A PILOT STUDY: TO INVESTIGATE THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN PERSONALITY ,AND POSTURE Thesis for III: Degree OI M. A. MICHIGAN STATE UI‘IEYERSITY Gail S. MoIot 1962 PLACE N RETURN BOX to remove thle checkout from your record. AVOID FINES return on or before date due. , II DATE DUE DATE DUE DATE DUE I f 0 ““37 , ‘ r 1 H I‘ J I: MSU le An Affirmative AcflorVEquel Opponunuy Immlon ABSTRACT A PILOT STUDY: TO INVESTIGATE THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN PERSONALITY AND POSTURE By Gail S. Molot The Problem It was the purpose of this study to investigate the relationship between personality and posture. Two objec- tive posture tests; the Massey Technique and the Howland Alignometer and a subjective rating was used to measure posture and the Bill's Index of Adjustment and Values was administered to measure personality. Forty-one college women between the ages of 18 and 20 were selected for the study. Bill's IAV furnishes two scores to be interpreted; a discrepancy score, which measures personal adjustment and a category score, which measures social adjustment. Both of these scores were treated statistically in relation to the subjects' posture. The range, mean, standard deviation and median were used to describe the subjects. Reliability of the two Gail S. Molot objective posture tests were determined by the Mann Whitney reliability test and the coefficient of concordance was used to determine the reliability of the subjective rating. The Pearson Product Moment correlation was the statistical tool used to determine the correlations between the posture tests and between the Massey Technique and the discrepancy score of the Bill's IAV. Differences between groups in terms of social adjustment on the Bill's IAV and postures of the Massey Technique were determined by means of analy- sis of variance. "t tests" were employed to further deter- mine where the greatest differences occurred. Conclusions Upon a statistical analysis of the data collected, the following conclusions have been drawn: 1. The Massey Technique posture test and the Howland Alignometer posture test have been found to be reliable at the 5%.level of confidence and the subjective rating has been found to be reliable at the 00001% confidence level. 2. The Massey Technique and the subjective rating correlated significantly at the 1% confidence level (r = -.4366). No significant correlation was noted Gail S. Molot between the Massey Technique and the Howland Alignometer or between the Howland Alignometer and the subjective rating. 3. When comparing Massey's letter grade distribution on the basis of one-sixth of the range between one standard deviation above and below the mean with the grade distribu— tion in the present study, it was found that there was only a difference of one degree in all the grade distributions. Therefore, it would seem to indicate that the Massey Tech— nique posture scores obtained in this study on college women are comparable to the norms established by Massey for men. 4. There was no significant correlation between the subjects' posture rating and their personal adjustment score (discrepancy score), as measured by the Bill's IAV and the Massey Technique. 5. The results on the "t test" indicated that the ++ vs. the —+ groups and the ++ vs. the -- groups were signi- ficantly different at the 5% level of confidence. There- fore, individuals who are socially well adjusted exhibit better posture than individuals with poor social adjustment. 6. The results of the ”t test" on self-rejecting and peer-rejecting individuals indicated that there was signi- ficant difference between the ++ vs. the (-+) (--) group at Gail S. Molot the 2% level of confidence and no significant difference between the ++ vs. the (+—) (--) groups. Therefore, self- accepting and peer-rejecting individuals (+—) have better posture than the group of individuals that reject themselves and accept peers (-+). Recommendations 1. Posture norms for women should be set up, by means of a feasible posture test with a random sample of 100 to 200 subjects. 2. A study of this kind should be done with the same tools as used in this study but with a larger number of subjects randomly selected to substantiate the direction of findings. 3. A similar study should be undertaken in conjunc— tion with a trained psychologist in order to probe more deeply into an individual's personality and a sociologist to throw further light on the social interaction and adjustment of each subject. A PILOT STUDY: TO INVESTIGATE THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN PERSONALITY AND POSTURE BY Gail S. Molot A THESIS Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF ARTS Department of Health, Physical Education, and Recreation 1962 Ahd¢ W ,///l/ DEDI CATION Dedicated to my mother and dad without whose encour- agement and understanding this thesis would not have been possible. Thank you. iii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I wish to sincerely thank Dr. Janet A. wessel for her assistance and guidance throughout the preparation of this thesis. Gratitude is also extended to Dr. Karl Hereford for his guidance in the use of the Bill's Index of Adjustment and Values. TABLE OF CONTENTS Chapter I. INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Purpose of the Study Definition of Terms Limitations of the Study II. REVIEW OF THE RELATED LITERATURE . . . . . . Statements Favoring a Relationship Between Personality and Posture Statements and Studies Emphasizing the Physical Nature of Postural Patterns Studies Investigating the Relationship Between Personality and Posture Methods Selected for Measuring Personality and Posture III. METHODOLOGY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Sample Tests Used Procedures IV. ANALYSIS OF DATA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Description of Subjects Description of the Angles Comparison of Massey's Distribution of Total Degrees Findings in the Bill's Study and Present Study Results of Reliability Tests Results of Correlations Analysis of Variance "t Tests" V. SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS iv Page 18 2O 29 36 36 37 39 42 42 43 44 45 48 49 53 54 57 Chapter Page Summary 57 Conclusions 58 Recommendations 60 BIBLIOGRAPHY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61 APPENDIX A. Raw Data . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66 APPENDIX B. Self-Concept Questionnaire Instruction Booklet and Answer Sheets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 79 vi LIST OF TABLES Table Page I. Description of Subjects . . . . . . . . . . . . 42 II. Description of Angles Obtained in Massey Technique . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43 III. Comparison of Massey's Distribution of Total Degrees and Letter Grades with Findings in Present Study . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44 IV. Comparison of Findings in the Present Study and in Bill's Study (Self) . . . . . . . . . . 46 V. Comparison of Findings in the Present Study and in Bill's Study (Discrepancy Score ) . . . 46 VI. Comparison of Findings in the Present Study and in Bill's Study (Others) . . . . . . . . . 47 VII. Correlation Coefficients Between the Howland Alignometer, the Subjective Rating and the Massey Technique . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50 VIII. Correlation Coefficients Between 25% High and Low Discrepancy Scores on Bill's IAV and Massey Technique Posture Scores . . . . . . . . 51 IX. Analysis of Variance of Four Categories of Bill's IAV and Massey Technique Posture Scores. 53 X. "t Test" Scores of Four Categories of Bill's Law and Massey Technique Posture Scores . . . . 54 XI. "t Test" on Self-Rejecting and Peer-Rejecting Individuals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56 XII. Raw Data of Subjects . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67 XIII. Raw Data for Posture Tests . . . . . . . . . . 69 Table XIV. XVII. Raw Data of Individual Angles of Massey Technique . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Raw Scores of Subjective Ratings by Four Judges Raw Data of Individual Scores on Bill's IAV (Self) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Raw Data of Individual Scores on Bill's IAV (Others) and Social Adjustment Category Score vii Page 71 73 75 77 CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION Much of the work pertaining to a relationship between personality and posture has been purely theoretical without concrete evidence to justify significance. If no correla- tion exists between the two, then the hypothesized state— ments from the 19th century on, bearing out significant relationships are unfounded. If however, there is a signi- ficant relationship, workers in the field might well consi- der the total self as well as the structural state of mus— cles and joints in developing and implementing posture pro- grams for preventive and corrective purposes. Many authors are of the opinion that a definite rela- tionship exists between personality and posture. Numerous statements have been made exemplifying such. Cowell states that, ”attractive and effective posture has long been asso- ciated with desirable personality traits. A well conditioned body makes possible good posture, the emotional concomitants of which might well be self-respect, pride, self-confidence and courage.” l C. C. Cowell, "Bodily Posture as a Mental Attitude “ Journal of Health and Physical Education, 1:14—15. May, 1930. Bickel is of the opinion that the body is considered equivalent to our entire existence, including the self. He feels that nothing can take place in the body without some modification of the self. No inner experience is conceiv- able without some change of condition of the bodily state.2 On the other hand, there are others, Rogers, for exam- ple, who believes that personality and postures have no significant relationship. He emphasizes that, "no evidence whatsoever exists that the style of carriage we happen to have been born with can be changed to a straighter model. There is no evidence of a relation of mentality or morality to carriage unless it be from some underlying cause affect- ing both mental and physical condition. There is ample evi- dence, like all our other features physical and mental, posture is an inherited trait bound up with the complicated physique handed down through millions of years and not to be tampered with highly for artistic Purposes."3 2Lothar Bickel, The Unity of Body and Mind (New York: Philosophical Library, 1959), p. 48. 3 J. F. Rogers, "The Long and Short of the Carriage Business,’I Journal of Health and Physical Education, 3:13. December, 1932. Purpose of the Study The primary purpose of the pilot study was to investi- gate the relationship between body poise (standing posture) and personality (acceptance of self and others). Two secondary purposes of the study were to determine: (1) the reliability of the Massey Technique and the Howland Alignometer, and (2) the relationship between the Massey Technique, the Howland Alignometer and the subjective posture rating. Definition of Terms Personality - "Personality can be thought of in terms of the person's awareness of himself and his conception of his relation to the world."4 Self Concept - The way in which one perceives oneself. Bill's Index of Adjustment and Values - Self concept ques— tionnaire used to measure personal adjustment and social adjustment. (Instructions for administering the questionnaire and complete questionnaire form may be found in Appendix B.) Standing Posture - The way in which the principle segments of the body are balanced over the base of support when the 4 John Anderson, The Psychology of Development and Per- sonal Adjustment (New York: Henry Holt and Co.,l949), p.410. individual is in a vertical position. (As measured by the Massey Technique and the Howland Alignometer--see Chapter III.) Good Posture - ”The principle segments of the body balanced evenly over the base of support." Poor Posture - Characterized by the degree of deviation from the vertical position, for example, forward head, round shoulders. Subjective Rating - The subjects were subjectively rated on a ten point scale: A = 10, A- = 9, B+ = 8, B = 7, B— = 6, C+ = 5, C = 4, C- = 3, D+ and D = 2, and D— and F = 1. Four judges were selected to rate the subjects on their pos- ture from a front and side View picture of each subject. Limitations of the Study 1. Techniques Used One of the limitations in this study was the measure- ment of personality. The total personality structure was not evaluated, but one phase of personality, the person's awareness of himself and his conception of his relation to the world was investigated. 5 . . Wayne W. Massey, "A Critical Study of Objective Meth- ods for Measuring Anterior Posterior Posture with a Simplin fied Technique," Research Quarterly, 14:3, March, 1943. In the two objective posture tests that were adminis- tered, the subject assumed her normal natural standing pos— ture. This may be questioned since the subject might be trying to assume a better posture than is normal for her, but it will measure what she thinks is good posture. A subject who has had poor posture all her life will not know what correct posture feels like and will not be able to as— sume it. Body sway is another limitation in the measuring of posture. Postural expression, bodily attitude and poise, is not static, but dynamic in different situations and with differ- ent people. 2. Sample Used The subjects for this study were not randomly selected. They were subjectively selected solely on the basis of exhibiting good and poor posture as determined by the in- vestigator. It was hoped by the selection to obtain ex- tremes in postures. There were only forty-one subjects used in the study. They ranged in age from 18-20. It is not known whether postural patterns and characteristics and personality char- acteristics are fully developed or set by this age. Norm tables are available for the Massey Posture Tech- nique for men, but no norm tables exist for women. CHAPTER II REVIEW OF THE RELATED LITERATURE A review of related literature concerning the relation- ship between personality and posture will be discussed here- in. Some of the things that have been said will be consi— dered and then some of the things that have been done will be reviewed. 1. Statements favoring a Relationship Between Personality and Posture. Lillian Drew states that, the individual who is effi- cient is the one whose social influence is desirable, who expresses an abundance of health—-in fact, the one who is well poised physically and mentally. She claims that these attributes are attained through correct bodily mechanics, otherwise known as, "good posture,‘ better termed poise, and she would go as far as to say personality. The ultimate tribute which can be paid to an individual implying mental and physical fitness is that he or she is well poised. We can at once visualize such an individual having an upright bearing, ease of manner, erect head; a mentally and physi- cally controlled organism, ready to face the world.1 Drew points up the relationship between Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde as an excellent illustration of posture versus per- sonality. Here were two personalities--Jekyll, erect in bearing, expressing health, respected socially, with noble aspirations; and the opposite, Hyde, the groveling, crouch- ing posture expressing his personality--and absolute antith— esis. Cowell discusses one's mental attitude toward life, work, friends and self and the fact that these factors are strongly colored by his state of health. He feels that bodily posture is one of the determining factors of physi- ological state. With our increasing knowledge of elements influencing behavior, posture becomes important to the study of mental attitudes, since poise concerns the entire body. An organism must be considered as a whole. Therefore physi~ cal poise must be related to mental poise; motor attitude to mental attitude.3 l . . . Lillian C. Drew, "Ways and Means of Overcoming Inef- ficient Posture," American Physical Education Review, 28:3—4, January, 1923. 2Ibid., p. 4. 3 . . C. C. Cowell, "Bodily Posture as a Mental Attitude “ Journal of Health and Physical Education, 1:14-15, May 1930. Mabel Todd states that postural patterns is composed of many parts moving definite distances in space with the exact amount of effort necessary to support the individual weights. Awareness of our own motion and position is not obtained from the outside world but rather from within the body.5 Todd further emphasizes that although posture attitudes of an animal are unconscious, man's are largely determined by preconceived notions as to how he should look.6 The com- mand, "straighten up," implies integrity and self reliance. we often try to emulate someone brave and strong. The ex- plorer and the pioneer stand up whereas the prisoner and the slave crouch. The mental and emotional equipment em- ployed in self expression, such as temperament, personal experiences and prejudices influence and control the rela- tion of the bodily parts to the whole.7 Deaver, in reviewing the literature on personality and posture, was astonished by the many statements on the 4Mabel Todd, The Thinking Body (Boston: Charles T. Branford Co., 1937). P. 22. 5Ibid., p. 26. 61bid., p. 34. 7Ibid., p. 35. 10 dire effects which result from poor posture and the physical and mental rewards for those who maintain good posture. The following statements are some of the many collected by Deaver from various articles: 1. Posture expresses mental as well as physical states, and he who stands erect with a well poised, con- trolled and therefore graceful body will feel that he is master of himself and a leader of men. 2. Posture and efficiency go hand in hand. 3. Posture is an index of personality. A poised and upright bearing usually connotes strong mentality, health, self command and leadership. Almost, if not absolutely never, does a feeble-minded person stand erect. 4. Erect posture is an expression of intelligence and character. It is also an index of physical effi— ciency. Deaver discusses the fact that it is difficult to get at the cause and effect between health and posture and per- sonality and posture. Incorrect posture can be said to be a result of many ills or many ills can be the result of in- 10 . correct posture. Dr. Rice states that, "the careless 8 . . G. G. Deaver, "Posture and its Relation to Mental and Physical Health," Research Quarterly, 4:221, March, 1933. 9 . Ibid., p. 221. 10Ibid., p. 222. ll lounging chap with shuffling gait and hang dog manner is a whipped man. The poor posture may not be a cause of his inefficiency, but it may be the result of the factors that made him a failure. Bickel states that, “all active and passive motions of our body, to the extent that they relate to, or stem from the totality of our power of existence--possess also an in- ner meaning or more correctly, they constitute this inner . . . 12 meaning, Simultaneously Viewed also externally." Bickel is of the opinion that the whole body consti- tutes the whole self.13 Mabel Todd stated that, Psychology as a force and as an influence in behavior is now generally recognized, so that the psychological principles involved in better bodily adjustment might be stated in these terms, "we cannot think a thought without a muscle change." Therefore our thinking is of supreme importance in our behavior. Thinking is an act of the whole man and affects not only the whole man, but individual parts. These factors--mental con~ cept, and emotional make-up and attitudes, are unde- niable forces which we must study and guide if we are ll;p;g., p. 222, citing T. B. Rice, "What is Good Posture?" Hygeia, June, 1931. 12Lothar Bickel, The Unity of Body and Mind (New York: Philosophical Library, 1959), p. 48. 13Ibid., p. 48. 12 to maintain balanced behavior of bodily parts. "As we think, so we are." we are not alone, "physical," not alone, "mental," not alone, "structural," but all three.14 "Courage is grace under pressure." This is a defini- tion by Ernest Hemingway, possibly drawn from his observa— tion of bullfighters. It gives us an inkling of what cour- age is, but allows us to furnish our own mental picture of grace. we all do however, have such a picture in our mind's eye, even if we have not achieved it in our bodily . 1 reactions. Lillian Drew states that good posture reacts upon an individual in an increase of self-respect, and gives one the needed confidence to make a presentable appearance before his or her neighbors. The relationship between the mental, physical and spiritual natures is too close to ever . . 16 be ministered alone. Drew also believes that posture is expressive of men- tal states and relaxation of posture implies mental l4Mabel Todd, "Basic Principles Underlying Postures," Journal of Health and Phy§ica1 Education, 2:13, October, 1931. 5Justus Schifferes, Healthier Living (New York: John Wiley and Sons, Inc., 1954), p. 590. 6Lillian Drew, Individual Gymnastics (Phil: Lea and Febiger, 1945), p. 42-43. 13 relaxation also. People are often unaware that they are ex— pressing themselves this way. Emerson says, "What you are, speaks so loudly that I cannot hear what you say.”17 The assumption of an attitude which is expressive of a particu- lar emotion often tends to produce that very emotion. De- pression may be expressed by a lowered head, a flattened chest and a walk lacking in buoyancy. An erect posture, may be the result of mental and physical freedom.18 "Posture is an index of personality,’ says Drew. There are exceptions to broad rules and so one may find a noble physique without many of the above mentioned charac- teristics, but a feeble-minded person will rarely be seen standing upright, an unhealthy person is seldom straight, and the quiet, timid, self conscious individual is not com- manding in bearing.19 John Anderson emphasized that from the standpoint of personal relationships with others, we must be cautious of forming judgments of other people solely on the basis of l7;21§., p. 43, citing Emerson. 18Ibid., p. 43. 19 Ibid., p. 44. 14 their physical appearance, but we must care for our own appearance because other people will tend to pass judgments on the basis of our appearance.20 Bliss Carman said, "Fine poise and posture is the basis of fine personal influence, the foundation of enduring beau- ty, the centre from which powerful impressiveness must ra- diate. A large part of this strange personal potency which we call magnetism is primarily a spiritual power and has its source in the soul, it yet must find its avenues of expres- sion through the body."21 Carman also feels that a well poised body expresses a well poised character and reacts on that character to help and enrich the whole personality. "To bear oneself with grace and kindly dignity is to foster and breed gracious- ness and self—respect, as well as to disseminate them."22 Lillian Drew is a firm believer of the fact that ex- ercises performed two or three times a week given by the 20John Anderson, The Psychology of Development and Personal Adjustment (New York: Henry Holt and Co., 1949), p. 81. 1 . . . Bliss Carman, The Making of Personality (Boston: Colonial Press, 1908), p. 97. 22Ibid., p. 100. 15 physical education teacher is not the only answer in over- coming inefficient posture. The major problem rests with— in the individual and this is the only way results can be effective. Interest should be aroused so that there will be a resultant desire to accomplish an end, the end of self improvement. If instructors talked more about poise and personality and less about posture, we would probably reach the goal more surely. If individuals could become aware of the fact that poise (posture) is the outward expression of personality, we shall have taken long strides forward in the solution of the difficulty.23 Barlow, in his discussion of psychosomatic problems in postural re-education, states that a basic point is being greatly overlooked in remedial work and that it is behavior rather than structure which determines the mechanics of the body. By behavior, he means all the habitual motor re- sponses with which we react to the world and the manner in which we adapt to its various stresses. These behavior patterns can take place within certain anatomical and 3 . . . . Lillian Drew, "Ways and Means of Overcoming Ineffi— cient Posture," American Physical Education Review, 28:4—5, January, 1923. l6 physiological framework; but as in the game of chess, which has fixed laws, Barlow points out that an almost infinite number of variations of behavior is possible. Irma Dovey is also of the opinion that posture reflects a mental state and that for the mental state which leads to erect and graceful handling of the body, a child very often depends upon the way his world treats him. Adults do the same thing. When someone has said a kind word to us, we walk proudly, and when we are dejected for some reason, we slump. Bobby's old sweater may be pretty well worn, but if teacher compliments Bobby on it, he will carry himself proudly. Dovey considers that posture represents a state of mind and Bobby's emotional attitude should be made to be one of assurance and happiness rather than telling him to straighten up. If this goal can be accomplished, his pos- ture will take care of itself.25 Feldenkrais states that, ”the posture and attitudes are acquired features fitting the environment and therefore 24 . W. Barlow, "Psychosomatic Problems in Postural Re- Education," Lancet, 2:661-662, July-December, 1955. Irma Dovey, ”Posture Gives You Away," Instructor, 65:89, May, 1956. 17 come up under the heading of learning. Any activity that has needed apprenticeship may be used to investigate the process of learning in an individual. The partial analysis of one or the other domain of activity has misled many to think that they thus analyze the whole personality. Only all of them together are a valid assessment of personality. With a proper technique, it is possible to analyze a per- sonality solely by a study of his muscular behavior, in the same way and with the same results as by an analysis of his mental processes alone. A judicial use of both insures a greater number of successful treatments. Re-education of the whole personality takes place; the physical body and the mental function are attacked directly and simultan— eously."26 It is evident that many statements have been made favoring a relationship between personality and posture; however, there are some opposing views. 26M. Feldenkrais, Body and Mature Behavior (New York: International Universities Press Inc., 1949). p. 34. l8 2. Statements and Studies Emphasizing the Physical Nature of Postural Patterns. T. K. Cureton stated that most authorities in correc- tive work are of the opinion that poor posture is caused by an unbalanced pull of muscles, inadequate muscular tone and a low energy level. Extremely strong and short pectorals may well cause round shoulders, unusually strong and short psoas iliacus muscles will cause lordosis and weak rib ele- vators will cause poor chest posture.27 Cureton further emphasized that the inherited shape of bones is an important consideration. He feels that short clavicles may be the cause of round shoulders, frail verte- brae, the cause of exaggereated spinal curves, femoral torsion the cause of lordosis and foot stance, pelvic type predetermining spinal lumbar curvatures and uneven leg lengths causing lateral deviations of symmetry. Coppock29 observed that proof of a relationship exist- ing between round shoulders and tightness of the pectoral 27 . . T. K. Cureton, "Bodily Posture as an Indicator of Fitness," Research Quarterly, 12:361, May, 1941. 281bid., p. 362. 2 . . . . 9Doris E. Coppock, ”Relationship of Tightness of Pectoral Muscles to Round Shoulders in College Women," Reseaggh Quarterly, 29:146-153, May, 1958. l9 muscles has not been established and so conducted a study to determine the degree of relationship between round shoulders and tightness of the pectoral muscles. All the girls enrolled in McPherson College, Kansas, in 1953-54 were selected for the study. The palm test, measurement of the distance between the scapulae, the shoulder line test and the chest angle measure— ment were tests used to determine round shoulders. The pec- toral stretching test was used to measure the degree of forced extension when arms are in an abducted position, and the table test was used to measure the degree of pectoral muscle tightness with passive hanging of the arms. Coppock concluded that tightness of the pectoral mus- cles did not correlate significantly with round shoulders. Some authorities believe that weakness of the abdom- inal muscles is one of the important causes of certain postural faults, particularly, downward tilting of the pelvis, hollow and sway back and over carriage. Fox3O conducted a study, the purpose of which was to determine the relationship of abdominal muscle strength to the above posture faults. 3OMargaret Fox, "Relationship of Abdominal Strength to Selected Posture Faults," Research Quarterly, 22:141— 144, May, 1951. 20 Subjects were selected on the basis of anterior- posterior posture pictures. Subjects judged to have a faulty pelvic tilt or to be sway backed were chosen from the women enrolled at the State University of Iowa. The control group was composed of students randomly selected. Abdominal strength was tested. The following conclusions were drawn from this study: 1) Faulty pelvic tilt was not associated with any signi- ficant weakness in abdominal muscularture, and 2) Sway back was not associated with weakness of the abdominal muscles. 3. Studie§:Investigating the Relationship Between Personality and Posture. William James,31 studying the expressions of bodily posture, stated that the natural expression is a total made up of a certain facial expression, certain gestures and a bodily posture. There is no guarantee, however, that expression cannot be based upon a single aspect of the total. James believed that the separation of its 31William T. James, "A Study of the Expression of Bodily Posture," Journal of General Psychology, 7:405- 437, 1932. 21 components for study was justified, since in no other way can the relation of the parts in the total expression be understood. "The purpose of this study is threefold, l) to deter- mine in how far bodily posture may be expressive and 2) if it is expressive, to determine the relative expressive values of the various parts of the total posture and 3) to determine whether or not there is in the experience of the observer a correlated attitudinal or emotional pattern."32 Three hundred forty-seven different postures were ob- tained by photographing a human manikin on a 35 mm. film, and projecting the postures on a white screen in a dark room one at a time. The figure was clad in white athletic shorts and shirt and wore a dark mask so as not to have any influence from facial expression. "These were the instructions, 'After the signal, ready, I shall show you a photograph of a bodily posture. Characterize briefly 1) what the posture signifies, for example, what attitude is expressed, and 2) say if you can, whether any part of the total posture is especially 33 significant and if so in what way.'" 3ZLQ;§,: PP. 406-407. 331bid., p. 413. 22 The greatest number of reports show that the observers found an expression of a mental state or function (thought or emotion) in the various postures. All of the expressions were reported by every observer, and no expression was ac— cepted as characteristic of the posture unless it occurred several times in the report of separate observations. The postural expressions were placed into two groups, the generic and the specific, related to each other as genus and species. The postures were taken as a total, but for the most part the observers were able to indicate one factor of the posture as most significant for the expression given. James mentioned the relation of the posture as an ex— pression of an idea or an emotion to the total movement of which the posture may be regarded as a phase. The human organism, attains its posture by way of movement and it may be argued that the movement as a whole is expressive, but the posture taken by itself is an abstraction. It may be true that in some cases the total movement would be less equivocal than any of its phases, but a single phase is sufficient for expression. He gives the example of the animal ready to spring upon its prey, the startled animal 23 that seeks safety in motionlessness, a child at prayer and goes on to say that in all of these and many others, the phase of the total movement is all that is necessary for expression, and it does not make the least difference by what movements the posture is reached or what movement will follow. James was forced to conclude that the postural expres- sion, as a rule, is not specific but general. Deaver34 conducted a study, the purpose of which was to attempt to discover what relationship existed between personality and posture. He wanted to answer such ques- tions as, ”Is posture an index of personality? Does he who stands erect feel that he is master of himself and a leader of men? Does self command and leadership have any relationship with posture?"35 Three tests were given the students; the personality Schedule, the Allport Ascendancy—Submission Reaction Test and the Harvard Posture Test. The Harvard System was the method of judging posture. Each man removed all his 4 3 G. G. Deaver, "Posture and its Relation to Mental and Physical Health," Research Quarterly, 4:221-228, March, 1933. 35 Ibid., p. 226. 24 clothing and stood behind a white sheet. An electric light was placed so that a silhouette of his body was thrown on the sheet. The individual was asked to take his normal standing position and his posture was rated on the basis of the similarities to the silhouettes in the Harvard charts which show ratings of good, fair and very poor. The Thurs- tone Personality test seemed to indicate various emotional and personality traits. It is supposed to reveal a well adjusted emotional life as well as those maladjusted emo- tionally. The Allport Ascendancy—Submission Reaction test was administered to discover the disposition of the indi- vidual to dominate his fellows or be dominated by them in the various relationships of everyday life. It was concluded that there was no relationship be- tween posture and personality integration when taking the entire group into consideration. When taking only the two extreme groups, of very good and very poor, there were significant differences between the means of the two groups in regard to posture and personality integration. It was found that those with very good posture, were on the average less stable than those with very poor posture. This was contrary to the expected results. Some of the 25 reasons for this might be attributed to the fact that the study was conducted with a select group of physical educa— tion majors and secretarial students. The percentage of those having very poor posture was considerably less than would be found in a random sampling. Deaver does not feel that this would be conclusive evidence against the hypothesis that posture relates to personality. Gessell defines posture as "the positions assumed by the body, as a whole or by its members in order to exe- cute a movement or to maintain an attitude."36 Deutsch37 found that on the basis of a controlled study, the motor behavior of patients seen during analy- sis can be observed to be motivated by underlying and coordinated psychological processes. Certain postural attitudes that developed independ— ently finally became integrated with each other, and became consistent with one another when the personality 36Arnold Gessell, Infant Development (New York: Harper and Brothers Publishers, 1952), p. 65. 37F. Deutsch, "Analysis of Postural Behavior," Psychoanalytic Quarterly, 16:195-213, 1947. 26 was fully developed, thus presenting the characteristic expressive acts of the adult. Behind the whole immanent talent organized structure of the integrated system, the specific expressive nature of a posture or movement is in- visibly enacted. Deutsch observed that random observation justified a more systematic investigation. He recorded all postures and changes of posture during successive analytical hours on a posturogram. Each patient has his characteristic postural pattern illustrating the integrated response of his motor appar- atus to unconscious psychological complexes. As psycho- logical changes occurred during treatment, the postural pattern became transitorily or permanently changed. The correlation of psychological (verbal) with postural ex- pression indicated that in states of instinctual conflict, the defenses and the repressed emotions were easily re- flected in bodily behavior. Deutsch concluded that, "there are definite motiva— tions for the postural behavior of every patient. Pos- tural attitudes reflect or substitute, precede or accom— pany the verbal expression of unconscious material."38 38;big.. p. 211. 27 He is of the opinion that the analyst is furnished with additional clues to psychoanalysis by observing postural patterns. The better acquainted he is with the basic pos— tural patterns of a patient, the more significant will de- viation from this pattern become to him. Moriarty39 conducted a study on the relationship of certain physical and emotional factors to habitual poor posture among school children. Williams and Brownell indicated that fear, self- consciousness, fatigue and other physiological states have been reflected in postural patterns.40 In Moriarty's study boys and girls from 23 different elementary schools from seven different communities in Massachusetts were selected. There were 250 cases of good and poor posture recommended from intermediate grades in- cluding approximately 4,000 children. The Iowa Posture Test was administered to each of the 250 children. Only the children with very good and very poor posture were used. 9Mary Moriarty, ”A Study of the Relationship of Cer- tain Physical and Emotional Factors to Habitual Poor Pos- ture Among School Children," Research Quarterly, 23:221- 225, May, 1952. 0Jesse Feiring Williams & Clifford Brownell, The Adminigtration of Health and Physical Education (Phila— delphia: w. B. Saunders Co., 1947). p. 167. 28 The medical examination, the check list, and the infor- mation data sheet were the sources of data explored. Speci- fic physical and emotional factors were studied. A medical record card was constructed and a special examination was made of each child and recorded. The check list was con- structed so that the classroom teacher could record obser— vations. The seven areas that were included were: impared vision, impaired hearing, speech difficulties, fatigue, clothing, deformities and other characteristics. Space was also provided for information concerning any home or school conditions indicative of emotional disturbances. The reported differences indicated that the emotional factors of self-consciousness, fidgeting, restlessness and timidity were conclusive at the 1% level of significance. Moriarty concluded that a significant association between poor posture and certain physical and emotional characteristics were found. These characteristics were: fatigue, self-consciousness, fidgeting, hearing defects, restlessness, timidity, underweight, heart defects and asthma. As can be seen from the above literature, there is a paucity of scientific studies both qualitative and 29 quantitative to justify the many comments and statements made concerning the significance of the relationship between personality and posture. 4. Methods Selected for Measuring Personality and Posture. Posture Tests. The Howland Alignometer was one of the objective posture tests used. "The relationship between the sternopubic line formed by the two body landmarks of the alignment technique and each of the five body landmarks of the traditional criteri- on of body posture was determined by computing the linear distances between them."41 It was found that when the point of the sternum and the point of the pubis formed a straight line parallel to the long axis of the body in a vertical position, structural alignment of the trunk occurred. The technique was validated by use of radiographs and photographs and the objectivity of the technique was determined by the test-retest method which resulted in a correlation of .923. 41 . . Ivalclare Howland, Body Alignment in Fundamental Motor Skills (New York: Exposition Press, 1953), p. 80. 30 The Massey Technique was the other objective posture test used. The results of a study conducted by Massey42 "indicated that in the erect position the segments, head, neck, trunk, hips, thighs, and legs form varying angles with each other and with the long axis of the body. The resulting angles, I (head-neck with trunk), II (trunk with hips), III (hips with thigh), IV (thigh with leg), when measured in terms of degrees deviation from a straight line, were found to be satisfactory as a measure of general and segmental poise."43 Massey concluded that anterior-posterior posture may be measured objectively and accurately by the above method. The technique was validated by the subjective judgment of selected experts. Personality Test. Ellis44 concluded after a thorough review of 350 studies that group administered pencil and paper personality questionnaires are not very valuable in 2wayne W. Massey, "A Critical Study of Objective Methods for Measuring Anterior-Posterior Posture With a Simplified Technique," Research Quarterly, 14:3-22, March, 1943. 431bid. , pp. 20-21. 44 Albert Ellis, "The Validity of Personality Ques- tionnaires," Psychological Bulletin, 43:385—440, September, 1946. 31 distinguishing between groups of adjusted and maladjusted individuals and that they are of much less value in the diagnosis of individual adjustments or personality traits. Since personality can be thought of in terms of the person's awareness of himself and his conception of his re- lation to the world, and since personality inventories do not necessarily measure the particular traits one is meas- uring, the author has used the Bill's Index of Adjustment and Values, which is a self concept questionnaire. W'ylie45 theorizes that a person's body characteris- tics as he perceives them to be might exert a significant influence on the development of his self concept. Self concept theorists agree on the general concept that body characteristics which are valued quite low by subjects may be expected to undermine their general self regard, while highly valued body characteristics should enhance self regard. Considering the importance of this idea, Wylie is sur- prised to find that no controlled study explores this hypothesis directly.46 45 . Ruth C. wylie, The Self Concept (Nebraska: Uni— versity of Nebraska Press, 1961), p. 159. 4 6Ibid., p. 203. 32 Bills, Vance and McLean47 state that, "enhancement of psychological organization implies two characteristics; (1) that the individual has information relative to his present self-organization and (2) that the individual has a view of himself as he wishes to be. The former being called the "self concept” and the latter will be designated as the "concept of the ideal self."48 The authors define maladjustment as any discrepancy be- tween the concept of self and the concept of the ideal self. It may be assumed, they feel, that maladjustment exists when the discrepancy between the concept of self and the concept of the ideal self is great enough to cause unhap- piness. They noted that this is a definition of personal maladjustment. "The total of the discrepancies between the self con- cept and the concept of the ideal self would be a measure of adjustment."49 47 . Bills, Vance & McLean, "An Index of Adjustment and Values," Journal of Consulting Psychology, 15:257-261, February, 1951. 48 , Ibid., p. 257. 4 9Ibid., p. 258. 33 The authors have concluded that the "Index of Adjust— ment and Values," is a reliable and valid instrument which should prove useful as a research tool. Roberts50 conducted a study to determine whether emo- tionality is involved in those traits which indicate a dis- crepancy between the concept of self and the concept of the ideal self. Since the ”Index of Adjustment and Values" consists of a list of 49 trait words it was adaptable to the technique of free association. Roberts compared emotionality as in- dicated by the self ratings on the Index with emotionality as indicated by a free-association test. Reaction time as the main indicator of emotionality in free association verified the hypothesis by serving to sep— arate certain types of responses on the index. The results show that the self-ratings of the Index are valid indices of emotionality. Where a discrepancy was indicated for certain trait words between concept of self and concept of the ideal self, the reaction time was significantly longer. A significantly longer reaction 50 Glen Roberts, "A Study of the Validity of the Index of Adjustment and Values," Journal of Consulting Psychol- ogy, 16:302-304, 1952. 34 time was found for words in which the subjects displayed a rejection of self in their present state. The results indi- cate that the concept of self is not an index of emotional- ity unless a rejection or discrepancy is indicated upon the same personality trait. Bills related Rorschach tests to the "Index of Adjust- ment and Values." With respect to certain important person- ality characteristics, the high and low scorers on the IAV, as measured by the Rorschach, made up two different person- ality groups. He concluded that the IAV can separate groups with different personality characteristics.51 Bill's52 "IA " requires that a subject make three ratings on a five point scale for each of 49 traits. The ratings are arranged in three columns as concept of self, acceptance of self and the concept of the ideal self. A fourth score called discrepancy, is achieved by totaling the differences between concept of self and concept of the ideal self. 5 . . . lRobert Bills, "Rorschach Characteristics of Persons Scoring High and Low in Acceptance of Self," Journal of Consglting Psychology, 17:36-38, 1953. 2Robert Bills, "A Validation of Changes in Scores on the Index of Adjustment and Values as Measures of Changes in Emotionality,“ Journal of Consulting Psychology, 17: 135-138, 1953. 35 To relate research findings on the Index to the larger body of research concerning "acceptance of self" as an im- portant personality variable, it was established that ac- ceptance of self as measured by the Index and by interviews were essentially the same. Bills ranked subjects according to acceptance of self shown by interview material and the IAV and the ranks were correlated to give an rho of .84. What a subject said about himself in an interview corres- ponded highly with the ratings he gave himself on the IAV.53 The above literature concerning the Bill's IAV present conclusive evidence indicating the reliability and validity of this index as a measurement of one's self concept. 53 . Robert Bills, "Acceptance of Self as Measured by Interviews and the Index of Adjustment and Values," Journal of Consulting Psychology, 18:22, December, 1954. 3 6 CHAPTER I I I METHODOLOGY The following methods were used to determine whether there was any relationship between personality and posture. EM Forty-one college women attending physical education service classes on the Michigan State University campus between the ages of 18 and 20 were the subjects for the study. The subjects were subjectively selected exhibiting good and poor posture. All subjects were within 15 pounds of their normal weight range so that weight would not be an influential factor in the subjects' posture. The Pryorl Width-weight Tables were used to determine normal weight range. l . . Helen Pryor, Width-weight Tables (second edition: Stanford; California: Stanford University Press, 1940), p. 14. 37 Tests Used StandingrPosture Two objective tests were used for measuring standing posture. . 2 . . . Howland Alignometer - This instrument was deVIsed to measure vertical body alignment. It consists of a perpendi- cular steel rod, with two sliding calibrated pointers at- tached to it. This rod is supported on a wooden plank. The present author had two additional pieces of wood placed in the center of the wooden plank to fit in between the feet of the subject and directly in front of the toes of the subject so that she would stand in the same place each time measured. Sliding pointers are located above and be- low the sliding pointer indicating the center of the stern— um. The center of the sternum was found by measuring the half distance between the upper and lower pointers on the sternum. The other sliding pointer was used to locate the superior border of the symphysis pubis. When the subject is in such a position so that the center of her sternum is directly over the symphysis, we 2Ivalclare Howland, Body Alignment in Fundamental Motor Skills (New York: Exposition Press, 1953). P. 79. 38 say that she is in balanced trunk alignment. The differ- ences in readings between the calibrated pointers at the center of the sternum and the superior border of the sym— physis pubis, would be zero. The poorer the trunk align- ment, the greater the difference in readings between the two points. Massey Technique3— This instrument was devised to measure standing anterior—posterior posture. Five points were placed on the subject. They were located at the 1) tragion of the ear, 2) acromion process of the scapula, 3) greater trochanter of thigh, 4) styloid process of the fibula (mid-point of the knee joint), and 5) outer malle- olus of the ankle. A side View picture was then taken of the subject. The angles were then recorded in terms of deviation in degrees from a straight line. The sum of these angles were then computed and a letter grade was given corres— ponding to the sum total of the angles. The higher the total, the poorer the anterior—posterior posture, and the lower the total, the closer the subject would be to assum- ing vertical alignment. 3 . . . . Wayne. W. Massey, ”A Critical Study of Objective Meth- ods for Measuring Anterior Posterior Posture With a Simpli— fied Technique," Research Quarterly, 14:17, March, 1943. 39 Subjective Rating - The pictures of the subjects (side view and front View) were placed into random order and given to the judges to be rated. Each judge worked alone, not knowing the scores recorded by the other judges. The judges rated each subject on the following ten point scale: A = 10, A- = 9, B+ = 8, B = 7, B- = 6, C+ = 5, C = 4, C- = 3, D+ and D = 2, and D- and F = 1. This letter grade was indicative of the all-over posture of the subject. Personality Bill's Index of Adjustment and Values - Since personal- ity inventories do not always measure what they purport to measure and since personality can be thought of in terms of the person's awareness of himself and his conception of his relation to the world, this index was used. This instru- ment was designed to measure personal and social adjustment. Procedures Height, weight, age and Pryor measurements were taken of the subjects to determine whether the subjects were suited for the study. 40 The Howland Alignometer and the Massey Technique were administered to the subjects at the second meeting. They were tested individually to avoid any feelings of self- consciousness. The subjects were told to assume their nor— mal natural standing posture for both the Howland Alignom- eter and the Massey Technique. The subjects were clad in bra and pants. Their faces were covered by means of a cardboard attached to a string extending from the ceiling. All measurements were taken by the investigator in an attempt to eliminate as much variance in measurement as possible. Equipment. The pictures were taken with a Conteflex 16 mm. camera at a distance of 16 ft. with lights placed at a dis- tance of 6 ft. A celluloid protractor and a proportional divider were used in order to accurately measure angles from pictures for the Massey Technique. First Step. The Howland Alignometer measurements were done three times for purposes of reliability. 41 Second Step. The Massey Technique was then administered. Two anterior-posterior pictures for each subject were taken for the Massey Technique in order to determine reliability. Third Step. A front and side view of each subject were taken for the subjective rating. Fourth Step. The Index of Adjustment and Values was admin- istered to several subjects at one time in a classroom situation. The author read the instruction booklet (see appendix) aloud with each group of subjects to be sure instructions were clear. I Testing Period. The testing period for the posture proce- dures extended through a five week period. The testing period for the Index of Adjustment and Values followed the posture testing period and covered a two week period. 42 CHAPTER IV ANALYSIS OF DATA Description of Subjects The description of subjects is presented in Table I. TABLE I DESCRIPTION OF SUBJECTS* Characteristics Range Mean Standard Median DeVIation Age (yrs.) 18.0 - 20.3 18.36 .557 18.7 Height (in.) 61 - 69.25 64.45 2.308 64.25 Weight (lbs.) 102 - 146.50 122.23 12.599 121 Deviation from stand- ard weight (%) 0.00 - 0.11 .04 3.153 .04 Deviation from stand- ard weight (lbs.) 0 - 14 5.58 3.923 5 Massey technique (degrees) 22 - 66 43 12.46 41 Howland alignometer difference between sternum and pubis (in.) 0.01 - 1.14 1.02 .395 0.16 Subjective rating (points) 7 - 37 19.48 9.32 16 *Calculated on the basis of forty-one subjects. 43 As was seen in Table I, the subjects were within 11% (14 pounds) of their normal weight range as determined by the Pryor Width-Weight Tables. Description of the Angles The description of the angles obtained in the Massey Technique are found in Table II. TABLE II DESCRIPTION OF ANGLES OBTAINED IN MASSEY TECHNIQUE Characteristics Range Mean D:::::::: Median Angle I (degrees) 11 - 31.5 21.13 4.977 21 Angle II (degrees) 2 - 21 11.60 5.582 12 Angle III (degrees) 1.5 - 15 5.91 3.968 4 Angle IV (degrees) .5 - 11 3.90 2.934 3.5 The means in Table II clearly indicated that the high- est scores were found in angle I (head-neck with trunk). These were expected since the examiner's original selection of the subjects with poor posture was based primarily on the forward head and round shoulders. 44 Comparison of Massey's Distribution of Total Degrees A comparison of Massey's distribution of total degrees and letter grades with the distribution found in the pres- ent study are found in Table III. Each letter grade in Massey's study and in the present study represents approxi— mately one-sixth of the range between one standard deviation above and below the mean. TABLE III COMPARISON OF MASSEY'S DISTRIBUTION OF TOTAL DEGREES AND LETTER GRADES WITH FINDINGS IN PRESENT STUDY Massey Technique2 Present Study Grade Sum of Angles Sum of Angles (I, II, III, IV) (I, II, III, IV) (Degrees) (Degrees) A 8 - 22 7 — 21 B 23 - 36 22 - 35 C 37 - 51 36 - 50 D 52 - 65 51 - 64 E 66 - 78 65 — 79 F 79 - 93 1Charles H. McCloy and Norma D. Young, Tests and Measurements in Health and Physical Education (New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts, Inc., 1954), p. 269. 2Wayne W. Massey, "A Critical Study of Objective Methods for Measuring Anterior Posterior Posture with a Simplified Technique," Research Quarterly, 14:17, March, 1943. 45 As was seen in Table III, there was only a difference on one degree in all the grade distributions between Massey's figures and the figures in the present study. This would seem to indicate that the Massey Technique scores obtained in this study on college women are comparable to the norms established by Massey for men. Findings in the Bill's Study and Present Study The findings on the Bill's Index of Adjustment and Values in the present study can be seen in Tables IV, V, and VI as compared with Bill's own findings. Since the negative trait scores in Columns I and III of Bill's study have been reversed (see questionnaire in Appendix B), and these traits have not been reversed in these columns in the present study, Bill's results are higher in almost all instances. Columns I and III are used to calculate the discrepancy score and has nothing to do with the category score for social adjustment. It was felt that it was not necessary to reverse the negative traits, since they remained constant throughout the study. A greater similarity was noted when comparing the Column II of "self" and ”others" in the present study with 46 .wosum ucmmmum USE CH ommum>mu p0: UHwB muHMHu 0>Hummmc mflu umflu uumm may OD woo mum hpsum ucmmmnm mfiu paw monum m.HHHm cmwBqu H: paw H mcESHOU cmmBHUQ mmocwuwHHHU mnet ms mm.6H mn.mv mHH . a stash m.aawm as www.mH mm.m¢ am I RH A6506 pammmhm QMHomz .Q.m £002 mmcmm macaw AHHH ocm H mQESHOU cmw3uwm wocmeHMHmv muoom mocmmmuumHQ AmmOUm MOdemmUmHQv MODEM m.HHHm ZH QZfi MQDBm BZMmmmm WEB ZH mUZHQZHm m0 ZOmHm¢mEOU > mamfiB w 5 m mmm om.©H Hm.Hmm mvNIHNH NNH nh.vm om.HnH mvNIHm owH mm.mH mn.mmH Nvmlva m ”Hum . . . . . swarm mmH nmm.m mg mmH momlmoH me ovm mm mm moH MHNImn moH 0mm NH no voH mmHImMH Dammmmm CMHU . Q . m Cam: mmcmm swap .Q . m Gmwz mmcmm GMHU .Q . m cmmz wmcmm Iwz I02 Imz Rheum HHH GESHOU HH GEDHOU H QESHOU tAmHmmv WQDBm m.HHHm ZH QZ¢ MQDBm 92mmmmm WEB ZH meHQZHm m0 ZOmHmH mflmfifi 47 .wpsum ucmmmwm Gnu CH owmum>mh uoc UHUB muHMHu m>Hummma mflu Ems» uumm map ou USU mum hosum ucmmmhm may 0cm mfisum m.HHHm cmm3qu.Hd UQm H mGESHOO :mw3uwfl mwocwummmHo 039* mmm mO.NN ©®.©HN mvNImNH omH mm.vN 5v.th mvmlom omH N@.NN mm.mmH mmmlwm hpst m.HHHm HmH ono.NH mm.mmH momlmmH moH th.Hm mm.v©H mHthNH ooH ¢HB.OH mm.¢oH melowH mosum ucmmmum Hum—”g Hugo CHM—”Mu o O O a O O o O O C O: Q m GMT: Omfimm m Q m EGO: OOGMM m 2 Q m 5mm: mm mm mtsum HHH assaoo HH assaoo H assaoo «AmmmmBOv VQDBm m.HHHm ZH QZ¢ NQDBm BZmWMmm WEB ZH mUZHQZHm m0 ZOmHm mqmfiB 48 the Column II of ”self" and "others" in Bill's study since the negative traits were not reversed in either study. The reason for this was that Column II was not in any way affected by the negative-positive nature of the traits. Results of Reliability Tests The Mann Whitney3 reliability tests were used on the two objective posture tests; the Massey Technique and the Howland Alignometer. The two above tests were run on the null hypothesis that there was no difference between the first and second readings of each of the tests. The tests were run at the 5% level of confidence. The Z score for the Massey Technique was -.129. Test— ing the null hypothesis at the 5% level of confidence, the resulting number did not show significance. Therefore, the above null hypothesis has been accepted and it has been concluded that the Massey Technique scores are reliable. The Z score for the Howland Alignometer was .0602. 3H. B. Mann and D. R. Whitney, "On a Test of Whether One of Two Random Variables is Stochastically Larger Than the Other," Annals of Mathematical Statistics, 18:50-60, 1947. 49 Testing the same hypothesis at the 5% level of confidence, this number did not show significance. The null hypothesis for this test has also been accepted and it is concluded that the Howland Alignometer scores are reliable. To determine reliability of the subjective rating, the coefficient of concordance4 was run to determine the amount of agreement between the four judges. The coefficient of concordance was .95. Agreement between judges is stated at the .00001 confidence level. Results of Correlations The Pearson Product Moment Correlations were run between all three of the posture tests. Table VII indicates the correlation coefficients. The test was run at the 5% confidence level on the hypothesis that the test was equal to zero, and the prob- ability of getting a sample correlation greater than + or -.318 was .05. Therefore the Subjective Rating and the Massey Technique were the only two tests that correlated, 4Helen M. Walker and Joseph Lev, Statistical Infer- ence (New York: Henry Holt and Co., 1953), pp. 283—286. 50 TABLE VII CORRELATION COEFFICIENTS BETWEEN THE HOWLAND ALIGNOMETER, THE SUBJECTIVE RATING AND THE MASSEY TECHNIQUE 0 M M M .148 c m N x y z r .Sflg m m X Y Howland Subjective Alignometer Rating 41 1.02 19.48 -.2863 .10 y z Subjective Massey Rating Technique 41 19.48 43 -.4366 .01 z x Massey Howland Technique Alignometer 41 1.02 43 .2204 .20 since the other correlations were not greater than + or -.318. The correlation between the Subjective Rating and the Massey Technique was significant at the 1% level of confidence. The correlations between the Massey Technique and the Howland Alignometer and the Howland Alignometer and the Subjective Rating was not great enough to indi- cate any significant correlations. 51 The Pearson Product Moment correlations were run be— tween the Massey Technique and the discrepancy score (per- sonal adjustment) of the Bill's Index of Adjustment and Values. The correlation coefficient on the basis of the entire group was .0731 indicating no significant correlation be— tween the Massey Technique and the discrepancy score of the Bill's IAV. Correlations were also run on the extreme discrepancy scores with the Massey Technique. The 25% highest discrep— ancy scores and 25% lowest discrepancy scores were corre- lated with the Massey Technique. The resulting coefficients are in Table VIII. TABLE VIII CORRELATION COEFFICIENTS BETWEEN 25% HIGH AND LOW DISCREPANCY SCORES ON BILL'S IAV AND MASSEY TECHNIQUE POSTURE SCORES M M M N r X1 X2 Y x1 y 25% high dis— Massey crepancy score Technique 10 63.7 42.1 .1782 x2 y 25% low dis- Massey crepancy score Technique 10 24.7 41.4 .3674 52 The discrepancy score which is an indication of per- sonal adjustment on the IAV did not correlate significantly with the Massey Technique. Therefore no significant rela— tionship exists between the subjects' postural attitude and their personal adjustment. Social adjustment was measured in the Index of Adjust- ment and Values from a combination of the acceptance of self score of the "Self" Index and the Column II score of the "Others" Index. With these two scores, subjects were divided into four categories: ++, +-, -+, and --. The first of each of these signs refers to the Column II scores of the "Self" Index. The mean used in Bill's study was 172. On the basis of extensive research extending over a ten year period at Michigan State University with the Bill's IAV, it was found that 168 was more desirable mean to use when working with college women.* If this score is above the mean (168 or greater), the sign is +, but if it is below the mean (168 or less), it is -. The second sign of each pair is obtained from the Column II score of the "Others" Index. If this score is equal to * Personal communications with Dr. Karl Hereford, College of Education, Michigan State University. 53 or greater than the "self” Column II score, it is +; if less it is —. Therefore a ++ person has an above average self- acceptance score and an "Others" Column II score equal to or greater than his self-acceptance score, and a -- person has a below average self-acceptance score. Analysis of Variance Analysis of variance was run on the four categories of the IAV: ++, +-, —+, and —- with the Massey Technique scores to test the null hypothesis that there were no differ— ences between the groups, significant at the 5% level of confidence. The results may be seen in Table IX. TABLE IX ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE OF FOUR CATEGORIES OF BILL'S IAV AND MASSEY TECHNIQUE POSTURE SCORES Source Sum Degrees M a S' . of Var- of of S eaEe F Ratio filgnl- iation Squares Freedom qu c nce Total 6220 40 Group 1210.17 3 403.39 2.9792 .05 Error 5009.83 135.40 5 . . Robert E. Bills, Index of Adjustment and Values Manual (Auburn, Alabama: Department of Psychology, Ala— bama Polytechnic Institute), p. 13. 54 The null hypothesis was tested on the basis that there were no differences between the groups. Table IX indicated that there was significant difference between the groups at the 5% confidence level, therefore rejecting the null hypothesis. "t tests" Since significant differences have been determined, the "t test" was used to determine where the greatest variance occurred. Results are shown in Table X. TABLE X "t TEST" SCORES OF FOUR CATEGORIES OF BILL'S IAV AND MASSEY TECHNIQUE POSTURE SCORES Signi- . t Test Degrees ficant Categories Mean Scores of at 5% Freedom Level of Confi- dence ++ vs. +- 33 vs. 40 1.3962 16 2.12 ++ vs. —+ 33 vs. 46 2.3687 19 2.093* ++ vs. -- 33 vs. 48 2.3708 10 2.228 +- vs. -+ 40 vs. 46 1.4829 27 2.052 +- vs. -- 40 vs. 48 1.3599 18 2.101 -+ vs. -- 46 vs. 48 .3309 21 2.080 55 Table X indicated that the greatest amount of variance occurred between the ++ and —+ categories and the ++ and —— categories. This difference was significant at the 5% level of confidence. When scoring the Massey Technique, it was noted that the sum total was derived from the sum of the angles and therefore the smaller the angles, the better the posture. As was seen from the means of the four categories in Table X, the ++ category had a mean score of 33, the —+ category, a mean score of 46 and the -- category, a mean score of 48. The ++ group indicated much lower posture scores with a mean of 33 than the —— group, which had a mean score of 48. The socially well adjusted individuals (++), as deter— mined by the Bill's IAV demonstrated better posture, as determined by the Massey Technique, than those people with poor social adjustment (--). Two additional ”t tests” were run on the groups to determine whether there was any significant difference between the self~rejecting individual (—+) and posture and the peer—rejecting individual (+-) and posture. Table XI indicates the results. TABLE XI "t TEST" ON SELF-REJECTING AND PEER-REJECTING INDIVIDUALS Signi— De rees ficant . t Test 9 at 2% Categories Mean of Scores Level of Freedom . Confi- dence* ++ vs. (+-)(--) 33 vs. 43 1.8018 23 2.81 ++ vs. (++)(--) 33 vs. 47 2.4944 26 2.479* As was seen from Table XI, the difference between the two sets of "t tests" was the (+-), which is the peer-re— jecting group and the (—+), which is the self-rejecting group. A greater difference in posture was seen in the ++ vs. (-+)(--) group, than in the ++ vs. (+-)(—-) groups. The difference in the (-+)(--) and the posture was signi— ficant at the 2% confidence level. There was no signi- ficant difference in the (+—)(—-) group. When referring to the means, a bigger difference in posture scores was seen in the (-+)(--) groups than in the (+—)(——) groups. Se1f~accepting and peerurejecting (+—) individuals have better posture than the group of individuals that reject self and accept peers (-+). CHAPTER V SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS Summary It was the purpose of this study to investigate the relationship between personality and posture. Two objec- tive posture tests; the Massey Technique and the Howland Alignometer and a subjective rating were used to measure posture and the Bill's Index of Adjustment and Values was administered to measure personality. Forty-one college women between the ages of 18 and 20 were selected for the study. Bill's IAV furnishes two scores to be interpreted; a discrepancy score, which measures personal adjustment and a category score, which measures social adjustment. Both of these scores were treated statistically in relation to the subjects' posture. The range, mean, standard deviation and median were used to describe the subjects. Reliability of the two objective posture tests were determined by the Mann Whitn reliability test and the coefficient of concordance was 57 ey used to determine the reliability of the subjective rating. 58 The Pearson Product Moment correlation was the statistical tool used to determine the correlations between the posture tests and between the Massey Technique and the discrepancy score of the Bill's IAV. Differences between groups in terms of social adjustment on the Bill's IAV and posture on the Massey Technique were determined by means of analysis of variance. "t tests" were employed to further determine where the greatest differences occurred. Conclusions Upon a statistical analysis of the data collected, the following conclusions have been drawn: 1. The Massey Tedhnique posture test and the Howland Alignometer posture test have been found to be reliable at the 5% level of confidence and the subjective rating has been found to be reliable at the .00001 confidence level. 2. The Massey Technique and the subjective rating cor- related significantly at the 1% confidence level (r = -.4366). No significant correlation was noted between the Massey Technique and the Howland Alignometer or between the Howland Alignometer and the subjective rating. 59 3. When comparing Massey's letter grade distribution on the basis of one-sixth of the range between one stand- ard deviation above and below the mean with the grade distribution in the present study, it was found that there was only a difference of one degree in all the grade dis- tributions. Therefore, it would seem to indicate that the Massey Technique posture scores obtained in this study on college women are comparable to the norms established by Massey for men. 4. There was no significant correlation between the subjects' posture rating and their personal adjustment score (discrepancy score), as measured by the Bill's IAV and the Massey Technique. 5. The results on the "t test" indicated that the ++ vs. the -+ groups and the ++ vs. the -- groups were signi- ficantly different at the 5% level of confidence. There- fore, individuals who are socially well adjusted exhibit better posture than individuals with poor social adjustment. 6. The results of the "t test" on self-rejecting and peer-rejecting individuals indicated that there was signi- ficant difference between the ++ vs. the (—+) (—-) groups at the 2% level of confidence and no significant difference 60 between the ++ vs. the (+-) (--) groups. Therefore, self- accepting and peer-rejecting individuals (+—) have better posture than the group of individuals that reject them- selves and accept peers (-+). Recommendations 1. Posture norms for women should be set up, by means of a feasible posture test with a random sample of 100 to 200 subjects. 2. A study of this kind should be done with the same tools as used in this study but with a larger number of subjects randomly selected to substantiate the direction of findings. 3. A similar study should be undertaken in conjunc- tion with a trained psychologist in order to probe more deeply into an individual's personality and a sociologist to throw further light on the social interaction and adjustment of each subject. BI BLI OGRAPHY 61 62 BIBLIOGRAPHY Books Anderson, John. The Psychology of Development and Personal Adjustment. New York: Henry Holt and Co., 1949. Bickel, Lothar. The Unity of Body and Mind. New York: Philosophical Library, 1959. Bills, Robert E. Index of Adjustment and Values Manual. Auburn, Alabama: Department of Psychology, Alabama Polytechnic Institute. Carman, Bliss. The Making of Personality. Boston: Colon- ial Press, 1908. Drew, Lillian. Individual Gymnastics. Philadelphia: Lea and Febiger, 1945. Feldenkrais, M. Body and Mature Behavior. New York: International Universities Press Inc., 1949. Gessell, Arnold. Infant Development. New York: Harper and Brothers Publishers, 1952. Howland, Ivalclare. Body Alignment in Fundamental Motor Skills. New York: Exposition Press, 1953. McCloy, Charles H., and Young, Norma D. Tests and Measure- ments in Health and Physical Education. New York: Appleton-Century Crofts Inc., 1954. Pryor, Helen. Width-Weight Tables. Second edition. Stan- ford, California: Stanford University Press, 1940. Schifferes, Justus. Healthier Living. New York: John Wiley and Sons Inc., 1954. Todd, Mabel. The Thinking Body. Boston: Charles T. Branford Co., 1937. 63 Walker, Helen M., and Lev, Joseph. Statistical Inference. New York: Henry Holt and Co., 1953. Williams, Jesse Feiring, and Brownell, Clifford. The Administration of Health and Physical Education. Philadelphia: W. B. Saunders Co., 1947. Wylie, Ruth C. The Self Concept. Nebraska: University of Nebraska Press, 1961. Periodicals Barlow, W. "Psychosomatic Problems in Postural Re-educa- tion," Lancet, 2:659-64, July-December, 1955. Bills, Robert. "Rorschach Characteristics of Persons Scoring High and Low in Acceptance of Self," Journal of Consulting Psychology, 17:36-38, 1953. "A Validation of Changes in Scores on the Index of Adjustment and Values as Measures of Changes in Emotionality," Journal of Consulting Psyghology, 17: 135-38, 1953. . "Acceptance of Self as Measured by Interviews and the Index of Adjustment and Values," Journal of Con- sultingyPsychology, 18:22, December, 1954. Bills, Vance and McLean. "An Index of Adjustment and Values," Journal of Consulting Psychology, 15:257-61, February, 1951. Coppock, Doris E. "Relationship of Tightness of Pectoral Muscles to Round Shoulders in College Women," Research Quarterly, 29:146—53, May, 1958. Cowell, C. C. "Bodily Posture as a Mental Attitude," Journal of Health and Physical Education, 1:14-15, May, 1930. Cureton, T. K. "Bodily Posture as an Indicator of Fitness," Research Quarterly, 12:348-67, May, 1941. 64 Deaver, G. G. "Posture and Its Relation to Mental and Physical Health," Research Quarterly, 4:221-28, March 1933. Deutsch, F. "Analysis of Postural Behavior," Psycho- analytic Quarterly, 16:195-213, 1947. Dovey, Irma. "Posture Gives You Away," Instructor, 65:89, May, 1956. Drew, Lillian. "Ways and Means of Overcoming Inefficient Posture," American Physical Education Review, 28:3—8, January, 1923. Ellis, Albert. "The Validity of Personality Question- naires," Psycholggical Bulletin, 43:385-440, September, 1946. Fox, Margaret. "Relationship of Abdominal Strength to Selected Posture Faults," Researcthuarterly, 22:141-44, May, 1951. James, William T. "A Study of the Expression of Bodily Posture," Journal of General Psyghology, 7:405-37, 1932. Mann, H. B. and Whitney, D. R. "On a Test of Whether One of Two Random Variables Is Stochastically Larger Than the Other," Annals of Mathematical Statistics, 18:50- 60, 1947. Massey, Wayne W. "A Critical Study of Objective Methods for Measuring Anterior Posterior Posture with a Sim- plified Technique," Research Quarterly, 14:17, March, 1943. Moriarty, Mary. "A Study of the Relationship of Certain Physical and Emotional Factors to Habitual Poor Pos- ture Among School Children," Research Quarterly, 23: 221-225, May, 1952. Rogers, J. F. "The Long and Short of the Carriage Busi- ness," Journal of Health and Physical Education, 3: 11—13, December, 1932. 65 Roberts, Glen. ”A Study of the Validity of the Index of Adjustment and Values," Journal of Consulting Psychol- ogy, 16:302-04, 1952. Todd, Mabel. "Basic Principles Underlying Postures," Journal of Health and Physical Education, 2:13-15, October, 1931. APPENDIX A RAW DATA 66 67 TABLE XII RAW DATA OF SUBJECTS % De- Pounds Sub- Age Height Weight vi:::;n Deviizion ject (Years) (Inches) (Pounds) Standard Standard Weight* Weight* Above Average (Good Posture) 1 18.7 61.00 105.50 0.08 10 2 20.3 62.75 131.00 0.00 0 3 18.3 64.25 116.00 0.04 6 4 18.8 67.50 138.00 0.01 2 5 18.7 65.25 116.50 1.07 10 6 19.10 66.00 121.00 0.09 12 7 18.11 63.25 119.50 0.05 7 8 18.9 64.25 122.00 0.01 2 9 18.10 62.00 132.00 0.04 6 10 19.0 66.50 134.00 0.00 0 11 18.7 64.75 131.00 0.00 1 12 19.3 61.75 102.00 0.05 6 13 20.1 67.50 138.50 0.02 3 14 18.1 61.00 107.00 0.08 10 15 18.9 64.75 123.00 0.03 5 16 18.3 65.25 130.75 0.03 4 17 18.1 63.25 127.00 0.04 5 18 18.11 62.25 115.50 0.04 5 19 18.5 61.00 106.00 0.00 0 20 18.6 61.00 108.25 0.01 2 21 18.1 64.75 138.00 0.03 5 68 TABLE XII (Continued) % De- Pounds Sub- Age Height Weight vi::::n Dev:::;on ject (Years) (Inches) (Pounds) Standard Standard Weight* Weight* Below Average (Poor Posture) 22 18.4 65.00 115.50 0.08 11 23 18.9 63.75 106.50 0.01 2 24 19.5 64.00 107.00 0.07 9 25 18.6 67.00 121.50 0.09 13 26 19.1 69.00 138.25 0.03 5 27 19.3 64.00 109.00 0.06 7 28 18.9 66.75 135.50 0.02 4 29 18.6 65.50 124.00 0.01 2 30 18.0 62.25 146.50 0.04 6 31 18.0 62.00 119.00 0.00 0 32 18.6 64.00 121.00 0.03 4 33 19.2 63.75 110.50 0.09 12 34 18.11 66.75 143.50 0.00 0 35 18.6 65.50 113.00 0.11 14 36 18.2 69.00 139.50 0.01 2 37 19.4 65.00 117.75 0.05 7 38 18.3 61.25 104.50 0.05 6 39 19.2 61.75 108.00 0.10 11 40 18.4 69.25 130.50 0.05 7 41 18.1 63.75 138.00 0.04 6 *As determined by the Pryor Width—Weight Tables. RAW DATA FOR POSTURE TESTS TABLE XIII 69 Massey Howland Alignometer Subjective Sub- Technique (Inches) Rating ject (Total Difference Between (Total Degrees) Sternum and Pubis Points) Above Average (Good Posture) l 42 0.15 10 2 32 0.13 30 3 41 0.13 25 4 37 0.16 21 5 26 0.02 26 6 30 0.08 37 7 42 0.01 28 8 46 0.08 18 9 48 0.26 10 10 60 0.05 30 11 22 0.01 34 12 40 1.00 30 13 34 1.05 25 14 23 0.04 32 15 27 0.06 14 16 28 0.03 33 17 62 0.26 28 18 40 0.14 14 19 51 0.05 30 20 26 0.06 32 21 32 0.13 33 TABLE XIII (Continued) 70 Massey Howland Alignometer Subjective Sub- Technique (Inches) Rating ject (Total Difference Between (Total Degrees) Sternum and Pubis Points) Below Average (Poor Posture) 22 45 0.31 16 23 63 0.16 10 24 55 1.10 8 25 49 0.13 15 26 51 0.10 7 27 36 0.29 9 28 54 0.21 22 29 35 1.04 22 30 59 0.23 10 31 41 0.28 12 32 50 1.07 16 33 38 1.11 15 34 55 0.22 9 35 58 0.15 24 36 60 1.04 15 37 58 0.10 9 38 66 1.14 7 39 35 0.22 12 40 41 1.04 12 41 25 0.24 9 71 TABLE XIV RAW DATA OF INDIVIDUAL ANGLES OF MASSEY TECHNIQUE Angle I Angle II Angle III Angle IV Sub- (Head-Neck (Trunk (Hips with (Thigh with ject with Trunk) with Hips) Thigh) Leg) (Degrees) (Degrees) (Degrees) (Degrees) Above Average (Good Posture) 1 24 5 3 9.5 2 18.5 2 6.5 5 3 21.5 12.5 3 4 4 21 13 2.5 .5 5 16.5 3.5 6 .5 6 14 3.5 10.5 1.5 7 20.5 12 6 3.5 8 25.5 14.5 1.5 9 23.5 18.5 2.5 2 10 18.5 17.5 15 8.5 11 11 7.5 1.5 2 12 21.5 11.5 2 4.5 13 15.5 8.5 6.5 3.5 14 14.5 4.5 2 1.5 15 15 6.5 3.5 2 16 13.5 11.5 2 .5 17 23.5 19.5 13.5 5 18 21 13.5 1.5 3.5 19 16.5 14.5 11.5 8.5 20 15.5 8 1.5 .5 N I—' TABLE XIV (Continued) 72 Angle I Angle II Angle III Angle IV Sub- (Head-Neck (Trunk (Hips with (Thigh with ject with Trunk) with Hips) Thigh) Leg) (Degrees) (Degrees) (Degrees) (Degrees) Below Average (Poor Posture) 22 22.5 15.5 4 3 23 24.5 19.5 10.5 8 24 31.5 17.5 3 3 25 23.5 17 7 l 26 22.5 3.5 14 10.5 27 19.5 7.5 4 5 28 22 21 8.5 2.5 29 21 9 3.5 2 30 28 20 8.5 2.5 31 23.5 12 1.5 4 32 24 13 4 9 33 19.5 8.5 9 1 34 31 17.5 3 3.5 35 19 16 12 ll 36 31.5 15.5 7 6 37 25.5 16 10.5 6 38 27 17 11.5 9.5 39 19 10 4.5 1.5 40 26.5 2.5 5 41 19.5 3.5 1.5 .5 73 TABLE XV RAW SCORES OF SUBJECTIVE RATINGS BY FOUR JUDGES* Subject Judge Juige Jgige Juige Above Average (Good Posture) l C C— D D- 2 B A A- 3 B- A- B- C 4 B- B- C+ C 5 C+ B B- B+ 6 A A A B 7 B— A C+ B 8 B- C C C 9 C D C— F 10 B A B- B 11 A B+ A— 12 A B- B 13 C+ B B- 14 B+ B+ A— 15 C C— C+ D 16 A- B B 17 B 18 C C+ D 19 B+ A C+ 20 B+ A B 21 B+ A B+ 74 TABLE xv (Continued) Subject Juige Juige Jgige Judge Below Average (Poor Posture) 22 C- B- C C- 23 C- D C F 24 D D C- F 25 C C+ D 26 D+ D D F 27 C D D+ F 28 B B C 29 C B+ B- C 30 C- D F 31 C- C— D 32 C- B C+ F 33 C+ C— C- 34 C D+ D D- 35 B C+ B+ C 36 C+ C- C+ D 37 D D C— D 38 D+ D D F 39 C- C- D 40 D+ C C D 41 C— D+ C- F *The ten point scale for the letter grade is: A = 10, A— = 9, B = 7, B— = 6, C+ = 5, C = 4, C- = 3, D+ and D = 2, and D- and F = l. 75 TABLE XVI RAW DATA OF INDIVIDUAL SCORES ON BILL'S INDEX OF ADJUSTMENT AND VALUES (SELF) Column I Column II Column III Discrepancy Sub- Score . Concept Acceptance Concept (Personal 3eCt of of of Ideal Adjustment) Self Self Self (Dif.between Cols.I & III) Above Average (Good Posture) 1 172 180 184 32 2 151 134 199 70 3 160 154 186 49 4 162 184 198 42 5 177 208 197 26 6 165 152 190 47 7 161 151 193 44 8 158 153 191 48 9 178 192 195 25 10 181 193 200 29 11 167 154 196 39 12 172 213 188 22 13 185 I 198 199 17 14 182 182 200 30 15 165 171 202 53 16 171 203 200 31 17 145 140 192 59 18 180 181 206 44 19 149 154 168 29 20 181 171 192 19 21 172 174 185 29 76 TABLE XVI (Continued) Column I Column II Column III Discrepancy Sub- Score , Concept Acceptance Concept (Personal jeCt of of of Ideal Adjustment) Self Self Self (Dif.between Cols.I & III) Below Average (Poor Posture) 22 149 141 181 52 23 166 147 191 35 24 161 165 196 51 25 151 149 185 48 26 150 131 191 55 27 154 164 202 66 28 183 169 208 49 29 172 171 198 42 30 149 121 197 84 31 147 144 183 61 32 143 134 177 54 33 139 73 201 76 34 164 161 195 45 35 177 180 191 29 26 150 167 179 35 37 170 158 183 23 38 174 144 187 39 39 170 168 200 46 40 172 171 192 28 41 152 154 194 59 77 TABLE XVII RAW DATA OF INDIVIDUAL SCORES ON BILL'S INDEX OF ADJUSTMENT AND VALUES (OTHERS) AND SOCIAL ADJUSTMENT CATEGORY SCORE Social 32:; EEiZZEtI EZEZEEaiie EEiZZEtlii Aggggggjgt of Self of Self Ideal Self Score Above Average (Good Posture) 1 167 151 182 +- 2 155 127 206 -- 3 171 167 194 -+ 4 175 189 195 ++ 5 175 200 199 +- 6 160 141 183 -- 7 159 130 192 -- 8 173 168 195 -+ 9 181 189 196 +— 10 183 188 202 +- 11 178 166 198 -+ 12 169 219 177 ++ 13 184 186 199 +- 14 183 183 201 ++ 15 160 177 193 ++ 16 160 189 193 +- 17 157 178 180 —+ 18 154 134 205 +- 19 183 193 195 —+ 20 156 134 188 +— 21 157 143 184 +— 78 TABLE XVII (Continued) 22222:: 22222222 222222522 2225:2522 JeCt of Self of Self Ideal Self category Score Below Average (Poor Posture) 22 ' 157 154 177 -+ 23 156 138 187 -- 24 154 162 173 -- 25 157 154 191 —+ 26 154 157 186 —+ 27 164 180 191 —+ 28 181 163 202 +- 29 172 170 208 +— 30 166 153 186 —+ 31 156 154 180 —+ 32 152 145 158 _+ 33 172 193 200 —+ 34 162 159 183 -- 35 146 143 158 +— 36 153 154 170 -- 37 175 176 177 —+ 38 156 153 178 —+ 39 164 172 188 ++ 40 152 150 171 +- 41 157 166 198 —+ APPENDIX B SELF-CONCEPT QUESTIONNAIRE INSTRUCTION BOOKLET AND ANSWER SHEETS 79 80 THE INDEX OF ADJUSTMENT AND VALUES* Directions (Adult Form) This device is a way of helping you to state some of your beliefs about yourself. It tells nothing more than what you want it to say--there are no hidden scores or tricks. It will have value only if you are careful and do your best to give an accurate description of yourself as you see yourself. On the separate sheet is a list of 49 trait words. You will be asked to answer three questions about yourself. These questions are: 1. How often are you this sort of person, 2. How do you feel about being this way, and 3. How much of the time would you like this trait to be character— istic of you? Please make the three ratings for each trait before going to the next trait. On the separate sheet is a list of 49 trait words and an example. Take each word separately and apply it to yourself by completing the following sentence: *Instruction booklet is same for "self" and "others.” The only exception is that for the "others," the words, "other people" replace "yourself" and "she is" replaces III am. ll 81 I am a(an) person. The first word in the list is academic, so you would substitute this term in the above sentence. It would read: "I am an academic person." Then decide how much of the time this statement is like you, that is, is typical or characteristic of you as an individual, and rate yourself on a scale from one to five according to the following key: Seldom, is this like me. Occasionally, this is like me. About half of the time, this is like me. A good deal of the time, this is like me. Most of the time, this is like me. U'IOPUJNl-J Select the number beside the phrase that tells how much of the time the statement is like you and insert it in Column I on the separate sheet. EXAMPLE: Beside the term ACA- DEMIC, number two is inserted to indicate that, "Occasion- ally, I am an academic person." Now go to Column II. Use one of the statements given below to tell how you feel about yourself as described in Column 1. l. I very much dislike being as I am in this respect. 2. I dislike being as I am in this respect. 3. I neither dislike being as I am nor like being as I am in this respect. 4. I like being as I am in this respect. 5. I like very much being as I am in this respect. 82 You will select the number beside the statement that tells how you feel about the way you are and insert the number in Column II. EXAMPLE: In Column II beside the term ACADEMIC, number one is inserted to indicate that I dis- like very much being as I am in respect to the term, aca— demic. Note that being as I am always refers to the way you described yourself in Column I. Finally, go to Column III, using the same term, complete the following sentence: I would like to be a(an) person. Then decide how much of the time you would like this trait to be characteristic of you and rate yourself on the fol- lowing five point scale. Seldom, would I like this to be me. Occasionally, I would like this to be me. About half of the time, I would like this to be me. A good deal of the time, I would like this to be me. Most of the time, I would like this to be me. 0143me You will select the number beside the phrase that tells how much of the time you would like to be this kind of a person and insert the number in Column III. EXAMPLE: In Column III beside the term ACADEMIC, number five is inserted to indicate that most of the time, I would like to be this kind of a person. Start with the word ACCEPTABLE and fill in 83 Columns I, II, and III before going on to the next word. There is no time limit. Be honest with yourself so that your description will be a true measure of how you see yourself. Please complete the ratings for yourself before you make the ratings for "other people." Be certain that you use the answer sheet marked "SELF" in the upper right hand corner for yourself and the one marked "OTHERS" when making the ratings for other people. 84 II SELF II ANSWER SHEET Name Address Sex Age Student No. II III I II III a. academic l. acceptable 26. merry 2. accurate 27. mature 3. alert 28. nervous 4. ambitious 29. normal 5. annoying 30. optimistic 6. busy 31. poised 7. calm 32. purposeful 8. charming 33. reasonable 9. clever 34. reckless 10. competent 35. responsible ll. confident 36. sarcastic 12 considerate 37. sincere 13. cruel 38. stable l4. democratic 39. studious 15. dependable 40. successful 16. economical 41. stubborn 17. efficient 42. tactful 18. fearful 43. teachable 19. friendly 44. useful 20. fashionable 45. worthy 21. helpful 46. broad-minded 22. intellectual 47. businesslike 23. kind 48. competitive 24. logical 49. fault-finding 25. meddlesome Name 85 "OTHERS" ANSWER SHEET (Complete this Index as you think the average person in your peer group would complete it for herself.) academic acceptable accurate alert ambitious annoying busy calm charming clever competent confident considerate cruel democratic dependable economic 17. efficient 18. fearful l9. friendly 20. fashionable 21. helpful 22. intellectual 23. kind 24. logical 25. meddlesome @mflmm‘P-WNHQJ P'H P‘O 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. I II III 26. 27. 28. 29. 30. 31. 32. 33. 34. 35. 36. 37. 38. 39. 40. 41. 42. 43. 44. 45. 46. 47. 48. 49. III merry mature nervous normal optimistic poised purposeful reasonable reckless responsible sarcastic sincere stable studious successful stubborn tactful teachable useful worthy broad-minded businesslike competitive fault-finding