A study of the basis for individual differences in a level of aspiration situation

513 74 10MB

English Pages 147

Report DMCA / Copyright

DOWNLOAD FILE

Polecaj historie

A study of the basis for individual differences in a level of aspiration situation

Citation preview

A 8OTJDX OF t m

/

m u m FOE INDIVIDUAL DIFFERENCES

m A LEVEL OF ASPIRATION SITUATION

BX JULIAN BERNARD ROTTER

S u b m itte d t o t h e F a c u lty o f th e G ra d u a te S chool I n p a r t i a l f u l f i l l m e n t o f t h e r e q u ir e m e n ts f o r t h e d e g re e , D o c to r o f P h ilo s o p h y , i n t h e D epartm ent o f P s y c h o lo g y , I n d ia n a U n i v e r s i t y , O c to b e r, 1941

ProQuest Number: 10295112

All rights reserved INFORMATION TO ALL USERS The quality o f this rep ro d u ctio n is d e p e n d e n t u p o n t h e quality o f t h e c o p y su b m itted . In t h e unlikely e v e n t th a t t h e author did n o t se n d a c o m p le t e m anuscript a n d th e r e a re m issing p a g e s , t h e s e will b e n o te d . Also, if m aterial h a d t o b e r e m o v e d , a n o t e will in d ic a te th e d e le tio n .

uest. P roQ uest 10295112 P ub lished by P roQ uest LLC (2016). C opyright o f th e D issertation is h e ld by t h e Author. All rights reserved . This work is p r o t e c t e d a g a in st un authorized c o p y in g u nder Title 17, U nited S ta tes C o d e Microform Edition © P roQ uest LLC. P roQ uest LLC. 789 East E isenhow er Parkway P.O. Box 1346 Ann Arbor, Ml 48106 - 1346

A c c e p te d b y t h e f a c u l t y o f t h e G ra d u a te S chool o f In d ia n a U n iv e rs ity a s f u l f i l l i n g th e t h e s i s r e q u i r e m e n ts f o r t h e d e g re e o f j g o c t p r o f P h ilo s o p h y . D ire c to r

Doctoral Committee:

A

H

MJKIOWLEJX&MEIIT fh® a u th o r w is h e s to a c k n o w le d g e h i e g r a t i t u d e t o t h e f o l l o i r t a g p e o p le ?

P r o f e s s o r 0 . M. L o u t t i t , who

d i r e c te d t h i s t h e s i s , f o r h ie g e n e ro u s h e lp and su g g es­ t i o n s ; Ur# D avid Shakow f o r h i e a i d an d d i r e c t i o n a t th e I n i t i a l s ta g e s o f t h is in v e s tig a tio n ; th e f a c u lty o f t h e D e p a rtm e n t o f P s y c h o lo g y f o r t h e i r many su g g e s­ t i o n s ; Hr* L o u is D* C ohen, D i r e c t o r o f C l a s s i f i c a t i o n , an d Hr* F lo y d Hammer, S u p e r i n te n d e n t , a t t h e I n d i a n a State P e n a l F arm , f o r t h e i r s p l e n d i d c o o p e r a t i o n i n t h e s t u d i e s I n v o lv in g p r i s o n I n m a te s , and Hr* H le h a rd 5* B a l l an d Mr* I r v i n S. Wolf f o r t h e i r a i d I n o b t a i n i n g s u b j e c t s i n t h e s t u d i e s o f c o l l e g e s tu d e n ts *

TABLE OF CONTESTS

£ss§ I. II. III. IV . V, V I. V II. V III.

GENERAL INTRODUCTION, EEWE* OF THE LITERA­ TURE AND STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM...................

1

THE INSTRUCTIONS, TASK, SUBJECTS AND GENERAL .PROCEDURE.....................................................

19

EVALUATION OF THE TASK, INSTRUCTIONS, MEAS­ URES, AND RELIABILITY OF THE MEASURES.................

35

CROUP I , THE NORGBSTER STATE HOSPITAL EM­ PLOYEES. .........................................

47

GROUPS I I AND I I I , NORMAL AND CRIPPLED COL­ LEGE STUDENTS. ..........................

50

GROUP V, PRISON IN M A T E S ......................................

55

AGE AND SBC DIFFERENCES.

70

...........

ANALYSIS OF GRADE PREDICTIONS.................................

75

IX .

INTRA-TEST RELATIONSHIPS...............................................

SO

X.

CUBICAL STUDIES....................................................................

85

FURTHER DISCUSSIONS, SUMMARY OF FINDINGS, AND CONCLUSIONS................................................................................

1X1

APPENDIX...........................................

13 2

X I.

IV

um

o r TABLES

h ie 1*

yagg Show ing t h e P o s s i b l e E f f e c t o f J P e rfo s ta n c e u p o n t h e B i f f ©rone® S c o re s a n d t h e Number o f Suc­ c e s s e s . . . . . . . ................ ** ............ * **.................. . . . . .

38

A v e ra g e P e rfo rm a n c e Score© f o r G ro u p s I I - V f o r E ach T r i a l , . . . .......................................................................

39

3*

R e l i a b i l i t y M e a su re m e n ts f o r G roup 1 . . . . . . . . . . . .

45

4.

O dd-Even R e l i a b i l i t y M e a su re m e n ts f o r G roups IX -V , ............ , ..........................................

46

5.

M eans a n d S ta n d a r d D e v ia tio n ® f o r G roup I . . ..........

48

6.

C hanges A f t e r S u c c e s s an d A f t e r F a i l u r e . , . .

49

7.

C om parison o f C r i p p le d a n d C o n tr o l C o lle g e S tu ­ d e n t s on Two M e a s u re s ................

52

D i s t r i b u t i o n o f U n e e le c te d In m a te s a n d A lc o h o lic In m a te s i n t h e F o u r P e r s o n a l i t y G r o u p s .

62

Mean S c o r e s f o r In m a te G r o u p s .

62

Z.

8« 9*

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

10.

Mean S c o r e s f o r Y ounger a n d O ld e r M ale S u b j e c t s .

71

11.

Sex D i f f e r e n c e s i n t h e W .S .H ., C o l le g e , and C o l­ .................................. l e g e C r i p p le d G ro u p s.

74

B - S c o r e & on t h e A s p i r a t i o n B o ard f o r 22 F a i r s o f S u b j e c t s M atched I n P r e v i o u s G ra d e s b u t Sepa­ r a t e d on t h e B a s i s o f G ra d e D - S c o r e s ...........................

77

12.

13.

D - B o o r e s a n d S h i f t s f o r S u b j e c t s Who R e p re s s A f t e r S u c c e s s More O f t e n , o r a s o f t e n a s A f t e r F a i l u r e , a n d f o r S u b j e c t s who R e p r e s s A f t e r F a i l ­ u r e More O f te n Than A f t e r S u c c e s s . .............. 81

14.

Mean 0 - S c o r e an d S h i f t s f o r S u b j e c t s w ith and w ith o u t U n u su al S h i f t s . .......................

83

10.

S h i f t s o f H igh an d Low D - s c o r e G r o u p s .

84

18*

D i s t r i b u t i o n o f P a t t e r n s I n P e r c e n t a g e s f o r MX G roups P r e v i o u s l y S t u d i e d .......................

105

D i s t r i b u t i o n i n P e r c e n t a g e s o f A c c e p ta b le and U n a c c e p ta b le P a t t e r n s f o r A n G ro u p s

109

0 -S c o re s and S h if ts f o r A il G r o u p s . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Ill

17. 18.

v

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

hXBt or mtlABd F ig u re 1«

F l a n o f A s p i r a t i o n B o a r d ................

24

2.

View o f t h e A s p i r a t i o n B o a rd w i t h S u b j e c t P o i s e d t o B o l l t h e S t e e l B e a rin g *

23

G ro u p ed F re q u e n c y D i s t r i b u t i o n o f 0 ~ £ o o re * f o r P r i s o n I n m a te s a n d W o r c e s te r s t a t e Hos­ p i t a l M a le s * . * . ................. ..............* . , , ............................

64

G rouped F re q u e n c y d i s t r i b u t i o n o f S h i f t s f o r P r i s o n I n m a te s a n d W o r c e s te r S t a t e H o s p i t a l M a l e s * ........... *

6b

3*

4*

vi

1

GHAFTEE X GEWtAL XHtEODUCfXOH, REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE amp m h tm & m o r t h e p ro b le m

W ith in r e c e n t year® t h a t a s p e c t o f p s y c h o l o g i c a l i n ­ v e s t i g a t i o n d e n o te d b y t h e t e n s # p e r s o n a l it y * 1 ( I n t h e r e ­ s t r i c t e d sen se o f s ta b le p a t t e r n s o f b e h a v io r o f th e I n d i­ v i d u a l a s a w h o le o t h e r th a n t h o s e c o n c e r n in g I n t e l l e c t u a l a n d m o to r a b i l i t i e s ) h a g b e e n g ro w in g r a p i d l y .

P s y c h o lo ­

g i s t s who c a l l th e m s e lv e s c l i n i c a l , a b n o rm a l, s o c i a l , c h i l d , ©r d e v e lo p m e n ta l a r e c o n c e r n in g th e m s e lv e s m ore and m ore w ith a n e x p e r im e n ta l o r o b s e r v a t i o n a l r a t h e r th a n a r a t i o n ­ a l i s t i c a p p ro a c h t o t h e s e p ro b le m s#

H ow ever, du e t o a

d e a r t h o f e x p e r im e n ta l m eth o d s i n t h e c l i n i c a l and e x p e r i ­ m e n ta l f i e l d s , r e s u l t s a r e m e a g re an d o f t e n c o n t r a d i c t o r y # I n v e n t o r i e s , h i g h l y d e v e lo p e d on t h e s i d e &f r e l i a b i l i t y b u t o f t e n q u i t e weak i n v a l i d i t y , h a v e l i m i t e d u s e i n ex­ p e r i m e n t a l s t u d i e s a n d even m ore l i m i t e d u s e i n t h e c l i n i ­ cal fie ld .

H ow ever, some new m eth o d s a r e a p p e a r in g ( ? )

su c h a s m a tc h in g t e c h n i q u e s b a s e d on I n t e r v i e w s and c l i n i c a l o b s e r v a t i o n s , p r o j e c t i v e t y p e s o f t e s t s su c h a s th e T h em atic A p p e r c e p tio n , R o rs c h a c h , D ra w in g , F r e e D e s ig n , Comic S t r i p , a n d T a u to p h o n e .

T h e re a r e a l s o a p p e a r in g c e r t a i n s p e c i a l ­

i s e d t e c h n i q u e s o r i g i n a t e d b y s t u d e n t s o f Lew ln such a s r e ­ su m p tio n and l e v e l o f a s p i r a t i o n .

A l l o f t h e s e m eth o d s r e ­

q u i r e c o n s i d e r a b l e f u r t h e r s t u d y and a n a l y s i s b e f o r e t h e y

2

©an becom e u s e f u l a s e x p e r i m e n t a l o r c l i n i c a l to o l® . t h e l e v e l o f a s p i r a t i o n te c h n iq u e i n p a r t i c u l a r h a s a ro u s e d c o n s id e r a b le I n t e r e s t and s tu d y ,

t h i s te c h n iq u e ,

c o n c e rn e d a s i t i s w ith th e e f f e c t s o f s u c c e s s o r g r a t i f i ­ c a t i o n a n d f a i l u r e o r f r u s t r a t i o n i n a d y n a m ic s i t u a t i o n

h m p o t e n t i a l im p o r ta n c e i n b o th t h e t h e o r e t i c a l s t u d y o f p e r s o n a l i t y d e v e lo p m e n t an d I n t h e f i e l d o f c l i n i c a l d i a g ­ n o s is and d e s c r ip tio n #

In i t s b ro a d e s t s e n s e , th e p u rp o se

O f t h i s s tu d y i s t o a n a l y s e a s f a r a s p o s s i b l e some o f t h e f a c t o r s o p e r a tin g in th e l e v e l o f a s p i r a t i o n s i t u a t i o n w ith t h e a im o f f u r t h e r e v a l u a t i o n o f i t s p o s s i b l e u s e f u l n e s s l a t h e s e a re a ® .

B e c a u s e o f i t s d y n am ic n a t u r e t h i s t e c h n i q u e

a p p e a r s t o b e a u s e f u l m eth o d f o r t h e s t u d y o f t h e n a t u r e o f s o - c a l l e d g e n e r a l t r a i t s , r e a c t i o n s y s te m s o r b e h a v i o r p a tte rn s .

We a r e a b l e t o o b s e r v e i n t h i s s i t u a t i o n v a r i o u s

f o r c e s a t work# d e te r m i n e t h e g e n e r a l i t y o f them an d o b ­ s e r v e how t h e y i n t e r a c t . The a u t h o r i n p r e v i o u s s t u d i e s (46 , 4 7 , 60) a n d many o t h e r w r i t e r s ( 4 ) h a v e h e l d a s a g e n e r a l fram ew o rk f o r t h e s tu d y o f p e r s o n a l i t y t h e p r i n c i p l e o f t h e u n i t y o f p e r ­ s o n a l i t y a n d p r e s e n t e d e v id e n c e t o show t h e e x i s t e n c e o f g e n e r a l t r a i t s w hose I n f l u e n c e i n a s i t u a t i o n c o u ld b e p r e ­ d ic te d .

By t h e u n i t y o f t h e p e r s o n a l i t y i s m eant t h e p r i n ­

c i p l e t h a t © very p r e v i o u s e x p e r i e n c e a f f e c t s i n some d e g r e e a l l p r e s e n t b e h a v io r *

The n a t u r e o f t h e e x p e r i e n c e a n d t h e

tim e o f It® o c c u r r e n c e w i l l d e te r m i n e t h e d e g r e e o f t h i s

3

mm$ e x p e d ie n c e s #111 b© r e l a t i v e l y in d e p e n d e n t o f

® ff® # tf

& p a ? t i o t t l & r t y p e o f b e h a v i o r , © th e re may e x e r t snob © p r o f o u n d e f f e c t t h a t on© c a n p r e d i c t 'b e h a v io r w ith r e a s o n ­ a b l e a c c u r a c y k n o w in g I t a l o n e .

By g e n e r a l t r a i t , c h a r a c ­

t e r ! e t l e mode o f a p p r o a c h , r e a c t i o n t e n d e n c y , o r s t a b l e b e h a v i o r p a t t e r n , we a r e r e f e r r i n g t o a c o n s t r u c t w h ic h r e ­ f e r s t o e x p e rie n c e s * ,

f o r e x a m p le , m c a n sa y o f Mr. A*

t h a t h e a lw a y s b l u s h e s when h e i n t r o d u c e s h i m s e l f , o r when­ e v e r a s i t u a t i o n a r i s e s w ith w h ic h Mrs* B, d o e s n o t f e e l a b l e t o cop© s h e b e co m es i l l , o r t h a t Mr. 0* w i l l a v o id a t * te m p tin g m a jo r p r o j e c t s b y c o n t i n u a l l y b u s y in g h i m s e l f w i t h d e ta ils *

He c a n becom e ev en m ore g e n e r a l in m r s t a t e m e n t s

a n d s a y t h a t w h e n e v e r a s i t u a t i o n a r i s e s w h ic h I n v o l v e s s e l f * e f m ! u a t i 0 n Hr* 1* i s c h a r a c t e r i s t i c a l l y I n f l u e n c e d b y d e e p f e e l i n g s o f I n f e r i o r i t y , o r t h a t Mr. E. i s a lw a y s i n ­ f l u e n c e d by h i s d e p e n d e n c e upon h i s m o th e r i n s i t u a t i o n s t h a t a r e p r e d o m i n a t e ly heterosexual* f h e s e a r e t h e t r a i t s w h ic h a r e c a l l e d c h a r a c t e r i s t i c , s t a b l e , o r g e n e ra lis e d *

Some a r e g e n e r a l i s e d o n ly t o r e ­

l a t i v e l y few v e r y s i m i l a r s i t u a t i o n s ; o t h e r s t o a g r e a t e r rang© a n d v a r i e t y o f s i t u a t i o n s .

The l a t t e r o n e s a r e mom

f r e q u e n t l y r e f e r r e d t o a s m ore b a s i c .

What we a r e r e f e r ­

r i n g t o h e r e i s a e o n s t r u e t d e te r m in e d by p l a c i n g some v a lu e Upon a l l t h e r e l e v a n t p a s t e x p e r i e n c e s i n sc f a r a s t h e y i n ­ f l u e n c e b e h a v i o r i n a p a r t i c u l a r w ay.

The c o n s t r u c t d o e s

n o t r e f e r e v e n to t h e e x p e r i e n c e s th e m s e lv e s b u t o n ly to one

4

o f them w h ic h we a b s t r a c t .

A lth o u g h t h e s e v a l u e s

c a n n o t a c t u a l l y b o s t a b l e , a s t h e r e a r e a lw a y s n m e x p e r i ­ e n c e s , some a r e so r e l a t i v e l y s t a b l e d o e t o t h e num ber a n d k i n d o f r e l e v a n t p a s t e x p e r i e n c e s t h a t t h e e f f e c t o f m o st

mm e x p e r i e n c e s i s i m p e r c e p t i b l e . When e x a m in in g a p a r t i c u l a r ty p e o f b e h a v i o r o n e h a s t o c o n s i d e r many su c h v a l u e s o r f o r c e s , a l l t h a t a r e c a l l e d f o r t h by t h e m eaning o r f u n c t i o n o f t h e s i t u a t i o n , a s a c t i n g i n dynam ic r e l a t i o n s h i p s .

I t i s w i t h a k n o w le d g e

o f t h e s e f o r c e s w o rk in g I n d y n am ic r e l a t i o n s h i p s t h a t t h e a p p lie d p s y c h o lo g is t can d e s c r ib e , c o n tr o l and p r e d ic t th e b e h a v io r o f in d iv id u a ls *

T h is i s t h e fram ew o rk i n w h ic h

t h i s s tu d y w as made a n d th r o u g h o u t t h e s tu d y we s h a l l b e c o n c e r n e d w i t h e v id e n c e t h a t v a l i d a t e s o r I n v a l i d a t e s I t *

M x s im JSt£ £M. A lth o u g h d i f f e r i n g c o n s i d e r a b l y among t h e m s e lv e s , s t u d i e s c o n c e rn e d w ith l e v e l o f a s p i r a t i o n h a v e i n common a s p e c if ic b a s ic p ro ce d u re, low s*

f h i s may be d e s c r i b e d a s f o l ­

A s u b j e c t i s © © n frea te d w ith some t a s k an d e i t h e r

b e f o r e o r a f t e r p r a c t i c e h e i s a s k e d t o make a s ta te m e n t o f how w e l l h e w i l l do on t h e t a s k .

A f t e r f a i l u r e o r su c ­

c e s s in re a c h in g t h i s e x p l i c i t l y s ta te d g o a l he I s a sk e d t o make a n o t h e r e s t i m a t e . tim e s ,

T h is may b e r e p e a t e d s e v e r a l

th r o u g h t h i s p r o c e d u r e i t 1® p o s s i b l e to s t u d y ,

f a i r l y o b j e c t i v e l y , t h e e f f e c t o f s u c c e s s and f a i l u r e on

#

tturn- e x p l i c i t l y

g o a ls o f m

i n d i v i d u a l , w h e re s u c c e s s

and f a i l u r e a r e d e fin e d a s re a c h in g o r n o t re a c h in g th e p r e ­ v i o u s l y m% g o a l . I n s p e a k in g o f l e v e l o f a s p i r a t i o n a s a t e c h n i q u e t h e w r i t e r I s a t t e m p t i n g t o r e m a in w i t h i n a n o p e r a t i o n a l fram e* to m

A lth o u g h t h e " l e v e l o f a s p i r a t i o n * ha® b e e n r e f e r r e d a "co n c e p t % a s an a t t r i b u t e o f i n d iv i d u a ls , and a s a

h i n d o f r e s p o n s e i n v a r i o u s s t u d i e s , t h e s e s t u d i e s d i f f e r so g r e a t l y i n t h e i r a s s u m p tio n s , p ro c e d u re ® a n d a lm s t h a t t h e r e is little

t o b i n d them t o g e t h e r , o t h e r t h a n t h e f a c t t h a t

som ew here i n t h e i r e x p e r i m e n t a l p r o c e d u r e t h e y u s e t h e s k e l e t o n t e c h n i q u e s t a t e d above*

In g e n e r a l one c an g ro u p

th e s e s tu d ie s i n to th r e e d i v i s i o n s , on th e b a s i s o f t h e i r p u rp o se s*

The f i r s t g ro u p i s i n t e r e s t e d I n d e te r m i n i n g

p r i n c i p l e s a p p lic a b le to th e th e o ry o f p e r s o n a lity .

T he

s e c o n d i s i n t e r e s t e d m a in ly I n t h e t e c h n i q u e I t s e l f ,

its

r e l i a b i l i t y , t h e g e n e r a l i t y o f t h e r e s p o n s e from o n e t a s k t o a n o t h e r , a n d t h e v a l i d i t y o f t h e a ssu m p tio n ® u s u a l l y m ade I n i n t e r p r e t i n g t h e r e s u l t s .

The t h i r d g ro u p a c c e p t s

t h e t e c h n i q u e a® a v a l i d m e a s u r in g d e v i c e o f some k i n d a n d u see i t

t o s tu d y o t h e r v a r i a b l e s .

T h u s, t h e r e h a v e h m n

s tu d io ® o f t h e l e v e l o f a s p i r a t i o n b e h a v i o r o f f e e b le m in d e d c h ild re n

(24),

® o h ls o p h r e n io s ( 4 4 ) , a n d m a n ic d e p r e s s iv e ® ( 1 3 ) .

th e t e c h n i q u e h a s a l s o b e e n a p p l i e d t o s t u d i e s o f m o t i v a t i o n i n s c h o o l c h i l d r e n ( 5 ) , v o c a t i o n a l a s p i r a t i o n ( 3 9 ) , a c a d e m ic f a c t o r s ( 9 ) , and p e r s o n a lity t r a i t s ( 2 7 ) .

6

T h e h i s t o r y o f s t u d i e s on t h e e f f e c t s o f s u c c e s s and f a l t e r * upon ch an g es i n th e I n d i v id u a l ’ s s t a te d g o a ls c a n h a r d l y b e g in w ith t h e f i r s t m a jo r s t u d y i n w h ic h t h e te rm l e v e l o f a s p i r a t i o n w as u s e d .

P re v io u s t h e o r e t i c a l

a n d e x p e r i m e n t a l s t u d i e s on s u c c e s s an d f a i l u r e h a v e b e e n r e l a t e d to t h i s s u b je c t a s w e ll a s c l i n i c a l d e s c r i p t io n s b y F re u d ($ 3 ) a n d p a r t i c u l a r l y A d l e r ( 2 ) and m ore r e c e n t s t u d ­ ie s m

f r u s t r a t l o n f a s f o r e x a m p le t h o s e o f R o se n sw e lg ( 4 b ) ,

B o l l a r d a n d Boob ( I X ) , and Boob a n d S e a r s ( I E ) *

H ow ever ,

th e p r e s e n t s e r ie s o f s tu d ie s can be c le a r l y tra c e d to th e w o rk b e g u n b y s t u d e n t s o f h m ln who w e re i n t e r e s t e d i n f o r ­ m u la t in g la w s c o n c e r n in g g o a l r e s p o n s e s .

Bombs (1 0 ) f i r s t

m e n tio n e d t h e t e n s " A n s p ra c h s n iv e fttt* , o r l e v e l o f a s p i r a ­ t i o n , i n a s t u d y o f a n g e r w h e re s u b j e c t s w e re o b s e r v e d d i ­ r e c t l y i n a d y n a m ic s i t u a t i o n .

Hoppe (3 2 ) f o llo w e d t h i s

s t u d y w i t h a similar s tu d y w h e re diroot o b s e r v a t i o n o f b e ­ h a v i o r w as m ade b u t t h e co n e e r a was w h o lly w i t h t h e la w s p e r t a i n i n g to th e change o f g o a ls fo llo w in g s u c c e s s an d fa ilu re . H oppe, h o w e v e r, f a i l e d t o d i s t i n g u i s h c l e a r l y b e ­ tw e e n i m p l i c i t a n d e x p l i c i t g o a l s a lt h o u g h r e c o g n i s i n g t h a t t h e s u b j e c t ’ s im m e d ia te o r m om entary g o a l w as d i f f e r e n t fro m h i s #I d e a l 11 g o a l*

The r e a l i t y o f t h e i d e a l g o a l c o u ld b e

C h an g ed b y e x p e r i e n c e s o f s u c c e s s a n d f a i l u r e .

He n o t e d

a l s o t h a t f a i l u r e d e p r e s s e d an d s u c c e s s e l e v a t e d t h e imme­ d ia te g o a l.

As H oppe w as n o t p r i m a r i l y c o n c e rn e d w i t h i n ­

d iv id u a l d if f e r e n c e s he f a i l e d to c o n s id e r th e e f f e c t o f d i f f e r e n t ta s k s o r d i f f e r e n t in s tr u c tio n ® upon th e c h an g e s l a l e v e l o f a s p i r a t i o n a lth o u g h h e n o te d t h a t v a s t i n d iv i d ­ u a l d if f e r e n c e s e x is te d In w hat h i s s u b je c ts c o n s id e re d su c c e ss and f a i l u r e .

Hoppe a l s o e x p r e s s e d t h e b e l i e f t h a t

t h i s t e c h n i q u e h a d p o s s i b i l i t i e s a s a m eth o d o f s tu d y i n g p e r s o n a l i t y t r a i t s a n d l i s t e d a m b i t io n , c a u t i o u s n e s s , s e l f * c o n f i d e n c e , f e a r o f i n f e r i o r i t y , and l a c k o f s u f f i c i e n t c o u ra g e to f a c e r e a l i t y a s t r a i t s In v o lv e d . I n a l a t e r s tu d y Hangman (2 9 ) v e e r e d fro m t h e th e n * re tie d

a p p ro a c h o f Hoppe a n d c o n c e rn e d h i m s e l f w ith t h e

t e c h n i q u e “a s a t e s t t o e v a l u a t e some p e r s o n a l i t y t r a i t s * 1# Me may h a v e r e c o g n i s e d some o f t h e difficulties w i t h H oppe*s instructions a l t h o u g h h e w r o te no d i r e c t c r i t i c i s m s .

He

d i d , h o w e v e r, c h a n g e t h e i n s t r u c t i o n s so t h a t a “bid** w as w ade e a c h t r i a l ,

th e s u b je c t b e in g p e n a lis e d i f he f e l l b e­

lo w h i s bid a n d r e c e i v i n g no c r e d i t o v e r i t i f h e s c o r e d h ig h e r th a n h i s b id .

Hausman a l s o s e t a d e f i n i t e num ber o f

t r i a l s a n d a s i n g l e t a s k , d a r t th r o w in g , w as u s e d ,

h ik e

H o p p e, h i s a p p ro a c h w as l a r g e l y q u a l i t a t i v e a lth o u g h t h e ra w d a t a h e o b t a i n e d p e r m i t t e d n u m e r ic a l t r e a t m e n t .

M ans-

m m $ h o w e v e r, was c o n c e rn e d p r i m a r i l y w ith t h e d i f f e r e n t p a t t e r n s o f r e s p o n s e shown b y h i s s u b j e c t s a n d d i s c u s s e d them i n r e l a t i o n t o su c h t r a i t s a s “i n s t a b i l i t y " ,

“p e r -

sev era n ce * * , “ s t u b b o r n n e s s " , “im p a ir e d J u d g m e n t" , a n d “c a u ­ tio u s n e s s

8

t h e t r e n d to w a rd t h e s t u d y ©f i n d i v i d u a l d i f f e r e n c e s

mm c o n t i n u e d b y F r a n k w hose a p p r o a c h , c h a r a c t e r i s t i c a l l y A m e ric a n , was q u a n t i t a t i v e ,

F r a n k ( 1 6 , 1 7 , 1©, 1 9) w as co n ­

c e r n e d w i t h b o t h t h e t h e o r e t i c a l v a lu e o f t h e r e s u l t ® o f s t u d i e s u s i n g t h i s t e c h n i q u e a n d w i t h th© p o s s i b i l i t i e s o f t h e t e c h n i q u e I t s e l f a s a m eth o d o f s t u d y i n g p e r s o n a l i t y * C o n s e q u e n tly , h e i n v e s t i g a t e d s u c h s u b j e c t s a s t h e r e l i a b i l ­ i t y o f t h e m e a su re s* t h e g e n e r a l i t y o f t h e I n d i v i d u a l t r a i t s t h a t d e te r m in e d t h e , r e s p o n s e i n t h e s i t u a t i o n , an d t h e p o s ­ s i b l e im p lic a tio n s o f o th e r fa c to rs *

A lth o u g h h e f a i l e d t o

c l a r i f y t h e d i f f i c u l t i e s e n c o u n te r e d d u e t o i n d i v i d u a l d i f ­ fe re n c e s l a th e in te r p r e t a t i o n o f th e in s tr u c tio n s and in t h e s e l e c t i o n o f t a s k s , h e d id b e g in th e s t a n d a r d i s a ti o n a n d q u a n t i f i c a t i o n of t h e r e s u l t s so t h a t t h e y w ould b e

amm a b l e t o f u r t h e r i n v e s t i g a t i o n s *

F ra n k d e f i n e d l e v e l o f

a s p i r a t i o n o p e r a t i o n a l l y a s “ t h e l e v e l ©f f u t u r e p e r f o r m a n c e i n a f a m i l i a r t a s k w h ic h a n i n d i v i d u a l , k n o w in g h i s l e v e l o f p a s t p e r f o r m a n c e i n t h a t t a s k , e x p l i c i t l y u n d e rta k e ® t o r e a c h 11.

I n d o in g t h i s h e w as g e t t i n g aw ay fro m t h e i m p l i c i t

h o p e s , w is h e s a n d d e s i r e s t h a t Hoppe w as i n t e r e s t e d i n b u t u n f o r t u n a t e l y n e i t h e r h e n o r f o l l o w i n g i n v e s t i g a t o r s who a c ­ c e p t e d h i s w o rk r e a l i s e d t h a t t h e e x p l i c i t f a c t o r s h e w as s t u d y i n g w e re n o t n e c e s s a r i l y t h e same a s t h e i m p l i c i t o n e s H oppe was I n t e r e s t e d i n .

F r a n k w as c o n c e r n e d m a in ly w i t h

o n e m e a s u r e , “t h e d i f f e r e n c e b e tw e e n t h e a v e r a g e l e v e l o f a s p i r a t i o n a n d m e d ia n l e v e l o f p e r f o r m a n c e * , a lt h o u g h h e

a l s o s u g g e s te d * b u t made l i t t l e

u s e o f , a m e a s u re o f “r i g i d ­

ity" ( l a t h e la n g u a g e o f L e w in ), w h ich c o u ld b e o b t a i n e d b y d i v i d i n g t h e num ber o f tim e s t h e s u b j e c t s h i f t e d o r c h a n g e d h i s a s p i r a t i o n b y t h e num ber o f t r i a l s # From hi® s t u d i e s F ra n k fo u n d t h e ( t e s t - r e t e s t )

re li­

a b i l i t y f o r th e d if f e r e n c e sc o re f o r th re e d if f e r e n t ta s k s t o rang® from #26 t o .7 2 .

t h e s e , h o w e v e r, w e re r a n k o r d e r

c o r r e l a t i o n s b a s e d on tw e lv e s u b j e c t s .

S im ila r ra n k o r d e r

c o r r e l a t i o n s w e re o b t a i n e d b e tw e e n t h e d i f f e r e n c e s c o r e o n a n y two o f t h e t a s k s an d an y o f th® two t e a t s . from -* 0 S t o p l u s .7 0 .

T h e s e ra n g e d

He c o n c lu d e d from m a n a ly s is o f

t h e s e r e s u l t s t h a t t h e r e w as some g e n e r a l i t y o f t h e t r a i t s d e te r m i n i n g t h e r e s p o n s e s .

F ra n k a l s o show ed t h a t ( 1 ) th®

a s p i r a t i o n e s t i m a t e s d i f f e r e d fro m random g u e s s i n g ,

( 2) d e­

p e n d in g on t h e d e g r e e o f 's i m i l a r i t y b e tw e e n t h e t e s t s , p e r ­ fo rm a n c e i n o n e t a s k a f f e c t e d t h e a s p i r a t i o n l e v e l i n a n ­ o t h e r , a n d (S ) t h a t some s u g g e s t i o n o f s e x d i f f e r e n c e s i n b e h a v i o r was p r e s e n t i n r e a c t i o n s t o th e l e v e l o f a s p i r a ­ tio n s itu a tio n .

L ik e Hoppe h e a g r e e d t h a t t h e in v o lv e m e n t

o f t h e “ ego * w as d e te r m in e d by t h r e e n e e d s i

(1 ) t h e n e e d

to k eep th e a s p i r a t i o n l e v e l a s h ig h a s p o s s ib le r e g a r d l e s s o f l e v e l o f p e r f o r m a n c e , w hich t e n d s t o d r i v e a s p i r a t i o n l e v e l a b o v e p e r f o r m a n c e ; (2 ) t h e n e e d t o make t h e l e v e l o f a s p i r a t i o n a p p ro x im a te th e l e v e l o f f u t u r e p e rf o rm a n c e a s c l o s e l y a s p o s s i b l e ( t h e n e e d t o k e e p i n c o n t a c t w ith r e a l ­ i t y ) w h ich t e n d s t o k e e p t h e l e v e l o f a s p i r a t i o n a t t h e

10

l e v e l . o f p e rfo rm an c e )- (3 ) th e n e e d t o a v o id f a i l u r e w h ic h te n d e d t o d r i v e t h e l e v e l o f a s p i r a t i o n b e lo w t h e l e v e l o f p e rfo rm a n c e ,

The f i r s t an d t h i r d n e e d a r i s e from t h e m ore

p r im a r y n e e d t o k e e p t h e *1'* o r 11e g o 8 l e v e l a s h ig h a s p o s ­ s ib le . U n f o r t u n a t e l y i n t h e s e s t u d i e s , m ost o f w hich w e re w ith I n s u f f i c i e n t s u b j e c t s , F r a n k 1® e o n o lu s io n s w ere n o t f u l l y b o rn o u t by h i s statist leal f i n d i n g s b u t n e v e r t h e l e s s many f o llo w in g s t u d i e s a c c e p te d h i s a s s u m p tio n s an d c o n c lu ­ s i o n s a n d u s e d t h e l e v e l o f a s p i r a t i o n a s a m ethod o f s tu d y ­ i n g su c h p ro b le m s a s t h e n a t u r e o f p s y c h o s e s , a c a d e m ic su c ­ c e s s , a n d o t h e r s o c i a l a s w e l l a s “p e r s o n a l ! t y “ f a c t o r s , w h ile t h e te c h n iq u e i t s e l f was s u b j e c t t o many u n c o n t r o l l e d a n d unknown f a c t o r s . A bout t h e same tim e U u c k n at (3 4 ), u s i n g a t e c h n iq u e i n w h ic h t h e s u b j e c t c h o s e o n e o f a s e r i e s o f m a z e s, g r a d e d i n d i f f i c u l t y , w i t h o u t an y v e r b a l c o m m ittm e n ts, fo u n d t h a t s u c c e s s a n d f a i l u r e i n o n e f i e l d may i m p o r t a n t l y d i s p l a c e t h e l e v e l o f a s p i r a t i o n i n a n o t h e r f i e l d , upw ard o r down­ w a rd , i f t h e r e i s a d e f i n i t e dy n am ic r e l a t i o n s h i p b e tw e e n t h e two f i e l d s a n d a n o t to o f i x e d l e v e l o f a s p i r a t i o n i n th e second f i e l d . T h ese i n d i c a t i o n s t h a t t h e n a t u r e o f t h e t a s k an d p r e v i o u s e x p e r ie n c e w ith t h e t a s k m ig h t i n f l u e n c e b e h a v i o r i n t h e s i t u a t i o n w as made m ore c l e a r b y s t u d i e s o f Chapman a n d Volkmann

(a)

a n d A n d e rso n an d B ra n d t

(5) .

Chapman an d

11

Volkm ann d e m o n s tr a te d t h a t k n o w le d g e o f w h at o t h e r s d i d up­ o n a t e s t (w h e re t h e s u b j e c t h a s n o t y e t a e t u & l l y p e rf o rm e d ) w i l l m a rk e d ly i n f l u e n c e t h e s u b je c ts ? s t a t e d a s p i r a t i o n d e ­ p e n d in g upon how th e y e v a l u a t e t h e o t h e r p e o p le w hose s c o r e t h e y know*

I n t h i s e x p e rim e n t o n e g ro u p o f s u b j e c t s w e re

t o l d t h a t , f o r a l i t e r a r y t e s t w ith a maximum o f 50 p o i n t s , e v e r t s s c o r e d a t 5 ? p o i n t s ; a s e c o n d g ro u p w ere t o l d t h a t s u b j e c t s s i m i l a r t© th e m s e lv e s s c o r e d 3 7 ; a t h i r d t h a t 3? w as t h e a v e r a g e f o r UFA w o r k e rs ; an d t h e f o u r t h was g i v e n no s u c h s u g g e s tio n *

The g ro u p t h a t w as t o l d t h a t e x p e r t s

s c o r e d 3? h a d t h e lo w e s t a s p i r a t i o n l e v e l ( 2 3 ) j t h o s e t o l d WfA w o r k e rs s c o r e d 3? h a d t h e h i g h e s t ( 3 3 ) ; a g a i n s t t h e i r own a v e r a g e t h e y a s p i r e d t© 31* a n d w i t h no s u g g e s t i o n t h e y a s p i r e d t o B6# as

well

A p p a r e n tly t h e r e i s a n o t h e r i n f l u e n c e h e r© ,

a s t h e s o c i a l o n e ; a te n d e n c y o f s u b j e c t s t o a s p i r e

to w a rd s t h e m id d le o f t h e d i s t r i b u t i o n when t h e y do n o t a c ­ t u a l l y know w h at t h e y th e m s e lv e s ©an d o , f o r n o t e v e n i n t h e c a s e o f t h e g ro u p a s p i r i n g a g a i n s t t h e f?A w o rk e rs d i d t h e e s t i m a t e s come up t o t h e s u g g e s te d 3 ? # w h ile t h e e s t i ­ m a te s o f t h e n o - s u g g e s t i o n g ro u p w ere p r a c t i c a l l y a t t h e m id d le o f t h e d i s t r i b u t i o n * A n d e rso n a n d B ra n d t s t u d i e d l e v e l o f a s p i r a t i o n i n a g ro u p o f s c h o o l c h i l d r e n who knew n o t o n ly t h e i r own p a s t p e rf o rm a n c e b u t c o u ld an d d i d com pare i t t o a l l o f t h e o t h e r c h ild r e n in th e c la s s *

U nder t h e s e c o n d i t i o n s t h e f u t u r e

e s t i m a t e s o f a l l g r o u p s d e te r m in e d by t h e h e i g h t o f p a s t

10

p e r f o r m a n c e te n d e d to w a rd m e d i o c r i t y ,

t h e g ro u p w ith t h e

h i g h e s t r a n k s s t a t e d f u t u r e g o a l s s i g n i f i c a n t l y lo w e r t h a n t h e i r a c h ie v e m e n t | t h e g ro u p w i t h th e l o w e s t a c h ie v e m e n t ra n k s s t a t e d g o a ls s i g n i f i c a n t l y h ig h e r th a n t h e i r p a s t a c h ie v e m e n t♦ I n a m ore r e c e n t s tu d y a o u l d (0 5 )* c r i t i c a l o f t h e a s s u m p tio n t h a t t h e e x p l i c i t g o a l s s e t b y t h e s u b j e c t s c o r ­ r e s p o n d e d t o t h e i m p l i c i t g o a l s o f H oppe, a n d o f F r a n k ’ s s t a t e m e n t o f t h e g e n e r a l i t y o f t h e t r a i t i n v o lv e d , s e t up a n e x p e r lM e n ta l i n v e s t i g a t i o n u s i n g s i x t a s k s g iv e n i n tw o s e s s i o n s a n d f o llo w e d t h e r e g u l a r e x p e r i m e n t a l p e r i o d w i t h

m In te rv ie w o f each s u b je c t.

A lth o u g h sh e r e c o g n i s e d t h e

d i f f i c u l t y w i t h t h e I n s t r u c t i o n s b e in g u s e d , s h e c o u ld n o t im p ro v e upon th e m , r e j e c t i n g H ausm an’ s i n s t r u c t i o n s o n a p r i o r i g ro u n d s.

C o rre la tin g th e d if f e r e n c e sc o re f o r th e

same s u b j e c t s an d d i f f e r e n t t a s k s some o f w h ic h d e a l t w ith f a m i l i a r an d some w i t h u n f a m i l i a r a b i l i t i e s , s h e fo u n d a m e d ia n i n t e r c o r r e l a t i o n o f t h e d i f f e r e n c e s c o r e o f o n l y . 0 9 . The p r o c e d u r e was so s e t u p , h o w e v e r, t h a t s u c c e s s o r f a i l ­ u r e i n o n e t a s k c o u ld e a s i l y i n f l u e n c e t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p b e ­ tw e e n p e rfo rm a n c e an d e s t i m a t e i n a n o t h e r so t h a t h e r s i x t a s k s m ig h t r e p r e s e n t s i x t r i a l s w i t h i n a l a r g e r l e v e l o f a s p ira tio n s itu a tio n .

In d e e d , th e i n t e r c o r r e l a t i o n s be­

tw e en t a s k s w e re a lm o s t tw ic e a s g r e a t when g iv e n i n t h e sam e s e s s i o n a s co m p ared t o t h o s e b e tw e e n t a s k s g iv e n I n a n o th e r s e s s io n .

15

tifowld d i d s u c c e e d i n e m p h a s iz in g t h a t t h e n a t u r e o f th e ta c it and s i t u a t i o n a l s o t t i n g in flu e n c e d th e b e h a v io r h u t s h e f a i l e d t o i n d i c a t e w h e th e r o r n o t t h e r e w e re r e l a ­ t i v e l y s ta h l© p e r s o n a l i t y f a c t o r s I n t e r a c t i n g w ith t h e s e s i t u a tio n a l d iffe re n c e s *

She a ls o # p a r t i c u l a r l y i n h e r i n ­

t e r v i e w m a t e r i a l , show ed how t h e s u b j e c t 1 g i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f t h e i n s t r u c t i o n s v a r ie d #

Mot o n l y w ere e x p l i c i t g o a l s

$ u i t * d i f f e r e n t fro m I m p l i c i t g o a l s b u t t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p b e tw e e n e x p l i c i t a n d i m p l i c i t g o a l s d i f f e r e d w id e ly fro m s u b je c t to s u b je c t*

O o u ld , u s i n g t h e m e d ia n o f t h e d i f f e r ­

en ce s c o re s f o r each in d iv id u a l, f a i l e d to f in d any s ig ­ n i f i c a n t c o r r e l a t i o n b e tw e e n t h e s e s c o r e s a n d g r a d e l e v e l # f h o r n d i k e I n t e l l i g e n c e E x a m in a tio n s c o r e s a n d s c o r e s f o r i n t r o v e r s i o n a n d d o m in a n ce fro m t h e i a s l o w S o c i a l P e r s o n a l ­ i t y In v e n to ry . d a r d n e r (2 2 ) , a c c e p t i n g a n o p e r a t i o n a l a p p ro a c h a s w e ll a s an o p e r a tio n a l d e f i n i t i o n o f l e v e l o f a s p i r a t io n , s e t o u t t o s tu d y t h e e x p l i c i t l y s t a t e d g o a l s f o r t h e i r own sak e*

He i n t r o d u c e d a s a c o n t r o l i n t h e s i t u a t i o n a p r e ­

a r r a n g e d s e r i e s o f p e r f o r m a n c e s c o r e s w h ic h w e re t h e sam e f o r each in d iv id u a l.

He co m p u ted a s e r i e s o f I n d i c e s a l l

r e l a t i n g t o t h e d i f f e r e n c e b e tw e e n h i s r e p o r t t o t h e su b ­ j e c t o f p e rf o r m a n c e an d t h e s u b j e c t 1® e s t i m a t e s .

C o n tra ry

t o 0 e u l d h© fo u n d a d e c id e d g e n e r a l i t y r e p o r t e d I n r e s p o n s e w i t h a n a v e r a g e i n t e r c o r r e l a t i o n on h i s m ain in d e x o f .5 ? fo r fo u r ta s k s .

M ore s i g n i f i c a n t , p e r h a p s , h e r e p o r t e d

14

t h a t ^ .D is c re p a n c ie s b e tw e e n a s p i r a t i o n l e v e l and p e rfo rm a n c e l e v e l te n d e d t o be p o s i t i v e b u t low when p e rfo rm a n c e w as d isp ro v in g r a p i d l y an d m a rk e d ly h i g h e r when t h e p e rfo r m a n c e w as f a l l i n g .

I n d i v i d u a l s te n d e d t o m a i n t a i n t h e same r a n k

w i t h i n t h e g ro u p w i t h r e s p e c t t o d i s c r e p a n c y s c o r e s when t h e >

performance c u rv e w as r i s i n g a s w e l l a s when i t was f a l l i n g . * 1 t h e s t a t i s t i c a l e v id e n c e on w h ic h t h e l a t t e r s t a te m e n t w as b a s e d w as n o t p r e s e n t e d . G a rd n e r f a i l e d c o m p le te ly t o o b t a i n a n y r e l a t i o n s h i p b e tw e e n p e r s o n a l i t y v a r i a b l e s a s m easu red by r a t i n g s c a l e s w i t h f o u r r a t e r s an d h i s e i g h t i n d i c e s I n t h e l e v e l of ac* piratlon- s i t u a t i o n .

A lth o u g h a d d in g a c o n t r o l on t h e s i d e

o f performance, G a rd n e r1® t e c h n iq u e s t i l l f a i l e d t o c o n t r o l o n t h e s i d e o f i n s t r u c t i o n s , was to o r i g i d t o p e r m it t h e f r e e expression o f b e h a v io r upon t h e p a r t o f th e s u b j e c t s , a n d r e l i e d to o h e a v i l y on I n d i c e s c o n c e rn e d o n ly w ith t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p b e tw e e n a s p i r a t i o n an d p e rfo r m a n c e and e a c h o n e b a s e d on t h e l i m i t e d sa m p le o f a s i n g l e e s t i m a t e . W hile t h e p r e s e n t s tu d y was i n p r o g r e s s S e a r s (5 8 ) p u b l i s h e d a r e p o r t o f a s tu d y o f th e l e v e l o f a s p i r a t i o n b e h a v i o r o f a c a d e m ic a lly s u c c e s s f u l an d u n s u c c e s s f u l

dren.

chil­

S e a r s s u c c e s s f u l l y t a c k l e d th e p ro b le m o f p r e v i o u s

a t t i t u d e an d e x p e r i e n c e w ith a t a s k by s e l e c t i n g h e r su b ­ j e c t s on th e b a s is o f th e n a tu r e o f t h e i r p re v io u s e x p e r i­

ence

w ith th e t a s k s .

She h a d t h r e e g r o u p s o f l i m i t e d sa m p le s

b u t m a tc h e d f o r a g e , sex and I n t e l l i g e n c e :

Group 1 u n s u c -

IB

e a s e f u l i n a l l s c h o o l s u b j e c t s , O roup 2 s u c c e s s f u l i n a l l , a ro u p 5 s u c c e s s f u l i n r e a d in g a n d u n s u c c e s s f u l i n a r i t h m e ­ tic *

t h e e x p e r i e n c e s o f s u c c e s s o r f a i l u r e w ere o f l o n g

s t a n d in g and S e a rs p l a u s i b l y assu m ed t h a t t h e s e g r o u p s c o u ld h e c a l l e d s e l f - c o n f i d e n t o r l a c k i n g i n s e l f - c o n f i ­ d e n c e w ith r e f e r e n c e t o t e s t s i n a s p e c i f i c s u b j e c t m a t t e r , f b # c h i l d r e n r e c e i v e d a s p i r a t i o n t e s t s i n r e a d i n g an d arithmetic* B e a rs fo u n d , a s m ig h t b e e x p e c te d from e a r l i e r w o rk , t h a t t h e c h i l d r e n w ith a h i s t o r y o f f a i l u r e i n a s u b j e c t h a d h i g h e r d i f f e r e n c e s c o r e s , on t h e a v e r a g e , t h a n su c ­ c e s s fu l on es.

S he a l s o fo u n d , h o w e v e r, t h a t th e y d i f f e r e d

©veil m ore m a rk e d ly i n t h e s p r e a d ©f t h e i r d i f f e r e n c e s c o r e s , t h e u n s u c c e s s f u l c h i l d r e n m aking up a lm o s t a l l t h e o a s e s a t t h e e x tre m e o f t h e d i s t r i b u t i o n .

E x p e r im e n ta lly in d u c e d

s u c c e s s b r o u g h t t h e r e a c t i o n ©f a l l s u b j e c t s I n t o a m ore hom ogeneous b u t s t i l l d i f f e r e n t i a l d i s t r i b u t i o n th a n d i d th e n e u tr a l c o n d itio n s o f s tim u la tio n .

I t was n o t made

c l e w w h e th e r t h e v a r i a b i l i t y o f th e f a i l u r e g ro u p was due t o t h e i r s p e c i f i c p r e v i o u s e x p e r ie n c e w ith t h e s u b j e c t m at­ t e r o f t h e t e s t o r w h e th e r b o t h t h e te n d e n c y ©f t h e d i f f e r ­ e n c e s c o r e s t o b e a t th e e x tre m e s o f t h e d i s t r i b u t i o n a n d t h e a c a d e m ic f a i l u r e i n s p i t e o f e q u a l i n t e l l i g e n c e w ere r e l a t e d t o some t h i r d , common f a c t o r . H ertzm an an d F e s t l n g e r ( 3 0 ) , K i l g a r d , B a it and Mar­ g a r e t ( 3 1 ) , an d O ould a n d L ew is (2 8 ) h a v e a l l c l e a r l y s u b -

16

s t e i t l & t e d t h e w ork o f A n d e rso n a n d B r a n d t a n d Chapman a n d f o l t o a n n showing t h e Im p o rta n c e o f s o c i a l s ta n d a rd ® i n t h e s o t t in g o f e x p l i c i t g o a ls ,

o th e r s tu d ie s u s in g th e l e v e l

o f a s p i r a t i o n t e c h n i q u e t o s tu d y o t h e r unknown f a c t o r s a r e n o t o f im m e d ia te i n t e r e s t t o t h i s s t u d y . I n su m m a risin g t h e s e s t u d i e s we f i n d :

( ! ) Uncon­

t r o l l e d f a c t o r s a r e p r e s e n t i n t h e u s u a l fo rm o f t h e i n ­ s t r u c t i o n s o f t h e n a t u r e o f v a r y i n g i n t e r p r e t a t i o n fro m s u b j e c t t o s u b j e c t o f what i s © a ile d f o r i n t h e way o f s t a t e ­ ment® o f g o a l® .

{2 ) When t h e p e rf o r m a n c e l e v e l o f o t h e r s i s

known t h e l e v e l o f t h e s u b j e c t 1 ® own p e rf o r m a n c e In f lu e n c e ® h is d iffe re n c e sc o re .

(3 ) E x p r e s s e d g o a l s ( a s p i r a t i o n l e v e l )

t e n t t o r e g r e s s to w a rd t h e mean o f p e rf o r m a n c e o f t h e g ro u p w i t h thorn t h e i n d i v i d u a l i n d e n t ! f l e a h i m s e l f .

(4 ) f h e d i f ­

f e r e n c e s c o r e f o r t h e same s u b j e c t f o r s e v e r a l t a s k s show s a m * r e l i a b l e c o n s is te n c y .

(5 ) A lth o u g h s e v e r a l i n v e s t i g a ­

t o r # h a v e g iv e n s l i g h t a t t e n t i o n

to o t h e r v a r i a b l e s no s i g ­

n i f i c a n t e x p e r i m e n t a l work h a s b e e n d o n e w ith a n y d e r i v e d s c o re s o th e r th a n th e d if f e r e n c e s c o r e , th e a b s o lu te l e v e l o f a s p i r a t i o n a n d t h e a b s o l u t e l e v e l o f p e rf o r m a n c e . ( 6 ) S u b j e c t s w ith a lo n g h i s t o r y o f f a i l u r e i n a t a s k d i f ­ f e r fro m t h o s e w ith a h i s t o r y o f s u c c e s s i n t h e h e i g h t an d sp re ad o f t h e i r d if f e r e n c e s c o re s .

(?) A ll in a l l ,

in

e v e ry l e v e l o f a s p i r a t io n s i t u a t i o n th e n a tu r e o f th e s i t u ­ a t i o n a l f a c t o r s and c e r t a i n I n d iv id u a l ^ p e r s o n a lity ” f a c ­ to r® I n t e r a c t t o d e te r m in e t h e r e s p o n s e .

H ow ever, l l t t i ©

17

o r n o t h i n g i s known a b o u t t h e s t a b i l i t y o r t h e n a t u r e o f th e s e p e rs o n a lity f a c to r s .

! ! » * ,» ,« .f

al

if e s

j ’P Q M C B

I t i s th e p u rp o se o f t h i s i n v e s ti g a t i o n to s tu d y t h o s e s t a b l e , i n d i v i d u a l *p e r s o n a l i t y *

fa c to rs , i f any,

w h ic h o p e r a t e I n t h e l e v e l o f a s p i r a t i o n s i t u a t i o n ,

th e

o p t im a l c o n d i t i o n s u n d e r w h ich to s tu d y t h e s e f a c t o r s w o u ld b e when t h e s i t u a t i o n a l f a c t o r s a r e a s c o n t r o l l e d a s p o s ­ s ib le .

C o n s e q u e n tly , t h e p ro b le m b r e a k s down I n t o s e v e r a l

s m a l l e r p r o b le m s ,

t h e s e may b e s t a t e d a s f o l l o w s 8 ( 1 ) t h e

s e l e c t i o n o f & c o n t r o l l e d s e t o f i n s t r u c t i o n s , (£ ) t h e s e ­ l e c t i o n o f a t a s k an d an e x p e r i m e n t a l p r o c e d u r e t h a t e lim ­ i n a t e s t h e p o s s i b l e I n f l u e n c e o f p e rfo r m a n c e a s shown i n p r e v i o u s s t u d i e s , ( 3 ) t h e c o m p a ris o n o f d e s c r i p t i o n s o f t h e p e r s o n a l i t y o f a v a r i e t y ©f s u b j e c t s w ith t h e r e s u l t ® o f th e a s p ir a tio n t e s t ,

(4 ) t h e s t u d y ©f t h e r e s u l t s a s a

w h o le r a t h e r t h a n r e s t r i c t i n g t h e a n a l y s i s o f r e s u l t s t o th e d if f e r e n c e s c o re . The c o n c e rn her© i s n o t w ith t h e v a l i d a t i o n ©f a new t e s t b u t a n a n a l y s i s o f a new m ethod o f s t u d y i n g p e r s o n a l ­ ity .

The p r im a r y p u r p o s e i s t© s tu d y i n d i v i d u a l s an d i n ­

d e e d i t I s h o p ed t h a t t h e s tu d y w i l l th ro w l i g h t on t h e l e v e l o f a s p i r a t i o n te c h n iq u e m a in ly b e c a u s e I t i s d e s i r e d t o th ro w l i g h t on t h e n a t u r e o f t h e i n d i v i d u a l s s t u d i e d . T h e r e f o r e a f i f t h p ro b le m m ig h t b e s t a t e d , t h e p a r t i a l s tu d y

IS

o f t l i t p e r s o n a l i t y o f t h e group® o f m ale and fe m a le h o s p i ­ t a l e m p lo y e e s , m a le a n d fe m a le e o l i e g e s t u d e n t s , c r i p p l e s a t t e n d i n g c o l l e g e , an d I n m a te s o f a s t a t e p e n a l fa rm , who make up t h e s u b j e c t s o f t h i s i n v e s t i g a t i o n .

When e x a m in in g

t h e s e p r o b le m s , we c a n n o t h e l p b u t e n t e r i n t o t h e o r e t i c a l q u e s t i o n s c o n c e rn in g t h e e x i s t e n c e o f s t a b l e p a t t e r n s © f b e h a v i o r an d t h e p o s s i b l e m anner i n w hich su c h t r a i t s , t h e y do e x i s t , i n t e r r e l a t e w ith o t h e r t r a i t s .

If

I t m u st b e

repeated h e r e t h a t t h i s s tu d y i s n o t s t u d y in g i n t r i n s i c w i s h e s , g o a l s , a n d h o p e s , b u t o n ly e x p r e s s e d g o a l s , f o r their own sake*

F o r t h i s r e a s o n , t h e te rm a s p i r a t i o n s h o u ld

p e r h a p s b e d ro p p e d from th e t i t l e o f t h i s p a p e r .

I t i s re ­

t a i n e d o n ly b e c a u s e t h e p r e v i o u s s t u d i e s u s i n g l e v e l o f a s ­ p i r a t i o n te c h n iq u e h a v e s t u d i e d t h e same t h i n g , w h e th e r o r n o t i t was t h e i r i n t e n t i o n .

It

OMAFflH XX

tm

x e s ta u c tio n s , m m $ s u b je c ts

m® ®mmm* rnoosmms O f u tm o s t im p o r ta n c e t o a n i n v e s t i g a t i o n s u c h a s t M s i s t h e p ro b le m o f t h e s e l e c t i o n o f i n s t r u c t i o n s , a t a s k , a n d t h e m e a s u r e s t o b e used*

It

seem s a p p a r e n t from

e a r l i e r s t u d i e s t h a t v a r i a t i o n i n i n s t r u c t i o n s an d t a s k s r e s u l t s I n m arked d i f f e r e n c e s i n t h e n a t u r e o f t h e d a t a ob­ ta in e d *

Con s e q u e n t 1st, t h e n a t u r e o f t h e t a s k , t h e i n s t r u c ­

t i o n s u s e d , an d t h e m e a su re s s t u d i e d , an d some r e a s o n s f o r t h e i r s e l e c t i o n a r e g iv e n b e lo w b e f o r e o u t l i n i n g t h e g e n e r a l p r o c e d u r e o f t h e e x p e rim e n t a n d l i s t i n g t h e s u b j e c t s u s e d .

iMasMfla st£ iM Sm ftM sm I n a tte m p tin g to f in d s a t i s f a c t o r y in s tr u c tio n ® , p r e ­ l i m i n a r y work w as d o n e w ith t e n s u b j e c t s u s i n g d a r t th ro w ­ in g a s th e ta s k .

E ach s u b j e c t to o k a b o u t t e n t r i a l s w ith

two s e t s o f i n s t r u c t i o n s an d t h e r e s u l t s f o r t h e two d i f f e r ­ e n t k i n d s o f i n s t r u c t i o n s w ere co m p a red .

T hey w ere l a t e r

I n t e r v i e w e d t o d e te r m in e how t h e y I n t e r p r e t e d t h e i n s t r u c ­ tio n s .

I n t h i s way f o u r d i f f e r e n t i n s t r u c t i o n s w ere com­

p a re d .

T h e se w e re :

tim e ?

(1 ) What do you e x p e c t t o g e t n e x t

(2 } What s c o r e w i l l y o u t r y f o r n e x t tim e ?

do you .tfy ia k you w i l l g e t n e x t tim e ?

( 3 ) " c r i p p l e s have a p a r t i c u l a r ty p e o f p e r s o n a l ­ i t y , n o r t h a t a l l c r i p p l e s a r e m a la d ju s te d .

I t can b e s t a t e d

a s a f a c t t h a t , jy§ j g ro u p , t h e s e s u b j e c t s have h a n d ic a p s w hich to some e x te n t l i m i t them i n s o c i a l , o c c u p a tio n a l, and s o c io - s e x u a l endeavor*

I t f o llo w s , I b e l i e v e , t h a t a© a

g ro u p th e y a r e more l i k e l y to th in k , o f th e m se lv e s a® b e in g h a n d ic a p p e d o r u n a b le to a ch iev e, a s h ig h a s o t h e r s , w hich I s o n ly a way o f s a y in g t h a t th e y have g r e a t e r f e e l i n g s o f in fe rio rity .

I would assume t h a t th e s e g r e a t e r g e n e r a l

f e e l i n g s o f I n f e r i o r i t y im ply a g r e a t e r need f o r a d e fe n s e r e a c t i o n o r s u p e r i o r i t y mechanism a g a i n s t th e la c k o f a c h ie v e * ffient th e y b e lie v e fo llo w s from t h e i r h a n d ic ap s*

I t seem®

n a t u r a l t h a t t h i s d e fe n s e w ould f r e q u e n t ly be o f th e ty p e t h a t say® in e f f e c t , *You see I am h a n d ic a p p e d , th ro u g h m f a u l t o f my own*

Too much c a n n o t b© e x p e c te d o f me*

f a c t , I t i s s u r p r i s i n g t h a t I can do a n y th in g w e ll.*

In SIml*

l& r to th e f e e l i n g s o f i n f e r i o r i t y , t h i s r e a c t i o n d e v e lo p s to some e x te n t from a s p e c i f i c r e a c t i o n to a s i t u a t i o n w h e re in th e c r i p p l e I s a c t u a l l y handicapped,* to a c h a r a c te r * I s t i c o r g e n e r a l i s e d mode o f ap p ro a ch to problem s i t u a t i o n s in v o lv in g s e l f - e v a l u a t i o n . I t sh o u ld b e em phasised t h a t we a r e t a l k i n g a b o u t a s t a t i s t i c a l d i f f e r e n c e betw een g ro u p s , n o t a b o u t I n d i v i d u a l s .

52

The a u th o r w ould a g re e t h a t th e s e a r e h y p o th e s e s , n o t f a c t s , h u t th e y a r e h y p o th e s e s t h a t have found c o n s id e r a b le sup­ p o r t I n th e e x p e rim e n ta l and c l i n i c a l work o f many p s y c h o l­ o g i s t s ( 3 i 3 8 , 4 5 ).

The a u th o r i s a ls o aw are t h a t such

s ta te m e n ts a s "general f e e l i n g s o f i n f e r i o r i t y 1* and “c h a r ­ a c t e r i s t i c mod© o f response** In v o lv e many a ssu m p tio n s con­ c e r n in g th e n a tu r e o f p e r s o n a l i t y and i t s d evelopm ent.

F u r­

t h e r d is c u s s io n o f th e s e , how ever, i s r e s e r v e d f o r a l a t e r c h a p te r . B ecause o f th e e q u al w e ig h tin g o f m ales and fem ale© i n b o th g ro u p s, I t i s p o s s ib le to compare th e c r i p p l e s a s a w hole to th e c o n t r o l s a s a w h o le.

T hese co m p ariso n s a r e

g iv e n i n T ab le 7 .

T a b le 7 Com parison o f C rip p le d and C o n tro l C o lle g e B tu d en ts on Two M easures B-Bcore

S.B,

B h if ts

8 .D .

C o n tro l Men

n m

2 .8 8

2 .8 5

9 .6 1

3 .8 7

C o n tro l Women

22

2 .6 6

2 .2 5

1 0 .6 4

4 .7 4

C rip p le d Men

11

.6 0

**

9 .0 9

C rip p le d Women

10

.4 5

# •»

1 2 .3 0

A H C rip p le d

21



S5#

2 .7 6

1 0 .6 0

4 .5 7

A l l C o n tro l

48

2.76*

2 .9 5

1 0 .1 1

4 .3 6

Croup

©#

©The c r i t i c a l r a t i o o f th e d i f f e r e n c e betw een th e B -sc o re o f c r i p p l e d and c o n tr o l s u b j e c t s i s 5 . 0 4 . in t h i s , a s w e ll a s i n a l l fo llo w in g t a b l e s , th e s i g n i f ic a n c e o f th e d iffe re n c e ® betw een means i s n o t g iv en u n le s s th e d i f f e r ­ ence I s g r e a t enough to a p p ro a ch s t a t i s t i c a l s i g n i f i c a n c e o r th e com parison i s n o t m ea n in g fu l f o r th e p u rp o se s o f t h i s in v e s tig a tio n . «® a re n o t g iv en h e re a s th e s e group© a r e to o s m a ll.

53

fh© o n ly m a jo r d i© p a rity betw een th e © r ip p le s and n o n - c r i p p l e s i® In t h e 0 - s c o r e . marked*

T h is d i f f e r e n c e l e q u i t e

He g ro u p i n th e s tu d y a p p ro a c h e s an a v e ra g e D~

s c o r e a s low a s t h a t found i n t h e © rip p le d group*

th is

d i f f e r e n c e c a n n o t be a c c o u n te d f o r on th e b a s i s o f p e rfo rm ­ a n c e h a n d ic a p , f o r none o f th e c r i p p l e d s u b j e c t s w ere a c ­ t u a l l y c l e a r l y h a n d ic a p p e d i n th e p e rfo rm a n c e o f t h i s t a s k , t h e o n ly c r i p p l e d s u b j e c t to h a v e a p e rfo rm a n c e below S3 p o i n t s was h a n d ic a p p e d o n ly i n h a v in g a s l i g h t lim p r e s u l t ­ i n g from one l e g b e in g to o s h o r t , w hich c o u ld n o t i n f l u e n c e h i s p e rfo rm a n c e on t h i s t a s k , and h i e D -s c o re (1 .1 8 ) was h i g h e r th a n th e a v e ra g e f o r h i s g ro u p .

The a v e ra g e p e rfo rm ­

a n c e f o r c r i p p l e s was 2 7 .1 , f o r n o n - c r i p p l e s 2 8 .1 .

Seven

o f th e c r i p p l e d g ro u p had a s p i r a t i o n s c o n s id e r a b ly lo w e r th a n t h e i r a c h ie v e m e n t.

The 0 - s c o r e o f o n ly f i v e o f t h e

© r ip p le s e q u a lle d o r exceeded th e mean o f th e c o n t r o l g ro u p . &s t h e r e a r e no o t h e r s e l e c t i v e f a c t o r s t h a t a r e known, i t i s n e c e s s a r y to c o n c lu d e t h a t t h i s d i f f e r e n c e i s a s s o c i a t e d w ith th e c r i p p l i n g ( t h a t i s , to th e e n t i r e s e r i e s o f r e a c t i o n s and e x p e r ie n c e s each I n d i v id u a l c r i p p l e h a s c o n c e rn in g h i s p h y s i o l o g ic a l an o m aly ). I f we a c c e p t th e a ssu m p tio n s c o n c e rn in g th e p e rs o n ­ a l i t y o f th e c r i p p l e s a s a g ro u p , th e n i t w ould a p p e a r t h a t w here t h e r e a r e d e e p e r f e e l i n g s o f i n f e r i o r i t y com pensated f o r by a f e e l i n g t h a t one c a n n o t be e x p e c te d to do v e r y w e l l , th e n th e D -sc o re te n d s t o b e s i g n i f i c a n t l y lo w e r th a n

54

l a a eoati*© ! group*

I n t h i s ©as® w© c a n n o t t a l k a b o u t

m a la d ju s tm e n t, f o r u n d o u b te d ly f o r some o f th e s e e a s e s s u c h a n a t t i t u d e r e p r e s e n t s a good a d ju s tm e n t to t h e i r lim ita tio n s *

I t i s p r o b a b le , h o w ev er, t h a t many o f t h e

o a s e s h a v e o v e r - r e a c t e d to o r o v e r - e s t i m a t e d t h e e x t e n t o f t h e h a n d ic a p .

I t i s im p o r ta n t h e r e a l s o t o r e - e m p h a s is e

t h a t t h i s r e s p o n s e was t o a s i t u a t i o n i n w hich © rip p lin g i n I t s e l f d id n o t e n t e r a s a h a n d ic a p a n d , t h e r e f o r # , t h e e x i s t e n c e o f t h i s d i f f e r e n c e b etw een c r i p p l e s and c o n t r o l s I s I n d i c a t i v e o f th e o p e r a t io n o f a g e n e r a l i s e d b e h a v io r p a tte rn *

55

CHAPTER VX tBQCF V# PRISON INMATES

The d e t a i l e d s tu d y o f BO p r i s o n in m a te s c o n s t it u t e ® t h e m ain v a l i d i t y s tu d y o f t h i s s e r i e s *

The i n t e n t i o n was

t o exam ine t h i s g ro u p c a r e f u l l y # make some d i a g n o s i s o r g ro u p c l a s s I f i c a t io n on th e b a s i s o f t r a i t s w hich p r e v i o u s s tu d y h a d i n d i c a t e d w ere in v o lv e d i n t h e ta s k # an d t h e n g i v e t h e a s p i r a t i o n t e s t t o t h e s e g ro u p s .

C o n se q u e n tly #

t h e s u b j e c t s w ere f i r s t s e l e c t e d by t a k i n g I n o r d e r e v e r y w hit® p r is o n e r # o f a v e ra g e o r b e t t e r th a n a v e ra g e i n t e l l i ­ g e n c e , b e tw ee n

10

and 05 y e a r s o f age# who e n te r e d t h e

p r i s o n i n a d e f i n i t e tim e i n t e r v a l *

F ifty * .tw o s u b j e c t s

w e re s e l e c t e d i n t h i s way and 83 more w ere l a t e r s e l e c t e d b y t a k i n g c a s e s w hich m ig h t b r i n g t h e N o f some o f t h e g ro u p s t o t h e p o i n t w here s t a t i s t i c a l t r e a tm e n t was p o s ­ s ib le *

I t s h o u ld be n o te d t h a t no a tte m p t was made t o ob­

t a i n r e p r e s e n ta tiv e o r " ty p ic a l c rim in a ls " .

Indeed# i n ad­

d i t i o n t o t h e s e l e c t i v e f a c t o r s l i s t e d th e n a t u r e o f t h e p o p u l a t i o n o f t h i s i n s t i t u t i o n i s c o n s i d e r a b ly d i f f e r e n t from m ost o t h e r s .

I n th e main# th e p r i s o n e r s a t t h e I n d i ­

a n a S t a t e P e n a l Farm w ere t h e r e on s h o r t s e n te n c e s f o r m in o r c h a rg e s*

The e x p e r im e n te r I n te r v ie w e d a l l o f t h e s e

@0 c a s e s , th e i n t e r v i e w t a k i n g a n a v e ra g e o f 1 to 1 .5 h o u r s . C o m p lete e f f o r t s w ere made t o d e m o n s tra te t o th e In m a te s

56

t h a t t h e e x p e r im e n te r was an o u t s i d e r d o in g s c i e n t i f i c r e ­ s e a r c h an d t h a t a l l m a t e r i a l w ould b e s t r i c t l y c o n f id e n ­ tia l*

In m a te s , s u s p i c i o u s an d e v a s iv e w ith p r i s o n o f f i ­

c i a l s , w i l l f r e q u e n t l y "open up* w ith o u t s i d e r s a n d , I n f a c t , e n jo y t a l k i n g w ith them* An e f f o r t was made to g e t a t im p o r ta n t f a c t u a l ma­ t e r i a l c o n c e rn in g ( ! ) e a r l y home and f a m ily l i f e , s i b l i n g a n d p a r e n t a l a t t i t u d e s , ( 2 ) h i s t o r y o f s o c io -e c o n o m ic s t a n d i n g , (3 ) o c c u p a ti o n a l h i s t o r y , (4 ) e d u c a t i o n a l h i s ­ t o r y , (5 ) c r i m in a l h i s t o r y , ( 6 ) se x h i s t o r y , and ( ? ) h i s ­ t o r y o f h e a l t h , h a n d ic a p s and b e h a v io r d i s o r d e r s .

In ad­

d i t i o n t o t h e s e , h i s p h y s i c a l a p p e a ra n c e and b e h a v io r i n t h e i n t e r v i e w w ere e v a lu a te d . A lso a v a i l a b l e t o t h e e x p e r im e n te r w ere t h e r e g u l a r p r i s o n r e c o r d s an d F . B . I . r e c o r d s . The d i r e c t o r o f c l a s s i f i c a t i o n a t th e p r i s o n , 3, an e x p e r ie n c e d c l i n i c a l p s y c h o l o g i s t , exam ined an d made in d e ­ p e n d e n t c l a s s i f i c a t i o n o f th e same c a s e s .

L i m i ta t io n s on

h i s tim e , h o w ev er, made f o r a d i v e r s i t y o f m ethods o f ob­ t a i n i n g in f o r m a ti o n .

I n some c a s e s he h a d an in d e p e n d e n t

i n t e r v i e w i n a d d i t i o n to t h e p r i s o n and F .B .X . r e c o r d s , t h e s i g n i f i c a n c e o f w hich h e was o f t e n b e t t e r a b le t o i n 1

B r& te fu l acknow ledgm ent i s made t o Mr. L o u is D* C ohen, D i r e c t o r o f C l a s s i f i c a t i o n , and to Mr. F lo y d Hammer, S u p e r in te n d e n t o f t h e I n d ia n a S t a t e P e n a l Farm , f o r p u t t i n g t h e i r f a c i l i t i e s a t th e d i s p o s a l o f th e a u t h o r , and f o r Mr. C ohen*s a i d i n t h e c l a s s i f i c a t i o n o f s u b j e c t s .

57

t e r p r e t th a n t h e a u th o r*

In o t h e r s h e may hav e known t h e

c m q p e r s o n a l l y an d I n s t i l l o t h e r s h e u s e d o n ly th e p r i s o n

r e c o r d s and r e f e r r e d to th e w r i t t e n r e c o r d s o f t h e e x p e r i ­ m e n te r 1® i n t e r v i e w o n ly f o r q u e s t io n s o f f a c t* F o u r m ain g ro u p s w ere d i s t i n g u i s h e d on th e b a s i s o f h i s t o r y o f s u c c e s s and f a i l u r e , r e a c t i o n to s u c c e s s and f a i l u r e a n d , p a r t i c u l a r l y , b e h a v io r i n p ro b lem s i t u a t i o n s I n v o lv in g s e l f - e v a l u a t i o n .

Exam ples o f su c h s i t u a t i o n s a r e

c h o ic e o f o c c u p a tio n , e f f o r t to e s t a b l i s h s o c i a l c o n t a c t s , d e te r m in in g w h e th e r o r n o t t o Hd a t e w, w h e th e r o r n o t to m a rry , c o n tin u e s c h o o l, t r y o u t f o r th e b a s k e t b a l l te a m , e tc ,

A l o g i c a l , a s w e ll a s c l i n i c a l a n a l y s i s o f th e p o s ­

s i b i l i t i e s o f b e h a v io r gave t h e f o llo w in g f o u r k i n d s ; (1 ) E v a lu a tio n o f s e l f on th e b a s i s o f p a s t e x p e r ie n c e w ith s l i g h t d e v i a t i o n i n t h e d i r e c t i o n o f t h e c u l t u r a l l y dem anded I n c r e a s e o v e r a c t u a l a c h ie v e m e n ts o f t h e p a s t , ( 2 ) u n d e r e v a lu a tio n o f s e l f o r o v e r-c a u tio u s e v a lu a tio n o f s e l f to a v o id t h e p o s s i b i l i t y o f f a i l u r e ,

(3) m arked o v e r-e v a lu a 1 1 o n

o f s e l f I n an e f f o r t t o e s t a b l i s h o n e s e l f I n o n e ’ s own o r o t h e r p e o p le ’ s e y e s , (4 ) i n a b i l i t y to re a c h a d e c i s i o n , o r c o n s t a n t t e n s io n on a r r i v i n g a t a d e c i s i o n b e c a u se o f con­ f l i c t o f d e s i r e s to fo llo w b o th on© and two a b o v e, o r v a c i l ­ l a t i o n s betw een two o r more s o lu tio n ® . Th© l a s t

t h r e e o f t h e s e g ro u p s a r e a l l c h a r a c t e r i s e d

by s tro n g f e e lin g s o f I n f e r i o r i t y ,

th e

firs t

g roup can b©

c h a r a c t e r i z e d a s n o rm al i n th e c u l t u r a l s e n s e o f t h e w ord.

58

f o r p u r p o s e s o f nam ing th e s e a r e r e f e r r e d to a s t h e n o rm a l, t h e d e fe a te d * t h e o v e n -c o m p e n sa te d , and t h e c o n f l i c t t e n ­ s io n g ro u p , V S, V

0

th e y c o rre s p o n d to e x p e rim e n ta l G roups V A,

, and ¥ D, r e s p e c t iv e ly *

A lth o u g h o r i g i n a l l y we r e f e r r e d t o h in d s o f b e h a v ­ i o r , we a r e now t a l k i n g a b o u t c o rr e s p o n d in g g roups* Jump i s p a r t i a l l y un w arran ted *

T h is

I t i s n o t e x p e c te d t h a t

an y o f t h e i n d i v i d u a l s w i l l a lw a y s a c t th e same way r e g a r d l e s s o f t h e p a r t i c u l a r s i t u a t i o n and i t s m eaning b u t t h a t i f we exam ine th e e n t i r e h i s t o r y o f r e a c t i o n s o f t h i s ty p e t h a t o n e o f t h e s e method® ( o r l a c k o f m ethod i n th e c a s e o f t h e c o n f l i c t t e n s i o n g ro u p ) I s p re d o m in a n t.

A c tu a l p a s t

an d p r e s e n t b e h a v io r was t h e b a s i s f o r t h e classification an d a s h o r t d e s c r i p t i o n was made of th o s e c a s e h i s t o r y f a c ­ t o r s w hich w ere a s s o c i a t e d w ith th e k in d o f i n d i v i d u a l and th e ty p e o f r e s p o n s e re q u ire d *

A l l o f t h e s e , how ever, w ere

n o t d i r e c t l y c o n c e rn e d w ith b e h a v io r In a s i t u a t i o n c a l l i n g f o r s e l f - e v a l u a t i o n b u t m ig h t sim p ly b e a d e s c r i p t i o n o f any e v e n t w hich m ig h t I n f lu e n c e t h i s re s p o n se *

In o rd e r to

make t h e b a s i s f o r c l a s s i f i c a t i o n e x p l i c i t th e a c t u a l c l a s ­ s i f i c a t i o n was b a s e d on th e d e g re e o f c o n fo rm ity to t h e c r i t e r i a g iv e n below*

T hese c r i t e r i a a r e made up o f t h e

ty p e o f i n f o r m a tio n w hich was a c c e s s i b l e i n t h e s e p a r t i c u ­ l a r cases.

59

A, Normal; C rim es u n d e r th e l e a d e r s h i p o f o t h e r s who a r e s o c i a l l y a c c e p te d i n d i v i d u a l s , p o s s i b l y u n d e r t h e i n ­ f lu e n c e o f a lc o h o l o r o f a s e a l - a c c e p t e d n a tu r e such a s d r i v in g w h ile u n d e r i n f lu e n c e o f a lc o h o l. S o c i a l , s e x u a l and o c c u p a tio n a l a d ju s tm e n t f a i r l y w e ll r e ­ l a t e d to a b i l i t i e s and p a s t e x p e r ie n c e s . S o c ia l h i s ­ t o r y f r e q u e n t l y shows s t a b l e home b ack g ro u n d . May h ave c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f b o th g ro u p s B and C b u t n e i ­ t h e r one to an e x tre m e , ale© a b se n c e o f u n u su a l de­ g r e e o f t r a i t s m entioned i n th e c o n f l i c t - t e n s i o n g ro u p . B* Defeated; L acks s e l f - c o n f i d e n c e . O v e r - c a u tio u s . De­ p e n d e n t; f o llo w s r a t h e r th a n l e a d s . A ccep ts p r i s o n s i t u a t i o n . Has l i t t l e hope f o r norm al a d ju s tm e n t o u t s i d e o f p r i s o n . C rim es f r e q u e n t ly u n d e r l e a d e r ­ s h ip o f o t h e r s o r u n d e r th e in f lu e n c e o f a lc o h o l. May u se a lc o h o lis m a s s o l u t i o n o f overw helm ing p ro b ­ lem®. H is to r y o f b e in g **011 th e bum8, f r e q u e n t m ir a t i o n s , w orking and bumming. U nsure o f s o c i a l and am lly t i e s ; a t t i t u d e o f Hn© on® w ants me8 a lth o u g h t h i s i s n o t alw ays e x p re s s e d v e r b a l l y . S o c ia l h i s ­ to r y r e f l e c t s lo o s e t i e s and fa m ily d is o r g a n is a tio n * May be a f r a i d t o g e t m a rrie d ; p e rh a p s one d iv o r c e and now d is c o u ra g e d ; p e rh a p s m a rrie d and a f r a i d to have c h i l d r e n . P o o r o c c u p a tio n a l a d ju s tm e n t and ach iev em en t i n r e l a t i o n to i n t e l l i g e n c e l e v e l and a b i l i t y . May demand sym pathy. R e tr e a t from p ro b ­ lem s by g iv in g up e a s i l y .

f

C. O ver-C om pensated; T r ie s t o b e a l e a d e r . A g g re s s iv e . f r e q u e n t l y a h i s t o r y o f f i g h t i n g . H is to r y o f a th ­ l e t i c p a r t i c i p a t i o n . Show© b ra v a d o ; t r i e s to g iv e Im p re ss io n o f b e in g to u g h and in d e p e n d e n t. F re ­ q u e n tly u n m a rrie d . E g o c e n tr ic . B o a s tf u l o f s e x u a l and o t h e r a c c o m p lish m e n ts. E x p re ss e s g r e a t c o n f i ­ d en ce i n th e f u t u r e . F re q u e n t h i s t o r y o f tr u a n c y . A m b itio u s. E a r ly c rim e s l i k e l y to b e due to d e s i r e f o r p r e s t i g e o r H o have a good tim e 8 o r f o r 8 ex­ c ite m e n t8. O v e r-e s tim a te s h i s a b i l i t y . R e p re s s e s fa ilu re s . Demands a d m ir a tio n . B, O o n f lic t- T e n s lo n ; U n s ta b le , e g o c e n tr i c , f r e q u e n t ly i n ­ t r o s p e c t i v e , “n e rv o u s 8 , im p u ls iv e , e m o tio n a lly im­ m a tu re . U nable to make d e c i s i o n s , f r e q u e n t ly throw n i n t o c o n f l i c t by p ro b le m s. G e n e r a lly u n d e r t e n s i o n . A tte m p ts to ©scape p ro b lem s when p o s s i b l e . May have c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f e i t h e r o r b o th o f 3 and C g ro u p s When he i s f a c in g a s i t u a t i o n he c a n n o t © scape. H ie-

60

t o r y o f unhappy lo v e a f f a i r s and d l v o r e e s . F re q u e n t h i s t o r y o f s ic k n e s s and d i s a b i l i t y * F re q u e n t h i s ­ t o r y o f b e h a v io r d i s o r d e r s . E n e u r i s i s , " S t. V itu s P a n c e 11 , ns h a k in g * , * t re m b lla g * , n i ghtroares , s l e e p ­ w a lk in g , In so m n ia, u n u s u a lly bad te m p e r, c h i l d l i k e b e h a v io r , h y p o c h o n d r ia s is , s t u t t e r i n g , sex m alad­ ju s tm e n t. Heeds re a s s u ra n c e * Pue to l a c k o f in f o r m a tio n , p o s s i b l e d e l i b e r a t e f a l ­ s i f i c a t i o n upon th e p a r t o f th e s u b j e c t s , and th e wonq u a n t i t a t i v e n a tu r e o f th e c r i t e r i a i t was n o t alw ay s e a sy to c l a s s i f y e ac h c a s e .

Where t h e r e was an y q u e s tio n a t a l l

i n th e clarification, a second ©hole© was l i s t e d .

W ith in

e a c h g ro u p th e c a s e s were a rra n g e d in a ro u g h ra n k o r d e r according to th e d e g re e o f c lo s e n e s s t o t h e c r i t e r i a .

The

same p ro c e d u re was u se d by th e D i r e c t o r o f C l a s s i f i c a t i o n . The f i n a l p la c e m e n t was th e n m ade, by t a k in g f i r s t a l l t h e c a s e s i n w hich b o th ra te r® a g re e d in t h e i r f i r s t c h o ic e . The o t h e r c a s e s w ere p la c e d i n th e g ro u p i n w hich th e y r e ­ c e iv e d a r a t i n g o f f i r s t c h o ic e from one r a t e r end seco n d b y a n o th e r*

I f th e y r e c e iv e d su c h r a t i n g s i n two g ro u p s

th e y w ere p la c e d a c c o rd in g to t h e ra n k s o f th e p la c e m e n ts . I t was p o s s i b l e I n t h i s way t o c l a s s i f y a l l b u t two o f t h e eases.

These w ere b o th p la c e d i n th e c o n f l i c t - t e n s i o n

g ro u p a f t e r J o i n t c o n s u l t a t i o n o f th e two r a t e r s . I t can be seen t h a t t h e r e i s an o b v io u s la c k o f p r e ­ c i s e n e s s w ith t h i s method and th e r e s u lt® C ould n o t b e e x ­ p e c te d t o show more th a n s t a t i s t i c a l d i f f e r e n c e s betw een g r o u p s , r a t h e r th a n c l e a r - c u t d i f f e r e n c e s o f a l l th e i n d i ­ v i d u a l s i n one g roup a s com pared to th e i n d i v i d u a l s o f an­

61

o th e r. One w ain pro b lem was to d e te rm in e w hat p la c e m e n t sh o u ld h e g iv e n th o s e c a s e s in w hich th e a g g r e s s iv e n e s s , b o a s t i n g , e t c . , w ere p u re ly on a v e r b a l l e v e l w h ile t h e a c t u a l b e h a v io r o f th e i n d i v i d u a l i n a r e a l s i t u a t i o n d i d n o t c o rre s p o n d to h i s v e rb a l e x p re ss io n #

Once I t was d®~

e ld e d n o t to in c lu d e such i n d i v i d u a l s I n th e oveavcom peng&ted g ro u p , I t was h a rd to f i n d I n d i v id u a ls from t h i s p o p u la tio n who d id f i t i t .

I n s p i t e o f d e f i n i t e e f f o r t to

g e t a s many a s 'p o s s i b l e , ag reem en t was re a c h e d on o n ly se v e n case® ,

T h is group c a n n o t b e h a n d le d s t a t i s t i c a l l y

and th e few score® o b ta in e d a r e so v a r i e d a s to make t h e

mean s c o r e s o f no v a lu e . fwo o t h e r g ro u p s w hich o v e rla p th e fo u r g iv e n above a r e t r e a t e d a® e x p e rim e n ta l g ro u p s .

The f i r s t o f t h e s e ,

c a l l e d th e u n s e le c te d g ro u p , c o n s is te d o f th e 52 c a s e s who w ere c o n s e c u tiv e a d m iss io n s and who met th e p r e v io u s ly men** tlo n e d a g e , c o l o r , and i n t e l l i g e n c e c r i t e r i a #

The se c o n d ,

t h e a lc o h o l i c g ro u p , was composed o f i n d i v i d u a l s who h a v e had two o r more com m ittm ents f o r a lc o h o lis m o r had two o r more com m ittm ents i n which i n t o x i c a t i o n p la y e d a m a jo r r o l e In th e crim e#

T hese p e o p le had t o be h a b i t u a l r a t h e r th a n

s p o r a d ic d rin k er® w ith some dependence upon a lc o h o l.

T h ere

was p e r f e c t ag reem en t betw een th e two r a t e r a I n c l a s s i f y i n g i n d i v i d u a l s i n t h i s g ro u p .

The d i s t r i b u t i o n o f o a s e s o f

t h e s e two o v e rla p p in g g ro u p s i n th e fo u r “p e r s o n a l i ty * g ro u p s 1® shown in T ab le

8

.

62

T a b le 8 D i s t r i b u t i o n o f U n s e le c te d In m a te s an d A lc o h o lic In m a te s i n th e F o u r P e r s o n a l i t y G roups as

Hom & l

D e fe a te d

O v e rco m p e n sa te d

C o n flic tT e n s io n

C n s e le o te d

82

12

16

0

24

A lc o h o l! 0

23

5

16

0

7

The u n s e l e c t e d group a p p e a r s t o b e h e a v i l y w e ig h te d w ith i n d i v i d u a l s c l a s s i f i e d i n t h e C o n llc t- T e n s io n Group* t h e a l c o h o l i c s w ith i n d i v i d u a l s i n th e D e fe a te d Croup* T h ese r e s u l t s c a n n o t be ta k e n a s r e p r e s e n t a t i v e o f " c rim ­ in a ls * a s a c la s s . T a b le 9 g iv e s th e mean s c o r e s f o r a l l f i v e g ro u p s an d f o r t h e W o rc e s te r S t a t e H o s p it a l m ale group* w hich I s a p p ro x im a te ly o f t h e same c u l t u r a l and s o c io -e c o n o m ic b a c k ­ g ro u n d a s th e c r i m in a l p o p u l a t i o n .

T a b le 9 Mean S c o re s f o r In m a te G roups G roup

I

D -S core

8 .D .

S h ifts

8 .9 .

W o rc e s te r s t a t e Ho ep 1 t s l —l i d e

22

2 ,2 9

1 .0 9

8*71

4 .1 1

hem al

21

2 .4 1

2 .1 4

8 .2 4

3 .5 8

D e f e a te d

21

1 .7 9

4 ,0 2

7 .8 9

3 ,9 8

C o n flic t— T e n s io n

31

1 .9 8

2 .5 5

8 .0 0

8 .0 1

U n s e le c te d

52

2 .2 3

2 .8 6

8 .0 4

4 ,7 2

A lc o h o lic

23

2 .3 0

3 .8 6

7 ,7 0

5 ,2 1

The r e s u l t s o f t h i s l a t t e r g ro u p &r© g iv e n to show t h e m arked s i m i l a r i t y betw een I t and th e norm al group o f c rim ­ in a ls ,

The s i m i l a r i t y o f th e s e g ro u p s s u g g e s ts t h a t th e

m ethod o f s e l e c t i n g no rm als ( i n th e se n se o f a v e ra g e i n d i ­ v i d u a l s ) was to some d e g re e s u c c e s s f u l . Du© to th e sm a ll H* a and th© ty p e s o f d i s t r i b u t i o n s p r e s e n t , co m p ariso n o f m eans, e x a m in a tio n s o f

8

.D ,* © and

c a l c u l a t i o n o f CE1s do n o t g iv e a r e a l p i c t u r e o f th© d i f f e r e n c e s shown.

Sim ple g ro u p ed fre q u e n c y d i s t r i b u t i o n s

p r e s e n t e d i n F ig u re s 3 and 4 show th e a c t u a l d i s t r i b u t i o n o f sc o re s. C o n s id e rin g T ab le

8

, F ig u re 3 and F ig u r e 4 , d i f f e r ­

e n c e s betw een in m a te g ro u p s a r e e v id e n t.

The norm al g ro u p

d i f f e r s from th© d e f e a te d g roup I n t h a t t h e r e i s a s l i g h t te n d e n c y f o r th e d i s t r i b u t i o n o f s c o re s to s l i d e to w ard th© lo w e r ( n e g a tiv e ) end o f th e s c a l e .

The most p ro m in e n t

^ d i f f e r e n c e i s th e p re s e n c e o f extrem e s c o r e s in th e De­ f e a t e d Group w here t h e r e a r e none i n th e Mormal G roup.

Ap­

p r o x im a te ly o n e - t h i r d o f th e D e fe a te d Group f a l l o u t s i d e th© l i m i t s o f th© fo rm a l G roup.

T h is r e s u l t I s c o n s i s t e n t

w ith t h e f in d in g s o f b e a rs ( 5 2 ) , who found t h a t s t u d e n ts w ith a h i s t o r y o f f a i l u r e showed a s i m i l a r ten d e n cy tow ard ex tre m e s c o r e s .

In th© c a se o f b e a r s 1 s u b j e c t s th e a d d i­

t i o n a l f a c t o r o f knowing t h a t t h e i r p e rfo rm a n c e i n th e t a s k b e in g u se d was p o o r e r th a n th e a v e ra g e a c te d to p ro d u c e an a d d i t i o n a l te n d e n c y to push th e s c o r e s to w ard th e u p p e r end

64

F ig u r e

6

t e m p e d F re q u e n c y D i s t r i b u t i o n o f D -S co re s f o r P r i s o n In m a te s and W o rc e s te r S t a t e H o s p ita l M ales* M id p o in ts o f I n t e r v a l s te m p

3N

f . 3 4 1 . M ales

82

B o re a l

81

D e f e a te d

21

C o n f l ic t * fen cion

31

A l c o h o li c

23

-4

-2

0

¥Z

+4

88

88

o

88

§8



08

o

08

88

08

08





0 08

0 08

00

08 08

# Eaeh c i r c l e r e p r e s e n t s one case.-

*8

4*10

08

08

00

4-6

§0 08

00

00

65

F ig u re 4 Grouped Frequency D i s t r i b u t i o n s o f S h i f t s f o r F r ls o n Inm ates and # o r c e |t e r S ta te H o s p ita l Males* Group

>S*K* M ales

M

M id p o in ts o f I n t e r v a l s Zero S h i f t s 2 10 14 IS

22

oo

B orstal

21

m

aefeafc ed

01

GonfliotTm si on

31

A lc o h o lic

23

08

88

88

o

00

oo



©8

oo

oo

88

oo

S h i f t s f o r th e W.8 .H. group were m u ltip lie d by a c o n s ta n t In o r d e r to make them d i r e c t l y com parable w ith th© o t h e r g ro u p s who had a maximum o f 19 p o s s ib le s h if ts * t l a o h c i r c l e r e p r e s e n ts one case*

o f th© a©ale*

T h ere I® a ls o a te n d e n c y f o r a © lig h tly

g r e a t e r s p re a d i n th© s h i f t s f o r th e D e fe a te d Group#

In

g e n e r a l , th e A lc o h o lic Group was s i m i l a r to th e D e fe a te d G roup, show ing s l i g h t l y l e s s te n d e n c y to w ard th e e x tre m e s w ith t h e B - s c o r e , s l i g h t l y more w ith s h i f t s *

Beyond th e

s ta te m e n t t h a t t h e a l c o h o l i c s a s a gro u p e x h i b i t m o b v i­ o u s s o c i a l and o c c u p a tio n a l m a la d ju s tm e n t, we ©an make no e f f o r t t o I n t e r p r e t th© s i g n i f i c a n c e o f d i s t r i b u t i o n o f s c o r e s o f t h i s group*

Guoh i n t e r p r e t a t i o n m ust w a it an

e x te n s iv e s tu d y o f th© p s y c h o lo g ic a l s i g n i f i c a n c e o f a lc o ­ h o lism and th e n a t u r e o f th e p e r s o n a l i t i e s o f a lc o h o lic s * The G o n f lie t- T e n s lo n Group d i f f e r e d from th© fo rm a l Group more i n a te n d e n c y tow ard th e e x tre m e s o f th e s h i f t s r a t h e r th a n i n th© D -s c o re s .

Comparison o f th© u n s e l e c te d

p r i s o n In m a te s w ith n o n -p ris o n g ro u p s w i l l be mad© i n Ghap­ te n * X and XX* T h is te n d e n c y tow ard b o th e x tre m e s in m a la d ju s te d g ro u p s i n d ic a t e d th e in ad e q u ac y o f tr e a tm e n t o f th e d a t a I n te rm s o f means and S .D .* s and d e m o n s tra te d th e n eed f o r some k in d o f a n a l y s i s t h a t d id n o t c o v e r o v e r th e s e im por­ t a n t a s p e c t s o f t h e d a ta *

I f w© a n a ly s e th© r e s u l t s even

f u r t h e r to d e te rm in e th e s i g n i f i c a n c e o f th© extrem e meas­ u r e s th e m s e lv e s , we f i n d t h a t th e same s c o r e may have m arked­ l y d i f f e r e n t m eanings f o r two i n d i v i d u a l s ,

dome exam ples

o f t h i s a r e g iv e n below to d e m o n s tra te th e n eed f o r some ap­ p ro a c h to th e d a ta t h a t ta k e s I n to c o n s i d e r a ti o n th e w hole resp o n se .

6?

In t a l k i n g a b o u t th e d i f f e r e n c e sc o re s u g g e s ts t h a t i n th© e a s e o f th e low and n e g a tiv e D -s c o re s t h e te n ­ dency o p e r a tin g i e tow ard p r o t e c t i o n o r d e fe n s e o f ego by making s u re o f su ccess*

The v e ry h ig h

s c o r e s i n th e same

f a i l u r e group she e x p la in s a s a re s p o n se t h a t p ro v id e s some g r a tif ic a tio n o f a s u b s titu te o rd e r.

" T h is c o n s i s t s i n th e

u t i l i s a t i o n o f th e s ta te m e n t o f th e g o a l a s a g r a t i f y i n g ag en t in i ts e l f }

i . e . , th e v e r b a l s ta te m e n t o f th e l e v e l o f

a s p i r a t i o n becomes more a k in to a g o a l re s p o n se th an to an a n t i c i p a t o r y g o a l r e s p o n s e .w T h is e x p la n a tio n a p p e a rs a d e­ q u a te .

From o u r own a n a ly s is o f th© re s p o n s e a s a w h o le,

comments, and b e h a v io r in th® s i t u a t i o n , th e two r e a c t i o n s m ight be o th e rw is e c h a r a c te r is e d a s a d e fe n s e a g a in s t f a i l ­ u re by

n o t a tte m p tin g and d e fe n s e a g a in s t f a i l u r e by e sc a p e

i n t o a p h a n ta sy o r u n r e a l g o a l s i t u a t i o n . The s to r y i s more c o m p lic a te d w ith th e s h i f t s .

The ex am in atio n o f th e whole

th e ex trem es o f p a tte rn o f r e ­

sp onse shows t h a t two d i f f e r e n t ty p e s o f r e a c t i o n s e x i s t , b o th o f w hich r e s u l t in a low number o f s h i f t s .

In th e

f i r s t on© th e in d iv i d u a l s t a t e s h i s o r i g i n a l o r an e a r l y a s p i r a t i o n c o n s id e r a b ly above h i s g o a l.

He th e n f e e l s i t

i s a l o s s o f p r e s t i g e to low er h i s e s tim a te and r e f u s e s to do so r e g a r d l e s s o f th e f a i l u r e s .

I f he does re a c h th e e s ­

t im a te , he may sh o o t i t up im m ed iately o r h o ld i t a t th e same l e v e l , s a t i s f i e d t h a t he h a s j u s t i f i e d h ie b e l i e f h e c o u ld do i t M.

11t h a t

The second r e a c t i o n i s one o f e sc a p e from

th e problem ©f h a v in g to make a d e c is io n ,

th e s u b je c t

sim p ly e sc a p e s from th e p a in f u l s i t u a t i o n o f making a s e l f e v a lu a tio n by r i g i d l y s t i c k i n g to th© e s tim a te he had o r i g ­ in a lly s e t.

In th e s e o a se s t h e r e a r e r a r e l y more th a n two

s h i f t s o u t o f a p o s s ib le

1 ®.

A t th e u p p e r end o f th© seal© t h e r e to o a r e two porn* s lb illtie s ,

The f i r s t i s one o f breakdown in th e s i t u a t i o n .

The s u b j e c t a c t s c o n fu s e d , shows many u n u su a l s h ift© (up a f t e r f a i l u r e o r down a f t e r s u c c e s s ) , l e c h a r a c t e r i s e d by Im p u ls iv e e s t im a t e s , b u t a t a l l tim e s i s so much In c o n f l i c t t h a t h e can n e v e r be s a t i s f i e d by what he ha© p r e v io u s ly done.

The e x tre m e ly h ig h fre q u e n c y o f s h i f t s g e n e r a l l y be­

lo n g s i n t h i s c a te g o ry .

The second group m ight be c a l l e d

th e achievem ent f o llo w e r s ,

h ik e th e second group a t th e

o t h e r e x tre m e , th e y to o d e s i r e to ©scape th e s i t u a t i o n by r e l y i n g on some method by which th e y can a v o id making a de­ c i s i o n b a se d on s e lf - e v a lu a tio n *

The method th e y u se i s

sim p ly to fo llo w th e ach iev e m e n t, w h atev er I t i e . s c o re

20,

t h e i r n e x t e s tim a te I s

20;

I f th e y

i f th e n e x t tim e th e y

make 5 6 , a lth o u g h a v e ra g in g 26, th e y w i l l s t a t e M m t h e i r e s tim a te .

I f th e y th e n f a i l and s c o re 1 5 , t h e i r e s tim a te

comes down to 15.

Most o f t h i s group s ta y c o n s i s t e n t l y one

o r two p o i n t s below th e a c t u a l achievem ent In o rd e r to be sa fe .

(T h is w i l l be shown a g a in l a t e r In an a n a l y s i s o f

th© fre q u e n c y o f s h i f t s o f th® in d iv i d u a ls w ith low B ~ s c o r e s .) Some, how ever, t r y to s ta y a t th e same l e v e l o r © lig h tly

69

above th e achievem ent. These d e s c r ip tio n s o f th e meaning o f extrem e s c o r e s , a s d eterm in ed by exam ining th e resp o n se as a w hole, and c l i n i c a l e v a lu a tio n o f th e comments and b e h a v io r made In th© s i t u a t i o n a re c o n s id e ra b ly r e in f o r c e d when we c o n s id e r th e n a tu r e o f th e groups showing them most f r e q u e n tly .

The

D efeated Group, s e v e r a l o f whom showed extrem e D -sc o re s, have a h i s t o r y o f f a i l u r e and f e e l in g o f f a i l u r e , a stro n g need f o r some d e fe n se o r p r o te c tio n a g a in s t th e f e a r o f more f a i l u r e and th e accep tan ce o f f a i l u r e .

The C o n f lic t-

T ension Group, who show extrem es in s h i f t s , a re c h a r a c te r ­ iz e d by i n s t a b i l i t y , h i s t o r y o f b e h a v io r o r n e u ro tic mechan­ ism s, a tte m p ts to ©scape s i t u a t i o n s , and i n a b i l i t y to make a d e c is io n , and th e A lco h o lic Group, who show extrem es in b o th s c o re s , a re c h a r a c te r iz e d by t h e i r s o c ia l and occupa­ t i o n a l m alad ju stm en t. The im p o rtan t q u e stio n o f w hether o r not th e s e same e x p la n a tio n s h o ld f o r s u b je c ts whose s c o re s a re in th e same d i r e c t i o n b u t no t q u ite to th e same d eg ree w i l l be c o n sid e re d i n C h ap ter X.

70

CHAPTK& VII AGE i\m

3EX DIFFEREN CES

I t was n e c e s s a ry l a o r d e r to d e te rm in e th e meaning o f th e d if f e r e n c e s betw een group® to e i t h e r c o n tr o l age o r to examine th e e f f e c t o f age a s an Indep en d en t f a c t o r .

Be­

c au se th e norm al group o f p ris o n Inm ates, th e W orcester © tate h o s p i t a l m ales and th e c o lle g e s tu d e n ts a re ro u g h ly homogeneous groups In t h e i r re sp o n se to th e a s p i r a t i o n t e s t s , w ith a wide age spread, th e y were used to study any p o s s ib le e f f e c t o f age. c o rd in g to ag e.

These in d iv id u a ls were ranked ac­

In th e younger group were p la c e d a l l sub­

j e c t s younger th a n and in c lu d in g th e median age o f th e d i s ­ trib u tio n .

In th e o ld e r group were p la c e d a l l above th e

median age o f th e d i s t r i b u t i o n . g ro u p s a r e shown i n T able 10.

The mean s c o re s f o r th e s e The mean age f o r th e younger

group was 3 ,8 y e a r s below t h a t o f th e o ld e r group.

The age

ran g e f o r th e younger group was 18-22, f o r th e o ld e r group 23-50.

W ithin th e s e a d u lt age ra n g e s th e r e seems to be

l i t t l e e f f e c t o f age.

None of th e d i f f e r e n c e s approach

s t a t i s t i c a l s ig n if ic a n c e a lth o u g h a s l i g h t tendency can be rioted f o r th e o ld e r group to show more s t a b i l i t y , t h a t I s , le s s s h ifts . A pproxim ately o n e -h a lf o f th e younger age group were c o lle g e s tu d e n ts , making th e d i s t r i b u t i o n somewhat u n eq u al

71

Table 10 Mean S c o re s for lo u n g e r and O ld e r Male S u b je c ts B

le a n %e

Mean 9 - Score

3 .P.

Mean S h ifts

lo u n g e r

36

£0 . 8

12.61

2 .7 5

9 .1

3 .7 0

O ld e r

30

2 9 .6

1JL< o&#OS to

1 .9 7

0 .4

5 .8 6

Group

f o r th e two g ro u p s .

0.0

.

However, e x a m in a tio n o f th e © cores

from th e p o in t o f view o f age showed no d i f f e r e n c e s w ith in th e t h r e e o r i g i n a l groups*

B ecause o f t h i s and th e f a c t

t h a t th e s e g ro u p s a r e a l l ro u g h ly e q u iv a le n t {In th e sens© t h a t th e y a r e a l l normal®* t h a t I s , g ro u p s n o t s e l e c te d f o r m al& d ju stln g f a c t o r s ) , i t i s n o t felt t h a t t h i s dispropor** t i o n I n th e d i s t r i b u t i o n o f th e g ro u p s m a t e r i a l l y a f f e c t s th e r e s u l t s * I t c an n o t be concluded t h a t th e r e a r e no age d i f f e r * eneee l a t h i s t e s t .

Oroup® w ith mean a g e s a t I S , 30, and

45 may show marked d iffe re n c e ® .

W ithin th e age ra n g e , how-

e v e r , I n which @5 p e r c e n t o f o u r s u b je c ts f e l l t h e r e seems to be l i t t l e

e f f e c t o f ag e.

ISS D ifferen ce

'

P

T hree p r e v io u s s tu d ie s have su g g e ste d t h a t t h e r e a r e d iffe re n c e ® In th e l e v e l o f a s p i r a t i o n b e h a v io r o f men and women.

F rank (SO) and Anderson and B ran d t (5 ) su g g e ste d

from i n c i d e n t a l f i n d in g s t h a t th e r e I s a p o s s ib l e d i f f e r e n c e

?2

I n th e d i r e c t i o n o f a low er d i f f e r e n c e sc o re f o r women* In n e i t h e r o f th e s e c a s e s w ere th e numbers l a r g e enough n o r th e perform ance l e v e l s c o n tr o l le d so t h a t any d e f i n i t e c o n c lu s io n c o u ld b e re a c h e d ,

Gould and Lewis In a r e c e n t

stu d y (80) s t a te d perform ance s c o re s to t h e i r c o n tr o l sub­ j e c t s In term s o f r e l a t i v e s ta n d in g in th e g ro u p . group c o n ta in e d 31 men and 35 women. women was

11c o n s i s t e n t l y

T h is

The 0 - sc o re o f th e

below t h a t f o r men* tout Gould and

Lewis m inim ise t h i s d if f e r e n c e because perform ance s c o re s were n o t a t th e same l e v e l .

E xam ination o f th e perform ­

ance sco res* how ever, d e m o n s tra te s t h a t th e women'were con­ s id e r a b ly below th e men and a l l p re v io u s re s e a r c h hag shown t h a t th e low er th e perform ance s c o re , th e h ig h e r th e

0~

sc o re may be e x p ec te d to b e , so t h a t th e low er D ~scores in th e fem ale s u b je c ts o c c u rre d In spit© o f a tendency t h a t would r a i s e them.

I t a p p e a rs th e n t h a t t h i s sex d if f e r e n c e

ap p eared i n s p i t e o f th e p re s e n c e o f a n o t i n s i g n i f i c a n t f a c t o r t h a t would te n d to e lim in a te i t . In t h i s stu d y th e r e a r e th r e e ro u g h ly matched m&X© and fem ale g ro u p s, th e W orcester S ta te H o s p ita l g ro u p , th e c o lle g e n o rm als, and th e c o lle g e c r i p p l e s .

In a l l p ro b a ­

b i l i t y th e group in which th e most s e l e c t i v e f a c t o r s were o p e ra tin g was th e W orcester S t a t e H o s p ita l g roup.

The male

group was lo a d e d w ith a tt e n d a n t s , th e fem ale group w ith n u rs in g a f f i l i a t e s ,

fle have no g u a ra n te e t h a t th e s e a r e

e q u iv a le n t g roups and th e b e h a v io r i n th e t e s t s i t u a t i o n

73

o f m n y o f th e n u rs in g a f f i l i a t e s was such a s to su g g e st t h a t l a t h i s p a r t i c u l a r s e l e c t i o n , a t any r a t e , th e r e was an u n u su a l amount o f s o c i a l m aladjustm ent*

The d iffe re n c e ®

th e y showed i n com parison to th e male g ro u p , however, were r e p e a te d in th e o th e r com parable groups b u t to a l e s s e r de­ gree*

t h e mean s c o re s and th e v a r i a t i o n o f s c o re s a r e

shown In f a b l e

11.

The d is c re p a n c y o f th e D -sc o re s c an n o t e a s i l y be ac­ c o u n ted f o r by exam ining th e d i f f e r e n c e s in perform ance

In th e college and c r ip p le d g ro u p s perform ance

sco res*

v was e x a c tly th e same f o r men and women; in th e W orcester S ta te H o s p ita l group i t was a lm o st fo u r p o i n ts low er f o r women*

H ere a g a in , a© w ith Gould and L ew is, t h i s d i f f e r ­

ence i n perform ance i f I t o p e ra te d a t a l l sh o u ld o p e ra te to m inim ise r a t h e r th a n acco u n t f o r th e e x is ti n g d i f f e r e n c e s . A lthough th e sex d i f f e r e n c e s shown a r e l a r g e r in th e W o rcester S t a te H o s p ita l g ro u p , they fo llo w th e same te n ­ dency i n th e o t h e r groups f o r a l l male© a s compared to a l l fem ales*

The OH o f th e d i f f e r e n c e f o r th e 0 - sc o re i s

f o r th e s h i f t s 3 ,1 5 .

1. 0 2

,

The amount o f th e d if f e r e n c e s may be

q u e s tio n e d due to s e l e c ti v e f a c t o r s in th e W orcester s t a t e H o s p ita l group b u t th e d i r e c t i o n o f th e d if f e r e n c e s i s con­ s i s t e n t n o t only w ith in th e s e th r e e gro u p s b u t a ls o w ith p re v io u s r e s e a r c h . I f th e s e a r e r e a l d iffe re n c e ® , th e fo llo w in g hypothe­ s i s c o u ld be p u t f o r t h to acco u n t f o r them.

( 1 ) Ag j. gypytp.

I’a b le 11 Sex D ifference® in th e w .s .K ., C o lle g e , .and C o lle g e C rip p le d Groups Group

N

D -Score

S.D.

S h ifts

0 .0 .

f'.B .H . Male®

m

o

OQ

1 .0 0

8 .7 1

4 .1 1

i.S .M . Fem ales

m

1 .3 6

2 .6 3

12.28

4 .6 0

C o lle g e Males

m

£ .8 9

2 .8 5

9 .6 1

3 .8 ?

C o lle g e Fem ales

zz

£ .6 6

2.95

10.64

4 .7 4

C rip p le d M ales

ii

.60

9 .0 0

C rip p le d Fem ales

10

.4 6

12.30

A ll Males*

58

2 .2 0

2.6 0

9 .1 5

4 .2 ?

A l l Females*

60

1 .6 8

2.90

1 1 .6 8

4 .3 8

*The GH o f th e d i f f e r e n c e betw een th e mean sc o re f o r th e en­ t i r e m ale and th e e n t i r e fem ale group i s l . o z f o r th e © -sco re and 3 . i s f o r th e s h ift® .

t h e r e i s l e s s p r e s s u r e f o r h ig h achievem ent in women th a n i n men an d , th e re fo r® , t h e r e i s l e s s p r e s s u r e upon them to a s p i r e above t h e i r a c t u a l a ch iev em en t.

(2 ) G i r l s r e c e iv e

l e s s t r a i n i n g in making d e c is io n s th a n men and in problem s i t u a t i o n s a r e more l i k e l y to be am b iten d en t and, t h e r e f o r e , show more s h i f t s . W hether o r n o t t h i s h y p o th e s is i s t r u e w ill r e q u ir e f u r th e r In v e s tig a tio n .

T h is stu d y o f sex d if f e r e n c e s r a t h e r

th an p ro v in g a n y th in g p e rh a p s d e m o n stra te s th e n e c e s s ity f o r a more c a r e f u l and com prehensive stu d y o f sex d i f f e r ­ en ces in th e l e v e l o f a s p i r a t i o n s i t u a t i o n in which th e se­ l e c t i o n o f o a ses i s mad® w ith t h i s p urpose s p e c i f i c a l l y in m ind.

75

CHAPTER ¥111 AWALmiS OF GRADE PREDICTIONS

Xu th e developm ent o f t h i s method an a tte m p t was made t o f in d a te c h n iq u e in w hich p e rfo rm an c e l e v e l was e lim in a te d a s an i n f lu e n c in g f a c t o r .

E s s e n tia lly * th e de­

s i r e was to g e t d i r e c t l y a t a g e n e r a l t r a i t o r t r a i t s * i f such e x i s t e d , t h a t would o p e r a te o n ly a s one o f many f a c ­ t o r s i n th e more t y p i c a l l i f e s i t u a t i o n w here r e l a t i v e p e r ­ form ance I s known by th e s u b j e c t .

I t was o f d e f i n i t e i n ­

t e r e s t th e n t o d e te rm in e w h e th e r o r n o t t h e b e h a v io r in a l e v e l o f a s p i r a t i o n s i t u a t i o n c o u ld be p r e d i c te d i f r e l a ­ t i v e p e rfo rm a n c e w ere known and one knew b o th th e p e rfo rm ­ a n ce l e v e l in th e new ta s k and th e b e h a v io r i n t h i s a s p i r a ­ tio n t e s t . The s im p le s t te c h n iq u e a v a i l a b l e was sim ply to a sk c o lle g e s t u d e n ts a t th e b e g in n in g o f a s e m e s te r to l i s t th e c o u rs e s th e y to o k th e p re c e d in g s e m e s te r and th e g ra d e s th e y r e c e iv e d and th e n to l i s t th e c o u rs e s th e y would ta k e t h i s s e m e s te r and th e g ra d e s th e y e x p e c te d to r e c e i v e . T h is I s o b v io u s ly a c ru d e te c h n iq u e i n t h a t th e c o u rs e s ta k e n in su c c e e d in g s e m e s te rs a r e o n ly ro u g h ly c o m p a rab le, p a r t i c u ­ l a r l y a s some s t u d e n ts a re ch an g in g t h e i r c o u rs e s from a m a jo r ity o f r e q u ir e d s u b je c ts to a m a jo r ity o f e l e c t i v e s u b je c ts .

N e v e r th e le s s , i t was f e l t i t c o u ld r e v e a l w h eth er

76

su ch p r e d i c t i o n was p o s s i b l e . F o rty -f© u r su b j e c t s mad© sueh p r e d i c t i o n s .

The

d i f f e r e n c e betw een th e g ra d e s o f l a s t s e m e s te r and p r e ­ d i c t e d g r a d e s f o r th e p r e s e n t s e m e s te r (G rade D -so o re) cor­ r e l a t e d - . 6 b w ith th e a c t u a l l e v e l o f p a s t g r a d e s .

T h at

i s , t h e r e was a v e ry strong- ten d e n cy p r e s e n t f o r s t u d e n ts w ith good g ra d e s to have a v e ry sm all o r s l i g h t l y n e g a tiv e Grade D -sc o re and f o r s tu d e n ts w ith p o o r g ra d e s to have a h ig h G rade B -s e o re .

T h is i s e x a c tly w hat we would e x p e c t

from p r e v io u s s t u d i e s .

I n o rd e r* then* to d e te rm in e w heth­

e r o r n o t th e s e Grad© B -s c o re s c o u ld be p r e d i c te d from th e b e h a v io r on th e a s p i r a t i o n b o a rd , th e s u b j e c t s were ra n g e d i n a ra n k o r d e r on th e b a s i s of p a s t p erfo rm an c e ( l a s t se­ m e s te r g r a d e s )•

They were th e n d iv id e d i n t o p a i r s , th e

h i g h e s t two* th e n e x t h ig h e s t two* e t c . , making 22 pairs i n a l l w ith m atched p erfo rm an ce i n p a s t g r a d e s .

Each p a i r

was c o n s id e re d , th e member o f th e p a i r w ith th e h ig h e r p o s­ i t i v e Grad© 0 - s c o re was p la c e d in Group A, th e one w ith th e lo w e r Grad© D -sc o re was p la c e d in Group B, © to ., for a l l 22 p a irs ,

f© th e n had two g ro u p s m atched on p a s t p erfo rm an ce

b u t d i f f e r i n g i n t h e i r e s tim a te s o f f u t u r e p e rfo rm an c e . The o b j e c t was to d e te rm in e w h eth er o r n o t th e s u b je c ts w ith th e h ig h e r Grade D -sc o re s a ls o had h ig h e r B -s c o re s on th e A s p ir a tio n B oard.

The a c t u a l score© f o r a l l o f th e 22 p a i r s

a p p e a rs i n T ab le 12. C o n sid e rin g th e many u n c o n tr o lle d f a c t o r s p r e s e n t

7? fa b le 12 B -S e c re e on th e A s p ir a tio n B oard f o r 22 Fair® o f S u b je c ts h a tc h e d i n P re v io u s G rades b u t S e p a ra te d on th e B a s is o f Grade D -S cores Group A (H ig h e r G rade B -S oores) F a ir Mo* 1 2

3 4 5 6

7 a 9 10 11 12

13 14 15 16 17 IS 19

P re v io u s G rade A verage* 11*67 U .0 0 1 0 .6 7 1 0 .4 0 9 .3 3 9 .6 0 8 ,5 0 a . 33 0 ,0 0

7 .7 5 7 .6 7 7 .5 0 7 .0 0 6 .2 0

20 21 22

5 ,8 0 5 .8 0 5 .2 5 5 .1 4 4 .8 0 4 ,7 1 4 ,5 0 3 .7 5

Mean

7 ,4 5

G rade 3 -S c o re

Asp. Board 0 - s c o re

Group B (Lower Grade B -Seores} Asp. P re v io u s G rade Board Grade D-Score A verage 0 - Score

•0 0

4 .8 9

1 1 .6 0

- .4 0 .0 4 .2 7

.6 8

1 1 .2 0 1 0 .8 6 1 0 .0 0

2 .1 2

.7 3 1 .7 0 2 .5 0 .7 5 .5 4 2 .3 3 2 .7 9 1 .6 7 1 .5 1 1 ,7 0 1 .7 0 2 .4 2 2 .3 6 2 .7 0 6 .0 0

3 .1 0 2 ,7 5 1 ,7 9 3 .0 . 3 .6 7

,5 8 4 .7 9 2 ,3 2 6 .8 4 2 .2 1

5 .2 8 - 6 ,4 2 7 ,0 6 1 0 .9 5 1 .7 4 .7 4 —3*84 1 ,7 9 .42 4 .2 1

9 ,6 7 9 .1 7 8 .5 0 8 .1 7 8 .0 0 8 .0 0

2 .1 1

7 .0 7 7 .5 0 7 .2 0 0 .4 0 6 .1 4 5 .6 0 5 .5 0 4 .6 0 4 .8 0 4 .7 5 4 .1 7 3 .0 0

-2.63**

7 ,4 0

1 .1 1

- .2 6 6 . El 3 .1 6

—.4 0 - 1 .0 0 - 1 ,8 6 .1 3 - .0 7 .4 3

• 53 - .7 4 1 ,7 9 3 ,5 2 - 1 .7 4 - 3 .1 1

1 .1 0

.2 1

- .1 7

- .7 4 -.2 6 4 ,1 6 3 .2 6 1 .5 3 - 1 .4 7 - 2 .2 6 3 .1 6 2 .1 6

.0 0

- 1 .2 9 1 .6 8

- .1 7 .60 - .1 5 1 .0 6 .40 1 .1 0 2 ,2 0

1 .6 3 1.25 2.43 1 ,5 0 .4 9

2 .0 5

- 1 .1 6 1 .1 6 3 .2 1 2 ,1 1 .6 8

.8 1

3 .D. 2 . 2 1

♦Grade average® a r e c a l c u l a t e d by a s s ig n in g a v a lu e o f 12 to A, 1 1 t o A-., 10 to B-scores or shifts have the same meaning, It has been possible to show only statistical differences between groups, much of the real difference being lost*

it is quite

clear to anyone watching the subject in the situation that equivalent B-scores may result from the operation of marked­ ly different modes of approach to the situation.

The pos­

sible differences in the meaning of the same ©cores on a single measure were pointed out In Chapter VI,

It was also

Indicated that these differences In interpretation of the meaning of the same scores depended on other aspects of the whole response.

In the last chapter, relationships between

four different aspects of the whole response were indicated that showed high statistical consistency.

Results such as

these emphasised the need for some approach to the data that took many of these aspect®' of the total response Into con­ sideration at the same time. tence of patterns.

They also indicated the exis­

For example, unusual shifts are associ-

m

atsd frequently with low B-scorea and high frequency of shifts, high 0-©cores with fewer shifts, etc, &ny worth while clinical use of this test must con** elder the test as a whole and interpretation of the signif­ icance of any derived ©cor© must depend upon all the other sc o re s. When the 20b cases, which comprise this study, were examined in terms of the whole pattern o f response, nine basic patterns appeared.

In this chapter the distribution

of such patterns for the various groups will be given, as well as example© of ©aeh pattern.

The available case his­

tory facts, and comments and behavior la the test situation will be presented for the subject© chosen as examples of the nine patterns. The whole pattern of response include© relation of performance to aspiration, frequency of shifts, direction of shift© following success and failure, and general behav­ ior in the test situation, all studied in relation to one another.

It should be noted that the first three of these

factors are all based on statistical measures and the fourth on a direct observation of behavior.

For this reason the

author maintains that such whole patterns are not to be thought of as subjective evaluations but as objective kinds of responses. The patterns that appear are not to be thought of as rigid type© of response but concentration points that appear

87

naturally*

Individual responses classified as belonging t©

on© pattern differ In the degree to which they conform to the prototype of that pattern.

Many of the patterns merge

into other ones and some represent mixtures of two patterns. Occasionally* although one pattern appears from an examina­ tion of the actual estimates made, the subject by his com­ ments Indicates a conflict and desire to react in an en­ tirely different, frequently opposite, fashion.

In thee©

cases the pattern as shown by the actual expressed estimates is taken a® a basis for classification but the significance of such responses is clearly different from that of the other responses placed in the same classification.

The psy­

chological significance of the response, therefore, cannot always be determined simply by the act of classifying but each case must be considered Individually.

They do, however,

serve as convenient points for description and classifica­ tion and as such appear to be considerably more meaningful than the us# of single measures that refer to only one as­ pect of the total response. Th# order of the numbering of the patterns is rough­ ly the order of the social acceptability of that type of response.

Patterns 1-3 represent methods of solution of

problems of self-evaluation which are culturally acceptable. Patterns 4-9 are considered socially unacceptable as they demonstrate tendencies toward solutions that either limit the achievement of the Individual, show little contact with

88

reality,. or Indicate attempt© t© escape the problem situa­ tion*.

However, patterns 4 and © may be considered border­

line a© they are about as frequent in normal groups a© in abnormal ones.

However, this rough classification into ac­

ceptable and unacceptable patterns is of little interest in contrast to the knowledge of the actual mod© of response. It is far from enough t© know that an individual i@ umaladjusted11! it is more important to know what he actually does* For convenience these patterns will be referred to by name, as wall as number#

these names give only a partial, not a

whole clue to the nature of the pattern#

Ho# 1 is referred

to as the "Low positive D-soore pattern", Mo* 2 as the "Low negative or very slightly positive 0-score pattern", Mo# 3 as the "Medium high positive 0-scor© pattern", Mo* 4 as the "Achievement followers", Mo. 5 as the "Step pattern", Mo. 8 as the "Very high positive 0-score pattern", Mo. ? as the "High negative 0-seor© pattern", Mo. © as th© "Rigid pat­ tern", and Mo. 9 as the "Confused or breakdown pattern". In attempting to interpret the significance of the response In the examples to follow, particular attention should be given to th© nature and frequency of changes fol­ lowing success and failure.

These figures will answer such

questions as "Were there any unusual shifts?11, "bid the sub­ ject shift down, after failure as well as up after success?", "How often did he actually succeed?", etc.

The total of

the number of times the subject went up, down, or d id not

89

eh&nge the level of hie estimate after* success is equal to the number o f times he actually succeeded, (except when the last trial resulted in a success, in which case the total number of successes Is one more than the number of changes after success)#

Flexibility of reactions to success and

failure is obscured by examining only the frequency of shifts, sine® th® subject may change his estimate invari­ ably as a reaction to success but never to failure or vie© v e rsa . In order to obtain some concept of the significance of the differences in D~eeoree and shifts, In the examples shown, it should be noted that the S.D. of the D-seore for all 206 subjects is 2.79, and 4.70 for the shifts. The subjects to be analysed below have been selected on the basis of their close conformity to the pattern pro­ totypes and the avallability of case material.

90

2 l £&£& g&l&eeB Ho* 1,

bow Positive D-Score Pattern*

In this response

estimates e r e , on the average, higher than past performances hut adequate adjustments are made to both success and fail­ ure#

there Is an average number of shifts and generally an

absence of unusual shifts#

If there is one unusual shift,

It occurs under somewhat excusable circumstances. Subjects horm&l College (3-roup* Senior* Female. Age 20. Stagaged to be married. One older brother 23 years old. Parents of middle economic group. Excellent grades In college. Classroom behavior inclined to be self-possessed and quiet. In testing situation she says very little, gives impression of deter­ mination and stability. boores 0-Score l.?9 Shifts 10

Shifts After Success Op Down Same 8 0 5

Repression After failure After success

0 0

Shifts After Failure Op Sown Sam® 0 5 4 this subject combines responsiveness to success and failure with stability and a tendency to estimate slightly above her achievement.

Her ease history, as m eagrely out­

lined her®, portrays a stable and successful c o lle g e g i r l . Mote the absence of extreme numbers of s h i f t s , unusual shifts, or repressions.

91

Ko, 2* tern.

Low Negative or Very Slightly Positive D-beore Pat­ this is similar to pattern Ho. 1 hut the tendency

her# is in the direction of cautiousness and protection. An average number of shifts; usually no* or only one* un­ usual shifts are present. Subject? Crippled College Gtocup. Female* Age 20. Sib­ ling age® not known but subject came from a large family. Her only difficulty Is a barely noticeable scoliosis. Three raters agreed that there was a minimum amount of aesthetic and locomotor interfer­ ence. They also agreed that her behavior in inter­ view and test situation was characterised as stable* generally free from tension but somewhat shy* re­ stricting verbalisation largely to answering direct questions. In school-her grades are better than average. Her physical appearance is attractive. B m rm B-Score Shifts

-.74 9

Shift© After Success Sam® Up Bomn 7 6 0

Repression After failure 1 After success 0

Shifts After Fallure Same Up Down 0 3 3 The pattern here is a stable one but clearly present is the slight but insistent tendency toward protection through cautiousness.

No. 5,

Medium High D-acore,

This Is characterized by high

D-sc©res, although usually not aa high as pattern 8 0 . 6 . The subjects set high goala# try hard to reach them, and show exceptionally deep Involvement In the task.

They are

responsive to success and failure, however, and do not leave the reality of the situation to the extent of those subjects falling in pattern 6 * This pattern is continuous with the low positive 0 -score pattern representing the tendencies there to a greater degree.

Hon©, or only one, unusual shift

Is present. Subjects f.S.H. Male Sroup* Age 25. Psychiatric Interne. Single. On© sister 2? years old. Family of ade­ quate socio-economic status. Subject has history of marked academic success. Referred to as a "seri­ ous student*. His manner in a social situation Is quiet and self-possessed. Inclined to b© somewhat Introverted. In the test situation he was absorbed in the task, commented more to himself than to the experimenter. Scores D-Score 15.5 Shifts ? (possible 24)

shifts After Success Barn© Sown Up 0 1 3

Repression After failure &ft@r succoss

0 0

Shifts After Failure Sam# Down Up 16 3 1

The on© shift up after failure was, as it frequently Is, on the last trial.

The picture this subject gave was

on© of persistence and determination to reach his selfdetermined goal of high achievement.

93

Mo. 4*

Achievement Followers*

In this group there Is a

constant change of estimate to a score exactly the mme or quit© close to the previous achievement. e s tim a te s

1

Mo s t a b i l i t y o f

© present; consequently, th e r e are a large number

of shifts, an absence of unusual shifts, and generally a score quit© close to aero. Subject; Crippled College Group. Male. Age 22. Catholic, older brother and sister living. In his autobiog­ raphy he states that he was the favorite of his father, fhe father®a death in his late childhood was a sever# trauma. Parents were o f foreign extraction. Before, and particularly after the d e a th of the father the family suffered deep privation, f h e sub­ ject entered the OCC when 1?, In his brother* s p la c e , and writes glowingly of It. He states t h a t he thrived due to the “camp routine1*, the *s p le n d id leadership* of on© of the other boy®, th e opportunity to build himself up physically, and the interest taken in him by the cm p doctor. At 20 he lost his leg in a s t e e l mill. He did not express bitterness c o n ce rn in g the company but gratitude for their paying the d o c to r bill and furnishing his artificial leg. Shortly a f t ­ er this his older sister was diagnosed as dementia prateeox* In M s a u to b io g ra p h y he conceives himself as a typical “Horatio Alger* hero who succeeds in spite of great difficulties and saeriflees. He con­ cludes his a u to b io g ra p h y by stating such maxims a s the©© as his codes' " I t matters not whether you won or lost but how you played the game*, “there there is a will, there ie practically always a way", and “I will never cease attempting to learn*. The major picture In his entire autobiography Is that o f an individual with l i t t l e independence of thought o r action, on© who has always tried to pleas© all the people all th e time. S c o res D-Seore -.74 S h i f t s IB

Shifts After Success Up Down Sam© 9 1 1 Shifts After Failure Up Down Sam® 0

8

0

Repression After failure After success

0 0

94

Sot* the large frequency of shift© tip after success and down after failure.

The one unusual shift dowi after

success occurred early In the test, on the fourth trial.

Ho. S.

the Step P a t t e r n .

In this r e a c tio n the subject re­

fuses to lower his estimate.

There are usually few s h i f t s

but there may be as many as 8, as In the ease below.

The

only shifts are up and usually no adjustment is made even to repeated failure.

D~scores may range from low positive

to high positive but are usually fairly high.

The charac­

teristic of this pattern 1© that the subject feels t h a t one© he hag mad© an estimate he must reach It without retreating. Behavior In the situation is commonly called stubborn and persistent.

Unusual shifts are infrequent but may occur

with some of the higher D-scores. Subject: Prison inmate, ConfXiet-f ©nsion, bnselecteel, and Alcoholic Group. Male. Age *36. Oldest child. Three siblings 32, 30 and 28. Parents separated when S was 6 years old. The subject went with hi® mother who was remarried and divorced twice. The father was a habitual drunkard. The family always had a very low socio-economic status. He started but did not finish high school, left and Joined the army for three years. Since 20 years of ag© he has spent half of his life (8 years) in Jail on c h a rg e s all associated with alcoholism* Married and has 2 children. Hi® general manner is hyper-thyroid. Be­ havior Is excitable, Impulsive, and q u ick -tem p ered . He has been bothered by nightmare© as a child and •‘nervousness* as an adult. In the testing situation h© kept up a steady stream of comments directed bo th to the experimenter and to the ball. Scores 0-score S h ifts

6.63

Shifts After Success Up Down Sam® ? 0 0

8

Shifts After Failure Up Down Sam® 1 0 11

R ep ressio n After failure After success

0 0

Although the actual scores show little adjustment to failure the subject showed in his comments a definite ten­ dency to protect himself by statements such as **Th&t*s a very difficult score to make, lsm*t It?* and *That *s a poor beginning,

1 can1t make it now*.

97

No*

6

.

Very High Positive P-Scor© Pattern,

In this response

there Is an average amount of shifts and frequently one or more shifts upward after failure. is largely a phantasy response.

In this case the response The subject leaves the

reality of the situation and gains his satisfaction merely from the statement of high goals itself or by implying by the statement that he expects to do that well and, in fact* is surprised t h a t he 1® not reaching his goal.

This lack

of contact with reality is often emphasised by a large num­ b e r of unusual shifts* up after failure* and by the repres­ sio n of failures.

The presence o f this pattern implies

l i t t l e as to whether the subject is aggressive or retiring in hi® reaction to dally problems but merely points to the strong tendency toward unreal solutions when they are pos­ sible under conditions of frustration. Subject? Uorual College Group. female. Age 27. Single* The subject was the only girl in a family o f f i v e sibling®. Her older brother was six year® older, her next youngest brother 7 years younger* The subject and her mother a r e quit© r e l i g i o u s , members of the Church of the Nasarene. The subject* s family ties are strong but other social contacts l i m i t e d . The subject was a full-time nurse and went b&ofc to school for graduate work while still working full time at night. She was obviously energetic, q u i t e aggressive in class, frequently was accused o f at­ tention getting by other stu d en ts* Generally her defenses to strong feeling® of inferiority a r e o v e rcompensating. In"the test s i t u a t i o n she v e r b a l i s e d considerably in an attempt to cover ov e r h e r inse­ curity and asked many questions. She was h ig h ly I n ­ volved In the task and frequently made excuses f o r her performance, r e f e r r i n g several times to h e r working at night.

98

Scores D-D©or© ♦10*9$ -Shifts 13

Shifts After Success Down Up Dam© 0 % 0

Repression After failure After success

1 0

Shifts After Failure Up Down Dame 6 5 6 In this ease the comments, high Involvement, and ra­ tionalisations indicate the aggressive trend as well as the trend toward an unreal solution*

99

Ho* 7.

High Meg&tlv© to~Score Pattern,

this response is

characterised toy an average number of shifts and frequent shifts down after success.

Predominant in the individual1©

behavior is the desire not to take a chance, to avoid fail­ ure at all cost,

this is the extreme of the low negative

pattern. Subject* Crippled College Croup. Male. Age 20 years# On© sister three years older. He had Infantile paralysis when four. After considerable treatment th© only evidence now is that one leg is shorter than the other. The subject wore a brae© as a child and reacted strongly to hi® difficulty. The family history is one of migration, privation and uncer­ tainty. The father died of cancer when the subject was in his early teens. He evidences some desire for sympathy now. He ha® very little confidence in himself or hi® future. He is a freshman at college with average grades, in the test situation there was a tendency toward “nervousness** and over-verbal­ isation. Scores 0-score -6.42 Shift® 7

Shift® After Success Sam® Down Op to 1 10

Repression After failure After success

0 0

Shift® After Failure Down Sam© Op 0 1 2 Although there were seven shifts, the subject never went higher than 2$ in hie estimates nor lower than 20. Slay­ ing in this area, he succeeded 17 out of a possible 20 time®. Fifteen times he scored higher than 23, his highest estimate. In the situation he made comments such as "I know I have been higher than 22 several time® tout I want to toe on the safe side", and, after scoring 30 and repeating his previous estimate of 20, “I think that Is about all I can do".

100

$0* S.

R ig id Pattern.

of shiftgt

1’hia la characterized by the absence

Occasionally the i n d iv i d u a l will shift one© and

then return to the original level or, If early in the test, stay at the new level*

The essential criterion in this pat­

tern i s the avoidance of the problem situation by maintain­ ing the original estimate regardless of the achievement. Occasionally there is some confusion between this and the Step Pattern where the individual’s first com m ittm ent is so high that he has little or no opportunity to shift up and refuses to shift down.

The comments and behavior in the

situation are the mean® o f separating these two types.

In

the case of the Rigid Pattern, the interest and involvement are not as deep*

The su b je ct® frequently comment that they

"are talcing 25 for th e rest of the trials'1, in spite of in­ structions to state their estimate before each trial, or they tell the experimenter that they are not going to change their estimate.

Sometimes the subject will shift around un­

c e r t a i n l y in the first few trials and then lapse into the Rigid Pattern or he may attempt twice to leave it and Imme­ diately return.

In this way it is possible to b© classi­

fied In this pattern when there are 4 or 5 shifts present. However, the great majority of subjects showing this pattern have no more than two shifts. In tills Rigid Pattern the 0-score can range from high negative to high positive; with the Step Pattern It ranges from low positive to high positive.

The Rigid Pattern may

101

be combined with the High Negative or High Positive Pat­ tern. Subject* Prison Inmate, Defeated, Un selected, and Alco­ holic ©roups. Male. Age 36* One brother died in infancy. The subject was brought up m an only child. He went through third year o f high school. Superior intelligence* He was married and divorced* Has never had & steady Job. Has at least 13 ar­ rests involving alcoholism. He has accepted his alcoholic pattern and makes no claim to any desire to change it, become remarried, etc. S c o re s D -s e o re - 4 .1 1 S h ifts 0

S h i f t s A f te r S u c c e ss Up Down Same 0 © IS

R e p re s s io n A fte r F a ilu re A f t e r S u c c e ss

0 0

S h if ts A fte r F a ilu r e Down Same bp 0 0 4 It appears in M s

case that the subject avoided the

problem situation by hi® rigid approach and at the same time selected an estimate that would insure him a clear margin of protection against a feeling of failure,

fh© desire to

©scape the problem situation was probably the stronger mo­ tive.

102

Ho,* 9-

The C o n f ttc e d or Breakdown P a t t e r n *

In this pat­

tern there la a very high frequency of shifts*

The P-s c o r e

can be any else but usually is low positive or negative* Unusual shifts of both kinds are frequent*

The pattern is

actually characterlied by the breakdown of the Individual in the problem situation.

Unable to provide any adequate

method of response, he is impulsive and unpredictable and his behavior lack© consistency. Subject: w.B.M. Employees, Nursing Affiliate. Female* Age 17, She was brought up a® an only child un­ til displaced by a boy when five years old* Her Intelligence scores were very low but, neverthe­ less, she was toeing pushed Into the nursing profes­ sion toy a very dominant father who had an overprotective attitude* Her supervisor described her as being emotionally unstable and having marked feelings of inferiority. In the test situation she showed extreme tension and extremely poor so­ cial adjustment* She frequently had long pauses before m aking an estimate, her face showing con­ flict and bewilderment. The subject remarked twice, HI don't know what to say”. Before she took the test, her father, who held a responsible position in the hospital, came down to see wl f it was all right”. sco re s

Shifts After Success Baa® Down yp

D-score -l.i Shifts 22 (possible 24)

10

2

1

Repression After failure After success

0 0

Shifts After Failure down Same bp 1 7 3

It can toe seen that the general instructions were understood in this case a® the subject did In general fol­ low the pattern of dropping her estimate© after failure and

103

M l s in g them a f t e r su ccess*

fh e c o n fu s io n and breakdow n

c o u ld b e se en i n th e b e h a v io r , comments, and th e f i v e un­ u s u a l sh ift® *

t h e r e I s e v id e n c e t h a t t h i s g i r l h a s h ad

h e r d e c i s i o n s made f o r h e r by h e r f a t h e r and was o v e rb u r­ dened by demand® beyond h e r a b i l i t y ,

th e i n a b i l i t y to m eet

p ro b le m s in d e p e n d e n tly r e s u l t e d i n h e r breakdow n i n t h i s s itu a tio n *

104

A© i n th e e a s e o f th e s u b je c t s e l e c te d a s an exam ple o f th e R ig id P a t t e r n , i t can be seen t h a t c o m b in atio n o f p a t t e r n s f r e q u e n t ly e x is ts *

i‘he d e s i r e to p r o t e c t on©*®

s e l f a g a i n s t f a i l u r e (High n e g a tiv e D -sc o re P a t t e r n ) , o r t h e d e s i r e t o g a in s a t i s f a c t i o n from th e s ta te m e n t o f h ig h g o a ls in I t s e l f (H igh P o s i t i v e D -sco re P a t t e r n ) may b e com­ b in e d w ith th e R ig id P a t t e r n .

Tendency tow ard a p r o t e c t i v e

low e s tim a te (Low n e g a tiv e o r v e ry S l i g h t l y P o s i t i v e D -sco re P a t t e r n ) i s f r e q u e n t ly combined w ith th e A chievem ent F ollow ­ e r P a tte r n *

d e n e r a l l y in th e s e m ix tu re s one p a t t e r n stand®

o u t a s th e m ajo r o n e , b u t n o t alw ays s o .

A tte m p ts t o ttp u sh w

e v ery o n e i n t o one o f th e s e n in e c l a s s i f i c a t i o n s , t h e r e f o r e , l o s e p a r t o f th e r e a l d a ta .

T h is l o s s , how ever, i s n o t a s

g r e a t a s t h a t w hich occur® when th e d a ta a r e t r e a t e d i n te rm s o f s i n g l e m e a su re s.

The p a t t e r n s sh o u ld be lo o k ed

upon a s f o c a l p o i n t s , p o i n ts o f c o n c e n tr a tio n .

They se rv e

a s standard® to be u se d In u n d e rs ta n d in g and d e s c r ib in g a l l case® b u t n o t a© r i g i d c l a s s e s in to w hich a l l c a s e s f a l l . By ta k in g th e c r i t e r i o n o f p red o m in an t p a t t e r n and m aking u se o f re c o rd e d d e s c r i p t i o n s o f comments and non­ v e r b a l b e h a v io r , i t was p o s s i b l e to c l a s s i f y a l l th e c a s e s a c c o rd in g to th e s e n in e g ro u p s w ith c o m p a rativ e e a s e .

The

r e s u l t s f o r a l l o f th e g ro u p s s tu d ie d a r e shown In T a b le 16. The f i n a l c r i t e r i o n f o r th e p lac em en t was th e p s y c h o lo g ic a l i m p l i c a t i o n s o f th e re s p o n s e , n o t th e a b s o lu te s i t e o f sc o res.

F or exam ple, t h e r e a r e one o r two c a s e s p la c e d in

05 4*

CO

10 * *•

1938, 3 , 43-62.

f r a n k , J« 9 , I n d iv id u a l d i f f e r e n c e s in c e r t a i n a s p e c t s o f th e l e v e l o f a s p i r a t i o n . % er* .