SELF CONCEPT OF APPEARANCE AND
MOVEMENT IN SPACE:

AN INDEX FOR FIFTH GRADE CHILDREN

TI'cesIs Iar IIM Degree aI M. A.
MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY

[one Genevieve Shadduck
1964

THESIS

LIBRARY

Michigan State
University

 

 

ABSTRACT

SELF CONCEPT OF APPEARANCE AND MOVEMENT IN SPACE:
AN INDEX FOR FIFTH GRADE CHILDREN

by Ione Genevieve Shadduck

Statement of the problem.-—It was the purpose of

 

this study to develop an instrument to measure conception
of self as related to appearance and movement in Space.
Two pilot studies were conducted to aid in the identifica-
tion of determinants for fifth grade girls and boys.

On the basis of student reSponse and the opinion of
judges, determinants were selected. The organization of
the items was the result of a comprehensive review of the
literature. The SCPC INVENTORY, a paper and pencil tool,
was developed.

One-hundred and five fifth grade girls and boys were
selected to take the INVENTORY.

The results were analyzed by scalogram analysis,
according to Waisanen. The coefficient of reproducibility
was computed. Split-half reliability was used projected
with the Spearman-Brown formula. The items which met the
Guttman criteria were retained and are scaled according to

order of difficulty.

Ione Genevieve Shadduck

Conclusions.--As a result of the investigation, the

 

following conclusions have been drawn:

1. Sixty—six descriptive traits were judged relevant
for girls and boys in the fifth grade.

2. Scalogram analysis of responses produced a thirty—
three item Guttman type scale for the girls and
a thirty—six item Guttman type scale for the boys.

3. The coefficient of reproducibility for the nine
items, SECTION I, girls was .93; for the nine
items, boys, .82, which is low.

4. The coefficient of reproducibility for the twelve
items, SECTION II, girls was .89; for the fifteen

boys, .90.

U7

The coefficient of reproducibility for the twelve
items, SECTION III, girls was .89; for the twelve

items, boys, .91.

Recommendations.--The findings of this study should

 

be regarded as preliminary. Several follow-up steps would
be apprOpriate at this point.

1. The scaled descriptive traits should be re—
organized into a simple check-list instrument. The form
used in the SCPC Inventory, Column II, is not recommended
for this age level. Difficulty in reSponding to Column I
reSponse, rather than the trait itself, was obvious. Con-
sideration should be given to replacing Column II with a

"Self as others see me,H item.

Ione Genevieve Shadduck

2. It is recommended that the three categories remain:
appearance, movement, and expression.

3. The instrument shouldtfimnibe given to a larger
sampling. A separate instrument is needed for girls and for
boys.

4. Correlation between the three categories should
be figures to determine whether reSpondents have the same
or similar rank ordering on all categories.

5. Resultant scores can then be correlated with
scores from physical fitness tests, teacher's rating of
respondent on a self—acceptance-to-self—rejection scale,
peer group ratings, and other available measures of total
self and separate items dealing with body—image.

6. Use of instrument with other girls and boys

grades 4—6 or ages 9-12, should be explored.

SELF CONCEPT OF APPEARANCE AND MOVEMENT IN SPACE:

AN INDEX FOR FIFTH GRADE CHILDREN

By

Ione Genevieve Shadduck

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

196M

3

3% 90),
Q-QAA

her

Roe
who

aid

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The author wishes to thank Dr. Janet A. Wessel for
guidance in the preparation of this thesis.

Gratitude is also extended to Jean Young and Elaine
for their help and encouragement. To the teachers
administered the Indexes and to Shailer Thomas whose

in the statistical analysis of the results was in-

valuable, the author is most indebted.

ii

TMEEOFCMWEWS

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
LIST OF TABLES
Chapter

I. INTRODUCTION

Statement of the Problem
Need for the Study . . . . .
Limitations. . . . . . . . . .

II. REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE . . . . .

Meaning of Concept of Self.

Importance of Self Concept Status

Studies as Related to Physical
Characteristics and Other Variables.

III. METHODOLOGY.

Identification of Determinants

Selection and Organization of
Determinants .

Sample and Administration

IV. ANALYSIS OF DATA

Scalogram Analysis
Content Validity
Reliability.

V. SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS.

Summary .
Conclusions.
Recommendations

BIBLIOGRAPHY

APPENDICES. . .
APPENDIX A—-Pilot Study 1
Pilot Study 2
APPENDIX B—-SCPC INVENTORY .
APPENDIX C——SCPC INVENTORY Traits Retained

iii

Page
ii
iv

H

\JUW U'l LUIUI—J

12

21

22
23

25
28
28

BO

BO
30
31

33

A2
43
149
s5

64

Table

LIST OF TABLES

Population by Schools

Coefficient of Reproducibility and
Remaining Items . . . . .

Reliability Coefficients

iv

Page
2A

27

CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION

In recent years, education has turned to research as

a method of approaching the perplexing and important prob—

lems in personality development and learning. More partic-

ularly,

concern has been expressed in the concept of identity

and the experience of identity from the perceptual point of

view.

In brief this theory postulates that:

1.

Behavior is consistent with a behaver's
perception of the world in which he lives.

Individual perception is influenced by needs,
values, abilities, and beliefs about self and
others.

Body image is an important variable in the
primary area of perceptual functioning and a
substratum for the development of certain
skills.

Perception and attitudes toward the body are
directly related to what we feel regarding
others.

Social adjustment involves believing you are
adequate and that others have a similar per-
ception of you.

Perpetual reinforcement by meaningful integrated
activities can bridge the gap between actuality
and potentiality.

As a result of the renewed interest in the study of

the self,

a number of methods have been developed to obtain

self-evaluations utilizing paper and pencil inventories.
None, however, were concerned primarily with the develOpment
of a tool to evaluate the self concept of physical appearance
and movement characteristics as a separate entity of the

total self concept.

Statement of the problem.—-The purpose of this study

 

was to develOp an instrument to measure concept of self as
related to appearance and physical activity. The specific
tasks of the study were:

1. Identification of determinants of the self
concept of appearance and physical activity
for fifth grade boys and girls.

2. Selection and organization of determinants into
a rating technique.

3. Administration of the rating technique to a
select population.

A. Development of a scale to measure self concept

of physical appearance and movement character—
istics of fifth grade students.

Need for the study.——Body image phenomena are promin—

 

ent in the everyday experience of the normal individual.

To attest to the importance of body image in our culture,
there is a widespread expenditure of time and money given

to altering the physical appearance. There is evidence that
the body schema acts as a basic frame of reference which can
influence perception and ability to perform certain

skills.(3A)

3

We build images of our bodies and movement in space
primarily through sensori—motor experiences and impressions.
Body perception is basic to motor learning and underlies
all directed movements and changes in movement behavior.
Perception of physical self is fundamental to the perception
of the external environment.

The theory that perception of physical self by the
individual may be a central influence on the development
of the total self is an important consideration that should

be explored directly and under controlled conditions.

Limitations.——

 

1. Geographical limitations. The study was limited
to fifth grade girls and boys enrolled in seven elementary
schools in Pontiac, Michigan. The schools chosen repre—
sented a cross section of schools in this particular area.
Interpretation of results should be considered in relation
to Specific population investigated.

2. Semantic limitations. The determinants, although
chosen as a result of student reSponse, may have had shades
of variation in meaning to different respondents. Precision
in experimentation was further hindered by lack of complete
uniformity in communication.

3. Temporal limitation. The value placed on any
particular descriptive trait is the value placed by the

individual at the moment he was tested.

A. Methodological limitation. Paper and pencil tests
reveal only what the individual is able and willing to com-
municate. The response to the determinants is, therefore,
limited to the description of self which the child chose to
reveal to the investigator.

5. Population limitation. The limitations of this
study were further compounded by the necessity to scale the
determinants separately for girls and for boys. This con-

siderably reduced the number of respondents per scale.

CHAPTER II

REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE

In the following review of literature, the author
will emphasize those areas which relate to the physical

aspects of the self concept.

Meaning of concept of self.—-Combs stated that the

 

concepts of self are not cold hard facts, but deep personal
meanings, beliefs, values, attitudes, and feelings about
one's self. He claims that the adequate personality
requires accurate, realistic information about himself and
the world and that gaps in knowledge of self, like false
information, can hinder acceptance.(24)
Jacobsen explains the realistic self concept as
follows:
By a realistic concept of the self we mean one that
mirrors correctly the state and the characteristics,
the potentialities and abilities, the assets and the
limits of our bodily and mental ego: on the one hand,
of our appearance, our anatomy and our physiology; on
the other hand, of our conscious and preconscious
feelings and thoughts, wishes, impulses and attitudes,
of our physical and mental activities.(AA)
Jersild discusses the self as a composite of thoughts
and feelings which constitute a person's awareness of his

individual existence, his concept of who and what he is.

He further explains that a person may have a generally

positive body image, that is he likes his looks, or he may
have a negative body image which infers that his physical
appearance as a whole or some feature of his bodily make-up
falls short of the image he would like to have of himself.
He believes that the image a person has of his body is sub—
jective as are all other aspects of the self-concept and
that a person may or may not see himself as others see
him.(45)

As a result of a theoretical analysis, Staines stated
that the concept of the self is a learned structure, growing
mainly from comments made by other people and from inferences
drawn by children out of their experiences in home, school
and other social groups.(78)

Symonds explains the self as the most real thing in
our experience, a frame of reference with which a person
perceives, conceives, and evaluates the world around him and
toward which he reacts. He believes that the first sensa-
tions of the self come through the kinesthetic sensations
and that later awareness of and reference to the body makes
self—consciousness a vivid experience. He stated further
that our feelings about ourselves come first from our orien-
tation in space. The bodily self which we feel does not
necessarily correSpond to the one which others may observe.(79)

". . . self concept is an organized and organizing
dynamic within personality structure . . .", is the statement

made by Brandt in his study on the accuracy of self—estimate.

(14)

In describing the body image, Ausubel stated the
following:

The body image is the mental picture that each
individual has of his own appearance in Space. It
includes such factors as height, weight, body build,
and facial appearance. Ordinarily, during most periods
of life (e.g., from childhood to preadolescense), the
body image changes imperceptibly because the body itself
changes in this way. The small changes in appearance
and quantitative increments in height and weight are
easily absorbed in the prevailing image the child has

of his own body. . . . During adolescence, however,
conscious and wholesale restructuring of the body image
is necessary . . . (4)

According to Hawkes, the self concept, the mental
picture an individual has of himself in relation to his
environment, develops as one'becmmesincreasingly aware of
the world about him” The body image, the picture each
individual has of his own appearance in Space, is a vital

part of the self concept and contributes to self—esteem.(AO)

Importance of self concept statuS.——Fisher stated

 

that body image variables may influence such diverse
phenomena as level of aspiration, Site of psychosomatic
symptomatology, reSponse to stress, and patterns of physio—
logical reactivity.(33)

According to Snygg and Combs, I'PeOple who conceive of
themselves as inadequate or inacceptable to others necessarily
operate under great psychological restraint."(75)

The following statement by Sarason is very pertinent

to our concern for the status of the self concept:

It is no exaggeration to say that the relationship
between what man does and what he is capable of has
always concerned the thinker and scholar regardless
of his field. . . . In our culture. , . the problem
has been viewed as one involving all its citizens,

i.e., each individual should have the opportunity
maximally to develop his potentialities.(69)

Perkins claimed that the growing importance of the
self concept as a construct is particularly evident in those
theories which postulate that the individual's perception
of himself is the central factor influencing his behavior.
He further stated that a more adequate interpretation of
behavior can be achieved by increasing our knowledge of the
behaver's perceptual field including the self concept.(6l)

Combs believes that an extremely adequate self~actual-
izing person seems to be characterized by an essentially
positive View of self and that a positive View of self gives
its owner a tremendous advantage in dealing with life. It
provides the basis for great personal strength.(2A)

Kelly stresses that an inadequate concept of self which
is so common in our culture is cripplingyto the individual.
Furthermore, it is what the person sees that is enabling or
disabling.[:The crucial matter is not so much what you are,
but what you think you are. He also states that the self
has to be achieved, that it is not given and that it is built
almost entirely in relationship to others.

Another important area of thought was added by Kelley
when he said that it is doubtful whether or not there can be

a self except in relation to others. People in the world

today suffer from inadequate concepts of self which
naturalLylead tonustaken notions of others.(49)

In agreement is this statement by Symonds: "There is
an intimate relation between the attitude we take toward
ourselves and that which we adOpt toward the world around
us."(79)

Z According to Symonds, shifts in attitude towards a
person by others are reflected by changes in the attitude
of the person toward himself. The developing self becomes
less stable and less secure in the midst of changing and
inconsistent situations. A child with low self-esteem is
actually afraid of the obligations of living up to praise
and of being successful. The person who believes in himself
acts accordingly and puts forth effort to further his ends;
but the person who depreciates himself sometimes gives up
the struggle and therefore, his performance suffers.(79)

In his discussion of human nature, Cooley stated:

As we see our face, figure, and dress in the glass,
and are interested in them because they are ours, and
pleased or otherwise with them according as they do or
do not answer to what we should like them to be; so
in imagination we perceive in another's mind some
thought of our appearance, manners, aims, deeds,
character, friends, and so on, and are variously
affected by it.(25)

I "Physical features noted by a person in describing
himself probably often represent more than meets the eye.

They may be symbolic of deeper meanings," according to

Jersild.(45)

lO

Ausubel believes that, "The individual's ego reSponse
to his own physical disability is largely a reflection of
the social reaction it ilicits."(u)

He also believes that individuals are usually regarded
as ugly or attractive insofar as they conform to or deviate
from the idealized anatomic measurements of their own sex
groups. In our culture, for example, shortness and puniness
in boys and obesity in either sex tend to detract from a
child's status in his peer group.(4)

In relationship to skill, Blair stated that:

Variations in size and physical skill are likely to

cause a child to be rejected by the group. The boy

who cannot throw a ball or run fast becomes a group
liability. The girl who does not roller skate or ride

a bicycle is likely to have a lonely time. The failure
to develop these is likely to occur in boys who are not
physically vigorous because they cannot compete with
other boys of their own age. For them sex differentia-
tion is confused and difficult. These boys may continue
to rely upon the protectiveness of adults. Extremely
aggressive and active girls may also encounter difficul-
ties in their relationships with the girls‘ clique.
Large or fat girls may also be left out of groups.(7)

In further reference to learning physical Skills,
Havighurst stated that the peer group rewards a child for
success and punishes him by indifference or disdain for
failure. When Speaking of middle childhood, he believes
that a child's conception of himself is tied up with the
skills he has which effects his relations with his peers.
The child adds to his conception of himself as his peers

react to his skills.(38)

11

Of more far—reaching importance is the area explained
by Logan:

Children who have a positive self-image are challenged
rather than threatened by new learning situations. .
The child who sees himself positively has little need
to be on the defensive; as a result he is able to think
more clearly, sense relationships more accurately, and
use his imagination freely. He meets problems courage—
ously and faces life with confidence. He takes learning
as he takes all experiences——in stride, secure in the
knowledge that he can achieve, that he can be effective.
Hence the importance of helping the child learn a posi—
tive view of self. . . (55)

Hawkes believes that although individual variations
in growth patterns are the rule rather than the exception,
marked deviations affect the way a child perceives himself
in relation to others and the way others perceive him. He
also points out that how an individual child sees himself
and his own physical growth is usually a reflection of the
social acceptance of those about him.(AO)
In his discussion of human deveIOpment in our culture,
Bernard stresses that:
The develOpmental task of building a wholesome con—
cept of self continues from infancy to adulthood.
It rises to eminence during middle childhood as the
individuals make more contact with persons outside the
home. . . . If his physical body permits him to do the
things expected at his age, if the standards of achieve-
ment are apprOpriate, and if he is not compared unfavor-
ably in terms of size or skills he comes to feel that he
is a worthy and adequate person.(5)
Bernard further emphasizes that, "The mental attitude
toward his abilities will have as much, if not more, bearing

on his future adjustments as will the develOpment of skills,

raise. . ”(5)

12

It was stated by Lecky that, "All emotions can be
traced directly to experiences which are interpreted by the
individual as SUPPORTS OF or THREATS TO one or more ideas
of self."(51)

He concluded that the, ” . . . concept of one's self
was considered to be the nucleus of Mind defined as the
totality of conscious experience unique to the individual.
More important than anything else is the attempt to discover
what a person feels and thinks about himself and about

life."(51)

Studies as related to physical chagacteristics and

other variables.-—Body-image phenomena ". . . are prominent

 

in the normal individual's everyday experiences and
are a matter of marked focus for the culture as a whole,"
according to Fisher and Cleveland. They define body—image
as a psychological variable evolving gradually during the
learning process in which the individual experiences his body
in manifold situations and also notes the varied reactions of
others to it. It is believed that the body—image boundary is
a guiding reference point which continually influences the
individual's orientation to the behavioral Space about him.(3A)
Schilder pointed out that, "Perceptions, in the whole
field of psychology, only have a meaning as the basis for
actions. The postural model of the body, the knowledge of
the limbs and of their relation to each other, is necessary

for the start of every movement." Furthermore, ”A discussion

13

of a body-image as an isolated entity is necessarily incom-
plete. A body is always the expression of an ego and of a
personality, and is in a world."(70)

In his discussion of the self—image, Anderson stated
that the physical as well as the psychological area has a
heirarchy of traits. Accordingly, "Those traits which have
not had a recognized interpersonal function are not included
in the self-image, just as those physical structures which
have not had a recognized function are not included in the
individual's physical self-image. It is function that deter—
mines not only structuralization, but the inclusion or exclu-
sion of the trait in the psychological self—image."(3)

A number of studies have been done in an attempt to
relate the self concept to other variables. Brookover,
Paterson, and Thomas (15) conducted a study of the relation-
ship of self—images to achievement in junior high school
subjects. Wattenberg and Clifford (82) studied the rela-
tionship of the self-concept to beginning achievement in
reading at the kindergarten level. Bledsoe and Garrison (8)
conducted research on the relationship of the self concept
to academic achievement, intelligence, interests, and mani-
fest anxiety of the elementary school child. Reeder (64)
studied some of the relationships between level of self
concept, academic achievement and classroom adjustment.
Spaulding(76) conducted a study on achievement, creativity,
and self concept correlates of teacher—pupil relationships

in elementary schools. Roth (67) studied the role of self

14

concept in achievement. Bruck (19) studied age and sex
differences in relationship to self concept and grade—point
average. Bodwin (12) studied the relationship between
immature self—concept and certain educational disabilities.

Research has been conducted on the self in relation—
ship to others. Staines (78) said that the concept of self
grows mainly from comments made by others and from infer-
ences drawn out of experiences in the home, school, and
other social groups. Helper (41) found that correlations
between parental evaluations and children's self-evaluations
were small but consistently positive. Koppitz (50) investi-
gated specific parental attitudes and characteristics as
related to children's attitudes and perception of self and
others. Silver (73) investigated the relationship of self—
concept to parental and peer acceptance.

In Brownfain's study, stability of the self-concept
was measured in terms of the discrepancy between the self
as positively conceived and as negatively conceived. All
findings indicated that subjects with stable self concepts
were better adjusted than those with unstable self con-
cepts.(l8) In Cowen's administration of Brownfain's inven—

II

tory, it was concluded that, the high scorers had

more positive concepts of self and were more self—acceptant."

(27)
In using self ratings and group ratings, Calvin (21)

found a tendency to enhance the self is inversely related

15

to maladjustment and that individuals who Show poor insight
regarding their own level of adjustment are more likely to
be maladjusted than those who show good insight. As a
result of Davidson's and Lang's study, it was indicated
that the child with a more favorable self image perceived
his teacher's feelings toward him more favorably.(3l)

On personality traits measured by most scales,
Amatora (2) believes that self-evaluations are valid when
opinion of classmates is the criterion.

In his study of the stability of the self-concept
and self—esteem, McGehee (57) found that Cowen's negative
self measure of self—esteem was a more meaningful and potent
measure than Brownfain's measure of stability of self-
concept. He also found that the negative self is a measure
exceeding in potency the Brownfain stability measure.

Phillips (62) observed that, ". . . individuals who
are prone to express negative attitudes toward others
also harbour negative self attitudes." In using Phillip's
questionnaire, McIntyre found that attitudes toward self
and others are positively and significantly correlated.(58)

As a result of his study on the accuracy of self-
evaluation, Holt (A2) concluded that, "Dominant and affilia—
tive needs were most accurately rated. . . . Only slight
and insignificant tendencies were found for these SS to
overrate their most highly prized needs and to underrate

distasteful ones."

16

In comparing self-evaluation with group evaluation,
Webb (83) found a consistent tendency for overevaluation
and over— or under—evaluation was related to the accept-
ability of the trait.

Staines (78) suggested that the self-structure
could be analyzed by looking at it on three levels: (1)
Cognized or Known Self, what the person perceives and con—
ceives himself to be; (2) Other Self, what the person
believes others think of him; (3) Ideal Self. Many studies
have been conducted along this line of analysis. In 1951,
Bills, Vance, and McLean constructed an index of adjustment
and values (IAV). The following statement was made:

From the point of view of phenomenological psychology,
maladjustment may be defined as any discrepancy between
the concept of self and the concept of the ideal self.
For practical purposes it may be assumed that maladjust-
ment exists when the discrepancy between the concept of
self and concept of the ideal self is great enough to
cause unhappiness.(6)

Chodorkoff's (23) study showed a significant curvi-
linear relationship between adjustment and ". degree of
correspondence between the individual's perceived and ideal
self." In the study by Hanlon, Hofstaetter and O'Connor (37),
it was concluded that the correlation between the self
concept and ideal self concept tends to be positive and the
use of measures of self—ideal congruence in evaluation of
the extent of personality maladjustment seems to be justified.

In the administration of tests by Phillips, Berger

and the IAV, Omwake (60) found that the three inventories

1?

agreed markedly and that there was a consistent tendency for
those who accept themselves to be acceptant of others. In
Zimmer's study to check the efficacy of self—concept-ideal-

self discrepancies as indicators of conflict, and by

inference of maladjustment," it was found that the results

H

failed to support the contention that discrepancies
between the concept of self and concept of the ideal self
are directly indicative of conflict."(88)

In further exploration of Cohen's and Brownfain's
work, Lepine and Chodorkoff (52) found that ". . . the more
an individual tended to express feelings of adequacy, (l)
the greater was the correspondence between his perceived and
ideal self, and (2) the less dependent upon environmental
evaluation of his past performance was his goal setting
behavior, when environmental evaluation indicated sequential
change in adequacy of performance."

Block and Thomas stated:

The satisfaction or concern of an individual with

his phenomenal self is a datum of great importance.
Much behavior becomes coherent when understood in
terms of the ideal self toward which an individual
aSpires and his very personal evaluation of how
close he sees himself to this ideal.(lO)

Levy examined the discrepancy between concept of self
and concept of ideal self as a definition for personal mal—
adjustment. (53) The results substantiated criticism of
current interpretations of these discrepancies when limited

to the Self as the object of description. In Wylie's study,

the findings ". . . supported the notion that defensiveness

18

will be a function of discrepancies within the self concept
and/or discrepancies between the self concept and the self
ideal . . . "(87)

As a result of her study of six measures of self-
concept discrepancy and instability, Smith (7A) concluded
that, "High discrepancy scores on all three discrepancy
measures, and high instability scores on all three instabil—
ity measures were found to be associated with poor adjustment
scores."

A self—ideal discrepancy measuring instrument was
devised by Bruce (20) for sixth grade children. Results of
administration indicated a statistically significant rela-
tionship between self-acceptance and measures of manifest
anxiety and observed insecurity such that those with the
smaller discrepancy scores had average scores indicating
less anxiety and less insecurity.

Lipsitt (SA) administered a self—concept scale to
approximately three hundred fourth, fifth, and sixth grade
children. His conclusions included the following: "(a)
both the self-concept and discrepancy measures . . . provided
reliable estimates of an individual difference variable; (b)
of these two types of measures, the self-concept score
provided a somewhat more reliable measure than the discrepancy
score; (c) for the fourth, fifth, and sixth grade 83, there
were no reliable grade or sex differences in mean self-

concept scores "

19

In Brophy's study, it was found that, "General satis-
faction was . . . negatively related to the discrepancy
between ideal self and imposed life r81e, and to the dis-
crepancy between self concept and ideal self . . . ” He
further stated that, ”The findings suggest that congruence
in the intra-personal relationship between the self concept
and ideal self is one of the most fundamental conditions
for both general happiness and for satisfaction in Specific
life areas."(l6)

Creelman (28) devised the CSC Test to measure self
conceptions of elementary school children. Three sets of
criteria were used: child's View of himself; child's
preferences; and evaluative judgment. Hamachek (36) con-
structed an instrument to measure the physical self-image,
social self-image, intellectual self—image and the total
self-image. Katz (48) used a self rating inventory of
twenty traits to measure stability of self—concept.

Brandt conducted a study on the accuracy of the self—
estimate. As a result of his finding that between—individ—
ual variation was significantly greater than within—
individual variation, he concluded that there seems to be
relationship between the accuracy of separate self—percepts.
He stated that if the total framework was biased in a certain
direction, then specified percepts would bend to be biased
in the same direction. It was pointed out that it is neces-

sary to deal with major aspects of the total self—concept,

20

rather than isolated bits of it in order to effect or
understand behavior.

Brandt also found that all of the abilities were rated
with approximately the same degree of accuracy. He further
concluded that peer acceptance appears to lead toward
greater accuracy of self—estimate, however, when inaccuracy
occurs, it leads to more overestimation than underestimation.
(14)

In studying self—esteem, COOpersmith stated: ”The
age group 10-12 was chosen since the personality has been
relatively well formed by this time, and the adolescent
turmoil frequently noted in our society is not yet likely
to have occurred."(26)

Secord and Jourard conducted a study on body—cathexis
and the self. They stated that, ”. . . body—cathexis is
believed to be integrally related to the self—concept,
although identifiable as a separate aspect thereof."
Furthermore, "One of the most significant results is the
demonstration that the body and the self tend to be
cathected to the same degree. This supports the hypothesis
that valuation of the body and the self tend to be commen-

surate.”(7l)

CHAPTER III
METHODOLOGY

A search of the literature on the self concept
revealed no previously develOped instrument designed to
measure the concept of physical appearance and movement in

space as a separate entity of the total self concept.

Identification ofdeterminants.-—The selection of

 

the inventory content was made through the administration
of two pilot inventories. The first administration, made
to twenty-one fifth grade girls and boys, consisted of the
following:

Part I--Pre-test assignment was given. The children
had the choice of either drawing a picture
or writing a poem which was descriptive of
themselves.

Part II——Sentence completion form.*
Part III—-Forced choice, four reSponse items.*
Part IV——Multiple—choice, five possible reSponses.*

Part V-—Open—response items.*

A study was made of the results of the first admin—

istration. On the basis of this study and conferences with

fifth grade teachers, a list of descriptive traits was

 

*See Appendix A, Pilot Study 1.

21

22

compiled and arranged in an adjective checklist form. One-
hundred and forty-five words or phrases were grouped into
the following categories:
SHAPE IN SPACE
1. Size
2. DevelOpment
3. Attractiveness
MOVEMENT IN SPACE
A. Aptitude in games and Sports
5. Expressiveness
The second pilot inventory (adjective checklist) was
administered to approximately one-hundred fifth grade girls
and boys (other than those used in the first pilot study).
The girls and boys were asked to consider how the descrip-
tive trait described them and reSpond by checking the "I am"
column or the "I am not" column. They were asked not_to
respond to any word which they did not understand. A column
was provided for the addition of any words which they felt
should be added.
See Appendix A, Pilot Study 2, for the list of descrip-
tive words or phrases used. Those which were eliminated on
the basis of lack of understanding by the majority of students

are starred. Those words which were eliminated for such

reasons as a retention or substitution of a synonym or homonym

are double starred.

Selection and organization of determinants.--After
studying the student reSponses to the check—list, the follow-

ing words were added to the words retained to make up the

23

SCPC INVENTORY: V—shaped, pear-shaped, limber, good in
exercises, good jumper, good in games, good thrower, poor
runner, cannot understand directions well, good in rhythm,
can learn new games easily, poor in catching, interested

in others, dumb in games, make a lot of mistakes, very smart
in games.

An effort was made to balance the negative with the
positive traits.

As a result of a study of the two pilot inventories,
conferences with several fifth grade teachers and observa-
tions of pupils at this grade level, sixty—six descriptive
traits were retained as determinants for the Self Concept
of Physical Characteristics Inventory (SCPC).

The SCPC INVENTORY consisted of three sections. Each
section was organized into three parts similar to Bill's

IAV (see Appendix B).

Sample and administration.—-The test booklets and

 

instruction sheets were given to the Physical Education
teachers of the fifth grade classes (subjects were not
included in the two pilot inventories) selected for the
inventory administration. Overlay transparencies were
available for projection as an aid in the interpretation of
the forms.

Two colors were used: (1) green for the boys, and
(2) yellow for the girls. The content of the inventory was

identical for both groups.

2A

The inventory administrators were instructed to guide
the students in filling out the cover page and to read to
the students the paragraph on the cover page. They were
also allowed to help with the meaning of a trait, but were
asked to make a note of all words in question.

Four elementary schools of Pontiac, Michigan were
chosen as representative of a cross sampling of the elemen-
tary schools in the area.

To a class of fifth grade girls and boys from each of
the schools the SCPC INVENTORY was administered. The total

number of respondents was one—hundred and five (lOS) (see

 

 

 

Table l).
TMflEl
POPULATION BY SCHOOLS*
Schools Total

Respondents l 2 3 4 ReSpondents

Girls l8 13 10 15 56

Boys 12 20 A 13 A9

Totals 30 33 1A 28 lOE

 

*In the analysis of results, two respondents were
eliminated for lack of complete data, thus reducing the
total pOpulation to one-hundred and three (103).

CHAPTER IV

ANALYSIS OF DATA

Scalogram analysis.-—The technique of typewriter

 

notation was used for the scalogram analysis.(8l) Part 1
of Sections I, II, and III, consisting of the rating of
"How much does this describe you?” was used for analysis
purposes. ReSpondents were scaled separately when it
became apparent that reSponses made by girls differed from
responses made by boys. The procedural steps in analysis
were as follows:
Step l——Respondents were scored by weighting the
"most favorable” response 5 and the ”least
favorable" response 1. Zero was reserved
to designate the few incidents where no
response was given. The sum was then taken
of all individual items for each respondent
to give a total score. Negative traits were
reversed..
Step 2——The reSpondents were then ordered from
highest score to lowest score.
Step 3——Data was then recorded by typewriter indicat—
ing five, ”most favorable" response by five
x's, four by four x‘s, etc. The items, thus

appeared as columns and the reSpondents as rows.

25

26

Step A——Examination at this point permitted combina—
tion of response categories to minimize error.
Breaking points were found for each item
dividing the reSponses into a favorable-
unfavorable dichotomy and made at the point
of least error.

Step 5-—All unfavorable responses in each item were
indicated.

Step 6-—The items were then ordered from most dif-
ficult to least difficult, the most difficult
being the item with the fewest favorable
responses.

Step 7--Maintaining the reSpondent—number column,
the items were re-ordered and/or eliminated
when no clear-cut breaking point existed,
number of favorable reSponses was identical
with one or more other items or the errors
were excessive.

Step 8——When items were eliminated, return was made
to Step 1 and procedure repeated on the basis
of the retained items. Upon completion of
Step 7, a scale type was assigned each reSpond—
ent based on "least error.” The errors in
the rank-ordering at this point were determined
and allowed computation of the coefficient of

reproducibility.

27

Step 9——The final scale was typed, reordering the
respondents on the basis of scale type.
Step lO——The final scale picture was examined to
determine if the other criteria of a
Guttman scale were fulfilled.

Parts 2 and 3, were not analyzed since they contained
an identical list of traits.

Table 2, illustrates the coefficient of reproduci-
bility, the number of original items, and the remaining
items in each section. (See Appendix C for remaining
items listed in order of difficulty as determined by the

Guttman type scale.)

TABLE 2

COEFFICIENT OF REPRODUCIBILITY AND REMAINING ITEMS*

 

 

Original Remaining

 

Section Items Items CR ReSpondents
SECTION I

Girls 22 9 .93 52

Boys 22 9 .82 A6
SECTION II

Girls 22 12 .89 53

Boys 22 15 .90 A2
SECTION III

Girls 22 12 .89 55

Boys 22 12 .91 A8

 

*See Appendix B, for complete list of original items.
See Appendix C, for list of items that remained upon com-
pletion of the scalogram analysis.

28

Content validity.--The criterion, a pure measure of

 

the trait-~se1f concept of physical self——probably does not
exist. The extent of validity would, therefore, have to
be inferred from other observations. The SCPC INVENTORY
was validated through the use of content validity, which
is concerned with how well the inventory content samples
the multitude of traits from which it was drawn. A search
of the literature, the results of the two pilot studies,
and final evaluation of the traits by three judges were the

criteria measures used to validate the instrument.

Reliability.-—The Split-half method of determining

 

reliability was used. The formula is as follows:

NZXY - (2x) (222)
I‘12 _\/[NZX2 - (2)02] [Ni Y2 - (2302]

 

 

In order to obtain an estimate of the reliability for the
full number of trials, the Spearman-Brown Prophecy Formula

was used:

2r12

1 + r12

 

Table 3, presents the correlation coefficients for the three

sections for girls and boys.

 

29

TABLE 3

RELIABILITY COEFFICIENTS

 

 

 

Section Respondents Items r Spearman-Brown
SECTION I

Girls 52 9 .67 .80

Boys A6 9 .53 .70
SECTION II

Girls 53 12 .53 .70

Boys A2 15 .83 .91
SECTION III

Girls 55 12 .76 .86

Boys A8 12 .67 .8O

 

CHAPTER V

SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Summary.-—It was the purpose of this study to develop
an instrument to measure conception of self as related to
appearance and movement in space. Two pilot studies were
conducted to aid in the identification of determinants for
fifth grade girls and boys.

On the basis of student reSponse and the opinion of
judges, determinants were selected. The organization of
the items was the result of a comprehensive review of the
literature. The SCPC INVENTORY, a paper and pencil tool,
was deve10ped.

One-hundred and five fifth grade girls and boys were
selected to take the INVENTORY

The results were analyzed by scalogram analysis,
according to Waisanen. The coefficient of reproducibility
was computed. Split-half reliability was used projected
with the Spearman-Brown formula. The items which met the
Guttman criteria were retained and are scaled according to

order of difficulty in Appendix C.

Conclusions.-—As a result of the investigation, the

 

following conclusions have been drawn:

30

31

l. Sixty-Six descriptive traits were judged relevant
for girls and boys in the fifth grade.

2. Scalogram analysis of reSponses produced a thirty-
three item Guttman type scale for the girls and a
thirty-Six item Guttman type scale for the boys.

3. The coefficient of reproducibility for the nine
items, Section I, girls was .93; for the nine
items, boys, .82, which is low.

A. The coefficient of reproducibility for the twelve
items, Section II, girls was .89; for the fifteen
items, boys, .90.

5. The coefficient of reproducibility for the twelve
items, Section III, girls was .89; for the twelve

items, boys, .91.

Recommendations.-—The findings of this study should be

 

regarded as preliminary. Several follow—up steps would be
apprOpriate at this point.

1. The scaled descriptive traits should be re-
organized into a simple check-list instrument. The form
used in the SCPC INVENTORY (see Appendix B), Column II, is
not recommended for this age level. Difficulty in reSpond-
ing to the Column I reSponse, rather than the trait itself,
was obvious. Consideration Should be given to replacing
Columnlfl with a "Self as others see me," item.

2. It is recommended that the three categories remain:

appearance, movement, and expression.

32

3. The instrument should then be given to a larger
sampling. A separate instrument is needed for girls and
for boys.

A. Correlation between the three categories should
be figured to determine whether respondents have the same
or similar rank ordering on all categories.

5. Resultant scores can then be correlated with
scores from physical fitness tests, teacher's rating of
respondent on a self-acceptance—to-self—rejection scale,
peer group ratings, and other available measures of total

self and separate items dealing with body-image.

6. Use of instrument with other girls and boys grades

A—6 or ages 9—12, should be explored.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

33

10.

11.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Allport, F. A. Theories of Perception and the Concept
of Structure. New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.,

1955.

Amatora, Sister Mary. "Validity and Self-Evaluation,"
Educ. & Psychol. Measurement, 16 (1956), 119—126.

 

Anderson, Camilla M. "The Self-image: A Theory of the
Dynamics of Behavior," Mental Hygiene, 36 (1952),
227-2AA.

 

Ausubel, David P. Theory and Problems of Child Develop-
ment. New York: Grune & Stratton, 1957.

Bernard, Harold W. Human Development in Western Culture.
Boston: Allyn and Bacon, Inc., 1962.

Bills, Robert E., E. L. Vance, and o. s. McLean. "An
Index of Adjustment and Values," Journal of Consult—
inngychology, XV, No. 1 (February, 1951), 257—261.

Blair, Arthur W. and W. H. Burton. Growth and DeveloP—
ment of the Adolescence. New York: Appleton-Century—
Crofts, Inc., 1951.

 

Bledsoe, J. C. and K. C. Garrison. The Self Concepts
of Elementary School Children in Relation to Their
Academic Achievement, Intelligence,_Interests, and
Manifest Anxiety. Athens, Georgia: The University
of Georgia, 1962}

 

Blocher, D. H. "A Study of the Relationships Between
Self Descriptions and Stereotypes of Occupations
with High and Low Claimed Interests,” Dissertation
Abstracts, 20 (1959), 2139.

 

Block, J. and H. Thomas. "Is Satisfaction with Self a
Measure of Adjustment?" Journal of Abnormal and
Social Psychology, 51 (1955), 254-259.

Bloom, Kenneth L. "Some Relationships Between Age and

Self Perception," Dissertation Abstracts, 21 (1960),
670.

3A

12.

13.

1A.

16.

17.

18.

19.

20.

21.

22.

23.

35

Bodwin, Raymond F. "The Relationship Between Immature
Self—concept and Certain Educational Disabilities."
Unpublished Ph.D. Dissertation, Michigan State
University, 1957.

Bonney, M. F. ”Personality Traits of Socially Success-
ful and Socially Unsuccessful Children," The Journal
of Educational Psychology, 3A, No. 7 (November, '
1943), HE9-A72.

 

 

Brandt, Richard M. "The Accuracy of Self Estimate: A
Measure of Self-concept Reality," Genetic Psychology
Monographs, 58 (1958). Provincetown, Massachusetts:
The Journal Press.

 

 

Brookover, W. B., A. Paterson, and Shailer Thomas.
Self-Concept of Ability and School Achievement. East
Lansing, Michigan: Office of Research and Publica-
tions, Michigan State University, 1962.

 

BrOphy, A. L. ”Self, Roles, and Satisfaction," Genetic
Psychology Monographs, 59 (1959), 263—308.

Brown, Ethan A. and P. L. Goitein. "The Significance
of Body Image for Personality Assay," Journal of
Nervous and Mental Disease, 97 (Jan.-June, 19A3),
AOl-A08.

 

 

Brownfain, J. J. "Stability of the Self-concept as a
Dimension of Personality," Journal of Abnormal Social
Psychology, A7 (1952), 597-6061

Bruck, Max. "A Study of Age Differences and Sex Differ-
ences in the Relationship Between Self-concept and
Grade-point Average.” Unpublished Ph.D. Dissertation,
Michigan State University, 1957.

Bruce, Paul. "Relationship of Self—acceptance to other
Variables with Sixth Grade Children Oriented in
Self—understanding,” Journal of Educational Psycho-

lesxa A9 (1958). 229-238.

Calvin, A. P. and W. H. Holtzman. "Adjustment and the
Discrepancy Between Self Concept and Inferred Self,"
Journalvof Consulting Psychology, 17 (1953), 39-AA.

Chein, I. "The Awareness of Self and the Structure of
the Ego," Psychological Reviews, 51 (1944), 304.

Chodorkoff, B. "Adjustment and the Discrepancy Between
the Perceived and Ideal Self," Journal of Clinical
Psychology, 10 (July, 195A), 2661268}

 

2A.

25.

26.

27.

28.

29.

30.

31.

32.

33.

3A.

35.

36

Combs, Arthur W. "A Perceptual View of the Adequate
Personality," Perceiving, Behaving, Becoming, ASCD
1962 Yearbook Committee, Arthur W. Combs, Chairman.
Washington, D. 0.: NBA, 1962.

 

Cooley, Charles H. Human Nature and Social Order.
New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1902.

 

Coopersmith, Stanley. "A Method for Determining Types
of Self-Esteem," The Journal of Abnormal and Social

Psychology. 59 (19597, 87-9A.

Cowen, E. L. "The 'Negative Self Concept' as a Person-
ality Measure," Journal of Consulting Psychology,
18 (1954), 138-142.

Creelman, Majorie B. "The csc TEST Self Conceptions of
Elementary School Children." Unpublished Ph.D.
Dissertation, Western Reserve University, June,

195A.

Crowne, D. P. and M. W. Stephens. "Self-acceptance
and Self-evaluative Behavior: A Critique of
Mefihodology," Psychological Bulletin, 58 (1961),
10 ~12l.

Crowne, D. P., M. w. Stephens, and R. Kelly. "The
Validity and Equivalence of Tests of Self-Accept-
ance," Journal of Psychology, 51 (1961), 101.

Davidson, Helen H. and Gerhard Lang. "Children's Per—
ceptions of Their Teachers' Feelings Toward Them
Related to Self—Perception, School Achievement and
Behavior," The Journal of Experimental Education,
XXIX (December, 1960), 107—118.

Estvan, F. J. and E. w. Estvan. The Child's World:
His Social Perception. New York: G. P. Putnam's
Sons, 1959.

Fisher, Seymour. "Right-Left Gradients in Body Image,
Body Reactivity, and Perception," Genetic Psycho-
logy Monographs, 61 (1960).

Fisher, Seymour and S. E. Cleveland. Body Image and
Personality. Princeton, New Jersey: D. Van
Nostrand Co., Inc., 1958.

 

Foshay, A. W. and D. D. Wann. Children's Social Values.
New York: Teachers College, Columbia University,

1954.

36.

37.

38.

39.

A0.

A1.

A2.

A3.

44.

A5.

A6.

A7.

37

Hamacheck, Donald E. "A Study of the Relationship
Between Certain Measures of Growth and the Self
Images of Elementary School Children." Unpublished
Ph. D. Dissertation, University of Michigan, 1960.

Hanlon, T., P. Hofstaetter, and J. O'Connor. "Congru-
ence of Self and Ideal Self in Relation to Personal
Adjustment," Journal of Consulting Psychology, 18
(1954), 215-218.

Havighurst, Robert J. Human Development and Education.
New York: Longman's Green and Company, 1953.

 

Havighurst, Robert J., M. R. Robinson, and M. Dorr.
The Development of the Ideal Self in Childhood
and Adolescent," Journal of Educational Research,
AO, No. A (December, 19A67, 2A1—257.

Hawkes, Glenn R. and D. Pease. Behavior and Develop-
ment from 5 to 12. New York: Harper & Brothers,
1962.

 

 

Helper, M. M. "Parental Evaluations of Children and
Children's Self—Evaluation," Journal of Abnormal
and Social ngchology, LVI (1966), 190.

 

Holt, Robert R. "The Accuracy of Self-Evaluations:
Its Measurement and Some Of Its Personalogical
Correlates," Journal of Consulting Psychology, 15
(1951). 95-102.

Hunt, J. and R. L. Solomon. "The Stability and Some
Correlates of Group-status in a Summer-Camp
Group of Young Boys," The American Journal of
Psychology, 55, No. l IJanuary, 19A2)] 33-A5.

 

 

Jacobson, Edith. "The Self and the Object World,"
The Psychoanalytic Study of the Child. New York:

Int. Univ. Press, 9 (195A), 75-127.

Jersild, Arthur T. In Search of Self. New York:
Bureau of Publications, Teachers College, Columbia
University, 1952.

 

Jervis, F. M. "The Meaning of a Positive Self-Concept,'
Dissertation Abstracts, 19 (1959), 3355.

Jones, Harold E. Motor Performance and Growth.
Berkeley: University of California Press, 19A9.

I

A8.

A9.

50.

51.

52.

53.

5A.

55.

56.

57.

58.

59-

38

Katz, Irving S. "A Study of the Stability of the Self-
Concept and Its Relationship to Sociometric Status
and Sociometric Perception.’ Unpublished Ph. D.
Dissertation, Michigan State University, 1956.

Kelley, Earl C. "The Fully Functioning Self,"
Perceivingy Behaving, Becoming. ASCD 1962 Yearbook
Committee, Arthur W. Combs, Chairman. Washington,
D. C.: NEA, 1962.

 

Koppitz, Elizabeth M. ”Relationships Between Some
Background Factors and Children's Interpersonal
Attitude," Journal of Genetic Psychology, 91 (1957),
119-129.

 

Lecky, Prescott. Self-Consistency. New York: Island
Press, 1951.

 

Lepine, L. T. and B. Chodorkoff. "Goal Setting
Behavior, Expressed Feelings of Adequacy and the
CorreSpondence Between the Perceived and Ideal
Self," Journal of Clinical Psychology, 11 (1955),

395-397.

Levy, Leon H. "The Meaning and Generality of Perceived
Actual-Ideal Discrepancies," Journal of Consulting

Psychology, 20 (1956), 396—398?

Lipsitt, Lewis P. "A Self-Concept Scale for Children
and Its Relationship to the Children's Form of the
Manifest Anxiety Scale," Child Development, 29
(1958), A63—A72.

 

 

Logan, Lillian M. and V. G. Logan. Teaching the
Elementary School Child. Boston: Houghton Mifflin
Company, 1961.

 

 

Lowe, C. M. "The Self-Concept: Fact or Artifact,”
Psychological Bulletin, 58 (1961), 325.

 

McGehee, Thomas P. "The Stability of the Self-Concept
and Self—Esteem." Unpublished Ph.D. Dissertation,
Michigan State University, 1956.

McIntyre, C. J. ”Acceptance by Others and Its Relation
to Acceptance of Self and Others," Journal of
Abnormal Social Psychology, A7 (1952), 62A-625.

 

Miyamoto, S. F. and S. M. Dornbuscy. ”A Test of Inter-
actionist Hypotheses of Self—Conception,” The
American Journal of Sociology, 61 (March, 1956),

3993303.

 

60.

61.

62.

63.

6A.

65.

66.

67.

68.

69.

70.

71.

39

Omwake, K. T. "The Relation Between Acceptance of
Self and Acceptance of Others Shown by Three
Personality Inventoriesaz Journal of Consulting

Psychology, 18 (195A), 3:AA6T

 

 

Perkins, Hugh V. "Teachers' and Peers' Perceptions
of Children's Self-Concepts," Child Development,
29, No. 2 (June, 1958), 203.

 

Phillips, E. L. "Attitudes Toward Self and Others:
A Brief Questionnaire Report," Journal of Consulting

Psychology, 15 (1951), 79-81.

Radler, D. H. and Kephart, N. C. Success Through Play.
New York: Harper & Brothers, 1960.

 

 

Reeder, Thelma A. "A Study of Some Relationships
Between Level of Self-Concept, Academic Achievement
and Classroom Adjustment." Unpublished Ph. D.
Dissertation, North Texas State College, 1955.

Renzaglia, G. A. "Some Correlates of the Self-Structures
as Measured by an Index of Adjustment and Values,"
Dissertation Abstracts, 12 (1952).

 

Robinson, Mary F. and W. Freeman. Psycho-Surgery and
the Self. New York: Grune and Stratton, 195A.

 

Roth, Robert M. "The Role of Self-Concept in Achieve-
ment," Journal of Experimental Education, XXVII
(June, 1959), 265-281.

Sanford, R. N., et a1. Physique, Personality, and
Scholarship. Monographs of the Society for Research
in Child DevelOpment, VIII, Serial No. 3A, No. 1
(19A3). Washington, D. 0.: National Research
Council, 19A3.

 

Sarason, Seymour B., et a1. Anxiety in Elementagy
School Children. New York: John Wiley & Sons,
Inc., 1960.

 

 

Schilder, Paul. The Image and Appearance of the Human
Body. New York: International Universities Press,

Inc., 1950.

Secord, Paul F. and S. M. Jourard. "The Appraisal of
Body-Cathexis: Body-Cathexis and the Self,"
Journal of Consulting Psychology, 17, No. 5 (1953).

3A3-3A7.

72.

73.

74.

75.

76.

77.

78.

79.

80.

81.

82.

83.

8A.

A0

Secord, P. F. "Objectification of Word—Association
Procedures by the Use of Homonyms: A Measure of
Body—Cathexis," Journal of Personality,2l (1953),

A79-A95.

Silver, Albert w. ”The Self Concept: Its Relationship
to Parental and Peer Acceptance." Unpublished Ph.
D. Dissertation, Michigan State University, 1957.

 

Smith, C. M. ”Six Measures of Self-Concept Discrepancy
and Instability: Their Interrelations, Reliability,
and Relations to Other Personality Measure," Journal
of Consultigg Psychology, 22 (1958), 101-112.

Snygg, D. and A. Combs. Individual Behavior. New
York: Harper and Brothers, 19A9.

 

Spaulding, R. L. Achievement, Creativity, and Self—
Concept Correlates of Teacher-Pupil Transactions
in Elementary Schools. UrEana, Illinois: University
of Illinois, 1963.

 

Stagner, Ross. Psychology of Personality, New York:
McGraw-Hill Book Co., Inc., 19611

Staines, J. W. "The Self-Picture as a Factor in the
Classroom," British Journal of Educational Psycho-
logy, XXVIII (June, 1958), 97-111.

Symonds, P. M. The Ego and the Self. New York:
Appleton—Century-Crofts, Inc., 1951.

Tanner, J. M. Education and Physical Growth. London:
University of London Press Ltd., 1961.

 

Waisanen, F. B. "A Notation Technique for Scalogram
Analysis,” TheSociologicalChmmterly, 1, No. A
(October, 19667,247-252.

Wattenberg, W. W. and C. Clifford. Relationship of
the Self-Concept to Beginning Achievement in
Readin . Detroit, Michigan: Wayne State University,
1962.

 

Webb, W. B. "Self—Evaluation Compared with Group
Evaluation," Journal of Consulting Psychology, 16

(1952). 305-307.

Wepman, J. M. and R. W. Heine, (edS.). Concepts of
Personality. Chicago: Aldine Publishing Co., 1963.

 

85.

86.

87.

88.

Al

Wiggins, J. S. and C. L. Winder. "Measurement of
Social Adjustment in Pre-adolescent Boys." Paper
readem the American Psychology Assn., Chicago,
September 1, 1960.

Wylie, Ruth C. The Self Concept. Lincoln: University
of Nebraska Press, 1961.

 

Wylie, Ruth C. "Some Relationships Between Defensive—
ness and Self-Concept Discrepancies,” Journal of
Personality, 25 (1957), 600—616.

 

 

Zimmer, H. "SelfeAcceptance and Its Relation to
Conflict," Journal of Consulting Psychology, 18
(1954) , 447T4‘4"9.

APPENDICES

42

APPENDIX A

Pilot Study 1

A3

AA

 

NAME
Grade Age
Girl Boy

PART I

INSTRUCTIONS: Below you will find parts of a sentence. We

10.

would like you to read what is written,
think about how you feel, and then finish
the sentence.

For example, if you would read, ”My name is
", you would then write ypg£_name.
The best—looking person I know
When I weigh myself
When I look at my body Shape
In Physical Education activities, I
I would like to be physically fit enough to
When I stand beside someone, I feel
In most games and Sports, I
Most of the time my posture

When I try to improve my appearance, I feel

(When I try to move well

A5

NAME

 

PART II

INSTRUCTIONS: Read each item and then answer the question:
Compared with other boys and girls my age,
how do I rate?

Choose the box which best describes how you

>.
H
0) >3 4.)
fl :3 2 feel. The words at the tOp Show what the
5 '2 boxes in each line stand for. Mark an X in
94 o .3’ one of the boxes to Show which best describes
w A .n ygfi
c a. m o
a q ,0
m m .o
m m a o
>1 >1 m z
[::I . [j E] D 1. Being the right height--not too tall,
not too short.
[1 D D E] 2. Having nice posture--not being slouchy.

[3 D D D 3. Being attractive, good-looking or
handsome in appearance.
I I I I I I [::] Having ability to improve my appear—
' ' I 7 ance.
I I I I I I 5. Being physically fit.
.::] I::] I I I 6. Having a nice body shape, body build,

or figure.

::I :] E] . I 7. Being the right weight—mot too fat,

not to skinny.

I I I [j 8. Being skilled in physical activities.
I I IgI I I 9. Having attractive movements-—not being

clumsy.

["F‘T
_ f , 10. Doing well in Physical Education

activities.

.t'

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

PART III

INSTRUCTIONS:

1. How do you

A6

NAME

 

Below you will find ten questions. Answer
the questions by circling the letter in
front of the statement which best answers
the question for you;

rate with others your age in ability to move

well in Physical Education activities?

mQ-OU‘QJ
HHI—IHI—I

am much better
am a little better
am about the same

am not quite as good
am very poor

2. Where d you think you rank in height compared to other
boys and girls your age?

(I) QOO‘Q)
I—IHI—II—II—I

3. How do you
girls your

(DQOU‘ID
I—II—II—IHI—I

am much taller

am a little taller
am about the same
am a little Shorter
am much shorter

rate in attractiveness with other boys and
age?

am much more attractive

am a little more attractive
am about the same

am a little less attractive
am much less attractive

A. Where do you think you rank in physical fitness compared
to others your age?

(DQOU'QJ
HI—IHHI—I

5. How do you

your age?
a. I
b. I
c. I
d. I
e. I

am much more fit
am a little more fit
am about average
am a little less fit
am much less fit

rate in weight with other boys and girls

am much heavier

am a little heavier
am about the same
am a little lighter
am much lighter

PART III (con't.)

6.

7.

10.

A7

NAME

 

Do you think you have the ability to do well in physical
skills compared with others your age?

(DQOO‘QJ

HHHHH

am much better than others
a little better

about the same

a little clumsy

am
am
am
am

very clumsy

Compared with others, what do you think about your
ability to improve your appearance?

(DQaOU'flJ

I
I

I
I

How do you

d.

e.

My body

have
have
I have
have
have

feel

My body shape

My body Shape

My body shape

My body shape

is

is

is

is

a much better chance
almost as much chance
about the same chance
a little less chance
a much less chance

about your body Shape compared to others?

Shape is round -- 0

square --[3
oblong -—[]
pear—shaped --Z3
V-Shaped —— v

How do you feel about your body shape compared to others

your age?

(DQOU‘QJ

I—II—lHHI—I

How do you

HHI—II—lI—I

am
am
am
am
am

the best

among the best
about average
among the poorest
the poorest

rate your posture compared to others your age?

look much better
look a little better
look about the same
look a little worse

look much worse

PART IV
INSTRUCTION:

10.

A8

NAME

 

There are ten numbered spaces on the page
below. Please write ten answers to the
simple question "Who am I?” in the Spaces.
Just give ten different answers to this
question which will best describe YOU.

 

2
ilot Study
P

 

A9

50

Circle the one you are: Boy - Girl
DIRECTIONS: Below is a list of descriptive words.

1. If you think the word describes you, put an X in the
" " column.
2. If you think the word does not describe you, put an
X in the "I am not” column.
3. If you do not know what the word means, do not mark
either column.
When you have finished, there is a space on the right-hand
side of the paper where you can write any other words that
you think describe you.

WHEN I LOOK AT MY BOD --

Please list below any
other words that you
I am I am not think describe you:

 

a
c u
*
ar
s or
us *
un ers e *
sma
un er eve o
o
buxo
hu e
hea
little*
t
th
b —foot d**
b -
s

*Eliminated on basis of lack of understanding.
**Eliminated because of retention or substitution of synonym

or homonyn.

51

Circle the one you are: Boy — Girl
DIRECTIONS: Below is a list of descriptive words.

1. If you think the word describes you, put an X in the
"I am" column.
2. If you think the word does not describe you, put an
X in the "I am not" column.
3. If you do not know what the word means, do not mark
either column.
When you have finished, there is a Space on the right—hand
Side of the paper where you can write any other words that
you think describe you.

 

WHEN LOO AT My BOD __ Please write below any
I K Y other words that

I am I am not describe you:

 

well- ro ortioned*
sha e *

croo e **

roun *

SOC

oc — ee *
ow- egge
eavy- 00 e
a Y
p ump*
roa - ppe **
ong- egge
roa —s ou ere *
scrawny
o ow—c es e
an*
S en er*
s oop—S ou ere
a - 00 e *
narrow—

*Eliminated on basis of lack of understanding.
**Eliminated because of retention or substitution of
synonym or homonyn.

52

Circle the one you are: Boy - Girl
DIRECTIONS: Below is a list of descriptive words.

1. If you think the word describes you, put an X in the
"I am" column.
2. If you think the word does not describe you, put an
X in the ”I am not” column.
3. If you do not know what the word means, do not mark
either column.
When you have finished, there is a Space on the right-hand
side of the paper where you can write any other words that
you think describe you.

 

WHEN I LOOK AT MYSELF—- Please write below any
I other words that you
am

think describe you.

 
        

I am no

  
 
   
  
  
 
  
 
  
 

  

attractive
or inar **
eau u **
so-so*
una rac
an some*
s a *
re
s c
00
nea
home
lain
1
muscular*
feminine
tid *

d rt
odd**

n terest
healt -lookin
muss
rum
Slouch
manl
daint
st lish*
Chic*
r

   
   
   
  
  
  
  

  

       
  
 

V€

   
 
 

*
OO

  

      
 
 
 

  
  
 
      
   
 

 
     
 
   
   
 
  
  
  

  

  
  
 

  

  
 
    
 
  

   
 
   
   

*Eliminated on basis of lack of understanding.
**Eliminated because of retention or substitution of
synonym or homonyn.

Circle the one you are: Boy - Girl
DIRECTIONS: Below is a list of descriptive words.

1. If you think the word describes you, put an X in the
"I am” column.
2. If you think the word does not describe you, put an
X in the "I am not'I column.
3. If you do not know what the word means, do not mark
either column.
When you have finished, there is a space on the right-hand
side of the paper where you can write any other words that
you think describe you.

 

IN GAMES AND SPORTS-— Please write below any
other words that you
think describe you:

 

I am I am not

able-bodied*
ac ive
ace u
uns e
wea
ve
success
c ums
u race
as
ye ca
a er
eager
s or -w
grea *
worn-ou **
s ow
a ea er*
s rong
e or
azy
ac ve*
unsuccess u *
scourage
secon —ra e
nervous
es *
a e c*
a o ower*
s e
aw ar *

*Eliminated on basis of lack of understanding.
**Eliminated because of retention or substitution of
synonym or homonyn.

5A

Circle the one you are: Boy - Girl
DIRECTIONS: Below is a list of descriptive words.

1. If you think the word describes you, put an X in the
"I feel” column.
2. If you think the word does not describe you, put an
X in the ”I do not feel"column.
3. If you do not know what the word means, do not mark
either column.
When you have finished, there is a space on the right—hand
side of the paper where you can list any other words that
you think describe you.

 

IN GAMES AND SPORTS WITH BOYS Please list below any
AND GIRLS —— I d other words that you
I feel 0 think describe you:

not feel

popular
un or an
se —consc ous*
rave
c eer u
quarre some
as u
coo era ve
r en y
o -x-
a ease
ru e*
oas u *
con en *
-mannere
*
moo
coura eous*
soc a e*
o ess*
se s
cowar *
rec ess
unsoc a e
o e
care ree*
agreea e*
cons era e*

appy
qu e **

 

*Eliminated on basis of lack of understanding.
**Eliminated because of retention or substitution of
synonym or homonyn.

APPENDIX B

SCPC INVENTORY

UT
\J'l

56

SCPC INVENTORY

Instructions: Guide subject in filling in cover page in-
formation. Read paragraph on cover page to
subjects.

 

There are three SECTIONS to the INVENTORY —

I. HOW MUCH DOES THIS DESCRIBE YOU? (The way you look)
II. IN GAMES AND SPORTS, HOW MUCH DOES THIS DESCRIBE YOU?
III. WHEN PLAYING GAMES WITH OTHERS, HOW MUCH DOES THIS
DESCRIBE YOU?

Each SECTION is divided into three parts —

Part 1 -- HOW MUCH DOES THIS DESCRIBE YOU?
The subject is to read the word in COLUMN I,
choose from KEY I whichever sentence best
describes how he thinks he looks, then place
the correSponding number in the blank under
CMNWJI.

Part 2 -- HOW MUCH DO YOU LIKE BEING THIS WAY?
The subject is to then read the same word in
COLUMN II, choose from KEY II, whichever
sentence best describes how much he likes being
as he is as stated in COLUMN I, and place the
correSponding number in the blank under
COLUMN II.

Part 3 -— HOW MUCH WOULD YOU LIKE TO BE THIS WAY?
After completing Parts 1 and 2, the subject
is to turn to Part 3 (the following page),
and choose from KEY III, the sentence which
would best describe how much he would like
to be "attractive," "fat," etc. and place the
corresponding number in the blank under
COLUMN III.

Repeat procedure with SECTIONS II and III.

57'

SCPC INVENTORY

School

 

Name

 

Age Birthday

 

Grade

Boy Girl

Date

 

This inventory is a way of helping you to state how you
feel about yourself-—How you look; How you feel in games
and Sports; and How you feel when you play games with
others your own age. It will have value only ifgyou are
careful and do your best to give an accurate description of

yourself and your feelings. THERE ARE NO RIGHT OR WRONG

 

ANSWERS. ANSWER EACH WORD ACCORDING TO HOW YOU FEEL.

58

 

 

 

HOW MUCH DOES THIS DESCRIBE

HOW MUCH DO YOU LIKE BEING

 

 

YOU? THIS WAY?
KEY I KEY II
1. I am definitely not 1. I very much dislike
like this. being this way.
2. I am not like this. 2 I dislike being this
3. I am a little like this. way.
A. I am like this. 3 I neither like nor dis—
5. I am very much like this. like being this way.
A. I like being this way.
5 I very much like being
this way.
COLUMN I COLUMN II
Attractive Attractive
Fat Fat
Small Small
Dirty Dirty
Healthy Healthy
V—shaped V-shaped

IIIIIIIIIHIHIHHHI

Heavy (weigh a lot)
Thin

Big

Short

Neat

Tall

Light (weigh little)
Unattractive
Pear—shaped
Straight

Flabby

Unhealthy

Homely

Built just right
Firm body

Slumped

 

IIHIHHHHIIHHIH

Heavy (weigh a lot)
Thin

Big

Short

Neat

Tall

Light (weigh little)
Unattractive
Pear-shaped
Straight

Flabby

Unhealthy

Homely

Built just right
Firm body

Slumped

 

59

 

 

HOW MUCH WOULD YOU LIKE TO BE THIS WAY?

 

KEY III
I would definitely not like to be

1.

U‘l-Il’ Com

this way.

I would not like to be this way.
I would like to be a little this

way.

I would like to be this way.
I would like very much to be this

way.

 

COLUMN III

HHHHHHIHI|IHH

Attractive

Fat

Small

Dirty

Healthy
V-shaped

Heavy (weigh a lot)
Thin

Big

Short

Neat

Tall

Light (weigh little)
Unattractive
Pear-shaped
Straight

Flabby
Unhealthy

Homely

Built just right
Firm body
Slumped

 

6O

 

 

IN GAMES AND SPORTS, HOW MUCH
DOES THIS DESCRIBE YOU?

IN GAMES AND SPORTS, HOW MUCH
DO YOU LIKE BEING THIS WAY?

 

KEY I
1.

I am definitely not like
this.

KEY II

1.

I very much dislike
being this way.

 

2. I am not like this. 2. I dislike being this way.
3. I am a little like this. 3. I neither like nor dis-
A. I am like this. like being this way.
5. I am very much like this. A. I like being this way.
5. I very much like being
this way.
CMNWJI CWNWVII
Active Active
Weak Weak
Fast Fast
Skilled Skilled
Clumsy Clumsy
Lazy Lazy
Strong Strong
Stiff Stiff
Slow Slow
Limber (bend and twist Limber (bend and twist
easily) easily)
Unskilled Unskilled

III HHHIH IIIHHHI

Good in exercises
Good jumper
Physically fit
Tired easily

Good in games
Good thrower

Poor runner
Cannot understand
directions well
Good in rhythm
Can learn new games
easily

Poor in catching

 

Ill IIIIIIIH llllilllll

Good in exercises
Good jumper
Physically fit
Tired easily

Good in games
Good thrower

Poor runner
Cannot understand
directions well
Good in rhythm
Can learn new games
easily

Poor in catching

 

61

 

 

IN

GAMES AND SPORTS, HOW MUCH WOULD

 

 

YOU LIKE TO BE THIS WAY?
KEY III
1. I would definitely not like to
be this way.
2. I would not like to be this way.
3. I would like to be a little this
way.
A. I would like to be this way.
5. I would like very much to be
this way.
COLUMN III
Active
Weak
Fast
Skilled
Clumsy
Lazy
Strong
Stiff
Slow
Limber (bend and twist
easily)
Unskilled

HI IIHIHII HHIHIH

Good in exercises
Good jumper
Physically fit
Tired easily

Good in games
Good thrower

Poor runner
Cannot understand
directions well
Good in rhythm
Can learn new games easily
Poor in catching

 

62

 

WHEN PLAYING GAMES WITH OTHERS,

HOW MUCH DOES THIS DESCRIBE

WHEN PLAYING GAMES WITH OTHERS,
HOW MUCH DO YOU LIKE BEING THIS

 

 

YOU? WAY?
KEY I KEY II
1. I am definitely not 1. I very much dislike being
like this. this way.
2. I am not like this. 2. I dislike being this way.
3. I am a little like this. 3. I neither like nor dis-
A. I am like this. like being this way.
5. I am very much like this. A. I like being this way.
5. I very much like being
this way.
CWMWII (EHMNII
Eager Eager
Nervous Nervous
Brave Brave
Cheerful Cheerful
Bashful Bashful
Friendly Friendly
Selfish Selfish
Polite Polite
POpular POpular
Unimportant Unimportant
Better than the others Better than the others
Unhappy Unhappy

IIHIHIHIIHIHHHI

Interested in others
Full of fun

Fearful

Sincere

Worried

Dumb in games

Make a lot of mistakes
Orders others around
Very smart in games
Always do what others
want

Interested in others
Full of fun

Fearful

Sincere

Worried

Dumb in games

Makes a lot of mistakes
Orders others around
Very smart in games
Always do what others
want

IIIIHIIHHHIHIHH

 

53

 

 

WHEN PLAYING GAMES WITH OTHERS, HOW MUCH
WOULD YOU LIKE TO BE THIS WAY?

 

KEY III
1. I would definitely not like to be
this way. _
2. I would not like to be this way.
3. I would like to be a little this way.
A. I would like to be this way.
5. I would like very much to be this way.

 

COLUMN III

IIIIIIIHHHIHHHH

Eager

Nervous

Brave

Cheerful

Bashful

Friendly

Selfish

Polite

POpular

Unimportant

Better than the others
Unhappy

Interested in others
Full of fun

Fearful

Sincere

Worried

Dumb in games

Make a lot of mistakes
Order others around
Very smart in games
Always do what others want

 

APPENDIX C

SCPC INVENTORY TRAITS RETAINED

6A

65

ITEMS RETAINED--SCALED IN ORDER OF DIFFICULTY

 

 

 

 

 

 

SECTION I
Girls Boys
1. Straight 1. Small
2. Thin 2. Tall
3. Built just right 3. Short
A. Firm body A. Big
5. Fat 5. Healthy
6. Flabby 6. Attractive
7. V—shaped 7. Unattractive
8. Homely 8. Flabby
9. Unattractive 9. Unhealthy
SECTION 11
Girls Boys
1. Limber 1. Strong
2. Good jumper 2. Limber
3. Lazy 3. Active
A. Unskilled A. Lazy
5. Weak 5. Clumsy
6. Poor runner 6. Good in exercises
7. Active 7. Weak
8. Fast 8. Poor in catching
9. Tired easily 9. Good thrower
10. Learn new games easily 10. Poor runner
ll. Clumsy 11. Fast
12. Cannot understand direc— l2. Tired easily
tions well 13. Good in games
1A. Slow

Unskilled

 

66

SECTION III

 

 

 

Girls

Boys

 

\OCDNmUl-II‘UOIUI—J

Interested in others
Popular

Bashful

Full of fun

Brave

Worried

Selfish

Fearful

Cheerful

Friendly

Unhappy 10.
Dumb in games 11.

\OCID'NO‘iU'I-Il’ LUMI—J

Very smart in games

Fearful

Makes a lot of mis-
takes

Unhappy

Brave

Nervous

Interested in others

Full of fun

Dumb in games

Polite

Friendly

Selfish

 

41: r? :1“
)‘Lz’: N
.. . we”
. - I,
filg‘13i.
PIN I

v91-

“ ‘

we

 

II II IIIIIIII II III III III II

31293 01762 8318