M
f

SELF-ESTEEM AS RELATED TO AMOUNT
AND LEVEL OF AGGRESSIVE AND
SEXUAL THEMATIC CONTENT

Thesis for the Degree of M. A.
MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY
CLEASON 3. DIETZEL
1970

 

‘1 We: 1W

LIBRARY ’-

'Michigan State
, University

 
 
  

7 ,mf‘ ; —

.  ' ' III IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII I III

3\I\1293 00005 8218

 
   
   

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

OVERDUE FINES ARE 25C DER DAY
PER LIFM

Return to book drop to remove
this checkout from your record. “x

"

 

 

 

 

ABSTRACT

SELF-ESTEEM AS RELATED TO AMOUNT
AND LEVEL OF AGGRESSIVE AND
SEXUAL THEMATIC CONTENT

BY

Cleason S. Dietzel

Various research studies have failed to support
earlier assumptions that underlying drives are directly
expressed in TAT fantasy behavior. The evidence points
rather to the operation of certain mediating processes
which intervene between the impulse and its overt mani-
festations.

The present study was designed to examine the
level of drive mediation in TAT productions and to study
the relationship between these mediational processes and
the individual's level of self-esteem. The concept of
"regression in the service of the ego" was utilized to
make predictions concerning the level of drive expression,
drive integration, and drive‘modulation in the thematic
productions and their relationship to level of self-

esteem.

Cleason S. Dietzel

Ninety-one subjects (g5) wrote stories to selected
TAT cards and responded to a self-concept inventory. TAT
protocols were rated for: (1) total amount of projected
sexual and aggressive drive content, (2) degree of drive
integration, and (3) degree of drive socialization.
Tetrachoric correlational coefficients between the the-
matic drive ratings and the self—concept inventory scores
were computed.

The major findings were as follows:

(1) Individuals with high self-esteem produce
TAT stories with higher levels of sexual and agressive
drive content. High self-esteem §§ also display higher
levels of drive integration and drive socialization in
their thematic productions.

(2) Individuals with low self-esteem produce TAT
stories with lower levels of sexual and aggressive drive
content. These low self-esteem gs tend also to either
(a) produce highly descriptive, banal stories with little
direct drive expression, or (b) develop stories with
higher levels of poorly-integrated, blatantly-unsocialized
drive expression.

These findings were interpreted as supporting the
assumptions surrounding the role of "regression in the
service of the ego" in the projective process. The impli-
cations of using this concept as a basis for a "process

theory" of the TAT were discussed.

Cleason S. Dietzel

(3) Male and female §§ did not differ signifi-
cantly in the level of drive expression or drive control
on the TAT. In addition, there were no sex differences
in level of self-esteem. Female §§ followed the major
trends between thematic behavior and self-esteem as
reported above. Male SE, however, obtained correlations
between self-esteem scores and drive socialization ratings
which were not in the hypothesized directions. A post hoc
analysis suggested that "adaptive" males projected more
drive with slightly lower levels of socialization which,
because of the limitations of the scoring procedure, were

rated as unsocialized rather than socialized drive content.

 

 

When these drive content ratings were re-rated as social-
ized, significant correlations in the hypotheSized direc-
tions were obtained.

(4) Several measures of ego control on the TAT
were found to be related to the degree of defensiveness
on the self-concept inventory. Level of thematic drive
integration was directly related to defensiveness

(r = .22, p < .05), whereas amount of total drive con-

t
tent was inversely related to defensiveness (rt = -.19)
p < .10). Level of drive socialization was not signif-
icantly related to defensiveness although the trend was
in the expected direction (rt = .12). These findings
were discussed as supporting Allport's (1965) views that

§§ are able to impose similar levels of control on pro-

jective and non-projective tests.

Cleason S. Dietzel

It was also pointed out that the present findings
represent one of the few reported studies where scores on
a projective technique were found to be related, in signi-
ficant ways, to scores on a paper-and-pencil test.

Future research was considered with an emphasis
on utilizing the Pine Drive Content Manual in a study

relating fantasy behavior to overt b havior.

Approved NM [Abe/LIA

Chairman, Thesis Committee

Date A fiIt’ (AV (3 7 0

 

 

Thesis Committee

Dr. Norman Abeles, Chairman
Dr. A. I. Rabin
Dr. Joseph Reyher

SELF-ESTEEM AS RELATED TO AMOUNT
AND LEVEL OF AGGRESSIVE AND

SEXUAL THEMATIC CONTENT

BY

2‘

Cleason waDietzel

A THESIS

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

MASTER OF ARTS
Department of Psychology

1970

J

(p) {VA “7
L)- (.l- r20

I

A

To my wife, Louise,
who was a constant source of hOpe and
encouragement during the
entire project.

ii

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

I would like to express my deepest appreciation to
Dr. Norman Abeles, my thesis committee chairman, for his
creative conceptualizations which served as a catalyst for
the study and for his guidance, encouragement, patience,
and insights during the entire project. I would also like
to sincerely thank Dr. A. I. Rabin and Dr. Joseph Rehyer
for their valuable suggestions and support.

And to Dr. L. Messé, who was willing to allow me
valuable class time to collect the thesis data, a heart-
felt thank you. A special word of thanks also goes to
John Phillips, a fellow graduate student and friend, who
assisted with the scoring of the thematic protocols.

I would also like to thank the girls in the Graduate
Research Office, Department of Psychology, for their excel-

lent typing services.

iii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Chapter
INTRODUCTION 0 O O O I O O O O O 0 O

The Question of Individual Controls on
Projective Techniques . . . . . . .
Ego Control Operations, Drive Expression, and
Projective Test Performance . . . . .

Personality Determinant of Adaptive Regres-
sion: The Individual's Self-Evaluations

or Level of Self-Esteem . . . . . .

Hypotheses to be Tested . . . . . . .

METHOD 0 O O O I O O O O O O O O 0

Subjects . . .
The Instruments. . . . . . . . . .
Procedures . . . . . . . . . . .

RESULTS. . . . . . . . . . . . . .
General Findings . . . . . . . . .
Sex Differences. . . . . . . . . .
Defensiveness . . . . . . . . . .
DISCUSSION. . . . . . . . . . . . .
Future Research Considerations. . . . .
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS . . . . . . . .
REFERENCES. . . . . . . . . . . . .
APPENDICES. . . . . . . . . . . . .
Appendix

A. A Manual for Rating Drive Content in the
Thematic Apperception Test . . . .

B. The Tennessee Self Concept Scale Test
Booklet and C & R Answer Packet . .

C. TAT Instructions . . . . . . . .

iv

15
20

22
22
24
31
33
33
38
41
44
55
57
61

66

66

75

85

L I ST OF TABLES

Table Page
1. Age of §§.bY Sex (N = 91) . . . . . . . 22
2. Educational Status of §§' by Sex. . . . . 23

3. Inter-rater Agreement for Total Drive
Content, Drive Level, and Drive Inte-
gration Ratings (N = 30). . . . . . . 28

4. Means and Standard Deviations for Major
variables (N = 91) o o o o o o o o o 33

5. The Relationship Between Total Drive Expres-
sion and Level of Self-Esteem (N = 91) . . 34

6. The Relationship Between Socialized Drive
Expression and Level of Self-Esteem
(N = 91) o o o o o o o o o o o o 35

7. The Relationship Between Unsocialized Drive
' Expression and Level of Self-Esteem
(N = 91) O O O O O O O O O O O O 36

8. The Relationship Between Highly Constricted
Drive Expression and Level of Self-
Esteem (N = 91). . . . . . . . . . 37

9. The Relationship Between Degree of Drive
Integration and Level of Self-Esteem
(N = 91) o o o o o o o o o o o o 37

10. Differences in Level of Self-Esteem, Total
Drive Content, Level of Drive Expression,
and Degree of Drive Integration for SE,
by Sex. . . . . . . . . . . . . 38

11. The Relationship Between Level of Self-
Esteem and Total Drive Expression, Level
of Drive Expression, and Degree of Drive
Integration for SE, by Sex . . . . . . 40

Table Page

12. Degree of Defensiveness for S5, by Sex
(N = 91) C I O O O O O C O O O O 41

13. The Relationship Between Indices of Ego
Control on the TAT and the Degree of
Defensiveness on the Self-Concept
Inventory. . . . . . . . . . . . 42

vi

INTRODUCTION

The present study was conducted to investigate
the relationship between the level of individual control
imposed on TAT fantasy productions (as manifested by the
total amount of drive content, degree of drive integra-
tion, and level of drive socialization) and level of self-
esteem.
The Question of Individual

Controls on Projective
Techniques

 

 

 

One of the leading debates in the literature on
personality assessment-has focused on the issue of whether
projective and non-projective tests elicit analogous in-
formation about the individual. The controversy centers
primarily on the question of the degree to which individ—
uals are able to control and modify their responses on
each type of instrument. A brief review of the pertinent
issues will provide a background for discussing one of
the questions which emerged from the debate: a question
to which the present study is directed.

During the early 1940's, supporters of the newly-

arrived "projectives" expressed the hOpe that these

indirect techniques would provide a more uncensored pic-
ture of personality than the existing paper—and-pencil
tests. Pr0ponents of this position (Frank, 1948; Murray,
1965, Abt, 1950) contended that responses on such "direct
method" tests as the Allport-Vernon-Lindzey Study of
Values or the MMPI were contaminated by the factors of
social desirability and personal censorship. It was
apparent that individuals on these tests were able to
realize the type of information they were revealing to

the examiner. In addition, the instructions made it clear
that the responses were personal and self-revealing. As

a result, individuals were able to, and often did, control
and modify their responses.

Projective techniques, however, were more likely--
according to their supporter--to circumvent the individ-
ual's defenses and controls. Projective adherents
believed that the ambiguity of the stimulus combined with
the impersonal instructions provided the testee with
little information about how his percepts would be inter-
preted. This adduced a less guarded response set which
resulted in the disclosure of material (i.e., drives,
needs, conflicts) from "deeper" levels of the personality.
What emerged from this process was, as Abt has termed it,
an "x-ray" picture of personality (1950, p. 57).

A number of early validation studies seemed to

support the x-ray hypothesis. Atkinson and McClelland

demonstrated that varying intensities of the hunger drive
are directly expressed in the thematic content of the
subject's TAT protocols. In another study, Feshbach
(1955) found that a group of undergraduate subjects who
had been insulted by the experimenter expressed signifi-
cantly more aggression in subsequent TAT stories than a
group of subjects who had not been insulted. McClelland,
gt_gl. (1953) and Walker, §E_§l. (1958) obtained similar
results through the analysis of projective protocols of
subjects who were highly motivated by the underlying
conditions of ambition and fear.

Opponents, however, have contended that projective
techniques are not exempt from the vitiation of individual
(ego) controls and that in some cases the two types of
assessment procedures yield almost identical material.

In a recent review of the literature, Murstein (1965)
states: "The original belief that the needs of the sub—
ject might be directly transcribed to the projective
protocols has been rejected. It is clear that mediating
variables relating to ego functions must be studied along
with drive level" (p. xvi). He further mentions that--
"the normal individual has proved unusually able to pro-
tect his private world from manifesting itself on pro-
jective techniques" (p. l). Allport (1965) likewise
asserts that the individual is able to actively impose

controls on the projective process and, consequently, is

able, as he is on the paper-and-pencil tests, to determine
the extent to which underlying material is exposed to the
examiner. Similarily, Lindzey (1958) maintains that
projectives do not provide a "royal road to the uncon-
scious" and that it is necessary to study "the ego pro-
cesses, directive mechanisms, or cognitive controls that
intervene between the motive and its expression" (p. 22).

Lazarus (1961) and Murstein (1965) agree that a
majority of the research supports these latter views.

In an oft-quoted study, Clark (1952) found that showing
fraternity men slides of nude females inhibited direct
sexual expression on subsequent TAT protocols. In a
second experiment, however, where another group of fra-
ternity men were shown the same slides while under the
influence of alcohol, the manifest sexual imagery was
significantly higher. Clark reasonably interpreted the
negative association between sexual arousal and amount of
erotic apperceptive fantasy in terms of intervening ego
control operations. Other studies where similar results
were demonstrated include Gordon (1953), Davids (1955),
and Scodel & Lipetz (1957).

Although the original debate continues, there is
considerable agreement, in recent years, that the x-ray
theory no longer represents an acceptable, viable hypoth-
esis for understanding projective test processes. The

majority of clinical and research data points rather to

the operation of certain psychic structures (i.e., ego)
which, as Lindzey (1958) has stated, intervene between
the underlying drive and its overt manifestations. Need-
less to say, these developments place the projective
enthusiast in a less sanguine position.

In dealing with this dilemma, several different
approaches have been suggested. A number of researchers
have attempted to devise newer and more subtle methods
with the renewed hope of bypassing the individual's con-
trols and censoring abilities. However, as Murstein
(1965) indicates, these attempts have led to higher levels
of inference with the test data and to conclusions of
questionable worth and value.

As an alternative approach, several theorists
(Schafer, 1958; Rosenwald, 1968) have suggested that the
ego control processes on the existing projective tech-
niques be studied. Since it has become apparent that
controls are imposed on the projective process, the
important question is no longer whether controls are

operating, but whether they are operating in systematic

 

and predictable ways. Schafer (1958), along with several

 

other ego psychologists (Holt, 1958; Pine, 1960), has
proposed that variations in level of ego functioning on
projective techniques are predictable and should be
studied to increase the usefulness of these assessment

procedures.

In line with this, the present study was designed
to investigate the level of ego functioning on the TAT
(as manifested by the amount and level of sexual and
aggressive drive expression) and the relationship between
these control operations and the individual's level of
self-esteem; a phenomenological variable which is cited
in the literature as being functionally related. As such,
the present study attempted to contribute to a process
theory of the TAT.
Ego Control Operations, Drive

Expression, and Projective
Test Peffbrmance

 

 

 

In one of his last major works--The Ego and the Id

 

(l923)--Freud elaborated on the ego and its relationship
to instinctual impulse expression. Using an analogy,
Freud saw the ego as a man on horseback who had the task
of adequately controlling the superior strength of the
horse (i.e., the intense underlying impulses). In another
place, he stated that "the ego develops from perceiving
the instincts to controlling them" (1936, p. 76). Cast

in this executive role, the ego is conceptualized as that
portion of the psychic structure which has, as one of its
functions, the responsibility for (l) regulating the extent
of impulse motility--in line with Id demands, and (2)
modulating the level of impulse expression (i.e., modera-
tion of drive intensity and degree of socialization)--

in keeping with superego and environmental demands. It is

clear from his analogy that Freud was concerned primarily
with the former Ego-Id dichotomy. It is not surprising
then that earlier studies with projective techniques
(especially the Clark experiments) tended to be concerned
more directly with the relationship between impulse ex-
pression and ego functioning.

More recent deve10pments in psychoanalytic ego
psychology (Hartmann, 1958; Schafer, 1958) have shifted
the emphasis from the Ego-Id relationship to the Ego-
Environmental interaction. This shift provides not only
a new perspective from which to evaluate ego functioning
in general, but also presents a new theoretical framework
for understanding projective test processes and accom—
panying control operations. With these more recent for-
mulations, impulse expression and ego functioning are
understood in connection with the adaptive problems of
the individual in his environment (Schafer, 1958).

Stated briefly, adaptation is required in those
situations where the individual does not possess a pre-
viously acquired set of responses. In such a situation,
adaptation is facilitated by a temporary downward shift
in the level of psychic functioning (Hartmann, 1958).

By temporarily lowering controls, the ego gains access to
and use of a wide range of forms and content, including
instinctual drives, for adaptive purposes. Following this

initial inspirational stage, the ego synthesizes and

integrates the primary process material previously ac-
quired (the elaboration stage). This final stage is
characterized by a return to "secondary process" modes of
functioning. Hartmann purposes that in this process "the
ego detours through regression toward adaptation" (Ibid.,
p. 36). In another place, Kris (1952) speaks of this
process as "regression in the service of the ego." Thus
far, the concept of "regression in the service of the ego"
has been applied both theoretically and empirically to our
understanding of such psychological activities as wit,
humor, and artistic creativity (Kris, 1952; Schafer, 1958;
Pine, 1959; Cohen, 1960; Hersch, 1962; Rogolsky, 1968).
Schafer (1958) ably suggests that the use of this
concept be broadened to increase our understanding of ego
functioning on projective techniques like the Rorshach or
the TAT.* He indicates that differences in level of ego
control (and corresponding levels of impulse expression)
can be understood in terms of: (l) the adaptive require-
ments of the particular projective test itself, and (2)
the individual's unique capacity for adaptive behavior
(i.e., possession of those personality characteristics

which permit adaptive regression).

 

*The TAT was chosen for the present study for sev-
eral reasons: One, the TAT pictures are only moderately
unstructured (as opposed to the Rorschach cards which are
hi hl unstructured) and seemed to more accurately simulate
the agaptive requirements of everyday interpersonal situ-
ations. Secondly, using the TAT permitted the use of an
existing scoring manual (Pine, 1960) for assessing ego
control operations.

 

Schafer continues by pointing out that projectives,
unlike paper-and-pencil tests, require considerable
adaptive behavior on the part of the testee:

In these projective tests we require the subject
to create something--an image or a fantasy. We give
him materials or a medium in which to work but he is
in many respects put in the position of the creative
artist and must find within himself forms of experience
and content to elaborate a response (Ibid., p. 133).

It is possible then to conceptualize the TAT, with its

vague, impersonal instructions and semi-structured stimuli,

as a situation or process requiring a moderate amount of

 

adaptive behavior.

It is apparent, as Schafer points out, that indi-
viduals vary greatly in the extent to which they are free
to "regress in the service of the ego" (i.e., engage in
adaptive behavior). This brings us then to the main point
of the thesis; namely, that variations in the level of ego
control (and corresponding levels of drive expression)
displayed on the TAT can be understood in terms of, and
are functionally related to, certain personality charac-
teristics which facilitate or retard the individual's
attempts to regress adaptively in the projective process.
It is posited that: (1) individuals who possess the per-
sonality characteristics which permit adaptive regression
will display lower levels of control (and higher levels
of ego-modulated drive expressions) in the thematic pro-
tocols, (2) individuals who lack these personality char-

acteristics will either (a) maintain relatively high

10

levels of control (i.e., stories will be highly descrip-
tive with an obvious absence of direct drive derivatives)
95 (b) give evidence of pathogenic regression with ego-
alien drive expressions. What is being suggested here,
if such is not already obvious, is that the concept of
"regression in the service of the ego" be utilized to
account for and predict the level of ego functioning on
the TAT.

Recent methodological developments now make it
possible to test these assumptions. Pine (1960) has
develOped a scoring manual for the TAT where levels of
ego functioning are assessed in terms of the degree and
level of manifest drive content (drive content, as it is
used here, refers to the expression of instinctual drives
and their derivatives, including aggressive and libidinal
drives and partial drives--oral, anal, phallic, genital,
exhibitionistic, voyeuristic, sadistic, masochistic,
homosexual, and narcissistic).

The Manual includes three main types of ratings.
The first of these represents the total number of rea-
sonably direct derivatives of sexual and aggressive drives
which appear in ideational form in the manifest content
of the TAT stories (i.e., the total drive content (TDC)
score). The second two ratings reflect: (l) the degree
to which drive content is integrated into the stories,

and (2) the degree of drive socialization (Ibid., p. 45).

11

(1) Drive Integration Ratings.--S's task on the

 

TAT is to tell a story about a picture. Drive content
which is used to develOp the main theme of the story
(thematic ratings) and that which is used to enrich the

story (incidental ratings) is interpreted as task-

 

appropriate and allows the inference that adaptive re-
gression has occurred. Side comments, verbal slips in-
volving drive derivatives, and other unrelated expres-

sions of drive (non-appropriate ratings) which are not in

 

accord with the TAT task suggests that pathogenic re-
gression and ego-alien drive expression has occurred.

(2) Level of Drive Expression.--A second index

 

of ego control assesses the degree of drive modulation
(i.e., the degree of drive socialization). (A) Direct—

socialized (D-S) ratings: D-S ratings include those

 

expressions of drive content where impulses are expressed
directly but in socialized ways. Mention of kissing,
intercourse between marital partners, verbal fighting,

and such, allows the inference that underlying drives are
being expressed but the ego is playing an active role in
defining the form which the drive takes (i.e., both the
inspirational and elaboration stages of adaptive regres—
sion are evident in the finished thematic product). Thus,
high D-S scores indicate considerable adaptive regres-

sion. (B) Direct-unsocialized (D-U) ratings: The ex-

 

pression of primitive, value-violating, and unrestrained

12

drives (rape, incest, robbery, murder, and such) in the
thematic productions indicates that ego functions have
been overwhelmed and pathogenic regression has occurred.
Conceptually, this may occur where the ego has lost the
ability to modulate impulses (as in a psychotic state)

or it may happen that following the initial inspirational
stage during adaptive regression, the ego is unable to
regain control and restore secondary process functioning.
Consequently, high D-U scores indicate an inability to

regress adaptively. (C) Disguised-indirect (D-I) ratings:

 

D-I ratings permit the inference that a particular drive
is an issue for the person, but the drive itself is £95
expressed. D-I ratings are given in those instances
where mention is made of boyfriend, girlfriend, husband,
police, soldier, ruler, saloons, illness, and such. High
D-I scores reflect the presence of high ego controls with
only minimal regression of either kind.

Validation studies, while few in number, support
the Manual and the various scoring categories which have
been discussed. In addition to the TAT protocols, Pine

(1960) obtained a Rorschach protocol, a Wechsler-Bellevue
Test, a written autobiography, and an extensive clinical
interview from each of the 14 males in the study. Two
raters, first independently and then by consensus, used
all of these materials to evaluate and then rate each S

on six Q-sorts (Affect and Inner States, Thought Processes,

l3

Motives, Defenses, Interpersonal Behavior, Identity, and
Self-Attitudes). Final cross-subject rankings were com—
pared by rank correlations to the TAT manual scores.
Pine reports the following favorable results: §§_with
high TDC scores tend towards emotionality, expressiveness,
and flux. An expressive quality characterizes thinking,
Communication, and relationships. The expressiveness has
distinctly positive and adaptive character including
spontaneous affect, insightfulness, and meaningful
relationships. In marked contrast, §§_with low TDC scores
appear to reflect a pattern of inhibition, over-control,
and rigidity. These individuals seem to be out of touch
with inner resources: thinking is blocked and control
operations seem both excessive and shaky (Ibid., p. 42).

§§_with well-integrated use of drive (high E227
matic ratings) present a general picture of smooth func-
tioning. Thinking is efficient and proceeds without
disruption by anxiety, expressive needs find their outlet
through relatively controlled channels, and a basis for
steady and adequate personality functioning appears well
established. §§ with poorly integrated use of drive
material (lower thematic ratings) are characterized by
anxiety and disruption of adaptive functions (Ibid,,
p. 43).

EE who express drives in direct-socialized ways

are characterized by a relatively balanced relationship

14

between expressive and control processes. This is re-
flected in a relatively free intellectual and esthetic
expressive style, a flexible identity, and adequate con-
trols over impulses. §§ using unmodulated drive expres-

sion (high direct-unsocialized ratings) tend toward im-

 

pulsive discharge, loose thinking, and a fear of loss of
control (Ibid., p. 45).

In another study, Pine (1959) explored the rela-
tionship between the various drive content scores on the
TAT and literary quality of the stories. Pine found a
positive relationship (rho = .51, p < .01) between TDC
scores and literary quality. Correlations between D—U,
D-S, and 0-1 scores and literary quality were also in the
hypothesized directions._ However, only the last relation-
ship (D-I and literary quality) had a correlation signi-
ficant at the .05 level. Pine also demonstrated that
literary quality was positively related to thematic
ratings (rho = .36, p < .05) and negatively related to

non-appropriate ratings (rho = -.25, p < .05); both re-

 

sults were in the hypothesized directions. The findings
were interpreted in terms of the individuals ability to
"neutralize" instinctual drives for adaptive, creative
purposes. The concept of "regression in the service of
the ego" was also used to discuss the data.

It would appear, thus, that the Pine Scoring

Manual represents a fairly valid procedure for assessing

15

drive expression and drive control on the TAT, and that

it provides an improved method for testing the assumptions
about ego functioning which have been discussed.
Personality Determinant of Adapt-

ive Regression: The IndividuaIrs

SelfFEvaluations or Level of
Self-Esteem

 

 

 

 

There is ample theoretical argument and some ex-
perimental evidence supporting a connection between the
capacity or potential for adaptive regression and the
nature of the individual's self-evaluations or level of
self—esteem. Schafer (1958) proposes that the process of
adaptive regression requires that the individual possess
an adequate, positive, secure sense of self. As was
mentioned earlier, the inspirational stage of the regres-
sive process is characterized by a lowering of ego con-
trols to allow access to the underlying, more primitive
modes of experience. During this period, there is an
enlargement of awareness, a blurring of the distinctions
between inner and outer, a relaxation of defense, an
entrusting of ideas to preconscious and unconscious elab-
oration, a loss of time and space perspectives, and other
regressive tendencies (Ibid,, p. 133). In order to be
able to tolerate and permit these experiences, Schafer
suggests that the individual must possess the sorts of
positive self-evaluations which will allow him to trans-

cend the momentary loss of identity. Those who

16

positively value their abilities and attributes, who feel
confident about themselves, and have a sense of who they
are, are in a better position, theoretically, to permit a
momentary regression where these attributes and self-
perceptions are lost. It is as though the positive self-
evaluations provide the ego with the "momentary freedom"
to lower control operations in order to facilitate in-
creased adaptiveness and competency; attributes which
ultimately contribute to increased self-esteem.

In contrast, individuals who lack confidence in
themselves, who have negative self-evaluations, and who
possess a rather tenuous picture of who they are, are in
a psychological position where higher levels of control
must be maintained. These individuals maintain higher
levels of control to prevent or avoid the anxiety asso-
ciated with a possible complete loss of self should
regression occur. Here, ego boundaries are rigidly main-
tained to guard against the possibility of losing an
already weak sense of self.

Paradoxically, by maintaining high controls, the
ego jeopardizes its ability to prevent pathogenic regres-
sion. By maintaining high controls the ego fails to gain
access to underlying material which not only facilitates
adaptation but also leads to the development of more
adequate, flexible controls and defenses. Consequently,

initial attempts at maintaining high levels of fragile,

l7

rigid, control may fail, leading to pathogenic regression.
Theoretically then, individuals with negative self-
evaluations should either display relatively high levels
of control (with little direct drive expression) on the
thematic productions or give evidence of pathogenic re—
gression and ego-alien drive expression.

Digressing briefly, level of self-esteem refers
to the positive or negative evaluations that are con-
sciously ascribed to the individual's self-concept. This
self—concept is a phenomenological datum which includes
those parts of the phenomenological field (i.e., a con-
stellation of perceived attributes and characteristics)
which the individual differientiates as definite and
fairly stable characteristics of himself (Rogers, 1951).
Self-concept as it is defined here is similar to Erickson's
"ego identity" (1968) or Sullivan's "self-system" (1945).

The Tennessee Self Concept Scale (TSCS, Fitts,
1965)* was incorporated in the present study to assess
level of self-esteem. Pitts reports that individuals
with high self-esteem

tend to like themselves, feel that they are persons

of value and worth, have confidence in themselves,
and act accordingly. PeOple with low self-esteem are

 

*The 100 items on the TSCS represent a rather broad
universe of self-conceptualizations tapping one's feelings
toward the major sub-systems of physical self, moral-
ethical self, personal self, family self, and social self.
In addition, the validity and reliability studies, re-
ported later, support the usefulness of the scale.

18

doubtful about their own worth; see themselves as
undesirable; often feel anxious, depressed, and
unhappy; and have little faith or confidence in them-
selves (Ibid., p. 2).

By expanding our discussion about ego functioning
from the TAT to life situations in general, there is
additional evidence for the relationships being discussed.
(This expansion assumes a direct, positive relationship
between fantasy behavior and overt behavior-~an issue to
be discussed in a later section.) Freud (1914,) quite
early, suggested a relationship between ego functioning
and level of self-esteem. He posited that as the child
develops he relinquishes his primitive feelings of omnip-
otence, and develops more realistic feelings of self-
regard based on actual achievements. In elaborating on
these earlier views, Diggory (1966) states:

Freud was never very explicit about the details
of the process of (self) evaluation, nor about the
terms in which evaluations occurred. From his vague
references to the ego's "accomplishments" it can only
be inferred that its success in preventing untimely
or inexpedient irruptions of actions aimed at grat-
ifying socially forbidden impulses is one of these
accomplishments. He (Freud) also clearly regarded
the artist's mastering fantasies and diverting energy
to the socially acceptable and useful communication
of fantasy as an achievement.

Generally, a relatively strong ego, capable of
mastering instinctive impulses in accord with the
reality and pleasure principles, is an achievement
of no mean proportions (pp. 260-61).

Symonds (1968) concurs:

The successfully functioning ego leads to self-
confidence, self-assurance, and self-reliance. These
qualities are the result of having the ability to
meet the demands as defined by others. When one can
function adequately so as to meet the approval of

19

others, then he gains self-esteem and self-confidence.
On the other hand, success and failure of the ego are
to a degree determined by the adequacy of the self,
that is, the individuals concept and valuation of
himself. The self is a partial determinant of the
ego (p. 87).

Smith (1964), likewise, in an effort to distinguish
between ego and self agrees that the "organizing, selec-
tive processes" (ego) in the personality are somehow
guided by the nature and status of the self and somehow,
in turn, (the ego) has an influence on its (the self's)
nature and status (p. 235).

Erickson (1968), similar to Freud, purposes that
realistic self-esteem is related to the ego's ability to
master and integrate the tasks assigned and sanctioned by
a particular social reality.

Although Pine (1960) presents some evidence for a
relationship between ego functioning on the TAT and level
of self-esteem, there has been surprisingly little addi-
tional research in this area. He demonstrated a signifi-
cant positive correlation (rho = .84, p < .01) between
total drive content on the TAT and "self-concept flexi-
bility."

The relevancy of Pine's findings become more
apparent in light of the positive relationship which
Taylor and Combs (1952) found between "self-concept flexi-
bility" and level of self—esteem.

Some indirect evidence is also available. Since

the ability to regress adaptively is positively related

20

to creativity (Cohen, 1961; Hersch, 1962; Rogolsky, 1968)
and since creativity is positively related to level of
self-esteem (Powell, 1964; Sisk, 1967), there is at least
an indirect possibility that a positive relationship also
exists between the ability to regress adaptively and level
of self-esteem.

In light of the lack of cogent research in this
area, the present study explored the relationship between
ego control operations on the TAT and level of self-
esteem. Utilizing the "adaptive regression" hypothesis,
the study attempted to demonstrate that levels of control
on TAT fantasy productions (as reflected in the amount of
projected drive content, level of drive integration, and
degree of drive socialization) are related in meaningful

ways to the individual's level of self-esteem.

Hypotheses to be Tested

 

In light of the preceding discussion, five major
predictions were investigated:

Hypothesis 1: There is a direct relationship between the
total amount of drive expressed (as mea-
sured by the Total Drive Content (TDC)
Score on the TAT protocols) and level of
self-esteem (as measured by the Total P
Score on the Tennessee Self Concept Scale).

Hypothesis 2: There is a direct relationship between the
amount of drive which is expressed in
socially acceptable ways (as measured by the
Direct-Socialized (D-S) Drive Content Score
on the TAT protocols) and level of self—
esteem.

Hypothesis

Hypothesis

Hypothesis

In

21

There is an inverse relationship between
the amount of drive which is expressed in
unsocialized ways (as measured by the
Direct-Unsocialized (D-U) Drive Content
Score on the TAT protocols) and level of
self-esteem.

There is an inverse relationship between
the amount of drive which is expressed in
indirect, highly constricted ways (as mea-
sured by the Disguised-Indirect (D-I) Drive
Content Score on the TAT protocols) and
level of self-esteem.

There is a direct relationship between the
degree of drive integration (as measured
by the weighted proportion of thematic,
incidental, and nonapprOpriate drive
ratings on the TAT—protocolsTand level of
self-esteem.

 

 

addition, the following relationships were of

interest in the present study and were explored without

specific hypotheses:

(1)

(2)

(3)

(4)

The relationship between sex of subject and
level of self-esteem.

The relationship between sex of subject and
(a) the total amount of drive expressed (TDC),
(b) the amount of socialized drive expression
(D—S), (c) the amount of unsocialized drive
expression (D-U), (d) the amount of highly
constricted drive expression (D-I), and the
degree of drive integration.

Sex differences on each of the five major
relationships studied.

The relationship between indices of ego con—
trol on the TAT and the degree of defensive-
ness on the self-concept inventory.

METHOD

Subjects

Subjects (gs) for the present study were taken
from a college student population. The sample consisted
of 91 students enrolled in an advanced undergraduate

psychology course at Michigan State University.

TABLE l.--Age of §§' by Sex (N = 91)

 

 

 

 

 

Sample Male §§_ Female §§
N = 91 N = 47 N = 44
Mean 21.00 20.97 21.02
Variance 4.41 2.09 12.00
t = 0.091a df = 89 (Edwards, 1967, pp.
F = 5.75b df = 43/46 209‘212°)
a

Not significant.

bp < .01 for a directional hypothesis.

As seen from Table l, the mean age for all §§ was
21.00 years. Male S3 had a mean age of 20.97 years,
whereas female §§_had a mean age of 21.02 years. The dif-
ference in mean age for male and female §§_was statisti-

cally non-significant.

22

23

Age variability among male §§ was negligible

(variance = 2.09). Female gs, however, displayed consid-

erable age variability (variance 12.00). The difference
in variances was statistically significant. The larger
variance in age among female §§ was due to the presence of

three §§_who were somewhat older than the rest of the

sample (ages: 25, 29, and 40).

TABLE 2.--Educational Status of Si, by Sex

 

Sample Male 5E Female 53

 

 

 

Class —————— ———————

Status N = 91 N = 47 N = 44
Freshman 0 0 0
SOphomore 16 5 11
Junior 38 l9 19
Senior 33 20 13
Graduate 4 3 1
Mean Years of
College Completed 3.28 3.44 3.09

a
t = 0.245 df = 89

 

aNot significant.

As seen in Table 2, the mean years of college com-
pleted for all §§_was 3.28. Male §§_had 3.44 years of
college while female §§ had 3.09 years of college. The
difference in educational status for males and females

was statistically nonsignificant.

24

The sample, therefore, represents a student popu-
lation composed of upper-level undergraduates who are

primarily between the ages of 19 and 21.

The Instruments

 

As mentioned earlier, the experimental variables
were derived from §§ responses to selected cards of the
Thematic Apperception Test (TAT) and to the Tennessee Self
Concept Scale (TSCS).

TAT Cards.--Ego functioning was assessed by rating

 

four (4) TAT stories for drive expression according to the
procedures outlined in the Pine "Drive Content" Scoring
Manual (1960). The TAT protocols were obtained from §§
written responses to Cards 1, 2, 4, and l3MF. Card 1 is

a relatively neutral, non-threatening stimulus (portraying
a young boy located in front of a violin) which served as
a "warm-up" card for the projective, story-telling process.
Cards 2, 4, and 13MF depict both male and female figures
in semi-structured interpersonal situations. Normative
studies (Eron, 1949; Pine, a personal communication,

1968) have indicated that each of these cards possess con-
siderable "stimulus pull" for stories with aggressive and
sexual themes and were therefore apprOpriate for eliciting
the desired data. The cards are sufficiently unstructured
however to allow and, in fact, require that the story-
teller determine not only the extent to which aggressive

or sexual impulses are projected but also the mode in

25

which these impulses find expression, i.e., ego-constricted,
ego-syntonic, or ego-alien ways.

Scoring Procedures.--Actual scoring consisted of a

 

content analysis of the type written transcripts of SS
written stories.* Stated briefly, the scoring procedure
involved reading through the entire protocol and under-
lining each unit of drive content. Since it is possible
for drive derivatives to be expressed many times in one
story, several rules were followed in selecting the unit

to be rated in each instance: (1) expressions of different
drives, i.e., sexual followed by aggressive, are rated as
separate units; (2) expressions of drive with differing

degrees of integration (thematic, incidental, or nonappro—

 

priate) are rated separately; (3) a single drive which is
expressed at two different levels of socialization (an
example: "The couple's argumen "--(rated D-S)--"slowly

developed into a physical fight."--(rated D-U) is rated

 

only EEEE at the most extreme level; (4) drive expressions
with the same level of socialization or same degree of
integration are related separately if new behavior se-
quences are described or if the expressed impulse has a

new aim.

 

*Appendix A contains the Pine Manual utilized in
the present study along with operational definitions of
scoring categories and procedures. Several scoring
examples are also included.

26

Once the actual number of drive units in a protocol
are located and decided upon, they are rated for level of
drive expression (1. direct-socialized, 2. direct-
unsocialized, or 3. disguised-indirect) and degree of

drive integration (1. thematic, 2. incidental, or 3.

 

nonappropriate).

 

Following these procedures, each S obtained seven
(7) summary scores: a score representing the total number
of drive content ratings in the four (4) thematic pro-
ductions (TDC); one score each for the total number of
D-S, D-U, and D—I ratings; and one score each for the

number of thematic, incidental, and nonapprgpriate

 

 

ratings.'

Statistical work on Hypothesis 1 was conducted
using the actual distribution of TDC scores obtained.
Theoretically, the range in TDC scores is from 0 to an
infinitely large number.

The total of the three levels scores is equal to
the TDC Score. Since the sub-scores are therefore not
independent of the total number of drive content ratings,
it was necessary to hold total drive content constant in
statistical work with the sub-scores. Consequently, to
make inter-individual comparisons on level of drive ex-
pression and to evaluate Hypotheses 2, 3, and 4, the D-S,
D-U, and D-I scOres were converted to pr0portions. As a
result, the theoretical range in scores on these three

variables was from 0 to 100.

27

To test Hypothesis 5, concerning drive integration,
a weighted composite score was utilized. Weighting the
instances of drive integration (three times the number of

thematic ratings plus two times the number of incidental

 

ratings plus the number of nonappropriate ratings), di-

 

viding by the total number of ratings, and multiplying by
a constant K = 100, gives a score which represents a
trend toward well-integrated drive content at the one
extreme (higher scores) and poorly integrated drive at
the other extreme (lower scores) with a theoretical range
between 0 and 300 (Pine, 1960, p. 36).

Scoring Reliability.--Inter-rater reliability was

 

established by two raters--the present author and another
second year graduate student. As a preliminary step,
both raters studied the Pine Manual. Following this, an
extensive period of rating practice was carried out using
protocols from another source. During this training
period, scoring discrepancies were discussed and resolved
in accord with the general guidelines of the Manual. The
reliability sample (N = 30) was randomly selected and
independently rated after a satisfactory degree of inter-
rater agreement was achieved. Table 3 lists the relia-
bility results.

Of the 120 stories rated, there were 343 rated
units of drive content. The raters agreed in 289 in—

stances or 84.4 per cent of the time. When one considers

28

TABLE 3.--Inter-rater Agreement for Total Drive Content,
Drive Level, and Drive Integration Ratings (N = 30)

 

 

 

 

Number Number Per Cent

Drive Ratings Unitsa Agreedb Agreedb
Total Drive Content 343 289* 84.4%
Direct-Unsocialized 65 60 92.3%
Direct-Socialized 110 105 95.4%
Disguised-Indirect 100 97 97.0%
Total for Levels 275 262 95.5%
Thematic 237 231 96.8%
Inc1dental 35 30 85.5%
Nonappropriate 3 2 66.6%
Total for Integration 275 263 95.7%

 

*Of the 289 agreements there were 14 unrated
stories, i.e., both raters agreed that 14 stories had 32
ratable drive content present.

aNumber of units where there was agreement on drive
present initially.

bBased on the degree to which rater II (JP) agreed

with rater I (CD).

that agreement by chance alone would be near Q_per cent,
the results seem more than adequate. The percentage of
agreement for the various levels of drive expression and
degrees of integration were also generally quite good.
Agreement by chance alone would be 33 per cent in each
category. Only the per cent of agreement for nonappro-
priate use of drive (66.6 per cent) falls below the 85

per cent mark.

29

Tennessee Self Concept Scale (TSCS).--The Coun-

 

seling and Research (C & R) Form of the TSCS is a 100-
item inventory of self descriptive statements designed to
portray the individual's self concept and level of self
esteem.* Such statements as "I like my looks just the
way they are" (item 9), "I am as smart as I want to be"
(item 44), "I get along well with other people" (item 87)
are rated by S on a five point Likert scale, from "com-
pletely false" (+1) to "completely true" (+5). Half of
the items in the Scale are negatively worded to control
for response set (the tendency to agree or disagree re-
gardless of item content). SS responses are carbon copied
through to a score sheet where response scale numbers for
the negative items have been reversed. Thus high scores
uniformly mean positive self description.

An additional feature of the Scale, which repre-
sents an improvement over earlier self concept invento-
ries, is the inclusion of a "defensiveness" scale (SC
scale). The SC scale is composed of 10 items taken from
the L-scale of the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality
Inventory and provides a measure of §L§ tendency to delib-
erately present a highly favorable, or unfavorable, pic-
ture of himself. As such, the SC score served as a val-

idity index.

 

*See Appendix B for the TSCS test booklet and
C&R answer packet.

30

The Total P Score is the single most important
index of self-esteem on the Scale and was used for hypoth-
esis testing. This score has a theoretical range from
100 to 500.

Test-retest reliability for the relevant scores
ranges between .88 and .92 (Congdon, 1958; Fitts, 1965).
Fitts also reports that "distinctive features of individ-
ual profiles are still present for most persons a year or
more later" (£SiS., p. 15). Four types of validation
procedures (i.e., (1) content validity, (2) discrimination
between groups, (3) correlations with other personality
measures, and (4) personality changes under particular
conditions) tend to support the Scale as an accurate,
valid measure of self-esteem. Content validity was
achieved using seven independent judges. The final items
used in the Scale were those for which perfect agreement
on item content (item represents either a positive or
negative self-evaluation) was achieved (Fitts, 1965).

Fitts demonstrated significant differences (mostly
at the .001 level) between patients (N = 369) and non-
patients (N = 626) for each of the scales used in the
present study. He also reports that Congdon (1958),
Havener (1961), and Wayne (1963) found similar patient vs.
non-patient differences.

Fitts also reports that "most of the scores on the

Scale correlate with MMPI scores in ways one would expect

31

from the nature of the scores" (1965, p. 24). Correla-
tions with the Edwards Personal Preference Scale were
quite low; however, a majority were in the expected direc-
tion.

Evidence for construct validity is also available
from studies which assess changes in self-esteem during
psychotherapy. Ashcraft & Fitts (1964) used an experi—
mental group (N = 30) of patients who had been in therapy
for an average of six months and a no-therapy control
group (N = 24) who had been waiting for therapy for an
average of 6.7 months. All subjects were measured on a
test-retest basis with the Scale. Significant changes in
predicted directions on 18 of the 22 variables were found
for the therapy group. Of these, self-esteem (Total P
score) was significantly higher for the therapy group

while remaining unchanged for the control group.

Procedures

 

Both instruments were group administered during a
single class period. SS, upon entering the classroom,
received a packet containing (1) a face sheet with the TAT
instructions and six lined sheets for the stories and (2)
a TSCS test booklet and C&R answer packet. All materials
contained an identification number. Spontaneity was
encouraged by omitting SS name or student number. Only

sex, age, and educational status were requested.

32

Following a review of the TAT standard instruc-
tions* by the experimenter (E), cards 1, 2, 4, and 13MF
were projected individually on a wall screen for a period
of five minutes (under semi-lighted conditions). TAT
stories were written out by SS. After each card there was
a 15 second "time-out" when the wall screen was empty.
This allowed for story completions and served as a cue
that a new picture was forthcoming. After the final card
was presented, additional time was given for story com—
pletions. All of the above procedures are in general
accord with those cited in the related literature (Har-
rison, 1965).

The TSCS instructions (located on the inside cover
of the test booklet) were than read aloud by S. Also at
this time, §§ were instructed to write their age, sex,
and educational status in the C&R answer packet. Follow-
ing completion of the Scale, the test packets were col-
lected by S. A brief question and answer period followed
in which the rationale and goals of the project were dis-

cussed with the participating SS.

 

*The TAT standard instructions are located in
Appendix C.

RESULTS

General FindingS

 

Table 4 lists the basic statistics for each of the

relevant variables in the study.

TABLE 4.--Means and Standard Deviations for Major Variables

 

 

(N = 91)
Standard
Variable Mean Deviation
1. Total P Score 332.64 31.60
(level of self-esteem)
2. TDC Score 8.40 3.46
(total drive expression)
3. D-S Score 38.02 19.95
(socialized drive expression)
4. D-U Score 24.20 17.72
(unsocialized drive expression)
5. D-I Score 37.00 18.84
(disguised-indirect drive
expression)
6. Drive Integration Score 281.89 17.36
7. SC Score 36.96 5.29

(degree of defensiveness)

 

data:

Following are the major hypotheses and pertinent

33

34

Hypothesis 1. There is a direct relationship between the
total amount of drive expressed (as mea-
sured by the Total Drive Content (TDC)
Score on the TAT protocols) and level of
self-esteem (as measured by the Total P
Score on the Tennessee Self Concept Scale).

 

TABLE 5.--The Relationship Between Total Drive Expression
and Level of Self-Esteem (N = 91)

 

Level of Self-esteem

 

 

 

 

Low High Totals

Total
High 17 28 45

Drive
Low 29 17 46

Content
Totals 46 45 91
rt = +39a df = 89
ap < .005

Note: r (tetrachoric coefficient) was calculated by
dichotomizing both variables at, or very near, the median
according to the procedures outlined in Edwards, 1967,
pp. 131-132.

As Table 5 indicates, level of self-esteem corre-
lates moderately and in a positive direction with total
drive expression. The correlation was significant at the
.005 level or beyond. Thus Hypothesis 1 was confirmed.
Hypothesis 2. There is a direct relationship between the

amount of drive which is expressed in
socially acceptable ways (as measured by

the Direct-Socialized (D-S) Drive Content
Score) and level of self-esteem.

35

As seen in Table 6, there is a small, positive
correlation between level of self-esteem and amount of
drive expressed in socially acceptable ways. The corre—
lation was statistically significant at the .05 level and
beyond. Hypothesis 2 was therefore confirmed.

TABLE 6.--The Relationship Between Socialized Drive Ex-
pression and Level of Self-Esteem (N = 91)

 

Level of Self—esteem

 

 

 

 

Low High Totals
Socialized
High 19 26 45
Drive
Low 25 21 46
Expression
Totals 44 47 91
rt = +.19a df = 89
ap < .05

Hypothesis 3. There is an inverse relationship between
the amount of drive which is expressed in
unsocialized ways (as measured by the
Direct-Unsocialized (D-U) Score) and the
level of self-esteem

 

Table 7 reveals a moderate, negative correlation
between level of self-esteem and amount of drive expressed
in unsocialized ways. The correlation was statistically
significant at the .005 level or beyond. Thus Hypothesis

3 was also confirmed.

36

TABLE 7.--The Relationship Between Unsocialized Drive Ex—

pression and Level

of Self-Esteem (N = 91)

 

Level of Self-esteem

 

 

 

 

Low High Totals

Unsocialized

High 27 20 47
Drive

Low 17 27 44
Expression

Totals 44 47 91
—_ a =
rt - .29 df 89
ap < .005

Hypothesis 4.

 

There is an inverse relationship between the
amount of drive which is expressed in highly
constricted ways (as measured by the
Disguised-Indirect (D-I) Score) and level

of self-esteem.

As seen in Table 8, there is no relationship

between level of self-esteem and amount of disguised-

indirect drive expression.

While the results are nonsig-

nificant, there was a very slight trend in the hypothesized

direction. Hypothesis 4 was, however, not confirmed by the

data.

Hypothesis 5.

 

There is a direct relationship between the
degree of drive integration (as measured by
the weighted prOportion of thematic, inci-
dental, and nonappropriate drive ratings)
and level of self-esteem.

As Table 9 indicates, there is a moderate, corre-

lation and in a positive direction between level of

37

TABLE 8.--The Relationship Between Highly Constricted Drive
Expression and Level of Self-Esteem (N = 91)

 

Level of Self-esteem

 

 

 

Low High Totals

Disguised-Indirect

High 23 22 45
Drive

Low 22 24 46
Expression

Totals 45 46 91
_ - a =
rt - .06 df 89

 

aNot Significant

self-esteem and degree of drive integration. The correla-
tion was statistically significant at the .005 level or
beyond. Hypothesis 5 was therefore confirmed.

TABLE 9.--The Relationship Between Degree of Drive Inte-
gration and Level of Self-Esteem (N = 91)

 

Level of Self-esteem

 

 

 

Low High Totals
Degree of
High 19 27 46
Drive
Low 28 17 45
Integration
Totals 47 44 91
a
rt = +.32 df = 89

 

ap < .005

Sex Differences

 

38

In addition to the main hypotheses, there was an

interest in the present study in exploring the relationship

between sex of S§_and each of the major variables.

10 lists those results.

Table

TABLE lO.--Differences in Level of Self-Esteem, Total Drive
Content, Level of Drive Expression, and Degree of Drive

Integration for SS, by Sex

 

 

Male Female
53 53
'Variable (N547) (N344) t F
1- 3223-23.32.35 2:232:23
2' lifiti‘ifiiive) 3:33 3:33 ”38*
3. ngcigiiied drive) Igigg 23:51 0'107* 1°531*
4° 12.-13.32321... , 32-2-2; m:
5. ngniggigted drive) 13:65 2::Ig 0°127* 1°620*
.. .¥:::;:.:£.:rive 223:2: 232:2:

 

*Not Significant (for nondirectional test).

As Table 10 indicates, there were no significant

differences (in mean levels or variability) between male

and female SS on any of the major variables.

However,

there was a small trend toward male SS exhibiting somewhat

39

higher self-esteem and expressing slightly more drive than
female SS.

Table 11 includes the correlation coefficients
(rt) for male and female §§ for each of the five major
relationships studied, along with a test of significance
for sex differences.

As seen in Table 11, there are several relation—
ships which yield significant differences when sex of S is
considered. Male and female §§ both displayed signifi-
cant, positive correlations (+.36 and +.48 respectively)
between level of self-esteem and total drive expression.
While the correlation coefficients do not differ signifi-
cantly it is apparent that for female SS a greater prOpor-
tion of the variance in self-esteem is attributable to

total drive expression, and vice-versa.

 

Female SS displayed a significant, positive corre-
lation (+.4l) between level of self-esteem and socialized
drive expression whereas male SS produced nonsignificant
(and slightly inverse) results with a correlation of —.04.
The differences in rt were significant at the .02 level
or beyond. The resEIts indicate that the significant
relationship for Hypothesis 2 was produced primarily by
the inclusion of female SS in the sample.

Female SS also revealed a significantly higher

negative correlation (-.54) between level of self-esteem

and unsocialized drive expression than did male §§ who

40

TABLE 11.--The Relationship Between Level of Self-Esteem
and Total Drive Expression, Level of Drive Expression, and
Degree of Drive Integration for SS, by Sex

 

Correlation Coefficients (rt)

 

Correlated Variables Male 85 Female 85

(N = 17)) (N = 4IT 2*

 

1. Level of self-esteem
and total drive expres- +.36
sion.

0.67**

2. Level of self-esteem and
socialized drive expres- -.04** +.41
sion.

3. Level of self-esteem and a c
unsocialized drive expres- +.10** -.54 3.24
sion.

4. Level of self-esteem and
disguised—indirect drive. —.04** -.15** 0.51**

5. Level of self-esteem and

degree of drive inte- +.48
gration.

+.14** 1.75d

 

*2 (Test of significance between two E for indepen—
dent samples as outlined in Edwards, 1967, pp. 250-251.)

**Not Significant

ap < .01 (nondirectional test)
bp < .02 ( " " )
Cp < .0006 ( " " )
dp < .04 ( " " )

displayed a slightly positive correlation (+.10). Differ-

ences in rt were significant at the .0006 level or beyond.

This again indicates that female SS contributed more to

the significant results on Hypothesis 3 than did male §§°

41

Neither male nor female SS exhibited a significant
correlation (-.04 and -.15 respectively) between self-
esteem and disguised-indirect drive expression although the
trends were in the hypothesized direction. In addition,

the rt values were not significantly different, indicating

no sex differences on these variables.

Unlike the previous relationships, male SS tended
to have a significantly higher positive correlation (+.48)
between self-esteem and drive integration than did female

E3 (+.l4). The differences in rt were significant at the

.04 level or beyond.

Defensiveness

 

It was of some interest to look at the ways in
which defensiveness on the TSCS related to drive expression
on the TAT productions. Table 12 lists the results for

the SC scale (TSCS) both for the sample and by sex of S.

TABLE 12.--Degree of Defensiveness for SS, by Sex (N = 91)

 

Sample Male 85 Female 85

(N = 91) (N = 4'7) (N = 4??

 

 

Mean 36.96 36.53 37.41
Standard Deviation 5.29 \5.02 5.43
t = 0.725*
F = 1.180*

 

*Not Significant (nondirectional test)

42

As Table 12 points out, male and female SS did not
differ significantly in the level of defensiveness dis-
played on the TSCS, although there was a very slight ten-
dency for female SS to be more open and free in their self-
descriptions.

TABLE l3.--The Relationship Between Indices of Ego Control

on the TAT and the Degree of Defensiveness on the Self-
Concept Inventory

 

 

Correlated r
Variables t p
1. Total Drive Content (TDC)
and Defensiveness (SC score). -.19 p < .10
2. Degree of Drive Integration
and Defensiveness. .22 p < .05
3. Level of Direct-Socialized
ratings and Defensiveness. .12 NS*
4. Level of Direct-Unsocialized
ratings and Defensiveness. .01 NS*
5. Level of Disguised-Indirect
ratings and Defensiveness. .13 NS*

 

*Not Significant

Table 13 reveals a nonsignificant negative corre-
lation between total drive content on the TAT and degree
of defensiveness on the TSCS. Although nonsignificant

(r = -.l9, .05 < p < .10), there is a trend for §§ who

t
project more drive content in the thematic productions to

be less defensive on the TSCS. Conversely, SS who project

43

less thematic drive content tend to be more guarded on
the self-concept inventory.

Table 13 also indicates that there is a significant
positive relationship between the level of drive integra-
tion on the TAT and the degree of defensiveness on the
TSCS. Nonsignificant correlations between drive social-
ization ratings and defensiveness were also evident from
Table 13 (D-S ratings and defensiveness - r = .13; D-U

t

ratings and defensiveness - r = .01; D-I ratings and

t

defensiveness - rt = .13).

DISCUSSION

Before proceeding with a discussion of the major
findings, a few observations concerning the characteris-
tics of the sample are in order. There were several in-
dependent indications that the sample represented a rela-
tively adaptive group of college students (see Table 4).
This was most clearly evident in the drive level scores
which reflect the degree of drive modulation in the TAT
fantasies. SS, regardless of age, sex, or educational
status, tended to express drive primarily in ego-syntonic,
socialized ways; with a smaller proportion of highly-
constricted, indirect drive expressions; and an even
smaller proportion of ego-alien, unsocialized drive ex-
pressions. Secondly; the mean drive integration score
was relatively high indicating that, as a group, SS_were
able to integrate impulses in ways that were appropriate
both stimuluswise and situationwise. Both of these
findings reflect normal (ego) functioning and agree with
results which Pine (1960) obtained with a similar sample
of college students.

On the TSCS, SS obtained a mean self-esteem score

which was significantly lower (t = 2.54, p < .05) than

44

45

Fitt's normative group (TSCS Manual, 1965, p. 14). Several
factors likely account for this difference. One, the
present group was somewhat different than Fitt's normative
group on such demographic variables as age and educational
status. SS in the present study were primarily between
the ages of 19 and 21 whereas Fitts reports an age range
from 12 to 68. In addition, SS in the present study were
all college students (primarily upper-level undergraduates)
while Fitt's group included educational levels from 6th
grade through the Ph.D. degree. Secondly; the lower self-
esteem scores in the present study may reflect cultural
changes which have occurred since 1965.

The mean "defensiveness" score on the TSCS did not
differ significantly from that reported in the Manual and
lends further support to the notions of an adaptive sample.
These findings seem to allow the conclusion that the sam-
ple represented a group of relatively well-adjusted, .
adaptive college students who were primarily between the
ages of 19 and 21 years. It is necessary then in the dis-
cussion which follows to restrict the conclusions and in-
terpretations to this particular portion of the population.

The major findings tended, in general, to support
the previously-stated predictions. As Tables 5-9 indi-
cate, SS_with positive self-esteem displayed more aggres-
sive and sexual drive derivatives in their TAT fantasies

than did SS_with low self-esteem. In addition, high

46

self-esteem SS revealed higher levels of drive socializa-
tion and higher levels of drive integration. In contrast,
SS_with low self-esteem tended to project less sexual and
aggressive content in their TAT fantasies. When drives
were expressed, they appeared more frequently in blatant,
unsocialized ways. In addition, these individuals re-
vealed a tendency toward poorlyeintegrated drive expres-
sion.

These findings lend considerable support to
Schafer's (1958) views that the concept of "regression in
the service of the ego" can be used to account for level
of ego functioning on projective tests. In line with these
views, the present results indicate that individuals with
positive self-esteem tend to produce TAT stories which
reflect considerable "regression in the service of the
ego": stories reveal higher levels of drive expression
combined with an apprOpriate level of ego control which is
reflected in the degree to which drive material is inte-
grated into the thematic product and in the degree to which
it is altered from more primitive, blatant forms. The
present results also indicate that individuals who possess
low self-esteem tend to reveal less "regression in the
service of the ego" on the TAT: stories reveal that higher
levels of control are maintained with a suppression of
drives. These stories reflect a guardedness which results

in mere card description with little or no direct

47

drive expression. When drives do appear, they are more
likely to be projected in blatantly unsocialized, poorly-
integrated ways.

Hypothesis 4 was not confirmed by the data. It
was predicted that low self-esteem individuals would dis-
play higher levels of disguised-indirect (D-I) drive ex-
pressions. This prediction was made on the assumption
that individuals with low self-esteem would be less able,
and willing, to regress adaptively and would therefore
maintain higher levels of control. Consequently drives,
if expressed, would appear in a highly-derived, disguised
form. However, as Table 8 indicates, there was no rela-
tionship between level of self-esteem and D-I ratings. In
attempting to explain this finding the author went back
into the TAT protocols and re-examined the D-I ratings.
It became obvious that a majority of these ratings were
derived from the character labels (husband, wife, boy-
friend, girlfriend, policeman, and such) which were used
in developing the thematic productions. While there was
considerable variability in the D-I scores, it appears as
though the variations were related more to the extent that
these labels were used in developing the written themes
than to the personality variable under consideration.
Individuals who obtained higher D—I ratings used labels
like "husband and wife" to develOp their themes rather

than just writing about "two peOple" or "this person and

48

that person." None of the other scoring categories in-
cluded ratings which are so directly germane to the test
task itself (i.e., developing the written theme).

The present study represents, what appears to be,
an initial attempt to demonstrate that the level of ego
functioning on the TAT is an understandable and predictable
phenomenon. The levels of drive expression and drive con-
trol evident in the thematic productions reflected, in
significant ways, the trends predicted by the "adaptive
regression" hypothesis. The concept of "adaptive regres-
sion" appears then to represent (at least for a normal
population) a viable hypothesis from which to understand
and assess the nature of ego control operations in the
projective process. Additional studies attempting to
examine the question of "Egg_does the individual respond"
(process) rather than "EEEE.d°eS he say" (content) are
needed to develop an adequate process theory of the TAT.
In so doing, valuable contributions to an increased under—
standing of the structural aspects of personality will
also be made.

It is evident from the modest size of the obtained
correlations that level of self—esteem is certainly not
the only determinant of ego functioning. The variations
in level of self-esteem account for only a small portion
of the variance in level of ego functioning, and 3333

versa.

49

In addition to the main findings, there was an
interest in studying sex differences on the major vari-
ables. While a number of studies have examined the rela-
tionship between level of self-esteem and sex of subject
(McKee & Sherriffs, 1959; Fitts, 1965), there has been an
almost complete absence of reported data on sex differ-
ences and TAT fantasy behavior. This is due primarily to
the fact that most studies have used only males (Eron,
1950; Purcell, 1965; Lindzey & Tezessy, 1965). Where both
males and females have been included (Pine, 195; Perkins,
1965), sex differences have not been reported. The pres-
ent data was analyzed for sex differences primarily to fill
this apparant void.

As Table 10 indicates, there was no significant
difference between male and female §§ for level of self-
esteem. These results agree with those reported by Fitts
(1965) and disagree with McKee and Sherriffs' (1959)
findings that males display significantly higher self-
esteem than females. While the differences were not sig-
nificant, it will be noted that the trend, in the present
data, was in the direction of McKee and Sherriffs' find-
ings.

Male and female §§ did not differ significantly in
their TAT fantasy behavior, either in terms of the total
amount of projected driveecontentor in the degree of ego

control (levels of drive socialization and drive

SO

integration). While there are reasons to expect that males
would project more aggressive drive content than females
(i.e., cultural expectations), it does not appear that
they differ when sexual and aggressive drives are assessed
collectively (the two types of instinctual drives were not
evaluated separately in the present study).

In examining sex differences for the five major pre-
dictions, several interesting findings emerged. Female
§§ tended to display, in a rather impressive fashion, the
trends between self-esteem and ego functioning which have
already been discussed. Of particular import, were the
sizable correlations between level of self-esteem and
total drive content (rt = .48, p < .01); level of self-
esteem and direct-socialized drive content (r = .41,

t

p < .01); and level of self-esteem and direct-unsocialized

 

 

drive content (rt = -.54, p < .01).

For male gs, an interesting reversal occurred.
Although males displayed significant correlations between
level of self-esteem and total drive content (rt = .36)
and between level of self-esteem and degree of drive inte-
gration (rt = .48), the relationships between level of
self-esteem and drive socialization (D-S and D-U ratings)
were in the Opposite directions of the original hypotheses.
What this seemed to suggest was that positive self-esteem

males who also revealed adequate ego functioning on the

TAT in terms of the drive integration ratings, were at the

51

same time revealing lower levels of drive socialization; a
theoretical contradiction. In‘a post hoc fashion, the
protocols for the high D-U male §§ were re-examined in an
attempt to explain these unexpected findings. The exam-
ination revealed that these §§ could be divided into two
fairly distinct groups based on the qualitatively differ-
ent D—U stories. Eight (8) of these males produced stories
where impulses were obviously expressed in anti-social
ways. For these gs, sexual and aggressive impulses were
mixed together and confused with stories like "rape fol-
lowed by murder," "a beating and then intercourse," and
other highly deviant expressions. These stories seemed to
clearly indicate unsocialized, value-violating drive ex-
pressions.

However, a majority of the high D-U males (N = 16)
produced stories, which, if the Manual had been modified
to fit the current male college norms, would have been

rated direct-socialized rather than direct-unsocialized.

 

 

Included amoung these stories were such themes as "going
to bed with a girlfriend," "having intercourse with a
date," "a Senator taking a mistress to bed," and such.
These stories should have likely received Q;§ ratings in
light of the changing standards on sexual behavior. It
is interesting to note that none of these "healthier"
stories included an admixture of aggressive impulses.

When these stories were re-rated, significant correlations

52

(in the predicted directions) between level of self-esteem
and drive socialization were obtained. It is important to
remember however, that this was a post hoc analysis and
that no independent rater was used. These findings do,
however, tend to emphasize several obvious but important
points. One, what is ego-syntonic and what is ego-alien
may be culture-and time-specific. It is important there-
fore to consider not only the norms of the particular sub—
culture with which the individual identifies but also the
extent to which these norms change with time. Secondly;
these findings point out the limitations of the scoring
procedure itself. It is apparent that the Manual, while
it represents an improvement over earlier methods, was
unable to assess finer nuances in ego-syntonicity and
levels of socialization.

It is interesting to note that the adaptive female
§§ adhered to more "conservative" ways of expressing sexual
impulses than the male gs. Whether this means that females
entertain somewhat different fantasies than males or
whether they were merely more reluctant to admit to the
same fantasies is a matter for additional speculation.

It will be recalled from an earlier section, that
considerable disagreement exists between those who believe
that projective and non-projective tests elicit qualita-

tively different information about personality (Abt, 1950;

 

(Murray, 1965) and those who purport that both instruments

53

produce similar material (Allport, 1953). The basic issue,

._-—
,lc-r-i

,_—e

as it was discussed, concerns the extent to which indi-
viduals control and censor their responses on each type
of test. Since the TSCS includes a "defensiveness" scale
it was convenient to compare the amount of guardedness or
censorship on this paper-and-pencil test to the level of
control imposed on the TAT fantasies. Scores from the
defensiveness scale were correlated with the TDC scores,
drive integration ratings, ng, 2:2, and 2:; ratings.

As Table 13 indicates, there is a negative corre-
lation (rt = -.l9, p < .lO) between the total amount of
thematic drive content (TDC) and degree of defensiveness
on the self—concept inventory. If we assume an inverse
relationship between level of projected drive and level of
ego control, then the data suggests that §§ who maintain
higher levels of ego control over impulse expression on
the TAT also exert more control (censorship) over their
responses on the paper-and-pencil test.

Table 13 also reveals a significant positive corre-
lation (rt = .22, p < .05) between the degree of thematic
drive integration and degree of defensiveness. In an
earlier discussion, the level of drive integration was
assumed to represent the extent to which the ego was able
to regulate impulses in task—apprOpriate ways. Thus,
higher levels of drive integration represent a greater

degree of ego control over impulse expression whereas

54

lower drive integration ratings suggest poorer ego control.
The positive correlation then suggests that §§ who,dis—~
play more active ego-regulation of drives in the thematic
product also exert more control over their response on the
paper-and-pencil test. These findings are in general
agreement with Allport's (1965) assumptions that §§ who
are more defensive and guarded, are able to control what
they say or do on either type of test. .

It should also be pointed out that the present
study represents one of the few reported times when vari-
ous scores on a projective technique have been found to
be related, in significant ways, to scores on a paper-and-
pencil test.

This discussion should not be concluded without
mentioning briefly an additional interpretation for the
current findings. Thus far, the results have been inter-
preted in terms of the "adaptive regression" hypothesis,
with a focus on the projective process itself. If we can
assume that fantasy behavior is directly related to overt
behavior, then the results can be explained in terms of
social learning theory as well (Bandura & Walters, 1967).
Individuals who learn to express sexual and aggressive
impulses in socially-acceptable ways should receive the
the sorts of positive feedback which would lead to posi-
tive self-evaluations. Conversly, individuals who dis—

play anti-social or asocial sexual and aggressive behavior

55

should incur negative reinforcement from others which would
lead to negative self-evaluations. The nature of the self-
evaluations (either positive or negative) should, in turn,
tend to sustain (reinforce) the different modes of im-
pulse expression. While these two interpretations are by
no means contradictory, they do shift the level of analysis
from the projective test itself to everyday overt behavior.
Research studies, to date, have failed to clarify
the nature of the relationship between fantasy behavior and
overt behavior. Studies by Purcell (1965), Perkins (1965),
and Pittluck (1968) have demonstrated a direct relationship
while other studies (Back, 1954; Korner, 1949) have found
an inverse relationship. This lack of agreement combined
with the fact that the present study did not include a
measure of overt behavior, suggests that the present re-
sults and interpretations should be restricted to fantasy

behavior on the TAT.

Future Research Considerations

Predicting overt behavior from TAT fantasy behavior
has met with many successes and failures. As was cited
previously, overt behavior has been found to be both
directly and inversely related to TAT fantasy behavior.
Part of the reason for these inconsistent results seems to
stem from the rather broad, poorly differentiated scoring
procedures which have been utilized. In predicting aggres—

sive behavior, Purcell (1965) rated such divergent TAT

56

expressions as "criminal assault" and "mention of illness"
in the same scoring category. It would seem necessary in
attempting to predict anti-social or asocial expressions
of sexuality or aggression, that the scoring categories

be refined sufficiently so as to differentiate between
impulse expressions which are commensurate with social
norms and those which are value-violating. The studies,
to date, tend only to reveal the extent to which impulses
are an issue for the person rather than hgw_the impulses
will be expressed. Obviously, the important question from
a diagnostic or prognostic viewpoint is not "how aggres-
sive does the person feel" but "how will this individual
express his hostility"? (Or sexuality as the case may
be.) The Pine Scoring Manual provides a means by which
such distinctions can be assessed and evaluated. Although
Berg (1963) and Perkins (1965) offer some evidence which
would validate these suggestions, additional research is

needed.

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

Various research studies have failed to support
earlier assumptions that underlying drives are directly
expressed in TAT fantasy behavior. The evidence points
rather to the Operation of certain mediating processes
which intervene between the impulse and its overt manifes-
tations.

The present study was designed to examine the
level of drive mediation in TAT productions and to study
the relationship between these mediational processes and
the individual's level of self-esteem. .The concept of
"regression in the service of the ego" was utilized to
make predictions concerning the level of drive expression,
drive integration, and drive modulation in the thematic
productions and their relationship to level of self-
esteem.

Ninety-one subjects (gs) wrote stories to selected
TAT cards and responded to a self-concept inventory. TAT
protocOls were rated for: (1) total amount of projected
sexual and aggressive drive content, (2) degree of drive
integration, and (3) degree of drive socialization.

Tetrachoric correlational coefficients between the

57

58

thematic drive ratings and the self-concept inventory
scores were computed.

The major findings were as follows:

(1) Individuals with high self-esteem produce
TAT stories with higher levels of sexual and aggressive
drive content. High self-esteem §§ also display higher
levels of drive integration and drive socialization in
their thematic productions.

(2) Individuals with low self-esteem produce TAT
stories with lower levels of sexual and aggressive drive
content. These low self-esteem §§ tend also to either
(a) produce highly descriptive, banal stories with little
direct drive expression, or (b) develop stories with higher
levels of poorly-integrated, blatantly-unsocialized drive
expression.

These findings were interpreted as supporting the
assumptions surrounding the role of "regression in the
service of the ego" in the projective process. The impli-
cations of using this concept as a basis for a "process
theory" of the TAT were discussed.

(3) Male and female §§ did not differ signifi-
cantly in the level of drive expression or drive control
on the TAT. In addition, there were no sex differences
in level of self-esteem. Female §§ followed the major
trends between thematic behavior and self-esteem as re-

ported above. Male gs, however, obtained correlations

59

between self-esteem scores and drive socialization ratings
which were not in the hypothesized directions. A post hoc
analysis suggested that "adaptive" males projected more
drive with slightly lower levels of socialization which,
because of the limitations of the scoring procedure, were

rated as unsocialized rather than socialized drive content.

 

 

When these drive content ratings were re-rated as social-
ized, significant correlations in the hypothesized direc-
tions were obtained.

(4) Several measures of ego control on the TAT
were found to be related to the degree of defensiveness
on the self-concept inventory. Level of thematic drive
integration was directly related to defensiveness

(r = .22, p < .05), whereas amount of total drive content

t

was inversely related to defensiveness (rt = -.l9, p < .10).
Level of drive socialization was not significantly related
to defensiveness although the trend was in the expected
direction (rt = .12). These findings were discussed as
supporting Allport's (1965) views that §E are able to
impose similar levels of control on projective and non-
projective tests.

It was also pointed out that the present findings
represent one of the few reported studies where scores on

a projective technique were found to be related, in sig-

nificant ways, to scores on a paper-and-pencil test.

60

Future research was considered with an emphasis
on utilizing the Pine Drive Content Manual in a study

relating fantasy behavior to overt behavior.

REFERENCES

REFERENCES

Abt, L. E. A theory of projective psychology. In L. E.
Abt & L. Bellak (Eds.) Pro'ective psychology.
New York: Alfred A. Knopf, Inc., 1950. Pp. 33—68.

 

Allport, G. W. The trend in motivational theory. In
B. I. Murstein (Ed.) Handbook of projective
techniques. New York: Basic Books, 1965. Pp. 35-
48.

 

 

Ashcraft, C. & Fitts, W. H. Self-concept change in psycho-
therapy. Psychotherapy, 1964, 1, 115-118.

 

Atkinson, J. & McClelland, D. The projective expression of
needs: II. The effect of different intensities of
the hunger drive on thematic apperception. Journal
of Experimental Psychology: 1948, 38, 643-658.

 

Bach, G. Young children's play fantasies. Psychological
monographs, 1945, 59 (No. 2).

 

 

Bandura, A. & Walters, R. Social learning and personality
development. New York: Holt, Rinehart, and
Winston, 1967.

 

 

Berg, P. S. D. Neurotic and psychOpathic criminals: Some
measures of ego syntonicity, impulse socialization,
and perceptual consistency. Unpublished doctoral
dissertation, Michigan State University, 1963.

Clark, R. The projective measurement of experimentally
induced levels of sexual motivation. Journal of
Experimental Psychology, 1952, 44, 391-399.

 

 

Cohen, I. Adaptive regression, dogmatism, and creativity.
Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Michigan State
University, 1960.

Congden, 8. Self theory and chlorpromazine treatment.
In W. H. Fitts, Manual for Tennessee Self Concept
Scale. Nashville,’Tennessee: Counselor Recording
and Tests, 1965. Pp. 28-29.

 

61

62

Davids, A. Comparison of three methods of personality
assessment: Direct, indirect, and projective.
Journal of Personality, 1955, £3, 423-440.

 

Diggory, J. Self-evaluation: Concepts and studies.
New York: John Wiley & Sons, 1966.

Edwards, A. Statistical methods. New York: Holt, Rine—
hart & Winston, 1967.

 

Erickson, E. Identity: Youth and crisis. New York:
W. W. Norton & Company, 1968.

 

Eron, L. A normative study of the TAT. In B. I. Murstein
(Ed.) Handbook ofpprojective techniques. New York:
Basic Books, 1965. Pp.4469-507.

 

Feshbach, S. The drive reducing function of fantasy be-
havior. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology,
1955' '5_0_, 3'11.

Fitts, W. Manual fer the Tennessee Self Concept Scale.
Nashville, Tennessee: Counselor Recordings and
Tests, 1965.

 

Frank, L. Projective methods. Springfield, Illinois:
- Charles C. Thomas, 1948.

Freud, S. The ego and the Id. (1923) New York: W. W.
Norton, 1960.

 

Freud, S. On narcissism: An introduction. In Collected
Papers. London: Hogarth, 1924, 4, 30-59. (trans.)

 

Freud, S. The problem of anxiety. (Trans. H. A. Bunker
from Hemming, Symptom, and Augst, 1926. ) New York:
W. W. Norton, 1936.

 

Gordon, H. A comparative study of dreams and responses to
the TAT. A need-press analysis. Journal of Per-
sonality, 1953, 3%, 234-253.

 

Harrison, R. Thematic apperception methods. In B. B.
Wolman (Ed.) Handbook of clinical psychology.
New York: McGraw-Hill, 1965:

Hartmann, H. Ego psychology and the problems of adaptation.
New York: International University Press, 1958.

Havener, P. Distortions in the perception of self and
others by persons using paranoid defenses. In
W. Fitts Manual for the Tennessee Self Concept
Scale. Nashville, Tennessee: Counselor Recording
and Tests, 1965. Pp. 28.

63

Hersch, J. Cognitive functioning of the creative person.
Journal of Projective Techniques, 1962, 26, 193-
199. —

 

Holt, R. Forman aspects of the TAT. Journal of Projective
Techniques, 1958, 34, 163—172.

 

 

Korner, A. Some aspects of hostility in young children.
New York: Grune & Stratton, 1949.

 

Kris, E. Psychoanalytic exploratipgs in art. New York:
International Universities Press, 1952.

 

Lazarus, R. A substitutive defensive conception of
apperceptive fantasy. In J. Kagan & G. Lesser
(Eds.) Contemporary issues in thematic apper-
ceptive methods. Springfield, Illinois: Charles C.
Thomas, 1961. Pp. 51-71.

 

 

Lindzey, G. The assessment of human motives. In G.
Lindzey (Ed.) The assessment of human motives.
New York: Rinehart, 1958. Pp. 3-32.

 

Lindzey, G. & Tezessy C. Thematic apperception test:
Indices of aggression in relation to measure of
overt and covert behavior. In B. Murstein (Ed.)
Handbook of projective techniques. New York:
Basic Bocks, 1965. Pp. 575-586.

 

McClelland, D., Atkinson, J., Clark, R., & Lowell, E.
The achievement motive. New York: Appleton, 1953.

 

Murray, H. Manual for the Thematic Apperception Test.
Cambridge: Harvard Universities Press, 1943.

 

Murray, H. Uses of the Thematic Apperception Test. In
B. I. Murstein (Ed.) Handbook of projectiye tech—
ni ues. New York: Basic Books, 1965. Pp. 425-
432.

 

Murstein, B. (Ed.) Handbook of projective techniques.
New York: Basic Books, 1965.

 

Pine, F. Thematic drive content and creativity. Journal
of Personality, 1959, El, 136-151.

 

Pine, F. A manual for rating drive content in the TAT.
Journal of Projective Techniques, 1960, 44, 32-45.

 

64

Perkins, R. Repression, psychopathology, and drive
representation: An experimental hypnotic investi-
gation of the management of impulse inhibition.
Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Michigan State
University, 1965.

Pittluch, P. The relation between aggressive fantasy and
overt behavior. In A. I. Rabin (Ed.) Projective
techniques and pegsonality assessment. New York:
Springer, 1968. Pp. 213.

 

Powell, M. Self-concept-vs-creativity. Dissertation
Abstracts, 1964, E3 (3), 2054.

 

 

Purcell, K. The thematic apperception test and antisocial
behavior. In B. Murstein (Ed.) Handbook of pro-
jective techniques. New York: Basic Books, 1965.
Pp. 575-586.

 

 

Rogers, C. On becoming a person. Boston: Houghton
Mifflin, 1951.

 

Rogolsky, M. Artistic creativity and adaptive regression
in 3rd grade children. Journal of Projective
Techniques and Personality Assessment, 1968, 33,
53.

 

 

Schafer, R. Regression in the service of the ego: The
relevance of a psychoanalytic concept for person-
ality assessment. In G. Lindzey (Ed.) The assess-
ment of human motives. New York: Rinehart,—1958.
Pp. 119-148.

 

 

Scodel, A., & Lipetz, M. TAT hostility and psychopathology.
Journal of Projective Techniques, 1957, 34, 161-165.

 

Sisk, D. Self-concept and creative thinking. Dissertation
Abstracts, 1967, 27(8—A), 2455.

 

 

Smith, M. The phenomenological approach in personality
theory: Some critical remarks. In E. Southwell
& M. Merbaum (Eds.) Personality: Theory and
research. Belmont, California: Wad§Worth, 1964.

Sullivan, H. S. Conceptions of modern psychiatry. New
York: W. W. Norton, 1945.

 

Symonds, P. The ego and the self. New York: Appleton-
Century-Croft, 1951.

 

Taylor,

Walker,

Wayne,

65

C., & Combs, A. Self-acceptance and adjustment.
Journal of Consulting Psychology, 1952, 19, 89-91.

 

E., Atkinson, J., Veroff, J., Birney, R.,

Dember, W., & Moulton, R. The expression of fear-
related motivation in thematic apperception as a
function of proximity to an atomic explosion.

In J. Atkinson (Ed.) Motives in fantasy, action,
and sociepy. Princeton, New Jersey: Van Nostrand,
1958. Pp. 143-159.

 

S. The relation of self-esteem to indices of per-

ceived and behavioral hostility. In W. Fitts
Manual for Tennessee Self Concept Scale. Nash-
ville, Tennessee: Counselor Recofding & Tests,
1965. Pp. 28.

APPENDICES

APPENDIX A

A MANUAL FOR RATING DRIVE CONTENT IN

THE THEMATIC APPERCEPTION TEST

APPENDIX A

A Manual for Rating Drive Content
in the Thematic Apperception Test*

Fred Pine

The Scoring Manual

Presence of drive content

Throughout the manual, the term "drive" is used in
the psychoanalytic sense to refer to instinctual drives
and their derivatives. This includes aggressive and
libidinal drives and partial drives (oral, anal, phallic,
genital, exhibitionistic, voyeuristic, sadistic, masochistic,
homosexual, narcissistic) (cf., Freud, 1905). The term
"drive content" refers to observable ideational derivatives
of the inferred aggressive and libidinal drives. These
derivatives appear in the TAT story content. ‘

Drive content is rated only if it is stated explicitly
in the story; thus, for example, implied motives and sym-
bolic expressions of drives are not rated. The decision
to rate only the manifest story content was made for two
reasons: first, in the belief that individual differences
would be erased somewhat in speculations about more
universally present drives which are latent (in the story)
and unconscious (in the person); second, in an attempt to
relate the ratings closely to the psychology of ego func-
tioning. The manual is not intended to be an all-purpose
one; both its usefulness and its limitations are tied to
its commitments to psychoanalytic theory (reflected here
in the selection of aggressive and libidinal drives for
rating) and its more specific commitment to psychoanalytic
ego psychology (reflected here in the emphasis on control
operations with regard to expressed drive content).

Drive content is rated if it appears at any point
in S's response to a TAT card except in response to a
direct inquiry question. Thus, "how did he feel?" -
"angry" would not be rated although responses to inquiries
such as "tell me more" or "how did it all turn out" are
rated. Drive content is rated without regard to its
extent; passing mention or full thematic development of,
say, an aggressive incident would each be rated. On the

 

* Journal of Projective Techniques, 1960, 31, 32-45.

66

67

other hand, drive content which is too far removed from
aggressive or libidinal connections is not rated (for
example, friendship, achievement motives, gazing at
scenery); it was found necessary to establish some such
cutting point, albeit an arbitrary one, in order to avoid
a tendency to rate almost everything 8 says. The ratings
of drive level, described below, represent an attempt to
cope with this entire issue. Finally, affective experi-
ences which are directly linked to particular drives (anger,
love) are rated, although affective states in general are
not (shame, guilt, sadness, elation, etc.). These and all
other ratings are illustrated below.

Integration of drive content

S's task on the TAT is to tell a story about a
picture. To the degree that drive content is given in
accord with this task requirement, some ego control is
indicated. The degree to which drive content is inte-
grated into S's response to a card (the response ordinarily
being a story, but on occasion an essay-like production
or an elaborated description) was taken to be an index of
appropriateness of drive expression and adequacy of ego
control.

Of the appropriately used drive content, two types
were distinguished. Drive content which is part of the
central theme or character portrayal of the story is
rated thematic, in contrast to drive content which is
incidental to the main theme (but still part of the story).
Drive content can be rated thematic even if it is given
only briefly; its links to the main story rather than
its extent is at issue here. Even if the rater feels a
story could get along without an item of drive content,
if S gave it as part of the central story theme it is
rated thematic. Incidental drive content, while integrated
into the story, is generally expendable even in S's pre—
sentation of the material. For example, drive content is
generally incidental when it is given in analogy which is
intended tangentially to enrich the story.

In contrast to both thematic and incidental ratings,
a rating of nonappropriate is given to those expressions
of drive which are not in accord with the TAT task
(telling a story about a picture) or which were not intended
by S. These include: 1. Exclamations and side comments
before, during, or after the story (for example, "Wow,
this is a sexy one" or "That murder last week gives me an
idea for this story"). 2. Drive content given in card
descriptions when it does not then get included in the

 

 

68

story (for example, mention of the gun on card 3BM followed
by a story about fatigue rather than, say, suicide).

3. Misperceptions or doubts about the identity of persons
or objects when drive content is involved (for example,
calling the violin on card 1 a machine gun or misperceiv-
ing the sex of a character; the figure on 3BM and the lower
figure on lBGF were unrated whether seen as male or female).
4. Verbal slips where drive content is evident in the

slip itself (including the sexual ambiguity suggested by
use of wrong-sex pronouns- "he" instead of "she" for
example). Slips that are made in a broader drive content
context are rated separately while the story context gets
its own rating.

Directness of expression of drive content.

TAT stories vary in the degree to which their
expressed drive content is primitive, value-violating, and
direct on the one hand, or socialized, value-syntonic,
and/or disguised on the other. The present manual dis-
tinguishes three levels of expression of drive content,
the levels partially modelled after Holt and Havel's (1959)
distinction between two levels of drive content in Rorschach
responses.

Level I (direct-unsocialized) includes those
expressions of drive content where libidinal or aggressive
impulses are directly expressed in a way contrary to
conventional social values. Murder, robbery, rape, prosti-
tution, homosexuality, alcoholism, and extramarital sexual
relationships, for example, are all rated here. In addition
to the criterion "violation of conventional values," a
second criterion is applied for aggression derivatives,
i.e., physical expression. Anger is rated level I only
when it involves physical violence. In all cases, it is
only the unsocialized and direct drive expression in the
manifest story content which gets rated.

Level II (direct-socialized) includes those expres-
sions of drive content where libidinal or aggressive
impulses are expressed directly but in socialized ways.
Anger expressed without physical violence, arguments among
family members, sexual rivalries and jealousies, kissing,
eating, social drinking, intercourse between marriage part—
ners, and childbirth are all rated here.

Level III (indirect-disguised; weak) actually includes
two kinds of drive content. The first, indirect and

69

disguised drive expression, includes those instances that
are associated with (often relatively strong) drives, but
where the underlying impulse is neither explicitly thought
nor acted upon in the story. Mention of police, soldiers,
rulers, restaurants, saloons, illness, accidents, natural
or accidental deaths are all included here. All of these
permit the inference that a particular drive is an issue
for the person but, although some reflection of the drive
appears in the manifest story, the drive itself is not
expressed. If the context alters this, e.g., "he §£g_in
a restaurant" or "the soldier fough ," level II or I would
be rated. The second type of content rated level III
includes drive expressions which are weak and highly
derived. For example, social expressions of aggression
derivatives such as strikes and militant unions are rated
here as are highly formalized drive expressions such as
familial affection. An arbitrary cutoff point must be
established here so that material which is too weak does
not get rated. Reference to surgeons, microscopes,
struggles to get ahead in life are not rated although
inferences can readily be made to impulses from which
they derive.

Three additional points on drive level ratings:
(1) Negation of drive expression is rated identically
with positive expression. "He wanted to kiss her but he
didn't" is rated level II. (Such negated expressions are
often given in such a manner as to make then "incidental";
for example, "let's see...it's not that he wanted to kiss
her, I'd say he just liked her.") (2) Thoughts and
wishes are rated equally with actions in most cases. "He
wanted to kill him" is rated level I whether or not the act
is carried out. On occasion, such content is given as a
way of communicating intensity rather than true intent:
in those instances a more controlled level may be rated.
(3) Context is always considered in rating drive level.
For example, kissing as part of an attempted seduction of
a married person is level I rather than II. Similarly,
criminal execution and war are the two major examples of
killing that may be rated level II rather than level I;
for war stories, the level II rating is given when the
emphasis is on patriotism, duty, and the normal course of
events in war rather than on aggressive acts and violations
of rules of warfare.

Units of analysis
Drive material may be rated many times in any one
story, and considerations of the extent of the expressed

70

content were independent of the rating unit. Several rules
were established to guide raters in selecting the unit to
be rated in each instance: (1) Expressions of derivatives
of different drives are rated as separate instances of
drive expression. For example, "he was angry but a couple
of drinks helped him to settle down" would be rated once
for the aggressive content and once for the oral content.
(2) Expressions of drive with differing degrees of inte-
gration into the story (thematic, incidental, or nonappro-
priate) are always rated separately, even if the drive
expressed is identical. Thus, an incidental and a thematic
aggressive phrase would receive two ratings. (3) In
contrast, a new level of an already expressed drive would
not get a separate rating. "He went into a bar (level III)
and got dead drunk" (level I) would be rated only once,

the rating of the more extreme content. This stepwise
expression of drive material appears so often and generally
with such an inevitability in the sequence that to rate
them independently would artificially raise the total
number of ratings given. (4) Within the same general type
of drive content and the same degree of integration
separate ratings are given if new behavior sequences are
described or if the expressed impulse has a new aim.

Some illustrative stories and ratings

Four illustrative TAT stories are given below.
Stories particularly rich in rating issues were selected.
In each, certain material is lettered and italicized;
comments on the lettered material are given immediately
following each story, using the letters for cross reference.
Ratings are given in parentheses. The first symbol
indicates the drive level (I, II, or III); the second
symbol indicates the degree of integration ("T" for
thematic, "In" for incidental, and "N" for nonappropriate).

1. (Card 3BM) (a) ‘Well, I take it that is a
pistol on the floor. This young man is in a Balkan country.
He was young and (b) inclined to melancholy. (c) The_
Germans had overrun the country. His father had been
captured and killed by the Germans. His fortune was lost
and all his friends died. Oh, I forgot to say he was
Jewish. He's been making feverish attempts (d) to release
his father, but without success. Now he has returned from
an exploit where he went to German headquarters, (e) shot
the man who was there, and ran through the streets to his
home. He knows what will happen when he's caught, so he
(f) puts a bullet through his own head. (9) I guess that's

 

71

a pistol. It certainly isn‘t a veryyrealistic representa-
tion of one though.

a. (Not rated) Although this is card description,
it is later used in the story. Had the gun been mentioned
and then omitted from the story it would have been rated
III-N (level III because it is associated with an aggressive
impulse which, however, would not have been expressed in
the story). As is, the rating is included with (f), below.

b. (Not rated) Affects are rated only if drive
content is specifically stated.

c. (I-T) All of this is rated as one unit. The
emphasis on the atrocities of war requires the level I
rating. It is all central to the story theme.

d. (I-N) The phrase "release his father"
contradicts the earlier "his father had been captured
and killed." There is a slip here somewhere, and since
it involves the killing of the father, it is rated level I,
nonappropriate.

e. (I-T) Though still aggression, this is a new
behavior sequence (in relation to the actions of the
German invaders) and is rated separately. Although one
may sympathize with the actions of the hero, the murder
in a revenge context is best rated as level I.

f. (I-T) This aggression too is sufficiently
different from the former instances to be rated separately.
Suicide is level I. Although the suicide is only briefly
mentioned, it is still part of the central theme of the
story and is rated thematic.

g. (I-N) This is a nonappropriate extraneous
comment; it has nothing to do with the story. Since
context is considered in rating drive level, and since the
gun has already been established in the story as a murder
and suicide weapon, the reference to the gun here is level I
rather than level III.

2. (Card 10) (a) A soldier going off to fight in
the war, and the woman with whom he is supposedly (b) 43
love is crying and kisses him gpodbye. Much later, he
returns to France and finds that his young lady has
(c) married someone else in order-to keep herself in
(d) food and clothing. And he does nothing probably.
Looks for (e) food and clothing for himself. No action.
Well, of course the marriage- I could clear that. He
could find her, and she, not having married for love,

(f) could give herself to him as well as to the person she
married.

a. (II-T) In the context of duty, war is rated
level II.

 

 

72

b. (II-T) This is a direct expression of a
libidinal impulse in a socialized way and in line with
the main story theme.

c. (III-T) The later references to marriage in
the story add nothing new to this first reference and are
included in this rating. Marriage, when given in such a
stylized way, is rated level III since only a very
watered down expression of drive comes through into the
story.

d. (II-T) Oral (food) content is different from
the earlier rated libidinal content (kissing and marriage)
and is rated as a separate unit. The reference to food
provides motivation for the marriage under wartime condi-
tions and, as such, is essential to the main theme of the
given story. It is a direct expression of an oral need.

e. (II-In) Once again the reference to food is
a direct oral expression in a socialized way. Here,
however, it seems to be presented by S as a momentary
pause in the story, before 8 gets on with the main theme;
as such it is rated incidental. Incidental presentation
by S in the story, rather than the rater's decision that
a story could do without an item of drive content, is
what requires an item of drive content to be rated inci-
dental. Although the "food" content here is identical
with the previously rated item, it is rated as a separate
unit because it is a different degree of integration
(incidental rather than thematic) and because it is a new
behavior sequence carried out by another person; either
of these reasons alone would be sufficient to require a
separate rating for this unit.

f. (I—T) Using the conventional values of society
as the yardstick for deciding between level I and level II
ratings, this is unsocialized drive expression and is
rated level I.

3. (Card 13MF) This boy had (a) time to kill and
stoPped in a (b) bar for a few drinks. He kept
(c) noticing a girl who was not pretty but whose dress
showed off her body well. She came up to him after a
while and suggested they go to her apartment. She was
(d) not what might be considered an actual_prostitute but
she was lonely and wanted to do something to change her
mood. After they had (e) three or four drinks at her
place, she suddenly suggested (f) theyygo to bed together.
The boy was naive and was taken aback, but felt his
(9) manly pride required him to do so- so he did. As
he's leaving the room now, he feels that sexual relations

 

73

are not all that they are made out to be and that he can
take it or leave it. But what he doesn't realize is that
(h) sex should never be an end in itself but only a means
to an end with someone you love.

a. (Not rated) Figurative expressions like this
one are not rated.

b. (II-T) This is an instance where two similar
instances of drive content are rated as one unit even
though they would individually be rated at different
levels (bar as level III and drinks as level II). The two
form a consistent unit and are rated at the level of the
strongest expression.

c. (II-T) Although "noticing" alone would be
considered too distant from voyeuristic impulses to be
rated, the total context provides a ratable voyeuristic-
exhibitionistic theme. The expression is direct, socialized,
and thematic.

d. (I-In) The denial here makes this incidental
to the main theme. Although prostitution is negated, it
is still level I.

e. (II-T) This is a new behavior sequence and is
rated separately from the earlier oral content. The
drinking here is still sufficiently socialized to get a
level II rating.

f. (I-T) This rating includes the various references
to intercourse in the story. Premarital intercourse,
certainly in this non-love context, is rated level I.

g. (III—T) This is a thematic and highly derived
expression of narcissistic libido.

h. (II-In) This is extraneous comment, but it
manages to retain enough of a link to the story (as a
”moral" of sorts) so that it cannot be rated nonappropriate.
Hence, the incidental rating.

4. (Card 4) (a) These people resemble Clark Gable
and Gene Tierney. The curtains give the impression this
takes place in a house, but (b) the pin-up picture in the
back seems to negate this. So I conclude that it's
(c) in a bar or a roadside stand or someplace like that,
and (d) this waitress is trying to prevent this truck
driver from leaving. He's (e) not too well liked by the
other drivers on the route, so one of them started a rumor
that his (f) girlfriend here was cheating on him. The
eyes of the girl make it clear that she'll convince him
of the falseness of the rumors. (How does he feel?)

He has a tinge of doubt, but he believes (g) him...her...
basically, but he has doubt. The doubt makes him have a
not very convincing (h) fit of anger but then they forget

 

74

it.

a. (Not rated) Although this is relevant commen-
tary, it has no drive content and is not rated.

b. (II-In) This is card description which gets
into the story only peripherally, through providing a kind
of atmosphere and backdrop; as such it is incidental. The
voyeuristic implications of the pin-up picture seem direct
enough to require a level II rating.

c. (III-In) All of this oral content is level III;
no one is actually eating. Although this is part of the
story, the way in which S presents it ("it could be X or
Y or Z") indicates that it is incidental even to S himself.

d. (III-T) "waitress" is rated separately from
"bar or restaurant" since it is given as part of the main
story theme and is thus a new level of integration.

e. (II-T) The rating is level II. In spite of
the euphemistic and negative mode of expression, this is
still a direct expression of hostility.

f. (II-T) Applying conventional standards of
morality: since the first man and the woman are unmarried,
and since intercourse is not explicit here, the reference
to "cheating" seems better described as level II than
level I.

g. (III-N) This slip, involving a sexual confusion,
gets rated although a slip in which the drive content is
not evident in the slip itself would not be rated. The
him-her ambiguity does not involve any direct drive
expression and is rated level III.

h. (II-T) Although this is part of the inquiry,
it is rated because it was not evoked directly by an
inquiry question. (If the sequence had been, "how does
he feel?," "angry," there would be no rating.) No physical
violence is made explicit in the story, so the "fit of
anger" remains level II.

APPENDIX B

THE TENNESSEE SELF CONCEPT SCALE

TEST BOOKLET

APPENDIX B

The Tennessee Self Concept Scale
Test Booklet*

INSTRUCTIONS

On the top line of the separate answer sheet, please
fill in your age, sex, and educational status. ‘Write only
on the answer sheet. Do not put any marks in this booklet.

The statements in this booklet are to help you describe
yourself as you see yourself. Please respond to them as if
you were describing yourself to yourself. Do not omit any
items. Read each statement carefully; then select one of
the five responses listed below. On your answer sheet, put
a circle around the response you chose. If you want to
change an answer after you have circled it, do not erase it
but put an E mark through the response and then circle the
response you want.

As you start, he sure that your answer sheet and
this booklet are lined up evenly so that the item numbers
match each other.

Remember, put a circle around the response number
you have chosen for each statement.

 

Completely Mostly Partly false Mostly Completely
Responses - false false and true true
partly true

1 2 3 4 5

YOu will find these response numbers repeated at the
bottom of each page to help you remember them.

 

*William H. Fitts, 1964
75

Page I If)?“
I. I have a healthy body ................................................... 1
3. I am an attractive person ................................................ 3
5. I consider myself a sloppy person ......................................... 5
I9. I am a decent sort of person ............................................. 19
2].!amanhonestperson ................................................... 21
23. I am a bad person ...................................................... 23
37. I am a cheerful person .................................................. 37
39. I am a calm and easy going person ........................................ 39
4I . I am a nobody ......................................................... 41 '
55. I have a family that would always help me in any kind of trouble. . . . . . . . . . . . .. 53
57. I am a member of a happy family ......................................... 57
59. My friends have no confidence in me ...................................... 59
73. I am a friendly person ................................................... 73
75. I am popular with men .................................................. 75
77. I am not interested in what other people do ................................ 77
9I . I do not always tell the truth ............................................. 91
93. I get angry sometimes .- .................................................. 93
Completely Mostly Partly false Mostly Completely
Responses- false false and true true
partly true

76

 

I 2 3 4 5

77 Page.2 No.

2. I like to look nice and neat all the time ................................. '2 "

4. I am full of aches and pains ............................ . ............... 4

6. I am a sick person .................................................... 6
20. I am a religious person ................................................ 20
22.Iamamora|fai|ure ............ ........................ 22
24. I am a morally weak person ...................... i ...................... 24
38. I have a lot of self-control ............................................ 38
40. I am a hateful person ................................................. ('0
42. I am losing my mind .................................................. 42
56. I am an important person to my friends and family ......................... 55 _
58. I am not loved by my family ........................................... 58
60. I feel that my family doesn't trust me .................................... ~60
74. I am popular with women .............................................. 7“
76. I am mad at the whole world ........................................... 76
78. I am hard to be friendly with ........................................... 78
92. Once in a while I think of things too bad to talk about .................... 92
94. Sometimes, when I am not feeling well, I am cross ........................ .95 4

Completely Mostly Partly false Mostly Completely
Responses- false false and true true
partly true

Item

 

I 2 3 4 5

Item

 

78 P”! 3 No,

7. I am neither too fat nor too thin ............... . ........................ 7
9. I like my looks iust the way they are .................... I ................ 9
II. I would like to change some parts of my body ............................. 11
25

25. I am satisfied with my moral behavior ....................................
27. I am satisfied with my relationship to God. . . . . ........................... 27
29. I ought to go to church more ........................................... 29
43. I am satisfied to be just what I am ....................................... 43
45. I am iust as nice as I should be ......................................... 45
47

47. I despise myself ......................................................
6l . I am satisfied with my family relationships ................................ 61
63. I understand my family as well as I should ................................ 63
65. I should trust my family more ........................................... 65
79. I am as sociable as I want to be ......................................... ~79
8i . I try to please others, but I don't overdo it ............................... 81
83. I am no good at all from a social standpoint ............................... 83
95. I do not like everyone I know .......................................... 95
97. Once in a while, I laugh at a dirty ioke ................................ 97

Completely Mostly Partly false Mostly Completely
Responses- false false and true true
partly true

I 2 3 4 5

79 Page 4 No.

8. I am neither too tall nor too short ..................................... 8
ID. I don't feel as well as I should ........................................ 19:
12. I should have more sex appeal ........................................ 13
26. I am as religious as I want to be ....................................... “26 -‘~
28. I wish I could be more trustworthy ..................................... 28
30. I shouldn't tell so many lies .......................................... 5g
44. I am as smart as I want to be .......................................... 44
46. I am not the person I would like to be .................................. 45‘
48. | wish I didn't give up as easily as I do ................................. ‘48 ‘i
62. I treat my parents as well as I should (Use past tense if parents are not living). 62
64. I am too sensitive to things my family say ............................... ' 64
'66. I should love my family more ............. ' ............................. 6 6
80. I am satisfied with the way I treat other people .......................... W
82. Ishouldbe more polite toothers 32
84. I ought to get along better with other people ............................ 85¢.
96. I gossip a little at times .............................................. gar
98. At times I feel like swearing .......................................... 93

Completely Mostly Partly false - Mostly Completely
Responses - false false and true true

Item

 

partly true

I 2 3 4 5

Page 5
13. I take good care of myself physically .................................
IS. I try to be careful about my appearance ...............................
I7. I often act like I am "all thumbs" ....................................
3I . I am true to my religion in my everyday life ...........................
33. I try to change when I know I'm doing things that are wrong ..............
35. I sometimes do very bad things .................................... . .
49. I can always take care of myself in any situation .......................
5I . I take the blame for things without getting mad .........................
53. I do things without thinking about them first ...........................
67. I try Io play fair with my friends and family ............................
69. I take a real interest in my family ....................................
7l . I give in to my parents. (Use past tense if parents are not living) .........
85. I try to understand the other fe-llow's point of view ......................
87. I get along well with other people ....................................
89. I do not forgive others easily ........................................
99. I would rather win than lose in a game ................................
Completely Mostly Partly false Mostly Completely
Responses - false false and true true
partly true
I 2 3 4 5

80

Item
No.

13

 

15

17

31

33

35

49

51

53

67

69

71

85

87

89

99

I4. I feel good most of the time ....................... - .................... 14
I6. I do poorly in sports and games ........................................ 16
I8. I am a poor sleeper .................................................. 18
32. I do what is right most of the time ..................................... 32
34. I sometimes use unfair means to get ahead .............................. 3!.
36. I have trouble doing the things that are right ............................ 36
50. I solve my problems quite easily ....................................... 50
52. I change my mind a lot ............................................... 52
54. I try to run away from my problems ..................................... 54
68. I do my share of work at home ......................................... 68
70.. I quarrel with my family .............................................. 7o
72. I do not act like my family thinks I should .............................. ' 72 I
86. I see good points in all the people I meet .............................. 86 '
88. I do not feel at ease with other people ................................. 88
90. I find it hard to talk with strangers ..................................... 90
IOO. Once in a while I put off until tomorrow what I ought to do today .......... 100
Completely Mostly Partly false Mostly Completely
Responses- false false and true true

81 Page 6 115613!“

 

portly true
I 2 3 4 5

FORM C. AND I.

 

 

 

 

 

 

TENNESSEESELFCONCEFI’SCALE ANSWRSt-ET
ITEM PAGES m PAGE! IT!“ noes
no amps no smos no. new:
13:21:45 7 Izsss t izs4s
I4 rzs4s I Illtfi‘! steel.
1512345 9 r2345: Izssl
Isizs4st011s4serzs4s
1712345" 123455 12345
teizs4slzisssse isses PEI
3| 1234525123451912343 ‘-
32r2s4szoizs4szorzs4s
33123452712s4521 Izs4s
341234520l134§2211348
35|2345 2912345 23:2345
36:234saoizsasuizsss
4912345 4312345 3712345
SOIzs4suits4ssaiss4s
511234545123453011345
521234540123454012345
531234547izses4t1234s
uizssseerzs4s 4212345
67:234561 l23455512345
6812345 GZIzaalflOtllls
6912345 6312345 57'2345
7oizsssurzs4ssolzs4s
7i 1234565123455912345
7212345 6612s4s¢0rzs4s
8512345 79'2345 7312345
seizs4seoizs4s74tzs4s
871234581 l234575l2345
larzsssazlzs4s7oizs4s
391234553123457711345
9012:4suizsss7urzs4s
991234551234591 Izs4s
mlzs4soerzs4surzses
97:23459312345
”issssuizses

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

PUBLISHED OVA
CMOROI mm M. fl."
.0! .9... “It.“ "A.
we“. rams. ”It. 1‘ M u. am. we.

 

 

 

Hm, . .4

0‘: IUL .Idii!

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

. u .n !-.Fh-O I 2 ~ all I III I
52.12%?“qu .. U + + + .. a
38.33.: In I I l 2.2 In. hr I .F hr
00— I 332
l n l I l I 9
I I I O— U I I l I I enclose:
.- 1 c .. 2 +8.11? In»...
I 4 II.
I (<0
.71. _. .. .2. ah
I I I I I I 8 .4 oh naive-5..
Pl _
3.2.1.3" 3
> .2
i
. ._ Ash: 5
. . . 3
> .0..— 3 200.. ..n.0. «Ayn... .ln.‘ .0“.
22.28.93 I l E2123:
. .03. .ee. .ne. .ne. 5! . 3P2
U. n e. u «r o 0., e W n
> in... I I ll 2i2§w 2.23400
.3 :8 3.8 :2 .28 .
2:... . .l.z+.s 25o.
9.281.90h
lzralz+a l2ialz+e IZIaIz+a lzralz+a Izaalz+a
I zl a l zl a I zl a I zl a l zI a
s as: 9.2”: _ . n n n _ . i n n n . _ . n n n . . _ r. n n . _ . n n n _ . .
u u v v v N a n e v v n ~ n v v v a n u e v v n n n e e e u u n «Hue
I n n n a n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n a n arse:
v v m n n e v e n n u v v v n n n e e v u n n e v e n u n e v e cosine
o n 2 . . n n n . . . n n n _ . . n n n . _ _ n r. n . . . n n n
09 3 8-2 8-2 8-2 3... 8131 22 :2 22 $4 8434 3-28.232 a... 81 $4 8.2 3.2 3.284 ~92 .2 9.2 2.2 2.2 94 :4 at .n 25:
lzralz+a zralzl... lzcalz+a Iznalz+a lzralz+e
I. 25.1 a ll zll a I zl a I le. a .. . z a 53......
13.2.4.2... _ . . . r. r. n . _ . n n n . _ 2 n n n 2 . . n n n _ _ _ n n n . . . “min!
n u N n e e v u N n v e e n u u e v e n n n v e e u a u v e e n u a 30.5.:
n n n n n n n o n n n n n .n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n a 4.5»...-
v e v v a u n v v v n u u v v v n u n 1 e v n n n e e v u u n e e e
n r. n n . . _ n n n . . _ n u n . _ . n n n _ . . n n u . . . e e e
on 3 3 no 3282825... 8121 3.23.23.23.23... a... 8222 3.294 3... 31 8.23.282 a... 313... ~72 2.2 9.2 I I 2.... .n. 26:
lzralz+alzralz+al21a z+alzralz+a Izrelz+2
l zl a I zl a I zl a I zl a I zl a
. an... 2.5... 2 2 _ _ n n r. . . _ n n n _ . . n n n . . . n n n . _ _ r. n n . . . I
N u ~ w v v e n u u e v v u u u v e v n n n e e e u n n e e e n u n I...
n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n, n n n n n a n n n n n n n :2:
s. as: arrflz-...w v e v e n u n v v v u u n e v v u a a e a e n n u v e e u u u e e e CF28.
z a t V i
at. I. 2.; n n n n . _ . n n r. 2 _ . n n n . _ . n n n . . . n n n . . . n n n
duh.) spark... who 3 an no 8 22:22.2£4.2213222328181343.28.2072218131323232a...8424 e... a... I. at n... I 23°C
WiFOh so! Imfixtku trim 44.8% 5mm >334... hJum Jgowkwl uJUW alkyd; EJUW 3.: "8
kam u 213400 0 ZIDJOU U IIDJOU D 22348 < 23348 “E I.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

“335:1 mm_>_mann_ 230.202. wI... >>OI

 

 

02.21.. a...»
ll

Spldpu '2»

  
  

...._ LE...

 

.039 gx —

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 
   

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

o. u :. 0~ v r. a {‘00
47.7,.)
o. v Q. I cu -.
U4 ‘8‘
.1 1 4 4 I1 4 .
_ fl. _ .
. _ 3 . T
u _. 2 I 3. W
l _ In... .
I. . I C. I no Tl nu I .~ I
I. . I a I I. I... LI
I I o I- I I I I .. I“:
(u.- l . u I3 I09 _ . T 9
I. I I .00 . I r. . Ir. I .-
l O . I o h. 0.. . _ . n
I. I a: . I n. I a. I 8 I 9. I
I. 4 II‘ 4 J
L 4. I ‘. I {- .o . . I
.1 . _ 5 I n v.1 .2 I o» I a. I 92 .I
l u I. I fl I U. n . ulna - I
I. a. I 3 T .0 . I a. l i J n I
I I, .- c. -IrT. I31
I. .- I a . I r. o _ I ma - 1|
I. a a o ..I 8 I J. I
I. 0 '9. I Eh I nu. 1| 1‘ a I a In! J. I ‘ a I
I. . 2 I S m” 9 _ . . . . In .1 I
I 4 5.1.. I
L Fifi. . . I n) . L. 3 .b a. .u x fl:
1 I no a . u H I 0.: I
.1 o . u I vi - .u o . I
I. II 6.: fl. 3 L I a I I a a I On. I
II: a . III I 3
l . 0.. . I o . I .3 I I a. 1. ... I .9. I
I. u o I n. o u . .I
In a I a I A T m o I
[I I u o . n 2 I
u II II n > I1
I. In a o i. 1! H uh I
I n I 3 I . 1 o. . . I...
I. . . I a. . . . . I
l n In! P‘ I ‘ u n H n n c I
I II II I III, III: III?
1 . I m I a... I a. . . v- ON . . . .u . r-
. 'I l . I .
u . I3. . H . . Us 1. .2n
1 I O n I t .0 I Q. I in .n I
1 q u III.OMII.I:I , o: .. . .I.I.I
I. I I u: . . .. I 8. _ . c“ . wI
IL .0 u c a I I O. f .I I I Q: o .o v'
I. . . a: 8 a 6 . I2. . .. . I
c I I o C t 3 c .
IL To— I [0| 8. n I I}. o {7' I (v a I. a
l A. . . d ..n I o I 2 In r .I . . u I 3. I,... . W CI
I. I o n I fi~_ o n 8 VI 0» o u n .
I _ . n . . . . u .
I. M . o I 0.. I r. c . It. If! luau.— I 00.. u h
If! 00' III. II IIII IIIIIO'IIIICIIII2Y
l A J» .. . u 2.. In 3 w. Oh . . n I n . d n
I. .. o . c . . c o J! a. It. .
I. u . . . . . . . . I
I.- n I a ‘0 om I fl. 0 T mu. 2 o o o I
. I Ii I4.: I I
J . n. . ..I . I -. . J 2. a. I I
I. I .u n I S n I
L . OQ . . .. . IIIb I
1 ~ u I 3 . 1:2 I a. H F I
D -II' . . I'” 4 5. fl
1 I I. N no I I H o ”I J l T
I. 0 IP . . u . o T
I; n 2 . a n .I. In. - I8 0 .o I
L n u n - I9: " - Tl I
r II\.fIIku n‘IIAYIII.I .ID I hp
1 I —I n . I q. C ‘.- we. ' 1
l . I. . .n I on . .. . . I
l . I 3 u. . .. T a: I o. I I a. . . T T
I. )l m a nu 4r NW 00. . . ‘I n. I O. o o . 0: III e .I
.1 (VB I 8 AI- . a I o I no 2 II. o I Dbl n I
l - II o .. u a ,. ~ . I
l n .2. .o g I “I I O... u I 9i I . .0 o _o J I
.1 I: _. f . _ J 3 I .. . p. Ila! w . I
F 4 3 b - >_I L I 1.1 I (I! I
o I I I I a o I a I a! . u I
(4 u . . a o. . .. . ” oao . _. .111 . b I an
1 l. I” n a . 2. n I. I... .1... .. .. 2. . I
I. . War” on . .I. . v0. . In an. N "no I I
I. I 0.. o n . ru- .- .u . . I I
J a .u u o o . . ,u u 1|
I. o Ian . no . . . I ,0 00 r... I n
I. I2 .0 . . 8.
a ‘N L4 L 8 IF 8 HA OflIR. F4” LII I o t
I . . u . _ _ . I I
IJ m . I8 _ . fl 1'
. j _ . . . I
n . . I
. _ . I
U H . n _ I
F I . p b h
I A 4 J I
A :0 o . hob . 2 U o T M w N p U
. .2 . III I.
.n. 2 n “>WQ. nu _ 0 20¢ .50 _ o mwkoum J 30¢ » UCOUW
III F r III I .ll 3:2...qu ,IIIII - II ., I- o »
3.20m 4<u.¢_a:u 335115., 3.33 u>_tm0a . »

 

 

u! . 44.0.#

a

:10?

 

Er. ._

2.1.3;

0.1!

 

:9: Ila» '24.»!Oc2
1.. IbJIUl I... '3-
...n. Ola 08.0IOUUI IO;UIIDOU

EsOu SEOOJUG “v2.0 .Ou.c_.U

EmIm 3.20%.

i. If... I II‘I .

0.3m .vacou rum 0039:...»

 

APPENDIX C

TAT INSTRUCTIONS

APPENDIX C

TAT Instructions

This is a test of imagination; one
form of intelligence. Ybu will be shown
four pictures, one at a time, and your
task will be to make up as dramatic a
story as you can for each. Tell what
has led up to the event shown in the pic-
ture, describe what is happening at the
moment, what the characters are feeling
and thinking, and then give the outcome.
Write your thoughts as they come to your
mind. Do you understand? Since you have
twenty minutes for four pictures, you can
devote about five minutes to each story.
Each picture will be projected on the
screen for 4% minutes, followed by a 30
second pause. The pause will allow you
to finish one story and get ready for the
next picture. Try to use the entire five
minute period.

 

*Murray, H. A. Thematic gpperception Test Manual
Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1943.

85

FEB 19 1969

"IlrfllfilflllfllfllfilW