarded persons as compared to those who are
not retarded:

98. Mentally retarded persons can usually complete elemen-
tary school.

. very few people believe
. some people believe
most people believe

all people believe

uhbJNl-J
I O

99. Mentally retarded persons can learn to develop personal
hygiene and good health habits.

1. very few people believe
2. some pe0ple believe

3. most people believe

4. all people believe

100. Most mentally retarded persons can learn social skills
to get along with other people.

1. very few people believe
2. some people believe
3. most people believe
4. all people believe w

170

ABS-IV-MR

 

Direction: Section II

This section contains the same statements about the
mentally retarded persons as they were stated in section
one, but here you are asked to circle the number that indi-
cates for each of these statements how YOU PERSONALLY com-
pare mentally retarded persons to those who are not mentally
retarded.

 

It is important to answer all questions even though
you are not sure of the answer to some of them.

In respect to mentally retarded persons would you expect
that:

 

101. Mentally retarded persons have less energy and
vitality than others.

strongly agree
agree

. disagree

. strongly disagree

wai-J

102. It is almost impossible for mentally retarded
persons to lead a normal life.

1. strongly agree

2. agree

3. disagree

4. strongly disagree

103. Mentally retarded persons have ability to do school
work.

1. strongly disagree
2. disagree

3. agree

4. strongly agree

104. Mentally retarded persons have as much initiative as
others.

1. strongly disagree
2. disagree

3. agree

4. strongly agree

171

ABS-IV-MR

 

In respect to mentally retarded persons would you expect
that:

105. Mentally retarded persons can maintain a good marriage.

1. strongly disagree
2. disagree

3. agree

4. strongly agree

106. Mentally retarded persons should not have children.

1. strongly agree

2. agree

3. disagree

4. strongly disagree

107. Mentally retarded persons are likely to be faithful
to their spouses.

1. strongly disagree
2. disagree

3. agree

4. strongly agree

108. Mentally retarded persons are able to take care of
their children.

1. strongly disagree
2. disagree

3. agree

4. strongly agree

109. Mentally retarded persons are likely to obey the law.

1. strongly disagree
2. disagree

3. agree

4. strongly agree

110. Mentally retarded persons make plans for the future.

1. strongly disagree-
2. disagree

3. agree

4. strongly agree

172

ABS-IV-MR

 

In respect to mentally retarded persons would you expect
that:

 

lll. Mentally retarded persons are so by luck or fate.

1. strongly agree

2. agree

3. disagree

4. strongly disagree

112. Mentally retarded persons like to be with others.

strongly disagree
disagree
agree

1
2
3
4 strongly agree

113. Mentally retarded persons are likely to have the
ability to be financially self-sufficient.

1. strongly disagree
2. disagree

3. agree

4. strongly agree

114. Rules for mentally retarded persons should be less
strict. 8*

1. strongly disagree
2. disagree

3. agree

4. strongly agree

115. Education for mentally retarded persons is as
important as for others.

1. strongly disagree
2. disagree

3. agree

4.

strongly agree

116. The intelligence level of most mentally retarded
persons can be increased through education.

1. strongly disagree
2. disagree

3. agree

4.

strongly agree

173

ABS-IV-MR

In respect to mentally retarded persons would you expect
that:

 

117. Mentally retarded persons can learn almost anything
but at slower rates.

1. strongly disagree
2. disagree
3. agree
4. strongly agree

118. Mentally retarded persons can usually complete ele-
mentary school.

. strongly disagree
. disagree

. agree

. strongly agree

119. Mentally retarded persons can learn to develop per-
sonal hygiene and good health habits.

1. strongly disagree
2. disagree
3. agree
4. strongly agree

120. Most mentally retarded persons can learn social skills
to get along with other people.

1. strongly disagree
2. disagree

3. agree

4.

strongly agree

174

ABS
This part of the booklet deals with many things. For the

purpose of this study, the answers of allgpersons are

 

important.

 

Part of the questionnaire has to do with personal informa-
tion about you. Since the questionnaire is completely
anonymous or confidential, you may answer all of the ques-
tions freely without any concern about being identified.

It is important to the study to obtain your answer to every

 

guestion. Please read each question carefully and do not
omit any questions. Please answer by circling the answer

you choose.

121. Please indicate your age as follows:

1. Under 20 years of age

2. 21-30
3. 31-40
4. 41-50

5. 50-over
122. Are you
1. student
2. teacher
123. Please indicate your sex.
1. Female

2. Male

175

ABS

This part of the questionnaire deals with your experiences
or contacts with handicapped persons. Perhaps you have had
much contact with handicapped persons, or you may have
studied about them. On the other hand, you may have had
little or no contact with handicapped persons, and may have
never thought much about them at all.

124.

125.

126.

Some handicapped conditions are listed below. In
respect to these various handicaps, with which one
have you had the most actual experience?

 

blind and partially blind

deaf, partially deaf, or speech impaired
crippled or spastic

mental retardation

. social or emotional disorders

UlubWNH

The following questions have to do with the kinds of
experiences you have had with the category of handi-
capped person you indicated in the previous question.
If more than one category of experience applies,
please choose only one answer.

1. I have read or studied about handicapped persons
through reading, movies, lectures, or observations

2. A friend or relative is handicapped

3. I have personally worked with handicapped persons
as a teacher, counselor, volunteer, child care,
etc.

4. I, myself, have a fairly serious handicap

5. No experience

Considering all of the times you have talked, worked,
or in some other way had personal contact with the
category of handicapped persons indicated in question
129, about how many times has it been altogether?

No experience

Up to 20 occasions

Between 21 and 100 occasions
Between 101 and 500 occasions
More than 501 occasions.

UivbWNH
O I O

127.

128.

129.

130.

131.

176

ABS

Have you had any experience with mentally retarded
persons? Considering all of the times you have
talked, worked, or in some other way had personal
contact with mentally retarded persons, about how
many times has it been altogether?

 

. No experience

. Up to 20 occasions

. Between 21 and 100 occasions
. Between 101 and 500 occasions
. More than 501 occasions

U‘l-bUJNI-J

How have you generally felt about your experiences
with mentally retarded persons?

No experience

I definitely disliked it

I did not like it very much
I liked it somewhat

I definitely enjoyed it

m-bWNr-l
O 0

Have you had any experience with visually impaired
persons? About how many times?

 

1. No experience

2. Up to 20 occasions

3. Between 21 and 100 occasions
4. Between 101 and 500 occasions
5. More than 501 occasions

How have you generally felt about your experience
with visually impaired persons?

 

No experience

I definitely disliked it

I did not like it very much
I liked it somewhat

I definitely enjoyed it

U‘IwaI—I
o o o o 0

Have you had any experience with deaf persons? About
how many times?

 

No experience

Up to 20 occasions

Between 21 and 100 occasions
Between 101 and 500 occasions
More than 501 occasions

Wok-WNW
O O O

177

ABS
132. How have you felt about your experience with deaf
persons?
1. No experience
2. I definitely disliked it
3. I did not like it very much
4. I liked it somewhat
5. I definitely liked it

":t‘JJ‘ ”it ‘n-u‘ y

’HIHJLJI lanky
‘—-.-J-'-" L45
,,_._J- . H‘ e-s
1...,an is. ..

,t___..z..
“Mag—abut.“
. “OWL“ ' | o. "J’. on f-‘J‘ .

. a no. Lysu.

178

179

par" 09.)” ‘4" r-v

 

’HN ' .1,»qu Wtwhyfll " bun-2|
H) co my.» “raw”; 0. WW1) f...“
.. (5.4.! "109.23..- IJJ Lat-pg.- “WI ,udrw

Hi: as... u...» 1.»: a.» M‘ ,5 gangs). Lu»,
0 . OLLiB-YI . 5'» flax—L391 00 LWJ'.

J—u—u—iL—i—W tau-L“ 91...“ 6.6.,“ "uh “J’s-3‘ 45.3.." 51.-3"." vi)

9 .: 3...!wa Dry.- ,1:
o 'I.’.J.'___~fl 'L—gQ-bd-l £U“—\

1,.de to,» .. “Jr... '9: I,” .. .).-,5 can't: at 5.3;... 4
.).—Law" bum “09., .. a.) “W‘afl‘ “J:
MI Jana. .3! “pm: dam.“ ow Lou—n “J: .51.; L...-.~1
W49: 034:... WW‘ “1.1:.” ,3 .. 0.3,..." rhywx
gunk-.1 0- uau. gh 'byb!|U¢,_-. n.1, .. 0.3)....114,
oL—fifl HID HUI—"u f-‘v( P‘" 3:.) «Dub DUI JSJyuoul
”w’oo I39,“ H.151! 'Jywuwn 4...”... ' f..." " ye.
1......»th 3.1.5.?! iayg'p 0.,”9... tux-v: 015.3.
..... uufl Mfi’b‘JIJQ‘JWWWuJJYI ,9
.thULIL.‘ “wumfip

0—! W' LIL-ilfiwrbl .).. “.591 up»;
oo’u—‘E-"130wW-n

u__5 u,» 135., hr...“ 'mh‘n u. 1"}ulmg1xj
.00 ~45 LLP“

000 ‘3,wa w;
WIM‘ rip.“ Jun-D

9°:

180

H#‘ QUNU|M
f—ufin 00. “a W 00. '“U'

: 9W):

 

41.—1.31,! 'ug' 0;;1...J.th—~¢b¢!La—fl saga...
o—flHJ‘Jwfichflfi-m'3‘svs‘v“h'ugfiww'
Pg" "up, .. WWu,'-usst_'J..-J.. uL—i!
( / )wcuotbsfiunj..ku,~audfinwi
- 4.15..“‘4, 'Wm 'ulij._-.( “9;.“ u...“ ,ut
My ? ujugt.‘ WWI " .-'J.....J:'C. swam...
.',d|',.a'¢.ugu..JL.p!IJ..L.ln

J__‘...'. U...“ 0‘ wt) .. M's-Luv» “st—U! 5.34! “.5"
'HW".L-J-DJJSL~JI ' . $1.19: ' J)» “aw: damaijww: 4,1.)
:JL—_——‘-¢

'(P‘J'p‘)gvjylwh~1hehhpww-\
othWvuJI JS.‘
mum-”1m ,wipha - v
°uawm~VWIfiv° "
. «Us “w“. 0" LU .(
3,—53 5.3.2. p?! 1.5:: 0! wm~vuu J50! £5.15...sz
L—M-R L02! w( \ ) HJW"oUr-'"Jv‘w 3...)...»
. 030‘ car): L65

 

L-lsuégjbilvhfiYWIOH—QY|')OUAQJ‘L:WI-\

" w ‘

u—HW v. 0‘ 0’3“.) “41.-.53.." OH" x; WM) .4
a.__.n_,...n ,1szqu Rafi-'4‘ .3) . 1,4..." 'LS.‘LJ|
ML, . ( .. 5.9:.- .. "n.3,! ) yawlemu v.5
Mnflutw' £14,1-woowm‘u"
HA 3;U,'WI 'yM,” 0. Cam!
.. LJSJ." Jail about MJJ!‘ 0!)»

Z___£-JL., by?! Fig.1." “M! " Ln hath-iv: f—a‘h -«r
. .. .3351! ,1; .. 8"" “Ul’th ,1

181

1.....s_,.l_n cubs“ ”.93..
P_——‘J‘
33m:
: JJYI ’9...“ 9w:

.. “stay... a! may! ,3," ,L.) ( /) c" L): C»

Hal 3......)s. g: . f..." ,3 :19ng f..." ”39.3%“
4_5L;.,.¢J15.¢,.,:S\J!415.»J‘,Jjubw.mcflsu.n
. at...) u.-
(wa1) ,2.“ Jag. 10...», Du. J5! 331.: HA! .4

.41.): va‘ J5—'

4U.) ”Enawu‘fi..-l.

wawwuufl-..

.dJJ ”Wuww-..
u-—-' (“tr-‘5) 3w)” ERWJHO' 'e‘J‘ ' uh '4?~.-"‘-" .r—Y

(M .r‘

.clJ.) ”Ar—£19.“) J_S_!

.dJs ”mu-w! '11.-..

.AJJ w2M¢w|H_s

. ELL”: wa‘hwu1ww - a
.. CL... .. u'J“"J‘ J-—" 0345-; 0' pugs-v4

. wbwmfigl—LJI u. 3.1.3-1

.uawm-cwun ”-fi,

4U.swu.~..-.u.u.u Pk“-*

.41.!) wa|ds-a
Wchflfivgng Jlutfg. bats-11,4: Q'JJU r‘J‘ LU 11......3

.41.); vai a- 3.1.3-!

nu.) ”3.1:...qu 91....-.”

.wbwwvu‘l Flu.-.»

.uUbwi-za'wupfl J__<..J
.. cps... .. by: 3w: 2.9L... W ”51-0

. wawmaMEJI 9.. 1.1—3-1

o $1.3 ”4.3-.2... VI...“ fh‘ .. a
. «1.13 ”4.3:... 04.3.“ J—S - J

VL—_fla‘ W 3” (”‘1‘ 9.15.»... -1
. «Us ”Anngm J__’. -1
.JJ.) wing-LAM ,3»-..
. cU3 “3.1.3....“L2J! up)... .. .»
.wwm,mi 0.3.1.3- J

182

H‘ufl'H-‘J‘ rm .0st mus—um w-Y
Ont-U.) My“! 0" 1.1-1-1
. 4U.) ”ALHwU-J‘ H-v
. NJWVLLJ! 9L“-.»
- w; win-gal J—‘u-J
. ".me nun-J! g.» 2,134: N...) P.“ -A
. 11.15%...va 9.. u.‘
. «LL» ”mgu’fl an..--
+MW¢LBJ| p-Ii—M-o?
. «LBWVL-J! .).—5-..:
.u-luyfdicaggl 13.4w (oi-q
.dJJWVLLJt a. LLJ-I
. wag-”33...;um ‘fi-l-v—s-r
. wwwui flue—é
waw-n-wt-Ju J—S-J
”,le Ala—ugpuu-“
. wawwu: Q. “.1

 

- ww-u-Vum H...-
- $1.3.) ”WWW! (Lu—a
. .51; NM“ uvU-‘J' J_5- .3
.Hcglwwy:-u
.0143 wfiwwl J__s-(
o w; nga'wUsJ! (bun-c—
. eUJ ”Abra-L3." Jar-a
941.10 (”Wu-Mvn LL?- .5
- g—jfiu 53.-41H 9,4“. pm at
.wswhww: 0‘ 3.14.!

ual-J4 whww| flag-a,
odJmewul J-S...)

. LPN-J! fi—fi-w’ ".53: ”.1. .n-mn ”J; 3J4“. ”5.1... P..." -\r
. GLL') QJmWL-JI 9- L15.)
. «Us ”.5.“le Jay—g—
0 an; ”lava: rhino-a
- «AU.» ”ix-pg: J4...)

- p.11 3......Jt-1333JJ! ”SU‘WWYIlele “(’24: -u
. wswln-vu1 0.. 1.1-3-1
uaLJJ wiLa~¢LiJI H-v
-w..w-:~.-....,,n_-.J' flu—u-)
.Uu ”um-19.9.1. J—J—J

183

. ”mgr-1.3,. 1...! .13.! ,2.“ H4.-.2-”
.m:,,-n...,u.u,. LLJ-t

o GILL} My VLLJ'.
o GILL. ”M” . wu‘

o wfy‘ 13.3w: fo-J' f-Lh; H‘éfiv 3.9L. ”J.

H-s—v
Adi-n,
.).-.5-4

.wswm,u.J|,.LLJ-I

. all.) ”4.1;... ,.L.'..JI
. an; why-.1:

. r‘J'r‘JWY‘c‘w‘JS- 5...... cb‘fi‘vw‘v 3.3L; 9...):

.).—5...:

. «U; ”3.3:... ,4...“
. .u. ”3.x... “FL...”
0 4".) ”cl-3.3.5! w‘mj'

“PJ‘RPF'VJJ'H‘WJ‘u'WL‘J‘J‘ P‘Ué“
. amtefluwwyfl

fiv-v
P-"
'14-.)

.wawfl,u: ,. 2.14.!

. «Us ”also. 9L..."

. c..." ,1. pin-.2 ,.-.J1 am ,. Q’s-5;... 33).: f...“

M—v
His-n...»
.).—5...:

.wswm,u-n ,. 2.1-3-1

. 4.1-J.» ”4.3;... ,4...“

H’ --
(Lu—a3
J-S-a

.wawme-JI 0—. LU...‘

JI—‘v-s—
'5‘.»
J4...)

—\‘

184

.0.._...s rL—‘J' GLDL—h- -‘1 9%
. '_—-*” .
3 “1;." f—fii-H

. E ~~:r'
,JJ)..JJ!I PL" ,JELLJ|J..JJU.;.,4.”.~P_LJ: |.n
.J—————‘-.sw pJJJ!.,.b(/)c.z.y cadres-rub.
.. 9.13,... C‘ 9“" Lama’s-n dbl-3.3;!
.-__..J,-..n.-LL-.,:... LU-‘I'szbwh-o‘ L-st. u
;.n.-..:J.,.JL..5.L-:.L-.a'u W‘s)...
. p.11 IA,- 1.)...) ULLJJ! 34L: (“4‘ 4‘
.auauJ: Mybt-t
..-,___n_,I--
.Q_.J|JI 1-.»

 

. 3...._.'..J__MJ(~1_4
J—‘J'U‘ ,aJ-ns LJL.‘ iww-JL-‘g’ f.“ Adar“)! fir-II
o P‘”

.3A—éwoélJl-I

. C9-——“J'-H'

. 5_—__JIJ'Y—.>

. awuti-a
-cL-—+.-,»Jw~u|way.* «wax-n

.:.__:.,_b:_,l-t

. Jan-,1-..

.yuli-»

.z...:..,.n.,l!-.:
«.ufl‘é-x-vuuuww—uuu—JIww-M «w 1.....-”

.3.._.:...,.n.,l-(

° 5_—'“J'-‘e'

. ‘5..__MJ‘!-._.

.33.;yths-l
-c*-.-L._»JJJ' 3w) LJLuw-rhh-f-aJl-Vo

.33-_.:..,J:J(y-!

..-,__.‘nJ(9-.

.5,___JI.,'-.>

.z._.:.3_.a|J(-.:
.iL—Jwi'f‘JIW-xj

.2._‘_.,_~.,n.,(i-(

. ~,____n.,(!-.-

.5-.__.-_.MJ'--

.3..____.- 5.51.,1-3

185

.fiQJJJouJ'Pngwgg1ldp.h.-J’ 0,.
.14_:--,.M.,11-!
-5_.._5:J1i-._.
o;,___n,t-._.
.ZHlel-a

-Ma.u.-J:.ba.,mtr'p~~.u
'3-I—T-vle‘Y-I
..g.___.‘|,rl!_..
o5..._._.61_,1-.
.33.__:.‘5JJJI-.a

' a-Fv'aé-“FJ‘ 95.01:».1...“ w
.:.L__.-..;,.n.,tv-t
oJ____JlJ(‘J-..
~.5______n.,1-.
.3..____,,: yul-J
’MHP‘J'
.3-_._,' yIle-l
-J____.M‘,(Y-g
-;,____JI.,I_.
.u_.__.,‘ Jug)-..
.J.\._._UIJ1L___~JJ' “HM
.t.x_;.,,__n.,(-(
f¢_______.6|.,l-..
.J_.__fl.,'!...»
.3._.:.,J1J!!-3
.0”.__L‘IL. Lb‘ll (ark-H" P‘J‘
.:._;.,1|J(1-(
.,,._-___u.,!!-._.
.,',______b|J'-.>
.:._.:...5__.n.,I-.

- UL...“ was.» '94.? ,1- .Law ,1. 2,134: ”5.1.. 9.4:
.3.._.:..;,_.MJ\~1-t
.J_____JIJ‘Y-.-
.J_.___.HJ1-+
'. 3.x___..,‘ @IJf-J

ognJJL-aJuanlejwwawbuuutfl1

. .3..-_.:.JJIJ1Y-!

..§__-___b|.,‘i-._.
oJ———_—-LHJ1-.>
.33.___-..: yiJl-s

-" Q

4"

~Ti

186

.PJ:,.,..L.;,.2...IJ.3J,.J1,-l.;_r.
.3...__-,- le1-1
.,3.____.n.,1-..
.‘5.____n.,t~l-.
.3._.:..._-,.M‘,Ii-.:
ooWQMigoofoJIrLanwnu Pall-Y1
.3._'..,.51Jts-1
. .... yIJl'l-..
.;,____.‘|.,t..._.
.3.i__...,‘ 6)!)1-4
. .mu ,g,u.m C’ ”k” chi-J“... was—iat- p.31 .rv
.3.__._,: yIle-I
.l',—__HJ"-..
I a; 9131-.
.34.____,‘ éth-J
“‘39 ‘ H-u ’9 WWW uh" :rJ'hJ'u-‘i" L‘J‘J' f‘uus‘v-VA
.L_.L.J\.;flu,...,,,4”.
.3.:__.:..,_‘,JIJIY-(
.,-,-___.n.,(!-..
'..L 41"...»
.IHJJIJl-J
.wauflg‘hawwwuuytqa
.1._.:.JJ|J1Y-I
.;,____M.,1i-..
.J____JIJ1-s
.3.___.:.,.tJt-.
. wow-.1...» 2.1.1,,1. 5,114: ”5.1... a... 1.11-5.
.a.__..:.,.|J(v-(
. §.____..'IJ‘~I-..
.é 4W"-..

187

3.5).1__-J| .-.us..:.1:,...i.
'v-lv-i-S cos-'LASYI '
“8.88.8
:JJW 3,—9.1!
:GL—q-r’);
“Jamal,“ ..-.( m5...“ ,3," fL.‘ ( /) c‘ 1.3. c.
. “HI C‘ tough-w c..-“ ”.5571 " ,3
J'}——- Jur’au» 349-" ”five-‘0‘ Lea-0.2L ‘4‘
- “A." o‘- AS'J-Jr‘d‘b-u-‘J-‘S' 3'
,__.L..-, L... 1.4-J: oL-flt... ”.33...- a... 3....-wjiy.
, .,.,.....J: rujugt-otasv-
. “f...“ ,. 1.0....) nu. J5! .:. I... 'LLSYI -“
. «Us ”ahvum JS-\
. waWWtfin—Y
.uJo-wm ”A...“ J... -\'
.dJJle—‘Jloow -1
. “.).-4.5 1.3L. 3:... ”.4... ,( H.151) ,1- :..._....H 0.-”
. .u. ”13...,u4: J$-\
. «Mo ”mVUpha-V
. we wmwuufi -T
. MMWLD -1
. C'—-—-’~'~ wJaJI .).-J! ”.3. ,I was»! 95...-“-
. d1...) ”3.3;...WBJI 0" 11.54
. mugs-,u: fi-v
.wswnmww| Plum—t
. NJWVLJ| J._S-¢
53.—J! Jul“...- BJM...“ VJ. ,.J.u " ”.45?! " LL. Limp—{i
° curb-m 64“
. 4J3 w&,uu 0‘ LU-\
. uwm,un .)...-f
. 4.1::thqu p-l‘I-n-o—f
o ww-hi-‘wwm‘ J—s—l
. CL...- 1...“: 3L...JI LJL... wk... H.159) -g°
. «Us ”1.3:...qu 0‘ Lb.)
. wbwmgw .).-.4
. 4.13”“,L.» rhu-r
. www¢WI J—J-t
. 1!...le 1| " 'USYI " WW—U
. «1.1;: W,L‘—JI .).—54
.mwh,w1 rhu—Y
.wawamww: .)....r
HALL) ,J.".:...,u-n,.w -1

188

_(.-

. fiflJH-fi,‘ H.553) J,s.,t (»J.;.~.JI w-gv
. «U3 thLJ\ 0. 21:4
. flaw, Jung-a—T
. wuss... ,3..." chm—r
- «Us J,.u.:... ,w: 3.5.:
. "Jun. Lug-J1 ,1. 2,...3JI Hm” -us\.n 4A
. ALL: ”ALL-veal 9.. Lb‘..\

. «Us J,....-..., Jud! a... -\'
0 4L1.) wax—n. ”uh...“ PL“ .Y
. «U: was... ,.L.:.J( .J—5 -t

.WIfl'OLiSYI " chi-19“»Jw‘w-H
. «Us wag-J. 0. Lb.\

o&,,...i:...,L.-.Ju M -Y
’dUJ ”33.-,um f-Iqu—r
.w. ”33...,LJ‘ J—5 —t
.Jfii' AIIWIL___ASYI .4...

 

. 4L1.) wwwwl J. 3.1.3.4
° ““3 ”JSAvJ-HJ‘ .F-‘v—Y
. EU.) w..g.—...,.-:.u .Lu-Y
. «U5 0,315.3...th J—S-t
-J..JI,1J»_.LJ2...-_.',a..n .uu'j ',...u "—o)
. w3wlh,t_wJ_s-\
. ELL: thL-JI (Jinn-Y
. ELL} ”MJLH\ J”.....r
. 2.1.1.": thL-thw -(
. ,U‘Jt- his.“ J,.|... ousw —o\'
. «Us ”*3“,th 0" LLB-g
.ulJ‘. ”43.-1...,QJ1 #4
.4112: ”MJL-J'! Hun-Y
.clJ'.) wfiJL'JI J_S-s
. 2.43...“ ".92.: ,5 H-..( ,1. 41......“ ,4. 2,1531 J,s.L.. H.151! .m-
. 4U.» ”3.1:...JQJ! .‘r‘ LLB-s
. «1J3 ”3.2.1....JLSJI Jun—Y
. mum,w. Flinn—Y
. 4D... ”3.2;"...JLJJI J—‘—!
0 ”453-, L...”- laanfl ”5:91....- LLYIthfiJI, .91)....“ —oi
. «Us 9,413...JL.'J| 0" 3.1.1-.
. an. ”13:...JLJ ”A
- uh.) ”awn-J: Phi-n—Y
. mw1hJ-Ln J_$-z

189

_. \\ _.

“(Ff—‘4' " W03 3.....1J.i..v" ousw " 9.1.3....
. EU.) WWI-.110. 1.1.3-)
. EU.) J,.).i:...,.L.'.JI fi.‘
. EU.) ”$1..qu Pkg-‘-
. EU.) ”.).-,Q) ”1.4.5
.JJ...» Jun) 6‘ mt...“ ELEM—:4! ,. 15,)...Jt J,..-I-:-. 'Li-SY‘ —o‘\
. EU; ”.).-,EU) u‘ 2.13 -(
. EU.) ”4.3;...qu ”-1'
. EU.) ”fly“! Hana—T
. EU.) J,.L1:.~,,.L.'.J| J.._S-g
.LEJ-an) -t-.LL_-..,.-.U.L‘-. LJLH, (4.: ,J. 3,...“ 9......) ”45:“ —0V
. EU.) ”saga! ,. LLB-)
. ELL") J,.).3.'...,.t_'.J( ,.__..-"
.ELJ.) wag“! y—ku—T
. ELI.) w.)_i:.~JL..J| J_S-g
l_._.-,.J,J._..J) L,..,.J.)... ,_-_JI,.JI_;.JI,...'., L|JJJ| vLfijJA-ai
. EU.) ,4. .)..)sL—z DUEIJJL, 9,3,).
. Eu.) ”EL-,um ,. LU-)
. 4.1),,1_i.-...,u.n,...-g
. EU.) waL-JI f._l....-r
. EU.) ”avg-.).]! J_'.-(
r—_._..JI ,4. " ”45$! " .).“... 3.))... Jig-H, 35,.J! ,J....,,.):-‘| 41
. 5.“). ,J) 19L...“ w.) fa»);
. ELI.) ”3.3.1....qu 0‘ LU-)
. EU.) J,Ei:.~.,I.-.J) H-x
. EU.) w-Lk-‘ru'L-‘J‘ 91)...-)-
. EU.) ”EMJLJt JA-z
L_.....JI 1...,le ,. fund) .-_.- H.652! "1...! 3.9.?“ C..\..~...JI ,3-1.
. 1.0.0:.» QgLéi—NWJ
. EU.) wimJLsfi 0.. 2.1.3.)
. EU.) wh,L-—.‘—Hfl._t
. EU.) J,.).L'...JL_.'.J| Hun—Y
. AJEJ,.).1:...JL.__;.M Js-z

190

-u-

UJJ—H GDLgE‘JI 'L’L.
" -L_BY) '
m8:
; g.)____‘...>.,;

,.-S.J_,..J,~l| -).JI ,6 iii-L..." J...Jt,..;,l.,‘,:.., P-L" t...
«guy-.51.): ,3,“ ,1. ( /) c. 3.3. c..,(_,.L-...,.u.-_J)
.,.,,.-.J. yous“ u,t.a..,.a,...‘.n

--———Ju-’-J‘d-L“-u-‘->a LU-Y‘Jsuhwfio‘uihndufiv 9'
g...:..:J.)L.SiL.;,.L.:.L-.. . .. w....-..I.)SL;..

 

. c”.)....“ Q. Ly; UL!) J)! 33).. ‘Lfiil -1)
. 3.._.:..,..'I,(-)
.&._JI,(_T
.;,_n,( i-)-
. 314,1),114
,_.,,....Ju 1.... 3).... w-J-‘v ,1 " .).-5): " ,1. )..-..th-1:
. 3.__.-,n,!-g
.6___J|,l -\'
.J._bl.,17.4'
. 31;..qu Y4
. CU... ,._,.)..Ji J...“ ”.5. ,! .).-ASN.1 ,3..-“
. 3...,JMJI y-)
.;,_M,! 14
.5___.'I,1-r
. :._.'..y\j-z
5.).__.u ,Eulr'... 3).)..." ,1. ,U.)L.3 " may) " 1.1.. 3.....-“

owffi—Hflfig
. 3&yl": Y-)
.yl,‘ i-w

.HIJl-V
. 3.._-:..,n,1-g
. c'--’*-'~ by. at...“ LJLEWE- ‘LaSYl -1.
. 3.)_.:..,.),! Y-)
.&._.|J( Y-y
.,____n,t-r
. 3.-._;.;,n,t-g
. ’1...) Jr...- Y! " nut»): " 9.....-“
. 3....L-le(_\

191

..‘T-

. t«lag-pr)o.....),1H.151)W3.“1......1..~.....11,..
. 3.....,)1,1Y-\

-00.)!» $33)) ”.1... “LESS!
. 34:.) ,1); )1-)
° 1.3-“.9' Y -1
. J.-.é|,1_f
2.)... 91,14
. 1.41...“ ....-.,:.:,. R...) ,1. EL...“ ,1; 3,..J1J,S.L.. tugs?)
. 3.):- éscj )1 -).
. p,__.él.,1 Y —1
. ‘3.__.H.,1 .4-
. 3.).._.:.. y1J1.-g
nus)“ “41.13.... J31”: ,1... 1.5.11, ,..I,.1.11, 3.1,...“
. 3...:- 31,1 )1 -1
. é._s1.,1 5' -t
. §____.-IJ1...1'
. 3.):- ,21J1-g

—'\V

--'1 A

—V1'

—YT

192

_ ‘f -

.wfi‘“ W¢M1JLY"‘LASY|"*L¢-vo
. 3.4.6.1,111-1

. Jun—41...“?! C‘ 1......‘11 gust-.11 ,. BSJLE.J1J,...1.... ousw -v;
. 2.)... 5.51,! Y-)
. 531,111-:
,3.._.'o|,‘ -1"
. 3.)..-&.1;,1-g
.3..._,,._1131....J1 3%.,914; 3...)», ,.L.:.,1. 3,4141 ".).J ‘1...“1 .-vw
. 3...:- ,)1_,1 1-1
. 5_-.)1_,1 8-1
. 0—4191—1'
. 3.L_._‘. 3.1.,1 -5
J,.)_,,. 1.....>J,,.-.J1 1...“)... ,-...11,.,1...J1,...- 2.1,...» -1..S)LJJS-.—v.~
. EU.) ,1. 93.1...) 2.1.“. 91,31-
. 3.1.1....3J1J1Y-1
. 31,1 )4
o ~_;__.1.,1-1r
. 3.1.2.5..1J14
9A.»). #1,). " '1..i.511“.).;1... 341-5M1" 15,..11,.1..-,...Ju-y‘
. 5.51,. 9J1 3.1....“ UJ“
. 3...:- ‘5..1',1 ~14
. ,-_-51,1)1-1
. C,___i1',1-r
. 3.1.1.5.)1J1_g
HE...“ 21.-.5419 'w11-..IL..SYI ”4...! 3...,.J.:.J1C.L.‘..J1,)_A.
. mg}! ngL.‘..‘.J1._,..._.,
. 3.).__..‘ ,Lélj Y-)
. .3—__JJ' Y-J
. J____H_,1-r

193

3,1,?! -,_.J1
”£7151JJQV 0.1.LLLQ‘54JI (JJM (sh-1 1/1?’ 1.11: ea
,_.,...1.E..J1,..'.51-)L.,.)11c. LJHAL. .. WW1,
. __ 1.....L'...
3451;1J15- Ava-bub .).-.91 an» ubs-a- .' 1—4- 0.)"! U
. E-L.1,..)sL..,.aJ13_,-
,....1..-..JL.;,.L.:.. L...) 3...J1_.J1'1.-:)11..J,.).“E...- Let. 1......J,,'.‘91
0 'er211 C. 1...,be Up}...
1 n1..._,..~11,. 2.0.», 3.11.1,J.)1 2.11.. L.,.L'.. W1 -11.
o‘UJUJJ-LA'VLEJ1JS_\
oEU.) 9,34,,1-41 fL-M—Y
. EU.) J,.).L.'....,L.;.J1 ”.4-
. EU.) J,.).i..:...,,L.'.J1,. L1.- -1
. 'Ur‘lts 1...)... 31....J,.J1.~Q1 " 1...)...,...1..:..J1' ,1..1.».....11,.-M
. EU.) ”mu-WI 515-1 --
.EUJW,L.'.J1 p-y
. EU.) “43...,L‘U1fi-r
. EU.) ”EM,1_.JI 0“ 3.1.3.:
- CL...,.,,..J1J..11,,)3.,11-.1.. MA..-"
. EIJJwEm,L-J1u. LIE-1
. EU.) ”4.3—1...,LU1M_\1
.EJJ.) “.).“,qu (Jun-1r
. waJmu-LEJ1JJ-[
H1,“ 3,31,41,1‘ “J31... " WW1" ~...L. 1.....-“
. -L.,.Y1 .$.1..,,.'1J1
. Eh.) ”m,L.J1,. LU-)
.EU.) wm,L‘.JIM-y
. EUJJ,.).1:...,U.11,L..-r
. EIJJUJABJEEV‘rLEJ1Jé-g
. c1...... P'13l—N1LJLA-FW 1...1.‘..,,..1.:...11-A°
. EU.) ”43...,L-J10. LLB-1
.EU.) ”m,1_dl,..._x
. EU.) uJéL’Wu'L‘J' I‘M-V
. E1J.)J,.).i.:...,1_.J1J.'_c
. ymt1,...,)111.-1.L.,...1....11,1.-._-m
EU.) ”aprl-JI ~15-)
. EU.) ”M,L.J1 91.-«-1
. EU.) ”12...,uJ1_,.-_\~
. EJ3,,..)....,1.-..11 ,- 24.-s

194

-n-

. ”Evy-L9,! thwQI1LW1w
.vaw1w LLB-)
-dJJwJ-iJ-n'wudlfi_"
. EU.) ”ELL-.VLLJI plum—r
.EUJWWLLJI JJ-g

. "Jun... 3.)...“ ,1.) ya) MAJ 1....Lu ,,..1......J" 1
. EU.‘)‘~,,.).L..~'" rut—3J1”. LL24
.EUEwEquLJ1M_r
oEUJwAL~,W1fL.._r
.Eu)u_,4.a;..~,L.-.J1 J_S-g

.W1JMJ’WWI ‘ $011.».anw
.Euawwwu1u, LU-)
.EUJ ”ELL-.VLEJ1»_T
. EU.) wM¢LEJ1 M“?
.wawwwu1 “14-;

. Mug-ha. WW1
. EU.) ”awn—J1 9‘ 1.1.3 .\
. EU.) wm¢wu1*~-y
. EU.) wmeEJI PL..._\“
.EUEwEx—awL—J1JJ_2

.).).th 31.5.4.1 MM‘QJN-J‘

.43...) ”4.3.3.... “4....“ J5 _\

0 EU.) wmwu: 9L.“ —1'
. EU.) ”E52,,u41 H -r
. 9.).) .1.,.E....,~ ,1...” 0.. Lb.:
. oufluuaw ”4...... L—Lb ”As-.41

. EU.) ”JMwLAJ1JE LL; -1

o QLLJJ ”Mu" ”A...“ .f-I- —"
. EU.) ”4.1:... “LU! 91....- -v

. EU.) ”anum J_S -2

. EU.) ”LL..." wt.“ 9' LU-)

0 EU.) ”4.3-3..., 9.1.3.31 f’L-fi -T

°'-v-LL5 Wkly—nu inn—AL— 'JJ-L'} JJ‘ ”$3 0‘ W “LYU, W‘J-F-J‘J J'JFJ‘

o ELL) wmww1 “9...,

_\

195

-‘Y-

.)....“ "1...; 3.1.1.}...1' WW1 " P1..-»
.EUwaqutu. LU-)

. EU.) ”mgum J)...

—Y

.,.1...J-1._;.,5u) E...- us-L-Lu ,_LL~..;...) 1'61”...

. EU.) ”11:... ,L-H JJ -(

. EU.) ”12.1.0.1...J10. LIE-)

. EU.) ”13;...wl-J1J...

—1'

0 EU.) ”4.1—”En. U'L‘J' Ph.D.. .1?
. EU.) ”WWI-.11 .JJ -2

- 1.411.241! 3.1.7419.) f.,_..,._|....’. on...) W. 3.))... 1...)... W1

. EU.) ”1...“...qu1 u.» LLB -\

0 EU.) ”gawk-H M

—Y

o 3.).» Wa1JUVL-é5'J W’} "Jh’S-mq 1.11.15 W1

. EU.) ”11;~¢LUI 0" 243-)

. EU.) wmwwtfi-x

.EU.) ”WWWI rhu-r

.EU.) “12...,L-J1 JJ-g

C‘ (1......‘11.’ 2.1.1.): QIJJ-‘Jl 11.; H495" 11.11.: W) 91.--)..
. 9.9—5?)

. EU.) ”131”,“) (.r‘ LU
. EU.) ”111.,UJ191-

. EU.) ”1...,UJ) L's...

. EU.) ”1.1.”...WLUI JJ

-‘1

-‘Y

-°.A

196

34,1...“ 1111...)“ ".11....
I ' |~ . II __ n .

:uéLJ—H 'JAJI

 

:c—L—wy

rsJJ..JJ11 0’...“ me-J1M1w31011‘5‘,“ ”.2..." 11.
«LL-1.111....“ 9’41 ,1. (J) (.341. 5.91)....131-41
. 11.0.)“ EWW1LJWUWU1

gen-12.». uawasuu—wJuaL-wuév w
-111.;.J.L..11‘Q..1.1.1U1.J.1._.L.- 1......1151...
. 1L..,.)11,_,. "vJ-v’.) LELL- J11 2.11.. WW1 _1.\

. 31.4-y1J1-1

 

.J._)1J1_y
.91.,1 )1-)-
311,311.,131-‘
- 11.._,.)11.s .)Ls b...» MJL...) Q1 L...L15 ”1111-41 ”1.11.“! 9..-“:
. 211.9131-)
.J__61J1 .4
.‘5—U1J19-T
. 31_1.¢11J1y_g
. C“"“" u-J-h-J‘ J-U1 ”.1;- .1‘ WWé-_1.r
.11.”)...
.5,__JIJ19-1
.J—JIJ1-r
. "mag—4131-:
64~51J1J1U1w11~ 2,111.31 u.1; 9.9.1.) Warm-U1 1.1.. LL.-1.:
. -L.,-_)11
. 211—1.3.5131 1-1
.&___.)1.,11-x
.9..__.)1.,1 -1'
. 31.—1.54.1111 -1
. C1...- 3.1).,“ 3W1 1..me...- WW) -1...
- 111.911.,114
. ~,.__)' 1.,1t4-)
.J..__.¢1.,1 -Y
. 31___;.¢;1J1_{
. )11-51 1)....“ WW1 ”1.1-1.3
. 211-1- 4,1131 -1
.w_,|J1_y
.‘,___.)1-,1 31-:

. a1__1.y1J1‘J_g

197

-1‘1-—

. 31;... 13“.)“ y

. H1} 7

. ‘-,__.' 1,1

. 2.1—...) ,51,1

0 Hub‘ LBJ-’1 U‘L’ 3JAJ-J‘ MAJ L’L.‘ W1

. 211...,51J1 )1
.&_.-)1J11
.,_-,___)1J1
. z1__;...,)1.,1

‘0’... "II I" . ”,1." 81,9111».L.—A.J' 1

. 3.):- ,)1J1 y -1
o ",_——D‘J‘ y
. I1___.‘.. ,51J1

. 31:..311J1Y
.,)1.,1)1
.J__.)1.,1

. 31.—4.0.51}

oJ11J1J51U3..-),LLU1.)‘.11-JI

___ .31_;-¢J1J1
.,____.)1J1
.J___.)1J1Y

. 314-511.”?

. 0.31.11.19.01... 1.1.1... W1

0 "’__—I‘J' y
. 3—41‘;

. 3.)___.. é—J‘)‘

. LUI-JI ".31.,1 9,-1.1 ,1.) .11....11 ,1. 3J1U1 Q’sL... 1.1.11.9)..111-11

. 311.,MJ1 Y
. ,___)- ‘1_,1 )1
. g___.p1.,1
.5.).__1..~',.)1J1

WWLJU1b1-2y1wU1-wy1Ju-19J1J31JU1

. :1..:. ,11" )1
. ,____)1J1

—1
—Y
-T

-i

—1
—Y
—T
-1

_\

—1-Y

—‘0‘

-1\.

—\\‘.

411T

—\\T

—1\£

198

. ot.,.i1,.-1.;u. “1.1.3.7 WW1

. z1_..;,)1,1)1

."___i1,1)1

.,____)1,1

. 3U_.:-,)1,1

. ”41,950.: Wé-vwwi—‘fi-J‘ as.)
. 31.—1.,11,1~1

. ~,___)1,1Y

'J——'“.9‘

. 2.1-__'-,. ,11,1

l..

-—1

. u—LMUSJ,C,¢,.51 1,..L..“..U1QS1.,L..L.;,,..J.;..JI

. 211—1. ,11,1 :1

. 2.1—- ,51,1

. g;1.g._)11‘-1..,..J1,) H‘s-L‘— I1....1 W... 311.; WW1

. 21.2... ,11,1 )1
o "’.——-_I- ‘J‘ Y
. 1.1—;- 511,1

-\
—T
—"
-:

' 3A...) WH‘JUUL—QS‘J ”wry “.1105... WOW—’1

. 31_.‘.. {91,1 :1
. ¢____a1.'-,1 11
.. a____£1,1
. 21__-:. ,11,1

{LA—.71, “L921 -I,L,...JI f""l'" “U ,3... 1.11... W!

Phi-.1-

' was“ C'°

. 31_-_-‘ 311,1)!
o‘}——I‘J‘ Y
._5____-1,1

-110

-H‘l

-11Y

—‘ \A

-\H

199

1.5,J—J1ou1-9311aL-oh
“as:
.).)...J1Wr. 3,5.g1eyw-ww, -,-J111.
1...)! 3.11.91 ,1. 2.1111,) c.1941 as,L:-,.,1.. 3.1,...“ 1.1.9.
Z_.1..J19L.,1..J1H,L.;.LLLYIQ:JL..... 2...), L9,,»
-¢>Lv-LJJ,J1.,,..F-J1P1U1L.Sc ,1..L).-.J.1..,.L..J1u:,
z__uvl,n(/)C.Ly¢a-.LL1-Lu-y11,s1xu
:J13-J-SJ UJL-i-séu—l‘
S‘EJ,__..a 95.—11')
° L-wJ-‘Ju-‘JM -1
1- Huh—Hg-v—Y
- L-t--r1g.-—r
...,,..L..)o.,,_g
9wufl—c-1n
..-11..1~..1
. L-15J1,s,.,1-J1 u....,.u-1r
$11.)! 3.11,.) ”4....51 ,1) "Lat-941,) L.._J1_1,._-.S 1.11
u-JJ" Li-“H
31.1.41 L—Ji -11
LLJL;.J1LL.J1_‘-
3.11.1,J1 3.1..J1.g
L1)...» 311.... 1...va wag-,u1 75.2.: ,1 1,..E..s 1.11
-!u-L'
5' .1,,;.$1J1J.1;J:-1
f—n-z—1
Y —1'
9EL~1..L--..1J»,..1-_- -—'

 

200

-n-

fits-1,1 2.1....J1E).,1...;.,J..:.1L:..;..~l1,,.u1 -,...11 1.).
--u.aJ-J1.pww c-J-‘L-“J'

9,5.___-. “*4.” " .).-5F‘ c.1161»); Lfiwuus‘ L‘w
.1__J..,1 aux-J1 wa-bz r-Jl-wax' tea») Hob-*4:
. ' 0.5,.U1'Jyfi-zut E14,... ...1 1...,4. .. 111-.111

0—" 61,. .. '1uus1"c1,.1,1-1 1.1.; LULEJ1-1,1.J1uJ—1n 1"

EJLS.»1,1.. 1.1.11-,LaEEU-.LS “...JL1J1"E.1_311~11" c1,.-.1,.

.).)“ .. J‘U‘r‘S-1

. Lqu,1.. H1-1

. ,:,._...J1,1,1$.11J_L:.11--1_...,.;,1 .. V1-1-

. L-___,.1-.-‘ 44.-...:

. 1___.1L.11,1L._1_-.,b~-o

.. .5141 WL" gag-~11 ,1-,1.....J1 5,1. ,1..."- Z...J1_;.J1 11.13.1111 -11’v

r151 191—31201.5 1..)1 .. ,1...11J1,_-11,1.;.-.1.-.u1,) a...“ -,.:.1
...—u 1»u.—-: L21 Adm-1191,1141 1,“;wa L—a w
‘4—-"J 3.2“ 1L3" 3*” 1 dfl‘w-I—‘u-iE—UHJ‘ r 1...),
' JV‘Jv-i L...:1J:...:,;JI,

"...-......11' ' 311,111“ J».,au.3,-.J1.Jy-L.:1E-.LE-1
. " ”...LU) ELL-31.41" ,1 '11,.u-J1 "

9.1,1..-1.5)L)u1..1.1,-uu,. 1...,1,1 1.1.1.1.).1 -1
. ( wag-,1

cart-5 w’xfiJ‘ Eda-“1‘ c; -~'—-1~ J u-’ .).-31- .5" J—u‘ —T
. C'“ ... C)!“ ,1 .. Hg):- ,1

. 2.311310... p.511 1...»; L11 -{

. ,..;-,_-..11n1,. C" 1.41:...)11- 1,1,1..-.-1_°
(1111J13-JJ419-b1g»;a .).-5,141.“ c...,1-.~..=1.1.-1.51_)1 -1111
U,1.__-.) .. mJAWI EU 9:51.11 W1 C). 1.1.411.» ,U1,
C—" .....161J1-5,J1,1L-.,J13,11J1u,.u,1 1.1: ...-11
r—Q .. ”1.11.51.11 w W' 1...,1.M,1)L.Ls,1u1a1. '93:.

; 61.51.11... 11.ELJE.1» :f

. ,g,..-J1c..-JLS.11,1-,L-;61.51JE-.U-1

' "=J-—' (flu—'3 -'-
. 2,.» 1.. ...n 9.2-1'

. 3,.9..-1.§u.,-g
' 5.)» 0’1wJ45‘--c
.)_L~.~..(_,.L-:1,1;,.; tJ-‘L-EJLSU1J1VJL»; 2.1.1.1.Jy -1211
W91»... ,1 Lu. “£51.31 '11aELJ-1.» Eff!) .- 1.1.11;

. H...»J1.§..»1,1-,1-_-, 3.1.51J,-J-1

. 2),... 1. .4

. 3f1"- Hum—1'

. Bran-“19...:

. ‘4’. 0'1 ng"'°

201

.WLU‘a-U1M1 31,1...) Jy— LU nag-d,,...: ,..1... -17.
ugh.» 1.1 EAJu-r-J—1
.Jflb‘l! ,J.)..,1._..:.Jl 11;)...1 C‘J' 'J-t
.1,.;.s1.,._1c.,1‘.4-v
. 1‘11,J1,E.,1.s:_31o1,.JE.a;,1-g
.-,L».:.JI o1r-11>E.11-'..1-°
-’-‘-”-‘.) 0 ( “'JU" 135'.” )Qv-‘Sfi‘ r-JL?‘ 1v"‘-4JJ‘-“"
,1,.-..-_1111.C.E11.s-)11,1JL1.111 1......) -,;J1-1,..11
9,114!)
'22)“ 1.16U-_U-1
. 71,—. y. —Y
. if)“ —nw-r
. 3,... 9.. -\"u‘-f
. “:J_. 0.10.);51 -0
‘3. " 'L...SYI " C‘QJ'JL" Jy- 31L; 11...,-,)1.‘.-11 EJ,,..; ,11... -1"
...,L...) 1.1.51.1...J-1
° .95-b" vbfiww‘ "“‘J C‘J' 1‘44
' 'Jr-‘SLFJEJ‘ PJ-T
. p»,J1,-,L-:.J1c1-JE_..,1_5
..,L..-J151.-11:a.1:.1:~1-¢
1‘" ,1“ " 6...,11.) 1.1.9..)JJ-e—1rr
.- 9.,91-Jl a1: L....JEU...L» ,1J1"E.1J..J1”.)1s 1...,
...,1... 3.1 51.1.1111-)
. 3,___. y._x
. 3’1-0— Hun—T
. 3,.» o.._\.\0..-g
. "or-.4: g.) U1,1151 -o
1' " t“1.11"?E.1..,1.....:.”1,... ".11.. LuE,-¢LsJ1d,,.;,oL.-1vz
...,1... 2.1 E111..-)
. ,15111,1..-J-;.11 ...-.1 {1,1 (.44
.1,..:.$1..JC;,1(.J-1-
. 1...»,J1,..,LA.T.J101‘.JE.A$,1-{
.-,L..;.J1 a1,-.-;...-1.1-°

coo ‘L—l—i-Y‘ W1
... ‘H‘J

("

BIBLIOGRAPHY

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Afrooz, G. Ali. An assessment of attitudes of regular
school teachers toward exceptional children in Iran.
Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Michigan State
University, 1978.

Allport, G. W. Attitudes. In C. M. Murchison (Ed.),
Handbook of Social PsycholOQy. Worchester, Massa-
chusetts: Clark University Press, 1935, pp. 778-844.

Allport, G. W. The historical background of modern social
psychology. In G. Lindzey (Ed.), The Handbook of
Social Psychology. Massachusetts: Addison Wesley,
1954, Vol. I, pp. 3-56.

 

 

Anders, S. F. New dimensions in ethnicity and childrearing
attitudes. American Journal of Mental Deficiency,
1968, 73, 505-508.

 

Babow, I. Staff attitudes in a mental hospital which estab-
lished a mental retardation unit. American Journal
of Mental Deficiengxp 1969, 74, 116-124.

 

 

Barker, R. G. gt _1. Adjustment to Physical Handicap and
Illness: A Survey of the Social Psychology and Dis-
ability. New York: Social Science Research Council,

1953 rev., Bulletin 55.

Bateman, Barbara. Sighted children's perceptions of blind
children's abilities. Exceptional Children, 1962,
29(1), 42-46.

 

Bedwell, S. K. The Meta theory of Facets: A structural
approach to attitude measurement. Unpublished doctoral
dissertation, Michigan State University, 1977.

Bell, A. Attitudes of selected rehabilitation workers and
other hospital employees toward the physically dis-
abled. Psychological Report, 1962, 10, 183-186.

Brenton, M. Mainstreaming the handicapped. Today's Educa-
tion, 1974, 63, 20-25.

 

202

203

Brodwin, M. G. A Facet theory analysis of ”what's in a
name": Black versus Negro. Unpublished doctoral
dissertation, Michigan State University, 1973.

Bruininks, H. R., and Rynders, J. E. Social acceptance of
mildly retarded pupils in resource rooms and regular
classes. American Journal of Mental Deficiency, 1974,
78(4), 377-383.

 

Central Planning Organization Development Plan, 1975-1980.
Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, 1975.

Cessna, W. C., Jr. The psychosocial nature and determinants
of attitudes toward education and toward physically
disabled persons in Japan. Unpublished doctoral dis-
sertation, Michigan State University, 1967.

Clark, E. T. Children's perception of educable mentally
retarded children. American Journal of Mental
Deficiency, 1964, 68, 602-611(a).

 

 

Clark, E. T. Children's perception of a special class for
educable mentally retarded children. Exceptional
Children, 1964, 30, 289-295(b).

 

Cohen, J. 8. Employer attitudes towardAhiring mentally
retarded individuals. American Journal of Mental
Deficiency, 1963, 67, 705-713.

 

 

College of Education in Twenty Five Years. Mecca, 1975
(in Arabic).

Collins, B. Social Psychology--Social Influence Attitude
Change, Group Processes and Prejudice. Boston,
Massachusetts: Addison-Wesley Publishing Company,
1970.

Corine, T. A. Acceptance or rejection of disabled persons
by teachers. Journal of School Health, 1969, 30,
278-281.

 

Cowen, E. L.; Underberg, R. P.; and Verrillo, R. T. The
development and testing of an attitude to blindness
scale. The Journal of Social Psychology. 1958, 48,
297-304.

 

Cowen, Emory L.; Bobgrove, Philip H.; Rockway, A. M.; and
Stevenson, John. Development and evaluation of an
attitudes to deafness scale. Journal of Personality
and Social Psychology, 1967, 6, 183-191.

 

204

Cruickshank, W. The false hope of integration. The Aus-
tralian Journal of the Education of Backward Children,

1975, 21, 67-83.

Curtis, S. M. Education in agricultural occupations for
the educationally disadvantaged. Paper presented
at the AATEA Research Seminar, New Orleans, Dec. 6,
1974.

Dailey, J. L. Modifying undergraduates attitudes toward
the handicapped by means of video tapes. Unpublished
doctoral dissertation, Auburn University, 1979.

Dickie, R. F. An investigation of differential attitudes
toward the physically disabled, blind persons, and
attitudes toward education and their determinants
among various occupational groups in Kansas. Unpub-
lished doctoral dissertation, Michigan State Univer-
sity, 1967.

Donaldson, J., and Martinson, M. C. Modifying attitudes
toward physically disabled persons. Exceptional
Children, 1977, 43, 337-341.

Dunn, L. Special education for the mildly retarded--is
much of it justifiable? Exceptional Children, 1968,

35, 5-22.

Edwards, A. L., and Kenney, K. C. A comparison of the
Thurstone and Likert techniques of attitude scale
construction. Journal of Applied Psychology, 1946,
30, 72-83.

Efron, R. Measurement of attitudes toward the retarded and
an application with education. American Journal of
Mental Deficiengy, 1967, 22, 100-107.

Elser, R. The social position of learning handicapped chil-
dren in the regular grades. Exceptional Children,

1959, 25, 305-309.

Emerton, R. G., and Rothman, Gail. Attitudes towards deaf-
ness: Hearing students at a Hearing and Deaf College.
American Annals of the Deaf, Vol. 123, August 1978,
pp. 588-593.

Euse, F. J. An application of covert positive reinforcement
for the modification of attitudes toward physically
disabled persons. Unpublished doctoral dissertation,

Auburn University, 1975.

205

Felty, J. E. Attitudes toward physical disability in Costa
Rica and their determinants: A pilot study. Unpub-
lished doctoral dissertation, Michigan State Univer-
sity, 1965.

 

Festinger, L. Informal social communication. Psychological
Review, 1950, 57, 271-282. '

Poa, U. G. Cross cultural similarity and difference in
inter-personal behavior. Journal of Abnormal and
Social Psychology, 1964, 67, 517-522.

 

 

Foa, U. G. New deve10pments in Facet design and analysis.
Psychological Review, 1965, 72(4), 262-274.

Foa, U. G. Three kinds of behavioral change. Psychological
Bulletin, 1968.

 

Foley, J. M. Effect of labeling and teacher behavior on
children's attitudes. American Journal of Mental
Deficiengy, 1979, 83(4), 380-384.

 

Force, D. G. Social status of physically handicapped chil-
dren. Exceptional Children, 1956, 23, 104-107, 132.

 

Friesen, E. W. Nature and determinants of attitudes toward
education and toward physically disabled persons in
Colombia, Peru, and the United States. Unpublished
doctoral dissertation, Michigan State University, 1966.

Gardner, P. L. Attitude measurement: A critique of some
recent research. Educational Research, February 1975,
17(2), 101-109.

 

Ghamdi, Ah, Mohammed. A study of selected factors related
student dropouts in the secondary schools of Saudi
Arabia. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Michigan
State University, 1977.

Goodman, N.; Dornbusch, S. M.; Richardson, S. A.; and
Hastorf, A. H. Varient reactions to physical dis-
abilities. American Sociological Review, June 1963,
28, 429-435.

 

Gottlieb, Jay. Attitudes of Norwegian and American children
toward mildly retarded children in special classes.
The Journal of Special Education, 1974, 8(4), 313-318.

Gottlieb, J.; Cohen, L.; and Goldstein, L. Social contact
and personal adjustment as variables relating to
attitudes toward educable mentally retarded children.
Training School Bulletin, 1974, 71(1), 9-16.

206

Gottlieb, J.; and Corman, L. Public attitudes toward men-
tally retarded children. American Journal of Mental
Deficiengy, 1975, 80(1), 72-80.

 

 

Gottlieb, K. A Guttman Facet analysis of attitudes toward
mental retardation in Colombia: Content, structure
and determinants. Unpublished doctoral dissertation,
Michigan State University, 1973.

Guttman, L. A structural theory for intergroup beliefs and
actions. American Sociological Review, 1959, 24,
318-328.

 

Guttman, L. Measurement as structural theory.
Psychometrika, 1971, 36, 329-347.

 

Guttman, L. The problem of attitude and opinion measure-
ment. In S. A. Stauffer (Ed.), Measurement and
Prediction. Princeton: Princeton University Press,
1950, 46-59.

 

 

Hamersma, R. J. Construction of an attitude-behavior
scale of Negroes and whites toward each other using
Guttman Facet design and analysis. Unpublished
doctoral dissertation, Michigan State University,
1969.

Harrelson, L. E. A Guttman Facet analysis of attitude
toward the mentally retarded in Federal Republic of
Germany: Content, structure and determinants.
Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Michigan State
University, 1970.

Hartlage, L. C. Factors affecting employer receptivity
toward the mentally retarded. American Journal of
Mental Deficiency, 1965, 70, 108-113.

 

 

Heater, W. H. Attitudes of Michigan clergymen toward
mental retardation and toward education. Unpub-
lished doctoral dissertation, Michigan State Uni-
versity, 1967.

Heath, E. In-service training: Preparing to meet today's
needs. Academic Therapy, 1974, 7, 267-280.

 

Herr, D. E.; Algozzine, R.; and Eaves, R. C. Modification
of biases held by teacher trainees toward the dis-
turbingness of child behaviors. The Journal of
Educational Research, 1976, 69, 261-264.

 

 

207

Hobday, Peter. Saudi Arabia Today: An Introduction to the
Richest Oil Power. New York: St. Martin's Press,
1978.

Holton, A. Susan. Not so different: Spatial and distancing
behavior of deaf adults. American Annals of the Deaf,
December 1978, 123, 920-924.

 

Horowitz, L. S., and Rees, N. S. Attitudes and information
about deafness. Volta Review, 1962, 64, 180-189.

 

Imamura, Sadako. Mother and Blind Child: The Influence of
Child-Rearing Practices on the Behavior of Preschool
Blind Children. New York: American Foundation for
the Blind, 1965.

 

 

Jacobson, E., and Schachter, S. (Eds.). Cross-national
research: A case study. Journal of Social Issues,
1954, 10(4).

 

Jaffe, J. Attitudes of adolescents toward the mentally
retarded. American Journal of Mental Deficiency,
1966, 70, 907-912.

 

Jaffe, J. "What is in a name"--Attitudes toward disabled

persons. Personnel and Guidance Journal, 1967, 45,
557-560.

 

Jane, R., and Hanks, L. M., Jr. The physically handicapped
in certain non-occidental societies. Journal of
Social Issues, 1948, 42, 11-20.

 

 

Jones, R. L. et 31. The social distance of the exceptional:
A study at the high school level. Exceptional
Children, 1966, 32, 551-556.

 

Jordan, J. E. Attitudes Toward Education and Physically
Disabled Persons in Eleven Nations. East Lansing:
Latin America Studies Center, Michigan State Univer-
sity, 1968.

 

 

Jordan, J. E. Attitude Behaviors Toward Mentally Retarded
Persons: A Cross-Cultural Analysis. Final Report.
U.S. Office of Education, Grant No. OEG-0-8-00126-
0197. Project No. 7_E-126, 1970.

 

Jordan, J. E. Attitude-behavior research on physical-
mental-social disability and racial-ethnic differ-
ences. Psychological Aspects of Disability, 1971,
18(1), 5-26.

Jordan, J. E. Attitude-behaviors toward educational change
in Latin America. Michigan State Univer31ty, 1975.

208

Jordan, J. E. Facet theory and the study of behavior. In
S. Shye (Ed.), Theory Construction and Data Analysis
in the Behavioral Sciences. San Francisco: Jossey-
Bass Publishers, 1978.

 

 

Jordan, J. E., and Friesen, E. W. Attitudes of rehabilita-
tion personnel toward physically disabled persons in
Colombia, Peru, and the United States. Journal of
Social Psychology, 1968, 74, 151-161.

 

 

Jordan, J. E., and Horn, H. The Facet theoretical approach
in attitude research: Method and results. 1973 (in
press).

Kelly, H.; Hastorf, A. H.; Jones, E. E.; Thibaut, J. W.;
and Usdane, W. M. Some implications of social psycho-
logical theory for research on the handicapped. In
L. H. Lofquist (Ed.), Psychological Research and
Rehabilitation. Washington, D.C.: American Psycho-
logical Association, 1960, pp. 172—204.

 

 

Kelman, H. Process of opinion change. Public Opinion
Quarterly, 1961, 25, 57-78.

 

Kennedy, P., and Bruininks, R. H. Social status of hearing
impaired children in regular classrooms. Exceptional
Children, February 1974, 40(43), 336-342.

 

Klineberg, O. Tensions Affecting International Understand-
ing. New York: Social Science Research Council,
Bulletin 62, 1950.

 

Krieder, P. A. The social-psychological nature and deter-
minants of attitudes toward education and toward
physically disabled persons in Belgium, Denmark,
England, France, the Netherlands, and Yugoslavia.
Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Michigan State
University, 1967.

Lacker, H. A House Built on Sand. London: Ithaca Press,
1978.

 

Lazar, Abl. A study of attitude change in special educa-
tion majors in three university training programs.
Paper presented at the annual international conven-
tion, Council for Exceptional Children, Chicago,
Illinois, April 4-9, 1976.

Long, E. David. Saudi Arabia. Beverly Hills: Sage Publi-
cation, 1976.

 

209

MacMillan, D.; Jones, R.; and Meyers, C. Mainstreaming the
mildly retarded: Some questions, cautions and guide-
lines. Mental Retardation, 1976, 14, 3-10.

 

McGuire, W. J. The nature of attitudes and attitude change.
In G. Lindzey and E. Aronson (Eds.), The Handbook of
Social Psychology, Vol. III. Reading, Massachusetts:
Addison-Wesley, 1967, pp. 136-314.

 

 

Meers, G. D. Development and Implementation of Program
Models for Assisting Vocational Teachers in Dealing
With the Educationally Disadvantaged, Handicapped,
and Minorities. Lincoln, Nebraska: University of
Nebraska--Lincoln, 1977.

 

 

 

 

Meighan, T. D. An Investigstion of the Self Concept of
Blind and Visually Handicapped Adolescents. New
York: American Foundation for the Blind, 1971.

 

 

Miller, R. V. Social status and socioempathic differences
among mentally superior, mentally typical and mentally
retarded children. Exceptional Children, 1956, 23,
114-119.

 

Ministry of Education Statistics. Riyadh, Saudi Arabia,
1979.

 

Mitchell, M. Teacher attitudes. High School Journal, 1976,
59, 302-312. ~—

 

Monbeck, M. E. The Meaning of Blindness: Attitude Toward
Blindness and Blind People. Bloomington: Indiana
University Press, 1973.

 

 

Morin, K. N. Attitudes of Texas-Americans toward mental
retardation: A Guttman Facet theory analysis. Unpub-
lished doctoral dissertation, Michigan State Univer-
sity, 1969.

Murphy, A. T. Attitudes of educators toward the visually
handicapped. Sight-Saving Review, Fall 1960, 30(3),
157-162.

 

Murphy, A. T.; Dickstein, J.; and Dripps, E. Acceptance,
rejection and the hearing handicapped. The Volta
Review, 1960, 62, 208-211.

 

Murray, C. A. Attitudes toward the physically disabled.
Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American
Sociological Association, San Francisco, California,
August 25-29, 1975.

210

Nikoloff, O. M. Attitudes of public school principals
toward the employment of teachers with certain dis-
abilities. Rehabilitation Literature, 1962, 23,
344-345.

 

Owens. A Heath text for 5th and 6th grades in Saudi Arabia
government schools. Unpublished doctoral disserta-
tion, Columbia University, 1962.

Payne, R., and Murray, C. J. Principals' attitudes toward
integration of the handicapped. Exceptional Children,
1974, 41, 123-125.

 

Phelps, W. R. Attitudes related to the employment of the
mentally retarded. American Journal of Mental
Deficiency, 1965, 69, 575-585.

 

 

Philby, St. J. H. B. Arabia. New York: Charles Scribner's
Sons, 1930.

Polansky, D. Beliefs and opinions concerning mental
deficiency. American Journal of Mental Deficiency,
1961, 66, 12-17.

 

Poulos, T. H. Attitudes toward the deaf: A Guttman Facet
theory analysis of their content, structure, and
determinants. Unpublished doctoral dissertation,
Michigan State University, 1970.

Renz, P. The social perception of normals toward their EMR
grade mates. American Journal of Mental Deficiengy,
1969, 74, 405-408.

Richardson, S. A.; Goodman, N.; Hastorf, A. H.; and Dorn-
busch, S. M. Cultural uniformity in reaction to
physical disabilities. American Sociological Review,
April 1961, 27, 241-247.

 

Rothschild, I. N. A comparison of cognitively and affec-
tively oriented in-service training programs in chang-
ing teacher attitudes toward the handicapped. Unpub-
lished doctoral dissertation, Columbia University,
1978.

Rugh, William. Emergence of a new middle class in Saudi
Arabia. Middle East Journal, Winter 1975, 2(1).

 

Rumford, H. P. An experiment in teaching elementary school
methods via closed circuit television. The Journal
of Educational Research, 1962, 56, 139-143.

 

211

Rustum, S. Ali. Saudi Arabia and Oil Diplomacy. New York:
Praeger Publishers, 1976.

 

Scott, W. A. Attitude measurement. In G. Lindzey and E.
Aronson (Eds.), The Handbook of Social Psychology.
Reading, Massachusetts: Addison-Wesley, 1969, Vol. II,
pp. 204-273.

 

Shaker, F. A. Modernization of the developing nations: A
case of Saudi Arabia. Unpublished doctoral disserta-
tion, Purdue University, 1972.

Sheare, J. Social acceptance of educable mentally retarded
adolescents in integrated programs. American Journal
of Mental Deficiengy, 1974, 78(6), 678-682.

 

 

Shears, Loyda M., and Jensema, Carl J. Social acceptability
of anomolous persons. Exceptional Children, 1969,
36, 91-96.

 

Show, M. E., and Wright, J. M. Scales for the Measurement
of Attitudes. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1967.

 

 

Siegel, E. Special education and human relations. The
Digest of the Mentally Retarded, 1966, 3, 12-14.

 

Sinai, Robert. Problems of transition to economic growth
and modernization in Middle Eastern societies. In
A. S. Russel (Ed.), OPEC and the Middle East: The
Impact of Oil on Societal Development. New York:
Praeger Publishers, 1977.

 

 

Smith, J. R., and Hurst, J. G. The relationship of motor
abilities and peer acceptance of mentally retarded
children. American Journal of Mental Deficiency,
1961, 66, 81-85.

 

Strong, E. K. Charge of Interest with Age. Stanford,
California: Stanford University Press, 1931.

 

Suchman, E. A. The comparative method in social research.
Rural Sociology, 1964, 29(2), 123-137.

 

Sully, J. The Human Mind. New York: D. Appleton, Vols. I
and II, 1892.

 

Triandis, H. C. Attitude and Attitude Change. New York:
John Wiley and Sons, 1971.

 

UNESCO. Opinion surveys in developing countries. Inter-
national Social Science Journal, 1963, 15(1).

212

UNESCO. Data in comparative research. International Social
Science Journal, 1964, 16(1).

Warren, S. A., and Turner, D. R. Attitudes of professionals

and students toward exceptional children. Training
School Bulletin, 1966, 62(4), 136-144.

Wasia, A. Education in Saudi Arabia. Riyadh Saudi Arabia,
1970.

Whiteman, M., and Lukoff, L. F. Public attitudes toward

blindness. The New Outlook for the Blind, May 1962,
56, 153-158.

Willey, N. R., and McCandless, B. R. Social stereotypes
for normal, educable mentally retarded and ortho-
pedically handicapped children. The Journal of
Special Education, 1973, 7(3), 282-288.

 

Wright, Beatrice A. Physical Disability . . . A Psycho-

logical Approach. New York: Harper and Brothers,
1960.