\

‘H H I \ \
\‘ ‘1 \\ It. ‘1 \ ‘ \ “1 ‘ II ill t

K

W

i

77g :;
; 7:7 ;_.’__
: r’———

i

t

03-4 ‘\
313?. W

 

SYS‘T‘EMATEC DHENQTMATIGN VS
8' . ,.

'TUD‘Y METHQDK EN IRE TEEA'E‘MEN?
Ct? STUDENTS WHC} SEEK HELP
FQR ACADEI‘AK GEFEIKUKHM

Thesis {’09 “to Dogma cf: M. A.
MECHIGME STATE HNWERSYFY

James 23; »: cwcfier

£938

THESIS

LUV" ’ ’5 '3"
Nh‘dfl, ' iatc
Uni'vusity

 

 

 

  

Systematic Desensitization vs. Study Methods
in the Treatment of Students Who Seek Help
for Academic Difficulties
by
James E. Crowder
Abstract of Master's Thesis
Completed Winter Term. 1968

Investigators who have tried (mostly unsuccessfully) to
help students who have academic problems have concluded that
these students have a low self-concept. and that they choose
to do badly in academic activities because doing badly re-
inforces their self-concept as an inadequate person.

The rationale for the present experiment was that stu-
dents who seek help for academic problems have those prob-
lems because academic activities are anxiety-eliciting
stimuli (perhaps for the above reason) for these particular
students. and. therefore, the students either avoid the
activities altogether. or they do them inefficiently. The
task, therefore. was to reduce the anxiety to academic ac-
tivities, and provide new learning in the form of effective
study methods.

§s were undergraduate student volunteers with cumula-
tive GPAs of 2.2 or below. A desensitization group receiv-
ed (1) systematic desensitization to eliminate avoidance
responses to academic activities. and (2) information about
effective academic techniques. A study methods group (in-
cluded to control for possible effects of teaching effective

academic techniques per se) was taught effective scholastic

techniques in an authoritarian and persuasive manner. A no
treatment group was included as the main control group. Hy—
pothesis one stated that students receiving systematic de-

sensitization would exhibit a significantly greater increase
in GPA than gs in the study methods and no treatment groups.

To test the possibility that systematic desensitization
of anxiety to academic activities would result in less anxi-
ety. the Taylor Manifest Anxiety Scale (TMAS) and the IRAT
Anxiety Scale Questionnaire (Self Analysis Form) (IRAT) were
administered before and after treatment. Hypothesis two
stated that students in the desensitization group would re-
port a significantly greater reduction in anxiety than §s in
the study methods and no treatment groups.

Although Gatley (1965) reported that help-seeking stu-
dents seemed more anxious than students in general. he fail-
ed to find a difference when the measuring instrument was
the TMAS. It was possible. however. that a different in-
strument. the IRAT. measuring covert anxiety. would show the
help-seeking students more anxious than other students. Hy-
pothesis three stated that students who seek help for aca-
demic difficulties report significantly more covert anxiety
than other students.

Treatment was given in the Winter Term. GRAe of both
treatment groups were higher in the Winter and Spring Term
than in the preceding Fall Term. but the only significant
increase was from Fall to Winter Term for the study methods

group. The no treatment group's GRA significantly decreased

from Fall to Spring Term.

Anxiety of the desensitization group did not change
significantly. Significant decreases were reported by the
study methods group on the overt part of the IPAT, and by
the no treatment group on the TMAS.

Hypothesis three was the only hypothesis confirmed; the
IRAT scores were significantly higher for the students in
the present study than for the IPAT college norm group.

The drop in anxiety by the study methods group may have
occurred because many of the students took the anxiety tests
the second time after taking one or more final examinations.
The drop in anxiety by the no treatment group lacks cogent
explanation.

There were fewer Se in this study than was desirable.
Methods of obtaining more §$ and ways of ensuring that they
continue treatment were discussed. Also discussed was the
possibility that a different anxiety hierarchy. one oriented
toward reducing students' anxiety to success rather than to
academic activities, might produce better results than were
obtained in the desensitization group of this study.

Approved: Dozier W. Thornton, Chairman
Paul Bakan
James S. Uleman ‘

Date: Februarlegll968

SYSTEMATIC DESENSITIZATION VS. STUD! METHODS
IN THE TREATMENT OF STUDENTS WHO SEEK HELP
FOR ACADEMIC DIFFICULTIES

By
\

Ye
.LW

James EJ—Crowder

A THESIS

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

MASTER OF ARTS

Department of Psychology

1968

z-L’

i“.

Acknowledgments

I would like to express my gratitude to a few of the
important contributors to this thesis. The suggestions and
guidance of my advisor. Dr. Thornton. have been invaluable.
Dr. Thornton actually deserves credit for the original idea
behind this research. I would also like to thank Dr. Bakan
and Dr. Uleman for their encouragement and constructive
criticism. Mr. helnick. who served as the second experi-
menter in this research. deserves my thanks for the fine
Job he did with his group.

Primary credit. of course. goes to my wife. Jean.
without whose unfailing inspiration. emotional support. and

typing ability I could not have completed this project.

11

Table of Contents

Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . .
List of Tables. . . . . . . . . . . .
List of Figures . . . . . . . . . . .
Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . . .
Problem . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Method. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Discussion. . . . . . . . . . . . . .
References. . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Appendix A. . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Appendix B. . . . . . . . . . . . . .

111

11
iv

11
11+
23
31
no
42
an.

List of Tables

Table Page

1. Mean scores of the three groups on Fall Term
GPA. College Qualification. and initial
8“].th teBtSO O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 23

2. Analysis of variance between groups on Fall
Term GPAs. College Qualification. and initial
anxiety tests. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2h

3. GPA and t.values of the differences in GPA.
Winter-Fall. Spring-Fall. and Spring~Winter
Term for each group. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26

u. TMAS means for each group. and t values of
the differences between first and second. and
first and third administrations. . . . . . . . 27

5. Means of IPAT total (T). covert (C). and
overt (0) scores of first. second. and third
adm1n18trat10neeeeeeeeeeeeeeeo 28

6. t tests on differences between first and
second. and first and third IPAT total (T).
covert (C). and overt (0).. . . . . . . . . . 28

7. Comparison of IPAT total score means of all
subjects in this study and the college norm
group O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 2 9

8. Spearman Rank Order Correlation Coefficients
between GPAs. CQT. and anxiety tests. for
all gs O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 0 O O O 30

9. Spearman Bank Order Correlation Coefficients

between increase in GPA and decrease in
anxiety for all §s . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30

iv

Figure

List of Figures

Page
1. GPA of the desensitization. study methods. and
no treatment groups for Fall. Winter. and
Spring Terms. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25

Cumulative GPA of the three groups for Fall.
Winter. and Spring Terms. . . . . . . . . . . . 25

Introduction

Study methods classes are offered at many universities
for students who seek help for academic problems. However.
these classes are usually not evaluated in terms of their
effectiveness. Results of experimental studies which have
been evaluated have either turned out negative or inconclu-
sive. ’.

Some evidence exists which indicates that students who
seek help for academic difficulties are a unique population.
Study methods classes have offered Opportunities to study
this population. and investigators have found some differ-
ences on personality variables between students who seek
help and other students. The investigators' objective was
to discover differentiating personality variables and to
suggest treatment appropriate to their findings.

The "Methods of Effective Study” course. Psychology
101. which was previously offered at Michigan State univer-
sity. has provided subjects for studies on students who
seek help for academic problems. Psychology 101 was de-
scribed in the university catalog as follows:

Methods of effective study. Fall. Winter. Spring.
1 credit. Not open to Juniors and Seniors except
on recommendation from the counseling center and
approval of department. Group and individual
counseling for students with problems in academic
achievement. including motivation. concentration.

and attitudes toward study: methods and techniques
of study: utilization of time; and student

efficiency in the classroom (Michigan State Uni-
versity Catalog. 1963).

Psychology 101 was an elective course. and the deci-
sion to enroll in it rested with the individual student.
although a student's counselor or academic advisor could
recommend it. Students in Psychology 101 voluntarily sought
help for academic problems which were manifested in low
academic achievement.

DeBolt (1963) administered the Edwards Personal Pref-
erence Schedule (EPPS) to students enrolled in Psychology
101. and compared the mean on each of the 15 variables with
the mean established by the EPPS college norm group. He
found that the Methods-of-Study males scored significantly
higher than their EPPS norm group on Abasement. but signif-
icantly lower than the norm group on both Achievement and
Dominance. For females. the Methods-of—Study group was
significantly higher in Abasement and Nurturance than the
norm group. but were exceeded by the norm group in Domi-
nance. (In all cases. the higher the score. the greater the
need.)

The manifest needs associated with these differenti-
ating variables are as follows:

Abasement: To feel guilty when one does something
wrong. to accept blame when things do not go
right. to feel that personal pain and misery
suffered does more good than harm. to feel the
need for punishment for wrongdoing. to feel better

when giving in and avoiding a fight than when
having one's own way. to feel the need for

confession of errors. to feel depressed by in-
ability to handle situations. to feel timid in the
presence of superiors. to feel inferior to others
in most respects.

Achievement: To do one's best. to be successful,
to accomplish tasks requiring skill and effort. to
be a recognized authority. to accomplish something
of great significance. to do a difficult Job well.
to solve difficult problems and puzzles. to be
able to do things better than others. to write a
great novel or play.

Dominance: To argue for one's point of view. to
Be a Ieader in groups to which one belongs. to be
regarded by others as a leader. to be elected or
appointed chairman of committees. to make group
decisions. to settle arguments and disputes be-
tween others. to persuade and influence others to
do what one wants. to supervise and direct the
actions of others. to tell others how to do their
jobs.

Nurturance: To help friends when they are in
trouble. to assist others less fortunate. to

treat others with kindness and sympathy. to for-
give others. to do small favors for others. to be
generous with others. to sympathize with others
who are hurt or sick. to show a great deal of
affection toward others. to have others confide in
one about personal problems.

These variables seem to indicate dominant personality
characteristics rather than transient reactions to failure
in college because the EPPS was given to students enrolled
in Psychology 101 during their first term at Michigan State
University. and. consequently. they had not yet experienced
failure in college.

Both males and females in the Methods-of—Study course
exhibited a significant excess of EPPS Abasement need. and a

significant deficit of Dominance need. Dominance need is

approximately the opposite of Abasement need: therefore. a
high score on one is associated with a low score on the
other. DeBolt (1963) interpreted these scores to mean that
the Methods-of—Study students have low self-value. i.e.. a
feeling of inadequacy and inferiority.

Methods-of-Study males. in addition. scored lower on
the Achievement scale. which suggests that they lack the
level of motivation generally found among male college stu-
dents. DeBolt suggests that the Methods-of—Study males feel
inferior and accept themselves as such.

The high Nurturance need among Methods-of—Study females
is difficult to understand. They seemingly have a strong
need to help others. yet they feel inferior and in need of
help themselves. DeBolt noted that the high Nurturance need
did not fit into the general inadequacy syndrome as indi-
cated by the other scales. and speculated as follows:

Is it possible that this is actually a displaced
need for Succorance. or dependency. whose dis-
placement was motivated by ambivalence? Ambiva-
lent feelings toward dependency are often observed
in the Methods-of-Study groups. It should be re-
membered that the EPPS is designed to tap manifest
needs and does not differentiate between man es
needs which are "real" and those which are reac-
tive or displaced (1963. P. 31).

In the same study. DeBolt suggests. as does Kimball
(1953). that a student may experience study problems. or

even fail. in order to maintain his self-concept as an in-

adequate person. DeBolt states that students with study

problems are "involved in the process of maintaining an in-
adequate self-concept" and. therefore. it would be appro-
priate "to explore and develop methods for changing self-
concept." because "the teaching of study techniques and me-
chanics will not provide a solution for problems which have
their origin in personality dynamics" (1963. pp. 33-3fl).

Gatley (1965). using the Taylor Manifest Anxiety Scale
(TMAS). (Taylor. 1953). found that there was no significant
relationship between anxiety and scholastic aptitude scores
of Psychology 101 students. These students score signifi-
cantly lower than the average college student on their
scholastic aptitude tests. but are no more anxious than
other students. It seemed probable that students. after
being told that they scored lower than most students on the
aptitude tests. would experience greater anxiety than those
students who were informed that they made higher scores.
But administration of the TMAS during Orientation Week
showed that those students who score lower on the aptitude
tests and who later enroll in Psycholgoy 101. experience no
greater anxiety after being told of their relative position
on the aptitude tests than other students.

Gatley (1965) believes his findings are consistent
with DeBolt's (1963) findings and conclusions. Gatley

writes:

...the low scores which 101 students obtain on
academic potential measures would be consistent

with such a ...poor... self-concept. If 101 stu-
dents are more comfortable with a view of them-
selves as poor students. it is logical that know-
ledge of low scholastic aptitude scores would not
make them anxious. On the contrary. from the
vieWpoint of phenomenological personality theory.
the 101 student would more likely experience
anxiety if he were to anticipate doing well. not
poorly. in school (1965. p. 30).

Likewise. Anderson (1952) states:

To alter one's pattern of behavior is to court
...anxiety.... One might expect that a person
who has structuralized the assumption that he is
incompetent would be eager to change. This is
not according to fact. for it is the familiar
rather than the hypothetically desirable that is
the comfortable role (PP. 235-236).

Further support for this view comes from Roth and
Meyersburg's (1963) observations that help-seeking students
experience academic problems out of a need for self-abase-
ment. They believe that. because of "impulsive self-
disparagement." students seeking help for achievement prob-
lems are motivated to do poorly. "Poor achievement." ac-
cording to these authors. "is an eXpression of the student's
choice” (1963. p. 535).

A student's choice to do poorly rather than well in
school may be motivated by hostile feelings. Golburgh and
Penney (1962) surveyed the literature and found a body of
empirical data and informed speculation that seemed to show
a relationship between hostility and underachievement. In
counseling college students. these authors found that the

major difficulty is verbalized by the students as an inabil-

ity to study. They write:
Inability to study is frequently a result. at
least in part. of the expression of unconscious
or partly conscious aggressive feelings toward the
student's parents. By not studying. the student
almost assures academic failure. which serves as a
highly aggressive attack against the parents
(1962. p. 135).

If all of the above findings and speculations are cor-
rect. there must be some relationship between the failing
student's hostility toward his parents and his low self-
concept. Perhaps the relationship is as follows: the par-
ents set their own achievements up as standards for their
children. which creates hostility toward the parents. This
hostility is expressed by nonachievement. The children are
scolded for their nonachievement by the parents. who contin-
ue to hold themselves up to their children as standards. As
a consequence of their being berated by their parents for
doing so badly. the children begin to feel inferior. and
their low self-concept develops.

Golburgh and Penney (1962) developed sector counseling
for nonachieving students and claim that it is an effective
treatment. In sector counseling. the therapist focuses up-
on the student's reporting symptom. the inability to study.
and attempts to hold the counseling interviews to this
topic. If a client indicates that he is eXpressing hostil-
ity toward his mother by failing to study. for example. then

the therapist talks with the student about his relationship

with his mother and its effect on his studying. and discour-
ages attempts by the student to talk about his dormitory
life. sex problems. etc. Golburgh and Penney feel that this
approach is an effective short-term treatment. but do not
provide experimental support for their belief.

Spielberger. Weitz. and Denny (1962) used group coun-
seling in an attempt to prevent pre-selected students from
suffering academic hardships. 0n the basis of their scores
(upper 30 per cent) on the TMAS. (upper 50 per cent) Welsh
Factor A Scale. and (4th stanine or above) an ability test.
male students in their first term were offered an opportuni-
ty to participate in the group counseling program. Half of
the volunteers were given group counseling sessions once a
week. during which they were encouraged to discuss methods
of study. and individual academic and personal problems.

The remaining half of the volunteers were told that they
would have to wait until the following semester before they
could get into the group meetings. Counseled students show-
ed a significantly greater increase in GPA between their
mid-semester and end of semester grades than the control
students. However. it was not reported whether the treat-
ment affected GPAs in following semesters. Also. the study
did not include a second treatment group to control for
possible placebo effects.

Baymur and Patterson (1960). and Broedel. Ohlsen.

Proff. and Southard (1960). failed to obtain significant im-
provement of group-counseled high school underachievers.

Related to the above studies insofar as it was design-
ed to help students who seek help for academic difficulties,
but different in that it was focused on problems in one
course. was a study by Paul (1966). Subjects in his study
were students who experienced intense performance anxiety in
a required public-speaking course. Paul conceptualized the
problem in terms of learning theory. i.e.. intense perfor-
mance anxiety is a learned. inappropriate emotional reaction
that can be unlearned. He compared the effects of a coun-
terconditioning technique with insight-oriented psychother-
apy. attention-pLacebo therapy. and no treatment. The coun-
terconditioning technique was consistently superior to the
other treatments and no treatment on several measures.

Paul used the counterconditioning technique of system-
atic desensitization developed by Wolpe (1958). This method
assumes the counterconditioning of anxiety by successively
associating relaxation responses with fantasies of increas-
ingly intense anxiety-arousing situations. While relaxed.

a subject undergoing treatment imagines himself in situa-
tions which in real life produce anxiety. He begins by im-
agining himself in situations which elicit little anxiety.
then moves to more intense anxiety-eliciting situations.

Wolpe states the theory as follows:

10

If a stimulus constellation made up of five
equipotent elements A1A2A3A4A5 evokes 50 units of
anxiety response in an organism. proportionately
less anxiety will be evoked by constellations made
up of fewer elements. Relaxation that is insuffi-
cient to counter the 50 units of anxiety that
A1A2A3AEA5 evokes may be well able to inhibit the
10 units evoked by A1 alone. Then if the anxiety
evoked by A1 is repeatedly inhibited through being
opposed by relaxation. its magnitude will drop.
eventually to zero. In consequence. a presenta-
tion of A1A2 will now evoke only 10 units of anxi-
ety. instead of 20. and this will similarly under-
go conditioned inhibition when opposed by relaxa-
tion. Through further steps along these lines the
whole combination A1A2A3A4A5 will lose its power
to arouse any anxiety (1958. p. 179).

Paul and Shannon (1966) used systematic desensitization
successfully in a group setting. The method was used with
students who sought help for interpersonal performance anxi-
ety. After nine group sessions. students reported decreas-
ed anxiety in interpersonal situations. and increased their
GPAs significantly from the semester preceding treatment to
the semester following treatment. GPAs of a no contact
group decreased. But GPAs of both groups were above 3.0
before selection for the study: therefore. it is not known
how effective this treatment would be with students who seek

help because of low GPAs.

Problem

At present. there is no cogent experimental evidence
of an effective treatment for students who seek help for
academic problems. manifested by low GPAs. A somewhat dif-
ferent conceptualization of the problem may be fruitful in
developing an effective treatment for these students.

Golburgh and Penny (1962). as discussed above. be-
lieved the main problem of these students was an inability
to study. It is possible to view this inability as a con-
sequence of unfortunate learning in which anxiety became
conditioned to studying. Studying would then be avoided
even though the student expressed a desire to be able to
study. Counterconditioning by systematic desensitization
should reduce or eliminate the anxiety associated with
studying. resulting in improved performance by the students
who seek help for academic problems.

This conceptualization of the problem is not necessar-
ily antagonistic to the combination inadequate self-concept
and expression of hostility theory described above. Study-
ing (acting as a good student) would threaten his self-
concept and create anxiety in the poor student.

If anxiety has prevented these students from studying.
it is possible that they lack effective study techniques. so

that it would be necessary not only to countercondition

11

12

them. but also to teach them effective study methods. In-
cluding instruction in study techniques. however, with sys-
tematic desensitization treatment indicates that a second
group is needed. to receive instruction in study methods. in
order to determine whether any effects obtained in the study
are due to systematic desensitization and instruction in
study techniques. or instruction in study techniques only.

The problem. then. is to determine whether a combina-
tion of study-methods instruction and systematic desensiti-
zation may be more effective in facilitating studying (re-
flected in higher GPAs) than instruction on study methods
alone.

Although Gatley (1965) found no difference in anxiety
scores on the TMAS between students who seek help and other
students. there is some specualtion that students who seek
help are more anxious. It is possible that a covert measure
of anxiety may detect greater anxiety in students who seek
help. and it may show a significant reduction of anxiety in
students who receive systematic desensitization for reduc-

tion of anxiety to studying.

Hypotheses
The hypotheses tested by this study are stated explic-

itly as follows:

Hypothesis one: Students receiving systematic

13

desensitization will exhibit a significantly greater in-
crease in GPA than students in a study methods group and a
no treatment group.

Hypothesis two: Students receiving systematic desensi-
tization will report a significantly greater reduction in
anxiety than students in a study methods group and a no
treatment group.

Hypothesis three: Students who seek help for academic
difficulties will report significantly more covert anxiety
than students in the general population.

Method

Subjects

Subjects were volunteers from freshman and sophomore
level psychology courses who had cumulative GPAs of 2.2 or
below. They were assigned to groups according to the time
they had free to attend sessions. The1§s in the no treat-
ment group were those who could not attend sessions at times
convenient for the other Se and the gs. There were six §s
in the desensitization group. five in the study methods
group. and four in the no treatment group. (Descriptive data

on the §s are included in Appendix A.)

Treatment Setting
This experiment was conducted at Michigan State Univer-

sity in the Winter Term of 1966-1967. Treatment began
during the week of mid-term examinations. and ended in the
week before final examinations. Treatment sessions were
held in a 10 x 18 ft. room in the Clinic Annex of Olds Hall.
The room was painted green. and illuminated by four uO-watt
fluorescent light fixtures. At one end of the room was a
small window. At the opposite end was a large portable
blackboard used by the study methods group instructor for
illustrative purposes. (In order to avoid possible experi-

menter bias on the part of the principal experimenter [El] .

1h

15

a second experimenter E23 served as the study methods in-
structor.) A large rectangular table was in the center of

the room. surrounded by straight-backed office chairs.

Anxiety Tests
To test hypotheses two and three. the TMAS and the

Cattell and Scheier (1963) IPAT Anxiety Scale Questionnaire.
Self Analysis Form (IPAT) were used (copies are included in.
Appendix B). They were selected partly because of their
brevity and simplicity in administration and scoring. Both
are easy for the student to understand. and require only 25
minutes or so for administration.

The TMAS contains 50 items drawn from the Minnesota
Multiphasic Personality Inventory. which the subjects an-
swer as true or false as applied to themselves. Examples of
these statements. and answers which indicate anxiety. are:
"I sweat very easily even on cool days.“ (True) "I am usu-
ally calm and not easily upset." (False)

The IPAT was selected mainly for a measure of covert
anxiety. It consists of #0 items. divided equally into co-
vert and overt items. The overt half consists of conscious.
symptomatic items from which anxiety is easily inferred.
Examples of overt items are: "I tend to get over-excited
and 'rattled' in upsetting situations." "I am brought al-
most to tears by having things go wrong." The covert half
consists of items that are designed to get at indirect.

16

hidden manifestations of anxiety: "I sometimes doubt wheth-
er people I am talking to are really interested in what I am
saying." ”I doubt the honesty of people who are more
friendly than I would naturally expect them to be." There
are three alternatives to each item. one of which the sub-
ject must check as his answer. Examples of alternatives
are: "True." "In Between." "False." and "Rarely." "Some-

times." "Often."

Study Methods Book

A search of the literature revealed that a study
methods book by Robinson (1946) was the best available for
purposes of this experiment. Although relatively old. this
book contains about the same information as newer books on
study techniques. In addition. it gives experimental evi-
dence for the study methods proposed in it. plus information
on classroom skills. examination skills. and preparing re-
ports. E2 used this book intensively in teaching the study
methods group. whereas E1 taught the desensitization group

only the main points expressed in the book.

Procedure

Course of Treatment of the Desensitization Group

The desensitization group was divided into two sub-

groups. Each subgroup met twice each week. 50 minutes per

17

session for eight sessions. One subgroup met at 6:00 p.m..
and the other at 7:00 p.m.. on Monday and Wednesday. The
desensitization group was divided for two reasons. First.
fewer §s would allow more time for E1 to focus on individu-
al problems in relaxation. and secondly. the anxiety hierar-
chy would be constructed by fewer individuals which would
result in less variation in the hierarchy. Therefore. most
items in the hierarchy would be appropriate for a larger
percentage of the fis. Treatment in these two subgroups was
identical. except for variations in the hierarchy. and speed
of movement up the hierarchy. which is somewhat dependent on
idiosyncrasies of the Se.

A model anxiety hierarchy was constructed by El after
the first three sessions. during which he obtained informa-
tion from the SS as to what they thought were their academ-
ic difficulties. The model anxiety hierarchy was used in
both subgroups. Other items were added in each subgroup
based on additional information gathered through interaction
with the §s. The model anxiety hierarchy follows:

1. You receive your grades through the mail. open
the envelope and find that you have received all
"A"s and "B"s.

2. You have finished your final examination. and
you are handing it in.

3. You have finished your final examination. and
you are rechecking it for errors.

a. You are sitting in the classroom. and you have
been working on your final examination for one
hour.

5. You are sitting in the classroom. and you have
been working on your final examination for #5

18

minutes.

6. You are sitting in your classroom. and you
have been working on your final examination for 30
minutes.

7. You are sitting in your classroom. and you
have been working on your final examination for 15
minutes.

8. You are sitting in your classroom. and the
final examination is being handed out.

9. You are on your way to take the final examina-
tion.

10. You are studying for your final examination.
which will be given in one day.

11. You are studying for your final examination.
which will be given in one week.

12. You are studying for your final examination.
which will be given in two weeks.

13. You are sitting in your classroom. taking
notes from the lecture.

in. You are sitting at your desk studying: you
have been studying for 50 minutes.

15. You are sitting at your desk studying: you
have been studying for 30 minutes.

16. You are sitting at your desk studying: you
have been studying for 15 minutes.

17. You have your textbook in front of you. and
you are ready to begin studying your assignment.
18. You are sitting in your classroom. and your
instructor gives the class a reading assignment.

Each scene was presented twice. and each presentation
lasted 10 seconds. unless anxiety to the scene was indi-
cated. Approximately 50 seconds elapsed between presenta-
tions. during which §s were to simply relax. Timing was
done by means of a stopwatch. The number of presentations
of each scene. duration of visualization. and the interval
between presentations varied due to indication of anxiety to
a scene (Se were instructed to raise their right index fin-
ger if they began to feel anxious while imagining a scene).
If this occurred. they were allowed more time between pre-

sentations in order for them to relax more completely. and

19

the anxiety-eliciting scene was presented five times for 5.
10. and then 20 seconds to ensure complete desensitization
to the scene. At the beginning of each successive session.
the last scene presented at the preceding session was pre-
sented again.

When §s missed a meeting. E1 made individual appoint-
ments with them to keep them up with the rest of the group.
The individual sessions were conducted exactly like the
group sessions. Scenes presented in the individual session
were those that had been presented in the missed group ses-
sion.

After the first session. the last five minutes of each
session was devoted to subject matter being taught in the
study methods group.

During the first session. the anxiety scales were ad-
ministered. and rationale for the treatment was explained.
Jacobson's (1939) technique was used. in the second and
third sessions. to teach the §s to relax their arms. legs.
stomach. back. chest. neck. eyes. and face muscles. Five
minutes were then allowed for discussion of any difficulties
the gs encountered in relaxing. §s were instructed to prac-
tice relaxing twice each day between sessions for 15-minute
periods.

In the fourth through the seventh session. the first
five minutes were used to establish rapport. after which 10

minutes were allowed for the gs to relax. §s imagined

20

scenes for the next 25 minutes. Five minutes were then de-
voted to discuss special problems with the preceding images.
In the eighth session. the anxiety tests were again adminis-

tered.

Course of Treatment of the Study‘Methods Group

The study methods group met at 6:30 p.m. on Tuesday and
Thursday. At the first meeting. the anxiety tests were ad-
ministered and rationale for the treatment was presented.
E2 lectured during the second and third session and instruc-
ted the §s to use the study methods in the courses in which
they were enrolled. In the fourth session E2 went through a
chapter of a textbook using the study methods he had taught.
Passing around photostatic copies of a chapter of another
textbook. he had a subject practice using the study methods.
Only one subject showed up at the fifth session. and it was
decided to discontinue meetings for this group.

During final examination week of the Winter Term. S3 of
the study methods group were contacted by El. and individual
appointments were scheduled for the second administration of

the anxiety tests.

Administration of Anxiety Tests to the No Treatment Group
Se in the no treatment group were told that. although

the meetings were being held at times which they could not
attend. in the future there may be other classes held which

21

they might be able to attend. They were told that. for per-
haps future use in their own treatment. and for comparative
purposes at this time. it would be helpful if they would
come in and take some short paper and pencil tests that oth-
er students who were participating in the program were
taking. Essentially the same approach was taken when they
were called for the other administrations of the tests.
Individual appointments were set up by E1. in which the

tests were administered.

Third Administration of the Anxiety Tests to All Groupp
Since the desensitization group had taken the anxiety
tests the second time during the week before final examina-
tions. whereas most Se in the other two groups had taken the
second test in the week of final examinations. differences
in anxiety level could conceivably be interpreted to reflect
time of the second administration and not the type of treat-
ment. Therefore. §s were recalled during the first week of
Spring Term to take the anxiety tests a third time. Unfor-
tunately. some of the §s could not be reached. and this re-
sulted in the loss of four S3 for the third administration.
When the second tests were given. Se in all groups
signed authorization slips so that E1 could obtain their
GPAs and College Qualification Test scores for evaluation of

the study. The GPAs were obtained from the Registrar's

22

Office. and College Qualification Test scores from the

Office of Evaluation Services.

Results

Table 1 lists the means of each group on Fall Term GPA.
College Qualification Test (CQT). TMAS. and IPAT (covert.
overt. and total scores). Table 2 shows the results of
analyses of variance on these variables between the three
groups. The data indicate that before treatment. no differ-

ences existed between groups on these variables.

Table 1. Mean scores of the three groups on Fall Term GPA.
College Qualification. and initial anxiety tests.

 

 

 

 

Mean7§30res
Group Fall IPAT IPAT IPAT
CQT GPA TMAS Covert Overt Total
Desensitization 122.7 1.66 2h.0 17.3 20.3 37.6
Study Methods 123.# 1.77 18.6 18.8 18.8 37.6
No Treatment 119.3 1.99 18.0 16.5 10.5 27.6—

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Term GPAs are plotted in Figure 1 for Fall. Winter.
and Spring. school year 1966-1967. Figure 1 shows that
Winter and Spring GPAs of the desensitization and study
methods groups are above Fall GPAs. with the study methods
group showing the greatest increase. The no treatment
group. however. suffered a decrease in GPA in the Winter
and Spring. with the greatest decrease occurring from Winter

to Spring Term. These same data are plotted in terms of

23

24

Table 2. Analysis of variance between groups on Fall Term
GPAs. College Qualification. and initial anxiety

 

 

tests.
Source of Variation Sum of Squares df MS F
CQT
Between Groups 43 2 21.5 .06
Within Groups 4557 12 379.8
Total 4600
Fall GPA
Between Groups 2611 2 1305.5 .97
Within Groups 16180 12 1348
Total 18791
TMAS
Between Groups 117 2 , 58.5 2.67
Within Groups 263 12; 21.9
Total 380 g
IPAT Covert j
Between Groups 13 2 l 6.5 .32
Within Groups 247 12, 20.6
Total 260 j
,' i
IPAT Overt ?
Between Groups 251 2 )126 3.46
Within Groups 437 12 i 36.4
Total 688 1
I
IPAT Total 5
Between Groups 332 2 166 g 1.69
Within Groups 1170 12 98 ‘
Total 1502 ,
(

 

 

 

 

 

 

cumulative GPA in Figure 2.

Table 3 lists the GPA of each group for the Fall.

Winter. and Spring Terms.

the p_values (two-tailed 2 test) computed from the

Additionally. Table 3 provides

  
 

 

 

2.
2 .
2.3
2.2
2.1
2.0
1.9
1.8*
1.7
1 . 6
GPA 1.
1. e-e sens iza on ro p
1 , ...a Study Methods Group
1 . LANo Treatment Group
1.
1.
.10 ““““ j Taf“ . -. ’firfi”/
. 00 i‘ Y i I
Fall Winter Spring
Term

Figure 1. GPA of the desensitization. study methods.
and no treatment groups for Fall. Winter. and Spring Terms.

.__.Desensitization.Group
o.ueStudy Methods Group
A_JANO Treatment Group

GPA.

HHHHHHHNNN
. O C O O O O O O O

\ -_.’q\_,

 

 

.1e . -- \A: ~ ' w e ”1"
.00 I I j.
Fall Winter Spring
Term

Figure 2. Cumulative GPA of the three groups for Fall.
Winter. and Spring Terms.

26

difference scores (Winter GPA-Fall GPA. Spring GPA-Fall GPA.
and Spring GPA-Winter GPA) for each group. As indicated in
Table 3. the increase in GPA evidenced by the study methods
group in the Winter Term is significant at the .05 level.
The decrease in GPA of the no treatment group from the
Spring to the Winter Term is also significant at the .05
level. The desensitization group showed an increase in GPA
from Fall to Spring Term. but it was not significant.

Therefore. hypothesis one is not confirmed.

Table 3. GPA and p,values of the differences in GPA.
' Winter-Fall. Spring-Fall. and Spring-Winter Term
for each group.

 

GPA" p va1ue
Group
Fall Winter Spring W-F‘ 1 S-F | s-w

Desensitization 1.66 1.91 1.84 1.04:[ .58L - .40
Study Methods 1.77 2.42 2.24 3 30*[_ 1.68[_ - .77
No Treatment 1.99 1.97 1.49 "°51) -1.39[ -3.69*
* Significant at the .05 level

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Table 4 lists the means of the first. second. and third
administration of the TMAS to the three groups. It also
lists the p values obtained from the difference scores be-
tween first and second. and first and third testing. As can
be seen in the table. only the no treatment group had a sig-
nificant decrease on this anxiety test between the first and

second testing. although each of the other groups showed a

27

nonsignificant decreasing trend.

Table 4. TMAS means for each group. and p values of the
differences between first and second. and first
and third administrations.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Means t Values
Group “
1st 2nd 3rd let-2nd let-3rd

Desensitization 2n.0 22.8 23.08 .73 1.90
Study Methods 18.6 17.6 17.0b .32 .89
No Treatment 18.0 13.5 11.50 3.77* 3.00

a N=5

b N=4

c N=2

* Significant at the .05 level

The means for all groups on the IPAT total. covert. and
overt scores for each administration are listed in Table 5.
The p values of the IPAT data in Table 6. reveal only one
significant decrease-—the first-second score on the overt
measure for the study methods group. This group showed no
decrease at all on the covert measure at the second adminis-
tration. The desensitization group showed a decrease in
anxiety on both the covert and overt indices. whereas the no
treatment group's covert anxiety decreased and their overt
anxiety increased. Hypothesis two is not confirmed.

Table 7 lists the means of the gs used in this study
and the college student norm group (Cattell & Scheier. 1963.

p. 11). Table 7 also gives the 2 score comparison of these

 

 

 

 

Table 5. Means of IPAT total (T). covert (C). and overt (0)

scores of first. second. and third administration.
First :Second THIrEE

Group

_ rcorcorco

Desensitization 37.6 17.3 20.3 35.3 16.6 18.6 35.8 17.4 18.4

Study Methods 37.6 18.8 18.8 32.4 18.8 13.6 33.5 18.0 15.5

No Treatment 27.0 16.5 10.5 27.0*16.0 11.0 25.5 15.0 10.5

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

a For third administration. N25 in desensitization group.
=4 in study methods group. and N=2 in no treatment group.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Table 6. t tests on differences between first and second.
and first and third IPAT total (T). covert (C).
and overt (O).
First-Second“ rs - r
Group
T C 0 T C 0
Desensitization .77 .51 .76 1.79 .38 2.20
Study Methods 2.17 a 4.00** 1.02 1.20 .80
No Treatment a .42 -.57 .08 a .20
a No difference etween the means

 

 

 

 

 

 

b N=5 in desensitization group. N24 in study methods group.
and N82 in no treatment group
** Significant at the .01 level

two groups. The difference between the means is significant
at the .05 level. The mean of the students in this experi-
ment exceeds that of the college norm group; therefore.

hypothesis three is confirmed-students in this sample who

seek help for academic problems are more anxious than the

general student population. at least when the measuring

29

instrument is the IPAT.

Table 7. Comparison of IPAT total score means of all
subjects in this study and the college norm group.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Group Means p.Value
Experimental §s 34.88 2 26*
College Norml§s A 28.7b

a a

b N=1395

* Significant at the .05 level

There is only one significant correlation in Table 8;
the TMAS and the IPAT total score correlation coefficient
just reaches significance (a correlation coefficient of +.44
is required for significance at the .05 level). The corre-
lation coefficient of +.47 between these tests indicate that
they measure. in part. the same phenomena. Neither the
overt nor the covert part of the IPAT alone is significantly
correlated with the TMAS. It is interesting that the CQT
and Fall and Winter GPA are not significantly related with
the particular students in this study. but are significantly
related with students in the general population.

Table 9 illustrates the correlation between increase
in GPA. Fall to Winter Term. and decrease in anxiety test
scores. Note that they are all in a positive direction. but

none are significant. An increase in GPA tends to be

30

Table 8. Spearman Rank Order Correlation Coefficients be-
tween GPAs. CQT. and anxiety tests. for all gs.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Fall Winter First
GPA GPA TMAS
CQT +.12 A +.IO
TMAS
FirSt "'e07
Second -.13
IPAT (First)
Total -.30 +.47*
Covert -.o7 +.36
Overt -.43 +.39
IPAT (Second) If
Total +.14
Covert +.31
Overt +.O7
‘ significant at the .05 love.

Table 9. Spearman Rank Order Correlation Coefficients be-
tween increase in GPA and decrease in anxiety for

 

 

 

all §S.

Anxiety Test Winter-Fall
(First-Second Administration) GPA
TMAS +.38
IPAT

Total +.30
Covert +.40
Overt +.22

 

 

associated with a decrease in anxiety. The change in IPAT
covert and TMAS approaches a significant correlation with

increase in GPA. but does not reach significance.

Discussion

Hypothesis one. that the desensitization group would
evidence a significantly greater increase in GPA between
Fall and Spring Term than the other groups was not confirm-
ed. The GPA of the desensitization and the study methods
groups increased. but not significantly. The no treatment
group showed a significant decrease in GPA during this
period. '

The initial large increase in GPA between the Fall and
Winter Term for both treatment groups suggests that Se are
helped most while receiving the treatment. but that neither
treatment is effective in maintaining a significant increase
in GPA. .

The decreased performance of the no treatment group in
the present study parallels that of the no treatment group
in Paul and Shannon's (1966) study. The decrease in GPA of
the no treatment group in the present study was significant.
The drop in GPA of the no treatment group in Paul and
Shannon's study was greater. but they did not report whether
the drop was statistically significant. It is not clear
whether the fact that these students sought help but were
turned away was detrimental to them. or whether any students
who need help but do not get it perform less well each suc-
ceeding term. To answer this question. a group who is not
offered help. but who need it. should be included in future

studies investigating methods of treatment for students who
31

32

seek help for academic problems.

Hypothesis two was not confirmed. Students who re-
ceived systematic desensitization did not report significant
decreases in anxiety on either of the anxiety tests. This
finding is not surprising since the desensitization treat-
ment. as applied in this study. was found not to be effec-
tive treatment for students who have academic problems.

The significant decrease in anxiety as measured by the
overt half of the IPAT for the study methods group is prob-
ably best accounted for by the fact that many of these stu-
dents had taken one or all of their final examinations prior
to taking the anxiety tests the second time. This decrease
in anxiety. however. was not evident on the TMAS. A possi-
ble explanation is that the TMAS and the overt IPAT measure
different phenomena. as suggested by the lack of a signifi-
cant correlation between the two measures in this study
(p. 30). Spielberger (1966a) differentiates between state
and trait anxiety. and reports that the TMAS measures trait
anxiety (relatively stable personality attribute). which is
subject to little variability over time. Trait anxiety
would not be expected to vary significantly before and after
examinations. The overt IPAT may measure state anxiety
(transitory feelings of apprehension and tension in a
stressful situation). State anxiety would be expected to

increase before. and decrease after. final examinations.

33

The no treatment group evidenced a significant decrease
in anxiety as measured by the TMAS between first and second
administrations. Since they received no treatment. there
should have been no change in this group. especially in
trait anxiety. The number of §s in this group was small.
and. therefore. not much confidence can be placed in this
finding.

Hypothesis three. that students who seek help report
more covert anxiety than students in the general population.
has been confirmed. This finding supports the observation
of Psychology 101 instructors (Gatley. 1965) that these
students appeared more anxious than other students. Since
the possibility exists that the IPAT measures state anxiety
also. it is likely that students who seek help for academic
problems are more anxious in the testing situation than
other students.

Systematic desensitization may not be as effective in
reducing avoidance responses to academic activities as a
persuasive authoritarian approach. as was applied in the
study methods group sessions. Since similar study methods
were taught in both groups. it seems that learning effective
study methods per se may not account for the increase in GPA
of the study methods group in the Winter Term. Although the
study methods group spent more time on the study techniques
than the desensitization group. the additional time was

spent going over experiments through which the techniques

34

were developed. The difference resided in the way in which
E2 taught his group. He gave them experimental evidence to
back up his claim that the study methods which he taught
were effective. He also tried to persuade Se in his group
to work hard and apply the techniques. He told them that
knowing the best study methods but never using them would
not result in any improvement in their academic performance.
When E1 discussed study methods with the desensitization Se.
however. he suggested that they try the techniques and use
them if they found them helpful. Thus. it may be that
authoritative persuasion is a more effective method of over-
coming academic problems.

That only four sessions were required to raise the GPA
of the study methods group is striking in itself. If this
treatment were the one of choice for students who seek help
for academic problems. it would be economical to administer.

It should be stressed. however. that the study methods
group did not maintain the significant increase in GPA
during the Spring Term. The kind of treatment the study
methods §s received seems to lack lasting effectiveness.

The reason for the failure of the desensitization group
to achieve a significant increase in GPA is not apparent.
Paul's (1966) method of treatment seems to have been follow-
ed in all significant respects. It is possible that his §s
were more relaxed. because he used padded leather chairs.

and minimum illumination in the room in which he applied the

35

treatment. Yet it seemed to E1 that the Se in the desensi-
tization group in the present experiment were able to relax
quite deeply. Their posture appeared relaxed. respiration
seemed reduced. they reported that their hands and arms
felt numb. and they sometimes stretched after relaxing as
one does when one has been asleep.

Systematic desensitization has been shown to be an ef-
fective method of reducing or eliminating certain classes
of avoidance responses. and the method seems to have been
applied correctly. What. then. might account for the fail-
ure of the desensitization gs to significantly increase
their GPAs? The two most obvious alternatives are (1) that
students who seek help for academic problems do not have
the ability to make higher grades even after being desensi-
tized to anxiety regarding studying. or (2) the items on
the anxiety heirarchy used by the desensitization group were
not the best for this particular problem.

It might be argued that students who seek help for ac-
ademic problems suffer from low ability. and that attempts
to help them will fail because the treatments will not raise
their ability. Gatley (1965) found that 101 students have
significantly lower scores than other students on college
ability tests. Spielberger (1966b) found an interaction of
ability and anxiety on GPA. such that high anxiety students
with high ability earn high GPAs. high anxiety students with

36

moderate ability make low GPAs. and high or low anxiety has
no effect on the GPA of the low ability student. i.e.. low
ability students make low GPAs regardless of their anxiety
level.

The following evidence. however. does not support this
view: (1) Some students with low scores on the ability
tests do earn degrees. (2) students who seek help are able
to raise their GPAs. as evidenced by the study methods
group in the present studY. (3) in the present study. there
was no significant correlation between ability scores and
GPAs. (4) there are some personality differences between
students who seek help and other students. which suggest
that factors other than ability could account for low GPAs
of these students. and (5) if the findings and speculations
that help-seeking students experience failure for support
of their inadequate self-concepts are correct. making low
scores on ability tests may also be an expression of choice,
and. consequently. not a trustworthy measurement of their
ability.

It is possible that the anxiety hierarchy used in this
study was not the best for these §s. E1 observed that the
item at the top of the hierarchy which stated that the gs
received all "A"s and "B"s for the term was more disturbing
to the desensitization group than any other single item.

i.e.. a greater number of Se indicated anxiety to this

37

scene than to any other. This observation lends support to
the inadequate self-concept hypothesis. Receiving good
grades would be incongruent with the low self-concept of
the help-seeking student. and. therefore. elicit anxiety.
Likewise. Gatley (1965) reports:
It is quite characteristic...to observe consider-
able embarrassment and uneasiness among 101 stu-
dents when they report something they are able
to do well. be it school work. sports. or knit-
ting; whereas. they are able to describe a
variety of inadequate or inferior performances
with equanimity. and even zest (pp. 31-32).

Therefore. the task seems to be to change the self-
concept of students who seek help for academic problems.

An anxiety hierarchy appropriate for this task would be
oriented toward achieving success in academic and other
activities. If they are desensitized to a more positive
self-concept. the fantasied achievement of good grades may
no longer elicit anxiety in these students. and their self-
perceptions should undergo change. and result in improved
academic performance.

Greater confidence could have been placed in the find-
ings of this study if each group had contained more S5. The
experimenter had originally planned on having lOI§s in each
group. but only 25 volunteers were forthcoming for the pro-
ject. Of these 25. some did not report for the first meet-
ing. and others dropped-out after attending the first ses-

sion.

38

If the study were replicated. it is suggested that-more
gs may be obtained by personally contacting students who are
on probation because of low GPAs. and sending announcements
of the program to low-level undergraduate classes in many
departments.

Other serious problems. which are related. that devel-
oped in this study were (1) lack of attendance and (2)
administration of the anxiety tests to the three groups at
different times after treatment was completed. Missed
sessions for the desensitization group were not a serious
problem. but for the study methods group it was critical
enough to end treatment for that group. The second anxiety
tests would have been administered at the same time for all
groups if the S8 in the study methods group had attended the
meetings through the last session. Because the second pro-
lem occurred. the experimenter attempted to get all §s back
for a third administration of the anxiety tests during the
same week. However. some of the §s could not be contacted
for the third administration: one had entered another uni-
versity. a second was reported to be in jail in Florida.
one had moved leaving no forwarding address. and another
was never at home when the experimenter telephoned. and did
not respond to messages left with her roommate. Had all §S
been tested the second time during the last week of treat-

ment. this problem would not have occurred.

It is suggested that better attendance could be gained
by paying the §s for each session attended. withholding pay-
ment until the last session. and deducting from the amount
earned a penalty for each session missed. §s not attending
the last session would forfeit the total amount of money
they had earned.

At least some of the problems arising in a study of
this kind may be a function of the personality attributes of
the Se. As might be expected of students who make low
grades. promptness and conformity are not their major
assets. Also. an obligation to make an agreed-to appoint-
ment seemed not important to most of the SS in this study.
An experimenter working with a sample out of this particular
student population should expect problems of this sort. and
develop methods of handling them before the experiment

begins.

REFERENCES

Anderson. C. M. The self-image: a theory of the dynamics
of behavior. Menta Hyg.. 1952. 36. 227-244.

Baymur. F. B.. & Patterson. C. H. A comparison of three
methods of assisting underachieving high school

students. J. counsela Psychol.. 1960. 2- 83-89.

Broedel. J.. Ohlsen. M.. Proff. F.. & Southard. C. The
effects of group counseling on gifted underachieving
adolescents. J. counsel. Psychol.. 1960. Z. 163-
170.

Cattell. R. B.. & Scheier. I. H. Handbook for the IPAT
Anxiet Scale uestionnaire e f Ana s s orm .
C paign: stitute for Personality an A i ity
Testing. 1963.

DeBolt. D. L. A dynamic approach to the investigation of
some personality factors related to study problems.
Unpublished master's thesis. Michigan State
university. 1963.

Gatley. R. H. Manifest anxiety and academic potential of
students who seek help for achievement problems.
Unpublished master's thesis. Michigan State
University. 1965.

Golburgh. S. J.. & Penney. J. F. A note on counseling
underachieving college students. J, consulta
Psychol,. 1962. 2. 133-138.

Jacobson. E. Pro ressive relaxation. Chicago: U. Chicago
Press. I959.

Kimball. B. Case studies in educational failure during

adolescence. Amer: J: Orthopsychiat.. 1953. a}.
406-415.

Michigan State University Catalog. East Lansing: MSU
Publications. 1963.

Paul. G. Insi ht vs. desensitization in s chotherapy.
Stanford: Stan?or3 U. FFess. I966.

Paul. G.. & Shannon. D. Treatment of anxiety through
systematic desensitization in therapy groups. g;
abnorm. soc. Pszchol.. 1966. 1;. 124-135.

 

4O

41

Robinson. F. P. Effective stud . New York: Harper &
Brothers PuSIishers. I9E6.

Roth. R. M.. & Meyersburg. H. A, The non-achievement syn-
drome. Personnel guid. J.. 1963. 41. 535-540.

Spielberger. C. D. Theory and research on anxiety. In C.
D. Spielberger (Ed.). Anxiet and behavior. New
York: Academic Press Inc.. I566. PS. 3-25. (a)

Spielberger. C. D. The effects of anxiety on complex
learning and academic achievement. In C. D.

Spielberger (Ed.). Anxiet and behavior. New York:
Academic Press Inc.. I966. Pp. 361-393. (b)
Spielberger. C. D.. & Katzenmeyer. W. G. Manifest anxiety

intelligence. and college grades. J, consult,

Psychol,. 1959. pg. 278.

Spielberger. C. D.. Weitz. H.. & Denny. J. P. Group
counseling and the academic performance of anxious

college freshmen. J, counsel, Psychol,. 1962. 2.
195-204.

Taylor. J. A. A personality scale of manifest anxiety. 9;
abnorm, soc, Psychol,. 1953. 48. 285-290.

Wolpe. J. Psychothera b reci rocal inhibition.
Stanford: Stanford U. Press. I953.

 

Appendix A. Descriptive Data on All Subjects

43

Subject Descriptive Data

Desensitization Group
Subject

(muxexoun-

Study Methods Group
Subject
1

KnvlerN

No Treatment Group
Subject

PWNH

Ass

18
24
18
19
19
18

20
18
20
18
21

20
21

19

(I)

333W’11 "lil‘lj’li’tlz’lfl

*11’11'11'11

ex

Class Level

Freshman
Sophomore
Freshman
Sophomore
Sophomore
Freshman

Sophomore
Freshman
Junior
Freshman
Sophomore

Junior
Freshman
Freshman
Sophomore

Appendix B. Anxiety Tests

Taylor Manifest Anxiety Scale

Date

 

 

Name
True False

EC: 1.
1:31:23 2-
1:31:] 3-

:53 a.
[23:3 5.
Egg: 6.
[23:2] 7.
[3):] 8.

EJIZJ 9.
ED10-
[31:311-
[:|[‘_:[ 12.
ESL—.313.
EL: 14.
[2:11:21 15.

I do not tire quickly.
I am troubled by attacks of nausea.

I believe I am no more nervous than most
others.

I have very few headaches.

I work under a great deal of tension.
I cannot keep my mind on one thing.

I worry over money and business.

I frequently notice my hand shakes when I try
to do something.

I blush no more often than others.

have diarrhea once a month or more.

worry quite a bit over possible misfortunes.
practically never blush.

am often afraid that I am going to blush.

HHHHH

have nightmares every few nights.
My hands and feet are usually warm enough.
I sweat very easily even on cool days.

Sometimes when embarrassed. I break out in a
sweat which annoys me greatly.

I hardly ever notice my heart pounding and I
am seldom short of breath.

I feel hungry almost all the time.

45

True False

[31:320.
1:1:321.
1:1:22.

[25:123.
c:1r:nzu.

C3325-
[3:326-
[3:327-

[2:328-

[21:329.
[21:330.
ISL—331.

EDS?-
3:33-
CECIL—134-

(23:335.
[32336-

312337.

[23:38.

46

I am very seldom troubled by constipation.
I have a great deal of stomach trouble.

I have had periods in which I lost sleep over
worry.

My sleep is fitful and disturbed.

I dream frequently about things that are best
kept to myself.

I am easily embarrassed.
I am more sensitive than most other people.

I frequently find myself worrying about some-
thing.

I wish I could be as happy as others seem to
be.

I am usually calm and not easily upset.
I cry easily.

I feel anxiety about something or someone al-
most all the time.

I am happy most of the time.
It makes me nervous to haVe to wait.

I have periods of such great restlessness
that I cannot sit long in a chair.

Sometimes I become so excited that I find it
hard to get to sleep.

I have sometimes felt that difficulties were
piling up so high that I could not overcome
them.

I must admit that I have at times been
worried beyond reason over something that
really did not matter.

I have very few fears compared to my friends.

True False

CDC—339-

[3340.
[35:341.

[:jfijuz.
[31:343.
:Cjuu.
[21:315.
[3:46.
3:347.
DEW.

[23:22:49.
E21350.

47

I have been afraid of things or peOple that I
know could not hurt me.

I certainly feel useless at times.

I find it hard to keep my mind on a task or
job.

I am unusually self-conscious.

I am inclined to take things hard.

I am a high-strung person.

Life is a strain for me much of the time.
At times I think I am no good at all.

I am certainly lacking in self-confidence.

I sometimes feel that I am about to go to
pieces.

I shrink from facing a crisis or difficulty.

I am entirely self-confident.

I P A T SELF ANALYSIS FORM

 

 

 

 

 

NAML TODAY'S DATL
First Middle Last
SEX AGL OTHER FACTS
(Write M or F) (Nearest Year) (Address. Occupation. etc.. as instructed)

 

 

Inside this booklet you will find forty questions, dealing with dificulties that most people
experience at one time or another. It will help a lot in self-understanding if you check
Yes, No, etc., to each, frankly and truthfully, to describe any problems you may have.

Start with the two simple examples just below, for practice. As you see, each inquiry is
actually put in the form of a sentence. By putting a cross, X, in one of the three boxes
on the right you show how it applies to you. Make your marks now.

Yes Malian! No

l. I enjoy walking Cl E) El

 

A middle box is provided for when you cannot definitely say Yes or No. But use it as little
as possible.

2. I would rather spend an evening:
(A) talking to people, (B) at a movie If] “ET“ En)

 

About half the items inside end in A and B choices like this. B is always on the right.
Remember, use the “In between” or “Uncertain” box only if you cannot possibly decide
on A or B.

Now:

1. Make sure you have put your name, and whatever else the examiner asks, in the place
at the top of this page.

2. Never pass over an item but give some answer to every single one. Your answers will
be entirely confidential.

3. Do not spend time pondering. Answer each immediately, the way you want to at this
moment (not last week, or usually). You may have answered questions like this be-
fore; but answer them as you feel now.

Most people finish in five minutes; some, in ten. Hand in this form as soon as you are
through with it, unless told to do otherwise. As soon as the examiner signals or tells
you to, turn the page and begin.

STOP HERE—WAIT FOR SIGNAL

© I957, 1963. by R. B. Cattell. All rights reserved. Printed in U. S. A. Published by the Institute for Personality and
Ability Testing, “02-04 Coronado Drive, Chompoign, Illinois.

1957-65 gnu-row

 

 

 

1.

O C 1+ .
I find that my Interests, 1n people and amusegments, tend to change
fairly rapidly

 

2. If people think poorly of me I can still go on quite serenely in my

3.

own mind

 

I like to wait till I am sure that what I am saying is correct, before
I put forward an argument

 

4. I am inclined to let my actions get swayed by feelings of jealousy ............

10.
11.

13.

14.

15.

16.

17.
18.

19.

20.

. I admire my parents in all important matters

If I had my life to live over again I would:
(A) plan very differently, (B) want it the same

 

 

. I find it hard to “take ‘no’ for an answer”, even when I know what

I ask is impossible

 

I doubt the honesty of people who are more friendly than I would
naturally expect them to be

 

In demanding and enforcing obedience my parents (or guardians)
were: (A) always very reasonable, (B) often unreasonable ....................... ..

I need my friends more than they seem to need me

 

I feel sure that I could “pull myself together” to deal with an
emergency

 

As a child I was afraid of the dark

People sometimes tell me that I show my excitement in voice and
manner too obviously

 

 

If ople take advantage of my friendliness I:
(Agesoon forget and forgive, (B) resent 1t and hold it against them.

I find myself upset rather than helped by the kind of personal
criticism that many people make

 

Often I get angry with people too quickly

 

I feel restless as if I want something but do not know what ...........................

I sometimes doubt whether people I am talking to are really
interested in what I am saying

I have always been free from any vague feelings of ill-health, such
as obscure pains, digestive upsets, awareness of heart action, etc. ............. ..

 

In discussion with some people, I get so annoyed that I can hardly
trust myself to speak

 

CONTINUE ON NEXT PAGE.

True

Tree

CI

Always
Often

Yes

[:1
If:

In between
In between
In between
Seldom
In between
In between
In between
In between
In between
Sometimes
Often
Sometimo
Uncertain

In between

E]

Often Occasionally

E]

N

Score

 

'61?

... "6117

31.
32.

33.

35.
36.

37.

40.

I make a point of not being absent-minded or forgetful of details ...............

. 5 O .
. Through getting tense I use up more energy than most people 1n
getting things done

 

However difficult and unpleasant the obstacles, I always stick to

my original intentions

I occasionally have vivid dreams that disturb my sleep
I always have enough energy when faced with difficulties

I sometimes feel compelled to count things for no particular purpose.-.“

admit it

If I make an awkward social mistake I can soon forget it

I am brought almost to tears by having things go wrong

 

. I tend to get over-excited and “rattled” in upsetting situations ..................

 

 

. Most people are a little queer mentally, though they do not like to

 

. I feel grouchy and just do not want to see people:
(A) occasionally, (B) rather often

 

 

In the midst of social groups I am nevertheless sometimes over-

come by feelings of loneliness and worthlessness

 

I wake in the night and, through worry, have some difficulty in

sleeping again
My spirits generally stay high no matter how many troubles I meet ......

I sometimes get feelings of guilt or remorse over quite small matters...

 

My nerves get on edge so that certain sounds, e.g., a screechy hinge,

are unbearable and give me the shivers

 

If something badly upsets me I generally calm down again quite

quickly

I tend to tremble or perspire when I think of a difficult task ahead- .......

I usually fall asleep quickly, in a few minutes, when I go to bed ..................

I sometimes get in a state of tension or turmoil as I think over my

recent concerns and interests

STOP HERE.

BE SURE YOU HAVE ANSWERED EVERY QUESTION.

3.

fl'rne

True

Yes

-<
2

CI? [2]?

I-l
w
B
e

E1? DEE]

E]:-

Never

Often

[Yfi

Often

True

Yes

True

I]

Uncertain

Uncertain

In between

In between

In between

In between

Uncertain

Uncertain

In between

In between

Very

rarely

In between

Sometimes

In between

In between

Sometimes

Uncertain

In between

In between

Uncertain

[:15 [3? [Z]? [:13

False

E]

False

[I

No

DwCI

Sonne-
times

DEC]

2

cm

No
Never
False

No

C]

No

C]

False

El
B Score

 

“Elli”

....................

51

"boEEam ozuoeuoma

3.323.330 25.—3:25

 

c. .3: 52:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

5.3... 295. . . - . . I t - . n
3325.... :25... o c ._ x 6 A 5 is
ARV 2.3. $30.55 .0 .. o . 4 . Eu . 1.0
a + S m .
““08 3: a-<.—-°P “0503 n dv A0500» N d. .500“ :8

 

 

 

 

 

 

65E? amateur: €023 23m m

 

3:2... €908 «Loom <

 

 

 

 

been-noun

 

 

2.5 ou< Inca

oEoz

 

 

51

3.2555 023.380

3.332.330 25.—322.0

 

c. .3: 22:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

"800m 2H5.” v . I . e l . Al m 8.83
3323..» .453 o o n A 6 so
+ Amuv atom to>oU-to>O .0 . O . 4 . TU . Two
3 S "
NICO” 3: ._<.—.O.—. .988 n .3 .23» u .8 «23¢. 38.
. 39?? 98:58 €99 28m m 165 £038 88m <

 

 

 

 

 

Sate—Rm econ Ildn< Jen oEoz

MIC CGHI GAN STATE UENIV RSITY LIBRARIES