39777.7” 7",, 777777777 717777737: 7777777773 777777777“ 77777 7 73773 77,,77 7377337 r.w.~. . 777 7., 7, :7 W777 3 ,3. 7. . 3. 33:177‘37 '7'. ‘7 33 7 3337' W 33337 7333:3333 337:7 77.73 7337337337 3,73" .3377: 3.7337733733733573}: 3333371333- 77373 ' , i “3:373:73 371.737]; 3737;!){7f3fif '1', 733;; ’37,],ij 77., .7337 3.377577%“ Iii” jifi-fyéfififfilfi “3.33337 .37" ‘f’f7"l’.‘ 177’ 3777 3773377337.7..3333777333737337373 37333 7777 33333773533? 3’ ".3 7. . 37- '33 33-333} 3371:» 3177.933 33.3 ., ‘ 3373:3337? 535.37,. '. (3. .3 7 3, 7373333333 ,; 7333373'3333173137 733.3'33H‘773 333:3 3' 33'H3'7w: 33; 3333177" .33” ; 3,337 3' 7': :7 7r 7 .3777 3777 ~7 7! 377. 77357373773777.3773..,3;3 It 7' 7:33 7...} . 3“! 31333314333" - , "7 33 3373 3;; 737‘733333’333333‘3373337‘3373733‘33’3‘33‘33‘33‘333333333333337 33333737333333.3333 '3 33 3 .7 . ”v ' 7” 7: ' Iqs’rfii 1%}... a . 1- f" ’3 313333333 3313333}? 3333:1333! 53:33:73 331.33m33333 73"! {323(3343‘; '3: : [i:.3.;3' l 3.3317 3 n "(:3 7 [33" ”‘7‘.“ 3-3317, 7 c 13% Jeff‘f i- 3' 7..- ‘77 7%W377~‘3HW737HWM333 N3 7 3333.153. : I '333 .0 3 ,. 37777 7377777733: 7373733373777 7.3.737, 77777 7333'7’3 . 77. ”733.37. 333,338; 1373337373343373-3333333317773717333373333:13!” 33 3 3'3.‘ ‘3‘3333 333‘33'3'3 3333733212333333333333333 3333’ 7.... , :“ '3;.-‘= 333 33’ 3 .. 33-73773737777733:777373737732.727 77 3'3- -' 3.33-3‘3 .335 '3: ‘3'733-3‘:E73ii:°.r'..7.3‘ 3337 ~ 3 333' . 7 . 93733533337333-3337 3.7373733373373333“ 33:73 73* 33737733333333 73333333733" 7 '3 333337 ‘3" 333.333.575.37 73“”; 17733.7! 7773 7737.33 {37373375 373'. 73.73773; . : 73 3,, 33,3777'937-7777373 37333:! 3:747:77, #337? 333%; '37" {37.2771}?! .. , 7 , 777 7 77, 77 777.7 .- s ‘ 7 - 333733733337 73737337377 3 " 3" 331737;:.77....3‘7777...77= .' ' 3' ~'~ < '7 :7, 3 7 -:« 423:7. ‘ 513:2! - ' 733737777333: 33733373733373 37773373737 7‘33: ’3 7. "33377777733737.3333;37733777733377 . . ”7; r- "' ‘ ‘ "‘ "7: z :‘i. - . 7 777737.734, 737777- 7. 3 3773733 73 7773777.:73777, 377371.77 7 7 3 3‘37377333333373333777 33313333377; 7'333‘37‘ 73‘ 3 3 3333*: 33732574.:77337733777777377 “3.3333377737777 7"" 7‘3" 22.7. “ 3'71“. .3’3’ " -> 3 “ 5‘..,.33'w=5i33 137333: 7 3333337371. :, 3‘3" 7)..“277 . 7:7. . .335‘1‘3 75:: .33ij 3x37” 7.3:. .~ =33377z73737733337~‘3, 7““737 .33. 3 . ~ . 7.777333% 7:777 . 3.3 7333733. 3 E .’ 7 .‘377‘737733333733337‘7733733315377333 3337 3337; 3333333 .7. 3333333373“ 33337333333» ‘77 .7 .73 - -33.773273773733373,73733733777373 733333.373 73773337377333 3.331.753 7 33331 tfigw 337373537333 ,7 33.333333331333333 7773:77‘7373737733373737 7777. 7777.777 7:7:77777777;. 3 7777.73” 7 5.7 77:3?7.a;:$1§77"”" k“ 7;} .77 7 3325357375377737773‘7337333337‘3377 37371173377 777732.57 3.377%; £77: 7: 37.7573 3 733“! ”“7371 7:777} [773 33 37334737 73393 71:73:: 777 a” 3% 7:,“ Q . 3 37:3 $3 333 337333 333" 3333333 333333 33763:?“ $373343 3337:3533 $32 73 3.3 I 33" 7 Jib 3 3 3‘. 3 s '3 E 7337377 3333333333“ 3777"”: 3333 7737 373333337777 33333 77.7. .7, 733.373 37333339337 77733777777733 333337" 3.37.337I3377‘H333 3 7.3 33377377zs3733377333g:3'~3333‘ 3 .-7 3.5.3333 ~ 37733.177317233775733;317777377327 733777777777777777’73.3377;33773733773333 7 "73:33.7 3:7,: 74 ;;:,H.::‘.;3._7:g,3'7777 ,7 7,57,.) ’7 .3 7' ‘-;i 3 ‘3' 7' 2' ' '.: 7 35333337777571373373737737775377373375733?73.73777777333337373333333" 33 3- 7 3 .33" 37 3' 7‘ 71'3““‘3' 3"" 37733733373733 ”77'1” '33 37.7.7773: 5.: . . 3 -~ 33 73377773777777 ~77 3 337.7573 ‘73 .3337 3 53.33333}; 7132. ‘7_ .,. 321.3 72.54}: 7.7..7-7.;73. .377 7. . 33353337737377“ 7..7773.3.7331J3733S‘473333353373 3 .7757; 33:37: (17'; ‘ ' 1' 7 . 7,33 33 333 7331133337737337733 3353131.. 777735 77 7 33333.33”; - . 333 3.11323 I! L733“;‘17373777317‘77773737373 ‘3 313‘. 'g 33,33”. {3‘}! z:_ 331.5523 fig‘fih 315:3K‘3 3 7 7 7,3 3.77,, 773733777 .77 7 777 3 7737:7377. 7 77737; b.“ A 7 .7 .7717" 77:73 , 7 .7’73; 7. 7577' 7 77777777773777772;7;777, :7.” g 3' ‘ fitflfgfirqg 33.373373313377332 iii: “huhfit'Kb‘v’ 33337333333351'fifiigii'33335313-333334“3' .' .: 7 ' {3-11.7qu 7m: ‘7'; 935773;? Lt . OYHI. . giggly _ . 33 . .- "’3;- 1‘ ' fit?! 5” [$717373 tit .firfii‘ 35‘1L‘fi‘} 3 ‘;:}227 rlngrizhxfl’ixfwtast‘sg.‘ .7 n 7 ~: '. 7 733537777377;- 33 5‘5; : -'--':¢f§,33:3 , 3373173777 7. 7:73.37: $3333.75 “-7.277377777773373 ”3373" 3; 33 3333‘ 3'3" 7 77373.33 ,. 3337333333 3373 ...§3 373 ‘ ‘34 2:7,; 3 3373: 33 :7“ .. 7 7 733.3 ‘333 3W3? 7,771,157 3.3.37 373’ 77777733737: 77777.77, l 3 ”35.37 W3 7 r333737333 73‘ 37.33.3333. 337331173 333 {3133.33 33 3’ 3333 LIBRARY Michigan State University This is to certify that the thesis entitled Sex Differences in Individuation, Relational Capacity (1 Af f an presenteed: by Carol S. Schwartz has been accepted towards fulfillment of the requirements for Masters {kgfieHIPSYChOIqu /:7 I [if "V 5- /w (,1 Major professor V ’7 ' /7 < ‘\ 3 /% Datepf/fiLQ In, cg] //,€ 0-7639 MS U is an Affirmative Action/Equal Opportunity Institution I’lllllllllllllllllll MSU LIBRARIES RETURNING MATERIALS: Place in book drop to remove this checkout from your record. FINES will be charged if book is returned after the date stamped below. of t4 x c» SEX DIFFERENCES IN INDIVIDUATION, RELATIONAL CAPACITY, AND AFFECT By Carol Stahl Schwartz A THESIS Submitted to Michigan State university in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF ARTS Department of Psychology 1987 ABSTRACT SEX DIFFERENCES IN INDIVIDUATION, RELATIONAL CAPACITY, AND AFFECT By Carol Stahl Schwartz Three hypotheses (two from.Chodorow) were tested from.TAT cards 4 and 10: first, females would project characters who were superficially individuated and interrelated, while males would project characters who were fully individuated but isolated; second, subjects who project highly differentiated, isolated self representations would project less differentiated representations of others; third, females would express more affect than males. Opposite to the prediction, females projected more fully individuated characters than males. No difference was found in capacity for interrelatedness. The second hypothesis could not be tested. A significant sex difference was found in both quantity and quality of expressed affect. Females experienced more affect than males, especially more interest and joy, and.more distress on card.4 (conflicted relationship). Males tended to experience more disgust. Males seemed to resolve conflict in a heterosexual affiliative context with separation and termination, while females resolved conflict by working through and maintaining relatedness. To my children: Michael and Aaron iii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS My enthusiasm for this study was sustained largely as a consequence of working with my chairperson, Dr. Bertram.Karon. His ability to clarify, simplify, empower, and.most importantly, enjoy the process of teaching, made it a pleasure to work with him. I am also grateful to Dr. Ellen Strommen for her enthusiastic support, for her assistance at several crucial points in time with clarifying my thinking, and for the respect she conveyed for my ideas. I am especially grateful to Dr. Elaine Donelson for her careful and thoughtful review of the thesis, and for the thought provoking issues she raised. Her contributions added significantly to my understanding of the research, and to the clarity of the final product. My friend, Mary Newcomb, made invaluable contributions to my thinking at all points in the process of completing this work. Her ideas, her practical assistance, and her emotional support made this process more manageable as well as more meaningful. My friend, Nayda Flores, also contributed a great deal as a friend, a classmate and a data coder. Her ideas helped to shape the iv v coding scheme and alter my thinking in perhaps the single most crucial aspect of the data interpretation. I am.very grateful for the careful and conscientious assistance of Darcy Delozier. Her ability to work long hours with a difficult coding scheme, and her willingness to put in extra hours at crucial points in time, made it possible to complete this project in a timely manner. Finally, this project could not have been completed without the willing assistance of Mark Schwartz, who has offered continuing emotional and practical support, with optimism, perceptiveness and humor. TABLE OF CONTENTS Page LIST OF TABL‘ES O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 0 I O O O O O O O Vii i INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 Statement of Purpose . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 Theoretical Background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 Research Findings on Affect . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 Research Findings on Differentiation . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 METHOD . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26 Research Design . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26 Research Instrunents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 Procedure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35 RESULTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42 Summary of Main Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42 Specific Hypotheses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43 DISCUSSION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56 APPENDICES A. Thematic Apperception Test Cards . . . . . . . . . . . 66 B. Instructions for Coding IR.Dimension . . . . . . . . . 68 C. List of Common Adjectives for Basic Affects . . . . . . 71 D. Guidelines for Scoring Affect . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73 E I Coment Pom O I O O O 0 O O O O O O O O O 0 O O O O O 7 7 vi F. Debriefing Form . G. Sample Stories LIST’OF REFERENCES . . vii Page 78 80 84 Table 1. LIST OF TABLES Sex Differences in Cunulative Frequency of IR Ratings.Cards4andIOCombined. . . . . . . . . . . Sex Differences in Cunulative Frequency of IR $tit‘88. m 4 O O O O O O l O O O O O O O O O O O 0 Sex Differences in Cumlative Frequency of IR fitims. M 10. O I O O O O O I O O O O O O O O O 0 Phle and Female Subjects Ratings of Self and OtheronIndividuation Phle and Female Subjects Ratings of Self and OtheronRelationalCapacity . . . . . . . . . . . . Mean Character IR Ratings by Character and SUb‘jmt sex 0 O I O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 0 Mean Quantity of Affects Experienced by Phle 81d lee sub‘jmts O I O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 0 Mean Quantity of Affect Attributed to Self and other (same sex and Opposite sex character) . . . . . Mean Quantity of Specific Affects for Male and Fennle SUbjmts O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 0 viii Page 44 45 45 46 48 5O 52 53 54 INTRODUCTION Statement of Purpose The purpose of this study was two-fold. First, it was to determine if there are measurable gender differences in affect. Because gender differences in affect have been demonstrated to exist in conjunction with certain, defined situational variables (Pollack and Gilligan, 1982; Horner, 1968), one of these situational variables was selected as a focus; namely, situations depicting affiliation. A second focus of this study involved an exploration of gender differences in individuation and relational capacity. Nancy Chodorow (1978) has proposed that differences in gender socialization, beginning in infancy, lead to differing needs and capacities for interrelatedness and individuation. It was hypothesized that these differences impact on the experience which men and women have when relating to each other. These differences in experience were explored by using a projective measure, the Thematic Apperception Test (TAT), to elicit thoughts and feelings pertaining to the self in relation in an affiliative context. The TAT stories were then scored to determine if there were measurable gender differences in individuation, relational capacity and affect, and whether these differences were related to the situation and to each other. Theoretical Background Emotions have been considered to be the primary motivational component of human experience (Tomkins, 1962; Izard, 1977). Emotions, or affects, have been defined as consisting of three essential elements including the conscious feeling of emotion, the processes that occur in the brain and nervous system and the observable expression of affect which occurs mainly on the face (Izard, 1977). Cross cultural studies (Izard, 1977) have demonstrated that the fundamental emotions (Tomkins, 1962; Izard, 1977) have the same expressions and experiential qualities in widely different cultures. It has also been empirically demonstrated that infants show differential thresholds for the various emotions (Izard, 1977). These differences, however, have not consistently been found to be related to sex. Affect development is considered by Tomkins (1962) to be influenced by (1) random events during infancy which connect affect arousal and attenuation, (2) the acquisition of linguistic labels for affects, (3) the effect of face to face interactions with the caretaker and (4) learned affect transformations. Affect development is a highly idiosyncratic process, over which the individual exercises little control or conscious awareness. Tomkins (1962) considers that the flexibility or freedom of the affect system can fUnction to limit or enhance pleasure, or movement toward what he terms the "ideal state".1 It is the flexibility or 1The ideal state, according to Tomkins, consists of four images: (1) to maximize positive affect, (2) to minimize negative affect, (3) to minimize affect inhibition, and (4) to maximize power to achieve images 1 through 3. generality of the affect system which provides the critical distinction between itself and the drive system, which it limited and finite. Tomkins (1962) states: The drive is primarily a transport mechanisms-it emits a set of motivating signals with a critical but limited and specific message. The affective system is characterized by more flexibility of activation, maintenance, and.delay . . . an individual may live all his life actually anxious, ashamed, sometimes depressed, or never excited, etc. The conditions which trigger affective responses include drives, but are not limited to them . . . the openness and flexibility of human affect accounts for the diversity of men’s motives. The sources of both psychopathology and of rewarding growth are found in man’s affective potentialities (1962, p. 6). The flexibility of the affect system then renders it both powerful and vulnerable to the influence of transformations through socialization. Differential socialization practices both across and within cultures have contributed to distinct, observable patterns of affect development (Tomkins, 1962). Within the last twenty years much has been written about socialization differences between males and females, and the influence of these practices on the development of gender differences in personality. A common perception that has not been empirically demonstrated is that females are more "emotional" than males. Tomkins speaks to this issue when he argues that men are socialized to be strong, relative to females, and that the display of emotion is not considered a socially rewarded indication of strength. Several questions arise as a consequence of these ideas: (1) Are there measurable, qualitative and/or quantitative gender differences in 4 emotional experience, (2) If so, how might we begin to look for the origin of these differences. Before looking at the research on gender differences in affect, consideration of theory about gender differences in personality will provide a useful framework for interpreting differences in emotional experience. The origin of gender differences in personality is discussed extensively by Chodorow (1978). Chodorow reviews psychoanalytic, ego psychology and object relations theory to arrive at a theory of differential gender socialization which leads to differences in relational needs and capacities. Chodorow’s theory speaks to the intrapsychic structure of the personality, how this structure differs for males and females, and the origin of these structural differences. She combines psychodynamic theory with sociology to arrive at what she terms "the sociology of gender." Chodorow (1978) argues that the sexual division of labor in our society leads to father absence in the family, making mothering an isolated task wherein mothers transfer needs and feelings into their relationships with infants and children. With regard to gender differences, because mothers are of a different gender than their sons, sons are perceived as "baby men", or "baby husbands", but most importantly, as distinct "others". In contrast, because they are the same gender as their daughters and have been girls, mothers perceive the baby girl as a "baby self" or "self" Object. This leads toa mother-daughter relationship characterized by prolonged symbiosis and narcissistic over-identification. She gives the following example, taken from an observational study, of the way in which boys and girls perceive, react to and form self perceptions as a consequence of their differential perception by mother: Burlingham and Sperling describe girls who act as extensions of their mothers, who act out the aggression which their mothers feel but do not allow themselves to recognize or act on. They describe boys, by contrast who equally intuitively react to their mothers’ feelings and wishes as if they were the objects of their mother’s fantasies rather than the subjects. Girls then seem to become and experience themselves as the self of the mother’s fantasy, whereas boys become the other (p. 103). Chodorow considers that while both males and females enjoy a pre— oedipal period of symbiosis with the mother, the length of this period varies. Differential perception by the mother of males and.females as "other" or "self" objects, pushes male children toward.differentiation at an earlier stage of development, forcing them to overcome the intense, exclusive mother attachment to attain independence and masculine identification. In Horner’s (1984) discussion of gender differences in the separation-individuation phase of development, she cites observational studies reported by Mahler, Pine and Bergman (1975) which provide behavioral evidence that boys and girls react differently to mother during the rapprochement phase of development (18 months to 3 years): A rather significant difference in the development of boys as compared with girls (was observed). The boys, if given a reasonable chance, showed a tendency to disengage themselves from mother and to enjoy their functioning in the widening world . . . The girls seemed . . . to become more engrossed with mother in her presence; they demanded greater closeness and were more persistently enmeshed in the ambivalent aspects of the relationship (p. 102). Chodorow considers that the differences experienced in the pre— oedipal period are built upon during the oedipal period, which is then negotiated differently for males and females. Girls approach the oedipal attachment to their fathers with a simultaneous, continuing primary attachment to their mothers. The relationship with mother is primary and contains the ambivalence characteristic of symbiosis. Because their ambivalence toward a loved and needed object is experienced with their mother, they are freer to form a heterosexual bond with their fathers which is less ambivalent and less intense. At the same time fantasies of maternal retaliation for the father-daughter bond are less likely for a girl because of her continuing, primary bond with her mother. Accordingly, a girl does not have to give up her attachment to her father as radically as a boy does to his mother, making repression of the oedipal attachment less marked, and thus less powerful in determining the quality of future heterosexual attachments from outside awareness. Chodorow draws on Freud’s assertion, however, that girls are as likely to chose a husband or mate based on that mate’s similarity to mother as to father. So, although the prototype or original heterosexual bond with father is less ambivalent and.less conflicted, the girl or woman’s sense of her "self in relation" is largely based upon both her preoedipal and oedipal attachment to her mother, which continues beyond the oedipal period to be symbiotic in nature. Boys, on the other hand, approach the oedipal attachment to their mothers without a stronger simultaneous bond to another object. The heterosexual, oedipal attachment to mother thus has more importance. In addition, while boys have begun to differentiate from their mothers, they retain a recent memory of the precedipal symbiotic bond. At this point boys have a growing sense of themselves as differentiated. The opportunity for re-attachment to mother offers the gratification of merger, but that merger simultaneously represents a threat to the ego and sense of masculine identity. Also, without a simultaneous bond of equal intensity to the father, boy’s fantasies of paternal retaliation for attachment to the mother are much stronger. This highly charged triangle makes the boy’s oedipal attachment much more vulnerable to repression, where the unresolved affects can then drive him from outside awareness, perhaps increasing his unconscious fear of heterosexual intimacy. During adolescence the oedipal issues re-emerge, and, again, are negotiated differently for boys and girls. Chodorow discusses the adolescent period for girls as a time when they struggle the most for differentiation from their mothers. The reciprocal ambivalence which arises from the symbiotic tie charges both mother and daughter with polarized needs to separate and fuse. The anger which both may feel as a consequence of their ambivalence about merged identity "leaves mother and daughter convinced that any separation between them will bring disaster to both" (p. 135). The management of this conflict in adolescent girls may include defensive splitting (MOm and.home are bad.- the outside world is good), the creation of boundaries by negative identification (I am what she is not) and often a merger within a friendship which allows her to experience merger while denying feelings of merger with her mother. 8 Chodorow discusses the boy’s adolescence as a period where he has already achieved a high degree of differentiation. He is, however, vulnerable to repeating his oedipal issues in adulthood because of his abrupt and total relinquishment of mother which he accomplishes in order to resolve the oedipal conflict. Horner’s (1984) discussion of gender differences in separation- individuation parallel’s Chodorow’s argunents concerning the effect of these differences on adult relational capacity. She states: It is my view that detachment is more common in.men than in women, and that this can be attributed to the early defense against the regressive, gender-blurring pull toward.the preoedipal mother and the need to resist it (p. 126). Chodorow draws from object relations theory to make her fundamental argument. This theory posits that when an exciting object elicits conflictual feelings which the ego cannot manage, those conflicted feelings are repressed along with a part of the ego or self that was attached to the exciting object. Drawing from this, Chodorow concludes that when the boy’s oedipal attachment to his mother is suddenly relinquished, a part of his ego which she terms his "self in relation" to his mother, is also repressed. The boy thus emerges from the oedipal conflict with repression of the "relational ego" which has a serious and significant effect on his entire personality organization. His needs and capacities for intimacy are partially repressed, which leaves the part of the ego she calls the "self in separation" relatively more prominent. A logical extension of this theory is that the affect surrounding affiliative events may, then, also be repressed. Girls, on the other hand, do not repress their relational ego because they do not have to relinquish the bond.with mother in order to establish their gender identity. Their needs and capacities for relating to others are thus continuously strengthened, They emerge from the oedipal period, however, with weaker boundaries, and struggle to attain a sense of self as differentiated and separate. Men and women thus approach intimacy with different conflicts, self perceptions, affects and needs. The woman is more likely to approach attachments with weaker boundaries and an expectation to merge, as this is the way she experienced relatedness originally with her mother. At the same time she has a simultaneous need to differentiate which she may have only partially accomplished. She may anticipate retaliation and object loss for her efforts to differentiate, based on her early experience with her mother. This would seem to place her in a bind in which the need for differentiation or assertion of "self" would be perceived as synonymous with loss of an object which she both needs, and which she perceives as needigg:her. The man, conversely, approaches intimacy with a greater sense of differentiation which has been developing since the oedipal period. At the same time he may have an unconscious fear of intimacy, based on a massive repression of the needs and affects tied up the both the preoedipal and oedipal periods. His bind is that his need for intimacy is tied to an unconscious fear of loss of a differentiated, masculine self, as well as the fear which arose in the oedipal period concerning the potential for paternal retaliation. 10 Chodorow’s theory and the conclusions that may be drawn from it would lead to differences in affect which have, in fact, been investigated and empirically demonstrated. Horner (1968) found that women wrote stories in which the heroine meets with a violent end in response to a description of competitive academic success.2 Pollack and Gilligan (1982) found that Thematic Apperception Test stories written by college students showed that men were more likely than women to include violence in stories which related.to affiliative themes, while women were more likely than men to include violence in stories related to situations of achievement.3,‘ These results were interpreted by Pollack and Gilligan as evidence that "fear of intimacy" in men may be the corollary of the "fear of success" in women which was demonstrated by Horner (1968). Both of these studies support the ideas set forth above, namely, women fear and anticipate retaliation for competition and success as these are perceived threats to the relational style originally experienced with mother, and subsequently repeated with others. Men fear and anticipate retaliation for their affiliative urges, again, due to fears concerning loss of differentiation and fears concerning 2An attempt by Horner (1977) to replicate these findings was unsuccessful. See Horner, M.J. (1977). 3Violence was scored in this study by a simple presence-absence scoring system. ‘Violence was scored "present" whenever death, suicide, homicide, rape or fatal disease was mentioned. The role of the hero, as far as his/her victim or perpetrator status, was not scored in this study. 4This research has been challenged and defended. See Benton, C.J., et al. (1983); Pollack, S., & Gilligan, C. (1983); weiner, B., et al. (1983); Pollack, S., & Gilligan, C. (1983). 11 paternal retaliation during the oedipal period. These studies then offer some empirical evidence for measurable gender differences in affect which occurs in response to affect transformation (Tomkins, 1962), through early socialization, and is observable in adulthood in conjunction with certain, defined situational variables. Sex differences in object relations configurations which are related to Chodorow’s (1978) arguments for differences in relational needs and capacities, and Pollack and Gilligan’s (1976) and Horner’s (1968) demonstration of differences in affect, have been demonstrated by Berry (1985). She found that in stories told to the Family Scene Card (Neugarten, 1958), "women were more likely to depict relationships as close, harmonious, and enmeshed. Males were more apt to describe themes including conflict, defensiveness and deprivation (p. 22)." Berry’s study will be discussed at length shortly. Returning to theory focused on gender differences in affect, Lewis (1976) presents another theoretical argument for gender differences in emotion which is based on superego distinctions between men and women. She argues that the closer, more affiliative bond which women enjoy with their mothers makes them more vulnerable to the loss of love. This vulnerability, together with their identification with mother as a person of the devalued sex, makes them more prone to shame. Men, on the other hand, because of their relinquishment of maternal closeness out of fear of paternal castration, and.hecause socialized aggression turns them away from their affiliative tendencies, will be more likely to internalize guilt. Lewis conceptualizes shame and guilt as being associated with opposite ends of a continuum of psychological l 12 differentiation. WOmen, who, she states, are less differentiated than men psychologically, will be more likely to experience shame, while men, who are more differentiated psychologically, will be more likely to experience guilt. Two investigations of this theory (Negri, 1978; Mirman, 1984) did not support Lewis’ ideas, and, in fact, found the opposite to be true. Careful consideration of Chodorow’s theory presents an avenue for understanding this opposite finding. Chodorow’s discussion of girls’ merged identification with others as a defense against merger with the mother, may in fact shed light on an.important dynamic which underlies the tendency for women to place their highest priority on affiliation (Lewis, 1976). To the extent that women’s intimacy with others is defensive in origin, it will retain the ambivalence characteristic of the original bond with mother, especially if the woman has not achieved an adequate degree of differentiation. The anger tied to this ambivalence over merged identity may intensify as a consequence of inexpression. The woman’s need to differentiate may elicit guilt, particularly when nurturance is expected and reinforced in the culture as a woman’s role and obligation. Returning to theory about personality differences, Miller (1984) discusses women’s greater affiliation for connectedness to others as a positive sign of healthy development which has been largely ignored, and certainly undervalued, in theoretical conceptualizations of what constitutes normal development and maturity. She argues that most theories about healthy psychological adjustment stress separation as 13 the critical forerunner to individuation and healthy development. In these theories Miller argues: The self presumably is attained via a series of painful crises by which the individual accomplishes a sequence of allegedly essential separations from others, and thereby achieves an inner sense of separated individuation. (p.1) Miller points out that these theories apply to male development more than female. Further, Miller argues against Chodorow’s position that because women are the same sex as their caretakers, girls cannot develop a sense of themselves as individuals. Miller considers that "all growth occurs within emotional connections, not separate from them". Further, she states that "to feel more related to another person does not mean to feel one’s self threatened, but enhanced," and that connectedness does not feel like a loss of part of one’s self, but an actual gain which increases pleasure and effectiveness. According to Miller, being in relationship, in positive, self and other enhancing ways, is a desired goal, and not a detraction from one’s own self development. Miller argues that separation and individuation are overvalued as prognostic indicators of healthy development, and sees connectedness to others as the essential element which sustains and enhances our lives. To this writer, it seems that the internal sense of connectedness and separateness may exist on a continuum, where extremes in either direction are not healthy. Rather, it would seem that it is the ability to move back and forth along this continuum as the situation demands that allows for maximal adaptation to, and enhancement of experience. 14 The theoretical arguments (Chodorow, 1978; Horner, 1984; Lewis, 1976; Miller, 1984) seem to suggest, however, that there are differences in the position of men and women.on the "separateness— connectedness" continuum. This issue will be discussed in more detail below. At this point, however, the questions of interest which arise from these arguments are: (1) Do women actually achieve less differentiation of self from others as a consequence of their early relationship with their mothers; (2) Do men achieve differentiation at the expense of developing their relational capacity; (3) How do these hypothesized.differences, if present, impact on the emotions which accompany affiliative events? In looking at the first question, a conceptual framework for the differentiation construct is needed. Also needed is a scale for measuring differentiation. Thompson’s (1981) work in the area of affect maturity offers a framework within which to conceptualize a developnental line of self-other differentiation and individuation. Thompson developed a scale for measuring affect maturity to assess the five components of affect development. These five components are defined by Thompson as: (1) cognitive development, (2) self-other representations in emotion, (3) the development of action in reaction to emotion, (4) the development of emotional expression, and (5) somatic aspects of emotion. (See Thompson, 1981, for a full description of components and their representation on the scales.) Benjamin (1983), drawing on Thompson’s work, used the concept of affect maturity as an arena in which to examine self-other 15 differentiation and integration of self-representations. Benjamin extracted relevant parts of Thompson’s scale to develop 2 scales called Self—Other Differentiation and Integration of Self Fragments. These scales were used to reliably code differentiation and ego integration from affective responses to Thematic Apperception Test cards. The reliability of these scales was further demonstrated by Hering (1985). The theoretical basis of Benjamin’s work is derived, in part, from Kernberg’s work on stages of development of internal Object relations. Kernberg identifies three stages in this process which occur in infancy. These will be briefly outlined in order to explicate the early phases of the process of differentiation and individuation. The first stage, normal autism, involves the build up of "primary undifferentiated self-other representations" as the basic unit of psychic experience. The three components of this basic unit are the self component, the object component, and affect. At this stage, self, other and affect are not separated from each other, but are part of an undifferentiated event. The second stage, normal symbiosis, involves the consolidation of pleasurable and unpleasurable self-other representations. Self and other are still undifferentiated, but affects are being divided into good and bad. The third stage involves two major transitions: self-other differentiation and integration of self-representations and Object-representations into integrated wholes (Benjamin, 1983). All three stages may be completed by age 3, but will vary in the kind and amount of development according to individual experience 16 during the process. Successful passage through stage three is essential for the development of affect maturity (Thompson, 1981), and for differentiation and individuation (Horner, 1984) to be achieved. Benjamin’s scales (1983), derived from Thompson (1981), tap each of the stages delineated.by Kernberg, and as such, represent levels in the developmental line of self-other differentiation and integration of self representations. Further, Benjamin has demonstrated that self-other differentiation and integration of self-representations are simultaneous processes which occur together, and can be conceptualized as two components of a single process which she terms "objectification." Because these component processes, of necessity, occur together, it can be concluded that a high score on self-other differentiation is sufficient to demonstrate a capacity for both. Also, any failure to achieve differentiation of self from other will thus affect one’s sense of wholeness or individuation. Because self-other differentiation and integration of self and other representations have been demonstrated to be parallel and necessary components of individuation, the concepts included in both of Benjamin’s scales will be included in this study as defining constructs of the individuation process. The scale for measuring individuation will be derived from Berry (1983), and will be discussed at length shortly. The second question posed above concerning gender differences in relational capacity can also be assessed using the Berry scale. Finally, the impact of hypothesized gender differences in individuation and relational capacity on the emotional experiences 17 which accompany affiliative events may be measured by assessing all three phenomena in tandem. Benjamin (1981) and Berry (1985) have successfully assessed the three components separately. Both Benjamin and Berry used the same projective test, the Thematic Apperception Test (TAT). The TAT cards selected for this study will depict men and women together. In addition, this study will combine the work of Benjamin and Berry, by assessing the three components (above) in tandem; individuation, relational capacity, and affect. It will depart from their work by focusing on sex differences, and by looking specifically at the context of affiliation. Sepagateness-Coggectedness Continuum Movement back and forth along the continuun of separation and connection requires that personal boundaries are "fluid." Optimal functioning might entail the ability for connection or separation, which varies with personal needs and the context in which they arise. Related to the hypothesis that men may be more "separate" and women more "connected" is a third question: are there gender differences in the ability to move back and forth along this continuum as the situation demands. Thompson (1981) addresses the issue of boundary permeability in her discussion of normal regressions to a temporary state of de-differentiation of self, object and affect. Her model of affect maturity assumes that normal transient regressions occur which may leave the individual in a state of temporary, partial, de-differentiation of affect, self and object. This de-differentiation may occur in reaction to stress, and is assumed to be active in 18 regressions to a psychotic state. She also states that de-differentiation may occur in the service of the ego, meaning in a creative endeavor. Although she does not include intimacy as a context in which normal regressions may occur, this seems to be a logical extension of her argument. With the knowledge that regressions occur, we can then distinguish between capggity for differentiation, and the extent of differentiation which may be in operation at a given point in time. Differentiation regression has been empirically demonstrated by Berry (1985). Her study showed that projections of self and other representations, in terms of differentiation, vary with the nature of social relational stimuli. Specifically, subjects in her study projected both self and other as superficially individuated or merged in stories told to TAT stimuli portraying intimacy. These same subjects, however, projected highly differentiated self and other representations in response to TAT stimuli that portrayed people in relation, without intimacy. This de-differentiation of self and object, which is depicted in object representations characterized as merged, represents a regression tgwagd the earliest state of undifferentiated events, where self, other and affect were not separate. This study demonstrates that these subjects have the capacity to move back and forth along the continuum of self-other differentiation, which appears to represent optimal boundary fluidity. 19 Research Findings - Affect A review of published studies on sex differences in affect was carried out to determine if study findings concur with those mentioned above, or show any consistent patterns which may support Chodorow’s theory. These studies are discussed below. Dudycha and Dudycha (1933) looked at early memory data as an arena for investigating sex differences in affect. Their findings included that men reported more fearful affect than women, and women reported more joy and more anger than men. An interesting finding in this study was that only women reported memories of fear experienced as a result of being alone. This finding supports Chodorow’s argunents about women’s difficulties with separation from others. The repression of needs and affects surrounding connectedness to others, may account for the absence of fear, reported by men, as a result of being alone. No statistics were performed on these data. waldfogel (1948) studied the affective content of early memories of college students from their first 8 years. Subjects reported their affect along with each memory. No significant differences were found in affects reported by men and women. Waldfogel suggests that these results may differ from those of Dudycha and Dudycha (1933) because of a larger sampling procedure. This study did not relate affective experience with thematic content of the memory. Stairs and Blick (1979) studied sex differences in the affective content of dreams recorded by male and female college students. In this study each student was asked to select two emotions from.an emotion checklist which most approximated their affective experience 20 during the dream. No sex differences in affect were found. This study did not look at thematic content of dreams in relation to affect, and had the additional limitation of a forced choice condition for affect reporting. Murstein (1972) collected written responses to projected TAT slides from college students to establish norms for this age group and to investigate sex differences in response patterns. Results showed that overall, stories were negative with regard to affect and action, but positive for endings. Cards 4 and 10, which depict a man and woman in relation, showed significant sex differences in affect and action associated with story content and resolution. In both cards, the frequency of neutral affect was significantly higher for men. This finding may offer some support for male repression of the "relational ego" with a consequent partial inhibition of affect in reaction to affiliative or relational events. The prOblem with Murstein’s scoring system is that story elements are scored positive or negative for either affect or action. Without distinction between the two, it is not possible to make statements or draw conclusions about sex differences in affect, beyond frequency of neutral vs. non-neutral affect. These studies show conflicting results, and have methodological limitations such as small sample size, noncorrelation of affect with thematic stimuli, and scoring systems which limit data interpretation. Research Findings - Differentiation Berry (1985) did an empirical investigation of Chodorow’s (1978) theory of differential gender socialization and the distinctions in 21 object representations which result. Specifically, Berry looked at feminine/masculine traits within women which come about through differences in level of maternal involvement and timing and degree of separation-individuation. The subjects in Berry’s research were drawn from.a clinic sample. Berry’s study demonstrated that women ranked by their therapists as early, middle and late individuators, based on low, median and high levels of maternal involvement, showed specific patterns in Object relations development which could.be reliably scored, and.which were statistically significant. Object relations development was assessed with an interpretive scoring system for stories told to TAT stimuli (cards 2 and 7GP), and Neugarten’s (1958) Family Scene Card. Berry summarizes her finding as follows: Early individuators, who according to their therapists had experienced mother as detached and relatively uninvolved [the masculine mother-child configuration according to Chodorow] were most likely to tell stories characterized by highly differentiated and isolated.self representations, overt conflict, a struggle to separate from family with a desire for greater closeness, portrayal of maternal and paternal figures who are depriving or unacknowledged, and less differentiated depiction of others. On the mother-daughter card these women were again more highly'differentiated and isolated, they portrayed the maternal figure as ambivalent or hostile, and portrayed themselves as separate, independent, self reliant and most mature. The late individuators, who had experienced prolonged dependency and a close a strong relationship with mother according to the therapists [the feminine mother-child configuration, according to Chodorow], show the highest frequency of family scene card (FSC) stories characterized by interactions which are covertly conflictual or harmonious, a maternal figure portrayed as submissive, a paternal figure who is self-absorbed.and dominant, ambivalent feelings toward the maternal person, merged or superficially individuated self-representations, and superficially individuatad representationa of others. In stories told to the 22 mother-daughter card (MDC) these women showed the highest percentages of interrelated and suparficially individuated representations of self and mpther; and a daughter who is predominantly related to a nurturing mother in a child-like dependent manner [emphases added]. (PP. 94-95) Berry’s research also included a group characterized by a medium level of maternal involvement, and middle separation-individuation, in terms of timing. This group showed representation of self and others as pare individgated than the early-individuators, with interrelatedneaa characterizing aelf-representations and isolation characterizing represeatationa:of othera. Berry concluded that her findings are supportive of Chodorow’s hypotheses that (1) A prolonged, QlQaa relationship with mother in early childhood leads to a relatively undifferentiated self-organization and a self-other schema characterized by'a high degree of interrelatedness; and (2) A more distant relationship with mother accompanied by early separation-individuation, leads to a agga differentiagag self-organization which is insulated or isolated vis-a- vis others. While Berry’s research clearly supports the two hypotheses mentioned above, she acknowledges that the mothers of early individuators in her study were more radically disengaged or detached in the mother—daughter relationship than the mothers Chodorow characterizes in her theory-based mother-son relationships. Chodorow characterizes mothers of sons only as laaa involved relative to mothers of daughters. Thus, gender differences in these patterns have yet to be demonstrated. 23 In addition, Berry’s sample was drawn from a population of clients engaged in outpatient psychotherapy. While both of these factors limit the generalizability of her findings, the results offer support for the influence of these early socialization factors in the development of adult Object relations configurations. Her findings also lend support to the observability of these patterns through the use of the TAT. Self and Other Repraaentations An additional interesting finding in Berry’s study is the observed differences in object representations between self and other. Berry’s scale for measuring level of differentiation was used to score level of differentiation of self aag level of differentiation of other characters in the TAT stories, and the two were found to differ. Thus, self-representations of aagly individuators were aighly differentiated, but representation of others were less differentiated. Berry considers this finding to be consistent with Chodorow’s theory that early individuators are less object dependent, and as such, are not finely tuned to the complexities within the personalities of others. In light of this finding, it is not surprising that early individuators were also found to be isolated from, rather than interrelated with, others. ' Current Research The foregoing review of the literature lead to the questions posed for the present study, which are: (1) Do women achieve less differentiation of self from others as a consequence of their early relationships with their mothers as Chodorow suggests; (2) Do men achieve differentiation at the expense of developing their relational 24 capacity as Chodorow suggests; (3) How do these hypothesized differences, if present, impact on the affects which accompany affiliative events; (4) Do women experience more affect than men in the context of affiliative events; (5) Do subjects who project TAT characters with incomplete differentiation of self from others (superficially individuated) experience more affect than subjects who project fully individuated.characters; (6) Are there sex differences in the ability to move back and forth on the separateness-connectedness continuum as the context changes from affiliation without intimacy to affiliation with intimacy; (7) Do subjects who project fully individuated same-sex characters project superficially individuated opposite—sex characters, as Berry’s study suggests. All of the questions posed above are addressed in the current research. In addition, an investigation of self and other representations was explored to look at the effect of sex role stereotyping. Specifically, role stereotyping was explored to determine if (1) women are capable of fully individuated character functioning, but attribute this level of functioning to the male characters in the TAT stories rather than to themselves; and (2) men are capable of interrelated functioning, but attribute relational efforts to the female character rather than to the self; and (3) men and women are equivalent in terms of quantity and quality of experienced affect, but men attribute emotionality to the female character, rather than to the self. Investigation of these differences in portrayal of self and other was carried out to determine the extent to which absolute capacities for individuation, relational 25 capacity and affective functioning are influenced by sex role stereotyping. In summary, the current research focused on five interrelated aspects of gender differences in personality functioning: (1) individuation, (2) relational capacity, (3) affect (quantity and quality), (4) boundary fluidity and (5) portrayal of self and other. All five aspects were measured in tandem. H1: H2: H3: The specific hypotheses were as follows: Male and female subjects will differ significantly on measures of individuation and relational capacity, with female subjects scoring more often as superficially individuated and interrelated, and male subjects scoring more often as fully individuated and isolated from others. Potential differences in portrayal of self and other, in terms of individuation and relational capacity, to look at the influence of sex role stereotyping, is included on an exploratory basis. The ability to move back and forth along the separateness- connectedness continuum was explored for male and female subjects separately to see if they differed in their ability to change boundaries with the context. Subjects who project highly differentiated and isolated self representations will project less differentiated representations of others. Men and women will differ significantly in expression of affect in response to stimuli representing relational or affiliative themes, with women expressing more affect than men. Attribution of affect to same sex and opposite-sex characters was included on an exploratory basis. Potential distinctions in affect quality expressed by male and female subjects was included on an exploratory basis. The relationship between level of individuation and quantity of expressed affect was explored. METHOD Research Design Nancy Chodorow’s hypotheses concerning sex differences in individuation and relational capacity were tested. The theoretical work of Kernberg and the empirical work of Thompson (1981), Benjamin (1983), and Berry (1983) were combined to develop a scale for measuring these two concepts. In addition, sex differences in affect were explored, to lock at the relationship between hypothesized differences in individuation and relational capacity, and the emotional experiences which accompany affiliative events between men and women. Two kinds of affiliative events were studied, one involving conflict and the other involving intimacy and affection. Two additional exploratory aspects of the study included looking at sex differences in boundary permeability, and representations of self and other. To test the hypotheses, 20 male and 20 female undergraduate students enrolled in an introductory psychology course were recruited to write stories in response to two Thematic Apperception Test (TAT) cards depicting men and women in relation. Subject’s TAT stories were scored by two independent raters for level of individuation and relational capacity, and presence of affect. 26 27 Subjects were rated on level of individuation and relational capacity according to their portrayal of the four characters on the two TAT cards. Ratings on affect were determined by the total quantity, as well as specific quality of affects expressed or implied in the story content. The Research Instruments Theaatic Apperception Test The Thematic Apperception Test (TAT), developed by Morgan and Murray (1935), is a projective test which requires the subject to tell a story in response to an image or picture. The cards are selected according to their portrayal of themes which are of interest to the clinician or investigator. Subject stories created in response to the specific cards reveal the subject’s inner world, including thoughts, feelings, fantasies, wishes and conscious and unconscious motives (Karon, 1981). Two cards from the TAT (Cards 4 and 10) were used to elicit stories from subjects (see Appendix A). These cards were selected because they depict scenes of men and women in relation and are commonly used to elicit thoughts and feelings concerning the subject’s experience with relating to the opposite sex (Karon, 1981). Card.4 was selected because it depicts a man and woman in relation in a non-intimate, conflict-based.context. Card 10 was selected because it elicits associations concerning affection and intimacy. USe of both cards enabled an investigation of the extent to which personal boundaries, as well as affects, change with the context. 28 Response norms for these two cards indicate a tendency for subjects to tell stories with negative affect/action content, and positive affect/action resolution on card 4, and positive affect/action content, as well as positive resolution on card 10 (Murstein, 1972). While these norms are not specific to affect, use of both cards provided some balance between positive and negative affect/action, to reduce response bias arising from stimulus characteristics of the two cards. Berry found that card 10 elicited projections of merged and superficially individuated Object representations in subjects who projected highly differentiated object representations to other TAT stimuli. Berry concluded that differential Object representations, based on level of maternal involvement and timing and.degree of early childhood separation-individuation, were not present in projections of self and other in an intimate context. This is an interesting and surprising finding which indicates that there are no differences in capacity for intimacy, even though there are differences in capacity for less intense relatedness. This study explored this phenomenon, again by using TAT cards which depict different levels of relatedness. Berry Scale for Meaauriag Individuation and Relational Capacity Berry (1984) developed a 5-point scale for measuring individuation and relational capacity, in tandem. The five levels are as follows: 1. Merged 2. Superficial Individuation, Interrelated 3. Superficial Individuation, Isolated 4. Full Individuation, Interrelated 5. Full Individuation, Isolated 29 The unique advantage of this scale is that it combines the two components at each level of the scale in order to create a continuum of psychological differentiation. It is possible with this scale to separate out two distinct levels of relational capacity, one which occurs at a low level of individuation and one at a high level. This adds richness to the whole notion of relational capacity. Rather than construing relatedness as a unidimensional construct which woman have "more" of and men "less," with this scale it is possible to determine if relatedness is associated with lack of individuatiOn, or if it exists in combination with high individuation, as Miller (1984) suggests. Several alterations were made in Berry’s scale for the purpose of 1) re-ordering the levels on the continuum of psychological differentiation to match theory concerning intrapsychic aspects of individuation, 2) defining specific guidelines for rating full and superficial individuation based on theory and prior empirical studies, and 3) defining two additional levels of individuation in order to more accurately represent the range of functioning represented by the data. Berry’s original scale defines isolation with full individuation as the highest level on her continuum of psychological differentiation. This writer disagrees with the notion that the highest level of differentiation would entail isolation of self’from.others, and.instead sees this level or posture as reflective of a defensive process. Following Chodorow, isolation of self from others would.be likely to occur as a consequence of repression of the relational ego. If a part of the ego or self is repressed, the capacity for integration of self 30 fragments or full individuation is reduced. That which is repressed cannot be differentiated and integrated into the self system. Because Berry (1985) defines the levels of differentiation in her scale as including both intrapersonal and integpersonal differentiation at each level, this writer placed full individuation, interrelated as a higher level of differentiation than full individuation, isolated. The defining components of individuation in the original scale appeared to this writer to be incomplete. To remedy this problem, the scale developed by Benjamin to measure self-other differentiation was initially included as a second instrument to measure individuation. The rationale for including the scale was that Benjamin (1983) has shown that self-other differentiation and integration of self fragments were two parallel components of a single process she termed objectification. This single process, in turn, was the crucial forerunner to individuation. The initial strategy for measuring individuation was to use both Berry’s (1985) and Benjamin’s (1983) scales. During initial efforts to train coders to use these scales, however, reliability in scoring could not be established using Berry’s scale. The difficulty with the scale arose from a lack of specific criteria for scoring individuation. As criteria were specified, based on theory (Kernberg), it became clear that the concepts included in the two scales were overlapping, and that it was, in fact, not possible to make them different enough to justify the use of two scales. The two scales were, therefore, combined into a single scale which is described in detail below. The resulting scale used to distinguish superficial from full individuation includes the capacities outlined by Kernberg as 31 necessary developmental achievements to the process of attaining self-other differentiation and mature object relations functioning. Some of the concepts were taken from Horner (1984) and are referenced as appropriate. All concepts are outlined below, as they appear in the Instructions to Coders: FULL INDIVIDUATION A character which is fully individuated is one which shows integration of parts of the personality. The following four aspects of personality integration should be considered. These concepts are derived from Benjamin’s (1981) scales measuring self-other differentiation and integration of self fragments. Time An integrated character has a sense of time, meaning a sense of past, present and future. The character may be described as one who "used to be a hothead," or "when he was a child he felt" or "since he can remember, he’s always felt annoyed.by . . .". The character may be working toward.a goal, growing up, reflecting about the future, planning, changing, etc. Affect Integration of parts of the personality goes hand in hand with integration of affect. The following three aspects of affective functioning should.be considered: A. Process The character is nit overwhelmed by or stuck in an affective experience. For example: "This character is looking out the window, frozen with despair." Rather, the character is able to access other parts of the self to resolve affect. For example: "This character is looking out the window, feeling desperate. She will stand there a while longer, but then tell herself that these feelings will pass with time. She will then do something else for a while to make herself feel better, knowing that these feelings may return at times, until she slowly makes peace with the loss. B. Simultaneous Contradictory Affect There is a capacity to tolerate two contradictory affects simultaneously without having to decide between them to reduce tension. For example: "John loves Sally, but he is also mad.at her for never being there for him." The character does not choose between two conflicting parts of the self. For example: "John is telling Sally he loves her, or else he is telling her he needs to go away and be by 32 himself for a while. But, I think he is telling her he loves her." C. Resolution Affect is 99; prematurely resolved. This overlaps with the process concept (A). Examples of premature resolution include action resolution (He was angry and so he left her forever . . . He was angry and so he beat the other guy up), a resolution without process (She felt terrible about losing him, but suddenly it just didn’t matter anymore and she became very cheerful), or a polyaaaa resolution (The cancer disappeared of its own accord and everyone lived happily ever after.) Reflective Thoggag An integrated character is one who can reflect on his position, his actions, thoughts, feelings, etc. There is a sense of internal constancy, together with flexibility or openness. New experiences are added to an existing character structure. The existing character structure enables the person to reflect on an experience in his own way, and then decide on a course of action, or a belief or attitude toward the experience. For example: "He’s thinking about what he should.do. He has never wanted to do anything like this before, but he wonders if maybe it’s time for him to try something different." Self and Other In interactions with others, an integrated character will perceive both self and other as constant. In Object relations terms, object constancy will be achieved. This entails the ability to value an object (person) for attributes other than those which satisfy needs of the self. A character may still decide to separate from another person, but with the realization that the two are too different to be comfortably together. The other will be seen as three-dimensional, a person in their own right, with their own needs, thoughts, affects, and, in general, their own character structure. The other will not be devalued or thrown out simply because they cannot satisfy the needs of the hero. Characters do not cling to each other defensively for a sense of safety. (Horner, 1984) For example: These two characters have been together for several years. The woman is beginning to feel that she needs to separate from the man, to be independent for a while, as she struggles with her internal conflicts. The man is disappointed, but not surprised. He can remember feeling this way himself at times, and understands how strong those feelings can be. At the same time he feels sad and somewhat angry that things are . this way at this point in time. He will go into the other room for a little while, but then come back, after thinking 33 the situation over. He will tell her that he feels angry and disappointed, but at the same time understands her feelings. They will part with mixed feelings. WICIAL INDIVIDUATION A character who is superficially individuated will not reflect the characteristics mentioned above. Any of the following may be present: 1. A character who has no past or future. 2. A character who has no description beyond their reaction to another character. 3. A character who is overwhelmed by and/or stuck in an affective experience. 4. A character who chooses between contradictory feelings rather than being able to tolerate both of them. 5. A character who acts, without reflection, to resolve affect. 6. A character who happily accepts a polyanna resolution, rather than processing an event internally, or being changed as a consequence of an experience. 7. A character whose self-perception changes in response to the other character not fulfilling his/her needs. For example: "He told her that if she wouldn’t make love to him, it proved that she never loved him in the first place and she should look for another boyfriend." (Horner, 1984) The third alteration in the Berry scale was the addition of two new levels in the scale. The first one, Merged B, was created during preliminary stages of data coding as coders recognized a need to categorize the response in which one character was portrayed as depending for his/her life on the other character. For example: "She feels that she needs him or she would not be able to survive . . . She flings her body over the guard rail and screams "I cannot live without you!."" In this example, there is a concrete description of a separate self and other, but the character described above is not psychologically separate, and so this one character is scored Merged B. This level was inserted in the scale as level 2 on the continuum. 34 The second level which was created during preliminary stages of data coding was named Fully Individuated, Merged. This level was added as coders recognized the need for a separate code for characters who were both fully individuated according to the conceptual guidelines above, but who were at the same time merged in terms of having the same affective and thematic experiences. The final level, Merged, was scored according to the original guidelines in the Berry scale. These guidelines are as follows: At level #1 (merged) the characters in the story are not acknowledged or described individually in any way. There is no mention of any independent thoughts or feelings of the characters. They are depicted as a single unit, all experiencing the same thing, as though they were one person. For example, 'This family has just had.dinner and they are relaxing together.’ The seven levels of individuation and relational capacity, therefore, arranged on a low-high oontinuun of psychological differentiation, were as follows: 1. Merged 2. Merged B 3. Superficially Individuated, Isolated 4. Superficially Individuated, Interrelated 5. Fully Individuated, Isolated 6. Fully Individuated, Interrelated 7. Fully Individuated, Merged The criteria for scoring relational capacity were as follows: Two levels of relational capacity will be coded: Interrelated and Isolated. Code interrelated if the characters have dialogue, or clearly react to each other in some way. It is often difficult to determine when a character is isolated as most characters are acting in response to something - often other people. The key consideration for the purpose of this study is are the people reacting/interacting to/with each other. 35 Coders were instructed to make independent decisions about the level of individuation and the level of relatedness, and then choose a point on the scale which included both levels chosen. Tomkins Delineation of Primary Affects Each TAT story was scored for the presence of primary affects (Tomkins, 1984). The positive affects are: interest-excitement, enjoyment-joy, surprise-startle. The negative affects are fear-terror, anger-rage, distress-anguish, shame-humiliation, contempt and disgust. A list of cross-cultural labels used to describe the primary emotions from their associated facial expressions (Izard, 1971) was supplied to coders to simplify and standardize scoring (see Appendix C). Procedure Data Collection Subjects were recruited from the Michigan State University Subject Pool. All participants were enrolled in an introductory psychology course and received course credit for their participation. Subjects were told that they were participating in a psychology research experiment entitled "Story Telling." All data was collected in a single testing session which was attended.by all subjects. Subjects were seated in a classroom and given two 8 1/2 x 11 sheets of lined paper on which to record.responses to TAT cards, one pen, and a consent form (see Appendix E).5 subjects were instructed to read and sign the consent form. 5Subjects were asked to record their age, sex, and marital status on the upper right hand corner of the paper. subject sex was recorded by placing a 1 on the paper if male, and 2 if female. 36 Instructions for participation were then given as follows: This is a study of story telling which I think you will find enjoyable. I am going to show you two pictures, one at a time; and your task will be to make up as dramatic a story as you can for each. Have fun with the story. Include in your story what has led up to the event shown in the picture, describe what is happening at the moment, what the characters are feeling and thinking; and then give the outcome. Write your thoughts as they come to mind. Please continue with the first ideas that come to mind. If you feel you must make changes, cross out your original thoughts with a single line so that they will remain legible. Be sure to use your pen to write the story. YOu will have 15 minutes to record each story. You will be asked to write two stories, one for each picture. The two cards were then projected on a screen in the front of the room, one at a time. Card 4 was presented first and then card 10. The subjects were given 15 minutes to record their stories for each card. At the end of the testing session students were debriefed about the purpose of the study and given some information about theory and research upon which the study is based. Subjects were also given a written debriefing sheet (see Appendix F) and informed that results would be made available to them at the completion of the study. Training of Coders One upper level graduate student and one undergraduate student served as data coders. Both students were blind to the hypotheses of the study, and all identifying characteristics of the subjects. The coders were trained by the investigator on a practice set of TAT stories. The upper level graduate student rated the TAT stories for level of individuation and relational capacity (IR). For training purposes, 25 stories, collected for another study, were rated jointly by the 37 investigator and the student. Eighty percent agreement was reached between the two coders. Because the scale was difficult to use, it was decided that the trained coder and the investigator would both code all TAT stories independently, determine percent agreement, and discuss differences until agreement could be reached on all character ratings. Percent agreement following coding of all data, determined from a sample of half the data, and before agreement was reached on differences, was 60. An undergraduate student was trained to code affect quantity and quality on all TAT stories. The same procedure was carried out with respect to training and scoring of stories. Percent agreement on affect quantity and quality on the 25 practice stores was 60. Both the investigator and the coder then coded all TAT protocols and met regularly to determine percent agreement and make joint decisions about differences in scoring. Percent agreement following coding of all data, determined from a sample of half of the data, was 75. Joint decisions, between the investigator and the individual coders, were then made on all differences, until 100 percent agreement was reached on all coding decisions. Data Analysia6 The raw data for each subject consists of four ratings on the IR scale, one for each character in the two TAT cards, and a numerical rating for each of the primary affects expressed or implied by each of the four characters on the two TAT cards. For example, if the female °Research subjects and TAT characters are both male and female. Female/male subjects refers to research subjects. Female and.male characters refers to characters on the TAT cards. 38 character on card 4 expressed distress three times and joy once, and the male character expressed disgust two times, each expressed affect would be rated for the number of times it occurred, and recorded for the character to whom it was attributed. The total score for expressed affect on card 4 for the above subject would be 6. Scoring in this way allowed an independent analysis of total quantity and.specific quality of expressed affect, and whether the affect was attributed to the male or the female character in the story. Sex differences on the Individuation-Relational Capacity dimension (IR) were assessed using the Kolmogorov-Smirnov Test for comparing distributions of the cumulative frequency of IR scores. Computations were done by recording the frequency of each rating (1 through 7) on the scale for male and female subjects separately, summing the cumulative frequency at each scale point, and looking at the differences in cumulative frequency for male and female subjects at each point on the scale. These computations were done for total IR scores on both cards combined, and for each card separately, to determine if the distributions varied with the social relational context. Dependent T-Tests were then computed to assess differences within subjects, in IR distributions for same sex and opposite sex characters on the two cards. This was done to assess differences in IR ca it , which is reflected in all character IR ratings, vs. IR self and other ratings, which is assumed to be partially determined.by sex role stereotyping. For example, if female subjects rate most characters, overall, as fully individuated, but rate the male characters as more 39 individuated than the female characters, it would be demonstrated that female subjects have the capacity for fully individuated character functioning, but may portray themselves to others as superficially individuated, while projecting representations of males who function at a higher level. This conclusion is based on the theory that subjects cannot project representations of self or other which are more highly developed characterologically than the subject him/herself (Tomkins, 1962). Self and other representations? were also analyzed to determine if subjects who are fully individuated project superficially individuated representations of others, based on the theory (Chodorow) that they are less object dependent, and empirical evidence (Berry, 1985). Dependent T-Tests were then computed to compare the IR distribution for male subjects on cards 4 and 10 separately, and for female subjects on cards 4 and 10 separately. This was done to explore sex differences in the ability to move back and forth along the separateness—connectedness continuum as the context changes from conflict to intimacy. Sex differences in total expressed affect was computed by sunning all affects for each subject and.performing a T—Test for a comparison of the mean number of affects expressed by male and female subjects. T—Tests were computed to compare total affect differences on cards 4 and 10 combined, and on each card separately. Dependent T—Tests were then computed to compare total quantity of affect attributed to the 7"Self" is assumed.to be represented by the character in the story who is the same sex as the subject, and "other" is represented by the character who is the opposite sex to the subject. 4O self and the other character in the stories. Again, dependent T-Test computations for evaluation of self and other attributions were performed on total affect quantity on cards 4 and 10 combined, and for each card separately. T-Tests were then computed to compare the mean incidence of each specific affect expressed by male and female subjects. These computations were performed to test the hypothesis that women express more affect than men, to investigate the effect of the specific context in which affect is expressed, to explore potential differences in total affect quantity attributed to self and other, and to explore differences in affect quality between male and.female subjects. The total IR distribution, for male and female subjects combined, was then split in half to form a dichotomous, high-low IR variable. A Point-Biserial Correlation was then computed to explore the relationship between total affect and high v. low position on the IR differentiation continuum. This computation was done to determine whether subjects who are superficially individuated experience or express a different quantity of affect than subjects who are fully individuated. The relational capacity dimension was then charted to explore differences in projections of self and other on relational capacity. Because relational capacity is included on the IR continuum together with individuation, conclusions exclusive to relational capacity were Obtained by extracting scale scores on this dimension independently of the overall analysis of the IR distribution. 41 The final phase of data analysis was an exploration of subjects scoring Fully Individuated, Isolated to determine if their projections of the opposite sex characters were rated Superficially Individuated. This was done to attempt replication of Berry’s (1983) results indicating that subjects who are fully individuated and isolated are less sensitive to the complexity of others due to their being less object dependent . gaggle Characteristics Subjects for this research were recruited from the Michigan State University Subject Pool. The subjects ranged in age fran 18 to 20 years old, with a mean age of 18.9. Fourteen of the subjects were eighteen years old, 14 of the subjects were nineteen years old, and 12 of the subjects were twenty. Half of the subjects (20) were male, and half of the subjects were female (20). All of the subjects were single . RESULTS Summary of Main Results Statistical analysis of the data indicates that (1) female subjects were more fully individuated than male subjects; (2) that male and female subjects do not differ with respect to capacity for interrelatedness, but both male and female subjects attribute more relational capacity to the female than the male character in a conflict-based context; (3) while females are higher overall on level of individuation, they attribute a higher level of individuation to the male character than to the female character in an intimate context; and (4) males were more highly individuated in an intimate context than in the conflict-based context, while females stayed at the same level of individuation regardless of the context. Statistical analysis of the affect data indicates that (1) female subjects experienced more affect than male subjects; (2) male subjects attributed more affect to the male character than to the female character on card 4 (conflict), while female subjects attributed equal amounts of affect to both characters; (3) female subjects experienced more interest and more joy, on both cards, and more distress on card.4, while male subjects experienced.more disgust on both cards, although this last finding did not reach statistical significance. 42 43 Statistical analysis of the IR dimension together with the affect data indicates that subjects, male or female, who project superficially individuated characters experience less affect than subjects who project fully individuated characters. This finding is consistent with the results above that (1) male subjects are lower on the IR dimension than female subjects, and (2) male subjects experience less affect. Specific Hypotheses H1: Male and female subjects will differ significantly on measures of individuation and relational capacity, with women scoring more often as superficially individuated and interrelated, and men scoring more often as fully individuated and isolated from others. This prediction was not supported by the data, and, in fact the opposite was found to be true. The Kolomogorov-Smirnov Test was used to detenmine the maximum difference between the cumulative frequency of the male and female subject scores on the IR dimension. The level rating frequencies are displayed in Tables 1 through 3 for cards 4 and 10 combined, and for card 4 and card 10 individually. The maximum difference between the two distributions is significant for both card.4 and 10 scores combined, and card 4 scores tallied separately (ES = 16, p (.005, ES = 12, p (.005). The maximum difference on the two distributions on card 10 was not significant. Table 4 shows the specific Individuation score frequencies. 44 Table 1 Sex Differences in Cumulative Frequency of IR Ratings. Cards 4 and 10 combined. Scale Level 2 3 4 5 6 7 Female Subject Rating Frequency 7 9 14 6 26 12 Cumulative Frequency 12 27 35 41 67 79 Male Subject Rating Frequency 4 17 28 1 15 10 Cumulative Frequency 6 23 51 52 67 77 Difference 6 2 16 11 0 2 p (.005 Table 2 45 Sex Differences in Cumulative Frequency of IR Ratings. Card 4. Scale Level 3 4 5 6 7 Female subject Rating Frequency 9 6 5 15 0 Cumulative Frequency 14 20 25 40 40 Male Subject Rating Frequency 16 15 1 7 0 Cumulative Frequency 17 32 33 40 40 Difference 3 12 8 0 0 p.<.04 Table 3 Sex Differences in Cumulative Frequency of IR Ratings. Card 10. Scale Level 3 4 5 6 7 Female Subject Rating Frequency 0 10 0 11 12 cumulative Frequency 7 17 17 28 40 Male subject Rating Frequency 4 13 0 8 10 Cumulative Frequency 9 22 22 30 40 Difference 2 5 5 2 0 46 Table 4 Male and Female Subjects Ratings of Self and Other on Individuation. Full Superficial Merged A B Card 4 Males Self 4 16 0 0 Other 4 16 0 0 Females Self 9 8 0 3 Other 11 7 0 2 Card.10 Males Self 10 8 1 1 Other 8 9 1 2 Females Self 11 3 4 2 Other 12 7 1 O 47 The relational capacity ratings were pulled out of the total IR frequency distribution and charted separately. Table 5 shows the number of characters rated Interrelated and Isolated for each card, for self (same sex character) and other (opposite sex character). As the table indicates, male and female subjects did not differ significantly on the total number of characters rated Interrelated and Isolated. However, both male and female subjects rated the male character as Isolated more frequently than the female character on card 4. No significant differences were found in ratings of relational capacity on card 10, either by card or by character. 48 Table 5 Male and Female Subjects Ratings of Self and.0ther on Relational Capacity. Interrelated Isolated Card 4 Males Self 8 12 Other l§ _§ TOTAL 23 17 Females Self 16 4 Other 19 19 TCHMR. 26 14 Card 10 Males Self 18 2 Other l§ 3 TOTAL 36 4 Females Self 20 0 Other ~ 29 9 TOTAL 40 0 49 The next exploratory hypothesis tested.was that sex role stereotyping influences portrayal of self and other. The results of the statistical analysis supports this prediction. To test this hypothesis, both same sex and opposite sex characters were rated and the IR distributions compared. Because subjects could not create characters who were more highly developed characterologically than the self (Tomkins, 1963), it was assumed that any differences in IR level between the two characters could be attributed to stereotyping. A significant difference was found for females’ projection of self and other on card 10. Specifically, females projected males as more fully individuated than females (I = 2.210, p (.04) in an intimate context. This occurred even though, overall, female subjects projected more fully individuated characters of both sexes than male subjects, indicating that females are, as a group, more fully individuated.(§§ = 16, p (.005). An important finding, however, was that an independent statistical analysis of frequency distribution differences for male and female subjects on card 10 only, showed no significant difference between the two. There was a trend, however, in the direction of females being more highly individuated. Table 6 shows the mean IR rating for both characters on both cards by subject sex. The next exploratory hypothesis tested.was that the level of individuation would change when the context changed from conflict to intimacy. Statistical analysis revealed that these changes did occur 'for male subjects. Males projected.both self and other representations as more fully individuated and interrelated on card 10, the intimacy context, than on card 4, the conflictual context (I = 2.210, p (.04). 50 The mean IR ratings for both characters in each card are shown in Table 6. These findings are in the opposite direction from Berry’s (1985) findings that subjects are more highly differentiated in a social relational context that does not involve intimacy. The explanation for this opposite finding may lie in the difference in scoring systems. This issue will be discussed at length below. There were no significant differences for female subjects in level of individuation as the context changed from conflict to intimacy. Table 6 Mean Character IR Ratings by Character and Subject Sex. *MDR4 FIR4 MIRIO FIR10 Male Subjects 3.8 4.0 4.9 4.6 Female subjects 4.4 4.4 **5.3 4.6 *MIR4: Male character IR rating on card 4 FIR4: Female character IR rating on card 4 MIR10: Male character IR rating on card 10 FIR10: Female character IR rating on card 10 **p (.04 H2: subjects who project highly differentiated and isolated self-representations will project less differentiated representations of others. Because only 2 out of 40 subjects portrayed the same sex character as fully individuated and isolated, there was insufficient data to test this hypothesis. In general, however, results from the analysis of self-other portrayal indicates that subjects scoring high on IR 51 (females) did not portray the opposite sex character as significantly lower on IR. H3: Male and Female subjects will differ significantly in expression of affect in response to stimuli representing relational or affiliative themes, with women expressing more affect than men. This prediction was supported by the data. T-Tests were computed to compare the mean quantity of affect scored in the female and male TAT stories. Female subjects expressed significantly more affect than male subjects in cards 4 and 10 combined (1 = 2.081, p (.044) and in card.4, analyzed separately (I = 2.585, p (.014). While female subjects experienced more affect than male subjects on card 10, the mean difference was not significant (I = .948, p (.349). These results are shown in Table 7. The next exploratory hypothesis tested was that attribution of affect quantity to self (same sex character) and other (opposite sex character) may differ. This prediction was supported by the data for male subjects. Male subjects attributed significantly more affect to the male than the female character on card 4 (I = 3.584, p (.002). Female subjects’ attributions of affect quantity to self and other were not significantly different. These results are shown in Table 8. 52 Table 7 Mean Quantity of Affects Experienced by Male and Female Subjects. Males Females 1 Card 4&10 combined Mean 15.050 19.050 Standard Deviation 5.346 6.732 ”Card 4 Mean. 7.300 10.100 Standard Deviation 2.993 3.810 Card 10 Mean 7.750 8.950 Standard Deviation 3.654 4.322 *9 (.044 it!) (.014 Table 8 Mean Quantity of Affect Attributed to Self and Other (same sex and opposite sex character) Self Other Mean S.D. Mean S.D. Card 4 tMales 4.350 2.033 2.700 1.342 Females 5.100 2.292 4.750 1.970 Card 10 Males 4.000 2.000 3.700 2.029 Females 4.000 2.492 4.650 2.434 p (.002 The final exploratory prediction about affect differences was that affect quality may differ for male and female subjects. This prediction was supported by the data for both male and female subjects. Female subjects experienced more interest (I = 1.987, p (.054) and more joy (I 2.043, p (.048) on cards 4 and 10 combined, and more 2.070, p (.045) on card 4. Males experienced more distress (I disgust on cards 4 and 10 combined, although this mean difference was not statistically significant (1 = 1.764, p (.086). These findings are shown in Table 9. Table 9 Mean Quantity 54 of Specific Affects for Male and Female Subjects Interest Joy Distress Disgust Mean S.D. Mean S.D. Mean S.D. Mean S.D. Cards 4 & 10 Male $3.90 2.33 *12.85 2.62 3.65 2.49*¥* .80 1.28 subjects Female 5.75 3.44 4.65 2.94 4.80 3.07 .25 .55 subjects Card.4 Male 1.75 1.55 .70 1.12**** 1.55 1.31 .60 1.04 subjects Female 2.85 2.18 1.50 1.79 2.60 1.84 .25 .55 subjects *9 (.054 #19 (.048 #319 (.086 ¥***p <.045 55 The final exploratory aspect of the study was to investigate the relationship between the IR dimension and total expressed affect. The prediction that a significant relationship exists between these two variables was supported by the data. A Pearson product moment correlations, computed to assess the degree of relationship between expressed affect and level of individuation, was significant (p = .297, p (.05). This analysis indicates that subjects scoring low on the IR dimension experience less affect than subjects scoring high. This finding is consistent with the theory that subjects with incomplete integration Of self fragments, will have incomplete integration of affect, and will thus experience and express less affect. This finding is also consistent with the results above that (1) male subjects were lower on the IR dimension than female subjects and (2) male subjects experienced less affect. 8While it is not widely known, E.J.G. Pittman (1937) has demonstrated that the Pearson Product Moment Correlation is the most efficient nonparametric test of association. DISCUSSION The data supports the existence of sex differences in individuation and affect, which are clearly present in a normal population, are measurable with a projective instrument, and are likely 'to impact on needs and expectations for affiliative events between men and women. The results of the analysis of individuation and relational capacity do not support Nancy Chodorow’s position that women are less individuated than men as a consequence of a prolonged symbiotic relationship with the female caretaker. According to the scale used in this research to measure individuation, women’s prolonged closeness with the maternal figure may actually enhance individuation, as Jean Baker Miller suggests (1984). The early relinquishment of the maternal symbiotic tie by male children, may actually function to limit personality integration, rather than forcing it to occur early. The finding that males project representations of self and other which are predominantly superficial, and significantly less affective than female representations, suggests that repression of the relational ego has a dis-integrating impact on character structure, as Nancy Chodorow suggests, and limits the accessibility of feelings which accompany affiliative events. Further, sex differences in affect quality found in this study suggest that the early oedipal separation solution for 56 57 males may make conflicted relationships more difficult for men to negotiate. The finding that male subjects experienced more disgust, while female subjects experienced more interest, joy and distress, led to an investigation of thematic differences between male and female subjects’ TAT stories. One of the more interesting discoveries in looking specifically at story content, was that females were almost three times as likely as males to project characters who could discuss conflict openly and resolve differences in order to maintain a relationship. Examples of conflict resolution from the stories of male subjects include: "Alexander will resolve his turmoil by ... getting (Mary) out of his life." "The cycle will continue until the man sees the light and leaves her for good." "The woman realizes that she has lost control, lost him." In only three out of the twelve stories created by male subjects which depicted conflict between the male and female character, conflict was resolved by having the characters work out their differences. The resolution, however, in two of the three cases, showed a lack of internal change, especially when compared to female stories. For example: He tells her he’ll have the operation if she’ll marry him. She says yes. Then they do it on the operating table and everything ends well. Stories from female subjects more frequently depict subjects who work through their differences slowly, are self reflective, and change internally as a consequence of the interaction. For example: 58 The construction job this hard-working man had was just dissolved. He no longer has the means to support his family and will not accept all the wages his wife is donating to their family affairs. He feels they should be spent on her buying the 'pretty’ things she deserves. How else can he keep his masculinity from dispersing? Who would be the one considered to be 'wearing the pants in the family?’ He realizes that at this moment he has no way of supporting the two of them. She, on the other hand, is understanding and compassionate towards his sore pride, but remains practical, insisting that the money was truly earned by both of them - for weren’t they made one through marriage? Despair is etched on his face, but not wanting to accept the obvious solution he pulls away stating firmly he will not accept her money. The forecast for the construction worker in finding another job is not good for a depression has hit the Big City. After weeks of searching and doing some odd but rare jobs, he starts swaying towards seeing the clear picture of what to do. Since he has so much time during the day, while she’s at work, he begins to take care of the house somewhat and cook simple meals. Pretty soon he realizes that housework is not as easy as he thought, nor is it only for females. The depression lifts ‘and construction begins again. His old job is opened up again. No longer does he expect his wife to take care of him - waiting on him hand and foot. He now takes an active role in half of the household jobs. The story above shows the character changing in response to conflict. Resistance is acknowledged but worked through, and there is a sense that the change takes place over time. This type of resolution is quite typical of female subjects’ stories, but quite uncommon in male stories. An interpretation of this finding from an Object relations theory perspective might be that men are less likely to work through conflict to maintain a relationship because of the early separation solution to the oedipal conflict. Wbman, on the other band, who maintain close ties to the mother for an extended period, must learn to negotiate conflict. 59 The disgust response has been characterized by Tomkins (1963) as a "throwing out" response, activated against something distasteful. The greater frequency of the disgust affect in male subjects on card 4 TAT stories makes sense in conjunction with the differences in conflict resolution styles mentioned above. Card 4 themes which differed in frequency between male and female subjects are shown in Table 10. Table 10 Frequency of Themes by Subject Sex. Card 4. Relationship Violence Sustained Dissolved Male Subjects 12 3 9 Female Subjects 6 8 4 The higher frequency of violence in male subjects’ TAT stories was also found by Pollack and Gilligan (1982). Their suggestion that the violence reflected fear of intimacy is reinforced by the findings in this study that male subjects were almost three times as likely as female subjects to project characters who dissolve a relationship as a resolution to interpersonal conflict. Further, Gilligan (1982) states: The violence in male fantasy seems to arise from a problem in communication and an absence of knowledge about human relationships. (p. 45) and 60 . . while women try to change the rules in order to preserve relationships, men, in abiding by these rules, depict relationships as easily replaced. (p. 44) These conclusions were drawn from an analysis of TAT story content from Pollack and Gilligan’s 1982 study, cited above. An exploration of thematic content of female TAT stories showed that the higher incidence of the affects of interest and joy in these stories was derived from two basic themes: (1) the man is distressed by something and the woman is concerned about him (concern was coded interest), and (2) the man and woman love each other. Interest and joy were both scored when one story character loved another, if the bond was a positive one. Interest and distress were both scored if one character loved the other, but was distressed by the relationship., . The male subjects were more likely on card 4 to tell stories in which the male figure had to go out and fight, and the female character was trying to restrain him from acting. The female subjets were more likely to tell card 4 stories in which the male character was distressed by his feelings and the female character was trying to comfort him, or where the male figure was distancing from the relationship and the woman was interested in sustaining it. The higher incidence of distress on card 4 for female subjects appears to be related to the same basic themes: (1) the man is feeling badly and the woman is also distressed, but out of concern for him, (2) the female character wants to work through conflict in order to maintain the relationship, while the male character is wanting to distance. 61 The attribution by male subjects of significantly more affect to the male than the female character in card 4 stories is explained by the finding, mentioned above, that male subjects frequently told stories to card 4 in which the male character had to go out and fight. In these stories, the male character was often the whole focus of the story, and so had all the affect. The role of the female character was frequently confined to efforts to restrain him from acting. One of the most interesting aspects of the study was the differences which were found between cards 4 and 10. The average level of IR was not significantly different for males and females on card 10, the females did not experience significantly more affect on this card alone, and the themes were not as distinctly different as they were in card 4. This finding suggests that in an affiliative context which includes intimacy and affection, without conflict, males and.females have similar experiences, and function at a similar level of ego development. The surprising finding that male subjects’ level of individuation on card 10 actually increased significantly over the level projected in card 4 is in stark contrast to Berry’s findings. Subjects in her study who projected fully individuated characters in cards without intimacy, projected superficially individuated characters on card 10. The differences in these two study findings is easily explained by the differences in the two scoring systems. In this study, the addition of level 7 to the scale combined two points on the scale that were at opposite ends of the continuum in Berry’s scale. Specifically, merged and fully individuated were 62 combined and placed at the highest point on the scale. The rationale for combining these two formerly opposite levels of individuation was that both levels were present in a single story. Because the criteria for full individuation was met in these stories, because the card showed two characters hugging each other, and because many of the subjects from this normal population projected characters with the same affective and thematic experiences, it was concluded that shared experience was a more normative and healthy experience than one reflecting pathological merging. Further, because these subjects were able to project characters who were sharing the same feelings and experience, while maintaining a high level of ego integration, this was considered to represent the very highest level of ego integration or individuation. That male subjects were capable of this level of functioning in an intimate, but not a conflict-laden context, suggests that male subjects have greater difficulty negotiating interpersonal conflict than shared intimacy. This suggestion is reinforced by the rise in level of relational capacity for males from card 4 to card 10. On card 10, only 4 characters out of 40 were scored isolated. On card 4, 17 out of 40 were scored isolated. This finding, and the one mentioned above about male subjects level of IR increasing from card 4 to card 10, offers support for the notion that male boundaries are fluid enough to change as the context changes from conflict to intimacy. Results of the analysis of female subjects IR scores indicate that females do not move back and forth along the continuum of separateness and connectedness as male subjects do. Female subjects 63 did, however, in this study, maintain a consistently high level of individuation and relational capacity, regardless of the context. A related interesting finding, however, was the occurrence of a statistically significant difference in the IR level of the female subjects, male and female characters on card 10. Female subjects projected a male character who was rated higher on IR than the female character. This finding lends support to the notion that there is a discrepancy, for females, between the actual and the perceived or projected level of individuation. Again, it is not possible to project a character representation at a level of development which surpasses that of the self (Tomkins, 1963). This finding supports the popular notion that females are socialized to perceive males as more highly developed than females, when in fact this difference does not actually exist. Male subjects, however, did not project female characters at a lower level of individuation than the self. Rather, all characters projected by the males averaged at a lower level of individuation than the characters projected by the female subjects. The data suggest, therefore, that in terms of actual capacity, females are more highly individuated, or have a higher level of personality integration, than males. The findings on relational capacity are actually inconsistent in this study. The finding that men were more likely to dissolve a conflicted relationship, and the higher frequency among male subjects of the disgust affect, suggests that male subjects’ relational capacity is actually weaker, as Nancy Chodorow suggests. The scale rankings for relational capacity, however, which were scored by raters who were 64 blind to the sex of the story teller, indicated that male and female subjects did not differ in relational capacity. The criteria for scoring relational capacity on the IR scale, however, are perhaps overly simplistic, as a character is scored "interrelated" if they simply react to or have dialog with the other character. The decision to score "isolated" was made only if the character had no reaction to the other character. The data contained in story content, as well as the specific affects which accompany them, are considered by this investigator to be a richer and more accurate basis for determining relational capacity. Further, the finding that both male and female subjects attributed more relational capacity to the female than the male character in card 4 reinforces the notion that both men and women perceive a stronger relational capacity in females. The inconsistency between the different criteria for judging relational capacity presents both a limitation of the present study, in terms of the scoring system, and an important consideration for developing a scale for relational capacity for future research. The final link in the data analysis which combined IR level and quantity of expressed affect showed that subjects who projected superficially individuated characters had.significantly less affect than subjects who projected fully individuated.characters. This finding supports the theory that incomplete integration of parts of the self is linked to incomplete access to affect. Further, this finding ireinforces the other significant findings in this study that (1) male subjects experienced less affect than female subjects and (2) male subjects were not as highly individuated as female subjects. 65 Study Limitations The most difficult aspect of this study was the reliable measurement of individuation level from written TAT responses. As mentioned earlier, the interrater agreement percentage for IR level was 60%. All interrater discrepancies were discussed until agreement was reached between the two coders. Agreement was often difficult to reach due to there being incomplete, as well as inconsistent, representation of scoring criteria in the stories. For example, subject stories might include self and other or time components reflecting full individuation, and a resolution more reflective of superficial individuation. Decisions were made based on the inclusion of scoring components which reflected the highest level of individuation. A recommendation for future research using these concepts would be the acquisition, where possible, of more information form the subjects. This might include verbal responses to TAT cards, or the addition of structured interview material. An additional limitation, mentioned above, was the criteria used for scoring relational capacity. Future research in the area of relational capacity should take into account the discrepancies found in this study between the affective and thematic data, and that derived from the scale criteria. A more complete measure of relational capacity would be attained by the inclusion of all three criteria. APPENDIX A TAT CARDS APPENDIX A TAT CARDS 66 67 APPENDIX B INSTRUCTIONS FOR CODING INDIVIDUATION AND RELATIONAL CAPACITY APPENDIX B GUIDELINES FOR SWRING INDIVIDUATION AND RELATIONAL CAPACITY Full Individuation A character who is fully individuated is one who shows integration of parts of the personality. The following four aspects of personality integration should be considered. These concepts are derived from Benjamin’s (1981) scales measuring self—other differentiation and integration of self fragments. Time ' An integrated character has a sense of time, meaning a sense of past, present and future. The character may be described as one who "used to be a hothead," or "when he was a child he felt" or "since he can remember, he’s always felt annoyed by . . . ". The character may be working toward a goal, growing up, reflecting about the future, planning, changing, etc. Affect Integration of parts of the personality goes hand in hand with integration of affect. The following three aspects of affective functioning should be considered: A. Process The character is 119; overwhelmed by or stuck in an affective experience. For example: "This character is looking out the window, frozen with despair." Rather, the character is able to access other parts of the self to resolve affect. For example: "This character is looking out the window, feeling desperate. She will stand there a while longer, but then tell herself that these feelings will pass with time. She will then do something else for a while to make herself feel better, knowing that these feelings may return at times, until she slowly makes peace with the loss. B. Simultaneous Contradictory Affect There is a capacity to tolerate two contradictory affects simultaneously without having to decide between them to reduce tension. For example: "John loves Sally, but he is also and at her for never 68 69 being there for him." The character does not choose between two conflicting parts of the self. For example: "John is telling Sally he loves her, or else he is telling her he needs to go away and be by himself for a while. But, I think he is telling her he loves her." C. Resolution Affect is 99; prematurely resolved. This overlaps with the process concept (A). Examples of premature resolution include action resolution (He was angry and so he left her forever . . . He was angry and so he beat the other guy up); a resolution withoutgprocess (She felt terrible about losing him, but suddenly it just didn’t matter anymore and she became very cheerful); or a polyanna resolution (The cancer disappeared of its own accord and everyone lived happily ever after). Reflective Thoaghg An integrated character is one who can reflect on his position, his actions, thoughts, feelings, etc. There is a sense of internal constancy, together with flexibility or openness. New experiences are added to an existing character structure. The existing character structure enables the person to reflect on an experience in his own way, and then decide on a course of action, or a belief or attitude toward the experience. For example: "He’s thinking about what he should do. He has never wanted to do anything like this before, but he wonders if maybe it’s time for him to try something different." Self and Other In interactions with others, an integrated character will perceive both self and other as constant. In object relations terms, object constancy will be achieved. This entails the ability to value an object (or person) for attributes other than those which satisfy needs of the self. A character may still decide to separate from another person, but with the realization that the two are too different to be comfortably together. The other will be seen as three-dimensional, a person in their own right, with their own needs, thoughts, affects, and, in general, their own character structure. The other will not be devalued or thrown out simply because they cannot satisfy the needs of the hero. Characters do not cling to each other defensively for a sense of safety. (Horner, 1984) For example: These two characters have been together for several years. The woman is beginning to feel that she needs to separate from the man, to be independent for a while, as she struggles with her internal conflicts. The man is disappointed, but not surprised. He can remember feeling this way himself at times, and understands how strong those feelings can be. At the same time he feels sad and somewhat angry that things are this way at this point in time. He will go into the other room for a little while, but then come back after thinking the situation over. He will tell her that he feels angry and disappointed, but at the same time understands her feelings. They will part with mixed feelings. 70 Superficial Individuation A character who is superficially individuated will not reflect the characteristics mentioned above. Any of the following may be present: 1. A character who has no past or future. 2. A character who has no description beyond their reaction to another character. 3. A character who is overwhelmed by and/or stuck in an affective experience. 4. A character who chooses between contradictory feelings rather than being able to tolerate both of them. 5. A character who acts, without reflection, to resolve affect. 6. A character who happily accepts a polyanna resolution, rather than processing an event internally, or being changed as a consequence of an experience. 7. A character whose self-perception changes in response to the other character not fulfilling his/her needs. For example: "He told her that if she wouldn’t make love to him, it proved that she never loved him in the first place and she should look for another boyfriend." (Horner, 1984) Megged Two levels of merged will be coded. The first level (Merged) will be scored as described in the original scale: At level 1 (merged) the characters in the story are not acknowledged or described individually in any way. There is no mention of any independent thoughts or feelings of the characters. They are depicted as a single unit, all experiencing the same thing, as though they were one person. For example, "This family has just had dinner and they are relaxing together." At level 2 (merged B) one or both characters in the story appears to have no sense of self and so will be clinging to the other in a desperate way. The character will be described individually, but will have no self without the other. For example: "She feels that she needs him or she would not be able to survive . . . She flings her body over the guard rail and screams "I cannot live without you!" RELATIONAL CAPACITY Two levels of relational capacity will be coded: Interrelated and Isolated. Code interrelated if the characters have dialogue, or clearly react to each other in some way. It is often difficult to determine when a character is isolated as most characters are acting in response to somethigg - often other people. The key consideration for the purpose of this study is: are the people reacting to/interacting with each other. APPENDIXC LIST OF C(I‘QDN ADJECTIVES FORBASICAFFECI‘S APPENDIX C LIST OF M ADJ'ECTIVES FOR BASIC AFFECI‘S Interest Concentrating, attending, attracted, curious attentive fervor concentration inquisitive concern interest contemplation observation curiosity pensive deliberating pondering excitement puzzlement expectation Enjoyment-Joy questioning reflection religious fervor seriousness somber reflection thoughtfulness wonder Glad, merry, delighted, joyful amusement gratitude bliss happiness clowning humor contentment jovial delight joy ecstasy laugh elation merry enjoyment mystical ecstasy gaiety optimism glee Surprise-Startle playful pleasantness pleasure rapture satisfaction sees something pleasant self-satisfaction serenity smile Sudden reaction to something unexpected, astonished amazed pleasant astonishment amused surpriSe pleasant surprise astonishment shock fearful astonishment startle joyful surprise 71 surprise surprise, fear surprise, joy surprise with fear about to cry anguish bad news crying dejected dejection depression despair disappointment distress aversion contempt cynical derision disapproval disdain disgust aggresive anger bitterness enmity ferocity ashamed bashful embarrassment anxious apprehension fear 72 Distress-Anguish Sad, unhappy, feels like crying grief sad hurt sorrow loneliness suffering melancholy troubled misery uneasiness not going well unhappy pain unloved pathetic upset pity worry Disgast-Contempt Sneering, scornful, disdainful, revulsion dislike scorn distaste skepticism insolence smirk mockery smug repugnance sneer repulsion superiority sarcasm er- e Angry, hostile, furious, enraged furious revenge fury spite mad vengeful rage vexation Shame-Humiliation Shy, embarrassed, ashamed, guilty guilt shame penitent shyness repentance timidity Fear-Terror Scared, afraid, terrified, panicked fright scared horror terror panic APPENDIX D GUIDELINES FOR SCORING AFFECT APPENDIX D GUIDELINES FOR SCORING AFFECT Affect coding is, at first glance, quite subjective. However, with practice, it becomes less so. The following are some guidelines for scoring affect which were developed.during the initial efforts toward establishing reliability. 1. The first step in coding affect is to read through the story several times to get a sense of what is going on and what the characters and feeling generally. Many of the affective statements will be coded according to the context of the overall story. 2. USe the following decision rules to code: A. Code one incidence of affect for a paragraph that has a tone of a specific affect without mentioning that affect by name. EXAMPLE I can’t do that. It would risk the family’s safety. I must go, but I’ll return. Code: Concern (Interest) B. Avoid coding several instances of a single affect based on the existence of several single words which lead to one idea (affect). W I can’t do that. It would risk the family’s safety. I must go, but I’ll return. Initially, during efforts to establish reliability, an interest code was scored for each underlined.word.(above). This, we decided, was over-scoring. Instead, interest should be scored only once. C. In a long paragraph with a general tone of anger, several different affects may be present. Often, feelings are not named, but are rather clearly implied: 73 74 EXAMPLE: I’m sorry Jean. YOu’ve been whoring around too long. [This is scored OONTEMPT because the term 'whoring’ implies more than disapproval which would be scored DISGUST.] I’m not putting up with it. You are carrying another man’s child. Not mine. we’re not even friends anymore as far as I’m concerned. I thought you loved me. [The last sentence shows the character’s vulnerability and so an additional score of disappointment is coded.] I always forgave you. But this time I won’t. I won’t. [The last sentence, as well as the paragraph in general, shows anger and so a third affect for the paragraph is coded: ANGER.) D. A sentence which reads "He loves her" can be coded several different ways, depending on the context. Read the whole story for context, and then decide whether the "love" is experienced as enjoyment—joy or distress. Then code both interest and one of the above (enjoyment-joy or distress) for the statement. EXAMPLE There is an older couple who have been married for quite a while. He is kissing her on the forehead and hugging her to tell her that he still loves her after all the years. She knows he loves her and she still loves him. In this example, the statement "he loves her" is contained in the context of positive affect and so would be coded INTEREST, ENJOYMENT-JOY. Consider, however, the following example: She loves him.and cannot hear to see him leave her. She feels that she doesn’t want to live without him and so threatens to kill herself if he leaves. For this example, code INTEREST-DISTRESS. E. In most cases, affect is implied rather than stated directly. Consider the following examples of implied affect: Oh sure, there were some rough times, but they made it through them and they’ll make it through more. Score: Optimism (Enjoyment-Joy) It seems like just yesterday, they were sneaking her out of the house for a while. Score: Reflection (Interest) F. Do not score descriptive paragraphs where emotion is not attributed to a character. 75 EXAMPLE A man just left this couple’s house and told him (Steve) that they would have to be out of the house in two days. The reason for this was because a few nights ago the owner of the house (Steve) was drunk and him and a few men were playing poker. He happened to run out of money so he wagered his house. The result of the game was that he lost. Code nothing in the above paragraph. This is merely description and we don’t know how the characters are feeling. G. Code NO AFFECT or AFFECT INHIBITION where characters either mention specifically that they cannot face their feelings, or in cases where something catastrophic occurs and the characters have no affective reaction. A EXAMPLE Ben turned away. He could not face his true feelings. He left. Code: Affect Inhibition The man was hit by a train crossing the railroad.tracks and was killed instantly. Steve and Joan got to keep the house after all. Code: NO AFFECT H. As the stories unfold, characters’ feelings often change as they react to or interact with each other. For each interaction, each character usually has a coded feeling. Even if it is the same as the one before it, code it again. EXAMPLE: Ben felt terrible. He didn’t want to talk to anyone. Joan tried to make him feel better by telling him everything would be O.K. Joan’s efforts were to no avail. Ben still felt m. Code Male: Distress Female: Concern Nale: Distress For each story, follow the steps below: 1. Read through the entire story once or twice. .2. Record each affect in the story. 3. Record whether it was experienced by the male or female character. 4. Record the adjective that best describes the feeling as well as the primary affect (e.g., concern (interest). 76 5. List all affects in the order in which they occur on a piece of paper. 6. Re-read.the story, consulting the list of affects, to make sure that each affect essential to the story has been recorded. APPENDIX E CDNSENT FORM APPENDIX E CONSENT FORM Thank you for your interest in participating in this experimental research project. This study is focused on an investigation of the experiences which accompany relationships with others. If you choose to participate, I will be inviting you to use your imagination in the creation of stories. About one hour of your time will be requested. If you would.like to take part, your signature is required on this form to indicate that you have, or are now being, informed of the following: 1) Your participation in the study has been explained to your satisfaction and is understood. 2) You freely consent to participate. 3) You understand that you may discontinue the experiment at any time without recrimination. 4) All information which you supply is both confidential and anonymous. 5) There are judged to be no risks of any kind associated with participation in this study. 77 APPENDIXF DEBRIEFING POEM APPENDIX F DEBRIEFING FORM Thank you for participating in my research study. I hope that you found your experience to be both interesting and enjoyable. My study is designed to explore the emotional experiences of men and women in their relationships with each other. Recent research and theory pertaining to the relationships of men and women indicates that there are sex differences in needs, capacities and emotional experiences. Specifically, women seem to have a greater capacity for connecting with others on an emotional level, but may, at the same time, experience difficulty with developing a sense of themselves as separate and autonomous. Men, conversely, appear to experience autonomy with greater ease, and have lesser needs and/or capacities for connecting emotionally with others. This study is focused on the emotions accompanying relationships between men and women to explore the impact of these hypothesized differences in needs and capacities. YOur participation in this study required that you write one story to each of two pictures showing a man and a woman together. The "stories you wrote will tell me about how you have experienced your relationships with others. By looking carefully at your stories, I 78 79 hope to determine if there are consistent differences between man and women in thoughts and emotions pertaining to being together with each other. If you are interested in finding out the results of this study, please contact me at the telephone number or address below. I will take your name and address and nail a brief smmery of the results to you when I complete the study. If you are interested in reading further on this subject, the books listed below provide an interesting introduction to the issues covered in the research. Thank you again for your time and interest. Carol Schwartz 349—6728 1534 Thistledown, Apt. 1-A Okemos, MI 48864 Chodorow, N. (1978). The reproduction ofgagtheriag: psychoanalyais and the sociolggy ofagender. Berkeley: University of California Press. Lewis, H.B. (1976). Psychic war in men and women. New York: New YOrk University Press. APPENDIX G SAMPLE STORIES APPENDIX G SAMPLE STORIES In the story below, the female character is scored at level 1 - Merged. There is no description of the female character as an individual. This story was created by a female subject. This is a picture of two parents. They have just heard that their daughter is getting her third.divorce in four years. They are very worried about her. She is falling into the wrong groups and marrying men for sex and money. She was also involved in a drug ring near their home in Miami, Florida. They are very disturbed and ashamed of their daughter. They cannot understand what they did.to ever make their child behave the way she does . They blame themselves for the way she turned out and they are saddened.by the way they brought her up. They were always trying to give her the best, but is was never good enough. They'want her to find the happiness they have found together. They have had 30 years of wedlock and have had four children. They always thought she was a nice girl. In their most shameful moment, he embraces her telling her it was not their fault. They had raised her correctly. Then he tells her he loves her with a kiss. In the following story, the female character is scored at level 2, Merged B. She is described as a separate person, but is not psychologically separate from the other character. This story was created by a female subject. The man and the lady are having an argument. They are arguing because he wants to end their relationship and she does not. The man is upset because she will not let him leave without some good reasons, so she grabs his arm in an attempt to stop him from leaving her life. The lady feels that this man is her life—long dream and she can’t let go of 80 81 the relationship. She feels that she needs him or else she would not be able to survive. Trying with all her heart to save the relationship, she threatens to kill herself if he leaves her. The man, still having some feelings left for the lady, stays to try, and calm.her down, even though he feels he would rather leave. As time goes on, he waits until the lady calms down and then he tells her that their relationship is over because he has another girlfriend who he deeply cares for. In shock, the lady runs to the balcony of her penthouse and flings her body over the guard.rail and screams, "I can not live without you." The man runs to the balcony and looks down. Then we see a tear roll down his face. In the story below, the male character is scored at level 3 (Superficial Individuation, Isolated) and the female character is scored at level 4 (Superficial Individuation, Interrelated). The story was created by a female subject. The woman is trying to reason with the man, but he doesn’t want to listen. He is trying to walk away, but she is trying to hold him back. The thing that led up to the event was his determination to do something that was dangerous. He wanted to go find the man that killed his brother and bring himlin to jail. She knew that he would be risking his life trying to catch him (the murderer) and wanted him to leave it up to the police. She is feeling very much love, caring and concern. She does not want him.to get himself hurt or killed, so he can get vengeance. He has a strong feeling of determination to catch the man. He is very upset about his brother’s death and is enraged at the murderer. He thinks that even though she will be upset, it is something he has to do. This event will be resolved by the police phoning them to tell them that they found the murderer about an hour ago, and that he is being held without bail at the county jail. This way his vengeance can be sought legally and safely through the court of law without his safety to risk. In the following story, the male character is scored at level 5, Superficial Individuation, Isolated. This story was created by a male subject. These two people are in love. The man looks like he is going to get into a fight with another person. The young lady looks like she is trying to calm him down. I would bet another man had.tried to make a pass at her or said something that annoyed the man in the picture. The 82 young lady looks concerned and.is trying to soothe his hostility. The man probably wants to show the lady that he won’t take any crap. Trying to be a tough guy in front of the lovely lady. The lady is thinking that there is no reason for the man she’s with to fight — that the man doesn’t have to prove anything to her. The man is thinking about kicking somebody’s ass, but he probably really doesn’t want to fight, because he’s worried about losing. The whole thing will end with the man turning back to the young lady and telling her what a jerk that other guy was, and how he should of cracked him. They lady will agree with everything he says, and also tell him not to worry about it because that other man doesn’t mean anything to me. The lady is also flattered by the man’s protection or jealousy over her. In the following story, both characters are rated at level 6, Full Individuation, Interrelated. The story was created by a female subject. The woman is trying to persuade the man to give in to her way of thinking, but he won’t because he doesn’t think she is right. This all started when Sue, the woman, wanted to go out to dinner and BOb, the man, didn’t because he hates restaurants and he’s tired from a long day at work. She had a rough day at work too, and doesn’t want to cook, so she’s coaxing Bob to go. Bob’s getting irritated with Sue and he’s ready to give in and go out to dinner. He also realizes that Sue is tired too and can understand her not wanting to cook, but he really doesn’t want to. She is getting mad and is just about ready to tell Bob to cook his own dinner because she’s going out alone when Bob gives in and agrees to join her.(Bob knows he can’t cook very well and he’d prObably starve.) So they put on their coats and drive in the pick-up truck to the nearest McDonalds. Sue orders her choice of food and Bob his. They eat without saying much because they’re both still a little mad, but by the end of dinner they are both full and happy so they head.for home in much better moods. The last story is scored at level 7, Fully Individuated, Merged. ,The story was created by a male subject. In was the holiday season again and the Johnsons had so much to be thankful for. Their children were all grown now and they'had.become grandparents. The holiday was the special time in which the family always shared. 83 This holiday season was better than years past. There had been financial and moral despair throughout the last few years and finally, everyone in the family was stable once again. The hardship of divorce was reconciled and the promises of better lives had been shown. The two Johnson sons and the one daughter were again on speaking terms. The foolishness of family fighting was no longer. Life was too short to hold grudges any longer. The past year had brought the death of a dear friend of the family. Each member felt remorse because it had been years since they had seen old George. But the family respected George and George had written a letter to the Johnson’s asking them to reflect and remember him as he always was. He wrote to them "life is too short so don’t dwell on others’ faults. Find the good in them," At first it was hard for the family to do this. Soon it became easier and easier for them to enjoy life and be happy once again together. That is why this year’s holiday is so joyous at the Johnson house. LIST OF REFERENCES LIST OF REFERENCES Benjamin, J. (1983). Two components of the process of objectification as observed on the theaatic apperception test. Unpublished.masters thesis, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor. Benton, C.J., Hernandez, A,C.R., Schmidt, A., Schmitz, M.D., Stone, A.J., & Weiner, B. (1983). Is hostility linked.with affiliation among males and with achievement among females?: A critique of Pollack and Gilligan. Journal of Personalityiapd Social Ps holo , 55(5), 1167-1171. Berry, D.K. (1985). A TAT researchaaeasure for assessigg adult correlates of early childhood aaparation-individuation dynamica. Unpublished masters thesis, Michigan State university, East Lansing. Chodorow, N. (1978). The reproduction of motherigg: Psychoanalysis and the sociology of gender. Berkeley: University of California Press. Dudycha, G., & Dudycha, J. (1933). Some factors and characteristics of childhood memories. Child Development, a, 265-278. Gilligan, C. (1982). In a different voice. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. Hering, A. (personal communication, July, 1985. Horner, A. (1985). Object relations and the developing ego in therapy. New YOrk: Jason Aronson, Inc. Horner, M.S. (1977). validity of an empirically derived projective measure of fear of success. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Ps holo , 3§(4), 564-574. Horner, M.S. (1968). Sex differences in achievement motivation and performance in competitive and noncompetitive situations. Dissertation Abstracts International, 1969, 39, 4073. (University Microfilms No. 69-12135). Izard, C.E. (1971). The face of emotion. New York: Meridith Corporation. 84 85 Izard, C.E. (1977). Human emotions. New York: Plenum Press. Karon, B.P. (1981). The thematic apperception test (TAT). In A.I. Rabin (Ed.), Assessment with projective techniques. New York: Springer Publishing Co., Inc., pp. 85-120. Lewis, H.B. (1976). Psychic war in gen and wogap. New York: New York university Press. Miller, J.B. (1984). The development of women’s sense of self. WOrk in progress, No. 12, Wellesley College, Wellesley, MA. Mirman, C. (1984). Shame andjgpilt: Activators, associated unconscious dapgers, and defenses. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Michigan State university, East Lansing. Murstein, B.I. (1972). Normative written TAT responses for a college sample. Journal of Personality Assesapent, 36(2), 109- 143. Negri, T. (1978). Shapaiand gpilt in relation to other aspects of personality. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Michigan State University, East Lansing. Pittman, E.J.G. (1937). Significance tests which may be applied to samples from any population, II. The correlation coefficient test. Supplement to the Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, 3, 225-233. Pollack, S., & Gilligan, C. (1982). Images of violence in thematic apperception test stories. Journal of Personality and Social Pollack, S., & Gilligan, C. (1983). Differing about differences: The incidence and interpretation of violent fantasies in women and men. Jouppal of Personality and Social Psychology, 55(5), 1172- 1175. Pollack, 8., & Gilligan, C. (1983). Killing the messenger. Jourpal of Personality and Social Psychology, fi§(5), 1176-1178. Stairs, P.W., & Blick, K.A. (1979). A survey of emotional content of dreams recalled by college students. Psychologjcal Reports, 35, 839-842. Thompson, A.E. (1981). A theory of affect development and maturity: Applications to the thematic apperception test. (Doctoral dissertation, University of Michigan, University Microfilms No. 82—04776.) Tomkins, 3.8. (1962). Affect imagery and consciousness: The positive affects. (Vol. 1). New York: Springer Publishing Company, Inc. 86 Waldfogel, S. (1948). The frequency and affective character of childhood memories. Psychological Monogpaphs, 52 (4), No. 291. Weiner, 8., Stone, A.J., Schmitz, M.D., Schmidt, A., Hernandez, A.C.R., Benton, C.J. (1983). Compounding the errors: A reply to Pollack and Gilligan. Journal of Personality and Social Psycholggy, 35(5), 1176-1178.