{I

32

‘1 J' '1 {’2 ', r "‘

mgsx>~ 3 1293 10646 3551 if Riga/é ”at

E,- E’Zc 22:23,? 52:2;
‘2 r3, . -

g Qfié?8?§iifi¥
a

This is to certify that the
dissertation entitled

EVALUATION OF A PROGRAM IN PREVENTIVE MENTAL
HEALTH: "BUILDING A COMPETENT SELF"

presented by
Janis K. Rosenberg

has been accepted towards fulfillment
of the requirements for

Ph.D. degreein Counseling Psychology

Major professor

Date November 27, 1984

 

MS U i: an Afl'irmatt've Action/Equal Opportunity Institution 0-12771

 

 

£32335.-

.3

$3333.:

 

MSU

 

Place in book

 

 

RETURNING MATERIALS:

drop to

remove this checkout from

 

 

LIBRARIES
“ your record. FINES will
be charged if book is
returned after the date
',_,r —-e stamped below.
I saw ' T‘
me «0‘; W ”12573::
W 000 “291
Mi. Ruin H '8819;
W
W ‘52?“ 30° ”W-
K203 ‘ “I ' -
r m
5-5 «:23 All“... 55
6 181

15“!!! . ’25:,

W

Iwon't!"
u

IfiE 19“““37 _
K239

 

 

25 K155

 

W
3 7 0315713

 

EVALUATION OF A PROGRAM IN PREVENTIVE MENTAL
HEALTH: "BUILDING A COMPETENT SELF"

BY

Janis K. Rosenberg

A DISSERTATION

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

DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY

Department of Counseling Psychology

1984

V K

ABSTRACT

EVALUATION OF A PROGRAM IN PREVENTIVE MENTAL
HEALTH: I'BUILDING A COMPETENT SELF"

BY

Janis K. Rosenberg

This study was designed to assess the impact of a pre-
ventive educational approach to teach positive mental health
skills. The study evaluates a program entitled "Building a
Competent Self" (BCS), a ten-week class offered at Michigan
State University. BCS offers a unique integration of affec-
tive, cognitive, and behavioral theories of positive mental
health with behavioral action strategies which aid in the
development of building a satisfying self-identity.

Fifty-six students participated in the study, twenty-
two of them enrolled in BCS and thirty-four enrolled in a
different class chosen as a control group. The design of the
study was a pretest-posttest quasi-experiment with a control
group selected for similar demographic attributes.

The variables of interest in the study were increased
ability to assume responsibility and personal power, as
measured by the Internal-External Locus of Control Scale
(IE, Rotter, 1966), and the ability to consciously differen-
tiate internal patterns of experience and change inner

dialogue, as measured by the Response to Situations Test

Janis K. Rosenberg
(RTS). This instrument was developed specifically to measure
the changes predicted to occur as a result of participation
in BCS. Frequency of use and perceived effectiveness of the
tools in building positive mental health, as measured by the
Evaluation Questionnaire, were also reported.

The results of the analyses performed using analysis of
covariance with pretests as a covariate showed that partic-
ipants in BCS demonstrated a significant increase in differ-
entiation of affects and in positive inner dialogue pat-
terns, when compared to participants in the control group.
No significant difference between treatment and control par-
ticipants was found for the locus of control variable.

The implications drawn from the results provide support
for the proposition that it is possible to enhance psycholog-
ical well-being using a preventive mental health model in an
educational setting.

Further research is needed to continue development of
the RTS instrument and to assess the changes that can be
expected from specific target populations as a result of

participation in programs like BCS.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

There are many individuals to whom I wish to offer my

appreciation for helping with this project.

To

To

To

To

To

To

Gersh, for your inspiration, encouragement and
patience.

John Powell, Richard Johnson, and Gary Stollak, for
your suggestions, direction, and support.

my parents, who had the foresight to encourage me in
the pursuit of my goals.

Bob, Jeff, and Jill, for your tolerance, understand-
ing, and love.

my raters, for your diligent participation in scor-
ing the RTS.

the students who participated in the study, and

allowed us to learn from them.

ii

II I.

II.

III.

IV.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION AND STATEMENT OF
Rationale for the Study . . .
The Need for Evaluation . . .
REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE . .
Prior Research . . . . . . .
Positive Mental Health . . .
Motivational Theory . . . . .

Locus of Control . . . . . .

THE

PROBLEM .

Building a Satisfying Relationship with the

Summary . . . . . . . . . . .

THE PROGRAM 0 O O O O O O O 0

Theoretical Underpinnings of the Program .

The Program . . . . . . . . .

Organization and Goals of the Program .

Principles of Positive Mental Health . .

Theory of Change . . . . .

Format . . . . . . . . . .
Conceptual Definitions . . .
Research Questions . . . . .
METHODOLOGY . . . . . . . . .
Purpose of the Study . . . .
Results of the Pilot Study .

iii

10
13
17
20
27

29

.29

37
38
40
41
42
44

46

'48

48
SO

VI.

iv
Discussion . . . . . . . . . .
Research Questions and Hypotheses
Operational Definitions . . .,. .

Measures 0 O O O O O O O O O O O

Internal-External Locus of Control

Reliability . . . . . . . .
Validity . .-. . . . . . .
Response to Situations Test (RTS)
Scoring Criteria for the RTS .
Training . . . . . . . . . . .
Rating the RTS . . . . . . . .
RTS Interrater Reliability . .
Participants . . . . . . . . . .
Procedures . . . . . . . . . . .
Research Design . . . . . . . . .
Analysis of the Data . . . . . .
Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . .
RESULTS . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Tests for Differences on Pretests
Rotter IE Hypothesis . . . . . .
RTS Hypotheses . . . . . . . . .
Evaluation Questionnaire Results
Supplementary Anecdotal Data . .
Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . .
SUMMARY AND IMPLICATIONS . . . .
Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Locus of Control . . . . . . .

51
52
54
58
58
60
60
61
62
65
67
67
7O
73
75
76
77
78
78
78
79
85
89
90
93
93
95

V

Measuring Inner Dialogue: The RTS‘ . . . . . .

Translating Concepts into Tools . . . . . . .

Implications O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 0

Limitations of the Study . . . . . . . . . . . .

Internal and External Validity Concerns . . .

Directions for Future Research . . . . . . . . .

Instrument Revision . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Evaluation Research of BCS with Special

APPENDICES

Appendix
Appendix
Appendix

Appendix

Appendix
Appendix
Appendix
Appendix

Appendix

A:

B:

C:

D:

I:

Target Groups . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

T0018 0 O O O O O O O C O O O O O O O O 0
Evaluation Form . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Evaluation Questionnaire . . . . . . . . .

Rotter Internal-External Locus of Control,
Rotter Scale (1966) . . . . . . . . . . .

Response to Situations Test (RTS) . . . .
RTS Scoring Manual . . . . . . . . . . . .
Information and Consent Forms . . . . . .
Pilot Study . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Feedback.Letter to Students . . . . . . .

LIST OF REFERENCES 0 O O O I O O O O O O O O O O O O C

96

98
100
105
108
109
109

110

113
117

118

123
126
147
161
165

167

170

LIST OF TABLES

TABLE 4.1 - RTS Interrater Reliability Study for
Pilot Testing Data . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69

TABLE 4.2 - RTS Interrater Reliability Study for
Actual Testing Data 0 O O I O O O O O I O 0 O 71

TABLE 4.3 - Demographic Composition of the Treatment
and Control Groups . . . . . . . . . . . . . 72

TABLE 5 O l - Means ' IE Scale 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 80
TABLE 5.2 - Analysis of Covariance, IE Scale . . . . . . 80
TABLE 5.3 - Percentage of Participants Increasing,
Decreasing, and Remaining Same of
ROtter IE 0 O I O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 80
TABLE 5.4 - Means, RTS Subscales . . . . . . . . . . . . 83
TABLE 5.5 - ANOVA; RTS Hypotheses . . . . . . . . . . . . 84

TABLE 5.6 - Means of Perceived Tool Effectiveness
and Frequency of Use . . . . . . . . . . . . 87

TSCS Means and Standard Deviation:

Table H1 -
PilOt Study 0 O O O I O O O O O O O O O 0 O O 165
TABLE H2 -

Internal-External Locus of Control . . . . . 166

vi

INTRODUCTION AND STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM

In recent years a number of mental health workshops and
programs have been developed for students' growth, adapta-
tion, or remediation of problems. Trends within the field of
mental health have changed from a preoccupation with path-
ology, or illness, to an acknowledgement of the need for
preventive programs to provide individuals with necessary
skills for living.

In recognition of this broader range of responsibility
by mental health professionals, a number of programs have
been formulated to address these needs. Although many Of
these preventive programs have been conducted using a
variety of approaches, there has been a paucity of evalua-
tion as to their efficacy (Cain, 1967; Cudney, 1970).

One such program is "Building a Competent Self" (or
BCS), an educational program in preventive mental health,
which is taught at Michigan State University. BCS is a two
credit class offered as a section of Student Leadership
Training through the College of Education, Department of
Education, Administration, and Curriculum. It has been
deve10ped and is taught by Dr. Gershen Kaufman, a clinical
psychologist at the M.S.U. Counseling Center, along with
Lev Raphael, a doctoral candidate in the Departments of
American Studies and Counseling Psychology.

1

2
This study evaluates the impact of BCS on students

during Spring Term, 1984.

Rationale for the Study

One of the central reasons for the present study was to
explore the question: Can preventive mental health skills be
taught in an educational setting?

Kaufman has designed a preventive mental health program
in an educational format, since he believes that psycho-
logical principles for mental health are learnable (Kaufman,
1983).

The role of the psychologist as educator has become
acceptable in professional circles. George Miller, in his
1965 presidential address to the American Psychological
Association, proposed that the task of the psychologist
should be "giving psychology away"--to give psychological
facts freely to those who need them (Sanford, 1955; Guerney,
Guerney, & Stollak, 1971). Psychologists must take steps to
share the wealth of knowledge about behavioral well-being
and teach personal and interpersonal skills. This is the
basis for Kaufman's program.

This change from the traditional medical model, that of
treatment of existing disorder, to an innovative educational
or preventive model, implies that the psychologist might be
better guided by learning theory than by the model followed
by medical professionals.

The practicing psychologist following an educa-
tional model is one whose work would derive di-

3

rectly or indirectly from a concern not with "cur-
ing neurosis," and not with eliminating symptoms
(or "complaints”), and not with intellectual
growth per se, but rather with the teaching of
interpersonEI skills which the individual can
apply to solve present and future psychological
problems and to enhance his satisfaction with life
(Guerney, Stollak, and Guerney, 1970).

Goldston (1977) defines primary prevention as a com-
bination of efforts to both prevent disturbance and to pro-

mote mental health:

Primary prevention encompasses those activities
directed to specifically identified vulnerable
high-risk groups within the community who have not
been labeled as psychiatrically ill and for whom
measures can be undertaken to avoid the onset of
emotional disturbance and/or to enhance their
level of positive mental health. Programs for the
promotion of mental health are primarily educa-
tional rather than clinical in conception and
operation with their ultimate goal being to
increase people's capacities for dealing with
crises and for taking steps to improve their own
lives (Klein and Goldston, 1976, p. 27).

Gerald Caplan, one of the founders of the Community
Mental Health movement, contends that preventive psychiatry
can be instrumental in ”improving nonspecific helping
resources in the community and in reducing those conditions
which we have some reason to believe are harmful” (Caplan,
1964, p. 30). Caplan's notion of reducing psychological dis-
orders seems to imply that healthy adaptation can be taught
to others, but he speaks more to the prevention of mental
illness, thus following the medical model. This emphasis on
learning how to avoid mental illness is different from

Kaufman's theory which emphasizes building skills for pos-

-4
itive mental health, as Opposed to learning to prevent ill-
ness.

Other preventive classes have aimed at teaching mental
health skills, including elimination of self-defeating
behaviors (Cudney, 1970), cognitive control (Ellis, 1977),
self-control methods (Mahoney, 1974), and affective aware-
ness (Malamud, 1965). There are also many stress-reduction
classes and life skills workshops.

BCS is exemplary of other preventive educational pro-
grams that purport to teach mental health skills. BCS com-
bines features of preventive mental health and building
skills for positive mental health. In addition, it seeks to
integrate cognitive, affective, and behavioral theories into
a unified approach which makes it unique. Therefore, evalua-
tion of the effectiveness of BCS can add to the evidence
supporting the practice of teaching mental health skills for

preventive purposes.

The Need for Evaluation

 

Colleges and university counseling centers throughout
the country sponsor mental health educational workshops as
an integral part of mental health programs. Some of these
workshops are preventive in nature, offered to specific
target groups vulnerable to emotional disturbance as a
measure to reduce the need for more expensive remedial
therapy. Others are skill-building workshops, which focus on

various concerns relevant to students.

5

Too often, however, the presenters of these programs
take for granted the positive effects of the experience. At
best, descriptive evaluations are collected. There have been
few studies actually measuring changes which result from
preventive programs that aim at teaching skills for positive
mental health (Cudney, 1970).

. . . a disappointingly large portion of preven-

tive projects--past, present, and planned, contain

no mechanisms whatsoever for evaluation of their

effectiveness. . . . Somehow the inherent value of

preventive efforts is presumed to carry the mat-

ter; if virtue is its own reward, preventive

efforts are their own justification (Cain, 1967,

pp. 641-2).

Although the need for evaluation studies in the area of
preventive mental health has been established (Novis &
Larsen, 1976), the literature in this area demonstrates that
there has been little response. Research in primary preven-
tion is not a financial priority (Van Antwerp, 1971), al-
though mental health educational programs are perceived as
essential (Broskowski & Baker, 1974).

The difficulty of evaluating mental health programs is
summarized by Bloom (1976):

We are generally asked to evaluate the outcome of

an undefined program having unspecified objectives

on an often vaguely delineated recipient group

whose level or variety of pathology is virtually

impossible to assess, either before or after their

exposure to the program (p. 51).

Also, efforts at evaluation of preventive programs have been

unreliable since they were "applied unsystematically to

small random pOpulations' (Klein, 1976, p. v).

6

Existing studies have dealt with different populations
and have utilized different theoretical bases than BCS. The
review of the literature disclosed evaluation studies of
classes that contained some elements of BCS, but none were
found that included the integration of concepts found in
BCS.

An evaluation study of BCS is unique in that the con-
tent of the program is original and the method for evalua-
tion has been tailored specifically to assess growth and
changes in inner dialogue, Kaufman's central methodology for
building personal competence and self-esteem. However, even
though BCS is a unique program, it is still an example of a
preventive mental health class. BCS contains features from
many theories and programs, and as such, one might predict
that participation in BCS would have a measurable impact on
students. Therefore, the need for a comprehensive evaluation
study of the effects of this program seems apparent; the
uniqueness and potential of this particular program demon-

strate even more strongly the importance of evaluation.

REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE

To enable the reader to understand the relevant litera-
ture in this area, an overview of pertinent concepts as they
apply to the program and to this evaluation study will be
presented. First a review of prior research of similar pro-
grams and evaluation studies will be described to show the
uniqueness of the present study. Second, a broader theoreti-
cal orientation for positive mental health and motivation
theory will be outlined to establish a context for this pro-
gram as it fits into a framework for positive mental health.
Third, the variables chosen for measurement will be de-
scribed, with an examination of the research on potential

for change in each of the variables.

Prior Research

 

A review of the literature yields information about
many preventive educational experiences which aim to enhance
self-esteem, build feelings of competence, and change locus
of control. Some are counseling techniques based on the
principles of Rational Emotive-Therapy (Ellis, 1977). Others
include Life Skills (Phillip, Himsl, & Martin, 1974; Katz,
1974), Skills for Living (Schlesinger, 1978), Human Develop-
ment Instruction (Baygood, 1974), self-control training
(Phelps, 1977), stress reduction (Barger, 1965), human rela-

.7

8
tions (Malamud, 1965), and psychosocial competence (Tyler,
1976). Therefore, it is important to delineate the charac-
teristics of BCS as differentiated from other classes of
this nature. The evaluation of prior classes will also be
reported where evaluation studies have been conducted.

One of the earliest classes to encourage increased
awareness and exploration of feelings was a Workshop on
Human Relations conducted by Daniel Malamud (Malamud, 1965).
This analytic workshop used films dealing with sensitive
subject areas as catalysts for students' exploration of
affect. Only self-report questionnaire evaluation was con-
ducted.

Stress-reduction classes are popular in most college
settings. One example is a preventive stress class conducted
at the University of Florida for freshmen and transfer stu-
dents (Barger, 1965). Evaluation of stress-reduction classes
is often descriptive or informal; a more rigorous example of
stress evaluation research was performed by William Griz
(1982) which compared the effects of cognitive, affective,
and cognitive-affective curricula in coping with stress. The
dependent variables reported were occurrence of stress-
related illness and coping ability, as measured by an
instrument similar to the RTS used in the present study. The
combined cognitive-affective approach was found to be the
most effective. Coping with stress is included within the
objectives of BCS, but is seen as a by-product of building a

satisfying inner relationship with the self.

9

There exist various self-esteem enhancement classes
which differ in their approaches. One example by Del Polito
(1973) concentrates on communication skills to enhance self-
concept. Using the Tennessee Self-Concept Scale and the
Index of Self-Concept as a Communicator, Del Polito measured
the effects of communication skill training on self-concept.
General self-concept and self-concept as a communicator were
not found to improve significantly.

Life Skills courses have been taught for the promotion
of self-esteem. Schlesinger (1978) used the Skills for Liv-
ing classes offered in high school settings to validate mea-
surement instruments on self-actualization, vocational
maturity, locus of control, and self-esteem. Another Life
Skills program targeted the economically disadvantaged and
focused on behavioral management techniques (Phillip, Himsl,
& Martin, 1974). No evaluation was reported for either
study.

Eliminating Self-Defeating Behaviors (ESDB) is a work-
shop developed by Cudney (1970) at Western Michigan Univer-
sity based on the theory that individuals learn inappropri-
ate behaviors to cope with anxiety or fear. The methods work
to reduce anxiety and, therefore, become self-reinforcing.
In the workshop, individuals realize that the behaviors are
self-defeating, and work through a seven-step process to
eliminate the unwanted behaviors (Parks, Becker, Chamber-
lain, & Crandell, 1975). This workshop, with specific tools,

is somewhat similar to the behavioral and cognitive elements

10
of BCS, but the essential differences between these two for-
mats is that BCS emphasizes building positive skills for
relating to the self, while ESDB teaches individuals to
eliminate negative behaviors.

There are other classes which aim to prevent stress,
enhance self-concept, and change locus of control. Although
the objectives and methods of BCS are unique, some compo-
nents of BCS are similar to other preventive educational
classes. Therefore, the proposed evaluation study will pro-
vide new insight into the effectiveness and potential of an
exemplary program in preventive education for mental health

skills.

Positive Mental Health

The importance of an approach to positive mental health
can be traced to the recommendations of the Joint Commission
on Mental Illness and Health in 1961, including a statement
by Jahoda (1958). Before this time, attention to competent
functioning had been largely ignored as a public health
issue. Because of the Community Mental Health movement, new
concepts in mental health stimulated action to more effec-q
tive interventions. Defining positive mental health became a
priority. .

Jahoda examined concepts of mental health and described
six criteria for mental health. They are:

1. attitudes of an individual toward his/her own self

2. growth, development, or self-actualization

11

3. integration

4. autonomy

5. perception of reality

6. environmental mastery (p. 23)

Jahoda's description of the first criterion, attitudes
toward the self, offers a framework for the theory of posi-
tive mental health in BCS. She includes four components
within this category: (1) accessibility to consciousness;
(2) correctness of self-concept; (3) self-acceptance; and
(4) a sense of identity (p. 25).

Accessibility to consciousness has been described as a
"self-determining attitude" by Mayman:

An intact sense of selfhood or self-determination

indicates a successful synthesis by the individual

of all that he has been and done, with all that he

wants to be and do, with all that he should and is

able to be and do, without his disowning any major
feelings, impulses, capacities or goals in the

interest of inner harmony (Jahoda, 1958, p. 25).

Mayman's description fits the hypothesis Kaufman es-
pouses, that one must be able to experience consciously and
own one's inner experiences to be able to maintain a measure
of personal integrity and control.

Jahoda also notes the importance of Allport's "self-
objectification":

That particular detachment of the mature person

when he surveys his own pretensions in relation to

his abilities, his present objectives in relation

to possible objectives for himself, his own equip-

ment in comparison with the equipment of others,

and his opinion of himself in relation to the
opinion of others (Jahoda, 1958, p. 26).

12
These qualities parallel the objective of differentiated
owning in BCS.

Correctness of self-concept is the ability to see one-
self objectively and to differentiate the real from the
ideal self. The phenomenological emphasis of BCS, where an
individual's feeling state is accepted as reality, does not
deal directly with the accuracy of self-perception, but does
include the construct of identifying the origins of negative
patterns of inner dialogue. For example, if an individual is
to perceive him/herself correctly, s/he must be able to
understand the causes of certain negative patterns, be able
to observe and detach from these inner states, and view
him/herself objectively.

Self-acceptance is the acceptance of the ”total self,
including shortcomings" (p. 26). Jahoda refers to Allport,
who purports that self-objectification leads to self-
acceptance. This goal is definitely included in BCS, within
the context of consciously owning one's internal states.

The last component is a sense of identity, "an integra-
tive attribute of the self . . . a global benevolent view of
the whole self, a positive feeling that pervades and inte-
grates all other aspects of the self-concept" (p. 26). This
concept is included in Kaufman's theory of a self-affirming

self-identity.

13

Motivational Theory

An examination of theories of motivation and self-
efficacy may offer a theoretical framework for the concepts
on which Kaufman bases his program. There is an increasing
emphasis on the sense of efficacy and control in the self-
concept literature. This is reflected in the amount of lit-
erature and programs in the self-help area.

Cooley, in 1902, was the first to discuss the impor-
tance of seeing oneself as a causal agent from infancy
(Harter, 1982). He asserted that

one's self-feeling was intimately bound up in the

exercise of power and one's sense of being a caus-

al agent. He placed the origins of this relation-

ship in infancy, citing the infant's earliest

attempts to control his or her limbs, playthings,

his bottle, as well as the later attempts to con-

trol the actions of the people in one's social

environment (p. 49).

White believed that the infant's striving could be
traced to an inherent drive for mastery. In 1959, in his
paper at the Nebraska Symposium on Motivation, White (1959)
expressed what he felt was a serious omission in the psycho-
logical theory of drive reduction, that being that "the
motivation needed to attain competence cannot be wholly
derived from sources of energy currently conceptualized as
drives or instincts" (p. 297). Through his study of the ex-
ploratory behavior of animals and humans, he discovered that
organisms seek stimulation because ”raised tension and even

mild excitement seem cherished . . . novelty and variety

seem to be enjoyed for their own sake" (p. 328).

14

He concluded that effectance motivation, or activities
which serve competence, are motivated "in their own right,"
which he designated as a feeling of ”efficacy,“ a sort of
satisfaction seeking with a "high adaptive value." Efficacy,
the feeling of doing something to influence the environment,
motivates competence, ”the organism's ability to interact
effectively with its environment” (p. 297).

Recent theorists have described the importance of com-
petence as a dimension in the evaluation of the self
(Bannister & Agnew, 1977; Brim, 1976). Bandura (1977)
describes a similar dimension which he calls self-efficacy,
the belief or expectation that one is competent, a facet of
self-evaluation that is central to self-concept. Bandura's
theory of self-efficacy exemplifies the social learning
theory of motivation as it applies to positive mental
health.

Self-efficacy is a future orientation based on past
learning experiences with family, peers, and teachers.
Bandura hypothesizes that the.

expectation of personal efficacy determines

whether coping behavior will be initiated, how

much effort will be expended, and how long it will

be sustained in the face of obstacles and aversive

experiences (Bandura, 1977, p. 191).

He differentiates between outcome and efficacy expectations.
An outcome expectation is the belief that a certain behavior
will result in a certain outcome. An efficacy expectation is

the ”conviction that one can successfully execute the behav-

ior required to produce the outcomes" (p. 193). Perception

15
of self-efficacy influences one's choice of behaviors and
the persistence of effort.

Bandura distinguishes perceived self-efficacy from
locus of control. Self-efficacy is determined by a ”causal
belief about action outcome contingencies,” or the belief
that outcome is determined or not determined by one's own
actions. The two phenomena are interrelated, in that locus
of control can affect the attainment of self-efficacy
(Bandura, 1977, p. 204). Harter adds that

self-efficacy is primarily concerned with judg-

ments about how well one can execute actions in

specific prospective or future situations, whereas

the locus of control construct typically refers to

a more generalized attribution of one's control

over outcomes, in the past, present, or future

(Harter, 1984, p. 336).

The extent to which self-effibacy perceptions can
change depends on accurate cognitive appraisal of behavior,
performance attainment, and internal locus of control.
Bandura identifies four sources of information on which
feelings of self-efficacy are based: (1) performance accom-
plishments, based on personal mastery experiences; (2)
vicarious experience--'seeing others perform threatening
activities without adverse consequences" (Bandura, p. 197);
(3) emotional arousal--reducing distress cues so as to
diminish avoidance behavior; and (4) verbal persuasion,
attempts to instill feelings of efficacy (p. 195). For each

source Bandura has developed various methods of facilitating

self-efficacy change. Methods include participant or live

16
modeling, performance desensitization, suggestion, self-
instruction, and relaxation.

A description of these behavioral change methods leads
one to question the view that competency evaluations and
locus of control are stable traits, resistant to change.
However, before examining the potential for change in each
variable to be examined in the present study, it will be
a useful to define each variable in the context of theory and
relevant literature and to describe the importance of each
variable to the goals of the program.

In the present study it was hypothesized that certain
variables related to the experience in BCS would change
because of the treatment program. These variables were locus
of control and the ability to build a satisfying relation-
ship with the self through consciously differentiating
affects and inner dialogue and through changing inner dia-
logue patterns. The variables were measured by the Internal-
External Locus of Control Scale (Rotter, 1966) and by an
instrument devised for assessing inner dialogue patterns,
entitled the Response to Situations Test.

In the present study, locus of control was chosen as a
variable because it was postulated that assuming personal
responsibility, seeing and making choices, and living from a
position of personal power ought to be reflected by perceiv-

ing locus of control as internal.

17
First, an examination of the locus of control con-
struct, included in Rotter's social learning theory, will be

presented.

Locus of Control

 

Locus of control refers to the attribution of causality
for events that happen in one's life. Those who have intern-
al locus of control feel that they are responsible for and
have the power to impact on life's events. Those with ex-
ternal locus of control believe outcomes happen because of
luck or fate, that impacting on outcomes is out of their
control (Maccoby, 1980). Locus of control is an important
dimension which partially determines self-esteem. Cooper-
smith (1967) suggests that the ability to perceive oneself

in control of events is a dimension of self-perception (p.
28). ”Children's motivation is intimately linked to the
amount of agency, the power to effect outcomes, that they
attribute to themselves" (p. 228). Maccoby believes, how-
ever, that having internal locus of control when one per-
ceives oneself to cause failure is not necessarily conducive
to mental health.

Harter describes a modification of attribution theory
which offers a different twist: "Beneffectance is the 'ten-
dency to take credit for success while denying responsibil-
ity for failure'" (Harter, 1982, p. 52). Greenwald (1980)
introduced this modified version of locus of control as a

means to protect the self from self-blame for failure. ”The.

18
particular term 'beneffectance' was derived by Greenwald
from a combination of benefficience (achieving desirable
outcomes) and effectance (White, 1959), namely the motiva-
tion to act competently" (Harter, 1982, p. 52). Greenwald
has collected evidence supporting the existence of this ten-
dency in adults. Harter has studied this tendency in child-
ren and finds that it is "particularly adaptive within the
scholastic domain" (p. 65). However, since no measurement
instruments exist to identify beneffectance, the present
study has examined locus of Control, the variable most
closely related to the objective of assuming responsibility
and personal power.

Since it has been hypothesized that locus of control
can be changed by treatment, it is necessary to examine the
literature in relation to facilitation of change of locus of
control. Harter conceives of locus of control as a dynamic
process, as opposed to the stable trait quality associated
with self-esteem (Harter, 1984, p. 335). Joe contends that.
locus of control could become more internal if ”new goals
could be cognitively linked to old successes“ (Joe, 1971, p.
633). Although the evidence is meager, Joe contends that
facilitation of change in locus of control is possible in
light of studies of behavioral change (p. 634).

MacDonald (1972) describes three programs which have
been successful in changing locus of control. Reimanis and
Schafer's counseling technique (1970) used in group and

individual settings, is devised to help the client see that

19

s/he has "some power to effect change" (MacDonald, 1972, p.
43). The method includes

(a) Challenging or confronting "external state-

ments" with "internal statements.” With each con-

frontation the counselor or therapist attempts to

replace an external control statement or thought

made by the subject with an internal one.

(b) Rewarding internal statements.

(c) Getting the subject to recognize and focus
upon the contingencies of his behavior (p. 45).

In a comparative experiment, Dua (1970) contrasted two
program formats for increasing internal locus of control,
one a behavior change program, and the other an attitudinal
change treatment. The clients in the "action program group"
developed specific behaviors that would lead to improvements
in relationships. The "re-education group” participants
focused on cognitive attitudinal changes. Both were eight-
week programs. Only the behavioral program showed statisti-
cally significant change in locus of control (MacDonald,
1972, p. 46).

A third method reported by MacDonald involves a combin-
ation of behavioral and cognitive techniques, where the
client is taught to change attitudes about a particular be-
havior. This is called the 'reconstrual method” and was de-
vised by Masters (1970). This method teaches the individual
to construe his/her behavior in a new light. The client is
encouraged to alter his/her perceptions of behaviors, with-
out changing the behavior per se. No evaluation studies were

reported.

   

20

Other research supporting enduring change in the direc-
tion of internal locus of control is reported by Gottesfeld
and Dozier (1966) and Levens (1968).

MacDonald suggests the need for more research on
”change-technics,” and recommends a synthesis of the ap-
proaches described.

Thus, the literature provides support for locus of con-
trol change. In the next section, theoretical andresearch
evidence will be presented to support changing one's rela-

tionship with the self.

Building a Satisfying Relationship with the Self

The second variable to be examined in the literature
deals with the objective concerned with building a satisfy-
ing, self-affirming relationship with the self through the
ability to consciously differentiate affects and their asso-
ciated inner dialogue patterns and to change inner dialogue
patterns. Definitions of these terms can be found in the
section on "Definitions," in Part III. The review will focus
on the concept of conscious experiencing of inner patterns
and on the importance of naming the feeling associated with
the pattern. Finally, theories of changing inner dialogue
will be presented, along with research evidence that inner
dialogue patterns can, in fact, be changed.

Gendlin defines experiencing as a "process of concrete,

ongoing events . . . a felt process, inwardly sensed, bodily

21
felt . . . the concrete stuff of personality or of psycho-
logical events" (Gendlin, 1964, p. 112). He believes that
only while experiencing inner events, or "direct referents,"
within a personal relationship can an individual become
aware of and change the contents of personality (pp. 112-
113).

He views experiential focusing as an "essential sub-
process” in psychotherapy (Gendlin, 1969, p. 4). Focusing is
the bodily felt sense of one's feeling or concern, without
the verbal or intellectual experience. Clients in therapy
are instructed on focusing in order to get in touch with the
bodily felt-sense of internal experience. Gendlin likens
experiential focusing to systematic desensitization in the
physical shift that occurs when one deals with a troublesome
image (p. 9).

This definition of experiential focusing differs from
Kaufman's view of experiencing, which includes the combina-
tion of these processes: differentiated owning, inner de-
‘tachment, self-observation and imagery. Differentiated
owning encompasses the ability to experience, name, and own
all the distinctly different parts within the self.

Owning means that a particular inner event, say a

feeling or need, is experienced consciously. Then

it is recognized and named accurately. Finally, it

is owned as an inherent part of the self. Owning

is the pathway toward integration of the self

(Kaufman, 1983b, p. 51).

Owning results from experiencing consciously and accurately

labeling inner states. Detachment and self-observation are

two additional dimensions of consciousness. Detachment

V

‘II

m_.‘Lm~

 

22
refers to "learning to step back from a particular feeling
or situation in order to observe it consciously and then let

go of it" (p. 69). Self-observation involves "learning to

 

hold a part of the self back inside as a friendly observer.
This enables us to experience events fully while simultan—
eously observing upon our experience” (p. 78). Imagery is
the last process dimension conceptualized under the rubric
of consciousness.

Kaufman emphasizes the development of a language of the
self to provide us with tools to master our inner life.

In conferring a name to a particular inner event,

whether it be a feeling, need, or drive, the lin-

guistic symbol provides a measure of self-under-

standing (p. 51).

Language provides a tool for understanding inner states
so that one can create and master the components of a con-
scious self. Both processes interact, since,

We need a coherent image of the self as an evolving

process in order to create an accurate language of

the self” (p. 13).

Bandler and Grinder (1975) theorize that the internal
linguistic representational system is a central cognitive
process. Language usage, or the representational system, is
the key in building either an adaptive model of the world or
an atrophied model. The process which underlies the ability
to build an adaptive model is based on the ability to manip-
ulate symbols. Bandler and Grinder define transformational

principles which are mechanisms to learn to build positive

models through changing one's personal mode of representa-

23
tion and communication (Bandler & Grinder, 1975). For these
'theorists, language is a map which guides behavior.
When people come to us in therapy expressing pain
and dissatisfaction, the limitations that they

experience are typically their representation of
the world, not the world itself (p. 179).

 

This emphasis on cognitive informational processing is
a definite component of BCS and guides Kaufman's theory of
”finding a language of the self." For Kaufman, however, the
Concept of inner dialogue is a combination of affect, imag-
ery, and language. His unique integration of existing theor-
ies includes the concept of cognitive or linguistic repre-
sentational systems, but not to the exclusion of affect,
cognitions, and imagery.

A theory which somewhat resembles Kaufman's concept of
inner dialogue is that of the cognitive behaviorists, not-
ably Ellis and Beck, who will be discussed in light of their
conceptualizations of self-observation and self-talk. Evalu-
ation studies which support changes in self-talk, using cog-
nitive-behavioral methods will be reported. Finally,
Tomkins' script theory will be examined in order to build an
understanding of the affective component of inner dialogue.

The concept of inner dialogue contains some of the same
components as Ellis' irrational beliefs and Beck's automatic
thought patterns. These patterns are distortions caused by
the individual's unrealistic or irrational thoughts. Ellis
and Beck conceptualize the cognitive process as follows:

A--an activating event causes one to have

B--an irrational belief, which then causes

C--a negative consequence, such as anxiety
(Ellis, 1977).

24

Beck identified maladaptive belief patterns, which are
common to depression, called the ”cognitive triad":

1. Events are interpreted negatively

2. The individual dislikes himself/herself

3. The future is appraised negatively

(Rimm and Masters, 1979, p. 405).

Both Beck and Ellis reject the unconscious component of
thought processes. This is a basic difference from Kaufman's
inner dialogue, where thought patterns are seen as a product
of unconscious identifications with significant others.
These patterns must be made conscious and labeled before one
can change them.

For Ellis, change occurs from detecting and challenging
negative or irrational thoughts. The therapist determines
I precipitating external events, specific underlying beliefs,
and then helps the client to change these beliefs (p. 382).

Rational Emotive Therapy has been used with some suc-
cess when combined with behavioral techniques, such as de-
sensitization and relaxation (p. 395). Rimm and Masters
report that the empirical support for using this form of
therapy is ”hardly overwhelming . . . In terms of applica-
tion, the literature is vast and abounds with enthusiasm,
but in terms of sound empirical support, there is much to be
desired" (p. 396).

Beck's method of treatment aims at thought or belief
modification. After activity scheduling and mood elevation

behaviors are instituted for depressed clients, Beck focuses

treatment on recording automatic thoughts. The therapist

25
points out the self-defeating nature of the beliefs and the
client practices distancing him/herself: "dealing with such
thoughts objectively, evaluating them rather than blindly
accepting them” (p. 406). This concept is similar to Kauf-
man's detachment and self-observation. For Beck, homework
assignments direct clients to write down self-defeating
thoughts and then to invent a thought that counters the neg-
ative one. This highly structured technique is quite direc-
tive. For Kaufman, homework assignments are used to help
students first observe and then record their self-critical,
blaming and devaluing dialogue patterns. Next, they're asked
to construct a positive dialogue to replace the negative
one.

Most of the research on Beck's method of changing cog-
nitions deals with clients who are depressed. Many studies
have used the Beck Depression Inventory (Beck, 1967) to mea-
sure changes related to cognitions concerning hopelessness
and depression. Rimm and Masters report encouraging empir-
ical support for Beck's methods (Taylor & Marshall, 1977;
Weintraub, Segal, & Beck, 1974).

Meichenbaum (1977) offers a type of cognitive treatment
different from Ellis and Beck. Instead of changing negative
I self-statements, Meichenbaum is concerned with ”teaching
patterns of implicit verbalization that will facilitate the
self-control of overt verbal and motor behavior" (Rimm &

Masters, 1979, p. 410).

26

Influenced by Luria's discovery of covert self-speech,
or one's internal messages to oneself, Meichenbaum points
out the importance of self-speech in controlling one's be—
havior. His self-instructional training has been helpful in
enabling impulsive clients to modify negative behaviors (p.
412).

A review of cognitive-behaviorists demonstrates the
cognitive dimension of Kaufman's theory of inner dialogue.
This also supports the hypothesis that one can change one's
inner dialogue, at least cognitively.

To understand the affective component of Kaufman's con-
cept of inner dialogue, it is important to examine Tomkins'
contributions.

The unconscious affective component of inner dialogue
is based to some extent on Tomkins' affect theory (1963) and
script theory (1978). Tomkins describes scripts as the rules
for predicting, interpreting, or controlling critical scenes
which are encoded in memory and which have become fused with
affect. A scene is the ”basic element in life as it is
lived. The simplest, most primitive scene includes at least
one affect and at least one object of that affect" (p. 211).
Affects are fused with the earliest and most significant
scenes in one's life, so that one's life experience is
formed by important scenes that have occurred throughout
one's life. These scenes act to filter or color one's exper-
ience of the world, not just amplifying past experiences,

but also future responses which are prompted by affects.

27

Kaufman contends that scenes are instrumental in formu-
lating later patterns of inner dialogue. Kaufman was influ-
enced by Tomkins' emphasis on innate affect, with conscious-
ness as a determinant of behaviors and cognitions. For
Tomkins and Kaufman, "the primary motivational system is the
affective system and the biological drives have motivational
impact only when amplified by the affective system"
(Tomkins, 1962, p. 2). Tomkins believes that imagery created
by the organism is what is consciously perceived. He posits
the need for psychologists to study the role of conscious-
ness--"the conditions under which messages become conscious,
and the role of consciousness as a part of a feedback mech-
anism” (p. 4).

Kaufman uses Tomkins' discoveries in his notion of con-
sciously experiencing inner dialogue. He feels that one can
increase conscious awareness or experiencing of inner states
through the mechanisms of retrieving those original scenes
by means of imagery, and recontacting one's inner child.
These tools can be helpful in consciously experiencing, nam-
ing, and owning one's inner dialogues, as well as in observ-

ing and differentiating other internal patterns.

Summary

The various approaches described in the review deal
with some of the components of the inner dialogue construct.
The review of the literature has presented a theoretical

framework which serves as a basis for an evaluation study of

28

a program which teaches skills in positive mental health. By
defining positive mental health as a context for BCS, and by
outlining the various theoretical orientations which have
contributed to Kaufman's program, one can see the premises
for the present study.

In the next section, the theoretical underpinnings of
BCS and the program itself will be described, including
objectives and curriculum. A summary of results of a pilot

study conducted in Fall Term, 1983 will be presented.

THE PROGRAM

In the following section, the experimental treatment
will be described in detail, with theory, curriculum, and

objectives of BCS.

Theoretical Underpinnings of the Program

To understand the theoretical formulation of "Building
a Competent Self,” we must first understand the evolution of
Kaufman's theory. Kaufman has synthesized and integrated a
theory of competence and positive mental health. Influenced
by Bill Kell's developmental perspective and Silvan Tomkins'
affect theory, Kaufman

conceives of the self as a developmental process

involving movement from global undifferentiation

toward increasing differentiation and integration.

The develOpmental process embraces phases as well

as tasks which are both interpersonal and inter-

nal. The image of the self is an evolving integra-

tion (1983d).
Kell's phenomenological perspective was another important
influence. Kaufman argues for

a return to accurate observation of the inner ex-

perience of the self in order to attach names to

inner states which keep close to the ground of

being. Concepts must be grounded in actual exper-

ience. The inner experience of the self must re-

main the test of our ideas (Kaufman, 1983d).

Kaufman's theory of competence and his broader concep-
tion of health have evolved from a theory of how the self
develops, actually functions, and changes into a conscious

29

30
integrated self. It is in this theory that the program is
rooted.

Kaufman sees two interrelated processes in the develop-
ment of the self: one is the internal process of the self,
the basis for the present study; the other is the interper-
sonal process which is taught in a companion class developed
by Kaufman and Raphael.

To learn about the internal process of the self, one
must learn a language of the self, accurate labels from
which an image of the self evolves into a fully conscious
self-identity.

Before examining the actual components of the self, the
theoretical evolution of Kaufman's concepts will be traced.
Kaufman began his study of the self by examining the impact
of shame on self-identity, especially as experienced in
childhood and adolescence. He describes shame as the affect
at the root of many disturbing inner states, including lone-
liness, worthlessness, and depression.

Kaufman discovered, through his clinical experiences as
a psychotherapist, that the effects of shame can be reversed
and that developmental tasks that were not completed in
childhood can be mastered in therapy. The tasks include re-
storing feelings of relatedness, exposing the self to an
accepting and validating significant other, and re-owning
the denied parts of the self. As the client resolves shame

dynamics and develops a language of the self, s/he comes to

31
understand his/her motivations and evolves a conscious self-
identity.

Kaufman's study of shame led him to investigate the
phenomenon of personal power. He contends that people are
not taught how to have feelings of self-worth, power, or
competence. If anything, one is taught not to own one's
power, competence, or adequacy. For Kaufman, shame and
powerlessness are two different phenomena; however, there is
a dynamic link between these two experiences. Shame is a
primary affect, while power offers a positive motive to
defend against shame.

Shame stretches differently into the human soul
than feeling helpless or powerless does. We must
find a way to understand these central motivations
and integrate them into a coherent image of the
self as an evolving process.

I was convinced that a profound sense of shame was
one of the sources for excessive power-seeking,
that being an attempt to compensate for the inner
deficiency of shame, as well as defend against
further shame, by striving for power as a way of
life. Yet power as a strategy of living held other
promises. Power-seeking could be kept more malle-
able, less rigidly relied upon, and held within
the bounds of guiding values. As one example,
instead of striving for power over others, one
might instead stOp at obtaining equal power in
relation to others. In this latter sense, power
offered a most promising stance that protected the
self positively against shame, while enabling the
self to remain open, flexible, and adaptive in
living life (Kaufman, 1980, pp. ix and x).

Kaufman began to wonder whether individuals could be
taught that power offered possibilities for freeing the self
from shame. He further wondered whether people could be
taught to live from a position of personal power. These were

the questions which led to the creation of the program.

32

To understand where power fits in as a basic human need
within the larger context of Kaufman's theory, one must
first examine Kaufman's view of the functioning of the self
as an evolving integration.

Kaufman describes the internal process of the self as
comprising certain steps which lead to the attainment of an
integrated self. The internal process includes 1) motiva-
tional systems, 2) dimensions of consciousness, 3) identity
or the self's relationship with the self, and 4) develop-
mental phases. The motivational systems of the self comprise
affects, needs, drives, and values. These four systems are
interrelated and provide a language to more accurately
describe the human experience. By labeling inner experience
with these four systems, Kaufman asserts that one can feel a
sense of control over the sometimes diffuse nature of inner
states.

Kaufman begins his formulation by drawing from Tomkins'
differentiation of the affect system, in which eight primary
affects are identified. There are positive affects:
interest-excitement, and enjoyment-joy; the resetting_
affect: surprise-startle; and negative affects: distress-
anguish, fear-terror, shame-humiliation, contempt-disgust,
and anger-rage. Tomkins believes that affect is the primary
innate biological motivating mechanism (Tomkins, 1978, p.
201). Kaufman contends that one must have "conscious access
to the entire range of primary affects . . . by the self to

the self“ (Kaufman, 1983b, p. 53). Learning to differenti—

33
ate, label, and be consciously aware of the different
affects enables one to create a language of the self.

Kaufman adds three additional motivational systems to
Tomkins' affect system. They are needs, drives, and values.

The need system includes the following:

1. The need for relationship, present since birth,
represents the need to be understood and loved for oneself.

2. The need for touching and holding which has been
demonstrated by the work of researchers such as Harry Harlow
and Ashley Montagu.

3. The need for identification which manifests ini-
tially through observational learning or modeling and is
experienced as a sense of merging, bridging the separateness
of existence. Fulfilling this need can establish a feeling
of connectedness or belongingness.

4. The need for differentiation, or separation-
individuation. This describes the task of forming a separate
identity from parents and significant others. An increasing
sense of competence accompanies and is aided by this
process.

5. The need to nurture: the basic need to give is not
purely altruistic, but based on a need which one strives to
satisfy.

6. The need for affirmation: through having signif-
icant others who affirm, one learns to value one's inner

self.

34

7. The need for power--"a need to feel in charge of
our own lives . . . a central human need which is not always
interpersonally directed” (p. 59). Power is similar to and
includes the striving for mastery or gaining competence.

Power is a vital human need which must be recog-

nized, acknowledged, and responded to positively

by parents, by teachers, and especially by our-

selves. We must learn how to build power into our

lives as well as maintain power in relation to

others. We must also learn how to take back the

power in numerous situations encountered in the

natural course of living in which we are rendered

powerless (p. 60).

Kaufman contends that power is a need born from the
condition of powerlessness of the human infant. "We are psy-
chologically motivated by a need for power in our lives, a
need to feel a measure of personal control" (p. 16). Kaufman
describes the importance of power as a part of physical, as
well as mental health, since research has shown that exper-
iences of powerlessness can be linked to the breakdown of
the body's immune system (p. 60).

The third major motivational system of the self is the_
drive system. Kaufman believes, as does Tomkins, that phys-
iological drives are not isolated, but become "fused with
affects” (p. 61). For example, sexuality can become fused
with excitement and enjoyment, or else with shame and dis-
gust. Tomkins states that affect is primary; drives require
affect to be fused with them so that the drive can be ampli-

fied. Therefore, the drive system becomes imbedded in the

self-system through fusion with affect.

35

The fourth part of the motivational system of the self
is the value system. Values are conscious purposes, the
”goals which pull us through life, the central goals for
which we live" (p. 62). Kaufman stresses the future orienta-
tion of values and purposes; these give meaning and direc-
tion to life. He credits Viktor Frankl and Alfred Adler for
their differentiation of the value system.

The second major process of the self involves dimen-
sions of consciousness. This includes differentiated owning,
detachment, self-observation, and imagery. The process of
living consciously develops through the ability which
Kaufman calls ”differentiated owning,” which describes the
act of experiencing, consciously identifying, and then own-
ing feelings and needs as inherent parts of the self. Inner
detachment and self-observation are two processes which
enable the self to step away from overwhelming emotions by
holding back a part of the self as a friendly observer. If
one can observe parts of the self with inner detachment, one
can develop a new "conscious center, which then can inte-
grate all of the remaining parts of the self around it" (p.
85).

Imagery is another useful tool to bridge from the outer
to the inner world of the self, thus increasing awareness of
the conscious self. Imagery has many uses, including detach-
ment and getting in touch with primary scenes or fantasies

from childhood. Kaufman agrees with Tomkins who believes

36
that the scenes which we imagine are the principal motiva-
tors for our behavior in life.

The third major process of the self is the formation of
self-identity. This is the primary goal of the program:
building a satisfying relationship with the self, which is
essential to maintaining feelings of worth and security.
Kaufman feels that the methods for developing a positive
relationship with the self lie in awareness and change of
inner dialogue, or the manner in which one behaves toward

oneself. One must move away from comparison-making, self-

 

contempt and self-blame toward a position of self-respect,
forgiveness, and valuing. Through self-affirmation and self-
nurturance, one can build the foundations of a secure, ac—
cepting inner self.

The fourth internal process of the self involves the
negotiation of developmental phases, including the task of
”integrating . . . earlier phases of the self into a unified
whole.“

We need to consciously recognize when we are re-

acting from a young level and we need to nurture

that child within us when it has surfaced. . . .

We must experience and consciously integrate the

child-self in order to restore security (p. 43).

Kaufman includes as a tool within the program recon-
tacting one's inner child through imagery.

The foregoing concepts provide a "language of the
self," accurate labels for inner experience. Kaufman has

translated this language into learnable tools which enhance

the ability to live consciously. These tools can help one

37

become more conscious of the basic parts of the self-system
and learn to differentiate, label and feel a sense of con-
trol over one's needs, affects, drives, and values.

Following the naming of feelings, needs, etc.,

comes owning each as an inherent part of the self.

.All feelings are valid. They are not to be ques-

tioned, criticized, or judged. Feelings are not

good or bad, they just are. Likewise, all of our

human needs are valid, and must be experienced,

named, and finally owned as natural parts of the

self (p. 65).

To summarize, Kaufman's theory of the process of the
self is one that can lend itself to translation into learn-
able tools. If the task of learning a language of the self

can be mastered, one can build a conscious self which can

evolve into an integrated self-identity.

The Program

"Building a Competent Self" is a ten-week course of-
fered in the School of Education, Department of Administra-
tion and Curriculum at Michigan State University. This class
can be taken for two hours of undergraduate credit. Dr.
Gershen Kaufman, a clinical psychologist at the M.S.U. Coun-
seling Center, designed the class originally as a workshop
and taught it first through the M.S.U. Evening College and
later through the Counseling Center. It was offered as a
noncredit course entitled "Reality Coping Workshop." Kaufman
and Lev Raphael, an educator and doctoral candidate in
American Studies and Counseling Psychology, have been co-
developing and coteaching the class as a special section of

EAC 415, a course in Student Leadership Training comprising

38

several different sections, each with a special focus. While
their class does not follow the traditional leadership for-
mat, it is a useful experience in leadership training since
it focuses more broadly on building personal competence.
Kaufman and Raphael have recently coauthored a book, The
Dynamics of Power: Building a Competent Self (1983b) based
on their program.

"Building a Competent Self" is a pass/fail grade course
and attracts a population consisting of undergraduate stu-
dents, although some graduate students and M.S.U. staff have
participated. There are typically between fifteen and

twenty-five students enrolled in the class.

Organization and Goals of the Program

The program is organized into three sections: (1) psy-
chology of competence, where the central concepts of respon-
sibility, choice, power, and living consciously are ex-
plained; (2) building a positive self-identity, by changing
inner dialogue; and (3) learning to live consciously, which
encompasses the skills of owning, detachment, self-
observation, and imagery, including methods to become aware
of and label inner feelings, needs, values, and drives.

The primary goal of the program is building a competent
self-~"feeling an inner sense of competence and power by
building a satisfying relationship with oneself” (Kaufman,
1983c). This goal is operationalized in the objective which

measures the ability to experience and name inner states, to

39
observe and detach from them, and finally, to replace nega-
tive inner dialogue patterns with self-affirming ones.
Kaufman (1984a) believes that personal growth hinges on a
personal sense of competence which emerges from translating
the four pivotal principles--responsibility, choice, power,
and living consciously--into action strategies.

Kaufman contends that the ability to learn and use the
tools is an important consideration in evaluating actual
internal changes.

This goal is stated in the objectives which include use
and effectiveness of the tools, a decrease in feelings of
perceived personal powerlessness, and an increase in the
ability to assume personal responsibility and power. These
four principles are the foundations from which the program's
objectives were formulated.

The primary objective as stated in the course descrip-
tion is:

To develOp a framework for building a conscious

and competent self, for seeing reality, and for

matching expectations to the reality of various

life situations. The four key working concepts are

responsibility, choice, power, and living con-

sciously. Competence-building is fostered through
seeing and making choices, living consciously, and
developing personal power (Kaufman, 1983a).
Kaufman further elaborates the four central concepts into
principles of positive mental health. These are the premises

on which the objectives are based. The principles give a

broader view of the focus of the class.

40

Principles of Positive Mental Health

 

1.

2.

10.

11.

12.

We have a choice over how we feel, react, and
perceive our lives.

We must learn not to give others the power to
decide our worth.

We must learn to affirm ourselves from with-
in, independent of outside evaluations.

We must never question our worth as human
beings.

We must learn to stop comparing ourselves
with others and to value our uniqueness.

We must learn not to attach our worth to
external events in the world.

We must learn to invest ourselves only in
those events over which we have control.

We must learn to accept reality and not have
unrealistic expectations, as for example,
that we must have total happiness.

We must learn that we alone are responsible
for our happiness.

We must learn to detect situations in which
we may become powerless and learn to take
back power, either by changing our attitude,
by changing our expectation, or by detaching
from the situation.

We must learn to maintain equal power in
relationships.

We must learn how to build supportive
'security relationships' (Kaufman, 1983b, pp.
29-49).

The content of the class is "building self-esteem and

inner security, naming and owning of feelings and needs,

discovering values, accurately seeing the reality of various

life situations, and coping with stress" (Kaufman, 1983a).

A major focus of the program is the discovery of inner

dialogue with the primary goal of detaching and changing

41
negative inner dialogue by using positive behavioral action
tools. The tools include methods for collecting self-esteem
and building feelings of personal competence, such as col-
lecting happiness and adequacy lists. Tools for building a
satisfying inner relationship with the self include becoming
conscious of and changing inner dialogue, cultivating ways
to self-nurture, and talking to one's inner child through
imagery. Learning to live consciously is promoted by consul-
tation with self, meditation, bubble meditation, imagery,
refocusing attention, self-observation, and clarification of
values and expectation. (A more complete description of the

tools can be found in Appendix A.)

Theory of Change

.Kaufman believes that change occurs as a result of
learning the tools and principles presented in BCS. Changes
in feelings of competency, personal power, and self-esteem
come about as a result of exposure to the theory, tools, and
concepts in the program.

Kaufman contends that internal changes occur in a
sequential, progressive pattern. As one increases the
ability to differentiate one's feeling world, one becomes
more aware of typical inner dialogue patterns, or the ways
in which one interacts with the self. As awareness of
affects and inner dialogue patterns increase, one is more
.able to change inner dialogue patterns by increasing

positive and decreasing negative inner dialogues.

42

There are three sequential stages that one might expect
to occur as a result of participating in BCS. The first is
increased differentiation of affect, which might increase
awareness of inner states, even negative ones. The second is
increased differentiation of one's typical inner patterns.
The third is an actual change in inner dialogue patterns,
with more positive patterns and less negative inner dialogue

patterns.

Format

The course combines lecture, discussion, and group
interaction. The tools are presented sequentially in short
didactic explanations. In teaching the class, Kaufman and
Raphael explain the theory, purpose, and structure of the
tools, giving personal examples of how the tools have worked
for them. Both instructors encourage class members to share
their experiences with the tools, including problems they
may have in mastering them.

Kaufman designed the course to function as an educa-
tional class, rather than as a therapy group. Students are
not necessarily expected to self-disclose, although some
class members will offer personal experiences as they apply
within the context of the concepts being taught.

Kaufman attempts to integrate the theory of self-esteem
with the tools, so that students do not just learn about
self-esteem, they "learn to £2 self-esteem" (Kaufman, 1983b,

p. 31). Kaufman and Raphael require participants to practice

43
the tools for the week following their presentation, since
they believe behavior change must be practiced to be mas-
tered. They stress that students may find just a few tools
at the time of the class that they can utilize to change
their feelings about themselves; they can learn which tools
best fit their needs and choose accordingly. The instructors
encourage students to change or combine tools to suit their
needs.

Each class begins with a discussion of students' exper-
iences with the tool being practiced that week. ”Discussion
centers around individual reactions to the tools, successes,
or difficulties encountered, discoveries about self, unique
applications, and personal usefulness of the tool in promot-
ing positive mental health" (p. 3).

Kaufman and Raphael present many of their own personal
experiences using the tools, since they believe that "model-
ing is a key vehicle for the transmission of knowledge"

(p. 3). Each instructor describes the evolution of his own
awareness of inner states and his ability to build positive
feelings of inner security through using the principles and
the tools. Sessions end with discussions and questions,
followed by new assignments.

Requirements for the course include writing weekly re-
action papers, detailing how participants are practicing the
tools. The goal of this journal is to keep the practice of
the tools conscious and to obtain feedback on students' pro-

gress or difficulties.

44

There is a mid-term project where students have an op-
portunity to consolidate and integrate their personal learn-
ing of the concepts and tools. The final project requires
students to actually teach the concepts and tools to others,
since the instructors believe that by teaching the tools,
the students will enhance their own mastery of them.

There are two texts required as outside reading to sup-
port class discussions. The primary text is The Dynamics of

Power:- Building a Competent Self (1983b) by Kaufman and

 

Raphael. The other is Kaufman's Shame: The Power of Caring

 

(1980). The two books are used in conjunction in order to
deepen awareness of inner experience and to learn more ef-
fective strategies for-coping with the sources of disturbing
inner states. One book focuses on shame dynamics, while the
other focuses on power. The course aims to integrate these
"two primary poles of inner experience" (Kaufman, 1984a).
Prior to the current research project, the instructors
have developed and utilized a self-report instrument de-
signed to assess participants' experiences of personal
growth or change accomplished through participating in the
course. Their instrument focuses on assessing effectiveness

of the tools directly taught through the program.

Conceptual Definitions
Key concepts related to "Building a Competent Self"

will be defined for the purpose of clarity.

45

1. Responsibility: The ability to be responsible for
one's feelings and actions; the challenge of owning inner
experiences.

2. Choice: The ability to determine one's reactions
to life's events, and to behaviors, responses, and feelings
toward oneself and others.

3. 22325: Power is a motive, a need rooted in one's
helplessness at infancy. Power is a need for personal con-
trol which motivates one to maintain equal power in relation
to others. Conversely, "any situation or life event which
thwarts our experience of inner control" would be described
as the experience of powerlessness (Kaufman, 1984).

4. Living Consciously: The ability to be fully con-
scious in the present moment of both inner events, such as
feelings, interpersonal needs, physiological drives, and
values, or future goals, and outer events, or interactions.
The four dimensions of living consciously are (a) differen-
tiated owning, (b) detachment, (c) self-observation, and (d)
imagery.

a. Differentiated owning: The ability to con-
sciously experience, accurately name, and finally, own a
feeling, need, drive or value as an inherent part of the
self. This developmental task is learnable.

b. Detachment: ”Learning to step back from a
particular feeling or situation in order to observe it con-

sciously and then let go of it" (Kaufman, p. 69).

46

c. Self-observation: The third step involves
"learning to hold a part of the self back inside as a
friendly observer. This enables us to experience events
fully while simultaneously observing upon our experience"
(p. 78).

d. Imagery: Visual, auditory, and kinesthetic
daydreaming is a tool to achieve differentiated owning,
detachment, and self-observation. For the purpose of this
study, imagery will not be examined.

7. Patterns of Inner Relating: One's ongoing pattern
of inner relating (inner dialogue), which either reproduces
positive feelings toward the self or negative feelings.

8. Positive Mental Health: This is the conception of
psychological health, which rests upon the central concepts:
responsibility, choice, power, and living consciously. Posi-
tive mental health evolves through internalizing these con-
cepts and by translating them into action strategies or
tools. ”Through living consciously from a position of per-
sonal power, one learns to build a competent self" (Kaufman,
1984).

9. Igglg: These concepts are translated into action
strategies which participants in the program learn through

practice. This is the basic core of the program.

Researchguestions

1. Does participation in BCS enhance students' ability to
assume personal responsibility and decrease feelings of

perceived personal powerlessness?

47
As a result of participation in BCS, do students in-
crease in their ability to build a satisfying, self-
affirming inner relationship with the self by a) in-
creasing awareness and differentiation of their charac-
teristic patterns of internal experience, and b)
replacing negative patterns with positive ones?
Does the program teach students to translate the four
central concepts--power, responsibility, choice, and
living consciously--into action strategies or tools
which can be used for cognitive-affective-behavioral

change?

METHODOLOGY

Purpose of the Study

The purpose of the present study was to investigate the
effectiveness of an educational program in preventive mental
health entitled, "Building a Competent Self," which is of-
fered as a section of Student Leadership Training, or
EAC 415, in the Department of Education, Administration, and
Curriculum.

The variables of interest in the study were: (1)
increased ability to assume responsibility and personal
power, as measured by the Internal-External Locus of Control
Scale (IE, Rotter, 1966); (2) the ability to consciously
differentiate internal patterns of experience and change

inner dialogue, as measured by the Response to Situations

 

Tee; (RTS); and (3) frequency of use and perceived effec-
tiveness of the tools in building positive mental health, as
measured by the Evaluation Questionnaire.

The design of the study was a preteSt-posttest quasi-
experiment with a control group selected for similar demo-
graphic attributes and for similarity in content of the
class experience, except for the treatment condition.

The evaluation was designed to determine if the follow-
ing program objectives were met: (1) improved ability to
assume personal responsibility and decrease feelings of per-

48

49
ceived powerlessness; (2) improved ability to build a satis-
fying, self-affirming inner relationship with the self; and
(3) translation of the four central concepts of BCS--power,
choice, responsibility, and living consciously-~into action
strategies or tools which can be used for behavioral change.

The rationale for the second and third objectives of
the present study derived from an Evaluation Form used in
the pilot study on BCS, Fall 1983 (Appendix B). The results
demonstrated that the most effective experiences for per-
sonal growth were 1) writing weekly reaction papers about
using the tools, 2) practicing the tools, and 3) becoming
more aware of feelings and needs.

The first objective deals with the locus of control
construct, which is closely related to dimensions of per-
sonal responsibility and perceived powerlessness. The second
objective deals with increasing awareness of feelings and
needs and developing a positive relationship with the self.
The third objective, perceived effectiveness and usefulness
of the tools, deals with measuring behavioral use of tools
and will be measured in a self-report Evaluation Question-
naire. The first and second variables, locus of control and
building a self-affirming self-identity, have been examined
in light of the literature, with description of pertinent
research about potential for change.

Since no measures in the literature can tap the unique
effects which are inherent in BCS, and upon the advice of

experts in the field of personality assessment (Harter,

50
1984), an instrument was developed to measure the second
objective. The Response to Situations Test (RTS) was formu-
lated to assess changing patterns of inner dialogue, a con-
struct which is seen as a central integration of the prin-

ciples and action strategies.

Results of the Pilot Study

A pilot study was conducted on BCS during Fall Term,
1983. Ten students who were enrolled in BCS were assessed
using the Tennessee Self-Concept Scale (TSCS) (Fitts, 1964)
and the Rotter Internal-External Locus of Control Scale
(Rotter, 1966).

A pretest-posttest control group design was used to
assess changes in self-esteem and locus of control. The con-
trol group was composed of students in another section of
EAC 415 entitled "Advanced Leadership Training." The two
groups were demographically similar with respect to age,
sex, and race.

Pretest comparisons of both groups showed no signifi-

. cant differences between treatment and control groups at
pretest. However, the treatment group was much more variable
than the control group (see Appendix H).

T—tests were also used to compare posttest scores
between treatment and control participants, and no signif-
icant results were found. Also, the null hypothesis for

change in locus of control was retained, indicating no sig-

51
nificant change in locus of control. However, the direc-

tional trend of the locus of control means was encouraging.

Discussion

From these results, few conclusions could be made. Per-
haps because of the small sample size and the consequent low
power of the test, or because of the difficulty in showing
change on measures with such high reliability as the TSCS,
it was difficult to detect significant results.

The difficulty of assessing self-esteem stems from the
fact that little research has been done to validate and
Operationalize this somewhat amorphous construct. Crandall
believes that "no clearly superior measures exist" in this
area (Crandall, 1973, p. 52).

The TSCS has not been found to be sensitive to detect-
ing change in self-esteem (Robinson and Shaver, 1973). "The
content tapped by self-concept and self-esteem scales deals,
for the most part, with relatively static characteristics or
attributes of the self" (Harter, 1984, p. 335). In addition,
as the researcher and the instructors examined the objec-
tives of BCS, it was decided that self-esteem change is a
by-product rather than a direct result of concepts taught in
the program. Therefore, self-esteem change was not directly
assessed in the final phase of the study.

Since the results of the pilot study did not yield any
significant results, it seemed worthwhile to examine the

objectives of BCS with greater scrutiny and ascertain what

52
actual changes could be expected to occur in this program.
This examination led to the decision to evaluate the program
objective of building a satisfying relationship with the
self through increased consciousness and replacement of neg-
ative dialogue patterns with self-affirming ones.

One's sense of personal efficacy and control are seen
to be more dynamic, changeable qualities (MacDonald, 1974,
p. 335). The Rotter IE scale has been shown to be sensitive
to changes for participants in life planning workshops who
were assessed with the IE before and after the workshop
(Johnson, 1977). Even in a one-day workshop on life plan-
ning, significant changes toward internality were found
(Lynch, Ogg, & Christensen, 1975). Participation in group
encounter or marathon experiences has also showed signif-
icant reduction of scores on the IE (Foulds, Guinan, &
Wareheime, 1974).

Since it was felt that the objective dealing with per-
sonal power and responsibility was an inherent part of the
treatment program, the experimenter decided to retain the
instrument measuring locus of control with the expectation
that a larger sample would yield more powerful tests to

detect change.

Research Questions and Hypotheses
1. Does participation in BCS enhance students' ability to
assume personal responsibility and decrease feelings of

perceived personal powerlessness?

Hypothesis

1:

 

53

In comparison to control participants,
treatment participants will score
higher in internal locus of control at
posttest, as measured by the Internal-
External Locus of Control Scale, admin-
istered at pre- and posttest (Rotter,
1966).

2. As a result of participation in BCS, do students in-

crease in their ability to build a satisfying, self-

affirming inner

Hypothesis

Hypothesis

Hypothesis

Hypgthesis

Hypothesis

II:

III:

VI:

relationship with the self?

In comparison to control participants,
treatment participants will increase in
their ability to demonstrate conscious
differentiation of positive and neg-

’ ative affects.

In comparison to control participants,
treatment participants will increase in
their ability to observe and differenti-
ate typical inner dialogue patterns.

In comparison to control participants,
treatment participants will increase in
the frequency of positive inner
dialogues.

In comparison to control participants,
treatment participants will decrease in
the frequency of negative inner .
dialogues.

In comparison to control participants,
treatment participants will increase in
ability to replace negative inner
dialogues with positive, self-affirming
ones.

Hypotheses II through V were tested by the Response to Situ-

ations Test, administered at pre- and posttest.

3. Does the treatment experience enable students to trans-

late the four central concepts--power, choice, respon-

sibility, and living consciously-~into effective action

strategies which can be used for change?

54

To explore this question, the perceptions and subjec—

tive evaluations of students have been examined and reported

descriptively using the results of the Evaluation Question-

naire. This instrument measures the perceived effectiveness

and the frequency of use of the tools and was administered

to the treatment group only at posttest.

Operational Definitions

1. Locus of Control: The degree to which the
individual perceives that the reward follows
from, or is contingent upon, his own
behavior or attributes versus the degree to
which he feels the reward is controlled by
forces outside of himself and may occur inde-
pendently of his own reactions. When the
event is interpreted in this way by an
individual, we have labeled this a belief in
external control. If the person perceives
that the event is contingent upon his own
behavior or his own relatively permanent
characteristic, we termed this a belief in
internal control (Crandall, 1973, p. 227).

An increase in the direction of internal locus of

control is defined as a decrease in the score on the

I-E Scale. For example, a score of eight on the pretest
followed by a score of five on the posttest demon-
strates an increase in internal locus of control.
Differentiation of positive and negative affects is
defined as the ability to demonstrate conscious exper-
iencing and accurate labeling or naming of positive and
negative affects. Gradations of ability from 3 to 1
account for differences in ability. (Three points for

clear, conscious differentiation and accurate labeling

55
of a primary affect; 2 points for diffuse differentia-
tion, and 1 point for no differentiation.)

An improvement in the ability to differentiate

affect is demonstrated by an increase in the dif-

ferentiation of affect subscale of the RTS from pre- to

posttest, as scored by trained raters. Primary affect

 

refers to the formulation by Silvan Tomkins of eight
primary feeling states within our experience (see RTS
Scoring Manual, Appendix F).

Observation and differentiation of inner dialogue pat-

terns is defined as the ability to step back from one's

inner experience so that one can observe the self in a
friendly, nonjudgmental manner. Differentiation of
inner dialogue patterns includes the ability to exper-
ience, to accurately identify, using a clear language
pattern, and to observe the patterns of inner exper-
ience. An improvement in the ability to differentiate
and observe inner dialogue is demonstrated by an
increase in the subscale measuring observation and dif-
ferentiation on the RTS, from pre- to posttest, as,
scored by trained raters. Scoring is similar to that of
the differentiation of affect subscale, with a 3 given
for clear, conscious differentiation and accurate lin-
guistic description of an inner dialogue pattern, 2
points for diffuse differentiation and observation
and/or unclear language, and 1 point for no differen-

tiation.

56
Positive inner dialogue patterns are patterns that
involve respect, valuing, forgiving, and behaving with
tenderness toward the self. Also included are the abil-
ity to own feelings of adequacy, competence, personal
power, and happiness. Scoring by trained raters for
this subscale is dichotomous: one point for evidence
of one positive pattern per item and no points for the
absence of a positive pattern.

Negative inner dialogue includes patterns of inner dia-

 

logue that are oriented toward self-blame, self-
contempt, and comparison-making. This subscale will be
scored by raters in a similar manner to the subscale
for positive dialogue, that is, one point for the pres-
ence of a negative pattern, and no point for the
absence of such.

Since the three major patterns of negative inner
dialogue are critical, both in the program and the
evaluation instrument, they will be first conceptually
and operationally defined at length.

Inner dialogue is an outgrowth of interpersonal
learning in the family. Often internal dialogue can
perpetuate insecurity through one of the three negative
patterns: (a) blemee-finding fault or transferring
responsibility to another part of the self perceived as
the offender.

The essence of the blaming dialogue is so

complete a fixing of responsibility upon one-

self that there is no way to maintain dignity
and self-respect." In a blame-oriented

57

family, attention is focused not upon how to
repair whatever mishap has occurred, but
rather on exactly whose fault it was, on who
is to blame. Fault must be fixed somewhere
and responsibility transferred, even to one's
own child, who in this eventuality is usually
perceived as an offending part of the self of
the blaming parent (Kaufman, 1984, p. 243).

An example of turning blame inward on the self is blam-
ing oneself or taking responsibility for failures and
mistakes, such as calling oneself stupid for being late

or misplacing something; (b) comparison-making--

 

comparing one's differences so that one finds oneself
lacking, or inferior. Individual differences are not
valued, but used to devalue the self. An example of
invidious comparison-making is an individual who
relates to herself in such a way that she cannot accept
her unique differences and accomplishments, but com-
pares herself to others and finds herself lacking; (c)

CODtEI’flEt"

an affect which distances the self from what—
ever arouses that contempt. Expressions of
contempt communicate unambivalent rejection.
The object of contempt becomes disgusting and
offensive. One way in which contempt becomes
manifest interpersonally is through an overly
critical attitude toward others (p. 13).
An example is an individual who is disgusted by the
needy child inside himself and tries to disown or
destroy that part of the self.
Replacing Inner Dialogue: "The unique pattern of inter-
nal actions first must be made fully conscious to the

experiencing self. Then a model for replacing it with a

58
new inner dialogue must be offered” (p. 13). Kaufman
gives these suggestions to replace inner dialogue:

Consciously try to change the way you talk to
yourself away from anger, self-blame, con-
tempt, or criticalness, toward respect, ten-
derness, valuing of self, and forgiveness for
mistakes and failings (Kaufman, 1983b, p.
44).

 

An increase in the ability to replace negative
inner dialogue patterns with self-affirming patterns is
demonstrated by the scales that measure the degree of
negative inner dialogue, the degree of positive inner
dialogue, and the actual replacements within the test
itself of negative with positive dialogue patterns.

(See Appendix F, RTS Scoring Manual.)

MeaSures

Internal-External Locus of Control Scale

The Internal-External Locus of Control Scale (IE,
Rotter, 1966) is based on Rotter's social learning theory
which purports that locus of control is a single dimension
or continuum (see Appendix D). Locus of control refers to
one's belief about whether or not one's behavior is related
or contingent to one's reinforcements. Individuals may find
themselves distributed along a continuum of internal to
external locus of control, depending on the degree to which
the person perceives his/her behavior to be contingent on
events that follow (Robinson & Shaver, 1973, p. 277). If an
individual believes s/he has no impact on receiving rein-

forcements, this person is believed to have an external

59
locus of control. If s/he believes that reinforcements or
events that follow her behaviors are contingent on his/her
behaviors, s/he is considered to have an internal locus of
control. ”The items deal exclusively with the subjects'
belief about the nature of the world. That is, they are con—
cerned with the subjects' expectations about how reinforce-
ment is controlled” (Rotter, 1966, p. 10).

The IE consists of 29 question pairs, six of which are
filler questions. The format is forced-choice, with one
choice internal and one external. Lower scores indicate high
internality. Rotter believes that although internality and
good adjustment are related, this relationship may not be
true for extreme internal scores. Extreme internal scores
may indicate a go-it-alone attitude, with an omnipotent
feeling that one is totally effective in controlling one's
life. Highly external scores may suggest defensiveness, pas-
sivity, and maladjustment (Rotter, 1966, pp. 16-17).

The IE has been administered to numerous samples (Joe,
1971), and is considered appropriate for high school, col-
lege, and adult groups (Lefcourt, 1972). It has been used
mostly with college students (Robinson & Shaver, 1978).

This self-administered scale requires approximately 15
minutes to complete and is scored in the direction of exter-
nality. The maximum score is 23, the total number of exter-
nal scores.

Normative data reported by Rotter (1966) ”computed

overall means for all groups combined: males, mean = 8.2

_60
(SD=4.0); females, mean = 8.5 (SD=3.9); combined, mean = 8.3
(SD=3.9)" (p. 228).

Reliability. An internal consistency coefficient of .70
was obtained from a sample of 400 college students (Rotter,
1966). Rotter reports test-retest reliability coefficients
at .72 for 60 college students and .55 for 117 students
after two months (Robinson & Shaver, 1978). The highest
reported reliability was for college females at .83.

A test-retest coefficient of .55 was reported for high
school students tested at an eight-month interval (Zerega,
Tseng, & Greever, 1967) and Hershe and Scheibe (1967) found
coefficients from .43 to .84 for college students tested
over a two-month interval.

Validity. Factor analyses to validate locus of control
as a construct have been reported and uncovered a general
construct called "personal control," which accounts for one-
half of the variance. Other studies which have attempted to
analyze factors have found two to four factors in the IE
(Gurin, Gurin, Lao, & Beattie, 1969; Mirels, 1970). There-
fore, there is some question about the unidimensionality of
the IE.

Convergent validity is demonstrated by Joe (1971) and
Lefcourt (1966) who indicate that the IE is sensitive to
differences in perception of locus of control.

Although some methodological problems exist, the IE
scale is still recommended as a measure of generalized IE

expectancy (MacDonald, 1973).

61
Response to Situations Test (RTS)

Unlike earlier attempts to assess changes in cognitive
self-statements in relation to anger (Novaco, 1975), fear or
depression (Beck, 1967), the present evaluation study
focused on changing prevalent patterns of inner dialogue and
required an instrument in which the specific objectives of
BCS could be assessed. Thus, the requirement for a measure-
ment instrument to assess changes in differentiation of
affects and their accompanying inner dialogue patterns and
actual changes in inner dialogue patterns. These were the
variables related to the third objective of BCS, building a
satisfying, self-affirming relationship with the self.

In the RTS, situations were chosen to reflect typical
life events relevant to college students which would be
effective in tapping internal patterns of affects, needs,
and values (see Appendix E).

The RTS was adapted from a test to assess competence in
college students formulated by Goldfried and D'Zurilla
(1969). Goldfried 8 D'Zurilla used sample situations as a
stimulus to elicit responses of college freshmen. The
responses were rated for demonstration of behavioral and
cognitive competency. The RTS, however, aims at eliciting
information about affective awareness and inner dialogue
patterns.

The general task is to respond to a series of questions
about each stimulus situation. The questions are structured

to elicit information pertinent to the ability to experience

62
differentiated affects, that is, to experience consciously
and accurately, name, and own positive and/or negative inner
experiences; the ability to differentiate the patterns of
inner dialogue, and finally, the ability to change from neg-
ative patterns of internal dialogue to self-affirming ones.
Kaufman believes that owning results directly from one's
ability to experience accurately and name inner experiences.
Therefore, although owning is not measured on the RTS, its
presence is implied by experiencing and naming.

The general content areas of the situations chosen
reflect various affective experiences and patterns which
would demonstrate achievement of objectives.

To enable the experimenter to administer two tests that
were similar in content, pretest and posttest items were
analyzed for similarity in content areas. From the paired
similar items, one was randomly assigned to pretest, and the
other to posttest.

Scoring Criteria for the RTS. The scoring of the RTS is
based both on Kaufman's theory of change and on Tomkins'
theory of primary affect. Kaufman believes that change in
feelings of competence and personal power occurs through a
sequence of internal changes. As one increases the ability
to differentiate one's feeling world, or affects, one
becomes more aware of typical inner dialogue patterns, or
the ways in which one interacts with the self. As awareness
of inner dialogue patterns increase, one is more able to

differentiate and finally change these patterns.

63

There are three progressive stages which one might
expect as a result of participation in BCS, and which can be
seen in the results of the RTS: 1) increased differentiation
of affect; 2) increased differentiation of inner dialogue
patterns; 3) change of inner dialogue patterns from negative
to positive, either by increasing the amount of positive
inner dialogues, decreasing the amount of negative
dialogues, or by replacing negative with positive inner
dialogues. The goals of the class include changes in all
three areas, but one might expect the changes to occur
sequentially in the three stages described. Of course, there
is still the possibility that there would be no change
resulting from participation in BCS.

The subscales of the RTS are drawn directly from
Kaufman's theory of change and from Tomkins' primary affect
theory. The first subscale, Differentiation of Affect, uti-
lizes the primary affects as the basis for scoring.

The highest score, three points, is given to definite,
clearly differentiated primary affects or descriptors of
primary affects. A score of two is given if an affect is
identified but is diffuse, implied and somewhat undifferen-
tiated. A one-point score is given for no conscious aware-
ness of affect.

The second subscale, Differentiation of Inner Dialogue,
is based on Kaufman's definition of conscious inner dialogue
patterns. This was the most difficult scale to operation-

alize into a scoring system. The resultant scoring system

64
was formulated by the raters, Kaufman, and the experimenter.
A three-point score is given if the subject meets two cri-
teria: the first is a demonstration of awareness of a con-
scious differentiated inner dialogue pattern: the person
knows how one part of the self talks to the other part or
treats the other part. The second criterion is that a clear
language pattern is demonstrated which captures the sub-
ject's actual words. For example, if the person says, "I
would feel badly," this does not capture the actual language
pattern of the self talking to the self. If the response is,
"You jerk--you are not at all responsible," then the lan-
guage component of the dialogue pattern is clear. A two-
point score is given for statements that show an undifferen-
tiated language pattern or implied knowledge of inner
dialogue pattern, such as the first example. One point is
given if the response demonstrates an undifferentiated lan-
guage pattern and undifferentiated knowledge of inner
dialogue pattern.

Subscale three, the Positive Inner Dialogue scale, is
rated as being present or absent, one point or zero.
Evidence of positive inner dialogue includes statements
which demonstrate self-respect, self-forgiveness, self-
pride, owning adequacy or happiness, and self-reassurance.

The fourth subscale, Negative Inner Dialogue, is rated
as a one or a zero. Evidence of self-blame, self-contempt,
comparison-making which causes negative feelings about the

self are indicative of negative inner dialogue.

65
The last subscale, Replacement of Negative Inner
Dialogue with Positive Inner Dialogue, is scored as either
present or absent, if, within the situation, a negative
inner dialogue is identified which is then replaced with a
positive inner dialogue. For example, "I used to be really
down on myself if I acted like that, but now I can see that

I'm only human and can forgive myself."

Training. Four raters were selected to score the RTS on
the basis of their background in the area of psychology and
on the basis of the experimenter's assessment of each
individual's interest and commitment to the project, as well
as his/her ability to learn the scoring techniques. Three of
the raters are students in the doctoral program in Clinical
Psychology and the fourth is a sophomore in Engineering who
has had experience in scoring psychological tests. Two of
the psychology doctoral students are familiar with Kaufman's
theory and with the program.

Four training sessions were held over a two-month
period. Each session was two hours long. The first session
included an orientation to explain the purpose of the study,
the content and theory of BCS, and the explanation of the
test itself. First, the basic hypotheses which were being
tested by the RTS were described. Then the variables were
defined within the context of the program. The first sub-
scale on differentiation of affect was presented with a

description of Tomkins' primary affect theory. This was fol-

66
lowed by a list of adjectives Tompkins uses to describe each
affect. Examples of responses to the RTS situations were
then shown, with the scoring designated for each. Practice
examples were then given to the raters, so that they could
begin to apply rating skills to Subscale 1.

During the second session, raters were given an over-
view of all of the subscales on the RTS. A review of the
Differentiation of Affect Scale was followed by a short
practice of this'scale. Then the subscales on inner dialogue
were explained. Examples of detecting positive and negative
'inner dialogue were given, with examples of the special
replacement subscale. This was followed by a practice ses-
sion of the last three subscales to see if raters were
reaching consensus and understanding the scoring system.
Discussion of the second subscale, Differentiation of Inner
Dialogue, began but was postponed because of the difficulty
the raters experienced in understanding this scale. The
experimenter was able to determine the difficulty, which
centered around translating the theory of differentiated
inner dialogue to a scoring system that was empirical.

In the third meeting of the raters, a basic review of
all subscales was followed by concentration on the second
subscale, Differentiation of Inner Dialogue. Dr. Kaufman
attended the meeting to explain the theory of inner dialogue
differentiation and to give his opinion of scoring this sub-
scale. The raters and experimenter were able to reach con-

sensus for scoring this subscale. (See Scoring the RTS,

67
Appendix F.) The rest of this session was spent practicing
examples of this subscale as well as the other subscales.
In the last session raters practiced grading actual
samples of tests, so that raters could see where they might
have difficulty making decisions. They were also able to

familiarize themselves with the rating sheets.

Rating the RTS. The tests were scored as follows: a
random subsample of 15 tests was chosen for an interrater
reliability study to be scored by all four raters. The
remaining tests were each scored by two raters. The subscale
scores of the two raters were then averaged. The exper-
imenter acted as a rater for one quarter of the tests, but
did not rate for the interrater reliability study tests.

All tests were scored blindly, that is, the raters
.didn't know if the test was a pre- or posttest, or if it
belonged to the treatment or control group. However, some
raters remarked that they were able to discern from the
responses those tests which belonged to treatment partic-

ipants and those which were controls.

RTS Interrater Reliability. Two separate calculations
of the interrater reliability for the RTS were determined.
The first was calculated on the basis of three expert raters
who scored the five tests which were given as a part of a
pilot test of the RTS items. Twenty-one situations were

given to a group of students at Lansing Community College

68

who were taking BCS during Winter Term. Five of these tests
were randomly selected for an interrater reliability study.
The raters assessed the RTS independently. The average cor-
relation between raters was calculated. The interrater reli-
ability was estimated using an analysis of variance proce-
dure described by Winer (1971, pp. 289-291). Table 4.1
described the reliability estimates for the scales as they
were formulated for the first study. The estimates are
tabled for values with two raters and with three raters,
since one of the raters had not attended some of the train-
ing sessions. The mean correlation of all subscales was .52.

Because of the low interrater correlations in certain
scales, the scoring system was revamped for the RTS adminis-
tration in the research study. Positive and negative affect
were collapsed into one subscale of affect differentiation.
Reversals and Observe and Detach scales were deleted. Neg-
ative and positive dialogue and replacement scales were
operationalized with more stringent criteria (see Appendix
F, RTS Scoring Manual).

The second interrater reliability study was computed
for the means of each subscale using the actual test data
for the final research. A subsample of fourteen subjects was
randomly chosen and rater by all four trained raters. A co-
efficient alpha (Cronbach 1972, p. 283) was computed for the
means and for the sums of each of the five subscales. The
results showed a fairly high degree of consensus by the

raters on the first four subscales, but not on the last one

69

vmm. mom. wmm. mem. unoeoomfimmm

 

mam. Hmm. mas. mmv. osmonac o>fiuamom
0mm. mmm. mmm. omm. osmoamao o>wummoz
mmm. Heb. In: 4:: zomuoo can o>uomno
web. wmm. Hem. mmh. mammum>mm
owe. mmm. mam. Hmm. nowmmm o>flumaoz
mam. mam. ave. can. uoommm o>Huflmom
u muoumu osu mcwm: u muoumu ooucu magma oamom
Hmscw>flocH u noumuuoucH Hmscfi>flcca u Houmuuoucu

ucosoz poscoum GOmHon u u
some chMumsumm Hm :uwB mummy m

mama assumes uoaaa Mom spasm suaHLQMAHom noumuumucH mam .H.v manna

70
(see Table 4.2). The mean correlation of all five subscales
was .81.

This study implies that the raters could easily agree
on all of the subscales except for the last one. Part of the
problem with the last subscale is that it was rarely marked
as present, so that the variance of response marked as pres-
ent would have been quite low, thus giving a lower coef-

ficient alpha.

Participants

 

Participants in the study included 56 Michigan State
students enrolled either in EAC 415, BCS, or in Teacher
Education 200.

The treatment group consisted of 22 participants who
elected to take EAC 415, BCS, during Spring Term, 1984. The
group contained 6 freshmen, 7 SOphomores, 2 juniors, 6
seniors, and one graduate student. Ages of the students
ranged from 18 to 30. The racial composition was primarily
Caucasian, with two black students. Seventy-three percent of
the group was female and twenty-seven percent male. Under-
graduate majors in the treatment group varied. Most of the
students' off-campus residences were located in the State of
Michigan.

The control group consisted of 34 students who returned
both pre- and posttest instruments. Two of the control par-
ticipants did not complete the RTS posttest. This group was

composed of 2 freshmen, 8 SOphomores, l4 juniors, 6 seniors

and 2 graduate students (see Table 4.3 for percentages by

71

Table 4.2. RTS Interrater Reliability Study for Actual
Testing Data

 

14 tests with 8 situations; four raters

 

Coefficient alpha Coefficient alpha
Scale of means for sums
Differentiation
of Affect .961 .963
Differentiation .
of Inner Dialogue .891 .892
Positive Dialogue .861 .863
Negative Dialogue .792 .791

Replacements .569 .57

72

Table 4.3 Demographic Composition of the Treatment and
Control Groups

 

n=56

Age Treatment Control
Mean 21.8 . 21.4
Range 18-30 18-33

e335
Male 27% 32%
Female 73% 68%

Educational Level

Freshman 27% 6%
SOphomore 32% 23%
Junior 9% . 44%
Senior 27% 18%

Graduate 5% 6%

73

class). Ages of the control participants ranged from 18 to
33. The racial composition was completely Caucasian. Sixty-
eight percent of the group was female and thirty-two percent
male. Undergraduate majors varied, but all students in the
control group were interested in pursuing certification for
teaching. Most of the students' off-campus residences were
located in Michigan.

The experimental group met for a total of 40 hours,
comprised of meetings for 2 hours a day twice a week-for 10
weeks. The control group met for a total of 50 hours during
10 weeks.

In terms of demographic characteristics, the two popu-
lations used for treatment and control groups are similar,
except for the teaching goal of the TB 200 students.

Another difference was in the educational level of the
students. Students in the control group were primarily
upperclassmen (sixty‘eight percent) whereas more students in
BCS were freshmen and sophomores. However, since the means
and ranges of the ages were similar, this difference does

not seem problematic.

Procedures
Participants from treatment and control groups com-
pleted two personality measures, the Internal-External Locus
of Control Scale and the Response to Situations Test, during
the first or second week of classes. The experimenter

explained the purpose of the study and the possibility for

individual feedback for participation. .All students in the

74
study were offered an interpreted report of their test
scores as an inducement for participation. Most of the
treatment participants completed the measures during the
first class session, with the exception of those who added
the class. These students were permitted to take the instru-
ments home and to return them completed during the first or
second week of class. Almost all students completed the
instruments at home for the posttests.

The control participants were permitted to take the
test packets home and complete them for both pretest and
posttest. Although this difference in procedure between the
pretest administration for treatment and control partic-
ipants may have introduced a confounding variable of dif-
ferent test settings, this method was found to be necessary
to enable the control participants to complete the instru-
ments. For both groups, pretest administration was completed
during the first two weeks of class and posttest administra-
tion was completed during the last two weeks of class. Tests
were given out at the end of one week and collected during
the next two class sessions of the next week.

During all administrations of the instruments, students
were asked to answer questions about themselves honestly,
taking time to give serious consideration to their respon-
ses. Thorough instructions were given to both treatment and
control groups before administration of the pretests. Stu-
dents were given code numbers which corresponded to the test

numbers. Only the experimenter had access to the identity of

75
the student who possessed the code number. Confidentiality
was protected in that the experimenter only released indi-
vidual test scores to the participant. Informed consent was

obtained for all participants.

Research Design

The quantitative research design was a pretest-posttest
'control group design with nonequivalent groups (Campbell &
Stanley, 1963, p. 47).

O X 0
O 0

Since the sample being used in this study was self-
selected, random sampling and random assignment were not
feasible. Generalization to a larger population of college
students who might volunteer for self-help programs for col-
lege credit might be justifiable (Campbell & Stanley, 1963,
pp. 5, 17).

The control group was selected for similarity in demo-
graphic attributes, such as age, sex, and race, and student
status. Both groups participated in a class at M.S.U. in
issues pertaining to psychology of the self. Although stu-
dents in TE 200, the control group, were required to take
this class for their major, the characteristic of being a
volunteer was somewhat controlled, since only students who
volunteered for pre- and posttests of personality attributes

were included in the control group.

76
Analysis of the Data

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the impact of
a preventive mental health treatment program. The dependent
variables were locus of control and ability to differentiate
inner states and to change inner dialogue. The instruments
to assess these variables have been discussed in a previous
section. The following analyses were conducted to test the
hypotheses for each variable.

T—tests were conducted on the pretest means for both
the IE Scale and the scales of the RTS to determine whether
groups were significantly different at pretest.

An analysis of covariance was performed on the posttest
scores of the Rotter IE Scale. The pretest scores were used
as a covariate. The criterion level of significance for
rejecting the null hypotheses was .05.

An analysis of covariance was performed on the posttest
scores of th RTS scales using the pretests as a covariate
(54L x .05).

The results of the Evaluation Questionnaire did not
lend themselves to quantitative analysis using tests for
statistical significance. A qualitative approach was used to
describe the data obtained for each scale of the Evaluation
Questionnaire. Specifically, the responses to items in each
category were used to estimate the mean and standard
deviation.

Finally, some respondents provided anecdotal data

regarding their experience with BCS. This information was

77
not analyzed but is presented for its added descriptive
value.
The results of the hypotheses and additional findings

are presented in Chapter V.

Summary

In this section the design and methodology of the eval-
uation study have been examined.

The participants were described for treatment and con-
trol groups, as well as a detailed description of the pro-
cedures, measures, research design and analyses of the data.

The findings of the study are presented in Chapter V.

RESULTS

In this chapter, the results of the analyses of the
hypotheses are presented. Qualitative descriptive data from
the respondents for the Evaluation Questionnaire and anec-

dotal data are also presented.

Tests for Differences on Pretests

 

T—tests on the means of the IE Scale pretest scores
showed no statistically significant differences between
treatment and control groups. The mean values for the treat-
ment and control group pretests and posttests on the IE are
presented in Table 5.1.

‘T-tests on the means of the RTS subscales at pretest
also showed no significant differences, except on the scale
entitled Differentiation of Inner Dialogue. Here pretest

scores were significantly different at .05 alpha level.

Rotter IE Hypothesis

Hypothesis I: In comparison to control participants,
treatment participants will increase
in the direction of internal locus of
control, as measured by the Internal-
External Locus of Control Scale,
administered at pre- and posttest
(Rotter, 1966).

4......

Ho: Ul-Uzso ' ' ~- 1, V
H1: Ul-Uzfio

78

79

An analysis of covariance was performed on the depen-
dent measure, the posttest scores. The pretests were held as
a covariate.

As shown in Table 5.2, no significant differences were
found at the .05 level between adjusted group means for the
IE posttest scores.

Hypothesis I was designed to test for differences
between the treatment and control groups on changes toward
internal locus of control.’ Since the analysis of covariance
was found to yield nonsignificant results, the null hypothe-
sis was retained. However, the movement of the means between
pre- and posttest was in the expected direction.

Looking at individual data one can see the trends of
movement of locus of control (see Table 5.3). Within the
treatment group, 14 participants decreased their scores; 10
of them by more than one point. Seven increased their
scores, 6 of them only by 1 point. One remained the same.

Within the control group, 15 participants decreased

their scores, and 12 increased. Seven remained the same.

RTS Hypptheses

 

Hypotheses II to VI were tested by the RTS Test, admin-
istered at pre- and posttest.

Hypothesis II: In comparison to control participants,
treatment participants will increase
in their ability to demonstrate con-
scious differentiation of positive and
negative affects.

Ho‘ U1-Uz=o
H2: Ul-U2#0

80

Table 5.1 Means, IE Scale (Standard deviations in parentheses)

 

Pretest Posttest
Treatment Control Treatment _Control
n=22 n=34 n=22 n=34
10.32 (4.0) 9.36 (4.12) 8.86 (3.85) 9.12 (4.56)

Table 5.2. Analysis of Covariance, IE Scale

 

n=55

Source Adj. §§ g; Adj. MS F P
Main effects,

Group 7.888 1 7.888 .58 .45

Error 712.377 1 13.7

 

Table 5.3. Percentage of Participants Increasing,
Decreasing, and Remaining Same of Rotter IE

 

 

Treatment Control

n=22 n=34

Decreased scores 63.6% 45.4%
Increased scores 31.8% 36.4%

Remained the same 4.5% 21.2%

81

Hypothesis III: In comparison to control participants,
treatment participants will increase
in their ability to observe and dif-
ferentiate typical inner dialogue pat-
terns.

 

0: Ul-UZ=O

3: 01-0250

Hypothesis IV: In comparison to control participants,
treatment participants will increase
in the frequency of positive inner
dialogues.

H

H

 

HO: Ul-Uz=0
H4: 01-0250
Hypothesis V: In comparison to control participants,

 

treatment participants will decrease
in the frequency of negative inner

dialogues.
H0: Ul-UZ=0
H5: Ul-UZ#O

Hypothesis VI: In comparison to control participants,
treatment participants will increase
in ability to replace negative inner
dialogues with positive, self-
affirming ones.

 

0: Ul-Uz=0
6: Ul-Uz#0
The scores for the different subscales of the RTS were

H

estimated by deriving the mean of each subscale for each
test, as scored by trained raters. Then, since each test was
.scored by two raters, the average of the two raters' mean
scores on each subscale was derived. Therefore, the mean
represents the combined means of items into subscales and

two raters' scores for each subscale.

82

The mean values for the treatment and control group
pretests and posttests are presented in Table 5.4.

The results of the analysis of covariance performed to
test the RTS Hypotheses are presented in Table 5.5

Hypothesis II tests the differences between treatment
and control groups on the posttest scores for the subscale
entitled Differentiation of Affect. The results show that
significant differences were found favoring the treatment
over the control group (3:4.054 [1, 51], p.<.05). In the
sample, the treatment group means increased in differentia-
tion of affect while the control group means decreased
slightly.

Hypothesis III tests the differences between treatment
and control groups on the posttest scores for the subscale
entitled Differentiation of Inner Dialogue. Although signif-
icant results were found (§=14.9 [1, 51], p.<.001), the
results were not in the direction intended. The means in the
treatment group decreased slightly (.003) in Differentia-
tion of Inner Dialogue while the control group means
decreased 0.3.

Hypothesis IV is a test of the increase in frequency of
positive inner dialogues. It was hypothesized that positive
inner dialogues would increase as a result of treatment.
This scale is reflected by subscale 3 of the RTS, which
measures Positive Inner Dialogue. Significant results were
found for this variable (Es21.58 [1, 51], p.<.001) and the

null hypothesis was rejected. The treatment group means

83

 

 

Amao.. mmoo. Ammo.. bmo. . Ammo.v Hmo. Amho.v mvo. mucmEmomHQOm
Am¢H.. mew. AmNH.V mm. Amma.v mmm. AMH.V mmm. osmoamwn O>Hummmz
AmHH.v HvN. AmHH.v vov. AHoH.V hm. AmH.V mm. mDmOHmHQ 0>HuHmOm
Ahmm.. hmo.H Amhm.. NHo.N Ammm.. Hm.a Aomm.v mo.m 03mOHMHQ HOCCH
mo coaumhbcmummmaa
Aam.. Hm.N AHN.V vv.m Aom.v mm.~ Amm.v mm.m DOOHHC
mo coaumaucmummmao

«mu: mm": mm": -uc
Houucou acoeucmua Houucou acosucoua oHcUszm

umouumom ammuomm»

Amomonucoumm ca mcoHumH>oc cumccmumv moamomnsm mam .mcmoz .v.m dance

84

 

 

moo. ovm.n Hoo. am who. uouum
Ho. H Ho. muons
.muoomwo can: mucosoomHmom
mmm. mav. mHo. Hm moo. uouum
moo. a moo. maoum osmo~mao mecca
. .muoowmo Cam: o>wummoz
mao. Hm moo. uouum
goo. mmm.sm cam. H cam. asoum mamonHa
.muoowwo can: HoccH o>fluwmom
Hoo. mom.¢a ano. Hm mmo.m uouum »
Hoo.a a amo.a moonm osmofim m “comm mo
.muoommo can: cowumaemwmomman
mmo. Hm mom.m Loewe
mo. mvo.s mam. H mam. :mnoum,
.muoommm sags-
m m mm. mm mm mousom mfimom
.flee .noa

 

mmmoauodxm mam a¢>oz< .m.m magma

85
increased in the number of positive inner dialogues while
the control group means decreased in the sample.

Hypothesis V is a test of the differences between
treatment and control groups for the presence of Negative
Inner Dialogue. This variable is reflected in subscale 4 of
the RTS. No significant results were found (§=.413 [1, 51],
p.<.523). Therefore, the null hypothesis of no difference
may not be rejected.

Hypothesis VI tests for differences between treatment
and control groups for the presence of Replacements. This
variable is reflected in the fifth subscale of the RTS.
Although significant results were found (F=7.546 [1, 51],
p.<.008), and the null hypothesis was rejected for the sub-
scale, the direction of change was opposite that expected by
the hypothesis. This subscale, which had very low interrater
reliability, was still reliable enough to find a significant

difference between groups.

Evaluation Questionnaire Results
Perceived effectiveness of the tools taught in BCS and
frequency of use of the tools were measured using the Evalu-
ation Questionnaire, a self-report questionnaire which was
administered to the treatment group only at posttest. The
questionnaire uses a seven-point Likert Scale for rating

items.

86

The means for each tool for effectiveness and frequency
of use were derived (Table 5.6) for 21 of the 22 partic-
ipants.

The results showed that Tools 6 and 7, Consultation
with the Self and Values and Expectations, were perceived as
most effective for treatment participants. Tools 6 and 11,
Consultation with the Self and Self-Observation, were used
most frequently. '

The means of effectiveness and frequency of use items
on the Evaluation Questionnaire were used to estimate a
grand mean for all the scores for tools. The grand mean for
the perceived effectiveness of all the tools is 5.106 (.905,
standard deviation). The grand mean for the frequency of use
for all the tools is 4.370 (.595, 8.0.).

Three questions were asked on the Evaluation Question-
naire, which address subjective satisfaction with BCS. The
first one, ”Rate the overall quality and usefulness of the
course," received a mean of 4.905 (1.375, 8.0.), on a seven-
point Likert Scale. The question which asked the students to

"Rate the contribution of the course for you personally

 

towards building positive mental health and competence in
living," received a mean score of 6.190 (.928 8.0.). The
last question, ”Rate the degree to which personal changes
accomplished through participating in the course have
remained with you," had a mean of 5.476 (1.123, 8.0.). All

of these ratings were based on a seven-point Likert Scale.

87

van.

oom.H

vvm.a

mmm.a

moh.a

mmm.a

NNm.H

mmm.a

mmm.a

vvv.a

Hhm.m

Hmm.m

Hhm.m

omm.m

hmm.v

Nmm.v

moo.v

mao.¢

mom.a

mam.a

mom.

mom.

vvo.a

voo.a

mmm.a

Hmo.H

m¢N.H

mhh.m

Hhm.m

mvo.o
ovo.o

mmm.¢
moh.m
hoo.m

mmm.m

mmv.m

cofiumuflooz
magnum
”a Hooa

coaumuwooz
no Hooa

mcoflumuoomxm
cam mosam>
uh Hooa

mfimm can;
COHUMU HDWCOU

u 0 H008

oflfiao “mesa
"m Hooe

waom weausuusz
“e Moos

osmoamwa uoccH
«m Hooa

homswmo<
meauomfisoo
“N “009

mmocwmmm:
mzauomgsoo
"a Moos

 

cofiumfi>oo oumcgmum coo:
moo mo mucosvoum

:oflumfi>oo oumocmum :moz
wmoco>wuoommm powwoouom

 

omo mo mocozvoum occ mmoco>fluoowwm H009 oo>wooumm mo mccoz .o.m manna

88

 

moo.H moo.v mmv.a mvH.m anommsa
"NH Hooa

Hmv.H Hmm.m mmH.H nmm.m :OAum>Homn01mHom
“Ha Hooa

ooH.H meH.m omH.H mom.m cowucouua
mcflmsoomom

«oa Hoos

soaumfl>oo oumocmum .cmoz :oHumw>oo oumocmum coo:

moo mo accosvoWW

mmocm>wuoommm co>fiooumm

.©.u:OU .m.m OHQMB

89
These results show fairly high satisfaction with the
contribution BCS has made to positive mental health and the

degree to which students believe the changes have remained.

Supplementary Anecdotal Data

 

A few respondents from the treatment group provided
descriptions of their perceptions and experiences with BCS.
Selected verbatim accounts from these participants are pre-
sented.

The course helped me look at myself much better. I
understand myself better now. It is up to me to
deal with what I've learned.

I truly learned a lot about myself through this
course. I find I am much more aware of my feelings
and my own reactions to them now. I think we some-
times could have used more time to discuss new
tools instead of spending the majority of the time
discussing past experiences in class. Overall, I
really enjoyed this class, and I am very glad that
I took it just before graduating. I plan on keep-
ing the books so that I can go back and read them
if I forget about some of the tools.

I've enjoyed this class immensely. It really helps
to talk about the problems we experience and have
someone listen in a nonthreatening, helpful way. I
learned that it's okay to feel certain ways, own-
ing my feelings.

Imagining scenes in the future was the most effec-
tive tool for me. It helped me look ahead. Before
I worried a lot about things I want to do. Now, if
I use imagery, I can own what I want to do.

It's hard to change habits I've had for 20 years.

I guess the tools are a foundation on which to

build. I can work on certain areas as they pop up.

This results in self-confidence.

One student had taken Kaufman's class on relationships,
which corresponds closely to BCS, during winter term. Her

experience was less favorable.

90

The last class was more personal. Everyone talked

easily about things. I identified with what they

said. Everyone was amazed that we had so much in

common. This class was not as talkative. Everyone

was quiet. I didn't want to keep telling my exper-

iences. Now, at the end of the term, people are

finally starting to talk, but nowhere near as per-
sonally as the last one. I haven't been able to
identify with the tools this term as well as last

term.

Two other students had taken the class on relationships
the previous term. One of them related a similar experience
to the one detailed above. The other student felt he had
gained as much in BCS as he had in the first class.

The above anecdotal accounts of the perceptions of
treatment participants indicate an overall favorable

response by students to the program.

Summary

The results of the hypotheses related to locus of con-
trol and the RTS scales were presented in this chapter. Six
hypotheses were tested. Also presented were results of the
Evaluation Questionnaire, which measured the perceived
effectiveness of the tools and the frequency of reported use
of the tools. Finally, anecdotal accounts from students in
the treatment group were offered.

1. Hypothesis I tested whether or not treatment partic-
ipants increased in internal locus of control as a
result of their experience in BCS, when compared to
control participants who were enrolled in a different
class, TB 200. The results were not significant for

this hypothesis and the null hypothesis was retained.

91
Hypothesis II measured the differences between treat-
ment and control groups on the RTS for Differentiation
of Affect for treatment participants. It was found that
when compared to control participants, treatment par-
ticipants changed in the direction of increased differ-
entiation of affect. Therefore, the null hypothesis was
rejected.
Hypothesis III was concerned with whether treatment
participants increased in their ability to differen-
tiate inner dialogue patterns. It was found that treat-
ment participants decreased in their scores on this
subscale, when compared to control participants. The
null hypothesis was rejected, but the direction of
change was not as predicted by the hypothesis.
Hypothesis IV tested the increase in the frequency of
positive inner dialogue as a result of treatment. It
was found that treatment respondents increased in the
amount of positive inner dialogues on the RTS when com-
pared to control participants. The null hypothesis was
rejected.
Hypothesis V concerned the frequency of negative inner
dialogues, predicting that they would decrease in fre-
quency as a result of the program. This was not found
to be true, and the null hypothesis was retained.
Hypothesis VI described the ability to increase in
replacing negative inner dialogues with positive ones.

The null hypothesis was retained, since no significant

92
differences were found in the treatment population when
compared to control participants at posttest.

7. The means for perceived effectiveness and frequency of
use of tools, based on self-report information on the
Evaluation Questionnaire, were estimated. The results
show fairly high (5.106 points out of 7 points) satis-
faction with the effectiveness of all the tools and
moderate (4.370 points out of 7) usage of the tools.
The most popular tools as far as effectiveness were

Consultation with the Self and Values and Expectations. The

ones which had the highest reported use were Consultation

with the Self and Self-Observation.
Anecdotal data was also presented to add participants'

personal descriptions of their experience in BCS.

SUMMARY AND IMPLICATIONS

In this chapter, a summary of the research study is
offered and conclusions are drawn from the results of the
analyses of the data. Validity concerns, limitations of the

study, and a discussion of future research are presented.

Summary

The present study was designed to investigate some
hypotheses about the effectiveness of a preventive educa-
tional approach to teach students to live from a position of
personal power and to build a positive self-identity. The
study evaluated a program entitled, "Building a Competent
Self,” a ten-week class offered for two hours of credit in
the Department of Education, Administration, and Curriculum.
The course is taught by Dr. Gershen Kaufman, a clinical psy-
chologist at the Michigan State Counseling Center, and Lev
Raphael, an educator and currently a doctoral candidate in
the Counseling Psychology Program.

The central inquiry guiding the research was whether
preventive mental health skills can be taught effectively in
an educational setting. The review of the literature pre-
sented theoretical evidence that supports this view
(Guerney, Stollak, and Guerney, 1971; Brosnowski & Baker,
1974). Although the literature describes other programs that

93

94
attempt to teach mental health skills in an educational set-
ting, evaluation research is 1acking to show their effec-
tiveness (Cudney, 1970; Cain, 1967; Klein and Goldston,
1976). It was also found that no other mental health program
has attempted a unique integration of psychological theories
of positive mental health, as BCS has done. Typically educa-
tional programs have not integrated cognitive, affective and
behavioral theories, but have instead dealt with narrow
areas, such as stress reduction or decision making. BCS con-
tains elements of all three theories, but goes beyond the
scope of existing theories and programs, offering tools
which enable one to build a satisfying self-identify.

Three variables related to outcomes in BCS were inves-
tigated in this study: 1) locus of control; 2) building a
satisfying, self-affirming inner relationship with the self;
and 3) translation of the central concepts of the program
into effective action strategies for change. These variables
emerged from the research questions and paralleled the fol-
lowing objectives of BCS: 1) ability to assume personal
responsibility and decrease feelings of perceived personal
powerlessness; 2) ability to build a satisfying, self-
affirming inner relationship with the self; and 3) transla-
tion of the four central concepts--power, choice, respon-
sibility, and living consciously--into effective action
strategies which can be used for change.

The theoretical framework for each research question,

variable and objective will be summarized, both in relation

95
to a larger theoretical framework of positive mental health

and in relation to the theoretical underpinnings for BCS.

Locus of Control

The first variable for investigation was locus of con-
trol, which seemed theoretically parallel to the BCS objec-
tive involving increased feelings of personal responsibility
and living from a position of personal power.

This variable was suggested by the review of the liter-
ature, which demonstrated the importance of motivational
theory as a dynamic dimension to positive mental health.
White's effectance motivation (1959) and Bandura's self-
efficacy (1977) were describedto demonstrate the importance
of the motive of self-efficacy, the belief or expectation
that one is competent. The measurement of locus of control
was chosen as the first variable for investigation, because
it parallels the BCS objective involving increased feelings
of personal responsibility and decreased feelings of per-
ceived personal powerlessness.

Locus of control is a single dimension that is measur-
able and assesses one's belief about whether or not behavior
is contingent upon reinforcements. The Internal-External
Locus of Control Scale (Rotter, 1966), based on Rotter's
social learning theory, purports to measure locus of control
on a continuum from internal (low scores) to external (high

scores). The IE is a 29-item forced-choice scale. It was

96
found that treatment participants did not change signif-
icantly in locus of control in comparison to control

participants.

MeasuringfiInner Dialogue: The RTS

The second variable suggested by the research ques-
tions and objectives was building a satisfying relationship
with the self through conscious differentiation and change
of inner dialogue patterns. The larger theoretical orienta-
tion of positive mental health was examined, using Jahoda's
criteria for mental health, with emphasis on attitudes
toward the self. The four components include: 1) accessibil-
ity to consciousness, 2) correctness of self-concept, 3)
self-acceptance, and 4) a sense of identity. Theoretical
elements which led to the investigation of this variable
fiwere discussed as they pertain to Kaufman's inner dialogue
theory, including conscious experiencing (Gendlin, 1969),
developing a linguistic representational system of the self
(Bander & Grinder, 1975), cognitive selftalk (Beck, 1976;
Ellis & Grieger, 1977), affect and script theory (Tomkins,
1963, 1978), phenomenological theory (Kell, 1974).

The second variable, which emerged from this theoret-
ical framework,led to the formulation of BCS. Kaufman devel-
oped the treatment program as a means to teach students to
build a satisfying relationship with the self. This goal can
be attained by practicing tools to develop differentiation

and integration of the self.

97

The internal process of the self can be mastered
through a series of developmental stages. For Kaufman, the
internal process of the self is comprised of certain steps
which lead to an integrated self-identity. The internal pro-
cess includes 1) motivational systems, 2) dimensions of con-
sciousness, 3) identity or the self's relationship with the
self, and 4) developmental phases.

The theory of change proposed by Kaufman follows the
sequence of the internal processes of the self. The first
step is to become more aware and differentiated in relation
to affects. Although Kaufman adds needs, values, and drives
to the motivational system, the development of the affect
system was chosen as a variable for assessment in the treat-
ment program because of the primacy of the affect system
(Tomkins, 1963; Kaufman, 1983, p. 52-3). The second step is
learning to become conscious of inner dialogue patterns,
which is accomplished through first learning to identify and
name them. The third step is changing inner dialogue pat-
terns from negative to positive.

The RTS was developed to assess the achievement of
these objectives in the treatment program. The RTS is a
quasi-projective instrument adapted from Goldfried and
D'Zurilla (1967) to assess the specific objectives of BCS.
It was developed to correspond to Kaufman's theory of
change, and contains five subscales: 1) differentiation of
.affects, 2) observation and differentiation of inner

dialogue patterns, 3) presence of positive inner dialogues,

98

4) presence of negative inner dialogues, and 5) replacement
of negative with positive inner dialogues. The RTS is com-
prised of eight situations chosen to reflect typical life
events relevant to college students. The situations are fol-
lowed by questions structured to elicit information about
internal dialogue patterns and affects pertinent to the five
subscales.

The RTS was scored by four independent raters, who were
trained during eight hours of training within four separate
sessions. Interrater reliability coefficients were estimated
for a subsample of the tests for all raters. The results
were high levels of correlation for all scales but Replace-
ment. Two parallel tests for pre- and posttest were devel-
oped for the RTS, which were judged similar in content and
potency by expert judges. Significant changes in the pre-
dicted direction were found for Differentiation of Affect
and for frequency of Positive Dialogues. No other subscales
produced significant results when posttests were compared
for both groups in the analysis of covariance. However, the
control group demonstrated a significant decrease in differ-

entiation of typical inner dialogue patterns.

Translating Concepts into Tools
The third research question deals with the perception
of effectiveness of the tools taught in BCS and the reported

frequency of use. The instrument used to assess these var-

99
iables was a self-report Evaluation Questionnaire, admin-
istered in the treatment groups at posttest only.

For the first two instruments the data was analyzed
using analysis of covariance, with the pretests as the
covariate. This enabled the differences at pretest between
the two groups to be held constant so that when comparing
the two groups at posttest, any treatment effects could be
seen. For the third research question, qualitative data
analysis using mean estimation was reported. A summary of
anecdotal data from treatment participants was also pre-
sented.

The sample consisted of 56 undergraduate and graduate
students at Michigan State. The treatment group consisted of
EAC 415 students enrolled in BCS; the control group con-
sisted of volunteer participants from several sections of TB
200, a course offered in the Department of Teacher Education
which focuses on values, motivation, and self-esteem in
relation to teaching. This group was chosen on the basis of
demographic similarity as well as some similarity in class
content, with the exception of the treatment variables.

A summary of the results for the hypotheses is pre-
sented below:

1. In comparison to control participants, treatment par-
ticipants did not increase in the direction of internal
locus of control, as measured by the Internal-External

Locus of Control Scale.

100
In comparison to control participants, treatment par-
ticipants increased in their ability to demonstrate
conscious differentiation of positive and negative
affects.
In comparison to control participants, treatment par-
ticipants did not increase in their ability to observe
and differentiate typical inner dialogue patterns. In
this test, control participants had a significant
decrease, while treatment participants decreased only
slightly.
In comparison to control participants, treatment par-
ticipants increased in the frequency of positive inner
dialogues. ’
In comparison to control participants, treatment par-
ticipants did not decrease in the frequency of negative
inner dialogue.
In comparison to control participants, treatment par-
ticipants did not increase in ability to replace neg-
ative inner dialogue patterns with positive ones. Since
interrater reliability was low on this subscale, sig-

nificant results would not have been meaningful.

Implications

Certain implications emerge from the present study.

First, it is possible to teach preventive mental health

skills in an educational setting. Participants in a treat-

ment program designed to teach positive mental health skills

101
demonstrated a significant increase in differentiation of
affect and in positive inner dialogue patterns when compared
to participants in a control group chosen for demographic
similarity. This finding adds support to the proposition
that an educational model can enhance psychological well-
being (Guerney, Stollak, & Guerney, 1970).

The results of the study demonstrate that, although
participants did not change in locus of control, the treat-
ment respondents moved in the direction predicted (toward
internality). There are several possible reasons why the
locus of control variable was not significant. It could be
that the instrument is not a good measure of locus of con-
trol (Smithyman, Plant, & Southern, 1974). Another possibil-
ity is that the sample was not large enough to detect sig-
nificant differences. Perhaps some confounding factors
caused the control group to change in the internal direc-
tion, thus masking changes when the treatment group was com-
pared to the control group, or that there may not have been
a long enough time between pre- and posttesting. Finally, it
could be that BCS does not impact directly on locus of con-
trol for students, so that, even though theoretically one
might expect changes in locus of control, actual evidence
does not support this. It might be that changes in locus of
control did not occur because most of the class time was
spent on tools and exercises to improve the self's relation-
ship with the self, rather than on tools to teach impacting

on one's environment. The tool dealing with locus of control

102
was Values and Expectations (see Appendix A, "Tools"). This
tool was offered toward the end of the class, and less
attention was given to it. This negative finding might imply
a change in the goals of BCS or at least in the focus.

The second variable, building a satisfying relationship
with the self, was measured by the RTS. The RTS scales
showed significant results in Differentiation of Affect and
Positive Inner Dialogue. From a developmental perspective,
one might predict that change in self-identity occurs'
through a progressive series of stages. The first is
increased differentiation of affect.. The second stage,
according to Kaufman's theory of change, is increased dif-
ferentiation of inner dialogue patterns. Since this scale
was not significant in the study, one might hypothesize that
this step in the theory can be bypassed. If the development
of the self is progressive and hierarchical, it would seem
difficult for individuals to make changes in inner dialogue
patterns before negotiating the stage of differentiation of
inner dialogue. The problem may also have been due to a dif-
ficulty in the measurement tool. Although the interrater
reliability was high for this subscale, the raters reported
some uncertainty about scoring. In training sessions, this
subscale was the most difficult on which to reach consensus.
The means for the subscale for the treatment group
decreased very slightly between pre- and posttest (.07

points) while the control group means decreased more dramat-

103
ically (0.3 points). These numbers may have been too small
to detect significant differences.

The two significant scales which increased as pre-
dicted, Differentiation of Affect and Positive Inner
Dialogue, seem to follow the movement predicted by the
theory--that is, that one begins to achieve an integrated
self-identity through developing a language to describe
inner experiences, by learning to live consciously and iden-
tify inner states, and by learning to observe the self in a
friendly, nonjudgmental manner. It might have been too much
to expect that negative inner dialogue patterns would
decrease on the RTS, since, as differentiation of affect
increases in the early stages of change, the individual
becomes more aware of negative patterns of inner dialogue..
Only over a long period of time might one expect this aware-
ness to translate into a decrease in negative patterns.
Further, on the short term, one might even expect an
increase in reported negative dialogues as one becomes aware
of and accepts negative inner dialogue patterns. This was
not the case in the research study, since both groups
decreased about the same amount in the scale between pre-
and posttest.

If one compares the results of the study to Jahoda's
criteria for positive mental health, especially the atti-
tudes toward the self components, one sees that accessibil-
ity to consciousness and self-acceptance are skills that can

be taught, since the results show that increased differen-

104
tiation of affect and increased frequency of positive inner
dialogues result from the treatment.

The results of the study seem to reflect the develop-
mental process whereby internal experiences are made con-
scious and self-accepting inner dialogue patterns occur more
frequently. This seems to parallel the findings from the
Evaluation Questionnaire, which demonstrated that the par-
ticipants found most helpful the tools that enable them to
practice self-consultation and self-observation. This also
corresponds to the anecdotal data collected from students in
BCS. The process described is one of self-examination,
learning about one's inner experiences, followed by a period
of nonjudgmental detachment and observation. Many of the
students stated that they learned from the teachers and
other students that they were not the only ones to exper-
ience certain feelings, needs and drives. They learned from
practicing the tools to increase awareness of inner exper-
iences and to accept inner states as valid. The group dis-
cussion and instructors' input enabled them to approach an
attitude of differentiated owning, the act of experiencing
consciously, identifying, and then owning feelings and needs
as part of the self. Finally, the tools which promote self-
valuing helped participants to cultivate a philosophy of
self-acceptance, which seems to have been internalized, as
demonstrated by the increase in the frequency of positive

inner dialogues.

105

To conclude, one might reflect that the two significant
findings imply that BCS has been successful in achieving at
least partially its objective of increasing ability to build
a satisfying, self-affirming relationship with the self. The
fact that the experimenter succeeded in measuring signif-
icant differences in differentiation of affect and increased
positive inner dialogue demonstrates the effectiveness of an
educational experience which integrates affective with
cognitive-behavioral techniques. Kaufman's tools, which
direct students toward conscious experiencing of internal
states and self-nurturance, have a measurable effect on
participants. These two achievements are often the goals of
group or individual psychotherapy, that is, establishing
affective linkages and increasing self-acceptance.

The implication of the positive findings seems to be
the affirmation of the current tools and teaching emphasis
of BCS. However, the goals of BCS also include assuming
personal responsibility. Since the findings for this objec-
tive were not significant, it might be important to ascer-
tain whether the goals of BCS are too broad and whether the

inclusion of this goal should be reevaluated.

Limitations of the Study
Several limitations are inherent in this study. The
primary concern is the small sample size. Other concerns
include the short time span of the class, the age of the

participants in the treatment group, limitations of research

106
design, and the difficulty of finding an appropriate con-
trol group.

The small sample available to participate in the treat-
ment limits the power of statistical tests, or the ability
to detect significant effects. "Increasing the sample size
increases the power of a given test of HO against a true
alternative H1" (Hayes, 1973, p. 360). Normally only 15 to
20 students elect EAC 415, BCS. This is an ideal number to
conduct a class using group discussions; however, for quan-
titative research design, the small sample size may present
a problem.

It is difficult to motivate large numbers of consumers
to partake in preventive services since few individuals
recognize their susceptibility to mental illness. "Those
without a current 'illness' are seldom interested in preven-
tion activities and those who have an 'illness' are more
interested in treatment services” (Brosnowski & Baker, 1974,
p. 716). .

Another factor which limits the study is the ability to
detect significant growth in a short span of time. The abil-
ity to master the tools and concepts within ten weeks time
and then to put them into practice as behavioral action
strategies may be a process that takes a longer amount of
time than the ten weeks available in the study.

This may have been a factor in the results of the RTS

scales. Since Kaufman's theory predicted progressive devel-

107
opmental changes, it may be that additional changes would
occur in participants after a longer period of time.

A third limitation may have been the age and the devel-
opmental stage of the treatment participants. Given their
limited life experiences it may have been too much to expect
significant changes from college students.

A fourth hurdle in actualizing an evaluation study is
the lack of theoretical knowledge and the inadequacy of
research methodology in primary prevention (Brosnowski &
Baker, 1974).

Most programs have multiple goals, generate unan-

ticipated consequences (positive and negative),

and are directly influenced by their own intended

outputs. . . . Evaluative research must somehow

incorporate such realities into the design because

they cannot be fairly ignored, assumed to vary

randomly or held constant in "experimental” or

”control" groups (p. 714).

In the present study, the experimenter has taken into
account these factors by tailoring an instrument to the
specific outcomes thought to be central in this class. How-
ever, a projective instrument is difficult to score empir-
.ically because of the subjectivity of the rating system as
interpreted by different raters and the difficulty translat-
ing theory into scorable criteria. Therefore, without
further testing of the reliability and validity of the RTS,
it is still not known how well this instrument assesses the
changes that occur in the program.

A quasi-experimental design may present threats to

internal validity, or the ability to make causal inferences

about an experiment, and external validity, the ability to

108
generalize to a larger population than the sample. Potential

threats to validity will be discussed.

Internal and External Validity Concerns

 

In a nonequivalent group design, there are certain
threats to internal validity. One potential source of bias
is interaction of selection and maturation. This problem
describes the possibility that the group which selects
treatment might mature or gain because of the intrinsic
motivation of having selected the treatment and would have
gained without treatment. This threat can be dealt with by
demonstrating the similarity of the populations, that is,
that they are chosen from the same universe. The volunteer
status of treatment students is more difficult to control,
since students who elect BCS may be more motivated and in
fact gain more because of this motivation. It might be
argued that the voluntary nature of choosing to participate
in a workshop or in the research study might, in fact, con-
trol for the selection factor of volunteering. Campbell and
Stanley state that self-selection can weaken internal valid-
ity, but stress that the study can still provide useful
information about the effects of treatment (1963, p. 36).

Threats to external validity or generalizability
emanate from the potential interaction effects between
selection and treatment variables. Since participants are
individuals who volunteer for this specific program and

further agree to participate in research, the sample is

109
somewhat removed from a truly representative sample of
M.S.U. students. Since motivation is a factor in participa-
tion, the results may be appropriately generalized to that
subpopulation of students who seek preventive educational
experiences in building self-esteem. This stipulation is
legitimate since the present study assumes an educational
model which implies that the participants are seeking an
intervention because of inherent motivation.

Another threat to external validity is the interaction
of testing and treatment. This sensitization to treatment
because of the nature of the pretests may be problematic,
but only to the extent that the pretesting experiences
increase motivation to enhance the qualities measured by the
tools. Since BCS is an educational experience, this threat
is not of great concern, since ”in research on teaching, one
is interested in generalizing to a setting in which testing
is a regular phenomenon" (Campbell and Stanley, 1963,

p. 18).

The problem of reactive arrangements, that is, stu-
dents' knowledge that s/he is participating in a research
experiment, may cause the experience to be unrepresentative,

but this is equalized by the use of a control group.

Directions for Future Research
Instrument Revision
Within the sections detailing the results and implica-

tions of the study, difficulties with the instrumentation

110
were discussed. Therefore, revisions of the RTS are recom-
mended for future research. These revisions include: refine-
ment of the scoring for the Differentiation of Inner
Dialogue subscale, elimination of the Replacement subscale,
and greater correspondence between the theoretical and
empirical dimensions of the scales. The results may indicate
reexamination of the theory of change proposed by Kaufman,
which could lead to a reformulation of the subscales and
scoring criteria of the instrument.

Although interrater reliability correlations were high
on four of the five subscales, further reliability studies
with other trained raters may prove informative and may dem-
onstrate specific difficulties with the scoring criteria.

Further.testing of the construct validity of the RTS is
recommended. This could be accomplished by comparing the RTS
scores with measures thought to correlate with the subscale
variables, such as individual self-report data or instructor
ratings of participants' progress.

In summary, the psychometrics of the RTS warrant
further development of the instrument, including revisions
and research to establish construct validity and reliabil-

ity.

Evaluation Research of BCS with Special Target Groups
Further investigation into the effectiveness of using
BCS with certain target groups may support the efficacy and

applicability of the program as a preventive mental health

111
treatment for specific populations. The present study indi-
cates that treatment is effective for college students in
increasing differentiation of affects and positive inner
dialogues. Therefore, it might be hypothesized that specific
groups experiencing difficulty in these areas might benefit
from the program.

One special group which might benefit from BCS is psy-
chopathic or narcissistic personalities. Currently BCS is
being offered in a local residential treatment center for
substance abusers, many of whom are diagnosed as narcis-
sistic personalities. Narcissistic personalities are charac-
terized by a need for power and control and by a denial of
feeling (Lowen, 1983, p. 75). As a result, one might expect
BCS to be an effective treatment for these individuals.
Evaluation into the impact of BCS on substance abusers is
suggested.

Other populations which might benefit from BCS are
clients with symptoms of depression, who have given up feel-
ings of personal power and competence, and psychosomatic
clients, who have denied expression of affects except as
somatic complaints. These clients could benefit by learning
to differentiate and express internal experiences, so that
feelings of self-worth and acceptance could develop. Evalua-
tion research as to the specific effects derived by these
groups can add to the information about BCS effectiveness.

In a study with a small sample, the qualitative data

sometimes offer subtle implications for further research.

112

For example, in the present study, a number of participants
stated that they would recommend the program to their peers;
some asserted that all college students should be exposed to
the program. If one is truly interested in the preventive
nature of the program, it might be hypothesized that BCS,
could be offered to healthy populations routinely as a pre-
ventive method. Kaufman believes that

we need to teach people practical tools in build-

ing positive mental health skills, for developing

self-esteem, and for forming relationships. These

are capacities we're expected to possess, but we

are never taught how to develop them. This program

is the first to create a curriculum to teach these

skills (Kaufman, 1984a).
Therefore, Kaufman believes that BCS should become a part of
the public educational system, to be offered at any level in
the educational system, from elementary to high school.
Further investigation of this suggestion is needed to deter-

mine the applicability of BCS to younger populations of

individuals.

APPENDICES

APPENDIX A

TOOLS

113

A. Tools for collecting self-esteem and building feelings
of personal competence:
Tool #1: Collecting Happiness

Make a list of five good things that happened each day, five
things or events you feel good about, that left you feeling

happy. Do this daily, either before going to sleep or else

periodically throughout the day. Remember to look for good

feelings, be conscious of them, and then record them. This

tool teaches us to store the good feelings inside and helps

us let go of bad feelings.

Tool #2: Collecting Adequacy

Make a list of five things you did in each day--accomplish-
ments, activities, situations you handled--which pleased
you. These ought to leave you feeling proud and satisfied
with yourself. This is a way of learning how to collect and
bank self-esteem: pride in self, valuing of self, esteem for
self. We must remember to consciously give ourselves those
feelings on a daily basis (Kaufman, 1983b, p. 24).

B. Building a satisfying inner relationship with ourselves:

Tool #1: Becoming Conscious of and Changing our Inner
Dialogue

Be conscious of the ways you typically talk to yourself
inside, particularly following disappointments, mistakes,
and failings. Then consciously try to change the way you
talk to yourself away from anger, self-blame, contempt, or
criticalness, toward respect, tenderness, valuing of self,
and forgiveness for mistakes and failings.

 

Tool #2: Cultivating Ways of Nurturing Self

Set aside some time in every day to actively nourish and
care for yourself, some activity that directly nurtures you
inside either at the adult or child level. This is a way of
learning to care for ourselves.

Tool #3: Talking to Our Inner Child Through Imagery

Close your eyes and call up an image of the young boy or
girl you were around either age five or age ten, whichever
comes easiest to mind. Beginning with happier memories, try
to visualize that child as clearly as possible: see how you
dressed, your way of walking or skipping, and your manner-
isms. When you have a clear, vivid image of the child you
were back then, ask your child to come over, sit beside you,
and hold your hand. Now talk to that child, asking about
feelings and needs. Then be the good parent or older friend

114

to your child you wish you had had. Before you complete this
experience, imagine giving that child a great big hug and
tucking your child into bed, as if somewhere inside of you.

If you have difficulty, find a photograph of yourself at
that age, look at it awhile, and then enter the imagery
(pp. 44-45).

C. Learning to Live Consciously:
Tool #1: Consultation with Self

Set aside ten minutes once a day to consult self. Focus
attention inwards to experience inner events consciously:
How am I feeling now? What am I needing emotionally? How is
my body reacting? What do I value most out of life? Exper-
ience, name, and then own each of these distinct parts of
the self as natural and valid. '

Tool #2: Meditation

This is a one-point focusing of attention. Set aside fifteen
minutes, relax your body, quiet yourself, close your eyes
and focus your attention on one point: a sound, your breath-
ing or counting from one--or on exhaling. Then allow all
feelings, thoughts, memories, or fantasies simply to come
into awareness and then to pass through awareness. The pur-
pose is to learn to let go.of, or detach from, the cOntents
of consciousness by focusing all attention on one point.
Meditation is a way of quieting the self that teaches us how
to develop inner detachment.

Tool #3: Bubble Meditation

Close your eyes and imagine yourself sitting quietly at the
bottom of a clear lake. Much as large bubbles slowly rise
through water, picture each thought or feeling as a bubble
rising into the space you can observe, passing through and
then out of this space. Allow seven or eight seconds for
each bubble to pass into and out of visual awareness. When
you have a thought or feeling, simply observe it for this
time period, encased in its "bubble," until it passes out of
your visual space. Then calmly wait for the next one and
observe it similarly. Do not explore, follow up or associate
to a bubble, just observe it. Allow fifteen minutes for this
meditation. With practice this will teach us one way of
detaching from or letting go of unsettling, anxious, or
stressful events.

Tool #4: Letting Go Through Imagery
Select a comfortable sitting or reclining position. Close

your eyes, and think about a place that you have been before
that allows you to fully detach or let go. (It should be a

115

quiet environment, perhaps the seashore or the mountains. If
you cannot think of such a place, then create one in your
mind.) Now imagine that you are actually in this place.
Imagine that you are seeing all the colors, hearing the
sounds, smelling the aromas. Just lie back, and enjoy your
soothing, rejuvenating environment. Feel the peacefulness,
the calmness, and imagine your whole body and mind being
renewed and refreshed. After five to ten minutes, slowly
open your eyes and stretch. Remember, you can instantly
return to your place whenever you desire, and experience a
peacefulness and calmness in body and mind.

Tool #5: Refocusing Attention

Practice letting go of, or detaching from negative feelings,
mistakes, or failings by consciously refocusing attention
outwards. It is fine to take something useful from our mis-
takes, but then we must find a way to let go of them. Atten-
tion can be refocused into external sensory experience such
as music, going for a walk, or even reading murder mys-
teries. Attention can also be refocused onto a physical task
such as jogging, swimming, bicycling, or even cleaning
closets. It is the conscious refocusing of attention by a
sheer effort or will which accomplishes the much-needed let-
ting go inside.

Tool #6: Self-Observation

The task here is learning how to divide attention by holding
a part of the self back inside as a friendly observer. The
observing part of the self develops a new conscious center
which then can integrate all of the remaining parts of the
self around it. It is perhaps the most difficult task of all
to remember to observe the self consciously in the moment of
our experience. Simply attempting to observe our own feel-
ings of discomfort or pain enables us to detach from them by
stepping out of the experience even while we are yet in it.
The key here is remembering, when caught in the net of our
reactions, to step back from or outside of them, to simply
observe them consciously with a detached and friendly eye.
Twice a day, remember to keep a part of the self back inside
as a friendly observer. And whenever you feel taken over by
a particular emotion or reaction, step outside of it and
attempt to observe it impartially, as though from a
distance.

 

Tool #7: Values and Expectations

We need to know what we are expecting or looking for from
each and every sphere of life we are invested in, that mat-
ters to us. This is a way of consciously identifying our key
goals and values from life's varied pursuits. And we must
know how realistic these expectations are, how well they
match reality. Questions to ask ourselves are: What moti-

116

vates me to do it? What am I looking for from marriage or
family? Which is more important, career or family, or are
both important? Do I like and respect my work? Do I enjoy my
work, is it fun?

Considering the immediate future, say, the next five to ten
years, make a list of the three or four key things you are
looking for or expecting from each of the following areas of
living: Work/Career, Relationships, Marriage/Partnerships,
Parenting, and Other Interests. Be as specific and concrete
as possible when identifying your basic goals and expecta-
tions from each of these pursuits. It will require much
soul-searching and consultation with self to make these
expectations conscious.

 

 

After you have listed your expectations, ask yourself which
ones are actually in your control to attain and which ones
are out of your control. Then look at which expectations are
realistic given the particular situation concerned. Finally,
with regard to each of your identified expectations, ask
yourself how much is enough in order to feel a basic satis-
faction with self (Pp- 83-86).

 

 

 

APPENDIX B

EVALUATION FORM

LOCOVOWEJ'IDKNNH

117

DATE

 

CODE #
EVALUATION FONN

PLEASE RANK ORDER THE FOLLOWING COURSE-RELATED EXPERIENCES FROM
W (NLMBER 1) T0 LEASLEEEECILUE (NUMBER 16) IN
CONTRIBUTING TO YOUR PERSONAL GROWTH:

NRITING WEEKLY REACTION PAPERS.
NID TERM PROJECT: ASSESSING TOOLS PERSONALLY.

FINAL PROJECT: TEACHING TOOLS TO OTHERS.

READING SuAUEl__IDE_EDUER_QE_£A81NQL
READING WELL

PRACTICING THE TOOLS.

SUPPORT AND ACCEPTANCE FROM TEACHERS.
SUPPORT AND ACCEPTANCE FROM GROUP MEMBERS.
IEACHERS’ EXPLANATIONS OF CONCEPTS.

TEACHERS’ SHARING OF PERSONAL EXPERIENCES.

GROUP MEMBERS' DISCLOSURES.

YOUR OWN DISCLOSURES.

LEARNING TO BE SELF ASSERTIVE.

LEARNING T0 COPE WITH UNCERTAINTY AND POWERLESSNESS.

LEARNING TO COPE WITH STRESS.

GETTING IN TOUCH NITH FEELINGS AND NEEDS.
OTHER:

 

APPENDIX C

EVALUATION QUESTIONNAIRE

118

BUILDING A COMPETENT SELF

 

EVALUATION QJESTIONNAIRE

 

Please fill out and return to address below.

Your Name

 

Address

 

 

Date

 

Sex ‘ Male Female

Age

 

Date of Course Participation

 

RETURN TO: Gershen Kaufman, Ph.D.
Counseling Center
Nfichigan State University
East Lansing, MI 48824
517/355-8270

1L19

Directions: Rate each tool according to how personally useful each is and also

Circle the appropriate number.

 

how regularly you are utilizing each one.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Collectin How personally userl is this:
H5 iness:
CBII—“‘ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
ecting
and storing not usefu1 very useful
ggings lbw regularly are you utilizing this:
1 2 3 4 S 6 7
rarely regularly
Collectin How personally useful is this:
A3 ua :
W 1 2 3 4 s 6 7
ecting
and storing not useful very useful
adequacy How rggularly are you utilizing this:
1 2 3 4 S 6 7
rarely regularly
Inner lbw personally useful is this:
WW 1‘" 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
oming not usefhl very useful
conSCious
of and - . . . . .
I ging to How regglarly are you utilizing this.
a positive 1 Z 3 4 5 6 7
one rarely regularly
Cultivatin How personally useful is this:
Na 5 of
FfigL——~ l 2 3 4 S 6 7
saf§¥Ilflfi. not usefhl very userl
Cirin and . . . .
fOrgiseness How regglarly arepyou utiliZing this:
of self 1 2 3 4 S 6 7
rarely regularly

 

 

 

120

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Talking to How personally useful is this:
CHER—“fl 1 2 3 4 s 6 7
TIT—mu ! not useful very useful
m How regularly are you utilizing this:
I 2 3 4 S 6 7
rarely regularly
Consultation How personally useful is this:
It :
F—T'— l 2 3 4 5 6 7
Nzgdéngs not useful very useful
Values . . . . .
Body How regularly are you utilizing this.
1 Z 3 4 S 6 7
rarely regularly
Values How personally useful is this:
. 1 2 3 4 S 6 7
@ectations not useful very useful
How regularly are you utilizing this:
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
rarely regularly
Meditation: How Ersonally useful is this:
““5198 1 2 3 4 s 6 7
attention on
one point not useful very useful
such as breath . . . . '
counting lbw regularly are you utilizng this.
1 2 3 4 S 6 7
rarely regularly

 

 

 

JJZI

Directions: Rate each tool according to how personally useful each is and

 

 

 

also how regularly you are utilizing each one. Circle the appropriate number.

 

—

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

9. Bubble How personally useful is this:
Meditation: 1 2 3 4 S 6 7
Focu51ng ,
attention not useful very useful
on the , . . . . .
bubbles HOw regularly are you utiliZing this.
1 2 3 4 S 6 7
rarely regularly
lO. Refocusin How personally useful is this:
Attention'
' 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Learning ,
to let go not useful \ery useful
How regularly are you utilizing this:
1 2 3 4 S 6 7
rarely regularly
11. Self- . How personally useful is this:
r—ngjnr‘l’fél‘t’g‘ 1 2 3 4 s 6 7
observe not useful very useful
conSCIOUSIy How regularly are you utilizing this:
1 2 ' 3 4 S 6 7
rarely regularly
12. Letting Go How personally useful is this:
HS: 1 2 3 4 s 6 7
___£_IX. not useful very useful
How regularly arepyou utilizing this:
1 2 3 4 S 6 7
rarely regularly

 

 

 

122

 

uncoHummmmsm pcm macmesou

no“; 30H
H e m e m m a

 

"50» nqu oochemH m>ms mmusoo
OLD cH mcHudeoHuumm cmsousu pwcmHHmEooom mmmcmno Hmcomnmm coch 0» mmummo on» mumm

coHuonHHucoo mHnmumoncoo :oHuanuucoo HOEHcHE
h w m v m m H

"mcH>HH cH mocmummsoo new nuHmwc Houses
O>HuHmom mchHHsn mpumzou .hHHMCOOHOQ so» How .mmusoo OLD mo :oHuanuucoo on» memm

 

huouommmHumm >HO> muouomumHummcs
h m m v m N H

umHmm ucmummeou m mCHUHHsm .mmuooo may mo mmmcHsmmm: cam auHHmsv HHmum>o may mumm

auopommmHumm >Hm> wuouommmHummcs
b o m w m m H

“quusomm HmccH cam EmmummImHmm mo mmcmm Hmumcmm H50» mumm

muouommmHumm >um> huouommmHummcs
h m m v m m H

"mcH>HH :H mocmuwmeoo cam mmmcm>Huommmo mo mmcmm Hmumcmm H50» mumm

muouommeumm >Hm> wuouommmHummc:
h m m v m m H

"mchmcoHumHmu cess: ucmuuso Mao» mo muHHmsv mnu mama

.H

 

.umnssc ODOHHmonmm mnu OHUHHU "mmcHumm HHmum>O

APPENDIX D
INTERNAL-EXTERNAL LOCUS OF CONTROL

ROTTER SCALE (1966)

1J23

ROTTER SCALE

Directions:

This is a questionnaire to find out the way in which certain important events

in our society affect different peOple. Each item consists of a pair of alter-
natives lettered g_or 9, Please select the one statement of each pair (and only
one) which you more strongly believe to be more true rather than the one you
think you should choose or the one you would like to be true. This is a measure
of personal belief; obviously there are no right or wrong answers.

Your answer, either g_or g_to each question on this inventory, is to be reported
beside the question. Print your name and any other information requested by the
- examiner on the bottom of the last page, then finish reading these directions.
Do not begin until you are told to do so.

Please answer these items carefull but do not spend too much time on any one
item. Be sure to find an answer for everv choice. For each numbered question
make an X on the line beside either the g_or Q, whichever you choose as the
statement most true.

In some instances you may discover that you believe both statements or neither

one. In such cases. be sure to select the one you more strongly believe to be

the case as far as you're concerned. Also try to respond to each item independeany
when making your choice; do not be influenced by your previous choices.

Remember
.Select that alternative which you personally believe to be more true.
I more strongly believe that:

l. a. Chi;dren get into trouble because their parents punish them too
muc .

b. The trouble with most children nowadays is that their parents are
too easy with them.

2. a. Manylof the unhappy things in people's lives are partly due to
bad uck.
b. People's misfortunes result from the mistakes they make.

3. a. One of the major reasons why we have wars is because people don't
take enough interest in politics.

b. There will always be wars, no matter how hard people try to prevent
them.

4. a. In the long run people get the respect they deserve in this world.
. Unfortunately, an individual's worth often passes unrecognized no
matter how hard he tries.

_____P
5. a. The idea that teachers are unfair to students is nonsense.
b

Most students don't realize the extent to which their grades are
'influenced by accidental happenings.

6. a.
b.

7. a.
b.

8. a.
b.

9. a.
b.

10. a.
b.

ll. a.
b.

l2. a.
b.

13. a.
____b
l4. a
b.

l5. a.
b.

l6. a
' b.

l7. a.
b

1J24

Hithout the right breaks one cannot be an effective leader.
Capable peOple who fail to become leaders have not taken
advantage of‘their opportunities.

No matter how hard you try some peOple just don‘t like you.

People who can't get others to like them don't understand how to
get along with others.

Heredity plays the major role in determining one's personality.

It is one's experiences in life which determine what they're like.

I have often found that what is going to happen will happen.

Trusting to fate has never turned out as well for me as making'
a decision.to take a definite course of action.

In the case of the well prepared student there is rarely if ever
such a thing as an unfair test.

Many times exam questions tend to be so unrelated to course work
that studying is really useless.

Becoming a succeSs is a matter of hard work, luck has little or
nothing to do with it.

Getting a good job depends mainly on being in the right place at
the right time.

The average citizen can have an influence in government decisions.
This.world is run by the few people in power, and there is not
much the little guy can do about it.

When I make plans, I am almost certain that I can make them work.’
It is not always wise to plan too far ahead because many thinQS'turn
out to be a matter of good or bad fortune anyhow.

‘There are certain peOple who are just no good.

There is some good in everybody.

In my case getting what I want has little or nothing to do with luck.
Many times we might just as well decide what to do by flipping a coin.

Who gets to be the boss often depends on who was lucky enough to.be
in the right place first.

Getting people to do the right thing depends upon ability: luck has
little or nothing to do with it.

A far as world affairs are concerned, most of us are the victims of
forces we can neither understand, nor control.
By taking an active part in political and social affairs the people

. can control world events.

JJZS

Most people can't realize the extent to which their lives are
controlled by accidental happenings.
There really is no such thing as “Luck.'

One Should always be willing to admit his mistakes.
It is usually best to cover up one's mistakes.

It is hard to know whether or not a person really likes you.
How many friends you have depends upon how nice a person you are.

In the long run the bad things that happen to us are balanced by
the good ones.

Most misfortunes are the result of lack of ability. ignorance.
laziness. or all three.

with enough effort we can wipe out political corruption.

It is difficult for people to have much control over the things
politicians do in office.

Sometimes I can't understand how teachers arrive at the grades they
give.
There is a direct connection between how hard I study and the grades
I get.

A good leader expects people to decide fOr themSelves what they
should do.
A good leader makes it clear to everybody what their jobs are.

Many times I feel that l have little influence over the things that
happen to me.

It is impossible for me to believe that chance or luck plays an
important role in my life. .

a - People are lonely because they don't try to be friendly.

There's not much use in trying too hard to please people, if they
like you. they like you.

There is too much emphasis on athletics in high school.

Team sports are an excellent way to build character._

Hhat happens to me is my own doing.

Sometimes I feel that I don't have enough control over the
direction my life is taking.

Most of the time I can 't understand why politicians behave the way
they do.

In the long run the people are responsible fer bad government on

a national as well as on a local level.

NAME

APPENDIX E

RESPONSE TO SITUATIONS TEST

126
Test A (pretest) and Test B (posttest) of the RTS are
included. Actual tests were typed on legal size paper to

elicit longer responses.

127
Test A
RESPONSE TO SITUATIONS SURVEY

Instructions

 

The purpose of this survey is to determine the feelings
you typically experience in reaction to various life situa-
tions.

On the following pages are a number of questions about
situations. As you read each situation, try to project your-
self into the situation by using your imagination. The more
clearly you can visualize yourself in the situation, the
better. When you have the situation clearly in mind, think
of how you are most likely to feel in such a situation.
Then, in the space provided for each situation, write down
your total feeling reaction in specific detail.

1. To report your most likely feeling reaction,
please try to think only of how you, yourself, would

actually feel at this time. There are pg right or wrong

 

answers for these situations. Your reactions should be based
entirely on your knowledge of yourself as a person.

2. In describing your total reaction to each situa-
tion, report (a) your feelings and the experience you have
with these feelings in the situation; (b) the words you
would say to yourself as you experience the scenes you
imagine; (c) how familiar are these feelings to you; (d)
what past experiences have taught you to react in this way;

and, (e) after your initial reaction, what happens inside.

128
4. You may find it somewhat difficult to respond to
some situations because they contain details which are not
exactly appropriate to you. If this occurs, please use your
creative imagination to place yourself in these situations.
5. If you can't answer a part of a question, just

write "I don't know."

IMPORTANT: The value of this questionnaire will depend in
large part on how frank and honest you are in reporting your
responses. Your responses will be kept strictly confiden-
tial; under no circumstances will they be made known to your

instructors or to anyone else.

 

 

129
RESPONSE TO SITUATIONS

Situation iégéngulz_' , Personal Code I

You have two chapters of assigned reading for a class. You have waited
in line at the assigned reading desk at the library for ten minutes.

Finally, you receive the book you need. You find that the pages of the
chapter have been torn out of the book.

~l. What is your immediate feeling reaction? How do you actually feel
I in this situation? Please explain and be specific.

«9 gy¢~nyalh¢ 46Q2.4N92?' abatgyfiéf/ 6;?2444gpee5./

LiotyflCA25£~Adz 4° .Jlaiaaiuuti; .fifizeefigy) 352412/1Ai37tflh9o4f1

2. What are the actual words you say to yourself? Please be specific.
/Qu 7;:uf ;§LJ ¢?._- Lafie7/ alafiudkil ~fQL49HJ/’¢UCZ‘

czflnno fi¢zILCQL‘fiL’ Séiaaii> jaéttlcznvt i47§fl*&r' 75
aginwfiL VQQD auzliclha xenouay- 7’ Z?/

7 H / J‘fi' )f—
(3 :,7.4/onn«uaeve/« zéhé- /a‘fi7°137 ‘ fi/ ’
’OCKLVfl/NQAAZ-Vzé apeaugananeud7- ’714P0d’ élzflnd 4L22afe,
id‘s/fl W' M,

3. How amiliar or typical of you is this feeling reaction? How do you
feel about feeling like this? Please be specific.

/7. ”lbs . fzfxzuzfl td’ decuanaa-1b24hué7 “‘34:?r‘f‘réfa“éznfibéza5
.zfidléZLI ~vfitru2pczhna‘6 Cga /7*?§r CAAQE§7

[3: 77 I’ 432/. c57lzn (Aacoufldzgér zn44?‘ ‘VZQZJC‘

4. What experiences have taught you to react to yourself this way?
Please explain and be specific.

. 41 a! beam! V6 /U¢V “Pr! 4*‘Dfi“ "‘<\
fifm’JW Zia,“ _nzéuwdoa“

3’ 1M“ M
Jfluflkfld ,71'.;J?<914u??~’7257éf’
<3 Sikweahonac é€?4*'W M\*¥£b¢§%L._—p

mmjfiwwvmfl

5. After you have experienced your initial reaction, how do you
handle it? Does anything also happen inside? Please explain and
be specific.

[9. cgyezyb ;H:atzrvzgwj§/kavésvvny Is7’ALaJc g;?::;;;.

?¥QMRVQJ~LPC44&2%

130
RESPONSE To SITUATIONS
Situation i - Personal Code 0

15. You have gotten a 4.0 in a class that is very difficult. You
are looking at the notice to inform you about your grade.

1. What is your immediate feeling reaction? How do you actually feel
‘ in this situation? Please explain and be specific.

2. What are the actual words you say to yourself? Please be specific.

3. How familiar or typical of you is this feeling reaction? How do you
feel about-feeling like this? Please be specific.

4. What experiences have taught you to react to yourself this way?
Please explain and be specific.

5. After you have experienced your initial reaction. how do you
handle it? Does anything else happen inside? Please explain and
be specific.

131
RESPONSE To SITUATIONS

Situation 0 - Personal Code i

2A. Other classmates have already been accepted for a position at

a 'ChOOI or j°b which You had also ho ed for. Y '
heard lnything y.t. P on haven t

1. What is your immediate feeling reaction? How do you actually feel
T in this situation? Please explain and be specific.

2. What are the actual words you say to yourself? Please be specific.

3. Bow familiar or typical of you is this feeling reaction? How do you
feel about feeling like this? Please be specific.

4. What experiences have taught you to react to yourself this way?
Please explain and be specific.

5. After you have experienced your initial reaction. how do you
handle it? Does anything else happen inside? Please explain and
be specific.

132
RESPONSE To SITUATIONS

Situation 0 - Personal Code #‘

3A. A friend tells you that you seem very together and they would
like to learn from you how to become such an impressive person.

1. What is your immediate feeling reaction? How do you actually feel
in this situation? Please explain and be specific.

2. What are the actual words you say to yourself? Please be specific.

3. now familiar or typical of you is this feeling reaction? How do you
feel about feeling like this? Please be specific.

4. What experiences have taught you to react to yourself this way?
Please explain and be specific.

5. After you have experienced your initial reaction, how do you
handle it? Does anything else happen inside? Please explain and

be specific.

133
. RESPONSE TO SITUATIONS
ituation O - Personal Code P

4A. A close friend comes to town but has no time to see you

What is your immediate feeling reaction? How do you actually feel
in this situation? Please explain and be specific.

2. What are the actual words you say to yourself? Please be specific.

3. Bow familiar or typical of you is this feeling reaction? How do you
feel about feeling‘like this? Please be specific.

4. What experiences have taught you to react to yourself this way?
Please explain and be specific.

5. After you have experienced your initial reaction. how do you
handle it? Does anything else happen inside? Please explain and
be specific.

134

RESPONSE TO SITUATIONS
Situation_0

SA. You have made a serious mistake that could lead to failure (like
studying the wrong chapters for a midterm). Success in this
class is important to your getting into the graduate program you
have chosen.

1. What is your immediate feeling reaction? How do you actually feel
in this situation? Please explain and be specific.

2. What are the actual words you say to yourself? Please be specific.

3. Bow familiar or typical of you is this feeling reaction? How do you
feel about feeling like this? Please be specific.
Q

4. What experiences have taught you to react to yourself this way?
Please explain and be specific.

5. After you have experienced your initial reaction. how do you
handle it? Does anything else happen inside? Please explain and
be specific.

Personal Code 0

.135
RESPONSE TO SITUATIONS
Situation # ‘ - Personal Code 0

6A. You have just found out that you are being offered a job that
both you and your best friend wanted.

1. What is your immediate feeling reaction? How do you actually feel
T in this situation? Please explain and be specific.

2. What are the actual words you say to yourself? Please be specific.

3. How familiar or typical of you is this feeling reaction? now do you
feel about feeling like this? Please be specific.
O

4. What experiences have taught you to react to yourself this way?
Please explain and be specific.

5. After you have experienced your initial reaction. how do you
handle it? Does anything else happen inside? Please explain and
be specific.

 

‘”13if
RESPONSE TO SITUATIONS
Situation ! ~ Personal Code !

7A. You‘ve borrowed a friend's car and had an accident. You're late
in your rent payment. You have two deferred rades that have to
be made up by the end of the term. g

i. What is your immediate feeling reaction? How do you actually feel
' in this situation? Please explain and be specific. '

2. What are the actual words you say to yourself? Please be specific.

3. now familiar or typical of you is this feeling reaction? How do you-
feel about feeling like this? Please be specific.

4. What experiences have taught you to react to yourself this way?
Please explain and be specific.

5. After you have experienced your initial reaction. how do you
handle it? Does anything else happen inside? Please explain and

be specifi .

137 ——-.~._.-- - - ..-.-i

RESPONSE TO SITUATIONS

Situation i - Personal Code #

8A. You have just transferred or begun a course of study in a new
university. far from your home. You move into your new housing
and realize that you don't know anyone.

l. What is your immediate feeling reaction? How do you actually feel
i in this situation? Please explain and be specific.

2. What are the actual words you say to yourself? Please be specific.

3. Bow familiar or typical of you is this feeling reaction? now do you
feel about feeling like this? Please be specific.

4. What experiences have taught you to react to yourself this way?
Please explain and be specific.

5. After you have experienced your initial reaction. how do you
handle it? Does anything else happen inside? Please explain and
be specific.

138

Test B

139
RESPONSE TO SITUATIONS

Situation 0 Personal Code 0

18. You have just gotten your transcript and realize you have made

the Dean's List. You find out that you've made it for the first
time.

What is your immediate feeling reaction? How do you actually.feel
in this situation? Please explain and be specific.

What are the actual words you say to yourself?. Please be specific.

 

How familiar or typical of you is this feeling reaction? How do you
feel about feeling like this? Please be specific.

What experiences have taught you to react to yourself this way?
Please explain and be specific.

After you have experienced your initial reaction, how do you
handle it? Does anything else happen inside? Please explain and
be specific.

140
RESPONSE TO SITUATIONS
Situation l Personal Code i

23. Someone you know gets a job that you were hoping for or thought
you deserved.

l. What is your immediate feeling reaction? How do you actually feel
. in this situation? Please explain and be specific.

2. What are the actual words you say to yourself? Please be specific.

3. now familiar or typical of you is this feeling reaction? How do you
fbel about feeling like this? Please be specific.

4. What experiences have taught you to react to yourself this way?
Please explain and be specific.

5. After you-have experienced your initial reaction. how do you
handle it? Does anything else happen inside? Please explain and
be specific.

141
RESPONSE TO SITUATIONS
Situation 3 - Personal Code O

-.—...a- .o. --~.c .—

33. It's a surprise to

./h. admires you. You when one of your friends tells you that

l. What is your immediate feeling reaction? How do you actually feel
' in this situation? Please explain and be specific.

2. What are the actual words you say to yourself? Please be specific.

3. How familiar or typical of you is this feeling reaction? How do you
feel about feeling like this? Please be specific.

4. What experiences have taught yOu to react to yourself this way?
Please explain and be specific.

5. After you have experienced your initial reaction. how do you
handle it? Does anything else happen inside? Please explain and
be specific.

142

RESPONSE TO SITUATIONS

Situation 4 - Personal Code 0

48. Someone very important to you forgets your birthday.

1. What is your immediate feeling reaction? How do you actually feel

in this situation? Please explain and be specific.

2. What are the actual words you say to yourself? Please be specific.

3. flow familiar or typical of you is this feeling reaction? how do you
feel about feeling like this? Please be specific.
0

4. What experiences have taught you to react to yourself this way?
Please explain and be specific.

5. After you have experienced your initial reaction. how do you
handle it? Does anything else happen inside? Please explain and
be specific.

1143
RESPONSE TO SITUATIONS

Situation 3 ' Personal Code 6

58. A teacher whom you respect has asked you to teach a class for her

°“ 3 6‘? when she'll be absent. That eve i
have forgotten. n n9 you realize that you

1. What is your immediate feeling reaction? How do you actually feel
’ in this situation? Please explain and be specific.

2. What are the actual words you say to yourself? Please be specific.

3. How familiar or typical of you is this feeling reaction? How do you
feel about feeling like this? Please be specific.

4. What experiences have taught you to react to yourself this way?
Please explain and be specific.

5. After you have experienced your initial reaction. how do you
handle it? Does anything else happen inside? Please explain and
be specific.

 

144
RESPONSE TO SITUATIONS
Situation 4 - Personal Code 3

68. You've been talking to someone in authority. a teacher or super-
Visor at your job. She tells you that you're doing a terrific
job. One of your friends is in the same situation and has heard

nothing positive from the person in authority.

1. What is your immediate feeling reaction? How do you actually feel
in this situation? Please explain and be specific.

2. What are the actual words you say to yourself? Please be specific.

3. now familiar or typical of you is this feeling reaction? How do you
feel about feeling like this? Please be specific.

4. What experiences have taught you to react to yourself this way?
Please explain and be specific.

5. After you have experienced your initial reaction. how do you
handle it? Does anything else happen inside? Please explain and

be specific.

145

RESPONSE TO SITUATIONS

Situation 9 ' Personal Code 0

73. You're doing poorly in an important class. You can't keep a part-

.1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

time job that you like because you need more money. You don't have
enough money to pay back a loan to a good friend.

What is your immediate feeling reaction? How do you actually feel
in this situation? Please explain and be specific.

What are the actual words you say to yourself? Please be specific.

now familiar or typical of you is this feeling reaction? How do you
feel about feeling like this? Please be specific.

What experiences have taught you to react to yourself this way?
Please explain and be specific.

After you have experienced your initial reaction. how do you
handle it? Does anything else happen inside? Please explain and
be specific.

 

146
RESPONSE TO SITUATIONS

Situation 0 - Personal Code i

83. You've just moved in to a new city to be '
gin a ro ram of t .
internship. or a job. It's the furthest away sougve eversb22g an
from your family. and you don't know anyone.

l. What is your immediate feeling reaction? How do you actually feel
in this situation? Please explain and be specific. '

2. What are the actual words you say to yourself? Please be specific.

3. How familiar or typical of you is this feeling reaction? how do you
feel about feeling like this? Please be specific.

4. What experiences have-taught you to react to yourself this way?
Please explain and be specific.

5. After you have experienced your initial reaction. how do you
handle it? Does anything else happen inside? Please explain and
be specific.

APPENDIX F

RTS SCORING MANUAL

147

RTS SCORING MANUAL

The following variable will be rated on each test:

1.

The degree of differentiation of positive or negative

affect (score 3. 2. or 1 pt.).

The degree of Observation and differentiation of inner
dialogue patterns (score 3. 2. or 1 pt.).

Presence of positive dialogue (score 1 pt. if present,
0 if not).

Presence of negative dialogue (score 1 pt. if present,
0 if not).

Replacements (score 1 pt. if present. 0 if not).

Rating: The Variables and Subscales

Variable #1: Ability to experience accurately and

demonstrate definite awareness and conscious
differentiation of feelings. including and as

indicated by the labeling Of affect.

DIFFERENTIATION: The ability to demonstrate conscious

experiencing and accurate labeling or

naming of positive or negative affects.

SUBSCALE #1: Differentiation Of affect

3 points: Definite. clear. conscious differentiation and

accurate labeling of primary affect.

2 points: Diffuse differentiation of affect--some awareness

but not very well differentiated

1 point: No differentiation--no awareness Of affect

148

LOOK FOR INDICATIONS FOR SUBSCALE 1 IN QUESTIONS 1 AND 2.

************************************************************

Variable #2:

SUBSCALE #2:

dialogue

Observation and differentiation of inner
dialogue patterns as demonstrated by the
ability tO step back from one's inner
experience so that one can observe the self in
a friendly, nonjudgmental manner.
Differentiation Of inner dialogue patterns
includes the ability to experience. to
accurately identify. and to Observe the
patterns of inner experience.

Observation and differentiation Of inner

3 points: Ability tO self-Observe. differentiate and name

one Of the major definite patterns of positive or

negative inner dialogue.

2 points: -Diffuse Observation and differentiation

1 point: NO differentiation and Observation

************************************************************

Variable #3:

Ability to change negative inner dialogue
patterns from negative to positive.
self-affirming patterns. This variable
includes three subscales: 1) presence of
negative dialogue; 2) presence of positive

dialogue: and 3) replacements.

149

SUBSCALE #3: Presence of positive inner dialogue patterns

1 point: Presence Of a pattern of respect Of self. valuing
self. forgiving the self. tenderness toward the
self; also included are the ability to own
feelings of adequacy. competence. personal power.
and happiness. Evidence of this variable can be
found throughout the test.

0 point: NO evidence Of this. or evidence that it is

 

lacking.

SUBSCALE #4: Presence Of negative inner dialogue

I point: Presence of a pattern of self-blame.
self-contempt. or comparison-making (see
definitions)

0 point: Absence Of the negative dialogue pattern

************************************************************

SUBSCALE #5: Replacing negative inner dialogues with

positive ones

1 point: Within the response there is evidence that the
individual has been able (either in the past or
at this moment) to switch from negative (usually
self-blame or self-contempt) dialogues to
positive ones (self-respect. self-valuing.
self-forgiveness. etc.). (This response Should
‘appear in Question 5. but may also appear
elsewhere.)

0 point: No evidence of replacement.

150

OPERATIONAL DEFINITIONS OF DIFFERENTIATED AFFECTS

The categories are based on Tomkins' and McCarter's
investigation Of the eight primary affects (1964). In their
research. they list descriptors for each affect. Affects are

correlated with facial-skeletal expressions.

Content Areas in Scoring Categories: (These adjectives are
only indicators. and do not necessarily have to be
listed.)

Positive Affects

 

3 points: definite. clear. conscious differentiation and
accurate labeling of primary affect

excited, overjoyed, thrilled. ecstatic. fantastic.

wonderful. joyful. delighted. extremely happy: feelings Of

competence. adequacy: assertive or coping behavior that

clearly shows owning positive affect. surprised.

2 points: Diffuse differentiation of affect: some aware-
ness but not able to clearly differentiate

(Affect in this scoring may be identified. but the person

may be ambivalent or qualify the feeling.),

Okay. fair. sort Of happy. somewhat glad. rather good

1 point: No differentiation--no awareness of affect

 

I don't know: without feeling. casual. emotionless. neutral.

so-so. no response

 

151
Negative Affects
3 points: definite, clear. conscious differentiation
distress-anguish: sad. torn apart. crying. hurt. pained,
lonely
fear-terror: afraid. scared. terrified. panicky
shame-humiliation: ashamed. embarrassed, mortified,
humiliated. inadequate. guilty. shy. discouraged
(bummed-out). feeling inferior
contempt-disgust: stupid, ridiculous. idiotic, scornful.
mocking. loathing, full of contempt
anger-rage: angry. furious. enraged. aggressive. hostile.

mad. powerless. helpless

 

2 points: affect is identified, but is diffuse. undiffer-
entiated
Anxious. nervous. upset. unhappy. depressed, tired.

confused. frustrated. bad.

 

1 point: Indefinite--no conscious awareness of affect

I didn't feel anything: numb; I don't know. no response

 

Problems: What if affect is clearly differentiated but seems
inappropriate for the situation?

What if the space is blank?

What if they don't identify an affect? Try to discern by

other cues: if this is not possible. mark 8 for unscorable.

 

152

EXAMPLES FOR SUBSCALE #1

3 point ratings: Think Of the primary affects: excitement.
joy. surprise. distress. fear. Shame. con-
tempt. anger

Terrific. confident.

Fear. powerlessness. childlike.

Hurt. let down.

Happy. proud.

Wonderful. I feel a sense of accomplishment and self-esteem

increase.

Great. I feel really terrific inside.

Very good. I feel proud Of myself.

Panic. pure panic.

My face would be red.

I would feel like killing someone.

Excited.

Guilty.

Sick to my stomach.

2 point ratings

Flattered.

Confused.

Depressed.

Fine.

Bummed out.

Terrible.

Modest.

Defensive.

153

Buried in disaster.

Relief.

Good.

Anxious.

How could I be SO dumb?

Lonely.

1 point ratings

Damn. Uncertain.

I can understand that time is
would have been nice.

I don't know.

Short. but a couple Of minutes

154

EXAMPLES OF OBSERVATION AND DIFFERENTIATION OF INNER

DIALOGUE

3 point ratings: (Evidence of knowledge of inner dialogue

plus direct language pattern.)

What a jerk. I'm such an idiot.

You did good. kiddo.

Nice going.

You really messed up this time--what a bum.

You can do it if you really try.

2 point ratings: (Diffuse knowledge of inner dialogue pat-

tern and/or indirect language pattern.)

I would feel happy about the compliment. My parents taught
me to be proud of accomplishments like this.

I would feel terribly afraid and would wonder if I could
make it in the job world. I would be very let down.

I have learned from experience that praising myself can give
me a feeling that's good and long-lasting.

Flattered and upset. since I can't teach others how to be
like me.

Good and proud. even though I Shouldn't be. People should be
humble.

1 point ratings

Difficult to answer. since my reaction could vary on this one.

When something goes wrong. everything does.

A little upset. I don't really deal with the problem.

Forget about it.

155

EXAMPLES FOR SUBSCALE 3--Presence Of Positive Dialogue

After the initial fear. I try to tell myself that I
cannot change the situation and to do the best that I
can. If there is a chance to rectify the matter and be
tested later. I may try that. If. in fact, there is no
out. I will rationalize myself out of further
self-contempt and move on. (This is also an example Of
replacement.)

Use inner dialogue. It's up to you how good you make it.
It may be scary. but it may be great. Try to direct
myself in a positive direction. May keep close contact
with family. old friends. to maintain security till
adjusted.

You did it--your hard work paid Off. I've been praised
and encouraged for past achievements--now I use this
process on myself.

Would look for other Options and keep hoping . . .
hopeful.

It's nice to know peOple look up to you. That makes me
feel so good.

After nausea. everything seems to work out. I can get
along with almost anyone--I am easy to get to know.

People usually like me.

Some evidence of owning adequacy. competence. or behaving in a

way that demonstrates positive inner dialogue must be present.

Some of the ones that have positive inner dialogue will have

156

overlap with replacement. That is. if the person starts out

with negative dialogue and then switches to positive inner

dialogue (usually on Question 5). then that is also a point

for replacement.

7.

I would bum out like crazy and then I would immediately
look into other Opportunities. Things for me always work
out in the end. SO I would just be very Optimistic about
the whole thing. (Earlier affect identified feeling
”terrible. jealous. assume that I was never going to hear
from them.”)

I would feel Sick to my stomach . . . how could I be so
dumb?. . . After bumming out. I would talk about it to
someone who would probably get me to call the prof about
it. Then I would feel that I shouldn't be so hard on

myself. I'm only human.

So rate these 1 for positive. 1 for negative. and 1 for

replacement.

157

EXAMPLES FOR SUBSCALE #4--Presence of negative inner dialogue

l.
2.

4.

How could I be SO dumb?

(In response to a compliment) They can't be serious--
have I misled them.

I would feel like an idiot--it just figures this would
happen to me.

You asshole-~what a jerk.

Note--In Situation 3A--"I would feel bad for my friend..." is

not negative inner dialogue. However. if they add "I

would feel like I don't deserve it because I'm no good,"

then it would be negative inner dialogue.

In Situation 7A--"What else can go wrong? This is a terrible

feeling--stressed out..." This is 225 negative inner
dialogue. But if they put ”This could only happen to
me...Why me? I try to be so good and look what happens."
this response implies a degree Of self-blame or

self-contempt.

158

PRACTICE SCORING FOR POSITIVE AND NEGATIVE DIALOGUES AND

REPLACEMENTS

All right--you did it (made good grade). I knew you could
do it. Now I go celebrate.

I blame the Situation. I try to avoid feeling like I am
not good enough. keeping a trace Of false hope and
blaming the environment--the interviewer. the paper work.
a delay in the mail. I blame them for not liking my
uniqueness. I feel self-confident and yet insecure about
others' Opinion Of me. I feel guilty for blaming. My
self-esteem sags.

(In response to 3A--) I would dread such a
situation--wouldn't want to deal with it--would
withdraw...What does she want from me? It would be
emotionally draining. like a clinging puppy.
Furious--like kicking myself. I go to friends, who bOth
punish me and help me to justify and forgive.

I want to run away--feel overwhelmed. angry. guilty. I
try to con my way out of the Situation--wish I could
disappear. be sick. not be responsible. I try to
prioritize the chaos. I'm angry still...I try to con my
way out Of any situation. by getting postponements. etc.
I feel like I want to get drunk and escape.
Disappointed..let down..I've always been taught to be

realistic. SO I avoid unnecessary let down..I would feel

lo.

10.

ll.

12.

159
good and happy that I could understand the person's
"reality.”
Idiot. It just figures this would happen to me. I would
calm down and try to study the right chapters. I would
also say to myself. "You studied and went to class. You
know this stuff." Positive reinforcement.
Feel something must be "wrong" with me..I get down on
myself..I get over it--realize the advantage of my n22
getting the position. (I think that things work out for
the best.)
I've worked hard to be who I am today. I'm really happy
that someone noticed and admired that.
Disappointed and angry--I would feel that he did not want
to see me very badly if he didn't make the effort--He
must not care very much about me..I calm down and accept
that he could not see me. whatever the reason.
I'm such a procrastinator and irresponsible. I will
eventually calm down and work on doing better next time.
What is wrong with me? I'm no good. I begin to feel
insecure and a nobody. I sometimes tell myself I'm a
loser because I'm not accepted. Sometimes my inner ally
does help and say. ”Wait. You still might hear something.
It's Okay." But I still don't feel any better.
"Well. forget her. If she can't take the time to see me
for a few hours. then her friendship isn't worth it."
Thene-Beth. you know She cares. She is just really busy

and isn't seeing anyone.” "She better have a good

160
excuse." "I'm sure she does." (I go back and forth a lot.
I'll call her and tell her I feel hurt--feel more alone

and lonely.)

APPENDIX G

INFORMATION AND CONSENT FORMS

161
INFORMED CONSENT

I have understood the proposal to conduct research on TE 200. I

have been given the opportunity to ask further questions about the
details and procedures of the study and have had my questions answered
to my satisfaction. I also understand that, within restrictions of
confidentiality, the general results of the study will be made avail-
able to me.

With the understanding and assurance that my name and/or my responses
on instruments will not be used in any reports based on this research,
and that my responses will be kept confidential, I agree to participate
in the study outlined in the proposal.

Specifically, I hereby agree to provide information requested in this

study. I also understand that I am free to withdraw from the study
at any time.

Signature:

 

Name:

 

Address:

 

Student Number:

 

Date:

 

Project Director: Jan Rosenberg
Department of Counseling and Educational Pyschology
Michigan State University '

.162

INFORMED CONSTENT

I have understood the proposal to conduct research on EAC 415. I have been
given the opportunity to ask further questions about the details and ‘
procedures of the study and have had my questions answered to my satisfaction.
I also understand that, within restrictions of confidentiality, the general
results of the study will be nade available to me.

With the understanding and assurance that my name and/Or my responses on
instruments will not be used in any reports based on this research, and that my
responses will not be given to the instructors without my permission, I

agree to participate in the study outlined in the proposal.

Specifically, I hereby agree to provide information requested in this study.
I also agree to cooperate in providing whatever additional data may be
requested if I annone of the individuals selected for a debriefing interview
at the conclusion of this study. 'I also understand that I am free to with—
draw frcm the study at any time.

Signature:

 

Name:

 

Address:

 

Student NUmber:

 

Date :

 

Project Director: Jan Rosenberg
Dept. of Counseling and Educational Psychology
Michigan State university

163

INFORMED CONSENT

I have understood the proposal to conduct research on TE 200. I

have been given the opportunity to ask further questions about the
details and procedures of the study and have had my questions answered
to my satisfaction. I also understand that, within restrictions of
cgnfidentiality, the general results of the study will be made avail-
a e to me.

With the understanding and assurance that my name and/or my responses
on instruments will not be used in any reports based on this research,
and that my responses will be kept confidential, I agree to participate
in the study outlined in the proposal.

Specifically, I hereby agree to provide information requested in this

study. I also understand that I am free to withdraw from the study
at any time.

Signature:

 

Name:
Address:
Student Number:

 

 

 

Date:

 

Project Director: Jan Rosenberg
Department of Counseling and Educational Pyschology
Michigan State University

164

INFORMATION ABOUT RESEARCH PROJECT

Hello,

My name is Jan Rosenberg. I'm a doctoral student in the Depart-
ment of Counseling Psychology and am conducting a research study
into the effectiveness of various classes in promoting positive
mental health. I would like to request your participation in this
study. ‘

Your part will include taking three tests of personal response patterns
at the beginning of the term and three tests at the end of this term.
The tests measure how you think about situations you commonly expe-
rience as students and as individuals. All three tests will only
take one hour of your time, to be arranged at your convenience.

Benefits which will be derived from participation in the study
include increasing your knowledge of your personality and your
potential for growth throughout the experience of the class. You
will receive a written interpretation of your scores from pre- and
posttests, with an opportunity for further elaboration.

AIndividual scores will be kept strictly confidential by the
experimenter and will not be released to anyone. For the purpose
of the experiment, only group data will be reported.

Only students who agree to participate and sign informed consent
forms will be assessed. Times will be arranged outside of class at

the convenience of the student.

APPENDIX H

PILOT STUDY

165

Table H1. TSCS Means and Standard Deviation: Pilot Study

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Total P Personal Self
Mean N S.D. Mean S.D.

Pretest
Treatment 346.9 10 61.52 66.3 12.9
Control 341.45 11 13.1 68.2 2.1
Posttest
Treatment 356.4 12 46.8 69.17 11.1
Control 363 5 21.7 71 4.6
Normative
Group

345.57 30.70 64.55 7.41
Treatment
Hypotheses
Total P H0: X post - Xpre = 0 retained at t = .3919
Personal
Self
t20.05 = 1.725

H0: X post - Xpre =.O retained at t = .5456
Control
Total P H0: X post - Xpre = reject at t = 2.5
Personal
Self

Ho: HO: Xpost - Xpre = 0 retained at t = 1.71
Treatment and
Control at HO: Xpre(treat) - Xpre(control) = 0

Pretest

= .273 < t = 2.86

t19.85 19

APPENDIX I

FEEDBACK LETTER TO STUDENTS

166

Table H2. Internal-External Locus of Control

 

 

 

 

 

Mean N S.D.
Pretest
Treatment 12.1 10 4.2
Control 9.5 11 3.4
Posttest
Treatment 11.6 12 5.8
Control 12.4 5 3.1
Treatment
HO: IX post - Xtreat = 0
Retained at t = -.2 < t20 = -1.72

Control

HO: X post - Xpre = O

Retained at t - 1.71 < t14 = 1.761
Treatment and Control at Pretest

 

HO: Xpre(treat) — Xpre (control) = 0

t = 1.625 < t19 = .729

Retain

167
August 1984
Dear Student:

I would like to thank you for your participation in the
research project which was conducted during your Spring Term
class in TB 200 or EAC 415. In exchange for your help in
this research project, I will explain the context and
purpose of the testing instruments and then give you an idea
of what your scores mean.

The shorter of the two tests, the "Attitude Scale," is
a measure of locus of control, which is

the degree to which the individual perceives that

the reward follows from, or is contingent upon,

his own behavior or attributes versus the degree

to which s/he feels the reward is controlled by

forces outside of him/herself and may occur inde-

pendently of his/her own reactions. When the event

is interpreted this way by an individual, we have

labeled this a belief in external control. If the

person perceives that the event is contingent upon

his own behavior or his own relatively permanent

characteristic, we termed this a belief in inter-

nal control (Crandall, 1973, p. 227).

The average score for this test is 8 or 9. The standard
deviation is 4. If you had a high (over 16) locus of control
test, it means that you may often attribute events that
occur to forces outside of your control. If you scored
between 12 and 16, you are a bit higher than the general
population. If your score was between 4 and 12, you are in
the average range. If your score was between 0 and 4, you
are rather internal in your locus of control.

You will notice that there are two scores for locus of

control. One was given as a pretest and one as a posttest to

see if change occurred during the term. If your score

168
changed significantly, you might consider what experiences
caused this change. Of course, there is always the possibil-
ity that other factors influenced your responses on this
scale. You might have remembered the questions from the
first time, you might have answered in a way that didn't
necessarily reflect what you were feeling, and factors out-
side of the test setting may have been affecting you (like
finals).

The longer test, which was called the Response to Situ-
ations Test, was given to assess your ability to demonstrate
conscious awareness and differentiation of your feelings and
inner dialogue patterns; that is, to see if you know what
you are feeling emotionally and to see if you are aware of
your internal patterns of experience. It also was looking
for how positively or negatively you treat yourself. There
are five scores reported:

Subscale 1, Differentiation of Affect or Feelings

Subscale 2, Differentiation of Inner Dialogues

Subscale 3, Positive Inner Dialogues

Subscale 4, Negative Inner Dialogues

Subscale 5, Replacing Negative with Positive Inner

Dialogues .

Each situation was scored for each subscale. The first
two subscales were scored on a three point scale, with three
given for the most differentiated. The last three subscales
were scored as either 1 or O, for presence or absence.

Then two raters' scores were averaged across all sub-
scales on the test to derive your scores.

A person with higher scores (2.5 or more) on subscales

1 and 2 is in touch with his/her feelings and inner

169
dialogue. Two points means s/he have some knowledge of inner
states, but it's not very clear. One point means very little
awareness of inner states.

For the Subscale 3, a score of between 0.5 and 1.0 or
greater indicates more positive inner dialogues. Below 0.5
indicates less.

The same is true for Subscale 4, but the higher score
(0.5 to 1.0) indicates more negative inner dialogues.

The last subscale represents how many times you
replaced a negative with a positive inner dialogue. Scores
of 0.5 or greater showed that you replaced frequently.

Again, there are 2 sets of scores, one for pretest and
one for posttest.

Your Scores

 

Rotter Internal-External RTS
Locus of Control

.pretest

posttest

Thank you for your help and participation. If you have
further questions, you may write me in care of the Counsel-
ing Center, 208 Student Services.

Sincerely,

Jan Rosenberg

LI ST OF REFERENCES

170

LIST OF REFERENCES

Allport, F. H. (1955). Theories of perception and the con-
cept of structure. New York: Wiley. Cited in Jahoda, M.
(1958). Current concepts of positive mental health. New

York: Basic Books.

Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy toward a unifying theory
of behavioral change. Psychological Review, 84(2), 191-
215. '

Bandler, R., & Grinder, J. (1975). The structure of magic,
Vol. I. Palo Alto, CA: Science and Behavior Books.

Bannister, D., & Agnew, J. (1977). The child's construing of
self. In J. Cole (Ed.), Nebraska symposium on motivation.
Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press.

Barger, B. (1965). Preventive action in college mental
health. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Univer51ty of

FIorida, Gainesville.

Baygood, B. T. (1974). An evaluation of the effectiveness of
human develgpment instruction. Unpublished doctoral dis-
sertation, Texas A and M University.

Beck, A. T. (1967). Depression:.Clinical experimental and
theoretical aspects. New York: Harper.

. (1976). Cognitive therapy and the emotional dis-
or ers. New York: International Universities Press.

Bettes, M. D. (1968). Mental health . .‘. growth . . . and
your national association. Mental Hygiene, 53, 190-196.

Bower, E. M. (1961). Primary prevention in a school setting.
In G. Caplan (Ed.), Prevention of mental disorders in
children. New York: Basic Books.

. (1963). Primary prevention of mental and emotional
isorders: A conceptual framework and action possibil-
ities. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 33, 832-848.

. (1965). Primary prevention of mental and emo-
tional disorders: A frame of reference. In N. Lambert
(Ed.), The protection and promotion of mental health in

171

schools. Bethesda, MD: Public Health Service Publication
No. 1226, 0.8. Department of Health, Education and Wel-
fare.

Brim, O. G. (1976). Life span development of the theory of
oneself: Implications for child development. In H. W.
Reese (Ed.), Advances in child development and behavior,
Vol. 11. New York: Academic Press.

Broskowski, A., & Baker, F. Professional, organizational,
and social barriers to primary prevention. American Jour-
nal of Orthopsychiatry, 55(5), 707-719.

Cain, A. C. (1967). The perils of preVention. American Jour-
nal of Orthopsychiatry, 51(4), 640-642.

Campbell, D. T., & Stanley, J. C. (1963). Experimental and
quasi-experimental_designs for research. Boston:
Houghton, Mifflin Co.

Caplan, Gerald. (1964). Principles ofppreventive psychiatry.
New York: Basic Books.

Cooley, C. H. (1902). Human nature and the social order. New
York: Charles Scribner's Sons.

C00persmith, S. (1976). The antecedents of self-esteem. San
Francisco: Freeman.

Crandall, R. (1973). The measurement of self-esteem and
related constructs. In J. Robinson, P. Shaver (Eds.),
Measures of social psychological attitude. Ann Arbor:
Institute for Soc1a Research, pp. 45-158.

Cronbach, L. J. (1972). Review of the analysis of learning
potential. In D. K. Buros (Ed.), The seventh_mental
measurements yearbook. Highland Park, NJ: Gryphon Press.

Cudney, M. R. (1971). Elimination of self-defeating behav-
iors. Kalamazoo-: Western Michigan UniVersity Press.

Dalzell-Ward, A. J. (1976). The new frontier of preventive
medicine. Public Health, 52, 101-109.

DelPolito, C. M. (1973). Development! implementation, and
evaluation of a self-concept enhancement program. Unpub-
lished doctoral dissertation, Purdue University, South
Bend, Indiana.

Dua, P. S. (1970). Comparison of the effects of behaviorally
oriented action and psychotherapy reeducation on
introversion-extraversion, emotionality, and internal-
external control. Journal of Counselipg, 51, 6(pt. 1)
(November), 567-572.

172

Ellis, A., & Grieger, R. (1977). Handbook for national emo-
tive therapy. New York: Springer-Verlag.

Fairbain, W. R. D. (1954). An object-relations theory of the
personality. New York: Basic Books.

Felton, G. S. (1973). Teaching internalization to middle-
level mental health workers in training. Psychological
Reports, 53, 1279-1282.

Foulds, M. L., Guinan, J. F., & Wareheimer, R. G. (1974).
Marathon group: Changes in perceived locus of control.
Journal of College Student Personnel, 55, 8-11.

Gendlin, E. (1964). A theory of personality change. In
Worchel & Donn Byrne (Eds.), Personality change. New
York: John Wiley & Sons.

. (1969). Focusing. Psychotherapy: Theory! Research,
and Practice, 6(1) (Winter).

 

Gladwin, T. (1967). Social competence and clinical practice.
Psychiatry, 59, 32.

Goldberg, P. (1978). Executive Health. New York: McGraw-Hill.

Goldfried, M. R., & D'Zurilla, T. J. (1969). A behavioral-
analytic model for assessing competence. In C. P.
Spielberger (Ed.), Current topics in clinical and com-
munityApsychology, Vol. 1. New York: Academic Press.

 

Gottesfeld, H., & Dozier, G. (1966). Changes in feelings of
powerlessness in a community action program. Psycho-
logical Reports, 19:3 (pt. 1), (December), 978.

Greenwald, A. G. (1980). The totalitarian ego: Fabrication
and revision of personal history. American Psychologist,
1' 603-6180

Griz, W. M. (1982). Training health maintenance organization
subscribers in affective and cognitive coping skills as a
primary prevention approach to mental health and health
education. Unpublished’doctoral dissertation, Michigan
State University.

Guerney, B., Jr., Guerney, L., & Stollak, G. (1971/72). The
potential advantages of changing from a medical to an
educational model in practicing psychology. Interpersonal
DeveIOpment,‘g, 238-245.

. (1973). The practicing psychologist as educator.
Unpublished paper.

Gurin, P., Gurin, G., Lao, R. G., & Beattie, M. (1969).
Internal-external control in the motivational dynamics of

Negro youth. Journal of Social Issues, 35, 29-53.

173

Hamachek, D. E. (1978). Encounters with the self. 2nd ed.
New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.

 

Harter, S., & Connell, J. P. (1981). A model of the rela-
tionship among children's academic achievement and their
self-perceptions of competence, control, and motivational
orientation. In J. Nicholls (Ed.), The development of
achievement motivation. Greenwich, CT: J.A.I. Press.

Harter, S. (1983a). Competence as a dimension of self-
evaluation: Toward a comprehensive model of self-worth.
In R. Leahy (Ed.), The development of the self. New York:
Academic Press.

. (1983b). Developmental perspectives on the self-
system. In P. Mussen & M. Hetherington (Eds.),
Carmichael's manual on child psychology, New York: Wiley,
1983b.

. (1984). Personal correspondence, January.

Hayes, W. L. (1973). Statistics for the social sciences. 2nd
ed. New York: Holt, Rinehart 8 Winston.

Hersch, P. D., & Scheibe, R. E. (1967). Reliability and
validity of internal-external control as a personality
dimension. Journal of Consulting Psychology, 5;, 609-613.

Jackson, P. H. (1956). Verbal solutions to parent-child
problems. Child Development, 31, 339-349.

Jahoda, M. (1958). Current goncepts of positive mental
health. New York: Basic Books.

Joe, V. C. (1971). Review of the internal-external control
construct as a personality variable. Psychological

Johnson, R. B. (1977). Life planning and life planning work-
shops. Personnel and Guidance Journal, 55, 546-549.

Jones, E. E., 8 Nisbett, R. E. (1971). The actor and the
observer: Divergent perceptions of the causes of behav-
ior. In E. E. Jones et al. (Eds.), Attribution: Perceiv-
ing the causes of behavior. NJ: GeneraI Learning Press.

Kaplan, H. B. (1975). Self-attitudeg and deviant behavior.
Pacific Palisades, CA: Goodyear Publications. Cited in
Harter, S. Developmental perspectives on the self-system.
In P. Mussen and M. Hetherington (Eds.), Carmichael's
manual on child psychology. New York: WiIey, 1983b.

174

Kaufman, G. (1980). Shame: The power of caring. Cambridge:
Schenkman.

. (1982). Evaluation questionnaire for building a
competent self. Unpublished questionnaire.

. (1983a). Building a competent self. Course syl-
abus.

with Raphael, L. (1983b). The dynamics of power:
Building a competent self. Cambridge: Scherkman.

 

. (1983c). An experiment in preventive mental health.
Unpublished article.

. (1983d). Seminar in psychology of the self. Course
syIIabus, l983d.

. (1984a). Personal interview.

, & Raphael, L. (1984b). Relating to the self: chang-
ing inner dialogue. Psyghological Reports, 51, 239-250.

Kell, B., & Burow, J. M. (1970). Developmental counseling
and therapy. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.

 

Kelly, E. L. (1955). Consistency of the adult personality.
American Psychologist, 52, 659-681.

Klein, D. C., & Goldston, S. E. (1976). Primary prevention:
an ideas whose time has come. Proceedings of the pilot
conference on Primary Prevention, U.S. Department of.
Health and Human Services, National Institute of Mental
Health.

 

. (1961). The prevention of mental illness. Mental
Hygiene, 25, 101-109.

Lefcourt, H. M. (1966): Internal versus external control of
reinforcement. Psychological Bulletin, 55, 206-220.

Levens, H. (1968). Organizational affiliation and powerless-
ness: A case study of the welfare poor. Social Problems,
55(1) (Summer), 18-32.

Lowen, A. (1983). Narcissism: Denial of the true self. New
York: MacMillan.

Lynch, M. G., Ogg, W. D., & Christensen, M. G. (1975).
Impact of a life planning workshop on perceived locus of
control. Psychological Reports, 37, 1219—1222.

17S

Maccoby, E. E. (1980). Social development: Psychological
growth and the parent-child relationship. New York:
Harcourt, Brace Jovanovich.

MacDonald, A. P., Jr. (1972). Internal-external locus of
control change techniques. Rehabilitation Literature, 55,
44-47.

. (1973). In J. Robinson & P. Shaver, Measures of
soc1a1 sychological research. Ann Arbor: Institute for
SociaI Research.

 

Mahoney, M. J. (1974). Self-control: Power to the person.
Monterey, CA: Brookstole.

Malamud, D. (1965). Teaching a human relations workshop.
Center for the study of liberal education for adults.

 

Marsh, H. W., Smith, I. D., Barne, J., Butler, S. (1983).
Self-concept: Reliability, stability, dimensionality,
validity and the measurement of change. Journal of Educa-
tional Psychology, 15, 722-290.

Masters, J. C. (1970). Treatment of "Adolescent Rebellion"
by the reconstrual of stimuli. Journal of Consulting Psy-
chology, 35 (October), 213-216.

Mayman, M. (1955). The diagnoses of mental health. Unpub-
lished manuscript of the Menniger Foundation.

Meichenbaum, D. H. (1977). Cognitive-behavior modification.
New York: Plenum.

Miller, G. A. (1969). Psychology as a means of promoting
human welfare. American Psychologist, 55, 1963-1075.

Mirels, H. L. (1970). Dimensions of internal versus external.
control. Journal of Consultinggand Clinical Psychology,
21: 226-228.

Mischel, W. (1968). Personality and assessment. New York:
Wiley, 1968.

Novaco, R. W. (1975). Anger control: The development and
Evaluation of an experimental treatment. Lexington, MA:
Heath. '

Novis, E., & Larsen, J. (1976). Critical issues in mental
health service delivery. What are the priorities? Hos-
pital and Community Psychiatry, 51(8), 561-565.

Parks, C., Becker, W. N., Chamberlain, J. M., & Crandel,
J. M. (1975). Eliminating self-defeating behaviors and

176

change in locus of control. Journal of Psychology, 55,
115-120.

 

Patton, Michael. (1980). Qualitative evaluation methods.
Beverly Hills: Sage Publications.

 

Phelps, R. E. (1977). Effects of self-control training upon
perceived locus of control. Unpublished doctoral disser-
tation, Arizona State University.

 

Philip, T., Himsl, W., & Warren, P. W. (1972). A life skills
course: A preliminary report of its effects on personal-
ity and attitude measures. Saskatchewan Journal of Educa-
tional Research and Development, 5, 56-65.

Reimanis, G., & Schaefer, M. (1970). Effects of counseling
and achievement motivation training on locus of rein-
forcement control. Paper presented at Annual Eastern Psy-
chological Association Convention, Atlantic City, New
Jersey, April.

Rieff, R. (1970). The need for a body of knowledge in commu-
nity psychology. In Ira Iscoe & Charles D. Spielberger
(Eds.), Community psychology: Perspectives in training
and research. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.

 

. (1967). A mental health manpower and institutional
change. In E. Cowan, E. Gardner, & M. Zax (Eds.), Emer-
gent Approaches to Mental Health Problems. New York:
Appleton-Century-Crofts.

Rimm, D. C., & Masters, J. C. (1979). Behavior therapy:
Techniques and empirical findings. 2nd ed. New York:
Academic Press.

Rossi, P. H., Freeman, H. E., & Wright, S. R. (1979). Evalu-
ation: A systematic approach. Beverly Hills: Sage.

 

Rotter, J. B. (1966). Generalized expectancies for internal
versus external control of reinforcement. Psychological
Monographs, 52 (Whole No. 609).

 

Sanford, F. H. (1955). Creative health and the principle of
habeas mente. American Psychologist, 55, 829-835.

Schlesinger, L. (1978). Assessing student outcomes in psy-
chological education: A validation study of measures of
self-esteem, locus ofgontrol, self-actualization, and
vocational maturit . Unpublished doctoral dissertatidn,
University of Toleéo.

Smithyman, Plant, and Souther. (1974). Locus of control in
two samples of chronic drug abusers. Psychological
Reports, 55, 3, 1293.

177

Taylor, F. G., & Marshall, W. L. (1977). Experimental anal-
ysis of a cognitive behavioral therapy for depression.
Cognitive Therapy and Research, 5(1), 59-72.

Tomkins, S. S. (1963). Affect, Imagery, and Consciousness,
Vol. 1 and 2. New York: Springer and Co.

, & McCarter, R. (1964). What and where are the pri-
mary affects? Some evidence for a theory. Perceptual and
Motor Skills, 55, 119-158.

. (1978). Script theory: A differential magnification
of affects. Nebraska Symposium on Motivation, 201-236.

Tyler, F. B., & Gatz, M. (1976). Development of individual
psychosocial competence in a high school setting. Journal
of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 55(3), 441-449.

Weintraub, M., Segal, R. M., & Beck, a. T. (1974). An inves-
tigation of cognition and affect in the depressive exper-
iences of normal man. Journal of Consulting and Clinical
Psychology, 55(6), 911.

White, R. W. (1959). Motivation reconsidered: The concept of
competence. Psychological Review, 55(5).

winer, B. J. (1971). Statistical principles in experimental
design. New York: McGraw-Hill.

Zerega, W. D., Tseng, M. 8., & Greever, K. B. (1976). Sta-
bility and concurrent validity of the Rotter Internal-
External Locus of Control Scale. Educational & Psycholog-
ical Measurement, 36, 473-475.