EGO-STRENGTH IN STUDENT LEADERSHIP ASSESSMENT A PATTERN*ANALYTIC INVESTIGATION By MARVIN SCHILLER A THESIS Subm itted to the C ollege of S cien ce and A rts o f M ichigan State U n iv e r sity of A gricu ltu re and A pplied S cien ce in p artial fu lfillm en t of the req u irem en ts for the d eg ree of DOCTOR O F PHILOSOPHY D epartm ent of P sy ch o lo g y ProQuest Number: 10008651 All rights reserved INFORMATION TO ALL USERS The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted. In the unlikely event that the author did not send a complete manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion. uest. ProQuest 10008651 Published by ProQuest LLC (2016). Copyright of the Dissertation is held by the Author. All rights reserved. This work is protected against unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code Microform Edition © ProQuest LLC. ProQuest LLC. 789 East Eisenhower Parkway P.O. Box 1346 Ann Arbor, Ml 48106- 1346 To m y w ife ii ACKNOWLEDGMENT The author ow es a p rim a ry debt of gratitude to D r. L ouis L* M cQuitty for h is patient guidance and co n stru ctiv e c r it ic is m in stru m en tal in the u ltim ate com p letion of th is r e se a r c h . As chairm an of the Guidance C om m ittee, D r. M cQuitty provided the encouragem ent and understanding that helped m ake th is a challenging ex p erien ce. The su g g estio n s of the other C om m ittee m em b er s, D r s. A lb ert I, Rabin, F r e d e r ic R. W ickert, and G erald F. King, w e r e invaluable in fa cilita tin g the developm ent and organization of th is p roject. The as sista n c e in p relim in a ry form u lation s o f th is d isser ta tio n by the sta ff m em b ers at the M ichigan State U n iv e r sity C ounseling C enter i s a lso gratefu lly acknow ledged. F in a lly , ap p reciation is e x p r e sse d to m em b ers o f the fa cu lty in the departm ents of A ir S c ien ce , B u sin ess A d m in istration, M ilitary S c ie n c e , and P sy ch o lo g y at M ichigan State U n iv ersity for th eir tim e and coop eration in allow ing th eir e n r o lle e s to be u sed as su b jects in th is r e se a r c h . M. S. EGO-STRENGTH IN STUDENT LEADERSHIP ASSESSMENT: A PATTERN-ANALYTIC INVESTIGATION By MARVIN SCHILLER AN ABSTRACT Subm itted to the C ollege of S cien ce and A rts of M ichigan State U n iv e r sity of A gricu ltu re and A pplied S c ien ce in p a rtia l fu lfillm en t of the req u irem en ts for the d egree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY D epartm ent of P sych ology 1959 ABSTRACT A s a m ean s o f te stin g one im portant concept from p sych oan alytic th eory in the a s s e s s m e n t of lea d er sh ip , it w as h yp oth esized that p attern s of e g o -stren g th c h a r a c te r istic s a re r ela ted to lea d er sh ip behavior* The Ss w e re 400 m a le c o lle g e se n io r s who w e re a ssig n ed to one of four lea d er sh ip c a te g o r ie s on the b a s is of the num ber and h ie r a r c h ic a l le v e l of lea d er sh ip p o sitio n s held, a s rep orted in a b iograp h ical le a d er sh ip q u estion n aire. The c r ite r io n c a te g o r ie s w e re P* p r e sid e n tia l le a d e r s (N = 86); CCa, c o m m ittee chairm an who h eld m o re than one such p osition but none high er (N = 83); CCb, com m ittee chairm an who held such p o sitio n s only once (N a 92); and NL<, n o n -lea d er s or Ss who have n ever h eld any lea d er sh ip p o sition {N = 139)* The total population w as random ly divided into standardization and c r o ss -v a lid a tio n groups o f equal s iz e . E g o -str en g th w as defined a s that p r o c e s s w hich fa c ilita te s the a n a ly sis and in teg ra tio n of im pinging stim u li (i. e. environ m en tal as w e ll a s th ose attributed to in tern al dynam ic p r o c e s s e s ) in the d ir ec tio n o f n eed * sa tisfy in g goal ach ievem en t. The ES s c a le , c o m p rised vi o f the 68 ite m B arron E g o -stren g th S cale and 30 ite m s con stru cted by th is author based on sp e c ific c r ite r ia of e g o -str e n g th , w as u sed a s a m e a su r e of e g o -str e n g th for te stin g the S s . Both lin ea r {additive) and configural (p attern -an alytic or typ al) m ethods w e r e u sed for the a n a ly sis of the data and the e ffic a c y of each , in a s s e s s in g lea d er sh ip , w a s in v estig a ted . A ppropriate item a n a ly ses w e re em p loyed for se le c tin g the b e st ite m s for the lin ea r and configural t e s t s . The p rim ary con figu ral trea tm en t w as the new ly developed M ultidim ensional S ca lo g ra m A n a ly sis. Som e of the m ajor findings are as follow s; 1. The lin ea r m ethod w as su p erior in d ifferen tiatin g betw een a ll four c r ite r io n c a te g o r ie s with 5 and 10 item k eys (p<. 01), w h erea s with the con figu ral m ethod the c r ite r io n for the se le c tio n of ite m s w as not sa tisfie d ; th erefo re a configural te s t w as not develop ed . 2. The lin ea r and configural a n a ly ses (5 item k e y s) w e re e ffe ctiv e in d ifferen tiatin g betw een c r ite r io n c a te g o r ie s P and N L . The m ean p e r ce n t o f c o r r e c t ca teg o riza tio n of S s in the c r o ss -v a lid a tio n sa m p le w ere 73% and 64. 5% for the r e sp e c tiv e a n a ly ses (p<* 01). 3. T here w as no sign ifican t d ifferen ce betw een the e ffe c tiv e ­ n e s s of the lin ea r and configural k ey s in d ifferen tiatin g betw een P and N L , and betw een th e se and the lin ea r k ey w hich d ifferen tiated a c r o s s a ll four c r ite r io n c a te g o r ie s. 4. B y com bining both the lin ea r and configural k e y s g rea ter e ffe c tiv e n e ss w as found in the a ccu ra cy of c la s s ific a tio n (76%) than w as the c a s e w ith eith er m ethod trea ted sep a r a tely , but the in c r e a s e w as not s ta tis tic a lly sig n ifica n t, 5. The ite m s o f the ES s c a le that w e r e develop ed by th is author proved to be of g rea ter e ffe c tiv e n e ss in d ifferen tiatin g betw een lea d ersh ip c a te g o r ie s than w ere B a rro n 's ite m s . A s a r e su lt of th e se findings i t can be concluded that e g o -stre n g th , a s m ea su red by the ES s c a le , i s e ffe c tiv e in lea d er sh ip a s s e s s m e n t. F u rth erm o re, the h yp oth esis w as found tenable w ithin the lim its of the p articu lar exp erim en tal conditions em ployed. The value of the p attern -an alytic approach to the data. and su g g estio n s for future r e se a r c h w e re diseussed< Major P r o fe s s o r Date /ft? / T able o f Contents P age 1. Introduction . . . . . . ............ 1 H ypoth esis ............. T estin g in stru m en ts • ........... II. Method and P r o c e d u r e . 19 ............................ 22 Subjects 23 L ead ersh ip c a te g o r is a tio n III. ........... 25 C onfigural a n a ly s is ................ 27 D ifferen tiation betw een two c a te g o r ie s (con figu ral). 31 L inear a n a ly sis 35 ........................... D ifferen tiation betw een two c a te g o r ie s (lin ea r) . . . 36 Com bining appropriate lin ea r and configural k e y s . 37 R esu lts ............................... 38 Configural a n a ly sis with stan dardisation S s 38 C onfigural a n a ly sis with c r o ss -v a lid a tio n S s 53 L inear a n a ly sis a c r o s s four c a te g o r ie s ................... 53 L inear a n a ly sis betw een two c a te g o r ie s ......... 55 .................................... 62 D eterm in in g the b e st k ey and m ethod of a n a ly sis , . 66 Combining both a n a ly ses IV. 19 D isc u s sio n .............. 70 v iii ix P age V. VI. Sum m ary B ibliography ............. 75 ............... 78 A ppendices Appendix As E g o -stren g th S cale ..................... Appendix B: B ib liograp h ical Q uestionnaire Appendix C. Item In ferco rrela tio n M a trices Appendix D; D ifferen ce M atrices 91 .......... 99 ........... 101 .................................... 114 L ist of T ab les T able Page 1 C r ite ria of e g o -stre n g th 2 An outline o f so m e c r ite r ia of e g o -stre n g th w ith b ib lio ­ graphic r e fe r e n c e s to lea d ersh ip stu d ies supportive of e a c h ................ 17 The su b jects in each o f the four lea d ersh ip c r ite r io n c a te g o r ie s d e sc rib ed in ter m s of th eir v etera n s sta tu s, age, and in te llig e n c e sc o r e . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39 The fifty -tw o ite m s cu lled from the ES sc a le by m ean s of the configural a n a ly sis, and the so u rc e of o rig in for each ....................... 41 Nine prototypes (20 ite m s each ), d erived from the 52 b e st con figu ral ite m s , a re shown with the d irectio n of th e ir r e sp o n se s and the c r iter io n ca teg o ry from w hich they evolved ........... 42 The m ean s c o r e for each of the c r ite r io n c a te g o r ie s on the nine con figu rally d erived prototypes ........... 43 P r o to ty p e -sc o r e m ean d ifferen ces betw een c r ite r io n c a te g o r ie s from w hich prototypes evolved ................. 44 P a rtia l ranking o f the colum n su m s o f the d ifferen ce m a trix d eriv ed from the item in te r c o r r e la tio n m a tr ic e s for c r ite r io n c a te g o r ie s P and N L ....................... 46 Six p re -p ro to ty p es (th irteen item s in each) which evolved from the M ultidim ensional S calogram A n a ly sis of c r ite r io n c a te g o r ie s P and NL ..................... 47 M eans, standard d ev ia tio n s, and T te s t r e s u lts for fiv e p re -p ro to ty p es te ste d on c r ite r io n c a te g o r ie s P and N L . 49 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ........................ x 8 T able 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Page M eans, standard d ev ia tio n s, and T te s t r e su lts for two exp erim en tal p rototypes te ste d on c r ite r io n c a te g o r ie s P and N L ...................................... . ....................................................... 51 A ccu racy of c la s s ific a tio n of Ss in the standardization population to c r ite r io n c a te g o r ie s P and NL a s a r e su lt of the u se of th ree c u t-o ff s c o r e s on the con figu rally d eriv ed ite m s . A lso shown i s the a ccu ra cy of c la s s i ­ fication of c r o ss -v a lid a tio n Ss at the b e st c u t-o ff p o in t.. 52 The o rig in a l so u r c e , the r esp o n se in the d irectio n of high lea d er sh ip , and the confidence le v e l o f 10 ite m s of the ES sc a le w hich, by m ean s of the Chi Square te s t w ere found able to d ifferen tia te a c r o s s a ll four le a d e r ­ ship c a te g o r ie s a re p resen ted in ord er of ^ m agnitude. 54 M eans and v a r ia n ce s for the S s in each lea d ersh ip ca teg o ry on the 5 and 10 item lin ea r k e y s ..................... . . . 56 T ukey's D t e s t o f the sig n ifica n ce of d ifferen ce betw een m ean s c o r e s on the 5 ite m k ey for sep a ra te c r ite r io n ........... ca teg o ry p a ir s 58 The r e su lts of 30 sig n ifica n t Chi Square te s t s for the r e sp o n se s of the S s in the stan d ard isation population b etw een p a ir s o f c r ite r io n c a t e g o r i e s ................ 59 A ccu racy of c la s s ific a tio n o f S s in the standardization population to c r ite r io n c a te g o r ie s P and NL a s a r e su lt of the u se of th ree c u t-o ff s c o r e s on each of th ree lin e a r ly d erived k e y s. A lso shown i s the a ccu ra cy of c la s s ific a tio n o f c r o s s -v a lita tio n Ss at the b e st c u t-o ff point for the b e st lin ea r s e t of item s ........................ 61 The E ve lin e a r and E ve configural ite m s, togeth er with th e ir o rig in a l so u rc e and appropriate r e sp o n s e s sc o re d in the d ir ec tio n of high le a d e r s h ip ............................................. 63 xi ? L igt of F ig u res F igu re 1 2 3 4 5 P age S e v e r a l e x a m p les of ach ievem en t a r e a s tow ard w hich an individual m ight d ir ec t h im se lf, and the le v e ls of e g o -stre n g th a ss o c ia te d with each . . . . . . . . . . . ...........« . . . 8 T h eo retica l plot o f the relation sh ip betw een lea d ersh ip and e g o - s t r e n g t h ................... 9 A sc a tter g ra m of the r e sp o n se s o f the standardization Ss in c r ite r io n c a te g o r ie s P and NL to the fiv e item lin ea r k ey and the four unique ite m s of the configural k ey ........................... 63 A sc a tter g ra m of the r e sp o n se s of the stan dardization Ss in c r ite r io n c a te g o r ie s P and NL to both the lin ea r and configural k eys 64 A sca tter g ra m o f the r e sp o n se s of the c r o ss -v a lid a tio n Ss in c r ite r io n c a te g o r ie s P and NL in both the lin ea r and configural k eys .................. 67 x ii I. Introduction A v ita l a r e a of r e se a r c h and th eo ry in s o c ia l p sy ch o lo g ica l s c ie n c e i s that o f leadership* Educators* m ilita r y m en, and in d u s tr ia lists have long been in te r e ste d in th is su b ject, and though nu m erous attem p ts have been m ade in the d irectio n o f lea d ersh ip a s s e s s m e n t , r e la tiv e ly little s u c c e s s h a s b een ach ieved (C artw right, and Z ander, 1956; Jen k in s, 1947; S togd ill, 1948). Som e o f the e a r lie s t r e se a r c h , under the ru bric o f the " g rea t man" t h e s is , p laced p rim a ry w eight on the tr a its and c h a r ­ a c te r is tic s o f the le a d e r , with the contention that the r e s t of the group i s w orthy o f co n sid era tio n only in so fa r a s it s b ehavior is the r e s u lt of h is in stig a tio n (Binet* 1892; B orgatta, et a l, 1954; E llio t, 1957; F eldm an, 1955; Given, 1957; S tryk er, 1959). P h y sic a l, in te lle c tu a l, s o c ia l, and p er so n a lity fa cto r s w e r e stu died in an attem pt to d ifferen tiate betw een le a d e r s and n o n -le a d e r s. D uring W orld War 11, and im m ed ia tely th erea fter, co n cern w as w ith outlining and d e scrib in g the v a rio u s p e r so n a lity tr a its and b eh avioral syn d rom es m o st typ ical o f le a d e r s . In itiative, r esp o n sib ility , a g r e s s iv e n e s s , fa ir n e s s , and the a b ility to m ake d e c is io n s w e re found to be o f im portance in so m e stu d ie s, but, in 1 2 g en era l, the r e s u lts w e re equivocal (Stogd ill, 1948). Jenkins (1947), after review in g the lite r a tu r e , concluded that " p ro g ress h a s not been m ade in the d evelop m en t of c r ite r ia of lea d er sh ip b eh avior, nor in the se ttin g -u p of an adequate w orking definition of the concept to guide r e s e a r c h in the iso la tin g of lea d ersh ip tr a its . The situ ation d o e s not appear to be a happy one with r e ­ gard to the d erivin g of g en era l p rin c ip les or of settin g up a sy ste m a tic th eory of lea d er sh ip from the a v a ila b le inform ation . " C u rren tly, the situ ation i s not v e r y m uch b etter (C artw right, and Zander* 1956). A s a r e s u lt of the w ork by Kurt L ew in (1947a; 1947b) and se v e r a l of h is colleagu es* a situ ation al approach to the under­ standing o f the lea d er sh ip phenom enon has been develop ed . H ere, an in d iv id u a ls a c c e s s io n to th is r o le i s se e n a s dependent upon so c ia l fa cto rs; the p articu lar situ ation and the contributions m ade to the group*s goal ach ievem en t (DuVall* 1943; H aythorn, et a l. , 1956; Jennings* 1937; Murphy* 1937). Gibb (1947) and others (K nickerbocker, 1951; P igors* 1935; S chn eid er, 1937; Stogdill* 1950) support th is view and add to it the concept of m utual stim u lation . Som e s o c ia l in tera ctio n a l p r o c e s s is sa id to take p la ce in which "the attitudes* id e a ls , and a sp ira tio n s of the fo llo w er s play as im portant a determ in in g r o le a s do the ind ividu ality and p e r so n a lity of the leader" (Gibb, 1947). The m em b ersh ip is em p h asized and 3 the lea d er is co n sid ered to be the product o f the group situation . Som e of the proponents o f th is in tera ctio n a l th eory m aintain that s in c e th ere can be no lea d er sh ip in iso la tio n (Gibb* 1947), and s in c e le a d er sh ip , only on few o c c a sio n s, is an enduring r o le (F ie d le r , 1954), som e s o c ia l phenom enon m u st th e re fo re account for the lead er*s e m e rg e n c e . But to a ccep t th is point o f v iew , with but secon d ary w eigh t attach ed to the p e r so n a lity dyn am ics in volved , m ight be to om it a v ita l co n sid era tio n in the understanding of the lea d er sh ip pnenom enon. T h ere m ay be value in attending to the other sid e of the coin; the in tera ctio n of individual attrib u tes of le a d e r sh ip that a r e su fficien t to band the group m em b ersh ip into a c o h e siv e , g o a l-se e k in g organ ization . Rather than co n sid erin g the c h a r a c te r istic s of the group stru ctu re that develop a need for a c en tr a l guiding fig u r e, attention m ight a ls o be turned tow ard the individual h im s e lf and th ose q u a lities and tr a its that are sought after and c a lle d upon by the group. One of the p rim a ry stu m b lin g b lock s in evaluating lea d ersh ip is due to the inad eq uacies in defining the term in o lo g y em p loyed (A ndrew s, 1955; Stogd ill, 1950). In the p r e se n t in v e s ti­ gation it is p rop osed that th ere a r e d ifferen t ty p es of le a d e r s . When the ad vocates o f the in tera ctio n a l th eory su g g est that lea d er sh ip v a r ie s from situ ation to situation (C ow ley, 1928; F ie d le r , 1954) they 4 a re probably r e fe r r in g to d ifferen t typ es o f le a d e r s than a re th ose r e s e a r c h e r s who find a c o n siste n t tendency in c e r ta in p e r so n s to a scen d to the lea d er sh ip p o sitio n in a v a r ie ty of groups (B a ss , 1949J B e ll * & F ren ch , 1950; C arter, et a l. , 1951; Jack son , 1953). B orgatta, Couch, and B a les (1954) have been able to d elin ea te “s ix typ es of thinking about the optim um lea d er sh ip stru ctu re o f the group for e ffe c tiv e p erform an ce. " In accord an ce with the g r ea t m an th eory they m ake a sp e c ia l effort to in v e stig a te the •‘a ll-a ro u n d le a d e r . •’ It i s pointed out that the la tter lea d er sh ip type n eed s to p o s s e s s a com bination of sp e c ific p e r so n a lity q u a lities to a su b stan tial d e g r ee . With a sim ultan eou s fu sion of th e se c h a r a c te r istic s ’’the g rea t m an is able to s a tis fy the m ajor ro le dem ands and p e r so n a lity n eed s of group m e m b e r s. ” It i s a purpose o f the p r e sen t study, in a s s e s s in g le a d er sh ip , to d ifferen tia te betw een typ es of le a d e r s accord in g to the lea d er sh ip c h a r a c te r istic s p r e sen t. In su rveyin g the lite r a tu r e on lea d ersh ip th eory and r e se a r c h it app ears that r e la tiv e ly few attem pts have been m ade to u tiliz e orthodox F reudian th eo ry (F reud , S . , 1924) to provide an understanding of the problem at hand. Som e in v estig a tio n s have cen tered about the O edipal c o n flict and its r eso lu tio n (H enry, 1957), w hile o th ers have been con cern ed w ith su p erego id en tifica tio n w h ere the lea d er i s thought o f a s the ’’fath er” (S ch eid lin ger, 1952) or 5 "grandfather” im age (F eldm an, 1955), Sch eid lin ger (1952) tie s this w ork togeth er and e m p h a sizes the d iffe r e n c e s in the r e la tio n ­ ship betw een the group m em b ers and the lea d er , depending upon the ch a ra cter of the group. He su g g e sts that in a group with an au to­ cr a tic kind of lea d ersh ip , "the lea d er tends to rep la ce the in d iv­ id u al’s su p erego. He a ss u m e s the ro le of a new inner authority and the tie to him is the b a sic c o h e siv e fo rce . . . In d em ocratic groups th ere is le s s p rojection of the in d ivid u al's su p erego upon the lea d er and l e s s dependence upon him . Instead, th ere is m ore id en tification (in the ego) with him and opportunity for in d iv id u a lized , at tim es c r itic a l, r e sp o n se s from the group. " For the m o st part, th ese th e o re tica l explorations se e m to have fa iled to m ake sign ifican t contributions to the com p reh en sion of lea d ersh ip , and its a s s e s s m e n t, b ecau se of eith er untenable h y p o th eses, inad eq uacies in the r e se a r c h d esign , a n d /or failu re by the r e s t of the field to accep t the e so te r ic th e o r e tic a l a ssu m p tio n s. One w o rth w h ile r e s e a r c h attem p t though, ten d s to c o m p e n sa te for m an y o f the o th er in a d e q u a c ie s. In ev a lu a tin g c h ild r e n 's g ro u p s, Redl (1942) d istin gu ish ed betw een ten types of lea d ersh ip in which som e cen tra l p erso n a c ts a s the fo ca l point around whom the group form ative p r o c e ss takes p la ce. T yp ical of the form u lae o ffered to explain each of th e se types is the follow ing: 6 The c en tra l p er so n ren d ers an im portant s e r v ic e to the ego of the p oten tial group m em b er s. He d oes so by providing the m ean s for the sa tisfa c tio n of com m on u n d esirea b le d r iv e s and thus p reven ts gu ilt fe e lin g s, a n x ie tie s, and c o n flic ts w hich o th erw ise would be in volved in th a t p r o c e s s for them . On the b a sis of th is s e r v ic e , the laten t u n d esireab le d r iv e s o f th e se y o u n g sters can m a n ife st openly. Through th is com m on con flict* solu tion , group em otion s develop in the in te rp er so n a l situ ation (R edl, 1942), The ego of the sin g le ind ividu als in volved in the group situ ation i s given g r e a te st p rom in en ce and s e e m s w orthy o f further co n sid era tio n . With the dynam ic concept of e g o -stre n g th a s the c h ie f point o f r e fe r e n c e , the p r e se n t in v e stig a tio n c o n sid e r s lea d er sh ip in te r m s o f both the p rev a ilin g environm ental and p e r so n a lity p r e m is e s . Within th is con text, e g o -str e n g th i s defined a s the p r o c e s s w hich fa c ilita te s the a n a ly sis and in tegration o f im pinging stim u li in the d irectio n of n e e d -sa tisfy in g goal ach ievem en t. E g o -str en g th i s p e r ce iv e d as the v e h ic le for in tegratin g the two m ajor th e o r e tic a l lea d ersh ip p o sitio n s. It enables the individual to behave a s a "great man" in r esp o n se to the n eed s of the m em b ersh ip o f a group by em erg in g in the lea d er sh ip r o le as a rea ction to group p r e s s u r e s . R ecogn ition i s taken o f the p o s sib ility that e g o -stre n g th m ay be d iv erted hlong lin e s other than p erson n el lea d ersh ip a c h ie v e ­ m ent (s e e F ig u re i ) . A p er so n m ay, a s a con seq u en ce, be high in e g o -str e n g th and s t ill not be a lead er; he e x p r e s s e s h is stren gth s in 7 other r o le s . On the other hand, it is argued though, that high e g o -str e n g th i s a p r e r e q u isite for lea d er sh ip (i. e . e v e r y lea d er w ill have it), but not a ll p e r so n s who have high ego stren gth w ill n e c e s s a r ily be le a d e r s , E g o -str en g th i s a high ly a b stra ct and global concep t and i s a ssu m e d to e x p r e s s i t s e lf in va rio u s p attern s of ego c h a r a c te r is tic s . F u rth erm ore, the va rio u s r o le s in which e g o -str e n g th is e x p r e sse d a r e postulated to have p attern s o f ego c h a r a c te r istic s w hich a re d istin ctiv e o f that p articu lar r o le . T his approach is app licable to the lea d er sh ip concept; le a d e r s w ill e x p r e ss th eir e g o -stre n g th in ego c h a r a c te r istic s which a re p ecu lia r to the lea d e r sh ip r o le . A h yp othetical plot of the exp ected rela tio n sh ip betw een p erso n n el lea d er sh ip and the a b stra ct concept of e g o -stre n g th is se en in F igu re 2. With lea d ersh ip arran ged at the ordinate and eg o -stre n g th on the a b s c is s a , it i s noted that anyone high in le a d e r ­ ship i s a lso exp ected to be high in e g o -stre n g th . Som eone found high in e g o -str e n g th though, does not n e c e s s a r ily have to be high in lea d ersh ip ; h is p sy ch ic en erg y i s probably d irected along other lin e s (i, e . acad em ic ach ievem en t, e t c . ). It i s the in tera ctio n or configuration of the v a r ia b le s which c o m p rise e g o -str e n g th that d em o n strates the u n iqu en ess o f any one m ode of behavior. The com m en ts by B eliak (1958) on the stru ctu ra l organ ­ iza tio n of the p e r so n a lity a re rep re sen ta tiv e of th is th e o r e tic a l p ositio n . 8 F igu re 1 S ev e ra l ex a m p les of ach ievem en t a r e a s toward which an individual m ight d ir e c t h im se lf, and the le v e l of e g o -stren g th a sso c ia te d with each. P er so n n e l L ea d ersh ip A ch ievem en t A cadem ic A ch ievem en t S cien tific A ch ievem en t A r tistic A ch ievem en t low high E g o -stren g th le v e l Legend: An individual m ay be high in e g o -str e n g th in any one or m o re a r e a s o f ach ievem en t. He m ay be low in any one or m o re ach ievem en t a r ea (s) but s t ill be high in other o n e s. In ord er to be high in one ach ievem en t a r e a he m u st be high in e g o -stren g th , but i f he i s high in e g o stren gth he need not be high in e v e r y ach ievem en t a r e a . 9 F igu re 2 T h eo r etica l plot of the rela tio n sh ip betw een lea d ersh ip and eg o -stre n g th High P erso n n el L ead ersh ip Low low high eg o -stre n g th 10 He m ain tain s that the b e st understanding of the concept of the ego is in te r m s o f the to ta l in tegrated p erform an ce o f it s functions, rath er than a s an o v e r -a ll con cep t o f e g o -str e n g th w h ere d e g r e e s o f ego functions a re add itive. It i s m entioned further that though e g o -str e n g th m u st be view ed globally, the ego cannot be con cep tu alized a s a p e r fe c t sp h ere, "The im a g e that su g g ests i t s e lf is that of an uneven ra sp b er ry on w hich each su rface point c o n stitu tes the term in o u s of one o f the m any ego functions. F u rth erm ore, th is protean ra sp b erry m ight be m ade of stretch a b le rubber and which would change it s shape d evelop m en tally and be su b ject to m om en tary d a ily variation s" (B eliak , 1958; p. 35). F en ich el (1945), exem p lifyin g F reudian psych oan alytic th eory, h as su g g ested that the m aturation of the ego is the r e s u lt of the "continuous in terp la y of the o r g a n ism 's n eed s and environm ental in flu e n c e s ." It is in constant co n flict w ith th o se portions of the p erso n a lity involved with the e x p r e ssio n of p r im itiv e , in stin ctu al dem ands (the id) and the e x p r e ssio n of the learn ed id e a l standards (the su p erego). Underneath the organ ized p erip h ery of the ego lie s the c o re of a dynam ic, drivin g chaos of fo r c e s , which str iv e for d isch a rg e and nothing e ls e , but which co n ­ stan tly r e c e iv e new stim u lation from ex tern a l a s w e ll a s in tern a l p ercep tio n s . . . . The organ ization p r o ­ c ee d s from the su rfa ce to the depth. The ego is to the id a s the ecto d erm i s to the endoderm . The ego b e c o m e s the m ed iator betw een the org a n ism and the outer w orld. A s such it has to p rovide p rotection 11 a gain st h o s tile in flu en ces from the environ m en t a s w e ll a s en fo rcem en t o f g ratification even ag a in st a r e str ic tin g ou tsid e w orld (F en ich el, 1945, p. 16), The ego is c o n sid ered a s dealing w ith the "executive" (a s w e ll a s p ercep tu al and in teg ra tiv e) functions of the p e r so n a lity a s a r e s u lt of its r e sp o n sib ility for r e a lity testin g , judgm ent, s e lf rea liz a tio n , em otion al in tegration , and m a ste r y o f r e a lity situ ation s (B lum , 1953; H all, 1954; K lopfer, 1951; M urray, & Kluckhohn, 1955), It should not be a ssu m ed that an appropriate patterning o f e g o -stre n g th c h a r a c te r istic s p reclu d es the e x iste n c e o f ego p ro ­ te c tiv e , d efen siv e m ec h a n ism s. On the con trary, the m o re com p lex, higher ord er d e fen se s (eg . in tellectu a liza tio n , sublim ation, co m ­ pensation , e t c . ) m ay be v ita l in the prom otion of lea d er sh ip b eh avior. King and S c h iller (1959) have found that for th ose individuals w ith a higher d e g ree of e g o -str e n g th , th ere i s a tendency tow ard a r e la tiv e ly g rea ter u se of d e fe n se s such a s ration alization as com pared with the m o re p rim itiv e d e fe n se s lik e denial and p rojection . The in ­ dividual with in fe r io r ity and inadequacy fe e lin g s m ay tend to co m ­ p en sate by str iv in g a ll the hard er for such p o sitio n s w h ere h is statu s w ill be enhanced. In doing so he m ay ra tio n a lize away any threat to h is w e ll being o r, in the c a s e s of low er e g o -stre n g th le v e ls , deny the e x is te n c e o f any o b s ta c le s. 12 S chafer (1954) r e fe r s to the develop ed "strength" of the ego a s "synonym ous with an adaptive, adequately r e a lis tic , r e s ilie n t p e r so n a lity , defended w e ll but not r ig id ly . " H e g o e s on to point out that the adaptive ego op eration s se e k to " articu late, reg u la te, and coord in ate a w ide v a r ie ty o f inner (id, ego, su p erego) dem ands with each other and to in tegrate th e se w ith the op p ortu n ities, d an gers and lim its in the surrounding p h y sica l and s o c ia l e n v iro n m en t." The quantity of ex cita tio n that can be ap p rop riately to lera ted w ithout d isch a rg e w as d is c u sse d by F reud (1924) a s being a m a tter of p sy ch o -ec o n o m ic s. "When ten d e n c ies to d isch a rg e and ten d en cies to inh ib it a re equally strong, th ere i s e x te rn a lly no evid en ce o f a ctivityj but en ergy is consum ed in an in tern a l hidden stru g g le. C lin ica lly th is i s m an ifested by the fact that the ind ividu als su bject to such co n flic ts show fatigue and exhaustion without dcing p ercep tib le w ork . . . . T h ose who have inn er p rob lem s to so lv e m u st apply a great d eal of th eir en ergy to them , and th ere rem a in s little for other functions" (F en ic h e l, 1945; pp. 1 3 -14). T h erefo re, if the organ ization of the ego i s such that a rigid bulwark o f d e fe n se s is continually n eeded for p rotection against the r e le n tle s s p r e s s u r e s of the id and su p erego, not m uch p sy ch ic en erg y can rem ain to be devoted to the m o re c r e a tiv e p r o c e s s e s that exem p lify le a d er sh ip . * ^Again, it is im portant to note that the c r e a tiv e ach ievem en t to which r e fe r e n c e i s m ade is p r im a r ily that w hich i s m o st ty p ica l of c r e a tiv e p erso n n el lea d er sh ip . In stan ces o f th is w ould be s e e n in an 13 K ris (1952), expanding on the F reudian notion, supports th is contention and r e fe r s to " r e g r e s sio n in the s e r v ic e of the ego" as c h a r a c te r istic of c r e a tiv e and productive p r o c e s s e s . T h ere is sa id to be an in c r e a se d op en n ess o f c o n sc io u sn e ss w hich r eq u ires rela x a tion o f the d e fen siv e , regu latory, and organ izin g ego attitu des that n o rm a lly s c r e e n co n sc io u s m a te r ia l seek in g p a ssa g e from the u n con sciou s to c o n sc io u sn e s s. An appropriate in tera ctio n of ego c h a r a c te r istic s i s a r e q u isite factor fo r such p r o c e s s e s to occu r. In speaking o f " field -an alytic" p e r so n s who have a "strong e g o ," Stagner (1959) su g g e sts that to the extent that each individual p e r c e iv e s h is environm ent in h is own p e r so n a l fash ion , se e in g a ttra ctiv e and threatenin g ob jects and r ela tin g h im s e lf to them , we have a m ajor so u rc e of u n iqu en ess in p e rso n a lity . T h ese individuals are b etter able to str ip aw ay the cu ltu ral a r tifa c ts and n o n -e s s e n tia ls that cloud the situ ation . They should be l e s s su bject to group con form ity, a s d e sc rib ed by A sch (1951) and C rutchfield (1955), and m o re prone to independent lea d ersh ip e m e rg e n c e . A ttem pts at evaluating e g o -stre n g th have tended, for the m o s t p a rt, to follow a p sych otherap eu tic ration ale (B arron , e x ec u tiv e ’s in te rp er so n a l planning, d e c isio n m aking, organ ization al stra teg y , e tc . But it i s a ls o reco g n ized that c r e a tiv ity can be e x p r e sse d in other d ir ec tio n s as w e ll ( i . e . a r tis tic and sc ie n tific p u rsu its). The la tte r m a n ifesta tio n s a re not co n sid ered h e r e . 1953; K lopfer, 1951; Rogers* 1951; S c h ille r , 1958), It is su g g ested that a s a r e su lt of s u c c e s s fu l p sych otherap y an individual is lik e ly to relin q u ish m any of h is d efen se m ech a n ism s w hich w e re p r e v io u sly em p loyed to p ro tect the ego from lib id in al p r e s s u r e s and th eir resu lta n t an xiety (F en ic h e l, 1945; R o g ers, 1951), A r elea rn in g ta k es p la ce in which the individual attains a b etter understanding o f h im s e lf and h is p rob lem s so that the environm ent can be p e r ­ c e iv e d through a m ore r e a lis tic , ob jective and ration al fram ew ork. C onsequently, th is strengthening of the ego p e r m its the app lication o f p sy ch ic en ergy fo r c e s in a m o re p o sitiv e d ir ec tio n (R o g e rs, 1951; S c h ille r , 1958). M urray and Kluckhohn (1955) have p re sen ted so m e fifteen s p e c ific v a r ia b le s w hich p erm it an outline of the " c r ite r ia o f e g o -str u c tu r e or e g o * str e n g th ," Under th ree m ajor c a te g o r ie s, p ercep tion and apperception, in te llec tio n , and conation, they co n sid er the im portant fa cto r s that have been a ss o c ia te d with the eg o -stre n g th con cep t by other th e o r ists (B eliak , 1958; B lum , 1953; F en ich el, 1945; S ch afer, 1954; Stagner, 1959). T able 1 contains a lis tin g of th e se " criteria" with a b r ie f d e sc r ip tiv e statem en t for each , based on the o rig in a l w ork of M urray and Kluckhohn (1955). It m ight be noted that the e g o ’s r o le i s p ortrayed a s both a m od ifier betw een inner dynam ic fo r c e s (id and su p erego), and a s a m o d ifier betw een the in tern al dem ands 15 T able 1 C r ite r ia of eg o -stre n g th A. P ercep tio n and apperception. 1. E xtern al ob jectivity: the a b ility to p e r c e iv e hum an action s and ev en ts without d isto rtio n . 2. Internal ob jectivity: in sigh t into o n e's own m o tiv e s, evalu ation s, and em otion al r ea c tio n s. 3. Long ap p ercep tive span: the habit of m aking c a u sa l connection s betw een even ts that a r e tem p o ra lly not contiguous in ex p erien ce. B. In tellectio n . 4. C oncentration, d irection ality: the a b ility to apply o n e's m ind to an a ssig n e d or se le c te d to p ic. 5. C bnjunctivity of thought and sp eech ; the a b ility to think, sp eak , and w rite c le a r ly , coh eren tly and lo g ic a lly . 6. R eferen tia lity o f thought and sp eech : the a b sen ce o f vague undefined, e s s e n tia lly m ea n in g less te r m s and e x p r e ss io n s. C. Conation, 7. W ill-pow er: the a b ility to do what one r e s o lv e s to do and i s capable of doing. 8. C onjunetivity of action: the a b ility to sch ed u le and o rgan ize o n e's a c tiv itie s . 9. R esolu tion of c o n flicts: the a b ility to ch o o se b etw een a ltern a tiv e c o u r se s of action, 10. S e lec tio n o f im p u lses: the pow er to r e p r e s s tem p o ra rily , inh ib it, or m odify unacceptable em otion s or te n d e n c ies. 11. S e lec tio n of s o c ia l p r e s s u r e s and in flu en ces: the a b ility to ch o o se am ong the dem ands, c la im s , e n tice m en ts, and su g g estio n s that a re m ade by other p eop le. 12. in itia tiv e and se lf-s u ffic ie n c y : the a b ility to d ecid e for o n e s e lf and act without w aiting to be stim u lated , urged or encouraged . 13. R e sp o n sib ility for c o lle c tiv e action; the w illin g n e ss and a b ility to take r e sp o n sib ility and e ffe c tiv e ly organ ize and d ir e c t the behavior of o th ers. 14. A dherence to r eso lu tio n s and a g reem en ts; the d isp o sitio n and a b ility to abide by lo n g -te r m d e c isio n s and com m itm en ts. 15. A b sen ce o f p ath ological sym ptom s: freed om from in cap acitatin g n eu rotic and p sych otic sy m p to m s. A Taken, in part, from M urray and Kluckhohn (1955). 16 and the environ m en t. R ep resen ta tiv es of the fo rm er function a re se e n , for exam p le, in the c r ite r ia " se le c tio n of im p u lse s, " "internal objectivity* " and "ab sence of p ath ological sym p tom s, " On the other hand* " se le c tio n of so c ia l p ressu res* " "external objectivity* " and " refe re n tia lity of thought and speech" a r e m o re ty p ica l of th ose eg o -str e n g th c h a r a c te r is tic s w hich act as a m ean s of s u c c e s s fu l co m p ro m ise betw een in tern a l and ex tern a l stim u li. The resu ltin g m a n ifesta tio n s o f ego*streng£h a r e seen* in accord an ce with the p r e v io u sly cite d definition* as fa cilita tin g the a n a ly sis and in tegration of im pinging inner and environm ental stim u li in the d ir ec tio n of need sa tisfa c tio n and goal ach ievem en t. Much o f the r e se a r c h findings con cern ed with lea d er sh ip can be su bsum ed under one or m o re of th e se c r ite r ia of e g o strength* In T able Z a re lis te d the M urray and Kluckhohn v a r ia b le s w ith appropriate bib liographic r e fe r e n c e s to th eory and r e se a r c h c a r r ie d on in the a r e a of lea d ersh ip w hich tend to be supportive o f each, T here app ears to be a c lo s e a sso c ia tio n betw een what is co n sid ered as c h a r a c te r istic of lea d ersh ip and the c r ite r ia of ego* stren gth . S in ce findings supportive of both the "great man" and " so c ia l in teraction al" th e o r ie s can fit with fa c ility w ithin the eg o*stren gth context, it i s su g g ested that th is approach can provide g rea ter c o h esio n and com p reh en sion o f the lea d er sh ip phenom enon. 17 Table 2 An outline of som e c r ite r ia of e g o -str e n g th 55* w ith bibliography r e fe r e n c e s to lea d e r sh ip stu d ies* * su pp ortive of each* R e fer en ce s C r ite r ia A* P erce p tio n and app ercep tion 1* E xtern al ob jectiv ity 2. 3. Internal o b jectivity Long ap p ercep tive span B* In tellectio n Concentration* d irectio n a lity 5. C onjunctivity o f thought and sp eech 6* R eferen tia lity of thought and sp eech C* Conation 7* W ill-pow er 8* 9. C onjunctivity o f action R esolu tion of c o n flicts 10« S e lec tio n of im p u lses 11* S electio n of s o c ia l p r e s s u r e s and in flu en ces 12* In itiative and s e lf-s u ffic ie n c y 13. 14. 15. R esp o n sib ility for c o lle c tiv e action <1, 14, 16, 18, 21. 28, 44, 72, 96, 100, 103. 1 0 6 ,) (1. 14. 50) (6, 21, 43, 51, 69, 70, 72, 93. 107) (6, 37, 50, 51* 72, 98) (7, 21, 58, 72, 96, 98) (6 , 72, 96*98) (1* 93, (3, <4, 81, (1* 8, 17, 26* 37, 43, 51, 72, 96) 18, 20, 44, 72, 81, 93, 98) 12, 21, 37, 38, 39, 51, 72, 93, 106) 32, 72) (32* 39, 43, 52, 55, 5 9 ,6 3 , 71, 83, 92, 96, 100, 102) (3, 4, 6, 15, 18, 41* 42, 56, 59 83, 108) (12* 14, 39, 41, 42, 43, 50, 56 57, 72, 96, 97, 103, 104, 105) A dherence to reso lu tio n s and a g reem en ts (17, 49, 72, 96, 97, 107, 108) A b sen ce of p ath ological sym ptom s (12, 20, 38, 39, 81) *F rom (M urray and Kluckhohn, 1955). **See bibliography. is M em bers o f in d u stry have relu cta n tly r ec o g n ise d that th e re a r e c o m p a ra tiv ely few great* a ll-arou n d le a d e r s . Fortune* in a s e r i e s o f a r tic le s on ex ecu tiv e q u a lities, d ea lt w ith the tr a its o f em otion al stability* ambition* drive* initiative* judgment* e tc . and concluded that th e r e can be no standard l i s t of p e r so n a l attrib u tes b eca u se the develop m en t o f one m a y "stunt the growth" of another (Stryker* 1959)* It w as found also* that a m anager m ay be w eak In so m e tr a it frequ en tly co n sid ered " essen tia l" and s t ill do an e x c e lle n t jobs that the m a n ifesta tio n s o f lea d er sh ip c h a r a c te r istic s m ay v a r y g r ea tly fro m tim e to tim e in the sa m e individual. Other r e s e a r c h ev id en ce su g g e sts th at v a rio u s p attern s of p e r so n a lity functions m ay in te ra c t to fo rm a d ifferen t ex ecu tiv e or le a d e r sh ip type (Henry* 1957; Madden* 1954; Mandell* 1957). In an a r tic le su m m a risin g p rev io u s findings con cern in g the "execu tive p erso n a lity * " H enry (1957) m ade the follow in g co n clu sio n s; The c h a r a c te r is tic s o f the ex ecu tiv e a s found by the r e s e a r c h e r s in a s e n s e c o m p rise a p erso n a lity p attern . T hey a re the c h a r a c te r istic s w hich se e m m o st im portant in the e x ecu tiv e p e r so n a lity co n ­ figuration* w hich se e m to have contributed m o st to s u c c e s s in the e x ec u tiv e role* which a re p r e sen t m o st frequ en tly in the p e r so n a litie s of th ose ind ividu als who would be c a lle d s u c c e s s fu l in th is a r e a (p. 329). D iffe r e n c e s in lea d er sh ip typ es can be se e n , for example* in the c a s e o f the b u sin e ss a d m in istrator who i s not n e c e s s a r ily the sa m e p erso n a s the b u sin e ss le a d e r . The job fu n ction s, and probably 19 the p e r so n a lity m an ifesta tio n s of an org a n iza tio n 's p resid en t, tr e a su r e r , and f ir s t- lin e su p e r v iso r , a ll m anagem ent p erso n n el and supposed le a d e r s , a re quite d ifferen t. T h ese d iffe r e n c e s should be am enable to a typal categ o riza tio n . H ypoth eses It i s th e r e fo r e a ssu m ed that by co n sid erin g le a d e r sh ip typ es and d ifferen tiatin g betw een them in te r m s of individual d iffe re n c es in p attern s of eg o -stre n g th c h a r a c te r is tic s , it i s p o ssib le to in tegrate the m ajor r e se a r c h findings concerning the "great man" and " so c ia l in teraction al" th e o r ie s of lea d er sh ip . M ore sp e c ific a lly , a s a te s t o f one im portant concep t from psych oan alytic th eory in the a s s e s s m e n t of lea d er sh ip , it is hyp oth esized that pattern s of ego*stren gth c h a r a c te r is tic s a re related to lea d ersh ip behavior. F u rth erm ore, the r e s u lts of lin ea r (additive) and con figu ral (typal) m o d els w ill be com pared in an attem pt to d eterm in e the e ffic a c y of both o f th e se a n a ly se s in lea d ersh ip a s s e s s m e n t. T estin g in stru m en ts B arron (1953) developed an ego*stren gth sc a le out of the M innesota M ultiphasic P e r so n a lity Inventory (MMPI). goal w as to p r e d ict r esp o n se to psychotherapy* H is o rig in a l U sing 17 n eu ro - p sy ch ia tric p atien ts who w e re judged to have im proved a s a r e s u lt of psychotherapy, and 16 p atien ts judged unim proved, he ite m an alyzed the 550 ite m MMPI. S ix ty -e ig h t ite m s w e re found to c o r r e la te 20 sig n ifica n tly with the rated im p rovem en t in the norm ative sam p le, a s w e ll a s in s e v e r a l cro ss-v a lid a tio n , groups. 2 T h ere w as no th e o r e tic a l ration al for the a ccep tan ce of the fin a l 68 ite m s , excep t that d erived from the lo g ic o f con stru ct v a lid ity (Cronbach and M eehl, 1955). It w as su g g ested that sin c e the s c a le d ifferen tiated betw een th ose who did and did not respond to psych otherap y, and sin c e in c r e a se d e g o -stre n g th i s th e o r e tic a lly co n sid ered to be of m ajor im port in the im p rovem en t r esu ltin g fro m therapy, the s c a le m u st th erefo re be a m e a su r e of eg o stren gth (B arron , 1953). The findings of other attem pts to evalu ate the co n stru ct v a lid ity o f Barron* s sc a le have not proven a s fru itfu l (S c h ille r, 1958), probably b eca u se of the contam inating e ffe c ts of r esp o n se s e t (King and S c h ille r , 1958). A s a r e su lt of the test*s o b jectiv e, the ite m s tend to be p r im a r ily concerned w ith p sych opath ological fa c to r s that m ight be a sso c ia te d with the e g o -str e n g th v a r ia b le . #6* Som e sam p le ite m s are: "I freq u en tly find m y s e lf w orryin g about so m e th in g ," 2 Supporting the rela tio n sh ip betw een e g o -stre n g th and lea d er sh ip , B arron (1953), in so far a s h is c r o s s valid ation sa m p le s are con cern ed , r ep o rts a som ew hat higher m ean e g o -str e n g th sc o r e for an A ir F o r c e o ffic e r sa m p le than with p atients and student groups. M ilitary populations, such a s the one rep orted on, a re often con ­ sid er ed a s exem p lifyin g lea d er sh ip (D avid, 1954; H alpin, 1954; Jenkin s, 1947* £»age, 1948). 21 #38, "E vil s p ir its p o s s e s s m e at t i m e s . " #55. "Often I c r o s s the s tr e e t in order not to m e e t som eon e I s e e . " #89. "At tim e s I have fits of laughing and cryin g that I cannot co n tro l. " II, M ethod and P roced u re S in ce ego* stren gth is a rather broad concept, it probably e n c o m p a sse s m o re than ju st the sev en " p sych ological h om ogen eities" that B arron (1953) w as able to cu ll from the MMPI, A s a m eans of extending the sco p e of that testin g in stru m en t, th irty new ite m s w e re developed by the p r e se n t in v estig a to r and random ly com bined with B a rro n 's s c a le to form a 98 item ego*stren gth (E S ) s c a le (Appendix A), The th irty ite m s w ere b ased on the d e sc r ip tiv e s ta te ­ m en ts o f M urray and Kluckhohn's (1955) fifteen c r ite r ia of e g o stren gth , with one "true" and one "false" r e sp o n se , p o sitiv e ly w eighted to m e a su r e high eg o -stre n g th , e sta b lish ed for each. In constructin g ite m s , attem pts w e re m ade to rem ain as c lo s e as p o ssib le to the o rig in a l w ording of each c r ite r io n so that the a sso c ia tio n would be unequivocal. F or exam p le, the c r ite r io n of "external objectivity" w as d e sc r ib e d , in part, a s " to p red ict the behavior of o th e r s, " and the equivalent te s t ite m w a s, "I have found m y s e lf ab le to p r e d ict the behavior of o th e rs, " F u rth erm ore, the c r ite r io n of "internal objectivity" w as d e sc rib ed , in part, as " . . . in sig h t into on e's own m o tiv e s, evalu ation s, and em otion al 22 23 r e a c tio n s* " w h ile the t e s t item, a sso c ia te d w ith it w as w orded, "I understand m y s e lf and m any of the m o tiv es underlying m y b eh avior. " F or th ose d e sc r ip tiv e sta tem en ts w hich could not e a s ily be rew orded to form a t e s t ite m , the ite m w as con stru cted a s a c lo s e approxim ation to the c r ite r io n 's m eaning. Such an exam p le is se e n in the c a se of the c r ite r io n d e sc rib ed a s "freedom from in ­ capacitating n eu rotic or p sy ch o tic sy m p to m s," and the sim p lifie d equivalent item , "I n ever have p rob lem s with n e r v o u sn e ss. " The c lo s e a ss o c ia tio n betw een the w ording of the te s t ite m s and the d e sc r ip tiv e sta tem en ts of the c r ite r ia o f eg o -stre n g th provide so m e evid en ce, in the form o f content valid ity, for the 30 ite m portion of the ES sc a le a s a m ea su r e of e g o -stre n g th . Subjects S in ce the purpose of the p r e se n t in v estig a tio n i s to a s s e s s lea d er sh ip by m ean s of a sc a le d esign ed to tap e g o -str e n g th , it w as n e c e s s a r y to te s t a population in volved in lea d er sh ip a c tiv itie s . The su b jects (S s) w e re drawn fro m the c o lle g e population availab le at M ichigan State U n iv e r sity . P rev io u s r e se a r c h evid en ce has in d icated that cam pus lea d er sh ip is the forerunner of, and c lo s e ly a sso c ia te d w ith la te r com m unity an d /or in d u strial lea d ersh ip (B ridgm an, 1930} E llio t, 1957). U n iv e r sity en rollm en t r ec o rd s w ere exam in ed and c la s s e s containing la r g e nu m bers of m ale se n io r s w ere la te r tested . The 24 resu lta n t population of 400 se n io r s w ere e n r o lle e s from b u sin ess ad m in istration , m ilita r y sc ie n c e , p sych ology, and other d iv e r s ifie d co u rses. A ll of the Ss had had the opportunity, during at le a s t th ree a cad em ic y e a r s, of becom in g a sso c ia te d w ith the m o re than 250 student o rgan ization s at MSU. S ta tistic a l and exp erim en tal co n tro ls w e re in stitu ted for the population te s te d in an attem pt to h a r n e ss the e ffe c ts of s e v e r a l v a r ia b le s w hich had, in p reviou s stu d ies (Jenkins, 1947; Stogd ill, 1948), b een found rela ted to le a d er sh ip . Both s e x and le v e l of education w ere kept constant by em ploying on ly m a le c o lle g e se n io r s as S s . The A m erican C ouncil on Education (ACE) te s t w as em p loyed as a m e a su r e o f in te llec tu a l a b ility. T his in stru m en t w as a d m in istered under sim ila r conditions to a ll incom in g students at MSU and r e su lts for each of the Ss w ere r ea d ily a v a ila b le. P r io r to the ad m in istration of the te s t in stru m en t the Ss w e re in stru cted by the author, in e ffe c t, as fo llo w s s I w ould a p p recia te your cooperation in a r e se a r c h study con cern in g lea d er sh ip w ith which I am in volved . I am p a r ticu la r ly in te r e ste d in te stin g c o lle g e se n io r s such a s y o u r se lv e s who m ay som ed ay be involved in im p o r­ tant le a d e r sh ip capacities* The te s t which 1 w ill ask you to co m p lete is m eant to m ea su re lea d ersh ip , but it i s s tr ic tly intended for r e se a r c h p u rp oses and w ill in no w ay e ffe c t your standing in the U n iv ersity . The t e s t w ill take about a h a lf hour. When you a r e fin ish ed I would lik e you to f ill out a sh o rt q u estion n aire. 25 If you have any q u estion s about the pu rp ose of th is r e s e a r c h or your r e s u lts on the t e s t, I w ill be glad to d is c u s s them w ith you afterw ard. When you r e c e iv e the m a te r ia l you m ay begin. L ea d ersh ip c a te g o riz a tio n A fter each o f the Ss com p leted the ES s c a le , p erso n a l inform ation and a h isto r y of lea d ersh ip p articip ation w as obtained by m ean s of a biograph ical qu estion naire (Appendix B), A ssu m in g that a ll individuals have so m e lea d ersh ip potential, o v e rt an d /or im p lic it, a lea d er w as o p eration ally defined a s a student who w as appointed or e le c te d by h is p e e r s to an execu tive le v e l p osition in any one or m o re student organ ization s r eco g n ized by M ichigan State U n iv ersity . An ex ecu tiv e p o sitio n i s one w hich in v o lv es som e ad­ v iso r y or su p e rv iso r y a c tiv ity in which other students a r e involved a s su bordin ates. F rom the above defin ition s it m ight be in ferred that th ere are at le a s t two r e la tiv e -le a d e r sh ip ty p es. The fir s t can be d escrib ed in ter m s of the particip ation or a ctiv e involvem en t in organ ization s, w hile the secon d , though p o s s e s s in g lea d ersh ip potential, has a h isto r y o f no lea d er sh ip p erform an ce. As a r e s u lt o f th is c la s sific a tio n , and in accord an ce with the p reviou s th e o r e tic a l d isc u ssio n , it w as next attem pted to d iffe r ­ entiate am ong th o se su b -ty p es that c o m p rise the "active lead er" type. In ord er to a cco m p lish th is ta sk the Ss w ere divided into four 26 c a te g o r ie s w ith r e sp e c t to the lea d ersh ip le v e l rep orted in the b iograp h ical q u estion n aire. be r e la tiv e ly unique. The c a te g o r ie s w e re each a ssu m ed to They w e re d ifferen tiated and defined a s follow s: 1. P r e sid e n tia l (P); the attainm ent on at le a s t one o c c a sio n o f the p o sitio n of p resid en t (or its equivalent) in one or m ore o rgan ization s. 2. C om m ittee C hief "A" ( CCa): the attainm ent on two or m o re o c c a sio n s of the p osition of com m ittee c h ie f or v ic e p resid en t (or th eir equivalent) in an o rg a n iza tio n ^ }, with no higher p ost e v er held, 3. C om m ittee C hief nB “ (CCb): the attainm ent on only one o c c a sio n of the p osition of com m ittee c h ie f or v ic e -p r e s id e n t (or th eir equivalent} in an organ ization , w ith no higher p ost e v er ach ieved . 4. N o n -lea d er (NL.); no h isto r y of the attainm ent o f any lea d er sh ip p osition . The sep aration resu ltin g in the c a te g o riza tio n s of C om m ittee C hiefs "A" and "B" w as due to an exam ination o f the biograph ical q u estio n n aires which su g g ested that the rep eated attainm ent of com m ittee c h ie f or v ic e -p r e s id e n tia l p o sts by so m e Ss m ight r ep re sen t a r e la tiv e ly unique group, a s opposed to th ose Ss who held such m id d le -le a d e rsh ip p o sitio n s on only one o c ca sio n . It seem e d that th ose S s in the CCa c a te gory exhibited a rather stagnant h is to r y of lea d ersh ip (which m ight a ls o be in d icative of th eir ego organization), w hile th o se Ss ty p ica l of the CCb ca teg o ry m ight be indicating potential for lea d ersh ip above and beyond that which is o v e r tly exhibited. The d ifferen tiation betw een CCa and CCb w as born out in a p ilot study w h ere S c h iller and A b eles (1959) found that the CCb 27 peop le w ere m o re lik e the p r e sid e n tia l (P )ty p e in th e ir pattern s of r e sp o n se s to the ES s c a le , than they w e re lik e th ose in c a teg o ry C C a. The Ss in each o f the four lea d ersh ip c a te g o r ie s w ere random ly divided into two groups for standardization and c r o s s validation p u rp o ses (i, e . P = 43, CCa = 46, CCb - 42, NL = 69 in the standardization sa m p les and P = 43, CCa = 46, CCb * 41, NL. a 70 in the c r o ss -v a lid a tio n group). C onfigural a n a ly sis A configural se le c tio n of item s w as p erform ed on the standardization sam p le to s e le c t m o st p rom isin g ite m s from a typological point of view . The approach w as d eriv ed from an expansion of the M eehl P aradox (M eehl, 1950) which d em o n stra tes that it is th e o r e tic a lly p o ssib le for two te s t ite m s , when c o n sid ered in co m ­ bination, to have a p e r fe c t rela tio n sh ip w ith a c r ite r io n even though each item treated in iso la tio n has a z er o c o r r e la tio n with the sam e c riter io n . E laborating further on th is p rop osition , M cQuitty (1957a, 1957b, 1958, 1959) has developed pattern analytic m ethods for the purpose o f c la s sify in g ob jects into types so that two or m ore c a te g o r ie s o f objects m ight be d ifferen tiated in ter m s of ty p e s. The num ber and nature of the typ es iso la te d a re a function of both the m ethod em ployed and the concatenation s in the data. In the p r e sen t study a type is defined a s a ca teg o ry of p e r so n s of such a nature that anyone in a 28 c a te g o ry i s m o re lik e e v e r y other p erso n in that c a teg o ry than he i s lik e anyone in any other category* E v ery c r ite r io n ca te g o ry into w hich p e r so n s a re c la s s ifie d is c o n sid ered to r e p r e se n t a type* The ind ividu als of any one type have p a rticu lar c h a r a c te r is tic s in comm on; the pattern of c h a r a c te r istic s are unique for e v e r y type* T h erefo re, any S is p red icted to r ep re sen t a sp e c ific lea d er sh ip type if he p o s s e s s e s , in th is in v estig a tio n , the pattern o f e g o -stre n g th c h a r a c te r is tic s w hich i s unique to that type. Of the s e v e r a l p a ttern -an alytic m ethods ava ila b le, Lfingoes' (1959) M ultidim ensional Scalogram A n a ly sis (MSA) w as em ployed in the p r e sen t study. T his technique w as u sed b e c a u se , a s far a s the req u irem en ts for p attern -an alytic stu d ies a re concerned, we are dealing with a r e la tiv e ly sm a ll population of S s * It would th erefo re be m o st advantageous to obtain a m ethod o f a n a ly sis w hich m in im iz e s the num ber of types which are iso la te d , and a s a r e su lt, in c r e a s e s th e ir dependability, MSA m e e ts th e se standards. MSA is a hybrid of McQuitty*s A greem en t A n a ly sis (1957) and Guttman's S calogram A n a ly sis (1944)* One im portant r e sp e c t in which MSA d iffe rs from Guttm an's technique i s that m o re than ju st one u n idim en sional s c a le can be developed out o f a s e t of data without m aking a ssu m p tion s about the p sy ch o lo g ica l nature of the u n iv er se of item s involved* The MSA i s m ultidim en sional; it p e r m its the p o s sib ility of m o re than one d ifferen tial pattern in a sin g le a n a ly sis. MSA*s p r im a ry advantage over M cG uitty’s m ethod is b a sed on the contention that "ord er” is a c ru cia l p aram eter o f both Ss and ite m s , and the m eth od i s , th e re fo re , capable of producing inform ation w hich is equivalent to com m unality; th is inform ation s e r v e s a s a b a s is for d eterm in in g the ca teg o riza tio n . H ence MSA i s co n sid ered to be a notew orthy addition to both sca lin g and p a ttern -a n alytic m eth ods a s a r e s u lt of the m in im al assu m p tion s m ade about the data, its th e o r e tic a l im p lic a tio n s, and its v e r s a tility (L in g o es, 1959). In ord er to s e le c t the b e st configural ite m s , m a tr ic e s of in te rc o r r e la tio n s betw een ite m s for the four c r ite r io n c a te g o r ie s w ere obtained (Appendix C). F or e v er y c a te g o ry of Sis each item w as c o rr e la te d with ev er y other one. F rom th e se m a tr ic e s , d ifferen ce m a tr ic e s w ere evolved which r ep re sen t the co rr ela tio n d iffe re n c es betw een c a te g o r ie s for com p arab le item p a irs (Appendix D). For exam p le, the c o rr ela tio n c o e fficien t betw een ite m s 1 and 2 for lea d ersh ip c a te g o ry P is su b tracted from the corresp on d in g c o e f­ ficien t in ca teg o ry CCa. The sa m e proced ure is follow ed for the co rr ela tio n c o e ffic ie n ts of Other ite m p a irs until d ifferen ce m a trix P , CCa i s com p leted. T his m ethod w as a lso u sed for obtaining the other d ifferen ce m a tr ic e s (i. e . P , CCb; P , NL; CCa, CCb; CCa, 30 In ord er to fa c ilita te and expedite the va rio u s a n a ly ses req u ired in th is r e se a r c h , the M ichigan State In tegral Com puter (MIS1TC) w as u sed . A problem a r o se in attem pting to com p lete the in te r c o r r e la tio n and d iffe re n c e m a tr ic e s in that MISTIC i s unable to handle m a tr ic e s a s la r g e a s 98 x 98, w hich would r e su lt from u sin g the en tire 98 ite m E S s c a le , T h erefo re, it w as n e c e s s a r y to divide the sc a le into th ree groups of ap p roxim ately equal s iz e . B ecau se the individual ite m s had o r ig in a lly been random ly a ssig n ed to th eir p o sitio n in the ES s c a le , it w as a ssu m ed that random n ess would be retained by u sin g ite m s 1 to 33 for the fir s t in ter cor relation m atrix, 34 to 66 for the secon d , and 67 to 98 for the third. D ifferen ce m a tr ic e s w ere then evolved by subtracting, a lg eb ra ica lly , each m a trix from each of the other th ree which w ere con cern ed with the sam e ite m s . F or exam p le, the in te rc o rr ela tio n m a trix rep resen tin g ite m s 1 -3 3 for the Ss in lea d er sh ip ca teg o ry P w e re subtracted from th ose r ep resen tin g the sam e ite m s for CCa, CCb, anti NL. E ighteen such d ifferen ce m a tr ic e s (three for each of the s ix c a teg o ry c o m p a riso n s) w e re d erived in th is fash ion . It w as next attem pted to determ in e which ite m s w ere b e st from a configural point of view . To acco m p lish th is, colum n su m s of the d ifferen ce m a tr ic e s w ere com puted and th ose ite m s with the h ig h est colum n su m s w e re a ssu m ed to be b e st. T his i s an elab oration and application o f M eehP s (1950) th e s is concerning configural sc o rin g . 31 E m ploying the d ifferen ce m atrix colum n su m s for each c r ite r io n ca teg o ry p a ir , the next step w as to d eterm in e the exten t to w hich the ES s c a le ite m s w e r e se n s itiv e to d iffe re n c es a c r o s s a ll four c r ite r io n c a te g o r ie s. T his w as accom p lish ed by m ean s of th ree independent Phi c o rr e la tio n s betw een the d ifferen ce m a trix colum n su m s for p a irs of c r ite r io n c a te g o r ie s. F or exam p le, the colum n su m for ite m one in d ifferen ce m atrix P , CCa w as com pared with that for the pair CCb, NL; and so on for ev er y one of the 98 ite m s in the ES sc a le . The sa m e p roced u re w as follow ed for the ite m colum n su m s for ca teg o ry p a ir s P , CCb v e r su s CCa, NL; and P , NL v e r su s CCa, CCb. D ifferen tiation betw een two c a te g o r ie s (con figu ral) It w as next attem pted to determ in e w hether any sep arate pair of c a te g o r ie s could be used* To lea rn the extent of d ifferen tiation that w as fe a s ib le , an a n a ly sis w as ca rr ie d out u sin g the b e st configural ite m s in a ll four categories* In se le c tin g the m o st appropriate item s from the d ifferen ce m a trix colum n sums* a c u t-o ff point w as a r b itr a r ily s e t at 6. 000. This sum , when divided by its N (i* e. 33 in th is c a se ), i s equivalent to a co rrela tio n d ifferen ce of app roxim ately * 20* T h is c u t-o ff point a lso p erm itted the s e le c tio n of at le a s t two ite m s from each of the 18 d ifferen ce m a tr ic e s . 32 N ext, each o f the four c r ite r io n c a te g o r ie s of the sta n ­ d ardization population w e re treated se p a r a te ly with the b e st configural ite m s by m ean s o f the com puter program p repared for MSA, B ased on the concep t of d im en sion ality' a lis tin g w as obtained of th ose Ss w h ose p attern s of r e sp o n s e s w ere in agreem en t with that o f each S in the sa m e c r ite r io n ca teg o ry under in v estig a tio n , F or example* S 1 m ight have S 4 a g reein g with h is pattern o f r e sp o n se s on 25 item s* S 12 m ight a g r e e with S 1 on 22 ite m s . with S 1 on only 12 ite m s. F in a lly , S 24 m ight a g ree It m ight th erefo re be sa id that th ree other Ss w e re in ag reem en t with S 1 on tw elve ite m s or m o re, A frequ en cy d istrib u tion w as s e t up which provided in ­ form ation concerning the num ber of o c c a sio n s in which each of the Ss w as found in agreem en t with the other Ss in the lea d ersh ip ca teg o ry . F or exam p le, it m ight fir s t be found that the pattern o f r e sp o n se s for S 1 has Ss 4, 12, and 24 in at le a s t p a rtia l a greem en t. Subject 2 m ight have Ss 6, 12, 13, and 31 a g reein g with h is pattern of r e sp o n s e s . The third S m ight be in a g reem en t w ith the r esp o n se pattern s of Ss 4, 9, 12, and 42, A frequ en cy distrib u tion of the o c c a sio n s on which each S, in th is h yp othetical situation, appears in a g reem en t with other Ss would have 12 as appearing m o st often (three tim e s), follow ed by S 4 (two tim e s), and so on. That individual pattern of r e sp o n se s which w as found to be m o st freq u en tly agreed with by the pattern s o f the other Ss w as 33 co n sid ered a p r e -p ro to ty p e. A ll th ose S £ who w e r e in a greem en t, and th e re fo re r ep re sen ted by th is p re-p ro to ty p e, w ere tem p o ra r ily rem oved from the a n a ly s is , The r esp o n se pattern s of the rem ain in g Ss then underwent com p arab le a n a ly ses until a ll of the Ss w e re found to be in a g reem en t with a p re-p rototyp e from that c r ite r io n category. B ecau se we w e r e in te r e ste d in m axim um d ifferen tiation betw een c a te g o r ie s, the next step w as to rem o v e from the p r e ­ prototypes th ose ite m s for w hich the answ er is com m on. Once th e se " u n iv ersa le1*(i* e. rep ortin g u n iv e r sa l agreem en t a c r o ss p re-p ro to ty p es in a n sw ers) w ere elim in ated from each of the p r e -p ro to ty p es, the rem aining p attern s (i. e , p rototyp es) w ere u sed for sco rin g the S s. The m ean sc o r e for each prototype in the four c r ite r io n c a te g o r ie s w as com puted. The h ig h est m ean of the m ean sc o r e d iffe r e n c e s betw een any two lea d er sh ip c a te g o r ie s, for the appro­ p ria te p ro totyp es, w as em ployed a s the c r ite r io n for se le c tin g that p air of c a te g o r ie s for w hich d ifferen tiation w as exp ected to be g r e a te st on c r o ss -v a lid a tio n stu d ies. Mean d iffe re n c es w ere com puted only for the s c o r e s on the specific prototypes d erived from the pair of c r ite r io n c a te g o r ie s being exam ined. T his w as done, rather than obtaining a ll p o s sib le m ean d iffe re n c es for any one pair of categories* b ecause further a n a ly ses would be concerned only w ith the p attern s of the c a te g o r ie s fin a lly se le c te d . Since the " b est configural item s" u sed for the developm ent o f the p r e v io u sly m entioned p rototypes w ere se le c te d from an a n a ly sis 34 of a ll four c r ite r io n c a te g o r ie s, and sin c e w e a re now in te r e ste d only in that p air of c a te g o r ie s for which d ifferen tiation i s exp ected to be g r e a te st, if w as n e c e s s a r y to return to the o rig in a l d ifferen ce m a tr ic e s rep resen tin g the two c a te g o r ie s w ith which we w e re now con cern ed so that a new s e t of ite m s could be obtained. The colum n su m s for the 98 ite m ES s c a le d ifferen ce m a trix w as p laced in rank ord er and exam ined in an attem pt to find any apparent “gaps" betw een adjacent su m s. The point w h ere the d ifferen ce m a trix colum n su m s no longer d iffered m ark ed ly from the adjacent su m s w as u sed a s the eut*off point in se le c tin g the b e st configural ite m s for that a n a ly s is . For ex a m p le, i f the d ifferen ce betw een the colum n su m s for ite m s ranked 1 and 2 w as 150, the d ifferen ce betw een ite m s ranked 2 and 3 w as 170, betw een 3 and 4 w as 10, betw een 4 and 5 w as 3, betw een 5 and 6 w as 8, and so on, the cut*off point would be se le c te d betw een ranks 3 and 4 sin c e it is at th is location that the d iffe r e n c e s begin, and continue to b e, r e la tiv e ly sm a ll, follow ing the fir s t few la r g e r d iffe r e n c e s. As a r e su lt, item s ranked 1, 2, and 3 would be s e le c te d a s b e st, from a configural point o f v iew , for the particu lar c r ite r io n c a teg o ry involved. The r e sp o n se s o f the Ss in the two lea d er sh ip c a te g o r ie s to th e se ite m s w e re then trea ted , one ca teg o ry at a tim e , by m ean s of MSA in a m anner com p arab le to that d e sc rib ed e a r lie r . The m ean s c o r e s of the two c a te g o r ie s on the d erived prototypes w ere com puted 35 and d iffe r e n c e s betw een them w e re m ea su red with Student’s 4, te s t. T hose p rototyp es for which sig n ifica n tly d ifferen t m ean s w e r e found w e r e then rea n a ly sed in so fa r a s th eir com m on (i. e . u n iv e r sa ls) and uncom m on r e sp o n se s w e re concerned. T h is w as done to answ er the qu estion about w hether the d ifferen tiation betw een c r ite r io n c a te g o r ie s w as due to the u n iv e r sa ls or to th ose ite m s on w hich the prototypes d iffered in th eir r e sp o n s e s . The b e st k ey w as fin a lly se le c te d for the Scoring o f Sa in the lea d ersh ip c a te g o r ie s and c u t-o ff s c o r e s which p erm itted m axim um a ccu ra c y of c la s s ific a tio n in the standardization population w e re d eterm in ed . The p e r ce n t o f c o r r e c t a ssig n m en t of Ss in each of the c a te g o r ie s w as tested for sig n ifica n ce of d ifferen ce from chance exp ectan cy by m ean s of the Chi Square te s t. The c r o ss -v a lid a tio n sam p le w as then te ste d in a sim ila r m anner. L inear a n a ly sis F or the lin ea r a n a ly sis o f the data 98 2x4 Chi Squares w ere com puted so as to s e le c t th o se ite m s of the ES s c a le which tend to d ifferen tiate betw een two or m o re c rite r io n c a te g o r ie s. T h ese Chi Squares w e re for the ’’tr u e ” and " fa lse ” r e sp o n se s to a ll the ES sc a le ite m s by the stan dardization Ss in the four categories* Item s w ere s e le c te d for th ree te s ts : a) th ose ite m s which w e re found to differen tiate betw een two or m o re c a te g o r ie s at the 1% confidence le v e l; b) th o se ite m s that d ifferen tia te at the 5% le v e l, including th ose 36 sig n ifica n t at the 1% le v e l; and e) th ose N ite m s which w e re b e st able to d ifferen tia te, w h ere N equals the num ber of ite m s d erived co n figu rally. The lin ea r k e y s w ere u sed for sco rin g the stan dardization Ss* A ppropriate c u t-o ff s c o r e s w ere d eterm in ed in a m anner analogous to that u sed in the configural a n a ly sis so a s to m a x im ize c o r r e c t c la s s ific a tio n in the c r o ss -v a lid a tio n groups. A n a ly sis of v a ria n ce and Tukey*s D te s t w e re u sed for d eterm ining those c a te g o r ie s for w hich d ifferen tiation w as g r e a te st. D ifferen tiation betw een tw o c a te g o r ie s (lin e a r ) The next step with the lin ea r a n a ly sis w as to s e le c t that pair o f lea d er sh ip c a te g o r ie s for which d ifferen tiation w as g r e a te st. The Chi Square te s t w as em p loyed with the standardization group to m ake th is determ ination. Each o f the four c r ite r io n c a te g o r ie s w as com pared with e v e r y other one ( i , e . s ix p o ssib le co m p a riso n s) for a ll of the r e sp o n se s to the 98 ite m ES s c a le . F rom the r esu ltin g 588 2x2 Chi S q uares, u sin g the Y ates c o rr ec tio n , th ree s e ts of ite m s w e r e obtained in a m anner com parable to that d escrib ed above. T h is tim e though, the item s w e r e s e le c te d which w e re b est able to d ifferen tiate betw een one pair o f c r ite r io n c a te g o r ie s; that pair which w as r ep resen ted by the m o st ite m s sign ifican t at the 5% con fid en ce le v e l or better* 37 The c u t-o ff point found to b e st d ifferen tiate (i. e. the h ig h est m ean p ercen t of c o r r e c t c la s sific a tio n ) betw een c a te g o r ie s in that standardization sam p le w as a lso u sed to te s t the c r o s s valid ation groups. C om p arison s w ere then m ade betw een the lin ea r and con figu ral m ethods in ter m s o f d iffe re n c es in p ercen t of c o r r e c t ca te g o riz a tio n in the c r o ss -v a lid a tio n sam p le. Com bining appropriate lin ea r and configural k eys It w as next attem pted to con sid er togeth er the k eys d eriv ed through both lin ea r and configural a n a ly se s. The r e sp o n se s to b e st configural k ey which d ifferen tiated betw een two c r ite r io n c a te g o r ie s w as exam in ed w ith the com parable lin ear k ey in a sc a tter gram . New c u t-o ff s c o r e s for each k ey w ere determ ined so a s to m a x im ize the to ta l p ercen t of accu ra te c la s sific a tio n when the r e su lts of both m ethods a re co n sid ered in com bination. T h ese c u t-o ff s c o r e s w ere then u sed for a s im ila r com p arison with the c r o s s validation population and th e se r e s u lts w e re com p ared to th ose obtained when each k ey w as evaluated se p a r a tely . XU* R esu lts Table 3 show s the r e su lts of se v e r a l sta tis tic a l te s ts w hich w e r e u sed to m e a su r e e x istin g d iffe re n c es in in te llig e n c e , age and v e te ra n s' statu s betw een the four c r ite r io n c a te g o r ie s. No sig n ifica n t m ean d iffe r e n c e s w ere found betw een the four c a te g o r ie s on to ta l s c a le raw s c o r e data (F = 1*04), S im ila r ly , no sta tis tic a lly sig n ifica n t d iffe r e n c e s betw een c r ite r io n c a te g o r ie s w e r e found for age ( F a : . 82) and the d istrib u tion of v e tera n s w ithin the sam p le ( \ 2 * 3. 94). Configural a n a ly s is with standardization Ss The P hi c o r r e la tio n s that w ere u sed with the configural a n a ly sis to d eterm in e the extent to which the ES s c a le ite m s w ere able to d ifferen tia te a c r o s s a ll four c a te g o r ie s w e re not sig n ifica n tly d ifferen t fro m chance exp ectan cy ( p > .0 5 ) . The relation sh ip (r) betw een the d ifferen ce m a trix colum n su m s for c r ite r io n c a te g o r ie s P , CCa v e r su s CCb, NJL w as -.0 0 9 * for P, CCb v e r su s CCa* NL. it w as * 134, and for P* NL. v e r s u s CCa, CCb it w as . 024. It w as th e r e ­ fo re concluded that the con figu rally s e le c te d item s w ere inadequate for the d ifferen tiation a c r o s s a ll four c a te g o ri e s . a n a ly sis w as not c a r r ie d out. 33 A s a r e su lt, th is 39 T able 3 The su b jects in each of the four lea d er sh ip c r ite r io n c a te g o r ie s d e sc rib ed in te r m s of th eir v etera n s status# a g e, and in te llig e n c e s c o r e , C riterio n C a teg o ries P CCa CCb NL Num ber of $ v etera n s 24 30 32 61 N um ber of non**vets 62 62 51 78 T otal N 36 92 83 139 V eteran s Mean 22. 18 2 1 .8 3 2 1 .5 7 22. 56 S. D. 1 .2 7 1 .0 9 1. 32 1 .4 8 Mean 1 1 7.06 1 1 5 .8 7 117.21 1 1 6 .1 9 S . D. 12. 24 13. 46 1 2 .8 3 13. 37 Age In tellig en ce (total ACE raw sc o r e ) *The Chi Square te s t r e v e a le d no sign ifican t d ifferen ce betw een the num ber o f v e te ra n s in each of the c a te g o r ie s » 3. 94; p > . 05). A n a ly sis of v a ria n ce rev ea led no sign ifican t d ifferen ce betw een the m ean s of the c a te g o r ie s (F = 0. 82; p > . 05). ^ ^ A n a ly s is of v a r ia n ce r ev ea led no sig n ifica n t d ifferen ce betw een the m ean s of the c a te g o r ie s (F = 1. 04; p > . 05). 40 F ifty -tw o ite m s w e r e cu lled out of the o rig in a l 98 in the ES s c a le so a s to m e e t the c r ite r io n for s e le c tio n outlined e a r lie r . T able 4 g iv e s the o rig in a l p o sitio n of each ite m in the ES s c a le and c ite s th eir o rig in a l so u r c e . T h ere w as no sig n ifica n t d ifferen ce in the num ber o f ite m s d evelop ed by S c h iller (N » 14), a s com pared with th o se from B arron 's (N ® 38) sc a le = . 36; p > . 05). In em p loyin g the MSA for the a n a ly sis of the r e sp o n se s of tihie Ss in the stan dardization population two p r e -p ro to ty p es w e re found in lea d er sh ip c a te g o ry F> two in CCa, two in C C b , and th ree in NL. R em oval of the u n iv e r sa ls r esu lted in nine 20 item prototypes* T hese a r e se e n in T able 5, togeth er with th eir r e sp o n se s and the c r iter io n ca te g o ry from w hich they evolved . The m ean s c o r e s for each prototype in the four c r ite r io n c a te g o r ie s a r e d epicted in T able 6, and T able 7 show s the p rototyp es c o r e m ean d iffe r e n c e s betw een c r ite r io n c a te g o r ie s from which prototypes evolved . The g r e a te st average m ean d ifferen ce w as found betw een c a te g o r ie s P and N L . It w ill be r e c a lle d that the Ss on th e se lea d er sh ip c a te g o r ie s w e re a ssig n ed b ecau se they had held p r e sid e n tia l p o sts (P ), or had n ev er been involved in a lea d er sh ip cap acity (NL). In returnin g to the d ifferen ce m atrix colum n su m s for c r ite r io n c a te g o r ie s P and NL we w ere able to s e le c t the b e st con ­ fig u ra l ite m s for th is ca teg o ry p a ir. An exam ination o f the d ifferen ce betw een ranked colum n su m s rev e a le d s e v e r a l m arked gaps. T his w as 41 T able 4 The fifty -tw o ite m s cu lled fro m the ES sc a le by m ean s of the con figu ral a n a ly s is , and the so u rc e of o rig in for each. 1 s c a le p o sitio n 1 4 6 7 9 12 13 14 16 17 19 21 23 26 29 31 34 35 37 40 43 47 43 51 53 55 O riginal so u rc e B arron B arron B arron B arron S c h iller S c h iller B arron B arron B arron B arron B arron B arron B arron B arron B arron S c h iller S c h iller B arron B arron S c h iller S c h iller S c h iller B arron B arron S c h iller B arron ES sc a le item p osition 59 60 62 63 64 65 68 69 70 71 73 75 77 78 81 82 83 85 36 88 89 90 95 96 97 98 O riginal so u rce S c h iller B arron B arron S ch iller B arron B arron B arron S c h ille r B arron B arron B arron B arron S c h iller B arron S c h iller B arron B arron B arron B arron B arron B arron B arron B arron S c h ille r B arron B arron 42 T able 5 N ine p rototyp es (20 ite m s each ), d erived from the 52 b e st configural ite m s , a re show n with the d irectio n of th eir r e sp o n se s and the c r ite r io n ca te g o ry from which th ey evolved . P S sc a le . p o sitio n P im m mmm 6 12 13 14 17 23 31 34 35 40 43 47 48 51 53 55 59 60 62 63 68 69 70 71 73 77 78 82 83 86 90 96 97 98 + ss "true" CCa P2 mmmmtm P3 ■ .... CCb P4 1 - + - - «* * + «■» -t- + - - + + m + - + + + m mt - - m m m + - + + - - - - + m m • + - + - m - 4- •f P5 —- P^ ■ - m m + + <# m + m - • * m «» + + - + 4* - + - 4- «• + - m m «• m + - + - m m + - m + 4- - m + - + + - m m - + + -t* + m m #» 4• w» + - 4* + 4* - 4* - «* + + M B + + m «» + «• - + - + + + - + m - + • + + - + - m + m - - + + + - + + + * ■» m - + - «• - + m + - m - + - 4- - 4- + + «• - - m + «■> - «• m m - - • «k m m - + + + + + + + + - + - + 4- - m - m m m - - - - s "false" tm - - + + + - m + » + + - - - + - *» •* - 4- + - m £9 4- m + fs + + + «• - P7 m m + «■» - NL <* - 43 T able 6 The m ean s c o r e for each of the c r ite r io n c a te g o r ie s on the nine con figu rally d erived prototypes P rototyp es C riterion C a teg o ries JP CCa CCb NL Pi 2 5 .6 3 2 4 .8 3 25. 10 24* 41 p2 23. 77 2 2 .2 2 23. 57 2 1 .4 8 P3 24. 81 24. 04 23. 76 2 3 .9 3 p4 23. 28 2 2 .9 6 23. 24 22 . 22 P5 2 3 .9 3 23. 09 23. 19 2 1 .6 4 P6 1 9 .1 4 1 9 .4 8 19. 52 18.71 p7 2 2 .6 3 22. 39 2 2 .0 5 23. 06 p8 2 4 .0 9 2 3 .4 4 23. 76 2 2 .2 9 P9 17. 02 1 7 .3 5 1 6 .9 5 18. 17 44 Table 7 P r o to ty p e -sc o r e m ean d iffe re n c es betw een c r ite r io n c a te g o r ie s fro m w hich prototypes evolved . C riterion C ategories P ro to ty p es P & CCa P & C C b P & N L CCa & CCb C C a& N L CCb&NL, Pi .8 0 .5 3 1 .2 2 Po 1.55 .2 0 2.29 P3 .77 .28 .1 1 P4 .32 .28 .74 P5 .26 1 .1 0 1.55 Pg .3 8 .04 .81 P? .43 .67 1.01 Pg 1 .8 0 1 .0 5 1 .4 7 P_ 1 .1 5 .82 1.2 2 .70 1.21 7 Mean of m ean s .8 6 .3 4 1 .3 8 .42 45 the c a se (a s i s se e n in T able 8) betw een ranks l&2j 2&3; 6&7; 8&9; 11&12; and 13&14* A lter the 14th rank the gaps did not appear to fluctuate in s iz e to any ap p reciab le extent* A s a r e su lt, a cu t-o ff point w as a r b itr a r ily s e t after the 13th rank so a s to include only th o se ite m s w ith the h ig h est d ifferen ce m a trix colum n sums* (T w elve o f th e se 13 ite m s (item 25 excepted ) w e r e part of the origin al 52 b e st con figu ral ite m s which w e r e s e le c te d for d ifferen tiation a c r o s s a ll four c r ite r io n c a te g o r ie s * ) Six p r e -p ro to ty p es w ere found when th e se 13 ite m s w ere tre a ted by MSA for Ss in P and N L . Table 9 show s that th ree of th e se w e r e obtained from the a n a ly sis of ca teg o ry P . The fir s t (#1) w as found to be in a g reem en t with the r e sp o n se s of 41 out of the 43 Ss in the category* The r e sp o n se s of the other two Ss w ere co n sid ered a s p r e -p ro to ty p es in th e m se lv e s ( # l a and # lb) b ecau se n eith er w as in a g reem en t with #1, and they agreed with each other on an equal num ber o f ite m s (i* e. two). T h ree p r e -p ro to ty p es a lso resu lted from the p attern a n a ly sis of the r e sp o n s e s by the 69 S£ in lea d ersh ip c a teg o ry N L . The f ir s t p re-p ro to ty p e (#2), in agreem en t with 28 p attern s, w as id en tical to #1 w hich evolved from c r ite r io n ca teg o ry P . (T his pattern is th ere fo re r e fe r r e d to h e r ea fter as # 1 & 2 .) The secon d p re-p rototyp e obtained from ca te g o ry N L ( # 2 a ) w as in agreem en t with 31 patterns of resp o n ses* F in a lly , the rem aining 10 resp o n se pattern s w e re in 46 Table 8 P a r tia l ranking of the colum n su m s of the d ifferen ce m atrix d e riv ed from the ite m c o rr ela tio n m a tr ic e s for c r ite r io n c a te g o r ie s P and NL. Rank O rder ES s c a le ite m p o sitio n D ifferen ce m a trix colum n sum D ifferen ce betw een ranks 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 89 78 47 82 48 31 34 16 65 98 25 29 26 8301 7553 6741 6669 6667 6612 6446 6396 6178 6171 6132 5930 5928 5769 5763 5755 5722 5698 5654 5631 5563 5561 748 812 72 2 55 166 50 218 7 39 192 2 159 6 8 33 24 44 23 68 2 47 Table 9 Six p r e - p rototypes (th irteen ite m s in each) which evolved from the M u lti-d im en sion al S calogram A n a ly sis of c r ite r io n c a te g o r ie s P and N L . P re -p rototyp es ES sc a le ite m p o sitio n P i* Pi a p lb p 2* P 2a p 2b 16 •m m + to to - 25 to + + to + to 26** to to to - - - 29 + to + 4- 4* 4* 31 + 4 4* 4* to + 34 4- to m + to - 47 + •f + + to - 48 tfm 4- to - - 65** to to «» ' to * - 78 to to to to to + 82 to 4- to to - 4- 89 m to to 98 m to to • to + 4- ^Identical p r e -p ro to ty p es. * * U n iv e r ea ls, i. e . com m on r esp o n se d irectio n a c r o s s a ll p r e ­ p ro to ty p es. 4* = "true" - » ’’false" 48 a g reem en t with the third p re-p ro to ty p e (#2b) resu ltin g from the a n a ly sis of NL. An exam ination of a ll p r e-p ro to ty p es r esu lted in the rem o v a l of th ree u n iv e r sa ls. The rem aining fiv e unique p rototyp es, ten ite m s in each, w e r e em ployed to sc o r e the Se in both lea d ersh ip c a te g o r ie s , JP and NL. The resu ltin g m ean s c o r e s and standard d ev ia tio n s a re rep orted in T able 10. The_t te s t w as u sed to te s t for sig n ific a n c e of d ifferen ce betw een c a teg o ry m ean s. A sign ifican t t w as found for prototype #1 &2 (Jt a 4, 67; p < . 01) and for prototype #2a ( t = 2, 64; p < . 05). The other th ree p r o to ty p es w ere unable to d ifferen tia te betw een the two c r ite r io n c a te g o r ie s and w e re th erefo re not retain ed for further a n a ly se s. An exam ination of the r e sp o n se s o f prototypes #1&2 and #2a r ev e a le d that the r e sp o n se s for fiv e of the ten ite m s w as the sa m e , i. e. u n iv e r sa ls. The question then a r o se as to w hether the d ifferen tiation betw een c r ite r io n c a te g o r ie s by th e se prototypes w as due to the co m m o n -re sp o n se ite m s , or to those ite m s on which they d iffered in th eir a n sw er. To d eterm in e the p rim a ry so u rce of d ifferen tiation s e v e r a l further a n a ly ses w ere made* The Ss in both c r ite r io n c a te g o r ie s w e re sc o r e d on the follow in g two ex p erim en ta l prototypes; 1) #1&2 + 2a, which rep resen ted the fiv e ite m s for w hich the d irectio n of r esp o n se w as com m on for the two p rototyp es, plu s the th ree u n iv e r sa ls p r ev io u sly elim in ated 49 T able 10 Means., standard deviations* and t t e s t r e su lts for fiv e p r e -p r o to ty p e s te ste d on c r ite r io n c a te g o r ie s P and N L . C riterion C a teg o ries F m ean s . d. m ean s . d. 8 .7 0 1 .3 6 7 .4 4 1 .4 6 5 .0 0 1.31 4 .5 8 1 .2 8 lb 5 .8 4 1 .0 4 5, 38 1 .2 2 2a*** 5 .3 0 1 .0 3 5 ,8 8 1 .4 2 2b 5*26 1 .4 0 5.0 1 1 .4 5 1&2* la P re -p r o to ty p es NL . StSt sitik *t = 4 .6 7 s p < .0 1 **p > . 05 * * * t* 2 .6 4 ; p < . 05 50 from the 13 item p re-p ro to ty p es; 2) #1&2', which rep re sen ted the fiv e ite m s (em p loyin g the r e sp o n se d irectio n of prototype #1&2) on w hich the two prototypes* #1&2 and #2a, d iffered in d ir ec tio n of r e sp o n se . The r e s u lts of th e se analyses* rep orted in the form of m eans* standard d ev ia tio n s, a-hdj. s c o r e s , a re se e n in T able 11. The d ifferen tiation betw een c r ite r io n c a te g o r ie s P and NL s e e m s to be due p r im a r ily to the e ffe ct of the fiv e ite m s on which prototyp es #1&2 and #2a d iffered (_t = 4. 53; p < . 01) rath er than to the co m m o n -re sp o n se ite m s (_t » 1. 80; p > . 05). C o n sisten tly follow ing the p reviou s p roced u re, w e rem oved fro m p rototyp es #1&2 and #2a th ose item s on which th ere is com m on a g reem en t in r e sp o n se d irectio n (i. e. the 5 u n iv e r sa ls for th ose two pro to ty p es). R em aining then a re 5 item s which c o m p rise the final pattern (or k ey), d erived con figu rally, that h as been found to b e st d ifferen tia te betw een c r ite r io n c a te g o r ie s P and NL in the exp erim en tal population. To a r r iv e at the m o st appropriate c u t-o ff point, each p o s sib le s c o r e w as c o n sid er ed in turn. In Table 12 we have the findings o f the th ree b e st c u t-o ff sc o r e s; that for a sc o r e g rea ter than 2 (i. e . a s c o r e o f 3, 4, or 5), for a sc o r e grea ter than 3, and for a sc o r e g rea ter than 4. The total number and p ercen t o f Ss in both c r ite r io n c a te g o r ie s of the standardization population that w e re c o r r e c tly c la s s if ie d by each c u t-o ff sc o r e are a lso shown. The a verage p ercen t 51 T able 11 Mean®, standard d ev ia tio n s, andjt t e s t r e s u lts fo r two ex p erim en ta l p rototyp es te ste d on c r ite r io n c a te g o r ie s P and NL* C riterio n c a te g o r ie s Num ber of ite m s P S 7 .3 3 S. D. #1*2* m P<,01 4 .2 1 1 ,1 7 ,8 9 5 NL p > , 05 I. SO* 6 .9 7 P tt*i{ .9 4 6 NL Experim ental p Mean 4 .5 3 3 .3 5 1 .1 4 52 Table 12 A ccu ra cy of c la s s ific a tio n of Ss in the stan dardization population to c r ite r io n c a te g o r ie s P and NL as a r e su lt o f the u se of th ree c u t-o ff s c o r e s on the con figu rally d erived item s. A lso shown is the a ccu ra cy of c la s s ific a tio n of c r o s s -v a lid a tio n Bs at the b e st c u t-o ff point* C u t-off score C riterio n c a te g o ry Total N Number P e r ce n t a c cu ra tely a c cu ra tely c la s s ifie d c la s s ifie d Mean p ercen t a c cu ra tely c la s s ifie d Standardization population 43 42 98% NL 69 15 22% s 43 32 74% NL 69 37 54% 43 21 69 56 >2 >3 >4 NL 60% 64% 65% 81% C r o ss-v a lid a tio n population >4 P 43 18 42% NL 70 61 87% 64.5% 53 of c o r r e c t ca te g o riz a tio n w as g r e a te st (65%) for a c u t-o ff sc o r e of g rea ter than 4 (i. e . a s c o r e o f fiv e v e r su s s c o r e s o f 0 through 4)« In other w o rd s, for th is standardization population, by u sin g the con figu ral k ey and a c u t-o ff sc o r e of > 4 w e w ere able to a c cu ra tely a s s ig n 21 o f the Ss in P and 56 of the Sss in NL. T h is p ercen t o f c o r r e c t ca teg o riza tio n w as found to be sig n ifica n tly d ifferen t from chance expectancy at the , 01 confidence le v e l ( \ ^ » 9. 57). C onfigural a n a ly sis with c r o ss -v a lid a tio n Ss The c r o ss -v a lid a tio n sam p le ( P = 43, NL = 70) w as then te ste d in a sim ila r m anner and the r e su lts a re a lso rep orted in Table 12. The m ean p ercen t o f c o r r e c t categ o riza tio n w as 64, 5 and the resu ltin g Chi Square w as 9. 49, sign ifican t at the 1% le v e l. L inear a n a ly sis a c r o s s four c a te g o r ie s N in ety -eig h t 4x2 Chi Squares w ere se t up a s a m ean s of testin g a ll ite m s o f the ES s c a le so a s to d eterm in e th ose which could sig n ifica n tly d ifferen tia te, when com puted, a c r o ss a ll four c r ite r io n c a te g o r ie s in the stan dardization population. Ten ite m s w e re found to d ifferen tia te at the 5% confidence le v e l or better; with five of th e se ite m s sig n ifica n t beyond the 1% le v e l (Table 13). The c r o ss -v a lid a tio n groups w ere sc o re d on both a k ey for the 5 ite m s for w hich Chi Squares w ere g r e a te st, and a k ey rep resen tin g 54 Table 13 The o r ig in a l so u r c e , the r esp o n se in the d irectio n of high lea d er sh ip , and the confidence le v e l o f 10 ite m s of the ES sc a le w hich, by m ean s of the Chi Square te s t, w ere found able to d ifferen tia te a c r o s s a ll four lea d ersh ip c a te g o r ie s a re p resen ted in order of m agnitude ES s c a le p o sitio n 54 2 31 96 19 69 98 11 72 80 ite m Source R esp on se C onfidence d irectio n le v e l “I am not c e r ta in of m y ab ility or of the goals X should lik e to str iv e fo r, " S c h iller F a ls e . 01 "I am m ade n ervou s by certa in a n im a ls ,M B arron F a lse ,0 1 S ch iller T rue ,0 1 "I do not m ind having r e sp o n s ib ilitie s no m atter how big they m ay be. " S ch iller True . 01 "I do m any things which I r e g r e t a fte r ­ w ards (I r e g r e t m o re things or m ore often than o th ers se e m t o ) ," B arron F a ls e . 01 True . 05 " P a rts o f m y body often have fee lin g s lik e burning, tin glin g, craw lin g, or lik e "going to s l e e p ," B arron F a lse . 05 "Some people a re so b o s sy that I fe e l lik e doing the op p osite o f what th ey req u est e v e n though 1 know they are righ t, " S ch iller F a lse ,0 5 S ch iller True . 05 B arron F a ls e "P eople often m ake favorable co m ­ m en ts about m y a b ility to think and sp eak in a lo g ic a l and coherent m a n n er," MI tend to have the a b ility to for e te ll and be p rep ared for future ev en ts, " "I find no d ifficu lty in applying m y m ind to an a ssig n e d t o p i c ," "X have had v e r y p ecu lia r and stra n g e e x p e r ie n c e s* " S c h iller . 05 55 a ll 10 sig n ifica n t ite m s . The r e su lts o f th e se t e s ts are rep orted in T able 14 in the form of m ean s and v a ria n ces for each lea d ersh ip c a te g o ry on both keys* A n a ly sis of v arian ce for 3 and 196 d e g r e e s o f freed o m r e su lte d in an F of 7. 30 for the 5 item k ey (p<* 01) and an F o f 14* 53 for the 10 ite m s (p<* 01). L in ear a n a ly sis betw een two c a te g o rie s When attem pting to d eterm in e the sig n ifica n ce of d ifferen ce betw een sep a ra te p a ir s of c r ite r io n c a te g o r ie s , h e tero g en eity of v a ria n ce w as d etected betw een P and C C b, and betw een P and NL. on the 10 ite m key* T h is h e tero g en eity probably accounts for som e of the m agnitude of the F resu ltin g from the a n a ly sis of that s c a le . N orton (1952) h as shown that when m arked h etero g en eity of v arian ce i s found, it i s d e sir a b le to allow for som e d iscrep a n cy by settin g a slig h tly high er "apparent1’ le v e l of sig n ifica n ce for the te s t than w ould o th erw ise be em ployed. A s a result* h etero g en eity e ffe c ts on the sim p le a n a ly sis of v arian ce can be m in im ized . In the p r e sen t study we w ish ed the r is k of a Type 1 err o r to be l e s s than 1% and th e re fo re req uired that the obtained F ex ceed the . 005 point in the n o rm a l-th eo r y F -d istrib u tio n . Since an F of 3. 38 is n o rm a lly c o n sid ered to be sig n ifica n tly d ifferen t from chance at the 1% le v e l (with df = 3 and 196), our obtained F of 14, 53, for the 10 ite m k ey, even when shifting to an apparent sig n ifica n ce le v e l 56 T able 14 M eans and v a r ia n ce s for the Ss in each lea d ersh ip ca te g o ry on the 5 and 10 item lin ea r k e y s. Mean V ariance 5 item k ey 3 .7 9 1 .2 2 10 item k ey 7*86 1 .9 3 5 ite m k ey 2 .8 0 1 .9 6 CCa 10 ite m k ey 5. 95 2. 80 5 ite m k ey 3 .1 3 1 .6 7 10 ite m sc a le 6. 54 3. 85 5 ite m k ey 2 .6 7 1 .7 6 10 item k ey 5. 60 4. 19 CCb NL. 57 would s t ill be d ifferen t fro m chance expectancy w e ll beyond the • 01 le v e l o f confidence* B e ca u se the obtained m agnitude of the F for the 10 ite m k ey cannot be attributed to m ean d iffe re n c es e x c lu s iv e ly (and b ecau se the 5 ite m k ey without such a r e str ic tio n g iv e s a lm o st as much sig n ific a n c e ), the 5 ite m key w as u ltim ately em ployed in testin g for sig n ific a n c e of d ifferen ce betw een sep arate c r ite r io n ca teg o ry p a ir s. Due to the fa c t that a fte r -th e -fa c t com p arison s w e re being m ad e, T ukey’s D , a r e la tiv e ly co n serv a tiv e test# w as u sed and the r e su lts a re rep orted in Table 15* With a D of . 32, sign ifican t d iffe r e n c e s betw een the m ean s of fiv e o f the s ix com p arison s w ere found. The only p air of c r ite r io n c a te g o rie s for which th ere w as no s t a tis tic a lly sig n ifica n t d ifferen ce betw een m ean s w as that betw een CCa and N L , The next step in the lin ea r a n a ly sis w as to d eterm in e that p air o f c r ite r io n c a te g o r ie s for which d ifferention w as expected to be g r e a te st. To do th is, 588 2x2 Chi Squares w ere com puted for a ll o f the r e sp o n s e s to the ES sc a le by the standardization Ss in the four c a te g o r ie s . T h irty Chi Squares w ere found to d iffer sig n ifica n tly fro m chance at the 5% confidence le v e l or b etter. An exam ination of Table 16 r e v e a ls that the g r e a te st num ber o f ite m s able to d ifferen tiate betw een a pair of c a te g o r ie s w ere T able 15 T u key's D te s t of the sig n ifica n ce of d ifferen ce betw een m ean s c o r e s on the 5 ite m k ey for sep arate c r ite r io n c a teg o ry p a ir s. C riterio n c a te g o r ie s Mean (X) (X )-2, 67 ( X ) - 2 .80 (X )-3 . 13 59 T able 16 The r e s u lts of 30 sig n ifica n t Chi Square te s ts for the r e sp o n se s o f the Ss in the standardization population betw een p a irs of c r ite r io n c a te g o r ie s. ES sc a le p o sitio n 2 54 2 31 54 2 69 98 97 48 25 19 U 54 39 72 49 8 27 69 94 80 40 72 80 11 69 25 19 16 Chi Square 14. 25 12. 10 11.61 1 0 .2 5 8. 32 7 .8 1 7. 71 7. 26 6. 80 6 .3 5 6 .1 7 5 .9 0 5. 62 5 .2 8 5.21 5 .1 8 5. 02 5 .0 2 4 .9 0 4 .7 6 4. 51 4. 51 4. 47 4. 39 4. 00 3. 98 3 .9 3 3 .9 2 3. 92 3. 86 C riterion c a te g o rie s CCb-NL P -N L CCa-CCb P -N L CCb-NL P-C C b P -N L CC a-NL CCa—CCb CCa-NL P -C C a P -N L CC a-NL P -C C a CCb-NL P -N L P -C C a CCa-CCb P -N L CCb-NL P -C C a P -C C a P -N L CC a-NL CCa-NL P -N L CCa-NL P-C C b CCb-NL P -N L Confiden le v e l .0 1 .0 1 .0 1 .0 1 .0 1 .0 1 .0 1 .0 1 .0 1 .0 5 .0 5 .0 5 .0 5 .0 5 .0 5 .0 5 . 05 .0 5 .0 5 .0 5 .0 5 .0 5 .0 5 .0 5 .0 5 .0 5 .0 5 .0 5 .0 5 .0 5 60 th o se nine ite m s d ifferen tiatin g betw een P and N L ; the sam e pair o f c r ite r io n c a te g o r ie s found from the configural a n a ly sis. T h ree sep a ra te s e ts of ite m s w ere u sed to te s t the stan dardization population. The th ree item s for which the Chi Square te s t show ed sig n ifica n ce of d ifferen ce at the . 01 confidence le v e l betw een P and NL c o m p rised the fir s t te s t of the exp erim en tal S s. The secon d t e s t w as m ade on a ll 9 ite m s found to be sign ifican t at the 5% le v e l or b etter and the fin al te s t w as m ade on the b e st fiv e ite m s (equal in num ber to th o se d erived configurally) which b e st d ifferen tia ted betw een P and NL. With both c r ite r io n c a te g o r ie s co n sid ered sep a ra tely , v a rio u s c u t-o ff s c o r e s w e re trie d , a s w as done with the configural a n a ly s is , in am attem pt to s e le c t that point at which g r ea test o v e r ­ a ll d ifferen tiation could o ccu r. The b e st c u t-o ff point for each of the th ree t e s t s w as determ ined fir s t (Table 17) and then that one w hich appeared su p erio r to the oth ers w as u ltim a tely located . The m ean p ercen t of c o r r e c t a ssig n m en t to the criter io n c a te g o r ie s in the stan d ard ization group for the 5 item te s t w as 75. 5%, w h ereas the t e s t s with 3 and 9 ite m s could only c la s s ify a m axim um m ean p ercen t o f 70. 5% and 74. 5% o f the S s, r e sp e c tiv e ly . The fiv e ite m te s t w as th erefo re u sed for testin g the c r o s s v alid ation sa m p le (P * 43, NL » 70) w ith a c u t-o ff sc o r e s e t at > 3 61 Table 17 A c cu ra cy of c la s s ific a tio n of Sis in the standardization population to c r ite r io n c a te g o r ie s P and N L as a r e su lt of the u se o f th ree cut­ o ff s c o r e s on each of th ree lin e a r ly d erived k e y s. A lso shown i s the a c cu ra c y of c la s s ific a tio n of c r o ss -v a lid a tio n Ss at the b e st c u t-o ff point for the b e st lin ea r se t of ite m s. N um ber C u t-off C riterion T otal o f ite m s s c o r e ca teg o ry N Num ber P er ce n t Mean p ercen t a c cu ra tely a c cu ra tely a ccu ra tely c la s s ifie d c la s s ifie d c la s s ifie d Standardization population P NL 43 69 41 18 95% 24% _ 59.5% P ^L « 69 32 46 74% 67% 7° - 5% >2 P NL 43 69 20 63 47% 91% ^ ^7 >2 P NL 43 69 36 38 84% 55% 60 69> *% >3 F NL 43 69 29 58 67% 84% 75' 5% P NL 43 69 15 66 35% 96% 65‘ 5% >4 P NL 43 69 37 35 86% 51% 68.5% >5 NL f3 69 46 ? ij 67% 74-°% P 43 27 63% , ** o*0L 7 3 ‘ >0 , 3 5 . . >4 9 y >6 >3 £ °% 0 " 73.0% 62 (i. 4 or 5 v e r su s s c o r e s of 0 through 3). T h ese r e su lts a re a lso rep o rted in T able 17 w h ere it can be se e n that the a verage p ercen t o f c o r r e c t c la s s ific a tio n w as 73%. T his finding i s sig n ifica n tly d ifferen t from chance expectancy at the 1% le v e l of confidence U 2 « . 9 7 ; p > , 50). Com bining both a n a ly se s The fiv e lin ea r and fiv e configural ite m s, togeth er with th e ir o rig in a l so u rc e and appropriate r esp o n se sco red in the d irectio n of high lea d er sh ip , a r e rep orted in Table 18. The a n sw ers for a ll ite m s , d eterm in ed through th e se a n a ly ses to m easu re high lea d er sh ip , a re in a g reem en t with that p red icted by B arron and S ch iller as in d ica tiv e of high e g o -stre n g th . One item , "P eople often m ake favorable com m ents about m y a b ility to think and speak in a lo g ic a l and coherent m anner, u w as found to occu r in both the lin ea r and configural s e ts o f ite m s. In ord er to d eterm in e the m o st appropriate c u t-o ff points for the two k e y s u sed jo in tly , one sca tterg ra m w as developed for the fiv e lin ea r ite m s and the four d ifferen t configural ite m s (F igu re 3), and another for both s e ts of fiv e ite m s (F igu re 4), The overlapping ite m w as one that w as found in the lin ea r a n a ly sis to d ifferen tiate betw een c r ite r io n c a te g o r ie s at the • 01 le v e l of confidence. It w as th e r e fo r e retain ed in the la tte r k ey and rem oved from the configural, rath er than u sin g the op p osite p roced u re, b ecau se it w as fe lt that l e s s 63 T able 18 The liv e lin e a r and fiv e configural item s; togeth er with th eir o rigin al so u r c e and appropriate r e sp o n se s sc o red in the d irectio n of high lea d ersh ip . 353 s c a le p o sitio n 19 s§ 3 31 54 69 72 25 31 0 h §> •rt l o 47 98 Item ,fl do m any things which I r e g r e t a fte r w ards (I r e g r e t things m ore or m ore often than oth ers se e m to);-." "P eop le often m ake favorable com m ents about m y a b ility to think and speak in a lo g ic a l and coh eren t m anner. " "I am not c er ta in of m y ab ility or of the goals 1 should lik e to str iv e for. " *'1 tend to have the a b ility to fo r e te ll and be p repared for future even ts. " "I find no d ifficu lty in applying m y mind to an a ssig n ed top ic. " "If I w e re an a r tis t I would lik e to draw flo w e r s. " "Bsople often m ake favorable com m ents about m y ab ility to think, and speak in a lo g ic a l and co h eren t m a n n e r ." "Once I sta r t w ork on som ething it is hard to get m e away from it. " "I understand m y s e lf and m any of the m o tiv e s underlying m y behavior. " " P a rts of m y body often have fee lin g s of burning, tinglin g, craw lin g, or lik e going to s le e p . " R esp on se Source d irectio n B arron F a ls e S c h iller True S c h iller F a ls e S c h iller True S c h iller True B arron F a ls e S c h iller True S c h iller True S ch iller True B arron F a ls e 64 F ig u re 3 A sc a tte r g r a m of the r e sp o n se s of the standardization Ss in c r ite r io n c a te g o r ie s J? and NL to the fiv e item lin ea r k ey and the four unique ite m s of the configural key. Configural sc o r e 0 1 - 5 2 3 0 4 xxxxo XXXXX XXXXX xo xxxxo oo xxxxo o XXXXX oo xxooo oo xxooo ooo xxxoo ooo oo ooo xxooo oooo xxxoo ooooo o ooo XQQOO xoooo ooooo 4 O 3 2 1 oo xoo 0 X « C riterio n category P O s C riterio n ca teg o ry NL Num ber of Ss c o r r e c tly c la s sifie d * T otal p e rcen t c o r r e c tly c la s s ifie d P 25 NL 62 78% ♦ With c u t-o ff s c o r e s s e t at > 2 for configural key, and > 3 for lin ea r k ey for m axim um d ifferen tiation . [ 65 F ig u re 4 A sc a tte r g r a m of the r e sp o n se s of the standardization Ss in c r ite r io n c a te g o r ie s P and NL to both the lin ea r and configural k e y s. Configural score I 0 2 3 O X XOO XXXXX xxo xooo XXXXX o OOOOO xxooo oooo xxoo xxxoo o o o xoooo oooo xoooo oo xxxoo oo ooo oooo xoooo ooooo XOO XXXXX o 5 L inear 4 3 2 1 0 5 4 XXXXX XXXXO oo 0 X = C riterio n c a te g o ry P O « C riterio n ca teg o ry NL ^ Num ber of Ss c o r r e c tly c la s s ifie d T otal p ercen t c o r r e c tly c la s s ifie d * P 28 NL 61 79% *With c u t-o ff s c o r e s s e t at > 2 for the configural key, and > 3 for the lin ea r k ey for m axim um differen tiation . 66 d istu rb an ce to the pow er of the configural k ey would r e su lt from its a b s e n c e ,) An exam ination of the r e su lts rev ea led that the com bination o f the 5 ite m lin ea r and 5 item configural k eys (79% total c o r r e c t c la s sific a tio n ) w as su p erior to the 5 item lin ea r and 4 item configural k e y s (78% total c o r r e c t c la ssific a tio n ) in the standardization population. In both c a s e s the c u t-o ff s c o r e s w ere se t at >2 for configural and >3 for lin ea r k ey s so as to ach ieve m axim um d ifferen tiation . As a r e su lt, the fo rm er com bination w as u sed in testin g the c r o ss-v a lid a tio n sa m p le fo r P and N L . The r e su lts o f th is te s t a re depicted in the sca tterg ra m of F ig u re 5* With c u t-o ff s c o r e s retained at >2 and >3 for the con figu ral and lin e a r k e y s, r e sp e c tiv e ly , the total p ercen t of Ss c o r r e c tly c a te g o riz ed i s 76% (30Ss c o r r e c tly a ssig n ed to P , and 56 Ss c o r r e c tly a ssig n ed to NL from the en tire sam p le w here N = 113), T his p ercen t, though high er than that found when configural and lin ea r k e y s w e re analyzed se p a r a tely i s not sig n ifica n tly d ifferen t, s ta tis tic a lly , D eterm in in g the b e st k ey and m ethod o f a n a ly sis No one k ey can be con sid ered better than any other sin ce the d iffe r e n c e s found w e re not s ta tis tic a lly sign ifican t from each oth er. It w as noted for exam ple that th ere w as no sign ifican t d ifferen ce b etw een the e ffe c tiv e n e ss of the 5 item configural k ey which d ifferen tiated b etw een P and N L, the 5 ite m lin ea r k ey which te ste d the sam e 67 F igu re 5 A sc a tte r g r a m o f the r e sp o n se s o f the c r o ss-v a lid a tio n Ss in c r ite r io n c a te g o r ie s JP and NL in both the lin ea r and configural k e y s, score 0_________ 1_______ C onfigural 2 3 4 XX XXXXX XXXXX XOO XXX XXXXX XXXXX XXO oooo 5 OO xxooo oooo 4 L inear 5 xxoo XXXXX xxxxo oo ooooo oooo ooooo ooo XOO oo ooooo oooo xooo o oo o ooooo pooooo 3 2 1 O 0 X a C riterio n ca teg o ry P O s= C riterio n c a te g o ry NL Num ber of Ss c o r r e c tly c la s s ifie d * T otal p e r ce n t c o r r e c tly c la s s ifie d P 30 NL 56 76% *With c u t-o ff s c o r e s s e t at >2 for the configural key, and > 3 for the lin ea r k ey fo r m axim um d ifferen tiation . 68 c a te g o r ie s , and the 5 ite m lin ea r k ey which w as d esign ed to d iffe r ­ en tiate a c r o s s a ll four c r ite r io n c a te g o r ie s. Each key, th e refo re, w ithin the lim its o f chance expectancy, i s com parably e ffe c tiv e . The one k ey w hich gave the h ig h est total p ercen t of c o r r e c t c a teg o riza tio n with the c r o ss-v a lid a tio n population (76%), but w as not s ta tis tic a lly sign ifican t in d ifferen ce of a ccu ra cy of r e s u lts , i s that for the combined configural and lin ea r k ey s testin g P and NL.. Both k e y s, co n sid ered ind ividu ally as w ell a s c o lle c tiv e ly , w e r e found to contribute to the a ccu ra cy of c la s sific a tio n beyond that which w ould be exp ected by chance alone. The sam e r e s u lts a re found in attem pting to s e le c t that m ethod o f a n a ly s is , configural or lin ea r , which w as found m o st e ffe c tiv e in th is in v estig a tio n . N eith er m ethod provided sta tis tic a lly sig n ifica n t b etter r e su lts than the other. Each m ethod can cla im it s own ad van tages. The lin ea r a n a ly sis of P and NL w as found to be slig h tly b etter (but not sig n ifica n tly so ) in the p ercen t of accu rate assign m en t o f Ss to th eir appropriate category. But when the configural key w as added to the lin ea r one* e ffe c tiv e n e ss w as found to in c r e a se , but not sig n ifica n tly . Also* it w as found that the 5 item configural k ey w as m ore c o n siste n t (but again not to a sign ifican t extent) in its findings when 69 com paring the r e s u lts of standardization and c r o ss -v a lid a tio n sa m p les The m ean p ercen t of c o r r e c t c la s sific a tio n in the standardization population, for P and N L , w as 65%. In the c r o ss-v a lid a tio n sam p le, the sa m e k ey w as a ccu rate in assig n in g S £ on an average of 64. 5%. T he lin e a r sc a le te stin g the sam e c a te g o r ie s showed an average p ercen t of 75. 5% and 73% c o r r e c t c la s sific a tio n for the Ss in the ex p erim en tal and c r o ss -v a lid a tio n sa m p le s, r e sp e c tiv e ly . F in a lly , it m ight be stated that the lin ea r m ethod w as found to be su p erior to the configural in sofar as its ab ility to s e le c t ite m s w hich w e r e capable of differentiatin g a c r o ss a ll four c a te g o r ie s i s co n cern ed . Ten such ite m s (sign ifican t at the 5% le v e l or b etter) w e re evolved v ia the lin ea r a n a ly sis, w h ereas the n on -sig n ifica n t P hi c o r r e la tio n c o e fficien ts precluded analogous testin g of cen fig u ra lly d eriv ed ite m s . IV. D isc u ssio n The findings of th is study show that the lea d ersh ip c a teg o riza tio n which w as em ployed (i. e . p resid e n tia l le a d e r s , two c a te g o r ie s of "m iddle lea d ersh ip , " and a n on -lead er group) is a m eaningful one in that so m e differentiation i s fe a sib le . The fact that we w e re able to d istin gu ish betw een the four c r ite r io n c a te g o r ie s w ith lin e a r , as opposed to configural m ethods, d oes not n e c e s s a r ily w arran t our concluding that only lin ea r m ethods a re of value in testin g the rela tio n sh ip betw een eg o -stre n g th and lead ersh ip ; w e m u st fir s t be fu lly aw are of the p o te n tia lities of both lin ea r and configural m eth od s. We can c u ll out of the p resen t in vestigation certa in findings that, togeth er w ith the r e s u lts of other stu d ies lead us to a better under standing o f the techniques and concepts involved . F or exam p le, w ith a la r g e r N it m ight have been expected that m ore ty p e s, if th ey e x is t, would have evolved . The p resen t population param eter m ay not p e r m it the configural te s t the freed om it r eq u ires to e x p r e ss i t s e lf fu lly . The MSA tends to m in im ize the num ber of ty p e s, but th o se that do ev o lv e a re lik e ly to be dependable. H ow ever, with a la r g e r population and a d ifferen t configural m ethod that tends to is o la te a r e la tiv e ly la r g e number of ty p e s, the obtained r e su lts m ight 70 71 be quite d ifferen t. M cQuitty (1958) has pointed out that at le a s t 200 Ss in each c r ite r io n ca teg o ry would be n e c e s s a r y Mto ach ieve c lo s e to th eir top c a p a b ilitie s'1 in the particu lar m ethod of configural a n a ly s is that he em ployed. F u rth erm ore, MSA w as found to be as e ffe ctiv e a m ethod of a n a ly sis for a portion of the data even under the p o ssib le handicap ju s t d e sc rib ed . The two ty p e s, p resid en tia l and n o n -lea d er, betw een w hich d ifferen tiation w as found p o ssib le , apparently w ere dominant in th is sam p le. The num ber of Ss in the NL. category w as grea ter than that for any of the oth ers and th erefore w as se le c te d by the MSA a s d istin gu ish ab le from another category. An exam ination of the m ea n s o f the m ean d iffe re n c es of prototype sc o r e s in T able 7 (which w e re u sed for se le c tin g that pair o f c a te g o r ie s for which d ifferen tiation w as exp ected to be g r ea test) further supports this contention. The ca teg o ry p air P & NL. w as ch osen for a n a ly sis b ecau se the m ean of its m ean s w as high er than any of th ose for other c a te g o r ie s. The next h ig h est w as for c a te g o r ie s CCb and NL. , and the next w as for CCa and N L . The rep eated su p erio rity of th is category is probably due to its la r g e r N . The fact that the ca teg o ry pair CCb & NL w as the secon d b e st, fro m a configural point o f view i s not n e c e s s a r ily unexpected. It i s in a cco rd w ith the r e s u lts of the p ilo t study p r e v io u sly rep orted (S c h ille r and A b e le s, 1958) w h ere Ss in c a te g o r ie s CCa and NL w e r e found to be m o re lik e each other in th eir pattern s o f r esp o n se than th ey w e re lik e anyone in any other c a teg o ry (i. e . P and CCb). F urther support for th is relation sh ip betw een c r ite r io n c a te g o r ie s i s se e n in the Tukey D te s t reported in T able 15. No sig n ifica n t d ifferen ce w as found betw een the m eans o f CCa and N L . T h is, togeth er w ith the other r e su lts su g g ests that a quantitative le a d e r sh ip continuum , w h ere the e x tr em e s are rep resen ted by in d ivid u als who hold a g rea t m any or v e r y few lea d ersh ip p o sitio n s, m ight not be the m o st appropriate th eory. Instead, an approach to lea d er sh ip w hich i s con cern ed m o re with qualitative a sp ec ts of both in d ivid u als and p o sitio n s would be of g rea ter valid ity. The e g o - strength concep t fits th is standard. In the p r e sen t in v estig a tio n the Ss in CCb held few er le a d e r sh ip p o sts than did the other m iddle lea d ersh ip people in CCa. If a quantitative lea d ersh ip continuum w as follow ed it would be e x ­ pected that GCa would follow P in the d egree of lea d ersh ip d isp layed . A continuum based on the type or le v e l of lea d ersh ip p osition held, such a s i s supported to som e extent by the findings h e r e , would co n sid er p otential lea d er sh ip in its boundries and th erefo re m ight include Ss in CCb a s show ing g rea ter im p lic it lea d ersh ip than th ose with m ore p o sitio n s (but l e s s lea d er sh ip ab ility). The Ste in c a teg o ry CCa m ight be co n sid er ed to have b een w orking to th eir fu lle st cap acity, a s far a s lea d e r sh ip i s con cern ed , but to la ck that ab ility or th ose e g o -stre n g th 73 c h a r a c te r is tic s that are ty p ica l of p r e sid e n tia l-c a lib e r le a d e r s. T h ose in ca teg o ry CCb, on the other hand, m ight have the c h a r a cter ­ i s t i c s that a re r e q u isite for the h ig h est form s of lea d ersh ip , but th e s e c h a r a c te r istic s m ay, for the m o st part, be untapped. B efo re m ore sp ec ific con clu sion s can be drawn, further in v e stig a tio n is n e c e s s a r y . The configural m ethod m ight have s p e c ia l valu e in such stu d ies. F or the configural evolution of th e se probably w eaker co m m ittee chairm an typ es (i. e , CCa and CCb), m o re S s c h a r a c te r istic of each ca teg o ry would be d e sir e d . A d ifferen t m ethod, such as H iera rch ica l Syndrom e A n alysis (McQuitty, 1959)* could a ls o be u sed s o a s to provide data concerning the r ela tio n sh ip betw een the se v e r a l typ es that e x ist. The lin ea r a n a ly sis m ight be em ployed in such a study too b eca u se it h as alread y been found to d ifferen tiate betw een the four c r ite r io n c a te g o r ie s. r e lia b le d ifferen tiation . The la rg e r N would help to provide m o re One way to d eterm in e, m ore adequately than w as done h e r e , the su p e rio r ity of one m ethod of a n a ly sis over the other would be to in c r e a s e the o v e r -a ll N in another study. The e sta b lish ed relation sh ip betw een lea d ersh ip and the ES s c a le tends to draw togeth er the r e se a r c h findings in the lite ra tu re con cern in g the "great man" and " so c ia l interaction al" th e o r ie s. G reater c o h e sio n i s had due to the su ggested p o ssib ility that the in c o n siste n t findings o f p reviou s stu d ies m ight now be explained with 74 g r ea ter fa c ility and dependability by em ploying a sp e c ts of p sy ch o ­ analytic: th eory such as that concerned with the concept of eg o -stre n g th . Both individual c h a r a c te r istic s and p r o c e s s e s of so c ia l in teraction can be d elegated to a com m on plane subsum ed within the eg o -stre n g th con cep t. R e la tiv e ly few ES sc a le ite m s w ere s e le c te d through the a n a ly se s as capable of differen tiatin g betw een the lea d ersh ip c a te g o r ie s. An exam ination of th e se ite m s does not p erm it the d esig n a tion o f a c le a r -c u t p sy ch o lo g ica l d escrip tio n which d istin g u ish es b etw een th ose Ss who sc o r e d eith er high or low . It w as found though that S c h ille r 's ite m s tended to evolve m ore frequently than B arron 's (i. e . in the com bined configural and lin ea r k ey s 6 of the ite m s w ere develop ed by S c h iller w h erea s 3 w e re from B arron 's sc a le ). Future r e s e a r c h would do w e ll to in itia lly em ploy a la r g e r num ber o f ite m s based on M urray and K luckholm 's c r ite r ia than w ere u sed h e r e so that th o se se le c te d follow ing item a n a ly ses would tend to be m o re c le a r ly d e sc r ip tiv e of lea d ersh ip ty p es. It should be noted a lso that ju st b ecau se attem pts w ere m ade to reta in content v alid ity in the construction of S c h ille r 's ite m s , b a sed on the c r ite r ia of e g o -stren g th outlined by M urray and Kluckhohn, it cannot be concluded that th ose ite m s are adequate m e a su r e s of e g o -str e n g th . F urther r e se a r c h is needed h e r e a lso to eith er support or refu te the su g g ested relation sh ip betw een th e se ite m s and the e g o -str e n g th concep t. V. Sum m ary A s a m ean s of testin g one im portant concept from p sy ch o a n alytic th eory in the a s s e s s m e n t of lea d ersh ip , it w as h y p o th esized that pattern s o f eg o -stren g th c h a r a c te r istic s a re r ela ted to lea d ersh ip behavior* The SjS w ere 400 m ale co lleg e se n io r s who w ere a ssig n ed to one o f four lea d ersh ip c a te g o r ie s on the b a sis of the number and h ie r a r c h ic a l le v e l of lea d ersh ip p osition s held, a s reported in a b iograp h ical lea d er sh ip q u estion naire. The c r ite r io n c a te g o r ie s w e r e P , p r e sid e n tia l le a d e r s (N = 86)} CCa, com m ittee chairm an who h eld m o re than one such p osition but none higher (N - 83); CCb, c o m m ittee chairm an who held such p osition s only once (N * 92); and N L , non le a d e r s or S£ who have never held any lea d ersh ip p o sitio n (N = 139). The total population w as random ly divided into stan dardization and c r o ss -v a lid a tio n groups of equal s iz e . E g o -str en g th w as defined as that p r o c e ss which fa c ilita te s the a n a ly sis and in tegration of im pinging stim u li (i. e. environm ental a s w e ll a s th o se attributed to in tern al dynam ic p r o c e s s e s ) in the d ir ec tio n of n e e d -sa tisfy in g goal ach ievem en t. 75 The ES s c a le , co m p rised 76 o f the 68 item B arron E g o -stren g th S cale and 30 ite m s con stru cted by th is author b ased on sp e c ific c r ite r ia of eg o -stre n g th , w as u sed a s a m e a su r e of e g o -stre n g th for testin g the S s. Both lin ea r (additive) and con figu ral (p attern -an alytic or typal) m ethods w ere u sed for the a n a ly sis of the data aJid the e ffic a cy of each, in a s s e s s in g lea d ersh ip , w as in v estig a ted . A ppropriate item a n a ly ses w ere em ployed for se le c tin g the b e st ite m s for the lin ea r and configural te s t s . The p rim ary con figu ral treatm en t w as the new ly developed M ultidim ensional S ca lo g ra m A n a ly sis. Som e o f the m ajor findings are as follow s; 1. The lin ea r m ethod was su perior in d ifferentiatin g betw een a ll four c r ite r io n c a te g o r ie s with 5 and 10 item k ey s (p<* 01), w h ereas w ith the configural m ethod the c r iter io n for the se le c tio n of item s w as not sa tisfie d ; th ere fo re a configural te s t w as not developed. 2* The lin ea r and configural a n a ly ses (5 item k e y s) w ere e ffe c tiv e in d ifferen tiatin g betw een c r ite r io n c a te g o rie s P and N L . The m ean p ercen t o f c o r r e c t categorization of Ss in the c r o ss-v a lid a tio n sa m p le w e re 73% and 64, 5% for the r esp e c tiv e a n a ly ses (p < . 01). 3, T h ere w as no sign ifican t d ifferen ce betw een the e ffe c tiv e ­ n e s s of the lin ea r and configural k eys in differentiatin g betw een P and N L , and betw een th e se and the lin ea r k ey which differen tiated a c r o s s a ll four c r ite r io n c a te g o r ie s. 77 4, B y com bining both the lin ea r and configural k eys greater e ffe c tiv e n e ss w as found in the a ccu racy of c la s sific a tio n (76%) than w as the c a se with eith er m ethod trea ted sep a ra tely , but the in c r e a se w as not s ta tis tic a lly sign ifican t. 5, The ite m s o f the ES s c a le that w ere developed by th is author proved to be o f g rea ter e ffe c tiv e n e ss in differen tiatin g betw een lea d er sh ip c a te g o r ie s than w ere Barron*s ite m s. A s a r e su lt of th e se findings it cam be concluded that eg o * stren g th , a s m easu red by the ES s c a le , is effectiv e!in lea d ersh ip a ssessm e n t. F u rth erm ore, the hyp othesis w as found tenable w ithin the lim its of the p articu lar exp erim en tal conditions em ployed. The value of the p attern -an alytic approach to the data, and su g g estio n s for future r e se a r c h w ere d isc u sse d . VI* 1* A r g y r is, C. B ibliography Som e c h a r a c te r istic s of s u c c e s sfu l e x ec u tiv es. P er so n n e l J, t 1953, 32, 50-55. 2. A sch , S, E. E ffects of group p r e ssu r e s upon the m od ification and d isto rtio n of judgm ents. le a d e r sh ip, and m en . 3* Pittsburgh; C arnegie P r e s s , 1951* B a le s , R. F . , & Strodtbeck, F . L. so lv in g , 4, In H. Guetzkow (E d .) Groups , P h a se s in group problem J , abnorm . so c . P sy c h o l. , 46, 1951, 385-495. B arnard, C. I. O rganization and m anagem ent. Cam bridge: H arvard U n iv e r sity P r e s s , 1948. 5. B arron, F . An eg o -stren g th sc a le which p red icts r esp o n se to psychotherapy. 6* B a ss , B. M. J . Consult. P sy c h o l. , 1953, 17, 327-333. An a n a ly sis of the le a d e r le s s group d isc u ssio n . J. appl. P sy c h o l. , 33, 1949* 527-533. 7* B a s s , B. M ., & W uster, C. R. E ffects of thenature of the lea d er sh ip p roblem on LGD p erform an ce. J. appl. P sy c h o l. 1953, 37, 9 6 -9 9 . 8. B e ll, G. B . , & F ren ch , R. L.. C on sisten cy of individual le a d er sh ip p osition in sm a ll groups of varyin g m em b ersh ip . J, abnorm . so c . P s y c h o l., 1950, 45, 764-767. 78 79 9* B elia k , L. { E d .), Schizophrenia; _A rev iew of the syn drom e. N ew York: L ogos P r e s s , 1958* 10* B inet, A. La su g g e stib ilite . 1892. A s r e fe r r e d to in A. P . H are, E, F . B orgatta, and R. F. B a les (E d s* ), Sm all grou p s: Studies in s o c ia l in tera ctio n . New York: A lfred A . Knopf, 1955. 11. Blum , G. S. P sych oan alytic th e o r ie s of p erso n a lity . New York: M cG raw -H ill Book Company, I n c ., 1953. 12. B orgatta, E. F . , B a le s, R. F , , & Couch, A. S. relev a n t to the great man theory of lea d ersh ip . Som e findings A m er, s o c ia l. R e v ., 1954, 19, 755-759. 13. B ridgm an, D. S. S u c c e ss in c o lle g e and b u sin e ss. P erso n n el £ . . 1930, 9, 1-19. 14. Brown, J* F, P sy ch o lo g y and the so c ia l o rd er. New York: M cG raw -H ill, 1936. 15. Brow n, W. B . D . , & R aphael, W inifred. m o r a le . 16. M anagers, m en and London: M acDonald & E vans, 1948. C am pbell, D . T. A study o f lead ersh ip am ong subm arine o ffic e r s . C olum bus, Ohio: The Ohio State U n iv ersity R esea rch Foundation, 1953. 17. C a rter, L. F . R ecording and evaluating the p erform an ce of ind ividu als as m em b ers of sm a ll groups. 1954, 7, 477-484. P erso n n el P sy c h o l. , 18. C arter, L. F . , Haythorn, W ., S h riv er, E . , & L anzetta, J. The behavior of le a d e r s and other group m em b ers. _J. abnorm . s o c . P sy c h o l. , 1951, 4b, 589-595. 19. C artw right, D . , & Zander, A. th eo ry . 20. Group d yn am ics: R esea rch and E vanston, 111. “Row P ete rso n , 1956. C ateil, R . B . , & S tic e, G. F . The psychodynam ic of sm a ll groups; final rep ort on r e se a r c h p roject for Human R elation s B ranch, O ffice of N aval R esea rch , entitled: " R esearch on the psych od yn am ics o f groups under control con d ition s; p rin cip ally d irected to d isc o v e r ob jectiv ely m easu reab le independent d im en sio n s of group m o ra le and p erform an ce. " Urbana, U n iv e r sity of Illin o is: L aboratory o f P erso n a lity A s se ssm e n t and Group B ehavior, 1953. 21. Chowdhry, K am la, & New com b, T. M. The r e la tiv e a b ilitie s of le a d e r s and n o n -lea d er s to estim a te opinions of their own groups. 22. J . abnorm . so c . P sy c h o l. , 1952, 47, 51-57. C ow ley, W, H. T hree d istin ction s in the study o f le a d e r s. J . abnorm . s o c l. P sy c h o l. , 1928, 23, 144-157. 23. Cronbaeh, L. J . , & M eehl, P . E. p sy ch o lo g ic a l t e s t s . 24. C rutchfield, R. S. C onstruct v a lid ity in P sy c h o l. B ull. , 1955, 52, 2 8 1-302. C onform ity and ch a ra cter. o g is t, 1955, 10, 191-198. A m er . P sy c h o l­ 25. D a v is, F . J. F orce, 26. C onception o f o fficia l lea d er r o le s in the A ir Soc. F o r c e s , 1954, 32, 253-258. Dubin, R. Human rela tio n s in adm inistration: The so c io lo g y of organ ization , with read in gs and c a s e s . New York: P r e n tic e - H all, 1951. 27. Du V ail, E . W. P e r so n a lity and so c ia l group w ork. New York: A sso c ia tio n P r e s s , 1943. 28. Dym ond, R osalind F . A s c a le for the m ea su re of em pathic a b ility . _J. con su lt. P sy c h o l. , 1949, 13, 127-133. 29. E llio t, J. M. P rom otion from within: F act or fa r c e ? In M. J . D ooher and E lizabeth M arting ( E d s .), S electio n of m anage ­ m ent p e r so n n el. New York: A m erican M anagement A sso c ia tio n , 1957. 30. F eldm an , H. How we c re a te " fath ers” and m ake them " son s. " A m e r . Im ago, 1955, 12, 71-86. 31. F en ic h e l, O. The psych oanalytic th eory of n e u r o sis . New York: W. W. N orton & C o ., I n c ., 1945. 32. F e stin g e r , L .., P ep iton e, A . , & Newcom b, T. o f d e-ind ividu ation in a group. Som e con seq u en ces J . abnorm . so c . P sy c h o l. , 1952, 47, 382-389. 33. F ie d le r , F . E. 1954, 12, 2 2 -2 4 . Good lead ersh ip : Nature or nurture. C ontact, 82 34. F reud, Anna, The ego and fe e m ech a n ism s of d e fen se . London: Hogarth P r e s s , 1922. 35. F reud, S. Group p sych ology and the a n a ly sis of the ego, London: H ogarth P r e s s , 1922. 36. F reud, S. In stin cts and th eir v ic is s itu d e s . C ollected p a p e r s, IV, London: Institute of P sy ch o a n a ly sis and Hogarth P r e s s , 1924. 37. G ardner, B, B. e x e c u tiv e s? 38. G ebel, A. S. status* 39. What m akes su c c e s sfu l and u n su cc essfu l Advanced M anagement, 1948, 13, 116*125, S elf-p ercep tio n and le a d e r le s s group d isc u ssio n J . s o c . P s y c h o l., 1954, 40, 309*318. Gibb, C. A. The p rin cip les and tr a its of lea d ersh ip . £ . abnorm . so c . P sy c h o l. , 1947, 42, 267-284. 40. Given, W, B. E xecu tive inter changeability*-and how to a ch iev e it. In M. J. Dooher and E lizabeth M arting ( E d s .), S e lec tio n o f m anagem ent p erson n el. New York: A m erican M anagem ent A sso c ia tio n , 1957. 41. Gowan, J. C. R elationship betw een lea d ersh ip and p erso n a lity m easu res. 42. J. educ. R e s. , 1955, 48, 623*627, Gowin, E . B. The execu tive and h is control of m en . New York: M acm illan, 1915. 43. G reenw alt, C. H. The m anagem ent p r o fessio n . M anagem ent. 1955, 20, 5. Advanced 44. G reer. F . L . , G alanter, E. H ., & N ord lie, P . G. Inter­ p erso n a l knowledge and individual and group e ffe c tiv e n e ss. 3* abnorm . s o c . P sy c h o l. , 1954, 49, 4 1 1 -414. 45. Guttman, L. A b a sis for sca lin g qualitative data. Araer. s o c . R e v ., 1944, 9, 139-150. 46. H all, C. S. A p rim er of Freudian psych ology. New York: The World P ublishing C o ., 1954. 47. H alpin, A. W, The lea d ersh ip behavior and com bat perform ance o f a ir -p la n e com m an d ers. JT. abnorm . s o c . P s y c h o l., 1954, 49, 19-22. 48. H ayfhorn, W ., H aefher, D ., Couch, A ., & C arter, L. The e ffe c ts of varying com binations of authoritarian and equal ita ria n le a d e r s and fo llo w er s. JF. abnorm . so c . P sy ch o l . , 1956, 53, 210-219. 49. H em phill, J . K, Situational fa cto rs in lea d ersh ip . Ohio State U m ver. Educ. R e s. M onogr. , 1949, No. 32. 50. H em phill, J . K. L ead ersh ip a c ts . Columbus: Ohio State U n iv e r ., R esea rch Foundation, 1954. 51. H enry, W. E. E xecu tive p erso n a lity and job s u c c e s s . In M. J . D ooher and E lizabeth M arting ( E d s .), S electio n of m anagem ent p erso n n el. A sso c ia tio n , 1957. New York: A m erican M anagem ent 52. H urw itz, J , X., Zander, A. F . , & H ym ovitch, B, o f pow er on the r ela tio n s among group m em b er s. Som e e ffe c ts In D. C artw right and A. F , Zander ( E d s ,), Group d yn am ics: R ese a rc h and theory. E vanston, 111.: Row, P ete rso n , 1953, 4 8 3 -4 9 2 , 53. Jack son , J . M, The e ffect of changing the lea d ersh ip o f sm a ll w ork groups. 54. Jenkin s, W. C, Hum. R elat. , 1953, 6, 25*44. A rev iew o f lead ersh ip stu d ies with p articu lar r e fe r e n c e to m ilita r y p ro b lem s. P sy c h o l. B ull. , 1947, 44, 5 4 -79. 55. J en n in gs, H elen H. Structure of lea d er sh ip --d ev elo p m en t and sp h ere of in flu en ce. 56. J o n e s, A, T. S ociom etry, 1937, 1, 9 9 -1 43. The education of youth for lea d ersh ip . New York; M cG raw -H ill, 1938. 57. Kahn, R. L . , & K atz, D. L eadership p r a c tic e s in r ela tio n to prod u ctivity and m o ra le. In D . C artw right and A. F . Zander ( E D s .), Group d y n a m ics; R esearch and th eory. E vanston, 111.: Row, P e te r so n , 1953. 58. K elly, H, H. a r c h ie s. 59. Com m unication in exp erim en tally crea ted h ie r ­ Hum. R elat. , 1951, 4, 39-56. K elm an, H. C. E ffec ts of s u c c e s s and fa ilu re on " su g g est­ ib ility" in the autokinetic situation. 1950, 45. 2 6 7-285. J. abnorm . so c . P s y c h o l., 60. King, G. F . , & S c h ille r , M. n e s s , and a c q u ie sc en ce . 61. Note on e g o -stren g th , d e fe n siv e ­ P sych ol. Rep. , 1958, 4, 434. King, G* F . , & S c h ille r , M. E g o -stren g th and type of d efen siv e behavior. jj* con su lt. P s y c h o l., in p r e s s . 62. K lopfer, B. Introduction: The developm ent o f a progn ostic rating s c a le , _J_. proj. T ech, , 1951, 15, 421. 63. Klubeck, S . , & B a ss , B. M, D ifferen tial e ffe c ts of training p e r so n s o f d ifferen t lea d ersh ip sta tu s. Hum. R elat. , 1954, 7, 5 9 -7 2 . 64. K nickerbocker, 1. p lica tio n s. m en t. 65. L eadership; A conception and som e im ­ In S. D. H oslett (E d .), Human fa cto rs in m anage­ New York: H arper & B roth ers, 1951, 3 -22. K r is, E. P sych oan alytic explorations in a rt. N ew York: intern ation al P r e s s , 1952. 66. L ew in, K. F ro n tie rs in group dyn am ics, Hum. R e la t., 1947, 1, 5 -4 2 . 67. L ew in, K. Group d e c isio n and so c ia l change. In T. N ew com b and E . H artley (E ds. ), Readings in so c ia l psychology. New York: Holt^ 1947. 68. L in g o es, J. C. se n a te . 69. A m ultid im en sion al a n a ly sis of the 83rd In p r e s s , 1959. Madden. W. F. M easurem ent of p erso n a lity v a r ia b le s by d e g ree of r elev a n ce . _J. aviat. Med. , 1954, 25, 623-629. 86 70. M aier, N. R. F . The quality of group d e c isio n s a s influenced by the d is c u ssio n le a d e r . 71. Hum. R e la t.. 1950, 3, 155-174. M aier, N. R. F . , & Solem , A. R, The contribution of a d is c u ssio n lea d er to the quality of group thinking: The effe ctiv e u se of m in ority opinions. 72. M andell, M. M. needed. Hum. R elat. , 1952, 5, 277-288. The se le c tio n of ex ecu tiv es: The q u alification s In M. J . D ooher and E lizabeth M arting (E ds. ), S e lec tio n of m anagem ent p erson n el. New York: A m erican M anagem ent A sso c ia tio n , 1957, 73. M cQuitty, L. L. A pattern a n a ly sis of d escrip tio n s of "best" and "poorest" m ech an ics com pared with factor analytic r e s u lts . 74. P sy c h o l. M onogr. , 1957, 71, No. 17 (Whole No. 446). M cQuitty, L. 1>. Isolatin g p redictor patterns a sso c ia te d w ith c r ite r io n p attern s. Educ, p sych ol. M easm t. , 1957, 17, 3-4 2, 75. M cQuitty, 1». L». Job-know ledge sco rin g k eys by item v e r su s configural a n a ly sis for a s s e s s in g le v e ls of m ech an ical e x p erien ce. Educ. p sy ch o l. M easm t. , 1958, 4, 661-680. 76. M cQuitty, L. L. H iera rch ica l syndrom e a n a ly sis. Educ. p sy ch o l. M easm t. , In p r e s s . 77. M eehl, P . E. C onfigural sco rin g . _J. con su lt. P s y c h o l., 1950, 14, 165-171. 87 78* Murphy, G ., Murphy, L. B . , & N ew com b, T. M. s o c ia l p sych ology. 79* (R ev. E d .), New York: H arper, 1937. M urray, H. A . , & Kluckhohn, C, p erso n a lity . E xp erim ental Outline of a conception of In C. Kluckhohn, H* A. Murray* and D. M* Schneider (E ds. J, P e r so n a lity in n atu re, so c ie ty , and cu ltu re. New York: A lfred A, Knopf, 1955. 80. N orton, D, W. An e m p irica l in vestigation of som e e ffects of n on -n orm ality and h eterogen eity on the F -d istrib u tion . Unpublished D octoral D issertation* State U n iv ersity of Iowa, 1952, 81. P a g e, H, E. D etectin g potential le a d e r s. J. aviat. M e d ., 1948, 19, 4 3 5-441. 82. P ig o r s , P . L eadership or dom ination. 83. P olan sk y, N. A . , L ippitt, R . , & R edl, F . o f b eh avioral contagion in groups. London; H arrap, 1935. An in vestigation Hum. R e la t., 1950, 3, 319-348. 84. R edl, F , Group em otion s and lead ersh ip . P sy c h ia try , 1942, 5, 573-596. 85. R o g e rs, C. R. 86. S ch afer, R. C lient cen tered therapy. Boston: Houghton P sych oan alytic in terp retation in R orschach te s tin g * New York: Grune & Stratton, I n c ., 1954. 87. S ch eid lin g er, S. P sy ch o a n a ly sis and group b ehavior. York: W, W. N orton & C o ., 1952. New 88 88. S c h ille r , M. E go*stren gth, m a n ifest anxiety, and d e fe n siv e n e ss. Unpublished M aster*s th e s is , M ichigan State U n iv e r ., 1958. 89. S c h ille r , M ., & A b ele s, N . E go-stren gth and lead ersh ip : A th e o r e tic a l approach and p relim in a ry r e se a r c h . P aper p r e ­ sented at the 63rd Annual M eeting of the M ichigan A cadem y of S c ien ce , A rts, and L etters* 90, Schn eid er, J . fam e, 91, E ast L ansing, M ichigan, 1959. S ocial c la s s , h is to r ic a l circu m sta n c es and A m er. J. S o c io l., 1937, 43, 37-56. S h artle, C. L, L eadership and execu tive p erform an ce. P e r so n n e l, 1949, 25, 370-380. 92. Sim pton, R. H. A study of th ose who influence and th ose who a re influenced in discussion* T each, C o ll., Colum bia U n iv e r ., Contrib. E d u c ., 1938, No. 748. 93, S la te r , P . E , R ole differentiation in sm a ll groups. A m er. s o c io l. R ev. , 1955, 20, 94* Stagner, R. P ercep tu al r e se a r c h and p erso n a lity theory. P aper p resen ted at the P sych ology Colloquium , E a st L ansing, M ichigan: M ichigan State U n iv e r ., F ebruary, 1959. 95. S tem n ler, J. Fuhrertypen, Kol. Z. S o z io l. , 1953, 6, 533-563. (P sy ch o l. A b str a cts, 1955). 96. S togd ill, R. M, P er so n a l fa cto rs a sso c ia te d with lead ersh ip : A s u r v e y of the lite ra tu re , 97. S togd ill, J. P sy c h o l. , 1948, 25, 35-71. R. M, L ead ersh ip , m em b ersh ip and organization. P sy c h o l. B u ll. , 1950, 47, 1-14. 89 98. S togd ill, R. M ., & Shartle, C, L. M ethods for determ ining pattern s o f lea d ersh ip behavior in relation to organizational stru ctu re and o b je ctiv e s. 99. S tryk er, P . J. appl. P sy c h o l. , 1948, 32, 286-291. The r a r e s t man in b u sin e ss. F ortune, May, 1959. 1 1 9 -1 2 0 , 210, 212. 100. T alland, G. A. The a s s e s s m e n t of group opinion by le a d e r s, and th eir in flu en ce on its form ation. J. abnorm . s o c . P sy c h o l. , 1954, 49, 4 3 1 -434. 101. T erm an, L. M. A p relim in a ry study of the p sych ology and pedagogy of lea d ersh ip . R. F . a ctio n . 102. In A. P . H are, E. F . B orgatta, and B a les ( E d s .), Sm all groups; Studies in so c ia l in te r ­ New York: A lfred A, Knopf, 1955. T orran ce, E. P . M ethods of conducting critiq u es of sm a ll group p ro b lem -so lv in g p erform an ce. J. appl. P s y c h o l., 1953, 394, 398. 103. T r a v e r s, R. M. W, A study in judging the opinions of groups. A rch. P sy c h o l. , 1941, 47, No. 266. 104. Taubman, R. E. The sp ec ia l lea d ersh ip training program at the Signal C orps O fficer Training School. J. appl. P s y c h o l., 1947, 31. 8 2 -9 1 . 105. U. S. C ivil S e r v ic e C om m ission . L eadership and su p e rv isio n . P e r so n n e l m anagem ent s e r ie s No. 9, D ecem b er, 1955, pp. 62. 90 106. Van D u sen, A. C, M easuring lea d ersh ip a b ility. P erso n n el P sy c h o l . , 1948. 1, 6 7 -7 9 . 107. W est, H. P r o fe ssio n a l qu alification s in gen eral m anagem ent. B r it. M anagement R ev, t 1950, 9, 51. 108. Z elen y, 1*. D . C h a ra c ter istic s of group le a d e r s, & so c . R e s ., 1939, 24, 140-149. Sociol. Appendix A 91 ES S cale T his inventory c o n s is ts of num bered sta tem en ts. Read each sta tem en t and d ecid e w hether it is true as applied to you or fa lse a s applied to you. You a r e to m ark your a n sw ers on the answ er sh eet you have. If a sta tem en t i s TRUE or MOSTLY TRUE, as applied to you, then blacken betw een the lin e s in the colum n headed T. If a statem en t i s FALSE or NOT USUALLY TRUE, as applied to you, blacken betw een the lin e s in the colum n headed F. R em em ber to give YOUR OWN opinion of your s e lf, Do not le a v e any blank s p a c e s * In m arking your a n sw ers on the answ er sh eet, be su re that the num ber of the statem en t a g r e e s with the number on the answ er sh e e t, Make your m ark s heavy and dark. E r a se co m p letely any a n sw e rs you w ish to change. 1. I so m e tim e s fe e l that I am about to go to p ie c e s . 2. I am m ade nervous by certain an im als. 3* I stick with long ter m com m itm ents even if they turn out to be fo o lish la ter on, 4. I have had no d ifficu lty in keeping m y balance in walking. 5. I p r e fe r an ord ered and planned approach to life , 6. I frequ en tly find m y se lf w orrying about som ething. 7. I am in ju st as good p h y sica l health as m o st of m y frien d s. 8. I am not afraid of fire* 9. I fe e l that everyon e should con sid er h is own enjoym ent and sa tisfa c tio n b efore anyone e l s e ’s. 10. When things get boring m y m ind so m e tim e s sh ifts from the m ain topic under con sid eration . 11, Som e people are so b o s sy that I fe e l lik e doing the opposite of what they request* even though I know they a re right. 12. 1 often have d ifficu lty understanding the action s of th ose around m e. 13. I v e r y m uch lik e horseb ack riding. 14. I think L incoln w as greater than W ashington. 15. If Xw e r e an a r tis t I would lik e to draw children. 16. I have strange and p ecu liar thoughts. 17. I go to church a lm o st e v e r y week* 18. I fe e l unable to te ll anyone a ll about m y se lf. 19* X do m any things which 1 r e g r e t afterw ards (X r e g r e t things m o re or m o re often than others se em to). 20* Going along with a ll the dem ands of a su p erior is often a b etter approach than trying to te ll him what I think. 21. S om etim es 1 enjoy hurting people I lo v e. 22. When som eon e sa y s s illy or ignorant things about som ething Xknow about, I try to s e t him right. 23. S om etim es so m e unim portant thought w ill run through m y m ind and bother m e for days, 24. X get m ad e a s ily and then get over it soon. 25. If X w ere an a r tis t I would lik e to draw flow ers* 26. I am e a s ily downed in an argum ent. 27. My w ay of doing things is apt to be m isun derstood by o th ers. 28. H esitation and prolonged evaluation are valuable techniques to u se when m aking decisions* 29. X have a good app etite. 30. E verything i s turning out ju st lik e the prophets of the B ible sa id it would. 50, I lik e to talk about se x . 51, 1 am afraid of finding m y se lf in a c lo s e t or sm a ll c lo se d sp ace. 52, I fe e l sym p athetic toward people who tend to hang on to th eir g r ie fs and tro u b les. 53, I do not lik e to m ake long ter m p r o m ise s b ecau se I have found that they m ay be hard to keep. 54, I am apt c er ta in of m y ab ility or of the goals I should lik e to str iv e for. 55, Often 1 c r o s s the s tr e e t in order not to m eet som eone 1 s e e , 56* 1 have had blank sp e lls in which m y a c tiv itie s w ere interrupted and I did not know what w as going on around m e, 57* 58. 59. 60. 1 fe e l that m y id e a s are often as good or better than m y su p e rio r 's and I lik e to e x p r e ss them . My s le e p i s fitfu l and disturbed. P eop le think I know what I am talking about even though m ay be r e a lly confused about a topic. I When 1 am with people I am bothered by hearing v e ry queer things* 61. 1 lik e sc ie n c e . 62. I n ever attend a se x y show if I can avoid it. 63. On o c c a sio n I have disturbing w o r r ie s, but that is only natural. 64. At tim e s I h ear so w e ll it b oth ers m e. 65. 1 brood a g reat deal. 66. I p ray se v e r a l tim es ev er y w eek. 67. During the p a st few y e a rs I have been w e ll m o st of the tim e. 68. D irt frigh ten s or d isg u sts m e. 69. I tend to have the ab ility to fo r e te ll and be prepared for future ev en ts. 70. The m an who had m o st to do with m e when I w as a child (such a s m y fath er, stepfath er, e t c . ) w as v e r y s tr ic t with m e. 71. C h rist p erform ed m ir a c le s such a s changing w ater into w ine. 72. I find no d ifficu lty in applying m y m ind to an a ssig n ed top ic. 73. I dream frequ en tly about things that are b e st kept to m y se lf. 74. I would cer ta in ly enjoy beating a crook at h is own gam e. 75. I have n ever had a fainting sp ell, 76. 1 u se con cep ts which r efer to rea l things and ex p erien ces rath er than th ose that ju st pop into m y m ind, 77. 1 have no trouble making a choice betw een two altern ative c o u r se s of action. 78. My skin se e m s to be unusually se n sitiv e to touch. 79. I n ever have p rob lem s with n erv o u sn ess. 80. I have had v e r y p ecu liar and strange e x p e rien ce s. 81. 1 do not m ind handling a job a ll alone even i f it m ean s utter solitu d e for a w h ile. 82. 1 fe e l tir e d a good deal of the tim e. 83. One or m ore m em b ers of m y fam ily is v e r y n ervou s. 84. I can be frien d ly with people who do things which I con sid er w rong. 85. 1 have d iarrh ea once a month or m ore. 86. I have m et p rob lem s so full of p o s s ib ilitie s that I have been unable to m ake up m y m ind about them . 87. I lik e to cook. 88. I b e lie v e m y sin s a re unpardonable. 89. A t tim e s 1 have fits of laughing and crying that I cannot con trol. 90. When I le a v e hom e I do not w orry about w hether the door i s lock ed and the windows c lo sed . 9 1. My plans have frequently seem ed to be so full of d ifficu lties that I have had to give them up, 92. My hands have not becom e clu m sy or awkward. 93. 1 am attracted by m em b ers of the opp osite se x , 94. I seld o m w o rry about m y health. 95. 1 have often been frightened in the m iddle of the night. 96. I do not m ind having r esp o n sib ilitie s no m atter how big they m ay be, 97. 1 find it hard to keep m y m ind on a task or job, 98. P a rts of m y body often have feelin g s lik e burning, tingling, craw lin g, or lik e "going to sle e p , " Appendix B 99 LEADERSHIP QUESTIONNAIRE N am e D ate of birth 3. Sex D ate entered MSU ter m V eteran ? C la ss (y es) year (No) F resh m an Sophom ore Junior Senior O rganization m em b ersh ip at MSU: O rganization(a) P o sitio n (s) h eld Appendix C 101 Intercorrelation m atrix lor item # i to 33 o l the ES sc a le by the Ss o l criterio n category F« Item 1 2 3 4 5 6 T 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 17 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 226 6 138 023 103 032 085 000 088 134 071 168 116 081 052 141 088 110 175 050 203 383 310 550 179 071 310 153 067 227 158 158 188 158 005 037 090 193 000 180 077 095 066 081 193 133 121 217 160 090 102 357 081 095 088 154 095 095 076 156 019 268 155 038 184 138 136 247 000 255 193 206 072 098 150 049 032 111 059 136 166 039 098 206 236 095 110 016 054 096 255 061 252 119 148 165 247 000 227 134 310 313 116 247 223 076 088 053 032 050 203 383 071 081 004 310 310 053 067 227 336 021 004 021 195 000 084 170 114 184 187 177 253 238 141 143 016 079 148 008 158 041 092 114 114 048 103 084 063 072 171 190 000 211 121 059 175 129 204 287 052 022 225 041 119 196 021 059 204 121 059 170 368 170 022 157 265 100 057 000 ooo 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 099 061 085 099 211 190 127 075 138 084 042 065 186 061 022 161 061 373 131 009 075 237 033 049 033 264 064 095 129 097 037 470 133 187 056 028 095 264 129 120 080 080 174 191 470 260 064 286 098 216 080 059 454 098 061 037 158 034 140 080 049 170 130 049 049 106 070 061 109 138 13© 138 226 175 116 199 085 114 184 158 233 209 226 114 067 216 005 O il 261 278 089 429 067 118 021 058 160 186 133 170 425 144 132 080 021 120 080 080 387 343 099 064 098 120 098 287 052 211 127 160 119 082 279 059 005 121 170 170 003 059 211 157 157 121 165 097 190 014 009 107 030 097 082 081 161 154 154 077 116 190 100 322 180 121 127 392 227 068 056 037 202 052 114 202 202 049 074 121 147 288 175 007 138 141 042 151 099 061 022 059 373 061 131 009 283 033 033 467 030 205 182 203 161 037 078 173 037 037 164 071 232 313 103 043 103 300 123 008 114 041 092 114 114 195 103 141 065 062 040 065 280 065 034 119 263 034 034 323 211 042 248 248 091 096 144 122 196 056 122 401 303 174 151 395 271 071 271 080 129 120 080 609 174 039 186 270 098 047 098 059 130 049 049 106 070 061 109 109 124 138 100 287 170 003 160 167 265 157 101 050 130 130 131 018 258 111 008 100 111 049 178 162 373 138 138 124 138 106 070 061 355 355 124 109 27 26 29 30 31 32 33 Inter cor relation m atrix lor item s 34 to 66 of the ES sc a le by the Ss o f criterio n category P . Item 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 SO 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 096 097 085 122 393 218 000 056 303 557 071 122 176 303 148 173 000 056 072 161 065 122 255 085 231 176 205 065 197 096 280 149 144 062 158 230 005 032 123 160 079 114 063 013 280 140 148 000 000 000 000 000 000 082 040 091 124 223 071 000 020 131074 106 489 122 000 268 150 016 107 154 253 030 000 048 051 072 040 091 377 040 308 000 023 053 066 230 005 034 039 114 122 000 130 106 154 130 333 168 382 310 032 203 000 179 153 119 004 071 153 240 323 107 048 020 000 143 079 306 280 178 053 042 160 017 158 124 123 000 171 246 131 040 114 032 099 063 208 085 140 123 043 000 071 020 030 071 122 013 161 393 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 236 174 091 124 040 308 000 023 006 066 145 130 188 131 092 056 000 297 022 144 237 251 039 000 226 206 151 415 016 138 206 093 039 000 095 153 109 323 178 342 161 000 006 079 051 006 106 258 232 195 303 000 131 034 153 085 042 373 308 065 000 049 338 190 049 061 227 131 084 065 000 049 072 338 089 226 699 049 114 140 000 130 106 154 130 049 310 178 158 122 000 124 016 178 051 032 009 062 089 123 063 000 082 153 293 072 089 129 153 042 222 000 082 107 020 110 089 062 151024 034 079 085 000 263 074 107 091 034 050 074 079 085 000 091 144 074 042 034 062 224 066 125 047 286 005 000 289 102 250 147 179 232 347 169 231 000 180 009 347 152 047 086 125 102 153 050 310 165 013 000 004 153 052 179 071 173 153 032 013 000 188 183 053 227 071 129 050 069 007 215 107 082 114 030 000 038 178 153 294 154 223 178 009 030 000 275 049 051 190 082 007 222 047 223 153 085 042 016 308 065 000 258 131 005 049 061 227 131 141 151 000 049 H I 104 075 061 110 042 152 088 005 072 146 091 130 171 182 000 100 143 180 267 377 188 143 223 182 000 023 308 280 161 130 082 091 256 188 294 161 032 009 383 230 123 314 000 072 020 137 072 089 333 153 042 063 000 225 107 325 417 230 032 062 086 333 137 153 236 062 151024 034 079 280 000 091 074 222 091 034 050 074 300 085 000 263 144 074 042 034 062 024 125 050 222 042 263 062 241 115 166 206 021 149 000 113 034 049 013 016 138 153 136 072 000 201 065 153 111 016 028 144 104 023 250 072 095 163 144 66 In tercorrelation m atrix lor item s 67 to 98 o l the £ S sc a le by the Ss o l criter io n category F . [tem 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 145 120 081 097 028 064 095 013 355 186 209 099 174 116 098 063 056 300 077 056 132 428 099 099 056 470 264 095 264 132 265 296 047 107 079 145 102 029 222 124 035 225 069 185 086 125 319 296 125 004 011 152 035 191 222 047 004 047 145 154 048 308 127 120 131 040 258 174 161 006 088 229 072 091 071 038 091 047 043 161 258 091 258 124 120 124 213 133 123 268 239 336 066 180 167 019 076 037 042 U9 235 193 008 102 235 045 019 019 102 180 336 077 095 081 322 090 097 077 282 190 083 005 051 090 010 007 017 054 063 107 197 115 199 005 222 190 082 058 318 213 222 028 020 428 151 233 151 820 392 149 069 085 005 237 085 200 021 065 065 260 151 140 144 140 081 260 031 089 237 015 033 031 021 156 101 248 133 071 096 098 313 033 033 096 237 158 064 138 213 174 081 186 209 099 013 116 089 146 056 004 239 456 132 014 099 099 056 470 088 095 264 028 011 131 131 104 079 133 102 020 074 104 206 074 013 200 131 104 074 131 178 386 178 260 098 069 085 250 153 188 008 158 314 339 158 226 358 268 085 151 085 216 309 005 132 085 075 131 088 440 153 042 152 180 042 086 138 075 075 052 642 071 099 061 174 085 131 008 015 125 151 006 035 158 209 057 098 989 058 286 005 081 005 081 338 088 170 153 042 035 019 042 099 323 075 131 042 075 071 187 061 186 258 168 153 047 020 055 322 174 042 131 088 047 131 106 013 178 064 158 129 050 259 138 482 116 053 227 033 482 099 071 116 071 186 001 096 079 184 096 260 108 033 110 284 237 109 064 109 20O 062 244 027 062 273 203 053 242 062 118 230 146 089 134 125 102 024 425 131 042 152 024 152 032 856 034 098 015 125 804 182 836 019 125 180 273 300 273 273 102 239 263 819 842 235 142 895 235 095 047 056 131 042 186 024 099 034 056 034 145 161 186 047 056 138 264 132 080 081 138 075 082 075 037 133 037 056 075 564 075 473 099 061 095 442 042 061 470 061 281 186 899 056 099 080 97 98 In tercorrelation m atrix for item s 1 t© 33 of the ES sc a le by the Ss of criter io n category CCa. Item 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 14 17 1 2 3 4 5 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 14 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 24 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 022 085 088 073 255 075 047 047 108 381 155 114 009 032 459 025 094 434 038 148 092 324 141 044 474 132 040 140 204 114 219 073 012 077 277 274 058 032 074 235 203 074 036 094 007 204 034 052 084 086 152 020 076 073 059 163 113 203 236 236 237 181 080 014 123 060 223 153 163 014 084 023 214 169 129 178 225 016 168 151 200 077 083 008 064 100 076 266 014 388 05 0 021 160 299 225 066 131 131 095 182 212 041 211 008 008 041 050 432 099 131 231 212 038 174 231 008 128 179 115 041 022 204 186 141 017 017 037 153 120 104 405 039 149 105 057 131 013 114 208 120 122 043 175 149 132 204 044 182 005 026 136 182 182 099 486 207 180 036 196 196 364 313 225 050 310 008 164 127 O il 193 303 120 099 216 004 150 086 090 090 066 233 112 187 234 120 120 243 079 066 068 503 056 112 163 126 056 120 196 066 248 187 134 141 011 299 098 364 005 110 096 046 005 222 084 199 180 112 077 300 111 112 238 024 084 037 117 137 247 299 219 217 005 013 188 047 361 351 084 055 158 112 365 168 169 133 096 219 131 093 128 003 017 128 025 041 055 008 008 041 115 095 099 131 082 025 032 174 082 173 027 095 215 115 022 204 152 012 070 100 203 165 294 182 155 219 065 258 167 039 122 203 036 128 014 077 188 145 176 121 199 075 176 196 399 053 077 139 233 178 191 288 199 046 212 029 143 138 110 469 081 228 062 045 041 088 005 044 079 096 013 124 434 165 271 045 062 161 200 056 160 023 113 211 129 013 136 121 101 257 043 263 237 055 113 112 062 074 075 228 064 189 089 096 148 199 015 004 058 044 002 173 154 183 214 038 081 054 390 019 044 148 199 078 034 471 283 305 189 045 022 101 071 045 115 098 239 054 155 009 019 124 022 077 113 323 115 054 084 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 2b 27 28 29 30 31 32 030 078 225 381 131072 004 082 177 112 195 212 154 077 074 158 018 024 157 07 3 049 005 011 111 047 175 009 009 004 544 193 112 070 288 157 004 154 008 019 188 058 099 015 115 255 107 027 211 024 112 152 151 041 112 100 115 179 043 131 231 035 183 183 231 008 128 284 115 021 154 004 029 115 101 192 044 294 215 350 041 280 128 301 143 022 034 124 081 012 041 138 181 022 251 033 030 214 153 075 144 124 004 320 534 054 045 132 113 149 017 119 038 308 205 041 038 300 043 448 214 33 In tercorrelation m atrix lor item s 34 to 66 o l the ES sc a le by the Ss o l criterio n category CCa. Item 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 020 134 094 094 250 215 103 207 003 214 288 111 030 177 006 305 134 069 207 424 094 000 17? 100 200 166 250 066 239 022 401 259 200 079 283 372 224 122 117 077 075 036 093 036 076 152 225 112 083 099 069 175 001 006 204 158 074 096 127 172 025 155 337 125 178 036 075 038 130 013 047 036 050 036 096 029 051 038 273 142 066 036 000 032 194 118 043 232 191 056 211 009 292 022 094 099 032 186 063 084 069 175 325 251 137 186 699 156 186 131 325 002 302 385 163 364 038 302 266 046 427 125 094 225 032 120 063 084 325 026 325 089 163 186 133 143 186 170 325 002 074 085 163 564 038 073 084 483 052 131 100 134 189 137 214 163 111 098 177 103 009 134 021 009 034 033 000 066 100 020 166 092 188 239 022 091 162 091 046 017 038 054 117 071 070 037 143 141 123 143 073 195 000 088 025 138 017 074 207 039 131 073 087 048 090 380 098 038 189 116 196 171 046 223 084 243 098 001 164 083 196 056 215 105 120 066 075 028 156 032 102 081 220 274 020 095 048 313 004 254 133 000 054 219 198 030 103 074 032 089 006 073 338 125 334 035 162 024 216 207 079 032 128 035 001 036 016 145 112 108 096 046 084 047 128 012 099 126 015 203 032 120 076 284 228 123 000 109 066 303 148 132 148 088 189 192 022 081 192 011 155 220 098 210 104 177 092 000 082 008 040 111 126 082 280 162 060 292 003 138 133 081 826 110 182 144 003 000 013 455 103 072 194 375 030 054 033 154 119 075 133 184 097 337 176 244 000 084 333 270 343 054 082 012 469 208 063 147 071 116 026 132 078 119 001 086 083 151 044 161 082 131 168 270 020 517 019 084 160 077 040 000 098 223 212 112 278 098 100 182 180 012 30 484 034 270 254 220 000 078 187 249 330 006 054 282 089 006 19? 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 009 048 028 184 001 164 551 019 376 009 432 130 066 268 183 035 126 106 020 102060 000 000 000 001 296 166 110 082 000 017 064 051 063 001 028 979 149 100 270 000 012 096 100 300 054 576 001 092 159 088 133 366 207 131 000 177 100 091 030 296 059 120 082 001 083 097 342 092 177 076 177 183 412 000 109 086 100 265 101 020 141 385 352 062 001 152 120 182 331 194 042 008 085 173 116 393 001 081 280 241 191 246 004 032 188 224 017 063 065 000 099 077 099 077 011 151 062 211 230 66 Intercorrelation m atrix for item s 67 to 98 of the ES sc a le by the Se o l criter io n category C C a. Item 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 67 68 69 000 000 253 000 396 054 000 148 027 000 100 032 000 299 118 000 109 170 000 092 081 000 042 068 000 032 008 000 135 142 000 151 012 000 206 172 000 056 042 000 356 055 000 088 123 000 172 085 000 047 156 000 120 313 000 077 102 000 147 143 000 074 156 000 212 038 000 191 242 000 042 168 000 074 165 000 331 076 000 130 07? 000 020 027 000 028 112 000 074 143 70 71 72 136 025 305 203 065 048 130 086 217 071 216 137 046 006 186 195 060 186 036 016 219 089 186 071 049 032 219 120 089 012 251 064 076 012 112 008 099 151 135 066 295 113 086 015 190 046 055 032 185 260 013 032 255 266 109 125 096 099 088 084 109 084 204 022 272 086 259 008 099 084 109 333 294 048 008 164 089 068 124 084 109 73 74 75 128 167 014 320 115 042 036 489 167 187 132 172 281 044 152 177 009 058 032 137 626 246 055 137 215 257 123 064 204 137 094 010 066 034 045 287 220 052 152 940 214 066 094 104 066 161 045 104 044 132 098 022 115 142 004 104 066 043 009 173 177 004 250 101 049 082 187 144 022 094 104 556 76 77 102 120 063 084 481 168 086 131 110 144 293 131 075 140 151 046 187 271 112 077 181 046 178 046 152 196 333 120 063 096 055 046 178 008 004 082 222 008 160 120 193 046 125 78 79 80 81 029 211 016 135 025 135 158 051 029 058 058 340 042 120 058 211 241 066 042 058 045 199 022 115 167 195 036 026 195 114 328 105 177 195 058 163 218 029 193 042 270 145 049 089 078 147 251 251 078 211 184 089 098 244 015 064 251 047 246 047 052 128 174 061 016 215 016 140 063 024 778 096 016 352 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 073 103 244 063 099 052 116 104 306 170 022 081 022 195 136 052 099 052 022 07? 114 052 099 022 177 118 022 022 166 008 257 133 062 146 170 133 072 305 072 058 079 029 058 058 051 299 108 046 041 07? 046 046 041 110 108 052 099 052 022 133 114 022 022 170 058 046 270 070 049 089 078 058 078 089 122 083 008 151 191 208 111 039 232 163 039 039 054 159 082 039 244 132 183 296 184 081 204 284 284 232 23? 008 084 115 058 072 065 135 058 311 029 039 058 079 233 339 058 083 102 237 42? 225 427 022 131 195 022 022 170 385 056 022 251 564 266 058 98 Intercorrelation m atrix for item s 1 to 33 of the £S sc a le by the Ss of criterio n category CCb. Item 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 U 12 13 14 IS 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 1 062 066 062 040 240 563 000 279 062 093 336 027 066 029 531 277 080 372 029 415 102 145 279 081 282 214 045 000 101 336 207 029 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 $2 203 050 245 043 165 043 194 014 258 028 035 142 035 129 135 000 000 000 000 000 000 125 171 125 006 258 279 000 050 246 475 185 258 035 000 138 000 048 000 146 096 156 000 112 224 176 047 109 094 298 322 000 298 109 121 285 221 176 048 113 199 000 022 055 196 006 022 057 022 165 094 142 000 171 246 144 197 075 142 045 106 230 114 099 000 106 142 000 173 062 061 117 108 117 076 452 299 000 389 117 174 190 068 008 184 000 144 224 049 096 156 000 112 224 048 364 000 048 106 058 117 458 117 194 335 082 000 156 117 058 338 290 008 074 152 406 050 022 050 185 032 699 000 138 050 000 176 285 022 106 156 000 117 142 272 142 200 228 099 000 106 142 211 096 047 045 050 193 000 184 106 228 039 091 198 354 064 000 091 091 272 149 180 234 043 284 000 119 091 344 082 039 082 004 021 058 000 033 273 074 178 015 405 093 146 074 013 082 233 150 156 108 107 042 017 082 000 020 117 058 190 307 125 074 010 174 152 117 055 119 192 138 059 125 109 258 279 000 344 125 112 014 137 059 017 389 112 020 138 018 251 033 117 117 108 156 042 101 072 000 117 156 174 106 051 008 312 152 174 152 117 202 047 166 131 156 062 120 062 148 240 043 000 155 066 093 101 027 066 167 081 277 306 062 029 151 102 481 155 306 092 012 150 078 580 233 000 472 150 258 331 207 091 033 278 052 153 092 082 351 087 099 351 153 014 133 112 133 160 078 262 000 176 133 163 401 021 003 017 085 163 217 375 223 089 219 085 049 079 165 304 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 109 290 109 277 175 076 000 014 109 121 081 256 168 038 042 000 042 176 230 149 176 106 014 190 101 200 013 000 271 165 185 087 224 189 000 109 043 049 094 152 225 200 076 049 161 043 307 079 153 042 109 042 336 287 061 000 094 067 079 167 094 057 117 000 050 067 050 145 278 121 032 147 050 095 176 252 034 033 268 183 062 207 121 000 000 094 094 142 061 106 123 091 099 000 106 142 106 038 379 267 050 074 211 184 142 067 108 070 202 230 202 029 082 103 000 038 123 299 33 Intcrcorraiation a u t t l i In* itnmn 34 te 66 ol din £8 •«*!• by tha 8* nf criterion category CCb. 34 31 34 37 It 30 40 41 4* 4$ 44 4$ 44 47 40 47 56 51 52 53 54 0 50 57 50 59 00 Oi 62 63 04 05 66 34 $$ 070 36 042 lit It ttl ttt 107 m lit 100 101 0$$ it 047 10$ ttt 044 001 40 lit ttt 040 12$ 176 100 41 000 001 001 00$ 00* 001 00! 41 010 ttt 041 0 0 a 117 lit 171 001 43 144 033 013 ttt 002 040 166 001 072 AHfl 177 20$ 44 ait 224 £01 h i 1$$ 044 0*1 ww 40 004 014 31$ 376 100 lt§ 111 000 104 007 01$ 44 114 100 043 03$ 010 071 001 000 117 263 m 017 Mi 4t im 000 ttt 064 001 w Wlf 040 000 21$ *70 321 170 220 32* 014 2ii *• m 100 Itt Ilf 001 104 117 11* 00S 176 140 att tit Iff 01$ 240 111 000 171 166 021 117 174 040 214 47 30 itt 440 171 04$ 10$ 044 244 000 §0$ 111 261 m 13$ 046 0tf 111 $1 2 2 0 001 im ill 043 iff 000 001 4*4 1$$ 173 1$7 073 077 1$7 *47 340 $2 314 047 094 210 167 020 13* 001 216 030 01$ 107 067 020 010 076 051 097 S3 000 101 014 111 07f 144 137 000 *44 104 017 $00 lit 144 143 067 153 032 104 $4 tit 010 006 274 12$ 071 200 001 117 140 047 014 12$ 2$1 114 137 174 390 147079 IS 141 $72 140 14$ 04* 11$ 16$ 001 001 1S4 161 101 06* til 13$ 16$ 044 040 014000042 W000 001 000 eoo ooi miooo ooi 0 0 1 94 000 001 001 00$ 002 001 001 000 001 001 WW000 IW it itt 0$4 341 043 100 02$ 004 000 04* 176 401 011 174 12$ 074 ill 013 175 145343 014 135 000 It 041 134 140 043 042 113 163 001 14$ 102 04$ 101 04* 111 163 210 005 190 179149 042 077 001 135 m 000 ttt $4$ 221 lit 144 $47 000 000 104 260 060 077 000 04$ 03$ 030 057 000179 040 149 000 429 194 60 m ttt ttt 024 031 064 i*$ 00$ *77 00$ *42 $22 0$t 044 064 1*3 242 051 210 111 279 043 001 322 043 111 41 104 141 000 247 114 M4 042 000 0$$ 417 102 17$ 104 17$ 030 047 117 154 032112 142 147 M0 030 174 000099 41 tat 14$ 100 111 30S 13$ 000 001 0*0 131 007 2$6 076 17$ 1$7 000 147 105 097115 2M 090 Ml 049 090 230 401 450 43 tat m$ lit 101 00* 124 $1$ 000 *24 007 $04 111 07* 273 174 101 070 217 049037 133 194 0M M0 014 002 233 194 042 44 145 104 040 04$ 111 16$ 001 001 102 16$ 11$ 14* 111 13$ 027 145 090 2070M042 077 Ml 135 077 194 043 174 090 1M 41 304 U4 040 04$ 202 11$ 027 001 $04 10* 04$ 04$ 14* in 101 *10 145 225 327194 179 077 Ml 135 202 194 043 029 OM077 077 44 174 044 341 114 224 *73 070 000 014 *21 014 234 000 136 000 174 054 OM OM101 224 277 OM243 093 OM154 211 MO2M M3 MS H P tP w w 4 pN8f In tercorrelation m atrix for item s 67 to 98 o i the ES sc a le by the S s o f criter io n category CCb. 68 69 70 71 72 73 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 322 172 111 221 129 210 172 082 076 135 563 170 064 299 481 105 064 425 117 190 025 035 189 043 349 043 058 035 051 043 058 076 086 172 030 018 067 190 235 035 336 197 025 042 049 194 198 009 109 006 076 109 030 101 109 101 196 176 157 135 196 169 372 128 022 231 008 047 083 066 231 098 225 357 012 098 039 079 074 172 246 420 305 022 120 039 022 194 120 039 250 034 016 135 000 172 204 196 271 000 123 115 037 144 260 000 035 221 079 034 000 045 196 104 079 115 000 104 275 000 068 246 172 102 000 135 289 123 287 146 144 052 000 173 221 079 343 000 226 196 052 316 111 196 052 398 067 194 030 266 040 128 078 042 228 287 198 004 389 148 189 271 087 336 239 290 146 043 228 336 004 121 286 145 043 179 022 122 098 097 253 162 033 170 176 221 167 094 014 067 207 033 167 073 372 274 74 125 168 207 129 039 098 108 194 091 CD 67 © N© Item 019 022 075 172 022 225 120 150 120 109 022 194 120 039 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 016 134 080 125 047 010 028 099 119 346 147 051 082 156 076 081 078 281 013 428 170 145 346 070 180 076 025 042 049 020 025 009 145 006 322 109 135 035 109 135 009 109 256 101 078 084 207 107 101 047 149 079 127 052 184 135 258 028 053 129 035 170 032 087 134 128 066 045 081 229 014 151 469 079 163 043 062 148 077 124 077 184 162 290 077 102 098 108 031 091 039 187 022 024 142 022 067 120 150 242 187 203 031 305 039 213 099 021 222 016 264 180 064 228 060 113 183 131 060 091 131 113 150 226 350 213 166 147 188 082 156 161 306 234 081 192 156 170 145 131 042 133 382 266 088 481 689 228 225 073 050 131 308 171 190 131 315 072 361 101 233 150 237 014 023 186 087 150 134 441 246 066 020 240 064 091 060 113 000 113 151 003 133 113 150 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 186 155 058 263 004 184 033 102 035 263 119 102 092 176 210 030 007 114 333 207 186 ©67 ©97 104 033 123 176 252 027 044 163 115 066 088 218 2 88 030 129 043 070 043 425 076 041 043 038 271 372 100 062 082 035 073 062 236 040 152 166 146 475 063 040 004 124 077 124 102 165 184 043 372 200 076 090 073 090 131 073 042 120 077 102 062 090 184 033 012 092 607 133 102 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 In te r c o d e la tio n m atrix for item * 1 to 33 o f the ES eca le by the Se o f criter io n category NL.. Item 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 a 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 20 29 30 31 32 33 1 2 055 032 114 000 162 079 047 073 030 112 110 052 171 049 110 055 114 149 068 395 178 162 006 092 009 010 243 006 162 259 085 017 014 055 063 126 035 012 012 055 115 193 038 076 046 122 095 025 112 063 034 103 063 037 181 025 058 126 142 122 035 024 255 $ 071 017 149 229 095 010 071 091 015 185 235 066 015 048 067 145 070 032 196 171 126 187 001 019 043 196 015 4 044 088 043 104 104 062 029 011 200 293 080 305 182 037 125 048 114 179 088 077 114 108 174 176 077 158 no 072 129 146 069 033 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 152 122 256 064 088 067 024 043 000 183 097 063 088 051 146 000 044 174 000 081 140 042 022 109 124 063 090 186 122 162 064 044 067 024 043 224 091 097 252 110 204 104 243 220 044 218 081 128 209 147 218 190 126 119 186 263 063 043 047 095 050 023 067 095 139 118 087 033 079 188 122 053 079 075 033 122 253 095 139 002 233 010 090 056 123 085 044 129 023 081 151 077 070 073 151 033 112 312 034 115 256 112 029 081 003 226 090 141 092 085 044 129 123 105 054 043 062 047 248 033 049 073 158 070 064 112 092 174 207 044 240 136 329 033 096 011 199 070 229 079 214 077 176 077 214 108 079 088 177 011 072 142 093 140 091 072 069 095 272 047 085 290 195 021 134 204 054 031 162 076 020 065 014 144 199 200 067 093 024 089 140 150 315 071 140 049 077 110 136 036 049 048 024 120 084 003 114 023 229 075 192 006 193 211 131 107 126 052 081 114 221 126 157 014 081 053 181 066 164 224 079 168 248 287 248 248 060 017 130 062 063 003 224 089 057 009 134 012 199 206 049 080 183 120 277 419 057 000 033 009 046 178 008 122 140 321 335 210 214 024 196 020 042 455 024 070 105 089 084 136 089 112 085 024 089 189 096 085 057 063 063 248 193 148 045 116 199 068 096 133 110 120 068 297 068 142 no 081 025 114 090 024 041 196 102 028 054 074 042 255 028 068 035 046 097 046 122 084 095 010 205 022 277 046 305 084 076 060 096 081 142 092 114 088 000 042 071 081 085 041 * 218 218 142 006 059 109 187 084 036 057 224 * 053 068 042 195 242 101 086 037 114 248 081 028 146 022 109 170 000 262 017 218 088 081 142 071 131 004 017 043 140 147 163 025 302 010 230 159 136 179 076 064 109 049 189 048 144 29 30 31 32 070 248 118 182 244 114 142 016 041 041 33 In tercorrelation m atrix for item s 34 to 66 o f the ES sc a le by the Ss o f criterio n category N L . Item 34 35 36 3? 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 5i 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 134 149 110 174 075 062 097 070 153 099 026 124 225 224 027 137 139 011 051 329 124 097 010 039 065 025 103 092 093 069 222 011 169 058 006 066 083 047 058 100 095 130 013 005 058 130 156 067 037 069 071 030 047 109 067 146 083 012 085 022 120 058 054 148 170 044 170 166 271 016 100 125 057 058 031 163 146 126 064 112 069 044 089 090 126 029 143 078 045 065 009 148 191 101 022 253 034 068 124 120 194 094 012 138 120 138 146 055 063 076 094 034 012 048 044 215 071 044 030 313 138 102 085 145 044 132 029 012 122 028 191 073 105 197 136 132 056 065 187 044 081 207 106 077 054 108 102 112 101 186 107 092 250 268 239 154 253 105 211 110 127 150 117 171 069 246 092 188 050 179 013 067 032 129 019 022 036 110 152 123 052 083 276 230 140 187 914 119 063 028 037 111 134 199 191 010 050 070 042 092 072 140 171 190 230 097 041 041 064 034 197 161 121 190 080 113 041 015 163 021 127 026 083 050 069 393 434 094 283 077 109 215 104 055 077 083 080 085 071 082 109 078 027 110 036 021 026 082 005 143 314 097 063 061 061 022 012 207 132 118 051 120 138 056 064 108 118 058 060 135 017 057 336 259 098 171 173 081 110 127 110 039 316 103 029 074 151 081 039 005 171 089 077 049 248 005 195 205 162 091 126 146 058 109 118 112 113 041 177 058 063 164 127 002 081 067 094 063 156 094 222 164 058 003 091 024 113 041 177 228 063 072 079 002 081 067 094 036 147 081 261 091 104 033 038 177 164 022 118 129 160 017 017 106 038 147 192 120 138 085 158 180 189 094 034 012 048 044 060 191 044 060 086 138 013 46 4 139 054 244 088 026 151 081 139 124 025 089 077 083 142 110 072 130 050 091 157 054 161 115 130 058 135 093 118 059 089 094 203 080 114 186 058 121 091 030 166 037 076 071 099 053 048 044 063 018 003 078 051 no 092 021 043 009 217 030 068 097 143 014 181 047 126 060 141 182 093 060 092 063 124 026 131 003 161 051 156 013 053 008 081 260 356 041 061 058 130 072 285 002 142 104 091 036 064 021 12? 026 083 050 069 038 034 094 109 129 112 017 083 025 163 124 047 181 137 076 174 089 053 048 044 062 033 007 100 316017 144 122 003 141 117 187 101 165 057 292 060 071 115 030 112 146 128 110 190 028 079 21? 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 In tercorrelation m atrix lo r item s 67 to 98 o l the BIS sc a le by the S* o l criterio n category N L . Item 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 00 0 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 261 071 175 094 193 043 080 054 016 431 131 099 041 110 041 137 079 030 001 277 609 166 110 114 028 026 204 081 268 221 081 043 090 014 013 017 113 068 238 025 182 036 278 083 119 119 077 079 159 289 195 096 042 079 148 197 022 148 060 031 003 201 098 129 192 035 123 089 071 107 105 140 235 195 082 190 117 021 106 110 136 043 047 158 194 087 043 334 066 008 045 161 108 265 129 145 066 031 060 010 055 136 252 007 204 078 307 069 057 041 051 129 037 163 060 005 112 006 228 135 046 064 006 113 120 079 052 146 036 044 220 130 017 063 190 049 214 124 273 034 120 089 154 146 073 024 099 141 110 141 137 097 047 158 098 167 166 092 009 028 026 114 162 226 056 195 037 148 264 031 216 180 098 064 109 161 081 091 056 260 058 120 008 024 002 018 103 255 138 208 005 021 161 134 003 031 020 202 071 125 017 088 115 005 137 076 271 328 102 146 012 017 107 043 190 170 014 121 154 165 128 166 065 246 137 050 041 076 050 059 183 026 126 004 115 024 113 170 174 155 050 033 333 061 113 003 262 146 043 211 096 205 209 172 149 105 178 043 445 062 083 063 037 150 367 772 162 073 213 122 173 298 224 402 577 073 036 159 197 039 039 247 100 025 101 003 133 178 073 195 199 126 235 134 189 157 036 050 053 111 103 072 276 113 226 015 205 206 122 034 048 054 064 021 169 087 101 065 108 002 050 137 121 170 034 029 204 126 091 069 064 095 263 051 220 244 313 201 230 043 226 O il 122 174 211 128 044 101 238 166 013 034 196 171 036 151 063 212 161 097 078 021 155 069 002 244 149 121 069 310 029 178 033 083 018 146 037 048 143 079 161 058 138 043 061 083 091 061 236 028 029 124 082 111 236 025 165 086 090 107 102 014 003 050 189 185 166 082 035 263 489 032 098 296 172 301 251 302 261 233 222 119 088 184 038 095 095 113 228 247 151 206 170 194 184 409 300 050 051 083 039 158 167 243 228 234 131 219 294 OSS286 094 039 147 198 210 529 065 221 059 177 015 319 149 195 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 Appendix D 114 D ifferen ce m atrix for ite m s 1 to 33 of the ES sc a le between the Se of c riterio n categories P and CCa , tem 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 116 401 491 041 340 075 135 087 037 213 271 197 053 109 547 085 071 686 165 531 402 074 228 025 164 285 027 087 046 042 031 085 007 ©40 367 063 058 232 151 331 137 005 157 039 128 013 196 038 186 443 133 115 012 315 154 068 189 047 255 032 082 143 264 152 279 307 223 092 030 220 156 075 064 120 097 067 284 120 002 190 102 129 153 178 080 084 042 170 269 327 302 098 308 464 0 22 066 358 265 405 495 328 288 434 ©68 096 012 082 502 104 514 302 293 004 136 079 045 061 048 221 062 018 183 381 141 101 187 077 031 067 281 152 277 008 247 073 210 161 122 050 079 054 159 061 197 235 288 018 120 176 217 156 029 203 040 311 145 385 241 248 174 589 272 106 046 331 067 368 001 070 023 065 040 121 059 269 050 143 090 090 066 233 112 187 254 120 120 243 079 066 068 503 056 112 127 126 056 120 196 066 148 187 134 241 088 360 183 463 207 080 223 121 143 138 126 134 366 051 055 323 050 485 107 015 159 274 084 088 234 035 283 122 124 110 151 424 228 438 139 027 063 376 493 180 249 213 078 028 501 167 064 283 115 088 105 018 209 106 069 004 043 061 041 041 033 195 298 223 033 067 043 034 324 023 108 066 074 163 175 079 288 051 no 024 078 428 291 144 015 187 107 192 225 140 103 372 244 036 155 179 359 ill 043 026 026 187 055 059 212 047 111 368 187 297 311 035 241 018 002 746 133 439 189 205 160 006 274 113 064 299 339 294 431 224 060 202 095 040 364 143 030 037 122 318 159 110 054 202 247 167 111 186 353 245 103 110 242 195 202 164 153 257 145 133 350 147 013 055 144 093 076 052 035 471 039 045 219 295 412 170 147 087 221 034 377 532 414 314 094 202 011 366 038 250 297 107 400 091 244 151 071 087 186 006 117 013 012 107 017 350 047 359 070 237 083 023 118 041 004 256 007 392 221 no 805 074 048 331 094 029 578 315 184 221 012 207 069 228 072 299 032 074 111 594 284 386 214 012 009 322 158 032 052 096 031 721 362 063 317 221 226 050 247 015 027 096 021 164 042 292 133 192 094 155 173 112 458 196 312 142 415 014 204 069 121 027 116 133 331 004 014 053 073 053 063 213 556 239 104 049 170 *> UR O' S' *4 U1 s0 w <*> o tu •si 00 UR e* in 26 371 042 292 163 063 231 290 096 234 309 277 199 2 7 7 343 *> in o in -4 £00 *■* in e* -si >p O m N *4 W *a *4 W O U R ft *•* m m e *4 D ifferen ce m atrix for item s 34 to 44 of the IDS sc a le between the Ss o f c r iter io n c a teg o ries P and CCa. +mmmm Item 34 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 076 231 009 028 143 003 103 263 300 343 217 011 143 126 154 132 134 213 135 263 029 122 078 015 031 010 045 131 042 118 121 408 Sums *4 «4 w mmmwmm «*» 35 36 3? 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 344 017 053 249 287 112 199 057 075 036 323 297 226 194 288 112 153 396 084 023 090 026 142 072 028 104 280 244 007 217 116 033 183 196 062 038 170 144 063 076 155 132 164 131 157 038 099 164 043 121 226 041 345 184 196 017 276 202 220 160 177 012 173 379 032 277 011 023 160 209 157 072 058 271 699 247 330 454 367 697 364 409 288 614 345 344 357 429 451 291 020 085 032 244 143 070 052 023 015 017 005 046 032 267 051 008 048 051 015 024 116 254 176 103 046 253 018 085 048 134 034 352 039 121 003 062 129 227 132 134 019 242 308 341 114 189 021 086 001 042 496 068 145 170 141 091 025 105 009 362 005 132 090 160 100 141 185 182 212 130 140 025 110 137 004 245 272 221 283 207 062 048 090 380 098 038 098 116 196 171 046 223 048 243 098 001 164 083 196 056 103 105 120 066 075 028 112 080 079 049 041 131 151 024 048 190 222 248 182 130 136 044 497 027 156 204 068 161 097 Q60 289 268 440 118 083 222 236 207 085 238 207 373 107 209 090 247 041 310 227 189 104 121 162 078 055 027 291 072 002 120 142 434 177 067 154 184 041 055 096 278 153 224 326 418 028 049 096 269 195 291 098 355 313 165 043 130 154 083 167 068 200 131 014 010 069 060 068 216 247 041 826 020 065 248 058 107 076 489 076 143 109 418 407 045 067 162 066 107 146 184 093 475 082 017 154 047 383 038 170 062 309 200 136 258 027 048 232 116 105 338 154 250 130 321 009 196 197 109 213 274 015 344 305 124 019 008 067 118 044 049 140 146 043 084 003 239 123 224 480 170 048 110 231 557 155 310 500 093 018 317 021 205 100 023 091 201 009 £*8 028 184 177 164 551 019 376 103 432 130 066 268 173 060 005 029 158 378 108 359 288 091 247 053 366 178 124 072 174 122 273 098 240 147 256 170 031 492 007 269 278 001 030 125 447 107 080 016 053 027 190 193 062 028 205 118 349 157 007 576 355 435 425 089 035 047 072 082 062 130 229 035 048 034 098 221 170 143 191 184 242 216 029 209 322 339 177 058 304 164 219 138 494 356 096 366 016 253 180 453 102 241 127 172 395 141 057 111 244 024 046 295 046 067 115 135 279 160 iw 4 oo » ^ 62 63 64 65 66 Difference m atrix fer item s 8T to 98 of the E8 i c t l t between the ga of criterion categoriea P end CCa. lt«m 67 69 69 70 71 n 73 74 75 76 77 79 79 90 91 9E 83 94 95 96 97 99 99 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 99 Som e 67 69 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 88 88 87 88 89 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 109 516 067 197 327 045 197 029 397 051 059 305 119 472 196 235 019 190 000 019 059 640 092 057 019 139 394 115 292 059 252 326 015 011 249 326 066 021 020 112 137 267 124 309 001 291 632 399 019 052 049 394 203 035 149 124 031 159 002 019 053 613 330 476 379 090 172 043 190 210 051 275 1144 277 124 022 277 233 027 390 347 277 329 025 152 095 093 044 111 332 327 529 095 114 290 004 030 005 302 097 031 069 091 019 319 067 067 011 019 153 494 097 009 003 071 066 015 176 053 449 003 195 106 105 003 262 002 150 075 002 301 397 060 094 331 494 090 147 194 322 092 139 300 392 339 514 329 152 146 066 160 009 029 017 009 294 170 021 097 374 109 306 043 047 066 246 146 400 369 029 024 006 076 099 305 352 099 019 310 202 269 165 092 009 229 142 109 292 364 216 249 359 057 157 613 293 025 293 010 291 097 010 066 090 197 141 010 297 330 013 296 699 113 011 047 064 210 293 029 160 029 373 293 029 059 004 011 199 029 123 260 379 299 129 161 112 011 360 140 193 160 020 202 520 020 391 691 203 140 329 099 006 049 199 206 036 296 147 047 415 299 016 101 151 016 244 479 117 04$ 016 431 492 033 103 244 040 330 014 130 292 346 102 009 037 095 403 007 175 037 326 159 299 034 259 334 192 315 202 047 213 166 293 350 254 296 243 047 173 305 171 125 065 211 410 106 011 109 019 396 111 209 147 215 011 155 494 109 162 152 09$ 232 002 375 116 534 064 219 155 229 534 359 262 249 143 293 325 003 025 265 003 359 100 272 266 347 167 099 247 056 127 010 530 005 010 325 054 091 002 010 061 039 442 046 154 295 297 002 403 000 016 004 002 047 005 029 024 034 021 295 166 244 044 111 006 074 505 391 039 014 012 125 117 049 096 349 239 069 031 124 276 034 301 018 004 002 047 008 028 024 034 030 128 087 232 088 188 034 012 822 004 010 280 008 087 293 303 091114 021 008 308 048 008 338 482 028 114 208 022 118 294 400 024 022 878 372 117 111 199 083 034 380 844 398 022 90 91 92 93 94 98 98 97 I S i § § H l i l i * * i * 3 ! 3 5 S 3 | ! 8 l 5 l * Os ft* -9 t*» & *4 9 *> N 9 «•# N U > O u» M » Ut * * & m W S V *: * 90 9 D ifference m atrix for item* I to 33 of the E§ scale between the Sa of criterion categoric* P and CCtr. Item 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 1 2 3 4 5 200 043 208 041 012 108 072 133 301 208 325 001 233 505 223 563 035 124 035 129 088 180 255 227 084 145 202 364 259 176 009 145 040 165 071 075 066 024 313 038 452 257 145 007 281 108 092 371 423 029 118 111 106 201 088 170 263 078 030 008 619 334 219 029 065 117 160 085 171 192 246 027 322 149 210 422 052 188 000 106 174 499 313 345 052 032 309 137 474 190 412 177 245 011 162 395 244 128 036 083 100 292 036 121 017 152 212 124 154 156 028 157 136 372 262 367 016 046 203 030 112 289 208 066 263 227 019 2 5 5 227 084 057 377 229 445 339 178 126 087 164 149 019 105 198 163 077 129 042 209 127 067 O' Soma 3 <* 6 7 8 9 10 U 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 135 211 279 199 079 169 317 370 067 430 129 294 151 032 375 080 187 137 170 070 214 082 022 018 041 043 034 000 279 035 156 322 199 142 099 299 156 082 699 099 064 058 082 279 082 043 233 262 000 076 189 117 099 099 061 085 099 211 190 127 075 138 084 042 065 186 061 022 161 061 373 131 009 075 237 033 049 033 126 048 203 107 268 143 081 021 031 194 078 004 297 109 224 197 078 646 015 470 246 173 236 204 008 029 114 092 044 056 187 275 016 282 011 312 053 005 203 013 044 203 061 218 161 197 004 105 371 028 199 259 066 126 158 022 481 300 056 045 042 088 247 098 268 032 478 117 012 015 139 013 004 497 168 249 044 281 098 169 106 026 181 055 058 099 017 004 025 136 208 010 143 127 450 166 035 459 074 312 016 221 197 204 080 211 413 005 299 114 158 198 062 001 085 085 331 487 044 102 162 220 168 119 190 068 097 059 286 057 286 153 174 106 006 109 126 132 110 378 082 091 121 165 488 207 057 196 293 198 335 383 227 032 340 221 142 409 094 283 009 109 614 107 201 182 203 161 037 106 061 212 314 112 092 232 313 152 007 108 417 061 127 101 193 112 266 420 042 114 141 107 099 135 249 174 035 200 048 111 070 002 161 248 251 125 038 131 097 017 083 080 023 216 418 026 028 372 458 053 251 021 355 231 221 489 019 102 220 025 120 164 048 128 289 245 031 017 235 042 151 186 060 167 258 373 061 072 164 111 387 159 197 052 244 205 578 019 262 199 117 180 019 076 161 2 5 7 191 2 5 8 083 150 331 046 204 206 068 152 341 064 080 27 28 29 30 31 32 152 104 231 185 318 184 009 210 081 215 450 033 170 019 049 026 017 033 018 068 426 33 Difference m atrix for item* 34 to 66 of the ES ecale between the S* of criterion categories P and CCb. Item 34 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 174 055 033 005 440 030 000 046 137 340 035 278 460 113 142 006 028 160 072 044 210 122 065 166 231 475 021 037 227 241 026 323 35 36 37 38 39 296 008 330 060 025 001 160 053 126 126 330 333 207 349 523 508 169 478 103 219 090 086 062 134 172 149 298 095 156 062 177 347 180 081 135 001 002 022 297 178 048 247 468 108 037 102 268 056 115 125 227 350 097 409 036 013 187 143 031 191 128 001 015 403 003 009 016 200 015 001 546 000 278 008 051 301 033 044 001 696 014 019 346 026 354 009 014 426 019 010 023 316 002 241 024 021 486 001 401 003 103 273 073 291 156 303 435 051 020 028 205 345 272 369 222 292 028 018 248 001 104 429 187 158 023 190 246 364 057 099 020 107 251 421 115 148 034 430 101 458 441 145 028 034 251 40 41 001 100 288 009 439 407 037 099 234 201 088 176 178 369 098 139 057 248 352 136 032 153 496 249 307 051 001 001 000 000 000 000 001 000 000 001 001 000 001 001 000 000 001 000 003 000 001 000 001 001 000 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 460 227 232 129 152 013 369 392 423 037 070 000 412 156 096 424 131 193 039 020 102 123 061 032 154 131 107 124 043 408 028 289 206 303 095 007 241 230 262 124 056 009 082 397 028 071 187 053 275 102 181 152 291 193 039 189 002 025 154 108 152 018 314 050 014 484 028 177 103 021 194 045 159 472 151 254 115 020 052 130 153 192 061 143 121 207 064 207 044 230 299 002 062 011 073 197 175 019 001 049 265 028 258 036 260 012 285 027 028 016 096 072 053 099 168 282 007 076 310 104 201 232 237 417 360 Q85 182 201 002 157 450 151 113 247 218 004 177 079 410 304 077 216 026 051 288 175 153 080 247 268 024 058 079 158 089 139 204 155 038 221 324 015 518 060 360 161 114 127 401 122 209 130 193 249 013 327 112 102 080 126 097 230 390 540 001 157 090 057 051 154 105 217 190 225 000 52 53 201 036 063 123 227 270 180 398 307 048 192 432 109 251 045 072 106 236 340 288 295 161 004 345 107 340 166 54 55 56 57 276 117 034 136 387 226 091 196 147 263 353 377 062 025 035 348 270 014 015 125 494 035 166 089 035 047 074 082 062 130 229 035 377 073 343 451 045 159 151 167 073 215 58 59 071 007 398 048 105 015 306 051 180 047 382 438 282 321 104 60 61 62 63 64 65 124 569 421 376 007 179 149 198 039 193 039 119 243 050 048 449 015 072 283 070 051 66 D ifference m atrix for item a 67 to 98 of the ES acale between the Sa of criterion categories JP and CCb. Item 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 Soma 67 68 69 70 71 72 322 172 069 111 206 425 221 253 076 404 129 067 081 014 142 210 046 129 202 123 076 172 012 310 008 200 077 082 095 137 120 485 097 076 248 055 041 164 047 135 408 054 244 036 016 563 150 156 454 180 150 172 012 355 097 302 211 064 074 063 161 308 074 299 216 000 117 047 009 481 165 288 303 324 062 105 292 197 266 188 277 064 261 185 072 025 205 425 065 086 169 183 103 117 409 398 071 193 452 199 083 122 003 165 231 025 020 297 313 323 296 035 023 242 126 156 368 189 458 431 009 388 202 043 200 153 161 019 137 349 208 013 303 207 244 043 157 071 105 298 451 058 274 183 362 232 336 035 088 025 045 020 039 051 252 190 005 038 170 043 399 073 124 291 018 058 328 106 109 133 217 73 74 73 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 341 240 125 471 330 211 273 075 295 104 258 118 165 413 295 033 115 079 002 487 184 307 217 232 246 385 199 296 117 024 131 139 215 065 003 139 111 146 268 076 088 087 183 216 128 160 258 258 299 068 215 105 084 052 003 144 197 265 402 151 188 026 288 062 180 177 137 483 508 265 409 478 081 232 207 129 037 202 098 005 083 043 212 396 122 353 004 005 061 140 287 130 077 004 232 138 112 149 106 267 070 285 257 523 023 484 386 321 214 204 255 184 162 139 208 019 490 212 313 426 002 511 027 343 001 248 010 002 199 035 458 001 009 016 288 013 023 023 106 164 036 044 011 300 231 008 022 248 410 081 208 050 300 025 551 187 191 069 102 299 199 022 327 383 038 180 071 135 030 319 052 336 032 186 366 240 127 234 405 330 203 437 365 155 061 262 183 323 213 200 004 432 525 226 001 805 175 002 161 572 219 379 287 019 003 416 168 440 083 329 410 129 019 056 434 224 259 198 305 344 122 244 213 002 364 263 266 110 051 040 321 013 024 423 311 117 034 162 127 226 075 078 090 297 063 068 148 161 335 296 189 021 485 082 034 206 203 287 178 021 063 011 046 025 072 195 271 323 313 207 021 002 432 001 186 028 286 019 006 467 017 001 211 537 059 009 018 002 168 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 178 199 154 008 006 070 077 285 049 641 027 001 009 343 002 082 090 261 397 063 132 226 038 021 034 230 337 043 041 538 699 046 191 688 263 022 98 Difference m atrixfox item s 1 to 33 of the ES scale between the Ss efcriterio n categories P and N W cem 1 2 3 4 I 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 IS 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 ms 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 193 075 011 032 247 079 041 061 121 280 226 133 119 190 198 055 179 199 271 012 316 072 017 163 301 163 310 233 320 417 103 175 009 092 027 319 039 168 089 040 181 274 145 209 167 095 255 115 214 294 103 152 015 091 086 120 134 282 161 146 120 062 439 067 029 098 229 340 183 135 163 113 335 186 034 126 011 069 313 031 230 332 040 266 171 017 025 053 059 046 362 010 217 Ofl 335 043 123 030 372 342 127 447 130 012 393 129 069 075 155 497 006 089 192 424 418 121 109 304 178 093 150 054 043 122 340 234 202 251 163 034 253 421 044 206 104 028 002 008 158 084 266 033 026 006 081 025 086 125 019 004 122 051 085 103 242 105 161 163 143 075 027 151 085 300 264 159 424 077 140 498 159 014 196 351 139 219 129 063 063 043 074 095 050 023 067 095 129 118 087 033 079 053 118 122 079 075 033 112 253 095 138 102 023 109 029 029 222 126 146 002 198 057 235 028 005 113 054 129 193 373 407 016 247 037 329 114 046 259 354 205 187 044 053 092 347 238 133 099 190 142 215 119 900 153 078 244 255 582 352 110 493 142 in 04 tO ft M e* w **1 U OK k m u> ua to K N 00 -4 -4 ft to £s 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 024 056 270 187 002 172 236 328 063 219 294 028 133 046 263 059 027 018 016 098 210 012 045 086 084 044 130 150 158 137 216 057 014 022 135 201 270 025 151 194 248 154 443 201 081 221 124 253 162 222 030 275 171 061 154 119 071 190 216 250 294 051 088 220 036 095 401 075 440 052 032 113 111 490 185 126 228 222 089 111 038 085 314 143 040 218 084 124 178 233 028 198 151 166 368 409 214 171 053 178 127 103 546 289 064 116 526 239 087 130 012 322 132 297 075 217 008 074 154 156 242 003 ©01 016 281 363 116 209 2 57 236 073 353 103 586 015 453 072 056 383 169 294 070 261 185 ©32 157 362 092 020 227 008 016 120 251 088 087 181 055 104 234 174 018 046 411 127 257 151 016 ©87 154 155 256 015 006 215 161 088 208 079 044 014 184 213 137 017 212 181 074 140 132 196 325 446 105 079 455 147 162 U -4K eis s£> ilt $ fv> o UK to s Ul «4 UK t 14 U m»f N> 14 «lt © 0% u? ife v» *4 0k II* 4*; sO ** *4( ft 0S N<* 30 21 31 32 062 225 039 172 495 262 039 328 331 279 038 os> 179 174 339 121 092 112 283 113 298 0K UK UK g N msp UK in •*j ob O' in yi © 0S UK to e ft U> ft e* to w e Ob #s Ah, in* ft, M On 33 Difference m atrix for item s 34 to 66 of the ES scale between the Ss of criterion categories P and NL. Item 34 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 230 246 025 296 318 166 097 021 150 652 097 246 401 527 475 310 139 045 123 168 059 025 245 124 116 151 308 027 290 027 504 138 35 36 37 38 313 120 306 236 165 067 057 204 101 029 146 157 533 285 037 166 034 044 024 230 159 256 080 115 198 135 196 116 227 142 202 185 003 499 217 062 060 077 328 227 494 401 095 281 184 179 172 103 199 263 219 062 223 319 06? 126 048 073 273 110 036 256 366 134 081 181 224 040 399 113 283 129 052 195 042 137 733 005 077 081 050 008 005 277 024 241 078 037 081 059 185 010 265 387 005 303 036 136 068 040 086 169 094 211 061 028 152 000 072 342 120 003 162 067 187 306 064 020 39 40 41 44 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 255 092 027 228 487 114 139 137 259 014 252 050 157 080 246 062 022 065 129 465 152 181 276 300 142 101 015 110 121 001 082 225 398 027 160 310 029 019 371 067 198 176 006 082 276 005 063 100 023 090 486 420 012 190 230 097 041 041 064 035 097 161 221 190 080 113 041 015 064 021 127 026 083 050 069 393 434 094 015 029 132 084 283 088 248 012 080 062 150 088 158 052 O55 373 325 026 074 340 105 071 405 084 114 082 045 131 091 039 052 118 057 086 059 282 042 271 192 044 213 313 114 086 356 333 132 105 081 038 416 104 080 039 250 137 080 117 305 212 146 245 119 064 082 135 111 217 146 335 176 371 066 117 058 254 433 126 162 089 249 033 210 015 167 051 348 005 003 076 127 272 336 268 058 127 075 130 452 008 088 262 242 001 233 059 458 156 060 052 200 039 248 091 084 171 120 404 374 107 168 103 113 230 244 294 371 097 330 219 023 048 310 387 421 037 202 165 433 391 093 369 175 017 239 212 166 053 139 148 141 283 048 007 123 262 045 057 080 064 130 100 410 208 130 006 052 146 119 283 337 168 289 122 033 269 123 152 009 285 080 114 186 058 021 091 026 166 037 067 071 099 053 048 i m 52 032 113 042 202 133 064 088 209 232 040 240 195 195 044 298 53 177 058 167 064 045 051 324 231 204 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 122 309 017 030 096 003 038 051 258 272 015 244 081 334 059 203 020 049 019 282 299 025 405 080 045 474 165 073 011 303 061 521 268 133 000 235 043 017 010 193 107 195 016 306 013 131 155 080 230 216 052 404 022 008 112 066 264 009 031 146 036 186 024 417 010 293 147 078 019 100 042 151 140 021 012 179 073 292 174 118 067 242 361 i in #«* ««i Iin 66 D ifference m atrix for item * 67 to 98 o f the ES ecale between the Se of criterion categories P end NLItem 67 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 67 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 116 191 094 191 221 021 175 041 287 245 076 198 133 226 139 200 023 330 080 333 741 262 011 213 028 496 050 176 004 353 337 253 043 093 092 122 011 039 016 099 147 189 356 268 207 243 326 217 034 293 184 248 007 270 074 144 018 195 205 185 051 107 029 249 323 005 135 263 090 101 293 089 163 004 153 152 02? 026 063 271 122 134 171 034 074 037 256 467 189 276 284 175 174 085 316 164 142 068 018 129 180 057 260 095 439 123 288 088 159 139 387 052 058 082 382 015 209 083 054 325 007 098 045 293 112 072 259 200 047 151 11? 015 182 058 412 239 136 066 045 247 100 161 034 282 224 209 250 061 282 190 233 006 042 393 013 376 187 027 056 308 125 254 018 166 028 065 005 029 483 056 249 149 077 092 210 409 214 162 040 358 371 153 041 072 239 156 039 087 398 034 086 207 048 233 016 085 078 348 015 121 222 032 017 009 236 032 327 125 022 051 242 115 159 174 240 274 065 132 048 145 202 268 271 320 124 240 090 028 024 072 005 360 062 170 213 055 198 080 021 273 059 125 017 173 045 229 096 122 128 362 011 011 000 177 230 020 253 012 174 092 533 167 348 210 110 164 021 190 115 313 330 135 409 183 586 099 024 078 148 231 128 285 080 231 469 109 359 204 323 207 465 240 391 070 149 245 206 203 016 067 084 030 375 210 301 060 247 281 183 220 145 132 194 143 318 013 001 010 431 172 008 006 010 096 165 135 21? 052 291 089 193 045 522 189 262 360 262 026 318 439 350 082 238 245 077 229 140 025 022 235 054 128 070 131 24? 275 074 041 163 004 208 011 212 131 076 420 046 201 276 324 052 123 001 190 143 045 013 473 012 037 203 034 180 009 117 049 034 046 361 032 157 159 068 014 084 248 125 187 235 209 341 249 022 069 424 005 071 277 130 344 545 999 056 338 048 061 285 358 295 289 385 167 002 038 250 145 290 374 434 050 009 069 068 263 034 018 216 020 592 245 323 342 329 035 298 169 122 442 155 158 126 049 022 005 121 100 230 045 208 278 399 114 399 381 275 98 D ifference m atrix for item s I to 33 at the ES aeale between the S e-o i criterion categoric* CCa and CCb. Item 1 2 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 IS 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 2$ 29 30 31 32 33 034 019 450 113 015 630 047 232 046 200 101 009 075 061 072 252 175 264 009 463 010 469 320 127 192 002 005 140 103 220 012 044 191 027 234 002 093 052 051 106 203 252 249 072 135 321 036 065 134 056 176 062 232 023 050 225 205 336 236 345 034 240 222 Sum* to to w 260 042 074 001 163 334 260 132 070 435 226 174 286 369 442 198 121 239 116 025 132 444 W"1 220 088 154 014 08$ 215 100 099 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 4 5 6 7 $ 9 10 11 12 13 14 256 403 031 131 006 570 182 321 135 233 098 125 183 067 502 241 040 313 329 117 018 293 158 005 179 224 226 145 310 158 012 017 O il 148 007 214 152 240 269 073 055 137 316 213 312 212 162 071 003 323 227 028 204 321 269 089 149 021 182 076 159 390 825 067 119 181 252 460 022 257 07$ 044 013 181 136 090 047 277 042 099 041 228 093 177 890 369 031 077 434 012 112 021 419 399 161 765 167 467 802 030 406 042 013 353 45$ 066 072 376 017 042 ©11 299 ©98 364 ©05 110 096 046 005 222 084 199 180 112 077 162 111 112 23$ 024 044 037 117 137 247 161 331 081 017 15$ 294 343 249 507 054 ©51 067 079 384 044 052 28$ 78$ 043 131 079 237 047 089 096 134 096 301 150 125 183 232 845 241 040 345 142 293 01$ 020 023 16© ©95 106 072 089 0 62 ©31 20$ 204 100 029 117 236 182 056 ©53 009 200 060 135 019 855 127 128 135 126 138 04$ 170 318 372 115 540 142 223 149 227 039 043 153 085 187 132 355 212 052 237 007 148 564 143 296 062 245 326 051 184 039 376 315 11$ 097 237 144 271 211 09© 439 479 005 168 025 121 233 084 221 541 246 155 005 109 354 234 055 044 113 183 093 259 182 023 010 002 451 083 114 115 067 039 165 096 1 08 331 139 23$ 239 232 040 272 241 313 128 171 000 410 138 273 189 350 044 329 219 196 266 119 374 190 029 030 036 227 124 190 055 156 140 243 112 191 064 119 306 147 234 390 401 302 606 222 039 032 20? 002 302 011 005 074 001 084 101 12? 145 298 336 038 241 ©15 220 086 110 348 434 065 331 067 102 230 27? 173 189 115 115 179 063 131 025 025 183 183 231 192 003 327 244 061 251 315 182 077 101 089 091 017 09$ 164 491 002 587 20? 454 185 131 076 212 239 23$ 114 086 145 $03 30? 003 054 030 101 041 08$ 145 125 139 274 046 041 087 083 268 106 176 £ m o *► VI e* •4 0s to VI •4 t 3 VI m «4 to 0s to *4 to 00 00 O i** y*» t*) to to *4 VI t to *** cK u* m sto to *9 to tw it m m © to to to 0s fw to t I Vi to 27 28 29 204 008 264 368 164 041 128 307 073 115 141 215 041 044 320 352 060 300 081 345 083 m •4 30 31 32 2* *■* 9b 33 I m D ifference m atrix for item s 34 to 66 of the ES scale between the S» of criterion categories 6Ca .and CCb. Item 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 Sum s S 34 39 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 48 46 47 098 176 048 012 009 314 023 383 363 013 297 191 115 030 003 027 302 073 024 401 200 103 113 037 035 034 135 009 217 039 172 268 003 070 125 047 163 110 166 005 019 077 183 091 348 003 051 234 009 049 148 018 380 147 521 182 090 254 007 216 037 077 098 208 116 025 267 007 107 210 024 020 402 038 036 071 220 028 317 036 115 389 416 128 169 098 433 305 075 290 231 013 019 314 071 020 375 189 115 380 153 110 224 214 030 296 155 023 336 108 137 074 196 151 190 224 036 309 035 126 235 120 279 310 075 101 171 180 332 293 181 052 199 162 620 140 750 041 233 053 047 376 076 073 059 899 085 053 016 367 054 024 001 009 222 003 046 181 101 177 075 207 082 108 297 107 135 004 048 242 136 244 198 077 193 307 019 072 410 295 057 581 242 371 268 179 185 267 427 239 197 004 368 387 080 032 099 214 219 042 009 059 099 000 000 001 001 000 001 001 000 001 000 000 000 000 000 013 060 309 378 035 041 082 164 012 252 292 001 189 047 181 080 342 428 004 013 138 084 364 118 110 109 517 182 200 062 225 058 321 344 215 196 198 041 037 126 182 270 465 144 232 586 599 102 140 059 330 054 410 211 107 407 066 045 032 009 448 416 297 103 163 551 229 267 151 355 094 018 069 353 382 055 119 106 026 035 139 338 430 051 266 149 363 371 176 113 274 120 192 133 260 050 122 285 123 149 251 003 545 173 032 077 170 186 354 197 008 318 095 279 031 470 010 204 100 076 300 149 241 025 095 057 085 293 049 031 093 110 Oil 028 131 349 076 535 154 199 48 49 109 218 204 273 228 008 092 089 091 064 060 254 123 000 000 242 229 419 007 108 237 120 325 325 041 329 018 325 201 303 209 029 038 020 185 50 51 52 S3 54 55 56 57 58 59 312 051 117 430 246 000 291 223 211 068 008 122 212 076 171 153 088 278 362 356 000 321 641 076 427 041 537 347 024 043 083 141 041 034 000 151 162 179 {119 398 199 145 066 287 174 027 102 001 509 242 428 441 094 174 214 385 333 118 002 000 004 011 060 333 011 080 050 290 163 161 000 053 240 466 619 143 008 601 139 470 330 000 000 000 002 000 000 000 000 000 000 107 441 230 215 016 040 017 315 342 100 202 076 387 072 043 002 016 399 091 112 082 378 045 60 129 389 032 274 234 Oil 105 61 023 296 018 217 149 62 63 64 65 022 132 194 094 1 5 4 031 210 488 209 211 66 D ifferen ce m atrix for item s 67 to 98 of the ES s c a le between the Ss of criterio n catego ries CCa and CCb* 6? 68 49 70 71 72 73 74 7S 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 172 111 221 129 210 172 082 076 135 363 172 064 299 481 105 064 425 117 199 025 035 189 053 349 043 058 035 031 043 058 177 310 320 130 281 033 282 277 021 201 046 231 098 307 106 026 083 229 083 002 035 182 292 067 175 136 306 137 107 270 323 399 096 140 061 189 121 075 176 243 074 267 412 111 183 195 234 276 315 090 382 547 190 036 134 099 221 232 104 386 059 411 338 356 420 334 282 054 071 093 252 009 138 446 195 025 035 107 018 219 044 382 033 070 147 219 016 186 012 132 358 164 049 066 022 305 077 319 114 112 215 025 074 305 163 321 086 218 280 385 464 049 282 136 147 143 082 129 069 299 214 111 097 053 274 057 105 3 i2 156 298 076 185 077 338 120 158 051 317 212 105 249 101 175 079 009 303 055 227 159 038 098 127 136 396 305 173 255 058 089 113 076 001 174 185 180 139 053 696 252 005 107 145 139 035 302 213 123 127 052 127 180 242 265 224 100 018 149 024 065 148 033 253 027 105 616 100 222 018 412 140 102 016 222 028 017 036 147 186 178 242 123 210 032 221 160 193 173 091 079 175 055 416 071 368 063 349 015 204 089 017 027 248 221 132 u* © •a eo u» to -y © to >o o* £ •4 & u* © w I£ i 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 305 116 074 125 166 190 113 060 002 037 204 065 370 011 286 527 128 192 015 004 488 119 244 019 027 383 024 119 044 053 307 009 024 128 362 086 002 337 136 395 015 073 447 245 366 249 334 234 237 170 124 271 149 019 033 315 023 138 324 351 204 038 335 148 177 401 179 596 270 229 150 262 019 219 511 290 150 144 216 222 017 161 365 115 226 434 465 110 533 741 395 153 067 038 139 117 039 162 296 091 171 286 182 332 051 229 291 322 087 ©17 358 049 249 471 112 916 218 012 039 317 185 108 061 101 232 429 022 477 016 180 036 285 127 242 079 080 046 302 035 044 114 140 040 130 055 075 374 076 108 299 178 325 164 009 062 106 002 121 277 043 339 292 189 483 013 299 115 024 021 514 005 565 015 036 402 430 054 040 007 514 011 004 285 090 111 166 268 097 062 039 174 234 019 019 213 327 049 210 *4 N £ 3 *tit•* © W 3 m m £ ■s 3 s £ a O ' «sj g 071 026 101 211 236 074 230 305 055 003 043 in Ut sO S On 0v *% ! © Ut fr-* £ w 92 ut £ 93 o> s 94 95 •a -4 © 8 * «n © 97 2 w o 98 Ii Difference m atrix for item * 1 to 33 of the ES eeale between theJS* of criterion categories CCa and NL . tern 2 077 137 502 073 093 004 094 024 158 493 045 054 142 081 349 030 108 487 104 3 002 132 085 340 230 402 209 019 452 044 248 042 153 291 085 318 007 249 038 012 399 170 044 039 043 082 193 059 273 077 051 028 313 149 221 332 017 084 017 203 144 027 113 211 224 098 138 240 251 445 188 107 122 055 047 283 329 223 144 094 210 344 114 373 375 202 040 134 205 108 090 175 091 00 o 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 14 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 24 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 1 e* W ima > 0 1O I *> 4 5 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 343 313 338 023 019 034 235 239 022 027 235 047 118 027 021 033 125 143 023 389 389 153 220 553 307 154 078 112 201 094 250 017 241 309 161 012 159 147 223 237 080 080 288 079 374 304 405 088 231 054 087 022 132 055 355 080 144 105 053 225 059 104 031 104 058 297 052 099 025 077 077 003 138 051 001 141 041 414 382 084 444 240 107 245 137 013 031 423 197 373 405 283 247 056 237 577 182 021 021 154 041 124 240 249 047 051 159 254 035 129 217 178 135 348 105 114 044 582 253 205 345 414 006 216 241 308 208 225 003 000 000 161 005 249 213 382 144 054 004 074 412 062 279 093 042 094 212 078 005 130 248 344 184 118 071 288 124 070 047 423 094 040 093 301 117 339 035 221 019 078 291 026 082 152 205 144 191 094 153 123 144 094 041 143 320 048 154 054 074 232 283 061 031 003 184 254 313 317 319 194 019 018 108 240 145 043 088 410 053 055 185 226 051 953 112 031 245 130 824 198 044 187 091 021 048 148 195 259 234 134 210 120 054 054 080 237 212 272 144 473 £ 7 111 045 107 147 & S £ 00 O' i £ S3 u t S g e•4 S3 N Is)O § is $ 14 237 094 044 141 242 203 111 084 014 290 170 04f 039 295 034 143 064 213 072 112 028 144 279 013 152 284 03f 047 020 024 040 341 429 133 101 172 175 002 329 118 206 349 114 163 040 334 229 047 047 034 017 131 046 207 tv $ O 4* 3 fc t t § 17 IS If 20 21 22 23 24 25 24 2? 28 130 051 100 260 202 031 237 245 201 054 024 2f 30 31 044 227 I 6 f 134 008 24f 233 090 140 140 344 087 111 021 067 041 014 133 132 263 019 070 123 063 101 023 293 086 261 104 204 305 967 045 304 016 066 059 370 226 228 207 051 006 068 211 054 042 057 021 398 041 064 017 336 464 174 004 118 173 061 203 226 010 024 011 095 053 088 209 187 076 001 003 144 052 264 087 024 243 047 246 185 004 161 090 129 126 674 095 285 182 022 328 109 105 286 214 027 040 041 172 167 071 291 222 252 084 056 099 468 188 ss *4 i y» £ S u» $*-* I £ * s § 175 117 066 m 3it* 8 S I 045 207 120 138 578 090 156 089 484 i 3 'in s in 32 33 Difference m atrix to r item* 34 to 64 of the E8-«cale between the Ss-ofjcriterion categoric* CCa and H E. Item 34 33 36 3? 33 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 39 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 154 015 016 268 175 163 200 284 150 309 314 235 258 401 021 442 005 258 258 095 030 097 167 139 135 141 353 138 332 091 624 270 031 1 37 289 306 141 065 175 023 121 166 106 031 137 022 069 045 120 020 140 305 048 103 127 006 157 109 212 150 145 097 303 270 248 008 094 128 401 029 053 109 093 094 127 134 095 164 209 030 003 008 089 122 068 147 186 320 236 009 220 157 483 079 116 143 002 118 187 204 025 269 337 113 257 048 747 211 249 055 419 036 314 433 207 249 309 258 296 357 289 227 009 370 012 012 092 072 447 054 516 162 268 365 031 O il 130 105 147 046 007 265 057 641 040 186 018 595 049 055 207 042 061 124 448 007 142 199 388 213 120 184 138 162 062 279 096 254 150 379 153 139 220 368 003 069 126 201 146 106 091 137 393 159 070 150 129 159 186 115 410 306 134 107 166 142 067 145 249 131 203 213 074 142 320 477 057 003 034 150 099 332 025 033 128 130 057 016 228 063 233 030 186 055 051 459 509 066 127 109 211 134 324 219 097 012 032 128 072 336 024 078 081 229 163 052 082 136 037 232 308 024 175 186 395 013 174 183 184 089 028 152 266 091 065 052 102 213 172 803 112 103 252 202 030 183 026 286 065 080 125 102 176 129 078 174 159 040 292 101 2 f6 220 257 291 050 205 151 049 028 095 105 050 300 023 023 047 215 221 071 080 089 362 437 005 211 066 173 229 46 47 059 046 266 089 156 227 394 884 275 107 009 172 304 118 038 110 421 041 064 164 060 227 215 166 141 144 286 124 178 359 069 051 095 121 507 127 355 007 084 48 49 267 209 071 164 158 205 138 048 084 267 165 213 014 035 151 156 017 035 086 195 088 104 137 478 083 038 175 291 007 254 324 132 070 016 139 50 51 178 104 071 179 162 411 214 274 242 161 033 163 255 048 581 307 185 194 412 054 036 064 503 223 229 178 013 100 316 127 107 52 53 54 55 56 37 58 59 60 028 108 023 078 245 127 271 079 323 287 293 171 017 419 249 116 083 209 307 189 479 025 034 117 477 074 017 156 131 012 110 251 110 118 067 175 271 144 094 042 021 221 400 648 318 080 273 166 302 146 064 022 127 027 080 051 069 039 035 033 063 141 204 160 050 084 O il 056 157 277 196 167 123 185 067 328 077 350 058 023 442 224 344 387 065 044 051 251 048 020 61 62 63 64 65 194 131 093 317 202 120 123 065 119 002 220 037 037 202 521 66 D ifference m atrix far item e 6 7 t o 98 i o ~ 4 © o 2 ! s ! 033 027 580 067 178 005 014 177 247 830 502 031 333 064 038 123 270 362 635 ^ U U S | 2 © <5 *Oi *■* m w w ** * it* H gI M ft JS 98 D ifferen ce m atrix for ite m s 1 to 33 o f the ES sc a le between the Se of criterio n ca teg o ries CCb and NL^ Item 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 0 9 Id 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 007 118 052 040 078 642 047 206 112 205 226 025 237 020 421 2 22 067 223 097 020 096 323 117 011 273 204 198 006 263 595 122 046 217 105 106 320 074 012 113 105 115 017 237 098 096 239 095 142 162 205 204 045 259 201 298 037 170 007 142 231 236 043 397 175 272 135 371 085 181 175 139 032 036 292 111 093 096 391 123 342 093 087 088 230 295 119 021 069 196 275 274 208 008 087 170 008 104 229 537 029 120 024 071 018 422 042 080 075 190 023 005 053 213 270 048 324 043 077 267 247 313 073 180 007 256 058 273 203 118 005 165 413 021 014 106 134 054 198 004 002 283 123 288 036 082 109 253 024 284 073 013 160 194 302 163 275 156 207 076 355 156 445 236 332 111 239 237 214 020 268 371 066 218 369 098 176 095 063 342 008 230 517 249 119 032 394 017 036 786 132 015 005 036 501 003 032 200 385 253 019 050 219 122 010 090 056 123 085 044 129 123 081 151 070 070 073 112 151 032 212 034 115 256 112 092 081 003 226 228 253 397 063 215 235 262 217 102 095 268 138 082 228 312 044 003 402 240 112 106 283 247 062 016 027 384 279 046 128 423 053 079 063 305 340 080 051 058 046 071 221 077 120 029 209 049 019 287 072 069 109 224 011 058 079 467 278 079 246 228 ©63 096 ©96 020 186 035 083 093 206 263 266 166 275 198 026 219 220 252 050 035 216 035 295 352 048 105 216 061 041 189 085 297 075 482 279 156 031 111 438 244 001 108 093 042 126 009 138 379 332 242 074 116 232 057 123 482 673 412 307 052 049 221 059 063 171 559 230 224 193 240 086 087 256 006 213 006 165 032 595 090 017 033 029 256 210 058 180 012 165 219 174 030 204 ’413 132 039 177 109 170 063 164 231 062 495 112 058 025 005 263 301 119 334 115 100 248 193 099 095 195 236 116 023 133 019 130 220 009 085 371 010 122 186 019 094 082 050 054 313 036 171 236 152 120 028 112 008 213 063 412 292 177 102 212 166 060 494 046 085 123 328 052 008 023 170 139 037 227 089 142 220 260 219 168 091 185 308 108 146 328 067 130 190 090 111 073 063 039 294 157 101 172 003 382 022 075 183 597 027 109 184 109 079 018 033 064 260 142 261 091 030 184 w sw nS w i0D ut w o 09 a «4 t> *— ut *4 * to I ut Sums •fc 2 Ut ut £ oe ut o I* 00 Ut w o O *- CO & w 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 029 025 074 147 059 109 035 164 062 170 311 108 128 248 076 509 038 169 132 226 020 012 072 165 144 180 139 258 U !*■> * ut s►ut* \© 5- 2 55 •4 33 Difference m atrix for item* 34 to 66 of tire ES scale between tire Se of criterion categories CCb and N L, Item 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 Sums 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 056 091 017 028 128 041 291 094 015 066 122 117 123 086 006 136 171 022 130 031 007 097 048 165 037 046 093 111 067 136 229 150 015 131 021 189 013 133 137 182 111 201 289 229 475 312 070 181 213 121 300 073 097 256 346 132 076 363 018 013 044 214 041 003 070 158 032 113 014 059 078 162 009 041 098 324 194 314 059 005 021 052 100 327 010 064 109 292 140 370 172 414 112 187 184 182 013 259 035 051 021 235 326 270 296 317 177 111 079 160 350 076 097 248 373 048 093 398 121 376 316 304 025 231 046 195 230 l 6 l 168 148 371 355 279 195 427 167 575 024 003 010 049 106 022 344 013 232 099 015 190 109 205 104 158 265 035 137 195 189 131 018 211 000 070 084 197 051 112 078 048 023 027 111 080 170 016 052 418 249 111 137 212 121 075 355 190 005 171 112 055 002 078 106 149 113 203 269 502 004 051 240 359 274 042 190 128 092 214 051 328 041 097 048 090 037 046 093 133 915 079 065 151 041 141 064 035 180 163 431 064 028 213 025 064 069 304 320 096 353 003 086 042 057 274 005 269 163 028 022 035 220 006 159 290 033 385 065 056 372 275 264 035 357 127 036 162 263 149 016 129 087 324 013 056 239 042 051 073 029 278 118 433 158 037 124 016 287 054 288 318 008 277 132 083 081 554 014 046 027 177 153 064 230 147 095 200 165 130 051 110 148 068 258 170 119 201 066 001 352 075 194 255 405 069 229 030 349 412 173 379 034 214 004 031 354 050 170 235 392 062 438 083 202 129 189 049 530 182 188 181 039 135 113 533 008 361 040 041 032 298 037 185 010 434 248 038 236 063 094 155 309 249 307 037 328 013 w S w ^ <*» 4k ^ sO 133 386 090 122 155 175 062 225 019 137 520 151 161 212 128 079 175 159 096 098 127 042 046 157 058 194 011 115 254 108 071 268 159 017 116 169 576 149 598 011 022 079 066 094 060 280 109 092 014 189 087 075 034 088 118 148 037 092 273 304 044 047 222 014 183 300 065 239 080 070 208 097 019 249 224 154 132 017 099 291 223 129 157 125 027 019 480 042 074 019 066 029 461 088 328 039 169 313 064 022 127 029 083 051 069 039 035 094 044 300 327 434 006 055 243 034 264 044 113 028 024 249 330 196 049 049 033 330 326 313 096 146 106 165 355 230 017 028 171 166 075 100 101 098 255 129 024 156 189 190 286 172 310 Difference m atrix for item s 67 to 96 of the ES scale between the Se of criterion categories CCb and N b . item 67 67 68 49 70 71 72 73 74 75 74 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 322 172 111 221 129 210 172 082 076 135 563 172 064 299 481 105 064 425 117 199 025 033 189 043 349 043 058 035 051 043 058 Sm as £» 00 185 015 347 124 175 033 270 289 121 095 064 024 083 061 153 061 088 079 003 353 718 196 211 005 129 222 038 076 403 025 o 088 329 038 036 218 025 066 015 172 246 084 189 644 071 021 157 072 095 331 535 615 401 020 119 109 119 172 268 099 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 219 037 095 037 129 374 239 319 360 071 016 010 177 091 165 082 155 338 100 072 110 181 239 191 079 079 087 147 609 077 076 201 011 210 265 014 144 189 257 206 154 003 136 425 2 28 283 265 307 295 139 093 367 014 233 215 458 062 306 036 038 175 204 172 036 231 389 277 156 252 184 145 251 217 319 302 039 097 175 104 663 033 241 079 091 189 106 003 023 136 013 294 025 112 123 018 308 334 072 106 058 179 059 053 235 398 218 320 204 325 366 070 118 288 292 027 207 270 103 016 2 28 282 283 240 142 144 111 004 297 345 099 102 129 102 036 181 013 059 119 083 417 372 034 006 271 071 056 145 190 341 530 316 157 363 240 058 033 145 028 070 146 150 119 311 059 076 246 103 094 033 088 068 292 230 025 174 019 083 310 069 127 006 129 160 274 350 022 255 290 199 086 156 266 173 162 038 022 o u> Ut O $ ft m tu ut u» m * ut u» in ut not tftk !£ 039 237 038 220 078 108 532 142 013 410 834 014 150 089 045 O il 360 314 481 679 *4 O w ilk. 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 025 069 190 104 000 227 269 124 117 132 07© 253 037 179 028 004 157 540 095 402 058 015 272 118 375 283 008 048 173 339 168 318 146 213 099 197 204 162 329 048 253 126 253 026 158 211 443 355 251 226 127 034 271 078 112 197 477 005 037 261 445 087 024 157 133 131 297 049 264 080 187 028 462 137 399 163 230 182 142 222 248 213 078 253 343 147 001 085 133 089 304 262 121 182 460 120 311 147 233 168 162 021 311 139 263 128 044 273 306 180 019 183 115 026 528 032 138 417 ©96 050 ©42 068 100 057 £ 04 «f6 2 S2 ut $ in & 87 230 278 238 024 094 352 200 342 046 138 351 88 90 91 92 93 95 96 97 524 055 366 029 528 386 179 304 291 ut ut 89 353 128 284 190029 032 223049 371 233 060 272 259 100 066 257 322 139 021 121 331 104 333 045 056 000 292 356 095014 218 038 249 260 300 266 069 037 026 075 077 289 018 297 Oft Ut o *> 0D Ut ut ■** ft g ft £ g U» fu ft . . ft ©